I can't say this to anyone in real life but ...

[Anonymous]

They are being cut which means they were there for years. So they had perks, bonuses, travel - but they are being cut. Which once again is you providing proof that they exist.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I'm not religious AT ALL, but I remember this parable from second grade at catholic school: 'These last men have worked only one hour, and you made them equal to us who have borne the burden and the heat of the day.' But he answered one of them and said, 'Friend, I am doing you no wrong. Did you not agree with me for a denarius? Take what is yours and go your way.'

Of course, OP has a point because we are all paying for OP's neighbor to get her great pension. Still, working in the federal gov't is no picnic, one gives up a lot, not just money but recognition, perks and excitement.

Perks? Excitement? Seriously?

My family and friends who work in corporations are for the most part not getting any perks or excitement. Quite the opposite. Budgets are being cut, travel and professional development are being cut, bonuses and benefits are being cut, etc etc.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I've got about 8 more years and then I can do this. I have already had offers from several organizations who will "buy" me for my contact list. I'm not sure what your issue is.

Is it that I'm getting a pension? Or that I'm getting a pension after working for so long at less than I could have earned say....at BigLaw?

Or, are you just thinking you should have gone into gov't?

Not trying to pick a fight, but you chose to work for the government and make less, correct? No one stopped you from going BigLaw, did they? The way you state this it sounds as if you feel entitled to cash in because of your "service." Not exactly the model of a selfless public "servant." You are playing right into the right wing here, you know? And I say this as a lefty who has a dirty taste in her mouth from your comments.

Yes, I agree with all of this. The perk of working with the government is more reasonable working hours and job security. That doesn't mean you get to cash in your contacts for $$$ because you think you "deserve" it.

Reasonable working hours....I actually was working until 9:00 on New Years eve. What time did you work until?

But most were not, and those that were (ahem, Congress) were there because of their ineptitude or that or their bosses. Don't like it? Leave. Many private sector people work holidays, too - doctors, nurses, first responders, store clerks, etc etc.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:They are being cut which means they were there for years. So they had perks, bonuses, travel - but they are being cut. Which once again is you providing proof that they exist.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I'm not religious AT ALL, but I remember this parable from second grade at catholic school: 'These last men have worked only one hour, and you made them equal to us who have borne the burden and the heat of the day.' But he answered one of them and said, 'Friend, I am doing you no wrong. Did you not agree with me for a denarius? Take what is yours and go your way.'

Of course, OP has a point because we are all paying for OP's neighbor to get her great pension. Still, working in the federal gov't is no picnic, one gives up a lot, not just money but recognition, perks and excitement.

Perks? Excitement? Seriously?

My family and friends who work in corporations are for the most part not getting any perks or excitement. Quite the opposite. Budgets are being cut, travel and professional development are being cut, bonuses and benefits are being cut, etc etc.

You're right. I'm sorry. You are such a put upon baby. I think I'll go cry for you now.

Do you realize how ridiculous you sound? Who's jealous NOW? You, by the sound of it.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:OP here. I think the 30% thing sucks! As I said, I support retirement for Feds, I just think it's not right that people then go on to a lucrative second career trading on their Federal contacts.

I would support a system where your Federal retirement decreases commensurate with outside earned income at a certain point.

I don't want my taxes going to retirement for lobbyists. But if someone wants to retire from a Fed job and be a teacher or something like that, I would 100% support it.

OP, I understand why you're upset here but would you like someone to decide how you can spend your retirement?

OP here. If they were paying for my retirement, I would understand if they had input. Certainly in the private sector, shareholders have input.

But what would you approve of as an appropriate retirement activity? You said it's okay of someone's a teacher. What if they don't do anything in retirement but just smoke a lot of weed and are irresponsible? What if a person wrote a novel which made a lot of money? Or is it okay if they write a novel which doesn't make any money? If the person volunteers during their retirement, can I pick what kind of volunteering is acceptable? What if they volunteer full-time for a political party that I find offensive and consider dangerous to our freedoms?

Do you see what I'm getting at? I can't see most of us being willing to accept limitations on what we can do with our free time if we receive a pension. I mean, I did the work, it's only fair that I should be able to get the pension without anyone telling me what I can do.

FTR, I have a 401K not a pension and I don't like the idea of someone making boatloads of money in retirement as a lobbyist but we're not paying for retirement for lobbyists. We're paying for retirement for a Federal worker who chose to go on and be a lobbyist. In order to preserve our own freedom to do as we wish we have to accept that others will make choices of which we disapprove.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I'm irritated by the fact that my neighbor made over $150K at her Fed job, retired, and now collects 80% of that while pulling in several hundred thousand more as a lobbyist.

I fully support retirement for federal employees but I think this double dipping is unconscionable, particularly as she's drawing on her contacts for profit.

Whew, I feel better!

Cops do this all the time. So do military veterans. Are we trashing them, too, or only the other people who keep the government functioning? In which I loosely include members of Congress, since "functioning" is a major stretch for them.

I'm a former fed, now contractor, although I didn't stay in the gov't long enough to actually retire. DH is retired military/fed and also now a contractor. I agree with OP that the double-dipping is frustrating, even though our family currently benefits from it via DH's military retirement pay.

