The Military Salary

#1
Can anyone tell me please in what year the military salary was introduced? I think it was late 1970s. Prior to the military salary food accommodation and everything from blankets and beans to blanco was free.
 
#2
National Service ended in 1961. The Forces then became totally voluntary and a review was made re remuneration.

I know the initial thing that was brought in was that you had to do the full 22 to get a pension, anything less than that you got sweet FA. I knew a W02 who left at the 20 year point and went to the Police but his service counted for nought.

Then the Notice Engagement was brought in with proportianate rates equalling the years you signed for, with 18 months being required when you wanted to leave. Thus if you were in for 9 you needed to sign off after 7.5 years to get out on time. If you missed the date you got out 18 months after whatever date you signed.

One of my mates was in for 3 but ended up doing 4.5 because he thought he could just leave at 3 but no-one in the orderly room sent him an invite. It was a case that if you didn't sign off you soldiered on.

In terms of deductions for food, accn etc I think it came in at the end of the 60's but am not 100%. It was certainly in force when I joined in 74. :wink:
 

oldbaldy

LE
Moderator
#4
MilSpFunc said:
Introduction was 1971.
April 1970.. I was in Sharjah at the time. :D
 

oldbaldy

LE
Moderator
#5
Jim_Research said:
Can anyone tell me please in what year the military salary was introduced? I think it was late 1970s. Prior to the military salary food accommodation and everything from blankets and beans to blanco was free.
Yes food & Accn was free. Got extra cash for being married (marriage allce) & so had to go though the CoC for permission to get married & be entitled to married quarters. Nearly every pay parade had stoppages:
Barrack damages was a favourite, used to have a set amount taken each month & it built up in the Coy Funds, god knows what it was used for.
Haircuts. Oh the joy of being marched to the Regt barber & having a haircut whether you had a civvie one the previous day or not.
I am sure there were more but the last 40 years have not been kind to the old grey matter (or the hair) :D
 
#6
Thanks to all for info on the intro of the military salary. My extinguished mil career stretched from 1958 to 1983 - there have certainly been a lot of changes over the years. However some things do not seem to change at all, like the great sense of humour especially in adversity, the last minute attempts to get leavers to sign on/extend, the negative comments about the resettlement 'service' (although I know it has changed hugely) and probably a lot more.
 
#7
Jim_Research said:
Thanks to all for info on the intro of the military salary. My extinguished mil career stretched from 1958 to 1983 - there have certainly been a lot of changes over the years. However some things do not seem to change at all, like the great sense of humour especially in adversity, the last minute attempts to get leavers to sign on/extend, the negative comments about the resettlement 'service' (although I know it has changed hugely) and probably a lot more.
Hello Jim. Sir, I must correct you. There were no changes between 1958 to 1983. The main changes in the 20th century were between 1900 to 1957 and 1984 to 1999 so sadly you just missed out. If you are wondering why you made this simple mistake I would like to respectfully point out that there was no adversity between 1958 to 1983 but plenty in the years before and after.

Sincerely yours.
 
#8
There were no changes between 1958 to 1983. The main changes in the 20th century were between 1900 to 1957 and 1984 to 1999 so sadly you just missed out. If you are wondering why you made this simple mistake I would like to respectfully point out that there was no adversity between 1958 to 1983 but plenty in the years before and after.

Sincerely yours.[/quote]

Oh! Missed out! No adversity! What about Brunei, Aden, Oman and NI to name but a few. Sadly I am never sad and had a great 25 years, 18 of them outside the UK.
Also Sincerely yours.

What are your views on the term veteran??
 

oldbaldy

LE
Moderator
#9
Downes said:
Jim_Research said:
Thanks to all for info on the intro of the military salary. My extinguished mil career stretched from 1958 to 1983 - there have certainly been a lot of changes over the years. However some things do not seem to change at all, like the great sense of humour especially in adversity, the last minute attempts to get leavers to sign on/extend, the negative comments about the resettlement 'service' (although I know it has changed hugely) and probably a lot more.
Hello Jim. Sir, I must correct you. There were no changes between 1958 to 1983. The main changes in the 20th century were between 1900 to 1957 and 1984 to 1999 so sadly you just missed out. If you are wondering why you made this simple mistake I would like to respectfully point out that there was no adversity between 1958 to 1983 but plenty in the years before and after.

