What is the real training commitment we should expect going forward in the reserve components?

2018-09-20T20:48:06-04:00

It seems that 3 or 4 day drills are just as common as "one weekend per month". It also seems that 3-4 week ATs are more normal than "two weeks per year." Is this formal policy? If not, is it dishonest to perpetuate the old phrase? What do you think about the impact on your civilian career and those of all reservists? How will that affect retention?

Response by LTC John Mohor made Sep 20 at 2018 9:06 PM

2018-09-20T21:06:02-04:00

CPT David Buck it's part of the new post 911 strategic reserve. The last three years before I retired I was averaging two to three weekends of duty a month with 21-29 days of AT becoming normal. A person has to be really honest with themselves about their career goals. Most can't be both aCEO of their company and a GO. It's a combination of trade offs. During my time in the Reserves my respect for the "part-time service member" grew. It's a total team fight. With the five year mobilization plan for the reserve components a sort of balance was reached. At one point in my civilian career I was planning to prepare to run my own drywall specialty yard. After a two year mobilization I certainly had to reevaluate that plan. I gave up that idea and was able to make it to LTC. I noticed a number of folks that were able to make 0-6 Level and beyond seemed to have a position working for the government as a civilian or owning their own business.

As technology and learning continues to improve we as a nation to include part timers have to keep up with advances so we can be prepared to survive, fight and win our nations battles. With the ongoing Global War on Terrorism in all its forms we don't have a choice.

Response by 1SG Private RallyPoint Member made Sep 21 at 2018 7:04 AM

2018-09-21T07:04:29-04:00

I am part of a ready force unit and it is a two-edged sword. I like the longer AT and 3 day weekend blocks because it allows the unit to complete more cohesive training blocks. But, I also recognize that it causes a strain on the Civilian lives..mine included. I am typically spending half of my personal time in the 10-14 days prior to a battle assembly having to deal with the difficulties Soldiers have with balancing school and work with the military.

The general civilian population needs education on how the reserve has changed with the move towards SRM. I know my boss was surprised when I asked for 22 days off to train. "I thought you guys only did one weekend an month and two weeks in the summer.." I think this is the general thought of most employers out there, even military friendly ones. After explaining (reservists) new and expanded role in the nation's defense, there was more understanding.

Response by COL Vincent Stoneking made Sep 21 at 2018 9:10 AM

2018-09-21T09:10:05-04:00

There is a push to increase baseline training days, at least among some units. If done well, I think this has the potential to both make reserve forces more relevant and increase retention. However, it requires careful career management and personnel assignment decisions. Assign the higher optempo units only Soldiers who are ready for the increased time commitment. Accept that these people will change over time and need to transition appropriately. For most of my career, I would have been happy to be in these higher tempo units. There were a few years when I would have absolutely NOT been, and would have left. It also actively requires that the reserve components accept and internalize a tiered readiness mindset. All reserve compo units will not

More importantly, if one expects their career to go anywhere in the reserve components, they need to fully expect that they will put in a lot more (& unpaid!) time than what is on the drill schedule. This is the biggest miss I see. People getting frustrated when they don't advance because they "checked all the blocks" (but not more).

Response by SSG Private RallyPoint Member made Sep 21 at 2018 1:44 PM

2018-09-21T13:44:16-04:00

I think that there's a chance that every one else in the Reserve/Guard may start feeling the pain of the aviation and SF folks in the Reserves/Guard. It's A LOT more than one weekend a month and two weeks a year.

That said, I've been in the Guard for 11 years. The only time I've seen MUTA 5s or 6s are for range weekends. If any calendar had more than one or two MUTA 5/6s, then you knew you were probably deploying sometime in the next two years. As far as AT goes... I've never seen one longer than 14-15 days unless the unit was on the board for JRTC/NTC.

Gen Milley has suggested that he wants to increase training days for some parts of the RC. I think that's probably going to hurt more than it helps. People already have a hard time finding stability with balancing RC/Work/Family. Increasing the training load for RC units is going to have a negative impact on retention. It's also going to have a negative impact on civilian careers. There are a lot of cases of the 2 weekends/2 weeks impacting civilian careers.

Response by 1SG Private RallyPoint Member made Sep 21 at 2018 7:17 PM

2018-09-21T19:17:29-04:00

I have had exactly one retirement year since 9/11 with less than 200 points - last year.
I think the days of 38 days of commitments are long gone.
The Army simply can't operate without the Reserve anymore. That is the difference.

