|
Statement
of National
Economic Commission The
American Legion Before
the Committee
on Veterans’ Affairs US
House of Representatives on 21st
Century Veterans’ Employment Training October 28, 1999
Thank you Mr. Chairman for
providing the opportunity to comment on a number of concepts currently
being considered by this Subcommittee.
It is evident that a great amount of thoughtful consideration
is being given to some of the problems faced by veterans when looking
for careers. This is commendable. The American Legion will
comment on each of these concepts, as appropriate. Draft Bill 1
A – Priority of Service for
Veterans in Federal Employment and Training Programs
The American Legion concurs
with the intent and the language contained in HR 364.
This legislation will correct some of the problems associated
with the current statute, which is outdated.
As the world changes, so should the Veterans’ Employment and
Training Service (VETS). The
American Legion agrees with part of this recommendation. All service-connected disabled veterans deserve a “leg
up” in obtaining a job when they leave the service.
However, there is some evidence that the Vietnam experience has
left large numbers of employers with doubts about hiring veterans who
are considered violent, psychologically abnormal, or otherwise not
suitable for employment. This
image is reinforced each time a veteran commits a violent criminal
act. To this extent, veterans will continue to be plagued by this
pseudo-employment barrier, until the image of
veterans-in-the-workforce changes.
Employers must be educated that hiring a veteran is a wise
investment. But until
then, there is a clear need for priority of service for veterans in
the nation’s public labor exchange. B
– DVOP and LVER Positions and Attendant Duties The
need for change in this section of the statute was addressed by the
Transition Commission, which made two basic assumptions. 1.
Veterans could find jobs via America’s Job Bank
or some other Internet information system.
This assumption may be true for most veterans, but not all
veterans. The America’s
Job Bank or some other Internet information system, at the present
time, provides no priority-of-service for veterans.
Another glaring problem is that these services do not list
Federal contractor jobs in a place where veterans can be referred, on
a priority basis, as required by law.
2.
Local
Veterans’ Employment Representatives (LVERs) and Disabled Veterans
Outreach Program (DVOPs) Specialists spend most of their time doing
the same thing – intake, assessment and referral.
Most LVERs and DVOPs spent most of their time on job-ready
veterans rather than those veterans with significant barriers to
employment and in need of more intensive case management.
This assumption is mostly correct, but also is the basis for a
fundamental problem – inappropriate utilization of limited resources
(LVERs and DVOPs). Most veterans employment personnel efforts are hindered by
the practical operations of employment services, in general, and the
local office managers, specifically, who don’t seem to understand
the purpose of these VETS programs.
In a typical local employment services office, any veteran that
walks in the door is usually sent directly to the DVOP or LVER,
whether that veteran is disabled or facing realistic employment
barriers. Therefore, the
veterans employment staff is dealing with virtually ALL veterans.
In essence, ALL veterans are being given priority-of-service,
rather than those identified by federal statute.
Although the National Veterans Training Institute (NVTI)
teaches effective case management, it is extremely difficult to find a
local employment service office where veterans’ case management is
properly implemented. The
primary way people pursue jobs hasn't changed, especially for veterans
since 1945. Depending on
the geographical location, a veteran may still find some hostility
against veteran's preference in the work place.
Some veterans, who enlisted at 18 and spent 20 years in the
Armed Forces, need the personal touch of a human being, because they
have never looked for employment before.
Their high school classmates that never left home or the local
community have a “leg up” on veterans returning home from military
service. Veterans have to
establish themselves in the local community.
Returning veterans have to create a local network.
LVERs and DVOPs serve as a link between veterans and the local
community. LVERs and
DVOPs can introduce veterans into the local workforce. There
are unique problems, like PTSD, that LVERs and DVOPs understand. Computers are machines – cold and insensitive.
Without the personal touch more veterans will fall through the
crack. Different
veterans, like different people, have different needs.
Normally a veteran’s top priority is finding a job.
If the veteran is unsuccessful because of realistic employment
barriers, who is going to tell the veteran?
A computer will just continue to provide employment
opportunities and perpetuate the problem. LVERs and DVOPs can provide the personal interface and
guidance to help eliminate or overcome employment barriers. The human factor is the critical difference.
