I have been hearing rumors that these pays could be getting drastically cut or even eliminated. Wonder what this is going to do for morale? Good luck trying to find MTI's, MTL's, recruiters, First Sergeants, career aviators, Spec ops, ect... Anyone got and inside info on this subject?
I just read somewhere that fighter pilots were being offered over $200,000 to resign. Ridiculous money.
"Respect My Authoritah!" - Eric Cartman
According to the PDSM, pilots (ANY pilots) aren't eligible for sevice committment waivers under the FY13 FM programs...
"LAF officers possessing an AFS of 11X, 12X or a Core AFS of 13B, 13C, 13D, 13L, 14N, 18X or 64P are ineligible for the LADSC Waiver Program"
Last edited by Pullinteeth; 07-11-2013 at 02:32 PM.
“I say, imagine in your private life, if you decided that I’m not going to pay my mortgage for a month or two—first of all you’re not saving money by not paying your mortgage. You’re just a dead beat. “
You may say I'm a dreamer But I'm not
Lord of the Pings
So, I guess this means that our "Nuclear Enterprise Incentive Pay" is off the table?
As per the AF Times...here is CMSAF Cody's comments about this topic.
Involuntary special duty
Meanwhile, the Air Force is “pretty far” into a review of all special duties, including first sergeants, military training instructors and professional military education instructors, Cody said.
Right now, airmen can earn up to $450 per month in special duty pay, depending on the assignment. Special duties do not yield promotion points, but they can be looked upon favorably at promotion time.
The current system of looking for volunteers to fill special duties no longer works, he said. It “worked a long time ago and it’s worked over time, but we forced it a lot,” Cody said.
The Air Force is considering requiring commanders to nominate their top performers for special duties to create a bench of the most qualified airmen for these jobs, he said.
Even if they don’t volunteer for special duties, all airmen had to volunteer to get into the Air Force, Cody said.
“What you’re interested in might be irrelevant; it’s what we need you to do,” he said.
However, there would be some minor exceptions for airmen in undermanned career fields — such as battlefield airmen — because the Air Force cannot afford to pull them out for special duties, Cody said.
On the aggregate, the Air Force has enough airmen to fill these special duty roles, and pulling the right airmen at the right time in their careers would be a “force multiplier,” he said.
“It doesn’t necessarily mean the airmen wanted to do it, but I promise you, 9.9 out of 10 of them will go there and do a great job if you send them, and a lot of them will get real charged up about the fact that we selected them to do it, because you always know how good you felt when somebody came up to you and said, ‘Hey, we think you’re this good to be able to do that,’ ” Cody said.
The fact that the Air Force is conducting the review does not mean it believes the airmen currently on special duty are a bad fit, Cody said in the email. Over the past decade, the service has struggled to make sure it has had a “deep enough bench” for special duties.
“Previously, we relied on the volunteer process, but that was set up for a bigger force,” he said. “As we become a smaller Air Force, the decisions we make about each individual airman become more critical. We have to ensure we’re selecting the right people at the right time for the right jobs.”
Many enlisted airmen see special duties as a career killer, but Cody said airmen who step outside their primary career field have a better chance of getting promoted. By having airmen nominated for these positions, special duties would be seen as a mark of distinction.
“Nominations also allow us to identify airmen who may not consider volunteering,” he said. “Some airmen may not consider leaving their functional area or may be too modest to see the potential their leadership can see in them. Building this ‘bench’ will give us a large pool of highly qualified airmen to fill these roles.”
The special duties review is expected to be finished by fall, Cody said.
WASHINGTON — Top defense officials were to meet Thursday to discuss trimming the list of countries where servicemembers’ paychecks are pumped up by imminent danger pay.
The officials were considering eliminating imminent danger pay in 18 countries and five waterways around the world that military officials believe may no longer be hazardous enough to warrant the extra pay. According to a Wednesday report from The Associated Press, that could affect up to 56,000 troops who serve in, sail through or fly over designated danger zones, saving the department $120 million annually.
A defense official who spoke on the condition of anonymity because he was not authorized to speak publicly about the matter cautioned that no decision has been made to eliminate danger pay, which amounts to $7.50 a day, or a maximum of $225 a month, in designated countries.
It would be the second cost-cutting move related to danger pay in just over a year. Last February, the Defense Department began prorating danger pay by the day — instead of paying the full monthly amount for even one day in a designated country — to save up to $30 million annually.
The move isn’t sitting well with some in the military.
Petty Officer 3rd Class Brandon McGowan has been stationed in Bahrain for the past two months. He is married, but his wife did not accompany him to Bahrain.
“If stuff goes down, we have two minutes before the missiles hit here,” McGowan said. “It really is imminent danger if something really does happen in the region. “It’s not necessarily that you are getting shot at everyday, but we’re in an area where you don’t know who’s friendly and who’s not.”
He added that the money is an added “incentive” to taking an assignment in Bahrain.
“It does impact your life. It definitely changes things for a lot people the way their lifestyle.”
Some Fort Bragg soldiers told the Fayetteville Observer that cutting the pay would demoralize troops who already sacrifice much during deployments, no matter where they’re sent.
“It’s really a slap in the face,” said one Special Forces major.
While people don’t join the military for combat pay, he said, “they do expect that pay. The savings as to personal benefits is a horrendous mistake. The [Department of Defense] trying to save money at the expense of the service member is a mistake.”
James Bratcher, 65, served 22 years in the Air Force. His military career included two tours of duty in Vietnam.
“I think a person serving over in that theater (the Middle East) should be paid danger pay,” Bratcher told the Observer. “I think it would be an injustice to a person serving” to eliminate the stipend.
“How long they stay in the military is dependent on their pay,” he said.
Crystal Jarrett, 35, is an assistant manager at Troopers Military Supply in Fayetteville, and the wife of a sergeant in the 82nd Airborne Division. Her husband has deployed three times.
Danger pay “was a big part (of his pay) when he would come back and pay off any outstanding bills,” she said. “Also, when he came back, and I had a new baby.”
Military officials have argued that if a location is safe enough for servicemembers to bring their families with them, such as Bahrain, the location does not merit extra danger pay, The Associated Press reported.
Troops receive imminent danger pay in nearly 50 nations, according to a list compiled by the Pentagon in 2011. In addition to war zones, the 2011 list included countries such as Cuba, Djibouti, Serbia, Turkey and Jordan.
Danger pay could be affected for some countries in the Middle East, but not anywhere U.S. troops are carrying out combat operations. But officials would not speculate on which countries are most likely to be removed from the list.
“The Department is currently in the process of reviewing Imminent Danger Pay for our servicemembers,” a defense official said in an emailed statement. "However, it would be inappropriate at this time to discuss any possible changes before they are finalized."
As much as I hate to admit it, I actually agree with the article. Too many damn places on the list that don't merit the pay. And the whole "in the range of Iran's missiles" is crap. What about S. Korea? There have been times that the threat from N. Korea was MUCH more grave than anyone in Qatar, Saudi, Bahrain, etc. had from Iran.
There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)