GovernmentExecutive.com

The dust is still settling from the last pay parity fight, which means that it is time to begin the next scrap.

Lawmakers in the House and Senate have introduced resolutions that call for equal pay raises for military and civilian federal employees in 2006. For the last several years, the White House has consistently recommended higher raises for the military in the proposed budget. Each year, Congress rebuffs that proposal and grants equal pay raises.

In his fiscal 2004 budget proposal, President Bush requested a 2 percent salary adjustment for civilian federal employees and a 4.1 percent boost for the armed forces. Congress, however, included a 4.1 percent raise for both civil servants and military personnel. In the fiscal 2005 budget, the White House proposed a 3.5 percent raise for the military and a 1.5 percent raise for civilians. All federal employees received a 3.5 percent raise. The fiscal 2005 result did not come without fight, however.

A group of Republicans in Congress backed Bush's proposal and claimed that pay parity would be an untenable burden on the budget. In March 2004, however, the House overwhelmingly backed equal pay raises for military and civilian federal workers in a nonbinding "Sense of Congress" resolution. Pay parity officially was endorsed in November, when Congress passed the omnibus appropriations bill.

"The civilian federal employees who strive every day to keep our country safe, strong and prosperous, deserve a fair pay adjustment that rewards their hard work," House Minority Whip Steny Hoyer, D-Md., said Tuesday. He introduced the House resolution Wednesday. "The bipartisan, bicameral support for this resolution sends a strong message to President Bush that Congress is united behind the principle of pay parity... We hope that he will incorporate pay parity into his upcoming fiscal 2006 budget proposal."

The White House did not respond to questions about the resolutions.

"Providing equitable pay raises for federal employees is not just an issue of fairness. It is also critical to recruiting and retaining talented individuals in public service, and to successfully administering our federal programs," said Sen. Paul Sarbanes, D-Md., who introduced the resolution in the Senate.

Federal workers unions, which have historically backed pay parity efforts, applauded Wednesday's resolutions.

"The strong message coming from congressional leaders on both sides of the aisle ... is that pay parity is important to the country in recognizing the contributions of both members of the military and the civilian workforce," said Colleen M. Kelley, president of the National Treasury Employees Union. "It plays an important role in the efforts by federal agencies to attract and retain a high-quality, high-performing workforce."

COMMENTS

• I stumbled upon this discussion in a search for programs that can assist my low income military family. I would like to make this realistic for those of you with disillusioned beliefs about military pay. Giving up B.A.H. we moved into base housing. We no longer get any assistance for housing, utilities, or food. So our family is living on my husband’s base pay alone. Our reality is a roof over our heads, but below poverty living. Our 3-year-old is quickly growing out of the "hand me down clothes." She still sleeps in her crib and for months we've slept on an air mattress. We have an old couch and a small TV and a shelf. I hand-wash our clothes in the kitchen sink because housing doesn’t include a washer and dryer. Our kitchen shelves are almost empty except a few packs of Ramen noodles and instant mashed potatoes a half of loaf of bread. One pack of frozen hamburger, milk and cheese in the fridge. Pay day is over a week away. Christmas will be just another day this year we aren’t able to buy our daughter the first present. That tiny 2 percent raise will only mean that we will have food for a few extra days a month. I'd suggest you spend sometime in a needy military home before you fight against a military pay raise. Navy Wife Posted December 9, 2005 1:57 PM
• The myth that most military need food stamps to survive is a huge misconception. The facts are that much of the military's pay is tax free in housing and food subsidies. Yes, FOOD subsidies. The military members then don't claim this income because it is non-taxable and only claim their base pay. By not claiming nearly half their pay, they can then qualify for food stamps. Please don't forget that a military family receives food and housing money that nearly doubles their pay, and then they have the nerve to collect food stamps, WIC, and other social welfare. Taxpayer who knows Posted March 19, 2005 8:57 PM
• Taxpayer: We can define COLA as a pay increase for obvious reasons - your pay went up. The sole purpose of it is Cost of Living Adjustment (COLA). The one that sounds bitter in all the postings is you my friend with your bitterness toward the military. I can say I have none. I just would like to see the extra pay increases for the military done outside the realm of the COLA and use the COLA as it is intended for - to adjust your pay in line with the increases that you will be paying out (i.e., medical, etc.). Military and civilians alike do not experience any difference in cost of living. Government Employee Posted February 8, 2005 1:29 PM