5 ms·

One of my team members is a former Army Captain and Iraq veteran. He doesn't seem to mind. And the only way anyone would be making $130K is if they landed at t

by vippy 11y ago

One of my team members is a former Army Captain and Iraq veteran. He doesn't seem to mind. And the only way anyone would be making $130K is if they landed at the top step of the GS-15 scale. I know most offers are made around the GS-13 level.

toomuchtodo 11y ago
Your pay is determined by your paystub from your previous/current employer by the Office of Management and Budget (edit: they do not take into account equity grants nor intangibles). You're also required to pass a drug test, as well as a background check and security clearance. I'm somewhat turned off by the idea that people shouldn't be paid ~$130K/year for their service. You're asking them to pick up and move to DC, covering none of their moving, travel, or new living expenses.
- vippy 11y ago
  Right, my friend said he needed to provide two years of salary information, and even then he was offered GS-13 step one. My point is that the USDS, 18F, etc, don't just offer $130k+ to anyone who walks in the door.
- deleted 11y ago
  [deleted]
- walshemj 11y ago
  Exactly you could argue that civil servants should get more pay to make up for the lack of share options (adjusted for pension of course) I bet at Cheltenham the BT staff on secondment are told don't mention sharesave to the Civil Servants :-)
- djcapelis 11y ago
  And this is why the government has trouble attracting good people. It's not the pay that bothers me, personally. It's the bullshit policies, lack of workplace flexibility and the idea that intrusions into my own private life is at all acceptable. Oh and I have to move to the central government swamp while we're at it? So then they pitch this as the only way people can help make things better offering below market pay along with all these trade offs? Good luck with that.
  - vippy 11y ago
    Except the USDS, 18F, PIFs, and OCSIT are all attracting really great people. Now, HTTPS everywhere is a dubious project, sorry Konklone, but its difficult to deny that the problem of talent in government has always been one of the hiring process being controlled by contractors and the perverse economic incentives of the traditional bodies-in-chairs contracting model.
    - konklone 11y ago
      > Now, HTTPS everywhere is a dubious project, sorry Konklone Well, I like it. =)
      - vippy 11y ago
        OH NOES! Hey Eric! :P The problem we have with our project is that we're dealing with a ton of subdomains and not a lot of data I would consider "sensitive" enough to really necessitate encryption. While I appreciate the sentiment of the project, and value your commitment to privacy, for our use case it's definitely a bit of a pain in the butt. That, and I know getting IT departments to move to install certs on their old infrastructure for things that might not require encryption is definitely painful. And the errors generated by expired certificates and "insecure content warnings" are confusing, and don't add value to projects that don't benefit from encrypted connections. We've been hearing all about it.
        djcapelis 11y ago
        Honestly, now that I read down the thread, it kinda sounds like you don't have your shit together and you want to blame someone else who created something awesome for it. It's not important whether you consider the data sensitive enough to bother doing your job. It's actually your users, which, if they've installed HTTPS Everywhere, they do. So get your shit together! :)
        konklone 11y ago
        FWIW, vippy's not referring to the browser extension, but to the federal policy: https://www.whitehouse.gov/blog/2015/06/08/https-everywhere-government https://www.whitehouse.gov/blog/2015/06/08/https-everywhere-...
deleted 11y ago
[deleted]
nacin 11y ago
It depends on a few different factors, but your salary can be matched up to $158K. That includes DC's locality adjustment.[1] [1] https://www.opm.gov/policy-data-oversight/pay-leave/salaries-wages/salary-tables/15Tables/html/DCB.aspx https://www.opm.gov/policy-data-oversight/pay-leave/salaries...

by vippy 11y ago

toomuchtodo 11y ago

Your pay is determined by your paystub from your previous/current employer by the Office of Management and Budget (edit: they do not take into account equity grants nor intangibles). You're also required to pass a drug test, as well as a background check and security clearance. I'm somewhat turned off by the idea that people shouldn't be paid ~$130K/year for their service. You're asking them to pick up and move to DC, covering none of their moving, travel, or new living expenses.

vippy 11y ago
Right, my friend said he needed to provide two years of salary information, and even then he was offered GS-13 step one. My point is that the USDS, 18F, etc, don't just offer $130k+ to anyone who walks in the door.
deleted 11y ago
[deleted]
walshemj 11y ago
Exactly you could argue that civil servants should get more pay to make up for the lack of share options (adjusted for pension of course) I bet at Cheltenham the BT staff on secondment are told don't mention sharesave to the Civil Servants :-)
djcapelis 11y ago
And this is why the government has trouble attracting good people. It's not the pay that bothers me, personally. It's the bullshit policies, lack of workplace flexibility and the idea that intrusions into my own private life is at all acceptable. Oh and I have to move to the central government swamp while we're at it? So then they pitch this as the only way people can help make things better offering below market pay along with all these trade offs? Good luck with that.
- vippy 11y ago
  Except the USDS, 18F, PIFs, and OCSIT are all attracting really great people. Now, HTTPS everywhere is a dubious project, sorry Konklone, but its difficult to deny that the problem of talent in government has always been one of the hiring process being controlled by contractors and the perverse economic incentives of the traditional bodies-in-chairs contracting model.
  - konklone 11y ago
    > Now, HTTPS everywhere is a dubious project, sorry Konklone Well, I like it. =)
    - vippy 11y ago
      OH NOES! Hey Eric! :P The problem we have with our project is that we're dealing with a ton of subdomains and not a lot of data I would consider "sensitive" enough to really necessitate encryption. While I appreciate the sentiment of the project, and value your commitment to privacy, for our use case it's definitely a bit of a pain in the butt. That, and I know getting IT departments to move to install certs on their old infrastructure for things that might not require encryption is definitely painful. And the errors generated by expired certificates and "insecure content warnings" are confusing, and don't add value to projects that don't benefit from encrypted connections. We've been hearing all about it.
      - djcapelis 11y ago
        Honestly, now that I read down the thread, it kinda sounds like you don't have your shit together and you want to blame someone else who created something awesome for it. It's not important whether you consider the data sensitive enough to bother doing your job. It's actually your users, which, if they've installed HTTPS Everywhere, they do. So get your shit together! :)
        konklone 11y ago
        FWIW, vippy's not referring to the browser extension, but to the federal policy: https://www.whitehouse.gov/blog/2015/06/08/https-everywhere-government https://www.whitehouse.gov/blog/2015/06/08/https-everywhere-...

deleted 11y ago

[deleted]

nacin 11y ago

It depends on a few different factors, but your salary can be matched up to $158K. That includes DC's locality adjustment.[1] [1] https://www.opm.gov/policy-data-oversight/pay-leave/salaries-wages/salary-tables/15Tables/html/DCB.aspx https://www.opm.gov/policy-data-oversight/pay-leave/salaries...