UnReserved - ROA's Blog
Blog Home All Blogs

GRASSROOTS: Effecting ROA Policy Change

Posted By Reserve Officers Association, Friday, November 1, 2013
Updated: Friday, May 13, 2016

By CAPT Marshall A. Hanson, USNR (Ret.) 

“The general advocacy policies of the Association shall be established by adoption of resolutions as mandates by the National Convention, the National Council or the Executive Committee.” ROA Constitution, Article A-6 – Policy.

The resolution is the tool that an ROA member can use to establish or change ROA legislative or military policy. It is a formally written statement addressing a matter of great importance. The statement can be about a decision, a policy, or express opinion or intent. ROA uses the resolution as a means to convey the results of its deliberations to Congress, the Administration, the Pentagon or the general public.

Preparation Process. Start well in advance of a national convention or conference. Define the problem. Determine if in fact there is a problem. Next ask if the problem is of national interest, or of only local or personal concern. Then determine if a resolution is needed to solve the problem. Then research the problem. Gather the documentation to support your proposed resolution. Drafting the Resolution

A resolution covers just one subject. Resolutions must be concisely written, using the following format:

TITLE: CENTERED, BOLDED IN CAPS

WHEREAS, the "WHEREAS" paragraph(s) set forth the argument by giving relevant supporting facts both about the issue, why the Reserve Officers Association (ROA) should relate to that subject, and why the Resolving Clause is needed; WHEREAS, each preamble paragraph will state a separate clarification with five “WHEREAS” paragraphs as a suggested maximum; and

WHEREAS, both the "WHEREAS" and the "NOW, THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED THAT" phrases are in bold and all caps; and

WHEREAS, all acronyms (such as ROA) should be spelled out the first time used and abbreviated thereafter, except in the resolved clauses; and

WHEREAS, the last word of the paragraph should be followed by a semi-colon and then the word "and" in the second and each succeeding, and the last "WHEREAS" paragraph should end with a semi-colon but no "and";

NOW, THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED, that the Reserve Officers Association of the United States, chartered by Congress, urges Congress, DoD or other government agencies to take a specific action as outlined in this and (if necessary) following paragraphs, or state what policy will be instituted; and that the end of the paragraph should be followed by a semi-colon and the word; and

BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED THAT, if a separate related action be need to be suggested by the ROA that it is included in a separate resolved clause; and

BE IT FINALLY RESOLVED THAT, all resolutions must be typed, single or double spaced, on 8 1/2 x 11 inch paper and should be no longer than one page, one side in length and type size must be no smaller than 10 point with the final “resolved” paragraph ending with a period.

Submitted by Name, member #, chapter

Endorsed by: Department President or Secretary, dated.

Examples of Resolutions can be found here.

Submitted Resolutions require ROA Department approval. Supporting documentation should be attached to the resolution. It should be delivered with an electronic copy to ROA Headquarters, Attn: Legislative Director, One Constitution Ave. NE, Washington, D.C. 20002, or mhanson@roa.org by mail or electronics, at least 15 days before the national business meeting at which it is to be considered, unless deemed "time sensitive" by ROA’s President. Resolutions are due by February 19, 2014 for consideration by the National Committee meeting.

This post has not been tagged.

PermalinkComments (0)
 

Dollars and Sense

Posted By Reserve Officers Association, Thursday, October 31, 2013
Updated: Friday, May 13, 2016

ROA urges MCRMC to consider the cost benefits of the Reserve Component

By Jenny Swigoda

As members of the Military Compensation and Retirement Modernization Commission are conducting a review of our military’s pay and retirement systems, ROA has been busy on your behalf. Positioning ourselves at the forefront of the discussion and ensuring the voices of Reserve Component members are heard loud and clear. 

On Wednesday, Nov. 13 ROA Executive Director Major General Andrew B. Davis, USMC (Ret.), offered testimony to the commission issuing a clear and resounding imperative to remember the unique service and unprecedented sacrifice of our nation’s 1.1 million Citizen Warriors. General Davis’ remarks served to illuminate the unique capabilities and efficiencies of the RC that all too often go overlooked in times of fiscal constraint.

