Northwest Vermont Locality Pay Proposal · 29/9/2014 · NORTHWEST VERMONT LOCALITY PAY PROPOSAL...

2014

Federal Executive Association of Vermont Bruce McDonald Chairman Locality Pay Initiative Team

NORTHWEST VERMONT LOCALITY PAY PROPOSAL

Request for consideration to establish a Locality Pay Area above Rest of US (RUS)

for Northwest Vermont Federal Employees

Northwest Vermont Locality Pay Area Proposal 2014

TABLE OF CONTENTS

SECTION 1 FORWARD BY BRUCE MCDONALD AND LISA REES

SECTION 2 LOCALITY PAY AREA PROPOSAL GENERAL

SECTION 3 LOCALITY INFORMATION

SECTION 4 FEDERAL EMPLOYEES PAY COMPARABILITY ACT BACKGROUND

SECTION 5 WAGE COMPARISONS

SECTION 6 RECRUITMENT, RETENTION AND RELOCATION

SECTION 7 CONCLUSION AND RECOMMENDATIONS

APPENDIX 1 LOCALITY PAY AREA RATES

APPENDIX 2 NEW ENGLAND MAP

APPENDIX 3 OES DATA COMPARISION GRAPHS

APPENDIX 4 LETTERS TO THE FEDERAL SALARY COUNCIL


SECTION 1

FOR WAR D BY MR . BR U CE MCDO NALD

The overall purpose of this proposal is to call attention to the growing inconsistency between Northwest Vermont’s RUS (Rest of US) locality pay of 14.16% and the comparable wages between the average federal employee and the private sector. The data included herein clearly displays that NW Vermont’s locality has been overlooked for many years and there is a growing inequity to states in the same geographic area. Objective measurements included will show data identifying the income gaps vs. locality pay, perceived income as well as resulting attrition losses due to constant siphoning of highly qualified employees to higher locality pay states. This proposal also includes testimonials from several agency directors, which reflects how the lack of locality pay in this area impacts their organizations.

In April 2013, a locality pay subcommittee was formed under the auspices of the Vermont Federal Executive Association and charged with conducting data analysis toward the feasibility of a NW Vermont locality package for submission to the President’s Salary Council. Since that time the group has updated the data with new 2013 data showing an even starker contrast. The group consisted of:

Sean McVey- CBP Diana Richardson- FAA

Kelly Larsen-FAA Jeff Ostlund-TSA

Corey Price- ICE Bruce McDonald-TSA

Bethany Cassell-USCIS John Abeling –VtARNG

After the formation of this committee the challenge for the team was to dispel a few common misconceptions that often plague new federal employees here in NW Vermont, especially those who transfer here from other parts of the country and immediately take a hidden but very real 15-25% drop in affordable housing, food, fuel and real buying power. For far too long, the federal community has been forced to rely on Vermont’s natural beauty as a bargaining chip to attract new employees or deter employees from leaving for higher pay, lower cost of living and greater opportunities in other parts of the country. Indeed, we often hear the laughably outdated misconceptions from new transfers that they thought they could “move to Vermont, buy a house for less than $200,000 and live very comfortably on the GS-5-11 salary”. Regrettably, the stark reality is far different:

The group’s findings are submitted herein and the overall conclusion was that:

Attrition data shows a costly cycle of constantly recruiting, hiring, training and out-processing of experienced personnel by all federal agencies.

In 2013, Vermont was the only state in the Northeast without an adjusted locality pay, yet is one of the highest taxed state per capita in the US.

Vermont has the second oldest population in the US, as new graduates and young potential employees are frequently forced to move due to high cost of living compared to the rate of compensation.


Northwest Vermont is hemorrhaging not just talented young graduates but senior and highly experienced federal employees who transfer out of Northwest Vermont prior to retirement in order to gain an automatic increase in locality pay and thus an increase of high three for their retirement pay.

The vast majority of the federal workforce in Northwest Vermont are either native Vermonters who choose to stay for quality of life or have family ties and are choosing not to move despite better paid opportunities elsewhere…for now. New and highly talented potential transfers quickly move back or decline job offers once they speak to a realtor.

By any reasonable standard, Northwest Vermont is long overdue for consideration when one considers successful appeals for locality pay in other parts of the country that cost far less to live in (Phoenix, Huntsville, Raleigh, etc.).

