Posted on Sep 13, 2014
LTC Paul Heinlein
89.3K
365
142
13
12
1
Officers get a one time uniform stipend when they get commissioned and then for the rest of their career they are expected to pay for their upkeep and replacement of their uniforms out of their pay. Enlisted get a complete initial issue of uniforms and then are paid a yearly allowance to keep up with the replacement cost for uniforms.
Posted in these groups: Customs and courtesies logo Customs and Courtesies4276e14c Uniforms
Edited >1 y ago
Avatar feed
Responses: 62
SGT 94 E Radio Comsec Repairer
44
44
0
Edited 10 y ago
Sir,

Maybe it's because enlisted folks' uniforms suffer actual wear and tear. ;)
(44)
Comment
(0)
MSgt Lr Sensor Operator
MSgt (Join to see)
9 y
I don't think there is any reason an E can put forth that an O will accept. The classic loaded question.
(2)
Reply
(0)
SPC Eddie "Nemo" Aiumu
SPC Eddie "Nemo" Aiumu
9 y
Sir,
An LTC with say 16 years in service recieves $8,000+ a month not including BAH, FSP, HDP and so on. Now if we times by 12 months we're looking at well....you get the idea. Compare that to an E4 with four years of service who makes $23,000 a year not including the BAH, HDP. Remember these are before taxes. But I understand that the question I assume is about fairness...right? Well a female enlisted or officer would make less than the figures mentioned above.
Ref: http://www.militaryrates.com/military-pay-charts-o1_o5_2015
http://m.goarmy.com/benefits/money/basic-pay-active-duty-soldiers.m.html
(0)
Reply
(0)
SPC Eddie "Nemo" Aiumu
SPC Eddie "Nemo" Aiumu
9 y
I hope no officers take offense. Just pointing out maybe a reason of why. If you are offended than my sincere apologies as that wasnt the nature of my answer. God Bless.
(1)
Reply
(0)
SPC Mike Davis
SPC Mike Davis
>1 y
Love that answer. It covers just about everything!
(0)
Reply
(0)
Avatar small
SFC Retired
31
31
0
I was always told its because officers make more money. Though enlisted get a yearly allowance it in no way will pay for what you are expected to buy, and I know I spend well over the allotted amount each year ensuring that I maintain my uniforms/equipment. It also gives NCOs more ammunition in enforcing standards as you can tell a soldier with a jacked up uniform to get it squared away. If they try to use the excuse of not having money it is easy to just reply with, 'the Army gives you a clothing allowance for just that purpose' or something along those lines.
(31)
Comment
(0)
MSG Usarec Liason At Nrpc/Nara
MSG (Join to see)
>1 y
Same story I've always been told.
(1)
Reply
(0)
1SG Michael Blount
1SG Michael Blount
>1 y
Because we're poor!
(10)
Reply
(0)
CWO2 Shelby DuBois
CWO2 Shelby DuBois
10 y
Throwback to when officers were Gentlemen and bought their commission and brought their cool custom made uni's and wouldn't be caught dead in enlisteds threads. Of course, they make more money and are expected to keep up appearances. When I made Warrant Officer it cost me an arm and a leg to get to Quantico, but would I trade it? No way. It's part of being an officer. Sets you apart. You left out officers having to pay for MRE's as well... If you're jealous, revert to being an NCO for all that cool cash.
(8)
Reply
(0)
CPT David Miller
CPT David Miller
6 y
IIRC, Non Commissioned Officers on drill sergeant and recruiting duty receive extra "pro-pay" to compensate for the extra expense above the uniform allowance. Officers in basic training and recruiting battalions...well, we're gentlemen of "considerable personal fortune".
(0)
Reply
(0)
Avatar small
MAJ FAO - Europe
29
29
0
Great theories in all of the comments above, most of which focus on pay differences between officers and enlisted, and some of which focus on the history of armies in general, and the U.S. Army in particular. Most of these comments hit on parts of the real answer, found in 37 U.S.C. §§415-419.

http://www.loc.gov/rr/frd/pdf-files/Military_Comp.pdf

See page 998 - 1002.

"H.R. 5007, 81st Congress, 1st Session (1949), that became the
Career Compensation Act of 1949, ch. 681 [Public Law 351, 81st Congress], 63 Stat. 802 (1949), as follows: Whenever an officer goes into the service, he does so knowing he will be required to subsist himself. Any time a man enlists in the service, the law requires that the Government subsist that man. And, if the Government does not subsist that man, then we will have to reimburse him for that food. Under his contract, they agree to feed him, clothe him, and shelter him. But there is no contract with the officer."
(29)
Comment
(0)
1stLt Jeffrey Jones
1stLt Jeffrey Jones
10 y
This does raise another issue. If the government has a "contract" with the enlisted personnel, why doesn't it have one with the officers? Both take the same oath of alligance.
(0)
Reply
(0)
CPT All Source Intelligence
CPT (Join to see)
10 y
MAJ (Join to see) - Sir, this thread's been revived. Based on the code extract you quoted, do you have any ideas on why officers are given a Basic Allowance for Subsistence? It seems directly contrary to the above.
(3)
Reply
(0)
MAJ FAO - Europe
MAJ (Join to see)
10 y
CPT (Join to see) Good point. It does seem directly contrary.
(0)
Reply
(0)
SPC Eric Zimmerer
SPC Eric Zimmerer
6 y
Very good sir!
(0)
Reply
(0)
Avatar small

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

close