Share:

Stop the Title 5 Repeal!

Messages Sent So Far
The FY16 NDAA contained Section 1053, a bi-partisan provision that ordered the conversion of no less than 20% of all National Guard (NG) Dual Status technicians (DSTs) from Title 32 to Title 5 employment to begin on January 1, 2017. The National Guard Bureau (NGB), the Adjutant Generals Association (AGAUS), the National Guard Association (NGAUS), and the Council of Governors (CoG) strongly opposed the law and called for its outright repeal citing unsupported claims of increased cost and reduced readiness. Senator John McCain, SASC Chairman, and Senator Jack Reed, SASC Ranking Member, strongly rejected the calls for repeal, and Section 1053 was ultimately included in the 2016 defense bill.

After repeal efforts failed, opponents of Section 1053 asked that language be included in the FY17 NDAA to delay conversion until at least October 1, 2017, under the guise that: 1. It would align the conversion with the beginning of FY18; and, 2. It would allow leaders some time to ensure a smooth transition for affected employees. The House and Senate Armed Services Committees (HASC/SASC) agreed to the proposal as presented, and included draft language in the FY17 NDAA to delay the conversion.

Supporters of Section 1053 warned HASC/SASC, and other members of Congress that calls to delay were merely a veiled attempt to give NGB, AGAUS, NGAUS, and CoG one more crack at repealing Section 1053 in the FY18 NDAA. It appears the warnings were justified as Section 1053 opponents are renewing their push for a full repeal of Section 1053 now, rather than later, during the election season, through the lame duck session, and before the FY17 NDAA is even signed. For the reasons stated below, I strongly urge you to oppose any effort calling for the repeal of Section 1053.

The NG DST program is over 100 years old. I believe the program is outdated, and the changes mandated in Section 1053 are a great start towards modernizing this force. The new law streamlines administration, cuts overall operating costs to the US Government, and allows technicians access to due process.

Concerning due process, technicians do not enjoy the full due process protections guaranteed to other federal employees because current law limits appeals of adverse employment actions to their respective State Adjutants General. As such, these employees cannot appeal to an arbitrator, the Merit Systems Protection Board, the Office of Special Counsel, or even Federal Court, which means they are also not protected as under Federal Whistleblower laws. The result is a program that is often susceptible to fraud, waste, and abuse, and is the only program in the federal government where the person who fires you also hears and decides your appeal.

The changes required by Section 1053 are the start of much-needed reform. The law is based on the independent report prepared by the Center for Naval Analysis at the direction of Congress in section 519 of the 2012 defense bill. It takes a conservative approach and gives National Guard and State authorities the ability to provide input on how the transition should occur, including how best to maintain these employees under the control of State AGs, all while affording them the rights enjoyed by every other federal civilian employee. Section 1053 will allow these employees an opportunity to reach full civilian retirement age, provide access to federal appeal rights, and simultaneously correct other inconsistencies that only affect this small but much-needed workforce.

