| Comment Number: | OL-10511239 |
| Received: | 3/16/2005 2:41:24 PM |
| 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:
Pay and Administration-Subpart C: Adjusting Rate Ranges and Local Market Supplements: I don't agree that Local Market Supplements (locality pay?) should only be given to the high performers. If this is the case your other workers who get the job done but are not exceptional will be penalized and will end up in the lower income brackets of the surrounding area. Every company/agency needs to have on their rolls those workers that are happy with what they are doing and don't want to be exceptional. However, they still have to feed their families and keep a roof over their heads. If they don't get any increases, you will eventually end up with employees quitting because they can't live on what the government pays them. I do agree that high performers should be acknoweldged more than they are, however, there has to be some way to ensure that the "Supervisor's Pet" who may not be a high performer, does not get what a high performer would get. Performance Management-Subpart D: Monitoring Performance and Providing Feedback - I agree that there should be ongoing feedback with employees regarding their performance. I believe two performance reviews during the appraisal period would be the optimum. This way underachievers would have time to improve their performance and be told that it has/has not improved prior to the annual appraisal. Thank you for your time and effort, and may God Bless America