Combined with Davis' oral testimony, ROA's written statement for the record detailed the unique capabilities and efficiencies of the RC by highlighting three often-misconstrued elements of Reserve compensation; drill pay, Reserve retirement and TRICARE benefits.

On these issues, ROA presented three primary positions to the commissioners

  1. Retain the current system of Reserve Compensation as outlined above.
  2. Reject changes to Reserve retirement outlined by the QRMC which actually reduce the benefit by 30 percent.  
  3. Adopt a seamless TriCare program covering all phases of the Reservist's service continuum would benefit the Reservist and ultimately cost the nation less in administrative expense.

“At a time when the Pentagon and Congress are examining our nation’s security, it would be incorrect to discount the Reserve Components’ abilities and cost efficiencies. Instead, these part-time warriors provide a cost savings solution and an area to retain competencies for missions not directly embodied in the administration’s strategic policy, Sustaining U.S. Global Leadership: Priorities for a 21st Century Defense,” MajGen Davis stated.

Drawing direct comparisons to active duty compensation, Davis highlighted the existing equity in a system ROA insists need not be tampered with.

“The Active Force gets paid for 360 days while working about 224 when you subtract weekends, personal leave and federal holidays. Dividing 360 by 224 you get a ratio of 1.6 days paid to 1 day worked for the Active Duty. The Reserve Force is paid for 63 days, 48 drills and 15 days annual training. They work 39, 24 drill days and 15 AT. That results in a ratio of 1.6 days worked for one days’ pay,” said MajGen Davis.

Although we are currently at a time of drawing down from a decade-long war, this is no time to pull back on our efforts to keep our nation secure. MajGen Davis summed up the shift and urged the commission to keep in mind the unique skills that members of the Reserve Component bring to the total force.

“During the last two decades, we have gone from a strategic Reserve Force to a vital operational force. Acquired military skills are perishable and we can ill afford to lose trained, seasoned combat professionals because of inadequate compensation.”

Voice your opinion directly to the commission. The MCRMC is seeking feedback directly from service members and ROA needs you to add your voice to the fight.
 

This post has not been tagged.

PermalinkComments (0)
 

DOD’s Top Doctor Calls Military Medicine a Joint Force

Posted By Reserve Officers Association, Wednesday, October 30, 2013
Updated: Friday, May 13, 2016

Terri Cronk Moon

As the second of two wars winds down in Afghanistan, today’s military health care has become an efficient joint force of active duty and reserve components, the Defense Department’s top health affairs official said here today at the Reserve Officers Association’s National Security Symposium.

Addressing reservists in the symposium’s medical seminar, Dr. Jonathan Woodson, assistant secretary of defense for health affairs and director of TRICARE Management Activity, told the audience he’s grateful for their collective work during the last 12 years in the Iraq and Afghanistan wars.

Medical reservists are talent-rich, available, proven to respond when called up, and do whatever needs to be done to accomplish the mission, he said.

The U.S. military medical system has no equal in the world, Woodson noted, adding that the active and reserve component force is prepared to work together as partners with NATO and other countries to respond to natural disasters and acts of terrorism.

After every major war, he emphasized, there’s a resetting and retooling on organizational strategy.
In the last 12 years, DOD has “thought differently,” especially in medicine as it became a joint and international force that produced medical standards, Woodson added. “Now, as we complete operations in Afghanistan, we have to figure out how to codify that … for the future,” he said. We’re working diligently with the services to define and develop what the future of military medicine looks like, and make it better and stronger.”

It’s clear it’s going to be very impressive and very relevant, Woodson said. “The services are … defining skills and knowledge and [identifying] the people who are the backbone of what we do,” he added.

As U.S. military troop strength downsizes from the war in Afghanistan, DOD is considering the proper balance between active-duty service members and reservists, and to optimize medical force readiness, Woodson said. Yet, while U.S. military medicine is the best in the world, some realities must be dealt with, he told the audience.

“We have to make sure that greater society understands the added value that we bring to the defense of this nation,” Woodson said. “Medicine, however, is expensive; there’s no doubt about it.”
Because of that, military medicine programs must be responsible and use systems that are effective and efficient for the future, he said. And with the collaboration among the services, medical methods and approaches will no longer be “service-unique.”

While military medicine looks at how to better standardize and integrate health care delivery at the local level, Woodson described a “signature change” regarding the magnitude of the changes in military medicine.

