Well, it is official

[LisaKinVA]

I'm in the same boat. Just this mornning, I discovered this common misconception about gov't employees not working much while making loads of money. I don't know where people get that idea - maybe they're friends with top level employees. All of the DoD employees I know IRL, including the top boss at Dh's job, make only 5 figures.

 

 

They've gotten this idea from several "studies" comparing the salaries of gov't workers to those in the private sector...showing that the majority of gov't employees make more than their private sector counterparts. There is also this "meme" going around which lists the salaries of the highest gov't officials (Supreme Court, Pres, VP, senior staff, that kind of thing), who make some nice salaries...I tried arguing that those employees didn't even make up 1% of the USFG work force, but the person insisted LOTS of people were making that kind of money.

 

While some jobs (usually lower-level gov't employees, entry-level, journeyman positions, and secretaries, janitors, postal service, from what I've seen)) tend to get paid more than their private sector counterparts, that difference is pretty much GONE by the time you reach a 13, 14 or 15...and if you're in a management series or SES series, the difference is even more stark, with gov't employees making significantly less than their private sector counterparts.

 

My dh manages billion dollar contracts, and oversees several employees. Comparable jobs in the private sector would command a minimum of $150k. based upon his experience, it would most likely be more. However, at the USFG he makes slightly more than half of that with nearly 20 years of experience. We took this job vs. something else for the job security...apparently that was the WRONG decision. Moreover, when the Pentagon cuts expenses, many prior military "jobs" are sent to my husband's organization to operate/oversee...so while their pay is being cut, their workload is increasing. I've been telling my husband for years that the work he was doing "on his own time" was against his contract...but since it's a military culture, they just suck it up and do it without complaint. That, however, has come to a halt. They can now be fired for doing work "off-book" or asking someone to do work "off book." Since everything they do supports active duty military...that means active duty militar are going to have to wait longer for mission-critical services. It scares me... regardless how I feel about where our active duty military may be, you don't send them and leave them hanging... you just DON'T.

[delaney]

I know it stinks but when the economy tanked a few years ago my DH took a huge pay cut because he did not receive any bonus for 2 years. That amounts to 6 figures in pay lost over 2 years. It really stunk but there was no one to complain to or about. We just had to deal. Hopefully the hill will get its act together and figure out this mess.

[ChrisOR]

I am sorry for the new pay cuts. It is hard.

 

My husband lost 30% of his income 4 years ago. He is still in the same job (17 years in) and makes what he made in 1998. That's real dollars. His production for this company (a major, nationally known company) has tripled sales in our area.

 

(I wanted to add that this is the same job, same town, same company so comparisons are truly accurate. Sales are tripled.)

 

Health insurance is at least 4 times what it was then. Our family size has tripled since then. He used to have a company car but now just a token car reimbursement for a personally owned vehicle that doesn't cover the true costs. We've borrowed from the 401(k) because we cannot even take our money out even if we wanted to pay the penalty and taxes (which we would have done if we could). We are only making it because DH has a second job now.

 

I guess I'm just writing this to say I'm sorry for the rough stuff that paycuts cause, and that many of us in private sector jobs really do understand, having lived this already.

[Serenade]

 

 

I just wish it had been an across the board cut. Every one could've had 2% taken off and not harmed anyone.

 

 

Agreeing with this.

[Orthodox6]

:grouphug: (in multiples) to every single one of you and your families who are suffering from this.

[Mrs Mungo]

 

 

Exactly my point. You are assuming private industry has great conditions. Step out, into the real world away from the american presence and go to the business districts that are lower in rent where the employees aren't wearing suits and are carrying tools.

 

Meanwhile, I'll share another misconception I heard from a school district employee who I know makes six figs -- her compensation is 'low' because she didn't get to cash in on stock ipos, like everyone in private industry and she deserves a high salary, high pension (she'll make over six figs in retirement as she's tier one) and her ultra low cost medical bennies to make up for it. Just another little misdirection to allow her crew to hike taxes and give themselves yet another 5% raise.

 

I haven't shared *any* conceptions about those working in private industry on this thread. I really don't know what you are talking about. You are "correcting misconceptions" that do not exist.

[chiguirre]

I guess I'm just writing this to say I'm sorry for the rough stuff that paycuts cause, and that many of us in private sector jobs really do understand, having lived this already.

