(This might be a controversial topic to some. I do enjoy hearing your opinions, however, if you do choose to comment, please stick to your views, and not attacks on me or mine. Attack comments will not be posted, respectful comments will.)
In the military world there are two camps- enlisted and officer. Most of the time people (at least the ones I know) do a good job of keeping the line between the two groups respectful. There is a time for separation/respect/etc. and a time where rank should not be at the forefront. I have friends in both groups, and believe that because I personally don't wear rank, rank is not a part of my friend making/social policies. Most people feel the same way, and many people on the enlisted side (particularly my spouse friends) often feel there should be little to no difference at all. However, there are always complaints. Officer wives get the good meat at the commissary. Officers don't do any real work. Etc. Etc. Etc. Surely you have heard it, right?
What you may NOT have heard is what is made mandatory for officers. People often call for fairness with other things, but I hardly ever see a discussion of policies that require increased financial obligations from officers. (Yes, I know this may seem random, but it's been a topic of conversation around here lately.) For instance, officers are required to pay more for holiday parties (20 for Os vs. 5 for Es), formal events, golf, child care, gifts, base activities, food, club membership, and are often told to bring the most expensive items at parties.
Before you have a cow, paying/giving more is NOT my issue. My issue is that these things are REQUIRED. In my opinion, it should be something officers CHOOSE to do out of respect for the people they lead. If I have one child at the local CDC, and you have 3, should I pay more because of my husbands rank? No off base facility would do such a thing. If the Christmas party costs 10 dollars, make that the price for all. I will gladly pay the ticket and CHOOSE to sponsor several airmen to attend for free. Send out a party list of items that are needed and we will gladly CHOOSE to bring the most expensive items. However, forcing this, particularly with "extra" things like parties and sporting events, is not okay. While I would hope that most officers would choose to step up and help, they should be given the option. Their choice to commission should not come with picking up the tab for others. A Christmas party ticket that is 4x more expensive for the same food and no prizes (since we CHOOSE to give those back for airmen) kind of ruins my mood for the party. However, if I paid the same price as everyone and sponsored airmen with the extra money (which would probably cover more than my forced ticket price), I think I would be a little more holiday cheery. If you know my husband and I, you know this issue is not that we don't like to help others, in fact, it's something we love to do. However, I realize that not everyone feels the same way. I think they have the right to opt out of the increased financial obligation when it comes to all these "extras." (In case you are wondering, my husband disagrees. He believes these responsibilities are just part of the job.)
Yes, to whom much is given, much is required, but why aren't officers allowed to choose when/how to support extra events with increased financial contributions? I'd like to see those who call for more fairness take up this issue as well. Just doesn't sit right with me...
(For those non-military readers, you might equate this to taxes. Should high income earners be forced to pay 60% in taxes because they make more, or should everyone pay an equal percentage?)
Thoughts?
38 comments:
I am extremely new to the military and my husband is enlisted...I honestly don't think it's fair that you are FORCED to pay extra, just like I don't think it's fair that high income makers have to pay more for taxes...but like I said I'm new and this is only my opinion. :S
I kind of agree with the policy when it comes to necessities like childcare. I love that the military takes care of its people. A Senior Airman may not be able to afford daycare for 3 kids off base, and I think it's very cool that the military helps them out.
As far as privileges and extras, I don't know... officers do usually make a lot more sacrifices (moving often, working more hours, going overseas, etc) and there's a reason they get paid more. It does seem silly to make them dump the extra pay back into the military.
This topic honestly has me sitting on the fence. While, I do not think it's fair to force anyone to pay anything, I understand why they feel the need to do it. There are a lot of people out there who wouldn't choose to help. They would do the bare nessecity to get by. Also, it might be a financial thing too. For example, they may not be able to afford throwing parties, if everyone only paid 10 dollars to get in. So to help offset the cost they charge those that they feel could pay $40 more easily a higer fee. Sometimes, it's nice fo enlisted to feel like they are the ones being pampered too. Everyone knows enlisted gets the crappy base houses, and crappy hours, along with fairly low pay (we have no kids and live on a pay check to pay check basis and it sucks) so having discounted rates for enlisted lets them feel more appreciated. Kind of like hey, we know you couldn't afford to pay $40 so we will offer it to you for $10 to help meet your budget. Like I said, I understand both sides, so it is hard to really say what is right or wrong on the issue.
