FERS pension contribution increase

[Anonymous]

The problem is the unfairness between feds hired before 2013 paying 0.8% and fed hired after paying 4.4%. It is time to correct this.

[Anonymous]

Crabs 🦀 in a bucket

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Crabs 🦀 in a bucket

No. Everyone paying 4.4% in FERS saves more money for the government. Cut to FEHB will be smaller.

[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?

This! I had two kids in the early teens and blew through all of my sick, annual leave and then had to take LWOP. Guess what, I'm happy that the younger folks don't have to do that, even if I had to. This mentality of the FERS being unfair is crap. I also don't whine about the CSRS retirement folks either who had a better retirement deal. It is what it is. They shouldn't raise the FERS contributions, instead those people will retire in the next decade and then everyone will be on the same plan, until they change it again.

[Anonymous]

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

No, they have no spine or love for Feds either. The years of 0% COLA were under Obama. Clinton did the last big round of RIFs. No one is in our corner.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

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?

This! I had two kids in the early teens and blew through all of my sick, annual leave and then had to take LWOP. Guess what, I'm happy that the younger folks don't have to do that, even if I had to. This mentality of the FERS being unfair is crap. I also don't whine about the CSRS retirement folks either who had a better retirement deal. It is what it is. They shouldn't raise the FERS contributions, instead those people will retire in the next decade and then everyone will be on the same plan, until they change it again.

Ditto. I’m not resentful of CSRS folks. You get what you get when you enter on duty. This is really petty stuff and will not provide gov with good people moving forward.

I had suggested a life of service (nursing at State) and military for each kid but recently altered course. It’s not worth it with such a mercurial employer - furloughs, changing contracts years later, constant drubbing. Go into sales! Not just this admin!