E-mail updates
Follow on Twitter
Subscribe to RSS
It has become a mainstream story – a soldier is unable to find work because of military obligations.
Many of those stories are about small, private companies. But according to The Washington Post, the biggest offender is the federal government.
The story, titled, “Returning military members allege job discrimination — by federal government,” reported that offices within the federal government have reneged on job offers to members of the military and fired others after a long absence.
By federal law, service members may be excused from work for military service.
Last year, veterans submitted 1,548 complaints that employers violated the law. Of those, more than 18 percent involved federal agencies -- the highest percentage among employers.
“On the one hand, the government asked me to serve in Iraq,” retired Army Brig. Gen. Michael Silva told the Post. Silva is a reservist who commanded a brigade in Iraq and was fired from his job as a U.S. Customs and Border Patrol contractor on his return. “On the other hand, another branch of government was not willing to protect my rights after serving.”
While the federal government is the largest offender, it is also employs the most veterans. According to the Post, more than a fourth of its employees have been in the military.
Leave a Comment:
... Sounds about right given the current administration and where their priorities are
Yes they actually forward these applications to the oval office for final approval ... it must be exhausting being so paranoid.
The current administration has been urging business to hire veterans. That, and the feds are the largest employer for veterans so naturally, they will receive a higher number of complaints
I know you don't really want to know the facts if they don't support your blind devotion to the anti-Obama cause, but if you read the whole article you'd see that the Brig. General's case happened in 2007 - 2008. During that supposedly perfect administration of "Dubya".
Hmmm... This is not new! Actually, this type of discrimination has been happening for at least the last 20 years or so, particularly if the veteran is aged 50 or older. More likely than not, it does not have much to do with the present administration. The people responsible for making hiring decisions for government jobs - federal, and states, have been long-term, (15 to 20 years), government employees. Basically, they do not give a rat's patootie about hiring younger or older veterans...
Supposedly, there is a law that protects veterans – USERRA, but, apparently, the governments are immune.
Isn't just Military leave either. Anyone put in apps for either federal or state employment along with veteran and disabled preference and still get turned down? Without any kind of oversite, how would anyone know if those employers were even honoring veteran and disabled preference? Have been turned down for three different state jobs that supposedly adhere to veterans employment statuses. Would LOVE to know if others have had the same problems and if a veteran with better skills than me got the job, or not.
STexan,,, WTF are you talking about & how can you with any degree of credibility blame this on Obama?
Yesterday there was an article on msnbc about the extraordinary number of jobs that have been eliminated in the federal government. If a veteran's job no longer exists, how can they give it back to him/her?
Why were those jobs eliminated? "Streamlining" government. Outsourcing. Expecting one person to do the job of three. And who is constantly on the case of 'big government?' The "unholy alliance of corrupt business and corrupt politics." Mostly Republicans.
Here's a headline from the Washington Post, February 2011:
John Boehner: If federal jobs are lost, 'So be it'
Public sector jobs are taking a hit. Lots of people, veterans and non-veterans alike, either lose their jobs or can't find any. (That's what corporatists do -- they're doing it in Greece as we speak. Weaken the public sector, enrich the elite of the private sector.)
When public sector jobs take a hit, people are out of work. Sadly, that includes veterans. They, along with the rest of us, are 'collateral damage.'
This has to stop. The 'free market' approach to economics and politics is ruining not only our country, but the world. There is a viable alternative. The winners of the "Nobel Prize for the environment" have come up with a proposal that makes extraordinary sense, but in today's world seems daring and innovative. Have a look.
http://www.commondreams.org/headline/2012/02/20-5
From the Washington Post article -
Was Silva an employee of Customs and Border Patrol or was he a contractor?
Since the Federal government is the single largest employer of veterans - it only stands to reason that veterans will be laid off to shrink the size of government. Closing Post Offices will result in laid off veterans.
There have been many comments elsewhere that active soldiers and veterans are mostly Republican - so they are promoting the politics that eliminate government jobs for veterans.
This says so much about America's not taking care of the Vets, who fought to put our Country by protecting the lives and making America a safer place to live. When the Vets come back, they get the esteem privilege of being the largest group among the homeless people with no work whatsoever. Their preference points are so minutely, miniscule and ignored, that it means nothing at all. The Fed jobs, the State Fed jobs, and the local local Fed jobs are so politically related, or appointed through very close familial connections, and political favor paybacks makes it impossible for the Vets to have any chance at all unless they have the deep inside connections regardless of qualified skills and experience. Will it take very long for the politicians to come up with more useless wars? "Use and Abuse!!"