(married to an officer) ... Since officers make considerably more money than enlisted, I don't find it too troublesome. I have to admit that even though I consider myself a giving person, I am not sure I would take the time to sponsor someone each time. I imagine cost would be prohibitive to some people.
I do think your comparisons with taxes is a good one. Just because you are rich, do you have to pay more. It's a fantastic debate.
I'm just going to up and say that I think it should be the same across the board.
I understand WHY they do things the way they do them, but I don't necessarily agree with it. I get the purpose behind it, but I think it's kind of backfiring. I also don't think it will ever change, because the military is about tradition, and this has been the tradition for a long time.
This is such a hard topic for me. My husband is enlisted, and honestly, we're not that active in military life outside of his work.
I've never really understood the need for officers to pay more, but I strongly believe that many enlisted people would not be able to pay more.
So, what can you do? Can you charge officers less at the risk of enlisted people not being able to afford to attend and then just not attending at all?
I couldn't disagree more. My husband is prior enlisted. This was before we met. We married when he was an Ensign. While it was a struggle for us our first year, compared to graduate school salaries (which are commensurate with some enlisted folks salaries), it was a breeze. We have enlisted families on welfare, I mean finances can be really tight for some of these people. Many enlisted spouses HAVE to work, in order to provide for their families. Most officer's spouses I have met look down on me for being employed, like I am not holding up my part of the officer spouse dream or something. It's a big difference. They often get the crappy end of the stick at the MTF too, because people are more responsive to scheduling concerns when your husband is standing next to you and they see his rank. When I complained about they way I saw some enlisted families being treated at the MTF, they thanked me because they feel to disenfranchised speak up and rarely see anything come of it when they do.
So no, I don't mind paying a little extra and not going home with a door prize. I consider it a privilege for us to do these things. Why? When we get out of the military, he'll almost assuredly get a better job and our lifestyle will continue to be incredibly comfortable with or without my income. And this isn't all that different from the rest of the world. Here at BIG U, we all have access to childcare, however, it is on a sliding fee scale, so that professors (who can afford to take their kids elsewhere) 1) help subsidize the facility and 2)don't take up all the slots so that those of us who can't afford anything else aren't left in a bind. Professors pay more in parking fees than students because they get the close parking. Grad. students pay more fees for certain things than undergrads, because we get more privileges and we are more likely to use the services on a consistent basis. When a faculty member takes me out to lunch, it is expected that s/he will buy, because s/he makes more income. It's just the way it is done.
So no, I can't agree with you on this one. It's a tradition and duty thing, reflective of the power my husband holds. And the same is true of the academic community.
I agree with Flakymn. I married my husband as an Ensign and his salary for us (vs. my grad school salary that was equivalent to what some enlisted people) was huge. We have never really struggled.
Some people aren't giving and so my guess is that holiday parties would then become a "HAVES" event.
Moreover,the same tradition holds in academia for childcare, parking, access to the facilities, etc. Rank has privileges but also responsibilities. Faculty ALWAYS pay more for events than I do and they always buy when we go out. It is a reflection of our different standings, as well as our different income levels.
So no, having had to live off what an E4 makes with a family, I will gladly ante my extra money into the pot and go home without a prize and have a great time doing it.
