Senate votes to scale back federal job preferences for veterans

[DonViejo]

Source: The Washington Post

Congress stepped this week into a sensitive issue that’s been quietly roiling the already-challenging hiring system for federal jobs: the Obama administration’s high-profile push to give preference to veterans.

The Senate version of the vast military policy bill that now heads to conference with the House would knock out one of the advantages veterans enjoy when they apply for federal work. They would continue to get a leg up over non-veterans to get a foot in the door. But once they’re in government and want to be considered for another federal post, they would no longer go to the head of the hiring queue.

[image][/image]

It was high-level Pentagon officials who pressed Sen. John McCain (R-Ariz.), chairman of the Senate Armed Services Committee, for a change to the veterans hiring system. These officials have expressed concern to McCain and other lawmakers that too many qualified non-veterans are getting shut out of federal jobs in deference to those who served but may not be qualified for some positions, according to committee staff.

Read more: https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/powerpost/wp/2016/06/17/tktk-veterans/

[geomon666]

1. Republicans love Veterans!

Just ask them, they'll tell ya.

[ProudProgressiveNow]

3. smh nt

[24601]

9. Did you not read that it is today's high-level DoD officials that are pushing congress to make this

change?

First some disclosure: I am a 50% service-connected disabled veteran, retired from the military, and a civil servant; however, that was not a factor in my hiring and I didn't have a disability rating for the first four years in civil service. I didn't even apply to the VA for the first two years because my injury was stable. It wasn't until after two major spinal surgeries that I submitted the application that began the process for medical examination (the VA did their own tests & diagnosis) and evaluation of my disability.

Our process for taking different positions is competitive selection. Since my 1997 hiring, my career has included four such selections, so my current job is the 5th I've held. My disability status was never known to the selection officials. Maybe two officials noticed my cane, but were smart enough to not ask about a medical condition I may or may not have that was not relevant to the job requirement Two of the interviews were by long distance telephone (1000 miles away), so it's really unlikely that they saw anything at all.

(Disclosure over) Most legislation is proposed by the Administration. That DoD would push for this is no surprise since the same Department has been pushing to cut back on medical care and greatly increase the costs of the medical care (TRICARE) for retirees and our families. Most folks probably don't know this part, but the ACA doesn't let our kids remain on TRICARE after 21 (23 of a full-time student). With any other insurance, they could remain at no additional costs until 26; however DoD was successful getting rules that kick our kids off and to continue with TRICARE until 26, must get their own "TRICARE Young Adult" policy with monthly premiums of $228 per month (Standard) or $308 (Prime). And prime doesn't mean more services but indicates that it's TRICARE run as an HMO. TRICARE Standard is a PPO, but has higher co-pays & deductibles.

Who pushes these changes? Primarily Senior Executive Service and Executive Scale political appointees. DoD has 598 political appointment positions (101 are patronage positions in Schedule C positions which use the GS Scale. Monica Lewinsky and Linda Tripp for example were DoD Schedule C appointees after each moved from the White House.) I'll post info and and a link to the Plum Book which lists the Presidential Appointment positions . Within DoD, you have senior military personnel up to and including the Joint Chiefs of Staff - Supported by the Joint Staff - and they handle traditional military functions. The real power for administering the Department is the Office of Secretary of Defense (OSD) which is overwhelmingly civilian and the real decision makers are political appointees.

When DoD pushes these initiatives, they are reflecting presidential policies. You can't blame previous administrations for pushing the Veteran Preference change - they never did. The Bush Administration appointees did push heavily (and unsuccessfully) for the TRICARE increases. It was both houses of congress that pushed back on DoD and prohibited the increase in our medical costs. Yes, DoD always has Generals testifying before congressional committees on the issue, but they are developed and pushed by the civilians running OSD.

So your words characterizing this as a partisan issue is wrong. If you want to support veterans, do so. If you don't want to, don't. But setting it up the way you did helps nobody and makes you look uninformed.

Thank you.

As promised: United States Government Policy and Supporting Positions (more commonly referred to as the Plum Book) is a publication of the United States Senate's Committee on Governmental Affairs and the House of Representatives' Committee on Government Reform. Published after each Presidential election, the register lists over 7,000 Federal civil service leadership and support positions in the legislative and executive branches of the Federal Government that may be subject to noncompetitive appointment, nationwide. Data covers positions such as agency heads and their immediate subordinates, policy executives and advisors, and aides who report to these officials.

Plum Book: https://www.gpo.gov/fdsys/pkg/GPO-PLUMBOOK-2012/pdf/GPO-PLUMBOOK-2012.pdf

[Herman4747]

2. Why discriminate strongly against nonveterans? n/t

[vkkv]

8. I agree, once they're in the system WITH a job, they can then prove themselves

worthy of a promotion like anyone else.

This seems campletely fair.

Give them an "in", but see how they do.. Why should they expect more than that?

