| Provision in House Defense Authorization Bill Could Kill NSPS |
|
|
|
|
Provision in House Defense Authorization Bill Could Kill NSPS 06/19/2009 "We have been fighting NSPS since 2003," Canterbury said. "This employee management scheme, which has a pay-for-performance system based on subjective criteria, is inconsistent with the mission of law enforcement officers and better suited for door-to-door salesman." Since the NSPS was passed into law in 2003, the FOP has been fighting the implementation because the system does not work for law enforcement. The NSPS sought to eliminate the General Schedule System and replace it with a pay-for-performance system for law enforcement officers within the Department of Defense (DoD). The system also entailed a reduction in the collective bargaining rights of our officers on issues such as overtime, flextime, and transfers by empowering the Secretary of Defense to remove any subject from the bargaining table. The FOP scored a victory in 2007 when the "National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2008," restored collective bargaining rights, but the troubling pay-for-performance aspect remained. "I am pleased that the language was included in the bill," Canterbury said. "But we need to fight to keep this provision in the Defense Authorization as the legislative process moves forward." The provision, which passed as an amendment sponsored by Representative Carol Shea-Porter (D-NH) by voice vote in the House Armed Services Committee, would prohibit new hires from being put into the NSPS and would prevent any further reclassification of positions to NSPS. Additionally, it would convert all employees back to the General Schedule system within one year of enactment, unless the Secretary of Defense notifies Congress of significant changes to NSPS. "When this provision becomes law it will not only be a victory for law enforcement officers within the DoD, but all Federal officers," Canterbury said. "Congress has sent a message that any attempt to reform Federal law enforcement shall not include any pay-for-performance system."
|


