GovernmentExecutive.com

Return to Article: Reviews of NSPS sharply divided at first public hearing

• 86012
  

  One thing stands clear in my mind. We need ONE system. Until such a time as there is one system that incorporates NSPS and GS we will never move forward.

  There is no 'perfect' system. Let's all face that and work to find a way to create a system that rewards those who work and removes those strap hangers that are taking up valuable space and resources.

  I believe that NSPS has some great pieces to it. That said, the way it was implemented and some of the policies such as pay setting, reassignments and promotions need major work.

  There should be a review by a working group that is a combination of supervisory, professional and technician level employees. The review should not be conducted solely by appointees who have never served within the system.

  T Cash Posted September 1, 2009 12:24 PM
• 84938
  

  I don't think many of us are against "pay for performance," but the NSPS pay-out or disbursemet method is flawed. Give us the pay-out in base-pay, not a partial cash bonus (as is currently required), so it stays 'with us' (you know-the gift that keeps on giving and counts toward high 3). Don't lower or "Norm" the ratings. Please don't claim they don't. We all know that they do exactly that. Make the pay pool manager's total outsiders. As it is now, it appears unfair. Someone's getting the bulk of of the pay-out, but it appears to be only management or favorites. NSPS is not only cumbersome and extremely time-consuming, but it's skewed toward management, allowing employees to be reassigned anywhere they want, without recourse for employees...

  Ken Posted August 17, 2009 10:54 AM
• 81976
  

  I think it's funny that somewhere out there some group of politicians, lobbyists, think-tankers, and god knows who else think that any organization in the world actually seriously uses pay for performance to get results better than those if some pay for performance system is not used. Where are these highly paid performers we have assumed exist for NSPS to be modeled after? In industry, finance, politics? I'm still looking. One place pay for performance seems to work is in show business, with popular actors and directors (whose films and television shows make more money than most) getting top dollar. Does Congress really want to use the entertainment industry as a model for rewarding government workers? I grant you that it IS the one industry in the US that, on a macro scale, seems to know what it's doing when it comes to rewarding good performers and staying in business. So I guess success in government may come to rely more on acting ability and personal attractiveness than anything else. Actually, it has been like this for quite some time, but NSPS will accelerate the process. The other thing that makes me laugh at NSPS is that it assumes an industrial age economic and management model. This works in well, industries that churn out products that consumers may or may not buy (such as the entertainment industry), but unlike entertainment mentioned above, many in government do not produce things comparable to a kind of mass market goods, but very specialized products and services for very specialized needs determined by our government and political masters. Is this what the nation really wants from defense and intelligence analysts? In such endeavors, it is the quality, not the quantity that counts. Do NSPS proponents know that, in some organizations, organizational goals are determined till AFTER the performance objectives from employees are submitted? Does it seem strange to anyone that government organizations don't have actionable strategic plans? How can we intelligently proceed with this program with so little thought given to what our masters expect us to accomplish? I have an idea: Hey Congress, why don't YOU try NSPS and see how well it works before deciding it is of such benefit to the government.

  gordon clay Posted July 7, 2009 11:02 AM
• 81870
  

  35+ as a "Government "Servant"" all Services -AF. Throughout as a raging bonfire fiercely & with purpose supported & defended that which made our country Great. Even direct Civilian "War Experience". Evident with all performance exceptional, outstanding, level 5, role model, & even highest possible passing. Received SECNAVs Distinguished Civilian Service Medal + others. Blessed. Started as a 7 now & for past 18 years a 14. Turned down higher as not being in direct support of our World Class military members or just too darn political. Participated in "key" progressive training. Now, as a result of NSPS, I'm just a "candle in the wind". Just barely made level 3 rated by a USMC major that could not see beyond his nose, graded outside objectives. Even his boss a USMC Colonel publicly claimed I made more than he. Forced to be a YC, been there & done that. Recourse being "10 day appeal for more $s" not in my character. Glad board is discovering truths about NSPS, funny all revelations were evident before implementation. Will "trudge" on, but LIFE IS NOT GOOD anymore as a prisoner of NSPS. Guess completely new gets higher grades for Washington Gang, vice fixing & educating about the proven old. Sad & my belief I'm not alone. Where have all the true leaders gone? God Save the USA.....

  GAL Posted July 6, 2009 8:07 AM
• 81847
  

  Did you know that the good ole boy network is alive and well and the buddy system is obvious under NSPS because management can select an employee without competition? Say you are at the entry level under NSPS YA 02 with a salary of 40,000 base pay and your manager just hired someone without advertising the position and they are getting 75,000 base pay doing the same work as you. I think you would feel angry that you didn't even have a chance to apply. On top of this you have to train this person. Also for those that are a 13 you don't have as many worries but the entry level folks that entered in around the comparable GS 9 thru the GS 12 salary under NSPS have many concerns. Just how do you get a 10,000 raise under NSPS in 1 year. Increases in pay are much better for those in the comparable GS 13 thru 15 ranges. But those in the comparable GS 3 to 12 ranges under NSPS are not so fortunate. Remember under NSPS a manager can hire who they want and there are many hiring their buddies and there is nothing you can do about it. The good ole boy network is alive and well in NSPS. At least under the GS your application was rated to determine if you qualify and if you made the cut and didn't get the position you could find out why. What are your options under NSPS - you didn't even get the option to apply!! This is a scary system and one that is not offering fair competition or fair transparency of your rating/pay band. Only speaking on behalf of those that cannot get promoted no matter how hard they work.

