| Comment Number: | OL-10509279 |
| Received: | 3/15/2005 2:13:54 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:
I am of the opinion that the proposed NSPS regulations will increase Defense Department employees anxiety and reduce their effectiveness in carrying out the agency’s mission. In addition to my following comments on the proposed NSPS regulations, allow me to comment on what are not there; namely, specific details. Much of the policy is yet to be defined, giving the powers to be the ability to make policy without meaningful accountability. These proposed regulations will allow the removal of many employee protections that our predecessors worked hard to put in place. Subpart C Pay, Sections 9901.301 to 9901.373 Defense Department employees should continue to receive the same annual pay and across-the-board adjustment 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The proposed regulations would replace longstanding provisions on hiring found in 5 U.S.C. Chapters 31 and 33 with unpublished procedures that will be prescribed at some future date through implementing issuances.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. Part of the selling point of these proposed regulations is how the are necessary ‘for national security!’ And yet here the door is being opened to allow foreign born terrorists to guard the door. Subpart F Workforce Shaping - 9901.6012 to 9901.611 The Defense Department should balance an employees’ years of service with his performance rating by keeping current layoff/RIF regulations. When an employee has disputes with his chain of command and is limited to the Merit Systems Protection Board to settle the dispute, the door is open for a long time loyal employee to lose his good standing if he is not well liked by his supervisor. Subpart G Adverse Actions - 9901.701 to 9901.810 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 deem the penalty to be unreasonable. The current standards approved by the courts to guide such bodies should be continued. Subpart I Labor-Management Relations - 9901.901 to 9901.929 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 board." The union must be a part of a joint selection of a dispute board in order for management to be held accountable. Allowing the few to have unregulated authority over many will lead to increased abuse and mistreatment. Thank you for considering these comments. I urge you to retain the protections that others have worked hard to put in place.