10 ms·

This selective service policy change is unrelated to any prospective or ongoing military operations. Enlisted personnel typically out-earn civilian counterpart

This selective service policy change is unrelated to any prospective or ongoing military operations. Enlisted personnel typically out-earn civilian counterparts when tax-free allowances are accounted. Officers have accepted comparably low pay for the history of the U.S. armed services. Cited reasons include prestige, networking opportunities, and as a distant third, sense of duty to nation.

kstrauser 6mo ago
> Enlisted personnel typically out-earn civilian counterparts when tax-free allowances are accounted. Citation heavily needed. When I was a junior non-com, my civilian colleagues made way more than I did, even including the (quite nice) military benefits, even when ignoring the fact that 80 hour workweeks are commonplace on deployment.
- bryanlarsen 6mo ago
  Did you calculate pension benefits? That military pension should be worth millions since you can start earning it young in life and it's based on your highest pay during the career.
  - kstrauser 6mo ago
    It ought to be worth millions, given that you work your tail off, for significant less pay, and get that pay instead of the civilian 401(k) you could have. Let's look at an E-9 Master Chief, the highest enlisted rank. Their basic pay is $9267 a month[0]. If they're in for 30 years, and get the High-36 retirement plan[1], then they get 75% of that — $6950/mo — afterward. That's certainly not chump change. However, the kind of person with the drive, leadership skills, political savvy, and work ethic to become a Master Chief would rise to least a director or VP, or a senior VP, at a civilian company. So yes, their military retirement's quite good, but at a substantial opportunity cost. To be super clear, my main argument is that the military should earn more, especially for the sheer amount of work they put in. They earn it. [0] https://www.military.com/benefits/military-pay/charts https://www.military.com/benefits/military-pay/charts [1] https://militarypay.defense.gov/Pay/Retirement/ https://militarypay.defense.gov/Pay/Retirement/
    - linkregister 6mo ago
      This is an absurd comparison. You neglect to include BAH or other tax-free allowances; your figure significantly deflates total compensation. Command Sergeants Major comparing themselves to VP of Human Resources is a meme in veteran circles; as in, those who do it fail miserably to get hired when applying to these positions. They are not comparable. I don't deny that servicemembers earn their pay. There is a premium to accepting the upheaval of a cross-country move every 3 years. But to assert that the average E-9 is equivalent to a director or VP position is incorrect. People of that rank are told in TAP to accept positions of perceived lower authority. Those who are successful in going from E-8 or E-9 to Director or VP roles are extraordinarily rare.
- linkregister 6mo ago
  The DoD publishes an annual schedule comparing civilian wages in most MOS's and rates. I couldn't find it within 10 seconds of searching, but I found this old study [1] posted on a mil website, stating that average compensation was significantly higher for enlisted personnel. For your individual experience, consider the years of experience and education of your contractor / DA civilian counterparts. Furthermore, consider your CZTE and danger pay. It's possible that your individual experience might have you earning less in pro-rated annual income during deployments. Does that also apply when you were in garrison? Did it account for your free occupational training (that you were paid to attend)? Tricare? Tuition assistance? The fact you're even posting on the orange site to begin with implies you received some expensive training that would ordinarily require a university degree. 1. https://militarypay.defense.gov/Portals/3/Documents/Reports/SR04_Chapter_1.pdf https://militarypay.defense.gov/Portals/3/Documents/Reports/...
  - esseph 6mo ago
    > The fact you're even posting on the orange site to begin with implies you received some expensive training that would ordinarily require a university degree. That is quite a leap.
    - kstrauser 6mo ago
      In the Navy, I stood next to a surgeon and passed them instruments, then cleaned up afterward. Yeah, it's an interesting footnote in my biography, but didn't have much relevance to my career arc after I got out.
      - esseph 6mo ago
        Did you mean this comment for a different post or comment?
        kstrauser 6mo ago
        No, I’m replying to you, and agreeing with you. I’m not posting here because of my l33t OR tech skills, but because of everything that happened after I got out of the Navy.
- red-iron-pine 6mo ago
  military pay is inflation adjusted. minimum wage is not. Private Dumbfuck will get paid more on a per-year basis than the average Walmart worker, esp. when you take in to account medical coverage and training benefits in service and out (e.g. GI Bill) on a hourly basis... maybe not -- they can work Pvt Df 24/7 an that will water down the per-hour takehome. But said Private will have the pride of wearing a uniform and being able to say they did their service, while no one will flog their experience of being a Wal-Mart drone.

