| Comment Number: | OL-10508235 |
| Received: | 3/14/2005 9:46:33 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:
Classification (Subpart B) 9901.201 to .231 I have not seen nor read any rationale from DoD of why you need these changes. I cannot understand how my classification or pay has affected national security. Pay & Pay Administration Subpart C 9901.301 to.373 There is no guarantee that I will not lose pay as a result of conversion to NSPS. Performance Management Subpart D 9901.401 to .409 Management has always been able to reward high performers with monetary award, time off award, QSI, etc. We don't need NSPS for this. Staffing & Employment Subpart E, 9901.501 to .516 I agree the hiring process is slow and cumbersome but we do not need NSPS to figure out a solution to that porblem. Workforce Shaping Subpart F, .6012 to .611 A year - long probationary period is more than enough time for anyone to endure. If a manager cannot figure out by then if they want to keep that individual or not, then the manager should be removed. Adverse Actions Subpart G, 9901.701 to .721 If the concern is that the system is too slow, we should look at making changes to the procedural process and not discard it completely. The time frame could be shortened. Appeals Subpart II, 9901.801 to 810 Congress mandated the employees be treated fairly and afforded the protections of due processes, yet, your proposals all but eliminates that. Labor/Management Relations Subpart I, 9901.901 to 929 The Union and the employees have always done what had to be accomplished to order to support the soldiers. I cannot ever remember a time when the Negotiated Agreement or the Union has been a hindrance. DoD has not allowed the Unions to be an active participant in this process. These proposals are all DoD's and none of it is input from the Unions.