View Full Version : Obama Orders Pay Raise for Biden, Members of Congress, Federal Workers
Snaquebite
12-29-2012, 08:21
President Barack Obama issued an executive order to end the pay freeze on federal employees, in effect giving some federal workers a raise. One federal worker now to receive a pay increase is Vice President Joe Biden.
According to disclosure forms, Biden made a cool $225,521 last year. After the pay increase, he'll now make $231,900 per year.
Members of Congress, from the House and Senate, also will receive a little bump, as their annual salary will go from $174,000 to 174,900. Leadership in Congress, including the speaker of the House, will likewise get an increase.
Here's the list of new wages, as attached to President Obama's executive order:
http://m.weeklystandard.com/blogs/obama-orders-raise-biden-members-congress-federal-workers_692223.html
Must be because of the great job they're doing. :confused:
How odd is it that these CAREER politicians that seem to have incomes that come in UNDER the POTUS magic 250,000 a year 'evil rich guy' water mark, yet, by any stretch of research you can easily see how these folks are some of the richest folks in the country...
...while doing such hard work on such a meager salary.
How odd is it that these CAREER politicians that seem to have incomes that come in UNDER the POTUS magic 250,000 a year 'evil rich guy' water mark, yet, by any stretch of research you can easily see how these folks are some of the richest folks in the country...
...while doing such hard work on such a meager salary.
While the right hand is accepting their salary, the left hand is under the table accepting bribes from lobbyists.
The Reaper
12-29-2012, 11:30
This 0.5% raise is the first raise for Federal civilian employees in three years.
Government civil service pay is not what most people think it is, anymore than military pay is.
TR
I haven't had a raise in six years. Just sayin'.
We wouldn't want to loose such quality employees now would we?
How odd is it that these CAREER politicians that seem to have incomes that come in UNDER the POTUS magic 250,000 a year 'evil rich guy' water mark, yet, by any stretch of research you can easily see how these folks are some of the richest folks in the country...
...while doing such hard work on such a meager salary.
Until recently there were no restrictions on insider trading in Congress. They finally stopped them. But their families can invest in anything still. Even their Wife. So basically they still insider trade. They lagally do what Martha Stewart went to jail for.
These discussions about the salary of government workers typically generates more heat than light in my humble opinion. The fact that all federal workers are getting a raise is symptomatic of a real problem. Having said that, if the federal government fails to offer a raise, many parts of the Federal government will degrade in service.
As an example: At the government run mental hospital where I work many of the doctors don't have MD licenses. Or rather, all they have is temporary ones until they can pass the real test. These temporary licenses have time limit after which they expire. What a lot of our "doctors" do is travel from state to state using these temporary licenses because they can't pass there real one. Apparently there is some kind of period after which they can re-acquire a temporary license because the same doctors keep coming back through on this revolving door system.
Now none of these quacks deserves to be paid one red cent in my humble opinion. But at the same time, the State desperately needs better quality doctors in its mental hospitals if it even wants to have the pretense of offering medical care to the people in its care. The few competent doctors we have really do make a difference.
The competent doctors don't work here for the money (they could make a lot more elsewhere). They generally say they take a state job because they have paid off their school loans and they want to spend more time with their family. The problem is that there is not enough doctors in the world willing to give up 50 grand to spend more time with their family to fully staff a hospital. And to make maters worse, some of the ones who are willing to give up that kind of money for more time with their family leave because they can't stomach the kinds of things that the revolving door quacks do.
The bottom line is that we need to pay the doctors more so that we can attract quality doctors and everyone on up to the commissioner knows it. Moreover, the money needed to pay the doctors more is small change compared to the overall budget. The problem is that the way the state is set up you can't give the doctors more money with out giving just about everybody a raise.
I could give you countless examples of the same type of problem. There are a lot of key positions that can not be filled with quality people because the state does not pay enough. And there are a lot of jobs where the state pays plenty. The problem is the government is incapable of making the distinction when it comes to raises. And so is most of the public. To them, if 51% of the workers are overpaid, they are all overpaid and there is no real public pressure to come up with a better system of paying public employees. Most people just want to pay them all less if they even think about the issue.
Until recently there were no restrictions on insider trading in Congress. They finally stopped them. But their families can invest in anything still. Even their Wife. So basically they still insider trade. They legally do what Martha Stewart went to jail for.
