Page 3 of 4 FirstFirst 1234 LastLast
Results 21 to 30 of 33

Thread: Are civilian employers showing bias against National Guard and Reservists?

  1. #21
    Skweegee_guest
    Guest

    Re: Are civilian employers showing bias against National Guard and Reservists?

    Quote Originally Posted by gabby1369@sbcglobal.net_guest
    If your employer wanted you to waiver your USERRA rights in order to obtain the good job would you take it. If your were about to be deployed, walked in and told your employer this and was summarily fired. How would you feel. These are the War Stories I here at home. We have a standard of taking care of our service members. I could go on. There are good employers but there are bad ones too! The only way to help the service members is to speak up.
    Not sure if you are responding to my post but I agree with you. I guess the problem is that there are just about no limits to current law and many employers are being seriously hurt by the current use of the Guard and Reserve. Without any limits, what happens when a local police force is predominately made up of soldiers from the local unit that is mobilized? This is not unheard of as both the police and military recruit from the same pool. In this situation, why shouldn't there be limits to how many police officers can be in the Guard or Reserve to ensure that the entire force is not decimated when a unit is mobilized? If this happens, why not also protect the businessman whose business will suffer when he loses many of his employees. Maybe we should all be supportive and willing to bite the bullet to protect this nation. And we probably would if we only used the Guard and Reserve for wars that most would support as directly protecting this country. But when the Guard and Reserve is being used for conflicts that appear to have little bearing on this nation, then it is hard to muster that kind of support.

  2. #22
    gabby1369@sbcglobal.net_guest
    Guest

    Re: Are civilian employers showing bias against National Guard and Reservists?

    I was replying to your post and yes there always has to be a balance but that is where good law comes in. Good law can only be accomplished if those who are involved speak up. Since 1994 the USERRA Law has attempted the protect the service members. This present conflict, Bosnia and Gulf I has really put a strain of the Guard and Reserve. We need to protect the Guard and Reserve giving both good retention and recruitment. Having the fact that you could loose your outside job because you are a member of it is not a good idea.

  3. #23
    leftbehind_guest
    Guest

    Re: Are civilian employers showing bias against National Guard and Reservists?

    Quote Originally Posted by Skweegee_guest View Post
    Not sure if you are responding to my post but I agree with you. I guess the problem is that there are just about no limits to current law and many employers are being seriously hurt by the current use of the Guard and Reserve. Without any limits, what happens when a local police force is predominately made up of soldiers from the local unit that is mobilized? This is not unheard of as both the police and military recruit from the same pool. In this situation, why shouldn't there be limits to how many police officers can be in the Guard or Reserve to ensure that the entire force is not decimated when a unit is mobilized? If this happens, why not also protect the businessman whose business will suffer when he loses many of his employees. Maybe we should all be supportive and willing to bite the bullet to protect this nation. And we probably would if we only used the Guard and Reserve for wars that most would support as directly protecting this country. But when the Guard and Reserve is being used for conflicts that appear to have little bearing on this nation, then it is hard to muster that kind of support.
    Wow, did you listen to yourself when you put this down? If a person is in the Guard, he/she has no control as to where he/she will be deployed. An employer can't say, "If you fight for our country here, you'll have your job when you return, but if you fight Bush's political and selfish war in Iraq, I'll have to replace you.". Does that make sense to you?

    Furthermore, the chances of "many" employees leaving for the same deployment would not happen unless it is in an area where it is a large employer and the majority of the population is enlisted in the Guard. In that case, the corporation would be large enough to buck up and support the employees who had to go.

    The issue of the police force suffering may be a different matter since it is to protect citizens from harm, not to line someone's pockets.

    I'm sorry, but there is no good excuse to not hold a job for someone deployed. I would consider it an honor if I were an employer.

  4. #24
    gabby1369@sbcglobal.net_guest
    Guest

    Re: Are civilian employers showing bias against National Guard and Reservists?

