| Comment Number: | OL-10509838 |
| Received: | 3/15/2005 7:10:25 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:
1. First, We really do not even know what NSPS is.I listened to the NSPS spokesperson who visited Norfolk Va. She (SES) could not answer specific questions simply as you read in the National Registrar they (the designers) have yet to get into specifics. I recommend that until there are detailed regulations in place that this system be postoned. Its like being told you have to buy a home yet the selling agent can change anything regarding the rules as the negotiation process takes place. 2. I am for pay for performance. However, there has to be detailed rules in place where the supervisor must objectively rate the employee from set standards and accomplishments-ie meeting set goals as outlined in his IDP objectives. This process- the subjectivity must be taken out. 3. RIF rules- seniority must be included along with performance. It must be a mixture of both. A person with only 1 year of outstanding performance rating should not bump a person with an excellent rating who has 10 years. A lot of times, the difference in rating could be the way the supervisor rates his people. You have to have the optimin mix of years of experience along with performance whereby a 5 year person with an outstanding would have seniority over a 10 year person with excellent evals. Not a 1 year person. I have an MBA and have done many case studies involving personnel management. My great Uncle and uncle were the Chairman of the Board of Colgate-Polmolive and my Dad who has a PHD in Inorganic chemistry was one of the execs in charge of recruitment for E.I. Dupont in Wilmington. If I were the responsible person for NSPS I would not rush into anything until the regs are finalized and fair and I felt that things are in place.