The Microcosm of the US that is the Military: Is the disparity between Enlisted and Officer Pay just or unjust?

2015-05-05T23:11:01-04:00

Yes, we have heard it before. Everyone (Enlisted that is), feels rather neglected when it comes to the payscales - what are the masses thoughts?

Response by SGT Michael Touchet made May 5 at 2015 11:15 PM

2015-05-05T23:15:53-04:00

I think it is clearly based on responsibility levels.

Response by COL Charles Williams made May 5 at 2015 11:20 PM

2015-05-05T23:20:00-04:00

It is better than it was 10-15 years ago, but we still have a ways to go.

Pay is based on level of responsibility, not necessarily the workload, or effort level.

That said, I find it hard to swallow that a CSM retiring at 30 years is so vastly differently than a COL retiring at 30. That is borderline appalling.

Response by SFC Private RallyPoint Member made May 5 at 2015 11:40 PM

2015-05-05T23:40:08-04:00

Responsibility is the key word in the discussions so far. Leading a squad of nine Soldiers is vastly different in responsibilities than a platoon sergeant leading 30+ soldiers and so forth. Same can be said on the officer side.....so no I don't see a problem with the pay gap.

Response by 1SG Private RallyPoint Member made May 6 at 2015 12:59 AM

2015-05-06T00:59:22-04:00

I'm with COL Charles Williams on this one. In most ways I would say that it is justified and that it has continually improved. The part that gets me as well is at the senior levels like a COL at 30 compared to a CSM at the same level. Using the regular template that would be a Brigade Cmd team, and yes the CDR has more responsibility but the workload difference doesn't directly correlate to the pay scale.
The new push in my CMF is the goal of Company Cmd teams having Masters Degrees which is a little different since our Company level is a MAJ and SGM. So while not a requirement expectation is I crank out a Masters on my own time, which I am working on slowly but when you have Enlisted soldiers on close/equal footing with field grades the gap should be narrowed a little more.

Response by CSM Private RallyPoint Member made May 6 at 2015 4:23 AM

2015-05-06T04:23:13-04:00

O-6 BDE CDR - SAMS graduate, War College graduate, Masters or Doctorate Degree. Required to make a decision to possibly send an entire company of Soldiers to their death to accomplish a military objective.

E-9 BDE CSM - Conducts NCOPD, Maintains BDE medical readiness, requisitions Soldiers to maintain USR, maintains good order and discipline of the unit, advises the BDE CDR. Probably has a Bachelors, maybe a Masters Degree.

Pay scale is justified.

Response by MSG Morgan Fiszel, CPCM, CFCM made May 6 at 2015 6:04 AM

2015-05-06T06:04:47-04:00

If "they" can come to an agreement on budgets, tax code and other laws do really think they have the knowledge, skills and abilities to un FK the chart you displayed above? I think career field and education should be accounted for.

Response by MSgt Brian Welch made May 6 at 2015 6:39 AM

2015-05-06T06:39:37-04:00

In my experience and opinion pay isn't a reflection of education. It comes down to level of responsibility. There are responsibilities that are less tangible but more weighted. Although the Maj or Col I worked for may have been far removed from "turning the wrench", and it may of appeared to a junior member that all he did was conduct meetings, I assure you he had more weight of responsibility than I did as a MSgt. I was superintendent of a flight and may have had 35 that worked for me. He had the reins of a unit of 1000 and all that comes with it. I was responsible for things like training and work completion. I'd get my butt chew if I failed. He'd be responsible for policy where failure would get him fired.

Response by CW5 Private RallyPoint Member made May 6 at 2015 6:39 AM

2015-05-06T06:39:15-04:00

For one, the payscales are public, unlike our private civilian counterparts and second, everyone is afforded the opportunity to apply for WOCS, OCS or green-to-gold. You also get free tuition assistance to get the Associate's, Bachelor's and Master's.

Like any position, you just need to meet the standards of admission.

Response by TSgt Joshua Copeland made May 6 at 2015 6:54 AM

2015-05-06T06:54:59-04:00

It is all about scope of responsibility. Start comparing a E7 and O1's pay (where they have roughly the same scope of responsibility and you will see they are roughly the same.

Response by Sgt Aaron Kennedy, MS made May 6 at 2015 7:03 AM

2015-05-06T07:03:09-04:00

We can't look at JUST Base Pay. We need to add in BAH & Benefits as well.

When you add in BAH, which is similar, and benefits which are identical, the gap narrows, while still in service. It goes from "Double" to "2/3" which is a lot closer to what it should be based on scope of responsibility.

Additionally, there are educational requirements involved in becoming an Officer as compared to becoming an Enlisted. This alone changes things. When they require Corporals & Sergeants to have A/S or B/S then we may start to be able to directly compare them.

Not all services currently require their senior most NCO's to have a degree at all. This is highlighted by the fact I just took a class with the MCPO of the Navy who should be graduating with his B/S soon (I believe 5/16 conferral).

But let's do some real comparison among "peers" as opposed to just looking at raw data. Comparing a 2Lt to a Pvt (E1) is just unfair. First off, how long does someone remain a E1? I was a Cpl at 2~ years in, and a Sgt at just under 5. So Cpl with 2 ($2100) vs O1 with 2 ($3000) is actually fairly comparable based on scope of responsibility. Even a Capt at 8 ($5700) to Sgt ($2900~) is not too far out when you add in BAH and Benefits. We're talking about a Squad leader (13~) vs a COMPANY Commander (120~).

Response by SFC Private RallyPoint Member made May 6 at 2015 7:53 AM

2015-05-06T07:53:38-04:00

The responsibility differences are substantial when the officer is in a command position. Take my company commander for instance. We have around 250 Soldiers, 72 vehicles, and a boat load of computer systems. (BCS3, CPOF, JCR, JCR LOG, MC4 and many more). Weapons, commo, NVGs, and everything else that the unit uses. The property book that the company commander, a CPT, is responsible for is woth several million dollars. Some of the butthurt comes from officers who don't have command roles or they may not have much responsibility in their current assignment. When you have a MAJ who has no Soldiers or equipment assigned to him/her and they are not part of the staff it appears to the juniors that they have nothing to do and make entirely too much money. And in many cases there are field grade officers who are overpaid. We all know them. There are a lot of overpaid NCOs too. For that matter I know a few overpaid PFCs

Response by LTC Eric Coger made May 6 at 2015 7:55 AM

2015-05-06T07:55:51-04:00

This is no different than any other organization. Entry level/trainees, Journeymen, Middle Management/Trainers, Executives, etc. The percentage difference from E-5 to O-6 is much smaller than the guy at the Apple Store and the CEO. Responsibility and Accountability as well as the authority to enact national policy at the four star level... those guys are underpaid if anything. And yes, we have good and bad at every rank, but as a whole, the system (of pay scale) is both effective in attracting talent and fair in regards to level of responsibility.

Response by Capt Richard I P. made May 6 at 2015 8:34 AM

2015-05-06T08:34:48-04:00

The military is one of the most meritocratic organizations in existence. Want that extra pay? Find the program that pays you to go to college and earn a commission. I think Sgt Matthew Johnson knows about one of them.

Response by SSgt Michael Orcutt made May 6 at 2015 8:45 AM

2015-05-06T08:45:13-04:00

I have always thought there should be a little less gap between the two payscales. I agree that officers should be paid more, that's a given as management is always paid more than their subordinates. However, the majority mission is executed by the enlisted. The planes officers fly, the parachutes they eject AC with, the coffee they drink (haha) is all executed by enlisted. Officers have earned their bars as enlisted have earned there stripes. I am not saying to make enlisted close to O's in pay, but bridging the gap would be nice.

Response by SGT Anthony Rossi made May 6 at 2015 9:04 AM

2015-05-06T09:04:26-04:00

Pay pay is a difficult thing to judge in this regard. Responsibility is hard to gauge. Yes, the officer had the "tactical responsability" and has to live with the repercussions of his choices. Yet the NCO if he is worth anything is responsible for training a soldier and to some degree his wellfare. You have to look that young man in the eye "who you know personaly" walk into a situation together that you can't show disagreement with. If the soldier fails you have his "face" in your mind for the rest of your life. I'm not saying the pay is just or unjust, but you can not compare a civilian career with a military one, even though on the surface they seem similar.

Response by CSM David Heidke made May 6 at 2015 9:41 AM

2015-05-06T09:41:45-04:00

I agree with COL Charles Williams.

Especially since the level of responsibility for CSMs can be quite different.

Response by SGM Erik Marquez made May 6 at 2015 10:04 AM

2015-05-06T10:04:11-04:00

The premise that an officer should be paid more (worth more) because of the "awesome responsibility" they have is failed at its base.
I agree a COMMANDER has an awesome responsibility and they should be compensated for that.. They are held responsible (in theory, but that's another thread) for everything the unit accomplishes or fails to, this includes sending men and women on missions that results in deaths or injury.. I do not in any way want to degrade or belittle that responsibility. Having had that level of decision making at a NCO level, and knowing, feeling the aftermath of my decisions...I would never attempt to make light of it in regards to a commander.

But it's plainly false that a CPT / Major on staff or otherwise NOT in command, or a LTC, or a COL has any more responsibility than a SGM on the same staff, in fact, it's normally LESS responsibility.
That CPT, MAJ or LTC is normally directly responsible for FEWER service members, signed for much less in property if any at all, has a much more narrow focus of duty and responsibility than that same senior NCO.

The problem becomes retention... what officer is going to stay in (or join) if they know they are only going to get paid "real" wages when they are in command and will be paid in line to level of responsibility (like in the civilian sector) when the job scope and responsibility goes down.

The answer is some, but not most I think.

To a much lesser degree the same can be said of senior NCO's/
That Master sergeant tasked as the Housing NCO, while his day might be hectic, the responsibility is low .. vs that same MSG that is the operations NCO for a BN, BDE, DIV.

Response by 1SG Private RallyPoint Member made May 6 at 2015 10:26 AM

2015-05-06T10:26:59-04:00

Ok though I believe that a Officer in command should make more then the Senior NCO he works along side of it is should it be a spread of $2,000 or more I don't think so. Although yes the commander is ultimately responsible how often do you not see the Senior NCO go down if the Commander makes the wrong decision. Not to often so in a sense the Senior NCO has the same level of responsibilty because he is the one advising on all situations.

Response by MAJ Ken Landgren made May 6 at 2015 11:33 AM

2015-05-06T11:33:12-04:00

Everyone who has the "don't quit attitude" had the equal chance of becoming an officer. They chose the path to be taken. However, I do wish we would increase the pay for the enlisted.

Response by SSG Kenneth Lanning made May 6 at 2015 11:38 AM

2015-05-06T11:38:32-04:00

College degree or not, I still feel that military officers should serve a minimum of 4 years before becoming officers...the thought of helping a 2LT put their combat gear together because that person didn't have a clue and was never trained on it is just the tip of the iceberg (yes, I've had to do this...twice). The one complaint I have about pay disparity goes hand in hand with actual experience; making the officers serve before commission would only strengthen the military as a whole, and I have no problem with the payscale at that point (O1-E through O3-E is right on par).

I do also agree that E-9 should be raised, especially for the division and higher levels of responsibility.

Response by LTC Paul Labrador made May 6 at 2015 11:55 AM

2015-05-06T11:55:19-04:00

Military pay is based off of rank. Rank dictates the responsibilities that you have, as well as cumulative skills and experience. Officers are generally paid more because they have more responsibilities.

That being said, I think generally, officer pay is about where it should be. NCOs, particularly senior ones, absolutely deserve more pay.

Response by SFC Private RallyPoint Member made May 6 at 2015 12:16 PM

2015-05-06T12:16:46-04:00

As NCOs are gaining more responsibilities the pay gap should shrink slightly. Obviously the higher echelons have earned that pay in relation to their qualifications but I think the big issue is the excess fat. We have a whole lot of people getting paid quite a bit that don't have a real job in the army.

Response by SSgt Private RallyPoint Member made May 6 at 2015 12:31 PM

2015-05-06T12:31:59-04:00

MY experience I am fine with my responsibilities compared to my compensation. Often times the officers I have worked with/for put in crazy hours, have higher stress, typically do a bang up job. Sure I have encountered the opposite but like they say there is always one in every family....
I am making more now than I ever have, my lifestyle is supported, so I continue to push myself to grow in most aspects.... still have trouble getting motivated to go to school but as is life....

Response by TSgt Kevin Buccola made May 6 at 2015 12:36 PM

2015-05-06T12:36:24-04:00

as a retired enlisted airman this is justified. When I graduated college while in the Air Force I had an opportunity to become an officer but turned it down. My choice. Executives and Management make more money....simply put. As an old friend of mine said - You want a piece of the executive pie then go to college get that degree and keep on moving up.

Response by MSgt Private RallyPoint Member made May 6 at 2015 1:52 PM

2015-05-06T13:52:25-04:00

The level of responsibility (legally speaking) justifies the pay difference. I am sure we all have examples of people that aren't worth the pay they get (Os and Es alike) and that is besides the point. Bottom line - Os can go to jail for a lot more than Es.

Now that all being said - our archaic system of ranks needs a massive overhaul. It's time to eliminate the "two tree" system and go to one path. Everyone starts off as an E, and if they meet certain qualifications, they can become an O. One tree - different branches.

Response by CPT Private RallyPoint Member made May 6 at 2015 1:57 PM

2015-05-06T13:57:13-04:00

I am sure I will be echoing what has already been said. The responsibility is so different. It is just he way it is. If you want to make officer pay you can become an officer. That is what I did. It is working out pretty good for me so far. Just as in any corporation it is the same way.

Response by SPC Charles Brown made May 6 at 2015 2:53 PM

2015-05-06T14:53:13-04:00

Executives in major corporations are paid much more than their employees, is this fair, YES. Why? Because by and large they do more to earn their pay than the average employee, and the higher up you go in the corporation the more you get paid. Why should the military be any different? Just my opinion

Response by SrA Edward Vong made May 6 at 2015 2:58 PM

2015-05-06T14:58:40-04:00

Considering how much a college graduate and a non graduate make in comparison, it is justified. Though I do believe enlisted members with higher education should be compensated, not as much as officers, but of course should get something.

Response by Lt Col Jim Coe made May 6 at 2015 5:02 PM

2015-05-06T17:02:18-04:00

Lets look at the starting salary vs education entry requirements:
E-1, $1,532/mo or $18,384/yr. Entry requirements: High School diploma or GED usually
O-1, $2,9045/mo or $34,860/yr. Entry requirements: Bachelors Degree usually

In my opinion both salaries are competitive with the private sector. In fact, the O-1 salary may be a little low depending on the industry into which the new college graduate is hired. On the E side, the E-1 salary is more than minimum wage, but the entry requirements are higher than some min wage jobs. (Federal minimum wage is $7.50/hr or $15,080/yr.) Nevertheless, the officer is making about twice what the enlisted member is making.

The difference remains proportional throughout the pay scale assuming normal advancement to the 20 year mark with the enlisted person at E-8 and the officer at O-5. After 20 years, the divergence gets larger because the enlisted person has only one grade to go, E-9, while the officer has 5 higher grades (O-6 through O-10).

Can I fully justify the pay scale? Nope. The people on the pay and benefits committees have to take a lot of factors into consideration. I believe they work hard to keep the DOD competitive with the private sector and do a reasonable job.

Unlike civilian industry where you can be paid based on your contribution to the company (or lack thereof), we are locked into the pay chart. Military members don't get raises and bonuses for doing their job very well. The E-5 that meets minimum requirements to remain employed gets the same salary as the E-5 who's busting his or her butt to lead, innovate, and make the Service better. Instead we try to offer the top performers opportunities for earlier promotion and certain intangibles like awards and training opportunities. It's the military way--maybe not the best way--and we all have to work with it.

Response by CPT Private RallyPoint Member made May 6 at 2015 5:22 PM

2015-05-06T17:22:46-04:00

What is funny about this is that if you go to see the full results every officers says it is clearly justified. But the kicker is that some enlisted think the same.

Response by MSG Private RallyPoint Member made May 6 at 2015 6:04 PM

2015-05-06T18:04:26-04:00

For all stating that "if NCOs or enlisted Soldiers want a pay raise, become an officer." It's implausible, as there are not enough billets not to add; what would happen to the NCO Corps if the flood gates were to open to all eligible personnel?

Response by Capt Private RallyPoint Member made May 6 at 2015 6:04 PM

2015-05-06T18:04:43-04:00

Interestly, I was told I was being stupid to accept a commission because it would be a cut in pay. It wasn't true, I am just stating to show many speak as authority when the simple do not have the knowledge.

As for me, I will say I never felt a need to back up to the pay table either as enlisted or officer.

Response by PO1 Dustin Adams made May 6 at 2015 6:05 PM

2015-05-06T18:05:00-04:00

Officers should get paid more, simply based on the basic level of responsibility as associated with their grade (whether they are in a leadership billet or not).

That being said I also think enlisted pay needs a boost.

Now to sidetrack, there is a growing push to increase the federal minimum wage to as high as $15/hr. Whether you think it is a good idea or a ridiculously horrible idea that will cost 100,000's of jobs or not.
If it were to pass, should military base pay be adjusted as well.

So right now an E-1 with less than 2yrs (based on a 40hr work week) makes more than the federal minimum wage of $7.25/hr (averages to about $9.57/hr based on 40 hr work week).

Should an entry level service member be paid at least minimum wage and then scale up based on paygrade and time in service? (keeping in mind that $15/hr based on a 40hr work week and 4 weeks in a month = $2400/month)

(edited for missing text)

Response by Capt Private RallyPoint Member made May 6 at 2015 6:24 PM

2015-05-06T18:24:30-04:00

SGT Private RallyPoint Member Hey, don't be afraid to say what you think!

Actually what I see from the specialist is an argument to not pay him so much.

Response by PFC Chris Hemingway made May 6 at 2015 7:17 PM

2015-05-06T19:17:17-04:00

Honestly if you go by the amount of work a person does some officers and NCOs are not worth the rank they, therefore the pay. One example is a Lt in the Bn I was in didn't even know the protocols that he he should have, such as clearing procedures at a clearing barrel at the chow hall. He fired a damned round into it my honest opinion was that he and officers like him should be either retrained, kicked out, or recieve an article 15 just like an enlisted would. But he's an officer he's paid to be smarter than the aberage joe under him thus he's better and therefore doesn't have to follow the rules.

Response by SSgt Charles Edwards made May 6 at 2015 7:45 PM

2015-05-06T19:45:51-04:00

Simply put, the pay scale in my opinion is fair based on grade and time in service. Compare it to some civilian jobs, and the scale across the board is reasonable. Especially to those struggling to find work.

Response by CPT Private RallyPoint Member made May 6 at 2015 7:56 PM

2015-05-06T19:56:39-04:00

My Soldiers work VERY hard, and I feel they deserve higher pay than what they currently are paid. However, I work just as hard, longer hours, am expected to be able to know and execute anything they can do, am the face of my section, protect them from all the bullshit so that they can continue to execute, run interference for them with the subordinate units and the higher HQ, etc, etc.
I think it would be great for there to be some sort of SDAP for enlisted personnel slotted in a leadership position at a higher skill level (SSG as PSG, E7 as 1SG). Currently my NCOIC is an E5 serving in an E7 position. She works very hard, and is having to learn things very fast & she is doing an excellent job.

