Posted on Jan 10, 2015
To join a reserve component, should it be a required to serve X amount of active duty time first?
63.6K
288
160
16
13
3
It seems there is a lack of experience or a "different" mentality in the reserves, from what I can only guess is from not being immersed in the military lifestyle every day for longer than basic training. I think a good answer to this is make a two year active duty minimum prerequisite to join any reserve component. Just a thought. Might not be THE way, but it's A way.
Posted >1 y ago
Responses: 99
No. One of the great things about the reserve component is people can resume their civilian lives after completing BCT/AIT. If the balloon goes up, those people WILL be ready. We've done it before - we can do it again
(0)
(0)
This sounds like a good idea ! It just might make the army national guard and or reserve function better and more proficient !!
(0)
(0)
I don't think that active service should be a prerequisite to service in the reserve component. I can see the point that you are making, but it doesn't account for the fact that every component and every branch is designed to fit a particular aspect of personal service. Requiring active service prior to entry into the reserve component would eliminate the ability to for many to serve who have obligations such as college or a business from serving. I have served in every component of the Army active, reserve, and national guard and each was right for me at the time. Though I did have two years on active duty it did little to prepare me for the various jobs that I have had since that time, but I still value that experience none the less. What I mean is that as Specialist on active duty trained in communication did not provide a lot of value while serving as a First Sergeant of a MP Company. I have read throughout the threads that it is recognized that the resrve component brings a lot to the table in their service and that they are every bit the professional as others who serve on active duty.
(0)
(0)
The Reserve and Guard are required to attend IADT. There is a different mentality in the reserve components, but to assume the the different mentality is negative in any way is short sighted and foolish. The Reserve and National Guard bring much to the table that the AD soldiers do not realize or understand. If nothing else, the cost of prolonged AD would be cost prohibitive, and that is before considering the recruiting repercussions.
(0)
(0)
PFC Ward,
In my experiences (all OHARNG) the Active Duty units we replaced on deployments were subpar compared to us. Understandably your MOS is harder to do training on at drill, being a medic, but you need to bring it to the attention of your squad leader or section sergeant that you are craving more training. Being familiar with your BN I know you are attached from HHC with probably one other medic. Make it aware during your AAR comments. There are plenty of opportunities outside your BN but within the Brigade to get some training done with other medics.
In my experiences (all OHARNG) the Active Duty units we replaced on deployments were subpar compared to us. Understandably your MOS is harder to do training on at drill, being a medic, but you need to bring it to the attention of your squad leader or section sergeant that you are craving more training. Being familiar with your BN I know you are attached from HHC with probably one other medic. Make it aware during your AAR comments. There are plenty of opportunities outside your BN but within the Brigade to get some training done with other medics.
(0)
(0)
PFC Ward,
I spent 7 years in the National Guard from 1988-1995. It was always beneficial to have some prior service guys around. Don't forget the purpose of the National Guard though; they are to augment our Active force and by and large have more Soldirs than the active component. There just aren't enough prior service folks to fill the ranks. You don't have to be prior service to make a difference. In closing, don't sell yourself short; you are not lower enlisted but junior enlisted.
I spent 7 years in the National Guard from 1988-1995. It was always beneficial to have some prior service guys around. Don't forget the purpose of the National Guard though; they are to augment our Active force and by and large have more Soldirs than the active component. There just aren't enough prior service folks to fill the ranks. You don't have to be prior service to make a difference. In closing, don't sell yourself short; you are not lower enlisted but junior enlisted.
(0)
(0)
I have had this thought many times since I served on active duty for 120 days beginning the day I reported in. At the end of those 4-month orders, the difference in deployment readiness and MOS proficiency between myself and the other junior Marines - reservists - who had been there for years was obvious.
(0)
(0)
Many have had this thought, and although it isn't a bad idea...I would have a hard time saying that it's a good one. The National Guard for instamce is a state force, which is already already (and wrongly) controlled by the federal government, but to make it so that only people who had served federally could get into the force would be a complete conflict of interest. For the reserves..
perhaps, but the NG and reserves really do benefit from the experience that alot of their people bring from the civillian world. We also tend to much less regemented and by the book which can be of benefit. I say all this as a former active duty service member. If the state decided to make it mandatory for anyone in command positions to have served some AD time I think that could have some benefit, but that should be entirely their decision.
perhaps, but the NG and reserves really do benefit from the experience that alot of their people bring from the civillian world. We also tend to much less regemented and by the book which can be of benefit. I say all this as a former active duty service member. If the state decided to make it mandatory for anyone in command positions to have served some AD time I think that could have some benefit, but that should be entirely their decision.
(0)
(0)
No, the Federal government could never afford the financial burden of having that many Active Duty Soldiers for one. Also, both Active and RC require those E1-E4 people in their ranks. That's why there are often recruiting bonuses to bring in fresh blood
(0)
(0)
Considering that most deployed guard units are regarded as highly as any active unit of the same corp, I would think it would be a pointless requirement. You have shitbag soldiers in active units, and shitbag soldiers in guard/reserve units. You also have highly trained and experienced soldiers in those same units. Active duty experience or not, the soldiers are trained the same prior to a mobilization and I will gladly serve with either or both when called upon to do so again.