...corruption sucks most when you aren't getting your beak wet!
I also love how they like to tell us they WE need to tighten OUR belts because of the hard times that THEY caused mismanaging the public coffers. On the bright side, the US is governed by some of the best politicians that money can buy, so at least we have that on our side.
Good for them!! This administration has to keep the backbone of this new, evil empire that it's developing strong-grow "it" even bigger!:mad:
Badger52
12-29-2012, 21:14
I could be wrong but thought Congress is supposed to set that pay and do it in such a way that it cannot take effect (for legislators or other elected officials) until at least the next term. This use of an Executive Order for other than executive branch civil service (who've been frozen since he volunteered them as the usual example a POTUS uses to show "we here are sacrificing too") sounds kind of hinky as applied to elected officials.
:rolleyes:
In my mind they'd all be relying on their investment angles to live because they shouldn't draw a dime of salary for "failure to achieve even the most basic performance objectives for which they were hired."
a technicallity, but I believe Martha went to prison for lying to a grand jury. further proof the cover up is as likely to get you as the crime.
Streck-Fu
12-30-2012, 09:06
This 0.5% raise is the first raise for Federal civilian employees in three years.
Government civil service pay is not what most people think it is, anymore than military pay is.
TR
I disagree with regard to most civil service salaries. While most of the salaries do not seem all that high on paper, the government is putting younger new highers in much higher pay grades than before.
Newly graduated from college engineers, logisticians, etc are being hired as GS-10 with GS-11 in year or two and GS-12 within 5 years or so. GS-11 used to be a management grade but has become a working grade over the last several years.
Combined with their retirement benefits (as they exist now) they are paid at a fairly higher level than private sector employed counterparts.
http://m.weeklystandard.com/blogs/obama-orders-raise-biden-members-congress-federal-workers_692223.html
Members of Congress, from the House and Senate, also will receive a little bump, as their annual salary will go from $174,000 to 174,900. Leadership in Congress, including the speaker of the House, will likewise get an increase.
Must be because of the great job they're doing. :confused:
Agree Sir! Hey Congress....the extra $900 means now you really, really are going to get us off the fiscal cliff...right?:rolleyes:
Ay, yi yi!:eek:
Holly
This 0.5% raise is the first raise for Federal civilian employees in three years.
Government civil service pay is not what most people think it is, anymore than military pay is.
TR
I remember when people in the private sector were making all the bucks. Now the private sector sucks for jobs. So Govt. workers are considered pampered and over paid. It's a well deserved pay raise. How the politicians who have made millions in insider trading accepted their raises........doesn't surprise me one bit.
In the Documentary that covered this and 60 Minutes. There are teams of people that try to monitor what family members of congress do with their stocks. They do this to try and predict what the market is going to do. THATS HOW MUCH INFORMATION THEY HAVE!
This is the only reason there are Anti Gun Politicians. Guns are a threat to the power they hold. I believe the doc is called Inside Job. There are so many of them I can't keep track. But 60 Minutes did a whole story on this also about a year ago.
Insiders: The road to the STOCK act (http://www.cbsnews.com/video/watch/?id=7411992n) 15+ min.
I disagree with regard to most civil service salaries. While most of the salaries do not seem all that high on paper, the government is putting younger new highers in much higher pay grades than before.
Newly graduated from college engineers, logisticians, etc are being hired as GS-10 with GS-11 in year or two and GS-12 within 5 years or so. GS-11 used to be a management grade but has become a working grade over the last several years.
Combined with their retirement benefits (as they exist now) they are paid at a fairly higher level than private sector employed counterparts.
Well, according to the 2012 GS pay tables, a GS-10 in a "rest of US" locality earns $52,252. According to Salary.com, a mechanical engineer I (starting position) earns an average of $60,839, an electrical engineer I earns $61,683, an environmental engineer earns $54,452, a warehouse manager earns $68,048 and a systems administrator I earns $52,695. I guess I'm not seeing the same pay disparity issue that you see. I also wonder how these GS-10 positions are being converted to -11s and -12s. GS workers generally get "step" raises, not level promotions, unless you meant they're moving into a new, higher position, in which case I'd have to wonder why there's such high turnover in the higher positions.
