"Uncharged leave"

[limblips]

I have no problem with the marriages or the benefits, it is granting "uncharged leave" that bothers me. It is discrimination. Hetero couples do not get basket leave to travel from overseas to the states, or home state to get married.

DOD announces full benefits to married same-sex couples
By Leo Shane III Stars and Stripes

Published: August 14, 2013
Related
Text of the DOD announcement on same-sex spouse benefits
Fort Gordon soldiers support Pentagon move on same-sex couples' benefits
1975 law blocks benefits for gay veterans' spouses

Army Sgt. Michael Potoczniak and his partner, Todd Saunders, left, and Cynthia Wides, left, and Elizabeth Carey go through the process of getting married at City Hall in San Francisco, California, June 29, 2013.
Wally Skalij/Los Angeles TimesWASHINGTON — Pentagon officials announced Wednesday that the DOD will provide marriage benefits to same-sex couples for the first time, giving gay spouses access to health care, housing allowances and family separation pay.

The move comes little more than a month after the Supreme Court struck down the Defense of Marriage Act, which Defense Department leaders have said prevented them from offering federal marriage benefits to gay troops. Numerous government agencies have taken steps to offer health care and other benefits to same-sex married couples in the wake of the ruling.

In a statement, Defense Secretary Chuck Hagel said the move reflects the Defense Department’s commitment to “ensuring that all men and women who serve in the U.S. military and their families are treated fairly and equally.”
The change, set to go into effect no later than Sept. 3, will mean tens of thousands of dollars in direct payments and covered health care costs for legally married same-sex military couples.

Housing allowances alone can reach up to $30,000 in annual payouts for married troops with dependent children.

Defense Department officials will also allow same-sex troops to take nonchargeable leave “for the purpose of travelling to a jurisdiction where such a marriage may occur.”Thirteen states and the District of Columbia currently allow gay marriages. In a memo to defense staff, Hagel called the inconsistent state rules a potential hardship for same-sex couples, and said the extra leave time would “help level the playing field.”

Troops stationed outside the United States will be allowed up to 10 days of uncharged leave for a same-sex wedding, per approval from their command. Troops inside the United States but stationed more than 100 miles from a state that allows gay marriage will have seven days. Servicemembers will be able to use the marriage leave time only once in their career.Gay troops who are already legally married could see retroactive benefits back to June 26, the date of the Supreme Court decision. Same-sex married couples who apply for benefits in the future will follow the same procedures and documentation as opposite-sex couples.

Since the military’s “don’t ask, don’t tell” law was repealed in 2011, gay rights advocates have pushed for extension of the married couple benefits to same-sex troops, arguing that the policy still amounted to discrimination in the ranks.

Defense Department leaders did extend access to family support programs and other resources to the couples, but said the Defense of Marriage Act — which forbade the federal government from officially recognizing same-sex marriages — preventing them from going further.

Mark Mazzone, spokesman for the military LGBT advocacy group SPART*A, said the changes will be a financial boost to many same-sex couples thus far deprived of equal benefits, and the leave time for travel to states that allow same-sex marriage show the military is committed to reaching out to gay troops.

“While some states are still saying same-sex marriage is a no-go, it’s clear with this that the military is accepting it,” he said.

In a statement, officials at the American Military Partner Association called the pending Pentagon announcement “a huge step forward for our families who for far too long have been excluded and cut off from support.”

Pentagon officials acknowledged that the new policy will require a host of policy regulation updates and some technical upgrades to existing systems. For example, the Defense Enrollment Eligibility Reporting System does not currently recognize same-sex partners for ID cards, and will have to be upgraded to implement the new policy.

Still, Pentagon officials are confident the changes can be handled in coming weeks.

The changes apply only to “legally married same-sex couples” and not gay troops who have state-backed civil unions.

shane.leo@stripes.com
Twitter: @LeoShane

 

[SG_Player1974]

And the stop watch on timing the repeal or adjustment of this press release STARTS NOW......

 

[Beta]

I have no problem with the marriages or the benefits, it is granting "uncharged leave" that bothers me. It is discrimination. Hetero couples do not get basket leave to travel from overseas to the states, or home state to get married.

One huge difference: hetero couples have the option of where they want to get married. Homosexual couples do not. So if they don't live in a state that allows it, and they have to take extra leave, there's an argument that can be made that they're being discriminated against because they have to take more leave than a hetero couple.

