Posted on Jan 5, 2025
What are your thoughts on some states considering legislation to prevent excessive deployments of their state Guard units?
0
23
22
3
3
0
Posted 3 d ago
Responses: 8
5
5
0
State guard units have a duel roll, state/federal. If a federal roll is required then they must answer to the federal orders. I don't see how the States can get around it. If the need could be picked up in the Reserve side of the house it should, but not so possible. Duties were split, CS/CSS were put in the Reserve, Combat Arms more in the Guard. Once the Federal orders are cut, Guard units then come under the President.
(5)
(0)
MAJ Ronnie Reams
The Guard is called to AD with the consent of the Governor, I've seen orders. These were individuals, but I would guess same same for a unit.
(0)
(0)
COL Randall C.
MAJ Ronnie Reams - The 'consent of the Governor' only applies to certain type of T10 orders and the location.
There are six sections of Title 10 in the US Code that allow for the reserve components to be called to active duty - 12301, 12302, 12304, 12406, 251, and 253.
Aside from section 251, which specifically requires the request of the Governor or state official for Federal aid in suppressing an insurrection, only a few subsections of section 12301 allow the Governor to withhold consent. Specifically only 12301(b), 12301(d) and 12301(h) allow it, and with respect to (b) and (d), that consent cannot be withheld if the orders are for OCONUS missions.
There are six sections of Title 10 in the US Code that allow for the reserve components to be called to active duty - 12301, 12302, 12304, 12406, 251, and 253.
Aside from section 251, which specifically requires the request of the Governor or state official for Federal aid in suppressing an insurrection, only a few subsections of section 12301 allow the Governor to withhold consent. Specifically only 12301(b), 12301(d) and 12301(h) allow it, and with respect to (b) and (d), that consent cannot be withheld if the orders are for OCONUS missions.
(4)
(0)
2
2
0
I am TOTALLY for this kind of stuff.
I think the Active Components are taking advantage of Reserves to shore up national defense metrics.
How many of us get orders for AT that is 29 days just to screw us out of BAH, or deployments short of the required number of days that screw us out of other things. They use NG and Reserves to shore up numbers and eagerly minimize the cost.
I would like to see the following laws:
1) 30 Days on orders over a rolling 12 month period turns on Housing Allowance Payments retroactively to all days on orders over those previous rolling 12 months.
2) Employers are protected against excessive deployments. Employees with more than 60 months of deployments can be terminated because of said deployments. This is rare, because how many of us are actually at a single employer long enough that 60 months can be racked up for the employer to use that clause, and then if they could, do they actually do that.
2a) The law should be for Reservists and NG, if deployed for 60 months (over the course of their RESERVE career), then the service member can Resign from the Service with 100% benefits, and current contractual bonuses considered fully met obligations (the exception being deployments one volunteered for). You can stay in if you want, but if the deployments are causing you to lose a civilian job based on Federal Law, then said Federal Law should protect Reserve service members enough to keep a civilian job.
My second idea isn't that big of a deal, and probably rarely needed.
My first idea would really screw around with mission planning of exercises ($$$$$) that are over using service members because of staffing shortages.
I think the Active Components are taking advantage of Reserves to shore up national defense metrics.
How many of us get orders for AT that is 29 days just to screw us out of BAH, or deployments short of the required number of days that screw us out of other things. They use NG and Reserves to shore up numbers and eagerly minimize the cost.
I would like to see the following laws:
1) 30 Days on orders over a rolling 12 month period turns on Housing Allowance Payments retroactively to all days on orders over those previous rolling 12 months.
2) Employers are protected against excessive deployments. Employees with more than 60 months of deployments can be terminated because of said deployments. This is rare, because how many of us are actually at a single employer long enough that 60 months can be racked up for the employer to use that clause, and then if they could, do they actually do that.
2a) The law should be for Reservists and NG, if deployed for 60 months (over the course of their RESERVE career), then the service member can Resign from the Service with 100% benefits, and current contractual bonuses considered fully met obligations (the exception being deployments one volunteered for). You can stay in if you want, but if the deployments are causing you to lose a civilian job based on Federal Law, then said Federal Law should protect Reserve service members enough to keep a civilian job.
My second idea isn't that big of a deal, and probably rarely needed.
