- A REVIEW OF VETERANS PREFERENCE IN FEDERAL GOVERNMENT HIRING

[House Hearing, 114 Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]

A REVIEW OF VETERANS PREFERENCE IN FEDERAL GOVERNMENT HIRING

=======================================================================

HEARING

before the

SUBCOMMITTEE ON ECONOMIC OPPORTUNITY

of the

COMMITTEE ON VETERANS' AFFAIRS
U.S. HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

ONE HUNDRED FOURTEENTH CONGRESS

SECOND SESSION

__________

WEDNESDAY, APRIL 20, 2016

__________

Serial No. 114-67

__________

Printed for the use of the Committee on Veterans' Affairs

[GRAPHIC(S) NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]

Available via the World Wide Web: http://www.fdsys.gov

______

U.S. GOVERNMENT PUBLISHING OFFICE

25-156 WASHINGTON : 2017
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
For sale by the Superintendent of Documents, U.S. Government Publishing
Office Internet: bookstore.gpo.gov Phone: toll free (866) 512-1800;
DC area (202) 512-1800 Fax: (202) 512-2104 Mail: Stop IDCC,
Washington, DC 20402-0001

COMMITTEE ON VETERANS' AFFAIRS

JEFF MILLER, Florida, Chairman

DOUG LAMBORN, Colorado CORRINE BROWN, Florida, Ranking
GUS M. BILIRAKIS, Florida, Vice- Minority Member
Chairman MARK TAKANO, California
DAVID P. ROE, Tennessee JULIA BROWNLEY, California
DAN BENISHEK, Michigan DINA TITUS, Nevada
TIM HUELSKAMP, Kansas RAUL RUIZ, California
MIKE COFFMAN, Colorado ANN M. KUSTER, New Hampshire
BRAD R. WENSTRUP, Ohio BETO O'ROURKE, Texas
JACKIE WALORSKI, Indiana KATHLEEN RICE, New York
RALPH ABRAHAM, Louisiana TIMOTHY J. WALZ, Minnesota
LEE ZELDIN, New York JERRY McNERNEY, California
RYAN COSTELLO, Pennsylvania
AMATA RADEWAGEN, American Samoa
MIKE BOST, Illinois
Jon Towers, Staff Director
Don Phillips, Democratic Staff Director

SUBCOMMITTEE ON ECONOMIC OPPORTUNITY

BRAD WENSTRUP, Ohio, Chairman

LEE ZELDIN, New York MARK TAKANO, California, Ranking
AMATA RADEWAGEN, American Samoa Member
RYAN COSTELLO, Pennsylvania DINA TITUS, Nevada
MIKE BOST, Illinois KATHLEEN RICE, New York
JERRY McNERNEY, California

Pursuant to clause 2(e)(4) of rule XI of the Rules of the House, public
hearing records of the Committee on Veterans' Affairs are also
published in electronic form. The printed hearing record remains the
official version. Because electronic submissions are used to prepare
both printed and electronic versions of the hearing record, the process
of converting between various electronic formats may introduce
unintentional errors or omissions. Such occurrences are inherent in the
current publication process and should diminish as the process is
further refined.

C O N T E N T S

----------

Wednesday, April 20, 2016

Page

A Review Of Veterans Preference In Federal Government Hiring..... 1

OPENING STATEMENTS

Honorable Brad Wenstrup, Chairman................................ 1
Honorable Mark Takano, Ranking Member............................ 2

WITNESSES

Honorable Michael H. Michaud, Assistant Secretary, Veterans'
Employment and Training Service, U.S. Department of Labor...... 3
Prepared Statement........................................... 21
Ms. Carin M. Otero, Associate Deputy Assistant Secretary for HR
Policy and Planning, Office of Human Resources and
Administration, U.S. Department of Veterans Affairs............ 5
Prepared Statement........................................... 24
Mr. Mark D. Reinhold, Associate Director for Emmployee Services,
U.S. Office of Personnel Management............................ 6
Prepared Statement........................................... 25
Mr. Aleks Morosky, Deputy Director, National Legislative Service,
Veterans of Foreign Wars of the United States, Prepared
Statement only................................................. 29
Mr. Daniel P. Smith, Assistant Director, Veterans Employment &
Education Division, The American Legion, Prepared Statement
only........................................................... 30
Mr. Rick Weidman, Executive Director, Government Affairs, Vietnam
Veterans of America, Prepared Statement only................... 32

MATERIAL SUBMMITED

Requested Material by Congresswoman Rice......................... 34

A REVIEW OF VETERANS PREFERENCE IN FEDERAL GOVERNMENT HIRING

----------

Wednesday, April 20, 2016

Committee on Veterans' Affairs,
U. S. House of Representatives,
Washington, D.C.
The Subcommittee met, pursuant to notice, at 2:30 p.m., in
Room 334, Cannon House Office Building, Hon. Brad Wenstrup
[Chairman of the Subcommittee] presiding.
Present: Representatives Wenstrup, Zeldin, Costello,
Takano, and Rice.

OPENING STATEMENT OF BRAD WENSTRUP, CHAIRMAN

Mr. Wenstrup. Good afternoon, everyone. The Subcommittee
will come to order. I want to thank you all for joining us here
today to discuss the role of veterans preference in the Federal
hiring process.
Some form of veterans preference has been a fixture in
Federal hiring since the Civil War, and while it is clear that
the Federal government does do a good job of hiring veterans,
we need to look at ways to modernize current rules and
regulations, increase enforcement, and change, overall, the
bureaucratic attitudes about hiring veterans.
In theory, veterans and disabled veterans should be
eligible for the 10- or 15-point preference in the competitive
or excepted service, which should act as a tiebreaker, so that
if you have two equally qualified candidates for one job, and
one of them is a veteran, then they should receive the
position.
In reality, veterans preference is often thwarted by an
overly complicated competitive or excepted service system, as
well as a feeling of unfairness from veterans' civilian
counterparts who are also applying for jobs in the Federal
government.
What is more disappointing is that this Committee hears
complaints on both sides of the issue. It is not uncommon for
VA hiring managers to complain that they always try to use a
special hiring authority to hire a new employee because when
they use the competitive hiring service they get back a
certification list from VA's HR that blocks qualified
nonveteran candidates and only lists nonqualified veteran
candidates. And I am sure that this is an issue facing HR.
officials across the Federal government.
On the flip side, it is not uncommon for us to hear from
veterans who were blocked by HR officials or managers for
consideration because of their bias against veteran candidates.
A recently uncovered court document highlighted this bias where
a senior official at one VA hospital said that when hiring for
positions at their hospital, they gave more credit to a
candidate who was involved in community organizations, like the
Boy Scouts or something like that, than those with veteran
status. When asked if they always tried to hire veterans, the
official was quoted as saying: ``Not really, and thank God.''
Now, I believe personally that veterans are what they were
in uniform, selfless and able to put the needs of others ahead
of themselves. But that comment about ``Not really, and thank
God'' is the type of institutional bias that has to be
eliminated from the Department and governmentwide. I can only
hope that this official's views represent the smallest minority
of VA and government hiring managers, but I am not sure.
It is also concerning to me that while veterans make up
approximately 33 percent of VA's workforce, a recent media
report highlighted that only 13 percent of VA senior managers
are veterans. I do understand that with education and
experience come opportunities for promotion. It is critical
that VA and all government agencies find ways to improve
veterans hiring for management positions as well.
I look forward to hearing from our witnesses today about
how to modernize veterans preference rules and regulations and
how Federal government agencies, like OPM and DOL, are
enforcing current laws. The Committee will continue its work on
hiring reforms at VA and the Federal government, and I am
hopeful that a meaningful and frank conversation today will
assist us in these efforts.
I now yield to my colleague, Ranking Member Takano, for any
opening statement he may have.

OPENING STATEMENT OF MARK TAKANO, RANKING MEMBER

Mr. Takano. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
First, I want to say what a pleasure it is to have
Assistant Secretary Michaud back in the House Veterans' Affairs
Committee.
Welcome back, sir.
Veterans have a devoted and highly informed ally at DOL
vets, and we are looking forward to working together with him
on policies that will help veterans transition to civilian life
and find meaningful jobs.
Chairman Wenstrup, I appreciate your decision to call this
hearing, even though veterans preference policies fall under
Title 5 and are not part of this Committee's jurisdiction,
there is no doubt that Members of this Subcommittee on both
sides of the aisle want to learn how we can improve the
process.
Federal jobs allow veterans to continue the public service
they began when they entered the military, and veterans
preference in the Federal hiring process is an important aspect
of how we as a Nation reward those who chose to serve. These
policies are meant to ensure that veterans seeking Federal
employment are not penalized for their time spent in military
service, especially after being deployed overseas during
wartime.
Veterans preference restores veterans to a favorable
competitive position for government employment and acknowledges
the larger obligation that we as a society owe to disabled
veterans. Most importantly, veterans preference hiring policies
make good business sense, as we will hear from our witnesses
today.
Our Nation invests significant resources into training and
developing our servicemembers, and Federal agencies directly
benefit from this training when they hire veteran employees.
Veterans are trained in a wide variety of valuable skills and
experiences during their time in the military.
To name just a few examples, the skills gained while
leading others, making quick decisions, and developing strategy
directly translate into management roles in the Federal
government. And experience in fields like IT and cybersecurity
help advance the missions of our Federal agencies by filling
crucial skills gaps.
While veterans preference policies do not guarantee
veterans a job, they provide useful tools in the application
process for qualified candidates. I am pleased that we will be
reviewing the program from the veteran's point of view as
opposed to reviewing it from a managerial perspective as they
do at the Oversight and Government Reform Committee.
I appreciate all of the witnesses being here today and look
forward to the opportunity to ask questions and have the
benefit of your answers.
Thank you. And I yield back, Mr. Chairman.
Mr. Wenstrup. Thank you, Mr. Takano.
I now want to recognize our first panel of witnesses today.
On our first panel, we have the Honorable Michael H. Michaud,
Assistant Secretary of the Veterans' Employment and Training
Service at the U.S. Department of Labor; Ms. Carin M. Otero,
the Associate Deputy Assistant Secretary for HR Policy and
Planning for the Office of Human Resources and Administration
at the U.S. Department of Veterans Affairs; and Mr. Mark D.
Reinhold, the Associate Director for Employee Services for the
U.S. Office of Personnel Management.
Assistant Secretary Michaud, it is a pleasure to have you
back with us today in this hearing room. And I appreciate,
personally, the outreach that you took upon yourself since
accepting your position. It is appreciated very much. So let's
begin with you, and you have 5 minutes for your opening
statement.

STATEMENT OF MICHAEL H. MICHAUD

Mr. Michaud. Thank you very much, Mr. Chairman. And good
afternoon, Mr. Chairman, Ranking Member, and distinguished
Members of Subcommittee. Thank you for the opportunity to
participate in today's hearing.
I appreciate the opportunity to discuss the Department's
performance with and responsibility to veterans preference in
Federal government hiring. While the employment situation for
veterans continue to improve with veterans' unemployment being
lower than nonveterans' unemployment, DOL will not rest as long
as any veteran needs assistance finding meaningful civilian
employment.
The Department is committed to following veterans
preference in our hiring. We have steadily increased the
percentage of veterans in the DOL workforce from 20.6 percent
in fiscal year 2013 to 21.4 percent in fiscal year 2015. In
fiscal year 2015, one in three new hires at DOL was a veteran,
of which 37.5 percent of those veterans hired were veterans
with a rated disability of at least 30 percent.
DOL's Veterans Employment Program Office provides
leadership and direction for the Department to ensure DOL
attracts, hires, and retains qualified veterans. In November
2009, President Obama issued Executive Order 13518, which
created the Veterans Employment Initiative to enhance
recruitment of and promote employment opportunities for
veterans within the executive branch.
Executive Order 13518 also established the Council on
Veterans Employment. The Council is still working to complete
its fiscal year 2015 report, but has published data for fiscal
year 2014, when 33.2 percent of the executive branch new hires
were veterans, a 9.2 percent point increase over the fiscal
year 2009 baseline of 24 percent. Veterans currently represent
30.8 percent of the Federal workforce as compared to 25.8
percent in fiscal year 2009.
Under the Veterans Employment Opportunities Act, or VEOA,
VETS is responsible for investigating claims alleging a Federal
agency failure to apply veterans preference in hiring or during
a reduction in force. While VETS has investigative
responsibility, OPM is responsible for interpreting and
administrating the statutes and regulations governed by
veterans preference in Federal hiring and during a reduction in
force.
When a complaint is filed, VETS field staff investigate if
rights have been violated by a Federal agency during either a
hiring process or a reduction in force. Upon reaching the
determination, VETS notifies the agency and advises on action
to be taken to comply with the VEOA. If the agency complies,
the case is closed as either settled or granted based on
agreement between the parties. The resolution depends on the
violation that occurred and may include payments, back
payments, or benefits.
If the agency fails to comply, the claimant is notified of
his or her rights to appeal the case to the United States Merit
System Protection Board, or the MSPB. Finally, if the MSPB
issues a decision adverse to the claimant, the claimant may
further appeal to the court of appeals for the Federal circuit.
If VETS determines that a VEOA violation has taken place or
there is evidence of a violation, a copy of the complete case
file, including the complaint information and supporting
documentation, is forwarded to the United States Office of
Special Counsel.
Of the 606 complaints received in fiscal year 2015 and the
34 cases that were carried over from fiscal year 2014, VETS
closed 590 cases. On average, the cases were resolved in 23
days. Of the 590 veterans preference cases closed in fiscal
year 2015, 32, or 5.4 percent, were found to have merit in
fiscal year 2015.
Investigations were completed in 491 of the 590 cases. The
remaining 99 cases were closed administratively, withdrawn by
the claimant, or the claimant elected to proceed to the MSPB
before the investigation concluded within the timeframe allowed
by statute.
The Department looks forward to working with the Committee
in this area. Veterans are some of our strongest and most
capable employees in the public workforce, and we are committed
to making sure that they have a place at the Department of
Labor in their preference rights.
So, Mr. Chairman, Mr. Ranking Member, and Committee
Members, this concludes my opening statement. I look forward to
the opportunity to work with you, and I welcome your questions.
Thank you very much. And I yield back the balance of my time.

