[Congressional Record Volume 142, Number 114 (Tuesday, July 30, 1996)]
[House]
[Pages H8762-H8768]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
VETERANS EMPLOYMENT OPPORTUNITIES ACT OF 1996
Mr. MICA. Mr. Speaker, I move to suspend the rules and pass the bill
(H.R. 3586) to amend title 5, United States Code, to strengthen
veterans' preference, to increase employment opportunities for
veterans, and for other purposes, as amended.
The Clerk read as follows:
H.R. 3586
Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representatives of
the United States of America in Congress assembled,
SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE.
This Act may be cited as the ``Veterans Employment
Opportunities Act of 1996''.
SEC. 2. EQUAL ACCESS FOR VETERANS.
(a) Competitive Service.--Section 3304 of title 5, United
States Code, is amended by adding at the end the following:
``(f)(1) No preference eligible, and no individual (other
than a preference eligible) who has been separated from the
armed forces under honorable conditions after 3 or more years
of active service, shall be denied the opportunity to compete
for an announced vacant position within an agency, in the
competitive service or the excepted service, by reason of--
``(A) not having acquired competitive status; or
``(B) not being an employee of such agency.
``(2) Nothing in this subsection shall prevent an agency
from filling a vacant position (whether by appointment or
otherwise) solely from individuals on a priority placement
list consisting of individuals who have been separated from
the agency due to a reduction in force and surplus employees
(as defined under regulations prescribed by the Office).''.
(b) Civil Service Employment Information.--
(1) Vacant positions.--Section 3327(b) of title 5, United
States Code, is amended by striking ``and'' at the end of
paragraph (1), by redesignating paragraph (2) as paragraph
(3), and by inserting after paragraph (1) the following:
``(2) each vacant position in the agency for which
competition is restricted to individuals having competitive
status or employees of such agency, excluding any position
under paragraph (1), and''.
(2) Additional information.--Section 3327 of title 5,
United States Code, is amended by adding at the end the
following:
``(c) Any notification provided under this section shall,
for all positions under subsection (b)(1) as to which section
3304(f) applies and for all positions under subsection
(b)(2), include a notation as to the applicability of section
3304(f) with respect thereto.
``(d) In consultation with the Secretary of Labor, the
Office shall submit to Congress and the President, no less
frequently than every 2 years, a report detailing, with
respect to the period covered by such report--
``(1) the number of positions listed under this section
during such period;
``(2) the number of preference eligibles and other
individuals described in section 3304(f)(1) referred to such
positions during such period; and
``(3) the number of preference eligibles and other
individuals described in section 3304(f)(1) appointed to such
positions during such period.''.
(c) Governmentwide Lists.--
(1) Vacant positions.--Section 3330(b) of title 5, United
States Code, is amended to read as follows:
``(b) The Office of Personnel Management shall cause to be
established and kept current--
``(1) a comprehensive list of all announcements of vacant
positions (in the competitive service and the excepted
service, respectively) within each agency that are to be
filled by appointment for more than 1 year and for which
applications are being or will soon be accepted from outside
the agency's work force; and
``(2) a comprehensive list of all announcements of vacant
positions within each agency for which applications are being
or will soon be accepted and for which competition is
restricted to individuals having competitive status or
employees of such agency, excluding any position required to
be listed under paragraph (1).''.
(2) Additional information.--Section 3330(c) of title 5,
United States Code, is amended by striking ``and'' at the end
of paragraph (2), by redesignating paragraph (3) as paragraph
(4), and by inserting after paragraph (2) the following:
``(3) for all positions under subsection (b)(1) as to which
section 3304(f) applies and for all positions under
subsection (b)(2), a notation as to the applicability of
section 3304(f) with respect thereto; and''.
(3) Conforming amendment.--Section 3330(d) of title 5,
United States Code, is amended by striking ``The list'' and
inserting ``Each list under subsection (b)''.
SEC. 3. SPECIAL PROTECTIONS FOR PREFERENCE ELIGIBLES IN
REDUCTIONS IN FORCE.
Section 3502 of title 5, United States Code, as amended by
section 1034 of the National Defense Authorization Act for
Fiscal Year 1996 (Public Law 104-106; 110 Stat. 430), is
amended by adding at the end the following:
``(g)(1) A position occupied by a preference eligible shall
not be placed in a single-position competitive level if the
preference eligible is qualified to perform the essential
functions of any other position at the same grade (or
occupational level) in the competitive area. In such cases,
the preference eligible shall be entitled to be placed in
another competitive level for which such preference eligible
is qualified. If the preference eligible is qualified for
more than one competitive level, such preference eligible
shall be placed in the competitive level containing the most
positions.
``(2) For purposes of paragraph (1)--
``(A) a preference eligible shall be considered qualified
to perform the essential functions of a position if, by
reason of experience, training, or education (and, in the
case of a disabled veteran, with reasonable accommodation), a
reasonable person could conclude that the preference eligible
would be able to perform those functions successfully within
a period of 150 days; and
``(B) a preference eligible shall not be considered
unqualified solely because such preference eligible does not
meet the minimum qualification requirements relating to
previous experience in a specified grade (or occupational
level), if any, that are established for such position by the
Office of Personnel Management or the agency.
