| Comment Number: | OL-10509832 |
| Received: | 3/15/2005 7:01:52 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:
The method for determining who receives pay increases is ripe for graft, fraud and favoritism...not performance. Individuals who are mobile and move for additional experience will be a disadvantage to those who remain at one location for most of their careers. Those who do not move will be perceived as loyal and pay will be use to reward loyalty, not performance. For those who are new at a duty station will be at a disadvantage for at least a year until the new supervisors get to know the individual. People skills will become at least as important as performance in determining pay increases. A supervisor who develops a truly high performance organization will be unable to justly reward all those who have made the organization excel. Budget limitations will hit a ceiling before all are rewarded. At the same time a poor performing organization may have the same resources to reward workers as a high performing organization. While we have this system now, it is not left to the supervisor on determining pay increases. As it is the current system of promotion, i.e. pay increases, is linked to performance and experience for the most part. On the spot awards is still the best system for the supervisor to impact high performance without institutionalizing potential corruption at the local level.