GovernmentExecutive.com

Federal agencies are failing to track employment complaints filed by returning military reservists with disabilities, according to a new report by the Government Accountability Office.

Since the Sept. 11 terrorist attacks, the Defense Department has mobilized more than 500,000 reservists. But "as demobilized reservists eventually return to their civilian life, their civilian employment and the difficulties they face in dealing with re-employment matters remain areas of interest," GAO said in a letter to Congress.

Reserve soldiers are entitled under the Uniformed Services Employment and Reemployment Rights Act to get their old jobs back when they return from active duty, as long as they meet certain requirements. Some reservists who have incurred disabilities as a result of military service file complaints with the government over their inability to return to civilian employment.

Inadequate tracking, however, is leading to a failure to address such complaints, GAO found (GAO-07-259).

The four federal agencies responsible for assisting reservists with USERRA complaints -- the Defense, Justice and Labor departments and the Office of Special Counsel -- addressed about 16,000 informal and formal complaints between fiscal 2004 and fiscal 2006. But GAO found that no one agency had complete visibility over all complaints in the system and only a small percentage were reported to Congress.

"For example, DOD has visibility over all complaints in the system, but its visibility over complaints in Labor's system is limited to those originally filed with DOD and then later re-filed with Labor," the report stated. "The [Labor Department] does not make aggregate complaint data available to DOD."

Labor's annual report to Congress for fiscal 2004 and fiscal 2005 did not include almost 10,000 informal complaints filed with the Defense Department, which accounted for 80 percent of the complaints addressed by the four agencies during that period.

"Consequently, Congress does not have the comprehensive information necessary to allow for complete oversight of reservists' employment and re-employment problems," the report stated.

In addition, GAO found that the information on the 16,000 reservists' complaints was not categorized to reveal trends in the kinds of problems some reservists are experiencing when returning to civilian employment.

GAO found that because agencies do not consistently categorize complaints, Defense may be unaware of the effect that reservists' disabilities incurred while on active duty have on employment or what additional assistance may be needed to help move them back into the workforce.

Finally, the Pentagon maintains and uses employment information to help manage its reserve forces, often assessing several factors when deciding which reservists should be activated. These factors include the civilian occupations of reservists, such as emergency responders necessary to ensure national security.

In 2004, Defense made reporting of employment information mandatory rather than voluntary. Though the number of reservists reporting employer information increased from 60 percent in 2005 to 77 percent in 2006, GAO found that reservists still have not fully reported civilian employment and Defense's process for verifying the information is inadequate.

GAO also found that some of information reported may not be current because Defense has not established a formal mechanism to remind reservists to provide updates.

To address these issues, Congress should consider changing the law to require Labor's annual report to include Defense Department complaint data, GAO recommended. The report also suggested that Defense improve its reporting of employer information and that Labor make aggregate complaint data available to Defense. Finally, GAO recommended that the four agencies adopt uniform strategies on tracking disability-related complaints.

Defense, Labor and the OSC generally agreed with GAO's recommendations. Justice had no comment.

In 2006, the National Defense Authorization Act required GAO to report on reservists' civilian employer data and the re-employment difficulties they face as a result of active duty, including disabilities incurred while activated. Prior GAO reports have also cited problems with the Defense Department's ability to track civilian employment data and reservists' complaints.

COMMENTS

• Mercenary, what rock did you crawl out from under. You know as much about vets’ preference as a duck knows about squirrel hunting. I would be willing to bet you are a federal employee (in not too smart of a job) Charlie Posted February 21, 2007 3:35 PM
• Wow. Such vehemence… Mercenary, perhaps it would sooth you (and Taxpayer - haven’t see him chime in yet but anticipate it any moment) to know that the Federal Government actually developed the Veteran’s Preference Guides because it helps them as much as the vets. I’ve been with my organization twice before as a “Green-Suiter”, and for the past nine years as a civie. Each time I asked to be assigned here, despite occasionally feeling like a masochist. Okay, I must admit I love it. I have a mission that helps the Army, my country, and me. How could it get better? Well, that’s for another story… Still, like me, many of those veterans worked side-by-side with their civilian counterparts. That’s why we truly feel we deserve parity on base pay increases. The best of the military and civilians learned to work in each other’s world. The difference in our missions is exemplified by mobilization and financially made up by other pays, allowances, and tax-exemptions that we do not receive; even though sometimes we also deserve them. Regardless of what you think, I did even more as a Green-Suiter than I do now as a civilian, and at less pay. But that is as it should be. Sergeants are the backbone of the military management system; it’s first-line supervisor. Now I’m just a nine-to-five, and loving it. The benefit to the government comes with it hires a soldier since that soldier has often already done that job. This cuts train-up time. He or she often hits the ground running, productive from the first day. If the job is new to the soldier, they are a good consideration for employment because that soldier has a documented track performance record that can be scrutinized by the hiring authority. Still, back to the topic, I think it’s horrendous what the government has made the veterans go through in this day and age. Of particular note are the reservists. Between pay foul-ups, medical problems, re-employment difficulties, families unaccustomed to deployment; I can’t imagine what I would do seeing how the government has thanked them for serving. I did the full 20 in the actives, I doubt if I would have put up with all that as a supposed “part-timer”. Tip off GovExec.com reader Posted February 21, 2007 2:48 PM
• I believe the problem exists because of Vet preference in federal hiring. This seemed like a good idea up until we went to an all volunteer military! However, it is a bad idea after that. Military service is voluntary and should be treated just as any other career decision. The Congress never redid the entire pay structure for the military after the move to the all volunteer military. Nor did Congress examine and change the structure of the DoD and services to handle an all volunteer military. What we have today is a total mess relative to retirement, health care, pay, housing and vet preference in federal hiring! One possible way to solve the problems of tracking vet applications for federal jobs is to eliminate vet preference. Maybe we should give farmer preference to get farmers off the land were we pay them big subsidies, or auto worker preference to allow the displaced workers from American auto companies to find new jobs with the federal government, or maybe ex-commercial pilots as we continue to require the pilots to stop flying after age 60. Military do no more deserve vet preference than any of these other groups. Vet preference was designed to help those drafted for military service to get back into a labor market from which they we forced into the military because of the draft. Today, the vet is not forced out of the labor market by a draft but they choose to go as a career move. There should be no vet preference for anyone serving in the military that was not drafted to be there. This is another indication of a total lack of competence on the part of Congress! Mercenary Posted February 20, 2007 8:08 AM