Posted on Oct 19, 2016
Why do Service Members with dependents deserve greater benefits, entitlements, and quality of life than single Service Members?
82.7K
447
272
36
36
0
Single soldiers are required to live in the barracks and eat DFAC food. A married soldier gets BAH, BAS, Family Separation Pay while TDY or deployed, and generally enjoy a far higher quality of life. If both soldiers do the same job, are the same MOS, same rank, have the same Time in Service, and Time in Grade, what makes the single soldier worth less to the Army?
BAH
Barracks
BAS
DFAC
Housing
Posted 9 y ago
Responses: 74
Absolutely agree I think it's completely unfair
Single soldiers get free housing they don't have to pay a penny for it, that's completely unfair married soldiers only get a partial stipend that in no way shape or form covers the actual cost of living in the housing, paying the bills for utilities etc.
Single soldiers get free quarters and appliance maintenance they don't pay a dime for, they make a simple phone call maybe fill out a form and maintenance people come out for free and take care of all your needs during duty hours.... YOU GET PAID and DUTY time to get your bathroom fan fixed for FREE.
That married soldier has to pay the AC repairman, has to go to Best Buy and get the new refrigerator or washing machine when it dies. I think it's completely unfair that a single soldier gets all that for free.
I also think it's completely unfair that a single soldier doesn't have to get up hours before first call formation so that they can get there on time and unfair that a single soldier doesn't have to pay huge costs to travel to work each day wasting precious hours every day in commute.
The single soldier has everything they need on the installation they don't have to go to the next town over to get food, cross to the other side of town to go get something to drink or find a movie theater or a restaurant.....that's completely unfair to the married soldier who has to go all over to get the same things the single soldier has provided for them.
Department of defense, the United States Army as well as the unit chain of command has specific programs benefiting the single soldiers.
Low-cost tickets, concert events, fishing trips, movie nights....all kinds of things are provided in the better opportunity for single soldiers program that married soldiers are not allowed to use, that's completely unfair to the married soldier... Married soldiers are people too.
And yes all of the above was said somewhat tongue-in-cheek.. the point being the desire to complain comes from your personal position and outlook not necessarily the reality of the situation
Single soldiers get free housing they don't have to pay a penny for it, that's completely unfair married soldiers only get a partial stipend that in no way shape or form covers the actual cost of living in the housing, paying the bills for utilities etc.
Single soldiers get free quarters and appliance maintenance they don't pay a dime for, they make a simple phone call maybe fill out a form and maintenance people come out for free and take care of all your needs during duty hours.... YOU GET PAID and DUTY time to get your bathroom fan fixed for FREE.
That married soldier has to pay the AC repairman, has to go to Best Buy and get the new refrigerator or washing machine when it dies. I think it's completely unfair that a single soldier gets all that for free.
I also think it's completely unfair that a single soldier doesn't have to get up hours before first call formation so that they can get there on time and unfair that a single soldier doesn't have to pay huge costs to travel to work each day wasting precious hours every day in commute.
The single soldier has everything they need on the installation they don't have to go to the next town over to get food, cross to the other side of town to go get something to drink or find a movie theater or a restaurant.....that's completely unfair to the married soldier who has to go all over to get the same things the single soldier has provided for them.
Department of defense, the United States Army as well as the unit chain of command has specific programs benefiting the single soldiers.
Low-cost tickets, concert events, fishing trips, movie nights....all kinds of things are provided in the better opportunity for single soldiers program that married soldiers are not allowed to use, that's completely unfair to the married soldier... Married soldiers are people too.
And yes all of the above was said somewhat tongue-in-cheek.. the point being the desire to complain comes from your personal position and outlook not necessarily the reality of the situation
(91)
(0)
AN Shelley Suriano
The USN always stated what comes in your seabag that you were issued. Therefore, your family didn't come issued in it. Here's another tip-buy your appliances at The NEX or in The Army's place, The PX and save a bunch of money instead of buying it from Best Buy. Remember to always do your homework before engaging your mouth. Tissues weren't issed in my seabag. Go Navy!
(1)
(0)
Suspended Profile
Military see dependants as an individual choice,and an extra commitment on your part. Your family you started was NOT part of your contract. Your duty is to your service first and foremost. It's sad , but there it is.