Interesting I was just having a similar talk with a friend about the childcare costs. In most instances I don't mind having to pay more, because I understand the mentality of leveling the playing field. But other times I feel frustrated with the idea of, in a way, be punished financially due to my husband's rank. It doesn't make sense to me to charge an enlisted family $5 per child for an hour of childcare and an officer's family $20. It's the same service, the officer's children aren't getting better or worse care, so why charge more? I'd rather have people with the greater need get priority for the service than be price gouged. But on another side, just because your husband is an officer doesn't mean you don't have financial struggles (ie: one income, multiple children). Just because you are enlisted doesn't mean you are having financial struggles (ie: one child, dual income). I don't really know if there is a good answer.. but thanks for giving me the opportunity to share my thoughts.
I think the root of this problem is assuming that officers have more money than enlisted personnel. I know a lot of officers with student loan debt and other things that eat up all that "extra" pay. Then again- debt is sort of a personal choice, so it doesn't really apply.
Forcing someone to pay more for mandatory "fun" is a load of crap. But then, I hear AF officer life is big on the politics and showing-off, so it just might be the specific situation you're in. I've seen both sides in the Army, and it tends to scale depending on the job and the base. Some have the money game, some don't. My husband's EOD (enlisted) so rank is hardly an issue.
Anyway, I think it nuts to provide essentially welfare for others. However, it sounds like a necessary evil. You don't see a lot of officers having a bunch of kids under 25 like a lot of E's do, and to live I guess they *need* it.
Everyone should pay the same amount per person to cover the cost. I don't like paying more for every.single.event so kids can be included, but that's what always happens. As a childless couple, I'm paying for kids. So I guess as a couple with "more money", you're going to pay for others, whether it's true or not.
Let me start by saying that my husband was enlisted for 8 years and completed OCS and is a supply officer on a submarine. I know both sides of the veil. I do not think it is right that officers have to pay more, just because they make more does not mean that they can afford to spend more. Secondly, I find it hilarious when people say that officers wives get better treatment at certain places, the simple fact is unless you are telling everyone your sponsors rank, nobody knows.
I find no problem with the "sliding scale" that the military applies to so many things. It's also not just officers that are "forced" to pay for things. We did not attend our battalion ball in September but my husband had to buy a ticket. The price was determined by rank, but it wasn't split enlisted/officer...it was $5 more for each pay grade step. So, we paid more than some and less than others for a ticket that we didn't even use. Plus, I find all these "requirements" just a part of the military lifestyle. We don't live in a "civilian" world so things aren't going to be done that way. Just my two cents...
I actually agree with you but understand that in the bigger picture, most people would not be as generous.
The military should not assume that just because you make more you're automatically willing to spend more.
We live very frugally right now and intend to maintain the same lifestyle once my husband commissions (enlisted for now) so to be forced to pay more because of rank is pretty bothersome.
However, we understand that it comes with the territory being Military and all. We'll bite the bullet because we don't want to be known as THAT couple that never goes out haha!
While I can definitely see your point and try to understand where you are coming from I disagree. I personally don't believe that pay adequately reflects responsibility or education of enlisted military much of the time. COs and NCOs are all very busy, very important, and very burdened with responsibility - it might just be different a kind of work. An O2 with no prior E pay makes the same as a 6 year E7...that always baffled me.
To me, officers paying a little more is one of those customs and courtesies in the military that has always and will always be around. It's really nice to be able to take the burden of a ticket price, childcare, or office gift from a younger soldier without saying, "I make more money than you! Let me make a huge show of my generosity!" I think one of the reasons it's expected/forced is so that giving can be regulated just like social interactions are regulated. An officer can totally hang out with their enlisted troops if everyone is invited and similarly [I believe] an officer can gift their troops as long as everyone reaps the benefits.
(Married to a former enlisted - getting ready to commision) Agree. Only because, as you stated, it kind of takes the fun out of giving. Of course the argument could be raised "well, then why don't you pay what's required and then sponsor a few of the $10 dollar tickets?" but again... because you're paying more it's easy to feel like "Hey, I already paid 4X the amount!" Futhermore - most of the times an officer does not really have the option to not go to these events. They're supposed to be setting an example and fostering a camaraderie for their unit so not only are you required to go (or "Highly encouraged")but you're also required to pay more. Kind of adds insult to injury.
