GovernmentExecutive.com

Return to Article: Overhaul Objections

• 8637
  

  I get a chuckle out of the constant references by DOD and OPM officials to their meetings with union representatives. If only the 740,000 employees these rules will affect could have sat in the back of the room and listened.

  In reading the proposed rules, they stink of change to cover managment weaknesses. Why is it the problem of 740,000 that management can't hire quickly? By Charlie Abell's own admission, they have over 35 different hiring systems. WHY? Why do hiring actions sit so long on a supervisor's desk, or in the personnel office, or get returned because the right name didn't come down on a referral list.

  Why does DOD cite non-DOD cases claiming bargaining takes too long. Last time I sat at the negotiation table, it takes two to tango. If it takes too long, both parties are at fault.

  Pay for Performance - well golly Gomer. Now instead of working together, folks will watch out for number one.

  The unions are prepared to discuss fixing the things that are really broke, but DOD has got to own up to the fact that part of the problem is how they manage and their attitude towards workers.

  Mark Gibson Posted March 5, 2005 7:37 PM
• 8476
  

  Dear David,

  Thank you- you have made a very, very good point regarding the employees who will drown when the sandcastle gets washed away. I'm sorry if I appeared callous. I don't mean to belittle the anguish and suffering that DoD and DHS employees will endure in the next few years under these draconian HR programs. I mean't to push the idea that the Unions have other avenues for addressing these issues. It is very doubtful the Courts will intercede to stop this experiment.

  Happily though this is a big wide open government and in the next few years I suspect DHS and DoD employees are going to vote on these new systems with their feet. David, being in HR in a less draconian environment I promise you I will do what I can to give some of my HR brethren who bail from DHS/DoD a safe landing.

  HR Specialist

  GovExec.com reader Posted February 25, 2005 2:20 PM
• 8457
  

  To HR Specialist,

  Continuing with your analogy what happens to all the people that get drowned when the first sandcastle is washed away, i.e. Spiral 1 victims? It leaves too much at stake for the people that are harmed by this first experimentation test and those caught in the wave may never be able to regain or return to what they presently had gained for their vested service over the years.

  This system should not be allowed to ever start just to fail, which I agree likely will unless major modifications are negotiated. But even if it does fail, it will be the employee's fault.

  Next, bring on Spiral 2, in come the contractors to begin replacing the federal work force as we are now considered inept to accomplish the mission, or better yet a threat to National Security if we stand up and dispute the new system after it has become Law.

  Read carefully the proposed regulations that take away our once guaranteed basic rights that protected us from unjustified removal...In my opinion and I'm sure many others, that this is a total planned and orchestrated setup to implement my Spiral 2 comment with complete, total, and legal ease (if NSPS is allowed to become law) to dramatically downsize the federal employee workforce.

  Everyone needs to contact their proper State Representatives and ask them to immediately intercede. But unfortunately, many of them could very well be part of the orchestra. Let's see how they respond to act upon our concerns.

  David Posted February 24, 2005 8:59 PM
• 8439
  

  Having been on both sides of the labor management relationship and being involved in this area for over a decade-- I personally believe this is the wrong approach. It forces the unions to focus on a lawsuit when they should be focusing on organizing DHS and DoD.

  The comment is that the personnel systems are built on sand-- good. When the water washes away the sandcastles built by folks with no real world experience and wishing for no help from those with experience maybe the next sandcastles will be built by everyone.

  If these programs fail I say good, let them fail and the unions weren't part of the decision to create such failed systems. Hopefully there will be something left of Title 5 for DHS and DoD to fall back on.

  I don't see the point of these lawsuits and the remedies being asked for. Let the experiment fail and when it does, probably by very serious retention problems in these departments, the unions can take the high road and offer their assistance to these agencies and help reconstruct the HR systems.

  Of course this will involve being patient for 3-5 years.

  HR Specialist

  GovExec.com reader Posted February 24, 2005 8:14 AM