TOPICS
TOPICS
Bush issues order implementing 3.9 percent pay raise
President Bush on Thursday issued an executive order implementing the 3.9 percent pay hike for federal employees included in the Consolidated Security, Disaster Assistance and Continuing Appropriations Act passed in September.
The 3.9 percent figure is 1 percentage point higher than the administration initially proposed in its February budget, and brings the 2009 civilian pay increase in line with the raise for members of the military.
National Treasury Employees Union President Colleen Kelley said she was pleased with the pay raise, but wished the initial proposal had been higher.
"It is disappointing that in every year of this administration, it has failed to make the connection between fair and competitive pay and the ability of agencies to secure and keep the high-quality employees they need if they are going to meet public expectations of government service," she said.
The executive order was necessary to specify how the overall civilian pay hike will be divided between base and locality pay. Bush allocated 2.9 percent to basic pay, and 1 percent to locality increases.
For General Schedule employees, base pay will range from $17,540 for employees in Grade 1, Step 1, to $127,604 for employees in Grade 15, Step 10. For employees in the Senior Executive Service, pay will range from $117,787 to $177,000 for executives in agencies with certified SES performance appraisal systems, and from $117,787 to $162,900 in agencies without such systems.
Members of the SES paid the current minimum salary of $114,468 will receive guaranteed 2009 raises of 2.9 percent to bring their salaries in line with the new floor of $117,787. Raises for other senior executives will be determined on an individual basis and will vary by agency.
The Office of Personnel Management posted updated locality pay tables to accompany the order.
Employees in the Washington-Baltimore-Northern Virginia area will receive the highest total pay adjustment, at 4.78 percent. Those in the "rest of U.S." category will get an overall boost of 3.52 percent.
COMMENTS
- WOW! I was very afraid going to NSPS after reading a lot of the comments from folks on this site. I just completed my first year under the new pay sytem and I am thoroughly satisfied. I was rated as a 3.33 and my total raise this year is 7.08%! Never had a raise that high in my 20 years under the old GS system. And that's not including the bonus aspect of my increase either that is paid in a lump sum next week! A bunch of whiners I say! Happy Fed worker Posted January 14, 2009 10:41 AM
- reminder: NSPS people get that bonus every year, and its neither TSP matched nor counts towards your retirement calculations of high-three. Didnt consider that, did ya? Deployed in kuwait Posted January 6, 2009 2:03 PM
- Yes, I’m thankful for the work. Yes, I’m thankful for ANY pay increase. No, I’m NOT grateful for any attempt to balance the budget UNFAIRLY AND SQUARELY on the backs of civil servants! As I’ve said in the past, if we have to actually pay for “Daddy’s War” to keep it off the back of our children, then so be it. “Wars” are expensive (but nowhere near the cost of these big business conflicts). Unlike Shrub and Skeeter, I feel all Americans should contribute, rich or poor, in the degree to which we can. “To All Suffering in NSPS. Get your butts into a union protected position! Pay dues and help fight the insanity. The unions are the working person's only protection.” While I must agree with your sentiments, oh Wise One, MOST of the folks in NSPS are: 1. Executives (or at least our version of them), and therefore not entitled to union membership. 2. Enablers of this foul system. 3. Apparently, according to many of the responses from our fellow commentors, happy with their lot; except this time of the year. Please forgive any sarcasm you may hear, I understand that most of us: A. Agree, in principle, with PfP; just not this aberration. B. Most of those in the NSBS actually agree with us as to the unfairness and inherent inequity, per studies quoted in stories found here that actually asked significant numbers of participants. C. Didn’t know what they had until it was gone. Please consider… if the Big Wigs pushing this system ain’t happy with it, what makes you think the Little Guy will be? Tip off Posted December 30, 2008 5:33 PM
