Cut Civil Service Pay, not Freeze It

A Friend’s Question: Bob, I’ve been hearing that there is a talk about freezing military pay next fiscal year? Is this true?

My Comment: That sounds like something Obama would do as he hates the military. In the past, he froze military pay, yet he raised the average pay of non-productive civil service personnel to twice the pay of the average comparable industry worker. That’s in line with his “spread the wealth” policy. He actively works to destroy the military, the Central Intelligence Agency (CIA), and industry job creators (small businesses) among others.

A Friend’s Comment: Bob, civil service pay would be frozen the same as military pay would be in the legislation that was proposed. Also, the survey of civil service pay was flawed as it did not compare apples to apples. Nearly all civil service administrative staff was contracted out, so were not included in the civil service pay average. An example was in my career field where procurement technicians and contract technicians were eliminated and those duties transferred to higher-paid contract specialists.

Also, when I shifted to the private sector doing the same work with Lockheed Martin, the pay was higher for the same duties as I have in the civil service. I took a slight pay cut when I returned to the civil service, while stepping up in responsibilities. I was paid about $70K as a Contracting Officer with signature authority in the civil service while a person with signature authority at LM was making more than $90K with the equivalent benefit packages.

My Comment: I hear you. I know you and other of my civil service friends feel opposite from what I feel.  I served in the military, the FAA civil service, as well as taught at the Defense Acquisition University (DAU). When I was in the military and FAA, the civil service government and military pay were woefully lower than industry pay. However, by the time I worked for DAU, we were making way above the average for university professors.

Actually, I think hazardous duty military pay should be doubled and all non-hazardous duty military pay should be frozen.  All “critical duty” civil service pay should be reduced somewhat, but all “non-critical duty” civil service pay should be drastically reduced.  Plus that, the total number of civil service jobs should be cut in half.  Contracting officers would be classified as “critical duty” as the government has been having a very difficult time finding and hiring good contracting officers.  So, under my proposed plan, your job would be somewhat safe.  That is my opinion on this matter.

Right now, if the civil service pay and military pay are frozen, the comparable pay for private sector workers are still way below that of the civil service.  Therefore, relatively speaking, it won’t hurt the civil servants as much as the private sector is being hurt.  Congress froze the Social Security benefits, so I am negatively affected by that.  Congress passed Obamacare, which eliminates $500 billion from Medicare, which directly and negatively affects me there.  Congress will be voting down the continuation of Unemployment Insurance (UI) benefits, which by the way, I’m not against, but which hurts me further there.

The government should be creating more jobs instead of doing all the things that Congress is doing to kill new jobs.  So, I don’t mind feeling the pain also.  California’s unemployment and underemployment combined figure is 21%!–one of the higher figures in the nation.  Wonder why we cannot find jobs easily in California?  Everything the spendthrift California legislature is doing kills new jobs, and profitable companies are moving to other states in large numbers.  Everything I profess does not exclude me from the pain.  We all must experience a lot of pain if we are to get our economy back on track.  I also think that Congress should eliminate the Social Security program and privatize it.

The following is a letter of a close civil servant friend of mine who sent this letter to his senators and congressmen:

I sent this to my Senators and Congressman:

Please submit/support a bill that will reduce the federal payroll by 10% over the coming decade. Sixty-six percent (66%) of voters nationwide favor such a proposal according to a recent Rasmussen poll. Earlier surveys found that 46% believe government employees make more money than comparable workers in the private sector. In addition to believing that government workers are paid more, voters overwhelmingly believe those on the public payroll have more job security but don’t work as hard as their counterparts in the private sector. The federal government currently employs approximately 2.1 million people, including 1.4 million civilian employees. During 2010, the number of federal employees grew to the highest level ever, and the president is requesting a 1.4% pay raise for the federal workforce in 2011. A very slight reduction in the number of federal employees is expected in 2011 as the Census process winds down. USA Today reports that the average federal worker’s pay and benefits totaled $123,049 in 2009, while on average private workers made $61,051 in total compensation. A 10% reduction in federal payroll costs would lead to direct annual savings of approximately $25 billion a year. However, if no change is made, the federal payroll would continue to grow by approximately $80 billion over the coming decade (assuming growth rates similar to the past decade). So the combination of direct savings and elimination of expected increases would lead to direct savings of more than $100 billion annually. Additional saving would likely be generated as well as a smaller workforce would probably lead to the elimination or reduction of some government programs. A smaller workforce also would require less spending on supplies, training and support. Can I count on your support?

Hence, we do have some civil service workers who understand the problem and are willing to bear some of the pain of reducing government service spending.  I wish more would join the chorus.