MAJOR IRR Policy Change...

[Flash]

I hope you are right, but I'm not sure how it is all going to shake out. I wonder if they are going to issue more information for clarity based on the information that they are gathering now. It feels like they are getting rid of everyone who signed-up after 911. I've been looking at the Demographics Reports for the IRR and there definitely has been an increase in the number of IRR members over the last 10 years.

Eh? They are bringing the Navy Reserve into line with what the other reserve component personnel policies are, it was specifically noted in the retirement commission's report a few years ago that spurred the BRS that the Navy Reserve's IRR retirement policy was an exception to the rule. They aren't getting rid of everyone who signed up after 9/11, they are making sure they get a return on their investment.

If there has been a rise in the number of folks in the IRR in the past 10 years I would be willing to hazard a guess it is directly a result of the regular mobilizations of SELRES, transferring to the IRR pretty much assured that wasn't going to happen to you.

I don't begrudge anyone who takes advantage of an opportunity that the military gives them but you can't blame the Navy for making these changes. The Navy gets pretty much no value from a member of the IRR who merely does some courses to get a good year but then has to pay them the same retirement as a drilling SELRES or VTU member. It makes no sense from a force or fiscal perspective so why continue to do it?

 

[Sam I am]

^Fair point, Flash. I'm thankful this one worked out for me...I feel the pain of those who are less fortunate.

 

[MrSaturn]

At 12 years (8 Active, 2 SELRES, 2 IRR) I am pretty envious of those who were able to pull it off.

The Navy gets pretty much no value from a member of the IRR who merely does some courses to get a good year...

I guess I was hoping SELRES, VTU and IRR would pull something off to deliver some of their promises. The whole technical civilian expertise being a force multiplier was something I bought into. Especially with article after article about cyber being underdeveloped.

I had to drop out of the SELRES, and ideally, I would have come back to SELRES a little later after my family situation settled down a bit. I think it will be more challenging than ever. Not sure if VTU is worth sticking around for.

 

[jagM3]

The Navy gets pretty much no value from a member of the IRR who merely does some courses to get a good year but then has to pay them the same retirement as a drilling SELRES or VTU member. It makes no sense from a force or fiscal perspective so why continue to do it?

This isn't directed at you, but rather just big Navy in general: The return on investment the Navy obtains from having a large pool of sailors in the IRR is the ability to activate the IRR at any time should World War III or other extraordinary strategic conflicts occur warranting the callup of the IRR that would otherwise necessitate this nation from engaging in the first draft since Vietnam. Most, if not all IRR sailors have already made significant contributions to the Navy for many years in both an active duty or SELRES capacity, like I did for 10 years on active duty, and remaining in the IRR may not seem like a daily sacrifice or contribution, but when this nation and our Navy needs the IRR, it is going to seriously regret forcing us out by the tens of thousands. The worst position for the Navy to be in is for our nation to sustain another 9/11 thrusting us into another war, and the Navy all of a sudden needs to double in size overnight and it cannot do so because it gutted the IRR. And turn on CNN or listen to the stated policies from our leaders that the Navy will eventually be executing -- this scenario is even more possible and plausible right now than it was on 9/12/2001. The other armed services can afford to gut their IRR's because they do not provide the same global strategic level service to the nation that the Navy does. Unfortunately, bureacrats in Millington are making these decisions out of purely fiscal concerns without, what I believe, is a fundamental understanding of the core mission of the IRR in the first place. And frankly, being SELRES doesn't mean the Navy gets a larger return on investment, and I personally believe the Navy gets a pretty awful return on investment for the average SELRES sailor. Sure, SELRES sailors give more quantities of blood and urine during the monthly donations than IRR sailors do, but most SELRES units sit around all weekend doing nothing except regurgitation of the same GMTs that IRR sailors do on NKO -- but that DWE costs the Navy well over $100k for just one decent sized unit. Yes, SELRES can mobilize, but so what? You can mobilize from the IRR as well if you choose like many others have. If the Navy wants to save money, make ALL reserve sailors go into the IRR and simply authorize involuntary IRR-ASP mobs if one chooses to be ASP. Want to avoid mobs, then just stay out of the ASP.

 

[Flash]

...The return on investment the Navy obtains from having a large pool of sailors in the IRR is the ability to activate the IRR at any time should World War III or other extraordinary strategic conflicts occur warranting the callup of the IRR that would otherwise necessitate this nation from engaging in the first draft since Vietnam. Most, if not all IRR sailors have already made significant contributions to the Navy for many years in both an active duty or SELRES capacity....

