GovernmentExecutive.com

Return to Article: Pay Puzzle

• 91816
  

  Michael, the intelligence did not connect Iraq the the 9/11 attacks. The intelligence related to whether Iraq had weapons of mass destruction. The entire world community got together, and nearly every country favored more inspections to test the intelligence. "W" decided to ignore 95% of the world community and rush headlong into an ill-considered war. So I definitely fault him for that debacle. Having now thrown trillions of dollars down the drain in matters that were none of our business, the circumstances are no longer what they were when cries for pay parity were in fashion. As for Democrats "playing politics," I would simply state that Republicans in glass houses shouldn't throw stones.

  Jayne Dough Posted November 11, 2009 7:33 PM
• 91809
  

  Thanks for clearing that up Jayne....

  Unfortunately, being President during such an event forces you to make tough decisions. Really tough ones without regard for politics. And they weren't uninformed - our intelligence was wrong. In fact, our intelligence was lacking in many ways, however, hind-sight is 20/20 isn't it? Exactly how long does it take for this to happen? Once "W" took office? So it was HIS fault right? Or, in the alternative, perhaps it started BEFORE he took office and things materialized that began BEFORE he became President?

  Look, there's much blame to go around. So you can't ignore something negative in one place but point out the exact same thing in another simply because you like one "idea" but dislike the "other."

  It's called "selective observation" and that's part of the problem.

  I call it as I see it and will continue to do so.

  Clinton signed the repeal of The Glass-Steagall Act for a nobel reason. He wanted "poor" people to own houses too. Well, sometimes the poor are poor for a reason. When Banks fail so do the ecomony.

  Botton line: Democrats are playing politics with our raise. If there was a Repulican President they would be screaming Pay Parity from the highest mountain top in order to make themselves look good. So why aren't they now?

  Michael Posted November 11, 2009 3:03 PM
• 91789
  

  Karl-- Interesting thing is that whatever else Ted Kennedy did during his lifetime or mistakes that he made, he was a champion for rights to the least of those among us. That is a rare thing for a politician of such wealth.

  P.S., "fought" should be "fault" in my previous post. I don't want the "Spelling Nazis" to come after me--LOL.

  Jayne Dough Posted November 11, 2009 10:46 AM
• 91784
  

  Michael-- It's "W's" fought that the country spent trillions it didn't have rushing into a war with a country that had nothing to do with 9/11, which has contributed to the U.S. dollar's worthlessness. He was simplistic in his approach to everything he did, and it hasn't served this country well.

  And when Congress places additional bills before President Obama that are watered down because of earnest attempts to gain conservative support that never materializes (because, as one Republican put it, they're looking to establish President Obama's "Waterloo"), it would be great if you would remember your basic premise that the incumbent President isn't always to blame for the junk that comes out of Washington.

  Jayne Dough Posted November 11, 2009 8:20 AM
• 91748
  

  I was unaware of any election last week. Here in Oregon we ALL vote by mail and my wife and I got nothing in the mail.

  One thing to consider is that most of the people in politics are lawyers and because of thier personal beliefs seem to just want the laws to work out good for the wealthy. Yes, they fit in that category, if not when elected, soon there after. It benifits them personally and then the other wealthy people and companies vote for them. I think it would really be best if they were paid on the same pay scale as the average civil servant and be limitted to one term.

  Karl Greulich Posted November 10, 2009 2:41 PM
• 91644
  

  How many of you voted last Tuesday?

  How many of you voted last year?

  How many of you are planning on voting next year?

  The only way to get rid of congress is to stop electing the bums back in for another term.

  People constantly complain about their elected officials but tell me they did not vote. Don't they realize that their vote has the power to do that.

  Are you fed up with the crap? Are you fed up with the double standards and double talk from Washington. VOTE THE BUMS OUT!

  I traveled to Connecticut last weekend and saw several signs stating "DUMP DODD" in reference to Senator Chris Dodd. We need more signs like this across the country stating "DUMP (insert elected official name here)". Think Congress would get the message?

  Ben Dover Posted November 10, 2009 5:47 AM
• 91623
  

  So let me get this straight Jayne....

  It's whoever happens to be President at the time should get the blame? So it's "W" fault that Clinton didn't take out OBL when clearly he could have, and it's "W" fault that Clinton signed the law on November 12, 1999 which created the banking pitfall.