Response by GySgt Joe Strong made May 6 at 2015 9:27 PM

2015-05-06T21:27:03-04:00

I have no problem with the pay scales until some Officer or Sgt Major decides that since their retirement or compensation package could be trimmed with no major effect that the same applies all the way down. And opines such drivel to the Press or Congress or other Body investigating pay and benefits. Then, I tend towards being somewhat irate.

Response by 1SG Private RallyPoint Member made May 6 at 2015 9:51 PM

2015-05-06T21:51:24-04:00

It will never change. I agree the gap is too big for the amount of work that is labor intensive enlisted have to do.

Response by PO1 John Miller made May 6 at 2015 10:33 PM

2015-05-06T22:33:11-04:00

While officers do have a completely different set of responsibilities, I found it really hard to swallow that an O-2 with 2 years of service (I'm not including prior enlisted officers who have that "e" after their pay grade, O2-E for example) made more than I did as an 18+ year E-6. While I did find my active duty paycheck very comfortable, the fact remains that a 24 year old with 2 years of military experience (and whom I often helped train) made more than I did.

Response by SSG Robert Burns made May 6 at 2015 10:34 PM

2015-05-06T22:34:50-04:00

Here's the thing. You pick what you want to be. If you want to be paid more, then go to college and become an officer. If you don't want to get paid more, then don't go to college and enlist. Seems pretty simple to me. But don't complain about your own choices.
My little sister is a pediatrician. It's stupid for me to complain that she makes more money than me. And if she opens her mouth about it, then I just hold her down and tickle her to death.

Response by CAPT Kevin B. made May 6 at 2015 10:41 PM

2015-05-06T22:41:48-04:00

I'm indifferent as the first two choices don't point to what's really going on. "Fairness" has little to do with it. Other than getting hammered for junior enlisted on food stamps, the structure is designed to provide the MINIMUM needed to obtain and keep fresh meat, regardless of enlisted or officer. Take a look at the rank and bonus doctors can come in with. That is what it takes given the overall marketplace.

I'm a Mustang. Way back when I was looking at my E-4 pay, what the options were for continuing enlisted or shifting to officer, and chose to not sign the E-5 paperwork in favor of O-1. If I didn't like either offering as much as starting out as a junior design engineer and working up from there, I would be ineligible for RallyPoint.

Response by Capt Private RallyPoint Member made May 7 at 2015 1:30 AM

2015-05-07T01:30:39-04:00

For the most part I agree with the pay scale. I think the enlisted pay makes sense and is not bad at all. E-9s can be underpaid depending on their position since they can serve in a the lowest level as a squadron superintendent and at the highest level as a command chief for a majcom without any difference in pay. Senior Chiefs probably should make mid grade major pay. That could be addressed by paying chiefs incentive pays, new E-10 rank (gasp!) or pays based on TIG but I digress. CGOs could stand to make a little less. I'd still love doing my job if they weren't paying me as much. That's not to say that being an O didn't take a lot of work. To summarize the bottom of the O scale (CGOs) could be lower and the top of the E scale (E-9s) could be higher.

Response by SSG Private RallyPoint Member made May 7 at 2015 3:50 AM

2015-05-07T03:50:43-04:00

I am a proud enlisted NCO. However when I have watched some of the circumstances that officers have to deal with are quite appalling. Senior NCOS are advisers, they advise the officer on the situation, however the decision, and consequences fall upon the shoulders of the officers. I would say education is the big difference, however college is no longer the difference. Many enlisted have bachelors degrees and above. Overall its desire, what do you desire as a soldier. I fulfill my desires daily as a NCO, I make plenty of money and enjoy what I do.

Response by SFC Private RallyPoint Member made May 7 at 2015 5:18 AM

2015-05-07T05:18:02-04:00

Here is why I am indifferent. I could have chose to go the "O" route. I could have gone to college and earned that right. I chose enlisted. when you look at Officers and their pay you have to remember that their pay is supposed to be somewhat commensurate to what a degree would give them on the outside (it isn't of course but still). Then there is the fact that you add in depending on how they got their degree the added benefits of the degree being paid for. I am getting my degree paid for now through Tuition Assistance. Officers are not afforded that opportunity. My daughter gets my GI Bill, so I get a lot of benefits and so it all equals out in the end. Just my opinion

Response by LTC Joseph Gross made May 7 at 2015 6:37 AM

2015-05-07T06:37:32-04:00

Don't compare enlisted pay to officer. Rather compare enlisted pay to a similarly educated and skilled civilian and decide if it is about right. What you will see is that perhaps we need a pay scale based at least partly on skills. How does a Cyber Skilled Soldier compare to his alternate number in the civilian world? And don't forget to include all those extra pays that civilians don't get.

The pay scale on the whole is fair. We are tax paid citizens and we can only get so much. Some want to claim that this measly sum isn't enough for a man who is laying down his life for his country but if you use that for a standard, how much could possibly be enough?

Response by SGT Private RallyPoint Member made May 7 at 2015 9:36 AM

2015-05-07T09:36:11-04:00

One must consider that officers have significantly more responsibility than enlisted. They are the ones that potentially have to make those decisions that put troops in harms way. They are the ones who have to make the plans to keep as many of us alive while still accomplishing the mission. Additionally the officer to enlisted ratio is around 1:5 or 1:6 so they simply couldn't afford to raise our pay to match that of officers. The only way to create equal pay is to lower the pay of officers, but then refer tk my first point. A lot of them deserve that pay.

Response by CSM David Heidke made May 7 at 2015 10:59 AM

2015-05-07T10:59:02-04:00

If you look at the full results, you will see some very interesting information...

Enlisted clearly are not happy with the pay gap.

Officers are clearly OK with it.

Is this a microcosm of the US Economy? Sounds like it.

Response by SFC Private RallyPoint Member made May 7 at 2015 11:12 AM

2015-05-07T11:12:53-04:00

All I know is this: when you are making $8000+ a month, you do not really need the 1% raises we get. Why not redistribute that to the lower guys who may be struggling to get by?

Response by SGT Thomas Sullivan made May 7 at 2015 11:52 AM

2015-05-07T11:52:54-04:00

I have made a post on this before, but it received little to no attention as most people turn a blind eye to it, and most officers feel comfortable with their compensation. I highly doubt anyone is actually fighting in any meaningful way to have this changed either. Our voice in the defense office consists of a few E-9s, and even their pay is paltry compared to their office neighbors. Outside influence and pressure on the senate might be the answer, not sure.

Response by PO1 Cleve Ikaika Waiwaiole made May 7 at 2015 12:07 PM

2015-05-07T12:07:32-04:00

I think the pay scale affects to the E-5 pay. I've seen many E-5s get their asses handed to them when it comes to being micromanaged and constantly tasked with things the E-6 or E-6(s) don't want to do. Not saying it's like this everywhere but I have seen it so much. E-5 should get better pay no doubt about it

Response by SFC Terry Murphy made May 7 at 2015 12:16 PM

2015-05-07T12:16:31-04:00

Looking at the pay chart above, an Army 1st Lt. with over 2 years in the Army, gets paid more than a Staff Sergeant (E-6) with over 16 years of service. At what point does experience and longevity overcome 4 years of college? Many NCOs have a degree, and a brand new 2nd Lt that when through college may have a degree in something that doesn't remotely come close to their military job. Just because someone goes to college for 4 years and does ROTC does not make them a leader, however, someone that starts from basic, spends the best years of their life training, and fighting, for their country, and now has the responsibility to lead soldiers, should be paid better than someone who spent 4 years in college.

Response by MSG Brad Sand made May 7 at 2015 12:22 PM

2015-05-07T12:22:59-04:00

It is Absolutely Appalling because of the risk and responsibility that everyone of our service members is volunteering to do for love of our Nation. The real disparity is not between Officer/Warrant/Enlisted but between civilian and military.

Response by CSM Private RallyPoint Member made May 7 at 2015 1:35 PM

2015-05-07T13:35:44-04:00

If one considers the minimum entrance and educational requirements in order to enlist in the military, the pay scales are more than fair. For example, a SPC in the Army (at two years) makes $25k per year in base pay. They also have 100% of their (and their family's) healthcare covered, plus are typicallly given a place to live. They even receive a food and uniform allowance. If they choose they can move up the ranks more quickly and make even more money.

The truth is, most Americans think they 'deserve' more than they're receiving. When an honest look is given though, rarely is what they think they 'deserve' justified.

Response by MAJ Private RallyPoint Member made May 7 at 2015 2:15 PM

2015-05-07T14:15:35-04:00

This analysis is also relevant---let's not focus so much on base pay, eh?

https://www.rallypoint.com/answers/what-percentage-are-you-based-on-income-do-you-think-you-are-adequately-compensated

What “percentage” are you, based on income? Do you think you are adequately compensated? |...

Do you think you are adequately compensated in comparison to your civilian “peers” or do you think the military personnel are under-paid? If you think military personnel are underpaid, why? If you think you, in particular, are underpaid, why? Even if one ONLY CONSIDERS BASE PAY, military compensation compares really well to nationwide averages. Personally, I’d be quite happy with more pay; why not? But I’d assess that the total compensation...

Response by MAJ Private RallyPoint Member made May 7 at 2015 2:25 PM

2015-05-07T14:25:58-04:00

The data that this thread is based on--which is simply base pay--is a terrible way to measure total compensation. Look at the whole compensation package!

Response by CPT Private RallyPoint Member made May 7 at 2015 2:55 PM

2015-05-07T14:55:43-04:00

I wish there was a "somewhat justified" answer, and especially on the Reserve side of the house. This is where my experiences comes from, and thus what I am going to base the following on.

