Bill Overview
Title: Civil Service Federal Employee Serving Overseas Pay Equity Act
Description: This bill provides for locality pay for federal employees who are teleworking overseas under a Domestic Employee Teleworking Overseas agreement, specifically the locality pay for where they would have been working in the United States or what they would receive as a member of the Foreign Service, whichever is lower.
Sponsors: Rep. Castro, Joaquin [D-TX-20]
Target Audience
Population: Federal employees teleworking overseas under a Domestic Employee Teleworking Overseas agreement
Estimated Size: 50000
- The bill targets federal employees who are teleworking overseas.
- These employees are under a Domestic Employee Teleworking Overseas agreement.
- The locality pay adjustment will depend on the pay for the location they would have been working in the U.S. or Foreign Service rates.
- The target group is limited to those federal employees who have agreements to work remotely from overseas locations.
- The bill does not affect federal employees working within the U.S. or those working overseas but not teleworking.
Reasoning
- The target population for this policy includes federal employees who are teleworking overseas under a Domestic Employee Teleworking Overseas agreement. This is a relatively small and specific group of individuals, estimated at about 50,000 people.
- Given the budget constraints of $125 million in the first year, the policy can cover a breadth of salary adjustments, particularly for low to mid-level employees.
- Many federal employees teleworking overseas may already be receiving a locality pay adjustment, but this policy aims to standardize and potentially increase it to the level they would receive in their U.S. headquarters, subject to a budget constraint.
- This policy will not affect federal employees based within the U.S., those in traditional overseas assignments, or those who work for other branches of the government such as the military.
- Interviewees were selected to include a variety of roles and settings, e.g., different job grades, family circumstances, and pre-existing arrangements, as these factors affect how the policy might impact each person.
Simulated Interviews
Senior Analyst at the Department of Commerce (London, UK)
Age: 45 | Gender: female
Wellbeing Before Policy: 7
Duration of Impact: 5.0 years
Commonness: 10/20
Statement of Opinion:
- This policy would make a significant difference in my paycheck as my locality pay hasn't matched that of my colleagues in D.C. for some time.
- I've felt a bit left behind with current arrangements, so aligning our pay means feeling more valued and less stressed over cost of living here.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 8 | 7 |
| Year 2 | 8 | 7 |
| Year 3 | 8 | 7 |
| Year 5 | 7 | 7 |
| Year 10 | 7 | 6 |
| Year 20 | 6 | 5 |
IT Specialist at the Department of Defense (Tokyo, Japan)
Age: 39 | Gender: male
Wellbeing Before Policy: 6
Duration of Impact: 4.0 years
Commonness: 8/20
Statement of Opinion:
- The cost of living in Tokyo can be quite high, and although we were managing, this policy offers relief.
- Pay adjustments closer to my base state of California would be beneficial.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 7 | 6 |
| Year 2 | 7 | 6 |
| Year 3 | 7 | 6 |
| Year 5 | 6 | 6 |
| Year 10 | 6 | 5 |
| Year 20 | 5 | 4 |
Cultural Affairs Officer at the State Department (Paris, France)
Age: 52 | Gender: female
Wellbeing Before Policy: 7
Duration of Impact: 2.0 years
Commonness: 12/20
Statement of Opinion:
- I appreciate the attempts to equalize pay, but given the already complex nature of my job package, I'm lukewarm about the impact.
- The possible increase in pay is good, but my main concerns are elsewhere.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 7 | 7 |
| Year 2 | 7 | 7 |
| Year 3 | 7 | 7 |
| Year 5 | 6 | 6 |
| Year 10 | 6 | 6 |
| Year 20 | 5 | 5 |
Junior Policy Advisor at the Environmental Protection Agency (Berlin, Germany)
Age: 28 | Gender: other
Wellbeing Before Policy: 5
Duration of Impact: 3.0 years
Commonness: 6/20
Statement of Opinion:
- As a newer employee, this policy helps bridge the salary gap I felt while starting out here.