My first idea would really screw around with mission planning of exercises ($$$$$) that are over using service members because of staffing shortages.
(2)
(0)
LTC Stephen C.
I don’t think it will ever happen, CPT (Join to see). The active components are so diminished that NG and USAR components are necessary for completion of the “mission” whatever that might be. Not only are active component numbers not sufficient, there was a time when some types of units didn’t exist in the active components and reserve components were deployed as a matter of functional necessity. Perhaps that is still true.
SGM Mikel Dawson COL Randall C. 1LT Larry Bass AN Ron Wright MAJ Ronnie Reams SGM Bill Frazer
SGM Mikel Dawson COL Randall C. 1LT Larry Bass AN Ron Wright MAJ Ronnie Reams SGM Bill Frazer
(1)
(0)
SGM Mikel Dawson
Sir, not only Reserve components. When I was deployed to Pristina, NATO HQ in 2001, all the active duty deployed there got orders for 179 days, one day short for getting mid deployment leave and lots of other benefits. I was the USNSE NCOIC. I had almost all the personal assigned there come to me wanting to put in for leave. I looked at their orders and told them they needed orders for 180 days, their orders were for 179. They were pissed. It is a way DoD saves money. I am guessing most deployed to Task Force Falcon at the time were the same.
(1)
(0)
SGM Mikel Dawson
LTC Stephen C. - Very true. Pretty much all 38 series are Reserve now. Many of your CS, CSS are only in Reserve/Guard components. If they are needed, then they get called up.
(1)
(0)
COL Randall C.
Rich, in principle I agree with your comments about the overutilization of the reserve component but have some clarifications/corrections about your “1” and “2” laws and am unclear about your “2a” proposal.
Regarding “1”, DoD limits annual training for reservists to no more than 30 days each FY, unless authorized by the SECDEF, so you’ll rarely, if ever, see someone with more than 30 days of AT each year (‘Annual Training’, not ‘Active Duty’). However, a reservist on active duty orders (including AT) is entitled to BAH. If the orders are for 30 days or less, then they receive prorated non-locality BAH (BAH Type II / BAH-RC/T) and if 31 or more days they receive standard BAH (i.e., Type I). If you or another Soldier aren’t being given BAH for AT, then someone is screwing up when they are processing the AT pay.
Regarding “2”, I assume you are referring to rights of reemployment under the Uniformed Services Employment and Reemployment Rights Act (USERRA) when you mentioned ’60 months’. Under the provisions of that law (38 USC 4312*), most active and inactive duty periods that you would normally be put in as a reservist as well as most situations where the service member is involuntarily ordered to, or retained on, active duty are exempted from the five-year cumulative limit*.
I’m not sure what you’re suggesting for “2a”. Very few reserve component service members will accumulate over five years of deployments during their initial Mandatory Service Obligation of eight years. Were you suggesting an expedited “officer resignation” or “early termination of an enlistment contract” process? Becoming retirement eligible based on the 5+ years of active duty?
Currently, if an individual separates under honorable conditions, they are eligible for all benefits a reservist would be entitled to. Since the individual would also have met the qualifying period of active duty for reservists, they would also be eligible for all VA benefits as well.
As I said, I do agree with the premise that the reserve component is being over-utilized. It comes from a combination of “do more with less”, the shifting of (now) necessary capabilities to the reserve component, and the transition of the reserve component from a “strategic reserve” into an “operational force and strategic reserve” in the National Defense Strategy since 2001.
While it is a voluntary choice to do so, more should be done to compensate reservists that chose to remain in a high-OPTEMPO reserve unit. However, the current legal protections for employment/reemployment already apply to the situations you described (unless you were including those periods of voluntary active duty that are not exempt from the five-year limit under USERRA).
-------------------------------------------------------------------
* 38 U.S. Code § 4312 (Reemployment rights of persons who serve in the uniformed services) - https://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/text/38/4312
* Specifically, active duty under the following situations don’t count against the 60 months:
• Required training such as IET, MOSQ, PMED, etc.
