Leaderboard

Well, anything else the airlines can do for you? Maybe instant upgrade to captain when you get back from mil leave too? Geez dude, I hope you don't come to my airline. This type of thinking is what has caused tons of problems for the rest of us. I'm currently on probation at my #1 choice airline and am glad I did things the way I did. I was offered an AGR flying job and the unit told me they'd work with me on the timing so I could get my seniority number first etc. I just didn't feel right about it so I took a much less desirable TR job and am so happy I did. While airline flying is much easier than mil flying, in my opinion, there is still a lot of new stuff to learn. During training I actually worked pretty hard and saw a couple of other mil dudes stumble pretty hard because they took it for granted. I've learned a ton on the line too. I don't think it's wise to leave right after training to come back to the airline environment years later that you probably aren't used to in order to face more jeopardy again. They're not going to cut you any slack either. I was tempted to take that AGR job and was tempted to go on orders recently too but I was advised by multiple bros to focus on the new job and get through probation first. I'm not a cool aid drinker for my airline but they deserve my focus and effort during probation. To get hired with the plan to go on orders a month or two later just because "you're not ready to stop flying full time in the military" is b.s. If that's how you feel then you're not ready to go to the airlines. Like others have said, your plan might be legal, but it's straight up dishonest. I can't tell you how many times it's already been emphasized to me by my airline that mil leave needs to be on the up and up because of the massive abuses they've seen. It really sucks to be the new guy and to know you're under the microscope for anything you do when it comes to mil leave due to the people ahead of you who have messed it up. Don't be THAT guy!

Then I enslave my children on a daily basis. Just being a cheeky bastard but the libertarians in this discussion are taking things too an extreme. Liberty and Personal Freedom / Choice are not infinite and the price to realize them at any level is that as individuals we sacrifice a small amount of our own allotment to allow the group to experience it as a whole. Like paying taxes, we each pay some so that we all have something(s) we all need. I think @Vertigo mentioned earlier that your freedom ends when it intrudes on the freedom of another, I would caveat that with unreasonably intrudes on the freedom of another. The greater point to take away from that astute statement (Vertigo's not mine) is that all principles, values and other human concepts are subject to limitations of realization in the real world, that is they can never be fully realized only approximated to a reasonable extent. To have a place on this Earth where your God given rights can be realized requires people who organize together as a tribe / nation willing to use force and violence to keep other groups of humans from imposing their will, stealing your resources and/or killing / displacing your group. Paradoxically, in order to do this, the individuals of that group will have to subordinate some of their freedoms / personal choices in order for the group to realize the maximum amount of liberty / personal choice, not fully but as close to fully as conditions / resources will allow.

The biggest difference I saw with the last shutdown was you didn’t have an asshole administration trying to make the shutdown as intrusive and painful as possible for the public. Fencing off open air monuments in 2013 was a real dick move, and I think it says a lot about the character of the last administration.

So you stand against the law, but not enough to suffer discomfort (whatever consequence is currently tied that law) to see it repealed. Dr. King has some words of wisdom in that arena. Stating the specific law you're fighting against would make this a much more productive discussion as the root morality of that law should be the topic of debate. Clearly you think the law immoral (from your perspective) and wish it repealed, yet elected officials (past or present) disagree. Is that on the mark? P.S. In my opinion, your statement on "inalienable rights" and how we are born into those rights is the modern entitlement generation's interpretation of a concept our founding father's laid down...not the founding father's original interpretation. The father's meant it from a core of duty and responsibility, "millennials" (the attitude, not the birthdate) mean it as their birthright, not something to be earned and upheld. They want to fight FROM that right, not FOR it. Our modern interpretation of those "inalienable rights" is what will bring America to its knees because it breeds entitlement, not responsibility. P.P.S. I think the draft should only exist during times of crisis and absolute need (i.e. not now). Draftees would universally lower our fighting edge. I agree that if the whole nation feels the pain of the conflict and has to pay the price (WWII) the quality of the nation improves. What that price is forced on them (Vietnam), resentment takes deep root and nothing good comes from it.

FIFY

$100/mo taxable raise isn't going to change anyone's calculus. They know this. They've already made it abundantly clear that their plan is recruiting, not retention.

