FatCratz

More Protections and Benefits for Federal Employees

Things have been a little quiet here at FatCratz (more on that later), but this article in the post jolted us out of our slumbers:

Congress is returning to work today with a full plate of measures important to federal workers, including several that would expand the protections and benefits offered to current and former government employees. The House is scheduled to vote this week on a bill that would grant federal employees four weeks of paid leave for the birth or adoption of a child. Another House measure ... would change the benefits structure for federal workers. The Senate will consider a bill that would expand federal workers' telework benefits... And both chambers will soon work on a bipartisan effort to extend health and retirement benefits to the partners of gay federal employees.

Recent reports suggest that public sector employees already far outstrip their private sector counterparts. And we know the average annual salary is $75,419--not bad, for government work (It's actually much higher in urban centers such as Washington, DC, where "locality pay" boosts it well above $80K a year).

What's wrong with this picture? Aside from the merits of any of these proposals, where in the private sector are benefits and job security INCREASING?! What rational organization in a time of rampant deficit spending chooses to make its labor costs more expensive?

But of course, the government isn't a rational organization. It is a political one. And the people making the decisions--Congress--aren't paying the bills. In fact, the people paying the bills--the re-election tabs for the decision makers--are increasingly the public sector unions who benefit the most from these benefit expansions.

And the real bill is stuck with you, the taxpayer.

Local Couple Probed

Federal grant money is used for the most remarkable things.

Eleanor and James Moss are not the kind of people who usually make the history books, but they have stories worth remembering. ... Sally Thomas, an adult services librarian at the Hayward Public Library, probed the couple on Tuesday at their home, culling stories about the local milkman, battling housing bias and a neighbor's professed UFO sighting. ... The state library this year awarded $345,000 in "California of the Past" digital storytelling grants to public libraries. The grants are supported by the federal Institute of Museum and Library Services.

And you wonder why we can't balance the budget.

This used to be called "oral history," but apparently that phrase doesn't test well. "It's not an oral history," said state library consultant Ira Bray. "These are short little snippets that illuminate an experience these folks have had."

Apparently, when oral history consists of "short little snippets" and is posted online, it becomes "digital storytelling," and is a different thing altogether.

With the advent of YouTube and other online services, recording and sharing videos has become an increasingly common mode of communication and expression. The librarians involved in the "California of the Past" project said they want to take advantage of that trend to record history and make it more accessible.

The big difference between this and YouTube, of course, is that people record short little snippets and post them on YouTube for free. And they don't need to hire consultants to do so.

Congressman Conyers on Reading Legislation

Conyers admits what we all know. Congress doesn't even read the bills they vote on and pass. This means they haven't even bothered to read something that citizens are required to understand and obey.

Adrift in Arlington

On Sunday, a Washington Post reader wrote in to the paper seeking employment advice:

Arlington: I left a senior middle-management private-sector position a few months ago for a federal job. At this point, I feel that federal service is not for me, and I desire to get back to the private sector. What is the best way to discuss this with prospective employers?

A few months in, and Adrift in Arlington already knows federal service isn't for her?

I'm not surprised in the least. In fact, I wonder how many experience this kind of regret when moving from private to public sector employment. Obviously, it's not easy to reverse course quickly, and I'm sure most just grin and bear it and eventually acculturate themselves to the change.

The structures and incentives and red tape of the federal workplace can be a shock to the system for someone coming from the private sector. The Post columnist euphemistically calls this a "hierarchical or structured environment" in her response. She could just as easily have said "inefficient and mind-numbing."

FatCratz Spend $440 Million a Year Printing Documents They Don't Need

The most dangerous waste in government is so small that most people have never thought of it. Like how bureaucrats use their printers in the office.

The government can generate substantial savings by reining in superfluous printing, according to a study released on Tuesday. ... the government spends nearly $1.3 billion annually on printing. Of that, about $440 million -- more than four times the amount President Obama recently asked agency managers collectively to eliminate from their administrative budgets -- is spent on pages that don't need to be printed, the survey found.

Over a third of pages printed are thrown out the same day they come off the printer.

Is the government more wasteful than the private sector? If you work for a company in the real economy, ask yourself if your boss would let you waste 35% of your printing budget. There's your answer.

Hat tip to Senator Coburn's "Pork Report."

Speed Reading Legislation--No Joke!

