Labor rules to boost employment for vets, disabled

[Omaha Steve]

Source: AP-Excite

By SAM HANANEL

WASHINGTON (AP) - Veterans and disabled workers who often struggle to find work could have an easier time landing a job under new federal regulations.

The rules, announced Tuesday by the Labor Department, will require most government contractors to set a goal of having disabled workers make up at least 7 percent of their employees. The benchmark for veterans would be 8 percent, a rate that could change from year to year depending on the overall number of former military members in the workforce.

The new requirements could have a major impact on hiring since federal contractors and subcontractors account for about 16 million workers - more than 20 percent of the nation's workforce. But some business groups have threatened legal action, complaining that the rules conflict with federal laws that discourage employers from asking about a job applicant's disability status.

Labor Secretary Thomas Perez called the new policy a "win-win" that will benefit workers "who belong in the economic mainstream and deserve a chance to work and opportunity to succeed." He said it also would benefit employers by increasing their access to a diverse pool of new workers.

FULL story at link.


Read more: http://apnews.excite.com/article/20130828/DA8EKCPG0.html

---

In this April 18, 2013, file photo then-Labor Secretary nominee Thomas Perez testifies on Capitol Hill in Washington. Veterans and disabled workers who often struggle to find work could have an easier time landing a job under new federal regulations. The rules, announced Tuesday, Aug. 27, 2013, by the Labor Department, will require most government contractors to set a goal of having disabled workers make up at least 7 percent of their employees.(AP Photo/Molly Riley, File)

[Divernan]

1. Disabled, yes, but only SOME veterans

It is quite common for able-bodied veterans who put in their 20 years in the military, retired and are collecting pensions for that service, to then begin a second career - often in federal agencies. In applying for federal jobs, they not only get an automatic preference in their initial hiring, but in applying for subsequent jobs in their original agency or in other federal jobs. It's a lifetime preference. As long as said 20 year plus veterans already HAVE a federal job, PLUS their 50% or more military pension, I do not believe it is fair or equitable to give them a preference over any other applicant, particularly someone who is unemployed, seeking their first job, and/or is applying for a different position within a federal agency. I don't like seeing this lifetime preference for well-paid, healthy workers extended to all federal contractors.

So as for this change to fed regulations, I think any requirement to hire vets should exclude counting vets who have taken the 20 years (or more) & out pensions. One other point - can the fed contractors double-dip, i.e,. hire a disabled vet and count that person's employment toward meeting both quotas? I saw this when the old AT&T was under federal order to increase their numbers of female and minority employees in the lower 3 management levels. Top management pushed hiring female minorities and counted one employee in both categories. I think double-dipping goes against the spirit of the change in regs, and should be specifically addressed and precluded in the regs.

♦ Retirement pay for active duty begins immediately after separation. It is typically 50% of the average of their final 3 years compensation.
http://projects.militarytimes.com/benefits-handbook/retirement/basic-plans/
http://usmilitary.about.com/od/jobopportunities/a/vetpreference_2.htm

10-Point Preference
Ten points are added to the passing examination score of:
A veteran who served any time and who (1) has a present service-connected disability or (2) is receiving compensation, disability retirement benefits, or pension from the military or the Department of Veterans Affairs. Individuals who received a Purple Heart qualify as disabled veterans.

An unmarried spouse of certain deceased veterans, a spouse of a veteran unable to work because of a service-connected disability, and a mother of a veteran who died in service or who is permanently and totally disabled.

Preference in Examination

Veterans meeting the criteria for preference and who are found eligible (achieve a score of 70 or higher either by a written examination or an evaluation of their experience and education) have 5 or 10 points added to their numerical ratings depending on the nature of their preference.

[beemer27]

2. Re; Veterans Preferance

When you point out that veterans with 20+ years in service receive a preference, you are leaving out the part about working for 20+ years for much LESS that their civilian counterparts, being shot at, and spending many years away from their families. You are also forgetting the part about being on-call 24/7, and being subject to recall at the convenience of the government for the rest of their life. Part of their compensation for spending 20 years working under these conditions is preference in federal jobs, access to some military facilities, and medical care at the VA. Many of these veterans also receive prosthetic limbs at government expense, free treatment for their PTSD, and a government paid Military Funeral.
If this sounds like a cushy job with great benefits, I am sure that the local recruiter would be more than happy to assist you with enlisting.

