[Congressional Record Volume 143, Number 41 (Wednesday, April 9, 1997)]
[House]
[Pages H1359-H1366]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]




             VETERANS EMPLOYMENT OPPORTUNITIES ACT OF 1997

  Mr. MICA. Mr. Speaker, I move to suspend the rules and pass the bill 
(H.R. 240) to amend title 5, United States Code, to provide that 
consideration may not be denied to preference eligibles applying for 
certain positions in the competitive service, and for other purposes, 
as amended.
  The Clerk read as follows:

                                 H. 240

       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 1997''.

     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)''.
       (d) Provisions Relating to the United States Postal 
     Service.--
       (1) In general.--Subsection (a) of section 1005 of title 
     39, United States Code, is amended by adding at the end the 
     following:
       ``(5)(A) The provisions of section 3304(f) of title 5 shall 
     apply with respect to the Postal Service in the same manner 
     and under the same

[[Page H1360]]

     conditions as if the Postal Service were an agency within the 
     meaning of such provisions.
       ``(B) Nothing in this subsection shall be considered to 
     require the application of section 3304(f) of title 5 in the 
     case of any individual who is not an employee of the Postal 
     Service if--
       ``(i) the vacant position involved is to be filled pursuant 
     to a collective-bargaining agreement;
       ``(ii) the collective-bargaining agreement restricts 
     competition for such position to individuals employed in a 
     bargaining unit or installation within the Postal Service in 
     which the position is located;
       ``(iii) the collective-bargaining agreement provides that 
     the successful applicant shall be selected on the basis of 
     seniority or qualifications; and
       ``(iv) the position to be filled is within a bargaining 
     unit.
       ``(C) The provisions of this paragraph shall not be 
     modified by any program developed under section 1004 of this 
     title or any collective-bargaining agreement entered into 
     under chapter 12 of this title.''.
       (2) Conforming amendment.--The first sentence of section 
     1005(a)(2) of title 39, United States Code, is amended by 
     striking ``title.'' and inserting ``title, subject to 
     paragraph (5) of this subsection.''.

     SEC. 3. SPECIAL PROTECTIONS FOR PREFERENCE ELIGIBLES IN 
                   REDUCTIONS IN FORCE.

       (a) In General.--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 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 90 days after the date of the 
     enactment of the Veterans Employment Opportunities Act of 
     1997, 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.''.
       (b) Applicability.--
       (1) In general.--Subject to paragraph (2), the amendments 
     made by this section shall apply with respect to--
       (A) reductions in force taking effect after the end of the 
     90-day period beginning on the date of the enactment of this 
     Act; or
       (B) in the case of the Department of Defense, reductions in 
     force taking effect after the end of the 1-year period 
     beginning on the date of the enactment of this Act.
       (2) Ongoing reductions in force.--If an agency has given 
     written notice of a reduction in force to any of its 
     employees within a competitive area, in accordance with 
     section 3502(d)(1)(A) of title 5, United States Code, before 
     the effective date under subparagraph (A) or (B) of paragraph 
     (1), as applicable, then, for purposes of determining the 
     rights of any employee within such area in connection with 
     such

[[Page H1361]]

     reduction in force, the amendments made by this section shall 
     be treated as if they had never been enacted. Nothing in the 
     preceding sentence shall affect any rights under a priority 
     placement program under section 3502(j) of title 5, United 
     States Code, as amended by this section.

     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;''.
       (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 paragraphs (2) through (4), the 
     Judicial Conference of the United States shall prescribe 
     regulations to provide for--
       (A) veterans' preference in the consideration of applicants 
     for employment, and in the conduct of any reductions in 
     force, within the judicial branch; and
       (B) redress procedures for alleged violations of any rights 
     provided for under subparagraph (A).
       (2) Regulations to be based on existing provisions.--Under 
     the regulations--
       (A) a preference eligible (as defined by section 2108 of 
     title 5, United States Code) shall be afforded preferences 
     similar to those under sections 3309 through 3312, and 
     subchapter I of chapter 35, of such title 5; and
       (B) the redress procedures provided for shall be similar to 
     those under the amendments made by section 4.
       (3) Exclusions.--Nothing in the regulations shall apply 
     with respect 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) Consultation.--The regulations under this subsection 
     shall be prescribed by the Judicial Conference of the United 
     States, in consultation with--

[[Page H1362]]

