| Comment Number: | OL-10507540 |
| Received: | 3/14/2005 12:14:42 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 entire, "Case for Action", speaks to an armed military with, "a future force that is defined less by size and more by mobility and swiftness, one that is easier to deploy and sustain, one that relies more heavily on stealth, precision weaponry, and information technologies’’, rather than addressing a home-based civilian support force that, "complement and support the military around the world in every time zone, every day." As a former active duty military member and a Gulf War veteran, I now support the military, as well as the civilian community, through the Army Corps of Engineers. We have members deployed on permanent and temporary assignments around the globe including Afghanistan and Iraq. Those individuals in hostile areas went there voluntarily and with supervisory consent. They previously have, and presently continue to serve honorably as integrated team members while upholding the security mission of the US. The rhetorical distinction of, "20th century assumptions", versus the, "21st century national security environment", is purely an alarmist argument against the employee protections embodied in the Civil Service regulations. There has never been an employee that couldn't be fired or removed from service for due cause under the existing regulations. It has been entirely the flaws of weak and incompetent management that have failed to adequately employ, train, utilize, reward and discipline the work force under the existing rules. There has historically been a, "labor system", in this country that, "encourages a dispute-oriented, adversarial relationship between management and labor", ever since we established the rights of laborers in this country, and backed those rights with court decisions upholding labor's right to unionize and be represented in numbers to the united front that management has always had. The implementation of new regulations, and worse, the removal of existing regulations that afford these protections for employees is a travesty against labor rights. Also, it only perpetuates incompetent management by allowing it greater freedom to pass blame for inefficiency and ineffectiveness down to the employees who are trying hard to succeed in the face of bad decision-making. Management seeks always to perpetuate a facade of infallibility by denouncing anyone who seeks redress of bad decisions. These regulatory changes play to that facade by allowing management to cover up its errors with labor purges under the guise of greater efficiency. The only result of enactment of these changes will be a labor force too afraid of quick and easy retribution to speak out against fraud, waste and abuse within the system. A more corrupt and amoral work force will be promoted into high paying, senior, and management positions for advocating and supporting prior bad management practices. Rewards and advancement will be reserved to those who parrot leadership's rhetoric. Punishments, dismissals and low-paying jobs will be the prizes for conscientious, moral and dedicated employees who have nerve enough to say, "the king isn't wearing any clothes". The aims of these changes may be well intended, but they are nonetheless badly aimed at the wrong people. These changes will in fact perpetuate a weak and inefficient civilian work force in the federal system through the revival of nepotism, favoritism, and cronyism rather than a purge of the ineffective and poor performers. I urge you see through the deception, and not dismantle, but rather strengthen the protections for the moral and dedicated workers who are the last bastion of an effective and high-performing federal civilian work force, and the last hope of the American people for a moral and righteous government that they can trust. The American people expect a government run by moral, dedicated, and effective employees. Don't make that less of a reality by threatening the existing precarious balance between management and labor.