| Comment Number: | OL-10508855 |
| Received: | 3/15/2005 11:10:39 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:
Re. National Security Personnel System (NSPS) regulations As a 40 year DoDDS employee, I have had ample opportunity to observe the workings of collective bargaining both at the local school level and at the national level. In each instance these discussions between teachers and principals/DoDDS director have led to an improvement in understanding between the two parties and generally to an improvement in working conditions for teachers. I have also personally been involved in a case of alleged sexual abuse of a student by a colleague which was arbitrated locally. Because of the excellence of the arbitrator, this case was decided in favor of the teachers, and he was reinstated. If my colleague had not had access to this arbitration process, his rights, professional reputation, and his long years of service would have been endangered. For these reasons, the NSPS regulations as they are currently proposed need to be reconsidered. The regulations 9901.905 (a) and 9901.914(d)(5) both deal with overriding any agreement bargained collectively. If we leave working conditions to be decided by the Department or their deputies, abuses will be more likely to occur. Also proposed regulation 9901.907(a)(1) which deals with abolishing a third party review would be deleterious to the morale and the working conditions of DoDDS teachers. Especially at this time, when the job of teaching dependents of military personnel deployed in Iraq, is particulary difficult, DoDDS teachers need to know that assigned duties and responsibilities are always open to a third party review. The fact that the Secretary could also "pack" the Board with as many people to reach his desired outcome, is particulary unsettling. This smacks of colonial despotism. My final point deals with the NSPS proposals to deny the right to appeal an adverse action (9901.807(k)(iii). Surely this cannot be the intent of Congress pledged to insure fairness and equity within the Civil Service. I urge you to reconsider these proposals taking into account the adverse effects that I have outlined above.