I don't understand why the amount of leave is so large, though. It takes 1 day to get to a state that allows the marriage and 1 day to return. That should be 2 days of leave. Maybe 4 for overseas because of length of travel. The rest should be the same as a hetero couple that's getting married locally. Or is there a bunch of extra preparation I'm not thinking about? Maybe marriage license stuff that needs to be handled that takes a few days? :shrug:

 

[aps45819]

One huge difference: hetero couples have the option of where they want to get married. Homosexual couples do not. So if they don't live in a state that allows it, and they have to take extra leave, there's an argument that can be made that they're being discriminated against because they have to take more leave than a hetero couple.

boo frickin hoo
It's not the job of the armed forces to facilitate any marriage.
Their job is to kill people

 

[goughrmak]

One huge difference: hetero couples have the option of where they want to get married. Homosexual couples do not. So if they don't live in a state that allows it, and they have to take extra leave, there's an argument that can be made that they're being discriminated against because they have to take more leave than a hetero couple.QUOTE]

I was stationed in Japan when I took leave to fly home (back to the states) to get married. Current scenario is:

Hetero couple (one in the states, and one overseas) want to get married. Service member has to take leave, travel, do all of the normal stuff.

Homo couple (one in the states, and one overseas) want to get married. Service gets FREE leave to travel, do all of the normal stuff.

These 2 service members work side by side, but one is getting punished because they are hetero??? What a bunch of CRAP!!!!

 

[NTNG]

One huge difference: hetero couples have the option of where they want to get married. Homosexual couples do not. So if they don't live in a state that allows it, and they have to take extra leave, there's an argument that can be made that they're being discriminated against because they have to take more leave than a hetero couple.QUOTE]

I was stationed in Japan when I took leave to fly home (back to the states) to get married. Current scenario is:

Hetero couple (one in the states, and one overseas) want to get married. Service member has to take leave, travel, do all of the normal stuff.

Homo couple (one in the states, and one overseas) want to get married. Service gets FREE leave to travel, do all of the normal stuff.

These 2 service members work side by side, but one is getting punished because they are hetero??? What a bunch of CRAP!!!!

One is being "rewarded" for being gay. If you want to allow service members to be gay, fine. If you start granting special privledges, and treating them "differently" you have defeated the attempt to integrate them and have the hetero members accept them as nothing more then another service member. On a differnt note, how long before the junior troops start "gaming" this, as well as other provisions for gay troops < housing, married BAH, etc > ?

 

[Beta]

Interesting. I agree with goughrmak -- I didn't think about someone stationed overseas with a spouse elsewhere. Maybe that should be considered too, if we're trying to keep everything even.

I still think you're all being a little biased: I mean, straight people can walk to their local courthouse and get married in a matter of hours, while a homosexual might have to fly halfway across the country to get it done. So this benefit is supposed to level the playing field. I guess that doesn't bother me. But I guess for overseas, it's not much different than someone who's straight. I don't know enough about marriage abroad to know if it's even an option for anyone, so it seems unfair that the straight people don't get some kind of paid leave off if they have to travel as well.

I'm OK with this concept as long as it makes an things more even, but some of these examples where it clearly gives them an ADVANTAGE, that's problematic. I have never been a fan of giving someone an excessive advantage to "level things out" because that never makes things even. It just builds up more resentment. So I guess if people don't like this concept AT ALL, they should encourage their states to legalize homosexual marriage so this benefit is no longer required. :shrug:

But I'd be for them reducing the days, and giving heterosexual couples some free leave based on goughrmak's examples.

 

[Ken King]

Wouldn't it be easier and fairer to simply construct a new form - The DOD Marriage Certificate, valid as any other marriage certificate in the US and around the world. Wouldn't have to travel anywhere to get one except the local personnel detachment. Sign it in front of a notary/CO/chaplain, do your ceremony exchanging vows or whatever. Honeymoon is on your dime. Would work for all, right?

 

[Beta]

Wouldn't it be easier and fairer to simply construct a new form - The DOD Marriage Certificate, valid as any other marriage certificate in the US and around the world. Wouldn't have to travel anywhere to get one except the local personnel detachment. Sign it in front of a notary/CO/chaplain, do your ceremony exchanging vows or whatever. Honeymoon is on your dime. Would work for all, right?

They could even arrange for webcam for people that aren't local.

That idea saves time, money, and then no need for these somewhat wasted funds in an attempt to avoid discrimination lawsuits.

Or even without a "DOD marriage cert" they could somehow arrange for states to provide them to the armed forces. Why not let DC marriage certs handle it?

