GovernmentExecutive.com

It's only July, but federal employees already are looking forward to the pay boost they may see come January.

The House and Senate Appropriations committees have passed their versions of the fiscal 2009 financial services spending bill, which contains the federal pay hike. Both versions would grant federal civilian employees a 2009 raise of 3.9 percent. That figure is equal to the adjustment already authorized by the House for military service members, and is higher than the increase proposed by the Bush administration, which in February requested a 2.9 percent hike for civilians and a 3.4 percent boost for military personnel.

But for federal employees to see the gain in their paychecks at the start of 2009, a number of steps must be completed. The full House and Senate must pass the spending bill, and then the chambers will have to work out differences in the two versions. After the conference committee reaches agreement, each chamber must pass the final version and President Bush will have to sign it.

This year, however, there may be a catch. Lawmakers are aiming to leave town in late September to return to their districts and campaign, so it appears unlikely that Congress will be able to finish work on all 12 annual appropriations bills before adjourning. Last week, Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid, D-Nev., said a lame duck session after the November election was unlikely, and he predicted lawmakers will have to pass a stopgap measure to fund the government until the new president takes over.

If Congress implements a continuing resolution and doesn't specify a 3.9 percent pay increase for federal employees, it's likely that President Bush's recommendation of a 2.9 percent pay increase will go into effect. That was the case for the 2007 pay raise, when Congress failed to enact an appropriations bill, including its proposed 2.7 percent pay, and Bush issued an executive order putting his recommendation of a 2.2 percent raise into effect.

It is possible that the pay raise could be approved by Congress after the end of the year, however, in which case federal employees would receive part of their raise retroactively. This happened in 2003 and 2004, when workers received their raises at least three months late.

A spokeswoman for House Majority Leader Steny Hoyer, D-Md., said Tuesday that regardless of how the House proceeds with 2009 appropriations, "Hoyer and the regional delegation remain focused on securing a 3.9 percent pay raise for both military and civilian federal employees."

While we "would like to see the 3.9 percent pay raise enacted in January, there have been situations in the past when the higher pay raise supported by Congress has been implemented retroactively," Colleen Kelley, president of the National Treasury Employees Union, said Tuesday. "If the 3.9 percent raise is not included in the continuing resolution, NTEU will push for retroactivity to Jan. 1, 2009."

Paperless Pay

Federal employees are now one step closer to having the option of receiving electronic pay stubs.

A bill (H.R. 6073) passed by the House Oversight and Government Reform Committee on Wednesday would allow federal employees to receive their pay stubs via e-mail rather than through standard mail.

Rep. Virginia Foxx, R-N.C., sponsor of the measure, sent a letter to House lawmakers in May noting that many private sector companies and state governments offer electronic pay records. This ensures on-time delivery of payroll information, she wrote. The information also is less susceptible to identify theft because the electronic stubs do not include private information such as Social Security numbers or home addresses, she added.

Rep. Henry Waxman, D-Calif., chairman of the oversight committee, said Wednesday that paper pay statements add unnecessary administrative costs.

COMMENTS

• “lawmakers will have to pass a stopgap measure to fund the government until the new president takes over.” And that is exactly what they wanted and, unfortunately, as it probably needs to be. With their minimal (and, subsequently, often ineffective) majority, Congress has been fighting this president since they received their mandate in January of 2007 and losing due to no fault of their own. They MIGHT be able to pass the raise buried inside other important legislation (and recent funding victories have shown the administration and Party Pachyderm seem to be realizing the functional gap between their plans, the results, and the public’s perception of their effectiveness); but, why in the world would they wish to continue fighting this lame duck and possibly losing those battles, when the next POTUS will actually be on the same sheet of music? While I would GREATLY appreciate a pay raise as soon as I could get it (to help with increased cost of everything), I will happily wait for a catch-up lump sum. That will be the biggest “bonus” most of us will get all year; NSPS or not. Most of us aren’t the SES with a 15% ceiling and a $13K average. As for the emailed pay slips, Richard J. and Army Civilian are correct, I’ve been getting mine for at least a couple of years. Every mid-pay-period I receive a DFAS email with the site link of my new pay voucher. I’m wondering if this "new" system is already in place, what’s the hubbub? Tip off Posted July 23, 2008 2:36 PM
• About the article about a possible 3.9% pay raise. For me that translates to an increase of about $42.00 a paycheck in 2008. Gasoline has gone from $1.90/gal. to $4.10/gal., and my gorcery bill has gone from $55.00 a week to $110.00 a week in one year. My point is the Union should be going out and asking for a 13.9% pay raise. That would translate to about $195.00 a paycheck in 2008. Tell the Union to get down off it's "pat me on the back Ive done a great job" stance, and go after a "real" pay raise in 2009! Howard Ogle Posted July 22, 2008 5:41 PM
• About the article about a possible 3.9% pay raise. For me that translates to an increase of about $42.00 a paycheck in 2008. Gasoline has gone from $1.90/gal. to $4.10/gal., and my gorcery bill has gone from $55.00 a week to $110.00 a week in one year. My point is the Union should be going out and asking for a 13.9% pay raise. That would translate to about $195.00 a paycheck in 2008. Tell the Union to get down off it's "pat me on the back Ive done a great job" stance, and go after a "real" pay raise in 2009! Howard Ogloe Posted July 22, 2008 5:40 PM