The "average" salaries are off because the grades in DC are SOOO much higher than the rest of the country.
I went to my HR office in the DC area. The HR specialists are all FPL GS-13's doing what I did for a GS-7 in another state.
Sure cost of living is higher there - THATS WHAT LOCALITY PAYMENTS ARE FOR. The grades should not be elevated just because of the location. Employees doing the same job should be paid the same wages, but it doesn't work that way in the DC area. A GS-5 in my state would be a GS-12 or 13 in the DC area. That's why the figures are so off from the rest of the country. Take out DC salaries, then give us the average federal wage. I'm sure it would come WAY down.
Re: Average Salary
GS-5 Poor Man DOD in Mississippi Tue Aug 29, 2006 11:31 AM
An HR specialist working at an Agency Headquarters in DC is obviously gonna be higher graded that an HE specialist in a local office in Bugtussle. If you look at their job descriptions, you will probably find the GS-12 in DC is much more technical than the job in Bugtussle.
Re: Average Salary
Analyst Dod Tue Aug 29, 2006 2:45 PM
For the same job, they should be the same grade. Yes, DC is more likely to have higher positions; however, they're not all that high. I've known people that were GS-13 secretaries in the DC area while someone who did less work (especially based on the description) was a GS-10 in the same region. The fact is that different agencies apply the rules differently. Personally, I think that needs to change so that positions can be transferred more easily. If you need to promote someone to give them enough money to be able to live, then raise the locality (which, of course, isn't actually for that purpose).
Re: Average Salary
Environmental Engineer EPA Wed Aug 30, 2006 8:24 AM
Rather than make overall generalities by grouping all government employees, both technical professionals and non-technical persons and comparing that to the overall public workforce, it would be more accurate to: (1) compare the federal employee engineers/scientist salaries to the non-federal engineer/scientist salaries and; (2) compare the federal non-technical employee salaries to the non-federal non-technical employee salaries. It would also be informative to know the % of college degreed staff in the government work force versus the % of college degreed in the overall non-government work force.
Average and Median Pay
Human Resources Specialist Department of Treausury Tue Aug 29, 2006 9:36 AM
It would be far more meaningful to compare the pay of equivalent positions in the public and private sector with the same amount of years in service. I may make more than the average private sector employee but that is meaningless unless I know what the skills level and position are, and, too,
the years of employment for the same employer which is often an indicator of increased pay both in the private and public sector. Absent that, your article reinforces the notion that Federal givernment employees are overpaid. When I worked in the private sector, I had far more benefits and was paid more for equivalent work. As an unskilled factory worker at the time, I tooka $5000.00 pay cut to begin employment in a technically-skilled position with the Federal government (fortunately I had a college degree). In addition, the state in which I lived would regulary entice people from my agency to the equivalent state agaency because the state paid better and provided more benefits.
Average pay for federal employees
SARC Program Asst DoD/USAF Tue Aug 29, 2006 9:54 AM
I one disagreement with your comments -- everyone thinks that just because federal employees (or, anyone for the matter) lives in a large metro area -- they have a high cost of living. Well, try living in a small/medium town in the Midwest (South Dakota). The town I live in has some of the highest property taxes in the country. But, we are still at the low end of the salary spectrum. So, let's be fair and re-think the 'average' salary for federal workers.
'Average' Pay Debate
Retired in Texas DoD Tue Aug 29, 2006 9:57 AM
I've never really questioned the OPM figures for average federal pay and benefits. What I'm still not clear on, and very suspicious of, are the BLS figures for the average private sector pay and benefits used in the comparisons. Do the private sector figures include the exorbitiant pay and benefits of such as Bill Gates, Warren Buffet, George Soros, the recently retired CEO of Exon-Mobile, et al, or are they excluded because there is no comparable such person in the public sector? Also do the private sector averages include the millions of minimum pay and even lower pay jobs with no benefits, in the private sector? If so, this would create a NOT apples to apples comparison since there are no such jobs in the public sector. This would also support a seeming agenda that public sector employee wages and benefits far exceed those of private sector employees.
Federal Salaries
HR Manager DOE Tue Aug 29, 2006 9:58 AM
The figure may still be skewed. Since we now contract out most of our entry level positions, it is hard to compare the Feds to all others.
Average salaries
IRS Agent/Union Steward IRS Tue Aug 29, 2006 10:09 AM
The comparasion of average salaries of federal workers versus US workers is not a valid comparasion. The real comparasion should be job series or position classification of federal workers versus the private sector workers of the same classification. In other words compare an investigator at HUD with an investigator in the private sector not with a cook at MacDonalds. Compare an IRS agent with an accountant in private. Apples vs apples, not oranges and apples.
fed salaries
Civil Servant DOL Tue Aug 29, 2006 10:15 AM
I have worked most of my federal career in the field but I have also spent 18 months in the DC area. I agree with the DOI guy about elevated grades in DC, and that locality payments are to help adjust the base salary for the area lived in....but DC is DC and that can not be changed.
When the average salary for private sector workers is calculated do they use the CEO pay? So why include it in the federal average pay--SES is basically the equivalent of a CEO but a federal employee.