All federal employees have felt the pinch in real income resulting from three years without a Cost Of Living Adjustment (COLA) increase; however, combined with local high inflation, taxes and skyrocketing housing and food costs, the situation is increasingly untenable for Vermont’s federal employees. Unlike large metropolitan areas, comparable OES data is not readily available on the job-to-job level. This group has painstakingly compared available similar job categories such as office and administration, management, healthcare, education and training. In nearly every case the data demonstrates a much higher non-government pay rate than the comparable government employee. Of particular note is that when all occupations are averaged together with cities that do have higher locality pay such as Atlanta, Raleigh, Buffalo, Boston, Miami etc., we find that NW Vermont has the highest average non-federal pay but the lowest locality rate using 2013 data (Appendix 3). It is the hope of this committee that the data presented herein and the testimonials provided adequately convey the threat that this economic disincentive poses to the smooth and cost-effective operation of the sizable federal offices located throughout NW Vermont.


SECTION 2

FEDERAL EXECUTIVE ASSOCIATION OF VERMONT

Proposal to Establish a Locality Pay Area for Northwestern Vermont

Chittenden, Franklin and Grand Isle Counties, Vermont

Federal agencies in Northwest Vermont face significant personnel challenges in recruiting and retaining employees. These challenges have been growing each year and are primarily a result of two factors:

Northwest Vermont pay levels in healthcare, education, professional, finance, technical services and food production companies are generally higher than the “Rest of the U.S.”.

All of the New England states, except for Vermont, have regions with a locality pay area of 24.8% or higher. In addition, the Boston locality pay area in particular, due to its proximity to Northwest Vermont, is able to attract our talent. Vermont Federal employees are frequently moving to other Federal agencies in the Boston area, resulting in a loss of qualified employees in Northwest Vermont. Employees generally come to Vermont to get their “foot in the door” of Federal employment, and then transfer to a variety of locations that offer higher pay and lower cost of living expenses for the same job.

These significant local pay disparities of Federal pay relative to the rest of New England, and competition with numerous private sector jobs in the area, have led to major difficulties for Federal agencies in filling vacancies and maintaining staffing in Northwest Vermont.


SECTION 3

LOCALITY INFORMATION

The Northwest Vermont Metropolitan area and the New England City and Town Area (NECTA) consists of Burlington and South Burlington, and the counties of Chittenden, Franklin and Grand Isle.

Northwest Vermont consists of 37 cities, towns, and villages with a total population of about 211,261 as of the 2010 census.

Towns included in these counties are: Alburgh, Bakersfield, Berkshire, Bolton, Buels Gore, Burlington, Charlotte, Colchester, Enosburgh, Essex, Fairfax, Fairfield, Fletcher, Franklin, Georgia, Grand Isle, Highgate, Hinesburg, Huntington, Isle La Motte, Jericho, Milton, Montgomery, North Hero, Richford, Richmond, Shelburne, Sheldon, South Burlington, South Hero, St. Albans, St. George, Swanton, Underhill, Westford, Williston, Winooski.

Senators Patrick Leahy and Bernie Sanders, and Congressman Peter Welch represent the people of the State of Vermont.

According to the most recent information from OPM , the Northwest Vermont Region has 3,291 Federal employees (all schedules) in the following agencies:

Department of the Air Force

Department of the Army

Department of Agriculture Agencies

Forest Service

Natural Resources Conservation Service

Farm Service Agency

National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration

Bureau of the Census

Patent and Trademark Office

Department of Defense Agencies

Federal Bureau of Investigation

Drug Enforcement Administration

U.S. Marshals Service

Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms, and Explosives

Executive Office for U.S. Attorneys

Department of Labor Agencies

Department of Education

Department of Health and Human Services

Department of Homeland Security Agencies

U.S. Coast Guard

U.S. Secret Service

Citizenship and Immigration Services

Immigration and Customs Enforcement

Occupational Safety & Health Administration


Customs and Border Protection

Department of Housing and Urban Development

Department of the Interior Agencies

Federal Aviation Administration

U.S. Fish and Wildlife

Department of State

Internal Revenue Service

Veterans Health Administration

General Services Administration

Office of Personnel Management

Social Security Administration

Transportation Security Administration

These Federal agencies are in competition with a number of private sector companies and Vermont State government for qualified applicants. Companies such as IBM, Keurig Green Mountain, Ben & Jerry’s, National Life Group, Cabot Creamery Cooperative, Burton Snowboards, Green Mountain Power, Fairpoint Communications, Mylan Technologies, Goodrich Corp, and BlueCross BlueShield of Vermont, as well as a number of banks, successfully operate in the area and compete for many of the same applicants that Federal agencies are trying to hire. Federal agencies are also competing with each other for talent in the local areas as well as in other localities.

Beyond the competitive private sector businesses and State government agencies, Northwest Vermont is home to large hospitals and medical care centers, plus a number of colleges and universities that compete with Federal agencies to attract well-qualified candidates to their positions. The medical industry employers include Fletcher Allen Health Care, Northwestern Medical Center, Central Vermont Medical Center, VNA of Chittenden and Grand Isle Counties, GE Healthcare, Howard Center and Washington County Mental Health Services.