Suspended Profile
To put it a bit more clearly, Sgt....as they told us in 1983...MISSION COMES FIRST.
PO1 William Van Syckle
AN Shelley Suriano - Shipmate, my wife was issued to me. Back in the early 70’s and before, two service members had to have permission to get married by the service. My wife and I had orders signed by SecDef and SecA to get married and my wife had a second set of orders authorizing her to get her name changed. I had a 1Sgt try the old if the Army wanted you to have a wife, they would issue you one. I produced our orders and did not hear another thing from him…..
(0)
(0)
I'd focus on your own level of compensation/benefits, and not worry about your colleagues. Research shows that many people pay more attention to "relative compensation" (i.e. compensation compared to others) than they do about their overall level of compensation, and it adversely impacts their own level of job satisfaction and happiness. A clear, but extreme, example can be seen in professional sports. An athlete making $10m per year complains that another athlete is making $12m per year. Their focus is on the $2m differential, rather than the $10m level of their compensation. You'll always be unhappy, in or out of the military, if your focus is on trying to acquire what someone else has. If you're not making an amount that satisfies you, find another career path.
(58)
(0)
LTC Kevin B.
SGT David Baker - When I lived in the barracks over in Germany (mid-80s), I did the same thing....cooked meals on a hot plate and had a mini-fridge. It was suboptimal, but better than eating only DFAC food or paying even higher costs to eat out. When I PCS'd back stateside, it was about the same. I then ETS'd in 87 and went off to college.
I do agree that barracks quality of life is suboptimal on many levels. In a way, I wish the military would just transition young, single service members onto BAH after a year (or so) on station. That gives them time to integrate and adjust before pushing them out on their own.
I do agree that barracks quality of life is suboptimal on many levels. In a way, I wish the military would just transition young, single service members onto BAH after a year (or so) on station. That gives them time to integrate and adjust before pushing them out on their own.
(0)
(0)
SGT David Baker
LTC Kevin B. - Yes. Transitioning to adult civilian life is a challenge on a par with having to "adult" immediately on leaving high school. I am blessed that I was able to do my last tour in Fort Living Room, commuting to Fort Hood, learning the ropes and the occasional unwelcome surprises. My time between leaving home and joining the Army could be a case study in "learning life lessons the hard way" as I had been sheltered in more than the usual sense while in my parents' care.
(2)
(0)
LTC Kevin B.
SGT Caroline Slothour - I suppose that type of setup (community kitchen) is better than nothing, but I can see how it can still be inconvenient in many ways. Regardless, it sounds like you've taken the initiative to solve some of your own quality-of-life issues. Great initiative, but I wish it didn't have to come out of your own pocket. I still think commanders should be able to transition everyone out onto BAH after a reasonable transition period (which you'd already be well past).
(0)
(0)
SFC Gregory Adams
When I retired after 24 yrs AFS, it was a culture shock the amount of money I needed to make as a civilian to compensate for the loss of revenue that i was getting from my active pay as a SFC. Like LTC B. stated, "stay in your lane" an worry about you. Life outside the military is much more difficult than inside. Yes, there are no inspections, you wear whatever you want, unless the compnay has a uniform, etc....but there is a HUGE difference when it comes to benefits and compensation in your bank account. The loss of BAH, Sep Rats, FSP, combat pay, jump pay, and the list goes on.....free money for doing your job. You don't get that on the outside. It is included in "do your job", if you don't like it......there is the door.
(2)
(0)
31
31
0
Look , its not fair that you judge us married people because we are married. Some of us that do get married also loose some of the things that you still have. Like Partying and getting shit faced , having multiple partners at a time, playing xbox all day all night. I know I no longer can do those things because I now have responsibilities.
(31)
(0)
SGT Gladys Perez
If you wanted to do those things then you should not have gotten married. The fact that you are making those specific points means that you're unhappy in your marriage.
(0)
(0)
SGT Gladys Perez
PFC Jim Wheeler why you may ask? I think it's because when a soldier needs to respond to an after hours call, they'll call barracks personnel before off post personnel. I can't tell you the number of times I had to come in to work in the middle of the night because an alarm was going off. No comp time. If an off post person was called in, the would get a 1/2 day. I was really poor back then and would have to walk to work but that didn't matter because I lived the closest.
