GovernmentExecutive.com

Return to Article: Freshman lawmaker champions telework, pay parity for feds

• 77722
  

  I think the comparisons between Feds and Military Service members is like comparing apples to organges. For example, one can't expect a 23 year old enlisted service member to make the same pay to that of a 23 year old Aerospace Engineer with a Masters Degree who is hired to work/design Weapons System or major defense systems. Also, pitting feds and service members against each other, to the point of comparing and contrasting who "deserves" something more than others, is not fair.

  Without service members our country goes un-protected. Without fed's our service members go unprotected, hence so does our country. The two worlds are not independent of each other. When a service member shows up to basic training, they show up with running water, they show up with uniforms, they show up with weapons/artillery available, they show up facilities already constructed and ready for use, they show up to be trained on pre-existing systems, they show up and beds are available to sleep in and barracks built to house them, and etc.... None of these are possible without Feds. Sure the work of service members involves extreme risks, that they signed up to take, and should be commended. But let's not get into the debates on who is more deserving of pay raise than others, because Service Members could not successfully perform their duties without Feds.

  I believe in paying people in accordance with the value (knowledge, skills and abilities) they bring to the table. I think this pay parity issue is a great debate, but the real focus should be on fixing the federal pay system and institutionalizing flexible work schedules (teleworking, and alternative work schedules).

  TB Posted May 17, 2009 2:50 AM
• 77257
  

  Finance guy did you forget when civilians deploy they get an additional 60% of their wages??Far exceeding what the grunts on the ground receive even though only their lives are at risk

  dan ketter Posted May 11, 2009 11:28 AM
• 77235
  

  Dan...you must've forgotten about the entitlements you get when your deployed such as Combat Zone Tax Exclusion, Hazardous Duty Pay, Family Separation Pay, etc., etc.

  Finance Guy Posted May 11, 2009 8:23 AM
• 77222
  

  As of this date, my DoD agency has been totally mum on this. The only way agencies are going to allow telework with DoD is if OPM makes them do it.

  Kathy Posted May 11, 2009 7:38 AM
• 77086
  

  I was glad to hear Berry's comments on the new OPM telework policy. So, what's the delay? What are we waiting? It is time that the new telework policy be implemented and not just talked about. Too many govt. agencies, e.g., DoD wil drag their feet as long as they can. Let's make this a top priority and do more than talk about it. I for one am tired of driving over 100 miles a day becasue my manager doens't believe in telework!!

  Steven Posted May 7, 2009 2:07 PM
• 76950
  

  Please extend the telework program to managers. It appears "telework" is still not encouraged in government by all ranks, although the benefits have been continually recognized and the reduction of the carbon foot print is obvious. Let's get everyone on board!! Government employees are dedicted intelligent public servants attempting to serve their country.

  Betty Posted May 6, 2009 12:28 PM
• 76937
  

  As usual we always have someone misinformed about military pay and benefits. Yes the military gets a tax free housing allowance but upon retirement that $$ isn't part of their calculation. If you would like retirement parity than Congress should do away with including locality pay to be fair. As to the comment that since our ranks are equal we should receive the same pay, 1st off a GS rate is never equivalent to a military rank. Land Crabs are always that so there is no reason to try and raise your status by hitching your job to a military rank. Second military work a tremendous amount of overtime its expected but its never compensated are you willing to do that as well? Your daughter serving in Iraq receives a bonus of 60% of her pay while all a GI gets is a tax free check up to $75K so even in a dangerous area CS are still paid better. As Gen Hito said "be happy in your work"

  dan ketter Posted May 6, 2009 11:46 AM
• 76920
  

  Even though the basic pay for civilians and military could be the same, there are still big differences. One writer mentioned having financial losses each time he had to move or sell a home as a military member. Federal civilians experience this, as well. I know I have. What he neglected to state is that military members get a tax-free housing allowance (based on rank) which civilians do not receive. I believe military members also get a tax-free clothing allowance (for uniforms); there is no such thing for a civilian. Many civilians do serve overseas in danger zones. Example: my federally employed civilian daughter is in Iraq for a year. Military and civilians in danger zones get extra pay (danger pay) - over and above their basic pay. I know many military members who have never been in a danger zone or even served overseas. Many of them are in jobs that are not stressful. Why should his/her pay be more than mine when our "ranks" are equal?

  jfb Posted May 6, 2009 10:16 AM
• 76918
  

  I would be happy if I could just work 4, ten hour days per week. It would reduce traffic, pollution, save my sick leave, etc.

  Dale Posted May 6, 2009 10:00 AM
• 76901
  

  When will they allow us here to do the telework. We as assistants do most all our work on the computer.

  We need to have the telework program and be allowed to work from home to eliminate a lot of travel time and polution in the metropoliton Atlanta, Ga area.

  Thanks for helping get up into the program.

  Please use location only if you use this coment.

  Thanks

  Thelma McClure Posted May 6, 2009 8:49 AM
• 76898
  

  This comment is on the concept of pay parity between the military and the federal civilian workforces. My opinion: Ensuring that both the military and the federal workforces receive the same annual pay increase does NOT equate to pay parity. Having served as both a soldier and a fed, I can assure you that there are vastly more factors than the annual pay raise that enter into the equation. In my thirty-year military career, the military relocated me a total of seventeen times. Each time I moved, I took out-of-pocket financial losses. Each of the three times I purchased a home with the idea of having this equity upon my retirement, I was severely burned by the market and the current economic realities of the moment which prevented me from being able to hang onto my house or sell it for a profit. Compare that with my civilian neighbors where I currently live, who have had thirty years to build up home equity or pay for their homes if they chose to do so. The value of a paid-up house is not factored in to the equation. Next, although both feds and military serve their nation, with the exception of certain fields with three-lettered agencies, firefighters and police, most feds do not willingly commit to risking being called upon to make the supreme sacrifice if that is required to protect our nation and our way of life. You simply cannot say that comparable work deserves comparable pay--military service deserves a premium for this risk factor. This risk factor is already compensated for within the federal workforce. I DO agree that feds should be adequately compensated such that the federal workforce is able to attract and retain energetic, talented, resourceful and dedicated individuals. But, I DO NOT believe that this means the federal workforce should have the expectation that their annual pay increase will match, stride for stride, year after year, that of their military brethren.

  Have Seen it From Both Perspectives Posted May 6, 2009 8:37 AM
• 76873
  

  I have had the opportunity to participate in the telework program while I was recovering from back sugery. The results were outstanding, I got more accomplished because there were no distraction. My superiors stated that my telework was sucessful. With the economy and high gas prices, cost of facilities and their support cost, it would make good business since. In the event I was needed at my duty location I could be there in 30 minutes

  David B. Williamson Posted May 6, 2009 7:18 AM
• 76868
  

  what about having to take work home in order to telecommute? If you deal with classified information, that could be very difficult. And, the other information is basically all, "for official use only". Could we take that work home to do our job?

  greg Posted May 6, 2009 6:27 AM