    In the March 10th article in the Cleveland Plain Dearler "Jobs: Casualties of War" by Brian Albrecht talked about this subject.
    http://www.cleveland.com/plaindealer...840.xml&coll=2

    I have had the honor to chat to two more service members who are going over to Iraq. Both are SeaBees. One notified his employer of his impending deployment and the employer gave him a going away gift by terminating him within two hours of notification.

    The other was a school teacher within an Ohio School System that because of his deployment will not be getting his tenure yet there is a Warrior to Teacher Program in Ohio. The Petty Officer 1st Class is 1 or two credits away from his Masters degree.

    http://www.userraproject.org

  5. #25
    Junior Member
    Join Date
    Mar 2008
    Posts
    1
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)

    Re: Are civilian employers showing bias against National Guard and Reservists?

    I have been in the Army National Guard for six years with one deployment under my bellt. I am currently finishing up the ROTC program at the college I attend - and I certainly do appreciate the benefits I have recieved from Uncle Sam for this cause.

    However, I am currently trying to find post-college employment in the private sector, and it is absolutely ridiculous. I made the decision to be an Accounting major specifically because the career field is hot. And it is hot for most people - I was the elected president of my university's accounting club, and everyone that I have talked to who worked for me in that organization has found employment, and I've talked to approximately 7 of the 12 who were on the staff during my tenure. I have a 3.5 GPA and heapfuls of more experience than my peers. During interviews (which aren't hard for me to get), I have always been asked how much longer I am contracted to the Guard. After telling one employer "6 years", his reply was "wow, that is a long committment". Now I'm interviewing for positions which start at about $10,000/year less than the standard CPA (Certified Public Accountant) candidates out of college are offered.

    I conciously worked harded and volunteered more during college in order to mitigate the hindrance I assumed would happen due to my committment to the ARNG. Clearly, it was either not enough, or it just did not matter.

    If the last two jobs I have interviewed for turn me down, I am going to actively seek to be released from the ARNG in order to finish up my non-IRR committment in 3 years instead of 6.

  6. #26
    ringjamesa
    Guest

    Re: Are civilian employers showing bias against National Guard and Reservists?

    Quote Originally Posted by Skweegee_guest View Post
    Not sure if you are responding to my post but I agree with you. I guess the problem is that there are just about no limits to current law and many employers are being seriously hurt by the current use of the Guard and Reserve. Without any limits, what happens when a local police force is predominately made up of soldiers from the local unit that is mobilized? This is not unheard of as both the police and military recruit from the same pool. In this situation, why shouldn't there be limits to how many police officers can be in the Guard or Reserve to ensure that the entire force is not decimated when a unit is mobilized? If this happens, why not also protect the businessman whose business will suffer when he loses many of his employees. Maybe we should all be supportive and willing to bite the bullet to protect this nation. And we probably would if we only used the Guard and Reserve for wars that most would support as directly protecting this country. But when the Guard and Reserve is being used for conflicts that appear to have little bearing on this nation, then it is hard to muster that kind of support.
    Actually, there are limits. There are limits on how long you are covered, documentation you must provide, etc.. Also the Guard isn't covered by the Federal law at all for state activations (most states have state laws to protect thier jobs).

  7. #27
    Junior Member
    Join Date
    Sep 2008
    Posts
    1
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)

    Re: Are civilian employers showing bias against National Guard and Reservists?

    I am a high school teacher when I am not playing AF. I've been activated and volunteered for multiple deployments. I got a lot of resentment from my human resources office upon my first activation, but when the employer figured out that USSERA was going to be in their face, that all but stopped. However, when trying to secure a new teaching position within a different subject area even at the same school, I have met resistance and of course I "know" why. There is not much I can do about it since it would be very hard to prove such, but it is aggravating. It makes me want to keep volunteering for deployments out of spite, especially when the Sec Def has printed on all of my orders that OIF and OEF do not count towards any of the limitations(5 years cumulative time away) placed on reserve service.

  8. #28
    bill_fogarty
    Guest

    Re: Are civilian employers showing bias against National Guard and Reservists?

