Hawaii Pay Shift?
Should federal employees in Hawaii be shifted from a system in which they get annual cost of living allowances to account for the expense of working in the state to the locality pay system under which other feds toil? That's the subject of a series of meetings being held this week and next in Hawaii by a Senate subcommittee. Staff from the subcommittee, the Office of Personnel Management, the Defense Department and the Postal Service will be on hand to answer employees' questions about options under consideration.
COMMENTS
Post a Comment
By using this Service you agree not to post material that is obscene, harassing, defamatory, or otherwise objectionable. Although GovExec does not monitor comments posted to this site (and has no obligation to), it reserves the right to delete, edit, or move any material that it deems to be in violation of this rule.
ABOUT THIS BLOG
Government Executive Editor in Chief Tom Shoop, along with other editors and staff correspondents, take a fresh look at news affecting the management and operations of the federal bureaucracy.
"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."
Fruit Bearing Children Posted Wednesday, May 21, 2008 4:49 PMThis 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.
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 Posted Wednesday, May 21, 2008 8:33 PMCOLA 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 Posted Thursday, May 22, 2008 11:31 AMAs "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 Posted Thursday, May 22, 2008 11:48 AMI 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 Posted Thursday, May 22, 2008 11:56 AMI 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 Posted Thursday, May 22, 2008 5:39 PMHey 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 Posted Friday, May 23, 2008 1:57 PMLocality 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 Posted Friday, May 23, 2008 7:45 PMRemember 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 Posted Friday, May 30, 2008 8:42 PMThe 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 Posted Tuesday, July 15, 2008 10:29 AMOnly Hawaii residents could overwhelmingly get behind a bill to repel there own tax cut. Does no one see that over the long term the tax savings from COLA exceed the benefit of locality pay. God forbid, you are responsible for saving and investment in your own retirement outside your TSP. The only ones with a positive benefit from this is the career federal employees that are wrapping up there working years ... saving them a transfer to the mainland for there high 3 (at the expense of all current and future federal employees in Hawaii). Reminds me of the gas cap ... only one in the nation, gas industry spends millions to pump out propaganda against it ... hmm do you think that was because the gas cap was helping or hurting their profits ... chump public of Hawaii takes the bait.
Federal Employee Husband Posted Thursday, October 2, 2008 6:59 PMThe proposal is a sneaky crock with Hawaii locality grouped with "rest of the US". Yup, that's right, the same pay as someone living in Hicksville USA where you can rent a 3 bedroom home for $500 a month. This would be a massive pay CUT and frankly I would have to quit because I can barely afford a $900/month studio apartment on my salary, but at least COLA gives me 25% and a tax shield. Wake up and read how disastrous this is going to be. Hawaii should have the same locality as high cost of living cities such as the Bay area (currently >30%!!) and NOT the lame-brain "rest of USA" which is currently 13%!!
Fed Employee Posted Sunday, July 26, 2009 8:25 AM