What they should do is NOT include SES in the calculation. Their pay starts at 6 figures and that is the true number that skews the pay.
In the private sector how many people are CEO's or managers at that level that receive the 6 figure incomes. Not many. Only use the salaries from GS-1 to GS-15....the worker bees and then we will probably see a true figure...one that is more reasonable and acceptable.
Do any comparison you want
Worker Private Sector Tue Aug 29, 2006 10:21 AM
Do any comparison you want, any of the ones mentioned here in the comments, and it won't matter - you will all still think you're underpaid compared to the private sector and will still complain about the figures being inaccurate since they don't reflect your unique position.
Re: Do any comparison you want
Human Resources Specialist Department of Treausury Tue Aug 29, 2006 11:55 AM
You and Federal employers have more in common than you think. We are workers, too. I am assuming that you are a general worker with no title and specific occupation, or is "worker" for rhetorical effect?
Please explain 'adjusted'
Employee Relations Specialist V.A. Tue Aug 29, 2006 10:24 AM
Ralph, your article reported OPM's data for the median ADJUSTED federal salary (non-postal Executive branch) is $60,636. Please clarify what "adjusted" means. Like you said, our salaries are a subject of very keen interest.
Thank you!
Two Observations
Lead Staff Accountant DFAS Tue Aug 29, 2006 10:55 AM
I have only two observations to make:
First, as others have said, there is still no comparison of salaries for like occupations.
Second, your last paragraph looks like a basic sign-off. I suspect that we can figure that you're sick of the subject and don't plan on saying too much more about it.
Debating 'Average' Federal Salaries
Lead Engineer DoD Tue Aug 29, 2006 11:40 AM
I think you are still comparing apples and oranges when you talk about average federal salaries compared to the "average" American (whatever salary pool that is). If you talk about specific jobs and associated salaries, the picture is much clearer. I'm a GS12 Step 4, Rest of US, Lead Engineer for the USAF. If I were working on the outside for a large company, my salary as a lead engineer would be quite a bit higher than a GS12 Step 4, Rest of US, based on comparable work and responsibilities; i.e, a lead engineer at Boeing or Northrop Gumman. No one can dispute that.
What is he selling?
Flunky File Clerk DoD Tue Aug 29, 2006 12:12 PM
Mr. Smith (who from his company hat and shirt has "Contractor" written all over him) continues to pound home his finding of 60k per annum again and again in the hopes that we will see the light and stop complaining. He makes a point of posting comments made from his previous articles, but those postings are all complaints about "average" pay, which he continues to counter. He has never commented on the need to compare like positions, which is a complaint more common than any other with this article. Why is that?
Mr. Smith is very selective in posting comments, just as he is selective with the information he provides in his writing. I can't help but wonder who pays his various salaries...
Re: What is he selling?
editor fedsmith Tue Aug 29, 2006 2:38 PM
Sorry to disappoint but FedSmith is a volunteer organization that provides a free service to federal employees. Ralph is retired and does not receive a salary. As a former federal employee-and a former contractor with a federal HR services firm--writes articles on a regular basis for this company as a service to the community.
Re: What is he selling?
Flunky File Clerk DoD Tue Aug 29, 2006 3:32 PM
So he lives entirely off of his retirement and receives no extra money from anyone, period? And his mantra of "average salary is 60k, deal with it" is just his own passionate opinion?
Forgive me if I don't believe you.
Re: What is he selling?
Analyst Dod Tue Aug 29, 2006 6:18 PM
Come on, it's not about silencing us into submission, just keeping us up to date where the issues are going. Sure, most of us think these numbers are skewed, but Ralph isn't the one skewing them; he's simply reporting them to us. It's better to know what's going on than what's not going on, especially if it's negative and we wish to have a prayer in addressing it before it does result in massive pay reform (which is already taking place for some of us).
Average Salary
Procurement Analyst NAVSUP Tue Aug 29, 2006 12:54 PM
I think you fail to take into account that many of the lower paying jobs that used to be performed by Federal employees have now been outsourced to the private sector. This occurs under the A-76 program when it is determined that the job is not inherently governmental. I believe this skews the data.
Also, I work in contracting and make decisions that determines where millions of tax payers dollars go. I have always fought hard to save Uncle Sam money during negotiations. I hardly believe my counterpart working for the company trying to get the Government contract is making less money than me. Government bonuses are a joke as well, were they taken into consideration when comparing us to the private sector? My neighbor got a 50% of his salary bonus last year. My annual performance appraisal award equated to 2%, that was actually pretty high compared to my co-workers in the field.
I did not take the job for the money
Contract Specialist DLA Tue Aug 29, 2006 1:55 PM
I took a pay cut coming here. I wanted to serve my country. It's a patriotic thing. I also know that many Americans try their best to make as much as they can. I guess I should thank my lucky stars that I know about frugality, thrift, and Good Will stores. I live debt free except Child support, and the mortgage. Mr. Private Sector, I spent 10.5 years in the Army and am a Disabled vet. I have an MBA, and have been a senior level person at the Fortune 500, 200, 100 levels and know first hand that many (not all) government employees are underpaid. In fact my old employer is trying to get me to come back. Do you want to know what the carrot is? MONEY.