The colleges and universities in the area include:

University of Vermont

Champlain College

Burlington College

St. Michael’s College

Norwich University

Vermont Technical College

Middlebury College

Johnson State College

Vermont College of Fine Arts

Union Institute & University

Community College of Vermont

New England Culinary Institute

Albany College of Pharmacy and Health Services (Colchester)

Vermont College of Cosmetology

Goddard College

The Salon Professional Academy

Vermont State Colleges – Office of the Chancellor

O’Brien’s Aveda Institute


SECTION 4

BACKGROUND

The Federal Employees Pay Comparability Act of 1990 (FEPCA) replaced the nationwide General Schedule (GS) with a method for setting pay for white-collar employees that uses a combination of across-the-board and locality pay adjustments. The policy for setting General Schedule pay contained in 5 U.S.C. 5301 is that —

(1) There is equal pay for substantially equal work within each local pay area;

(2) Within each local pay area, pay distinctions be maintained in keeping with work and performance distinctions;

(3) Federal pay rates be comparable with non-Federal pay rates for the same levels of work within the same local pay area; and

(4) Any existing pay disparities between Federal and non-Federal employees should be completely eliminated.

The across-the-board pay adjustment provides the same percentage increase to the statutory pay systems (as defined in 5 U.S.C. 5302(1)) in all locations. This adjustment is linked to changes in the wage and salary component, private industry workers, of the Employment Cost Index (ECI), minus 0.5 percentage points.

The locality-based comparability payments for GS employees, which are in addition to the across-the-board increase, are mandated for each locality having a pay disparity between Federal and non-Federal pay of greater than 5 percent.

As part of the annual locality pay adjustment process, the Pay Agent prepares and submits a report to the President which—

(1) Compares rates of pay under the General Schedule with rates of pay for non-Federal workers for the same levels of work within each locality pay area, based on surveys conducted by the Bureau of Labor Statistics;

(2) Identifies each locality in which a pay disparity exists and specifies the size of each pay disparity;

(3) Recommends appropriate comparability payments; and

(4) Includes the views and recommendations of the Federal Salary Council (FSC), individual members of the FSC, and employee organizations.

The President's Pay Agent consists of the Secretary of Labor and the Directors of the Office of Management and Budget and the Office of Personnel Management. This report fulfills the Agent's


responsibility under 5 U.S.C. 5304(d), as amended. It recommends locality pay adjustments if such adjustments were made under 5 U.S.C. 5304.


SECTION 5

WAGE COMPARISONS

WAGE COMPARISONSSOURCE OF THE DATA: The data in Table 1 is from the U.S. Department of Labor, Bureau of Labor Statistics (BLS) at http://stats.bls.gov/oes/current/oessrcma.htm. This link provided data from the Occupational Employment Statistics (OES) Survey. The team gathered the

data from the link for Metropolitan and Nonmetropolitan Area Occupational Employment and Wage Estimates. This site provided OES Survey data for hundreds of Metropolitan Statistical Areas (MSA)

across the United States, including the Burlington/South Burlington, VT Metro Area.

HOW THE DATA WAS ANALYZED: The data from the May 2013 Occupational Employment Statistics (OES) was gathered for Burlington/South Burlington, VT Metropolitan area and compared against the same May 2013 OES data for 9 other Metropolitan areas that currently have locality pay. Seven Major Occupational Groups that were prominent in the Burlington/South Burlington area including All Occupations combined were compared against these other 9 metro areas. The Team analyzed the following 7 Major Occupational Groups: 00-0000 All Occupations 11-0000 Management 25-0000 Education, Training, and Library 29-0000 Healthcare Practitioners and Technical 31-0000 Healthcare Support 43-0000 Office and Administrative Support 51-0000 Production These codes and titles represent Major Groups. The Major Groups contain all OES Survey data for each of the occupational subcategories within that Group. The team selected these Major Groups because they represent a large percentage of GS occupations. It is within these occupational groups that Federal agencies must compete to recruit and retain well-qualified employees. ANALYSIS – COMPARISON TO EIGHT CURRENT LOCALITY PAY AREAS: Appendix 3 identifies nine current Locality Pay Areas and the MSAs that make up each of them. The team compared the data of the selected Major Occupational Groups against these nine other locality pay areas to show how the Burlington/South Burlington MSA ranks among other MSAs which currently have locality pay. The analysis in Table 1 on the following page and Appendix 3 represents comparisons of the 2013 Northwest Vermont (Burlington/South Burlington) mean annual wage for each of the Standard Occupational Classifications (SOC) to the mean annual wage for those SOCs in each of the nine representative Locality Pay Areas. These tables clearly show that without locality pay, Federal Agencies in Northwest Vermont are having recruiting and retention problems due to the pay scale in this area.

