[House Document 110-78]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
110th Congress, 1st Session - - - - - - - - - - - - - House Document 110-78
AN ALTERNATIVE PLAN FOR LOCALITY PAY INCREASES
__________
COMMUNICATION
from
THEPRESIDENTOFTHEUNITEDSTATES
transmitting
AN ALTERNATIVE PLAN FOR LOCALITY PAY INCREASE PAYABLE TO CIVILIAN
FEDERAL EMPLOYEES COVERED BY THE GENERAL SCHEDULE (GS) AND CERTAIN
OTHER PAY SYSTEMS IN JANUARY 2008, PURSUANT TO 5 U.S.C. 5305(a)(3)
December 11, 2007.--Referred to the Committee on Oversight and
Government Reform and ordered to be printed
The White House,
Washington, November 27, 2007.
Hon. Nancy Pelosi,
Speaker of the House of Representatives,
Washington, DC.
Dear Madam Speaker: I am transmitting an alternative plan
for locality pay increases payable to civilian Federal
employees covered by the General Schedule (GS) and certain
other pay systems in January 2008.
Under title 5, United States Code, civilian Federal
employees covered by the GS and certain other pay systems would
receive a two-part pay increase in January 2008: (1) a 2.5
percent across-the-board adjustment in scheduled rates of basic
pay derived from Employment Cost Index data on changes in the
wages and salaries of private industry workers, and (2)
locality pay adjustments averaging 12.5 percent based on Bureau
of Labor Statistics salary surveys of non-Federal employers in
each locality pay area. According to the statutory formula, for
Federal employees covered by the locality pay system, the
overall average pay increase would be about 15.0 percent.
Title 5, United States Code, authorizes me to implement an
alternative locality pay plan if I view the adjustments that
would otherwise take effect as inappropriate due to ``national
emergency or serious economic conditions affecting the general
welfare.'' For the reasons described below, I have determined
that it is appropriate to exercise my statutory alternative
plan authority to set alternative January 2008 locality pay
increases.
A national emergency, within the meaning of chapter 53 of
title 5, has existed since September 11, 2001. Full statutory
civilian pay increases would cost $16.4 billion in 2008 alone.
That amount exceeds by $12.7 billion the cost of a 3.0 percent
overall Federal civilian pay increase that I proposed in my
2008 Budget. Furthermore, the costs would grow at compounded
rates in subsequent years. Such cost increases would force deep
cuts in discretionary spending or Federal employment to stay
within budget. Either outcome would unacceptably interfere with
our Nation's ability to secure the homeland and pursue the war
on terrorism.
Accordingly, I have determined that under the authority of
section 5304a of title 5, United States Code, locality-based
comparability payments for the locality pay areas established
by the President's Pay Agent, in the amounts set forth in the
attached table, shall become effective on the first day of the
first applicable pay period beginning on or after January 1,
2008. When compared with the payments currently in effect,
these comparability payments will increase the General Schedule
payroll by about 0.5 percent. When combined with the 2.5
percent across-the-board increase, the 3.0 percent total
increase equals the 12-month increase in overall nationwide
labor costs as of September 2006 (the reference period for
decisions about the January 2008 pay adjustment under current
law). Our national situation precludes granting larger locality
pay increases at this time.
Finally, the law requires that I include in this report an
assessment of the impact of my decision on the Government's
ability to recruit and retain well-qualified employees. I do
not believe this decision will materially affect our ability to
continue to attract and retain a quality Federal workforce. To
the contrary, since any pay raise above the amount proposed in
this alternative plan would likely be unfunded, agencies would
have to absorb the additional cost and could have to freeze
hiring to pay the higher rates. Moreover, the GS ``quit'' rate
continues to be very low (2.1 percent on an annual basis), well
below the overall average ``quit'' rate in private enterprise.
Should the need arise, the Government has many compensation
flexibilities, such as special salary rates and recruitment and
retention incentives, to maintain the high quality workforce
that serves our Nation.
Sincerely,
George W. Bush.
Alternative Plan for 2008 Locality-Based Comparability Payments
Locality Pay Area Locality Payment (percent)
Atlanta--Sandy Springs--Gainesville, GA-AL........................ 16.59
Boston--Worcester--Manchester, MA-NH-RI-ME........................ 21.74
Buffalo--Niagara--Cattaraugus, NY................................. 14.76
Chicago--Naperville--Michigan City, IL-IN-WI...................... 22.47
Cincinnati--Middletown--Wilmington, OH-KY-IN...................... 17.57
Cleveland--Akron--Elyria, OH...................................... 16.53
Columbus--Marion--Chillicothe, OH................................. 15.40
Dallas--Fort Worth, TX............................................ 18.04
Dayton--Springfield--Greenville, OH............................... 14.76
Denver--Aurora--Boulder, CO....................................... 20.52
Detroit--Warren--Flint, MI........................................ 22.03
Hartford--West Hartford--Willimantic, CT-MA....................... 23.20
Houston--Baytown--Huntsville, TX.................................. 27.02
Huntsville--Decatur, AL........................................... 13.92
Indianapolis--Anderson--Columbus, IN.............................. 13.25
Los Angeles--Long Beach--Riverside, CA............................ 24.64
Miami--Fort Lauderdale--Pompano Beach, FL......................... 18.70
Milwaukee--Racine--Waukesha, WI................................... 16.13
Minneapolis--St. Paul--St. Cloud, MN-WI........................... 18.80
New York--Newark--Bridgeport, NY-NJ-CT-PA......................... 25.46
Philadelphia--Camden--Vineland, PA-NJ-DE-MD....................... 19.49
Phoenix--Mesa--Scottsdale, AZ..................................... 13.98
Pittsburgh--New Castle, PA........................................ 14.54
Portland--Vancouver--Beaverton, OR-WA............................. 18.17
Raleigh--Durham--Cary, NC......................................... 16.50
Richmond, VA...................................................... 14.90
Sacramento--Arden--Arcade--Yuba City, CA-NV....................... 19.62
San Diego--Carlsbad--San Marcos, CA............................... 21.17
San Jose--San Francisco--Oakland, CA.............................. 31.43
Seattle--Tacoma--Olympia, WA...................................... 19.16
Washington--Baltimore--Northern Virginia, DC-MD-VA-WV-PA.......... 19.73
Rest of U.S....................................................... 12.91