| Comment Number: | OL-10501923 |
| Received: | 2/28/2005 1:46:24 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:
I currently work under the current system for GS employees having the various grades and steps. I believe it is a good system overall. The current system has a measure of protection from favoritism by management. Pay banding with the performance pay replacing annual raises will lead to hate and discontent among employees. Under this performance pay unless a manager looks favorably upon an employee that employee may only get a 1% annual raise. This means that in effect the employee could be earning less purchasing power that the year before. In some cases, management is just looking for someone who can meet his or her quotas at the expense of doing a good job. Management sometimes receives compensation for meeting these quotas. At times Management is looking for yes men and people with integrity and principle are not looked upon favorably. This proposed pay for performance system gives to much power to management. The present system has ways for management to reward good performers. They can promote them, and they can use cash awards. Why does the Government have to be the same as the commercial world where there is little or no protection for the employees from management? The current system has a measure of protection from favoritism and has ways to reward good performers. Longevity would basically been done away with in any reduction in force. Someone with 20 years of faithful service and who may be getting older is in the same category with someone with 6 months of service. This is not correct policy. As a little background info on where I am coming from. I have 37 years service to the US Government with eight years of enlistment in the US Navy including three years of duty in Vietnam.