I have Firestones on my car, they should be good for a few more years.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:In my agency, folks tend to work a long time, so retirement chit chat is more about crowd-sourcing TSP strategies or possibly trying to see if someone has a successful spouse that obviates the need to maximize pension.

The reality is that even for those folks that have 30 years in at 55, 1) they still have to work until 57 for an immediate retirement 2) there are pretty significant pension penalties for retiring before 62 regardless of how many years one has in 3) if someone is at MRA but has less than 30 years in, those penalties (5% for every year one is under 62) are REALLY significant.

There are a bunch of really optimistic folks in say r/govfire, but many of them are not looking to live a DC metro-area lifestyle. ONE of my coworkers will hit 30 years before MRA, but most of my team started around 40 and have about 10 years in (several converted from contractor positions). There are only a handful of position types where folks could retire at 50-55 with a penalty-free pension, and those are mostly law enforcement.

keep plugging away, contribute the max to your TSP, and when folks ask about your retirement plans just smile and tell them you love your job.

The reality of my personal situation is that I'll need to work until at least 62, but probably 65, and that seems par for the course for most of the people I work with. A lot of actual non-feds tend to have a really optimistic idea of what the current pension plan looks like and the rules around them, and hear the stories of say, FBI agents that can retire at 50 and then make big consulting dollars while collecting a pension, but that does not describe the bulk of federal employees.

Wait, if at MRA (57) and you have 30 years, aren't you good? No penalty

The multiplier goes up to 1.1 at age 62. So if your MRA is 57 with 30 years and you retire then you get your average high 3 salary x 30%. If you wait until you're 62 you get your larger average high 3 salary x 35% x1.1, which goes up to 38.5%. If you can hold out until age 62 that can be a big difference in pension income.

Anonymous wrote:In my agency, folks tend to work a long time, so retirement chit chat is more about crowd-sourcing TSP strategies or possibly trying to see if someone has a successful spouse that obviates the need to maximize pension.

The reality is that even for those folks that have 30 years in at 55, 1) they still have to work until 57 for an immediate retirement 2) there are pretty significant pension penalties for retiring before 62 regardless of how many years one has in 3) if someone is at MRA but has less than 30 years in, those penalties (5% for every year one is under 62) are REALLY significant.

There are a bunch of really optimistic folks in say r/govfire, but many of them are not looking to live a DC metro-area lifestyle. ONE of my coworkers will hit 30 years before MRA, but most of my team started around 40 and have about 10 years in (several converted from contractor positions). There are only a handful of position types where folks could retire at 50-55 with a penalty-free pension, and those are mostly law enforcement.

keep plugging away, contribute the max to your TSP, and when folks ask about your retirement plans just smile and tell them you love your job.

The reality of my personal situation is that I'll need to work until at least 62, but probably 65, and that seems par for the course for most of the people I work with. A lot of actual non-feds tend to have a really optimistic idea of what the current pension plan looks like and the rules around them, and hear the stories of say, FBI agents that can retire at 50 and then make big consulting dollars while collecting a pension, but that does not describe the bulk of federal employees.

Wait, if at MRA (57) and you have 30 years, aren't you good? No penalty

They sound really rude.

In the future say, “I will let you know, but no time soon. How about you? “

They may really just want to talk about their plans. Many people are counting the days.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Federal employment lawyer here. Your coworkers should not be asking you that. Of course, if it's a collegial conversation and it's coming up naturally, that's one thing. But if they are asking a lot, that's age discrimination. And your division head needs to put the kibosh on that -- not by naming you, but by letting the entire division know that retirement plans are personal.

Just say “it’s illegal for you to ask me that”.

Works for pretty much any question you don’t like.

Love it!

Anonymous wrote:Moved to the DC area due to a career change after being laid off in midlife--starting over and plan on working until I qualify for social security (or longer) because of financial reasons. Now that I am working for the feds, coworkers and neighbors and people I meet in the DC area constantly ask me when I am planning to retire!

