RAND researchers compared military and civilian pay for 2016, following up on comparisons for 2009 and 1999, and assessed how recruit quality changed as military pay rose relative to civilian pay after 1999.

Comparing military pay with civilian pay, the authors find that military pay in 2017 was above the 70th percentile of civilian pay. It was at the 85th percentile for enlisted personnel and the 77th percentile for officers.

This report investigates the military/civilian pay gap and its implications for capping military pay increases. The pay gap is defined as the percent difference in military versus civilian pay growth as measured from a given starting point. The index currently used for civilian pay growth is the Employment Cost Index (ECI), which reflects pay growth in the civilian labor force at large. The authors instead recommend measuring civilian pay growth for the subset of civilian workers whose composition by age, education, occupation, gender, and race/ethnicity represents that of active duty military personnel. The authors do so via construction of a Defense Employment Cost Index (DECI). They compare pay gaps based on the ECI vs. the DECI, and present DECI-based pay gaps for officer and enlisted personnel by gender and seniority and for occupational and age categories. The authors then consider the implications of these pay gaps for capping military pay.

The briefing examines how the pay of enlisted personnel compares to that of their civilian counterparts, how these comparisons have changed over time, how the FY 2000 pay actions affect the comparisons, and how recruiting and retention have fared recently.

Compares pay and benefits provided to members of the Armed Forces (AF) with that of comparably situated private-sector employees to assess how the differences in pay and benefits affect recruiting and retention of members of the AF. The objectives were to: (1) assess total military compensation for active duty officers and for enlisted personnel; (2) compare private-sector pay and benefits for civilians of similar age, educ., and experience with similar job responsibilities and working conditions of officers and enlisted personnel of the AF; and (3) assess the 10th QRMC recommendation to include regular military compensation and select benefits when comparing military and civilian compensation to ascertain if it is appropriate.

This report investigates the military/civilian pay gap and its implications for capping military pay increases. The pay gap is defined as the percent difference in military versus civilian pay growth as measured from a given starting point. The index currently used for civilian pay growth is the Employment Cost Index (ECI), which reflects pay growth in the civilian labor force at large. The authors instead recommend measuring civilian pay growth for the subset of civilian workers whose composition by age, education, occupation, gender, and race/ethnicity represents that of active duty military personnel. The authors do so via construction of a Defense Employment Cost Index (DECI). They compare pay gaps based on the ECI vs. the DECI, and present DECI-based pay gaps for officer and enlisted personnel by gender and seniority and for occupational and age categories. The authors then consider the implications of these pay gaps for capping military pay.

Introduction and summary. Defining military compensation ; Comparing military and civilian compensation ; Factors that complicate military-civilian comparisons -- Military pay, promotions, and rank -- Estimates of military compensation. Total compensation for enlisted personnel by years of experience ; Cash earnings for selected occupations -- Comparing increases in military and civilian pay. The "gap" between changes in basic pay and civilian earnings ; Issues in using the "pay gap" to evaluate military compensation ; Increases in regular military compensation versus the employment cost index -- Comparing levels of military and civilian pay. Cash compensation ; Noncash and deferred benefits ; General limitations of military-civilian comparisons -- Linking military compensation to recruiting and retention. Effectiveness of using pay to resolve occupational shortages or surpluses ; Effects of cash and noncash compensation on recruiting and retention -- Options to increase the visibility and efficiency of military compensation. Integrating the components of total compensation ; Increasing cash relative to noncash compensation -- Appendix A: Total compensation for the median enlisted member -- Appendix B: How pay changes with deployment -- Appendix C: Types of occupation- or skills-based compensation.