TARGET ON YOUR BACK

[James48843]

Looks like Federal Employees, once again, have a very, very large target on their backs.



House Budget Committee Chairman Paul Ryan, R-Wis., in his fiscal 2014 budget plan, wants feds to pay 5.5 percent more of their salaries toward their FERS defined benefit; he would also eliminate an additional benefit -- what’s known as the Federal Employees Retirement System Annuity Supplement -- for those government workers who retire before the age of 62 and who are not eligible for mandatory retirement.

President Obama in his fiscal 2014 budget blueprint recommended that federal employees contribute 1.2 percent more of their pay, phased in at 0.4 percent over the next three years, toward their pensions. The White House estimated that the change would save the government $20 billion during the next decade. Obama also supports eliminating the FERS Annuity Supplement.

Geeze-we 're getting it at every turn. Which will it be? Paying 5.5% more of our salary into FERS, and no FERS supplement? Or only paying 1.2% more for our FERS, and no FERS supplement?

Sad.

More:

Groups Fear Federal Pensions Are At Risk in Budget Talks - Pay & Benefits - GovExec.com (http://www.govexec.com/pay-benefits/2013/11/groups-fear-federal-pensions-are-risk-budget-talks/73433/?oref=dropdown)

[WorkFE]

The good ole days are behind us James.

[weatherweenie]

I wonder if these proposals include everyone, or if they have wording that it would only be for employees hired after a certain date?

[Khotso]

Looks like Federal Employees, once again, have a very, very large target on their backs.



Geeze-we 're getting it at every turn. Which will it be? Paying 5.5% more of our salary into FERS, and no FERS supplement? Or only paying 1.2% more for our FERS, and no FERS supplement?

Sad.

More:

Groups Fear Federal Pensions Are At Risk in Budget Talks - Pay & Benefits - GovExec.com (http://www.govexec.com/pay-benefits/2013/11/groups-fear-federal-pensions-are-risk-budget-talks/73433/?oref=dropdown)


[/B]

Yeah, Obama's been a huge disappointment in this regard -- as well as in holding Wall Street accountable, willingness to consider cuts to SS and Medicare, etc. That's why we need to get BIG MONEY OUT OF ELECTIONS!

[nnuut]

If You Like Your Retirement Plan, You can Keep Your Retirement Plan, PERIOD!:cool:

[Khotso]

I wonder if these proposals include everyone, or if they have wording that it would only be for employees hired after a certain date?

Who cares? Federal employees and retirees are a target. It hurts us all in the end. It's all about dragging everyone down to the same low level rather than trying to raise all boats. Very few of our "leaders" are saying the right thing. We need more Sherrod Brown's.

[PessOptimist]

I wonder if these proposals include everyone, or if they have wording that it would only be for employees hired after a certain date?

Time will tell but I hope they grandfather us grandfathers. 750 days left.

[Buster]

All I got to say and I'm sick of people saying they're going to do it and do the opposite or nothing..


Next time you are at the voting booth..and you recognize a candidate on the ballot and you see a newbie running for the same office in Congress or Senate..punch the newbie's name (regardless of party) ..I mean flush every single one of those SOB's in Washington the hell out of office for good....Time to put people back in there that will represent the People that elected them.:mad:

[Frixxxx]

If You Like Your Retirement Plan, You can Keep Your Retirement Plan, PERIOD!:cool:nnuut for President!

[James48843]

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=en0p1Y35p3w

[Buster]

Federal budget deal hits worker pensions

12/11/13 03:00 PM—Updated 12/11/13 05:52 PM
facebook twitter 3 (http://www.tsptalk.com/mb/#) save (http://www.tsptalk.com/mb/#) share (http://www.tsptalk.com/mb/#) group (http://www.tsptalk.com/mb/#) 28 (http://www.msnbc.com/all/emerging-deal-would-screw-workers#discussions)


