Federal Compensation: Too High, Too Low or About Right?

FedSmith.com ^ | September 16, 2010 | FedSmith staff

[Poundstone]

Are federal employees paid too much or too little?

The controversy does not appear to be going away. The Office of Personnel Management is certainly aware of it and has defended its work that shows federal employees are underpaid by about 22%. In fact, as the year wears on, the agency seems to be getting more aggressive. Early in the summer, the OPM director made statement with an acknowledgment of a "credibility problem" and that he would be enlisting outside experts to resolve the dispute. "Everybody has their formula, and says, ‘My formula's right, your formula's wrong,' " he commented at a Senior Executives Association conference. "If people of goodwill come together and are genuine about this, we ought to be able to craft a formula that has credibility everywhere."

[ml/nj]

Is this a trick question?

ML/NJ

[DannyTN]

I just wish they wouldn’t hire illegal aliens like the one they pay $400,000 a year to occupy the white house.

[Poundstone]

No, but read the article and you’ll see there’s a range of opinions about the “right” federal salary levels.

[pacpam]

Do those people originally compared to still making the same salary in the private sector. My contention is they, as a whole, are not. Fed employees salary and or pensions need the same contractions.

[ml/nj]

there’s a range of opinions about the “right” federal salary levels.

I'm sure.

They're all public servants after all.

ML/NJ

[MNJohnnie]

Total BS. IF you add the benefits to the package Feds are some of the most well paid employees on earth.

What you Fed employee propaganda drones keep doing on thread after thread is drop out any facts that do not fit your emotion based dogma to manufacture a fraudulent equivalency.

For example, Fed workers get 13 paid holidays compared to an average of 6 for private sector workers.

Lying by omission is still a lie.

[ClearCase_guy]

I think it's possible to make the point that the federal government is too large and soaks up too much money, without necessarily suggesting that soldiers are not needed and shouldn't be paid.

Everyone on this board supports the soldiers and wants them to be adequately compensated. But most of us feel that there are many areas where some federal employees are just not needed or are paid too much.

[Genoa]

Compensation levels, and what about staffing levels? Some entire agencies could be abolished.

[MNJohnnie]

The fact that you responded to my post in 38 seconds indicates you are not even bothering to THINK about this topic but merely posting per-programed emotion based propaganda.

Quit wasting our time with your emotional hysteric posturing and try thinking about this topic for a change.

[skeeter]

Any calculation’s gotta include lifetime pension payments less contributions, and retirement health benefits.

[Vendome]

Tell you what.

Let them keep their ridiculously high compensation and give them a cost of living increase every 5 years.

But, take away their extraordinary retirement package and that should just about even the playing field.

[Vermont Lt]

I once pressed my HR group to show me how they calculated compensation for my position. It was a new position in their company and I was a recent acquired Vice President. After months of badgering, they finally did an industry assessment. The process they used was extensive and it compared more than a dozen components: responsibility, reporting structure, benefits, bonus structure, technology, education, etc, etc.

In the end I got a decent raise AND I understood the process. It was fair and reasonable.

I became the poster child for our HR group after that, and I was their champion when people bitched about our pay grades.

Knowing the amount of time and effort that our pros put into the process, I simply cannot imagine a single government agency doing that kind of work. The existence of the unions, the inability to track performance in a meaningful way, and the “can you hold....” mentality of the average government worker precludes any real effort in making sure their wages and benefits packages are decent.

I am all for paying government employees a good wage. I think it is important for our public servants to not sacrifice to work as an air traffic controller, or member of the military. However, an average wage that is twice the average non government worker seems to be way out of line.

[dalereed]

All civil service pay is 50% too high!

[MediaMole]

There are plenty of jobs in regulatory agencies that actively kill US jobs. The EPA drives factories overseas where air quality standards aren’t as restrictive. The drilling ban has killed thousands of jobs.

...and when figuring in total compensation, don’t forget to include the value of pensions, which are non-existent in the private sector.

[tired_old_conservative]

My experience in working with government people has been that the lower paid folks at the bottom who actually do something might be a little underpaid, though the basic benefits are better than many jobs. There are also are a few highly skilled types at the higher pay levels that are underpaid in the sense of having needed capabilities they can bring to bear. But run-of-the-mill bureaucrats are overpaid. I'm talking about the people who simply trade memos between desks, mindlessly executing rules whose origin they don't even understand themselves.

As an example, I did some work on a case involving the Department of Energy at one point. It involved a nuclear safety issue. The people “in charge” of that issue were functional idiots who couldn't manage a coherent conversation. We finally penetrated to a technical specialist who explained, based on the original CFR bases, that they were interpreting the whole thing wrong; there was a simple policy ruling to be made that was consistent with the law and would solve everyone’s problem.

So that guy was probably underpaid no matter what he made; he knew his stuff, was problem-solving oriented, and did all the work that twenty other people tried to take credit for. Those twenty were probably each making in excess of $100,000 a year and were in way worth it.