Comment Number: OL-10506057
Received: 3/11/2005 10:54:12 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:

COMMENTS on Proposed Rule for National Security Personnel System (NSPS), published in the Federal Register, February 14, 2005. Please consider the following as formal comments on the abovementioned proposed rules: General: A tremendous amount of fundamental information has been left out of the proposed rules as published. The proposed regulations repeatedly state that more detail will be provided by “implementing issuances” at some point in the future. They will be subject to the same collaboration, mediation and notice to Congress requirements the NSPS law requires for these proposed regulations. Even if the proposed regulations became final in 60 days, they could not be implemented until the rest of the NSPS is subjected to the same process. It is recommended that DOD propose the entire NSPS at one time in a complete form. Subpart B: Classification: Under this subpart, DOD would have the authority to establish a new pay system completely outside the GS and WG systems. Specifics need to be provided so that they may be reviewed in their entirety. The proposed regulations indicate that when an employee is reduced in pay due to a reduction in force, the employee may get some sort of pay retention but no details are provided. DOD should assure its employees that if they were reduced to a lower pay band without personal fault (e.g., reassignment to a lower paying position to accommodate a disability), they would not suffer a loss in pay. Subpart C: Pay and Pay Administration: The proposed regulations do away with the General Schedule and Wage Grade systems, so Congress will no longer be involved in setting or adjusting basic pay or in providing cost of living increases. DOD, not Congress, will set this. Please provide details on how this information will be determined. Section 9901.343 would allow DOD to reduce the basic pay of an employee whose performance or conduct are unacceptable by up to 10 percent. A supervisor could undertake these actions to the point of cutting the employee’s pay in half in 5 years. The proposed regulations also provide that, upon promotion, an employee’s pay can be set anywhere in the higher pay band. This eliminates the provisions of current law, which control the exact grade and step an employee receives upon promotion. The opportunities are rife for abuse as management officials vary the pay of each new employee promoted depending on personal opinion. Subpart D: Performance Management: Supervisors would be permitted to set performance expectations in such vague terminology as “teamwork” and “cooperation.” These are trendy management buzzwords. They have no place in long-term regulations. Performance ratings would be used by supervisors to “adjust” employee pay (presumably up or down). Performance ratings would not be grievable but could be challenged through some other procedure yet to be designed. This is unacceptable and promotes cronyism, which the current civil service system was created to eliminate. Subpart F: Reductions in Force: Employees facing a RIF situation have always relied on their seniority to give them standing during a budget crisis. It is a way of rewarding loyalty and creating a stable workforce. As an employee with 27 years Federal service, I am opposed to changes to the existing system, which are not detailed in this Federal Register notice for public review. Subpart G: Adverse Actions: The proposal would provide for “mandatory removal offenses” for which no reduction in the penalty would be allowed. No list of such offenses is given. Instead, the proposal says that the Secretary can issue and change the list at will. This is unacceptable and gives the Secretary unwarranted power with no checks and balances. While I agree that revisions to the current Civil Service personnel system are warranted to provide incentive to a new generation of public servants, these rules are dangerous and treat career employees like political appointees. Many of the protections, which these rules seek to eliminate, enable the day-to-day career Federal workforce to do its job in a professional and unbiased manner regardless of who is currently in office. Thank you for the opportunity to comment.