The Senate on Thursday rejected an amendment that would have frozen the 2011 pay increase for federal workers and cut the size of the government workforce.
The Senate voted 57-41 to defeat a Republican amendment to the American Jobs and Closing Tax Loopholes Act that sought to freeze federal employee salaries, eliminate their bonuses and collect their unpaid taxes. It also would have frozen hiring at most federal agencies.
The move marks the latest attempt by Republican lawmakers to attach to legislation language that would limit pay increases for federal workers in 2011. Many argue that federal employees should not be receiving pay increases while many private sector workers face layoffs, pay cuts and reductions in hours and benefits. But federal unions and other critics argue that eliminating the federal pay increase and other incentives would undermine the government's ability to recruit and retain a qualified workforce.
President Obama has proposed a 1.4 percent pay increase for federal workers in 2011. Given that it's an election year, it's likely that we'll see attempts to freeze federal pay surface again. What do you think? Should federal workers be asked to forgo their annual pay raise, and what impact would this have on the government's recruitment and retention efforts?
COMMENTS
Being a retired federal employee forced into retirement by medical reasons. I feel retired federal employees should not be forced into austerity while the so called job creators are not creating jobs. It's bad enough when our pay decreased about 50% when a federal employee retires. Some federal employees didn't make very much to begin with. This crap that they make more then private sectore is just that crap.
Barbra Midkiff 12/26/11 02:17 pm ET
Critical thinking and analysis, rather than an "everyone else is suffering..." approach is necessary. Despite recent popular articles, the Bureau of Labor and Statistics data still shows Federal Gov employees are paid an average of 35% below their private industry counterparts. There are laws and requirements that obligate the employer (i.e.; the Federal government) to cost of living adjustments. Also, the Federal workforce is the major employer in many small towns and areas across our country. Those employees in turn, are the support for commerce in those areas and like everyone else, will not spend what they don't have. Additionally, they are taking in children who can't find jobs, and supporting relatives who have been laid off from their jobs. THe point to be made is that this is not a decision that should be made based on raw emotion that includes jealousy. The trickle down effects and doing the right thing for employees, no matter who the employer is, requires critical analysis.
CJH 11/01/10 12:25 pm ET
While politics may be motivating the push for these actions, it is probably a necessary evil at this time. An across the board hiring freeze may not be wise, but it is appropriate for federal employees to experience the same/similar reality felt by most Americans. In our DC office, we have had furlough weeks the last two years and a pay freeze. Our medical contributions have continued to rise during the period and people have had to make sacrifices and tighten their budgets, but we are surviving so it can be done. The federal government salaries and benefits are no longer below acceptable levels so they also can help the country get through the current situation by pitching in and tightening their belts. We have not seen a decline in employee retention or motivation as people are happy to have a job and know that in the next few years things will improve.
RD 06/22/10 10:06 am ET
Which Democrat(s) voted for the bill? Real profile in courge to whomever they were
John T 06/21/10 09:51 am ET