       (A) the largest congressionally chartered veterans' service 
     organization;
       (B) 2 congressionally chartered veterans' service 
     organizations that represent former noncommissioned officers;
       (C) a congressionally chartered veterans' service 
     organization that represents veterans who have fought in 
     foreign wars;
       (D) a congressionally chartered veterans' service 
     organization that represents veterans with service-connected 
     disabilities;
       (E) a congressionally chartered veterans' service 
     organization that represents veterans of the Vietnam era; and
       (F) a congressionally chartered veterans' service 
     organization that represents veterans of World War II, the 
     Korean conflict, the Vietnam era, and the Persian Gulf War.
       (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.
       (6) Submission to congress; effective date.--
       (A) Submission to congress.--Within 5 months after the date 
     of the enactment of this Act, the Judicial Conference of the 
     United States shall submit a copy of the regulations 
     prescribed under this subsection to the Committee on 
     Government Reform and Oversight and the Committee on the 
     Judiciary of the House of Representatives and the Committee 
     on Governmental Affairs and the Committee on the Judiciary of 
     the Senate.
       (B) Effective date.--The regulations prescribed under this 
     subsection shall take effect 6 months after the date of the 
     enactment of this Act.

     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,''.

     SEC. 8. FAILURE TO COMPLY WITH VETERANS' PREFERENCE 
                   REQUIREMENTS TO BE TREATED AS A PROHIBITED 
                   PERSONNEL PRACTICE FOR CERTAIN PURPOSES.

       (a) In General.--Subsection (b) of section 2302 of title 5, 
     United States Code, is amended--
       (1) by striking ``or'' at the end of paragraph (10);
       (2) by redesignating paragraph (11) as paragraph (12); and
       (3) by inserting after paragraph (10) the following:
       ``(11)(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; or''.
       (b) Definition; Limitation.--Section 2302 of title 5, 
     United States Code, is amended by adding at the end the 
     following:
       ``(e)(1) For the purpose of this section, the term 
     `veterans' preference requirement' means any of the following 
     provisions of law:
       ``(A) Sections 2108, 3305(b), 3309, 3310, 3311, 3312, 3313, 
     3314, 3315, 3316, 3317(b), 3318, 3320, 3351, 3352, 3363, 
     3501, 3502(b), 3504, and 4303(e) and (with respect to a 
     preference eligible referred to in section 7511(a)(1)(B)) 
     subchapter II of chapter 75 and section 7701.
       ``(B) Sections 943(c)(2) and 1784(c) of title 10.
       ``(C) Section 1308(b) of the Alaska National Interest Lands 
     Conservation Act.
       ``(D) Section 301(c) of the Foreign Service Act of 1980.
       ``(E) Sections 106(f), 7281(e), and 7802(5) of title 38.
       ``(F) Section 1005(a) of title 39.
       ``(G) Any other provision of law that the Director of the 
     Office of Personnel Management designates in regulations as 
     being a veterans' preference requirement for the purposes of 
     this subsection.
       ``(H) Any regulation prescribed under subsection (b) or (c) 
     of section 1302 and any other regulation that implements a 
     provision of law referred to in any of the preceding 
     subparagraphs.
       ``(2) Notwithstanding any other provision of this title, no 
     authority to order corrective action shall be available in 
     connection with a prohibited personnel practice described in 
     subsection (b)(11). Nothing in this paragraph shall be 
     considered to affect any authority under section 1215 
     (relating to disciplinary action).''.
       (c) Repeals.--
       (1) Provisions of title 10, united states code.--Section 
     1599c of title 10, United States Code, and the item relating 
     to such section in the table of sections at the beginning of 
     chapter 81 of such title are repealed.
       (2) Section 2302(a)(1) of title 5, united states code.--
     Subsection (a)(1) of section 2302 of title 5, United States 
     Code, is amended to read as follows:
       ``(a)(1) For the purpose of this title, `prohibited 
     personnel practice' means any action described in subsection 
     (b).''.
       (d) Savings Provision.--This section shall be treated as if 
     it had never been enacted for purposes of any personnel 
     action (within the meaning of section 2302 of title 5, United 
     States Code) preceding the date of the enactment of this Act.

