Pay Raise Victory Comes With Price

Be careful what you wish for. That's the message of this year's debate over the federal pay raise. Those who were shouting for military civilian pay-parity got their wish yesterday, as President Bush proposed identical 2.2 percent pay increases for both groups.

But while the raise may be equal, it's not what one would characterize as overly generous. And it may be the best employees can hope for. Rep. Tom Davis, R-Va., the influential chairman of the House Government Reform Committee, signaled that with parity in place, the fight over the raise is over. "This will be the first time in many years that Davis and the Washington-area delegation will not have to wage a battle in Congress to protect pay parity, the belief that our federal workers should be treated equally in the annual cost-of-living pay raises," the congressman's office said in a press release.

But Davis' team got it wrong: Annual federal pay increases are tied (albeit loosely, as a practical matter) to the cost of labor, not the cost of living. That's why the Bush administration made it clear that this year's raise proposal was not an effort to help federal wages keep pace with inflation, or to endorse the parity concept. Instead, OMB spokesman Alex Conant told the Washington Post the 2.2 figure simply represents "an amount that will most effectively and responsibly allow us to recruit, retain and reward quality employees." Translation: We still have a lot of people apply for every opening, and we don't think too many people already in the workforce will quit if we keep the raise this low.