(0)
(0)
CPT Lawrence Cable
PO3 Donald Murphy - You failed to mention coffin racks, shipboard watches, that single sailors quarters are on the ship, or that you can be at sea for long periods of time. Now the payback is shore leave in some very unique places.
Going to spend some time with the Navy this week and next.
Going to spend some time with the Navy this week and next.
(1)
(0)
SFC Robert Falco
PO3 Donald Murphy - Don't necessarily agree, as a married person in a civilian job I'd be perhaps a little more motivated than my single counterpart to progress and make more money.
(0)
(0)
18
18
0
Its not a matter of DESERVING greater benefits, my friend, its a matter of knowing that those you love, will not be left in poverty and want, when you have to leave them, and you know you will at some point.
When separated by orders, most of us take money from the family funds for our own needs, and sometimes, that can cause a serious hardship. The Gulf War saw about a quarter of the families involved seeking out food banks and food stamps for a while, because we all know, military pay for lower grades has never been generous.
In all truth, singular troops are a great deal better suited for the military, but the military knows that unless we can be sure our families are able to keep a roof over their heads and food in the fridge, those 'family guys' are not going to keep their heads in the game.
When separated by orders, most of us take money from the family funds for our own needs, and sometimes, that can cause a serious hardship. The Gulf War saw about a quarter of the families involved seeking out food banks and food stamps for a while, because we all know, military pay for lower grades has never been generous.
In all truth, singular troops are a great deal better suited for the military, but the military knows that unless we can be sure our families are able to keep a roof over their heads and food in the fridge, those 'family guys' are not going to keep their heads in the game.
(18)
(0)
SSG (Join to see)
SSgt (Join to see) , I understand that, but all the responses I get seem to completely gloss over or ignore this...
Why shouldn't both equal service members leave with exactly the same paycheck and LES, and decide for themselves how to use that money. Why does a person with a family in nearly every other situation that I am aware of have to budget and make his family fit into his pay, whereas in the military there is just additional allowances, or at the minimum the actual handing over of the money so they service member can decide how to use it, regardless of its intent?
Why shouldn't both equal service members leave with exactly the same paycheck and LES, and decide for themselves how to use that money. Why does a person with a family in nearly every other situation that I am aware of have to budget and make his family fit into his pay, whereas in the military there is just additional allowances, or at the minimum the actual handing over of the money so they service member can decide how to use it, regardless of its intent?
(0)
(0)
SSgt (Join to see)
SSG (Join to see) - What does the military do with the barracks that are no longer filled since the troops want their BAH to live out in town? Where exactly do the troops live once they move out of the barracks? There is only so much housing available on the market and if all troops moved out it would cause the cost of renting to increase dramatically. Troops would end up renting larger houses with roommates so they could pocket some extra cash, and be in the same situation they are in at the barracks. Then you would have the ones that have no idea how to manage their money that would be unable to afford food each month but since everyone gets BAS there would no longer be a reason to have mess facilities on base.
But the real answer is, the troops do get that money just not in cash form. They get it through the housing they live in, food they eat, and special singles events that happen on base just for them. Troops just tend to see one group get more up front and assume they are getting the short end of the stick. When you live in the barracks that $3000 a month you get for basic pay is for that member to play around with because the military has covered all of your needs with barracks and mess facilities, married individuals do not get that.
Remember that BAS is for the service member, not their family, because they do not eat at the mess facilities. When they deploy they lose BAS, usually but not in all cases, because they start using the on base mess facilities. Families that live in base housing also do not receive BAH.
Maybe the military should make a rule that you cannot get married and receive any of those extras until you have been in a certain amount of time and attained a certain rank but that would never pass politically.
But the real answer is, the troops do get that money just not in cash form. They get it through the housing they live in, food they eat, and special singles events that happen on base just for them. Troops just tend to see one group get more up front and assume they are getting the short end of the stick. When you live in the barracks that $3000 a month you get for basic pay is for that member to play around with because the military has covered all of your needs with barracks and mess facilities, married individuals do not get that.
Remember that BAS is for the service member, not their family, because they do not eat at the mess facilities. When they deploy they lose BAS, usually but not in all cases, because they start using the on base mess facilities. Families that live in base housing also do not receive BAH.
