Posted on Dec 12, 2013
SSG Robert Burns
41.7K
374
116
14
14
0
What are the pros and cons of still having barracks as opposed to giving single soldiers BAH to live off post? &nbsp;Do we really believe that their barracks quarters are equivalent to the amount they would receive in BAH?<div>Most of them would get a roommate anyway and be splitting the rent on a 2 bedroom apt.&nbsp;</div><div>What do you think?</div>
Posted in these groups: Vc iwcc w415 Barracks
Avatar feed
Responses: 70
SSG Medically Retired
37
37
0
I don't think NCOs should have to reside in the barracks. It is laughable to make a 30s-40s NCOs live amongst a bunch of teenagers/20 somethings.
(37)
Comment
(0)
Sgt Electronics Maintenance Technician
Sgt (Join to see)
>1 y
Sgt (Join to see) - a boot is a boot no matter their age. leadership or responsibility should never be associated with it. In m experience it was a double edge sword the go ones where good. But the shitty ones where a liability. Then again age or years in service should never be factors to consider when determining military prowess or capabilities in my book.
(1)
Reply
(0)
SPC Medical Specialist
SPC (Join to see)
3 y
I think it should be the NCO's choice. I knew some NCO's that maintained a room in the barracks, but they lived off post. It made sense where there were frequent alerts and if they lived too far away.
(2)
Reply
(0)
CAPT Dave Woodard
CAPT Dave Woodard
2 y
It's a maturity point. The newly enlisted "boot" probably needs some barracks time to adjust to the rigors and expectations of the military. Our Barracks (1966) were rank-stratified so that if you were a SNCO you had a floor that was only fellow SNCO's. Think once you have been promoted to NCO it should be your choice however, but, screw up and lose the rights.
(1)
Reply
(0)
SSG Lyle O'Rorke
SSG Lyle O'Rorke
2 y
MAJ Ronnie Reams that is something I have always seen assigned to the CQ or SDNCO. They would be assigned that duty by the 1SG or SGM.
(1)
Reply
(0)
Avatar small
SGM Erik Marquez
26
26
0
Edited 2 y ago
Funding is likely a primary reason to retain on post single SM housing... cost to house in barracks vice cost to supply BAH.
And then wasted supervisor man hours, training detractors chasing after thousands of younger, typically less mature, and less experienced living on their own with the trial and tribulations that come with that.
Plus issues with transportation, reliable transportation, which would include possession, registration, maintenance and insurance would be need to now be a "mandatory" requirement to entering service...
"Oh you want to Join the Army, yes, sit down here, let’s check to see if you are in the less than 1% that even meet the qualifications for service in the US Military.. ..Ok good you made it, now, may I see your vehicle title or lease contract for your vehicle, certified ASE technician vehicle condition report, Registration and valid insurance please?"

I Joined the Army at 19 years of age, I had lived on my own a few years at that point and I LOVED
the BENEFITS single SM housing gave me...
10 man rooms, shower rooms down the hall, FREE FOOD down the road at least three times a day, no need to maintain my 'house" other than the room itself.... Always having a buddy or 10 to keep me straight....so you can’t forget the next time or place you were supposed to be, borrow a pair of socks if my last clean set went missing, borrow some boot polish (not that a SM in the last 15 years would know what that stiff is...lol), having someone be look out when we repelled out the third floor window (Sorry 1SG Keast, Im still not saying who was in that room with me)
The benefits and freedom, no worries about paying for and maintaining a domicile, no transportation worries, no food worries means a younger SM learning the way of Military life, and life on their own in general, vastly out-way any perceived benefits of turning lose a few hounded thousand junior enlisted.
(26)
Comment
(0)
Avatar small
SFC Clinops
24
24
0
SSG Burns, I think in some instances the barracks are a necessity, not because of any BAH equivalent, but bc some Soldiers don't have transportation, some Soldiers have financial mismanagement issues, and some just NEED to be in the barracks. So that being said, yes I think SSB should still be "offered" to E5 and below.
(24)
Comment
(0)
SSG Robert Burns
SSG Robert Burns
8 y
Great point!  Transportation is always a biggie, especially for those knuckle heads that can't make it to formation on time right down stairs from their rooms.  
(12)
Reply
(0)
SGT Information Technology Specialist
SGT (Join to see)
4 y
IF THEY CANT be responsible in Garrision they wont be in war. Its just another way to take up their time so they cannot do college and stuff. We cannot have soldiers who are educated more so than their supervisors. Just like if you have a subordinate who runs faster than you youll suddenly disappear whenever its a run day (well mine always did) Which explains why formation runs are soo slow. Did you know average walking speed is 5 MPH. and at my last unit they AVERAGED 4.5 MPH for the fucking formation RUNS.. And that was artillery.. tsk tsk ....
(2)
Reply
(0)
SFC Force Protection Supervisor
SFC (Join to see)
4 y
A long time ago Military bases had buses traveling all over the base. Its seems that many years ago the Army taken those away. I agree that barracks are still needed, the sad thing is that the program that took away the 1SG having full responsibility for the barracks and conducting inspections are out the door. Also lots of changes in the military has taken away discipline and pride away.
(4)
Reply
(0)
CPO Roy Thornton
CPO Roy Thornton
2 y
SGT (Join to see) - I agree and disagree. Being Navy we lived on Ships. I had guys that were almost useless when we were in port for all of the above listed reasons, that were exceptional at sea and in casualty situations. Once you removed them fro the distractions they were stellar. Before anyone goes there I'm not condoning, just commenting
(1)
Reply
(0)
Avatar small

Join nearly 2 million former and current members of the US military, just like you.

close