``(h) In connection with any reduction in force, a
preference eligible whose current or most recent performance
rating is at least fully successful (or the equivalent) shall
have, in addition to such assignment rights as are prescribed
by regulation, the right, in lieu of separation, to be
assigned to any position within the agency conducting the
reduction in force--
``(1) for which such preference eligible is qualified under
subsection (g)(2)--
``(A) that is within the preference eligible's commuting
area and at the same grade (or occupational level) as the
position from which the preference eligible was released, and
that is then occupied by an individual, other than another
preference eligible, who was placed in such position (whether
by appointment or otherwise) within 6 months before the
reduction in force if, within 12 months prior to the date on
which such individual was so placed in such position, such
individual had been employed in the same competitive area as
the preference eligible; or
``(B) that is within the preference eligible's competitive
area and that is then occupied by an individual, other than
another preference eligible, who was placed in such position
(whether by appointment or otherwise) within 6 months before
the reduction in force; or
``(2) for which such preference eligible is qualified that
is within the preference eligible's competitive area and that
is not more than 3 grades (or pay levels) below that of the
position from which the preference eligible was released,
except that, in the case of a preference eligible with a
compensable service-connected disability of 30 percent or
more, this paragraph shall be applied by substituting `5
grades' for `3 grades'.
In the event that a preference eligible is entitled to
assignment to more than 1 position under this subsection, the
agency shall assign the preference eligible to any such
position requiring no reduction (or, if there is no such
position, the least reduction) in basic
[[Page H8763]]
pay. A position shall not, with respect to a preference
eligible, be considered to satisfy the requirements of
paragraph (1) or (2), as applicable, if it does not last for
at least 12 months following the date on which such
preference eligible is assigned to such position under this
subsection.
``(i) A preference eligible may challenge the
classification of any position to which the preference
eligible asserts assignment rights (as provided by, or
prescribed by regulations described in, subsection (h)) in an
action before the Merit Systems Protection Board.
``(j)(1) Not later than 3 months after the date of the
enactment of this subsection, each Executive agency shall
establish an agencywide priority placement program to
facilitate employment placement for employees who--
``(A)(i) are scheduled to be separated from service due to
a reduction in force under--
``(I) regulations prescribed under this section; or
``(II) procedures established under section 3595; or
``(ii) are separated from service due to such a reduction
in force; and
``(B)(i) have received a rating of at least fully
successful (or the equivalent) as the last performance rating
of record used for retention purposes; or
``(ii) occupy positions excluded from a performance
appraisal system by law, regulation, or administrative action
taken by the Office of Personnel Management.
``(2)(A) Each agencywide priority placement program under
this subsection shall include provisions under which a vacant
position shall not (except as provided in this paragraph or
any other statute providing the right of reemployment to any
individual) be filled by the appointment or transfer of any
individual from outside of that agency (other than an
individual described in subparagraph (B)) if--
``(i) there is then available any individual described in
subparagraph (B) who is qualified for the position; and
``(ii) the position--
``(I) is at the same grade or pay level (or the equivalent)
or not more than 3 grades (or grade intervals) below that of
the position last held by such individual before placement in
the new position;
``(II) is within the same commuting area as the
individual's last-held position (as referred to in subclause
(I)) or residence; and
``(III) has the same type of work schedule (whether full-
time, part-time, or intermittent) as the position last held
by the individual.
``(B) For purposes of an agencywide priority placement
program, an individual shall be considered to be described in
this subparagraph if such individual--
``(i)(I) is an employee of such agency who is scheduled to
be separated, as described in paragraph (1)(A)(i); or
``(II) is an individual who became a former employee of
such agency as a result of a separation, as described in
paragraph (1)(A)(ii), excluding any individual who separated
voluntarily under subsection (f); and
``(ii) satisfies clause (i) or (ii) of paragraph (1)(B).
``(3)(A) If after a reduction in force the agency has no
positions of any type within the local commuting areas
specified in this subsection, the individual may designate a
different local commuting area where the agency has
continuing positions in order to exercise reemployment rights
under this subsection. An agency may determine that such
designations are not in the interest of the Government for
the purpose of paying relocation expenses under subchapter II
of chapter 57.
``(B) At its option, an agency may administratively extend
reemployment rights under this subsection to include other
local commuting areas.
``(4)(A) In selecting employees for positions under this
subsection, the agency shall place qualified present and
former employees in retention order by veterans' preference
subgroup and tenure group.
``(B) An agency may not pass over a qualified present or
former employee to select an individual in a lower veterans'
preference subgroup within the tenure group, or in a lower
tenure group.
``(C) Within a subgroup, the agency may select a qualified
present or former employee without regard to the individual's
total creditable service.
``(5) An individual is eligible for reemployment priority
under this subsection for 2 years from the effective date of
the reduction in force from which the individual will be, or
has been, separated under this section or section 3595, as
the case may be.
``(6) An individual loses eligibility for reemployment
priority under this subsection when the individual--
``(A) requests removal in writing;
``(B) accepts or declines a bona fide offer under this
subsection or fails to accept such an offer within the period
of time allowed for such acceptance, or
``(C) separates from the agency before being separated
under this section or section 3595, as the case may be.
A present or former employee who declines a position with a
representative rate (or equivalent) that is less than the
rate of the position from which the individual was separated
under this section retains eligibility for positions with a
higher representative rate up to the rate of the individual's
last position.
``(7) Whenever more than one individual is qualified for a
position under this subsection, the agency shall select the
most highly qualified individual, subject to paragraph (4).
``(8) The Office of Personnel Management shall issue
regulations to implement this subsection.''.
SEC. 4. IMPROVED REDRESS FOR VETERANS.
(a) In General.--Subchapter I of chapter 33 of title 5,
United States Code, is amended by adding at the end the
following:
``Sec. 3330a. Administrative redress
``(a)(1) Any preference eligible or other individual
described in section 3304(f)(1) who alleges that an agency
has violated such individual's rights under any statute or
regulation relating to veterans' preference, or any right
afforded such individual by section 3304(f), may file a
complaint with the Secretary of Labor.
``(2) A complaint under this subsection must be filed
within 60 days after the date of the alleged violation, and
the Secretary shall process such complaint in accordance with
sections 4322 (a) through (e)(1) and 4326 of title 38.
