What is your e-mail address?

My e-mail address is:

Do you have a password?

Forgot your password? Click here
close

Unions critical of NSPS overhaul decision

Employee advocates say system is a failure, should be abandoned

Federal employee unions sharply criticized the recommendation of the Defense Business Board (DBB) to overhaul, and not abandon, Defense Department’s controversial National Security Personnel System (NSPS). In a final report released Aug. 25, the DOD federal advisory committee recommended “reconstruction” for NSPS, which would include a total restructuring of the DOD pay-for-performance system and a name change.

DBB said it did not call for abolition of the system because “the performance management system that has been created is achieving alignment of employee goals with organizational goals.” The report also said the reconstruction “should include a true engagement of the workforce in designing needed changes and implementation.”

Getting employee buy-in to overhaul the system — which federal labor unions have criticized as unfair, not transparent and inequitable — is not going to be easy, according to labor leaders.

“NSPS has been a complete and utter failure,” said William R. Dougan, president of the National Federation of Federal Employees. “The recommendation to keep NSPS going in light of the program’s failed history is baffling. NSPS should be discarded once and for all.”

Also reacting to the report, American Federation of Government Employees President John Gage reiterated his union’s contention that NSPS was created by the previous administration as a way to curb the workplace rights of DOD civilian employees, including the right to collective bargaining.

“A steady stream of DOD managers and supervisors have told us that NSPS is unfair, dishonest and ineffective,” Gage said. “We know that those under the system suffer from low morale and lower productivity.”

About 205,000 of 865,000 DOD civilian employees are in NSPS.

For more information, visit: http://www.nffe.org/ht/display/ReleaseDetails/i/13898 or www.afge.org/index.cfm?page=PressReleases&PressReleaseID=1039.

Reader comments

Thu, Oct 15, 2009

The GS system is far superior to the NSPS mess. NSPS promotes secrecy, secret combinations, and is definitely not a transparent system. You don't know what your supervisor has written about you, unless they share it with you. But, my observation is they appear to be forbidden to show it to you. So, how can you improve? Bad system, I am glad it is going away.

Sat, Oct 10, 2009 as-if

unfair, not transparent and inequitable? Think back to the "good old days" of the General Schedule. Do you have any idea what criteria management used to determine the amount of your GS performance award (that is assumig you even got one)? Any idea how decisions were made regarding who would get quality step increases? Go ahead and check--my prediction is that you will find is evidence of rampant cronyism and discrimination--whether intentional or unintentional. you will discover that QSIs and performance awards (more importantly, significantly higher performance awards) are much more likely to be given to white males who work closely with the boss. What's the difference between GS and NSPS? First, the pay pool panel have been successful at leveling the playing field by ensuring that ratings and performance payouts are reviewed at multiple levels--not just by the king. Second, NSPS IS much more transparent than General Schedule--which is the entire reason we are even aware of the differing results among various employee groupings. Perhaps repealing NSPS is the best move--we can simply stick our heads in the sand and maybe the problems (which WILL still exist under GS) will simply go away.

Mon, Oct 5, 2009 Bob Dangredo DoD

If I was trying to build an un fair system that would get the Government Civilians, supervsors, Managers, Leaders, congress, the senate, the unions and the Lord all Mighty mad. I would build it exactly like NSPS. NSPS represents the biggest failure in federal Government of recent years. Let's go back to the the GS System, which is not perfect, but in time we can improve it and make it better.

Fri, Sep 18, 2009

The primary supporters of NSPS are those who have maxed out in there perspective pay grades. Those are at the step 10 level can now receive pay increases within there perspective pay band under NSPS. However, when you have several people doing the same manner of work this is unfair. Not to mention how time consuming it is.

Thu, Sep 3, 2009 DOD

What the supporters of the system fail to understand is that the environment for making NSPS work will never be there in the Federal Government because it is a non-profit organization. You cannot link salaries and pay raises to to profitability of the organization like you can in the private sector because there is none. Therefore, there is no real performance you can measure that relates to pay. What these pay raises are based upon are perceptions, favortism, the approach the supervisors use to do their evaluations, and political power. The NSPS system will never be fair and it will never work as intended because of that. People need to go back to and accept the limitations of the GS system because, while it is not perfect, it is at least as fair, if not fairer, than NSPS and it will cut down on the waste associated with the excessive NSPS paperwork. Or maybe the problem with NSPS supporters is that they thrive off of that extra paperwork to justify their own jobs.

Show All Comments

Please post your comments here. Comments are moderated, so they may not appear immediately after submitting. We will not post comments that we consider abusive or off-topic.

Your Name:(optional)
Your Email:(optional)
Your Location:(optional)
Comment:
Please type the letters/numbers you see above

eSeminar

  • Where Cyberwarfare and Cybersecurity Meet

    We invite you to attend the third event in this three-part series on Cybersecurity. 1105 Government Information Group will present a panel of government and cybersecurity experts including Steven Heacox, Principal Systems Security Engineer at the Joint Information Operations Warfare Center, DOD; Gregory T. Garcia, the nation's first presidentially-appointed Assistant Secretary for CyberSecurity and Communications with the U.S. Department of Homeland Security, 2006-2008; and Jeffrey Carr, cyber strategies consultant and author of Inside Cyber Warfare, in this editorial webcast on Tuesday, April 13 at 11 a.m., where they will discuss the cyberwarfare threat to both industry and government, as well as strategies to consolidate the wider cybersecurity mission. Read more

Federal Computer Week eNewsletters

  • Subscribe to Newsletters Subscribe

    Federal Computer Week's eNewsletters deliver the latest policy and management news to your inbox.

Highlights from the current issue