A Gripe About Pay

I know I speak for many in my unit when I make this post about the pay systems for the Army National Guard. Simply put, the systems are still in the same state they were when the Government Accounting Office (GAO) published its November 2003 report "Military Pay: Army National Guard Personnel Mobilized to Active Duty Experienced Significant Pay Problems."

Our first encounter with the system's deficiencies came after the unit's original cross country ferry mission in November, 2005. Each of us incurred had incurred expenses for hotel stays, rental car fees and meals. Mine came to over $700, and it took two months for me to be reimbursed. There are soldiers still looking for their money. Since some in the unit made three cross country trips, there are soldiers with expenses that total more than what some enlisted personnel bring home in a pay period.

The other gripe I have is with the way the military pay system handles the Combat Zone Income Tax Exclusion. Basically when a service member serves in areas of the world deemed combat zones, they are entitled to receive their full income without federal income tax withholding. However, the National Guard/Reserve systems still can't handle this law. Here is an excerpt from the November 2003 GAO report on that subject:

"Specifically, Defense Joint Military Pay Systems - Reserve Component (DJMS-RC) was not designed to make active duty pays and exclude federal taxes applicable to those pays in a single pay transaction. To compensate for this system constraint, Defense Finance and Accounting Service (DFAS) established a workaround that requires two payment transactions over a 2-month payroll cycle to properly exempt soldiers' pay for the combat zone tax exclusion. That is, for those soldiers entitled to this exclusion, DJMS-RC withholds federal taxes the first month, identifies the taxes to be refunded during end- of-month pay processing, and then makes a separate payment during the first pay update the following month to refund the taxes that should not have been withheld. Soldiers' taxes could not be refunded the same month because the DJMS-RC refund process occurs only one time a month."

Basically our Guard soldiers are subject to the opportunity cost of waiting a month to get their tax money back, but active duty soldiers aren't. I cannot imagine what the sum of the interest calculated on taxes withheld from National Guard/Reserve soldiers must be since the "Exclusion" was adopted.

By Bert Stover |  January 18, 2006; 2:13 AM ET  | Category:  Pay and Benefits
Previous: Back to Business | Next: A Pen Pal's Questions Before Going to Iraq


Please email us to report offensive comments.

Even with the govt saying for years now that it is working on it, it still makes it hard to believe that things will ever change. It takes a LONG time to get used to the way the reserves handle ANY paperwork. It took over a year for me to be "officially" discharged once I got out. By the way, you are the one still responsible, along with your credit rating, for paying your govt credit card while waiting to be reimbursed. Been there done that, active and reserve. CITIBANK doesn't care. Good luck.

Posted by: Craig | January 28, 2006 06:49 AM

I don't see what the problem is, your paid what your worth, if your a CEO of some company your paid untold millions, if you protecting the country from evil-doers your only cannon fodder supporting the good lifestyle of those CEO's so your worthless or close to that and if your stupid enough to fall for the rhetoric you should be paid even less.

Posted by: rich | January 30, 2006 10:56 AM

I believe you sould recieve the same as men on regular duty

Posted by: Joe Rorie | January 30, 2006 11:03 AM

The last comment is really offensive and merits no particular response.

As to the Reserve pay issue, if this were done by a corporation, both the federal and states would hit them like a ton of bricks. Hate to sound cynical, but that is a lot of money, and even at measly current interest rates, the delay is very profitable - as is the delay in reimbursements.

Posted by: KK | January 30, 2006 11:07 AM


A private married, with seperate quarters after four months get $1320 a month!
Beats my $116 @ month after two years as Spec 4. !

Posted by: Archie A Vietnam Vet | January 30, 2006 12:52 PM

Your comments concerning the problems with pay to the reservists and national guard reinforce what I have already been told by my son who is serving in Iraq training Iraqi soldiers. This entire debacle is an outrage. The President and VP should be impeached. By the time 2008 roles around I shudder to think how many more of our men and women will have been killed and/or injured. We really cannot allow this incompetent governing to continue.

