The government is saying that if your are injured in the line of duty, and you recieved a bonus, but did not complete your contract due to injury (caused by other than your own), you must pay back part of that bonus? Is this correct?
They are saying "because" you didn't complete your contract...
Who says that this person(s) wanted to not complete their contract. The Government fired them after they were hurt on the job. Where is the E.O.?
I was actually kept 6 months after my ETS date so they could medically retire me.
2007-11-30 07:57:07 · 7 answers · asked by Rawbert 7 in Politics & Government ➔ Military
I'm just amazed that this thought of taking the bonuses away was even put into effect
2007-11-30 08:23:25 · update #1
This was discussed, reported, and debated weeks ago. The Pentagon has already admitted that they made a mistake and are taking the measures to identify those that received letters and to pay back any money that was "paid back". They are correcting the error.
2007-11-30 08:04:18 · answer #1 · answered by jbdb2494 3 · 4⤊ 0⤋
The clerks messed up and took some away that weren't supposed to be and it is being corrected. The only ones who were supposed to have to pay back were for not completing it because they requested discharge for personal reasons and got it, discharged for other then honorable reasons prior to completing the contract and certain other specific mostly personal choice reasons. A government employee or employees (read bureaucrat) misread it basically and took it to mean something different then intended. As the lady above says it is being corrected and the deserving personal will get the money due them. A person who gets booted out for bad conduct won't and the person who gets to recruit training and suddenly remembers he had a disqualifying thing the recruiter told him to lie about won't but then why should they.
2007-11-30 08:24:30 · answer #2 · answered by GunnyC 6 · 1⤊ 0⤋
Come on! If anyone was in the militry, they'd know what the term SNAFU means.
There are 3 ways of doing things, the right way, the wrong way and the Army way!
Where the F is the Senate Armed Forces committee?? Doing what the Senate does best, probably. NOTHING!
2007-11-30 09:24:02 · answer #3 · answered by Barry auh2o 7 · 2⤊ 0⤋
it is definately correct for the nat'l guard as you have to sign paperwork stating that you will payback whatever bonus you get for any uncompleted service.
this may be what the news report was about i dont know. but i do know that we havent been briefed one way or the other for the active army or army reserves. therefore the best possible person to answer this question would be someone at your local VA office.
2007-11-30 08:02:39 · answer #4 · answered by Anonymous · 1⤊ 2⤋
It was a bureaucratic mix-up. The accounting and finance just knew that the individuals had been discharged, not why. They don't have to pay anything.
2007-11-30 11:46:23 · answer #5 · answered by Anonymous · 1⤊ 0⤋
Get real, one veteran received a letter by mistake,
Just one.
People are blowing this way out of proportion.
2007-11-30 08:32:53 · answer #6 · answered by jeeper_peeper321 7 · 1⤊ 2⤋
It followes right along with all that, "Support the Troop B.S.", the right wing likes to put out.
2007-11-30 08:03:59 · answer #7 · answered by Dave M 7 · 0⤊ 3⤋