| Comment Number: | OL-10509728 |
| Received: | 3/15/2005 5:25:33 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:
Beginning with the stated intentions and purpose of the "transformation"; I believe that the purpose was to transform the workforce into a divided, easily intimidated group of individuals who could no longer find support among colleagues in dealing with supervisors who may impose their idiosyncrasies, personality defects, and oppressive tendencies on employees one at a time. Over the last few years, the term "culture of intimidation" has been used to describe several government departments and to explain system failures that might have been prevented if employees had asserted themselves and voiced views different from those of their bosses. This is what Rumsfeld in particular is using National Defense to extend into the traditionally independent, assertive, and often Democratic Civil Service. It appears that only supervisors will be independent in future, and despite the idea that their performance will eventually be judged as the performance of their subordinates, far too much damage may be done by a single bad supervisor allowed too much power and lack of oversight for any length of time. If all supervisors are free to act as they choose until their system fails, and if there is no consistency of job description, rating, expectations, and levels of fulfillment, there can only be a powerless, demoralized workforce. Descriptions of appeals processes stress that there are such strong limitations on those seeking fairness that few will try. Why have so many fallen for such a debacle in the making? When the systems start failing it will be too late to bring back the best of Civil Service. Remember the "McDonalds Military"? You're creating the "Jack in the Box DOD".