Do you think military retirees should be accorded more active participation if they desire?

LTC Private RallyPoint Member — Sun, 03 Jan 2016 17:44:21 -0500

I believe that two things should happen with reasons why:

1. All reserve/National Guard retirees in the gray area should be allowed to stay in an IRR/for points only status until age 60 if they desire. It would facilitate mobilization if they are needed; it would not cost that much more in the small amount of increased retirement pay at 60; and it would not interfere with ability of other reservists to move up since it would be IRR only.

2. There should be an active program where retirees who are receiving their retirement pay can volunteer with local active, reserve or Guard units where they live. ie administration, recruiting, public affairs, training, mentoring. Some times its done informally. State defense forces do it with NG units, but not all states have it and it only applies to Army and Air Guard units.

In both cases above it taps upon the wisdom and experience of our retired military members.

I am a proud retired "Soldier for LIfe" I can still pass a PT test at age 66 and although I am very active with military/veterans associations and military-themed youth groups, I still miss working with active soldiers!

Response by LTC Private RallyPoint Member made Jan 3 at 2016 5:52 PM

LTC Private RallyPoint Member — Sun, 03 Jan 2016 17:52:12 -0500

yes especially with the new sequestration of 100 billion over 10 years and the desire of soldiers just shy of 20 years to get their 20 and retire under the old plan and those over 20 to just be able to serve his/her country and help their units with his/her experience.

Response by LTC Private RallyPoint Member made Jan 3 at 2016 5:56 PM

LTC Private RallyPoint Member — Sun, 03 Jan 2016 17:56:32 -0500

the State Military Reserve aka SMURFS are relevant and necessary to keep support the state ARNG/ANG

Response by Maj Densel Galloway made Jan 3 at 2016 6:09 PM

Maj Densel Galloway — Sun, 03 Jan 2016 18:09:43 -0500

LTC Dolgin your points are spot on. However, I believe that the benefits of volunteering returns more personal and professional benefits to the volunteer than any financial rewards that can be offered. Those benefits are derived from witnessing the growth and development of the people and processes you have influenced and the direction of institutions you have invested your time to guide. We volunteer for different reasons and I hope we continue to do so because it is the right thing to do, when you can, for as long as you can.

Response by PO1 John Miller made Jan 3 at 2016 6:21 PM

PO1 John Miller — Sun, 03 Jan 2016 18:21:58 -0500

Not to mention it could possibly free up senior personnel for deployment, if there is an experienced volunteer to "hold down the fort."

I've often heard our retired pay described as a "retainer," or "reduced pay for reduced services."

Response by SGM David W. Carr LOM, DMSM MP SGT made Jan 3 at 2016 6:49 PM

SGM David W. Carr LOM, DMSM MP SGT — Sun, 03 Jan 2016 18:49:10 -0500

As I start my 60th year, my mind believes that I am still the young stud that could do non stop push-ups. But the reality prior to and during retirement of numerous surgeries and cancer prove my 26 years of military service have taken a toll for the worse on my once Stong and Powerful ultra fit body with a 30 inch waist.
Be it exposure to Fort McClellan toxins and chemicals, third world countries pollution and diseases, combat and hostile deployments, PTSD, injuries during training and exercises.

I think that we could provide valuable support and understanding using our wealth of experience.

Response by 1SG Private RallyPoint Member made Jan 3 at 2016 7:02 PM

1SG Private RallyPoint Member — Sun, 03 Jan 2016 19:02:22 -0500

Soldiers in the Guard and Reserve who choose to may transfer to the IRR when in receipt of their 20 year letter, if they so choose.

Response by SCPO Charles Thomas "Tom" Canterbury made Jan 3 at 2016 8:20 PM

SCPO Charles Thomas "Tom" Canterbury — Sun, 03 Jan 2016 20:20:58 -0500

I think it should be afforded for those who would be willing to participate. However, the one caviat I have for that is that the retired service member must realize that the military has and will continue to change. Some of the "back when I was in" no longer applies and for some generations wouldn't even be healthy. (No disrespect implied here at all - but times have changed whether we think for good or for ill). In the scant time I've been away on terminal leave and now that I'm out there has been a new PFA Program that has taken effect for the Navy and unfortunately my opinion no longer applies since I have the blue card.