I asked my husband though and he had the same opinion as yours -"small price to pay"
Ok my husband wanted me to make a little bit more of his point clear :) - It's good for the Enlisted to know that officers pay more because it doesn't raise the question of "Why does someone who makes 3X more than I do, pay the same amount that I do?" and even though he would sponsor other tickets for say a ball, it would never be appropriate to tell them (enlisted) that. So all Sgt. Joe would see at the ball is "He's here, and he paid the same amount I did" It's a way for the military to show their enlisted that the officers are willing to literally pay a higher price and that you can trust their officers do the right thing. Sort of fostering that "An officer, and a gentlemen" theory.
So, there's the other side of the argument lol.
I don't think it should be required. But as we all know, the military is an above and beyond type of lifestyle that often asks strange and great things of those that serve. I have never heard the "Officer's wives get the better meat at the commissary" one. That gave me a good laugh!
I am also married to an officer, and while I definitely notice the difference in prices, I never feel "forced" to pay it. My personal opinion is that if someone has a problem with how much their ticket would cost, then don't go. Also, at least in all the squadrons we have been a part of, the prices are set by a group of officers - so they are essentially volunteering themselves and other officers to pay a higher price.
We are currently in the final stages of planning our Christmas party, and when we consider the venue, decorations, food and beverage costs, etc... and you divide that number by the number of people who might attend you might get something like $25 per person. Well, $50 for a couple could definitely be prohibitive for an enlisted couple. Likewise, paying $25 (or more) on top of the $50 we are already spending for our own tickets might be prohibit officers from sponsoring as well (this is an example, by the way, we haven't set our ticket prices yet). But by staggering the prices, a few officers paying $10 more per couple can go a long way toward reducing the amount an enlisted person would need to pay. Plus, I don't know about you, but my husband would be offended if higher ranking officers were constantly "sponsoring" us like we couldn't pay for ourselves. So I see it as a form of leadership for officers to accept a greater part of the financial burden, as a way of acknowledging that they know they get paid more, and at the same time it is not condescending to the enlisted members, or implying they cannot afford to contribute for themselves, at a level proportional to their income.
I am marrying an Officer and haven't encountered this yet since he hasn't commissioned. We recently went to military ball and it was expensive as hell (not to mention the cold food and crappy hosts who forgot our table not once, but three times.)
Because I know he'll make more money, I don't see that big of an issue sponsoring. However, I am not a rich person, I never have been and never will be. I still think that paying for an apartment off base is ridiculous even if they give him more housing allowance for it. I still think that $10 for a tube of mascara is stupid.
My fiance does have a big responsibility, a HUGE one. He has to make sacrifices just as much as anyone - rank or no rank. He goes where they send him and he makes no mum about it. He does what he's supposed to and what is required of him without as much as a word about it. If that is what they ask for, so be it. He's worked his butt off to be an officer and he'll work his butt off going to graduate school so he can move up in the Air Force. In return, he gets the house he wants, he can afford the things he needs and the things he doesn't need. If that means we have to pay double for childcare BUT we can afford to get our child extra clothes and things he doesn't necessarily NEED, we'll do it.
Comfort comes with a price tag, and officers have quite the cushion.
I do believe we have responsibilities for the ones that earn less. Just like lower ranking officers pay less than higher ranking officers when it comes to official functions, club membership, Hotels, golf, Childcare, etc. If the higher ranking officer's wouldn't pick up the bill, many lower ranking officer families couldn't afford to go to these events, just like enlisted families. And yes, we've been given prices we won to young officer's and to young enlisted families alike and there are times we chose to keep them and that was fine, too. The military is a family and we take care of each other, it's more than a job, it's a lifestyle.
From what I know - having both enlisted and officer friends - childcare is on a sliding scale based on the income of the entire family, not just the military member. Obviously income is tied to your rank, but I still think that is completely fair.
However, other pricing is strange. Like the differences in cost for military balls, etc. Most of those things are optional/voluntold - and there are people who opt out of participating because of the cost. I don't think they should be penalized.