Fair enough and I am not for using conscription willy nilly just for keeping it legal and ready if required Referring to your idea that if the people will not willingly fight in numbers sufficient to ensure their sovereignty then their nation is not worth fighting for perhaps but if they are not willing to fight I am thinking that it is more accurate that they are not worthy of liberty

Tread lightly, it wasn't the GOP that started that.

T-38 transition at KRND likely followed by IFF at KRND.

Of course it’s not. It’s likely illegal. And he very likely might get fired when he turns in his orders to the company and they show him on mil AGR orders during the dates of indoc. And if he’s still in the military at that point (part time) could also be subject to discipline on that end too. Turns out it matters not in the eyes of USERRA whether you “plan” to drop mil leave or if you are forced to. Both are legally protected. BUT...buyer beware. Doing things to bring a spotlight on yourself during probation (like dropping mil leave right after indoc) might not be the wisest move, even if perfectly legal. You’re protected by USERRA for your mil service. But when you return, you are a still a probationary employee that can be fired for virtually any reason legally. And dudes have been. If you don’t act in good faith to the company, don’t expect any slack when you sign in late, miss a commute, struggle in training, are involved in an incident, etc. Not that one minor thing would mean you’re fired. But it could. Probation is a risky time to play obvious games with mil leave.

danny, we're discussing a plan to get hired, a plan to not work at that job, and a plan to receive financial, seniority, and quality of life benefits for three years... from the company he plans not to work at. i cannot believe anyone has any trouble whatsoever in comprehending there's a problem with this. we can argue all day about what the right amount of USERRA military service is, but in this case, we're talking............ zero productivity, zero contribution to the company that hired you to do at least something for the benefits you're being given. the expectation is that youll be compensated for either full-time or part-time work, not zero-time work. if you're working a full time guard or reserve gig and you know there's a need for your service, full-time, for the next three years and you intend to fulfill it, then the obvious and correct thing to do would be to work that position and when the times up, find your airline job. in this instance, he says he's not ready to be a part-timer, doesn't want to put in a full year of probation, and just wants to get his foot in the door. are you really trying to rationalize that?

There's a difference though between stepping up from part time to fill a full time job when a need arises, versus planning and pre-coordinating your 3 year orders before even getting hired at an airline. Heck, I know a guy (I think we both do) who never even got off AGR orders! Before starting INDOC he had already worked out his leave schedule to get through training and then dropped 'orders' to finish up his AGR tour for 3 more years. Can't imagine that was what USERRA was designed to protect.

1). It’s not even remotely a “technicality”. 2). What exactly is “periodic legitimate military service?” One weekend a month and 2 weeks a year? Only Deployments? What about volunteer mob vs invol? If “periodic service” is all the law intends, then why is 5 years the limit? Is serving as a desperately needed FTU IP during time of pilot production crisis “legitimate service?” What about a CMR pilot serving as Full time support in a squadron that’s wheezing to fill FTS spots? Or what about someone on the staff, which is otherwise manned at 12% with 11Fs right now? Is that service “legitimate?” It is it just a self serving boondoggle? Pretty much every job—flying or staff, deployed or home station is desperately needed right now. You can argue style points about dropping mil leave on probation or right after, but at the end of the day it matters not that much. Other that that the pilot would be in some level of jeopardy going through training one more time while still on probation. If you suck. Airlines don’t like it if you drop mil leave at all. But they also accept it as reality

i dont give a shift

cmon, man. were talking about planning to exploit a technicality in a law with a design and intent to protect people who are required to perform periodic legitimate military service. it sure as shit wasn't designed for people to skip work for three years immediately after being hired for the sole purpose of enriching themselves. how is this not completely obvious? the fact that integrity (especially among military officers) should extend a least a little bit beyond what the law allows you to get away with shouldn't be something that needs to be typed on a forum post. it happens. people can scam the system all the time. but let's have a little intellectual honesty here, admit that's it's harmful, and not encourage more military folks to do it lest we poison the well.

Are you sure its 30%? Take the MEB and run, you will get your annuity immediately and TRICARE, the VA may rate you higher and you could potentially make more money. Scroll down to hip replacement, looks like 30% in the end, it also says TDRL, which means they can put you back on active duty if you get better. https://www.militarydisabilitymadeeasy.com/hipandthigh.html

Since Turkey is really only interested in bombing the PKK, seems like overkill.

The enemy of my friend’s friend’s enemy is my enemy. Or something like that.