Smaller government, lazy feds paid too much, cut the budget, cut down on hiring - so vets suffer. too. You can't have it both ways, bud.
04 Majors and above do not get Preference unless they are disabled vets. The top officers are whining the most???????? General, stop whining and get a job. Preference for the top brass????? Puleezzzzzz.
A General as a Contractor? Reserve at that. GTFO.
Idiot.
Vets with no military obligation are not what this article is about. It's about vets who are reservists or something and they get called into active duty, and end up losing their job back home as a result.
Vets still get a hiring preference of 5 points, while disabled vets get 10 point preferences for federal positions.
Currently, federal jobs are being cut across the board. Most of the cutbacks are being done through voluntary early retirement incentives and hiring freezes (1 hire for every 3 losses). Pay raises are also still frozen for GS payscale employees (and have been for awhile).
morrigan--
Interesting article. Thanks for posting the link.
I particularly like the phrase "perpetual growth myth." I've often wondered about our worship of so-called "progression." Are we really happier than the Native Americans we disposed?
Sound like the government to me...Do as I say not as I do....This is on both sides left or right
"This has to stop. The 'free market' approach to economics and politics is ruining not only our country"
I disagree. It isn't the free market approach. We don't have a free market approach in this country anymore. Once the economy is ruled by corporations, it's no longer a free market.
@subsailor585
Not sure what you're reading. I read the whole article and it says, "In fiscal 2011, more than 18 percent of the 1,548 complaints of violations of that law involved federal agencies, according to figures obtained under the Freedom of Information Act."
Sorry, that's during Obama's administration.
Any employer out there that wouldn't give a veteran a better than equal chance for a job, ought to be ashamed....
Equal - yes. Better than equal - no. Especially not in any customer facing position.
I have the utmost respect for those who serve - but with that respect comes the understanding that not all of the skills - particularly the social ones - necessary for modern employment come with Basic or Advanced Training in the military.
The republicans wanted to shrink government. These jobs are going away just like they wanted.
@ Digitalnoise, I disagree. Basic and Advanced training prepares a candidate for customer facing employment very well. If you adequately fulfilled an enlistment obligation, you obviously learned to show up at the right time in the right uniform, do your job and follow instructions. In my opinion that is above and beyond most civilian standards. Verifiable military service should be an automatic stamp of approval for most entry level employment opportunities. That said, any veteran or person seeking work should know their own strengths and weakness as well as look for work they are suited for. Example, some people are more suited for sales and some have a technical aptitude. I think veterans should get preference over non veterans. You just can't B.S. around a verifiable DD-214 but anyone can make up a fake reference or say they can do something they can't.
Old bumper sticker: "If you don't like soldiers, next time you go to war, call a hippie."
New bumper sticker: "If you don't like hippies, next time you need some pot, call a cop."
Eugene, if you read the article it's clear that it's not about hiring preferences - it's about reservists who get called into active duty and losing their jobs while away.
Vets still have a large advantage over civilians with no military experience when it comes to being hired for federal positions. Especially vets with security clearances.
Newest bumper sticker: "WTF is a "Hippie?"
This has been a problem since forever. Remember the Bonus Army?
Here's a suggestion - Don't volunteer to fight the government's wars. A standing army encourages them to start wars that are less than necessary...like Afghanistan and Iraq. The Constitution allows for conscription.
Get a regular non-government job and show up with conscripted if you want to help out.
@Cavey
Please see my comment about "social skills" - knowing how to show up on time and properly dressed as well as following instructions is not a military skill - sorry to burst your bubble there. It's certainly a skill required to be successful in the military - but also life and jobs in general.
Again, I have the utmost respect for those who've served - but the employees with the most issues - especially when it comes to dealing with customers - have been former military. I'm not sure if it's a contempt issue for all of them (for one very memorable employee that was exactly the excuse he gave), or just not knowing how to interact with difficult people.
On a technical skills side, they're usually pretty awesome, especially the former signal corps guys & gals - but I will never, ever hire a programmer with a military background again.
The point that I'm trying to make is that being a vet is not an automatic pass, and shouldn't be. Jobs should be filled by those not only with the skills required for the technical definition of the job, but also by those who possess the less definable skills.