    Quote Originally Posted by BUSAMASTER View Post
    I am a high school teacher when I am not playing AF. I've been activated and volunteered for multiple deployments. I got a lot of resentment from my human resources office upon my first activation, but when the employer figured out that USSERA was going to be in their face, that all but stopped. However, when trying to secure a new teaching position within a different subject area even at the same school, I have met resistance and of course I "know" why. There is not much I can do about it since it would be very hard to prove such, but it is aggravating. It makes me want to keep volunteering for deployments out of spite, especially when the Sec Def has printed on all of my orders that OIF and OEF do not count towards any of the limitations(5 years cumulative time away) placed on reserve service.
    Unfortunately, many more NG and reservists will see what you describe. Especially with the jobs market in the pits, every employer (government, schools, corporations, and especially small businesses) will be scrutinizing very carefully who they hire or who they keep. The core issue is we have a reserve force and a National Guard force which was never intended to be deployed except in a WWII type scenario. What they are doing now is multiple tours to pick up the optemp of Active Duty forces that do not have the manpower available.

    Sure you get POTUS or SecDef make some public statements, but it is all smoke n' mirrors. There was no update on the USERRA of any significance to support the change of role of reservists from strategic reserve to operating reserve. And likewise, no actions have been started by Bush or Congress in aligning national policy and regulations with this change in manpower sourcing.

    In short, employers are barely staying afloat and will likely not hire a reservist over a non-reservist. Why would I, as a small-business owner, even hire a reservist who will be gone 12 months out of every 3 years? That is an immense cost of retraining and hiring a temp to fill that spot. I can't really blame the employers in this regard.

    Until SecDef, Congress, and Administration solves the manpower issues in the military (active and reserve and NG), we will all see more and more reservists and NGs out of work.

    As someone who has served both active duty and reserve, here is my advice to reservists and NG:
    (1) If you want to keep a career in the military, then it is best join active duty and stay in. Sure, you may deploy a lot, but you already do that with reserve and NG (and get none of the active duty benefits or pension).

    (2) If you want to keep a career in the civilian world, then it is bet to cut the ties and get out of military altogether. The bottom line is keeping a reserve career is no longer a viable option for those who want to maintain a civilian career along with raising a family.

  9. #29
    Junior Member
    Join Date
    Nov 2008
    Location
    Montreal, Canada
    Posts
    1
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)

    Re: Are civilian employers showing bias against National Guard and Reservists?

    I found this topic to be very interesting just liked to say that here in Canada you are more likely to be employed if you are or were a reservist than if you weren't because we are well known to work harder and more efficiently than civis in most cases, even the anti-army separatists here in the Province of Quebec employ us over a fellow separatist because they fear the army for what happened in the early 70's. Is there cases in the States where certain groups feel resentment against the army? (in Canada we had the Mohawk natives but many joined the army and now they are one of the many places soldiers are proud to be, the Quebecois nationalists or separatist feel resentment against the army but fear the army and doesn't act against it though they try their best politically.)

  10. #30
    Junior Member
    Join Date
    Mar 2009
    Posts
    2
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)

    Re: Are civilian employers showing bias against National Guard and Reservists?

    Really appreciate all this insight, everyone. One question remains, though: what about those who sign up? USERRA says that it protects the employment status of those who join the military as well, but I'm curious what experience anyone has with the practicalities of this. I am ready and willing to join the ARNG but I want to make sure I don't face significant retaliation at work and want to make sure I'm not leaving my employer in the lurch.

    What experience does anyone here have with joining the Guard or Reserves while having a civilian job? I'm preparing for ARNG, and attending State OCS thereafter. That's 8-9 weeks away from work, and with goals to be met and constant deadlines that's a big challenge. We just had a mother out on maternity leave for 3 months and while there was absolutely no resentment, it was like an eternity for us.

    Any insight would be much appreciated! How have employers reacted to this? How have you handled the initial conversation? Should I have a plan for all of my work goals and tasks, re-organized around my 9 week absence?

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •