Nords is going to love this one.
So reading these two topics today:
http://early-retirement.org/forums/index.php?topic=8309.0
http://early-retirement.org/forums/index.php?topic=8363.0
reminded me of a conversation the spouse and I had recently about a guy we know trying to stay on active duty after being wounded in Iraq. He's an O-3 infantry officer with about 12 years of service and lost one leg below the knee. He was given two options:
a) immediate medical retirement with 60% of base pay for the rest of his life - roughly $3000/month. Presumably this includes his medical care.
OR
b) Stay on active duty with a not-very-sexy desk job in DC and finish out his 20 years with one more promotion until retirement. Job would be working in a mostly civilian environment with no chance of ever serving again in the operating forces as an infantry officer.
What would you do?
This guy obviously chose option (b), mostly because he is having a hard time letting go of "being a Marine" and not because of any financial issues. In fact, unless I'm missing something this move is less lucrative than taking a civil service job in the same office and collecting his disability on the side.
Since my husband also loves his work and has the same rank with the same job and nearly the same years in service I asked him the "What would you do question?". His immediate response: "I'd take the money and run!!" On the one hand he was pleased to see the military bending over backwards to keep someone on active duty after being wounded, on the other hand he was appalled that someone would have their identity so wrapped up in their job that they would take any "lame" assignment just to keep wearing the uniform. Yeah, kind of a morbid topic, but nice to have another confirmation that the spouse and I are on the same track with regards to ER attitudes.
So reading these two topics today:
http://early-retirement.org/forums/index.php?topic=8309.0
http://early-retirement.org/forums/index.php?topic=8363.0
reminded me of a conversation the spouse and I had recently about a guy we know trying to stay on active duty after being wounded in Iraq. He's an O-3 infantry officer with about 12 years of service and lost one leg below the knee. He was given two options:
a) immediate medical retirement with 60% of base pay for the rest of his life - roughly $3000/month. Presumably this includes his medical care.
OR
b) Stay on active duty with a not-very-sexy desk job in DC and finish out his 20 years with one more promotion until retirement. Job would be working in a mostly civilian environment with no chance of ever serving again in the operating forces as an infantry officer.
What would you do?
This guy obviously chose option (b), mostly because he is having a hard time letting go of "being a Marine" and not because of any financial issues. In fact, unless I'm missing something this move is less lucrative than taking a civil service job in the same office and collecting his disability on the side.
Since my husband also loves his work and has the same rank with the same job and nearly the same years in service I asked him the "What would you do question?". His immediate response: "I'd take the money and run!!" On the one hand he was pleased to see the military bending over backwards to keep someone on active duty after being wounded, on the other hand he was appalled that someone would have their identity so wrapped up in their job that they would take any "lame" assignment just to keep wearing the uniform. Yeah, kind of a morbid topic, but nice to have another confirmation that the spouse and I are on the same track with regards to ER attitudes.