Same BAH rates for married and single Soldiers?

SGM Matthew Quick — Sun, 12 Jan 2014 12:33:41 -0500

DoD proposals are suggesting scrapping the "with dependents" rates under the current BAH program, moving instead to a simpler, flatter benefit that makes no distinction between single service members and those with families.

What are your thoughts about a universal BAH (based on locality) for single/married service members?

Response by SGM Private RallyPoint Member made Jan 12 at 2014 12:51 PM

SGM Private RallyPoint Member — Sun, 12 Jan 2014 12:51:25 -0500

I think it is a bad move unless they plan to get rid of barracks altogether. In a time when we are looking to trim money and some "brain child" decides to spend more? Doesn't make sense.

If they decided to go down this route we would be able to maintain the barracks as transient rooms only. The BAH would allow the Soldiers to move out and onto the economy. It makes me wonder where the cuts would come from for this extra money to be freed up.

Response by 1SG Private RallyPoint Member made Jan 12 at 2014 1:01 PM

1SG Private RallyPoint Member — Sun, 12 Jan 2014 13:01:34 -0500

I guess that would seem weird to have Soldiers in the barracks getting the same BAH rate as their married friends. Will they have to pay rent? Or will it be deducted like government leased housed, and move from the First Sergeant Barracks Program and back to housing control? We will have to see.

Sounds like they haven't addressed these questions yet. More to follow perhaps...

Response by SFC James Baber made Jan 12 at 2014 1:09 PM

SFC James Baber — Sun, 12 Jan 2014 13:09:02 -0500

I don't think this would be fair to the families of SMs as it would put an even more financial strain on what has been proven to be substandard pay scale for military members compared to their civilian counterparts as shown yearly in various studies.

If they did this, I feel it would also hurt recruitment and retention capabilities, as current married SMs may feel it is not financially feasible for them to remain active when they could potentially find a higher paying, more benefitted job on the outside, or even switch to the contract/GS side of things that provide higher pay with better benefits that many see daily during deployments and interaction with GS employees on post. The recruitment suffering would be similar as well when potential married enlistees would not see a beneficial advantage to joining the military when the ability to take care of their families with proper and safe housing affordability is removed from the prospects.

Response by SGT(P) Private RallyPoint Member made Jan 12 at 2014 1:12 PM

SGT(P) Private RallyPoint Member — Sun, 12 Jan 2014 13:12:16 -0500

I hate to be a conspiracy theorist, but I could see DOD using such a redesign as a vehicle to reduce BAH rates across the board. Such a redesign has been reported in the Army Times within the last 3 or 4 weeks. BAH would be a huge raise for single soldiers but if it is implemented in concert with reduction in BAH rates that would really hurt many military families particularly the enlisted.

Response by CW2 Private RallyPoint Member made Jan 12 at 2014 1:33 PM

CW2 Private RallyPoint Member — Sun, 12 Jan 2014 13:33:03 -0500

Stating the obvious, a 1BR apartment/house costs less than a 3/4 bedroom house. That being said, how can DoD say that a single soldier who only needs 1/2BR should get the same BAH as a family of 5 who needs a 3/4BR? I feel BAH should be based off of how many dependents you have (i.e. someone with only a spouse should not get the same rate as someone with 3 children who need more BR to fit the family needs). Of course it should still be based on pay grade and duty location.

Response by SGT(P) Private RallyPoint Member made Jan 12 at 2014 1:52 PM

SGT(P) Private RallyPoint Member — Sun, 12 Jan 2014 13:52:27 -0500

Just don't see how this could work. If the single rate goes up so be it I guess, but it would be wasting money. Just sounds like a plan to lower BAH across the board to me. We will see I guess.

Response by SSG Robert Burns made Jan 12 at 2014 2:05 PM

SSG Robert Burns — Sun, 12 Jan 2014 14:05:43 -0500

just to clarify, BAH isn't based off of marriage or single, it's whether you have dependents or not.  But the proposal makes no sense what-so-ever.  What exactly does that accomplish?  It is an allowance, not a salary.  To be honest I think it should be based on your number of dependents.  Meaning a newly married couple with no children does not need the same housing than a single mother with 4 kids.  Nor for just a 20 year old with no kids.  Giving everyone a flat rate will only create problems and solve none.<div>The same for on post housing.  Why should an E8 with no kids be living in a detached 4 bedroom home while an E4 with 5 kids is in a 2 or 3 bedroom townhouse?</div><div><br></div>

Response by SSG Robert Burns made Jan 12 at 2014 2:07 PM

SSG Robert Burns — Sun, 12 Jan 2014 14:07:27 -0500

Where can I read about this at? I can't find anything.

Response by CW2 Stephen Pate made Jan 12 at 2014 3:01 PM

CW2 Stephen Pate — Sun, 12 Jan 2014 15:01:24 -0500

I have always thought that the Army paying my rent/mortgage was too good to be true. It wouldn't be a surprise to me if we lose it completely someday.

