Comment Number: OL-10502474
Received: 3/2/2005 9:33:52 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The present rules pertaining to Veteran preference in regard to RIF are outdated. For example, veterans who retire at 20 years (or more) are currently penalized when compared to people who retire or separate under 20 years. A 20+ year veteran with less than 30 percent disability has NO priority in a RIF, while in comparison, someone who retired early at 15 years (or separated before 20) does. What is wrong with this picture? In my opinion, the veteran with the most years or service who retires under Honorable conditions, and has outstanding work performance SHOULD have RIF priority over someone who separates earlier than 20 years..for whatever reason. The current regulation appears to have been written when the 20+ years retirement was the only option for career warriors. This has not been the case for some time now. Early retirements (under 20) have been utilized going all the way to the early 90's. A case in point, I was "bumped" as a result of a RIF by someone who had less actual civil service time than I do, and who was not as qualified as I was for the position I was in, and who's work performance was not even close in ratings/awards. But because this person retired from active duty at 15 years, he had more total years than I did (I retired with 24 years active duty). Although I was able to qualify for another career field within civil service, this was a clear example of how the current system works against the 20+ year veteran, and in many cases, allowed for a less experienced/qualified person to take a job from a person who had far more experience/qualifications. This type of situation should not be allowed under the new NSPS. Qualifications and past work performance should be top consideration. Not if someone retired from active duty at 15..17..19..or even 20 years or over.