| Comment Number: | OL-10502448 |
| Received: | 3/2/2005 8:28:49 AM |
| 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:
The proposed National Security Personnel System (NSPS) regulations issued by the Department of Defense (the Department) and the Office of Personnel Management (OPM) are deeply disturbing to me as a Department employee. I believe that these proposed regulations exceed the authority Congress granted in the NSPS statute in the following ways. The Department’s proposed NSPS regulations 9901.905(a) and 9901.914(d)(5) violate Congress’ explicit order in 5 U.S.C. 9902(b) to preserve collective bargaining by overriding any provision of a collectively bargained agreement through “DoD or Component Issuances.” In proposed NSPS regulation 9901.914(d)(5), the Department seeks to declare such issuances to be non-negotiable and superior to collectively bargained agreements. Essentially, this provision will provide the Department the authority to make any change it desires through these issuances, while barring any negotiation over these changes, in spite of Congress’ specific orders in the statute to the contrary. The Department’s proposed NSPS regulations violate the specific Congressional directive in 5 U.S.C. 9902(b) to preserve collective bargaining by expanding management rights so dramatically as to deny bargaining in almost any circumstance. In the proposed NSPS regulation 9901.910(a)(2), the Department declares that management will now have the power “to take whatever other actions may be necessary to carry out the Department’s mission,” a clause that literally has no definition or limitation in the regulation. This proposed management “right” effectively ends collective bargaining in the Department, in direct violation of Congress’ specific order to the contrary, as management can literally apply it to any situation in the Department to deny bargaining. Particuliarly disturbing to me is that our Service Computation Dates, or seniority in DoDDS could be ignored if the event of a RIF. Many of us have spent years devoting our working lives to benefit the dependents of military personel, and to be told that all that could count for nothing, is a violation at the deepest level of trust.