You know the radio commercials that make a joke about fine print by having a speed reader breathlessly read through the required material?

That's how our current majority in Congress views the legislation they pass.

One of the few tactics open to a legislative minority in the U.S. Congress is to demand that the full text of any law be read before a vote. Given the size and utterly incoherent complexity of virtually all legislation these days, this is an onerous and time-consuming task.

Democrats have come up with a response. They've hired a speed reader:

Democrats in the House Energy and Commerce Committee have taken a novel precaution to head off Republican efforts to slow action this week on a sweeping climate bill. They are hiring a speed reader. Republicans on the committee have said they may force the reading of the entire 946-page bill -- as well as major amendments that measure several hundred pages -- all aloud. This is a procedure lawmakers have a right to invoke.

Legislators have become so accustomed to not actually reading the bills they vote on, that they're willing to publicly flaunt a procedural requirement to do just that. That they are not embarrassed by this fact reveals their utter contempt for the citizens who have to abide by the reckless laws they pass, under threat of prosecution.

Government Vs. Business

John Steele Gordon has a great piece on the differences between government and business, which gives seven reasons why government can't run a business. It's a brilliant summary of the public vs. private sector contrast that is the heart and soul of this blog. Well worth reading.

I have two favorites. First, government is a monopoly, and virtually never faces competition, thus voiding the most powerful force driving capitalism toward greater efficiency. Second, Government is regulated by government:

When "postalization" of the nation's phone system appeared imminent in 1917, Theodore Vail, the president of AT&T, admitted that his company was, effectively, a monopoly. But he noted that "all monopolies should be regulated. Government ownership would be an unregulated monopoly."

It is government's job to make and enforce the rules that allow a civilized society to flourish. But it has a dismal record of regulating itself.

Another great tidbit from this piece, for which I couldn't find the source:

In 1913, for instance, thinking it was being overcharged by the steel companies for armor plate for warships, the federal government decided to build its own plant. It estimated that a plant with a 10,000-ton annual capacity could produce armor plate for only 70% of what the steel companies charged. When the plant was finally finished, however -- three years after World War I had ended -- it was millions over budget and able to produce armor plate only at twice what the steel companies charged. It produced one batch and then shut down, never to reopen.

Guess What Country Has Balanced It's Budget For the Last Ten Years

Canada.

Believe it or not, our neighbor to the north has been far more fiscally sound than the U.S. for over a decade. And they're balancing the books by cutting spending, not increasing taxes. Personal taxes are equal to the US; corporate tax rates are far lower than ours.

Check out these charts. The numbers are staggering.

The key statistic? Only 41% of all government spending in Canada occurs at the federal level. In the U.S. it is 62% and growing. The further one gets from the taxpayers--literally and metaphorically--the easier it is to spend their money without accountability.

Moat Cleaning at Taxpayers' Expense

A scandal has been brewing in the UK over abuses of housing expense subsidies provided for Members of Parliament. The fun part is that when something like this happens in Britain, some pretty extravagant expenses show up on the public account. Like moat cleaning.

The perquisites claimed offer a colorful reminder of the resilience of the class system in Britain: from the Tory MP who claimed for the upkeep of the moat at his country house, to the Labour man who charged for a couple of toilet seats.

The scandal crosses party lines. It turns out that in the 1980's, MPs wanted to vote themselves a raise during an economic downturn, but couldn't handle the public scrutiny. So they agreed to expand the list of expensible items. Most of the expenses are, in fact, legal under the current regime, while many others are clear abuses of the system. One such abusive scheme entails flipping "second home" designations to rack up expenses renovating multiple residences in turn, all at taxpayer expense.

The bottom line here is daylight. Most british citizens had no idea such a housing subsidy existed, and are frankly shocked that during an economic downturn MPs would have the taxpayers paying for their light bulbs to be replaced, or their swimming pool to be cleaned, or for $1,100 television sets. It just shows what politicians will try to get away with when they don't think anyone is looking.

Average Pay for Federal Employee: $75,419

But at least they're worth it, right?

What industry can match that pay?

And job security.

And annual cost of living pay increases.

And days off.

And health insurance benefits.

And lack of accountability.

A word of warning to those hundreds of thousands of employees about to join the two million plus federal employees: there are grave tradeoffs for this security and benefits. You will never be as efficient, as productive, or as innovative as you might have been when you start working for the federal government (military excluded). Pass on the security. Join the private sector.