(0)
(0)
I think the National Guard has proven it can function as a full time capacity AND still cover its state side missions!
(0)
(0)
That may not be a terrible idea, but as I'm sure you have noticed that the majority of work that gets done in the military is done by E4 and below. Requiring someone to be prior service before accepting them into the Guard or Reserve would limit your pool of acceptable candidates even further than it is already. Most people that separate after 4-6 years are either eligible for promotion to SGT or already have been promoted. There are only so many E5 slots in units so it would be very difficult to try and implement your idea without a large structure change.
But I definitely don't disagree with your logic, it would be beneficial to units all over the Guard and Reaerve to have a large quantity of prior active duty soldiers. On the flip side of that coin, being a prior active duty Guardsman myself, it isn't the easiest transition from active to guard. There would be a lot of folks that would not transition well.
But I definitely don't disagree with your logic, it would be beneficial to units all over the Guard and Reaerve to have a large quantity of prior active duty soldiers. On the flip side of that coin, being a prior active duty Guardsman myself, it isn't the easiest transition from active to guard. There would be a lot of folks that would not transition well.
(0)
(0)
My thoughts are that the most senior leaderships should be prior active duty members. And if I'm not mistaken they already are and should've been activated as such at some point during their careers. Either way you look at it our reserve forces will lack in many areas more than none when it comes down to leadership, organization, and professionalism because of the lack repetition and stick time.
(0)
(0)
That would make sense but I'm also willing to bet your unit has a bunch of prior active duty soldiers in it. I've never served in the guard/reserves so I can only speculate what the problem might be. You said it yourself, "part time". These men and women may be friends outside of the guard so there's where a breakdown in discipline and bearing might be. Also because it's "part time", the training tends to be lax as well.
Again, I have no experience with the guard/reserves though and I'm sure not all units are relaxed, maybe someone with experience in this subject will enlighten us.
Again, I have no experience with the guard/reserves though and I'm sure not all units are relaxed, maybe someone with experience in this subject will enlighten us.
(0)
(0)
having prior active in Nat'l guard units is a plus for the NG unit - one of the "odd" things about the Guard in this regard is the large number of troops from other MOS's that couldn't continue in their old MOS 'cause that kind of unit doesn't exist locally, which actually makes the guard better than AC where so many senior leadership are still in their original MOS's, and don't know any other way of doing things other than the "Army Way" (one of the Active units I was attached to in Iraq, senior ldrs didn't have a clue)
But there are so many people in the guard for whom AC is not possible (work, family, school, etc) that AC requirement is would decimate the guard
But there are so many people in the guard for whom AC is not possible (work, family, school, etc) that AC requirement is would decimate the guard
(0)
(0)
Not sure what USAR or ARNG unit you might be referring to but since OEF members of the reserve component have been deployed as much sometimes more than their AC counterparts. Not sure what mentality they are supposed to have?
(0)
(0)
COL Jeff Williams
I would also add that a basic training grad's only military experience is in basic and AIT which is not the same as being in a unit
(0)
(0)
I have often wondered this myself. I see a large number of people on here jumping down this NCO's throat for asking a very logical question.
Now everyone calm down and think where this NCO might be coming from. We are one of only a few countries that allow IET soldiers directly into the RC and NG. Many of our own allies and fellow NATO countries only fill their reserves with prior AD soldiers. So why are we the exception to this very normal practice?
Many other allied nations do this as a means to continue combat strength while not upholding a budget that undoubtedly comes with having a large AD military. The U.S. having one of the largest standing militaries in the world does have some draw back. We spend more on defense than any other country.
With a budget deficit and a ever ahrinking military force maybe it is time that we as a nation look to others as an example of how to combat the need for a larger standing force.
To everyone chastising this NCO let me ask you this. If circumstances change and you are obligated to serve a term on AS would you forfeit being in the Reserves entirely?
Now everyone calm down and think where this NCO might be coming from. We are one of only a few countries that allow IET soldiers directly into the RC and NG. Many of our own allies and fellow NATO countries only fill their reserves with prior AD soldiers. So why are we the exception to this very normal practice?
Many other allied nations do this as a means to continue combat strength while not upholding a budget that undoubtedly comes with having a large AD military. The U.S. having one of the largest standing militaries in the world does have some draw back. We spend more on defense than any other country.
With a budget deficit and a ever ahrinking military force maybe it is time that we as a nation look to others as an example of how to combat the need for a larger standing force.
To everyone chastising this NCO let me ask you this. If circumstances change and you are obligated to serve a term on AS would you forfeit being in the Reserves entirely?
(0)
(0)
NO. There are many fields in the Reserves that would never meet goals if they only depended on prior service. Information Systems. Medical. Legal. Musical. Military Police.
I don't like the AC mentality. That's why I got off active duty.
I don't like the AC mentality. That's why I got off active duty.
(0)
(0)
Read This Next