  Patricia Posted July 4, 2009 2:36 PM
• 81846
  

  Let's hope this NSPS system gets abolished! As a high performer I was rated a 3.0 with 1 share. My boss told me that my work was excellent and I'm a valued employee and I should be very happy with this rating. This was my first year being rated under NSPS. My story, in 2007 under the GS system I was rated a 5, also got an Achievement medal for civilian service award (very hard to earn), a QSI which is very hard to get. In 2008 we transitioned under NSPS and we didn't get a rating -- this was the buy in process only. Then in 2009 received my first NSPS rating of 3. It didn't take me long to see the downside-which you would not think would or could exist. I thought well a valued performer with a rating of 3 is okay with 2 shares. I didn't expect to get a rating of 4 or 5 because we all knew that even if you performed exceptionally well that was not going to happen because it was limited to very few. I was okay with the 3 but admit I was naive with how the rating would turn out. A rating of 3.0 and no contributing factors considered so the rating was an even 3 which is below average and equates to 1 share. I thought I was a valued performer - actually a high performer and I was going to get at least 3.51 which would have been 2 shares. How did I go from being a high performer valued employee to below average? A rating of 3 is supposed to mean that you are valued employee but when the majority of folks are getting a 3.0 to a 3.50 which is rounded down to 3 and equates to 1 share you are actually below average which is unfair. As a result of this rating I received 1084 toward my base pay and 718 in bonus. I actually make less than what I would of made had a stayed under the GS system as a GS12 step 9. It appears that no matter how hard you work you will still not be given a rating of 4. Wake up folks those of you that got a 4 this year may not get a 4 every year. Gotta be fair and make room for those rated a 3 in the past as an exceptional employee to fairly get their rating of 4 or 5. NSPS was initially set up as a pay for performance system but there simply is not enough money in the pool to pay all employees that are truly exceptional performers 3 or more shares which is a rating of 4 or higher thereby the majority of employees are rated in the 3 category.

  Anonymous Posted July 4, 2009 2:30 PM
• 81845
  

  2009 NSPS Performance Payout Example is incorrect: The sample used by the NSPS government web site on the 2009 NSPS Performance Payout Example is incorrect at best. The example does not clearly articulate all of the steps that take place in the calculation. The example is a person getting a 3 and 2 shares, when a straight 3 is only 1 share. This is a misleading example and many employees were not clear in the first year of being under this system on how the performance salary was being calculated. Also the example shows that the employee got 6.3 percent in addition to a bonus of 1080. Keep in mind the bonus has nothing to do with your overall base pay therefore this example should of showed that the base pay increase was less than 5.3. Honestly the example of the NSPS website is just incorrect and a new one with all of the steps to include the entire formula process (nothing hidden) to be shown so that employees have a clearer understanding how the performance pay is calculated. The sample should show a 3.0 getting 1 share so that valued employees have an honest example. I don't expect to get an award every year but I do hope that I am not under NSPS for the future. I thank all of you that are working toward making the NSPS a fair system or working toward going back to the GS system. Last - question how do employees under NSPS in a YA 02 which is equivalent to a GS 9 thru GS 13 pay band actually get to a 13 level. One would have to be rated a 4 or 5 with 3 or more shares for 10 or more consecutive years. That simply is not going to happen. No one under NSPS will be rated a 4 or 5 every year.

  Patty Posted July 4, 2009 2:27 PM
• 81692
  

  For Defense Dept. employees, there must be a way to determine which jobs are critical to national security. Then methods used by the intelligence agencies, such as the CIA and FBI, where people are engaged, motivated and enjoy their jobs/organizations, can be emulated.

  Governmentwide, I recommend a hybrid pay system in that the Fed Govt is looking for ways to improve. The # of with-in grade increases per the GS schedule can be decreased, for example.

  Providing the majority of good employees with COLA raises is very good, though, in that there are too many abuses and too much favoritism when a pay for performance system is used. There is also the tendency to rate everyone a 3 or in the middle. Recently in the Washington Post, negative favoritism/gross unfairness was discussed.

  The Fed Govt has public service as a value that people are drawn to, and management must continue to strive for fairness and transparency. This differentiates the fed govt from the private sector.

  However, there are still many employees, unionized and not, who are also unfair to good managers/leaders, therefore there must be some modification of the GS schedule system.

  Nonpartisan Posted June 30, 2009 5:24 PM
• 81676
  

  Last year, the number of workers that received fours and fives could be counted on a few fingers. There are so many employees being weeded out by the board, who doesn't know them, it is laughable. My last appraisal was the best I will ever have in my civil service career due to the high vis and important work I was doing. Same with my coworkers. We all received a three. The final result was whittled down by the board. My supervisor fought tooth and nail in our favor, to no avail. That shows you how powerful the rating system is when a supervisor can be stomped down. This year, I have a new job and I am doing great. I expect no more or no less a rating of three. I know how the system works, now. No matter how you perform, you get a three. Due to the extremely low number of so called "high achievers," my chances of being recognized and rewarded are impossible. This sytem doesn't work. It plays favorites. I don't support it. I never will. Those I know and work with don's support it, either. It is a sham.

  Glenn Posted June 30, 2009 1:58 PM
• 81661
  

  Obviously, this system favors: 1) Highly-placed individuals sitting near Paypool managers and commanders 2) Those who were "topped out" under the old system and who would never be receiving another raise in their career--anything they get is better than nothing 3) Folks with highly verbal, highly agressive supervisors who can (and will take the time to) write well enough to defend their ratings for their subordinates to the paypool managers. None of those groups are necessarily performing any better under the new system, and yet they benefit more. Other folks, who have worked hard, have been penalized because they don't fall into one of those groups OR because their command has a (tacit Shhhh!) policy of "all 3's" OR has budgetary issues and can't afford to reward people so they are downgrading their performance ratings to match the money available. Again...none of those penalized are actually being under-rewarded as a result of their "performance"...AND YET, they are suddenly less competitive for promotion, as a reult their lowered ratings, when compared to the chosen few. By the way, I'm not yet NSPS, and I've been fighting tooth and nail to avoid it. But I've seen plenty of screwings for a variety of my high-performing friends and peers who are in the cesspool...I mean, paypool...system. I'm all for "pay for performance"...that would be waaay cool! It would be even cooler if NSPS actually did that!!

  TRCIII Posted June 30, 2009 11:53 AM
• 81655
  

  This is the worst thing I have seen in my 22 years of service. My manager straight up told me there will not be any 4s or 5s given out in our command. Does that tell you the system is broke? Under the GS system I was an outstanding employee and I still am. This system stinks. My incentive to excel is not there any longer. I also spend 15% of my time working on documentation just to get a 3.0 that to me is a waste of the taxpayer's time and money in its self. Dump this ridiculous process and get back to the real work.

