Archives for February 2021

MLB proposes delaying start to April 28, cut to 154 games

NEW YORK (AP) — Major League Baseball has proposed a one-month delay in starting spring training due to the coronavirus pandemic and pushing back opening day to April 28, two people familiar with the plan told The Associated Press.

Under the plan presented to the players’ union on Friday, the regular season would be cut from 162 games to 154.

Also, the playoffs would be expanded from 10 teams to 14, the designated hitter would extend to the National League for the second straight season and MLB would keep the experimental rules for seven-inning doubleheaders and beginning extra innings with a runner on second base.

All players would report for spring training on March 22, back from the current calendar that calls a voluntary reporting date of Feb. 17 for pitchers, catchers and injured players, and Feb. 22 for others.

Opening day would be pushed back 27 days from its currently scheduled April 1 and the regular season would end Oct. 10 instead of Oct. 3. The postseason would extend into November.

The people familiar with the plan spoke on condition of anonymity Sunday because no announcements were made. The sides have not discussed the proposal with each other since MLB made it.

A day before the plan was presented, Commissioner Rob Manfred said he would like to know by his regular Monday call with owners if the union had interest in delaying the start of spring training.

The reasoning behind the delay would be to gain time for more vaccinations and better assess the health situation.

Seven teams in each league would make the playoffs, and only the division winner with the best record would receive a bye in the best-of-three first round. There would be a selection show in which the seeded teams would be able to, in order of percentage, select their first-round opponent. The three advancing teams in each league and the one with a bye would advance to the best-of-five Division Series, starting the traditional rounds of the postseason.

While the plan says players would receive 100% of pay if all 154 scheduled games are played, Manfred would have an expanded right to stop spring training, the regular season or the postseason under certain conditions. Those would be if government restrictions prevent five or more teams from playing home games even without fans, if government rules restrict travel in the United States, if Manfred determines after consultation with medical experts and the union there is an unreasonable safety risk to players or staff or if the number of regular major leaguers unavailable because of COVID-19 undermines completive integrity.

Each team would start with 18 scheduled days off, and each team would be allowed to be scheduled up to 12 split doubleheaders.

Players usually are reluctant to agree to split doubleheaders because of the lengthy day at the ballpark each entails

The regular season would be compressed to 154 games in 166 days from 162 games in 186 days.

The World Series would be scheduled to end in the Nov. 10 range, with the exact time depending on discussions with broadcast partners.

As part of the plan, owners would guarantee a postseason players’ pool of 60% of the gate of the first two first-round games plus $80 million for the remainder of the postseason, matching the 2019 pool.

Players previously rejected a proposal teams made Jan. 5 for expanded playoffs in exchange for extending the DH to the National League.

Last season was cut from 162 games per team to 60, and the postseason was expanded to 16 teams and ended Oct. 27 when the Los Angeles Dodges beat the Tampa Bay Rays in World Series Game 6. Players received 60/162nds of their salaries.

No fans were allowed during the regular season last year, which because of the pandemic started July 23 rather than March 26. About 11,000 fans per game attended the NL Championship Series and World Series, both played at the neutral site in Arlington, Texas. In a deal for expanded 16-team playoffs in 2020, MLB guaranteed a postseason players’ pool of $50 million.

___

More AP baseball: https://apnews.com/MLB and https://twitter.com/AP_Sports

Protecting your TSP investment after retirement

Investing in the federal Thrift Savings Plan while working is a no-brainer. Do it. Max your contributions (at least enough to get the government match) and go with the stock-indexed funds. Put as much as you feel comfortable in the stock indexed C, S and I funds, which (based on past performance) is where the money is. So far, so good.

But what about when you retire? Do you stick with the TSP (and its low-fees and multiple-oversight) or move into another tax-deferred investment option? That’s an important question because so many feds typically retire in December and January. And most, by a slight margin, move some or all of their TSP to an outside account. So what’s your plan?

