Deploy or out

tony292

PEB Forum Veteran
#21
Technically recruiters are considered to be deployed on mission every single day of their career. It would be a major distraction to the recruiting effort if medical appointments were tossed into the mix.
But they are not required to be worldwide deployable. I was a company cdr of a recruiting company, around 1/3 of my company was on permanent profile most due to combat injuries and then got detailed recruiting and stayed there and converted from 11b or other combat arms mos to 79R because they knew they couldn’t go back to the infantry. One had a total hip replacement, one had serious spinal issues resulting in fusion and hardware. As long as they could recruit for me, I didn’t care if they’d never be able to wear an ACH again or ruck March again. Pass a pt test within the limits of their profiles and we were golden. Throw those guys back into the infantry and they’d be meb’d In a heartbeat.
 

AFOddJob

Registered Member
#22
I'm really interested in seeing how this all turns out. I think DoD is going to have to be very specific about the terms "world-wide" and "deployable". If they truly want everyone to be fully "world-wide deployable", then we may see some loss of folks in the Air Force. Following the MEB-IPEB-PEB process, an Air Force member could be found "fit-for-duty", with duties limited by an Assignment Limitation Code (ALC). I'm certain a lot of the military folks on here know this, of course. If I'm not mistaken, all C-codes are "potentially" deployable, but require different levels of waivers. I went through an MEB for asthma back in 2006/2007 and have been ALC-C2 ever since. I can deploy, but only to locations that have adequate medical facilities, and only after approval from the gaining MAJCOM's SG staff. That should mean that I'm NOT world-wide qualified, as there are overseas bases and locations without medical facilities, and furthermore some locations where the MAJCOM SG staff may not approve of me going. If the intent is to remove members that are not world-wide deployable...I guess that means that I'm at risk for removal. It'll also mean that my asthma will also flag me as no-longer fit for duty, which should force the Air Force to process me through DES and assign me a disability rating. As I require daily inhaled anti-inflammatory medication, that should mean 30% for disability and therefore medical retirement. I have over 15 years in the military so far...but if all goes as forecast, I may be out later this year whether I like it or not. I guess we'll see!
 

Former MiTT Team Leader

PEB Forum Veteran
Registered Member
#23
Thought would post this here from: http://www.pebforum.com/threads/dod...deployable-service-members.43150/#post-199519
___________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________
Jason Perry submitted a new resource:

DOD Retention Policy for Non-Deployable Service Members - The recent guidance from the DoD on retention policy for Non-Deployable Service Members

This is the guidance from the DoD on Retainability of Non-Deployable Service Members.
While this is interim guidance, it potentially impacts all members with disabilities that prevent deployment. (Note that many profiles or referral to the IDES/PEB include a limitation on deployment).

This may be a very important regulation that impacts those servicemembers with conditions that fail retention standards.Read more about this resource...

Former MiTT Team Leader

PEB Forum Veteran
Registered Member



Wednesday at 5:43 AM
#2

Honorable Mr. Perry, "seems" we accidentally were duealing banjo's here as posted, the below, about same time you posted on this very "HOT" Topic ("Tabasco")- so thought just place here for clarity and simplification as well as kind of "in" your highly "specialized" and "wealth" of KNOWLEDGE ON lane:

Thanks Honorable Mr. Perry...... hopefully you and/or other "super" Moderator's" comment....??????

PS: I personally, have alway's believed "laws"/ "regulations" should be written such that the "common" man can in fact understand them- i.e. the "Napolean's" Private Standard, and kind of like US Military- Purpose and Intent- Intent being "most" important...... as well as "enforceable," for all, just not "selective".....

Looking forward to any response on this Topic......
________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________
Honorable Mr. Perry, would you be willing to explain what you perhaps foresee as issues with:

"Third, this may impact adjudication of conditions for the folks on the TDRL?"

I ask for several reason's, 1) While I was on TDRL, I was told by TDRL examiner at Ft. Benning, those placed on TDRL MH Conditions are in fact almost "never" returned to active duty!" If, this is in fact case, which based on your experience as JAG Formal PEB Chief in TX would "assume" you would know-perhaps, then why are they placed on TDRL at all to begin with?"

2) While on TDRL, and after, the US DVA MH Provider treating me, (who died of brain tumor), told me he had "patients" on TDRL in local Gulf Coast VA System for over the "five" year limit, and were in fact so bad off could not "take" care of themselves and had "funds" cut off, as well as significantly "low" VA ratings, that further contributed to their "issues," as well as placing sigificant burden "famly" etc....! So my question here would be, if case number one, hardly any members on TDRL MH reason's returned "duty,"- is "true" and if still on TDRL after 5-year limit, what is the point of TDRL for MH Conditions, anyway, and what impact this "Directive" will in fact on anyone in above situation still possibly on TDRL past 5-year limit?

