GovernmentExecutive.com

A House subcommittee voted Tuesday for a 3.5 percent average salary increase for civilian federal employees, echoing actions in both the House and Senate to raise pay for military service members by that amount next year.

Last month, the full House voted in favor of a 3.5 percent military pay raise in approving the fiscal 2008 Defense authorization bill.

On May 24, the Senate Armed Services Committee passed its version of the bill, which also contained a 3.5 percent increase for the military.

The White House has proposed a 3 percent raise for both military and civilian employees. The Bush administration said in a policy statement that it strongly opposes the extra 0.5 percent the authorization bill would grant the military, on the grounds that it is unnecessary.

Tuesday's vote by the House Appropriations Subcommittee on Financial Services marks the first time next year's civilian raise has come up for a vote on Capitol Hill, and confirms federal labor unions' hopes that Congress would move to enact equal civilian and military raises next year.

The vote "signals that Congress is ... supporting pay parity between military and civilian employees," said Colleen Kelley, president of the National Treasury Employees Union, adding that she was "pleased" by the subcommittee's action.

The fiscal 2000 and fiscal 2004 Defense authorization acts called for military pay raises equal to 0.5 percent more than the rise in the Employment Cost Index. The administration followed that standard every year until 2007, when military and civilian employees received a 2.2 percent increase -- the lowest in many years.

COMMENTS

• Thank goodness that attitudes such as that expressed by the writer who tells anyone who finds a fault with their Government job to quit, does not prevail any more. These type of thoughts likely supported child labor, indentured servants, share croppers and even more likely slavery. The writer should be reminded that The First Amendment guarantees the freedom of petition to the government for redress of grievances. Implementors and managers of the NSPS should be concerned that their workers object to part or all of it. What is the goal? Inserting management's total control or developing a better work force to support the needs of our Nation? No chain is stronger than it's weakest link and a basic role of Government is to protect and defend the least of it's citizens which includes it's workers. Attitudes that say "love it or leave it," "or take it like this because I say so" do little to build team spirit, morale, or congenial workers. Hopefully this and other NSPS workers who have a grievance will continue to express their thoughts through this medium. At least they are speaking from a point of personal knowledge, not from IGNORANCE as the "take it or leave it" writer is expressing his opinion from. Do continue to speak up... Will Posted June 8, 2007 12:45 AM
• I feel our military deserves the very best we can offer. The job they do requires them to risk their lives, leave their families, businesses, farms, etc. which also puts their livelihood, assets, etc. at risk. When they return from combat, they have another battle to face, changes in personalities, readjustment to normal life. They've been through hardships that we can't imagine. It is also a struggle for their families as the family has adjustments to make as a result. Most Americans do not know the hardships and strugges they face when they return unless you have been through it or witnessed it. I feel they deserve the very best our country can give for their dedication and willingness to risk the very breath they breathe for our great country. PH Posted June 7, 2007 2:44 PM
• I'm a manager who's already been converted to the NSPS. I fully agree with the concept of pay for performance -- it's the right thing to do. However, the web based system developed by DoD is a FARCE. It's one of the most poorly designed systems I've ever experienced. The persons who developed it should be fired for poor performance! The web based tool seems designed to ensure the system - which requires employees and managers to play "ping pong" as objectives and appraisals are developed - will defeat the overall objective of NSPS -- link performance and pay. Anyone who thinks our senior military and civilian leaders (Gen'l Ofcrs and SES) are going to take the time to play "ping pong" with the web based system needs a reality check. DG DG Posted June 7, 2007 9:42 AM