Personnel Political Work

Keeping Good Policies 'Warm': Turning the Warmth of Policy into a Warm Current in the Hearts of Officers and Soldiers

给好政策“保温”，把政策的暖意转化为官兵心中的暖流

PLA Daily (解放军报) 15 July 2026

Summary

A PLA Army investigative report published following the April 1, 2025 implementation of the revised Internal Affairs Regulations documents implementation failures of the new 'return home to sleep' (回家住宿) provisions at a brigade under the 75th Group Army, identifying four distinct friction points: command culture that treats overnight presence as a proxy for professionalism, unresolved administrative status for personnel living inside garrison compounds, discretionary 'may' language that subordinate leaders exploit to deny entitlements after extended field deployments, and absent guidance on edge cases such as single-officer unit coverage. The article documents a recurring institutional problem in PLA personnel policy: welfare provisions enacted at the regulatory level are systematically diluted at the brigade and company level through informal norms, locally invented supplementary conditions, and leaders' risk aversion, a pattern that extends to this new regulation despite its explicit intent to protect individual rights. The specific detail that NCOs completing three-month-plus field rotations are being denied the discretionary increased home-accommodation frequency—while simultaneously ineligible for separation allowances or home leave—raises the question of whether the 75th Group Army's operational tempo is structurally incompatible with the welfare framework the revised regulations assume.

Translation

The newly revised "Internal Affairs Regulations of the Chinese People's Liberation Army" (中国人民解放军内务条令) took effect on April 1, 2025. Among its provisions, the regulations concerning off-post overnight accommodation (留营住宿) have been optimized and adjusted, and the provisions related to "returning home to sleep" (回家住宿) have permeated the hearts of officers and soldiers like a warm current, effectively enhancing the sense of happiness and fulfillment (幸福感和获得感) of military personnel and their families. However, in the course of implementing the relevant provisions, a number of problems and "blockages" (梗阻) have emerged that have diluted the effect of these heartwarming policies on officers and soldiers. The following is an investigative report from a certain brigade of the Army.

On a Wednesday afternoon, Lieutenant Li, a platoon leader in a certain company of a certain brigade under the 75th Group Army, received an approved application form for returning home to sleep—yet his face showed none of the joy one might expect at the prospect of seeing his wife. "Don't always be thinking about going home; keep your mind on your work…" The words his superior let slip while signing the form, seemingly offhand, fell on him like a bucket of cold water.

Lieutenant Li was promoted from the enlisted ranks. After graduating and returning to his unit last year, he married his partner and settled near the garrison. Under the new regulations, he is entitled to the right to return home to sleep, but the repeated form-filling and successive approval procedures have left him weary. What left him with even more mixed feelings were the "fixed views" (固有看法) of certain leaders. "In their eyes, it seems like only staying in the company every single day counts as fulfilling your duties." Lieutenant Li told the reporter that this kind of "stereotyping" (刻板印象) makes him feel, even though he knows he is returning home in full compliance with regulations, that he has no ground to stand on and no confidence to assert himself.

"The skewed notion of 'measuring commitment by time on duty and professionalism by hours of overtime' not only makes grassroots cadres hesitant when they return home to sleep in accordance with regulations, but also creates an invisible field of pressure within the headquarters element (机关)." Staff Officer Yang of the brigade headquarters had a deep appreciation of this.

His home is only a ten-minute drive from the garrison, yet he rarely manages to return home to sleep on weekdays, and often has to spend weekends in the office. "Sometimes it's not that the work isn't finished—it's the worry that others are working overtime while you're not there, making you look 'lax in work style' or 'lacking in ambition.'" Staff Officer Yang seemed somewhat helpless when discussing the topic. Under the new regulations, personal discretionary extracurricular activity time (课外活动时间) on weekday evenings also allows personnel to "return home to sleep once." Wednesday evenings are designated as free activity time for the brigade, but within the headquarters element, collective overtime on Wednesdays and working late into the night on Fridays have become an unspoken "convention" (惯例) that everyone tacitly accepts.

During the investigation, the reporter noted that the rights protection of another group also deserves attention—officers and soldiers who meet the conditions for returning home to sleep but reside within the garrison compound.

