<DOC>
[109 Senate Hearings]
[From the U.S. Government Printing Office via GPO Access]
[DOCID: f:28238.wais]
S. Hrg. 109-814
PREPARING FOR TRANSITION: IMPLEMENTATION OF THE NATIONAL SECURITY
PERSONNEL SYSTEM
=======================================================================
HEARING
before the
OVERSIGHT OF GOVERNMENT MANAGEMENT,
THE FEDERAL WORKFORCE, AND THE DISTRICT
OF COLUMBIA SUBCOMMITTEE
of the
COMMITTEE ON
HOMELAND SECURITY AND
GOVERNMENTAL AFFAIRS
UNITED STATES SENATE
ONE HUNDRED NINTH CONGRESS
SECOND SESSION
__________
FIELD HEARING AT FORT DERUSSY, HONOLULU, HAWAII
__________
APRIL 12, 2006
__________
Printed for the use of the Committee on Homeland Security
and Governmental Affairs
U.S. GOVERNMENT PRINTING OFFICE
28-238 PDF WASHINGTON : 2007
------------------------------------------------------------------
For sale by Superintendent of Documents, U.S. Government Printing
Office Internet: bookstore.gpo.gov Phone: toll free (866) 512-1800;
DC area (202) 512-1800 Fax: (202) 512-2250. Mail: Stop SSOP,
Washington, DC 20402-0001
COMMITTEE ON HOMELAND SECURITY AND GOVERNMENTAL AFFAIRS
SUSAN M. COLLINS, Maine, Chairman
TED STEVENS, Alaska JOSEPH I. LIEBERMAN, Connecticut
GEORGE V. VOINOVICH, Ohio CARL LEVIN, Michigan
NORM COLEMAN, Minnesota DANIEL K. AKAKA, Hawaii
TOM COBURN, Oklahoma THOMAS R. CARPER, Delaware
LINCOLN D. CHAFEE, Rhode Island MARK DAYTON, Minnesota
ROBERT F. BENNETT, Utah FRANK LAUTENBERG, New Jersey
PETE V. DOMENICI, New Mexico MARK PRYOR, Arkansas
JOHN W. WARNER, Virginia
Michael D. Bopp, Staff Director and Chief Counsel
Joyce A. Rechtschaffen, Minority Staff Director and Chief Counsel
Trina Driessnack Tyrer, Chief Clerk
OVERSIGHT OF GOVERNMENT MANAGEMENT, THE FEDERAL WORKFORCE, AND THE
DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA SUBCOMMITTEE
GEORGE V. VOINOVICH, Ohio, Chairman
TED STEVENS, Alaska DANIEL K. AKAKA, Hawaii
NORM COLEMAN, Minnesota CARL LEVIN, Michigan
TOM COBURN, Oklahoma THOMAS R. CARPER, Delaware
LINCOLN D. CHAFEE, Rhode Island MARK DAYTON, Minnesota
ROBERT F. BENNETT, Utah FRANK LAUTENBERG, New Jersey
PETE V. DOMENICI, New Mexico MARK PRYOR, Arkansas
JOHN W. WARNER, Virginia
Andrew Richardson, Staff Director
Richard J. Kessler, Minority Staff Director
Nanci E. Langley, Minority Deputy Staff Director
Emily Marthaler, Chief Clerk
C O N T E N T S
------
Opening statements:
Page
Senator Voinovich............................................ 1
Senator Akaka................................................ 3
WITNESSES
Wednesday, April 12, 2006
Maureen U. Kleintop, Deputy Chief of Staff for Total Fleet Force
Manpower and Personnel, Commander, U.S. Pacific Fleet.......... 6
Jeffrey T. Wataoka, Director, Human Resources Service Center
Pacific, Department of the Navy................................ 8
Michael L. Vajda, Director, Civilian Human Resources Agency, U.S.
Army, Aberdeen Proving Ground, Maryland........................ 10
John C. Priolo, Retired President, Chapter 19 Pearl Harbor Naval
Shipyard, Federal Managers Association......................... 21
Benjamin T. Toyama, International Vice President, Western Federal
Area, International Federation of Professional and Technical
Engineers (IFPTE), AFL-CIO CLC and Vice President of IFPTE
Local 121, Pearl Harbor Naval Shipyard......................... 23
Don Bongo, Vice President, Hawaii Federal Employees Metal Trades
Council, AFL-CIO CLC and Sergeant First Class, E-7, Hawaii
National Guard, 227th Engineer Company (combat), 29th Brigade.. 25
Alphabetical List of Witnesses
Bongo, Don:
Testimony.................................................... 25
Prepared statement........................................... 86
Kleintop, Maureen U.:
Testimony.................................................... 6
Prepared statement........................................... 35
Priolo, John C.:
Testimony.................................................... 21
Prepared statement........................................... 60
Toyama, Benjamin T.:
Testimony.................................................... 23
Prepared statement........................................... 79
Vajda, Michael L.:
Testimony.................................................... 10
Prepared statement........................................... 54
Wataoka, Jeffrey T.:
Testimony.................................................... 8
Prepared statement........................................... 48
APPENDIX
Questions and answers submitted for the Record from:
Ms. Kleintop with attachments................................ 89
Mr. Wataoka.................................................. 112
Mr. Vajda.................................................... 130
Mr. Priolo................................................... 153
Mr. Toyama................................................... 156
Mr. Bongo.................................................... 159
PREPARING FOR TRANSITION:
IMPLEMENTATION OF THE NATIONAL
SECURITY PERSONNEL SYSTEM
----------
WEDNESDAY, APRIL 12, 2006
U.S. Senate,
Oversight of Government Management,
the Federal Workforce and the
District of Columbia Subcommittee,
of the Committee on Homeland Security
and Governmental Affairs,
Washington, DC.
The Subcommittee met, pursuant to notice, at 1:37 p.m.
P.S.T., in the Asia-Pacific Center for Security Studies, Fort
DeRussy, Honolulu, Hawaii, Hon. George V. Voinovich, Chairman
of the Subcommittee, presiding.
Present: Senators Voinovich and Akaka.
OPENING STATEMENT OF SENATOR VOINOVICH
Senator Voinovich. This hearing will come to order. This is
a hearing of the Subcommittee on Oversight of Government
Management, the Federal Workforce, and the District of Columbia
of the Committee on Homeland Security and Governmental Affairs.
I would like to remind everyone that this is an official
hearing of the U.S. Senate, and Senator Akaka and I discourage
audience participation except for the witnesses.
We thank you all for coming. The title of today's hearing
is, ``Preparing for Transition: Implementation of the National
Security Personnel System.'' Senator Akaka and I were both
involved in the consideration of the National Security
Personnel System in 2003, and we have both followed its
development closely. We held two oversight hearings
specifically on NSPS last year, and we hope to hold another one
later this year. We have also held five other hearings on the
various challenges confronting the Federal Government's
national security workforce over the last several years. We've
been working on this for about the last 7 years, haven't we,
Senator Akaka?
Senator Akaka. Yes we have.
Senator Voinovich. I would like to publicly mention, in
Senator Akaka's home State, the high regard that I have for
Senator Akaka. He does an excellent job of representing the
interest of his constituents. Occasionally we have differences
of opinion about issues, but what we try to do is find those
things that unite us rather than divide us. I've gotten to know
Senator Akaka through our Thursday Bible studies in the U.S.
Senate. Senator Akaka, his wife Millie, and his family are a
real asset to the U.S. Senate. The people of Hawaii should be
proud of Senator Akaka, a man of high integrity, a man who
works hard, and a man who represents his State, but also
considers what's in the best interest of the country.
I was concerned right from the start that the
implementation schedule for NSPS was much too fast, and Senator
Akaka also is very concerned about that.
In fact, it appeared that the Defense Department might try
to put NSPS into effect by October 2004. Can you imagine? I
scheduled a meeting with the Department's top leaders on March
30, 2004. I met with Deputy Secretary Paul Wolfowitz and then-
Secretary of the Navy Gordon England, and urged them to slow
down the implementation schedule for NSPS. I stressed to them
that doing it right was much more important than doing it
quickly. They agreed and slowed down the process considerably,
and since then, I believe the Defense Department, in
partnership with the Office of Personnel Management, has
proceeded thoughtfully and carefully.
I think everybody understands that NSPS is here to stay:
That's a given. I believe, for several reasons, that it has an
excellent chance for success.
First, top leaders of the Department, most notably Deputy
Secretary of Defense Gordon England, are involved. Second, DOD
has decades of experience with alternative personnel system.
DOD has more experience with this than probably any other
department in the Federal Government. The defense labs, which
we have at Wright-Patterson Air Force Base in Dayton, Ohio,
have had this for several years and it's worked out terrific
for them. Third, the Defense civilian workforce, in my view, is
one of the more motivated in the Federal Government. It has a
clear mission and sense of purpose. And finally, the military
culture, which is a strong presence in DOD, already requires
that all military personnel receive a written annual
performance appraisal, so there's a culture here throughout the
Defense Department. This appraisal system affects awards and
pay through promotions. In other words, if you're doing your
job and you move up, you get more money, and if you don't, you
don't get the promotion and you don't get the money.
Now, 2\1/2\ years after it was authorized, NSPS will go
into effect on April 30. Today we are focused on where the
rubber meets the road. Thousands of miles from Washington, DC,
where we debated and established this system, we want to learn
what's going on.
Today we're talking about some 250 people here in Hawaii,
and they are just the first of over 16,000 DOD civilian
employees in Hawaii who will eventually be in NSPS. We have
thousands of people in Ohio who will also go into NSPS. In
fact, the train-the-trainer sessions are taking place in Ohio,
and I'd be interested to hear what you think about it.
The components we are examining today are now the
laboratory. Our oversight must focus on ensuring that NSPS is
properly funded and thoughtfully, fairly, and deliberately
implemented.
I am particularly interested in learning about the
training, as I mentioned to you, and I'd like to hear exactly
how the Defense components are implementing NSPS and how they
are preparing their people for the enormous changes in
workplace management that are under way. I would like to hear
from the employee representatives what they are doing to make
sure that NSPS is a success, and what suggestions they may have
for improving the implementation of NSPS. I look forward to a
productive session.
I would mention that I implemented personnel reforms when I
was mayor of the City of Cleveland. It was very difficult.
That's when I really started to understand how important
training is, so that employees understand what is expected of
them. Training should also be of good quality and it must be
done properly.
When I was governor of Ohio I instituted total quality
management. We called it QSTP, Quality Services Through
Partnership. The first thing I did was to attend 4 days of
training with my labor leaders. I was there and took the time
to learn the new system. We really worked hard on getting
people to understand what Quality Service Through Partnership
meant. And what started out as something that the unions
thought would be bad, turned out to be the best thing that we
ever did. It was the first time that they could recall that
they were empowered to be involved in examining their work and
how they could improve.
Now, the tough job was changing the culture of our middle
managers, because they had spent their careers in a command and
control environment. So this was the hardest thing to overcome.
I would really appreciate it if everyone would have an open
mind on this issue, give DOD a chance to move forward with it.
If it's not working out the way it should be, we'll do
everything that we can to make sure that we correct those
things. We know it's not perfect, but I think it's really in
the best interest of our country and our employees.