I tell them the truth--not anytime soon because it will be about 15 years or so before I reach retirement age and have 20 years in. They look at me blankly and ask me the same question the next time they see me. I understand that lots of people here have been feds most of their working lives and that many might be able to afford to retire at 55. It's frustrating to me because I don't necessarily want to work for years, but it is what it is.

It seems like yet another reminder I don't really fit in here, and also makes me so sad at times. Is there anything I can say or do to convince others not to bring this subject up again, once I've covered it once with them?

If a woman asks, ask her when is she expecting. Awkward silence for both of you. I'm sorry people are idiots, OP.

I retired a few years ago at 61 and no one ever asked me when I planned to retire. In fact they were surprised that I wanted to retire I’m sure due to the fact I was making a lot of money. But I had plenty of money and you can’t buy extra time.

Do you look much older? That's a super weird question for someone in their 40s

I would never dream of asking a coworker when they plan to retire. Maybe a close friend if the topic came up? It seems so rude to me. And legally fraught.

Get a make over

Now, if your agency has an on-going VERA, then your colleagues are actually trying to suss out who is at least 50 and has 20 years service in, that will jump at an early retirement.

In my agency, folks tend to work a long time, so retirement chit chat is more about crowd-sourcing TSP strategies or possibly trying to see if someone has a successful spouse that obviates the need to maximize pension.

The reality is that even for those folks that have 30 years in at 55, 1) they still have to work until 57 for an immediate retirement 2) there are pretty significant pension penalties for retiring before 62 regardless of how many years one has in 3) if someone is at MRA but has less than 30 years in, those penalties (5% for every year one is under 62) are REALLY significant.

There are a bunch of really optimistic folks in say r/govfire, but many of them are not looking to live a DC metro-area lifestyle. ONE of my coworkers will hit 30 years before MRA, but most of my team started around 40 and have about 10 years in (several converted from contractor positions). There are only a handful of position types where folks could retire at 50-55 with a penalty-free pension, and those are mostly law enforcement.

keep plugging away, contribute the max to your TSP, and when folks ask about your retirement plans just smile and tell them you love your job.

The reality of my personal situation is that I'll need to work until at least 62, but probably 65, and that seems par for the course for most of the people I work with. A lot of actual non-feds tend to have a really optimistic idea of what the current pension plan looks like and the rules around them, and hear the stories of say, FBI agents that can retire at 50 and then make big consulting dollars while collecting a pension, but that does not describe the bulk of federal employees.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I would live to know how they will retire at 55 and possibly live 30-35 more years on a pension? They'll have to worry about every penny.

Yeah I don't get this. I understand people in their mid 50s and older are retiring mid 50s but most people I know under 50 are planning on working much longer. I prioritize work life balance because I feel like I will be working into my 70s. People I know in my parents' generation worked and worked with no balance and saved it all for retirement. I'd rather work years longer with more balance now. I also don't have a lit of working woes - telecommuting options and flex schedules help me significantly cut down on my hours commuting and help me manage my schedule. Plus I like my work.

boomers have a lot of money, housing and benefits setup on the backs of the youth

Stop with the generational warfare. Paying off their mortgage and paying in to SS and Medicare for decades was not in the backs of the youth. Come back in 30 years when you’ve done the same.

Anonymous wrote:Federal employment lawyer here. Your coworkers should not be asking you that. Of course, if it's a collegial conversation and it's coming up naturally, that's one thing. But if they are asking a lot, that's age discrimination. And your division head needs to put the kibosh on that -- not by naming you, but by letting the entire division know that retirement plans are personal.

Just say “it’s illegal for you to ask me that”.

Works for pretty much any question you don’t like.

Anonymous wrote:Federal employment lawyer here. Your coworkers should not be asking you that. Of course, if it's a collegial conversation and it's coming up naturally, that's one thing. But if they are asking a lot, that's age discrimination. And your division head needs to put the kibosh on that -- not by naming you, but by letting the entire division know that retirement plans are personal.

lighten up bro