New bill would boost spec ops retired pay
A North Carolina congressman proposes boosting retired pay for special operations troops to encourage them to stay in service instead of accepting lucrative private-sector security jobs.
But Rep. Robin Hayes’ idea to allow special pays and bonuses to be included when calculating retirement pay is controversial. Even Hayes does not expect it to be acted upon this year.
http://www.marinecorpstimes.com/story.php?f=0-MARINEPAPER-1872707.php
By Rick Maze
Times staff writer
Hayes, a Republican whose congressional district includes Fort Bragg, home of the Army Special Operations Command, and Pope Air Force Base, home to the Joint Special Operations Command, introduced his Special Operations Forces Retention Improvement Act on June 12.
Its goal is to encourage career special operators — whose experience, he said, is “essential to our success” in the war on terrorism — to remain in the military by promising a lifetime of more money.
Hayes said keeping experienced people, who are being enticed to leave the military by lucrative jobs with contractors, is a must if the Defense Department is going to be able to increase the size of its special operations forces quickly. A 15 percent increase in special ops manpower is a key recommendation of the latest Quadrennial Defense Review.
Under Hayes’ plan, hazardous-duty pay, imminent-danger pay, overseas duty pay, aviation career incentive pay, diving duty pay, jump pay, sea and submarine duty pay, responsibility pay for officers and incentive pay for serving on weapons-of-mass destruction civil action teams could be factored into retirement pay for some people.
Currently, only basic pay is used to calculate retired pay. Hayes’ idea could increase retirement pay by as much as one-third, though amounts would vary from person to person.
Not everyone would be eligible. Under Hayes’ bill, HR 5584, a special operations forces member would have to receive hazardous-duty or imminent-danger pay for at least 18 months and have been assigned to a designated special operations duty assignment for at least 60 months in order to get increased retired pay.
The proposal would apply to special operations troops of any military branch.
The Joint Chiefs toyed with a similar idea during the Clinton administration because some people in bonus-heavy specialties, such as doctors and pilots, complained that their retired pay fell far short of their military earnings and was not an incentive to serve a full career.
In the end, the Pentagon rejected the concept, deciding that retirement was one of the basic elements of military compensation and should remain the same for everyone, regardless of specialty.
The timing of Hayes’ bill makes its fate uncertain. He is a member of the House Armed Services Committee, which would have to approve the bill, but the committee and the full House have already passed the 2007 defense authorization bill that includes other increases in military pay.
As such, the measure is unlikely to be considered until next year.
Hayes, a Republican whose congressional district includes Fort Bragg, home of the Army Special Operations Command, and Pope Air Force Base, home to the Joint Special Operations Command, introduced his Special Operations Forces Retention Improvement Act on June 12.
Its goal is to encourage career special operators — whose experience, he said, is “essential to our success” in the war on terrorism — to remain in the military by promising a lifetime of more money.
Hayes said keeping experienced people, who are being enticed to leave the military by lucrative jobs with contractors, is a must if the Defense Department is going to be able to increase the size of its special operations forces quickly. A 15 percent increase in special ops manpower is a key recommendation of the latest Quadrennial Defense Review.
Under Hayes’ plan, hazardous-duty pay, imminent-danger pay, overseas duty pay, aviation career incentive pay, diving duty pay, jump pay, sea and submarine duty pay, responsibility pay for officers and incentive pay for serving on weapons-of-mass destruction civil action teams could be factored into retirement pay for some people.
Currently, only basic pay is used to calculate retired pay. Hayes’ idea could increase retirement pay by as much as one-third, though amounts would vary from person to person.
Not everyone would be eligible. Under Hayes’ bill, HR 5584, a special operations forces member would have to receive hazardous-duty or imminent-danger pay for at least 18 months and have been assigned to a designated special operations duty assignment for at least 60 months in order to get increased retired pay.
The proposal would apply to special operations troops of any military branch.
The Joint Chiefs toyed with a similar idea during the Clinton administration because some people in bonus-heavy specialties, such as doctors and pilots, complained that their retired pay fell far short of their military earnings and was not an incentive to serve a full career.
In the end, the Pentagon rejected the concept, deciding that retirement was one of the basic elements of military compensation and should remain the same for everyone, regardless of specialty.
The timing of Hayes’ bill makes its fate uncertain. He is a member of the House Armed Services Committee, which would have to approve the bill, but the committee and the full House have already passed the 2007 defense authorization bill that includes other increases in military pay.
As such, the measure is unlikely to be considered until next year.