Posted on 03/22/2005 3:56:04 AM PST by Flavius
WASHINGTON (Reuters) - The U.S. Army, stung by recruiting shortfalls caused by the Iraq (news - web sites) war, has raised the maximum age for new recruits for the part-time Army Reserve and National Guard by five years to 39, officials said on Monday.
The Army said the move, a three-year experiment, will add about 22 million people to the pool of those eligible to serve, from about 60 million now. Physical standards will not be relaxed for older recruits, who the Army said were valued for their maturity and patriotism.
The Pentagon (news - web sites) has relied heavily on part-time Army Reserve and Army National Guard soldiers summoned from civilian life to maintain troop levels in Iraq and Afghanistan (news - web sites). Roughly 45 percent of U.S. troops currently deployed for those wars are reservists.
At home, the all-volunteer Army has labored to coax potential recruits to volunteer for the Guard and Reserve as well as for active-duty, and to persuade current soldiers to re-enlist when their volunteer commitment ends.
Maj. Elizabeth Robbins, an Army spokeswoman, said the maximum enlistment age for the regular Army will remain 34. While congressional action was not needed to raise the age for the Guard and Reserve, Robbins said, Congress must approve any change for the active-duty force.
"Raising the maximum age for non-prior service enlistment expands the recruiting pool, provides motivated individuals an opportunity to serve, and strengthens the readiness of Reserve units," the Army said in a statement.
Air Force Lt. Col. Ellen Krenke, a Pentagon spokeswoman, said it was possible after the three-year test ends in September 2008 that the Pentagon may consider an enlistment age for Army reservists even older than 39.
RECRUITING GOALS
Recruiters say the Iraq war is making military service a harder sell, and the Army has added recruiters and financial incentives for enlistment.
The Army National Guard missed its recruiting goal for the 2004 fiscal year and trails its year-to-date 2005 targets. The Army Reserve missed January and February goals and is lagging its target for 2005. The regular Army missed its target for February and trails its annual goal.
"Obviously, this decision is being made partly in response to the personnel shortfalls caused by the war in Iraq," said defense analyst Loren Thompson of the Lexington Institute.
But he said U.S. life expectancy increased by 40 percent in the 20th century, adding, "The pressure of wartime has pushed the Army to make a change that may have been overdue anyway."
"Anecdotally, our recruiters have been telling us for years that we've had people who are otherwise qualified but over the age limit who have attempted to enlist," Robbins said. "There are physically fit, health-conscious individuals who can make a positive contribution to our national defense."
The Army said the policy applies to men and women, and older recruits must meet the same physical standards and pass the same medical examination as everyone else.
"Experience has shown that older recruits who can meet the physical demands of military service generally make excellent soldiers based on their maturity, motivation, loyalty and patriotism," the Army said.
Krenke said the change was first considered last fall and approved by the Pentagon last week. She said the Marines, Navy and Air Force had not requested a similar change.
The Army Reserve is made up of federal soldiers who can be mobilized from civilian life for active duty. National Guard soldiers also serve under the control of state governors for roles like disaster relief in their home states.
thank you SOOOO much for the link.
With no end in sight against the opponents we face, it seems the guard and reserves are not a good option for people as they are set up now.
Make much more sense to me to take instead really expand the marines and army.. and to seriously increase the pay.
In my mind army soldiers deployed should make like 200k a year. And 100k a year when at home. We seem to have no problem paying government bureaucrats, union workers, and consultants big bucks.. it shouldn't bea problem to pay our soldiers big money.
Right now we have about 550k active duty in marines and army.. if we had 1million with an average salary of 150k.. that would be 150 billion dollars a year. Our federal budget for 2005 is 2.6 trillion so it should not be a problem to find the money.
You have valid concerns and I understand that you are hesitant to jump right in.
I applaud your thought, to maybe enlist and that you will further study on the issues you mentioned.
One of my coworkers went to Iraq for a year and our employer was able to keep his position open,but I work for a big company and understand that a smaller company might not be able to do so.
Talk to your employer about it and see what he has to say on the issue.
You are welcome!
There were so many posters, wanting to have more info that I wanted to help!
Here is another link that might help!
http://www.military.com/NewsContent/0,13319,FL_age_032105,00.html?ESRC=army.nl
I was in the Guard for six years in NC. We were a Mechanized Infantry battalion. Honestly, the Guard differs so widely from unit to unit. If you're really interested, talk to a recruiter, or, better yet, find a Guard unit nearby that does something that sounds interesting and ask if you can tail 'em for a drill or two, see what it's like. Usually, they're happy to accomodate you.
Interesting. I wonder if that holds true w/officers? I went through Annapolis, and I've been a civilian for 10+ years, but I'd consider serving as an e-man in the Army if I didn't have to go through that basic bullsh*t all over again.
Thanks for the information---that sweetens the pot considerably.
You are welcome!
See posts#43 and #66 both links should have that info in it!
Glad to help a former soldier willing to rejoin!
God bless you and thanks for your prior service to our nation.
Sorry if I've been slow to respond to your note. I recently re-joined the reserves at age 40. Yes, your prior service (and rank) probably DO count for a lot, and the Guard and Reserve might love to talk with you if you're interested.
If I could help in any way, let me know any time.
Sorry if I've been slow to respond to your note. It's not likely that the Regular Army will raise their minimum enlistment age to 39 or 40. But you may know that those in the reserves can apply for full time duty in the "AGR" program, which is very similar to Regular Army active duty in most ways. So in a sense, the opportunity already exists. (Also, there are a few reserve units with so many opportunities for active duty schools and deployments that they are similar to active duty. I'm mainly thinking of USAR "Civil Affairs" units.) If I can help with any questions, let me know any time.
Guard and Reserve recruiters aren't laughing at many people these days. If you want to touch base with them one more time, this is a good time to do it. If you have good health and enough prior service, they'll probably take you -- if you want.
Sorry if I've been slow to respond to this thread. I recently re-joined at age 40. If I can help with any questions, let me know any time.
I can get answers to your questions if you want. Let me know and I'll send you a few links with info. (The short answer is that non-avaiation Warrant Officer may be a most realistic goal. But these days, there is flexibility.)
The Army's Engineers are the equivalent to the Navy's Seabees. (Actually, I think they prefer the title "Combat Engineers.") I could help you get more info if you wish. I recently re-joined the military at age 40.
My youngest brother is in the Guard right now (trying to go active duty later on) and will be deploying to Iraq later this year.
If you are interested, I could put you two together...
Any assistance will be appreciated...I am going to join, just need direction.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.