<DOC>
[109 Senate Hearings]
[From the U.S. Government Printing Office via GPO Access]
[DOCID: f:24166.wais]
S. Hrg. 109-264
ENHANCING COOPERATION BETWEEN EMPLOYERS AND GUARDSMEN/RESERVISTS
=======================================================================
HEARING
BEFORE THE
SUBCOMMITTEE ON EMPLOYMENT AND WORKPLACE SAFETY
OF THE
COMMITTEE ON HEALTH, EDUCATION,
LABOR, AND PENSIONS
UNITED STATES SENATE
ONE HUNDRED NINTH CONGRESS
FIRST SESSION
ON
EXAMINING ENHANCING COOPERATION BETWEEN EMPLOYERS AND GUARDSMEN/
RESERVISTS, FOCUSING ON CIVILIAN AND VETERAN ORGANIZATIONS TO WORK
TOGETHER TO REACH OUT TO SOLDIERS RETURNING FROM THE BATTLEFIELD
__________
OCTOBER 19, 2005
__________
Printed for the use of the Committee on Health, Education, Labor, and
Pensions
U.S. GOVERNMENT PRINTING OFFICE
24-166 WASHINGTON : 2006
_________________________________________________________________
For sale by the Superintendent of Documents, U.S. Government
Printing Office Internet: bookstore.gpo.gov Phone: toll free
(866) 512-1800; DC area (202) 512-1800 Fax: (202) 512-2250 Mail:
Stop SSOP, Washington, DC 20402-0001
COMMITTEE ON HEALTH, EDUCATION, LABOR, AND PENSIONS
MICHAEL B. ENZI, Wyoming, Chairman
JUDD GREGG, New Hampshire EDWARD M. KENNEDY, Massachusetts
BILL FRIST, Tennessee CHRISTOPHER J. DODD, Connecticut
LAMAR ALEXANDER, Tennessee TOM HARKIN, Iowa
RICHARD BURR, North Carolina BARBARA A. MIKULSKI, Maryland
JOHNNY ISAKSON, Georgia JAMES M. JEFFORDS (I), Vermont
MIKE DeWINE, Ohio JEFF BINGAMAN, New Mexico
JOHN ENSIGN, Nevada PATTY MURRAY, Washington
ORRIN G. HATCH, Utah JACK REED, Rhode Island
JEFF SESSIONS, Alabama HILLARY RODHAM CLINTON, New York
PAT ROBERTS, Kansas
Katherine Brunett McGuire, Staff Director
J. Michael Myers, Minority Staff Director and Chief Counsel
______
Subcommittee on Employment and Workplace Safety
JOHNNY ISAKSON, Georgia Chairman
LAMAR ALEXANDER, Tennessee PATTY MURRAY, Washington
RICHARD BURR, North Carolina CHRISTOPHER J. DODD, Connecticut
JOHN ENSIGN, Nevada TOM HARKIN, Iowa
PAT ROBERTS, Kansas BARBARA A. MIKULSKI, Maryland
MICHAEL B. ENZI, Wyoming (ex JAMES M. JEFFORDS (I), Vermont
officio) EDWARD M. KENNEDY, Massachusetts
(ex officio)
Glee Smith, Staff Director
William Kamela, Minority Staff Director
(ii)
C O N T E N T S
__________
STATEMENTS
WEDNESDAY, OCTOBER 19, 2005
Page
Isakson, Hon. Johnny, Chairman, Subcommittee on Employment and
Workplace Safety, opening statement............................ 1
Murray, Hon. Patty, a U.S. Senator from the State of Washington,
opening statement.............................................. 3
Roberts, Hon. Pat, a U.S. Senator from the State of Kansas,
opening statement.............................................. 6
Prepared statement........................................... 7
Burr, Hon. Richard, a U.S. Senator from the State of North
Carolina, opening statement.................................... 8
Gregg, Hon. Judd, a U.S. Senator from the State of New Hampshire,
prepared statement............................................. 9
Kennedy, Hon. Edward M., a U.S. Senator from the State of
Massachusetts, prepared statement.............................. 10
Hollingsworth, Bobby, Executive Director, National Committee for
Employer Support of the Guard and Reserve, Washington, DC;
Dennis Donovan, Executive Vice President, Human Resources, Home
Depot, Inc., Atlanta, GA; Christine Bierman, Chief Executive
Officer, Colt Safety, Fire and Rescue, St. Louis, MO; Lisa
Nisenfeld, Executive Director, Southwest Washington Workforce
Development Council, Vancouver, WA; and Ronald J. Fry,
Portfolio Management Associate, Wachovia Corporation, and
Sergeant First Class, North Carolina Army National Guard,
Charlotte, NC.................................................. 12
Prepared statements of:
Mr. Hollingsworth........................................ 15
Mr. Donovan.............................................. 17
Ms. Bierman.............................................. 21
Ms. Nisenfeld............................................ 24
Mr. Fry.................................................. 28
Jeffords, Hon. James M., a U.S. Senator from the State of
Vermont, prepared statement.................................... 34
ADDITIONAL MATERIAL
Statements, articles, publications, letters, etc.:
Response to questions of Senator Kennedy and Senator Jeffords
by Christine Bierman....................................... 41
Response to questions of Senator Kennedy and Senator Jeffords
by Dennis Donovan.......................................... 42
Response to question of Senator Jeffords by Bob Hollingsworth 42
Response to questions of Senator Kennedy by Bob Hollingsworth 43
Response to questions of Senator Kennedy and Senator Jeffords
by Lisa Nisenfeld.......................................... 45
(iii)
ENHANCING COOPERATION BETWEEN EMPLOYERS AND GUARDSMEN/RESERVISTS
----------
WEDNESDAY, OCTOBER 19, 2005
U.S. Senate,
Subcommittee on Employment and Workplace Safety, Committee
on Health, Education, Labor, and Pensions,
Washington, DC.
The subcommittee met, pursuant to notice, at 2:00 p.m., in
Room 430, Dirksen Senate Office Building, Hon. Johnny Isakson
[chairman of the subcommittee] presiding.
Present: Senators Isakson, Burr, Roberts, Murray, and
Jeffords.
Opening Statement of Senator Isakson
Senator Isakson. I call the Subcommittee on Employment and
Workplace Safety hearing to order and we will get started. We
have members including ranking member Murray on the way.
Senator Burr is also coming, but I want to be prompt in
beginning so I will start with my opening statement, and
hopefully others will come in and we will recognize them before
we hear from our distinguished panelists.
I would like to start by saying this. I was a member of the
Georgia National Guard for 6 years. I ran a company for 22
years and employed guardsmen and reservists. Now I have served
in the U.S. Senate and the U.S. House and voted to commit our
young men and women in the Reserve to defend freedom around the
world. There is nothing more important to us as a nation than a
ready Reserve that is ready, that is trained, and is staffed to
do the jobs we would never anticipate doing.
There is not a one of us that would have guessed that
September 11, 2001 would have ever happened, or that within
months after that we would have guardsmen and reservists
deployed in Afghanistan, Iraq, and around the world.
The companies that are here today and those that are here
in support of our men and women are real heroes to me. We are
going to hear from three companies that go above and beyond the
call of duty in the support of their employees who are members
of the Reserve and the Guard. The purpose of the hearing is to
really focus the light of day and shine the light, the
spotlight, on these great companies and what they have done.
It is critical that we continue in this difficult world of
ours to have the best trained, best equipped, best staffed
Reserve and Guard anywhere in the world. Because of the
employers that we have, we have that, and today, I am proud to
commend them to all of you.
Given the vital role employers play, the National Committee
for Employer Support of the Guard and Reserve, or ESGR, was
established in 1972 to promote cooperation between reservists
and their civilian employers and to help resolve any conflicts
that may arise due to employees' military commitment. Today, we
are very pleased to have Bob Hollingsworth here, who is the
Executive Director of that distinguished committee.
The USERRA Act, which was passed by Congress in 1994,
requires minimum requirements of American business, not to
discriminate in the hiring of guardsmen and reservists and to
ensure that they have a job waiting when their deployment is
complete. But I am pleased to report that thousands upon
thousands of employers like the three represented here today go
well above and beyond the call of duty.
Many employers voluntarily offer differential pay to their
activated employees. These are payments that represent the
difference in the wages they earn and what they would have
earned. In addition, many continue to extend health benefits to
the deployed employees and their family members. Beyond even
this, we will hear how some employers take the extra step to
show how much they appreciate the devotion of their employees.
We are happy to have with us today two such corporate role
models, including one from my home State of Georgia, and we
welcome Dennis Donovan of the Home Depot, and Christine Bierman
from Colt Safety, Fire and Rescue based in St. Louis, Missouri.
I also understand the importance of reemploying veterans
once back from their tour of duty and I welcome Lisa Nisenfeld
from the Southwest Washington Workforce Development Council to
speak to us today on the efforts that are done in that area.
We in Congress must always be looking for more ways to
foster the important relationship between reservists and
employers. Numerous bills introduced in this Congress take
different approaches to this end. I look forward to hearing
from all of our witnesses today on the importance of the
contribution they make to our Reserve and Guard.
On a closing comment in my opening statement, I would just
like to add that this morning, ironically, I spent 3 hours at
Walter Reed Hospital with members of the 48th Brigade who are
back from Iraq going through physical therapy and
rehabilitation from the limbs they lost in defense of our
country and in defense of freedom. Ironically, three of those I
visited guardsmen from Georgia, all of whom talked of how proud
they were to serve the country and how much they were looking
forward to going back to their employers. Having no idea that I
would be conducting this hearing this afternoon, two of them
talked specifically about their employer and about how much
their support had meant to their families while they were
deployed in Iraq.
This is the story we want to hear in the Congress. These
are the companies we want to brag about today, and I thank all
of our guests who are testifying on their behalf.
I introduce the distinguished ranking member, Mrs. Murray.
Opening Statement of Senator Murray
Senator Murray. Thank you very much, Mr. Chairman, and I
want to thank you for hosting today's hearing on this really
critically important issue to the men and women who are serving
us in the Guard and Reserve.
I want to start by saying that our Guard and Reserve
members are playing an extremely important role for our country
every day in Iraq, Afghanistan, now Louisiana and Mississippi,
Alabama, communities across the United States. I want to take a
moment here to thank all of them for their tremendous service.
Guard and Reserve employment is an important issue that our
committee must focus on. Although we have had some successes,
it is clear that we are not providing our Guard and Reserve
members all of the resources they need to access and maintain
employment once they are separated from active duty.
I want to extend a special thanks, as well, to our
panelists who are here today. Lisa Nisenfeld, who is the
Executive Director of the Southwest Washington Workforce
Development Council, comes from my home State in Vancouver, WA.
I was with her last week talking about these issues. I know
from firsthand experience that Lisa is one of the workforce
stars in our State, and under her leadership, workforce
programs in the region have more than doubled their positive
outcomes and, in fact, have become a key economic development
resource for growing companies.
Mr. Chairman, I have been working with Guard and Reserve
members throughout my 13 years here in the U.S. Senate and I
know the issues facing them have never been as severe as they
are today. The system simply doesn't work well enough and is
not adjusted for the up-tempo military model where our Guard
and Reserve members make up 40 percent of our troops in Iraq.
Guard and Reserve members are doing the jobs of active duty,
but they are getting few of the benefits.
One of the Guard members I recently talked to told me that
the mindset of Guard members was that the VA was for their
fathers, not for them. We have to cut through those kinds of
misunderstandings and show our Guard and Reserve members what
benefits they have earned and deserve.
The return of so many OIF and OEF veterans has made
veterans' employment assistance even more important. Since
2001, we have had over a million troops serving us in Iraq and
Afghanistan. Although the Department of Defense provides
services for the active duty component, the Guard and Reserve
face some major reintegration hurdles.
Over the past 6 months, I have met with many of these
veterans, especially our Guard and Reserve members in
Washington State. Many of them have talked to me about the
difficulty accessing employment assistance once they have been
demobilized. Time and time again, I have sat down with veterans
who tell me stories about struggling to get caught up at work
after their deployment, about having difficulty getting
education benefits, or they are struggling just to find a job
to support their families when they return.
I have to tell you, Mr. Chairman, those stories really
frustrate me. Last week, in fact, I was with Lisa and we had
three Guard members with us who returned last March and, not
one of them have been employed yet, and it is 6 months after
they have returned. They are now days away from losing their
unemployment insurance.
Other Guard members have spoken with me and tell me about
getting behind at their jobs, or not knowing how and where to
get the training they need. Others have told me that they have
no idea that employment services were even available and that
USERRA protected their rights to get back to their old jobs.
Others have told me about employers who were nervous about
hiring Guard members, since they might have medical issues
caused by injuries or they may be deployed again in just a few
months.
One Guard member in a Senate Veterans' Affairs Committee
hearing testified to us that he lost his business because SBA
programs intended to help small business owners and the self-
employed didn't work with the realities of mobilization. I have
also heard about the Transition Assistance Program, the TAP
program, that it doesn't work well for the 2-week time frame
Guard members are given to separate and it is too focused on
the needs of traditional forces. A finding that we recently got
from our May GAO report confirmed what I have heard on the
ground out there.
Now, often when people think of veterans' services, they
often just think of the VA health care system. However, we need
to let people know that there are a large amount of services
that are available to our veterans for benefits and they
include employment assistance. That means there are
considerable resources available to help our veterans meet the
employment challenges they face and I hope that in today's
hearing, we will hear from our panelists about what is working,
what is not, and where we need to make the changes necessary to
improve these services.
Last August, Mr. Chairman, at a Senate Veterans Affairs
Committee hearing, General Lowenberg, who is the Adjutant
General of the Washington National Guard, said that he felt
many Department of Defense programs don't work for our Guard
and Reserve members. He said that services provided by the
Defense Department and the VA should be revised to fit the
nature of a military now heavily dependent on Guard and Reserve
members. The Department of Defense estimates, in fact, that 68
percent of separating service members attended the full TAP
seminars, but only 35 percent of our Guard and Reserve members
attend.
I hope we hear from our panelists today on what we can do
to provide resources to help veterans and employers. I think it
is clear that Congress needs to look at many programs and
services, including interpersonal and life skills training,
readjustment counseling, VA briefings and workshops that are
presented before the members' active duty tour ends, and
training sessions and workshops that continue for up to a year
after Guard and Reserve members release from active duty.
We have got to find some innovative ways of educating our
veterans about the many Federal and State benefits to which
they are entitled, along with the growing number of services
that are provided by private, nonprofit public service
organizations, and I want to hear the panel address how those
and other services may or may not be working for traditional
active duty members as well as for our Guard and Reserve
members.
We need to update our resources. The Cold War is over, yet
we are holding on to programs that were built for veterans of
that era. The Department of Defense, the VA, the Department of
Labor, and others need to look at how we can get the right
services to veterans today. We should provide improved services
to our Guard and Reserve members after they have separated,
whether it is 3 months or 6 months or a year later. We have to
update the TAP program to work within the realities of what
Guard and Reserve members are going through today.
We should improve the Labor Vets program by expanding its
outreach efforts with creative initiatives designed to improve
employment and training services for our Guard and Reserve
members. We should place a priority on identifying military
occupations that require licenses or certification or
credentials at the local, State, and national levels. And we
should provide programs and funding that truly help our Guard
and Reserve members who run small businesses or are self-
employed as they manage that transition.
Mr. Chairman, I have said many times, I believe how we
treat our veterans when they come home is an important
indication of the character of our Nation. That is why I think
it is important for this subcommittee to look for ways to make
the transition to work and home life smoother and easier for
our service members and for their families.
So I hope that with today's hearing, we can hear about some
of these current needs and improvements, but I want to end with
just two final thoughts. I want everyone in this room to bear
in mind the story of a young guardsman that I met in August. He
is a father of three and he recently returned from Iraq. He
lost his job. He can't get unemployment. He can't get the VA or
the DOD doctors to figure out what is wrong with him, and he is
currently getting food stamps to feed his family.
Today, we are going to hear some success stories, and I
applaud the employers who are doing the right thing. We so
appreciate that and want you to continue. We want to do what we
can to make that happen. But we also have to focus on a lot of
these Guard and Reserve members who are falling through the
cracks, just like this father I talked to.
Second, I have heard for over a year that we did a better
job of taking care of our Guard and Reserve members during and
after the Gulf War. I have heard that from everywhere I go, and
I know that was a war where our Guard and Reserve made up a
smaller percentage of our troops in the Middle East and
obviously it was a much shorter conflict. Helping our Guard and
Reserve transition into civilian life is a fundamental cost of
war, and the Service Members Occupational Conversion and
Training Act was developed as a transitional tool designed to
provide job training and employment to veterans discharged
after August 1, 1990, the first Gulf War.
