-
Welcome to the TSP Talk Forums forums.
You are currently viewing our boards as a guest which gives you limited access to view most discussions and access our other features. By joining our free community you will have access to post topics, communicate privately with other members (PM), respond to polls, upload content, join our AutoTracker, and access many other special features. Registration is simple and absolutely free so please, join our community today!
If you have any problems with the registration process or your account login, please contact us. -
Please read our AutoTracker policy on the IFT deadline and remaining active. Thanks!
-
$ - Premium Service Content (Info) | AutoTracker Monthly Winners | Is Gmail et al, Blocking Our emails?
Find us on: Facebook & X | Posting Copyrighted Material
-
20% Off Annual Premium Subscriptions!*
Ends Jan 18... Click Here For More Information
* For new or current subscribers -
Join the TSP Talk AutoTracker: How to Get Started | Login | Main AutoTracker Page
-
The Forum works well on MOBILE devices without an app: Just go to: https://forum.tsptalk.com ...
Or you can now use TapaTalk again!
Retirement and Sick Leave
- Thread starter Montana
- Start date
sammyshanker
New member
imported post
According to K. Wayne MacLeod, President of Federal Employees Benefit Group (http://www.febg.com), the Government will be offering thesame sick leave benefit to FERS employees as soon as 2011. He stated that due to the rising cost of FERS employees using their sick leave prior to retirement and the fact that almost all CSRS employees will be retired by 2011 it will cost the Government approximately one (1) billion dollars per month in lost productivity if nothing is done. He added that Congress is already aware of this problem and plans to take action. I just don't know if it is worth giving 2000 hours of sick leave for one percent in additional retirement.
If you are a current Federal Employee and youhave not experienced a FEBG seminar, I would highly recommend it. MacLeod was extremely knowlegable and did not lay on the sales pitch. He focuses on reducing your tax liability in retirement so you can enjoy more to the money you saved. No I willnot be paid for giving FEBG a positive plug here, I just really appreciated thehonest assessmentprovided to me during the seminar I attended in May 2005.
According to K. Wayne MacLeod, President of Federal Employees Benefit Group (http://www.febg.com), the Government will be offering thesame sick leave benefit to FERS employees as soon as 2011. He stated that due to the rising cost of FERS employees using their sick leave prior to retirement and the fact that almost all CSRS employees will be retired by 2011 it will cost the Government approximately one (1) billion dollars per month in lost productivity if nothing is done. He added that Congress is already aware of this problem and plans to take action. I just don't know if it is worth giving 2000 hours of sick leave for one percent in additional retirement.
If you are a current Federal Employee and youhave not experienced a FEBG seminar, I would highly recommend it. MacLeod was extremely knowlegable and did not lay on the sales pitch. He focuses on reducing your tax liability in retirement so you can enjoy more to the money you saved. No I willnot be paid for giving FEBG a positive plug here, I just really appreciated thehonest assessmentprovided to me during the seminar I attended in May 2005.
imported post
The system lends itself to abuse. Every one has an FMLA packet on file. Private industries have the same problems. Isave my sl and hope I never have to use it. It is a good feeling to know if any thing happens I will collect my paycheck for over a year. How much would an insurance policy for that type of coverage cost? SL is there to be used if needed, not to be considered a "I" will loose it when I re tire.
The system lends itself to abuse. Every one has an FMLA packet on file. Private industries have the same problems. Isave my sl and hope I never have to use it. It is a good feeling to know if any thing happens I will collect my paycheck for over a year. How much would an insurance policy for that type of coverage cost? SL is there to be used if needed, not to be considered a "I" will loose it when I re tire.
imported post
Hmm.. So abusing it is actually helping us move towards this being fixed. I'll be sure and keep that in mind the next time i dont feel like going to work.
My federal employer doesnt want me to cheat them by misusing sick leave, yet they feel perfectly ok punishing me for being healthy.
Call me an optimist, but i'm just not going to need many sick leave hours.
