3:57 am, July 11, 2014

FederalNewsRadio.com - Purpose of Comments statement Click to show

Hubbard Radio, LLC encourages site users to express their opinions by posting comments. Our goal is to maintain a civil dialogue in which readers feel comfortable. At times, the comment boards following articles, blog posts and other content can descend to personal attacks. Please do not engage in such behavior here. We encourage your thoughtful comments which:

  • Have a positive and constructive tone
  • Are on topic, clear and to-the-point
  • Are respectful toward others and their opinions

Hubbard Radio, LLC reserves the right to remove comments which do not conform to these criteria.

  • 1
       

  • Closer than you beleive
    deployed decoy
    A few interesting quotes by the DOD NSPSTO PEO need reviewed. ‘I don't think it's the right approach to just pull out one piece - whether it's pay or career advancement or mobility - in isolation. I think the best approach is more holistic.’ Now call me naive but as the top leadership on this issue is ‘think’ the best term to use opposed to maybe ‘shall’, then holism is a theory, not necessary the reality that lower folks in the food chain may adopt as the making their ‘part’ of this ‘whole’ greater than the sum of the parts. So we again are leaving it up to lower level folks in the food chain to invent rules that do not take into account the sum of the parts that Mr James is the manager of. Another quote ‘Secondly, I think one of the advantages that we saw in NSPS is that it almost forced us to make sure that we had complete alignment between each individual department, down to the individual employee’. Excuse me but ‘almost’ if FAILURE in NSPS, as in ‘I almost met my objectives this year’. ‘I think that there are concepts in there that we should keep in mind, but also, as we look at a new personnel system, we should look at all thoughts and really bring in a very diverse organization, including our labor partners, to make sure we capture everyone's thoughts and we build the best system that we can for employees.’ This third quote really sums it up. DOD proved the failures and congress ordered the termination of the last DOD experiment. OPM is responsible for this type of action and always was. For any DOD employee to even 'think' they could do it right (other than follow OPM GS regulations or something OPM new in the future) just proves to me that DOD is still marching to their own failures and proven inability to lead in the human resource area again. I will transition back to GS on 20 June 2010. Many of the retransition rules are not in print or if released in a continues state of updating and lower agency adding to the rules to really confuse folks. I suggest Mr James and DOD develop ONE set of instructions that no subordinate agency can so much as interpret themselves if something appears to be ambiguous to them – ask the PEO for the answer, surly no further regulatory or instructions issued by subordinate units authorized. NSPS was a 100% failure. The actual network enterprise that was required for employees and raters to complete simple things like objectives failed time and time again. Many of us in the Middle East were (some still are) locked out of the DOD managed network I believe simply because the official DOD Authority to Connect was violated over and over again, placing private information at risk of compromise to boot. Many I know were required to do everything manual in this multi-page cruel system. Many Pay Pools and higher PRA authorities outright violated both DOD and DA regulatory directions. My PRA in Nov 2009 willfully violated several regulatory directions, but called the pay pool process ‘fair’. Never mind the average rating in my pay pool rounded to a 4 and the formal business rules these select criminals followed behind closed doors last Nov have still NOT been released to the employees and I know were changed at some date after 3 July 2009. I could go on and on as to the failures of PEO NSPS and that office lack of direction. But just one other failure needs pointed out Army Europe CPD came up with formal ‘suggested procedures’ defining when early evaluations or close outs should be issued. Then Army Europe pay pools ignored their own written word behind closed doors and called it ‘fair’… Now as we transition back the lowest level of HR at unit level is being allowed to determine ‘fair’ within their agency. How folks with special pay rates will reconvert is up to each of these HR folks. Some apparently stand to make 17% more for example going into IT pay table 99AF after grade and step is determined in the base table. Others will lose GS high grade and step held (in the same grade) when they convert direct into 99AF. Then the last effective step increase date is a very open question. Again some might have that last step increase date set back to 2004 when they hit step 10, others January 2010 when they with that perfect 3.00 in a very inflated pay pool that averaged 4.10 got a $200 performance bonus. Myself I am working with a legal tem to sue the pants off DOD on all of this. I tried to resolve it through my chain of command, but they all were part of this and sure not going to give up that 4.50 rating and admit they failed to follow federal regulations in the process. They also I feel believe they are above the law overseas, where federal employees have never been protected by the preponderance of OPM, federal labor laws or union protections. Lastly salary is the basis of GS grade in the DOD PPP regulation. But for the next few months if I find a GS12 position I lose save pay, but I will reconvert as GS12 in June. Who makes this stuff up?
    { "Agree":"1","Funny":"1","Insightful":"1","Disagree":"-1","Offensive":"-1","Troll":"-1" }
  • { "Agree":"1","Funny":"1","Insightful":"1","Disagree":"-1","Offensive":"-1","Troll":"-1" }