Count me as a union member and employee rep who disagrees with the union opposition to rehiring some retirees. While I agree there should be a term limit, I would think that up to five years as opposed to 3180 hours would be smarter. These folks left with a wealth of corporate knowledge that is still relevant in today's workplace, member or not. When the smoke clears this is STILL about getting work done for the American taxpayer who employs us. That is my bottom line!
Bill to Allow Rehiring of Federal Employees
National Vice President American Federation Of government Employees Tue May 26, 2009 9:01 AM
Wrong again Ralph. AFGE represents retired Federal Employees and many of those who were members continue their membership into retirement. What we are looking for is a level playing field for current and retired employees in filling positions.
Retiree Feedback
Federal Retiree (10/2007) USDA Tue May 26, 2009 9:01 AM
If the government needs our help, we (retirees) should not be penalized for providing the assistance as needed.
Rehiring retirees
worker Fed Tue May 26, 2009 9:02 AM
Guess management did not properly prepare for the alleged mass of retirements by the baby boomers. Therefore, they must rehire retirees until the new people hired are off and running. it takes years for them to be able to do the job properly.
Bargaining Unit Status
John L. Lewis UMW (AFL-CIO) Tue May 26, 2009 9:03 AM
I think unions would be inclined to offer more support if the retired employees who are brought back will become members of a bargaining unit if they were otherwise in a unit. Presently, the unit descriptions probably don't address these employes one way or the other. This could create many "questions concerning representation" throughout the government. That would be costly to clear up unit by unit.
Re: Bargaining Unit Status
HR Retired Tue May 26, 2009 3:39 PM
Unless something has changed since I retired, the position is designated as bargaining or non-bargaining, not a person. Therefore, whether the employee is a rehired annuitant or not, depending on the position they are placed in, they could be a bargaining unit member.
Hiring Fed Retirees as Contractors
Federal Employee DOE Tue May 26, 2009 9:06 AM
Whether this bill passes or not, really doesn't matter because federal retirees are hired back as contractors with no limitations on work hours. In other words, managers already have complete discretion to hire annuitants of their choice as a contractor, without any regard to veterans preference, or any objective, competitive criteria. This is a common practice at my agency.
Re: Hiring Fed Retirees as Contractors
retired fed DHHS Tue Jun 9, 2009 9:01 AM
Only if an agency has money for such contracts for retirees. Many do not. Allowing retirees to return part time without taking a hit on their annuities should be permitted on an as-needed basis. In my former agency it took 2 years to get a new hire up to speed, and however effective they would never have the institutional knowledge to understand how some agency policies evolved. Unions oppose rehiring retirees because it will limit promotion opportunities for their members (and nonmembers who they represent).
WTH?
Beach Bum Retired DoD Tue May 26, 2009 9:07 AM
The stupidity of these unions has to stop, no wonder why their membership is dwindling.
I bet they feel really proud of themselves or they are just trying to hope for more dues paying members. Well even when I was eligible to join I realized how out of touch these unions were/are with their base.
I vote NO to unions and find their leadership is something lower than the junk on the bottom of my shoes.
Re: WTH?
Bill Williams Postal Servicre Retiree Tue May 26, 2009 1:15 PM
What a bunch of union nuts. They cream Chrysler, GM; Those people want it all and with Obama they'll probably git it. Hasn't he bailed them out so far?
Please, give me a break. Retired military can go to the work for the Feds, no penalty.
Re: WTH?
Tech DoD Wed May 27, 2009 11:52 AM
Membership is on the rise not decline.
Union Opposition to Hiring Retired Feds
HR Consultant Various Federal Agencies Tue May 26, 2009 9:12 AM
Another example of how Federal unions-the comfortable, complacent, custodians of the status quo- can stop new human resource programs. On the other hand, what better way to help your friends than this incentive.
Re: Union Opposition to Hiring Retired Feds
usda worker Tue May 26, 2009 10:00 AM
"what better way to help your friends", hit the nail right on the head. anyone who anticipates anything different is not in the real world of federal gov't employment
Not in favor of bringing back betirees
Service Rep Social Security Administration Tue May 26, 2009 9:16 AM
I personally do not think that the retirees should be brought back. I have been with the Social Security Administration for 10 years and I am still waiting for a promotion. I am 42 years old and I will be with the agency at least another 15 years. I have to ask the question of how long will the retiree be with the agency if brought back? I can't get a promotion right now because of the new people that they are bringing on from off of the street. Many of the new people they simply take resumes' on and never post the vacancy announcement so that people like me with the experience can apply. Then when I try to give them my resume' I was told that I would never be promoted through that route and that I should apply on-line when an announcement was released (needless to say……one will never be released from my office because of this practice)
With all of that being said…..I have experience….I have been here for the daily training etc. The retiree will still have to go through some sort of training. I think that the agency would be better served if it promoted the more experienced personnel from within and back filled the lower paying jobs.
Re: Not in favor of bringing back betirees
Beach Bum Retired DoD Tue May 26, 2009 12:28 PM
You must work in OCO, they brag about the generations and families that work there. One of their head recruiting honch's also was all in favor of using FCIP to backdoor Vet's. All in all it is not a very nice place to work at all.
But hey, they have a song and a slogan to go along with their ever increasing backlog and overtime payments.
Re: Not in favor of bringing back betirees
Worker USDA Tue May 26, 2009 2:29 PM
I agree with not bringing back retired folks. I was forced to leave a position because my boss came back as a retired-annunitant! I stayed as long as I could, but never received all the great information that he was suppose to share. Come on! Let us folks that are still trying to make a living move up in the ranks. If you choose to retire, retire!
Please stay retired!
Supervisor DLA Tue May 26, 2009 9:17 AM
No offense to all the retirees out there, but we have been doing fine without you. If anything, we have been doing better. New people bring fresh ideas, and a lot of energy. Please stay away and allow the next generation of federal employees to serve their country!
Re: Please stay retired!
Brian SSA Tue Jun 9, 2009 1:31 PM
Thank you soooo much...
All we need is more DEAD WOOD!!!
Wish more people would retire........ GOOD BYE SO LONG!!!
The OLD BREED is Not up on technology all they do is take up space that could be filled by a younger more motivated person with fresh ideas and a pulse...
retirees excluded from bargaining unit
Management Analyst FDA Tue May 26, 2009 9:20 AM
"Retired federal employees may not become members if they come back to work." it has been my understanding that anyone can join a union, but not everyone may be represented by the union (i.e., excluded from bargaining unit). I assume that is what you meant. in which case, my response is: I did not know that! what is the basis for their exclusion?
