Veterans Thread

(Applications Advice, Letters of Recommendation . . . )
User avatar
dannyswo
Posts: 3628
Joined: Thu Mar 03, 2016 4:27 pm

Re: Veterans Thread

Postby dannyswo » Thu May 11, 2017 6:14 am

CenterFringe wrote:
CMac86 wrote:What did you guys do between starting terminal leave/end of contract and starting school?

I'm planning fairly far out. I have two years left on my contract. I've talked to my command career counselor and developed a plan for getting the wheels in motion.

If all goes well, I'll be knocking a month off of my contract via early out so my EAOS will be a month before school starts, and then the exact amount of time of terminal I'll be authorized will depend on when they can get a replacement for me. I'm the only person with my NEC at my command, so I'm mentally preparing for two possibilities: having to work right up until my EAOS and then on the flipside, being authorized to take the maximum terminal (in my case, I could have up to 90 days on the books since my EAOS is before the start of the next fiscal year). I've read milpers 1050-10 and 1050-20, and it sounds like it is at OIC discretion and depends on if they can get a replacement early enough. If all of that works out, I'll have about 120 days between start of terminal and the start of school. I'm saving up money for a buffer fund, if all goes well, I'll have 6-8 months worth of living expenses (rent, food, bills, etc) saved up. I know that I'll be house/apartment hunting, but I'm more so curious about what else you guys did.


So I thought I was going to be able to get out about 6 weeks before classes started. Literally had orders in my hand for about an hour before they got pulled back. While I still may get out two weeks before classes start, the lack of certainty has made it impossible to commit to starting classes this fall, so I deferred for a year and will just sell back my leave. I know it's NBD, but it was pretty hard, emotionally, to submit that deferral, especially after going to ASW.

I'm going to live with my dad for 6 months, probably volunteer with the Colorado Legal Society and/or an substantively relevant organization in an attempt to set myself up for a good paying 1L externship. I'm also planning to do a metric-shit ton of skiing, climbing, and hiking over that six months, and then travel for the remaining three or four, to do some more climbing. Due to the lack of need to pay rent, I'm currently not planning on working, although I may pick up a short term project (I'm an engineer by trade) to make a little beer money, but I honestly don't know that I even want to do that. I'm feeling pretty burned out right now.

Anyway, a lot can change in two years, and it's so easy for the O-5/O-6 to just say "not until your replacement arrives" and, well, there goes your plan, so be financially and emotionally prepared if you've gotta wait a year to start classes.

I'd take it up your chain of command. Make the O-5/O-6 explain to the flag why his organization can't deal with one fewer person for a couple of weeks.
BT BT
Funding might be an issue right now in releasing orders.

CenterFringe
Posts: 104
Joined: Thu Mar 24, 2016 7:30 pm

Re: Veterans Thread

Postby CenterFringe » Thu May 11, 2017 5:05 pm

dannyswo wrote:
CenterFringe wrote:
CMac86 wrote:What did you guys do between starting terminal leave/end of contract and starting school?

I'm planning fairly far out. I have two years left on my contract. I've talked to my command career counselor and developed a plan for getting the wheels in motion.

If all goes well, I'll be knocking a month off of my contract via early out so my EAOS will be a month before school starts, and then the exact amount of time of terminal I'll be authorized will depend on when they can get a replacement for me. I'm the only person with my NEC at my command, so I'm mentally preparing for two possibilities: having to work right up until my EAOS and then on the flipside, being authorized to take the maximum terminal (in my case, I could have up to 90 days on the books since my EAOS is before the start of the next fiscal year). I've read milpers 1050-10 and 1050-20, and it sounds like it is at OIC discretion and depends on if they can get a replacement early enough. If all of that works out, I'll have about 120 days between start of terminal and the start of school. I'm saving up money for a buffer fund, if all goes well, I'll have 6-8 months worth of living expenses (rent, food, bills, etc) saved up. I know that I'll be house/apartment hunting, but I'm more so curious about what else you guys did.


So I thought I was going to be able to get out about 6 weeks before classes started. Literally had orders in my hand for about an hour before they got pulled back. While I still may get out two weeks before classes start, the lack of certainty has made it impossible to commit to starting classes this fall, so I deferred for a year and will just sell back my leave. I know it's NBD, but it was pretty hard, emotionally, to submit that deferral, especially after going to ASW.