I guess it's a good thing there are soldiers, and civilians willing to keep us safe. Milton Friedman might even agree. Maybe sometime in the future I will make the "Median", or yet better the "Average." Thank you for the oppurtunity to serve. God Bless America.
Federal Salaries Comparison- Better Method
Retired Research Scientist Retired From NOAA Tue Aug 29, 2006 6:28 PM
Rather than using the Median, the better statistic to use in this case would probably be the Mode.
The Mode is the most frequently occuring value. The Median, which is the value halfway between the maximum and the minumum is better than the Average, but is still distorted by lots of extreme values.
If the Mode is used, I expect most readers will feel much better about the results, although the other comments about apples and oranges bad comparisons are still valid.
Re: Federal Salaries Comparison- Better Method
Information Technology Specialist DoD Tue Aug 29, 2006 6:35 PM
I'm sure if you tweak the statistics enough, one can eventually get them to show whatever outcome is desired. That's evident in many of these comments - people are just seeing what they want to see since it fits their agendas. Unfortunately, facts are still facts whether you like them or not.
Re: Federal Salaries Comparison- Better Method
HR Specialist USDA Wed Aug 30, 2006 12:44 PM
Won't change it. The mode will come up GS-11, which is in the 60K range.
Liars figure, figures lie - lies, damn lies, and statistics
Analyst DoD Wed Aug 30, 2006 9:11 AM
I've been active duty military (officer, non-retired), support contractor, and finally decided to take a TWENTY THOUSAND DOLLAR cut in pay to join civil service, DOING EXACTLY what I did in the military and as a contractor. I left the military because the military is being run by insufficiently trained officers who depend on the "good ole boy" service academy and collegiate cronies for the plumb jobs. Well guess what? They retire to the beltway bandits and the system is duplicated there. So I went civil service. NOW GUESS WHAT? YEP, retired officers are now feathering their nests for either beltway bandit jobs OR CIVIL SERVICE JOBS NOW (because Congress changed the law about 3 - 4 years ago). Our organizations cannot hire good, desireable straight-out-of college graduates with fresh degrees because retarded Cols, LtCols get veterans preference. In-breeding such as this is the reason the USA has become a welfare nation - and civil service an exclusive "white-collar" welfare club.
DO NOT put down the vet preference. It helps many people gets good jobs with benefits to take care of their families.
As for officers...they do not just get vet pref. There are specific rules for higher level officers to get vet pref i.e. they must be disabled.
Do not change the subject--we were discussing salaries...
Federal Pay
Program Manager USDA Wed Aug 30, 2006 9:27 AM
The median was interesting - it was slightly higher than I had thought it would be. However, the logical follow-up now is for an analysis of comparison of federal job categories with the pay and benefits of like categories. I am a GS-13 and am well compensated in my opinion. Based on information from colleagues who left for the private sector (lending), my pay and benefits are less than a comparable job in the private section. However, my work schedule is much more flexible, I have more vacation days. I also have a more secure retirement (I think!) and don't have to "sell" the product to make a profit. In my state, the employees are 8 grade 7, 11 grade 11 and 10 grade 12. Therefore, the median income would be high as you report. Lending is also technical, and therefore the need is for a highly qualified workforce. We have a lesser need for lower paid technical workers. The fact that many federal jobs are more technical in nature has led to more employees in the GS-11-13 pay grades, as opposed to GS-9 and below. At one time we needed 1 techical per loan officer. Now the ratio is probably 1 to 3.
Avgerage Psay Fed vs Private
management and program analyst DHS Wed Aug 30, 2006 11:31 AM
I have friends in Contracting/Procurement. They tell me it is cheaper to hire a contractor than keep a fed. 2nd: DC has a huge amount of these contractors. The individual contractor may not make what the individual Fed does, but his company makes enough out of placing him that they run a corporation and make a profit after paying their officers' eggregious salaries. On the other hand a contractor can be fired, even a contract ended; a Fed is kept on, and is assigned other work if the work he was doing ends. How can Feds be compared with Contractors when different rules govern each? And don't even bring retirement into it! I'm in the FERS program. I will make less than my CSRS coworkers unless I make some hefty savings decisions-just like private sector employees! The only saving grace is that I will probably stay a Fed until I retire at 65-and it's 65 because FERS can't afford to leave sooner. Gotta build up that TSP!
Average Salary
HR Specialist USDA Wed Aug 30, 2006 12:40 PM
Why are some having such a hard time believing that 60K is the average or median or whatever you want to call it. It's a fact, and as a fed classifier for over 25 years, I can certainly believe it. But its way too difficult to generally compare that to the entire private sector. I just read that (2005 stats) a whopping 17% of American households now bring home over 100K. 17% is almost 1 in 5. So there are obviously alot of private sector types making alot of money. Trouble is, the same study showed how the lower end of the workforce hasn't made any gain since 2001. The widening gap that everyone knows about. That's not true in the fed. All grade levels get the same percentage increase yearly, along with within grade increase. Two obvious factors are the ever increasing numbers of GS-13 and above positions, and the ever decreasing numbers of GS-5 and below positions. In 20 years, average grade has increased from GS-7 to GS-11.
