Military Personnel
Considerations Related to Extending Demonstration Project on Servicemembers' Employment Rights Claims Gao ID: GAO-08-229T October 31, 2007The Uniformed Services Employment and Reemployment Rights Act of 1994 (USERRA) protects the employment and reemployment rights of federal and nonfederal employees who leave their employment to perform military or other uniformed service. Under a demonstration project from February 8, 2005, through September 30, 2007, and subsequently extended through November 16, 2007, the Department of Labor (DOL) and the Office of Special Counsel (OSC) share responsibility for receiving and investigating USERRA claims and seeking corrective action for federal employees. In July 2007, GAO reported on its review of the operation of the demonstration project through September 2006. This testimony describes the findings of our work and actions taken to address our recommendations. In response to the request from Congress, GAO also presents views on (1) factors to consider in deciding whether to extend the demonstration project and the merits of conducting a follow-up review and (2) options available if the demonstration is not extended. In preparing this statement, GAO interviewed officials from DOL and OSC to update actions taken on recommendations from our July 2007 report and developments since we conducted that review.
Under the demonstration project, OSC receives and investigates claims for federal employees whose social security numbers end in odd numbers; DOL investigates claims for individuals whose social security numbers end in even numbers. Among GAO's findings were the following: DOL and OSC use two different models to investigate federal USERRA claims, with DOL using a nationwide network and OSC using a centralized approach, mainly within its headquarters. Since the demonstration project began, both DOL and OSC officials have said that cooperation and communication increased between the two agencies concerning USERRA claims, raising awareness of the issues related to servicemembers who are federal employees. DOL did not consistently notify claimants concerning the right to have their claims referred to OSC for further investigation or to bring their claims directly to the Merit Systems Protection Board if DOL did not resolve their claims. DOL had no internal process to routinely review investigators' determinations before claimants were notified of them. Data limitations at both agencies made claim outcome data unreliable. DOL officials agreed with GAO's findings and recommendations and are taking actions to address the recommendations. In July 2007, DOL issued guidance concerning case closing procedures, including standard language to ensure that claimants (federal and nonfederal) are apprised of their rights,and began conducting mandatory training on the guidance in August 2007. In addition, according to DOL officials, beginning in January 2008, all claims are to be reviewed before the closure letter is sent to the claimant. These are positive steps and it will be important for DOL to follow through with these and other actions. If the demonstration project were to be extended, it would be important that clear objectives be set. Legislation creating the current demonstration project was not specific in terms of the objectives to be achieved. Clear project objectives would also facilitate a follow-on evaluation. In this regard, GAO's July 2007 report provides baseline data that could inform this evaluation. Given adequate time and resources, an evaluation of the extended demonstration project could be designed and tailored to provide information to inform congressional decision making. GAO also presents potential benefits and limitations associated with options available if the demonstration project is not extended.
GAO-08-229T, Military Personnel: Considerations Related to Extending Demonstration Project on Servicemembers' Employment Rights Claims
This is the accessible text file for GAO report number GAO-08-229T
entitled 'Military Personnel: Considerations Related to Extending
Demonstration Project on Servicemembers' Employment Rights Claims'
which was released on October 31, 2007.
This text file was formatted by the U.S. Government Accountability
Office (GAO) to be accessible to users with visual impairments, as part
of a longer term project to improve GAO products' accessibility. Every
attempt has been made to maintain the structural and data integrity of
the original printed product. Accessibility features, such as text
descriptions of tables, consecutively numbered footnotes placed at the
end of the file, and the text of agency comment letters, are provided
but may not exactly duplicate the presentation or format of the printed
version. The portable document format (PDF) file is an exact electronic
replica of the printed version. We welcome your feedback. Please E-mail
your comments regarding the contents or accessibility features of this
document to Webmaster@gao.gov.
