Return to Article: House approves 3.1 percent pay increase
-
18210
I'm currently in Iraq working as a contractor and I can tell you first hand that a large portion of the logistical and maintenance side of the military is straight out of basic training/AIT. Military personal work four to eight and sometimes 10 hours a day, four to five days a week, whereas a civilian works 12 hours a day seven days a week for a year straight. If we didn't deserve the money we make then we probably shouldn't have been able to bid on a contract. The fact that we produce a better productivity rate with exceeding the standards of the U.S. Military means we're doing our part. Do yours!
-
10951
Personally, I feel that the military deserves every cent we can give them and more for what they do for this country. Where would we be without their sacrifices? Believe me, some of the housing and other "bennies" they get are truly substandard. And, politicians work everyday to try to find new ways to cuts those bennies so they can enrich themselves and their supporters. But, Military Officer, civilians in Iraq and elsewhere are also working 14-16 hours a day, 7 days a week, living in austere conditions, subject to death (without weapons to defend themselves) to support these men and women. And, they do not get the tax break that the military (deservedly) gets, and that contractors (undeservedly) get. Been there, seen that.
-
10917
You want pay parity. Take away the lifetime health benefits for retired military that go to work in the private sector or civil service! These guys go to work for government contractors the day they retire and cost far less than a private sector civilian because they do not need health benefits or good retirement. Thus, the continuous flow of retired military into government contractor positions allows the contractor to hold the costs lower than would normally occur because they can provide far less in benefits and attract people that the military think provide good contract personnel to support their desires. This does not lower the cost to the public because the people not hired and those hired that are not retired military go without health benefits of the same level they otherwise would have and probably lower salaries. This means the government has to provide greated medical coverage and gains less income taxes for those people. Government gives up more than it gains but they do not look beyond the initial impact. The A76 process compounds this distrortion of the markets even more because it gives government contractors with retired military a significant advantage when competed with civilian operations within the government. For example, DFAS should be totally civgilian, DLA should be totally civilian, the Air Force civil engineering unit should not exist except for the battle ready units in red horse, the Army Corp should not handle public waterways and remain in the Corp., the military should almost totally be comprised of battle field personnel and close in support but not the total logistic system.
-
10829
The pay parity issue should not be something that causes divisiveness. We are all doing our best for our country. I personally appreciate the military and their families who make huge sacrifices for our freedom. However, I wish that they would realize how hard it is for the civilian workers to make ends meet. We don't have housing allowances, free medical and dental, tax free shopping on base, combat pay, or any of the other tax breaks/incentives that the military gets. In addition, we are not receiving the pay raises that are required under the law that Bush Sr. passed which was supposed to make our pay comparable to the public sector. Pay parity is fair. And it is deserved. By all who serve...in the military or not.
-
10818
I have no doubt that many military personnel are pulling extremely tough duty during their tours in Iraq (and Afghanistan and in ...). My personal (daily) experience has taught me that the U. S.'s military personnel are second to none and my personal commitment is to do what I can to have the other poor suckers die for their countries (idiot causes or whatever) and to have our guys come home to us and their families. However, the proposed higher raises are not earmarked for the grunts on the ground getting shot at every day, they apply equally to the soldiers, sailors, marines, doing their jobs here which are directly comparable to the work that I and my co-workers do. There is compensation for the added hazards, inconveniences (to understate them) that the guys on the pointy end are subjected to. It can be argued whether that compensation is adequate or not, but that is the purpose of that compensation. We have a tough time competing with private industry in recruiting the best talent possible now. If civilian compensation can't be maintained then we are going to have to settle for second best. Do you want a second-rate engineer designing and maintaining software in the Hornet you're riding around in? My feeling is that second rate is not good enough for our military.
-
10808
A military officer thinks civilians should not get the same amount of a raise. That makes sense, officers never think the other guy is deserving of much.
Well, military officer, we are getting the raise. Put that in your pipe and smoke it.
-
10801
They have no justification to award fat pay increases to civilians based on the fact that military personnel receive bigger pay raises. This is nothing but politicial boondoggling to justify what Congress gave themselves. There is no way a civilian deserves the same pay parity as a military person wearing the uniform of this country and risking their lives in a war zone. Same old crap when it comes to military versus civilian. I hope Bush rejects it.
-
10799
To Military Officers and others who don't agree with the pay parity. The increase is not supposed to be a "raise", but rather to cover the cost of living increases. Does the military pay more for gas, housing, health insurance, and etc.? I don't think so. That is the whole point. It is supposed to cover inflation and the increases in what it requires to live and eat.
-
10797
To Military Officer:
I worked with military stateside and civilians did a lot more work and better QUALITY work than the military. You can forget the 24/7 argument. It doesn't cut it for the majority of military jobs. Where I work they get 3 days passes if they have to work more than a 40 hour work week. I also had a relative (who was a Gov't worker) that worked in a "combat zone" and didn't get the big tax break the military did (he was in just as much, if not more, danger than his military counterparts). We don't get all the tax free allowances you get, let alone the commissary, BX/PX, tax breaks on plates for the car, and all the other discounts you get. It all adds up. So, civilians DESERVE an equal pay raise.
I work in military pay so, you can't pull the wool over my eyes. I know what you get paid.
-
10791
After serving 4 months in Bosnia, 1 year in Korea, and 7 months in Iraq in the last 48 months of my service, I am finding the pay parity argument between civilians and military lacking justification. Yes there were civilians in Iraq, however, it was not uncommon for the military to pull 14-18 hour days, 7 days a week, for 6 months straight. We had some awesome civilian (ex military) hitting the road hard, however, within CONUS the qualifications, expectations, and level of demanded performance between military and civilian are too far apart to compare and thus not comparatively deserving of longevity increases.
-
10783
Wow! A 3.1 percent pay raise, hmm, that might be able to keep up with the cost of gas to get to work. But I am grateful ongress gives civil service employees pay raises, I know too many private sector employees who do not get any raises.
PROMO RIGHT: EVENTS
UPCOMING WEBINARS
NOVEMBER 18
Speed bumps for Teleworking: What are they and how to avoid them?
DECEMBER 3
Achieve Program Success: Unlock the Management Information in Your Data
DECEMBER 10
Practical Transparency: Applying Exchange Networks for Mission Results
PROMO RIGHT: DIRECTORIES
Post a Comment
To post a comment, you must provide a name and a valid e-mail address. Messages must be limited to 400 words. By using this Service you agree not to post material that is obscene, harassing, defamatory, or otherwise objectionable. Although Government Executive does not monitor comments posted to this site (and has no obligation to), it reserves the right to delete, edit, or move any material that it deems to be in violation of this rule.