What is your opinion of the pay raise for federal employees?

2014-03-28T14:30:19-04:00

Is it justified considering the military is still taking cuts and only received a 1% pay raise? Don't get me wrong, I truly appreciate all their support and they deserve to be compensated...but at 3x the amount service members receive? Do they do 3x the work? They are allowed to receive performance based bonuses and promotions. This is not about right or wrong. I'm just asking if you feel it's justified. Everyone is entitled to have their own opinion on the subject.

http://www.military.com/daily-news/2014/03/27/house-bill-would-give-federal-workers-3-3-raise.html?comp= [login to see] 41&rank=3

House Bill Would Give Federal Workers 3.3% Raise | Military.com

WASHINGTON — A group of House Democrats has introduced a bill that would give federal workers a 3.3 percent pay raise in 2015, far more than President Barack Obama has requested.
Rep. Gerry Connolly,...

Response by SGM Matthew Quick made Mar 28 at 2014 11:14 PM

2014-03-28T23:14:53-04:00

It's just another slap in the face to our servicemembers by our civilian leaders.

“Federal workers deserve to be compensated for the vital role they play in the lives of millions of Americans,” one co-sponsor, Rep. Jim Moran, D-Va., said in a statement. “These are the men and women finding lifesaving cures at NIH, catching criminals, supporting our troops, and protecting the environment. They have bills to pay and families to support. After three years of pay freezes and too many furloughs, they’ve earned this modest, decent raise.”

Really? After 12+ years of constant combat, the military deserves 1%? Double standards.

Response by CSM Michael J. Uhlig made Mar 29 at 2014 12:50 AM

2014-03-29T00:50:20-04:00

I believe they DO deserve a pay raise but, my perspective is that they DO NOT deserve a 3.3% raise, but a similar raise like we received (1%) this year look at the numbers & listen to my reasoning here.

I've had the opportunity to be deployed with some great Americans - both military and civilian (Federal employees and contractors), most recently I redeployed from Afghanistan last April as the Senior Enlisted Leader for the CAAT and we had some great Federally employees making a huge strategic impact which has and will continue to save large numbers of American and Coalition lives.

Looking at the Federal employee pay raises since Desert Storm, you see a complete linear pay raise of 205% for the 23 year period. So if an employee had a $30,000 salary in 1990 (the year Iraq invaded Kuwait), 23 years later the pay (based only on annual pay raises, and including the 2014 raise) would be $61629.83 as an annual salary. Here's a link for multiple references concerning the Federal employee pay raises (see page 11):

http://assets.opencrs.com/rpts/94-971_20100120.pdf (if this link does not work, copy the link and paste it into the web browser)

(the multiplier for the 20 years is 2 [login to see] 65314, but also includes pay freeze and included is also the 2014 raise)

Now lets look at military raises during the same period:

If you take the same base military pay amount as I used in the example above ($30,000 base pay) and use the linear multiplier (roughly 214%, the multiplier is below) it gives us an annual salary of $64055.81

(the multiplier for military base pay from 1991 to current is 2 [login to see] 946)

Here's the military pay raise chart (over 50 years of documented pay raises on the chart): http://www.navycs.com/charts/

Again, the cumulative pay difference is $2425.98 which equals a $202.165 monthly difference. I believe the hardships our Soldiers endured coupled with multiple deployments equates to a much larger pay differences earned by the service member.

Understand there are benefits on both sides that are almost intangibles (military members can receive non-taxed benefits such as BAS & BAH; federal employees can receive Thrift Savings Plan matching funds up to a specific percentage) so understand I did not take those figures into account however, I tried to give you the information to make your own educated opinion.

Historical Archive of US Military Basic Pay

Directory of historical United States military pay and allowance charts, with raise percentages, for the years 1949 through 2017.

Response by SFC Benjamin Harrison made Mar 29 at 2014 10:40 PM

2014-03-29T22:40:39-04:00

Being a big advocate for the reduction of GS level jobs and employment, I believe that providing Federal Civilian employees with a pay raise is a huge slap in the face to our Soldiers. Reducing the use of overpaid civilians and replacing them with Soldier position I believe would reduce the cost of the defense budget in whole.

Response by SSG Private RallyPoint Member made May 31 at 2014 12:10 PM

2014-05-31T12:10:44-04:00

Is this simply a response to make up for the four years of pay freeze. So in relative terms Federal employees have been taking a cost of living pay cut every year.

So the real question is... Does the 3.3 percent raise make up for the four years of lost wages or is it a slap in the face to federal employees?

Response by CW4 Aaron Rasmussen made Sep 5 at 2014 3:07 PM

2014-09-05T15:07:48-04:00

Another thing to consider for federal employees, is that they typically don't see promotions as often as members of the armed forces. I was getting promoted every two to five years as a Soldier. Most federal employees are lucky to be promoted four or five times in their career - and that's if they're trying by applying to new positions. Many are happy with their jobs and might see one or two promotions in a career. So by comparing an annual salary increase for federal employees to an annual salary increase for members of the armed forces, you're comparing two very different things. Add to that members of the armed forces have not seen a pay freeze since I enlisted. A four year pay freeze would have the armed forces and the public freaking out, understandably.

Response by Sgt Edward Allen made Apr 23 at 2016 11:08 AM

2016-04-23T11:08:49-04:00

I, personally, believe that the federal employees should receive a pay cut AND also have the number of staff reduced.

In the 1990s, I worked for a contractor to the Naval Aviation Depot at MCAS Cherry Point. We were a logistics company. I wrote computer applications to track AV8, CH46, C130 and other aircraft maintainence The reports were used by the Civil Service employees to justify there jobs. They were getting 20 - 30 an hour, I was getting 11. They even had an Admiral come down from DC who, when looking at the reports, questioned why the Navy was paying for their services when the contractor was doing off the work.

Or the old scanner that the Civil Service computer support could not get working in over a year, but I had up and running in 10 minutes.

In 1986, while stationed at the Marine Corps Central Data Processing Activity, Kansas City MO, They had civilian programmers making 2 - 3 times what the Marines were making, Lowest rating was GS10 (at that time, Sgt in the Marines was about 11,000 a month, GS10 was about 2,500). They were having to ask the Marines how to do something, when they were "senior to the Marines".

Revamp the Civil Service and cut the number of employees! Oh, that's right. They are UNION and you can't get rid of them.

Response by Maj Marty Hogan made Aug 24 at 2016 9:26 AM

2016-08-24T09:26:10-04:00

I am a dual status Guard technician and the civil service side has moved little in the last 10-15 years. Usually corresponds to our health insurance increasing 2-4% as well. One thing I will point out on the civil service side is they increase locality pay and not base pay. Why should this concern people? They can take away locality pay with a stroke of a pen- base pay not so much. No to answer do we do 3x the work- in our case yes. We are not your typical federal worker- that is how we are paid, but we deploy in status along with AD counterparts and in a lot of cases more. I have not received a performance award after being rated outstanding every year because of the shortage of money in the system. Federal worker is a very broad term.