Re: Average Salary
management and program analyst DHS Thu Aug 31, 2006 9:28 AM
I do believe HR ought to know. And the fact there is no pay gap in the Gov't is to be commended. What if the private sector followed that lead? Why can't it take care of its lower paid workers as we do. If they did that, the average salary of private employees could equal or exceed the public sector. Instead of complaining about our "so high" pay, why not find ways to eliminate the "their" pay gap between the lowest paid and the highest paid workers? Gov't DOES pay better for college degrees, BUT time in grade doing the same work will give promotions to anyone who can deliver. If the Gov't average, median, etc. pay beats private, why aren't there more Gov't employees? Why must we spend time and money recruiting if the deal is so good? And, by the way, why not hold the higher paid private sector grades to the same salary ceiling GS emp;oyees have? Yeah, right.
last para: retirement pay=useless
eng. tech DOD Wed Aug 30, 2006 3:19 PM
The article said the avg CSRS was about $2400 in monthly pay. Vs FERS of $860. I see little use in this paragraph. What is the
avg. pay of FERS using all three components or even better, what is the avg. retirement pay for grades GS5-9 and then the GS 10-13 grouping.
You can look up the data yourself
Manager DOC Wed Aug 30, 2006 7:30 PM
For those who are skeptical, you can get the average salary yourself from OPM. From the Feddata website.
If you did, it would reveal that it is GS that drives the average salary at $63,124. That doesn't include the 7,057 SES (Governmentwide Plans) who average $150,000. The GS control the average because of the 1,844,517 federal employees in March 2006, 1,307,916 are in the GS pay plan.
That only leaves 500,000 or so in other plans, of which 200,000 are in blue collar plans and average less than $45,000.
By: Elaine E. Bedel - President , Bedel Financial Consulting
Category: Personal Finance
Beginning January 2007, the Medicare Part B premium will increase based on income levels. The premium currently paid by individuals eligible for Medicare is 25% of the total cost. This will go up to as high as 80% for some.
FERS Retirement
Ground Safety Manager DOD Thu Aug 31, 2006 9:01 AM
To show a true comarison of CSRS vs. FER's you should have included the Social Security Off-set which all FER's empolyee's receive until age 62. CSRS $2396 monthly vs $868 looks bad and is not an acurate estimate.
Looking at the Retirement Data
It Specialist DoD Thu Aug 31, 2006 9:14 AM
Must remember that the $868.00 annuity figure for FERS does not include the social security received by them with this annuity.....Once that is added to the retirement equasion plus the TSP amount matched by the government, it will about equal or mean more for the FERS retirees in the future.
Federal Salaries
HR Specialist Social Security Administration Thu Aug 31, 2006 9:44 AM
I agree wholeheartedly with Civil Servant from DOL. Why should SES salaries be included? As previously stated, the average salary figure will be more accurate regardless of the DC salaries.
Truth in Stats
HR Specialist DoD Thu Aug 31, 2006 10:16 AM
The reality of comments with regard to this article is that most of us don't like seeing the salary figures in black and white. A new report shows that the median American household income is $46,326--that is for the entire household--while the median fed individually takes in $60,636. It looks as though various people have said we should use the average figure but should use the median figure while others have said we should use the mode figure. Some have said we should not count air traffic controllers, others think SES should be excluded while others do not like including highly paid medical personnel.
The reality is that we are pretty well paid and most of us know the taxpaying public does not like seeing the figures. We can quibble and whine about being underpaid and how the figures should "really" be counted but it always seems to come out fairly high. Perhaps we should just be grateful for having a good job with good benefits and quit complaining.
Re: Truth in Stats
Analyst Dod Thu Aug 31, 2006 2:11 PM
I agree with most of this. We hate seeing it because we fear that it'll affect how quickly we receive a pay increase. Let's not worry about whether it's the mean, the mode or the median though, let's just compare like jobs to like jobs (mostly because I want to see if my job even exists in the private sector and how much such a person would make). We do get paid more than the average family, but we're also more educated than the average person. What's the average wage for someone who has the average amount of education we do? Even those with a high school diploma probably has had a lot of on-the-job training.
Ralph
It Specialist SSA Thu Aug 31, 2006 2:45 PM
Ralph knows he is comparing apples to oranges (after all he is an ex-federal employee). His purpose is to create discussion amongst the readers. If the majority of his readers were from private industry instead of the federal gov't, his brush would be painting a different picture. Good job Ralph!
Editor Fedsmith:
You did a fine job of defending Ralph, but you failed to answer the question.
Debating Average Federal Salary Figures
Lead Engineer DoD Fri Sep 15, 2006 9:45 AM
What irritates me is that no one ever discusses what the data base is for the "average" American (non-federal employee) figures. I seriously doubt that the data base for the average American figures can be compared to the data base used for the average government employee. Are you actually comparing apples and apples? Anyone can make calculations, including OPM, and say here. It is up to us to analyze what the numbers really mean before jumping on some kind of crazy band wagon.