Back then, I think we need to recognize, there was a lot
stronger network that helped our Guard members with
reintegration than there is today. So I hope to hear from our
panelists today how we can best change that to provide our
veterans today the services they need, deserves and have
earned.
Thank you very much, Mr. Chairman.
Senator Isakson. Senator Roberts?
Opening Statement of Senator Roberts
Senator Roberts. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. I would like to
associate myself with your remarks and that of the
distinguished ranking member. I want to thank you for holding
the hearing, and I would ask permission that my entire
statement be made a part of the record and I will very briefly
summarize.
Senator Isakson. Without objection.
Senator Roberts. We have two of Kansas' largest employers,
Sprint and Westar Energy, who have made the decision to further
support their citizen soldiers by providing differential pay. I
certainly want to bring that to the attention of the committee.
We are very proud of them and we hope that they serve as an
example.
I would also point out that I think that Congressional
action is needed to clarify the tax treatment of this important
voluntary benefit. Here is the problem. Under a 36-year-old tax
ruling, our military fighting from foreign operating bases are
required to file quarterly tax returns and submit quarterly tax
payments because IRS rules actually treat a guardsman or a
reservist called up to active duty as a, quote, ``terminated
employee.'' This ruling is outdated. It is unacceptable to our
service members.
If you stop and think a minute about anybody in the Reserve
and Guard trying to stop the influx of the insurgency at the
border in Anbar Province, or trying to stabilize, say, Falujah,
they simply do not have time to sit down and fill out quarterly
tax forms.
I think that we need to take prompt action. Last year, we
almost had the problem fixed. Unfortunately, during
consideration of the 2005 Defense authorization bill, the
prospective legislation was removed during conference due to
objections with regard to an unrelated tax provision, so we got
into yet another turf fight. We cannot allow this IRS ruling to
stand.
Earlier this year, three members of this committee, Senator
Gregg, Senator Alexander, and myself joined together to
introduce legislation to clarify the tax treatment for
differential pay. We need to make sure that this voluntary
benefit provided by employers who want to do the right thing
does not inadvertently really create an additional tax
reporting burden on our citizen soldiers. Adopting this bill
will relieve that burden and send a message to both Guard and
Reserve families and employers that Congress recognizes the
importance of this voluntary benefit.
Again, Mr. Chairman, thank you for holding this important
hearing. I apologize for leaving, but as chairman of the
Intelligence Committee, we have Porter Goss, who is to give his
yearly report. The flak jacket that we were going to provide
him is missing and I have to find it.
[Laughter.]
Senator Isakson. Senator Roberts, before you leave, I want
to personally thank you for your leadership on the tax issue
and associate myself with your remarks and your support for
that change. You are exactly correct.
[The prepared statement of Senator Roberts follows:]
Prepared Statement of Senator Roberts
Mr. Chairman, thank you for holding this hearing to focus
on the relationship between our Nation's employers and Members
of the National Guard and Reserve. This important relationship
is critical to the success of our armed services and vital to
our national security.
As I visit with employers at home in Kansas, and our men
and women in uniform, I am encouraged by the positive news I
hear about steps employers are taking to assist employees
called to active duty. While Federal law sets out employment
protections for guardsmen and reservists who are on active
duty, I know that many employers are going above and beyond
these requirements.
One way they are doing this is by providing differential
pay. Differential pay provides the difference in pay between
active duty military pay and an employee's civilian pay. It is
a voluntary benefit offered by employers to their employees who
are members of the Guard and Reserve and who are called to
active duty.
Across the country, many employers recognize the value of
their employees who serve in the National Guard and military
Reserves. As a result, these employers, including two of
Kansas' largest employers, Sprint and Westar Energy, have made
the decision to further support their citizen soldiers by
providing differential pay.
This income is critical to many families who, faced with
the loss of income because a wage-earner is called to active
duty, now have greater financial security while their family
member is deployed. It means the difference between paying the
mortgage or car payment or struggling to make up the loss in
income. It means that a guardsman or reservist can better focus
on their mission without the added stress of wondering if their
family is financially secure. However, Congressional action is
needed to clarify the tax treatment of this important,
voluntary benefit.
Here is the problem: under a 36 year-old tax ruling,
soldiers fighting from forward operating bases are required to
file quarterly tax returns and submit quarterly tax payments
because IRS rules treats a guardsman or reservist called up to
active duty as a terminated employee. This ruling is outdated,
unacceptable and an insult to our men and women in uniform.
Prompt action is needed to correct this situation. Last year,
we almost had the problem fixed. Unfortunately, during
consideration of the 2005 defense authorization bill, the
proscriptive legislation was removed during conference due to
objections regarding an unrelated tax provision. We cannot
allow this IRS ruling to stand.
Earlier this year, three members of this committee, Senator
Gregg, Senator Alexander, and myself, joined together to
introduce legislation to clarify the tax treatment for
differential pay. We need to make sure that this voluntary
benefit, provided by employers who want to do the right thing,
does not inadvertently create an additional tax reporting
burden on our citizen soldiers. Adopting this bill will relieve
that burden and send a message to both Guard and Reserve
families and employers that Congress recognizes the importance
of this voluntary benefit.
Again Mr. Chairman, thank you for holding this important
hearing to highlight the vital relationship between our citizen
soldiers and their employers.
Senator Isakson. Senator Burr?
Opening Statement of Senator Burr
Senator Burr. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Let me take this
opportunity to welcome the panel. I had the opportunity this
morning to spend time with Mr. Donovan and to get some insight
as to the tremendous commitment that Home Depot makes. What we
find is they are not alone. There are a lot of companies around
the country that provide us the opportunity to tap into our
Guard and Reserve at a time like this, where we do have very
responsible corporate citizens, and where we don't. Hearings
like this, Mr. Chairman, are very helpful to help us fix the
system.
I might also point out that the University of North
Carolina at Chapel Hill leads a collaborative effort funded by
Congress with other institutions around the country called
Citizen Soldier to look specifically at the deployment of
guardsmen and reservists from the time that they are notified
of that deployment until the time that they get home. Rather
than waiting for an after-action report by DOD to be done after
an event, this is done in real time to try to evaluate how we
can do it better the next time we deploy. I think that already
some of the information that this collaborative agreement has
produced is beneficial to the quality of lives to the family
members and to the troops who are deployed.
It is indeed an honor today, Mr. Chairman, to also
introduce a constituent, Sergeant First Class Ronald Fry.
Sergeant Fry has been a member of the North Carolina Guard
since 1985. He was mobilized in September 2003 and deployed to
Iraq for Operation Iraqi Freedom from February 2004 to December
2004. He served as a platoon leader for a motorized infantry
element during 10 months of combat operations in Tikrit, Bayjl
and Najaf.
In peacetime, Ron Fry has been directly responsible for
mission execution, safety supervision, training, near- and
long-term planning, and logistical operations of 40 personnel,
four self-propelled howitzers, and a fire direction center. He
has multiple military awards that he has won. Sergeant Fry was
selected as the Brigade Non-Commissioned Officer of the Year in
1990 and the Battalion Non-Commissioned Officer of the Year in
1990, 1997, 1998, and a member of the Joint Counter Narcotics
Task Force in 1990.
Ron Fry works for Wachovia Bank in Charlotte, North
Carolina. He has worked there since 1998. Wachovia,
interestingly enough, Mr. Chairman, received the 2005 Secretary
of Defense Freedom Award on October 15, 2005. Currently, Ron
serves as a Portfolio Manager Associate for the Credit Products
Group at Wachovia Securities and he manages the credit risk of
a multibillion-dollar portfolio of the financial institution's
clients. He is responsible for all senior debt underwriting for
any new or existing clients in the portfolio.
He received a B.A. in Business Administration in 1998 from
Belmont Abbey College in Belmont, North Carolina, and is
currently in the MBA program at Wake Forest University's
Babcock School of Management, an institution that is close to
my heart, Mr. Chairman, in it's Charlotte Master's program.
Mr. Chairman, it is indeed an honor to introduce not only a
good Wachovia employee and North Carolinian, but a brave
American who has served his country well. I welcome you, Ron.
Senator Isakson. Thank you very much, Senator Burr. We
appreciate that.
At this time I would like to ask unanimous consent that the
statements of Senators Gregg and Kennedy appear in the record
and that any other statements submitted may be submitted during
the next 10 days and the record held open. Without objection,
so ordered.
[The prepared statement of Senator Gregg follows:]
Prepared Statement of Senator Gregg
Today, I am pleased that the Chairman has called this
important hearing and I would like to take a few moments to
discuss a significant bill that will be discussed today, The
Uniformed Services Differential Pay Protection Act.
Sustained military operations in Afghanistan and Iraq have
brought to light another example of how outdated and burdensome
Government policies can punish generous employers. Employers
that continue to pay their employees now on active duty in the
uniformed services are experiencing tax and pension
difficulties that are discouraging this pro-worker, patriotic
gesture.
Under current law, employers of reservists and guardsmen
called up for active duty are required to treat them as if they
are on a leave of absence under the Uniformed Services
Employment and Reemployment Rights Act of 1994 (USERRA). The
act does not require employers to pay reservists who are on
active duty. But as I have pointed out, many employers pay the
reservists the difference between their military stipends and
their regular salaries. Some employers provide this
``differential pay'' for up to 3 years. For employee
convenience, many of these companies also allow deductions from
the differential payment for contributions to their 401(k)
retirement plans.
The conflict arises, however, because a 1969 IRS Revenue
Ruling considers the employment relationship terminated when
active duty begins. This ruling prevents employers from
treating the differential pay as wages for income tax purposes,
resulting in unexpected tax bills at the end of the year for
these military personnel. Further, the contributions made to
the worker's retirement account potentially invalidate
(disqualify) the employer's entire retirement plan which could
make all amounts immediately taxable to plan participants and
the employer.
The Uniformed Services Differential Pay Protection Act that
I have introduced amends the Internal Revenue Code to clarify
that differential wage payments are to be treated as wages to
current employees for income tax purposes and that retirement
plan contributions are permissible. It defines ``differential
wage payment'' as any employer payment to an individual serving
on active duty in the uniformed services for more than 30 days
which represents wages such individual would have received if
such individual were performing services for the employer. The
bill treats an individual receiving differential wage payments
as an employee and treats differential wage payments as
compensation for retirement plan purposes.
In summary, the Uniformed Services Differential Pay
Protection Act upholds the principle that employers should not
be penalized for their generosity towards our Nation's
reservists and members of the National Guard. Again, I thank
the Chairman for bringing this issue to the attention of the
committee during this hearing today.
[The prepared statement of Senator Kennedy follows:]
Prepared Statement of Senator Kennedy
I commend Chairman Isakson and Senator Murray for holding
this important hearing. The longer the war in Iraq goes on, the
greater the toll it places on members of the Guard, Reserves,
and their employers.
Before September 11th, the average number of reservists and
guardsmen on active duty was 35,000. Today over 150,000 are on
active duty around the world, with many on their second, third,
or even fourth tours of duty.
Their continuing deployments strain our troops and their
families, but they also cause hardship for their employers.
Large companies struggle to find ways to work around their
absent employees, but for small businesses, the loss of an
individual can mean the difference between survival and
bankruptcy, and for doctors and lawyers, the time away may well
mean that their practice no longer exists when they return from
their deployment.
But the greatest hardship falls on the members of the Guard
and Reserves themselves and their families. In the current
economy, continuing activations can be a severe hardship. When
these men and women leave their civilian jobs behind, they
often give up higher salaries and benefits too. Their families
have to find other ways to meet mortgage payments, buy
groceries, and care for their children without the benefit of
their civilian salaries.
To reduce this hardship, our laws provide that service
members returning home are entitled to return to their old
jobs, without losing their seniority or benefits. Most
employers obey the law, and as a recent survey by the
Department of Defense has found, many employers actually go
above and beyond the law's requirements to help reservists and
their families. We'll recognize some of these employers at
today's hearing. Massachusetts protects the salaries of its
State employees called up for duty in the armed forces by
paying the difference between their civilian pay and their
military pay.
Raytheon, the largest employer in the State, does so
indefinitely. It also continues employee health benefits, so
that families don't have to change doctors while their loved
one is away. Raytheon employees receive credit for their
pensions while they are on duty.
Hopefully, now that this issue is being raised, many more
employers will follow the example of the companies here today,
and many more soldiers who are bravely fighting in Iraq and
Afghanistan or serving in other parts of the world will find
their jobs waiting for them when they return.
Too many soldiers, however, return to find that they've
been replaced, or are being demoted to a lower-paying position
or a job with less responsibility.
We'll hear today from the Department of Defense, which
provides support for over 800,000 members of our Guard and
Reserve now on drilling duty. The Department has over 4,000
volunteers, including 800 ombudsmen, across the country who
answer questions and try to resolve workplace problems. In
fiscal year 2004, over 1,400 service members had problems with
their employers and filed complaints with the Department of
Labor as well.
When I first heard about these types of problems from
Massachusetts reservists, they told me they were worried about
their jobs when they returned. Their employers were frustrated
when they left their jobs to serve our country, and they feared
they would be punished for it--by being passed over for
promotion, being moved to another position, or worst of all,
being fired.
I asked the Government Accountability Office to study what
the Federal Government actually does to protect the rights of
men and women in uniform, since it's not enough to have
protective laws on the books. We also need to enforce them. The
GAO report I'm releasing today shows that our Federal agencies
need to do a better job. Servicemembers' rights are at risk of
being mired in a bureaucracy that can't communicate with
itself. The four agencies responsible for enforcing the rights
of our reservists and National Guard members have separate
tracking systems that are not only not electronic, but are also
incompatible with each other. In some cases, GAO found that the
same servicemembers' files were being opened and closed
repeatedly--with some complaints taking nearly 2 years to
resolve.
GAO has a number of recommendations to address these
problems, such as that one agency should be responsible for
overseeing the complaint process from start to finish. We need
to consider this option seriously and I look forward to working
with my colleagues to tackle these challenges and provide the
necessary oversight and assistance to these agencies.
We need to do everything we can to protect the rights of
our service members as they reenter the American workplace.
These men and women have already made tremendous sacrifices,
leaving behind not only their civilian jobs but also their
homes, their families, and their communities. They are doing
their duty with great skill and courage, and it's our job to be
sure that the Federal Government does its duty too, so that no
one in our volunteer military suffers on the job for serving
their country on the battlefield.
Senator Isakson. Now I will introduce three of our panel
members and Senator Murray will introduce the fourth. You have
just gotten a wonderful introduction, Sergeant Fry. We
appreciate you being here today.
Senator Murray. And I introduced Lisa in my opening
remarks, so she is introduced to the committee.
Senator Isakson. First, representing the views of the
administration is Bobby Hollingsworth, Executive Director of
the National Committee for Employer Support of the Guard and
Reserve. Appointed by President Bush less than 2 months after
September 11, 2001, Mr. Hollingsworth serves as an advisor to
the Assistant Secretary of Defense for Reserve Affairs on all
matters involving employer support programs for the Reserve
components of the United States Armed Forces.
Second, I am very pleased to welcome Mr. Dennis Donovan,
Executive Vice President of the Home Depot. Mr. Donovan
oversees human resources functions for the Atlanta company's
more than 300,000 associates. In just the Iraq conflict alone,
the Home Depot has catered to the needs of approximately 1,800
associates who have been called to active duty.
On a point of personal privilege, I have had the occasion
over and over again to witness the commitment of the Home Depot
Corporation in the hiring of veterans. This year, they have
already hired 13,000. Last year, they hired 16,000. They are a
national leader in seeking out members of the armed forces and
our veterans to serve, and their unparalleled support of the
military and the young men and women who fight on behalf of
this country is appreciated tremendously by this Nation and by
their families.
Third, we welcome Christine Bierman, founder and CEO of
Colt Safety, Incorporated, a small business from St. Louis,
Missouri. A former teacher turned entrepreneur, she has
supported two employees activated by Operation Noble Eagle and
Operation Iraqi Freedom and we are delighted to welcome you
here today. To all of our panelists, we appreciate the example
that you set.
I will now open our hearing and ask Mr. Hollingsworth if
you would like to make the first statement. We would like for
you to keep the statement within 5 minutes, if possible. If you
go over a little bit, we will let you fudge.
STATEMENTS OF BOBBY HOLLINGSWORTH, EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR, NATIONAL
COMMITTEE FOR EMPLOYER SUPPORT OF THE GUARD AND RESERVE,
WASHINGTON, DC; DENNIS DONOVAN, EXECUTIVE VICE PRESIDENT, HUMAN
RESOURCES, HOME DEPOT, INC., ATLANTA, GA; CHRISTINE BIERMAN,
CHIEF EXECUTIVE OFFICER, COLT SAFETY, FIRE AND RESCUE, ST.
LOUIS, MO; LISA NISENFELD, EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR, SOUTHWEST
WASHINGTON WORKFORCE DEVELOPMENT COUNCIL, VANCOUVER, WA; AND
RONALD J. FRY, PORTFOLIO MANAGEMENT ASSOCIATE, WACHOVIA
CORPORATION, AND SERGEANT FIRST CLASS, NORTH CAROLINA ARMY
NATIONAL GUARD, CHARLOTTE, NC
Mr. Hollingsworth. Chairman Isakson, ranking member Murray,
Senator Burr, and Senator Jeffords, it is indeed a privilege
and we really thank you for the opportunity to come over and
talk about the great things that are happening in America today
for the members of the Guard and Reserve.
Just in the past weekend, the Secretary of Defense
recognized 15 employers nationwide by presenting them with the
Employer Support Freedom Award, which is the Department of
Defense's highest award recognizing employers for going above
and beyond the requirements of the law to support their
employees who serve our Nation's National Guard and Reserve.
I am honored to be joined today by Dennis Donovan from the
Home Depot and Christine Bierman from Colt Safety. Both of
those were 2004 recipients of the Freedom Award. And, of
course, I am also pleased to have Ronald Fry be here from
Wachovia, who is a 2005 recipient. Lisa, it is great to be here
with you, as well.
The rigorous selection process for the Secretary of Defense
Employer Support Freedom Award begins with the guardsman and
reservists or a family member of a guardsman or reservist
nominating their employer for this prestigious award. This
year, I am pleased to report to you that we had over 1,500
nominations for this award.
In 1994, Congress passed the Uniformed Services Employment
and Reemployment Rights Act, or USERRA, as it is more commonly
known. It updated the 50-year-old Veterans Reemployment Rights
Act to provide a broader range of protections to incorporate
many court decisions that were relative to the VRR. USERRA
prohibits discrimination in the basis of military service and
established the conditions under which an employee may return
to employment following active duty, active duty for training,
or inactive duty for training.
For guardsmen and reservists to continue to serve knowing
his or her civilian employment is protected by law is extremely
important. Knowing that his or her employment supports his or
her service to guarantee our national security is equally
important.
Employer Support of the Guard and Reserve is a Department
of Defense organization, as you mentioned earlier, that is
responsible for gaining and maintaining support from all public
and private employment for the men and women of the National
Guard. Through an aggressive employer outreach effort, we
educate and inform employers of their responsibilities under
USERRA and encourage them to go above and beyond to support
their employees serving in the Guard and Reserve.
We recognize that there are employers within the private
and public sectors that cannot provide differential pay or
health benefits because of public policy or fiscal or economic
constraints. Going above and beyond is not limited to
differential pay or continuation of health benefits. There are
many things that an employer can do that carry little or no
price tag, and in many cases, these little things are every bit
as meaningful, if not more so, to the employees serving in the
Guard and Reserve.
For example, Army Reserve Lieutenant Chad Souers from
Northport, Alabama, sat down at a computer in Tikrit, Iraq, to
nominate his employer for the 2004 Freedom Award. He
acknowledged that his employer, which was Wal-Mart, provided
differential pay and paid his portion of the civilian health
insurance, but elaborated on Wal-Mart's personal touches. His
boss, which is Mr. Fred Twilley, made regular phone calls to
Lieutenant Souers' wife to ensure that she and their infant
daughter were coping with his absence. Mr. Twilley and
Lieutenant Souers' Wal-Mart associates invited Mrs. Souers to
their store on their wedding anniversary for a surprise
anniversary party. Lieutenant Souers' Wal-Mart associates sent
flowers to Mrs. Souers on Valentine's Day and on Mother's Day
to help with the pain of separation on these important days.
Lieutenant Souers says, and I quote, ``They have repeatedly
gone out of their way to include my wife and my daughter in the
Wal-Mart family during my absence, only as dear friends could.
All of this has given me the peace of mind when I needed it the
most, knowing that there were so many people looking after my
loved ones when I was unable to.''
In Las Vegas, the Metropolitan Police Department is a
public sector agency that goes above and beyond in supporting
its employees of the Guard and Reserve. Sheriff Bill Young has
assigned a family support coordinator to each of the
department's area commands to maintain contact with the
families of the deployed guardsmen and reservists. Not only do
his area commanders maintain e-mail contact with the deployed
soldiers and airmen and marines and other service members, but
they do so with--also, the members of the employee's squad.
The Las Vegas Metropolitan Police Department has instituted
a leave donation policy allowing an employee to donate unused
leave so that the guardsmen and reservists may have extra paid
leave when they return from mobilization. To their credit,
quotes Captain Gabriela Hatfield-Cook, ``the officers and
employees of the Las Vegas Metropolitan Police Department stand
behind their deployed comrades without reservation.''
In another situation, Coast Guard Reserves Chief Warrant
Officer Norm Chapman from Olympia, WA, has been a reservist the
entire 18 years he has been employed by the South Puget Sound
Community College. While South Puget Sound Community College is
unable to provide differential pay, Mr. Chapman notes that the
college grants veterans preferential credit points for most
positions, they provide recognition of Guard and Reserve
service through various college-wide activities, and upon
several occasions, the school's automotive department made
repairs to his family's vehicle, reducing the stress on his
wife during mobilization. Not only did the college's public
relations department publish stories about his experiences on
active duty, but they ensured that he was informed about the
news from the college so that when he was away, which enabled
him to return to work with some knowledge of what was happening
in his absence.
Mr. Chapman said, quote, ``After the events of September
11, a few of us employees have been called up more than once
and I have heard nothing but positive words of encouragement
from the administrative team. I feel totally confident that my
job and position is fully protected by my employer and that
they truly care about my Reserve participation.''
Lieutenant General Steve Blum, the Chief of the National
Guard Bureau, frequently says that we recruit the soldier, but
we retain the family. In order for an employee to feel secure
in continuing to serve in the National Guard and Reserve, not
only must he or she be confident that they will return to their
job and face no penalty for their service, but also that his or
her employer supports their service to our national security.
The Department of Defense recognizes that we share almost half
of our workforce with America's employers, and those employers
share sacrifices of the guardsmen and reservists. On behalf of
a grateful Nation, the Department of Defense thanks these
employers.
If National Guardsmen and Reservists are indeed twice the
citizen, then their civilian employers are twice the patriot.
America's employers are inextricably linked to our Nation's
security.
Thank you, and I am looking forward to answering any
questions you may have.
Senator Isakson. Thank you, Mr. Hollingsworth.
[The prepared statement of Mr. Hollingsworth follows:]
Prepared Statement of Bobby Hollingsworth
Mr. Chairman and members of the subcommittee, thank you for the
opportunity to testify today on the importance of employer support for
the Members of the National Guard and Reserve.
This past weekend, the Secretary of Defense recognized 15 employers
nationwide by presenting them with the Employer Support Freedom Award,
the Department of Defense's highest honor recognizing employers for
going ``above and beyond'' the requirements of law to support their
employees who serve our Nation in the National Guard and Reserve. I am
honored to be joined here today by Dennis Donovan of Home Depot and
Christine Bierman of Colt Safety, Fire and Rescue. Both firms are 2004
recipients of the Freedom Award. The rigorous selection process for the
Freedom Award begins with a member of the Guard or Reserve, or a family
member of a guardsman or reservist, nominating the employer for the
award. I am pleased to report to you that we had over 1,500 nominations
for the 2005 Freedom Awards.
In 1994, Congress passed the Uniformed Services Employment and
Reemployment Rights Act, or USERRA as it is more commonly known. It
updated the 50 year-old Veterans' Reemployment Rights (VRR) Act, to
provide a broader range of protections and incorporate many court
decisions relative to VRR. USERRA prohibits discrimination on the basis
of military service and establishes the conditions under which an
employee may return to employment following Active Duty, for Training,
or Inactive Duty for Training. For a guardsman or reservist to continue
to serve, knowing his or her civilian employment is protected by law is
extremely important. Knowing that his or her employer supports his or
her service to guarantee our national security is equally important.
Employer Support of the Guard and Reserve is the Department of
Defense organization responsible for gaining and maintaining support
from all public and private employers for the men and women of the
National Guard and Reserve. Through an aggressive employer outreach
effort, we educate and inform employers on their responsibilities under
USERRA and encourage them to go ``above and beyond'' to support their
employees serving in the National Guard and Reserve.
We recognize that there are employers within the private and public
sectors that cannot provide differential pay or health benefits because
of public policy or economic constraints. Going ``above and beyond'' is
not limited to differential pay or continuation of health benefits.
There are many things an employer can do that carry little or no price
tag, and in many cases, these ``little things'' are every bit as
meaningful, if not more so, to the employee serving in the Guard and
Reserve.
Army Reserve Lieutenant Chad Souers of Northport, Alabama, sat down
at a computer in Tikrit, Iraq, to nominate his employer for a 2004
Freedom Award. He acknowledged that his employer, Wal-Mart, provided
differential pay and paid his portion of his civilian health insurance,
but elaborated on Wal-Mart's personal touches. His boss, Fred Twilley,
made regular phone calls to Lieutenant Souers' wife to ensure that she
and their infant daughter were coping with his absence. Mr. Twilley and
Lieutenant Souers' Wal-Mart associates invited Mrs. Souers to the store
on their wedding anniversary for a surprise anniversary party.
Lieutenant Souers' Wal-Mart associates sent flowers to Mrs. Souers on
Valentine's Day and Mothers' Day to help with the pain of separation on
those important days. Lieutenant Souers said, ``They have repeatedly
gone out of their way to include my wife and daughter in the Wal-Mart
family during my absence as only dear friends could. All of this has
given me the peace of mind when I needed it the most, knowing that
there were so many people looking after my loved ones when I was unable
to.''
The Las Vegas Metropolitan Police Department is a public sector
agency that goes ``above and beyond'' in supporting its employees who
serve in the Guard and Reserve. Sheriff Bill Young has assigned a
family support coordinator within each of the department's area
commands to maintain contact with the families of deployed guardsmen
and reservists. Not only do his area commanders maintain e-mail contact
with deployed employees, but so do the members of the deployed
employee's squad. The Las Vegas Metropolitan Police Department
instituted a leave donation policy allowing any employee to donate
unused leave so that guardsmen and reservists may have extra paid leave
when they return from mobilization. Army Reserve Captain Gabriela
Hatfield-Cook said, ``To their great credit, the officers and employees
of the Las Vegas Metro Police Department stand behind their deployed
comrades without reservation.''
Coast Guard Reserve Chief Warrant Officer Norm Chapman of Olympia,
Washington has been a reservist the entire 18 years he has worked for
the South Puget Sound Community College. While South Puget Sound
Community College is unable to provide differential pay, Mr. Chapman
notes that the college grants veterans preference credit points for
most positions, provides recognition of Guard and Reserve service
through various college-wide activities, and upon several occasions,
the school's automotive department made repairs to his family's
vehicle, reducing the stress on his wife during the mobilization. Not
only did the college's public relations department publish stories
about his experiences on active duty, they ensured he was informed
about news from the college while he was away, enabling him to return
to work with some knowledge of what had happened during his absence.
Mr. Chapman said, ``After the events of September 11th, a few of us
employees have been called up more than once, and I have heard nothing
but positive words of encouragement from the administrative team. I
feel totally confident that my job and position is fully protected by
my employer and that they truly care about my Reserve participation.''
Lieutenant General Steve Blum, Chief of the National Guard Bureau,
frequently says that we recruit the soldier but retain the family. In
order for an employee to feel secure in continuing to serve in the
National Guard or Reserve, not only must he or she be confident that
they will return to their job and face no penalty for their service,
but also that his or her employer supports their service to our
national security. The Department of Defense recognizes that we share
almost half of our workforce with America's employers, and these
employers share the sacrifices of our guardsmen and reservists. On
behalf of a grateful Nation, the Department of Defense thanks these
employers.
If National Guardsmen and Reservists are indeed ``twice the
citizen,'' then their civilian employers are ``twice the patriot.''
America's employers are inextricably linked to our Nation's security.
Thank you, and I will be happy to answer your questions.
Senator Isakson. Mr. Donovan?
Mr. Donovan. Good afternoon. I would like to start out by
thanking Chairman Isakson and Senator Murray for inviting the
Home Depot to participate in this subcommittee hearing.
The Home Depot was founded just in 1978. We are the world's
largest home improvement specialty retailer, the second-largest
retailer in the United States. We currently employ more than
325,000 associates. Home Depot operates more than 1,950 stores
in all 50 States, the District of Columbia, Puerto Rico, 10
Canadian provinces, and Mexico. Our headquarters are in
Atlanta, Georgia, and we are proud to call the chairman of this
committee our Senator.
At the Home Depot, we take our support for the military
very, very seriously. One of our core values at the Home Depot
is taking care of our people. Since 2002, the Home Depot has
had approximately 1,800 associates called to active duty for
the current conflict. Beyond assuring that these associates
have a good job when they return home, the company also
implemented an extended and enhanced leave of absence benefit.
The Home Depot equalizes pay between their military salary and
their Home Depot compensation and we extend health benefits to
deployed associates as well as their family members.
Our company's support of the military goes beyond our
deployed associates. In September of 2004, the Home Depot
joined forces with the U.S. Departments of Defense, Labor, and
Veterans' Affairs to launch Operation Career Front. This is an
unprecedented program to provide job opportunities for
veterans, separating active duty service members, National
Guard, Reserves, and military spouses.
In 2003, the Home Depot hired 10,000 veterans. In 2004, the
company hired more than 16,000 former military personnel, and I
am proud to say that we expect to surpass this number in 2005,
since we have already hired 13,000 veterans through September
of this year.
Home Depot has also hired a significant number of former
junior military officers into our Store Leadership Program.
Since 2002, we have hired a total of 1,147 people into this
program. Five-hundred-and-twenty-nine of them are former junior
military officers. And out of that number, 125 of the JMOs are
academy graduates.
The company also participates in the Marine Corps' National
Fellows Program. This is a 1 year rotation inside of the Home
Depot where the Marine works very closely with the senior
leadership team of the company. Lieutenant Colonel Jim Izen,
who is here with me today, is our fourth Marine fellow.
The Home Depot also collaborates with the military to share
best practices. We are hosting the Army's Strategic Leadership
Program for the third time on November 16. The focus will be on
leadership, information technology, supply chain, and
logistics.
Another one of the core values at the Home Depot is giving
back to the community, and we do this through donations and
volunteerism. Giving back to the military community is
certainly part of this. In April of 2003, we launched Project
Homefront. While they were protecting our homeland, we wanted
to protect their homefront. This program was designed to help
military families with home repairs while their loved ones were
deployed. The Home Depot donated a million dollars and a
million hours of volunteerism to help out during 2003 and 2005,
and to date, we have repaired over 1,000 homes.
In addition, in July of 2004, the company donated $1
million in tools and materials to support the U.S. military
efforts in Iraq.
I would like to close by saying that we view our support
for the military as our responsibility to our country. We don't
view this as a cost. We consider this as a valuable investment
to our company's future. Again, this is something we take very
seriously and we will continue to support those who are
defending our rights and protecting our freedoms.
Chairman Isakson, Senator Murray, thank you again for
inviting the Home Depot to be here today.
Senator Isakson. Thank you, Mr. Donovan.
[The prepared statement of Mr. Donovan follows:]
Prepared Statement of Dennis Donovan
Good afternoon. My name is Dennis Donovan, and I am the Executive
Vice President of Human Resources for The Home Depot, Inc.
I would like to thank Chairman Isakson and Senator Murray for
inviting The Home Depot to participate in this subcommittee's hearing
on cooperation between employers and guardsmen/reservists.
Founded in 1978, The Home Depot is the world's largest home
improvement specialty retailer and the second largest retailer in the
United States, with fiscal 2004 sales of $73.1 billion. The company
employs approximately 325,000 associates and has more than 1,950 stores
in all 50 States, the District of Columbia, Puerto Rico, 10 Canadian
provinces and Mexico. Headquartered in Atlanta, Georgia, we're
extremely proud to call the chairman of this subcommittee our Senator.
At The Home Depot, we feel that our support of the military sets
the standard for corporate America. It is our belief that we must honor
our military heroes where it matters most, not only in our thoughts and
prayers, but also in our business practices, human resource policies,
corporate giving and volunteer efforts. It is in our value proposition
to take care of the people who are defending our country. We do not
view our military support as a cost, but rather as an investment. It is
not a burden. It is our responsibility, and one that we live up to
proudly each and every day.
The Home Depot's commitment to the men and women who serve our
country is unquestionably strong and very close to the heart. Since
2002, The Home Depot has had approximately 1,800 associates called to
active duty for the current Iraqi conflict.
