https://www.whitehouse.gov/briefings-sta...senate-32/


"Dear Mr. Speaker: (Dear Mr. President:)

I am transmitting an alternative plan for pay adjustments for civilian Federal employees covered by the General Schedule and certain other pay systems in January 2019.

Title 5, United States Code, authorizes me to implement alternative plans for pay adjustments for civilian Federal employees covered by the General Schedule and certain other pay systems if, because of “national emergency or serious economic conditions affecting the general welfare,” I view the increases that would otherwise take effect as inappropriate.

Under current law, locality pay increases averaging 25.70 percent, costing $25 billion, would go into effect in January 2019, in addition to a 2.1 percent across-the-board increase for the base General Schedule. We must maintain efforts to put our Nation on a fiscally sustainable course, and Federal agency budgets cannot sustain such increases. Accordingly, I have determined that it is appropriate to exercise my authority to set alternative across-the-board and locality pay adjustments for 2019 pursuant to 5 U.S.C. 5303(b) and 5304a.

Specifically, I have determined that for 2019, both across‑the‑board pay increases and locality pay increases will be set at zero. These alternative pay plan decisions will not materially affect our ability to attract and retain a well‑qualified Federal workforce."

(08-30-2018 01:28 PM)200yrs2late Wrote:  https://www.whitehouse.gov/briefings-sta...senate-32/


"Dear Mr. Speaker: (Dear Mr. President:)

I am transmitting an alternative plan for pay adjustments for civilian Federal employees covered by the General Schedule and certain other pay systems in January 2019.

Title 5, United States Code, authorizes me to implement alternative plans for pay adjustments for civilian Federal employees covered by the General Schedule and certain other pay systems if, because of “national emergency or serious economic conditions affecting the general welfare,” I view the increases that would otherwise take effect as inappropriate.

Under current law, locality pay increases averaging 25.70 percent, costing $25 billion, would go into effect in January 2019, in addition to a 2.1 percent across-the-board increase for the base General Schedule. We must maintain efforts to put our Nation on a fiscally sustainable course, and Federal agency budgets cannot sustain such increases. Accordingly, I have determined that it is appropriate to exercise my authority to set alternative across-the-board and locality pay adjustments for 2019 pursuant to 5 U.S.C. 5303(b) and 5304a.

Specifically, I have determined that for 2019, both across‑the‑board pay increases and locality pay increases will be set at zero. These alternative pay plan decisions will not materially affect our ability to attract and retain a well‑qualified Federal workforce."

So, he denied federal employees a 2.1% COLA pay increase and that's fiscal conservatism?

(08-30-2018 01:45 PM)Marc Mensa Wrote:  

(08-30-2018 01:28 PM)200yrs2late Wrote:  https://www.whitehouse.gov/briefings-sta...senate-32/


"Dear Mr. Speaker: (Dear Mr. President:)

I am transmitting an alternative plan for pay adjustments for civilian Federal employees covered by the General Schedule and certain other pay systems in January 2019.

Title 5, United States Code, authorizes me to implement alternative plans for pay adjustments for civilian Federal employees covered by the General Schedule and certain other pay systems if, because of “national emergency or serious economic conditions affecting the general welfare,” I view the increases that would otherwise take effect as inappropriate.

Under current law, locality pay increases averaging 25.70 percent, costing $25 billion, would go into effect in January 2019, in addition to a 2.1 percent across-the-board increase for the base General Schedule. We must maintain efforts to put our Nation on a fiscally sustainable course, and Federal agency budgets cannot sustain such increases. Accordingly, I have determined that it is appropriate to exercise my authority to set alternative across-the-board and locality pay adjustments for 2019 pursuant to 5 U.S.C. 5303(b) and 5304a.

Specifically, I have determined that for 2019, both across‑the‑board pay increases and locality pay increases will be set at zero. These alternative pay plan decisions will not materially affect our ability to attract and retain a well‑qualified Federal workforce."

So, he denied federal employees a 2.1% COLA pay increase and that's fiscal conservatism?

Well I don't get one and I work private sector. A raise is not a right or requirement for a job, it's a form of reward for a job well done.


Pfft. Mensa in name only.

(08-30-2018 01:45 PM)Marc Mensa Wrote:  So, he denied federal employees a 2.1% COLA pay increase and that's fiscal conservatism?

Good point. Better to cut them completely, but it's a start.

(08-30-2018 01:50 PM)Kronke Wrote:  

(08-30-2018 01:45 PM)Marc Mensa Wrote:  So, he denied federal employees a 2.1% COLA pay increase and that's fiscal conservatism?

Good point. Better to cut them completely, but it's a start.

why?

The Congressional Budget Office said the Trump tax cuts will add 1.4667 trillion dollars to the national debt over ten years.

Nothing fiscal or conservative to see there.