 

 

:iagree:

 

I do know how hard it is to take a 25% pay cut, because dh had to do it in 2009. But at the same time, he had to work longer hours because his company laid off lots of other people. Health insurance was more expensive and provided worse coverage and they stopped matching 401K contributions. The really amazing thing was that we were so happy that he had a job and health insurance because it was so much better than being laid off. It helps to look at the positive side. It doesn't make scrimping and saving easier, but it helps to put it in perspective.

[Audrey]

:grouphug: to all affected.

[Amy in NH]

Why would this be a bad thing? If there is no money to sustain budget increases, why should there be budget increases?

 

Why can't they use zero based budgeting instead of baseline based budgeting?

 

 

Ask Chucki & Mrs. Mungo and all the others who will be immediately affected why this is a bad thing. Then read some unbiased economics articles about how it will affect everyone else and set the economy back. Right idea, wrong method, wrong time.

[Mrs Mungo]

Ask Chucki & Mrs. Mungo and all the others who will be immediately affected why this is a bad thing. Then read some unbiased economics articles about how it will affect everyone else and set the economy back. Right idea, wrong method, wrong time.

 

 

Right. To add on to that:

 

It is not about budget increases. It isn't even about budget cuts (which, I favor in some areas). This particular method makes blanket cuts. What is that going to mean for the military? It will mean less flying time for pilots. It will mean less training time for our soldiers (especially in specialized locations like NTC). It will mean not replacing equipment. It will mean regular maintenance on certain vehicles will cease. It means promotions slow down because there is a glut of people at the top. We know exactly what it means because we have already been through one period of military drawdown and budget cuts. They might have 2 trucks that run and 4 that they are scavenging parts from because their budget won't allow them enough repair parts to fix them all. It means putting soldiers at increased risk.

 

Would you want your spouse or child jumping out of a plane with a chute packed by an overworked rigger?

 

Would you want your spouse or child entering a combat zone that they had not been fully trained and prepared to enter?

 

Those are the dangers the military is facing.

 

Can the military face budget cuts? Absolutely. But, I would prefer that Congress cut programs that the Pentagon doesn't even *want*, but Congress approves because it helps the economy in some influential Congressman's state. I don't think that is what will happen because it *isn't* what happened before.

 

Example: dh's unit needed some particular type of bolt to fix vehicles. To order them through the DoD system they were $10 each. Dh got the blueprints, asked his engineers about it, and dh went and bought them at the local hardware store-$20 for a 5 gallon bucket of them. Now? They are required (by Federal law) to order them from a particlar company and pay the $10 each. I am sure it helps some friend of a Congressman or some Congressman's local economy in some way. *That* is how pork works. *That* is what needs to stop.

[LisaKinVA]

Totally agree, Mrs. Mungo. There is LOTS of pork to cut (in every organizational budget, including DoD), but log-rolling (or back scratching) always seems to take precedence over what is wanted/needed. In one of the recent spending bills (may have been Sandy), NASCAR got $75 MILLION...I mean, seriously??? NASCAR needs gov't funding? The Pentagon has become famous for spending boondoggles, but the funny part is the Admirals and Generals aren't the ones requesting/holding onto many of those programs...CONGRESS is. In fact, some contractors purposely spread out where parts are built for their equipment to reduce the likelihood that the program will get cut (too many districts affected = lots of Congressmen going to bat to keep the program). Oh the stories we could tell!

[Mrs Mungo]

Totally agree, Mrs. Mungo. There is LOTS of pork to cut (in every organizational budget, including DoD), but log-rolling (or back scratching) always seems to take precedence over what is wanted/needed. In one of the recent spending bills (may have been Sandy), NASCAR got $75 MILLION...I mean, seriously??? NASCAR needs gov't funding? The Pentagon has become famous for spending boondoggles, but the funny part is the Admirals and Generals aren't the ones requesting/holding onto many of those programs...CONGRESS is. In fact, some contractors purposely spread out where parts are built for their equipment to reduce the likelihood that the program will get cut (too many districts affected = lots of Congressmen going to bat to keep the program). Oh the stories we could tell!

 

Exactly!!!! So, Congress may go to bat for a proposed weapons system that DoD doesn't even want!! Meanwhile, leaders down in a maintenance unit may be having a throw down over drysweep or something equally minuscule!

