Does this help? http://assets.opencrs.com/rpts/94-971_20100120.pdf

I doesn't appear that the aggragate cost of just raises is calcultated. Only the % of the raise added to previous salaries are reported, or at least that's how I see it.

Thanks! JH

If you find a good source, please post it -- I would love to use that information for my new project with the Maryland Public Policy Institute.

Thanks, and good luck!

Here was an article that appeared in USA today a while back. (hopefully that is OK to post a link to a competitor?)

Thanks. JH

I'm all for no federal pay raises, as long as it holds true to all federal elected officials.

Just Google 2010 federal pay scale and the first link should take you to all salary tables for this year and previous years.

In 2007, the CBO issued a paper which stated, in part, that: "Systematic comparisons of full-time permanent federal employees with similar workers in the private sector are beyond the scope of this analysis. The paper presents some evidence, however, suggesting that the part of the federal workforce that is the focus of this report has a higher concentration—relative to the private sector—of jobs among management, professional, and related occupational categories. Correspondingly, because people in
such occupations tend to be older, more experienced, and more highly educated, the average age and educational
attainment of federal workers are higher than those of private-sector workers."

See: http://bit.ly/fzmFGP

In other words, one of the reasons that federal workers get paid more is that they have more experience and better educational attainment than private sector workers.

Aside from a few anomalies... the issue is NOT that Government employees are getting a too generous wage and benefit package... (ya'all ready for it?)

The problem is that PRIVATE industry wages and benefits have been allowed to retrench so far.