Soldiers not receiving Hazard Pay

[gkatl]

Just heard this on the radio - want to see if anyone knows anything more than just a headline. Apparently, some soldiers are presently not receiving Hazard Pay. The assertion is that it's a political decision by the White House, because if they do pay "Hazard Pay" to the soldiers it would be an admission that we are actually in a war that requires congressional approval?

This seems absolutely crazy to me.

Any thoughts?

 

[jlcnuke]

Haven't heard of that to date. I'm assuming it's talking about soldiers actually in a combat zone though and not all soldiers since at any given time many are not eligible for hazard pay.

 

[jeepinshep]

The only war we're fighting without congressional approval is the war in Libya.

In which case, we have no troops on the ground that are eligible for hazard pay.

Otherwise, as jlcnuke stated, not all deployed troops receive hazard pay - only the one's deployed to designated combat zones and/or with combat roles.

Can you quote your source so we may be able to look into it more? Like, what station/show were you listening to where this topic was being discussed?

 

[gkatl]

It's not all soldiers for sure - I'm trying to find more info., but it seems like this is a very new story. I thought I heard "Afghanistan" mentioned, but I'm at work and I could have heard the story wrong - that doesn't sound right. It would make more sense if it was Libya, but that's not jiving, either, when I look it up online.

John McCain was speaking with Brian Kilmeade about it this morning. . .

Anyone else hear this story can maybe fill me in?

 

[gkatl]

Can you quote your source so we may be able to look into it more? Like, what station/show were you listening to where this topic was being discussed?

I heard it on Fox News Radio on the "Kilmeade and Friends" show.

 

[wnchstrtnfldvlle]

Lol its funny you should mention that. In airborne units you get hazardous duty pay for jumping at a minimum of once every 3 months. And I have yet to get my pay and i have been here for 7 months. thats 150 a month that isnt taxed. The only plus side is that i will get it all back paid when they finally get the paperwork though.

 

[gkatl]

I have yet to find out more info. . . . I have looked a little bit but I am at work so can't spend too much time on it. Wish I was listening better this morning!

I have yet to get my pay and i have been here for 7 months. thats 150 a month that isnt taxed. The only plus side is that i will get it all back paid when they finally get the paperwork though.

Thank you for your service! I hope they get this worked out for you. This kind of thing doesn't make sense to me. I guess that's what you get when you rely on the govmt for something. . . .

 

[Bellman2]

Anybody ever worked the flight deck of an aircraft carrier? That place is so dangerous, its hazzard duty pay in peace time operations.

 

[dunkel]

I think the rules can be a little funny at times. I seem to recall that the guys that went into Kosovo or otherwise supported that Yugoslavia debacle did not receive certain hazardous duty pay...even though, for example, some of the pilots flying missions there were getting lit up by Serb SAM sites all the time. I'm also pretty sure no one on that mission was eligible for a combat patch from it.

I honestly don't know all the rules, but little quirks like this are not really new.

 

[gkatl]

I think the rules can be a little funny at times. I seem to recall that the guys that went into Kosovo or otherwise supported that Yugoslavia debacle did not receive certain hazardous duty pay...even though, for example, some of the pilots flying missions there were getting lit up by Serb SAM sites all the time. I'm also pretty sure no one on that mission was eligible for a combat patch from it.

I honestly don't know all the rules, but little quirks like this are not really new.

Good info., dunkel. Thank you for your service also, BTW! I'm not a military guy and I don't understand the whole pay structure, but it just seems wrong that soldiers being put in the position to deserve hazardous pay would for some reason not receive it.

Perhaps I am jumping the gun a bit, though - I still can't validate this news and am hoping I didn't just horribly mess up what Kilmeade was talking about this morning. I'm sure it will come up again in the news at some point - especially if what I asserted to start the thread is actually true in some fashion.