Originally Posted by
rickair7777
Such a policy would have very minimal impact from 2010-present... virtually all AD orders would be exempt from the five-year limit due to OCO/GWOT/ONE. Navy at least writes them all as invol anyway, even if you informally "volunteer" for assignment. I can only think of a few niche jobs, plus perhaps some ANG jobs which would not be exempt.
In the future perhaps it will be harder to obtain exempt orders.
But if anyone is worried about the five-year limit, you need to get real smart on the rules. Involuntary orders are always exempt. Most orders linked to operations are exempt. Orders which support operations indirectly are usually exempt (ex. IP training squadron members to deploy for real-world ops).
Among other complexities, orders DO NOT have to state that they are exempt, or invol, in order to be exempt. That's a nice feature that some organizations add to orders to smooth the process for their members but it has led some employers to conclude that the absence of such language means the orders are not exempt, which is usually incorrect.
It's actually just starting to become an issue for us. We have dudes jumping on orders to help out because so many full timers have been hired. Year or 2 here and there, then you tack on the screw job we've had with our last two "deployments" to NON-contingency operations. So you have the choice of going vol vs invol. Of course if you go voluntary, you get all he goodies but no USERRA exemption or dwell protections. If you go involuntary, you get your USERRA exemption and dwell, but none of the good benefits. Of course guys want early retirement credit, ect... so some are starting to hit limits. If we keep going to non-contingency ops, they'll be forced to go involuntary.
Also, Noble Eagle orders are NOT USERRA exempt, note yet anyway. In fact unless you're working on the staff (naturally they've taken care of themselves), most of our orders are NOT exempt...actual contingency ops aside.