For those that are attempting to try to have insurance for one year via your sick leave, have you guys never heard of disability insurance? They make insurance for that, and there's no need to eat 1500 hours of sick leave when you retire for that purpose. For starters, you get a basic disabilities package just being a federal employee (granted it doesnt take effect until a few years of service; i forgot how many).
Hmm.. So abusing it is actually helping us move towards this being fixed. I'll be sure and keep that in mind the next time i dont feel like going to work.
My federal employer doesnt want me to cheat them by misusing sick leave, yet they feel perfectly ok punishing me for being healthy.
Call me an optimist, but i'm just not going to need many sick leave hours.
For those that are attempting to try to have insurance for one year via your sick leave, have you guys never heard of disability insurance? They make insurance for that, and there's no need to eat 1500 hours of sick leave when you retire for that purpose. For starters, you get a basic disabilities package just being a federal employee (granted it doesnt take effect until a few years of service; i forgot how many).
imported post
Boy, that's not my experience! In the DCarea, federal government employees areextremely sharp, entrepreneurial, hard working, and ambitious. I'd picktop government and military personnel over peoplein private sector any day (politicos, especially Republicans,don't count!). Specifically, civil servants couldrun General Motors much better than its current, over payed, moronic, andmyopicmanagement.
Incidentally, I interviewed with General Motors 35 years ago and they didn't hire me. How smart could they be?
Boy, that's not my experience! In the DCarea, federal government employees areextremely sharp, entrepreneurial, hard working, and ambitious. I'd picktop government and military personnel over peoplein private sector any day (politicos, especially Republicans,don't count!). Specifically, civil servants couldrun General Motors much better than its current, over payed, moronic, andmyopicmanagement.
Incidentally, I interviewed with General Motors 35 years ago and they didn't hire me. How smart could they be?
Spaf
Honorary Hall of Fame Member
imported post
rokid,
A while back we had a run in with xxxxxx motor company. We needed a D&B report for our file. The actual D&B was about a dozen pages, however the listing of corporate officers was about 1 1/2 thick, of nothing but VPs. Unbelievable!
Rgds Spaf
rokid,
A while back we had a run in with xxxxxx motor company. We needed a D&B report for our file. The actual D&B was about a dozen pages, however the listing of corporate officers was about 1 1/2 thick, of nothing but VPs. Unbelievable!
Rgds
Spafimported post
Spaf,
Top Heavy! Inefficient! Greedy!
I get frustrated with GM because: 1.) I'm from Detroit and grew up and worked in the auto industryduring the glory days - 50s and 60s; 2.) There's no reason why U.S auto manufacturers shouldn't be #1, world-wide - except for mismanagement. Toyota pays the same wages,provides equivalent health care, and builds way better cars than any of the big three. And, they do it with U.S. employees.
GM, Ford, and Chrysler - decades of mismanagement. Now they want a bailout. Who would have bought a Japanese, let alone, a Korean car in the 1960's? I'd still buy a '59 Chevy Impala SS convertible (white with a red interior) over anything Detroit produces today!
Spaf,
Top Heavy! Inefficient! Greedy!
I get frustrated with GM because: 1.) I'm from Detroit and grew up and worked in the auto industryduring the glory days - 50s and 60s; 2.) There's no reason why U.S auto manufacturers shouldn't be #1, world-wide - except for mismanagement. Toyota pays the same wages,provides equivalent health care, and builds way better cars than any of the big three. And, they do it with U.S. employees.
GM, Ford, and Chrysler - decades of mismanagement. Now they want a bailout. Who would have bought a Japanese, let alone, a Korean car in the 1960's? I'd still buy a '59 Chevy Impala SS convertible (white with a red interior) over anything Detroit produces today!
Birchtree
Well-known member
imported post
Rokid,
You get a free pass tonight on the Republican comment. But the primary problem with Detroit are their legacy cost structures and the entrenched unions with their inbred inefficiencies. Same problems that plagued the steel industry, autoparts and airlines. And don't you think that government agencies both state and federal will go through their own restructuring? I know I want my defined contribution plan roll over to put me in charge of my own retirement. The sooner the better. Take care.
