Agreement to End Shutdown Allows for 1% Pay Raise

By on October 17, 2013 in Current Events, Pay & Benefits with 245 Comments

The prospect of ending the pay freeze is looking a bit more likely.

Senators Barbara Mikulski (D-MD) and Ben Cardin said in a recent statement that the legislation that ended the partial government shutdown includes a provision to allow President Obama to move forward with a 1% pay increase for federal employees in January.

The pay freeze was first announced in 2010 and pay has remained frozen for three years. Past attempts to end the pay freeze failed in Congress, the latest of which happened earlier this year.

The White House proposed a 1% pay increase as part of its 2014 budget proposal, and it reaffirmed that stance in August when the president transmitted a proposal for an alternate pay plan for an across the board pay increase of 1%.

“The promise of a modest pay raise and back pay for furloughed government employees are good first steps in recognizing the value of federal workers,” said Mikulski. “They have been the targets of unending attacks. They’ve been furloughed, laid off and locked out through no fault of their own.”

The agreement on reopening the government also includes back pay for federal employees who were furloughed during the shutdown.

© 2016 Ian Smith. All rights reserved. This article may not be reproduced without express written consent from Ian Smith.

About the Author

Ian Smith is one of the co-founders of FedSmith.com. He enjoys writing about current topics that affect the federal workforce. Ian also has a background in web development and does the technical work for the FedSmith.com web site and its sibling sites.

Post a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

245 Replies

Comments RSS

  1. Old Guy says:

    1%?……..Whoop – t – do. Congress raises theirs 7-8% at will. Jerks

  2. Brate Levin says:

    The hate towards Federal works is all about republicans and their quest to destroy Feds unions. Republicans want all states be be ‘right to work’ states, like their red (poor) states who take in most of the federal handouts. The republican American dream for America: Workers have no rights, no protects, and little benefits and earn low wages.

  3. FedUpFed says:

    Don’t get me wrong, I thought the shutdown was a DUMB idea on the republicans part but I’m confused. If the democrats insisted on a clean CR, then why were they allowed to add various things to the CR? I can understand the back pay (or even do that as a separate bill) but as much as I could use the money, I don’t think this is a good time to get a pay raise, especially when coupled with back pay.

  4. Rachel Roberts says:

    My question is, does this affect non-appropriated fund DoD employees who weren’t affected by furloughs? Or is this just another measure that excludes NAFs?

  5. Steve Neal says:

    Don’t want to confuse anyone with my math, so here it is real simple like…

    The average of the 20 most recent annual federal raises (before ObaMao, Reid, and Pelosi took charge in 2010) was about 3.3%. So, being screwed out of the last three consecutive annual raises comes out to more than 10% accumulated buying power loss (3 x 3.3%), because the missing increases would have compounded upon themselves…

    My point is, that 1% is virtually nothing ($14 a week) and anything less than a 10% raise right now is just a slap in our faces for our hard work and dedication. If they deny us again this year, it will require a 13.5% raise in 2015, so I hope they are budgeting for a personnel pay increase to make this all up to us…

    • Ross200 says:

      You need to accept the new reality that Federal Pay increases will be small to non-existent in the coming years. At a time when the Federal Government had huge budget deficits why do you think that Federal Employees should receive large pay increases ?

  6. Spanky says:

    The assault on federal employees 2000-2008 was brutal. The TSP also disappeared 2006-2008

  7. Guest says:

    Bribe … I will still NOT vote for any of ’em.

  8. HMA269 says:

    RAMBO IS _ _ _ _:)

  9. pay me now says:

    WHY DO WE HAVE TO WAIT AGAIN-NOW Jan? This is BS-we have aleady waited 4 years and freeze was only set for 3 horrible years-pay me now and pay me quick-then-give me another 1% in Jan-hurry up!

  10. rdubbs says:

    Will this also apply to agencies that are not on the GS scale? I’m particularly interested in TSA (SV grading system).

  11. good_reader1 says:

    The 1% doesn’t come close to the increase of health care premiums the last 3 years with no COLA. We continue to loose actually spending funds in the community.
    Unlike wall street that make millions and then defers any tax liability every cent paid to Federal workers are tracked and taxed.

    • 011290 says:

      Actually, your health care premium will be going down thanks in part to the Affordable Care Act. I haven’t had to pay any co pays at my children’s doctors this year.

    • mandinka says:

      You should be feeling sorry for the taxpayers that fund 75% of the premiums

      • Brooklyn says:

        Nobody feels sorry for you…. you get a lifetime retired military pension along with premiums paid for your health plan, free medicine, military hospitals, doctors & dental care, and use of the commissary, PX at reduced prices. We, Federal Employees, pay our taxes for your lifetime retired goodies.
        So cry me a river….

        • Proudvet says:

          I didn’t realize that you were willing to put down your life for this country.

          • mis12cuerdas says:

            I was in the military – but that I know of, no one willingly puts down their life for their country – Out of 6 brothes in my family, 5 of us served in the military and 2 of them during the Vietnam era… the last thing a soldier wants to do is die. We make commitments and we vow to defend our country and to follow orders, even though we know we may get maimed/killed – the military has been a volunteer choice since the draft was abolished after the Vietnam conflict., and for many is a way to find work and get paid, college tuition, etc… just like any other federal employee. Yes we have made sacrifices during our tours, etc…, but it was a volunteer choice I also know many ex-military personnel that work for the federal government (me included). Mandinka is full of it – as we all subsidize 100’s of federal programs that he takes advantage of (we all do)- w/out them he would not be able to afford all the goodies like cars, trips, tv’s, cable, or whatever else he needs.

  12. krs1251 says:

    Hope you all enjoy the 1% and the back pay. If you thought the public hated us before, you ain’t seen nothing yet! It will not take long (if they haven’t already started) for the fed bashers to get spun up on this. The spin will be something like, “Great! Feds get an extra two weeks off with pay and a raise!” Let spinning begin.

    • Fed_Peasant says:

      They will hate someone anyway. Any excuse will do in this culture!! It will keep being feds for a while longer. Let the idiots spin!! The more intelligent ones, who don’t spend hours per day with political talk shows, will have more original thoughts.

      • Ross200 says:

        You are correct. Instead of being positive, far too many people in the US thrive on blaming and hating particular institutions like the government or particular groups of people.

        • Rambo1957 says:

          What a hypocrite!

          • retired worker fed says:

            Why do you label Dennis a hypocrite on what he said in the above comment. He appears correct to me.

          • Rambo1957 says:

            He is absolutely correct. However, he labels people often on this forum. He assigns blame and makes excuses for those he supports politically. Have you not paid attention to how many times he’s used the racist accusation without anything more than assuming anyone slightly leaning to the right must be? Please tell me you have even bothered to notice.

        • mandinka says:

          much like feds blaming congress for their problems

    • retired worker fed says:

      I agree with fed peasant. The public does not judge me. I am also a taxpayer.

    • Brate Levin says:

      The hate towards Federal works is all about republicans and their quest to destroy unions. (Republs want all states be be ‘right to work’ states, like red poor states that take in most of the federal handouts because the workers have no rights, no protects, and low wages.