In Table 1 the Average Variance column demonstrates that the Burlington-South Burlington median wages across all 7 Major Occupational Series is higher than the 9 locality pay areas represented in this comparison.

http://stats.bls.gov/oes/current/oessrcma.htm


Table 1

Locality Area - OES Data - May 2013

Occupation Series

Average Location 00-0000 11-0000 25-0000 29-0000 31-0000 43-0000 51-0000 Variance

Burlington-South Burlington, VT 47,920 103,570 54,370 77,710 31,040 35,740 35,560 –––––

Miami-Fort Lauderdale-Popano Beach, FL 43,120 117,180 48,280 72,890 27,310 32,730 30,830

Variance 11.13% -13.14% 12.61% 6.61% 13.66% 9.20% 15.34% 7.92%

Atlanta-Sandy Springs-Marietta, GA 48,270 115,550 47,110 76,520 27,920 35,140 32,110

Variance 0.73% -11.57% 15.41% 1.56% 11.17% 1.71% 10.74% 4.41%

Cleveland-Elyria-Mentor, OH 45,380 102,620 59,290 71,700 25,990 34,720 35,370

Variance 5.60% 0.93% -9.05% 8.38% 19.43% 2.94% 0.54% 4.11%

Raleigh-Cary, NC 47,100 120,670 48,720 72,280 27,730 34,290 33,060

Variance 1.74% -16.51% 11.60% 7.51% 11.94% 4.23% 7.56% 4.01%

Columbus, OH 45,760 105,270 57,730 74,820 26,440 34,680 32,390

Variance 4.72% -1.64% -6.18% 3.86% 17.40% 3.06% 9.79% 4.43%

Buffalo-Niagara Falls, NY 43,010 106,070 47,250 71,550 29,050 33,890 37,400

Variance 11.42% -2.41% 15.07% 8.61% 6.85% 5.46% -5.17% 5.69%

Phoenix-Mesa-Glendale, AZ 45,680 103,620 45,990 77,370 31,070 34,930 34,450

Variance 4.90% -0.05% 18.22% 0.44% -0.10% 2.32% 3.22% 4.14%

Dayton, OH 44,510 98,220 53,030 69,990 27,650 33,110 34,130

Variance 7.66% 5.45% 2.53% 11.03% 12.26% 7.94% 4.19% 7.29%

Indianapolis-Carmel, IN 44,740 97,230 45,850 72,440 28,320 34,270 33,970

Variance 7.11% 6.52% 18.58% 7.27% 9.60% 4.29% 4.68% 8.29%


SECTION 6

RECRUITMENT, RETENTION AND RELOCATON

This locality pay proposal outlines the significant job competition that exists due to the numerous contending employers, plus the region’s low unemployment rate: 3.7% compared to the national average of 6.2% as of July 2014.1

Total Unemployment Rate Comparison

Jul-14 Jun-14

Vermont 3.70% 3.40%

Connecticut 6.60% 6.70%

Maine 5.50% 5.50%

Massachusetts 5.60% 5.50%

New Hampshire 4.40% 4.40%

New Jersey 6.50% 6.60%

New York 6.60% 6.60%

Rhode Island 7.70% 7.90%

United States 6.20% 6.10%

The salary disadvantage makes it very difficult for the Federal agencies in Northwest Vermont to:

o Recruit employees,

o Retain employees, and

o Attract Federal employees to relocate to the area

Various Department Executives have provided examples of the struggles and impact of these issues to support our endeavor to correct this continued issue. These individual testimonials are compiled in Appendix 4.

1 Vermont Department of Labor, Press Release dated August 20, 2014


SECTION 7

CONCLUSION AND RECOMMENDATIONS

There are several factors that have caused significant staffing challenges for Federal agencies in Northwest Vermont as they try to recruit qualified applicants, retain essential staff, and attract employees to relocate to the area. For example:

The Federal agencies in Northwest Vermont are experiencing difficulty in recruiting new employees locally, attracting employees from other areas to a high cost area with no commensurate locality pay rate, and retaining current employees. These problems are largely due to the disparity between RUS pay levels and pay levels in other areas in New England which offer a much higher Locality Pay rate.

To help us correct these recruitment, retention, and relocation problems, we ask that the Federal Salary Council support this proposal and take the steps necessary to establish a locality pay rate for Northwest Vermont. In past years, the Council has put in place locality pay adjustments to correct this kind of recruitment and retention problem in various areas across the nation.