Response by CPO Private RallyPoint Member made Jan 12 at 2014 7:13 PM

CPO Private RallyPoint Member — Sun, 12 Jan 2014 19:13:16 -0500

I disagree unless they increase the BAH for single people. A lot of military people with families are living off of the one income alone because it is difficult for military spouses to have careers. Doing something like this would only increase the number of military families on WIC and food stamps, etc.

Response by 1SG Private RallyPoint Member made Jan 12 at 2014 7:22 PM

1SG Private RallyPoint Member — Sun, 12 Jan 2014 19:22:33 -0500

I believe BAH should be based on the number of dependents. Bottom line is, how is it possible to think a change to a flat rate without regard to number of dependents would be beneficial to the Soldier? It benefits the DoD's pocketbook, but not much else.

Response by SFC Stephen P. made Jan 13 at 2014 4:16 PM

SFC Stephen P. — Mon, 13 Jan 2014 16:16:08 -0500

The military should provide for a a certain standard of housing for service-members, and the service-member only. Any requirement beyond that is the responsibility of the member or his family, not the military.<br><br>These policies do influence behavior. As a direct result, I executed my legal marriage 10 months prior the actual planned ceremony. This netted me a difference of about $2700. <br><br>The benefits, stipends, and allowances are supposed to be providing for military readiness, not welfare.<br>

Response by LTC Paul Labrador made Feb 11 at 2014 7:46 AM

LTC Paul Labrador — Tue, 11 Feb 2014 07:46:00 -0500

Not necessarily. But I do feel that two married service members shouldn't be able to get individual BAH's if they are stationed at the same base.

Response by SFC James Baber made Feb 11 at 2014 7:49 AM

SFC James Baber — Tue, 11 Feb 2014 07:49:46 -0500

quick answer no, married Soldiers have more responsibilities and family to support than a single Soldier.

Response by SSG Robert Burns made Feb 11 at 2014 7:51 AM

SSG Robert Burns — Tue, 11 Feb 2014 07:51:11 -0500

There's already a discussion posted on this.

Response by CPT Private RallyPoint Member made Aug 8 at 2014 12:35 PM

CPT Private RallyPoint Member — Fri, 08 Aug 2014 12:35:02 -0400

I need participants for my doctoral project research study on the factors that influence the decision to marry. If you meet the following criteria, you are eligible to participate (Please review the criteria carefully and let me know if you have any questions):

1. Male
2. 18-50 years old
3. Currently or previously married
4. Employed full-time when you got married

I am looking for civilians as well as Army soldiers to participate in this study.

Army soldiers MUST have been serving on active duty when they got married.

This link will take you to the survey. It should only take you 5-10 minutes to complete. SPREAD THE WORD! Thanks!

https://mspp.co1.qualtrics.com/SE/?SID=SV_cOtWClm9JtqMXcx

Marriage Research Study

Married & divorced MEN, 18-50 y/o, can participate in my research study! It only takes 5-10 min!

Response by CPT Private RallyPoint Member made Dec 1 at 2014 3:25 PM

CPT Private RallyPoint Member — Mon, 01 Dec 2014 15:25:01 -0500

I have posted this on here before but wanted to do this again because I was recently donated some gift cards that I can give away!

INTERESTED IN WINNING ONE OF MY TWENTY $15 VISA GIFT CARDS? KEEP READING…

I need participants for my doctoral project research study on the factors that influence the decision to marry. If you meet the following criteria, (AND ONLY IF YOU MEET THE FOLLOWING CRITERIA), you are eligible to participate and be entered into a raffle for one of twenty $15 Visa gift cards

(Please review the criteria carefully and let me know if you have any questions):

1. Male
2. 18-50 years old
3. Currently or previously married
4. Employed full-time when you got married

I am looking for MALE civilians as well as MALE ARMY soldiers to participate in this study.

NOTE: MALE ARMY soldiers MUST have been serving on active duty when they got married.

This link will take you to the survey. It should only take you 10-15 minutes to complete. SPREAD THE WORD! Thanks!

https://mspp.co1.qualtrics.com/SE/?SID=SV_cOtWClm9JtqMXcx

This study has been reviewed and approved for use by the Massachusetts School of Professional Psychology’s Institutional Review Board (MSPP IRB). If you have questions or concerns regarding your rights as a participant in this survey, you may contact the IRB chair, Dr. Edward De Vos, [login to see] , or at [login to see] . You may also report your concerns or complaints via email to [login to see]

Response by SFC Private RallyPoint Member made Feb 2 at 2015 3:58 PM

SFC Private RallyPoint Member — Mon, 02 Feb 2015 15:58:00 -0500

I don't agree with many of the responses here that are saying the allowance should be based on the number of dependents you have. I believe at one point in the past, it actually was that way, and then switched to a flat rate. Raising the allowance based on the number of dependents is a ridiculous idea, in my opinion. It would seem to encourage some families to have more children in order to get a larger allowance. I think that was the reason the rate was switched to a flat rate.
I don't believe that the rate should be the same for married and single soldiers, as many have pointed out. Single and marrieds have different responsibility levels, such as rent/mortgage, utilities, insurance, etc. Singles are allowed to live in the barracks and utilize the DFACs, room and board paid. Marrieds have to take care of the property where they live, in a home or duplex situation, mowing, weed-eating, I've never had a landlord provide me with the lawnmower or weed-eater to keep up his yard. Barracks personnel have the post contract personnel to do their yard upkeep. These are only a few examples, I'm sure there are many more. I don't believe the rate should be the same.