I'm going to live with my dad for 6 months, probably volunteer with the Colorado Legal Society and/or an substantively relevant organization in an attempt to set myself up for a good paying 1L externship. I'm also planning to do a metric-shit ton of skiing, climbing, and hiking over that six months, and then travel for the remaining three or four, to do some more climbing. Due to the lack of need to pay rent, I'm currently not planning on working, although I may pick up a short term project (I'm an engineer by trade) to make a little beer money, but I honestly don't know that I even want to do that. I'm feeling pretty burned out right now.

Anyway, a lot can change in two years, and it's so easy for the O-5/O-6 to just say "not until your replacement arrives" and, well, there goes your plan, so be financially and emotionally prepared if you've gotta wait a year to start classes.

I'd take it up your chain of command. Make the O-5/O-6 explain to the flag why his organization can't deal with one fewer person for a couple of weeks.
BT BT
Funding might be an issue right now in releasing orders.


I took it to the two star. I lost. I'm the third officer, that I know of, to have been denied terminal by this commander in the last two years. I don't think my case is normal across the services, but when it comes to terminal leave "command discretion" is still the operative word.

User avatar
dannyswo
Posts: 3628
Joined: Thu Mar 03, 2016 4:27 pm

Re: Veterans Thread

Postby dannyswo » Fri May 12, 2017 12:28 am

CenterFringe wrote:
dannyswo wrote:
CenterFringe wrote:
CMac86 wrote:What did you guys do between starting terminal leave/end of contract and starting school?

I'm planning fairly far out. I have two years left on my contract. I've talked to my command career counselor and developed a plan for getting the wheels in motion.

If all goes well, I'll be knocking a month off of my contract via early out so my EAOS will be a month before school starts, and then the exact amount of time of terminal I'll be authorized will depend on when they can get a replacement for me. I'm the only person with my NEC at my command, so I'm mentally preparing for two possibilities: having to work right up until my EAOS and then on the flipside, being authorized to take the maximum terminal (in my case, I could have up to 90 days on the books since my EAOS is before the start of the next fiscal year). I've read milpers 1050-10 and 1050-20, and it sounds like it is at OIC discretion and depends on if they can get a replacement early enough. If all of that works out, I'll have about 120 days between start of terminal and the start of school. I'm saving up money for a buffer fund, if all goes well, I'll have 6-8 months worth of living expenses (rent, food, bills, etc) saved up. I know that I'll be house/apartment hunting, but I'm more so curious about what else you guys did.


So I thought I was going to be able to get out about 6 weeks before classes started. Literally had orders in my hand for about an hour before they got pulled back. While I still may get out two weeks before classes start, the lack of certainty has made it impossible to commit to starting classes this fall, so I deferred for a year and will just sell back my leave. I know it's NBD, but it was pretty hard, emotionally, to submit that deferral, especially after going to ASW.

I'm going to live with my dad for 6 months, probably volunteer with the Colorado Legal Society and/or an substantively relevant organization in an attempt to set myself up for a good paying 1L externship. I'm also planning to do a metric-shit ton of skiing, climbing, and hiking over that six months, and then travel for the remaining three or four, to do some more climbing. Due to the lack of need to pay rent, I'm currently not planning on working, although I may pick up a short term project (I'm an engineer by trade) to make a little beer money, but I honestly don't know that I even want to do that. I'm feeling pretty burned out right now.

Anyway, a lot can change in two years, and it's so easy for the O-5/O-6 to just say "not until your replacement arrives" and, well, there goes your plan, so be financially and emotionally prepared if you've gotta wait a year to start classes.

I'd take it up your chain of command. Make the O-5/O-6 explain to the flag why his organization can't deal with one fewer person for a couple of weeks.
BT BT
Funding might be an issue right now in releasing orders.


I took it to the two star. I lost. I'm the third officer, that I know of, to have been denied terminal by this commander in the last two years. I don't think my case is normal across the services, but when it comes to terminal leave "command discretion" is still the operative word.

How can they not let you take leave? I'd consult a JAG and go Congressional. I mean, fuck those guys. They owe you leave. It's part of your pay. They want to withhold that because the service has shitty manpower management? That's a 4 star problem, not your problem.

Wipfelder
Posts: 726
Joined: Wed Jul 09, 2014 3:26 am

Re: Veterans Thread

Postby Wipfelder » Fri May 12, 2017 10:06 am

dannyswo wrote:
CenterFringe wrote:
dannyswo wrote:
CenterFringe wrote:
CMac86 wrote:What did you guys do between starting terminal leave/end of contract and starting school?

