AD/Reserves/NG

C

CM11

5-Year Member
Joined
Sep 15, 2013
Messages
34
I can, and have, looked up the differences in the missions between Active Duty, Reserves, and National Guard. I am interested in hearing people's personal perspectives, thoughts and ideas on their different missions. If you wouldn't mind taking a minute, and in your own words what do you feel the difference in their missions are. Thank you for your time.
 
I'm assuming you are referring to the active Army and it's reserve components.

In general, the active standing Army has the combat arms (trigger pullers like Infantry, Armor, Aviation, etc) and some of the support / medical units it needs to function in a large scale. The Army Reserve consists of (generally) support units (transportation, medical, Intel, MP, Quartermaster, Civil Affairs and whatnot). If there is a major conflict like the ones we have been in for the last 10-12 or so years, the USAR supplies much of the needed support to the combat brigades and divisions. The NG consists of both combat and support elements. They are managed at the state levels until the big red handle is pulled and they are activated by the President. The Army NG of each state (and territory), the Active Army and the US Army Reserve make up what we know as "The US Army".
 
Having been a member of all three components at one time in my life, this is not really a useful question. The "mission" of the Army is to fight and win the nations (ground) wars. No matter what component and what branch you are in, that is going to be your mission. If you are not actively involved in the fight, you will be training for that fight. Whether you accomplish that mission by waking up every day and putting on a uniform, or whether you do it one weekend a month and two weeks in the summer is the big difference. There is also the state component of the Guard force. You will swear allegiance to the Governor of your state, and you may play a role in things like disaster relief. Other than that, as an Officer your job will be to lead/manage your organization to accomplish the mission.
 
As a parent I have until recently had the incorrect idea that:

- Active Duty Army stands 24x7 in a deployed or preparing to deploy mode
- Army Reserves stand ready to mobilize when:
1) The US is involved in a declared war, AND
2) the active duty army is in need of additional war fighters
- The National Guard belongs to the State and doesn't deploy overseasy

What I am understanding from these and other posts is something much more complicated. That the Army Reserve can deploy not in time of war... is that correct? And that during time of declared war, the Reserves might spend as much time in the war zone as the regular Army. Is that correct?

I'm almost getting the feeling that Active Duty is like a Dr. doing his/her shift each day in a hospital Emergency Room, but that the Reserve component like a list of Doctors always on call and go into the ER a lot.... Is this close?

Or that the AD Army is like a school teacher, and the Reserve is like a Substitute Teacher who is always available and in fact in some years works amost as many days in the classroom as a full time teacher. Is this close?

If this is anywhere close to correct, wouldn't that cause employers to avoid hiring newly commissioned Reserve Officers, knowing there is a good chance that employee would be gone for anywhere from 25% to 75% of a year's operation? And if that is the case, wouldn't the Reserve officer have just as much war fighting responsibility, but possibly nor nearly as much income? I'm thinking that choosing Reserves could in fact be a really unstable, and possibly financially difficult, position to be in for a young officer.

Where would a parent get much more detailed information about these three components?
 
Last edited:
dunninla said:
As a parent I have until recently had the incorrect idea that:

- Active Duty Army stands 24x7 in a deployed or preparing to deploy mode
- Army Reserves stand ready to mobilize when:
1) The US is involved in a declared war, AND
2) the active duty army is in need of additional war fighters
- The National Guard belongs to the State and doesn't deploy overseasy

What I am understanding from these and other posts is something much more complicated. That the Army Reserve can deploy not in time of war... is that correct? And that during time of declared war, the Reserves might spend as much time in the war zone as the regular Army. Is that correct?

Where would a parent get much more detailed information about these three components?
Click to expand...

Actually- other than your point about the AD Army being a 24/7 operation, virtually none of the rest of that is correct. The Governing laws are Title10 USC 12301 , 12302 and 12304.
Basically: The Reserve Component of the US Army is composed of both the USAR and the various state Army National Guards. The Reserve Components can be called to Active duty in total by a declaration of War or National Emergency by the Congress. The President can call up to 1 Million men to AD from either of those components by a Preidential declaration of Emergency for up to 2 years without Congress taking action, and under the Presidential Selected Reserve Call up act can call up 200,000 to AD for a year again without Congressional action. They are all deployable when called to AD and during the last several years hundreds of thousands of USAR and Army National Guard Soldiers have deployed as units to Iraq and Afghanistan for as much as 15 months in theater (for example my wife had two such deployments for a total of 27 months in Afghanistan as her USAR Civil Affairs Brigade deployed to Afghanistan to run Provincial Reconstruction teams throughout the country)
The USAR ie.. the Army Reserve is mostly a Combat Support/ Combat Service support operation. USAR like USA troops are governed by Pose Comitatus restrictions so they are not used in domestic law enforcement roles or even disaster assistance unless requested by the state to the DoD and authorized by Presidential directive, while Army National Guard units can be used in that role when directed by the State Governor.
 
dunninla said:
As a parent I have until recently had the incorrect idea that:

- Active Duty Army stands 24x7 in a deployed or preparing to deploy mode
- Army Reserves stand ready to mobilize when:
1) The US is involved in a declared war, AND
2) the active duty army is in need of additional war fighters
- The National Guard belongs to the State and doesn't deploy overseasy

What I am understanding from these and other posts is something much more complicated. That the Army Reserve can deploy not in time of war... is that correct? And that during time of declared war, the Reserves might spend as much time in the war zone as the regular Army. Is that correct?