I now yield to my good friend, Senator Akaka.
OPENING STATEMENT OF SENATOR AKAKA
Senator Akaka. Thank you very much. I want to say mahalo to
my Chairman, George Voinovich, and I also want to welcome his
lovely wife, Janet, who is here with us. Will you raise your
hand? Thank you for joining us today. And to all of you, as we
say in Hawaiian, aloha auinala, which is good afternoon, too.
I want to thank my Chairman for holding this field hearing
on the National Security Personnel System in my home State of
Hawaii. Sometimes you think about wanting to do something like
this, and think about how hard it is and you think, well, it
can't happen. Well, it has happened. The Chairman is here and
I'm here, and I'm really indebted to him for having this
hearing here in Hawaii.
Chairman Voinovich and I have worked very well together, in
a bipartisan manner, and the reason is he's easy to work with,
and he's very open-minded. The difference is that besides being
a Senator and former mayor, he was also a governor. He's had
all these experiences with people in different levels of
government, and knows government. And so I really appreciate
working with him.
And I'm also happy to join and welcome our distinguished
witnesses and our equally distinguished audience. I extend a
special thank you to General Hirai because you have just become
the deputy director. I want to thank you and the staff at the
Asia-Pacific Center for Securities Studies for making available
the center today. The Center has made Hawaii the gateway for
the Department of Defense's interactions with Asian militaries,
and the Center's importance will only grow in this Age of the
Pacific.
I've been here before, and I have witnessed what goes on
here. What's great about this place is that it creates
relationships that build confidence and knowledge of the United
States with other countries. The Center has been a real benefit
to the United States over the years.
Mr. Chairman, like you, I have heard from numerous Defense
Department employees about their concerns with NSPS, and I
appreciate your working with me to provide a local forum to
discuss one of the most critical elements of NSPS, employee
training.
Nothing is more important to the Federal Government than
how it hires, fires, compensates, and evaluates its employees.
Federal employees are the ones charged with the public's trust
to carry out agency missions. Since such employee programs go
to the very heart of agency performance, training for these
programs is critical, as is ensuring that there are mechanisms
in place to assess the effectiveness of training.
This hearing provides us with a unique opportunity to
review the training and communication programs for managers and
employees who will transition into Spiral 1.1 at the end of
this month.
We want to know who has been trained, what kind of training
they are receiving, how the training is being delivered, how
the training programs are being evaluated and coordinated, and
what the cost is of such a massive undertaking.
Getting training right on the front end of the
implementation of NSPS could promote greater employee
understanding. Getting it wrong will send managers and
employees on a scavenger hunt to figure out for themselves
what's happening, when it's happening, to whom it's happening,
and this could lead to misinformation.
NSPS represents a huge cultural change for DOD civilian
employees, and setting aside my personal feelings on NSPS, I
want to explore what I see as a decentralized training regime.
While I understand the design and the need to place training
responsibilities within individual service commands, I am
concerned that this could lead to inconsistent training that
will benefit no one. Because pay under NSPS will depend on
effective training, there is no room for uneven or unequal
training opportunities.
For a system that rests so heavily on a manager's ability
to make meaningful performance distinctions among employees,
whose pay and work will be directly impacted by these
managerial decisions, there must be strong oversight,
accountability, and transparency.
My understanding is that while the Project Executive Office
(PEO) in Washington, DC, developed the training programs,
individual commands are responsible for providing and funding
all training for its personnel. In Hawaii, the vast majority of
those going into Spiral 1.1 will be Navy civilian personnel.
Given the Navy's emphasis on the One Shipyard Vision, I am
curious whether all Navy commands will use the same approach
for NSPS training. However, it is important to note that Pearl
Harbor Naval Shipyard is mission funded unlike the other three
shipyards. Given that our Shipyard is mission funded, I will be
interested to know whether the Department will provide
additional funds for the training.
If agility and flexibility are the end game in this pay-
for-performance system, then training must be consistent so
that no employee is at a disadvantage.
DOD's civilian managers, who are the backbone of the new
system, must have training that will provide them with the
skills and understanding to foster collaborative relationships
with their employees, especially in areas like developing
performance expectations. We must make certain that managers,
over half of whom are eligible for retirement, by the way, are
given the support and resources necessary to carry out the
implementation of NSPS.
Mr. Chairman, again I want to thank you so much for holding
this hearing here. and I feel that the Asia-Pacific Center is a
great place for this kind of hearing because this is a place
where we will build relationships.
Senator Akaka. Also, since the Chairman did mention that we
didn't want any responses from the audience, I want to just
point out that I have staff here that would be willing to meet,
in case you have a concern, with those in the audience and pass
on your concern. If you do, they'll be out in the lobby. I want
to introduce them both, Nanci Langley and Jennifer Tyree, for
all their work. Thank you very much, Mr. Chairman.
Senator Voinovich. Thank you, Senator Akaka. I'd like to
second the thanks to those responsible for welcoming us to this
excellent facility. I am pleased that Jennifer Hemingway, a
member of the staff of Senator Collins' Homeland Security and
Governmental Affairs Committee, is present with us. I
especially would like to thank Nanci Langley of Senator Akaka's
staff for the work that she did in preparation for this
hearing. In addition, I would also like to thank Andrew
Richardson from my staff, who's this Subcommittee staff
director, for all the work that you and your team have done for
this hearing.
We are very fortunate today to have three wonderful
witnesses. We have Maureen Kleintop, the Deputy Chief of Staff
for Total Fleet Force Manpower and Personnel, of the staff of
the Commander, U.S. Pacific Fleet. Jeffrey Wataoka, the
Director of the Human Resources Service Center Pacific of the
Department of the Navy. And Michael Vajda, the Director of
Civilian Human Resources Agency, in Aberdeen Proving Ground of
the Department of Army, so I'm glad to have you all here.
We have a custom in this Subcommittee that we swear in our
witnesses, so if you'll please stand, I will administer the
oath.
Do you swear that the testimony you are about to give this
Subcommittee is the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the
truth, so help you, God?
Please have the record note that all witnesses have
answered in the affirmative.
I'd like all of you, if possible, to keep your statements
to 5 minutes or less. Your entire written testimony will be
entered into the record. There is a good possibility that we
will not be able to ask all the questions we would like, so we
may submit to you some questions in writing.
Ms. Kleintop, please proceed with your testimony.
TESTIMONY OF MAUREEN U. KLEINTOP,\1\ DEPUTY CHIEF OF STAFF FOR
TOTAL FLEET FORCE MANPOWER AND PERSONNEL, COMMANDER, U.S.
PACIFIC FLEET
Ms. Kleintop. Thank you. Good afternoon, Chairman Voinovich
and Senator Akaka. I'm very pleased to be here this afternoon
to discuss the implementation of the NSPS at COMPACFLT
Headquarters. This afternoon I'll cover how we have prepared
for the NSPS, and how NSPS will further our mission.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ The prepared statement of Ms. Kleintop appears in the Appendix
on page 35.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Admiral Roughead, as Commander of the Pacific Fleet,
believes our civilian workforce is vital to accomplishing our
mission. In his recent Commander's Intent entitled ``Enhancing
Asia-Pacific Sea Power,'' he focuses on four areas that
maximize our contribution to regional security and stability.
These are: Warfighting readiness, force posture, regional
relationships, and future preparedness.
Our civilian workforce is key in every area. It is
essential that we have a human resources system that is capable
of supporting and protecting their critical role in COMPACFLT's
total force effectiveness.
COMPACFLT Headquarters volunteered to be among the first of
the Department of Defense organizations to implement NSPS. We
have a successful record of leading transformational change and
a strong commitment to building a high performance workforce.
On April 30, 2006, 170 employees assigned to COMPACFLT
Headquarters command will convert to this new personnel system.
To compare the employees for this conversion, we have taken
an assertive and responsible approach. We have implemented a
very rigorous training program and have maintained open lines
of communication to ensure the workforce that we are committed
to their success.
About a year and a half ago, I appointed a project manager,
a change management agent, a training program manager, and
chartered an NSPS implementation team. Our project manager and
the implementation team launched a massive communication effort
that incorporated the use of our on-line knowledge management
tool called eKM. Almost 300 documents including news items,
memos, and newsletters, and links to NSPS have been posted on
this particular eKM. We have also distributed NSPS brochures
developed by the Department's Project Executive Office.
We took a very proactive approach in providing informal
education sessions and established networks with local DOD
activities here in the islands. We hosted and invited local
representatives to participate in the following events and
training sessions:
<bullet> LBeginning in July 2004, town-hall meetings hosted
by Ms. Pat Adams, who's the Deputy Assistant Secretary of the
Navy for Civilian Human Resources.
<bullet> LFebruary 2005, roundtable discussions led by
China Lake's demonstration project, human resorces management
team.
<bullet> LFrom February through September 2005, we
conducted informational sessions facilitated by our project
manager and the change agent that we basically brought on
board.
<bullet> LOn May 31, 2005, we hosted a question-and-answer
panel discussion led by some of our own employees who had demo
experience or who had private industry experience with pay-for-
performance.
<bullet> LFinally, in August 2005, the Department of Navy's
Project Management Officer came out and conducted an executive-
level presentation, a briefing for managers and supervisors, a
town-hall style briefing, and a meeting with members of the
Federal Managers Association at the Pearl Harbor Naval
Shipyard.
So that kind of gives you a sense of some of our informal
sessions.
We've incorporated a blended approach to our NSPS strategy,
and, sir, we were fortunate enough to send 10 of our employees
to Columbus, Ohio, to receive the training, train the trainer,
on the human resorces technical elements, and, in fact, some of
them are here today and probably could attest to that training.
This approach, our blended approach, includes the following:
Former classroom training, some facilitated workshops, and some
e-learning courses.
The Navy's Knowledge On-line (NKO) site hosts DOD's web-
based training and the Department of Navy's e-learning
curriculum. Our soft-skilled training entitled ``Coaching for
High Performance'' was launched in April 2005. We trained a
total of 114 managers and supervisors, not only from COMPACFLT
Headquarters, but other local activities in Oahu.
From January through March 2006, we conducted 19 follow-on
workshops to assist our directors in developing organizational
performance objectives cascading from Admiral Roughead's
Commander's intent to create that kind of activity.
DOD's web-based training, called NSPS 101, also provides a
well-organized introduction to NSPS and features a conversion
tool that our employees are now using.
Last Friday, on April 7, 2006, COMPACFLT's top leadership
flag and NSPS members attended a Senior Leader Forum that
provided an executive-level overview not only of the NSPS
architecture, but it also focused on their leadership
responsibilities as well as the Performance Management System.
Training on human resorces elements for managers,
supervisors, and employees was initiated on April 5, 2006, and
to date, we have trained over 200 managers, and supervisors,
and employees, primarily from COMPACFLT Headquarters but also
others from the islands.
Our first of three ``Performance Management for Managers
and Supervisors'' courses began on Monday of this week, April
10, 2006. And beginning April 18, our employees will receive 8
hours of Performance Management training and learn to develop
their personal job objectives linked to the Commander's Intent
that has been published by Admiral Roughead.