- Increasing my pay to what it would be in D.C. could influence my decision to extend my stay.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 6 | 5 |
| Year 2 | 6 | 5 |
| Year 3 | 6 | 5 |
| Year 5 | 5 | 5 |
| Year 10 | 5 | 5 |
| Year 20 | 4 | 4 |
Research Scientist at the National Institutes of Health (Sydney, Australia)
Age: 34 | Gender: male
Wellbeing Before Policy: 7
Duration of Impact: 4.0 years
Commonness: 9/20
Statement of Opinion:
- Pay adjustments are welcomed, aiming to standardize is great.
- However, time zone differences and job complexities still limit other life quality aspects.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 7 | 7 |
| Year 2 | 7 | 7 |
| Year 3 | 7 | 7 |
| Year 5 | 7 | 6 |
| Year 10 | 6 | 6 |
| Year 20 | 6 | 6 |
Program Officer at USAID (Madrid, Spain)
Age: 46 | Gender: female
Wellbeing Before Policy: 8
Duration of Impact: 7.0 years
Commonness: 11/20
Statement of Opinion:
- Positive about the policy’s intent to bring parity among different pay structures.
- This could affect my long-term savings and retirement plans positively.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 9 | 8 |
| Year 2 | 9 | 8 |
| Year 3 | 9 | 8 |
| Year 5 | 8 | 7 |
| Year 10 | 8 | 7 |
| Year 20 | 7 | 6 |
Trade Specialist at the Department of Agriculture (Rome, Italy)
Age: 30 | Gender: male
Wellbeing Before Policy: 6
Duration of Impact: 5.0 years
Commonness: 7/20
Statement of Opinion:
- This policy has a good focus on equity but needs to cover more aspects like bonuses and benefits.
- It might decide how long I stay overseas, given the cost of living here.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 7 | 6 |
| Year 2 | 7 | 6 |
| Year 3 | 7 | 6 |
| Year 5 | 6 | 6 |
| Year 10 | 6 | 5 |
| Year 20 | 5 | 5 |
Engineer at NASA (Seoul, South Korea)
Age: 40 | Gender: other
Wellbeing Before Policy: 8
Duration of Impact: 1.0 years
Commonness: 6/20
Statement of Opinion:
- While pay adjustments are good, my main hurdles are technical and familial.
- This helps financially but doesn't address all my concerns with the overseas setup.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 8 | 8 |
| Year 2 | 8 | 8 |
| Year 3 | 8 | 8 |
| Year 5 | 8 | 7 |
| Year 10 | 7 | 7 |
| Year 20 | 7 | 6 |
Diplomat at the State Department (Ottawa, Canada)
Age: 55 | Gender: female
Wellbeing Before Policy: 8
Duration of Impact: 2.0 years
Commonness: 15/20
Statement of Opinion:
- At my stage, changes in pay are less critical for day-to-day but affect retirement planning.
- This policy helps bring continuity and confidence in my financial future.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 8 | 8 |
| Year 2 | 8 | 8 |
| Year 3 | 8 | 8 |
| Year 5 | 8 | 8 |
| Year 10 | 8 | 7 |
| Year 20 | 7 | 7 |
Policy Analyst at the Department of Education (Santiago, Chile)
Age: 29 | Gender: male
Wellbeing Before Policy: 6
Duration of Impact: 3.0 years
Commonness: 5/20
Statement of Opinion:
- Shifting pay scales is a start, but flexibility in work hours would also contribute greatly to wellbeing.
- Overall, I appreciate the notion of equalizing pay, but it's a small part of what impacts my quality of life.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 6 | 6 |
| Year 2 | 6 | 6 |
| Year 3 | 6 | 6 |
| Year 5 | 5 | 5 |
| Year 10 | 5 | 5 |
| Year 20 | 5 | 5 |
Cost Estimates
Year 1: $125000000 (Low: $50000000, High: $250000000)
Year 2: $125000000 (Low: $50000000, High: $250000000)
Year 3: $125000000 (Low: $50000000, High: $250000000)
Year 5: $125000000 (Low: $50000000, High: $250000000)
Year 10: $125000000 (Low: $50000000, High: $250000000)
Year 100: $125000000 (Low: $50000000, High: $250000000)
Key Considerations
- The cost estimate assumes an indefinite duration reflecting the ongoing nature of teleworking agreements.
- The legislative intent to ensure pay parity could have implications on federal employment practices and telework policies moving forward.
- The increased pay could potentially make overseas teleworking positions more attractive and competitive.