The whole "Quality of Life" thing...

[eddie]

I've done a fair amount of archival searching around here and read through numerous posts about "Navy vs. USMC," and one of the major points is how the Marines have a "lower quality of life."

I am curious as to exactly what this means.

Does this have to to do with a lack of base golf courses, or being the service that "gets more done with less," or something?" Are deployments really any worse than they are in the Navy? Are shore tours/B-billets really any "worse" than they are in the Navy? Etc... etc...

I get the feeling from what I have read that the phrase "lower quality of life" is just a way of shooing away the faint of heart.

Please... enlighten me.

 

[Gatordev]

I'm not a Marine, and I only have a limited experience with Marine bases, but here's my observation. Marine bases, in general, don't spend the money to make them look as pretty or be as nice as the AF or Navy (in that order). Driving around Kaneohe Bay MCAF, you can see the Marine enlisted barracks and the officer/enlisted housing, and it's not pretty. The BOQ is absolutely crappy. Then you look across the street at the Navy barracks, which had to be built to support all the squadrons that came there in '99, and they're brand new and very nice. They just started building new housing for the enlisted families that look very nice, and are now tearing down all the ghetto homes in base housing. I know part of the improvement is because there are more bodies there, but you get the idea.

When I would go to Miramar MCAS, it was like driving on an AF base. Everything is in great shape and looks beautiful, especially for the desert wasteland that is Miramar. Then I remembered that they just took it w/in a year or two from the Navy when I was there, and it was a TacAir (read: money) Master Jet base. The Marines definitely got a steal of a deal w/ that base.

Again, just my outside point of view, but I think that's the general idea behind the comments.

 

[Brett327]

I'm not a Marine, and I only have a limited experience with Marine bases, but here's my observation. Marine bases, in general, don't spend the money to make them look as pretty or be as nice as the AF or Navy (in that order). Driving around Kaneohe Bay MCAF, you can see the Marine enlisted barracks and the officer/enlisted housing, and it's not pretty. The BOQ is absolutely crappy. Then you look across the street at the Navy barracks, which had to be built to support all the squadrons that came there in '99, and they're brand new and very nice. They just started building new housing for the enlisted families that look very nice, and are now tearing down all the ghetto homes in base housing. I know part of the improvement is because there are more bodies there, but you get the idea.

When I would go to Miramar MCAS, it was like driving on an AF base. Everything is in great shape and looks beautiful, especially for the desert wasteland that is Miramar. Then I remembered that they just took it w/in a year or two from the Navy when I was there, and it was a TacAir (read: money) Master Jet base. The Marines definitely got a steal of a deal w/ that base.

Again, just my outside point of view, but I think that's the general idea behind the comments.

Yeah, concur. It's all about money and how the Marines chose to spend it (and it's not on their troopers). If the Marines had their way, everyone would be living in tents and taking a crap in a ditch. I did a deployment to Iwakuni, which is fairly nice by Marine standards, but they were constantly trying to take OUR money away too. We were getting X number of per diem dollars for everyone, but since we were under the OPCON of MAG-12, they tried to take our per diem away to use for something else (something they did to all their Marines). Well, our CO would have none of it and got our Commodore involved. We kept our per diem. Sons of B!tches!

Brett

 

[Brett327]

...we have to be creative.

The Marine Corps makes due with what they can get their hands on ...

To include stealing GSE and parts (sometimes right off another jet) from other squadrons. That's another bad rep the Marines have.

Brett

 

[Steve Wilkins]

Life in the Marine Corps is not perfect by any stretch of the imagination but we are often tasked to do far more than what our Operational funding would allow so we have to be creative.

You say all that as if the very same thing isn't an issue for the Navy side as well. It is. It's just that I think we have a better track record of taking care of our people when it comes to issues like this. And that track record has developed into a kind of culture that does not allow pulling money from our sailors pockets that they are rightfully owed according to current regulations in order to fund an operation. The whole thing about our people being our number one asset....well, actions speak pretty loudly when it comes to showing that.

 

[eddie]

Ok... I think the First Part of the question was answered... let's try these again:

2.Are deployments really any "worse" than they are in the Navy?

3.Are shore tours/B-billets really any "worse" than they are in the Navy?

Thank you.

 

[Brett327]

Again, the Marine Corps has limited funds so YES sometimes parts have to be taken from one aircraft to get others flying. This is avoided whenever possible and the only instances I have even heard of is when the aircraft being taken from is already "down" for something else.

