| Comment Number: | OL-10501766 |
| Received: | 2/27/2005 10:22:24 PM |
| Subject: | Notice of Proposed Rulemaking, Request for Comment |
| Title: | National Security Personnel System |
| CFR Citation: | 5 CFR Chapter XCIX and Part 9901 |
| No Attachments |
Comments:
My comments are addressed not toward any particular section of the proposed regulations, but to the entire premise whereby the NSPS is to be established. -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- As the son of a retired DCAS Contract Administrator and a new DoD civilian employee, I would like to state my objection to the radical changes proposed under the new regulations. Federal Government employment with the protections afforded by the GS system has long been a source of secure and stable employment, providing for a motivated workforce largely free of the type of office politics that plague the private sector and serving in support of our nation's military mission. Employment under the GS system allowed my father to enter the middle-class and provide for a family of 5. Moreover, the stability of employment within the public-sector defense-related workforce afforded by the GS system got this nation through the long years of the Cold War, including the nation's longest conflict, the Vietnam War. As we are now in the early stages of a new type of conflict of indeterminate duration, this is not the time to upset the system of employment. To inject private-sector-style performance-based evaluation criteria into the DoD runs the risk of (i) duplicating the burn and churn conditions prevalent in the private sector today and (ii) creating conditions whereby employees are judged and rewarded by their supervisors based on entirely subjective criteria. Under such circumstances, blatant favoritism could result, and the cooperation and cameraderie which I have witnessed in my short time in the office would likely evaporate, as employees jockey for advantage with management. Innovation, risk-taking, integrity, creativity and mutuality of effort would all suffer as a result. Having myself come from the private sector, I can credibly state that there is no model there worth emulating. Elimination of the GS system of steps, pay increases, job security and various protections against retaliation and unjust termination could only demoralize the workforce while facilitating the creation of a culture of individual self-promotion and backstabbing, under which employees direct more energy towards their own advancement and the goal of becoming the boss's favorite than they do cooperation with coworkers and completion of their tasks. If the DoD goes ahead with its plans and scraps the GS system, I - and, I'm sure, many other DoD employees - would have to reconsider whether DoD is an employer for which we care to continue to work. The GS system has served us well since its inception many years ago. There is no legitimate justification for tinkering with it now. As the saying goes, If it ain't broke, don't fix it. I respectfully request that the proposed regulations not be adopted and that the GS system, as currently structured, be maintained.