  13. Ross200 says:

    Something to think about, if we were not giving Senator McConnell a couple of billion dollars for that dam boondoggle, that extra money would probably allow the 2014 Pay Raise to go from 1% to 2.5% or 3%.
    The congress has its priorities. You heard about the bridge from nowhere in Alaska. This is the dam project that never ends. It was supposed to be completed years ago. The current estimated completion date is 2023. I suspect that Senator McConnell is reelected of his successor will be demanding more billions in a couple of years.

  14. mandinka says:

    Just added another $40B to the national debt. Oh well let the kids worry about it

    • lvmra says:

      Quit your whining. If Mitt got in, you would get 30% less on your retirement.

      • konc2 says:

        Yea, it’s probably what you deserve, so now that you have taken your children and grandchildrens future from them, tell us dear greedy one, how much are your children going to get after you and Obama leave them the bill for spending money we don’t have in addition to paying their own bills?

        • Ross200 says:

          I don’t care about your children and grandchildren.

          • sickofthis says:

            He’s been drinking too much of the tea party “Kool-Aid.”

          • Rambo1957 says:

            Man, you folks sure are original.

          • An Original Folk says:

            Thank you.

          • Rambo1957 says:

            These are your words:

            You are correct. Instead of being positive, far too many people in the US thrive on blaming and hating particular institutions like the government or particular groups of people.

          • theinnerring says:

            there was no blame or hatred in that post, her merely made a statement.

          • Rambo1957 says:

            We disagree. Besides, statements contain hate. No statement, no hate.

          • theinnerring says:

            statements may contain hate but not all statements do. come on you can do better than this.

          • Rambo1957 says:

            Fine. Again we disagree. I did better than saying I don’t care about another persons family members. Funny, when he calls people racist with no reason, you are strangely silent. You are on his side, that’s fine. You may choose to ignore what he posts and why but I won’t give him a pass. You don’t give me one and I surely don’t expect you or anyone else to. Just be consistent and call a spade a spade.

          • theinnerring says:

            racist? are you referring to “particular groups of people”? people are not always grouped by race. by the way, do you care about my family members?

          • Rambo1957 says:

            As if you’ve never read him call people racist for no reason. I do care about your family members. I’m sure they are terrific. Why would I not care? If a stranger was injured and needed my help, I would care enough to help them.
            As a matter of fact, I have. I’ve fought to assist strangers. Perhaps your family members. Who knows?

          • mandinka says:

            Obviously

        • theinnerring says:

          i don’t have either of those so i’m golden 🙂

        • lvmra says:

          My children(all grown and on their own) and grandchildren’s future are fine, thanks for asking. My wife and me have prepared them properly, they received the education they need, and they are passing it down to their children. If I passed on today they will be fine.

          • konc2 says:

            I better let the messiah know you evil 1% ers aren’t paying your fair share, and by the way you and your wife “didn’t build that” (their future) Obama did, you can’t do that on your own, you need Obama and the government, so quit taking credit for something you did not build.

          • mandinka says:

            you also passed them a bill of $150,000 EACH. That’s a great way to prep your grankids

        • retired worker fed says:

          So we give them a great depression instead?

          • konc2 says:

            Tell me Moderate, at what point should we actually try to spend within our means? 18 trillion, 25 trillion, 100 trillion or wait until China quits lending us money. We won’t have a depression then, we will have a total collapse of society, but that’s the plan from the messiah, “fundamentally change America”, redistribute wealth. socialized medicine because the government is so good at running things, A depression will look like a little girls tea party compared to what president shuck and jive is going to leave future generations..

          • Rambo1957 says:

            A question I often ask. Is there a tipping point? Or is the political aspect blinding to some? I suspect if a Republican gets in office, our debt will immediately become an issue for many excusing it for the past five years. I’ll be happy to have them on board.

          • retired worker fed says:

            Guess when we recover from George and the Republicans’ mess. We do not want a second great depression. We had the first thanks to Herbert Hoover and his tight fisted policies. And instead of giving tax cuts to the wealthy, as George wanted, we should use surpluses to reduce the accumulated deficit. I guess you would prefer mother pig with lipstick instead. Maybe we would have had a war and purges like the one done to her ex brotherin law.

          • Lc Goodfellow says:

            ” Why are so many of today’s followers’ ” …. educated beyond their intelligences … ” ?

            If you’re hungry enough, roadkill will make for a king’s feast. Liberals were so hungry for someone like Obama, he seemed like so much more than he really was.

            ARE YOU KEEPING SCORE ? I have, this is what the record show’s.
            Congressional Control: for 62 years, the I know best for you crowd.
            U.S. House: 1951-2013, Rep. 9 times, Dem. 22 times. Two year terms
            U.S. Senate: 1951-2013, Rep. 10 times, Dem. 23 times. Six year terms
            Need help with the math?
            How did we ever get to where we are today?
            Count it over!
            “I know that you believe you understand what you think I said, but I’m not sure you realize that what you heard is not what I meant.”
            “That One” didn’t say it, but it sure does fit.

          • konc2 says:

            Here’s a news flash for you low information voter types, the Bush tax cuts expired years ago, where’s the surplus?, oh yea Obama spent it and trillions more. There is no amount of money in the world that liberal democrats will take and finally say, “thanks stupid taxpayers, we now have enough money to implement all the insane big government programs we have dreamed of, you may keep the rest”. So the question still stands, how much deficit spending will be enough for you lefty’s?

      • Rambo1957 says:

        Show us how.

        • lvmra says:

          Say what????

          • Rambo1957 says:

            Show how you came up with your contention people would get 30% less on their retirement if Romney got in.

          • retired worker fed says:

            I do not know about 30%, but Ryan, his running mate, can answer your questions. He wants to increase FERS employee contributions to the pension plan by at least 5%. This could reduce contributions to the TSP. The Republicans were looking for pay freezes through 2015. That also affects pensions. That is also cumulative as raises are based on your salary of that year.

          • Rambo1957 says:

            Someone here made a statement of fact. I simply want to see how he (she) came up with it. Not too much to ask. Not looking for excuses to distract away from the original post.

    • retired worker fed says:

      How did you arrive at the 40B figure? Better than giving them a second great depression.

  15. Fedup12 says:

    GOP just caved to socialism. What kind of world will our children live in?

    • Hobie says:

      With available healthcare, perhaps more of them will live in it.

      • Charles says:

        Do you refer the allegedly “affordable health care” that few can seem to purchase and the one that has unquestionably exhibited way higher than expected premiums, that “affordable health care?”

        • Hobie says:

          It’s a start. Foot in the door. One small pebble, etc. It might not seem so great to us well-Feds, but judging from the amount of people who have tried to sign up early, crashing the signup page, maybe the real judgement on worthiness is going to be made by those folks beating down the door.

          • Charles says:

            It’s not a start. It’s just one more trip down the road to tyranny. How else can one explain the United States Government for the first time odering its citizens to buy a specific product under threat of legal action?

          • Ross200 says:

            Charles, for decades states have required drivers to have automobile insurance. I am tired of paying higher health insurance premiums to cover people who could afford to buy health, but choose not to do so.

          • Rambo1957 says:

            You ain’t seen nothin’ yet.

          • wayne_5555 says:

            Apples and oranges. There is no law requiring you to own a car and drive it.

          • Hobie says:

            Likewise there’s no law that says you have to light up that cigarette, eat all those calories until you cardiac arrest, drink your liver up or couch potato yourself into a coffin. But somebody sure has to pay for it when you do.

          • OldRet says:

            …and pay car insurance or a tax if you elect not to pay car insurance.

          • $30795581 says:

            States are sovereign entities that created a federal government giving it specific powers and authority…requiring people to purchase a product or anything to do with healthcare isn’t one of them. States can require drivers to have insurance…where does this authority come from for the federal government. It only passed because it was sold in the SCOTUS as a tax and not a requirement to purchase which we all know is false. There is also no requirement for citizens to purchase or drive a car…there is a choice. With this healthcare mandate there is no choice unless you are one of the generational welfare people or an illegal immigrant of course.

            Why is the extreme liberal left always ok with “choice” until you let people choose something that they don’t agree with? Why if Obamacare is so wonderful does it have to be made mandatory under penality of law and force of government? Wouldn’t people flock to it because it is so great?

          • Ross200 says:

            A person’s right to not purchase health insurance ends when it impacts me. The millions of people who don’t have health insurance results in hospitals and other medical providers charging people with health insurance more to cover the cost of the uninsured. Why should I be required to subsidize these people ? I am all for everyone having the freedom to do what they want, but when it adversely impacts me then there needs to be limits to their freedom.

          • Rambo1957 says:

            If you don’t think this law will affect you, you are even a bigger fool than first thought.

          • Charles says:

            Correct to a point. One is required to have automobile insurance when one commits the overt act of driving a car. However, the U.S. Government is requiring citizens to purchase a specific product merely because they breathe and for no other reason. Will they next require us to buy a specific car, type of bread, or some other product because they say so?

          • Ross200 says:

            Charles, as the Supreme Court has ruled, this is a tax. Most modern industrialized countries tax their citizens to pay for health care. Here is the other justification for requiring individuals to have heath insurance. Being a humane people, by law hospitals are required to treat people who are seriously ill, involved in accidents etc. I am tired of people who can afford health care insurance choosing not to buy it and then the hospitals are stuck with absorbing the costs. The costs are passed on to people like me who have insurance. This raises my premiums. I am all for people having the freedom to do what they want, but their freedom ends when it costs me money.

          • Hobie says:

            You pay into Social Security (unless you have a union pension waiver) and that’s “OK” because it’s viewed as an investment with an expected return when you retire (assuming some tea partier doesn’t kill it as “big guv meddling”). Somebody had to mandate that money out of your paycheck. You pay car insurance. Somebody mandated it to keep you from deadbeating after you hospitalize someone. Now somebody’s mandating that you have healthcare so you don’t cost the rest of us a ton of money when you get cancer and don’t have any way to pay for treatment. What benefits the majority is not tyranny. And as a guvvie you have the FEHB option, so nobody’s forcing you down the cattle chute if you can choose your own plan – no tyranny there either. Obamacare isn’t even socialism since it’s industry-run, so all the GOP “socialism” and “tyranny” jingo doesn’t really apply, does it?

          • Charles says:

            Apples and oranges my good man. I clearly stated that the United States government was ordering citizens to buy a specific product or face penalty. In mentioning car insurance you are referring to state government. But I’ll amuse you for a moment. Whereas the U.S. is requiring the purchase of health insurance to everyone, any particular state only requires car insurance only if one has a car, not merely because one is breathing. Lik I said earlier, apples and oranges. You also make two other baseless assumptions: 1. You assume that everyone perusing this website is a federal employee 2. You also make the baseless assumption that all who dislike the Affordable Care Act are Republican. I await your next baseless assumption.

          • theinnerring says:

            read the decision, that explains it all.

          • $30795581 says:

            Yes, while in the SCOTUS Obama lawyers argued that it was a tax…while outside at the White House they were arguing that it wasn’t a tax.

          • OldRet says:

            You’re right about that! Everything is going as planned for Obamacare. We realize the mess it’s creating and move to single payer which is what Obama, Biden, Pelosi, Reid and company wanted from the very beginning and it’s well documented fact that IS what they wanted.

      • gmanqa says:

        That’s a crock.

      • AvgFed says:

        We’re not getting healthcare – we’re gettin insurance. Not the same.

    • Ross200 says:

      Did you really expect the GOP to not cave ? They always cave.

      • konc2 says:

        You should be happy about that Dennis, it just shows that republicans are still not ready to go the full distance to actually reach up and pull our children and grandchildren off of Obama’s sacrificial alter of spending trillions of dollars we don’t have and tying the bill around their necks that can never be paid back. Are children will be living in a country where 70% tax rates will be the norm and will essentially be nothing more than slaves to the government thanks to our generation of greedy entitlement freaks. A pox on both parties.

        • Ross200 says:

          I really don’t care about your children.

          • Rambo1957 says:

            You only care as a party faithful. You rarely have an original thought.

          • Fella says:

            That’s certainly not the left’s thinking… In fact, it’s 100% opposite. They care about everyone and everything. Kumbaya is the norm, is it not? That’s where ACA comes from, right? How about (some) overgenerous entitlement programs? I think you care more than you say.

      • Rambo1957 says:

        Perhaps the first time we agree.

      • Independent Fed says:

        I wish the newer GOP wasn’t so vicious in their tactics. They seem like an out-of-control mob. It borderlines on some of them acting like hate-mongers. And what’s with all the Lies? “I didn’t say this” or “I didn’t say that”, roll back the video and oops, there you go, caught in another lie. These very people profess to be Christians. Really? Treat others the way you wish to be treated (?). The approach was too aggressive for me and my elderly father.
        There once was a time I enjoyed the GOP’s different points of view, but now… it’s more like a ‘Seek & Destroy Mission’ with no Plan B. Just hack it all away. I understand the need to make changes & adjustments, but to intentionally do harm and impact peoples lives in a blunt negative way – with no visions for Working solutions or Transitions – seems odd to me. I kept listening for remedies, but I didn’t hear any, it was about completely destroying everything. How is that Win-Win for everyday people? The Parties need to work together for the good of our nation. It’s make it work time!

        • Rambo1957 says:

          Lying is not more typical of one party over another. Those videos can be replayed (and have been) on many. The MSM spins facts. You get them after the final rinse.

          • Steve Neal says:

            MSM ignores, omits, twists, and deletes facts, and is almost 95% “spin”. Stick with C-Span where you can pause and delete “spin” if it ever appears. Then, when any legislative topic comes up, you’ll have recently viewed “current events” to back your opinion and engage in the conversation…

          • Rambo1957 says:

            We need to take everything with a grain of salt. I want badly to trust. I just can’t.

        • mandinka says:

          when they are trying to stop another $ TRILLION budget shortfall they have no choice but to use a meat ax

    • Bryan J says:

      Caved to socialism because we got a pay raise? (that’s what this article is about). If you mean that the ACA is socialism, then you obviously don’t know what socialism is.

  16. Steve Neal says:

    I will gladly take a $14/wk raise. Might be able to afford the gas to get back to work next year…

  17. Jim Bob says:

    1% is better than another year of no increase. Federal employees need to understand that the public already perceives us as being overpaid, underworked, etc… Complaining about getting a raise, however small, following what many view as a paid vacation is not going to help the situation.

