| Comment Number: | OL-10502372 |
| Received: | 3/1/2005 6:38:21 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:
As a fairly new (3+ years) employee I am partially in favor of the NSPS changes. I fully support the idea that productivity should be more important than seniority for employee reductions (i.e. RIF). The shipyard would be crippled if it ever lost its investment in the new generation of employees, especially when considering the number of employees scheduled to retire in the next few years. I would agree that the majority of DoD employees are consciences and honest in their work habits; however, there is no shortage of employees that are simply sponging off of their job security. I would propose modifying the current system to allow delinquent employees to be dealt with more efficiently and relieved of their positions if necessary. I am partially in favor of the proposed NSPS method of performance based promotions. On the surface it seems that the only people opposed to performance based promotions would be the dead-weight employees that would rather not perform. My concern would be the implementation of the system at the management level and the completeness and fairness of employee evaluations. It will be difficult for supervisors to adequately monitor and review employee performances because we are often required to be relocated and surge to support the needs of the fleet on a regular basis. I think that it will be impossible for the evaluations to be complete and objective. With regard to salaries being below industry standard on the current GS system, I think that the majority of employees will still be in this category with the new system because it isn't reasonable to assume that the majority of employees will get significant pay increases each year. As I see it, the trade off for the automatic GS pay system is the job security and consistency that it provides; however, I think that job security is abused in many cases because employees cannot be downgraded for poor performance.