Federal Employees Paid A Quarter Less Than The Private Sector: BLS

Federal workers make more than a quarter less than private sector employees doing similar jobs, according to a recent study.

Federal employees make 26.3 percent less than private sector workers on average, a recent study by the Bureau of Labor Statistics found, cited by the Washington Post. The figures were compiled for the Federal Salary Council, a group made up of union representatives, federal officials and other wage experts. One member of the council says the widening gap is largely a result of the federal employee pay freeze that President Obama's administration announced last year.

Despite the BLS findings, the debate over whether public or private sector workers make more money likely won't be put to rest any time soon. The Heritage Foundation, a conservative think tank, found that public sector worker wages exceeded private sector pay by 22 percent, another article by The Washington Post notes. USA Today also found that wages for public sector workers was higher than those for private sector workers in 83 percent of similar occupations, according to an analysis the paper published last year.

But there is also some evidence backing the BLS's findings. According to a study from the left-leaning Economic Policy Institute public sector employees are underpaid by 3.7 percent, compared to those in the private sector.

There have been a few notorious examples of high public sector worker pay that have stoked criticism against public sector wages. One California prison nurse took home $270,000 in income, mostly due to over time pay, Bloomberg recently reported. California lifeguards also took home paychecks in the six figure range. In addition, the head parole psychiatrist for the Department of Corrections and Rehabilitation received nearly one million dollars in compensation last year, according to LA Weekly.

As a result, many conservatives have been pushing for more public sector layoffs and job cuts as a way to pare down budget gaps, even though the economic slowdown has forced governments to slash jobs. About 24,000 public sector jobs were lost last month, offsetting the 104,000 private sector job gains. The losses aren't new either: Since the beginning of 2010 the government has cut an average of 23,000 jobs per month or 509,000 total .

Despite the grim outlook, it seems public employees still count themselves better off. A July poll by Gallup-Healthways found that public sector employees had a better sense of well-being than those in the private sector.

Private sector employees may be more pessimistic because their wages have been slow to increase. While good news may be on the way for some low-wage employees as the minimum wage set to increase in four states next year, recent wage growth has been marginal in the private sector, barely keeping pace with rising cost of living. Last quarter, income levels for private sector employees in 20 major cities increased by just 0.4 percent when not accounting for inflation, according to wage tracker Payscale.com.

Comments

[lulubelle1956]

08:02 PM on 11/10/2011

This has always been the case. Federal, state and local workers always make less than their private counterparts as they serve and are paid by the public. That includes professionals such as doctors and lawyers as well as non-professionals.

[dissentiscool]

11:58 AM on 11/09/2011

Mitt Romney might want to, y'know, refer to facts before he opens his mouth and puts his foot in it. Fortunately, for him, he is running in a party that doesn't really care about facts, so that shouldn't slow him down. Fact: government employees make less on average than people in the private sector. So, no, Mr. Romney, government employees do not make more money than you.

[John Harbin]

10:48 AM on 11/09/2011

I say he's right....for the majority of common jobs. Take the Postal Svc for example: A window clerk with 20yrs service makes an average of $32 an hour, compare that to the sales clerk at your local department store making around $10 an hour. They are both in sales and have limited responsibility....but the Postal clerk also get 11 Fed holidays a year, 3 weeks paid leave, and has a union crafted exceptional retirement package. And most GS schedule employees make on average a third more than their private sector counterparts.

[LeftRight]

04:00 PM on 11/09/2011

No they don't, because most federal employees aren't in menial jobs.

[GoodbyeRubyTuesday]

06:31 PM on 11/09/2011

Please provide a link for your figures - because the postal workers I know do not make the salary that you are stating; otherwise, you are just posting propaganda on a thread to disavow an article that states that public employees make a quarter less than private employees.

[John Harbin]

08:25 AM on 11/10/2011

I retired as a letter carrier making $32 an hour.....and clerks with the same length of service make approximately the same I know what I'm talking about...obviously your 'friends' are not telling you the whole story. Here's a link to the APWU pay scale....look at the bottom of it and you'll have your proof...
http://www.apwu.org/dept/ind-rel/pay/current/112109FTR.pdf

[tacevad]

09:58 AM on 11/09/2011

Ask not why Government workers get good benefits, Ask why private sector workers don't, especially when private sector CEO's are being paid record bonus and golden parachutes for failing.

[Janna03]

02:07 PM on 11/09/2011

Good point. Maybe more people should turn the puzzle around and look at it from a different angle.

[Deranged loner]

05:18 PM on 11/09/2011

The difference is that the taxpayers are paying the salaries , benefits and retirement compensation of public workers.How much would it cost the taxpayers to hire someone who is competent to work at the DMV or as a groundskeeper, postal worker vs how much these jobs pay ?

[LeftRight]

09:48 AM on 11/10/2011

No, the GOVERNMENT is paying the salaries, benefits, and a portion of the retirement compensation of public workers. The taxpayers pay the government.

By YOUR logic I pay the salaries, benefits, and a portion of the retirement compensation of AT&T workers because I have their phone service in my home, and therefore I can tell them that they must be paid less!

