Comment Number: OL-10508240
Received: 3/14/2005 9:56:20 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:

There are issues that I have with the new pay system. The first is that the new system allows for reducing an employeees pay by a maximum of 10% a year based upon the supervisor's rating. This provides the supervisor with an enormous amount of power over an employee, especially if the supervisor may base this rating and penalty based on interjecting his/her personal feelings as part of the evaluation and not keeping it to based facts. If an employee grieves this action, and overturns an incorrect rating, the pay portion can't be revised, only the rating. This still leaves the employee damaged due to an incorrect adverse action. I have seen instances where supervisor's ratings were not totally based on performance, but on personal feelings. There are presently methods in dealing with poor performers, however they are cumbersome and many supervisors don't want to make the effort to follow the methodology. A better way of dealing with this problem is to make the present system work easier so that supervisors will make more of an effort to use it. The proposed system easily allows now the supervisor too much ease to abuse the system. The second issue is that the method each employee will be rewarded based on the employees negotiation with the supervisor on their pay increase, if any. This will create an advesarial situation at each rating period in that it will be open season as to how much an employee can convince a supervisor how much they should be rewarded for their performance. I again have seen how supervisors have treated certain employees much more favorably when they based their work subjectively instead of objectively for non-performance factors. In the present situation, when the situation is abused, the abuse is limited in how a supervisor can reward an employee in such a situation whereas the new system doesn't provide any limits to a system that can be easily abused. The system doesn't appear to guarantee a correction of the original problem from the past, how to deal with pay increases if you have topped out in your GS grade. I have been at step 10 for many years with no chance for any pay advancement at this grade. Pay banding is part of the proposed system, but depending how pay is banded, there may be little relief to this long standing problem. This problem really needs to be addressed in a positive manner, but the new system doesn't identify a definitive method if this will be realized. I don't understand how the new system can foster any team performance. It is basically a situation to allow personal greed to be the controlling factor in how employees interact and be rewarded.