| Comment Number: | OL-10510026 |
| Received: | 3/16/2005 12:03:49 AM |
| 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:
Subpart D: Performance Management This subpart would eliminate 5 USC Chapter 43, with its requirements for valid performance standards and a good faith opportunity to improve before an employee is demoted or fired. Supervisors would be permitted to set performance expectations with such vague terminology as “teamwork” and “cooperation.” No more than one progress review per year would be required. And performance ratings would be used by supervisors to “adjust” employee pay (presumably up or down). To top it off, performance ratings would not be grievable but could be challenged through some other procedure yet to be designed. This represents a step backwards. In recent years, most federal agencies, including DOD, came to realize that all the friction and misunderstandings caused by multiple-level performance ratings could be eliminated by a “pass/fail” system. This allows supervisors to separate the employees who should stay from those who should go, and use other tools such as performance awards and time off awards to recognize superior performance. Now its back to the personality pageant as employees grapple with supervisors over who has the best attitude or who is most appreciated in the workplace. And the stakes are even higher: basic pay and retention in a RIF are on the line. If you think this is going to contribute to a more productive workforce, well…wait and see. In this proposal, DOD also turns its back on the concept underpinning 5 USC Chapter 43, which is that poor performance is something to be corrected, not punished, and if it can’t be corrected after a structured opportunity to improve, the employee must be moved out of the position. The proposal would allow for any sanction to be meted out for poor performance, from a written reprimand to a long suspension, harkening back to the days when poor performance was considered a character flaw that needed to be punished.