Formal training on Writing Accomplishments and Pay Pool
Management will be added to our training curriculum as soon as
those courses are developed. By April 30, 2006, we will have
trained almost 250 individuals on the technical aspects of
NSPS.
Successful execution of our communication and training
strategies has prepared our workforce for the upcoming
transition. We have built credibility into each aspect of our
deployment plan by involving our people. The face-to-face
communication structure provided by the implementation team, as
well as event and training evaluations, allowed us to
effectively incorporate employees' feedback into our
strategies. All employees have been reminded that Merit System
Principles, Equal Employment Opportunity, and Veterans
Preference Policies remain unchanged under NSPS. We are
confident in our ability to successfully implement this new
civilian personnel system with a view towards minimizing
employees' concerns while maximizing their participation and
acceptance.
NSPS will provide COMPACFLT Headquarters with the modern
human resources system we need to attract and retain the talent
that we require. A core NSPS objective is to provide an
environment where employees will be encouraged to excel,
challenged with meaningful work, and ultimately recognized for
their contribution. By aligning our individual objectives with
Admiral Roughead's mission objectives, NSPS ensures
accountability exists at all levels.
Thank you again for the opportunity to testify.
Senator Voinovich. Thank you very much. Now, you're the
Deputy Chief of Staff for Total Fleet Force Manpower, for the
Commander, U.S. Pacific Fleet. Are you a career civil servant?
Ms. Kleintop. Yes. I'm a member of the Senior Executive
Service.
Senator Voinovich. OK.
Ms. Kleintop. Yes. And my background, sir, is predominantly
in human resources management over the period of the last 35\1/
2\ years with the Department of the Navy.
Senator Voinovich. So you've seen a lot of things come and
go over the years?
Ms. Kleintop. Absolutely. Not only in the civilian
personnel sector, but as the de-cost, if you will, for total
force management. Approximately 5 years ago, then Admiral Fargo
gave me responsibility for the military personnel programs as
well.
Senator Voinovich. Thank you. Mr. Wataoka.
TESTIMONY OF JEFFREY T. WATAOKA,\1\ DIRECTOR, HUMAN RESOURCES
SERVICE CENTER PACIFIC, DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVY
Mr. Wataoka. Good afternoon, Senator Voinovich and Senator
Akaka. I am Jeffrey Wataoka, Director, Human Resources Service
Center Pacific. We have a workforce of 62 employees, and are
one of seven HRSCs within the Department of the Navy. Our
Headquarters is the Office of Civilian Human Resources, located
in Washington, DC. Our Headquarters and all of our U.S. HRSCs
are converting to NSPS as part of Spiral 1.1. I appreciate the
opportunity to be here, to address how I helped prepare our
employees for implementation of NSPS.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ The prepared statement of Mr. Wataoka appears in the Appendix
on page 48.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
This September, I will have served in the Department of the
Navy for 40 years. During my years of service in the human
resources field, I've participated in many changes including
those made under the Civil Service Reform Act of 1978.
Effecting change is oftentimes challenging especially when the
goals are significant and affect a wide variety of employees,
and this is true of NSPS. From the outset, the Department of
the Defense structured their plan to build trust and
credibility with employees, and this is what I focused on, in
the HRSC Pacific.
NSPS--What's in it for employees? And four things come
readily to mind: Recognizing and rewarding employees based on
their personal contribution to the mission. Defining
performance expectations between supervisors and employees.
Encouraging employees to take ownership of their ownership and
success. And promoting broader skill development and
advancement opportunities in pay bands.
To prepare employees for the transition to NSPS, I focused
on three critical factors: Communication, training, and
participation. I will now provide some details on each of these
factors.
First and foremost is communication, both oral and written.
Face-to-face interaction, which started over 1 year ago,
included ``all hands'' meetings conducted by supervisors and
employees in our office to discuss proposed NSPS regulations
and procedures. Employees also attended separate presentations
and discussions with the Deputy Assistant Secretary of the Navy
(civilian Human Resources); the Director, Office of Civilian
Human Resources; and the Program Manager, NSPS Project
Management Office; and also representatives from Demonstration
Projects who have experience with the pay-for-performance
system.
Written material disseminated to the staff included NSPS
regulations; the HR Primer on NSPS that highlighted key points
on issues such as classification, staffing, performance
management, compensation, and workforce shaping. We also shared
newspaper articles that include information on pay issues,
legal issues, and comments from employees regarding NSPS.
Newsletters from the Deputy Assistant Secretary of the Navy,
Office of Civilian Human Resources, as well as those that I
issued at the local level were all disseminated to employees.
So far, there have been 18 newsletters from the Deputy
Assistant Secretary of the Navy. The most recent one is dated
March 7, 2006. This newsletter covered such topics as facts
about conversion, preparing for NSPS, and an update of
training.
Information on NSPS was also communicated to employees via
various websites including those from the Department of Defense
and the Department of the Navy. The Department of Defense
website includes the regulations and frequently asked questions
and answers. NSPS material was posted on our bulletin boards. I
disseminated NSPS brochures to all employees, including those
entitled ``Communicating With Your Supervisor,'' ``Focus on
Performance,'' and the ``Role of the HR Practitioner.'' Video
such as ``NSPS: Towards a Mission-Centered Workforce'' and
``Appraising Performance'' were shown to employees.
Finally, key members of my staff participate on biweekly
web-exchanges in which the latest status of NSPS is discussed
and questions answered.
The second factor is training. Training under NSPS is
comprised of soft skills and technical training, and, because
we're a human resources office, additional informal and formal
training has been or will be conducted for employees. Soft
skill on-line training in the Department of the Navy taken by
employees included ``Coaching for High Performance,''
``Listening Skills,'' ``Goal Setting,'' and ``Effective
Communication.'' The technical training completed or scheduled
to be completed for all employees by the end of this month is
NSPS 101, which is an interactive web-based course, ``HR
Elements for Practitioners,'' a 24-hour course, and
``Performance Management.'' Both the ``HR Elements'' and
``Performance Management'' courses are mandatory for all
employees, including supervisors. Training that will be
scheduled in the near future will include pay-pool management
and pay-for-performance.
The third factor is participation. Our employees have been
involved in specific NSPS initiatives. Our Headquarters
established teams with representatives from all of Spiral 1.1
HRSCs to provide input on how NSPS will be implemented
throughout our Command. These teams provided input on proposed
regulations, conducting joint training, and participating in
focus groups for development of job objectives and
implementation teams involving information technology,
conversion, classification, and recruitment. Employees
identified and documented the employee development needs and
participated in developing their own performance plan.
HRSC Pacific employees have conducted training for our
staff, on human resorces elements for human resorces
practitioners, and will assist in training on performance
management. I expect our staff will continue to be involved in
formal and informal NSPS training in the future.
We have been actively engaged in ensuring all employees
understand NSPS and the effect of this new system on their role
in furthering our important mission. Personally, I'm excited to
begin deployment of NSPS and am continually committed to open
communication, training, and involvement of our workforce in
NSPS. I believe our employees are well prepared for NSPS
implementation and will soon embrace it as a means to improved
performance.
Thank you for the opportunity to testify.
Senator Voinovich. Thank you very much for your testimony.
Mr. Vajda.
TESTIMONY OF MICHAEL L. VAJDA,\1\ DIRECTOR, CIVILIAN HUMAN
RESOURCES AGENCY, DEPARTMENT OF THE ARMY, ABERDEEN PROVING
GROUND, MARYLAND
Mr. Vajda. Good afternoon, Chairman Voinovich and Senator
Akaka. My name is Mike Vajda, and I am the Director of the
Department of Army Civilian Human Resources Agency, Army's sole
Spiral 1.1 organization. I would like to thank both of you, the
Subcommittee and your staffs, for inviting me to discuss our
preparations for implementation of NSPS.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ The prepared statement of Mr. Vajda appears in the Appendix on
page 54.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
And as described in my written testimony, the Army is
looking forward to using the many flexibilities offered under
NSPS, to better care for our civilian workforce. Acquiring and
sustaining a capable and focused workforce in these times
requires a human resources system that is as contemporary as
the challenges we now face. Our Spiral 1.1 participants are the
members of Army's operating civilian human resource community.
As a sole participant in Spiral 1.1, they will have the
opportunity to learn NSPS firsthand and use this detailed
knowledge to assist our commanders, managers, and employees who
would transition in later spirals.
The Army believes that effective communication is key to
successful implementation of NSPS. We have consistently shared
the NSPS message through an organized chain teaching program,
orchestrated town-hall meetings, briefings, brochures, fact
sheets, training bulletins, and dedicated websites. Perhaps our
most effective communication tool has been our senior leaders,
who have had the desire and vision to support this critical
initiative, leaders who embrace change and guide their
organizations and employees toward successful NSPS
implementation.
One of these leaders is right here in Hawaii, Major General
Stephen Tom, Deputy Commanding General for Mobilization and
Reserve Affairs, U.S. Army Pacific. Major General Tom was
appointed by Lieutenant General Brown, Commander of the U.S.
Army Pacific, to spearhead the transition of the civilian
workforce to NSPS. Since assuming this role, Major General Tom
had been actively engaged in communicating the significance and
value of NSPS to Army leaders and personnel throughout the
Pacific.
This effort presented the unique challenge of reaching out
to many different Army commands and activities, geographically
disbursed, in Hawaii, Alaska, and Japan. Major General Tom more
than met the challenge. He has implemented an NSPS information
campaign that began in August 2005, and continues to reach
employees, managers, and civilian and military leaders at all
levels.
Major General Tom chairs the U.S. Army Pacific Civilian
Advisory Board, that addresses broad issues that impact the
civilian workforce. He also serves as a member of Army's NSPS
General Officer Steering Committee. He has used the employee
and leadership feedback he has obtained, to inform and
positively influence NSPS implementation issues in the Pacific
and throughout the Army.
I want to show you that the NSPS training delivery is well
under way in the Army. More than 60 percent of approximately
2,400 Army's Spiral 1.1 employees have received formal
training. Twenty employees here at Fort Shafter Personnel
Advisory Center are in Spiral 1.1. Six of these employees have
completed the official train-the-trainer sessions at Columbus,
and will serve as NSPS trainers. The two supervisors of the 20-
person advisory center have also been trained, as have the
remaining employees at Fort Shafter.
In summary, we are confident that the Army is well
positioned to implement NSPS on April 30, both here in Hawaii
and in our other Spiral 1.1 locations throughout the United
States. The Army looks forward to the flexibilities that NSPS
will provide us in our efforts to acquire, develop, and sustain
a highly skilled and motivated workforce. We truly believe that
it will enhance our ability to support the warfighter and their
families, as well as allow us to better serve our Nation.
I would again like to thank you for providing me the
opportunity to share Army's NSPS implementation plans with you,
and I would be happy to take any questions.
Senator Voinovich. Thank you for that excellent testimony.
I have to say that I'm very impressed with what all of you have
said about the preparation that you have made.
Mr. Vajda, is there any communication between you and other
people in the Navy, Army, and the Air Force? I noticed you had
a very robust way of preparing for this. Did you do that on
your own or did you get some direction from another office, how
did that work?
