Return to Article: Budgeting Benefits
-
71309
I couldn't agree more with the comments. Seems like the federal worker/retiree is the first one to be looked at when budgets need to be cut. Seems to me that somebody should be looking at the salaries and perks of our congressmen in addition to looking at salaries in the "outside" world. We definitely get the short end of the stick. I sincerely hope that NARFE and AARP are keeping on top of this mess and what a mess it is!
-
71192
Everbody agrees the Government needs to increase worker productivity and promote consumer spending to get this country out of this mess. Start a four day work week and encourage people to spend the extra day with their families doing something to support the local economy. We can shut down the mill one day out of each week, increase productivity and be more in line with commercial industry practices with Government agencies saving millions on electricity and phone bills while workers reduce their transportation costs to work with one less day of travel to and from the office.
-
71048
I am not surprised about anything that comes out of this Congress. Naturally they don't mention cutting their benefits, salary, etc. Didn't they just vote themselves approx a $90K per year raise? Also, did you realize that when they retire after just one term they have full pay retirement for life! Want to cut somewhere Congress, start at home! We as Americans need to really have a shakeup in Congress this next election. We have some power it is in our vote! A lot of this country is already talking about creating a new CSA (Consertative States of America). It's not going to take much more to push people of the edge.
-
70948
Bait and switch. Hire someone and promise them a set of benefits, then after they are hired, reduce the benefits... Is there any wonder there is such turnover in gov service, except in Congress where turnover could be good. If a private company did this the Dept. of Labor and the labor unions would be all over them like ducks on a Junebug. Can we say violation of Contract!!?? But then in politics violations are simply a matter of opinion and the party in power.
-
70943
30 years ago when I came to work for the government you could take pride in what you were doing to support our troops. As a reward for our efforts, we are continuously targeted to reduce our benefits. The recent NSPS change was to benefit a reduction in employee salaries, while drastically rewarding management officials who can only make dumb decisions. Now we have the CBO who again wants to reduce our health benefit. I feel like the Veterans who sacrifice and give to this country to only be rewarded by incompetent government officials, poor medical care, and have benefits taken away. Let's stop supporting foreign countries and take care of our own; we could really save taxpayers dollars!!!!
-
70892
Being a federal employee is a choice all of us "CIVIL SERVANTS" make and we all know that comes with sacrafice, but to take out "CORE" benifits away from us is deffinately not the "SAVE ALL" answer for the dying economy!! How about we try to hold the white collor CRIMINALS accountable for their crimes and stop making "MIDDLE" america carry the country. This country is suppose to be for the people by the people that incluse ALL of us just not the federal employees or the middle class!!!
Signed< SFC US Army Retired and Federal Employee 30+ years of servicve to my country and the federal government.
-
70878
Mr. President, The proposals listed in the "Budget Options" report regarding cuts for government employees are very disappointing, to say the least. I am struggling to make ends meet, hoping to one day retire. To be penalized for being employed by the federal government is demeaning. Hopefully,other options are considered.
-
70857
I agree with what has been posted. As a government worker for over 20 years I have seen the government employee take a lot of hits from benefits and retirement. I don't however; see the top dogs on government hill taking the same hits.... aren't they government employees? Why do they get two raises a year when the average government employee on get one (maybe) ... why do they get better retirement, benefits, and of course pay. I think if they are willing to hit government workers again ... let them drop the one's in DC to the same level as the rest of us ... then see how fast they want to hit our paychecks, benefits, retirement.
-
70843
Instead of sticking it to your employees, if you want to save money Mr. Obama, let's look at the BILLIONS os dollars we give every "tom, Dick, and Harry" foregien government with their hand out. How many BILLIONS/TRILLIONS of tax dollars would that save in a ten year period. A heck of a lot more than bilking Federal employees. Since we are on the subject, How much money do we give away Mr. and Mrs. Congress"person" to your congressional district to get you "re-elected" because you gave away the store. Fiscal Responsibility - HA! Scrooge the employees - of course. Scrooge yourself - Not a Chance!
-
21802
Federal workers will give up some of their benefits to help reduce the federal budget? Who are the authors of this study kidding? Any "savings" will lower even further the current horrible morale of most federal workers, and the money will just be spent on more pork by Congress, so where are the savings? I would urge Congress to set an example, and cut its own bloated budgets and benefits first, before going after ours!
-
21730
I am concerned about this country's deficit, but not the way you think. Why is it easier take money and benefits away from federal employees? Why is it that government employees such an easy target?
So much money and effort is spent on other countries and let's not forget you. Congress never talks about cutting their salaries or benefits? How about their retirement plan or any of the extra benefits they receive?
How do you think that makes the federal employees feel? We work very hard to support our soldiers and keep this country running. Do we get any thanks? Our pay is not even completive anymore with the private sector and with all of the cuts and reductions of benefits employees will have to leave the federal government and go to the private sector just to make end meet.
If congress thinks this is such a good idea, why is their salary and benefits not a part of this package? Why do the cost reduction packages never include your salary and benefits? Smaller percentage reductions on congress's salary should give you the same savings.