[The prepared statement of Michael H. Michaud appears in
the Appendix]

Mr. Wenstrup. All right. Good job. Under the wire.
Thank you, sir.
Ms. Otero, you are now recognized for 5 minutes.

STATEMENT OF CARIN M. OTERO

Ms. Otero. Good afternoon, Chairman Wenstrup, Ranking
Member Takano, and Members of the Subcommittee. Thank you for
your invitation to appear before the Subcommittee on veterans
preference and the Department of Veterans Affairs' success in
recruiting and hiring veterans.
I would like to highlight the Department's commitment to
hiring veterans. We believe that affording qualified veterans a
statutory preference in employment is not merely the obligation
of a grateful Nation, it is also good government and good
business. It gives VA an advantage in recruiting and retaining
employees from a pool of the Nation's most highly motivated,
disciplined, and experienced preference-eligible veterans.
VA is adamant about and consistent in ensuring the
application of the existing Federal regulation, which requires
the selection of all qualified preference-eligible veterans
over other individuals when filling positions that are open to
the general public. VA's internal hiring procedures are aligned
with the Merit System Principles, of which the basis is to
recruit qualified individuals from all segments of society and
select and advance on merit after fair and open competition.
In addition to our hiring policies and procedures that
address veterans preference, VA's Human Resources Oversight and
Effectiveness Office evaluates compliance with veterans
preference laws, regulations, and policies, conducting onsite
evaluations of human resources offices throughout VA.
VA has focused on veterans hiring for many years. We track
the employment of veterans by facility throughout VA. We have
launched various programs and initiatives which have resulted
in VA placing in the top tier of agencies employing veterans.
As of February 29, 2016, more than 119,000, or just shy of 33
percent, of VA's 365,000 employees are veterans. More than
100,000 of the 33 percent are veterans preference eligibles,
and 47,000, approximately 12 percent, are disabled veterans. VA
proudly ranks first among nondefense agencies in hiring
veterans.
VA regularly uses veteran-specific special hiring
authorities, such as the Veterans Employment Opportunities Act,
the veterans recruitment appointment, and 30 percent or more
disabled veterans. We have also hired veterans using the
Schedule A authority for people with disabilities.
In the first 5 months of fiscal year 2016, VA hired 8,705
veterans using a mixture of all of the above-mentioned
authorities. The Department has established a strategic target
of 35 percent veterans for its employee population.
One of the challenges that we face is the rate at which
veterans are leaving the Department. While recognized early on
by the Office of Personnel Management as having one of the
better retention rates in government, the cohort of veterans
who joined the Department of Veterans Affairs after the Vietnam
war is now eligible for retirement.
In contrast, younger veterans, similar to other U.S.
workers their age, are frequently more mobile, changing jobs
and employers more often than many older employees. On average,
VA has lost about 1,300 veteran employees per month during this
fiscal year through separations and retirements. Countering
these losses, we have, on average, hired about 1,740 veterans
per month during this fiscal year.
In 2011, in support of Executive Order 13518, Employment of
Veterans in the Federal government, VA established the Veteran
Employment Services Office, VESO, within the Office of Human
Resources and Administration. VESO supports the Interagency
Council on Veterans Employment created by the executive order
by recruiting qualified veteran candidates for critical VA
positions, managing retention initiatives, and reporting the
veteran hiring and retention statistics for VA to the Council
for inclusion in its annual report to the President.
VESO focuses on giving veterans the tools to find Federal
jobs, making the transition to civilian employment seamless,
and improving veteran engagement and satisfaction. Activities
include personalized one-on-one services to support Federal
veteran recruitment, support to retention efforts, support to
veterans throughout a deployment life cycle, and providing
Federal partners with services that support veterans
recruitment.
In closing, every day at VA, we see the sacrifices which
veterans have made for our Nation. It is our responsibility and
privilege to support their return to civilian employment. We
are committed to continue our robust and successful focus on
veterans hiring in VA.
Chairman Wenstrup, thank you again for the opportunity to
testify today. I am prepared to respond to any questions the
Subcommittee may have.

[The prepared statement of Carin M. Otero appears in the
Appendix]

Mr. Wenstrup. Well, thank you, Ms. Otero.
Mr. Reinhold, you are now recognized for 5 minutes.

STATEMENT OF MARK D. REINHOLD

Mr. Reinhold. Chairman Wenstrup, Ranking Member Takano, and
Members of the Subcommittee, thank you for your invitation to
testify at today's hearing on veterans employment in the
Federal government and OPM's role in the implementation of
veterans preference in the Federal hiring process.
This administration has made it a priority to honor
veterans for their service and sacrifice in defense of our
Nation, including assisting them in reentering civilian life
and finding employment. In November of 2009, President Obama
issued an executive order laying out three objectives: that we
honor our obligations to our Nation's veterans, that we use the
talents of veterans to help the Federal government meet today's
dynamic challenges, and that we create a model veterans
employment program.
Veterans bring distinctive training, skills, leadership,
and experiences that we need at every agency in the Federal
government. The Federal government invests significant
resources in the training and development of the brave men and
women in our military. Efforts to hire transitioning military
service personnel to positions in the Federal workforce helps
maximize our return on this investment.
Veterans possess a wide variety of skills and experiences,
as well as a dedication to public service, that can be of
enormous benefit to the government as an employer and to the
American people that these individuals will continue to serve.
Not only is hiring veterans the right thing to do, it also
makes good business sense.
Preference eligibility for veterans in Federal employment
is defined in statute and applies to new appointments in both
the competitive and excepted service. The technical application
of veterans preference is defined in statute and regulation and
varies depending on the ranking and selection method used by
the employing agency to select candidates for Federal
employment.
Additionally, OPM encourages agencies to make full use of
the various hiring authorities that can facilitate veterans
employment. This includes veterans recruitment appointments,
which are an excepted authority that allows agencies to appoint
an eligible veteran without competition. Agencies may also
noncompetitively appoint any veteran with a 30 percent or more
service-connected disability.
And though not specifically for veterans, the Schedule A
authority for people with disabilities is an excepted authority
that agencies can use to appoint eligible veterans who have a
severe physical, psychological, or intellectual disability.
Finally, the Veterans Employment Opportunities Act allows
veterans to apply to job announcements that are otherwise open
only to current or former Federal employees who completed
requirements for career or career conditional tenure.
These efforts have yielded good results since 2009. In
fiscal year 2014, 33.2 percent of executive branch new hires
were veterans, surpassing the fiscal year 2000 rate of 31
percent. Veterans currently represent 30.8 percent of the
Federal workforce, as compared to 25.8 percent in fiscal year
2009.
The Federal government has protections in place in order to
ensure veterans are properly accorded the preference to which
they are entitled. OPM, through our Merit System Accountability
and Compliance Office, conducts regular reviews of agency-
delegated examining units across the government to ensure that
veterans are receiving the preference they have earned in the
Federal hiring process.
Executive branch recourse exists for a veteran or other
preference eligible who believes that his or her rights under
any law or regulation related to veterans preference have been
violated, a disabled veteran who believes he or she has been
discriminated against in employment because of his or her
disability, and the intentional failure by a government
official to comply with veterans preference requirements.
Public outreach is key to the government's recruiting
efforts. We teamed with our administration partners to create
FedsHireVets.gov to serve as the principal source for Federal
employment information to assist our veterans, transition
servicemembers, their families, Federal HR professionals, and
hiring managers. The purpose of the site is to provide
consistent and accurate Federal employment information, useful
training, and other resources to better inform the applicant,
the employee, and the hiring agency.
Agencies are responsible for applying the law correctly so
that preferences are not inappropriately withheld or granted.
To support agencies in this effort, OPM recently launched the
Hiring Excellence Campaign. Through this campaign, OPM is
working directly with agency hiring managers and human
resources staff to help them identify skills gaps and find and
recruit the best talent to fill positions. This allows us to
hear directly from hiring managers and supervisors, while also
giving us the opportunity to have discussions with Federal
agencies about the tools and flexibilities available to them,
including those available for hiring veterans.
We have also launched a Hiring Toolkit on HR University,
which provides guidance on various hiring authorities and
flexibilities, information about assessment techniques, and how
to leverage data to inform recruiting and outreach.
Since 2009, significant progress has been made to enhance
employment opportunities for veterans in the Federal
government, but we know that challenges remain and improvements
can be made. As OPM works to meet our mission to recruit,
retain, and honor a world class workforce, we will continue to
focus on helping agencies bring in skilled and diverse
employees with the best talent to serve the American people.
Thank you for the opportunity to participate in today's
hearing, and I welcome any questions.

[The prepared statement of Mark D. Reinhold appears in the
Appendix]

