Obama Cuts Troops Wages

[Runner]

http://www.armytimes.com/news/2012/02/m ... h-020212w/

Prorated Imminent Danger Pay starts this month

By Andrew Tilghman - Staff writer
Posted : Thursday Feb 2, 2012 10:47:34 EST

Starting this month, some troops will begin receiving less Imminent Danger Pay when a new policy takes effect that will prorate the standard $225 monthly IDP stipend.

Under the new policy, troops will be paid only for the actual days they spend in the danger pay location, defense officials said Thursday.

Under the previous policy, troops who spent any portion of the month in a danger pay location received danger pay for the entire month.

The proration amounts to $7.50 per day. So, for example, if a service member spends only 7 days of the month in Afghanistan, he or she will have only $52.50 in Imminent Danger Pay added to their paycheck.

Exceptions will be made for troops who are “exposed to a hostile fire incident”, regardless of location. They will receive the full monthly amount of $225.

The change was mandated by Congress as a part of the 2012 budget, and the Pentagon announced the implementation of the new rules on Thursday.

I am positive that there was other places that could have been cut.....But I guess the unnecessary raises on the Hill was more important

And before any of you on the left, say that Obama is not mentioned in the article....THINK.....Who's signature is on that paper?.....Proving once again how big of a dumba$$ he really is.

[abuck76]

You as a con want cuts.....This is a legitimate cut........Next.......... :12224

[Orange and Brown]

You as a con want cuts.....This is a legitimate cut........Next.......... :12224

This is not a good cut

[Tigercannon71]

Not a good cut. You cant cut military pay. Cut experimental weapons, but not their pay.

[Runner]

You as a con want cuts.....This is a legitimate cut........Next.......... :12224

If there was ever a stupid post.....yours was it!

[mikepike]

How about we only pay Congress and the President for days they actually do something? There goes the deficit!

[courier]

My take on this and it's only an opinion. The folks who will be hurt the most are the aircrews who fly into a base, drop their cargo and head back to safety at one of the Gulf States and/or Europe. Aircrews rotate constantly due to crew rest requirements and other obligations. They'll no longer enjoy the entire chump change that Soldiers who are in "Imminent Danger" receive. As far as I'm concerned, they shouldn't. Some aircrews never land in the 'zone' but reap the same benefits as those under stress from potential attack, 24/7. They fly a track at around 40,000+ feet, waiting on the call. I'd like to see what the cost savings will be by implementing the cuts.

[courier]

I don't think they took some of these incentives far enough. For instance, you have an aircrew fly in from, say, Germany. Lets say they are on the ground in Afghanistan for 4-12 hrs off/on loading cargo. They depart the AOR and head back to Germany and possibly back to the states. By this sole act their pay is tax exempt for the entire month. Hundreds of sorties are flown in and out of the country monthly, some by the same crews some not, but each crew member receives the same benefit. There can be 6-10 members on the larger cargo planes. That's a ton of cash for being on the ground for a few hours. Also, you have some aircrews flying around at XXXXXX thousand feet. They never land their aircraft but because they are in the airspace they, too, receive tax exempt status for the month. Can you imagine the cost savings by prorating these type sorties? 8)

[Tigercannon71]

Thats not a bad idea FIDo. For the pilots and crew who might only spend a few hours over hostile territory pro rate their combat pay, but I think for ground troops let them get combat pay for the entire month.