Re: retirees excluded from bargaining unit
usda worker Tue May 26, 2009 10:02 AM
the basis for their exclusion comes from when the unit was initially "clarified". that is when the FLRA determines the members of the bargaining unit and if they were not included (retirees/temp workers) they would not be included
Rehiring Issues
Former (Retired) RO IRS Tue May 26, 2009 9:24 AM
Going to have to give you a "well - duh!" on this one. What your story doesn't point out (and what you are surely aware of) is that the retirees that management will hire will be their buddies - former managers - not former rank and file employees. This has already been shown to be the case in previous instances where waivers have been granted under existing laws. Check out the rehiring of retirees to serve as instructors in the IRS about 7 years ago. Many of those folks, although good, competent managers in most cases, had not actually done any of the work they were attempting to teach to new trainees in a great many years. So, not only are these rehired annuitants not likey to join a union, they're also not the best qualified individuals to carry out the work. Seems as though you could included that point in your story as well, but, as usual, you chose only to blame the federal unions. How about a little journalistic integrity every once in a while??
Re: Rehiring Issues
HR Retired Tue May 26, 2009 3:44 PM
Because not all situations are the same. My former agency hired retired employees back as trainers for positions and they were all people who had served in those positions. None were former supvs or managers, but people with only the most up-to-date experience in that job.
Retired Annuitants
Management Analyst Navy Tue May 26, 2009 9:52 AM
I have to agree with union opposition on this one. The way I have seen the principal of reemployment applied so far has been for highest ranking managers, with six-figure salaries and very tidy retirements, coming back as highly paid contractors or "reemployed annuitants," sometimes only days or weeks after "retirement." Even with the salary offset, it is apparently sufficiently lucrative that it is been done pretty often. This effectively blocks advancement for lower ranking civilian employees and allows agencies to procrastinate on establishing effective succession policies and practices.
Diversity
Environmental Engineer ASC Tue May 26, 2009 10:16 AM
I believe that the federal "retirement tsunami" would be just like the A-76 Program, i.e., "hinder" a diverse work environment and promote the "ol boys' network and nepotism." Because of this practice too much effort would have to go into promoting equal opportunities and at the same time there is not enough effort in promoting equal opportunities, conditions, and privlege of employment for the current workers. Also, the same lazy privilege folks that messed-up the work force will be back in business.
Union
QA FRCE Tue May 26, 2009 10:55 AM
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
Retired DHS DHS Tue May 26, 2009 11:22 AM
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
Manager Independent Agency Tue May 26, 2009 11:22 AM
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
Manager USPS Tue May 26, 2009 11:26 AM
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
Retired DHS DHS Wed May 27, 2009 12:40 PM
He/She should have done that BEFORE retirement
Above article
HR Specialist OPM Tue May 26, 2009 11:52 AM
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
Rehired Annuitant Corps Of Engineers Tue May 26, 2009 12:07 PM
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
Staff HHS/SAMHSA Tue May 26, 2009 12:20 PM
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.
Rehiring old farts
Environmental Protection Specialist usepa Tue May 26, 2009 12:24 PM
It never ceases to amaze me, one minute the federal employee is a lazy go for nothing slug who is an overpaid underaciever. Now it seems we want to give them incentives to come back to work after we finally got rid of them. Which one is is it you want us or you dont want us? Well i tink the union s got it right this time, lets get some new blood in here, with some fresh ideas, enthusiasm. I love EPA its a great place to work, but not because of the mgt, its the environment stupid, but once i do leave which may be soon, isnt very inviting. i ll tell you who will come back the SESers the middle managers who wanted to be a SESer, and the folks with no life out side of work, is that truly who i want to be mentors to the new generation of employees,i dont think so. First they dont speak the same language baby boomers vs Xers, Yers and what ever else you call them.
S. 629
Bank Examiner Financial Regulatory Agency under Geithner Tue May 26, 2009 12:35 PM
My agency must have gotten some special ability to do this because we have had this program for about a year now. It hasn't been very successful, as the agency DOES NOT hire the annuitants back at the salary they left at but at the midpoint of the grade they left out. Consequentlly retirees most can make better money as "contract hires" and the amount of time is more flexible.
I will say some of the earlier responders do have it right...this is definitely a "good ole boy" program based on who you know when you left. The rehires are even able to put in conditions such as "refuse to travel out of town." That means more travel assignments for the full time employees.
Re: S. 629
BMEU USPS Tue May 26, 2009 1:14 PM
Some of these postings are so Pavlovian that it would be hilarious if it weren't so sad. The author frames this issue as "obstructionist union is the problem", and the salivating and howling is instantaneous. If you could rub 2 brain cells together you could easily slice thru the reactionary propaganda and see that the union has an inherent right to weigh in on the terms of reinstatement- I'm CSRS and less than 5 yrs to go, so I can see the self-serving side of this for the retiree; nevertheless, extreme caution is a no brainer, before the fed proceeds down the reinstatement path---thank god the union is there to slow this operation down long enough that it can be thoroughly examined beforehand!
Re: S. 629
Rehired Annuitant Corps Of Engineers Tue May 26, 2009 1:54 PM
Believe me, I am not a "good ole boy". I was asked to come back because this office does not have enough people in my job title to get the work done. It takes many years to get proficient at my job.
And, I'm not an "old fart". I retired at 55 years of age.
Re: S. 629
Tech DoD Wed May 27, 2009 12:09 PM
I know the Corps all too well. You're back becasue they can't get their heads out of the hole fast enough to hire someone in your place. Years to get proficient? Hire the qualified - don't qualify the hired.
Sounds like a rip-off...
Retired Fed None Tue May 26, 2009 12:55 PM
...where do I get mine?
I retired from Federal service for a reason. I stay retired from Federal service for the same reason. All that brain drain? I doubt anyone misses any of the displaced gray matter.
UNION OPPOSITION
urology manager VA HEALTHCARE SYSTEM Tue May 26, 2009 2:41 PM
The problem with the AFGE is they do not realize these retired employees put in 30 to 40 years of service as dedicated employees who loved there jobs. These individuals are skilled people with alot of experience. This knowledge would be a total asset to our veterans who need alot of attention and care. What the AFGE needs to take into consideration is these retireed employees will go into the private sector with all this knowledge and we lose, because other private institutions will benefit in the long run. AFGE wake up and see the roses this is not rocket science
Move it or lose it
20 years to go USDA Tue May 26, 2009 3:00 PM
Supply and demand affects labor also. Federal retirees already have one of the most generous pensions in the U.S. (that includes FERS). Once they have the golden ticket, get out of the way and let that young family have a crack at a living wage. That's more important than someone coming back to bankroll another room on their lake home, or management not having to do their job (i.e. training somebody new).
