Colleen Kelley, NTEU president, wrote the warning in a letter April 20 to members of the House and the Senate involved with working out a compromise budget resolution. Both chambers passed a budget resolution at the end of March, but most reconcile the differences between the two.

The budget blueprint is non-binding and does not need to be signed by the president. Instead, the Senate and the House will use the budget during the appropriations process to decide how much funding federal programs and agencies get in fiscal 2016.

See also: Budget targeting pensions, workforce will get quick vote

See also: House-passed budget cuts workforce, ups pension contribution

See also: Obama's budget ends sequestration, boosts funding

Both the Senate and the House versions would increase federal employee pension contributions to six percent or more of salaries. The House version would also cut the federal workforce by 10 percent through attrition and increase Postal Service employee contributions to their health insurance premiums.

The budget proposal also decreases the rate of return on the Thrift Savings Plan's government securities fund (G Fund) and encourages the elimination of the Federal Employee Retirement System annuity supplement.

But Kelley said federal employees had already given up $159 billion in deficit reduction as the result of pay freezes, increased pension contributions and through furloughs.

"I am asking you to look elsewhere for additional savings. Enough is enough. This country has the greatest civil service in the world, but that will not continue to be the case if Congress continues to use their pay and benefits as a piggy bank to fund other things," Kelley wrote.

She said it was becoming difficult to recruit new employees and retain existing ones, and that continued attempts to cut agency budgets and reduce benefits is hurting morale.

"I think it's pretty clear that, as an employer, Congress cannot continue to take actions that harm federal employees, including government shutdowns and furloughs in addition to reductions in benefits, and expect federal employees to not be affected negatively by those actions," Kelley said.

Share:
In Other News
Load More