  MS. Kwiatkowski Posted June 30, 2009 11:25 AM
• 81645
  

  M.Smith: "Your" young crowd likes NSPS. "Your" young crowd will never be oppressed and always entitled to the best DOD offers in regards to TRAVEL, TRAINING and PROMOTION. Congratulations !

  Conversely, Young Minorities do not like NSPS......at all! And pretty soon we will make up the majority population of FED-CIV employees. NSPS subjects minorities (who work for a NEO-CON boss) to oppression and the conservative rath of a middle-aged manager who is out of touch with reality. I have worked in different work cultures and will have to admit that the way you choose leaders/management within DOD is.....outdated.

  Rags Posted June 30, 2009 10:09 AM
• 81625
  

  The only people who are for NSPS are those who do very well. It doesn't matter whether or not they deserve their ratings and salary increases. What matters is if they are liked and are part of the click. This does not apply to everyone, as there are a large percentage of hard working employees who worked hard and made major contributions to their agency's mission and received generous ratings/increases. Unfortunately, there are not enough managers out there that care about their employee's performance. They only care about whether or not their employees suck up to them and be a yes sir/madam kind of person, regardless what the consequences are to the programs they are responsible for. This problem starts at the top and works its way down in management. Our leaders within government really need to focus more on the quality of managers they have in charge and how they misuse and abuse their authority. It runs rapid in the government like an out of control disease. Managers need to be held accountable and made to answer for abusing their authority. It has always amazed me how managers get high ratings and good bonuses and their employees get passing ratings and little if no bonus. How can managers receive high ratings and their employees don't. Does anyone who approve these ratings ever ask that question? Or do they put their blinders on and go with the flow? The employees are the ones who do the work to make the managers look good and should be rewarded for the contributions, period. Need I say more? NSPS sucks and need to be shut down and the GS system reinstituted. I read a few comments from others who said it worked for them....well that's great for you. I just wonder if things changed and your ratings weren't so rosy, what your opinions would be then. Think about that. Overall, whatever the pay system ends of being, it needs to be crystal clear and fair to everyone.

  AL Posted June 30, 2009 8:20 AM
• 81611
  

  This "Will" not the w i l l in the 9th post below, does not favor a go slow or any kind of fazed approach to NSPS. In fact, this Will wholeheartedly supports it's immediate demise. The NSPS was and is a poorly conceived system which relies on elements of the past spoils system and was without care, rammed down employees throats. Obviously in the posts below are several from the sacred few who received gladly their shares from this system which rewards the few with that which was due others so in natural law of self preservation fashion, they advocate for the continuance of this destroyer of morale, organization and likely the present day civil service system..... Let it be hoped that common sense and civility will prevail and that this mockery for "Security" is buried.

  Finally, there was never a rational (believable) explanation given for creation of this "Frankenstein." Supposedly a personnel system for the 21st Century where we would engage in 21st Century conflict was needed. Then we engaged ourselves in a 18th Century War of Insurgency. Some, like Jeremiah, in the second post blamed 9-1-1 and unions. RIGHT....bad people were given visas to come to this country to learn how to fly...with out learning how to take off or how to land; citizens from a select Mid East country were not required to have a vise to come here.... and for THIS, pay pools were needed, collective bargaining was abandoned and DOD needed Pay for Performance. Fantasy...

  Coincidentally...., The pattern for this creation imitates the pattern utilized for the launch of the "invasion" which has shown to have been based on faulty data and unwisely, in the opinions of many, hastily pursued. At present, we are saddled with the cost of fixing what which we broke with the invasion choice. Let this choice, removing the unwisely conceived NSPS, be pursued with equal haste lest we brake one of the back bone of our democracy, a highly competent, efficient Civil Service.

  Will Posted June 29, 2009 11:47 PM
• 81569
  

  "Look we have jobs for life who cares what the taxpayers want. If they want accountability let them form a new government. We have rights and coming and going as we please and annual pay raises and promotions are guaranteed, its in the constitution"

  That's our Skeeter, blowing smoke like an Afghani toking on a hookah! You go, Big Guy! Don't ever let their fact and figures sway your sense of reality!

  Just look out for Big Brother; he's been watching you anti-government types ever since the PATRIOT Act! Heck, if King George was still in charge they might have succeeded in repealing the Posse Comitatus Act and sent your beloved military after you!

  Tip off Posted June 29, 2009 12:15 PM
• 81550
  

  I was told last year by several Colonels sitting on the Mock Pay Board for NSPS that I/we made too much money. It didn't matter how hard I/we worked, all appraisals had to be dumb downed and reduced. That is exactly what happened in this command, maybe in others. There has always been a slight misunderstandings between Colonels and GS-15s, but a least as a GS-15 you were respected. Now, under NSPS we are under their thumbs and I for one don't like it.

  Henry Daniel, Jr Posted June 29, 2009 9:45 AM
• 81547
  

  A degree will not make a better manager or leader. Attitude and a genuine concern for their employees will. I was rated unfairly, and my super later admitted it. What's up with that? He has a degree, but not the concern for employees (well maybe one of them, but not me.) We WILL lose a lot of valuable employees if NSPS doesn't go away.

  NSPS Go Away Posted June 29, 2009 9:29 AM
• 81541
  

  I think they should cut their losses and do away with NSPS. No one i know that has been converted has liked it and the reward for performance system is broke in almost all commands that have NSPS systems. This is a waste of time, effort and money. No one likes it outside of the Pentagon.

  Jkolkman Posted June 29, 2009 9:06 AM
• 81523
  

  I just served on a mock pay pool panel. We were told that pay was getting too high so even if employees did an outstanding job, we have to downgrade them to a 3 because "they can't make too much money".

  Kathy Posted June 29, 2009 7:43 AM
• 81503
  

  Read OPM's workplace surveys. Every survey shows a lack of trust by employees in DOD leadership, yet nothing is done to fix that problem. All DOD managers should be required to obtain a minumum of a BS degree in management (from an accredited university, not the fake degrees held by many senior leaders, google it and see) Look at any private sector job announcement for a manager,they all require a minimum of a BS if not a Masters. In DOD we have managers handling huge budgets and workforces, who barely have high school educations and couldn't read a finacial ststement if their life depended on it. Make the managers a professional management workforce like the Financial and Acquisition workforces, with positive education requirements, then hold them accountable for performance. Once managers are professionals with management skills and held accountable for performance, I'll gladly support a new pay system.