First remember what the TSP is. And what it isn’t:

When the Federal Employees Retirement System was set up, experts said the TSP would be critical because along with Social Security and a modified civil service annuity, the TSP could supply as much as 30% to 50% of the retiree’s total income. Being in the TSP while working is a no-brainer. But what about when you retire? Or move to a job in the private sector with its own 401k plan? And investing at least enough to get the match is a no-brainer.

Do you stick with the TSP or look for a better option?

When they leave federal government more than half of feds take some or all of their money out of the Thrift Savings Plan. Many think outside IRAs offer them more investment and withdrawal options and active advice they can’t get from the TSP — which they do. The question is: Is that a good thing? Earlier this year we asked Abraham Grungold, a successful TSP investor and financial coach, about nurturing your retirement nest egg after retirement. And what about making it “safe” by putting it in the Treasury securities G-fund.

During the Great Recession of 2008-2009, hundreds of thousands of federal-postal investors took money out of their stock indexed C, S and I funds and put it into the Treasury securities G fund for stability. Many missed the record rebound of the stock market and the 11-year long bull market.

Although today’s pandemic situation is totally different — and a lot more frightening — than any recession, and is being dealt with more aggressively, nobody knows when it is going to get better, or pending vaccines notwithstanding, if the worst is yet to come. Here’s what he’s telling his clients:

Whether you are retired or whether you are leaving federal service mid-career to take a position in the private sector, there is always the decision of how to handle your Thrift Savings Plan.

The main question that faces many federal employees is whether to maintain their TSP investments with the government or transfer them to an Individual Retirement Account brokerage account. This is a question that is not easily answered. Each person has their individual lifestyle, risk level and financial pressures regarding this issue. Many employees want to cut their ties with their employer. I fully understand that. So, I feel the best way to answer this difficult situation is to address the positive and negative sides of making this decision.

No question, the TSP is the greatest 401(k) because, it provides an employer match up to 5% of employee contributions. It provides a government fund, bond fund, small capital fund, S&P 500 Index fund and an international index fund. That is five diverse investment options. It has a proven 30-year track history of successful growth, and it has the lowest administrative expense of any 401(k) plan. It also provides a loan program.

The TSP allows for monthly distributions. Recently, TSP rules have provided more flexibility for distribution options. If you choose to transfer your portfolio outside of the government, it also allows you to return your portfolio to the TSP. However, keep in mind in order to keep this available option you need to maintain a balance of $500 in order to make that return to the TSP. Closing out your TSP in retirement to a balance of zero is a final and irrevocable step. An important consideration with your TSP is when you leave federal service to seek a position in the private sector, if you have any pending loans you will have to immediately pay them off the loan. If you are less than 59 ½ years old you will have to pay the IRS 10% penalty regarding the loan.

During my federal career, when I attended our annual retirement planning conference, I would occasionally hear a presentation from a financial planner or a company that specializes in IRAs. I always heard the financial companies suggesting that moving your funds from the TSP to an individual IRA will give you more control over your assets, and you have more investment options. But be careful what you ask for. I had a client who had their 401(k) sitting with a reputable company and they were paying that custodial company a $1,500 annual administrative fee and received no services for that fee. Also, this same person was paying commissions on each mutual fund transaction.

Most important, you are exposed to investment advisers such as Bernie Madoff and many others who have deceived their client’s trust and their assets. I have a personal IRA and I receive periodic calls from someone who wants to help me manage my account. The pitch is usually expensive annuities, and junk bonds which yields them large commissions. I have never been contacted by my TSP because it is a self-directed account managed by the employee.

Personally, in retirement, I am staying with my TSP. The only thing I strongly urge is that everyone should have a designated beneficiary and make sure your loved ones know that your TSP exists. Whether you stay with the TSP or move it to an external financial custodian, it is your choice. Ask plenty of questions and do your homework, it is ultimately, your decision.

Any questions or comments please contact me on LinkedIn or Facebook.