[Meriwether]

 

Example: dh's unit needed some particular type of bolt to fix vehicles. To order them through the DoD system they were $10 each. Dh got the blueprints, asked his engineers about it, and dh went and bought them at the local hardware store-$20 for a 5 gallon bucket of them. Now? They are required (by Federal law) to order them from a particlar company and pay the $10 each. I am sure it helps some friend of a Congressman or some Congressman's local economy in some way. *That* is how pork works. *That* is what needs to stop.

 

This makes me nuts. I like low taxes. There are very few things that I approve spending federal money on, but I want our military to have the best support, the best equipment, the best training. I want the families to be well-compensated. I would willingly pay higher taxes to support our military, but I hate the waste. I hate $10 bolts and $50 dollar trash cans.

[besroma]

We are in the same boat, Chucki.

[Flowing Brook]

Same boat chucki same boat

[Lisbeth]

I hate to say it, but when a levy talk came up a while back I wrote that school levies will be the least of our worries. I say it again: what we are seeing now will be the least of our economic problems in the nearish future. People have been quietly preparing for several years now. If you know which quiet trends to watch- if you watch the quiet wealthy prepare for what they believe is coming under the radar, it will scare your socks off. I pray for us all. I hope it blows over but I don't believe it will. Various talking heads out there can deny, deny, deny, but hard economic numbers don't lie. :( For those immediately affected, you are in my thoughts tonight.

[molon labe]

Ask Chucki & Mrs. Mungo and all the others who will be immediately affected why this is a bad thing. Then read some unbiased economics articles about how it will affect everyone else and set the economy back. Right idea, wrong method, wrong time.

 

 

I don't need to read economics articles-I have a master's degree with a concentration in economics and my professional career consisted of working in government finance for many years.

 

The current situation stinks-for just about everyone (except those making the decisons). I never said I agreed with the cuts that were taking place now. I believe that the government's primary purpose is our protection and thus the military should be properly funded.

 

But having baseline budgeting whereby prior year spending was simply added to is not a method of budgeting that considers actual costs. It is part of the reason why there is so much waste in government spending. Agencies that have not spent all of their budgets toward the end of the fiscal year will go out and make purchases they absolutely do not need in an effort to spend down their budgets. A good administrator is not one that makes prudent decisions, but rather one that protects his agency's budget and influence by ensuring that it isn't reduced in future years. One would think that the opposite would be true. For those who work in the private sector or who own their own businesses (like I do), we know that budgeting that way isn't fiscally responsible. And for those of us who are scrimping to get by with our own personal family budgets it is sickening to see the waste.

 

I also agree that NASCAR doesn't need $75 million from the government. It is capable of generating it's own revenue. But so is PBS and NPR.

[MBM]

So, Congress may go to bat for a proposed weapons system that DoD doesn't even want!! Meanwhile, leaders down in a maintenance unit may be having a throw down over drysweep or something equally minuscule!

 

Yep. Congress does this because it is a way to give money to friends.

 

The government has spent over $1 million to audit my husband's department. They don't do it because it's poorly run; they do it because the politically-appointed Inspector General (meaning he got his job as a political favor) has a grudge against my husband after my husband pointed out he didn't understand basic investment strategies (the guy claims to be an expert but is dumb as a rock). $1 million is a drop in the bucket, but it's a still a waste of money. Btw, they couldn't find anything even remotely wrong in any year.

[MBM]

For those who are complaining that everyone should pay their fair share of taxes, don't forget those who make the most in this country.

[MyLittleWonders]

I hate to say it, but when a levy talk came up a while back I wrote that school levies will be the least of our worries. I say it again: what we are seeing now will be the least of our economic problems in the nearish future. People have been quietly preparing for several years now. If you know which quiet trends to watch- if you watch the quiet wealthy prepare for what they believe is coming under the radar, it will scare your socks off. I pray for us all. I hope it blows over but I don't believe it will. Various talking heads out there can deny, deny, deny, but hard economic numbers don't lie. :( For those immediately affected, you are in my thoughts tonight.

 

Do you mind explaining this a bit more or posting some links?

[Serenade]

Did anybody see the AP news story yesterday about tax distribution?

 

A new analysis, however, shows that average tax bills for high-income families rarely have been higher since the Congressional Budget Office began tracking the data in 1979. Middle- and low-income families aren't paying as much as they used to.

 

The top 1 percent of households, those with incomes averaging $1.4 million, will pay an average of 35.5 percent.