Posted by: Marion Erwin | January 30, 2006 01:38 PM

The fact that there is ANY issue with the logistics of how
military people are paid, and have their expenses reimbursed is a disgrace to the military, the gov`t. and to the political/civilian leadership--Rumsfeld,Bush and the boys don`t wait a month or two to be made whole and they make a tad more than a pfc.(which is a whole separate open sore).

Posted by: R.N.Springstein | January 30, 2006 02:43 PM

Hey Rich, of the comment about worthless people, have you looked in the mirror lately. Thats what worthless looks like. Of course I guess you discount the fact that these are the very same people who afford you the chance to make foolish statements like that in relative freedom. The constitution gave you the right, but its the soldiers who protect that right. Your an idiot, and the poster-boy for abortion. Hows that idiot.

Posted by: Pete | January 30, 2006 03:17 PM

What are you all crying about, no matter how you look at it your getting the money back. Some of you will never see an income like this in your life time and your still crying. Just do your job and move on now.

Posted by: mark | January 30, 2006 10:03 PM

to Pete - do you really believe that "those" people afford him the chance to make statements in freedom?? Who are you kidding? How does "abortion" fit into this - I can hardly believe your logic - I think you should take a look in the mirror and let Rich say what he wants and believes, even if you do not like it.

Posted by: Mary Ann | January 30, 2006 10:08 PM

From reading the responses, it is hard to believe that many of the respondents actually read the initial story.

The Chief did NOT complain about his salary. He gets a good income . . . as he should. He's a bright guy, working in excess of 80 hours per week in a harsh environment where the locals want to kill him.

Instead he complained about the pay processes of his employer. Specifically he complained that:
1) His employer forces employees to fund company directed travel and expenses from the employees' own pockets -- and is very slow to reimburse those expenses.
2) His employer is discriminatory in the application of pay; active duty soldiers are paid more promptly than reserve soldiers.

These pay problems create havoc with soldiers' credit histories and their ability to plan a personal/family budget. Therefore, they are legitimate concerns.

But, I don's see how the Chief's post is in any way related to abortion, impeachment, etc.

Posted by: Mel | January 31, 2006 11:13 AM

Our Commander in Chief has seen fit to risk American lives in the Iraq conflict among others and yet he cuts Veterans' benefits in his budget proposal - now THAT'S leadership!

It should come as no surprise to anyone that the pay structure for guardsmen and reservists is lagging behind that of the active duty personnel. Lack of enlistment numbers has the military using our "backup" troops on the front lines... where it was never imagined they'd have to serve. As usual with the gov't, taking care of the people comes later after you've asked them for the possibly ultimate sacrifce.

This is the type of military leadership you often see from someone who's never actually served. I'm sure it was hard for the future president to see how military personnel were paid while he vacationed in Alabama during the Vietnam War. After all, he was partying and getting paid for it. What's not to like, eh?

Posted by: Sacrifice vs. Reward | January 31, 2006 12:30 PM

Backup soldier? I am not real sure how to take that one. The US has always relied upon "citizen soldiers" to augment the active duty forces. This tradition goes back to the very beginning of our nation. Instead of manning and equiping a large standing military, we use the reserve component. This makes sense for many reasons, especially when you consider the fact that we are not always in an active conflict. I have bristled many times when politicians and civillians say the Guard belongs in the US. The Guard does have a large homeland response capability (ie. Katrina), and we are usefull in that regard. Don't ever think that the Guard is a "backup", for this has never been true. We are, at all times, able to be federalized and sent to do our true job. That job is to close with and destroy the enemies of this country. To be honest, we are not real fussy about which president or which party decides this is a good idea. We don't pick them, we don't whine about them, we just go and fight them.
I am in this unit with Mr Stover. None of us feel exploited or used. This is a job we all signed up for, and the pay issues are a thing we will gripe about. The Army has always been a bit shaky when integrating us onto active duty. Bert was just making a comment about that fact of life. Civillian companies have similar pay and travel problems that all of us have griped about. We are proud to serve our country. For all of you who support us, may God bless you all. For those of you who call us "cannon fodder", God bless you too. You live in a country that "backup soldier" blood paid for your right to speak. And for those of you who hate this war, I have this to say:
1. So do we, but it needs done
2. If you could have seen Kuwait city in 1991, you would understand why this was needed, I was there
3. WMD had plenty of time to go to Syria (our next war?)
4. Your protests and words telegraph weakness and division to the enemy, giving them hope. They know that if they keep it up, the politics will cause us to loose our will. Sound familiar? Ho Chi Min used it to his advantage. So did the warlords in Somalia. I believe a much loved democrat had us in that desert.