Rehire retirees
Retiree In Sunny CA DoD Tue May 26, 2009 4:47 PM
I'm sorry, I'm still stuck on: "Federal retirees already have one of the most generous pensions in the U.S. (that includes FERS). Once they have the golden ticket, get out of the way and let that young family have a crack at a living wage". Me thinks someone lives in a fantasy world and has never seen a retirement check.
I need a job and this is the answer.
Retired GS-11 Inspector in charge USDA FSIS MEAT & POULTRY Tue May 26, 2009 5:51 PM
I joined USDA during the 60's and was PROmISED that when I retired I would get my Social Security full benifit. and the US Govt. full retirment at 30 years service. I had my 40 Quarters paid in to SS but my monthly check is about $230.00 per month with the offset. When I retired I had been an AFGE UNION MEMBER FOR 30 plus years and I STILL BELONG AND PAY DUES AND AM ACTIVE IN MEETINGS AND UNION FUNCTIONS AND ADVISORY. Also in 1995 I became a consultant in the meat and poultry industry but I can not now live on the $. and the union has not helped get my SS benifits back. ? WHY should I not be qualified to work part time? SS retirees can work part time and I think I am qualified as I have been working in USDA plants continually since 1959 and train sanitation and HACCP to the companies. When do we quit getting screwed, when we die? And our kids get nothing if they correct it after we die. So approve this or reverse the windfall provision act signed by Pres.Regain that took our $$$.
Rehiring Retirees
Retired government employee Treasury Dept. Tue May 26, 2009 8:26 PM
If retirees are allowed to work, the system will not work fair. Only the high graded retirees will be the ones getting the job. Both high, mid, and lower graded retirees should have the chance to return to work. All retired employees have experience in the field of work they performed while being employed. But I know only the highest graded retirees will get the job. I have no desire to return to work. I was too glad to retire and not having to look at that place again. I am enjoying my retirement. No more work for me.
why retire in the first place
retired irs Tue May 26, 2009 9:42 PM
My question in all this is. If someone wants to work then why retire in the first place?. If someone hasn't "maxed out" that is, put in their 41 years and 10 months or so and acquired their 80% of high 3 (plus sick leave) then stay on. If the job sucked enough for them to want to get out earlier than they had to, then why go back. The conditions at the office probably haven't improved any. I am a NARFE member and sorry, but I disagree with their position on this one.
Rehiring Retired Feds
Postal Inspector US Postal Inspection Service Tue May 26, 2009 10:11 PM
Everyone in the Fed system knows retirees are rehired as contractors and there are no limitations except the ones written in the contract. Everyone knows that the union's only interest is to get their dues and don't care much about anything else. I think the union positions should be given to part-time retirees and get those full-time union workers back to the work for the government.
AFGE
Supervisory Border Patrol Agent (Retired) Border Patrol Wed May 27, 2009 12:03 AM
AFGE has never really cared about the employee, just collecting dues from the members. I paid their dues for several years before becoming a supervisor. Now they want to freeze me out of employment.
Re: AFGE
Retired DHS DHS Wed May 27, 2009 12:45 PM
You, sir, have been drinking too much of the green kool-aid if you don't think AFGE cares about the employees. How many times did you, as an agent, get a backpay FLSA check? That came as a result of AFGE, not the Border Patrol being generous.
Federal Annuitants
Import Specialist C.B.P. Wed May 27, 2009 6:07 AM
Didn't they go to a reirement seminar? . Ffind out how
Retention of retirement eligible federal employees
risk analyst nrc Wed May 27, 2009 7:57 AM
It would make sense to provide incentive to federal employees to stay past their eligiblity for retirement. Such as an additional percentage of their high three. Decrease the time in each step to allow quicker pay increases. Lift the cap of pay or allow the calculation to bank compensation no used for the whole year. So rather than using pay for each 26 pay periods, count the total for the number of pay periods that has past. Many feds leave because they have an annuity in place, but are capped for pay at GG-15 step 10. An alternative is not to count the money they could receive from any annuity eligibility. Leaving and comming back is very limiting. The cap on FTE could be lifted so that a proper transistion is provided. A three year window would be necessary to do a proper and conprehensive transfer of critical information. This also establishes relationships that can stand for some communication when the person does leave. Retention of security clearances for life would h
Bill Favoring Fed Retirees Opposed by Unions
Retired US Treasury Dept Wed May 27, 2009 8:20 AM
Does anyone know what the position of NTEU is on this issue. I paid dues to them for almost 40 years. I hope their opposing this bill isn't the "thanks" I get for my loyalty to that union.
Report the Truth, regarding Union Opposition.
Tech DoD Wed May 27, 2009 8:21 AM
Your report does no justice to reporting the reason for Union opposition. You have created a reason where none has been stated. If readers actually read the FedTimes article you have in your report they will quickly realize that Unions have a valid point. "rehiring retirees, even on a temporary basis, will undermine the hiring of new employees and thwart promotions of current federal employees". The legislation should have restrictions placed on it, otherwise the hiring process will continue to stagnate. Employers will abuse the legislation. Employees hang around hoping to get a buy-out. This will only encourage those employees to retire early and get rehired. Unions are not a rubber stamp of Obama and Democrats as many would have you believe.
rehiring federal annuitants
program implementation manager federal aviation administration Wed May 27, 2009 10:06 AM
this is a viable alternative to the expensive contract process. We need these people and their talents, badly. If and when we have plenty of job applicants, we can "retire" this program, but for now, let's do it!
Also, the hiring process really does need to be streamlined. It took me 6 months to get picked up on an internal bid, way too slow!
Bill Favoring Fed Retirees Opposed by Unions
Underwriter HUD Wed May 27, 2009 10:25 AM
If the Unions feel it is not in their best interest to support current members nearing retirement, many of whom have an interest in programs such as this, then it might be in the best interest of those Baby-Boomers to abandon their current union and joining groups like NARFE that is looking out for their future.