  18. Mollie812 says:

    I’m surprised that we may be getting a 1% pay increase. If the budget deficit is as bad as they’ve made it seem, why would they approve a 1% pay increase at this time? The whole furlough was an attrocity, a political game, and there is no true rhyme or reason of why we were furloughed — a mere political ploy to see which side would cave first, so the other side could say “we won.”
    If not receiving a 1% pay increase would keep me from receiving additional days of sequestration furlough next year, then I’m for no pay raise again. We haven’t had a pay raise in four years and I’ve adjusted and gotten used to it, even with the increasing health care, gas, and grocery costs.

    • Steve Neal says:

      These are the kinds of things we should discuss among ourselves at work… NOT on a public forum where legislators looking for budget cuts can read them. You know, it only takes one of us to say “You can just keep my raise!”, and they’ll do it…

      • Steve says:

        You’re giving these fools too much credit. They do not care what the people want or their voices. It’s all about their own self-interests. I though that would be made clear after these past few weeks.

        • Ross200 says:

          Steve Neal doesn’t realize that the members of Congress really care about the folks who give them big campaign checks.

      • mandinka says:

        Hmm can you justify your raise other than attendance??

    • mandinka says:

      That’s easy Obama could care less about the national debt. Our kids are each saddled with $150,000 and barak keeps his 47% who don’t pay taxes as his base

  19. fnulnu40 says:

    “The Department of Health and Human Services (HHS) spent over $56 million on 135 conferences in one year, ranging from Head Start meetings to diversity seminars.”
    Here is yesterdays story: “IRS Funnels Billions to Illegal Aliens”. Until somebody starts caring about the peoples money we don’t deserve a raise.

    • Ross200 says:

      I found the story “IRS Funnels Billions to Illegal Aliens. ” How does anyone expect the IRS to know whether anyone is a US Citizen or not ? The IRS does not have citizenship or resident alien records. The IRS processes individual tax returns based on Social Security Numbers. If the Congress wants to stop illegal aliens from getting the tax credits they need to pass legislation to somehow give the IRS access to citizenship or resident alien records, or require all taxpayers to submit such documents when they file their tax returns. The IRS gets blamed for the failure of Congress to do its job.

      • fnulnu40 says:

        “In what appears to be a significant oversight, the Internal Revenue Service sent a total of $46,378,040 in refunds to “unauthorized” workers at one address in Atlanta, Ga., according to a report from the Treasury Inspector General for Tax Administration.” Yea your right. Cant blame government workers for sending $46 mil to one address. the best they can do.

  20. Bryan J says:

    To compare the pay raises given among the different Presidential terms is naive, if not intentionally disingenuous. First, the President presents a budget, but the appropriations are passed by Congress. So let’s stop the “it’s his fault” routine. Second, the lack of raise during the last three years was result of the Nation’s financial crisis…it was not because any one person, party or entity disliked government employees. During these same years, many Americans were losing their jobs, getting fewer hours to work, or not getting raises. So we did what the rest of America did (the furloughs were a different issue, but that’s not what the discussion is about). Now, as we begin to climb out of the fiscal mess, the first raise is 1%. As a fellow Federal employee, I implore you take take your raise and quit whining.

    • Rob says:

      Why are you so sensitive? I merely listed the previous 20 years of federal pay raises. I didn’t provide any analysis, make any assumptions, or provide any opinion as to why the raises were what they were. However, since you’re quick to blame the lack of raises under the current president on a poor economy then why the low raises under Clinton when the economy was booming?

      • Bryan J says:

        Using your numbers, which I presume to be accurate, during President Clinton’s tenure, the average raise was 3.22%. During President GW Bush’s tenure, the average was was 3.36%. That’s not a significant difference. I was a Federal employee during that entire time, and I never felt slighted for those raises. Your comment makes it obvious that you want to assign ill-intent to Democratic Presidents…but the stretch to do so with the facts is ridiculous. When we, Federal employees, whine about everything, then we lose the credibility that we need when there is something legitimate about which we need to raise our collective voice.

        • Rob says:

          Not trying to assign ill-intent to anyone. Just trying to point out reality when it comes to federal pay raises. Read into it what you want. I’ve been a fed employee for the entire 20 year stretch as well and it gets old hearing the left assign ill-intent to Republican presidents. When you get past all the baloney and brain washing from the federal unions and other Kool-Aid drinkers my take home pay has been better when the GOP runs the White House.

        • Jane Snape says:

          Thanks for this, Bryan. I’m glad to see that FedSmith’s moderators will allow some lefties through their gates. They do seem to wave though every righty who can peck at a keyboard.

          • blujkts says:

            No it’s just the Lefties have no grounds to stand on, especially with this Tyrant in office, so they haven’t got much to write about on here. The guy is an abysmal failure and history will prove it.

          • Ross200 says:

            The so called “tyrant” was elected last November was a very large electoral vote and a five million popular vote margin. Your views are not representative of most realistic people in this country.

          • ll says:

            And your numbers represent dead people, illegals, mentally disabled taken to the polls and had the button pressed for them, and people that voted multiple times. Your views indicate you believe in the tooth fairy.

          • konc2 says:

            You would have made an excellent German citizen in 1930’s Germany, seem like you fuhrer Obama can do no wrong, Seig Heil to Obama. Oh by the way how did that majority who supported Hitler work out for Germany?

          • Ross200 says:

            My grandfather had three sons. All three sons fought in WW 2 in Europe, and all three were wounded and received the Purple Heart. For this reason and many others, I find your comments offensive. Anyone who would compare President Obama to Adolph Hitler and the Nazi Party is in meed of medical attention.

          • konc2 says:

            I find you offensive, as a parasite intent on; living on the backs of future generations not yet born, and your family isn’t the only family that served in that war, but I’m sure you never served this country, most takers don’t.

          • Rambo1957 says:

            Your uncles can be offended. I doubt you served at all. Unless they come up with a job of drooling over Obama, you never will.

          • wayne_5555 says:

            Actually the Nazi party never got a majority in an election. The closest they got was in 1932, when the won 37% of the popular vote.

          • konc2 says:

            You are correct, Hindenburg won the election as president and later appointed Hiltler as Chancellor, just days before Hindenburg died, the cabinet abolished the position of president and combined that power with the Chancellor, making Hitler the leader until April of 1945 He never did win a real election..

          • konc2 says:

            You are correct, Hindenburg won the election but eventually appointed Hitler as Chancellor, and just before Hindenburg died, the German cabinet abolished the position of president and combined it’s powers with the Chancellor, and Hitler ruled until April 1945 having never been elected to anything, but he certainly was able to mesmerize a majority of the German people, to their downfall.

          • Bryan J says:

            You may or may not be right. It’s too early to tell how history will judge this presidency. I know how the voters have judged, based on the recent election. I don’t judge anybody based on party affiliation. I do, however, find obstructionism to be the antithesis of leadership. I also believe that it serves no useful purpose to try to find fault or point blame on any political person or party just because you don’t like him/them. In the instant case of the pay raise, it is simply asinine to be digging for a reason to blame or complain. Let’s take our dang raise and, for once, not gripe.

