Attack on FERS

[brooksmd]

Personally I'd be more concerned with this:

http://moneymorning.com/2010/01/27/retirement-plans/

I realize this is from Jan 2010, but the fact that some in congress think it's a good enough idea to have the person who dreamed it up come talk to them, gives cause for concern. Doing away with the pre-tax investment option would put a lot of tax money in the congressional coffers. How would you like the people running SS, Medicare and Healthcare, running your retirement plan? Scary thought.

 

[Viva_La_Migra]

The Burger King point I was trying to make...was that if the proposed bill reduced Federal retirement to a 5% matching 401K and whatever is left of social security, then federal retirement would be not only worse than any other state or local gov't...it would be worse than any of the largest 500 companies in the country...and even worse than Burger King.

If the lawmakers were concerned about making sure the reduced pension portion of FERS was fully funded (and it is in great shape compared to CSRS) they could nudge the employee contribution portion up from near 1% today to perhaps 1.3 to 1.5% and it would be fully funded.

If they wanted to go to just a TSP, they could at least do a 2% match per 1% employee match for the first 5% of employee contributions.

But that's not whats being proposed by these lawmakers. They just want to do away with the FERS pension, not give employees a chance to fix it. Not make the 401k matching as good as some larger companies. They want to punish federal employees just like Wall Street CEO's have done to the rest of the working class over the past decade. Anyway that's just my opinion, and I know that opinions vary.

BTW...many large companies have gone to the FERS model of combined 401K and reduced pension plus Social Security.

http://www.marketwatch.com/story/new-milestone-reached-in-pensions-slow-death

And there is a recent push for smaller companies to also go to a FERS type retirement model.

http://www.mainstreet.com/article/retirement/401k/pension-plus-401k-best-both-worlds

Are they hiring weathermen at Burger King? Go for it!

 

[crws]

Are they hiring weathermen at Burger King? Go for it!

you never know- they could orient their locations based on the prevailing breezes blowing towards McD's direction. :laugh:

 

[nnuut]

HEY!!! Share the Wealth, what's wrong with you?:nuts:

 

[SkyPilot]

I would like apologize to you, FWM... I have been unduly snarky. I will try to be better.

 

[crws]

HEY!!! Share the Wealth, what's wrong with you?:nuts: View attachment 10854

Got Wealth?

 

[nnuut]

Got Wealth?

No, But Obama still wants me to share what I worked for with the non-achievers.
​

 

[crws]

No, But Obama still wants me to share what I worked for with the non-achievers.
View attachment 10865​

you're sharing already, what's changed? :laugh:

 

[Afishegg]

you're sharing already, what's changed? :laugh:

You mean whats gonna change? I dunno, but I bet you it's gonna be B.a.d in the worst kinda way possible.

 

[James48843]

Skip Burger King.

McDonalds just announced they are hiring.

McDonald's wants to fill 50K jobs

http://finance.yahoo.com/news/McDon...GRzd2Fu?x=0&sec=topStories&pos=8&asset=&ccode=

 

[alevin]

FWM, if kids are at all idealistic like I was, they're going to go for the job they think they want to do the rest of their lives, even if it doesn't pay that great. I treaded water for 10 years (including grad school) trying to break into my profession and a stable job with benefits doing something I wanted to be doing the rest of my life. went into short-term debt to my folks to transition the last few months out of grad school into first PFT job across the state. I grew up hearing that feds accepted lower incomes for greater job stability and benefits-relative to the private sector. I accepted gov employment under those conditions. health insurance, life insurance, disability, a do-it-yourself (in part) retirement. what wasnt to like-from the perspective of someone coming out of school into the jobless recovery of the mid-80s with a few thou in debt?

In the current job market, there will be many kids coming into the workforce who would be happy to have the opportunity to do something they love, even if flipping burgers at BK might offer better retirement bennies. How many kids want to sling burgers at MickeyDs the rest of their lives? just tonight, I heard a checker at the grocery store checkstand say his kid wants to go into marine biology for his M.S. degree, even tho his dad kept encouraging him to go into pharmacy for the job prospects. sounds like me at that age. my parents wanted me to become a veterinarian, I kept saying no thanks.

 

[Hallatauer]

Did anyone read this fully? for new federal government hires starting in 2013.

As far as the current budget, this is meaningless. New hires in 2013 won't retire until 2038 with 25 years. This doesn't affect us... it's the new hires 2 years from now that will ultimately be affected 25-30 years from now.

 

[crws]

Did anyone read this fully? for new federal government hires starting in 2013.

