Comment Number: OL-10502741
Received: 3/2/2005 5:42:04 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:

You got to be kidding me..."Commenters should refer to a specific portion of the proposal (that is, the subpart and section number or the heading and page number), explain the reason for any recommended change, and include supporting data or information." You asked for comments but you want us to make your job easier by telling you the para. The subpart and all that other crap in this long dry and confusing document...No way...You don’t want to make our life easier. But I can tell you I have read this long proposal and it sucks. I have 26 yrs in and you want to change the system now that I am getting closer to retirement. Well you asked for comments so I am going to give them to you. Not the way you want them but at least if you really read this you will know I went over this darn thing and tried to understand it. It will take the lawyers that are suing Mr. Rumsfeld (Philadelphia Inquirer Newspaper Feb 24, 05) years to figure out that he is appointing himself the king of DOD. This new system is very political. I am writing to you because of my concern about the National Security Personnel System (NSPS) scheduled for implementation for employees of the Department of Defense over the next year. NSPS was authorized under the 2004 Defense Authorization Act, passed by Congress in November 2003. There is, however, a significant difference between the skeletal authorities that Congress approved and the sweeping new authorities that the Secretary of Defense, Donald Rumsfeld is now claiming. During congressional hearings on this issue, the Secretary asserted that the Pentagon's broad mission requires greater "flexibility" in hiring, disciplining, compensating and assigning civilian personnel. It appears to me that the Secretary wanted the same "chain of command" authority over civilian personnel as he enjoys over uniformed military personnel. Neither the Secretary nor his subordinates offered any concrete examples to explain how union rights might have impinged on the Pentagon's mission in the past. I see this new system being used to get rid of older employees especially those on the old CSRS retirement system, which I am a part of. I feel that this new system is striping the employees of the DOD of their basic rights of employment law. The new system has been built with a belief that employees need to keep there mouths closed and to do what, when and where there boss tells them to do with out question and to respect all decision made by their management. The new regs open the way for backsliding even more into the "Good 'ole Boy" system where politics play too large a part. The majority of workers feel cheated when advancement, promotion and pay decisions are given over to the sole discretion of a supervisor. The process typically reduces salaries and morale. It is too autocratic and eliminates any redress for decisions made on the basis of considerations other than merit. Will the new safeguards be adequate to prevent the system from slipping backward to that unfair system? There is too much favoritism in the government on who gets the good ratings and jobs. Why is Congress saying this system might be good for the DoD, but not other branches of government? Why not apply this across the board - including Congress! They are always quick to give themselves large pay raises at my expense. Why not make them GS or GM 15 and apply those wages and benefits to them that are offered to us. I bet you would see this system stay that same that it has been since Teddy Roosevelt. God forbid if they had to pay for plane fare, hotels etc and tried to live the life they live on our salaries. I want a better system to reward the excellent workers and fire the slackers, but not at the cost of giving managers all the controls. If you are not liked, but produce, good-bye bonus. If you are liked, and do crap work, hello bonus. There will always be favoritism and cronyism. It has been that way for years, but those bad managers move on or you move on. What bargaining rights we Federal Employees have managed to get need to be preserved. Although Congress acceded to the broad requests lodged by the DOD, it attached certain strict conditions--including a specific requirement that DOD observe legal requirements of labor relations statutes and that they involve duly elected unions in the development of the new system. The Pentagon has done neither. Although DOD has convened a dozen or more meetings to "brief stakeholders" and to "solicit the views" of unions, there has been no information sharing from DOD and absolutely no response to repeated union requests for specific information as to exactly what problems management wishes to address with the adoption of NSPS. The unions have been taken out of the picture. I wonder, who is next to be taken out of the picture - the employee. One of the provisions replaces seniority with performance-based criteria. I feel that this is discriminatory since age discrimination is against the law and since the people with the most seniority are older employees, this is wrong. The system will be totally corrupt if you change these rules. Those employees who may have done their jobs well but have made enemies among management will be sitting ducks. The EEO laws work well with minorities but does not work well with Age Discrimination and will not work at all in the future. It is not fair to people who served the government faithfully to get the boot. If you don't consider seniority there will be no reason for anyone to be in the government. I would be protected by the Merit System and also would be served by Seniority advantages to work to retirement if I chose. But with this new system, a younger person may replace me. And if my supervisor does not like me for whatever reason, out the door I go. Way to old to start over. What I can gather, promotions are limited to funds of 15 percent of the people at a certain command. 10 percent will get raises and the rest will suffer, meaning that 85 percent will get no raises or promotions. This means that management will get all the funds and the employees will pay the price. Do not allow Supervisors to determine pay raises. This would create an atmosphere of hostility and retribution. Why won't bonuses and Cost of Living be added to baseline salary? Does this mean that if management spends the 15 percent of top performers then the rest of the workforce gets no Cost of Living or pay increase? That is why the old system works well. At least we know that we will get our pay increase so that we can earn our high 3 towards retirement. The new system would take this away from us. The New DOD policy of placing people where they are needed is fine, if it is in the somewhat same geographical area but as stated there are no parameters. I urge you to review these policies and consider being more clear and concise. A lot of us are single parents, have child care issues, commute long distances and the list goes on and on. Why would you want to move an employee across the United States and disrupt their way of life and the people around them. It seems to me this is just another way of getting rid of an employee that management may not like. I did orders for the Marine Corps for many years and I know that if a Col didn’t like his supply officer or someone else in his command, they would come to me and tell me to get that person orders and out of the unit. This will be what happens to government employees who have not been in the good ole boys club. NSPS has failed all DOD federal civil service employees. Leave our current personnel system alone! This new system is no way to repay the loyalty & hard work of Civil Service employees. I oppose the implementation of NSPS until the Pentagon is willing to substantively address the issues raised by the United DOD Workers Coalition and other unions that have filed suit against Mr. Rumsfeld. This is another case of deceptive labeling. I do believe that I gave more to my job than I received over the years and truly believe my best years are behind me. I am certain that I will be gone in two years for several reasons. One I am not and never will be a political player or in the good ole boys club. I am an American and just want to work hard to keep the mission of the DoD going and my country safe. Also I think you will get more responses if you will please publish a document in layman terms that the average government employee can understand! After reading this mind-boggling document, it seems I would be better off working at Wal-Mart. Which I am sure is what is going to happen to a lot of DoD employees for substandard wages and no benefits. The more I read this hidden Dictatorship proposal, the more upset I get.