11:19 am, July 13, 2014

FederalNewsRadio.com - Purpose of Comments statement Click to show

Hubbard Radio, LLC encourages site users to express their opinions by posting comments. Our goal is to maintain a civil dialogue in which readers feel comfortable. At times, the comment boards following articles, blog posts and other content can descend to personal attacks. Please do not engage in such behavior here. We encourage your thoughtful comments which:

  • Have a positive and constructive tone
  • Are on topic, clear and to-the-point
  • Are respectful toward others and their opinions

Hubbard Radio, LLC reserves the right to remove comments which do not conform to these criteria.

  • 15
       

  • FERS Annuity Supplement
    Hector
    RE: A plan to eliminate the FERS social security option for workers who voluntarily retire before age 62. THE WHITE HOUSE PROPOSAL IS TO APPLY THIS TO NEW HIRES MIKE. The proposal in Congress to strip the FERS annuity supplement from CURRENT employees that retire after 12/31/12 is simply ruse meant really to serve as a defacto RIF, whereas numerous FERS employees aither already eligible to retire or close to theri MRA will leave in droves. Is the OPM geared up for that?
    { "Agree":"1","Funny":"1","Insightful":"1","Disagree":"-1","Offensive":"-1","Troll":"-1" }
  • Why would any Fed vote for any politician who removes FERS supplement?
    contrarian
    Sorry, this is a deal breaker for me. What people don't get is the current DC makeup of politicians isn't working. Unions haven't figured out they can't bully their "friend in the White House" as easily as someone from their less desireable party. The FERS supplement can't go away without Obama and Reid's help, what part of that are you missing?
    { "Agree":"1","Funny":"1","Insightful":"1","Disagree":"-1","Offensive":"-1","Troll":"-1" }
  • Not what I agreed to when I joined the Gov
    1st generation American
    I say class action suite. This is not what I agreed to 20 years ago when I entered Federal service. I have done all that was asked and then some by deploying. Now they want to change the rules. I call foul. Any politician that votes for this should be targeted come re-election time. Lets throw them all out and see how they like a pay freeze.
    { "Agree":"1","Funny":"1","Insightful":"1","Disagree":"-1","Offensive":"-1","Troll":"-1" }
  • You nailed it
    Rob
    None of the proposals can become law without Reid and Obama. Although it's true that the GOP is peddling most of the anti-federal employee proposals the fact is that many of the Dems, including Obama, support their efforts. They just sit back and let the GOP do all the dirty work. The only Dems speaking out against the proposals are those from areas with a large number of fed employees. Obama hasn't said a word about any of the proposals to slash our benefits. NOT ONE WORD
    { "Agree":"1","Funny":"1","Insightful":"1","Disagree":"-1","Offensive":"-1","Troll":"-1" }
  • who is nailing what?
    Jerry A.
    There goes Rob, yet again, blaming President Obama and the Democratic Party for, well, everything. The GOP bashes federal workers? "Blame the Demo(n)crats." The GOP wants to fire 10-20-30% of federal workers? "It's Reid and Pelosi's fault." The GOP wants to close entire federal Departments? "It's Obummer's fault for not blocking them." Your far right winger repetitive screed is getting old and tired, Rob.
    { "Agree":"1","Funny":"1","Insightful":"1","Disagree":"-1","Offensive":"-1","Troll":"-1" }
  • To Jerry
    Moderate
    Don't you realize that Rob is still in 1984 where newspeak is spoken. He thinks that if you repeat a falsehood, it will be truth because he says so. By the way, Rob, the Democrats did what they could for the federal workers while your friends, the Republicans and their lackeys railed against the feds. Obama has attempted to keep the damage to us at a minimum while the Republicans continue to push bill after bill against us. When are you going to blast your friends, the Republicans, who continue to try to stick it to us? At least I continue to say no to the SSS supplement elimination when I am not affected by it.
    worker
    { "Agree":"1","Funny":"1","Insightful":"1","Disagree":"-1","Offensive":"-1","Troll":"-1" }
  • To contrarian
    Moderate
    I am missing your condemnation of the Republicans for proposing and supporting this attempt to stick it to federal employees. I agree that it should not be eliminated for current employees. I have no opinion about new employees. The supplement can't go away without Republican support. To 1st generation-Your idea sounds great, but will not work. Suites are based on law. If the law is changed, you cannot win the case unless you have a constitutional issue with the law change. I am not a lawyer, so see a lawyer to get a better answer.
    worker
    { "Agree":"1","Funny":"1","Insightful":"1","Disagree":"-1","Offensive":"-1","Troll":"-1" }
  • FERS Annuity Supplement
    Just me
    Is OPM ready for the exodus? Um...no, they can't handle the current workload. The real question is going to be what happens when huge segments of the government's institutional knowledge flee?
    { "Agree":"1","Funny":"1","Insightful":"1","Disagree":"-1","Offensive":"-1","Troll":"-1" }
  • Changing the FERS Supplement midstream
    DOtransportation
    FERS employees need to speak LOUD and CLEAR with one voice that these changes for existing employees is UNACCEPTABLE --- This is a $$ grab of 70-100K depending on your length of service --- It is not a small deal and people need to understand that it should not be looked at in the same light as a pay freeze or change of retirement computation method like the HI3 to HI5 proposal This is a MUCH bigger deal and if passed for current employees it will be as if someone just stole tens of thousands from your retirement funds -- you will either need to dip into your 401k to make up the difference or continue to work for 5 years to offset the loss in funds. Dipping into your 401k to make up the difference @ 57 years old means you'll run out of retirement 401k funds earlier.
