| Comment Number: | OL-10510402 |
| Received: | 3/16/2005 9:24:16 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:
I write in disappointment to the proposed regulations from DoD. I would have hoped that with the many trials in changing other departments within the Federal Government, that our decision makers would have learned how to be successful instead of becoming dictators. Because of this massive undertaking, I think it should be studied further, and most of all, it needs to be done right the first time. I hear Senior Staff testifying before Congress and Subcommittee Members about the importance of this new system and how training is such a vital part in success of its implementation. But yet, time seems to be one of the factors. Slow down...make sure you do it right the first time. Now you might understand why America has doubts about the Government. Because they act too quickly on these important issues! The training issue just blows my mind. If you want to succeed, then first off, put out the details of your plan. Publish the plan in full, down to the finite details. If you so proud of this new system and how great it is supposed to be, then publish it in full, and let it stand on its own merit! My opinion is that if you do that, you'll prove that it isn't the plan you want it to be, and not accepted like you want it to be! If you don't publish the details, you can't expect people to be attracted to it. How many times have you purchased a car based on what your being told it can do? Don't you want to see it, look it over, test drive it and see what shape it is really in? That is why many employees are leary about "buying" this program without truely being able to see it first. How can you make an offer on the car that you haven't seen, or know what type of options it really has. Your asking us to make comments in the same way. Based on very few facts. We need independant boards to make reviews on Classification and Pay issues, not appointees from the Agency. We need to ensure that fair, and unbias evaluations will be completed. And again have an impartial board to decide if yours was done fairly. Adding conduct as performance criteria is another way of allowing a supervisor to abuse his power unless there is fair representation and an impartial review. These safeguards are essential if you want to maintain a committed and successful workforce. I honestly think that if DoD wants to work with Labor in getting a system that works for America, and enhances National Security and adds flexibilty AND credibility, they need to give all the details of their plan and address now, the possible problems and shortfalls instead of diving into the water, realizing they can't swim as well as they thought, and drowning. If your organization truely wants feedback on this program, then provide details. But my true feeling is you just want to fill squares so you can say...see, we tried to get them to tell us what they thought! Your killing what little trust and integrity are left in the system. Please consider taking the extra time to do it right the first time.