Call Back Veterans From The IRR, Do You Agree Or Disagree!

SFC Joe S. Davis Jr., MSM, DSL — Sat, 31 Oct 2015 20:30:36 -0400

In a Recent Armytimes Article dated 2 November 2015.

While most military recruits sign up for active or reserve component duty for three or four years, their enlistment contracts actually obligate them to a total service agreement of eight years. Troops who choose to hang up their uniforms short of eight years of service transition into the Individual Ready Reserve for the remainder of that commitment and serve as an emergency backup “force of last resort.”
The vast majority of IRR members are never called back to duty. But that could change in a big way if reserve advocates gain traction on a new plan to significantly overhaul how the IRR is managed. The goal is to make this historically disorganized component into a more integrated, reliable and useful part of the ‘total force’ in an era when the services are under pressure to reduce active-duty personnel strength and its associated high costs. The Reserve Forces Policy Board, a federal advisory group, has suggested that a revamped IRR might seek to tap inactive vets for a wider range of potentially short-term missions, creating a relationship similar to the private sector’s use of part-time consultants.

The board is calling for new laws and policies that would redefine the IRR and the role of more than 250,000 young veterans who do not drill regularly or receive pay but have prior military service and are committed to mobilize in the event of a crisis.
The push comes at a time when the military is shrinking, defense budgets remain tight and the Pentagon is looking for ways to modernize the all-volunteer force and tap new sources of talent. The IRR is “a pool of pre-trained, high-quality manpower that the American military has invested a lot of money in — and they are just sitting there,” Arnold Punaro, chairman of the Reserve Forces Policy Board, said in an interview.

“If we are looking at creating greater flexibility and maximizing the use of all talent, the IRR could playa very important role.”Punaro and the RFPB recently sent Defense Secretary Ash Carter a letter urging large-scale changes that could include: Improving official tracking of individual IRR troops and their skills by modernizing personnel data systems.

Possibly changing the laws governing when and how IRR troops are mobilized. Attaching IRR troops to traditional reserve units. Offering IRR troops access to some level of Tricare health coverage and retirement benefits. Allowing IRR troops to freeze their high-year-tenure clocks to incentivize the possibility of resuming a career with the active or Select Reserve components. In most cases, the military is able to fill any gaps in its manpower needs through the traditional reserve components, known as the Selected Reserve, in which part time troops are assigned to units, drill regularly and are often dubbed “weekend warriors.” But during severe personnel shortages, the IRR is tapped, too.

During the peak years of the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan, about 30,000 soldiers and Marines from the IRR were mobilized for deployments. The most common occupational fields for which they were recalled were the combat arms, military police, vehicle operators, mechanics and engineers.
The Navy and Air Force also.
The current number of people in each
service’s Individual Ready Reserve:
Army: 93,861
Marine Corps: 70,188
Navy: 53,353
Air Force: 36,751
SOURCE: MILITARY SERVICE

Response by CAPT Kevin B. made Oct 31 at 2015 8:43 PM

CAPT Kevin B. — Sat, 31 Oct 2015 20:43:42 -0400

I'd expect the IRR manning would get cut in half if there was much of a pull as those who affiliate would see risk without any real benefit. So to keep them, a decent carrot is needed. Presumably there are those you don't want to keep but since they are in the IRR, nobody is spending the resource to periodically purge.

Response by COL Jon Thompson made Oct 31 at 2015 9:30 PM

COL Jon Thompson — Sat, 31 Oct 2015 21:30:27 -0400

Any forced call up outside of a National emergency declared by the President would be a mistake IMHO. Unlike select reservists. these service members have gone back almost fully to the civilian world and if you uproot them from their jobs, you are not going to get a quality person. In 2003, I was mobilized and ended up in Macdill AFB working for SOCCENT. Also there was a Marine captain who had just a few months left on his military service obligation. He had started a brokerage business in SOCAL and had to turn over all of his clients to someone else. He did the bare minimum to not get in trouble and that what in 2003. The other thing I will say is that the Army will need to look at how they administer IRR Soldiers. In my case, I transferred to the IRR from my last unit so I could deploy. I came back to the IRR when I de-mobed. I retired a couple of years later from the IRR but am still trying to get my retirement award. These Soldiers really do not have a home or a unit and that would have to change. I think it will have to be more than just attaching them to a unit for a mission. The final thing is that many of these service members probably will not be physically fit anymore. I think there is a reason that these service members are "just sitting there." This issue raises a lot of questions that the DoD will have to answer to make it work. Now, if this is solely for volunteers, the Army already has done that with Tour of Duty. All they would need to do is restrict tours to IRR only and they probably would get many of them filled.

