| Comment Number: | OL-10508834 |
| Received: | 3/15/2005 10:59:56 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:
The Federal Service has always had a reputation for being fair and unbiased and a decent employer with very infrequent layoffs. Many people chose to work for the Federal Government for these reasons and have been loyal and industrious workers for many years. Federal job applicants either passed an entrance test or had the work experience/education to qualify for a job and were given an equal chance with other applicants regardless of race, creed, or color. In the same way, federal employees couldn’t be removed from a job without just cause, a RIF of your series, or being bumped by someone with seniority during a RIF. The changes proposed in this new plan, while still being vague in some very important areas, would jeopardize the Federal Service’s reputation for fairness. The supervisor would have the power, through just the evaluation process: to punish employees by lowering their pay, to favor selected employees with positions or awards, and to coerce employees through the threat of losing their jobs. Giving management and supervisors unrestricted leeway to handle what has been a closely supervised and regulated process would be a disaster. The reason the system has always worked well is there are balances and counter balances with regulations that guide and protect the rights of employees as well as Government. To improve the Government service system: 1. Eliminate problem employees during the first probation year and 2. Don’t allow employees nearing retirement to slow down drastically before they stop. Requiring first level supervisors to handle these two areas would promote positive change. You might argue that not all supervisors or managers are corrupt. I concede but remind you of the truism that power corrupts and total power corrupts totally. Also the current push to make limited resources stretch to fill the experience and manpower shortages could make someone (the worm) turn to new methods. Pay banding would totally destroy any thought of teamwork among workers in similar jobs. If you only reward the guy who can walk on water, check beneath the waves to see how many of his teammates’ bodies he has piled up. Change is considered a good thing but only positive change is good. I think that there are enough safeguards in our current system and enough good federal employees to make the current system work if everyone does their job and is held accountable for that job. There are enough benefits to encourage federal employees to do a good job, enough accountability to judge the value of each job, and enough protection to enable them to compete fairly. Why change something that works? This scheme seems like a last ditch effort to save money, to effect an iron control on employees, and to work miracles by doing more work with far fewer employees. In the public sector fair wages, good benefits, and the chance to advance encourages the best workers to apply and to stick loyally to one company. I vote we try that route!