(08-30-2018 01:45 PM)Marc Mensa Wrote:  

(08-30-2018 01:28 PM)200yrs2late Wrote:  https://www.whitehouse.gov/briefings-sta...senate-32/


"Dear Mr. Speaker: (Dear Mr. President:)

I am transmitting an alternative plan for pay adjustments for civilian Federal employees covered by the General Schedule and certain other pay systems in January 2019.

Title 5, United States Code, authorizes me to implement alternative plans for pay adjustments for civilian Federal employees covered by the General Schedule and certain other pay systems if, because of “national emergency or serious economic conditions affecting the general welfare,” I view the increases that would otherwise take effect as inappropriate.

Under current law, locality pay increases averaging 25.70 percent, costing $25 billion, would go into effect in January 2019, in addition to a 2.1 percent across-the-board increase for the base General Schedule. We must maintain efforts to put our Nation on a fiscally sustainable course, and Federal agency budgets cannot sustain such increases. Accordingly, I have determined that it is appropriate to exercise my authority to set alternative across-the-board and locality pay adjustments for 2019 pursuant to 5 U.S.C. 5303(b) and 5304a.

Specifically, I have determined that for 2019, both across‑the‑board pay increases and locality pay increases will be set at zero. These alternative pay plan decisions will not materially affect our ability to attract and retain a well‑qualified Federal workforce."

So, he denied federal employees a 2.1% COLA pay increase and that's fiscal conservatism?

Eliminating an automatic increase qualifies as fiscally conservative to me.

(08-30-2018 01:55 PM)Redwingtom Wrote:  The Congressional Budget Office said the Trump tax cuts will add 1.4667 trillion dollars to the national debt over ten years.

Nothing fiscal or conservative to see there.

That's not what is being discussed here.

(08-30-2018 02:02 PM)200yrs2late Wrote:  

(08-30-2018 01:55 PM)Redwingtom Wrote:  The Congressional Budget Office said the Trump tax cuts will add 1.4667 trillion dollars to the national debt over ten years.

Nothing fiscal or conservative to see there.

That's not what is being discussed here.

Derail, deflect the thread. Bail! Bail!

(08-30-2018 01:51 PM)Marc Mensa Wrote:  

(08-30-2018 01:50 PM)Kronke Wrote:  

(08-30-2018 01:45 PM)Marc Mensa Wrote:  So, he denied federal employees a 2.1% COLA pay increase and that's fiscal conservatism?

Good point. Better to cut them completely, but it's a start.

why?

Because we dont need most of them and--of the ones we do need---too many suck at their job.

(08-30-2018 01:51 PM)Marc Mensa Wrote:  

(08-30-2018 01:50 PM)Kronke Wrote:  

(08-30-2018 01:45 PM)Marc Mensa Wrote:  So, he denied federal employees a 2.1% COLA pay increase and that's fiscal conservatism?

Good point. Better to cut them completely, but it's a start.

why?

The GS increase isn't technically a COLA. Why shouldn't compensation be more performance based? That's how it works in the private sector and we all know which is more efficient.

Before you try to pounce on anything I've said, my wife is a GS10 and just received a 3% performance based raise. She constantly complains about lazy workers that she has to pick up the slack for.

(08-30-2018 01:51 PM)Marc Mensa Wrote:  

(08-30-2018 01:50 PM)Kronke Wrote:  

(08-30-2018 01:45 PM)Marc Mensa Wrote:  So, he denied federal employees a 2.1% COLA pay increase and that's fiscal conservatism?

Good point. Better to cut them completely, but it's a start.

why?

Fed employees on the whole do not provide value for money. If they are honest with themselves, they don't even have a gripe, because they should be fortunate to even have a job that likely entails them digging a hole, then filling it back in.

Call a federal program, and ask them a simple question. Then call back, and ask it again. You will call 3 times and get 3 different answers.

This will make working with DCAA and DCMA even more enjoyable

(08-30-2018 02:02 PM)200yrs2late Wrote:  

(08-30-2018 01:55 PM)Redwingtom Wrote:  The Congressional Budget Office said the Trump tax cuts will add 1.4667 trillion dollars to the national debt over ten years.

Nothing fiscal or conservative to see there.

That's not what is being discussed here.

sure it is... fiscal conservatism is managing both the revenues and the expenditures, and DJT has done little of both. Oh, he scores a few cheap points with his base by withholding a paltry 2% COLA for federal employees but then increases the deficit by 20% with his handouts to the wealthy and corporations.

(08-30-2018 03:16 PM)Marc Mensa Wrote:  

(08-30-2018 02:02 PM)200yrs2late Wrote:  

(08-30-2018 01:55 PM)Redwingtom Wrote:  The Congressional Budget Office said the Trump tax cuts will add 1.4667 trillion dollars to the national debt over ten years.

Nothing fiscal or conservative to see there.

That's not what is being discussed here.

sure it is... fiscal conservatism is managing both the revenues and the expenditures, and DJT has done little of both. Oh, he scores a few cheap points with his base by withholding a paltry 2% COLA for federal employees but then increases the deficit by 20% with his handouts to the wealthy and corporations.