This is a work of the U.S. government and is not subject to copyright
protection in the United States. It may be reproduced and distributed
in its entirety without further permission from GAO. Because this work
may contain copyrighted images or other material, permission from the
copyright holder may be necessary if you wish to reproduce this
material separately.
United States Government Accountability Office:
GAO:
Testimony:
Before the Committee on Veterans' Affairs, U.S. Senate:
For Release on Delivery:
Expected at 9:30 a.m. EDT:
Wednesday, October 31, 2007:
Military Personnel:
Considerations Related to Extending Demonstration Project on
Servicemembers' Employment Rights Claims:
Statement of George H. Stalcup:
Director:
Strategic Issues:
GAO-08-229T:
GAO Highlights:
Highlights of GAO-08-229T, a testimony before the Committee on
Veterans‘ Affairs, U.S. Senate.
Why GAO Did This Study:
The Uniformed Services Employment and Reemployment Rights Act of 1994
(USERRA) protects the employment and reemployment rights of federal and
nonfederal employees who leave their employment to perform military or
other uniformed service.
Under a demonstration project from February 8, 2005, through September
30, 2007, and subsequently extended through November 16, 2007, the
Department of Labor (DOL) and the Office of Special Counsel (OSC) share
responsibility for receiving and investigating USERRA claims and
seeking corrective action for federal employees.
In July 2007, GAO reported on its review of the operation of the
demonstration project through September 2006. This testimony describes
the findings of our work and actions taken to address our
recommendations. In response to your request, we also present GAO‘s
views on (1) factors to consider in deciding whether to extend the
demonstration project and the merits of conducting a follow-up review
and (2) options available if the demonstration is not extended.
In preparing this statement, GAO interviewed officials from DOL and OSC
to update actions taken on recommendations from our July 2007 report
and developments since we conducted that review.
What GAO Found:
Under the demonstration project, OSC receives and investigates claims
for federal employees whose social security numbers end in odd numbers;
DOL investigates claims for individuals whose social security numbers
end in even numbers. Among GAO‘s findings were the following:
* DOL and OSC use two different models to investigate federal USERRA
claims, with DOL using a nationwide network and OSC using a centralized
approach, mainly within its headquarters.
* Since the demonstration project began, both DOL and OSC officials
have said that cooperation and communication increased between the two
agencies concerning USERRA claims, raising awareness of the issues
related to servicemembers who are federal employees.
* DOL did not consistently notify claimants concerning the right to
have their claims referred to OSC for further investigation or to bring
their claims directly to the Merit Systems Protection Board if DOL did
not resolve their claims.
* DOL had no internal process to routinely review investigators‘
determinations before claimants were notified of them.
* Data limitations at both agencies made claim outcome data unreliable.
DOL officials agreed with GAO‘s findings and recommendations and are
taking actions to address the recommendations. In July 2007, DOL issued
guidance concerning case closing procedures, including standard
language to ensure that claimants (federal and nonfederal) are apprised
of their rights, and began conducting mandatory training on the
guidance in August 2007. In addition, according to DOL officials,
beginning in January 2008, all claims are to be reviewed before the
closure letter is sent to the claimant. These are positive steps and
it will be important for DOL to follow through with these and other
actions.
If the demonstration project were to be extended, it would be important
that clear objectives be set. Legislation creating the current
demonstration project was not specific in terms of the objectives to be
achieved. Clear project objectives would also facilitate a follow-on
evaluation. In this regard, GAO‘s July 2007 report provides baseline
data that could inform this evaluation. Given adequate time and
resources, an evaluation of the extended demonstration project could be
designed and tailored to provide information to inform congressional
decision making. GAO also presents potential benefits and limitations
associated with options available if the demonstration project is not
extended.
To view the full product, including the scope and methodology, click on
[hyperlink, http://www.GAO-08-229T]. For more information, contact
George H. Stalcup at (202) 512-9490 or stalcupg@gao.gov.
