| Comment Number: | OL-10503212 |
| Received: | 3/4/2005 12:22:08 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:
General - After having listened to under-Secretary Adams, I have mixed feelings on NSPS. She did not make the case for the reason for the change. Adding the word Security is a little doomist. We are Americans working for America and by changing the name and the way we hire and fire will not in any way make our country more secure. Overall it seemed like a sales pitch for a program that is really undefined. The purpose and expectations are repeated over and over, but no detail as to how things will really work. I do not think the case has been made for the need to change the existing system. I am not opposed to change if it makes sense either monetarily or from a standpoint of value added. This has not been done, or the Under Secretary did not present it in a very enlightening venue. The documentation I have read thus far has laid down basic existing structure; supervisors will sit down with employees and set expectations. How is that different? When you sell a program to employees, make sure you have researched exactly what and how you plan on doing something, lay out the reasons for the change, show ultimate improvement over current conditions and have answers for the inevitable questions that will be forthcoming. Change for the sake of change is an injustice and misappropriation of our limited resources.