Mr. Wenstrup. I thank you all for your remarks, and I will
now yield myself 5 minutes for questions.
I am not sure who can answer this best of the three of you,
but I am just curious, what percent of veterans that are
applying for jobs that are not hired end up filing a complaint?
Or even an estimate?
Mr. Michaud. I can follow-up, for the record with more
information.
Mr. Michaud. When you look at fiscal year 2015, out of the
590 cases that were closed, 371 had no merit. Of those cases,
359 had to do with hiring issues. I am not sure exactly how
that is. But we can get back to you, see if staff has a further
breakdown.
If you look at the cases in 2015, only 5.4 percent, as I
mentioned, had merit. In the previous year, only 2.3 percent
had merit. So there is a huge percentage that have no merit.
Mr. Wenstrup. So you see where I am going with this. I am
just wondering if it is like an automatic process for people,
that if they are not hired they just immediately make a claim.
So that is an interesting statistic too, that out of all those,
only 5.4 percent had merit.
And from my understanding, and I think you touched on this,
if someone knowingly disregarded the system, then a complaint
should be filed. And so how do you prove that someone knowingly
was adverse to the veteran?
Mr. Michaud. Once the case is closed, by the Department of
Labor, then it would be referred to the Merit System Protection
Board. I can just talk about the Department of Labor. If you
look at the number of cases that were filed with us, there were
six cases in fiscal year 2015. Out of the six, one case was
found to have merit.
When I looked at the previous years with the low amount of
merit, it led me to believe that the system is complex. It is
very difficult to understand whether it is on the hiring
managers' side or the veteran themselves as far as how the law
applies to them. I read a couple of reports from the Merit
System Protection Board, and they actually recommend that the
statutes and regulations governing veterans preference should
be consolidated and streamlined in one single body. Both
reports, in August and November, recommended that
recommendation.
Mr. Wenstrup. Well, I guess I am still curious as to how
you discover that somebody knowingly acted out of bounds on the
rules and against the veteran, what is it that actually proves
that. And maybe that is kind of something that needs to be
better defined to show how they did that.
And then in the case of someone who knowingly did that,
what action was taken on the manager that knowingly disregarded
the system or knowingly ruled against the veteran when they
should not have?
Mr. Michaud. Only cases with merit are referred to OSC for
violations. In those cases, if they are not resolved, the
claimant, if they are not satisfied, they can file with the
Merit System Board. But I am not sure out of those cases how
many are actually intentional. But we can get back to you for
the record on that.
Mr. Wenstrup. Yeah, I would just like to look at that
further more on process, I guess, as much as anything else.
And another question I have is, during the process, are
there any points awarded for anyone else, besides veterans, for
something in their background or their status or organization
or affiliation with something, or are there only additional
points awarded to veterans through the hiring process? Are
there other point systems?
Mr. Reinhold. So I am happy to take that one. Generally
speaking, when agencies apply an assessment to a pool of
candidates, they often use a numerical score to rate and rank
those candidates.
Veterans preference is the only provision in statute that
provides a benefit to individuals of additional points. So for
many veterans it is 5 points, and for disabled veterans with a
30 percent or more service-connected disability, it is 10
points.
Mr. Wenstrup. So those points are in at the beginning.
Real quickly, and maybe we can take this for the record,
Mr. Secretary, is there any type of training or recommendations
you may have that we can include during the TAP program to
enhance veterans' preparation for applying with the VA or any
other Federal government agency?
Mr. Michaud. Thank you very much.
Under the new curriculum, it actually talks about veterans
preference. And what we have done for that new curriculum is
actually we took the OPM's site as far as it relates to
veterans preference. Plus OPM actually teaches the trainers. I
believe they have an hour worth of training as far as it
relates to the veterans preference piece under the TAP program.
And the curriculum was signed off on by OPM.
Mr. Wenstrup. Thank you, sir.
Ms. Otero. And, sir, if I could just ask. I was integrally
involved during the redesign of the Transition Assistance
Program, the TAP program, and that was also in response to the
VOW Act, the career readiness standards and a checklist to help
the veteran be career ready, the transitioning servicemember to
be career ready and to be their own advocate to have knowledge
of what hiring authorities that they are eligible for, so that
that gives them an extra punch toward their career readiness as
they transition.
Mr. Wenstrup. Well, thank you.
I now recognize the Ranking Member for any questions he may
have.
Mr. Takano. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
Mr. Secretary, I want to ask you about retention of
veterans once they are hired. We have talked about the process,
about getting the veterans preference, and recourses for
veterans that feel that they might not have been treated
fairly, but I want to talk about what happens in the agencies.
What are agencies doing to retain them and what do those
statistics look like?
Mr. Michaud. Well, thank you very much, Mr. Ranking Member.
I can provide you and the Committee for fiscal year 2013 and
2014 the retention rate for veterans versus nonveterans in all
the agencies. I will make sure we provide that to you for the
Committee's reference.
Mr. Michaud. Looking quickly at the list, the agency with
the lowest retention rate had 61.54 percent for veterans, and
the highest agency had a 88.41 percent retention rate. So it
does vary depending on the agency, but we will provide the
Committee with this information.
There is actually a Council on Veterans Employment meeting
on May 4. I had a Subcommittee meeting last week. And part of
that discussion is to find out what agencies are doing as far
as retention, trying to get the best practices for each agency,
so we can get that out to all the agencies.
Mr. Takano. Okay. Do these retention rate statistics also
indicate whether or not they may be intentionally letting these
veterans go before the end of their probationary period?
I know that there were these, when I was on the community
college board, there was always this part of the year where new
faculty, for example, were going to run up against that moment
by which it would become very, very difficult, under their
tenure, to have them removed. Is there a similar sort of
probationary period letter? There has to be some statistic on
this as well.
Mr. Michaud. As far as why they might leave, it could be
for various reasons. They actually could receive a promotion
somewhere else that will better for the veteran, or they could
leave for another agency. So we do not delve into the reasons
why they left, but I do have the number as far as retention.
They could have left for various reasons.
I have heard the comment, the anecdotal comment, that you
just mentioned, that they just keep them there until they can
say, ``Well, we hired a veteran,'' then they let them go. That
would be a concern, but that is only anecdotal at this time,
and we will definitely be keeping a very close eye on that as
well.
Mr. Takano. Do we have numbers on that? Do we know? I mean,
we should be able to know, people hired under the preference,
we should know how many of them are leaving before--
Mr. Michaud. Oh, yes. We have numbers on the retention rate
and how many are leaving. Not only in the veterans population,
but also in the nonveteran population. So we do have that,
those numbers, by agencies, and we will provide the Committee
with that list.
Mr. Takano. Okay.
Mr. Michaud. And the 2015 numbers, hopefully, will be out
soon, so you will be able to have 2013, 2014, and 2015.
Mr. Takano. Well, I certainly would appreciate your
office's cooperation in helping us understand what is going on
and ascertain whether there are any patterns.
Mr. Chairman, I yield back.
Mr. Wenstrup. Mr. Costello, you are now recognized for 5
minutes.
Mr. Costello. Thank you Mr. Chairman.
Mr. Secretary, I wanted to ask about the following. In
talking about the training provided to servicemembers during
TAP about veterans preference laws, do you feel that there
needs to be any more of an emphasis or further emphasis on the
benefits that veterans preference laws provide to
servicemembers, specifically so that they understand what
preferences they may be entitled to during the Federal hiring
process?
I will ask a second question so that you can just sort of
take them both at the same time. Do you have any
recommendations to improve existing veterans preference laws,
and if so, what might they be?
Mr. Michaud. Thank you very much.
Veterans preference is taught in the TAP class. The
facilitators are trained on the veterans preference piece. That
portion of the TAP class, if you look at the curriculum book,
is actually what was signed off by OPM, since OPM administers
the veterans preference law and regulations.
As far as what we need to improve, if you look at the role
that the Department of Labor plays, we deal with the
complaints, if someone feels that they have been violated as
far as veterans preference. And as I mentioned earlier, the
fact that only 5.4 percent in fiscal year 2015 and only 2.3
percent in fiscal year 2014 were found to have merit, that
leads me to believe, consistent with the Merit System
Protection Board, that the statutes and regulations governing
veterans preference should be consolidated, streamlined, so it
will be easier to administer it and easier to understand the
process.
The Department of Labor track of the cases that we
currently have. But once they leave us, getting back to the
Chairman's question, as far as what happens after that, it goes
to the Merit System Protection Board, and then they deal with
that. So they would have, hopefully, a more comprehensive
reason why they rule in a certain way. But that is something
that I can't answer because that is outside of the Department
of Labor.
Mr. Costello. As a follow-up, you mentioned the word
``feedback.'' Amongst VA employees who have taken the mandatory
training for HR professionals and hiring managers on veterans
preference, what type of feedback have you received from
employees about that training, if any?
Mr. Michaud. I would have to let VA talk about the VA
piece. But what we do at the Department of Labor, we actually
have a military veterans alliance, a veterans affinity group,
that meets regularly and gives input to the senior leadership
at the Department of Labor on how we better can recruit and
retain employees at the Department of Labor. That is why I am
very pleased, when you look at the overall Department,
particularly vets, 80 percent of our employees in VETS are
veterans.
As far as the VA, what they do, I would leave that for the
VA to be able to speak.
Mr. Costello. Ms. Otero.
Ms. Otero. Good afternoon, sir.
As far as the training for veterans preference and for HR
specialists and hiring managers, OPM developed a curriculum,
and it is available on HR University, and we find that it is a
very robust training. And we also have our VESO office, our
Veterans Employment Service Office, that is able to help our
hiring managers to navigate how to hire, and if they want to
look for a 30 percent disabled veteran.
So we are finding our hiring managers are advocating and
they want to hire a veteran. We feel that the robustness of the
training is there, that there is strength in the availability
through our learning management system, through HR University,
and that we do have the added support to provide technical
assistance. Any of our HR specialists are able to help hiring
managers navigate.
Mr. Costello. And do you have within the VA any program or
pipeline in order to recruit and retain veterans at a higher
rate within the VA? I mean, could you describe that a little
bit?
Ms. Otero. I am not sure I understand what you mean about
recruit and retain at a higher rate.
Mr. Costello. Veterans employees that you have within the
VA, can you describe what the VA does to recruit and retain
employees at the VA who are veterans?
Ms. Otero. Okay.
Mr. Costello. I apologize.
Ms. Otero. We recognize that some of our veterans and
transitioning servicemembers have some challenges with the
cultural adaptation from leaving military service to coming to
sometimes a desk job. So we offer coaching and very strong,
robust mentoring programs, we try to get them to feel
connection to their job. And a lot of times it is through
mentoring and having another VA employee who is also a veteran,
help guide them toward career preparedness to be ready for a
promotion when it becomes available, to get the training needed
to build their technical skills.
Mr. Costello. Thank you.
Mr. Wenstrup. Miss Rice, you are now recognized for 5
minutes.
Miss Rice. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
I would like to speak with Secretary Michaud.
First, I want to welcome you here, and thank you for your
commitment to veterans. And you actually showed that by
traveling all the way out to my district to visit the American
Job Center in Hempstead in February, and everyone was very
grateful for your visit.
But one of the things that we constantly hear, whether it
is in that kind of a forum where we were or in hearings like
this, is outreach and how is it that we connect servicemembers
to this benefit that they may not be aware of. So what is the
outreach plan? And is there any way to quantify how many
veterans are not aware of this, and how we can better reach out
to them?
Mr. Michaud. As far as outreach, this is taught at the TAP
class when every soldier gets ready to leave the military.
There is a portion of that that talks about veterans preference
that is consistent with what OPM has approved.
One of the areas, as far as outreach, we are trying to make
it easier for soldiers or men and women who are in the TAP
class, but once they leave, to have a refresher course. The
Department of Labor TAP curriculum is going to be on ebook
Reader and it is going to be on Kindle, so it will be available
24/7. So if someone needs a refresher course, particularly as
it relates to veterans preference, then they would be able to
take that refresher course.
When we do outreach, we talk about encouraging businesses
to hire vets. And that is where a lot of our outreach has been
in the private sector, collaborating with the chamber of
commerce and the business community, talking about the benefits
of hiring a veteran, and why they should hire a veteran and
actually help them find veterans. That has been our primary
focus on outreach.
As far as veterans preference, each agency has a goal, that
OPM has given guidance on, and I will let OPM talk about that.
But we in the Department of Labor with the affinity group
really are focused on how can we better recruit, how can we
retain the veterans that are in the Department. And we have
actually done a phenomenal job in the Department, and we will
continue to encourage our HR folks to hire veterans. But as far
as overall recruitment, that is more of an OPM question.
Miss Rice. I think one of the earlier questions asked you
about how many people who were not hired, veterans who were not
hired, who would appeal.
In your study of this, what are the most common causes of a
Federal agency's failure to comply with the veterans preference
provision in hiring? I mean, you said that you found that some
were not for cause. But what were the reasons? Was it a lack of
training? Was it intentional? What was the preference for
someone else? I mean, what was the reason?
Mr. Michaud. I will have to refer to staff if they know
more in detail. But when you look at the broader issues, for
instance in 2015 the number of cases that were found to have no
merit, out of the 371, 359 were because of hiring. As far as
what is in that hiring, I would have to get back to you for the
record.
Miss Rice. Well, but don't you think that--I mean, to me,
that is very relevant information, because if you are talking
about training veterans and training employers and the hiring
is not--I mean, I just think that the reason for why someone, a
veteran, is not hired in this preference program would be
relevant.
Mr. Michaud. Yeah, absolutely. When you look at that only
5.4 percent have merit, part of the bulk of the reasoning is
actually the lack of understanding of the law. It is a very
complex law. It is a law where it is spread out through all of
Title 5. And that complexity is the reason why a lot of these
cases are found to not have merit.
As far as the ones that do have merit and they move
forward, I am not sure exactly the final outcome of those. But
for the investigations that we do, it is they have no merit,
and that is primarily because of the complexity of the law that
is out there. And that has been consistent with what the Merit
System Protection Board has stated in their last report.
Miss Rice. It is complexity of the law on the part of the
employer understanding it?
Mr. Michaud. On the part of the veteran and/or employer.
Some veterans think that because of veterans preference, that
they will automatically be hired in the Federal services. That
is not the case.
When you look at veterans preference, you can have two very
well qualified candidates, and if one is a veteran and one is
not, then the veteran should get hired. But you could have
several candidates that are very well qualified and they very
well all could be veterans and one gets hired but four or five
others do not get hired, you could have cases for those other
veterans.
Miss Rice. So I don't know how many of those top three
choices that they can choose from are all veterans or if it is
a civilian and a veteran. And I think that if more of these
appeals are found to be--the smaller percentage of them have
merit, then we have to figure out why, what the issue is with
the majority of those cases not having merit.
Mr. Michaud. Yeah. The issue with the investigations that
we do at the Department of Labor is because of the complexity
of the law and the lack of understanding of the law. Just
because a case is filed doesn't mean that the HR manager
violated the law. It could be that the veteran was not eligible
in the first place. So that complexity of the law and
complication is what I believe is driving the huge amount of
nonmeritorious cases that are found.
Miss Rice. Understood. Thank you.
I yield back.
Mr. Michaud. Thank you.
Miss Rice. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
Mr. Wenstrup. Mr. Zeldin, you are now recognized for 5
minutes.
Mr. Zeldin. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
Miss Rice, do you need any additional time?
Miss Rice. I am sorry?
Mr. Zeldin. Miss Rice, would you like me to yield to you
any additional time?
Miss Rice. I would love it. I didn't even get to--
Mr. Zeldin. I wouldn't mind yielding a minute and a half to
Miss Rice. Proceed.
Miss Rice. That is very sweet. Thank you. Thank you, Mr.
Zeldin.
Mr. Michaud, I don't know if you wanted some of the heat to
be off of you, not that I was putting any heat on you, but you
were talking about the agency goals for hiring.
If you could just talk about that very briefly, Mr.
Reinhold, from OPM's position. Can you just explain that? In a
minute and a half.
Mr. Reinhold. Sure. I would be happy to.
So it is actually a performance model that was created by
the Veterans Employment Council in collaboration with OPM and
other agencies, and it is designed to provide a benchmark, if
you will, so that agencies have something to compare themselves
to, to see how they are doing when it comes to hiring veterans
and retaining veterans.
It is a performance model that is comprised of four
components, which include percentage of your new hires who are
veterans, percentage of new hires who are disabled veterans,
veterans as a percentage of your total workforce, and
retention. And all of those factors are combined. Agencies are
compared to similar size agencies, so they are compared to a
cohort group. There is an algorithm, if you will, that
essentially comes up with a rating for an agency ranging from
``exemplary'' down to ``needs improvement.''
There are not targets, but rather it is really meant to be
informative and instructive to agencies so that they can see
how they are doing, and they can identify areas where they need
to improve.
Miss Rice. What agency, in your understanding, that you are
aware of, has the worst performance?
Mr. Reinhold. I don't have that information, but to my
knowledge, the ratings of ``exemplary'' through ``needs
improvement'' are documented, and that is something we would be
happy to follow-up on.
Miss Rice. That would be great. Thank you very much.
Thank you, Mr. Zeldin.
Mr. Zeldin. Thank you again, Mr. Chairman.
Ms. Otero, are you familiar with the statement made by Dr.
Gonzalo Solis Sanchez of the VA's Caribbean Healthcare System
that was quite controversial?
Ms. Otero. I did become aware of it 2 days ago.
Mr. Zeldin. Okay. And have you had an opportunity to look
into it at all internally?
Ms. Otero. I must confess, I just heard about the matter. I
do understand that the article seemed to extrapolate some
comments, and I haven't seen any official transcript of any
deposition. But I just want to state emphatically that Veterans
Affairs does not tolerate any bias, and there is no room for
that type of behavior.
And I have inquired with the Veterans Health
Administration, and the doctor has been retrained. And my
understanding is that some of his statements were taken out of
context because he was discussing a Title 38, a pure Title 38
position that was a medical position and where veterans
preference is only considered if there are absolute equally
qualified applicants, and that the veterans preference would
then be applied as a positive factor.
But yes, sir, I want to emphasize that there is no
tolerance for bias or that type of statement.
Mr. Zeldin. Okay. So just two things then on that. One,
with regards to the words being taken out of context, what was
reported was a transcript from a July 2014 deposition in an
EEOC complaint where in the exchange with the doctor, when
asked whether or not the VA provides a hiring preference, his
response was, ``Not really, and thank God.'' But it is--this
exchange is documented. So no one is taking anything out of
context. It is actually word for word.
So what is the retraining that would take place in a case
like this?
Ms. Otero. As a senior executive, all senior executives,
when you are onboarded, you are given onboarding training, and
you are told about ethics, about HR hiring, about policies. And
so it was reiterated to the doctor what the veterans preference
rules are, what the authorities are, and explaining that this
is our commitment to--
Mr. Zeldin. Do you know when that retraining took place?
Ms. Otero. I don't know exactly because I just found out
about the article 2 days ago, and I inquired. I just found out
this morning that there was retraining. I don't know the date,
but I will take it for the record.
Mr. Zeldin. Okay. And would you be able to submit that to
the Committee as to when the retraining took place?
Ms. Otero. Yes, sir.
Mr. Zeldin. Okay. And is anything usually put in writing as
far as this retraining or counseling?
Ms. Otero. I couldn't speak to that because if it is about
any counseling or any discussion with that person's supervisor,
I would not have knowledge of it, and I don't have--
Mr. Zeldin. Okay. So you can submit to the Committee when
the retraining took place?
Ms. Otero. Yes.
Mr. Zeldin. If you find out if anything was done in
writing, would you be able to let us know that as well?
Ms. Otero. Yes, sir.
Mr. Zeldin. Thank you.
Ms. Otero. I will take that for the record.
Mr. Zeldin. I yield back.
Mr. Wenstrup. Well, if there are no further questions, the
panel is now excused.
Mr. Wenstrup. And I now invite our second and final panel
to the table.
Mr. Wenstrup. With us today, we have Mr. Aleks Morosky, the
Deputy Director of the National Legislative Service for the
Veterans of Foreign Wars of the United States; Mr. Daniel P.
Smith, the Assistant Director of the Veterans Employment &
Education Division for the American Legion; and Mr. Rick
Weidman, the Executive Director of Government Affairs for the
Vietnam Veterans of America.
I want to thank you all for being here today, for your
service to our Nation in uniform, and for your hard work and
advocacy on behalf of our Nation's veterans.
In the effort of time, we are going to submit all of your
testimonies for the record so that we can go directly to
questions to you. And I appreciate your willingness on that
part.