[End of section]
Chairman Akaka, Senator Burr, and Members of the Committee:
I am pleased to be here today to discuss the results from our review of
a demonstration project established by the Veterans Benefits
Improvement Act of 2004 (VBIA),[Footnote 1] related to servicemember
rights under the Uniformed Services Employment and Reemployment Rights
Act of 1994 (USERRA),[Footnote 2] which protects the employment and
reemployment rights of federal and nonfederal employees who leave their
employment to perform military or other uniformed service. USERRA also
prohibits discrimination in employment against individuals because of
their uniformed service, obligation to perform service, or membership
or application for membership in the uniformed services. USERRA further
prohibits employer retaliation against any individual who engages in
protected activity under USERRA, regardless of whether the individual
has performed service in the uniformed services. USERRA applies to a
wide range of employers, including federal, state, and local
governments as well as private sector firms. The demonstration project
authorized the Office of Special Counsel (OSC) along with the
Department of Labor (DOL) to receive and investigate certain federal
employee USERRA claims. DOL's Veterans' Employment and Training Service
(VETS) investigates and attempts to resolve USERRA claims. In July, we
issued a report responding to a mandate in VBIA on our evaluations of
the demonstration project.[Footnote 3] Our report focused on agency (1)
processes, (2) outcomes, and (3) major changes during the demonstration
project.
For today's hearing, I will discuss:
* USERRA claims processing under the demonstration project for
servicemembers of federal executive branch agencies,[Footnote 4]
* the findings of our work and actions taken to address our
recommendations, and:
* considerations related to extending the demonstration project.
For our July 2007 report, we reviewed relevant documentation and
interviewed knowledgeable DOL and OSC officials on their policies and
procedures for processing federal employees' USERRA claims under the
demonstration project. We also reviewed and analyzed data from VETS's
database, the USERRA Information Management System,[Footnote 5] and
OSC's case tracking system, OSC 2000,[Footnote 6] from the start of the
demonstration project on February 8, 2005, through fiscal year 2006. We
also assessed the reliability of selected data elements on federal
employee claims from VETS's database and OSC's case tracking system by
tracing a statistically random sample of data to source case
files.[Footnote 7] We did not assess the quality of the claims'
investigations or the quality of the outcomes of those investigations.
Considerations related to extending the demonstration are based on our
knowledge of the demonstration project and requirements for effective
program evaluation. We conducted our work for this statement in October
2007 in accordance with generally accepted government auditing
standards.
USERRA Claims Processing under the Demonstration Project:
Under a demonstration project established by VBIA, from February 8,
2005, through September 30, 2007, and subsequently extended through
November 16, 2007,[Footnote 8] OSC and DOL share responsibility for
receiving and investigating USERRA claims and seeking corrective action
for federal employees. While the legislation did not establish specific
goals for the demonstration project, the language mandating that GAO
conduct a review suggested that duplication of effort and delays in
processing cases were of concern to Congress.[Footnote 9]
The demonstration project gave OSC, an independent investigative and
prosecutorial agency, authority to receive and investigate claims for
federal employees whose social security numbers end in odd numbers.
VETS investigated claims for individuals whose social security numbers
end in even numbers. Under the demonstration project, OSC conducts an
investigation of claims assigned to determine whether the evidence is
sufficient to resolve the claimants' USERRA allegations and, if so,
seeks voluntary corrective action from the involved agency or initiates
legal action against the agency before the Merit Systems Protection
Board (MSPB).[Footnote 10] For claims assigned to DOL, VETS conducts an
investigation, and if it cannot resolve a claim, DOL is to inform
claimants that they may request to have their claims referred to
OSC.[Footnote 11]
OSC's responsibility under USERRA for conducting independent reviews of
referred claims after they are investigated but not resolved by VETS
remained unchanged during the demonstration project. Before sending the
referred claim to OSC, two additional levels of review take place
within DOL. After OSC receives the referred claim from DOL, it reviews
the case file, and if satisfied that the evidence is sufficient to
resolve the claimant's allegations and that the claimant is entitled to
corrective action, OSC begins negotiations with the claimant's federal
executive branch employer. According to OSC, if an agreement for full
relief via voluntary settlement by the employer cannot be reached, OSC
may represent the servicemember before MSPB. If MSPB rules against the
servicemember, OSC may appeal the decision to the U.S. Court of Appeals
for the Federal Circuit. In instances where OSC finds that referred
claims do not have merit, it informs servicemembers of its decision not
to represent them and that they have the right to take their claims to
MSPB without OSC representation. Figure 1 depicts USERRA claims'
processing under the demonstration project.
