MSPB issues report on vet hiring

The Merit Systems Protection Board has issued a new report on hiring practices of veterans by federal agencies. 

The report discusses veterans preferences hiring rules and provides survey data on federal employees’ take on the policy. Those findings show that employee misperceptions—and the actual lack of clarity in some of those rules—“invite misunderstandings, confusion, perceptions of wrongdoing, and possibly actual wrongdoing—whether intentional or inadvertent,” as MSPB said in a statement

“Between their training, experience, and commitment to public service, veterans have much to offer potential employers, especially the Federal Government,” MSPB Chairman Susan Tsui Grundmann said. “But the laws and regulations that the Government uses to bring veterans into the civil service are varied and complicated,” she added.

Reader comments

Sat, Sep 6, 2014

I have read this article and can tell you that on almost every military installation the "Best Qualified" person does Not always get a federal job. Management and the Civilian Personnel Offices work hand in hand and a person with little or no experience, lacking education will be placed on a Best Qualified list because he/she is a friend or that manager. Boards or the so called interview process are rigged in almost every hiring. What's even worse is when a job announcement is canceled so that a person management wants either retires or returns from overseas or TDY. In the recent MSPB report it states that DoD has issues but agencies charged to investigate wrong doing either let the military bully them or assist in hiding Prohibited Personnel Practices (PPP). I have been fighting this system for almost 4 years and every agency overlooks violations of U.S. Code and common law. What even worse is they only interview those who violate the law. These agencies never do surveys like this recent MSPB survey. On one post over 30 people witnessed first hand a deliberate high jacking of a job announcement in favor of 1 person. When people asked why they a job announcement was never made public knowledge or why non of the employees working in that cell, they were threaten and active duty officers intiminated by leaders! Yes, leaders who should know better!

Thu, Sep 4, 2014 Dallas

I disagree. I am a 20 yr vet (VRA, VEOA, 10 point, and schedule A disabled). I also have a master’s degree and I am working towards a professional license. Many of the licensed positions start at the GS-9 grade. I have applied for over 300 positions but at least 50% resulted in an "unqualified" rating. I did manage to get a job at a GS-6 grade after being unemployed for over a year. Rather than being homeless I accepted the position. However, now I cannot move to a licensed GS-9 position regardless of my vet status and experience/educational credentials. There is an epidemic of homeless vets. I can only guess the reasons (the perception: of a tendency towards violence, lack of training, civilian/military various structural differences, etc. etc.). For many vet's it is extremely difficult to find employment. To compound the problem many do not have the skills to compete in the civilian sector (for ex. ammunition loader equates to what in the civilian sector?). In my “opinion”, the merit system was designed to give a slight advantage to veterans for this reason, but from what I have witnessed most vets are given low level positions (housekeeping, admin, aides etc.). Now it is true that the “CFR” and the other codes that pertain to the hiring process definitely need a revision. However, the greatest need is that they are revised into an understandable language that the HR departments in the lower level agencies can understand. I have applied for positions all over the country. I am learning that different agencies interpret the rules differently. There is no consistency but the rules are the same for each of these agencies. In my agency (unspecified VA in Texas) a majority of the employees have never served in the military. If veteran’s homelessness is seen as an epidemic, how can the government better assist veterans in finding employment?

Thu, Aug 21, 2014

"The MSPBoard has issued a new report on hiring practices of veterans by federal agencies-By FederalSoup Staff Aug. 20, 2014." I feel this report is "Long Overdue." Like many of the 6.5% Fed. Employees, I feel that Vet. hiring practices are unfair as well. I was a victim (yes victim) of "Vet. hiring preference" during a gov't-wide RIF and, I know what it feels like to have a Vet. who has no more training or experience than you have and be given preference over you while you are bumped out of an Upward Mobility position and grade that took 10 years to finally get back to. Had it not been for that Veteran's Preference, I would have been much further ahead a long time ago. I feel that, Veterans who are not "Wartime Veterans" should not be given 10 pts preference over Fed employees. This is unfair advantage because, Vets joined the Military for an advantage just like Fed. employees joined the Federal Gov't for advantage. Each one made a choice and, the "Non-Wartime Vet" should have no more advantage than the Fed. Gov't employee when it comes to hiring. Yes the "Wartime Vet" should have preference because, they are "giving their life" to save our Country. But, what is the "Non-Wartime Veteran" doing? nothing but building a career just like the Federal Gov't employee. Veteran's Preference "Veteran Preference for the Non-Waretime Vet is" "Unfair."

Thu, Aug 21, 2014


Thu, Aug 21, 2014

Let me begin by stating that I am a combat veteran. I believe that veterans preference laws, policies and regulations are discriminatory. This is America and we should all be given an equal opportunity to compete for federal jobs. Unfortunately, there is veteran's preference; there is diversity hire; etc. What does this mean? We are excluding many non veterans and non diversity candidates from federal employment. This is discrimination on the basis of having served or not having served in the military. This is discrimination based on race. Shame on this ridiculous approach to hiring. We should hire on the basis of merit and the process should be blind to status, gender, ethnicity and age. At least that is what the fine print on all HR documents state. Let's not forget that many non veterans also possess training, experience, commitment and academic qualifications that make them ideal candidates or better candidates for a federal job. Finally, veteran's preference needs to be revamped. Only combat vets should be receiving veteran's preference. My HR people send lists of all veterans whether they served in combat or warmed a chair in a cubicle in the US throughout their career. HR is afraid to weed them out even though many do not have required qualifications. Minimally qualified means all vets are minimally qualified because HR is afraid to do their jobs. Time to level the playing field!

Please post your comments here. Comments are moderated, so they may not appear immediately after submitting. We will not post comments that we consider abusive or off-topic.

Please type the letters/numbers you see above


Edward A. Zurndorfer Certified Financial Planner
Mike Causey Columnist
Tom Fox VP for Leadership and Innovation, Partnership for Public Service
Mathew B. Tully Legal Analyst

Free E-Newsletter


I agree to this site's Privacy Policy.

Stay Connected

Latest Forum Posts

Ask the Expert

Have a question regarding your federal employee benefits or retirement?

Submit a question