Army Reserve 24 Month Mobilization Deferment

[Retention NCO]

The U.S. Army Reserve is offering a 24 Month Mobilization Deferment to any soldier that transfers from the IRR to the Army Reserve. You will NOT be mobilized during this period. If you have 1-24 months left on your Statutory Obligation, you are guaranteed not to be mobilized with your Reserve unit.

You also have the option to have your Statutory Obligation decreased by half. If you have 12-36 months left on your contract, you would only have to serve a minimum of 12 months.

Contact me via e-mail for more information.

[neurorad21]

The U.S. Army Reserve is offering a 24 Month Mobilization Deferment to any soldier that transfers from the IRR to the Army Reserve. You will NOT be mobilized during this period. If you have 1-24 months left on your Statutory Obligation, you are guaranteed not to be mobilized with your Reserve unit.

You also have the option to have your Statutory Obligation decreased by half. If you have 12-36 months left on your contract, you would only have to serve a minimum of 12 months.

Contact me via e-mail for more information.

I was told this several times as I was separting, but it doesn't seem to make any sense. If I sign up and am pretty much "non-deployable" for 24 months, what good am I to the unit anyway?

If it sounds too good to be true, it probably isn't true.

[Civi08]

I still don't really understand this 24 month Mobilization Deferment that the army is wanting to sell. So many people in the army get lied to at one level or another at some point in their career. For the most part, people involved in the army system aren't as accountable as the public likes to think. This is why young soldiers feel that there are parts of the army that are lawless. Leaders don't always practice what they preach, and that makes soldiers of all ages not trust in their leadership.

Nobody can say it's the soldier's fault for feeling like he/she has been screwed over by the system. I do understand that people aren't perfect. This also means that the system can't be perfect. But the army does take advantage of this fact. Those in charge will manipulate people into believing in the sales pitch. Those who are what some people would call "lifers" will often say something about how the soldier should have read the contract better. That's a bunch of BS. Most of the people who are joining are still teenagers or are in their early twenties. They are not meant to read something at the college level. It is my belief that this is another form of exploitation. This isn't the case for every little thing about the army, but it is something that happens.

A more productive way to handle this as a recruiter, would probably be to put the contract out there for everyone to read. This would make it easier for everyone to read without someone distracting them by tossing another sales pitch at them. People would know what they are signing before hand, thus a smarter choice will have been made.

As of right now, I'm are sure that there is some sort "but if this happens" clause. Those things would mean that you really WILL BE DEPLOYED-AGAIN. That's really what it comes down to. Anyone who has been deployed at least once knows that they don't want to go back. And that has nothing to do with how much we love our country. Despite what some would like to believe, soldiers DO have political positions that influence the choices they make. Instead of twisting the facts, the contracts should be made public, on the web, so people can read them long and hard before they deploy again.

There is something that I found funny, and it was on the armytimes website. This one guy says, “Soldiers want three things. They want to be part of something bigger than they are, and that means they want to wear the uniform. They want to get paid. And they want to be trained. This is what we give them,”.
Now let me tell you something about that. That was garbage. Maybe if you were a soldier who stayed on the FOB (and didnt' get morared a lot) for your entire deployment you would have that attitude (that's usually E-7 and above). If you were part of the few who went out and did missions and had a crappy deployment (usually E-6 and below), you would probably never want to wear the uniform again. After all, who wants to go to Iraq to feel like they have to go out on mission with handcuffs on? That's how a lot of soldiers feel. They also feel that their country might not have their back like they're told.

Anyways, the point is this. Things aren't what they used to be. Once again, our country has sent our army to war, and has forced them to bring politics and the media with it. When will we learn that this doesn't work?

Don't hate my because I'm right. Even if the truth hurts, it's still the truth, and that's better than a lie.

[ringjamesa]

A more productive way to handle this as a recruiter, would probably be to put the contract out there for everyone to read. This would make it easier for everyone to read without someone distracting them by tossing another sales pitch at them. People would know what they are signing before hand, thus a smarter choice will have been made.


I am assuming you mean your enlistment contract? If so, it is out there for everyone to read;

http://www.dtic.mil/whs/directives/infomgt/forms/forminfo/forminfopage1.html

If you are referring to the 24 month deferrment-yeah I would get that in writing as well as well as that blurb about reducing your Obligation by half since the MSO is DoD not just Army so I don't know how they would waive it without kicking somone out (that is usually the only way someone is discharged prior to their MSO expiring-misconduct, citizenship, medical, dropping out of a service Academy, etc...).

[former31B]

I, too, was sold this 24 month stabilization when leaving active duty. From those I know who have actually done it, I'm told that there is still the stop-loss loophole and much pressure is put upon a soldier to stay in the unit after their obligation is up.

For example, if you sign this little deal for 12 months, stop-loss could be applied to you up to the day you are to final-out, just like active duty.

Even if that doesn't happen, the reasoning behind this policy is that it is easier to retain people in a unit than those already out. Once you are attending drill, you'll have the chain of command and peer-pressure urging you to re-up.

Furthermore, they are banking on the fact that most people that leave the Army are just sick of active duty and perhaps if given a taste of the reserves, might like it enough for the long-haul.

I guess the program isn't bad for those who don't mind the Army as a whole. For those who just want to be done with it all, I'm sticking to the IRR.

[bigdog]

The DA memorandum for the Implementation of the MOB deferment Dated 15 May 2007 states the following. Offering a deferment from involuntary mobilization for 24 months will provide predictability for families and allow adequate transitioning time for the soldiers...(para 3)

There is no "but if" clause as stated in another blog. ANY Retention and Transition office can pull this memo out along with the offical form you sign and hand this to ANY ONE in question of such a MEMO. You actually sign a new DA form 3540 with the MOB stab. statement on it. ( this is you method of fulfillment on your contract).there is no between the lines, just exactly what it is,a deferment from being mobilized.

The DA letter for MSO reduction is dated 29 sept 2006. Once again, see your transition office and they will show you . The purpose of it is to bring skilled soldiers out of the IRR and put them into a unit where there knowledge can be passed on. This is a good deal, you get out of the military early and they get a skilled soldier back to pass on what they know for the last year that they own you.

Both of the above are incentives to bring highly trained troops from the IRR to SELRES.