I don't disagree that folks should have the option to continue to serve in the IRR, it is the policy of letting folks get a retirement merely by doing correspondence courses that I have heartburn with (again, the policy and not the folks doing it) and so does the Navy. Hopefully the Navy will get to a point where they let folks go IRR then transition back to the SELRES or VTU when they are able but since this policy is new I am not surprised it is starting out so strict.

From a big picture perspective you also have to keep in mind that the Navy now has 16 years of regularly mobilizing reservists at a previously unprecedented rate, almost all of them SELRES who are supposed to be 'ready', and the issues they have experienced first-hand has guided some of these policies. Just trying to maintain SELRES readiness has continued to be an enormous challenge the Navy Reserve still struggles with regularly, trying to utilize the IRR on the scale that you talk about would be a much more significant challenge. Back when I first MOB'd in 2010 ~25% of SELRES who were mobilized weren't able to fulfill their orders, ~80% of them because of medical issues. These were the folks who were supposed to be ready and underwent annual physical and medical screenings (albeit not very thorough ones, but they at least could make sure had a pulse among other things) and the Navy had been regularly mobilizing folks for 9 years at that point. If the Navy tried that with the IRR on a large scale the numbers would be far worse.

 

[subreservist]

@Flash - definitely agree with your assessment of SELRES readiness; IRR would no question be a LOT more painful in the event of a recall.

@jagM3 - I don't think the Navy "loses" as much as you think with this policy. Even if all members in the IRR were ready at a moments notice in the event of WW3 (they wouldn't be, but...), you only put so many folks on a ship, sub or aircraft. And a call for WW3 would recall all service IRR, not just Navy. Further, even inactive as USNR-S2, you are still subject to recall...so in WW3, should you be S2, you could be tapped for service just like S1. The difference primarily being the accumulation of retirement points and/or pay.

Even if the manpower numbers in a war time scenario were low, they could simply adjust the policy at any time or raise the recruitment numbers.

I do feel your pain, though. However, even though you may be an active IRR participant, there are probably a lot more just sitting on the books not even knowing they are IRR. I think the policy kinda address both Navy concerns: clearing up the books and not making it the norm to obtain retirement via IRR (for the majority of their service). A member could literally do an active duty 2 year commitment, followed by 18 years in IRR and earn a retirement.

Like Flash, I have no issue with those taking advantage of a policy, but you can't be upset at the Navy finally wising up to change it.

 

[Uncle Fester]

Way back at my very first DWE, we got a "Navy Reserve 101" brief at the NOSC. The briefer compared the IRR to the Ghost Fleet ships - keep them around 'in case', but it'd be so much work to activate them, it's unlikely to ever happen. I think it's an apt metaphor. It's a lot of work and money to maintain the IRR, and while the 'break glass in case of WWIII' concept sounds good in theory, what would the Navy do with them?

The Navy doesn't need bodies. They need people that are reasonably current, trained, and able to deploy. As @Flash mentioned, the Navy has enough trouble with that with SELRES, who are least in theory current, trained, and fit to deploy. Making the cost-benefit math work to justify keeping IRR around has been getting increasingly difficult.

 

[Randy Daytona]

It's a lot of work and money to maintain the IRR, and while the 'break glass in case of WWIII' concept sounds good in theory, what would the Navy do with them?

If the SHTF, a potential use of the IRR would be to backfill certain areas as the training command, staffs or niche (but growing in importance) areas such as cyber. This would allow the active duty to be utilized in higher priority areas. Granted, if the situation was that bad, you could recall retirees but it would give the IRR a focus. I believe the Air Force is offering to bring some pilots out of retirement to fill critical staff positions.

 

[Uncle Fester]

If the SHTF, a potential use of the IRR would be to backfill certain areas as the training command, staffs or niche (but growing in importance) areas such as cyber. This would allow the active duty to be utilized in higher priority areas. Granted, if the situation was that bad, you could recall retirees but it would give the IRR a focus. I believe the Air Force is offering to bring some pilots out of retirement to fill critical staff positions.

I get the concept, but like the Selective Service, it's an idea whose time has passed. We've been in a protracted war for 16+ years now, with widespread and sustained callup of the Reserves - in other words, exactly the sort of scenario the IRR is intended for - and still the Navy's never seriously looked at dipping into the IRR. It just gets too difficult, too fast, and the point is that there are easier (cheaper, faster) ways of filling billets. Much easier to call up a SELRES, or get a contractor or even TNE Fed employees, so why go through the trouble? And if the Navy's never going to use them, why keep them around?