``(b)(1) If the Secretary of Labor is unable to resolve the
complaint within 60 days after the date on which it is filed,
the complainant may elect to appeal the alleged violation to
the Merit Systems Protection Board in accordance with such
procedures as the Merit Systems Protection Board shall
prescribe, except that in no event may any such appeal be
brought--
``(A) before the 61st day after the date on which the
complaint is filed under subsection (a); or
``(B) later than 15 days after the date on which the
complainant receives notification from the Secretary of Labor
under section 4322(e)(1) of title 38.
``(2) An appeal under this subsection may not be brought
unless--
``(A) the complainant first provides written notification
to the Secretary of Labor of such complainant's intention to
bring such appeal; and
``(B) appropriate evidence of compliance with subparagraph
(A) is included (in such form and manner as the Merit Systems
Protection Board may prescribe) with the notice of appeal
under this subsection.
``(3) Upon receiving notification under paragraph (2)(A),
the Secretary of Labor shall not continue to investigate or
further attempt to resolve the complaint to which such
notification relates.
``(c) This section shall not be construed to prohibit a
preference eligible from appealing directly to the Merit
Systems Protection Board from any action which is appealable
to the Board under any other law, rule, or regulation, in
lieu of administrative redress under this section.
``Sec. 3330b. Judicial redress
``(a) In lieu of continuing the administrative redress
procedure provided under section 3330a(b), a preference
eligible or other individual described in section 3304(f)(1)
may elect, in accordance with this section, to terminate
those administrative proceedings and file an action with the
appropriate United States district court not later than 60
days after the date of the election.
``(b) An election under this section may not be made--
``(1) before the 121st day after the date on which the
appeal is filed with the Merit Systems Protection Board under
section 3330a(b); or
``(2) after the Merit Systems Protection Board has issued a
judicially reviewable decision on the merits of the appeal.
``(c) An election under this section shall be made, in
writing, in such form and manner as the Merit Systems
Protection Board shall by regulation prescribe. The election
shall be effective as of the date on which it is received,
and the administrative proceeding to which it relates shall
terminate immediately upon the receipt of such election.
``Sec. 3330c. Remedy
``(a) If the Merit Systems Protection Board (in a
proceeding under section 3330a) or a court (in a proceeding
under section 3330b) determines that an agency has violated a
right described in section 3330a, the Board or court (as the
case may be) shall order the agency to comply with such
provisions and award compensation for any loss of wages or
benefits suffered by the individual by reason of the
violation involved. If the Board or court determines that
such violation was willful, it shall award an amount equal to
backpay as liquidated damages.
``(b) A preference eligible or other individual described
in section 3304(f)(1) who prevails in an action under section
3330a or 3330b shall be awarded reasonable attorney fees,
expert witness fees, and other litigation expenses.''.
(b) Clerical Amendment.--The table of sections at the
beginning of chapter 33 of title 5, United States Code, is
amended by adding after the item relating to section 3330 the
following:
``3330a. Administrative redress.
``3330b. Judicial redress.
``3330c. Remedy.''.
SEC. 5. EXTENSION OF VETERANS' PREFERENCE.
(a) Amendment to Title 5, United States Code.--Paragraph
(3) of section 2108 of title 5, United States Code, is
amended by striking ``the Federal Bureau of Investigation and
Drug Enforcement Administration Senior Executive Service, or
the General Accounting Office;'' and inserting ``or the
Federal Bureau of Investigation and Drug Enforcement
Administration Senior Executive Service;''.
[[Page H8764]]
(b) Amendments to Title 3, United States Code.--
(1) In general.--Chapter 2 of title 3, United States Code,
is amended by adding at the end the following:
``Sec. 115. Veterans' preference
``(a) Subject to subsection (b), appointments under
sections 105, 106, and 107 shall be made in accordance with
section 2108, and sections 3309 through 3312, of title 5.
``(b) Subsection (a) shall not apply to any appointment to
a position the rate of basic pay for which is at least equal
to the minimum rate established for positions in the Senior
Executive Service under section 5382 of title 5 and the
duties of which are comparable to those described in section
3132(a)(2) of such title or to any other position if, with
respect to such position, the President makes certification--
``(1) that such position is--
``(A) a confidential or policy-making position; or
``(B) a position for which political affiliation or
political philosophy is otherwise an important qualification;
and
``(2) that any individual selected for such position is
expected to vacate the position at or before the end of the
President's term (or terms) of office.
Each individual appointed to a position described in the
preceding sentence as to which the expectation described in
paragraph (2) applies shall be notified as to such
expectation, in writing, at the time of appointment to such
position.''.
(2) Clerical amendment.--The table of sections at the
beginning of chapter 2 of title 3, United States Code, is
amended by adding at the end the following:
``115. Veterans' preference.''.
(c) Legislative Branch Appointments.--
(1) Definitions.--For the purposes of this subsection, the
terms ``employing office'', ``covered employee'', and
``Board'' shall each have the meaning given such term by
section 101 of the Congressional Accountability Act of 1995
(2 U.S.C. 1301).
(2) Rights and protections.--The rights and protections
established under section 2108, sections 3309 through 3312,
and subchapter I of chapter 35, of title 5, United States
Code, shall apply to covered employees.
(3) Remedies.--
(A) In general.--The remedy for a violation of paragraph
(2) shall be such remedy as would be appropriate if awarded
under applicable provisions of title 5, United States Code,
in the case of a violation of the relevant corresponding
provision (referred to in paragraph (2)) of such title.
