| Comment Number: | OL-10507513 |
| Received: | 3/14/2005 11:51:58 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:
It appears to me that NSPS's method of reducing the (quote) dispute-oriented, adversarial relationship between management and labor (unquote) is not to improve the working conditions, productivity and protection of employees so they may do the best possible job to ensure the safety and security of our nation, but to limit and minimize the unions' and labor's current bargaining and protection on behalf of Federal employees so management can unilaterally decide the fate of employees in an arbitrary and capricious manner, allowing NSPS to move employees to any job anywhere in the world. I believe (quote) more flexibility to assign employees new or different work (unquote) and (quote) lengthy, detailed job descriptions no longer needed (unquote) in the name of (quote) National Security (unquote) if actually implemented will create more churn and confusion within the workforce and will therefore diminish the ability of the employees to provide the timely and expert support needed for the security and safety of our nation. I do not know why management would want this to transpire. The security of this nation would be better helped by better contingency planning and implementation on the part of management within the framework we have now and would go much farther to enable our Federal workers to do the job of protecting our nation; the Federal workforce is more than able to handle the scope of any new contingency planning and implementation within the system we have today. The statement (quote) nothing delays management's ability to act (unquote) (re: Labor Relations) connotes a violation of due process under law and, along with the attempt of NSPS to (quote) limit situations that are subject to bargaining (unquote) and therefore (quote) water down (unquote) current Union-Management interaction, is another example of an anti-employee (and therefore anti-national security) action, and is I believe additionally totally at odds with the statement (quote) ensures due process (unquote) (Adverse Actions). I believe that the use of the (quote) NSPS Labor Relations provisions (unquote) is an attempt to circumvent our current system where current policies regarding reduction-in-force and the current bargaining and protection of employees by Unions and Labor all support the employee and, therefore, help keep our nation secure by enabling the employee to be a part of the government and not some pawn on some management chessboard, subject to the arbitrary and capricious whims of those within management who would be allowed under NSPS to determine the fate of those actually doing the work. I did not see any references to annual cost of living increases, flextime, alternate work schedules or telework mentioned within the NSPS 53-page Federal Register publication either. I would certainly be remiss in not pointing these omissions out, since I am certain that these are not only issues of concern to me, but to many other hard-working Federal employees as well. (Also, it seems to me that being given only 30 days for review of a 53-page document that is of such importance to us workers is a rather short amount of time, especially since we have our work to do; so there are probably issues I missed that I would have found important enough on which to comment, given the appropriate amount of time.) (Additionally this comment software does not support the use of quotemarks...who designed this comment system? rhetorical question)