Platoon Leader Wang of a certain company is one such individual. He told the reporter that comrades who live outside the garrison compound can go out in accordance with regulations once the approval process for returning home to sleep is complete, but he and his family live in apartment housing inside the garrison compound, and if he wants to leave the compound during a period of authorized home accommodation, he must separately apply for leave.

At first, Platoon Leader Wang was unaware of this requirement. Last year, he had arranged with his family to go out after work on a Friday to celebrate his child's birthday, only to be stopped at the gate by a sentry. "The sentry said that my registered information at the gate post was 'returning home to sleep within the garrison compound,' so I could not leave the compound without the relevant paperwork," Platoon Leader Wang recalled.

Staff Officer He of the headquarters element, who also lives in garrison compound apartment housing, had a similar experience. On one occasion, his parents came to visit the unit, and he had planned to take them to a night market over the weekend and spend the night at a hotel chatting as a family. But according to unit regulations, although he was classified as a home-accommodation personnel, because he resided within the garrison compound, he was required to return to the garrison each night. In the end, he abandoned the idea.

"Do personnel returning home to sleep within the garrison compound need to separately apply for leave and approval to go out? After going out, must such personnel return to the garrison to sleep at night?" During the investigation, the reporter put these questions—questions that officers and soldiers care about—to the brigade headquarters. Staff Officer Li of the Human Resources Section told the reporter that there are no specific management regulations for such personnel, so they have applied the management approach used for personnel on in-garrison overnight accommodation (留营住宿). The brigade has, however, made some humanizing adjustments, such as extending the duration of authorized outings and pushing back the time for returning to the unit.

In fact, certain provisions contain a degree of flexibility, and because grassroots units cannot accurately gauge the standards and are concerned about safety risks, the relevant provisions are difficult to implement in practice.

"For companies that have continuously executed tasks away from their home station (易地连续执行任务) (such as field training, exercises, etc.) for more than three months, regimental-level and above units may, based on actual circumstances, increase the frequency of personnel returning home to sleep during the rest and recuperation period (休整期间) following their return to the home station." A noncommissioned officer (军士) in the brigade told the reporter that when studying the new regulations, this provision had made a strong impression on him, because at the time he had just finished a field training assignment and had not been able to see his family for more than three months. However, after returning to the unit, when he eagerly applied for an increased frequency of home accommodation, he was politely declined.

"The text doesn't say 'shall' (应当) or 'must' (必须)—it says 'may' (可以). If leaders don't step up and take responsibility (不担当作为), this provision cannot be implemented." Flipping through the regulations, the noncommissioned officer appeared somewhat dejected. "So the benevolent original intent of this provision currently remains only on paper and has not truly become a tangible right that everyone can see and touch." The noncommissioned officer also told the reporter that current field training taskings for the force are heavy, and many officers and soldiers bearing long-term field training assignments face a situation in which they can neither return home to sleep nor receive separation allowances (分居费) nor apply for home leave (探亲假).

Beyond this, the reporter learned that in actual practice there are also questions such as "may a company return home to sleep when only a single primary officer (单主官) is present in the unit?" These questions lack clear policy guidance, and most units adhere to a management philosophy of "err on the side of strictness rather than leniency" (宁紧勿松), invisibly adding "supplementary conditions" (附加条件) to officers' and soldiers' right to return home to sleep.

This investigation left the reporter with a deep impression. The policy of returning home to sleep is a pragmatic measure that puts people first (以人为本) and warms the hearts of soldiers, but in actual implementation, certain units' one-sided management thinking, cumbersome approval procedures, absent supporting detailed rules, and various "local regulations" (土规定) have discounted the legitimate rights and interests of officers and soldiers. It is hoped that at every level, the regulations will be implemented with precision, keeping good policies "warm," and truly converting the warmth of policy into a warm current in the hearts of officers and soldiers.

