My take home pay at the FD, after taxes, union dues, pension fund, and health care contributions was approx. $1800 every two weeks. The FD did not pay me while I was gone, although I know some guys from other depts who did get that.

My E9 take home pay was approx $3400 per pay while I was in Iraq. That was tax free with BAH, BAS, combat pay, and family separation pay.

I'm not arguing for lower military pay or retirement, only adding some info for comparison.

"My woman done left
And took all the reasons
I was working for
You better not try to stand in my way
As I'm walking out the door"

Johnny Paycheck

Thanks, just wanted some clarification, the tax free does make a huge difference in take home but I just am not sure it is good for comparison since it does not count towards any retirement and you are also an E9, most guys make E6-E7 at the most after 20.

It won't happen, every single Military Org. and even some pols on both side are opposed to it, they have also tried it in the past about every decade, it won't fly. The last time they got it through was under Ronnie and it the got rid of it the "redux" because it killed retention. I am not sure what idiot thinks it will help retention but I can tell you right now that the combat arms will flee.

If I were on the DBB and was a little self-aware, I'd probably study what went wrong w Redux instead of acting like it never happened.
"Those who cannot remember the past are condemned to repeat it."
George Santayana

This thing can have adverse impact before it is implemented or even if it is NEVER Implemented. We have a MSG in our organization dropping his paper work because of the Army Times art!?!? We told him he was nuts and that he'd be grandfathered or would have lots of time to duck and dodge. He said his Wife was tired of being jacked with by the Army and She said it was time to go.

It is nutty,but not THAT nutty. Markets and Futures and the whole World run on "Psychology" . Early in this Administration a rumor started that the Govt was going to go after ammo. There were guys lined up in Cabela's with 3 shopping carts full of ammo and reloading supplies. Guys that didn't HAVE $5-6-7K spent that much on ammo in one pop. You couldn't get 5.55mm, 7.62x39, 9mm for mos. Psychology a pseudo-science to explain the nutty things we do?!?!?

Thanks, good to chat and due to unforseen events I will have lots of time now to do so lol.
FG42, it might be cheaper and while it is something to contemplate I sure as heck do not want to see what you talk about ever happen. If the combat arms become a "flush and fill" that folks just do a tour in we will lose so much corporate knowledge that it will have deadly results. Not much can be substituted for time in real combat or experience period, if you couple that with what is an obvious trend by the Deer who lead the Lions (Officer Corps) to tend toward "shiny objects and toys" over training for their people then we are in for a rude wake up in the next war.
You want to save real money, get rid of at least 50% of Officer Corps. A 1-5 ratio of Officers to enlisted in all branches except the USMC is just silly and expensive.

Well, they have done it before via threats and plans, let's hope it does not get passed, if it gets beat back this year it will be a done deal for a while.
Unfortunately, I do not think anyone is going to bring up REDUX, even the military folks on here seem to forget that silliness and what it did so I doubt the MSM will have it on during a prime time news show. Sorry you lost your E9, that is a lot of knowledge to see go out the door.

Eric III How are you doing? Don't make me come to VA to kick you Butt out of Bed !???!

The DA work force is so old they can probably get rid of these by attrition?!? The Army already asked us who was interested in early out incentives (not many). We expect that the hammer will fall on contractors in 2012.

A problem w this is that it will make it harder on vets who are interested in a DA or Govt job. Another problem is if you freeze hiring, you don't get any young people in org. When I was in NIMA/NGA (DoD) they were shrinking the organization but they were still hiring a couple hundred youngsters a year right out of college. They didn't want everyone retirement eligible at the same time and wanted some of those young tech smart types.

"WASHINGTON, D.C., Aug. 4, 2011 -- The Army announced today it will reduce the size of its civilian employee workforce by more than 8,700 people by Sept. 30, 2012. These cuts are based on Department of Defense resource decisions as reflected in the fiscal year 2012 President’s Budget and require a reduction of Army civilian employees to comply with decreased funding levels.

The Army has identified more than 30 different commands and agencies affected by these reductions, with nearly 80 percent of the cuts taking place within Installation Management Command, Army Material Command, Training and Doctrine Command, and Headquarters, Department of the Army."

I'm good thanks, almost out of the hospital.
Yeah, they are going to cut a lot of civilians and I doubt they will do it smartly but I imagine a lot of it is just talk until a Congressman decides to try and block whatever cuts come down that might effect his or her district.

A lot of these comments make great points, I just want to challenge the assumption that civilians are working 40-hour weeks that are sacred.