  30yearhrspec Posted June 28, 2009 9:14 AM
• 81490
  

  Look we have jobs for life who cares what the taxpayers want. If they want accountability let them form a new government. We have rights and coming and going as we please and annual pay raises and promotions are guaranteed, its in the constitution

  dan m ketter Posted June 27, 2009 2:47 PM
• 81477
  

  In my case, NSPS works against my best interests due to my career choice. I work in a predominately female occupation on a combat arms military post - the most conservative of the CA branches. I began my civil service career with undergraduate and graduate degrees, plus experience. My 'training' cost DOD zero and started from day one way ahead of the game. Even though my position is classified as professional, during the past 27 years I was treated as clerical by upper management. Yes, very annoying but under the GS system as long as I did my job well, I was paid fairly. I felt the GS system recognized and respected both my career choice and my pay.

  This is not the case under NSPS. I know who composes my pay pool and they are all retired military from the combat arms. These anointed ones are the same folks who have always thought I was an overpaid clerical worker. So what are the chances that I will ever be 'awarded' more than one share? And to add insult to injury, these managers have 'administrative assistants' (true clerical workers) who are paid nearly as much as I am!! NSPS is too, too subjective.

  FED-up Posted June 27, 2009 5:31 AM
• 81470
  

  The premise was that a new compact could better align the goals and objectives of DoD's civil servants. However, the naivete of NSPS was its premise that civil servants do or would value personal profit and self-marketing over duty and profession.

  John Sone Posted June 26, 2009 10:28 PM
• 81461
  

  What about DCIPS for the Intel community? Wonder if any NSPS decisions will impact those folks?

  Jim Posted June 26, 2009 3:34 PM
• 81460
  

  I have a good idea. I call upon the DOD, Congress and taxpayers to put the same trust in DOD managers as they want DOD employees to have. Make the available money for raises open-ended. Since NSPS magically makes DOD managers infallible, a unlimited pool of money for pay raises should solve all of the problems I have seen complained about over the past few years. When there is no zero sum game in the money, managers can make those fine distinctions between performances and high wage personnel won't need to get theirs at the expense of those of lower power and wage. Are the DOD, Congress, and taxpayers willing to take my "trusting DOD managers to do the right thing" challenge? If not, why ask federal employees to do it?

  I am not in NSPS and will retire in about 18 months so I can't claim to have skin in this game. However, I remain astonished that someone that performs their jobs can be denied the same pay increase as is given in another agency. I am more astonished that two employees in NSPS with the same rating can be given different pay increases by diversion of one employees reward for performance to a one-time bonus while giving the other employee a big pay increase.

  Anna Posted June 26, 2009 3:12 PM
• 81459
  

  Under the GS system, I felt like I was providing service to the American people, a high calling. Now, under NSPS, I feel like I'm working for my supervisor, not a high calling.

  I feel there is more movement of personnel from job to job under NSPS. The only way to get an increase in pay is to go to another organization for a five percent increase. Under the GS system, the employee would get an increase for getting better at their job through the within grade increase. There was a reason to stay in the position and this provided stability and established in-depth knowledge in an organization.

  Personnel compete in their position in the private sector for profits. The Government is not for profits. Positions within the Government are to serve. You pit employees against each other for shares. Assigning shares is a factor of who writes the best and who you know. I want to spend my time doing the best job I can do, not worrying about who likes me and who I need to impress if I want to do well at pay out time.

  If the Defense organization had put the time into the GS system that they have had to put into NSPS, the GS system would have worked well. The GS system is a good system. There are stops within the system to keep a person from getting a within grade increase if they are not performing. There is reduction to a lower grade if the person isn't performing. There is the ability to reassign an individual. And lastly, a person can be released from Government service if they are not capable of doing their job. A person can get an additional step increase if they are an outstanding performer. And other awards are available. Other opportunities can be given to an individual if they are an outstanding performer. I believe supervisors weren't provided enough expertise when they had a poor performer. Establishing a new personnel system doesn't help that.

  Joan Posted June 26, 2009 3:04 PM
• 81457
  

  I'll tell you what's not fair..what's not fair is that Suzy Q Public that got hired the same day as I did into the same type of job gets the exact same step increases as I do and she only does 1/4 of the work I do!

  Macs Posted June 26, 2009 2:58 PM
• 81453
  

  I wonder if it were your paycheck - you'd be willing to say it's too early to decide if NSPS is working?

  Pay for performance with the same net some of money amounts just to a different distribution of money.

  Mark Gibson Posted June 26, 2009 2:44 PM
• 81450
  

  NSPS appears to be too complicated and costs too much. As a transparency exercise I would like to see the total employees covered by NSPS, hours and dollars used by DCMA, including training, to implement and process the FY 2008 ratings. I would also like to see the number of employees covered by the GS system, hours and dollars used by DCMA, including training, to process the GS system CY 2008 ratings. Also in the interest of transparency, I would also like to see the ratings, broken down from DCMA Headquarters, through Divisions and Centers to the Tertiary CMO level. I suspect that a higher percentage of higher ratings went to Centers, Divisions and Headquarters then to CMO'S. The calculation would be as follows: number of eligible NSPS employees with higher ratings at each activity/ total NSPS eligible employees at each activity. If my hypothesis is correct, this would be objective proof that the NSPS system is unfair.

  Transparency Posted June 26, 2009 2:25 PM
• 81449
  

  I have been generally disappointed with NSPS. That employees responsible for the implementation of NSPS are receiving the highest rating at my installation is very disappointing.

