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.
Didn't we have 2-3 other threads on this topic in the last 3-4 months?
_______
Bush hired contractors like never before.
They're now being let go; especially from inherently government positions.
Under the Bush administration, contracting was very big, to the detriment of the government itself.
That's being corrected during this administration.
I don't know where you got the idea that there are 2 people doing comparable jobs.
Do you have facts here or perhaps what you've seen in one place?
I'm really not seeing that in the field.
I've worked all over the world and barely see enough employees to cover the jobs that need to be done, let alone having more than one person doing the same thing.
Since I was a fed for 34 years (retired right before Obama - field and DC) I know contractors were hired to do jobs Feds could do just as easily. Really, researchers contracting out research work, contracted facilitators - you mean to tell me feds can't facilitate meetings?, huge contracts given to companies to determine what desks and office space should look like (which by the way, everyone hated), etc. Right now, for example, there are contractors doing the hiring of massive amounts of federal workers. These are jobs that used to be done by feds and the rub is the contractors hire government retirees to do the job. I'm saying working feds could do that hiring. It's not rocket science. You score applicants based on their skills and experience. Plus, it's being done in a high cost of living state, if not the highest one. You don't need contractors or rehired federal retirees (hired by the contractors) to do it. If Obama is getting rid of contractors, good for him. But the hiring done by contractors now that I know of, is being done under Obama's watch because he's the one doing all of the massive hiring.
sanrene, you're just illustrating further what I said before, that you're being trained to hate your fellow workers in order to to divert you from looking too closely at your own unionbusting companies.
Quote:
Originally Posted by desertdetroiter
No it's not. And even if it was, that just means that the private sector needs to catch up. Sounds to me like you're angry because you think someone is getting a better deal than you. Are you equally mad at your CEO making 300 times your salary?
(to that whole post.)
Taking the second USATODAY article -- what is their beef with federal employees? -- covering the Heritage Foundation report, even it has to admit, though below the fold of course,
Some of that gap is due to the fact that some federal jobs, like IRS agents and customs officials, are unique to the federal government, the study notes, so there is no private sector equivalent to compare them too.
Another factor that drives the raw average up is the fact that the government employs a higher percentage of college-educated Americans than the private sector does. Only 59 percent of private-sector workers have high school diplomas compared to the 89 percent of federal workers who do. Federal workers, the study noted, are also an average of five years older than private sector ones.
“A more skilled workforce naturally earns more than a less skilled one; education and experience increase workers’ productivity,” the study notes.
It says fed workers get better benefits on average. Implication = fight against your own opportunities to get better benefits.
It also, quite stupidly, says,
The Heritage report also found that government jobs – in addition to being more lucrative – are almost impossible to lose. Despite a national unemployment rate that remained at 9.5 percent, federal employment has grown during the recession.
“Federal employees enjoy job security irrespective of the state of the economy,” the study documented. “Since the recession began, federal employment has risen by 240,000 – 12 percent. The unemployment rate for federal employees has only slightly risen from 2.0 percent to 2.9 percent between 2007 and 2009.”
Of course the federal government is going to hire people during a financial crisis! Not to mention the DoD and medical employee increases noted in earlier post.
And I really think it's reprehensible to try to teach you to resent job stability.
Great couple of posts by Delusianne. I especially appreciate the links to current articles, as figures on salaries, size of federal workforce, and so on change over time.
To re-cap:
On average, federal employees are paid 24 percent less than their private sector counterparts, according to the most recent Bureau of Labor Statistics data;
Total federal employment was lower in 2009 than it was in 1970, 1980, or 1990;
Although there are several unions representing federal workers, only 28% of federal workers belong to a union;
Only one in seven federal workers work in the Washington DC metropolitan area. 85% of federal workers work outside the DC area.
Since I was a fed for 34 years (retired right before Obama - field and DC) I know contractors were hired to do jobs Feds could do just as easily. Really, researchers contracting out research work, contracted facilitators - you mean to tell me feds can't facilitate meetings?, huge contracts given to companies to determine what desks and office space should look like (which by the way, everyone hated), etc. Right now, for example, there are contractors doing the hiring of massive amounts of federal workers. These are jobs that used to be done by feds and the rub is the contractors hire government retirees to do the job. I'm saying working feds could do that hiring. It's not rocket science. You score applicants based on their skills and experience. Plus, it's being done in a high cost of living state, if not the highest one. You don't need contractors or rehired federal retirees (hired by the contractors) to do it. If Obama is getting rid of contractors, good for him. But the hiring done by contractors now that I know of, is being done under Obama's watch because he's the one doing all of the massive hiring.
I realize many are justifying the big numbers with past year comparisons.
But if revenue goes down..doesn't the government need to cut back rather than wave their "tax" wand to cover their expenses ? We're already borrowing about a billion a month to pay our bills.
The more that is borrowed the higher the interest paid out each month which means you have to borrow more. We are digging quite the deep hole here.
Obama is constructing a large herd of supporters, using pay raises, who will vote for him and his pals at the next election.
The raises are actually bribes. What else do you need to know.
That's probably the intended takeaway, but it has nothing to do with reality. There are millions of Republican and Tea Party and farther-right wing federal employees, in the DC area and throughout the federal workforce. Millions who can't stand Obama. They don't take a loyalty oath, you know. (You do know that?)
They're just the same folks as private sector workers are, except they have background checks and tend to be better educated (and as sanrene's article pointed out, better paid as a result).
That's probably the intended takeaway, but it has nothing to do with reality. There are millions of Republican and Tea Party and farther-right wing federal employees, in the DC area and throughout the federal workforce. Millions who can't stand Obama. They don't take a loyalty oath, you know. (You do know that?)
They're just the same folks as private sector workers are, except they have background checks and tend to be better educated (and as sanrene's article pointed out, better paid as a result).
I don't know the exact numbers but, when I worked for a non Defense agency the ratio was about 20% on the right and 80% on the left.
Who pays the wages for the federal workers? The federal government. Where does the federal government get the money to pay the fedearal workers? The tax payers. The taxpayers are saying that we can not afford to pay anymore to the federal government for a lot more hiring and paying of federal workers. Same goes for the public sector where jobs and wages are also down. The tax payers (we the people) are a little concerned about money right now to do a lot of hiring or raising of wages.
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.
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.
(to that whole post.) 
