Back for More: National Newspaper Smears Federal Workers with Another Misleading Article on Retirement Benefits
Thursday, August 16, 2012(National Federation of Federal Employees)
For the
past several years, the nation’s most widely
circulated newspaper, USA Today, has
published high profile stories disparaging the
pay and benefits of federal employees.
One
story claimed federal employees earn
double that of workers in the private
sector despite conclusive Bureau of
Labor Statistics reports confirming federal
workers earn 26% less than their private
sector counterparts. Another claimed that the number of
federal employees earning $150,000 per year
exploded under President Obama,
without accounting for the fact that the GS 15
Step 10, the governments pay cap, barely crept
past the $150,000 milestone due to a 2% pay
increase endorsed by Congress the year
before.
This
week it appears that these anti-federal worker reporters are
back to their old ways with a new
story exposing the “handsome
rewards” received by federal retirees. The
story focuses on the 1.2% of federal retirees
with pensions exceeding $100,000. In the story,
author Dennis Cauchon explains briefly that
those receiving these high pensions are
primarily top agency leadership, doctors,
lawyers, and scientists, but quickly
transitions to fear tactics on federal
retirement benefits generally. At one point, he
says:
“Pensions are a growing federal budget
burden, rising twice as fast as inflation over
the last decade. Pension payments cost $70
billion last year, plus $13 billion for retiree
health care. Taxpayers face a $2 trillion
unfunded liability — the amount needed to cover
future benefits — for these programs, according
to the government's audited financial
statement.”
This may
paint a bleak picture of federal retirement,
but there are some serious omissions that
undermine his argument. While retirement costs
for the federal government are increasing in
the short term, this will fall sharply once
Civil Service Retirement System (CSRS) retirees
cease collecting pensions. Once the next
generation of retirees, hired under the Federal
Employee Retirement System (FERS) begins
drawing their pensions en masse, costs will
decrease substantially. This is because the
FERS pension benefit is half that of the old
CSRS system – a fact Cauchon neglects to
mention in his story. In fact, the
average annual pension benefit for FERS
retirees is just $12,800, a small fraction of
the $100,000 pensions described in the story.
The other problem with
Cauchon’s characterization of the federal
retirement problem is the idea of a “$2
trillion unfunded liability.” This is simply
not true. In fact, according to a recent
report by the Office of Personnel Management
(OPM) the Federal Employee Retirement System
(FERS) was not only fully funded – it was
running a $12.2 billion surplus in 2010 (the
latest year which information is available).
Cauchon is simply misleading people about the
health of the federal pension
system.
“The
fact of the matter is that some people in
Congress and the media will stop at nothing to
paint federal employees as greedy, underworked
bureaucrats,” said NFFE National President
William R. Dougan. “The reality is that federal
employees keep our food safe to eat, our skies
safe for flying, our military prepared for
combat, and countless other indispensable
services. Federal employees are the backbone of
this nation and it’s about time these
muckrakers understood
that.”
This article is one of thousands of anti-federal employee smears that populate the newspapers, airwaves, and internet. Until we respond, rebut, and expose these attacks as unfair, federal employees will continue to face scrutiny from Congress and our fellow Americans. We need to stand up and make our voices heard in the media and Congress. Visit our Legislative Action Center and Communicators Toolkit to find out what you can do to stand up for yourself and your fellow federal employees.
