| Comment Number: | OL-10511854 |
| Received: | 3/16/2005 5:48:01 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:
Cost of Living and Locality pay must not be linked to results of an appraisal accomplished by one's own supervisor. Denying these salary adjustments based on one supervisor's view of an employee on a particular “bad” review day could be a huge negative impact over the employee’s remaining career as well as into the employee's retirement. For a loyal and hard working employee, these adjustments are in place to help keep the employee’s 'nose above water.” If employer cannot at least provide this minimal type of security, why would one, especially the outstanding performer, want to stay with a company that will not provide any assurance to the employees? Based on previous NSPS publications, isn’t this exactly type of employee the Government is trying to attract? In the past, there have been problems with limited funding for salary increases and for bonus/cash awards. With out the stabilization of the Cost of Living and Locality pay the employer cannot hope to retain top notch employees. What type of criteria is to be used in approving and applying the Cost of Living and Locality for employees? If the receipt of these two adjustments is only linked to performance, in an office full of outstanding employees, especially during a limited funding period, how will manager determine who under his authority will receive the pay adjustments and who won't? How can this be fair to all the outstanding employees? How will this help moral in the office much less across DOD? How will employee be represented in these and other personnel issues with out the Union? These types of salary adjustments must not be linked to performance.