[Divernan]

3. Yes - so give them preference for their first fed. govt. job, but not limitless preferences.

One of my kids is a vet, and now a federal employee. She's the source of my info, and my opionion is based on her opionion and experience. And a vet can have 20 years service and be only 38 years old, and getting a 50% pension at age 38. THAT is the compensation for the lower pay & hardships. And of course, if a vet has a prosthetic limb or suffers from PTSD, they would qualify as disabled under the new regulation. Once more, I'm not talking about disabled vets. The great majority of vets with prosthetic limbs and/or PTSD, would have left the service well before reaching the 20 year mark.

I proposed a NARROW group of non-disabled vets w/20yrs. or more time in, receiving 50% or more in pension starting upon retirement, NOT be given limitless preferences. For their first fed. govt. job - fine. After that, when it comes to promotions or lateral moves, let them compete with their fellow employees based on their abilities and performance.

[beemer27]

5. Your idea is a good one.

If a non-disabled vet who is qualified gets a one-time bump to the head of the line, it should be enough. I had not heard this idea before, and after thinking on it, it makes sense. If the vet is really qualified, this should be all that he/she needs to get established. As long as we are talking about veterans preference, I would also like to see any government supervisor or department head have to justify IN WRITING why any job vacancy should be exempt from this veterans preference. As long as I am dreaming, I would also like to see some teeth in the law guaranteeing the jobs of National Guard and Reserve troops on their return. These guys are only part time soldiers, and should not have to lose their jobs when they are called up for one tour.
By the way, tell you daughter Thanks! Wearing a uniform was never easy, and it takes a strong person to do it now days.

[itsrobert]

6. I am not familiar with this limitless preferences

My understanding it gets in the door, but once in you compete for openings like everyone else.

[cstanleytech]

7. Just wanted to point out though that it also closes a door in the face of someone else. nt

[Divernan]

9. It adds points to applicant's score on written exams and/or evaluations.

Check the link in my post above for a lot more detail. But as I posted above, basically:
"Veterans meeting the criteria for preference and who are found eligible (achieve a score of 70 or higher either by a written examination or an evaluation of their experience and education) have 5 or 10 points added to their numerical ratings depending on the nature of their preference."

Vets do not automatically get "in the door" to any federal agency. They have to apply separately for any job posted by a federal agency - involving a civil service exam for new hires. Those 10 points were designed to be and do in fact function as a significant leg up on competing applicants. And that's fine with me for initial hires. But after that, I think it should be a level playing field.

They also get preference when it comes to being furloughed, i.e., they're the last to go. Believe me - although I obviously cannot name names or federal agencies here, vets hired by fed. agencies continue to apply for jobs offering them higher GS rankings/salary ranges, just as most fed employees do. And those vets continue to receive the preference points added to their scores/rankings. When there are many applicants (as there always are), the pool is narrowed down to the top 3 "scores" and the "winner" must be chosen from among those 3.

[JoeyT]

4. How about instead of shifting workers around

we just focus on creating more jobs? If there are X number of jobs, the same percentage of people are going to remain unemployed no matter how much we shift hiring dynamics.

[cstanleytech]

8. Actually shifting them around some might help as well.

For example I am in favor of shifting alot of those working for the federal government who face being fired and or furloughed over to the the Army Corp and shifting 1/3 or so of the DoDs budget (about 200 billion I believe) from the other branches of the military over to the Army Corps and assigning the Army Corp the duty of updating and repairing the highways, bridges, railroads and dams within the US because lets face it those actually are a military necessity.
After all without the highways, bridges and railroads materials will have a harder time getting to key places they need to get to and if the dams break they can cause massive damage which divert even more materials to repair the damage that it would have taken to repair the dams properly.

Edit: Forgot to point out that the republicans would have a difficult time in turning it down to because the money is still part of the DoD so if they try to cut it they cut their own throats.

[Divernan]

10. I like the way you think. Love to see Army Corps of Engineers do that work.

[beemer27]

11. Excellent Idea

The Corps of Engineers can do world class work when they are given a chance, and when the politicians stay out of the day to day business. The local contractors would scream bloody murder because they are used to the good-ole-boy gravy train where they call their friend in DC and get the right strings pulled. The old way has always cost the tax payer much more that it should have. If the COE were to fix our infrastructure, the actual costs would be more transparent, the job would get done right, and we could keep the costs more affordable. Many people act as if the COE is a bunch of stumble-bums who know nothing. The truth is that they are very capable, if we let them do the job, and keep politics out of it. Many of our roads, bridges, and dams are in terrible condition, and it is time for us to either fix them, or accept that we are slowly drifting into third-world status. A nation can not be prosperous with poor infrastructure.