Welcome Guest! To enable all features please Login or Register.

Notification

Icon
Error

Federal Career Planning and Development

Are you looking to get promoted?
Maybe a change in your federal career?
Need tips on resume writing to land a federal job?
Or how to increase your salary or get a pay raise?

Join this active discussion with others climbing the same challenging career ladder.

Consider ordering some helpful resources or read today's top news stories on federal employee pay, benefits, retirement, job rights and other workplace issues by visiting FederalDaily.com.

Options
Go to last post Go to first unread
decipher  
#1 Posted : Wednesday, March 28, 2012 6:46:35 AM(UTC)
decipher

Rank: Senior Member

Groups: Registered
Joined: 3/25/2009(UTC)
Posts: 290

House plan envisions partial federal hiring freeze

By Eric Yoder

 

The budget plan scheduled to reach the House floor Wednesday envisions a partial federal employee hiring freeze under which only one replacement could be hired for every three employees who leave.

The measure, which cleared the House Budget Committee last week, seeks a 10 percent reduction in the federal workforce by attrition through 2015. “The reforms called for in this budget aim to slow the federal government’s unsustainable growth and reflect the growing frustration of workers across the country at the privileged rules enjoyed by government employees,” said a description released when the plan was first introduced.

A more detailed report posted in advance of Tuesday’s scheduled vote in the House Rules Committee, the last step before floor consideration, states that the government “would be permitted to hire one employee for every three that leave government service.”

“The policy assumed in the budget is one new hire for every three separations government-wide, not agency-by-agency,”a Budget Committee spokesman wrote in an e-mail. He added that the restriction would apply only to civilian federal employees and not to uniformed military personnel.

Executive branch employment is about 2.1 million as measured by work-year equivalents, not counting intelligence agencies whose staff numbers are classified information or the self-funding U.S. Postal Service.

A blog posting last week by Jeffrey Zients, deputy director for management at the Office of Management and Budget, argued that a 10 percent reduction in the federal workforce would “make it extraordinarily difficult for government to do the basic business that people rightly expect of it.”

“Evenly allocated cuts would mean deep reductions in the Federal Aviation Administration, leading to the elimination of air traffic control services in parts of the country,” it said. “In 2014, there will be more than 4,500 fewer federal agents at the Department of Justice and the FBI to combat violent crime, pursue financial crimes, help secure the southwest border, and ensure national security, resulting in over 160,000 fewer criminal cases that can be prosecuted over the next decade.”

Zients wrote that other effects would include the closings of hundreds of national parks for parts of the year, fewer workplace and food safety inspections, less enforcement of clean air and clean water laws, and longer waiting times for services such as Social Security and Medicare.

“It is difficult to take seriously complaints about ‘imbalance’ from the White House. Their budget for America’s future never balances,”the Budget Committee spokesman said by e-mail.

The White House’s budget plan released in February showed federal employment levels growing in 2013 by 2,400 employees, about 0.1 percent. It projected increases at the Veterans Affairs department to meet increased demand for veterans’ services; the Department of Homeland Security for airport and border security; the Justice Department for staffing new prisons; and the Treasury Department for increased tax enforcement. That plan further projected a decrease of about 7,500 Defense Department civilian employee jobs, largely offsetting those increases. Employment at most other agencies would be essentially flat.

The House budget measure also assumes that federal salary rates will not increase through 2015 and that employees will contribute more toward their retirement benefits.

The budget “resolution” is not enacted into law, but it does set guidance for other House committees to follow as they write spending bills for the fiscal year that starts in October. The Senate apparently will not take up the House plan nor draft a counterpart, but rather will base its spending bills on last year’s debt ceiling deal.

Fed1969  
#2 Posted : Wednesday, March 28, 2012 9:44:47 AM(UTC)
Fed1969

Rank: Senior Member

Groups: Registered
Joined: 10/28/2010(UTC)
Posts: 3,333

Obama wants to reduce DOD.  With budget cuts, buyouts, and possible hiring freezes, a DOD reduction of 7,500 should not be that hard and is probably just a starting number for DOD.  Don't be surprised if the number increases to over 100,000 after Obama is re-elected.