@ DigitalNoise, I respect that. Would you agree that vet status should secure an interview at the very least? I understand what you mean about less definable skills and a good question for a candidate is how frequently they interacted with higher ranking officials.
DigitalNoise - I am a disabled vet myself and would you believe graduated college Magna Cum Laude? I am sure you somehow mistakenly believe a choice to serve means we couldn't hack it out here in the big bad world with you. Get over yourself. A huge component of our armed forces are reservist that work in the civilian sector right next to you wait for the call, a call you no doubt could not muster the courage to answer while you sleep under the cozy blanket of freedom we provide.
We don't ask for your respect, but certainly have done nothing to lose it. I am sure you appreciate the peace of mine a local and state law enforcement agency provides. Who do you think keeps them safe from the world so they can watch over you?
I do not think being a veteran alone qualifies you for a given job, but some of earn degrees before entering service, some of us work extra hard to earn one while we serve, and some after we get out. While in service we are doctors, lawyers, scientist, nurses, engineers etc. I was trained on one of the first laptops while in the Army and fielded cell phones in signal corps long before you civilians knew they existed. We had the internet years before you were out here hearing rumors of it.
You have an edge by getting freedom at a cost oters pay, why then not be a little more understanding when a veteran returns, that he be able to have a shot at life after getting shot at for you?
Amen and amen. I think Mr. "I'll never hire a vet again" is more ignorant and shows his lack of attention to detail of the issue at hand on top of it. The issue is that Federal agencies as well as State and private are obligated under Federal law to hold the position of any member who serves in the Armed forces while they are serving our country. Upon their return, their prior place of employment is to grant them any and all allocated raises and promotions as if they were still employed and have a position open for the vet to walk back into. The Government fails big time on this and yes, we can blame the "Obuma" admin because of their ties and back pocket deals with the unions that blackball vets in the first place. I myself am involved in a suit where the federal agency told me I had to provide my VA medical record otherwise I would not get a job offer. This is illegal and against the law. While I never did submit to their illegal demand, they offered me a temp position for a job that was set aside by congressional law for disabled vets. Upon going to work as a vet I found out that they had transferred over non vets, people who never served a day in their life to fill job positions that were by law, set aside for people like myself who were injured during service and in my case, forced me to resign my career as a law enforcement officer. I got targeted by the Union and finally let go. When I filed for unemployment, the agency told them they never fired me so that took another 2 months of no pay thanks to Obuma and his passing of the "Fair Pay Act" that only helped to enforce his other pro union clauses that were hidden in his original "rape of the American people" when he pushed his 1000+ page of gibberish spending that put us in the hole we are currently in. The other fact is, it doesn't matter if you provide link or include citations for proof of your claims, liberals are always blind to anything that bumps against their hero's and agenda.On a last note, thanks your vets for keeping you safe at home as well seen as how vets make up more than 50% of law enforcement in America. Yes some vets have PTSD from combat but that's your companies job to make sure you don't put person like that in a position that would add to the fire. The law states you have to hold a position open for the vet, not the exact same job, gotta love excuses.
@Rob - I never said I wouldn't hire a vet again. I said I'd never hire a programmer with a military background. Try actually reading before commenting - but then that would place you in the 0.01% of commentators on this site.
@Kevin - again, read what I said. I said that being a vet shouldn't be an automatic pass - ie. "Oh, you're a vet? Have a job!". There are plenty of skilled and incredibly talented people with military backgrounds - there are also plenty of skilled and incredibly talented people who don't have military backgrounds. As an employer, asking me to hire the vet over the other simply because they're a vet is asinine.
Employment is competitive - as it should be. As a job seeker your skills must set you above the other candidates - a military background doesn't always do that.
A perfect example is one candidate I had back in December - former Army, excellent technical skills, understood the job and the tools - but had a completely crappy personality from the moment he walked in. So he didn't get the job. The guy with not so polished skills and who wasn't completely familiar with the tools, but with an open eagerness to learn and a good personality did. In the long run, he'll be better for my business.
Just another example of the bureaucracy being out of control. The question to be asked is why? A private company would be prosecuted and fined...at least with the Federal government the decision maker should be fired.
Then talk to the RepukliCONS that are shrinking government. When you "shrink" and employer, people have to lose jobs, there is NO other way to "shrink" and employer.
"Last year, veterans submitted 1,548 complaints that employers violated the law. Of those, more than 18 percent involved federal agencies -- the highest percentage among employers."