3) Would you make any recommendations' as what should be done/changed/modified- in light of this "Directive," with the whole convoluted and overly complex, "TDRL" system??????

4) Perhaps, deyond your purvue, but US State Department Officals' and Merchant Mariners, can utilize the US DVA System, are they in fact held to same "rating" and compensation "standards" as US Armed Services Members'????? If so are they "considered" "non-deplorable," etc...within-in their own "system's" like etc... US Armed Service Members affected by this "Directive"...?????

Thank you Honorable Mr. Perry, and belive this best website out there for Veterans', etc.. issues......"being no "expert" by any means in these matters, but a simple "yokel," myself, which as per "Merriam-Webster" word of day 20- FEB 2018, "365 New Words-A-Year Page-A-Day Calendar 2018- Calendar – Day to Day Calendar, August 3, 2017" by Merriam-Webster (Author) (at https://www.amazon.com/Words-Year-P...8424&sr=8-2&keywords=365+words+a+day+calendar), is "a naive or gullible inhabitant of a rural area or small tow
__________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________

I have read Tony292 post on this and wonder if anyone, concerning this matter has in fact read "Starship Troopers" -Paperback – May 15, 1987 by Robert A. Heinlein (Author) [athttps://www.amazon.com/Starship-Troopers-Robert-Heinlein/dp/0441783589/ref=sr_1_1?ie=UTF8&qid=1519646089&sr=8-1&keywords=starship+troopers+book - for example????]

This book was "required" "PROFESSIONAL" reading in a unit I was in, early on! This book, in fact, brings up a whole of point's Tony292 and other this "Post" are in fact addressing/discussing????? One of main "character's" is in fact a wounded "veteran"- who due to experience etc.. gets recalled active duty to fight for "humanity!" Also, the "recruiters" for the "Elite" "Mobile Infantry" Corps are in fact highly decorated and wounded "combat" veterans! (Interestingly in this book- the price of "citizenship" and all its rights and prividleges, is i fact military service or service to the nation/ world/earth in book!!!!)

So "Starship Troopers" in fact "reiterates" a lot of what folks are in fact posting here!!!!

However, it also begs the question, as many are discussing, "what" is correct criteria "across" the spectrum of "retention" of non-deployable's as simply once again not a "one shoe fits all situation!" Seems to me "personnel" folks and whole lot of other's might need roll up there sleeves and do a whole lot of "analysis" that address a lot of concern's addressed in this post/thread's?????

Just my mere "peon" two cent's worth......others can fell free to chime in......etc.....
 

AFOddJob

Registered Member
#24
I am curious how this will effect the USAF. As for me, I have a simple back condition and I've deployed before with it but I'm not Worldwide qualified on paper without a waiver for those deployed locations each time I go out the door. If they rid the USAF of all injured people for greater than a year our manning issue will turn into a manning crisis. Will boards just be more strenuous now? Will everyone require a SAFPC appeal? Very confusing times.
Jay,

Indeed! I have the same concern about ALCs. I would think that having an Assignment Limitation Code would make someone not, "worldwide and lifted." I'm definitely looking forward to some clarification from DoD and the AF.
 

chaplaincharlie

PEB Forum Veteran
Registered Member
#25
Concur with @gsfowler

In my experience recruiter duty is too demanding for people who are unfit for deployment, in most cases. It is a very high stress environment. Regardless of your success last month, you get regular feedback about your success this month. Some months its easy to make quota; others not so much. The stress put on recruiters is unbelievable.
 

Former MiTT Team Leader

PEB Forum Veteran
Registered Member
#26
Chaplain Charlie- I respectfully disagree, I have known both "enlisted" as well as "officer" US Army recruiters, and never once did I hear them say they "were" stressed out as opposed to being in a "regular" line-unit, especially one always on "alert status!" Really, only thing I can recall them "ALL" kind of griping about was in fact "travel" and "quota's," but not so much because they had to make quota's but because of "other" things associated with the "quota" standard!"

"Concur with @gsfowler

In my experience recruiter duty is too demanding for people who are unfit for deployment, in most cases. It is a very high stress environment. Regardless of your success last month, you get regular feedback about your success this month. Some months its easy to make quota; others not so much. The stress put on recruiters is unbelievable."


Furthermore, in some MOS's it takes years to "train" someone to be "competent" at their job and some of these MOS do not in fact require "being" deployed "Abroad!" Such as teachers in "branch" specific school's, highly technical profession's- "Cyper Security," etc..... so simply DX'ing that experience and knowledge before one can in fact replace it "equally"- is that really in fact "smart" business??? Leave that to other's to ponder.....