Thats all I have to say for now. Thank you all for exercising democracy. It works much better than we think. And to those Bush bashers and "cannon fodder" bloggers, the enemy thanks YOU. Thanks to your comments and words of division, you got an American soldier or marine killed today.

Posted by: CW2 Hill | January 31, 2006 01:35 PM

One of the things that makes America great is the commitment of its warfighters; be they active, USAR, ARNG soldiers or any components of the sister services. Military folks do not stay in the military for the money; it is a calling. We fight because it is our profession and we put our politics and personal beliefs aside to uphold our committment, our duty and our oath.

Rest assured, if politician's or corporate honcho's pay got as screwed up as ANY soldiers pay, especially the Guard and Reserve's, heads would roll.

As a registered and regular voter, a veteran of combat and retiring after a 30 year career as an Army Noncommissioned Officer, I believe I have the right to speak out against the present or ANY adminstration without contributing to a warrior's death in Iraq; just as CW2 Hill has the right to feel otherwise.

That is another thing that makes America great - the right to free speech, even when it comes from the mouthes of the
un-informed, and biased folks as seen in SOME of the comments posted routinely on this website.

Bottom line is

1. Most military folks do not get rich being in the military, even when in a combat zone.

2. For all those who continue to think only men are fighting, over 15% of the military is comprised of women who are deployed and executing their missions as professionally and competently as their male counterparts. We all wear camo and bleed red, white & blue.

3. The National Guard will always be managed differently as they serve "two masters" the state and federal governments; their contributions are in keeping with the highest traditions of military service but they are often stuck in a "Catch-22" within the state/federal bureaucracies

And finally; let's not repeat the mistakes from Vietnam: If you do not/cannot support the war, at least respect and honor the warriors for they are the ones who preserve our rights.

If you can read this, thank a teacher; for the freedom to read this thank your military and those veterans whose benefits are routinely taken away

Posted by: Rat Warrior 7 | January 31, 2006 02:35 PM

I still do not believe in this war or do I believe in or trust the Bush adminstration but I believe in our troops period. I support anything or any deed that can make their difficult lives easier, including simplicity in their pay regulations. So if anyone can come up with a solution to the National Guards dilemma speak out. As for those who say we Bush Bashers help are enemies, I say the Bush administrations disregard for civil liberties and approval of torture fuel our enemies cries that the United States of America is tyrannical country blindly bullying the rest of the world.

Posted by: Robert Torres | January 31, 2006 04:20 PM

Pay problems. That's part of the system. That will NEVER change. When I was DRAFTED. Yes! I was paid, in cash, $90 a month as a Pvt E1. That's the lowest rank. During my years in the Army Reserve, I was called into wartime service. Pay was also a problem. However it DID straighten out. In the meantime, I was "housed," armed, well-fed, entertained, well-clothed, transported and updated on the war. Hey folks! That's the military. I would sure like to see a movie where they addressed the mundane stuff. They never do. They could start with pay problems. Just be sure you get your DD214 when you ETS!

