Posted on Nov 20, 2016
Why is it difficult for Reserves and National Guard to go active duty?
24.6K
21
38
1
1
0
Reserves
Responses: 17
7
7
0
There are several reasons. The first is retention. The Reserve Components want to retain their troops and risk losing them if they go on tour or 'go active.' It is tough to recruit 'part-time' troops. So, once recruited, the focus is retention.
The second is social. For a long time, Reserve Components were treated by the Active Component as the 'great unwashed.' The AC would call on the RC during times of conflict or stretched resources with an expectation that we would 'go back to where we belong' after they were done with us. Once a troop transitions from active duty to RC, they are treated differently from those who remain their entire career on active duty.
The third is legal. There are regulations on the number of days an RC trooper can spend assigned on Active Duty (Mobilized, ADOS, COTTAD, AT, etc.) whereas there is no limitation on how long an AC troop can remain assigned or attached to RC units. Granted, there are few opportunities for AC troops to be assigned/attached to Drilling Reserve Units.
Finally, there is the bureaucracy. The policies make it so difficult to gain permission, find the right tour/slot and actually transition from RC to AC, it is easier to just quit all together. Many want to serve full-time but are unable to find the right fit. So, they struggle in a part-time status, balancing work, family, military, education and social life and often find it easier to just return to civilian life. My recommendation continues to be that every member of the AC should come from the RC and all Military and Civilian Education requirements would be fulfilled while a member of the RC. Instead of a two year RC course and a 6 month AC course, there should be many two year RC courses and everyone attends. The AC join the RC units in a full-time status or attend college or obtain civilian employment during course attendance, then return. Also, every assignment and promotion should be made regardless of component. If an RC troop is selected for promotion to an AC position, then they should be provided the option to serve on active duty. We are one force, despite how they treat the RC and AC differently.
The second is social. For a long time, Reserve Components were treated by the Active Component as the 'great unwashed.' The AC would call on the RC during times of conflict or stretched resources with an expectation that we would 'go back to where we belong' after they were done with us. Once a troop transitions from active duty to RC, they are treated differently from those who remain their entire career on active duty.
The third is legal. There are regulations on the number of days an RC trooper can spend assigned on Active Duty (Mobilized, ADOS, COTTAD, AT, etc.) whereas there is no limitation on how long an AC troop can remain assigned or attached to RC units. Granted, there are few opportunities for AC troops to be assigned/attached to Drilling Reserve Units.
Finally, there is the bureaucracy. The policies make it so difficult to gain permission, find the right tour/slot and actually transition from RC to AC, it is easier to just quit all together. Many want to serve full-time but are unable to find the right fit. So, they struggle in a part-time status, balancing work, family, military, education and social life and often find it easier to just return to civilian life. My recommendation continues to be that every member of the AC should come from the RC and all Military and Civilian Education requirements would be fulfilled while a member of the RC. Instead of a two year RC course and a 6 month AC course, there should be many two year RC courses and everyone attends. The AC join the RC units in a full-time status or attend college or obtain civilian employment during course attendance, then return. Also, every assignment and promotion should be made regardless of component. If an RC troop is selected for promotion to an AC position, then they should be provided the option to serve on active duty. We are one force, despite how they treat the RC and AC differently.
(7)
(0)
4
4
0
It depends on the time and the needs of the Army. Right now the AD is full up with recruits, wait a year or two and I'm thinking they'll be recruiting again.
It's very, very difficult if you are in the NG, not so much in the RC as the dollars are all federal, so your State doesn't loose the money they spent on your training.
It's very, very difficult if you are in the NG, not so much in the RC as the dollars are all federal, so your State doesn't loose the money they spent on your training.
(4)
(0)
SSG (Join to see)
No disrespect Sir, but it isn't very difficult at all to get an AD hitch whether NG or USAR. Also the money I agree is an issue but it does all come from Big Army, It just depends on the needs of the mission. I was selected as NCOIC of a 4 PAX to deploy to Kuwait to support GO3 Webster in 2010-11, and we were ALNG. If the soldier is looking to go straight AD from NG or the Reserve, I only have one statement which I know because I have seen me do it! I was a SPC with the Reserve back in 1989 and had to reduce back to an E-2, as it was the rank I wore while on Title 10 in basic and AIT. I still had the TIS, just didn't keep the TIG.
(0)
(0)
MAJ (Join to see)
Deploying isn't going AD. The states burden some of the cost to train a Soldier as a result you need a release from your State if you are NG. Army reserves you just need your chain of command release which is much easier to get then a State (normally TAG signature) During drawdowns it's very hard to go from RC to AD. During manpower increases it is very easy. Right now it's hard, wait a few months and that is likely to change. If you are nearing the end of your ETS it becomes very easy to go AD.
