| Comment Number: | OL-10505586 |
| Received: | 3/10/2005 6:31:32 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:
The proposed National Security Personnel System (NSPS) regulations issued by the Department of Defense (the Department) and the Office of Personnel Management (OPM) are deeply disturbing to me as a Department employee. I believe that these proposed regulations undermine the value of the government employee by stripping away the hard-fought rights we've attained. The proposed NSPS regulations do not preserve collective bargaining, instead they override any provision of a collectively bargained agreement. Essentially, this provision will provide the Department the authority to make any change it desires, while barring any negotiation over these changes. The Department declares that management will now have the power “to take whatever other actions may be necessary to carry out the Department’s mission,” a clause that literally has no definition or limitation in the regulation. The Department has always had the power to make decisions based on the "mission". With the new proposal, they don't have to discuss the impact it'll have on the employees, however detrimental. DoD and OPM should scrap their harmful proposals for NSPS and work collaboratively with employee unions to develop a new system, as Congress directed them to do! Any time you have an evaluation system involving cash incentive, problems always come up because they are viewed as unfair, biased, and un-objective. Making it a quota-based eval system doesn't apply to everyone, because everyone doesn't do quantitative work that can be measured against a list or chart. Past history of monetary-based evaluations has shown that the managerial levels always get the gold more than the employees------It's the employees that do the work that the managers get credit for-why should management be so much more entitled? It's just not right. The argument was presented that this new system will allow people to be fired easier for non-productivity....the current system allows for people to be fired based on the performance-or lack thereof....We don't need this changed, just educated mangers that can use the system as it should be used. The most disturbing thing is that the way these proposed regs are presented, the Department would be able to do just about whatever it wanted to do, and be able to thumb their collective noses at the people they will be hurting with -without caring. It used to be that the government job was one where the employee was appreciated for their time, service, expertise, and loyaly. Changing to this proposed system invites animosity, disgruntled attitudes, unfair representation, railroaded employees, and disparity among the ranks. Stripping people of their hard-earned rights is not the way to encourage people to work for the Department. These proposals show that people are worth less to the Department than the rules that govern them, and that taking rights and advantages away from these people "is just good business". Why do they hurt most the ones that make them what they are to begin with?