(B) Procedure.--The procedure for consideration of alleged
violations of paragraph (2) shall be the same as apply under
section 401 of the Congressional Accountability Act of 1995
(and the provisions of law referred to therein) in the case
of an alleged violation of part A of title II of such Act
(4) Regulations to implement subsection.--
(A) In general.--The Board shall, pursuant to section 304
of the Congressional Accountability Act of 1995 (2 U.S.C.
1384), issue regulations to implement this subsection.
(B) Agency regulations.--The regulations issued under
subparagraph (A) shall be the same as the most relevant
substantive regulations (applicable with respect to the
executive branch) promulgated to implement the statutory
provisions referred to in paragraph (2) except insofar as the
Board may determine, for good cause shown and stated together
with the regulation, that a modification of such regulations
would be more effective for the implementation of the rights
and protections under this subsection.
(C) Coordination.--The regulations issued under
subparagraph (A) shall be consistent with section 225 of the
Congressional Accountability Act of 1995 (2 U.S.C. 1361).
(5) Applicability.--Notwithstanding any other provision of
this subsection, the term ``covered employee'' shall not, for
purposes of this subsection, include an employee--
(A) whose appointment is made by the President with the
advice and consent of the Senate;
(B) whose appointment is made by a Member of Congress or by
a committee or subcommittee of either House of Congress; or
(C) who is appointed to a position, the duties of which are
equivalent to those of a Senior Executive Service position
(within the meaning of section 3132(a)(2) of title 5, United
States Code).
(6) Effective date.--Paragraphs (2) and (3) shall be
effective as of the effective date of the regulations under
paragraph (4).
(d) Judicial Branch Appointments.--
(1) In general.--Subject to paragraph (2), appointments to
positions in the judicial branch of the Government shall be
made in accordance with section 2108, and sections 3309
through 3312, of title 5, United States Code.
(2) Reductions in force.--Subject to paragraph (2),
reductions in force in the judicial branch of the Government
shall provide preference eligibles with protections
substantially similar to those provided under subchapter I of
chapter 35 of title 5, United States Code.
(3) Exclusions.--Paragraphs (1) and (2) shall not apply
to--
(A) an appointment made by the President, with the advice
and consent of the Senate;
(B) an appointment as a judicial officer;
(C) an appointment as a law clerk or secretary to a justice
or judge of the United States; or
(D) an appointment to a position, the duties of which are
equivalent to those of a Senior Executive Service position
(within the meaning of section 3132(a)(2) of title 5, United
States Code).
(4) Redress procedures.--The Judicial Conference of the
United States shall prescribe regulations under which redress
procedures (substantially similar to the procedures
established by the amendments made by section 4) shall be
available for alleged violations of any rights provided by
this subsection.
(5) Definitions.--For purposes of this subsection--
(A) the term ``judicial officer'' means a justice, judge,
or magistrate judge listed in subparagraph (A), (B), (F), or
(G) of section 376(a)(1) of title 28, United States Code; and
(B) the term ``justice or judge of the United States'' has
the meaning given such term by section 451 of such title 28.
SEC. 6. VETERANS' PREFERENCE REQUIRED FOR REDUCTIONS IN FORCE
IN THE FEDERAL AVIATION ADMINISTRATION.
Section 347(b) of the Department of Transportation and
Related Agencies Appropriations Act, 1996 (109 Stat. 460) is
amended by striking ``and'' at the end of paragraph (6), by
striking the period at the end of paragraph (7) and inserting
``; and'', and by adding at the end the following:
``(8) sections 3501-3504, as such sections relate to
veterans' preference.''.
SEC. 7. DEFINITIONAL AMENDMENT.
Subparagraph (A) of section 2108(1) of title 5, United
States Code, is amended by inserting ``during a military
operation in a qualified hazardous duty area (within the
meaning of the first 2 sentences of section 1(b) of Public
Law 104-117) and in accordance with requirements that may be
prescribed in regulations of the Secretary of Defense,''
after ``for which a campaign badge has been authorized,''.
The SPEAKER pro tempore. Pursuant to the rule, the gentleman from
Florida [Mr. Mica] and the gentleman from Virginia [Mr. Moran] each
will control 20 minutes.
The Chair recognizes the gentleman from Florida [Mr. Mica].
Mr. MICA. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume.
Mr. Speaker, as chairman of the House Subcommittee on Civil Service,
one of my major concerns during my tenure has been the problem of the
status of veterans in our Federal work force and their treatment.
Because of that concern, our subcommittee held a hearing on April 30,
1996, to examine the status of veterans' preference in the Federal work
force.
Unfortunately, Mr. Speaker, that hearing revealed ample reason for
all of us to be concerned about the state of veterans' preference,
particularly in our Federal workplace. The testimony at our hearing
showed that veterans' preference in the Federal work force is often
ignored or circumvented. Its continued viability is in fact threatened
by several recent developments, most notably the introduction of single
person competition during reductions in force in our Federal
Government.
But perhaps most important, Mr. Speaker, the hearing revealed a
widespread agreement in the veterans' community that veterans do not
have an adequate redress mechanism. In fact, both the American Legion
and the Disabled American Veterans identified this as the No. 1
problem, the major problem Congress should solve.
As the House considers this legislation, Mr. Speaker, it is important
for us to remember the veterans' preference is not a gift. It is in
fact a right and an opportunity that our veterans deserve. Congress has
a moral obligation to recognize the sacrifices of the men and women of
our Armed Forces who have served their country. We called upon them to
serve in war and defend this Nation. Now we offer them this opportunity
to serve their Nation in peace.
{time} 1300
This bill, the Veterans' Employment Opportunity Act of 1996, is
necessary to ensure that this Nation fulfills that moral obligation.
That promise of veterans' preference is indeed a reality in our Federal
workplace. It is also the product of a lot of hard work by Members on
both sides of the aisle, and this in fact is a truly bipartisan effort.
