oldtimer a veteran?

[rcarver]

I served in the Oklahoma Army National Guard 1954-1959; then in the Army Standby Reserve 1959-1971. The only active duty was the two weeks training each summer. At a function, if the host asks for all "veterans" to stand, should I stay seated? I receive lots of invitations to join the American Legion, but I think that deployed active duty is required. Does my little bit of military service qualify me for any benefits at all? Can I even call myself a "veteran"?

[SteveLord]

Given what you've said here, you would not qualify as a veteran. You have to serve active duty and be discharged from that duty (which is what the DD214 is for.) Active duty "training" does not count.

It's typically at least 90 or 180 days depending on the era.

[SGT Bart]

Still thank you for your service That's 7011's era of soldiers!

[Chief Kemosabe]

I served in the Oklahoma Army National Guard 1954-1959; then in the Army Standby Reserve 1959-1971. The only active duty was the two weeks training each summer. At a function, if the host asks for all "veterans" to stand, should I stay seated? I receive lots of invitations to join the American Legion, but I think that deployed active duty is required. Does my little bit of military service qualify me for any benefits at all? Can I even call myself a "veteran"?

Good day Rcarver. I recently posted about legislation to give the status of veterans to soldiers as yourself. In my book, you have served and that is what counts. I am looking forward to the retirement pastures myself.

Is the Standby Reserve similar to todays Individual Ready Reserve (IRR)?

[7011USMC]

Still thank you for your service That's 7011's era of soldiers!

That was when men were men and sheep still scared...lol

[rkazer]

Given what you've said here, you would not qualify as a veteran. You have to serve active duty and be discharged from that duty (which is what the DD214 is for.) Active duty "training" does not count.

It's typically at least 90 or 180 days depending on the era.

A veteran is defined by federal law, moral code and military service as any person who served for Any length of time in Any military service branch.

A combat/war veteran is any GI who experiences any level of hostility for any duration resulting from offensive, defensive or friendly fire military action involving a real or perceived threat in any pre- or post-designated theater of combat (war) operations.

[Chief Kemosabe]

This was discussed in another thread

xxjaygrl, recently your question was answered at these websites 1) http://www.ngaus.org/tier2.asp?bid=17553 and 2) http://www.stripes.com/news/military...ervists-1.7515


LEGISLATIVE ALERT #10-23 October 20, 2010



The Issue: Authorizing Veteran Status for National Guard and Reserve Members Entitled to Reserve Retirement Pay

Immediate Action Required: Contact your Senators and ask them to expeditiously pass H.R. 3787, previously passed by the House of Representatives and now before the Senate. This bill would authorize National Guard and Reserve members entitled to Reserve retirement pay the honor of claiming Veteran status

The House of Representatives passed H.R.3787 - The Honor America’s Guard-Reserve Retirees Act, September 28, 2010 and sent the bill to the Senate for its approval. This cost-neutral bill provides an opportunity for a divided Congress to come together post election in support of our Reserve Component members.

Many members of Congress may not know that a Reserve Component member can complete a full Guard or Reserve career but not earn the title of “Veteran of the Armed Forces of the United States” - unless the member has served on Title 10 active duty for other than training purposes.

Today, National Guard member’s performing Operation Noble Eagle duty or protecting our Southwestern border in a Title 32 status may one day retire from the Guard but not qualify to be classified as a Veteran of our Armed Forces.

Title 38 (Veteran’s Benefits) excludes career reservists from the definition of “veteran” who have not served on Title 10 (active duty) for other than training purposes. Drill training, annual training, active duty for training and Title 32 duty are currently not qualifying service to earn veteran status.

This cost neutral bill would not bestow any benefits other than the honor of claiming “veteran” status for Reserve Component members who completed a 20 year career but were never ordered to Title 10 active service.


TAKE THE FOLLOWING ACTION:


By using the “Write to Congress” feature provided below, you can IMMEDIATELY e-mail your elected representatives. A sample letter is included in our “Write to Congress” feature. You can e-mail the pre-written message or edit the sample letter as you desire. This is the quickest and most effective method of expressing your views to Congress. Also, contact your friends and family and urge them to “Write to Congress” as well. For more in-depth information and background visit our web site at http://www.ngaus.org/.