-
21634
I totally agree with Robert M. but then again, we must remember that Robert M. doesn't have to get re-elected.
-
21545
I simply do not understand why -- year after year - retirement and health benefits are picked on to save the government monies. The government spends so much on other countries and places. It seems like every time we get into a war or disagreement with another nation or country, they mostly end up over here in the USA instead of working to make it work in their own country. Wouldn't that save us a lot of spending?
-
21533
Here we go again -- lets take money and benefits away from federal employees, we are an easy target. Has anyone ever calculated how much it cost the government every year because Congress is unable to pass a budget and we go from one continuing resolution to another? I think it is unconscionable to reduce federal benefits of employees and retirees that were promised at the beginning of employment. Hopefully, this will not happen. Why doesn't the government focus on spending less and reducing waste and mismanagement?
-
21518
As they keep chipping away at my take-home pay, it won't be long before I cannot afford to do government work. Pay scales are not competitive now, with all the cost-reducing ideas they have, they won't have to worry about a federal payroll, only the subcontractor's bill. Of course they will be three times the cost of the employee and the person actually doing the work will receive at most 15% of the payment.
So let's see we what his adds up too, three times the cost for 15% of the work. Mean while embezzlement will be up as there will be no one to be sure the contractor is actually providing the agreed upon service. The contract employee will qualified for welfare, child care, and food stamps, which of course the government will have to pay. Government agencies are having hard enough time hire employees with technical skills because the current wages are not competitive with the private sector.
Look at the total wages paid skilled government labor, (including overtime) and the amount are huge because they are forced to work overtime because no one else wants the low paying job, (border patrol, fire fighters, police, etc).
-
21512
This shouldn't even be considered until and unless all other ideas are exhausted. I've heard $500 million could be saved just by converting from dollar bills to dollar coins. A pittance in the big picture, but if we're so desperate for savings, let's look at things that don't hurt people first.
-
21501
To paraphrase a fine American, Adlai Stevenson: A billion here, a billion there andpretty soon you're talking real money. If Congress (both parties!) andthis administration were serious about reducing the deficit andfuture outlays, they'd not have authorized the waste of $500 billion andcounting we've poured into Iraq; they'd go after the 'missing' $100 billion that was lost on Medal of Freedom recipient Paul Bremer's CPA tenure in Iraq; they'd eliminate Congressional earmarks, sugar and farm subsidies to corporate farms, etc. Here's a novel approach: Congress stays in session longer than the 100 or so days they are actually in Washington. No lobbyist golf junkets/conferences (fact-finding Ha!) and they work until they balance the budget - just like their little brothers/sisters have to do at the state legislature level.
-
21496
Here's the single best way to save the largest amount of money: Get out of Iraq
-
21494
Let the politicians sit back and cut back all the government benefits they want. They enjoy representing us and giving themselves raises whenever they want. They don't do what we ask them to do for us who elect them in the first place. If we stop corruption and "pork barrels" in the political world that would save billions and much more than the proposed cutbacks they want to enforce against government workers.
I used to enjoy working for the government, but as I grew more and more politically educated, I realized we are not "a government for the people and by the people." I love my country, but the politicians are ruining it for future generations. Government salaries were decent in the past but with the cost of living increases, the salaries don't meet our needs.
Now since the politicians have passed a new "lump sum" raise for FAA employees instead of an actual increase, our high 3 years has been drastically reduced. If the politicians keep draining the government employees, no one will want to work for the government anymore. These new proposals are ridiculous to say the least.
-
21491
I am just in shock. Government Executive actually mentioned something about worker's compensation for federal employees. They always seem to avoid the subject as though it would bring on the plague. Now, if they just got the rest of the story.
The federal government could save billions of dollars by following this simple plan:
A. Actually reduce the federal workforce.
B. Actually get rid of nonperforming managers.
C. Actually close facilities that are obsolete, redundant or unproductive.
D. Actually use computers to automate work and reduce travel instead of just using them to send email and store documents.
E. Actually hold managers and agencies, like the Labor Department, accountable for what the law says they are supposed to be doing. Stop the fraud, stop the waste and stop the abuse of authority.
Reality, What a concept!
-
21483
In the last six to seven years this administration has changed the perspective of the world and thus has caused a shift in the way we do business, the way we treat our fellow human beings, the way we relate to good and evil, and most importantly the way we think of ourselves. In a nutshell I do not feel as save about anything anymore. The future - as much as we do not have total control over - has now been handed over to the government. I feel that I will not be able to afford living in the land of the brave and the free when I retire. You connect the dots.
-
21482
Just stand up on your hind legs and eliminate all federal retirement benefits... just admit it was all a clever white-lie and have Tony "Snowjob" Snow tell us we are un-American whiners if we object! In the meantime, the president can exercise his veto power (for only the second time ever) to prevent those uppity TSA Employees from unionizing.
One last thing Mr. President, be sure to keep dental benefits off-the-table lest those TSA employee's spend eighty bucks for tooth extractions that could be better spent in Iraq! Republicans - the death party, both slow and fast. You and your supporters sir, should be ashamed.
