The public appears to have a
general misconception on the compensation of federal employees
The Gen. Services Administration (GSA) has the responsibility for administering federal employees compensation. While there are some differences within the system, most federal employees operate under the same compensation rules.
One public misunderstanding appears to be the impression that federal employees have higher salaries than the equivalent positions in private industry.
As a comparative example, information was recently published that a tennis coach at Texas Tech has retired at the age of 48 and will receive an annuity involving 80% of his previous salary. The implication is that he started at the age of 24, and therefore he would have 24 years of service.
I recently talked with an employee in the US Attorneys Office of the federal government. His anticipated retirement annuity is estimated to be 35% of his previous salary. One could say this is an unreasonable comparison, because the federal employee salary was so much higher than the salary of the tennis coach. We don't know the facts on the tennis coach's salary, but we do know that two employees who recently joined the US Attorneys Office took salary cuts of $20,000 per year. In addition, they had joined a group whose salary has been frozen for the last three years. One could also ask why anyone would to do that, but there are reasons unrelated to the federal employee benefits which we are discussing.
Many years ago when I was a chemist at the Bridesburg Plant of the Rohm & Haas Company, there were two salary classifications; nonexempt and exempt. The nonexempt payroll involved wage payments for a 40-hour week, with overtime payments at one of a half times the regular hourly rate, and double time for Sundays and holidays. The exempt category did not receive additional compensation for overtime. Such overtime would be occasional, if we were running a plant trial around-the-clock, but might involve four or five hours of overtime per month.
I talked with the US Attorney's Office employee about overtime. He says that the Department management strongly encourages employees to engage in uncompensated overtime. In other words, they are on the "exempt" payroll. As I recall, my contact says he generally puts in 5 to 10 hours a week on overtime and considerably more when he is preparing for trial. At that time he might be working 10 to 12 hours a day. Some of that overtime may be compensatory time off, but no extra pay. If he happens to be working on Christmas day or any other federal holiday, that time is a gift to the Department. There is no compensatory time off. If he is working overtime, the building services are usually shutdown, and in summer he may be working in a 90° office.
I asked whether there any other "strange conditions of his employment". He said that he has to pay for a parking space in the government parking lot at his office. There's nothing special about that parking space. It is not a garage or otherwise covered. He also said that when he initiated employment he had to buy his own calling cards, although in recent years that has changed.
I also asked whether he knew of any differences in compensation within the GSA system. He said that FBI employees by Congressional edict receive a higher retirement annuity than employees of the US Attorneys Department. The difference was said to be based upon a higher stress level at the FBI than in US Attorneys operations. Apparently Congress felt that there is no significantly higher stress in standing before a judge and jury.
I asked why our US Attorney Department employee continued his work, in view of these rather stupid rules and inequalities. He said he likes the principles of his job in maintaining law and order for his country and his benefits overall were not bad, even though they didn't seem to compare favorably with the retired Texas tech tennis coach.
Does this all this mean that there is no justification for the public complaint that we spend too much money on federal employees? The answer is "no". There is justification. It does not involve individual federal employees. We spend too much money on government, because there are too many federal employees. Are there too many federal employees in the In the US Attorneys Office? Probably not. Are there too many US employees in the Department of Energy, the Department of Education, and the Environmental Protective Protection Agency? Undoubtedly, "yes".
The Gen. Services Administration (GSA) has the responsibility for administering federal employees compensation. While there are some differences within the system, most federal employees operate under the same compensation rules.
One public misunderstanding appears to be the impression that federal employees have higher salaries than the equivalent positions in private industry.
As a comparative example, information was recently published that a tennis coach at Texas Tech has retired at the age of 48 and will receive an annuity involving 80% of his previous salary. The implication is that he started at the age of 24, and therefore he would have 24 years of service.
I recently talked with an employee in the US Attorneys Office of the federal government. His anticipated retirement annuity is estimated to be 35% of his previous salary. One could say this is an unreasonable comparison, because the federal employee salary was so much higher than the salary of the tennis coach. We don't know the facts on the tennis coach's salary, but we do know that two employees who recently joined the US Attorneys Office took salary cuts of $20,000 per year. In addition, they had joined a group whose salary has been frozen for the last three years. One could also ask why anyone would to do that, but there are reasons unrelated to the federal employee benefits which we are discussing.
Many years ago when I was a chemist at the Bridesburg Plant of the Rohm & Haas Company, there were two salary classifications; nonexempt and exempt. The nonexempt payroll involved wage payments for a 40-hour week, with overtime payments at one of a half times the regular hourly rate, and double time for Sundays and holidays. The exempt category did not receive additional compensation for overtime. Such overtime would be occasional, if we were running a plant trial around-the-clock, but might involve four or five hours of overtime per month.
I talked with the US Attorney's Office employee about overtime. He says that the Department management strongly encourages employees to engage in uncompensated overtime. In other words, they are on the "exempt" payroll. As I recall, my contact says he generally puts in 5 to 10 hours a week on overtime and considerably more when he is preparing for trial. At that time he might be working 10 to 12 hours a day. Some of that overtime may be compensatory time off, but no extra pay. If he happens to be working on Christmas day or any other federal holiday, that time is a gift to the Department. There is no compensatory time off. If he is working overtime, the building services are usually shutdown, and in summer he may be working in a 90° office.
I asked whether there any other "strange conditions of his employment". He said that he has to pay for a parking space in the government parking lot at his office. There's nothing special about that parking space. It is not a garage or otherwise covered. He also said that when he initiated employment he had to buy his own calling cards, although in recent years that has changed.
I also asked whether he knew of any differences in compensation within the GSA system. He said that FBI employees by Congressional edict receive a higher retirement annuity than employees of the US Attorneys Department. The difference was said to be based upon a higher stress level at the FBI than in US Attorneys operations. Apparently Congress felt that there is no significantly higher stress in standing before a judge and jury.
I asked why our US Attorney Department employee continued his work, in view of these rather stupid rules and inequalities. He said he likes the principles of his job in maintaining law and order for his country and his benefits overall were not bad, even though they didn't seem to compare favorably with the retired Texas tech tennis coach.
Does this all this mean that there is no justification for the public complaint that we spend too much money on federal employees? The answer is "no". There is justification. It does not involve individual federal employees. We spend too much money on government, because there are too many federal employees. Are there too many federal employees in the In the US Attorneys Office? Probably not. Are there too many US employees in the Department of Energy, the Department of Education, and the Environmental Protective Protection Agency? Undoubtedly, "yes".
No comments:
Post a Comment