The Home Depot has implemented an extended and enhanced leave of
absence benefit for our deployed associates. Beyond making sure these
associates have a good job when they return home, The Home Depot
equalizes pay between their military salary and what they would have
made at The Home Depot as well as extends health benefits to all of our
deployed associates and members of their families.
We feel it is important to take care of our associates while they
are away protecting our freedoms, so the company has extended these
benefits to our associates for the duration of the Iraqi conflict. It
is extremely important to us that these men and women are given the
opportunity to continue receiving their benefits and have their pay
equalized if their military position pays them less then what they
would be earning if they were not a reservist or guardsman. These
individuals should not have to forgo benefits or income because of
their decision to defend our Nation.
Our company's support of the U.S. military and the men and women
serving our country goes far beyond what we offer our own deployed
associates. The Home Depot has been a long-time proponent of hiring
separating military, veterans and military spouses.
On September 21, 2004, The Home Depot joined forces with the U.S.
Departments of Defense, Labor, and Veterans Affairs to launch Operation
Career Front, an unprecedented program designed to provide career
opportunities for America's military personnel who are interested in
transferring their unique skills, knowledge and abilities into a
successful second career.
I was in Washington, D.C. with Bob Nardelli, our Chairman,
President and CEO; Elaine L. Chao, the Secretary of Labor; Dr. David
S.C. Chu, the Under Secretary of Defense for Personnel and Readiness of
U.S. Department of Defense; and Anthony J. Principi, the former
Secretary of Veterans Affairs to launch this tremendous initiative.
In addition to providing employment opportunities for active,
Reserve, National Guard or veterans, The Home Depot also has a program
for military spouses and dependents. With our network of stores
throughout the country, The Home Depot works with its military
associates to provide transfers in the cases of reassignment of duty
stations, retirement or separation.
Operation Career Front is a program that enhances the company's
hiring efforts within the military community. In 2003, The Home Depot
hired 10,000 veterans, and in 2004 the company hired more than 16,000
former military personnel. I could not be more proud to tell you that
we plan to exceed that number in 2005 as we already have hired more
than 13,000 veterans through September.
Our effort, Operation Career Front, supports America's military job
seekers, including veterans, separating active duty service members,
National Guard members, Reserves and military spouses.
To support the initiative, the U.S. Department of Defense provides
a link on its Web site to enable military members and their families to
apply for employment with The Home Depot, and it lists The Home Depot
as a prospective employer on its job search Web site. The U.S.
Department of Defense also makes information available to interested
military personnel and their families outlining the process to apply
for careers with The Home Depot through their Military Transition
Assistance and Family Centers.
The U.S. Department of Labor makes Operation Career Front
information available to more than 2,000 One-Stop Career Centers
throughout the Nation. The U.S. Department of Labor also supports the
initiative utilizing the Local Veterans Employment Representatives
(LVERs) as well as Disabled Veteran Opportunity Program (DVOP)
specialists located at One-Stops and Transition Assistance Centers
across the Nation.
The U.S. Veterans Affairs Department's Vocational Rehabilitation
and Employment (VA VR&E) division makes Operation Career Front
information available to veterans with service-connected disabilities
through its representatives located in State offices across the Nation.
The Home Depot has also hired a significant number of former
military into our Store Leadership Program. The Store Leadership
Program provides individuals who are dynamic and driven with a strong
foundation of strategic and technical skills, placing them on the fast
track to store manager positions.
Since the inception of the program in 2002, the company has
enrolled 1,147 individuals. Of those enrolled, 529 of them are former
junior military officers, with 125 of the JMO's being Academy
graduates.
The Home Depot is always looking for the best, brightest talent
available, and we have found that the former junior military officers
that have joined our company possess tremendous leadership
characteristics that have made them invaluable hires. We have found
that these men and women have transferable experience because they have
been put in a position where they have had to deliver results, and
where they must act strategically as well as tactically.
In addition, our experience shows us that junior military officers
have the ability to drive excellence and lead through inspiration.
Also, they have the self-confidence and the know-how to engage
customers.
The company also is a participant in the Marine Corps Corporate
Fellows Program. For the past several years, an officer from the U.S.
Marine Corps has been assigned to The Home Depot for a 1-year rotation
working closely with the company's senior leadership team. The company
benefits from the military leader's experience, and the officer is able
to transfer his or her learnings at The Home Depot back to the Marines.
We are proud to say we have our fourth Marine Corp Fellow, Lt. Col. Jim
Izen, currently at The Home Depot.
The company also collaborates with the military to share best
business practices. On November 16, 2005, The Home Depot is scheduled
to host the Army Strategic Leadership Program for the third time. More
than 25 senior officers and personnel will be in Atlanta to meet with
Bob Nardelli and the members of the Senior Leadership Team to discuss
and share ideas around leadership, logistics, information technology
and supply chain management. On November 18, I am slated to meet with
officers and personnel from the Air Force to share best practices.
Taking care of our communities through corporate philanthropy and
volunteerism is one of the company's core values. Our commitment to the
military community is no exception.
In 2003, we launched Project Homefront, a program designed to help
military families with home repairs while their loved ones were away
serving on active duty. The company pledged $1 million and 1 million
volunteer hours from our associates to complete these home repairs
during 2003 and 2004.
In July 2004, The Home Depot donated $1 million in tools and
materials to support U.S. military efforts in Iraq. Nearly 100,000
tools and materials, including shovels, table saws, concrete mixers,
safety scaffolding, power generators, light bulbs, jackhammers, and
thousands of letters from associates at The Home Depot to troops were
loaded on nine tractor-trailers in San Diego and taken by the U.S. Army
and U.S. Marine Corps transportation to U.S. military installations in
Iraq.
The Home Depot's support of the military has not gone unnoticed as
the company has received numerous awards and recognition for our
efforts and initiatives. The company received the Employer Support of
the Guard and Reserve's Freedom Award in 2004 and The Home Depot was
the recipient of the Employer Support of the Guard and Reserve's
Homefront Award in 2003.
In addition, The Home Depot received the No. 1 Ranking in the ``Top
10 Employers for Military Personnel'' by G.I. Jobs magazine in November
2004.
In June 2005, Bob Nardelli received the Most Distinguished American
Award from the Marine Corps Law Enforcement Foundation.
Recently, the company received the 2005 Veterans of Foreign Wars
James R. Van Zandt Citizenship Award, a commendation from The American
Legion, the USO (United Service Organizations) Patriot Award, the PSC
Private Sector Leadership Award for the Partnership for Public Service,
and the Military Officers Association of America's Distinguished
Service Award.
I would like to close by saying we view our support of the military
as our responsibility to our country and as a valuable investment in
our company's future. It is something we take very seriously at The
Home Depot, and we will continue to support those who are defending our
rights and protecting our freedoms.
Chairman Isakson, Senator Murray, thank you again for inviting The
Home Depot to participate in this Senate subcommittee hearing.
Senator Isakson. Ms. Bierman?
Ms. Bierman. Mr. Chairman, members of the committee, and
distinguished guests, as a citizen of this great Nation, I am
honored to testify before you today and trust that my ideas and
opinions will be considered as we work together to continually
improve the way we do business in Government and in the public
and private sector.
My name is Christine Bierman, CEO and founder of Colt
Safety, Fire and Rescue, located in St. Louis, MO. Colt Safety
is a small, woman business enterprise celebrating our 25-year
anniversary this year. We warehouse and distribute personal
protective equipment and industrial safety supplies. I am a
national founding partner of Women Impacting Public Policy, a
longtime member of NAWBO, National Association of Women
Business Owners, and WBENC, Women Business Enterprise National
Council, and a longtime member of the American Society of
Safety Engineers.
Our company's mission is to protect the American workforce.
Our vision is to nurture a successful company, poised to give
back to our family of employees and to the community.
After the devastation to our Nation and our psyche as we
watched the World Trade Towers vanish before our eyes on
September 11, how could any American not step up to the plate
and protect and defend this great Nation and to support any and
all efforts to that end?
Colt Safety had 2 of our 17 employees activated after
September 11. That represents 20 percent of our entire
workforce. Master Sergeant Jim Mixco, United States Air Force
reservist and 9 year Colt Safety employee, was called to action
to support Operation Noble Eagle shortly after those towers
crumbled. My heart and my patriotic duty, and the fact that Jim
was a longtime manager at our company, guided me to continue
his full salary and benefits for the year he was activated.
Another employee, Specialist Joey Petry from the 203rd
Battalion, Fort Leonard Wood, was deployed directly to Baghdad
during our company's busiest season.
Only after our company received the ESGR Freedom Award and
the Government went out of its way to thank us with Waterford
crystal eagles and Boss lifts to military bases across the
country did I learn that not all employers do what I felt in my
heart was the right thing.
I was moved by soldiers at Fort Benning, GA, who thanked us
from the bottom of their hearts for supporting them in their
efforts to protect us. Over the past year, soldiers have either
been given my name or found us online, contacted me, asking us
for advice on how to help them set up programs at their own
companies. It is my hope that Colt Safety can serve as a role
model to other companies that endeavor to do the right thing
for our Guard and Reserve.
Former Secretary Wolfowitz said to me as he was handing me
that beautiful crystal eagle that he knew it was easier to do
if you are American Express. He understood the financial impact
on a company our size. I do believe I am the smallest company
ever to win this award. I think I am the only woman-owned
business. And until last Saturday night, I was the first
Missouri company to ever win until Enterprise Rent-a-Car just
won.
Colt Safety's revenue was directly impacted by 50 percent
decrease in profits and sales during Jim's absence. Small
businesses that extend themselves financially in support of our
Guard and Reserve must be recognized not only with crystal
eagles and conspicuous service medal awards, but also with
Government contracting opportunities. Colt Safety and other
small diversity companies can only continue to do the good that
we do that is documented in this testimony when we are afforded
opportunities to do business with the largest procurement
agency in the world, the United States Government.
I am asking you today to author a bill that supports by way
of Government contracts those small businesses, and large
businesses, of course, that support our President and our
service men and women. This will encourage and afford others
the financial stability to do the right thing.
Thank you for the opportunity to testify today and I will
answer any questions.
Senator Isakson. Thank you, Ms. Bierman.
[The prepared statement of Ms. Bierman follows:]
Prepared Statement of Christine Bierman
Mr. Chairman, members of the committee, distinguished guests. As a
citizen of this great Nation I am honored by the invitation to testify
before you today and trust that my ideas and opinions will be
considered as we work to continually improve the way we do business in
Government and in the public and private sectors.
My name is Christine Bierman, CEO and Founder of Colt Safety, Fire
& Rescue located in St. Louis, MO. Colt Safety is a small, woman
business enterprise celebrating our 25 year anniversary milestone this
year.
Colt Safety warehouses and distributes Personal Protective
Equipment (PPE) and industrial SAFETY Supplies, everything a worker
wears or uses in a hazardous environment according to OSHA and NFPA
regulations.
I am an advocate for small and diversity businesses and have had
the honor of testifying before local, State and Federal committees many
times regarding small business and OSHA regulatory issues over the past
20 years. I am a National Founding Partner of Women Impacting Public
Policy (WIPP), a long-time member of National Association of Women
Business Owners (NAWBO), a member of Women Business Enterprise National
Council (WBENC) and the American Society of Safety Engineers (ASSE).
Our Company's Mission is to profitably meet the safety and hygiene
needs of the American workforce. Our VISION is to strategically and
profitably nurture a successful company poised to give back to its
family of employees and the community. After the devastation to our
Nation and our psyche as we watched the World Trade Towers vanish
before our eyes on September 11, 2001, how could any American not step
up to the plate to protect and defend this great Nation and to support
any and all efforts to that end.
Colt Safety had 2 of our 17 employees activated after September 11.
That represents 20 percent of our entire work force.
Master Sgt. Jim Mixco USAF reservist, 9 year Colt Safety employee
and Director of all Technical Sales and Service at Colt was called to
action to support Operation Noble Eagle shortly after those towers
vanished. Jim would serve at Scott Air Force Base, IL which is 40 miles
East of our offices in St. Louis, MO. His duty would be 24 hours on and
24 hours off.
My heart and my patriotic duty and the fact that Jim was a long-
time employee and responsible for a complete department at Colt Safety
led me to choose to continue his full salary and benefits for the
complete year that he was activated. Then Jim's annual 3 week tour of
duty had long been scheduled for March of 2003. Jim's unit was deployed
to Saudi Arabia as the President presented ultimatums and deadlines to
Saddam Hussein.
Needless to say tensions and emotions ran high while Jim was in the
Middle East and terrorist threats and attacks began to escalate.
I was in continual contact with Jim's wife and frightened children.
Jim e-mailed us periodically from Saudi. I replied that I was worried
for his family and we should do something for his wife. He and I
concocted a plan that I would purchase a gift certificate for a massage
at a Day Spa for his wife and put it in a card and sign it from Jim.
When I presented that gift to her on behalf of Jim . . . she cried.
Another employee SPC Joey Petry from the 203d BN Ft Leonard Wood,
an hourly warehouse person was deployed directly to Bagdad after the
President declared war on Saddam Hussein and during our company's
busiest season. Joey's tour of duty was extended 2 times and lasted 16
months. Joey returned to his position at Colt until he chose to leave
us and go back to college full time.
In October 2004, our Company received the Secretary of Defense ESGR
FREEDOM Award. It was then after the Government went out of its way to
thank us with Waterford Crystal Eagles and Boss Lifts to military bases
across the country did I begin to learn that not all employers do what
I felt in my heart to be ``the right thing.''
I was in awe of the Soldiers at Ft. Benning, GA who thanked us
BOSSES from the bottom of their hearts for supporting them in their
efforts to protect us. At first blush it seemed that they were
following orders as they thanked us for supporting the Guard and
Reserve. It was not long into the 3 day visit that I realized that
these thank you words were truly sincere and coming from the depths of
their hearts. I was very moved by this!
I heard stories on that trip to Ft. Benning from soldiers, other
bosses and reporters that . . . what a handful of us were doing for our
activated employees was the exception and not the rule.
Just 2 weeks ago a banker came to my office and noticed our Freedom
Award. He told me his horror story of his most recent activation. He
said that by law his former bank had to give him a job upon his return.
All of his previous clients were given to someone else and he would
have to find new clients or be out of a job. He stayed at that bank for
45 days before he sought friendlier employment.
Over the past year, soldiers have either been given my name or
found us online and have called for advice on setting up procedures at
their companies. It is my hope that Colt Safety can serve as a role
model to other companies in their endeavors to do the right thing for
our Guard and Reserve.
With all of this said, I know that we at Colt Safety have always
done the right thing. We have been a powerful and vocal advocate for
supporting our Guard and Reserve.
Secretary Wolfowitz said to me on stage as he was handing me that
beautiful Waterford Crystal Eagle, ``we know it is easier to do what
you have done when you are American Express.'' He knew that we were
probably the smallest business ever to receive this award and that it
may not have been easy for us financially.
Colt Safety's revenue was directly impacted by Jim's absence. His
24 on 24 off schedule translates to less than 50 percent duty to Colt
Safety. (This does NOT include his annual 3 week tour of duty which we
have paid full salary and benefits also for the past 9 years). The
sales generated in Jim's technical sales arena, (specifically sales of
SCBA's, breathing apparatus, bunker gear and gas monitoring equipment
to fire departments) were down 50 percent for the year Jim was serving
under Operation Noble Eagle and Operation Iraqi Freedom.
In order to continue the good that we and other companies like us
do by going above and beyond the call of duty, we must continue to be
viable businesses. My request of you today is that you recognize
companies like mine, not only with crystal eagles and Conspicuous
Service Medals, but also with Government contracting opportunities.
Once the doors of commerce are open to small diversity companies, our
Nation and its leaders will realize growth, quality services and
prosperity beyond our wildest dreams.
I am certain you are aware of the following facts so I will quickly
brief you on them.
Small business is the engine that drives our Nation's economy!
Women business enterprises:
<bullet> Represent 38 percent of all majority-owned, privately held
firms in the United States;
<bullet> Generate $3.7 trillion dollars in revenues to the U.S.
economy;
<bullet> Are growing at twice the rate of all U.S. firms;
<bullet> Stay in business longer than all other businesses;
<bullet> WBE's generally employ a more gender-balanced workforce;
<bullet> Are more likely to offer flextime, tuition reimbursement
and profit sharing;
<bullet> There are an estimated 1.2 million firms owned by women of
color equaling 1 in 5 or 20 percent of all women owned firms;
<bullet> In the State of Missouri, Women-owned firms employ 217,000
people;
<bullet> With annual sales approaching $25 billion;
<bullet> Yet Women business owners receive less than 2 percent of
all Government contracting and Fortune Company dollars.
All statistics are from the Center for Women's Business Research.
Colt Safety is one small, woman business enterprise that can only
continue to do the good documented in this testimony when we are
afforded opportunities to do business with the largest procurement
agency in the world, the U.S. Government.
