Analysis Of A Time In Grade Pay Table For Military Personnel And Policy Alternatives

Federal law mandates that every four years the Secretary of Defense conduct an assessment of the military compensation system, resulting in a Quadrennial Review of Military Compensation (QRMC). In response to this request articulated in Section 603 of the Senate Armed Services Committee version of the National Defense Authorization Act of 2019, the 13th QRMC is providing an assessment of the effects of a time-in-grade pay table for military personnel, particularly on readiness. A time-in-grade pay table would set pay based on pay grade and years of service within a grade, in contrast to the current time-in-service pay table, which sets pay based on pay grade and years of service inthe military.

Military compensation is a pillar of the all-volunteer force. It is a fundamental policy tool for attracting and retaining personnel, and its structure-and the incentives implied by its structure-can affect U.S. service members' willingness to join, exert effort, demonstrate their leadership potential, remain in the military, and, eventually, exit the military at an appropriate time. Military compensation is a composite of current pay and allowances, special and incentive pays, health benefits, disability benefits, retirement benefits, and other benefits. Its importance to the readiness and morale of the force is such that it is reviewed every four years to determine whether it is adequate to meet the U.S. military's objectives. To inform the 10th Quadrennial Review of Military Compensation, this monograph presents an in-depth examination of the mix and structure of the U.S. military's current retirement-benefit system and several policy alternatives. The study included the development of a model that was estimated and used to run a series of simulations based on active-duty and reserve personnel data to track the careers and potential decisionmaking of military personnel across the services. The simulation results were then assessed in terms of their cost-effectiveness and ability to meet the services' expectations for accession, retention, and career mobility.

The purpose of this study is to develop a unified model that will permit an analysis of all the various issues relating to the military compensation system. This report develops a theoretical framework that allows an evaluation of the militarv pay and retirement system. Our analysis aims at addressing the traditional macroeconomic questions and two additional microeconomic questions that have received little attention: Does the system motivate personnel to work hard and effectively? and Does the system promote the best person/job/rank matches?

Every four years, the U.S. Department of Defense (DoD) commissions a review of the military compensation system. Since the 9th such commission reporting in 2002, the benchmark for setting the level of military pay has been at about the 70th percentile of earnings for similar civilians given the unusual demands and arduous nature of military service. The 70th percentile benchmark was based on analysis from the 1990s indicating that pay at around this level had historically been necessary to enable the military to recruit and retain the quality and quantity of personnel required. In addition, by law, the annual increase in military basic pay is guided by changes in the Employment Cost Index (ECI), a measure of the growth in private-sector employment costs; research from the early 1990s suggested that an alternative to the ECI, the Defense Employment Cost Index (DECI), would be more relevant to military personnel. The authors of this report provide input on the setting of the level of military pay, the relevance of the 70th percentile, and the use of the DECI versus the ECI in setting the annual adjustment to military pay. They find that current military pay may be too high, since recruit quality today exceeds DoD's stated requirements, and, further, quality and retention both exceed the levels observed during the late 1980s and mid-1990s, when the 70th percentile was established. However, the 70th percentile may be too low a benchmark, because there are reasons to believe that the recruiting environment is more difficult than it was in earlier periods. Figures of around the 75th to 80th percentile for enlisted personnel and of around the 75th percentile for officers are likely to meet existing recruit quality objectives. Assessing the ECI versus the DECI, the authors conclude DoD should consider replacing or supplanting the former with the latter. The DECI has several advantages over the ECI, and most of the critiques of the DECI have been addressed by advances in data availability and computing power in recent decades.

The research presented in this Documented Briefing grew out of two concerns: whether military compensation is adequate to enable the military services to meet their manpower requirements year in and year out, and the question of whether action to change military compensation is required now. These two strands of research consider not only long- term trends affecting the adequacy of military compensation, but also short-term circumstances. Further, since major military pay legislation was passed in 1999 and took effect in Fiscal Year 2000 (FY 00), there is a question of whether that pay action is sufficient to meet both short-term and long-term challenges in recruiting, retaining, and motivating personnel. And if it is not sufficient, what sort of actions should be taken? Given the breadth of the subject, this briefing draw s upon the body of existing research on defense manpower and military compensation. However, the briefing also contains new material on military/civilian pay comparisons and first-cut predictions of the impact of the FY 00 compensation changes. Specifically, we examine how the pay of enlisted personnel compares to that of their civilian counterparts, how these comparisons have changed over time, how the FY 00 pay actions affect the comparisons, and how recruiting and retention have fared recently. The briefing also discusses the variety of policy options that might be considered.

Drawing on a large body of research, this RAND Arroyo report, part of a series, provides an examination of the role of military compensation as a strategic human resource tool, how well it fulfills that role, and how it could be improved.

The Harper government's policies are moving our country backwards toward a vision of society, the role of government, and the nature of the federation reminiscent of the 1920s. [...] As the government tried to liberalize markets in grains, the Wheat Board Ceo was fired 14 The Harper Record and the government worked to prevent Board members from speaking out in support of the marketing board. [...] The report of the Iacobucci Commission was originally meant to be submitted the week before the 2008 election was called, but was delayed until the week after the election.9 Both the Liberals who were in power during the events in question and the Conservatives, who are in favour of the anti-terrorist agenda, were thus spared public scrutiny on these issues during the election campaign. [...] Conclusion In the 32 months that the Conservative minority government was in power between 2006 and 2008, the people of Canada faced signifi- cant challenges because of the substance of what the Harper govern- ment achieved and because of the anti-democratic way in which he went about it. [...] In a 1989 memo to Preston Manning, he argued that the core political cleavage in contemporary Western democracies pits taxpayers and private sector-oriented citizens (the ideological right) against the public sector-oriented political class and "tax recipients of the Welfare State" (the ideological left).17 The conserv- ative coalition of the right would include the corporate sector and the privat.

The U.S. military has been continuously engaged in foreign conflicts for over two decades. The strains that these deployments, the associated increases in operational tempo, and the general challenges of military life affect not only service members but also the people who depend on them and who support them as they support the nation â€" their families. Family members provide support to service members while they serve or when they have difficulties; family problems can interfere with the ability of service members to deploy or remain in theater; and family members are central influences on whether members continue to serve. In addition, rising family diversity and complexity will likely increase the difficulty of creating military policies, programs and practices that adequately support families in the performance of military duties. Strengthening the Military Family Readiness System for a Changing American Society examines the challenges and opportunities facing military families and what is known about effective strategies for supporting and protecting military children and families, as well as lessons to be learned from these experiences. This report offers recommendations regarding what is needed to strengthen the support system for military families.