Newsvine
  • Welcome
  • Help
  • Report Bug
  • Conversation Tracker
  • Your Column
  • Replies
  • Friends
Type Comments Since You Last CheckedArticle Source Last Checked Stop Tracking All Clear Tracking All
Advertise | AdChoices
Log In | Register
Close the Login Panel
Existing users log in below. New users please register for a free account.

New Users:

Existing Users:

E-Mail:
Password:
Forgot Password?
Please enter the e-mail address or domain name you registered with:
E-Mail/Domain:
Back to Login
Log Out
  • Top News
  • Local News
  • World
  • U.S.
  • Sports
  • Politics
  • Tech
  • Entertainment
  • Science
  • Business
  • Health
  • Odd News
  • More
    • Arts
    • Education
    • Environment
    • Fashion
    • History
    • Home & Garden
    • Not News
    • Religion
    • Travel
What is Newsvine?

Updated continuously by citizens like you, Newsvine is an instant reflection of what the world is talking about at any given moment.

Get a Free Account
Help
Fun Stuff
  • Your Clippings
  • Leaderboard
  • E-Mail Alerts
  • Top of the Vine
  • Newsvine Live
  • Newsvine Archives
  • The Greenhouse
  • Recommended Articles
  • Wall of Vineness
Put a Seed Newsvine link on your own site

Congress targets federal workers for savings

Tue Feb 21, 2012 2:31 AM EST
politics, us, congress, social-security, workers, federal-workers
Jim Abrams, Associated Press
Advertise | AdChoices

WASHINGTON — Federal workers were $15 billion losers as Congress looked for ways to pay for parts of the just-passed legislation to extend the payroll tax cut and federal unemployment benefits through the end of the year.

Their advocates are crying foul, saying two consecutive years of seeing their pay frozen means the nation's 2 million civil servants already have contributed more than $60 billion to reducing government costs. Republicans, led by their aggressive freshman class, say federal employees, with their generally secure jobs and benefits, can do more. They have proposed several bills to make that happen.

The White House also is asking federal employees to pitch in more for their retirement plans.

Under the bill passed Friday, about half of the $30 billion cost of extending unemployment benefits will be made up by requiring newly hired federal workers to pay an additional 2.3 percent of their salaries for their pensions. Currently they pay 0.8 percent.

Combined with other bills House Republicans have proposed to further limit federal wages and benefits, the total cost to civil servants could be $134 billion over the next decade, said House Democratic Whip Steny Hoyer of Maryland.

"The ongoing efforts to target federal workers will substantially undermine our ability to recruit and retain the quality of people we need," said Hoyer, whose district encompassing some of the Washington suburbs is home to thousands of government employees.

Unions representing federal workers were equally upset.

"It is unreasonable to turn to this dedicated workforce yet again while shielding those who are not paying their share," said Colleen M. Kelley, president of the National Treasury Employees Union.

"I don't know how cutting our retirement puts anybody back to work," said John Gage, president of the American Federation of Government Employees. "What are we, an ATM machine?"

Republicans in December proposed an even more ambitious plan to pay for part of the payroll tax and jobless benefit bill by freezing government workers' pay a third consecutive year and reducing pension benefits in addition to raising their retirement plan contributions.

The Senate wouldn't go along, but in the more recent round of negotiations the House GOP again asked for all federal workers to pay more for their retirements. Democrats objected, and in the end they settled for higher contributions only from newly hired employees.

But that's not the end of it. Earlier this month, the House passed separate legislation, offered by freshman GOP Rep. Sean Duffy of Wisconsin, to keep the pay freeze in effect for a third year in 2013 and also deny members of Congress a salary hike. Democrats complained but, not wanting to be seen as supporting a pay raise for themselves, 72 voted for the bill and it passed 309-117.

The House is also considering a bill that would require federal workers and members of Congress to contribute a total of 1.5 percent more to their pensions over three years and readjust how annuities are calculated for new hires. That bill, estimated to save more than $40 billion, also eliminates a Social Security supplemental income program for those eligible to retire before age 62.

