GovernmentExecutive.com

A federal judge has set a date of Jan. 24 to hear arguments in a lawsuit filed by a group of labor unions challenging the Defense Department's new National Security Personnel System.

Judge Emmet G. Sullivan of the U.S. District Court for the District of Columbia also said he would ensure that the case would be decided expeditiously, according to the American Federation of Government Employees, one of the unions that filed the suit.

"We are eager to make our case on the illegality of the Department of Defense's new workplace rules," said Joe Goldberg, AFGE's associate general counsel.

The Pentagon released the final regulations for the new civilian personnel system in late October. In early November, a coalition of unions filed suit challenging the rules. The unions charged that the Pentagon failed to adequately consult with labor organizations before issuing the regulations.

The new system streamlines the labor relations process and replaces the General Schedule pay structure with market- and performance-based compensation.

Last week, Defense Department officials agreed to hold off on implementing the new rules until February. Government and union lawyers jointly agreed to the postponement, which was designed to make it unnecessary for the unions to seek a temporary restraining order to halt implementation of the system.

Under the agreement, Defense still will be able to implement a few minor portions of NSPS before February. Most notably, the department can continue to train employees on the workings of the new system, and it can release implementing issuances, which provide details on how to carry out the regulations. Those issuances cannot take effect until Feb. 1, however.

The unions and the Pentagon had asked the judge to hear arguments in the case during the week of Jan. 9, but AFGE President John Gage said he was satisfied with the timetable.

"We are very pleased that the court has agreed to hear the case in timely manner," said Gage said. "Over 600,000 federal workers await the ruling."

COMMENTS

• Vincent, Everyone wants to use the example of the lazy fed worker. I don't see that. I guess I am to busy dodging mortars and rockets in the war zone to notice. G.W. et al. blame the unions for the epidemic of lazy federal employees. If that were true it would be management’s fault for letting that happen. No union would condone or protect such actions. Rumsfield likes to blame us for all of the DoD's problems. The NSPS wasn't designed to improve performance. It is a perfect way to break the systems back so to bring in contractors without competition. I am in mid-career and now they want to change the rules for the worst. What an insult the many of us who dedicated our professional and personal lives to the American war fighter. I believe their actions are borderline criminal. Mid-career federal employee Posted January 16, 2006 12:48 AM
• Here we go again. The military versus the civilians. I also work with military and between PT and so called training days, hair cuts, meals on wheels, etc., they are gone more than at work. Then they retire and come in as GS-11s and up. Triple dippers. Retire from the military, retire from the government, and then retire as contractors when the rest of us are still working towards our first retirement. I would love to see the military on pay-for-performance and see how they like it. GovExec.com reader Posted November 30, 2005 7:07 PM
• All this talk about lazy civilian and military employees misses the point. It's not about the workers being lazy -- it's a supervision problem. If supervisors did their job -- the job they're paid to do -- none of you would be complaining about the other. C'mon supervisors, do your job. Earn those big bucks the way you're supposed to. GovExec.com reader Posted December 1, 2005 8:11 AM