Return to Article: Bush seeks 2.9 percent civilian pay raise; 3.4 percent for military
-
44016
"Ah, and there in lies the rub." No, Charles, I couldn't even tell you how much pay would be enough to get buy in from young citizens who can legally vote but not drink; who can get married, have babies, die for their country, but have trouble obtaining a mortgage. This equation is particularly thrown off kilter since many perceive this action has been without merit. This statement is not intended to belittle the sacrifice of our men and women now deployed, military, civilian, and/or contractor.
If I may? Without a number of patriotic response enlistments or sufficient pay, I must turn to other motivations. Back in the OLD days (and granted ... MY days) of McNamara's 10,000, when there was no draft in place, perceptions were similar from another conflict, and enlistments languished the administration resorted to offering the price of freedom from incarceration. Well, I understand that the current "forgiveness" policy on (shall we call them youthful indiscretions?) applicants is considered temporarily, limited, but necessary to make mission. As I said, I know not the ultimate cost of recruitment. I only wish to point out that a lack of high class (grad-A)volunteers speaks volumes on the unspoken thoughts of our youth.
As for that relationship to we civilians, like the services I think we are on a down hill course. The dwindling but persistent scattering of applause for NSPS in these responses indicates IMHO that the reality hasn't set in. Once the trend towards lower pay & retirements has solidified in the statistics (2 - 5 yrs out) the best of us (but that do not fall within the 3% quota) will seek fulfillment and reward elsewhere. And then Dan "Sketter" Ketter will finally feel vindicated.
Wow, I just had an epiphany. I've often wondered why NSPS advocates couldn't to see its inherent weaknesses, particularly the P4P problems; well, I just realized those select few are actually positive representatives for the future, with similar attitudes to those folks how took ARM mortgages in anticipation of a brighter future. Most of us simply prefer the fixed income (mortgage and/or employment).
-
43936
Equal pay raises makes sense. Civilians aren't seeking free medical care, free housing, and commisary and exchange privileges, just an equal pay raise.
-
43908
Tip Off, Pray tell, how much pay would be enough to participate in an unjust war?
-
43906
As both career paths are voluntary pay parity should be the norm. GIs receive extra compensation for hazardous duty.
-
43463
rmathews3, you're right. Reporting the extra time required an IG complaint, involving the CG, and joining the unofficial post black list. I don't recommend it; even if I felt obligated to do it. That's okay, I have reached one step below my Peter Principle and here I will wait out the current regime. It did result in our section being acknowledged for the work load we carried; and 16 new personnel being hired. As for other civilians doing the same, I wouldn't dream of snitching on them. I merely wish to note the reality due to what they consider conscientiousness and dedication. As David Gates once crooned, "It don't matter to me."
As for the military, I really don't mind them getting a raise either. As I stated, I no longer wish to change places with them. Still, IF you are giving them a raise because of the hardships they endure, that raise should go to their tax exempt hardship pays. The soldiers benefit more and the cost is temporary in nature.
If you've ever been a green-suiter, you know that stateside duty is known by the soldiers and the command as "down time"; and they justly earn it. But the liberal manner in which the command grants off time (perfectly legal for salaried workers) sometimes causes friction with and hardship for those civilians working alongside them. We don't necessarily begrudge their liberal time-off policies, but it does cause a certain inequity in the work place.
I wouldn't think of dwelling on the military tax exempt BAQ, BAS, and COLA, as some previous posters did. Some soldiers get them and others don't. I am educated enough to realize the cost of making such available for all soldiers or the cost of removing their tax exempt status but upping their pay to give the soldiers the same cash in hand (or purchasing power after taxes).
The one true reason I could readily understand for increasing military base pay over civilians I've not seen addressed here. Evidently the US isn't paying entry level soldiers enough for them to risk their lives in what many see as an unjustified war. If current pay incentives were enough, there'd be no recruitment problems. But there they normally use bonuses; once more, targeted and temporary in nature.