Posted by: samtheoldaccordianman | February 1, 2006 05:22 PM

To samtheaccordionman--You must be a little older than I am--I got $100 per, and I had a free uniform, 3 squares (4 if I wanted to eat midrats; yeah, I was Navy) and a comfortable rack to catch some ZZZs The above comments from active ( and activated) members surprise me not at all ( after all, it the RIGHT of every soldier (sailor, airman, marine) to bitch . What does surprise me is the comments of those who (obviously) have never served. My initial reaction to the comment by Rich was F*** You! Then I rethought after reading more comments. Had Rich been raised by someone like a father figure, rather than by a Cindy Sheehan type ( but then Cindy Sheehan raised a son who VOLUNTEERED) so that argument becomes --How much influence did she have over her own son?. And so then why should we listen to her screechy, whiney rants at all? And why should we be surprised at extraordinarily stupid comments like that made by Rich? It's not really your fault, Rich. You can blame it on the National Education Association, or on the Democrat party, or on your mom. Whomever you choose to blame it on, remember that you have to carry your own water. Semper Fi--Oh, and F*** You, Rich.

Posted by: Chuck | February 2, 2006 02:21 AM

To Mel, CW2 Hill and Rat Warrior: BRAVO!

Unfortunately, for years, the Army seemed to be the last one to realize the power they had in "reserve." For the longest time, it seemed to be that the Army thought that if a reserve unit was used, and it looked bad, the Army itself looked bad. ("Why spend so much time, money, effort, etc. on reserve units?" attitude.) If a reserve unit was used, and it looked good in any way, performed as well as, or many times better than, the active Army, than the Army looked bad then too, since they did it as "part timers." (Why should we spend so much time, money, effort, etc. on so many active troops when we can get the same results with reservists?" attitude.) Other services have used therir reserve components to their advantage that the Army is finally realizing. A reserve unit can brings many things with it that any active unit can not. Working with the same people for longer than 2-3 years at a time builds a camraderie, trust, loyalties, and a host of other traits as "part timers" that can not be built as much as with an active unit that works together every day. Depending on the unit, many members also live in the same communities together for years at a time.

As far as the "part time" gig, it is a lot more time and work than most people, even or especially active duty, realize. Reservists are still required to meet the same standards as their active counterparts. That includes skills, physical fitness, flight time, schools, and many others. A LOT, not some, is done on the reservist's own time, without pay, not on the unit's time. That is in addition to all of the other day to day routines, AND having the same responsibilities for a civilian job, AND being away from their civilian job for much longer than the traditional one weekend per month and 2 weeks a year. Reservists, and their families, have to deal with the service member being at their full time job, reserve job, as well as schools, studying/staying current, and preparing to move up ang get promoted for BOTH jobs.

BTW - the whole WMD bit in the media is a joke. The whiney media go on and on about not finding any. The pictures of pulling fighter jets and other huge pieces of military equipment out of hiding positions BURIED in the desert were quickly and quietly burried by the media. Don't you think a few mason jars with enough chemicals in them to wipe out a large American city would be a little harder to find? And yes, WE, the US, gave them to Iraq when they were seen as the lesser of 2 evils between Iraq and Iran.


Posted by: Craig | February 2, 2006 10:33 AM

CW2 Hill.. your facts on Somalia are wrong it was iniatiated by Bush 1 prior to departure from office

Posted by: Chief S | February 2, 2006 11:42 AM

I am not sure that most of you understand what it going on. Soldiers are not forced to fund their own travel. They have charge cards and can get advances prior to their travel. I do find it a little strange that we have TDY War. The pay system needs to be replaced and the government is slow at doing it, even though they are working on it. To say we should fire the current administratation for it is absurd. The pay systems have been a problem long before this administration. It is a wonderful benefit that servicemen in the zone do not pay taxes on their pay. It is a shame that the benefit comes after their first month of actualy pay in the zone, however, the fact is that after that first month they are consistently reciving their full pay and at the end of their tour they will get that last return of taxes after the fact.

Posted by: Accountant | February 2, 2006 12:31 PM

I am not sure that most of you understand what it going on. Soldiers are not forced to fund their own travel. They have charge cards and can get advances prior to their travel. I do find it a little strange that we have TDY War. The pay system needs to be replaced and the government is slow at doing it, even though they are working on it. To say we should fire the current administratation for it is absurd. The pay systems have been a problem long before this administration. It is a wonderful benefit that servicemen in the zone do not pay taxes on their pay. It is a shame that the benefit comes after their first month of actualy pay in the zone, however, the fact is that after that first month they are consistently reciving their full pay and at the end of their tour they will get that last return of taxes after the fact.

