GovernmentExecutive.com

Return to Article: OPM sets new funding mechanism for executive boards

• 45238
  

  "Federal retirees should not be allowed to come back to work because we need new, younger and more educated people who can make changes and be innovative, not more of the same old stuff!"

  Sarah, I don't know how long you have been a Fed, but the bureaucracy does not lend itself to innovation and change. I was a sparkly-eyed new fed 20 years ago, and since it is in my nature to work smarter, I still try but for the most part the intractable monolith that is the Federal government has burned me out. Please don't make prejudicial generalizatons, not all older feds are uneducated (I have a masters degree)dinosaurs weho refuse to change. Heck, I even pay all my bills online!

  The reason things don't change much in the government is because that's the nature of the beast. it has nothing to do with the age of the employees. You will see that one day, unless you think you already have all the wisdom you will ever acquire.

  TIRED OF AGEISM Posted March 6, 2008 2:19 PM
• 45048
  

  Forget about dual compensation waivers. Federal retirees should not be allowed to come back to work because we need new, younger and more educated people who can make changes and be innovative, not more of the same old stuff!

  Sarah Posted March 5, 2008 9:46 AM
• 44895
  

  It is interesting that these brain trusts in charge simply do not get it. The GM vs. GS comparison is complete horse hockey.

  Avis Posted March 4, 2008 7:17 AM
• 44873
  

  Many years ago, a revered political science professor told me that Dr. Samuel Johnson had it wrong when he said that the last refuge of scoundrels was patriotism. No, he argued, the real scoundrels are those who resort to ad hominem bellowing when they can't deal with or credibly refute an opponent's arguments. The ranting of Mr. Robespierre is a case in point. The sham outrage and figurative foaming at the mouth all betray the classic symptoms of a disputant who is pushed into a corner and can only resort to innuendo and wild allegations in a desperate attempt to obfuscate and divert attention from an opponent's rational contentions. If he is representative of the so-called voices of change coming out of one of the major parties in this year's elections, it displays the intellectual poverty of the entire cynical project. God help us all.

  Jeremiah Posted March 3, 2008 6:40 PM
• 44797
  

  Director Springer's comparison of a GM retiree to a Government retiree, is rediculous. The Government employee can get hired by GM keeping retirement and getting full pay from GM exactly the same as in the case she cites. What she doesn't say is that if the GM retiree was rehired back at GM, they WOULD NOT pay both retirement AND full pay. Having Federal employees come back at full pay and full retirement makes no sense. If this was enacted, everyone would retire as soon as eligible,, get full retirement and full pay. Why not just say when you reach retirement eligibility, you get a 150% pay increase. Do we have an endless supply of money? Director Springer's proposal simply makes no sense and her analogy to GM was rediculous.

  Dan Diviney Posted March 3, 2008 8:41 AM
• 44761
  

  You "sound more like a union leader?" Give me a break! The ONLY reason you and your Republican dirt-bag corporatist cohorts want to rehire retired federal employees who are already receiving a pension and allow them to receive additional compensation - with no offset -- is because you want to be able to fill jobs intended to be permanent, full-time FTEs with a series of part-time, term-limited employees so you don't have to start a new employee in the Federal benefits system! Funny how you always fail to mention that these people would be re-hired for only a limited time, would accrue no additional value in their pensions, and would not be able to pay FEHB premiums on a pre-tax basis. This is yet another example of a Republican ruse to mask the real intentions behind your devious attempt to destroy middle class America. It's one more facet of the Republican race to the bottom, where we avoid providing good-paying, stable jobs with benefits to young workers, thereby avoiding any future obligations to the furture retirees of America. In short, your purported motives are as disingenuous as your purported disbelief. But, fear not, you will not need to worry about your job frustrations for much longer.

  Max Robespierre Posted March 1, 2008 11:38 PM