Search:

Custom Search

Readers' Comments

Total Comments: 94
Page 1 of 8

« Previous | Next »

NSPS and Your 2009 Pay Raise

Great raise!

Pay pool member
Defense
Mon Dec 29, 2008 9:18 AM

Post Reply

Since I'm in a position to see how NSPS raises ACTUALLY impacted our salaries, I can say with certainty that almost all of us did MUCH better under NSPS than we would have under GS - even after within grade increases are factored in. As intended in the NSPS design, those who fell below the curve are the ones who did not perform up to expectations. I say HURRAH! for NSPS. I'm happy with the enhanced communication that is occurring between me and my supervisor. I'm happy with the clarity of my performance expectations. And I'm THRILLED with my salary increase and bonus amount. I'm a happy NSPS camper.

Re: Great raise!

D.O.D Supervisor
USN
Mon Dec 29, 2008 1:35 PM
Oh course YOU are happy. What about the rest of us who work EXTREMELY hard, all the time. As a member of the pay pool panel you could easily impact your outcome. Our bonuses were well below par even when our agency gave theh GS employees a bonus over the summer, we were told that we would be given that bonus in Jan and instead, the money was placed in the pool. Those rated a 4 and obove got the lions share of that bonus and the normal supervisor walked away with a mere $350. When you and your supervisor are in the same pay pool, you know who's going to get more money. We strive to be our best to make our bosses look good and they are the ones who reap the bulk of the benefits off of our backs. Good for you, but what about the rest of us.

If you love NSPS so much, than you keep it

Government Analyst
Department of Defense
Mon Dec 29, 2008 9:21 AM

Post Reply

No matter how you try to slice it. No matter how you try to dice it. Now matter how much perfum or lipstick you put on it NSPS is really NSBS. I'd give up this rotten system in a nano seccond to get back the honest, open, and fair GS System that we had. Supervisor's ratings are now clouded by what happens behind closed doors in secret meetings. NSBS is an unfair system where supervisors are no longer accountable. Employees hate NSBS because its built on a bunch of lies. Supervisors hate it becuase they make a call on performance and performance can be manipulated. Everyone knows that this system is biased and discriminates. This system needs to be repealed. The government needs to issue appologies to federal workers. This system was built on goverment lies and it targeted unions. This system is not fair and it promotes cronyism and favortism. The government insists on perpetuating the lie; when this is really about shorting government workers now and in their retirements.

Re: If you love NSPS so much, than you keep it

Diversity Manager
DOL
Mon Dec 29, 2008 5:27 PM
No matter how you slice it or dice it the taxpayers are getting a bad deal with the old GS pay system. People are rewarded for attendance everyone gets the same raise regardless of what they contribute, so its a race to the bottom when it comes to performance.
Does the system discriminate you bet those who are lazy and do shoddy work get less money and from a taxpayers standpoint that is GREAT NEWS

Re: If you love NSPS so much, than you keep it

engineer
Navy
Tue Dec 30, 2008 9:50 AM
Au contraire, Mr Diversity Manager, the taxpayers are getting ripped off BIG TIME under NSPS. The actual awards given pale in comparison to the real costs of administering and running the system. A proper cost-benefit analysis would quickly condemn the whole fiasco.

Re: If you love NSPS so much, than you keep it

Cost Analyst
DoD
Sat Jan 17, 2009 2:25 PM
Even with out my Masters in Economics and full on analysis you can see the truth in the fact that wil overall payroll goes down, cost of NSPS implementation soars. Its time to get real and stop spouting off that GS rewards lousy performers, when in fact GS was rewarding lousy managers that did not manage their staff. No one wants to be the bad guy, do all of the paper work to get someone demoted or fired, or have a worker spouting off and upsetting the rest of the crew. By the way that is still true under NSPS.

The Cato Institute

Fed Worker & Union Guy
DOD
Mon Dec 29, 2008 9:29 AM

Post Reply

When you quote the Cato Institute, you have said enough already!! Check out their "conservative" & anti-government worker credentials. It was them & the Herritage Foundation, that brought us NSPS!!

Re: The Cato Institute

Diversity Manager
DOL
Mon Dec 29, 2008 5:29 PM
Darn pesky CS in the Commerce dept who gave CATO the data, they should be hung trying to make NSPS so attractive. I'm a CS and don't ever confuse me with the facts...

Re: The Cato Institute

HR Specialist
DOL
Tue Dec 30, 2008 9:07 AM
Diversity Manager,

Don't lie! From other posts you have made, we know that you are retired military. You are not and never were a Civil Service employee. You just love attacking all things Civil Service, for some reason unknown to us.

