Pay per month vs. time in rank.

2014-07-14T20:26:57-04:00

So today a coworker of mine brought up that he thought it wasn't right (something like that) that a person who promotes to a certain rank with less time in grade would get paid more than someone else who got the rank before them because of time in service.

Example:
I have tested for E-5 (SSgt) three times now (and finally made it (this year), which is a shocker honestly). My friend made it his first time (last year) and promoted earlier this year. Since I have a low line number I will put SSgt on fairly quickly (I'd say 6 months after my friend). I will hit my six year mark this December (if I decide to stay in) and will get paid more than my friend since I have more time in service (he will have 5 years). So according to my other friend's point of view, it's not right since technically my other friend would out rank me.

I tried to tell him it's just time in service and my other friend would still make just as much in the long run.

So just wondering what everyone's point of view is on this topic.

Response by LTC Yinon Weiss made Jul 14 at 2014 8:31 PM

2014-07-14T20:31:45-04:00

In my view, the mere amount of time somebody has been in uniform should dictate neither position nor pay. Rather, performance and advancement should represent compensation and responsibility.

In the military, time often controls advancement, but I don't think that is the best approach. Performance should be awarded over time whenever possible in my personal opinion.

Response by PO3 John Jeter made Jul 14 at 2014 9:10 PM

2014-07-14T21:10:06-04:00

Fastest way to stir up a fecal maelstrom is to discuss payroll......Therefore, I don't do it. Everyone likes to think they are indispensable, and therefore should get paid more. I just check to make sure the number is right on my check and go on my way........ That may not be the type of answer you're looking for, but it's the best I can offer! *grin*

Response by LTC Paul Labrador made Jul 16 at 2014 6:26 PM

2014-07-16T18:26:39-04:00

TIS component of pay encourages longevity in service that you need for a truely professional military. It also acknowledges the contributions you have already given to the organization in the past.

Response by CSM Michael J. Uhlig made Jul 16 at 2014 6:49 PM

2014-07-16T18:49:52-04:00

the SSgt rank is equal rank to one another, one might have more time in grade (your buddy) or in a more senior position however, I see it as the same rank

Response by 1SG Frank Rocha made Jul 16 at 2014 7:11 PM

2014-07-16T19:11:00-04:00

Well, in order to "adjust" the pay tables to meet your perspective the DoD would have to base the pay on pay grade and time in grade. Each subsequent pay grade you would reach sends you back to the beginning of the chart but one row higher. Additionally, the highest pay you can receive on any pay grade should be lower than the lowest pay for the next higher pay grade.

That said, I don't see that happening any time soon or ever. Too many problems with implementing a system like this.

Response by PO3 Private RallyPoint Member made Jul 16 at 2014 7:33 PM

2014-07-16T19:33:13-04:00

Not gonna lie, pay and the lack of rewarding service-members for a job well done, but promoted time and "knowing how to play the game" to the right people involved was yet another huge motivating factor of why I got out of the service after only 1 tour. I don't support Union-like pay. I want to be paid for MY hard work, for MY accomplishments, for MY achievements, and where I am now, my pay reflects my rocking performance. Not a timetable, not a test, and certainly not brown-nosing or rubbing elbows with "the right people."

I do not want to be held back because "well, you've only been in X amount of time and you're Y rank which equals Z pay. Hey look at Joe Shipwreck over there, you both came in the service at the same time. Man, he's a POS and you're pretty outstanding, doesn't it suck that he gets paid the same as you?"

Yep. It sure does.

Response by Capt Private RallyPoint Member made Sep 7 at 2014 4:24 PM

2014-09-07T16:24:12-04:00

I don't really care one way or the other. People at the same rank and same time (more or less) get the same base pay, unless you're an O-1, 2 or 3 with prior time enlisted. People should focus less on what they're being paid compared to X or Y person and focus more on doing the best job they can. I guarantee you that if you continue to rank up, the money will follow.

Response by 1SG Private RallyPoint Member made Sep 11 at 2014 8:13 PM

2014-09-11T20:13:47-04:00

TSgt Private RallyPoint Member , CSM Michael J. Uhlig is correct. As Staff Sergeants, you and your friend are being paid the same amount of money. You on the other hand are making more because of your time in service. When he reaches the TIS that you currently hold, he will make the same amount. I'm concerned as he seems to be more worried about how much money you/he make vs be prepared for his additional responsibilities in a junior leadership position. You need to not be concerned, you did nothing at all, let him whine to himself, don't discuss it, it's not your battle. There is nothing you can say or do to help him with his dilemma.

Response by SGT Private RallyPoint Member made Sep 12 at 2014 6:40 AM

2014-09-12T06:40:52-04:00

I think it is fair and if it was to change then your friend will just complain about how married Soldiers get more pay because they decided to start a family. The only time i complain about pay but in a jokingly way is when im at my monthy drills and the whole weekends pay is less that one day of work in my civilian job. I really dont care and its not like the pay system is going to change really maybe one day but i dont foresee that happening anytime soon. The only real time i would have a problem conserning pay would be if i would deploy again being my civilian job pays me about 30-40k more than what my AD base pay would be and within the next year or two would be be about 1/3 or less than AD base pay. So until your friend has an issue like that he really doesnt have any much room to complain about especially since it was his decision to join the military and if he has that much of a problem with the pay maybe he should get out and be a civilian as soon as he can.

Response by CPT Private RallyPoint Member made Sep 16 at 2014 7:32 PM

2014-09-16T19:32:18-04:00

Maybe your friends should have joined the military sooner.

Tough luck. A lot of my 2LT cronies have the same issue. And I tell them... Its not my fault that I will be capped at max for each rank until I hit CPT due to my time in service. Don't like it... Too bad. Should have joined at 17 lol.

Not to mention Im an average 4 years older than half these goons. Im not going to complain...

Response by CPT Private RallyPoint Member made Sep 17 at 2014 3:33 AM

2014-09-17T03:33:50-04:00

I think the problem lies in the nebulous nature of performance. Because there is no way to adequately rank everyone compared to everyone else, there's no way to base pay off their performances or contributions to their organization. I think time in service is used because that is the only quantifiable metric for gauging a service member's contribution to their service. It is by no means perfect nor necessarily even good, but it is not completely out of line with the civilian world. Many civilian jobs give raises based on the time an employee has worked for the company. Perhaps it's useful to look at it as the Army recognizing that if a person has served for so long and is at a certain rank then they've adequately contributed enough of their life to warrant more pay.