  The SPEAKER pro tempore. Pursuant to the rule, the gentleman from 
Florida [Mr. Mica] and the gentleman from Pennsylvania [Mr. Holden] 
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, I am pleased to come to the floor this afternoon to 
present H.R. 240, the Veterans' Employment Opportunity Act of 1997, as 
reported.
  This legislation contains many vital features of importance to our 
Nation's veterans. This bill is the product of hard work by a number of 
Members on both sides of the aisle, Mr. Speaker.
  I want to take just a moment to pay particular thanks to several 
individuals who have helped make this historic legislation possible. 
First, the gentleman from Arizona [Mr. Stump], who chairs the Committee 
on Veterans' Affairs, the gentleman from Indiana [Mr. Buyer], who is 
chair of one of the subcommittees and last year worked with us on a 
nonstop basis. Both of those gentlemen deserve great credit.
  In addition, of course, the chairman of the Committee on Rules, who 
has been an untiring advocate on behalf of our veterans interests, the 
gentleman from New York [Mr. Solomon], also the gentleman from Indiana 
[Mr. Burton], chair of our committee, and the gentleman from New Jersey 
[Mr. Frelinghuysen].
  I also want to pay a particular debt of gratitude to the new ranking 
member of our subcommittee, the Civil Service Subcommittee, which I 
chair and which produced this legislation, to the gentleman from 
Pennsylvania [Mr. Holden], again, the current ranking member of our 
subcommittee, and also to the gentleman for Virginia [Mr. Moran], who 
was the ranking member of the subcommittee last year, and his untiring 
efforts helped make this legislation possible, and also to the many 
Members who served and acted as cosponsors of this legislation.
  Mr. Speaker, last year the House passed a very similar bill, H.R. 
3586, with overwhelming support. However, the other body failed to act 
on this legislation before we adjourned. In order to strengthen that 
proposal that we had last year, that bill, and in order to facilitate 
its consideration as it moves through the Congress, we have consulted 
with the major veterans service organizations, Federal employee 
organizations, and other interested parties before bringing the 
legislation back to the House. I want to thank each of these 
organizations also for their assistance.
  Mr. Speaker, there are two important differences that I would like to 
explain between the bill before the House today and the bill we passed 
last year. First, H.R. 240 makes the knowing violation of veterans 
preference a prohibited personnel practice.

  Second, as a result of our consultations, we made it clear that the 
bill would not interfere with job bidding and assignment under 
selective bargaining agreements in the Postal Service.
  Mr. Speaker, I will not attempt to detail here all of the benefits in 
this bill for our veterans, but I would like to emphasize what I 
believe are the three most important provisions of this legislation:
  First, H.R. 240 establishes for the first time an effective user-
friendly redress mechanism for our veterans whose rights have been 
violated. The second major provisions of H.R. 240 protects veterans 
against reductions in force using techniques that we have seen such as 
single person competition that in fact undermine veterans preference.
  The third major provisions in the equal access section of the bill. 
Mr. Speaker, this provision has been included to ensure fair treatment 
for the men and women we employ in the Armed Forces. Just because these 
Federal employees have worn uniforms should not bar them from competing 
for Federal jobs. Yet that is the practice in the Federal civilian work 
force that we see today.

[[Page H1363]]

  This bill tears down those artificial barriers for those who have 
served honorably in the Armed Forces for 3 years. We have made clear, 
however, that the equal access provisions do not interfere with certain 
transfers, promotions and assignments of employees under collective 
bargaining agreements between the Postal Service and its unions. The 
language in the bill has been carefully crafted.
  Mr. Speaker, this bill does not interfere with the reassignment or 
transfer of rights of postal employees, and it does not diminish the 
rights of injured postal employees to what is called limited or light 
duty positions.
  Finally, the bill has also been revised to permit the Judicial 
Conference to develop its own program for implementing veterans 
preference in our judicial branch. We recognize that personnel 
practices in the judicial branch may differ and do differ markedly in 
many instances from civil service processes in the executive branch.
  Finally, Mr. Speaker, we have honored the request of the Office of 
Personnel Management that in fact when there are changes in reduction 
in force procedures, that we do not disrupt ongoing RIF's and that at 
least 90 days will be allowed in which to implement those changes.
  Mr. Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.
  Mr. HOLDEN. Mr. Speaker, I yield 30 seconds to the gentleman from 
Virginia [Mr. Moran], who was the subcommittee ranking member in the 
last Congress and worked very hard on this legislation.
  Mr. MORAN. Mr. Speaker, I thank my friend and colleague from 
Pennsylvania for yielding me the time.
  Let me just congratulate the gentleman from Florida [Mr. Mica], the 
chairman, and staff director, Mr. Nesterczuk, for bringing this bill 
forward and my good friend and colleague, the gentleman from 
Pennsylvania [Mr. Holden], the ranking Democrat on the subcommittee, 
and his ace staff Cedric did such a great job last year. I know what a 
great job he did this year as well. I know it is a good bill and will 
be overwhelmingly approved. They did a good job.
  (Mr. HOLDEN asked and was given permission to revise and extend his 
remarks.)
  Mr. HOLDEN. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume.
  Mr. Speaker, I rise today to express my strong support for H.R. 240, 
the Veterans' Employment Opportunity Act. I would first like to 
congratulate the Civil Service Subcommittee chairman, the gentleman 
from Florida [Mr. Mica], for his leadership and bipartisan efforts on 
behalf of America's veterans to strengthen the veterans preference 
policies and programs.
  The spirit of cooperation on both sides of the aisle has been 
critical in bringing forward this important legislation. Last year 
Chairman Mica and the gentleman from Virginia [Mr. Moran], the ranking 
member, did a great job working on this issue, a great deal of work on 
this issue. H.R. 240 continues our efforts to strengthen veterans 
preference. It builds on the progress made by last year's bill by 
improving the ability of veterans to compete during the Federal hiring 
process, providing adequate protection for preference eligibles and 
reductions in force, extending veterans preference to all branches of 
the Federal Government and providing veterans preference for service in 
Bosnia, Croatia, and the former Yugoslav Republic of Macedonia.
  The bill also makes knowing violations of veterans preference laws a 
prohibited personnel practice. Finally, it makes improvements in the 
system for investigating and redressing violations whenever they occur.
  Testimony in previous Civil Service Subcommittee hearings has 
revealed that veterans preference in the Federal work force is often 
ignored or circumvented and that its continued viability in the 
workplace is threatened on several fronts.
  This legislation addresses these problems by making it more difficult 
for agencies to place preference eligibles in single-position 
competitive levels. Under this bill, preference eligibles cannot be 
placed in such a competitive level if by reason of their education, 
training or experience, a reasonable person could conclude that they 
would be able to successfully perform another job at the same grade and 
in the same competitive level within 150 days. In such cases, the 
preference eligible is to be placed in another competitive level for 
which he or she qualifies.
  We have always agreed that our veterans deserve special consideration 
in employment decisions because of their special contributions to our 
country, and this bill continues that tradition.
  Our veterans answered their call to duty and were always there for 
our country in times of need. This legislation honors our obligation to 
our veterans, who make up 28 percent of the Federal Government 
employees, and protects their rights in the Federal work force.
  H.R. 240 is a good bipartisan framework for strengthening veterans 
preference. I know that some concerns remain about specific provisions 
of the bill, and I look forward to working with the chairman and all 
interested parties to address these concerns.
  With the leadership of the Civil Service Subcommittee in the House 
and the cooperation of the Senate, we have an opportunity with H.R. 240 
to pass an effective bill which will give our veterans help in 
obtaining and retaining civilian employment within the Federal 
Government based upon their military service.