A ten percent Federal 10% reduction is over 200,000 positions, this could be a real challenge.  However I suspect Obama will want to take the majority of the proposed cut from DOD.
Beagle1AD  
#3 Posted : Wednesday, March 28, 2012 12:32:49 PM(UTC)
Beagle1AD

Rank: Senior Member

Groups: Registered
Joined: 7/30/2011(UTC)
Posts: 766

Both sides want to take us out.....choose your poison.

As for me I'm voting for the one that is not going to reduce my pay as much as the other guy.


ebgard15  
#4 Posted : Thursday, March 29, 2012 6:53:15 AM(UTC)
ebgard15

Rank: Advisor

Groups: Registered
Joined: 12/11/2008(UTC)
Posts: 137

this feels like such a bad time to be just starting out in the system....I've only been in for 1.5 years as a GS-5 but every time I read the news it just seems like opportunities are dwindling more and more...I understand the whole 'be thankful you have a job' but I don't want to be stuck like this for an extended period....the 3 for 1 plan sounds like it will make things very difficult to make progress in the system
Fed1969  
#5 Posted : Thursday, March 29, 2012 12:15:32 PM(UTC)
Fed1969

Rank: Senior Member

Groups: Registered
Joined: 10/28/2010(UTC)
Posts: 3,333

Beagle1AD wrote:
Both sides want to take us out.....choose your poison.

As for me I'm voting for the one that is not going to reduce my pay as much as the other guy.



So you are voting for the GOP.  They are all talk, but no action.  

Obama will get results with union support.
grieveit  
#6 Posted : Friday, March 30, 2012 7:56:11 AM(UTC)
grieveit

Rank: Advisor

Groups: Registered
Joined: 3/3/2012(UTC)
Posts: 177

This is the usual PAP put out by OMB, closing parks reducing service all the while they build ever larger headquarters in DC. You have Homeland security building complex to house 10% of their work force.
rather than looking to see what entire functions need to go away its the sky is falling the sky is falling. Zients is the poster child for what is wrong with the federal govt, stove pipe thinking and that's the way we have always done it". OK Mr Zients lets try another scenario freeze pay for 10 years and then there won't be any need to cut the people..which would you prefer?
Beagle1AD  
#7 Posted : Saturday, April 07, 2012 12:23:27 PM(UTC)
Beagle1AD

Rank: Senior Member

Groups: Registered
Joined: 7/30/2011(UTC)
Posts: 766


Fed1969 wrote:
Beagle1AD wrote:
Both sides want to take us out.....choose your poison.

As for me I'm voting for the one that is not going to reduce my pay as much as the other guy.



So you are voting for the GOP.  They are all talk, but no action.  

Obama will get results with union support.


So you think Pres Obama will cut more than the GOP?  I disagree, I think GOP will cut more.

I was a registered Republican but I'm not voting since President Obama already has my state anyways.
Fed1969  
#8 Posted : Saturday, April 07, 2012 9:12:37 PM(UTC)
Fed1969

Rank: Senior Member

Groups: Registered
Joined: 10/28/2010(UTC)
Posts: 3,333


Beagle1AD wrote:

Fed1969 wrote:
Beagle1AD wrote:
Both sides want to take us out.....choose your poison.

As for me I'm voting for the one that is not going to reduce my pay as much as the other guy.



So you are voting for the GOP.  They are all talk, but no action.  

Obama will get results with union support.


So you think Pres Obama will cut more than the GOP?  I disagree, I think GOP will cut more.

I was a registered Republican but I'm not voting since President Obama already has my state anyways.

I think the conservative side of the GOP will try to cut more than the democrats, but will fail.  

The GOP will support many of the Obama cuts, hence the Obama cuts will be larger than the GOP cuts.
Rss Feed  Atom Feed
Users browsing this topic
Guest
Forum Jump  
You cannot post new topics in this forum.
You cannot reply to topics in this forum.
You cannot delete your posts in this forum.
You cannot edit your posts in this forum.
You cannot create polls in this forum.
You cannot vote in polls in this forum.


This page was generated in 0.345 seconds.