(0)
(0)
3
3
0
OK, I have been out of service since 1987 but let me give you some quick advice on rank. If someone wrote their rank as PFC(P) in the Regular Army the person would be humiliated and ridiculed publicly. Maybe times have changed but just a tip for you if your really trying to go Active Duty you might think it is funny thing to do in the USAR but your going to be a real target if you do that on Active Duty in some units........based on my long ago past experience.
(3)
(0)
SSG (Join to see)
In the Guard when you see (P), it's usually administrative meaning they are promotable. They are sometimes sitting in a higher slot than their current rank.
(0)
(0)
2
2
0
It can be several reasons. Maybe their job isn't available due to overmanning, not enough credientials, etc.
(2)
(0)
1
1
0
Because they have you under contract, and letting you out of your contract hurts their manning numbers, and with the case of the state NG, a loss of the money they spent on training you. A lot of NG recruiters like to sell the "test drive" enlistment with the 17 yr old High school juniors who can do the split training while still in school, with the presumption that they can easily "switch" to active duty later if they want. I used to get a lot of NG kids fresh out of AIT walk in wanting to go active, only for them to find out that getting released was not easy. And when they did, their options were limited.
(1)
(0)
SSG Laurie Mullen
I did split option training when I was in the Reserves. I don't know if transferring to active was easier in the mid 80s or I was just very lucky, but I went active after less than three years in the Reserves.
(0)
(0)
SFC J Fullerton
SSG Laurie Mullen - It has been my experience (as a former Army Recruiter), that it was easier to get released from the Army Reserve to go active than it was from the National Guard. The Army Reserve did change the policy about 10 years ago making the approval authority HQ USARC, which slowed the process of getting released.
(1)
(0)
0
0
0
Active duty has slots, and we don't not compete for those slots as a serve force, but as a Reservist or National Guards you can volunteer for missions that will put you in Active service.
(0)
(0)
0
0
0
It boils down to the needs of each service at the time. For me, prior service in the Army and Air National Guards were positive factors in getting my Navy commission. Before my Guard service I was turned down probably 5 times by the Navy, AF and Army for a commission.
(0)
(0)
0
0
0
SPC (Join to see) it probably is money, at least in part, as both MAJ (Join to see) and MAJ Daniel Buchholz have said. But I think it's also that everyone wants someone who starts and stays with their program.
There is a certain amount of discrimination against reserve soldiers. We have only 39 days a year to do the same training the active has 365 days for. It's not uncommon for reserve soldiers, especially in the highly technical and low density MOSs, to not be as well trained as we would like. I can imagine an active duty SFC wondering if the SSG he just got from the reserves is ready to go, or is a PFC wearing too many stripes and needing a lot of training.
SFC J Fullerton makes the case for release of a soldier to active duty in the case of severe financial hardship (unemployed with a family, sick child/no insurance) and thinks that the welfare and best interests of the Soldier and family have to be considered. I respect compassion, but I think that is misplaced. The Army isn't a welfare society. No civilian employer would be held to this standard, requiring that an employee be given higher paid work just because of financial hardship.
There are means of getting release from the reserves. Just move to somewhere more than 50 miles from a reserve unit. Then ask to be released. You'll get it, and then if you want to go active, you can. As a National Guard 1SG, I had enough to deal with in my 39 days a year without having to help someone leave my unit to go to another one.
There is a certain amount of discrimination against reserve soldiers. We have only 39 days a year to do the same training the active has 365 days for. It's not uncommon for reserve soldiers, especially in the highly technical and low density MOSs, to not be as well trained as we would like. I can imagine an active duty SFC wondering if the SSG he just got from the reserves is ready to go, or is a PFC wearing too many stripes and needing a lot of training.
SFC J Fullerton makes the case for release of a soldier to active duty in the case of severe financial hardship (unemployed with a family, sick child/no insurance) and thinks that the welfare and best interests of the Soldier and family have to be considered. I respect compassion, but I think that is misplaced. The Army isn't a welfare society. No civilian employer would be held to this standard, requiring that an employee be given higher paid work just because of financial hardship.
There are means of getting release from the reserves. Just move to somewhere more than 50 miles from a reserve unit. Then ask to be released. You'll get it, and then if you want to go active, you can. As a National Guard 1SG, I had enough to deal with in my 39 days a year without having to help someone leave my unit to go to another one.
(0)
(0)
SGM (Join to see)
SFC J Fullerton obviously I think the Army could give preference for TDY and TTAD to those who previously served, or those with exceptional or needed skills. I certainly believe that having done a two year activation and lost my civilian job, that the Army could easily have used me in other deployments.
In short, I'd like to see people EARN a transfer or additional tour through what they have already given, rather than getting a benefit just because something didn't go as well as they hoped.