After gathering and reviewing the data presented above, we think these salary disparities are causing recruitment and retention problems similar to those observed in locations that the FSC has previously considered as deserving of establishing a Locality Pay rate above the RUS rate. A pay rate above the RUS is essential to the efforts of Northwest Vermont Federal agencies to recruit and retain well-qualified employees. An appropriate rate in Northwest Vermont will help greatly with our efforts to bring both new hires and experienced mid-career hires to our agencies.

We believe that our proposal to establish a Locality Pay rate in Northwest Vermont is reasonable, well documented and that it deserves the Council’s consideration and prompt action to move it forward. We urge that the Council examine all avenues to allow establishment of an equitable Locality Pay rate for Northwest Vermont, in order to eliminate or reduce the existing pay disparities.

In the years before the National Compensation Survey data was available, the Occupational Employment Statistics Survey (OES) was used to make the Locality Pay area decisions. We urge that the FSC accept the OES data as the necessary documentation showing that a Locality Pay rate is warranted and should be established for Northwest Vermont.

If any further studies are needed, we think it is essential that the Council strongly recommend to the appropriate individuals and organizations that the Bureau of Labor Statistics be adequately


funded to complete the National Compensation Survey in the Northwest Vermont area as soon as possible.

We believe that, although the President’s Pay Agent has recommended an overhaul of the pay system, the framework of the locality pay system now in use should still be given consideration until some other system is in place. The recommendations of the Federal Salary Council and the facts of each locality area should be considered currently.

We are aware and understand the difficult economic conditions currently facing our nation, and that over the next few years the federal workforce may be significantly reduced. However, with a significant reduction in workforce, it will be increasingly important to retain experienced staff as productivity will need to increase to keep pace with each Agency’s workload. In a report published by the Lewin Group, they estimated “by 2010, 40 percent of the U.S. workforce will be over 50 years of age. This shifting demographic will be especially acute in knowledge-driven sectors such as healthcare, aerospace, energy and others that have become increasingly technical and complex.” The Federal Government must also recognize this increased demand for experienced workers, and continue efforts to pay fair and competitive wages in our locality, and throughout the nation.

We sincerely appreciate the Council’s consideration of our locality pay rate request. We will also be glad to provide the Council with any further data that may be required, or to meet with the Council’s staff at any time to discuss these pay issues. If you have any questions related to this proposal, please contact Lisa Rees, President of the Vermont Federal Executive Association President at (802) 236-9653.


APPENDIX 1


Locality-Based Comparability Payments and Pay Increases

in 2014 for General Schedule Employees

Locality Pay Area [1]

Locality

Rate

San Jose-San Francisco-Oakland, CA 35.15%

New York-Newark-Bridgeport, NY-NJ-CT-PA 28.72%

Houston-Baytown-Huntsville, TX 28.71%

Los Angeles-Long Beach-Riverside, CA 27.16%

Hartford-West Hartford-Willimantic, CT-MA 25.82%

Chicago-Naperville-Michigan City, IL-IN-WI 25.10%

Boston-Worcester-Manchester, MA-NH-ME-RI 24.80%

Alaska 24.69%

Washington-Baltimore-Northern VA-DC-MD-PA-VA-WV 24.22%

San Diego-Carlsbad-San Marcos, CA 24.19%

Detroit-Warren-Flint, MI 24.09%

Denver-Aurora-Boulder, CO 22.52%

Sacramento-Arden-Arcade-Truckee, CA-NV 22.20%

Seattle-Tacoma-Olympia, WA 21.81%

Philadelphia-Camden-Vineland, PA-NJ-DE-MD 21.79%

Minneapolis-St. Paul-St. Cloud, MN-WI 20.96%

Miami-Fort Lauderdale-Miami Beach, FL 20.79%

Dallas-Fort Worth, TX 20.67%

Portland-Vancouver-Beaverton, OR-WA 20.35%

Atlanta-Sandy Springs-Gainesville, GA-AL 19.29%

Cleveland-Akron-Elyria, OH 18.68%

Cincinnati-Middletown-Wilmington, OH-KY-IN 18.55%

Milwaukee-Racine-Waukesha, WI 18.10%

Raleigh-Durham-Cary, NC 17.64%

Columbus-Marion-Chillicothe, OH 17.16%

Buffalo-Niagara-Cattaraugus, NY 16.98%

Phoenix-Mesa-Scottsdale, AZ 16.76%

Hawaii 16.51%

Richmond, VA 16.47%

Pittsburgh-New Castle, PA 16.37%

Dayton-Springfield-Greenville, OH 16.24%

Huntsville-Decatur, AL 16.02%

Indianapolis-Anderson-Columbus, IN 14.68%

Rest of U.S. 14.16%

[1] Locality pay areas are defined in 5 CFR 531.603(b) and are available at

http://www.opm.gov/oca/10tables/locdef.asp .

