The Pentagon said Wednesday that it will temporarily cut pay raises in half for more than 11,000 civilian workers transitioning out of the derailed National Security Personnel System.
John James, director of the NSPS transition office, told the Senate Homeland Security and Governmental Affairs Subcommittee on Oversight of Government Management, the Federal Workforce and the District of Columbia that 21 percent of the 53,057 that have shifted back to the General Schedule since May 23 earn salaries that exceed the maximum rate for their positions' GS grade. According to the government's pay retention rules, he said, these employees must be put on pay retention, meaning they will receive only half of the annual pay raise all other GS employees receive until the General Schedule's maximum step 10 pay rate catches up to their salary.
"In other words, pay retention protects the employee's current pay and limits pay increases," James said. "Each time a GS annual adjustment occurs, the employee's pay comes closer to being appropriate for the grade level of the work he or she performs."
Still, while pay increases will be cut for some employees, approximately 71 percent of the employees that have transitioned back to the GS system since May 23 received a pay increase, with an average salary bump of $1,363 per year, James said. Eight percent remained at their same rate of pay because their salary matched a step within their new GS grade, he added.
The Pentagon is in the process of creating a new personnel system to replace NSPS, and James assured lawmakers that the department is fully committed to working with management, employees, unions and other stakeholders. Success in designing the new system will depend on whether it is fair, credible and transparent, several witnesses testified. "In order for any new system to succeed at [Defense], we must learn from the implementation mistakes made under NSPS," said Patricia Niehaus, national president of the Federal Managers Association.
It's unclear how many employees will be impacted by the pay retention rules as the Defense Department continues transitioning the 226,000 total employees out of NSPS and back to the General Schedule. What are your thoughts on the transition? Are the pay retention rules fair, and how might they impact Defense's ability to retain employees?
COMMENTS
What if your salary is above the step 10 unedr NSPS. for example, My salary is 98,000 annually, the Gs12 Step 10 does not equal this annual salary. Should I go to the GS13 salary to match my salary under NSPS?
Roy 07/20/10 02:22 pm ET
The simple solution to the transition is to add more steps to the grades. The transition has NOT been fair for the employees placed on retained pay where different rules apply than with the employees who fit back on the GS Pay Scale. The transition stated no one would lose pay and employees would be converted back to the GS Pay Scale. Retained Pay employees were NOT converted back to the GS Pay Scale, but are off the pay scale. Retained Pay employees will lose pay with only 50% of the Annual Pay Raises. Retained Pay employees are subjected to other rules that those who were placed back on the GS Pay Scale are not subjected to. A retained pay employee cannot decline a position to the next higher grade if selected or they lose their retained pay. The transition back to the GS Pay Scale has been very unfair for the retained pay employees where a different set of rules apply. OPM and Congress needs to consider adding steps to the current pay scale grades to insure fairness for all transitioning employees.
ANON 06/21/10 11:14 am ET
With the unemployment rate in the double digits in this country and the number of people without health insurance, I should think that those of us with jobs & health care would be grateful and not greedy. How dare we get pushed out of shape to talk about unfairness of a pay scale at a time like this. I would rather keep my job and benefits and not get a raise ever again, if it meant the money would help people get a job or help those seriously in dire straits. Are we that callous? Arrogant? Uncaring? The gap between the haves and the have nots is large enough. Who wants to look down the barrel of a gun held by a "have not" because they lacked the job to buy the food or medicine or housing or whatever, and came to take it from someone making a large six figure income. I mean really, when is it enough? Let us be content with where we are and not tread on those already down.
DC Commuter 06/16/10 07:21 pm ET
The current Civil Service GS system is horrible, the only thing is every other system designed and implemented from scratch will be so much worse. For real folks over 50 years the GS system has evolved and is not bad, tweak yes, improve on the edges, but lets not spend Billions on another revolutionary system that turns out to be the fiasco that NSPS was.
John T 06/16/10 02:24 pm ET
NSPS base pay was set per pay for performance rule. Why should the change in the pay system penalize those who have performed over and above their step 10 ray rate? Additionally, reverting back to the GS system ultimately reward those who have their pay set at under step 10 level of their GS positions, including the underperformers.
This is not fair and equitable system.
yf 06/13/10 09:59 pm ET
With everyone talking about ZERO pay raise for federal workers, it would be fair. Otherwise, the high performers are being penalized. Now what does that tell you?
By the way, there are personnel rules that can allow for everyone to get an equal raise if DoD wanted to get OPM's approval. Now why didn't he mention that !??!
M Y Comment 06/11/10 11:55 am ET