| Comment Number: | OL-10504740 |
| Received: | 3/10/2005 9:46:28 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:
Subpart C, sections 9901.331 to 9901.334: If locality pay (local market supplements) is based on the cost of living of a geographical area, how can it legally be withheld or dispersed at different rates based on occupation? How does this agree with the Federal Employees Pay Comparability Act of 1990 (FEPCA)? In that same law, Congress gave rating-based performance awards a specific legal authority for the first time, but excluded locality pay from award calculations? Has there been a change to FEPCA? Subpart C, sections 9901.301 to 9901.373: The step raises in the Civil Service system are like the longevity raises the military receives. The DOD is not proposing to change the way the military is paid, why are they changing the way the civil servant who supports the military member is paid? Subpart C, 9901.322: This paragraph contradicts paragraph 9901.313. After addressing the expected compensation comparability in 9901.313 which leads one to believe that we will not lose money as a result of NSPS, 9901.322 makes it clear that an employee may have their rate of pay reduced due to availability of funds and mission requirements. This will allow the DOD to reduce our Congressionally approved pay raises to a lower amount. While NSPS purports to be for the purpose of rewarding performance in the workplace, the reality is that a high-performing and acceptably performing employees can have their pay cut simply because the DOD has decided to use the money for mission requirements. Subpart C, Section 9901.352: Under Reassignment - Involuntary moves should NEVER result in a reduction in pay under any circumstances. Subpart D, Sections 9901.401 to 9901.409: The current appraisal system we use is a simple sat/unsat and we typically are late in getting these type of appraisals completed. If or when the appraisal system changes, the supervisors will fall even further behind. This affects both workers and supervisors, everything that is created that takes time away from the supervisor will eventually affect the workers and take time away from them, when the supervisor cannot properly supervise, train, mentor, etc. Subpart D, Sections 9901.401 to 9901.409: How will the training required by these regulations be funded? Subpart E, Section 9901.514: There might be times in other countries where the DOD would need to hire non-citizens but this requirement should be changed to read "outside CONUS". If the positions are located in the United States, only US citizens should hold them. Priority should be given to US citizens for jobs outside the US. Subpart F, Sections 9901.601 to 9901.611: The current retirement system implemented for Civil Service personnel (FERS) is not equivalent to that in private industry. For example, the retirement annuity computation formula for Northrop Grumman Corporation is 1.667% times the highest salary of the previous three years. FERS on the other hand provides on 1% of base pay. Industry employees have the same or better 401k and social security plans as well. For the employee, the total package of Pay, Benefits and retirement plan comes down to risk associated with the tenure of employment. That is to say that jobs with increased risk of lay-off, or "RIF" should carry a commensurate increase in pay, benefits and retirement. The NSPS, specifically with regard to workforce shaping, increases the government employee's risk of losing their job without a commensurate increase in pay, benefits and retirement seen in private industry. If the employees are expected to perform under commercial standards and at the same risk of job loss, then the compensation, or at least the ability to bargain for additional compensation by the employee, must also be factored into the system.