Figure 1: USERRA Claims Processing under the Demonstration Project:
[See PDF for image]
This figure depicts two related flow charts: DOL/VETS formal
investigative process and OSC formal investigative process. Portions of
the processes are characterized as one of the following: Investigative
process under the demonstration project; or Referral phase under USERRA.
The flow charts depict the following data:
DOL/VETS formal investigative process:
Claimant submits claim to VETS;
VETS investigates claim for those with even SSNs:
Investigative process under the demonstration project:
Is claim resolved after investigation?
If yes, claimant is notified.
If no, claimant is notifited of closure of claim and right to referral
to OSC.
Referral phase under USERRA:
Does claimant request referral of OSC?
If no, claimant may file with MSPB.
If yes, VETES investigator prepares memorandum of referral;
VETS regional office reviews;
DOL REgional Solicitor reviews, prepares analysis, and sends case file
to OSC;
OSC reviews case file;
Does OSC determine the claim has merit?
If no, claimant is notified of closure of claim and of right to file
with MSPB.
If yes, OSC attempts resolution, including representation before MSPB.
OSC formal investigative process:
Claimant submits claim to OSC;
OSC investigates claim for those with odd SSNs[a]:
Investigative process under the demonstration project:
Is claim resolved after investigation?
If yes, claimant is notified.
If no, claimant is notifited of closure of claim and right to file with
MSPB.
If no, claimant is notified of OSC's willingness to represent before
MSPB.
Source: GAO (data), PhotoDisc (images).
Note: VBIA did not change VETS's formal investigative process or the
referral phase under the demonstration project.
[A] OSC is also authorized to handle any USERRA claim where OSC has
authority to handle a related claim--that is, one alleging a related
prohibited personnel practice--brought by the USERRA claimant.
[End of figure]
Key Findings on the Demonstration Project and Actions Taken to Address
Recommendations:
Under the demonstration project, VETS and OSC used two different models
to investigate federal employee USERRA claims. Both DOL and OSC
officials have said that cooperation and communication increased
between the two agencies concerning USERRA claims, raising awareness of
the issues related to servicemembers who are federal employees. In
addition, technological enhancements have occurred, primarily on the
part of VETS since the demonstration project. For example, at VETS, an
enhancement to its database enables the electronic transfer of
information between agencies and the electronic filing of USERRA
claims. However, we found that DOL did not consistently notify
claimants concerning the right to have their claims referred to OSC for
further investigation or to bring their claims directly to MSPB if DOL
did not resolve their claims. We also found data limitations at both
agencies that made claim outcome data unreliable. DOL agreed with our
findings and recommendations and has begun to take corrective action.
Agencies Used Two Models for Processing USERRA Claims:
Since the start of the demonstration project on February 8, 2005, both
DOL/VETS and OSC had policies and procedures for receiving,
investigating, and resolving USERRA claims against federal executive
branch employers. Table 1 describes the two models we reported DOL and
OSC using to process USERRA claims.
Table 1: Characteristics of DOL's and OSC's USERRA Claims' Processing
Models:
Characteristic: Structure of office;
DOL: Nationwide network with over 100 investigators working together on
fact-finding at VETS's offices in each state, six regional offices, and
one national office;
OSC: Centralized USERRA Unit within OSC headquarters with the Unit
Chief, three investigators, and three attorneys working together on
fact-finding and legal analysis at the time of our review.[A].
