| Comment Number: | OL-10503358 |
| Received: | 3/5/2005 8:44:18 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:
Reductions in Force It is difficult to understand what you are trying to accomplish with the proposed changes to the RIF regulations published by OPM at 5 CFR Part 351. The proposal is certainly not simpler or easier to administer. The most confusing part is section 9901.607, which purports to describe retention standing. It says that all employees in a competitive group (basically, a competitive level) will be placed on a retention list in descending order, based on tenure, veterans preference, performance rating and creditable service. An employee’s retention standing therefore depends on four factors, but how are they combined? For all the employees with the same tenure (say, career employees) does the disabled veteran get to keep his job? Does the employee with a high performance rating and 10 years of service get to displace the disabled veteran? Is this just one more example of a policy where we have to wait for the “implementing issuance” to figure out what it is? It seems fairly clear that the proposed regulations will not have tenure sub-groups. This is how veterans were given preference in a RIF under the old regulations. Disabled veterans with more than a 30 percent disability were in tenure group IAD and other veterans were in tenure group IA. Employees in lower tenure subgroups would be released before veterans. It now appears that disabled veterans and other veterans will have to compete with non-veterans for retention in a RIF, something that Congress has never allowed.