Mr. Chairman, thank you for calling today's hearing on the National Security Personnel System (NSPS) as proposed by the Department of Defense (DOD) and the Office of Personnel Management (OPM).

I join you in welcoming Secretary England back to our Committee, along with Director Blair and our other distinguished witnesses who will share with us their views on NSPS.

As the ranking member of this Committee's Readiness Subcommittee, as well as the Senate's federal civil service subcommittee, I have heard from many Department of Defense employees across the nation who do not support implementation of these new regulations, as drafted. Mr. Chairman, I cannot recall a single issue in my 28 years in Congress that has generated more anxiety among federal workers in Hawaii than the NSPS. This is especially true of the more than 16,000 civilian DOD employees, many of whom work at the Pearl Harbor Naval Shipyard.

I believe the government's most important asset is the federal workforce, whose dedication -- commitment -- and courage -- are demonstrated every day. Any reorganization, such as NSPS, will fail if the concerns of employees go unanswered. Congress was told that DOD needed a new personnel system that was, and I quote, "flexible and contemporary" to meet its national security mission. However, NSPS should not reduce current rights and protections of the civil service in its aspirations for flexibility.

I used the recent public comment period to lay out my concerns in a 16-page letter and focused in the areas of pay, performance, and staffing; labor relations; veterans preference; and adverse actions and appeals. Although I feel that all these areas pose serious challenges to maintaining a fair and impartial civil service, I believe the limitations on the scope of collective bargaining are particularly egregious.

In testimony before the Governmental Affairs Committee two years ago, Secretary Rumsfeld testified that the labor-management provisions in chapter 71 of title 5, which governs the federal workforce, would not be repealed.

However, the NSPS proposal effectively eliminates collective bargaining by restricting bargaining over approximately 75 percent of current bargaining issues. The regulations permit DOD to issue a regulation, directive, or policy that trumps provisions of existing collective bargaining agreements.

The proposed regulations would eliminate negotiation on overtime policy, shift rotation, safety and health programs, flex time and compressed work schedules, and deployments. If such restrictions are implemented, it is no wonder that DOD employees are voicing concern. By restricting the ability of employees to bring their concerns to the table and essentially eliminating collective bargaining, the changes proposed in NSPS will undermine agency mission, lower employee morale, and make the Department an employer of last resort.

Let me be clear that the concerns being relayed to me are not just from rank and file employees. I am also hearing from federal managers -- the men and women who must execute NSPS and be accountable for its success.

Just yesterday I was asked by a manager how he was to implement the new plan on July 1 without any information or guidance from DOD. He said he was told by a superior that "implementation is a journey," and then he was referred to the NSPS website.

Mr. Chairman, NSPS appears to be a trip without a destination -- without a compass -- and without a map. I urge that implementation of NSPS be done in a manner that respects the rights and protections of the DOD workforce, provides adequate resources and training, maintains fair and credible appeals systems, sustains an environment in which labor and management coexist, and provide all workers -- both managers and employees alike -- opportunities to provide meaningful input on agency policies.

Thank you Mr. Chairman. I look forward to our hearing today.