| Comment Number: | OL-10512068 |
| Received: | 3/16/2005 8:49:56 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:
Sirs: I am a proud Vetern of the US Army in Vietnam. Some time after my return from military duty, I attained a job at a nearby Army base as a DA Civilian, where I have spent many years supporting Those who succeeded me into Military Service. 1. WORKFORCE SHAPING SUBPART F: Leave the present Reduction In Force rules alone! Many people such as myself have given our entire dedicated career service to DoD. As a prior military member, of the U.S. Army, I bought and paid for my military service to be credited towards my DoD civil service retirement. That payment I made was done in good faith, for a worthy retirement that has always been my goal to achieve by serving my country. I currently have over 25 years of total government service vested. The new proposed RIF rules will totally strip away the tenure that I have rightly earned for my dedication and provided service. This is wrong and totally unacceptable! Limiting RIF to areas as specific (Small) areas, such as a targeted office, branch, or even a particular occupational (job) series without it affecting others of the same(Classification) just 50 feet down the hall is completely wrong and disingenuous to the dedicated career civil servant. The proposed rules that allow a senior employee to be removed over an employee of the same, with as little as one year of service, just because they work in an office not affected by the RIF should be considered criminal at best. Whoever proposed such a policy should be ashamed of this egregious attempt to DEFRAUD honest Federal employees! It is obvious that this person (or persons) will never be under these policies themselves. 2. If this type of selective RIF is permitted to take place then the DoD will have instigated a hostile workplace environment for all employees. Do you suppose that people who have given so much over the course of their careers, to suddenly find themselves removed from Service by such discriminatory measures will react kindly? I want to make it clear that I am not making any type of threat by saying the following, but only pointing-out the obivious situation that would result. Don’t you understand that if THIS RIF proposal is ever carried out and destroys the retirement opportunity of a person on the edge, for whatever reason it may be, that a violent situation is likely to occur at some point, sometime, somewhere? I do. And this RIF proposal, if made law, has just now put my fellow employees and myself at great risk by certainly subjecting us to a new catalyst for a hostile work environment that could potentially become violent without warning. Will anyone in the workforce ever feel safe again, (while) not knowing when a "Postal situation" could erupt? A VERY BAD "Policy". Leave RIF rules alone! Today’s RIF rules are understandable, exacting in intention, and, when properly executed, have been designed in the fairest possible means to all. 3. To require civilian employees to be placed in a position of being relocated to another country to work, against their will, would be detrimental to the Army, and it's employees. Working for the Army in support of our (Nation's) mission is a privilege and an honor but most of us, however, we can't possibly afford to have to leave our families and (probably) be forced to work in a hostile environment. Many of these people have already proudly served our country and do not feel it would be appropriate for them to be forced to leave their Familys/homes/ and current jobs. If our mission requires us to leave the States, then (we should)consider increasing our military workforce. I'm afraid that in the future the standards of the workforce will decrease due to the (new) requirements of being forced to work in very hostile nations. You will force a lot of people to take early retirement, losing a great deal of expertise. Young people with families will not even consider a career as a government employee. This is a very poor arrangement to rely completely on DOD Contractors