Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I don’t care about a a raise of a couple thousand dollars.
I’m in it for the benefits.

Which suck.

Educate yourself. The benefits are outstanding. Among them: If you make it to retirement, you can carry the health insurance for you and your partner for the rest of your lives. Best insurance coverage available. Full stop.

In guessing you aren't in STEMland?

Our competition does 7%, 401k matches, can mega backdoor, similar insurance, sabbaticals, money to travel to conferences etc.

You mean Logan’s Run? Where they lay you off if you’re too old, in favor of someone who costs less to employ? No thanks.

Anyone know how this works for ses with a performance increase?

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:So what will the raise be for GS employees in DC?

I get it’s 2.2% across the board. But any estimates on what the locality % will be for DC?

Based off prior years when it was a .5% average, I would guess a total of 3.1%.

I'm paycapped, so 2.2% it is for me.

Comes out to 3.02% for DC area.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I don’t care about a a raise of a couple thousand dollars.
I’m in it for the benefits.

Which suck.

Educate yourself. The benefits are outstanding. Among them: If you make it to retirement, you can carry the health insurance for you and your partner for the rest of your lives. Best insurance coverage available. Full stop.

In guessing you aren't in STEMland?

Our competition does 7%, 401k matches, can mega backdoor, similar insurance, sabbaticals, money to travel to conferences etc.

But mostly only for those under 30, versus Fed employees which are mostly nearing 40 or older

looking at the executive pay tables, they could collapse the tiers from 5 to 3. There has already been some talk at OPM of doing this. If so, that could slightly lighten pay compression. SES Tier 3 is $187,300.

and my former private sector job also paid for my month gym memberships. but I love the separation of annual and sick leave in the federal government.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I don’t care about a a raise of a couple thousand dollars.
I’m in it for the benefits.

Which suck.

Educate yourself. The benefits are outstanding. Among them: If you make it to retirement, you can carry the health insurance for you and your partner for the rest of your lives. Best insurance coverage available. Full stop.

In guessing you aren't in STEMland?

Our competition does 7%, 401k matches, can mega backdoor, similar insurance, sabbaticals, money to travel to conferences etc.

+1. I switched from private sector where I got 10% 401k match and far better health insurance options (such as health insurance that can actually cover IVF). Federal govt wins on number of vacation days, and if you stick it out 20+ years for the pension.

EO signed and 2022 tables posted - https://www.opm.gov/policy-data-oversight/pay-leave/salaries-wages/2022/general-schedule/

Anonymous wrote:So what will the raise be for GS employees in DC?

I get it’s 2.2% across the board. But any estimates on what the locality % will be for DC?

Based off prior years when it was a .5% average, I would guess a total of 3.1%.

I'm paycapped, so 2.2% it is for me.

So what will the raise be for GS employees in DC?

I get it’s 2.2% across the board. But any estimates on what the locality % will be for DC?

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I don’t care about a a raise of a couple thousand dollars.
I’m in it for the benefits.

Which suck.

Educate yourself. The benefits are outstanding. Among them: If you make it to retirement, you can carry the health insurance for you and your partner for the rest of your lives. Best insurance coverage available. Full stop.

In guessing you aren't in STEMland?

Our competition does 7%, 401k matches, can mega backdoor, similar insurance, sabbaticals, money to travel to conferences etc.

As a Federal employee myself, I hear and feel you frustration. The thing to keep in mind here is that the annual raise is not connect to, nor supposed to be connected inflation, at least not directly. The annual raise is about keeping the federal government a competitive employer. So the annual raise is supposed to mirror the growth in wages across industry. No employer, including the American people, want to pay more for talent that the competitor does...

However, given that the President usually announces intent for the raise early in the year, the raise is usually a reflection of the increase in wages from the prior year. So while wages in 2021 are expected to rise around 3.5%, the 2.7% should be a reflection of what wages did in 2020. So maybe next year's raise will be in line with 2021 wage growth...

Not trying to justify the raise, just explain the logic. It about competition for talent, not our buying power.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:some straight talk: this is a weak raise from a president who professed to love him some government employees.

+1. We need a 6% raise just for inflation. 2.7 is ridiculous.

I agree with both of you! Given the growing anti-government, anti-Washington and anti-public service sentiment in this country, I don't see any administration or congress giving more than 3% in a given year. People feel like federal workers are already overpaid. While maybe certain positions/occupations are, I disagree with folks that think this. but that is how this country feels. Given all this, I feel like a consistent 2-3% increase every year will be our best outcome. Of course that is not enough to keep up with inflation. but it won't set us back like in the three years we got zero followed by four years of 1%.

We got 0-1% ish for about 7 years, and now, with "7%" inflation, without taking into account inflation in housing and energy, getting 2% is worse than almost no inflation with 1% increase. It's worse!

I get your point and don't disagree. but I like to think 2.7% is better than another year of 0--even with high inflation. Trust me, I know how hard we work for this country and I know we deserve a 5+% raise, but that is just NEVER going to happen. it would be political suicide in these times.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:some straight talk: this is a weak raise from a president who professed to love him some government employees.

+1. We need a 6% raise just for inflation. 2.7 is ridiculous.

I agree with both of you! Given the growing anti-government, anti-Washington and anti-public service sentiment in this country, I don't see any administration or congress giving more than 3% in a given year. People feel like federal workers are already overpaid. While maybe certain positions/occupations are, I disagree with folks that think this. but that is how this country feels. Given all this, I feel like a consistent 2-3% increase every year will be our best outcome. Of course that is not enough to keep up with inflation. but it won't set us back like in the three years we got zero followed by four years of 1%.

We got 0-1% ish for about 7 years, and now, with "7%" inflation, without taking into account inflation in housing and energy, getting 2% is worse than almost no inflation with 1% increase. It's worse!

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Where is that executive order? It's December 20th already!

Usually comes at the very last minute. Won’t be any raise fue capped 15s, perhaps. Maybe one percent.

I don't understand. I know the SES Tier 4 cap has to raise for the 15 cap to raise. won't it raise by 2.2%? The pay raise is 2.7% (2.2 is across the board adjustment, and 0.5% is locality). SES don't get the locality, but do get the across the board. This is normally how it works, but maybe that is just by happenstance. But that's how it's always been explained to me. so, the cap should raise by $4k to $176,300.

BTW, I'm not one of these maxed out 15s. I'm a 13/8, but I'm curious.