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.
The number of federal workers earning $150,000 or more a year has soared tenfold in the past five years and doubled since President Obama took office, a USA TODAY analysis finds.
An which party has been in control for 4 of the 5 years?
Quote:
The Defense Department had nine civilians earning $170,000 or more in 2005, 214 when Obama took office and 994 in June.
This is really outrageous - just look at those numbers.
while the executive supervisors (gs 15 and up) might have increased.....the pay for the actual workers gs12 and down have had their lowest increase in the last 2 years....this year up comming uncrease of 1.5% is lower thasn the average increase in the private sector of 1.9%
most federal workers fall in the range of gs5-7 (entry level) and gs 9-11 journeymen workers top pay for a gs11(step10(steps are based on longevity, usually a step10 has been in for at least 20 years)) in about 75k(depending on locality the actual top range nation wide is 70-80
An which party has been in control for 4 of the 5 years?
This is really outrageous - just look at those numbers.
I hate to tell you this, but not everything can be blamed on Obama.
If federal wages are too high to suit you, blame Richard Nixon because the current federal wage system is a result of a bill signed by him back in the early '70's.
Federal jobs have paid the prevailing wage in relation to civilian counterparts since at least the Civil War.
while the executive supervisors (gs 15 and up) might have increased.....the pay for the actual workers gs12 and down have had their lowest increase in the last 2 years....this year up comming uncrease of 1.5% is lower thasn the average increase in the private sector of 1.9%
most federal workers fall in the range of gs5-7 (entry level) and gs 9-11 journeymen workers top pay for a gs11(step10(steps are based on longevity, usually a step10 has been in for at least 20 years)) in about 75k(depending on locality the actual top range nation wide is 70-80
The problem is in the Washington area, the headquarters location of most federal agencies. You would think, the span of control would be larger with higher graded employees. Why do a handful of Grade 13 and 14 headquarters employees need so much Grade 15 managerial oversight compared to field offices where a grade 9 or 10 can manage triple the number of lowered graded and usually less experienced employees. And that's just headquarters managers because they then justify the existence of executives. I'd love to know how many executives (not on the same payscale) there are now compared to 10 years ago.
If I were Congress I would also ask the federal government why they need to keep so many civilian workers when they hire contractors to do the same jobs the federal workers used to be doing. In private industry, one of them has to go. In the federal government, when contractors are hired to do a job, the federal employees whose job is now being done by those contractors stays employed and is just shuffled around. I ask you, does the federal government really need to hire contractors to do, for example, personnel work and if they do, why are those former federal personnel employees still employed?
The Executives are still making far less than their private sector counterparts. Given the current economic mess and the requirement for infrastructure improvment we need far more Federal employees to get something done. Outsourcing Federal jobs to private sector contractors is foolish because the work is improperly done and costs three times as much. What private sector executive is going to supervise 100 employees on a $150k salary. None.
The Executives are still making far less than their private sector counterparts. Given the current economic mess and the requirement for infrastructure improvment we need far more Federal employees to get something done.
I'm saying there are too many of them, not that they make too much money.
Federal compensation is way, way above the private sector.
I looked at the numbers as reported by USA Today, but digging the raw data out of the OPM website would take days.
In any case, making a judgment about federal pay in relation to the prevailing wage MUST begin with a cross-examination of individual positions, not just general averages. USA Today made no effort to do that.
For instance, it's easy to say a certain number of DOD employees make over $150,000 per year, but it's meaningless unless one compares the job those people do in relation to similar jobs in the private sector. If a janitor at the Pentagon makes that much then, yes, that's out of line. But, if that person is a mid-level manager with broad responsibilities then, no, it's not.
Let's have much less government, but leave the ones left standing a good wage to ensure comptency.
Surely we can pare down the 1300 government agencies and deep six the civil service program.
Federal compensation is way, way above the private sector.
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?
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.
