Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:New poster. I’ll hit 30 years at age 57. If I retire then, what am I giving up? What incentive do I have to wait until age 62?

FYI that I’m 50 now.

- 5 years of earning
- 5 years of pension
- 5 years of COLA adjustment
- 10% bump

but you gain SS supplement until you turn 62.

came back to add one more "gain". i forgot the most important one - you gain 5 "best" years of your remaining life.

I’m sure the people leaving at 50 are doctors and lawyers — anyone else can’t leave because of ageism.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Does it really make sense to stay past 62 in order to get the extra .1 percent? I've never understood this with our retirement system as a Fed. People with 20+yrs of service who are younger than 62 seem to be leaving my office in droves. I will hit 20 years in about 4 more years but I'll only be 50 by then. I'm maxed out at the GS level, so basically I need to work another 12 years for another .1%? Sigh. Seems kind of worthless if you ask me, but I have no other plans beyond that so guess I'll just stick it out. Can't complain that I get a pension, but the 1 vs 1.1% doesn't seem like much of an incentive.

They’re just leaving, not necessarily retiring. They’re probably deferring. If they’ve been gs-15s for more than a few years, they have maxed out. I’m not sure what they get for staying any longer except depressed wages. I’m at 16 years and thinking about leaving (am not at the highest 15 yet though so it has to be for GOOD money). Private sector pay in my field is so much higher. I don’t think the losses for me are going to be significant.

My DH was a federal employee for 22 years, and left for the private sector at age 50 (in 2020). I was surprised that he was interested in exploring other options, as he seemed content where he was (maxing out as a GS-15 lawyer at an agency.)

He recently commented that he's so glad that he left federal employment because he likes being his own boss. (He makes about 2x his federal salary, but with fewer benefits.) It felt more stable having him as a federal employee, but so far he's been building his book of business more each year, and I also have a stable job in corporate America (which provides nice benefits).

Anonymous wrote:Does it really make sense to stay past 62 in order to get the extra .1 percent? I've never understood this with our retirement system as a Fed. People with 20+yrs of service who are younger than 62 seem to be leaving my office in droves. I will hit 20 years in about 4 more years but I'll only be 50 by then. I'm maxed out at the GS level, so basically I need to work another 12 years for another .1%? Sigh. Seems kind of worthless if you ask me, but I have no other plans beyond that so guess I'll just stick it out. Can't complain that I get a pension, but the 1 vs 1.1% doesn't seem like much of an incentive.

They’re just leaving, not necessarily retiring. They’re probably deferring. If they’ve been gs-15s for more than a few years, they have maxed out. I’m not sure what they get for staying any longer except depressed wages. I’m at 16 years and thinking about leaving (am not at the highest 15 yet though so it has to be for GOOD money). Private sector pay in my field is so much higher. I don’t think the losses for me are going to be significant.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:my pension at 62 is 16% greater than my pension at 60. Extra two years seem worth it.

Why is it 16% greater?

Bump. I don’t understand the 16% either.

2 more years of service, 10% bump. high x service time at 60 x 1.0 vs high x (service time at 62) x 1.1 comes out 16% difference for me.

estimated pension at 60 w/ survivor benefits, w/o SL added in is $59,460 (at 60), and $69036 at 62. So, with SL, it will be slightly higher.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:my pension at 62 is 16% greater than my pension at 60. Extra two years seem worth it.

Why is it 16% greater?

Bump. I don’t understand the 16% either.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:12 years of raises add up

If you assume we'll get raises. Not always guaranteed.

This. I’m the same as OP but in my mid-50s now and wondering whether to stay those extra years (not as many for me now). The best we can hope for is that the pay scale continues to get nudged up by something close to inflation so that we don’t lose real value. At our level (and true for lots of older feds in the DMV) we don’t get annual raises anymore. So part of the retirement equation is whether you could leave and get a job that pays better and improves in real value over the last 5-10 working years.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:New poster. I’ll hit 30 years at age 57. If I retire then, what am I giving up? What incentive do I have to wait until age 62?

FYI that I’m 50 now.

- 5 years of earning
- 5 years of pension
- 5 years of COLA adjustment
- 10% bump

but you gain SS supplement until you turn 62.

I will also hit 30 years at age 57, so if I retired at 57 I would get 30% of my average high 3. If I wait until I’m 61 I would get 34% and waiting one more year to 62 would get me 38.5%. Both of my grandmothers lived into their 90s, my mother is healthy in her 80s and I’m in good health in my 50s so I want to maximize my pension given my life expectancy.

Anonymous wrote:my pension at 62 is 16% greater than my pension at 60. Extra two years seem worth it.

Why is it 16% greater?

Anonymous wrote:12 years of raises add up

Not as much as it would if you switched employers repeatedly.