First and foremost, this is not a "bitch session" on my part, but an attempt to make aware what goes on to make some drill weekends available. I'm a CPT in an Army Reserve unit. During the month, I have between 1 and 6 teleconferences that I am required to be a part of, plus typically invest multiple resources throughout the month, sometimes as much as 15-20 hours per week to manage unit issues. All of this is without pay. As a platoon leader trying to get things organized, I would do the same. I'm also going to be involved in several recruiting events, helping to meet with locals and also to try to get with various recruiters, especially AMEDD to help fill needed slots. We also get taskers, FRAGOs, Soldier concerns, transfer orders, award orders, lift flags, add flags, and various other things throughout the month.

Now, my big issue: Part of the problem with the Army Reserve lies in the distribution of workload. You have a high speed officer or NCO that is gung-ho on everything. I was one of those. Platoon leader, Medical Readiness SME, Profiling SME, LOD SME, Unit Movement Officer, MPDV-Data Viewer Operator, Mobilization Planning/Senior Leadership....and there were a few more. Then you have the officers/senior enlisted that show up to drill and barely function....these are the guys often seen doing school work or "shamming out" to their cell phones or other non-duty related items. As a result, those DOING the work get burned out and you soon have a culture of apathy, and largely the makings of a disgruntled unit. If you assign the shammers the duties, they don't do them often with the required attention to detail, so rather than fighting that fight...they don't get assigned the duties.

I would love to see the enlisted bringing home a bit more than they do for the junior enlisted...but ultimately, I feel that those doing the work outside of drill to make that drill weekend as painless as possible deserve credit.

That being said, I still feel the need to give a shout out to the S-Shops and UAs on the Reserve side. Everyone loves to complain about them, but I gotta say that a good full-time staff makes the job absolutely beautiful. I'm blessed to have some of the best, and could not imagine trying to learn how to be an effective company commander without their patience and assistance. If you really want to see where the money is earned, sit down next to one of them, their OIC, the XO, and the Commander....I'm so grateful for the experience, as it's opened my eyes to a whole new world of experiences that I never would have gotten otherwise.
v/r,
CPT Butler

Response by SGT Michael Glenn made May 7 at 2015 2:56 PM

2015-05-07T14:56:28-04:00

This is a VERY generic question that will have many at wits end. I believe it all depends on who you ask and what kind of experiences they have had.Should an out of shape NCO who basically just comes to "work"and always skates out and is no where to be found the entire day receive the same pay as others that are on "duty" with their soldiers during the duty day?? Or how about the Infantry Officer who cant perform his duties and hides behind his rank and does absolutely nothing but push everything off on the PLT SGT??? Again, there are too many different situations, both good and bad to ever really be able to give an iron clad answer to this one...

Response by CW3 Kevin Storm made May 7 at 2015 3:18 PM

2015-05-07T15:18:56-04:00

I am voting clearly justified. Lets take a 4 star pay scale for a moment.
What does a the average 4 star have in service 25 plus years? so they are close to maxing out the pay scale, even with full benefits, and the highest cost of living wages, and BAH maybe a $150,000 a year give or take. What do they oversee?

Billions of dollars of equipment
A budget worth billions
thousands of people under them
protect a chunk of the world
accountable to the POTUS
May be asked by some rather dippy congressional person some really lame questions and can't call the guy out for being fracking idiot
May have to send those thousands of troops into harms way

Now take the average fortune 500 CEO and what do they make? How many millions of dollars?
Think that is fair? Hardly

A private coming in off the street will go Fort Sam to learn how to be a Medic. In two years that medic will be an E-4, that average E-4 makes $2216 a month (26,592 a year)with no other benefits, but he gets free health care, free dental, free retirement, 30 days paid vacation, holidays mostly off, and education benefits while they are in and when they leave.

Paradoxically a civilian EMT may make minimum wage, may or may not have healthcare, but it won't be free. No education benefits, will work 2-3 three jobs to get buy, no free meals, no free dental, no paid vacation, and few if any education benefits. Now is that fair?

An E-6 13 Bravo who was Category III coming into the service, is a gun Chief. No college, should he paid as much as the 1LT who is running the Fire Direction Center? BTW the 1LT is prior service and worked his way through college. Should he paid what the E-6 gets paid?

Lets look at the pay compression between senior NCO's and WO's notice that Senior NCO's pay starts getting closer and closer WO pay and in some instances exceeds. Is that okay? If you say yes, is that an incentive to recruit future WO's?

While were at it. BAH, why should some one get paid more money for being married? Is that nothing more than a form of discrimination? Why should anyone get paid one cent more for being married? If you use the tired argument "well a family cost more," you have no argument. BAH IMHO should be one flat rate.

Is the pay system perfect, by no means, but many lower enlisted, without degrees are doing far better than their counterparts in civilian world without degrees. To say otherwise is just plain foolish.

Response by MAJ Ken Landgren made May 7 at 2015 3:50 PM

2015-05-07T15:50:16-04:00

Response by 1SG Jason Smith made May 7 at 2015 4:22 PM

2015-05-07T16:22:02-04:00

You have different levels of responsibility between enlisted and officer. That being said I don't think the Pay gap between an E8 with 16 and an O3 with 6 should be 1000

Response by MAJ Ronnie Reams made May 7 at 2015 7:45 PM

2015-05-07T19:45:53-04:00

Two things:
One an O is responsible for every penny of any equipment responsible for that is lost/destroyed and he is found responsible in a report of survey. EM up to one month's pay.

Two an O pays for many things that EM get free. A small uniform allowance when commissioned and after that on their dime, no DX. Pay for laundry, not free QM, well, EM did pay 25 cents a month. Pay for quarters, not free like EM. No free quarters. No free food. Etc

I remember when I went from a $165 month SGT to $300 month 2LT, I thought I was rich. However, at the end of pay day after paying mess bill* (you also had to pay your share of unit functions, whether you went or not), BOQ bill, laundry bill, etc I had less in my pocket than when I was a SGT.

*Did get $47 and change to eat on, but that would not have covered eating in Mess Hall, had I been allowed to eat there, because of the surcharge. Sure did not cover meals at the OOM.

Response by CSM Private RallyPoint Member made May 8 at 2015 1:25 AM

2015-05-08T01:25:54-04:00

WTF happened to my comment? Not a big fan of removing a comment that is clearly within the rules!!!! If there was a disagreement I am a big boy and capable of fighting my own battles. I am pretty thick skinned regardless of rank. If someone could please tell me why my comment was removed, it would be greatly appreciated.

Response by CPT(P) Private RallyPoint Member made May 8 at 2015 8:47 AM

2015-05-08T08:47:05-04:00

I have a plethora of comments, from commissioned officers, in this thread stating that education and responsibility are the key variables in this discussion. Therefore the question I must pose is; if enlisted soldiers obtain the same level of education and bear most of the weight of YOUR responsibility then shouldn't they be compensated?

Response by Col Joseph Lenertz made May 8 at 2015 9:58 AM

2015-05-08T09:58:12-04:00

The pay difference is significant. It tries to account for the significant differences in responsibilities, and it also serves as motivation to put in the initial commitment to 4 years in college and to be willing to sign up to those increased responsibilities. If the pay were the same or very close...who would forgo 4 years of pay?
The good news is, everyone gets to choose. It is possible for anyone with the academic skills and who works hard in High School, to get into college and become an officer through one of the three typical paths (Service Academy, ROTC, and OTS) or through your service's Bootstrap program after you enlist.

Response by CPT Pedro Rivera made May 8 at 2015 10:12 AM

2015-05-08T10:12:23-04:00

I would have to agree that SNCOs should get paid more based on their levels of responsibility. That is where I see the largest level of "unfairness" in pay.

Response by SrA Edward Vong made May 8 at 2015 10:57 AM

2015-05-08T10:57:31-04:00

"Hard work" and responsibility over work are different. The pay is justified.

Response by SPC Private RallyPoint Member made May 8 at 2015 2:43 PM

2015-05-08T14:43:58-04:00

I dont think the problem is with the difference in pay between officers and enlisted Soldiers. Rather the problem is with the pay scale itself. No matter what position a Soldier may have or job they do, they could have the heaviest of work loads or barely do a thing on a day to day basis. But because of that rank is on your chest it determins how much money you will make regardless of MOS. I wont go in to what i think is wrong with the promotion scheme thats another topic. But if they based military pay off of actual jobs done instead of rank alone i think there would be alot more competition of the better Soldiers to actually stay in the service instead of leaving to find jobs that can better accomidate them for work done.

Response by 1SG Brian Adams made May 8 at 2015 3:53 PM

2015-05-08T15:53:23-04:00

I enlisted in the mid 80s and this has been a sore subject of conversation since. It has never got any better period. There was talk in the 90s about a hybrid pay scale for enlisted members that obtained their various college degrees commensurate with that of officers. Obviously, that never happened.
The haut monde life styles of officers has continued to segregate the enlisted in all branches of service. I feel that officers should indeed make more money on the pay scale as they represent the president of these United States, however, it is at an embarrassing disparity.

Response by CPT Carl Kisely made May 8 at 2015 4:05 PM

2015-05-08T16:05:07-04:00

As a platoon leader, I made less money than my platoon sergeant. As a company commander, I made about the same as my 1SG. And frankly, my duties and responsibilities were vastly greater than the soldiers and junior NCOs. The money seems to equal the responsibility. It's always the complaint of those lower down the chain that they don't get enough compensation. Hell, we used to laugh about the "O-3 mafia" in brigade staff, because "we did all the work", but the reality is our COL had a huge responsibility. Really, we should be appalled that corporate America doesn't have pay scales as equitable as ours.

Response by Sgt Packy Flickinger made May 8 at 2015 6:25 PM

2015-05-08T18:25:00-04:00

So you can't have an E-1 over 2 but you can have an 0-1 at 18 years?

Response by SSG Private RallyPoint Member made May 8 at 2015 6:56 PM

2015-05-08T18:56:10-04:00

Our current rank structure (division between officer and enlisted) worked really well during the 18th and 19th century, and worked ok during the 20th Century, however I do not believe it reflects the realities of the 21st Century.

