The Daily Bell Newswire – It's Free!

News & Analysis

Fed Salaries Explode During Recession

Saturday, December 12, 2009 – by Staff Report

The number of federal workers earning six-figure salaries has exploded during the recession, according to a USA TODAY analysis of federal salary data. Federal employees making salaries of $100,000 or more jumped from 14% to 19% of civil servants during the recession's first 18 months – and that's before overtime pay and bonuses are counted. Federal workers are enjoying an extraordinary boom time – in pay and hiring – during a recession that has cost 7.3 million jobs in the private sector. The highest-paid federal employees are doing best of all on salary increases. Defense Department civilian employees earning $150,000 or more increased from 1,868 in December 2007 to 10,100 in June 2009, the most recent figure available. When the recession started, the Transportation Department had only one person earning a salary of $170,000 or more. Eighteen months later, 1,690 employees had salaries above $170,000. The trend to six-figure salaries is occurring throughout the federal government, in agencies big and small, high- tech and low-tech. The primary cause: substantial pay raises and new salary rules. "There's no way to justify this to the American people. It's ridiculous," says Rep. Jason Chaffetz, R-Utah, a first- term lawmaker who is on the House's federal workforce subcommittee. Jessica Klement, government affairs director for the Federal Managers Association, says the federal workforce is highly paid because the government employs skilled people such as scientists, physicians and lawyers. She says federal employees make 26% less than private workers for comparable jobs. – USA Today

Dominant Social Theme: Maybe they're deserving?

Free-Market Analysis: This article points out what is just part of a larger issue that both America and Europe have to face. In previous times, the ruling elite was fairly small in number, though highly monied – and fairly self-evident through revelations of royalty, etc. Now the elite speaks through proxies, and this is inevitably a clumsy system with manifold distortions. The distortions have to do with the determination of those who stand behind the throne to continue to drive forward what we would consider to be a powerful dominant social theme – that democratic socialism (regulatory democracy) is an appropriate state methodology.

It is not. Democratic socialism as it appears in the West today is basically the celebration of a technocratic elite, well-educated and concerned, that is supposed to bring its skill set to government and empower the political process in much the same way as it has the private sector. But even leaving aside the dubious achievements of the plethora of lawyers and accountants in the private sector, the idea that the public sector can WORK like the private sector is a dubious one indeed.

The public sector has no competition. If someone is not doing his or her "job" in the public sector, there are few ways of observing that it is not being done and few ways of determining whether it matters anyway. What exactly does the public sector produce? And granting it produces something, how does it maintain any level of quality control over this production as, again, there is no competition, and therefore no market feedback. Absent private-market price discovery it seems to us that it is almost impossible to determine the value of whatever IS being produced in the public sector.

From our humble point of view the whole idea of the public sector – and public service in general – is just one more dominant social theme. The power elite seeks to encourage large governing bodies behind which it can hide. The more powerful the government, the more easily accessible the levers of power and wealth are for those who know how to pull them and have the wherewithal to do so. The continual empowerment of the public sector is part and parcel of this process. The trouble for the power elite, in our estimation, is that trends do not grow to the sky. Correctives occur.

Conclusion: In both America and Europe it seems to us a fairly dangerous game is being played. In Europe, there is a good deal of discontent over the "anti-democratic" way that Brussels operates with all its attendant corruption. In America, an Investors Business Daily poll recently found that there are more independent voters than there are Republicans or Democrats. As the recession grinds on – and the public sector is continually empowered as it must be during such fiat-money downturns – we think that dissatisfaction will grow as well. This full story has not yet been told – and the Internet, as we continually predict, will cast a merciless eye on the unraveling.




Latest Daily Bell Articles

Feedback

Effective April 25, 2012, the Daily Bell will discontinue allowing feedback comments. We have left in place the large body of responses posted in the past, as we appreciate the valuable contributions made by some of our readers.
Showing 1 - 10 of 10 - Newest on top - Reorder Feedback
  Posted by Ted Verspyck on 12/14/09 11:54 AM

Your article is top-notch and points out the direction Washington is headed if not stopped. That direction is Sweden and other European countries where big business and big government become bed partners to the detriment of the individual.

Reply from The Daily Bell

Not a good direction, in our opinion.

  Posted by The Walking Man on 12/14/09 08:48 AM

The public sector will never be able to function with the same efficiency as the private sector. When the public sector makes poor business decisions that cost millions of dollars, they are not adequately punished as a company in the private sector would be. Besides, it's not their money they are losing anyways. There will always be a lack of true accountability in the public sector and state run monopolies will never be able to operate with the same efficiency as the private sector.

Whenever one sees a queue it generally means it's a government run operation they are observing. Red tape, inefficiency, featherbedding, sky-rocketing prices and plunging quality are the familiar characteristics of state run goods and services. We receive far too many services from the state that could be provided much cheaper and efficiently by the free market private sector.

Reply from The Daily Bell

Didn't the Pentagon "lose" hundreds of billions in the early 2000s?

  Posted by Gul on 12/12/09 11:43 PM

The mantra of Socialists is to keep government workers on a high salary leash; so come election time they will play the "puppy dogs" and vote for the continuation of the socialist elite. Every now and then they will allow the elitist cabal to "show" a change just to present a shadow which hides their real agenda of control.