 

The average family in the bottom 20 percent of households won't pay any federal taxes. Instead, many families in this group will get payments from the federal government by claiming more in credits than they owe in taxes, including payroll taxes. That will give them a negative tax rate.

 

The middle 20 percent of U.S. households — those making an average of $46,600 — will pay an average of 13.8 percent of their income in federal taxes for this year, according to the Tax Policy Center. Over the past three decades, the average federal tax rate for this group has been about 16 percent.

 

http://www.wral.com/...-high/12176091/

 

This is something we rarely hear in the news.

[MBM]

 

 

Even better, they shouldn't draw a salary at all then. They should serve as they used to - as a duty and a privilege - not because they wanted to make a career of it. If they didn't draw a salary think of the money the government could save. Give them healthcare and retirement benefits but no salary. They also shouldn't get kickbacks from lobbyists either. That should weed out the greedy to some extent.

 

Salaries are not all that important. Many politicians made big money by trading in the stock market using inside information (as well as making other questionable investments), a big no-no for anyone else. I wouldn't be surprised if many of them still are making money this way despite the STOCK Act.

 

http://www.cnn.com/2012/08/02/politics/stock-act-loophole

 

Another thing they do is legally get profits from their businesses recategorized so that they can pay less taxes.

 

There are good politicians out there who care about the state of our country but unfortunately we have others who are concerned with making themselves wealthy and powerful. Those are the ones we need to get out of office. Voters need to research more and not be swayed by sound bites and good looks.

[Arcadia]

Did anybody see the AP news story yesterday about tax distribution?

 

 

This is something we rarely hear in the news.

 

I found another interesting trend while filing my family's tax returns. We pay much higher percentage in federal tax than California state tax every year. It is close to four time more. So basically we are poor by California standard and not poor by federal standards.

[blessed3x]

:thumbdown: Sadly, raising my hand to join in on the forced furlough. :crying: Money was already tight enough, but this pay cut will hit our finances pretty hard.

 

 

 

Us too.....

 

We took a pay cut to move back to VA and now are facing this too. Ugh.

[Mrs Mungo]

The other issue with the current tax system is that the *very* wealthy pay fewer taxes because they are earning through capital gains versus income. Capital gains taxes are lower.

[TravelingChris]

I agree that many federal employees are not making big bucks. My dh is AD and since he has been in 26 years, we are seriously contemplating when he will retire and what kind of employer he is looking for. I was always strongly against him taking a federal job, even SES, because they pay less in his field and with his expertise. I still hold to that view.

[garddwr]

 

 

Even better, they shouldn't draw a salary at all then. They should serve as they used to - as a duty and a privilege - not because they wanted to make a career of it. If they didn't draw a salary think of the money the government could save. Give them healthcare and retirement benefits but no salary. They also shouldn't get kickbacks from lobbyists either. That should weed out the greedy to some extent.

 

 

But wouldn't eliminating the salary make it so that ONLY those who are independently wealthy could serve? Surely that is not a desirable outcome.

[Dandelion]

But wouldn't eliminating the salary make it so that ONLY those who are independently wealthy could serve? Surely that is not a desirable outcome.

 

 

Positions in congress used to be part-time positions with very low pay. They were not full-time jobs with oodles of staffers and massive perks. Congress members came to Washington when congress was in session, performed their duties, and then returned home for much of the year where they had regular jobs. This accomplished several things: it kept the costs of running the government down, it made congress more productive (after all, they got paid more when they were back home, so there was no incentive to waste time in Washington), and it kept the congress members grounded in the real world because any decisions they made directly affected them as well. I'm sure there were other benefits, but those are the ones that jump out at me. Some in congress are calling for a return to that type of part-time model, and I think it deserves serious consideration.

 

 

Here's an excerpt from an interesting NPR article on this topic:

 

From 1789 to 1815, members of Congress couldn't afford to stay year-round in Washington because they were paid so poorly. Senators and representatives made just a few dollars a day. In 1815, they began receiving $1,500 a year salary. In 1855 that doubled. By 1935, they were making $10,000 a year. But most members of Congress still needed day jobs.

 

Even into the 1960s, members of Congress "were out of session about as much as they were in, and they had almost no personal and committee staffers assigned to them unless they were senior and powerful," says Larry Sabato, an American history professor at the University of Virginia and director of the university's Center for Politics. It wasn't until the 1970s that members of Congress began seeing their positions as year-round commitments.

