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.
Well for one, the government isn't immune as the near-closure of the Federal government this year proved. Had it closed, those workers would not have received back-pay.
Another LIE - add in all the benefits, and they're at twice was a private sector worker earns.
Prove it.
I was private sector for 18 years and went to the federal service three years ago doing the SAME job I was doing. I can assure you that I, and my coworkers, are not nearly earning TWICE was the private sector does.
I earn 4 days more annual leave. I still have a 401K just like I did before. I do not have the fat-cat pension that everyone talks about. That was phased out in 1985.
HurricaneDC's comment was not a "complete and outright LIE."
Backpay for furloughed federal workers due to a shutdown is not a "right." It is not a law. It is something that Congress votes on AFTER the furlough/shutdown. In 1995, Congress decided to pay the federal employees. There was a good chance that this was not going to happen this time due to the "climate" around federal workers and budget concerns.
I would rather see the average American spend more time studying so we can actually compete will the science/technology jobs that are outsourced. Unfortunately, most outsourced jobs in tech fields are done so because there is a shortage of educated American workers in IT/Engineering fields.
Quote:
Originally Posted by ChristineVA
Prove it.
I was private sector for 18 years and went to the federal service three years ago doing the SAME job I was doing. I can assure you that I, and my coworkers, are not nearly earning TWICE was the private sector does.
I earn 4 days more annual leave. I still have a 401K just like I did before. I do not have the fat-cat pension that everyone talks about. That was phased out in 1985.
Here is a quote with the statistics you are looking for. It isn't twice as much, but 44 percent more is substantial, especially given how poorly government workers perform compared to the private sector.
According to the most recent Employer Costs for Employee Compensation survey from the U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics, as of December 2009, state and local government employees earned total compensation of $39.60 an hour, compared to $27.42 an hour for private industry workers-a difference of over 44 percent. This includes 35 percent higher wages and nearly 69 percent greater benefits.
I would rather see the average American spend more time studying so we can actually compete will the science/technology jobs that are outsourced. Unfortunately, most outsourced jobs in tech fields are done so because there is a shortage of educated American workers in IT/Engineering fields.
Here is a quote with the statistics you are looking for. It isn't twice as much, but 44 percent more is substantial, especially given how poorly government workers perform compared to the private sector.
According to the most recent Employer Costs for Employee Compensation survey from the U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics, as of December 2009, state and local government employees earned total compensation of $39.60 an hour, compared to $27.42 an hour for private industry workers-a difference of over 44 percent. This includes 35 percent higher wages and nearly 69 percent greater benefits.
Oh, sorry, I was only referring to federal workers and not "state and local" workers which are a different ball of wax entirely.
As for federal workers, two of the *studies* out there, by Cato and Heritage, have been proven to be biased. Right now, OPM is looking to do a non-biased study and a properly done comparison on wages. The right leaning studies indicate feds make way more than private, while another study by the labor department indicates they make 24% less.
I got a call yesteday from someone who was trying to peddle a prodcut on me...as soon as I heard her voice, I knew she was from overseas, plus you could hear everyone else in the background reading the same script....instead of hanging up, I let her finish her spill and then I asked her, "are you calling from India or Pakistan? She was silent, then said India....I told her that job probably used to belong to someone here in America, but she had now because they are probably paying her and her friends $1.00 an hour......
I told her to take me off her call list and hung up on her azz
Oh, sorry, I was only referring to federal workers and not "state and local" workers which are a different ball of wax entirely.
As for federal workers, two of the *studies* out there, by Cato and Heritage, have been proven to be biased. Right now, OPM is looking to do a non-biased study and a properly done comparison on wages. The right leaning studies indicate feds make way more than private, while another study by the labor department indicates they make 24% less.
I really have a difficult time supporting any job where you cannot be fired for not performing well. The amount of job security that comes with federal jobs really bothers me. If you are performing poorly, you should be given a demotion/less money/or be fired. The fact that you get raises automatically (i.e. not tied to performance) in federal jobs should bother EVERYONE....
I really have a difficult time supporting any job where you cannot be fired for not performing well. The amount of job security that comes with federal jobs really bothers me. If you are performing poorly, you should be given a demotion/less money/or be fired. The fact that you get raises automatically (i.e. not tied to performance) in federal jobs should bother EVERYONE....
For federal government employees, you most certainly CAN be fired. Does it happen often enough? Hell no, but it happens and I've actually seen it happen. Unfortunately, due to affirmative action issues a long time ago, there are many controls in place to help employees who feel like they are being unfairly persecuted against and this, too many times, slows down the disciplinary process and intimidates managers.
I came into the federal service under a pay-for-performance plan and not the traditional GS scale. We have recently transitioned out because it was determined to "not be working" effectively. I enjoyed it and did very well under it. Poor performers did not do well. And then, so I've heard, there was the "good old boys" network that rewarded people in the clique. I did not personally witness it but I'm sure it happened. But I saw WAY more of that type of cronyism in the private sector.
Also, please note that automatic increases are not the case. We do have STEP increases under the GS scale for time-in-grade but they can always be withheld when a supervisor deems an employee is not performing. The only raises that are automatic are COLA that is granted (or not) by Congress/the President.
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.
Would you take a 50% cut in salary to bring jobs back to America?
I enjoyed it and did very well under it. Poor performers did not do well. And then, so I've heard, there was the "good old boys" network that rewarded people in the clique. I did not personally witness it but I'm sure it happened. But I saw WAY more of that type of cronyism in the private sector.