Posted by: Accountant | February 2, 2006 12:33 PM

If it's any consolation, I am a civilian Federal employee and we too experience a similar problem with travel reimbursements. If you travel on Gov't business and use your travel credit card, the bill comes due a whole lot faster then the reimbursement. If I don't pay the bill till I'm reimbursed, it affects my credit and I get in trouble with my Institute. So in a small way, I'm making an interest free loan to the Gov't while I wait to be reimbursed. Like I (and the Guard) make enough to afford that!

Regardless, good luck on your deployment and be safe. Hope you and your buds come home safely.

Posted by: Fed | February 2, 2006 01:29 PM

I am the sister, daughter, mother, grandmother, wife of men who have served this country. I know how it was and how it is. My son and my husband were both wounded. When my husband served everything was provided and it was the very best this country had to offer. By the time my grandson served it had changed. This country doesn't seem to have enough money anymore to take care of its' own. What a shame.

Posted by: Pat | February 2, 2006 09:18 PM

I proudly served 27 years in the USAF through three conflict periods, I did not decide, then or now, what enemy to fight. Or even if it's an enemy but performed the job I was hired to do. I think any employer should first and foremost be concerned with the treatment of its personnel.A gripe is a gripe and should be aired.As the world super power that can spend millions on a bridge to no where, we can afford to treat our military as first class, as they they well deserve.Please, don't berate the guys that are part of a system that will be in place when any enemy comes for you.Sometimes we get it wrong but most times it is right and no one reports this.If for no more than our sucess in WWI and II, give us the benefit of doubt.

Posted by: TED | February 3, 2006 09:37 AM

I wonder why 'clowns' like Rich even bother to read this blog. Does he have a guilty conscience that he is down deep a coward, selfish, etc. so he can live in his own little world and scream and holler like a maladjusted kid.
I bet he is a druggie to.
I wonder about policy inre Iraq too. But we are there...so lets win!!!! Quit this messing around.
Semper Fi
Wondrous Moose

Posted by: Bill | February 6, 2006 11:13 AM

Lets put this in perspective. First the gov't should ensure our soldiers are taken care of. Its as much the duty of the gov't to do that as it is the duty of the soldiers to fight. Second, I am a reservist and volunteered to deploy after 911. My pay issues were screwed up and while it did not affect me militarily, it affected my family who has also made a sacrifice. Very unfair. Finally, while Rich's comments are sarcastic there is some truth in them. The bottom line is that if your like a CEO type, your "important" relatively speaking and things will get done. But what is a foot soldier to do but count on the Army to make things right. He/she deserves the same fairness. Finally, while I am there to do my duty for my country, I not blinded enough not see the fact that VP cheney is awarding billions of dollars in no bid federal contracts to his friends in Halliburton. After all the was the CEO, and in two years he will need to look at this very industry to make money. More than anything its that which disgusts me. Im proud of our troops for doing their duty, but I don't like the American flag to be used and a shield for money exchnages and corporate greediness in foreign countries.

Posted by: roger | February 6, 2006 11:26 AM

Pity that the companies who've grown too rich from the Iraqi invasion and occupation (such as Halliburton, Lockheed Martin, GE and other defense contractors) don't provide stock options to the military personnel serving in Iraq. After all, the enlisted men and women are the ones who ensured those contractors are scoring their record profits.

Posted by: E. Etage | February 6, 2006 11:34 AM

I agree with roger. The military pay system is broken. For three years I have been informing the DFAS that I am a resident of Wisconsin not Illinois. I have called, written them and filled out the change of state residency form 6 times. Still, they claim me a resident in Illinois, and though I don't live there I have to file state taxes because these bofoons at DFAS can't get it together. Not only is it more expensive but I am paying taxes in multiple state for no good reason. I have no faith in the government doing the right thing...but the men/women of our military deserve better.