Response by CPT Christopher Webb made May 8 at 2015 10:15 PM

2015-05-08T22:15:53-04:00

Honestly, by civilian standards Commissioned officers above the rank of Captain are obscenely compensated. It's VERY hard to match that kind of pay on the outside.

Response by CW3 Craig Linghor made May 8 at 2015 10:26 PM

2015-05-08T22:26:06-04:00

When I was a CW2 with 15 years I made less than a 1LT with 3 years. That's just the way it is. Never served my country for the money.

Response by SGT Private RallyPoint Member made May 8 at 2015 11:24 PM

2015-05-08T23:24:55-04:00

I remember as a boy when my dad would sum up the importance of taking school seriously by saying something generally along the lines of "if you want to be poor, work more with your hands; if you want to be rich, use your mind instead."

I ignored his advice until it was far too late, but I'll be damned if he wasn't right about that specific piece of knowledge.

Response by MAJ Private RallyPoint Member made May 9 at 2015 1:03 AM

2015-05-09T01:03:28-04:00

Maybe not "appalling" but I do believe the gap should be lessened. Especially when you have CSM's fulfilling roles similar to the responsibility of an O5, O6, O7, etc. and making a pretty significant amount less.

Response by Cpl Christopher Bishop made May 9 at 2015 4:18 AM

2015-05-09T04:18:52-04:00

I think the year one graduated High School should be taken into consideration.

Example: Person E goes to boot camp in 1990 knowing stuff is about to get dicey near Kuwait. Person O chooses the college route, and shows up for OCS in 1994. By this time Person E is probably an E4 promotable to E5 if they re-up. I would like to add that in addition to the fact we all know about a middle-rank NCO is going to have more useful, functional experience, than the new 2LT will....but my addition is I'm not sure any reward should be granted for those who only choose college first to avoid conflicts.

Obviously this isn't all or even most Officers, but you know there are always those few. So if this doesn't apply to you specifically, then please don't bombard me with your oppositions.

Now that I'm thinking about it, I have an interesting thought. When we talk Sports, say the NFL, we sometimes talk about a certain year of rookies producing a higher level of talent than usual, or in some cases a rather lackluster year. I have to wonder how great the 1994 OCS grads were in comparison to years before or after them.

At any rate, I do not believe a citizen wanting to serve and having the nuts to face any arguably higher than normal adversities or risk should be dumped on by some 2LT who had any cowardice in him a few years prior (or ever). Especially if the Degree achieved couldn't land them anywhere but an Infantry Plt.Co. spot (which in the case of these types likely wasn't done by request).

I'd probably adjust a new O1's pay down to about E5 pay, maybe marginally higher. Or rather, move the E scale UP accordingly (inflation, ya know). =)

Semper Fi

Response by MAJ Haris Balcinovic made May 9 at 2015 11:46 AM

2015-05-09T11:46:55-04:00

How about introducing another pay grade for Senior Enlisted - the problem is, in my humble opinion, that a CSMs are available from BN level and up all the way to Sergeant Major of the Army (or other respective service). The level of responsibility between a BN CSM and a DIV or Command CSM is quite distinct yet they're on the same pay-scale, save the years of service. My proposition would be to introduce E10 rank for DIV level and up CSM positions. And provide pay incentives for completing additional civilian education (on par with Officers, i.e. Baccalaureate or Masters program - but they have to be relevant, none of these basket-weaving degrees that are doled out from these online degree programs)

Response by SGT(P) Private RallyPoint Member made May 9 at 2015 11:59 AM

2015-05-09T11:59:00-04:00

I am indifferent about this. Being an E5 with almost 6 years and 2 combat tours looking at my paycheck every two weeks and going home to my duplex where my family of 4 lives that is extremely small frustrates me, then seeing a new single 2LT that asks me for help on a regular basis because he has not had the actual experience goes home to a large single family home with a large yard and makes my monthly salary every two weeks along with the fact he pretty much does whatever he wants throughout the day (including pt on his own) is pretty irritating. I realize he is "in charge of the plt" but just the actions of his plt fall on him whether it's the credit for a spot on group of soldiers or constant SIR's however that same outlook falls on the PSG, SL, and TLs yet we all still struggle to pay our bills. I love the pay increase for TIS but it's still not much. I think company commanders and higher as well as XOs should receive a pay increase for their responsibilities but new LTs should not be paid so much and receive such amazing living conditions. Saying that I believe 1SGs and higher should receive a pay increase as well

Response by SSG Private RallyPoint Member made May 9 at 2015 12:05 PM

2015-05-09T12:05:24-04:00

I think the pay scale is off balance between NCO'S and Officers.

Response by LTC Private RallyPoint Member made May 9 at 2015 1:05 PM

2015-05-09T13:05:26-04:00

There are problems with the pay system at all levels. I support the Russian model where Commanders get a high pay level that staff officers too, but I don't see that happening any time soon. Pay needs to be based on level of responsibility, it will never line up with the civilian sector there, and I'm not sure how you would judge the difference between officers and enlisted levels of responsibility and make it truly fair. You also could easily make the argument that MAJ Carl Ballinger made, we are getting and retaining good people, the Army and DOD aren't going to pay more if they don't have too, especially while right-sizing (read that as down-sizing) the military.

Response by PFC Tuan Trang made May 9 at 2015 7:24 PM

2015-05-09T19:24:50-04:00

To me, Is doesn't affect much, If you work as a reservist you can always find a part time or full time job. Full time sm should make better money then reservist(Depend on ranks).

Response by MAJ Ken Landgren made May 9 at 2015 9:11 PM

2015-05-09T21:11:01-04:00

An E-4 with 3 years experience makes close to the average household income in the US if you add BAH and Separate Rations in. That's not too shabby.

Response by PO2 Edward Shelton made May 9 at 2015 9:54 PM

2015-05-09T21:54:24-04:00

It seems to be just. White collar is the same as officer ranks, just as blue collar workers are enlisted. If enlisted feel neglected about it, then strive for the higher rank.

Response by MAJ Private RallyPoint Member made May 10 at 2015 12:30 AM

2015-05-10T00:30:32-04:00

I think there's some flaws in this argument. While base pay is certainly a large portion of benefits received, enlisted members receive a number of other tangible benefits that Officers do not. A few points to consider:

1. Uniforms and equipment. Officers are required to purchase their own uniforms and equipment. While 1 set of ACUs a year may be a drop in the bucket, it all adds up. When I went to Ranger School I had to buy everything on the packing list. All said and done it cost me close to $1,000. Even during a normal year I spend a couple hundred dollars on uniform items.

2. Education benefits. Enlisted Soldiers receive federal tuition assistance essentially without any strings attached. For me to apply for FTA requires an additional 2 year ADSO. We could also look at the GI Bill. Enlisted Soldiers are able to use the post 9/11 GI Bill almost immediately. Officers are required to fulfill an initial obligation before their time even accrues towards Post 9/11 GI Bill benefits. There's also the GI Bill "kicker" to consider.

3. Bonuses. Many Soldiers regularly receive reenlistment bonuses, sometimes in the tens of thousands. Officers rarely receive any sort of monetary bonus.

4. Meals. As an Officer I pay for all of my meals during a drill weekend. It's easy to spend $30 or more for two days of meals. While this is a relatively small impact, Annual Training is much more significant. During AT 3 meals per day are deducted from my pay whether I eat them or not. It'll be a several hundred dollar debt that immediately comes out of my check.

As others have alluded to, we need to look at the whole benefits package not just base pay.

Furthermore, we could use the same logic applied by some in this thread to argue that pay grades in themselves flawed. Should an 11B NCO get paid the same as the 92G who never leaves the wire? One has a much higher level of risk involved, but they both get paid the same. Should the highly skilled IT NCO get paid the same as a construction engineer when there's a huge disparity in pay in the civilian world? Should the Company Commander with a huge property book and 131 lives depending on his decisions get paid the same as the S1 with limited responsibilities? I agree that the system isn't perfect, but there's no way for it to truly be "fair" while maintaining a grade based system.

Response by SFC Private RallyPoint Member made May 10 at 2015 9:32 AM

2015-05-10T09:32:33-04:00

Look guys, if you want to make big bucks, GO TO COLLEGE! Be an officer! There is nothing stopping you! I have a college degree, but I don't want to be an officer, so what right do I have to complain? I stayed an NCO because I want to be close to the Soldiers. I love the stripes! Younger NCOs and Soldiers really have a poor perspective of just exactly what being an officer entails. It is a lot of work, and most of all a lot of responsibility. To be a young LT is a hard job, much harder than you realize, and the responsibility on your shoulders only grows as you go up. They have good pay and they deserve it. You NCOs and Soldiers have good pay too, you just might not realize that. For a workforce that doesn't require higher education (not including military ed) you guys make good money. What we need more of is financial readiness.

Response by SGT Jason Jones made May 10 at 2015 10:12 AM

2015-05-10T10:12:04-04:00

Much as I don't enjoy being near the bottom of the pay chart, I believe the system works and provides a fair incentive to those who want to improve their situation--if you want to make that officer $, you have to take on that officer responsibility. I would (and do) enthusiastically take our system over what goes on out in the civilian workforce.

Response by SrA Private RallyPoint Member made May 10 at 2015 12:20 PM

2015-05-10T12:20:14-04:00

I don't think the inequity lies between officer and enlisted as much as civilian versus enlisted. Especially when we have contractors who come onboard, do a terrible job, and make more money sometimes than the CO. Yet, now you don't get BAH until at least second class and often work longer hours. I did not re-enlist because after four years, I deserve more. I also did not advance to second class purely because of TIR despite being 90%+ percentile with less than 1 point kf f my total... Just no. You want retention? Make the numbers for regular pay more reasonable.