 

[stgislander]

As the old says goes, if you were meant to have a wife (or husband), you'd have been issued one in your seabag.

 

[goughrmak]

Wouldn't it be easier and fairer to simply construct a new form - The DOD Marriage Certificate, valid as any other marriage certificate in the US and around the world. Wouldn't have to travel anywhere to get one except the local personnel detachment. Sign it in front of a notary/CO/chaplain, do your ceremony exchanging vows or whatever. Honeymoon is on your dime. Would work for all, right?

Wow Ken!! Something you and I agree on!! I think this is a GREAT idea!!

 

[DooDoo1402]

boo frickin hoo
It's not the job of the armed forces to facilitate any marriage.
Their job is to kill people

That would be the typical attitude of the gung-ho career drunkerd, winging their PS3 controller around, foaming at the mouth! believing they are someone. Perhaps you should review defense...

 

[Railroad]

As the old says goes, if you were meant to have a wife (or husband), you'd have been issued one in your seabag.

Okay, stepping away for a moment from Military people so we can see how others handle these situations, it shouldn't come as a surprise that as a rule, employers (private or otherwise) don't provide basket leave for people who choose to get married - hets and homos alike. The same applies for Federal and State Civil Servants.

Having sacrificed my own freedoms to protect those guaranteed by the Constitution for the rest of U.S. citizens, I know what it's like to be in uniform, and I know what it's like to be unable to do just anything that comes into your head.

There's no equality being served by granting basket leave for those who want to marry someone else of the same sex. Hets who choose to marry people located in faraway places figure out how to get it done within their personal limitations - income and leave are key factors. IMHO there is no need for basket leave for anyone wishing to marry or have conjugal relations. So if gays want equality, let them have the same amount of basket leave granted to hets (none).

 

[Vince]

One huge difference: hetero couples have the option of where they want to get married. Homosexual couples do not. So if they don't live in a state that allows it, and they have to take extra leave, there's an argument that can be made that they're being discriminated against because they have to take more leave than a hetero couple.

I don't understand why the amount of leave is so large, though. It takes 1 day to get to a state that allows the marriage and 1 day to return. That should be 2 days of leave. Maybe 4 for overseas because of length of travel. The rest should be the same as a hetero couple that's getting married locally. Or is there a bunch of extra preparation I'm not thinking about? Maybe marriage license stuff that needs to be handled that takes a few days? :shrug:

The Navy didn't issue me a wife or kids, that was up to me. No difference. Extra leave because they are a same sex couple?

 

[Beta]

Okay, stepping away for a moment from Military people so we can see how others handle these situations, it shouldn't come as a surprise that as a rule, employers (private or otherwise) don't provide basket leave for people who choose to get married - hets and homos alike. The same applies for Federal and State Civil Servants.

The government has a harder time with discrimination cases than regular businesses. It's larger and held to a different standard, unfortunately. That's the problem. People try to sue the government for all sorts of bull####, and this new policy (while excessive) is probably cheaper than dealing with litigation.

The Navy didn't issue me a wife or kids, that was up to me. No difference. Extra leave because they are a same sex couple?

did you bother reading my post or did you just click one at random? my point was only about some states not allowing same sex marriage, so it's a little more difficult for a homosexual than a straight person to make that happen, so there is a difference between your situation and theirs (unless you were in a homo-friendly state when you got married). That was my only point.

Put their shoes on for a minute. If the government had banned hetero marriages and only allowed homosexual marriages where you were stationed, you probably would have bitched and moaned about it. Let's be honest, everyone knows a bitching sailor is a happy sailor.

 

[Railroad]

The government has a harder time with discrimination cases than regular businesses. It's larger and held to a different standard, unfortunately. That's the problem. People try to sue the government for all sorts of bull####, and this new policy (while excessive) is probably cheaper than dealing with litigation.

That might be their logic, especially given the risk-averse mentality which seems to dominate thinking in the Pentagon. I still strenuously disagree with "special case" rules and this rule in particular, in view of the fact that others suffer hardships which rules and guidelines don't accommodate.

But I do get your point, Beta, and you may well be correct in what you said.

 

[SG_Player1974]

Hey.. I say WHY NOT!!!

Certain "ethnic cultures" were given preferential treatment with regards to education, employment, etc. due to past laws and discriminations and look how that turned out.

 

[Railroad]

Hey.. I say WHY NOT!!!

Certain "ethnic cultures" were given preferential treatment with regards to education, employment, etc. due to past laws and discriminations and look how that turned out.