CSRS vs FERS
Range Conservationist USDA Wed Sep 27, 2006 9:58 AM
Comparing the average CSRS annuity with FERS is not a good comparison. That is like comparing apples to oranges. The retirement systems are so completely diffrent that straight comparisons are misleading.
Federal Employees salaries
Education Specialist I H S Wed Sep 27, 2006 6:09 PM
In many cases, salaries of federal employees are on a par with private sector workers in the same field. Things like locality pay are not understood by the private working public. Things are not as rosey salary-wise for federal employees as the figure may imply. Very many private sector professionals would not work in localities that many federal employees are assigned as duty stations.
Variations in Grade Structures, Duties, and PAY
Labor Relations Specialist AFGE Thu Sep 28, 2006 7:22 AM
If you think the variations in grades, duties, and pay are of concern now, wait until systems like NSPS go into effect.
All of it
management and program analyst DHS Fri Sep 29, 2006 8:39 AM
This is a good conversation. That's the job of this blog(?): more comments. And the comments are almost all from the Feds. Why? Because this is Fedsmith. Who gets it? Feds. That doesn't mean the publication is bad, nor that its focus is wrong. People can speak out, air grievances, etc. This is good and healthy. Mode, median, averageit's still apples to oranges. But there's nothing wrong with fruit salad, as long as you're aware that's what you're getting.
Average Salary
DOI
Tue Aug 29, 2006 9:28 AM
The "average" salaries are off because the grades in DC are SOOO much higher than the rest of the country.
I went to my HR office in the DC area. The HR specialists are all FPL GS-13's doing what I did for a GS-7 in another state.
Sure cost of living is higher there - THATS WHAT LOCALITY PAYMENTS ARE FOR. The grades should not be elevated just because of the location. Employees doing the same job should be paid the same wages, but it doesn't work that way in the DC area. A GS-5 in my state would be a GS-12 or 13 in the DC area. That's why the figures are so off from the rest of the country. Take out DC salaries, then give us the average federal wage. I'm sure it would come WAY down.
Re: Average Salary
DOD in Mississippi
Tue Aug 29, 2006 11:31 AM
Re: Average Salary
Dod
Tue Aug 29, 2006 2:45 PM
Re: Average Salary
EPA
Wed Aug 30, 2006 8:24 AM
Average and Median Pay
Department of Treausury
Tue Aug 29, 2006 9:36 AM
It would be far more meaningful to compare the pay of equivalent positions in the public and private sector with the same amount of years in service. I may make more than the average private sector employee but that is meaningless unless I know what the skills level and position are, and, too,
the years of employment for the same employer which is often an indicator of increased pay both in the private and public sector. Absent that, your article reinforces the notion that Federal givernment employees are overpaid. When I worked in the private sector, I had far more benefits and was paid more for equivalent work. As an unskilled factory worker at the time, I tooka $5000.00 pay cut to begin employment in a technically-skilled position with the Federal government (fortunately I had a college degree). In addition, the state in which I lived would regulary entice people from my agency to the equivalent state agaency because the state paid better and provided more benefits.
Average pay for federal employees
DoD/USAF
Tue Aug 29, 2006 9:54 AM
I one disagreement with your comments -- everyone thinks that just because federal employees (or, anyone for the matter) lives in a large metro area -- they have a high cost of living. Well, try living in a small/medium town in the Midwest (South Dakota). The town I live in has some of the highest property taxes in the country. But, we are still at the low end of the salary spectrum. So, let's be fair and re-think the 'average' salary for federal workers.
'Average' Pay Debate
DoD
Tue Aug 29, 2006 9:57 AM
I've never really questioned the OPM figures for average federal pay and benefits. What I'm still not clear on, and very suspicious of, are the BLS figures for the average private sector pay and benefits used in the comparisons. Do the private sector figures include the exorbitiant pay and benefits of such as Bill Gates, Warren Buffet, George Soros, the recently retired CEO of Exon-Mobile, et al, or are they excluded because there is no comparable such person in the public sector? Also do the private sector averages include the millions of minimum pay and even lower pay jobs with no benefits, in the private sector? If so, this would create a NOT apples to apples comparison since there are no such jobs in the public sector. This would also support a seeming agenda that public sector employee wages and benefits far exceed those of private sector employees.
Federal Salaries
DOE
Tue Aug 29, 2006 9:58 AM
The figure may still be skewed. Since we now contract out most of our entry level positions, it is hard to compare the Feds to all others.
Average salaries
IRS
Tue Aug 29, 2006 10:09 AM
The comparasion of average salaries of federal workers versus US workers is not a valid comparasion. The real comparasion should be job series or position classification of federal workers versus the private sector workers of the same classification. In other words compare an investigator at HUD with an investigator in the private sector not with a cook at MacDonalds. Compare an IRS agent with an accountant in private. Apples vs apples, not oranges and apples.
fed salaries
DOL
Tue Aug 29, 2006 10:15 AM
I have worked most of my federal career in the field but I have also spent 18 months in the DC area. I agree with the DOI guy about elevated grades in DC, and that locality payments are to help adjust the base salary for the area lived in....but DC is DC and that can not be changed.
