Gouging Military Vets

Someone inside the Bloomberg administration has a peculiar sense of the equities when it comes to city employees who took leave from their jobs because they were called to military service in the wake of 9/11. Those employees, who had been military reservists, were given the option of continuing to receive their salaries and benefits, provided that when they returned to their jobs they paid back either their salaries or their military earnings, whichever was the lesser amount.

It seemed like a reasonable deal, but now some of the returning military veterans are discovering that they are being dunned for more than they bargained for.

Part of the problem is that when the city did not move to collect any money when veterans initially returned from service, some assumed they were being given a pass on that obligation. It was a nice thought, but one they shouldn't have indulged without getting something in writing to that effect.

The Bloomberg administration has compounded their problem in a couple of ways that couldn't have been foreseen, however, which strike us as either unnecessarily or grossly unfair.

It is demanding repayment based on gross military pay, before taxes were deducted, even though the veterans never saw the full amounts of their checks. The New York Times, following up on a story first reported here a month ago, quoted Department of Citywide Administrative Services Commissioner Martha Hirst saying that the veterans could recoup the difference by amending their tax returns. That may well be, but why should the individual veterans be put to that inconvenience?

A more egregious piece of business is the city's insistence that military housing and food allowances be counted in computing service pay, which drives up compensation to where it is nearly double the military salaries. The Times noted that in some cases this would leave that compensation higher than what the affected employees got from their city jobs.

In essence, the reservists' covered expenses are being treated as if they were corporate perks. This is both mutton-headed and callous. These veterans in most cases continued paying rent or mortgages while they were away on military duty, and in cases where they had families, a portion of their salaries went toward feeding them.

One justification for low military pay has been that the Federal Government is covering the other basic expenses of those serving their country. It is unseemly for the city to put all this into a total compensation package as if the reservists were living a life of luxury on the city's tab. As this newspaper went to press Sept. 25, the City Council passed a resolution by Staten Island Councilman Michael McMahon that asked Mayor Bloomberg to stop treating the military housing and food allowances as income. DCAS is reviewing the standards, and if the Mayor is wise, he will revise them quickly, in the name of justice and consideration to those serving our country, as well as this city.