Well that would mean that 82% of the complaints were against civilian companies wouldn't it. Lets not look at how the numbers are twisted by the media but instead what they mean......82% of the complaints are coming from the civilian sector.........
The difference is that it's the government, and it should be leading by example.
Er, Edward ... that's listing the fed gov as ONE employer. And all the others as separate employers. Get it?
I'm pretty certain that the remaining 82% be it several companies, or one lump sum are still classified as non-federal civilian private industry jobs. Got it Beth? Lol.
What I don't get is that the General in the article is a "contractor" - ie employed by a private company that contracts with the government. So, wouldn't it be the private company that fired him while he was deployed, and not the Fed?
I am a federal supervisor who works with civilian federal employees, military, and contractors. Before the bashers get started, I'm also former military.
There is unquestionably a huge sense of entitlement on the part of retiring military, military, and veterans for jobs. It shows in the responses in this forum. Most contractors are former military, and I can tell you that they are not better than the general population. They bring real baggage, including no life experience outside the military in many cases. I have had retired military getting on as civilians or contractors and sitting on their backsides just to get a second retirement, with the same ideas about the pace of work and productivity expectations in the new jobs as they had in the military.
There is real truth in the saying that if it weren't for minimum standards, there wouldn't be standards at all...
Now that this has come to light it behooves the Obama administration to look into the issue and correct it. It's that simple.
Yep, probably create a "ghost" problem then come up with a quick fix.
Now what book was this maneuver in again ?
In a huge institution like the government it could well be that sections are not complying. I'm not blaming the Obama administration for causing it - but I am saying they need to attend to it.
I work as a civilian employee of the Department of the Navy, and I can tell you first-hand that there's an extra effort being made to recruit and hire veterans, especially "Wounded Warriors." I'm not saying other areas in the government are stepping up to the plate - I don't know one way or the other - but I know it's not a completely government-wide problem.
I agree dbarak. I am also a fed employee and have first hand knowledge of Vets preference. I have been blocked from jobs because of veterans preference. I have to work many an extra hour because of military duty. On one hand, I respect that we have a fellow employee that serves, on the other hand, I know that he is doing things voluntarily to advance his career and retirement, which affects me and my family. Just to be told, when his schedule is disrupted by the tiniest amount, that he doesn't know why he should have to rearrange HIS schedule for anyone else. I am a vet as well, so it is not against the military, it is against the attitude. Some Vets feel entitled to EVERY little luxury from their employer, and if they dont get it, they whine. I have seen it and heard it. Now this is not all, but there are those that do.
Also, this extended leave for military. OK, you have bare minimum staffing to do the job, then you lose one for 6 months to a year. You need to fill the position, because it has to do with public safety. Perhaps the Vet came back and they had a position for him, but it was not in the same job, or perhaps a different location, that the Vet doesn't like. So he says they got rid of my job. So, by all means, serve our country, but make a decision about what you want, before you impact multiple peoples lives because you want for YOURSELF. Serving is supposed to be the ultimate sacrifice, not about getting as much for you as you can get, no matter the cost to others.
Please understand, this is not the majority of Vets, these are to the few that ruin this for the rest. Being a Vet should have taught you that there is a bigger picture than yourself and gotten rid of the I am number one and all that matters attitude. but for some, I guess it is ingrained.
I work for the US Army, they do the same thing, they want interns and new grads and force out veterans to get it. They have said rite out that veterans need not apply, wait until they retire and are the veterans!
I was lucky enough to advance to mid-grade officer status from the enlisted ranks. Just before retirement, I went to one of those "job recruiting seminars" where I was told they were only looking for "younger" military officers and refused to look at my resume.
Well, send the article to the White House and see what our Leader has to say. He boasts putting back to work so let him mull over what his own agency is doing to help or hinder.
Since it's his policy to put them to work, what makes you think he isn't going to help?
Oh, that's right.... Conservatives will try to stop the funding..... My bad, I don't see how myself or anyone else can forget that
I had committed 8 years to the Department of the Army as a civilian after I retired from the military. I brought the organization in to the 21st Century and won accolades for my leadership. I've been recently notified that my job has been eliminated; have a good day. I am scrambling now or something in my field that will keep food on the table, but couldn't believe that even though my job is going there is no priority placement or other assistance to find something else. I was told, "You'll be find, you have marketable skills. Apparently they haven't looked at the market recently.
