Promoting Opportunities for Veterans

For much of America, affirmative action may be out of favor when it comes to race and gender. But it is enshrined in law for veterans.

Just before Office of Personnel Management staffers took Veterans Day off, they issued this reminder: “Most departments and agencies in the Federal Government are required to have an affirmative action program for the recruitment, employment, and advancement of disabled veterans. The law requires agencies to develop annual Disabled Veterans Affirmative Action Program (DAP) Plans.”

The agency reports describe “efforts to promote the maximum employment and job advancement opportunities for disabled veterans as well as certain veterans of the Vietnam era and of the post-Vietnam era,” according to OPM.

Below are some facts and figures regarding the employment of veterans in fiscal year 2007. The entire report can be found here.


  • Total employment in the federal government increased from 1,803,055 in FY 2006 to 1,811,459 in FY 2007.

  • Veterans, as a percentage of all employees, increased from 25.4 percent in FY 2006 to 25.5 percent in FY 2007.

  • Veterans, as a subset of the total employment, increased from 457,965 in FY 2006 to 462,744 in FY 2007.

  • Disabled veterans, as a percentage of the total employment, increased from 5.4 percent in FY 2006 to 5.7 percent in FY 2007.

  • Disabled veterans, as a subset of the total veteran employment, increased from 97,828 in FY 2006 to 103,180 in FY 2007.
  • By Terri Rupar  |  November 11, 2008; 3:39 PM ET  | Category:  Hiring
    Previous: Top Transition Official Explains How to Make Government 'Cool' Again | Next: Advice From Top Civil Servants

    Comments



    And this is as it should be, Mr. Davidson. Disabled veterans are returned to society as other than when they left it. We have a responsibility to accommodate their re-entrance int society in every way possible.

    As far as your comment on Racial affirmative action programs, they may have fallen out of favor with a portion of the electorate, but they remain in force, especially in academia.

    I am unaware of any college scholarships reserved exclusively for women, though are many which adhere to racial quotas. In my opinion, that favoritism is passe. Scholarships awards should be made on the basis of achievement and/or economic need. Racial affiliation is not a fit standard.

    Posted by: rangerjim1 | November 12, 2008 5:14 PM | Report abuse

    Again
    I was unjustly accused of a criminal offense February 2001, and to this day ; after three dismissals, have yet to have the HDO lifted.
    I have requested from the Ombudsman (Philippines); my attorney from the DOJ (Philippines), no help, the U.S. Embassy Manila "That's not our job", DOJ U.S., State Dept. U.S. no reply, the Human Rights branch of the UN Switzerland no reply.
    Is there any entity in the world that can assist as I am sixty-nine years old, diagnosed with several medical problems beyond the scope and my budget here, from mysterious growth on my leg to cancer and many others!
    I did my time with thirty-eight years with the U.S. Navy.
    This welfare recipient country supposed to be our allie has many ignored short comings in the human rights areas, contact Daniel Smith Cpl at the Embassy Manila! He can confirm!

    Posted by: jakwdoyle | November 12, 2008 8:22 PM | Report abuse

    Disabled Veterans Affirmative Action Program (DAP) Plans.
    There was no action on DAP by the agency that I worked for. They stated that it did not exist. I considered hiring a lawyer but did not have the money. Freedom is not free and as a Disabled Veterans who fought for his country in Viet Nam, I was ridiculed, held back, and not considered for better positions with promotion potential.

    Posted by: jimgatliff1 | November 12, 2008 9:17 PM | Report abuse

    In my employment discrimination appeals against the federal civil service, I have learned that many agencies falsify their statistics and spin their results to eliminate evidence of the resistance many have developed against obeying veterans' preference laws. Furthermore, the statistics presented in the article say nothing about the kind of employment offered veterans. The reason the number of veterans employed by the civil service seems high is the fact that about half of the many employees of the DOD and Departments of the Army, Navy, and Air Force are preference-eligible veterans, as they should be. The percentages of vets working for other departments and agencies show that the laws are not being followed. Many employ lower precentages of veterans than their percentage in the workforce, and in some, the percentages are at the 1% to 3% level, even though more than 11% of the workforce are veterans. In an appeal against the Forest Service in 2000, I discovered that most of the Vietnam Era veterans working for the Pacific Northwest Research Station were clustered at the level of GS-5 to GS-7, an extremely low level for people whose ages indicated that they should be earning their maximum lifetime salaries. When leaving her post as director of the Office of Personnel Management, Kaye Coles-James stated that avoidance of hiring veterans was the "dirty little secret" of her agency. She was certainly correct.

    Posted by: cwheckman | November 12, 2008 10:28 PM | Report abuse

    According to a para-legal for a major veterans' service orgainzation who assisted me several years ago, a footnote to these statistics is required. Please note that roughly 1.5 million federal civil servants in the mid-1970s were preference eligible veterans. The percentage is now well under 500,000. During the post-Vietnam era, more than a million jobs were taken from veterans and given to non-veterans.

    Posted by: cwheckman | November 12, 2008 10:35 PM | Report abuse

    The comments to this entry are closed.

 
 
RSS Feed
Subscribe to The Post

© 2010 The Washington Post Company