Posted on Dec 12, 2022
Dramatic changes in military pay to be focus of new study
543
25
15
4
4
0
Do you think current military compensation is fair? If you can change something, what would you change?
Dramatic changes in military pay to be focus of new study
Posted from armytimes.comPosted in these groups: 
Military Pay
Fair Pay
Military Pay Fair Pay
Posted >1 y ago
Responses: 6
Other factors are the various "add on compensation" and such.
For example, plugging in an E6/18 TIS/Married Filing Jointly/22060 zip ... Base pay is $52,959 a year, but with BAH and tax advantage savings, it's got a "this is what you'd make as a civilian" of $98,436 a year.
I remember way back when (it's possible that I'm misrembering it) getting an annual "military compensation" sheet that said things like the above (non-taxable income) plus other things like VA programs you can take advantage of, savings from the commissary, etc. I usually dismissed a large portion as things I'll probably never take advantage of (although I'm becoming a much bigger believer in the savings at the commissary when I compare a trip there and a trip to Giant).
On the other side of the equation ... this is all fine and good when you compare garrison activity to civilian compensation. What about when you're downrange? Where's the overtime bonus when I'm in the middle of the suck?
Like others said - 'a lot to be considered' if you want to do an Apples and Apples comparison.
For example, plugging in an E6/18 TIS/Married Filing Jointly/22060 zip ... Base pay is $52,959 a year, but with BAH and tax advantage savings, it's got a "this is what you'd make as a civilian" of $98,436 a year.
I remember way back when (it's possible that I'm misrembering it) getting an annual "military compensation" sheet that said things like the above (non-taxable income) plus other things like VA programs you can take advantage of, savings from the commissary, etc. I usually dismissed a large portion as things I'll probably never take advantage of (although I'm becoming a much bigger believer in the savings at the commissary when I compare a trip there and a trip to Giant).
On the other side of the equation ... this is all fine and good when you compare garrison activity to civilian compensation. What about when you're downrange? Where's the overtime bonus when I'm in the middle of the suck?
Like others said - 'a lot to be considered' if you want to do an Apples and Apples comparison.
(3)
(0)
SGT (Join to see)
COL Randall C. excellent example of military to civilian pay difference. Also, the overtime was where I made the most money each year. It was long hours... but it paid off come "early" retirement time that I really hadn't figured on when it happened.
(1)
(0)
3
3
0
A tough question. How do you compare an Infantry rifleman to any civilian job?
When I retired as a MSG, E-8, my primary MOS was Sr. Data Analyst with a secondary as a Computer Programmer and additionals as a Data Entry Sp and a Military Policeman. How does that compare?
With technical MOS's, should I have made more then an Infantry Company 1sg or a Signal Bn. Operations NCO?
I thought the old Proficiency Pay was a good idea. Perhaps something modeled after that?
When I retired as a MSG, E-8, my primary MOS was Sr. Data Analyst with a secondary as a Computer Programmer and additionals as a Data Entry Sp and a Military Policeman. How does that compare?
With technical MOS's, should I have made more then an Infantry Company 1sg or a Signal Bn. Operations NCO?
I thought the old Proficiency Pay was a good idea. Perhaps something modeled after that?
(3)
(0)
SFC Casey O'Mally
As far as pro pay for technical jobs and the like, I am vehemently against. Every job has its pros and cons. Yes, that IT guy in the S6 can find a high 6 figure job on the outside. So we need to pay him more. And that MAJ on the BDE S4 who is running logistics better than the CLO of Wal-Mart? Surely she is worth a pay bump. We have technical skills ALL OVER the place that are marketable on the outside, BUT......
1) 98% of the time, those skills are a result of an investment by the military in that individual. Training, whether formalized or OJT, was provided by the military to give that person their skills. So getting those skills is simply ROI. And
2) Those technical skills and technical expertise generally come as a tradeoff. I get a job using my wizardry and helping the military do what needs to be done. In exchange, the military puts that job someplace safe(r). When we start paying all of the technical people for their technical skills, what we are implying is that the folks at the tip of the spear are worth less. All they do is go and die, and ANYONE can do that. That is not only a bad message to send, it is also how your combat arms become incompetent.
You don't have to be smart to be an infantryman. But it helps. And you definitely need smart leaders. Pro pay for technical jobs will cause a level of brain drain on the combat arms. Not sure how much, but definitely enough to be a problem. And
3) What happens when the servicemember leaves that job and PCSes to a less technical job? They still have the same skills, but now a lesser job. Does their pay drop? What about when a less skilled (i.e. less certified) person takes over the job? Do they get paid less to do the same job? Even if they end up doing it better? There are just way too many variables to make the system work well, without causing pay resentment. It is already bad enough when service members work a rank (or two) up and see themselves doing a better job then their peers for less pay. Adding the pro pay will make it even worse.