Government cuts, sad but it happens... My last government job was privatized. Hope things work out for you
Wishing you the best.
don't tell me you are the one that brought the US Army into the wonderful world of political correctness on the battlefield? Does the infantry have to call you for permission to shoot the enemy or just Hillary?
If it was you or Gen Patton that I had to be in a foxhole with..................guess who. todays politically correct us army is a joke. lets see how your 21st century army stand ups to the Chinese "old way" of doing things-time will tell real soon.
1st CAV, Read your post and see if it makes sense. There are so many errors in structure that it is impossible to derive meaning from what is written. To whom are you responding?
"Does the infantry have to call you for permission to shoot the enemy or just Hillary?"
They have to call him for permission to shoot the enemy, but they may fire at will on Hillary. NEXT QUESTION?
But, at least you have your military retirement pay plus Tri-Care medical benefits plus commissary access. That is a lot more than most unemployed people have. Count your blessings instead of griping.
Sounds like the other 78% that are discriminating against the Vets are private industry, and the so-called job creators. The Repubs are desperate, they are looking for any opening, since their class of presidential contending clowns are bombing.
I wonder how many ex-military mechanics, electronics/avionics technicians, etc. are hearing the same kinds of things I did while searching for work, "But do you have any real experience and/or training?" :-D (because, you know a radio isn't a radio, and a schematic isn't a schematic, and a Humvee engine isn't the same as a truck engine). We used to joke that it took a college degree to break the airplane and a high school diploma to fix it!
I am reminded of a couple of Rambo's lines from the movie "First Blood" :
"For me civilian life is nothing! In the field we had a code of honor, you watch my back, I watch yours. Back here there's nothing!"
"Back there I could fly a gunship, I could drive a tank, I was in charge of million dollar equipment, back here I can't even hold a job parking cars!"
Huh...who would have thought?
Guess it's not what you know but who you...well, you get the idea!
How much butt you can kiss...
In 97 I had a civil service boss who sent a vet from the 1st Iraq war, no, 2 vets the dude & his wife are Army vets, all the way to Tahoe for a government job he already knew was filled, just because the boss didn't like him
The Obama government is trying to do a balancing act.
The troops are being brought home too soon (for the liberal vote).
Civil servants are getting cut or RIFFED to make way for troops coming home.
Problem is, there are not enough slots to fill.
AND the government is cutting back on ALL military which will cause a domino effect on the US.
All we are about to see is more vets on the streets and in unemployment lines along with military contractor personnel.
War is hell, but it is also a business.
Since it's his policy to put them to work, what makes you think he isn't going to help?
Oh, that's right.... Conservatives will try to stop the funding..... My bad, I don't see how myself or anyone else can forget that
All in the name of "Smaller Government" I guess you can say, huh?
The veteran cited is a Federal contractor - sorry, the fault would not be the Fed's - it belongs with the contractor.
Good catch Linderella,, I missed it -- These clowns fall flat on their face trying to blame this on Obama or the government
But it happens,, the family I know wasn't back from Desert Storm a year when that happened to them back in 97. ---- It was a problem with a corrupt double dipping GS 13 who ripped off the government that caused that problem
The fault would still be with the FEDS if the company he worked for still had an active contract.
This guy was a bad choice of example, but what is being said is true.
It doesn't matter if your flipped hamburgers, your job (along with raises for time served) by law are still supposed to be waiting for you.
In a perfect world.
Dude,,, Every region is managed differently. Go get a contracting job involving government work & see for yourself!
Screaming at the government is like you screaming at your car for stopping because you didn't put gas in it
I worked at a state agency for years. We had one engineer who belonged to the National Guard. He was belittled, passed over for promotions, and I actually heard a couple of the bosses complain about his going to go 'play solider' when they wanted him to work one weekend and he had to go report that weekend. He never complained. I asked him why and he said all it would do would to bring even more cr@p down on his head. This guy was a really good engineer. He was there at 6:30 every morning and i never saw him leave before 5:30. Worked his tail off. So it's not just the Feds, it's much more prevelant than many think and has been going on forever.
Sounds like you shouldn't bother volunteering. If we had fewer volunteers, Bush would have had to start a draft for his play war in Iraq. Just sayin'...
All the Veterans returning will be unemployed to join the other millions of unemployed, Fuel prices sky rocketing, Goodbye Mr President.