When the average salary for private sector workers is calculated do they use the CEO pay? So why include it in the federal average pay--SES is basically the equivalent of a CEO but a federal employee.
What they should do is NOT include SES in the calculation. Their pay starts at 6 figures and that is the true number that skews the pay.
In the private sector how many people are CEO's or managers at that level that receive the 6 figure incomes. Not many. Only use the salaries from GS-1 to GS-15....the worker bees and then we will probably see a true figure...one that is more reasonable and acceptable.
Do any comparison you want
Private Sector
Tue Aug 29, 2006 10:21 AM
Do any comparison you want, any of the ones mentioned here in the comments, and it won't matter - you will all still think you're underpaid compared to the private sector and will still complain about the figures being inaccurate since they don't reflect your unique position.
Re: Do any comparison you want
Department of Treausury
Tue Aug 29, 2006 11:55 AM
Please explain 'adjusted'
V.A.
Tue Aug 29, 2006 10:24 AM
Ralph, your article reported OPM's data for the median ADJUSTED federal salary (non-postal Executive branch) is $60,636. Please clarify what "adjusted" means. Like you said, our salaries are a subject of very keen interest.
Thank you!
Two Observations
DFAS
Tue Aug 29, 2006 10:55 AM
I have only two observations to make:
First, as others have said, there is still no comparison of salaries for like occupations.
Second, your last paragraph looks like a basic sign-off. I suspect that we can figure that you're sick of the subject and don't plan on saying too much more about it.
Debating 'Average' Federal Salaries
DoD
Tue Aug 29, 2006 11:40 AM
I think you are still comparing apples and oranges when you talk about average federal salaries compared to the "average" American (whatever salary pool that is). If you talk about specific jobs and associated salaries, the picture is much clearer. I'm a GS12 Step 4, Rest of US, Lead Engineer for the USAF. If I were working on the outside for a large company, my salary as a lead engineer would be quite a bit higher than a GS12 Step 4, Rest of US, based on comparable work and responsibilities; i.e, a lead engineer at Boeing or Northrop Gumman. No one can dispute that.
What is he selling?
DoD
Tue Aug 29, 2006 12:12 PM
Mr. Smith (who from his company hat and shirt has "Contractor" written all over him) continues to pound home his finding of 60k per annum again and again in the hopes that we will see the light and stop complaining. He makes a point of posting comments made from his previous articles, but those postings are all complaints about "average" pay, which he continues to counter. He has never commented on the need to compare like positions, which is a complaint more common than any other with this article. Why is that?
Mr. Smith is very selective in posting comments, just as he is selective with the information he provides in his writing. I can't help but wonder who pays his various salaries...
Re: What is he selling?
fedsmith
Tue Aug 29, 2006 2:38 PM
Re: What is he selling?
DoD
Tue Aug 29, 2006 3:32 PM
Forgive me if I don't believe you.
Re: What is he selling?
Dod
Tue Aug 29, 2006 6:18 PM
Average Salary
NAVSUP
Tue Aug 29, 2006 12:54 PM
I think you fail to take into account that many of the lower paying jobs that used to be performed by Federal employees have now been outsourced to the private sector. This occurs under the A-76 program when it is determined that the job is not inherently governmental. I believe this skews the data.
Also, I work in contracting and make decisions that determines where millions of tax payers dollars go. I have always fought hard to save Uncle Sam money during negotiations. I hardly believe my counterpart working for the company trying to get the Government contract is making less money than me. Government bonuses are a joke as well, were they taken into consideration when comparing us to the private sector? My neighbor got a 50% of his salary bonus last year. My annual performance appraisal award equated to 2%, that was actually pretty high compared to my co-workers in the field.
I did not take the job for the money
DLA
Tue Aug 29, 2006 1:55 PM
I took a pay cut coming here. I wanted to serve my country. It's a patriotic thing. I also know that many Americans try their best to make as much as they can. I guess I should thank my lucky stars that I know about frugality, thrift, and Good Will stores. I live debt free except Child support, and the mortgage. Mr. Private Sector, I spent 10.5 years in the Army and am a Disabled vet. I have an MBA, and have been a senior level person at the Fortune 500, 200, 100 levels and know first hand that many (not all) government employees are underpaid. In fact my old employer is trying to get me to come back. Do you want to know what the carrot is? MONEY.
I guess it's a good thing there are soldiers, and civilians willing to keep us safe. Milton Friedman might even agree. Maybe sometime in the future I will make the "Median", or yet better the "Average." Thank you for the oppurtunity to serve. God Bless America.
Federal Salaries Comparison- Better Method
Retired From NOAA
Tue Aug 29, 2006 6:28 PM
Rather than using the Median, the better statistic to use in this case would probably be the Mode.
The Mode is the most frequently occuring value. The Median, which is the value halfway between the maximum and the minumum is better than the Average, but is still distorted by lots of extreme values.
