| Comment Number: | OL-10506439 |
| Received: | 3/11/2005 3:18:59 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:
Supplementary Information: The Case for Action, page 7553, about 4/5ths of the way down the middle column. The statement "DoD leadership (I will hereafter refer to them as the "good old boys") will ensure that supervisors and employees understand the new system and can function effectively within it", is asinine. What it really means is that that the employees will be forced to talk about their co-workers like dirt, be rat finks, not share information freely (as knowledge is viewed as power), and generally run each other down to the supervisor to show the supervisor that one deserves a pay raise and the other one doesn't. And that I not only deserve my pay raise, give me his also cause I am such a good butt kisser. Perhaps I should invest some of my social security monies into the Chapstick company as sells will be picking up shortly. The Case for Action, page 7554. Collaboration procedures are the exclusive procedure for the participation of employee representatives. What does that mean? The meetings that the "good old boys" have held so far with the Unions have consisted of the "good old boys" telling the Union to sit down and shut-up and we will tell you what we are going to do. In reading this, I see that "due process" is castrated. All the gains made in the past 50 years by minorities and women will disappear or at a minimum be severely restricted according to what the "good old boys" want. It does away with the collective/negotiated agreement that the working Americans have fought so hard for. In one fell swoop, the "good old boys" will set the hard working Americans back years. The 6 year expiration, unless extended by statute, means nothing. What is the contingency plan if it is not extended? How will the workforce get back to what was? Or are the "good old boys" just "assuming" that it will be extended because no one thought it through and questioned their real motives for this action? Process; Leadership, page 7554. In April 2004, the "good old boys" approved the collaborative process that the Department is using to design and implement NSPS. Where were the Unions in this process? The "good old boys" took three (3) whole weeks to draft a document that belongs in "Ripley's believe it or not museum". I am so glad they put so much thought into the process. Apparently, when the "good old boys" managed to slip this through Congress by attaching it to the appropriations bill, they decided in their own minds that our elected officials had given them expressed permission to strip the patriotic Americans who serve the American Public, of their rights that they have earned through the years. I hope Congress did not have this in mind. If so, every dam one of them should be booted out next election as their interest is not for the people who elected them. Process; Guiding Principles and Key Performance Parameters, page 7555. The second bullet states "Respect the individual-protect rights guaranteed by law...how is that to be adhered to. Seems that NSPS will do just the opposite and take away rights. Please explain in detail as it walks like a duck, quacks like a duck but the "good old boys" are insisting it is a puppy. A workforce that can be deployed at the "good old boys" whim? Our employees are not military people. The vast majority of the jobs they were offered and accepted did not entail having to leave their families and go to war zones. It is the military's responsibility to go to hotspots as directed by their commander in chief, and they know that when they "voluntarily" joined the military. There is a difference but the "good old boys" do not want you to think about it as it is contrary to their desires. The nerve of the "good old boys" to talk about "credible and trusted system". Only an anal retentive idiot would think that management, sorry, the "good old boys" can be trusted or are even credible after reading this so-called sorry excuse of a regulation.