Military Personnel Military And Civilian Pay Comparisons Present Challenges And Are One Of Many Tools In Assessing Compensation

Compares pay and benefits provided to members of the Armed Forces (AF) with that of comparably situated private-sector employees to assess how the differences in pay and benefits affect recruiting and retention of members of the AF. The objectives were to: (1) assess total military compensation for active duty officers and for enlisted personnel; (2) compare private-sector pay and benefits for civilians of similar age, educ., and experience with similar job responsibilities and working conditions of officers and enlisted personnel of the AF; and (3) assess the 10th QRMC recommendation to include regular military compensation and select benefits when comparing military and civilian compensation to ascertain if it is appropriate.

Military Personnel: Military and Civilian Pay Comparisons Present Challenges and Are One of Many Tools in Assessing Compensation

The National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2010 required that we conduct a study comparing pay and benefits provided by law to members of the Armed Forces with that of comparably situated private-sector employees to assess how the differences in pay and benefits affect recruiting and retention of members of the Armed Forces. 4 Specifically, our objectives were to (1) assess total military compensation for active duty officers and for enlisted personnel; (2) compare private-sector pay and benefits for civilians of similar age, education, and experience with similar job responsibilities and working conditions of officers and enlisted personnel of the Armed Forces; and (3) assess the 10th QRMC recommendation to include regular military compensation and select benefits when comparing military and civilian compensation to ascertain if it is appropriate. The focus of this review was active duty servicemembers' perspectives on compensation. That is, we focused on cash compensation and the value of benefits to servicemembers versus the cost to the government of providing compensation.

The National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2010 required that we conduct a study comparing pay and benefits provided by law to members of the Armed Forces with that of comparably situated private-sector employees to assess how the differences in pay and benefits affect recruiting and retention of members of the Armed Forces. Specifically, our objectives were to (1) assess total military compensation for active duty officers and for enlisted personnel; (2) compare private-sector pay and benefits for civilians of similar age, education, and experience with similar job responsibilities and working conditions of officers and enlisted personnel of the Armed Forces; and (3) assess the 10th QRMC recommendation to include regular military compensation and select benefits when comparing military and civilian compensation to ascertain if it is appropriate.

Assesses DoD¿s use of cash incentives to recruit and retain highly qualified individuals for service in the armed forces. It: (1) identifies recent trends in DoD's use of enlistment and reenlistment bonuses; (2) assesses the extent to which the services have processes to determine which occupational specialties require bonuses and whether bonus amounts are optimally set; and (3) determines how much flexibility DoD has in managing selected special and incentive pays for officer and enlisted personnel. The report analyzed service data on bonuses and special and incentive pays, and reviewed relevant guidance and other documentation from DoD and the services. Charts and tables. This is a print on demand report.

The Department of Defense (DoD) paid active duty military personnel over $18 billion in housing allowances in FY 2010. DoD sets housing allowance rates annually based on market costs of rent, utilities, and renter¿s insurance. Also, DoD has identified 26 installations significantly impacted by expected growth in personnel due to various rebasing actions. This report reviewed DoD¿s rate-setting process, among other issues. The report determined: (1) whether there are enhancements to strengthen DoD¿s rate-setting process; and (2) whether service members have encountered challenges in obtaining off-base housing. Includes recommendations. Charts and tables. This is a print on demand edition of an important, hard-to-find publication.