| Comment Number: | OL-10503686 |
| Received: | 3/7/2005 12:05:42 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:
While I see a need for supervisors to have a way to eliminate poor performers, why should the rest of us suffer for the failure of a few? The system is not broken as the politicians would lead you to believe. I think there is an ulterior motive behind this change and that is to allow the people in charge to build a position to fit themselves or a friend, then apply for the job themselves. The present system rewards those who excel through promotions in a competitive "stacking". It also ensures that employees who do not elect to go to all the parties, join in community actions, etc., but do their job extremely well without reward other than the step increase or a performance reward, will not be recognized. Invariable, under the new system, since there will be a limited amount of money available for each pay band for performance reward (salary increase) there will be many employees who are not awarded the pay simply because they choose not to play the "game" but perform exceptionally well in the job. If the intent of the new system is to "weed out" poor performers, it will not work. A job at a lower wage is preferable to no job at all, so the minimum employee will still be around doing the minimal work. I understand the need to bring in younger, forward-thinking workers, but these workers will be without experience or mentors to learn like the older workers have already done. The way to do this right is to make the pay comparable with the average wage for the same work in the private sector. The current government benefits package is much better than the majority of private companies and could attract as many new workers as a better wage, since a lot of those benefits (jury duty pay continuation, cumulative sick leave, increasing annual leave hours, life insurance, etc) are not offered in the private sector. I also forsee personality conflicts between supervisors and employees resulting in less pay, no awards and no progression. (Don't think it doesn't happen because I have personally seen it.) A loose cannon (superviors and management) without safeguards is not the way to change anything. I realize change is inevitable, but the new system should be phased in as the employees under the old sytem retire or quit.