Do you understand 73% of Fed employees receiving raises amounting to almost double what the President said he would save by freezing salaries makes absolutely no sense?

This is true. And that is what infuriated Obama's base, too - he puts out a pay freeze for those least able to afford it (the "average worker"), that won't save all that much, and does it without using it as a negotiating point with the GOP on the whole tax package thing. It was simply bizarre, that he came up with it out of nowhere and announces it. This pay freeze was 100% a GOP suggestion, too, not a Dem one. The GOP got mad he co-opted it when he announced it last week! :D

Then tell the GOP, because this is 100% their idea.

What makes no sense is you taking one value, pay raises, and completely ignoring the rest of the payroll budget. Those are not the only two values contributing to the payroll. The payroll isn't only A- pay raises, and B -COLA freezes.

You do realize that there's a huge "rest of the payroll budget" to consider? For example, what would the normal value of the frozen COLA raises be, that are now 1.3 billion less over two years? The article didn't even consider that.

If you are decreasing a budget by 1.3 billion, pulling out one line item out of that budget that has a greater value, and saying, "Oh, but it's still over 1.3 billion" is just silly.

If your budget is $2000 a month, and your mortage is $1000, and your taxes, insurance, utilities are $500 - if you announce a budget cut of $100 a month in your "taxes, insurance, utilities" category - pulling out a tax bill that is still $300 and making the claim that "Oh, you didn't cut $100, because this is still $300!" doesn't make sense.

He's actually giving 3 out of 4 a raise during the freeze so you should be happy.

In many companies, not only government, COLA and base pay step schedules for positions are separate, and calculated separately in the budget process. See unions.

A starting policeman may get $30,000 a year, after 1 year $33,000, after 5 more $38,000. That is separate from COLA raises (which are variable tied to economy)

Seeing the base pay step schedules stay normal, while the COLA has been taken away, is absolutely a net loss for the employee. If they were hired thinking they would get a 4% raise every year, but now are only getting 3% (their step raise, no COLA) - yeah, they have had part of their pay frozen.

In this case, 1.3 billion is not paid out on the bottom line of the budget. The normal raises going on as part of that budget doesn't change the bottom line, the 1.3 billion was calculated on top of, inclusive, of that.

Later on in the article was a GOP offering,

But Rep. Jason Chaffetz, R-Utah, called the retention of step increases a hole in Obama's plan. He also said the administration should freeze hiring and reduce the federal payroll from $447 billion to $400 billion.

"Somehow, someway I think this country can survive on just a $400 billion payroll," Chaffetz said. He is the ranking Republican on the House Oversight and Government Reform subcommittee on the federal work force, and could become chairman when Republicans take control of the House next year."

That's $47 Billion saved per year or like Obama likes to use $470 Billion saved over 10 years. And forget about Cost of Living Adjustments.

I haven't had a COLA since 1982, I believe. We tried to get one on a new contract in '85 and spent 9 weeks on strike Nov/Dec. Beauty,eh?

I havent had a COLA raise or any raise since the economy tanked. Nice to see government workers are exempt from the tough economy.

Well, when you cut thru all the BS, they don't get a COLA, but they'll get the normal step raises for employment...not that the budget is providing that either!

yeah most people in the private sector arent getting either raise type during these times.

If you really cut thru the BS this is another case of do as I say not as I do.

Very few if any private sector jobs come with COLA clauses in a contract unless it's a union contract. Thus is there any wonder why so many union jobs are no longer in existence and those that are needed government bailouts and a government funded rebate program in order to stay afloat?

Wonder if the unemployed steel worker from Cleveland still reminisces of the good old days when he had COLA and thinks that standing up for unrealistic wages and benefits then was worth it despite having to work two crappy jobs, if he can find them, to get by now?

Most people in the private sector are reliant on the profits of their employer for raises and thus have a 'vested' interest in their employers' success, regardless of what the cost of living is at. Call it dedication.