Readers' Comments
Total Comments: 78
Page 3 of 9
Page 3 of 9
Bill Favoring Fed Retirees Opposed by Unions
Total Comments: 78
Page 3 of 9
Page 3 of 9
Free Email Newsletter
| Close | Change | YTD | |
| G | $13.2114 | +0.0012 | +0.70% |
| F | $13.6201 | -0.0062 | +2.14% |
| C | $13.8116 | -0.0706 | +4.49% |
| S | $17.9282 | -0.1903 | +8.91% |
| I | $18.5079 | -0.0782 | -0.16% |
| Close | Change | YTD | |
| L 2040 | $16.1968 | -0.0789 | +3.59% |
| L 2030 | $15.9593 | -0.0673 | +3.23% |
| L 2020 | $15.7365 | -0.0532 | +2.72% |
| L 2010 | $15.4595 | -0.0197 | +1.57% |
| L Income | $14.0856 | -0.0155 | +1.48% |
March 22, 2010
Search:
Custom Search
Home | About Us | FAQ's |
Site Map | Terms of Use |
Privacy Policy |
RSS 
|
Twitter 
| Mobile
© 2010 FedSmith Inc. All Rights Reserved.
Union
FRCE
Tue May 26, 2009 10:55 AM
Post Reply
Just like the politics we have; it's about the money they can generate to influence the politician. Just what have they really done for federal employee's in the past forty years. This is what they could have done (1) Federal employee's world wide that includes postal and I'm not interested that they are a different union that is the problem. Federal employee's should have the cheapest insurance around and only one insurance company instead of leaving it to the employee for open season; make the insurance companies compete for the right to insure all federal employee's (2) Instead of 56.6% for thirty years @ 55 years of age for CSRS make it 60% for 30 years @ 55 years of age. They won't members well do something instead of courting our politicans with our money. No to the unions Yes for hard working Americans.
Bad Idea
DHS
Tue May 26, 2009 11:22 AM
Post Reply
The problem is that Agencies tend to hire thier "friends, the retired managers" into positions like this. Anybody in the federal service can tell you that very few of the people who actually do the work ever get rehired.
I've seen DHS rehire high ranking managers into "rehired annuitant" postions as First line supervisor. All this did was 1) help out an old friend, and 2) deny a real worker the chance to compete for the job.
Scrap this Notion Quickly
Independent Agency
Tue May 26, 2009 11:22 AM
Post Reply
I am a federal employee and a manager, I am not in a union, and I believe this is a bad idea. For one, the government is in bad enough shape, so why bring back people that helped it to get that way? Next, we have enough substandard supervisors and managers in the federal system; do we really believe that they will be able to keep control over some part-time retires that will have control attitudes and think they know more about what is going on in the federal government of “today”?
Besides the countless retirees that will apply, those from way back when “things were this way,” this opens Pandora’s Box in that it will become customary for feds to retire and jump through the revolving door into a part-time position. It will only set back the slow progress of the federal system already distorted with confusion and poor metrics and measurements for success. I hope this does not become a reality.
rehire of retirees
USPS
Tue May 26, 2009 11:26 AM
Post Reply
This should be used to bring back highly skilled managers so they can train the newer, younger, up and comers, not as a way to replace new hires. This would allow a manager to retire but continue to help and guide his replacement
Re: rehire of retirees
DHS
Wed May 27, 2009 12:40 PM
Re: rehire of retirees
ssa
Sun Jan 10, 2010 5:12 PM
Above article
OPM
Tue May 26, 2009 11:52 AM
Post Reply
Even watered down in its current form (the original bill last year doubled the number of hours and years in which they could be worked by returning retirees over what's found in the present bill), the bill still is badly needed by agencies who perceive so much of their institutional memory getting ready to walk out the front door as retirement beckons. It's predictable that the Federal unions, who at bottom have little interest in what benefits agencies and their ability to carry out their missions, but are entirely focused on their own short-term goal of maximizing dues paying membership, would be against such a necessary, common sense proposal. If the Democrats cave on this, it'll be one more broken hollow promise about bringing a new way of doing things inside the Beltway. (It's a matter of regret that Senator Akaka chose to abstain from voting in committee for the bill, even though he acknowledged it was needed.) That particular mantra is getting more than a little tattered.
Already Back at Work
Corps Of Engineers
Tue May 26, 2009 12:07 PM
Post Reply
I don't get this bill either. I retired in Jan 2007. Went back to work for two months in May-June 2007, took a year or so off, went back to work in Spring 2008, and have been working every since (at my old job/desk). I'm a "Rehired Annuitant" for the COE. I get NO benifits, but thats OK with me. The extra $$ is nice, all going into the bank!
I have no limits to the amount of work, but as I understand it, I can do this for up to 5 years. I don't intend to stay THAT long.
Hire retired federal officers
HHS/SAMHSA
Tue May 26, 2009 12:20 PM
Post Reply
I support bringing back retired workers because it is better than hiring incompetent staff, which has already begun around here during the transition period. When you hire unqualified people, you have hold back qualified workers to make them look good, which is also happening here.