          • Rambo1957 says:

            The victimization of Jane Snape. You are certainly in the right party. A little whine with your cheese?

          • konc2 says:

            Whould you like me to send you a pacifier or maybe you can move on over to Moveon.org they love shrill leftist insanity.

      • Jane Snape says:

        The only reason the Republicans consented to even this much was because they shot themselves in the foot with their monumentally stupid plot, concocted by their puppetmasters over at the Heritage Foundation, to hold the government hostage. (Go look up “michael a. needham heritage action power purse” in any search engine to find out the details.) It they hadn’t put themselves in a horrible negotiating position, they never would have agreed to any pay raises, much less the pay raise Obama wanted to give us.
        The GOP/Heritage shutdown has really hurt the Republicans’ political standing, and also the Republicans’ push for austerity. A month ago, John Boehner had got Harry Reid to unwillingly accept the continuation of the GOP’s sequestration starvation budget into all of FY 2014 and nearly had it set in stone for eight years after that. Pay raises weren’t even a dream — pay freezes and furloughs were much more likely. The Democrats had asked eighteen times since March for a House-Senate budget conference, but the Republicans blew them off each time.
        Then the Republicans put a Heritage-designed gun to America’s head.
        Now, sequestration’s only guaranteed until January 2014 — and the Republicans have finally deigned to a budget conference (and a real one, not the last-minute time-stall gimmick they pulled in the last hours of September 30). The continuance of the sequester is in real doubt as Harry Reid’s going to be hacking away at it, and we have our first raise in years. And Reid’s position will be even stronger in January, because for all their current bluster the House Republicans are not going to want to do Shutdown 2: Electric Boogaloo in an election year, and at a point when voters might be starting to forget all the havoc and credit downgrades they caused.

        • Hopeisnot_A_Plan says:

          In case you were not aware, the sequestration was Obama’s idea.

          • ObservingTheProcess says:

            The Liberals are not proud of the fact that sequestration was Obama’s idea. They are taking every opportunity to deny it and blame the Tea Party. Eventually if you tell the lie enough times the “lie becomes the truth.”

          • Bryan J says:

            You are right…I am not proud of the sequestration. I am not proud of the President’s role it, whether that was as initiator or signatory…it makes no difference which he was, he agreed to it either way. I am not proud that the Tea Party’s antics led to the implementation of the sequestration. I am not proud that the President caved in to allow it to be implemented. I am not proud that mob rule and gamesmanship have supplanted educated debate and statesmanship in the White House, in the Congress, in the public square, and at the dinner table.

          • ObservingTheProcess says:

            What part of “it was Obama’s plan” don’t you understand? Sequestration had significant cuts to the DOD and he did not think the Republicans would agree or allow it to happen. The Republicans did not “blink” and it went into effect. Again, it was Obama’s plan…………..It is time for him to put on his “big boy” pants and own up to it!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

          • Bryan J says:

            I understand every word of it. What I don’t understand is why you think sarcastic, rhetorical questions add to the conversation. I don’t understand how multiple exclamation marks make a point more valid…as if the louder you talk, the more right you are. I do understand the absolute irrelevance of whose plan it was…it was stupid and it was implemented by both parties…not by the President alone. If you agree that it was stupid, as you seem to suggest, then let’s all agree to write our Congressmen and demand its repeal. If you think it was a good idea, then you should be praising the President, by your assertion. In no case is it productive or even significant to keep parroting whose idea you believe it to have been.

          • Sincerely_09 says:

            Bryan, I would agree with you on this point except that the President, Dems & media wielded the sequester like a blunt instrument from the podium, on campaigns & in interviews every chance they got for a very long time… directly stating it was the Repubs idea from the beginning.

          • Bryan J says:

            Sincerely, it was equally unproductive and misleading for the Dems to have done that. My assessment doesn’t change just because of party affiliation. The Dems, the President in particular, should have been more concerned with preventing the implementation of sequestration and less concerned with whose idea it was. That argument, by either side, just shifts the focus from the real problem in that both sides allowed or enabled it to take effect.

          • Sincerely_09 says:

            Understood & I agree that the blame game, distraction technique is unproductive. My main point & what concerns me most about this topic however is the across the board, intentional, denial, lying & smearing for the sole intent of political gain that was done by the groups I mentioned. That is much worse than any distraction, spin, opposing viewpoints or even polarized ideology… it is about power, by any means necessary gaining & control of power.

            Most people don’t like the politics, spin & distraction but as with any opposing viewpoints, the public can see it for what it is & still make their own decisions.
            But when the people are blatantly lied to by leaders for political gain… that is an attempt to steal the people’s liberty, the very soul of our country & is nothing short of tyranny.
            Now I’m not going to attempt to replay a tit-for-tat film for any political party because there is guilt all around but the number of times that President Obama, Reed, Pelosi, their appointees & the left leaning organizations, voting registrations, etc have been caught lying or conducting illegal activities cannot be ignored.

          • Bryan J says:

            There’s posturing and misdirection by all. This “they keep lying to us and doing illegal things” is just a Fox talking about…it has no credence and it is itself a misdirection that serves as an easy-to-repeat mantra for those who don’t take time to conduct unbiased analysis for themselves.

          • Sincerely_09 says:

            Of course it is that evil Fox station! You are right about one thing though, Fox is the only station consistently asking questions & CNN is finally starting to come around. Ugh. I actually believed you were an open minded person too.
            So these are all just Fox lies right? The following never happened?
            Reed on the SENATE FLOOR saying “Romney hasn’t paid taxes in 10 yrs!” / President “ACA will lower premiums by $2500 per yr” / President “ACA will not affect anyone’s access to doctors or healthcare.” / President & Sebelius “There is no such thing as a death panel; the Gov will not step in between you & your doctor… tell that to the 10 yr old girl approved by her Dr to get a lung transplant that Sebelius denied & a judge overturned to let the girl live. / President “ACA will not add one dime to our deficit or federal debt.” / President “ACA will create jobs”… I guess that could be technically true… take approx 1 million full time jobs & cut their hours in half… you now have 2 million jobs! / Clinton & President “Benghazi was a mass protest to a video, not a coordinated attack”… when proven untrue Clinton’s response = “What difference does it make?!?”… all the while promising to gather the facts so we can be prepared to ensure this never happens again & bring culprits to justice… HUH?… How do you do that if you don’t care how it happened in the first place?
            None of those are mantras or propaganda… they are lies & results of government actions.

          • Bryan J says:

            Yes it is propaganda, and often out of context. A lot of spinning going on and some CYA, sure…lying, not so much. I have no disillusions that you’ll be convinced otherwise, and I’m not going to try. But to call yourself and Fox open-minded and unbiased, objective observers is simply laughable. Although I disagree with you, I do appreciate that you make your points without the frothing and hyperbole that characterizes the Tea Party movement.

          • Rambo1957 says:

            Oh come on! Give it a try.

          • Nope says:

            I’m a liberal and I hate that sequestration was Obama’s idea, and I don’t blame the Tea Party republicans for it at all. I also hate that Obama sold out federal employees by starting the pay freeze in the first place in exchange for NOTHING. The truth is that the policies he has pursued in the first 5 years of his administration would have been considered republican policies in 90s. That’s why I find it so funny that people call him a socialist. He’s a moderate democrat at best.

