| Comment Number: | OL-10506260 |
| Received: | 3/11/2005 1:13:15 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:
Subjects: Awards, promotions, Quality Step Increases, Ideas I think that those that actually save the government money when they perform technical reviews of contractor proposals warrant promotion and substantial awards regardless of management's opinion of the value of the savings. By this I mean, management in the government often, after years of being taught that we must move into the cost:benefit logic of business (use small business as your best example), still rewards people for extraneous reasons that are not actual cost savings and conversely often does not reward those who do provide actual cost savings. Using inductive and deductive logic, we should see if the job proposed is being done completely. If it is and the government technical writer provided logic to get things done for less, and this position is held at the end of the negotiations, that technical writer should be allowed a substantial reward, to include one time money and/or QSI and/or promotion. It is not wise to 'starve' the productive technical writer when to 'feed' him or her would greatly benefit the government.