Petition2Congress logo

309 Public Comments So Far

View More Comments:
November 7, 2016
David W. from Long Prairie, MN signed.
just now
Someone from Bolingbrook, IL signed.
November 10, 2016
Someone from J B P H H, HI writes:
Quotation mark icon
Don't allow repeal of law, system is outdated, and should have been improved years ago from a train, and maintain force, to a full blown operational force (Total Force Integration wth Active Duty). Personally I prefer they move technicians into the law enforcement/fireman retirement system (25 yr retirement) it would definitely fit in todays environment, but hey Title 5 is fine...and its about time.
November 16, 2016
Someone from Memphis, TN signed.
November 16, 2016
Jose H. from Santa Maria, CA writes:
Quotation mark icon
It is time that our country take care of our Soldiers that have risked and done so much for us to be given the chance to have their position changed to title 5 and have the same rights as anyone else. One is not doing our nation a favor by getting rid of Soldiers that are the experts in the field when they retire. I am tired of seeing all the good people leave. Its time for change!
November 17, 2016
allen m. from Sparks, NV writes:
Quotation mark icon
Too many qualified individuals are lost due to being non-retained at retention boards and unable to keep their jobs. Most technician jobs require a minimum of E5 to qualify for and we are unable to reach full federal retirement age before being forced out of the guard. Wearing a uniform has no benefit at all to the technician force and only serves to let AGR's attempt to force tasks on us that is illegal.
3 months ago
Eric B. from Romeoville, IL signed.
November 29, 2016
Someone from Helena, MT writes:
Quotation mark icon
It seems to me that some "middle ground" could be found here? In order to appease both sides of the argument. How about a 20 \ 20 plan. 20 years in the military and 20 years as a dual status technician, the incumbent gets to convert if he \ she wants to? It's a way to get the "ball rolling". New hires are all Title 5.
December 1, 2016
Someone from Buckhannon, WV writes:
Quotation mark icon
I have been in Title 32 for 16yrs and Army National Guard for almost 21yrs, I have deployed and enjoyed my guard life but with 21yrs of the Army its a scary feeling that if they choose not to keep me in the guard anymore that I would lose my technician job, for not being retained in the military (which is Happening a lot) anymore and that's a scary thought for me and my family, as for losing readiness or state emergency ill be honest when state emergency's comes up we are the last to be asked they ask their M-day soldiers. I would like to know that my life as a technician is no longer at jeopardy because of my military career. Please let the title 5 conversion take effect it would be so wonderful.
December 3, 2016
Barbara K. from Buckhannon, WV writes:
Quotation mark icon
Based on my experience as a mother of two federal technicians under the Title 32 program I highly encourage our Congressional delegation. To implement the Title 5 conversion for these young patriots. The double standard is cumbersome nerse and unfair for family members. It is definitely time for a change.
December 3, 2016
Robert J. (COL retired) K. from Buckhannon, WV writes:
Quotation mark icon
As a retired military Title 32 Technician, Active Army Officer and Traditional Guardsman I am proud of the National Guard for it's contribution to the support of the nation and their respective states, but it is time for a change. The Title 32 "Dual Status" program is out of date and needs changed. Politics plays too much of an extreme role in the longevity of these young men and woman. I highly encourage our Congressional delegations to implement the Title 5 conversion now, do not delay. The title 32 program is outdated and needs eliminated. This conversion will not only strengthen the support to the Guard for their federal mission it will eliminate the unwarranted dual status our young families are subjected to on a daily basis.
December 5, 2016
allen m. from Sparks, NV signed.
December 6, 2016
Verona J. from Cave Junction, OR signed.
December 6, 2016
John V. from Benton, AR writes:
Quotation mark icon
We get abused, I feel demoralized holding to the same standards without benefits as active soldiers. I'm not treated like a soldier. The work environment tends to be hostile.
December 7, 2016
Eric R. from Alma Center, WI writes:
Quotation mark icon
Change is long overdue! A new DST has an extremely low chance of reaching retirement age under the current ties with military membership.
just now
from Madison, WI writes:
Quotation mark icon
Title 32 was initiated for "maintenance and repairing of NG equipment". This has been soooo abused by AG's. They can take these positions and use them as they see fit. Less then half of Title 32 employees are in the job of "maintaining equipment". They are "created" positions for HQ staff, mostly consisting of high level, high salary positions. This highly abused power needs to be removed from AG's, and have some oversight. If conversion to Title 5 is the answer, so be it. 2 downsides though: 1-no more Military Leave, and 2-no more "early disability retirement".
