Help is required to clarify what exactly LOA is supposed to be for.

Surely Living overseas allowance is for personnel and families to maintain the same standard of living as they do in the UK?

If this is true then why does the rate increase the higher the rank you go?

I feel that this is unfair :!: Does a WO1 eat and drink moree than say a CPL? Does it cost him more to by his bread and milk and beer?

Would it not be better to have one rate regardless of rank as I can see no reason why an allowance such as LOA should be discrimate from lower ranks.

Whinge Over.
If this argument made sense everyone would be paid the same regardless of rank. If you get paid more in the UK you are able to maintain a higher standard of living. If the cost of living is higher abroad then you need a higher rate of LOA to maintain a similar standard.
This is an old chestnut that keeps appearing on this site.

I believe that there is now a move towards gaining greater parity between the ranks than there is at present.

I take the point about rank et al. Also there is an argument that if a person earns x and another person earns x + 1, then the person earning x + 1 need a greater amout of LOA to ensure approximate parity with living in the UK.
It is no surprise when you look at comparative outgoings across the board that the Local Overseas Allowance (LOA) increases as one goes up the rank straucture. A few obvious examples might be:

Newspapers - Sun Vs Torygraph - Torygraph much more costly
Schooling - SCE Secondary Vs Harrow or Eaton - just think of the cost of rugger boots!
Flights Home - Air Berlin Vs BA (Club Europe) - free drinks anyone?
Drinking habits - Yellow Herforder Handbag vs Dom Perignon - Fizzzz!
Uniforms - Man at Q&M Vs Gieves & Thieves - suit you sir!
Reading habits - FHM Vs Horse & Hounds

Where's the issue? :?

Latest Threads