Most green suiters' perspective is that civlian world = DA civilian world. Not the case.

DA civilians' 40-hour work week is sacrosanct. Not so anybody else, especially with the corporate sector or small businesses.

They're all hustling it, working their asses off 60-80 hours a week. In the corporate sector, you're doing your job, plus the work of your colleague who was laid off and hoping you're not next. Business owners are working days, nights, and weekends, taking as their salary whatever's left after payroll and other expenses, which probably averages out to less than minimum wage for the time they put in.

I don't have much to say on the big picture, but I want you folks on "the inside" to know that the 9-4 bearded contractor mechanic and the ID card lady don't reflect reality. Their workday and work ethic don't mirror the workday or work ethic of the average American (at least the 91% of the work force who have jobs). They're still living in the 50s when a salaryman could put in a 40-hour workweek and support his wife and 2.4 kids. The rest of the civilian world is hustling it, and retiring with nothing but what they've saved.

I do have one suggestion: reduce the retirement pay of military retirees who revolve through the door into government jobs.

And one quibble: I don't like how the DSS says that 4-6 year servicemembers walk away with "nothing." They can contribute to TSP, they got paid that whole time, and the Post-9/11 Gi Bill is an incredible benefit. It's more than enough in an AVF.

I'm a former active enlisted and officer, and a current reserve officer, and I've worked in the corporate sector for 1yr and the gov't contractor game for 4 years.

Look up related articles on Wikipedia and get your sources/check the facts from the links in the footnotes. As long as you're not citing Wikipedia in your bibliography, you'll be fine. RIO It's simply the best online resource for that kind of information..

Always a little dubious when someone shows one slide out of what was probably a much longer brief. Also the title has (cont'd) in it, so there are more findings. Maybe you could post the WHOLE brief and just not pick and choose the "one" that back up your thoughts. The whole brief may back you up, but we don't know based on you cherry picking the one slide. Thanks for listening.

Just noted it was linked in the article. Thanks.

Another “half right” article. Makes me wonder if anyone is engaged in unbiased reporting any more.
The author makes the following “points”. Most are inaccurate.
1. Military skills are transferable to the private sector.
a. Some are transferable, but many are not. The most common MOS within the army is a combat infantryman. Just exactly how does that transfer to a civilian job? Machine gun operator? Mortorman? Missile operator? Predator drone operator? Many military jobs don’t transfer to civilian jobs. Maybe they transfer to other government jobs, but not always civilian jobs.
2. Second careers are now “common” for those retiring after 40.
a. Second careers have been “common” for those retiring after 40 for quite some time. Many of the military retirees (probably most), get a job with the government civil service. They then combine their military retirement with their civil service retirement. My dad retired at 37, after serving in WWII, the Korean War and Vietnam. I think he more than deserved the $400 a month retirement that he got when he retired as an E-9 after 20 years.
3. Payout at 20yrs makes retention difficult. 76% leave between years 20 and 25.
a. They leave between 20 and 25 because that is when they are most likely to be able to get hired into a second job.
b. If the military thinks retention is difficult after 20 years, wait until they take away the retirement pay at 20. They won’t keep them for the first 20.
4. 20 years of service earns a lifetime payout of 50%, ramping up to 85% for 35 years of service.
a. This is REALLY deceptive and it irritates that someone would headline something this way. The percentages are correct, but unlike civilian government pensions, these percentages are based on “base pay”, which is not their gross pay. They don’t get paid a percentage of their housing allowance, clothing allowance etc. Base pay for an E-7 with over 20 years service is $4189.20. His retirement would be about $2,100 a month.
To top it all off, military retirement isn’t like other retirements.
1. Your military retirement does not “vest” like other retirement plans. If you want to retire at 19 years - - or if you try to re-enlist at 19 years and find they won’t take you because of your weight, your conduct, (even a simple bankruptcy will make you ineligible in some circumstances) - - you have nothing. Civilian and civil service pensions usually vest after 5 years.
2. If you retire after 20 years you still have a requirement to serve 10 years in the reserves. What other job can call you back out of retirement and tell you to go risk your life.
WAKE UP PEOPLE - - do your homework before you write an article like this.

..... Not much in the Pentagon Briefing is wrong or biased. Facts are facts, and the opinions stated in the briefing carry some weight. But it's hard to argue that $46B is all that much of a budget-buster, these days. Reform might shave a few billion off that number, but not all that much. Worth doing, but don't think it's all that much of a big deal.