Original Chinese

新修订的《中国人民解放军内务条令》自2025年4月1日起施行，其中对留营住宿相关规定进行了优化调整，“回家住宿”相关规定更如一股暖流浸润官兵心田，有效提升军人军属的幸福感和获得感。然而，在落实相关规定的过程中，出现了一些问题和“梗阻”，让暖心政策落到官兵身上时打了折扣。请看来自陆军某旅的调研报告—— 周三下午，第75集团军某旅某连李排长拿到了通过审批的回家住宿申请表，脸上却没有将要回家见到妻子的喜悦。“别总想着回家，还是要把心思放在工作上……”领导签字时看似不经意间说出的一句话，仿佛一盆冷水浇在心头。李排长是士兵提干，去年毕业回营后便与爱人成婚，并在驻地定居。按照新条令规定，他享有回家住宿的权益，但一次次表格填写、一道道审批流程，又让他心生疲惫。更让他感到五味杂陈的，是个别领导的“固有看法”。“在他们眼里，好像只有天天扎在连队，才算履职尽责。”李排长告诉记者，这种“刻板印象”，让他明知自己是依规回家住宿，却总感觉理不直气不壮。 “‘以在岗时间论担当、以加班时长论敬业’的偏颇观念，不仅让基层干部依规回家住宿时心存顾虑，也在机关形成了一种无形的压力场。”该旅机关杨参谋对此深有体会。他家距离营区不过十几分钟车程，但他很少能在工作日回家住宿，周末也常常要在办公室度过。“有时并非工作没干完，而是担心别人加班时自己却不在，显得‘作风松懈’‘没上进心’。”谈及这个话题，杨参谋显得有些无奈。依照新条令规定，每周工作日个人支配的课外活动时间也“可以回家住宿1次”。每周三晚上为该旅的自由活动时间，但在机关，周三集体加班、周五忙到深夜，已成为大家心照不宣的“惯例”。调研过程中，记者注意到，另一个群体的权益保障同样值得关注——符合回家住宿条件，但居住在营区内的官兵。某连王排长就是其中一员。他告诉记者，住在营院外的战友，完成回家住宿审批流程后即可依规外出，但他与家人居住在营区公寓房内，想在回家住宿期间离开营区，需要另外请假。起初，王排长不知道这个要求，去年曾与家人约好周五下班后外出为孩子庆祝生日，没承想被哨兵拦在了门口。“哨兵说，我在门岗处的登记信息是‘营区内回家住宿’，所以没有相关手续就不能离开营区。”王排长回忆道。同样在营区公寓房居住的机关贺参谋也有相似经历。一次，他的父母来队探亲，他本打算利用周末时间带着二老逛逛夜市，晚上一家人住在酒店聊聊家常。可按照单位规定，他虽然属于回家住宿人员，但居住在营区内，每晚必须归队。最终，他打消了这个念头。 “营区内回家住宿人员外出，还需另外请假报批吗？这类人员外出后，晚上必须回营住宿吗？”调研过程中，记者向该旅机关咨询这些官兵关注的问题。人力资源科李干事告诉记者，对于此类人员，没有具体管理规定，所以他们便参照了留营住宿官兵的管理方式。不过，该旅也做了一些人性化调整，比如延长外出时长、推迟归队时间等等。事实上，还有部分规定存在一定的弹性空间，而基层把握不准尺度标准、担心存在安全隐患，导致相关规定难以落地。 “易地连续执行任务（如野外驻训、演习等）3个月以上的连队在归建后休整期间，团级以上单位可以根据实际情况，增加人员回家住宿频次。”该旅一名军士告诉记者，在学习新条令时，他对这项规定印象深刻，因为他当时刚结束驻训任务，已经3个多月未能见到家人。然而，归队后，他满怀期待申请增加回家住宿频次，却遭到了婉拒。 “条文里写的不是‘应当’，也不是‘必须’，而是‘可以’。领导不担当作为，这条规定便无法落地。”翻看条令，这名军士显得有些失落，“所以，这条规定的善意初衷，目前只是停留在纸面上，并没有真正变成大家看得见、摸得着的权益。”这名军士还告诉记者，当前部队驻训任务较重，很多担负长期野外驻训任务的官兵，面临着既不能回家住宿，又无法领取分居费、申请探亲假的境况。除此之外，记者了解到，实际工作中，还存在诸如“连队单主官在位期间，是否可以回家住宿”等问题。这些问题缺乏明确政策指引，大部分单位秉持“宁紧勿松”的管理理念，无形中为官兵回家住宿增设了“附加条件”。这次调研让记者感触颇深，回家住宿政策是以人为本、温暖兵心的务实举措，但在实际落地中，有些单位片面的管理认知、繁琐的审批流程、缺失的配套细则以及各类“土规定”，给官兵的正当权益打了些折扣。期待各级精准落实条令，给好政策“保温”，真正把政策的暖意转化为官兵心中的暖流。