In the interest of full disclosure, I'm a relatively new GS employee, after doing 15 years as a defense contractor. I still believe contractors are a less expensive (in the long run) alternative to the government, however.
The Reaper
12-30-2012, 16:38
I disagree with regard to most civil service salaries. While most of the salaries do not seem all that high on paper, the government is putting younger new highers in much higher pay grades than before.
Newly graduated from college engineers, logisticians, etc are being hired as GS-10 with GS-11 in year or two and GS-12 within 5 years or so. GS-11 used to be a management grade but has become a working grade over the last several years.
Combined with their retirement benefits (as they exist now) they are paid at a fairly higher level than private sector employed counterparts.
Well said, Razor.
As far as the much vaunted Federal "retirement benefits" goes, the current retirement program is calculated according to this formula: 1% of your high-3 average pay, times years of creditable service. If you retire at age 62 or later with at least 20 years of service, a factor of 1.1% is used rather than 1%.
If you work a Federal civilian job for 20 years, you would get 20% of your pay (unless you are over 62 and have 20 years, in which case you would get 22%) of your highest three years pay for retirement.
To hit 50% of your high three in retirement pay, you would have to work your civil service job for almost 46 years. That would make a military retiree with 20 years of service who worked civil service after retirement 84 years old to collect 50% of his civil service pay in retirement. Most military personnel following their careers as GS civilians will not get more than 20-25% of their GS salary at their final retirement. I don't see this being overly generous.
When it comes to the Federal pay schedules, consider this. Cabinet members and Supreme Court Justices are in the same boat with respect to rules and pay increases as everyone else, all the way down to the lowest GS-1. If you think a lawyer with the experience of a Scalia or a Thomas, or a Sec State or Sec Def would would be working in the private sector for what they are paid as Federal employees, think again. Look at comparable civilian pay for senior law firm partners, executive officers, etc., and you will see a real disparity. Not saying it is right, but it is reality. If you want good people running this country, you have to at least try and make the pay somewhat adequate.
Ten years ago, when the economy was booming, there was a huge outcry about how it was impossible to hire technically competent Federal employees for the pay being offered. There were a number of pay reforms intended to address that problem.
I have worked uniform, private sector, contractor, and GS jobs. If you want a retired E-9, CW-4, O-5, or the equivalent in any of those jobs, you have to pay wages similar to what they earned previously, if not more. I made more as a contractor and in the private sector than I did in any of the other jobs, but there was no job security. I moved to a GS position for that reason. If you want a kid who is barely shaving in the position, offer entry level wages.
Congress is a whole 'nother bucket of worms with their own rules.
TR
I disagree with regard to most civil service salaries. While most of the salaries do not seem all that high on paper, the government is putting younger new highers in much higher pay grades than before.
Newly graduated from college engineers, logisticians, etc are being hired as GS-10 with GS-11 in year or two and GS-12 within 5 years or so. GS-11 used to be a management grade but has become a working grade over the last several years.
Combined with their retirement benefits (as they exist now) they are paid at a fairly higher level than private sector employed counterparts.
As of January 2010, the CPI-W had risen to 569 since 1969.
(Using that as "Base 100")
During that period.....
Social Security benefits increased 10%
Salaries for federal employees decreased 9%
Civil service retirement benefits decreased 13%.
Average wages among all workers in theeconomy increased 11% .
Salaries of members of Congress have decreased 46%.
https://opencrs.com/document/94-971/
GratefulCitizen
12-30-2012, 18:06
There's nothing wrong with government employees being well compensated.
There is also nothing wrong with having sufficient employees to do a given task.
The problem is that the federal government does too many things.
Governments are not entirely subject to marketplace discipline (especially when funded by a fiat currency).
The larger the scale of government the more true this is.
State governments and county governments are more subject to marketplace discipline.
Overtax and underserve your citizens, they'll leave.
Limiting the mission of the federal government is the answer.
Screw all you guys...I'm getting a raise! :p
Badger52
12-30-2012, 20:47
Razor pretty much covered it. The working-level professionals that were needed for years (that went to the private sector after being insulted by the USG) used to get offered "upward" positions for grad-level engineers of GS-5-7-9.
Whoopee-f'n twang. The fat in the civil service sector isn't at the operational level; it's in the SES agency-level pigpens. Not coincidentally, those mandarins are found within M2 ball range of the Beltway.