I'm planning fairly far out. I have two years left on my contract. I've talked to my command career counselor and developed a plan for getting the wheels in motion.

If all goes well, I'll be knocking a month off of my contract via early out so my EAOS will be a month before school starts, and then the exact amount of time of terminal I'll be authorized will depend on when they can get a replacement for me. I'm the only person with my NEC at my command, so I'm mentally preparing for two possibilities: having to work right up until my EAOS and then on the flipside, being authorized to take the maximum terminal (in my case, I could have up to 90 days on the books since my EAOS is before the start of the next fiscal year). I've read milpers 1050-10 and 1050-20, and it sounds like it is at OIC discretion and depends on if they can get a replacement early enough. If all of that works out, I'll have about 120 days between start of terminal and the start of school. I'm saving up money for a buffer fund, if all goes well, I'll have 6-8 months worth of living expenses (rent, food, bills, etc) saved up. I know that I'll be house/apartment hunting, but I'm more so curious about what else you guys did.


So I thought I was going to be able to get out about 6 weeks before classes started. Literally had orders in my hand for about an hour before they got pulled back. While I still may get out two weeks before classes start, the lack of certainty has made it impossible to commit to starting classes this fall, so I deferred for a year and will just sell back my leave. I know it's NBD, but it was pretty hard, emotionally, to submit that deferral, especially after going to ASW.

I'm going to live with my dad for 6 months, probably volunteer with the Colorado Legal Society and/or an substantively relevant organization in an attempt to set myself up for a good paying 1L externship. I'm also planning to do a metric-shit ton of skiing, climbing, and hiking over that six months, and then travel for the remaining three or four, to do some more climbing. Due to the lack of need to pay rent, I'm currently not planning on working, although I may pick up a short term project (I'm an engineer by trade) to make a little beer money, but I honestly don't know that I even want to do that. I'm feeling pretty burned out right now.

Anyway, a lot can change in two years, and it's so easy for the O-5/O-6 to just say "not until your replacement arrives" and, well, there goes your plan, so be financially and emotionally prepared if you've gotta wait a year to start classes.

I'd take it up your chain of command. Make the O-5/O-6 explain to the flag why his organization can't deal with one fewer person for a couple of weeks.
BT BT
Funding might be an issue right now in releasing orders.


I took it to the two star. I lost. I'm the third officer, that I know of, to have been denied terminal by this commander in the last two years. I don't think my case is normal across the services, but when it comes to terminal leave "command discretion" is still the operative word.

How can they not let you take leave? I'd consult a JAG and go Congressional. I mean, fuck those guys. They owe you leave. It's part of your pay. They want to withhold that because the service has shitty manpower management? That's a 4 star problem, not your problem.


Don't do this. They do not have to let you take leave, ever really. You'll get the money back, or just lose the days. (speaking from Army experience), it was generally poor form to actually use your leave as an officer, and also inappropriate to try and sell back excess days (you can only do it once a career). So,

1) They don't have to let you take leave

2) The General Officers who have to deal with it probably have less than no sympathy towards you, and none was ever given to them

3) Officers who quit the military in a time of war deserve no sympathy (this is a real POV that I have witnessed on many occasions)

User avatar
dannyswo
Posts: 3628
Joined: Thu Mar 03, 2016 4:27 pm

Re: Veterans Thread

Postby dannyswo » Fri May 12, 2017 10:22 am

This is not Nam. There are rules. The military cannot deny you leave. Any more than they can cut your pay without taking you to mast. Fuck sympathy. You signed a deal. They need to play by the rules too. Don't let the military walk over you because they can't plan. You're not leaving a battlefield. Stand up for yourself.

User avatar
dannyswo
Posts: 3628
Joined: Thu Mar 03, 2016 4:27 pm

Re: Veterans Thread

Postby dannyswo » Fri May 12, 2017 10:24 am

Also
Fuck your chain of command for not having your back.

Wipfelder
Posts: 726
Joined: Wed Jul 09, 2014 3:26 am

Re: Veterans Thread

Postby Wipfelder » Fri May 12, 2017 10:27 am

dannyswo wrote:Also
Fuck your chain of command for not having your back.


The rules are on their side, there is no "law" saying commanders have to grant leave.

And LOL at a chain of command having a typical junior officer/enlisted soldier's back . . . especially one getting out. I mean, some do, but that is, by far, a minority position.