All the while conservatives refuse to support the President's efforts to get jobs for them & refuse to fund the President's programs
Don't figure, does it? --- Good Bye conservatives
OBAMA-BIDEN 2012
Oh STFU! Unemployment is now at it's lowest rate since dumbass left office in 2008 and the market is approaching 13000. Fuel prices are going up because the Iranians are stirring the turd. Good grief! You stupid f'n teatards will stop at nothing to blame Obama for everything. If a meteor struck Paris you retards would blame it on Obama. Get lost....jesus.
Oil,
So, you don't blame ANYTHING on past administrations? Pull your face out of your other face. It would make no difference who was in office the market and unemployment would recover. Look at the history of the stock market. Oh that's right, you just ride on the blatherings of the 99% and don't research for yourself. My apologies.
sam...to the contrary...I blame A LOT on past administrations. Perhaps you should clean your glasses and re-read my comment, but my point was merely that Obama is being unfairly targeted by blithering idiots such as US Citizen. Perhaps you should pull your head out of your ass and stick to the subject.
I recently saw an article about how Australia is looking to hire US Military vets to work for their military - at this point in time, I'll bet it sounds pretty tempting for many unemployed vets.
I am not suprised that the Feds discriminates against vets. They'll discriminate against anyone for any reason. I am a Federal employee who has been a victim. I filed an EEO complaint and it came down to his word against mine. EEO rules don't apply to the upper levels of management in the Government. It has nothing to do with who is President, it has to do with the character of the career Federal managers.
Yep,,, Been there seen that,, It's the Good Ol' Boys Club... You can't blame that on the Feds when it's the ones doing the hiring & firing are the supervisors
In Long Beach a while back, a worker was killed because he was going to rat out the problem supervisors in his area
Shameful.
Shameful conservatives trying to blame it on Obama!
They have no honor to our country or to our returning veterans
Finally! An article that points out Veteran discrimination! Yet there are so many more methods of discrimination against veterans out there.
First off, veterans points (or preference) are regularly disregarded or circumvented (preferred candidates are simply weighted higher "in other areas" by selection committee's to off-set the veteran).
Secondly, (and I've heard many anecdotal stories of this), selection committees/hiring authorities will purposely disqualify veterans because the correct "buzz" words aren't used even though anyone with half a brain can see the similarities (i.e. Chief of Personnel = Supervisor, Human Resource Dept, etc) Even if a "correction" in translation of duties is made by the veteran, it appears illegitimate to the hiring authority. Or rather, the vet's experience isn't in the civilian world...so it simply doesn't "count."
(In essence, vets are like chiropractors. The majority of the federal hiring authorities and the private sector see their skills as "questionable" or "second-rate.")
Thirdly, veteran applications in the federal system face a hurdle with verifying references because veterans have so many supervisors in the span of their careers. These supervisors end-up in deployed locations and are often hard to contact. Even if a veteran maintains contact with two or three former supervisors, job application systems such as Taleo or Avue or even USA jobs create an appearance of "missing data" or purposely-evaded information. This occurs when a vets' other supervisors are identified as "unavailable."
Fourthly, (and somewhat off-topic) all of these recent Veteran Hiring Initiatives between the govt and the private sector are ripe with scams and are an outright disgrace. Corporations (such as Chase) only want free publicity. Their hire-a-vet programs are simply linked to monster jobs, Indeed, and other jobs search engines. Ironically, many of the jobs that appear in these hire-a-vet search engines exclude veterans. Moreover, many dubious ads appear. One job ad was for a chief of operations at an escort-like "adult" service and another was for work in the adult film industry. All this while Chase and Obama tout their efforts.
To be clear, city and state local governments probably ask for more information about a vet than is "necessary and one wonders whether that is used to passively discriminate. I once heard a member of a "traditionally-un-diverse selection committee" say "we don't want to hire him. He sounds like he will come in and "take-over. He has a combat-type medal/award" ***And, btw, yes, by traditionally-un-diverse, I simply mean there were no males in the committee nor any person not considered part of a disenfranchised group. To be politically incorrect, there were no males in the committee.
There is so much more to this story. A solid FOIA request (providing statistical information) from federal and state government hiring authorities should reveal so much more.
Ever fill out an application for a federal Job? That is another problem people have
I recommend to anyone applying for one to take a class in how to fill one out, or it won't even be looked at. It will be stopped way before it gets to the place you are trying to get the job at
A lot of things need to be done to make civil service efficient
Been there. If your uncle is connected and got you the job then you could put your x on a blank page and still get the job. Disabled veterans that have skills and could walk in and do the job get passed over while nephews with no points or experience get jobs. It's a currupt system and getting worse. If you complain then you never will work for the feds.
