More shutdown details from OPM
April 6th, 2011 | 2011 Budget | Posted by Stephen Losey
Here are some additional information from the shutdown guidance OPM posted last night:
- Health benefits and life insurance coverage will continue during a shutdown, as long as the shutdown doesn’t last more than a year.
- But furloughed employees may lose their long-term care, dental and vision coverage. The guidance says “deductions will cease for non-excepted employees” — that is, those who are furloughed. OPM said it will provide information on how furloughed employees can continue long-term care, dental and vision coverage by Friday. I’ve asked OPM for confirmation on this and will update the blog when they get back to me.
- Any paid leave — annual, sick or otherwise — will be canceled. Meaning you still won’t come in to work, but you won’t be paid for those days.
- As expected, it will be up to Congress to decide whether furloughed employees will be paid for the shutdown time. It happened last time, but given the prominence of deficit hawks in Congress these days — and the general hostility towards federal employees in some quarters — it may not happen this time.
- If an excepted employee refuses to report for work, he will be considered absent without leave and subject to any AWOL penalties.
- Federal employees’ pensions — including calculation of the high-3 — won’t be affected unless the shutdown lasts for more than six months.
More information can be found in this Q&A we posted in February.
USPS pension puzzle (revisited)
March 18th, 2011 | 2012 Budget OPM Postal Service Uncategorized | Posted by Sean Reilly
Attentive (and we mean really attentive) Fedline readers might remember a post from last month about the apparent disconnect of the Office of Personnel Management’s charging the U.S. Postal Service more for its current pension contributions at the same time the Obama administration is proposing a big refund to the Postal Service on past contributions. We’d asked OPM for comment and finally received an answer yesterday. So, in the interest of thoroughness, we’re rerunning the original Feb. 22 post, with the OPM response appended verbatim.
Here’s an intriguing nugget from the U.S. Postal Service’s latest quarterly report: Even as the Obama administration agrees that the Postal Service is owed a huge refund on past payments to its pension program, the Office of Personnel Management—headed by Obama appointee John Berry—is requiring it to shell out more for current payments.
For the first quarter of fiscal 2011, the Postal Service’s contributions to the Federal Employees Retirement System, or FERS, rose by $24 million—from $1,469 million to $1,493 million—versus the same period in fiscal 2010, even though the USPS workforce continued to shrink, the report says. The reason, according to the Postal Service, is that its employer contribution rate increased from 11.2 percent to 11.7 percent of eligible payroll. The agency is appealing that boost to a federal board of actuaries on the grounds that its FERS obligation is already overfunded to the tune of some $6.9 billion.
In its newly released 2012 budget request, the White House proposed refunding the Postal Service that money over 30 years, starting with a $550 million down payment this year.
At least to non-actuarial minds, it seems contradictory to be giving with one hand and taking away with the other. In an email, OPM spokeswoman Brittney Manchester offered the following explanation:
“Under current law, the Postal FERS ongoing contributions and the Postal FERS surplus are subject to different provisions of law that are independent of each other. Without specific legal authority, the Office of Personnel Management cannot make adjustments to Postal’s ongoing contributions despite the fact that there is a surplus in the retirement fund attributable to Postal employees.
“The October 1, 2010, increase in the FERS employer contribution rate applied not just to the Postal Service, but to all other agencies as well. Under FERS, all agencies pay the same contribution rate. Different provisions apply to the overall funding situation. Retirement funding is a long-term matter, and estimates have to be made covering economic and other factors that are many years distant. Over the past quarter century, Postal Service FERS funding has grown gradually to exceed projected future liabilities by approximately $6.9 billion.”
“The President’s 2012 Budget provides short-term financial relief through a sensible and fair restructuring of key retiree liabilities, while seeking to work with Congress and stakeholders to secure needed reforms to modernize its business model.”
Tags: John Berry, Office of Personnel Management, U.S. Postal Service
USPS pension puzzle
February 22nd, 2011 | 2012 Budget OPM Postal Service | Posted by Sean Reilly
Here’s an intriguing nugget from the U.S. Postal Service’s latest quarterly report: Even as the Obama administration agrees that the Postal Service is owed a huge refund on past payments to its pension program, the Office of Personnel Management—headed by Obama appointee John Berry—is requiring it to shell out more for current payments.
For the first quarter of fiscal 2011, the Postal Service’s contributions to the Federal Employees Retirement System, or FERS, rose by $24 million—from $1,469 million to $1.493 million—versus the same period in fiscal 2010, even though the USPS workforce continued to shrink, the report says. The reason, according to the Postal Service, is that its employer contribution rate increased from 11.2 percent to 11.7 percent of eligible payroll. The agency is appealing that boost to a federal board of actuaries on the grounds that its FERS obligation is already overfunded to the tune of some $6.9 billion.
In its newly released 2012 budget request, the White House proposed refunding the Postal Service that money over 30 years, starting with a $550 million down payment this year.
At least to non-actuarial minds, it seems contradictory to be giving with one hand and taking away with the other. We’ve asked OPM for an explanation; if we get one, we’ll post it here.
Tags: Federal Employees, John Berry, Office of Personnel Management
Bypass OPM, postal groups urge Obama
January 14th, 2011 | Postal Service Uncategorized | Posted by Sean Reilly
With the U.S. Postal Service on a steady slide toward insolvency, labor and management are double-teaming the White House in a bid for help.