Mr. Vajda. Yes, sir. Each of the components have a project
manager for NSPS, Army, Navy, and the Air Force. They work
together and work with the Project Executive Office (PEO). We
basically have ``soft skills'' training on-line, very similar
to the Army. In fact, we've trained over 5,000 of Army
civilians on the on-line training and approximately 4,000 in
classroom training on change management, setting performance
objectives, and having effective performance discussions. So we
do coordinate and work together.
Senator Voinovich. So the initial information that was sent
down through the ranks was the same information for all
branches involved?
Mr. Vajda. Very consistent, sir.
Senator Voinovich. I was very concerned about the soft
skills training because I think it is probably more important
than going through the training manuals, videotapes, and
websites--is it all more or less the same information?
Mr. Vajda. Exactly, sir. And we track all accomplishments.
Our training efforts are centrally managed at the department
level, and we track every accomplishment. Our supervisors have
to be certified in order to work on pay pools, or, actually
rate employees' performance.
Senator Voinovich. I have been concerned about training
since I first took this chairmanship. Senator Akaka may
remember that I sent a letter out to 12 Federal agencies and
asked them how much money they were spending on training,
because training is extremely important, so people know they
have an opportunity to obtain greater skills and they are
growing professionally. Of the 12 agencies, 11 said they didn't
know, and one said they did know, but they wouldn't tell me.
You have all been asked to do more training than you would
be ordinarily requested to do. Do you have the necessary
resources to do the training that you're supposed to do? Did
you have to pay for this training out of your existing budget?
What kind of consideration was given to your budgets in order
to implement this new program? I'd also be interested to learn
if the trainers of the trainers were employees of the
Department of Defense, or were they from the private sector? If
they were from the private sector, did you have to pay them out
of your budget? Could all three of you please comment on this?
Ms. Kleintop. I'll start by saying that, to the best of our
ability, when we realized a year and a half ago, the huge
investment in training that would be required, we have
attempted to budget for it through the normal PBB process.
Obviously, since it's event driven, we may not have it exactly
right, but so far, so good.
Senator Voinovich. In other words, because you recognized
you had this new responsibility, you did allocate resources to
it?
Ms. Kleintop. We did, yes, sir.
Senator Voinovich. Did you get any additional resources
over and above the year before?
Ms. Kleintop. I did not, no, sir.
Senator Voinovich. So you cut back on some of your programs
and decided to put those resources into NSPS; is that correct?
Ms. Kleintop. I would say that's a fair assessment for the
first year and a half, but now that we see the line of sight in
terms of where we're headed, I think that's one of the
advantages of going first as a major claimant, which we are,
because the lessons that we take away, vis-a-vis what does this
cost, we'll be able to plan for, as we implement for the
remaining 18,000 employees that work for our Headquarters.
Senator Voinovich. Do you anticipate asking for additional
money over and above the budget that you received in the 2007
budget?
Ms. Kleintop. Yes, sir. We will have to.
Senator Voinovich. If NSPS is going to be successful, you
have got to have the resources that are necessary for you to
get the job done.
Ms. Kleintop. Yes, sir.
Senator Voinovich. Linda Springer is the new OPM director,
and we have discussed personnel reforms similar to NSPS for the
entire Federal Government. A key question is whether agencies
will have the management capacity and resources to do this.
Ms. Kleintop. Yes, sir.
Senator Voinovich. So, successful implementation will rely
in part on the budgets of these agencies, I think that's one of
the things we have to pay particular attention to, that we
don't ask you to do a job and then don't give you the resources
to get it done. Because I've always observed that if you ask
somebody to do a job and you don't give them the resources to
do it, basically, you are telling them that you don't think
very much of what you're asking them to do.
Ms. Kleintop. That's right.
Senator Voinovich. So, that's good. Mr. Wataoka, same
question.
Mr. Wataoka. Yes, sir. First of all, Senator, all of our
training course is captured, and we're submitting our reports
to our comptroller located in Washington, DC. No additional
supplemental funds were provided to us. However, I see NSPS as
an investment, and if I can just use one data point, under the
current general schedule system, there are 400 OPM
classification standards. Under NSPS, there will be only 15. So
I can see that there's going to be tremendous amount of savings
on our part, when we implement NSPS. It will be simpler and
much more timely and less effort involved by our staff in the
future.
Senator Voinovich. Does you agency use category hiring
instead of the ``Rule in Three?''
Mr. Wataoka. Category ranking, sir, is that what you're
talking about?
Senator Voinovich. Yes.
Mr. Wataoka. Yes, sir.
Senator Voinovich. So now you have a larger pool of
applicants than you can review, and that's going to help save
time?
Mr. Wataoka. Absolutely, sir. And we also have numerical
ratings. We have both, numerical and categorical, yes, sir. So
we see tremendous savings for us in the future. Now, we are
human resources, so we will be directly impacted.
Senator Voinovich. OK. So that's good to hear. Mr. Vajda.
Mr. Vajda. Sir, in the Army, we've centrally managed the
training requirement, the technical training requirement for
NSPS, the training that our employees, our supervisors will
need to understand and execute their roles in the NSPS
environment. I personally briefed at the Pentagon the
requirements--the budgetary requirements to train our
workforce, both supervisors and managers, current year through
2009. That budget was recognized as a must-paid bill. Of
course, a year of execution, and this year, basically, we're in
an unfinanced requirement, this mode where the Army looks for
money to pay that bill, but recognizes it as a bill.
So it's centrally recognized within the Department of Army
that we must do this, that a certain amount of dollars are
allocated to do that, and we're hoping to get the--in our palm
years, 2008 through 2013, it recognized as an additional
requirement for those years.
Senator Voinovich. OK. So you have your own budget for the
Army, and you have yours?
Ms. Kleintop. For COMPACFLT, right.
Senator Voinovich. But certainly, the Department itself is
going to have some real input into this decision making. I'm
going to talk to Gordon England about this, and he has
understood this process from the beginning.
Senator Akaka, we have 10-minute question periods and I've
used 11 minutes. Senator Akaka.
Senator Akaka. Thank you very much, Mr. Chairman.
I again want to express my gratitude to our witnesses for
being here and also sharing--and I am smiling as I say this--
your 30, 35, and 40-plus years of service. I look forward to
hearing your thoughts.
I want to ask Ms. Kleintop and Mr. Wataoka, as Federal
employees living in Hawaii, about non-foreign COLA. I
understand that COLA, which is an allowance, has been given to
Federal workers living in noncontiguous areas and in U.S.
Territories since 1949. Under NSPS, pay raises will be based on
five possible factors, including what is called ``local market
supplemental adjustment,'' which will take the place of
locality pay. Obviously, DOD employees in Hawaii are wondering
how COLA fits into NSPS, and how COLA and local market
supplements will interface. Moreover, COLA is protected under
NSPS and cannot be waived by the Secretary.
Ms. Kleintop, would you please describe what will happen to
those receiving COLA as they convert to NSPS?
Ms. Kleintop. Sir, as you said, and it is a fact, the NSPS
legislation does not affect Title 5 that provides us the non-
foreign COLA If I might, though, comment, as early as the town-
hall meeting, 2004, with Ms. Adams, this was a large concern on
the part of the local constituents, so much so, that since we
hosted Ms. Adams, I immediately identified this issue to Mary
Lacy, and she established that obviously NSPS would not impact
that entitlement. However, what I further asked her to do, and
they did promptly, was to make that a matter of record on the
website that they were setting up, so that all of our
constituents here would understand, because quite frankly, the
people at the town-hall really were wishing that NSPS would
change the existing legislation on COLA to enable us to receive
the locality pay.
As we transitioned into NSPS, as you've mentioned for those
that receive locality pay, that will be part of that conversion
and taken into consideration. Here we, in fact, will continue
to receive COLA As far as the local market supplement, though,
I can't explain precisely how that will proceed, because that
is something that we're looking forward to, in the future, I
would expect that the COLA surveys, as we know them, will
continue, and I would be projecting, but I would think that the
local market supplement surveys would have to take into
consideration the fact that we do receive COLA And I will yield
to Mr. Wataoka in case I've left something out.
Senator Akaka. Thank you. Mr. Wataoka.
Mr. Wataoka. Quite a complete answer, Senator. We did host
Ms. Adams', the Deputy Assistant Secretary of the Navy, visits
to Hawaii, and it was held in the Pearl Harbor Naval Base, with
over 200 employees. This question came up from a number of
participants in the audience. She did go back and she did
address this answer on the website. It was actually Question
No. 18, because I received it and disseminate it to our staff
and our service activities. So, I think that was a complete
answer by Ms. Kleintop.
Senator Akaka. Will Hawaii employees be disadvantaged in
any way if they don't get local market supplement?
Mr. Wataoka. They would, in the sense of retirement. We
know that COLA doesn't count toward our retirement, but that's
subject to a separate lawsuit that's ongoing now, sir.
Ms. Kleintop. I think, Senator, you've hit on the crux of
the issue, and that is the disadvantage, if I can call it that.
That is we receive the COLA and not locality pay. Like some of
the Kona's locations, locality pay is computed currently into
your retirement annuity. And, basically, I go back to that was
the point at the town-hall, that many people were hopeful with
the NSPS legislation, that legislation could rectify that
inequity, if you will, and clearly, it does not change that.
Mr. Wataoka. I'd like to add one more comment on that,
Senator, if I may.
Senator Akaka. Yes.
Mr. Wataoka. I'm not sure that all employees would agree
that there would be a disadvantage. Only in the sense with
cost-of-living allowance, there's no taxes paid. So, many of
the new employees may not want it. I don't know, I didn't ask
everyone, obviously, but I think if you're looking at long-term
retirement, then it doesn't count toward your annuity, the
cost-of-living allowance.
Senator Akaka. Well, I would really appreciate your
continuing to work on this, to be sure it's clarified, and
there's an understanding and even a resolution as to what it's
going to finally be.
Mr. Wataoka. Yes, sir.
Senator Akaka. And I think the workforce would really
appreciate that.
Ms. Kleintop. Sir.
Senator Akaka. So let's continue to work on that.
Ms. Kleintop, we know that the departments and components
will fund training for NSPS from existing funds. However, as
you know, Pearl Harbor Naval Shipyard is mission funded. How is
the Shipyard paying for the NSPS training programs, and if the
Shipyard is not receiving additional funds from DOD for NSPS,
how is Navy balancing NSPS training with other necessary
employee training programs? Are existing programs being scaled
back or eliminated to cover the cost of NSPS training?
Ms. Kleintop. Sir, I would like to take that question, for
the record. To my knowledge, a formal training has not started
at the Pearl Harbor Naval Shipyard. However, I believe that
question would be best answered by NAVSYS Systems Command.
Because as you stated in your opening remarks, though it is
mission funded and COMPACFLT Headquarters is the budget-
submitting office for the Pearl Harbor Naval Shipyard, the
shipyard--excuse me, NAVSYS has taken a one-shipyard approach
in terms of NSPS implementation. We agreed to that at the
outset. And so I don't feel that I could give you an adequate,
precise answer on your question.
Senator Akaka. Well, let me give Mr. Wataoka a chance, in
case you want to say anything about that.
Mr. Wataoka. I really have no comment on that, sir.
