The National Security Personnel System (NSPS): New Insight from our DoD Readers

re: The National Security Personnel System (NSPS): New Insight from our DoD Readers

Ralph Price — Fri, 16 Oct 2009 00:10:40 GMT

I'm looking for specific individuals that left gov't service or retired from gov't service after 30 Sept and before the designated NSPS payout date, which for the 1Oct07 to 30Sep08 performance period was 4Jan09. Individuals that met this criteria would not get a NSPS bonus payout, even though they worked the 365 days of a performance period, just because they weren't onboard some 90+ days later on the NSPS payout date. It seems that this is discriminatory for all individuals that met this criteria. If you fall into this category, please contact me - rep@erols.com In my case, after 36 years of federal service, I left gov’t service on 3 Jan’09. The NSPS payout date was 4 Jan’09, and even though performed the 365 days of the performance period, 1 Oct 07 to 30 Sep 08, in which my performance was rated at my highest NSPS rating of my career, and highest payout amount from the Command’s NSPS pay panel, I was not entitled to a payout because I left gov’t service 1 day (or 1 minute or 1 second) before the pay out date. The following is the specific regulation: 5 CFR 9901.342(g)(7) is the specific guidance that applies: (7) Unless otherwise specified in this section, employees who are no longer covered by NSPS on the effective date of the payout, or who moved out of NSPS on a permanent move after the end of their rating cycle but before the effective date of the payout, are not entitled to a performance-based payout.

re: The National Security Personnel System (NSPS): New Insight from our DoD Readers

AlabamaGirl — Tue, 28 Apr 2009 20:59:20 GMT

I couldn't agree with you more!

re: The National Security Personnel System (NSPS): New Insight from our DoD Readers

Marty R. McLeod — Mon, 23 Feb 2009 20:14:17 GMT

I too believe on the surface NSPS sounds reasonable, however it is has so many flaws. Some of which are:

1). Pay Pool managers make final rating decisions and override raters and senior raters without having any knowledge of an individual or their job specialty. Not right! Proper decisions cannot be made on simply how good someone writes.

2). A very high percentage of NSPS individuals poled consistently average (around 95%) are dissatisfied with the system.

3). There are far too many secrets within this system i.e. what are the business rules used to rate individuals. I have heard that is secret and cannot be released. In addition, most questions I have heard directly ask to an installation pay pool manager could not be answered, either because of privacy or because they did not know themselves. How are we to learn and improve the process if we do not know or allowed to get direct feed-back from the panel of individuals who know nothing of us or what we do?

4). The NSPS rating / evaluation process is far too cumbersome. It literally takes 4-5 times longer to "try" and come up with objectives that meet standards that are not clearly defined by most managers "who themselves do not understand" the full NSPS process.

5). Finally, if we continue on this course we will have all "supervisors, managers, and executives (non-bargaining) employees under NSPS and all junior (bargaining) employees under the GS system. Two pay systems for one workforce. Is simply is not fair. This promotes dissention between management and the employees. The numbers I have seen are about a 55% GS to 45% NSPS split under DOD. We need help, repeal NSPS and let us all return to one pay program so we can all be under the same standards. In addition, it would unify the workforce. We need someone to listen, research if needed and fix this mess now. Do not leave it in place simply because money was spent to create it. Do the right thing and place us all back together "one team" one fight. This is becoming very distracting. It is really hurting morale, (proven inequalities and favoritism). Just look at all the studies done. We need someone to correct this wrong now.

re: The National Security Personnel System (NSPS): New Insight from our DoD Readers

Joe Horning — Mon, 20 Oct 2008 14:29:19 GMT

Another shortcoming of NSPS is that job openings do NOT have to be advertised if the supervisor recruits within the same pay band. This eliminates competition and impedes employees from moving up to a higher graded position. Case in point within a Corps of Engineers Division - a series 510 position was to be vacated in Decemeber 2008 due to a retirement. The incumbant is a GS12 and is under NSPS. In lieu of announcing the opening for all qualified employees, the selecting official canvassed the defined area of consideration for a current employee who was already under NSPS. The employee selected is a GS13. But under NSPS rules and the fact that the outgoing and incoming employees are within the same pay band, the GS13 could be selected without ever announcing the job opening or competition. NOW

re: The National Security Personnel System (NSPS): New Insight from our DoD Readers

Charles Couch — Thu, 28 Aug 2008 17:39:42 GMT

Terry, it is not only retirees who are affected by this horrible rule regarding your time frame. If a person works through an entire appraisal cycle and then for whatever reason leaves NSPS before the payout period (1st full pay period in Jan), they get no bonus or raise. I do not understand this at all. You perform your job Sep through Sep and then get nothing in return. I am resigning my position on 2 Oct 2008 and will receive nothing come Jan 2009 based on the fact I am not on the active roll that first full pay period. Rediculous. I am just waiting for the lawsuit so I can get my fair share. Pay for performance - as long as you stay? Do the work - reap the rewards I say.

re: The National Security Personnel System (NSPS): New Insight from our DoD Readers

Terry H. Dunn — Mon, 28 Apr 2008 03:46:13 GMT

This note is to alert you to what I believe to be is a serious flaw in the new National Security Personnel System "pay for performance" program. - I recently retired on 3 Jan 08 after almost 34 years of Federal service. I became eligible for retirement under the Civil Service Retirement System on 13 Dec 07. Under CSRS you must retire within the first 3 days of a month to get a pension check for that month. I set my retirement date at 3 Jan 08 in order to receive a pension check for the month of January 08. - I submitted my retirement papers on 15 Oct 07. At the time my organization (Missile Defense Agency -MDA) did not inform us know about the bonus “payout rule” and I didn’t know what if any my distribution share would be. However, my Supervisor recommended to our award board that my distribution be paid at 100% Bonus because I was retiring. (See attachment 1). I got notice that I had been awarded a 1 share bonus on 13 Dec 07. ( See attachment 2) - After I retired, I was surprised and very disappointed to learn that I would not receive the Bonus I earned under NSPS because as a Federal annuitant I was not on my Agencies (Missile Defense Agency) payroll as of 6 Jan 08. - It’s hard to believe that the intent of NSPS is for an employee to lose a Bonus they earned for a years’ work finished 3 months before they retire if the employee chooses to get a pension check in the first month possible which in my case was for the month of January 08. -I know that this can’t be rectified in my case but I believe this should be fixed so that in the future retirees are not penalized if they retire at the beginning of a calendar year. -If this is rule is not changed , what incentive does NSPS offer the employee who retiries at the beginning of a calendar year? I believe NSPS is not equitable to employees working in their last year of service and this aspect should be reconsidered. Sincerely, Terry H. Dunn 256-233-0953