Exactly! I couldn't agree with you more Joshua. In addition to the items/issues you detailed, other government practices exist that minimize opportunities for vets seeking jobs.
First, most government agencies maintain longstanding standards and rules designed to prevent nepotism. However, standards against nepotism are selectively enforced. So, instead of insuring fair hiring practices, selective implementation represents a tactic for discrimination against qualified veterans. The end result is opening is filled by an individual who was already ear-marked for the job (more on that below).
The federal government uses USAJobs to solicit applications for most fed openings. One of the problems for USAJobs is that no standardized procedures exist for how an application is to be formatted. An element of arbitrariness exists throughout the entire process, ensuring numerous opportunities for discounting a qualified applicant. The applicant can type all the buzzwords in the job description on their application, but no standards describe a correct resume formatting, i.e...cover sheet, no cover sheet, number of years of job history, etc... In the end, if an applicant doesn't get a job, it is their fault for not reading the minds of the human resources dept posting the opening. The level of uncertainty creates cover for officials involved in any hiring decision. Both the Army and the Navy had their own websites for posting job openings, but those sites (which were much more standardized, clear, and pragmatic than USAJobs) were discontinued last year in favor of the much more archaic (and arbitrary) USAJobs website. Why? Financial constraints? Maybe....or maybe not. To tell the truth, I don't really know what goes on through USAJobs, because......
..... USAJobs has no feedback mechanism! Standards and practices for hiring decisions are shrouded in secrecy. If I don't land a position as a "widget inspector", no one in Human Resources gets back to me with information on how I could be more competitive for the next opening. Furthermore, artificial barriers exist that prevent me from soliciting said feedback. As a matter of practicality, it is nearly impossible to contact HR personnel making the decisions, unless you know them personally. Additionally, the way the system is set up prevents concerned applicants from critiquing it, and possibly suggesting improvements, or (more likely) identifying unfair hiring practices. The best information I've received is a suggestion to go through some professional resume development website to maximize my chances. But I shouldn't have to pay an outside consultant to develop my resume. I'm a veteran of 20 years with a graduate degree. I can write my own resume....I just need my perspective employer to publish clear standards. Actually, there's no reason not to post precise and exact standards....unless, of course, you are hiding something.
Its not that I'm paranoid, its just that I've seen the system circumvented to prevent the hiring of qualified applicants in favor of someone who maybe is friends with the hiring authority's wife (YES...I've seen/heard of this happening several times). The person landing the job often lacks the critical requirements...such as a college degree, or anything approaching the prerequisite job experience. And yes, I am bitter, because I'm unemployed after 20+ years service, educated, and a very qualified applicant. But I don't play Bridge with so-and-so's wife.
Reiterating: Standards should be clear, exact, and fairly implemented. Feedback should be provided or available upon solicitation. Hiring authorities and leaders should explain the decision-making process, and integrate criticism into process improvement activities. Transparency should exist at all levels of the hiring beauracracy; it should be the rule, rather than the exception. These are all lessons I learned, implemented, and promoted while a member of the US Armed Forces...i.e., the federal government. I don't believe its too much to expect other agnencies/parties to display the same standards of conduct.
WW1 - 4 years
WWII - 4 years
Desert Storm - 7 months
Iraqi Freedom/Enduring Freedom (Afghanistan) - TEN YEARS
Could you hold a job vacant for TEN years or fire the person who has been doing that job for TEN years when original employee returned? No I'm not saying it is alright but in some cases it is understandable. My friend worked for IBM when he was called up as a reservist and has been active duty Army since 2003. In the mean time, MOST of IBM has shipped to India and his division was all laid off. His old job is GONE and not coming back. Where should he go when he gets out next year? Another military friend's company went bankrupt while she was in Afghanistan. Even if she hadnt deployed with her reserve unit, she would STILL be unemployed from that job.
