military compensation?

Question

how come in the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan, a soldier on the front who loses a leg will get approximately £50,000 if they lose a leg, and about £250,000 if they lose both arms and legs, and this is supposed to be the highest injury payout, how come a clerk who got RSI from typing and her layer said she could never get another job i was that bad (like the quadruple amputee could) got almost £500,000 more than double for loosing all limbs. Can anyone see the fairness in that?

Answer 1

No. I can't. You ought to be pestering the British Ministry of Defense and Number 10 until they explain this travesty. It even goes beyond some piece of governnmental flannel in a previous government who wanted to cut the benefit of former British POWs from World War Two if they smoked during their captivity.

Answer 2

The fairness is in the detail. She used a lawyer and the amputee cannot. She is not frontline and chipping a nail at her desk is a Health and safety matter. Getting shot at or blown up is unfortunately not.

Lots wrong with societies values and thats why people tell the army to go fish when they come recruiting. Being male and under 30 these days is dangerous.

Answer 3

The courts who make financial awards to anyone claiming compensation for injury should be publicly accountable for the amounts that are decided upon.

It is high time that fixed amounts were introduced for every conceivable injury and its long-term effects, which amounts the courts should not be permitted to exceed. That way everyone would receive equal treatment, although I believe that people injured as a consequence of serving in the armed forces, where an injury is sustained as a result of a military action, should be receive additional compensation to reflect the circumstances in which the injury was received.

Answer 4

no ur right but unfortunately their are alot of unfair things that happen not only in the Army but in life

Answer 5

your right its a disgrace.