Dennis - card carrying Republican or should I say born again Republican thanks to Jimmy.
Rokid,
You get a free pass tonight on the Republican comment. But the primary problem with Detroit are their legacy cost structures and the entrenched unions with their inbred inefficiencies. Same problems that plagued the steel industry, autoparts and airlines. And don't you think that government agencies both state and federal will go through their own restructuring? I know I want my defined contribution plan roll over to put me in charge of my own retirement. The sooner the better. Take care.
Dennis - card carrying Republican or should I say born again Republican thanks to Jimmy.
imported post
I know, personally, 4 GS-15's/SESs. I know, ole, about 150 GS-5-13's.
You say you know of more gs-5-13's that abused sick leave than GS-15's/SESs? Well, doh! So do I, rofl. Of course, I realize that maybe i know more gs-5-13's that abused sick leave because...i know more gs-5-13's, lol.
Also, of those 4 GS-15s/SES's i know, all 4 of them are on CSRS. hmm!
I know, personally, 4 GS-15's/SESs. I know, ole, about 150 GS-5-13's.
You say you know of more gs-5-13's that abused sick leave than GS-15's/SESs? Well, doh! So do I, rofl. Of course, I realize that maybe i know more gs-5-13's that abused sick leave because...i know more gs-5-13's, lol.
Also, of those 4 GS-15s/SES's i know, all 4 of them are on CSRS. hmm!
Wimpy
Member
imported post
Yeah, I've never really had a problem with how other people manage their benefits. I've always thought that how someone manages benefits is their business and no one elses. I'm not a supervisor and even if I was I would not be preoccupied with sick leave usage unless someone flat out put their stupid face on and admitted to abusing it.
Like others, I've had my doubts at times about someone's sick leave usage but I never let that doubt turn to envy.Envy, in this instance, is when we expect everyone else to follow the same standard we set for ourselves, but are not quite convinced our standards are practical or fairin thereal world. Miseryoftentimes loves company.
I look at my sick leave balance and get some measure ofsecurity or peace of mind in having what I term a 'reasonable balance'.That number will be different for different people with their unique circumstances. My definition of a 'reasonable balance' is shifting as I grow older.
I know of asupervisorwhoinitiated disciplinary action againstan employee for abusing annual leave and that dip stick supervisor had signed the leave slips. That was good for a laugh or two. Again, envy was the culprit because the individual accused of abusing his annual leave was earning the maximum rate of leave per year while the upstart supversior was getting the minimum. It is amazing sometimes how envy and not minding our own business can distort one's perception of reality.
Yeah, I've never really had a problem with how other people manage their benefits. I've always thought that how someone manages benefits is their business and no one elses. I'm not a supervisor and even if I was I would not be preoccupied with sick leave usage unless someone flat out put their stupid face on and admitted to abusing it.
Like others, I've had my doubts at times about someone's sick leave usage but I never let that doubt turn to envy.Envy, in this instance, is when we expect everyone else to follow the same standard we set for ourselves, but are not quite convinced our standards are practical or fairin thereal world. Miseryoftentimes loves company.
I look at my sick leave balance and get some measure ofsecurity or peace of mind in having what I term a 'reasonable balance'.That number will be different for different people with their unique circumstances. My definition of a 'reasonable balance' is shifting as I grow older.
I know of asupervisorwhoinitiated disciplinary action againstan employee for abusing annual leave and that dip stick supervisor had signed the leave slips. That was good for a laugh or two. Again, envy was the culprit because the individual accused of abusing his annual leave was earning the maximum rate of leave per year while the upstart supversior was getting the minimum. It is amazing sometimes how envy and not minding our own business can distort one's perception of reality.
imported post
Birchtree,
Thanks for the pass,but I stand by my analysis of the auto industry (and Republicans). Bad management.