Characteristic: Responsibilities of staff;
DOL: Investigators process both federal and nonfederal USERRA and
veteran's preference claims,[B] provide outreach and education to
servicemembers (at mobilizations and demobilizations) and employers
(federal and nonfederal), and respond to informal requests for
information;
OSC: Investigators and attorneys process federal employees' USERRA
claims, process prohibited personnel practice claims filed by
servicemembers, and provide outreach and education to employees and
employers.
Characteristic: Investigative approach;
DOL: Investigators are to investigate and attempt to resolve claims,
prepare an investigative plan for claims taking more than 30 days, and
send a letter notifying claimant of the determination. For referrals,
investigators prepare a memorandum of referral with supporting
documentation. Attorneys from the Office of the Solicitor are available
for consultations during an investigation if an investigator has a
question or needs legal assistance, but attorneys are not assigned to
every case[C];
OSC: Investigators or attorneys are to investigate and attempt to
resolve claims, prepare a summary of investigation with supporting
documentation, and provide a detailed letter to each claimant (and for
a claim with merit, to the agency) containing the factual and legal
basis for its conclusions.
Characteristic: Oversight;
DOL: There is no required internal review of investigative findings and
closure letters prior to closure letters being sent to the claimant;
VETS senior investigators are to review claims taking longer than 90
days and a random sample of 25 percent of all closed claims and 10
percent of all open claims at the regional level;
OSC: At the time of our review, the USERRA Unit Chief provided ongoing
guidance, reviewed all work products in a case, and reviewed and
approved the letter notifying the claimant of OSC's determination and,
in a case with merit, the letter to the agency, prior to sending the
letters.
Source: GAO.
Note: VBIA did not change VETS's formal investigative process or the
referral phase under the demonstration project.
[A] Since our report was issued, OSC now has seven attorneys and two
investigators.
[B] Under the Veterans Employment Opportunities Act of 1998, Pub. L.
No. 105-339 (Oct. 31, 1998), an individual who believes his or her
preference rights have been violated may file a complaint with VETS
within 60 days after the alleged violation, and if VETS's efforts do
not result in resolution of the complaint, the individual may appeal
the matter to MSPB, 5 U.S.C. § 3330a.
[C] An official from DOL's Office of the Solicitor said that attorneys
from the office are only assigned when contacted by VETS investigators
or when a regional office is contacted by the public. He added that an
attorney from the Office of the Solicitor is assigned to every case
that is a referral, which involves a legal review of a completed case
file.
[End of table]
VETS Is Taking Action to Help Ensure That It Consistently Notifies
Claimants of the Right to Referral:
Once a VETS investigator completes an investigation and arrives at a
determination on a claim, the investigator is to contact the claimant,
discuss the findings, and send a letter to the claimant notifying him
or her of VETS's determination. When VETS is unsuccessful in resolving
servicemembers' claims, DOL is to notify servicemembers who filed
claims against federal executive branch agencies that they may request
to have their claims referred to OSC or file directly with MSPB. Our
review of a random sample of claims showed that for claims VETS was not
successful in resolving (i.e., claims not granted or settled), VETS (1)
failed to notify half the claimants in writing, (2) correctly notified
some claimants, (3) notified others of only some of their options, and
(4) incorrectly advised some claimants of a right applicable only to
nonfederal claimants--to have their claims referred to the Department
of Justice or to bring their claims directly to federal district court.
In addition, we found that the VETS USERRA Operations Manual failed to
provide clear guidance to VETS investigators on when to notify
servicemembers of their rights and the content of the notifications.
VETS had no internal process to routinely review investigators'
determinations before claimants are notified of them. According to a
VETS official, there was no requirement that a supervisor review
investigators' determinations before notifying the claimant of the
determination. In addition, legal reviews by a DOL regional Office of
the Solicitor occurred only when a claimant requested to have his or
her claim referred to OSC. A VETS official estimated that about 7
percent of claimants ask for their claims to be referred to OSC or, for
nonfederal servicemembers, to the Department of Justice.