User avatar
dannyswo
Posts: 3628
Joined: Thu Mar 03, 2016 4:27 pm

Re: Veterans Thread

Postby dannyswo » Fri May 12, 2017 10:34 am

Wipfelder wrote:
dannyswo wrote:Also
Fuck your chain of command for not having your back.


The rules are on their side, there is no "law" saying commanders have to grant leave.

And LOL at a chain of command having a typical junior officer/enlisted soldier's back . . . especially one getting out. I mean, some do, but that is, by far, a minority position.

Mostly because we are told to suck it up by bad leaders. I'm no sea lawyer, but big Navy policy is clear and signed by an Admiral. And I'm pretty sure leave is a right. Bottom line: you can stand up for yourself or let them get away with fucking you over. At ten years I might have gone quietly. Not at 20. Dues are paid.

Wipfelder
Posts: 726
Joined: Wed Jul 09, 2014 3:26 am

Re: Veterans Thread

Postby Wipfelder » Fri May 12, 2017 10:46 am

dannyswo wrote:
Wipfelder wrote:
dannyswo wrote:Also
Fuck your chain of command for not having your back.


The rules are on their side, there is no "law" saying commanders have to grant leave.

And LOL at a chain of command having a typical junior officer/enlisted soldier's back . . . especially one getting out. I mean, some do, but that is, by far, a minority position.

Mostly because we are told to suck it up by bad leaders. I'm no sea lawyer, but big Navy policy is clear and signed by an Admiral. And I'm pretty sure leave is a right. Bottom line: you can stand up for yourself or let them get away with fucking you over. At ten years I might have gone quietly. Not at 20. Dues are paid.


First, Navy v. Army.

Second, "signed by an admiral" means its a command order, and general officers are allowed discretion on how to follow, or when not to. A two-star general already said "no". I doubt he would if it were clearly "illegal".

Here is the US Army's interpretation of leave and how it fits into UCMJ (AR 600-8-10):

"Operational missions and essential supporting functions of each command must be accomplished to the extent permitted by the manning provided.
Leave will be granted within the constraints of operational military requirements and to the degree of support for leave provided in the unit manning document."

So basically, for poster to "win", he needs a three-star or four-star to overturn the legal, "reasonable" orders of a two-star acting within the UCMJ and Army Regulations. . . . . or have, through a congressional findings process that may take a year, the DoD overturn the two-star's order.

User avatar
dannyswo
Posts: 3628
Joined: Thu Mar 03, 2016 4:27 pm

Re: Veterans Thread

Postby dannyswo » Fri May 12, 2017 12:23 pm

Nah, he needs a JAG to tell the general he's wrong because the reasoning is bullshit, or he needs a Congressman's aide to call the office and ask why the Army can't function without a junior officer for two weeks. Drown the G1 in paperwork, and FOIA the General's emails. You don't need to win, you just need to show that it's easier to give you 2 weeks off than deal with someone asking questions about why your command can't run without one JO.

You've got to look out for yourself, especially if you're getting out. Don't play nice with people who are willing to fuck you over to help their career. If they were good leaders, they can do without you for two weeks of earned leave. The description posted above does not prohibit your leave. You're not putting your unit below it's minimum manning. You're not impacting operational military requirements. If 90% of the unit put in for leave, yeah, someone has to stay at work. If your unit was deploying and 50% of people put in for leave, yeah, it's an operational military requirement. One person doesn't impact either. If they need your billet filled, they can use the manning process to do it. You don't need to suffer because Big Army can't do their job.

The military is full of shitty leaders who get away with fucking over their people because they train you to be stoic and not complain. That's a suckers game. You've got nothing to lose when you're getting out. Obviously, I've got no skin in the game, so do what works for you.

User avatar
dannyswo
Posts: 3628
Joined: Thu Mar 03, 2016 4:27 pm

Re: Veterans Thread

Postby dannyswo » Fri May 12, 2017 12:27 pm

http://www.forthoodsentinel.com/news/mi ... ba6d3.html

Article about army leave written by the Assistant Inspector General.
Leave is paid vacation from duty for recreation and relief from the pressures of job-related duties. You may also take leave for personal reasons and emergency situations.

Leave is a right (not a privilege) that is granted by Congress under federal law. While leave is a right, that doesn’t necessarily mean you can take it whenever you wish. As with all things, the commander determines when you can take leave. Most units have block leave periods already planned in advance. This does not mean you cannot request leave outside of the block leave period; any Soldiers can put in for leave at any time. However, the commander approves or denies all leave requests based on unit mission/training, pending Uniformed Code of Military Justice action, administration action, health and welfare of the Soldiers or unit strength percentages.