1) 98% of the time, those skills are a result of an investment by the military in that individual. Training, whether formalized or OJT, was provided by the military to give that person their skills. So getting those skills is simply ROI. And
2) Those technical skills and technical expertise generally come as a tradeoff. I get a job using my wizardry and helping the military do what needs to be done. In exchange, the military puts that job someplace safe(r). When we start paying all of the technical people for their technical skills, what we are implying is that the folks at the tip of the spear are worth less. All they do is go and die, and ANYONE can do that. That is not only a bad message to send, it is also how your combat arms become incompetent.
You don't have to be smart to be an infantryman. But it helps. And you definitely need smart leaders. Pro pay for technical jobs will cause a level of brain drain on the combat arms. Not sure how much, but definitely enough to be a problem. And
3) What happens when the servicemember leaves that job and PCSes to a less technical job? They still have the same skills, but now a lesser job. Does their pay drop? What about when a less skilled (i.e. less certified) person takes over the job? Do they get paid less to do the same job? Even if they end up doing it better? There are just way too many variables to make the system work well, without causing pay resentment. It is already bad enough when service members work a rank (or two) up and see themselves doing a better job then their peers for less pay. Adding the pro pay will make it even worse.
(0)
(0)
MSG Stan Hutchison
SFC Casey O'Mally - I agree the old system was flawed. It was based too much on MOS testing rather than actual hands-on work. But why could there not be a form of such? In the civilian world, one gets paid based on the job being held. If the position is shut down and the individual has to go elsewhere, they may be required to accept a lower paying job. Same, same the military maybe.
This idea of comparable pay has been around forever.
As a side note, I have always told those asking about a career in the military that we did not do it for the money. Want to make the big bucks? Don't look to the military.
This idea of comparable pay has been around forever.
As a side note, I have always told those asking about a career in the military that we did not do it for the money. Want to make the big bucks? Don't look to the military.
(1)
(0)
SFC Casey O'Mally
MSG Stan Hutchison But there is a big difference between the position being shut down and life cycle rotation. We PCS regularly just for the sake of PCSing. So now you are telling people to take a pay cut for no reason other than "eh, that's the Army (Navy, AF, Corps) for ya."
Did your job well? Congratulations, here's a pay cut so we can give someone else a chance to hopefully do it as good as you did.
The civilian side also has choice in where you go. The military picks your assignment for you. Sure, you have input, but not final say.
I just don't see it being a good idea.
But I am also a contrarian by nature, so there's that.
Did your job well? Congratulations, here's a pay cut so we can give someone else a chance to hopefully do it as good as you did.
The civilian side also has choice in where you go. The military picks your assignment for you. Sure, you have input, but not final say.
I just don't see it being a good idea.
But I am also a contrarian by nature, so there's that.
(1)
(0)
MSG Stan Hutchison
SFC Casey O'Mally - The military pay system needs to be addressed. I am just throwing out ideas.
(0)
(0)
2
2
0
I think it is generally pretty fair. Of course, no service member would ever admit to being overpaid, and almost all would claim to be underpaid.
But when you look at total military compensation - include that BAH, BAS, and, oh, by the way, the free TriCare for the service member AND the family? It stacks up OK.
Obviously, the folks at the bottom don't make enough to support a family of 4 comfortably. But should they? Just like the argument about a minimum wage job - that is entry level and you should either wait to have a family, have a spouse that also works, or work your ass off to get promoted. An E4 can comfortably support a family on just their income and benefits. Not blissfully, not without clipping coupons and budgeting well. But if they are smart and plan, it is comfortable enough.
The military is like few other jobs in its demands. But it is also like few other jobs in its rewards.
Besides, if you join for the paycheck, NO paycheck will be big enough.
But when you look at total military compensation - include that BAH, BAS, and, oh, by the way, the free TriCare for the service member AND the family? It stacks up OK.
Obviously, the folks at the bottom don't make enough to support a family of 4 comfortably. But should they? Just like the argument about a minimum wage job - that is entry level and you should either wait to have a family, have a spouse that also works, or work your ass off to get promoted. An E4 can comfortably support a family on just their income and benefits. Not blissfully, not without clipping coupons and budgeting well. But if they are smart and plan, it is comfortable enough.
The military is like few other jobs in its demands. But it is also like few other jobs in its rewards.
Besides, if you join for the paycheck, NO paycheck will be big enough.
(2)
(0)
Read This Next
Continue with Facebook 
Continue with Google