Response by SFC Everett Oliver made Oct 31 at 2015 9:31 PM

SFC Everett Oliver — Sat, 31 Oct 2015 21:31:48 -0400

Basically we are talking about a prior service draft....I don't like it.... As a last resort maybe, but if we need troops that bad i would hope they would open up enlistments and many of those in the IRR would re-enlist anyway.... Or maybe not...

Response by SFC A.M. Drake made Oct 31 at 2015 11:13 PM

SFC A.M. Drake — Sat, 31 Oct 2015 23:13:43 -0400

Yes I believe that they should provided there is an extreme need i.e. Russia, N Korea, ISIS, etc. Most in the IRR still have some MSO time remaining

Response by LCpl Steven Fiore made Nov 1 at 2015 5:50 AM

LCpl Steven Fiore — Sun, 01 Nov 2015 05:50:20 -0500

Think it would make recruiting a much harder sell. A four year contract with 4 inactive is a much easier sale than essentially 4 year active and 4 year semi active reserve.

I think the last resort is the correct move. We already have enough problems with vets transitioning after their EAS, I think messing with the IRR, will make it much harder to assimilate back into civilian society.

Response by MSgt Robert Pellam made Nov 1 at 2015 8:32 AM

MSgt Robert Pellam — Sun, 01 Nov 2015 08:32:21 -0500

This sounds like some bean counter is looking for a promotion. Why would you go after members who are out unless you have a national Crisis? The article eludes to it being done in the civilian world. Military and Civilian worlds are not compatible, or comparable. You would be getting someone who left for reasons in the first place. Dragging them back would shoot moral right in the leg. This sounds like a scheme for someone in Washington to get a promotion or get some recognition. May sound great on paper but in actuality it would just piss a lot of people off with no benefit. But its just my opinion.

Response by COL Vincent Stoneking made Nov 1 at 2015 9:34 AM

COL Vincent Stoneking — Sun, 01 Nov 2015 09:34:34 -0500

I could see making continuum of service moves in and out much easier, but not mandating increased duties to IRR Soldiers. Quite simply, most people in the IRR don't WANT to be doing military duties - If they did, they would be doing them.

I am currently technically a member the IRR, because it was necessary to accept my voluntary mob under the rules then in place (they have since changed, for the better). The previous time I was in the IRR, I desired to be there and would have fought any attempt to bring me on any duty status whatsoever.

Response by LTC Jason Mackay made Nov 1 at 2015 10:33 AM

LTC Jason Mackay — Sun, 01 Nov 2015 10:33:44 -0500

Other articles I have seen proposed one paid drill per year to ensure contact info, medical checkup ala SRP, and to remind them they are in the IRR. I can see where people who had been run off like QMP, ESERB, OSB and one and done enlistments would be bitter about this. I wonder how much the services will have to invest in this to say it works.

I will retire this coming year and understand my retirement pay is partially a retainer. I can be recalled from retirement. I chuckle to myself picturing an older, broken version of me trying to pull on all the kit and wedge myself in the cupola of an MRAP, but there it is.

Response by SGM Mikel Dawson made Nov 1 at 2015 11:10 AM

SGM Mikel Dawson — Sun, 01 Nov 2015 11:10:32 -0500

IRR is part of the total force, use it if it's needed, but if they're calling them up just to fill a hole, then bad mistake.

Response by SrA Matthew Knight made Nov 2 at 2015 2:23 PM

SrA Matthew Knight — Mon, 02 Nov 2015 14:23:29 -0500

"The IRR is “a pool of pre-trained, high-quality manpower that the American military has invested a lot of money in — and they are just sitting there,” Arnold Punaro, chairman of the Reserve Forces Policy Board, said in an interview."