[The prepared statements of Aleks Morosky, Daniel P Smith,
and Rick Weidman appears in the Appendix]

Mr. Wenstrup. And with that, I will allow myself 5 minutes
for questions.
Mr. Weidman, can you explain why removing the, quote/
unquote, ``knowingly'' portion in the VEOA is so important?
Mr. Weidman. Mr. Chairman, the Veterans Employment
Opportunities Act actually started in this room, even though it
was considered by another Committee. And it was action of Mike
Brinck, when he and I both had hair, in 1996, who brought in
Mr. Mica's, John Mica's staff, who was head of that Civil
Service Subcommittee at that time. And Mr. Mica was a great
champion throughout the two Congresses that we had to go
through to get here.
When it left Mr. Mica's Subcommittee and left the Full
Committee on the Workforce to go to the other side of the Hill,
that word ``knowingly'' was not there. And it got inserted on
the Senate side, specifically as a poison pill, and it has
worked because virtually no managers have ever been
disciplined, much less fired, for violating veterans
preference, no matter how egregious the violation is.
And it is OPM, not specifically the individuals who are
here, but OPM in general and HR shops across the government
have tried to confuse veterans preference with affirmative
action, two totally different animals. Veterans preference is
based on a 19th century concept of the bounty, which is reward
for sacrifices made and service rendered, and that is the basis
of it. That is why California, when their State Supreme Court
threw out affirmative action, upheld veterans preference
because it was a different philosophical base.
Incidentally, the other thing that is different about
veterans is we are black, we are brown, we are white, we are
Native American, we are Asian and Pacific Islanders, men,
women, and increasingly women. So you can satisfy every
affirmative action guideline in the book and only hire vets,
and in many cases only hire disabled vets.
Mr. Weidman. But you are not going to get any enforcement
of that across the government until you take that word
``knowingly'' out. If somebody is a manager and doesn't
understand veterans preference, then they ought to be
immediately relieved and proceedings started to dismiss them
for total incompetence.
Mr. Wenstrup. I appreciate that. And on the other point, I
feel that being a veteran is a qualification in and of itself
that lends you to greater expertise in working in the VA. That
is maybe just my personal opinion, but I find it to be true.
Mr. Morosky, in your written statement you commented that
veterans preference laws currently disadvantage reservists and
guardsmen that have not served 180 consecutive days on Active
Duty. This Subcommittee has been working with the Health
Subcommittee to fix this and change it to 180 cumulative days
of Active-Duty service to be eligible for veterans preference.
Could you inform us why you believe this change is necessary?
Mr. Morosky. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
Particularly in the post-9/11 era, and for Guard and
Reservists in particular, they get activated for short periods
of time, but several times throughout their careers. And so in
many cases, although they are not necessarily able to
accumulate 180 days consecutively, put together they will have
far more than 180 days. And we feel as though that service
should also be recognized for the purposes of veterans
preference.
A new topic that we hadn't been aware of has just come to
our attention where you have veterans in some cases who are
going to school full-time-student veterans who are being
activated just to go fly drones on the weekends. That is good
service. I mean, that should count towards veterans preference,
Mr. Chairman.
Mr. Wenstrup. Thank you very much.
Mr. Takano, you are now recognized.
Mr. Takano. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
Mr. Weidman, you state in your written testimony the
Disabled Veteran Affirmative Action Program, or DVAAP, should
be scrapped, that DVAAP plans for Federal entities are never
effectively checked for the actual result against the stated
goals at the end of each year. This thing serves no purpose
except to be a fig leaf for agencies doing nothing or little to
hire disabled veterans and other veterans preference eligible.
Furthermore, veterans are not another affirmative action group,
as you said in your oral testimony.
My question to you is, why do you recommend scrapping the
program rather than straighten it out? Don't these vets need
this initiative to get jobs?
Mr. Weidman. Implicit in that, Congressman, is that
veterans are, in fact, an affirmative action group, and that if
you get 30 percent of the new hires are veterans, then that is
okay, you have met that quota.
But that is not it. Veterans preference accrues as an
individual right to the man or woman who takes a step forward
pledging life and limb to defend the Constitution, particularly
during wartime, and that is when they get veterans preference.
So it shouldn't be included in affirmative action, and that
is where it was stuck for years, and it is still stuck there.
It should be with the deputy of the agency. The chief operating
officer ought to be responsible to make sure that the agency is
looking first to qualified veterans and disabled veterans, sir.
Mr. Takano. So your quarrel is that it is classified as an
affirmative action program?
Mr. Weidman. It is that, and nobody checks. OMB has for
years put the same--they change the number by 1 or something.
And they have never come close to actually meeting it, but they
submit the same plan on their Web site every year. Nobody comes
back and says: Wait a minute, you didn't do anything towards
recruiting disabled vets.
Mr. Takano. All right. Thank you.
Have votes been called?
Mr. Wenstrup. They have.
Mr. Takano. What are your members' main complaints with the
veterans preference process, real quickly?
Mr. Morosky. The main complaint that we hear is people
apply for a job, they don't get the job, and they feel that a
nonveteran was necessarily hired ahead of them. They don't
understand that you have to also be qualified and meet the
basic job qualifications in the first place.
It is sort of a myth that veterans preference is a
guarantee of employment in any job in the Federal government
that you apply for. And so I think that could be helped with
training, better training, at the TAP program. The TAP Web site
could probably be a little bit better. Instead of being
essentially just a narrative of the highly technical statutory
language, maybe do a myth/fact, frequently asked questions,
that sort of thing.
But the main complaint we get is that people are upset
because they didn't get hired, but they don't necessarily
understand the system either.
Mr. Takano. Okay. I think that kind of answered my other
question.
Quickly, anything to add from either one of you?
Mr. Smith. Yes. Thank you for the question.
The main thing is it is subjective. There is no way to know
if veterans preference is actually being followed. You have an
HR manager or a hiring official inside of a closed door. They
have two applicants, one is a civilian, one is a veteran. There
is no way of knowing if they are using veteran preference.
I don't have a solution for that and the American Legion
doesn't have a solution for that. Hopefully, this Committee
could look into that. But ultimately there is no way of knowing
if veterans preference is working, but when veterans preference
is used, it works. I will leave it at that.
Mr. Takano. All right.
Mr. Weidman, anything to add.
Mr. Weidman. The proof is in the pudding, Congressman. What
underpins all of this, unfortunately racism and sexism are
alive and not well within our society, but so is vetism, and it
is every bit as ugly as racism or sexism. And people don't like
us. And it all started during Vietnam, and it became part of
the corporate culture of the Federal bureaucracy, and it is
passed on. They do things, they are still doing things like,
quote/unquote, Outstanding Scholar Program in order to get
around veterans preference.
When I was in school a million years ago, when I rode my
horse up to Colgate University, 3.5 meant you were way up
there. The median grade point average of my class was 2.7, and
that was reflective of colleges around the country. And what
happened in the late 1960s and 1970s was grade inflation, 3.5
now is no big deal at a lot of institutions.
And so it is a way to circle around veterans preference.
Like I say, you can satisfy every affirmative action guideline
in the world and hire only vets.
Mr. Takano. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. I yield back.
Mr. Wenstrup. Thank you.
Mr. Costello, do you have any questions at this time.
Mr. Costello. I do.
But, Mr. Smith, if you could detail for the record--we
don't want to miss votes--if you could detail your suggestion
as to how you would streamline the veterans preference rights,
any violation or allegation of violation, as well as why you
feel that it may be necessary to streamline. I think that is an
important question that I would like to get feedback on.
Mr. Costello. I will yield back.
Mr. Wenstrup. Miss Rice, you are recognized.
Miss Rice. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
My question is, it is bothersome to me that a lot of
veterans apply for positions because most of them are offered
by either the VA, DoD, or Homeland Security. And the fact that
they are not getting jobs there because of a lack of
qualifications or misunderstanding of the law is bothersome
enough.
But I would like to just put it out to everyone for us to
figure out a way to encourage other agencies within the Federal
government to be as aggressive as the VA, DoD, and Homeland
Security are, and actually pass that on to our veterans to
understand that they don't have just these three agencies to
choose from.
Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
Mr. Wenstrup. One of the things I am taking away from this
is that we don't really have a definitive system that we are
working with on this, that we don't have a defined set of rules
that we can follow.
I agree with you, Mr. Weidman, on the ``knowingly''
portion. It certainly changes things. One of the things I was
trying to get to is, what are the criteria and how do you prove
knowingly. And so we should have a system in place, and that is
something that we need to work on.
So I want to thank you all for being here today and for
taking the time to discuss these issues and for your testimony.
It is valuable to us.
I ask unanimous consent that all Members have 5 legislative
days to revise and extend their remarks and include extraneous
material. Without objection, so ordered.
Mr. Wenstrup. And this hearing is now adjourned. Thank you.

[Whereupon, at 3:37 p.m., the Subcommittee was adjourned.]

A P P E N D I X

----------

Prepared Statement of Michael H. Michaud
Introduction
Good afternoon, Chairman Wenstrup, Ranking Member Takano, and
distinguished Members of the Subcommittee. Thank you for the
opportunity to participate in today's hearing. As Assistant Secretary
for the Veterans' Employment and Training Service (VETS) at the
Department of Labor (DOL or Department), I appreciate the opportunity
to discuss the Department's performance with and responsibility to
veterans' preference in federal government hiring.
It is also my personal privilege to return to this room once more,
now as a member of the Executive Branch. I have proud memories of the
great work done by the Committee while I was a member - or should I say
``in spite of my having been a member.'' All kidding aside, the House
Veterans Affairs Committee has a sacred duty, so eloquently put by
Abraham Lincoln, ``to care for him who shall have borne the battle and
for his widow, and his orphan.'' I am pleased to report that I found
the spirit of that commitment alive and well at the Department of Labor
upon my arrival there five months ago.
While the employment situation for veterans continues to improve,
and last month marked 23 of 24 months with veterans' unemployment being
lower than nonveteran unemployment, DOL will not rest as long as any
veteran needs assistance finding meaningful civilian employment. A
great place for our veterans to find such employment is through
continued public service as a Federal employee, as a third of all new
Federal hires last year have learned for themselves.
Employment Situation of Veterans - 2015 BLS Report
Every March, DOL's Bureau of Labor Statistics (BLS) releases an in-
depth report on the employment situation of veterans. In 2015, 21.2
million men and women were veterans. Veterans are more likely to be men
(only 9% are women) and older than nonveterans. In part, this reflects
the characteristics of veterans who served during World War II, the
Korean War, and the Vietnam era. Veterans who served during these
wartime periods accounted for 42% (8.9 million) of the total veteran
population in 2015. One-third of veterans (7.0 million) served during
the Gulf War-era I (August 1990 to August 2001) or Gulf War-era II
(September 2001 forward). Another quarter (5.3 million) served outside
the designated wartime periods.
Regardless of their period of service, many veterans with a
service-connected disability worked, or are working, in the public
sector. In August 2015, 36% of employed veterans with a disability
worked in Federal, state, or local government, compared with 20% of
veterans with no disability and 13% of nonveterans. Among the employed,
25% of veterans with a disability worked for the Federal government,
compared with 7% of veterans with no disability and 2% of nonveterans.
A higher proportion of employed Gulf War-era II veterans worked in
the public sector in 2015 than employed nonveterans-26% and 14%,
respectively. Among the employed, 14% of Gulf War-era II veterans
worked for the Federal government, compared with 2% of nonveterans.
Veterans Preference at the Department of Labor
The Department is committed to following veterans' preference in
our hiring. As Secretary Perez has said, we are not just an
organization that promotes veterans' employment. We practice what we
preach. We have steadily increased the percentage of veterans in the
DOL workforce from 20.6% in Fiscal Year (FY) 2013 to 21.4% in FY 2015.
In FY 2015, one in three new hires at DOL was a veteran, and one in six
of all new hires was a veteran with a rated disability of at least 30%.
And the vast majority of the staff at VETS are veterans.
DOL's Veterans Employment Program Office (VEPO) within the Office
of Diversity and Inclusion provides leadership and direction for the
Department's Veterans Employment Program to ensure DOL attracts, hires,
and retains qualified veterans who have served and sacrificed in
defense of our country. In addition, the VEPO provides advisory
services, outreach, training, career development and promotional
opportunities in support of the government-wide veterans hiring
initiative, the Department of Labor's mission, our partners, our
employees, our customers, and the veteran community.
The increased hiring of veterans within DOL allows the Department
to capitalize on their unique and diverse backgrounds, and to benefit
from the leadership and technical skills they learned or enhanced while
serving on active duty. Our DOL workforce is strengthened through our
increased employment of veterans, who understand the critical
importance of education and training as the basis for success in
accomplishing tasks on a personal as well as on a national level.
DOL REPRESENTATION RATES
At the end of FY 2015, the Department had a total workforce of
15,937, of which 3,419 (21.4%) were veterans.
In FY 2015, DOL employed a greater percentage of disabled veterans
than in FY 2014. Specifically, in FY 2015, DOL's workforce included
1,605 (10.0%) veterans with disabilities compared to 1,503 (9.4%) in FY
2014.
In FY 2015, DOL employed a greater percentage of veterans with a
rated disability of at least 30% than in FY 2014. In FY 2015, the DOL
workforce included 1,109 (7.0%) of these veterans compared to FY 2014,
when the DOL workforce included 1,017 (6.4%).
DOL HIRING RATES
Of DOL's FY 2015 veteran hires (440), 236 (53.6%) were veterans
with disabilities. The number of disabled veteran hires increased
nearly 32% compared to FY 2014, when 179 of our veteran hires were
veterans with disabilities. Significantly, 165 (37.5%) of our FY 2015
veteran hires were veterans with a rated disability of at least 30%.
This represented an 18.7% increase over the previous year, when 139 of
our veteran hires were veterans with a rated disability of at least
30%.
Veterans' Employment Initiative
In November 2009, President Obama issued Executive Order 13518,
which created the Veterans Employment Initiative to enhance recruitment
of and promote employment opportunities for veterans within the
Executive Branch, consistent with merit system principles and veterans'
preferences prescribed by law. Executive Order 13518 also established
the Council on Veterans Employment (Council). We are proud that the
Secretary of Labor co-chairs that Council with the Secretary of the
Department of Veterans Affairs (VA). The Director of the Office of
Personnel Management (OPM) serves as vice-chair of the Council.
The Council is still working to complete its FY 2015 report, but
has published data for FY 2014 when ``33.2 percent of Executive Branch
new hires were veterans, surpassing the FY 2013 rate of 31 percent. a
9.2 percentage point increase over the FY 2009 baseline of 24.0
percent. Veterans currently represent 30.8 percent of the Federal
workforce, as compared to 25.8 percent in FY 2009.''
Secretary Perez is committed to fairly executing veterans'
preference not only at DOL, but also across the Federal government.
Under his co-leadership with VA and OPM, in 2014, the Council published
its Strategic Plan for Government-wide Veterans Recruitment and
Employment. The plan covers FY 2014 to FY 2017 and emphasizes the
hiring and retention of veterans.
The Role of VETS in Veterans' Preference in Federal Hiring
Under the Veterans' Employment Opportunities Act (VEOA), 5 U.S.C.
Sec. Sec. 3330a-3330c, VETS is responsible for investigating claims
alleging a Federal agency's failure to apply veterans' preference in
hiring or during a reduction-in-force, as well as claims from veterans
alleging a lack of access to a Federal agency's covered employment
opportunities. While VETS has investigative responsibilities, it is
important to note that OPM is responsible for interpreting and
administering the statutes and regulations governing veterans'
preference in Federal hiring and during reductions- in-force.
Under 5 U.S.C. Sec. Sec. 2108 and 3304(f), as added by the VEOA,
preference-eligible spouses and those persons with ``derived''
preference (e.g., spouses of disabled veterans), as well as veterans
who have been separated from the Armed Forces under honorable
conditions after three years or more of active military service, are
allowed to apply for certain Federal merit promotion opportunities for
which an agency accepts applications from individuals outside its own
workforce. Under 5 U.S.C. Sec. 3330a, VEOA also provides that
preference-eligibles who allege their rights have been violated under
any statute or regulation relating to Veterans' Preference may file a
claim with VETS.
When a complaint is filed, VETS field staff investigate if rights
have been violated by a Federal agency during either a hiring process
or a reduction-in-force. Upon reaching a determination, VETS notifies
the agency of the determination and advises on actions to be taken to
comply with the VEOA.
If the agency complies, the case is closed as either settled or
granted, based on agreement between the parties. The resolution depends
on the violation that occurred and may include payment of back wages
and benefits.
If the agency fails to comply, VETS advises the claimant of VETS'
inability to resolve the issue and closes the investigation case file.
In those circumstances, the claimant is notified of his or her right to
appeal the case to the United States Merit Systems Protection Board
(MSPB) against the federal agency determined to have violated his or
her VEOA rights. Finally, if the MSPB issues a decision adverse to the
claimant, the claimant may further appeal to the Court of Appeals for
the Federal Circuit.
If VETS determines that a VEOA violation has taken place, or there
is evidence of a violation, a copy of the complete case file, including
the complaint information and supporting documentation, is forwarded to
the United States Office of Special Counsel (OSC), after the case is
closed, as a potential prohibited personnel practice (PPP) case for
review under a Memorandum of Understanding between OSC and VETS. OSC's
role is to ascertain whether a PPP has taken place pursuant to 5 U.S.C.
Sec. 2302(b)(11), which provides that a Federal employee who has
authority over personnel decisions may not:

(a) knowingly take, recommend, or approve any personnel action if
the taking of such action would violate a veterans' preference
requirement; or
(b) knowingly fail to take, recommend, or approve any personnel
action if the failure to take such action would violate a veterans'
preference requirement.

OSC's review of the VEOA complaint does not affect VETS'
investigation. OSC's review for PPPs is a separate matter, and OSC's
review occurs after VETS' investigation and attempt to settle a case.
Further, OSC's review has no impact on the claimant's right to appeal
to the MSPB or to the Federal Circuit Court. Instead, OSC reviews cases
to determine if PPPs took place that warrant disciplinary action
against the agency or its responsible personnel.
VETS maintains an interactive Veterans' Preference Advisor that
provides information and advice in an electronic format on the roles
and responsibilities of both employers and employees regarding
Veterans' Preference issues. In particular, the Advisor helps veterans
determine the types of preferences and benefits to which they are
entitled, and if they determine they may have been denied their
Veterans' Preference rights, the Advisor explains the process for
filing a complaint, and provides an electronic capability to file a
complaint form. The Advisor can be found on the Department's ``elaws''
website at http://www.dol.gov/elaws/vetspref.htm. VETS also provides
its investigators with a ``Veterans' Preference Operations Manual,''
which, among other things, provides uniform guidance for processing
complaints brought by preference-eligible veterans who allege a denial
of their rights under the provisions of the VEOA.
Tables 1 and 2 below display the total number of Veterans'
Preference cases investigated by VETS and associated outcomes, during
FY 2015. Of the 606 complaints received in FY 2015, and the 34 cases
carried over from FY 2014, VETS closed 590 cases. On average, cases
were resolved in 23 days.
Of the 590 Veterans' Preference cases closed in FY 2015, 32 (5.4%)
were found to have merit. Investigations were completed in 491 (83.2%)
of the 590 cases. The remaining 99 cases were closed administratively,
withdrawn by the claimant, or the claimant elected to proceed to the
MSPB before the investigation concluded within the time frame allowed
by statute. \1\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ In these cases, the claimant may request that VETS cease
investigative action after 60 days and appeal to MSPB directly on the
61st day after VETS' receipt of the claim.
\2\ As reported in the Veterans' Preference Information Management
System (Run Date October 30, 2015).

Table 1. FY 2015 Veterans' Preference Cases /2/
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Number or Percentage of
Category or Subcategory Cases
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Total Cases................................... 640
Cases Carried Forward from FY 2014............ 34
Cases Opened During FY 2015................... 606
FY 2015 Opened Cases - Issue Hiring......... 589
FY 2015 Opened Cases - Issue Reduction in 17
Force........................................
Total Cases Closed During FY 2015............. 590
Percent of FY 2015 Cases Closed within 60 97.5%
days.........................................
Percent of FY 2015 Cases Closed within 90 98.3%
days.........................................
Average Number of Days Case Was Open........ 23
------------------------------------------------------------------------

Table 2. FY 2015 Veterans' Preference Case Outcomes
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Category or Subcategory Number of Cases
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Total Cases Closed............................ 590
Cases Closed Due to ``Merit Finding''......... 32
Hiring...................................... 32
Reduction in Force.......................... 0
Cases Closed Due to ``No Merit Finding''...... 371
Hiring...................................... 359
Reduction in Force.......................... 12
Cases Closed Due to ``Not Eligible''.......... 57
Cases Closed Due to ``Untimely Filed''........ 31
Cases Closed Due to ``Merit Determination Not 99
Made''.......................................
Administratively Closed..................... 31
Claim Withdrawn............................. 50
Merit Undetermined.......................... 7
Duplicate................................... 11
Total Cases Converted to USERRA Claims........ 0
Total Cases Still Pending..................... 50
------------------------------------------------------------------------

Conclusion
The Department looks forward to working with the Subcommittee to
ensure that Veterans' Preference in Federal government hiring remains
strong. Veterans are some of our strongest and most capable employees
in the public workforce and we are committed to making sure that they
have a place at DOL and their preference rights are not violated. Mr.
Chairman, Ranking Member, and distinguished Members of the
Subcommittee, this concludes my written statement. Thank you for the
opportunity to be a part of this hearing. I welcome your questions.

