So with the cost of just about everything going up. BAS increased and the Sea Pay charts have not been changed in seven years (Oct 2001). It might be time for someone to take a look at bringing this pay incentive up to speed with 2008. Maybe our voice of concern will be heard. Opinions.....?
One of the reasons Sea Pay was raised in the past was to entice people to request sea duty. With the number of people requesting back to back Sea Duty tours there may be no reason to raise Sea Pay.
What happen to the days when sailors got u/w not for money, but for fun, excitement, adventure, and probaly most important, rating experience.
I spent 14 yrs at sea, and it was not about money; it was about becoming a well-rounded sailor, which provided me the proper tools to advance quite rapidly. I believe you learn more at sea than at shore, but then again, I never had the luxury of a Base/ISC tour.
When I PCS'ed from my last cutter (WHEC), I made approximately $375.00 per month. Therefore to me, the current sea pay is very liberal and requires no adjustments.
People tend to forget, the Coast Guard is a sea going service...just like the Navy. Unfortunately for the Coast Guard, it takes dollars to entice personnel to go to sea to become well-rounded Coasties.
To prove my point, I served with numerous top-notch sailors, such as Admirals Papp, Sullivan, and Parker. All were sailors and are very sucessful in their careers.
I think the sea pay chart is fine just as it is. Getting paid extra to go to sea, which is our job, is a bonus in my opinion. I have often heard many junior people in their first sea duty tour that complain about the amount of sea pay they receive, and my answer to them is if you want more sea pay, I suggest you advance and log more years of sea time.
All valid and true points. As a Cutterman and a sailor that came from the time when non-rates didn't receive sea pay I too never chose going to sea "for the pay". I chose to go for experience. I did see the sea pay as a pay adjustment for the longer work days and time away from family. Which sea pay will never fully compensate but experience and respect makes up for that(kinda...). But the scale is from 2001 and the cost of things have increased highly since then. It just makes sense to look into compensating its sailors to the recent cost of living increases. i.e. gas, food,.....
Originally posted by patfish: To take into account also is the fact that it costs some people to go to sea because of losing BAS when they get to the boat.
WRONG! It doesn't cost them a dime, because they get Rations-in-Kind. If they choose not to take advantage of the free food, so be it. If you look closely, it probably costs you MORE when you GET BAS, becuase you get no free food at all. BAS puts food in your belly when the Govt does not do it themselves. (just your belly - not dependants!)
Good point patfish. I dont know anyone who would come back to the boat just to "take advantage" of what the cooks are cooking. Not a hard choice. Eat with family... or eat what FS3 cooked.. hmmmmm Over the past two months I have spent $350 on my own food(and I'll say I ate rather well). Cost that boat would have charged me for two months Aprox $600. So cant really say it is cheaper.
I too was a a Non Rate that did not recieve sea pay for 2 years. I Now have 9 years seatime and the sea pay was not the final reason for getting uw, but it is a big reason. It does not cost me more when I do get BAS. Also when your on a cutter you dont always get food that you enjoy, so that means you then have to buy food for the patrol to take place of the meals you dont like or cant eat. I am not saying Sea Pay needs to be raised, but it would not hurt.
I think it needs to be raised, just to keep up with inflation. I look at sea pay as compensation for being isolated from families, stores, actually everything.
Dont take any offence to this but the members that are saying it doesnt need to go up are High ranking and now on land for the remainder of there careers. I would be bitter too, because I didnt get much for being at sea in the old guard, trust me I get it. But it would be nice .
I love the ill informed money for food battles. And it is so easy to go to the FSO and ask how much it cost the galley to feed the entire crew daily, including all the items available in between meals. It ain't equal to what you would receive for BAS.
I enjoy my sea pay at the level it is and I would lose money on land. No complaints from someone that didn't always draw sea pay while underway.
FlynnPatrick or CDR, I know it just would be nice is all i am saying, I am a cook so I will be going to plenty more cutters, I know you were a former SS so underway is the only way for us. I wish all members got FSA but only the married members.
speaking of married folks can someone please explain why they changed the BAH for single members when they PCS. If your single they stop your BAH but when you report CG back pays you, If your married they never stop it, makes no sense just more work and vunerable to error in my pay.
Well since FSA was mentioned, I will comment. FSA should be for everyone or cancel it all together. Just because someone is single does not mean they deserve any less than a married person. Single members are still away from home, belongings,other family members. Single members lose out on Cola,BAH and FSA. I say make it equal or at least close the gap alittle
You get COLA? Good for you, I always wondered why the people in Boston got COLA and the people on Cape Cod did not, especially since so many people in Boston commute from the Cape.
I thnk BAH should be the same across the board married or single.
Want to have 5 kids, good for you, want to have no kids, good for you. Housing allowance should be the same.
I know about boston/cape all too well. I think the BAH in cape should be much higher. The cost of living there is crazy. I agree with you 100% on that!
Tonys hag, Why exactly should a coastie with dependents get paid more than one without? This practice absolutely infuriates me. People of equal time, and equal rank should receive the same paycheck. Bottom line. Those with dependents get tax breaks. That is their hand-out from Uncle Sam. There is currently legislation before Congress that makes BAH equal no matter what the marital status of a member is. In no way should my marital status determine wheather I live in a safe neighborhood or a dangerous one. Many zip code's have this problem. Remember, marriage and children are a choice, and one should not be awarded for either. By the way, I am married.
This argument is an interesting one. The government spends more for families on per diem, mileage, airfares, OCOLA, medical care, dental care, utilities, TLE, TLA, DLA, housing maintenance, FSA, homeport return, and FFSA to name a few. But mention BAH and people get all riled up.
One thing that does not sit well with me is the fact that members who are married and assigned to areas designated as a Critical Housing Area (CHA) get the extra supplement added to their BAH and the single members are ineligible for it. Single members have to find a place to live too in the same area as the married members, so why should it be any different?
As for the sea pay issue, I still stand behind my earlier post and think it is fine just as it is.
