| Comment Number: | OL-10509777 |
| Received: | 3/15/2005 6:00:37 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:
NSPS Comments Jon H. Gaston 618-229-5309 jon.gaston@scott.af.mil Federal Register Vol. 70, No. 29, Feb 14, 2005 Page 7558, General Provisions, Subpart C, Pay and Pay Admin In general terms, I believe the flexible authority given the commander to increase/decrease pay without a series of check/balances will lead to an atmosphere of favoritism and discourse within the unit, thus leading to degradation of morale and unit fitness. Page 7561, “Reasignment” “unacceptable performamnce/conduct ---- reduce pay up to 10 percent.” “Unaccepatble performance” is too vague and allows any supervisor/commander too much room for intereptation. Page 7562, “Performance and Behavior Accountability” – para 1, “teamwork/cooperation” – hypothetical; if a team of workers is already corrupt, and the new member pushes for positive change, then he/she would be considered a “non-team player and uncooperative.” Para 6, “supervisor and manager will be held accountable.” I could not find any accountability standards in this document, which may lead to vaguness and unnecessary interruptation. Para 7, “broadrange of options dealing with unacceptable behavior.” This appear intentionally vague to provide great latitude, however, what’s to prevent a commander from having the civilian in correctional custody, or other severe punitive action? Page 7563, “Performance Rating Challenges”, in general, I see procedures for challenging ratings, but what about challenging feedbacks. If, say a prejudicial action begins at or during the feedback process, is it not easier to stop it then, than to permit the practice from carring over to the actual rating? Page 7565, “Mandatory Removal Offenses” is there a list of such offenses? end