If the Mode is used, I expect most readers will feel much better about the results, although the other comments about apples and oranges bad comparisons are still valid.
Re: Federal Salaries Comparison- Better Method
DoD
Tue Aug 29, 2006 6:35 PM
Re: Federal Salaries Comparison- Better Method
USDA
Wed Aug 30, 2006 12:44 PM
Liars figure, figures lie - lies, damn lies, and statistics
DoD
Wed Aug 30, 2006 9:11 AM
I've been active duty military (officer, non-retired), support contractor, and finally decided to take a TWENTY THOUSAND DOLLAR cut in pay to join civil service, DOING EXACTLY what I did in the military and as a contractor. I left the military because the military is being run by insufficiently trained officers who depend on the "good ole boy" service academy and collegiate cronies for the plumb jobs. Well guess what? They retire to the beltway bandits and the system is duplicated there. So I went civil service. NOW GUESS WHAT? YEP, retired officers are now feathering their nests for either beltway bandit jobs OR CIVIL SERVICE JOBS NOW (because Congress changed the law about 3 - 4 years ago). Our organizations cannot hire good, desireable straight-out-of college graduates with fresh degrees because retarded Cols, LtCols get veterans preference. In-breeding such as this is the reason the USA has become a welfare nation - and civil service an exclusive "white-collar" welfare club.
Re: Liars figure, figures lie - lies, damn lies, and statistics
DOL
Wed Aug 30, 2006 11:00 AM
As for officers...they do not just get vet pref. There are specific rules for higher level officers to get vet pref i.e. they must be disabled.
Do not change the subject--we were discussing salaries...
Federal Pay
USDA
Wed Aug 30, 2006 9:27 AM
The median was interesting - it was slightly higher than I had thought it would be. However, the logical follow-up now is for an analysis of comparison of federal job categories with the pay and benefits of like categories. I am a GS-13 and am well compensated in my opinion. Based on information from colleagues who left for the private sector (lending), my pay and benefits are less than a comparable job in the private section. However, my work schedule is much more flexible, I have more vacation days. I also have a more secure retirement (I think!) and don't have to "sell" the product to make a profit. In my state, the employees are 8 grade 7, 11 grade 11 and 10 grade 12. Therefore, the median income would be high as you report. Lending is also technical, and therefore the need is for a highly qualified workforce. We have a lesser need for lower paid technical workers. The fact that many federal jobs are more technical in nature has led to more employees in the GS-11-13 pay grades, as opposed to GS-9 and below. At one time we needed 1 techical per loan officer. Now the ratio is probably 1 to 3.
Avgerage Psay Fed vs Private
DHS
Wed Aug 30, 2006 11:31 AM
I have friends in Contracting/Procurement. They tell me it is cheaper to hire a contractor than keep a fed. 2nd: DC has a huge amount of these contractors. The individual contractor may not make what the individual Fed does, but his company makes enough out of placing him that they run a corporation and make a profit after paying their officers' eggregious salaries. On the other hand a contractor can be fired, even a contract ended; a Fed is kept on, and is assigned other work if the work he was doing ends. How can Feds be compared with Contractors when different rules govern each? And don't even bring retirement into it! I'm in the FERS program. I will make less than my CSRS coworkers unless I make some hefty savings decisions-just like private sector employees! The only saving grace is that I will probably stay a Fed until I retire at 65-and it's 65 because FERS can't afford to leave sooner. Gotta build up that TSP!
Average Salary
USDA
Wed Aug 30, 2006 12:40 PM
Why are some having such a hard time believing that 60K is the average or median or whatever you want to call it. It's a fact, and as a fed classifier for over 25 years, I can certainly believe it. But its way too difficult to generally compare that to the entire private sector. I just read that (2005 stats) a whopping 17% of American households now bring home over 100K. 17% is almost 1 in 5. So there are obviously alot of private sector types making alot of money. Trouble is, the same study showed how the lower end of the workforce hasn't made any gain since 2001. The widening gap that everyone knows about. That's not true in the fed. All grade levels get the same percentage increase yearly, along with within grade increase. Two obvious factors are the ever increasing numbers of GS-13 and above positions, and the ever decreasing numbers of GS-5 and below positions. In 20 years, average grade has increased from GS-7 to GS-11.
Re: Average Salary
DHS
Thu Aug 31, 2006 9:28 AM
last para: retirement pay=useless
DOD
Wed Aug 30, 2006 3:19 PM
The article said the avg CSRS was about $2400 in monthly pay. Vs FERS of $860. I see little use in this paragraph. What is the
avg. pay of FERS using all three components or even better, what is the avg. retirement pay for grades GS5-9 and then the GS 10-13 grouping.
You can look up the data yourself
DOC
Wed Aug 30, 2006 7:30 PM
For those who are skeptical, you can get the average salary yourself from OPM. From the Feddata website.
If you did, it would reveal that it is GS that drives the average salary at $63,124. That doesn't include the 7,057 SES (Governmentwide Plans) who average $150,000. The GS control the average because of the 1,844,517 federal employees in March 2006, 1,307,916 are in the GS pay plan.
