TOPICS
TOPICS
OPM, lawmakers seek to ease rehiring of federal retirees
Agencies will be able to rehire federal retirees in nonemergency situations without reducing their salaries if a newly proposed regulation from the Office of Personnel Management is implemented.
OPM proposed that agency heads be allowed to request case-by-case clearance to hire retirees without deducting their government pensions from their paycheck, when there is exceptional difficulty in recruiting for particular positions that are not necessarily related to an emergency. The proposal was published in the Federal Register last week.
Under standard rules, federal retirees who are rehired for government jobs must take a cut in their salary equal to their pension payments.
OPM already grants waivers of the salary offset to agencies in rare emergency circumstances, such as Sept. 11, 2001, but this proposed regulation is intended to broaden the scope of waivers as more federal employees retire and agencies worry about filling their spots.
Some agencies already have their own legal authority to rehire retirees. On Monday, Director of National Intelligence John Negroponte issued a policy memorandum outlining hiring rules for the National Intelligence Reserve Corps, made up of annuitants ready to be rehired temporarily to aid in intelligence gathering for emergencies, said Ronald Sanders, chief human capital officer for DNI.
"Seasoned professionals who can teach our next generations of intelligence professionals...operational and analytical arts are ready to retire," Sanders said at a Tuesday hearing of the House Government Reform Subcommittee on the Federal Workforce and Agency Organization. "The ability to bring back some of those artisans without penalty is critical to our human capital recovery plan."
Rep. Jon Porter, R-Nev., chairman of the subcommittee, convened the hearing to mine for ideas on rehiring government retirees. Porter said he is looking at legislative options with OPM for rehiring annuitants and for allowing federal workers to switch to part time without adversely affecting their pension calculation.
Porter said a Veterans Administration nurse in his district retired from federal service and then opted to return to the VA hospital to help out during a nursing shortage. Because of the salary offset, the nurse instead pursued a contract through a private staffing company with the same hospital that allowed her to continue working and still receive her retirement payments. As a federal employee, Porter said, she earned $35 per hour, but the private contractor billed the hospital $55 per hour.
Waiving the salary offset entirely could give incentives for retirement and cost the government more money, warned Nancy Kichak, OPM's associate director for strategic human resources policy. Kichak advocated judicious use of the waivers.
Waiving the offset also can have negative effects because rehired annuitants cannot make contributions to the Thrift Savings Plan or to their pensions. The Defense Department, which like the DNI has its own special waiver authority, is required to waive the offset when rehiring retirees.
Patricia Bradshaw, the Pentagon's deputy undersecretary for civilian personnel policy, told the subcommittee that she wanted flexibility to keep the salary offset because some employees, especially those who retired early because of downsizing, prefer the chance to build their TSP accounts or pensions.
COMMENTS
- This program is already in place in some agencies. I am a rehired annuitant at the Federal Law Enforcement Training Center. The purpose is to provide training by experience instructors, while allowing more of the active officers to remain in the field. The increased numbers of trainees also puts a significant strain on the resources of the academy, and using rehires allows them to staff the training courses. I have seen the difference in the quality of the training also. Many of the rehires have extensive (20+ years) of experience which pays off when preparing new officers and agents to go out into the real world. Although there may be a few rehires in upper management positions, for the most part we all work as instructors and it has been a big boon to the academy to have this type of experience available. I do believe that rehires would be of great benefit to most agencies, even if they are just there in a mentor role. There is a world of talent out there, available to help out. They are better trained and more economical than private contractors. Walt Setzer Posted September 20, 2007 11:52 AM
- Here's a scenario: Hired in 1984, under the then new Federal Employee Retirement System rather than the Civil Service Retirement System. Worked 21 years in federal law enforcement, doing the same job and taking the same risks at CSRS folks did-we worked side by side. There is mandatory retirement at 57 years of age for Fed LEO's. FERS is a tri-part system: 1) basic annuity (pension) approximately 1/3 of high three, 2) a Social Security supplement (formulized amount) --supplement is the key word here, until forced to take early benefits ar 62 when you lose the supplement; 3) Thrift Savings Plan investment (401K). CSRS at 20 years retire at a minumun of 50% of their high three. Simple example: The high three is $100,000. At fifty percent that is $50,000 each year for the CSRS pension. And unless they had sufficient quarters from other employment outside CSRS, no social security benefits. However, CSRS folks were allowed to invest in the TSP, though not is the same way, and could accrue a large amount of money for buying an annuity. FERS in the same example: $100,000, high three = 33% $33,000 per year. There is a SS supplement figured thru a very convulted formula, which provide about $500-$600 a month additional. 12 x 600= 7,200 + 33,000= $40,200. Living on $50,000 is can be challenging; living on $10,000 less a year at that level generally takes you almost to the Federal poverty level, after taxes. Effectively, those who retired under CSRS are guaranteed a minumum of half the high three and ususally substantially more. Not so with the FERS. There is a 59 1/2 years of age limitation on withdrawing from the TSP without penalty, so what does one do for a minumum of 2 1/2 years to fill the gap ? Well, a FERS annuitant gets another full time job. THe CSRS can work, but more often than not, my friends have done whatever they wanted to do with all there free time. Now tell me, if a CSRS and a FERS annuitant were shot, might there be any difference. No, except the FERS annuitant might hope for a better package for his family if he didn't make it thru surgery...at least they'd be able to eat and pay the rent. Drastic example-maybe. The reality is the GOV has two standards of retirement for the same work and service. How fair is that? FERS Annuitant Fedthinker Posted June 30, 2007 2:56 PM
- Man, talk about a hornet’s nest… Folks, we’re talking about two different things here. Military retirement has no comparisons in civilian employment, let alone retirement. Civilians, for the most part (and my hat is always off to those 40-and-over civilians in the protective services) are not required to run anywhere except off at the mouth, let alone duck and dodge bullets. The physical nature of active duty service makes it an entirely different animal. Police and fire departments have similar retirement policies for the very same that reason. Now the exceptional person can go beyond that pseudo limit, if they can take it, but not the vast majority. And, please remember, the criticality of performance behooves us to try to weed out those who are struggling to keep up. Civilian retirement: This proposal is for “the benefit of the government.” It is to the common good that, as an exception to policy, highly skilled personnel are called back to help out. Yes, I agree that new, younger, and fresh personnel should fill these positions. But that is not always possible. In such cases, management should use this tool to train replacements, not use this to take advantage of the system. The unfortunate reality is that some will. Just comfort yourself and remember, you can’t change human nature. Tip off. Tip Posted August 3, 2006 11:25 AM
Clarification: OPM's associate director for strategic human resources policy, Nancy Kichak, supports the use of salary offset waivers for rehired retirees. She only wants to ensure they are used judiciously.