I grant your point about the AF, but it was brought up in another thread that that's more self-inflicted AF pain - insisting on filling with pilots billets that don't really require pilots. The drill sergeants and officers running NIACT when I went through were all recalled recently-retired guys.

I think the fucked up part is less that the Navy decided to kill off the IRR, than they did it abruptly and took everybody concerned by surprise. I can't figure out why Millington all of a sudden decided this had to be done ASAP. But bad communication about major personnel decisions has been a theme of late.

 

[Flash]

If the SHTF, a potential use of the IRR would be to backfill certain areas as the training command, staffs or niche (but growing in importance) areas such as cyber. This would allow the active duty to be utilized in higher priority areas. Granted, if the situation was that bad, you could recall retirees but it would give the IRR a focus. I believe the Air Force is offering to bring some pilots out of retirement to fill critical staff positions.

That is a big part of why we have the reserves but those roles are filled by the SELRES already, there is just simply too much disconnect between the regular Navy and the IRR to utilize them effectively except in niche areas like the ones the recent policy has highlighted like Strategic Sealift Officer.

Again, while the idea of utilizing the IRR as some sort of strategic reserve is a great idea but soon runs into major issues when put into practice. I actually served with a pair of US Army retirees and knew several more who volunteered to get reactivated as part of a program the Army used for a few years at the height of wars in Iraq and Afghanistan, it was great on paper but very uneven in practice. While some of those retirees were decent it was really hit and miss for each individual, much more so than with active duty or SELRES. The biggest issue overall was the significant 'disconnect' between the some of the retirees who had been gone for more than 3-5 years and the Army as an institution, they were used to the way things used to be and not the way things were now. In some cases they caused more work than it was worth to have those people filling a billet, one of the two I worked with filled a billet and then had to be 'helped' by another officer full time because he dropped the ball in the first week.

While it may be noteworthy that the USAF is looking at retirees they are only looking for a tiny number, 25. On a very small scale and for very specialized billets targeted efforts to employ retirees or folks in the may work but not on the WWII/Cold War scale we grew up with.

 

[nittany03]

I get the concept, but like the Selective Service, it's an idea whose time has passed. We've been in a protracted war for 16+ years now, with widespread and sustained callup of the Reserves - in other words, exactly the sort of scenario the IRR is intended for - and still the Navy's never seriously looked at dipping into the IRR. It just gets too difficult, too fast, and the point is that there are easier (cheaper, faster) ways of filling billets. Much easier to call up a SELRES, or get a contractor or even TNE Fed employees, so why go through the trouble? And if the Navy's never going to use them, why keep them around?

This "protracted war" is more of a low-grade brush fire than a raging inferno. We as a society seem to be making a habit of using one term to conflate two things which differ as much as they are alike. The GWOT and WWII are both "wars," yet one has required little to no civil involvement outside "I support the troops," and the other mobilized an entire society and killed millions. The Navy never looked into dipping into the IRR, because they didn't need to. I'd say the GWOT isn't "exactly the same scenario the IRR was intended for." The scenario it was intended for was 8th Guards Army coming through the Fulda Gap. Peer-on-peer industrial-strength killing.

I do agree the IRR-ASP is a solution in search of a problem. If the situation gets that bad, there'd arguably be a draft anyway. And you'd probably have just as much admin ass-pain getting Joe or Jane NAVET IRR Reservist back in uniform as you would if they showed up at a recruiter's office as a pure civilian. But I don't think Selective Service's "time has passed," either. It's a tool in the national toolbox, if a specialized and expensive one that you only use once in a blue moon. Though I do think the hippie-dippie granola types would raise holy hell if it got used again, even if we as a nation were staring down the barrel of a proverbial gun when we did.

 

[Gatordev]

If the SHTF, a potential use of the IRR would be to backfill certain areas as the training command, staffs or niche (but growing in importance) areas such as cyber. This would allow the active duty to be utilized in higher priority areas. Granted, if the situation was that bad, you could recall retirees but it would give the IRR a focus.

But then all of the IRR guys will complain about being INVOL activated.

I'd argue the Training Command is the last place IRR would be helpful. There's already more bodies knocking on the door than billets available. If you're going to add billets and looking for bodies to fill, take the PSB non-selects, since they'll be significantly more current (and probably be more up-to-date on STAN.....ZING!)

I believe the Air Force is offering to bring some pilots out of retirement to fill critical staff positions.

