Navy Sea Pay: History and Recent Initiatives

Golding, Heidi L.; McArver, Susan C

doi:10.21236/ada407239

Cited by 6 publications

(6 citation statements)

References 0 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Despite these apparent contradictions, Golding and McArver (2002) find that any increase in sea pay is followed by a subsequent increase in voluntary extensions of sea duty. Using projected rotation date extension request data, which Golding and McArver (2002, p. 15) (Golding & McArver, 2002).…”

Section: Recent Studiesmentioning

confidence: 79%

“…While statutorily classified as a special pay to compensate for the arduous nature of sea duty, it has also been described as a necessary force-shaping tool (Golding & McArver, 2002). Because of this dual nature, it is important to understand CSP in both contexts.…”

Section: Chapter Overviewmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…As Golding and McArver (2002) explain, CSP is geared more towards careerists while the CSP premium is geared towards junior personnel near their first reenlistment point. This is because the CSP premium is paid only after three consecutive years of sea duty are completed.…”

Section: Recent Studiesmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…This is because the CSP premium is paid only after three consecutive years of sea duty are completed. Increasing the CSP premium gained favor after the 1996 homebasing survey revealed 65 percent of Sailors would extend for 1 year and 22 percent for 3 years for an additional 150 dollars per month in sea pay (Griffis & Golding, 1997;Golding & McArver, 2002). Extensions can be effective since savings are realized from permanent change of station and training cost reductions.…”

Section: Recent Studiesmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Using projected rotation date extension request data, which Golding and McArver (2002, p. 15) (Golding & McArver, 2002). Thus, Golding and McArver (2002, p. 19) conclude that CSP is "an effective distribution tool and only secondarily a retention tool.…”

Section: Recent Studiesmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 4 more Smart Citations

Navy Career Sea Pay: Is it Still a Viable Compensating Wage Program? A Historical and Financial Analysis

Ashby¹,

Scinicariello²,

Vasquez³

2007

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Public reporting burden for this collection of information is estimated to average 1 hour per response, including the time for reviewing instruction, searching existing data sources, gathering and maintaining the data needed, and completing and reviewing the collection of information. Send comments regarding this burden estimate or any other aspect of this collection of information, including suggestions for reducing this burden, to Washington headquarters Services, Directorate for Information Operations and Reports, 1215 Jefferson Davis Highway, Suite 1204, Arlington, VA 22202-4302, and to the Office of Management and Budget, Paperwork Reduction Project (0704-0188) Washington DC 20503.

show abstract

Section: Recent Studiesmentioning

confidence: 79%

Section: Chapter Overviewmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Recent Studiesmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Recent Studiesmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Recent Studiesmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 3 more Smart Citations

Navy Career Sea Pay: Is it Still a Viable Compensating Wage Program? A Historical and Financial Analysis

Ashby¹,

Scinicariello²,

Vasquez³

2007

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

Do the Services Need a Deployment Pay?

Koopman¹,

Hattiangadi²

2001

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

The Navy Survey on Reenlistment and Quality of Service: Using Choice-Based Conjoint to Quantify Relative Preferences for Pay and Nonpay Aspects of Naval Service

Kraus¹,

Lien²,

Orme³

2003

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Public reporting burden for this collection of information is estimated to average 1 hour per response, including the time for reviewing instructions, searching existing data sources, gathering and maintaining the data needed, and completing and reviewing this collection of information. PERFORMING ORGANIZATION NAME(S) AND ADDRESS(ES):Center for Naval Analyses 4825 Mark Center Drive Alexandria, Virginia 22311-1850 PERFORMING ORGANIZATION REPORT NO.:CRMD0008416.A2 SPONSORING AGENCY NAME(S) AND ADDRESS(ES):Assistant Deputy Chief of Naval Operations, Manpower and Personnel (NIB) 2 Navy Annex Washington, DC 20380-1775 SUPPLEMENTARY NOTES: N/A ABSTRACT: (U)The primary tasking for this project was to develop a choice-based conjoint (CBC) model of Sailors' preferences for reenlistment incentives and quality-of-service factors to learn more about how compensation-based reenlistment incentives compare with non-compensation factors in influencing reenlistment decisions. In response to this tasking, we designed the Navy Survey on Reenlistment and Quality of Service (NSRQOS), and sent it to approximately 9,000 first-term Sailors. The survey results indicate that, even with several measures of pay included in the survey, nonpay factors play a substantial role in guiding Sailors' reenlistment intentions.(U) The secondary tasking was to demonstrate how CBC survey data and models can be used to analyze personnel issues. Based on a review of the relevant literature, we concluded that CBC surveys are most appropriate for short-term applications in which the decisions of interest are made on the basis of competitive differences between a few well-known attributes. Therefore, the best Navy personnel applications of the CBC methodology would be analyses of proposed policies that entail well-defined trade-offs between a few characteristics. Furthermore, use of CBC results should focus on the relative effects of different characteristics; results should not focus on absolute changes in predicted reenlistment rates or program participation rates. SUBJECT TERMS:Reenlistment behavior; reenlistment intentions; reenlistment incentives; pay elasticity; quality of service; preference survey; choice-based conjoint (CBC); discrete-choice modeling; hierarchical Bayes estimation; disk by mail; survey response rates

show abstract

Navy Sea Pay: History and Recent Initiatives

Cited by 6 publications

References 0 publications

Navy Career Sea Pay: Is it Still a Viable Compensating Wage Program? A Historical and Financial Analysis

Navy Career Sea Pay: Is it Still a Viable Compensating Wage Program? A Historical and Financial Analysis

Do the Services Need a Deployment Pay?

The Navy Survey on Reenlistment and Quality of Service: Using Choice-Based Conjoint to Quantify Relative Preferences for Pay and Nonpay Aspects of Naval Service

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About