Prepared Statement of Ms. Carin M. Otero
Good afternoon, Chairman Wenstrup, Ranking Member Takano and
Members of the Subcommittee. Thank you for your invitation to appear
before the Subcommittee on Veterans' preference and the Department of
Veterans Affairs' (VA) success in recruiting and hiring Veterans.
I would like to highlight the Department's commitment to hiring
Veterans. We believe that affording qualified Veterans a statutory
preference in employment is not merely the obligation of a grateful
Nation, it is also good government and good business. It gives VA an
advantage in recruiting and retaining employees from a pool of the
Nation's most highly motivated, disciplined and experienced preference-
eligible Veterans.
VA is adamant about and consistent in ensuring the application of
the existing Federal regulation, which requires the selection of all
qualified preference-eligible Veterans over other individuals, when
filling positions that are open to the general public. VA's internal
hiring procedures are aligned with the Merit System Principles, of
which the basis is to recruit qualified individuals from all segments
of society and select and advance on merit, after fair and open
competition. In addition to our hiring policies and procedures that
address Veterans' preference, VA's Human Resources Oversight and
Effectiveness Office evaluates compliance with Veterans' preference
laws, regulations and policies, conducting onsite evaluations of human
resources offices throughout VA. VA has focused on Veterans' hiring for
many years. We track the employment of Veterans by facility throughout
VA.
We have launched various programs and initiatives which have
resulted in VA placing in the top tier of agencies employing Veterans.
As of February 29, 2016, more than 119,000, or just shy of 33 percent,
of VA's 365,000 employees are Veterans. More than 100,000 of the 33
percent are Veterans' preference eligibles, and 47,000, approximately
12 percent, are disabled Veterans. VA proudly ranks first among non
Defense agencies in hiring Veterans. VA regularly uses Veteran-specific
special hiring authorities, such as the Veterans Employment
Opportunities Act, the Veterans Recruitment Appointment, and 30 percent
or more Disabled Veterans. We have also hired Veterans using the
Schedule A authority for people with disabilities. In the first 5
months of fiscal year 2016, VA hired 8,705 Veterans using a mixture of
all of the above-mentioned authorities.
The Department has established a strategic target of 35 percent
Veterans for its employee population. One of the challenges that we
face is the rate at which Veterans are leaving the Department. While
recognized early on by the Office of Personnel Management (OPM) as
having one of the better retention rates in government, the cohort of
Veterans who joined the Department of Veterans Affairs after the
Vietnam War is now eligible for retirement.
In contrast, younger Veterans, similar to other U.S. workers their
age, are frequently more mobile, changing jobs and employers more often
than many older employees. On average, VA has lost about 1,300 Veteran
employees per month during this fiscal year through separations and
retirements. Countering these losses, we have, on average, hired about
1,740 Veterans per month during this fiscal year.
Although the math on our Veteran gains versus losses on the surface
does not depict a challenge, VA is measured by an OPM metric expecting
no more than a 5 percent gap between retention of Veteran and non-
Veteran employees. Currently, our retention gap is more than 7 percent,
with 2014 showing an 80.30 percent retention rate for non-Veterans and
73.23 percent for Veterans. Also, there is an enormous cost to replace
each employee and a loss of stability and efficiency as well.
Additionally, there are indicators of a poor employee experience
associated with the reasons for leaving the organization.
In 2011, in support of Executive Order 13518 (Employment of
Veterans in the Federal Government), VA established the Veteran
Employment Services Office (VESO) within the Office of Human Resources
and Administration. VESO supports the Interagency Council on Veterans
Employment, created by the Executive Order, by recruiting qualified
Veteran candidates for critical VA positions, managing retention
initiatives and reporting the Veteran hiring and retention statistics
for VA to the Council for inclusion in its annual report to the
President. VESO's mission is to develop and implement innovative and
comprehensive programs, procedures, and services to support VA and
Federal Veteran recruitment and VA retention and reintegration.
To execute the mission, VESO focuses on giving Veterans the tools
to find Federal jobs, making the transition to civilian employment
seamless, and improving Veteran engagement and satisfaction. Activities
include: personalized one-on-one services to support Federal Veteran
recruitment, support to retention efforts, support to Veterans
throughout a deployment lifecycle, and providing Federal partners with
services that support Veterans recruitment, retention and
reintegration.
In closing, every day at VA we see the sacrifices which Veterans
have made for our Nation. It is our responsibility and privilege to
support their return to civilian employment. We are committed to
continue our robust and successful focus on Veterans' hiring in VA.
Chairman Wenstrup, thank you again for the opportunity to testify
today. I am prepared to respond to any questions the Subcommittee may
have.

Prepared Statement of Mark D. Reinhold
Chairman Wenstrup, Ranking Member Takano, and Members of the
Subcommittee:
Thank you for your invitation to testify at the Subcommittee's
hearing on veterans' employment in the Federal Government and about the
Office of Personnel Management's (OPM's) role in the implementation of
veterans' preference in the Federal hiring process.

Veterans' Employment Initiative

This Administration has made it a priority to honor veterans for
their service and sacrifice in defense of our Nation, including
assisting them in re-entering civilian life and finding employment. In
November 2009, President Obama issued Executive Order 13518, which
clearly laid out three objectives: that we honor our obligations to our
nation's veterans; that we use the talents of veterans to help the
Federal Government meet today's dynamic challenges; and, that we create
a model veterans employment program. The Order established the Veterans
Employment Initiative to reinforce the commitment to enhance
recruitment of, and promote employment opportunities for, veterans in
the Federal workforce, consistent with merit system principles and
existing veterans' preferences. \1\ In addition, the Order created the
Council on Veterans Employment (the Council) to advise and assist the
President on improving employment opportunities for veterans in the
Federal Government. The Council is co-chaired by the Secretaries of
Labor and Veterans Affairs, and the Director of OPM serves as Vice
Chair. Twenty-four agencies are represented on the Council.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ https://www.whitehouse.gov/the-press-office/executive-order-
veterans-employment-initiative
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Veterans bring distinctive training, skills, leadership, and
experiences that we need at every agency in the Federal government. An
example is the increasing need we have for people trained in
information technology and other technical areas. The Federal
Government invests significant resources in the training and
development of the brave men and women in our military. Efforts to hire
transitioning military service personnel to positions in the Federal
workforce helps maximize our return on this investment. Veterans
possess a wide variety of skills and experiences, as well as a
dedication to public service, that can be of enormous benefit to the
Government as an employer and to the American people that these
individuals will continue to serve. There are a number of skills gaps
in the Federal workforce, including health care, information
technology, and cybersecurity, that these individuals can fill
immediately. Not only is hiring veterans the right thing to do, it also
makes good business sense.
In April 2014, the Council published its second Strategic Plan for
Governmentwide Veterans Recruitment and Employment (the Strategic
Plan). \2\ The Strategic Plan, which covers the period from Fiscal Year
(FY) 2014 through FY 2017, builds on the Council's work to tackle
barriers to veterans' employment in the areas of leadership commitment,
skills development, marketing employment opportunities for veterans,
and creation of a single-source information gateway for disseminating
veterans' employment information. The current Strategic Plan added an
additional emphasis on retention of veterans and reintegration of
deployable Reservists or National Guardsmen.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\2\ https://www.fedshirevets.gov/pdf/Vets--Initiative--Strategic--
Plan--2014.pdf
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
These efforts have yielded good results since 2009. In FY 2014,
33.2 percent of Executive Branch new hires were veterans, surpassing
the FY 2013 rate of 31 percent. This was a 9.2 percentage point
increase over the FY 2009 baseline of 24.0 percent. In FY 2014, as the
number of total Federal employees onboard dropped from 2,015,000 in FY
2013 to 1,990,000, the total number of veterans onboard saw an increase
from 607,000 to approximately 612,000. Veterans currently represent
30.8 percent of the Federal workforce, as compared to 25.8 percent in
FY 2009. Last summer, OPM published a report, ``Employment of Veterans
in the Federal Executive Branch, Fiscal Year 2014,'' demonstrating the
improvements that have been made in employment opportunities for
veterans in the Federal workforce. \3\ This report, issued on an annual
basis and drawn from data in OPM's Enterprise Human Resources
Integration-Statistical Data Mart, is in support of the Executive
Branch's efforts to support the employment of veterans in the Federal
government. In regard to diversity among new veteran hires in the
Executive Branch, of the 33.2 percent of new veteran hires for FY 2014,
25 percent were women, 66.2 percent were Caucasian/non-Hispanic, and
27.2 percent had a rated disability of at least 30 percent.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\3\ https://www.fedshirevets.gov/hire/hrp/reports/EmploymentOfVets-
FY14.pdf

---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Veterans' Preference

Preference eligibility for veterans in Federal employment is
defined in section 2108 of title 5, United States Code, and applies to
new appointments in both the competitive and excepted service. While
veterans' preference does not guarantee veterans a job and does not
apply to appointments under merit promotion procedures or internal
agency actions such as promotions, transfers, reassignments and
reinstatements, it does provide a very useful tool in the application
process for qualified candidates.
Under 5 U.S.C. 2108, and supported by implementing regulations by
OPM, certain types of active duty service may qualify for veterans'
preference (i.e., preference eligible). \4\ There are three types of
preference eligible (as defined by the points added to the veteran's
passing examination score or rating):
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\4\ https://www.opm.gov/policy-data-oversight/veterans-employment-
initiative/vet-guide/#2

10-point preference eligible
oAn individual who served at any time and has a service-connected
disability or has received a Purple Heart, and survivors or spouses of
certain veterans.

5-point preference eligible
oAn individual with active duty service during certain time periods
specified in law or who received an armed forces expeditionary or
campaign medal.

0-point preference eligible
oAn individual who is released or discharged from a period of
active duty from the armed forces, after August 29, 2008, by reason of
a ``sole survivorship discharge.''

In addition, only veterans discharged or released from active duty
in the armed forces under honorable conditions (or, more recently,
active duty members who certify through official documentation that
they are expected to be honorably discharged or released within 120
days) are eligible for veterans' preference. Retired members of the
armed forces are not included in the definition of preference eligible
unless they are a disabled veteran or they retired below the rank of
major or its equivalent.
The application of veterans' preference is provided for in statute,
and depends on the ranking and selection process agencies use to select
candidates for Federal employment. As part of improving the Federal
recruitment and hiring process, in May 2010, President Obama directed
agencies to use category rating for most competitive examinations for
Federal employment. Under category rating, applicants who meet basic
minimum qualification requirements established for the position and
whose job-related competencies or knowledge, skills and abilities have
been assessed are ranked by being placed in quality categories instead
of being ranked in numeric score order. Preference eligibles are listed
ahead of non-preference eligibles within each quality category.
Veterans' preference is absolute within each quality category, which
means a hiring manager cannot select a non-preference eligible over a
preference eligible within the same category.
An agency generally cannot bypass a preference eligible who meets
the qualifications to perform the duties of the position and has
achieved a passing score in order to appoint a non-preference eligible.
However, if the hiring manager concludes that a preference eligible is
not qualified to perform the duties of the job the manager may request
to ``pass over'' the preference eligible. In most cases, the authority
to decide to pass over a veteran is delegated to the agencies, except
that OPM, by statute, must make the determination whether a veteran
with a 30 percent or more service-connected disability may be passed
over.
The Federal Government has long been at the forefront of appointing
veterans - particularly disabled veterans. OPM, through our Merit
System Accountability and Compliance office conducts regular reviews of
veterans hiring across the government to ensure that veterans are
receiving the entitlements they have earned in the Federal hiring
process. A veteran or other preference eligible person who believes
that his or her rights under any law or regulation related to veterans'
preference have been violated may file a written complaint with the U.
S. Department of Labor's Veterans' Employment and Training Service. A
disabled veteran who believes he or she has been discriminated against
in employment because of his or her disability may file a
discrimination complaint with the offending agency under regulations
administered by the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission. In
addition, the intentional failure by a government official to comply
with veterans' preference requirements is treated as a prohibited
personnel practice, which can be reported to the Office of Special
Counsel for investigation and is grounds for disciplinary action.

Special Hiring Authorities for Veterans

OPM encourages agencies to make full use of the various hiring
authorities that can facilitate veterans' employment.
Veterans' Recruitment Appointments (VRA) are an excepted authority
that allows agencies to appoint an eligible veteran without competition
if he or she: is in receipt of a campaign badge for service during a
war or in a campaign or expedition; is a disabled veteran; is in
receipt of an Armed forces Service Medal for participation in a
military operation; or, is a recently separated veteran (within the
last 3 years), and separated under honorable conditions. Individuals
can be appointed under this authority at any grade level up to and
including a GS-11 or its equivalent. After successful completion of 2
years of Federal service, the employee is converted to the competitive
service unless he or she is employed in a temporary (not to exceed 1
year) or term (more than 1 year, but not more than 4) position.
Agencies may also non-competitively appoint any veteran with a 30
percent or more service-connected disability if they retired from
active military service with a service-connected disability rating of
30 percent or more or they have a rating by the Department of Veterans
Affairs showing a compensable service-connected disability of 30
percent or more. This authority can be used to make initial temporary
or term appointments in the competitive service lasting at least 60
days, and the veteran can be converted to a permanent appointment.
In addition, though not specifically for veterans, the Schedule A
authority for people with disabilities is an excepted authority that
agencies can use to appoint eligible veterans who have a severe
physical, psychological, or intellectual disability. Agencies can use
this authority, at their discretion, to appoint individuals at any
grade level and for any job (time-limited or permanent) for which they
qualify. After two years of satisfactory service, the agency may
convert the employee, without competition, to the competitive service.
Finally, the Veterans Employment Opportunity Act of 1998 (VEOA)
allows veterans to apply to job announcements that are otherwise open
only to current or former Federal employees who completed requirements
for career or career-conditional tenure. To be eligible to apply for a
position under VEOA, the veteran's discharge must be issued under
honorable conditions and he or she must either be a preference eligible
or have completed 3 or more years of active service.

