GovernmentExecutive.com

Return to Article: Defense, OPM officials face questions on new personnel rules

• 9304
  

  Why all this 'hoopla' about new personnel rules, when these same personnel rules are already in place by OUTSOURCED/A-76'D Federal offices? IT'S CALLED THE M E O (Most Efficient Organization) whereby ALL Federal employees are viewed as NEW employees...and coupled with the NEW APPAS Performance Standards, a 10 year experienced, above average rated Federal employee could be FIRED BEFORE new Federal employees AND new CONTRACT employees while the unions simultaneously have been reduced to nothing more than court jesters.

  A-76'd Career Federal Employee Posted April 18, 2005 9:23 AM
• 9300
  

  Initiate a program that is only 1/3 completed? I wish Mr. England would take his next flight on an aircraft that is only 1/3 completed - if you know what I mean...

  GovExec.com reader Posted April 18, 2005 6:15 AM
• 9289
  

  Federal employees should be very concerned. The proposed changes are very similar to what happened to federal employees' workers compensation. The Federal Employees' Compensation Act was nothing but a ruse to take away the injured federal workers right to sue the federal government in a federal court for violating their lawful rights.

  The Department of Labor conspired with the Congressional labor comittee to rush the FECA through Congress so as to prevent federal workers from challenging it. They promote it as faster and more fair to injured workers. What it really did was centralize all avenues of appeal within the Department of Labor. Injured workers can't sue the governemt for violating their lawful rights. As a result, many thousands of injured federal workers are wrongfully denied compensation for their injuries every year.

  Could it be that this is a thinly deguised effort to allow OPM and DOD to abuse the rights of federal employees without being held accountable for their actions?

  Robert M. Posted April 15, 2005 10:59 PM
• 9282
  

  If NSPS causes my pay to stagnate or decrease I know which political party will be paying at the polls in our next election. The politicians that promise to pull the plug on the system will be getting my vote.

  GovExec.com reader Posted April 15, 2005 11:53 AM
• 9274
  

  The comments presented by Mr. England remind me of the following dialogue from a Dilbert cartoon:

  Boss: "Our employees are the 9th most important assets in our organization."

  Dilbert: "What's number eight?"

  Boss: "Carbon paper."

  Fred Hall Posted April 15, 2005 6:31 AM
• 9272
  

  As a manger I'm pleased to see the Adimintration set the standard for peformance by nominating John "kiss up, kick down" Bolton for an Ambassadorship. He's set a high standard of performance, and I'll strive to meet it.

  Ann Nonomuos Posted April 14, 2005 7:35 PM
• 9265
  

  Yesterday (GOVEXEC) the Undersecretary of Defense for personnel and readiness, Charles Abell, "took issue with the argument that employees are upset with the (NSPS) changes". Today's article states England (DOD) and Blair (OPM), "were reviewing closely the thousands of public comments, most of which were critical,...". I guess Government employees are not upset, they simply hate the NSPS regulations. The Government isn't backing-up but it's hesitating to take another step forward. One for the Gipper! I don't understand the, "We are determined to make this a win for our employees, and a win for national security". I don't remember national security being under any threat under our present personnel system? What exactly are they talking about, it was our policy makers who let the terrorist into our country. The policy makers are a threat to national security not the Government employees. G. Hernandez

  Gil Hernandez Posted April 14, 2005 4:38 PM