Take away the human factor and the unemployability problem is
exacerbated. C
– Financial Incentive Program for State Employment Security Agencies
and/or Authorization to Compete Veterans’ Employment and Training
Services Under Certain Circumstances These recommendations are also
based on some assumptions made by the Transition Commission. These assumptions include: ·
fewer than 2 percent of veterans go to the
Employment Service when looking for a job; ·
the unemployment rate for newly separated veterans
exceeds that of non-veterans of the same age by more than 20 percent;
and ·
that nine states met performance standards while
placing fewer than 10 percent of veteran registrants. Potential solutions include a
financial incentive program for the states and giving the Secretary
the authority to compete services for veterans between the job service
and private sector business for non-performing states.
Incentive Programs for States
The concept of incentive programs for states has been discussed
within DOL since the Government Performance and Results Act (GPRA).
VETS has looked at various plans to reward states that have an
outstanding record of performance as well as motivate those states
that have been poor performers. Under this initiative VETS would
receive approximately 7-10 million dollars in addition to authorized
DVOP and LVER funds for a flexible incentive program. Those funds would be competed between and within states with
specific criteria. The
goal of the incentive funding would be to reward “Outstanding”
performance and influence dramatic improvements in other states.
VETS would set the criteria based on GPRA and its strategic
plan using outcome measurements negotiated with each state. The following are some
possible criteria: A.
Outstanding criteria for excellence may include such factors as
(1)
number of Entered
Employments compared to previous year or approved plan; (2)
number of Entered Employments by DVOP/LVER compared to previous
year or approved plan; (3)
number of Case Managed veterans who entered employment for
greater than 180 days; (4)
number of Entered Employment of disabled veterans; and (5) Wage
at Entered Employment compared to previous year. B.
Outstanding criteria for excellence for
outstationed staff should be developed for state staff that have
contributed measurably to the advancement of veterans.
This would allow outstationed DVOPs and LVERs to be recognized
by their peers and other service providers.
VETS may use customer satisfaction surveys to determine
“Outstanding” performance so DVOPs/LVERs at Transitional
Assistance Program (TAP) locations can receive recognition. C.
The criteria outlined in paragraph A above can also
be used for “dramatic improvements.”
States with poor performance may be assisted, using the SGA
mechanism, with funding to hire special DVOPs or LVERs to assist
existing federal staff and who would work within the state system to
monitor and improve state performance. States
who turn around their performance could then be eligible for
performance bonuses. VETS will propose a weighted
system to ensure that veterans with employment barriers are given
special consideration. The
following groups are examples;
GROUP
POINTS
Special Disabled
5
Disabled
4
Campaign Medal Recipients*
3
Barriers
2
Aged over 45
2
Recently Separated
2
Other veterans
1
Case management of the above
1 in addition *Current Title 38 language
would need to be changed from “Vietnam era” to “campaign medal
recipient”. The
Secretary of Labor will also need legislative authority to make
monetary awards to non-federal employees. This incentive program can be
used on an intrastate or interstate basis.
The awards can be provided to states, SESA Directors, DVOPs,
LVERs or other employment staff. The award would be given on an
annual basis. These
awards may be in the form of (1) cash incentives; (2) service awards;
(3) award ceremonies on a national, regional or statewide basis; and
(4) funding for statewide conference. Competing Employment Services
for Veterans The American Legion adamantly
opposes this recommendation. Some
states have had experience with this concept of “contracting out”
the services provided to veterans and general public.
In all cases, services have been degraded to the point to where
no meaningful employment help is offered for the tax dollars spent. Firms in the job placement business have a long history of
placing the most qualified applicants first, a process called
“creaming.” These
firms make money on each placement made so the more placements, the
more money. There is no
reason to expect this practice would change if services to veterans
were contracted out. If
services to disabled and hard to place veterans is an
expectation of this recommendation, this is not the best way to go
about achieving it. Putting
a for-profit entity, which deals in volume in charge of placing disabled veterans or those with barriers to
employment in suitable employment guarantees that nobody will benefit. This recommendation refers to
“cost effective organizations” without defining the term. Law charges the people who make up the veterans’ staff of
the public labor exchange charged with placing the disabled and those
with barriers to employment. It
is very unfair to charge an agency with a low placement rate when, by
definition, the agency is working with those who are hardest to place. There is an additional problem
with the concept of competition.