          • Samueul says:

            You are right, it was his idea. The assumption was that nobody would be dumb enough to push our country to such a brink as to actually incur it… Obama’s biggest mistake was underestimating the brinkmanship and hatred the right has for him. He didn’t make that mistake this time around thankfully.

          • mandinka says:

            Did you read Hope’s post?? He’s talking sequester and your talking nonsense

          • lvmra says:

            Nonsense is what you post many times a day.

          • OldRet says:

            Hasn’t Obama been watching the congress too?Nobody that has been observing this congress is dumb enough to think they won’t do almost anything beyond our comprehension!

          • The Master says:

            You are correct, the sequestration was Obama’s idea. We are stuck with it because no one else can come up with any other viasble ideas. How sad is that?

          • Ross200 says:

            Who care whose idea it was ? It was passed by both Houses of Congress and signed into law. It is the law of the land.

    • blujkts says:

      Congress has been trying to give us a bigger raises than what BHO proposes. He froze it and thats the facts.

      • Bryan J says:

        I’m sure that you are correct that the conservative-led, Tea Party controlled House of Representatives has been falling all over itself to give Federal employees more money. There’s absolutely no reason to believe to the contrary…it’s all part of that alternative universe.

        • little taxpayer says:

          Bryan, You probably missed the news that the “Tea Party controlled House” passed a bill to pay federal employees for their furlough days within a few days of the start of the shutdown. The Democrat controlled Senate sat on it for more than two weeks. Which party is looking out for the little guy??

          • saveourplanet22 says:

            The bill began in the Senate (bipartisan)
            http://www.fedsmith.com/2013/1

            As is sometimes the case, the House claimed they too had a bill and a short time later introduced it, and voted their approval – thank God.

          • RETVET03 says:

            I guess you were sleeping in the morning a GOP senator said it wasn’t a priority. And you know what? He was actually right….do I need to spell it out?

          • Bryan J says:

            Actually, no, I didn’t miss that fact. I just find it to be a silly point. The reason we had a furlough was that the House wouldn’t pass the CR without a partisan policy initiative attached, thus using employees as pawns in their ploy. For the House to vote to give backpay for a problem they caused does not make them heroes. That is like pirates who blow a hole in the side of a ship, and then are celebrated as heroes for pulling a drowning sailor out of the water. The silliness is heightened by the fact that the Senate did pass the bill, and having done so earlier would have had zero real impact because it didnt go into effect until the CR was passed…which the House was finally strong-armed into doing. This kind of silly argument that lemmings follow and repeat are why we cannot get to the point of having real, honest, and intelligent debates. I don’t mind opposing views, but you cannot have a constructive discussion when this is the level of conversation.

          • little taxpayer says:

            Bryan, I finally agree with you. Your silly arguement doesn’t lend itself to real, honest and intelligent debates.

          • konc2 says:

            Byran is on the side who supports illegal aliens, Jesse jackson, Al Sharpton, Occupy Wall Street, forced Obamacare down our throats, he supports the people who blocked 90 year WWII veterans from their memorial, he supports the man-child who went out of his way to make it hurt American citizens as much as possible because “we are winning in the polls” Byran is in the “what does it matter now” camp supporting the regieme that let brave Americans die so president shuck and jive would not look bad before the election and he supports the pathological liars runninng this country. Tells me all I need to know about Byran.

    • Ross200 says:

      Bryan, this is a very intelligent and thoughtful post. Many of the posters on this site are rabid right wingers who want to slash government expenditures which is their right. But these same folks want to increase the budgets of the agencies who employ them (mostly DOD Folks) and increase the wages of Federal Employees. There is a great deal of disconnect and some hypocrisy. These folks want to cut everyone but themselves.

      • Rambo1957 says:

        Go from intelligent and thoughtful to wildly partisan in a flash. Truly ignorant. Amazing.

      • konc2 says:

        Another Ted Kazinski type incoherent rant void of any facts or truth, I would have to say Dennis, many of the posters on this site are rabid left wingers who want to grow government expenditures which is their right. But these same folks want to decrease the budgets of the agencies they hate (mostly DOD folks),..you get the point, you are just a tax and spend lefty who really does not care about America’s looming bankruptcy as long as you get yours and thoses on the right are trying to reel in this out of control Marxist taking us into the abyss. In your world, right wing BAD, left wing GOOD. Does not change the facts of our looming bankruptcy.

    • mandinka says:

      It was Obama in his budget that were always late who decided that since the avg FEd was making $130,000 a year that a raise was unneeded

    • RETVET03 says:

      You ignore some pretty important facts. The reason many people lost their jobs is not because of the budget shortfall or federal employee’s paychecks. It’s because we trust the vast majority of this nations wealth to a few investment banks who gambled with it and we lost. In turn, the recession caused by that decreased revenue and hence increased deficits. Now that the economy is recovering, the deficits are constantly being revised downwards because the revenue is increasing. Again, nothing to do with our pay in either direction. Meanwhile, a look at the ECI, which are our raises are SUPPOSED to be based on, has been positive every year since 2010. As a Federal Employee, I implore you to be more of a professional, especially in regards to facts, before you start accusing people of whining…people who see this mess for what it is without the ideological blinders.

      • Bryan J says:

        No, I did not ignore any of those facts. I did not discuss all the reasons for the fiscal crisis, because I wasn’t attempting to give an economics lesson. I pointed out the undisputed facts: that there was a fiscal crises and many Americans suffered, Nothing in my post is based upon ideological blinders, or any ideological taint at all. I am a pro-union, pro-employee Democrat…if I were wearing ideological blinders, I’d be claiming foul for not giving us Federal employees more. Instead, I’m advocating for a fiscally responsible and reasonable response to having been told that we are getting a raise. No matter how you slice it, most of America has been financially hurting, and there’s already a perception that we are overpaid and pampered (right or wrong, that’s the perception). If our raises continue to be at 1% as the economy grows and recovers, then yes we have a complaint. At this point, all the complaining about that is just whining. Again, the whining I refer to is regarding the raise alone, not the furloughs.

        • Charles says:

          Unions have little or no real use in the federal workplace. If one accepts that the two main purposes of a union are to bargain for wage increases and to engage in a strike to redress their grievances, then what good is a federal employees union, for they are prohibited by federal law from doing either?

    • $30795581 says:

      False: The pay freeze was an Obama White House idea.

      • Bryan J says:

        Nothing in my post is false. While the President submits a budget, Congress appropriates and the President signs appropriations bills (for reference, read the Constitution, google it, or reach back to your memories of Schoolhouse Rock). My point is that the argument of “whose idea it was” is ridiculous and irrelevant, and I really don’t know who had the first thought bubble on the topic…because it doesn’t matter. Both branches of government had an opportunity to add a raise to the appropriations bill, and both are responsible for the result. Furthermore, as I pointed out, the result wasn’t wholly unreasonable considering what most other Americans were experiencing. So, I don’t know what you are referring to with your broad claim of falseness.

        • $30795581 says:

          Spin all you want. The pay freeze was President Obama’s idea implemented under an Executive order.