[SteveLord]

A veteran is defined by federal law, moral code and military service as any person who served for Any length of time in Any military service branch.

Can you show me that federal law? I'm not saying you're 100% wrong or I'm 100% right.

Perhaps with regard to having the title. However, you need a DD214 to prove your active duty time and "war era" if you intend to receive practically any kind of benefit tied to the status....which the OP was inquiring about.

[rkazer]

Can you show me that federal law? I'm not saying you're 100% wrong or I'm 100% right.

Perhaps with regard to having the title. However, you need a DD214 to prove your active duty time and "war era" if you intend to receive practically any kind of benefit tied to the status....which the OP was inquiring about.

Straight from the OPM website in refernence to Federal Law. You are correct i believe. If you are trying to get Veteran Benefits, it is a bit different.

The National Defense Authorization Act for
Fiscal Year 2006, Public Law 109-163, was signed into law by the
President on January 6, 2006, containing two provisions (sections 1111
and 1112 of Title XI) which amend section 2108(1) of title 5, United
States Code. Section 1111 of Title XI of the Act expands the definition
of a veteran in 5 U.S.C. 2108(1) to include individuals who served on
active duty for more than 180 consecutive days, other than for
training, any part of which occurred during the period beginning
September 11, 2001, and ending on the date prescribed by Presidential
proclamation or by law as the last day of Operation Iraqi Freedom. OPM
is revising its regulation by adding this new definition to Sec.
211.102(a) consistent with this statutory change.

[Mr_Loki]

So the same people who have been messing up my pay for 4 straight years are veterans?

Good thing I claim the "War Veteran" and they don't.

[rkazer]

The whole thing is confusing.

The soldiers deployed to the Mexican border are on Title 32 orders so in that definition, they will not be considered 'Veterans'. I don't understand how that is right by any mean.

[Mr_Loki]

I honestly think people get the two mixed up.

Veteran - someone who has been in an organization for an extended period of time

is different that the Veteran that most members talk about which is "War Veteran".

[Rokovak]

Can you show me that federal law? I'm not saying you're 100% wrong or I'm 100% right.

Perhaps with regard to having the title. However, you need a DD214 to prove your active duty time and "war era" if you intend to receive practically any kind of benefit tied to the status....which the OP was inquiring about.

With free meals at Applesbee's, Golden Corral and other restaurants being among the exceptions. They don't ask for your DD214 and most employees couldn't make sense of it anyway!

[SteveLord]

The whole thing is confusing.

It is. Generally though, it's all about having that DD214 that lays out 180+ days of active duty time overseas.

[Chief Kemosabe]

rkazer,

If the bill is passed or not; its still great to know that a person can serve his country for 20 years in part-time status and receive a pension. No other profession offers that benefit.
I am monitoring the bill , and I believe the Senate will do the right thing. The issue is money since you will increase the veteran pool but I believe it is worth is.

Ironically, what happened to me was that I was always using the VA and then went on federal active duty. There was a VA clinic on the installation but I could not use it since I was now on orders and had to use the base clinic. I showed them my VA card but it still did not mattered.

[rkazer]

rkazer,

If the bill is passed or not; its still great to know that a person can serve his country for 20 years in part-time status and receive a pension. No other profession offers that benefit.
I am monitoring the bill, and I believe the Senate will do the right thing. The issue is money since you will increase the veteran pool but I believe it is worth is.

Ironically, what happened to me was that I was always using the VA and then went on federal active duty. There was a VA clinic on the installation but I could not use it since I was now on orders and had to use the base clinic. I showed them my VA card but it still did not mattered.

WOW. I am so glad that you shared that information.

I hope this passes. I work full time for the national guard and being under Title 32, I will never get benefits as a "Veteran".

I'm sorry what's going on w/ you and your situation. I hope they pass this bill.