Really, well how about this: Isn't crappy pay and crappy schedules a condition of service to the regional airline? Regional pilots are sacrificing in order to build hours towards a further career, with that in mind how about they pay for their own training and suffer those long hours and low pay as a service to the company that is giving them the opportunity to move on to bigger and better things? As a further sign of their gratitude, how about they sign agreements that they will serve minimum term lengths? We can call them conditions of service to the employer.

Let's refresh - some regional people think that their pay should be indexed off of 2LT pay? Since you mention "roughly equal training", would you care to elaborate? USAF pilots are paid as officers (not pilots), they got officer training, they have officer responsibilities, they get officer pay - officer pilots get a small flight pay increment in addition to their officer pay. Those hardships that you call service, that is why the pay is what it is. The military set's pay to whatever it takes to get the most qualified candidates to agree to endure those hardships in exchange for that pay (just as regional airlines set their pay to that which is required to get the candidates they are willing to live with). There are many who think that the salary of a 2LT is not worth the enduring of those hardships, including the majority of those who are reading this very discussion - otherwise they would have raised their right hand.

When you can't think of a reason why your conditions should be improved on its own merits, you try to tie your pay to a completely different industry. I tell you what, I had 6 years of college (M.S.) and had 13 years of experience (training) before I went to work with my current employer - maybe I should index my pay to that of a surgeon? After all, we have similar durations of education and training.

For those who continue to compare their pay to those of other industries, you can always quit and switch to that industry. Unlike the military, you have the freedom to come and go as you wish. If you don't like your work conditions and you can't formulate the argument of why you should be compensated better or have better work rules - leave. If you want to articulate why you should be paid commensurate to your responsibilities, fine, you'll have a productive discussion. If you want to say that you should be paid what X or Y gets paid, then I'll have a simple answer - go be X or Y.

iPilot: It's called salary. Due to the nature of the gov't system, the pay of anyone in the military is comprised of base pay plus allowances. There is no overtime, there are no bonuses (except for ACIP and other pays that we incorrectly call bonuses - they are really re-signing payments), etc. Housing pay is a way for the gov't to modify one's pay based on rank and dependent status. In reality, it would be no different if your company reduced your base pay, and they added some portion back and called that portion "housing pay", and another "subsistence pay", etc. It would be like someone saying "if I got per diem like you do, I'd be able to eat for free."