  DOC Posted June 26, 2009 2:24 PM
• 81448
  

  "Sharply Divided", as an implication of equal opposing forces, my read says majority if not all in favor of dropping NSPS. Others: "D"/"No performance system that will truly reward...", GS had QSIs, step denials, Special Acts, etc. problem too many could only claim to be "Leaders" who cared nothing for their folks. "Mark Schultz", Union is not in charge, but only called upon for their "truths" about the system, agree reward performance-true Leaders & Managers will do. "Will"/ "Too early to tell..." just read "Sal's" situation. NSPS from the majority (74%) think like a cancer and the longer it is allowed the less likely a cure. Think of all the gene distuptions now allowed in, "retiring military front of the line", call it inbreeding. "Robert M"/ agree. OPM does nothing to protect hard earned rights, thus the Union Leaders perspectives, essential. "Doug"/ a grievance mechanism, you say? Tell us more. Only a 10 day period appeal to pay panel and/or boss of and if used only appears that you want more $s. In gov 35+ years and never a walk out for higher $s. "Michael J Smith MPA"/ Awesome! Truths to "opportunistic sycophants". Those in high places would have gotten much less if only to improve GS vice creating a whole new system. Ah! the tricks folks will do when enpowered & paid with big $s. All Be Safe.......

  GAL Posted June 26, 2009 2:13 PM
• 81446
  

  A few observations: Rudy de Leon: He was a member of the National Paternship Council. His accomplishments as a member: Nothing. I was involved with Council activities during the entire tenure of the Council. Bob Tobias: Why will you change? Same song, second verse over the last 30 years. Your presence on the panel voids any credibility the panel might have had, not that it would have had any in the first place. Pay-for-Performance: Aside from providing human resource folks things to do, it has shown itself to be of little value. The DoD representatives admits that they have not studied the link between individual and organization performance. I would suggest that he not waste his time by trying. Any positive results of NSPS in terms of organizational improvement would have to be fabricated. Then there are the tremendous costs associated with the design and development of NSPS or any other pay-for-performance program. I have worked on the matter for over 15 years at various Federal agencies.

  Been There Posted June 26, 2009 2:01 PM
• 81439
  

  Nice misleading picture - most union members aren't even members of NSPS. They are just psoing for the cameras - the union bosses are running things. NSPS is FAR better than the outdated GS system. Too many lazy employees make too much money in GS system. At least NSPS weeds out the losers.

  Dean O Posted June 26, 2009 1:18 PM
• 81436
  

  John Crum and others identify the first missing piece of successfully implementing pay for performance in the government - a significant (10-30%) amount of pay has to be involved. I think most people would welcome the opportunity to have true high job performance be financially rewarded with a 20% of base pay bonus. The second part may not be achieveable in the Federal sector - a degree of lack of compensation transparency. Doesn't matter how well trained managers are, how structured the performance management system is - even if the system is truly identifying top performers, if the amount of bonus is public knowledge, a certain percentage of the workforce will think, "that's bs...I know Jim/Jane isn't a top performer."

  Former Fed Posted June 26, 2009 1:12 PM
• 81432
  

  NSPS wastes valuable time...time we cannot afford to lose. Rummy was an idiot...his time had no value.

  NSPS destroys morale...it rewards the popular. Rummy was an idiot...his morale did not matter.

  High morale leads to greater productivity and sustained efficiencies...Rummy and NSPS are both losers because they destroyed esprit de corps in DOD.

  KO Posted June 26, 2009 12:52 PM
• 81427
  

  D- let me get this right...you're working 50-60 hr weeks. That's 10-20 hrs every week which adds up to say 450-900 uncompensated hours every year (45 wks x 10-20 hrs) for a what an $8000 a year pay raise at the end? That's $8000/450 = $17.75 before taxes. Or if closer to the higher hrs worked then $8000/900 = $8.90 before taxes. Not bad if you're a GS-7 equivalent...if you're a GS-9 or higher...well I did the math you draw the conclusion.

  JIm Posted June 26, 2009 12:23 PM
• 81426
  

  For Chris, et al...The Army already has a viable personnel evaluation system that I must use for the civilian employees I supervise---it's called TAPES (Total Army Personnel Evaluation System). It requires clearly-defined performance objectives, employee assessment of accomplishments, and clear standards of performance that must be met to receive satisfactory or higher ratings. It is much more effective & efficient (when used properly) in doing all the things NSPS was purported to have done. TAPES provides for both monetary and non-monetary rewards for top performers, and also allows an employee to receive a legitimate rating for record by his/her supervisor and senior rater. NSPS only allows the supervisor to provide "recommended ratings" or "input" which have had little or no influence on the panel & pay pool manager's decisions. The pay panel & pay pool manager are too far removed from our office to know or care about what we do or how well we do it. They are only concerned with taking care of themselves & those who serve directly under them. Of all the systems I've worked under, including private industry, military, and civil service, NSPS is by far the worst, and TAPES is one of the better ones. DoD should look at TAPES as a good starting point for any agency-wide system. All the training, indoctrination, and propaganda about NSPS has only created more negative attitudes & bitterness, along with less-motivated employees. I and most of the personnel under NSPS that I know, most of whom were stellar performers, no longer strive to excel, because we know we'll only get an average rating and payout, regardless of what we accomplish.

  LJG Posted June 26, 2009 12:19 PM
• 81424
  

  Mr. Bunn's description of the "training" provided right before NSPS was implemented at my installation is misleading. Yes, there was a LOT of mandatory training. However, little of it was the RIGHT training. We got lots of the touchy-feely stuff, and none of the basic mechanics - using the PAA tool (poor), detailed training on writing job objectives and appraisals and none of the training I got did a compare/contrast between the two systems. One other point - under the GS system, your grade was pretty much your metric for how you were doing in your career (at least at my installation). NSPS collapsed 15 grades into 3 bands, doing away with that metric, but not replacing with something else. NSPS=Non-Stop Pain and Suffering

  Steve Posted June 26, 2009 12:17 PM
• 81423
  

  "Except for the Pentagon personnelists espousing the virtues of the system, I haven't heard anyone say anything good about NSPS." Know why? Because those who like it are busy earning their shares. That's why they like it.

  I, too, am a DoD employee and I welcome NSPS along with most of my 100+ division co-workers and many, many, MANY other DoD employees. There, now you can say you have heard someone say something good.

  It seems that most of the concerns people have with NSPS is based on a lack of trust in their supervisors or management. Isn't that what we need to fix? Does that mean that if we went back to GS, then everyone would be able to trust their supervisors again? I doubt it. We'd just be back where we started and the complaints wouldn't stop.

