[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.
____________________