http://www.opm.gov/oca/10tables/locdef.asp


APPENDIX 2


Currently Approved

Presidential Salary

Council Locality Pay

Rates

Connecticut 25.82%

Maine 24.80%

Massachusetts 24.80%

New Hampshire 24.80%

Rhode Island 24.80%

Vermont 14.16%

Rest of United States 14.16%


APPENDIX 3


Burlington-S.Burlington,

VT

Atlanta-SandySprings, GA

Raleigh-Cary,NC

Columbus,OH

Phoenix-Mesa-

Glendale, AZ

Cleveland-Elyria-

Mentor, OH

Indianapolis-Carmel, IN

Dayton, OHMiami-FortLauderdale,

FL

Buffalo-Niagara Falls,

NY

Annual Mean Wage $47,920 $48,270 $47,100 $45,760 $45,680 $45,380 $44,740 $44,510 $43,120 $43,010

Locality % 14.16% 19.29% 17.64% 17.16% 16.76% 18.68% 14.68% 16.24% 20.79% 16.98%

10%

11%

12%

13%

14%

15%

16%

17%

18%

19%

20%

21%

22%

23%

24%

25%

$40,000

$41,000

$42,000

$43,000

$44,000

$45,000

$46,000

$47,000

$48,000

$49,000

$50,000


Raleigh-Cary, NC

Miami-FortLauderdale,

FL

Atlanta-Sandy

Springs, GA

Buffalo-NiagaraFalls, NY

Columbus,OH

Phoenix-Mesa-

Glendale, AZ


VT

Cleveland-Elyria-

Mentor, OH


Dayton, OH

Annual Mean Wage 120,670 117,180 115,550 106,070 105,270 103,620 103,570 102,620 97,230 98,220

$-

$20,000

$40,000

$60,000

$80,000

$100,000

$120,000

$140,000May 2013 OES Data of Management Occupations (11-0000)

Cleveland-Elyria-

Mentor, OH

Columbus,OH


VTDayton, OH

Raleigh-Cary,NC


FL


NY

Atlanta-Sandy

Springs, GA

Phoenix-Mesa-

Glendale, AZ


Annual Mean Wage $59,290 $57,730 $54,370 $53,030 $48,720 $48,280 $47,250 $47,110 $45,990 $45,850

$0

$10,000

$20,000

$30,000

$40,000

$50,000

$60,000

$70,000

May 2013 OES data of Education, Training, and Library Occupations (25-0000)


VT

Phoenix-Mesa-

Glendale, AZ

Atlanta-Sandy

Springs, GA

Columbus,OH


FL


Raleigh-Cary,NC

Cleveland-Elyria-

Mentor, OH


NYDayton, OH

Annual Mean Wage $77,710 $77,370 $76,520 $74,820 $72,890 $72,440 $72,280 $71,700 $71,550 $69,990

$66,000

$68,000

$70,000

$72,000

$74,000

$76,000

$78,000

$80,000May 2013 OES data of Healthcare Practitioners and Technical Occupations (29-0000)



VT

Atlanta-Sandy

Springs, GA

Phoenix-Mesa-

Glendale, AZ

Cleveland-Elyria-

Mentor, OH

Columbus,OH

Raleigh-Cary,NC



NYDayton, OH


FL

Annual Mean Wage $35,740 $35,140 $34,930 $34,720 $34,680 $34,290 $34,270 $33,890 $33,110 $32,730

$31,000

$31,500

$32,000

$32,500

$33,000

$33,500

$34,000

$34,500

$35,000

$35,500

$36,000May 2013 OES data of Office and Administrative Support (43-0000)


NY


VT

Cleveland-Elyria-

Mentor, OH

Phoenix-Mesa-

Glendale, AZDayton, OH


Raleigh-Cary,NC

Columbus,OH

Atlanta-Sandy

Springs, GA


FL

Annual Mean Wage $37,400 $35,560 $35,370 $34,450 $34,130 $33,970 $33,060 $32,390 $32,110 $30,830

$0

$5,000

$10,000

$15,000

$20,000

$25,000

$30,000

$35,000

$40,000May 2013 OES data of Production Occupations (51-0000)

Phoenix-Mesa-

Glendale, AZ


VT


NY


Atlanta-Sandy

Springs, GA

Raleigh-Cary,NC

Dayton, OHMiami-FortLauderdale,

FL

Columbus,OH

Cleveland-Elyria-

Mentor, OH

Annual Mean Wage $31,070 $31,040 $29,050 $28,320 $27,920 $27,730 $27,650 $27,310 $26,440 $25,990

