Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:In my part of the civil service, which is filled with STEM grad degrees, really the biggest issue is the GS-15 pay cap.

There really ought to be an entirely different pay system for STEM.

Because you are so special? You know the same holds true for several other disciplines right? Legal and finance immediately come to mind.

There are financial agencies that pay differently than GS scale so why that can't be true for STEM graduates.

As long as we keep applying band-aids instead of redoing the system, the same problems will continue.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:In my part of the civil service, which is filled with STEM grad degrees, really the biggest issue is the GS-15 pay cap.

There really ought to be an entirely different pay system for STEM.

The agency I work with could no longer hire qualified STEM people at GS rates, so they started contracting out so the contractors could pay market salaries. But then someone in congress got the bright idea to limit the amount that contractors can get reimbursed for salaries unless they get a waiver. So now the contractors waste time to write up some justifications for why they are paying market salaries for qualified STEM folks and federal employees waste time to approve them.

which agency is that? How high you are going? We can easily pay contractors $350K or so.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:In my part of the civil service, which is filled with STEM grad degrees, really the biggest issue is the GS-15 pay cap.

There really ought to be an entirely different pay system for STEM.

Because you are so special? You know the same holds true for several other disciplines right? Legal and finance immediately come to mind.

There are financial agencies that pay differently than GS scale so why that can't be true for STEM graduates.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:They need to raise the top of the GS scale. Its ridiculous to get topped out at 15-4…

or would it be easier to add some form of premium pay if you are a supervisor at the GS-14 and 15 levels? Like a supervisory 14 gets 7 percent additional pay annually. and a 15 gets 12 percent annually? I feel like that would be easier to accomplish than a 20-25 percent cap raise.

but if they were to do something like premium pay for supervisory roles, then they need to figure something out for SES because then you'll have 14s and 15s making the same or more.

The real issue is that in order to be competitive with the market for talent, increasing all of the top end (GS, SES) will push up against the ES and Congress etc. and they won’t vote for that. And they won’t vote to increase their salaries.

Anonymous wrote:In my part of the civil service, which is filled with STEM grad degrees, really the biggest issue is the GS-15 pay cap.

There really ought to be an entirely different pay system for STEM.

The agency I work with could no longer hire qualified STEM people at GS rates, so they started contracting out so the contractors could pay market salaries. But then someone in congress got the bright idea to limit the amount that contractors can get reimbursed for salaries unless they get a waiver. So now the contractors waste time to write up some justifications for why they are paying market salaries for qualified STEM folks and federal employees waste time to approve them.

For all the reasons mentioned above is why I have stayed at the 14-10 for 3 years. Not worth it to be a supervisor with all those extra responsibilities for almost the same pay.

Anonymous wrote:The have to raise the minimum SES. Pay compression is horrible in DC and other high COL areas. I’m looking at a decade with no raises or significant bonuses in sight as a supervisor before I can retire. No thanks.

Not only this. But they need to give SESers real bonuses. The law says 5 percent to 20 percent. The reality is most give 5-10 percent tops. I process these bonuses at my agency and I always think “no way in hell I would work 70 hours a week and have all that pressure for a $10k bonus. It’s just not worth it.” The highest bonus we paid out was $13k. I know a lot of people on DCUM crap on SESers. But I know quite a few good ones. I work for one now. She protected us from crazy politicals etc. and she isn’t a task master. She isn’t a visionary, but she genuinely appreciates her subordinates and is reasonable. And because of that my team works extra hard to make sure she doesn’t look bad. But the amount of work she does is insane for $197k salary and $10k bonus.

The have to raise the minimum SES. Pay compression is horrible in DC and other high COL areas. I’m looking at a decade with no raises or significant bonuses in sight as a supervisor before I can retire. No thanks.

Anonymous wrote:They need to raise the top of the GS scale. Its ridiculous to get topped out at 15-4…

or would it be easier to add some form of premium pay if you are a supervisor at the GS-14 and 15 levels? Like a supervisory 14 gets 7 percent additional pay annually. and a 15 gets 12 percent annually? I feel like that would be easier to accomplish than a 20-25 percent cap raise.

but if they were to do something like premium pay for supervisory roles, then they need to figure something out for SES because then you'll have 14s and 15s making the same or more.

They need to raise the top of the GS scale. Its ridiculous to get topped out at 15-4…

Congress isn’t going to give government employees more than $200k for the same reason they can’t raise their own $174k salaries.

(Setting aside the few agencies off the GS scale)

Anonymous wrote:In my part of the civil service, which is filled with STEM grad degrees, really the biggest issue is the GS-15 pay cap.

There really ought to be an entirely different pay system for STEM.

Yes!

Anonymous wrote:DH left federal government 6 years ago to start a small business consulting. For these last 6 years he makes 2-3 times what he made in federal government on a consistent basis. I am a capped out GS-15 and have very marketable skill sets. I work more hours than him, travel for work more, and have to go into the office (he works from home). If it wasn’t for the health insurance and pension, I would have long left given the pay cap.

Depending on the amount you can earn elsewhere, the pension may not be such a great deal.

DH left federal government 6 years ago to start a small business consulting. For these last 6 years he makes 2-3 times what he made in federal government on a consistent basis. I am a capped out GS-15 and have very marketable skill sets. I work more hours than him, travel for work more, and have to go into the office (he works from home). If it wasn’t for the health insurance and pension, I would have long left given the pay cap.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:In my part of the civil service, which is filled with STEM grad degrees, really the biggest issue is the GS-15 pay cap.

There really ought to be an entirely different pay system for STEM.

Because you are so special? You know the same holds true for several other disciplines right? Legal and finance immediately come to mind.

Many Federal finance jobs already are in the excepted civil service and pay much better. Some legal jobs also are, but those mainly are at financial parts of the government.

excepted service does not necessarily mean better pay. Many attorneys are excepted service but receive GS pay.

I think all of you are arguing the same point: the GS pay scale cap is problematic for a highly educated workforce. The best estimate is that a 20-25% rise would fix this problem.

https://www.cbo.gov/publication/60235

URL is helpful, thanks.

I at least would phrase it differently. Try this:

The current GS structure breaks down for certain specific jobs where the pay offered by the civil service GS system is a LOT (i.e., not merely a little) lower than the market rate. (Stability of Federal employment usually can make up for smaller salary gaps.).

Further, ongoing difficulty with recruiting and retention ought to be the benchmarks for whether that is the case for a particular job category.

I would expect different job categories to move in and out of those difficulties over time.

PP. Yes, more granularity would be a more targeted tool. The CBO and others do these assessments often enough that the data exist and the approach could be implemented if the President followed the Pay Agent’s recommendation as per FEPCA, which never happens. Another good reference is their report of this year.

https://www.opm.gov/media/ilpnao1r/pay-agent-report-for-2025.pdf