“On Oct. 1, we’re standing up the Defense Health Agency, which represents [DOD’s] interservice, joint administrative structure,” he said. The new agency will operate and oversee shared services, which will affect nearly all aspects of military medicine -- policy, research and development, medical logistics, health information technology, education and training, the management of TRICARE and its pharmacy programs, and the design and construction of medical facilities.

Woodson also emphasized the role of leadership to properly defend the nation. DOD’s top doctor said the department wants to hone the experiences of the last 12 years and what it takes to mobilize reservists and active duty, and return them to their communities.

“It’s important for us to cull those lessons learned, … the policies, programs and procedures, … so all of you effectively serve this nation,” he told the reservists. “The job could not have been done without you. You have become indispensable. Thank you for your courage, patriotism and sacrifice.”

This article originally appeared on defense.gov via the American Forces Press Service.

This post has not been tagged.

PermalinkComments (0)
 

Levin: Corporate Tax Reform Could Help Void Sequester Cuts

Posted By Reserve Officers Association, Wednesday, October 30, 2013
Updated: Friday, May 13, 2016

John T. Bennett

Sen. Carl Levin on Friday revealed he is working with a senior Republican on a plan to close corporate tax loopholes, aiming to find up to $100 billion for a sequestration-addressing fiscal package.

The Michigan Democrat said he and Sen. John McCain, R-Ariz., are examining ways to prevent firms from directing billions in revenues to offshore tax havens, dollars the bipartisan duo believes should be taxed by Washington.

Levin wants any tax revenue generated by closing loopholes to be part of the kind of $1 trillion “grand bargain” needed to turn off sequestration.

“One key part of that package is ending some of the outrageous loopholes in our tax code, and using the revenue as part of a balanced deficit-reduction plan to replace sequestration,” Levin said at a conference here.

“For more than a decade, we have shown how international corporations exploit unintended loopholes in the tax law,” Levin said. “We estimate that tax avoidance abuses cost the Treasury [Department] $100 billion a year or more.

“That money is one essential ingredient to the balanced deficit-reduction package we need to end sequestration,” he said. “It is unconscionable that we would allow large and highly profitable multinational companies to continue these tax avoidance schemes while sequestration denies the men and women who protect us the training and support they need.”

Levin and McCain have been studying the corporate loophole issue as part of their work as the chairman and ranking member of the Senate’s Permanent Subcommittee on Investigations.

GOP senators and White House officials have begun fragile talks about finally striking the grand bargain fiscal pact necessary to lessen or replace twin $450 billion cuts to planned national defense and domestic spending. But the sides remain far apart on key issues, lawmakers and insiders acknowledge.

Some longtime Washington budget analysts, like the Stimson Center’s Gordon Adams and Stan Collender of the Capital Gains and Games blog, say there are too many political and ideological hurdles to clear, making any kind of fiscal deal unlikely this year.

Levin said he remains hopeful a big deal can be reached. Lawmakers technically have until the new fiscal year begins Oct. 1 to address sequestration before another $50 billion cut to planned Pentagon spending kicks in.

“There are some Republicans in the Senate who, I believe, are willing to participate in a compromise approach to this budget problem we have,” he said, before highlighting one of the major obstacles to sending a Senate-approved deficit-reduction plan to the president for his signature.

“That’s less true in the House of Representatives, where the line has been drawn against any additional revenues,” said Levin, who also chairs the Senate Armed Services Committee, “including the types of revenues that I have described.

Conservative House Republicans, especially tea party members, are ideologically opposed to any Americans — even the most wealthy — sending another penny to Washington. That goes for some of the most pro-defense members.

“We raised taxes. We had a big tax increase in January,” House Armed Services Committee Chairman Rep. Buck McKeon, R-Calif., told Defense News last week. “Now, before we do any other further talk of more tax increases, we need to get back to what we all know is the real problem, and that is the mandatory spending.”

Levin, the White House and most Democrats in both chambers want what they long have called a “balanced approach” as the basis for a grand bargain. Such an approach would focus on more spending cuts, new revenue from tax hikes on the richest Americans and savings generated by reforming domestic entitlement programs.

