| Comment Number: | OL-10506094 |
| Received: | 3/11/2005 11:29:04 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:
RIN 3206-AK76/0790-AH82-While I feel that many of the concerns I have in regard to NSPS as a Federal Employee fall upon deaf ears, I deem it necessary to express them before the few rights I have left are gone forever. I agree that the present federal hiring system is often slow and cumbersome. Because of the critical need of performing background checks and the amount of time it takes to through the chain of command, I disagree that NSPS is a solution. So far, in all the data I have read to date, I have not seen a single line which remotely suggests NSPS can recommend or implement a solution to change anything that can speed up this process. Like the need for Armor Plating on the light wheeled vehicles, no one in Congress or the Senate listened until a close friend or relative of their own was killed. NSPS concept of wanting to hire the best is good. The notion that we pay new hires more than the experienced personnel that have been performing this work for the past 20 plus years is wrong. Hands on experience is the real education in life. DoD needs to understand the difference between civilians and the military. Civilians hire on to support the military. While their integrity is high and their loyalty is strong, they did not hire on to be deployed to any place in the world on a moment's notice for as long as DoD sees fit to keep them there. We do have exceptions already in place (Equipment Specialist/LARS) who hire on with the knowledge that as part of their job, they will be required to follow the piece of equipment they are assigned to, any place in the world to establish corrective actions that will make it more efficient. There will always be workload fluctuations. Our agency has been hiring a lot of term and temp employees which gives you the flexibilities for "rightsizing." Even under these standards, there are issues that need to be addressed. Probationary periods should be the same for everyone, not set for each individual employee. A year-long probationary period is more than enough time for anyone to endure. If a manager cannot figure out by then if they want to retain an individual or not, maybe the manager should be replaced. I maintain that seniority should always come before performance ratings. Under the NSPS plan, it would appear that DoD wants to forget about the years of dedicated service people have performed. Take a closer look at what is already established. Presnetly performance ratings already affect seniority. During a RIF, ratings are added to years of service. Everyone is treated equally. Veteran's preference should be enhanced instead of NSPS plan to greatly reduce benefits. During this time of putting the lives of our women and men in uniform at risk, while we all sleep snug in our beds, we owe it to them. Performance ratings should be left in tact and preference for veterans should be retained straight across the board. Under NSPS, a veteran during a RIF could be retained, but at what cost? A veteran could only compete within their competitive level. Bump and retreat rights to a previously held job would be gone. Please note, these facts are only addressing the Staffing and Employment and Workforce Shaping. I have not addressed Classification, Pay and Pay Administration, Performance Management, Adverse Action, Appeals, or Labor/Management Relations. Let's keep America and our federal workforce free and not turn it into a dictatorship like China. This is how I truly see NSPS. My rights as a federal worker are on the line and I'm not giving up without just cause. Thanks for your time. Mr. Larry Rayls, 1304 Gaines St., Davenport, IA 52804