Should Army Reserve Soldiers be Barred from reenlistment if they do not complete SSD in a reasonable amount of time?

I think they should have the same time frame and rules as AD. If AD does barred to reenlist for failure to do SSD then the reserve components should play by the same rules.

I think that if they are given the opportunity while on orders then yes. If they are expected to do it on their own time then there should be some considerations made. I don't care what anyone says, getting on a military site from a home computer is a pain. Not to mention the amount of hours that it takes to complete these courses. I understand that we are all still Soldiers but being on active duty you are a Soldier 24/7 and you are getting paid to be in that status. As a Reservist you have another life that pays your bills and puts food on your families table.

I haven't followed the ALARACTs on SSD in a few years but in 2010 when it seemed like SSD burst onto the scene this is the ALARACT that was issued: ALARACT 288/2010 R 151806Z Sep 10. A key phrase from that is: "SSD SETS THE CONDITIONS FOR CONTINUOUS GROWTH BOTH AS A WARRIOR AND A WARRIOR LEADER. SSD IS BOTH AN INDIVIDUAL AND FIRST LINE LEADER RESPONSIBILITY EXECUTED AT THE INDIVIDUAL'S PACE BUT UNDER THE SUPERVISION OF THE FIRST LINE LEADER." Key being that it is intended to be executed at the individual's pace. Furthermore in this ALARACT it lists the duties of the FLL the 1SG and BN CSM.
The FLL is to:
"(A) ENSURE SOLDIERS COMPLETE, OR HAVE COMPLETED, ALL COURSE ADMINISTRATIVE REQUIREMENTS DURING THEIR INITIAL COUNSELING.
(B) MONITOR SOLDIER'S PROGRESS.
(C) COACH, MENTOR, AND COUNSEL SOLDIER AS REQUIRED OR NEEDED.
(D) IAW REF A., PROVIDE SOLDIERS TIME DURING THE DUTY DAY TO WORK ON SSD COURSE MATERIAL."
Parts C & D are pretty specific and I know that the units I have been in have not done either of these well.

Once again this ALARACT is pretty old and odds are it has changed (can anyone verify?). Being a member of the Guard they usually expect us to do this on our own time, thus not meeting the requirements above.

SFC William Jozwiak based on your putting them on orders comment below the question: I would have to say that they have been given the time and if they were counseled on the requirement and the repercussions for noncompliance then if barred from reenlistment was in the counseling it should be pretty cut and dry. If someone is just throwing the bar to reenlistment at them and they were not counseled on that being a possible outcome I would probably fight it.

A Soldier is a Soldier is a Soldier...if an Army career is important for Army reserve Soldiers, they'll complete the requisite SSD course.

SSS is part of PME. PME is a requirement to move to the next rank, especially now. I understand some people do not want to get promoted and would rather be a SPC for life. In those cases, RPC's MYOS need to be enforced. However, if a SM was promoted conditonally and does not meet the requirements in the designated time frame, yes they should be discharged honorably but barred from further service. If they are brought in on orders and still don't complete the SSD, then Leadership needs to be looked at as it is highly likely that the SM was never given the time they needed to complete the SSD. Chances are they were seen as an extra body to do daily activities and or shit details. That is my opinion.

The question should be why are we not enforcing Retention Control Points in the reserve component. Instead of forcing people to be ready for the next rank by completing SSD

Yes

I don't believe they should be bar for reenlistment for not completing SSD. Soldiers that doesn't complete that task are usually the same Soldiers that can pass APFT or height and weight. Usually those Soldiers fail to meet the standards in other areas. But what are the odds that they will approve a regulation or policy to bar a SM for failing to complete the required SSD?

Same rules apply for other regulations...you cant wear poke-a-dot PCs in any component...Logic reasons that yes if one regulation is good for one its good for all