[tabasco]

11. Letter to the editor I saw here in WV

I was saddened and angered when I learned that our U.S. Senators representing West Virginia, Senator Shelley Moore-Capito and Senator Joe Manchin, both voted in favor of Senate Bill 2943, which would eliminate veterans' preference for hiring in federal government jobs, with the exception of an initial hire. As usual, politicians begin dismantling veterans' benefits soon after the bleeding stops. Of course, few politicians have served in the military and understand the full range of sacrifices that veterans make while serving their country.
Veterans have gone into harm's way and many have died and suffered physical and mental disabilities from the rigors of military service - but those aren't the only sacrifices they make. While service members train to become experts on weapons and tactics in order to defeat our enemies, they are not making contacts and polishing political skills they need to move up the ladder in the civilian sector. As our troops fight in war zones across the world, they are not gaining bureaucratic experience and specific skills that civilian agencies and businesses require. Service members entering the civilian work force are at a disadvantage and that is why we have veterans' preference in government hiring.
Now, our politicians want to break their promises to treat veterans fairly and limit veterans' preference to an initial hire. But one thing our representatives should remember – while spending time in the service and foregoing civilian employment, veterans have gained qualities of leadership, discipline and loyalty they could get nowhere else. Everyone can agree that these are qualities we need in our federal employees.
I urge your readers to contact Senator Shelley Moore-Capito at 304-347-5372, and Senator Joe Manchin at 304-342-5855 and urge them to reconsider their support for cuts to veterans' preference in federal hiring.

[kairos12]

4. Kipling had it right with the poem "Tommy"

I went into a public-'ouse to get a pint o' beer,
The publican 'e up an' sez, "We serve no red-coats here."
The girls be'ind the bar they laughed an' giggled fit to die,
I outs into the street again an' to myself sez I:
O it's Tommy this, an' Tommy that, an' "Tommy, go away";
But it's "Thank you, Mister Atkins", when the band begins to play,
The band begins to play, my boys, the band begins to play,
O it's "Thank you, Mister Atkins", when the band begins to play.

I went into a theatre as sober as could be,
They gave a drunk civilian room, but 'adn't none for me;
They sent me to the gallery or round the music-'alls,
But when it comes to fightin', Lord! they'll shove me in the stalls!
For it's Tommy this, an' Tommy that, an' "Tommy, wait outside";
But it's "Special train for Atkins" when the trooper's on the tide,
The troopship's on the tide, my boys, the troopship's on the tide,
O it's "Special train for Atkins" when the trooper's on the tide.

Yes, makin' mock o' uniforms that guard you while you sleep
Is cheaper than them uniforms, an' they're starvation cheap;
An' hustlin' drunken soldiers when they're goin' large a bit
Is five times better business than paradin' in full kit.
Then it's Tommy this, an' Tommy that, an' "Tommy, 'ow's yer soul?"
But it's "Thin red line of 'eroes" when the drums begin to roll,
The drums begin to roll, my boys, the drums begin to roll,
O it's "Thin red line of 'eroes" when the drums begin to roll.

We aren't no thin red 'eroes, nor we aren't no blackguards too,
But single men in barricks, most remarkable like you;
An' if sometimes our conduck isn't all your fancy paints,
Why, single men in barricks don't grow into plaster saints;
While it's Tommy this, an' Tommy that, an' "Tommy, fall be'ind",
But it's "Please to walk in front, sir", when there's trouble in the wind,
There's trouble in the wind, my boys, there's trouble in the wind,
O it's "Please to walk in front, sir", when there's trouble in the wind.

You talk o' better food for us, an' schools, an' fires, an' all:
We'll wait for extry rations if you treat us rational.
Don't mess about the cook-room slops, but prove it to our face
The Widow's Uniform is not the soldier-man's disgrace.
For it's Tommy this, an' Tommy that, an' "Chuck him out, the brute!"
But it's "Saviour of 'is country" when the guns begin to shoot;
An' it's Tommy this, an' Tommy that, an' anything you please;
An' Tommy ain't a bloomin' fool -- you bet that Tommy sees!

[Demit]

5. That seems fair enough.

Veterans continue to get preference over non-vets for their first job in govt. Just not for promotions later.

"...too many qualified non-veterans are getting shut out of federal jobs in deference to those who served but may not be qualified for some positions, according to committee staff."

That "may not be qualified for some positions" phrase rings true. It made me think of McCain, whose campaign leaned heavily on his war hero status in his bid for the presidency. Being a "war hero" is one thing, but it doesn't automatically qualify you to be president.

[PatSeg]

6. Whoa, that is brutal

Yet another slap in the face to veterans. Does the Senate know this is an election year? Seems politically suicidal.

[tabasco]

7. Everybody forgets the veterans

after the bleeding is done.

[rladdi]

10. Yes, this is the Republicans who tell us how much support they give to Vets.

But they only talk, and in the states and in Senate and House, they take away from the Vets. AZ Senator John McCain has received over $7.7 million from the NRA and gun rights groups. He fully supports the mass killings that the NRA and lame GOP does.

[24601]

13. You don't know what you are talking about. The Senate vote was 85-13. The Nays were 7 Democrats

and 6 Republicans. Senators Boxer and Sanders did not vote.

It's not very hard to check these out before posting.

http://www.senate.gov/legislative/LIS/roll_call_lists/roll_call_vote_cfm.cfm?congress=114&session=2&vote=00098

[liberal N proud]

12. Hey Veterans - Remember this come November

Even if you are not looking for a federal job, this is a slap in the face!