[quote=deadzone]BG, if you can’t understand how the sequester will cause job loss in the civilian defense contractor business and beyond then you are clearly too ignorant to be having this discussion.

Regarding federal retirement, again, you are in a fantasy world. Give me one exameple of a current federal employee who is guranteed to make close to 100% of his salary in retirement? Doesn’t exist. I work in the business. You clearly only have experience with folks who worked in govenemtn service many many years ago if at all.

And again, you assume most of those folks who will be laid off will also be retirement eligible. That is one of most ignoratn speculations I have ever heard.[/quote]

If you work in the “business,” I’m sorry if you feel “insecure” right now, deadzone. Perhaps you’re overreacting to all the “rumor-and-innuendo” mills.

I actually have several current neighbors who are Federal retirees (some fairly recent) and they are ALL doing just fine.

I can’t give an “example” of a Federal worker’s exact pension calculation and neither can you without the answers to many variables.

Yes, the “retirement eligible” government employees (on EVERY govm’t level) have ALWAYS been the “low-hanging fruit” when cutbacks were announced. These employees ARE the FIRST to be pandered to in order to accept their “golden handshake” and move on.

The next “lowest-hanging fruit” for layoff is the unvested *new* employee (typically with under five years svc). They will go if there are not enough workers to retire and the furloughs won’t cut into the budget deep enough.

These “relatively new” employees will be given reinstatement privileges at the time of layoff in case their agency finds it necessary to hire that particular classification again.