Soldier Sues U.S. Military Over Extended Service

[Todd33]

A decorated U.S. combat veteran filed a lawsuit on Tuesday asserting that the government can not prevent reservists from leaving the military when their enlistment periods end.

The suit against Defense Secretary Donald Rumsfeld and other military officials, names the plaintiff only as John Doe. It says he served in the Marine Corps and Army for nine years on active duty and three years as a reservist.

"This lawsuit seeks to stop the forced retention of men and women who have fulfilled their service obligations," said attorney Michael Sorgen. "When their period of enlistment ends, they should be entitled to return to their families."

He called the suit the first of its kind.

The Army has issued "stop-loss" orders preventing tens of thousands of soldiers designated to serve in Iraq and Afghanistan from leaving the military if their volunteer service commitment ends during their deployment.

The Pentagon has relied heavily on reservists to fight in Iraq and Afghanistan.

http://www.reuters.com/newsArticle.jhtml;jsessionid=VEYKXDEV0TZ5MCRBAELCFFA?type=topNews&storyID=5999552

I wonder if this will start a trend. Interesting.

 

[maddogchen]

Well good luck to him. Don't think he'll win though.

 

[Crimson]

He knew this was a possibility when he joined..

 

[EagleKeeper]

The only possibility of winning is if his reservist committment is up and he is being force to extend.

 

[BaliBabyDoc]

Originally posted by: Crimson
He knew this was a possibility when he joined..

If he can prove his recruiter provided information that was in conflict with the fine print of his enlistment agreement . . . he's got a fighting chance.

 

[Ogi]

Originally posted by: Crimson
He knew this was a possibility when he joined..

dude .... perhaps you are not familiar w/ military contracts when you enlist, but if your enlistment ends, you are placed in "inactive reserves" meaning that you will not be called up unless a national emergency arises. if there was a national emergency arising, i don't think anyone would mind being called up (including myself). this iraq war is far from a national emergency.

Ogi

 

[Ogi]

Originally posted by: BaliBabyDoc

Originally posted by: Crimson
He knew this was a possibility when he joined..

If he can prove his recruiter provided information that was in conflict with the fine print of his enlistment agreement . . . he's got a fighting chance.

recruiters always provide poor information, that much is a given and most people in the service know that, however if his contract states something that conflicts with going on he's got a chance, but recruiters don't provide much in the way of documentation, they just provide brochers (sp?) and put you on the plane for boot camp.

Ogi

 

[Don Vito Corleone]

Originally posted by: BaliBabyDoc

Originally posted by: Crimson
He knew this was a possibility when he joined..

If he can prove his recruiter provided information that was in conflict with the fine print of his enlistment agreement . . . he's got a fighting chance.

For once I agree with Crimson. There's no way this is going to fly. His enlistment contract clearly stated this could happen, whatever the recruiter may have told him (those guys are known for the occasional, er, overpromise).

As I recall from my Contracts class (ahhhh, first year of law school!), prior verbal modifications are invalid if they conflict with a written contract, so he'd be SOL even if he could prove the recruiter promised him something to the effect he couldn't be retained past the end of his enlistment (not to mention the fact that anyone contracting on behalf of the government has to have actual authority to make or modify a contract, as opposed to implied or constructive authority, and I imagine the only person with the authority to agree to this is SECNAV).

If I were this guy, I would write my congressman rather filing a lawsuit that will be kicked by summary judgment at the first opportunity.

 

[Ogi]

either way i would be qurious to see how this goes, and if he is let out, you can guarantee that all new recruits will have a slightly different contract

Ogi

 

[glenn1]

dude .... perhaps you are not familiar w/ military contracts when you enlist, but if your enlistment ends, you are placed in "inactive reserves" meaning that you will not be called up unless a national emergency arises. if there was a national emergency arising, i don't think anyone would mind being called up (including myself). this iraq war is far from a national emergency.

Inactive reserves is only for folks that have served less than their stipulated 8-year contract. Meaning if you enlist 11B out of high school for a 3-year hitch, you still owe 5 years on IRR if you seperate from service. If you remain on military duty through or beyond your 8th year you've fulfilled your initial enlistment contract and should be let go once your current re-enlistment period ends. This guy has done 9 years already, so he doesn't have any IRR obligation. Same deal with me, I did 10 1/2 years, so I'm not IRR anymore, they'd have to draft my ass to get me back in. Not that they'd want an 34 y.o. former paratrooper with suspect knees who's been out for 6 years anyway.

