Talk:Individual Ready Reserve

The IRR

The IRR is where an induvidual does the rest of his 8 year obligation. All people when they enlist incur 8 years of service, it's broken down anywhere from 2 years active and 6 years inactive on up evenly (2x6, 4x4, 6x2).

My point is, it's not 'normal' for 4x4, only in the Regular Army. In the National Guard, especially with new recruits, you will see a 6x2 contract (6 years in the ARNG, 2 in the IRR).

Will I still be put into the IRR if I am chaptered out involuntarily? I want to go reserves but the recruiter said I have to be put in the IRR to qualify.

Numbers

Article needs a lot of detail on how big this is. Currently the reader can't tell if it's 2,000 people or twelve million. Suggested details to add:

• What percentage of enlisted men go into the program? (categorized by service)
• What percentage of officers? (categorized by service)
• What's the current number?
• How many people sign up for an 8-year obligation when they enlist?

Tempshill 22:15, 22 August 2006 (UTC)

To the best of my knowledge, all enlistments are 8 years. Those who enlist into active duty typically spend the first 4 years in active duty, and the remaining 4 in the IRR. Reservists typically have a 6 year "drilling reservist" status, followed by two years in the IRR. --User:Cuervo @ 76.212.167.62 06:04, 24 August 2007 (UTC)

Expansion

Should we expand this? The IRR is going to be playing a huge role due to the GWOT.

Hal06 13:43, 29 August 2006 (UTC)

The article claims that "Until the Global War on Terror, members of the Individual Ready Reserve had not been called up since World War II." Then the article claims that "approximately 20,000 IRR troops were called up in support of Operation Desert Storm." One of these claims cannot be true.71.40.72.189 17:44, 11 January 2007 (UTC)

The IRR was called up during Desert Storm. Source provided in article. Gelston 10:08, 14 January 2007 (UTC)

I'm not a wiki guy but the source on Desert Storm is mighty weak. It's a breifing on a study and has almost no information on the extent of the callup or what their role was. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 24.34.116.93 (talk) 17:39, 21 October 2007 (UTC)

Army bias

The article reads like it was written by a soldier (as opposed to a Marine, airman, or whatever). --Cuervo @ 76.212.167.62 06:05, 24 August 2007 (UTC) To be more specific, if one didn't know any better, they would never know that the Air Force has IRR as well based on reading this definition. All Armed Services have IRR. Discussions that reference "MOS" and artillery are Army-specific. This article needs to be written from the perspective of any service.

UCMJ is applicable to IRR soldiers.

UCMJ is applicable to IRR soldiers as they are soldiers waiting for a discharge after having finished their term of service. The military is not going after them for whatever reason, cost to benefit comparison, savings the personnel for more important things, etc. They do have the authority to prosecute for AWOL/UA, they simply choose not to. Also, you are given a tentative character of discharge when you are reassigned to the IRR, your character of discharge that you receive at the end of your IRR is your true and final character of discharge from the army, and the only character of discharge that you have. The article makes it sound as if you will only get a bad discharge from the IRR but you will still have you honorable discharge from active duty. The reference for the section is a propaganda site run by IRR resisters, not exactly the fairest or most impartial group. I would hesitate to trust a group of people who feel they have the right to ignore their contractual obligations to activate from the IRR based on a mistaken belief that just because the Army ignores them that means the Army isn't able to come after them. Even if the UCMJ did not apply to IRR soldiers they would still be liable under contract law for a breach of contract and my admittedly inexpert guess is that the Army's damages for that breach would be the entire cost to train a new recruit to replace the IRR resisters, which is quoted at approx. $150,000. AaronMP84 (talk) 11:27, 21 June 2013 (UTC)

Completely agree. Refusal to mobilize from the IRR is a very serious thing and can follow a person for the rest of their life. Also, most employers DO know the difference between "Released from Active Duty" and "Discharged". Showing a DD214 saying you got an Honorable RAD is great, but any employer with a brain will then ask to see the final discharge order or certificate from the reserves. Social Security checks too, and someone who gets a general or OTH from the reserves will have that reflected on SSA payments even decades later. -OberRanks (talk) 20:32, 23 May 2010 (UTC)

Here is the link: [1] -OberRanks (talk) 20:37, 23 May 2010 (UTC)

VA

Members of the IRR who meet the minimum service requirements for VA eligibility, i.e. 2 continuous years of active duty, less than 2 years active but with a deployment, etc., will still be eligible for veterans benefits even if they are recalled to active duty. Visit www.va.gov or go to your nearest VA hospital for full requirements and to apply; you do not have to have a service-related injury or illness to be eligible for VA healthcare. I would like to know of an actual example where a person is not in the IRR to finish off their 8 year contract. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Peacekeeper 1234 (talk • contribs) 15:20, 17 December 2010 (UTC) DoD health care programs are available to IRR members only if they are activated. Now if an IRR member manages to qualify for retirement by accumulating enough "points" and "good years" (jargon), they will have all of the benefits available to every other military retiree. Many servicemembers do manage to retire with a combination of active duty, Ready Reserve duty, and Selected Reserve service. But this sort of information may be too much "in the weeds" for WP. --S. Rich (talk) 16:19, 17 December 2010 (UTC)

Authority to recall IRR soldiers

The issue of whether or not there is a "civilian law" that provides a legal compulsion for soldiers to report when ordered to activate from the IRR has been disputed. There are, in fact, at least two "civilian laws" which provide such a compulsion, both of which are currently relevant.

