Two of the fed-related items being considered by a joint House-Senate conference committee would reduce the starting benefits of future retirees or trim future cost-of-living adjustments for all retirees and survivors. They are part of a long laundry list of proposals that were floated, considered, then ignored by Congress last year.

The conference committee is due to report by Feb. 29, and — if all goes as planned — Congress will vote up or down (no amendments) on its recommendations. Insiders say Congress may actually deliver this year (it failed to follow a similar script in 2011) because the current payroll tax reduction and extension of unemployment benefits are also at stake. And this is an election year.

The fed-related plan getting the most attention would, if approved, base annuities of feds retiring in the future (probably Jan.1, 2013) on their highest five-year average salary. Under current law, annuities are based on the employees’ highest three-year average salary.

Many people have said that the change would have a minimal impact on the annuities of people retiring in the future — especially if the pay-raise freeze continues. They say that people could get their higher benefit (under the high-five system) by working a little longer. True, in some cases …

But for some people, moving to the high-five would be semi-catastrophic. They would get a lot less than they planned and felt they were promised. In yesterday’s column we used the example of John, a long-time fed who ran his own numbers and said switching to the high-five would reduce his starting FERS benefit by $2,248. While his example is accurate, his situation isn’t typical. Whereas he’s planning on an annual starting benefit of $47,750, the average FERS retiree now gets a civil service benefit of $12,780, and the typical CSRS retiree today gets about $35,000.

So what would a switch from a high-three to a high-five calculation do to the average fed? We turned to the expert, Tammy Flanagan. She is a columnist for Government Executive magazine and works with the National Institute of Transition Planning. She was our guest on Wednesday’s Your Turn show.

She crunched the numbers for a more typical fed. See how close this comes to your situation:

“… For most employees under FERS, the difference wouldn’t be as much as it is in John’s example. He … has a good point and he’s done the math for his own situation. To have a $200 per month difference in his FERS annuity between the high-five and high-three has to mean that he has had some major pay adjustments… such as a big promotion or several step increases in the past five years. It wouldn’t be that big of a difference for most employees if it took effect in the next year or so. Let’s say that an employee has been a GS 12 step 10 for the last 5 years … here’s their salaries for each year:

• 2012 – $97,333
• 2011 – $97,333
• 2010 – $97,333
• 2009 – $95,026
• 2008 – $90,698

If they retire on December 31, 2012… their high-three average would be $97,333 and their high-five average would be $95,544.

If they had 30 years under FERS, their benefit would be $29,199 using the high-three and $28,663 using the high-five — A difference of $536 per year or $44.66 per month

If they had 30 years under CSRS, their benefit would be $54,749 using the high-three and $53,743 using the high-five — A difference of $1,005 per year or $83.79 per month

This isn’t huge … but the problem would be if Congress begins granting annual pay adjustments of 3 – 6 percent as they used to do… then you’re looking at a much bigger difference. Also… an employee who gets promoted during that five years and may also have a step increase… that could make a bigger difference as well.

        Read more: Mike Causey

Let’s see if they were promoted during that same time from a GS 11, step 10 to a GS 12, step:

• 2012 GS 12, step 7: $89,846
• 2011 GS 12, step 7: $89,846 (quality step increase for good performance)
• 2010 GS 12, step 6: $87,350
• 2009 GS 12, step 6: $85,281 (6 months = $42,640)
• 2009 GS 11, step 10: $79,280 (6 months = $39,640)
• 2008 GS 11, Step 10: $75,669

Now… the high-three = $89,014 (30 years under FERS= $26,704 and 30 years under CSRS = $50,070) and the high-five = $84,998 (30 years under FERS = $25,449 and 30 years under CSRS = $47,811)

Now the difference is $1,255 per year ($104.58 per month) for the FERS employee and $2,259 per year for the CSRS employee ($188.25 per month)

NEARLY USELESS FACTOID

By Jack Moore

More than 20 percent of football fans, in a new survey, said they would be willing to miss a loved one’s funeral or the birth of a child to see their favorite team, in person, at the Superbowl, according to LiveScience. But many of the viewers who tune in at home aren’t as die-hard in their fanaticism — about 40 percent said they watch mainly for the commercials, according to the same survey.

MORE FROM FEDERAL NEWS RADIO

DoD budget to reshape military, slow programs
Defense Secretary Leon Panetta is expected to outline the main areas of the 2013 defense budget today, more than two weeks before the Obama administration submits its 2013 budget proposal to Congress. To save money, Panetta would reduce the size of Army and Marine Corps ground forces. Defense officials say substantial savings will come from slowing some programs, like F-35.

Army praised for management turnaround at Arlington cemetery
The investigative agency that originally detailed huge management problems at Arlington National Cemetery last year says there’s been a dramatic improvement.

GAO: Capitol Police pay, benefits structure not to blame for attrition
For nearly a decade, some lawmakers and union officials have raised concerns about the United States Capitol Police’s pay and retirement benefits, arguing they don’t stack up to other federal police forces and make recruiting and retaining difficult. But a new Government Accountability Office report finds the hand wringing over stingy retirement benefits may be unwarranted.

Copyright © 2024 Federal News Network. All rights reserved. This website is not intended for users located within the European Economic Area.