 

Some people never got used to the transition. "I think we spend too much time in Washington," Sen. Bob Dole testified before Congress in 1993. "If we could spend six months here and six months at home, I think the country might be better off. We might be more efficient. We might get our work done."

 

ETA: As an additional data point, the current salary for rank-and-file members of the House and Senate is $174,000 per year. Those in leadership positions are paid at a higher rate.

[mmpmelmack]

We will be furloughed as well. In 2009 we joined the federal govt after we lost everything. While this sucks, I can say that it will teach you how to live on so much less. After 2009 we worried about it happening again, and we forced ourselves to live well below our means, even when everyone said we didn't have to worry about it now that we were with the govt. It's paying off now. Most of our family is with the govt as well, our extended families will face major cuts as well. I hope they work it out soon, but I no longer count on anything but ourselves.

[Arcadia]

"The House bill would make one change in the recent automatic spending cuts, called sequestration: It would give the military and veterans programs officials more flexibility to shift the cuts around their departments to minimize impacts. The House adopted the plan to extend government financing by a vote of 267-151." (Source)

 

Video link from PBS here

 

Not sure if it will help those of you affected

[jennynd]

Example: dh's unit needed some particular type of bolt to fix vehicles. To order them through the DoD system they were $10 each. Dh got the blueprints, asked his engineers about it, and dh went and bought them at the local hardware store-$20 for a 5 gallon bucket of them. Now? They are required (by Federal law) to order them from a particlar company and pay the $10 each. I am sure it helps some friend of a Congressman or some Congressman's local economy in some way. *That* is how pork works. *That* is what needs to stop.

 

 

Did your hubby know for sure what material is the bolt, what heat treat was used? Any special coating required for the specific bolt at the specific location? What is the temperature. what is the thermal growth between the 2 materials, what is the stress caused by the thermal growth? Do your hubby consider crack growth, the life of the bolts? Fatigue?

I worked military contract as stress analysis engineer previously for joint strike fighter and missile programs. The government spec is very very very strict. So they can protect the soldiers. Every component went through qualify test in the lab. Each componet has a long design report including a tiny bolt. actually bolts are the most icky component to analyse. So, no, your hubby can't go off and buy bolts. And I can tell you some of the bolts used on aircraft cost hundreds just the raw material.

[mommaduck]

As of today, we've lost 1/3 of dh's take home pay due to the crappy job the gov't is doing on the budget and the small cut he took to take the day job.

 

And even if they get the budget under control the parts they cut today won't be coming back. So in the last 9 weeks dh has lost every pay increase he has had in the past 10 years. The down side of that is the gov't didn't take our bills when they took our ability to pay them.

 

Anyone else in this boat with me?

:grouphug: ouch. I'm so sorry, hon.

[Denisemomof4]

I'm sorry. :crying:

 

In the pasts 4 years dh's raises are tinier than tiny, sometimes not even getting one, medical expenses are COMPLETELY out of control while AT THE SAME TIME insurance costs are skyrocketing, ( I know families with "great" insurance plans that CAN'T AFFORD MEDICAL CARE) and have SERIOUSLY impacted our family, and Every Stinkin Time I go shopping for ANYTHING, but mostly groceries (and GAS!), I am shocked at how little I get for such a HUGE amount paid.

 

It just STINKS all the way around.

 

I'd love to say more but........

 

 

I do count myself as lucky, but things are REALLY getting tight.

[Denisemomof4]

after reading some more in this thread (I can't read most of it. It's all just so sad and so scary) I realize how stupid my response was, but I'm going to keep it there because today was a very bad day and we are definitely feeling pain in our family, and have for years, because of our government. I truly worry for my children.

[FaithManor]

Denise, your response isn't stupid.

 

Many people in my area have shared similar feelings at local gov't budget meetings...a 20% cut when you've been receiving annual 3-5% raises in salary plus about the same in bennies yearly means you are set back less than 4 years. Everyone else, since early 1990s, has either lost their job and been declared a non-purple monkey or they've kept the job and they're doing five people's work with unpaid OT and unpaid mandatory leaves of absence, raises of less than 1% and decreased bennies annually...they get set back by COLA every year.

 

I feel like I'm living some of the novels my children have read. How much is enough? 1/3 of the families in my area are on free lunch..and the majority aren't headed by single parents. Many are doubled up in housing. Rents are incredibly high to support taxes (6% state tax, 6% local tax plus federal). I've seen more gardens in the past two years than in the 20 previous.