I want to take a moment and thank, first of all, the distinguished
gentleman from Virginia [Mr. Moran], who is the ranking member on the
Subcommittee on Civil Service of the Committee on Government Reform and
Oversight, for his hard work and efforts in making this bill a reality.
I would also especially like to thank my good friend, the gentleman
from Indiana, the Honorable Steve Buyer,
[[Page H8765]]
chairman of the Subcommittee on Education, Training, Employment and
Housing of the Committee on Veterans' Affairs. He and his staff have
worked very hard and long on this bill and cooperated with our
subcommittee, and I appreciate their many valuable contributions as
well as the outstanding leadership that he and his subcommittee have
provided on this and other legislation relating to veterans' issues.
I also want to take a moment and thank Chairman Stump of the
Committee on Veterans' Affairs. The gentleman from Arizona has been
outstanding in both his cooperation and leadership of all veterans'
issues.
I also want to pay particular attention and due credit to the
gentleman from Pennsylvania, Mr. Jon Fox. Mr. Fox has been a leader in
veterans' legislation, particularly the veterans' preference
legislation, and in fact wanted to extend the provisions of this act
beyond what we are doing today. I give him full credit.
Mr. Speaker, I would also just take a personal moment and recognize
my brother, who served on the other side of the aisle for 10 years on
the Veterans' Committee. Dan Mica showed his dedication to veterans.
Part of the commitment of both of the Mica brothers is that 24 years
ago this month our father died in a crowded veterans' hospital, so we
both have a deep commitment to seeing that our veterans are not only
remembered, but also that we honor the rights and obligations that they
are due.
Mr. Speaker, before I address some of the provisions of this bill in
detail, I would like to give a thumbnail sketch of what this bill does
for veterans. This bill does in fact provide veterans with an
effective, user-friendly redress system. It extends veterans'
preference to certain jobs in the legislative branch, also in the
judiciary branch, and also at the White House.
This bill removes artificial barriers that often bar our service men
and women from competing for Federal jobs. These individuals should be
able to compete for jobs for which they qualify, just like other
Federal employees. This bill provides enhanced protections to veterans
in a reduction in force. This legislation requires Federal agencies to
establish priority placement programs for employees affected by a RIF,
or reduction in force. Federal agencies must give veterans' preference
when rehiring employees.
This legislation also requires the FAA to apply veterans' preference
in any reduction in force, and this legislation provides veterans'
preference for service in Bosnia, Croatia, and Macedonia while it is a
qualified hazardous duty area, by definition.
Mr. Speaker, those are some of the provisions of our bill. I am
pleased to present this legislation to the House, and I reserve the
balance of my time.
Mr. MORAN. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume.
Mr. Speaker, I rise in support of this bill, H.R. 3586. The goal of
our veterans' preference laws is very simple. We want to afford
individuals who have served our country in times of war an opportunity
to continue their public service through Federal employment. Veterans'
preference does not entitle a veteran to a Federal job but, rather, it
gives him or her an advantage in seeking employment. This has always
been a bipartisan goal and it is supported by the Congress and the
White House.
It is in this bipartisan spirit that the gentleman from Florida [Mr.
Mica] and I have brought forward this bill. Since 1865 the Federal
Government has been a leader in offering job opportunities to veterans.
This has been true regardless of who has been in the White House.
As a percentage of the work force, there are more veterans in the
Federal work force today than there are in the private work force.
There is also a higher representation of disabled veterans and a higher
representation of veterans who are 30 percent or more disabled in the
Federal work force.
Since the Subcommittee on Civil Service of the Committee on
Government Reform and Oversight began work on this legislation 3 months
ago, we have had some criticism. I do not think that the criticism that
was directed at this administration is justified by the facts.
While it is true that the absolute number of veterans in the Federal
work force is declining, it is also true that this trend began in 1984.
The reduction in the number of federally employed veterans does not
represent any insidious effort by any administration to diminish
veterans' preference, but it reflects the simple fact that the largest
group of veterans, those from World War II and the Korean War, are now
ready for retirement.
More than 59 percent of all veterans in this country are between 55
and 64. The number of Americans who served in Vietnam, Grenada, Panama,
and the Persian Gulf simply are not large enough to replace their
predecessors. We do not have to look farther than the U.S. Senate to
see the example of a World War II veteran retiring and replaced by a
nonveteran. It is happening all over.
Despite the absolute decrease in the number of veterans, it should be
said that the Clinton administration has done an excellent job in
recruiting veterans. The percentage of veterans in the Federal work
force declined throughout the 1980's, but it stabilized since President
Clinton was elected. In fact, the percentages of veterans as new hires
is actually increasing. Since 1992, the percentage of veterans hired
has gone from 23.6 percent of new hires to 33.3 percent. One out of
every three new hires is a veteran.
But the Federal Government is not hiring, it is firing. We are
downsizing. Therefore, the focus of veterans' preference has shifted
toward ways to protect veterans during a RIF. The focus now is how to
give veterans the opportunity to retain their existing Federal jobs
when their agency and the Federal Government as a whole is cutting
employment.
Again, this is not an entitlement that we are passing today. We do
not intend to ensure that no veteran ever gets riffed. Rather, this
legislation contains a series of protections that give veterans an
advantage over other Federal employees in retaining their jobs. This
legislation closes a number of loopholes through which agencies might
try to circumvent the current veterans' preference laws.
The bill allows veterans and those who have served in the military
the opportunity to compete for a greater number of existing Federal
jobs. The bill also gives veterans greater protections in RIF's. It
seeks to prevent agencies from manipulating Federal RIF laws to
unfairly, improperly target veterans.