[brandon20678]

09:12 AM on 11/09/2011

Federal Employees can't complain they have ( Benefits, Job security and Yearly raises) most private sectors don't

[ivotedabsentee]

09:17 AM on 11/09/2011

[Federal Employees can't complain they have ( Benefits, Job security and Yearly raises) most private sectors don't ]

The yearly raises aren't guaranteed. No doubt Federal salaries for 2012 will remain the same as 2011 and 2010.

Yes, it is true there are step increases, but depending on the step, the period ranges from 52 weeks to 104 weeks to finally 156 weeks.

[Mugzi]

07:13 PM on 11/09/2011

I can only speak from a state perspective and we haven't had a salary increase in over 6 years...the person doing my job in the private sector, not only has received yearly salary increases of 4-5%, but bonuses...republicans really need to get up-to-date talking points....

[Eagleman]

08:21 AM on 11/09/2011

There is a difference between getting paid to work and getting paid for being a lazy bum....

Federal employee should not complain

[mortrefuge]

01:51 PM on 11/09/2011

That is an ignorant statement. If that's all you've got you should stick to posting on Faux.com.

[LeftRight]

04:01 PM on 11/09/2011

That's true, even though the federal employees are asked to work much harder for less pay than a private sector employee.

[newportky]

08:59 PM on 11/08/2011

Private-sector employees are more pessimistic because most are employed "at-will." Meaning, your company can let you go for no reason, and as long as you don't complain and signed the "at will" agreement it's perfectly legal. Public-sector employee's can take some comfort in the "show-cause" burden the Federal government must endure as an employer.

That's why public-sector employees work in the public-sector - it's fair.

[Mugzi]

07:15 PM on 11/09/2011

Florida is a "right to work" state and there isn't any job security anywhere anymore...

[ogledude]

07:59 PM on 11/08/2011

Why is it that the dc area has the highest per capita income in the country and the real estate is so expensive, this study is cra. TGhe federal government is sucking the rest of america dry with overspending and federal workers are the problem not the solution, cut every federal worker thirty percent.

[LeftRight]

09:46 PM on 11/08/2011

Because the DC area has two groups of people that aren't in this comparison:

1) Elected officials
2) Lobbyists

BOTH of whom make so much more than the average American as to skew the local results. Look at OTHER locations where government workers make a large percentage of the population and you'll see that they aren't NEARLY as well off!

[ogledude]

10:41 PM on 11/08/2011

Fairfax count has over 1 million people in it Loudon has three hundred thousand, arlington 200000 dc 700000 montgomery nd 500000 and the many others unmentioned are all populated by government workers or government contractors go up there and see the waste there are only four hundred and thirty five members of congress yet there are five million people in the dc area basically supported at high income levels by the federal government. I grew up there and I have seen it triple in my lifetime dont take my word for it drive down the dulles access road go to some of these areas yourself and see the absolute corruption that is the federal government

[TaiJi2]

12:12 PM on 11/09/2011

You don't even know what percentage of federal workers that live in D.C., do you? Perhaps you should find some facts BEFORE you reach a conclusion.

[ogledude]

12:21 PM on 11/09/2011

Thats inconseqential they all work for the feds either through govt jubs or contractors or jobs that support the beast check the facts, DC northern virginia and southern maryland are owned by the feds its a one industry town with the highest per capita income in the country.

[ogledude]

12:36 PM on 11/09/2011

320000 not including probably 2 to 3 times that number working as contractors

[bobdaily99]

05:56 PM on 11/08/2011

YES.... when you average in people who ask "do you want to super size that?" at work does tend to have them make less than a paramedic or teacher....................
YES.... If they do not hire enough prison guards and police,, they have to pay overtime to make up for that!

[LeftRight]

09:48 PM on 11/08/2011

That's why I always laugh at people who claim that government workers make so much more than regular Americans.... I've worked government and I've worked private sector, both utilizing my experience as an electronics specialist. During government service I had better benefits and better job security, but that was MORE than offset by the higher pay in the private sector!

[Ed Baker]

05:55 PM on 11/08/2011

Yes, a study done by federal workers about the compensation of federal workers - I wonder why it came out this way. :)

If they can do so much better in the private sector - what's stopping them? Get going! Get a 25% pay raise in the private sector. :)

[ptarmigan78]

06:03 PM on 11/08/2011

Because there isn't such a thing as a park ranger in the private sector d00che wad.

[Ed Baker]

06:08 PM on 11/08/2011

Tsk tsk tsk.... your culture is showing. Mind your language and act like a lady/gentleman or I won't respond next time. Let's not turn the internet into a sewer.

If there is no such thing as a park ranger in the private sector, then how is it that a park ranger in the public sector is making 25% less than a park ranger in the private sector? Please explain.

There are "Foresters" in the private sector, and also Wildlife Biologists..... my family's firm uses them from time to time as we own timberland. Some work for environmental consulting firms...... most want to have your job though. Most want to work for the state. :) I wonder why that is? Perhaps you have some explanation?