In a joint letter to President Obama this week, the Postal Service’s four unions, as well as organizations representing postmasters and postal supervisors, asked the administration to override the Office of Personnel Management’s position on allocation of pension costs.
If that subject sounds like a snoozer, some see it as a magic bullet for the Postal Service’s many ills.
Over the years, the Postal Service has overpaid between $50 billion to $75 billion into the Civil Service Retirement System and another $6 billion or so into the Federal Employees Retirement System, according to outside studies. Although the Postal Service would love to have that money back, OPM has stuck to its stance that Congress must authorize any change in actuarial methods, even though some lawmakers say the personnel office could do the job on its own.
“Since OPM refuses to exercise this authority, we urge you to use your authority as President to do so,” the letter states.
A White House spokesman did not respond to requests for comment Friday.
The Postal Service, which suffered record losses last year, expects to run out of money in September if it has to make a legally required $5.5 billion payment for retiree health care.
Tags: Office of Personnel Management, President Obama, U.S. Postal Service
Service credit deposit problems: Have you been affected?
January 4th, 2011 | Office of Personnel Management | Posted by Stephen Losey
OPM said yesterday it is sending letters to many federal employees whose interest on retirement system deposits has been over- or undercharged for years, telling them how much they owe.
If you’ve received one of these letters or have otherwise found out there’s a problem with your service credit deposits, we’d like to hear from you. When did you find out there was a problem, and what were you told? How long did the problem go on? How much do you owe, or have you overpaid in recent years?
E-mail me at slosey@federaltimes.com if you’d like to talk. If you’d prefer to remain anonymous, that’s fine.
Tags: Office of Personnel Management, retirement, service credit deposits, what do you think?
FEHBP open season dates announced
July 28th, 2010 | Pay & Benefits | Posted by Stephen Losey
"Duck season!" "Wabbit season!" "Duck season!" "Wabbit season!" What? That's not the open season OPM is talking about? Never mind.
The Office of Personnel Management just released a letter that said this year’s open season for the Federal Employees Health Benefits Program will run from Monday, Nov. 8 through Monday, Dec. 13. Federal employees will be able to select their health, dental and vision insurance plans and enroll in a Flexible Spending Account between those dates.
Anyone already enrolled in a health, dental or vision plan will stay enrolled in their current plan unless they choose to change or cancel it. But Flexible Spending Accounts don’t carry over from one year to another — enrollees must set up an account again if they want to keep directing pretax money to an account used to pay for medical and other expenses.
What’s that you say? Wasn’t OPM going to simplify the open season schedule beginning this year so it runs along the easy-to-remember dates of Nov. 1 to Nov. 30? Well, that’s still in the works, apparently. The April 19 draft regulation changing the schedule hasn’t yet been finalized. And OPM said that once it is approved, the simplified schedule will take effect next year.
Tags: FEHBP, health care, Office of Personnel Management, open season
OPM’s ROWE program: What do you think?
May 6th, 2010 | Office of Personnel Management | Posted by Stephen Losey
Office of Personnel Management Director John Berry is a full-fledged convert to the Results Oriented Work Environment theory of employee management, under which employees are given complete leeway to choose where and when they work, as long as they get their jobs done. He’s even getting ready to experiment with the ROWE program at OPM headquarters and its facility in Boyers, Pa.
But will it work? We’d like to hear from employees and managers alike about the potential benefits and pitfalls of such a program, and the challenges that might come from trying to change an office’s culture so thoroughly.
E-mail me at slosey@federaltimes.com. We’re happy to keep responses anonymous if that’s what you’d prefer.
Cherry blossom time for OPM employees
March 30th, 2010 | Office of Personnel Management | Posted by Stephen Losey
Photo courtesy of the National Cherry Blossom Festival
Office of Personnel Management employees in Washington will get a treat later this week: an hour off to view the cherry blossoms and squeeze in a little exercise.
OPM Director John Berry issued a memo March 26 to the nearly 1,500 employees at the agency’s Washington headquarters granting them an hour off from April 1 to 4 to walk down to the Tidal Basin and see the blossoms. Those four days will be the blossoms’ peak blooming days.
Berry has made promoting wellness initiatives and encouraging federal employees to be healthier a major part of his agenda. This excused absence — and the nearly mile-and-a-half walk he hopes will accompany it — fits in with that drive.
The National Cherry Blossom Festival is an annual springtime event in Washington that commemmorates Tokyo’s 1912 gift of 3,000 cherry blossom trees to the United States.
Full text of the memo can be found after the jump.
Tags: cherry blossoms, John Berry, Office of Personnel Management, wellness
Health care reform: What do you think?
March 30th, 2010 | Office of Personnel Management | Posted by Stephen Losey
Federal Times would like to hear from federal employees who might be affected by the health care reform bill passed last week.
Do you have an adult child who can get health coverage as a result of the bill? Are you concerned about the excise tax or how it might affect your premiums? Are you worried that putting the Office of Personnel Management in charge of insurance exchanges could take its attention away from its traditional missions? Send us an e-mail at slosey@federaltimes.com.
Government to open on time Wednesday
February 16th, 2010 | OPM | Posted by Stephen Losey
All federal employees in Washington will have their first full workday in nearly two weeks tomorrow. The Office of Personnel Management announced this afternoon that government offices will open on time Wednesday, and without an unscheduled leave option. So if you haven’t dug your car out yet, now may be the time.