| Comment Number: | OL-10511927 |
| Received: | 3/16/2005 6:28:17 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:
I am a physicist. I have worked in DOD for many years. During this time, I have often found myself at odds with managers on technical issues. The main responsibilities of these supervisors are primarily managerial – not technical. Their technical direction is often misguided. Their evaluation of employee performance is almost always more strongly impacted by the amount of business an employee attracts rather than on an employee’s technical contribution. An employee who’s well-founded and honest technical appraisal discredits a well funded program or discredits a manager’s favored hypothesis is already (under the current rules) likely to be made to suffer. The proposed NSPS package promises to worsen matters. As a result of my experiences, I am very concerned about all of the following NSPS subparts Subpart C Pay, Sections 9901.301 to 9901.373 Defense Department employees should continue to receive the same annual pay and across-the-board adjustment that other GS/FWS workers receive. The individual pay increases for performance in the regulations should include guaranteed percentages so that strongly committed employees who are driven to always to tender their best (even when it may be unpopular) will at least persevere. Subpart D Performance Management - 9901.401 to 9901.409 Defense Department employees should be continue able to appeal any performance rating to an independent grievance and arbitration process. Simple fairness requires this. Subpart F Workforce Shaping - 9901.6012 to 9901.611 I feel that it would be better if the Defense Department should not change the current layoff/RIF rules, which give balanced credit to performance and the employees' valuable years of committed service. Moreover, under he proposed regulations employment disputes over such matters would be unfairly limited to the Merit Systems Protection Board. Subpart G Adverse Actions - 9901.701 to 9901.810 The NSPS guiding principle on enhanced management flexibility would be undermined if the provision on mandatory removable offenses is retained. Due process and fairness demand that the independent body reviewing major suspensions and terminations be allowed to alter the proposed penalty if it deems deem the penalty to be unreasonable. The current standards approved by the courts to guide such bodies should be continued. Subpart H Appeals - Section 9901.801 to 9901.810 Over 25 years worth of case law will be discarded, where those precedents conflict with NSPS. This will eliminate the use of the Douglas factors, which third parties used to mitigate or overturn agency-imposed penalties. Subpart I Labor-Management Relations - 9901.901 to 9901.929 I feel that the labor-management law that has governed the employees' right to organize and engage in collective bargaining has worked reasonably well. There is no compelling reason to take away most of the collective bargaining rights or grievance rights. Employee grievance rights should be strengthened not diminished. The Defense Department should not create a "company-dominated dispute board." Any dispute board must be jointly selected by management and the union. Finally, seniority and veterans rights should be preserved in Reduction in Force (RIF) situations. The Civil Service of the United States has been the world’s showcase model and greatest achievement in the employer-personnel relationship. Let us hope that our best judgment and wisdom continue to uphold that example.