Thank you for the opportunity to testify before you today. I would
be happy to answer any questions.
Senator Isakson. Ms. Nisenfeld?
Ms. Nisenfeld. Mr. Chairman and members of the
subcommittee, thank you for the opportunity to talk with you
today about employment issues for returning Reserve and
National Guard soldiers.
The efforts of many employers to assure continued
employment for our returning National Guard and Reserve
veterans in both the public and private sectors is truly
outstanding. These organizations well deserve the Nation's
recognition and thanks.
Much more needs to be done, however, to make sure that all
our returning National Guard and Reserve soldiers are employed
and economically stable. The challenges facing these heroes are
complex.
Last spring, 700 Oregon National Guard soldiers returned
home, many of them residents of Southwest Washington. Fully 40
percent of them were unemployed upon return. Another group of
700 is scheduled to return next month, and of these, at least
30 percent anticipate being unemployed. An equal number,
another 30 percent, describe themselves as underemployed. This
occurs as our region's economy is in the midst of a strong
recovery. So while the employment prospects for the public at
large have improved, the options for our reentering service
people are not as bright.
In Washington State, citizen soldiers demobilized from the
Washington National Guard's 81st Brigade, demonstrating a 40
percent unemployment rate among 1,000 returnees. The largest
number of these unemployed soldiers were jobless when they
entered the Guard. That is especially true because we were in
the midst of a recession at that time. To them, the challenges
of securing gainful employment are even greater. They tend to
be young people who have little, if any, college education.
Some of them were students. Others were downsized during their
period of service. The transition for these soldiers has been
very, very difficult.
Upon first returning to civilian life, they are provided
with a substantial amount of information regarding employment
and education resources in their communities. That information,
however, often falls upon deaf ears because the soldiers aren't
ready to jump into a job. They face many pressing issues--
reintroduction to their families, housing, deaths, and health
challenges. So the usefulness of the information presented at
demobilization is often limited.
Further, those who worked low-wage, low-skilled jobs are no
longer satisfied with that. During their deployment, they
learned many technical skills, lived in intense and demanding
situations. They developed a maturity unlike that of others
their age. Their expectations for work and family change
substantially, yet they often come home to minimum-wage jobs,
debts, and challenging family situations. They may have
physical and mental challenges, as well, resulting from their
service. So they are given 3 weeks or less to decompress prior
to entering civilian life.
How can we help solve these challenges? There are a variety
of possibilities. First, we should consider providing a
military salary and benefits during the transitional years so
individuals can afford to go to school. A wide variety of
resources are out there to help pay the tuition and fees for
veterans returning to school, yet many have young families and
financial obligations which preclude full-time education. They
simply can't afford the cost of living.
Our economy needs these young people to pursue higher
education and technical credentials, so this would be a sound
investment.
No. 2, encourage civilians and veterans' organizations to
work together to reach out to returning soldiers. Congress has
funded a comprehensive system of one-stop employment centers
throughout the country. These centers consider returning
veterans to be their top priority populations for services. For
the most part, however, these programs are not connected
directly to the various military organizations that are
demobilizing soldiers. These programs stand ready to actively
reach out to returning veterans as well as their dependents,
yet most are mystified about who to call and how to connect.
Our system regularly mobilizes resources to deal with large
layoffs and plant closures. Surely, our experience in rapid
response can be applied to working with these men and women.
Making these connections is especially challenging for Army
Reserve units, such as the 104th Division in Vancouver, because
they draw soldiers from 12 States. They need to better
understand how to connect with these local workforce systems.
This is especially critical because their soldiers separate
from the military one or two at a time, requiring much
individual work.
The best part about this strategy is that it is already
paid for. Let us make the most of the resources already out
there.
A third option is to provide tax credits to assist small
employers when National Guard and Reserve soldiers are
deployed. In our experience, employers want to do the right
thing. Small employers, however, have a difficult time bearing
the substantial cost of training an employee to replace a
deployed soldier. The result of this is some hesitation in
hiring members of the Guard or Reserve. A tax credit to cover a
portion of the replacement training costs would be very
helpful.
Finally, assure that military credentials are fully
transferrable. This already occurs in many arenas, but remains
a challenge in others. It will require close coordination
between the military and State licensing authorities for many
occupations, especially in industries such as health care and
transportation, where demand is high. Both classroom and hands-
on experience should be transferrable.
I look forward to continuing our work with Senator Murray
on these issues and I thank all of you for your commitment to
the success of our returning soldiers. I would be happy to
answer any questions.
Senator Isakson. Thank you, Ms. Nisenfeld.
[The prepared statement of Ms. Nisenfeld follows:]
Prepared Statement of Lisa Nisenfeld
Mr. Chairman and members of the subcommittee, thank you for the
opportunity to talk with you today about employment issues for
returning Reservist and National Guard soldiers.
The efforts of many employers to assure continued employment for
our returning National Guard and Reserve veterans in both the public
and private sectors is truly outstanding. These organizations well
deserve the Nation's recognition and thanks. Much more needs to be
done, however, to make sure that all our returning National Guard and
Reserve soldiers are employed and economically stable. The challenges
facing these heroes are complex.
Last spring approximately 700 Oregon National Guard soldiers
returned home, many of them residents of southwest Washington. Fully 40
percent of them were unemployed upon return. Another group of 700 is
scheduled to return next month. Of these, at least 30 percent
anticipate being unemployed. An equal number consider themselves to be
``underemployed.'' This occurs as our region's economy is in the midst
of a strong recovery. So while the employment prospects for the public
at large have improved, the options for our reentering service people
are not as bright.
In Washington State, citizen soldiers demobilized from the
Washington National Guard's 81st Brigade also demonstrated a 40 percent
unemployment rate among 1,000 returnees. The largest number of these
unemployed soldiers were jobless when they entered the Guard. To them,
the challenges of securing gainful employment are even greater. They
tend to be young people who have little, if any, college education.
Some of them were students. Others were ``downsized'' during their
service.
The transition for many of these soldiers has been very, very
difficult.
Upon first returning to civilian life, they are provided with a
substantial amount of information regarding employment and education
resources in their communities. That information, however, often falls
upon deaf ears because the soldiers aren't ready to jump into a job.
They face many pressing issues: reintroduction to their families,
housing, debts, and health challenges. So the usefulness of the
information presented at demobilization is often limited.
Further, those who worked low-wage, low-skilled jobs are no longer
satisfied with that. During their deployment they learned many
technical skills, living in intense and demanding situations. They
developed a maturity unlike that of others their age. Their
expectations for work and family have changed substantially, yet they
often come home to minimum wage jobs, debts, and challenging family
situations. They may have physical and mental challenges as well,
resulting from their service.
So they are given 3 weeks (or less) to decompress prior to re-
entering civilian life.
How can we help solve these challenges? There are a variety of
possibilities.
1. Provide military salary and benefits during a transitional year
so individuals can afford to go to school. A wide variety of resources
are out there to help pay tuition and fees for vets returning to
school, yet many have young families and financial obligations which
preclude full-time education. Our economy needs these young people to
pursue higher education and technical credentials, so this would be a
sound investment.
2. Encourage civilian and veterans organizations to work together
to reach out to returning soldiers. Congress has funded a comprehensive
system of one-stop employment centers throughout the country. Those
centers consider returning veterans to be their top priority population
for services. For the most part, however, those programs are not
connected directly to the various military organizations that are
demobilizing soldiers. These programs stand ready to actively reach out
to returning vets as well as their dependents, yet most are mystified
about who to call and how to connect. Our system regularly mobilizes
resources to deal with large layoffs and plant closures. Surely our
experience in ``rapid response'' can be applied to working with these
men and women.
Making these connections is especially challenging for Army Reserve
units such as the 104th Division in Vancouver because they draw
soldiers from 12 States. They need to better understand how to connect
with local workforce systems. This is especially critical because their
soldiers separate one and two at a time, requiring much individual
work.
The best part about this strategy is that it is already paid for.
Let's make the most of the resources that are already out there.
3. Provide tax credits to assist small employers when National
Guard and Reserve soldiers are deployed. In our experience, employers
want to do the right thing. Small employers, however, have a difficult
time bearing the substantial cost of training an employee to replace a
deployed soldier. The natural result of this is some hesitation in
hiring members of the Guard or Reserve. A tax credit to cover a portion
of the replacement training costs would be helpful.
4. Assure that military training credentials are fully
transferable. This already occurs in many arenas, but remains a
challenge in others. It will require close coordination between the
military and State licensing authorities for many occupations,
especially in industries such as healthcare and transportation where
demand is high. Both classroom and hands-on experience should be
transferable.
I look forward to continuing our work with Senator Murray on these
issues. I thank all of you for your commitment to the success of our
returning soldiers. I would be happy to answer any questions.
Senator Isakson. Mr. Fry?
Mr. Fry. I would like to thank Senator Burr for the
introduction. Mr. Chairman and members of the committee, I have
the honor to speak to you as a representative of both the
Wachovia Corporation and as a citizen soldier.
When reservists deploy, they must rely on a support network
that includes the businesses that they work for or own. In my
experience, that level of support varies widely. I would like
to detail the outstanding support that I received as I prepared
to mobilize, mobilized, deployed, and redeployed in support of
Operation Iraqi Freedom and to relate to the committee what
that level of support means on a personal level.
At the time of my initial alert, Wachovia's existing
corporate policy was already what I consider generous,
providing for continued full pay and benefits for 6 months in
the event of activation. In March of 2003, the corporation
extended this policy to 1 year in recognition of the sacrifices
being made to support the war on terror as more Wachovia
employees joined the active ranks. Wachovia has since continued
to extend that policy in subsequent months in support of our
employees called to extended active duty for Operations
Enduring Freedom and Iraqi Freedom.
Let me explain what these benefits meant to my family. As
an active duty Sergeant First Class, my pay was less than half
of what I had been making at Wachovia, even factoring in the
additional allowances for the combat deployment. To compound
this, my wife had to leave her job, which involved night and
weekend work that she would no longer be able to perform since
I was not there to care for our children. Day care was not
available during those periods, and her employer would not
grant her a leave of absence, so she was forced to resign and
subsequently lost her benefits.
I was faced with the prospect of losing two-thirds of our
annual income and benefits for my family while being halfway
around the world and not being able to do anything about it.
While Tricare health benefits began upon my activation, they
involved a change in medical service providers and new and
unfamiliar paperwork. Without the financial support from
Wachovia and the extended benefits, we would have been in
serious trouble. Not having to worry about my family's
financial condition or health benefits gave me a great sense of
relief and made it easier to focus on my duties.
I was initially concerned that the one-year policy would
leave a period where I would only have the Army salary.
However, the extensions to the policy ensured that I was
covered for the entire period of my service. The company also
maintained the employer matching of my 401(k) funds, allowing
me to continue pursuing our savings goals. Wachovia also
counted my military service as qualifying toward the company-
funded pension plan. I was also paid my full incentive plan
bonus for 2003, even though it could have been prorated to
exclude the 3 months that I was on active service. These
measures ensured that my future financial goals weren't
derailed by the deployment.
During the call-up process, I had a lot of questions and
was relieved to find the answers readily accessible. Wachovia
has the entire military policy on its Web site with frequently
asked questions and linked me to a human resources
representative whose support allowed me to plan thoroughly for
the change. My Wachovia management team worked with me
throughout the process and expedited it, when possible. My
employer didn't just make policy that benefited reservists,
they made it easy to access and receive these benefits. The
company continued to count my years of service while I was
gone, and when I returned, paid me retroactively for a raise
that I would have received in 2004 had I not been activated.
My coworkers sent me a copy of a corporate newsletter
applauding deployed Wachovia reservists that was published in
the fall of 2004. There, I learned I worked for a company that
the ESGR had named an outstanding employer, although by that
time, I already knew that I worked for an outstanding employer.
I also learned that on October 13, 2004, Wachovia teamed
with the Charlotte Chamber of Commerce and the ESGR to sponsor
a salute to the troops in the atrium of Wachovia's corporate
headquarters. This public demonstration of Wachovia's ongoing
support makes me very proud to be a part of this company.
Upon my return to work in March of this year, I submitted a
letter to the ESGR detailing the level of support that I had
received from Wachovia and was pleased to see this letter
included on Wachovia's military support webpage that was used
as a source of information in consideration for the 2005
Secretary of Defense Freedom Award. Wachovia subsequently was
awarded this honor here in Washington last Saturday, on October
15, 2005. Upon the announcement of the Freedom Award, the
military's highest honor for a civilian employer, Wachovia
interviewed several recently deployed reservists and broadcast
our stories of support through company print and visual media.
CEO Ken Thompson stated in a release at that time,
``Wachovia is proud to support the men and women who are
serving our country and we are honored to receive an award that
demonstrates our unwavering commitment to them. Their selfless
service exemplifies the values that we work hard to live up to
every day--integrity, respect, teamwork, service, personal
excellence and accountability, and winning.''
I would also like to relate the level of support that I
received from the employees of Wachovia. Soon after the
deployment, my department made me aware that they were starting
a fund to donate airline miles so that my family could visit
relatives while I was deployed. My wife and two sons were able
to travel to Pennsylvania during the summer months and visit
relatives thanks to their generosity.
During deployment, I received from current and past
coworkers more than 50 large and unbelievably well-stocked care
packages that I was able to distribute to my battery. The flood
of donations became so overwhelming that I started to donate
large quantities of items to other units attached to the 1st
and the 33rd Field Artillery whose soldiers were not as
fortunate as us to have such a dedicated support channel. The
regular Army soldiers were amazed when I told them I had
received all the items from work, and I was proud to tell them
about the company and my experience.
The care packages included disposable cameras, food items,
toiletries, games, books, magazines, signed banners of support,
sunblock, lip balm, insect repellant, and curiously, a 12-and-
a-half pound box of sugar packets, which the coffee drinkers in
the platoon took as a godsend. I also received Wachovia office
forms in case I was missing work too much. I can't begin to
imagine the effort involved, and I am sincerely grateful.
I received countless letters and e-mails extending support
and prayers and discovered that my colleagues had told our
clients about my experiences. Some of these clients, in turn,
also started to send letters, e-mails, and packages to support
me and my soldiers in the field.
Upon returning, I received an outpouring of support, not
only from my teammates, but also from individuals throughout
the corporation, as I learned that my team had been sharing my
correspondence from Iraq throughout the company. I had an ever-
larger group praying for my unit's safe return and I am still
struck when someone whom I don't recognize will come up to me
and thank me for my service and share with me that they, too,
were praying for our safety.
Upon my return to work in March of this year, my Wachovia
teammates helped me raise over $2,000 for a severely wounded
soldier in my platoon. My business unit donated over $1,000 to
a local nonprofit, VALOR, which was conducting a fundraiser for
my wounded soldier. And through the Wachovia charity matching
funds program, We Give, the corporation donated a matching
amount.
Again, I take great pride in detailing the encouragement
and assistance that I received as I deployed with the 30th
Brigade, North Carolina Army National Guard to Operation Iraqi
Freedom. Over the 17 months of the deployment process, Wachovia
was more than an employer with deployed reservists. Wachovia
was a partner to me in the deployment. The company has created
a culture of encouragement for its reservists consistent with
our core values.
The experiences of the soldiers in my unit who did not
receive the same level of support made me all the more grateful
for my experience. It also made me acutely aware that more
could be done to convince the employers of the thousands of
reservists still on or entering active duty to fight the war on
terror how vital their support is to the citizen soldiers at
home and downrange. Thank you.
Senator Isakson. Thank you, Mr. Fry.
[The prepared statement of Mr. Fry follows:]
Prepared Statement of Ronald J. Fry
Mr. Chairman and members of the committee, I have the honor to
speak to you as a representative of both Wachovia Corporation and as a
citizen soldier. When reservists deploy, they must rely upon a support
network that includes the businesses that the reservists work for or
own. In my experience, that level of support varies widely. I would
like to detail the outstanding support that I received as I prepared to
mobilize, mobilized, deployed, and redeployed for Operation Iraqi
Freedom, and relate to the committee what that level of support means
on a personal level.
At the time of my initial alert, Wachovia's existing corporate
policy was already what I considered generous, providing for continued
full pay and benefits for 6 months in the event of activation. In March
2003, the corporation extended this policy to 1 year in recognition of
the sacrifices being made to support the war on terror as more Wachovia
employees joined the active ranks. Wachovia has since continued to
extend that policy in subsequent months in support of our employees
called to extended active duty for Operations Enduring Freedom and
Iraqi Freedom.
Let me explain what these benefits meant to my family. As an active
duty Sergeant First Class my pay was less than half of what I had been
making at Wachovia, even factoring in the additional allowances for
combat deployment. To compound this, my wife had to leave her job which
involved night and weekend work that she would no longer be able to
perform since I was no longer there to care for our children and
daycare was not available during those periods. Her employer would not
grant her a leave of absence, so she was forced to resign and
subsequently lost her benefits.