  But you're right - "one size does not fit all" despite your attempt to do so by shoving a square peg through a round hole.

  Michael Posted November 9, 2009 5:35 PM
• 91588
  

  Regardless of spelling faux pas, I would like to point out that the "Federal employee in the south" has a point, even if it could have been put a little better. The current system is like a self-fulfilling prophesy. The high cost areas (job-wise, perishable goods-wise, whatever scale and measure you use) get more because it costs more to live there (thus driving up comparable earnings), and the more they get the more the competition drives up the comparable salaries; particularly for those leaving our services.

  This circle has been going on in many fields for a long time. As green-suiters, we saw the PX and commissary prices get jacked up a week before the new pay increases came out. And this has been happening for at least three decades that I know of.

  While, as often happens, I don't know the answer; but I DO know that this is a continuous circle that is pulling more of the annual wage increase (whether you call the ECI, locality, or COLA) away from the RUS. Combine this with the standard operating procedure that overrates the positions in these same areas (i.e. that what is a GS-9 in the RUS is a GS-11 in the high cost areas, GS-11 is equivalent to GS-12, etc.) and you begin to see the GREAT imbalance between these areas and, perhaps, that our current system is partially to blame. As a matter of fact, those who are more mobile out here often move to these areas for the rate increase and then move back for retirement.

  BLUF, bystanders like Skeeter, FedSmith, and Chris Edwards of the Cato Institute have a point on the high salaries earned by mid to upper management in these high cost areas; while we of the silent majority out in the hinterlands known as RUS, must cope with an ever diminishing slice of the pie.

  Can I have an "Amen"?!

  Tip off Posted November 9, 2009 12:18 PM
• 91514
  

  One person who was overpaid in salary and locality was Obama's wife (name escapes me). She got paid $300+ working a gov't job (VA) that was created and HANDED to her for political favors from Obama in Illinois. When she left, her job was abolished. Hmmmm, what does that tell you?

  Fire Obama and Congress Posted November 9, 2009 8:01 AM
• 91507
  

  Reaganite, the circumstances have changed since "W" was in office, because the policies he pursued ran this country and its economy into the ground. The criticisms that applied to actions taken by "W" do not necessarily apply to the same actions taken by President Obama, who is attempting to pull the country out of the recession that "W" helped to create. You know, one size doesn't fit all and there's nothing wrong with a little nuance in a position.

  Jayne Dough Posted November 9, 2009 6:48 AM
• 91498
  

  No puzzle. It's called hypocrisy.

  If the Republicans were in, then the Democrats would be screaming for Pay Parity just like they alwasys have. Since they now believe they have the Federal Employee/Union sewn up, and are in power, there is now no need to act like the Republicans are screwing us over.

  Politics as usual, and I think its time "we" start playing too, or we'll be facing the short end of the stick for the next 3 years unless we give them a wake-up call. And what's would that be? "They" actually do have to worry about our vote. The bottom line is our families so we will cross party lines to make sure that happens.

  Michael Posted November 8, 2009 9:55 AM
• 91479
  

  Wow.....beware potential posters....mispell a word on this site.... better be ready for a roasting.

  JPA Posted November 7, 2009 7:58 AM
• 91469
  

  Where are the representatives of the Unions (Ms Kelley and her ilk)complaining about a 2% increase. What deal did you make with the administration?? I wonder if the demise of NSPS helped the UNION Reps keep their mouths shut about the 2% raise!!!!!!!!!!!!!

  JP Posted November 6, 2009 7:47 PM
• 91423
  

  Locality pay is based upon comparisons to "like" jobs. Example: private nurses to V.A. nurses, Plumbers to Govt Plumbers, ect. Has nothing to do with the price of milk in your town. If a private nurse in NY is paid 100k a year but the VA only offered 65k, where do you think the qualified applicants will go? How about the substandard ones?

  If you live in Podunk middle of nowhere and your local nurses are only paid 30k a year, why would you think you are entitled to the same as the nurses in NY at 100k? Locality Pay was intended to help the government become more competitive in a local market. Has nothing to do with actually helping you make more money or give you a fair shake. Although, that is a nice side benefit.

  Fed in the SW Posted November 6, 2009 11:52 AM
• 91376
  

  I couldn't have said it better Danyak, and certainly spelled it better than "Federal employee in the south" ignorance is bliss.

