To the ANG,
I am writing this letter because I have a few complaints I would like to express to your office.
My first complaint is in regards to the reimbursement of the SGLI funds that was authorized almost a year ago. We have been patient, but after multiple phone calls and continually being told that the paperwork was being processed we are at the end of our rope. The double standards that seem to exist in your office are appalling. Do you remember a few years back when we were in England? You sent us an email stating that an error had been made in your office with the per diem payments over a 6 month period. The email went on to say that we owed you over $5000.00 which needed to be paid promptly. The following month, without any further correspondence from your office, you collected on your debt by not paying the per diem for the month and not paying the monthly housing allotment. Your office made a mistake, we owed you, you promptly collected. Debt paid in full. Yet we have had to wait almost a year to be reimbursed the $1200.00 you owe us. We have had to make call after call asking for the funds that you have told us have been approved! Does this double standard seem fair to you?
My second complaint is in regards to Stephen's retirement from the Ohio National Guard. Back in November,2009 6 month extension papers were signed to make sure Steve was in the system long enough after his retirement date of Dec. 28, 2009 for the paperwork to be finalized. His retirement date approached and he was then told that the paperwork had not been completely processed so he would have to continue to attend weekend drills until April, 2010. The new year rolled around. He attended the January drill. His pay was deposited. And then, a week before the February drill, an email is sent informing him that his official retirement date is December 28, 2009. After jumping through hoops, doing everything you told him to do, and getting no conclusive answers, you send an email telling him his 23 year military career is over? Officially over on his original retirement date? The indecisiveness and lack of communication certainly doesn't give me much comfort in the military's effectiveness.
My final grievance is also in regards to Stephen's retirement. Stephen gave his country 23 years of his life. 23 years of being part of the military efforts to ensure freedom for all. Do you think that after 23 years the letter sent to him congratulating him on his retirement could have possibly had his name on it? Do you think that instead of sending a letter addressed "Dear Sir or Madame," to thank him for his years of service you could have taken the time to insert his name and rank? Would a small effort towards those that have worn the uniform honorably be too much ask for? It would have been less offensive for no letter to have been sent at all.
"Above All"----yeah not so much.
Disgruntled,
the wife of a veteran.
I am writing this letter because I have a few complaints I would like to express to your office.
My first complaint is in regards to the reimbursement of the SGLI funds that was authorized almost a year ago. We have been patient, but after multiple phone calls and continually being told that the paperwork was being processed we are at the end of our rope. The double standards that seem to exist in your office are appalling. Do you remember a few years back when we were in England? You sent us an email stating that an error had been made in your office with the per diem payments over a 6 month period. The email went on to say that we owed you over $5000.00 which needed to be paid promptly. The following month, without any further correspondence from your office, you collected on your debt by not paying the per diem for the month and not paying the monthly housing allotment. Your office made a mistake, we owed you, you promptly collected. Debt paid in full. Yet we have had to wait almost a year to be reimbursed the $1200.00 you owe us. We have had to make call after call asking for the funds that you have told us have been approved! Does this double standard seem fair to you?
My second complaint is in regards to Stephen's retirement from the Ohio National Guard. Back in November,2009 6 month extension papers were signed to make sure Steve was in the system long enough after his retirement date of Dec. 28, 2009 for the paperwork to be finalized. His retirement date approached and he was then told that the paperwork had not been completely processed so he would have to continue to attend weekend drills until April, 2010. The new year rolled around. He attended the January drill. His pay was deposited. And then, a week before the February drill, an email is sent informing him that his official retirement date is December 28, 2009. After jumping through hoops, doing everything you told him to do, and getting no conclusive answers, you send an email telling him his 23 year military career is over? Officially over on his original retirement date? The indecisiveness and lack of communication certainly doesn't give me much comfort in the military's effectiveness.
My final grievance is also in regards to Stephen's retirement. Stephen gave his country 23 years of his life. 23 years of being part of the military efforts to ensure freedom for all. Do you think that after 23 years the letter sent to him congratulating him on his retirement could have possibly had his name on it? Do you think that instead of sending a letter addressed "Dear Sir or Madame," to thank him for his years of service you could have taken the time to insert his name and rank? Would a small effort towards those that have worn the uniform honorably be too much ask for? It would have been less offensive for no letter to have been sent at all.
"Above All"----yeah not so much.
Disgruntled,
the wife of a veteran.