Posted by: mike | February 6, 2006 11:37 AM


Posted by: Chimpeach | February 6, 2006 01:21 PM

I have never understood why the VA, all military personnel and anyone associated with them have not raised a major ongoing protest. For years I have read of inequities for the military. The problems of many of the wounded veterans should be the subject of national outrage.

The press and major NGO's should be asked to help.

Posted by: Gerald Thebeau | February 7, 2006 07:13 PM

No soldier gave me any inalienable rights or freedoms, and no soldier dies because I exercise any of those said rights.

To criticize or arm chair critique government policy is not to aid THE ENEMY.

Specifically, in this engagement, soldiers are dying due to the risks obtained by occupying a large country in which the enemy is a locally based insurgent force using irregular tactics and improvisation.

No post on a website is going to change any of that.

I'm terribly sorry for the loss of life and injury to any parties in this engagement. The pay is small remunarence for extremely high risk and solemn duty. That's why they call you folks heroes. Best of luck to any and all. May you get paid. May you be safe.

Posted by: faustrolla | February 8, 2006 02:03 PM

It is not about Bush, Democrats or a soldier's duty. It is all common sense. We as a nation are very proud of our fairness, the way we care for others and the technology. Why can't we use technology to pay our soldier's on time, be fair to them and care for their families welfare. Feeding, clothing and transporting them on duty is necessity to keep them prepared. However, it is also neccessary that they be paid well, paid on time and always respected by our actions not political sound bites. Why can't we be honest and accept our mistakes and correct them. By the way, it is a Commander-in-Chief's responsibility to evaluate risks, rewards against loss of life, time, money and long-term repercussions of committing our troops in any war. It should also, include a calaculations of destruction of families caused by wars. Simple slogans of caring for families is not enough. Actions always speak louder than words. Politicians make sure they are compensated well even when they have created blunders and cost the tax payers billions of dollars. Why can't they make sure that our soldier's are paid well and truly respected for their sacrifices. These soldier's are the ones that make sure that our children have a future that's safe from the enemies who would only want to take their smiles away. DEMOCRACY STARTS FROM OUR BACKYARD AND FAIRNESS IS THE FIRST RULE OF A DEMOCRATIC NATION! GOD BLESS AMERICA! MAY GOD GIVE COURAGE AND LONG LIFE TO OUR SOLDIER'S BECAUSE WITHOUT THEM WE HAVE NO TOMORROW!

Posted by: Ravi | February 8, 2006 02:09 PM

"Your" is the possessive, meaning "Your car" or "Your house" -- some object belonging to you. "You're" is the proper form of the conjunction "You are" as in "If you're a CEO, you're paid what you're worth" etc...

I think at least half the posts are getting this wrong. You have no idea how stupid this makes you look when you write like this.

Posted by: You're | February 8, 2006 02:40 PM

Interesting comments.

Paying our military personnel promptly & correctly should be a high priority with things being the way they are.

There really isn't any valid excuse for not doing so.

People should be allowed to gripe about what they want to gripe about. If you don't like reading it, feel free to check out a different blog.

Posted by: amo | February 8, 2006 03:40 PM

I can identify with this story but with the opposite result. I'm in the Army Reserve and in all the years I've been in, not once has the Army withheld federal income tax from my drill pay, and I've never been deployed. I gave up trying to get it straightened out - not that I tried too hard though. It all evens out come April 15.

Posted by: porochi | February 8, 2006 06:07 PM

Yea Roger! You said what I wanted to say in fewer words. I am the mother of a soldier who has returned safely from Iraq. We do care, but that does not mean we approve of the things this administration has done and continues to do.

