| Comment Number: | OL-10509005 |
| Received: | 3/15/2005 11:59:39 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:
As it is currently defined, the NSPS pay system does not appear to be a better system for employees, or the government who depend on its employees to get work accomplished. I am opposed to implementation of the NSPS at this time. I have almost 18 years with the DON and I have 17 Outstanding awards, so I don’t see a problem with me doing my job, and going above and beyond. On the other hand, there is more to it than that. I’ve had military supervisors in the past who do not like to do paperwork. The system is supposed to hold supervisors accountable for how well they do their paperwork or promote employee’s but if you have a military supervisor, who will hold them accountable? The proposed system is too autocratic and eliminates any redress for decisions made on the basis of considerations other than merit. For example, even in this day and age, there are some male supervisors who think men deserve pay raises because they are the head of the household, but guess what? There are plenty of single women/parents out there too who depend on locality pay adjustments, cost of living increases and regular pay raises as part of their salary. Another concern is budgetary: If the NSPS system will be connected to the budget, does that mean that there will be budget constraints that interfere with the pay banding and raises? We hear it all the time, “no money for awards, no money for training”, etc. For example, what if a supervisor has 10 employees and 4 are approved for “raises” - will management come back and say that there is only enough money for 2 of the 4 to get raises? How will you then decide who gets a raise? Favoritism? Whoever you know the best? Whichever is a man and might need the money more? It sounds as if the “good ole boy” network is going to become stronger in the workforce. Supervisors have all the power. Playing favorites could be a determining factor for giving raises. I think it could also foster an attitude that is in direct opposition to teamwork. And what about position descriptions and fair payment for jobs you do? Who decides this? Your supervisor who has been to possibly one supervisory class, 10 years ago, who knows nothing about position classification?? This system needs some serious re-work before it can hope to work well on all levels. While the current system does have some problems, must we go to the direct opposite of the scale in an effort to fix them? Thank you