This Bill Can Assist Feds in Preparing for Retirement
The government’s 401(k)-style retirement savings programme, which is currently being debated in Congress, would allow federal employees to save for retirement for a longer time.
The SECURE 2.0 Act, was proposed by Rep. Richard Neal, D-Massachusetts, and passed the House overwhelmingly last month. The bill, which the Senate is currently considering, would raise the age at which persons, including federal employees who participate in the Thrift Savings Plan, must begin taking mandatory minimum distributions from 72 to 75 years old.
The shift would be phased over time, with mandated minimum distributions starting at 73 years old in 2023, 74 in 2030, and 75 in 2033.
In addition, a provision would mandate that all catch-up contributions for 401(k)-style plans, including the Thrift Savings Plan, be Roth rather than pre-tax. When a TSP participant is among 62 and 64, the annual limit for catch-up contributions is raised to $10,000.
Last month, spokeswoman Kim Weaver of the Federal Retirement Thrift Investment Board, which supervises the TSP, said the agency had expressed concerns to lawmakers about a prior version of the bill that set execution deadlines within weeks of potential passage. Still, that staff collaborates with Congress to determine when those regulations should take effect if signed into law.
Agencies have been given instructions to improve the collection of union dues.
On Tuesday, the Office of Personnel Management issued a series of memos to further the Biden administration’s objectives of making the federal government a “model employer” that embraces a cooperative relationship between the management and labor, one of which could have a direct effect on federal employees’ paychecks.
One memo directs agencies to handle requests to start or stop the automatic deduction of union dues from federal employees’ paychecks “as soon and accurately as feasible,” making it simpler for employees to obtain union dues collection forms.
In the memo, OPM Director Kiran Ahuja alerted agencies that failing to “expeditiously” process a payroll deduction request related to union dues can lead to a union filing an unfair labor practice complaint with the Federal Labor Relations Authority. It could force the agency to pay the union the amount it effectively prevented the employee from contributing.
These principles apply whether or not the bargaining unit has yet to sign a union contract with the agency.
“Whether or not there is a collective bargaining agreement in effect between the office and the union representing the employee,” OPM noted, “[federal labor law] requires the agency to honor the employee’s request for dues withholding.”
“If an agency and a union have a legitimate disagreement about whether they should include an individual in a bargaining unit, unit clarification procedures before the FLRA may be used to settle the issue.” Typically, unit clarifying judgments do not allow for the withholding or payment of union dues retroactively.”
“Whether or not there is a collective bargaining agreement in effect between the office and the union representing the employee,” OPM noted, “[federal labor law] requires the agency to honor the employee’s request for dues withholding.”
“If an agency and a union have a legitimate disagreement about whether they should include an individual in a bargaining unit, unit clarification procedures before the FLRA may be used to settle the issue.” Typically, unit clarifying judgments do not allow for the withholding or payment of union dues retroactively.”
