The supplement is an additional benefit beyond the civil service annuity for FERS employees who retire before age 62 until they can begin drawing Social Security. Image: zimmytws/Shutterstock.com
By: FEDweek StaffThe FERS “special retirement supplement,” targeted for a general repeal for those retiring after 2027 under the House-passed budget reconciliation bill, would be preserved in the version being drafted for a Senate vote.
A package of changes to the bill, crafted by the Homeland Security and Governmental Affairs Committee, makes no mention of the retirement supplement, which the House voted to end for those retiring in January 2028 or later, except for those under special retirement provisions that primarily apply to law enforcement officers, firefighters and air traffic controllers.
The supplement is an additional benefit beyond the civil service annuity for FERS employees who retire before age 62 that duplicates the value of Social Security benefits they earned through federal employment until they reach that age and can begin drawing Social Security. The Congressional Budget Office has estimated that the supplement is worth $18,000 a year on average to retirees receiving it.
While making no statement against the House’s language, by remaining silent the Senate version effectively disapproves of it. However, the Senate version accepts or modifies several other House-passed provisions, while adding several new ones (see related story).
One of those provisions would affect only those newly hired after the date of enactment of the bill, to require them to choose between paying an additional 5 percentage points of their salary toward their civil service retirement benefits or accepting “at-will” employment status. That would mean giving up rights such as challenging disciplinary actions and other workplace decisions against them to the MSPB.
While the House version would keep the standard FERS contribution at 4.4 percent of salary for those who accept at-will status, the Senate version would require higher contributions in both cases: an extra 5 percentage points for those who accept it and an extra 10 percentage points for those who refuse it.
The CBO has estimated that three-fourths of new employees would accept that rather than pay the extra amount toward retirement. Federal employee organizations have said that over time, that would greatly erode traditional civil service protections against workplace decisions not based on merit; certain protections would remain, however, such as those against discrimination under civil rights law.
The Senate version meanwhile retains House language to: impose a $350 fee for filing an appeal at the MSPB, with the amount to be refunded to an employee who prevails in the appeal; and require a full audit of FEHB enrollments for ineligible persons being covered as family members and removing them.
Republican leaders of the Senate hope to bring the bill to a floor vote by July 4. Assuming it passes there, differences in the two versions would have to be resolved before a final round of floor voting.
Congress Leaving Key Policy, Funding Decisions to the Fall
Guidance on ‘Schedule G’ Stresses Political Oversight
OPM Tells Agencies to Allow ‘Religious Expression’ in Federal Workplace
Agency RIFs, Reorganizations Starting to Take Shape
Order Formally Launches ‘Schedule Policy/Career,’ Adds Category of Appointees
Court Allows Order against Unions to Remain, but Congress Eyes Stepping In
See also,
Top 10 Provisions in the Big Beautiful Bill of Interest to Federal Employees
A Pre-RIF Checklist for Every Federal Employee, From a Federal Employment Attorney
Work Longer or Take the FERS Supplement Now: Which is Better?
Doubling Your TSP (C Fund vs G Fund)