-
43457
This comment is met for the person that commented: "I'm not stupid enough to vote for another Clinton and I won't vote for Obama. His church and his devotion to the church tells me he is a racist."
It appears to me that you don't have your facts correct about Obama and only someone that is stupid and a racist would make such comments.
Stay home and don't vote. You're too stupid to make an intelligent decision.
-
43411
Hey Tip off, working unreported hours is falsification of your time card which is a firing offense. It is just as illegal to work and not report it as it is to claim hours when you didn't work. As a CS employee, I don't mind military getting higher raises because they are not/can not be paid enough. I make plenty of money, of course, I would like to make more, who wouldn't. But I won't get my panties in a wad if I "only" get 2.9 percent. My brother is a blue collar worker and is happy when he gets a quarter or fifty cents an hour raise, which happens rarely. Meanwhile, I get a dollar or more EVERY year, not to mention step increases. Government employees need to quit whining or get another job. I'm happy as hell and am not complaining. Neither should any of you.
-
43395
crushee, gals like you just don't get it.
If you were in the military it must have been for the French.
. vast majority of troops live on base??? WRONG
. institute a PFP there already is 1 if you don't get promoted your forced out. there isn't any automatic step increases, luckly socialism doesn't exist in the military
. Housing and rats are part of their pay but aren't included in their retirement pay. Base pay is a lot less than any CS rate. Unfortunately your retiremnet is based on your total income are you willing to disacrd 30% of you income when it comes time to retire? The military doesn't give M-16's to cretons so if you were there it must have been to support the French
.if you look at all these posts its quite evident that the landcrabs aren't on any TEAM but out for themselves. Some how or other they actually believe that they are the war fighters and deserve military benefits. Last time I looked the military was still hiring so maybe its time for you to try and make the grade
-
43376
Don't expect any changes if McCain gets elected. McCain is a loser. We really don't have any good people to vote for. I'm hearing more and more people say why bother going to the polls, the delegates have already decided who we can vote for. I'm not voting for McCain just to prevent the Democrats from winning and I'm not stupid enough to vote for another Clinton and I won't vote for Obama. His church and his devotion to the chuch tells me he is a racist. Actions speak louder than words.
-
43212
Charlie, your example of the discrepancies between military and civilian pay is based on the fact that they are salaried and we are paid hourly. And despite, federal law to the contrary, civilians work thousands of undocumented, uncompensated hours just to get the job done. Budgets can not afford the overtime pay, even if often capped at only $5 more dollars per hour, and accepting compensatory time off, even at a one-for-one basis, just gets you further behind.
As for separating services by deployment and hardship tours, that may be OBE; if you read your NSPS basic tenets, civilians are now INVOLUNTARILY deployable and subject to the UCMJ while deployed. Additionally, like the military, we have always been held to a higher legal standard than the general population because our federal employment and security classifications do not tolerate indiscretions that would earn most Americans a mere slap on the wrist.
I will not deny that right now there are more military deployed, and that I do not wish to change places with them (been there, done that, got the T-shirt); but the next time you visit a DoD mixed service office during Christmas Exodus, look around and see who is manning the fort. Heck, do the same during any training holiday. Stateside military duty is a far cry from deployed and often cushier than civilian work requirements.
"military personnel are limited by promotion boards and rigid pay charts that inhibit pay advances; civilians can seek other opportunities that result in higher pay. " This tells me you REALLY haven't looked at NSPS, recent GovExec articles by Brittany Ballenstedt (whom I must say is now officially losing increasing credibility with this audience daily) have seen quotes that under NSPS civilian can now often expect 2, maybe 3, promotions within a 30 year career. Look around, Buddy, this ain't the same service it used to be. And military service training is often the gateway to a cushy civilian job.
And Bob "It's now time for the military to implement a pay for performance plan pay system." IAW the CBO Papers, Military Pay and the Rewards for Performance, Dec 95, a Time-in-Grade pay scale (similar to our current GS pay tables) is being considered as performance pay since it rewards those soldiers who get promoted faster.