If we give significant consideration to financial hardship, we will see a revolving door, where those who lost their jobs take a 3 year tour, before returning to the reserves. I don't think the Army can be held to this standard. But if we expect people to earn some preference, we can better manage those who need preference.
As a National Guard First Sergeant, my policy, with the grudging acceptance of the Company Commander, was that if you asked me for time off, and made up that drill BEFORE, I would grant it. But only rarely did someone ask me to take a drill off earlier than the week before drill, and even less commonly made up the drill before. (In case you or other readers don't know, I can count as Present for drill anyone who made it up early. But no matter how valid the excuse, those who made up later counted as if they were AWOL.) I basically feel that if you couldn't help me/the CO/the unit make their status, you really didn't have much to complain about if I failed to help you.
In short, I'd like to see people EARN a transfer or additional tour through what they have already given, rather than getting a benefit just because something didn't go as well as they hoped.
If we give significant consideration to financial hardship, we will see a revolving door, where those who lost their jobs take a 3 year tour, before returning to the reserves. I don't think the Army can be held to this standard. But if we expect people to earn some preference, we can better manage those who need preference.
As a National Guard First Sergeant, my policy, with the grudging acceptance of the Company Commander, was that if you asked me for time off, and made up that drill BEFORE, I would grant it. But only rarely did someone ask me to take a drill off earlier than the week before drill, and even less commonly made up the drill before. (In case you or other readers don't know, I can count as Present for drill anyone who made it up early. But no matter how valid the excuse, those who made up later counted as if they were AWOL.) I basically feel that if you couldn't help me/the CO/the unit make their status, you really didn't have much to complain about if I failed to help you.
(0)
(0)
SFC J Fullerton
That is an apples to oranges comparison. I understand that the ARNG can't just release anyone and everyone to AD who asks or it would be a revolving door. When I was on recruiting duty, we got ARNG walk-ins all the time. Most of the time it was young 18-19 yr olds fresh out of Infantry AIT who did the split option in high school. Sometimes the kid realized that part-time military was not fulfilling enough, in some cases they were misled by the recruiter into believing that they could easily "switch" to active duty after training. We just give them the DD368 to take back to the unit, and usually that was the last we saw of them, and really didn't care. That was on them for not thinking through their decision, or researching the facts before committing to their enlistment contract in the ARNG. But in the rare cases where the ARNG Soldier had a legitimate family hardship that could be resolved with a Regular Army enlistment, I had a hard time understanding why the ARNG leadership would not make an exception and release the Soldier to go active duty.
(0)
(0)
SGM (Join to see)
SFC J Fullerton there is a difference between just being less than satisfied with how things worked out or what your recruiter promised, and financial hardship. As an AD recruiter, I can understand how you aren't too worried about the reserve unit's issues over paying for the training, or filling the slot in the unit. And while I think there COULD be circumstances where an exception could be made, I don't think it is incumbent on the Army to make it.
In my own situation, having lost my job, and unable to support my family on 2 days drill a month, I asked for a deployment. I didn't get it, and that's fine - needs of the Army. But having to support my family is what drove me to become a contractor and deploy. The National Guard obviously didn't like it when accusing me of going AWOL, but their lack of concern over how I fed my family made that my only reasonable choice.
The point remains that the issue is MINE to solve, and not the responsibility of the Army to solve for me. That's one of the few advantages the Reserves have over Active duty soldiers - we have to have a civilian career, because we know you can't live on 2 days drill per month. That also means we are more likely to solve our own problems. Again, I think we are going to have to agree to disagree.
In my own situation, having lost my job, and unable to support my family on 2 days drill a month, I asked for a deployment. I didn't get it, and that's fine - needs of the Army. But having to support my family is what drove me to become a contractor and deploy. The National Guard obviously didn't like it when accusing me of going AWOL, but their lack of concern over how I fed my family made that my only reasonable choice.
The point remains that the issue is MINE to solve, and not the responsibility of the Army to solve for me. That's one of the few advantages the Reserves have over Active duty soldiers - we have to have a civilian career, because we know you can't live on 2 days drill per month. That also means we are more likely to solve our own problems. Again, I think we are going to have to agree to disagree.
(0)
(0)
(0)
(0)
0
0
0
Supply and demand, the active component is still in a draw down mode. There are limited opportunities right now as a result. If they reverse course and start to increase troop levels, the opportunities will definitely increase over the next several years.
(0)
(0)
0
0
0
From my guys who are in the NG it's difficult because when your NG your paid for by the state and not the federal government. Therefore it's a huge waste of money for them to send you active from I've oticed for guard everything is based on funds. Idk why though
(0)
(0)
Read This Next
Continue with Facebook 
Continue with Google