While it is important to remember that none of the current
flexibilities have ever actually been used to target veterans, in fact,
veterans have disproportionately benefited from the Clinton
administration's use of flexible hiring and RIF, some in the veterans'
community have expressed concerns. So this bill addresses their
concerns and ensures that in the future the Clinton administration will
maintain its commitment to veterans.
The bill also gives veterans a forum for redress if they believe that
their veterans' preference rights have been violated. This new appeals
process is more generous than that enjoyed by any other Federal
employee and is built around the popular and very successful Uniformed
Services Employment and Reemployment Rights Act of 1994. The acronym is
USERRA law. It has been working well and we are going to duplicate it.
Finally, the legislation extends for the first time veterans'
preference to the nonpolitical jobs in the White House, the Congress,
and the judiciary. I had a number of concerns with the legislation as
originally drafted. I wanted to ensure that we do not unduly impede the
operations of the agencies in getting the most qualified people as we
attempt to close loopholes in veterans' preference, but downsizing is
always difficult and only can be done correctly if Congress grants the
agency a high degree of flexibility.
I also wanted to ensure that the redress system was fair and
effective. The last thing we need is an overly burdensome and
complicated redress system that encourages frivolous and meritless
appeals. No one can be served rightly by such a system.
The chairman of the subcommittee and I have worked closely on this
legislation. We have made some significant improvements to the original
bill. These changes do not weaken the bill but, rather, they ensure
that it will work and that our goals will be administratively
achievable. These consensus modifications have been incorporated in the
bipartisan substitute offered in
[[Page H8766]]
committee and the manager's amendment which will be offered here on the
floor.
We could not, however, agree on two major amendments offered for
inclusion in the manager's amendment. While I appreciate the spirit in
which these amendments were offered, I could not accept any proposal
that would have watered down the preference that is enjoyed by those
who actually served in the Persian Gulf war or reservists who
experienced combat.
In addition, I could not accept any amendment that would worsen the
already complicated and overly burdensome Federal appeals process.
Again, I appreciate Chairman Mica's leadership in bringing this
legislation to the floor, and I appreciate his willingness to continue
to work on this issue in a bipartisan and a constructive manner.
Mr. Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.
Mr. MICA. Mr. Speaker, I yield 2 minutes to the distinguished
gentleman from Arizona [Mr. Stump], chairman of the Committee on
Veterans' Affairs.
(Mr. STUMP asked and was given permission to revise and extend his
remarks.)
Mr. STUMP. Mr. Speaker, I thank the gentleman for yielding time to
me.
Mr. Speaker, I would like to congratulate the subcommittee chairman,
the gentleman from Florida, Mr. Mica, and the ranking member, the
gentleman from Virginia, Jim Moran, for bringing this important bill to
the floor. Most people have classified this bill as being the best for
veterans' employment probably since the 1940's.
As we reorganize government to run in a more businesslike and cost-
effective manner, veterans need to receive the protection they are
entitled to because of their service. The provisions of this bill will
bring veterans' employment enforcement into the sunshine of public
scrutiny and make it easier for veterans to obtain justice.
I strongly urge my colleagues to support H.R. 3586.
Mr. MORAN. Mr. Speaker, it is my honor to yield such time as he may
consume to the gentleman from Mississippi, the Honorable Major General
``Sonny'' Montgomery, the representative of America's veterans.
(Mr. MONTGOMERY asked and was given permission to revise and extend
his remarks.)
Mr. MONTGOMERY. Mr. Speaker, I do not know what to say, but I want to
thank the gentleman from Virginia for his kind remarks, and for
yielding me this time.
Mr. Speaker, H.R. 3586 is a bill that would enhance veterans'
employment opportunities in the Federal Government. Eligible veterans
seeking Federal jobs would be able to compete for jobs that are now
closed to them. Those veterans covered by the veterans' preference who
already work for the Federal Government would, for the first time, have
access to an effective appeals system if they believe their preference
rights have been violated.
This bill brings together the efforts of all members and staff of the
Civil Service Committee, the Office of Personnel Management, and
several veterans' service organizations.
Mr. Speaker, I want to thank the gentleman from Virginia [Mr. Moran]
and the gentleman from Florida [Mr. Mica] for their hard work and their
subcommittees' work. The gentleman's brother did serve on our committee
for many years. I thank the gentlemen on behalf of our Nation's
veterans.
Mr. Speaker, I urge my colleagues to support this legislation.
Mr. MICA. Mr. Speaker, it is my pleasure to yield 3 minutes to the
distinguished gentleman from New York [Mr. Solomon], the chairman of
the Committee on Rules and a real friend of veterans of this Nation.
Mr. SOLOMON. I thank the gentleman for yielding time to me, Mr.
Speaker, and I also want to commend him and the gentleman from Virginia
[Mr. Moran], the gentleman for Arizona [Mr. Stump], the gentleman from
Mississippi [Mr. Montgomery], and the gentleman from Indiana [Mr.
Buyer].
Mr. Speaker, let me just say to the chairman of the subcommittee that
I served with his brother. He and I came here together. He was from the
other side of the aisle, but I can say he was an outstanding member. He
stood up and fought for the veterans of this Nation. I also served with
him on the Committee on Foreign Affairs for 10 years as well, and he
was an outstanding member.
Mr. Speaker, let me say there are some disturbing trends going on in
this country and within this very Government with regard to veterans'
employment. It is hard for me to believe and impossible to understand,
but there is even more proof that veterans are being discriminated
against when it comes to finding jobs. If Members do not believe it,
just go out and ask any number of them.
That is why this bill is so terribly important. It provides some real
teeth to the veterans' preference laws when it comes to hiring, when it
comes to reductions in force, and promotions within the Federal
Government. I commend the chairman of the subcommittee, the gentleman
from Florida, Chairman Mica, for taking the time to recognize these
real problems.