(officer wife here) It drives me NUTS about the childcare thing. The military member makes enough to support the military member. Should you choose to have your 5 kids you should pay more. Birth control is free folks. Yes, E4 pay sucks. It's way more money I made when I was 21 though. My poor butt was eating ramen when I was in college. Don't have more kids than you can financially support.
I find it interesting that when the boat deploys, the enlisted men just stop getting their food allowance. They eat all their meals on the boat (obviously) and everyone calls it even. Officers keep getting their food allowance. Then they get a bill when they come home for all the meals they ate. The bill is more than the food allowance. They are purposely not paying them what the Navy considers a fair amount to feed them.
I guess it comes down to being fiscally responsible. If the $40 is going to break your budget, you probably should save that $10 anyways and build up a savings account.
Officers make more. Typically people with more education, more responsibility and more risk do.
Sorry if that sounds witchy. Just super frustrating to me.
I have to take no position on this, although in a unique manner ... this will be our last Christmas as enlisted. I'm happy that you've brought this debate up, as I had no idea officers were required to contribute more.
In pure hypothetical form, I cant say Ill mind it; however, I do see your point about it being voluntary. I also dont believe that officers should just be expected to have the extra money to give. As my husband is commissioned, I will likely be entering law school, which is going to bring us back down to the bare essentials for a period of time. I would never equate paying for my education to struggling to pay for food ... but I also dont know that I should have to worry about those extra dollars for things that arent essential to living, such as holiday parties.
Like I said, I have no real take on this, as I only see one side. But I appreciate the thought behind it.
Funny, I was just talking to my husband about this 2 days ago! I 110% agree, it's crap. It's the same here, we have a holiday party, although it's not mandatory for us to go, it's so much more for us to go to the party than anyone else. Same thing if you want to become a member at the club, or golf, or childcare, it seems like everything! I understand that officers make more, but they went to college, they should make more. It's like if you went went to Target and you want a sweater, should you have to pay more for it just because you make more? I don't think so. I know my husband does a lot of work, especially for his rank. Usually you don't come out of EOD school until you've been a captain for at least 1-2 years. He's been the EOD flight commander here at Aviano since April and he is still a 1st Lt, won't make Captain until June and I can tell you, he is very busy with work.
I think it's just always going to be a problem in the military between ranks. I don't care about rank and don't think I am better than anyone else. I respect everyone serving for our country. Especially here in Italy, you have to be close with everyone because it's such a small base, all the EOD men and women in the shop here are absolutely amazing.
We are enlisted... and to start off, we have no desire (any more) to be on the officer side. My husband went to college to become an officer but he was caught up in the AF drawbacks and enlisted Army instead. Now that he has seen just how much crap officers in the Army have to put up with, he doesn't want to go that route. He likes his job and the only reason would be for money which isn't really worth the long hours away from home.
I can't be sure because my son doesn't go to CDC yet, but I imagine your price is so high so E1-4 prices can be so low. I do not think that is right, but I can see why they might think it is. Personally, I think if there is going to be a sliding scale, it should be closer in price. It is soooo cheap to have kids as a junior enlisted that I see families of 10 piling out of cars. That is fine if you want that many; but you should have to pay for that many imo.
Oh, and one thing about holiday parties... it is optional to attend right? Well we decided as a family we did not want to attend and now because my hubby is junior enlisted, he is being "volun-told" to go and help out. Now we don't have any family time. That really bugs me about being an enlisted family.
Equating it to taxes I compltely agree with you. I am not in the military but I am just like you. Even when it comes to my taxes I dont even mind being charged more than someonw ith a lower income but I would like to choose where that money goes. I would like to say I want the extra taxation to go to a certain social program. Ideally I would like a percentage across the board but knowing that would never happen I would be happy being able to decide where my income is being allocated just as I am sure many officeers would like to choose which programs/events they support. And it certainly doesnt seem fair to me that while you may make more than enlisted that additional income is them forced back into the military. Your hubby worked hard to get where he is and should be able to save income accordingly.