  Those of you that are complaining about NSPS probably complained about GS before the switch and will continue to complain if we all switch back.

  There are a few things I would like to change about NSPS but, for the most part, I believe it is the direction we need to go. I hope we're able to continue with NSPS and give it a real chance to suceed.

  Proud to Serve Posted June 26, 2009 12:15 PM
• 81420
  

  NSPS is DOD's PONZI SCHEME of Performance Management. Based on a lie, built on gulibility, and on sale to fools worldwide with a little greed and desire to be declared better than the next person in thier hearts.

  From what I have seen and heard - the DOD NSPS wonders did more for citing reasons why NSPS isn't working than why it should stay.

  Mark Gibson Posted June 26, 2009 12:10 PM
• 81411
  

  Finally! Here we have a list of comments with some balance and logic. A welcome change from all the emotion and misinformation that we normally see.

  There are always challenges in a new system of this magnitude - particularly when pay is impacted. NSPS was not designed to run parallel with the General Schedule. It's true that Congress granted DoD authority to develop a new management system and authorized a short-term relaxation of certain union/labor responsibilities. I understand why union officials took issue with that, but the result of all this rhetoric and legal action is a system that cannot operate as originally intended. So we are now trying to juggle an apple, a carrot, and a lima bean. Let's give the review panel a chance to do their work, see what they propose, and move on from there. It just doesn't make sense to "go off half cocked" and compromise mission effectiveness. If we are going back to General Schedule, let's do it smartly, not emotionally.

  NSPS employee Posted June 26, 2009 11:32 AM
• 81410
  

  Like I have said all along. The middle managers who ruined the previous system of management because of their inherent misbehavior and at times criminal acts ruined NSPS. Who in their wildest dreams/fantasies believed there is any other possible outcome. They are lazy and they will not change. These dirty birds even foul their own nest. No matter what the upper tiers of management, and I am really stretching it to call them management, comes up with for direction. The middle and lower sections of this effort will mess it up. Mainly because they are just plainly stupid and lazy. When one of them messes up royally, they will roar, scoff, spit, and at time cuss. But, they will not punish and correct the mess up. Why? Simply, because they fear that they will be punished when they do the same thing!!! And they will, bet on it. I am still rolling on the floor laughing my ass off.

  Retiree ROTFLMAO Posted June 26, 2009 11:26 AM
• 81404
  

  I came to the fed govt from the private sector-a nonprofit manager with 12 years of experience where I supervised staff, conducted program design, and represented my organization to many outside groups and organizations, locally and nationally, in a variety of venues. When I decided the fed govt might be interested in my skillset, I was hired, and have have been plugged into an analyst job, handed a lot of reports to prepare because I have an MBA. In my bosses view, I am new (new is less than 15 years with the govt), which means to him that I don't know much, but they seems to feel I can write, so I get write the reports-what other use for me is there? My boss has never supervised a soul until now, and has a technical background, not business management like me, and the agency loves him. So, as you can see, the govt wants subject experts, but they don't train them, and the old timers could care less, so they can't manage a dam thing. Management and supervision requires working WITH ones staff, and those who should be in those roles need to enjoy or at least appreciate their staff, and building their program for the benefit of the public. You have got to get rid of the old apathetics, and find real management professional, and acknowledge that type of skill as expertise the government needs.

  Mike Posted June 26, 2009 11:07 AM
• 81399
  

  NSPS was designed to decrease cost, bottom line, end of discussion. The fact of the matter is that what ever system is put into place if managers do not take the time to document performance and provide training the system is flawed. NSPS is worse in that it lends itself to personalities, rating by committee. It is set up under the guise of promoting productivity, but it is no different than the old system. Those in the click win, those who aren't lose. This coming from someone who has gained monetarily!

  Federal Executive Posted June 26, 2009 10:48 AM
• 81398
  

  I don't know why everyone is down on NSPS. I've been through two pay pools now, and come out better than I would have in GS. Did I get along with my management? Not always, but I did a good job, helped the command reach goals, and was rewarded accordingly. I like NSPS. As a younger DoD employee, I can't imagine being forced into the GS system where I have to wait for steps and there is no real incentive to do well. Something like 80% of the DoD got "1"'s on TAPES. How is that helpful? Keep NSPS around, eventually all these old gray head will either retire or die. The younger crowd likes NSPS!

  M. Smith Posted June 26, 2009 10:47 AM
• 81397
  

  NSPS is a broken system that no one wants but those who are benefiting from it and nothing can fix it but to get rid of it. If the system was so fair why all the controversy? Most veteran employees have retired so what's left are employees who have to work an extra 5, 10 years. We are not receiving training because the government don't feel we are the best and brightest employee, yet we have been performing duties for 20, 25, 30 years. NSPS training was to quick and many are still wondering what to do. It was not important for us to understand the system and the process, just speed up the process to convert as many employees as possible. You are told to evaluate yourself but it can only relate to to duties in your PD. Most employees do far more than what's in their PD. Management nor NSPS is trusted and until there is a fair system in place for all employees the majority will never trust NSPS or management either. I have never had a manager to guide me in my career, yet I have always inquired about one. What's fair about this system, NOTHIHG!!!

  Faye Wescott Posted June 26, 2009 10:46 AM
• 81396
  

  While the aims of NSPS are laudable, the system itself is not. There is no widespread support and no real attempts have been made to obtain buy-in. There is no transparency about any of it. The wage grade employees are not included. The feeble attempts to sell the system were smoke and mirrors and were easily discerned as such. Total accountability, one of the stated aims, is not being inforced. Far from creating a DoD workforce, each branch of the Armed Forces has its own version of NSPS; each region of these branches has its own version; each installation has something different from the others. The practices, mindsets, and policies which created the need for reform are being left almost entirely intact. I don't know about the rest of you, but HRO at my installation did not even let us know that we had an opportunity to provide input to these hearings. Reform is necessary, but NSPS is not going to provide it.