Response by 1SG Private RallyPoint Member made May 10 at 2015 2:09 PM

2015-05-10T14:09:38-04:00

At times if feels like it. I was told by a Navy Commander that I worked and was smarter that some field grade officers that he has work with (no offense to any of the officer here).

However, I let him know there's no greater achievement than directly impacting the lives of Soldiers. That is something that Officers will lose once entering the field grade levels. I know Officers have an effect on a Soldiers life, but it is in a different way.

My pay does not fill that void, the pleasure of helping service members grow professionally and personally.

Response by CAPT Doreen Freeborn made May 10 at 2015 8:36 PM

2015-05-10T20:36:54-04:00

There is usually an educational difference that makes the difference.. and many of the enlisted are 4 years closer to retirement time the "typical" officer joins!

Response by 1SG Jeff Finlay made May 10 at 2015 8:57 PM

2015-05-10T20:57:23-04:00

Congress decided it was easier just to add a 3% across the board rather than actually looking at duty descriptions. Over the years a straight percentage increase has caused the disparity.

Response by SSG Private RallyPoint Member made May 10 at 2015 11:05 PM

2015-05-10T23:05:56-04:00

Wow. Pay has improved greatly since I was a Pvt. It has basically doubled. I remember making $753 a month, BEFORE they taxed it and split into two payments (do the math on THAT).

It's better, yes, but the disparity is significant, IMO. It's not that they don't pay NCO's enough, it's they pay Officers a BOATLOAD more. The gap, the chasm, is the big issue, IMO. A young 1LT, for example, already makes what a MSG with 15 years in makes. Odds are favorable that the MSG has a comparable or better education level, one that he/she probably had to get while burning midnight oil, raising kids, and other life issues for a great part of his/her career, while the 1LT got his/her education with very few life obstacles, if any at all.

NCO's aren't off the hook as far as responsibilities go. If we can't account for Soldiers and/or equipment, or aren't where we're supposed to be, doing what we're supposed to be doing, we have some explaining to do, with consequences, if applicable. We don't get to walk around and be Beetle Bailey. Then there's the training aspect. NCO's train Soldiers. Sometimes we train Officers, too.

Response by CMSgt James Pruit made May 11 at 2015 8:15 AM

2015-05-11T08:15:13-04:00

I don't disagree officers in many instances hold more responsibility and will be accountable in the end; however, my issue lies with the fact enlisted promotions to the top levels require degrees. If you want me to get a degree then pay me like I have a degree. After all, it's the basic separation of the two. For those who think Commanders bear all the responsibility, you should check out the work of a Squadron CMSgt.

Response by CPT Private RallyPoint Member made May 11 at 2015 12:53 PM

2015-05-11T12:53:09-04:00

This never gets old. We defend freedom so that people have the choice of leaving a job if/when they don't like something. It boils down to this:

1. Nobody (other than yourself) is preventing you from becoming an officer. I started out as an enlisted Soldier making $870/mo base pay then went to OCS.

2. Whenever something goes wrong in a unit, it is ALWAYS the commander's or PL's fault.

3. A typical SSG with a HS diploma and 5 years of service makes about $50,000/year. Try this: ETS and try to find a civilian job that pays you that much.

NCOs are the backbone of the Army, but I think a better question to ask yourself would be "Is my pay commensurate with my my education level, level of responsibilities and skill set?" If you think the answer is "no," then what are YOU going to do to improve YOUR situation?

Response by SP5 Ronald Stanton made May 11 at 2015 6:16 PM

2015-05-11T18:16:23-04:00

Hi Troops;
I was E5 under two, some decades back. OK, way back. Is this weekly, monthly, or annual pay scale? Looks a lot like my annual pay!

Response by SGT Private RallyPoint Member made May 11 at 2015 7:52 PM

2015-05-11T19:52:18-04:00

So if we both do 20 + yrs your entitled to more because of what ? We both have degrees , deployments , training etc... So why do officers deserve more ?

Response by Lt Col Private RallyPoint Member made May 11 at 2015 11:21 PM

2015-05-11T23:21:10-04:00

That's the difference between a college degree and a high school diploma. As an officer progresses, he/she must go beyond a Bachelor's Degree and get better than a Master's... the pay matches that reality.

Response by MSG Private RallyPoint Member made May 12 at 2015 12:10 AM

2015-05-12T00:10:07-04:00

I see a bog difference in pay. The amount of work Senior NCOs do on a daily basis is astronomical. Now, add in there a 1SG tour and it get even bigger. Officers do get paid a good amount more. I believe that the pay gap should not be as big as it is. Great NCOs take care of those officers and in most cases, in the end just get pushed to the waste side. Now I am not saying all officers do that, but it seems the norm for some officers to just go about their business when it comes tho their PCS and award. The amount of knowledge an NCO has to have, keep up with, and train subordinates on is the same, if not more, than some officers.

Response by SFC Private RallyPoint Member made May 12 at 2015 2:13 AM

2015-05-12T02:13:54-04:00

its sad my pay matches an O1 with less than 2 years...

Response by SFC Private RallyPoint Member made May 12 at 2015 11:03 AM

2015-05-12T11:03:21-04:00

I agree that pay should be based on responsibility, and for the most part the officers carry more responsibility than that of the enlisted. I don't think a CSM should be getting so little pay, considering what they actually do.

Response by SMSgt Private RallyPoint Member made May 12 at 2015 2:00 PM

2015-05-12T14:00:15-04:00

I believe the pay difference is fine for most career fields. However, when you look specifically at certain career fields, Cyber Ops for example, there really needs to be a way to increase the pay for enlisted members. More often than not, the Airmen working for me in the pay grades of E-4 to E-6 have bachelors degrees in Information Technology disciplines. A surprising trend that I have also witnessed is our Cyber Airmen getting advanced degrees and certifications which exceed most of our officer counterparts who seem to stagnate as they move into leadership positions. This inevitably leads to these highly educated Airmen leaving the military to earn the money as government contractors. This is what needs to be fixed.

Response by PO3 Private RallyPoint Member made May 12 at 2015 10:10 PM

2015-05-12T22:10:16-04:00

College or no, We all complete the same job at the end of the day, some more hands on and others with a little more ink. Enlisted in any marine service take a beating that is hardly acknowledged through disability, and then are completely incapacitated from working after they get out if the receive "too much" disability. But maybe I'm biased. *shrugs*

Response by Maj Private RallyPoint Member made May 12 at 2015 11:50 PM

2015-05-12T23:50:14-04:00

My husband and I were enlisted the early 90's. My daughter and son-in-law are enlisted now... they are doing a LOT better than we were 20 years ago. I do believe it all equals out in the end considering degrees, pay, etc.

Response by SSG (ret) William Martin made May 13 at 2015 5:57 AM

2015-05-13T05:57:47-04:00

I am hear a lot of folks saying if you want to be paid more, go to college and become an officer but simply making more money to make more money is not what life is all about and might not bring happiness. Officers have a unique position; here today, gone tomorrow and I am not sure if its that simple but enlisted can be more flexible. Far as going to college, I went to enlighten myself, to open my mind, and a degree in CJ as helped me out tremendously in the MP field and as an NCO. Do I wish I made more money? Yes of course but I live within my means and I am investing in my future. When I leave the military, I will do so with very little debt. I will retire and I plan to go back to college so I can become an attorney which has been a life time dream. College is for both, enlisted and officer.

Response by SSG John Bacon made May 13 at 2015 10:49 AM

2015-05-13T10:49:02-04:00

Yeah I get it they went to college, big woop. why does an O1 makes more than the E-6 who has to hand hold his wet behind the ears hand for 2 years.

Response by 1SG Harold Piet made May 13 at 2015 12:34 PM

2015-05-13T12:34:32-04:00

If the enlisted does not like the pay scale go to Collage or OCS and change their pay scale. I always thought a LT was overpaid but, he did have a degree he paid for before he showed up at my door with a butter-bar.

Response by Maj Jason Wengel made May 13 at 2015 2:14 PM

2015-05-13T14:14:11-04:00

The pay is justified. I was enlisted infantry before becoming an officer so I am confident in that statement. The disparity between services is, however, another story. Workload aside, I had more personnel and responsibility as a Marine Cpl (E-4) then just about every Army/AF/USN 2LT/Ensign I have been familiar with. More is expected out of you as well. It's like the O-1/2 grade of the other services get a "retard" pass for 4-6 years.

Response by PO1 Michael Turner made May 13 at 2015 2:17 PM

2015-05-13T14:17:28-04:00

The military is never going to pay well, that is a historical fact. Still seeing e-9s making less than the pay of an o-3 is pretty disheartening. In the civilian world senior workers quite commonly make more than their first and second level managers. I've seen enlisted men do absolutely amazing jobs in difficult situations and the division officer (who's most important nod was stay out of the way) gets a medal, the chief gets a commendation, and the man or men who worked the hearts out for their shipmates get a handshake countless times in the Navy. Much of the pay problem has been fixed, but there is still an assumption that when things go right an officer should get a medal, when things go wrong it's an enlisted mans fault. Even during the current wars I've heard from friends still in that many units limited awards by rank. E-4 to e-6 gets. Commendation e-7 and above get bronze stars, regardless of the actual value contributed. Lower ranked enlisted feel degraded and devalued and finally demotivated by these blatant give aways.

Response by SSG Ronald Conaway made May 13 at 2015 2:25 PM

2015-05-13T14:25:55-04:00

I am a disabled veteran but I was in for over 8 years. I feel that the difference in the pay does not reflect the difference in responsibility. I am a senior manager in my company at this point and can understand that the difference is somewhat justified when one gets to high levels, COL and above, but anything below that is not necessarily justifiable. Senior non-commissioned officers, E8 and above, are the equivalent of a operations manager, with E7s being like project managers and so on and so forth. I feel that the LTs should not make any more than an E5 under 4 years. The disparity is great and it should be addressed.

