0:00
the House Oversight Committee has
0:02
advanced legislation that contains cuts
0:04
to federal employees benefits but I
0:07
think there's been some
0:08
misunderstandings about what this really
0:10
means so let's take a look at the
0:12
details hi everyone I'm Ian Smith with
0:15
fedsmith.com thank you for watching
0:17
today in my last video I went over
0:20
legislation that was being considered in
0:23
the House Oversight Committee that made
0:25
a number of cuts to federal employees
0:27
benefits and it was being considered in
0:30
a markup session on this past Wednesday
0:33
April 30th and that session is now
0:35
taking place the committee voted on the
0:37
legislation and they did advance it and
0:40
it's now going to go to the House Budget
0:43
Committee for further consideration but
0:45
let's dig into the details of what's
0:47
going on so the House Oversight
0:49
Committee was tasked with cutting $50
0:51
billion from the federal budget and the
0:54
legislation they came up with which was
0:57
called the committee print primarily did
0:59
this by proposing a number of cuts to
1:02
federal employees benefits and as I said
1:05
the legislation advanced yesterday out
1:08
of the uh out of the committee's markup
1:10
session so what is a markup session well
1:13
according to the House of
1:14
Representatives website it states this
1:17
quote after hearings are completed the
1:20
bill is considered in a session that is
1:22
popularly known as the markup session
1:25
members of the committee study the
1:27
viewpoints presented in detail
1:29
amendments may be offered to the bill
1:31
and the committee members vote to accept
1:32
or reject these changes so that's
1:35
basically what was going on yesterday in
1:39
nothing has really changed in the
1:41
legislation but we do have some
1:42
additional details about some of the
1:44
items so just a quick recap of what's in
1:48
this legislative package it would raise
1:50
the FUR's contribution rate to 4.4% for
1:53
all federal employees it would eliminate
1:55
the FUR's annuity supplement it would
1:58
switch from a high three to a high five
2:01
average salary for pension calculations
2:04
it would include FEB protection audits
2:07
to remove ineligible employee dependents
2:10
in order to save money within the FEB
2:13
that's the federal employees health
2:14
benefits program now a couple items with
2:17
some new info that that was presented
2:19
yesterday um there's an MSPB filing fee
2:23
that's being proposed and it would
2:25
charge federal employees a $350 fee for
2:29
filing MSPB appeals to reduce frivolous
2:32
claims the fee would be refunded to
2:35
federal employees who win their appeals
2:38
uh when I did my video before and
2:40
reported on this before I did not know
2:41
the amount of the fee but that came out
2:43
in some information presented yesterday
2:46
the last item in this legislation is
2:48
there's an option for new hires to elect
2:51
at willill employment in exchange for
2:53
higher take-home pay with a lower first
2:55
contribution rate if the new hires were
2:59
to accept the atwill status their first
3:02
contribution rate would be
3:05
4.4% um if they opt to retain their
3:08
civil service protections however they
3:10
pay a higher rate it would add 5% to
3:13
their first contribution rate for a
3:17
9.4% and that 5% figure that's some new
3:20
information that that I did not have
3:22
before when I covered this so in the
3:24
vote and the debate on the legislation
3:26
yesterday um Democrats opposed it across
3:29
the board but there was one Republican
3:31
on the committee who opposed it as well
3:33
that was Congressman Mike Turner
3:35
Republican from Ohio he was opposed to
3:39
the legislation package because of
3:42
cutting pensions for federal employees
3:44
he didn't like that in a statement he
3:46
posted on X he wrote quote "The goal of
3:49
reconciliation should be to reduce
3:51
overall government spending by
3:53
eliminating waste fraud and abuse and
3:55
reducing needless and unnecessary
3:57
spending i oppose any and all efforts to
4:00
reduce federal spending by taking money
4:02
from the hard-earned pensions of federal
4:04
workers employee benefits are not a gift
4:07
they are earned i will not support and
4:10
will not vote for the oversight
4:12
committee's current budget
4:13
reconciliation proposal reducing earned
4:16
pension benefits for current federal
4:18
employees and Turner actually wrote and
4:21
posted that prior to um the vote in this
4:24
markup session just for clarification
4:27
but something else interesting to note
4:29
he also thinks that the pension cuts to
4:32
which he's opposed um will not stay in
4:35
this bill as it works through the
4:36
legislative process here's a clip of
4:39
something he said um in the committee