Maybe the military should make a rule that you cannot get married and receive any of those extras until you have been in a certain amount of time and attained a certain rank but that would never pass politically.
(2)
(0)
SSG (Join to see)
SSgt (Join to see)
"Troops would end up renting larger houses with roommates so they could pocket some extra cash, and be in the same situation they are in at the barracks."
"But the real answer is, the troops do get that money just not in cash form. They get it through the housing they live in, food they eat, and special singles events that happen on base just for them. "
What I would suggest in response to those statements is that I know you are correct that barracks Soldiers get more money than their paychecks state, just as you indicate. I would not believe that they get an equivalent value to their BAH and BAS receiving counterparts.
Additionally, choosing a couple of buddies and becoming roommates is more satisfying because where you live and who you live with were your choices...not dictated to you. Some people might prefer to live in the barracks, and for them, elsewhere in this thread I have proposed that new Soldier get put in the barracks initially, but then after some "probationary" period have the option to request to move out. Similar to how some families choose to live in on-post housing, some Soldiers might prefer the barracks life. More power to them.
"When you live in the barracks that $3000 a month you get for basic pay is for that member to play around with because the military has covered all of your needs with barracks and mess facilities..."
And, for any Soldiers that actually do this, they are, in my opinion, even more someone who needs to get out and have to actually survive on their own, paying for their own stuff, and going a little hungry if they don't manage it correctly. I am not suggesting letting them starve to death, but everything being provided, in addition to functionally overcharging them for what they are getting, is doing nothing to help them be prepared for when they find themselves in the "real world".
"Troops would end up renting larger houses with roommates so they could pocket some extra cash, and be in the same situation they are in at the barracks."
"But the real answer is, the troops do get that money just not in cash form. They get it through the housing they live in, food they eat, and special singles events that happen on base just for them. "
What I would suggest in response to those statements is that I know you are correct that barracks Soldiers get more money than their paychecks state, just as you indicate. I would not believe that they get an equivalent value to their BAH and BAS receiving counterparts.
Additionally, choosing a couple of buddies and becoming roommates is more satisfying because where you live and who you live with were your choices...not dictated to you. Some people might prefer to live in the barracks, and for them, elsewhere in this thread I have proposed that new Soldier get put in the barracks initially, but then after some "probationary" period have the option to request to move out. Similar to how some families choose to live in on-post housing, some Soldiers might prefer the barracks life. More power to them.
"When you live in the barracks that $3000 a month you get for basic pay is for that member to play around with because the military has covered all of your needs with barracks and mess facilities..."
And, for any Soldiers that actually do this, they are, in my opinion, even more someone who needs to get out and have to actually survive on their own, paying for their own stuff, and going a little hungry if they don't manage it correctly. I am not suggesting letting them starve to death, but everything being provided, in addition to functionally overcharging them for what they are getting, is doing nothing to help them be prepared for when they find themselves in the "real world".
(0)
(0)
SSgt (Join to see)
SSG (Join to see) - You make some good points. I do agree that after some period of time in troops should be allowed to get BAH on right. I did when I picked up sergeant (E5) and had about six years in, but I was at a reserve unit at the time who did not have very much space in the barracks for the few active duty troops that they had attached to them.
(0)
(0)
16
16
0
Okay, I'll bite on this one. Here is the simple answer from where as I see it. It cost more to have a family. For most dependents of a service member, it is tricky to find a job and other means to support themselves. I'm not saying they cannot but there are cases that I have seen where if the wife wants to move to be with her husband, she has to leave a well paying job and is not promised to find a job in the field they were working in. This is not the Army saying the single Soldier is any less "worthy" to the fight. It is the Army's way of acknowledging that it takes more to support more people in your family. Things like housing, family separation pay, and everything else is the just the Army's way to ensure the Soldier has the means to provide for his/her family.
(16)
(0)
SSG (Join to see)
SSG Robert Webster - That's absolutely true, however, both of those people agreed to do that job (mechanic/cook) for the Army... Not outside. But either of those people could get married and get an "instant" pay spike. And, not that it should, but it won't even factor in how much involve the new spouse has. Just more money even though the person has had no change in what they do for the Army or how well they do it since yesterday and in fact now potentially have more family issues that may conflict with their duties.