Response by SGM Bill Frazer made Sep 21 at 2018 11:09 PM

2018-09-21T23:09:32-04:00

1. Since 1990 2/3-3/4 of the Army's logistical train/units are in the USAR- Most of the truck units almost all the water/POL units, etc. Hell during Somalia OPS, the XVIII Abn Corps was considering dropping their readiness level to a 2, because they had tasked so many of our log units to support them, so as to not send the USAR over. 2. You and every USAR are going to have to make a decision- serve the Nation or your employer. 3. If you folks quit, then the next conflict will have to be CONUS, because we will have no support for the active units fighting.

Response by SGM Private RallyPoint Member made Sep 22 at 2018 11:38 AM

2018-09-22T11:38:10-04:00

In the 1980's, our Active Component Army end strength was about 790K. We also had a larger Army Reserve and Army National Guard, (with combat arms in both). Since then, the Active Component saw a draw down to 429K around 1993 and an increase to only around 550K during the peak of OEF/OIF, with another drawdown after that. With the increase of operational and strategic commitments around the world, as well as an increase in training requirements (both METL and mandatory), the "one weekend a month, two weeks per year" was likely the rule rather than the exception in the 1980's, but those days are long gone. The reserve components are now an Operational Reserve, not a Strategic Reserve. Today the total training requirements for an active component maneuver BDE add up to 400+ days per year (you can see the math problem there). And ARNG will have to find a way to schedule 3 to 5 week ATs for the new SBCTs in the coming years to meet minimum training requirements.
The SECARMY and Chief of Staff see the issue of too many requirements and have started cutting some of those, and leaving more to the discretion of the first GO in every chain of command, but so far the 19 they have issued only add up to saving a few hours per year.

Response by LTC Stephen C. made Sep 22 at 2018 12:35 PM

2018-09-22T12:35:16-04:00

CPT(P) Private RallyPoint Member, a good friend of mine served at TRADOC as the Deputy Commanding General/U.S. Army Reserve immediately prior to his retirement a few years ago. His personal, unclassified perspective was that if anything, reliance on the USAR, ANG and ARNG components will only significantly increase as we move forward. Our active components are smaller and require augmentation. Some of the functions performed by USAR units no longer reside in the active Army. It seems as though the armed forces of the United States are needed on an ever increasing basis on a veritable worldwide stage.
All that to say, the days of a routine monthly MUTA-4 and a two week annual training period are over for many of the units in the reserve components. Serving an entire enlistment in one of the reserve components without a deployment is the exception not the norm nowadays. Even when units are not deployed, training requirements and “time in the units” are increasing.
I think it does affect retention. Many that might serve will not, thinking it will have an adverse effect on their civilian career and their family lives. Although employers now are much more indulgent and supportive of reservists and guardsmen than when I served, civilian employers must accomplish their “mission” also, and they need employees that can be relied upon to be “there” to accomplish it.

Response by CPT Private RallyPoint Member made Sep 22 at 2018 11:00 PM

2018-09-22T23:00:52-04:00

It really is foolish to consider the old phrase- When it comes to the billpayer- they would absolutely like to consider it as a "strategic reserve" because they do not want to expand your health care coverage, your base compensation, your travel expenses, your administrative costs etc.

However- The folks who would like to utilize you, surely want you more capable, and will pay you at your current rate to mandate that you train a bit more every year.. They do not care about your 'other' career.

its a dichotomy, and the sad thing is you really cant choose whether or not you want to remain strategic or operational.,... you just are.

If you really want a solid civilian career, your military career will not be flexible- however, they will expect your civilian career to bend over backwards- which is absolutely the wrong answer. The Answer cannot be- you must maintain your own company or hold a government position in order to advance... it will drastically limit the talent pool as well as the talent we bring to the fight.

I am a USAR Company Commander of an ECC unit... I personally know enlisted Soldiers that make far more money (in the range of $120K plus) that have civilian jobs running equipment. If we impose more training on them, they will simply walk and I lose all my experienced operators.... The Army is walking a delicate line, and the effects may not be immediate... but they will become known once its time to reenlist.

The answer cannot be to simply keep throwing money at new recruits, Especially when there is such a drastic amount of talent leaving at the mid level ranks.