Bruzilla
Well-Known Member
I've been hearing all about how some members of the California National Guard are being forced to pay back re-enlistment bonuses they got years ago and that they were not supposed to get. And of course, there's a big ruckus over how unfair this is and they should get a pass. I would be all for this if everyone who got a bonus back them was impacted, but that's not the case. This was a small number of one state's Guard that this impacted, which makes me suspicious.
I remember being deployed to Sicily in the 1980s, and someone at Disbursing screwed up the per diem rate we were getting, so everyone in the squadron was getting paid more than we were supposed to be getting. They did an audit months later and discovered the error, and everybody in the squadron had to pay that money back. That to me is a systemic problem.
I also remember when a couple of E-7s came into the shop one day and started spreading the word that they had heard about a loophole in the rules for re-enlistments that allowed senior people to re-enlist and end up getting $32,000 for a six-year enlistment vice $16,000. Someone, somewhere, had found a way to game an exception that was meant to get a select group of specialists career designated and the word spread like wildfire. Our career counselor got wind of this and came to the shop and told everyone this deal was not legit, and that the Navy would eventually catch the error and these guys would have to pay all that money back, and sure enough that's what happened. There were several other times someone got wind of a "good deal" like this, and someone else was always telling them "don't do it because you're gonna have to pay it back!". Some folks would listen, others wouldn't. To me, that's not a systemic problem.
So when I see this bonus issue only applying to a small group of one state's Guard, I suspect this is a case of someone finding a loophole and exploiting it. It's also hard to miss the folks the media are interviewing are making the case of "I held up my end of the deal and served" or "This is a great hardship on my family", but I haven't seen any interview where an impacted guardsmen says "I didn't know getting the money was wrong", which is telling. If they make a statement like that, and it can be shown they were told via a unit memo or other communication that this loophole wasn't legit, they would get into legal problems so it's always better to not make that case.
So I would agree it sucks to make them pay back that money, but I also suspect they knew they weren't entitled to it at the time and figured they would roll the dice, so they should pay it back.
I remember being deployed to Sicily in the 1980s, and someone at Disbursing screwed up the per diem rate we were getting, so everyone in the squadron was getting paid more than we were supposed to be getting. They did an audit months later and discovered the error, and everybody in the squadron had to pay that money back. That to me is a systemic problem.
I also remember when a couple of E-7s came into the shop one day and started spreading the word that they had heard about a loophole in the rules for re-enlistments that allowed senior people to re-enlist and end up getting $32,000 for a six-year enlistment vice $16,000. Someone, somewhere, had found a way to game an exception that was meant to get a select group of specialists career designated and the word spread like wildfire. Our career counselor got wind of this and came to the shop and told everyone this deal was not legit, and that the Navy would eventually catch the error and these guys would have to pay all that money back, and sure enough that's what happened. There were several other times someone got wind of a "good deal" like this, and someone else was always telling them "don't do it because you're gonna have to pay it back!". Some folks would listen, others wouldn't. To me, that's not a systemic problem.
So when I see this bonus issue only applying to a small group of one state's Guard, I suspect this is a case of someone finding a loophole and exploiting it. It's also hard to miss the folks the media are interviewing are making the case of "I held up my end of the deal and served" or "This is a great hardship on my family", but I haven't seen any interview where an impacted guardsmen says "I didn't know getting the money was wrong", which is telling. If they make a statement like that, and it can be shown they were told via a unit memo or other communication that this loophole wasn't legit, they would get into legal problems so it's always better to not make that case.
So I would agree it sucks to make them pay back that money, but I also suspect they knew they weren't entitled to it at the time and figured they would roll the dice, so they should pay it back.
There is no way out.