 

 

You have expressed my thoughts. I too, have felt like I'm a time traveler sent back to the Great Depression - we just have more of safety net now such as free lunch for low income families, WIC, etc. - or the Dust Bowl, or.....I pray I don't end up witnessing Feudalism again!

 

Dh has worked unpaid OT to the tune of 1200-1800 hrs. per year. He's recently gone to work for company that appears to be more sane and compassionate than his last, so we have some hope that at least that problem will ease up.

 

I am scared for the future my kids face. It's so uncertain compared to the circumstances in which dh and I became adults and started out in life.

 

Faith

[Butter]

Salaries for federal employees have been frozen for I think three years now and the raises before were not 3-4%. People have still been getting their step increases, but many get them only every 2-5 years anyway depending on how long they've been in their grade. In the DC area my husband could easily make 1 1/2-2 times his federal pay for the exact same job. We went with what he does for job security (lol). Several people in his group and some other friends of ours went from contractor to civil service recently. Not one got a raise. They all took paycut to do it. But it was either that or no job at all so they all did it.

 

My husband's agency just signed intent to furlough letters this week. One day a pay period. No one's quite sure how all the work will get done in my husband's group. They are overworked as it is. Of course furloughs won't start until mid-April and no one seems to think they will still be likely then. We'll see. The amount on time wasted on sequestration and the amount of revenue lost due to furloughs no doubt costs more than the savings. I hate politicians.

[Chris in VA]

 

This makes me nuts. I like low taxes. There are very few things that I approve spending federal money on, but I want our military to have the best support, the best equipment, the best training. I want the families to be well-compensated. I would willingly pay higher taxes to support our military, but I hate the waste. I hate $10 bolts and $50 dollar trash cans.

 

When my 12yo heard about sequestration, her comment was, "Guess they better reconsider those $500 toilet seats."

 

Not sure where she heard it, but she has a point.

[Mrs Mungo]

Did your hubby know for sure what material is the bolt, what heat treat was used? Any special coating required for the specific bolt at the specific location? What is the temperature. what is the thermal growth between the 2 materials, what is the stress caused by the thermal growth? Do your hubby consider crack growth, the life of the bolts? Fatigue?

I worked military contract as stress analysis engineer previously for joint strike fighter and missile programs. The government spec is very very very strict. So they can protect the soldiers. Every component went through qualify test in the lab. Each componet has a long design report including a tiny bolt. actually bolts are the most icky component to analyse. So, no, your hubby can't go off and buy bolts. And I can tell you some of the bolts used on aircraft cost hundreds just the raw material.

 

These were NOT for something like aircraft. You did see where I said that he requested the blueprints and had them tested by his engineers (actual engineers, not a random person from engineering branch)? They were the exact same bolts, ultimately made by the exact same company, just sourced differently. Yes, he COULD (and DID for a while) just go buy those particular bolts. The program allowing them to buy stuff like that ended because of pork, not specific requirements.

[Mom0012]

They've gotten this idea from several "studies" comparing the salaries of gov't workers to those in the private sector...showing that the majority of gov't employees make more than their private sector counterparts. There is also this "meme" going around which lists the salaries of the highest gov't officials (Supreme Court, Pres, VP, senior staff, that kind of thing), who make some nice salaries...I tried arguing that those employees didn't even make up 1% of the USFG work force, but the person insisted LOTS of people were making that kind of money.

 

While some jobs (usually lower-level gov't employees, entry-level, journeyman positions, and secretaries, janitors, postal service, from what I've seen)) tend to get paid more than their private sector counterparts, that difference is pretty much GONE by the time you reach a 13, 14 or 15...and if you're in a management series or SES series, the difference is even more stark, with gov't employees making significantly less than their private sector counterparts.

 

My dh manages billion dollar contracts, and oversees several employees. Comparable jobs in the private sector would command a minimum of $150k. based upon his experience, it would most likely be more. However, at the USFG he makes slightly more than half of that with nearly 20 years of experience. We took this job vs. something else for the job security...apparently that was the WRONG decision. Moreover, when the Pentagon cuts expenses, many prior military "jobs" are sent to my husband's organization to operate/oversee...so while their pay is being cut, their workload is increasing. I've been telling my husband for years that the work he was doing "on his own time" was against his contract...but since it's a military culture, they just suck it up and do it without complaint. That, however, has come to a halt. They can now be fired for doing work "off-book" or asking someone to do work "off book." Since everything they do supports active duty military...that means active duty militar are going to have to wait longer for mission-critical services. It scares me... regardless how I feel about where our active duty military may be, you don't send them and leave them hanging... you just DON'T.

 

 

I think people are misplacing their anger at the waste the government as a whole incurs with the individuals working in everyday jobs, who are just like them.

 

My husband works in the private sector, but that doesn't make me feel any less terrible for the families who are going to suffer such a huge loss in pay right now just because they work for the government. I also believe that these cuts will extend deeply into the private sector. We live in the DC area and many private sector jobs here are supported government contracts. Probably more than I ever realized.

 

Anyway, I hope that this gets resolved quickly and that the families who are hurt by it are all able to make ends meet until it is over.

[jennynd]

These were NOT for something like aircraft. You did see where I said that he requested the blueprints and had them tested by his engineers (actual engineers, not a random person from engineering branch)? They were the exact same bolts, ultimately made by the exact same company, just sourced differently. Yes, he COULD (and DID for a while) just go buy those particular bolts. The program allowing them to buy stuff like that ended because of pork, not specific requirements.

 

 

Sure it might made by same company, but do they go through same test on the bolts they will sale to local hardware store??, the same material contents (1% of extra of something can make the bolt very very differnt), same testing/inspection like the military part?? Cadillac and saturn are made by the same company and they are very very differnt in quality.

 

The other reason might be the warrenty issue. Govement new contract nowadays start to do power by hour (only pay when the equipment runs) rather than cost plus (deigner/engineer/maufacture cost direct charge the governemnt). With that, I think the vendor will require government uses only approved part. And trust me, it saves the government shit load of money to do power by the hours

[Mrs Mungo]

 

 

Sure it might made by same company, but do they go through same test on the bolts they will sale to local hardware store??, the same material contents (1% of extra of something can make the bolt very very differnt), same testing/inspection like the military part?? Cadillac and saturn are made by the same company and they are very very differnt in quality.

 

The other reason might be the warrenty issue. Govement new contract nowadays start to do power by hour (only pay when the equipment runs) rather than cost plus (deigner/engineer/maufacture cost direct charge the governemnt). With that, I think the vendor will require government uses only approved part. And trust me, it saves the government shit load of money to do power by the hours

 

None of this was an issue in this case. And, yes, they were *exactly* the same. Again, dh and his engineer went over the blueprints. If you don't want to believe me, then you don't have to, but I see no reason to go back and forth about it.

[QueenCat]

These were NOT for something like aircraft. You did see where I said that he requested the blueprints and had them tested by his engineers (actual engineers, not a random person from engineering branch)? They were the exact same bolts, ultimately made by the exact same company, just sourced differently. Yes, he COULD (and DID for a while) just go buy those particular bolts. The program allowing them to buy stuff like that ended because of pork, not specific requirements.

 

This reminds me of the chair dh needed for his desk. His broke.... and wasn't repairable. The process to get a new one, and the cost was crazy. He wanted to buy one at Office Depot & get reimbursed. Chair would have been about $150. Instead, due to furniture contracts, he had to get an identical (same brand/model) one for $280. And it took a month to get it.

[violamama]

We lived this but at the state doj level over the last three years.

 

My husband took a job there wih promise of a certain level of pay (huge decrease from private sector and less in our state then others) because what he wanted was reasonable hours. Instead of the step increases he was told he would get, he was furloughed (but without decreasing his overall required hours for the year), and they had too few people for the job. When we realized he was pulling all-nighters regularly and doing the work of two positions for such lame pay, he quit.

 

For us we could have lived with less pay if they hadn't also expected everyone to work like dogs without recognition or security of pay level. It was sucking the life out of him, completely thankless and unreasonable.

 

He's in a new private sector job now, and so far loves it. If he works harder or longer hours, he is paid more. The moral is so much higher, and people work together. Expectations are not changed mid-stream. Funny how well capitalism works when the "bosses" do what they say they will do.

 

[Parrothead]

 

This reminds me of the chair dh needed for his desk. His broke.... and wasn't repairable. The process to get a new one, and the cost was crazy. He wanted to buy one at Office Depot & get reimbursed. Chair would have been about $150. Instead, due to furniture contracts, he had to get an identical (same brand/model) one for $280. And it took a month to get it.