The NTEU, the largest independent union of federal workers, says the increased pension contribution would boost the annual payment for a worker earning $50,000 a year from $400 to $1,150.

In introducing the bill, freshman Rep. Dennis Ross, R-Fla., said people are "rightfully outraged by the pension benefits guaranteed to a bloated federal workforce."

Ross wants to see savings from his bill go to deficit reduction, but the current plan is to use it to help pay for a $260 billion bill to finance highway construction and transit programs over the next five years.

Freshman Rep. Martha Roby, R-Ala., has also introduced a bill to stop what she called a gimmick to dodge the pay freeze. Her bill would suspend through the end of this year within-grade step increases, wherein many employees can get raises of 2 percent or 3 percent every one to three years upon the recommendation of their bosses. These increases, not covered in the pay freeze, cost about $1 billion a year, Roby said.

While most of the action has been in the House, a group of Senate Republicans has proposed extending the federal tax freeze for two more years and reducing the size of the government workforce by 5 percent as one way to help avoid automatic Defense Department budget cuts passed by Congress last summer and due to take effect in 2013. All these proposals will face resistance in the Democratic-controlled Senate.

Republicans are not alone in trying to tap the federal workforce for savings. The White House, in its budget proposal for 2013, is calling for a 1.2 percent increase in federal employee contributions to their pension plans. That would reduce the government's share by $27 billion over the next decade.

But the White House also favors giving federal workers a 0.5 percent pay raise in 2013. "A permanent pay freeze is neither sustainable nor desirable," it said.

An AP-CNBC poll taken in November 2010 found that many agree that the federal workforce is too big and can be a source of savings. Some 62 percent said they favored reducing the number of federal workers as a means of shrinking the federal deficit, and 59 percent supported a federal wage freeze.

Republicans base many of their arguments on a recently published report by the Congressional Budget Office that found that the average federal worker earns about 2 percent more than a comparable private sector worker, and that, when pension and health benefits are factored in, federal compensation is 16 percent greater. Federal unions say the report overstates the advantages of federal workers.

The CBO reported wide variances depending on worker education levels. Federal civilian workers with no more than a high school education earned about 21 percent more, and their benefits were 72 percent higher, than their private-sector counterparts. But federal workers with a professional degree or doctorate earned about 23 percent less.

The government spends about $200 billion a year to compensate the 2.3 million federal civilian employees, including about $80 billion for civilian personnel working in the Defense Department.

The CBO noted that the size of the federal workforce has remained at about 2 million over the past 30 years, and that its share of the total U.S. workforce has declined, from 2.3 percent in 1980 to 1.7 percent in 2010.

© 2012 The Associated Press. All rights reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten or redistributed.
  • Enjoy this article? Help vote it up the 'Vine.

Back To Top | Front Page

Published to:

  • Jim Abrams's Column, All of Newsvine
  • Groups: none
  • Regions: United States , Washington DC
  • Public Discussion (12)
MeanGene-3334839

Waaah Waaah Waaaah go the lousy unions. It's about time these union workers got punished and their unions busted.

They're actually crying about paying a lousy 0.8% towards their HUMONGOUS pensions? Are you kidding me? These goofballs work for 20 years, pay a lousy $400 per year towards their pension, and retire by the age of 45 making more on their pension than they ever did working for a living.

These Unions don't want anybody to know what a sweetheart deal they've got going because anybody taking so much as a glance at their scam wouldn't feel a bit of sympathy for their so-called "pain".

You could freeze Federal Government pay for a hundred years and it would still be a sweeter deal than the private sector gets.

  • 2 votes
Reply#1 - Tue Feb 21, 2012 4:34 AM EST
Darryl Blackshear

Anything to not get the rich to pay their fair Shae right? Any average worker is fair game i guess. As long as their precious rich are protected! This is a sad sorry excuse for a party!!!!!!

    #1.1 - Tue Feb 21, 2012 7:58 AM EST
    Lynn-410457

    MeanGene, My answer to you is where are your facts? They aren't there with your assertion that govt. workers make more than pvt. sector workers. Why? Because I suspect you didn't research it and it is more than likely blatantly untrue. I already know what your response will be, so I have saved myself the time and energy, by putting you on ignore.

