Editor Note on Chapter President
Retirement
This will be the
final Chapter Chatter before Chapter 301 President, Gary
Denison, retires on September 2nd. Some of you may
have missed his last Chapter Update email on August 24th.
If you did miss it, you can read his Farewell and Lessons
Learned at this link
CHAPTER UPDATE
Prior to the
union, management engaged different types of employee/management
committees and focus groups and effectively created the
impression that these assisted in management decisions affecting
employee conditions, most of which were basically previously
decided and in search of support. Actions taken were often in
total contradiction to the results that such efforts produced.
However, while management might prefer there was no union, the
very existence of the union provided the perfect opportunity to
stop going through the motions anymore. It became the union’s
responsibility and mission to look after the bargaining unit
employees.
Gary set the bar
very high for his successor. He has always been very true to
the mission. He has said a few (perhaps a lot of) things that
have made people very unhappy with him. He has written a few
things via email that the “editorial staff” did not have the
opportunity to review. Still, he kept the focus on the
employees, and was a key individual to the success NTEU has
achieved in the agency.
We wish Gary only
the best. A lot of dialogue would never have occurred without
his leadership.
Update on Compensation Bargaining
NTEU and OCC
management recently engaged the use of an independent federal
mediator in an attempt to move the two parties closer toward
agreement. While we achieved some incremental progress, the two
parties remain significantly apart on several key issues.
The most
significant issue is the proposed size of the merit pool. NTEU
believes that management’s proposal is too small and thus
negates the concept of “pay for performance” in a merit pay
system. NTEU contends that unless the agency properly funds the
merit pay systems, the difference in the merit awards for level
3 and 4 rated employees will be minimal, neutralizing the intent
of “pay-for-performance".
OCC management
contends that “political optics” is driving the necessity of
their proposed small merit pay pool. NTEU continues to believe
that this political battle has already been fought and won, with
the passage of FIRREA, which pulled the financial regulatory
agencies out from the government pay system. We are also
mindful that the majority of these agencies are non-appropriated
and consequently their actions will have no impact on the
federal deficit.
Conversely, merit
bonuses are the one area in which OPM has offered definitive
guidance to government agencies. While NTEU is pleased that
management’s proposed for the merit bonus pool will exceed the
OPM recommendation, it does put management’s “political optics”
argument at a dichotomy with their proposal on merit increases
on which OPM has provided no definitive guidance to federal
agencies.
Likewise, while we
made some progress in making the size of merit pay increases
more transparent; management remained steadfast in refusing to
apply these same principles to the merit bonus. NTEU contends
that as these are “merit” bonuses there should be definitive
linkage to what level of performance is needed to warrant a
bonus. Management wants to retain unrestrained discretion in
both the size of the bonus awarded and to whom they award these
bonuses.
NTEU was pleased
with management proposal to increase agency contributions to
employee 401(k) accounts. The OCC has historically lagged
behind the other FIRREA agencies in this particular area, and
management proposals finally move the agency to the premier
status NTEU has been requesting. Management also proposed
improvement to the lifecycle account and its supplemental
healthcare contribution. NTEU supports these proposals.
Thus, while the
proposed enhanced benefit package is fairly “rich”, much of the
current increase is in the form of deferred compensation via the
401(k) contribution. Again, this contribution is long overdue
and finally moves the OCC to a competitive position within the
FIRREA community.
Given the shortage
of experienced staff, the high level of problem financial
institutions, the integration of the agencies, the need to train
employees and the constant stress of the political environment,
OCC employees are working harder than ever. In accepting the
current proposed management package, most employees would
experience a minimal increase to their current pay. While NTEU
is appreciative of the economic plight of many of our friends
and neighbors, we believe that the OCC can afford to fund its
merit pay program to make meaningful distinctions in pay for
performance and that is what “merit based pay” is all about.
OCC management is
willing to state that we are at an impasse on this matter and
turn the matter over to the Federal Impasse Committee for final
decision. NTEU believes that there is still the opportunity for
a mutually negotiated agreement. We hope that OCC employees
will let management know that a negotiated agreement is
desirable. This is not a matter of money, as the OCC’s
financial health is very strong; this is a matter of will. It
is time for OCC management to throw the “political boogey man”
out of the negotiating room and do the right thing for the
agency’s most valuable resource.
Federal Employees Still Under Fire
Congress and the
White House are working on savings and permanent spending cuts
that could reduce future retirement benefits, take a substantial
bite out of already frozen salaries, and make government much
less attractive for future hires. This is not a ploy or scare
tactic by the unions. The media did not dream this up.
Most of the
recommended changes will come from the bipartisan congressional
super committee. Its job in part is to complete action on some
of the proposals that came out of the all-star Simpson-Bowles
commission created by the White House. We expect the super
committee to propose some tough calls. With Congress prepared
to vote them up or down in early December, they are taking
direct aim at federal workers with some of the proposed
changes.
The number one
candidate, because of its future savings, may be a plan to force
federal workers — under both the old CSRS and the newer FERS
retirement systems – to shoulder more of the burden in paying
for their own retirement. Insiders believe it will be a version
of a proposal from the Simpson-Bowles Commission, which the
Blair House group headed by Vice President Joe Biden also
considered.
Under that plan —
and the numbers and timetable are subject to change — current
FERS employees, who now contribute 0.8 percent of their salary
to the civil service retirement fund (as well as paying Social
Security taxes) would see that increased 0.5 percent each year,
until they are paying around 2.3 percent for their FERS
retirement. Workers hired in the future under the FERS system
might be forced to pay 5.5 to 6 percent toward retirement. For
CSRS employees, there has been consideration for raising their
contributions .5 percent each year for the next three years. If
that prevails, they would wind up paying about 8.5 percent of
their salary toward their retirement.
Couple those
increases with the undoubtedly higher FEHBP premiums and the
minimal merit increases discussed above, the attractiveness of
the job becomes….well unattractive. Consequently, it is very
important that federal employees understand where their elected
representative stand on the issues.
NTEU’s link at:
http://www.nteu.org/UnionOffice/LegislativeIssues/
can help employees
stay up-to-date on the legislative issues that are directly
affecting them. Please bookmark this website in your favorites
and visit it often. Of course, NTEU always apprises its members
about these matters, and this is just another benefit of their
membership.
We invite you to
join NTEU and to become a legislative activist.
