The Pentagon’s
decision to extend active-duty requirements for citizen soldiers in the National
Guard or reserves could take a toll on both civilian employers and
employees.
The new policy
could require citizen soldiers to be on active duty in Iraq or Afghanistan for as long as 48
months—an initial tour could last up to 24 months, followed by a return to
civilian life and then a second mobilization round that could be additional
stretch of 24 months. By contrast, the old policy limited active-duty
requirements in Iraq or
Afghanistan to 24 consecutive
months.
“Employers are
not going to be happy with this new policy,” says Ted Daywalt, president of
VetJobs, an online job board for individuals who have served in the military.
“They are already up in arms about the pressure that the old, less severe system
is placing on their business.”
Some 1.3 million
citizen soldiers who work in a wide spectrum of industries could be affected by
the lift in traditional caps.
The expansion of
active duty may hit small employers hardest. According to Daywalt, 70 percent to
80 percent of individuals in the National Guard or reserves work for companies
with 300 to 500 employees. Some firms are even smaller. He cites a Houston-based
machine shop which lost 12 of its 21 workers virtually overnight when they were
called on active duty in Afghanistan in
2002.
“The owner of
the shop had difficulties complying with his contracts because more than half of
his workforce was missing,” Daywalt says. “I can assure you that this has not
been an isolated case.”
The threat of
diminished productivity is not the only source of worry for employers. Under the
Uniformed Services Employment and Reemployment Rights Act, companies are
required to continue providing certain benefits for family members of the
individuals who are on duty as well as ensure employment of citizen soldiers
when they return from their missions.
Employers didn’t
mind incurring these and other financial responsibilities when the tours of duty
were less frequent and shorter in duration, Daywalt explains. But the escalation
in requirements has been changing this landscape.
Daywalt warns
that the new policy will aggravate the situation and make it unpalatable for
companies to hire an individual who is enlisted with the National Guard or
reserves.
“Why would
anybody want to hire an individual who may called away for two years only to
return for a just a few months and then be mobilized for another two years?”
Daywalt says. “Companies are not going to be happy about
this.”
—Gina Ruiz