Comment Number: | OL-10508790 |
Received: | 3/15/2005 10:46:32 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 don't like the idea of being deployed into a war zone area. After retiring from the Air Force after serving 20 years I feel that I have served faithfully and now I am trying to share my experiences and knowledge to new Airmen coming into the Air Force. If deployed to a war zone and unfortunately killed, how would my family be taken care of? I don't like the pay for performance system. There are too many varibles that could effect my pay for performance. If my supervisor felt that I deserved a pay increase and his boss doesn't feel the same way, then I would not get the pay raise I deserved. Or if my supervisor doesn't put me in for a pay increase and his supervisor felt I deserved one then I would still be out. At least with the longivity rasie system I would have received something and something is better than nothing. There is too much of "good ole boy" syndrome that could play into this. There already is this in the current system as well. I feel that everyone deserves the locality pay regardless of performance. This is to ensure that the rate of inflation or cost of living is met at a fair pace. I can't understand why people want to break something that really isn't broke. It the current system is working fine then why mess with it. If anything it only needed to be tweeked not revamped. To say that this new NSPS will not be tested prior to full implementation is crazy. Why put something out there without testing it properly. Do you put your hand in the fire without testing to see if it is hot first? Come on people, think about how deep the water is before you jump in head first. Why wasn't the 100 Focus Groups and 50 Town Hall meetings worldwide publicized? Where were they held? Is there any transcipts of what was said? I think that there could have been a survey conducted to see what if any changes needed to be made to the current or future system. What real guarantee do we have that this new system will have the necessary funds to support annual increases? What happens if there is not enough funds to support increases to those who have been submitted for one? Would the increase go away or would there be a decrease in raises to support all who have been nominated? If you are going to revamp our pay by performance then Congress needs to get on the same bandwagon. They really need this type of system since they don't perform. Congress doesn't care about the way we get paid because they get thier annual increases automatically without having the public vote to decide whether they deserve a increase or not.