Veterans and Agency Education and Outreach

In partnership with the Departments of Defense, Labor, Veterans
Affairs, Homeland Security, and other Federal agencies, OPM created
www.FedsHireVets.gov to serve as the principal source for Federal
employment information to assist our Veterans, transitioning service
members, their families, Federal Human Resources (HR) professionals,
and hiring managers. The purpose of the site is to provide consistent
and accurate Federal employment information, useful training, and other
resources to better inform the applicant, the employee, and the hiring
agency. This website is a critical component of the Federal
Government's strategy to facilitate the recruitment, employment, and
retention of Veterans.
OPM has developed mandatory training for human resources personnel
and Federal hiring managers on veterans' employment. The web-based
training covers veterans' preference, special hiring authorities for
veterans, non-competitive appointment eligibility for military spouses,
and the Uniformed Services Employment and Reemployment Rights Act. The
training is available through Human Resources University, the Federal
Government's ``one stop'' training resource center for the Federal HR
professionals, managed by OPM.

Hiring Excellence

OPM recently launched the Hiring Excellence Campaign. Through this
campaign, OPM will be working directly with agency hiring managers and
human resources staff to help them identify skills gaps and find and
recruit the best professionals to fill these positions. This allows us
to hear directly from hiring managers and supervisors, while also
giving us the opportunity to have discussions with Federal agencies
about the tools already available to them, including those available
for hiring veterans. We have also launched a Hiring Toolkit on HR
University, which includes guidance on various hiring authorities and
flexibilities, information about assessment techniques to evaluate
applicants, and how to leverage data to inform recruiting and outreach
strategies.
Agencies are responsible for applying the law correctly so that
preferences are not inappropriately withheld or granted. Agencies
should ensure that their job vacancy announcements accurately describe
the position being announced and that they have appropriately described
the qualifications required to successfully perform the duties of the
job. Agencies should also apply effective assessment approaches that
help distinguish the best qualified candidates from the overall
applicant pool. Agencies are encouraged to define threshold proficiency
levels or requirements (beyond simply meeting minimum qualifications)
that an applicant must meet in order to be considered further for a
position. This will not only assist agencies in their ability to
recruit qualified individuals capable of effectively meeting their
missions, but also helps ensure that the process is carried out
transparently and reduces any perception of unfairness.
The work and mission of the Federal Government has become more
complex, as we continue to ensure the safety of our information
systems, the security of our borders, and the health of our veterans,
and we must have the workforce with the right skills to meet the
challenges we face. To that end, OPM is leading efforts to ensure that
agencies are recruiting and hiring the best possible talent and leaders
to facilitate a smarter, more innovative, and more accountable
government for its citizens. Achieving and maintaining a world-class
workforce to serve the American people depends on the ability to
recruit and hire the most talented and diverse workforce possible, and
that includes our nation's veterans.

Conclusion

Since 2009, significant progress has been made to enhance
employment opportunities for veterans in the Federal government, thanks
to the efforts across government to implement the Veterans' Employment
Initiative, but we know that challenges remain and improvements can be
made. As we implement the Governmentwide Veterans Recruitment and
Employment Strategic Plan, we will continue to focus on helping
agencies develop workforce management strategies to advance the goals
of the Initiative and to reaffirm the commitment to advancing economic
opportunities for our Nation's veterans. As OPM works to meet our
mission to recruit, retain, and honor a world-class workforce,
providing the highest quality service as America's model employer for
the 21st century we will continue to focus on helping agencies bring in
skilled and diverse employees with the best talent to serve the
American people.

Prepared Statement of Aleks Morosky
Chairman Wenstrup, Ranking Member Takano and members of the
Subcommittee, on behalf of the nearly 1.7 million members of the
Veterans of Foreign Wars of the United States (VFW) and our
Auxiliaries, I would like to thank you for the opportunity to testify
on veterans' preference in federal government hiring.
It is clear that veterans are an extraordinarily valuable asset to
the federal government workforce. While veterans make up only nine
percent of the adult population in the United States, they represent
over 30 percent of federal government workers, with over 25 percent of
those being preference eligible. According to the Office of Personnel
Management, these numbers have climbed steadily in recent years. While
veteran employees do seem to be concentrated in certain federal
agencies such as Defense, Veterans Affairs, and Homeland Security,
nearly all agencies have consistently increased the percentages of
veterans they employ each year since 2009.
It makes sense that veterans would gravitate towards federal
employment, as many of them see civilian public service as a way to
continue serving their country after the military. The real winner, of
course, is our nation, whose federal workforce benefits greatly from
the experience, patriotism, and values that veterans bring with them to
their civilian careers. For this reason, we believe that the federal
government must continue doing all it can to recruit, hire and retain
as many veterans as possible.
Although the data indicates that the veterans' preference is a
successful program, there are certain opportunities for improvement
that we have identified. First and foremost, we strongly support
amending veterans' preference to ensure veterans who served in the
Guard and Reserves are afforded the same hiring preferences as their
active duty counterparts. Currently, veterans who served after
September 11, 2001, are required to have served at least 180
consecutive days on active duty. We believe that this is inconsistent
with the way the Department of Defense (DOD) has utilized the Reserve
Component in recent years. In the Post-9/11 era, National Guard and
Reservists are frequently called to active duty for short periods of
time in order to support deploying units, providing training support,
and backfilling their duties at home duty station. These contributions
have been critical to DOD's ability to fight the Global War on Terror
with an all-volunteer force. For this reason, we strongly support
changing the eligibility for veterans' preference to 180 cumulative
days on active duty for veterans who served after September 11, 2001.
As for the feedback we receive from VFW members, the most common
complaints are from veterans who applied for federal employment but
were not hired. We find that there is a common perception in the
veterans' community that veterans' preference all but guarantees
federal employment. This, of course, is not the case, as veteran
applicants must still meet basic job qualifications and be ranked based
on their job-related competencies when applying for a position. The 5
and 10 point preference functions as more of a tiebreaker, rather than
a guarantee of employment in all cases. We find that veterans also
commonly assume that if they are not hired, then it must mean that a
non-veteran was hired instead. While the veterans' preference makes it
far more likely that a veteran will get an interview, it is not
uncommon for several preference eligible veterans to interview for the
same position.
To address these misconceptions, we suggest that the Transition
Assistance Program (TAP) be reviewed to ensure that proper training is
being offered on veterans' preference. This should include both the DOD
module, and the Department of Labor's online version of TAP. Although
it is already part of the curriculum, it is apparent to us that many
veterans remain unclear on what it means and how it is administered.
Mr. Chairman, this concludes my testimony and I will be happy to
answer any questions you or the Subcommittee members may have.
Information Required by Rule XI2(g)(4) of the House of Representatives
Pursuant to Rule XI2(g)(4) of the House of Representatives, the VFW
has not received any federal grants in Fiscal Year 2016, nor has it
received any federal grants in the two previous Fiscal Years.
The VFW has not received payments or contracts from any foreign
governments in the current year or preceding two calendar years.

Prepared Statement of Daniel P. Smith
Simply stated, Veterans' Preference is a rising tide that lifts all
boats. Because the Armed Forces are comprised of people from every walk
of life in the United States, so is Veterans' Preference. This benefit
does not discriminate. Veterans' Preference includes veterans from
every socioeconomic class, gender, religion, ethnicity, sexual
orientation and creed. Veterans' preference is fair, and aims to help
our veterans obtain employment all while furnishing the U.S. government
with qualified candidates and personnel.
Chairman Wenstrup, Ranking Member Takano, and distinguished members
of the subcommittee; On behalf of our National Commander, Dale Barnett,
and the over 2 million members of The American Legion, we thank you for
this opportunity to testify regarding The American Legion's positions
on Veterans' Preference before this committee.
Veterans' Preference is triggered when a hiring manager is deciding
between two equally qualified candidates, where one is a civilian and
the other is a servicemember or veteran. Veterans' Preference requires
a veteran must be fully qualified for the position being sought. The
preference was not and is not designed to force agencies to hire a
veteran simply because they are a veteran.
When the system in place is working, more veterans are employed,
which is obviously a goal of The American Legion. However, when the
system fails, perhaps because a hiring manager chose not to select the
veteran, even though they are equally qualified, it is extremely
difficult to know if ignoring Veterans' Preference was the reason. The
culture of seeking employment is filled with customs dictating
interview etiquette. Candidates are trained to balance aggression and
avoid coming on too strong. In some situations it is not considered
proper to ask why you did not get the position you were seeking.
Because of these customs it can be hard for a veteran to definitively
say they did not receive Veterans' Preference.
Veterans' Preference is important however, and a great benefit to
the government, or indeed any organization, to stock their employee
ranks with qualified veterans. The government has already invested a
great deal of resources in training veterans during their military
service, and that training can be put to use in further service of the
government. Common military training includes, but is not limited to,
the ability to work well within a team, unparalleled work ethic,
dedication and many other attributes an employer wants in an employee.
The initial investment made by our government in our servicemembers and
veterans still continues to pay dividends as these people are still
working for the government and using their training to benefit the
country and the American tax payer.
The American Legion supports veterans' preference in the federal,
state, and private sector:
One of the reasons Veterans' Preference was established was to
assist our nation's veterans, who joined the military and were not
typically exposed to standard professional social settings. Veterans'
Preference accounts for this by giving them inroads into government
employment that will allow them to learn the soft personal skills that
their civilian counterparts learned early on. Absence from the highly
competitive job market due to military service creates an unfair and
unequal burden on veterans in competing for employment with non-veteran
peers upon completion of military service. Veterans' Preference was
created to help restore the place of veterans on equal footing with
their civilian counterparts by giving them an advantage.
One area in particular The American legion has been working to
assist servicemembers and veterans happens to deal with an antiquated
Department of Defense policy. The policy (5 U.S.C. 3326) stated that a
separating servicemember could not obtain employment at the DOD for a
minimum period of 180 days. Fortunately, Representative Derek Kilmer
authored and introduced H.R 4527, the Military Retiree Employment Act.
This common sense legislation removes the 180 day hold off and permits
the DOD to hire qualified and experienced personnel. The American
Legion, through Resolution 350 \1\ was able to support Rep. Kilmer's
bill, and we encourage the House of Representatives to consider this
proposed legislation.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ Resolution No. 350 ``Veterans Employment Initiative'' (August
2014)
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
That said, The American Legion does not only support Veterans'
Preference in the federal government, but also within the state and
public sectors. Veterans' Preference is mandated at the federal level,
and though we would not suggest the private sector be forced to hire
veterans, we certainly encourage them to investigate and implement
their own level of veterans' preference. Many companies and
organizations already do this, including The American Legion. It is
worth highlighting that The American Legion does not only advocate for
veterans at the federal level, where it's mandated, but at every level.
Veterans are a very unique and dynamic group of people who understand
and typically possess a great work ethic and know how to work under
pressure and stressful conditions.