                              {time}  1330

  I urge all my colleagues to support this important legislation.
  Mr. Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.
  Mr. MICA. Mr. Speaker, I yield 1 minute to the gentleman from New 
Jersey [Mr. Pappas] the vice chairman of the Subcommittee on Civil 
Service.
  Mr. PAPPAS. Mr. Speaker, I rise today to support our veterans by 
calling for the passage of the Veterans Employment Opportunities Act, 
introduced by the distinguished gentleman from Florida [Mr. Mica].
  For too long many of our Nation's veterans have been neglected by our 
own Government when it comes to obtaining Federal employment. Our 
Nation's veterans, who served so selflessly and risked their lives, 
face unnecessary restrictions that preclude them from employment. All 
they simply desire is the opportunity to continue serving their Nation.
  As a result of this legislation, veterans can apply for Federal jobs 
on a more competitive basis at a time when their employment within the 
Federal work force is declining and approaching a historically low 
level.
  This is a bipartisan bill that reflects the interests of the people 
who served our country so courageously. I commend Mr. Mica for his work 
and urge my colleagues to support it.
  Mr. HOLDEN. Mr. Speaker, I yield 2 minutes to the gentleman from 
Illinois [Mr. Evans] who is the ranking member of the Committee on 
Veterans' Affairs.
  Mr. EVANS. Mr. Speaker, I thank the gentleman for yielding this time 
to me.
  I rise in strong support of the Veterans Employment Opportunities 
Act. For the first time, wartime veterans and service-connected-
disabled veterans will have access to an effective appellate process if 
they believe their rights under veterans' preference laws have been 
violated. Additionally, the bill will provide meaningful protection 
during a reduction in force for all preference eligibles.
  I want to thank the gentleman from Florida [Mr. Mica], the gentleman 
from Virginia, [Mr. Moran], and the gentleman from New York [Mr. 
Houghton] for their bipartisan efforts on behalf of our Nation's 
veterans.
  I also want to mention the good advice and hard work the 
representatives of the veterans' service organizations have contributed 
to the development of this legislation. Their assistance and 
cooperation was invaluable.
  H.R. 240 is an excellent bill, and I urge my colleagues to support 
this measure.
  Mr. MICA. Mr. Speaker, I yield 1\1/2\ minutes to the gentleman from 
New Jersey [Mr. Frelinghuysen] who is the very distinguished Member who 
has been a very strong advocate on behalf of our veterans.
  Mr. FRELINGHUYSEN. Mr. Speaker, I thank the gentleman for yielding me 
this time, and let me salute the gentleman from Florida, Chairman Mica, 
and the ranking member for their hard work and effort on this piece of 
legislation.