I don't begrudge them, I am them (20 years out of 30 in government service).
-
43209
Under the GS system the Cash award was a reward for superior performance, and not part of pay compenesation. This superior performance award was something enjoyed by relatively few employees. The NSPS is suppose to mirror civil sector pay schemes where any cash award is considered part of your overall pay package, and enjoyed by most employees. In that regard, the NSPS cash award should be considered as your total annual compensatin and part of your high 3 for retirement calculation. This only makes sense, as NSPS basic pay will erode in comparison to GS pay, the factoring of NSPS cash awards as part of the total pay package for retirement purposes would correct the erosion, somewhat, and calm many concerns over this program. However, this argument runs counter to the government's scheme to reduce expenditures over the long haul.
-
43143
Ketter...get a better grip on that Kevlar helmet and keep your head on a swivel... 'cause you're definitely NOT a Fed worker. Points to consider.....
1. Maybe you ought to NOT slam civ DoD workers unless you have been one before
2. Having been in the sandbox myself (twice) and been shot at there as well and am now working for the fed, you need to UNDERSTAND ALL the issues and facts before spouting off/talking smack about what you CLAIM are facts (that's read "been there, done that - twice")
3. How about DELETING the annual CPI raise for the military since their cost of living is mainly driven by ON BASE living expenses/conditions not associated with off base expenses; plus a vast majority of the military doesn't live off base anyway.
4. Institute a purple suit PFP for the all services and see how Marines, Coasties, Sailors and ground pounders fight over their own "performances" each year to VALIDATE a pay raise of any sort (that's read "every man/woman for themself)
5. Give all DoD workers - military and civilians - all of the living allowances the military cuyrrent enjoys (BAH/BAQ and BAS) in addition to a base salary. Let's be fair and level the playing field. If I go to Iraq or Afghanistan now, I get an M-16 to blast the enemy just a sure as a someone who has a green ID card. Why not pay me the same as them - at home and away, 24/7, 365? Sound FAIR? Without these, I pretty sure most of the military would be crawling up the steps of Congress BEGGING for $$ assistance to LIVE "on the economy." Or how about deleting them from the the military permanently and make everyone live ON base?
AND Finally, 6. IRT to this stupid remark of "If your not doing more than why are you getting a raise, its unfortunate that you have so little regard for what this country stands for hard work and risk taking." Let's take a look at what YOU personally are doing MORE of right now. Hmmm....obviously NOT hard work. Just talking smack about apples and oranges.
Remember, we're all on the same TEAM... let's go fight the enemy, not between ourselves.
-
43076
Personally I don't see what the big deal is with military/civilian pay parity. I am a Fed Civilian and don't object to any raise the miliary gets - I'm just glad that there are braver souls than I, that are willing to what they have to do. However Ketter there are many hardworking feds who put in long hours with no extra pay - what's the matter - Government wouldn't take you?
-
43071
What this really means is: a 1.9% across the board pay raise. The other 1.0% is always used to fund locality pay adjustments. The employees in the overseas theatre will get 1.9% on the basic scale. There is a very wide difference now between the basic scal and the rest of US scale. For my grade, the basic pay rate is about $9000 less then the Rest-of-US scale. The incentives for overseas duty are getting less and less, and just amounts to a backdoor tax on the overseas encentives. On top of that my NSPS pay adjustment resulted in a $1400 pay cut overall.
-
43060
BT i agree but trying to be something your not does belittle the contributions of civil servants. As to the 90% number you must have served with Hillary when she attempted to join the marines
-
43058
I was thinging mostly armor, infantry, armor cav, air cav, etc. The maneuver elements. But all military are significantly exposed to danger.
I take issue with Mr Ketter. He seems to have made bad career choices. Envy.
We do not need to pit civil servants and military against each other.