As far as the current budget, this is meaningless. New hires in 2013 won't retire until 2038 with 25 years. This doesn't affect us... it's the new hires 2 years from now that will ultimately be affected 25-30 years from now.

Who just won't know it until they wake up in 15 years....

 

[Texarkandy]

Congress IS on the FERS plan, and has been since the Federal Government moved from CSRS to FERS for Congress members first elected after January 1, 1984.

Details:

http://www.senate.gov/CRSReports/crs-publish.cfm?pid='0E,*PLC8"@

True ... except they are on the 12d FERS plan for LEO's/ATC's/Firefighters with the enhanced 1.7% computation & early unreduced retirement w/supplement eligibility.

Must be a stressful and/or dangerous job being a congressperson.


(had it not been for the LEO 12d retirement ... I wouldn't have stayed with the Feds for 25 years)

 

[Show-me]

I want CSRS, but wait they got rid of that the last time they needed to ................. cut spending. Wait a minute, that sounds familar ........... naagh they wouldn't after all politicians rely on it too. Oh wait they got the better deal last time a 1.7 multiplier instead of the paltry 1.0 multiplier. And, they plan on retiring on the money they make from the Corporate Board positions they will hold after politics. LOL, now it make sense. Wake up folks, you can't stop this train, the public will support it and we live in a Democracy which means a voter will not want you to have a better deal than they have and they don't have a pot to **** in.

Be happy you got in on the good deal the same way the CSRS folk feel when they look at us FERS folks. It's the way it goes, count on it.

 

[Show-me]

They got any LEO jobs for maintenance guys and can my years transfer over and I get the 1.7 multiplier?

 

[Texarkandy]

They got any LEO jobs for maintenance guys and can my years transfer over and I get the 1.7 multiplier?

The FERS Law Enforcement/AirTrafficController/Firefighter retirement is sometimes referred to "12d" which is the section it is found in in the law (CSRS was called "6c")

Sorry show-me .... if you were to transfer to a 12d covered LEO/ATC/FF job (or get elected to congress :cheesy , your non-12d years will still only compute at 1% and you still have to do twenty 12d years to be eligible for the 1.7% computation. Even if you work and pay in as a 12d employee for part of your career, if you don't get a minimum of twenty 12d years you won't get the 1.7% computation for those years no matter how many total years you have.

Also, each 12d year over the initial twenty only computes at 1%.

Example: I have 4 bought back military years + 25 FERS 12d (LEO) years for a total of 29 years. However only twenty years were computed at 1.7% and the other nine were computed at 1%. You'd think my additional five LEO years would compute at 1.7%, but nope ... they nickel & dime FERS at every turn ---- even those of us with that "good" 12d deal.

Speaking of nickel & diming .... wait'll you find out how they compute the FERS Supplement.

Still, I'm not complaining (much)

 

[Show-me]

Thanks, I think.

 

[Zebra]

Count your blessings and name them one by one: My FERS was at 1.1% and that was only because I was over 62 I believe.

The FERS Law Enforcement/AirTrafficController/Firefighter retirement is sometimes referred to "12d" which is the section it is found in in the law (CSRS was called "6c")

Sorry show-me .... if you were to transfer to a 12d covered LEO/ATC/FF job (or get elected to congress :cheesy , your non-12d years will still only compute at 1% and you still have to do twenty 12d years to be eligible for the 1.7% computation. Even if you work and pay in as a 12d employee for part of your career, if you don't get a minimum of twenty 12d years you won't get the 1.7% computation for those years no matter how many total years you have.

Also, each 12d year over the initial twenty only computes at 1%.

Example: I have 4 bought back military years + 25 FERS 12d (LEO) years for a total of 29 years. However only twenty years were computed at 1.7% and the other nine were computed at 1%. You'd think my additional five LEO years would compute at 1.7%, but nope ... they nickel & dime FERS at every turn ---- even those of us with that "good" 12d deal.

Speaking of nickel & diming .... wait'll you find out how they compute the FERS Supplement.

Still, I'm not complaining (much)

 

[Texarkandy]

Any way you slice it with FERS, the fact remains that this ain't your Dad's old civil service pension (or health insurance). I'm sure there's many more large corporations with better retirement packages than FERS nowadays. I've known at least a couple employees whose spouse's corporate health benefits far exceeded FEHB at less cost to the employee.

And things aren't likely to get better with the likes of Senator Colburn and a lot of his ignorant grandstanding.

Personally, I'm an advocate of cutting unecessary & duplicative programs & the overall number of workers employed by the government rather than employee compensation and benefits.

I hope they remember Senator Colburn someday when we have a civil service of the caliber found in some third world countries. Ultimately, you get what you pay for.