Philip Klein, American Spectator:
Earlier this morning, I noted that President Obama’s proposal to freeze the pay of federal employees (excluding the military) for two years wouldn’t have much impact on the debt. Now we have more specifics. In his press conference, Obama claimed that the move would save the government $28 billion over five years. Taking that number at face value, that would represent a sixth-tenths of one percent reduction in the projected $4.52 trillion deficit over that same period (2011 through 2015). It would be the equivalent of a person who expects to rack up $10,000 of of credit card debt over the next five years touting the fact that he’s found a way to reduce his expenses by $60 over that time period. In football terms, it would be like a kickoff return that gains about a half of a yard.
Well, yes, but it’s a start, right — and largely symbolic, much like the GOP earmark ban?
Not really. As Mark Levin noted last evening on his show, federal employees get beyond these “pay freezes” by providing employees with “step increases” and bonuses — neither of which is affected by this pay freeze. Meaning that this is merely a way of looking like you’re making concessions without actually doing so.
The “symbolism,” then, is aimed not only at the casual observer — but also to the savvy clients in Obama’s growing government client state, who recognize that Obama is throwing them a wink and a nod, and that no real sacrifices will have to be made by federal employees on his watch.
It is a cynical gambit — as will be many of the cost-cutting measures we’ll soon see instituted by bitter Dems who will pretend to give us what we asked for. They’ll cut emergency services first — police, firefighters — then they’ll begin making cuts to schools. “This is the price of austerity,” they’ll tell us.
Meanwhile, they’ll leave untouched the massive, unfunded entitlement programs they champion — as well as wholly unnecessary programs like NPR.
The Tea Party must remain dedicated during the manufactured outrage that is likely to result, with the media running stories of homelessness around the holidays, or fires that weren’t contained because of cuts to local firehouses. We must point out that, say, 50 police officers lost their jobs — while the federal government employs over 2,000,000 people whose jobs are in no kind of jeopardy — and that, rather than cutting local emergency services, we should be concentrating on cutting 15-20% of the federal workforce.
We should ask, why are you looking to punish people for demanding responsible spending by cutting the necessary spending first? And do you not know that we know that’s precisely what you’re doing?
In short, call the bluff — and make sure your elected officials have the backbone to represent your wishes.
Otherwise we will have won nothing.
Obama and his fellow travelers really do think we’re all complete morons.
They’ll cut emergency services first…
Something tells me that the police and firefighters will still manage to protect the homes of the powerful, and will somehow find a way to keep volunteers from taking their places.
Can’t have amateurs protecting their own neighborhoods. Heavens forfend!
A note about “step increases,” for those unfamiliar with government compensation models:
Generally, a position is assigned a grade. Within each grade are a number of steps. For our example, let’s say that there are 10 steps in each grade, each 2% higher than the last. So if you start at Step 1 at $30,000, Step 10 will be about $35,850, for a total range of about 19.5%. (Bear in mind that the number of steps and the percentage between them can vary quite a bit from jurisdiction to jurisdiction, or even from one bargaining unit to another.)
Usually, what we talk about with “pay increases” is that the $30,000 starting figure goes up by however many percent; in the current debate, we’re talking about freezing that number. But if your contract says that you go up a step every year, you’re still getting that 2% bump as you work your way across the grid. So anyone with 10 years is automatically making 19.5% more than the starting wage (which is the only figure you’ll ever hear quoted). And if you’ve got much more than 10 years in position, chances are good that your union has already negotiated additional “longevity bonuses” so that you effectively wind up on “Step 15” or “Step 20”.
So remember, when a government drone talks about employees getting a 0% or 1% or 2% raise in a given year, what they’re really saying is that a new hire gets only that much more than last year. Existing employees are all moving through the steps and getting their time-in-position increases like clockwork.
I work with these compensation systems for a living, and it makes me sick to think that I’m lucky to get a 2% increase some years, while the jokers who hire my company are getting a 2% increase in the pay scale AND a 2% step increase, which through the magic of compounding is a 4.04% raise.
In next week’s lesson, we’ll talk about a teachers union who agreed to modest wage increases in the 90s in exchange for generous health and pension benefits, and then argued in the 00s that they were woefully underpaid compared to their peers, and should get beefy wage increases…
Squid,
70+% of firefighters (including me) ARE volunteers. Not true in big cities, but true pretty much everywhere else. And, like the military, we’ll embrace the suck, adapt, and overcome.
“Backbone”. Good one.
I grew up in rural PA, scotch, and believe me, the VFD was central to our little town’s identity. I mean no offense to you when I talk about our City Fathers and their union partners withholding essential services as they throw their fiscal temper tantrums.
If anything, I believe the “professional” fire departments would like nothing better than for you guys to disappear, lest we taxpaying morons point to you as an alternative to paying a bunch of guys $50,000 a year to sit around a fire house eating chili, polishing chrome and watching the big screen until retiring at 50.
here’s how the politico whores want to frame this issue in their site poll today – you get to choose whether this is a “sacrifice” or a “burden”
50 – 50 damnit. %50 force reduction, %50 paycut for the remaining bozos. They come back with a 10 – 10 counter-offer, we move to 60 – 60 and see whether they get the message.
Nice synopsis Squid. Another alternative is to do away with step increases altogether like Cuyahoga County, and doubtless other large counties, has done. One thing, though is the “pay freeze” for non bargaining employees only? Because our union workers are still getting raises sure as clockwork.
OI – I put out a lot of feelers today. I will keep you posted, obviously.
Cool! A no fee credit card.
Never mind, it won’t matter. I’ll just keep paying the $15 annual fee on the one I have. It has a higher limit!
Thank you so very much, JD. I can’t tell you how much I appreciate it.
“…President Obama’s proposal to freeze the pay of federal employees (excluding the military) for two years …”
We (military) should be included. We go up in pay over the number of years time in service, but it STOPS at a point (I will not go any higher inside the O-5 band, even if I stayed another number of years)and we don’t get any “longevity bonuses” to duck around that…
You obviously need a better union, John.
Why wait? (music included without charge)
A more though and technical look.
Bill Wilson is largely unimpressed…
Republicans have to stop being so agreeable. That’s not what we pay them for. Either say NO! and mean it, or be ready for a very short term.