-
43057
Let's keep this in perspecitve. There are many of us in the non-government, private sector who have in fact taken a pay cut rather than a raise, and not due to our performance but to aid in keeping the company in business. And we get no perks. I firmly believe that individuals should be paid based on their worth. Unfortunately it appears that worth has many different values.
-
43052
b. t. is the only one focusing in on the REAL issue, here. This is NOT a raise. This is a reflection of inflation--how much the cost of living has increased in the prior year. Has the cost of living increased less for civilians than military? If you believe so, I'd like to see your figures...
On the other hand, since housing (covered by BHA for the military) and food (covered by BAS for the military) are figured into the real increase in the cost of living index which COLA "raise" reflects, you could make the argument that the two figures should actually be reversed...more increase for civilians than military, since we don't get supplements for housing and food!
(No, I'm not seriously proposing this...but the COLA should be equal for everybody--including NSPSers--because inflation hits us all equally.)
-
43050
Calling this a raise confuses the issue, as bt explained. The media doesn't help here. Some here have argued that mil-civ. pay ought not be compared. But there is a rationale for comparison, because in TDA units there is at least a rough attempt to place mil. and civ. grades appropriately throughout the hierarchy. Without comparability, this could not be done. Most of the difficulty in comparing military and civilian incomes derives from the structure of military "pay" and "allowances." Military allowances aren't subject to federal or state tax, or to social security withholding, yet allowances comprise about 1/3 of monthly income. Another difficulty is that military retirement is noncontributory, whereas civilians must sock away a good chunk of their net to ensure a decent retirement income. Having retired from the military, I can attest to the big hit civilian pay takes when fully taxed (at much higher income levels than 'comparable' military basic pay), and when paying into a retirement plan.
-
43041
1. The cost of living adjustment is not a "raise". It is what protects our wages from being eroded by inflation.
2. The majority of military are no more subject to "closing with the enemy" than the typical federal worker. Traditionally something like 90% of military are in support postitions. I suspect that in the modern military this is even higher. And what about the federal park rangers (for one case in point, there are plenty other examples in federal service)? Gone is the day when their typical duty was leading nature hikes and such. They come in contact with druggies and other dangerous criminals on a regular (almost daily) basis. And no rotating home on occaision to escape those scum, and all at GS9 pay, so who's underpaid?
3. For the Military who are posted to positions of danger there are financial compensations (hazardous duty, income tax relief, veterans' benefits) that civilians posted to positions like Iraq don't receive.
Devaluing the contribution of the federal civil service does no one any good.
-
43028
Civilian/Military comparisons are seldom valid. Two different worlds.
Civilians are mostly office workers and not intended to close with the enemy.
Military have shorter careers for retirement but must seek out real physical danger. They cannot hide. They must engage. Go up to the enemy and smash'em.
The administration however is anti civil servant.
-
43027
There is no civilain equilavent to a military job its apples and oranges. Military retirement pay is based on base pay not their food/housing allotment. What I'm not hearing from all the land crabs is just what they are doing to justify the 2.9% increase in increased productivity or is this their general entitlement philosophy? If your not doing more than why are you getting a raise, its unfortunate that you have so little regard for what this country stands for hard work and risk taking. Civil servants are neither and any raise is a gift
-
43024
Anyone thinking this salary proposal is generous need to remove their head from the economic sand dune! The U.S. dollar is losing its value much faster than any federal pay raise - even those proposed by the unions. Don't believe it? Each time the interest rates are dropped by the Fed, the dollar drops in value. Still don't believe it? Check the exchange rates for the U.S. dollar against the Euro, the Pound, or the Canadian dollar.
The past five years have been BRUTAL to our currency. For the sake of my 401k, I wish this were not true, but those note-for-note currency numbers do not lie. In essence, yuo cannot spend a raise you are not really getting...as a matter of fact, you will have less to spend.