Response by LTC David Stender made May 13 at 2015 2:50 PM

2015-05-13T14:50:33-04:00

I chose indifferent; it's not us versus them, it's us versus our civilian peers. I remember when I was a SGT and I was very glad to get the pay and benefits that were far better than my friends at the time. I then choose to get a Bacholar's Degree w/ ROTC. Once again, my income and benefits were comparable and in most cases better than my peers w/ the same education. I'm now retiring and find that my ending pay and benefits was far better than equivalent peers w/ my education and experience living in central Texas. Retirement pay provides the ability to do well in about any region. We do lag behind the civilian margin but they can't even compare to our unseen benefits that make our Army great.

Response by CPT Anthony Kennedy made May 13 at 2015 3:12 PM

2015-05-13T15:12:24-04:00

If you are enlisted and don't like the pay..... Move up or get out.
I went from E-1 thru O-3E...... I got my degree while on active duty and went to OCS because I loved serving but I also wanted more. More means greater sacrifice and longer hours and greater responsibilities ......... It's not a disparity if just how life is.

Response by MAJ Roberto Better made May 13 at 2015 4:39 PM

2015-05-13T16:39:14-04:00

I when first enlisted I knew what I was getting into and pay; especially when it comes to retirement pay. Instead of complaining of the disparity in pay, I chose to take advantage of the army programs (tuitions assistance, college, CLEP, OCS) and get my commission.

The services gives one the opportunity, if you are willing.
So top complaining and be a go getter.

Response by Capt Private RallyPoint Member made May 13 at 2015 5:21 PM

2015-05-13T17:21:27-04:00

My personal opinion, having 8 years prior enlisted and 9 years commissioned time is that individuals should be paid on qualification and rank. If an enlisted individual has a college degree, they should rate higher pay that is comparable to an Officer.

Response by SPC Nathaniel Reynolds made May 13 at 2015 5:37 PM

2015-05-13T17:37:52-04:00

You have to make E-5 with 8 years to get what a butter bar LT who doesn't know crap beyond general studies in college gets paid which is sad. Everyone knows the difference between an O1 and and E2 is that the E2 has been promoted.

Response by Maj Private RallyPoint Member made May 13 at 2015 5:59 PM

2015-05-13T17:59:09-04:00

It is like the civilian word. If you want to get ahead and make more money go back to school.

Response by 1LT Private RallyPoint Member made May 13 at 2015 6:11 PM

2015-05-13T18:11:42-04:00

Clearly Justified in that the United States Military is an all volunteer Force. About everyone in our day and age has an opportunity to be what he or she wants to be. If you chose to be an enlisted you will get an enlisted personnel pay and the same goes with being an officer. Just common sense to me.

Response by SFC Robert Neidow made May 13 at 2015 6:45 PM

2015-05-13T18:45:40-04:00

When talking about pay please include BAS and BAH when adding all the pay. It does make a difference. And when comparing the $15 an hour minimum wage to Privates pay please do the same.

Response by SFC Scott Leenerts made May 13 at 2015 7:03 PM

2015-05-13T19:03:20-04:00

It wouldn't be so bad if instead of a 1% pay raise, switch to a flat dollar amount. As it stands a PVT gets $17/mo raise and a GEN gets a $198/mo raise. I think $20/mo across the board would be better.

Response by SFC(P) Private RallyPoint Member made May 13 at 2015 7:21 PM

2015-05-13T19:21:09-04:00

I have no problem with the pay of officers. The problem I have is BAH. I didn't realize that an O3 with a wife and children had more housing needs than an E3 with children. Maybe that needs to be rethought, with officers just getting paid more in base pay, and adjusting BAH to be based on family size, regardless of rank. I feel that could be a solution that would save money and make the most sense.

Response by SSG Private RallyPoint Member made May 13 at 2015 8:24 PM

2015-05-13T20:24:54-04:00

now the pay from O-4 and above i can see and have seen the justification, however the pay difference from O-1 - O-3 is just ridiculous they don't have that big a burden on their shoulders nor do they have the time in the military in most cases to justify getting paid so much more than senior NCO's

Response by SGT Private RallyPoint Member made May 13 at 2015 11:24 PM

2015-05-13T23:24:01-04:00

Everyone wants to make more and feels they work harder than the guy to the other guys for the same money...sometimes it's true. Sometimes obviously so, bottom line is this, the enlisted side is the vast majority of the military...you can't afford to pay joe blow the same as you do his manager. That being said...I don't think the officer pay meeds to be what it is. I think there is a disagreeable disparity for sure, but rather than raising enlisted wages, I would rather see the officer wages come down...and their numbers reduced.

Response by PFC Private RallyPoint Member made May 14 at 2015 7:44 AM

2015-05-14T07:44:07-04:00

enlisted and NCOs do more work than officers do. they need better pay rate. sorry officers but it's true!

Response by CSM Christopher St. Cyr made May 14 at 2015 8:20 AM

2015-05-14T08:20:59-04:00

If you want officer pay, go to college for four years, complete ROTC or OCS and accept your commission. Along with the bar you deal with the stuff officers have to deal with, including not working with troops and having to deal with other officers.

Response by CPT(P) Private RallyPoint Member made May 14 at 2015 10:36 AM

2015-05-14T10:36:34-04:00

MAJ Private RallyPoint Member Sir, might I asked why you have voted me down? After all, out of 20k plus people that have viewed this discussion, you are the one and only who has!

Response by PV2 Glen Lewis made May 14 at 2015 2:35 PM

2015-05-14T14:35:38-04:00

It has always been in my lifetime.

Response by SGT David T. made May 14 at 2015 2:52 PM

2015-05-14T14:52:08-04:00

An enlisted person typically has less responsibility than an officer. As such they should be paid less. The private sector is no different in that regard. The worker bees get paid less than management, simple as that. It all comes down to the choices we make.

Response by SrA Private RallyPoint Member made May 14 at 2015 4:23 PM

2015-05-14T16:23:06-04:00

Just because you have a college degree doesn't mean shit to the enlisted folk. We are all forced as enlisted members to go to school and get degrees now as is and many of the enlisted folk have just as much education as the officers appointed above us. The parity between the pay is too severe and unjust.

Response by LTC Chad Uhl made May 15 at 2015 8:36 AM

2015-05-15T08:36:46-04:00

Similar to college/advanced degree initial pay in non-union, unskilled jobs market.

Response by CPT Private RallyPoint Member made May 15 at 2015 11:41 AM

2015-05-15T11:41:20-04:00

There is no reason we should have such a widening gap. The problem is pay raises are based on percentages. That is why it is everwidening. Do away with the O1-E thru O3-E pay. Make clothing allowances, BAH, and BAS the same across the board, dependent upon family size and TIS. Realign the base pays to remove the increasing gap, and then make pay raises set amounts, similar to a bonus, only permanent. I've been on both sides as an NCO and currently as a commander. It is a statistical divide that alienates one from another and underlies the lack of cohesion in today's military.

Response by SGT Cyrus Thompson made May 15 at 2015 5:19 PM

2015-05-15T17:19:43-04:00

go earn it if you believe your worth more, its called monitary motivation! if you need more incentive

Response by MSG John Wirts made May 17 at 2015 6:18 PM

2015-05-17T18:18:33-04:00

Up to the Korean Conflict, enlisted personnel were required to use common skills, shooting was almost universal, basic training prepared one for military life with drill and ceremonies, proper wear of uniform, and military customs and courtesies. Weapons proficiency for military weapons including grenades and rockets. Anyone who could graduate from high school, if they did not have health problems were eligible to enlist or be drafted. The officers had more stringent standards, WWII officers had three entries into the officer corps West Point, ROTC, or OCS. My father was commissioned with a high school diploma. Most officers had at least some college. It was possible to go from E-1 to E-9 with a high school diploma. No longer many army Mos's require at least an AS, AA, BA, or BS, some require a MBA. With these requirements the NON-COMMISSIONED Officer is more officer then enlisted. As long as the military requires an up-or-out policy, and college for NCO's, high ranking enlisted pay and retirement should reflect the effort and schooling required to survive in today's military!

Response by CSM Private RallyPoint Member made May 18 at 2015 1:44 PM

2015-05-18T13:44:51-04:00

I think there is something to be said for folks who are in charge and responsible for decision making to get paid requisite with their duties. That being said, I find it hard to believe that a senior NCO with 18-20 years in can still make less than a CPT with 6 years. And not all Captains are commanders. But all 1SGs are 1SGs and SGM/CSMs are SGM/CSMs. It think there should be some salary leveling at the Senior NCO level. I don't think it will ever happen, but here is to hoping for our future generation of Soldiers.

Response by MSgt Private RallyPoint Member made May 22 at 2015 2:44 PM

2015-05-22T14:44:15-04:00

I think the enlisted, officer separation is draconian and unneeded now. It breeds resentment. To answer the question. The pay should be based on a combination of amount of work, type of work, responsibility, and intellectual demand. Those variables could be weighted and added up to a composite score.

Response by PO3 Sherry Thornburg made May 22 at 2015 4:10 PM

2015-05-22T16:10:34-04:00

Sliding scale dependent on responsibility and I noticed that some lower rank pay is static, requiring advancement to get a raise in pay. Mind you the civilian to military pay comparison is appalling, but just try to get the government to pay comparatively by professional occupation and experience . . . won't happen.

Response by CPT Private RallyPoint Member made May 22 at 2015 5:05 PM

2015-05-22T17:05:04-04:00

The there is a pay disparity, whether we believe it or not we all had the choices to go to college and get a degree and then join the military as an officer. Heck the army have programs where they'll continue to pay you, spend you to get a college degree, PA school and when you complete that they'll pay you more for your achievement. The choice I'd ours ladies and gentlemen, but I think we should compare it to the civilian sector and include all the benefits and those programs/resources that we have free of charge compare to what the civilian sector has.

