Should the military raise or lower maximum age limits to enlist?

2018-10-01T09:03:02-04:00

The Army's maximum age is 35, Navy is 34, Air Force is 39, Marine is 28 and the Coast Guard is 32?

Response by LTC Stephan Porter made Oct 1 at 2018 9:03 AM

2018-10-01T09:03:56-04:00

I think based on skill in need of the services he should always be done, as it happens.

Response by SPC Jovani Daviu made Oct 1 at 2018 9:18 AM

2018-10-01T09:18:35-04:00

I am 35 now. I would like to reenlist Air National Guard or reserves. In my opinion, the age limits should be raised a bit.

Response by SGT David A. 'Cowboy' Groth made Oct 1 at 2018 9:20 AM

2018-10-01T09:20:15-04:00

IMHO, they should raise them .

Response by SrA Private RallyPoint Member made Oct 1 at 2018 9:33 AM

2018-10-01T09:33:42-04:00

Raise em, ability > age

Response by SGT Dave Tracy made Oct 1 at 2018 9:37 AM

2018-10-01T09:37:54-04:00

Such decisions should be based on the needs of each service branch at a given time, so by that measure there shouldn't be a hard & fast, forward-looking blanket policy. For the upper age limit, the various services might also want to give consideration (i.e. wavers) based on prior service or for those with specialized skills, for potential enlistees. On the lower age end, I see no reason to raise it.

I may be biased in terms of the upper age range; I enlisted in the Infantry at age 36, and did 3 years on Active Duty followed by 5 years as a part time Army trucker. Due to my age at enlistment, I was older than all the company's drill sergeants, company commander and XO; only 1SG was (slightly) older.

Response by SSG Mark Franzen made Oct 1 at 2018 11:10 AM

2018-10-01T11:10:45-04:00

Why do people mess with things that are not broken if they were broken then fix it.
SSG MarkFranzen
USA vet

Response by MCPO Roger Collins made Oct 1 at 2018 11:36 AM

2018-10-01T11:36:08-04:00

There is a reason professional athletes retire 30-35. Physical ability drops off in that age range, even our careerists must pass physical tests to ensure they retain essential ability to serve in combat effectively. There are a few skills, for example medical, that should be exempted. Were it not for the physical ability requirement, we would have a lot of old men in the military by retirement. Not good.

Response by CW3 Michael Bodnar made Oct 1 at 2018 11:37 AM

2018-10-01T11:37:41-04:00

I think it should ultimately come down to needs of the service. As a prior service Marine, I fully understand why that number is where it's at. It was a tough ten years on active duty and my legs, back, and shoulders took a beating. Now that I'm in the Guard, it's not as difficult as it once was in terms of stress to the body. I do however feel the MOS they choose should play into what the max age should be as well.

Response by MSG Private RallyPoint Member made Oct 1 at 2018 12:21 PM

2018-10-01T12:21:31-04:00

No. If we allow older people to join the service, the number of people who cannot deploy will go up. Currently the Army has about 14% non deployable personnel. Many of these are civilians who came into the Army with medical waivers. I am currently working with NATO allies, and I see what happens when older people stay in the service too long. 40 is old enough. It should be max 35.

Response by SFC Harry H. made Oct 1 at 2018 12:31 PM

2018-10-01T12:31:01-04:00

My question is, why does it matter how old a person is to enlist or to apply for any job? If the person is qualified and physically able then why is this even a question? Is it because of retirement requirements like it is for Law Enforcement?

I think being the Army is moving to the new Blended Retirement System (BRS), age shouldn't be a factor. I thought even before the new BRS, age should never be a factor. If a person intentionally applies for any job knowing he/she would not be able to retire with that job, then that's on them.

We talk about equality for blacks/whites/Hispanics etc, men and women but what about age? I feel discriminated on by the fact that I'm to old to apply to other Law Enforcement agencies in or around the state here and I just turned 40.

Response by SPC Cathy Goessman made Oct 1 at 2018 1:38 PM

2018-10-01T13:38:38-04:00

I think the military severely undervalues the life experience and maturity that an older person brings. I was a snot-nosed kid at 19 years old. I expect to do a lot better this time around rejoining at 29-30 years old.