Support passage of this bill
Nurse Practitioner VA Wed May 27, 2009 11:48 AM
Given the war and the thousands of veterans we can anticipate with PTSD and TBI, experienced MH providers knowlegeable of these conditions will greatly help the growing veteran population from the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan.
rehiring retirees
Retired contract administrator DCMA Thu May 28, 2009 7:22 AM
I have never understood this whole topic. When a federal employee retires they can sell their accumulated knowledge by becoming a consultant, starting their own business or, working for a contractor. They would get the full salary that accompanies that position. In many cases they would get a higher salary because of their 30 years of experience. This salary would be in addition to their full pension. Now this same person wants to return to their former employer, or is asked by their former employer to return to work or work for another federal agency. In these cases they would be having their pension reduced by the amount of their salary. How are they making any more money? How are they any better off than staying at home working in their yard? Why does the federal government think they are any different than any other employer? Today most of the employees who return to work for the federal government are under the CSRS pension system. When they are rehired they would be under the FERS system. Why aren’t these rehires just considered new hires? They would get their full salary. The pension would not be changed. They would contribute to SS and could be come part of the union again. If they did not have enough quarters to collect SS this would be a way to build up SS quarters. Only bored retirees would go back to work for the federal government under the current conditions.
Part time retires
HVAC Supervisor USAF Thu May 28, 2009 11:26 AM
Why would the union be against this good idea when70% of the returning people would not even be bargining unit personal? All they are trying to do is exersise there political ground because the present administration thinks they have some sort of power or influnce somewhere. The union has in the past caused folks more grief than good by pushing bad
advise upon them and having these people go through a lot of greif for nothing. The union is only interested in promoting the union, not neccessarly what is good for its members.
Wilfull Misinterpretation?
Union Rep SSA Thu May 28, 2009 12:42 PM
Some commentators, like Mr. Smith, will read an AFGE quote that the proposed re-hiring would provide no protection against arbitrariness, cronyism nor violations of veterans rights, and then turn around and tell us, There you have it, the unions are just looking out for their current members and not for their retirees. Maybe he was thinking, instead, about what the Federal Times article he linked to the AFGE quote said: "Unions fear that rehiring retirees — even on a temporary basis — will undermine the hiring of new employees and thwart promotions of current federal employees." And maybe both quotes make sense.
At SSA, we have had too many years of FCIP evasion of merit-hiring practices, too many promotions of management favorites, and too little advancement of more skilled (and more senicr) employees. And we also have had too many years of understaffing to apply a temporary bandaid to. We need both true merit hiring and an increased permanent Social Security workforce.
Bill Favoring Fed Retirees Opposed by Unions
PROGRAM SPECIALIST FNS Fri May 29, 2009 10:29 AM
i stongly support this bill and think
fed retirees should be allowed to become union members and have them pay their dues as they will be protected by the federal union
regarding Senate bill on rehiring annuitants
retiree SSA Sat May 30, 2009 11:42 AM
I am a retiree from SSA and am looking to work as a rehired annuitant on a limited basis. I feel this is an asset to an agency, not a deterrant at all. I agree with the restrictions since an office should not be staffed with rehires but on the other hand, having all new untrained employees is a worse fate. The unions should concentrate on working conditions and benefits for the regular workforce and welcome the rehires with their experience as viable support structure, thus allowing new employees more time for training and learning the complex jobs of the various agencies.
Bill Favoring Federal Retires Opposed by Unions
General Supply Specialist Defense Logistics Service Center Mon Jun 1, 2009 6:51 AM
All of a sudden the Government is giving value to the old timers knowledge, and not the college people? We who could not be given promotions, because we didn't get the added credit points the college people were getting. The Government wants it both ways, but only if it is to their benefit.
Why Unions Oppose the Bill
Union AVP and Agency Claims Rep AFGE and Social Security Tue Jun 2, 2009 5:49 AM
It is clear to the rank and file in SSA that the friends and family in the Boston Region will be rehired - many are CSRS and would be subject to FICA thereby allowing them to double dip and further drain the Social Security System. Those who were union activists certainly would NOT be rehired regardless of their rank and file skills that are MOST needed for the Agency. It should be noted that years ago in the one time a severance of up to $25,000 was allowed - ONLY SSA restricted it to management only (This proves the union point that the Agency has a bloated management force that is expendable).
Now with the economic situation as it is Congress should instead be considering what Connecticut state and local govts do to save money-- add 3 years to the retirement computation of the pension to those who would retire before the close of fiscal 2009. That would save $$$ on leave and salary and allow the Agency to hire younger out-of-work people to stimulate the economy.
Rehire
RetireD CSRS OFCCP Thu Jun 4, 2009 5:45 PM
I am for rehire, I was rehired in 2001 and terminated in 2004, and the Union did not stick up for me. Now I am in Federal Ct. I was only getting half of my salary as a rehire retiree, because I was still collecting my retire pay. If you still have the skills and quailify for the job why not!
Just got asked back
Retired (Technical Expert) Social Security Admin Sun Jun 7, 2009 7:16 AM
I've been retired from a SSA field office for a year and received a call from my manager asking if I would like to return for a limited time (through Sept. 30th) either 32 or 40 hrs. per week, without losing my pension. Now, this manager is not my "friend", but did respect my work and work ethic. When I said I would consider it if I could still take my planned (and paid for) 3 week vacation this summer, it was approved after checking with the Area Director, who certainly "was not my friend". He said, "we desperately need the help". All the recent hires are in training and will be so throughout the summer. My 35 years of experience go a long way. SSA certainly did not plan well for the retirement of so many of us. Part of it was not their fault since the government was in "retrenchment mode" since the early 90's until very recently.
Retired govt. worker STILL a paying AFGE dues.
Retired GS-11 Inspector in charge USDA FSIS MEAT & POULTRY Tue Jun 16, 2009 11:51 AM
I joined US Govt. as a worker in 1964 and also joined AFGE union the same year. I bacame a retired old geazer in 1995.
BUT I DID NOT RETIRE FROM THE UNION AFGE american fereration of Govt. employees. I still 14 years later attend union meetings and pay my union dues.
I try to help the current members of AFGE by adding "my 45 yearsknowlage" and history of how we old GEEZERS FOUGHT the battels and won the rights that they now enjoy.
You so called union managment of AFGE owe we OLD GEEZERS the respect to help us get this temp rehiring
chance so we can help the Govt. agency that we were employed by. What did AFGE do to correct the WINDFALL ELIMINATION PROVISION when I lost my socical security?
I STILL AM A PAYING MEMBER, SUPPORT ME.