As always the IG is here to help.

Drop a dime to the IG. It's free, and if I'm wrong, you don't have to sweat it.

Wipfelder
Posts: 726
Joined: Wed Jul 09, 2014 3:26 am

Re: Veterans Thread

Postby Wipfelder » Fri May 12, 2017 1:01 pm

dannyswo wrote:Nah, he needs a JAG to tell the general he's wrong because the reasoning is bullshit, or he needs a Congressman's aide to call the office and ask why the Army can't function without a junior officer for two weeks. Drown the G1 in paperwork, and FOIA the General's emails. You don't need to win, you just need to show that it's easier to give you 2 weeks off than deal with someone asking questions about why your command can't run without one JO.

You've got to look out for yourself, especially if you're getting out. Don't play nice with people who are willing to fuck you over to help their career. If they were good leaders, they can do without you for two weeks of earned leave. The description posted above does not prohibit your leave. You're not putting your unit below it's minimum manning. You're not impacting operational military requirements. If 90% of the unit put in for leave, yeah, someone has to stay at work. If your unit was deploying and 50% of people put in for leave, yeah, it's an operational military requirement. One person doesn't impact either. If they need your billet filled, they can use the manning process to do it. You don't need to suffer because Big Army can't do their job.

The military is full of shitty leaders who get away with fucking over their people because they train you to be stoic and not complain. That's a suckers game. You've got nothing to lose when you're getting out. Obviously, I've got no skin in the game, so do what works for you.


Don't you think the General who denied his leave signed off on the "memo" after it was approved by at least two JAG officers already? Like maybe the G1 and the JAG who recommended a course of action are at least as read-up on the rules as you are?

General officers don't just shoot from the hip when it comes to stuff like this.

But anyways, IG would have to find that some process or rule was violated. The truth of it all is that shitty, self-centered leaders survive and thrive in the military, and the system weighs heavy in their favor.

You do remember stop-loss and stuff right?

User avatar
dannyswo
Posts: 3628
Joined: Thu Mar 03, 2016 4:27 pm

Re: Veterans Thread

Postby dannyswo » Fri May 12, 2017 1:05 pm

Wipfelder wrote:
dannyswo wrote:Nah, he needs a JAG to tell the general he's wrong because the reasoning is bullshit, or he needs a Congressman's aide to call the office and ask why the Army can't function without a junior officer for two weeks. Drown the G1 in paperwork, and FOIA the General's emails. You don't need to win, you just need to show that it's easier to give you 2 weeks off than deal with someone asking questions about why your command can't run without one JO.

You've got to look out for yourself, especially if you're getting out. Don't play nice with people who are willing to fuck you over to help their career. If they were good leaders, they can do without you for two weeks of earned leave. The description posted above does not prohibit your leave. You're not putting your unit below it's minimum manning. You're not impacting operational military requirements. If 90% of the unit put in for leave, yeah, someone has to stay at work. If your unit was deploying and 50% of people put in for leave, yeah, it's an operational military requirement. One person doesn't impact either. If they need your billet filled, they can use the manning process to do it. You don't need to suffer because Big Army can't do their job.

The military is full of shitty leaders who get away with fucking over their people because they train you to be stoic and not complain. That's a suckers game. You've got nothing to lose when you're getting out. Obviously, I've got no skin in the game, so do what works for you.


Don't you think the General who denied his leave signed off on the "memo" after it was approved by at least two JAG officers already? Like maybe the G1 and the JAG who recommended a course of action are at least as read-up on the rules as you are?

General officers don't just shoot from the hip when it comes to stuff like this.

But anyways, IG would have to find that some process or rule was violated. The truth of it all is that shitty, self-centered leaders survive and thrive in the military, and the system weighs heavy in their favor.

You do remember stop-loss and stuff right?

Leave is a right. Full stop denying it is the violation.
Man, generals shoot from the hip all the time, usually because they follow the advice of staff officers for minor things. 99.9% of the things that leave my desk get approved without changes by flags. But anyway, we're going round and round about this. I don't think you're wrong about anything. I think that you're right, and that's why anyone getting out should be prepared to burn everything to the ground to take care of themselves.