I was faced with the prospect of losing two-thirds of the annual
income and benefits for my family while being halfway around the world
and not able to do anything about it. While Tricare health care
benefits began upon my activation, they involved a change in medical
service providers and new and unfamiliar paperwork. Without the
financial support from Wachovia and the extended benefits, we would
have been in serious trouble. Not having to worry about my family's
financial condition or health benefits gave me a great sense of relief
and made it easier to focus on my duties.
I was initially concerned that the 1 year policy would leave a
period where I would have only the Army salary. However, the extensions
to the policy ensured that I was covered for the entire period of my
service. The company also maintained the employer matching of funds in
my 401(k), allowing me to continue pursuing our savings goals. Wachovia
also counted my military service as qualifying towards the company
funded pension plan. I was also paid my full incentive plan bonus for
2003, even though it could have been pro-rated to exclude the 3 months
that I was deployed in that year. These measures ensured that my future
financial goals weren't derailed by the deployment.
During the call-up process I had a lot of questions, and was
relieved to find the answers readily accessible. Wachovia has the
entire military policy on its Web site with Frequently Asked Questions
and linked me to Human Resources representatives whose support allowed
me to plan thoroughly for the change. My Wachovia management team
worked with me throughout the process and expedited it when possible.
My employer didn't just make policy that benefited reservists; they
made it easy to access and receive these benefits.
The company continued to count my years in service while I was
gone, and when I returned paid me retroactively for a raise that I
would have received in 2004 had I not been activated. My coworkers sent
me a copy of a corporate newsletter applauding deployed Wachovia
reservists that was published in the fall of 2004. There I learned that
I worked for a company that the ESGR had named an ``Outstanding
Employer,'' although by that time I already knew that I worked for an
outstanding employer.
I also learned that on October 13, 2004 Wachovia teamed with the
Charlotte Chamber of Commerce and the ESGR to sponsor a salute to the
troops in atrium of Wachovia's corporate headquarters. This public
demonstration of Wachovia's ongoing support makes me very proud to be a
part of this company.
Upon my return to work in March of this year, I submitted a letter
to the ESGR detailing the level of support that I had received from
Wachovia, and was pleased to see this letter included on Wachovia's
Military Support web page that was used as a source of information in
consideration for the 2005 Secretary of Defense Freedom Award. Wachovia
subsequently was awarded this honor here in Washington last Saturday,
on October 15, 2005.
Upon the announcement of the Freedom Award, the military's highest
honor for a civilian employer, Wachovia interviewed several recently
redeployed reservists and broadcast our stories of support through
company print and visual media.
CEO Ken Thompson stated in a release that ``Wachovia is proud to
support the men and women who are serving our country and we are
honored to receive an award that demonstrates our unwavering commitment
to them. Their selfless service exemplifies the values we work hard to
live up to every day--integrity, respect, teamwork, service, personal
excellence and accountability, and winning.''
I would also like to relate the level of support that I received
from the employees of Wachovia.
Soon after the deployment my department made me aware that they
were starting a fund to donate airline miles so that my family could
visit relatives while I was deployed. My wife and two sons were able to
travel to Pennsylvania during the summer thanks to their generosity.
During the deployment I received from current and past co-workers
more than 50 large and unbelievably well stocked care packages that I
was able to distribute to my battery. The flood of donations became so
overwhelming that I started to donate large quantities of items to
other units attached to the 1/33rd Field Artillery whose soldiers were
not as fortunate to have such a dedicated support channel. The Regular
Army soldiers were amazed when I told them I had received all the items
from work, and I was proud to tell them about the company and my
experience. The care packages included disposable cameras, food items,
toiletries, games, books, magazines, signed banners of support, sun
block, lip balm, insect repellant, and curiously, a 12.5 pound box of
sugar packets (which the coffee drinkers in the platoon took as a
Godsend). I also received Wachovia office forms in case I was missing
work too much. I can't begin to imagine the effort involved, and I am
sincerely grateful.
I received countless letters and e-mails extending support and
prayers, and discovered that my colleagues had told our clients about
my experiences. Some of these clients, in turn, also started to send
letters, e-mails, and packages to support me in the field. I returned
to an outpouring of support from not only my teammates but also from
individuals throughout the corporation, as I learned that my team had
been sharing my correspondence from Iraq throughout the company. I had
an ever larger group praying for my unit's safe return, and am still
struck when someone whom I don't recognize will come up to me and thank
me for my service and share with me that they too were praying for our
safety.
Upon my return to work in March of this year, my Wachovia teammates
helped me raise over $2,000 for a severely wounded soldier in my
platoon. My business unit donated over $1,000 to a local non-profit,
VALOR, which was conducting a fundraiser for my wounded soldier, and
through the Wachovia charity matching funds program, We Give, the
corporation donated a matching amount.
Again, I take great pride in detailing the encouragement and
assistance that I received as I deployed with the 30th Brigade, North
Carolina National Guard to Operation Iraqi Freedom. Over the 17 months
of the deployment process Wachovia was more than an employer with
deployed reservists; Wachovia was a partner to me in the deployment.
The company has created a culture of encouragement for its reservists
consistent with our core values. The experiences of the soldiers in my
unit who did not receive the same level of support made me all the more
grateful for my experience. It also made me acutely aware that more can
be done to convince the employers of the thousands of reservist still
on or entering active duty to fight the war on terror how vital their
support is to their citizen soldiers at home and downrange. Thank you.
Senator Isakson. I thank all the members for their
testimony. To Wachovia and to Colt and to Home Depot, you are
shining examples to the business community, and the
contribution you are making to our country and to our men and
women who work for you and serve as guardsman or reservists is
appreciated by your Nation very much.
Ms. Bierman, tell me how you would envision the contract
preference proposal that you made working.
Ms. Bierman. I don't know if I would call it a preference,
but I just think some kind of a bill----
Senator Isakson. That was my word, that wasn't yours.
Ms. Bierman [continuing]. Right. First off, we have been
soliciting the Federal Government for 25 years and most
recently for 4 years to help rebuild Iraq, now help rebuild the
Gulf Coast, and the Federal Government, FEMA, Homeland
Security, and the DOD. I was actually--it was kind of their
idea when I met and I had a meeting with Secretary Rumsfeld. We
were invited back to have a meeting with him in his private
conference room last year after the awards and one of the under
secretaries said, ``We owe you.'' And I said, ``Well, I never
thought of it that way, and I don't want any handouts, but just
help us get Government contracting opportunities, which we are
working on anyway.''
So that has come up. That particular under secretary
actually took me to the Chief Procurement Officer for all chem-
bio personal protective gear and it didn't go anywhere. But I
just think there needs to be a bill. There are bills out there.
We have bills for small business. We have set-asides. I don't
like that term. I don't like goals and I don't believe anyone
owes us anything.
But in this particular case, in order for me to continue
the good that I do--I am a contributor to society and a good
employer, and to continue--this has all cost me money, coming
to receive these awards. You were kind enough to pay today, but
most of the time I come to Washington, DC, it is on my--all the
time, it is on my dime. I cannot continue to be a profitable,
viable company without growing my business and the best way to
grow the business is with the largest procurement agency in the
world, the Federal Government.
So I have been actively seeking contractual agreements
there for 4 years and I could use a little help, and I know I
am not alone. I think there needs to be some kind of a bill or
a sponsorship or names of those of us that have supported the
Guard and Reserve specifically in this case, that our name goes
before those buying agencies, that they take a really good,
hard look at us.
Senator Isakson. Your testimony that when you lost 20
percent of your employees due to deployment, in that same year,
your profit reduction was 50 percent, that was a significant
contribution that Colt made to the United States Armed Forces.
Your recommendation is intriguing and certainly what Colt has
done, and obviously what Home Depot and Wachovia, but in
particular many small businesses do certainly is something that
ought to be known and be a part of that process. The awareness
alone of the contribution you are making ought to be a
qualification at least for application purposes or knowledge
purposes, if not anything else.
I wanted to ask that question because I would like to
follow up with you on that and see if there are not some ways
that we can elevate the visibility of those that are providing
goods and services that are also going above and beyond the
call of duty on our men and women in the Guard and the Reserve.
Ms. Nisenfeld, you made a comment--I think I heard it
right--that said there are lots of one-stops around the
country, and I don't know whether you were referring to the
Department of Labor one-stops or private one-stops.
Ms. Nisenfeld. Yes, the Department of Labor under the
Workplace Investment Act.
Senator Isakson. OK. You then said, I think, and tell me if
I misheard this, that there wasn't a good connection between
them and the military.
Ms. Nisenfeld. Right. There are agreements between the
Employment Service and the VA and other agencies to work
together and there are veterans' reps in each agency. I think
it would be more helpful if we were simply given names of
soldiers as they return and let us go find them and seek them
out rather than wait for them to show up on our doorsteps.
There is a significant veterans' presence in each one-stop
center, but we need to go beyond that. We need to use all of
our resources to get these folks employed.
Senator Isakson. Mr. Hollingsworth, can you help make that
happen?
Mr. Hollingsworth. Sir, I can certainly take that message
back to the Secretary. We are more in the employer relationship
business. We are not in the employee information business for
the guys, but I think that is a great idea for us to take back
and pursue.
I know that General Blum has worked very diligently with
that for the Guard because he has made a corporation with some
folks called Helmets to Hardhats so that when they return,
there is a job opportunity there for them. I think that this is
something that we need to do more of. I think it is a no-cost
item, it is just a matter of information flow and I would take
that back, sir.
Senator Isakson. I thought it was an excellent suggestion
and the Department of Labor and the Department of Defense are
two parts of the same Government. I know Senator Murray,
Senator Jeffords, Senator Burr, and myself worked on The
Workforce Investment Act and the one-stops and employment
issues and there ought to be a good connection so that the one-
stops have that information and we can find those jobs for
those veterans.
My time has expired. We will go back and do a second round
if other members would like to. Senator Murray?
Senator Murray. Thank you very much, Mr. Chairman.
Sergeant Fry, let me start with you. First of all, thank
you so much for your service and pass my thanks on to Wachovia
for really an incredible outpouring of support from them, and
it sounds like your fellow employees, as well. Were you
fortunate within your unit or were there a lot of members of
your unit who had similar situations, or were there others who
came back home and haven't been able to find a job?
Mr. Fry. There is a wide variety of experience within my
unit and I can speak to probably a battalion-sized element,
maybe between 500 and 600 troops. We had troops that were
receiving full differential and partial differential in pay.
There were 7 of us out of 108, so that is not common.
Now, again, probably 30 percent of my troops were either
college students who were fresh out of high school or were
unemployed, so that skews the numbers slightly. But of the
troops we had that were activated, I am going to guess that
probably half of those in the senior levels, even more so, were
impacted financially.
Senator Murray. Mr. Hollingsworth, are the employers you
are talking to interested in hiring Guard and Reserve members?
Mr. Hollingsworth. Yes, ma'am. As a matter of fact, there
is just an incredible outcropping of support for these young
Guards and Reserves coming back, not only the folks who are
just returning normally but I have had opportunities to talk to
many of the businesses out there that are making slots
available for the folks that have had some severe injuries and
they have promised that they will ensure that no one in this
country that sacrificed will go without employment.
Senator Murray. Have any of them mentioned to you any of
the roadblocks or incentives that we can provide that would
help encourage them to do that?
Mr. Hollingsworth. No, ma'am. They are all willing to do
it. There is nothing that the guys have said, we need to be
incentivized about, at all. We are just willing to do it
because we care about these young guardsman and reservists.
Senator Murray. Ms. Nisenfeld, has that been your
experience?
Ms. Nisenfeld. I would say we have had more mixed
experience. Employers certainly are anxious to tell, say that
they support our troops. When it comes down to individual
businesses, particularly small businesses, they are hesitant,
and it is mostly fear of redeployment that we are hearing
about.
Senator Murray. I have heard that a lot, too, especially
seeing the history of 13 and 14 months gone, back for 90 days,
back out again to the Gulf Coast or a short time later back to
Iraq.
What can we do, and I have asked both Mr. Hollingsworth and
Ms. Nisenfeld, what can the Federal Government do to help
businesses manage that aspect of hiring a Guard or Reserve
member?
Mr. Hollingsworth. Senator Murray, I will go first, if it
is okay, Lisa. One of the things that, as I go around the
country talking to employers, that I ask them, we are the
employer advocate within the Department of Defense, so I try to
solicit information from employers so I can take it back and
keep our Department informed as to what the atmosphere is out
there toward Guard and Reserve service.
Continually, I will hear employers say, and I am talking
large and small employers, both public and private, that if you
will give us one thing, and that is predictability, we can
manage the rest. So, if you can tell us when they are going to
go, when they are going to come back, and give us advance
notice on both of those items, we can manage the rest. That is
what our Department has really emphasized.
Secretary Rumsfeld has said that we will give 30-day notice
and certainly the Department of the Army, which is the largest
employer, user out there of these shared manpower assets, they
are really working hard to develop a predictable model so that
employers will clearly know exactly when they can expect these
young men and young women to leave and come back.
Senator Murray. I am certain if that is implemented, that
would help a lot. Is there anything else, Ms. Nisenfeld?
Ms. Nisenfeld. I think that something on the order of an
on-the-job training subsidy for replacement workers would be
helpful, and this could be a very short-term approach to work
with folks who normally we would expect to be training people
for long-term positions. In this case, we would know that that
person was going to be there for a short period of time. That
would be an expected outcome. So just a little slight tweak to
the system, we could provide that assistance.
Senator Murray. Thank you. I see my time is running out,
Mr. Chairman. I have to get back to the floor. I am managing
the transportation bill, so I apologize, but I would like to
submit some of my other questions for the record.
Senator Isakson. Without objection.
Senator Murray. And I would like to thank all of the
panelists for being here today.
Ms. Bierman. Could I quickly respond to your original
question, Senator Murray, are small businesses and companies
looking to hire or not? It has always been our policy, and, of
course, way before we got into the war situations, but I always
look for guardsmen and reservists because we do highly
technical--repair SCBAs and breathing apparatus and gas
monitors and sell them and repair them. I mean, those guys are
so smart. They know this stuff. They have a mechanical
background. So, like my last four technicians have been from
the Guard and Reserves. So that is something I seek out just
because of the knowledge, the work ethic that these folks have.
Senator Murray. Thank you very much, Mr. Chairman.
Senator Isakson. Thank you, Senator Murray.
Senator Jeffords?
Senator Jeffords. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. I would like to
thank the witnesses for sharing their thoughts and insights. I
would also like to submit my opening statement for the record,
Mr. Chairman.
Senator Isakson. Without objection.
[The prepared statement of Senator Jeffords follows:]
Prepared Statement of Senator Jeffords
Mr. Chairman, I would like to thank you for holding today's
hearing on this very important issue. I would also like to
thank the witnesses for being here today.
Vermont has a long and proud tradition of a fine militia
and dutiful citizen soldiers. The Green Mountain Boys, famously
led by brothers Ethan and Ira Allen, first organized to protect
their land claims against New York. In 1775, the Green Mountain
boys captured Fort Ticonderoga from the British Army without
firing a shot. We Vermonters still refer to our National Guard
as the Green Mountain Boys.
Today, there are hundreds of them currently serving in
Afghanistan and Iraq. When Members of the Army or Air National
Guard are called to active duty, they make a great many
sacrifices.
Today's hearing will help us better understand some of
those sacrifices, and the sacrifices made by those employers
and family members who do not wear the uniform, and still are
strongly affected by this call to duty.
Employers, especially those in rural areas and those who
operate small businesses, struggle to make due without key
employees for extended periods of time during deployments. This
is a hardship felt all across our country.
In Vermont, particularly in those communities that have a
very high proportion of Guard members or Reserves serving in
Iraq or Afghanistan, this strain on employers is felt acutely.
A May 2, 2005, article from the Los Angeles Times tells the
story of how long-term deployment is affecting soldiers,
employers, and families in the small town Enosburg Falls,
Vermont. Because so many of its citizens have been activated,
Enosburg's men and women have felt the pains of separation more
than most.
I ask unanimous consent that a copy of this article be
printed as part of this hearing's record.
The reality of most families today is that both parents
work outside the home, and managing the day-to-day life of
families is a two-person job. When a soldier, airman, Marine,
or sailor is deployed, family structures and their daily
functioning are often severely affected. Any absence,
especially absences of several months due to a deployment
overseas, can be debilitating.
The employers of family members are also affected, as the
employee attempts to cope with greater burdens and fewer hands.
In an effort to help families cope with this hardship, Senator
Feingold and I introduced the Military Family Support Act of
2005 this morning.
