National Security Personnel System (NSPS)
Position: The
regulations as proposed by the Department of
Defense (DoD) for the National Security
Personnel System (NSPS) do nothing to enhance
national security and only strip federal
workers of their rights. Donald
Rumsfeld’s personnel reform plan has also
been found to be inconsistent with law by the
In 2003, under the guise of
national security, Congress granted the
Department of Defense (DoD) the authority to
establish a new human resources system and to
modify certain labor relations provisions under
what was called the National Security Personnel
System (NSPS).
When then-Defense Secretary
Rumsfeld appeared before Congress, he stressed
the need for flexibilities in order to defend
our nation against the new threats of
terrorism. Yet, when draft regulations
were finally issued on February 14, 2005, the
agency put forward a plan that scarcely
resembled the one brought to Congress.
The law required DoD
officials to engage in meaningful discussions
with the unions concerning the development of
NSPS.
Moreover, Congress mandated that NSPS be
created jointly with employee representatives
through a “meet and confer” process before
any changes to existing personnel and labor
relations policies could be implemented. In
light of this, shortly after the law was
created, 36 labor organizations came together
to form a coalition called the United
Department of Defense Workers Coalition
(UDWC).
The UDWC went to work not only to defend
federal employee rights but to work with DoD to
find real solutions to real problems.
In April of 2005, the UDWC
sat down with DoD to begin the meet and confer
process. The unions
representing the federal civilian workforce
made a good-faith effort to address the needs
of DoD and revise the current personnel
system.
Rather than trying to collaborate with
the UDWC, the agency chose to ignore virtually
all of the proposals offered by the
unions.
DoD insisted that the authority granted
to them by Congress allowed them to use
national security as a pretense to do whatever
the agency wanted. This approach was encouraged
by the Office of Personnel Management
(OPM).
Then-OPM Director Kay Cole James stated
in a letter to Secretary Rumsfled that we
“…strongly support the objective of
assuring DoD’s discretion to act without
being burdened by collective bargaining
obligation…”
DoD published its final
regulations on November 1, 2005.
Remarkably, despite nearly 58,000
comments from the public and federal workers
and a 30-day meet and confer period, DoD only
deviated slightly from the originally proposed
regulations. The end product was a set of
regulations that lacked in specificity and thus
resulted in an unbalanced set of employment
directives that were neither objective nor fair
for federal employees.
On November 7, 2005, 10
member unions of the UWDC filed suit against
the DoD in the United States District Court for
the
On February 27, 2006, Judge
Emmett G. Sullivan issued a decision on the
case.
He determined that several key
components of NSPS, including those concerning
collective bargaining and third-party review of
labor-management disputes, were “legally
deficient.” Sullivan’s ruling was
consistent with an earlier ruling by Judge
Rosemary Collyer in a similar lawsuit that
challenged the personnel changes attempted by
the Department of Homeland Security (DHS). The DHS
decision was later unanimously affirmed by a
court of appeals decision.
On April 18, 2006, DoD
appealed Judge Sullivan’s decision. In
December of 2006, the appeal was heard before a
three-judge panel and a decision is expected to
be rendered by the court of appeals in the
spring of 2007.
Mismanagement
The Comptroller General of
the
The following are
observations noted by the
GAO:
·
The process used to
advance major initiatives is critical to a
successful transformation. DoD
faces a significant challenge in implementing
NSPS.
The inclusion of employees and their
representatives must be meaningful, not just
pro forma.
·
By including employee
representatives in the process, DoD can improve
policies and procedures, increase acceptance
within the workforce, and minimize potential
adverse effect on morale.
Unfortunately, the final regulations do
not identify a process for the continuing
involvement of employees and other key
stakeholders.
In April of 2006, GAO began
a review of the costs associated with
NSPS.
As of May 7, 2007, a final report had
not been issued.
Congressional
Action
For
nearly three full years, DoD has misused the
authority granted by Congress to design and
implement a contemporary human resources
management system. As the record reflects,
there has not been meaningful involvement of
employee representatives and several proposed
changes have been found contrary to law.
DoD’s overreaching
regulations under NSPS do not maintain
collective bargaining in the federal sector,
and, as such, are contrary to Congressional
intent.
Nonetheless, the Department will
continue to spend billions of taxpayer dollars
on plans to implement significant personnel
changes affecting more than 700,000 federal
employees.
With our country in the
midst of a global war against terrorism, this
is hardly the time to institute another one of
the former Secretary’s ill-conceived reforms,
much less one that has demonstrated that it
will demoralize the federal workforce and take
much needed resources away from our men and
women in uniform as they defend our
country.
It is time for Congress to
repeal NSPS and compel DoD to once again comply
with Chapter 71 and the merit system
principles.