Comment Number: OL-10507359
Received: 3/14/2005 10:31:52 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:

I know the powers to be have already decided this change, but that is part of the problem. We all need to be leery when something this big has been discussed with those it will effect, so little. The question isn’t, “Are we going to be screwed?” it’s “How badly are we going to be screwed?” If the government wants to change this system, it should only be changed for the people that come into civil service from this point on. I signed up for this career many years ago with the understanding that I would have certain benefits. This included not only the pay, but also the rights of seniority when it comes to a RIF, etc. In many cases, the civil service supervisors are military personnel who might not know there is a difference between the military way and the civil service way. This has always been a problem because in the military, you can be told to do anything; you are moved from place to place or job-to-job without asking you first. That is fine for them, as a civil service employee, I’m not in the military and I want to make my own decisions. Just because some boss thinks I might be better suited for another job in another office, doesn’t mean it would fit in with my life. Also, why should a boss that is here for two years be concerned about my pay? He can have me jumping through hoops trying to prove myself just because he wants to. What if he knows of someone that was once in the military that could do my job? Don’t you think he is likely to try to hire them? He could find a job for me somewhere else or just find a way to get rid of me. The “good ole boy” syndrome is right around the corner. The “pot” of money for raises that each supervisor, division, or directorate will have will only be so big. That tells you that your raise won’t be based on performance; it will be based on what is available after a senior supervisor gives his people what he wants them to get. Also, what about the employee who is at the top of the pay ban, if the supervisor wants to save money so he looks good, it might be better to get rid of that person and hire someone younger that would probably start at the lower end of the pay ban. You say we are a team, but I don’t see any team here, I see everyone against everyone else. There are more reasons to not help someone in your office than to help them. After all, if you’re competing with them for money, why would you want them to look good? And, a good “suck-up” with the supervisor will go a long way. This entire system opens the doors to bring back the “good ole boys” and the “suck-ups”. Thanks for having the government live up to its reputation of first spending, then changing, followed by thinking and regretting, and finally moving along with another messed up product. Webster’s defines a democracy as government through representation – a way of life providing extensive personal rights – the greatest good for the greatest number. What happened here? I certainly don’t remember voting for someone to come in and change my career life and I certainly don’t think this is for the good of the greatest number.