To the officer wives here that don't agree with the policy. You know that higher ranking officers pick up your bill as well. Have you ever volunteered to pay the same for childcare as O-4 and above or club fees, ball fees and the list goes on? Have you ever said, oh, I think it's wrong that O-4 and above has to pay more than I do, let's make it fair and I pay as much as they do? Or do you pay the dues as you've been told and benefit from the fact that you earn less and therefore pay less?! I know many of you are still young and haven't been in the military that long but you need to understand that we are a big family and even though it might not always seem to be fair, we are here to help each other and with time and experience you will see that as well :-)
I'm going to sound a bit selfish here, but that's ok. I know my husband and I help out quite a bit out of the goodness of our hearts, so people can read this and think what they may. First, people argue we should pay more for childcare. Well, maybe people should only have as many kids as one can afford. We all know what our salaries will be b/c it's online. See where you will be in x-number of years and have as many kids as that salary can support. Second, Officers have to pay for their uniforms while Enlisted are given an allowance. We spent years paying off those loans. We are on recruiting duty right now, and we get a big "thanks for serving" while enlisted recruiters gets an extra few hundred dollars a month for this duty. When my husband says he'd like to continue serving the Marine Corps, he gets a handshake, while our enlisted friend just got a $40,000 thank you gift.
I have many enlisted friends and while I understand the frustration, I do not have any sympathy for whining. In the big bad world out there, separation exists as well. My dad ran a multi-billion dollar division and he always told my mother and myself, "you can't entertain people at your home when you may have to fire them the next day. The higher you climb, the lonelier it gets."
OK, I might take this in a slightly more offensive direction, but this does bother me...alot.
I get tired of the entitled attitude that many enlisted soldiers and their families have. There is this mentality that officers make SO much more money than they do. And yes, there obviously is a difference.
However, there is also a huge discrepancy in the number of "perks" that enlisted soldiers recieve (at least in the Army). An annual payment to put towards uniforms, cheaper childcare, cheaper dental care for your family, cheaper meal plans at the commissary, higher priority for R&R selection and many other things on and around post... and never having to donate to the pot for going away gifts, extra tickets for parties, etc.
In my humble opinion, if all these things were taken into consideration, I'm pretty certain the pay discrepancy wouldn't be NEARLY as large as enlisted soldiers believe it is.
In my experience, it has more to do with inability to manage finances than discrepancy in pay. I'm tired of seeing enlisted soldiers with BMWs, Jaguars, Hummers, and other vehicles that cost more than double what my car payment is. I'm tired of seeing enlisted soldiers wearing all name brand clothing that is new every season. And I'm extremely tired of these same soldiers turning around and saying that they deserve more pay because they're barely making ends meet.
Are there cases where this doesn't hold true? Absolutely. I'm not saying this applies to all the enlisted, I am friends with a great many enlisted soldiers that don't live in excess and do need assistance here and there. However, I've seen the soldier I described above often enough that it isn't an "exception to the rule".
Since I'm not in the military and have no experience, I certainly won't comment like I know what I'm talking about.
However, it has been interesting to read your post and especially the follow-up comments. I'm learning a lot!
First and foremost, I don't and haven't felt any real difference in how I am treated vs. an enlisted wife. I'm an officer's wife and I work a full time job. We have no kids, and when we do I will still probably work a full time job.
I never like the comparisons about "who has it easier"...because in the long run its tough all the way around. My husband has a dangerous job and works long hours...the maintainers that work on his jet work long hours, have a huge responsibility, and will deploy with my husband every single time.
Within our section of the AF we don't associate with enlisted, but that's not because we chose not to, its just the way its structured. All activities are totally seperate from 1 another, so I can't say that "we" have to pay for things. But I don't mind paying a lil more to play a round of golf.
While officers do make more money than enlisted, I will say that my husband took a pay cut to join the AF. He had a full time job after college and then went to OTS.
