Guardsman Has to Pay to Serve
 

I couldn't believe this:

http://www.freep.com/news/latestnews...3_20040303.htm

I had to send an e-mail to the school board, expressing my disgust. :mad:

Wow...It's just sickening how some people treat those that defend our country. If I were that soldier, I would tell them exactly were they could put they're money.:mad:

I always thought that if you are a reservist, and you get called to active duty, the job you had when you were called is required by law to give you your job back when you return, no questions asked. That's ridiculous that they're making him pay for the substitute. If I were him I'd tell them to stick it and find a new job.:mad:

that's the policy here in georgia. the company i work for had someone get called from reserves to active duty, the job is still here for him when he gets back. his family still gets insurance benefits.

makes me sick with the school board up there. here we have a person who works for little money for the school system teaching kids. he's called to duty, risks his life for country, and gets bent over from his employer who gets funding from state and federal government. it's gross.

You are correct, it is the law. Only thing is, he wasn't called to active duty. This is just the normal 2 weeks a year thing that all reservists do. Most do it during vacation time so they can get double pay - from regular job & Uncle Sam. Heck, even as a civil service employee of Uncle Sam, I wouldn't get my regular check while doing the two week thing.

I don't understand the part where he ends up $573 ahead in two weeks if he has to give back his pay of $78/day, plus an added $74/day.

Seems something fishy is in this story - is this newspaper prone to sensational stories?

That's the first time that I've ever heard of something like this. The guy should try to find a job as a teacher in another school district. Wait till the local and regional politicians get wind of this. The people on th eschool board will be forced to change their policy or be out of jobs.

Someone should send this to a national news organization. Imagine how the school board members will feel when they see themselves on TV on the evening news.

It bothers me, but something nobody has brought up is his willingness to sign an agreement with the schoolboard and the fact that he has done this in the past (again per the article).

I wouldn't do and it sounds like most people here wouldn't do it, but none of us are in his shoes.

Todd

As Larry and some of you else know I served 18 months on active duty following 9/11 and while I did get some benefits (medical) while i was gone, all I received was 6 months of differential pay. I have to pay back all of my pension contributions that I missed. Being activated cost me over $4k in payroll deductions I'll be making for the next 4 years. All federal law grants you is your job when you get back at the same pay and level as when you left. If you have a self-pay pension (civil service police, fire, etc..) you must make up the money if your employer chooses not to make the contributions for you. During the time I was gone, I never met another civilian police officer that got screwed like I did. But I don't have much choice. That's why I elected to take 4 years to pay it back, so I didn't have to come up with all the money at once.

I noticed the "sign an agreement" thing. I'm facing something similar right now. Our "merger" has spawned a lot of paperwork that has heretofore been unnecessary. I face having to sign an "Employee Confidentiality Agreement" that is more in-depth than makes me comfortable, or, find another job.

I'm guessing that's pretty much the "blackmail" job they used on him.

hmm..i made a mistake in reading the article, i thought he was going longer than 10 days. if it is only reservist duty i would say ok, maybe no pay, but he shouldn't have to pay for a sub.

i have a question for reservists. do they get to specify when to serve their 2 week terms?

Can't speak for all, but for the ones I deal with on an Air Force Base, I would say yes. They can also sign up for what's called man-days and work full-time for up to 189 days/year that's pretty much at their discretion as to place and length of duty, i.e., 6-months straight, 1-on/1-off, etc. That's assuming somebody wants their skills of course - they petition to get the jobs.

Having to cover the substitute teachers pay may seem like it sucks, but if this guy had used his vacation time to cover his duty there wouldn't be any issue. He'd be getting both pay checks, and not paying for someone to take his place. That's more than I would get as an Air Force civil service employee serving on reserve duty (my organization has 3 guys now in the middle east doing just that).

Like I suggested/asked before, this paper seems to be looking for a pot to stir.

My own local paper (FLA Today, a USA Today subsidiary) is fond of running stories about husband/wife reservists that both get called to active duty, and then what happens to their kids. The usual reponse by the regular force members I work with is...they weren't drafted ya know...been happy drawing that paycheck for years and now when called...want cheese with that whine?

Now maybe Army/Navy/Marine reserves are diff, can't speak to them first hand.

That's not that bad considering my mom was called to jury duty for a 3 1/2 week murder trial. She's a teacher and they wouldn't let her out of it for that so she was forced to drive over an hour to the courthouse, pay for parking and got $10 a day which paid for parking and a little gas. The school didn't pay her for the time off. It seems that taxpayers had forced the school board to change the rules 2 years before since they are the ones who have to foot the bill. Personally, considering the reservist is the one who signed up for the service and goes during the school year (which HURTS the students the most:( ) I don't really feel for him. Now if he was called to active duty that's another story. He could always use his vacation days for it. That is unless he's like my mom and gets 2 a year.

hmm..strange, need more details.

so the person mentioned in the article will be getting paid by the school system and from the military to serve? then he would have to pay for the substitute. seems fair. i would rather not pay him if he's out of vacation days and then pay the substitute versus paying him some, and then him paying the substitute. guess he gets a little more money, but doesn't sound all that good. oh well not my problem :( :D

That will never hold up. There is a federal law that says he cannot be penalized for being called to serve. They dont have to pay him while he's not there, but they cannot penalize him, or even fire him for it.