Thank you for your attention to this very important matter.
Public Comments
May 23rd, 2017
Someone from San Juan, PR writes:
Quotation mark icon
There is a bill to amend the NDAA FY 17 to change the following: Commencing not earlier than October 1, 2017 (instead of no later than) and the total number of positions converted may not exceed the number equal to 4.8 % of military technician (instead of converting no fewer than 20%). Where is the justice?
May 22nd, 2017
Someone from Sparks, NV writes:
Quotation mark icon
Hurry this up already.
May 19th, 2017
Someone from Jackson, MI writes:
Quotation mark icon
Stop the Title 5 Repeal!
May 15th, 2017
Someone from Oakland, ME writes:
Quotation mark icon
Convert ALL dual Status techs to title 5 ! after 30 years in the NG I'm still bound by this law,, as I work beside civilians in this office , does this military career ever end as a Dual Tech,, with all the negatives that im not entitled to as a M-day SM makes me wonder why I've chose this career,,, I'll have almost 40 Years in the NG before I can draw my Tech Retirement,, this needs to change
May 15th, 2017
Someone from Lincoln, NE writes:
Quotation mark icon
Convert all technicians to title 5!
May 10th, 2017
Someone from New Orleans, LA signed.
May 10th, 2017
Someone from Concord, NH signed.
May 10th, 2017
Someone from Shelburne, VT signed.
May 9th, 2017
Joe P. from Gulfport, MS writes:
Quotation mark icon
I have been dual status for 19 years now. I currently face a retention board every 1 or 2 years. What kind of job security is that? I say they should convert all title 32 to title 5. It would be better for all in the end. I have a total of 33 years now. Les than 5 years to ERD. But I loose my job if not retained in the guard. All my experience walks.
May 9th, 2017
Darlene P. from Hilliard, FL writes:
Quotation mark icon
It is bad enough that a National Guard member who has served the country more than 30 + years must be subjected to an annual board that will "assess" whether their expertise and experience is still needed. What a way to show support for your toughest, best and brightest. In private industry, this could be classified as age discrimination! For dual status technicians, the pressure is much greater. Not only could they be kicked to the curb, but they also lose their livelihood, possibly their retirement, and their insurance. National guard members already must wait to age 60 to receive retirement benefits even though many have served on active duty for years with all of their deployments. They also cannot qualify for military insurance until 60. If they lose dual status, they are likely over the age of 50, searching for a job, and in many cases without any benefits. Is this any way to treat those that fight for our country? This is the unspoken veteran travesty! My husband is a great example. He has been in the Guard for 33 1/2 years and a federal technician for 7. He is 52 years of age and received the notice from his commander that he will be non retained. He is too young to receive any insurance or retirement from either the federal government or the National Guard and as stated in other comments posted, his rights and ability to challenge are extremely limited. He deployed just last year to the Middle East for six months to return to this nonsense. As a military spouse for all of these years, it is an unthinkable way to treat our servicemembers and our families. Stop talking out of both sides of your mouth, you either need them so readiness is not reduced or your don't. Eliminate the need for dual status technicians to go to the retention board every year (and keep your readiness) or follow the law and convert these civilian technicians positions to Title V.
May 8th, 2017
Someone from Lansing, OH writes:
Quotation mark icon
I have been a military technician for almost 20 years. I now have over 24 years of exemplary military serivce that includes 31 months of mobilization in support of overseas operations. Now it appears the retention boards have it out for all technicians, regardless of how well they have served their county. The retention boards don't consider or care about the service individuals such as myself have given to the federal government. Many times I put my military job and federal job above my family needs. Now it seems it was all for nothing, they are now getting rid of us, I am now considered a marginal Soldier and I will lose my federal technical job. This law can't be repealed, it must go forward to help hundreds of individuals such as myself. The boards are getting rid of techcians, it is happening now, it needs to stop. Thank you for your time.
May 7th, 2017
Someone from Marana, AZ signed.
May 7th, 2017
Someone from Tucson, AZ signed.
May 6th, 2017
Someone from Schenectady, NY writes:
Quotation mark icon
It's the law. Now do the right thing! The program needs to be reformed to fit the needs of today. We need job security and more control of our career. Title 5 will be a start in the right direction in making it difficult to exercise the abuse of power and mistreatment of dual status technicians. It also provides protection and job security of your technician position.
May 3rd, 2017
Someone from Sioux Falls, SD writes:
Quotation mark icon
The program needs to be reformed to fit the needs of today. We need job security and more control of our career.
May 3rd, 2017
Shawnn M. from King George, VA writes:
Quotation mark icon
Those of us in the tech jobs just want fair treatment and access to things like Tricare, that we earned!
May 2nd, 2017
tommy j. from Bourbonnais, IL signed.
May 2nd, 2017
Someone from Northbridge, MA writes:
Quotation mark icon
