GovernmentExecutive.com

President Bush moved Wednesday to limit the locality-based increase for white-collar federal civilian employees to 0.5 percent next year, bringing the total overall increase to an average of 3 percent.

Under federal law, the president has until the end of November to propose an alternative to pay levels set under procedures laid out in the 1990 Federal Employees Pay Comparability Act. Under that law, employees would be due a 2.5 percent base pay raise in 2008, plus locality pay increases averaging 12.5 percent. It was designed to close the gap between federal and private sector salaries, but raises under the law have never been fully funded.

"Full statutory civilian pay increases would cost $16.4 billion in 2008 alone," the president wrote in issuing his plan. "Such cost increases would force deep cuts in discretionary spending or federal employment to stay within budget. Either outcome would unacceptably interfere with our nation's ability to secure the homeland and pursue the war on terrorism."

With the 2.5 percent increase set, the final locality number will depend on whether lawmakers allocate a 3.5 percent or a 3 percent total pay increase for civilians next year. Many appropriations bills are still waiting for a vote, largely because Congress and the president cannot agree on spending priorities for federal agencies.

The president has said he opposes a 3.5 percent pay raise for military and federal civilian employees, though he recently signed a Defense appropriations bill setting a 3.5 percent raise for military members. Approval of the military increase could indicate that he would not oppose an equal raise for civilian employees should Congress pass the 3.5 percent figure.

National Treasury Employees Union President Colleen Kelley on Wednesday called the president's proposal a "disservice" to federal employees and expressed optimism that Congress would approve the 3.5 percent hike.

"When you consider all of the important contributions that civilian employees make each day to the federal workplace, a 3 percent salary increase is simply inadequate," Kelley said. "Pay is a critical factor in the government's ability to recruit and retain skilled and talented employees."

COMMENTS

• Didn't our president give himself a 100% raise at the beginning of his administration? Yes a "Full Statutory Raise" would cost $16.4 billion, but that 12.5% locality increase is a long shot from what we are getting. I wouldn't be offended if our president really was a fiscal conservative. He Pennywise and pound foolish, and I can't help feeling that he picks on those who can't really do much to him, like a schoolyard bully. thafatrat Posted December 11, 2007 3:54 PM
• All this talk about pay raises makes me positively ill. Are you all forgetting that we poor fools in the NSPS system will only be getting half of our cost of living increase? There are no incentives for doing a good job - under NSPS, if you are lucky, you will get the rest of the 2008 pay raise which is something that is due to us poor slobs anyway. I can't believe the government would hold our money hostage like this. So when you see a coworker get a 5 and you get a 3, the government puts their hand in your pocket and gives it to them. How is this fair??? NSPS is a Joke Posted December 11, 2007 1:23 PM
• Dear Mr. President, Unlike "itsjustme" I work for DHS/ICE and am struggling to cover four to five full time positions. I come in a half hour early (and you don't pay me for that), I work through my lunch (and you don't pay me for that either), and often stay about a half hour late (or more- and I don't get paid for that either). I'm not really qualified for three of the positions I hold down, because there's no money for training, and most of the equipment I work with is seven to ten years old. It takes somewhere between seven months and two years to hire someone, when we're allowed to hire. Everyone knows about the problem, and their answer is that things will get worse before they get better. It's like telling someone with no feet to be glad that they don't have to tie their shoes. Meanwhile we don't get any relief from deadlines, unfunded mandates, and requirements imposed on us. We also don't get much in the way of contract support because they left to work for someplace that will pay them better. You say that giving me a 3.5% raise will break the bank, but given the number of vacancies, we're not being allowed to fill I find that hard to believe. Army of one Posted December 8, 2007 6:41 PM