📋 Social Security Plans ‘Significant’ Staff Reductions (AARP Article)

[SummerOnTheWay1]

FROM THE ARTICLE: AARP calls for reassurances from SSA on commitment to customer service.

By Andy Markowitz, AARP.

Published February 28, 2025.

The Social Security Administration (SSA) announced plans for a “massive” restructuring of its operations on Friday that “will include significant workforce reductions” affecting thousands of jobs.

A Feb. 28 statement from the SSA set a target of reducing the SSA workforce from about 57,000 employees to 50,000, a 12 percent cut.

USE LINK BELOW TO READ THE ARTICLE: https://www.aarp.org/social-security/ssa-workforce-reductions.html

[GailL1 · Accepted solution]

@SummerOnTheWay1 

Many of the staff reductions are gonna be long term employees retiring - they have stayed for a while to train others since the attrition rate in the administration has been high.  They have put in their years and now time to retire.

Some are upset that they have had to come back into the office from the remote working which they did during the pandemic.  That’s understandable, change is hard so perhaps they are looking for another remote working job,

As you know, I am very old and have been retired for a very, very long time - never once have I missed a SS benefit deposit once started.  Thru different administrations, thru different party majorities, thru the pandemic, just like clock work, on time, every time, every month.

I’d be more worried about what is ahead of us when the Social Security Trust Fund income doesn’t have enough to cover the 

benefits being paid out and there is no action by Congress to make the corrections needed to fully fund it for the future.

In fact, many of the younger ones want a different system altogether.  

[fffred · Accepted solution]

I fully understand the point of not increasing FICA taxes. Such action would require individuals to adjust their entire personal budgeting. Even they don't, their finances will feel the effect of their budget being adjusted for them from outside forces. The same effect as when inflation suddenly increases, for example from 2% to 10%. They had no choice in this. The family's "pie" has to be cut up differently, decisions have to be made as to where to cut and how much, in order to pay for other increased costs. 

On the other hand, giving a certain category of people a permanent tax holiday doesn't seem like it can be justified, or at least some justification should be given. Retirees are already often given a break on property taxes for their home. Maybe instead young people with families should be given more tax breaks because they are raising children, the future workers and drivers of economic expansion, and  they'll be paying FICA payroll taxes to support retirees.

It's important to acknowledge that SS retirement benefits are already not taxed...up to $25,000 or $32,000 (single or a couple). Those above that income may have their benefit subject to income tax on a sliding range up to 85% only. So it's not those at the lowest levels of the economic cake that are wanting tax-free benefits but those in a more middle class level of income. So I still don't see how it can be justified to not tax SS benefits.

[GailL1]

Why ?