| Comment Number: | OL-4800000 |
| Received: | 2/14/2005 11:03:47 AM |
| Subject: | Notice of Proposed Rulemaking, Request for Comment |
| Title: | National Security Personnel System |
| CFR Citation: | 5 CFR Chapter XCIX and Part 9901 |
| Attachment: | comments.doc Download Adobe Reader |
Comments:
Performance Pay Pools & Performance and Behavior Accountability: (I tried to attach as a file - but it didn't work) : Here's my comments: The proposed system is subject to significant failure/bias in cases of poor or corrupt management. The problems I have experienced/witnessed with current pay system would or could be exacerbated because more is discretionary based on management. Currently, non-supervisory staff rarely have their ratings done on time (sometimes 2 years behind) in order to possibly get an award - yet management seems to get theirs done on time. In addition, evaluation standards are written unclearly and promises are made to explain/clarify by management - yet that never happens. Interim evaluations rarely, if ever happen. Most of the time it is a "Quick! sign this - it was due 3 months ago and we'll have our mid-term sit-down next week, OK?" Regardless of complaints to union, Colonel, supervisors, nothing has improved. It scares me that these same poor managers would probably end up being the "appropriate" pay pool managers. The proposed regulations state that supervisors and managers will be held accountable (middle of pg 7562), yet who will hold them accountable? Who monitors the managers? My experience is that when a Colonel rotates districts so frequently - there is little incentive to deal with the problems that arise. I have seen staff complain politely up the chain of command a number of times over years - with absolutely no response. I am sure there is good management out there, but I have not experienced it in my career with the Corps - although when I worked for a different fed agency, I was extremely impressed with management there. Therefore - I would recommend that REAL accountability be worked in to any system. In addition, it would be ideal to have GAO do an in-depth analysis of how our current system is, or is not working. Why make a bad thing worse? Thank you for the opportunity to comment.