By defining failure to comply with these laws as a prohibited
personnel practice, managers and supervisors who hire and fire
throughout this Government will fully understand that this Congress is
committed to helping our veterans readjust and reenter civilian life.
Not only that, but this Government will finally have the added benefit
of capitalizing on the invaluable service and experience American
veterans have to offer.
I am also pleased because this bill will apply these veterans'
preference laws to hiring within the White House and this Congress as
well. I think we can all agree that the perspective of veterans is
underrepresented these days. That is why we fought so hard to obtain
the Department of Veterans' Affairs as a Cabinet-level secretary, to
sit there next to the President when we are discussing these terribly
vital issues.
Again, I want to commend the chairman for bringing this vital
legislation to the floor. It is badly needed. One more time, I will
just say that not only do veterans sacrifice when they put on that
uniform, but they suffer financially as well. They are always 4 years
behind their peers going to college, stepping into the civilian work
force, and all through life they are penalized for that. This simply
gives them a job preference to help them catch up a little bit. That is
why it is so terribly important. I commend the gentlemen for bringing
this to the floor.
{time} 1315
Mr. MORAN. Mr. Speaker, I yield such time as he may consume to the
gentleman from California [Mr. Filner], from the heartland of America's
veterans who has fought his way into the hearts of all those veterans
in his district.
Mr. FILNER. Mr. Speaker, I rise in strong support of H.R. 3586, the
Veterans' Employment Opportunities Act of 1996. This bill would broaden
and strengthen veterans' preference in Federal employment, and I
congratulate John Mica, chairman of the Government Reform Subcommittee
on Civil Service, and Jim Moran, the ranking member on that
subcommittee, for developing this measure.
For too long our veterans have not had an effective means of redress
when they believe their rights under civil service law have been
violated. I am particularly pleased that section 4 of H.R. 3586 would
correct this problem. I know that representatives from several of the
veterans' service organizations, and Office of Personnel Management
staff, helped design the appeal mechanism in H.R. 3586, and I want to
thank all of them for their good, creative work on this issue.
It is important to point out that the civil service system has worked
very well for veterans in recent years. For example, an average of 18.5
percent of new fulltime hires were veterans during fiscal years 1990,
1991, and 1992. During fiscal years 1993, 1994, and 1995, that figure
increased by more than 50 percent to 31.1 percent. Nonetheless, even
the best, most supportive system can be improved, and I urge my
colleagues to support H.R. 3586.
Mr. MICA. Mr. Speaker, I yield 2 minutes to the distinguished
gentleman from Virginia [Mr. Davis], also a member of our subcommittee
and chairman of the Subcommittee on the District of Columbia of the
Committee on Government Reform and Oversight.
Mr. DAVIS. I thank my friend for yielding me this time.
[[Page H8767]]
Mr. Speaker, I want to thank the gentleman from Florida [Mr. Mica]
and the gentleman from Virginia [Mr. Moran] for getting this bill in
shape to bring it to the floor. This gives equal and expanded access
for Federal jobs to veterans. It provides veterans who have been
honorably discharged after 3 years equal access to compete for vacant
positions. Such has not been the case in the past.
I think President Clinton put it well in his Memorial Day address
this year at Arlington National Cemetery when he said: ``let us also
remember to honor those who served in times of peace, who preserve the
peace, protect our interests and project our values. Though they are
the best-trained, best-equipped military in the world, they, too face
their share of dangers.''
This legislation in section 2 will provide for those who are
honorably discharged after 3 years of service that they cannot be
prevented from competing for Government jobs because they do not have
status or are nonemployees of the hiring agency.
This also removes artificial barriers that bar preference eligibles
from competing for Federal jobs. It extends veterans preference to
nonpolitical jobs at the White House and in the legislative and
judicial branches.
It is important that we here set the example in the legislative
branch and at the White House as well for the same kind of rules that
we are applying throughout the Federal bureaucracy. It requires OPM to
create and maintain a comprehensive list of all vacant position
announcements inside and outside the employing agency.
There are also some special protections for veterans built into this
when agencies are conducting reductions in force. This prevents
agencies from stripping veterans of their preference during a RIF. It
prohibits agencies from placing preference eligibles in single-position
competitive levels. It provides enhanced assignment rights for
preference eligibles, and it requires the Federal Aviation
Administration to apply veterans preference in a reduction in force.
Finally, for the first time this establishes an effective user-
friendly redress system for veterans who believe their rights have been
violated. There is one thing we heard in the testimony, that the
current system is not working, it is not operating. I think the
veterans groups have been working for years to get Congress to
establish this system. This year under the leadership of the gentleman
from Florida, Chairman Mica, we have brought it to the floor. I rise in
support.
Mr. MICA. Mr. Speaker, I yield 3 minutes to the gentleman from
Indiana [Mr. Buyer], the distinguished chairman of the Subcommittee on
Education, Training, Employment and Housing of the Committee on
Veterans' Affairs who has been a national leader for veterans.
Mr. BUYER. Mr. Speaker, I want to thank the chairman personally.
There has been work from my subcommittee and his subcommittee on this
issue. I want to congratulate the chairman; also Mr. Moran, the ranking
member; and all members of the subcommittee for what I view are
magnificent works for this very important piece of legislation.
Mr. Speaker, I had the honor of testifying before the chairman's
committee. I am doubly pleased that some of the points brought out from
the hearing are in fact in this bill. It was a joy to work with the
chairman.
Mr. Speaker, the gentleman from Arizona [Mr. Stump], the chairman of
the Committee on Veterans' Affairs, has already addressed some of the
important provisions with regard to discriminated or aggrieved
veterans, they need a recourse for their grievances, and that of a new
administrative and judicial method for veterans to pursue their
employment claims.