“I’ve been working closely with Sen. McCain on this. He’s very interested in … ending those loopholes,” Levin said Friday. “I’m very hopeful that Sen. McCain and others will support a balanced approach. That could really break a logjam.”

The White House for months has conducted an on-again-off-again courtship with more than a dozen Senate Republicans who Obama administration officials believe will support a so-called balanced approach.

Senate Republicans with whom the president has met since March include McCain, Sens. Lindsey Graham of South Carolina, Kelly Ayotte of New Hampshire, Tom Coburn of Oklahoma, Bob Corker of Tennessee, Dan Coats of Indiana, Richard Burr of North Carolina, Mike Johanns of Nebraska, Pat Toomey of Pennsylvania, Ron Johnson of Wisconsin, John Hoeven of North Dakota and Saxby Chambliss of Georgia.

Levin, a veteran of the inside game of legislating, has picked a loophole-closing partner that many in Washington see as the single most important player in fiscal talks that will heat up when Congress returns after Labor Day.

Norm Ornstein of the American Enterprise Institute, in a column this week, used a “Star Wars” reference to underscore McCain’s importance.

“There is at least a chance that a deal could be forged in the Senate,” he wrote for The Atlantic. “To paraphrase Princess Leia, Obi-Wan McCain, you are our only hope.”

The way Ornstein sees it, if the White House can get McCain to sign onto a grand bargain, he’ll bring along the support of his “Rat Pack.”

In addition to the GOP senators with whom Obama has dined or golfed this year, Ornstein says fiscal watchers can “add institutionalist Susan Collins of Maine” who he says is “now furious with” Senate Minority Leader Mitch McConnell, R-Ky., “for actively undermining her after she worked overtime to craft a bipartisan transportation bill.”

Ornstein says McCain’s “Rat Pack” likely would include GOP Sen. Lisa Murkowski of Alaska — “more independent after her near-political death experience in the Senate primary in the last cycle.” Ornstein also labels these GOP senators as gettable: Roy Blunt of Missouri, Johnny Isakson of Georgia and Mark Kirk of Illinois.

“Together,” Ornstein wrote, “they could bump the numbers in the Senate for a deal to break the impasse close to the magic 70 that would force the House to act.”

This article originally appeared on Defensenews.com

This post has not been tagged.

PermalinkComments (0)
 

Government Funding and Its Impact on National Security

Posted By Reserve Officers Association, Wednesday, October 30, 2013
Updated: Friday, May 13, 2016

By Bob Feidler

Funding for the federal government must be approved prior to Oct. 1, or there is a risk of a partial government shutdown. It is not likely to have a major impact on national security – but there are some unanswered questions. Currently the House has passed a Continuing Resolution (CR) funding the government thru Dec. 15; the Senate is expected to pass a CR Sept. 25 that would fund the government thru about mid-November. However, as a result of a provision added by the House defunding the Affordable Health Care Act (Obamacare), if and when the bodies can resolve their differences is uncertain.  

The size of the federal workforce, including civilians, postal service employees and active-duty service members, is approximately 4.1 million. Roughly 800,000 federal civilian employees are in danger of being furloughed. However, most federal workers would continue to work because the government considers them “essential” workers. About 1.4 million active duty military personnel and about 1.3 million civilian workers are exempt from furloughs in the event of a government shutdown because they have jobs in defense, health care or other areas of national security and/or emergency-related fields. Additionally, the postal service does not depend on annual congressional appropriations so they are not in danger.

Political appointees, the president, the vice president, lawmakers and certain legislative staff also are not subject to furlough. Social security and veterans benefits are likely to continue substantially undisturbed. 

It is not clear how the Reserve Components will be treated but guidance from the Pentagon is expected by the end of this week. It is likely that drilling reservists will report as normal during the first weekend of the month, however, for a variety of reasons, and they will likely ultimately be paid although this might be delayed. The status of DoD civilians to include Mil Techs is uncertain at this time although many DoD civilians will fall within exempt categories. It is likely that retirees will continue to receive their retirement checks without substantial interruption.

This post has not been tagged.

PermalinkComments (0)
 

A Step Back Into The Future

Posted By Reserve Officers Association, Wednesday, October 30, 2013
Updated: Friday, May 20, 2016

To achieve $50 billion in DoD savings in Fiscal Year 2015 (FY15), the Stimson Center proposed 27 recommendations including Pentagon management reforms, changes to force structure, and reduced modernization costs, including changes to Reserve Component (RC) missions and retiree benefits.