Allowing us to help with the transation of the new hires that will be needed. These young new workers ARE NOT REQUIRED TO JOIN AFGE. YOU KNOW THIS. So set a good example how you support your retired members AFTER RETIRMENT. They may be watching.
retirement
charles ferederal employee Thu Jun 18, 2009 3:58 AM
i belive that sick leave schould be added into our retirement package. even if the lawmakers disappove of this.
Federal Unions Oppose Bill
Group Secretary IRS - TEGE Tue Jun 23, 2009 11:52 AM
This is terrible.... the UNION just want the employees money. I think this is a good thing for us over the hill gang... I am retiring in December, phylically tired, and the though of a part time job with the Federal Government is a great idea and opportunity for retirees. I for one would definitely want to do a part time job, and have retirement funds coming in. I am widow and alone so I really need a second job to keep me going.... I will vote for this issue and ask my government officials, even the President to approve this bill that will help all the way around.
Who cares
Beach Bum Retired DoD Tue Sep 15, 2009 8:34 AM
what these useless unions think. The ultimate is that unions no longer want voting to be secret - this way they know who to try and harass, like their brothers over in the SEIU.
CHANGE THE FORMULA ON COST LIVING ALLOWANCE
COST OF LIVING ALLOWANCE SHOULD BE CHANGE RETIRED MILITARY FEDERAL CIVILSERVICE 100% DISABLE Tue Sep 15, 2009 10:46 AM
we need ours cola raise every year cpi is not dependable so change it right now i am very upset
Why I'm against it
Forester US Forest Service Tue Sep 15, 2009 12:36 PM
I will be able to retire in 4 years and I probably will at that time but I'm against any long term reemployment of retirees.
For short term it is allright.
Us federal employees are getting knocked all the time about our average salaries being above ($79000) the average salary of non-government workers. Now they want to bring back retirees who get anywhere from 40% (FERS) up to 80% (CSRS) of their high 3 salary plus pay them a full salary.
What incentive would there be for anyone to work beyond the minimum retirement age and minimum years if you can retire and collect retirement and then go back to work and make the same salary?
The current system allows them to make the same as if they were still employed.
Re Hiring of Annuitants
FAA
Tue May 26, 2009 9:00 AM
Count me as a union member and employee rep who disagrees with the union opposition to rehiring some retirees. While I agree there should be a term limit, I would think that up to five years as opposed to 3180 hours would be smarter. These folks left with a wealth of corporate knowledge that is still relevant in today's workplace, member or not. When the smoke clears this is STILL about getting work done for the American taxpayer who employs us. That is my bottom line!
Bill to Allow Rehiring of Federal Employees
American Federation Of government Employees
Tue May 26, 2009 9:01 AM
Wrong again Ralph. AFGE represents retired Federal Employees and many of those who were members continue their membership into retirement. What we are looking for is a level playing field for current and retired employees in filling positions.
Retiree Feedback
USDA
Tue May 26, 2009 9:01 AM
If the government needs our help, we (retirees) should not be penalized for providing the assistance as needed.
Rehiring retirees
Fed
Tue May 26, 2009 9:02 AM
Guess management did not properly prepare for the alleged mass of retirements by the baby boomers. Therefore, they must rehire retirees until the new people hired are off and running. it takes years for them to be able to do the job properly.
Bargaining Unit Status
UMW (AFL-CIO)
Tue May 26, 2009 9:03 AM
I think unions would be inclined to offer more support if the retired employees who are brought back will become members of a bargaining unit if they were otherwise in a unit. Presently, the unit descriptions probably don't address these employes one way or the other. This could create many "questions concerning representation" throughout the government. That would be costly to clear up unit by unit.
Re: Bargaining Unit Status
Retired
Tue May 26, 2009 3:39 PM
Hiring Fed Retirees as Contractors
DOE
Tue May 26, 2009 9:06 AM
Whether this bill passes or not, really doesn't matter because federal retirees are hired back as contractors with no limitations on work hours. In other words, managers already have complete discretion to hire annuitants of their choice as a contractor, without any regard to veterans preference, or any objective, competitive criteria. This is a common practice at my agency.
Re: Hiring Fed Retirees as Contractors
DHHS
Tue Jun 9, 2009 9:01 AM
WTH?
Retired DoD
Tue May 26, 2009 9:07 AM
The stupidity of these unions has to stop, no wonder why their membership is dwindling.
I bet they feel really proud of themselves or they are just trying to hope for more dues paying members. Well even when I was eligible to join I realized how out of touch these unions were/are with their base.
I vote NO to unions and find their leadership is something lower than the junk on the bottom of my shoes.
Re: WTH?
Postal Servicre Retiree
Tue May 26, 2009 1:15 PM
Please, give me a break. Retired military can go to the work for the Feds, no penalty.
Re: WTH?
DoD
Wed May 27, 2009 11:52 AM
Union Opposition to Hiring Retired Feds
Various Federal Agencies
Tue May 26, 2009 9:12 AM
Another example of how Federal unions-the comfortable, complacent, custodians of the status quo- can stop new human resource programs. On the other hand, what better way to help your friends than this incentive.
Re: Union Opposition to Hiring Retired Feds
worker
Tue May 26, 2009 10:00 AM
Not in favor of bringing back betirees
Social Security Administration
Tue May 26, 2009 9:16 AM
I personally do not think that the retirees should be brought back. I have been with the Social Security Administration for 10 years and I am still waiting for a promotion. I am 42 years old and I will be with the agency at least another 15 years. I have to ask the question of how long will the retiree be with the agency if brought back? I can't get a promotion right now because of the new people that they are bringing on from off of the street. Many of the new people they simply take resumes' on and never post the vacancy announcement so that people like me with the experience can apply. Then when I try to give them my resume' I was told that I would never be promoted through that route and that I should apply on-line when an announcement was released (needless to say……one will never be released from my office because of this practice)
With all of that being said…..I have experience….I have been here for the daily training etc. The retiree will still have to go through some sort of training. I think that the agency would be better served if it promoted the more experienced personnel from within and back filled the lower paying jobs.
Re: Not in favor of bringing back betirees
Retired DoD
Tue May 26, 2009 12:28 PM
But hey, they have a song and a slogan to go along with their ever increasing backlog and overtime payments.
Re: Not in favor of bringing back betirees
USDA
Tue May 26, 2009 2:29 PM
Please stay retired!
DLA
Tue May 26, 2009 9:17 AM
No offense to all the retirees out there, but we have been doing fine without you. If anything, we have been doing better. New people bring fresh ideas, and a lot of energy. Please stay away and allow the next generation of federal employees to serve their country!
