The Federal Criminal Investigator Association Initial Response to the House and Senate Majority Staff “Concept Paper for a Federal Law Enforcement Personnel System”

The Federal Criminal Investigator Association (FCIA) thanks the House and Senate Majority Staff for the opportunity to comment on the “Concept Paper for a Federal Law Enforcement Personnel System”. The FCIA welcomes any positive reform to the current system governing classification, pay and retirement benefits for federal law enforcement officers. We commend the House and Senate for bringing this important issue to the table for discussion and reform.

Our comments will reflect our initial reaction to review of the concept paper. We believe the concept paper sets forth some positive recommendations that FCIA supports, some recommendations the FCIA would contest and, in some instances, some generalized concepts for further consideration. We would reserve full comment on certain conceptual proposals until we have significantly greater details with respect to those proposals. With that in mind, we offer the following initial comments with respect to some of the proposals in the concept paper:

· The FCIA recognizes that the House and Senate subcommittees “concept paper” attempts to address the disparity in benefits and pay among various job classifications in the federal law enforcement field. The FCIA acknowledges however that there are diverse authorities, duties and responsibilities within this field. The FCIA supports all efforts to enhance the consistency of classification, pay, retirement and other benefits to all federal law enforcement officers, allowing for their disparate functions. .

· The FCIA is supportive of the principle statement “the right of employees to organize, bargain collectively, and otherwise participate (through labor organizations of their choosing) in decisions affecting them, when applicable.” However the unique position and responsibilities held by federal law enforcement personnel make labor negotiation problematic. In traditional collective bargaining agreements the members select a labor organization to negotiate on the members behalf. As part of the process the threat of work slow downs or strikes is among the options. This tact is not available to federal law enforcement officers because the law enforcement officers are duty bound. Unlike other federal employees the federal law enforcement officer must place his/her trust in the executive management to take care of his/her occupational needs.Although federal law enforcement officers do not presently have collective bargaining rights, we feel that this issue should receive consideration to afford federal law enforcement officers similar collective bargaining rights afforded non- federal law enforcement employees. We recognize that federal law enforcement officers hold a unique position within our system of government and that any collective bargaining agreement would need to be sensitive to that reality.

· The FCIA is supportive of fair and equitable physical fitness requirements for federal law enforcement officers that would include provisions to address and accommodate unique physical circumstances that may arise during the career of a federal law enforcement officer. The FCIA recognizes that law enforcement requires the ability to be physically competent to execute our duties and responsibilities.

· The FCIA has strong reservations to bestowing to the Director of OPM the de facto title of “law enforcement czar”. We believe that this concept paper affords the Director of OPM, a civil administrator and political appointee, an inordinate amount of authority to govern federal law enforcement officers, and by unilateral decree, make decisions on critical federal law enforcement matters. As an example, the Director of OPM would have the authority to determine and adjust federal law enforcement retirement benefits, to change and/or abolish law enforcement classification positions, and would be responsible for designing and establishing a law enforcement pay system. The concept paper references the establishment of a “Federal Law Enforcement Pay and Retirement Council” consisting of representatives from the various federal law enforcement agencies who would provide “views and recommendations” to the Director of OPM. We note, however, that the Director of OPM would have the exclusive authority to make whatever determination he/she sees fit with respect to these critical law enforcement matters, irrespective of the recommendations of the Council. The FCIA is not conceptually opposed to the establishment of a “law enforcement czar” and a Council to oversee federal law enforcement issues. We, however, believe a “law enforcement czar” needs to be a law enforcement professional and not a civil administrator. We agree that OPM should have a voice in shaping law enforcement reform, but that voice should not be so loud, as in being the final decision authority, but rather that voice should be softer, as in being part of a chorus on a Council with various representatives of the federal law enforcement agencies. The FCIA recommends that the Council have a representative from each cabinet level department having a significant number of federal law enforcement personnel. The “czar” would be selected from amongst these representatives. By having a law enforcement professional as the so-called czar, we believe the needs of federal law enforcement officers can be much more fairly addressed than by having someone with no law enforcement background making those critical assessments and decisions. We further believe that a Council could be designed to have more than simply an advisory function to the czar. Perhaps requiring a Council consensus on certain law enforcement matters before the czar can make certain fundamental changes with respect to law enforcement matters. To conclude, we are not opposed to OPM playing a key role in shaping and reforming federal law enforcement, but that role should be as a participant rather than as a dictator of sorts.

