AFPRB Quick and Dirty Analysis

Summary of the recommendations and a few notes on methodology

AFPRB Recommendations:

On Pay:

Recommendation 1: We recommend that the military pay ranges under Pay 2000 for Other Ranks and Officers be uprated by 3.3 per cent from 1 April 2007. The annual salary scales arising from our recommendations are at Appendix 1.
(Has the government agreed to this with or without staging?)

Recommendation 2: We recommend the targeted restructuring of Pay Range 1 from 1 April 2007 as follows:
• The rate for Pay Range 1 (higher and lower band) increment Level 1 be increased to £15,677; and
• The rate for Pay Range 1 (lower band) increment Level 2 be increased to £16,111.
Retention Incentives:

Recommendation 3: We recommend the introduction of a Royal Marine Other Ranks’ Financial Retention Incentive of £10,000 (including existing Commitment Bonuses) from 1 April 2007, for a period of four years, for those with four years’ service subject to a three-year return of service.

Recommendation 4: We recommend the introduction of an Infantry Other Ranks’ Financial Retention Incentive of £4,500 from 1 April 2007, for a period of four years, for those with four years’ service subject to a two-year return of service.
The difference reflects 5 and 8 year bonuses which will not change (so the infantry get 10,000 in bonuses for 8 years service)

Specialist pay and allowances:

Recommendation 7: We recommend that all rates of Specialist Pay, including Reserve Bands, be increased by 3.3 per cent from 1 April 2007.

Recommendation 8: We recommend that all levels of Longer Separation
Allowance be increased by 3.3 per cent from 1 April 2007.
Reflects the pay award.


Recommendation 12: We recommend a 2.7 per cent increase to Grade 1 Service Family Accommodation rental charges, 1.8 per cent to Grade 2, 0.9 per cent to Grade 3 and zero to Grade 4 from 1 April 2007.
The same rates apply to SLA. It appears that AFPRB have been paying attention.

Now, some important stuff from the notes and on methodology.

Pay Comparisons:

Whilst broad comparison between civilian and military seems to indicate similar renumeration (whole package) levels for comparably weighted jobs, packages available to other uniformed civilian services continue to appear to be comparatively advantageous, especially compared to the most Junior Ranks.. Importantly, comparison with civilian packages do not take account of contributions to civilian earnings from overtime and unsocial hours premia which can be important additions to earnings at this level.

This is particularly enlightening since it calls in to question the weighting of the X-Factor (up for a comprehensive review next year).


[we] deduct [the military pension] from civilian comparator pay (excluding employer national insurance contributions and employer pension contributions) as part of our pay comparability calculations...the relative advantage of the military pension over civilian comparators was 7 per cent

However, after a comprehensive review of current pension schemes:

• The value should be 4 per cent; and
• The value will be deducted from the civilian pay comparisons from 1 April 2007, which will be part of the evidence for our 2008 Report.

In other words, that 3.3% pay rise should have been a 6.3% pay rise. Maybe next year :frustrated:


One I was not aware of, which may explain some of the eyebrow-raising statistics quoted by the MOD on SFA (or maybe everyone else knew this, and I'm the village idiot):

There are significant differences in “Standard 1 for condition” and Grade 1 forcharges. At April 2006, 57 per cent of SFA was “Standard 1 for condition” whereas only 27.4 per cent was at Grade 1;

Nevertheless, AFPRB still:

believe that it remains necessary to gradually reduce the significant gap between SFA charges and civilian costs – less the discount

That may be a fair aspiration, but it will mean a continued erosion of the overall renumeration package and it will not encourage accompanied service; this is diametrically opposed to stated Army (though not Navy or RAF) policy - which is the reason that Married Unnacompanied (MU) status is only available to soldiers on the Over 18 years service package (previously Over 37 package), whilst Sailors and Airmen are treated as MU for accommodation and food charges regardless (the distinction is explicitly made in JSPs).

And on politicians:

MOD drew attention to the conclusions in our 2006 Report that the packages of uniformed civilian services appeared advantageous compared with the military both in competition for recruitment and as second careers. In oral evidence, the Secretary of State reiterated the “perceived fairness” of Armed Forces’ pay awards compared with other public sector groups.

In other words, it doesn't matter that you are underpaid, because if we were to bring your pay in line with Firemen and Policemen, that would upset the public service unions. :pissedoff:

Thread starter Similar threads Forum Replies Date
green_slime Army Pay, Claims & JPA 7
green_slime Army Pay, Claims & JPA 11
Soldier_Why Army Pay, Claims & JPA 0

Similar threads

Latest Threads