(0)
(0)
SSG Robert Webster
SSG (Join to see) - It seems that today, as in the past most if not all people both military and civilian forget the definition of "in lieu of" and what it means.
When applied in context that means that all those different E6s make the same except under for the FSA or combat conditions. And even under combat conditions the equity that people are supposedly striving for does not exist. Believe me there is a big difference between the living conditions for an Infantry E6 and most if not all Support E6s.
For those talking about living conditions and cost take a look at college or university living and the related cost.
When applied in context that means that all those different E6s make the same except under for the FSA or combat conditions. And even under combat conditions the equity that people are supposedly striving for does not exist. Believe me there is a big difference between the living conditions for an Infantry E6 and most if not all Support E6s.
For those talking about living conditions and cost take a look at college or university living and the related cost.
(0)
(0)
SSG (Join to see)
SSG Robert Webster - The difference between the infantry Soldiers' conditions and my conditions boils down to what we each agreed to do for the Army as our primary duties. Within either my job or that infantryman's job all of my points stand.
(0)
(0)
SSG (Join to see)
SSG Robert Webster - Also, I wouldn't personally be opposed to different MOSs being paid differently based of the skillsets they bring to the table. I mean, we already have situations where that applies (jump pay, flight pay) and situations where the military temporarily raises your pay because of things it tells you to do (hazardous duty pay). But that is a different and unrelated topic from the one being discussed.
(0)
(0)
13
13
0
I think you are not seeing the big picture. Not being married is the best benefit. No responsibilities or people to take care of. Nobody stealing your bank while you are deployed. Free to choose who you want to spend time with. All the time in the world to fUrther your career or enjoy hobbies.
(13)
(0)
11
11
0
You are not worth less. Those are investments in a married soldier, most of whom tend to stay in the military longer than their single peers.
Fair, maybe - maybe not -- work your way up and change the policies that were made ages ago at echelons above echelons...
As an addendum, worrying about what others are getting is corrosive and can lead to us vs them mentalities.
Fair, maybe - maybe not -- work your way up and change the policies that were made ages ago at echelons above echelons...
As an addendum, worrying about what others are getting is corrosive and can lead to us vs them mentalities.
(11)
(0)
SGT (Join to see)
SCPO Jason McLaughlin - I also contend that I am older than many 2LTs who enter the military, I have 5 years in the army, drive a used paid for car, live well below my means and have a substantial savings, yet I still am assumed to not be responsible enough to feed myself.
(0)
(0)
SCPO Jason McLaughlin
SGT (Join to see) - I get it. Kind of like the 35yo Private. What you have to come to terms with is that you joined an organization with a class system based on rank. And while the precepts of the system may be outdated they are what they are, and by agreeing to "sign on the dotted line" you have accepted it. Decide now whether you can live with it because change happens slowly (unless there is a political agenda).
(0)
(0)
SFC (Join to see)
SGT (Join to see) - Married vs Single is your argument? I would have to ask is this your greatest concern in the military? You complain that they take your money and make you eat in the DFAC. First off your are given that money outside of your base pay and then it is taken back in the form of a meal card. Do you have to pay an electric bill, heating bill, water bill? Actually if you want you don't even need to pay for transportation because most bases offer a shuttle service. There are many benefits as being a single Soldier. Now you may be a responsible person and able to handle the living off post and providing for yourself, however, for the one of you, there are probably at least ten that cannot handle it. Everyone's quality of life is different, some of the Soldiers that live in the barracks see it as an upgrade to where they came from and some see it as worse. You are making generalized statements and everyone's life and aspect of military living is different, married or single. Like a lot of the other commenters have stated, don't worry about what someone else has, worry about making your life better. And to end this I will say this honestly and upfront, you seem disgruntled because you don't have what some one else does and this is causing the friction and the state of mind you have.
(0)
(0)
PO1 Joseph Glennon
SGT (Join to see) - Your *income* would practically double, but your "outgo" would exceed your income more than you can imagine. A *lot* of military folks found this one out the hard way.
Truth is, the married soldier / sailor / Marine is a better investment. They do tend to stick around longer, they are vested and invested in the military.
If someone's single, when they "get fed up," they can leave at the end of their current hitch without any second thoughts. Many do, and many find much better paying jobs and careers (which also wreak havoc on their overall wealth, because they're having to pay more for the same standard of living)... but, not all do.
Enjoy your time being single, but do keep an eye out for both the type of woman that you want to marry (and take home to Mom) as well as those women who just want to marry a man in uniform.
Truth is, the married soldier / sailor / Marine is a better investment. They do tend to stick around longer, they are vested and invested in the military.
If someone's single, when they "get fed up," they can leave at the end of their current hitch without any second thoughts. Many do, and many find much better paying jobs and careers (which also wreak havoc on their overall wealth, because they're having to pay more for the same standard of living)... but, not all do.
Enjoy your time being single, but do keep an eye out for both the type of woman that you want to marry (and take home to Mom) as well as those women who just want to marry a man in uniform.
(0)
(0)
9
9
0
SGT Pappas, while I understand the desire for your own place and dining options (my son is a single E-5) I bet that the single Soldiers have more disposable income than their married peers when it comes down to it, kids are expensive. My kids are out of the house now and we have money and time to do the things we want. Just an old tanker throwing out some food for thought.
(9)
(0)
MSG (Join to see)
outstanding sir, dead nuts with a family comes more responsibillity and expense, if I were single i'd own 400 acres vs my 4 acres
(0)
(0)
SSG (Join to see)
LTC Tim Ellis
"I bet that the single Soldiers have more disposable income than their married peers "
Sir, I am sure that is accurate, however, it seems like an outlook that facilitates feeling better about how things currently are...but does not strike me as a way to support or justify things being that way.
"I bet that the single Soldiers have more disposable income than their married peers "
Sir, I am sure that is accurate, however, it seems like an outlook that facilitates feeling better about how things currently are...but does not strike me as a way to support or justify things being that way.
(1)
(0)
8
8
0
Here's the thing, it all depends on what you do with what you have. I use to have a solder who had no major bills. I mean no car, credit cards, loans, housing costs ect. All he had was a phone and Internet. He lived like a king. Always had money. At one point he flat out bought a $2500 watch, which he promptly gave to a stripper at Cat West. (Fort campbell people know exacty what im talking about) Work with what you are given and stop thinking "life's not fair" .
(8)
(0)
SGT Alicia Brenneis
SSG (Join to see) - I don't feel that it needs to be justified. If you break down the basic expenses of married verses single soldiers and break down their pay/benefits, single soldiers come out on top. They are not mistreated or viewed as lesser because they are single. Nor are married soldiers treated better or viewed higher. If you see something of this nature happening around you, then as a senior leader, you should take steps to put a stop to it.
(0)
(0)
SSG (Join to see)
SGT Alicia Brenneis I suppose my question is, why are people getting paid based on their expenses rather than based on their productivity?
I understand that if a single Soldier were to use all the things offered the net value of that might be more than what a married Soldier gets, but if the single Soldier doesn't want or use that stuff it's worthless. Why can't the single Soldier get the benefits in the form of money in his/her bank account and then use it for a rafting trip or a concert (as the MWR/Boss might provide access to) or a car or food or savings? Why can''t they get it as actual pay?
I understand that if a single Soldier were to use all the things offered the net value of that might be more than what a married Soldier gets, but if the single Soldier doesn't want or use that stuff it's worthless. Why can't the single Soldier get the benefits in the form of money in his/her bank account and then use it for a rafting trip or a concert (as the MWR/Boss might provide access to) or a car or food or savings? Why can''t they get it as actual pay?
(0)
(0)
SGT Alicia Brenneis
SSG (Join to see) - because it costs money to house(up keep, electric, water) and feed them. I suppose they could receive the money but they would still have to pay for a barrack room and meals. What would happen if the solder blew his/her money and didn't pay their room rent? Would they be put out without a place to live? Civilian rentals would put them out. The same could be said for meals. Give them money and let them choose where to eat or if they even want to spend the money on food. Again, let say they don't spend responsibly and can't get food. Does the army let those soldiers go hungry? Obviously not all single soldiers are irresponsible and some would do just fine if pay worked that way but a large majority of single soldiers wouldn't. When married soldiers struggle off post, they are moved (or are supposed to be) back on post and loose the "cash in hand". There was a married soldier in my company who was moved on post and had supervised commissary trips because they couldn't manage and social services was getting involved. Single soldiers may also request to live off post. All I had to do was prove no financial or disciplinary problems for at least a year prior to my request. My command approved and as a single PFC I was off post. The Pont is, the structure is there as a safe guard so that at the very least soldiers have a roof and food.