[dissentiscool]

12:02 PM on 11/09/2011

Because some people actually believe that working as a public servant is a noble cause, even if they make less money. I, for example, am a government employee. I took the job knowing that my public sector counter-part makes more money than I ever would. Money is not everything, my friend.

[Ed Baker]

12:24 PM on 11/09/2011

Oh and I believe you too.

[carleronn]

03:39 PM on 11/08/2011

That "good news" that the article refers to about the minimun wage increase in four states may be bad news for the employees who are laid off because of that same increase. Look at youth employments drop since the dems instituted the minimun wage increase as their first act after taking power in jan '07. It's a job killer

[LeftRight]

09:49 PM on 11/08/2011

Actually, increases in the minimum wage show a medium and long term INCREASE in employment.

[carleronn]

11:48 AM on 11/09/2011

How is it that youth unemployment has exploded? Also, every credible study shows the opposite

[Marines1371]

03:34 PM on 11/08/2011

There is a lot of anger at Federal Employees, but when was the last time a federal employee from any agency, lets say NOAA, crashed the US economy?
If you have a problem with what you think are inefficiencies with federal workers, thank your elected officials and their pet projects where they exert their political influence and FORCE decisions. Mitch McConnell is one.
And if you think we should privatize the federal workforce; by hiring contractors, will reduce costs, think again: Why do you think an F-22 costs so much? Its because the CEO made $12.05M in 2010.
Perhaps the Private Sector should look itself in the mirror and recommit to improving the basic benefits of an organizations stakeholders--especially since this hasn't happened since 1970, meanwhile CEO pay has skyrocketed.

[bobdaily99]

05:59 PM on 11/08/2011

Problem is to many federal MANAGERS (chiefs) and not enough WORKERS (Indians)
FIRE 1/2 the managers!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

[LeftRight]

09:49 PM on 11/08/2011

Ain't THAT the truth!!!

[gomezrules]

03:28 PM on 11/08/2011

Gee, a GOVT agency declaring that GOVT employees are less paid! Who would have thought? I don't see any mention in the article about benefits, it just seems to be concerned with actual pay. It also doesn't mention employees protections in the way of job security that the private sector does not enjoy.

[carleronn]

03:40 PM on 11/08/2011

I was shocked as well...lol

[Janna03]

03:42 PM on 11/08/2011

Gomez, pick several studies, and you will find at least one in the bunch that says what you want it to. If we had a functional government and a good economy, nobody would care about this issue but since we don't some of our politicians have decided to make this a talking point. It's better to have people bickering with each other over their jobs and lack there of than actually complaining about the $174,000 a year our Congressmen and Congresswomen make plus excellent benefits; or expecting them to come up with, I don't know, a budget or a real jobs plan that's more than just deregulating everything.

[Janine547]

03:03 PM on 11/08/2011

I enjoy reading post from those who AREN'T even Federal employees defending those who are and the money they work for goes to support federal employees with taxes. So, the federal employee can retire sooner, have a better benefit package all on the backs of those working. Must be union mentality.

[Marines1371]

03:22 PM on 11/08/2011

Are you a Federal Employee? If not, you're just making ridiculous assumptions based on your own biases and incorrect perceptions.

[Janine547]

03:49 PM on 11/08/2011

Those aen't assumptions, they're facts ! Tell me how a federal worker earns their income. Where is the basis of what they earn come from?

[PuSencer]

12:08 AM on 11/09/2011

i'm an educated private sector worker here to support the public workers with my words, actions, tax dollars and sincere thanks for the work they do

[LeftRight]

09:51 PM on 11/08/2011

Ah but since throughout his whole career he's making CONSIDERABLY less than an equivalent private sector worker, usually has to work TONS of OT (NONE of which counts toward his retirement!) and should have between 1 and 3 extra people working around him to make up for the workload.....

[seeker2]

02:23 PM on 11/08/2011

Does a professor at Harvard/Yale/U of P, etc. earn less than a professor at U of Mass./Penn State/UC Berkley? Does a teacher at a prestigious private school earn less than a public counterpart? How do unskilled workers' pays compare in the public vs private sectors? What about the pay for say, the skilled and unskilled employees of a firm doing government contract work...how does their pay compare with their counterparts paid directly by the government?

Less provocative, these links offer more in-depth analyses of the issue:

http://reason.org/news/show/public-sector-private-sector-salary

http://www.nytimes.com/interactive/2011/03/06/us/public-private-employees.html

http://www.npr.org/2011/02/24/134003073/are-government-employees-too-well-paid

Federal Workers Are Underpaid Compared To Their Private Sector Counterparts, Despite
GOP’s Assertions: http://www.truth-out.org/federal-workers-are-underpaid-compared-their-private-sector-counterparts-despite-gops-assertions/13

Considering the vast number of public sector jobs, from dog catcher to mayor to governor to US President and all the support jobs in between, it's easy to cherry-pick which group serves the political end, especially with the union controversy swirling right now.

[Deranged loner]

05:42 PM on 11/09/2011

You cherrry pick and find one area where public sector workers are paid less. Professors at Penn State and most public schools deserve less money than those at Yale . Some public schools such as Univ of Ca at Berkeley are as prestigious as schools like Yale and Princeton but most are not .