New Hires pay more into FERS

[Silverbird]

Obama signs federal pension provision -- FederalDaily.com

 

[Silverbird]

Not really happy, all it means is after the hiring freeze we still will have to each be 2 people, or three people, or four people. Government service doesn't exactly look like a good propect for graduates! Anyway, if they decided to change the current retirement system, not only would there be a lawsuit or two, they probably would get a bigger drop in head count than they want as workers get out before the system changes (there always is a phase-in time). And with the hiring freeze, can't hire.:ban:

 

[PessOptimist]

Sad.
Should never have hapened.
Either a smaller pension fee (another 1%) for all should have been done, or no pension hike...with an end to Oil company tax subsidies instead.
But I am sure of one thing. Many FERS folks on this site are saying: "Yay! who cares if it affects someone else...as long as its not me then thats OK".

All this so we can keep taxes low for the top 1% "Job Cremators".... aka big business outsource specialists.

I agree that a better solution/compromise could have been found.

But I am sure of one thing. Many CSRS folks at the end of 1986 were saying "Yay! who cares if it affects someone else...as long as its not me then thats OK".

History repeats itself. Will this be referred to as "FERSII"?

 

[WorkFE]

We are all feeling the affects of "Change":laugh:
I don't know anyone on this board personally but I know alot of federal employees. I can't think of one that would be thinking "Yay! who cares if it affects someone else...as long as its not me then thats OK".
CSRS employees bought into the system that was offered many years ago and when it changed to FERS they had an option to switch. FERS employees bought into that system and I believe it only fair that FWM be afforded the opportunity to switch.
I am glad, at this moment I'm not affected but in no way do I not care that my future fellow employees are affected. It creates to a certain degree segragation between the employees.
I'll prove how much I care in Nov.

 

[Show-me]

Both parties make me sick...........................

 

[PessOptimist]

We are all feeling the affects of "Change":laugh:
I don't know anyone on this board personally but I know alot of federal employees. I can't think of one that would be thinking "Yay! who cares if it affects someone else...as long as its not me then thats OK".
CSRS employees bought into the system that was offered many years ago and when it changed to FERS they had an option to switch. FERS employees bought into that system and I believe it only fair that FWM be afforded the opportunity to switch.
I am glad, at this moment I'm not affected but in no way do I not care that my future fellow employees are affected. It creates to a certain degree segragation between the employees.
I'll prove how much I care in Nov.

Well said WFE!

Unfortunately I can think of a few feds both current and retired who do feel that way. They are getting fewer as time goes on (here anyway) but were usually the ones who complained a lot and thought their main job was to serve on as many committees as possible and to cook lunch for said committee's fundraisers.


My main concern whenever these personnel changes come about is the definition of "joined the federal work force". This concerns the people in our training and apprentice programs. When they complete their programs and are kept on as Journeymen will they be considered new hires? That would really suck for them.

But then I could say "Yay! who cares if it affects someone else...as long as its not me then thats OK"

PO

 

[Kaufmanrider]

I agree that a better solution/compromise could have been found.

But I am sure of one thing. Many CSRS folks at the end of 1986 were saying "Yay! who cares if it affects someone else...as long as its not me then thats OK".

History repeats itself. Will this be referred to as "FERSII"?

What concerns me is that President Obama signed the bill. And they say he urged leading Dem's (supporters of Fed's) to back off and give him an election year victory at our expense.

Truth be known, neither the Rep's or Dem's will stand up for us when it comes down to it.

 

[KevinD]

Kind of off topic I know but I didn't want to start a new thread.

Alan Simpson: US Budget Deficits Heading For a Train Wreck
Bi-Partisan Support Building in Congress for Simpson-Bowles Initiative

Theres an MP3 to listen to the interview but theres also a transcript so you can read it if you want.

Alan Simpson: US Budget Deficits Heading For a Train Wreck Bi-Partisan Support Building in Congress for Simpson-Bowles Initiative | James J Puplava CFP | FINANCIAL SENSE

Website...

Moment of Truth

 

[WorkFE]

usually the ones who complained a lot and thought their main job was to serve on as many committees as possible and to cook lunch for said committee's fundraisers.

Oops, I guess I do know a few.:nuts:

 

[Boghie]

I think a better option would have been a higher match on TSP contributions. Or maybe a higher automatic contribution.

I, personally, would have taken that over an unfunded pension.

Promised to you and Run by todays politicians, but...

Paid by future politicians.

 

[nasa1974]

All that congress is doing now is making it less attractive for people to come work for the government. When you started working for the government you knew that you were making less money a year than someone outside the government, but you had a stable and steady job and you looked forward to a nice retirement pension. Now if you come work for the government you still make less money your job is not very stable and the retirement pension sucks. So why come work for the government?

 

[Buster]

All that congress is doing now is making it less attractive for people to come work for the government. When you started working for the government you knew that you were making less money a year than someone outside the government, but you had a stable and steady job and you looked forward to a nice retirement pension. Now if you come work for the government you still make less money your job is not very stable and the retirement pension sucks. So why come work for the government?

 

[uscfanhawaii]

Obama signs federal pension provision -- FederalDaily.com

I wonder how they came up with this number...3.1%!? I didn't do the meticulous math on this, but 3.1% for 30yrs is almost a whole year of salary. So if you get a 30% 'pension' after working 30yrs, isn't it really just your own money for 3 years? And that does not even take into account compounding interest over those 30 years, which must double or quadruple the amount paid in. And what about the folks that do not live very long after retirement? How is that a good deal for them?! This seems VERY short sighted. If someone sees this some other way, I would sure like to hear it! Why bother with a pension at all....just let them keep their own money. People are not stupid, and they will see this pension as non-existent and likely look elsewhere for a job. :suspicious:

 

[SteelSaving]

Well said WFE!

Unfortunately I can think of a few feds both current and retired who do feel that way. They are getting fewer as time goes on (here anyway) but were usually the ones who complained a lot and thought their main job was to serve on as many committees as possible and to cook lunch for said committee's fundraisers.


My main concern whenever these personnel changes come about is the definition of "joined the federal work force". This concerns the people in our training and apprentice programs. When they complete their programs and are kept on as Journeymen will they be considered new hires? That would really suck for them.

But then I could say "Yay! who cares if it affects someone else...as long as its not me then thats OK"

PO

That is a good point, PO.
I am actually in an intern program. The thing is, after the first year and a half, they scrapped it because some people thought they were using it as a way to bypass the point system at USAjobs. So no intern program, but also not considered a journeyman yet as far as I know. We were under a 3 year probation period, which was dropped to the standard 1 after the program was scrapped, so I wonder if at that point I received my final appointment.
I signed a document that says I will be an intern for three years (from Sept. '09) before graduating from it, which would be Sept. of this year, but I won't receive my GS-12 until Sept. 2013.

I guess if they try to put me into the new program, I can go back to that document I signed if I want to make it a fight.