[[Page H1364]]

  As a veteran, I am proud to support the Veterans Employment 
Opportunities Act, which addresses some very serious concerns I have 
regarding personnel decisions being made at Federal facilities in my 
congressional district and around the Nation. Those men and women who 
have sacrificed years of their lives securing the blessings of liberty 
for all Americans deserve to be credited for that service in the 
Federal workplace.
  My chief concern is that veterans' preference is being circumvented 
by many Federal agencies while they are downsizing through what is 
known as the designer reduction in force, or designer RIF. Many RIF's 
are carried out by Federal agencies artificially tailoring job 
categories to make them uncompetitive, thereby negating the employment 
of veterans' preference in the first place.
  The bill Mr. Mica has brought to the floor today would make it more 
difficult for agencies to use these types of RIF's and provide veterans 
who are RIF'd with enhanced rights to other jobs. More importantly, 
this legislation would finally give veterans who believe their rights 
have been violated a user-friendly redress system, while also making 
violation of veterans' preference a prohibited personnel practice to be 
enforced with disciplinary action.
  Finally, Mr. Speaker, I would be remiss if I did not thank the 
chairman, Mr. Mica, and his staff for inviting me to help in crafting 
this bill to strengthen and expand veterans' preference. The chairman 
and his staff have done a wonderful job, and I am very proud to join 
with them.
  Mr. MICA. Mr. Speaker, I yield such time as he may consume to the 
gentleman from Pennsylvania [Mr. Fox] for the purpose of a colloquy.
  The gentleman from Pennsylvania [Mr. Fox] has worked with the 
subcommittee both last year and this year. He has some very specific 
concerns about the application of this legislation, and we were not 
able to meet all of the requirements he would like in this legislation, 
but he is going to state in his colloquy his goal.
  Mr. FOX of Pennsylvania. Mr. Speaker, I want to thank the 
distinguished chairman of the Subcommittee on Civil Service, Mr. Mica, 
for bringing this important issue before the House today. I would like 
to commend him for his leadership on this important matter of veterans' 
employment opportunities. I also want to indicate my support for H.R. 
240 that is before us today.
  I believe there is another related issue that needs to be addressed 
as well, Mr. Speaker. Reservists from all branches that were called to 
active duty during Desert Storm and Desert Shield but did not serve in 
the actual theater of combat were not awarded veterans' preference 
points. I would like to point out that these fine men and women were an 
integral part of supporting these important operations by making them 
so successful.
  There is precedent from the Vietnam era for giving preference points 
to reservists who were not in the theater of operation but still called 
to active duty. In this case, many of them went overseas as well but 
not to the theater.
  I have introduced H.R. 1006, which would correct this injustice. It 
is a related bill and seems to go hand in hand with this bill brought 
by Congressman Mica. I would very much like to work together with Mr. 
Mica, as the chairman, and other representatives of the House and 
Senate to see both these important measures pass the Chambers and are 
signed into law in this Congress and in this session.
  Mr. MICA. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume to 
tell the gentleman from Pennsylvania that it is my intention to work 
with the gentleman on the matters he has raised, and the gentleman has 
my commitment to do so.
  Mr. Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.
  Mr. HOLDEN. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume 
for the purpose of entering into a colloquy with the subcommittee 
chairman, Mr. Mica.
  Mr. Speaker, as I indicated during my earlier statement, I am aware 
there are still some groups with concerns about certain provisions of 
this bill. Though we expect to pass this bill in the House today, I 
would like the gentleman's commitment to continue working with me, our 
colleagues in the Senate, and all interested parties to address these 
concerns and further improve the bill.
  Mr. Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.
  Mr. MICA. Mr. Speaker, might I inquire as to how much time we have 
left on each side?
  The SPEAKER pro tempore (Mr. Gutknecht). The gentleman from Florida 
[Mr. Mica] has 10 minutes remaining; the gentleman from Pennsylvania 
[Mr. Holden] has 15 minutes remaining.
  Mr. MICA. Mr. Speaker, I yield 3 minutes to the gentleman from Texas 
[Mr. Sessions] another distinguished member of our subcommittee.
  Mr. SESSIONS. Mr. Speaker, I thank the gentleman for yielding me this 
time.
  It is a privilege to come before the American people in support of 
this bill, and it is never inappropriate, I believe, to stand up for 
the rights of veterans, men and women of this country who have fought 
for us not only in peacetime but also in war. It is easy to take for 
granted the freedom that we experience every day, but we must not and 
cannot ever forget the contributions that the men and women of this 
country of our Armed Forces have made for America.
  The Veterans Employment Opportunities Act of 1997 gives to those who 
have served our country needed appeals and avenues in cases where they 
may have been denied the opportunity to work in a position for which 
they were qualified. When veterans are not given the chance to prove 
their ability, I believe justice must prevail.
  H.R. 240 strengthens the veterans' preference in place today and 
increases economic and employment opportunity for veterans. This bill 
would create for the first time an effective, user-friendly redress 
system for veterans who believe that their rights may have been 
violated. It would make any violation of veterans' preferences a 
prohibited personnel practice and provide severe disciplinary actions 
for those who violate those preferences.
  Perhaps the most important element of this legislation is the fact 
that it will remove artificial barriers that often bar service men and 
women from competing for Federal jobs. These individuals should be able 
to compete for jobs for which they are qualified just like other 
Federal employees.
  Government downsizing has not been good for veterans of this country. 
In 1984, veterans accounted for 38 percent of the Federal work force. 
Today, sadly, that number hovers at just 28 percent.
  James King, Director of the Office of Personnel Management, testified 
before the chairman's subcommittee that as recently as 1992 the 
percentage of veterans among Federal civilian full-time permanent new 
hires averaged just 18.5 percent. This is a crisis. The talent and 
drive that our veterans possess could be just the thing that could turn 
our bloated bureaucracy around.
  One element of this legislation that was particularly important to me 
was the fact that it ensures that only the most qualified candidates 
could receive employment under a veteran's preference. Some say that 
this legislation will place unqualified people in positions of 
importance, but as my good friend, the gentleman from Florida [Mr. 
Mica] assures me, this artful bill makes certain that those veterans 
with the most experience and the greater qualifications get a fair 
treatment when they are applying for a Federal job.
  Mr. Speaker, I urge enactment of this bill and, thus, I stand for the 
good people, men and women, who have represented America in peacetime 
and in war.
  Mr. HOLDEN. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume.
  In following up to my prior inquiry, Mr. Speaker, I want to have a 
commitment from the gentleman from Florida [Mr. Mica] that I received 
privately, off the record, that we would continue to work with 
interested parties who have some concerns about the bill and do our 
best to address those concerns as we move forward with the process.
  Mr. MICA. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume to 
assure the gentleman from Pennsylvania and the distinguished ranking 
member that he has my commitment to work with him and the subcommittee 
in working out any further details or