Thought I would attach the below "not" as an "advertisement/ endorsement" but simply because of the fact's in contains... very good summary of whole "gambit" of issue's facing and "New" Generation of "War-Experienced" veterans.... it is from "Coalition to Salute America's Hero's,"...etc.....

Personally, have witnessed to much of "facts" contained in attachment and highlighted, and if does not significantly "upset" folks I simply do not know what ever will....

Thanks Chaplain Charlie and sorry to disagree with you, once again....

Hope attachment, helps some folks.....
 

Attachments

AirmanKelly

Registered Member
#27
This has been nagging in my head since it was put out and I wish there was more direction/updates. I had a primary bone tumor called chondrosarcoma back in 2014. I had a surgery that removed part of my pelvis where the tumor grew (thus also reattaching muscle and tendors elsewhere) and am still getting scans every 6 months to make sure I have no reoccurance. I was medboarded, found fit for duty, but with an ALC-C2 Y, DAV 43. I can only deploy CONUS with fixed facilities and only with a waiver OCONUS with fixed facilities. I haven't been WWD since 2014 and I don't see growing bone back.
A part of me would be almost relieved if I got Med'd out. The first year after my surgery I was on a circumference only PT test. The next year I got it in my head that I didn't want to be different and took the fit test as is, trained hard, and got an excellent on it, but after that, my leg was never the same. Now I'm on a permanent running/walking restriction. It's exhausting trying to keep up physically and knowing that some who don't know what I've been through just think I'm some old broad riding the system. My issue though is I am an Air Guard technician. I get thrown out, I am also out of a job unless by pure luck I get a Title 5.
Sorry to unload. No one is really talking about it here on my Guard base, but this can affect alot of us.
 

AFOddJob

Registered Member
#28
I was medboarded, found fit for duty, but with an ALC-C2 Y, DAV 43. I can only deploy CONUS with fixed facilities and only with a waiver OCONUS with fixed facilities. I haven't been WWD since 2014 and I don't see growing bone back.
Similar situation, different condition. Med boarded back in 2007 and also received an ALC-C2. I haven't been qualified for WWD in over 11 years. Going by the words being tossed around in the news articles, it really seems like they want everyone to be worldwide deployable. But is that really the case? Are they really going to re-PEB all of us on duty limitations or ALCs? I wish the DoD Instruction was co-released with the policy letter so we could have a bit more clarity in regard to what's next. If the new retention standard for service is to be qualified for WWD, then they should say that very clearly so that the services don't misinterpret the new policy. And with the new standard in place, everyone on enduring duty limitations or ALCs needs a new PEB with the majority being found "unfit" and given a fair disability rating.
 

AirmanKelly

Registered Member
#29
Similar situation, different condition. Med boarded back in 2007 and also received an ALC-C2. I haven't been qualified for WWD in over 11 years. Going by the words being tossed around in the news articles, it really seems like they want everyone to be worldwide deployable. But is that really the case? Are they really going to re-PEB all of us on duty limitations or ALCs? I wish the DoD Instruction was co-released with the policy letter so we could have a bit more clarity in regard to what's next. If the new retention standard for service is to be qualified for WWD, then they should say that very clearly so that the services don't misinterpret the new policy. And with the new standard in place, everyone on enduring duty limitations or ALCs needs a new PEB with the majority being found "unfit" and given a fair disability rating.
I agree. If they want to find me fit for duty then four years later say "psych, GTFO!" then they should reboard me and Med me out so I can at least go out on the Technician side on a disability. Otherwise, I'm screwed.

I feel like the worst part of all this is the uncertainty. Just threw out this vague policy and then let us stew on it. I can easily tell you on that on my Guard base, no one is even talking about it unless it may affect you. Our whole world can change and there is no guidance. Whether I go or stay, I'll be happy. I just don't like being in this uncertain limbo.
 

AFOddJob

Registered Member
#30
I feel like the worst part of all this is the uncertainty. Just threw out this vague policy and then let us stew on it. I can easily tell you on that on my Guard base, no one is even talking about it unless it may affect you. Our whole world can change and there is no guidance. Whether I go or stay, I'll be happy. I just don't like being in this uncertain limbo.
Indeed. The uncertainty is pretty terrible. Will I still be in service later this year? No idea at all. I think it's a bit more certain for folks that are ALC-C3 (they are outright listed as non-deployable), but C1/C2 are in limbo for sure. Also, services can grant waivers, but I think the intent for the waiver is to allow a person to fix themselves, not to keep in members with needed expertise.

I did find an Air Force Commander's Call topic PDF about it, but it says nothing about what will happen to folks on ALCs. I'll try attaching it to this post. I'm really hoping they publish the DoD Instruction soon.
 

Attachments

AirmanKelly

Registered Member
#31
Me too. I'm slated to go to tech school for cyber transport in September. Five months in Keesler...don't want to waste my time if they are going to boot me.
 