This bill would allow Federal employees who are caring for
the dependents of deployed service members additional
flexibility in accessing the leave to which they are already
entitled. This bill would also establish a pilot program, run
by the Department of Labor, to provide businesses with guidance
on how to be more flexible in administering leave for employees
who are caregivers for dependents of our activated service
members.
The goal of the Military Family Support Act is to make life
a little easier for those who remain behind. Our deployed
soldiers are able to give their best only if they are confident
that their families are doing okay on the home front.
We must do our best to assist in this effort for those who
are already giving so much to for their country.
Mr. Chairman, thank you, and I look forward to hearing the
testimony of our witnesses.
Senator Jeffords. America's employers are proud of our men
and women in uniform and we are proud of the efforts employers
are making to keep the home fires burning while the troops are
away. Employers, especially those in rural areas, those who
operate small businesses, struggle to make do without key
employees for extended periods of time during deployments. This
is a hardship felt across the country.
In Vermont in particular, in these communities that have a
very high proportion of guardsman or reservists serving in Iraq
or Afghanistan, the strain on employers, therefore, is acute.
The reality of most families today is that both the parents
work outside of the home, managing the day-to-day life of
families and two-person jobs. When a soldier, airman, or sailor
is deployed, family structures and their daily functioning are
often severely affected. The employers of family members are
also affected as the employees attempt to cope with greater
burdens and fewer hands.
In an effort to assuage this hardship, Senator Feingold and
I introduced the Military Family Support Act of 2005 this
morning. Our bill would allow Federal employees who are caring
for dependents of deployed service members additional
flexibility in accessing the leave to which they are already
entitled. This bill will also establish a pilot program run by
the Department of Labor to provide businesses with the guidance
on how to be more flexible in administering leave for employees
who are caregivers for dependents of our men and women serving
overseas.
The goal of the Military Family Support Act is to make life
a little easier for those who remain behind. Our deployed
soldiers are able to give their best only if they are confident
that their families are doing okay at home.
I understand that the witnesses have not had an opportunity
to study this legislation. However, I would appreciate each of
your reactions to my description of this legislation, and it
will be available to you. I guess I am just going to go on to
questions here. Do you see this legislation as necessary and
helpful as I have described it? Do you see any problems with
the OPM implementing the Federal employee provisions of this
bill? Is it your experience that most employers are willing to
be flexible in this regard? If so, for how long, and how do you
think this program will be greeted in the private sector? Do
you have copies? No, you don't. Sorry.
Senator Isakson. Does anyone want to take a stab based on
the Senator's description?
Mr. Hollingsworth. Sir, I would just like to say that
anything that we do for those families, that really does
provide some really needed assistance to them, but it will have
an impact financially on the employers and I think we need to
look very closely at that. I would defer an answer as to how
that would impact our employers to some of our colleagues here
because they have a little bit better knowledge of their impact
upon them from a financial perspective.
But certainly we applaud anything that our employers do.
They lean forward in such a terrific manner already and I just
want to express my appreciation to all of those great Americans
out there that have done what they have for our Guard and
Reserves.
Senator Jeffords. Thank you. Any other comment? I
understand without a copy before you, I guess it is a little
difficult.
Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
Senator Isakson. Thank you, Senator Jeffords.
I am going to continue with a few more questions. I will be
happy to let Senator Jeffords or any other Senator who comes in
ask a few more, too, but there have been some very beneficial
suggestions made and a couple of them haven't been mentioned
and I want to follow up on them.
Ms. Nisenfeld, again, I want to make sure I heard it right,
because I was writing and listening at the same time, but you
made a comment with regard to those leaving the military once
they are coming home, and I think you were referring to
reservists and guardsmen, because that is the focus of this,
and I think you said the usefulness of the information provided
them as they left was not helpful at the time and what you
meant were they were leaving, they were going home, they were
getting out, so they get a whole lot of information and then
there was nothing to follow. Is that correct?
Ms. Nisenfeld. That is correct. Sometimes, there are
employment seminars down the road that have been funded in a
variety of places and some of the soldiers participate in that.
But at the time of separation, they are pretty much thinking
about what they are going to do in the next 20 minutes, not
long-term.
Senator Isakson. Right. Lieutenant Colonel Izen, I am going
to ask Mr. Donovan if he will share his microphone with you for
just a minute. I don't want to catch you off guard. I know you
weren't expecting it.
First of all, we have thanked Mr. Fry for his service. We
want to thank you and all the members here for their service to
the country. But in light of that statement, and I know you are
still associated with the Marine Corps and you aren't out
looking for employment, but are you familiar in the Corps or
any other branch of the service with how they are provided
information and how much follow-up there is beyond severance?
Lt. Colonel Izen. Sir, I am more familiar with, on the
active duty side of the house, the TAP programs that were
already addressed. I did serve as an advisor to a Reserve unit
for 3 years. We mobilized reservists, but I left before we
started bringing them back. I believe that Ms. Nisenfeld had it
right. There are some programs that are out there, but
generally speaking, these are National Guardsmen and Reservists
that have been pulled away from their families and they are
excited about getting home and it is very difficult to provide
meaningful instruction in that short period of time.
Senator Isakson. Sergeant Fry, or Mr. Fry, whichever you
would prefer me to address you by, you were nodding your head
vigorously there. Do you want to make a comment?
Mr. Fry. It is a very quick process, Senator. When we came
back--it took us 3 weeks of State active duty and 5 months of
Title X Federal active duty to deploy to Iraq, and most of my
troops were released, unless they were in a medical hold
status, within about 7 days. After a 4 day family leave with
almost 16 months receiving family separation allowance, you
have to remember, when the guardsman deploys, they leave their
families to go to training bases. They don't have the
opportunity the active duty does. As they train up for
deployment, their family is with them. So having been separated
for almost 16 months, it is very hard to get them to focus on
the benefits that they are receiving.
Once separated, we have had follow-ups, and most of those
are medical, dental, and counseling, but we have not received
in my unit, in my experience, having been back now over 6
months, we have not received any vocational or educational or
other work-related information from the Government except on a
one-off basis. Now, the local Veterans' Departments, once your
name is in that database, they will contact you, and myself and
my unit members have been contacted through the local veterans'
organizations and VA.
Senator Isakson. That is a very helpful point that you have
made and both your comments lead me to believe there probably
would be some things we could do to help get the branches of
the service to have maybe a 90-day or 180-day after-severance
period where they go back to the service men who had been
deployed or the reservists and say, did you remember X, Y, and
Z is available, and Senator Murray made a good comment.
Since the liberation of Iraq and since Operation Enduring
Freedom, we have come to recognize that there needed to be some
equalization of benefits for guardsmen and reservists with
regular active duty personnel, particularly because of the
tremendous dependence we have had in this battle, and I think
this is an area we can help. I think in active duty, there is
better follow-up postseverance than there probably is in the
Guard and Reserve and that is probably because we have been
more used to having to do it with regular duty people and not
used to having such a large component of our Reserves called
up. So I appreciate that suggestion.
A second suggestion that you referred to was a tax credit.
I think I heard this right. You were talking about a tax credit
to small businesses for the training of the person that fills
the role of the reservist when they are called up, is that
correct?
Ms. Nisenfeld. Yes.
Senator Isakson. So in other words, if I was--well, Ms.
Bierman is a small business person. If she lost one of her
people for a 9-month or 12-month deployment, then she could get
a tax credit for the cost to train that person's replacement
who is hired just for that temporary period of time, is that
correct?
Ms. Nisenfeld. That is correct. We have a standing formula
for that, which is half the wage for 6 months in the Workforce
Investment Act system. That would be a simple formula to apply.
Senator Isakson. And you would do that at a small business
threshold?
Ms. Nisenfeld. I think it is most acute for small
businesses.
Senator Isakson. OK. Yes, ma'am?
Ms. Bierman. I believe the SBA had a program, and it was
like a $50,000 loan or something like that, and we found out
about it. Deputy Secretary Melanie Sablehouse had said,
``Christine, you need to go after this,'' and I think I missed
the date by a couple of days. It was a year you had to go back.
And it was actually, frankly, it was a loan. I don't need any
more loans.
Senator Isakson. There is a lot of difference between loans
and credits.
Ms. Bierman. You had to fill out tons and tons of paperwork
to do it. It wasn't worth my time and energy and it would not
have even covered the loss that we had in direct result to the
sales and service in Jim's department, which was--but on two
really positive notes, Jim, our Master Sergeant, Jim Mixco, who
was a 9 year employee and director of all my technical sales
and service, I mean, he sells directly to Homeland Security and
fire departments and highly technical equipment, he was ready
to retire, but then there was the stop-loss so he couldn't
retire.
He has gone on to, after all this is over, he has actually
reenlisted and he is going to school now to get a degree in
business. So he is always calling me on weekends now, tell me
about this, how did you start the company? So he is writing all
these papers. So he has reenlisted, but I keep hoping they
don't take him away for very long, but reenlisted. He is going
back to school.
And then my young man, Specialist Joey Petry, has now left
our company. He was an hourly employee in my warehouse and he
has left the company to go to school full-time and I guess they
are going on the GI Bill. So I think those are both very
positive things that came out of the things that the Government
has to offer our guardsmen and reservists.
Senator Isakson. Well, it is a meaningful recommendation. I
was sitting here thinking about what Home Depot and what
Wachovia would think about a benefit, i.e. a tax credit for a
small business that you might not propose for a larger one, but
as I think about it, it is one thing for a company that has
325,000 employees today, and it will go to 400,000 probably
over the next 2 years. Actually, when you hire that replacement
to take the job the guardsman did while they are activated, by
the time that guardsman comes back, you need that trained
employee and you are probably not going to replace that
replacement. They will probably work somewhere in the system.
The same thing would probably be true with the bank,
whereas if it is 2 of 17 people, that is a huge impact on the
business, and if you hired somebody, you probably wouldn't keep
them once the person came back. So it is a worthwhile
suggestion.
And again, with your comment of the State of Washington,
the 81st Brigade, 40 percent were unemployed, but I think you
said most of those were unemployed when they were called up,
too, most of them probably would have been more employable in a
small business than a large business, I would guess.
Senator Jeffords, did you have any further questions?
Senator Jeffords. Yes. Mr. Fry, you mentioned that your
wife had to quit her job when you were deployed because she
could not get child care during nontraditional hours. How
typical is this of a problem? Do you think that this is a
widespread problem for activated guardsmen and reservists?
Mr. Fry. Senator, I have noticed that at least in a handful
of instances, we probably had four or five troops within my
company-sized element that had similar problems. Child care,
when you take one of the parents out of the equation, child
care becomes increasingly difficult. If you are like the
majority of my unit, around a metropolitan area, most of the
guardsmen are not from that area. Most of their families are
not from there. In some of the more rural units, yes, you have
a much wider network of support. But around metropolitan areas
where most of the National Guard and Reserves are, yes, that
becomes a problem.
There were at least five of us that had similar
circumstances. And while the reservist is covered by Federal
legislation, the spouses, they can't get a leave of military
absence because they are not in the service.
Senator Jeffords. Do others have comment on that?
Ms. Nisenfeld. Senator, any health care professional who
has to work odd shifts will tell you that getting odd-shift
child care remains very difficult, even in urban areas. So
soldiers who have spouses in those industries are--I totally
agree with Sergeant Fry. They are having a very difficult time.
Senator Jeffords. Any other comments?
[No response.]
Senator Jeffords. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
Senator Isakson. Thank you, Senator Jeffords.
I have one last question. There was one last suggestion
that was made about fully-transferrable military credits for
employment certification. I take it what you meant by that was
if they are a mechanic in the military or if they are a teacher
in the military or something that requires certification in the
private sector, that the military experience be prima facie
evidence of alternative certification in the private sector, is
that correct?
Ms. Nisenfeld. That is correct, and there has been much
progress on that topic nationally, I understand. It has been
something of a challenge to get the different branches of the
military, what the training consists of and then kind of
reconcile one with the other. But for things that require State
certification, driving trucks and many health care occupations,
we really need to reconcile those two, and there are many
different licensing boards to contend with in every State.
Senator Isakson. Yes, and there are many different
professional organizations that are into turf protection, and
that is not a criticism of anybody, but I know--and I chaired
the State Board of Education in Georgia, where we developed a
Troops to Teachers Program where we gave alternative
certification to retired military personnel to go into the
classroom and teach on a fast-track method because of their
experience and it worked extremely well, but there was a lot of
reluctance by everybody else to let somebody else go in a
different way or an alternative way.
All those suggestions are very good. I want to thank Mr.
Hollingsworth for his being here today and hope he will take
the suggestion with connecting the one-stops and DOD together.
I think that was an excellent suggestion.
To representatives of Wachovia and Home Depot and Colt,
thank you again for what you do for your country and for your
employees who are serving our country.
Ms. Nisenfeld, thank you for your very valuable
suggestions. You are probably the closest person to seeing the
problem and putting a face on it of anybody here, because these
other people are the solution. You see a lot of the ones who
are suffering because there aren't as many employers as we need
doing these good things.
We want to thank you all for your contribution to your
country. Thank you for coming to this hearing and testifying
today.
Unless there is other business, and I am the last one
standing and I don't think there is, this meeting is adjourned.
[Additional material follows.]
ADDITIONAL MATERIAL
Colt Safety, Fire, Rescue,
November 12, 2005.
Response to Questions of Senator Kennedy and Senator Jeffords by
Christine Bierman
questions of senator kennedy
Ms. Bierman, you are very generous to continue the salary and
benefits of your reservists. As you testified, losing 20 percent of
your workforce to deployments was obviously a strain on your firm. Many
small businesses may not be able to survive the loss of a few
reservists.
Questions. At what point does the loss of reservists threaten the
viability of a small business? What is the greatest hardship you faced
as a result of the deployment of two of your employees?
You suggested that the Government should increase the number of
contracts to small business who support their reservists. What other
incentives could the Government offer to encourage employers to do the
right thing for their reservists?
Answer. I will be very honest with you . . . the loss of Master
Sgt. Jim Mixco directly impacted our business financially. That coupled
with rising health care costs and fuel surcharge increases etc. almost
took us down after 25 years in business.
We continued paying Jim's full salary as other costs of doing
business escalated. Being the forever optimist and certain we would
close at least one of the many Government contracts we had been working
on, we continued down the same path.
After winning the Secretary of Defense Freedom Award, we were
actually told by an undersecretary at the Pentagon that ``We Owe you
and with what you have to sell, fits right in with what we buy.''
He then was kind enough to seek out yet another avenue for me to
call on for business. That call was with the Chairman of the Joint Chem
Bio Warfare program. The person who specifies exactly what is worn by
the soldiers. A few of those items are off the shelf items sitting in
my warehouse on any given day. The Brigadier General told me I would
have to go back to FedBiz Ops to look for opportunities. That is an
area I had been soliciting since my first year in business 25 years
ago.
That is the infamous Government maze of an outsider and a small
business trying to get their foot in the door. Agencies continue to
give billions of dollars of NO BID contracts to the same big businesses
and are not even questioned or held accountable for not meeting
diversity or small business goals. These agencies can lose billions of
dollars of tax payers dollars and not account for any spending . . .
with no questions asked.
I will never understand it . . . but while it is has begun to
affect me personally and professionally, I am having great difficulty
remaining quiet on the subject and have spoken to my Senator and the
House Small Business Committee and the leaders office regarding these
issues.
Not even increasing, but affording a few contracts to small
businesses like mine who go above and beyond the call of duty in
supporting our Guard and Reserve, will assure our viability in business
so that we can continue to do the good that we do. It will afford us
the wherewithal to continue to be CONTRIBUTORS in our society. In
addition to offering quality services at better prices and
accountability when spending tax payers dollars.
question of senator jeffords
Question. Please provide any comments you have in regard to the
programs proposed in the Military Family Support Act of 2005, S. 1888.
I would greatly appreciate having your insights as to how you would
take advantage of this legislation or how this legislation could be
improved. Thanks for your assistance.
Answer. Both of Colt's employees who were activated and have now
returned, are taking advantage of the GI Bill and enrolled in college.
This is a very good thing.
We as an employer did our part while they were gone to stay in
touch with their families and offer support in their absence. Employers
large and small can continue to support their Guard and Reserve when
they too are compensated. And I do not mean with hand outs. It just
makes sense that the largest procurement agency in the world, the U.S.
Government would be happy and lucky to do business with those that have
given extraordinarily to our citizen soldiers.
Again I am asking your committee to author a bill that will
compensate by way of Government contracts, those specifically small
businesses that support our Guard and Reserve specifically in the way
that Colt Safety, Fire and Rescue has done.
Respectfully submitted,
Christine J. Bierman
______
Response to Questions of Senator Kennedy and Senator Jeffords by Dennis
Donovan
question of senator kennedy
Question. What would you recommend that a model employer adopt to
show support for guardsmen and reservists? Could you cite examples from
your current employer, and past employer?
