GovernmentExecutive.com

Senators, union representatives and outside experts pressed Defense Department officials during a hearing Tuesday for more details on the controversial new National Security Personnel System.

Defense personnel officials said details will emerge during the upcoming meet and confer period, during which union officials will share their concerns with agency negotiators. The concerns were raised during a hearing of the Senate Governmental Affairs Subcommittee on Oversight of Government Management, the Federal Workforce and the District of Columbia.

In 2003, lawmakers gave the Pentagon permission to dramatically overhaul its personnel system to respond to national security threats. Early this year, defense officials released preliminary regulations indicating the agency wants to scrap the General Schedule system, implement performance pay, reduce union bargaining powers and streamline the employee appeals process.

A coalition of Defense unions has filed suit to stop the new system, claiming personnel officials ignored a congressional mandate to include union representatives in the development of NSPS.

"There are many details that have not been defined," said David M. Walker, comptroller general at the Government Accountability Office. "Details are important."

Specifically, Walker said he was interested in more information on performance management, compensation and reductions in force.

Union and Defense officials are poised to enter a meet and confer period to explore reaction to the proposed regulations. Charles Abell, principal deputy undersecretary of Defense for Personnel and Readiness, said that many questions will be answered during that period.

"This is where the details that so many long for will be revealed," Abell said. "It would be unnatural if they were not concerned or anxious; we will address those concerns."

Subcommittee Chairman George Voinovich, R-Ohio, sought more details on funding that will be allocated to training managers and supervisors in how to use the new performance pay system. A number of experts have told Congress that the success of NSPS rests on the training that is provided for the transition. Abell said, however, that training for NSPS has not been isolated as a separate line item in the fiscal 2006 budget request.

"It is difficult to look at the budget and see the training in there," Abell said.

"I would like to see in writing what you have in mind," he told Abell.

An array of Democratic senators and union representatives also decried the lack of details on the new system.

"I agree that the devil is in the details," said Sen. Daniel Akaka, D-Hawaii. "NSPS lacks details."

COMMENTS

• We have to keep fighting for what is right. If this gets passed my bosses "pet" will get all the glory and the money. Right now all she get is the glory! I am so tired of people trying to redo things (pay system) instead of trying to fix what we have. Also, if this gets passed I have heard that I can become a deployable employee. That's right, I can just see myself in SWA with both bad knees trying to track down the bad guys. I love my job and try to do 110% for the customers in the field that I work for. I give the taxpayer his/her moneys worth above and beyond because I care. Why do BUSH, CHENEY, AND RUMMY WANT TO DESTROY THAT?!!! worker bee, kc GovExec.com reader Posted March 18, 2005 11:54 AM
• I've just finished reading a book called "Raving Fans" by Dr. Ken Blanchard. A central customer for the NSPS are DoD's own employees. The three step approach to create over the top customer service is to decide what you want, discover what the customer wants, and than deliver consistently plus 1%. We know full well the vision the administration has for labor and employee relations, performance management etc...-- and I have no doubt that this program will be delivered consistently. It breaks down in the middle-- does anyone care what the customer wants? Here we have hundreds if not thousands of comments from the customer. Many more are either silent on the issue or resolved to deal with it because they believe they can't change the outcome. Can DoD afford to ignore its customer base? I work for another Department-- a competitor. So if the DoD Customers (employees) decide not to utilize DoD services further there is an alternative-- although if we are all forced to go the NSPS route that alternative will disappear and I might become the disgruntled customer looking for an alternative. GovExec.com reader Posted March 17, 2005 9:33 AM
• I've been a lifelong Republican, rarely voted for a Democrat and don't currently belong to a union, but I have to tell you I'm so proud of those folks of both parties and the unions for standing up for all of us. Thanks for your support!!! GovExec.com reader Posted March 16, 2005 8:27 AM