(0)
(0)
5
5
0
The other way to look at it is a numbers game. I remember the day when you had to get permission to marry. Since it's something people do, then what do you do to keep the MIL member in and productive while they're being reproductive? The Government shells out the minimum necessary to obtain and maintain a volunteer force. So every set number of years, the employee decides if it's worth it to sign up again. If not, they vote with their feet. Another interesting thing is for a long time we had junior ENL families on food stamps. Doesn't sound like a windfall to me but more like the poverty line.
(5)
(0)
SSG (Join to see)
To kind of tie this in with the overall point of the thread...
PO3 Donald Murphy
"Keep in mind also folks that families are not issued. You CHOSE to get married. There is no military requirement to have a family."
This is absolutely true, and all the more reason that equivalent single and Service members with families should be receiving exactly the same compensation (not only base pay) for doing the same job in the same location.
"This is why the military's pay scales are the way they are."
And this does not reflect the above attitude. The way the pay scales are, all things considered, "pay" Service members with dependents more for doing the same job, all other factors being equal.
PO3 Donald Murphy
"Keep in mind also folks that families are not issued. You CHOSE to get married. There is no military requirement to have a family."
This is absolutely true, and all the more reason that equivalent single and Service members with families should be receiving exactly the same compensation (not only base pay) for doing the same job in the same location.
"This is why the military's pay scales are the way they are."
And this does not reflect the above attitude. The way the pay scales are, all things considered, "pay" Service members with dependents more for doing the same job, all other factors being equal.
(0)
(0)
PO3 Donald Murphy
SSG (Join to see) - What I meant was that the pay is not structured to give a family a good life. Its basics. Your "reward" of more pay for being married and doing the same job, is offset by having to live off base and pay more bills. So legally, you make LESS than a comparable single SM with the same rank/MOS. The only time you'd have a possible win is if you're in base housing. But last time I was in it, you still had to pay water and electric. Whereas a single guy in the barracks pays nothing.
Now me personally, I'm a productivity kind of guy. If I know that "being married" keeps you happy and that therefore equals better efficiency, then I as president would make sure you had more than enough money to not only make ends meet but enjoy a little extra as well. Especially since I understand that I'm asking you to kill/be killed for your country. And from a strategic/health standpoint, I'd rather you be married "playing" with someone safe than going out every night with random "hook ups" and possible health/crime issues. Not to mention security issues (a throw back to my day and all the guys with top secret clearances suddenly having Eastern European girlfriends).
But sadly I'm not in charge and the military pay folks - by and large - don't share our concerns. The submarine force did. They beat up the DOD and forced them to allow our wives to have dental and vision for free which no one else (other than USAF) did at the time. Girlfriends were sometimes snuck in under the table as well on occasion. We also had a strange thing called COMRATS (commuted rations) which meant that we got paid for eating but were allowed to eat for free on base. So that money went into my pocket and the wife and I ate on base every day. But that was back in the Cold War days. Not sure how it is now...
Now me personally, I'm a productivity kind of guy. If I know that "being married" keeps you happy and that therefore equals better efficiency, then I as president would make sure you had more than enough money to not only make ends meet but enjoy a little extra as well. Especially since I understand that I'm asking you to kill/be killed for your country. And from a strategic/health standpoint, I'd rather you be married "playing" with someone safe than going out every night with random "hook ups" and possible health/crime issues. Not to mention security issues (a throw back to my day and all the guys with top secret clearances suddenly having Eastern European girlfriends).
But sadly I'm not in charge and the military pay folks - by and large - don't share our concerns. The submarine force did. They beat up the DOD and forced them to allow our wives to have dental and vision for free which no one else (other than USAF) did at the time. Girlfriends were sometimes snuck in under the table as well on occasion. We also had a strange thing called COMRATS (commuted rations) which meant that we got paid for eating but were allowed to eat for free on base. So that money went into my pocket and the wife and I ate on base every day. But that was back in the Cold War days. Not sure how it is now...