• US Code 10 Section 12302 grants the President the authority to involuntarily activate "any unit, and any member not assigned to a unit organized to serve as a unit, in the Ready Reserve" to active duty for up to 24 months. The primary limitations on this power are that it may only be exercised during a national emergency declared by the President, and that there may be no more than 1,000,000 such personnel on active duty against their will at one time.

In connection with this it is worth pointing out that we have been in a declared national emergency since 9/14/01 due to 9/11. I'm not sure if it's still true, but at one time I researched national emergencies and at the time, if I remember correctly, I determined that we have technically been in a state of national emergency without interruption since Iran-Contra.

• US Code 10 Section 12304 grants the President the power to "order any unit, and any member not assigned to a unit organized to serve as a unit of the Selected Reserve (as defined in section 10143 (a) of this title), or any member in the Individual Ready Reserve mobilization category and designated as essential" to active duty for up to 365 days.

The only pre-requisite for involuntary activations under this section is that the President determine that "it is necessary to augment the active forces for any named operational mission or that it is necessary to provide assistance referred to in subsection (b)." Subsection (b) lists essentially a response to emergencies related to either terrorism or WMDs.

Section 12304 goes on to list specific limitations and set forth certain procedures related to callups under this section.

AaronMP84 (talk) 05:19, 23 June 2012 (UTC)

No one has ever been punished for refusing IRR orders. 140.186.246.248 (talk) 03:04, 3 November 2023 (UTC)

UCMJ Status (finally verified)

There was an unreferenced revision to the article a while ago that stated that UCMJ does not apply to IRR soldiers, and there is no "civilian law" requiring them to report as ordered. The second part of that statement I addressed in the previous section of this talk page, showing that there are, in fact, two non-UCMJ laws yielding a legal compulsion to report. This shows that failing to report is in violation of law, but leaves unanswered the question of whether the UCMJ does in fact apply to IRR soldiers or not.

• First and foremost it is important that it is understood that UCMJ is, in fact, no different than any "civilian law," as it is a law enacted by congress like any other. Specifically it may be known as 10 USC Chapter 47.

• The primary distinction that provides it with it's "military law" aspect, is Article 2 of 10 USC Chapter 47. Article 2 of 10 USC Chapter 47 (UCMJ) delineates who is subject to UCMJ authority. The relevant text would be "persons lawfully called or ordered into, or to duty in or for training in, the armed forces, from the dates when they are required by the terms of the call or order to obey it." This clearly states that if lawfully ordered to report under the two laws cited in the previous section of this talk page, that upon the date you are required to report you become subject to UCMJ. This effectively means that as of the day that you fail to report, you simultaneously become subject to UCMJ regardless of whether or not you actually do report, and if not, regardless of what the reason you didn't report was.

To summarize, the only reason that civilians are in general excluded from being subject to UCMJ is due to their not being listed in UCMJ Article 2. IRR soldiers, however, if ordered to activation ARE listed in UCMJ Article 2 as of their report date.

AaronMP84 (talk) 05:46, 23 June 2012 (UTC)

None of this changes the fact that you can ignore IRR orders without consequences. 140.186.246.248 (talk) 03:09, 3 November 2023 (UTC)

History of Activations section

The activation history section could be made more clear, the history section begins in Feb 2003, but the prior paragraph describes the Marine Corps beginning activations in 2001

Lack of enforcement

No matter what the military law states the fact is: the individual ready reserve law is not enforced. No one has ever been punished for ignoring or refusing IRR orders. I feel that every veteran has a right to know that if they receive IRR orders. If you refuse to report you will receive orders to report for a hearing. If you ignore those you get a general discharge from the IRR. Only one veteran I am aware of reported to his hearing. His story is here:

 Ihttps://linksunten.archive.indymedia.org/node/5088/index.html

If the situation changes, and members of the IRR begin to face legal consequences, I can change the page to reflect that. 140.186.246.248 (talk) 23:34, 10 October 2022 (UTC)

History of War on Terror activations

I tagged this section with {{Prose|section|date=October 2024}} because it presents information in a list format (or really, mostly lists and then a short bit of prose), even though the other sections present information in a prose format. Still-Can't-Believe-It's-Not-Butter (talk) 00:45, 23 October 2024 (UTC)

Opening Summary Needs Rewrite

Can anyone rewrite the opening summary so that it's written in a fluid fashion, in a proper English syntax? Stevenmitchell (talk) 07:33, 17 November 2024 (UTC)