Nearly Useless Factoid

By Alazar Moges

The Ancient Romans used to drop a piece of toast into their wine for good health – hence why we “raise a toast.”

Source: Cosmopolitan

New annual leave carryover policy now in effect for federal employees, OPM says

Federal employees who forfeited vacation time in excess of the usual annual leave carryover limit at the end of 2020 may be able to get some of those days back for use later this year, thanks to a policy in the new annual defense authorization law.

The Office of Personnel Management on Tuesday issued detailed guidance covering the new annual leave policy and instructed agencies to implement it.

Under current statute, most federal employees can carry up to 240 hours, or 30 days of leave, though some can accrue more. Employees must usually forfeit any accrued leave that exceeds the statutory limit.

But a provision in the latest annual defense policy bill, known as “section 1111,” set a new, temporary cap on the number of hours federal employees can carry over from 2020 to use in 2021.

For the vast majority of employees, the cap — for 2021 only — is now 300 hours or 37.5 days of annual leave, Michael Rigas, OPM’s acting director, said Tuesday in a memo to agency heads.

Employees stationed outside the U.S. have a higher temporary cap of 450 hours under the new annual leave policy, OPM said.

For federal workers who ended the 2020 leave year with more than 30 days of unused annual leave and thought they’d have to forfeit the time, the new policy allows them to hold on to at least a few more vacation days to use in 2021 only.

The new OPM guidance comes a few days after the Senate completed a veto override of the National Defense Authorization Act. President Donald Trump had vetoed the bill last month before the Christmas holiday.

With the 2021 NDAA now law, OPM can fully implement the new annual leave policy, which has a relatively broad scope for federal employees.

It applies to most executive branch employees, including workers at the U.S. Postal Service, Postal Regulatory Commission, Transportation Security Administration and Federal Aviation Administration, as well as healthcare professionals at the Veterans Health Administration, according to the OPM guidance.

Most members of the Senior Executive Service and employees working for a “non-appropriated fund instrumentality” aren’t, however, covered under the new annual leave policy.

“Executive branch agency heads who administer annual leave programs under any other law must apply the OPM policies described above and in the attached guidance by establishing parallel policies to the maximum extent practicable,” Rigas said. “I am delegating authority to such agency heads authority to implement those policies. This delegated authority does not prevent an agency head from providing a greater benefit under the agency head’s independent leave system authority.”

Postal employees, for example, have a leave and personnel system separate from the one the vast majority of federal employees use, but Tuesday’s memo requires USPS to establish a comparable leave carryover policy reflecting the changes described in the 2021 NDAA.

The new policy itself is complex.

It requires agencies to first apply other leave restoration policies to any vacation time that exceeds the 240-hour carryover limit.

If agencies have exhausted those methods and employees still have forfeited annual leave leftover, they can apply the NDAA policy to prevent forfeiture up to the 300-hour limit.

“If any employee has any remaining annual leave (after applying leave restoration rules) that would otherwise be forfeited under the normal carryover limit (240-hour limit for most employees), apply the higher 125 percent carryover limit under the section 1111 authority to prevent forfeiture to the extent possible under the higher limit,” OPM said. “Any annual leave in excess of the higher limit would be forfeited.”

Employees must use leave carried over through the new policy only in 2021, according to OPM. Employees will forfeit any extra leave that isn’t used in 2021, and it will not count for the purposes of calculating an employee’s lump-sum payment upon retirement or separation.

In addition, employees can’t donate unused carryover leave under this new policy to their colleagues, OPM said.

Employees who carry over more annual leave this year under the new NDAA policy must use that time first — before using any leave they accrued in past years or through restored, donated or advanced annual leave, according to the OPM memo.

Agency human capital leaders have said they’ve been encouraging their employees to take leave whenever possible since the COVID-19 pandemic began in earnest last March. But the ongoing health crisis has created new pressures and more work for many agencies, while others have been reluctant to take time off.