          • Bryan J says:

            I’m not spinning, I’m saying it doesn’t matter “who” because Congress can, but didn’t pass legislation to grant a pay raise…and the President could have also fought for it. Neither did. For reference just from fedsmith, see http://www.fedsmith.com/2013/0… and http://www.fedsmith.com/2013/0… and http://www.fedsmith.com/2011/1… And, again, go to back to Schoolhouse Rock…a bill passed by Congress and signed by the President (which makes it a law) trumps an Executive Order. It boggles the rational person’s mind that anybody would think the result would have been different with a different President or that the Congress wanted to give us more.

  21. TJ says:

    Being that I no longer expect anything from this administration, I will happily take 1%. I have figured it will at least cover the increase in my health insurance! I have reached the top of the pay scale for my series, so no longer receive step increases!

  22. LadyGuest says:

    A year ago I would have been complaining about the 1% pay raise, but I feel like I’ve been so badly beaten in the last year between the furloughs this summer and then this extended furlough (ok, we are getting retroactive pay, but still, the uncertainty of the last few weeks hasn’t been fun) that the 1% increase leaves me simply saying “whatever”.

    • mandinka says:

      Can you explain to use what you did to justify the raise?? I’m curious

      • polanalyst says:

        It’s not a raise. It’s basically offset against the rising health premiums of the last few years.

      • LadyGuest says:

        Actually Mandinka, it’s a very easy explanation. I’ve gone three years without a raise. In those four years (three without a raise and one with a 1% raise) I have been in the same job where I have learned more concerning new laws that affect my work and have become far more efficient at my job due to my advanced level of knowledge. Frankly, that deserves a heck of a lot more than a 1% raise, but again – “whatever”.

  23. Rob says:

    Here’s a 20 year (3 administration) summary of federal pay raises. These raises are for the Rest of US locality: Clinton: 3.09, 2.64, 2.38, 2.97, 2.90, 3.54, 4.69, 3.57……..Bush: 4.52, 4.03, 3.90, 3.26, 2.83, 1.81, 2.99, 3.52…………..Obama: 1.77, 0.00, 0.00, 0.00

    • Ross200 says:

      Robby, your analysis is also ridiculous because it does not take into account the geographic pay increases.

      • Rambo1957 says:

        You are free to post your stats. Analysis? You mean statistics?

      • konc2 says:

        Thanks for making Robs point, facts are really hard for you liberals to deal with, so let me help you out here, “it’s Bush’s fault”, nothing like the good old standby excuse when you are up against the wall with facts.

    • Robert Meyers says:

      The TEA PARTY is holding back raises. Every time Obama proposes a raise , they say no. Come on the GOP HATES government workers, except those carrying guns.

      • Rob says:

        Whatever happened to pay parity with the military? The unions hardly mention it anymore. I’ve been a fed for over 25 years and until Obama took office I can’t remember a time when feds didn’t get pay parity. Obama and the Dems had super majorities in both the House and Senate in 2009 and 2010. They could have given any raise they wanted and the GOP couldn’t do a thing about it. So what did they do? We got 1.77 and no pay parity in 2010 and in 2011 the Dems, still in control of both the House and Senate, decided to freeze our pay for 2011 and 2012. Liberals don’t like to talk about that. They’d rather sit around and bash tea partiers for demanding the government live within its means.

      • LadyGuest says:

        So Robert are you saying that we should elect a Republican President? The Tea Party wouldn’t hold back raises from a Republican President, right? Just compare Bush’s stats to the two Democrats listed. Bush’s average raise given over 8 years is 3.36%. Clinton’s was 3.22 over 8 years.

      • $30795581 says:

        False: The pay freeze was an Obama White House idea.

  24. Arcturus6 says:

    Obama, Reid, Boehner and Pelosi can take the 1% pay raise and I’ll let them use their perverted imagination as to where to put it. This nation is accelerating at the speed of light toward financial and social oblivion thanks to the “liberal establishment.”

    • Jane Snape says:

      You sound a lot like the Birchers who were calling JFK an un-American traitor back in 1963. (You know, the John Birch Society whose founder Fred Koch was the daddy of modern right-wing sugardaddies Charles and David Koch, the backers of the various Tea Party front groups?)

    • Ross200 says:

      If you right wingers want to save the country then compromise. What this country needs is a budget agreement similar to that outlined by the Simpson-Bowles Deficit Reduction Committee. You folks can’t have your cake and eat it too. You can’t say any deal can’t increase revenues and can’t touch defense spending, farm programs and then expect Democrats to slash entitlements and social programs. We need a balanced deficit plan, not a Faux News Plan, not a plan that makes millionaires richer and senior citizens power. You don’t want compromise, you want to blackmail. You expect the Democrats to capitulate to your demands, and it ain’t going to happen.

      • Charles says:

        Are you referring to the type of negotiation that the President refused to engage in that reeulted in the recent shutdown, that tye of negotiation?

        • Ross200 says:

          Charles, all of the recent political polls show that the American People supported the President when he refused to allow himself of the American People to be blackmailed over ACA. The polls blame the GOP much more than the Democrats for the shutdown. How do you like them “green eggs and ham.”

          • wayne_5555 says:

            From the last Washington Post Poll.

            ” Seventy-four percent of people questioned in the ABC News/Washington Post survey from Wednesday through Sunday said they disapprove of the way congressional Republicans are handling budget negotiations. That’s up 11 percentage points from late September, just prior to when the shutdown took effect.

            According to the poll, 61% of the public says it disapproves of how congressional Democrats are handling the talks, up 5 points. And 53% give the President a thumbs down, a slight increase of 3 points since late last month.

            a 61% disapproval rating is nothing to shout home about.

      • konc2 says:

        You mean the Simpson-Bowles DRC deal that Obama tossed aside because it didn’t spend enough money to suit him?

      • $30795581 says:

        False: We had the soak the rich tax increases over and over with zero spending cuts…and you spelled Fox wrong.

  25. dlandrover says:

    Yeah, meanwhile Sen. McConnel received 3 billion dollars in pork!

  26. blujkts says:

    Is the 1% effective Oct. 17th. Nope.

  27. FEDERALWORKER says:

    Yes, they are making provisions relatively quickly for our retro pay, which I am surprised and thankful for. However, 1% is a slap in the face for the four years we’ve been in a chokehold. C’mon now. Do better. How about 1% every year retrocactively which would be 4% cola. Some of us deserve this!

    • LaborAttorney says:

      One percent is ridiculous coming on the heels of three years of freezes but at least it gets the monkey off our backs and brings pay raises back into the discussion.

    • Jane Snape says:

      The only reason we got this much is because the Republicans shot themselves in the foot with their Heritage-planned shutdown scam. But now that they’ve hurt their own standing, Harry Reid will be working on getting rid of the sequester in addition to the reinstatement of pay increases. (That’s why Reid accepted the short-term deal: That along with the GOP’s finally agreeing to seven months of Democratic demands for budget conference opens the GOP up to actual negotiations, and during an election year.)

      • blujkts says:

        Enough the partisan crap. Obama treats Feds worse than Bush ever did. Not to mention how he treats our Veterans. And then the Bengahzi debacle. he can keep his 1%.