Lastly, I am not sure where they get their info because every job fair and recruiting open house I have attended in the last two years - either as an applicant or as a recruiter/company rep - has PREFERRED veterans and will often hire them on the spot to make sure we get them and their skills. We also get them to refer OTHER vets and hire them too! (And FYI, I am in Washington DC Metro and yes we hire for jobs with the Federal government and Dept of Defense)
IBM,, "I've Been Moved".. Yep, been to their job fairs. Finally decided to retire at 62. When the President promoted the last spurge in federal hiring I started to get calls, but not from the job fairs... From the commissary at old McCellan AFB & Travis which took a bit of door knocking -- I'm staying retired, I didn't want to go backwards.. My first job was in grocery stores at 16
For the US World War I was less than two years. As for Viet Nam or Iraq/Afghan war, no reservist served for ten years unless he wanted to. Yes, some reservists have served multiple tours, but that is because the Defense department has cut the Regular Military so much that Reserves and National Guard must be used. Blame the DOD wonks for that decision.
Well obama said the buck stops with him so let's see how he deals with our nations patriots. So far he has cut the military budget, and wants a 80% nuclear arms reduction. obama has also banned the importation of the US made M1 Garand rifle from S Korea. obama must be parinoid about we the people confronting his dictatorship to do that. God obama will start a war if needed so he can enact the draft and target potential Republican voters, and Iran may be the start of it.
Since it's his policy to put them to work, what makes you think he isn't going to help?
Oh, that's right.... Conservatives will try to stop the funding..... My bad, I don't see how myself or anyone else can forget that
All in the name of "Smaller Government" I guess you can say, huh?
By the way, it's republican voters who are screaming for a war with Iran!
This article is missleading. Contractors do not work for the US Federal Government. They are not on the USG payroll. They can not obtain health coverage on the USG dime like the civil service. The USG does not contribute to their TSP retirement plan.
A person can have a PSC a personal services contract or work for a company that have a services contract.
It is not easy to fire a civil servant. This article is nonsense. These folks should check their earnings and leave statements. Then they would know who they are really working for.
If he contacted his services to the US Customs & Border Patrol, then he wasn't a "civil service" government worker, he was a contract employee & who the hell do you think "paid for those services"?
So your point is that a poorly chosen example invalidates the entire story?
Just like the hypocrites are doing vets the White House carps about banks not refinacing while Freddy Mac screws customers by refusing them reasonable refinances. During the stimulus spending small contractors could get some of the government work but you had to be connected. Same old curruption, different party. They're all currupt and don't give a rats ass about forty-nine point nine percent of Americans. They will do what needs to be done to impress fifty point zero, zero, zero, one percent every four years. A pox on their houses.
Freddie Mac? They won't finance buyers that are doubling their profit by flipping. Other than that, you shouldn't have any problem with low financing from them unless you've got other problems
Go call a real estate loan agent, they will explain how it works
Seriously, dude,,,, Come here armed with some knowledge so you don't look like the usual right wing false patriot & nut job
Bye the way amigo,,, Freddie Mac is under federal receivership now
Their problems started happening under the conservative administration when it wasn't & there was an even bigger emphasis on deregulation. Flipping helped to inflate prices & increase property tax rates.... It was a big part of the problem
After they've served in combat, they come back with PTSD and kill their fellow employees, so do you really blame the government for firing them?
Blame the supervisors who do the hiring in any federal work place.. Many don't readily accept new policies.
Some oddly enough don't like federal government telling them how to do their own federal job & most need to be means tested for competence
Want to see a government supervisor jump out of his skin? --- Tell him the IG is coming in two hours & his password doesn't work anymore
Why was he fired? It doesn't say anything about that, other than he was fired when he returned. Are they saying he was fired because he left his job for the war? or are they saying he was banging children in the break room, or was he masturbating to farm animals... seriously another MSNBC headline story without substance.
If it is Government policy that he can leave his job to go to war and come back to that job when it's over or his tour is up then get a lawyer take them to court. Otherwise shut up and get in line with the rest us who work for a living. And not off the taxpayer dime either.
I'd thank you for your service to our country, but as far as I can see you weren't doing anything to serve this country in Iraq to begin with. Except contributing to this mountain of debt we're in now.
If you look it came from the Washington Post
Have fun Bman, I'm out
I'm dappled and drowsy and ready to sleep.
Let the morning time drop all its petals on me.
Life, I love you,
All is groovy.
OBAMA-BIDEN 2012
bman
Who said he was fired?
contractor means he was a TEMP. Whether that was a direct 1099 temp or a third party (i.e. manpower) it does not say. Having been a contractor I understand the whims of the employer. Every day when you go home could be your last. There is a vast gulf between being a contractor and an employee. Problem is employers want it both ways, but that is another thread/argument. The day this CONTRACTOR quit showing up to perform his job he QUIT. I am not saying it is right but legally it is what it is.