Re: Please stay retired!
SSA
Tue Jun 9, 2009 1:31 PM
All we need is more DEAD WOOD!!!
Wish more people would retire........ GOOD BYE SO LONG!!!
The OLD BREED is Not up on technology all they do is take up space that could be filled by a younger more motivated person with fresh ideas and a pulse...
retirees excluded from bargaining unit
FDA
Tue May 26, 2009 9:20 AM
"Retired federal employees may not become members if they come back to work." it has been my understanding that anyone can join a union, but not everyone may be represented by the union (i.e., excluded from bargaining unit). I assume that is what you meant. in which case, my response is: I did not know that! what is the basis for their exclusion?
Re: retirees excluded from bargaining unit
worker
Tue May 26, 2009 10:02 AM
Rehiring Issues
IRS
Tue May 26, 2009 9:24 AM
Going to have to give you a "well - duh!" on this one. What your story doesn't point out (and what you are surely aware of) is that the retirees that management will hire will be their buddies - former managers - not former rank and file employees. This has already been shown to be the case in previous instances where waivers have been granted under existing laws. Check out the rehiring of retirees to serve as instructors in the IRS about 7 years ago. Many of those folks, although good, competent managers in most cases, had not actually done any of the work they were attempting to teach to new trainees in a great many years. So, not only are these rehired annuitants not likey to join a union, they're also not the best qualified individuals to carry out the work. Seems as though you could included that point in your story as well, but, as usual, you chose only to blame the federal unions. How about a little journalistic integrity every once in a while??
Re: Rehiring Issues
Retired
Tue May 26, 2009 3:44 PM
Retired Annuitants
Navy
Tue May 26, 2009 9:52 AM
I have to agree with union opposition on this one. The way I have seen the principal of reemployment applied so far has been for highest ranking managers, with six-figure salaries and very tidy retirements, coming back as highly paid contractors or "reemployed annuitants," sometimes only days or weeks after "retirement." Even with the salary offset, it is apparently sufficiently lucrative that it is been done pretty often. This effectively blocks advancement for lower ranking civilian employees and allows agencies to procrastinate on establishing effective succession policies and practices.
Diversity
ASC
Tue May 26, 2009 10:16 AM
I believe that the federal "retirement tsunami" would be just like the A-76 Program, i.e., "hinder" a diverse work environment and promote the "ol boys' network and nepotism." Because of this practice too much effort would have to go into promoting equal opportunities and at the same time there is not enough effort in promoting equal opportunities, conditions, and privlege of employment for the current workers. Also, the same lazy privilege folks that messed-up the work force will be back in business.
Union
FRCE
Tue May 26, 2009 10:55 AM
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
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
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
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
Above article
OPM
Tue May 26, 2009 11:52 AM
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
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
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.
Rehiring old farts
usepa
Tue May 26, 2009 12:24 PM
It never ceases to amaze me, one minute the federal employee is a lazy go for nothing slug who is an overpaid underaciever. Now it seems we want to give them incentives to come back to work after we finally got rid of them. Which one is is it you want us or you dont want us? Well i tink the union s got it right this time, lets get some new blood in here, with some fresh ideas, enthusiasm. I love EPA its a great place to work, but not because of the mgt, its the environment stupid, but once i do leave which may be soon, isnt very inviting. i ll tell you who will come back the SESers the middle managers who wanted to be a SESer, and the folks with no life out side of work, is that truly who i want to be mentors to the new generation of employees,i dont think so. First they dont speak the same language baby boomers vs Xers, Yers and what ever else you call them.
S. 629
Financial Regulatory Agency under Geithner
Tue May 26, 2009 12:35 PM
My agency must have gotten some special ability to do this because we have had this program for about a year now. It hasn't been very successful, as the agency DOES NOT hire the annuitants back at the salary they left at but at the midpoint of the grade they left out. Consequentlly retirees most can make better money as "contract hires" and the amount of time is more flexible.
I will say some of the earlier responders do have it right...this is definitely a "good ole boy" program based on who you know when you left. The rehires are even able to put in conditions such as "refuse to travel out of town." That means more travel assignments for the full time employees.
Re: S. 629
USPS
Tue May 26, 2009 1:14 PM
Re: S. 629
Corps Of Engineers
Tue May 26, 2009 1:54 PM
And, I'm not an "old fart". I retired at 55 years of age.
Re: S. 629
DoD
Wed May 27, 2009 12:09 PM
Sounds like a rip-off...
None
Tue May 26, 2009 12:55 PM
...where do I get mine?
I retired from Federal service for a reason. I stay retired from Federal service for the same reason. All that brain drain? I doubt anyone misses any of the displaced gray matter.
UNION OPPOSITION
VA HEALTHCARE SYSTEM
Tue May 26, 2009 2:41 PM
The problem with the AFGE is they do not realize these retired employees put in 30 to 40 years of service as dedicated employees who loved there jobs. These individuals are skilled people with alot of experience. This knowledge would be a total asset to our veterans who need alot of attention and care. What the AFGE needs to take into consideration is these retireed employees will go into the private sector with all this knowledge and we lose, because other private institutions will benefit in the long run. AFGE wake up and see the roses this is not rocket science
Move it or lose it
USDA
Tue May 26, 2009 3:00 PM
Supply and demand affects labor also. Federal retirees already have one of the most generous pensions in the U.S. (that includes FERS). Once they have the golden ticket, get out of the way and let that young family have a crack at a living wage. That's more important than someone coming back to bankroll another room on their lake home, or management not having to do their job (i.e. training somebody new).
Rehire retirees
DoD
Tue May 26, 2009 4:47 PM
I'm sorry, I'm still stuck on: "Federal retirees already have one of the most generous pensions in the U.S. (that includes FERS). Once they have the golden ticket, get out of the way and let that young family have a crack at a living wage". Me thinks someone lives in a fantasy world and has never seen a retirement check.
I need a job and this is the answer.
USDA FSIS MEAT & POULTRY
Tue May 26, 2009 5:51 PM
I joined USDA during the 60's and was PROmISED that when I retired I would get my Social Security full benifit. and the US Govt. full retirment at 30 years service. I had my 40 Quarters paid in to SS but my monthly check is about $230.00 per month with the offset. When I retired I had been an AFGE UNION MEMBER FOR 30 plus years and I STILL BELONG AND PAY DUES AND AM ACTIVE IN MEETINGS AND UNION FUNCTIONS AND ADVISORY. Also in 1995 I became a consultant in the meat and poultry industry but I can not now live on the $. and the union has not helped get my SS benifits back. ? WHY should I not be qualified to work part time? SS retirees can work part time and I think I am qualified as I have been working in USDA plants continually since 1959 and train sanitation and HACCP to the companies. When do we quit getting screwed, when we die? And our kids get nothing if they correct it after we die. So approve this or reverse the windfall provision act signed by Pres.Regain that took our $$$.
