| Comment Number: | OL-10506500 |
| Received: | 3/11/2005 4:52:59 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:
The pay banding concerns me for several reasons. First, I see the potential for abuse by reverting or moving deeper into the buddy system. Second, the system does not take into account the fiscal benefits for individual members of a team if the entire team is highly productive. Lastly, and my biggest concern, is the size of the pay bands. If the pay bands are to broad, specific categories of people will be benefited at others expense. For example, IMA has dictated that all environmental offices will fall under the purview of the Directorate of Public Works. If the band is made at the DPW level, environmental specialists will compete with engineers. If you are honest with yourself, you know the DPW, who is an engineer, is going to give the money to their fellow engineers. This problem is only further compounded as a pay band becomes larger. The pay band should be maintained at the smallest functional level. A branch under a division would be best and a division under a directorate would be next best. Please do not place at risk those positions that perform duties, which are often times looked down on by others at an installation. Those persons such as environmental, safety, SJA, etc. who have to periodically explain that an action simply cannot be taken should be protected from retaliatory action by someone who is in control of their pay band.