Seniors May Have to Pay for Medicare Home Health By RICARDO ALONSO-ZALDIVAR businessweek.com WASHINGTON Congressional advisers are calling for a new out-of-pocket charge for Medicare home health care, a service that until now has been free of charge to patients. The recommendation Thursday from the Medicare Payment Advisory Commission comes as lawmakers look for health care spending cuts to help get control of federal deficits. The advisory panel did not prescribe an amount, but its staff has suggested the charge be $150 for a series of related visits. More than 3 million seniors got home health care last year, including visits from nurses, therapists and personal care attendants. The service was once seen as a cost saver, since it's much cheaper than putting patients in the hospital, but costs are approaching $20 billion a year and rising. The AARP seniors lobby opposes the plan. For more news from businessweek.com, click here.

Will Changes to Federal Employee Benefits Provide a Financial Windfall (or Disaster)? The Joy and Pain of the Rumor Mill By Ralph Smith fedsmith.com There has been plenty of bad news in recent weeks and months regarding federal pay and benefits. A proposal by President Obama to freeze federal pay for two years was enacted relatively quickly by the former Congress and there are proposals floating around to change the federal retirement system by using a formula of an employee's "high five" earning years instead of the "high three" earning years. The result would most likely be a reduction in your future retirement annuity. (See Your Financial Future: Your Federal Employee Benefits and the Deficit Commission Recommendations and High Five vs. High Three: Is There a Difference In Your Retirement Annuity?) And, as we have dutifully reported on our website, there are several proposals for cutting the federal workforce in one way or another. (See Commission Proposes "High-Three" to "High-Five" for Retirement, Pay Freeze and Changes to FEHB for Federal Employees. ) Human nature being what it is, rumors inevitably start flying, even before the first word has been typed into a Congressional committee's computer program. Before the internet, people would get on the telephone and tell one friend about the latest "news" and that friend would then contact others with a rumor that quickly morphed into a well-known "fact." The difference today is that a rumor can be sent out to large groups of people with one short email. The numerous proposed changes are confusing. The confusion quickly leads to more rumors which, by the second or third iteration become an established "fact" even if the rumor is not true. For more on this article from fedsmith.com, click here.

5 Myths About Federal Workers The Washington Post By Ed O'Keefe Federal employees are overpaid compared with private-sector workers. 1. The notion that federal workers consistently earn higher salaries than comparable private-sector workers has become an accepted truth. Conservative think tanks, including the Cato Institute, make much of data that does not offer fair comparisons of similar public-sector and private-sector jobs or account for how experience and education affect pay. A pediatrician with a small practice in Des Moines and a doctor at the National Institutes of Health who is leading a team of 50 researchers trying to cure cancer both provide health care, for example, but we shouldn't expect that they be paid the same. Though some critics question their accuracy, government analyses show that federal employees make on average 24 percent less than their private-sector counterparts. The Congressional Research Service reported in 2009 that private industry pays higher salaries than the government for PhD-level employees in computer science, information science, mathematics, statistics, biological sciences, environmental life sciences, chemistry, economics, and civil, architectural, electrical and computer engineering. In addition, the average private-sector salary in 2010 for a recent college graduate was $48,661. Entry-level federal workers start at $34,075, or $42,209 for candidates with superior academic achievement. On the other hand, some federal blue-collar and clerical workers are paid more than those in the private sector. The ongoing debate about federal pay, however, does not address the root problem: The government does not have a pay system flexible enough to recruit the best talent and pay in accordance with the market. For the other four myths, click here.

