Little Hope for Pay Parity in 2010, but the Fight Continues

Posted by admin in News You Can Use on July 16, 2009
Wednesday, July 15, 2009

 

 

“Pay parity” is a mantra federal civilian employees have long chanted to bring about a desired state of income.

For most of the past 30 years, they have used the power of positive thinking, not to mention good, hard lobbying, to persuade Congress they should get the same pay raise as members of the military.

But at this point, for fiscal year 2010, Frankie and Flo Fed don’t appear to have much more than a hope and prayer that Congress will give them the 3.4 percent increase that men and women in uniform are slated to receive.

Take it from Rep. Steny H. Hoyer (D-Md.), the House majority leader who also represents thousands of federal workers in his suburban Washington district. He said he was “very disappointed that parity was not achieved in either the House or the Senate. I intend to work with the administration to include pay parity in next year’s [fiscal 2011] budget.”

More likely for civilians in 2010 is the 2.9 percent cost-of-living increase the Senate Appropriations Committee approved last week. That’s certainly better than the 2 percent raise President Obama proposed in his budget. And because the House appropriations bill is silent on civilian pay, there currently is no vehicle Frankie and Flo can ride to the land of 3.4.

That doesn’t mean they won’t keep trying.

“At this point we’re still fighting for pay parity,” said Beth Moten, legislative director for the American Federation of Government Employees. “I believe that the cause is far from lost. If you get to 2.9, it’s only a half-point to 3.4.”

And they aren’t fighting alone.

Last month, two key House members on federal workforce issues urged the House Appropriations Committee to bump salaries to the higher level.

Democratic Reps. Edolphus Towns (N.Y.) and Stephen F. Lynch (Mass.) are chairmen of the Committee on Oversight and Government Reform and its subcommittee on the federal workforce, Postal Service and District of Columbia, respectively. They deal with a variety of topics affecting the federal workplace, but their panels don’t set salaries.

So they urged the committee that does set salaries to maintain pay parity.

“Federal employees work side-by-side with military personnel both here and abroad, and deserve to be recognized for their extraordinary efforts,” said their letter (pdf) to House Appropriations Committee leaders.

 ”Civilian employees serving at DOD [Department of Defense], FBI, State, DHS [Department of Homeland Security], and at many other agencies support the men and women of the armed forces and work tirelessly to ensure the security of our nation.

“Pay parity has long enjoyed bipartisan and bicameral support, and we ask your Committee to continue this tradition.”

Good arguments, but probably not winning ones during a period when the unemployment rate is exploding like Fourth of July fireworks, when General Motors is mired in bankruptcy, and when many parts of the private sector are threatened with financial ruin.

It’s not a time when giving a larger raise to federal workers, who already enjoy strong job security and benefits, will find many sympathizers. And the argument that they work side by side with military personnel really doesn’t make the best case. By far, most civilian workers are not subject to the life-threatening dangers that troops in Iraq and Afghanistan face daily. And those who are stationed in perilous places often can get hazardous duty pay.

A better argument for parity is that it would help close the pay gap between private-sector and public-sector workers. Closing that gap in the Washington area would require a federal raise of almost 10 times the 3.4 percent, according to a Congressional Research Service report issued last year.

Despite the administration’s 2 percent proposal, John Berry, the Office of Personnel Management director, has said President Obama is willing to close the public-private gap. But it’s a long way between the cup and the lip on that one. The Obama administration would consider boosting government pay so it is on par with the private sector, as long as that is part of a larger reform of the federal pay structure, which includes a performance evaluation system.

Closing the public-private gap is one of the main reasons Colleen M. Kelley, president of the National Treasury Employees Union, says she’ll continue to work for civilian parity with the military, as has generally been the case for decades.

Getting that has been “a fight every year,” she said in an interview.

But she’s also realistic enough to have issued a statement last week that said “NTEU will work to include at least 2.9 percent” in the final legislation.

That’s probably the best she can get.