 

[1EZduzit]

If the only reason he is in is because he is over there whe his time ran up, then he should be able to get out. Anything else is a travisity of justice. LOL, which doesn't surprise me any. In WWII they had people getting out who had signed up for only 4 years.

I know my Dad had done 2 tours in the Pacific in WWII and was up for his 3rd. He went to his commanding officer and told him he had just gotten married and had already done 2 tours and he knew plenty of people who hadn't even done one tour yet. The Major just took a pencil and scratched his name off the list.

If for some reason he re-enlisted then could that extend his reservist period? I think sometimes it may depending on the training that they got when re-enlisiting? Not sure about that though.

 

[Ogi]

Originally posted by: glenn1

dude .... perhaps you are not familiar w/ military contracts when you enlist, but if your enlistment ends, you are placed in "inactive reserves" meaning that you will not be called up unless a national emergency arises. if there was a national emergency arising, i don't think anyone would mind being called up (including myself). this iraq war is far from a national emergency.

Inactive reserves is only for folks that have served less than their stipulated 8-year contract. Meaning if you enlist 11B out of high school for a 3-year hitch, you still owe 5 years on IRR if you seperate from service. If you remain on military duty through or beyond your 8th year you've fulfilled your initial enlistment contract and should be let go once your current re-enlistment period ends. This guy has done 9 years already, so he doesn't have any IRR obligation. Same deal with me, I did 10 1/2 years, so I'm not IRR anymore, they'd have to draft my ass to get me back in. Not that they'd want an 34 y.o. former paratrooper with suspect knees who's been out for 6 years anyway.

i stand corrected, thanks for pointing me in the right direction, I've done about 5 years, due to get out in 10 months, also same way they will get me back in is through the draft.

Ogi

 

[onelove]

I see the wheels of justice about to run over a John Doe... nice try, but I'm willing to bet the deck's stacked pretty heavily against this guy. If you turn him over, he's probably got "property of uncle sam" tatoo'd on his butt...

 

[Ogi]

Originally posted by: 1EZduzit
If the only reason he is in is because he is over there whe his time ran up, then he should be able to get out. Anything else is a travisity of justice. LOL, which doesn't surprise me any. In WWII they had people getting out who had signed up for only 4 years.

I know my Dad had done 2 tours in the Pacific in WWII and was up for his 3rd. He went to his commanding officer and told him he had just gotten married and had already done 2 tours and he knew plenty of people who hadn't even done one tour yet. The Major just took a pencil and scratched his name off the list.

If for some reason he re-enlisted then could that extend his reservist period? I think sometimes it may depending on the training that they got when re-enlisiting? Not sure about that though.

the training you receive in the miliary specifies an "obligated service time". Rarely do people with more than 8 years in the service get some kind of training that requires them to have X number of years in service upon completion of training, I don't think that's the case here, I think this guy has a good chance, and I wish him the best of luck!

Ogi

 

[EagleKeeper]

This John Doe signed into the reserves.

When he did thta, he contracted for a set period of time. If that time expired, then he should be clear to leave.
However, National Security will have a loophole to retain him as needed.

 

[jackschmittusa]

When I got out of the service, I too had papers that said my obligation was up. I was from Ohio, but had moved to Atlanta. One day 2 guys from ONI (NCIS now I think) showed up at my office. They had some questions about an officer I had served with who was still in. When I beat around the bush, they told me I could be back in uniform and on a plane in 24 hours, standing in front of a Board of Inquiry, if I didn't co-operate. I suggested that they couldn't do that as my obligation was over. They assured me that that was not a problem and I could consult a lawyer while they waited. I did not consult a lawyer at the time (I believed them), but I did ask a lawyer some time later about it and he told me that they probably could have had recall orders made up immediately regardless of service obligation. This was in '72.

 

[CQuinn]

Recall orders for a specific situation are one thing, but a general order affecting hundreds to
thousands of troops is something else.