During our review, citing our preliminary findings, DOL officials
required each region to revise its guidance concerning the notification
of rights. Since that time, DOL has taken the following additional
actions:
* reviewed and updated policy changes to incorporate into the revised
Operations Manual and prepared the first draft of the revised Manual;
* issued a memo in July 2007 from the Assistant Secretary for Veteran's
Employment and Training to regional administrators, senior
investigators, and directors requiring case closing procedure changes,
including the use of standard language to help ensure that claimants
(federal and nonfederal) are apprised of their rights; and:
* began conducting mandatory training on the requirements contained in
the memo in August 2007.
In addition, according to DOL officials, beginning in January 2008, all
claims are to be reviewed before the closure letter is sent to the
claimant. These are positive steps. It is important for DOL to follow
through with its plans to complete revisions to its USERRA Operations
Manual, which according to DOL officials is expected in January 2008,
to ensure that clear and uniform guidance is available to all involved
in processing USERRA claims.
Number of Claims and Average Processing Time under the Demonstration
Project:
Our review of data from VETS's database showed that from the start of
the demonstration project on February 8, 2005, through September 30,
2006, VETS investigated a total of 166 unique claims. We reviewed a
random sample of case files to assess the reliability of VETS's data
and found that the closed dates in VETS's database were not
sufficiently reliable. Therefore, we could not use the dates for the
time VETS spent on investigations in the database to accurately
determine DOL's average processing time. Instead, we used the correct
closed dates from the case files in our random sample and statistically
estimated the average processing time for VETS's investigations from
the start of the demonstration project through July 21, 2006--the
period of our sample. Based on the random sample, there is at least a
95 percent chance that VETS's average processing time for
investigations ranged from 53 to 86 days. During the same period, OSC
received 269 claims and took an average of 115 days to process these
claims. We found the closed dates in OSC's case tracking system to be
sufficiently reliable.
In his July 2007 memo discussed above, the Assistant Secretary for
Veteran's Employment and Training also instructed regional
administrators, senior investigators, and directors that investigators
are to ensure that the closed date of each USERRA case entered in
VETS's database matches the date on the closing letter sent to the
claimant.
Data Limitations at Both Agencies:
We found data limitations at both agencies that affected our ability to
determine outcomes of the demonstration project and could adversely
affect Congress's ability to assess how well federal USERRA claims are
processed and whether changes are needed. At VETS, we found an
overstatement in the number of claims and unreliable data in the VETS's
database. From February 8, 2005, through September 30, 2006, VETS
received a total of 166 unique claims, although 202 claims were
recorded as opened in VETS's database. Duplicate, reopened, and
transferred claims accounted for most of this difference. Also, in our
review of a random sample of case files,[Footnote 12] we found:
* the dates recorded for case closure in VETS's database did not
reflect the dates on the closure letters in 22 of 52 claims reviewed,
so using the correct dates from the sample, we statistically estimated
average processing time, and:
* the closed code, which VETS uses to describe the outcomes of USERRA
claims (i.e., claim granted, claim settled, no merit, withdrawn) was
not sufficiently reliable for reporting specific outcomes of claims.
