| Comment Number: | OL-10510437 |
| Received: | 3/16/2005 9:38:10 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 am past the age of retirement, so NSPS will not really impact me. I have a Master's in Business Administration; I have taught business classes in a small college, and I am a high ranking civil servant. I approached NSPS with an open mind. But, I see little validity in establishing this system, because it lacks specificity in all aspects. Further, I firmly believe DoD should have taken another approach to achieve its goals. The old GS system is not a bad system. With little expense and fanfare, this system could easily have been tweaked to support DoD's requirements (which are rendered in rhetorical terms such as "...in the interest of national security", "...achieving an agile and responsive total force". The old GS system has one major advantage: objectivity. Most people don't like having to compete for their supervisor's favor, but, with NSPS, the system becomes wholly subjective. What NSPS should allow is some level of objectivity, blended with a level of subjectivity, but closely monitored by management (civilian management, not military management.) This would make the transition much more acceptable to employees, easier to implement, and somewhat mitigate the possibility of a supervisor playing favorites. I think NSPS represents a significant amount of money put in the wrong place. Modification(s) of the old GS system in steps would have been more productive, less expensive, and provide for a better transition. I feel empathy for the people who will not be able to retire in the next few years. NSPS will bring great stress to a number of lives.