Sincerely yours.
So nothing happenned in the South Atlantic in 1982. Pr!ck.
 

Auld-Yin

ADC
Kit Reviewer
Book Reviewer
Reviews Editor
#10
oldbaldy said:
Downes said:
Jim_Research said:
Thanks to all for info on the intro of the military salary. My extinguished mil career stretched from 1958 to 1983 - there have certainly been a lot of changes over the years. However some things do not seem to change at all, like the great sense of humour especially in adversity, the last minute attempts to get leavers to sign on/extend, the negative comments about the resettlement 'service' (although I know it has changed hugely) and probably a lot more.
Hello Jim. Sir, I must correct you. There were no changes between 1958 to 1983. The main changes in the 20th century were between 1900 to 1957 and 1984 to 1999 so sadly you just missed out. If you are wondering why you made this simple mistake I would like to respectfully point out that there was no adversity between 1958 to 1983 but plenty in the years before and after.

Sincerely yours.
So nothing happenned in the South Atlantic in 1982. Pr!ck.
I think it was just a wind-up OB.

I remember the military salary coming in in 1970. I went from £5 per week to £20 per week - still skint by the next payday though. NAAFI put all their prices up as well IIRC. I don't think I had such a sustained drinking period as in the few months after introduction of the mil sal. (Still in Osnabruck at the time - German beer DAB, Union etc - loverly)
 
#11
Hello Jim, Oldbaldy and Auld-Yin. I'm afraid all your galant campaigns do not come under the heading of adversity. Between 1958 to 1983 these campaigns come under the heading affliction. The window for affliction in the 20th century was quite short.

OldBaldy. I must correct you. Your comment that nothing happened in the South Atlantic in 1982 is entirely untrue.

Jim. In answer to your question regarding my views on what is a veteran. A veteran is a man or woman, retired or still serving who has served his country or Commonwealth at home or overseas in the field of conflict and has suffered at the hands of adversity or affliction. That's all four of us then.

Auld-Yin. You've got it!
 
#12
Hi Downes,
Interested in your comments about veterans with which I entirely agree. However I find that UK government policy is hugely different. Below is an extract from a recent study:

...the majority of the general public considers veterans to be
those who have served in the world wars of the twentieth century or, at most, those
who have been involved in operational service. By inference, for this sector of public
opinion, a young veteran today would be regarded as a contradiction in terms.
The United Kingdom has recently formalized its approach to veterans, using the
most inclusive of the definitions available: all personnel who have served more than
one day (together with their dependants).

So serve ONE DAY!!! and you're a veteran.
 
#13
Jim_Research said:
Hi Downes,
Interested in your comments about veterans with which I entirely agree. However I find that UK government policy is hugely different. Below is an extract from a recent study:

...the majority of the general public considers veterans to be
those who have served in the world wars of the twentieth century or, at most, those
who have been involved in operational service. By inference, for this sector of public
opinion, a young veteran today would be regarded as a contradiction in terms.
The United Kingdom has recently formalized its approach to veterans, using the
most inclusive of the definitions available: all personnel who have served more than
one day (together with their dependants).

So serve ONE DAY!!! and you're a veteran.
 
#14
Hello Jim, I've just posted a profound reply to you and the computer has cocked it up, I'll try again.

Did the study statement prompt your question to me regarding veterans?

It's an interesting statement and here is my view. Campaigns and wars all differ in fighting methods, duration and levels of danger. Two NI tours and 31 days on Op Granby in '91 do not make me feel like a worthy veteran. I've never faced a bullet in anger (a couple of wayward scude thanks to the snoozing Yanks) and have never been more scared than when returning home pissed with the 'boss' to face!