    { "Agree":"1","Funny":"1","Insightful":"1","Disagree":"-1","Offensive":"-1","Troll":"-1" }
  • Congress first...
    Putt-Putt
    Congress should look to their own house first when it comes to budget cuts. Leading by example is a wonderful model. I read recently (sorry Moderate, I can't recall the cite) that Congressional staff salaries have increased sharply over the last two years - some receiving pay increases of over 10% per year. I have a few suggestions for Congress and their budget: 1) Each member gets a flat annual allotment for office expenses (salaries, supplies, staff travel) of say, $1,000,000. 2) A congressional housing complex should be constructed where Members and Staff live. Each will be provided a studio apartment and a pass for two meals per day at a cafeteria plus a sack lunch (or maybe an MRE); 3) Each member will receive $5,000 for annual travel and must use GovTrip to book trips; 4) Each member must adhere to Government Ethical Standards for accepting gifts (i.e., no more than $75 per year from each "vendor"); 5) Each member will be issued a Government credit card and any misuse will subject them to sanctions, such as loss of 10% of their office budget for each infraction; 6) A budget must be passed before the summer recess or sanctions will be applied (such as loss of 50% of their office budget); and 7) Office space will be converted to cubicles.
    { "Agree":"1","Funny":"1","Insightful":"1","Disagree":"-1","Offensive":"-1","Troll":"-1" }
  • Putt-Putt
    Linda
    Great ideas! Too bad they will never be put into effect. When I hear about Congressman having taxpayers pay for $1,000 a month leases on vehicles I am appalled! I don't know if it is true (maybethose of you who work in the beltway now), but why isn't Congress providing their own vehicles? Is there a contract somewhere that says Americans must pay for 100% of the living expenses of Congress of which over 50% are millionaires? I am pretty sure that isn't true when some poorer Congressman talk about sharing apartments with 3 or 4 other poorer Congressman for the sessions due to lack of money and high priced housing in the area? So which is true? They get everything paid for? Or they pay for it themselves?
    { "Agree":"1","Funny":"1","Insightful":"1","Disagree":"-1","Offensive":"-1","Troll":"-1" }
  • To Putt Putt
    Moderate
    Don't need a cite, I have also heard that staff salaries went up, but I do not remember the cite. I also like most of your ideas, but the travel might be low. The annual travel might be low but the concept is there. Remember that they have 2 sets of offices. One is is Washington and one is in the home district. Should the Congressperson from California get the same travel allowance as the one from Maryland? The gift idea is great. Aren't they already restricted? (at least in theory)The budget idea is a no go because of the political differences between the 2 parties and the ability for a minority to filibuster. Your concept is great.
    worker
    { "Agree":"1","Funny":"1","Insightful":"1","Disagree":"-1","Offensive":"-1","Troll":"-1" }
  • More work, less pay
    jinva
    Speaking of the 10% force reduction, it has, in my 40 years plus experience as a federal employee, always been the case that the workforce decreases, but the workload increases. Perhaps a 10% cutback, through attrition, isn't too bad...but let's also see a 10% reduction in workload, i.e. the work being performed by those who are not replaced no longer gets done, rather than being moved onto the plates of the already slammed, by past force reductions, employees who remain.
    { "Agree":"1","Funny":"1","Insightful":"1","Disagree":"-1","Offensive":"-1","Troll":"-1" }
  • Outstanding Job Making Federal Government Service Cool again....
    MDBBALL02
    Eliminate the FERS social security option for workers who voluntarily retire before age 62? Seriously, and the White House supports this plan? This had BETTER apply to new hires only! If not, I will leave before it takes place. I am 50 with 28 years service. I will flip burgers for a living if I have to, but I will get what is owed to me from this country. I spent the vast majority of my career making far less than the private sector doing the same work, and I did so for the stability and yes the benefits I would EARN by continuing to do a good job. I have also done ALL my financial planning for retirement based on having the Supplement. What happened to President Obama's campaign promise of "making Federal Government Service Cool again?????" The GOP is taking the place down debt wise, refusing to tax the rich, and the Feds are being targeted because we can't strike over this stuff. Perhaps it's time for a Federal Fever to hit the Nation, knocking all Feds out of the office for a week or so on Sick Leave -- every agency ... What do you think? See how much gets done and how the American economy comes screaching to a halt! We keep EVERYTHING Moving! Food to market after inspections, planes taking off and landing, Cars on roads, trucks weighed and inspected, VA hospitals, SS checks, you name it! Happy EARLY Retirement to us all!
    { "Agree":"1","Funny":"1","Insightful":"1","Disagree":"-1","Offensive":"-1","Troll":"-1" }
  • Better hope for a early out offer
    Linda
    MDBALL01 - at age 50 with 28 years of service you have to have an early out (or buy out) offer or an involuntary separation from service to qualify for the SSS. I do not know if you have to be your minimum retirement age. I would be careful before I just jumped ship as if you don't qualify, you get nothing until you are 62, less along the supplement. Any retirement specialist out there that can comment?
    { "Agree":"1","Funny":"1","Insightful":"1","Disagree":"-1","Offensive":"-1","Troll":"-1" }
  • { "Agree":"1","Funny":"1","Insightful":"1","Disagree":"-1","Offensive":"-1","Troll":"-1" }