I'm almost getting the feeling that Active Duty is like a Dr. doing his/her shift each day in a hospital Emergency Room, but that the Reserve component like a list of Doctors always on call and go into the ER a lot.... Is this close?

Or that the AD Army is like a school teacher, and the Reserve is like a Substitute Teacher who is always available and in fact in some years works amost as many days in the classroom as a full time teacher. Is this close?

If this is anywhere close to correct, wouldn't that cause employers to avoid hiring newly commissioned Reserve Officers, knowing there is a good chance that employee would be gone for anywhere from 25% to 75% of a year's operation? And if that is the case, wouldn't the Reserve officer have just as much war fighting responsibility, but possibly nor nearly as much income? I'm thinking that choosing Reserves could in fact be a really unstable, and possibly financially difficult, position to be in for a young officer.

Where would a parent get much more detailed information about these three components?
Click to expand...

To add to Bruno's excellent explanation in answer to your other questions.... Yes, going Reserves or Guard can make it tough to land or keep a job. In theory there are laws to protect you from this and folks can file "discrimination" law suits etc. Also, when called up, there is supposed to be a job for you when you get back... maybe not the same job, but a comparable job. In practice, at least some folks had difficulties in these areas when repeatedly called up over the last 10 or more years. I think the vast majority were OK though.

Also, as I recall, and you may, even during Iraq I (Gulf War to drive Saddam out of Kuwait) massive numbers of Reserves and Guard were called up. These folks frequently lose the pay from their civilian jobs while deployed (depends on the company... some very large corporations often pay the difference). Makes it difficult on the family back home whose financial obligations were based on the assumption of the civilian pay. Nevertheless, that's what these selfless folk signed up for.
 
dunninla said:
If this is anywhere close to correct, wouldn't that cause employers to avoid hiring newly commissioned Reserve Officers, knowing there is a good chance that employee would be gone for anywhere from 25% to 75% of a year's operation? And if that is the case, wouldn't the Reserve officer have just as much war fighting responsibility, but possibly nor nearly as much income? I'm thinking that choosing Reserves could in fact be a really unstable, and possibly financially difficult, position to be in for a young officer.

Where would a parent get much more detailed information about these three components?
Click to expand...

Employers discriminating against newly commissioned Reserve officers would be illegal (of course they have to get caught).

On the flip side, if employers are smart they will consider hiring newly commissioned Reserve officers as chance of them going away is smaller and they should have more leadership skills.

Being a member of the Reserves is like getting the benefits of serving in the Army without some hardships (multiple PCSs, deployment, and etc) and maintaining a civilian career. It's not easy, but it can be managed.

Talking to current RC members will give you a better idea. I have been in a NG since 2001. I would say on average, I take off about 30 work days from my work for military duties. Might sound like a lot, but other than 2 weeks of annual training, 1 or 2 days here and there makes it manageable. I was probably below average, but only deployed once (OIF 2007-08) since I joined NG. Since I have a full time job, pay for my NG is a pretty nice supplement.
 
And then there are the reserve folks who want to be called up, sometimes for extended periods of time, while their federal positions CAN'T be filled. That was a fun "reality" of some reservists as I looked for a federal position.
 
LineInTheSand said:
And then there are the reserve folks who want to be called up, sometimes for extended periods of time, while their federal positions CAN'T be filled. That was a fun "reality" of some reservists as I looked for a federal position.
Click to expand...

Some reservists repeatedly volunteer for mobilization, knowing that the law protect their civilian jobs. The law doesn't care if a reservist volunteered or not. There is a five year limitation on an employee's military absence with the same employer, but war time service is excluded.

The reality is there is more to being activated as a reservist that just serving the country.
 
kinnem said:
dunninla said:
As a parent I have until recently had the incorrect idea that:

- Active Duty Army stands 24x7 in a deployed or preparing to deploy mode
- Army Reserves stand ready to mobilize when:
1) The US is involved in a declared war, AND
2) the active duty army is in need of additional war fighters
- The National Guard belongs to the State and doesn't deploy overseasy

What I am understanding from these and other posts is something much more complicated. That the Army Reserve can deploy not in time of war... is that correct? And that during time of declared war, the Reserves might spend as much time in the war zone as the regular Army. Is that correct?