Former MiTT Team Leader

PEB Forum Veteran
Registered Member
#32
Me too. I'm slated to go to tech school for cyber transport in September. Five months in Keesler...don't want to waste my time if they are going to boot me.
AirmanKelly, sorry to hear of your troubles, but hopefully will not go Keesler AFB... because if as you say "booted" there you will sadly be under the current US DVA Rated "awesome" 1-Star system of the Gulf Coast VA-VISN-16 (Jackson, MS) for possible rating and adjudication..... I would not even wish that on "insurget's" I fought in Iraq in the never ending "Global War On Terror!"

Sadly, this US DVA System is wrought with nothing but "issues," you can simply look on "internet" countless "newspaper," etc.. articles going way back- so would in fact highly suggest some "homework'" or "research" on this issue-area- before you make any "possible" leap" of faith......???????

Hope this assist's Airman Kelly.... often fore-warned is in fact fore-armed....(perhaps??)

PS: I have in fact Airman Kelly- if in fact you are a female solider, sailor, airman,etc..., heard through the Grape Vine-so to speak, that because the US DVA and in particular this VA System around Kessler AFB, has been remiss in so many issue's such s "Women Veteran's" health, that "female" vet's are in fact going straight to the "front of the bus"- to quote an old addage- ,as well as getting very highly cushy C&P Exam's/Evaluation's etc..... so if look into this and find a "shred/ kernel" of truth- who could simply begrudge you for taking total "advantage" of a situation not of your making, but simply the fault of other's....... First rule of "International Relation's-IR" or "Prime Directive" for Star Trek fans out there from the "Borg" ...state actor's act in own self-interest, first......???????
 
Last edited:

AirmanKelly

Registered Member
#33
AirmanKelly, sorry to hear of your troubles, but hopefully will not go Keesler AFB... because if as you say "booted" there you will sadly be under the current US DVA Rated "awesome" 1-Star system of the Gulf Coast VA-VISN-16 (Jackson, MS) for possible rating and adjudication..... I would not even wish that on "insurget's" I fought in Iraq in the never ending "Global War On Terror!"

Sadly, this US DVA System is wrought with nothing but "issues," you can simply look on "internet" countless "newspaper," etc.. articles going way back- so would in fact highly suggest some "homework'" or "research" on this issue-area- before you make any "possible" leap" of faith......???????

Hope this assist's Airman Kelly.... often fore-warned is in fact fore-armed....(perhaps??)

PS: I have in fact Airman Kelly- if in fact you are a female solider, sailor, airman,etc..., heard through the Grape Vine-so to speak, that because the US DVA and in particular this VA System around Kessler AFB, has been remiss in so many issue's such s "Women Veteran's" health, that "female" vet's are in fact going straight to the "front of the bus"- to quote an old addage- ,as well as getting very highly cushy C&P Exam's/Evaluation's etc..... so if look into this and find a "shred/ kernel" of truth- who could simply begrudge you for taking total "advantage" of a situation not of your making, but simply the fault of other's....... First rule of "International Relation's-IR" or "Prime Directive" for Star Trek fans out there from the "Borg" ...state actor's act in own self-interest, first......???????
I don't foresee being stuck at Kessler if this deploy or get out gets me. I just imagine I'll either not go or worst/maybe best case, I go only to find myself medicaled out. I say best case because at least I'll have some good STEM skills under my belt to market with outside of the guard.
 

mjf114

Registered Member
#34
It will be interesting to see what the DoD Instruction entails. I hit 19 yrs this fall, right about the same time my SECAFPC appeal verdict comes back. If I'm not retuned to duty, I'm crossing my fingers that I can apply for LAS to stay 1 more year and retire at 20. With all of my leave, outprocessing, and PTDY, I'd only be asking to stay in about 7 months. Praying that I'll be able to retire at 20.
 

Former MiTT Team Leader

PEB Forum Veteran
Registered Member
#35
It will be interesting to see what the DoD Instruction entails. I hit 19 yrs this fall, right about the same time my SECAFPC appeal verdict comes back. If I'm not retuned to duty, I'm crossing my fingers that I can apply for LAS to stay 1 more year and retire at 20. With all of my leave, outprocessing, and PTDY, I'd only be asking to stay in about 7 months. Praying that I'll be able to retire at 20.

Personally, I hope that is the case for you- 19- years is long time "honorable" service and sacrifice....

I know other's with almost 18-years in US Army, though, not granted COAD, even thought injuries deemed "combat-related"etc.... so sincerely wishing you the best of "luck?"
 
data-matched-content-ui-type="image_stacked" data-matched-content-rows-num="3" data-matched-content-columns-num="1" data-ad-format="autorelaxed">
Top