This bloke is taking the piss

Platapus · 03-18-12, 08:12 AM

I am not understanding the problem here.

Perhaps I did not understand the article, which I though was awkwardly written.
If I understand the article, the move is to go away from a set national wage scale to one that incorporates different costs of living. Is that right?

That's the way we do things here in the US with our Federal Employees.

In the US, our federal employees are, with few exceptions, eligible for regional pay. In the US there are significant changes in the cost of living depending on where you live. It simply costs a lot more to live in Washington DC than it does to live in Ponca City, OK.

If we were to pay our federal workers the same amount, at which level would we pick?

If we paid everyone at the Ponca City level, the federal employees in DC would be on food stamps. Resulting in no one applying for the DC jobs.

If we paid everyone at the DC level, federal employees in Ponca City would be living like Dukes and that would, rightfully, piss off the tax payers.

The way Federal jobs are handled in the US is that everyone gets a base pay for that type of job. All GS 10 Step 1 employees earn the exact same base salary (it is more complicated these days with new "band" system, but that's for another rant)

If, as a GS10S1, you are assigned to Washington DC, you would be given a higher adjustment based on the cost of living. There are charts giving the regional adjustments and if you are considering a federal job it is most important to know what region you will be working in.

In no case is anyone's pay reduced. The government sets the base level low enough to prevent that.

The intent is for the Ponca City GS10S1 and the DC GS10S1 to have the same standard of living. Not too high, not too low.

Yes, the Ponca City employees may feel they are being "penalized", but they are not. Due to errors in how regional rates are computed, I think it is more advantageous to work in a region with a low or no regional adjustment. I think your money will go further.

03-18-12, 08:12 AM	#7
Platapus Fleet Admiral Join Date: Oct 2006 Posts: 19,397 Downloads: 63 Uploads: 0	I am not understanding the problem here. Perhaps I did not understand the article, which I though was awkwardly written. If I understand the article, the move is to go away from a set national wage scale to one that incorporates different costs of living. Is that right? That's the way we do things here in the US with our Federal Employees. In the US, our federal employees are, with few exceptions, eligible for regional pay. In the US there are significant changes in the cost of living depending on where you live. It simply costs a lot more to live in Washington DC than it does to live in Ponca City, OK. If we were to pay our federal workers the same amount, at which level would we pick? If we paid everyone at the Ponca City level, the federal employees in DC would be on food stamps. Resulting in no one applying for the DC jobs. If we paid everyone at the DC level, federal employees in Ponca City would be living like Dukes and that would, rightfully, piss off the tax payers. The way Federal jobs are handled in the US is that everyone gets a base pay for that type of job. All GS 10 Step 1 employees earn the exact same base salary (it is more complicated these days with new "band" system, but that's for another rant) If, as a GS10S1, you are assigned to Washington DC, you would be given a higher adjustment based on the cost of living. There are charts giving the regional adjustments and if you are considering a federal job it is most important to know what region you will be working in. In no case is anyone's pay reduced. The government sets the base level low enough to prevent that. The intent is for the Ponca City GS10S1 and the DC GS10S1 to have the same standard of living. Not too high, not too low. Yes, the Ponca City employees may feel they are being "penalized", but they are not. Due to errors in how regional rates are computed, I think it is more advantageous to work in a region with a low or no regional adjustment. I think your money will go further. __________________ abusus non tollit usum - A right should NOT be withheld from people on the basis that some tend to abuse that right.