| Comment Number: | OL-10510667 |
| Received: | 3/16/2005 11:11:12 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 C Pay and Pay administration It seems like setting up these paybands and market values and so on is going to create a lot of work for some people. Having one huge payband for GS5-11 is going to allow managers to move people within that entire payband by manipulating their job duties, not by competitive action. There needs to be paybands for each level of grade that there is now, and the only way to move up is through competitive action or as a result of a settlement, etc. There will be former GS5s getting paid GS 11 wage if the salary range in the payband is just one huge payband. The supervisor will just keep moving the GS 5 up. If we have to have paybands, then we should so as the private sector does, which is that jobs are assigned to payband subsets. And if we have payband subsets, then why not just use the current GS salary ranges that now exist? I also don't agree that GS 12s and 13s should be in a separate bayband. Most (over 50% of our GS12s and 13s in my agency don't even have a bachelor's degree. To put them way above the other paybands is ridicoulous.