FSM Salary Increase Bill Approves by FSM Congress

edited January 2007 in General
During the National Christmas and New Year Celebration yesterday January 12, 2005, after Chief Justice pleaded again on behalf of the employees of the National Government for the third time, Speaker Peter Christian swiftly interjected an announcement, as if it was a last minute thought, informing the crowd of employees and families that the bill which sought salary increases for the employees had been passed by the Congress and would be transmitted immediately to the President for his approval.

Before the celebration was over, people were expressing contentment, while rumors immediately spread, claiming that only those making less than $20K per year would be affected, but not all whom have served under the Public Service System. If this is so, I applauded the author, freshman Peter Sitan, for his landslide victory, but still feeling sorry for the few whose vote(s) may not be that important to Speaker Christian. The Congress had all the time to change the language to include all employess, regardless of their payscale.

Comments

  • Stoix,

    Thank you for the dissemination of a piece that I think is quite unfair for its intended purpose and nature.

    It is alarming at this very stage for our National Government do pay more attention to raising its employees salaries while many essential services that must be addressed first are ignored to give priority for something less urgent. Comparing the salaries of employees of the National Government to those of the state governments in particular, one can quickly determine the huge difference or disparity between the two establishments of their employees salaries! The leaders of the National Government have to conduct a thorough investigation and assessment on whether such salaries increase is urgently important and needed.

    Why should members of the National Government demand such partial increase of their salaries alone while the majority of the working FSM populace have been struggling dramatically to even catch up with the lowest pay level of such particular entity? Are they enjoying a much wider disparity between their lucrative living and that of the low paying ordinary employees of both the state governments and the private sectors?

    What must be fair enough is to design a comprehensively uniform national minimum wage for all employees that will be consistent with that of the National Government employees. And this the obvious societal shenanigans that will never solve our problems because why keep on feeding the fat pigs when the malnutritions are dying and suffering. The employees of the National Government do not need the increase for their salaries as the many who make a living working six days a week with a hourly rate of fifty cents.

    It is very sad and unfortunate that we, the people, are actually not afforded the privilege of exercising our divine rights as as creators of our Constitution. Our rights has been deprived and are only a theoretical fantasies! Sometimes, it seems that our National Government has considered itself as a separate establishment from the states. It often works on its own doing for what it thinks will benefit its members without due regards to the states. And this bill is another clear example of that!

    Aren't we, the people, legally entitled to voice our inputs, comments, suggestions, oppositions and whatever we can say before a bill is enacted and signed into law?
  • Onofek,

    Hi! Your points are noted but I think the distinction between the employees in the national and state governments (leave out the private sector at this stage as they are free within their own means) must be made here because they are covered by different legal means. The state should not dictate to the national government as to the type of wage structure they should operate within as they lack the capacity to do so. Each government should take care of their own employees and make sure they recieve the appropiriate renumeration.

    It would be wise to have a national minimum wage but at this stage I do not think it can be done as it falls within the power of the states. A better way to change that "quickly" is to sign the International Labor Organization's (ILO) standards Treaty rather than go through the Constitutional means which takes ages to take effect.

    Personally I do not have any qualms if the national government wants to increase the wage/salary of its employees as his honorable Congressman Peter Sitan is fighting for.
  • I do not know what happened here, but I noticed my piece before Rebel's post had been withheld altogether or perhaps deleted. I do not know whether it's the thing I said earlier under a different topic or it's just simply a technical glitch.

    At any rate, what I'd said has been implied above by Rebel. I hope we continue to discuss this important matter. Cheers!
  • I need one of those anonymous names! I think I'll get me one...
  • I generally agree with Onofek. The raise in FSM salaries at this time is a political gimmick to get votes. It is similar to the $50/ pay period "COLA" raise in Pohnpei State.

    The fact is neither entity can afford it. It is no secret that the FSMNG has experienced intermittent cash flow problems throughout FY-06---- payments to vendors have been drastically delayed in many cases. Everyone knows, too, the struggle Pohnpei State went through to find general fund funding to handle the JEMCO cuts...there is no more available genral fund monies to cover this increase so there will be deficit spending...an additional $1.9 million a year.

    So certainly it is sending a wrong message to everyone. It is so typical of this congress. I hope the President will veto.
  • In any financially responsible organization, when the overhead is shown to be sizably more in comparison to revenues being generated, any responsible CEO would cut back on costs. Lay off workers. Lessen the size of the organization.
  • THE CONGRESS SURE HAS ITS WAYS OF SCREWING WITH OUR MINDS. AN ADDITION OF $1.9 MILLION TO THE GOV'T EXPENDITURE AND A CUT OF $1.7 MILLION FROM THE GENERAL FUNDS RESULTING FROM THE CHANGE IN GRT LAW. I THINK WE NEED A REVOLUTION, COUP OR WHATEVER WORKS.
  • The increase as approved by FSM Congress isn't for every employees covered under their Public Service System, but for only those who are making $20K and less per year, according to Personnel Officer and a lawyer from the Congress. A handful of those making over $20K and have been serving the government over twenty years would not be that lucky, despite their perseverance. These folks are usually in the leading roles as division heads and their assistants or those, through seniority in services, had reached such salary levels.
Sign In or Register to comment.