| Comment Number: | OL-10510517 |
| Received: | 3/16/2005 10:17:21 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 would like to start off by saying that the idea of improving pay and hiring processes may be long overdue. The rest of the proposed NSPS guidance is to vague. We in the DOD Civil Service are being asked to trust the administration will do the right thing here and accept their decisions without seeing them up front. I believe this is referred to as BLIND FAITH. If this is an all or nothing proposal then I would vote for no change right now because I do not have that kind of faith in this administration. Specifically, I'm concerned with how hiring is going to be improved. By taking less time to process applicants? Not taking adequate time to do background checks? Pay Banding - How will the Pay increase pots be handled, at what level will they be distributed to Service, Branch, MACOM, MSC, Etc.? What safe guards will there be against padding accounts? What prevents the President/Staff from recommending no pay raise (one of no significance) because of fiscal contstraints due to the deficit status our country is in? The bottomline is that this Administration seems to have taken the position that if you throw enough crap at a wall something has to stick - the NSPS should not be one of those that do. In closing, I would like to say that I have served my country proudly for 31 years (military/civil serivce). I have not read anything within the NSPS that outlines what the problems (between Civil Serivce and DOD) are today and how the implied problems will be addressed. I certainly do not see anything here that shows how National Security will be markedly improved by implement the NSPS. I am not against a change for improving the way we do business or how we take care of what I have always been told is the most important asset the government possesses - PEOPLE! Let's just do it fairly, with open discussions that address specific guidance, not subjective theory, including all voices - DOD, Unions, Committee Members, etc. Thank You