[[Page H1365]]

problems with this legislation as it moves through both the House and 
the other body.
  Mr. HOLDEN. 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 the balance of my time to 
close.
  Mr. Speaker, when the Veterans Preference Act was passed in 1944, 
veterans had a reasonable expectation that service to our Nation would 
be recognized and rewarded. Veterans, many of whom risked their lives 
and livelihood, could expect, with all other factors being equal, to be 
given a preference when seeking Federal employment.
  As our country has moved from the threat of international conflict, 
rewarding those who in fact have served our military has become more an 
illusion than a reality, unfortunately. While hiring preferences for 
others, for various reasons, has actively been encouraged, veterans' 
preference in securing Federal employment has, unfortunately, withered 
on the vine.

                              {time}  1345

  Lacking any enforcement or redress capability, veterans have watched 
the value of their so-called preference decline as others usurp their 
rightful place at the front of the Federal employment line. How ironic 
it is that those whose Federal service often put them at the most peril 
in an armed conflict now become more often the last hired and the first 
fired in a time of downsizing.
  In closing, Mr. Speaker, I believe that the Veterans Employment 
Opportunities Act of 1997 provides much-needed protection to our 
veterans. It provides an effective redress system, and it expands job 
opportunities for those who in fact have served our Nation honorably in 
its armed forces.
  Mr. Speaker, this bill is strongly supported by 19 major veterans 
service organizations representing 12 million veterans. I urge my 
colleagues to support and pass this bill.
  Mr. BURTON of Indiana. Mr. Speaker, I rise in strong support of H.R. 
240, the Veterans Employment Opportunities Act of 1997. As chairman of 
the Government Reform and Oversight Committee, I am pleased that one of 
the committee's first bills on the floor in the 105th Congress is one 
which will help our Nation's veterans. Chairman John Mica is to be 
commended for his hard work on this issue and for introducing this 
bipartisan measure and bringing it to the floor. Last year the House 
passed similar legislation not once, but twice. Unfortunately, the 
other body failed to act on this legislation. I was an original 
cosponsor of H.R. 3586, which Congressman Mica introduced last year, 
and as chairman of the full committee I have worked very hard for 
passage of H.R. 240 this year.
  Mr. Speaker, Congress intended for veterans' preference rules to help 
veterans compete for jobs in the Federal Government and to protect 
veterans' rights during reductions-in-force, or RIF's. Unfortunately, 
the Civil Service Subcommittee has found that the benefits of the 
original veterans' preference laws have been eroded. Agencies often 
ignore or find ways to circumvent veterans' preference directives. One 
way that agencies do this to conduct special RIF's that are narrowly 
targeted to specific individuals, leaving those individuals with no 
opportunity to benefit from the veterans' preference or other rules 
that would enable them to compete to keep their jobs. This is not 
right.
  I served on the Veterans' Affairs Committee before joining the 
Committee on Government Reform and Oversight. Many of our Nation's 
veterans have made tremendous sacrifices for the peace and freedom that 
all Americans enjoy today. I think it is only fair that Congress take 
steps to help them compete for Federal jobs for which they are 
qualified and to protect their rights during RIF's. All veterans have 
earned those rights.
  Clearly, veterans' preference laws need to be strengthened in order 
for them to remain effective. H.R. 240 would do this by establishing an 
effective, straightforward redress system for veterans. Federal 
officials who knowingly violate veterans' rights could be brought 
before the Merit Systems Protection Board and fined $1,000, suspended, 
or fired. Federal agencies would be prevented from conducting designer 
RIFs which unfairly remove veterans' rights. Agencies will be required 
to establish priority placement programs for veterans who are affected 
by RIF's, and agencies must give veterans a preference when they rehire 
employees.
  Anyone who is eligible for veterans' preference or has served in the 
Armed Forces honorably for 3 years would be eligible to compete for 
Federal jobs which agencies currently restrict to their own work forces 
or to current Federal employees. The bill specifies that members of our 
Armed Forces who are serving in Bosnia, Croatia, and Macedonia also 
will qualify for veterans' preference.