The Veterans’ Employment and Training Service currently makes
up about 15 percent of the public labor exchange, which is funded by
Wagner-Peyser funds. If
the VETS funded portion of the system is carved away and put in its
own in a competitive bid process, it can no longer use office space,
supplies, information technology equipment, telecommunications
equipment, office equipment, etc. This will ultimately be more expensive to maintain.
Congress will balk at the additional funding necessary.
We also note that the neither the recommendation nor the
justifications and assumptions on which it was made makes any
reference to where the funds will come from.
Government operates in a pay-as-you-go environment with a
finite amount of money available. Thus, any additional funds to carry the additional expense of
competition must come from some other program. Having said this, The American
Legion pledges to work toward a solution for those state employment
security agencies, which are not doing well in placing veterans.
Surely reasonable people can discuss this issue with the idea
of improving performance. The American Legion would
recommend that the Subcommittee meet with LVERs
and DVOPs who have been privatized.
You will discover their viewpoint toward veterans is different.
Their role is to manufacture job orders for the company and to
place job-ready veterans for the profit motive.
Ask them how they handle veterans with employment barriers. D
– Sustained DOL National Marketing Program Directed at Employers The American Legion fully
supports an effort to market veterans to employers.
Such a program will help to solve the problem outlined above
where employers seem to think that veterans should not be hired
because of some propensity for violence.
There is another problem in
this area. The human
resources directors in the corporate world tend to not have any
experience with the armed forces.
They are of a younger generation, which doesn’t seem to
understand it when some young man or woman calls them “sir” or
“ma’am”, or stands when they enter the room.
A strong marketing program could help solve this problem. E
– MGIB Usage for Tests for Licensing or Certification The American Legion fully
supports this concept. We
note that CBO projects this will increase direct spending by $1 to $2
million for the next several years.
This is a paltry sum when viewed in the context of surpluses
exceeding $1 billion for this past year alone.
We would also point out that the cost of the test will be
repaid more than ten-fold when the veteran gets a higher paying job
and pays more taxes. This
item should be viewed as an investment, not an expense. F
– State Residency Requirements for DOL/VETS [State] Directors of
Veterans’ Employment and Training The American Legion opposes
removal of the requirement that State Directors of Veterans Employment
and Training be residents of the state for two years. Draft Bill 2 – Chairman Stump
Use of Internet Technology to Meet
Veteran Job Search Needs
The information sheet provided
for this hearing notes the need to consider the role of the government
in providing “labor market information, job placement services, and
job training.” The
information sheet then goes on to, apparently, question the
effectiveness of these functions by stating that they were created in
a different era. Then, a
“re-thinking” of the role of the government is suggested based on
something the Transition Commission published in its report. Mr. Chairman, when I joined
the Armed Forces, I joined the United
States Army, not the Michigan Army, not some militia group.
I joined the Army at a time when my colleagues and friends were
being drafted for service. While
it is true that the draft is no longer used to fill the ranks of the
Armed Services, people who join today are facing some of the same
problems faced by veterans of my generation when we returned home. This Subcommittee held a
hearing on September 9 at which Members heard compelling testimony on
the barriers faced by 80 – 90,000 veterans annually,
who are trained by the military in a civilian skill. These veterans are then not able to use this skill because
some civilian governmental credentialing
authority refuses to
recognize the training. This
will remain a problem until the government
sorts out the problem. How
dare anybody, including the Transition Commission, question the
necessity of the government to get involved in these issues, no matter
how long ago the system was designed. No entity is equipped to
provide labor market information except the government.
That is the purpose of the Bureau of Labor Statistics.
No entity, except government, is equipped to properly provide
job placement services to veterans who have never had a civilian job
and are behind their peers in the civilian labor market because of
their service. No entity,
except government, is equipped to provide the necessary changes to
military training curriculums so they meet civilian standards thus
providing the opportunity for veterans to make a seamless transition
to civilian society without proving to be a burden on taxpayers. LVERs and DVOPs are not just
job counselors and job placement people.
The National Veterans Training Institute trains these people to
serve the “whole veteran.” Thus,
when a veteran comes in for job counseling, the veteran is asked about
service connected disabilities. If
the veteran says he needs help with a claim, the job counselor knows
exactly where to send that veteran for assistance in order that the
disability does not become a hindrance to a civilian career. The American Legion has no
problem with leveraging technology to provide services to veterans.
