GovernmentExecutive.com

Return to Article: Pay Day

• 53786
  

  In response to DOD Employee. He should be loving life. As noted in the article only non-bargaining unit employees are being subjected to this ridiculous paybanding. Mr. Ketter, the promise of 6% may sound wonderful, except you may receive nothing for three years. If you enter mgmt as a step 2, do you want to sit at no raise for three years, when those bargaining unit employees at the same grade level are receiving automatic WGIs. Oh, and don't forget that generally manager's performance is directly connected to those employees that are NOT paybanded. IRS has been operating under this disaster of a pay system for several years now. There is no one satisfied with the system and that 6% every 3-7 years you MIGHT get, does not make up for the 3 years you get nothing. This system does nothing to negate the good old boys club, golden child, or favorites from getting outstanding ratings. Nor is it helping new hires, since most are not hired into non-bargaining unit positions. At IRS it isn't even ALL non-bargaining unit, just management officials. Front line managers are the least desirable job in the Service, yet in some ways is the most critical.....just where we want all are C students to end up, since the A and B students are smart enough to figure out when they are being bent over the table.

  Paybanded at the IRS Posted July 9, 2008 3:10 PM
• 52981
  

  As someone who is in FSIS under the pilot, I can tell you right now...DLX is RIGHT! There is no way this Agency will be able to handle "pay for performance" due to the lack of performers in the Agnency. It is rife with folks that should've been fired from federal service YEARS AGO. Yes, at the leadership positions...check the record, the very people in charge of the pilot, placed the Agency in ADA by over spending the appropriations in FY 2004! Do you really think "we" as employees and (performers) can trust the leadership to implement such an important change to the HR system? I've only been here 2.5 yrs...and I'm already applying for new jobs due to the inadequate leadership at the top of this organization. Did I mention, the article is incorrect? The majority of the positions are NOT supervisory! (sigh!!)

  FSIS_Employee Posted June 24, 2008 7:29 AM
• 52247
  

  I would like to comment on a comment by John who asks where is NTEU. It is obvious that John is not an NTEU member or he would know that NTEU is constantly fighting these very issues. Perhaps John should put his money where his mouth is and make a contribution to TEPAC. NTEU cannot use the money paid by dues for legislative matters. Instead, contributions made by fellow employees to the political action committee are used for this. I am so tired of non-union members asking where is NTEU when all they do is sit by and watch as the dues paying members do all the work. Shame on you!

  Sue Posted June 12, 2008 8:23 PM
• 51948
  

  I must say, I'm a little disappointed in some of the comments here. The Core CPI has been around for a while now as a measure of price increases for products excluding food and energy. There is no one trying to pay less...etc. I would suggest it's out of date only because it's an older formula in a time where fuel prices and food prices didn't shoot up like they are now but that is due to the Pres and Congress pushing for ethanol in some ways. It's fine if you want to produce it but do it with other methods...and not corn! Corn is a staple of our food chain...cereals, poultry, cattle, pigs and now fuel?

  I would urge all of you to take stock in what we have as federal employees over our counterparts in the private sector who pay a lot more in health care than we do, don't get automatic raises like we do, and surely do not have a leave schedule and the number of holidays we do. I feel blessed in the job that I have within DoD. I'm not rich but with time and savings, I'll hopefully retire well....neither lavish nor poorly. There are more important things in life than just the almighty $

  DoD Employee Posted June 9, 2008 1:15 PM
• 51723
  

  Since January Feds have seen a 15% drop in real wages due to the bailout of millionaire mortgage speculators. While the private sector raises prices and goes on, federal employees face foreclosures and bankruptcy due to their own employer devaluing their pay. Expect to see a lot of secrets sold by desperate Feds with sensitive information. Federal employees need a retroactive 15% COLA now to restore their pay to agreed-upon levels in real terms. Where is the NTEU?

  John Posted June 4, 2008 9:07 AM
• 51290
  

  The government deliberately uses a bogus measure of cost of living increases by excluding the costs of food and energy because they are too "volatile" even though these are essentials of life. If anything feeding our families and heating our homes should count more. This formula saves the government money in COLA increases of all kinds while making people suffer while inflation erodes their income. Something to remember while gas and food prices rise by double digits and we feds have to fight and beg for 3.9.

  Vince Posted May 27, 2008 8:29 AM
• 51282
  

  I work for the USDA and I can tell you right now that they will screw this up like they do everything else....HR here can't even handle getting your SF-50's to you. There's no way they'll be able to handle this.