Rehiring Retirees
Treasury Dept.
Tue May 26, 2009 8:26 PM
If retirees are allowed to work, the system will not work fair. Only the high graded retirees will be the ones getting the job. Both high, mid, and lower graded retirees should have the chance to return to work. All retired employees have experience in the field of work they performed while being employed. But I know only the highest graded retirees will get the job. I have no desire to return to work. I was too glad to retire and not having to look at that place again. I am enjoying my retirement. No more work for me.
why retire in the first place
irs
Tue May 26, 2009 9:42 PM
My question in all this is. If someone wants to work then why retire in the first place?. If someone hasn't "maxed out" that is, put in their 41 years and 10 months or so and acquired their 80% of high 3 (plus sick leave) then stay on. If the job sucked enough for them to want to get out earlier than they had to, then why go back. The conditions at the office probably haven't improved any. I am a NARFE member and sorry, but I disagree with their position on this one.
Rehiring Retired Feds
US Postal Inspection Service
Tue May 26, 2009 10:11 PM
Everyone in the Fed system knows retirees are rehired as contractors and there are no limitations except the ones written in the contract. Everyone knows that the union's only interest is to get their dues and don't care much about anything else. I think the union positions should be given to part-time retirees and get those full-time union workers back to the work for the government.
AFGE
Border Patrol
Wed May 27, 2009 12:03 AM
AFGE has never really cared about the employee, just collecting dues from the members. I paid their dues for several years before becoming a supervisor. Now they want to freeze me out of employment.
Re: AFGE
DHS
Wed May 27, 2009 12:45 PM
Federal Annuitants
C.B.P.
Wed May 27, 2009 6:07 AM
Didn't they go to a reirement seminar? . Ffind out how
Retention of retirement eligible federal employees
nrc
Wed May 27, 2009 7:57 AM
It would make sense to provide incentive to federal employees to stay past their eligiblity for retirement. Such as an additional percentage of their high three. Decrease the time in each step to allow quicker pay increases. Lift the cap of pay or allow the calculation to bank compensation no used for the whole year. So rather than using pay for each 26 pay periods, count the total for the number of pay periods that has past. Many feds leave because they have an annuity in place, but are capped for pay at GG-15 step 10. An alternative is not to count the money they could receive from any annuity eligibility. Leaving and comming back is very limiting. The cap on FTE could be lifted so that a proper transistion is provided. A three year window would be necessary to do a proper and conprehensive transfer of critical information. This also establishes relationships that can stand for some communication when the person does leave. Retention of security clearances for life would h
Bill Favoring Fed Retirees Opposed by Unions
US Treasury Dept
Wed May 27, 2009 8:20 AM
Does anyone know what the position of NTEU is on this issue. I paid dues to them for almost 40 years. I hope their opposing this bill isn't the "thanks" I get for my loyalty to that union.
Report the Truth, regarding Union Opposition.
DoD
Wed May 27, 2009 8:21 AM
Your report does no justice to reporting the reason for Union opposition. You have created a reason where none has been stated. If readers actually read the FedTimes article you have in your report they will quickly realize that Unions have a valid point. "rehiring retirees, even on a temporary basis, will undermine the hiring of new employees and thwart promotions of current federal employees". The legislation should have restrictions placed on it, otherwise the hiring process will continue to stagnate. Employers will abuse the legislation. Employees hang around hoping to get a buy-out. This will only encourage those employees to retire early and get rehired. Unions are not a rubber stamp of Obama and Democrats as many would have you believe.
rehiring federal annuitants
federal aviation administration
Wed May 27, 2009 10:06 AM
this is a viable alternative to the expensive contract process. We need these people and their talents, badly. If and when we have plenty of job applicants, we can "retire" this program, but for now, let's do it!
Also, the hiring process really does need to be streamlined. It took me 6 months to get picked up on an internal bid, way too slow!
Bill Favoring Fed Retirees Opposed by Unions
HUD
Wed May 27, 2009 10:25 AM
If the Unions feel it is not in their best interest to support current members nearing retirement, many of whom have an interest in programs such as this, then it might be in the best interest of those Baby-Boomers to abandon their current union and joining groups like NARFE that is looking out for their future.
Support passage of this bill
VA
Wed May 27, 2009 11:48 AM
Given the war and the thousands of veterans we can anticipate with PTSD and TBI, experienced MH providers knowlegeable of these conditions will greatly help the growing veteran population from the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan.
rehiring retirees
DCMA
Thu May 28, 2009 7:22 AM
I have never understood this whole topic. When a federal employee retires they can sell their accumulated knowledge by becoming a consultant, starting their own business or, working for a contractor. They would get the full salary that accompanies that position. In many cases they would get a higher salary because of their 30 years of experience. This salary would be in addition to their full pension. Now this same person wants to return to their former employer, or is asked by their former employer to return to work or work for another federal agency. In these cases they would be having their pension reduced by the amount of their salary. How are they making any more money? How are they any better off than staying at home working in their yard? Why does the federal government think they are any different than any other employer? Today most of the employees who return to work for the federal government are under the CSRS pension system. When they are rehired they would be under the FERS system. Why aren’t these rehires just considered new hires? They would get their full salary. The pension would not be changed. They would contribute to SS and could be come part of the union again. If they did not have enough quarters to collect SS this would be a way to build up SS quarters. Only bored retirees would go back to work for the federal government under the current conditions.
Part time retires
USAF
Thu May 28, 2009 11:26 AM
Why would the union be against this good idea when70% of the returning people would not even be bargining unit personal? All they are trying to do is exersise there political ground because the present administration thinks they have some sort of power or influnce somewhere. The union has in the past caused folks more grief than good by pushing bad
advise upon them and having these people go through a lot of greif for nothing. The union is only interested in promoting the union, not neccessarly what is good for its members.
Wilfull Misinterpretation?