Fiscal Commission Proposes to Cut Federal Retirement NARFE Legislative Hotline Fiscal Commission Co-Chairs’ Proposal: The final report of the Fiscal Commission issued December 1st contains proposals to cut federal civilian and military retirement by 70 billion over 10 years, shift health premium costs to federal retirees, freeze federal pay and reduce the federal workforce by 10 percent. The final report, including the federal retirement and health benefits cuts, will be voted by the 18 Commission members on Friday, December 3. Several Commission members have announced plans to vote for the report, a few to oppose and others remain undecided. Because of the unfair cuts to federal retirement and health benefits and employee compensation NARFE President Joseph Beaudoin asks each NARFE member, especially those who acted recently, to contact their own Representative and both Senators. Due to the urgency we must employee electronic mail and telephone calls. President Beaudoin urges members to use the Legislative Action Center to deliver an updated message. The NARFE TOLL FREE number for the Capitol switchboard is listed below with a brief message to be delivered to every Member of Congress. Legislative Action Center: The Commission Report, more draconian than the Co-chair’s proposal, will receive expedited consideration in the Senate and House during the December “lame duck” session if it gets 14 of the 18 Commission votes. With such high stakes, NARFE President Joseph Beaudoin implores each NARFE member to immediately send NARFE’s just updated message to the current Members of Congress. The Legislative Action Center allows this to be done easily. The link to use is here. Organizing Telephone Calls: Just as important, NARFE officers and leaders should rally the vast majority of NARFE members who are not online to use chapter and federation telephone trees and all other tools to urge members to use NARFE’s toll free number, 1-866-220-0044, to reach the Capitol switchboard and ask for your Representative and both Senators by name, or supply your ZIP Code. Once connected, the message is: “I urge you to oppose the Report of the Fiscal Commission to cut my earned federal civilian retirement and health benefits, freeze federal pay and reduce the federal workforce by 10 percent.” Pay Freeze for Feds: On November 30th, President Obama proposed a two-year pay freeze for federal civilian employees throughout the government even in bargained wages. NARFE expressed opposition in a press release which obtained good national exposure for the organization. Now, NARFE joins the entire federal coalition to inform Congress of this unfairness. NARFE’s Legislative Action Center allows any user to easily send a prepared message to his or her Representative and both Senators.

Federal Retirees' Groups Press for Onetime Boost to Benefits By Amy Goldstein Washington Post Staff Writer Gary Faley, a retired freight yard clerk in Flint, Mich., paid attention the other day when House Speaker Nancy Pelosi (D-Calif.) said she will schedule a vote in November on a plan to give an extra $250 to retirees who will not receive a cost-of-living increase in their benefit checks next year. Faley, legislative director of an association that advocates for the nation's 600,000 retired railroad workers, immediately sent out an alert asking members to phone a toll-free number and urge their congressional representatives to support the bill. "My members will let them know we are out there watching them," said Faley, 62, of the National Association of Retired and Veteran Railways Employees. Retirees from the nation's railroads are one of several constituencies that are affected by an announcement by the Labor Department that consumer prices have gone up too little to warrant a cost-of-living increase in retirement benefits for 2011. It will be the second year in a row that benefits have not risen. The consecutive years without an increase are  unprecedented since the mid-1970s, when the government began to adjust such payments automatically, based on the inflation rate. For more on this Washington Post article, go here.

Hoyer: Feds Shouldn't Look for Lower Health Premiums Anytime Soon By STEPHEN LOSEY federaltimes.com BOWIE, Md. — Two proposals to lower health insurance costs for employees and retirees are unlikely to advance until the economy and the government's fiscal outlook improve says House Majority Leader Steny Hoyer, D-Md. Hoyer told representatives of the National Active and Retired Federal Employees Association that he would like to increase the government's share of Federal Employees Health Benefits Program premiums to 80 percent, but doesn't see that change happening soon. "I haven't introduced the bill this session because of our financial situation," Hoyer said. "When times get better, I want to pursue it." Read the rest of the story here.

Will You Get a Larger Retirement Check in 2011? By Ralph Smith FedSmith.com A frequent question we get from readers is: "Will I get a COLA increase next year?" A closely related question is usually phrased along these lines: "If federal employees get a 1.4% pay increase next year, does this mean that retirees get the same increase?" Here is a third question on the minds of some readers: "My health insurance, food costs, and related expenses are higher. Won't this require Congress to give us a COLA increase next year?" Here is a quick answer to all three questions: No. There is not going to be a COLA increase in 2011. For more on this story, click here.