Talk:Uniformed services pay grades of the United States
This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the Uniformed services pay grades of the United States article. This is not a forum for general discussion of the article's subject. |
Article policies
|
Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL |
![]() | This article is rated Start-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
Untitled
edit- This page is in serious need of reorganization. Unfortunately, I am not knowledgeable of this subject, so I cannot do an adequate job. 06:37, 31 May 2006 (UTC)
pay grade
editi believe the pay grade scales should be updated, but being new i am unaware of how to post images. gpans 19:31, 16 January 2007 (UTC)
Shouldn't "pay grade" be about a little more than US Military pay? I've never worked for the military, but pretty much everywhere I have has had pay grades.—Preceding unsigned comment added by 136.244.17.170 (talk • contribs)
The pay grade is missing a time frame -- is this pay per month? Per week? Per year?—Preceding unsigned comment added by 68.173.29.142 (talk • contribs)
Just a little confused by the "zero" grades: does this imply that these ranks are typically unseen in those terms of service (e.g. a first-year E-9), or that advancement into these grades are discouraged because you will literally be paid nothing? — Nahum Reduta [talk|contribs] 21:19, 19 May 2008 (UTC)
- I presume that by the term "zero" grades (sic) you are referring to the fact that for E-8 and E-9 the basic pay table is blank until "over 8 years" and "over 10 years", respectively. What this indicates is that statutorily an individual may not be promoted to those grades until having completed at least eight or ten years of creditable military service. While highly unlikely, it is theoretically possible (with waivers for minimum time in service and time in grade requirements) for an individual to gain promotion up to and including E-7 in under two years. CobraDragoon (talk) 22:23, 21 September 2016 (UTC)
Name Change
editThis should be moved to something along the lines of US Military Pay Grades, probably with a disambiguation page here outlining the meaning of it in common usage. Supersheep (talk) 02:06, 29 February 2008 (UTC)
- Agree and done. --dashiellx (talk) 18:16, 26 June 2008 (UTC)
It doesn't even state the currency despite part of it referring to the EU —Preceding unsigned comment added by 77.100.27.103 (talk) 18:40, 19 October 2008 (UTC)
- Name changed again. The pay grades do not only apply to the U.S. military, it applies to all of the Uniformed services of the United States. Neovu79 (talk) 00:37, 5 November 2008 (UTC)
- Right you are! Good change. ~PescoSo say•we all 00:15, 15 November 2008 (UTC)
- Name changed again. The pay grades do not only apply to the U.S. military, it applies to all of the Uniformed services of the United States. Neovu79 (talk) 00:37, 5 November 2008 (UTC)
Lowest 3 enlisted pay grades of the Navy
editThe lower 3 pay grades of the Navy have different names depending on the "job" you have (mechanical and weapons jobs, for example, fall under fireman rates). The table only lists the seaman rates (seaman recruit, seaman apprentice, seaman), however, there is also triplets (5 sets in all) for fireman, hospitalman, airman, and constructionman (ie., fireman recruit, fireman apprentice, fireman, airman recruit, etc.). wiki ref: US Navy Rates E1-E3
— al-Shimoni (talk) 11:06, 2 November 2018 (UTC)
- All of the Navy enlisted rates, ratings, and ratings groups are shown on the List of United States Navy ratings page. Perhaps a note and a link to the applicable section could be placed under the "Enlisted pay grades" table. Also, the "Fireman" group does not contain weapons "ratings," rather it is limited to "engineering and hull." Weapons falls under the "general" group for "administration, deck, technical, and weapons" ratings.CobraDragoon (talk) 14:56, 2 November 2018 (UTC)
History section
editShould the current "Structure" section be split into a "History" section and a "Structure" section? The current section seems like it would be better organized as two sections. X5163x (talk) 18:50, 1 January 2022 (UTC)