Reply from The Daily Bell

Yes continual government expansion would seem to guarantee continued government.

  Posted by Eileen on 12/12/09 11:10 PM

I have to heartily disagree with your assessment. Anything the private sector does is up for competition and sometimes the skill sets of the federal worker champions.

U.S. Federal workers work for far less pay than what private sector unionized workers get, and in fact the only good part about being a Federal worker is that you NEVER get to strike.

This not only prevents paralysis of any and all services due to laws preventing such, it ensures a regular paycheck that though less that the private sector is without labor dispute interruptions.

Reply from The Daily Bell

Thanks for the feedback.

  Posted by Kaydell Bowles on 12/12/09 07:33 PM

This is salary not to mention the other perks such as bonuses, good retirement and health care packages and their work hours with non-accountability to the people who they serve.

Pox be upon both political Click to view linkbbing from those whose right it is to keep and giving to themselves!

Reply from The Daily Bell

The system is not good during the better times and worse during the bad ones.

  Posted by David Anderson on 12/12/09 02:51 PM

I am a retired federal civil servant. When I graduated from college in 1969, I did not wish to work in the private sector, feeling that it was too self-serving.

Instead I wanted to serve my fellow citizens. And so I did--as an employee of the Social Security Administration. I still believe that the mission of the SSA is a noble one. Too, SSA prides itself on its low administrative budget (under 2%), the lowest in government by far.

However, despite all that, I developed a distaste for bureaucracy in particular and government growth in general. I have watched both for 40 years and I have seen the disturbing results.

What is the solution to big government? The first shoe to drop must be the electoral demand that government shrink. The voters have to be clear in their mandate, or the rebels will. As for ACTUALLY shrinking the huge federal bureaucracy, I think Ronald Reagan (or someone in his administration) had the "what-if" solution: Eliminate all federal agencies except the departments of state, defense, and treasury, and a few indedpendent agencies, like the SSA.

To buffer the impact of millions of employees out of work all at once, continue to pay them their salaries for 10 years, but reduce them by 10% per year.

Reply from The Daily Bell

Thanks. Sounds like a plan!

  Posted by Bonnie Donaldson on 12/12/09 02:37 PM

I hope that everyone has called or emailed the White House and their congressional reps today to voice their displeasure over the new bill that will give big new salary increases to most federal government workers. Once again, I note that Russ Feingold, apparently the moral compass of the Dems, has voted against the bill.

As for the difference between the public and private sectors and production, I have worked for both groups and find generally that you could send home at least 50% of workers in both groups and not notice anything except more harmony. In any group, 20% of workers do 80% of the work, that's just human nature.

Do you recall the Peter Principle in which employees are generally promoted to their highest level of incompetence? That seems to explain the nature of the world pretty well.

Reply from The Daily Bell

Thanks for the feedback. But we're not sure the Peter Principle explains everything.

  Posted by Todavek@aol.com on 12/12/09 11:26 AM

That's a lie. There was a time when govt workers made less han public counterparts. But with the unions dictating the pay rates of govt "workers" now, they're 15 to 25% above public equivalents.

And if you count in the generous vacation and sick day allowances, health care, and the scandalous retirement benefits they get, the govt employee is 40 to 50% above the public worker. And I'd to include the lavish sprinkling of overtime pay, it's another 5% added to the Govt employee's advantage. That doesn't evaluate the job assurance difference, cell phones, cars, nurseries, etc that are common freebies for govt employees.

What she said is simply a lie, and she knows it.

What ever happened to the investigative reporters like Woodward, that would expose government waste and lies like this. Nowadays, journalists just pass on and publish the lies that government employees and politicians tel;l in their press releases. What a country!

Reply from The Daily Bell

The press in America today is unfortunately supine. We would argue that much of the Western mainstream media, in fact, is owned, pretty much, by the forces of globalism, consolidation and socialism.

  Posted by Ernest Kroll on 12/12/09 10:49 AM

Thanks for the excellent article; once again you have brought out the truth.

While in the military during the 60's, I worked closely with civil service employees; as a Data Processing Superintendent I supervised about 120 military and civilian personnel. In this capacity my best estimate was that one or two out of 100 civil servants were worth their salary - not a very impressive figure.

That is one of the main reasons I declined to enter civil service after my military retirement although I was offered a G-12 position. I just could not envision myself having to deal with the intense bureaucracy, and I certainly didn't want to find myself morphing into one of those "typical civil servants."

Of course I have no experience as to the quality of Civil Service today, but I would venture to say that the situation has not improved during the last 40+ years.

Reply from The Daily Bell

Thanks for the personal insights. The founding fathers believed in limited government - and created a Constitution that gave the federal government a very limited role. Today, with various levels of government redistributing up to 40 percent of the American GNP, it is no wonder that quality of life in the US is plunging and entrepreneurialism is waning. The private sector is inevitably subject to competition and price discovery, which is why it works better than the public one at delivering goods and services.

  Posted by Scroggins on 12/12/09 06:50 AM

Don't know that these salaries are justified. The recession may take care of them.

Reply from The Daily Bell

As it turns into a depression?