On September 24, 2013, the Stimson Center released its report, Strategic Agility: Strong National Defense for Today’s Global andFiscal Realities. The Washington, D.C.-based think tank asserts that their “strategy would protect U.S. interests even at much lower levels of spending.” The nonpartisan institution recommended the $50 billion in savings for FY15, claiming that such cuts would not “gut operation capability.”

ROA attended the public release of the report, but left with the feeling that Stimson’s guidance mirrored recommendations of the past, and that some of the military savings being claimed by the organization were efficiency dollars that have already been taken by the Pentagon.

For the RC, the report was both good and bad news. Stimson recommended mirror ROA’s position of maintaining the strategic depth of the Reserve and Guard, and actually increasing the size of the Reserve Component by putting weapons and combat veterans into the RC. But the kicker is that the center suggested that the RC return to its traditional role in domestic emergencies and as the nation’s strategic reserve for foreign wars. In doing so, the nonprofit suggested that they can keep the capability but “reduce the funding levels for the Guard and Reserve somewhat.”

The report strongly suggested that by avoiding entry into protracted ground wars saving can occur by avoiding entry into protracted ground wars. This permits deeper cuts into the Army force structure to 450,000; and a reduction in Marine Corps end-strength to 160,000. The Army and Marine Reserves and Army National Guard would be the hedge against a possible protracted war. Stimson suggests that this scenario would permit time to train Reservists to needed readiness levels once they are mobilized.

As for the 1,100 fighter aircraft in the Air Force, Stimson recommended a redistribution in light of a waning need for large-scale operations. Stimson proposes a scalable and surge ready force with increased fighter capability in the Reserve would adequately support contingency operations as they arise. The report suggested that 500 operational high-end fights be retained by the Active Component, as well as an additional 250 F-16s for training and operation contingencies. The remaining 350 vintage F-16 aircraft would be transferred to the Reserve Component as a surge capability.

The report also suggested cuts to personnel at the Pentagon that could affect 50,000 civilian employees. Reforming military retirement, increasing health benefit fees, and eliminating government appropriations to the commissaries and post exchanges are other points of interest in the report. Stimson calculated that by reducing benefits, the Pentagon can save $8 billion in FY15.

In total, to achieve the $50 billion in savings, the Stimson report makes 27 recommendations including management reforms, changes to force structure, and reduced modernization costs.

ROA will continue to advocate for its members and the Reserve Components. After 12 years of war, the operational reserve will not be put back on the shelf, nor will promised deferred benefits be changed or reduced.

This post has not been tagged.

PermalinkComments (0)
 

Here We Go Again

Posted By Reserve Officers Association, Wednesday, October 30, 2013
Updated: Friday, May 13, 2016

Calls for Tricare Restrictions Sound all too Familiar

CAPT Marshall Hanson, USN (Ret)

While Charles Lane included facts in his March 25 Op-Ed entitled Tricare the Untouchable, his information is a bit dated. That which was published echoes past Pentagon press release that have been made over the last three years, which have spawned dozens of columns nearly identical to Mr. Lane’s, parroting the need to raise TRICARE fees for military retirees.

For the past three years, the Pentagon has attacked the level of TRICARE fees paid by TRICARE retirees, with the Department of Defense (DoD) claiming that these individuals are consuming “10 percent of the budget.” This press campaign is always a pre-curser to the President’s budget that will again ask for TRICARE fee increases once. The Reserve Officer Association strongly opposes any recommended increases, because the administration and the Pentagon want military retirees to carry an unjustified portion of the military healthcare.

Over eleven years of war have caused health care costs to sky rocket, as the Pentagon cares for an all-volunteer force, their families, and wounded warriors, as well a military retirees. Because of the demands on military health facilities, many retirees could no longer be treated on military bases, but were required by DoD to seek treatment from civilian health professionals. Retirees shouldn’t be the scapegoat for the $53 billion health program.

Active duty members get free health care, as they should. Their families don’t pay co-payments or enrollment fees on medical treatment. Once retired, members who have served honorably in the past are then expected to pickup a share of their TRICARE costs. DoD leadership complains this is too little.

