| Comment Number: | OL-10509050 |
| Received: | 3/15/2005 12:21:20 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:
Subpart A General Provisions – Section 9901.101 to 9901.108 9901.101 How does NSPS “put mission first”? 9901.101 How does NSPS “respect the individual”? 9901.101 How does NSPS “ensure accountability at all levels” without preserving access to neutral third-party review of labor relations issues? 9901.101 While DoD states that “credible and trusted” is a “key operational characteristic and requirement,” why is it necessary to reduce and encumber the role of employee representatives (unions), who can ensure that the system is truly credible and trusted? Subpart B Classification - Section 9901.201 to 9901.231 NSPS will replace the current government job classifications by grouping them into a few occupational categories with pay being set in "bands" with the new categories. Individual employees will be unable to appeal these newly classified positions or the broad range of duties under the revised categories to a neutral arbitrator. NSPS describes a process to build a classification structure, but fails to define one. Where is the accountability? Where is the credibility? Where is the trust? Subpart C Pay, Sections 9901.301 to 9901.373 Defense Department employees should continue to receive the same annual pay and across-the-board adjustments that other GS/FWS workers receive. The individual pay increases for performance in the regulations should include guaranteed percentages so employees will understand the pay system and what their pay increase will be depending on their performance. Subpart D Performance Management - 9901.401 to 9901.409 To ensure fairness and accuracy, Defense Department employees should be able to appeal any performance rating to an independent grievance and arbitration process as they can do now. Subpart E Staffing and Employment - 9901.501 to 9901.516 The proposed regulations would replace longstanding provisions on hiring found in 5 U.S.C. Chapters 31 and 33 with unpublished procedures that will be prescribed at some future date through implementing issuances. Using this approach will allow the Defense Department to arbitrarily develop and administer new rules on staffing and employment that have not been available for public comment. This is especially troubling given the proposal to engage in non-citizen hiring to positions within NSPS. Our national security would surely be put at risk if Defense Department managers were able to exercise such hiring flexibilities. Subpart F Workforce Shaping - 9901.601 to 9901.611 The Defense Department should not change the current layoff/RIF rules, which give balanced credit to performance and the employees' valuable years of committed service. Moreover, under the proposed regulations employment disputes over such matters would be unfairly limited to the Merit Systems Protection Board. Subpart G Adverse Actions - 9901.701 to 9901.821 The NSPS guiding principle on enhanced management flexibility would be undermined if the provision on mandatory removable offenses is retained. Due process and fairness demand that the independent body reviewing major suspensions and terminations be allowed to alter the proposed penalty if it deems the penalty to be unreasonable. The current standards approved by the courts to guide such bodies should be continued. Subpart H Appeals - Section 9901.801 to 9901.810 Over 25 years worth of case law will be discarded, where those precedents conflict with NSPS. This will eliminate the use of the Douglas factors, which third parties used to mitigate or overturn agency-imposed penalties. Subpart I Labor-Management Relations - 9901.901 to 9901.928 The labor-management law that has governed the employees' right to organize and engage in collective bargaining has worked well since 1978. There is no compelling reason to take away most of the collective bargaining rights or grievance rights. The Defense Department should not create a "company-dominated dispute.