I don't think we can ever say we know how the 'other half' lives until you've walked in their shoes.
Ok, I'll weigh in. :)
I'm a little on the fence with this one. We're enlisted, but I have several officer wives that I count as friends so I get a feel for what they go through as well.
As far as ball tickets go or parties, I have to say I can understand why they have various ranges for enlisted and officers. Mostly because not everyone is as generous as you and some of the other ladies that commented and would not sponsor several other soldiers/airman in exchange for not having to pay as much for your own ticket.
I see where it could seem unfair, but then I also know how much more officers make than we do as enlisted. We're not one of the enlisted couples who take assistance from the government and we have no children at the present time and if we did, I know we'd never have more children than we could afford. Of course, I've seen a lot of enlisted couples out there that abuse the system and I can see where that could be frustrating.
That being said, we have my student loans, a car loan, insurance and utility bills to pay for every month. Would a reduced ball ticket make a difference for us some months? Yes..it would. Overseas it's not such a problem as when we are stateside.
I'm not even going to weigh in on the childcare, because I don't have a child and I don't even really know the system that goes along with that.
I guess what I'm trying to say is that I see where it could seem unfair, but I also know that a lot of people wouldn't contribute extra if they weren't made to. I also think with being an officer comes extra responsiblity, no, that's not always fair and sometimes the responsiblity is monetary, but I think that's part of being "in-charge". So I have to agree that for now there should be a difference between the two.
In all of the units that we have been associated with there was a sliding scale, E-4 and below would be one price, E-5 to E-9 another price, O-1 - 0-3 another price, and O-4 and up yet another.
That being said, it was often expected for my husband as an NCO to pay for his Airman's tickets. And there were only 2 officers in his entire unit, and no one bought our tickets. Our view on it was that with great privilege comes great responsibility.
Is it 100% fair? Probably not. But when your husband joined did he get promised fair?
As for childcare, at our last base you don't pay by rank you pay by total family income. And there are still multiple child discounts available at every pay rate. In fact, the cheapest childcare is averaged at $1.24 if you do childcare all week, and the most expensive is $2.76. Nothing like the $5 to $20 you stated. And the per hour rate is a flat $4 no matter if you are E or O.
(Enlisted spouse here.) I had no idea that there were officers/spouses out there who felt this vehemently about this topic.
I personally don't think that there is a direct parallel between this situation and people paying a greater percentage of taxes when they have a larger income. There are cultural issues involved that make the situation a little more complicated than that. The U.S. military is not the same as the U.S. at large; it's a completely different system altogether.
Officers are required to ask a lot of their soldiers (and airmen, etc). It's easy to lose sight of that when so many jobs are no longer on the front lines, but it's true. In many cases, still, officers are required to ask their soldiers to put their lives on the line for them. And they do it. These customs came about as a way for officers to tell their troops thank you. To tell them that their bravery and sacrifice are appreciated. It's just how things were done.
I don't know what the numbers are, but there is a sliding scale for enlisted as well. SNCO's and NCO's pay more than junior enlisted do on all these same things. I wonder if the difference between the upper level NCO's and the officer's is as different as everyone seems to think?
IMO, I don't think it's fair to make it a requirement. Yes, I do agree that with extra perks, should come extra responsibilities, but I don't think it should be monetary; after all each family is different. Sure as a (currently) childless family, y'all (may) have the extra time/money to contribute right now, but what about in a couple of years or so if/when y'all decide to TTC and might not have as much time/money to contribute? Shouldn't it be the family's discretion to give what they can, while making sure their needs are met?
@Lindsay: I totally agree with your statement!
Due to my husband's rank and job he is considered senior leadership and we as the spouses of senior leadership try very hard to unite enlisted and officer wives. It is very difficult to get our point across to young officer wives since they seem to feel a certain kind of entitlement. I know one will learn with experience but there is a reason why E-4 and below have certain privileges and the same goes for O1-O3. But it is a privilege and not a entitlement. The military is not and will not be fair, like it or not!
Post a Comment