That only leaves 500,000 or so in other plans, of which 200,000 are in blue collar plans and average less than $45,000.
See for yourself:
http://www.fedscope.opm.gov/cognos/cgi-bin/ppdscgi.exe?BZ=1AAABT0ZWSjYABEwU6VFChhEjU8q2A6Pljyl0wtCpM~cWRdrAYfMmT5sybuhKpyZh5IxB_7cHhg0TQqL0GNtezI9dMXDMIAHzQ80umfn2kCBZd2Y1zi6yZCxmcbFqb0w8JKCEyfsKCpswbt_2mX5H5IQhS6QUhA2bEjByNCkSZEoVKUWmOiScXTPvVkZmn9iunNog5g1iasOLkCDaes1Wj40YNZswlvToTXDWxsybBLFTtlycTUBTwpYhOXml1U1cK6a1doZuHPbGbAo3yk6aMWUTvw8yuwH~
secret is out!
anon
Wed Aug 30, 2006 8:54 PM
Some Seniors Will Pay More For Medicare Part B
By: Elaine E. Bedel - President , Bedel Financial Consulting
Category: Personal Finance
Beginning January 2007, the Medicare Part B premium will increase based on income levels. The premium currently paid by individuals eligible for Medicare is 25% of the total cost. This will go up to as high as 80% for some.
FERS Retirement
DOD
Thu Aug 31, 2006 9:01 AM
To show a true comarison of CSRS vs. FER's you should have included the Social Security Off-set which all FER's empolyee's receive until age 62. CSRS $2396 monthly vs $868 looks bad and is not an acurate estimate.
Looking at the Retirement Data
DoD
Thu Aug 31, 2006 9:14 AM
Must remember that the $868.00 annuity figure for FERS does not include the social security received by them with this annuity.....Once that is added to the retirement equasion plus the TSP amount matched by the government, it will about equal or mean more for the FERS retirees in the future.
Federal Salaries
Social Security Administration
Thu Aug 31, 2006 9:44 AM
I agree wholeheartedly with Civil Servant from DOL. Why should SES salaries be included? As previously stated, the average salary figure will be more accurate regardless of the DC salaries.
Truth in Stats
DoD
Thu Aug 31, 2006 10:16 AM
The reality of comments with regard to this article is that most of us don't like seeing the salary figures in black and white. A new report shows that the median American household income is $46,326--that is for the entire household--while the median fed individually takes in $60,636. It looks as though various people have said we should use the average figure but should use the median figure while others have said we should use the mode figure. Some have said we should not count air traffic controllers, others think SES should be excluded while others do not like including highly paid medical personnel.
The reality is that we are pretty well paid and most of us know the taxpaying public does not like seeing the figures. We can quibble and whine about being underpaid and how the figures should "really" be counted but it always seems to come out fairly high. Perhaps we should just be grateful for having a good job with good benefits and quit complaining.
Re: Truth in Stats
Dod
Thu Aug 31, 2006 2:11 PM
Ralph
SSA
Thu Aug 31, 2006 2:45 PM
Ralph knows he is comparing apples to oranges (after all he is an ex-federal employee). His purpose is to create discussion amongst the readers. If the majority of his readers were from private industry instead of the federal gov't, his brush would be painting a different picture. Good job Ralph!
Editor Fedsmith:
You did a fine job of defending Ralph, but you failed to answer the question.
Debating Average Federal Salary Figures
DoD
Fri Sep 15, 2006 9:45 AM
What irritates me is that no one ever discusses what the data base is for the "average" American (non-federal employee) figures. I seriously doubt that the data base for the average American figures can be compared to the data base used for the average government employee. Are you actually comparing apples and apples? Anyone can make calculations, including OPM, and say here. It is up to us to analyze what the numbers really mean before jumping on some kind of crazy band wagon.
CSRS vs FERS
USDA
Wed Sep 27, 2006 9:58 AM
Comparing the average CSRS annuity with FERS is not a good comparison. That is like comparing apples to oranges. The retirement systems are so completely diffrent that straight comparisons are misleading.
Federal Employees salaries
I H S
Wed Sep 27, 2006 6:09 PM
In many cases, salaries of federal employees are on a par with private sector workers in the same field. Things like locality pay are not understood by the private working public. Things are not as rosey salary-wise for federal employees as the figure may imply. Very many private sector professionals would not work in localities that many federal employees are assigned as duty stations.
Variations in Grade Structures, Duties, and PAY
AFGE
Thu Sep 28, 2006 7:22 AM
If you think the variations in grades, duties, and pay are of concern now, wait until systems like NSPS go into effect.
All of it
DHS
Fri Sep 29, 2006 8:39 AM
This is a good conversation. That's the job of this blog(?): more comments. And the comments are almost all from the Feds. Why? Because this is Fedsmith. Who gets it? Feds. That doesn't mean the publication is bad, nor that its focus is wrong. People can speak out, air grievances, etc. This is good and healthy. Mode, median, averageit's still apples to oranges. But there's nothing wrong with fruit salad, as long as you're aware that's what you're getting.