Senator Akaka. Thank you. Mr. Wataoka, you have over 20
years of experience in the field of labor and employee
relations, which makes you uniquely qualified to understand
employee concerns over their rights and protections under NSPS.
As such, I'm sure you will agree with the Federal Managers
Association, that training managers and employees on employee
rights will help ease concerns and create an environment
focused on an agency's mission. Would you describe for us the
training that employees are receiving on their rights and
protections under NSPS, and how those rights under NSPS differ
from a current law?
Mr. Wataoka. We had several O.M. meetings where we
discussed the proposed regulations. However, at the end, when I
did address to my staff personally the adverse actions, the
appeals, and the laborer relations portions, even though we do
not have a bargaining unit, so I went over those provisions
with them, but, of course, now because of the court decision,
these programs are enjoined, and so we've stopped our training
in these areas. There are provisions, however, for employees to
contest certain actions on the current other systems regarding
the appeal, the performance ratings, for example, so there are
built-in protections for employees.
Senator Akaka. Ms. Kleintop, DOD's training manual, HR
Elements for Spiral 1.1 states that veterans' preference
principles will be protected under NSPS. To me, the term
``principles'' is a departure from the clear statutory
preference for veterans in hiring and protections during a
reduction in force. Does the use of the term ``principles''
imply a change in veterans' preference rights under NSPS from
current law?
Ms. Kleintop. Sir, not as far as I'm advised. Obviously I
was not the author of that particular manual, so I would have
to yield on the use of ``principles'' versus the ``law.'' But,
basically, what we've instructed is that veterans' preference
will not be interrupted.
Senator Akaka. Mr. Wataoka or Mr. Vajda, would either of
you want to make a comment on that?
Mr. Vajda. Sir, as far as I understand, the current rules
regarding veterans' preference is maintained in NSPS, and it
will continue without being impacted adversely. And I would
just like to say that as far as the Army goes, our veterans are
a great recruitment resource for us, and we value them as a
component of the civilian workforce.
Senator Akaka. Mr. Wataoka.
Mr. Wataoka. We would administer reduction in force for our
service activities. There are four factors that would be
considered, and in order, they would be tenure, veterans'
preference, performance rating, and credible service. That's
how it is under the current system, with the exception that
credible service and performance ratings are flip-flop; that
is, today, credible service overrides the performance rating.
That will be changed under NSPS. But veterans' preference would
remain the same under both systems, the current and NSPS.
Senator Akaka. We need to clarify this, so that people will
feel that they understand what is meant by veterans' preference
``principles,'' and I thank you for that.
Senator Voinovich. Thank you, Senator.
In terms of the veterans' preference, we held a very good
hearing in Washington that was requested by Senator Akaka, and
we heard from some of the organizations who weren't happy.
Senator Akaka and I are going to send a letter to the
Department of Defense and the Office of Personnel Management to
get additional information. We are very committed to this
particularly with our men and women coming back from
Afghanistan and Iraq, it's really important.
I never did get an answer because I didn't give you a
chance to respond. Who was doing the training?
Ms. Kleintop. If I might go first, we are doing it with in-
house trainers, with one or two exceptions, and what I would
offer to you, sir, based on our current experience, the way
that NSPS is set up and the way that we're implementing it,
based on our Commander's intent and Admiral Roughead's
objectives, there is such goodness to using in-house people, if
you can.
Now, I realize at COMPACFLT, we're implementing 470 people.
There are larger organizations that may not be able to humanly
do that with their in-house talent, but the feedback and we
have it from our flag officers, SESRs attending the training,
is that they really like the goodness of the in-house trainers
who know the command, know the people, encourage the openness,
and basically have been with us for the last year and a half,
getting ready, and that's real-time feedback to you, because
this is going on, as we speak.
Senator Voinovich. That's great. When we did our Quality
Service Through Partnership training, which was Total Quality
Management, Xerox Corporation was the one that really helped
us. But eventually all of our trainers were Ohio government
employees. When I left the governor's office, we had 3,500
continuous improvement teams, and we had 2,500 facilitators.
These are all people that had taken time away from their
regular jobs to participate, and it really, I think, is the
best way to get the job done.
The people in the Pentagon that are overseeing this program
in Washington, DC, do you believe they've got the resources to
oversee this? In other words, the P----
Ms. Kleintop. PEO.
Senator Voinovich. Yes. Do you feel comfortable that
they've got their act together and have the resources to get
the job done?
Mr. Vajda. Sir, from my perspective, they've done a very
good job. Army, and I believe Navy and Air Force, all have
representatives that work with the Project Executive Office,
and we work very closely with them. We all have project
managers, and we work as a team, basically. I've met with the
OIPT and seen how Mr. Dominguez and that group, very carefully
and exactingly, considers what they do and how we do it with
NSPS.
Senator Voinovich. So you feel very comfortable?
Mr. Vajda. I do feel comfortable, sir.
Senator Voinovich. Are they engaged and concerned?
Mr. Vajda. They are engaged.
Senator Voinovich. That's good.
On the issue of the soft skills training, is that done in
the classroom with people, or by a videotape or over the
Internet?
Mr. Wataoka. It's both, sir. We do have web-based training
on a lot of it, and others are face-to-face interaction in
classrooms.
Mr. Vajda. Sir, we do both in the Army as well. We have
classroom training that we offer at every installation, and we
have web-based training, a wide variety of web-based courses
that employees can take at their leisure.
Senator Voinovich. Congress authorized 2 years ago that the
Senior Executive Service would have a pay-for-performance
system. Have all of the SES people in your respective offices
gone through the pay-for-performance training and entered this
system? How is it working?
Ms. Kleintop. I can speak to that. We have four SESers at
COMPACFLT, and, in fact, yes, we have been through one
evolution on pay-for-performance. And actually, I think some of
the things that were done for NSPS are helping to inform
backwards how we can improve the transparency on that effort,
but----
Senator Voinovich. That's great. I don't think there was
this level of preparation for the Senior Executive Service. I
don't think it was done. Are you saying that maybe that it
didn't work out as well as you would like it to?
Ms. Kleintop. I have no personal complaints, but I have
heard people say that perhaps the transparency of the process
was not as ideal as we feel it is right now for our people, but
that's all part of transformation. And to answer your question,
yes, in fact, one of our four will probably be the pay pool
manager for COMPACFLT, and that's because of his experience
working at the senior Navy level on the pay pool process back
there, so we're trying to use his experience to do it at our
headquarters.
Senator Voinovich. Mr. Wataoka.
Mr. Wataoka. I was going to make a comment about that. What
I thought was interesting was the Deputy Assistant Secretary of
the Navy, Patricia Adams, shared her performance objectives
with all of us. My understanding is that performance management
for the SES group has been successful. I've heard very
favorable comments.
Senator Voinovich. They feel good about it, overall?
Mr. Wataoka. I can't answer that. I don't know.
Senator Voinovich. You say it's been successful, but you're
not sure?
Mr. Wataoka. The people that I've talked to are happy that
they've launched this. My boss is at least showing that they
are leading the way, they're the senior executives, and she's
willing to share her standards with us. I think that's making a
statement, sir.
Senator Voinovich. I'll be interested to hear from the
representative of the managers on that one.
Do you have any comment on this, Mr. Vajda?
Mr. Vajda. I would just echo what Ms. Kleintop said, sir,
and I do know that the OIPT, Secretary England and his group
really did take a hard look at what happened with senior
executive performance appraisal process and the lessons they
learned there, and tried to apply that to NSPS.
Senator Voinovich. Thank you. Senator Akaka.
Senator Akaka. Thank you very much, Mr. Chairman.
Having the three of you here today provides me with the
opportunity to ask the question I've asked of DOD officials
before, which is, what are the plans for converting Wage-Grade
employees to NSPS? Has anything been developed for a potential
conversion, and has there been any discussion on the
application of the Monroney Amendment to Wage-Grade employee
pay under NSPS? Ms. Kleintop?
Ms. Kleintop. The details, as I know them, have not been
developed at the DOD or Department of Navy level, but COMPACFLT
obviously employs, throughout our areas of responsibility, many
wage grade employees, two of the shipyards, and so, obviously,
at my level, our line of sight and vision is that we will
convert, we will implement NSPS for our wage grade employees.
The original schedule, however, given the Spirals, was not to
have that happen until Spiral 2.0. So, as to the further
development and crystallizing all of that for the wage grade, I
would have to take that for the record, in terms of the new
schedule and the exact details that have been fleshed out.
Senator Akaka. Mr. Wataoka, do you you have anything to
add?
Mr. Wataoka. Nothing significant, sir. I did attend a DOD
meeting in which this issue was addressed, but I think as Ms.
Kleintop said, it's in Spiral 2.0, which is sometime in
calendar year 2007, so I haven't heard very much more about it,
sir.
Senator Akaka. Mr. Vajda.
Mr. Vajda. Senator, I don't think I could add much
specifics aside from the fact that I do believe that the
principles and theories underlying NSPS would be equally
applicable to our blue collar employees as they are to our
white collar employees, and I know the intent is for this
system to cover our wage grade employees as well.
Senator Akaka. I have many other questions, Mr. Chairman,
but I'll submit them for the record. However, if I may ask this
one, Ms. Kleintop, our Subcommittee was told last November by
Secretary England that 85 percent of NSPS training will be
conducted on a face-to-face basis in the classroom. Is this the
case, and have you evaluated which training, classroom or on-
line, is more effective?
Ms. Kleintop. All of the training that we have accomplished
to date in the last year and a half, we have evaluated. There
are built-in pre- and post-evaluations that are done. And what
I stated in my testimony is that we have used a blended
approach, because, quite frankly, we do have employees that do
enjoy going to the website and taking advantage of those
courses. But I would say in the main, our soft skill training,
which was coaching for high performance, was all done in
person, and obviously the training that we're conducting at
this moment is all in person, and to his credit, Admiral
Roughead has directed that all of this training will be
required for all employees, managers, and supervisors, and so
even though we are not directed that way, from DOD or Navy, he
believes that it is that critical, that is basically what our
metric is, as we speak.
Senator Akaka. The question also comes because you
testified that those without computers were given brochures for
information on NSPS. I am interested in on-line training
programs. What alternatives are in place to provide on-line
training programs to individuals without a computer, and how
many employees does this affect?
Ms. Kleintop. Sir, I apologize if I misled you. I can
assure you, all 170 employees at COMPACFLT Headquarters have
not just one, but two computers, basically unclassified and
classified. What I should have said more clearly is that this
blended approach is allowing our employees to go to the
websites on their own time to take advantage of some of the
courses that are there, on the soft skill side, but in no way
did that replace the formal classroom training that we are
doing, and I apologize if I misled you on that.
Senator Akaka. Thank you so much for your response. Thank
you, Mr. Chairman.
Senator Voinovich. Thank you very much for your testimony
today. I must say that you have made me feel more confident
about this system because of all the work that you've done in
preparing for it. I think that you understand, as
implementation continues, the level of effort needed to be
successful, as well as the need for continuous training.
Mr. Vajda, how long have you worked for the Federal
Government?
Mr. Vajda. Thirty-two years.
Senator Voinovich. OK. I want to thank you all for
continuing to serve your country at a very critical time. Your
years of experience are important to the operations of the
government.