· The FCIA is supportive of a fair and equitable pay for performance system (“pay banding”) for compensating federal law enforcement officers. We recognize that employees who perform their duties to the best of their abilities should be rewarded for their efforts versus those employees who do not perform their duties to their fullest extent.

· The FCIA recognizes that premium pay (or Law Enforcement Availability Pay, commonly referred to as LEAP) is an important aspect in the compensation package for federal law enforcement officers who perform critical law enforcement duties beyond a traditional 40 hour work week. With respect to the premium pay bullet point on page 18 of the concept paper, the FCIA would object to any proposal to modify the current premium pay (LEAP) structure for federal law enforcement officers. However, the FCIA has no objection if the meaning of this proposal is to become more inclusive for federal law enforcement officers not presently covered by premium pay. Further, if what is meant by this proposal is to address matters such as night differential inequities for certain federal law enforcement officers, the FCIA is supportive of such efforts.

· The FCIA will reserve full comment on the concept paper proposals to change the retirement system for federal law enforcement officers until we have had the opportunity to review significantly greater details of such proposals. Having said that we make the following comments with respect to the retirement proposals in the concept paper:

o Tier I and Tier 2 retirement determinations:

§ As noted earlier with respect the role of the Director of OPM, the FCIA would object strongly to the Director of OPM being exclusivilyexclusively authorized to make the determination as to which federal law enforcement officers would qualify under Tier I or Tier 2 retirement coverage.

o With respect to the Retirement Option I proposals:

§ The FCIA believes that early retirement eligibility should remain at age 50 with 20 years of law enforcement service or at any age with 25 years of law enforcement service. By completely eliminating the 25 year at any age provision, federal law enforcement officers who begin their careers in their twenties will be required to work up to 30 years before becoming eligible to retire. The early retirement benefit is a significant benefit to compensate federal law enforcement officers for the sacrifice and risks associated with law enforcement service. However, if age 52 with 20 years of law enforcement service were to become the standard, the FCIA submits that those currently serving as federal law enforcement officers be grandfathered under the current retirement provisions. Secondly, the benefit calculation would undoubtedly need to be adjusted from the present 1.7 percent for the first 20 years of service and 1 percent thereafter. If federal law enforcement officers must reach age 52 versus age 50 before being eligible to retire, then at a minimum, the benefit calculation at 1.7 percent must be adjusted to include the first 22 years versus 20 years of service. The FCIA in fact contends that the 1.7 percent benefit should be extended to at least the first 25 years of service to all federal law enforcement officers in order to provide appropriate retirement benefits to current law enforcement officers and to provide a necessary retirement incentive to those individuals in their twenties who are contemplating federal law enforcement service.

§ The FCIA is neutral with respect to raising the mandatory retirement age to 62 from 57. We recognize the importance of retaining qualified federal law enforcement officers who desire to continue with service beyond age 57. The FCIA strongly recommends that the FERS retirement system be reconfigured so federal law enforcement officer’s defined benefit not be reduced to 1% after 20 years of service. This would go a long way in retaining the experienced agents who leave federal law enforcement for other careers.

o With respect to Retirement Option 2 proposals:

§ Without further details and modifications, the FCIA does not support this proposal as set forth in the concept paper. We believe this retirement option will not provide the necessary retirement support for federal law enforcement officers.

· The FCIA conceptually supports the proposal of the creation of a housing allowance for federal law enforcement officers who are assigned to a high housing cost area.

· The FCIA conceptually supports the proposal of the creation of a Homeland Security Reserve Force.

The FCIA remains supportive in encouraging reform to provide the necessary pay, benefits and retirement structure for our federal law enforcement officers. Federal law enforcement officers shoulder a heavy, and often dangerous, burden in protecting our citizens, our borders and bringing to justice those who would violate the laws of our land. The citizens of the United States deserve a highly trained, professional and motivated federal law enforcement community as we confront the difficult law enforcement challenges of the 21^st Century. We must ensure that we deliver federal law enforcement officers who meet these high standards. We can take a big step in confronting these challenges by providing robust support to our federal law enforcement officers through appropriate pay, benefit and retirement structures.

The FCIA looks forward to providing additional input to the House and Senate Majority Staffs and other governmental entities who are addressing the critical issues facing federal law enforcement employment.