FPPFederal Pay Parity
Federal Pay Parity / The allocation edition2027 compensation review

Civilian general pay adjustment
August 26 presidential pay plan

0%.Please interpret accordingly.

Military personnel receive a financial reason to remain. For civilians, continued attendance appears to have settled the question.

Your disappointment does not require a correction to the pay table.

Read the allocation
Military basic pay +5% to +7% · General civilian schedule 0%Captain versus GS-15

01 The retention hierarchy

The money found the people it wanted.

Recruiting and retention justify military pay growth under the plan. The general civilian schedule receives zero, suggesting that the difficulty of keeping people depends on which people are leaving.

E-1 through E-5Junior enlisted

7%

E-6 through O-3Includes captains

6%

O-4 and aboveSenior officers

5%

General ScheduleCivilian base & locality

0%

January 2027 adjustments in the August 26 presidential pay plan. Military percentages apply to basic pay, subject to statutory caps. Civilian 0% applies to the general base and locality schedules; a separate 3.8% law-enforcement adjustment is directed. Pay plan, pp. 1–2.

Captain · O-3 over 6+$5,571

Annual basic-pay increase
6% of $92,844

Civilian · GS-15 step 1+$0

Annual general schedule increase
0% of $147,945

The same pay review produces two rather different invitations to stay.

Fixed profiles, before deductions. Captain increase: $5,570.64 per year, rounded. DFAS 2026 O-3 table · OPM 2026 RUS table · 2027 pay plan. Individual step increases, promotions, awards, and special rates are outside this comparison.

02 The compensation verdict

A captain moves ahead while the GS-15 stays put.

An O-3 over six years exceeds a GS-15 step 1 by $1,427 in the selected 2027 model. The civilian still leads on cash pay. Change the basis below to inspect the distinction. OPM 2026 RUS table, grade 15

2027 selected model

$1,427

Captain ahead per year on this basis. Projected values under the August 26 pay plan.

Annual selected model

Air Force captainO-3 over 6 · 2027 projection$133,690
Senior civilianGS-15 step 1 · 2027$132,263

Military tax-equivalent value less Social Security; civilian salary less 4.4% FERS and Social Security. This selected model is not take-home pay or a full benefits valuation.

Methodology
Profiles, assumptions, and calculation

O-3 over six years of service, with-dependents housing allowance at Hill AFB, Utah; GS-15 step 1, Rest of U.S. locality. The model uses a 22% federal income-tax gross-up on housing and subsistence allowances. The selected civilian deduction assumes a 4.4% FERS contribution. Both sides deduct 6.2% Social Security on covered pay.

Components of the current comparison, annual dollars
Annual componentCaptainGS-15
Basic pay / gross salary$98,415$147,945
Housing allowance$28,332No separate allowance
Subsistence allowance$3,942No separate allowance
Modeled tax advantage$9,103$0
Selected FERS deduction$0−$6,510
Selected Social Security deduction−$6,102−$9,173
Comparison value$133,690$132,263

2027 applies the pay plan's 6% O-3 basic-pay adjustment and unchanged civilian schedule. Housing and subsistence allowances remain at their 2026 values for this projection. The model excludes Medicare, individual income taxes, health-benefit values, pension accruals, bonuses, special pays, and differences in service obligations. Rounded components may differ by $1 from the rounded total.

Calculation inputs · Military source series · Civilian source series

Fixed profiles: Hill AFB, with dependents; Rest of U.S. locality. These are not equivalent jobs.

Read the full comparison

The experience question

The problem with experience

Consider a 30-year-old captain and a GS-15 with 30 years of experience. One is described in terms of potential; the other can explain why the last three attempts at the current proposal failed. Only one of these is likely to be welcomed at the briefing.

The captain must contribute more, since the selected compensation model assigns the captain greater value. Requiring a separate measure of contribution would mean doing the assessment twice.

Illustrative editorial scenario. Age and career length are not inputs to the pay calculation above. Its civilian profile is GS-15 step 1, not a modeled 30-year career. Pay is not a measure of productivity.

03 Deferred Resignation Program

The first invitation came with continued pay.

In 2025, OPM offered eligible employees deferred resignation and explicitly encouraged private-sector work. Its FAQ described a move from lower productivity jobs in the public sector to higher productivity jobs in the private sector. OPM DRP FAQ.

Employees who stayed continued doing the work, which was an awkward response to an invitation to leave. There is only so much a personnel office can convey in a resignation offer before having to repeat itself through the pay schedule.

They offered to pay you to leave. You appear to have heard “please stay.”

Historical program · 2025Original OPM offer closed February 12, 2025. Closure notice.
An unmarked access badge rests on a dark conference table before an empty chair and a cold open doorway.
The institution can accommodate an empty chair.

04 Make room for leadership

The appointment was the assessment.

A political appointee arrives with an endorsement from the people making the decision. A career employee arrives with experience, qualifications, and several reasons the decision may not work. It is easy to see which application is more convenient to process.

Institutional knowledge has a habit of introducing information after leadership has finished being informed. A fresh perspective avoids this problem by having no recollection of the previous attempt.

Thirty years of experience is thirty years of attachment to procedures we have not read.

The decision logic

The accountability allocation

Accountability has been delegated.

The national debt requires an explanation, and bad civilian management is a convenient place to begin. Elected leaders approved the policies and appointees supplied the direction, but career staff were still in the building when the bill arrived. The personnel records should make them easy enough to find.

Who makes better decisions? We recommend looking at the results, provided the review preserves leadership’s ownership of the strategy and assigns everything that happened afterward to implementation.

This page does not calculate the causes of federal debt or assess individual performance.

A small payroll slip is examined under a magnifying glass while a monumental stack of invoices receives museum lighting and a velvet rope.
The invoice receives a warmer reception.

05 An overlooked constituency

Please consider the contractor.

Every dollar paid directly to a government employee is a dollar that missed an opportunity to become contract revenue.

You have a salary. They have growth targets. Before requesting a raise, consider the contractor who could have invoiced for this. The same work becomes easier to respect once it arrives with overhead, a management fee, and a cover letter.

The case for the invoice
Direct employeeA recurring personnel cost.

Compensation requires restraint. Continued service indicates the restraint is working.

External providerA strategic investment.

Compensation requires realism. A larger invoice indicates the work was more sophisticated than previously appreciated.

Payroll dollars do not automatically become contract funds. In covered procurements, FAR 52.222-46 requires evaluating professional compensation for realism, recruiting, retention, and continuity. A contract bill rate is not an employee’s salary.

06 The decision framework

Every outcome confirms the strategy.

The strategy can accommodate employees staying, employees leaving, and the cost of replacing them. Please select whichever result occurred; the assessment has already been entered.

How each workforce outcome is interpreted.
Observed outcomeApproved interpretationAssessment
Employees stayCompensation is sufficient.Confirmed
Employees leaveWorkforce reduction is succeeding.Confirmed
Expertise disappearsExternal support is required.Confirmed
Contract costs increaseThe work demands specialized expertise.Confirmed
Employees question the resultResistance to reform remains a concern.Confirmed

There is no field for “the policy was wrong.”

Submit your objection to the explanation

The remaining consideration

The work may still be necessary. Your employment is a separate consideration.

Please take the pay decision into account when considering your next contribution.

The record is available