  Ellen Guillemette Posted June 26, 2009 10:45 AM
• 81393
  

  Chris has this exactly right. NSPS is not the PROBLEM. It was the DELIVERY of the program. NSPS is a tedious, time consuming process and final decisions on employees performance come from people who don't even know the employee or what they do. The decision is based on who the best writer is and ends up benefiting those who can make it sound like just showing up to work every day saved the world. We were also told there wouldn't be any quotas but every pay pool I have seen has had their bell curve they want to work with. Managers are also supposed to be able to rebut the paypool when they want to decrease a rating for one of our employees. Last year I had every appraisal come back reduced by 1 share without any explanation from the paypool. This is a HUGE foul. I do think NSPS can work if we can figure out the right things to measure and get the Paypool system worked out.

  DoD Supervisor Posted June 26, 2009 10:40 AM
• 81392
  

  One particularly offensive aspect of NSPS' implementation at AFMC is the separation of pay pool results from lower management ratings; our ratings are arbitrarily lowered, for reasons that are never explained, and then the lower level manager is required to sell the eval results to the employee. This institutionalized deceit epitomizes NSPS for me. Oh, and later on, I was summarily swapped out with someone sitting on a non-supervisor billet; another NSPS benefit for management - such arbitrariness is completely insulated from review.

  douglas campbell Posted June 26, 2009 10:36 AM
• 81391
  

  NSPS is too time consuming and underfunded. I fought to give one employee a 4 rating two years in a row. It was awarded. In spite of that, that employee's pay today is $40 less a month than it would have been under the GS system. There is something wrong with this picture. This does not equal pay for performance.

  Leia Posted June 26, 2009 10:35 AM
• 81384
  

  As a GS-13 and non union person converted to NSPS I have to say the system sux.

  We had a case of sexual harrassment in our office. The first two levels worked together to suppress it. By the time she jumped the chain, the time to file officially had passed. The predator, of course, got a promotion. We have to trust these folks for our pay?

  NSPS isn't about pay for performance. It is about pay for writing about performance. It is about who can be a supervisor's pet and receive the most "glorious" assignments that write up well on paper. Doing an excellent job day to day is not rewarded.

  Anyone working 50-60 hours a week is rewarded with overtime pay. If not, that person is illegally supplementing the appropriation. Why reward illegal activity? Something very shady is going on there.

  Cindy Posted June 26, 2009 10:06 AM
• 81371
  

  More hot air trying to defend NSPS. It was and it always will be an attack by Rummy on the work force. DOD has distracted itself away from terrorism to terrorize its employees. Talk to the workers and mamagers.

  Wise Old Owl Posted June 26, 2009 8:53 AM
• 81365
  

  NSPS sucks. Except for the Pentagon personnelists espousing the virtues of the system, I haven't heard anyone say anything good about NSPS.

  On the other hand, I have heard every mid-level manager that I know complain about how difficult the appraisal system is and how rigged the payouts are. That assessment is absolutely unanimous at the mid-level too. The words cumbersome, unwieldy and ineffective come to mind when I think about NSPS.

  DoD Employee Posted June 26, 2009 8:35 AM
• 81362
  

  If there was a since of mistrust between management and labor at the GS level prior to NSPS, the conversion broke it for sure. Since the conversion, I've seen highly qualified professionals leave for other jobs or leave federal service all together because of NSPS and major mistrust of upper management doing the right thing. Most of these professionals actually stayed through the first NSPS evaluation period just to prove it true. When you receive a 3 and work your tail off, and your coworker who never completes a project on time or puts in that extra effort receives the same eval, the system is broken. So far we've lost seven professionals to this program...and so far been unable to fill the first one. Everyone offered a position has turned it down.

  John Posted June 26, 2009 8:25 AM
• 81361
  

  The problem with NSPS is that there is no incentive to excell. I have several reports to Congress each year. If I get them done on time, I'm a level 3. So how do I get to be a level 4 or 5. Get the reports to Congress a week early or two weeks early? There are no stretch goals. Also, I have heard several managers within DoD say that they will just wait out NSPS. It will go away eventually. How is an employee supposed to be motivated with that type of management attitude.

  Clancy Posted June 26, 2009 8:23 AM
• 81354
  

  The NSPS system and in conjuction of the A-76 created a mess. As a GS-12, I was converted to the NSPS system as YA-02. In the A-76, I was in the Inherently Governmental position. A co-worker, who was a GS-11 Chief in the Most Efficient Organization (MEO), was converted to the NSPS system as YC-02. Now that the A-76 was terminated or put on hold. I'll be supervised by the YC-02 (remember my co-workers pay is equivalent to the GS-11). I am told that when the NSPS goes away, my co-worker may get promoted above me because she had been supervising me, the YA-02 (GS-12 equivalent)

  Sal Posted June 26, 2009 8:06 AM
• 81353
  

  Until we change our Lake Wobegone culture that says everyone is wonderful then there can be no performance system that will truly reward superior performance. I like NSPS in that finally my 50-60 hour weeks are recognized and rewarded.

  D Posted June 26, 2009 8:03 AM
• 81349
  

  I am sure that management does not want to do away with NSPS. Just look at the pay raises that they have given themselves under this new pay system. Compare that to non-management positions and then tell me that the system is fair.

  Jeff Willis Posted June 26, 2009 7:51 AM
• 81348
  

  Can we please have some one else besides union personnel conducting these "investigations"?

  They are hardly objective observers and only bring accelerant to a bon fire.

  They demand complete employee buy in, but they old GS system did not have that, nor was it ever required to or designed that way.

  Nothing in government is irretrievable broken. If you want to have government work better you have to reward perfromance , and you have to have a system that does not reward longevity the way the old system did.

  Please let rational heads prevail on this issue.

  Mark Schultz Posted June 26, 2009 7:46 AM
• 81347
  

  I have to agree with the people concluding it is too early to tell. Culture shifts take time - 5 years is probably too early. NSPS is barely in year 3 at my agency. For those who demand that we get rid or move people who don't adapt, I have to ask the question: who will do the work? Good leaders understand that the people they lead are imperfect. You have to balance having technical skills with the right people skills and attitude. If you throw out the people who need training or who don't immediately have the right attitude, then you will be doing the job with about 30% of the needed staff. Give people time before deciding this will or will not work.

