U.S. CitiesCity-Data Forum Index
Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Politics and Other Controversies
 [Register]
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
View detailed profile (Advanced) or search
site with Google Custom Search

Search Forums  (Advanced)
Reply Start New Thread
 
Old 10-19-2010, 07:07 AM
 
188 posts, read 170,648 times
Reputation: 433

Advertisements

I keep reading that no one has a plan to actually shrink the federal government. How's this for an idea.

With the exception of people in the armed forces below a yet to be specified rank, all federal workers should be forced to undergo a pay cut.

Those whos annual income is less than $150,000 - 10%
Those whos annual income is greater than $150,000 - 15%

There should be no annual increases or merrit increases for two years.

There should be a hiring freeze for all federal jobs. Make the government learn how to get things done with less people.

This isn't much more than what private industry has been forced to do over the last few years and studies have shown that federal government employees already make more and have better benefits than those in comperable positions in private industry.

I'll sit back and wait for the bombs in my mail box.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message

 
Old 10-19-2010, 07:13 AM
 
Location: Central Maine
4,687 posts, read 5,537,116 times
Reputation: 4966
Quote:
Originally Posted by KYBob View Post
This isn't much more than what private industry has been forced to do over the last few years and studies have shown that federal government employees already make more and have better benefits than those in comperable positions in private industry.
Please provide a link to these studies. Make sure that the studies are for truly comparable jobs - nurses in the federal sector vs. non-federal nurses, lawyers in the federal sector vs. non-federal lawyers, etc. Thanks.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 10-19-2010, 07:15 AM
 
25,059 posts, read 23,172,752 times
Reputation: 11619
I think their pay should be cut down to about $80,000 maximum. The 15% sounds too small. Plus it's not so much that their pay is high, but they have outrageously generous pensions as well, much better than most private sector workers that cost a lot of money as well. It's the pensions where it hurts the checkbook the most.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 10-19-2010, 07:20 AM
 
Location: Londonderry, NH
41,492 posts, read 51,379,395 times
Reputation: 24613
I never hear the Republicans calling for pay increases for government employees during the "good times" when private sector employees are paid far more. Why should government employment be a vow of poverty and paid in glorious sunsets instead of cash and a decent retirement? In this economy the governments, Federal, State and Local, should be hiring more employees instead of cutting back. A decent paying government job is a better way of supporting the economy than short term infrastructure contracts.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 10-19-2010, 07:28 AM
 
29,745 posts, read 16,439,768 times
Reputation: 13821
In a perfect world:

We ditch the draconian civil service program, eliminate the dead weight and the incompetent and pay top dollar to those left standing.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 10-19-2010, 07:34 AM
 
Location: Texas or Cascais, Portugal
3,418 posts, read 3,183,190 times
Reputation: 8275
Quote:
Originally Posted by theunbrainwashed View Post
I think their pay should be cut down to about $80,000 maximum. The 15% sounds too small. Plus it's not so much that their pay is high, but they have outrageously generous pensions as well, much better than most private sector workers that cost a lot of money as well. It's the pensions where it hurts the checkbook the most.
Any federal employee hired after 1989 has a pension that is hardly "generous". The pension formula is 1% of the average top 3 earning year salaries, multiplied by the number of years employed. So, for example, an employee earning $80,000 annually who worked 30 years, their pension would be $800 (1% of 80,000) X 30 (years employed) = $24,000 annually or, $2000 a month before taxes.

Hardly a lot to live on these days. Albeight, there are plenty of private companies that no longer provide ANY pension at all but, is that the right thing to do?

Although I wouldn't be opposed to a 10% pay cut if it would significantly impact the budget deficit, the deficit is NOT due to federal employee's salary and benefits, it's due to irresponsible spending on military and other policies that are irresponsible. Yes, government spending could easily be reduced in all areas but, just blaming federal workers and cutting their wages is not going to solve the national debt. For many years federal employees were laughed at for making less than private industry. Now that the tables have changed, federal workers are the scapegoat.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 10-19-2010, 07:35 AM
 
188 posts, read 170,648 times
Reputation: 433
Quote:
Originally Posted by GreenGene View Post
Please provide a link to these studies. Make sure that the studies are for truly comparable jobs - nurses in the federal sector vs. non-federal nurses, lawyers in the federal sector vs. non-federal lawyers, etc. Thanks.
Federal workers earning double their private counterparts - USATODAY.com

Public-sector pay, private-sector backlash :: Jeff Jacoby

Public Sector Workers Are the New Privileged Elite Class - US News and World Report

Ben Casnocha: The Blog: Disturbing Chart of the Day: Public Sector Pay

Oh, and by the way, This year's federal COLA 2.0% Next year's proposed 1.4%. What was Social Securities COLA for those two years? 2010 0.0% 2011 0.0%
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 10-19-2010, 07:42 AM
 
Location: Sacramento
13,784 posts, read 23,809,056 times
Reputation: 6195
How about some factual statisitical data, just for humor if nothing else:

Pay/cost increases % since 1969:

Cost of living - 477.0%

Private industry pay - 632.3%

Federal pay - 428.0%


http://assets.opencrs.com/rpts/94-971_20100120.pdf
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 10-19-2010, 07:45 AM
 
Location: Sacramento
13,784 posts, read 23,809,056 times
Reputation: 6195
Quote:
Originally Posted by KYBob View Post
Blogs have a purpose, I guess. However, I'll take statistical data any day of the week.

By the way, did you know that there have been many, many, many years when the Social Security increases were far greater than the Federal pay increases?
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 10-19-2010, 08:00 AM
 
Location: Sierra Vista, AZ
16,133 posts, read 20,824,289 times
Reputation: 8293
Eliminate the cap on the wage tax and the pressure will be off.
Then let the Tax Cuts expire
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.

Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.


Reply
Please update this thread with any new information or opinions. This open thread is still read by thousands of people, so we encourage all additional points of view.

Quick Reply
Message:

Over $104,000 in prizes was already given out to active posters on our forum and additional giveaways are planned!

Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Politics and Other Controversies
Similar Threads
Follow City-Data.com founder on our Forum or

All times are GMT -6.

2005-2019, Advameg, Inc. · Please obey Forum Rules · Terms of Use and Privacy Policy · Bug Bounty

City-Data.com - Archive 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31, 32, 33, 34, 35 - Top