  Rick Posted November 6, 2009 1:55 AM
• 91365
  

  Danyak, great come back... Just another cs who fails to understand his pay system. locality pay has nothing to do with the cost of goods housing or gas. So before you critique another poster understand how you get paid

  dan m ketter Posted November 5, 2009 8:42 PM
• 91352
  

  Since when has the Federal Salary Council and/or its legal foundation -- i.e. the 1990 Federal Employees Pay Comparability Act -- had any significant or even insignificant role in setting federal civil service salaries? Sorry, GovExOnline, but your lazy streak is showing, again. For random readers and web surfers this salary coverage must be compelling as surveiling growing grass. For all others, say for any reader who is an actual government executive or any agency level CFO, this coverage must be time wasting pap, redux a DC fairy tale. Any editing needed? Just minor, punch in the 2009 dates, and await the surprising, only for the naïve, outcomes. Surprise, surprise: the Council will crunch numbers and discover, objectively of course, using the Act mandated formulas, that the feds must receive a double digit increase. But, alas, GovExOnline will break as news, big headlines needed here: White House will NOT endorse the double digits, President will boldly exercise his authority under the Act to recommend a single digit. But wait, there's always more, yes I said more!!!! The final enacted civil service salary increase percent will equal the annual base salary military increase, without matching in dollar terms, the military benefit increase. Yes, I am perceptive, thank you. But, seriously readers, why doesn't GovExOnline do a bit of real reporting work - doesn't the vast army of Atlantic Media reporters have some contacts within the Congressional budget and appropriations staffs? Wow these guys leak regular to the big time press- Wash Post, NY Times, etc. Can't GovEx break a story from union sources, gosh maybe an intentional leak, jeepers what a concept? Maybe a revelation on just what per cent will satisfy the President's new best friends? But, hey, my bad for being so cranky. After all, the GovExOnline newsletter is a freebie, so I guess readers are getting all the info they don't pay for. For anyone hungry for non-tourist info, best upgrade to the pay pubs of Atlantic Media, so meaty. It's the iron law of old DC, you get what you pay for. Plus ca change.

  Concerned Retiree Posted November 5, 2009 4:40 PM
• 91347
  

  Reaganite said it best... The union always supports the WRONG guy when it comes to our pay...

  Motoman Posted November 5, 2009 3:34 PM
• 91335
  

  Come on Ms. Kelley, where's the outrage? Do you remember your comments when "W" was in office and recommended the military pay increase be greater than the civilian pay increase? And why aren't you attacking B.O. for his paltry 2 percent pay increase when you excoriated the former president for pay increases that were greater? Where's the vitriol concerning the lack of pay parity with the private sector? Where's the "love" for the constituency you supposedly represent?

  Oh wait a minute, I missed that last part...your role hasn't changed but the circumstances have. Translation: You're more than willing to accept less for your consituency now that your guy is president. I'm sure you will return to business as usual when another Republican is elected president.

  Ms. Kelley, your silence is deafening in what it teaches us about you and the unions. Here's "change you can believe in" people!!

  Reaganite Posted November 5, 2009 1:50 PM
• 91328
  

  Federal Employee in the south,

  I'm not sure a dimbulb like yourself will understand this, but I'll try.... a dollar will buy more for you where you live than it will for those living in major cities (DC,NYC,etc). That is why locality pay exists. Then again, you spell college as "collage", you "have credit card", and spell paid as "payed". My guess is that you get overpaid.... caveman.

  Danyak Posted November 5, 2009 1:20 PM
• 91298
  

  " and have credit card, ..... why should we be payed any less."

  Perhaps because you can't spell?

  John Snith Posted November 5, 2009 10:21 AM
• 91274
  

  The employees that are in what you call locality based pay areas should get the same pay increase as every one else. We pay taxes, send our children to collage,own homes and have credit card,just like the rest of the world. why should we be payed any less?

  Federal employee in the south Posted November 5, 2009 9:01 AM
• 91257
  

  The problem is there is more focus in DC on benefits to those that don't work or refuse to contribute (takers and moochers (illegals included))to the economy and well being of this country. Why worry about citizens that work hard, lets worry about those on the dole and those taking jobs from citizens who would work, and want to work for a fair wage.

  RJ Posted November 5, 2009 7:39 AM