| Comment Number: | OL-10509916 |
| Received: | 3/15/2005 8:58:38 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:
As I read and skim through the Federal Register this evening at 6:00 P.M., I think back what the last 30 days in my life has been like; and what little time I've had to sit and read and ABSORB what all this says and wonder how it will affect my and my people's future. I do have a job with tons of work to be done on a daily basis. Navy Personnel Command is going to be in Spiral One starting in July 2005 we're told; and the only meeting I've attended thus far is one ALL HANDS when Mr. Navas came to Millington to discuss NSPS, and that was quite good. On page 7556 under Outreach to Employees, I can only wish we'd been apart of the Focus Groups in that short-three week period. Yet we were picked to lead off in Spiral One because our boss wanted us to be first - yet how much does anyone here know and understand about this major change to civil service. CHANGE is needed in civil service for the very reasons Mr. Navas spoke when here this past year; and performance managed system can be very beneficial for the government, employee and the taxpayer. But, not much is thoroughly understood by the majority of folks that I have spoken with about NSPS; change is, as you know, viewed by many as something negative. We'll learn all the pros and cons about it after it's official, not before . . . . . but it just seems that performance management is the real issue and that could be fixed in a smaller and more dynamic and acceptable fashion than to turn the entire civil service world upside down. On many occasions, I've had people tell me that if we just went back to the old grading system of outstanding, excellent, satisfactory, unsatisfactory (and I forget the other category) that managers could more effectively manage performance and productivity. Then, getting rid of the problem employee . . . . the non-productive employee . . . . . that's what we need. It's too hard today. However, in my opinion, DOD has not prepared its employees for this change well enough. I've sat in training classrooms far longer to receive far less benefit, yet this change affects my life from here forward as a civil service employee, and I'm to read and interpret everything in the Federal Register, your website and to understand it thoroughly? I would like to be in a classroom where it is discussed and explained . . . I realize that is not totally practical. However, many great civil service employees have given much to our country and deserve to understand the real impact of this this major change - - - we, the workforce, are adrift when it comes to understanding the ramifications of NSPS. Pg 7559 under Subpart C - the pay aggregate for FY04-08 sounds good, but who controls the purse. Is this just talking totals allocated to claimancys or is this saying the amount actually paid to each person will not be less than if they had not been convereted to the NSPS? I hope others submit their thoughts/comments. Although the 16th is tomorrow, I'll continue to review and wonder and ask questions to learn more and more about this. One thing for sure, whoever wrote the 51 pages in the federal register about this - - did a real good job - - albeit I might not understand or know the law referenced, the other parts of this are easier to read than I originally thought when I started. Respectfully submitted, John David Booth