| Comment Number: | OL-10509594 |
| Received: | 3/15/2005 4:31:08 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:
A. My initial comments apply to the overall NSPS concept and its implementation: 1. I see no reason that the beneficial concepts proposed, could not have been individually implemented without all the confusion, aprehension and fuss that has been happening since this "process" began! 2. The goals of flexible mission accomplishment; personal and organizational accountablility; cost effective interoperability; and a credible, fiscally responsible human resources management process do not come about by polarizing the individuals with an unduly complex set of ambiguous directives such as have been presented thus far! 3. It is obvious to those of us, like myself, who have worked in the Federal Service for many years that the described process issues existed prior to the current Civil Service management system WILL NOT be significantly improved under the new directives -- the root causes of these problems will simply adjust their tactics and actions to appear to fit within the revised rules, and go on about their business as usual! B. Position classification is certainly in need of both standardization and simplification. Job descriptions must be written in concise, clear terms that actually detail what the position involves: Supervision, Program/Project conduct (management), Research, Training, Administrative Processes, and so forth. Just tell everybody what the incumbent will/is responsible for. We don't need the fancy titles or descriptions; just the truth about what is expected to be done and at what level of responsibility. Organizational responsibilities can be asigned in an identical manner by creating teams or groups to lead, manage or stay out of the way of those who really want to ensure that the operational warfighter gets the tools and services needed promptly! We don't need the multiple levels of idiots and politically-correct though mis-guided guidelines to protect us from the real work to be done. Set up a team to develop a modification, system, process, or tactic the warfighter needs; give them a budget to work with; any known "real" limits or constraints; the authority to make it happen ands let them go!! C. Specifically, I believe that "Pay Banding" is probably a good idea. It needs some thought put into the actual methodology and the "buy-in" of our management to make it operational. Once this is accomplished, turn it on and run with it! It's really not that different from the existing processes, so there is no reason to get excited it that.