Mr. Vajda. Thank you, sir.
Senator Voinovich. Will the second panel of witnesses come
up, please.
Before our witnesses sit down, I'll administer the oath.
Do you swear the testimony you are about to give this
Subcommittee is the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the
truth, so help you, God?
Thank you. Please have the record note that all witnesses
have answered in the affirmative.
We're very fortunate today to have representatives from
three organizations. We have John Priolo, the past President of
Chapter 19 of the Federal Managers Association. Mr. Priolo,
Senator Akaka reminded me, has testified before us previously.
Benjamin Toyama is the International Vice President,
Western Federal Area of the International Federation of
Professional and Technical Engineers, AFL-CIO. Don Bongo is the
Vice President of the Hawaii Federal Employees Metal Trades
Council, AFL-CIO.
Thank you very much for being here today to share your
thoughts, we welcome them.
Mr. Priolo, we'll start with you.
TESTIMONY OF JOHN C. PRIOLO,\1\ RETIRED PRESIDENT, CHAPTER 19,
PEARL HARBOR NAVAL SHIPYARD, FEDERAL MANAGERS ASSOCIATION
Mr. Priolo. Thank you. Chairman Voinovich and Senator
Akaka, it's good to see you both again, and thank you for
inviting me to be here today to talk about the roll-out of NSPS
and its impact on managers and employees. You already have my
detailed written testimony, and I'll just hit some of the high
points.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ The prepared statement of Mr. Priolo appears in the Appendix on
page 60.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
I'm a Retired President of FMA's Chapter 19 at Pearl
Harbor. I was also a past Zone 7 President, responsible for
chapters in Hawaii and portions of the West Coast. I spent
almost 40 years in Federal civil service, most of which was in
the nuclear engineering department at Pearl Harbor Naval
Shipyard. And I'm here to testify today on behalf of the DOD
managers, supervisors, and employees throughout the Department.
FMA was established in 1913. It's the largest and oldest of
managers and supervisors associations. It originally was
organized within the Department of Defense, and since, it's
branched out to include 35 different Federal departments and
agencies. So what happens at DOD is going to affect all our
people and we're vitally interested in being a part of it.
We're a nonprofit advocacy organization and our job is to
promote excellence in government.
I'm very pleased to be sitting next to my good friends, Ben
Toyama and Donald Bongo. When I was actively working at Pearl
Harbor, we worked very hard with our unions to build strong
relationships, and they are superb voices on behalf of their
membership, and, frankly, without their help and guidance, and
of course the support of our Congressional delegation, Pearl
Harbor would not have an apprentice program.
The development of a new personnel system at DOD is a
historic step in the history of civil service. Because of the
critical mission and the sheer size of the DOD, success is
vital.
As those who will be responsible for the implementation of
the Department's proposed personnel system and subjected to its
changes, managers and supervisors are pivotal to ensure the
success. We believe this hearing is most important as we sit on
the precipice of the first wave of employees being enrolled in
the new system at the end of this month.
We support the message of the system to institute
flexibility, accountability, and results. We also recognize
that change does not happen overnight. Managers, supervisors,
and employees throughout DOD await a system that many question
whether it will actually come to fruition. Their skepticism is
rooted in a lack of adequate communication that clearly
indicates the expectations and time frame for training and
employing enrollees in the new system.
Despite such concerns, men and women of the defense
workforce are committed to meet any challenge head-on, and we
are still optimistic that the new personnel system may bring
together the mission and goals of the Department with its on-
the-ground functions.
One of the greatest challenges we see is that managers and
supervisors are clueless when it comes to the new system. The
communication coming down from agency leadership on time frames
and expectations isn't nearly enough to find managers,
supervisors, and employees prepared for their role in the new
system.
Voluntary Internet-based soft skill training has been
offered, but little accountability or time has been made
available for managers to prioritize that training. Spiral 1.1
is expected to be implemented at the end of this month, and
training programs have only recently begun for those members.
We encourage that NSPS scale back the overall
implementation, but information people are receiving on the
ground remains too elusive. We've extended our publications,
our conferences, and, in fact, our local chapter meetings as
mechanisms to educate employees, but these only capture a small
percent of the supervisory workforce even among our membership.
We are thankful that many of our members have taken advantage
of these opportunities, and we are pleased with the information
coming out of the Program Executive Office. But we believe more
needs to be done throughout the chain of communication, from
the secretary on down, to keep managers, supervisors, and
employees engaged in a roll-out assessment and analysis of the
system.
Concern also remains about funding the pay-for-performance
system. We reiterate that without proper pay, it's impossible
for a manager to adequately compensate an employee for their
performance. Most of our members will be enrolled in Spiral
1.3. We hope that as the system moves forward, we will see
greater efforts on behalf of the Department to engage and
educate the managers and supervisors on their expectations.
They are up to the challenge. They just need to be aware of
when and where they need to step up to the plate.
I'll just add, I know some of the trainers that the
shipyard will use. They're good people, experienced trainers
and know the culture of the organization that they're going to
train. And I'm cautiously optimistic that the support will be
there, but I do guarantee you that if the support is not there,
Mr. Chairman and Senator Akaka, you will hear from us.
Thank you again for allowing us to be here, and I'd be
happy to answer any questions that you may have.
Senator Voinovich. OK, you are saying most of your people
will be in Spiral 1.3. When does that begin?
Mr. Priolo. Does somebody have a time limit for that? I
think the date keeps moving. That's why I don't have an answer.
Senator Voinovich. OK. The question I have is, how many
people in your organization are in the 1.1 Spiral?
Mr. Priolo. Very minimal. These would be headquarters-level
people and we don't normally represent any of those kind of
people, so, absolute minimal.
Senator Voinovich. All right. Thank you. Mr. Toyama.
TESTIMONY OF BENJAMIN T. TOYAMA,\1\ INTERNATIONAL VICE
PRESIDENT, WESTERN FEDERAL AREA, INTERNATIONAL FEDERATION OF
PROFESSIONAL AND TECHNICAL ENGINEERS, AFL-CIO CLC, AND VICE
PRESIDENT OF IFPTE LOCAL 121, PEARL HARBOR NAVAL SHIPYARD
Mr. Toyama. Thank you. I would like to extend a special
note of appreciation to you, Chairman Voinovich, for your
foresight in holding today's hearing in Hawaii. I know I speak
for all the workers here at Pearl Harbor Naval Shipyard, and I
extend to you a warm aloha and welcome.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ The prepared statement of Mr. Toyama appears in the Appendix on
page 79.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
I want to also extend a very heartfelt note of appreciation
and aloha to Senator Akaka. Senator Akaka's outstanding efforts
in Congress over many years, including his most recent efforts
to bring fairness and equity to the NSPS, is not only important
to the workers here in Hawaii, but to all DOD workers
worldwide. Senator Akaka, mahalo and thank you for giving me
this opportunity to testify.
I will deviate a little from my written remarks, to address
a subject of today's hearing, ``Preparing for Transition:
Implementation of the National Security Personnel System.''
This leads me to ask the following question: How does DOD and
OPM plan on implementing a system that has largely been ruled
as illegal by a Federal court and has absolutely no buy-in from
the very workforce it will impact?
The employees that we represent and the supervisors that
work with our members all hear our frustration, the union's
frustration with the DOD, and their refusal to honestly
consider the proposals put forth by the United DOD Workers
Coalition. The implementation of the NSPS will be very
difficult and painful because of the failure of DOD to at least
try to get any buy-in from the State COLAs, the employees.
It appears that DOD believed that they could fast-track the
NSPS and go through motions of meeting and considering the
comments of the unions and force a failed system on the
employees. This scheme, this trick, did not work because the
courts have ruled the actions of DOD illegal, and the
capricious nature of the implementation of NSPS has gone to a
halt or at least significantly slowed down. This failure of DOD
to honestly address the concerns of the Federal employees, and
the arbitrary and capricious rules that they tried to use to
implement the NSPS breeds mistrust and contempt of the NSPS by
all of the employees affected by the NSPS. Without trust, the
NSPS will fail to produce any gains, and, in fact, produce
terrible results for DOD. The unintended consequences of NSPS
will make it less productive in the workplace, because it will
destroy teamwork and will cultivate a cultural silence. This
would adversely affect safety and productivity.
Morale, productivity, and efficiencies will suffer because
of lack of trust and training under the pay-for-performance
rules of NSPS, when ensured. And the pay-for-performances of
the managers will not be able to properly implement a fair
system.
Senator Voinovich, you spoke of TQM and your efforts as a
mayor, I applaud you for that. The unions have been always
interested in Dr. Demmings, and TQM, and TQL. I have been
involved in that since 1985. Currently in the Pearl Harbor
Naval Shipyard, we're spearheading the union, is spearheading
the team of employees to train and teach productive
improvement, according to Steve Covey's ``8th Habit,'' how to
find our voices and inspire others to find their voices, from
effectiveness to greatness. And we are pushing this and we're
talking about teamwork. Pearl Harbor Naval Shipyard has a
tiger-team concept that is the best in the country. We change
batteries, the best in the country. We've done work on the USS
San Francisco after it hit an undersea mountain, and we worked
that as a tiger team.
We believe that the NSPS and the pay-for-performance system
will destroy the concept of teamwork, because we compete
against each other for the pool of funding and we compete
against each other for the performance rating. The bean
counters and the ratchet counters will be forcing the employees
to stop working as a team and start to work as an individual to
increase the opportunities for promotions and things like that.
We have a nuclear safety program in the Navy that places a
premium on safety and quality. NSPS places a premium on
performance, which is measured by cost and schedule. The NSPS
will cause employees to make hard decisions to report a quality
or safety defect or take a chance and not report the defects,
because the requiring of a defect could adversely affect the
employee's performance. This will sure lead to a culture of
silence that the NASA auditors found in NASA. We are very
concerned about that cultural safety and the safety problems
when that happens. We lost a Hawaii astronaut, Ellison Onizuka,
in the Challenger space shuttle disaster, and we think that
pay-for-performance will drive some safety problems in the
nuclear program.
NSPS is a bad policy intended to promote a DOD strategy
that would take away employee rights at the workplace. NSPS
will render moot current laws regarding EEOC and
discrimination, the Whistleblower Protection Act. It will
render moot veterans' rights regardless of what they have told
you, and the other employee appeal systems.
The reason I say that, is because the penalty of reporting
a manager or your own supervisor for fraud waste abuse,
discrimination, sexual abuse, or any other wrongdoings will
impact that employee's paycheck and his career, unless he hits
a home run and proves that manager is wrong. We have seen EEO
complaints go on for 5 to 7 years with adverse conditions to
the complainant. We have seen whistleblower protection on
problems when someone proposes to report fraud, waste, and
abuse in the current system. And unless everyone finds
religion, we will have a very difficult time separating
reprisal from the pay pool and pay-for-performance, and that's
how we feel about this.
Regarding the veterans' rights, they have not changed the
rules regarding the veterans' rights, but what they had done is
changed the area of consideration. So veterans have no right
now to bump and retreat, as they did in the past, the positions
that they qualified for. The bumping and retrieving rights for
veterans will be gone, and that rights greatly diminish the
rights that all veterans enjoy under the current law.