• Unit Training Assemblies (UTAs) or Annual Training (32 USC 502(a))
• Participation in exercises (32 USC 503)
• Retiree Recall (10 USC 688 or 14 USC 331/332/359/360
• Individual or unit mobilizations for a national emergency (10 USC 12301(a)/12302/12304)
• Augment active component units performing certain operational missions (10 USC 12304(a))
• Fulfill critical mission or requirements (as designated by the service Secretary or SECDEF)
• A member of the National Guard on active duty in a T32 status (Full Time National Guard Duty – FTNGD) to support to Law Enforcement missions (Chapter 15 of 10 USC)
• A member of the National Guard on FTNGD or State Active Duty (for periods on/after January 5th, 2021) for training or operational missions authorized by the President or SECDEF in response to a national emergency (32 USC 502(f)(2)(A)).
There are also additional situations (MIA/POW, retention on AD beyond term of service, etc.) that could apply, but those situations are typically rare.
Regarding “1”, DoD limits annual training for reservists to no more than 30 days each FY, unless authorized by the SECDEF, so you’ll rarely, if ever, see someone with more than 30 days of AT each year (‘Annual Training’, not ‘Active Duty’). However, a reservist on active duty orders (including AT) is entitled to BAH. If the orders are for 30 days or less, then they receive prorated non-locality BAH (BAH Type II / BAH-RC/T) and if 31 or more days they receive standard BAH (i.e., Type I). If you or another Soldier aren’t being given BAH for AT, then someone is screwing up when they are processing the AT pay.
Regarding “2”, I assume you are referring to rights of reemployment under the Uniformed Services Employment and Reemployment Rights Act (USERRA) when you mentioned ’60 months’. Under the provisions of that law (38 USC 4312*), most active and inactive duty periods that you would normally be put in as a reservist as well as most situations where the service member is involuntarily ordered to, or retained on, active duty are exempted from the five-year cumulative limit*.
I’m not sure what you’re suggesting for “2a”. Very few reserve component service members will accumulate over five years of deployments during their initial Mandatory Service Obligation of eight years. Were you suggesting an expedited “officer resignation” or “early termination of an enlistment contract” process? Becoming retirement eligible based on the 5+ years of active duty?
Currently, if an individual separates under honorable conditions, they are eligible for all benefits a reservist would be entitled to. Since the individual would also have met the qualifying period of active duty for reservists, they would also be eligible for all VA benefits as well.
As I said, I do agree with the premise that the reserve component is being over-utilized. It comes from a combination of “do more with less”, the shifting of (now) necessary capabilities to the reserve component, and the transition of the reserve component from a “strategic reserve” into an “operational force and strategic reserve” in the National Defense Strategy since 2001.
While it is a voluntary choice to do so, more should be done to compensate reservists that chose to remain in a high-OPTEMPO reserve unit. However, the current legal protections for employment/reemployment already apply to the situations you described (unless you were including those periods of voluntary active duty that are not exempt from the five-year limit under USERRA).
-------------------------------------------------------------------
* 38 U.S. Code § 4312 (Reemployment rights of persons who serve in the uniformed services) - https://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/text/38/4312
* Specifically, active duty under the following situations don’t count against the 60 months:
• Required training such as IET, MOSQ, PMED, etc.
• Unit Training Assemblies (UTAs) or Annual Training (32 USC 502(a))
• Participation in exercises (32 USC 503)
• Retiree Recall (10 USC 688 or 14 USC 331/332/359/360
• Individual or unit mobilizations for a national emergency (10 USC 12301(a)/12302/12304)
• Augment active component units performing certain operational missions (10 USC 12304(a))
• Fulfill critical mission or requirements (as designated by the service Secretary or SECDEF)
• A member of the National Guard on active duty in a T32 status (Full Time National Guard Duty – FTNGD) to support to Law Enforcement missions (Chapter 15 of 10 USC)
• A member of the National Guard on FTNGD or State Active Duty (for periods on/after January 5th, 2021) for training or operational missions authorized by the President or SECDEF in response to a national emergency (32 USC 502(f)(2)(A)).
There are also additional situations (MIA/POW, retention on AD beyond term of service, etc.) that could apply, but those situations are typically rare.
(0)
(0)
2
2
0
Part of their role is to the Federal Govt. Thanks to cutbacks for active unit- almost all PYOPS units are reserves or guards, ditto for almost all water units, trans and logistics. They receive funds for training up to Fed standards. If they don't work, then they lose the funds!
(2)
(0)
Read This Next
Continue with Facebook 
Continue with Google