It's a small number and presumably, those that come back to duty would be full-up rounds and not CLASS 4 dental with some bizarre IMS code.

 

[CoyoteK]

Just got this today, not completely sure what this means but it appears to be good news for BGIOs. Does this mean BGIOs will be considered quasi- SELRES if already in the program?

All Reservists -


First if you are retired or not a reservist - please update your BGO information page on BGIS (or your A/C may have updated it recently - so in the future you don't receive notes when we pull reservists for a distribution)


We were informed of the bottom e-mail on Thursday afternoon and we had a conference call with PERS-93 on Friday and now we were just informed that Blue and Gold participants will not be affected by the new Reserve policy change!


This is per CIV Charles L Freeman, Pers-9 Pers-93 and decision made by CAPT Howell that USNA "Blue and Gold participants will not be affected by the new policy change."

Attempting to get that added in the new instruction as well for posterity.


Thanks for all your efforts to the BGO program! (Even if you are in the IRR and less than 16 years!)


Thanks!

 

[atmahan]

sorry, long post:

The way I always saw the IRR was this.

It had 3 main intents and a fourth un-intended:

Intended:

1) A place where people could finish out their 8-year MSO, if they didn't already do so in Active Duty, which most people don't, since they normally signed up for 2-6 Active Duty years. For this group, there is no need to get Qualifying Years and it is from this group that the Navy gets their main batch of people in case of WWIII because, just having gotten out of Active Duty, they are the most "fresh". The high mobilization "mis-fire" rates encountered from trying to mobilize SELRES individuals (not so "fresh") masked the utility of having the IRR as a backup force.

2) A place to take a break from SELRES (due to personal issues or no SELRES slots available). Here the intent was to just stay in the IRR 1-2 years to sort your stuff out and still be able to earn Qualifying Years if you desired (hence the Correspondence Courses, Funeral Duties, etc.).

3) A place to let those that got out (really pushed out) of Active Duty with more than, let's say, 12-16 years (think LCDRs and E-5s,+ etc that did not advance) and still provide a way/place to get something out of the time they have already invested in their careers/lives. This option could also apply to senior individuals that could not get SELRES billets due to unavailability but still wanted to reach the 20 year mark. Remember, before BRS it was 20 years or nothing (for both Active or Reserve). People in this category had one remaining option, depending on their own initiative and personal situations. The O-4 20 Year Commissioned guarantee and HYT of E-5s and above are good proof of this.



Unintended:

4) The problem of people going into the IRR to earn points was certainly exacerbated by a lot of the SELRES billets going "below the line" (IAP - In Assignment Processing) during the 2000's, which would flag the people filling those billets for mobilization. I remember a lot of people strategically opting to go IRR to minimize their chances of being mobilized.

Also, the number of Inactive Duty Points a person could earn went from 60 to 90 in 2003, then up to 130 in 2008. That's more than double.

Like subreservist said: "A member could literally do an active duty 2 year commitment, followed by 18 years in IRR and earn a retirement." And, if done in the last 15 years, a pretty good one at that if they maxed out. I am sure that there has always been, going back forever, people that took advantage of how the IRR system worked to get to 20 years.

But, recently I am sure the Navy saw a significant spike of this type of group and I am sure the Navy ran the numbers and did not like what it saw.

The new Blended Retirement System now allows a person to walk away with at least something if they get out before 20 years. The longer a person remains affiliated (Active Duty or SELRES), the more they can walk away with. It covers those that serve 2-16 years in Active Duty/SELRES.

The new IRR policy then covers those in the 16-20 years range (with Sanctuary covering officers in the 18-20 year mark).

And, finally, the new IRR policy finally allows a way to block Group #4.

It was good while it lasted . . . .

 

[Hair Warrior]

I think the fucked up part is less that the Navy decided to kill off the IRR, than they did it abruptly and took everybody concerned by surprise. I can't figure out why Millington all of a sudden decided this had to be done ASAP. But bad communication about major personnel decisions has been a theme of late.

Follow the money. Sometimes a Congressional committee and federal department negotiate a tit-for-tat arrangement. Trim a bit in one place, and you’ll get X funding over in this other area. Those deals don’t hang around long - there’s not often time to break the news gently to those members impacted 20,000 feet below the decision making. Congress has a way of forcing cuts in non-priority areas in exchange for releasing new money toward unfunded priorities. Sometimes DoD takes the painful cuts in-house before it rises to Congressional level... but it’s all driven by the same budget line.