reserves-weekends and tours of duty

[mack333]

I know when in the reserves you have to report for work a couple of nights a week and on weekends.  I was wondering if during the year you have to report for a tour of duty for a certain lenght of time.  If so, does you full time job have to give you the time off?

Any info would be appreciated.

 

[Munner]

You usually prarade once a week and then have a weekend exercise once every couple months.

When you first join however you will have to take your BMQ - Basic Mliitary Qualification, SQ - Soldier Qualification and BIQ - Basic Infantry Qualification (assuming you are going infantry)

Depending on when you join they may run all three courses int eh summer. Currently, I'm doing my BMQ on weekends which consists of about 2 weekends on, 1 weekend off - give or take a weekend here and there. In the summer I will be gone for close to two months doing my SQ and BIQ.

They provide you with some handouts you can give your employer to help them explain the commitment that you've made and why they(your current employer) should give you the time off, but they don't have to if they don't want to.

 

[Dissident]

There is currently no law stopping your employer from firing you because of your reserve commitment.

Your primary job takes precedence over your reserve one, but before joining you should be sure to be able to commit the time necessary to your trade.

During the year, your formation has training objectives to attain. These are usually scheduled on your week night and week end scheduled training days. You should be able to get  a training calendar well in advance, as to warn your employer and domestic niner. Ideally, you should attend all of those.

On top of this,  you are expected to take certain career courses, as mentionned: BMQ, SQ and your basic trades course. BMQ can be taken in week end format, but I don't recommend it, as the training value is not as good as the single block one, IMHO. Generally, career course are offered in the summer for the reserve. So for the first year, expect to spend maybe 2 months away form home, completing BMQ/SQ. After that, most courses are 1 month or less, depending on your trade(could be longer, clerks QL3 is 2 months, I believe).

As far as other "tour of duty", nothing mandatory. Sometimes your unit will recieve a demand for augmentation from other units, for exercises like prairy ram. Its great if you can attend those, but nobody expect a student to show up for an exercise thats scheduled from mid october to mid november. But I must stress that the experience gained is invaluable.

And finally, there is the possibility of going on overseas operation. Chances few and people fight to get those. So if you don't want to go, nobody is forcing you. Just remember that the overall concept of training reservist is to help augment the regs. You should be ready and willing to serve.

 

[mack333]

Thanks for the reply.  But I'm quite shocked that your full time employer can show you the door in these situations.

Again, thanks for the info.

 

[Dissident]

Well, the best thing you can do is write a letter to your local MLA. I think the law that protects nationnal guardsmen in the states is a good thing. We should have something similar over here.

 

[dglad]

There is currently no law stopping your employer from firing you because of your reserve commitment.

I think this statement needs to be qualified.  There is no jurisdiction in Canada which would consider a dismissal with such cause as reasonable, and the employer would be liable to punitive and compensatory action.  Your employer COULD fire you for non-performance of your duties, regardless of whether this was a result of time spent working with the Reserves, when you should have been working for your employer, or time spent doing any number of other things.

A fine distinction, perhaps, but I'd hate anyone reading this to think that being a Reservist in itself would be cause for dismissal by a civ employer.

 

[Gayson]

I think having a law to protect reservists is a bit of a grey issue.

It would be nice for reservists who are already employed to be protected by such a law, but what happens when employers just stop hiring reservists due to such a law?

 

[Tpr.Orange]

There is no law against it, unless in a wartime situation. There is however a Canadian forces employeer assistance program where the Canadian forces will speak to your employer on your behalf and request time off for specific courses, and help entice your employer to give you the time off.

 

[Love793]

Well, the best thing you can do is write a letter to your local MLA. I think the law that protects nationnal guardsmen in the states is a good thing. We should have something similar over here.

That law only really protects people whom are truly gainfully employed full time.  A lot of Guard and Reserve guys have a hell of a time trying to find full time employment on civie street.  Especially now, when they're being rotated and called up so often.

 

[pbi]

That law only really protects people whom are truly gainfully employed full time.   A lot of Guard and Reserve guys have a hell of a time trying to find full time employment on civie street.   Especially now, when they're being rotated and called up so often.

During my time here in Afgh I have made a point of trying to hear what ARNG and USAR guys have to say about these laws, because as COS of a Res CBG I am of two minds on the issue. On the one hand, I can see that the op effectiveness and training continuity of our Army Res could be given a huge boost by job protection legislation. On the other hand, I have heard enough stories here to realize that there is a downside to it. Even in a country as patriotic and pro-military as the US is, employers (especially smaller employers) will only put up with so much. A few comments I have gathered:

a) most employers do cooperate, even if grudgingly, and the majority of ARNG/USAR folks seem to be doing OK (IMHO);

b) some employers definitely have low tolerance for extended absences caused by Res duty, and some of these will resort to "covert" pressure tactics in order to avoid the applicable laws;

c) things are getting worse for some Res pers because of the increasing number and lengths of call-ups. I have heard several times that there will be a spike in Res attrition due to this issue (and job-related pressures);

d) some states' ARNG Bureaus are reluctant to use the law against employers-they prefer willing cooperation and to work things out much as our CFLC does for our Res. The thinking here is that if an employer is "forced" to put up with a Res employee, he may begn to look for ways to get rid of him;

e) the USAR permits employers to ask why a soldier is on full time service. Just because he is on full time service is not necessarily a guarantee of protection: it seems to depend on WHY he is on FTS;

f) some ARNG are experiencing attrition and recruiting difficulties already. I spoke to NCOs in one battalion who told me that their state had to mobilize an entire Bde to get a battalion's worth of soldiers. I was told that part of this was due to the heavy drain of OEF, but that a significant part was due to retention problems in the units;

g) the Chief of the USAR has expressed concern that continued heavy demands on the USAR (and, by extension, the ARNG) will distort the demographic of who actually joins the Res. His fear (apparently) is that if the Res is called up too much, the "solid working man" will no longer be attracted to Res duty and the Res will become the premise of the semi-employed (or semi-employable);

h) employers may not dismiss a Res employee directly because of Res duty, and they must offer the same job back on return. However, there is a loophole that permits employers to "restructure" such that the job actually disappears. I do not know if this has been used by any employer, but a few people have mentioned it to me; and

i) despite all the talk of "One Army" and the very heavy use of Res, my impression is the gap between Active Army and Res resembles our own Army about a decade ago. There does not seem to be too much love between the two: even less than in our system. Perhaps te increased empl of Res will have the same effect on the US Army that it had on us: a reduction of the barrier between the two components.

Cheers.