Page 1 of 8 123 ... LastLast
Results 1 to 10 of 76
Like Tree2Likes
Discuss London Allowance for the Chop at the Strategic Defence & Spending Review 2010 forum within the The Army Rumour Service website; BBC News - Ministry of Defence cuts armed forces' London allowance I actually agree with ...
  1. #1
    Senior Member bitterandtwisted's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2005
    Location
    Wiping my cock on your wifes curtains whilst your at work
    Posts
    2,010

    London pay to be slashed if you're above screw

    BBC News - Ministry of Defence cuts armed forces' London allowance

    I actually agree with this cut. I have known that people who live nearby have never qualified. Look at the amount of garrison towns that is in the commuter London belt and personnel never got anything. Anywhere you get posted in the reading, colchesterwindsor areas etc and pay London prices, ( if not more) expensive and you get diddly squat..... In my eyes its a unfair and dated allowance.....
    I would rather be mexican bumwanked by giant haystacks and ram a jam jar of angry wasps up my ronson than be Camberwell Carrott.........

  2. #2
    Senior Member Fallschirmjager's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2006
    Location
    TQ7480015495
    Posts
    8,603
    Why you think it's a good idea for any soldier to get less money is beyond me. Sounds like sour grapes to me.

  3. #3
    Senior Member bitterandtwisted's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2005
    Location
    Wiping my cock on your wifes curtains whilst your at work
    Posts
    2,010
    Its not sour grapes at all. It just the balance of fairness with allowances, which has never been fair.... I am ex sps and firmly belive in the balance of fairness on allowances, but believe soldiers shouldnt be out of pocket neither. I always shovelled out blind to help guys what they were entitled too, even if it was a heated debate with the RAO's. Because some of them treated the regs with spin and with a view that it was thier own money and not the MOD's.....
    Last edited by bitterandtwisted; 25-01-2012 at 09:05.
    I would rather be mexican bumwanked by giant haystacks and ram a jam jar of angry wasps up my ronson than be Camberwell Carrott.........

  4. #4
    Member charleyb's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2004
    Posts
    67
    Allowances were initiated for a reason. Whether you think it's "fair" or not is irrelevant; the point is that it is yet another piece of chipping away at the quality of life in the forces. In the grand scheme of things, actually how much of a percentage of military pay do you think London weighting is? Peanuts, so this measure will do little more than p!ss people off. One of the reasons I left was that I took an effective 15% pay cut over six months whilst serving in Germany. Military pay is not where the savings need to be made.
    If we wait until the last minute to do it, it'll only take a minute.

  5. #5
    Senior Member bitterandtwisted's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2005
    Location
    Wiping my cock on your wifes curtains whilst your at work
    Posts
    2,010
    Its not pay - it's an allowance. therefore what you earn and what you get is the fundemental difference. I am saying the Allowance is is not balanced. Pay needs to addressed not the allowances, same as the pension cut its pay related and not ALLOWANCE related!
    I would rather be mexican bumwanked by giant haystacks and ram a jam jar of angry wasps up my ronson than be Camberwell Carrott.........

  6. #6
    Member charleyb's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2004
    Posts
    67
    Pay, allowances, whatever....I'm not that much of a spotter......the bottom line is that any move that reduces the amount of disposable income Joe Soldier gets is a bad thing, surely you agree? And London weighting is an easy one as it affects a relatively small percentage of HMF; what's next?.........
    If we wait until the last minute to do it, it'll only take a minute.

  7. #7
    Senior Member bitterandtwisted's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2005
    Location
    Wiping my cock on your wifes curtains whilst your at work
    Posts
    2,010
    Thats the point Charley. If the redress of balance for allowances was made then PAY could be increased... see my point?
    I would rather be mexican bumwanked by giant haystacks and ram a jam jar of angry wasps up my ronson than be Camberwell Carrott.........

  8. #8
    Senior Member Mighty_Blighty's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2004
    Posts
    1,148
    Whats next?...

    CEA hopefully, unless you are serving overseas, and have a posting expectation.

    MB

    (Awaits incoming)

  9. #9
    Member charleyb's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2004
    Posts
    67
    No, not really. Do you really think that there is any way that given the current financial state this country, and others, are in that the government would even consider a pay rise, even with a removal of allowances? And this from an legislature that won't put £26K cap on benefits...................I agree that military pay is a mess, especially having had to brief the JESJET panel a few years ago as to why a certain trade should earn more than another - hugely devisive - but not my point. I'm with Fallschirmjager; why would a cut in income ever be a good thing?
    If we wait until the last minute to do it, it'll only take a minute.

  10. #10
    Senior Member Chef's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2007
    Posts
    3,138
    I agree with Fallschirmjager, any cut is a bad thing for forces pay. Look on this as a test case, if this allowance can go without too many dramas, then the next one and the next one, then onto trade pay, cynical? Perhaps, but I noticed a little item that said troops were being brought back from Afghanistan for a few days on longer tours so that they can't claim non-dom tax status. It may be true it may not, but it shows the petty attitude of the MOD and taxman.

    I see that the MOD has no forced redundancies for CS staff according to the NAO.
    Field Marshal Erich von Manstein (1887-1973)
    Guilty of 9 of 17 indictments, Nuremberg 1949.
    Sentence; 18 years.
    Reduced to 12,
    Served 4.

    Labour:
    Tough on war crimes
    Tough on the causes of war crimes.

Page 1 of 8 123 ... LastLast

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •