| Comment Number: | OL-10512240 |
| Received: | 3/17/2005 12:16:51 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:
Under NSPS, civil service rights are compromised. The NSPS fails to preserve the current rights of employees to organize, bargain collectively, and participate/have a voice in the decision-making process re: jobs, salaries, working conditions, etc. Instead of dismantling good ol' boys networks, the NSPS blatantly promotes those networks and supervisor favoritism. Under the NSPS, supervisors and managers will have carte blanche to do as they please. Who will provide oversight and monitor these supervisors and managers - many of whom ARE the good ol' boys? Under NSPS, those who suck up, play politics, and just "answer the mail" (regardless of whether the information is correct) will get the bennies. Low-profile, hard-working employees who don't play the politics will lose out. Under NSPS, the right to adequate due-process will be lost. Without increased funding, the NSPS will create an adversarial relationship between workers as they compete for limited "rewards." Under NSPS, agencies will be able to deploy DoD civilians - which was not "part of the deal" when employees signed on. There are many who are already at a Step 10 within their grade levels and have been for several years. Under NSPS, their salaries could be reduced by a supervisor or manager with a grudge. Under NSPS, within-grade increases will be eliminated. Under NSPS, supervisors with only minimal knowlege about subordinates' functions can easily establish unrealistic expectations and goals which employees can't meet. Under NSPS, emphasis will be on reports (capturing data) at the expense of doing the actual work. Under NSPS, gov't jobs will no longer be secure. Baby boomers who are expecting to retire comfortably within the next few years may lose out. Under NSPS, loyalty and longevity mean nothing. Working for the Federal Government no longer looks attractive when you combine the NSPS threat with the proposed changes to Social Security (which will negatively impact those under the Federal Employees Retirement System - FERS). NSPS is money, not performance driven. If supervisors give out too many high ratings, upper management can change those ratings based on funds available for incentive awards. It makes no sense to implement NSPS incrementally by groups of arbitrarily-selected states each year until the program is fully implemented. Imagine the chaos within the Army Reserve! In New England, for example, the workforce covers 6 states, with many employees living in one state and working in another. (Will state of residence or state where an employee works determine NSPS status when a state is identified to implement NSPS?) During NSPS Year One, half of the DACs and dual-status civilians (military technicians) will be under the old system with Union protections, the other half will be under NSPS. Supervisors and managers will be forced to work 2 systems at once. If 2 people are doing the same job at the same location, one may be under the old hiring and rating system, the other under NSPS, making more money because of NSPS pay banding provisions (low morale at that site and all the others just like it). Bottom line: working for the Federal Government becomes less and less attractive every year.