-
43011
Regardless of whose side I'm on, the FY09 budget policy stating the raise percentages was put to rest last September during the passback process between OMB and agencies and everybody in the game knows it. By the time Hoyer, et.al. sent their annual letter the entire budget proposal for FY09 was already printed and waiting to be delivered. Sure, the President could change his mind at State of the Union but then OMB would have to send up a revised budget for everybody or punt and admit that the 09 budget has its numbers wrong. It's just political posturing whose real purpose is to get a couple lines of press when they know full well that the President's decision was made long ago - and by the time we get to the budget end-game on the Hill, the President won't care about the raise because increasing it for civilian agencies will not lead the Hill to add any funding to pay for it and won't change the President's line in the sand on total spending. We can still debate the issue of course but to be useful to agency budgets, the debate ought to take place six months earlier....fat chance of that.
-
43010
The one thing I've noticed over the years, is the grade inflation that has occurred to keep federal service jobs competitive with the civilian sector. What use to be a GS-7 job is now a GS-9 or GS-11; what use to be a GS-9 job is now a GS-12 or GS-13. Twenty years ago, it was rare to meet a employee as high ranking as a GS-12/13, now half the civil service are GS-12/13. If pay had kept up over the years, this inflation in grade/rank wouldn't have been necessary. NSPS is only going to complicate the matter, with the resulting slow deterioration in pay. Basically, you'll have to quit your current job, then reapply and negotiate a higher pay rate to return in another job. NSPS will encourage this growth of organizational dis-continuity, inefficiency, and job hopping. For the employee to their salaries in an accpetable range, this is the most obvious option to beat this NSPS system.
-
43007
Federal workers, particularly in Washington, are already grossly overpaid. These annual increases are only the tip of the iceberg. Positions are routinely overgraded and within-grade increases and awards are handed out like candy. If the average citizen went into almost any Federal office in Washington and saw what people do for the money they make, there would be a ground swell for Ron Paul.
-
43006
Hey, Jeremiah. "Get your head out". The war on terrorism is being fought as much by federal civilians, as by the military. My agency has been tasked to support the war fighters by going into harms way to administer contracts that the military could not adequately manage. The only difference is that when a federal civilian goes into harms way, his/her pay is taxed, there is no hazardous duty pay, and the long hours and weekend duty is accomplished at straight pay rates, not the time and a half that civilians are paid. If injured in a combat zone, the federal civilian does not have access to the services of the veterans hospital, that the military has. Add to this that in support of our country's warfighter, if the federal civilian is killed, more than likely his supplimental life insurance coverage is voided, and will not pay the benefit coverage to his/her family. Add further to this that when a civiliam federal worker goes overseas to assist the military warfighter, the workload he/she had in the states is distributed among those who remain, further straining the limited resources available to accomplish the necessary duties to get the product out the door and to the military. The federal civilian workforce is NOT asking for anything special or extra, just the same as the military receives, although we don't get subsidized housing, do not have our utility costs paid, and have to pay for our own medical/dental costs. Jeremiah, let me be one of many who tell you that "you don't have a clue."
-
43004
Or the president knows Congress will increase the budget when they get it to cause parity. .5% raise for all civilian labor is a big increase to the budget - now he can stick within the agreed budget he stated knowing Congress will be the one to break it.
When you know Congress will make make the budget larger for you - then pass the blame to them.
-
43001
The civilian workforce has sucked up way to many anemic pay raises in the last few years, 1.7%, 2.1%, 2.5%. It's now time for the military to implement a pay for performance plan, pay system. The military would have to swallow the expectation of 82 percent of the force getting a 3 out of a possible 5 performance rating. As is the current DoD expectation for the civilian workforce. The majority of military personel I work with barely perform at the 3 level. Also gone would be the longevity pay increases. So, most of them wouldn't get much of a pay raise under a pay for performance plan, nor see much pay growth with time, thus reducing government costs of a already overpaid military. A pay plan similar to NSPS, would level the paying very quickly.