I will agree that the UAWbecame too arrogant in the 1970s. However, the pendulum has swung way too far in the other direction.WalMartizing is not good forthe country. If you wanta tiny number of very richand everyone else poor, go to Brazil (or any other 3rd world country).That's real laissez faire.
The UAW gave up wage increases in favor of benefits, i.e. pensions and health care. Now the big three are reneging on thoseagreements. Are bonds and stocks next?
Quote: "As General Motors slashes jobs, closes plants and battles to avoid bankruptcy, the company’s CEO has set up a retirement plan that will pay him at least $4.6 million a year – nearly twice his current salary."
Actually, this is an academic discussion. GM is going down. Their management can't figure it out. Good riddance.
Birchtree,
Thanks for the pass,but I stand by my analysis of the auto industry (and Republicans
). Bad management. I will agree that the UAWbecame too arrogant in the 1970s. However, the pendulum has swung way too far in the other direction.WalMartizing is not good forthe country. If you wanta tiny number of very richand everyone else poor, go to Brazil (or any other 3rd world country).That's real laissez faire.
The UAW gave up wage increases in favor of benefits, i.e. pensions and health care. Now the big three are reneging on thoseagreements. Are bonds and stocks next?
Quote: "As General Motors slashes jobs, closes plants and battles to avoid bankruptcy, the company’s CEO has set up a retirement plan that will pay him at least $4.6 million a year – nearly twice his current salary."
Actually, this is an academic discussion. GM is going down. Their management can't figure it out. Good riddance.
Mike
Active member
imported post
"WalMartizing is not good forthe country."
How do you figure? They provide goods and services at very low cost(which helps offset inflationary pressures.. I thought that was a good thing?)- which is how they've gotten to be such a big company (by beating the crap out of the competition). They provide jobs in areas that might not otherwise have them. People make fun of "Wal-Mart" jobs as if they're bad. I bet the people working those jobs don't necessarily feel that way. I know for a fact my close friend who has worked his way up from sales into management there doesn't feel that way, either. It's funny that someone working for the government would take shots at a successful company. If it wasn't for this company and others like it providing the jobs (and thus the income and the tax revenue), you and I would NOT have jobs in our current capacity.
Give that one some thought.
"WalMartizing is not good forthe country."
How do you figure? They provide goods and services at very low cost(which helps offset inflationary pressures.. I thought that was a good thing?)- which is how they've gotten to be such a big company (by beating the crap out of the competition). They provide jobs in areas that might not otherwise have them. People make fun of "Wal-Mart" jobs as if they're bad. I bet the people working those jobs don't necessarily feel that way. I know for a fact my close friend who has worked his way up from sales into management there doesn't feel that way, either. It's funny that someone working for the government would take shots at a successful company. If it wasn't for this company and others like it providing the jobs (and thus the income and the tax revenue), you and I would NOT have jobs in our current capacity.
Give that one some thought.
SkyPilot
Well-known member
imported post
Annual Leave Abuse? How could that be? Is there even any policy that outlines what "Annual Leave Abuse" could be? Using vacation time by it's nature cannot be abuse, whereby withholding permission by a supervisor must be justified. So, the supervisor who signed the leave slips is truly goofy, as you say!
And in most agencies, "sick leave" is so loosely defined that a supervisor pursues a disciplinary action against an employee at their own peril. And it must be applied uniformly so as not to show favoritism or preferential treatment, thereby eliminating almost any claim of abuse, as application of this rule would prompt so many exceptions as to no longer be viable.
Annual Leave Abuse? How could that be? Is there even any policy that outlines what "Annual Leave Abuse" could be? Using vacation time by it's nature cannot be abuse, whereby withholding permission by a supervisor must be justified. So, the supervisor who signed the leave slips is truly goofy, as you say!