 

 

Oh, I know. The uniform company has started selling several undergarments (undershirts, sox, thermals) that "match" the uniform. I'm just waiting for the day that it is mandatory to buy those items for work from this company.

[QueenCat]

Part of the reason this type of thing happens is that the government has to buy from certain vendors, usually vendors that employ otherwise non- or under-employable people, like the mentally retarded, profoundly blind, or hearing impaired. Without the government support for these companies, many people with disabilities would have a hard time finding employment. The reason he couldn't run out to Office Depot and buy a chair is because the govt has a contract with, say, Lighthouse for the Blind, to provide chairs. LftB makes the chairs using blind people's handiwork, which provides employment for them while still providing the needed chair. It is supposed to be a win- win situation.

 

The chair he got was the same brand they had at Office Depot, not something made by a disabilities based group. Regardless, they shouldn't be paying significantly more for the product, nor making him have to go borrow chairs (and return them) after each use, wasting more of his time.

[Parrothead]

 

The chair he got was the same brand they had at Office Depot, not something made by a disabilities based group. Regardless, they shouldn't be paying significantly more for the product, nor making him have to go borrow chairs (and return them) after each use, wasting more of his time.

 

Capitalism only works if the market is free. Crap like these contracts is a slap in the face to the people of the country whose taxes go to paying for these overly expensive things.

 

And also when the government buys junk made outside of the country it is another slap.

[Annabel Lee]

Denise, your response isn't stupid.

 

Many of the little people in my area have shared similar feelings at local gov't budget meetings...a 20% cut when you've been receiving annual 3-5% raises in salary plus about the same in bennies yearly means you are set back less than 4 years. Everyone else, since early 1990s, has either lost their job and been declared a non-purple monkey or they've kept the job and they're doing five people's work with unpaid OT and unpaid mandatory leaves of absence, raises of less than 1% and decreased bennies annually...they get set back by COLA every year.

 

I feel like I'm living some of the novels my children have read. How much is enough? 1/3 of the families in my area have their children on free lunch..and the majority aren't headed by single parents. Many are doubled up in housing. Rents are incredibly high to support taxes (6% state tax, 6% local tax plus federal). I've seen more gardens in the past two years than in the 20 previous. And the number of exempt properties on the tax roll is at an all time high. Walking outside after these meetings shows where the wealth is..nothing like seeing the person arguing for a 5% salary increase need tooling away in the Mercedes while the opposing viewpoints are in the old beat up junkers, carpooling with neighbors.

 

I don't know why I feel the need to share this, but this has been happening to federal workers for years, too. There was a pay freeze for gov't civilian employees in a particular branch at the beginning of 2009, there have been no raises since. There have never been raises in benefits, if that is what you meant by "plus about the same in bennies". There has also been a hiring freeze on at dh's particular job for years, just as there has for his type of work on every other military installation in the U.S. They are severely understaffed, now doing a workload that used to be multiple jobs. They stopped paying overtime last year but still required him to work overtime. They pay in "comp. time", but there's never time to use it due to the staffing issue. So, he waits a full calendar year for the comp. time to convert to overtime pay, when it has depreciated some due to inflation.

 

My family is kicked back financially to what we were making 10 yrs. ago.

 

ETA: Wait a second, what kind of benefits are you all (other civilian gov't employees) getting? We don't even have vision and the dental is a joke (they pay $12 on a $400+ bill... practically nonexistant coverage), and the regular medical coverage is very limited. Where do people get these ideas that all federal employees have got it made?

[Parrothead]

 

I guess I see it differently.

 

Yes, you're paying a higher price for that chair, but you are buying the chair PLUS paying the people who make the chair PLUS helping fund the organization that employs these people.

 

You are going to be paying for these people, regardless. That's what social programs do. I would rather pay them to do some work than to sit at home and do nothing while collecting their benefits. It's better for everyone in the long run. Better for society.

 

Perhaps I see things a little differently since I am the mother of a mentally retarded child.

 

 

Oh, yes. I agree with you there.

 

I think if we stop buying plastic crap made in China and buy American made that those small manufacturing businesses that use disabled Americans employees would have a better chance at selling their wares. It is the contracts that the gov't have enforce with companies who manufacture products overseas or in Mexico which really screw over American employees disabled or not.