Incorporate Uniform Overtime Provisions Into New System- OPM made the general recommendation that “Federal law enforcement officers in the new system should be subject to a uniform set of overtime provisions. While this does not necessarily mean that different forms of overtime pay might not be used for different situations (e.g., uncontrolled overtime versus scheduled overtime), it does mean that overtime rules should be properly and consistently applied across all agencies to ensure that all Federal law enforcement officers are treated equitably."

Scope of System Coverage for the New Job Evaluation and Pay System Coverage Would Include All Executive Branch Employees Who Meet the Retirement Definitions, Except Personnel in Correctional Institutions Whose Primary Occupation Is Not Law Enforcement, plus all Positions Properly Classified As Police Officers That Are Not Now Covered. OPM determined that the retirement definition of law enforcement was too narrow for a proposed separate pay and job evaluation system, and created a "primary duty" requirement for inclusion in the new system. OPM concluded that most corrections personnel, as well as Customs and Immigration Inspectors, would not meet the law enforcement as a "primary duty” requirement, but would still merit a differential of up to 25% of basic pay in certain dangerous positions and locales. Categories that were not included in the retirement definition of law enforcement but were recommended by OPM for inclusion in the new system included "Park Rangers and other land management employees (e.g., certain Bureau of Land Management Rangers and Department of Agriculture forestry technicians) who perform law enforcement work (including police-type work) as a primary duty.'

5. Conclusions

53

OPM determined that, though it should be linked to the General Schedule to maintain internal equity and minimize administration cost, a separate law enforcement job evaluation and pay system should be created "specifically designed to take into consideration the elements that distinguish law enforcement work, such as the hazards, the physical skills, the need to be trained in the use of deadly force, and the need to be prepared to make instantaneous, life-and-death decisions."54

IV.

Legislation Introduced in the House of Representatives During the 108th
Congress

H.R. 466, S. 985 (Congressman King (NY), Senator Dodd) – These proposals would revise the special pay adjustments for certain classes of federal law enforcement personnel in 31 specified metropolitan statistical areas and the remaining "rest of the U.S."

H.R. 1676 (Congressman Mike Rogers (MI)) – The legislation would modify levels of special pay adjustments for certain classes of federal law enforcement personnel in particular regions of the country. This bill covers cities that were the original statutorily designated cities from the 1990 Law Enforcement Pay Reform Act; and, cities where the cost of living is ten percent or more above the national average and that are not specific metropolitan statistical areas but are covered under the general "rest of the U.S. provision."

H.R. 2276 (Congressman Van Hollen) – This proposal would make the National Institutes of Health (NIH) a permanent police force. These officers would be considered LEOS for retirement purposes as long as they are not appointed above a standard maximum age.

H.R. 2442, S. 819 (Congressman Filner, Senator Mikulski) – These bills would redefine the term "LEO" to include any federal employee not otherwise covered by such term whose duties include the investigation or apprehension of suspected or convicted individuals and who are authorized to carry a firearm; and employees of the IRS whose duties include the collection of delinquent taxes and the securing of delinquent returns.

H.R. 2260 (Congresswoman Ros-Lehtinen) – The legislation would include assistant United States attorneys (AUSAs) within the definition of a LEO. Individual AUSAS would have the option to decide whether or not they wanted to be deemed a LEO for retirement benefits. If they so choose, retirement benefits would be applied retroactively as though the AUSA had received LEO retirement benefits from the outset.

H.R. 2060 (Congressman Todd Platts) - This legislation would amend the Law Enforcement Pay Equity Act of 2000 to permit United States Park Police and United States Secret Service Uniformed Division retirees to receive the adjustments in pension benefits they would otherwise have been entitled to as a result of the salary increases of active members of the United States Park Police and United States Secret Service Uniformed Division received in the aforementioned Act.

Appendix A

Note: Annual quit rates were determined by taking the number of voluntary
resignations from Federal service and dividing by the average mumber of
employees employed during that fiscal year. The term “quit" is defined as
a voluntary resignation from the Federal service, including any resignations
during a probationary or trial period. Quits exclude such actions as
reassignments to other series, transfers to other Federal agencies,
involuntary separations, retirements, and deaths.

The GS-0082 series applies primarily to Deputy U.S. Marshals in
grades GS-5, 7, or 9. There are about 15 GS-15 U.S. Marshals who
are Presidential appointees; however, since they have temporary
appointments, they are not included in OPM's standard reports on
turnover rates. The normal career path for GS-0082 Deputy U.S.
Marshals includes movement to the GS-1811 criminal investigator
occupation at grade GS-11; thus, these GS-0082 employees have not
reached the normal career journey level. As a result, quit rates for the
GS-0082 series are higher than they would be if journey-level

2002

07/22/03 TUE 14:58 FAX

The quit rates for GS-1896 Border Patrol Agents are in the 41-46
percent range at GS-5 and at the 10-12 percent range at GS-7, which
reflects high quit rates during the first year of employment, which are
largely attributable to failure to successfully complete basic training or
probationary period. At grades 9 and higher, the average quit rate for
Border Patrol Agents was 1.7 percent in FY 2001 and 1.1 percent in
FY 2002.

*** Effective in January 2003, OPM established higher special rates for
GS-0083 police officers in most agencies. Similar special rates were
established for Department of Defense GS-0083 police officers
effective in April 2003. OPM anticipates that quit rates for the
GS-0083 police officers will be lower in FY 2003 as a result of these
special rates.

Source: U.S. Office of Personnel Management, Central Personnel

Data File

003