Wrngway
09-02-2008, 03:34 PM
Here's a Stephen Losey article on some NSPS results. It was posted 26 August, but I didn't see any threads on it.
http://www.federaltimes.com/index.php?S=3692119
While I agree with the overall purpose of NSPS, overall I was fine with the regular GS system. One of my main gripes about the system is that your performance payout is based not only on your performance, but the performance of your peers. As more people are rated higher in a pay pool the value of each share is diminished.
DLA's transition plans are on hold. To date only supervisors are under NSPS. I was promoted to a supervisor position just before the transition. While this position increased my responsibility greatly, I was in the same grade as before. I didn't have a problem with that. Now I'm under a different pay system and unless I'm rated as a 4, my pay increase will likely be less than if I had stayed in my old position.
That, combined with the 1.5 percent base salary increase and average 1 percent locality pay raise that all but Level 1 “unacceptable” NSPS employees received, means that all but 165 employees at Levels 3 through 5 received total pay increases that were equal to or greater than the average 3.5 percent pay raise that General Schedule employees received.
This quote compares GS & NSPS wage increases. The figure of 3.5%/year for GS employees does not appear to include the step increases. For those in step 1 or 2 they're total increase would be closer to 7%, decreasing once steps are not received annually. So that may be true for those at a higher step, but definitely not true for those at steps 1-3.
http://www.federaltimes.com/index.php?S=3692119
While I agree with the overall purpose of NSPS, overall I was fine with the regular GS system. One of my main gripes about the system is that your performance payout is based not only on your performance, but the performance of your peers. As more people are rated higher in a pay pool the value of each share is diminished.
DLA's transition plans are on hold. To date only supervisors are under NSPS. I was promoted to a supervisor position just before the transition. While this position increased my responsibility greatly, I was in the same grade as before. I didn't have a problem with that. Now I'm under a different pay system and unless I'm rated as a 4, my pay increase will likely be less than if I had stayed in my old position.
That, combined with the 1.5 percent base salary increase and average 1 percent locality pay raise that all but Level 1 “unacceptable” NSPS employees received, means that all but 165 employees at Levels 3 through 5 received total pay increases that were equal to or greater than the average 3.5 percent pay raise that General Schedule employees received.
This quote compares GS & NSPS wage increases. The figure of 3.5%/year for GS employees does not appear to include the step increases. For those in step 1 or 2 they're total increase would be closer to 7%, decreasing once steps are not received annually. So that may be true for those at a higher step, but definitely not true for those at steps 1-3.