Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Politics : Politics for Pros- moderated -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: DMaA who wrote (321125)	8/25/2009 1:07:31 PM
From: ManyMoose	1 Recommendation Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 793964

That chart is bogus. Here's the real one: fedjobs.com The problem with your graph is that it doesn't include the majority of the work force, which is below GS-12. It took me 30 years to advance to GS-12 with a master's level education and considerable responsibility, and the most I ever made including a Cost of Living Adjustment was less than the lowest number on your chart. Locality Pay adds to the base pay, which I never got. Locality Pay is based on the cost of similar work and responsibility in the private sector in those localities. That's why New York and Los Angeles get such a high percentage, because without the locality pay, Federal agencies would not be able to compete with private industry for the employees they need, and federal employees would be unable to afford to live in those communities. I'm NOT defending over-staffing, which I think is the root problem in government. And by the way, private industry has plenty of over-pay issues too. I have my own problems with poor service from government employees. I view this as a management problem. The government employees I knew and worked with worked long hours and were very dedicated. You can't paint government employees with a broad brush. For many, you're getting more than your money's worth.