$23,000

$24,000

$25,000

$26,000

$27,000

$28,000

$29,000

$30,000

$31,000

$32,000May 2013 OES data of Health Care Support Occupations (31-0000)


APPENDIX 4


155 Grand Avenue Swanton, VT 05488 SWB 50/2-C

U.S. Customs and Border Protection

July 17, 2014

MEMORANDUM FOR: Vermont Federal Executive Association

Locality Pay Committee

FROM: John C. Pfeifer

Chief Patrol Agent

Swanton Sector

SUBJECT: Need for Locality Pay in Vermont

The purpose of this memorandum is to outline the need for an increase in locality pay in

Vermont. Although the Swanton Border Patrol Sector (SWB) does not require employees to

complete an exit survey, the cost of living in Vermont is a deciding factor for most Agents

leaving the area.

The evidence is anecdotal, but we often hear from Agents about how expensive it is to live

here. When comparing areas with the same locality pay (Rest of US) the disparities in

housing, food prices, utilities, transportation, and health care costs are clear. On top of that,

going back to the 1970s, Vermont's individual tax burden is consistently among the highest,

laying somewhere in the top ten states or just outside. It should be noted that there is not a

lot of freedom of movement in the Border Patrol. Often agents find Vermont to be far more

expensive than areas where they have previously worked and, while most like living and

working in Vermont, they make the difficult decision to transfer.

Let me illustrate this with a couple of examples. Vermont has "Rest of US" COLA.

Houston, Texas has 28.71% COLA. Basic comparisons, according to the CNN Financial

Planner, reveal that average food costs in Houston are 26% lower, housing costs are 43%

lower, utilities are 29% lower and healthcare costs are 7% lower than Burlington, Vermont.

In addition, out of the 50 states, Texas consistently ranks among the lowest in individual tax

burden, laying somewhere in the mid to high 40s for a rank.

In another example, Detroit has a 24.09% COLA yet food is 12% lower, housing is 42%

lower, utilities are 18% lower, and health care is 10% lower on average. Michigan

consistently ranks near the 20s for tax burden.

If we compare some areas where agents are likely to transfer to that also have the "Rest of

US" COLA, we find even more of a disparity. Using the CNN Financial Planner to compare Need for Locality Pay in Vermont

Page 2


Burlington, VT to McAllen, TX, which is "Rest of US", we find that in McAllen food is

27% less, housing is 49% less, utilities are 22% less and healthcare is 13% less on average.

Tucson, AZ, another area where agents are likely to transfer, reveals a similar situation. On

average, housing costs are 41% lower, food is 10% lower, utilities are 31% lower, and

healthcare is 5% lower. Arizona consistently ranks in the 30s for individual tax burden.

This situation creates an environment where many high quality employees simply cannot

afford to live in Vermont and they make the decision to transfer out of this area; in some

cases they leave the agency. There are also instances where the most qualified applicants do

not apply for positions in SWB because of the high cost of living without the appropriate

COLA.

My recommendation is that in order to attract the best and brightest, and keep these

employees , that a locality pay increase is necessary.

If you need any additional information regarding this topic, please contact Patrol Agent in

Charge Sean P. McVey at (802) 848-3434.


From: Drew, Vicky - NRCS, Colchester, VT [mailto:[email protected]] To: Rees, Lisa T Cc: McDonald, Bruce <BTV> Subject: RE: Updated Passport Day Flyer/Locality Pay Update

Lisa,

Last year, we had a GS-13 position that was vacated, in part, due to the cost of living here in Vermont. The incumbent took a lateral transfer to Missouri. While this was reflected in the spreadsheet, what we did not add was how challenging it was to back fill the position. I had to advertise the position twice. Despite offering FULL relocation, the first advertisement resulted in a panel of four that were not found best qualified. I then advertised the position a second time, making it a multi-disciplinary position to attract more candidates. Again, I was provided a certificate with only 4 qualified candidates, for a GS-13 position with full relocation. Typically, we see a dozen or more applications for a GS-13 position. During the interviews, one GS-12 candidate from MD (in a locality pay area) was surprised to hear that he would likely take a cut in pay to move to VT for a GS-13 position and backed away from the job, as a result.

I don’t know if this will help or not, but thought I would share it with you, just in case.

