GovernmentExecutive.com

The US Postal Service is getting the short end of this deal; but the postal employees are making out like bandits.
The 1990 FEPCA essentially diminished the importance of NFA COLA by excluding those teritories from receiving locality pay. With new proposed legislation, NFA COLA will disappear for all federal entities except the US Postal Service.
The feds have in effect integrated NFA COLA into its base pay policies, but not allowed the US Postal Service to do the same. This is a windfall for postal employees, but a burden on the USPS and its customers.

Anonymous Policy Analyst  | Tuesday, July 15, 2008 |  10:29 AM

---

Remember the last Jan 08 raise? It was a 3.5% for everyone, but those of us in Alaska and Hawaii. Locality pay areas got a 2.5% on base pay and another 1% on locality pay, to make the 3.5%. COLA areas got the 2.5% on base pay and that was that. So Alaska and Hawaii feds only got a 2.5%, not the 3.5% as advertised.

Alaskan Fed  | Friday, May 30, 2008 |  08:42 PM

---

Locality pay is tied to prevailing private-sector wages and since the Fed Govt and Dept of Defense are the majority employer in the State of Hawaii; specifically Oahu where the majority of Fed Civilians work...what is the comparison going to be based against? I certainly hope the fact most true private sector employees work multiple jobs in order to cope with the cost of living here on Oahu is taken into account when such a private-sector rate is established.

Not yet Pau Hana  | Friday, May 23, 2008 |  07:45 PM

---

Hey Dan, we want locality pay, ok? I'm no fan of the State government, but another reason milk and gas are so expensive here,...is maybe because we live in the middle of the ocean. Get a clue.

Berserker  | Friday, May 23, 2008 |  01:57 PM

---

I agree a locality pay is better. HOWEVER, the locality pay being proposed by OPM and the NSPS cronies is only 1/7 of the current 25% COLA TO START and would ONLY MAX out at a FULL 20.3% locality pay in 7 years. LESS NOW and LESS LATER. If it was 32.53% like in the Bay area, we all would be smiling - Except for Mr. Ketter who seems to have a BEEF with the folks who ALLOW him to put food on his dinner table.

Ketter Krusher  | Thursday, May 22, 2008 |  05:39 PM

---

I worked in Hawaii as a GS-11/12 govenment employee for several years prior to moving to the mainland to grow my federal career (now a GS-15) and what I realized is that grades in Hawaii are depressed by at least one grade to make up for the COLA's 25 percent difference in pay. Suggest government employees in Hawaii be afforded appropriate grades for similar positions on the mainland and then the locality pay plan will work in Hawaii. Afterall this is all about equal pay for equal work. This issue is the reason I left dakine.

Darrell Robertson  | Thursday, May 22, 2008 |  11:56 AM

---

As "Alaskan for Locality Pay" states, SF, San Jose, and San Diego do not get COLA. They get Locality Pay. And their Locality Pay is 22% in San Diego, and 32.53% in SF and San Jose. I think that if you ask those employees, as suggested by "Fruit Bearing Children," they are probably happier with the locality pay than they would be with COLA of "up to 25%." Especially when it affects the "High 3" for retirement calculations.

Tom Steinbrunner  | Thursday, May 22, 2008 |  11:48 AM

---

COLA and Locality Pay are different issues. The proposal is to gradually lower COLA, while gradually adding Locality Pay. This would offer thousands of Hawaiian and Alaskan employees LOCALITY PAY which they do not presently have. COLA does not count toward the 'high 3' for retirement. Locality Pay does.

The issue is one of fairness. Why should someone in the same grade and step, with the same number of years, in a comparable cost of living area, get a smaller retirement??

We have people LEAVE in their last three years, transfer to a Locality Pay area, strictly to increase their retirement. And we can't get people in their last three years to transfer in, as they LOSE retirement money.

And BTW, SF, San Jose, and San Diego do not get COLA. They get Locality Pay. (COLA in those areas is for military not civilian).

COLA is strictly for Hawaii and Alaska civilian employees in this case. And changing them to locality pay will not affect anyone in any other area.

Alaskan for Locality Pay  | Thursday, May 22, 2008 |  11:31 AM

---

Treat them all the same No Cola, a locality pay is the right answer. The reason bread and milk and gas go up so much there is too many government employees and no industry. Quit asking for a handout and get your state and its bureaucracy under control

dan ketter  | Wednesday, May 21, 2008 |  08:33 PM

---

"About 19,500 federal and Postal Service employees in Hawai'i receive cost-of-living allowances, amounting to up to 25 percent of their pay. "Locality pay" is tied to prevailing private-sector wages."
This is a case of APPLES vs. ORANGES. How does a Cost of living rate eqaute to what the average rate of pay is in a specific area?
DPM and DOD (i.e. NSPS) want to take away $$ for gas, milk and food and replace it with wages that equates to whether my job has a higher or lower equivalency in the private sector? How dumb is that? Let's ask folks in SF, San Jose and San Diego to give up ANY COLA and replace it with a reduced locality pay. Nuff said.

Fruit Bearing Children  | Wednesday, May 21, 2008 |  04:49 PM

---