Wipfelder
Posts: 726
Joined: Wed Jul 09, 2014 3:26 am

Re: Veterans Thread

Postby Wipfelder » Fri May 12, 2017 1:09 pm

dannyswo wrote:
Wipfelder wrote:
dannyswo wrote:Nah, he needs a JAG to tell the general he's wrong because the reasoning is bullshit, or he needs a Congressman's aide to call the office and ask why the Army can't function without a junior officer for two weeks. Drown the G1 in paperwork, and FOIA the General's emails. You don't need to win, you just need to show that it's easier to give you 2 weeks off than deal with someone asking questions about why your command can't run without one JO.

You've got to look out for yourself, especially if you're getting out. Don't play nice with people who are willing to fuck you over to help their career. If they were good leaders, they can do without you for two weeks of earned leave. The description posted above does not prohibit your leave. You're not putting your unit below it's minimum manning. You're not impacting operational military requirements. If 90% of the unit put in for leave, yeah, someone has to stay at work. If your unit was deploying and 50% of people put in for leave, yeah, it's an operational military requirement. One person doesn't impact either. If they need your billet filled, they can use the manning process to do it. You don't need to suffer because Big Army can't do their job.

The military is full of shitty leaders who get away with fucking over their people because they train you to be stoic and not complain. That's a suckers game. You've got nothing to lose when you're getting out. Obviously, I've got no skin in the game, so do what works for you.


Don't you think the General who denied his leave signed off on the "memo" after it was approved by at least two JAG officers already? Like maybe the G1 and the JAG who recommended a course of action are at least as read-up on the rules as you are?

General officers don't just shoot from the hip when it comes to stuff like this.

But anyways, IG would have to find that some process or rule was violated. The truth of it all is that shitty, self-centered leaders survive and thrive in the military, and the system weighs heavy in their favor.

You do remember stop-loss and stuff right?

Leave is a right. Full stop denying it is the violation.
Man, generals shoot from the hip all the time, usually because they follow the advice of staff officers for minor things. 99.9% of the things that leave my desk get approved without changes by flags. But anyway, we're going round and round about this. I don't think you're wrong about anything. I think that you're right, and that's why anyone getting out should be prepared to burn everything to the ground to take care of themselves.


Word.

User avatar
Lahtso Nuggin
Posts: 61
Joined: Mon Oct 17, 2016 8:55 pm

Re: Veterans Thread

Postby Lahtso Nuggin » Fri May 12, 2017 1:18 pm

CenterFringe wrote:
dannyswo wrote:
CenterFringe wrote:
CMac86 wrote:What did you guys do between starting terminal leave/end of contract and starting school?

I'm planning fairly far out. I have two years left on my contract. I've talked to my command career counselor and developed a plan for getting the wheels in motion.

If all goes well, I'll be knocking a month off of my contract via early out so my EAOS will be a month before school starts, and then the exact amount of time of terminal I'll be authorized will depend on when they can get a replacement for me. I'm the only person with my NEC at my command, so I'm mentally preparing for two possibilities: having to work right up until my EAOS and then on the flipside, being authorized to take the maximum terminal (in my case, I could have up to 90 days on the books since my EAOS is before the start of the next fiscal year). I've read milpers 1050-10 and 1050-20, and it sounds like it is at OIC discretion and depends on if they can get a replacement early enough. If all of that works out, I'll have about 120 days between start of terminal and the start of school. I'm saving up money for a buffer fund, if all goes well, I'll have 6-8 months worth of living expenses (rent, food, bills, etc) saved up. I know that I'll be house/apartment hunting, but I'm more so curious about what else you guys did.


So I thought I was going to be able to get out about 6 weeks before classes started. Literally had orders in my hand for about an hour before they got pulled back. While I still may get out two weeks before classes start, the lack of certainty has made it impossible to commit to starting classes this fall, so I deferred for a year and will just sell back my leave. I know it's NBD, but it was pretty hard, emotionally, to submit that deferral, especially after going to ASW.

I'm going to live with my dad for 6 months, probably volunteer with the Colorado Legal Society and/or an substantively relevant organization in an attempt to set myself up for a good paying 1L externship. I'm also planning to do a metric-shit ton of skiing, climbing, and hiking over that six months, and then travel for the remaining three or four, to do some more climbing. Due to the lack of need to pay rent, I'm currently not planning on working, although I may pick up a short term project (I'm an engineer by trade) to make a little beer money, but I honestly don't know that I even want to do that. I'm feeling pretty burned out right now.