Posted by: Brenda | February 9, 2006 05:17 PM

After 8 yrs in the Military, and as many yrs as a Federal civilian worker & also as a spouse of a former military member, & a former Guard member, I have to add my 2 cents.
Pay problems have always been an issue for military members, both active duty & those called back to active service & their families. All should be treated equally though, no waiting & having to attempt to get the back pay for the withholding. The gov't pay systems do well to quickly take back any overpayment it gives but is very slow in catching up the pay it was negligent in not giving. As to up front payment for travel & hoping for the reimbursment before the payment is due, I have experienced it first hand. Sure we could refuse to pay until we get the money due for the travel, but it wouldn't be a black mark on anyone other than yourself & affect only yourself negatively.
As to being paid what your worth. How can you put a price tag on being placed in danger 24/7 for a year or more at a time. Yes, most of these soldiers have volunteered for duty, but are they really being paid enough & more importantly being paid what is due to them on time?
Most businesses would go under if they didn't pay their workers correctly & timely.
You don't have to agree with the current administration to support our troops & their families. Afterall they are doing the job they are given orders to carry out.
Some of the folks have talked about CEOs & the great pay the deserve. How is it that their worth is greater than the teachers who without a doubt got the CEO to that position, & to the law enforcement officers who protect him from harm. Both of which are paid much less they are worth.

Posted by: Deb | February 10, 2006 03:41 PM

As a financial professional and with many years in financial systems, having a problem with pay should be a rare event. The feds have not put enough time, money, and effort and our soldiers have to bear the brunt. The miliary needs a better pay system so any issues can be quickly resolved. By that, I mean within 30 days or less. The miliary is world class outfit. It needs a world class pay system.

Posted by: Chuck | February 15, 2006 10:40 AM

Obviously you all have had some business gone bad. Leave the military alone and focus on yourself. The military has been and will always be something to criticize but let's not forget, we are a FREE nation because of............

Posted by: Guam | April 5, 2006 08:39 PM

I agree that the pay could be a little faster! But I use the Government travel card "Which is interest free" then when I do my travel voucher they take the money due to me and apply it right to my government credit card. So yes it takes time but they provide everyone "As long as their credit don't suck really bad" with that credit card so it isn't all that bad.
Army National Guard

P.S. As far as I know when Guard/Reserve is on active duty we get paid the same, and we also get paid a little better on our weekend drills. Correct me if i'm wrong.

Posted by: Casey | May 1, 2006 10:31 AM

Why is it the 'speed of business' is overnight when it comes to the global business world, and 'whenever we get around to it' when related to compensation for reservists and National Guard?

If there would be a policy to not deploy the reserves and guard until the pay inequity is 'fixed,' then you can bet the payroll solution would be closer to overnight than to whenever. How many software engineers can it take to solve a payroll problem?

Posted by: MNVet | May 1, 2006 03:06 PM

The pay system is a joke, I was on ADT for an MOS course 2 months ago...still have yet to see a dime. I'm a full-time student and I cannot afford the luxury of waiting for some payroll clerk to get off thier lazy hide to do thier f***ing job. (I'm paying for school out of my own pocket, no free bennies)

In my state, I see the problem as the "union" Mil-Techs and AGR soldiers who work 9-5...they forget that they are soldiers. The reason for my venom is the excuses I have gotten from my unit....

1. UA went on vacation and forgot to submit your pay (Big surprise as he only works 6 hours a day on AGR status)

2. STARC is doing thier AT (5 weeks in a row??)

3. Changeover in finance personnel
(Funny how the clerks I talk to have been there for years....)

4. We're understaffed
(with 5 temps more than they are alloted on MTOE)

5. This isn't the Regular Army (Something my commander and I agree on)

and the beat goes on......

While I'm venting, I figured that I would voice my dissent to the current administration. It's funny that last drill we were reminded about UCMJ and that speaking your mind can be an offense.

I personally would enjoy seeing Dubya, Dick and Rummy raked over the coals for Iraq. 3000+ of my brothers and sisters are dead for thier actions. The 5th anniversary of 9/11 is almost upon us and we still aint got Bin Laden...("WTF, over")

Simple Math....

Bin Laden + 1 Division + 5 years = ?

Iraq + 10 Divisions + 3 years = ?

Posted by: AbleDog | August 15, 2006 07:51 PM

The comments to this entry are closed.


© 2007 The Washington Post Company