Just sitting there? What kind of a joke is this guy? Many of those people that are "Just sitting there" got out and started families and what they hope to be life long careers. They are not just sitting there and pulling them away from that to fill gaps that you could fill by either incentivizing people to stay in or increasing recruiting is just absurd. The IRR needs to stay the way it is, a last possible resort to be used only when the defecation hits the oscillation. Pulling people back who wanted out in the first place is in no way going to bring back high-quality man power. It's just going to give you a bunch of resentful former service members who got out for their own reasons who now probably hate the military more than ever.

Now don't get me wrong, there will be people who probably will not mind it. I could definitely get on board with them offering positions to IRR members who are interested. But forcefully pulling them back is not going to be good.

Response by SFC David Brunk made Nov 2 at 2015 4:15 PM

SFC David Brunk — Mon, 02 Nov 2015 16:15:37 -0500

I don't know about anyone else and I've been retired for 20 years, but they can call me back any time! Now for the question ... though it sounds good in theory, in practical application it may not be a good idea. For what ever reason these individuals decided to to end their enlistment and return to civilian life. Many have good jobs and families to take care of and I believe they would be taking a pay cut when recalled. I know all too well what a decrease of income could do to a family's finances. I also believe it could possibly cause more dissension among the ranks. I know a lot has changed in 20 years and these are just my thoughts. Oh, and BTW, I may not be able to run with the BIG dogs like I used too, but I can still "BARK' with the best of them!

Response by SSG Audwin Scott made Nov 3 at 2015 1:33 PM

SSG Audwin Scott — Tue, 03 Nov 2015 13:33:23 -0500

Why? This makes no sense especially when the Army has brought back the QMP!

Response by SSG Conrad Sylvestrelamb made Nov 9 at 2019 10:35 AM

SSG Conrad Sylvestrelamb — Sat, 09 Nov 2019 10:35:01 -0500

If an individual within certain criteria totally disabled etc ok me myself and I hell yes I would AWD chair and all my country being invaded by terrorists domestic or foreign need not say more. Castle moot drawbridge up hurricane rain down on the enemy. No POWs can't care for them with this budget. US not Geneva.

Response by SSG Private RallyPoint Member made Dec 7 at 2019 10:15 AM

SSG Private RallyPoint Member — Sat, 07 Dec 2019 10:15:04 -0500

No, not necessary. Unless, it is dire; or a certain forgotten skill set required; we ran out of volunteers.

Response by GySgt Thomas Vick made Dec 7 at 2019 12:59 PM

GySgt Thomas Vick — Sat, 07 Dec 2019 12:59:26 -0500

It sounds good and I would agree with this plan, as long as they make it apply equally to everyone.

Response by LTC John Griscom made Dec 20 at 2019 9:46 AM

LTC John Griscom — Fri, 20 Dec 2019 09:46:36 -0500

There is a reason why it is called the Individual Ready Reserve. Still a commitment to serve if needed.

Response by MAJ Michael Cummings made Dec 20 at 2019 9:49 AM

MAJ Michael Cummings — Fri, 20 Dec 2019 09:49:03 -0500

That's definitely one way to break the bank.

While there are some individuals there because they are looking for a unit, the majority of these people have either finished their minimum time so they could get some college money or been put into the IRR because they are fat/lazy slobs that could not pass a PT test to save their lives.

Let's pull their out of shapes bodies back into service and try to force them to do something they do not want to do.

I can see the VA claims climbing through the roof in an instant.

Response by 1SG Private RallyPoint Member made Oct 1 at 2022 11:09 AM

1SG Private RallyPoint Member — Sat, 01 Oct 2022 11:09:32 -0400

"High quality"? Some if them. A portion of them will.have let themselves go on fitness. Some will have got their medical Marijuana cards. Would this be voluntary? If not you're likely to have a higher degree of disgruntlement than in a similar number of draftees.

Response by LTC Stephen F. made Oct 2 at 2022 12:52 AM

LTC Stephen F. — Sun, 02 Oct 2022 00:52:53 -0400

My friend and brother-in-Christ SFC Joe S. Davis Jr., MSM, DSL thanks for asking this question.
In my opinion,
1. Only if there is a general mobilization [last general mobilization was for WWII]
2. the only Individual Ready Reserve service members I would be in favor of called back to active duty should be trained and certified service members of critically shortage MOS and specially trained shortages.
FYI LTC Trent Klug LTC John Shaw SPC Gary C.COL Randall C. MSgt Robert E. M. Amn Dale Preisach SPC Private RallyPoint Member CMDCM John F. "Doc" Bradshaw LTC David Brown LTC John Mohor SFC Jim Ruether SFC William Farrell SGM Major Stroupe SGM Bill Frazer MGySgt Private RallyPoint Member CMSgt Marcus Falleaf CSM Charles Hayden MSG Darold R. 1SG Joseph Dartey