The ONI guys could get away with it because they'd be able to prove that compelling you
back into uniform was the only way to gain your cooperation in order to complete an investigation.
And it would probably not have been as easy as they claimed, otherwise they wouldn't have
needed to mention it as a threat to get your assistance. They would have just recalled you for
the duration of the investigation.

The problem (as I see it) with the "stop-loss" orders is it gives a clear indication that the Pentagon
did not properly plan for allocation of troops. Otherwise they would have increased recruitment
to increase military numbers to a level where it would be acceptable to let reservists go,
or offered better incentives for current troops to voluntarily extend enlistment.

 

[conjur]

This is somewhat related so I thought I'd add it here instead of a new thread:

Former soldiers slow to report
http://www.usatoday.com/news/n...4-09-27-reserves_x.htm

WASHINGTON ? Fewer than two-thirds of the former soldiers being reactivated for duty in Iraq and elsewhere have reported on time, prompting the Army to threaten some with punishment for desertion.
The former soldiers, part of what is known as the Individual Ready Reserve (IRR), are being recalled to fill shortages in skills needed for the conflicts in Iraq and Afghanistan.

Of the 1,662 ready reservists ordered to report to Fort Jackson, S.C., by Sept. 22, only 1,038 had done so, the Army said Monday. About 500 of those who failed to report have requested exemptions on health or personal grounds.

"The numbers did not look good," said Lt. Col. Burton Masters, a spokesman for the Army's Human Resources Command. "We are tightening the system, reaching the people and bringing them in."

Masters said most of the requests for exemptions are likely to be denied: "To get an exemption, it has to be a very compelling case, such as a severe medical condition."

The figures are the first on the IRR call-up. They reflect the challenges the Pentagon faces in trying to find enough troops for ongoing operations and show resistance among some servicemembers who returned to civilian life.

The ready reserve is an infrequently used pool of former soldiers who can be called to duty in a national emergency or war. On June 29, the Army announced it would call 5,674 members of its IRR back to active duty this year and next.

Several of those who received recall notices have already been declared AWOL (absent without official leave) and technically are considered deserters. "We are not in a rush to put someone in the AWOL category," Masters said. "We contact them and convince them it is in their best interests to show up. If you are a deserter, it can affect you the rest of your life."

Fourteen people were listed as AWOL last week; six subsequently told the Army they would report. Punishment for being AWOL is up to the unit commander and can include prison time and dishonorable discharge, said Col. Joseph Curtin, an Army spokesman.

With a force that generals say is stretched thin, the Army is considering $1,000-a-month bonuses to ex-soldiers who volunteer to return for overseas duty.

Ready reservists are soldiers who were honorably discharged after finishing their active-duty tours, usually four to six years, but remain part of the IRR for the rest of their original eight-year commitment. The IRR call-up is the first major one in 13 years, since 20,277 troops were ordered back for the Persian Gulf War.

 

[PatboyX]

Originally posted by: EagleKeeper
This John Doe signed into the reserves.<BR><BR>When he did thta, he contracted for a set period of time. If that time expired, then he should be clear to leave.<BR>However, National Security will have a loophole to retain him as needed.

youd think in "times of war" all bets would be off.

 

[DanceMan]

Several of those who received recall notices have already been declared AWOL (absent without official leave) and technically are considered deserters. "We are not in a rush to put someone in the AWOL category," Masters said. "We contact them and convince them it is in their best interests to show up. If you are a deserter, it can affect you the rest of your life."

Well, then I would hope it affects my life like it has George Bush's!


DanceMan

 

[imported_Sasha]

There is always Canada.

 

[1EZduzit]

Originally posted by: PatboyX

Originally posted by: EagleKeeper
This John Doe signed into the reserves.<BR><BR>When he did thta, he contracted for a set period of time. If that time expired, then he should be clear to leave.<BR>However, National Security will have a loophole to retain him as needed.

youd think in "times of war" all bets would be off.

If he's did his time, he should get out. Anything else is just making indentured servants out of them. They should have thought of that before they cut all their benifits and made the "one week-end a month" boys start towing the line their leaders wouldn't.

 

[imported_judge]

Originally posted by: Sasha
There is always Canada.

not any more