By Ned Resnikoff (http://www.tsptalk.com/person/ned-resnikoff)
New federal employees are going to feel the sting from the federal budget deal (http://www.tsptalk.com/msnbc/budget-deal-last) unveiled on Tuesday. Of the proposed legislation’s nearly $1 trillion in savings, an estimated $6 billion comes out of the pensions of any federal workers hired after Dec. 31, 2013. Those newer workers would have to pay for 4.4% of their retirement benefits, more than five times what older employees would pay.
Shortly before the details of the budget plan were announced, National Treasury Employees Union president Colleen Kelly told msnbc that changing her members’ retirement benefits would be “unacceptable.”
“There are too many in Congress who do not value and respect federal employees and the work they do,” she said. Kelly’s union estimates that federal workers have already lost some $113 billion to deficit-reduction efforts, thanks in part to a multi-year pay freeze (http://www.tsptalk.com/the-ed-show/house-gop-attempts-block-federal-employee) lasting from 2010 to the end of the 2013 government shutdown (http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/federal-eye/wp/2013/10/17/budget-deal-allows-for-january-federal-pay-raise/).
Many federal employees also lost money to unpaid furlough days as a result of the across-the-board budget cuts known as sequestration. In addition, federal employees hired after 2012 already contribute more to their own pensions (http://www.govexec.com/pay-benefits/2012/02/congress-approves-pension-hike-new-feds/41239/) than those hired before, thanks to a bill Congress passed in February of that year. Whereas older hires pay 0.8% of their salaries into the federal retirement system, those hired after the law went into effect contribute 3.1%.

MORE: http://www.msnbc.com/all/emerging-deal-would-screw-workers

[Warrenlm]

Let me get this straight, applying eyes with many moons behind them: individuals hired as new employees next year will see a larger deduction from their paychecks, for their annuity, if they stay with the federal govt, and claim it 30 years later. (or 40 years if the rules are changed.) (or at age 65 if the rules are changed.) (or at high 8 if the rules are changed) (or......) I know that this Entitlement Training and The State is your Father indoctrination begins in PreSchool now, but can't the cub reporter and the people who make their living by enflaming apply some thought? Does anyone know a Millenial who thinks he/she is mortal?

[k0nkuzh0n]

Its a sneaky way to do a 3.6% paycut for all new hires

[Frixxxx]

Terms of employment. We're not facing a cut but they're not facing the same term of employment for doing the same job as someone next to them.

Change the term of employment mid stream on me, and then we have an issue.

I'm not sure how this is going to save anything since many aren't allowed to replace retiring/leaving employees now.

Oh well.

[tsptalk]

Who cares? Federal employees and retirees are a target. It hurts us all in the end. It's all about dragging everyone down to the same low level rather than trying to raise all boats. Very few of our "leaders" are saying the right thing. We need more Sherrod Brown's.
Since this is the public area of the forum I won't get all political here, but we could be having this conversation in Redistribution of Wealth thread in the Political Forum. Maybe I'll meet you over there and tell you why. :)

[Bquat]

Terms of employment. We're not facing a cut but they're not facing the same term of employment for doing the same job as someone next to them.

Change the term of employment mid stream on me, and then we have an issue.

I'm not sure how this is going to save anything since many aren't allowed to replace retiring/leaving employees now.

Oh well. Went through the same thing in early 80's. Came out with FER's and hiring freeze. Only hired temps and contractors. It showed real savings on the costs of government. Showed how hiring contractors moved their wages over to private sector and cut retirement cost. Didn't show how they were being paid 10% more an hour because of no retirement commitment. Nobody said anything about mid-management and workers were made up 60% of government retirees. This was just what I witnessed. The contractors under bided the government to show savings and when the skill set was gone from the government they raised their rates. After the economy turned, bonuses had to be offered to get skilled people and all the temps became permanent.

[Buster]

Terms of employment. We're not facing a cut but they're not facing the same term of employment for doing the same job as someone next to them.

Change the term of employment mid stream on me, and then we have an issue.

I'm not sure how this is going to save anything since many aren't allowed to replace retiring/leaving employees now.

Oh well.First of all Frixxx....it's semantics and I think second of all, they intend on lifting the hiring freeze for most agencies...otherwise, this whole bit with higher retirement contributions for newbies after January 2014, is just smoke and mirrors..