Military health care costs have gone up for numerous reasons to include:

  • Many new patients who are anxious children because a parent has been away at war.
  • The number of TRICARE beneficiaries has increased to 9.6 million.
    • Including increase numbers authorized by Congress to active duty Army and Marine Corps
    • Reserve and Guard members, with over 875,000 mobilizations. Unlike active duty, Reserve Component members pay a premium for their health care when not deployed.
  • A shift from hospitalization and surgery to maintenance prescriptions.

DoD officials really don’t know how their money is being spent. Former Secretary of Defense Robert Gates admitted as much, with the Pentagon agreeing to an auditable financial statement before 2017. Unfortunately, this has led to inconsistency in details of cost.

At a House Armed Services hearing last year Dr. Jonathan Woodson, assistant secretary of defense for health affairs claimed that the retiree costs would add $13 billion over the next five years to the defense budget, causing cuts to active duty end strength by 30,000 to 50,000 more troops. This exaggeration illustrates how badly DoD covets benefit dollars being spent on retirees.

In 2011, Robert Hale, then the Pentagon’s Chief Financial officer told Congress that the administration’s health plan would save at least $3.2 billion between 2012 and 2016. Either military health care costs are coming down, or the Pentagon has trouble estimating its actual costs.

In a Government Accountability Office (GAO) report it was found that DoD was over budget by $722 million dollars in Fiscal Year 2010, and $1.36 billion dollars in FY 2011.

In 2012, the Pentagon asked for another excess of $708 million from Health Care to be reprogrammed to other non-health programs. As Walter Pincus wrote in an 8-7-2012 Washington Post Article, “one recent reprogramming request would take $708 million that it did not require this year for private sector health care under the Pentagon’s Tricare system and use it on other programs.”

Over the last three years, the Pentagon has highlighted almost a $2.9 billion excess in the military health system, while claiming a $3.2 billion shortfall. It is obvious that the Administration and the Pentagon is asking Congress to “tax” by military retirees through higher TRICARE fees in order to spend health care dollars. Columnists like Mr. Lane should not issue knew-jerk responses to DoD press releases.

Congress hasn’t been impressed, taking the authority to set TRICARE fees away from the Pentagon over the last few years.

In what has become an annual battle between advocacy groups and the Pentagon, Congress acts as a referee who tallies up the score, and determines the final outcome.

This post has not been tagged.

PermalinkComments (0)
 

ROA Executive Director Provides Unique Voice For Reserves During Sub-Committee Meeting

Posted By Reserve Officers Association, Wednesday, October 30, 2013
Updated: Friday, May 13, 2016

Jenny Swigoda

On Wednesday, June 26, Major General Andrew Davis delivered testimony on behalf of Reserve officers before a subcommittee of the House Veterans’ Affairs Committee. As the sole representative of a Reserve organization, Davis presented support for several pending legislative bills while offering the unique perspective of citizen warriors.

The sub-committee heard testimonies from three panels regarding the specific needs of veterans, their families and soldiers currently serving overseas. Panelists included representatives from the Department of Veterans Affairs, the Department of Defense, Veterans of Foreign Wars of the U.S. and the American Legion. 

Davis spoke on proposed legislation which would further support the families of fallen soldiers from foreclosure; provide educational opportunities for soldiers after deployment; recognition of soldiers as “non-traditional” students; expansion of the Marine Gunnery Sergeant John David Fry scholarship and a bill that would provide service members with civilian credentialing opportunities. 

Davis emphasized the importance of helping service members transition into civilian life by providing them with certification and educational opportunities when they return from deployment.

“Due to stealth discrimination and employers concerns about the mobilization of a peacetime operational Reserve, unemployment for 18 to 24-year-old Reserve and Guard members is triple the unemployment rate for non-affiliated veterans,” said Davis.

ROA continues to provide a voice for the thousands of men and women Reserve members in the halls of Congress.

For more information on ROA or how to become a member, please visit here.

This post has not been tagged.

PermalinkComments (0)
 

ROA Briefs RFPB On Strategies, Policies And Programs For A Stronger Reserve

Posted By Reserve Officers Association, Wednesday, October 30, 2013
Updated: Friday, May 13, 2016

Bob Feidler

On Tuesday, July 16, ROA Executive Director Major General Andrew Davis, USMC (Ret) briefed the senior policy board at the Pentagon on strategies, policies and programs that ROA would endorse to ensure a strong and relevant Reserve Component for the future. 

In his briefing to the Reserve Forces Policy Board (RFPB), Davis suggested that key items relative to the RC included: continuing the RC as an operational - as opposed to strategic - Reserve; ensuring a balanced force mix that is affordable; and ensuring that the voice of the RC is heard in various strategic forums that will drive the future of our military and national security. These forums include the upcoming Quadrennial Defense Review, which is due in 2014, the compensation modernization commission dealing with pay and retirement benefits for the military, and a variety of other commissions now at work such as the commission to review the Air Force. MajGen Davis also called for a separate commission to periodically review the RCs and their role in our national security.

Executive Director Davis expressed ROA's full support for the RFPB's report which quantified the cost efficiency of the RCs. The report found that the relative costs of the RC to be about one third less expensive than the Active Component when fully burdened life cycle costs were addressed. Davis pointed out that Reservists should receive the same joint educational credit for completion of senior service schools in non-resident status as resident students currently receive.

"Since they must complete the same course work with the same standards as resident students, they should receive equal credit," said Davis.

Davis concluded his briefing with a suggestion that the RFPB consider creating an entirely new Reserve Component that would be made up of true subject matter specialists in high-demand, low-density, high expertise fields that are not normally found in the military. These fields may include positions such as macro-economic advisor, finance or cyber specialists.

This post has not been tagged.

PermalinkComments (0)
 

House Passes Bill To Fund Inactive-Duty Training Of Reserve Component, Headed To Senate

Posted By Reserve Officers Association, Wednesday, October 30, 2013
Updated: Friday, May 13, 2016

Q: Will I get paid while the government is shut down?

A: The short answer is under a recently passed law active duty service members (including reserve components on annual training) will get paid, but inactive duty members (including reserve components on weekend drill training) will not.

Congress passed H.R.3210 “Pay Our Military Act”, on Oct. 1, authorizes service members on “active service” to be paid during the government shutdown. The act provides that:

(a) In General- There are hereby appropriated for fiscal year 2014, out of any money in the Treasury not otherwise appropriated, for any period during which interim or full-year appropriations for fiscal year 2014 are not in effect--

(1) such sums as are necessary to provide pay and allowances to members of the Armed Forces (as defined in section 101(a)(4) of title 10, United States Code), including reserve components thereof, who perform active service during such period;[underline included by ROA]

Active service includes active duty and full time National Guard duty. It is important to note that active duty is different from "active status. Active status includes any member of the reserve component not on an inactive status list or in the Retired Reserve. Active duty applies to reservists on full-time active duty (including annual training, but not weekend drill periods). Full time National Guard duty is any training or other duty, other than inactive duty (which includes weekend drill periods), during which the Guardsman rates pay from the federal government.

The Army and Navy have put out policy outlines before the law was passed, but the services will still determine who will be paid, when.  ROA is providing feed back to the offices of Reserve Chiefs, but service leaders are the final determiners of how money will be allocated.  Bottom line is individual Reserve our guard members who have annual training (AT),  active duty for training orders (ADT),  or Active Duty for Special Work (ADSW or ADOS) orders that start Oct. 1 or later should contact your gaining command or operational support (or training) officer to get confirmation.


UPDATE:

On Tuesday, the House introduced and passed, H.R. 370. The new bill, now up for consideration in the Senate, provides funding for continuing several government functions during the shutdown. Among them is the provision to fund inactive duty training (IADT) overlooked by the previously accepted H.R. 3210, Pay our Military Act.

From the H.R. 370: “providing for consideration of the bill (H.R. 3230) making continuing appropriations during a Government shutdown to provide pay and allowances to members of the reserve components of the Armed Forces who perform inactive-duty training during such period”

But don’t bank on passage, Senate leadership has stated that they are not interested in piecemeal legislation to partially end government shutdown.

This post has not been tagged.

PermalinkComments (0)
 
Page 8 of 9
 |<   <<   <  3  |  4  |  5  |  6  |  7  |  8  |  9