Download Full eBooks in PDF
Quadrennial Review Of Military Compensation Book in PDF, ePub and Kindle version is available to download in english. Read online anytime anywhere directly from your device. Click on the download button below to get a free pdf file of Quadrennial Review Of Military Compensation book. This book definitely worth reading, it is an incredibly well-written.
Author : United States. Department of Defense
Publisher : Unknown
Page : 1564 pages
File Size : 44,7 Mb
Release : 1983
Category : United States
ISBN : IND:30000090069414
Author : United States. Department of Defense
Publisher : Unknown
Page : 194 pages
File Size : 49,9 Mb
Release : 1967
Category : Armed Forces
ISBN : IND:30000103850933
Author : Beth J. Asch
Publisher : RAND Corporation
Page : 142 pages
File Size : 48,9 Mb
Release : 2008
Category : Business & Economics
ISBN : UOM:39015075639552
Military compensation is a pillar of the all-volunteer force. It is a fundamental policy tool for attracting and retaining personnel, and its structure-and the incentives implied by its structure-can affect U.S. service members' willingness to join, exert effort, demonstrate their leadership potential, remain in the military, and, eventually, exit the military at an appropriate time. Military compensation is a composite of current pay and allowances, special and incentive pays, health benefits, disability benefits, retirement benefits, and other benefits. Its importance to the readiness and morale of the force is such that it is reviewed every four years to determine whether it is adequate to meet the U.S. military's objectives. To inform the 10th Quadrennial Review of Military Compensation, this monograph presents an in-depth examination of the mix and structure of the U.S. military's current retirement-benefit system and several policy alternatives. The study included the development of a model that was estimated and used to run a series of simulations based on active-duty and reserve personnel data to track the careers and potential decisionmaking of military personnel across the services. The simulation results were then assessed in terms of their cost-effectiveness and ability to meet the services' expectations for accession, retention, and career mobility.
Author : United States. Department of Defense
Publisher : Unknown
Page : 294 pages
File Size : 53,8 Mb
Release : 1984
Category : Military pensions
ISBN : PURD:32754078068305
Author : Carla Tighe Murray
Publisher : Unknown
Page : 48 pages
File Size : 52,9 Mb
Release : 2007
Category : United States
ISBN : PURD:32754075491856
Introduction and summary. Defining military compensation ; Comparing military and civilian compensation ; Factors that complicate military-civilian comparisons -- Military pay, promotions, and rank -- Estimates of military compensation. Total compensation for enlisted personnel by years of experience ; Cash earnings for selected occupations -- Comparing increases in military and civilian pay. The "gap" between changes in basic pay and civilian earnings ; Issues in using the "pay gap" to evaluate military compensation ; Increases in regular military compensation versus the employment cost index -- Comparing levels of military and civilian pay. Cash compensation ; Noncash and deferred benefits ; General limitations of military-civilian comparisons -- Linking military compensation to recruiting and retention. Effectiveness of using pay to resolve occupational shortages or surpluses ; Effects of cash and noncash compensation on recruiting and retention -- Options to increase the visibility and efficiency of military compensation. Integrating the components of total compensation ; Increasing cash relative to noncash compensation -- Appendix A: Total compensation for the median enlisted member -- Appendix B: How pay changes with deployment -- Appendix C: Types of occupation- or skills-based compensation.