Well they stole all the Social Sec money, they might as well take my TSP Funds too!
http://t.money.msn.com/business-news/newsarticle?feed=ap&date=20130115&id=15997915
US taps pension fund to avoid passing debt limit
14 hr(s) ago | By MARTIN CRUTSINGER
WASHINGTON (AP) - Treasury Secretary Timothy Geithner says the government has begun borrowing from the federal employee pension fund to keep operating without surpassing its debt limit.
Geithner says in a letter to congressional leaders that the move will free up $156 billion in borrowing authority while Congress debates increasing the $16.4 trillion debt limit.
The government reached its borrowing limit on Dec. 31, but began using bookkeeping maneuvers to keep from surpassing it. Geithner has told congressional leaders that Treasury expects to exhaust those measures by mid-February to early March.
The latest action has been taken by other Treasury secretaries and will not put in jeopardy any monthly pension payments. Geithner said he will replace the funds removed from the pension account after the borrowing limit is raised.
Ret10Echo
01-16-2013, 07:39
Well....just an added kick in the chops to the taxpayer. The recent Fiscal Cliff dope-deal increased (they are using "restored") Fed transit benefits from a maximum of $125 monthly to $240 monthly in the D.C. Metro region.
(Link-story) (http://greatergreaterwashington.org/post/17224/fiscal-cliff-deal-restores-transit-benefit/)
My husband and I just put this letter in the mail to our Congresscritters.
Dear Sir,
We are writing this letter to convey our concerns over the possibility of sequestration and its immediate impacts to our family. You see, we are a military family. Allison was born and raised in the Air Force and is currently a Lt Col stationed at Wright Patterson AFB, OH with 19 years of service. As for myself, I served the Air Force for 28 years as an active duty member, and am now a government civilian who works at 18th Air Force at Scott AFB, IL.
This is the third time in our 10 year marriage Allison and I have been stationed apart, this does not take into account deployments. We have come to accept that in order to keep our country safe, we will have to bear the burden of separation. That has meant our daughter Jordan living with one parent, and seeing the other when the opportunity presents itself. Sometimes that is often, other times she has gone for 6 months or more without seeing one parent. We have accepted this as part of our life.
We have also accepted the financial burden that goes along with the seperations. Maintaining two households is very expensive. While both of us were on active duty, this wasn’t as big of a burden as it is today. For today, I was told that with sequestration, I may be furloughed for up to 30 days. For my family that would be upwards of $6500 in lost income, at a time where running two households has become more expensive than it ever has before.
So while you and your colleagues think sequestration is an easy thing to do, I ask you, have you REALLY thought what that means to over 800,000 families, your constituents. While you and your colleagues have continued to “kick the can” down the road, you still receive your pay, and your government benefits. Are you willing to forgo your pay, and the threat it causes to your family, while asking the same of mine? Why should 800,000 hard working civilians have their livelihood threatened while you pass spending bills such as Hurricane Sandy Relief, that is ladened with pork, and then tell me I must sacrifice my family’s wellbeing to pay for it.
I ask you, as your constituent, to seriously consider the damage that is going to be done, not only to the Defense Department as a whole, but individual families, if you do not find a compromise to sequestration. I can guarantee you, come election time, I will be thinking about who supported me, and who took the easy road, and put my family in peril.
ironyoshi
01-30-2013, 06:31
post
In my opinion, the solution is not just offering higher salaries for a given position. Rather, merit-based pay. That's how the private sector maintains its edge.
Badger52
01-30-2013, 08:13
My husband and I just put this letter in the mail to our Congresscritters.BZ, ma'am. They need to be getting the other 799,999 letters like that as well.
The Reaper
01-30-2013, 17:06
In my opinion, the solution is not just offering higher salaries for a given position. Rather, merit-based pay. That's how the private sector maintains its edge.
They tried that already.
Apparently, it was perceived as unfair and was dropped.
See NSPS.
TR
NSPS, that was the good ol' boy club annual essay contest!!!!
Now it is called the No Such Pay System!
This 0.5% raise is the first raise for Federal civilian employees in three years.
Government civil service pay is not what most people think it is, anymore than military pay is.
TR
That will not cover what they started taking out of my check on 1 Jan 13.