Anyway, a lot can change in two years, and it's so easy for the O-5/O-6 to just say "not until your replacement arrives" and, well, there goes your plan, so be financially and emotionally prepared if you've gotta wait a year to start classes.

I'd take it up your chain of command. Make the O-5/O-6 explain to the flag why his organization can't deal with one fewer person for a couple of weeks.
BT BT
Funding might be an issue right now in releasing orders.


I took it to the two star. I lost. I'm the third officer, that I know of, to have been denied terminal by this commander in the last two years. I don't think my case is normal across the services, but when it comes to terminal leave "command discretion" is still the operative word.


Sounds like you already deferred if not I would walk into the GO's office and ask him face to face. If you can't get around the secretary ambush him somewhere like coming into work in the morning and hit him up....."sir, i'm starting law school and need terminal leave, COL so and so said you won't support it, is that true?" I mean if you truly want to keep it 100 you video the exchange. Lots of people have trouble delivering bad news face to face and, at a minimum, it will definitely get everyone's attention. Maybe first request the office call and if denied then go for broke....of course this may all be moot, you said he denied you so i'm not clear whether that was face to face or a staffing action passed up and back down to you.

User avatar
Dcc617
Posts: 2128
Joined: Mon Oct 13, 2014 3:01 pm

Re: Veterans Thread

Postby Dcc617 » Fri May 12, 2017 2:04 pm

Ignore most of that advice but using the open door policy may actually help. If you present yourself well and play it as a positive thing that would really rather than as something you're owed then it may get your thing signed. Just make sure to go up the chain of command.

Don't make a scene or start confronting people. There is no obligation to permit terminal leave, it's a privilege. It fucking sucks, but it's not really something you can seek action to enforce.

User avatar
Lahtso Nuggin
Posts: 61
Joined: Mon Oct 17, 2016 8:55 pm

Re: Veterans Thread

Postby Lahtso Nuggin » Fri May 12, 2017 2:35 pm

Dcc617 wrote:Ignore most of that advice but using the open door policy may actually help. If you present yourself well and play it as a positive thing that would really rather than as something you're owed then it may get your thing signed. Just make sure to go up the chain of command.

Don't make a scene or start confronting people. There is no obligation to permit terminal leave, it's a privilege. It fucking sucks, but it's not really something you can seek action to enforce.


Somewhat disagree about going up the chain of command. You already have that answer (and likely have already made your decision to defer) if the GO has a published open door policy, making a casual reference to your immediate boss (CO/BN) that you would like to exercise that might influence them but if they are hard set on denying it makes little sense to ask their permission. Maybe this is totally verboten in the Marines I don't know, i'm Army. Its also dependent on the all the personalities involved but if you're getting out anyway and want to go for broke a face to face meeting with the GO could be more likely to work out for you than calling IG or a congressional office.

Some of the above was tongue in cheek, particularly the comment re: video, and the word choice of 'ambushing' could be changed to 'accidentally run into at the gym' but if you have NOT been told by the GO in question face to face yet, it could work out in your favor at a minimum it will ensure that the GO knows what decisions are being made in his name as this kind of thing can easily be your BN passing the blame upstairs.

I of course would defer myself because why in the world would you NOT take a year off (assuming ability to feed oneself and lack of responsibility to a spouse/kids) before starting school. Of course it feels like you absolutely must start school now but i'd put money on it that five years from now you'll kick yourself for not having a year of climbing/skiing etc you were planning upthread.

Final note: what a bum rap for the marines that they don't let folks have leave to start LAW SCHOOL. I mean, if you were going to be getting out to sit on the couch and eat chips, that's one thing but damn. I guess I haven't seen a lot of folks get their terminal leave denied when they had legit follow on work that the leave was enabling. Good luck.

Wipfelder
Posts: 726
Joined: Wed Jul 09, 2014 3:26 am

Re: Veterans Thread

Postby Wipfelder » Fri May 12, 2017 3:01 pm

Denial of Terminal Leave, when you want to take it, happens all the time in the Army. It might be more the norm than not.

CenterFringe
Posts: 104
Joined: Thu Mar 24, 2016 7:30 pm

Re: Veterans Thread

Postby CenterFringe » Fri May 12, 2017 3:03 pm

Thanks everyone for your responses. It's really hard to explain how toxic this particular command is. I know two O-4s and four O-3s who were going to stay in longer, but decided to drop papers because of this regimental commander. The Division CG is about 6000 miles away, so there is near complete autonomy provided to the regiment. As for "taking care of your troops", more and more I'm thinking that's something they just want junior officers/NCOs to practice, or maybe the ones who care just get out. And you absolutely fall to the bottom of the who gives a shit when people find out you're EASing.