Author : United States. President's Commission on Military Compensation
Publisher : Unknown
Page : 220 pages
File Size : 49,6 Mb
Release : 1978
Category : Military pensions
ISBN : MINN:31951D00830253O
Author : Anonim
Publisher : Unknown
Page : 108 pages
File Size : 55,8 Mb
Release : 1986
Category : United States
ISBN : IND:30000090349568
Author : Anonim
Publisher : Unknown
Page : 0 pages
File Size : 55,5 Mb
Release : 2008
Category : Electronic
ISBN : OCLC:1050654632
Military retirement reform has been a central element of the policy debate regarding why and how to restructure the system for compensating members of the U.S. armed forces. Concerns about the compensation system, and the retirement system specifically, include the rising cost of military compensation and the need for greater efficiency in the provision of compensation, the greater need for flexibility to reshape the force as missions change in ways that challenge the current compensation system, and issues related to the equity of military retirement benefits of active versus reserve personnel, junior versus senior personnel, and military personnel versus their civilian counterparts. Active members can claim retirement benefits before reservists can; junior members who leave prior to completing 20 years of service do not qualify for retirement benefits, unlike their more senior counterparts; and the 20-year vesting rule is outside the civilian vesting norm of 5-7 years of service, under the Employee Retirement Income Security Act of 1974 (ERISA). The 10th Quadrennial Review of Military Compensation (QRMC), building on previous studies and commission reports, including the 2006 report of the Defense Advisory Committee on Military Compensation (DoD, 2006) and the 2000 report of the Defense Science Board Task Force on Human Resources Strategy, has proposed an alternative military retirement system that addresses concerns regarding the current system while still sustaining the force. The defined benefit (DB) and defined contribution (DC) plans are the foundation of the alternative system considered in this analysis. RAND was asked to develop a modeling capability to assess compensation alternatives, such as the QRMC proposal, in terms of their effects on military retention, retirement behavior, vesting, cost, reserve participation, and the value of compensation from the perspective of the member leaving active duty. This monograph presents the results of that study.
Author : Beth J. Asch,Michael G. Mattock,Troy D. Smith
Publisher : Unknown
Page : 218 pages
File Size : 51,9 Mb
Release : 2021-02-28
Category : Business & Economics
ISBN : 1977405851
Every four years, the U.S. Department of Defense (DoD) commissions a review of the military compensation system. Since the 9th such commission reporting in 2002, the benchmark for setting the level of military pay has been at about the 70th percentile of earnings for similar civilians given the unusual demands and arduous nature of military service. The 70th percentile benchmark was based on analysis from the 1990s indicating that pay at around this level had historically been necessary to enable the military to recruit and retain the quality and quantity of personnel required. In addition, by law, the annual increase in military basic pay is guided by changes in the Employment Cost Index (ECI), a measure of the growth in private-sector employment costs; research from the early 1990s suggested that an alternative to the ECI, the Defense Employment Cost Index (DECI), would be more relevant to military personnel. The authors of this report provide input on the setting of the level of military pay, the relevance of the 70th percentile, and the use of the DECI versus the ECI in setting the annual adjustment to military pay. They find that current military pay may be too high, since recruit quality today exceeds DoD's stated requirements, and, further, quality and retention both exceed the levels observed during the late 1980s and mid-1990s, when the 70th percentile was established. However, the 70th percentile may be too low a benchmark, because there are reasons to believe that the recruiting environment is more difficult than it was in earlier periods. Figures of around the 75th to 80th percentile for enlisted personnel and of around the 75th percentile for officers are likely to meet existing recruit quality objectives. Assessing the ECI versus the DECI, the authors conclude DoD should consider replacing or supplanting the former with the latter. The DECI has several advantages over the ECI, and most of the critiques of the DECI have been addressed by advances in data availability and computing power in recent decades.
Author : United States. Department of Defense
Publisher : Unknown
Page : 194 pages
File Size : 44,7 Mb
Release : 1967
Category : Armed Forces
ISBN : MINN:30000010449605
Author : Beth J. Asch,Michael G. Mattock,Patricia K. Tong
Publisher : Unknown
Page : 134 pages
File Size : 51,6 Mb
Release : 2021-02-28
Category : Business & Economics
ISBN : 1977405835
Federal law mandates that every four years the Secretary of Defense conduct an assessment of the military compensation system, resulting in a Quadrennial Review of Military Compensation (QRMC). In response to this request articulated in Section 603 of the Senate Armed Services Committee version of the National Defense Authorization Act of 2019, the 13th QRMC is providing an assessment of the effects of a time-in-grade pay table for military personnel, particularly on readiness. A time-in-grade pay table would set pay based on pay grade and years of service within a grade, in contrast to the current time-in-service pay table, which sets pay based on pay grade and years of service inthe military.
Author : United States. General Accounting Office
Publisher : Unknown
Page : 52 pages
File Size : 46,9 Mb
Release : 1979
Category : Military pensions
ISBN : STANFORD:36105126820823
Author : United States. Department of Defense
Publisher : Unknown
Page : 278 pages
File Size : 53,8 Mb
Release : 1967
Category : Armed Forces
ISBN : MINN:30000010449613
Author : Congressional Research Congressional Research Service
Publisher : CreateSpace
Page : 24 pages
File Size : 53,8 Mb
Release : 2015-01-20
Category : Electronic
ISBN : 1507737033
From the earliest days of the republic, America's Armed Forces have been compensated for their services by the federal government. While the original pay structure was fairly simple, over time a more complex system of compensation has evolved. Today's military compensation includes cash payments such as basic pay, special and incentive pays, and various allowances. Servicemembers also receive non-cash benefits such as health care and access to commissaries and recreational facilities, and may eventually qualify for deferred compensation in the form of retired pay and other retirement benefits. This report provides an overview of military compensation generally, but focuses on cash compensation for current servicemembers. Since the advent of the all-volunteer force in 1973, Congress has used military pay and allowances to improve recruiting, retention, and the overall quality of the force. Congressional interest in sustaining the all-volunteer force during a time of sustained combat operations led to substantial increases in compensation in the decade following the September 11th attacks. More recently, concerns over government spending have generated congressional interest in slowing the rate of growth in military compensation. Some have raised concerns about the impact of personnel costs on the overall defense budget, arguing that they decrease the amount of funds available for modernizing equipment and sustaining readiness. Others argue that robust compensation is essential to maintaining a high-quality force that is vigorous, well-trained, experienced, and able to function effectively in austere and volatile environments. The availability of funding to prosecute wars in Iraq and Afghanistan mitigated the pressure to trade-off personnel, readiness, and equipment costs, but the current budgetary environment appears to have brought these trade-offs to the fore again. The average cost to compensate an active duty servicemember-to include cash, benefits, and contributions to retirement programs-is estimated at about $90,000-$100,000 per year, although some estimates are higher (methodologies vary). However, gross compensation figures do not tell the full story, as military compensation relative to civilian compensation is a key factor in an individual's decision to join or stay in the military. Thus, the issue of comparability between military and civilian pay is an often-discussed topic. Some analysts and advocacy groups have argued that a substantial "pay gap" has existed for decades-with military personnel earning less than their civilian counterparts-although they generally concede that this gap is fairly small today. Others argue that the methodology behind this "pay gap" is flawed and does not provide a suitable estimate of pay comparability. Still others believe that military personnel, in general, are better compensated than their civilian counterparts. This latter perspective has become more prominent in the past few years. The Department of Defense takes a different approach to pay comparability. The 9th Quadrennial Review of Military Compensation (QRMC), published in 2002, argued that compensation for servicemembers should be around the 70th percentile of wages for civilian employees with similar education and experience. However, according to the 11th QRMC, published in 2012, it had reached the 83% level for officers and the 90% level for enlisted personnel.
Author : Anonim
Publisher : Unknown
Page : 66 pages
File Size : 50,9 Mb
Release : 2002
Category : Electronic
ISBN : OCLC:946696028
This report presents an overview of military compensation for active-duty officer and enlisted personnel in 1999. It provides information on the receipt and amount of each type of cash pay, highlighting the patterns by year of service, occupational area, and branch of service. It also quantifies the range of variation in military pay and includes data on private-sector pay variation for comparison. The report should be of interest to policymakers and to researchers concerned with military compensation The research was undertaken for the ninth Quadrennial Review of Military Compensation, whose purpose is to investigate the adequacy of the military compensation system and recommend improvements as needed. The Office of Special Projects and Research, Office of the Under Secretary of Defense for Personnel and Readiness, sponsored the research. The research was conducted in the Forces and Resources Policy Center at RAND's National Defense Research Institute, a federally funded research and development center sponsored by the Office of the Secretary of Defense, the Joint Staff, the unified commands, and the defense agencies.