IMO, any federal pension (civilian or military) should not kick in if you are still working for the gov't in any capacity, including as a private sector contractor. In an ideal world, I'd actually not see that pension kick in until age 65 unless there was a medical/disability component to it such as with our wounded warriors.

Huzzah! A former federal employee with some degree of ethics and a conscience. Welcome. It's about time you came to represent.

[Anonymous]

Since when does taking advantage of the opportunities you can take constitute being an entitled whiny person? The only person whining here is the OP.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:OP here. I think the 30% thing sucks! As I said, I support retirement for Feds, I just think it's not right that people then go on to a lucrative second career trading on their Federal contacts.

I would support a system where your Federal retirement decreases commensurate with outside earned income at a certain point.

I don't want my taxes going to retirement for lobbyists. But if someone wants to retire from a Fed job and be a teacher or something like that, I would 100% support it.

OP, I understand why you're upset here but would you like someone to decide how you can spend your retirement?

OP here. If they were paying for my retirement, I would understand if they had input. Certainly in the private sector, shareholders have input.

But what would you approve of as an appropriate retirement activity? You said it's okay of someone's a teacher. What if they don't do anything in retirement but just smoke a lot of weed and are irresponsible? What if a person wrote a novel which made a lot of money? Or is it okay if they write a novel which doesn't make any money? If the person volunteers during their retirement, can I pick what kind of volunteering is acceptable? What if they volunteer full-time for a political party that I find offensive and consider dangerous to our freedoms?

Do you see what I'm getting at? I can't see most of us being willing to accept limitations on what we can do with our free time if we receive a pension. I mean, I did the work, it's only fair that I should be able to get the pension without anyone telling me what I can do.

FTR, I have a 401K not a pension and I don't like the idea of someone making boatloads of money in retirement as a lobbyist but we're not paying for retirement for lobbyists. We're paying for retirement for a Federal worker who chose to go on and be a lobbyist. In order to preserve our own freedom to do as we wish we have to accept that others will make choices of which we disapprove.

What you are getting at is ridiculous. It is obvious that OP is advocating for a provision that would prevent anyone whose work puts them in contact with the government from collecting partial or full benefits until their private sector employment concludes. This is a perfectly reasonable (and fiscally responsible) position. Your smoke and mirrors about pot and bad novels is a bullshit distraction. Boy, you folks sure are defensive, which surely means we've hit upon some truth.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I've got about 8 more years and then I can do this. I have already had offers from several organizations who will "buy" me for my contact list. I'm not sure what your issue is.

Is it that I'm getting a pension? Or that I'm getting a pension after working for so long at less than I could have earned say....at BigLaw?

Or, are you just thinking you should have gone into gov't?

Not trying to pick a fight, but you chose to work for the government and make less, correct? No one stopped you from going BigLaw, did they? The way you state this it sounds as if you feel entitled to cash in because of your "service." Not exactly the model of a selfless public "servant." You are playing right into the right wing here, you know? And I say this as a lefty who has a dirty taste in her mouth from your comments.

Yes, I agree with all of this. The perk of working with the government is more reasonable working hours and job security. That doesn't mean you get to cash in your contacts for $$$ because you think you "deserve" it.

Reasonable working hours....I actually was working until 9:00 on New Years eve. What time did you work until?

You weren't the one magically wishing the President would "give you" Christmas Eve off, were you? Yes, I realize you said NYE. Look, if wanted to take it off, you SHOULD HAVE. Conversely, if you're in a position that you were forced to be at work for the United States government until 9:00, then you should have some pride that your a reliable employee whose service is essential. Unless of course we're talking shiftwork here, like TSA or something, in which case, I'd also show little sympathy as it's the life you chose. Kind of like the wait staff that works ALL night on NYE, b/c they chose that life.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I've got about 8 more years and then I can do this. I have already had offers from several organizations who will "buy" me for my contact list. I'm not sure what your issue is.

Is it that I'm getting a pension? Or that I'm getting a pension after working for so long at less than I could have earned say....at BigLaw?

Or, are you just thinking you should have gone into gov't?

Not trying to pick a fight, but you chose to work for the government and make less, correct? No one stopped you from going BigLaw, did they? The way you state this it sounds as if you feel entitled to cash in because of your "service." Not exactly the model of a selfless public "servant." You are playing right into the right wing here, you know? And I say this as a lefty who has a dirty taste in her mouth from your comments.

Yes, I agree with all of this. The perk of working with the government is more reasonable working hours and job security. That doesn't mean you get to cash in your contacts for $$$ because you think you "deserve" it.

Reasonable working hours....I actually was working until 9:00 on New Years eve. What time did you work until?

You weren't the one magically wishing the President would "give you" Christmas Eve off, were you? Yes, I realize you said NYE. Look, if wanted to take it off, you SHOULD HAVE. Conversely, if you're in a position that you were forced to be at work for the United States government until 9:00, then you should have some pride that your a reliable employee whose service is essential. Unless of course we're talking shiftwork here, like TSA or something, in which case, I'd also show little sympathy as it's the life you chose. Kind of like the wait staff that works ALL night on NYE, b/c they chose that life.