We think, we believe, had DOD worked with the union and the
United Defense Workers Coalition and properly taken our input
and our proposals, we could have made a difference and we could
have, in fact, looked at the pay-for-performance system and
NSPS system, that would probably work better, but without the
trust, I would suppose that your experience with your own
employees, as mayor, taught you that without the trust of the
employees, everything goes slower, everything is difficult. We
have had no contact or discussion with regards to all of the
plans that DOD wants to implement in NSPS.
Thank you for giving me this time to testify.
Senator Voinovich. Mr. Bongo.
TESTIMONY OF DON BONGO,\1\ VICE PRESIDENT, HAWAII FEDERAL
EMPLOYEES METAL TRADES COUNCIL, AFL-CIO CLC, AND SERGEANT FIRST
CLASS, E-7, HAWAII NATIONAL GUARD, 227TH ENGINEER COMPANY
(COMBAT), 29TH BRIGADE
Mr. Bongo. Senator Voinovich, thank you for coming all the
way down to Hawaii to listen to our testimonies. To my dear
Senator Akaka, thank you for serving the great people of
Hawaii, with your warmth and aloha, with true spirit, and I
thank you.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ The prepared statement of Mr. Bongo appears in the Appendix on
page 86.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
I have made a statement of my testimony and I would like to
give it as evidence to you guys, but, basically, what I want to
do is enhance this and say a thing that's been on my heart.
I've been involved in the coalition of unions in Washington not
only with Ben Toyama, but President Ron Alt, in what we call
the meet-and-ignore sessions that we had up there to discuss
the system that would ensure security of our Nation. I've
attended most of those meetings prior to me being mobilized
with 29th Brigade Combat Team, August 16, in the year 2004.
Yes, I am a Federal worker for Pearl Harbor Naval Shipyard,
going on 25 years, but I'm also a proud citizen soldier for the
State of Hawaii and for this great Nation. And what I would
like to say, my dear Senators, is that it wasn't too long ago
that State of Hawaii, while we were a State at that time, that
we were attacked. And as I recall President Roosevelt saying at
that time, ``a date which will live in infamy,'' we will not
forget for the many thousands of lives that our sailors had
given that day, and yet vowed that it would never happen again
to this great country.
Sad to say a few years ago, we were attacked again, and
many innocent men and women, the World Trade Center, Pentagon
and the fields of Pennsylvania, lost their lives, and their
families were greatly impacted, and till today they still mourn
their loss. I say that to remind us because it wasn't too long
after that, that we started to meet and confer on a system that
was supposed to be protecting or keeping our America safe, a
system that would ensure that it would not happen again.
But at that time, hundreds of thousands of American women,
men and women in our Armed Forces volunteered to fight, to get
involved and fight the bad guys out there. Hundreds of
thousands of men and women decided that they wanted to get
involved as civil servants, like myself, in that fight. I was
based out in LSA, Anaconda, right outside of Balah, where we
were mortared just about every day by 6-round Charlie. I had
the pleasure to help fortify the base, to keep it safe for the
American soldiers within that compound. I got involved with the
election process by helping the poling station, keeping them
safe by putting up barriers. I worked with the Iraqi army and I
worked with the Iraqi police.
During that time, there were many situations on a daily
basis while I was outside the wild, me and my soldiers were
encountered by the children of Iraq, and all they wanted was
water and food. And I can recall one day sitting back in our
hooch, sitting down with our men, after a mission, and one of
my young soldiers, about 22 years old, came up to me and said,
Sarge, do you see the children over there? Do you see them, the
same clothes from the first day we came, at 137 degrees, same
clothes. All they want is water and food.
And another soldier told me, Sarge, how can a government
treat their people like that? With the amount of monies that
they have.
And I say this because I want to remind everyone here that
the men and women in our Armed Forces volunteered to help fight
this cause, that the men and women in the Department of Defense
as civil servants want to help the men and women in the Armed
Forces to accomplish that mission. We cannot take away their
rights. A lot of them were veterans that fought.
Myself and Brother Tommy Miguel, are veterans of the
Vietnam era, and sometimes we say we kind of feel guilty coming
home when we know men like Staff Sergeant Wilgene Lieto and
Specialist Derence Jack, from Saipan, of the 100 Battalion
442nd Infantry, that pulled security for me and my men to help
the people of Iraq through the election process. On a sad day
in October, they were killed in IED.
Senator Voinovich. Mr. Bongo.
Mr. Bongo. Yes.
Senator Voinovich. You have exceeded your time, and if you
could wrap it up, please.
Mr. Bongo. All I'd like to say, sir, is that what we need
to do with this system is remember why the people are getting
involved in the Department of Defense, both civilians and
military. Thank you.
Senator Voinovich. Thank you. I'd like to make a couple of
comments. First of all, Mr. Toyama, I'm very excited to hear
about your tiger teams. We have DFAS in Cleveland and they had
a real problem with processing claims, they put a tiger team
together and it reduced the processing time significantly
because they went to the employees and said, ``How do you feel
you can get the job done better?'' I'd be interested if you'd
send me some information about what you have accomplished, I'm
very interested in that.
Second of all, it puzzles me that you don't have
information about the program. However, the program will be
implemented first for the white collar workforce and then for
the blue collar workforce. Mr. Priolo, you noted that just a
few of the people you represent have gone into the system.
I believe that the Department of Defense will continue to
do the same kind of outreach that they've done with the Spiral
1.1, that they're going to do the same thing with the next
spirals, and they may even do more, because of the concerns
that Mr. Toyama has raised.
Another issue is that part of this system is being
contested in court. The unions argue that wages is something
that should be bargained, and the labor-management rules are in
court, and we may not know the decision for some time. The
courts decision may impact the unions. So I just want to
mention that.
Were you impressed with what you heard here from the first
panel about the training and everything that they did?
Mr. Toyama. I heard Mr. Wataoka and Ms. Kleintop, I've
known them for most of their lives. I've got 40 years in the
shipyard. Also, I've worked with them. I taught Jeff everything
he knows. Let me say this: We represent the people and we're
the voice of the membership. And it is very disturbing to us
that we have Spiral 1.1, senior executive members, and non-
union members be the representative of choice for our
membership and my union to determine how good and how well a
program runs. I don't think it's fair to me, I don't think it's
fair to my membership, that the representative of choice that
DOD selected was all non-union people and managers to determine
how well this is, how well liked it is, and how well received
by the population and then put this on us.
Senator Voinovich. The Department of Defense has delayed
implementation of NSPS multiple times. They could have
implemented it much sooner. Senator Akaka, myself, and other
Members of Congress, insisted that implementation not be
rushed. Now, is that the process that you're talking about, or
is it a process that was subsequent to that?
Mr. Toyama. That's the process I was talking about. It was
not vetted properly.
Senator Voinovich. So you feel that it was not vetted
properly because the people that they selected to represent the
wage workers were not union representatives?
Mr. Toyama. No. What I'm saying is, the United Defense DOD
Worker Coalition was all union representatives, and I was part
of that. But none of our proposals, none of our concerns, and
none of our counterproposals to management's proposal on the
table was even applied and/or considered. They listened to us
and they ignored us.
Then I said to you that we have heard testimony that Spiral
1.1 has been taught and trained, and everyone likes it, and
it's wonderful and everyone is excited about Spiral 1.1. But
what it does, it sets the parameters and it sets the action for
Spirals 1.3 and 2.0, and all the rest of the Spirals that
follow Spiral 1.1. And they are the representative voice in
terms of correcting or, in fact, making sure that the NSPS is
proper.
In that representative voice that will drive and, in fact,
steer all of NSPS, there's not a single union member or
representative. It's all managers and senior managers. To do
Spiral 1.1, they're going to convince Congress, me, my
grandmother and everyone else how wonderful it is, but there is
not a single employee voice in that crowd.
Senator Voinovich. Now this was before the lawsuit was
filed?
Mr. Toyama. Yes. But I think the spirals was already
planned that way. They were going to go before the lawsuit was
filed, Spiral 1.1.
Senator Voinovich. So prior to the lawsuit being filed, the
development of NSPS did not involve union representation?
Mr. Toyama. Correct, it did not.
Senator Voinovich. OK. I genuinely believe that it's in the
best interest of everyone that we go forward with NSPS. I was
impressed with your testimony about your TQM teams because you
do want to have camaraderie. As a matter of fact, in the State
of Ohio, we used to award individuals if they came up with a
new idea that would save money for the State. But when we
adopted Total Quality Management, we reevaluated that, so that
the teams ended up getting the money. And there isn't any
reason why, as we move through the implementation of NSPS to
make some accommodations--it's not cast in stone.
Regardless of the outcome of the lawsuit, I would encourage
you to make suggestions to the Defense Department on changes
they could make to NSPS to give you more confidence in the
system. I would be interested in knowing your ideas too.
At the hearing we had on veterans' preference we learned
something from the people that represent veterans, and we're
going to take action as a result. So I just want to say to you
that NSPS is not cast in concrete, and there are changes that
can be made to the system that will better accommodate some of
your concerns.
I would also mention that I asked if managers were
evaluated on enforcing veterans' preference. The answer was no.
I was a proponent of affirmative action, and a lot of people
that worked for me weren't really supportive of affirmative
action. I made supporting affirmative action a criteria of
their performance evaluation. My staff knew that was very
important to me, as a mayor of Cleveland and the governor of
Ohio.
I think that if this system is implemented right that it
could make things better for your members. I know you feel that
NSPS is bad, but I'm saying to you that you need to continue
the dialogue and provide your input to the folks in Washington.
Mr. Toyama. Yes. Let me tell you about the union's passion
and drive with regards to productive improvement and Steve
Covey's ``8th Habit.'' In the BRAC hearings, they compared
Pearl Harbor to Portsmouth Naval Shipyard, and Portsmouth Naval
Shipyard was deemed the goal standard of labor relations and
productivity. We, in Pearl Harbor, the workers in Pearl Harbor
took personal umbrage to that, and we are working hard to show
them the platinum standard. We will rise above their standard,
and we will compete and we will be good. We understand that and
we'll do that, maybe in spite of NSPS, I understand that.
Federal employees are volunteers, like Mr. Bongo said, we
volunteered to keep fit to fight, we volunteer to make sure our
military are well prepared to fight any war that we need to
fight, and we're volunteers. I'm just saying that it sets us
back from all of those things we are attempting to do now,
because there's not transparencies, there is not clear
communication, and I think the stakeholders are cut out of the
planning session of this NSPS.
Senator Voinovich. Thank you. Senator Akaka.
Senator Akaka. Thank you very much, Mr. Chairman. I want to
recognize this panel of friends who have been active in trying
to make sure employees understand NSPS and have provided great
ideas and suggestions to improve NSPS. I want to thank all
three of you for your tireless efforts on behalf of the DOD
workforce, and I want you to know that your work has not gone
unnoticed.
Mr. Bongo, I thank you for your service to our country, as
both the combat veteran and a career Federal employee. You
testified that NSPS will significantly diminish veterans'
preference, especially in the event of a reduction in force.
How would you strengthen veterans' preference under NSPS?