Re: The Cato Institute

Diversity Manager
DOL
Tue Dec 30, 2008 7:05 PM
We work in the same building I'm on the 3rd floor I park under the building we should do lunch 1 day

Re: The Cato Institute

HR Specialist
DOL
Wed Dec 31, 2008 7:06 PM
Div Mgr,

Don't continue lying, and don't try to be cute. You are not a DOL employee. There is no such position as Diversity Manager. You are retired military, who has nothing better to do than attack Civil Service employees all day on this and other websites.

Average Statistics Deceiving

Mechanical Engineer
US Army Corps of Engineers
Mon Dec 29, 2008 9:31 AM

Post Reply

NSPS payouts can be distributed in salary or bonus. Many people are getting their payout 100% in bonus, not just the folks high on the pay range, but young people, who the GS system was helping to climb out of the considerably low starting Federal salary. Young people with good ratings are being given no salary increase; shouldn't they be given the highest salary percentages?

Re: Average Statistics Deceiving

Analyst
DOA
Wed Dec 31, 2008 9:40 AM
Mechanical Engineer US Army Corps of Engineers, why should young people be given the highest salary percentages, because they are young? Do you think being young makes them smarter, or work harder than those who are no longer young? I have found that the young want everything now, do not think they should pay their dues or earn their promotions. They have absolutely no work ethic and usually get hired by some relative or friend of a friend.

Re: Average Statistics Deceiving

Trainer
DOD
Tue Jun 23, 2009 11:25 PM
I would find it a highly unusual circumstance where a "young person" (or should I say a new higher low in his payscale) who was rated highly would only get a bonus and no base pay increase. I goes against the system and if it happened to me I would find a new position someplace else. So if I was on the pay pool why would I do that. The only justification to do such a thing is if the employee is already near the toop of the raterange for thier position. If I was the employee I would have talked to my HR person to see if I have any recourse based on either merit system principles or if there is an EEO violation. Because something like this would pop out in an audit of ratings and there would have to be some good justification for it.

NSPS

Budget Analyst
DHS-TSA
Mon Dec 29, 2008 9:34 AM

Post Reply

Sure. But in an agency that works us like dogs and makes the rules up as they go along, it doesn't make much difference.

Average salary not a good guage.

Env. Engineer
USACE
Mon Dec 29, 2008 9:39 AM

Post Reply

I'm one of those NSPS employees who got a "3" rating. I got 2 shares. But the value of a share varies widely depending on the number of employees in a pay pool, the ratings given, and the amount of money in that pay pool. The more who get higher ratings means the share value decreases. The employees with the most face time get the higher ratings so it's not about performance at all. What that does is give a select group a BIG salary increase while the rest of us get less than our GS counterparts. For instance, my 3 rating for the past 2 years means I make less than my GS step 6 counterpart in the rest of the fed system. The bad part about that is that affects my retirement pay negatively. Since I'm not one of those "face time" employees, I'll never see a higher rating no matter what kind of work I do. I'm actively looking for another position back in the GS system.

again no Step increase

Former DOD
FS
Mon Dec 29, 2008 9:53 AM

Post Reply

While I won't argue with the math, with no Steps many employees lose out. I found it dishonest to hear from those praising NSPS as beneficial to employees by showing how much more we would make, then when questioned about Steps to be told that we were comparing two different pay systems that shouldn't be compared.

Re: again no Step increase

Fed Worker & Union Guy
DOD
Mon Dec 29, 2008 10:24 AM
Using this same approach, & attitude, is getting incarceration for those in financial services. It's called full disclosure & due dilligence. NSPS promoters....crooks on Wall Street....same....same!!! Don't ask too many questions....don't do your homework...just take their word for it!!! Maybe we'll see some federal agency heads get what's coming to them!!!

Re: again no Step increase

Diversity Manager
DOL
Mon Dec 29, 2008 5:12 PM
No one loses out your being paid based on your contributions its what the rest of the US work force faces every day. Before you got raises and promotions based on attendance well guess what no one but CS get paid like that. When you couple the average CS making $117K a year twice what the average wage earner in the private sector makes nobody really cares what you have to say. A better solution would have been for Bush to cancel the raise
Total Comments: 94
Page 1 of 8

« Previous | Next »

Add a Comment about this Article

** All fields are required.
Note: Your comments will not show up right away. FedSmith.com selects the most insightful comments from our readers for posting. If selected, your comments will show up in the comments section after they have been reviewed and approved. See our terms of use for more information.