| Comment Number: | OL-10505806 |
| Received: | 3/11/2005 8:35:25 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:
It appears from the majority of comments that this system lacks buy-in from those it affects. Just to comment on a few as a manager: 1. Manage to the budget already exists and high-level managers completely control it (Most of whom are 06 positions). If it is not working, then the SECRETARY should hold them accountable. 2. A flexible workforce must be in existance as most organizations constantly go through reorgs/restructures. The goal of those most of the time are not necessarily mission related, but rather power building and upgrading of higher-level civillians. 3. WGI based on performance exists. If an employee is NOT performing as expected, the manager can notify the system to NOT implement their increase. It has become automatic to take tracking burdens off people and put them in technology. If this is an issue that the SECRETARY sees as a problem, provide guidance to the existing program. 4. Experience with Direct Hires is usually those veterans with 30% disability. Practicle application of this benefit shows many times loss of mission performance and having the right, qualified people in the job due to management changing existing job series that may require special qualifications to lesser qualifiations and keeping (or raising) the grade of the existing slot. 5. Cost of living increases must be left in tact. This kind of system will certainly affect the quality of employee the government is able to keep. 6. Instead of Pay Bands, use the existing system of CAPPING grades. Recommend that organizations be tasked to provide a review that shows impact of some of these "new" processes to their representatives in a formal response format.