I also want to lay out some facts. I know that the gentleman from
Virginia [Mr. Moran] had said that some of those criticisms with regard
to the administration are unfounded.
To those who feel that veterans do not need protections provided to
them in this bill, let me just quote an internal memo from Postmaster
General Mr.. Marvin Runyon to his Board of Governors. Mr. Runyon stated
that veterans preference will ``have a detrimental impact on the Postal
Service.'' It will ``tie our hands''; and it would ``be costly and make
our personnel decisions more difficult and onerous.''
Finally, recognizing the average American's support for veterans, he
says, ``This is a difficult issue to oppose publicly, especially in an
election year.''
That is the Postmaster General. We could go down the line, I guess,
perhaps, and talk about others.
The Postmaster, though, almost got it right, but I would offer this:
I would say that this is an issue that should never be opposed, whether
it is an election year or not. Veterans preference must remain the
cornerstone of Federal employment simply because it is the right thing
to do and it is an earned benefit. Veterans preference knows no color
or gender or ethnic origin, whether a person is a Christian, a Jew, a
Muslim, or even an atheist. It is based on what is becoming a novel
idea in the country, and it should not be, but a willingness to
sacrifice one's life for the country.
I challenge anyone to point out a more appropriate group of citizens
to receive some small advantage in securing and maintaining Federal
employment. This bill will do much to reverse what I call a growing
antiveteran culture among the bureaucrats.
There is no doubt that women and minorities have long suffered
employment discrimination in both the Federal and private sector. I am
proud to note that our military forces have been in the forefront of
promoting women and minorities among all ranks. But it is time for
Federal hiring managers to put veterans first and stop balancing the
scales of the goals of diversity on the backs of veterans.
I would also note that some statistics were quoted for 1990, 1991,
and 1992 and we are saying, we have increased veterans hiring in 1993,
1994, and 1995. I think America should recognize that that was over the
same time period that we brought down our military forces by over 27
percent. Let us be careful in the cheerleading.
Mr. Speaker, I want to thank both gentlemen for their work on this
bill. It is a very good bill.
Mr. MORAN. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume to
respond to the gentleman's points.
As I said in my comments, this should not be a political issue. There
is bipartisan support for this bill as there always has been for
veterans preference and veterans benefits. The point was made that Mr.
Runyon, the head of the Postal Service, had criticisms of this bill.
But I would inform the gentleman from Indiana that Mr. Runyon is not a
presidential appointee. He is not a Clinton appointee. There is no
Clinton appointee who has said anything of the like.
The reality is that the decline in veterans preferential hiring
occurred during the 1980's. Since the gentleman has brought the issue
up, since the Clinton administration took over, it has increased from
26 percent to 33 percent. Those are facts. But the major, overwhelming
fact is that there simply are not as many veterans around, the average
age is 59, for obvious reasons, because that is when most people fought
in World War II and the Korean War; so you are going to have a decline.
What matters is the percentage of new hires. Since the Clinton
administration took over, one out of every three new hires is a
veteran.
I just do not think we can support those numbers. I feel compelled to
take some issue with the point that the gentleman attempted to make.
Mr. Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.
Mr. MICA. Mr. Speaker, I yield 1 minute to the gentleman from Indiana
[Mr. Buyer].
Mr. BUYER. Mr. Speaker, just to respond to my colleague from
Virginia, I lay the blame for a lot of this at the feet of a culture
within the bureaucracy, whether it is a political appointee or not a
political appointee. That is what this bill is trying to get at.
I do recall in the hearing in testimony before the gentleman that
there were only 4 percent of the hirings of veterans in the Executive
Office of the President. When the President makes a decision for powers
and influence of positions and they are going not to veterans, then I
have a concern and a fear of what that means down range into the
bureaucratic culture.
I lay the blame at the bureaucracies, whether it is a political
appointee or not. I think this is a good bill, and I appreciate the
work on the bill by the gentleman from Virginia [Mr. Moran].
[[Page H8768]]
Mr. MORAN. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume,
just to say I do agree with the gentleman who just spoke that this is a
good and appropriate bill.
Mr. Speaker, I have no further requests for time, and I yield back
the balance of my time.
Mr. MICA. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume.
Mr. Speaker, in closing I want to again thank many individuals, the
gentleman from Virginia [Mr. Moran], the gentleman from Indiana [Mr.
Buyer], the gentleman from Arizona [Mr. Stump], the gentleman from New
York [Mr. Solomon], the gentleman from Pennsylvania [Mr. Fox], and all
those others who have provided leadership and cooperation so that we
could make this bill a reality.
Mr. Speaker, the Veterans' Employment Opportunities Act of 1996
provides much needed protection to our veterans. It provides an
effective redress system, and it expands job opportunities for those
who have served this Nation honorably in our Armed Forces. I urge my
colleagues to join me in passing this important bill today.
Finally, Mr. Speaker, I would like to recognize the service of the
distinguished gentleman from Mississippi, Mr. Sonny Montgomery, who
will be leaving this body soon. He has chaired the Committee on
Veterans' Affairs over many years and led the Nation's efforts to
recognize and serve its veterans.
Mr. Speaker, I urge again the passage of this legislation for all our
veterans.
Mr. Speaker, I have no further requests for time, and I yield back
the balance of my time.
The SPEAKER pro tempore (Mr. Ewing). The question is on the motion
offered by the gentleman from Florida [Mr. Mica] that the House suspend
the rules and pass the bill, H.R. 3586, as amended.
The question was taken; and (two-thirds having voted in favor
thereof) the rules were suspended and the bill, as amended, was passed.
A motion to reconsider was laid on the table.
____________________