December 7, 2016
Someone from Ettrick, WI signed.
December 8, 2016
Someone from Necedah, WI signed.
December 8, 2016
Someone from Cadott, WI signed.
December 12, 2016
David W. from Elgin, SC signed.
December 13, 2016
COL Dave H. from Williamsburg, VA signed.
December 15, 2016
Someone from Lansing, OH signed.
December 15, 2016
Carrie N. from Lansing, OH signed.
December 16, 2016
allen m. from sparks, NV writes:
Quotation mark icon
This needs to happen already and quit being pushed back. Good employees will lose their jobs because they get retired from the military.
December 17, 2016
allen m. from sparks, NV signed.
2 months ago
Someone from Rapid City, SD writes:
Quotation mark icon
We deserve protection from loss of employment due to forced retirment, or medical disqualification. This needs to happen for all title 32 technicians, not just administrative. Title 32 program blocks career progression for traditional guard.
2 months ago
Someone from Hermitage, TN signed.
2 months ago
Someone from Saint Joseph, MO writes:
Quotation mark icon
This needs to be passed and finalized. Stop NGB from dragging its feet. Technicians are expected to work all kinds of overtime and on call when off duty without being properly compensated.
2 months ago
Someone from Saint Joseph, MO writes:
Quotation mark icon
NGAUS is clearly not concerned about all of its members. Glad I stopped paying dues.
2 months ago
from Saint Joseph, MO writes:
Quotation mark icon
When a good part of your full time force is a day away from being medically discharged, "non-retained", close to retirement age, or mandatory deployment, this conversion seems like the most logical thing to do to keep the knowledge and maintain mission readiness. It also benefits the traditional workforce as it frees up a lot of top rank. So instead of them being "staff-sergeant for life", there will be many opportunities for upward mobility. To repeal this act helps no one except the bureaucrats fighting against it.
2 months ago
Someone from North Highlands, CA signed.
December 27, 2016
Someone from Scott, AR writes:
Quotation mark icon
Making this change in my opion will not affect organizations as much as they are trying to say. I am already considered a MDay Soldier and being Title 5 will not change that. If you need Soldiers for State Active Duty mission usually the first one called are the MDay Soldiers who are not full time anyway. Just because you would not be in uniform during the work week doesn't stop you from being a Soldier.
December 27, 2016
Someone from Gore, VA writes:
Quotation mark icon
I agree that NGAUS is clearly not concerned about all of its members or they would support the Title 5 positions. NGB need to support this also. Bottom line is the AG for each state will not have control over the person.
December 30, 2016
allen m. from sparks, NV signed.
January 1, 2017
Someone from Lacey, WA writes:
Quotation mark icon
So many great points in all comments posted. Adding my support in brief.
just now
ABBY N. from Christiansted, VI writes:
Quotation mark icon
I support Section 1053
January 4, 2017
allen m. from sparks, NV signed.
January 5, 2017
Someone from Lafayette, TN writes:
Quotation mark icon
I support the conversion. It offers a way for older technicians to continue their civil service without fear of non-retention or unfavorable repercussions due to PT failure or medical issues. There are plenty of technicians who are in non-deploying positions and it wouldn't affect the mission to convert them. I would gladly do it so that I can do my job without the never-ending fear of being non-retained because I am getting older or the stress of one day being booted because I cannot pass my PT.
January 5, 2017
Someone from Lafayette, TN writes:
Quotation mark icon
This is for the good of the National Guard and greatly helps our older dual status service members, that when in their greying years they are not cast out into the streets, their lively hoods cut short, because they did not pass their PT test and were not able to keep up with the twenty year olds. Let us have a safe place where if we choose we can retire with dignity and respect with a full career not cut short by missing your mile and a half by 15 seconds or because of having bad knees and bones that bore the brunt of service in the defense of our nation for decades.
January 9, 2017
David S. from Jackson, TN signed.