Pay Rates per Day as of 1914. Also very interesting articles including facts and figures.
-
Interesting articles and facts and figures and Rates of Pay for the British Army WW1 1914.
Makes very interesting reading - Link: http://www.tommy1418.com/wwi-facts--figures--myths.html
Rates of pay are mentioned- with the equivalent amount today. Example:-
(Private 1s. 0d.) (Sergeant 2s. 4d.) ( Lt. 6s.0d.) (Major 13s. 8d.) (Colonel 18s.0d).
In 1914 the value of shilling = £3.44 by today’s standards. In 1917 Pay rates per day were increased to 1s.3d.
Sorry unable to work out the corresponding currencies for our friends abroad who are tagging these diaries!
Posted
-
by
ral104
moderator, scientist
Thanks for the link, Marie. I've never looked into it, but I've wondered on occasion how British pay compared to that of other soldiers. I have a feeling the French were quite poorly treated in comparison. I'm not at all sure about the Germans.
Posted
-
by
David_Underdown
moderator
The Dominion armies were generally better paid than the British I think - led to some problems with people trying to join Canadian units in the UK to get the better pay on offer.
There a re various different means of calculating equivalent value of money today. Given these are rates of pay, it's probably better to use labour earnings as a comparator, rather than real price (although even that for 2015 values gives £4.33 per shilling, rather than £3.44 according to https://www.measuringworth.com/ukcompare/relativevalue.php). In that case a shilling equates to £16.09, somewhat better, but still not great (though of course you did get food and accommodation).
In many cases there were additional proficiency payments for those who had a recognised army trade.
Posted
-
by
ral104
moderator, scientist
Ah, I'd heard about people magically becoming Canadian in order to get the better pay! I didn't realise it was a general Dominion thing.
Posted
-
by
cyngast
moderator
Somewhere in the reading I've done since becoming a volunteer here there was mention of tension between British troops and Australians because the latter had so much more money to spend. I wish I could remember where I read that and what the exact circumstances were.
Posted
-
by
ral104
moderator, scientist
I wonder what the American troops got paid back then - there's always that thing of them being paid more in the Second World War than then Brits, but I wonder if it was true then too. My guess would be not.
Posted
-
An article on Australian Pay`- WW1.
“Australian soldier pay rates in WWI Australian troops were known to their Commonwealth counterparts as "six bob a day tourists", which tells you almost all you need to know right there- the men, at Private rank, were paid six shillings a day, which is apparently nearly three times as much as their UK counterparts. One shilling was held over as "deferred" pay, to be paid out at the end of their service. Soldiers higher in rank were paid more.
Of the 5s they received each day after their deferred pay, the men could choose how much was allocated to Australia and their family, and how much they received on the Front.”
Link: http://roadtowarandback.blogspot.co.uk/2013/03/soldier-pay-in-wwi.htmlUnable to find a link for American Rates of Pay.
Posted
-
by
ral104
moderator, scientist
Interesting! Thanks, Marie. It looks like the Australians set their pay to be roughly equal to an average worker's pay. Apparently, junior officers were also paid more than their British counterparts, but the senior officers were often paid considerably less. Probably says something about different social attitudes at the time.
Posted
-
by
cyngast
moderator
I hunted around for a while online last night looking for pay rates for the US Army without any success, at least for World War 1. I did find a nice list for the U.S. Civil War in the 1860s, but the only hint I found for WW1 was that the army didn't at that time pay according to rank, but rather according to what kind of job a soldier was assigned to do. That was about it. It was in the introduction to this article https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States_Army_enlisted_rank_insignia_of_World_War_I
Posted
-
by
ral104
moderator, scientist
That's an odd system - of course most armies paid supplements for particular trades, I think, but to base it entirely on that with no grades according to rank is surprising. Unless they counted various levels of command as an assignment.
Posted
-
by
cyngast
moderator
I couldn't find any more details. The Civil War listing http://www.civilwar.org/education/history/warfare-and-logistics/logistics/pay.html was based on rank, from private on up to Lt. Gen. and includes both Confederate and Union armies.
Posted
-
My diary says that the battalion was paid 5 francs. AWD0003h4k . I suppose it means the soldiers.
Posted
-
by
cyngast
moderator
Yes, I think that probably means each man received 5 francs. I wonder what time period that covered? Two weeks or a month probably.
I tag any mention like that of the men being paid as Army Life; Other.
Posted
-
by
erik.schaubroeckscarlet.be
in response to cyngast's comment.
The writer of the diary changes now and than and every writer has apparently his own priorities, the current one mentioning the payment. The payment took place every week (2, 9 and 17 july).
Posted
-
by
cyngast
moderator
Yes, isn't it interesting how each writer has his own priorities? One does a weather report every day and the next one never mentions it. One gives the details of a football match and one says only, "Recreation in the afternoon." I tagged one diary where the writer gave great detail about what the unit did when in Reserve, but when they were in the front line, he just wrote "In the trenches." These variations really show the humanity behind the official records.
Posted
-
Rates of Pay British Army 1914:
http://www.1914-1918.net/pay_1914.htmland Soldiers Separation allowances updated 1915:
http://www.iwm.org.uk/collections/item/object/28448Posted