Federal pay and benefits spared -- for now

GovernmentExecutive.com ^ | July 26, 2011 | Kellie Lunney

[mdittmar]

The House and Senate debt proposals released Monday do not contain specific provisions targeting federal employees' pay or benefits, although such spending cuts likely will be part of future proposals, observers believe.

The plans, released by House Speaker John Boehner, R-Ohio, and Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid, D-Nev., both endorse trillions in spending cuts that would affect agency budgets, including Defense Department spending, over the next decade. Neither proposal includes tax increases or specific cuts to entitlement programs like Medicare.

"I am pleased that neither of the two latest proposals addressing the debt ceiling and fiscal deficit calls for immediate federal retirement cuts," National Treasury Employees Union President Colleen Kelley said in a statement.

[edge10]

Well there’s part of your problem right there.

[muawiyah]

No doubt there are those who imagine that the federal budget can be balanced simply by cutting the pay of federal employees ~ most of whom work at the post office or for the Department of Defense.

[napscoordinator]

It is always Seniors, Vets, and Federal Workers who are targeted. Can you imagine a Senior Citizen who retired from the military and federal government. That poor guy will be screwed three times for giving of himself his entire life. Pitiful.

[EasySt]

FAIL.

[glock rocks]

... over ten years myass. Kick the can, how can you have any pudding...

[EGPWS]

The House and Senate debt proposals released Monday do not contain specific provisions targeting federal employees' pay or benefits,...

As it should be, because government is what gives us a reference point for hard work equals more pay, less work equals no job, and over all government workers are those workers who suffer the most because they give selflessly for the promotion of the freedoms that the rest of us enjoy and in many cases abuse.

And this is without even considering the hell that those in the armed services have to go through.

Government workers, especially politicians are true civil servants because they give more than they take.

[Jim from C-Town]

One out of three should be laid off today, two out of three the next day and so on until someone begins to notice....

In all reality, I'll believe they are serious when they eliminate at least some of the workers in the Federal Government.

[Jim from C-Town]

When has there ever been a general lay off or reduction in force of the federal work force?

[dfwgator]

One out of three should be laid off today, two out of three the next day and so on until someone begins to notice....

I would put the over/under on the point where somebody notices at about 5 years.

[Jim from C-Town]

That soon?

[dfwgator]

So I take it, you would go with the “over.”

[muawiyah]

Hmm, 1 out of 3 ~ that'd have to be in the UNNECESSARY government agencies ~ such as:

Labor

Commerce

HUD

Education

Interior

Agriculture

and a host of other subcabinet entitites.

[muawiyah]

Hmm ~ RIFs ~ I went through SEVERAL of them.

They are held all the time. You haven't lived until you go through a RIF.

Why do you ask?

Hey, I even went through the abolition and dismantlement of a Department, as well as the creation and set up of a new major government agency.

There are all sorts of experiences to have as a government employee.

Ever been drafted?

Then there's retirement.

[Jim from C-Town]

Yes

[shield]

This doesn't really matter....old Harry already said it is DOA...when it reaches the senate and the crack smoking man child in our WH has already said per his advisers he'd veto it....it sounds like it is time to invoke the 25th.

[Jim from C-Town]

I would exempt the military from utter annihilation, however Most government agencies should be outright eliminated. We have a $14 trillion debt and budget deficit of 42%. There should be wholesale eliminations of programs and departments.

These are serious times. There isn't enough money in the World to pay for the debt and unfunded liabilities of the Federal Government. That doesn't include the state and local governments. People should be fired, they have to be. Any talks that do not include elimination of large portions of the Federal workforce are on their face not serious.

[wiggen]

“Government workers, especially politicians are true civil servants because they give more than they take.”
You may want to double check that sentence as i don’t know anyone that thinks politicians give more than they take.

[La Enchiladita]

What? So now all they are proposing to cut is Defense? Am I the only who remembers that Republicans vowed that defense cuts were off limits?

[La Enchiladita]

Any talks that do not include elimination of large portions of the Federal workforce are on their face not serious.

And that is why I am not giving serious attention to the so-called negotiations going on. Imho, both parties are screwing us and not getting ANYTHING done.