The Office of Personnel Management fast-tracked a new policy this summer that allows certain “essential” federal employees to hold onto the annual leave they’d otherwise have to forfeit at the end of the year. But the new policy from OPM only applies to federal employees whose service during the pandemic or future national emergencies is considered “essential,” and it allowed agencies to make those calls on their own.

Lawmakers made several attempts of their own to allow federal employees to carry over more leave due to the pandemic.

The provision that made it into 2021 NDAA stemmed from an amendment from Rep. Jennifer Wexton (D-Va.), which called for a more flexible leave policy for federal employees due to the pandemic.

The Federal Worker Leave Fairness Act, which Rep. Derek Kilmer (D-Wash.) and Sen. Mazie Hirono (D-Hawaii) introduced this fall, also called for any federal employee to hold on to annual leave they’d otherwise have to forfeit during the pandemic.

Feds, you were quite popular over the last four years

The end of the year and the end of an administration puts many of us in a reflective mood.

I recall a conversation I had at a family gathering a few years ago. An extended family member who many of us hadn’t met or hadn’t seen in years introduced herself.

“So what do you do?” we asked.

“Oh, I work for the government,” she said offhandedly.

Someone in the group suggested she must work for one of the intelligence agencies. She didn’t.

My dad, a former fed, joined the group to say hi. “And how’s the IRS?” he half-whispered.

Whoops. Cat was out of the bag. It turns out the extended family member worked in tax enforcement. Jokes ensued.

Whether you work for the IRS or not, I’m willing to bet some of you have had a similar conversation like this before. I suppose the thought is that the IRS isn’t popular, and maybe working for the government isn’t either.

These thoughts and conversations aren’t unique to the last four years, but federal employees were part of the spotlight in a big way during the Trump presidency. Like it or not, you and your agencies were often put in the spotlight.

Like during that 35-day partial government shutdown, the longest one in U.S. history.

Or with the president’s payroll tax deferral, which few companies are using, but the federal government has made mandatory for most of its own employees and military members.

Hopefully, members of the public learned a thing or two about what you all do every day. At the very least, they probably got a quick crash course on the Hatch Act or learned what an inspector general does.

Maybe they got some clarity on what exactly a special counsel is and why it’s different from the Office of Special Counsel. Yes, there’s one of those too.

Maybe they learned about the two reasonably obscure entities within the Agriculture Department, which provide critical research and grant-making support but got picked up and moved to Kansas City last year.

The average member of the public probably had no idea who the Postmaster General was, say, nine years ago. Today, I’m willing to bet your neighbor next door could tell you it’s Louis DeJoy.

Three months ago, that same neighbor had probably never heard of the General Services Administration. Ask that neighbor what GSA does today. The answer may be interesting.

And for my nervous extended family member at the IRS, maybe the public learned that her agency has been underfunded for years, prompting a few glitches in sending out those pandemic stimulus checks earlier this year.

My point is that you, as feds, were quite popular topics of discussion over the last four years. In a few cases, maybe all the attention and drama produced a few decent outcomes.

Federal unions argued the public learned more about who federal employees are and what they do because of that 35-day government shutdown.

The ordeal certainly put pressure on Congress to reverse course on the president’s already-implemented pay freeze and give feds a retroactive raise instead.

(It took a while to get there, but it did happen).

The longest lapse in U.S. history forced Congress to write new laws surrounding shutdown pay for feds. Furloughed employees will get back-pay after future government shutdowns now. Before, it was up to Congress to authorize it for each lapse in appropriations.

The drama and chaos forced some members to sit up and pay attention when it came to issues federal employees cared about. Some of the usual federal employee advocates in Congress put pressure on their colleagues to pay attention too.

Think about how Congress, after more than a decade of trying, managed to score paid parental leave benefits for federal employees. When it came time to negotiate over the annual defense policy bill, House Democrats struck a deal with the White House: We’ll give you a Space Force if you give us paid parental leave.