Answer. Each organization should adopt practical policies that they
can fully support and develop programs that make sense for their own
organization, recognizing that all employers are different and have
differing abilities to accommodate the needs of their workforce in this
area. At The Home Depot, we feel it is extremely important to support
those who are defending our rights and protecting our freedoms. Since
2002, The Home Depot has had approximately 1,800 associates called to
active duty for the current Iraqi conflict. The Home Depot has
implemented an extended and enhanced leave of absence benefit for our
deployed associates. In 2004, the company joined forces with the
Departments of Defense, Labor and Veterans Affairs to launch Operation
Career Front, an unprecedented program that supports America's military
job seekers, including veterans, separating active duty service
members, National Guard members, reservists and military spouses. Our
support of the military stretches into our community efforts, as well.
Through our Project Homefront program, the company donated $1 million
and our associates gave back 1 million volunteer hours to repair the
homes of deployed associates. Our commitment is something we take very
seriously at The Home Depot.
question of senator jeffords
Question. Please provide any comments you have in regard to the
programs proposed in the Military Family Support Act of 2005, S. 1888.
I would greatly appreciate having your insights as to how you would
take advantage of this legislation or how this legislation could be
improved. Thanks for your assistance.
Answer. We have found that the model where Government gives the
companies the flexibility to do what makes sense for each organization
works very well. We view our support of the military as our
responsibility to our country, and as a valuable investment in our
company's future. All of the policies and programs we have developed to
support the men and women who are defending our freedoms have been on
our own accord. We were not told to implement these programs, but
rather we chose to do so because our company feels it is important to
take care of people who are defending our country.
Response to Question of Senator Jeffords by Bob Hollingsworth
Question 6. Please provide any comments you have in regard to the
programs proposed in the Military Family Support Act of 2005, S. 1888.
I would greatly appreciate having your insights as to how you would
take advantage of this legislation or how this legislation could be
improved.
Answer 6. While commenting on this legislation is not in my area of
expertise or responsibility, I conferred with members of the Personnel
and Readiness staff and this is our response. The purpose of the act is
to permit employees to use sick leave (including leave received under a
leave transfer program) in the same manner as annual leave, in order to
serve as a ``caregiver.''
Current title 5 provisions limit use of sick leave to specific
circumstances--e.g., caring for a family member who is incapacitated by
a medical condition, attending to a family member who is receiving an
examination or treatment. This proposal would permit a ``caregiver'' to
use sick leave in the same manner as annual leave is used--i.e., it
does not restrict use of sick leave to specific circumstances.
A number of civilian employees, especially those employed by the
Department of Defense, have close working/personal relationships with
soldiers deployed to Iraq and Afghanistan. In many instances, the
employees are spouses who are relatively new to the organization and
who have not accrued large amounts of annual and sick leave. When a
deployed soldier depends on an individual at home to assume family
responsibilities, it is in the best interest of the Department to allow
an employee (designated by the soldier as a caregiver) access to all of
his or her available sick and annual leave. The caregiver can use the
leave to accomplish the legal, financial, parental, and medical duties
normally performed by the deployed soldier. Access to more personal
leave (and any leave received under a leave transfer program) makes it
less likely affected employees would be placed in a leave-without-pay
status or forced to resign when performing duties necessary for the
support of a deployed soldier and his or her family.
Current provisions require that an employee be dealing with a
``medical emergency'' in order to be a recipient of donated leave. This
proposal would deem ``caregiver'' status to be a medical emergency--
thereby qualifying employees designated as caregivers to receive
donated leave. This leave could then be used in the same manner as
annual leave.
Enactment of the enhanced leave flexibility would enable designated
caregivers to more effectively fulfill their roles, and would thereby
help maintain the readiness of the Armed Forces by helping to ensure
adequate caregiver coverage during potential periods of prolonged
deployments. This benefit will enable our Armed Forces to prepare for
their family's well-being and security during their deployment, and
will go a long way in easing the stress and burden associated with
deployment.
As a matter of policy, the Department of Defense (DOD) would
encourage supervisors and managers of civilian employees to approve
caregiver leave requests to the maximum extent possible without causing
an adverse impact on mission accomplishment. The Department also would
publicize caregiver leave user eligibility for DOD Component leave
transfer programs to its workforce and encourage the Military
Departments and Defense Agencies to ensure full employee support and
participation.
The legislation could be improved with the following changes:
<bullet> Do not require qualified employees to exhaust their
personal sick and annual leave accounts prior to using leave
transferred to them as required under the provisions of subchapter III
of chapter 63 of title 5, United States Code (U.S.C.). Currently, 5
U.S.C. 6333(b) reads ``A leave recipient may use annual leave received
under this subchapter . . . except that any annual leave, and sick
leave, accrued or accumulated by the leave recipient and available for
the purpose involved must be exhausted before any transferred annual
leave may be used.''
<bullet> Allow leave donors to donate sick leave as well as annual
leave to caregiver leave recipients. Sick leave transfer is currently
not possible under 5 U.S.C. 6332, which reads ``Notwithstanding a
program under which annual leave accrued or accumulated by an employee
may be transferred to the annual leave account of any other employee if
such other employee requires additional leave because of a medical
emergency.''
<bullet> Expand the definition of member of the Armed Forces in
section 2(a)(1)(E) of the Military Family Support Act of 2005, S. 1888
to provide coverage to Department of Defense civilian employees
deployed in support of contingency operations. Civilian employees
require the same degree of family support as do the active duty members
with whom they serve.
<bullet> Delete the age requirement. This is an artificial
limitation and may likely stand in the way of obtaining the services of
a skilled and appropriate caregiver. As long as the Federal employee is
deemed to be a suitable caregiver by the individual requiring the care,
the Federal employee should be permitted to use sick leave to provide
the care, regardless of age.
We suggest that the committee consult with the Department of Labor
and the Office of Personnel Management on the impact of the provisions
that affect them.
Response to Questions of Senator Kennedy by Bob Hollingsworth
Question 1. General Hollingsworth, thank you for those positive
stories about employers and the variety of ways they've supported our
troops. How have the longer deployments--15 months and longer--affected
employers, especially small or non-profit businesses?
Answer 1. Employer hardships increase the longer the employee is
gone. The smaller the business, the more significant the absence.
Overall, many managers indicate 1 year is the maximum, not the optimum,
period of leave.
In a recent survey of Reserve component employers sponsored by the
Henry M. Jackson Foundation for the Advancement of Military Medicine
and the Uniform Services University of Health Sciences entitled
Attitudes, Experiences and Intentions of Employers of Reserve Component
Members Concerning Employee Participation in the National Guard and
Reserve, roughly 15 percent of employers report a negative effect on
operations as a result of the temporary loss of employees due to
military service. Overall, the survey concludes that support for the
Reserve components is very high, and appears to be durable, among all
types of organizations and categories of managers.
Employers' main concerns appear to center around the uncertainty of
the timing and the durations of instances in which they temporarily
lose an employee to military duty, not with the burden of compliance.
Most suggestions made by employers for improving their compliance with
USERRA relate in one way or another to receiving adequate advance
notice of the pending temporary loss of an employee and limiting the
amount of time they are away from the job.
Question 2. GAO has just completed a report suggesting that the
four agencies involved in protecting the rights of Service members are
actually not serving our troops well. The agencies have incompatible
information collection systems. Because no one agency is responsible
for tracking complaints from start to finish, the claims can languish
for months, or even years. Shockingly, GAO found that despite a
requirement to collect information about reservists' civilian
employers, the Department of Defense still lacks this information on
nearly 40 percent of reservists.
Obviously, complete information about civilian employers of
reservists and National Guard members is a vital part of protecting
Service members' rights and educating employers about their
responsibilities. Would you support (1) having one agency perform
oversight of complaints and (2) increasing collection of this critical
information about civilian employers?
Answer 2. Yes, ESGR strongly supports having one agency perform
oversight of complaints. Currently, the collection systems are
incompatible. The infrastructure of the data bases differ which creates
a challenge for sharing and tracking data. The Department of Labor
(DOL) has enforcement authority and many years of experience and
expertise in dealing with the complaint process for Service members.
DOL has an established system for data collection; therefore, it is
uniquely qualified to oversee the complaint process and the collection
of data.
Concerning the second question, supporting increased collection of
critical civilian employer information, Department of Defense answers
with a strong yes. We have made the process as painless as possible by
utilizing a web based application.
Question 3. GAO conducted a survey of the ombudsmen, who are all
volunteers performing the invaluable task of helping Service members
resolve problems with their reemployment. The role will only grow in
importance as more National Guardsman and Reservists return. GAO found
that although nearly 100 percent of participants said they had
completed basic ombudsman training, two-thirds said they hadn't had any
advanced ombudsman training, and 80 percent had no mediation training.
What plans do you have to increase the level of training for the
ombudsmen and volunteers, and how can we assist in giving volunteers
the level of training they need to support returning Service members
more effectively?
Answer 3. ESGR is pleased that GAO substantiated our statement--
nearly 100 percent of the ESGR Volunteer ombudsmen (711 as of December
7, 2005), have received basic ombudsman training.
Before January 2005, mediation training was considered ``advanced''
training and provided as a separate course. However, in January 2005
the ombudsman basic course was modified to include mediation training.
To provide mediation training to those ombudsmen who have completed
the early version of the basic ombudsman course, our initiatives
include developing web based interactive learning products. Our
Strategic Plan for fiscal year 2006 identifies numerous training
requirements and we are seeking resources to support the development of
these distance-learning products.
Finally, we are validating training needs by seeking input from
those volunteers we serve. A training subcommittee has been chartered
to validate assumptions made by the National Committee and to guide the
comprehensive training needs of the entire organization.
Question 4. Your testimony discussed examples of businesses that
offer differential pay. Do you have any statistics about Service
members who haven't been able to get differential pay or other
benefits? Are there areas we should be pursuing to help Guard members
and Reserves whose employers can't offer costly benefits for long
periods of deployment?
Answer 4. Many employers choose to go ``above and beyond'' what
USERRA requires in supporting their employees who serve in the Reserve
components. Differential pay is an example of an ``above and beyond''
human resource policy. ESGR encourages employers to go ``above and
beyond,'' but we recognize that differential pay can carry a
substantial price tag for the employer. Other examples of ``above and
beyond'' support include recognition for employees who serve in the
Reserve components and frequent communication with the employee and the
employee's family while he or she is deployed.
We are currently conducting surveys to determine how many employers
go ``above and beyond.'' Over 4,400 employers have signed ESGR
Statements of Support indicating that they have employment policies
that go ``above and beyond'' the requirements of USERRA.
The number one request we receive from employers is that we provide
them predictability. They want to know when the guardsman or reservist
will be needed, approximately how long they will be gone, and when they
will return to work. The Department of Defense has made great strides
to provide at least 30 days notice of activations. We encourage Reserve
component members to communicate frequently with their employers before
the activation, during the activation, and after the activation.
Question 5. Have you heard examples of families who have no health
insurance while one parent is deployed and the other parent works at
home or works only part-time without benefits?
Answer 5. I am not aware of any such examples. Employers of Reserve
component members activated for less than 30 days must continue to
provide their normal health insurance benefits. When a Reserve
component member is activated for more than 30 days, the member and his
or her dependents qualify for military healthcare benefits.
Response to Questions of Senator Kennedy and Senator Jeffords by Lisa
Nisenfeld
questions of senator kennedy
On February 28th in Boston, I organized a Veterans Employment
Summit, with leaders in the business community, State and Federal
agencies, representatives from the Massachusetts National Guard and
members of our armed forces to discuss the economic and health care
challenges faced by soldiers and their families returning from Iraq and
Afghanistan. Central to the discussion were the employment
opportunities available to soldiers, and the most effective way to put
the new skills they've learned overseas to good use back home in
Massachusetts.
Questions. I understand you've worked closely with veterans in
Washington State to help them find jobs. What programs have worked well
for you? What should we be doing to see that our veterans and
reservists know about all the opportunities available to them?
Answers. Many efforts are underway in Washington State to better
connect the State's workforce development system with soldiers
returning from active duty. We have raised particular concerns about
returning National Guard and Reserve soldiers because the current
pattern of deployment for these forces is unprecedented. Most Americans
assumed that these individuals would simply return to their prior
activities, not fully understanding the complexities of their lives
following deployment. Because of this, it is difficult to say that any
programs or strategies have worked well--it is simply too soon to say.
It is encouraging to note, however, that the Senate's interest in
this subject has engendered substantial activity in the States to
address these issues. Senator Patty Murray has shined a light on these
problems in Washington State, moving officials throughout the State to
close gaps and align resources to help these soldiers re-enter their
lives and communities with good jobs.
Washington officials have discovered a way to cross bureaucratic
hurdles and provide contact information on returning soldiers,
including National Guard and Reserve members, to local One-Stop
Employment Centers. In our region we will be actively and repeatedly
reaching out to these individuals when they come home and for several
months afterwards. We will not simply wait until they show up on our
doorstep. We want them to know that we appreciate the sacrifices they
have made for our Nation and that we will do our part to help them
succeed. They are the highest priority customers for services under the
Workforce Investment Act and we will work with them and track results
for at least a year following employment.
Washington officials are also working across agency lines to
promote focused hiring programs among employers, to recognize exemplary
employers (in concert with Federal efforts) and to assure that State
and local human services efforts are working together on these issues.
We recognize that there is a well-developed system to help traditional
veterans and it is our intention that the State's efforts will
complement and augment these services.
A significant concern that many have voiced recently relates to
mental health issues and the returning civilian soldiers. Many are not
ready to jump back into jobs as soon as they return home. They need
time to decompress and to address the many challenges that may have
come up at home during deployment. Others may not experience mental
health issues for several months following their return.
The current system of health care for veterans is overloaded and
has difficulty responding to these mental health needs in a timely
manner. If these mental health issues are addressed in a timely manner,
they are less likely to become major barriers that could eventually
affect all aspects of the soldier's life eventually.
We suggest that the Congress consider providing limited term mental
health vouchers, similar to those provided to Hurricane Katrina
victims, allowing community mental health centers to provide counseling
for returning soldiers. Such counseling would occur in concert with
employment services from the One-Stop Employment Centers. More serious
cases would then be referred to the Veterans Administration for follow
up.
question of senator jeffords
Question. Please provide any comments you have in regard to the
program proposed in the Military Family Support Act of 2005, S. 1888. I
would greatly appreciate having your insights as to how you would take
advantage of this legislation or how this legislation could be
improved.
Summary of S. 1888
To allow Federal employees who are caring for the dependents of
deployed service members additional flexibility in accessing
the leave to which they are already entitled. To establish a
pilot program, run by the Department of Labor, to provide
businesses with guidance on how to be more flexible in
administering leave for employees who are caregivers for
dependents of our activated service members.
The goal of the Military Family Support Act is to make life a
little easier for those who remain behind.
Answer. We have anecdotal evidence that some caregivers have been
forced to leave their jobs to care for others while the caregiver's
spouse is deployed, although it isn't clear how extensive this problem
is. When this situation occurs, the following elements may be helpful:
<bullet> Assign the caregiver similar high priority to that
received by veterans in the Nation's One-Stop Employment system. An
immediate family member in such a situation would often benefit from a
job with a different schedule or improved arrangements for dependents.
<bullet> Consider allowing unemployment benefits for caregivers who
must leave their jobs because of a deployment.
<bullet> Provide a technical support hotline for caregivers to
learn about their options before deciding to leave a job. With some
coaching, some people will be able to work with their employers to work
out a more flexible employment arrangement. A hotline arrangement might
work (if publicized appropriately through the military) because
caregivers often have difficulty leaving the home.
<bullet> Consider expanding the ``soldier and family support''
model used by the Army Reserve. In our region a single staff person is
responsible for hundreds of families across 12 States. This model
(perhaps with some increase in staffing) should be considered for use
with National Guard units as well. Further, these representatives can
be assisted by One-Stop and other community resources if they are given
some assistance in learning about the availability of those resources
in various areas.
Extending sick leave benefits for Federal employees is a good
thought, but will have very little impact in our region. It will
probably be more significant in areas with many Federal employees.
It is less clear, however, that proposing to provide technical
assistance to employers about how to apply sick leave benefits to
caregivers will be a successful strategy. Some of the national human
resource associations would probably be willing to step forward and
help get information out to companies throughout the country--at little
or no cost to the Federal Government. It is probably more critical to
assure that the families of our service men and women know that their
communities stand ready to support them through these difficult times
and provide them with information on where to turn for help.
Thank you for caring about these matters and please do not hesitate
to contact me if you have further questions or concerns.
[Whereupon, at 3:25 p.m., the subcommittee was adjourned.]