| Comment Number: | OL-10509576 |
| Received: | 3/15/2005 4:20:10 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:
My comments are not to any specific section rather proposed guidance to implementation of the process at the supervisor.employee level. Having participated in the pilot Paybanding as a Supervisor for 3 years, it is imparative that employee Roles and Responsibilities be documented as part of the initial establishment of expectations on the part of the Supervisor prior to commencement of the rating period. In doing so, provides clear direction to the employee and documents the requirements to be obtained as viewed be the Supervisor. This approach "protects" both parties. These Roles and Responsibilities should be based on overall organization immediate and higher goals and reflect contribution on the part of the employee to those overall goals. In addition, some articulation needs to be provided as to levels, minimum, average, and high, of contributions to permit the ability to "rate" the employee against. Again, this protects both parties as being expectation/ actions fully documented and signed by both parties. As the rating period progresses to mid year evaluation, these Roles and Responsibilities are to be used as the bases for evaluation performance feedback to the employee and modified, as required, to reflect the remaining evaluation criteria for end of the year evaluation. If the document is changed at mid year, both parties must re-sign, while retaining the documented first half year R/R to be included as part of the contributions to the entire year. I contend that if the above, or similiar is not adopted; the ability to perform, on the part of the employee; and rate by the Supervisor will be greatly hindered. As evidenced by the Paybanding Pilot, in conducting the first 2 year end reviews. In addition, Position Descriptions currently in place are normally very broad in scope and do not provide the proper level of detail to define in a flexible manner, changes in organizational goals or requirements. I would be available to provide any additional information or specific examples of the above cited approach.