Response by CPT Private RallyPoint Member made Feb 3 at 2015 7:16 PM

CPT Private RallyPoint Member — Tue, 03 Feb 2015 19:16:16 -0500

Kids cost money...

Response by LTC Private RallyPoint Member made Mar 11 at 2015 9:44 PM

LTC Private RallyPoint Member — Wed, 11 Mar 2015 21:44:03 -0400

SGM Matthew Quick absolutely. Get rid of historical labels and approved discrimination.

Response by COL Charles Williams made Mar 12 at 2015 12:47 AM

COL Charles Williams — Thu, 12 Mar 2015 00:47:58 -0400

I may be an outlier, but I think flat BAH makes sense, by grade and location. Whether you are single or have a family, you still need a home, and things aren't cheaper if your single. My only concern would be going with the single rate vs. the with dependent rate; higher is always better.

Response by Capt Private RallyPoint Member made Mar 12 at 2015 1:00 AM

Capt Private RallyPoint Member — Thu, 12 Mar 2015 01:00:45 -0400

If you're thinking of your bah as part of your salary it really doesn't make sense to get more money just because you have dependents. That isn't a practice you see mimicked in the private sector.

Response by CPT Private RallyPoint Member made Jul 24 at 2015 8:07 PM

CPT Private RallyPoint Member — Fri, 24 Jul 2015 20:07:34 -0400

To be fair, I have a married with dependents. I recognize that receiving additional money at the with dependent rate bah costs the Army more money in the short term and is more than what single Soldiers recieve. Point taken. For everyone who believes there should be only one bah rate, please hear me out.

1. For those who state" you never see that in the civilian world" we are not civilians. You can not compare apples to oranges. It is true not all of our MOSs see combat up close but all serve to support the Soldiers who do . This responsibilty is unique and requires the institution charged with executing it, arm its Soldiers with the necessary tools to be successful. Soldiers perform better when they know their families are well taken care of while they are gone. A distracted mind is a dangerous mind downrange.

2. For those that state " it is not fair that someone received more money than me just for having dependents" well,I have many friends who are single and I would gladly trade their budget and extra savings per month with mine. Not to mention that roommates and small one bedroom apts ( more sq ft per person space) allow for them to spend under their bah rates and pocket that money. More money does not equal more disposable income. To me this is ignorant to the financial realities of others and comes across as self-centered.

2a. Additionally, marriage and marital values are consistent with and support Army values. Loyalty, duty, respect are all championed by both institutions. What does this have to do with bah you ask....well the additional bah encourages and supports developing and living those commitments in all aspects of a Soldiers life. Succesful military families require balance in our Leaders and Soldiers. I'm not saying you can't have balance as a single Soldier but being married forces you to split your time. Have you ever been lead by someone that was single and had nowhere else to be, so he or she spent all of his time between sleep at work. How did that work out for you?

2b.Financially,I propose lowering the with dependent bah rates will cost the Army more money by driving quality families and Soldiers from the military. The military will have to spend more money to continually train new personel after families realize they can not support a reasonable anf standard lifestyle. The cycle would repeat over and over with each new families departure costing the military significantly more money in the long term than the extra bah given each month. This does not invlude the cost of inexperience and its effect on the affectiveness of the force.

3. Written in every Army creed, it mentions taking care of Soldiers and those we lead. Being selfless and sacrificing for others on our team is what we are all supposed to live. I am surprised and saddened that in our own military there are so many people that can't see these types og perspectives are directly opposed to these values.

If I have bread on my table and my friends do not I will invite them over to eat. What it sounds like to me is that those people who think it should be equal are saying, I have enough so you should too. What kind of answer is that?

Our society depends on us as Soldiers to take care of one another. We should only look in others bowls to see if they need more not to say we didn't get enough.

Response by SPC John Lebiecki made Aug 18 at 2016 6:46 PM

SPC John Lebiecki — Thu, 18 Aug 2016 18:46:21 -0400

Old post. But here is something to think about for those who support "flat rate"
- Soldiers receiving BAH with or without are usually looking for something affordable with the ability to save money. They want to spend as little as possible to. Ideal for that married soldier with a spouse with no kids because they might be able to get away with having a 1BR.

- That soldier with a spouse AND children involved is a different story, and will risk looking into non-safe areas. Why? Because that may be all that they can afford as they need multiple rooms. Look at places like Fort Bragg and Fort Sill (for example). Lots of areas that aren't family friendly, but are the only affordable area to house their family.