Personally, unless someone simply needed first aid training for their unit I probably wouldn't do it myself. But for those who aren't embarking on a second career this could be an excellent opportunity.

Response by PO2 Private RallyPoint Member made Jan 4 at 2016 9:05 AM

PO2 Private RallyPoint Member — Mon, 04 Jan 2016 09:05:22 -0500

For those who want to still be involved or participate and or pass down knowledge.

Response by COL Vincent Stoneking made Jan 4 at 2016 10:21 AM

COL Vincent Stoneking — Mon, 04 Jan 2016 10:21:08 -0500

I would be all over this. Especially given the math of MRD, the Army is overlooking a large pool of prime talent.

In a "normal" basis, I think we could pass on a lot of wisdom/mentorship. Especially as we would be free of having to think about "our" careers. During "not normal" times, we could be easily available manpower. Even if the retiree is no longer deployable, during or after grey area, they could fill necessary billets that require the skills, knowledge and experience gained over a career, freeing a deployable Soldier for use.

I have looked at dropping a warrant packet to extend my affiliation with the USAR. I occasionally think about resigning my commission just prior to MRD, until I come to my senses and realize that a 50 year old NCO, with no experience as an NCO, probably doesn't go in the "asset" column.

Response by CSM Private RallyPoint Member made Jan 4 at 2016 11:00 AM

CSM Private RallyPoint Member — Mon, 04 Jan 2016 11:00:49 -0500

I think this is an idea that looks great on paper but there would be entirely too many intracies in the implementation process.
I was afforded the opportunity to work with all of the retiree recalls coming through Fort Leonard Wood from 2005-2012. There were a lot great NCO's and Officers answering the call when our nation was in dire need. They filled critical vacancies, and made great contributions.
In 3 short years I will have attained my twenty. Even though I scored a 270 on my last APFT, I know that I would have issues competing for my EIB. My combat effectiveness is not nearly what it used to be.
One of the current senior leaderships focus is to "trim the force" through strict enforcement of deployability standards. It would not be nearly as simple as "holding down the fort" during our next conflict. Retiree recalls will need to meet current deployment standards. While running the SRP process for all of the IRR and Retiree Recalls it was simply amazing to see the attrition rates.
The knowledge the retirees bring to the table is an invaluable resource, however figuring out exactly how to tap into that knowledge is going to be a challenge.

Response by LTC Private RallyPoint Member made Jan 5 at 2016 3:39 AM

LTC Private RallyPoint Member — Tue, 05 Jan 2016 03:39:56 -0500

I do recall an example where my second point in my original post has been done. A retired SEABEE Master Chief has written non-pay orders to drill with the unit he retired from. It CAN and HAS been done. I'm merely suggesting that the services make this a more common practice and start a program to encourage it. I'm saying it would be completely voluntary and non-pay.

Response by LTC Eric Udouj made Jan 18 at 2016 10:34 AM

LTC Eric Udouj — Mon, 18 Jan 2016 10:34:16 -0500

I agree on it being wasted assets that are available. DoD spent a lot of money training some of us to do a few jobs, and experience does not grow on trees. A fine example is the AF-PAK Hands - and why would you not be asking the retired seniors back to help train and mentor units and staffs trying to tackle the same issues they know so well. Then you have a handful of folks who retired that were senior PSYOP and CA officers and NCOs that retain a wealth of knowledge in trade craft and different regions that is reinvented about every 5 years when the need returns. Gray area retired Reservists placed into the IRR till 60 is an interesting concept - and I would have loved to been able to have some of the great senior leaders return to help train different staffs I had in USAR PSYOP units.

Response by CPT Private RallyPoint Member made Feb 6 at 2016 1:19 AM

CPT Private RallyPoint Member — Sat, 06 Feb 2016 01:19:50 -0500

I love this idea sir, how do we get this up the chain?

Response by CH (LTC) Robert Leroe made Mar 18 at 2018 6:06 PM

CH (LTC) Robert Leroe — Sun, 18 Mar 2018 18:06:56 -0400

I like the idea. I retired at the age of 49 and joined the Civil Air Patrol where there are no age restrictions. It was a great way to continue serving.