Response by SGT Richard Nelson made May 22 at 2015 7:20 PM

2015-05-22T19:20:40-04:00

I knew full well how I would be compensated as an Enlisted Soldier. The pay charts are directly in front of you. If you want more, strive to achieve more. I don't much care for a large majority of officers, but their job is something on another level. Sure, I'd like to get paid more but I don't feel I'm entitled. Bottom line, the military service is a sacrifice. Remember that the next time to see a servicemember acting a fool because Walmart doesn't offer a military discount.

Response by SPC(P) Mark Newman made May 23 at 2015 12:09 AM

2015-05-23T00:09:05-04:00

As a enlisted troop, I say it is justified. in the real world, someone who has more education and is in management is paid more. however, I do think that NCOs in certain positions should receive higher pay. battalion sergeant major, first sergeant COB,. these people are experienced, educated and have management requirements. they should receive higher pay even if they are an e-5 filling a higher posting. As for the size of the disparity, I don't think a second lieutenant with less than 2 years in should be making more 10 East 6 who has taken on the responsibility of platoon sergeant. so I think some adjustment is necessary, but I do believe officers should receive more pay in general than enlisted.

Response by CPT Private RallyPoint Member made May 23 at 2015 11:42 AM

2015-05-23T11:42:08-04:00

Don't fret all that extra money goes into a savings fund in the god-awful chance some really expensive equipment goes, for some odd reason or another, missing. Because officers do not have a cap on how much we have to pay the Army back. Go figure.

Response by Lt Col Michael Hills made May 24 at 2015 11:23 AM

2015-05-24T11:23:10-04:00

I don't think things are so bad at the junior enlisted level--troops are in an entry level position at that point afterall. Where I think things are out of balance is when enlisted folks move into the more senior NCO ranks--at that point things are woefully out of whack with many senior enlisted in positions of responsibility that far exceed their compensation. Also think that a hard look needs to be taken at a pay bump for certain specialties. Cyber folks for instance leave in droves because the pay they can make outside the military far exceeds what they are making, especially in those first couple of terms of enlistment. Not to diminish the importance of all specialties but your average cook or band member on the outside is making nowhere close to what a network admin or an medical tech pulls.

Response by MAJ Keira Brennan made May 24 at 2015 10:04 PM

2015-05-24T22:04:28-04:00

I've always felt that the Enlisted pay should JUMP UP at E-6. The Army doesn't differentiate to what's called a "staff NCO" in the USMC. But at E-6 there's a huge reliance place on them and it's mid-management and deserving of such.

Response by SSG Private RallyPoint Member made May 25 at 2015 2:50 AM

2015-05-25T02:50:49-04:00

I think everyone has an opportunity to become an officer. Regardless, of enlisted or NCO reasons the opportunity was there or for some people is there. So, if anyone from the NCO corp or PVT to SPC corp want to complain they can email their congressmen to maybe change it. I do know in the civilian world people with college degree get pay more than people who don't and i doht think it's going to chage anytime soon in the civilians world or military. I also would like to add that TA and the Green to Gold program is available to all NCO and enlisted soliders to get a degree for free. So, why are we having a debate about this as being unfair?

Response by SGT Anthony Rossi made May 26 at 2015 12:27 AM

2015-05-26T00:27:32-04:00

SSG Blanco, since rank = the same pay shouldn't the physical standards be the same for both male and female. (Same standard in Physical Training, schooling, taxtical and professional training? Just a thought with all the talk about "equality"?

Response by PO3 Private RallyPoint Member made May 26 at 2015 1:04 AM

2015-05-26T01:04:41-04:00

I think the Officer pay scale can get a little ridiculous as you go past O5 and O6, but that's just because how low the enlisted counterparts are. If anything, we should just work to increase Enlisted pay and leave Officer pay where it is. Maybe bridge the gap a little more that way?

I am very biased about this though, because who doesn't want more money?

Response by PO2 Private RallyPoint Member made May 26 at 2015 9:01 PM

2015-05-26T21:01:06-04:00

It's hard to say because I'm a e5 that's under 10 and you have ensigns 0-1 "navy ranks" that are under 2 years getting paid the same when I know a lot more of the military then them.... So it's a hardline to decided where pay scales should be because they do have a degree and which I do not but which would you rather have out in the fight a degree or experience?

Response by MSG Martin C. made May 28 at 2015 7:59 PM

2015-05-28T19:59:59-04:00

The truth of the matter is that we get paid fairly in my opinion. I frankly get upset when I hear service members complaining about the pay between officers and enlisted and here it's why.
We enlist on either 2,4,6 year contract increments we get bonuses and opportunities to earn a degree and transition to either Warrant, or Officer.
It is really up to us to make that decision, the problem is that we live in a entitlement society even in our beloved Armed Services.
Individuals always feel as if they deserve more than what they already get, even if we made the scales equal this will always be the case, simply because of our human nature and our inability to be honest with ourselves.
So like I tell my Soldiers and what I told my recruits as a Recruiter and DS the Army has ample opportunities for you to succeed the question is are you Bold enough to get after them???? So I ask what are you doing to get after a better pay? Are you going to sit here and complain about it or are you going to go get after it......

Response by SPC Private RallyPoint Member made May 28 at 2015 8:37 PM

2015-05-28T20:37:57-04:00

I'm fine with it. Just tell me what to execute.

Response by SGM Matthew Quick made Jun 1 at 2015 10:35 PM

2015-06-01T22:35:34-04:00

If enlisted Soldiers want to earn officer pay, there are MANY ways to earn a commission...stop complaining about pay and take action to earn it!

Response by CW3 Kevin Storm made Oct 9 at 2015 3:26 PM

2015-10-09T15:26:23-04:00

We take a kid before he graduates from high school and guarantee him a job, training for that job, healthcare, dental, retirement if he/she chooses to stay, we feed, cloth, and board them, give them perks like a commissary, education benefits and yet enlisted soldiers don't feel they get paid enough. So lets do a comparison, a 4 star general makes under 10K a month to 12.2 K a month. In comparison his CSM makes $4800 to $5200 a month, now on paper this may not sound fair. Who is in charge, who will testify before Congress if it all goes to hell in a hand basket? Who gives the orders that can cause death to those under him? Who has to oversee that budget? Who meets with dignitaries from foreign countries. Now what would a CEO of a Corporation of say some 50k to 100k employees make? Now what would his executive assistant make, because I humbly submit there is no equivalent to a CSM in the Corporate world. This not an attempt to belittle CSM's, I have nothing but respect for them, but reality if reality. If looking at in this respective that senior enlisted person is getting over paid as they are making roughly 45% of what the guy in charge is making with out the headaches, or we could say the guy at the top is grossly underpaid for the job.

Response by MAJ Ken Landgren made Oct 10 at 2015 5:02 PM

2015-10-10T17:02:21-04:00

If someone is so bent on making the money of an officer, they need to go thought the right gates and get a college degree to become an officer.

Response by MAJ Ken Landgren made Oct 11 at 2015 3:22 PM

2015-10-11T15:22:17-04:00

Another way to look at this is an E-6 with ten years service makes $56,700 annually vs. the average US household income of $49,000.

Response by SPC Private RallyPoint Member made Oct 15 at 2015 8:12 PM

2015-10-15T20:12:30-04:00

Compared to the corporate world it is rather tame.

Response by MAJ Ken Landgren made Oct 20 at 2015 11:49 AM

2015-10-20T11:49:15-04:00

The crux of the matter is, nobody stopped an enlisted soldier from becoming an officer.

Response by MAJ Ken Landgren made Nov 16 at 2015 12:50 PM

2015-11-16T12:50:51-05:00

Enlisted folks and officers have some familiarity to their pay when they join.

Response by SSG Kevin McCulley made Nov 16 at 2015 4:24 PM

2015-11-16T16:24:00-05:00

The real question is... Should there be a multi-tier rank structure in a 21st century army

Response by SFC Private RallyPoint Member made Jan 5 at 2016 2:53 PM

2016-01-05T14:53:53-05:00

The pay is not the issue.....it's the housing allowance!! Why would a single LT get more than a SFC with 13 years in, married with 3 children. BAH is to supplement the family to live off post not the rank!!

Response by 1SG Jeff Finlay made Feb 18 at 2016 9:14 PM

2016-02-18T21:14:02-05:00

Congress does nothing to address the disparity. The only thing they do is give a 3% raise across the board. This increases the gap between Enlisted and Officer.

Response by SGM Private RallyPoint Member made Feb 18 at 2016 10:36 PM

2016-02-18T22:36:26-05:00

The role of NCO's has vastly changed over the past 20 years. I agree you have to compare apples to apples. You can't compare NCO's to Officers pay. No other Army in the world has the NCO's that the American Army does and it shows. Our NCO's can do things now that are unheard of anywhere else in the world. If the Army reduced the pay of enlisted, I would do it again and not think twice. With the budget cuts I don't see any change coming anytime soon. I do think that it should be reviewed regularly to ensure it is competitive with civilian equivalent. At this point with the draw down, just happy and honored to be able to continue to serve. Remember the only reason we all get paid is to serve Soldiers and the American people.

Response by PFC Stephen Eric Serati made Mar 3 at 2016 7:01 PM

2016-03-03T19:01:21-05:00

Solution:as we down size ,increase E-1 pay to $2000 and adjust all Enlisted up accordingly.Thats roughly $532 more a month.Increase Benifits to match today's economy,by 2017.Every year your at the same rank you would receive a $50 dollar raise until you hit the next rank,and there should be a jump for that.A cost of living raise which reflects the true economic landscape.

Response by SSG Edward Tilton made Jun 28 at 2017 2:35 PM

2017-06-28T14:35:39-04:00

Whenever Pay raises are a percentage over several years the disparity accumulates. That can be addressed by raises of X$ at all grades for several cycles