FERS pension contribution increase

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Now you’ll know how the newer federal employees feel. It kills me that I have to pay 4.4 percent every paycheck when others are contributing close to nothing and getting much more in return. I really wish we could opt out or not even have FERs. I’m in my early 30s and suspect that this will account to almost nothing upon retirement but meanwhile I’m subsidized the hell out of my older colleagues for decades

We also didn’t have parental leave and student loan repayment. So pick your poison.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Now you’ll know how the newer federal employees feel. It kills me that I have to pay 4.4 percent every paycheck when others are contributing close to nothing and getting much more in return. I really wish we could opt out or not even have FERs. I’m in my early 30s and suspect that this will account to almost nothing upon retirement but meanwhile I’m subsidized the hell out of my older colleagues for decades[/quote

You think you have it rough? I've been paying into Social Security for 45 years now, and watching retirees blow their monthly checks on RVs, bingo games, cruises and all-you-can-eat buffets. If I could have all of my SS tax payments back, with interest, I'd be a multi-millionaire.

My first federal job was as a GS-4 and I was paid $11,000/yr plus some supplement because I could type. There was no locality pay back then. $11,000 in 2025 dollars is $31,000 or about $15/hour.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Honestly those of you complaining about a potential increase in your contribution sound very petty to me - I’d bet plenty of your riffed or soon to be riffed colleagues would have been happy to increase their contribution.

Them increasing their contribution wouldn’t have prevented RIFs. What a dumb thing to say.

That is not what she meant--she meant they would all rather have a job and live through the increase than their situation of not having a job at all.

Race to the bottom and she’ll be so pleased to get there first. Maybe she’s hoping Elon will give her a head pat.

The poster was expressing reality. You think being mad and having clever comebacks and shutting down any discussion of literally reality of the possibility of the increase taking place will ensure the change will not take place. This is not how planet Earth works.

It works how we choose to make it work. You apparently choose “Thank you, sir! May I have another?”

Helloooo??? It does not work how we choose to make it work. Especially when your paycheck comes from somewhere or someone else. But feel free to take that argument up with Congress or Trump right now while federal agency budgets are literally getting slashed by the billions.

Of course it does. That’s why there are entirely different countries with entirely different systems all across the planet. How can you possibly have trouble understanding that?

I suggest you consider moving to one of those countries bc nothing is changing here for the next few years.

I have a lot of sympathy for the 24,000 illegally fired probationary employees and the Maryland man illegally deported to the El Salvador prison, just to name a few of the travesties resulting from this administration so far. But it’s difficult to have much sympathy if you’ll be required to contribute to your retirement in the same manner that many of your colleagues have for years.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Honestly those of you complaining about a potential increase in your contribution sound very petty to me - I’d bet plenty of your riffed or soon to be riffed colleagues would have been happy to increase their contribution.

Them increasing their contribution wouldn’t have prevented RIFs. What a dumb thing to say.

That is not what she meant--she meant they would all rather have a job and live through the increase than their situation of not having a job at all.

Race to the bottom and she’ll be so pleased to get there first. Maybe she’s hoping Elon will give her a head pat.

The poster was expressing reality. You think being mad and having clever comebacks and shutting down any discussion of literally reality of the possibility of the increase taking place will ensure the change will not take place. This is not how planet Earth works.

It works how we choose to make it work. You apparently choose “Thank you, sir! May I have another?”

Helloooo??? It does not work how we choose to make it work. Especially when your paycheck comes from somewhere or someone else. But feel free to take that argument up with Congress or Trump right now while federal agency budgets are literally getting slashed by the billions.

Of course it does. That’s why there are entirely different countries with entirely different systems all across the planet. How can you possibly have trouble understanding that?

I suggest you consider moving to one of those countries bc nothing is changing here for the next few years.

I have a lot of sympathy for the 24,000 illegally fired probationary employees and the Maryland man illegally deported to the El Salvador prison, just to name a few of the travesties resulting from this administration so far. But it’s difficult to have much sympathy if you’ll be required to contribute to your retirement in the same manner that many of your colleagues have for years.

Not with that attitude. Congratulations on being part of the problem. I’m sure you won’t be expecting sympathy when your agency starts requiring you to work 12 hour days for minimum wage, right?

“Just happy to have a job, sir!”

[Anonymous]

For people who are paying 0.8%, you have already saved on 3.6% of your salary for over 12 years. You can calculate how much you have earned more than people who joined fed in 2014 and later for doing the same job.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:For people who are paying 0.8%, you have already saved on 3.6% of your salary for over 12 years. You can calculate how much you have earned more than people who joined fed in 2014 and later for doing the same job.

Ok but what about the LWOP we took when we had kids? And the student loan forgiveness programs we didn’t get to take advantage of? And the cost of before and after care we had to pay for since we couldn’t telework?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:For people who are paying 0.8%, you have already saved on 3.6% of your salary for over 12 years. You can calculate how much you have earned more than people who joined fed in 2014 and later for doing the same job.

