This replies to your letter on behalf of Mr. John At the outset it is essential to note that the military technician program primarily exists to enhance mobilization readiness of the Armed Forces of the United States. The fact that it offers Federal civilian employment is but a secondary consideration. Consequently, any changes that might occur in the technician program in the future could only be made if they enhance readiness. The Army Reserve is actively reviewing the entire technician program and conducting research that will be the basis of any proposed changes in current policy or regulations. The object of such changes would be to increase the compatibility of the systems that manage the careers of soldiers and those that manage the careers of Federal civilian employees. Issues of promotion opportunity and employment after military retirement will be carefully examined. To this end, the Office of the Assistant Secretary of Defense (Reserve Affairs) has recently created the Military Technician Study Group, and the Army Reserve is conducting an Army Reserve Technician Survey. policy prior to the completion of this important research would be obviously premature. Changing Honorable Les Aspin OCT 1991 The necessary research is expected to be completed and an implementing Department of Defense directive issued in early 1992. After the directive is issued, any necessary changes in the governing Army Regulations will be finalized along with any proposals for required legislation. During this process, input from knowledgeable people like Mr. Esposito is extremely useful; therefore, his suggestions will be kept on file and given serious consideration. If he has further concerns or would like to make additional suggestions, he is invited to contact Mrs. Barbara Mayer at (703) 695-0879. I trust this information will be of assistance to you and Mr. Esposito. Your interest in and support of the United States Army Reserve are most appreciated. Sincerely, 59-855 - 92 - 22 JOHN P. McLAURIN, III Thank you for writing and also visiting my office to explain your views about a number of proposals of concern to civilian technicians. You certainly have been an asset to your colleagues as you continue to push for what you feel are necessary changes in federal law. My staff has prepared for me materials concerning not only the 8 December '83 law, but the other bills you are pursuing in Congress. I have not yet made a decision on what bills I will cosponor. However, you can be sure I will give each one serious consideration. I believe if you look at my record you will see that I have been very supportive of union concerns. You explain in a concise manner what you consider to be the problems with Public Law 98-212. I am reviewing this to ensure that you and your colleagues receive fair treatment from the federal government. Again, thank you for contacting me on this important issue. Mühe Nicholas Mavroules TIRS STATKIMERY PONTED ON PAPER MADE OF RECYCLED FIMERS DEPARTMENT OF THE ARMY HEADQUARTERS, FIRST U.S. ARMY AND FORT GEORGE G. MEADE 20755-7500 : REPLY TO AFKA-PR-C (140) 13 March 1990 MEMORANDUM FOR COMMANDER, FORCES COMMAND, ATTN: FCJ1, FORT SUBJECT: Military Technician Retirement 1. In accordance with AR 140-315, paragraph bi, military technicians may be retained in a military status to age 60 to attain eligibility for an immediate civil service annuity. Recently, OCAR has implemented an unwritten policy to disapprove requests for retention if a unit position would be blocked longer than one year. We understand that blocking a unit position may not be desirable, but we believe denying a military technician a livelihood and subsequent civil service annuity is a much larger: problem. 2. We recently had two requests for retention disapproved. Une individual is currently 49 years old with 19 years of Federal: civil service and the other is 50 years old with 12 years.of. Federal service. The likelihood of further placement of these employees through the 000 Priority Placement Program is most unlikely because of lack of qualification requirements for non-military technician positions. We have resubmitted the one ** case for reconsideration and will be forwarding the other case in the near future. :3. One command within First Army studied the civil service. retirement posture of the military technicians in the command. or those military technicians hired after December 1983, 55 out of 80 military technicians would require a waiver for retention beyond MRD or maximum years service to attain civil service retirement eligibility. It is reasonable to predict, similiar results in other commands. 4. There are several options to resolve the problem: a. Approve requests for retention to age retirement eligibility whichever is earlier. regulations permit this. T .. 60 or civil service The current |