kstrauser 6mo ago

> Enlisted personnel typically out-earn civilian counterparts when tax-free allowances are accounted. Citation heavily needed. When I was a junior non-com, my civilian colleagues made way more than I did, even including the (quite nice) military benefits, even when ignoring the fact that 80 hour workweeks are commonplace on deployment.

bryanlarsen 6mo ago
Did you calculate pension benefits? That military pension should be worth millions since you can start earning it young in life and it's based on your highest pay during the career.
- kstrauser 6mo ago
  It ought to be worth millions, given that you work your tail off, for significant less pay, and get that pay instead of the civilian 401(k) you could have. Let's look at an E-9 Master Chief, the highest enlisted rank. Their basic pay is $9267 a month[0]. If they're in for 30 years, and get the High-36 retirement plan[1], then they get 75% of that — $6950/mo — afterward. That's certainly not chump change. However, the kind of person with the drive, leadership skills, political savvy, and work ethic to become a Master Chief would rise to least a director or VP, or a senior VP, at a civilian company. So yes, their military retirement's quite good, but at a substantial opportunity cost. To be super clear, my main argument is that the military should earn more, especially for the sheer amount of work they put in. They earn it. [0] https://www.military.com/benefits/military-pay/charts https://www.military.com/benefits/military-pay/charts [1] https://militarypay.defense.gov/Pay/Retirement/ https://militarypay.defense.gov/Pay/Retirement/
  - linkregister 6mo ago
    This is an absurd comparison. You neglect to include BAH or other tax-free allowances; your figure significantly deflates total compensation. Command Sergeants Major comparing themselves to VP of Human Resources is a meme in veteran circles; as in, those who do it fail miserably to get hired when applying to these positions. They are not comparable. I don't deny that servicemembers earn their pay. There is a premium to accepting the upheaval of a cross-country move every 3 years. But to assert that the average E-9 is equivalent to a director or VP position is incorrect. People of that rank are told in TAP to accept positions of perceived lower authority. Those who are successful in going from E-8 or E-9 to Director or VP roles are extraordinarily rare.
linkregister 6mo ago
The DoD publishes an annual schedule comparing civilian wages in most MOS's and rates. I couldn't find it within 10 seconds of searching, but I found this old study [1] posted on a mil website, stating that average compensation was significantly higher for enlisted personnel. For your individual experience, consider the years of experience and education of your contractor / DA civilian counterparts. Furthermore, consider your CZTE and danger pay. It's possible that your individual experience might have you earning less in pro-rated annual income during deployments. Does that also apply when you were in garrison? Did it account for your free occupational training (that you were paid to attend)? Tricare? Tuition assistance? The fact you're even posting on the orange site to begin with implies you received some expensive training that would ordinarily require a university degree. 1. https://militarypay.defense.gov/Portals/3/Documents/Reports/SR04_Chapter_1.pdf https://militarypay.defense.gov/Portals/3/Documents/Reports/...
- esseph 6mo ago
  > The fact you're even posting on the orange site to begin with implies you received some expensive training that would ordinarily require a university degree. That is quite a leap.
  - kstrauser 6mo ago
    In the Navy, I stood next to a surgeon and passed them instruments, then cleaned up afterward. Yeah, it's an interesting footnote in my biography, but didn't have much relevance to my career arc after I got out.
    - esseph 6mo ago
      Did you mean this comment for a different post or comment?
      - kstrauser 6mo ago
        No, I’m replying to you, and agreeing with you. I’m not posting here because of my l33t OR tech skills, but because of everything that happened after I got out of the Navy.
red-iron-pine 6mo ago
military pay is inflation adjusted. minimum wage is not. Private Dumbfuck will get paid more on a per-year basis than the average Walmart worker, esp. when you take in to account medical coverage and training benefits in service and out (e.g. GI Bill) on a hourly basis... maybe not -- they can work Pvt Df 24/7 an that will water down the per-hour takehome. But said Private will have the pride of wearing a uniform and being able to say they did their service, while no one will flog their experience of being a Wal-Mart drone.