I'm not talking about a normal maintenance canibalization action, I'm talking about Marines literally stealing parts off another squadron's aircraft in the dead of night. This isn't directed at you, but it's unsat that I have to make my maintainers stand an extra hangar watch because some of our fellow service members have sticky fingers and less than scrupulous moral character. Man, don't get me started about thieving Marines. In Iwakuni, I could go out in town and leave my bike unlocked all day on the street, but on base, the Marines would cut your lock and steal your bike. We had about 12 officers and many more troopers get their bikes stolen (primary mode of transport over there). The Marine leadership was less than interested in addressing the problem. WTF?

Brett

 

[Brett327]

Did anyone catch Marines doing it? Stealing bikes that is?
I find it hard to believe that if presented with evidence that it was going on through proper channels something wasn't done about it.

Yeah, that's what i would have thought too, but the leadership just shrugged their shoulders and basically said, "that's life." Obviously, nobody was ever caught in the act, but lots of them would be found at the Marine barracks in the bike racks, coincidentally right after a new squadron would show up - hmmm? I'm just glad we got the word before we deployed, because if I would have brought my expensive MTB there, only to have some douche bag EM steal it, I would probably have gone on a rampage. Now, I'm not knocking the 99% of Marines that are obviously not thieves, but it's a hell of a rep to have for a service which prides itself on its integrity. One bad apple...

Brett

 

[skidkid]

Bottom line that is unsat. I wish it didnt happen but it does. Im disapointed but not surprised. The reaction of the leadership is what really digusts me, weak leadership that is the bottom line. Assuming it was exclusively Marines at fault I cant see any commander at any level wanting that as a reputation for his unit.

 

[eddie]

I'll just try this again...

Are deployments really any "worse" than they are in the Navy?

Are shore tours/B-billets really any "worse" than they are in the Navy?


I understand these are subjective questions... but feel free to answer to the best of your ability.

Thank you.

 

[Steve Wilkins]

I'll just try this again...

Are deployments really any "worse" than they are in the Navy?

Are shore tours/B-billets really any "worse" than they are in the Navy?


I understand these are subjective questions... but feel free to answer to the best of your ability.

Thank you.

Eddie, you're probably not getting the response you want because there are few of us here, if any at all, that have been or are presently, both Naval and Marine officers. It's like asking a bunch of people if it would be better to be the opposite sex than what they are. My short answer. Deployments vary among services and I'm guessing, even within each service itself. I've never been a Marine, so I don't know how often or how long they deploy. They go on my ships, eat our food, and work out in the gym. Maybe they'll make an unscheduled beach landing...maybe they won't. I don't know what a B-billet is, so I have no idea how to even address that. Shore tours in the Navy are different for every single community. I don't know what the options are for the Marine Corps just as I'm sure they don't really know what the options are for us. So, it will be somewhat difficult to get a comparison from a single person...not impossible, just not probable. You'll do better if you ask a more specific question on what you REALLY want to know and target that question to a Naval or Marine officer.

 

[Steve Wilkins]

Regardless, to say that ANY branch has "a better track record of taking care of our people" is just plain idiotic. I have had more Marines go out on a limb to help me than I care to think of while I have had many problems with certain Navy branches.

And it's idiotic because why.....? Please enlighten me o 2nd LT at TBS. Let me guess, you're a mustang who's BTDT, right?

 

[eddie]

Yeah... this whole thing has proven kind of futile (for obvious reasons...).

This looks like it requires some more "watching, waiting, and learning" on my part. Soul-searching, I guess: It's pretty hard for someone else to tell me what I think I want.

Thanks everyone.

 

[IRfly]

Hey, man...Personal attacks are the norm around here, especially when you have people arguing positions that are mostly based on personal experience (or lack thereof) rather than documentable fact...
Come on...A Marine needs to be tougher than that... :icon_mi_1

 

[highlyrandom]

Speaking of personal attacks...while I love the Marines, there's always the conversation below from a while ago:

"So you're saying that Marines equip the man while the Navy mans the equipment?"
"Oorah. Yeah. And We fly jets because the Devil Dogs can't trust a navy pilot with their lives, didn't you know that?"
"Okay...I thought it had something to do with a unified air-ground task force."
"Nope. Trust. It's what we do."
"So let's say we get a Sailor and a Marine fresh out of boot camp, equip the Marine with an M-16 and make the Sailor man an M-16. Then have the weapons jam in the middle of a firefight. Besides the Marine's cool martial arts stance, is either of them really any less screwed than the other?"