4:41
markup session yesterday play the clip
4:44
um I have talked to enough people on the
4:46
House floor that I do think that this
4:48
will not be included in the final bill
4:50
and that this bill ultimately will have
4:52
to be changed if it's going to be
4:54
included in the ultimate uh budget
4:57
reconciliation uh so I will be voting no
5:00
and I certainly hope that the uh that
5:03
this process as it goes through will be
5:05
will be changed because I do not think
5:07
that it is it is fair and it represents
5:10
either Republican values or American
5:11
values i think that we as a party stand
5:15
up for pensions and I don't think that
5:17
we should say to the American public
5:19
that we will that we will change
5:21
someone's pension in the middle of the
5:23
process of their employment i yield back
5:25
so as you can see based on other members
5:27
of Congress um or at least in the House
5:30
that he's spoken to he doesn't think
5:32
that this this one provision will will
5:35
make it into the final bill he may be
5:37
right i don't know but that brings me to
5:39
my final point there's been a lot of um
5:41
misunderstandings and misinformation I
5:43
think about this legislative package
5:46
that I wanted to just mention and I
5:48
understand that it's a complex process
5:51
but some of the comments and emails that
5:54
received indicate the confusion
5:56
surrounding this um for instance some
5:59
people have asked if the provisions in
6:01
the legislation will impact them given
6:04
the their specific details of of their
6:06
situations that's an understandable
6:09
question and um they're worried about
6:11
cuts to their their pensions and whatnot
6:14
so they want to know other comments or
6:16
questions have asked so when when is the
6:18
date that this takes effect well it's
6:20
important to keep in mind these are just
6:22
proposals what happened yesterday
6:25
um when this advanced out of the
6:27
committee it is not law now these
6:29
provisions are not about to go into
6:31
effect they're not set in stone as the
6:34
comments from Congressman Turner
6:36
indicate there's still more to go in the
6:39
legislative process and as he was saying
6:42
he thinks that at least the provision
6:44
about cutting um pensions won't make it
6:47
bill so it's important to remember these
6:50
are just proposals they may not become
6:53
law they may get changed along the way
6:56
so what's being discussed now could
6:58
could end up being different in the
7:00
final product if it actually does become
7:01
law um also we've been hearing about
7:04
some of these proposals for a long time
7:06
now decades in some cases the high- five
7:09
the change from a high three to a high
7:11
five that's one example um that goes
7:13
back decades that I know of on
7:16
fedsmith.com when I was researching this
7:18
I found articles over 10 years old that
7:21
were talking about that change because
7:23
it was being discussed in Congress at
7:25
the time and it still hasn't gone into
7:27
effect it still may not go into effect
7:30
even though it's being considered now so
7:32
after the this legislation this budget
7:35
legislation goes to the various
7:36
committees it still ultimately has to
7:39
pass the House and the Senate go through
7:41
any changes they make and be signed into
7:43
law by the president so it's a long
7:45
process and even if some of these
7:47
proposals were to become law as I said
7:49
they could be changed along the way we
7:51
don't know exactly how they'll be
7:52
implemented for instance there could be
7:54
grandfathering provisions in them so
7:57
they wouldn't affect current federal
7:58
employees but only future ones that
8:01
that's something you might see um also
8:04
once a new law comes out it has to then
8:08
be implemented and OPM oftentimes will
8:12
issue a notice to agencies outlining how
8:16
they think a new law should be
8:18
implemented so it's a it's a long
8:20
process it takes a while it can change
8:21
along the way the point I'm trying to
8:23
make I guess is don't panic right now
8:26
just be informed it's it does affect you
8:28
your pay and your benefits so it is
8:30
important you want to pay attention to
8:31
it but just stay informed just watch the
8:35
process we'll have more details as it
8:37
moves through the legislative process as
8:39
it gets closer to becoming law again if
8:41
it gets to that point and FedSmith will
8:44
certainly keep you updated along the way
8:46
so you can be aware of what's going on
8:48
and ultimately make the best decision
8:50
for you and your family thank you for
8:52
watching today and please remember to
8:54
like and subscribe and visit our website
8:56
for other articles on this and other
8:59
topics with news that will impact you in
9:02
your career have a good day