GovernmentExecutive.com

First of all a gov't workers are worth much more than a private sector employees. We are more productive in that we are smarter/more creditialed etc.... All the myths about public sector employees is crap. Gov't is what makes the economy; screw the market. Are you with me fellow workers!!!

We are worth every penny!!!  | Tuesday, August 21, 2007 |  10:55 AM

---

Same old BS. Previously, they said federal employees were underpaid. Now, they're saying federal employees are overpaid. I'm a federal employee and I believe I'm underpaid for my skills, knowledge and education.

Iris  | Tuesday, July 10, 2007 |  09:25 AM

---

This is certainly not the case for attorneys. My law firm salary upon graduation in 2000 still greatly exceeds my gov't attorney salary after 5 years of service.

Jason  | Monday, July 09, 2007 |  09:17 AM

---

I was always under the perception that Federal employees got paid less than private counterparts. However, I had a friend in my MBA program who worked for a major defense contractor while I worked in Fed Gov't contracting. We had essentially the same position and duties, and as a GS-11, I was making more than her with 2-3 yrs experience and she was with 6-7 yrs experience, which is sad.

Chris  | Friday, June 29, 2007 |  01:38 PM

---

So, what's the Privacy Information implications of this database?

Can I look up the salary of my neighbor who doesn't work for the Federal Government?

He can look me up, but I can't look him up?

Why can't I look him up?

Privacy? What about my privacy?

Ed

Ed Drone  | Thursday, June 28, 2007 |  12:25 PM

---

I was told at a young age that if you do not have anything good to say then stay silent. The good thing to say about Federal salaries, annuities, benefits, and Thrift Savings Plans is that at most times we have the politicians on our side (they enjoy the same benefits) and also fear fighting the military. The real part about being a "fed" is that you became one for a reason, and rarely was it to become rich. If so maybe you made the wrong choice. We need to be proud of being feds and start fighting prejudices with facts.

Old Timer  | Thursday, June 28, 2007 |  09:39 AM

---

I always cringe when CSRS retirement is compared to the private sector; and how generous it is.

Many in the private sector receive a "pension". A pension is a freebie.

Under CSRS, employees pay 7% of their wages into the retirement system. While the government kicks in their share, an employee paying into retirement results in an "annuity", not a pension.

So if it seems CSRS employees get a generous retirement, remember - they paid for it - or at least a significant part of it.

Remember - Annuity, not a pension.

And if you really want to see a mess, look at the federal income tax structure on that annuity.

Gov't employee  | Wednesday, June 27, 2007 |  02:51 AM

---

Then the Government shouldn't have any concern about losing talent to the private sector because of pay then?

Hmm...  | Tuesday, June 26, 2007 |  11:36 AM

---

The issue of job title comparison is indeed tricky. I'm a Computer Scientist (1550) because I have a C.S. degree and my position is so coded, but that title doesn't accurately describe what I do. In the private sector, a Computer Scientist is generally an architect, researcher or technical expert, often with an advanced post-graduate degree. In the government, you can be anything from a code monkey to management to paper-pusher, and you're still a Computer Scientist if you're in a 1550 series position.

Grant  | Tuesday, June 26, 2007 |  11:12 AM

---

Yada, Yada, Yada, Blah, Blah, Blah
Apples to Apples
Oranges to Oranges
Do Not Mix

iggy  | Tuesday, June 26, 2007 |  09:48 AM

---

I fought the battle of Chris Edwards’ faulty analysis using 20 year old, CSRS data in the new FERS world last time. Suffice it to say that his assertions have overcome by events; events that changed civil service, its retirement, and compensation system. I also agree with Mr. Shoop that the basis of this analysis is also flawed considering the lack of specific job compensation comparative data.

I would like to point out to the various pundits that the total income averages are often offset by geo-political clusters that include large numbers of SES employees receiving high-cost area payments on top of their average salaries of $151,266. Even the ordinary GS employees are envious of such largess.

But let’s go beyond that to the micro level. For once I would like to see what the local population that surrounds most large government employers and facilities thinks. I’d like to see what their opinion would be of entire posts and major facilities’ employees being cut approximately /3 in salaries.

The average size post where I work sinks approximately $2.7 billion a year into the local economy. We purchase homes in this area, shop, invest, entertain, and in general live and spend our money here.

Such municipalities have shown their support for these government facilities time and time again during the BRAC hearings; knowing that their lifestyles and, sometimes, their very existence depends on the flow of cash that runs from the governmental stream.

Please remember that controlled growth and monetary injections stimulate economies; and unlike many welfare programs, there are tangible returns on these salaries. Why do you think these Senators and Representatives strive to mightily to preserve those jobs in their territory? They know that the employees AND many of their non-federally employed constituents depend on those jobs.

Tip Off  | Tuesday, June 26, 2007 |  09:35 AM

---

My agency is on the list and our Investigators all telecommute; however when you select my state (New York) and agency, only our Deputy Director's information appears - None of the 5 lower GS-level Investigators!

Lori  | Tuesday, June 26, 2007 |  09:29 AM

---

It's all about the methodology fellas! Sample size, groups studied, etc. We know the truth.

I can easily compare my salary to my peers in the private sector (assuming that all qualifications and education are similar, which for me it is.) and wonder about that 45-50K gap between the two of us.