Response by SSG Eddye Royal made Mar 18 at 2018 6:13 PM

SSG Eddye Royal — Sun, 18 Mar 2018 18:13:29 -0400

I think that would be a great tool.

Response by LTC Private RallyPoint Member made Mar 18 at 2018 6:59 PM

LTC Private RallyPoint Member — Sun, 18 Mar 2018 18:59:11 -0400

Great idea. It is logical and makes good sense so we know that the military would never implement a plan like that, lol

Response by Lt Col Charlie Brown made Mar 31 at 2018 11:20 AM

Lt Col Charlie Brown — Sat, 31 Mar 2018 11:20:41 -0400

I really understand and empathize with your view. It was really tough to finish up and leave after 22 years and I tried to go back in after 9/11. Just couldn't make it happen. So my way to work with the troops is via the Service to the Armed Forces Division of the Red Cross. I work with vets, retirees, active duty and all the families. It's a close second.

Response by Capt Daniel Goodman made May 4 at 2019 2:23 PM

Capt Daniel Goodman — Sat, 04 May 2019 14:23:03 -0400

https://www.rallypoint.com/answers/suggest-federal-use-of-disabled-veterans-and-military-retirees-to-support-military

I just sent this thread in, I'd seen yours, I thought it might offer some ideas, possibly, I'd be eager for any notions, obviously, many thanks....

Suggest Federal use of disabled veterans and military retirees to support military? | RallyPoint

I was yakking with somebody on a thread on here a cpl of days ago, and had something I thought interesting get brought up, OK? One of the other guys I'd been yakking with is apparently mil retired, possibly also disabled, I'm not entirely sure...anyway, he, as have I, had wanted to try to contribute to the svcs somehow in a serious volunteer way, so, as I did, he'd looked at the state defense forces (SDFs), the ones that largely fall under...

Response by Capt Daniel Goodman made May 4 at 2019 2:24 PM

Capt Daniel Goodman — Sat, 04 May 2019 14:24:10 -0400

Maybe also teaching, perhaps? I know Navy uses civilians to work on board ships as college faculty, I've seen stuff on that as well, maybe at active, Guard, and Reserve installations, ya think? Just another thought, of course....

Response by Capt Daniel Goodman made May 4 at 2019 2:35 PM

Capt Daniel Goodman — Sat, 04 May 2019 14:35:37 -0400

I just figured I'd repeat the stuff I'd sent in on that other thread here, just for convenience, it seemed apt for this one also...here it is:

I was yakking with somebody on a thread on here a cpl of days ago, and had something I thought interesting get brought up, OK? One of the other guys I'd been yakking with is apparently mil retired, possibly also disabled, I'm not entirely sure...anyway, he, as have I, had wanted to try to contribute to the svcs somehow in a serious volunteer way, so, as I did, he'd looked at the state defense forces (SDFs), the ones that largely fall under that group SGAUS, that I'd sent in here sevl times. Apparently, he pretty much agreed with my thoughts, though, he'd also found that, for total perm disabled, evidently, insurance rules seem to preclude use of mil/vet disabled, esp total perm, from being used by them, I guess due to perfectly understandable state-government liability thoughts of some kind, from what I've gathered. Now I can obviously understand the reasoning behind such thoughts, as well as the bureaucratic caution involved, of course; I merely pointed out to him various other suggestions, many of which he'd also considered himself, like CAP, USCG Auxiliary, JROTC volunteer faculty, Navy Sea Cadets, and Army Volunteer Corps (AVC), which I've sent in here asking about, to see if any of you knew anything about it at all. Which then begged the question I'd thought to send in here: Have any of you ever heard of any serious Federal effort to create a serious Federal body to use mil/vet disabled, of any level, incl total perm, on any serious organized basis, to help with, say, local Reserve/Guard centers, or state armory stuff? I'm obviously well aware of the family MWR stuff, certainly, I've also looked at USCG Auxiliary, esp, being as they have, from what I've gathered, the most in the way of serious usage of an auxiliary for actual operational stuff, I've been really wanting to do it, it's just that my whole total perm disabled thing constantly gets in the way, for myriad reasons. Now, that being said, I'd obviously be more than willing to help, say, the NY Guard (NYG) by us, one of the SDFs, of course, if it could somehow be legally allowed. Though, whether that'd take a Federal or state law, I clearly don't have a clue; my point is, if you all look at the whole border wall thing, or disaster relief/aid, there's also the USPHS, which runs the Medical Reserve Corps (MRC) nationwide, which our dentist, who went NYG as a dental friend of his had wanted him to join him in the NY ARNG, had suggested for me. I just wasn't sure if the total perm disabled rules might let me actually do MRC, as I'd obviously possibly need to turn on my clinical license again, which, likewise, I have no clue if it'd also be allowed, as well. He eventually switched from NYG to NY ARNG, as he found he was suited to it, NYG let him go, when NY ARNG picked him up. I know, also, that USCG Aux has a clinical program for licensed clinicians to be able to help at USCG facilities, among other things they allow, like standing real radio watches, helping guard installations, also helping in galleys for cooking, I've seen sites on those aspects as well. My point is, the whole thing just strikes me as rather haphazard and disorganized, only insofar as one has to basically try to search out some mechanism suited to one's background, where one could be allowed to participate. I've just wondered, quite seriously, whether it might make sense to actually try to create an organized mechanism for mil/vet disabled to be able to contribute to the svcs, whether active, Guard, Reserve, whichever, on any serious combined Federal/state organized level, you know? As I'd said, the idea has just been rolling around in my noggin for some time now, it was just that my yakking with that other guy on that other thread kind of crystallized the whole thing for me, prompting me to write the whole question up here for all of you to also try to chew on, so far as possible. I mean, I wouldn't have clue one how to actually organize such a thing, plus, God knows, it'd obviously need manifest help from all of the major disabled-vet groups, of course, as well as other vet groups besides, in addition to Congressional as well as state legislative help. My sole thought is that the whole mil/vet disabled population could represent, if properly organized, potentially, on any serious organized level, as opposed to doing the whole thing piecemeal and haphazardly, a serious potential Federal/state resource that could really be a major possible force multiplier, in terms of being able to contribute experientially to local units, as well as on a serious state/national level, that's all I'm trying to get across. As I'd said, those are obviously solely my thoughts, of course; I'd just wondered if all of you might be able to give any thought to the notion, whether disabled or not. I know there's apparently some sort of mechanism for mil/vet retirees to be able to try to go back in, whether active, Guard, Reserve, whatever, however, the laws for them are different than for those mil/vets who are disabled. Whether one might be mil/vet retired combined with mil/vet disabled, or not, my point is, the whole mil/vet disabled thing clearly seems to preempt one's ability to try to contribute seriously in the fashion I describe, not due to any overt wish to interfere, rather, merely out of, as I'd said, bureaucratic caution as to liability, I've gathered. Maybe I'm reading the whole thing wrong; honestly, I'm not entirely sure, it's just that I've obviously been trying to do something serious to be of such use for years, many of you have doubtless see me write up stuff about me asking about such volunteer stuff; I just thought I'd actually send this in, to try, as I'd said, to crystallize my thoughts about the whole thing, in the hope that you all might see it, and be able to maybe give the whole notion some thought, as it were; that's pretty much everything I've thought of, I'd really be most eager to hear the notions of all of you about the whole thing, if you'd all ever have any time to be able to try to give me any of your ideas, honest, many thanks, sorry this was so long, I just needed to try to explain the whole thing adequately, so as to try to convey what was on my mind, that was all, OK? I'd appreciate any thoughts, plus, if sending this might possibly engender any serious effort or reflection about the whole thing, I just figured it'd be at least of some value, purely for that reason, as well, many thanks, obviously, looking forward to any ideas, no rush, whenever might be convenient, I know this is likely gonna have to be modified and/or shortened by admin, I obviously expect that, I just was uncertain how else to send it in, to try to explain my ideas properly, as I'd said, if it's gotta be shortened a good deal, I completely understand the reasons, by all means, many thanks, once again.

Response by Capt Daniel Goodman made May 4 at 2019 2:36 PM

Capt Daniel Goodman — Sat, 04 May 2019 14:36:27 -0400

And that is a nifty point about the SDFs, I'd obviously noticed that, as well....

Response by SGT David A. 'Cowboy' Groth made May 4 at 2019 6:56 PM

SGT David A. 'Cowboy' Groth — Sat, 04 May 2019 18:56:09 -0400

Excellent share sir.