  The honorable treatment of our veterans through such legislation is 
the least we can do to show our appreciation for the tremendous 
sacrifices so many veterans have made to protect the liberties of this 
great democracy for all American citizens.
  I urge my colleagues to support H.R. 240.
  Mr. QUINN. Mr. Speaker, I rise in strong support for H.R. 240 because 
it is the biggest improvement to veterans' preference in many years.
  To me, the most important aspect is that veterans, for the first 
time, will be able to seek justice through the courts when they feel 
their preference rights have been violated--that is a landmark in 
veterans' preference law.
  H.R. 240 prevents agencies from building artificial barriers to 
hiring veterans. Veterans will now be able to compete for jobs 
currently restricted to people with civil service status or employed by 
the agency. Eligible veterans will be able to have priority placement 
if they lose their jobs in a reduction-in-force. To discourage agencies 
from designing elaborate processes to avoid hiring veterans, the bill 
makes violation of veterans' preference a prohibited personnel practice 
and authorizes damages if the violation was deemed willful. Also, for 
the first time, veterans' preference will apply to nonpolitical jobs in 
the legislative branch, the White House, and certain jobs in the 
judicial branch. The bill will also apply veterans' preference in any 
reduction-in-force at the Federal Aviation Administration and make 
those serving in Bosnia, Croatia, and Macedonia eligible for veterans' 
preference.
  H.R. 240 will actually improve the employment opportunities for women 
and minority veterans. Women now comprise about 12 percent of the 
Active Duty Force and minority members now make up nearly 20 percent. 
These groups will now have a small advantage over similar nonveterans 
and that is the way it should be.
  Mr. Speaker, I congratulate Chairman John Mica and Ranking Member Tim 
Holden for their persistence and the way they have developed this 
legislation. Because they have listened to, and worked with the major 
unions on this bill, the unions have expressed their support. OPM, in 
testimony before the Civil Service Subcommittee has expressed its 
support. The Veterans Service Organizations enthusiastically support 
the bill. I thank all the groups who have helped build this landmark 
legislation for their efforts.
  Mr. Speaker, this bill is a winner for veterans, women, and 
minorities and I urge my colleagues to vote in favor of H.R. 240.
  Mr. STUMP. Mr. Speaker, today I rise to voice my strong support for 
H.R. 240, the Veterans Employment Act of 1997. This is the most 
important improvement to veterans' preference laws in decades and I 
congratulate Civil Service Subcommittee Chairman John Mica and his 
ranking member Tim Holden for the excellent work they have done on this 
bill. H.R. 240 is a testament to Chairman Mica's persistence on this 
issue and I commend him.
  Mr. Speaker, I believe it is important that Members understand the 
significance of this bill and how it affects veterans' preference. As 
you know veterans' preference was first passed in 1944. Through 
veterans' preference, wartime and disabled veterans got a small 
advantage competing for Federal jobs, and in promotion and retention. 
As a result, veterans comprise 27.6 percent of the Federal work force. 
But a law does not mean automatic compliance, and there are those who 
resent the small advantage given to wartime and disabled veterans.
  Over the years, some Federal agencies have become very inventive when 
trying to avoid veterans' preference laws and regulations. Recently, 
with the pressure to downsize, agencies and hiring managers have found 
new ways to circumvent veterans' preference. A major reason agencies 
and hiring managers have felt free to pursue such tactics is that there 
was no real consequence for their illegal actions.
  Today, the House has an opportunity to demonstrate to America's 26 
million veterans that veterans' preference for Federal jobs is an 
important way to share the sacrifices of war. General Omar Bradley once 
said, ``Veterans benefits are one means by which society attempts to 
ameliorate the tragedy of war and distribute its burdens.'' I concur in 
that assessment.
  H.R. 240 has several important provisions. First, under current law, 
Federal agencies are able to shut veterans out by restricting hiring to 
those with civil service status or those already employed by the 
agency. With downsizing, it is routine to shut out many otherwise 
qualified veterans through these restrictions. H.R. 240 would change 
that by opening those vacancies to preference-eligible veterans and 
those with 3 years of honorable service.
  The bill will also make it more difficult for agencies to design 
reductions in force, or