Mark  | Tuesday, June 26, 2007 |  09:25 AM

---

Great, a stalker's paradise.

VA Worker  | Tuesday, June 26, 2007 |  08:55 AM

---

I'm not in there and neither are my co-workers and other friends who work for the federal government. Strange. Seems to be that the dataset is not complete so makes one wonder about the study itself. Anti-federal worker?

td  | Tuesday, June 26, 2007 |  08:26 AM

---

Yes, large segments of government employees do make more than they would in the private sector where comparisons could be made, especially in smaller markets. I've been involved in a compensation study recently. However, govt. employees get sunk in the high cost areas like LA, SF, NY and the like. If you're in Houston or Fargo, government employment is the way to go! DC - not so much....

JMK  | Tuesday, June 26, 2007 |  08:00 AM

---

I'd be more concerned if the database was actually formatted to be useful. Since it isn't, it appears to be the old trick of burying the real information in a pile of nonsense to disguise the fact that the allegation isn't true. Some of these queries came up with over seven thousand responses- which the user can only view at a rate of about ten per page. The data is not sorted or formatted in a manner that would allow users to get a real handle on what is true and what is not. Who is going to wade through seven hundred pages of nonsense in order to test the validity of this assertion? Answer: not many people.

Concerned citizen  | Tuesday, June 26, 2007 |  07:45 AM

---

When comparing apples to apples, Federal employees are approximately 32% underpaid compared to Private Sector employees. This can vary by specific professions, but let's have a look; Doctors - Federal $150,000/year, Private no less than $150,000 up to $350,000/year and the same for Federal Attorneys. Federal agents and Law Enforcement; Some Local agencies in California - Patrol Officers max pay grade in about 5 years on average at $107,000/year in base pay plus earn overtime at a rate of time and a half/hour and are not pay capped, 1st line Sup. $125,000/year in base pay plus can earn overtime and are not pay capped. Federal Agents in California may start at $46,882/year in base for the highest COLA area and will only receive 25% in overtime totaling $58,602/year; overtime is paid at straight time and not at time and a half/hour. All Federal agents on the GS pay scale are pay capped at $145,400 and may take over 15 years to reach the pay cap with at least one promotion to a GS-14 level. A senior Federal agent that does not promote will NEVER hit the pay cap and could take more than 20 years to reach max pay grade. GS-14 and 15 level Federal agents actually have their pay reduced, a portion of it is returned to the gov't every pay period, and the deduction is noted on the employees pay earnings and leave statement every two weeks. This is for ALL law enforcement agents in the Federal Gov't. in every agency. The Federal agents work at the need of the agencies and are not compensated above the 25% included into their final pay rate and the average Federal agent will work many hundreds of hours in addition to the required yearly hours for free and will not receive any additional compensation; time-off, comp-time, or any other form of leave/pay. So, let's look at the final salaries with the 32%; Doctors and Lawyers $198,000/year much more respectable. Federal agents $187,000/year for the highest COLA area and the number could be reduced by up to 17% for the lowest COLA area or $161,767/year. That is a much better picture of what the pay scale looks like for only three of the White-Collar professions in the Federal Gov't. Also, benefits are standard for the Federal employee, with no additional stock options or 401K matching above 5%. Lest we forget health care costs that can rise 3 to 10% on any given year. Finally, how about the company car..?? Need we say anymore..???

Concerned  | Monday, June 25, 2007 |  09:28 PM

---

So thats why the federal unions want to mandate in law that federal benefits be surrogated in A-76 comparisons for use in private sector cost estimates - because they know that federal employees get paid less than that their private sector counterparts? Ok, I agree that comparisons of job titles don't work. Sending in a GS 14 program analysit when a GS 7 Program analysis will do might skew the data, but then, why do so many A-76 competitions - even the streamlined ones have so much downgrading in them?

Washington  | Monday, June 25, 2007 |  04:51 PM

---

how about executive pay? SES receive about 150k in salary; private execs.....? thats what I thought.

john  | Monday, June 25, 2007 |  02:19 PM

---

Also interesting... I don't exist and for my Agency, it is very hit and miss as to who's included or who's not.

Additionally, although the report says that "Employees involved in security work, FBI, CIA, defense department, nuclear materials, and other jobs essential to national security are excluded.", some employees who work in such positions are included.

Patricia L.  | Monday, June 25, 2007 |  01:28 PM

---

Certainly a study that concludes "Feds are paid more" is worthy of questioning on the grounds of scope and methodology. Even if comparing the salaries of workers with similar job titles, the sample from which the average salary is drawn is much larger in the case of private industry than public. For example, there are many more food service workers in the private sector, representing a greater range of skills, localities, hiring requirements, and a host of other omitted variables.

Even if we buy the results of the study, what critics like Donahue and Sherk do not address is that, in a free society, the Government is forced to compete with private industry for talent. Of course we don't want all our best and brightest in federal offices, but the opposite extreme is dangerous as well. Do we really want substandard intelligence professionals in the CIA? Cut-rate economists at Treasury? Middle-of-their-class-experts at DOE? That's why the Government must pay competitively.

nick  | Monday, June 25, 2007 |  01:20 PM

---

Interesting, the database does not contain the dept of defense.

Kellie  | Monday, June 25, 2007 |  12:00 PM

---