        • Ross200 says:

          You don’t have much of a memory do you. Do you recall the Bush administration sending the remains of Veterans to a dump yard ? Do you not recall the scandalous condition of the VA Hospitals during the Bush Administration? Four Americans were killed during the Benghazi Incident. How many of our soldiers were killed and wounded in the illegal and immoral Iraq War?

          • Charles says:

            Because Congress authorized the use of the force the Iraq war, by definition, was not illegal you partisan hack.

          • Ross200 says:

            Charles, you are clearly are not the “sharpest knife in the drawer.” Let me explain it to you. Because there were no WMDs, the US had no right under international law to invade another country. A country only has the right to invade another country to protect itself from an imminent attack. We share this planet with many other countries. Because we are the US, this does not give us the right to ignore international law. When it comes to our actions in Iraq, we are a pariah or terrorist nation.

          • $30795581 says:

            I swore an oath to support and defend the US Constitution…not some international law. No matter what side you come down on for the Iraq and Afghanistan war you need to focus on what is real and most important.

          • LikeBuffaloWingsALittleTooMuch says:

            jjfedup, I think it comes down to, is the “international law” to which dennisc200 is referring part of a treaty which the U.S. signed?

            According to this law article:
            http://law.justia.com/constitu

            the SCOTUS has ruled that the Constitution treats treaties the same as normally enacted legislative law.

        • RETVET03 says:

          Bengahzi? Compared to Iraq, Afghanistan, 9/11?

      • Fed_Peasant says:

        You have a generous amount of faith in the dems. I would not!!

      • Charles says:

        Are you referring to the type of negotiation that thevPresident refuses to engage in.

    • mandinka says:

      Can you explain to the taxpayers what you did to justify even the 1%

      • tag1555 says:

        That’s done every year when agencies submit their budget justifications to Congress. If the taxpayers through their representatives don’t think a function is worth funding, they cut or eliminate it. If the taxpayers don’t trust Congress to do that, well, that’s on them/us for voting those folks in in the first place. If a function isn’t cut, ipso facto the People have decreed its worth doing.

      • slres8716 says:

        @mandinka

        Federal employees Process Claims, Inform/treat and guide veterans/service members/the
        elderly/disabled, investigate crimes (FBI, CIA, etc.), perform safety inspections on foods/buildings/the environment, provide for the common defense, create laws (Congress), judge on the Constitutionality of Laws (the Judicial branch of our government), maintain records/buildings/national parks/national security/etc., lead our country (No matter who is voted in as our President, that person is still a federal employee.) and so on.

        Keep in mind that I am no big government advocate but a lot goes on, in the public sector
        that is very important to preserving our way of life Sir. A private business
        needs to hire the best people to help run that company and our government needs
        to hire the best to help run our government. We Feds work very hard to make our
        government run as smoothly as possible and a raise, no matter how small, would
        be a very nice “thank you for all you do” gesture to those that may sometimes dedicate upward of 30 years; of their lives, to the service of this Great Nation.

        Amen.

    • tag1555 says:

      Its not great, given that overall inflation is now 1.5% and health care premiums are up 4.4% this year for feds. However, the status quo is to continue with no raises at all, so this at least breaks that precedent so it’ll be politically easier to have raises go through in future budgets.

    • LikeBuffaloWingsALittleTooMuch says:

      I think you’re looking at this the wrong way. Will you, or won’t you, seek employment elsewhere given the lack of / low raises?

      If the answer is no, then your employer is listening to your complaints with deaf ears.

      If the answer is yes, then you should probably move on to another job.

  28. HappilyRetiredFed says:

    Wow! How generous.

    • gracepmc says:

      Given that it is 1% x incalculable # of federal workers — yes, I would say that the American taxpayer is incredibly generous. Especially in light of the fact that private enterprise worker hours are being cut to accommodate Obamacare for which most hard working Americans will not qualify for subsidies. Not to mention federal jobs are jobs for life, with healthy pensions. Ask Lois Lerner.

      • Jane Snape says:

        If Federal jobs are for life, why are so many Feds being RIFed? I’ll see you your “Lois Lerner” FOX News sliming point and raise you several former co-workers forced out of their jobs.
        (Assuming that the apparently right-leaning folks behind FedSmith ever let this comment see the light of day, of course.)

        • Rambo1957 says:

          Freak.

        • RETVET03 says:

          I lost a lot of respect for Fox News with their repeated use of “slimdown”. Their colors are now out in the open. Certainly not of the caliber they claim to be, clearly someone was dictating the terms at that organization.

        • Jim Bob says:

          “(Assuming that the apparently right-leaning folks behind FedSmith ever let this comment see the light of day, of course.)”

          Right, because there is a great conspiracy at FedSmith to block the comments from the left…

        • HRGuy71 says:

          Are you kidding? Most of the comments on the site appear to be from the far left of the political spectrum parroting the latest tweets from the Democrats.

      • Ross200 says:

        Don’t blame President Obama and the ACA because a few greedy corporations are using the ACA as an excuse to cut employees hours. Many of these same corporations have no problem in Canada paying the required medical insurance tax imposed by governmental entities in Canada.

      • The Informed Fed says:

        Seriously, this is the biggest joke. Private sector is doing very, very, well….in professional occupations. I happen to be very plugged into private sector side professional occupations (think non-service sector) because my wife is a consultant to private sector. I also happen to live in what could be only described as an upper middle class suburban subdivision (I made some good investments). My neighborhood is comprised of homeowners who work in the insurance industry, human resources (all occs), manufacturing, pharmacy, medical, telecommunications, healthcare (public and private), computer, and similiar. Very, very few are small/independent business owners. The occupations of my neighbors can be easily correlated to professional occupations in federal sector. For example, managers, HR executives and specialists, pharmacy techs, nurses, nurse managers, billing, network managers, network specialists, hospital director, area managers, medical coding, etc.. You get the idea. In every instance in which my wife compared, private sector salaries beat federal by decent, if not outrageous margins.

        The intentional flaw by many in comparing public/private sector salaries has to do with lower graded (some call then non-professional) occupations. For example, a food service worker in federal government makes more than someone at McDonalds, especially considering benefits. Same is arguably true when comparing some (not all) purely clerical positions. However, as you move up the grade scale, the curve becomes significant. For example, in our area, a private sector HR manager at a company with less than 1,000 employees on site makes around $140k a year salary. Whereas, an HR manager of a real federal facility (same local area) in which there are 3,500 employees and much more complex regulations, is a GS-14 making about $96k a year (rest of US). At the top level, a local facility director for a federal healthcare facility makes about $150k a year. A comparable position locally pays about $350k a year to a director who manages a much smaller facility. I won’t even get into bonus comparisons. Benefits comparison also clearly shows fed benefits are much less generous in this case.

        Granted, the federal workforce is not mostly comprised of GS-14’s and higher. However, a careful examination of comparable occupations across all GS levels will show a steady trend. That trend being? The more educated and experienced you are and the more responsibility you are willing to accept means you will make far less than your private sector counterpart.

        I look forward to the annual neighborhood Christmas party where I get to hear my neighbors complain of “small” $15,000 bonuses (again) on top of a six figure salary with benefits that make ours look pathetic.
        http://www.informedfed.com

Top