Which he did, BTW! OMG - everyone flip out! The feds got a perk I didn't get! I am owed. I am OWED, people!

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Since when does taking advantage of the opportunities you can take constitute being an entitled whiny person? The only person whining here is the OP.

This is the attitude of millions who complain of the revolving door on the Hill.

Because Capitol Hill is the only place in the world where someone's prior experience is actually look upon favorably.

I can't wait until we finally become a society where resumes are irrelevent and we're finally all judged on our looks, b/c I'm pretty attrative and funny so I'll be okay. Oh and I don't smoke and I'm thin, so minimal health risk to employers who can't hire me b/c of my background, but only the superficial, irrelevent things.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:OP here. I think the 30% thing sucks! As I said, I support retirement for Feds, I just think it's not right that people then go on to a lucrative second career trading on their Federal contacts.

I would support a system where your Federal retirement decreases commensurate with outside earned income at a certain point.

I don't want my taxes going to retirement for lobbyists. But if someone wants to retire from a Fed job and be a teacher or something like that, I would 100% support it.

100% agree with this. And no, I have no jealousy, I just think that the scenario OP describes is absolutely not what was envisioned when the pension system was designed. I think what OP suggests is fiscally and ethically responsible.

+1000

Once I met a woman, who told me that she was retired from Fed government years ago in her late 40s (she was 52) and was now considering what her 3rd luxury car should be. BTW, she only had a high school diploma and no other qualifications.

Feds do get perks and excitement too. Remember the meetings in vegas? Many are paid to attend conferences of their choosing usually in great locations and I know because I work for the Fed govt and have these travel perks. I have been to confeences in Hawaii, vegas, the Carribean and each location and meeting was my choice as long as it is career development.

OP is absolutely right. No wonder the budget is in the red and USA is borrowing money from China. Partly to pay pensions to relatively yiung "retirees" who use the govt contatcs in a second career with high salary. Better start learning Chinese.

[Anonymous]

The lack of knowledge of the day-to-day work of a federal worker is pretty obvious, here. The fed-bashing of the jealous are, sadly, not surprising.

I work hard at my job and at all hours (often through lunch at in the evenings; over the holidays). The 9-5 gig is no longer present in any fed job I've had. I get no overtime. None.

I've put in my years (almost 15) when others couldn't be bothered with the salary I drew (now those big firm lawyers are trying to come to the fed side in droves - I know, I've interviewed them). So, yeah, when I receive my retirement (FERS, not the more generous CSRS) I'm going to take it gleefully. And, if I can use my contacts for something else, you best believe I will do it and without apology.

You can call me whatever you want. I made a smart choice. And am not apologizing for it.

[Anonymous]

Young...

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:OP here. I think the 30% thing sucks! As I said, I support retirement for Feds, I just think it's not right that people then go on to a lucrative second career trading on their Federal contacts.

I would support a system where your Federal retirement decreases commensurate with outside earned income at a certain point.

I don't want my taxes going to retirement for lobbyists. But if someone wants to retire from a Fed job and be a teacher or something like that, I would 100% support it.

100% agree with this. And no, I have no jealousy, I just think that the scenario OP describes is absolutely not what was envisioned when the pension system was designed. I think what OP suggests is fiscally and ethically responsible.

+1000

Once I met a woman, who told me that she was retired from Fed government years ago in her late 40s (she was 52) and was now considering what her 3rd luxury car should be. BTW, she only had a high school diploma and no other qualifications.

Feds do get perks and excitement too. Remember the meetings in vegas? Many are paid to attend conferences of their choosing usually in great locations and I know because I work for the Fed govt and have these travel perks. I have been to confeences in Hawaii, vegas, the Carribean and each location and meeting was my choice as long as it is career development.

OP is absolutely right. No wonder the budget is in the red and USA is borrowing money from China. Partly to pay pensions to relatively yiung "retirees" who use the govt contatcs in a second career with high salary. Better start learning Chinese.

OMG you met a federal worker who drives a luxury car? The NERVE of her! These bastard feds, sucking at the teat of the government, wasting precious hours of taxpayer-funded time on DCUM... Wait a second. You are one of them? Why don't you do all of us a favor and quit? Something about your post screams sock puppet troll.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:The lack of knowledge of the day-to-day work of a federal worker is pretty obvious, here. The fed-bashing of the jealous are, sadly, not surprising.

I work hard at my job and at all hours (often through lunch at in the evenings; over the holidays). The 9-5 gig is no longer present in any fed job I've had. I get no overtime. None.

I've put in my years (almost 15) when others couldn't be bothered with the salary I drew (now those big firm lawyers are trying to come to the fed side in droves - I know, I've interviewed them). So, yeah, when I receive my retirement (FERS, not the more generous CSRS) I'm going to take it gleefully. And, if I can use my contacts for something else, you best believe I will do it and without apology.

You can call me whatever you want. I made a smart choice. And am not apologizing for it.

PP, salaried employees outside the government don't typically get overtime either.