(0)
(0)
SSG (Join to see)
CAPT Kevin B. Sir,
You say "what do you do to keep the MIL member in and productive while they're being reproductive?"
This concept is understandable to me. What I don't understand is why the married Service Member gets this bonus while the single one does not...aside from plain old cheapness and "because we can get away with it".
If both do the same job...both provide the Army with the same capability, and it takes, as an example, $200 more a month to keep the married guy in, and a guy who can do what he does is worth that $200/month to the Army, then why don't they both get $200 more per month?
The alternative would be to decide that that capability is not worth an additional $200/month to the Army and let the married guy go and replace him with a single guy who doesn't need $200 more a month.
PO3 Donald Murphy
" If I know that "being married" keeps you happy and that therefore equals better efficiency, then I as president would make sure you had more than enough money to not only make ends meet but enjoy a little extra as well."
This is what doesn't make sense to me. We are not talking about the civilian sector where you are giving the married guy more money because he has a better skill set...he does more with less...he has more experience...etc. We are giving him more money because he has a spouse and/or children. How does this make sense to anybody?
You say "what do you do to keep the MIL member in and productive while they're being reproductive?"
This concept is understandable to me. What I don't understand is why the married Service Member gets this bonus while the single one does not...aside from plain old cheapness and "because we can get away with it".
If both do the same job...both provide the Army with the same capability, and it takes, as an example, $200 more a month to keep the married guy in, and a guy who can do what he does is worth that $200/month to the Army, then why don't they both get $200 more per month?
The alternative would be to decide that that capability is not worth an additional $200/month to the Army and let the married guy go and replace him with a single guy who doesn't need $200 more a month.
PO3 Donald Murphy
" If I know that "being married" keeps you happy and that therefore equals better efficiency, then I as president would make sure you had more than enough money to not only make ends meet but enjoy a little extra as well."
This is what doesn't make sense to me. We are not talking about the civilian sector where you are giving the married guy more money because he has a better skill set...he does more with less...he has more experience...etc. We are giving him more money because he has a spouse and/or children. How does this make sense to anybody?
(0)
(0)
PO3 Donald Murphy
SSG (Join to see) - We are a volunteer force. We're not driven by the economy. So we have to take stock of what we attract and take stock of what we keep. Marriage is a two way street. The only time it's not is when your spouse is former military or dependent. Now, in my wife's case - English - she had to not only leave her home country (language, currency, customs, food, weather) but she had to suddenly jump into a social circle consisting of women who grew up completely different. So based on THAT committment, the people making those changes are going to be not so gung-ho about doing it again. So for most military retention analysts, a married couple is going to be x percent more likely to stay in. Especially if you had a tough time converting like we did. My wife's dad was a baker. Home every night at the same time. He didn't deploy, right? So she had to get used to a lifestyle she had no experience with.
My friend on the other hand, married a girl who's dad had been in the Navy. So she was already well versed in how to contact the pier to find out when hubby's coming back, shopping at the base, using the benefits, dealing with separation, etc. And the Navy was correct in my case. Had they not medically retired me I had orders to a brand new submarine out in California (USS San Juan). And I took those orders because it was an ass-kissing favor to get orders that I really wanted which was Navybase London England or Submarine Base Holy Loch, Scotland. So when the Navy looked at me from a distance, they saw that I was going from four years in to twelve years committed. And from a retention standpoint thats cash in the bank for the Navy.
So while it appears unfair that a married SM is getting more money/bennies/perks, there is an economic reason.
My friend on the other hand, married a girl who's dad had been in the Navy. So she was already well versed in how to contact the pier to find out when hubby's coming back, shopping at the base, using the benefits, dealing with separation, etc. And the Navy was correct in my case. Had they not medically retired me I had orders to a brand new submarine out in California (USS San Juan). And I took those orders because it was an ass-kissing favor to get orders that I really wanted which was Navybase London England or Submarine Base Holy Loch, Scotland. So when the Navy looked at me from a distance, they saw that I was going from four years in to twelve years committed. And from a retention standpoint thats cash in the bank for the Navy.
So while it appears unfair that a married SM is getting more money/bennies/perks, there is an economic reason.
(0)
(0)
Read This Next
Continue with Facebook 
Continue with Google