GovernmentExecutive.com

Return to Article: A Price to Pay

• 42193
  

  ...and continue, Ketter, with the word "inacted". If you're going to jenralize, at leest spel it rite.

  rosemary Posted January 24, 2008 9:01 PM
• 36571
  

  To Dan Ketter. Your comment that "our Civil Servants.. complain about everything and perform minimually" is very offensive to me, and I'm sure to most Federal employees. Perhaps you, too, could get a job such as ours if you learn how to spell correctly. I suggest you begin with the word "minimally."

  Bill Ashley Posted November 5, 2007 12:19 PM
• 36450
  

  As I have stated in my comments to like articles regarding "unfairness" about Federal employee pay: when Federal employees take their oath of office they affirm the following: "I, [name], do solemnly swear (or affirm) that I will support and defend the Constitution of the United States against all enemies, foreign and domestic; that I will bear true faith and allegiance to the same; that I take this obligation freely, without any mental reservation or purpose of evasion; and that I will well and faithfully discharge the duties of the office on which I am about to enter. So help me God."

  Meeting obligations regarding the oath have nothing to do with pay. Please stop using this venue to complain about your difficulties! Complaining does not solve problems, but writing to to your state's representatives and Senators might help. If you feel that you are underpaid, send them a letter. Otherwise, please stop whining!

  Veteran Posted November 2, 2007 11:44 AM
• 36367
  

  Hansen is typical of our Civil Servants. Complain about everything and perform minimually. Fire fighters in Cal make less becasue the demands placed on them are significantly less than the average LA firefighter. Comparing cities for cost of living isn't what the locality pay was inacted to address. California's commute time and fuel costs are a local issue that can addressed by the voters when they get a stomach full of socialism

  dan ketter Posted November 1, 2007 1:13 PM
• 36363
  

  And we wonder why recruiting and retention are so difficult in the federal sector. Locality pay should be based on cost of living, not solely on private sector salaries. I work in DC now and used to work in Los Angeles. We would spend a lot of time and money recruiting and training new hires, only to find that they would escape to another work site with a lower cost of living. Who can blame them? We will never have the best and brightest in the federal system until several leaders in government and Congress get on the stick and concentrate on finally getting the federal pay system to a point at which employees can afford to live and thus work in high cost areas such as LA, DC, and San Francisco. Otherwise, the vacant position rate will continue to be high and the employees who are working in those locations will have to shoulder the burden.

  Deborah Posted November 1, 2007 12:03 PM
• 36348
  

  This also does not take into account those near the top of the GM-15 and DP-04 pay scales in the LA Area, who will get either no locality pay increase or a reduced amount because of the $145,400 pay limit. Even if they raise it, it probably won't be enough to allow those near the top end of the scales to see pay increases. At least that is what happened this last year. Even the people at these pay levels can't afford to live here, forcing both spouses to work just to survive.

  BW Posted November 1, 2007 10:38 AM
• 36340
  

  I also believe that there is an issue with California's tax structure (retired military and also plain state taxes), housing costs, comutting costs due to distances between work and home.

  James Cochran Posted November 1, 2007 9:39 AM
• 36314
  

  We in New Orleans certainly understand the recruiting problem. Since Hurricane Katrina devastated the area, the Corps of Engineers has had an expanded and urgent charge. However, since New Orleans in still in the "Rest of the U.S." locality despite the enormous local salary increases in the last two years, we are having to temporarily fill many jobs with expensive contract and TDY employees, at great cost to taxpayers and other positions stay vacant.

  Jay Joseph Posted November 1, 2007 8:26 AM
• 36306
  

  I feel that the locality pay should be based on the cost of living for the area inwhich you live. I am in Battle Creek,MI and the cost of living here is actually higher than the Detroit area. This partially because the compition for things is not as great as it is in Detroit. Businesses like Food Stores,Gas Stations,housing is higher among others. We also have a city income tax that I have never had to pay until being sent to Battle Creek,MI. I worked at TACOM Warren,MI and made out better there when I was getting less pay. I was sent to Huntsville,AL. The pay in Huntsville is the same as we receive here in Battle Creek yet things there are a lot cheaper. Now tell me what is fair when I ended up where I it costs me all of my pay to survive, when if I had been able to stay at TACOM Warren,MI I would be making about $7,000 dollars more a year for the same grade and step. I would be able to get more for less and be able to save money..

  Rodney R. Logan Posted November 1, 2007 6:30 AM