Mr. Bongo. Senator, basically, I'd like to strengthen the
veterans' preferences by keeping it equal, to remember why
these men and women were veterans. They served our country,
they deserve their right to be treated equal, especially in the
rift during a reduction in force, to continue to serve as a
civil servant without any prejudice.
Senator Akaka. Mr. Toyama, do you have anything to add to
that?
Mr. Toyama. I would think that the veterans' preference
should remain the same as they have it now. The problem with
the NSPS is they have taken, say, shop of welders, of 150
welders, they now have the ability to narrow the area of
consideration in the reduction in force to a work area that
would encompass maybe 25 of the 150 welders. Now, if a veteran
was promoted to become a special nuclear welder, for instance,
and they need to cut back on nuclear welders, he had no right
to return to his regular welding job, which would be a grade
level below him, if that work area was not affected. He had no
right to bump and/or retreat to any job that he qualified to,
because they have agreed and NSPS allows management to narrow
very limited areas in term of reduction in force.
It used to be where throughout the activity, a veteran had
the right to retreat or bump throughout the activity any
position that he came from and/or was qualified for, and that
right or that privilege is gone. In our discussion with Mr.
Nesterczuk in the meet-and-confer process, we asked him about
that, and he's----
Senator Voinovich. Mr. who?
Mr. Toyama. George Nesterczuk, OPM.
Senator Voinovich. Thank you.
Mr. Toyama. We discussed this. And I'm a Vietnam vet, and I
told him that if I'm a vet, and I was in fact impacted, and Don
Bongo was ready to deploy, like Don Bongo goes and deploys and
come back, and he is affected, because he's a special welder,
why wouldn't we accommodate him? And the answer to us was, we
don't want to disturb or inconvenience 3,000 employees in Pearl
Harbor Naval Shipyard for a vet that maybe is being affected in
a rift.
And I told him, ``Look, you inconvenienced me for a year. I
dodged bullets out in Vietnam for a year. You put me in mud
paddies for a year. You get Don Bongo in Iraq Desert for a
year, you inconvenienced him and his family, and you don't want
to inconvenience the people that stayed in home?
He said, well, that is the reason they narrowed, very
narrow scope of where a veteran can retreat and bump to. The
trick is, they did not change the veterans laws, but they
changed all the employment laws around the veterans laws.
Same as the Whitman amendment. A person can come in and get
promoted and pay raises ten times a year. Every time he's
temporary, assigned to a job at a higher pay rate, he can
accumulate that higher pay rate or move to a higher pay band
and accumulate that, and if he is reassigned multiple times
during the course of the year, his pay raise will go up
multiple times through the course of the year.
Now, the Whitman amendment was put in, in 1952, to avoid
that. The rules currently says you spend a year in the grade
level, the pay level, at the grade below the level that you'd
be promoted to. But you had a year wait, then you move to the
next step. Not anymore. They can do ten steps in a year. And
that opens the door for a lot of unfairness, and we sit here
and we say, look, if there is complete trust, maybe with the
amount of trust we have now, that's a bitter pill to swallow,
that they will do the right thing at the right time, for right
reasons at this time. And it's a tough sell for us.
Senator Akaka. Thank you, Mr. Toyama.
Mr. Priolo, I understand that several members of your
chapter just returned from the train-the-trainer events. Can
you share with us whether those who attended feel better
prepared to train other employees, and have they discussed with
you whether they would like additional training?
Mr. Priolo. Discussions were limited, but the training that
they have indicated has been very effective. And additional
training will be needed to continue through the process,
because it can't be one shot. It's got to be a continuous
improvement. And as I said, I'm optimistic, as long as the
support, which means funding and train-the-trainer training
continues, and as long as, by far, almost all training is done
in a classroom atmosphere as opposed to some on-line training.
In my opinion, one of the most difficult jobs for any civil
servant is a first-line supervisor in a shipyard. He or she is
expected to be on the deck plates for many long hours. They
come in early, they work through lunch and they stay late, and
they're not always compensated for it, and to expect them to
then find a computer and do on-line training, well, it's not
going to happen. But if you use classroom training as the major
vehicle, with the excellent trainers that we have in place,
then that supervisor's job for the day is to go to training.
In fact, if I could be king of this program for a day, I'd
make sure that any training of Pearl Harbor supervisors
occurred off base. Maybe we'd send them to the Hickam theatre
or the submarine base, so they're not going to be constantly
bombarded with cell phone calls and pagers going off, so that
they could absorb the excellent training that's provided.
And that's what my complaint is about--I've taken on-line
training before, and it can supplement, but it can never, ever
replace classroom training.
Senator Akaka. Thank you very much, Mr. Priolo, for that.
Mr. Chairman, my time has expired, and I have questions
that I'd like to submit for the record.
Senator Voinovich. OK. Senator Akaka, if you have a couple
more questions that you'd like to ask, that would be fine, and
then you could also submit questions for the record.
All I can say in conclusion, I'd like to continue to hear
from you.
Mr. Toyama. I will send you all of our program data to show
what we have done on productive improvement, and I am so proud
of that program, I'll tell you this: We took a 400-manhour job,
we had three people work on it for 9 hours. Three meetings.
Monday, Wednesday, and Friday, we implemented, we completed
that job. Now in Pearl Harbor, it become an 8-hour job. From
400 manhours to 8 hours. This is the creativity and the ability
of the worker out there, if we ask them and empower them, and
this is what we have done, but it takes teamwork, it takes lot
of risk management, and sometimes it affects productivity and
performance.
Senator Voinovich. Every year we held an event called
``Team-up Ohio,'' and we would bring the quality management and
improvement teams to Columbus, we would take over the whole
convention center. Every team had a booth and they would
describe what they did and how they did it. It was one of the
best days I had, seeing the pride of the people that worked for
the State, learning about their ideas and how they were making
a difference. People started to really feel good about what
they were doing, and they were participating. This is just a
suggestion, maybe you ought to do it here and celebrate what
you've done and let people know about it.
Mr. Toyama. We plan to do that on July 20, do a
presentation, at Old Dominion College, and we will come to
Washington. If you have 2\1/2\ hours you can schedule, we'll
give you a presentation of what we have. We have put together a
traveling show. And the important aspect of this whole deal is
this. We, the old guy in the shipyard, I got 40 years there,
picked up these people, this team that's 34 years old and
younger, 25- to 34-year-old, and they are driving this team and
they are doing the presentations. They have done the work, to
save the money on the jobs.
These youngsters come in and says, ``Boy, you old-timers,
why are you doing it the hard way?'' And they have provided us
this kind of performance improvements, and that is our team.
The youngsters, we have some of them in the crowd here.
Melissa? Wave your hand, Melissa. She's the leader of the
team, and we have a couple other people here, all these
youngsters, and we are trying to drive that. We are afraid that
our efforts could be forestalled if there is not a clear
understanding of what we intend to do and what the impact of
NSPS will be to these workers.
Senator Voinovich. I have a few more questions. If you were
in our position, we're the Subcommittee on Oversight of
Government Management and the Federal Workforce, would you
suggest that we consider quality management as something that
would be promoted government-wide, as something that would
really make a difference for our Federal workers?
The other question I have, and, Senator Akaka, maybe you
have thought about this, but it seems odd to me that the only
time that Federal agencies practice quality management is when
work is competed and employees establish Most Efficient
Organizations. So you're saying to your workers that you can
compete and try to be more efficient or else your jobs will be
contracted out. The interesting thing is that Federal employees
win over 85 percent of the competitions.
Mr. Toyama. Yes.
Senator Voinovich. I wonder why does it take the threat of
competition to give the people who want to do the best they
can, the flexibility to create their own Most Efficient
Organization. In effect, that's what you did with quality
management, right?
Mr. Toyama. Yes.
Senator Voinovich. You put your best team together. We need
to examine that.
Mr. Toyama. I think in response to your first question, I
think, yes, quality management expectation from the national
level is well worth the effort, and I think it will drive
productivity, and you're correct, what happened in Pearl Harbor
Naval Shipyard, they're going to farm the total shipyard out.
We're going to be on the BRAC list. It opened everybody's minds
and eyes up, to understand that we're not bulletproof because
we work in Pearl Harbor Naval Shipyard. We're not bulletproof
and we need to add to the national effort of improving our
efforts here in Pearl Harbor, and we've done that, and I will
send you the presentation and I'll tell you this, we will make
this happen with or without management's help, because our
vision is we can ensure the future, our mission is to ensure a
future for the Pearl Harbor workers, and this is the youngsters
that put this together, and our values is always good. We will
always do good for the shipyard and the Navy.
Senator Voinovich. Thank you. Senator Akaka.
Senator Akaka. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. I want to tell our
panel that I cannot adequately say how proud I am of you and
the way you've shared the spirit of Hawaii here today. I thank
you for sharing your wisdom gained from all the years you've
served at Pearl Harbor Naval Shipyard, and your experience with
us today. I look upon this as helping us try to determine what
is best for our country, and I thank you so much for your
assistance. So, mahalo, thank you so much for your testimonies.
Mr. Toyama. Senator, one more issue. I forgot to answer one
of Senator Voinovich's question, What can we do?. The
coalition, the United DOD Workers Coalition have proposed this,
and I think it's a workable plan, and I think it will help NSPS
with the blue collar workers and throughout, is to look at the
issue of national bargaining. They don't want to bargain with
us, and they want to do collaboration, thus we have this whole
program that no one trusts.
I think they talked about bargaining, that it should go to
national bargaining maybe, and have the smart guys in
Washington kind of hammer it out, so we, the trenches, if you
get some buy-in and some perspective of what our leaders in
Washington have proposed and accepted, and what the leaders of
DOD in Washington have proposed and expected, opt to work for
us, I think national bargaining may help. I cannot speak for
the coalition entirely. I tell you from the trenches, from the
bottom looking up, we need buy-in from the top coming down.
Senator Voinovich. Is the coalition----
Mr. Toyama. United Coalition, Department of Defense. United
Department of Defense--Worker Coalition. My age catch up with
me once in a while.
Senator Voinovich. So does mine.
Mr. Toyama. But, I would think that our national leaders
will be well equipped to vet this out quickly, at the national
level, and the transparency and the trust and the buy-in at
this level would go incredibly faster.
Senator Voinovich. Thank you. Senator Akaka, thank you very
much for encouraging me to do this. I just want to tell you, we
have differences of opinion on a couple things, but I'm really
glad you're in a leadership role, and that you are in the
Senate. I look forward to continuing to work with you on the
Subcommittee.
Mr. Toyama. I represent the West Coast of the IFPTE, and I
represent NASA, Glenn, Local 28 of IFPTE.
Senator Voinovich. Oh, do you?
Mr. Toyama. And Virginia Cadwell always reminds me that
you're a good guy.
Senator Voinovich. Thank you.
Senator Akaka. Well, let me add my mahalo nui loa to the
Chairman for taking this time to come out here to Hawaii, and
to Janet, his wife, and for holding this hearing out here. I'm
really grateful. This will not only help Hawaii, but it will
help our country. Thank you.
Senator Voinovich. Great. Thanks. The hearing is adjourned.
[Whereupon, at 4:09 p.m. P.S.T., the Subcommittee was
adjourned.]
A P P E N D I X
----------
[GRAPHICS NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]
<all>