Comment Number: OL-10506618
Received: 3/12/2005 12:15:46 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:

First of all, as hard as I tried, I could not read and understand all of this change to take place. Perhaps the change is warranted in many areas such as hiring faster etc., but my concern is the pay performance changes. Although I agree it is unfair for those who perform less than expected receive the same amount of compensation. However, what would be worse is for someone who does perform above expectations receive less because of a personal conflict with a supervisor, an incompetent supervisor who doesn't pursue the paperwork for the employee or who doesn't understand the importance of the new pay system. The flip side is playing favoritism for the employee who doesn't deserve the "pay raise". I believe in the idea of being paid for "performance," but there is too much chance this could become more abused than how the system is now. I worked in the post office for 6 years, and believe me, I saw people who did little more than show up for work. As you probably know, moving mail fast and efficiently is part of the postal service. I saw people stand with a foot on a ledge of the mail ledge, bending over to pick up each piece of mail to be sorted. Instructions were to have at least 6 inches of mail in the hand to sort. (I could give many examples of non-performance, subordination on the floor). It was very frustrating to see them earn the same as someone who gave 100%, but at least I knew they couldn't be paid more than me and others who did perform. And believe it or not, some of those people were very tight with the supervisors (because of time in the position or personality), and I saw others who were great workers but whom the supervisors despised. I also saw workers who performed well, but caused havoc with others on the work room floor causing their performance to decline. How would this be judged? I believe there is a greater risk to overcompensate those who do not deserve the performance pay than those who deserve it not receiving it. Possibly the idea behind this new change is to encourage performance. I don't know that this will be the result. Instead, it may cause more resentment from employees to supervisors, co-workers, and the job itself. If my prediction were to be true, these are all negativity issues that cause performance to fall, not increase. More complaints to management, more grievenances (if applicable), etc. I feel that I am one of those who gives at least 100% (rarely falling from this), and I am not in favor of the performance pay. The other day pay came up when my supervisor and another supervisor were speaking. They mentioned it was a shame their secretaries couldn't get paid more. I mentioned the new system coming and neither were aware of it. (And I feel my supervisor is informed and intelligent--what about those who aren't!) If I felt there could be no room for "cracks", I would be in favor of it. But I believe there could be major cracks, and the overall effect would be more of a crisis than a help. Perhaps I am being too quick to be negative before giving the system a try, but it often it is not easy to return to the old, if the new doesn't work. I am not well-versed about the change, and I don't pretend to be. Yet, I thought it was my responsibility to voice my opinion (when asked) hoping that I bring issues to the surface that may have not been considered. Sincerely, Gayle C. Buss 336 H Flight Secretary (1 year) Previous Postal Employee (6 years)