Economics is about incentives. People do things that bring them satisfaction. The incentives can be money or intangible rewards like public recognition or the satisfaction of helping society.
Getting people to do dangerous or unpleasant tasks requires greater compensation than is needed for safe, pleasant jobs.
This is elementary, but important to keep in mind as we send people to fight in Afghanistan and Iraq, while maintaining forces to act in case of trouble in Korea or elsewhere.
This is the first time in a century that we have engaged in prolonged fighting without resorting to conscription.
If we don’t want to return to a draft, then we must make military service so rewarding in monetary or non-monetary terms that enough people volunteer to serve.
Our success at this has varied. The Army missed its active-duty recruiting goals in May, but achieved them in June. Filling Army Reserve and National Guard units has been difficult for some time. The three other services have not had similar problems.
If we have problems getting enough people, one obvious way to make military service more attractive would be to raise base pay. It would quickly prove expensive, however, since it would result in an increase for all the services, including the Navy and Air Force. Relatively few members of those branches have been exposed to enemy fire, and they have not had trouble meeting recruiting goals.
It would also raise the beginning retirement pay of people like me who have already put in most of our service. I wouldn’t mind getting more money when I get my reserve pension in five years, but that windfall would not motivate me to do anything more now. Many people are in my position.
Special compensation for dangerous duty is well established. Aviators, parachutists and divers, for example, get extra pay even in peacetime. Those exposed to enemy action get hostile-fire pay.
Increasing these categories of compensation would reward those who are bearing a disproportionately greater burden without giving windfalls to those in safe jobs who already are sufficiently compensated for what they do. It also would give no after-the-fact windfall to people like me.
When we moved to an all-volunteer force, we greatly increased the proportion of service members who are married. The sharp increase in the frequency and duration of unaccompanied overseas service is hard on families. Disruptions to family life are a key reason people leave the service. A substantial increase in family separation allowances would at least partially offset this problem.
Public recognition and respect are important. Fortunately, service people today get much more respect from the general populace than in the Vietnam era.
Nevertheless, as many who work in offices might confirm, flowers on Secretaries Day seldom mean as much as cold, hard cash. Medals and hometown parades are nice, but better pay is more substantial.
© 2005 Edward Lotterman
Chanarambie Consulting, Inc.