It's simple... I'm an ARNG Soldier, have served proudly for 31 years, and I'm only 50 years old. I've also been a Title 32 Mil-Tech for my entire 30 year career. I will be forced out the door and have to vacate the administrative position I hold as a GS employee if I do not get retained by a Qualitative Retention Board QRB) which occurs every two years. Title 5 status would leave my career employment intact allowing me to continue to provide for my family and serve my country. I do not wish to retire from the ARNG as I have once more enlisted rank to achieve and I remain fit for duty while meeting all military requirements for my present grade. The QRB policy does not allow me to appeal. It's simple... Make T-32 exempt from QRB's; there are Army Regulations that will discharge Soldiers if they do not meet standard. Thank you for your time and consideration.
May 1st, 2017
Someone from Columbia, SC writes:
Quotation mark icon
Title 5 will be a start in the right direction in making it difficult to exercise the abuse of power and mistreatment of dual status technicians. It also provides protection and job security of your technician position. It will prohibit leadership from using your mil status as a way to harass and terminate you from the Title 32 program. Title 5 has a boat load of benefits. I'm a CSR, I'm responsible for almost 1000 Title 5 civilians.. Benefits are not the same!!! Please research! More rights and competitive positions vs family affair, blood ties and country club atmosphere. Level the playing field. Make it more difficult for leadership to have negative control over honest, hardworking federal technicians! Always look after the blue collars of the organizations.
May 1st, 2017
Someone from Columbia, SC writes:
Quotation mark icon
Title 5 will be a start in the right direction in making it difficult to exercise the abuse of power and mistreatment of dual status technicians. It also provides protection and job security of your technician position. It will prohibit leadership from using your mil status as a way to harass and terminate you from the Title 32 program. Title 5 has a boat load of benefits. I'm a CSR, I'm responsible for almost 1000 Title 5 civilians.. Benefits are not the same!!! Please research! More rights and competitive positions vs family affair, blood ties and country club atmosphere. Level the playing field. Make it more difficult for leadership to have negative control over honest, hardworking federal technicians! Always look after the blue collars of the organizations.
May 1st, 2017
Someone from Columbia, SC writes:
Quotation mark icon
Title 5 will be a start in the right direction in making it difficult to exercise the abuse of power and mistreatment of dual status technicians. It also provides protection and job security of your technician position. It will prohibit leadership from using your mil status as a way to harass and terminate you from the Title 32 program. Title 5 has a boat load of benefits. I'm a CSR, I'm responsible for almost 1000 Title 5 civilians.. Benefits are not the same!!! Please research! More rights and competitive positions vs family affair, blood ties and country club atmosphere. Level the playing field. Make it more difficult for leadership to have negative control over honest, hardworking federal technicians! Always look after the blue collars of the organizations.
May 1st, 2017
Kevin R. from Salinas, CA signed.
Apr 30th, 2017
Issac S. from Hattiesburg, MS writes:
Quotation mark icon
become a fed tech: Guard Bonus you say? Nope! you can kiss that goodbye, tricare? Nope! Overtime? Nope! Job security? As long as your capable of staying in the guard you can keep your civilian Job that you have to wear your guard uniform to (kinda like impersonating to me). Be treated like your active duty with none of the pay or benefits? YOU BET!
Apr 30th, 2017
Elmer O. from Wilmington, DE writes:
Quotation mark icon
I'm considered a hair ball clogging the system. I'm an E7 and been a fed tech for over 31 years. Title 5 would elevate hair balling by reliving m day slots that older fed techs hold so that traditional soldiers can get those slots.
Apr 30th, 2017
Someone from Newark Valley, NY signed.
Apr 29th, 2017
Someone from Tinley Park, IL writes:
Quotation mark icon
I'm a Tech in Illinois unless title 5 would guarantee possible relocation to a different state (of course through proper channels) for individuals that want to change their location and lateral transfer would be allowed, then I'm against it. I'll take my 60/40.
Apr 29th, 2017
Ciro G. from Bell Gardens, CA signed.
Apr 29th, 2017
Someone from Brazoria, TX signed.
Apr 29th, 2017
Someone from New Haven, VT signed.
Apr 29th, 2017
Someone from Mendon, UT signed.
Apr 28th, 2017
John W. from Easley, SC writes:
Quotation mark icon
IF Title 5 is repealed, "The result [will be] a program that is often susceptible to fraud, waste, and abuse, and is the only program in the federal government where the person who fires you also hears and decides your appeal."
Apr 28th, 2017
Eleuterio M. from Decatur, IL writes:
Quotation mark icon
No title 5 makes us a status of convenience. We are military when they won't supply us PPE and Civilians when they don't want us to have free healthcare. Many other injustices and they'll never care for us. Have to medical out to even maybe hit a decent retirement.
Apr 28th, 2017
Krystal S. from Goose Creek, SC signed.
Apr 28th, 2017
Someone from Pollock, LA signed.
Apr 28th, 2017
Someone from Linn, MO writes:
Quotation mark icon
Technicians should have the title 5 as we should be allowed to carry our career to retirement age regardless of our mday things happen people get old and it takes longer for techs to retire and we need to be able to keep our jobs even if we retire mday in order to have a decent retirement KEEP TITLE 5!!!
Apr 28th, 2017
Ronald M. from Berwyn, IL signed.
Apr 28th, 2017
Ronald M. from Berwyn, IL writes:
Quotation mark icon
Please stop taking everything away from is!
Apr 28th, 2017
Vanny P. from Cary, IL signed.
Apr 28th, 2017
Emmanuel B. from Gurnee, IL signed.
Apr 27th, 2017
David H. from Alamogordo, NM writes:
Quotation mark icon
Leave the bill alone
(c) Petition2Congress, all rights reserved. For support: email info@rallycongress.com or call (202) 600-8357