And in most agencies, "sick leave" is so loosely defined that a supervisor pursues a disciplinary action against an employee at their own peril. And it must be applied uniformly so as not to show favoritism or preferential treatment, thereby eliminating almost any claim of abuse, as application of this rule would prompt so many exceptions as to no longer be viable.
Wimpy
Member
imported post
Wal-Martization of America is certainly a hot topic of late. Gee, for a company that so many people seem to hate, they ain’t doin’ so bad, are they?
Hey, I’ve certainly had feelings of remorse about some of the smaller stores being pushed out. Small is good. You get to know people on a first name basis and you can find things easier…if they have it[/i]. And, sometimes it is worth paying a little more for something for the perceived value of dealing with people you know on a first name basis, but then again, friendship only goes so far. If the small store doesn’t have what you need or their prices exceed the value of the friendships, personalized service, and the convenience of shopping at the corner…it soon becomes a business decision for consumers to make. And, the consumer has spoken. The consumer wants lower prices and they are willing to sacrifice the homegrown feel of the small community stores for the Wal-Marts that help them stretch their ever shrinking dollar and ever shrinking real wages.
So, if anyone is to blame for the Walmartization of America it is the consumers themselves. But, who can throw rocks at them without chancing a hit from a richochet? Don’t we all shop around for the lowest priced gas? I’ll pay a little more per gallon for the convenience of avoiding long lines, but I have my limits. Voting with our dollars is true democracy in its purest form. Each dollar spent in Wal-Mart or the small store on the corner has a direct economic impact. Forcefully removing Wal-Mart via political law subverts that process and ultimately will lead to less choices and much higher prices…as the U.S.S.R experienced.
I trust that one day Wal-Mart will get a little too big for its britches just like some of the major airlines and Detroit auto makers. Successful companies, with little competition, are tempted to do a little scalping. And when they do, some eager beaver will look at their fat profit margin and say to himself that he can beat them in quality and/or pricing or a combination of the two. And the whole process begins again. Isn’t that how Wal-Mart got started?
Businesses have their lifecycles and to deny these marketplace processes to evolve and come full circle, via collectivist interventionism and political law, isn’t[/i][/b] freedom.
Wal-Martization of America is certainly a hot topic of late. Gee, for a company that so many people seem to hate, they ain’t doin’ so bad, are they?
Hey, I’ve certainly had feelings of remorse about some of the smaller stores being pushed out. Small is good. You get to know people on a first name basis and you can find things easier…if they have it[/i]. And, sometimes it is worth paying a little more for something for the perceived value of dealing with people you know on a first name basis, but then again, friendship only goes so far. If the small store doesn’t have what you need or their prices exceed the value of the friendships, personalized service, and the convenience of shopping at the corner…it soon becomes a business decision for consumers to make. And, the consumer has spoken. The consumer wants lower prices and they are willing to sacrifice the homegrown feel of the small community stores for the Wal-Marts that help them stretch their ever shrinking dollar and ever shrinking real wages.
So, if anyone is to blame for the Walmartization of America it is the consumers themselves. But, who can throw rocks at them without chancing a hit from a richochet? Don’t we all shop around for the lowest priced gas? I’ll pay a little more per gallon for the convenience of avoiding long lines, but I have my limits. Voting with our dollars is true democracy in its purest form. Each dollar spent in Wal-Mart or the small store on the corner has a direct economic impact. Forcefully removing Wal-Mart via political law subverts that process and ultimately will lead to less choices and much higher prices…as the U.S.S.R experienced.
I trust that one day Wal-Mart will get a little too big for its britches just like some of the major airlines and Detroit auto makers. Successful companies, with little competition, are tempted to do a little scalping. And when they do, some eager beaver will look at their fat profit margin and say to himself that he can beat them in quality and/or pricing or a combination of the two. And the whole process begins again. Isn’t that how Wal-Mart got started?
Businesses have their lifecycles and to deny these marketplace processes to evolve and come full circle, via collectivist interventionism and political law, isn’t[/i][/b] freedom.
Similar threads