The one day veteran? Whether a day or a year, if one has placed themselves voluntarily in danger they are a 'veteran', hardly African Star material but a vet all the same! I suppose it is the modesty of the recipient that will determine his/her acceptance amongst others.
 
#15
Hi Downes.
Thanks for your comment. No, I have been looking at the issue of 'veterans' for some time both in terms of what the word means to joe public but more importantly what it might mean in practical terms to veterans. Other countries adopt a different approach to 'those who have served' and also are comparatively more generous in looking after their veterans. Perception is also different especially in for instance the USA. In the UK, apart from the very all inclusive use of the term officially, my recent research indicates that even those who have served a full NRAE do not like or use the term. What is confusing I find is the existence of a 'Veterans Agency'. Some align this with the Veterans Administration in the USA, however it is in reality just the War Pensions office renamed. In other words those, who for whatever reason need financial help and assistance. The ex soldiers I have interviewed fit a specification which says that they have completed 22 years and have made a successful transition to civilian life. Success here is determined by the individual. A great deal has been researched and written about those who have served and have not made successful transitions, I am looking at those who possibly gained benefit from their service and don't continually look back. Within the theory of career development is the notion that when one moves on to something new - either by design or when pushed one should disengage from the past as an essential stage is moving on. I have found however that ex miners will always be ex miners (and proud of it) ex soldiers will always be ex soldiers(even prouder). Bit of a long answer but it is Sunday and we did beat Paraguay!
 
#16
Hello Jim,

Everything you say is very interesting. I am not sure where to start and how I can elaborate or offer anything that will add to your research. You seem quite involved, in particualar interviewing ex soldiers etc. Without giving too much away on an insecure forum, can you tell me in what capacity you approach this? Maybe via PM. I was thrown a little when you remarked the transition between military life and moving on. I might have an interesting view vie PM.

I've just read your answer again and pick up on the seemingly harsh criteria a 22 year soldier must reach. Is this the benchmark for receiving certain financila benefit? Maybe I'm misunderstanding but it seems almost impossible for a man to forget his past in order to move on and strange that this should be suggested. Please enlighten me.
 
#17
Hi Downes,
Thanks for your response. You can find details of my research (now in its fourth and final year)
on this means at "Current Affairs News and Analysis >>Update on my PhD Research about army veterans". In brief this research is an independent academic study towards my Doctorate in the combined social sciences. (Sociology, psychology, philosophy and anthrapology). I have provided my contact e mail as a PM. I am not suggesting that people forget their military past (not possible of course) but rather that there is what is referred to as a period of disengagement, or in other words - a realisation that army life is ending and something else (civlina life) is next. This leads on to socialisation - becoming a civilian. My view is that that there are lots skills and positive attidues (as well as a lot of knowledge) gained from military service that can be more than usefully retained - so that disengagement should not mean forsaking all of the many years of service and let it disappear into a khaki haze.
Jim
 
#18
Jim_Research said:
Hi Downes,
Thanks for your response. You can find details of my research (now in its fourth and final year)
on this means at "Current Affairs News and Analysis >>Update on my PhD Research about army veterans". In brief this research is an independent academic study towards my Doctorate in the combined social sciences. (Sociology, psychology, philosophy and anthrapology). I have provided my contact e mail as a PM. I am not suggesting that people forget their military past (not possible of course) but rather that there is what is referred to as a period of disengagement, or in other words - a realisation that army life is ending and something else (civlina life) is next. This leads on to socialisation - becoming a civilian. My view is that that there are lots skills and positive attidues (as well as a lot of knowledge) gained from military service that can be more than usefully retained - so that disengagement should not mean forsaking all of the many years of service and let it disappear into a khaki haze.
Jim
Hello John, I will look at the current affairs forum later to pick up on your input. I will keep this short for now but just say that 'a period of disengagement' seems against the human will. I totally agree with the principle. But when leaving the service (I'm on resettlement) surely the past would be foremost due to anxiety, good memories and the loss of a way of life. I have set myself up for leaving and hope to be sucessfully self employed, I'm very confident in my future but I would still love to 'do it all again' and am missing this way of life already!
 

Latest Threads

Top