I'm almost getting the feeling that Active Duty is like a Dr. doing his/her shift each day in a hospital Emergency Room, but that the Reserve component like a list of Doctors always on call and go into the ER a lot.... Is this close?

Or that the AD Army is like a school teacher, and the Reserve is like a Substitute Teacher who is always available and in fact in some years works amost as many days in the classroom as a full time teacher. Is this close?

If this is anywhere close to correct, wouldn't that cause employers to avoid hiring newly commissioned Reserve Officers, knowing there is a good chance that employee would be gone for anywhere from 25% to 75% of a year's operation? And if that is the case, wouldn't the Reserve officer have just as much war fighting responsibility, but possibly nor nearly as much income? I'm thinking that choosing Reserves could in fact be a really unstable, and possibly financially difficult, position to be in for a young officer.

Where would a parent get much more detailed information about these three components?
Click to expand...

To add to Bruno's excellent explanation in answer to your other questions.... Yes, going Reserves or Guard can make it tough to land or keep a job. In theory there are laws to protect you from this and folks can file "discrimination" law suits etc. Also, when called up, there is supposed to be a job for you when you get back... maybe not the same job, but a comparable job. In practice, at least some folks had difficulties in these areas when repeatedly called up over the last 10 or more years. I think the vast majority were OK though.

Also, as I recall, and you may, even during Iraq I (Gulf War to drive Saddam out of Kuwait) massive numbers of Reserves and Guard were called up. These folks frequently lose the pay from their civilian jobs while deployed (depends on the company... some very large corporations often pay the difference). Makes it difficult on the family back home whose financial obligations were based on the assumption of the civilian pay. Nevertheless, that's what these selfless folk signed up for.
Click to expand...
kinnem said:
dunninla said:
As a parent I have until recently had the incorrect idea that:

- Active Duty Army stands 24x7 in a deployed or preparing to deploy mode
- Army Reserves stand ready to mobilize when:
1) The US is involved in a declared war, AND
2) the active duty army is in need of additional war fighters
- The National Guard belongs to the State and doesn't deploy overseasy

What I am understanding from these and other posts is something much more complicated. That the Army Reserve can deploy not in time of war... is that correct? And that during time of declared war, the Reserves might spend as much time in the war zone as the regular Army. Is that correct?

I'm almost getting the feeling that Active Duty is like a Dr. doing his/her shift each day in a hospital Emergency Room, but that the Reserve component like a list of Doctors always on call and go into the ER a lot.... Is this close?

Or that the AD Army is like a school teacher, and the Reserve is like a Substitute Teacher who is always available and in fact in some years works amost as many days in the classroom as a full time teacher. Is this close?

If this is anywhere close to correct, wouldn't that cause employers to avoid hiring newly commissioned Reserve Officers, knowing there is a good chance that employee would be gone for anywhere from 25% to 75% of a year's operation? And if that is the case, wouldn't the Reserve officer have just as much war fighting responsibility, but possibly nor nearly as much income? I'm thinking that choosing Reserves could in fact be a really unstable, and possibly financially difficult, position to be in for a young officer.

Where would a parent get much more detailed information about these three components?
Click to expand...

To add to Bruno's excellent explanation in answer to your other questions.... Yes, going Reserves or Guard can make it tough to land or keep a job. In theory there are laws to protect you from this and folks can file "discrimination" law suits etc. Also, when called up, there is supposed to be a job for you when you get back... maybe not the same job, but a comparable job. In practice, at least some folks had difficulties in these areas when repeatedly called up over the last 10 or more years. I think the vast majority were OK though.

Also, as I recall, and you may, even during Iraq I (Gulf War to drive Saddam out of Kuwait) massive numbers of Reserves and Guard were called up. These folks frequently lose the pay from their civilian jobs while deployed (depends on the company... some very large corporations often pay the difference). Makes it difficult on the family back home whose financial obligations were based on the assumption of the civilian pay. Nevertheless, that's what these selfless folk signed up for.
Click to expand...
 
"These folks frequently lose the pay from their civilian jobs while deployed (depends on the company... some very large corporations often pay the difference). "

When adding housing and meal allowances to basic pay, only a minority of deployed Guard and Reserve members suffer a pay cut. Very few employers make up the difference in pay to those few who do suffer a pay cut. When factoring in tax free benefits such as food and housing, the pay for lower ranking enlisted is higher than the median income for that age group, and with possible exception of Engineering graduates, Office pay exceeds the median pay for college graduates.

During my time in the Guard, I noticed nearly everyone was either a full time student, a teacher, a government worker (state, local or federal) or someone working in a family owned business. Since the Iraq War deployments, quite a few government agencies aren't as supportive as they once were. It's going to get worse with the increased Annual Training time, and 3 and 4 day drills.

Anyone in Army ROTC with any doubts about qualifying for active duty needs to consider the negative effect that a reserve component commission can have on civilian employment.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top