But “virtual” job fairs, “virtual” employment services
offices, “virtual” one stop service centers serving veterans, and
the transforming of the jobs of LVERs and DVOPs based on these
“virtual” concepts is a pipe dream until employers, DoD, VA, and
the Congress recognize veterans are “real” not “virtual”
people. There is no “one size fits all” formula. Draft Bill 3 – Chairman Stump
Pilot Test of Competed versus
Non-Competed Employment and Training Services to Veterans It is our understanding that
the Secretary of Labor already has the authority to “contract out”
employment services provided to veterans.
Based on The American Legion’s analysis, it doesn’t work. The old desire of companies to make money for their owners
will focus on placing job-ready veterans first.
This process, “creaming,” leaves those veterans that are
not job-ready, that lack necessary job skills for the modern labor
market, that have been homeless, that lack the necessary civilian
credential because their military training is not recognized, those
otherwise are not as marketable unemployed or underemployed.
Their country will not properly serve these true defenders of
democracy after performing service for
their country. H.R. 625 would amend 38 USC
3680 (a) to authorize the continued payment of monthly education
benefits to veterans enrolled in educational institutions during
periods between terms or semesters, if the interval between such
periods do not exceed eight weeks. Currently, education
assistance payments may continue, if the interval between terms or
semesters is not more than one month.
However, some schools and universities schedule breaks which
last more than one month. The
American Legion is supportive of the proposed change in law.
It recognizes that the current one month limitation on
continued education assistance payments can cause financial problems
for some enrolled veterans, when the break between semesters is longer
than one month. We believe there is a need to ensure continued benefit
payments for up to eight weeks to assist veterans in completing their
program of higher education. With regard to changing the
eligibility criteria for the Montgomery GI Bill (MGIB) where an
enlisted service member is discharged to accept a commission, The
American Legion believes these individuals should remain eligible for
the MGIB program. The
discharge and immediate entry on to active duty as an officer is an
administrative formality. However,
the wording of the current statute causes them to become ineligible
for MGIB benefits. The American Legion does not believe it was Congress’
intent to deny this valuable benefit to some of the Armed Force’s
most outstanding individuals. The
American Legion would favor an amendment to the statute to provide
that, in this type of circumstance, the two periods of active duty,
enlisted and officer, will be considered as one continuous period.
The American Legion believe that such change is necessary to
ensure that those who choose to serve this nation have the opportunity
to avail themselves of the benefits of a higher education. Concerning an initiative to
expand the type of activities covered under the VA work-study program.
Currently, veterans working at educational institutions under
this program must be engaged in VA-related work.
In many instances, this limitation denies many veterans the
opportunity to participate in the program and benefit from the
financial assistance provided. The
American Legion believes the parameters of type of approved work
should be expanded to include assisting veterans involved with other
Federal programs and working with state and nonprofit organizations to
assist veterans and service members.
This will greatly expand the opportunities for those veterans
pursuing a higher education whom desire to work part-time. Comment was also requested on
an initiative to allow a veteran’s claim for a 100%
service-connected disability and a surviving spouse’ claim for
Dependency and Indemnity Compensation (DIC) to be considered a claim
by the veteran’s child for education assistance under 38 USC Chapter
35, Survivors’ and Dependents’ Educational Assistance (DEA). The
U.S. Court of Appeals for Veterans Claims has held that each child
must file his or her own DEA claim.
The American Legion believes an amendment to the current law is
necessary and appropriate. The
amendment should allow the retroactive benefit payments to the date a
child began their program of education.
This is based on an award of a 100% service-connected
disability rating or the award of DIC to the surviving spouse
regardless of how long it took for the claim to be adjudicated or
decided on appeal. This
change would overcome the inequity resulting from the current one-year
limitation on retroactive payments where the child had started their
program before then. Does
anyone really not understand why America is facing a recruitment and
retention problem in today’s armed forces?
Nobody wants to be expendable – used and tossed aside! They want to be recyclable – used and reused!
VETS is truly a recycling system.
Mr. Chairman, I will be happy
to answer any questions. Back to Witness List |