Vicky M. Drew State Conservationist USDA NRCS 356 Mountain View Drive, Suite 105 Colchester, VT 05446 (802)951-6796, Ext. 242


From: Flanagan, Colleen J To: McDonald, Bruce <BTV> Cc: Palmatier, David Subject: Locality Impact Statement The Homeland Security Investigations (HSI) Tip Line Unit serves as a 24x7 national intake center to receive, analyze, document, and disseminate investigative leads regarding more than 400 crimes enforced by the Department of Homeland Security (DHS). The staffing levels for the HSI Tipline Unit have decreased dramatically since April 2011 with 21 employees leaving the unit. 40% of those employees left for areas that had a higher locality pay. These were employees that started their government careers at the HSI Tipline and had relocated to Vermont from a variety of states. These employee expressed surprise and concern when they realized how expensive it was to live in Vermont. We have had a few employees take the position with the intention of getting their foot in the door and did not relocate their families or household. Once they are able to do so, they start applying for other federal positions in hopes of returning to their home state. This is frustrating in that we invest a great deal of time and money to recruit, clear, and train employees who subsequently transfer to other agencies for higher pay or geographic locations due to the higher cost of living in Vermont. Our current work staff is also affected by the high cost of living in Vermont. 50% of our workforce drive a substantial distance from the office building due to the high cost of living within Chittenden County were our facility is located. 15% of our workforce are either currently, or have in the past, taken on outside employment to supplement their income. All of our workforce are currently at the GS-11 or higher, with a good majority of them earning night differential, Sunday pay and Holiday pay which helps supplement the base income. Our employees want to continue with their successful government careers here in Vermont. However, when faced with the recent economic challenges, employees will need to reevaluate their current financial situation to decide if the sacrifice of financial stability is worth staying in Vermont, which will impact our ability to support the DHS, ICE, and HSI Missions. Colleen J. Flanagan Immigration & Customs Enforcement Homeland Security Investigations - Tipline 188 Harvest Lane Williston, VT 05495 (802) 662-8114


Case Examples for Locality Pay for Vermont

In August 2009, the National Bulk Cash Smuggling Center (BCSC) was established in Williston, Vermont, as part of a Congressional mandate to focus investigative efforts on the movement of criminally derived bulk cash. The BCSC has a national focus and was located in Williston, VT, as part of a cost savings measure to take advantage of existing Department of Homeland Security resources located in the area such as the Law Enforcement Support Center and the Homeland Security Investigations (HSI) Tip Line. As part of this mandate, the BCSC was authorized to hire staff to operationalize the center with an experienced workforce to disrupt and dismantle transnational criminal organizations moving their illicit cash.

In 2009, a national vacancy announcement was published for a BCSC Intelligence Research Specialist (IRS) position. In March 2010, an applicant was selected to fill the IRS position and reported for duty in October 2010. Prior to the applicant’s arrival at the BCSC, he was a highly accomplished IRS with the Air Force Office of Special Investigations (AFOSI) based at Wright-Patterson Air Force Base in Greene and Montgomery counties, Ohio. The applicant’s resume included assignments as the Chief for AFOSI Criminal Investigations and Operations at 27 locations throughout the United States, including an assignment as the Special Agent in Charge of AFOSI Detachment. The applicant’s desire to take a position at the BCSC was predicated on both the opportunity to work illicit bulk cash investigations and a chance to return home as a native Vermonter after spending the previous 20 plus years out of state.

The IRS worked at the BCSC for approximately 11 months prior to resigning and transferring back to Ohio to work again for AFOSI. The employee was very happy with the opportunity to return to Vermont and with the work he was doing at the BCSC, but he was ultimately forced to return to Ohio because of the high cost of living required to live and work in Vermont. The high cost of living resulted in the BCSC’s loss of a valuable, well-qualified employee. Perhaps more importantly, however, the high cost of living created a cascading effect and resulted in the BCSC’s inability to maintain an unencumbered position. Indeed, since the position that the former employee occupied was part of a special Congressional funding package known as the Southwest Border Enhancement, the BCSC was unable to backfill the position after it was vacated and it ultimately lapsed unencumbered.

In January 2011, the BCSC was authorized to hire a second Section Chief, again under the Southwest Border Enhancement funding, to ensure an adequate ratio of staff to supervisory personnel. A Supervisory Special Agent, who was assigned to HSI Headquarters in Washington, DC, applied for and was chosen to fill the position. While the actual cost of living was virtually the same in both localities, the BCSC Section Chief had to take over a 10% reduction in pay (24.22% versus 14.16% GS pay scale cost of living differential) in order to accept the position. The BCSC Section Chief had over 10 years of experience in both working and overseeing financial investigations as a Special Agent, National Program Manager and Section Chief. The employee made many positive contributions to the BCSC since his arrival in May 2011, but ultimately requested a new assignment in an HSI field office after only approximately two years at the BCSC, due in large part to the high cost of residing in the Burlington area.

Northwest Vermont Locality Pay Proposal · 29/9/2014 · NORTHWEST VERMONT LOCALITY PAY PROPOSAL...

Documents

Transcript of Northwest Vermont Locality Pay Proposal · 29/9/2014 · NORTHWEST VERMONT LOCALITY PAY PROPOSAL...