Response by MSG Thomas Currie made Oct 2 at 2022 10:53 AM

MSG Thomas Currie — Sun, 02 Oct 2022 10:53:52 -0400

Calling up "Recently Trained" soldiers from the IRR has been part of the US Army mobilization plan since at least the mid-1980's. As I recall it was about 20 years ago that the planning shifted from using just "RT-12" reservists (those who left active duty in the past 12 months) to using "RT-24" reservists as the surge capacity for full or partial mobilization. Mobilization planning was a part of my job for the Armor School. We had to look at revising the plans for refresher training of RT-12 and RT-24 personnel from the IRR.

Several people responded to the original post saying that any call up of the IRR should be only in a "National Emergency" We usually think National Emergency means a war or at least some significant conflict; but the President's authority to declare a "National Emergency" is very broad.

Each of our recent presidents declared several "National Emergencies" during their terms in office and neither Congress nor the courts have ever done anything to limit that power. There are many laws that authorize the President to do things or spend money only in time of a "National Emergency" and presidents simply declare an emergency whenever they want to do something.

The National Emergencies Act allows the president to declare emergencies with nothing more than a signature on an executive order, and presidents can renew those emergencies every year ad infinitum. Congress can vote to end an emergency, but it effectively needs a veto-proof majority to do so.

Remember several years ago when congress passed legislation REQUIRING pay raises for the military and federal civilian employees to bring them up to comparable civilian wages -- at the time that would have required about a 26% pay raise -- that same year and every year thereafter has been a "National Emergency" to limit the pay raises for federal employees as well as limiting COLA for retirees and social security recipients.

Response by MSG Darold R. made Oct 2 at 2022 4:48 PM

MSG Darold R. — Sun, 02 Oct 2022 16:48:11 -0400

I believe if the military would stop being snowflakes and return the military to a fighting force people would be proud to serve in they would have enough troops. The current administration has diminished the quality of our Armed Forces the same way they have diminished law and order and our police force. Who in their right mind would want to serve the way things are? You risk being left behind in a foreign country among other things. I’d rather fight for my Country, Countrymen and the Constitution in a militia of Veterans than to take orders from a bunch of snowflakes!

Response by SGT Private RallyPoint Member made Oct 2 at 2022 8:43 PM

SGT Private RallyPoint Member — Sun, 02 Oct 2022 20:43:37 -0400

SFC Joe S. Davis Jr., MSM, DSL thanks for the post.

Response by A1C Medrick "Rick" DeVaney made Oct 3 at 2022 6:59 AM

A1C Medrick "Rick" DeVaney — Mon, 03 Oct 2022 06:59:14 -0400

The Reserves Is For Back-Up When Our Regulars Are Hard At Work.
If The Regulars Get Overwhelmed, Then The Reserves Are Sent In
Too Help Relieve The Others......But Only As Necessary.
Transfer More Regulars Into Combat Areas First..

Response by SSgt Private RallyPoint Member made Oct 3 at 2022 11:05 AM

SSgt Private RallyPoint Member — Mon, 03 Oct 2022 11:05:54 -0400

The BRACs is a bad idea. because where will SM and other forces will hav to go?

Response by Lt Col Scott Shuttleworth made Oct 3 at 2022 5:06 PM

Lt Col Scott Shuttleworth — Mon, 03 Oct 2022 17:06:02 -0400

AGREE if needed...Need to maintain a strong active force!

Response by CPT Richard Trione made Jan 19 at 2023 11:41 AM

CPT Richard Trione — Thu, 19 Jan 2023 11:41:59 -0500

Thank you so much for sharing.

Response by Lt Col Scott Shuttleworth made Jan 19 at 2023 11:48 AM

Lt Col Scott Shuttleworth — Thu, 19 Jan 2023 11:48:36 -0500

IF we callthem back we need to forward deploy the Regulars then use the IRR to support the ingarrison ops stateside. IRR are not physically fit, mentally ready for combat like the regulars are...they can get back there but not right off the bat.