GovernmentExecutive.com

Return to Article: Success of civil service overhaul could hinge on rollout of Pentagon plan

• 14213
  

  Someone must have voted for President Rumsfeld. I hope everyone is happy now. They tried to do away with the Fair Labor Standards Act. Completely. If you make more than $450.00 per week, you can be exempt. The tried to take away FERS high three and make it a high five and raise taxes on the FERS and bankrupt Social Security. People said why do I need a union? Working for the contractors will be like the good ole days (1800's) going from job to job no benefits or security. Kind of like a third world country. Welcome to the new "world order" (The other Bush) Thank God we still have a little freedom of speech, but not for long. I for one will be too tired after working 14 hours a day, seven days a week. (That wasn't too far back in American history)

  GovExec.com reader Posted January 14, 2006 9:57 AM
• 11270
  

  NSPS (pay for performance) is designed to increase political power and not to better the fate of government employees. Pay raises ultimately will be decided by political appointees and military supervisors. Our military supervisors already think we should work under military rules - what a crock! They get overpaid and we get underpaid for the same jobs but they volunteered for the military (as long as they do not have to go to a fighting zone!).

  The measure of performance is arrive early and leave late. You do not have to do anything in between but you have to be here. That is because they have no idea what the output should be! We are paid to be here for a certain number of hours and supervisors that decide on pay increases measure performance by the number of hours you appear on the job - not by output either in terms of quality or quantity. However, if they do look at output it is in terms of quantity.

  Quality output is defined as that output that agrees with the position of the department regardless of how ridiculous that position may be. In the financial areas of DoD operations in all services and agencies the positions are often flat out wrong but the financial people will not change because that is what they think they need to get money from Congress. The majority of DoD and service actions is to get more funds from Congress and not to use those funds effectively for the defense of the country, but rather to increase the life style of the people in DoD and increase teir power.

  Look at the power of the base commander at Fort AP Hill following the electrocution of Boy Scout leaders setting up a tent. He closed the base and would not allow Boy Scouts that had traveled thousands of miles to be there to enter so they could spend the night. He should be punished for this bad decision but will be applauded as taking a very good anti-terrorist step to keep those Boy Scouts out of the base for a day. Who is going to question the base commander - he is a good! He also influences the pay for performance rating for everyone at AP Hill, if he wants to!

  They had pay for performance with the old GM system that they couldn't work either and we all went back to being GS employees. The problem is not the systemn for pay increases! The problem is management!

  taxpayer Posted July 28, 2005 9:07 AM
• 11118
  

  Pay for performance just like industry. Sounds great. However, I have been involved in pay raise decisions in industry, and the real question was not how well they performed, but how valuable they were to the company and how likely were they to leave if the raise wasn't big enough. Performance, even with significant demonstrated improvement over time, was a minor consideration at best.

  I have confidence in my supervisor, however, he can only allocate what the organization provides, and this organization has proven certain departments are more favored than others. I have very little faith the organization will allocate fairly.

  GovExec.com reader Posted July 21, 2005 7:45 AM
• 11010
  

  I don't see a lot of success with this new system. While I do like the fact management will be able to make changes easier without such heavy involvement, I also understand workers complaints. Pay for performance is something I have heard much about from my private sector friends and most have been negative. Unforunately, the only thing about NSPS I've seen has been through govexec.com or nsps web site. The Pentagon still has a big sale job ahead. Of course, President Bush could probably do an executive order and that would end this debate. All employees must tread carefully.

  GovExec.com reader Posted July 15, 2005 5:47 PM
• 11006
  

  The statement below is a LIE!!

  Defense officials charged that they "took great care to ensure that the materials and messages addressed" the concerns of employees, labor unions, managers and senior officials.

  Not one of my numerous concerns has been addresssed OR ACKNOWLEDGED! Top officials don't care in the least about the worker. They have their agenda and come hell or high water they will implement it. Only a sick, demented, ignorant fool would make such a broad statement.

  Gilbert Hernandez Posted July 15, 2005 2:55 PM
• 10997
  

  As a civil service worker, I disagree with the Defense Departments response 'that they took great care.....'. I have been to commander's calls and briefings and even a required training class in preparation for the forthcoming personnel changes. There were little or no specifics given at the commander's calls and briefings. The NSPS training class was a course titled "Who Moved My Cheese" and was supposed to teach employees how to adapt to change, not what the changes were going to be. Basically, I felt that it was a statement by the government to the effect that "We (the higher command), don't care what your opinions are or if the changes are something that you can live with or not. Change is coming, deal with it!". I have read the information I could find regarding the changes but, I have doubts that the proposed changes are going to achieve the goals, that I perceive, the government is trying to achieve. The "good 'ol boy" system is alive and well and the particular pay-for-performance change is not going to help change that. I have been in the civil service for 21 years and have watched many 'new' programs make the circle. The government is always striving to do/make things better. I am not saying that is a bad goal but, I am also not convinced that NSPS changes will make civil service employment more enticing. Working for the civil service is not a glamorous job and a large part of the civil service employment enticement is the benefits and the steady paycheck. I honestly hope and pray that the proposed personnel changes do not set civil servants and the defense department back 30 or 40 years rather than move us forward.

  GovExec.com reader Posted July 15, 2005 8:22 AM
• 10990
  

  I would like to embrace the National Screw Personnel System, that would be until it stopped breathing.

  Corrupt people do bad things and this is just one more of them. Maybe Karl Rove can help with this one, he seems to have a large amount of contacts in the DC area.

  GovExec.com reader Posted July 15, 2005 7:07 AM