    • 2 votes
    #1.2 - Tue Feb 21, 2012 9:09 AM EST
    Nancy-607557

    MeanGene - there are far more federal workers that fall into the category of having more education and making 23% less than their private counterparts. My husband is a retired federal worker with a college degree plus more professional training. We pay more than $700.00 per month for our health insurance and he contributed 8% of his salary for retirement purposes.

    I don't know where you got your figures but my husband worked for the federal government for 30 years. He was in air traffic safety and there were many nights he was called out during the night because of a storm to fix equipment. Your facts are false and I have no idea where you got them but they are not true.

    Military retirement is something I know nothing about but I expect you don't either. There is no federal employee that puts in only $400 per year on their retirement and retires at age 45.

      #1.3 - Tue Feb 21, 2012 10:52 AM EST
      Reply
      fstwarrior

      Wow - are you lacking in reality.

      • 2 votes
      Reply#2 - Tue Feb 21, 2012 6:53 AM EST
      newsguru

      Agree, what planet is that great job on?

      The CBO reported wide variances depending on worker education levels. Federal civilian workers with no more than a high school education earned about 21 percent more... than their private-sector counterparts. But federal workers with a professional degree or doctorate earned about 23 percent less.

      If you haven't checked usajobs.gov in a while, you'd see the vast majority require advanced degrees.

      • 1 vote
      #2.1 - Tue Feb 21, 2012 7:20 AM EST
      Idj

      The headline is mis-leading! it is the regressive Republicans in Congress targeting the workers; Federal,State,Local and private...But they have NO problem holding the Country hostage in oder to deny a 0.05% tax hike on Billionaires? Go figure...

      This only makes sense to low information Teabaggers, as they await their Social Security checks. They've taken the GOP's bait,hook,line and sinker!

      • 1 vote
      #2.2 - Tue Feb 21, 2012 7:22 AM EST
      Reply
      BeMyJellyfish

      I don't think the Federal employees have much to complain about. Requiring an increase in their pension contribution? So what? They should consider themselves lucky that they have a decent paying, secure job that has a pension & benefits program.

        Reply#3 - Tue Feb 21, 2012 8:15 AM EST
        Chief CRD

        Congress targets federal workers for savings

        And the hits just keep on coming...

        • 1 vote
        Reply#4 - Tue Feb 21, 2012 8:24 AM EST
        Baron Brian

        Just goes to show, job security is dead---across the board.

        Decent pay, pensions and benefits are likely not far behind.

        • 2 votes
        Reply#5 - Tue Feb 21, 2012 9:41 AM EST
        Chief CRD

        We have "pro" and "con," and we have "progress," for moving forward - guess what's opposite of progress?

        • 2 votes
        Reply#6 - Tue Feb 21, 2012 12:00 PM EST
        Idj

        Regress! That's why I refer to them as regressives. They have perfected Michael Jackson's infamous ' MOON WALK' dance...

        • 1 vote
        #6.1 - Tue Feb 21, 2012 6:31 PM EST
        Reply
        Leave a Comment:
        You're in Easy Mode. If you prefer, you can use XHTML Mode instead.
        You're in XHTML Mode. If you prefer, you can use Easy Mode instead.
        (XHTML tags allowed - a,b,blockquote,br,code,dd,dl,dt,del,em,h2,h3,h4,i,ins,li,ol,p,pre,q,strong,ul)
        Newsvine Privacy Statement
        As a new user, you may notice a few temporary content restrictions. Click here for more info.
        FUN STUFF:
        • Leaderboard |
        • E-Mail Alerts |
        • Top of the Vine |
        • Newsvine Live |
        • Newsvine Archives |
        • The Greenhouse
        COMPANY STUFF:
        • Code of Honor |
        • Company Info |
        • Contact Us |
        • Jobs |
        • User Agreement |
        • Privacy Policy |
        • About our ads
        LEGAL STUFF:
        • © 2005-2012 Newsvine, Inc. |
        • Newsvine® is a registered trademark of Newsvine, Inc. |
        • Newsvine is a property of msnbc.com