It worked. Congress rushed to draft the new policy — and yes, accidentally left out tens of thousands of federal employees from coverage in the process — but the program went live in October.

Congress will eventually correct its mistakes from the last year with this year’s annual defense policy, whenever it becomes law.

Of course, there’s a political calculus to all of this, and that calculus may change in the next administration with new leaders in charge. There will be more seemingly small and not-so-minor scandals; it happens in every administration.

But hey, if your next-door neighbor learned a little more about the quirks of government — and what makes your job stressful, chaotic, interesting and (hopefully!) fulfilling — it’s a good thing.

New book sees a ‘New Possible’ emerging from 2020’s tumult

SAN RAMON, Calif. (AP) — In pop culture, 2020 has been understandably reviled as the “hell year.” It tormented us with a lethal pandemic spiraling out of control, thousands of shuttered businesses, violent protests over racial injustice, raging wildfires and political extremism and lies that underpinned January’s harrowing coup attempt at the U.S. Capitol.

But what if all that tumult actually laid the foundation for societal revival? That’s the premise offered by an eclectic group of writers, academics, scientists, environmentalists, and technology engineers in “The New Possible,” a collection of essays that explore what and how the world might rebuild from the rubble of the past year.

The group behind the book doesn’t lack for ambition. People from science fiction novelist Kim Stanley Robinson to Buddhist monk Jack Kornfield suggest ways to reshape technology, the economy, the environment, the food supply, government and community in hopes that people can eventually look back at 2020 as a reawakening and not a death rattle.

“People can tell our systems are broken, and not just in a subtle way, not just like we need to tweak a few things or throw a few bad apples out,” said Justin Rosenstein, a former Google and Facebook engineer who contributed an essay on building a “democratic economy.” “The rules of the system are rigged against us. They are not designed to serve the interests of humanity, they are not designed to serve the interests of nature.”

Rosenstein was one of the driving forces behind the book, which was released last week. Some critics may see him as part of the problem, given that he invented the Facebook “Like” button that helped propel the success of a social network that has become a massive funnel of misinformation that has become a source of consternation and regret for him and other one-time Facebook backers like investor Roger McNamee. “It is very tempting to hate the players rather than look at the game and realize it’s the problem,” Rosenstein said. “We have new technology that can enable us to harness our collective intelligence in ways that has never been possible before.”

The book is backed by One Project, a nonprofit group Rosenstein started as part of his effort to improve the way we live and work. He also was a protagonist in “The Social Dilemma,” a Netflix documentary about the dark side of social media released four months before the Jan. 6 insurrection at the Capitol.

Another “Social Dilemma” standout, former Google engineer Tristan Harris, founded the Center for Humane Technology in 2018r to nudge the industry away from building services and devices designed to attract and hold onto our attention. His considers his essay a kind of sequel to the Netflix documentary and its warning about how Facebook and Twitter can tear people apart instead of bringing them together.

“We have been screaming at the top of our lungs about this train running off the cliff for a long time and then it culminated in Jan. 6,” Harris told the AP, referring to the insurrection at the U.S. Capitol incited by former President Donald Trump. “We have trapped the entire global psyche inside this Vegas-style dopamine machine that has become the host of our democratic conversations.”

“The New Possible” aims to spur change through 28 essays divided into 10 categories — Earth, Us, Change, Wealth, Work, Food, Education, Love, Community and Tomorrow. The contributors the gamut from best-selling author Michael Pollan to high school teen activist Anisa Nanavati.

The contributors quickly embraced idea last spring, said Philip Clayton, one of the book’s editors and president of the Institute for Ecological Civilization. In the eight months since work on the essays began, Clayton believes the sequence of events that bookended the Nov. 3 election have turned “The New Possible” into a Kairos book, referring to the ancient Greek word for an opportune time in history.

“This is the one of the few moments in life,” Clayton said, “when the world points to you and says, ‘Are you going to make that inner change or are you not going to transform?’”

Archives for February 2021

Nearly Useless Factoid

Footer