Senate panel votes to give civilians higher raise than military

In a break with tradition, the Senate Appropriations Committee on Thursday approved a higher 2007 pay raise for civilian federal employees than for military service members.

On the same day committee members voted for a 2.7 percent civilian pay hike as part of the fiscal 2007 Transportation-Treasury appropriations bill, they backed a 2.2 percent pay raise for members of the military as part of the Defense spending bill.

The 2.7 percent figure for civilians matches a mid-June vote by the full House. The 2.2 percent military raise also matches a House floor vote on the Defense appropriations bill, although that vote went against the House's earlier position to provide a 2.7 percent military raise as part of separate legislation - the fiscal 2007 defense authorization bill.

For years, federal employee advocates have fought for the principle of pay parity between the two groups after the Bush administration has proposed larger raises for the military, but this year the concept has been turned on its head.

"The appropriate pay raise for both civilian and military employees is 2.7 percent," National Treasury Employees Union President Colleen Kelley said. "NTEU will support all efforts to provide a 2.7 percent pay raise to both civilian and military personnel."

Kelley added she expects Congress to grant a 2.7 percent increase to the military at the end of the process, which it could do on the Senate floor and then in conference negotiations.

A spokeswoman for Sen. Barbara Mikulski, D-Md., said, "The difference will be negotiated as the bills move to the Senate floor."

President Bush proposed a 2.2 percent raise in his fiscal 2007 budget for both groups, marking the first time he did not suggest a higher raise for military service members than for civilian government employees. But members of Congress said soldiers deserve a higher raise, especially in a time of war; soon the House passed the 2.7 percent raise as part of the Defense authorization bill.

That prompted a pay parity movement from pro-federal worker lawmakers.

In a June statement of administration policy, the White House said it "strongly opposes" a 2.7 percent increase for federal employees, arguing it would cost an additional $600 million on top of the Bush proposal and that "any recruitment or retention challenges facing the federal government are limited to a few areas and occupations and are not addressed by arbitrary across-the board increases."

As part of the Transportation-Treasury measure, the Senate Appropriations Committee also retained competitive sourcing provisions from last year's bill that are in line with those governing the Defense Department.

The provisions would prevent the direct conversion of functions involving more than 10 federal employees to contractor performance, and would require that contractors show savings of at least 10 percent over the in-house team or $10 million, whichever is less, before work is awarded to the private sector.

Mikulski introduced that language in conference last year, and competitive sourcing foes were glad to see it included earlier in this year's bill.

American Federation of Government Employees lobbyist John Threlkeld said his organization "is particularly pleased that the committee's retention of the competition requirement will prevent agencies that are carrying out OMB's controversial lines of business initiatives from perpetrating direct conversions, giving away work performed by federal employees without public-private competition. The competition requirement ensures that agencies can get the quality they need, but at the lowest price to taxpayers."

"This language helps to level the playing field for federal employees and continues my fight to protect them against unfair contracting out policies," Mikulski said.

Also included in the Transportation-Treasury bill was funding for an Office of Personnel Management initiative to automate the federal employee retirement system, which the House rejected.

OPM Director Linda Springer urged the House to support the Senate's decision as the appropriations process moves forward "so that current and future federal employees will enjoy a smooth transition from their jobs to their golden years."