What are the chances that members of the Air and Army Guard and reserves will be able to collect on their retirement before age 60 or 55?

TSgt Ralph Hetzel — Wed, 13 Apr 2016 21:17:24 -0400

I know you can collect earlier if you did six months or more in an AOR like Afganastan or Iraq. I want my retirement now. What would be the problem with that?

Response by SGM Mikel Dawson made Apr 13 at 2016 10:02 PM

SGM Mikel Dawson — Wed, 13 Apr 2016 22:02:40 -0400

Like my Dad told me: You can wish in one hand and crap in the other and see which one fills up first! In the Reserve you know the deal, that's it. Oh by the way - I GET TO COLLECT FRIDAY!!!!

Response by COL Charles Williams made Apr 13 at 2016 10:28 PM

COL Charles Williams — Wed, 13 Apr 2016 22:28:01 -0400

0. You should have served on active duty if you wanted immediate retirement pay upon retirement from the military... I like it the way SGM Mikel Dawson said it better. Why would anyone stay on active duty if the retirement benefits were the same if served in the reserve/guard.

Response by CPT Joseph K Murdock made Apr 13 at 2016 10:53 PM

CPT Joseph K Murdock — Wed, 13 Apr 2016 22:53:04 -0400

I always had sympathy for reserves and NG retiring and having to wait awhile to get the pensions.

Response by CCMSgt Private RallyPoint Member made Apr 14 at 2016 1:25 AM

CCMSgt Private RallyPoint Member — Thu, 14 Apr 2016 01:25:16 -0400

I this not six months or more, back in 2009 a law was passed that for every 90 days of active duty your returns age will drop in 99 days increments. Is not six months and is not for time served in Iraq Ana Afghanistan, any active duty time will count, AGR time or activations.

Response by Capt Tj Feeley made Apr 14 at 2016 7:09 AM

Capt Tj Feeley — Thu, 14 Apr 2016 07:09:21 -0400

I had 11 years active, deployed 6 times. I retires from the guard last year. I got my time reduced to 58 1/2 from 60. Im good with that. The men and women who stayed the 20, earned that retired pay as soon as they retire. I would like to see it reduced to 55 but that will never happen, at least not in my lifetime.

Response by LTC Betty Holm made Apr 14 at 2016 1:09 PM

LTC Betty Holm — Thu, 14 Apr 2016 13:09:49 -0400

Any active duty that you performed after Jan. 2008 that was 60 days or more counts as one day for each active duty day you performed and you can subtract that from your retirement date. Good luck.

Response by LTC Thomas Tennant made Apr 14 at 2016 1:27 PM

LTC Thomas Tennant — Thu, 14 Apr 2016 13:27:42 -0400

I had to wait to age 60. You know if they change the law they will make it a reduced benefit.

Response by Maj Private RallyPoint Member made Apr 15 at 2016 1:25 PM

Maj Private RallyPoint Member — Fri, 15 Apr 2016 13:25:03 -0400

I'm a guard guy.... This guy is An diot.... You know what you get going in.... Stop trying touchable the rules to suit you now.

Response by SSG Private RallyPoint Member made Apr 15 at 2016 1:30 PM

SSG Private RallyPoint Member — Fri, 15 Apr 2016 13:30:14 -0400

The main benefit of doing 20+ years on active duty is the ability to draw retirement pay immediately. I understand that the reserve and national guard are part of the armed services but they do not spend 20 years moving around, uprooting and restarting your family in new places every 3 or 4 years. If the retirement was available immediately to the guard/reserve Soldiers then I don't think we would be able to keep an active duty Army

Response by LTC Private RallyPoint Member made Apr 28 at 2016 12:25 PM

LTC Private RallyPoint Member — Thu, 28 Apr 2016 12:25:40 -0400

Here's what I know: On 28 JAN 2008 when the National Defense Authorization Act (NDAA) was signed into law, the following rules applied - for every 90 days DEPLOYED to either IRAQ; or AFGHANISTAN; or KUWAIT; Waters surrounding either, or on Contingency Orders for other places, then 90 Days are drawn from the AGE 60 retirement. [Example: 1 FEB 2008 you get into Kuwait with follow-on duty in Iraq, and on 31 JAN 2009, you and your unit leave Kuwait for CONUS. You've been there 365. The Military takes away 1 year, so you can start drawing at age 59.] PDRMA leaves counts towards this. I believe that the other accumulated leave counts as well.

The lowest that you can start drawing is Age 55. Same as Federal Employees.

If it's been modified to be as the CMSgt Dominguez states, then this is new to me.

I do know that when you are putting in your retirement packet, that at the top of your DD214's - and if it's FOR SERVICE AFTER 28 JAN 2008, you need to write: FOR RETIREMENT AGE LOWERING and highlight it/underline it. The individuals who work at the various HQ's/ HR Centers will not see it, unless YOU WRITE IT.

LASTLY: when asked - "Why didn't CONGRESS start the process instead of 28 JAN 2008, and either on 12 SEPT 2001, or in early OCT 2001, when the US got involved in A'stan? Their answer is: IT'LL COST TOO MUCH."

Response by SMSgt Dennis Bullard made May 23 at 2016 4:43 PM

SMSgt Dennis Bullard — Mon, 23 May 2016 16:43:05 -0400

Lowing the age to 55 has been voted on a few times, and each time it has been voted down. I served 11 years Army and 27 years Air National guard. I retired last year with 38 good years and I still have three more years to wait.

Response by CMSgt Private RallyPoint Member made May 29 at 2016 8:36 PM

CMSgt Private RallyPoint Member — Sun, 29 May 2016 20:36:03 -0400

It is as simple as cost. It's all about statistics and the chances of you not making it to 60.

Response by CDR Tom Davy made Jun 15 at 2017 5:40 PM

CDR Tom Davy — Thu, 15 Jun 2017 17:40:55 -0400

I served for 34 years, 16 active, the rest reserve. I'm 56 and while I understand the deal I made, reducing the Reserve Retirement age is consistent with the Federal retirement age of someone with 30 or more years of federal service. Perhaps a comprise: 30 years active service + age 56 + one or more combat tour. Thoughts?

Response by CDR Tom Davy made Jun 22 at 2017 1:14 PM

CDR Tom Davy — Thu, 22 Jun 2017 13:14:08 -0400

The problem with the reduction of retirement with pay based on combat service is that it is not retroactive to 9/11. I was in Afghanistan in 2006 so my retirement is not adjusted. The adjustment should be day for day of service while serving in a combat pay zone retroactive to 9/11. Same intent, just fair to those of us who served before 2008.

Response by Capt Private RallyPoint Member made Jun 22 at 2017 1:52 PM

Capt Private RallyPoint Member — Thu, 22 Jun 2017 13:52:02 -0400

The answer as to why you must wait until 60 is obvious.

One, it is the deal under which you served and agreed to.

Two getting retirement pay earlier would add to the cost of your retirement for the service making the payments..

Response by LTC James McElreath made Nov 24 at 2018 5:30 PM

LTC James McElreath — Sat, 24 Nov 2018 17:30:24 -0500

A few years back those in congress did look at early out but I do believe it was voted down as it would cost too much. In their defense they retire after serving one term in office , so they would not want those service members taking their money out of their pockets of benefits. Besides some serve well beyond 20 yrs due to the delay in pay. I myself stayed n 38 yrs since I would not get paid for my service until age 60. One generally doesn't see this in the active service.