THE VIRGINIAN-PILOT
Copyright (c) 1995, Landmark Communications, Inc.
DATE: Monday, April 10, 1995 TAG: 9504070017
SECTION: FRONT PAGE: A6 EDITION: FINAL
TYPE: Letter
LENGTH: Short : 40 lines
In an effort to cut military expenses, there is talk to cut military medical benefits and other benefits to dependents and to retirees. Such efforts will reduce the retention rate of current military personnel. But retention is not even the major issue in my eyes. The issue is whether the medical benefits are a privilege or an earned right.
The military does not pay an hourly wage, nor does it pay overtime. Any civilian employer must adhere to federal and state laws with respect to wages, but the military is an exception. I can understand why. If military personnel were paid an hourly wage and overtime, the Pentagon's budget would be astronomical and taxes would skyrocket.
My husband just finished three years of sea duty. His work day on the ship averaged 12-15 hour days. Two of those three years were spent at sea and on maneuvers, and when he was home his duty rotation was such that every third day required 24-hour duty aboard ship.
The monthly paycheck is the same whether military personnel work a 40-hour week or whether they work over 65 hours a week (not uncommon). After 17 years of service, E-6 pay comes nowhere near the top of the national low-income bracket.
Military medical benefits are part of the pay that military personnel earn. When those benefits are tampered with, it is the same as cutting our pay. Military benefits exist to compensate in part for wages our tax dollars are unable to support. When the government or the public demands cuts in these benefits, they should consider whether the alternate of offering wages according to federal laws might not be far more costly.
JOYCE T. PIPER
Norfolk, March 31, 1995 by CNB