  DLX Posted May 27, 2008 7:36 AM
• 51166
  

  How are these percentages calculated? The costs of everything in my life have gone up double digits last year and again this year. 2.9%, 3.9% give me a break!If these raises are supposed to allow us to tread water, instead we are drowning.

  wdl Posted May 22, 2008 2:21 PM
• 51164
  

  NSPS, the share values from one pay pool to the next depending how many shares are paid out. The more shares given the less their value, some of the pay pool managers just won't turn down a 4-5, everyone suffers, because the share value is less. There is a myth that the pay outs have to be distributed between salary and award, there can be adjustments, like no salary all to award, yeah pay more tax. All employees thinking of making government a career would want the majority of their award to go to salary, to keep running up their high three, a cash award does not help the retirement base.

  Jim Posted May 22, 2008 2:10 PM
• 51144
  

  If you want to keep the GS system, then for Barack.

  Want the pay-for-performance, vote for McCain. That is just my thoughts

  Les Posted May 22, 2008 11:44 AM
• 51135
  

  2.9% is fair, that's what retirees COLA is and I think that as proud union members we should all be equal when it comes to pay raises. Look we get them right now for coming to work. Now if the gov't goes to Pay for Performance across the board the opportunity to get 6-9% are always there for those who want to strive for more. This is definitely on the right track and part of the American dream

  Dan ketter Posted May 22, 2008 10:52 AM
• 51127
  

  Concerned employee CSRS Yes states that FERS and CSRS employees will not leave because they are stuck. While this is true for CSRS, they get no retirement annuity, which is normally 58% or more of their salery, if they leave before 55 or 50 with VERA. The FERS annuity for 30 years at minimum retirement age is 30% and reguardless FERS employees can collect an annuity at age 62 if they have more than 5 years in government no matter when they leave. In short FERS does not have the "Golden Handcuffs" that CSRS provides. Personnaly, after receiving an NSPS rating in the top half of a 3 "Valued Employee" and loseing .8% per year vs the GS system, I will be leaveing at 20 years service and delaying my annuity. Under the GS system I had planned on staying an additional 4 years.

  Gem Posted May 22, 2008 10:25 AM
• 51123
  

  Quit complaining! At least we get some pay raise. If you don't like it, try the private sector. For 15 years my husband got no raises, no vacation pay, no holiday pay, no sick pay. If he didn't work, he didn't get paid.

  Rita Posted May 22, 2008 9:58 AM
• 51098
  

  Yes they post the federal register and will implement a pay for performance system. They take away the normal WGIs that keep seniority pay raises in effect. This usually qill quash or negate the good old boys club, golden child, favorites from getting they automatic outstanding ratings? Not, they say that new training will take away the disparity. This will enhance new hire acquisition. Not, this demoralizes the morale even farther. Will a 20 year or more FERS or CSRS employee leave the government due to this. Not, they are stuck. Do the actual comments count? Not, let's allow voluntary transfer to this program? Not, because they need the appropriations from the rest of the people to fund it. Let's grandfather all of us whom were hired under the GS schedule. Not, for the same reason. Most of us are stable career employees, we do not have new hires staying for a short period and jumping ship. That is the excuse for implementing this program. All of us need to computate our losses now. My potential loss to my retirement is approximately 15% and I am in the outstanding-superior rating class each year. Why should a brand new hire be possible to earn as much or more than I after 25 years of service to the public? Not, oops I am wrong on this one because OPM/ USDA new 5 year project states they can and will. Yes, we will pay for performers. Not, like in the past in USDA there has never ever been funding for substantial award allocation. $250 to $1000 if you were great or one of the chosen ones. So let's retool the award base and apply it to performance properly. Not, because no significant funding exists. But that is the way to pay for performance not by trashing our pay system and re-allocating our various modes of pay increases. It is amazing that the comment period is June 26, 2007 but the information is coming out in minute weekly form. This is to somehow restraint any actual comment period or interaction. Like it could have an effect anyway? Not, do I have a right to voice my concern? Yes, but will it actually have a trickle effect? Not, because I will still lose out in my retirement pay and in the end.

  Concerned employee CSRS YES Posted May 22, 2008 6:55 AM
• 51089
  

  A pay raise for fiscal 2009 of 3.9 percent would not match with the higher prices of food, clothing, and gasoline. Say a civilian, who currently earns $99,000 per year will receive a gross salary increase of 3,861 or $321.75 per month; after taxes, the increase will not even cover the gas money to drive to and from work. Imagine some who is currently getting paid less. Workers will end up paying the right to work rather getting paid to work.

  Vic Posted May 21, 2008 9:09 PM