GovernmentExecutive.com

Return to Article: Labor relations ruling threatens Pentagon's personnel reforms

• 15963
  

  A system that worked well enough to supply the resources and equipment to win WW1, WW2 and the Cold War now should be tossed aside so that those employees that gave up the right to strike and were saddled with scale fixed wages are now expected to be at a supervisor's whim. Canned without cause, because they will not brown nose those above them is typical of the conservative mindset that started the notion among U.S. voters that "unions are no good" and "the old system has already served its purpose." It's clear that the trickle down economy thought doesn't work. Nor do the mindsets that exist above. I saw fairness in the basic structure of the Marines, the Army and the old DCSC but this situation I describe above exists at DFAS Columbus. Everything from attempting to thwart OWCP claims, to surpassing work quotas regardless of human capability and injury to these same employees. This mindset sickness exists also among those that dislike veterans' preference as well as supervisors working to abuse their subordinates as opposed to taking care of their workforce.

  Don Heil Posted April 6, 2006 3:12 PM
• 15532
  

  After 20 years in the military scattered between Infantry, Armor, Air Defense, and TRADOC, I can appreciate that security often requires an investment that exceeds the general public's appreciation.

  But ... I thought we already learned from this historical mistake. As for the current feeding frenzy, ah, it harkens back to the days of my youth.

  How did that song go? "There's a name for it; A phrase that fits." (Tina Turner-What's Love Got to Do With It?)

  And the word is? McCarthyism. For those of a more recent generation, or who like myself often slept during history class, this definition is taken from the Encarta Dictionary, English version:

  Definition 2. Unfair accusation or investigation of people. The practice of using unsubstantiated accusations or unfair methods of investigation to discredit people.

  I'm not quite saying that of the current witch hunt, still undecided there; but I am saying that of those pointing the finger at all who question the patriotism of the doubters of our current foreign policy.

  It is our right, nay, our responsibility and duty to raise questions when actions are taken to prohibit those freedoms ensured by the Constitution and the "Bill of Rights."

  'Nuff said.

  Tip Off.

  Tip Posted March 20, 2006 9:19 AM
• 15505
  

  Help Us All, I think the phrase you quoted was meant as sarcasm. At least, I sincerely hope so. The actions of this administration have gotten so insane it's hard to tell. Honestly, Republicans would accuse their own mothers of being terrorists if they saw a way to gain the slightest advantage from it.

  The name "National Security Personnel System" worries me. Think about the bills that have passed this Congress: "Clear Skies" filled the air with more pollution.
  The "Patriot Act" insults genuine patriots by undermining our freedoms.
  The "Farm Security Act" had nothing whatsoever to do with security, but got passed because of the name.
  

  Clearly, NSPS is just meant to sound good, and the real system has nothing to do with national security.

  Maybe we need a new acronym:
  UNSPS: Undermining National Security Personnel System
  ITNSPS: Irrelevant To National Security Personnel System
  IFPS: Irrational Fear Promotion System
  CPPS: Crony-Powered Personnel System
  UYMEP: Universal Yes-Man Employment Plan
  LLAA: Labor Law Avoidance Act
  EPAE: Executive Power Abuse Extravaganza
  

  Sar Chasm Posted March 17, 2006 2:49 PM
• 15476
  

  "DoD should appeal Judge Sullivan's ruling and energetically so. The whole idea of NSPS is to address pressing national security needs. Therefore, Judge Sullivan must obviously be with the terrorists!" Oh my God! Here we go again -- if they don't do it the terrorists have won! Come on administration, the terrorists already have won! The ridiculous wire taps in the name of security, the search of shoes at airports, the excessive spending on the war of aggression in Iraq and Afghanistan and the entire operation of the administration is based on a fear of terrorists that is excessive in its price of freedom. The greatest terrorists sit in the White House and the Congress and continue to expand government powers over the governed. The terrorists have won!

  NSPS is not a security measure, it is a move by the administration to increase the power of political appointees (not elected) to determine the behavior of government employees! This is a shift in power from the Congress to the administration and nothing more or less. All civil servants will have to do as told by political appointees regardless of the action or the consequences. This will make every civilian employee a yes man just has been done with the volunteer military!

  Help us all Posted March 17, 2006 7:33 AM
• 15467
  

  Good grief! Somebody actually believes that NSPS is in response to terrorism. What a load of crap! NSPS is a lot of things, but saying that implementing it will somehow aid in the fight against terrorism is nothing more than stupid rhetoric.

  GovExec.com reader Posted March 16, 2006 7:47 PM
• 15461
  

  NSPS looks dangerous but we wouldn't need a change if it wasn't for the clueless management and union lackeys. Both keep anything worthwhile from happening.

  GovExec.com reader Posted March 16, 2006 2:25 PM
• 15435
  

  Thank God for unions. Unions protect the people from the whims of politicians.

  GovExec.com reader Posted March 15, 2006 12:47 PM
• 15433
  

  DoD should appeal Judge Sullivan's ruling and energetically so. The whole idea of NSPS is to address pressing national security needs. Therefore, Judge Sullivan must obviously be with the terrorists!

  GovExec.com reader Posted March 15, 2006 11:58 AM