| Comment Number: | OL-10512280 |
| Received: | 3/17/2005 7:55:00 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:
The current GS system DOES provide incentives to be a hard working productive government worker. If departments exist where this is not true, the supervisors should be held accountable. The GS system has provisions for “Incentive Awards” in 5 U.S.C. chapter 45. Hard work is rewarded through promotions, on the spot awards, employee of the month, and many more. During my tenure, I have seen the GS system work as it was intended, and I have seen it not work because of the 'good ole boys club'. Employees are rated every year and must evaluate to at least a satisfactory rating prior to receiving any increase of money. NSPS is not the answer. NSPS will further instill into management, they could do no wrong. Employees will suffer. Where is the system of checks and balances? The initial regulations that are published mentions ‘employees will NOT lose money upon implementation of NSPS’. When and why will employees suffer the loss of money? The NSPS system plans on implementing ‘pay pools’ for performance-based pay increases and bonuses. Will the ‘pay pools’ end up like the comparable wage with the private sector fund; ‘locality pay’? In the current GS system how often is an emergency declared, therefore negating our comparable wage increases? As money grows even tighter, and demands on the government grow exponentially, I believe the ‘pay pools’ will be a political target. The rate ranges are tied to the ‘overall budgetary constraints’, and I’m sure the ‘pay pools’ will be as well. A NASA executive who is under the Performance-Based System said, "The system is geared toward going along to get a raise or performance bonus." In January, about 50 percent of NASA executives received a 2.5 percent pay raise, the highest increase given. Twenty-seven percent received raises ranging from 0.5 percent to less than 2.5 percent, and 23 percent got no pay raise, said John Pennington, NASA's executive resources director. Is this the way the government wants to build a more qualified and proficient workforce and generate a greater return on investment in terms of productivity and effectiveness? As an employee, if the threat of losing my job through a BRAC, BCA, or contractors disappears, I believe my colleagues would provide a ‘greater return on investment’.