[[Page H1366]]

RIF's to circumvent veterans' preference. Section two of the bill will 
make it more difficult to design RIF's in this way and will improve a 
veterans' right to transfer to another position through priority 
placement within the downsizing agency or at another Federal 
organization.
  The most important provision, in my opinion, is the creation of a 
redress mechanism for those who feel their rights under veterans' 
preference have been violated. The bill provides that a veteran may 
file a complaint with the Secretary of Labor within 60 days of the 
alleged violation. The Department of Labor's Veterans Employment and 
Training Service [VETS] will have the responsibility to investigate the 
complaint within 60 days. If VETS is unable to resolve the complaint or 
has not completed action within 60 days, the veteran may file a 
complaint with the Merit Systems Protection Board [MSPB]. The Board has 
120 days to complete its work. At any time after that, the veteran may 
file a complaint in Federal district court.
  Equally important, the veteran may seek ``make whole'' relief for 
back pay and liquidated damages equal to back pay if the violation is 
found to be willful. The bill also makes violation of veterans' 
preference a ``prohibited personnel practice'' and makes any individual 
guilty of such violations subject to disciplinary action.
  For many years, large parts of the Federal Government have been 
exempt from veterans' preference. The bill will extend this preference 
to nonpolitical and non-senior executive service jobs at the White 
House, Congress, and much of the judicial branch. It is long past the 
time when Congress, the White House, and the judiciary do their part in 
hiring veterans.
  Next, the bill will require the Federal Aviation Administration [FAA] 
to implement veterans' preference in any RIF. Currently, the FAA is 
only required to follow veterans' preference in hiring.
  Finally, the bill extends veterans' preference to the troops serving 
in Bosnia, Croatia, and Macedonia. These fine young American men and 
women are on the front line in a very dangerous area and they deserve 
the advantages of veterans' preference.
  Mr. Speaker, this bill is the most significant improvement in 
veterans' preference in my memory and it deserves the strong support of 
this House. I urge my colleagues to support H.R. 240.
  Mr. BUYER. Mr. Speaker, I want to thank my colleague from Florida for 
working as hard as he has on this legislation. I also appreciate the 
cooperation we've had from our colleagues on the other side of the 
aisle on H.R. 240.
  Veterans' preference and its implementation in the Federal work force 
are issues that cause me great concern. We need effective and 
comprehensive enforcement of preference laws and regulations.
  Federal agencies have long abused veterans preference in hiring, 
promotion, and retention. I view the entrenched bureaucracy as the main 
source of the problem. There are many hiring managers that would like 
to see veterans go away.
  They resent a veteran's presence in an organization for any number of 
reasons. Maybe it's because these managers didn't serve and are 
embarrassed by the presence of those who did. Maybe it's because they 
have other diversity goals which they believe take precedence over 
veterans.
  Our career civil servants must be made to follow the law, and their 
political bosses should be educated to watch closely for these 
unacceptable personnel practices.
  The American people understand the nature of the sacrifices made for 
them by their veterans, and understand why veterans deserve 
preference--especially those disabled in the performance of their 
duties.
  The Nation has a history of helping veterans returning to the work 
force and working successfully to place them in jobs, dating back to at 
least the post-Revolutionary War era when land grants were given in 
return for military service.
  Veterans' preference must remain the cornerstone in hiring, 
promotion, and retention. Veterans' status is blind as to race, gender, 
age, religion, and other differences that make this Nation a melting 
pot. We are not arguing against diversity, but we do believe that 
veterans' preference must remain first among the priorities of Federal 
managers.
  There is no excuse for hiring managers to develop ways around the 
hiring or retention of veterans in their employ.
  Currently, there is no effective means by which a veteran may air a 
preference grievance, especially if the veteran is not hired. How then, 
are we to hold managers accountable for the provisions of law giving 
preference to qualified veterans?
  The redress issue is at the core of the Veterans Employment 
Opportunity Act of 1997 and will help our veterans without harming 
other Federal workers.
  As long as we continue to have conscientious lawmakers willing to 
address veterans' preference, we remain confident that we can take the 
corrective actions necessary to ensure its future health as a viable 
program for veterans who have faithfully served. I urge my colleagues 
to support the measure.
  Mr. Speaker, I yield back the balance of my time.
  The SPEAKER pro tempore (Mr. LaHood). 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. 240, 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.

                          ____________________