Where are the problem areas?:

No veterans organization does as much as The American Legion to
work to ensure veterans are getting hired and finding their proper
place in the workforce. The American Legion annually conducts dozens of
Hiring Fairs across the country in conjunction with the Chamber of
Commerce. American Legion seminars provide expertise to veterans on
constructing resumes and developing interview skills. The American
Legion works to develop translators that can convert military skills
into civilian resumes and link up qualified service members with the
civilian jobs that need them. Through our research and dealings with
Veterans Preference in the veterans community, we have found several
small issues, which is to be expected in a large bureaucracy such as
the federal government.
One of the largest issues we've encountered deals with the
reporting or complaint system that a veteran utilizes once they feel
their benefits have been violated. Currently, when a veteran wishes to
file a complaint, they have multiple options for reporting the possible
infraction. A veteran can submit a claim to the Department of Labor
Veterans Employment and Training Services (DOL VETS). They can report
their complaint to the agency where they applied for the position. They
can even report their concern to the Equal Employment Opportunity
Commission (EEOC). Though having options is hardly ever viewed as a bad
thing, The American Legion is concerned the possibility of not having
one location for complaints to travel through may cause problems.
For example, multiple reporting venues makes it difficult to track
or consolidate information about possible Veterans' Preference
violations. Compartmentalization of the information leads to stove
piping which prevents broad analysis which would be helpful. Logically
speaking, consolidating complaints through a single path makes the most
sense, so if there are many issues with the same agency/office, it will
be easier to recognize and correct, instead of complaints being divided
among several offices.
A secondary problem is illustrated by a recent example reported in
the Federal Times. Sometimes agencies or sections of the government
skirt or circumvent the Veteran' Preference regulations. According to
an article a few weeks ago, ``.The Office of Special Council has
launched allegations at the Export-Import Bank sought to illegally
remove veteran applications from consideration for IT positions within
its office.'' \2\ It is because of cases much like this that The
American Legion believes Congress should conduct an investigation of
all federal agencies and their individual practices of Veteran'
Preference hiring \3\. An investigation of this sort simply aims to
ensure the preference is being applied fairly, and not being avoided or
being rewarded to those who do not deserve it. Veterans' Preference
provides such a strong benefit to both veterans and the government that
The American Legion absolutely believes it is important to investigate
to ensure it is being properly applied and situations such as the
recent problems with the Export-Import Bank do not arise.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\2\ ``Allegations of Export-Import Bank dumping vet applicants
emerge'' - Carten Cordell, Federal Times - March 16, 2016
\3\ Resolution No. 322 ``Support an Investigation of Hiring
Practices in the Federal Government'' - National Convention, Charlotte,
NC - AUG 2014
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Finally, The American Legion is concerned about the potential
impact of a bill currently being considered in the House of
Representatives. H.R. 1964, the Air Traffic Controllers Hiring Act of
2015, as it is currently written, may place another group on the same
level as Veterans' Preference, and this raises warning flags for our
members. According to the legislation, which we understand may be
revised, people who graduate from Collegiate Training Initiative (CTI)
may be given ``preferential consideration,'' just as veterans are. This
may be an unintentional consequence of the legislation, but
nevertheless, The American Legion believes that to be wrong and is
willing to work to ensure the legislation does not damage the effects
of Veterans' Preference. The American Legion's position has always been
and will continue to be in favor of veterans and Veteran' Preference,
and that no other preference should exist on the same level of
preference. Attending or obtaining certain certificates or degrees are
important and should be recognized for what it is that they do, raise
the level of qualifications of a candidate, but this should not replace
or counter Veterans' Preference.
The men and women, regardless of rank, who have served our nation
boldly gave up a large amount of their lives to do so. The reason for
veteran' preference is to reward them and acknowledge that sacrifice
over a civilian who did not take that oath and assist the veteran in
giving them a hand up. The American Legion ``deplores each and every
attempt to degrade, dilute or modify the historical precedence of
giving job eligibility preference to those who are taken from their
communities to serve their country in time of war.'' \4\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\4\ Resolution No. 342 ``Support Veterans Preference in Public
Employment'' - National Convention, Charlotte, NC - AUG 2014
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
The American Legion has and will aggressively continue to support
Veterans' Preference across the federal government. It is our belief
that millions of veterans have served our nation honorably, and
therefore should be rewarded properly and provided this common sense
benefit as thanks for their hard work and sacrifice. As always, The
American Legion thanks the Subcommittee Economic Opportunity for the
opportunity to explain the position of the over 2 million veteran
members of this organization.
For additional information regarding this testimony, please contact
Mr. Matthew J. Shuman at The American Legion's Legislative Division at
(202) 263-5755 or [email protected]

Prepared Statement of Richard Weidman
Good afternoon Mr. Chairman, Ranking Member Takano and members of
the House Subcommittee on Economic Opportunity. On behalf of VVA
National President John Rowan and all of our officers and members, we
thank you for the opportunity for Vietnam Veterans of America (VVA) to
appear here today to share our views on the implementation of Veterans
Preference by the Department of Veterans Affairs as well as across the
federal government.
In our legislative agenda for the 114th Congress, VVA called for
measures to strengthen Veterans' Preference laws, focusing on better
implementation by and accountability of managers. Much of the problem
with veterans' preference is in the implementation. VVA does commend
the current Administration for their focus through the Office of
Personnel Management (OPM) on hiring veterans, particularly young
veterans. These efforts have met with success in many departments and
agencies across the government, and dramatically increased the number
of veterans working for the Federal government for the first time since
President Reagan's second term. The honorable Constance Horner was
Director of OPM. It was her commitment to veterans that spurred her to
force the bureaucracy to do better in regard to honoring veterans'
preference in hiring.
President Obama's issuance of Executive Order (EOP) 13518 on
November 9, 2009 has helped reinforce proper use of the Veterans
Employment Opportunities Act (VEOA), as well as active utilization of
other Federal hiring authorities to bring more veterans into the
workforce. The percentage of veterans in the Federal workforce is now
about a third of all Federal employees. While the initial impetus came
from The White House, Director John Barry was personally and
passionately involved in pushing for more veterans to be hired. The
``Feds Hire Vets'' program has seemed to be of some assistance. The
Council on Veterans Employment established by that same 2009 Order has
also helped a great deal to focus the attention of the departments and
agencies on hiring and retaining veterans.
Despite all of the efforts expended to recruit and hire veterans,
we still hear from young veterans that they cannot wend their way
through the maze to find a job with the Fed. Additionally we hear from
some who were hired and quit after a year or so because they were
``bored'' or ``did not fit in.'' It seems clear to us that those who
come straight from the military into the Fed need a mentor, perhaps an
older veteran, to start learning to negotiate the corporate culture and
procedures at that agency, as well as being able to understand the
feelings and attitudes of the newer veteran.
Setting up a formal orientation and mentoring program for veterans
new to the organization has worked extremely well for many private
employers, such as Prudential. It should definitely be tried in Federal
agencies. Done properly, it will increase retention. Additionally,
managers need to understand that the young veterans just out of the
military are used to handling significant responsibilities, often in
situations of life or death, depending on how well one does their job.
The need to both challenge as well as support these veterans is crucial
to their success, and to the overall success of the Federal entities.
Also part of the VVA legislative priorities is the institution of
contracting with service disabled veteran-owned small businesses that
are veteran preference eligible veteran staffed call centers. The
purpose of these call centers would be to collect reports of violations
of veterans' preference in Federal departments and agencies, Further,
these call centers could be utilized to do a real investigation of each
alleged violation. The current system of having the Director of
Veterans Employment & Training (DVET), United States Department of
Labor receive and investigate all such complaints just does not work
very well.
Additionally, the institution of pro-active reviews of practices
and patterns in the recruitment, hiring, and retention of veterans in
each hiring authority location to the federal workforce would be a
giant stride forward. As this is a new way to approach this, many
details would need to be worked out.
The Disabled Veteran Affirmative Action Program (DVAAP) should be
scrapped. The DVAAP plans for federal entities are never effectively
checked for the actual result against the stated ``goals'' at the end
of each year. This thing serves no purpose except to be ``fig leaf''
for agencies doing nothing or little to hire disabled veterans and
other veterans' preference eligible. Furthermore, veterans are not
another affirmative action group, period.
The main change to the actual VEOA is to delete the word
``knowingly'' fro that section of the law. Nowhere in civil service or
other law does it say that a manager cannot be punished if he/she did
not know they were violating the individual's rights to veterans'
preference. In the 18 years since passage of VEOA the number of
managers reprimanded and otherwise punished for violating veterans'
rights is in the single digits. This is absurd on the face of it.
Thank you for allowing us to share our views on this vital issue
with you here today. I would be pleased to answer any questions.
VIETNAM VETERANS OF AMERICA
Funding Statement
April 20, 2016
The national organization Vietnam Veterans of America (VVA) is a
non-profit veterans' membership organization registered as a 501(c)
(19) with the Internal Revenue Service. VVA is also appropriately
registered with the Secretary of the Senate and the Clerk of the House
of Representatives in compliance with the Lobbying Disclosure Act of
1995.
VVA is not currently in receipt of any federal grant or contract,
other than the routine allocation of office space and associated
resources in VA Regional Offices for outreach and direct services
through its Veterans Benefits Program (Service Representatives). This
is also true of the previous two fiscal years.
For Further Information, Contact: Executive Director of Policy and
Government Affairs, Vietnam Veterans of America, (301) 585-4000,
extension 127

Materials For The Record

REQUESTED BY CONGRESSWOMAN RICE
The President's Council on Veterans Employment (the Council) has
been tasked with carrying out the mission of the President's Veterans
Employment Initiative (as established by Executive Order 13518), which
directs the Federal agencies to enhance their recruitment and promotion
of employment opportunities for veterans within the executive branch.
The Secretaries of Veterans Affairs and Labor act as co-chairs of the
Council, while the Director of the Office of Personnel Management
serves as the vice-chair. On May 4, 2016, the co-chairs and the vice
chair came together to host the eleventh meeting of the Council to
highlight Government-wide progress and the future of the Veterans
Employment Initiative.
At the meeting, current data developments were shared documenting
Federal government efforts in recruiting, hiring, and retaining
veterans. Agencies are rated on their veteran employment performance
using a new Veteran Employment Performance Model which rates agencies
based on four veteran employment metrics: Veteran New Hires, Disabled
Veteran New Hires, Veterans on-board, and Veteran Retention Rates. This
performance model went into effect for FY 2015. The data below was
shared at the Council meeting.

FY 2015 - Agency Veteran Employment Performance
4th QUARTER GROUP RESULTS
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Veteran New Disabled Total
Hires Veteran New Veterans On- Veteran New Non-Veteran
10K Employees -------------- Hires Board Hire New Hire FY-14 Rating FY-15 Rating
---------------------------- Retention Retention
20.7% 10.6% 15.9% Rate Rate
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
4th QUARTER GROUP RESULTS
Education............................................. 11.1% 4.8% 10.7% 79.7% 89.5% NI NI
HUD................................................... 23.4% 14.2% 15.2% 80.8% 85.1% EX EX
NRC................................................... 27.5% 10.4% 21.5% 88.0% 87.0% E EX
NSF................................................... 11.1% 4.2% 9.3% 68.4% 80.4% NI NI
OPM................................................... 25.5% 13.1% 23.3% 71.7% 77.4% EX EX
SBA................................................... 28.5% 16.5% 16.8% 67.2% 83.4% EX EX
USAID................................................. 17.9% 11.0% 14.7% 71.1% 85.3% NI E
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

4th QUARTER GROUP RESULTS
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Veteran New Disabled Total
Hires Veteran New Veterans On- Veteran New Non-Veteran
10K-40K Employees -------------- Hires Board Hire New Hire FY-14 Rating FY-15 Rating
---------------------------- Retention Retention
29.5% 14.7% 17.7% Rate Rate
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
4th QUARTER GROUP RESULTS
DOL................................................... 38.2% 21.3% 21.3% 69.9% 84.4% EX EX
Energy................................................ 35.8% 13.9% 23.8% 81.2% 86.7% EX EX
EPA................................................... 16.2% 8.3% 8.3% 83.9% 87.4% NI NI
GSA................................................... 24.5% 11.3% 21.4% 74.8% 78.8% EX EX
NASA.................................................. 30.7% 16.7% 12.0% 73.2% 70.3% E EX
State***.............................................. 31.8% 16.4% 19.5% 75.4% 85.2% HE EX
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

4th QUARTER GROUP RESULTS
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Veteran New Disabled Total
Hires Veteran New Veterans On- Veteran New Non-Veteran
40K-80K Employees -------------- Hires Board Hire New Hire FY-14 Rating FY-15 Rating
---------------------------- Retention Retention
27.5% 12.0% 20.3% Rate Rate
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
4th QUARTER GROUP RESULTS
DOC................................................... 14.3% 4.8% 12.0% 69.9% 79.6% NI NI
DOI................................................... 16.6% 6.6% 16.8% 71.4% 78.3% NI NI
DOT................................................... 40.1% 16.3% 36.7% 81.4% 82.2% EX EX
SSA................................................... 38.9% 20.3% 15.6% 72.6% 80.7% HE HE
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

4th QUARTER GROUP RESULTS
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Veteran New Disabled Total
Hires Veteran New Veterans On- Veteran New Non-Veteran
80K-250K Employees -------------- Hires Board Hire New Hire FY-14 Rating FY-15 Rating
---------------------------- Retention Retention
18.0% 7.1% 16.8% Rate Rate
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
4th QUARTER GROUP RESULTS
DHS................................................... 27.2% 9.8% 27.9% 76.9% 80.8% HE EX
HHS................................................... 9.1% 4.1% 7.3% 68.3% 77.5% NI NI
Justice............................................... 29.1% 10.0% 25.1% 76.7% 81.9% E EX
Treasury.............................................. 12.7% 6.9% 11.2% 72.0% 85.0% NI NI
USDA.................................................. 12.0% 4.6% 12.4% 66.9% 77.9% NI NI
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

4th QUARTER GROUP RESULTS
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Veteran New Disabled Total
Hires Veteran New Veterans On- Veteran New Non-Veteran
250K Employees -------------- Hires Board Hire New Hire FY-14 Rating FY-15 Rating
---------------------------- Retention Retention
41.6% 19.6% 40.2% Rate Rate
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
4th QUARTER GROUP RESULTS
DoD................................................... 48.3% 17.9% 47.2% 74.3% 77.6% EX EX
VA.................................................... 34.9% 21.3% 33.1% 71.6% 80.0% EX EX
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
RATINGS: Exemplary (EX) Highly Effective (HE) Effective (E) Needs Improvement (NI)
***State Dept. FY 2015 performance rating is based on self-reported data.

[all]