That said, I do think the age limits for someone to come in as a base enlisted Private seem appropriate. Higher age limits for certain MOSs would make sense. You could certainly expect a 40 year old joining as a nurse or optometry technician to still finish out their enlistment without major issues. 40 year old infantry though? How long are those knees going to last? Speaking in generalities of course. Some people are stronger at 40 simply because they have years of a good fitness base to draw off of.

Response by PO3 Private RallyPoint Member made Oct 1 at 2018 3:59 PM

2018-10-01T15:59:41-04:00

I feel they should raise them, as well... Especially for those willing to serve that have advanced degrees (not talking about anything medical). I would say that if they are motivated to serve and meet the physical requirements, there's really no reason we shouldn't allow someone to do so.

I have noticed that they age limits are different for Active Duty and Reserves. I'm not quite sure why this is, since I've had friends and relatives deploy far more as Reservists than some Active Duty folks I know.

Response by Sgt Private RallyPoint Member made Oct 1 at 2018 5:58 PM

2018-10-01T17:58:48-04:00

as mentioned by MSG Private RallyPoint Member, the age limits should be left where they are. We can not afford to raise the limits and have an increasing percentage of non deployable men and women.

Response by SGT Ryan Collins made Oct 1 at 2018 7:40 PM

2018-10-01T19:40:52-04:00

While I was in BCT, the upper age limit for the ARNG was 42. We had a Gentleman who had his 42nd birthday while in BCT. Even though enlisting later in life, serving was something he always wanted to do. He had his BS in Electrical Engineering and his MBA - not to mention 20(ish) years of real world management/work experience. He walked into the Guard recruiting office at 41 and said he wanted the next available ship date.

He outperformed and, frankly, out motivated many of the troops in the 18-20 year old age group. He was a voice of reason and counselor to many of the younger enlisted men.

Some 10+ years later, we are still in contact. He is now a CW2(P) and still loves it.

If you are physically able to meet the standards - I say let 'em in.

Response by SSG Pete Fleming made Oct 1 at 2018 9:50 PM

2018-10-01T21:50:23-04:00

I would say the cut off should be 40, depending on the job class... MOS... whatever... Infantry, no a person in the mid-thirties-40 shouldn't be doing that, but cook, supply, admin, mechanic and such jobs, chances are they have been doing it in the real world already or they have other skills to bring to the table. Warrant Officer should be opened to prior service who gained useful skills since getting out but would like to return. There are positions and options that should allow for more mature people to enlist, even if they never served previously. But again not all positions should be open. Actually they could split it into class, the deployable and not, Garrison MPs and such (including those listed above) could also be older. Again, many of whom will have civilian law enforcement experience )or other skill sets) and would perform better in the garrison environment.

Response by SPC John Kozma made Oct 1 at 2018 10:34 PM

2018-10-01T22:34:52-04:00

Raise I think that there are some MOS's that an older individual can do that wont be issue as long as they meet the PT standards. I had a desk job in MI field and think that being older person could do the job just fine. also on a case by case situation I guess

Response by COL Private RallyPoint Member made Oct 2 at 2018 1:17 AM

2018-10-02T01:17:58-04:00

MOS should dictate age requirements. After all, it dictates physical standards, so why not age?

Likewise, the blanket policy of kicking folks out at 60 is silly too.

Response by CSM Danny S. made Oct 3 at 2018 1:13 AM

2018-10-03T01:13:04-04:00

I think you have to look at the mandatory age for retirement. So if the person did 20 years they would be 55 in the Army. I am sure that has a great deal to do with this.

Response by SSG Warren Swan made Oct 3 at 2018 9:41 PM

2018-10-03T21:41:51-04:00

Being there is damn near a waiver for almost anything, keep the waivers and make them ability based. Leave the age's along being we all know the waivers are there. The problem with that will be when folks look at where most of those waivers went, Medical and Technical MOS's will see the greatest gain from them. So if the Army's in dire need of computer hackers, or senior level sys admins (for ex), they could expand the waivers looking for specific individuals who fit very narrow guidelines in those particular skillsets. It wouldn't be an "Army wide" thing. They had a doctor(surgeon) who was 74 and a full LTC in the Stan. The Navy just commissioned a father who is in the Medical field at a higher rank than his child who graduated the Academy. I believe he's a CDR (LTC) to us. What do we need vs what do we have? What can we get away with not having or can we train what we have to do a specific job without making "FNG" Officers at senior ranks with the ability to make tactical decisions with no experience? What can we get as a ROI for those who come in later in life?

If they opened the flood gates and seriously raised the age of enlistment, you'd have a good chunk (maybe 40% if not more) of your retired forces asking to come back into service. You'd have a LOT of your prior service and younger troops running back. It helps in the short term, hurts in the long. Some things are for the young and the bold. I just refuse to admit that, but I recognize the truth in it.

https://www.navytimes.com/news/your-navy/2018/07/14/ensign-commissions-her-63-year-old-father-as-a-navy-officer/
http://www.nbcnews.com/id/29189177/ns/us_news-military/t/army-doc-ready-deploy-afghanistan/#.W7Vt3PZFyUk

Ensign commissions her 63-year-old father as a Navy officer

The heart surgeon passed up a relaxing retirement to join his daughter as a naval officer.

Response by SGT Private RallyPoint Member made Oct 8 at 2018 1:36 PM

2018-10-08T13:36:38-04:00

Why do we have age limits for potential officer recruits too? We are loosing out on seasoned NCOs, prior service and NPS people who have degrees in addition to viable real world experience. If you can do 20 years by the maximum retirement age that’s all that should matter. 42 years old for all services; make it even across the board.

Response by SSG Private RallyPoint Member made Oct 8 at 2018 8:43 PM

2018-10-08T20:43:50-04:00

My only issue with this is how it relates to combat effectiveness. When you bring in a new recruit, you're making a huge investment in their training in so that they can delivery those skills in the war fighting effort. The older you are, the more prone you are to injury or other issues. I'm not saying young people don't also have a ton of issues that interfere with them serving in full capacity, but you're more likely to find someone 40+ who requires medical profiles than someone who is 18. The only time I would consider raising the maximum in the Army would be to bring in someone with an exceptional skill like medicine or being extremely well versed in something technical like cyber operations.

Response by Brad Powers made Oct 15 at 2018 4:00 PM

2018-10-15T16:00:48-04:00

I do not think that the U.S. Military should adjust to people of course people should definitely adjust to the US Military. But there is a age waiver at least I heard of it. Maybe they could consider using it for certain cases. I'm sure there are plenty of 35 to 40 year olds with the mental and physical capacity needed to not only take the training they also use that training to do the job at hand. Also if they have the maturity (which they should at that age) it would be potentially good balance. Or they could just raise the age limit to 40 I have recruiters use the best judgement because the Army, Navy, Airforce, Marine Corps, and of course the Coast Guard can think of a thousand reasons to turn down an applicant no matter the age.

Response by SGT Mark Seymour made Oct 18 at 2018 2:15 PM

2018-10-18T14:15:53-04:00

Difficult to say is one can get waivers if they are identified to be in a special need for a particular MOS. Thus they can get in at an age beyond the maximum.

Response by PVT Private RallyPoint Member made Oct 24 at 2018 7:02 PM

2018-10-24T19:02:11-04:00

The military is changing where vital MOS positions are not being filled. I as an older veteran, having an advanced skill set and with civilian and military experience can and should be able to serve. Of course I am a really old fart at 50, but don’t count me out because of my grey hair.

Response by Sheila Kemper made Oct 27 at 2018 9:12 PM

2018-10-27T21:12:02-04:00

I believe they need to raise it. To be honest, I don’t think there should be any age limit. If they can do the job, let them enlist.

Response by GySgt William Hardy made Oct 28 at 2018 7:48 PM

2018-10-28T19:48:11-04:00

What if a person was not thinking about making the military as career and just wanted to serve like many did back in WWII? I served from 1967 to 1978 and then from 1983 to 1994 and retired with 22 years. Half active and half reserve. Ten years later I asked to be moved to the active reserve and requested duty in Iraq. I was granted my request and I turned 58 in Iraq. After I returned, I could not get another mission to Iraq and serve my full tour so I went ahead and retired at 59. One of my conditions for returning to active reserve status was being able to pass the physical requirements which I did at age 55. From that point forward, I did the PT and took the PT test until I was accepted for a tour in Iraq.

What if a person was in their 40s or 50s and could pass the physical conditioning/basic training? Should they not be allowed to serve their country? My personal experience says YES, and I was feeling very good about doing my part in the Operation Iraqi Freedom.

Response by Rhonda Hanson made Oct 29 at 2018 12:42 AM

2018-10-29T00:42:35-04:00

My husband joined the navy reserve at 38yrs and 7mos. So is it different for reserves and active duty? He was in 4 years before he went FTS. That was 16 years ago and he’s so ready for retirement, as am I. He’s getting tired of babysitting. He’s mentioned that the longer he is in, the worse it gets.

Response by SSG Doug Terrel made Nov 1 at 2018 12:13 PM

2018-11-01T12:13:09-04:00

I joined at 27, and there were people in BCT with me that were much older than I was. They struggled physically, but they were mentally much more competent than the 18-20 year old privates. When you look at the complete soldier, the maturity of the older soldiers make up for the lack of physical prowess. A bunch of "hooahs" will brow beat me for saying this, but with how technologically advanced we've gotten, being able to run for 8 miles in under 60 minutes is less important than it used to be. Age=experience. Everyone brings something to the table, it's on the leader to figure out what that is an how to utilize it.

Response by CPO Albert Kennison made Nov 2 at 2018 9:34 PM

2018-11-02T21:34:31-04:00

The Navy Reserves had a great program when I was recruiting called the Advanced Pay Grade program. They would enlist older skilled personnel up to E-6. My personal opinion of raising the age limit should remain with the needs of the service, and the capabilities of the individual.

Response by CPT Bobby Fields made Nov 6 at 2018 12:05 PM

2018-11-06T12:05:16-05:00

Raise the age to 40 (with waivers for up to possibly 50 for medical specialties, cyber, etc), but ensure the physical standards can be met based on each service's current physical fitness test. Enlistees going through MEPS (or ROTC and service academy applicants) only have to meet a very basic standard that isn't as strenuous as a PT test. And rather than a minimum passing score, require a score of 75 percent in each event. It is much more unlikely that a 40-year old who barely qualifies physically to enlist would be able to be brought up to standard during basic training.
The reality is there are plenty of active duty service members who are beat up and broken, and in some cases in their 40s and 50s that stay on active duty, but if they were required to pass an entrance physical at MEPS they would fail. Yet they are allowed to continue serving so long as they are deployable.
The issue discussed about being able to serve 20 years should be a non-issue since we have the blended retirement system, as someone already pointed out. Plus, the vast majority of those who enlist don't serve to retirement anyway so that would't change for a pool of 40-year old enlistees vs. a pool of young adults. We don't need everyone to serve to 20 years, our manning structures don't support that.

Response by SR Aj Jr made Nov 6 at 2018 12:23 PM

2018-11-06T12:23:15-05:00

I think prior enlisted is higher (42) with waivers. I think though if anyone can pass the Physical and MEPS and they want do it as an older person let them in!!!

Response by SPC Hosea Hudson made Nov 10 at 2018 6:10 AM

2018-11-10T06:10:44-05:00

Raise

Response by LCpl Michael Cappello made Nov 11 at 2018 9:19 PM

2018-11-11T21:19:03-05:00

Considering the sad state of our youth today, I believe we may need to increase the cut off age. Let's face it. Kids nowadays (just leaving high school or in college) are a sad bunch. they would make Pvt. Pyle (Full Metal Jacket) look like a college graduate. Actually, most college graduates today make Pyle look like a rocket scientist. Frankly, I am surprised they haven't forced my beloved Corps to install "Cry Closets" in boot camp.

Response by LCpl Michael Cappello made Nov 11 at 2018 9:19 PM

2018-11-11T21:19:23-05:00