No it isn't Tom and other libs are famous for calling out "whataboutisms".

Tax cuts jump started the economy, put more money in people's paychecks and has consumer confidence at 18 year highs and the DOW setting new records. Now it appears Trump is beginning to look at spending, hence the thread title "goes fiscal conservative".

You don't get to decide what a thread I created is about. OP link strictly discusses the pay increases.

Maybe they'll all quit.

No such luck as they are still on the greatest gravy train ever!

(08-30-2018 01:28 PM)200yrs2late Wrote:  https://www.whitehouse.gov/briefings-sta...senate-32/


"Dear Mr. Speaker: (Dear Mr. President:)

I am transmitting an alternative plan for pay adjustments for civilian Federal employees covered by the General Schedule and certain other pay systems in January 2019.

Title 5, United States Code, authorizes me to implement alternative plans for pay adjustments for civilian Federal employees covered by the General Schedule and certain other pay systems if, because of “national emergency or serious economic conditions affecting the general welfare,” I view the increases that would otherwise take effect as inappropriate.

Under current law, locality pay increases averaging 25.70 percent, costing $25 billion, would go into effect in January 2019, in addition to a 2.1 percent across-the-board increase for the base General Schedule. We must maintain efforts to put our Nation on a fiscally sustainable course, and Federal agency budgets cannot sustain such increases. Accordingly, I have determined that it is appropriate to exercise my authority to set alternative across-the-board and locality pay adjustments for 2019 pursuant to 5 U.S.C. 5303(b) and 5304a.

Specifically, I have determined that for 2019, both across‑the‑board pay increases and locality pay increases will be set at zero. These alternative pay plan decisions will not materially affect our ability to attract and retain a well‑qualified Federal workforce."

Gotta pay for the tax cuts and bailouts needed because of the Tariffs.

Thanks for posting this. I checked USA jobs and there is an IT specialists position open at the local VA that I am more than qualified for and would be a substantial pay increase

(08-30-2018 02:09 PM)200yrs2late Wrote:  

(08-30-2018 01:51 PM)Marc Mensa Wrote:  

(08-30-2018 01:50 PM)Kronke Wrote:  

(08-30-2018 01:45 PM)Marc Mensa Wrote:  So, he denied federal employees a 2.1% COLA pay increase and that's fiscal conservatism?

Good point. Better to cut them completely, but it's a start.

why?

The GS increase isn't technically a COLA. Why shouldn't compensation be more performance based? That's how it works in the private sector and we all know which is more efficient.

Before you try to pounce on anything I've said, my wife is a GS10 and just received a 3% performance based raise. She constantly complains about lazy workers that she has to pick up the slack for.

2% doesn't cover inflation. I can't remember a time I didn't get a minimum of a 2% bump in the private sector.

Where is the Trump proposal for a performance based merit increase? Are these employees being asked to indefinitely forgo an COLA while DJT devises a merit based system?

Lazy is a rather subjective term, yet there isn't a place I've worked where some workers don't throw others under the bus to make themselves look better.

(08-30-2018 03:58 PM)Marc Mensa Wrote:  

(08-30-2018 02:09 PM)200yrs2late Wrote:  

(08-30-2018 01:51 PM)Marc Mensa Wrote:  

(08-30-2018 01:50 PM)Kronke Wrote:  

(08-30-2018 01:45 PM)Marc Mensa Wrote:  So, he denied federal employees a 2.1% COLA pay increase and that's fiscal conservatism?

Good point. Better to cut them completely, but it's a start.

why?

The GS increase isn't technically a COLA. Why shouldn't compensation be more performance based? That's how it works in the private sector and we all know which is more efficient.

Before you try to pounce on anything I've said, my wife is a GS10 and just received a 3% performance based raise. She constantly complains about lazy workers that she has to pick up the slack for.

2% doesn't cover inflation. I can't remember a time I didn't get a minimum of a 2% bump in the private sector.

So what? Corrections are painful, especially after drinking from a never-ending flow of increases. I haven't gotten a raise in three years, but in that same time my bonuses have increased to close to 20% of my base. It' much more cost effective to reward deserving employees than to just give everybody an increase in base pay.

(08-30-2018 03:58 PM)Marc Mensa Wrote:  Where is the Trump proposal for a performance based merit increase? Are these employees being asked to indefinitely forgo an COLA while DJT devises a merit based system?

stop exaggerating. This is an annual thing.

(08-30-2018 03:58 PM)Marc Mensa Wrote:  Lazy is a rather subjective term, yet there isn't a place I've worked where some workers don't throw others under the bus to make themselves look better.

I grew up near a military town and still live close by. The base employs the majority of two nearby towns and there are currently over 1600 openings on base right now. It's the ultimate in job security because it is so hard to get fired. My wife has a full caseload (20+ families) while some of her coworkers complain when they are handed more than a half-dozen.

She will be just fine without a 2% increase next year.