I've already done a fair bit of cage rattling, starting back in January. Always professional via official correspondence. I've also talked directly to the Division Deputy Jag, and it's clear Division is deferring to the local commander in this. As previous posters have mentioned, they "technically" are allowed to deny terminal leave. He doesn't deny everyone's terminal, just those who's replacement hasn't arrived yet. I actually needed the full 60 days of terminal in order to get out 2 weeks before classes start. While I completely disagree that it's necessary for me to stick around, at least on paper the CO has a valid argument.

Anyway, I've come to terms with my deferral, and am prepared to make the best of it. The point of my post wasn't to bitch about my circumstances (well, maybe partially it was) but just to emphasize why it's important to have enough financial flexibility to weather unforeseen changes and challenges when transitioning out. It's really easy to forget how much of your future is dictated by the whims of the commanding officers and generals appointed above you.

User avatar
Lahtso Nuggin
Posts: 61
Joined: Mon Oct 17, 2016 8:55 pm

Re: Veterans Thread

Postby Lahtso Nuggin » Fri May 12, 2017 3:09 pm

Wipfelder wrote:Denial of Terminal Leave, when you want to take it, happens all the time in the Army. It might be more the norm than not.


Well I guess that comes as a surprise to me but then I'm still active and the folks who worked with for or around me and were getting out never complained about it. Luck I guess.

AJordan
Posts: 348
Joined: Wed Oct 05, 2016 3:48 am

Re: Veterans Thread

Postby AJordan » Fri May 12, 2017 4:02 pm


User avatar
dannyswo
Posts: 3628
Joined: Thu Mar 03, 2016 4:27 pm

Re: Veterans Thread

Postby dannyswo » Sat May 13, 2017 2:59 am

CenterFringe wrote:Thanks everyone for your responses. It's really hard to explain how toxic this particular command is. I know two O-4s and four O-3s who were going to stay in longer, but decided to drop papers because of this regimental commander. The Division CG is about 6000 miles away, so there is near complete autonomy provided to the regiment. As for "taking care of your troops", more and more I'm thinking that's something they just want junior officers/NCOs to practice, or maybe the ones who care just get out. And you absolutely fall to the bottom of the who gives a shit when people find out you're EASing.

I've already done a fair bit of cage rattling, starting back in January. Always professional via official correspondence. I've also talked directly to the Division Deputy Jag, and it's clear Division is deferring to the local commander in this. As previous posters have mentioned, they "technically" are allowed to deny terminal leave. He doesn't deny everyone's terminal, just those who's replacement hasn't arrived yet. I actually needed the full 60 days of terminal in order to get out 2 weeks before classes start. While I completely disagree that it's necessary for me to stick around, at least on paper the CO has a valid argument.

Anyway, I've come to terms with my deferral, and am prepared to make the best of it. The point of my post wasn't to bitch about my circumstances (well, maybe partially it was) but just to emphasize why it's important to have enough financial flexibility to weather unforeseen changes and challenges when transitioning out. It's really easy to forget how much of your future is dictated by the whims of the commanding officers and generals appointed above you.

On the plus side: You can stick around for the extra month and a half, collect a paycheck, and then sell back 60 days, since you're going to have 10 months of unpaid terminal leave.
If you're worried about finances, you can join a reserve unit and still enjoy a lot of down time.

KPUSN07
Posts: 65
Joined: Tue Oct 20, 2015 9:37 am

Re: Veterans Thread

Postby KPUSN07 » Thu Jun 01, 2017 9:43 pm

Any vets at W&M?

User avatar
haus
Posts: 3645
Joined: Wed Aug 18, 2010 11:07 am

Re: Veterans Thread

Postby haus » Sat Jun 03, 2017 9:06 am

Somehow the idea of signing up for reserve duty when you have a mental defective man child running the show seems a bit risky for the level of compensation on is likely to receive.

hawkeyelaw
Posts: 25
Joined: Fri Oct 21, 2016 9:48 pm

Re: Veterans Thread

Postby hawkeyelaw » Sat Jun 03, 2017 1:57 pm

Any Vets at Iowa?




Return to “Law School Admissions Forum”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 5 guests