Download Free Comparison Of Federal And Private Sector Pay And Benefits Book in PDF and EPUB Free Download. You can read online Comparison Of Federal And Private Sector Pay And Benefits and write the review.

Pursuant to a congressional request, GAO provided current information on private sector and federal white-collar employee compensation packages. By law, federal employees' salaries are set at a level equitable and comparable with similar levels of work in the private sector, unless the President proposes alternative federal pay rates. There is no such requirement for benefits comparability. GAO analyzed several pay and benefits comparability studies conducted by private and federal organizations, but did not independently validate the data contained in the studies. GAO noted that an independent study found that: (1) as of 1984, federal employees' total compensation averaged 7.2 percent less than that for private sector employees; and (2) in 1985, the difference increased to 9 percent or more because the federal pay increase for 1985 was limited to less than the average pay increase in the private sector. GAO found that: (1) frequent presidential use of alternative pay rates caused pay for federal employees to lag significantly behind that for private sector employees; (2) an 18.28 percent federal pay increase would be necessary to achieve federal pay comparability in 1985; (3) the federal retirement system is better than the average private sector system because it is worth more as a percentage of the average employee's pay, and federal retirement benefits are adjusted annually to offset consumer price increases; (4) private studies indicated that private sector employers generally pay a higher share of employee health insurance premiums than does the government; (5) private sector employee life insurance programs provide more basic coverage than the federal employee program, usually at no cost to the employee; (6) while federal employees generally receive one less holiday than private sector employees, this is offset by more generous federal annual leave benefits; and (7) federal sick leave lags behind the average private sector illness and disability income plan by 0.7 percent of pay.
Introduction and summary. Defining military compensation ; Comparing military and civilian compensation ; Factors that complicate military-civilian comparisons -- Military pay, promotions, and rank -- Estimates of military compensation. Total compensation for enlisted personnel by years of experience ; Cash earnings for selected occupations -- Comparing increases in military and civilian pay. The "gap" between changes in basic pay and civilian earnings ; Issues in using the "pay gap" to evaluate military compensation ; Increases in regular military compensation versus the employment cost index -- Comparing levels of military and civilian pay. Cash compensation ; Noncash and deferred benefits ; General limitations of military-civilian comparisons -- Linking military compensation to recruiting and retention. Effectiveness of using pay to resolve occupational shortages or surpluses ; Effects of cash and noncash compensation on recruiting and retention -- Options to increase the visibility and efficiency of military compensation. Integrating the components of total compensation ; Increasing cash relative to noncash compensation -- Appendix A: Total compensation for the median enlisted member -- Appendix B: How pay changes with deployment -- Appendix C: Types of occupation- or skills-based compensation.
Designed as a comprehensive overview of public sector compensation, the book addresses strategies for change, with the author warning that failure of the profession to address this issue will ultimately lead to citizens taking matters in their own hands. The author's issues-oriented approach addresses his core messagethat the escalation of public sector compensation is impacting the ability of government to meet its core responsibility and the failure of government to address this has serious consequences. Not just a critique, it presents context, analysis, and suggestions for reform.
This report presents information regarding the patterns of variation in the salaries paid to public and private school teachers in relation to various personal and job characteristics. Specifically, the analysis examines the relationship between compensation and variables such as public/private schools, gender, race/ethnic background, school level and type, teacher qualifications, and different work environments. The economic conceptual framework of hedonic wage theory, which illuminates the trade-offs between monetary rewards and the various sets of characteristics of employees and jobs, was used to analyze The Schools and Staffing Survey (SASS) database. The national survey was administered by the National Center for Education Statistics during the 1987-88, 1990-91, and 1993-94 school years. Findings indicate that on average, public school teachers earned between about 25 to 119 percent higher salaries than did private school teachers, depending on the private subsector. Between about 2 and 50 percent of the public-private difference could be accounted for by differences in teacher characteristics, depending on the private subsector. White and Hispanic male public school teachers earned higher salaries than their female counterparts. Hedonic wage theory would predict that teacher salaries would be higher in schools with more challenging, more difficult, and less desirable work environments. Schools with higher levels of student violence, lower levels of administrative support, and large class sizes paid higher salaries to compensate teachers for the additional burdens. However, some of the findings contradict the hypothesis. For example, public school teachers working in schools characterized by fewer family problems, higher levels of teacher influence on policy, and higher job satisfaction also received higher salaries. In conclusion, the results are consistent with the hypothesis that a complex array of factors underlie the processes of teacher supply and demand and hence the determination of salaries. Teachers are not all the same, but are differentiated by their attributes. At the same time, districts and schools are differentiated by virtue of the work environment they offer. Seventeen tables and two figures are included. Appendices contain technical notes, descriptive statistics and parameter estimates for variables, and standard errors for selected tables. (Contains 84 references.) (LMI)
Government compensation and employment policies are important for the efficient delivery of public services which are crucial for the functioning of economies and the general prosperity of societies. On average, spending on the wage bill absorbs around one-fifth of total spending. Cross-country variation in wage spending reflects, in part, national choices about the government’s role in priority sectors, as well as variations in the level of economic development and resource constraints.
The federal government is having increasing difficulty faithfully executing the laws, which is what Alexander Hamilton called “the true test” of a good government. This book diagnoses the symptoms, explains their general causes, and proposes ways to improve the effectiveness of the federal government. Employing Hamilton’s seven measures of an energetic federal service, Paul Light shows how the government is wanting in each measure. After assessing the federal report card, Light offers a comprehensive agenda for reform, including new laws limiting the number of political appointees, reducing the layers of government management, reducing the size of government as its baby-boom employees retire, revitalizing the federal career, and reducing the heavy outsourcing of federal work. Although there are many ways to fix each of the seven problems with government, only a comprehensive agenda will bring the kind of reform needed to reverse the overall erosion of the capacity to faithfully execute all the laws.
Fiscal realities and changing social priorities are requiring a dramatic shift in the way that benefits are selected and awarded to employees, especially in the public sector. This means that public administrators and policy researchers must consider new parameters and contingencies, both financial and social, when evaluating choices and making pol