| Comment Number: | OL-10505872 |
| Received: | 3/11/2005 9:22:06 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:
Since it's not every day people are actually asked for input I would like to seize this opportunity to express some of my concerns. I have worked as a civilian for the department of the Army for over 20 years and would like to continue for 20 more. Regarding Hiring Flexibilities- Many senior leadership/supervisor positions are staffed by military personnel, and will probably continue for some time. I have not seen much interest from them in hiring the right person and then develop those people once hired. Because our military supervisors are only in positions for temporary time periods, there is very little interest on their part for the health/success of the organization. The military thinks nothing of having Ph.D. employees with a wealth of experience employed as GS-9's. Yet with military service qualifying as ‘specialized’ they are able to walk into positions without proper civilian education credentialing. As more jobs are civilianized, military personnel may simply bring their cronies on board, because of the hiring flexibilities. One positive outcome might be that doing so would perhaps result in higher-grade levels than would ordinarily be the case for civilian positions. Otherwise, I fully expect that as military jobs become "civilianized," jobs currently performed by O-3's and O-4's for example, will become GS-7's and 9's. I also question the establishment of "career groups" with "corresponding paybands." "pay for performance" sounds wonderful in theory, but when one works for weasels, performance isn't necessarily enough. I see room for favoritism and popularity contests.