Helping Hand

We write often about the differences between the public and private sectors when it comes to pay and benefits, management styles, and personnel issues. But many federal employees are feeling the same kind of economic pressures affecting much of the rest of the workforce, according a new set of numbers released on Monday by the Federal Employee Education and Assistance Fund.

In four public opinion polls conducted between Aug. 15 and Sept. 7, between 40 percent and 46 percent of Americans said jobs and the economy were their biggest concerns as they considered who to vote for in November's presidential election. The federal government, a steady supplier of jobs, is the rare employer that can set itself up as a safe harbor during a struggling economy.

Even if their jobs aren't in jeopardy, some federal employees are financially strained, according to the Federal Employee Education and Assistance Fund's figures. In August, the fund, which helps federal workers affected by natural disasters, including the 2007 wildfires in California, and personal crises such as divorce, doled out more aid than ever before in its history.

The fund, which relies on individual and corporate contributions, distributed more than $500,000 to 1,000 federal employees and their families in August 2008, alone. Of those funds, $300,000 went to first-semester scholarships for the children of federal employees, while $149,503 went to subsidized child care expenses. In addition, the fund gave out $47,000 in interest-free loans directly to creditors to help federal employees pay for basic living expenses, such as rent and utilities.

That last figure is double the amount the fund paid out in August 2007.

"Each day, I am flabbergasted at the need I see out there," said Rosanne Martillaro, director of FEEA's emergency assistance program. "I often feel that I have a front-row seat on this economic downturn, and from my vantage point, things are much worse than even the news reports are telling us."

Martillaro pointed out that all the people who receive assistance from the fund are employed by the federal government and are struggling, despite their employment.

Kathrene Hansen, executive director of the Greater Los Angeles Federal Executive Board, told lawmakers similar hardship stories in June to argue that the federal government should switch from a locality pay system to one based on cost of living.

"We hear about employees who sleep in their cars while they save up to get into an apartment, employees who get their dental work done in Mexico, employees who share an apartment based on their shift assignment," Hansen told members of the House Oversight and Government Reform Federal Workforce Subcommittee.

This is not to say that all federal employees are living on the edge of financial collapse. In the Washington area, the pay raises for federal employees were comparable to those in the private sector: between 2007 and 2008, pay for employees in both sectors rose an average of 4.5 percent. Nor is it to argue that the federal government should immediately adopt a new pay system, or that charitable groups like FEEA are a cure-all to the economic woes of feds.

But at a time of much discussion about how to make the government an attractive employer, and with a new administration on the horizon, it is worthwhile to remember that debates over federal employee pay and benefits are not merely an exercise in semantics.