SSA
Thu May 28, 2009 12:42 PM
Some commentators, like Mr. Smith, will read an AFGE quote that the proposed re-hiring would provide no protection against arbitrariness, cronyism nor violations of veterans rights, and then turn around and tell us, There you have it, the unions are just looking out for their current members and not for their retirees. Maybe he was thinking, instead, about what the Federal Times article he linked to the AFGE quote said: "Unions fear that rehiring retirees — even on a temporary basis — will undermine the hiring of new employees and thwart promotions of current federal employees." And maybe both quotes make sense.
At SSA, we have had too many years of FCIP evasion of merit-hiring practices, too many promotions of management favorites, and too little advancement of more skilled (and more senicr) employees. And we also have had too many years of understaffing to apply a temporary bandaid to. We need both true merit hiring and an increased permanent Social Security workforce.
Bill Favoring Fed Retirees Opposed by Unions
FNS
Fri May 29, 2009 10:29 AM
i stongly support this bill and think
fed retirees should be allowed to become union members and have them pay their dues as they will be protected by the federal union
regarding Senate bill on rehiring annuitants
SSA
Sat May 30, 2009 11:42 AM
I am a retiree from SSA and am looking to work as a rehired annuitant on a limited basis. I feel this is an asset to an agency, not a deterrant at all. I agree with the restrictions since an office should not be staffed with rehires but on the other hand, having all new untrained employees is a worse fate. The unions should concentrate on working conditions and benefits for the regular workforce and welcome the rehires with their experience as viable support structure, thus allowing new employees more time for training and learning the complex jobs of the various agencies.
Bill Favoring Federal Retires Opposed by Unions
Defense Logistics Service Center
Mon Jun 1, 2009 6:51 AM
All of a sudden the Government is giving value to the old timers knowledge, and not the college people? We who could not be given promotions, because we didn't get the added credit points the college people were getting. The Government wants it both ways, but only if it is to their benefit.
Why Unions Oppose the Bill
AFGE and Social Security
Tue Jun 2, 2009 5:49 AM
It is clear to the rank and file in SSA that the friends and family in the Boston Region will be rehired - many are CSRS and would be subject to FICA thereby allowing them to double dip and further drain the Social Security System. Those who were union activists certainly would NOT be rehired regardless of their rank and file skills that are MOST needed for the Agency. It should be noted that years ago in the one time a severance of up to $25,000 was allowed - ONLY SSA restricted it to management only (This proves the union point that the Agency has a bloated management force that is expendable).
Now with the economic situation as it is Congress should instead be considering what Connecticut state and local govts do to save money-- add 3 years to the retirement computation of the pension to those who would retire before the close of fiscal 2009. That would save $$$ on leave and salary and allow the Agency to hire younger out-of-work people to stimulate the economy.
Rehire
OFCCP
Thu Jun 4, 2009 5:45 PM
I am for rehire, I was rehired in 2001 and terminated in 2004, and the Union did not stick up for me. Now I am in Federal Ct. I was only getting half of my salary as a rehire retiree, because I was still collecting my retire pay. If you still have the skills and quailify for the job why not!
Just got asked back
Social Security Admin
Sun Jun 7, 2009 7:16 AM
I've been retired from a SSA field office for a year and received a call from my manager asking if I would like to return for a limited time (through Sept. 30th) either 32 or 40 hrs. per week, without losing my pension. Now, this manager is not my "friend", but did respect my work and work ethic. When I said I would consider it if I could still take my planned (and paid for) 3 week vacation this summer, it was approved after checking with the Area Director, who certainly "was not my friend". He said, "we desperately need the help". All the recent hires are in training and will be so throughout the summer. My 35 years of experience go a long way. SSA certainly did not plan well for the retirement of so many of us. Part of it was not their fault since the government was in "retrenchment mode" since the early 90's until very recently.
Retired govt. worker STILL a paying AFGE dues.
USDA FSIS MEAT & POULTRY
Tue Jun 16, 2009 11:51 AM
I joined US Govt. as a worker in 1964 and also joined AFGE union the same year. I bacame a retired old geazer in 1995.
BUT I DID NOT RETIRE FROM THE UNION AFGE american fereration of Govt. employees. I still 14 years later attend union meetings and pay my union dues.
I try to help the current members of AFGE by adding "my 45 yearsknowlage" and history of how we old GEEZERS FOUGHT the battels and won the rights that they now enjoy.
You so called union managment of AFGE owe we OLD GEEZERS the respect to help us get this temp rehiring
chance so we can help the Govt. agency that we were employed by. What did AFGE do to correct the WINDFALL ELIMINATION PROVISION when I lost my socical security?
I STILL AM A PAYING MEMBER, SUPPORT ME.
Allowing us to help with the transation of the new hires that will be needed. These young new workers ARE NOT REQUIRED TO JOIN AFGE. YOU KNOW THIS. So set a good example how you support your retired members AFTER RETIRMENT. They may be watching.
retirement
ferederal employee
Thu Jun 18, 2009 3:58 AM
i belive that sick leave schould be added into our retirement package. even if the lawmakers disappove of this.
Federal Unions Oppose Bill
IRS - TEGE
Tue Jun 23, 2009 11:52 AM
This is terrible.... the UNION just want the employees money. I think this is a good thing for us over the hill gang... I am retiring in December, phylically tired, and the though of a part time job with the Federal Government is a great idea and opportunity for retirees. I for one would definitely want to do a part time job, and have retirement funds coming in. I am widow and alone so I really need a second job to keep me going.... I will vote for this issue and ask my government officials, even the President to approve this bill that will help all the way around.
Who cares
Retired DoD
Tue Sep 15, 2009 8:34 AM
what these useless unions think. The ultimate is that unions no longer want voting to be secret - this way they know who to try and harass, like their brothers over in the SEIU.
CHANGE THE FORMULA ON COST LIVING ALLOWANCE
RETIRED MILITARY FEDERAL CIVILSERVICE 100% DISABLE
Tue Sep 15, 2009 10:46 AM
we need ours cola raise every year cpi is not dependable so change it right now i am very upset
Why I'm against it
US Forest Service
Tue Sep 15, 2009 12:36 PM
I will be able to retire in 4 years and I probably will at that time but I'm against any long term reemployment of retirees.
For short term it is allright.
Us federal employees are getting knocked all the time about our average salaries being above ($79000) the average salary of non-government workers. Now they want to bring back retirees who get anywhere from 40% (FERS) up to 80% (CSRS) of their high 3 salary plus pay them a full salary.
What incentive would there be for anyone to work beyond the minimum retirement age and minimum years if you can retire and collect retirement and then go back to work and make the same salary?
The current system allows them to make the same as if they were still employed.