-
43000
Again, there is no way that you can compare military personnel and civil service employee pay and try to equalize them. What really needs to be done is compare civil service pay with the private sector. Consider: military serve 24/7, 8760 hours per year, civilians serve 2080 hrs per year; military is subject to two set of laws (civil and UCMJ), civilians are not; military is subject to being re-located, uprooted to new locations usually without choice, civilians usually not; military is subject to hazardous duties, civilians usually not; military has no sick leave benefit, civilians do; military can not "quit" their jobs or service on short notice, civilians can quit any time they like; military is not paid overtime pay, most civilians are paid overtime; military personnel are limited by promotion boards and rigid pay charts that inhibit pay advances; civilians can seek other opportunities that result in higher pay. Congress should be using the 1994 Pay Comparability Act (?) or other laws to bring civil service pay up to the same level as the private sector and quit trying to compare militay personnel against civil service employees. Bottom line is to quit trying to compare and equalize miitary personnel and civilian employee pay systems. There is no comparison in what these two groups do.
-
42998
Jeremiah's belief that the president has taken a principaled position must also take into consideration for the payment of wages to contractors in no-bid contracts who work in Iraq. This would put the order of importance as;
contractors - military - federal employees.
-
42993
Let's not forget that in the warzone civilians still pay taxes on their earnings while the military are tax free. So I guess that means I'm impervious to all bullets and IEDs according to Bush. Maybe it's time for pay for performance in the executive branch of the government.
-
42980
The dictatorial Bush never liked the government employees nor he ever trusted them. His Texas oil magnate attitude shows in 8-yrs administration. During 80's when oil went down to $20/barrel, exploration stopped in Texas. I am sure the Bush family is doing fine at $90+. So why help the average gov't employee with higher raises. Yes, giving us non-taxable housing allowance would be just fine. They can keep the 2.9% raise. Based on locality the GS-13, equiv. to O-4 could get as much as $2000 per month allowance. For sure that would help the current recesion and housing problems.
-
42977
Comments about how the civilian part of the government is not under stress is not only uncalled for, but is untrue. I am a government shift worker that has to bounce between nights and days. This has been proven to shorten your life. Now add on the stress that comes with my position, where if I make a wrong desicion, people can be hurt, or worse yet, injured, and stress takes on a whole new meaning. Just because there are those of you sitting behind a desk, collecting a fat paycheck, dont think that conveys to the entire government. People in my field not only deserve parity, but are not compensated enough for their efforts. It takes more then just the military to keep this country safe. I am not trying to demean the military, because I think they do a hard job. But they also have housing provided to them, as well as food and medical, at extra cost, whereas the civilians do not. I was in the military myself and have done my time. I think congeress just needs to give a high enough raise to everyone to truely adjust for not only higher fuel costs, but also more expensive food and medical costs.
-
42974
Hey Jeremiah, what was the shrub's principaled position when he was in the National Guard? There are chairborne military also. There are civilians in the combat zone now also. In the combat you get combat pay or hazard pay. This is not part of that.
-
42966
This proposal takes potential Congressional action on a higher raise (say 3.9 or 4.0 vs 3.4) for all out of play. Instead, Congress will concentrate on parity of 3.4 for everyone. Had the administration proposed parity, Congress might have sought a higher raise as it did the previous year. Parity will win out but any raise greater than 3.4 won't.
-
42956
I could accept a 2.9 raise if civilians received a Housing allowance like the military.
-
42953
The President is taking a principled position. The military as a whole are under far more stress in fighting the War on Terrorism than the vast bulk of the civilian workforce, of which I'm a member. It's time for the "chairborne" to stop trying the military's coattails and recognize who the truly deserving are. NTEU's position was eminently predictable - and, dare I say, despicable and self-serving.
-
42937
Nice parting gift from the outgoing admininstration. Can't wait for a new admin...
-
42931
This proposed pay differential underscores this president's continuing devaluation of the contributions of the civilian workforce.
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.