Comment Number: OL-10502830
Received: 3/3/2005 8:16:01 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:

I question the fact that the NSPS was not developed to a level that allowed employees to truly evaluate the program. How are we to submit comments about a skeleton of a system? With that said, I have the following comments and concerns: 1. I believe that once the program has been better developed it should THEN be opened up for comment. 2. Who is deciding the categories that different career fields will fall into in the pay banding? What are these decisions based on? What if you have a similar career field, but are much more technical than your counterparts-beyond the scope of the bands? 3. How will the pay pool committee (I believe it was billed as an oversight committee) be implemented? At what level will it be conducted? Who performs the checks and balances on the pay pool committee? 4. In a system that allows one person to perform evaluations, how do you ensure that evaluations are fair? I know that employees can submit comments, but what happens to these comments? 5. Do you believe that employees will still be motivated to train and share information with their peers if you pit them against each other for income? If only so much money is available, why should they help others become proficient? 6. If there are quotas instituted to keep supervisors from evaluating all personnel at the highest level to get them all raises (I am assuming, the plan is to vague), what about offices that have a high percentage of outstanding performers? Will they be capped on how many outstandings they can award? 7. If quotas by organization occur, wouldn't that encourage outstanding performers to go to inefficient offices? Who would want to work with other outstanding performers if they believed that it would impact their income? Your very efficient offices could lose their employees. Thank you.