  Will Posted June 26, 2009 7:43 AM
• 81342
  

  Do you expect Defense employees to trust a management that abuses and misuses its authority while OPM does nothing? This relationship has gone on for years because OPM has handled workers like cattle in a herd.

  OPM was and still is indifferent to employee rights. They don't respond. They don't investigate. Is it any wonder the government has difficulty hiring skilled workers? Yeah, I bet any supervisor was ever fired for incompetence.

  Robert M. Posted June 26, 2009 7:16 AM
• 81337
  

  My last two years prior to retiring was under NSPS and the NSPS rating system was the "fourth" rating system that I had been part of in my 38 years of service.

  In the initial NSPS training that we as managers under went there was only one thing that stood out in NSPS and that was the increased time it took in writing and processing an employee's appraisal. The NSPS has no less than four checks and balances that ensures that an employee recieves an honest, objective, and supported rating. Of these four checks and balances the employee is empowered by NSPS rules to "grieve" a rating at least two levels above the rater and reviewer. No previous federal civil service rating system ever had this "grievance" proceedure available to employees.

  There is always apprendhension on "new" rules and regulations; but the organization I was in had 250+ NSPS employees and I can honestly state that the opinions of Mr. Crum, Mr. Bunn, Ms. Farrell, Mr. Tobias, Mr. Brown, Mr. Gage, Mr. Perkinson, and all of the others are absolutely not respresentative of the 250+ NSPS employees rated in my organization at Fort Hood, Texas.

  You have my first name, so anyone of the officials that want to talk with me personally can contact Fort Hood and I will return your call. But I am willing to bet that none of the persons that I mentioned above will take the time to contact me.

  Doug

  Doug Posted June 26, 2009 6:31 AM
• 81336
  

  Despite Mr. Tobias's comment about the desire of DoD employees to change and adopt NSPS, I believe given the right roll-out plan, they would embrace the system. The very fact a large part of the issue is a lack of trust of leadership reveals DoD leadership is out of touch with its workforce. Pretty sad that it takes an perfromance system to get leadership to recognize it has nor management, jsut technical leaders; so much for Human Capital Strategy. Don't do away with NSPS. Roll it back. Restore the 100% cost of living pay raise (ala DCIPS). Establish qualifiying training for supervisors. This is the first level that needs to improve it's performance before you can seek to measure and rate the working level performance. Do this over a 3 to 5 year period to get all used to doing the NSPS style of setting objectives and performance evaluations. This would allow maturation of the process, a slow cultural shift in the work force, and education of leadership. NSPS beats the hell of pass fail on objectives of id the employee show up for work, and did they fog the mirror.

  Fed Vetter Posted June 26, 2009 6:15 AM
• 81332
  

  NSPS is not the PROBLEM. It was the DELIVERY of the program. Those who drew up the program didn't think it through. NSPS is a tedious, time consuming process. In my opinion, the concept behind NSPS is good, but it's delivery needs a major overhaul. ONE example, no two organizations run the paypool the same. You would think that process would be standardized. One organization does it one way, another does it differently. In addition, the paypools can last for weeks. Put a dollar amount to that and measure the lost productivity to the time spent in these pools and you've lost any gain you thought you had. Keep NSPS, come up with a user friendly system that is a MUCH less time consuming system and don't have complete strangers making decisions on employees they no nothing about while trying to decipher superlative adjective evaluations. Keep the information short and simple and target it to what the individual does. Get rid of the War and Peace novels employees and supervisors must write just to make others understand what it is they do.

  Chris Posted June 26, 2009 5:00 AM
• 81324
  

  I wish I was on this panel I would expose Managers for what they really do to the Employees that work under them. Its a cry for help that is really needed and I am a witness to the fact. I was threaten by higher ups in DLA it forced me into Disability Retirement.

  David Steppe Posted June 25, 2009 8:53 PM
• 81315
  

  The administration needs to complete the cleansing process by either demoting or forcing into retirement or simply terminating any and all of the DOD's so-called senior-level 'leaders,' in cluding this shill Dunn, all of who have been acting as mere toadies for the failed Shrub administration's NSPS, an incompetent, chicken-hawk infested, crony capitalist reeking administration that arrogantly foisted this abonimation called NSPS onto the DOD workforce with not a care about the millions that went doen the drain and/or the easily foreseen negative impact both on the organization and the public it serves. These yes-men and yes-women toadies have showen themseves to be nothing more than opportunistic sycophants. They all ought to be ashamed of themselves and leave on their own, or if necessary be forced to leave (with their tails tucked firmly between their legs). What are your thoughts

  Michael J. Smith, MPA Posted June 25, 2009 6:50 PM
• 81314
  

  There appears to be a fundamental misconception (or mass amnesia) regarding the genesis of NSPS. In the wake of 9-11, it was widely recognized that we as a nation were facing determined, fanatical adversaries, confronting whom required a much more nimble and flexible DoD organization than was possible with the existing framework of civil service procedures, including the mindset of Federal unions operating within these. These saw no need - or resolutely ignored such - for basic alterations in the cozy, slow, not to say sclerotic ways of doing things within DoD as they'd evolved over the years, and obviously perceived a threat to their own power and status in the Federal labor / management equation. The underlying need for a much more responsive Federal workforce remains, although the intervening close to eight years since 9-11 have obviously lulled many back into complacency. Let's just hope we don't pay a high price for the unions' short-sighted intransigence, and the equally short-sighted approach of the Democrat-controlled Congress.

  Jeremiah Posted June 25, 2009 6:42 PM
• 81313
  

  DOD's PONZI SCHEME for pay for performance may have the few (I stress few) who are seeing higher than normal pay outs, those who designed the system, and maybe even the White House (althought Obama promised to repeal or drastically change NSPS when he was running for President), but it's clear that the majority aren't buying shares in "turst me, and I'll increase your pay".

  NSPS was built in an environment of distrust, hatred for unions, and distain for many workers without recognizing the failings of the agency to make sure supervisors and managers could adequately meet basic elements of performance management. FIX THOSE FIRST - then we'll talk.

  Mark Gibson Posted June 25, 2009 6:41 PM