What’s the interest rate on your mortgage? Do you think it’s fair that people buying in your neighborhood today might be paying a significantly higher rate? Maybe the bank should increase yours to match; after all, you’re both getting essentially the same benefit, why should your younger neighbors pay more?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Honestly those of you complaining about a potential increase in your contribution sound very petty to me - I’d bet plenty of your riffed or soon to be riffed colleagues would have been happy to increase their contribution.

Them increasing their contribution wouldn’t have prevented RIFs. What a dumb thing to say.

That is not what she meant--she meant they would all rather have a job and live through the increase than their situation of not having a job at all.

Race to the bottom and she’ll be so pleased to get there first. Maybe she’s hoping Elon will give her a head pat.

The poster was expressing reality. You think being mad and having clever comebacks and shutting down any discussion of literally reality of the possibility of the increase taking place will ensure the change will not take place. This is not how planet Earth works.

It works how we choose to make it work. You apparently choose “Thank you, sir! May I have another?”

Helloooo??? It does not work how we choose to make it work. Especially when your paycheck comes from somewhere or someone else. But feel free to take that argument up with Congress or Trump right now while federal agency budgets are literally getting slashed by the billions.

Of course it does. That’s why there are entirely different countries with entirely different systems all across the planet. How can you possibly have trouble understanding that?

I suggest you consider moving to one of those countries bc nothing is changing here for the next few years.

I have a lot of sympathy for the 24,000 illegally fired probationary employees and the Maryland man illegally deported to the El Salvador prison, just to name a few of the travesties resulting from this administration so far. But it’s difficult to have much sympathy if you’ll be required to contribute to your retirement in the same manner that many of your colleagues have for years.

They were hired under that rate, so it is pay cut.This is only part of the plan to cut federal employees benefits. Congress is also proposing a retroactive change to the retirement benefit formula for people that are already eligible for retirement.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:For people who are paying 0.8%, you have already saved on 3.6% of your salary for over 12 years. You can calculate how much you have earned more than people who joined fed in 2014 and later for doing the same job.

Ok but what about the LWOP we took when we had kids? And the student loan forgiveness programs we didn’t get to take advantage of? And the cost of before and after care we had to pay for since we couldn’t telework?

I have a family member who started working for the federal government right out of college in 2009 and he was able to take advantage of some leave (maybe it was vacation) when his children were born in 2019 and 2022. He would have been able to take advantage of student loan forgiveness, but he didn't have loans.

[Anonymous]

Holy Moly! Federal employees hired before 2013 only had to contribute 0.8% of their salary towards their pension?

How on earth did they decide on 0.8% as the number? That's so... obscure. Why not 1%?

I had no idea the contribution was so low. I'm married to a fedgov worker.

I'm a teacher. We contribute 7% of our salary towards our pension. (Maryland).

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Holy Moly! Federal employees hired before 2013 only had to contribute 0.8% of their salary towards their pension?

How on earth did they decide on 0.8% as the number? That's so... obscure. Why not 1%?

I had no idea the contribution was so low. I'm married to a fedgov worker.

I'm a teacher. We contribute 7% of our salary towards our pension. (Maryland).

But your pension multiplier is 50% higher than the standard federal government pension (1.5x years worked versus 1.0)

[Anonymous]

So when, not if, the Democrats get back in power, will they reverse these increases? Doubtful.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Holy Moly! Federal employees hired before 2013 only had to contribute 0.8% of their salary towards their pension?

How on earth did they decide on 0.8% as the number? That's so... obscure. Why not 1%?

I had no idea the contribution was so low. I'm married to a fedgov worker.

I'm a teacher. We contribute 7% of our salary towards our pension. (Maryland).

But your pension multiplier is 50% higher than the standard federal government pension (1.5x years worked versus 1.0)

Now add-in the 5-7% , depending on the agency, matching TSP contributions for federal employees.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Now you’ll know how the newer federal employees feel. It kills me that I have to pay 4.4 percent every paycheck when others are contributing close to nothing and getting much more in return. I really wish we could opt out or not even have FERs. I’m in my early 30s and suspect that this will account to almost nothing upon retirement but meanwhile I’m subsidized the hell out of my older colleagues for decades[/quote

You think you have it rough? I've been paying into Social Security for 45 years now, and watching retirees blow their monthly checks on RVs, bingo games, cruises and all-you-can-eat buffets. If I could have all of my SS tax payments back, with interest, I'd be a multi-millionaire.

My first federal job was as a GS-4 and I was paid $11,000/yr plus some supplement because I could type. There was no locality pay back then. $11,000 in 2025 dollars is $31,000 or about $15/hour.

I didn’t have, flexible spending, paid paternal leave, student loan forgiveness, please stop whining.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Holy Moly! Federal employees hired before 2013 only had to contribute 0.8% of their salary towards their pension?

How on earth did they decide on 0.8% as the number? That's so... obscure. Why not 1%?

I had no idea the contribution was so low. I'm married to a fedgov worker.

I'm a teacher. We contribute 7% of our salary towards our pension. (Maryland)

One of the many reasons I left teaching to be a federal employee.