-
21477
As a federal retiree, I can say from the heart that this is not just a very bad set of ideas, but a horrendous set of ideas. It may sound like a lot of money to the average schmoe, but in reality it's just chump change in the overall federal budget. They don't need to balance the budget on the backs of the federal employee any more than they need to do it on the backs of our grandparents with Social Security and/or Medicare.
Saying that you'll eat beef instead of pork if the cost of pork goes up is stupid since the price of beef had probably already gone up to the point where you had to eat pork. People who dream this kind of crap up have never had a day's worry about how to pay for something in their lives. I've worried all my life about ending up living in a cardboard box somewhere because my income couldn't be enough to live on.
Now I have to worry about having enough to cover the cost of food and medicines for the rest of my life. My little GS6 pension (which is smaller than anticipated due to a forced early retirement) was never going to be that much; if they get their way, I'll owe them money out of every check.
-
21476
When you read this article, make the following recommended changes! Everywhere you see "save the government" (or words to that effect), change it to "cost the employees".
-
21472
One thing that neither the CBO nor any other government office can tell the American taxpayer is what happened to the proposed savings after beneficial legislation is made law? We are told it will save the country "lots of money". This country's financial picture does not get any better. There is no hard data that proves this country actually gets a savings. The CBO needs to focus on the bigger programs that can produce higher and better savings. In the engineering field there is an old axiom that goes "focus more of your time and energy on 80 percent of the cost and less on the remaining 20 percent." This country would be better served if the CBO adopted this as part of their business plan.
-
21467
It doesn't surprise me that retirees continue being the easy target when it comes to reducing costs. That is a no-brainer.
Imagine if Telework were mandatory for all government employees? How much do you imagine the government could save on utilities and maintenance/new construction of government buildings alone? Imagine if everyone that qualified for telework in my office building were told that starting next week we would be required to work from home. Can you imagine how empty this building would be? If in charge, I would move those employees that could not telework to one floor. Of course, before implementing any of this I would have a thorough audit of all positions to validate a need for the positions and eliminate the rest. The remaining empty floors and offices, I would lease out to local agencies as a money making venture.
Telework employees would still be required to attend meetings and do whatever they do on post w/the exception of not having an office here. Maybe there could be an open area w/wireless connection where employees could bring their lap tops to work while waiting for the next meeting/appointment Or better yet, telework employees would have a camera attached to their work laptop so that we could conduct most of our meetings electronically rather than have the employee travel to the work site. That my friends, in my opinion, is a cost avoidance, cost reducing, cost savings approach, not to mention the benefits for the employee and the environment. But is anyone listening? No.
-
21464
While Congress is looking for ways to save federal dollars, they need to look at their own bag of benefits. It is outrageous what they get, and continue to get into retirement, that far exceeds our civilian benefits. And of course since they don't pay into Social Security, they really don't lose sleep over the future of this program, now do they?
-
21462
Yes, by all means let's cut federal worker benefits instead of facing up to the entitlement tsunami headed our way. Short range thinking will enable politicians--and CBO--to assure us that something is being done, while preserving the welfare state and avoiding real, meaningful spending cuts. How long can CBO call itself "nonpartisan" before people begin to see its not-so-subtle tendentiousness?
-
21461
Gee, I'm honored. CBO has finally indicated they are considering using one of my ideas. I have said for years that the flat rate on health care would save money and be fair since everyone would receive the same benefit. If adopted, let's just hope they set the rate at a average rather than low end. Also they should consider the rest of my idea concerning setting the family plan to be a "family of 4". This way, smaller families won't have to absorb part of the load due to couples who decide to have larger families.
-
21458
Congress seems to always put federal employees on their "reduce the federal budget hit list." Why not reduce their own retirement benefits; make their retirement benefits according to their length of service and impose term limits? Let's cut out pork barrel spending. The average American citizen lives within their budget, why not Congress? Like the average citizen, let's cut out all unnecessary and frivolous spending and see if that wouldn't solve the problem.
-
21456
My annuity has yielded a net decrease since I retired because of health insurance increases. I would suggest that Congress members be put back on the pay system they were on originally and get their pay in line with what they are worth. Last I heard it cost the tax payers $12,000,000 a year to one of them in office. I'm sure it cost more now. It must be nice to vote yourself a pay raise whenever you want.
PROMO RIGHT: EVENTS
UPCOMING WEBINARS
NOVEMBER 18
Speed bumps for Teleworking: What are they and how to avoid them?
DECEMBER 3
Achieve Program Success: Unlock the Management Information in Your Data
DECEMBER 10
Practical Transparency: Applying Exchange Networks for Mission Results
PROMO RIGHT: DIRECTORIES
Post a Comment
To post a comment, you must provide a name and a valid e-mail address. Messages must be limited to 400 words. By using this Service you agree not to post material that is obscene, harassing, defamatory, or otherwise objectionable. Although Government Executive does not monitor comments posted to this site (and has no obligation to), it reserves the right to delete, edit, or move any material that it deems to be in violation of this rule.