TOPICS
TOPICS
To Market, to Market
One of the key elements of the Defense Department's new personnel system is that labor-specific local markets will eventually be considered when determining pay raises. That is, the department wants to base pay raises in part on what employees with similar jobs in the same city are making in other sectors.
The Homeland Security Department also will use market-sensitive pay in its new personnel system, though the details have not been made public. And various proposals to extend personnel reforms to every federal agency will likely include this hallmark.
According to a fact sheet released by Defense, the local market supplements, as these market-based pay raises are called, will be the same as locality pay under the General Schedule system for the 11,000 employees who became the first entrants to the National Security Personnel System on April 30. Under the General Schedule, annual pay raises are split between across-the-board and local adjustments, which are based on the cost of labor among cities, but are not tailored to job functions.
Once the department forges ahead with the local market supplements, here's what you need to know: The supplement still will be calculated as a percentage of base salary, but will change according to occupation, specialization (such as a nurse specializing in anesthesiology), payband and official worksite.
Every year, and possibly more often, the Defense Department will adjust the local market supplement. When making these changes, though, the department will pay attention to more than just the labor-market conditions. Officials also will look at the availability of funds and locality pay given by other federal agencies.
The supplements are not transferable. If you receive a higher market supplement in one job or location, and move to a lower-paying position or region, the higher supplement will not go with you.
Listening In
As for performance-based pay, an employee group launched a survey Friday of the Senior Executive Service's experience with its new compensation system.
The Senior Executives Association hired Avue Technologies to create an online survey that takes about 20 minutes to complete and is open to both members and nonmembers of the association. The confidential poll asks senior executives about their experience with the pay-for-performance system put in place for them two years ago.
This is the first time these employees, who serve as a test group for extensions of personnel reform, have been surveyed about the changes, according to the SEA.
"It is critical that we have hard data instead of anecdotes with which to assess this system and to make recommendations for any necessary change," said Carol Bonosaro, president of SEA. "We urge every SES member to respond."
Bonosaro, whose group will present the results to Congress and Bush administration officials, said high participation numbers will give more credence to the findings. She encouraged SES members who are happy with the system, making them less inclined to participate, to do so regardless.
The survey will be open until at least May 15. To participate, e-mail SEAPresident@seniorexecs.org with your name, title and agency. The SEA will e-mail you back with directions for taking the survey to ensure everyone participating is an SES member.
COMMENTS
- Just curious, what if the government wants a specialty field located where there is little basis for a local market comparison. Such was the case when the Army moved the Computer Science School to Augusta, Ga. The GS-2210s (then GS-334s) had no significant civilian population for comparison in the local market. The economy was primarily manufacturing and medical based employment. With the civilian market attraction of people in this field to the much higher priced (and therefore higher compensated) East Coast, West Coast, Twin Cities and Raleigh Durham areas for competition, what cost basis would be assigned to draw automation and information management specialists to the CSRA? And, particularly during BRAC implementation, there are many cases of senators and congressmen trying to capture and relocate prize organizations to their district in an effort to expand jobs and industrial bases. Between the uniqueness of governmental requirements and political infighting, how will these special cases be resolved? Tip out. Tip Posted May 17, 2006 8:14 AM
- So if you move to better your opportunities and utilize more of your skills, you can lose salary. However, it’s unclear as to the impact on retirement, since supplements are included in determining the high 3, will CSRS COLA's become affected by this -- i.e. it’s cheaper to live in "X" rather than "Y" so when you move to "X," your COLA will be different. Or perhaps you will have to have your annuity recomputed because you have moved to a "cheaper area" and you need to have your high 3 adjusted? GovExec.com reader Posted May 10, 2006 11:44 AM
- "Availability of funds"? We are a debtor nation. Our salary annual adjustments were divvied up between base salary and locality pay for several years now. Now that portion of those adjustments is going to disappear because of non-availability of funds. That's a 12.52 percent cut in pay. "Pay for performance?" Sounds like a hooker slogan to me. Ray Bielicke Posted May 5, 2006 9:56 AM