At OSC, we assessed the reliability of selected data elements in OSC's
case tracking system in an earlier report and found that the corrective
action data element, which would be used for identifying the outcomes
of USERRA claims, was not sufficiently reliable.[Footnote 13]
DOL Has a Lengthy Two-Phase Review Process before Claims Are Referred
to OSC:
We separately reviewed those claims that VETS investigated but could
not resolve and for which claimants requested referral of their claims
to OSC. For these claims, two sequential DOL reviews take place: a VETS
regional office prepares a report of the investigation, including a
recommendation on the merits and a regional Office of the Solicitor
conducts a separate legal analysis and makes an independent
recommendation on the merits. From February 8, 2005, through September
30, 2006, 11 claimants asked VETS to refer their claims to OSC. Of
those 11 claims, 6 claims had been reviewed by both a VETS regional
office and a regional Office of the Solicitor and sent to OSC.[Footnote
14] For those 6 claims, from initial VETS investigation through the
VETS regional office and regional Office of the Solicitor reviews, it
took an average of 247 days or about 8 months before the Office of the
Solicitor sent the claims to OSC.[Footnote 15] Of the 6 referred claims
that OSC received from DOL during the demonstration project, as of
September 30, 2006, OSC declined to represent the claimant in 5 claims
and was still reviewing 1 of them, taking an average of 61 days to
independently review the claims and determine if the claims had merit
and whether to represent the claimants.
Considerations Related to Extending the Demonstration Project:
You asked us about factors that could be considered in deciding whether
to extend the demonstration project and to conduct a follow-up review.
If the demonstration project were to be extended, it would be important
to have clear objectives. Legislation creating the current
demonstration project was not specific in terms of the objectives to be
achieved. Having clear objectives would be important for the effective
implementation of the extended demonstration project and would
facilitate a follow-on evaluation. In this regard, our report provides
baseline data that could inform this evaluation. Given adequate time
and resources, an evaluation of the extended demonstration project
could be designed and tailored to provide information to inform
congressional decision making.
Congress also may want to consider some potential benefits and
limitations associated with options available if the demonstration is
not extended. Table 2 presents two potential actions that could be
taken and examples of potential benefits and limitations of each. The
table does not include steps, such as enabling legislation that might
be associated with implementing a particular course of action.
Table 2: Examples of Potential Actions and Potential Benefits and
Limitations with Respect to Processing Federal USERRA Claims:
Potential action: Return to pre-demonstration status (i.e., DOL
receives and investigates all claims);
Potential benefit: DOL has an infrastructure in place; All USERRA
claims, federal and nonfederal, would be processed by the same agency;
Potential limitation: DOL is taking a number of actions to correct
deficiencies in notifying servicemembers of their rights and to
implement controls to help improve the quality of the data on the
number of cases, outcomes, and the time to investigate claims. The
effectiveness of these actions has not been determined.
Potential action: Give OSC authority to receive and investigate all
federal claims;
Potential benefit: OSC has institutional experience from enforcement of
statutes to protect federal employees from prohibited personnel
practices, which according to OSC, are similar to USERRA claims. This
eliminates two extra reviews at DOL under current system for referrals
of federal claims;
Potential limitation: OSC would need to "stand up" a more robust
infrastructure to handle all USERRA cases, which may include hiring and
training additional staff as well as additional operating expenses. A
significant increase in the number of claims to be processed may also
necessitate a change to the oversight structure that OSC used during
our review of the demonstration project, which relied heavily on the
actions of one individual.
Source: GAO analysis.
[End of table]
At a time when the nation's attention is focused on those who serve our
country, it is important that employment and reemployment rights are
protected for federal servicemembers who leave their employment to
perform military or other uniformed service. Addressing the
deficiencies that we identified during our review, including correcting
inaccurate and unreliable data, is a key step to ensuring that
servicemembers' rights under USERRA are protected. While DOL is taking
positive actions in this regard, it is important that these efforts are
carried through to completion.
Chairman Akaka, Senator Burr, and Members of the Committee, this
concludes my prepared statement. I would be pleased to respond to any
questions that you may have.
For further information regarding this statement, please contact George
Stalcup, Director, Strategic Issues, at (202) 512-9490 or
stalcupg@gao.gov. Contact points for our Offices of Congressional
Relations and Public Affairs may be found on the last page of this
testimony. Individuals making key contributions to this statement
included Belva Martin, Assistant Director; Karin Fangman; Tamara F.
Stenzel; Kiki Theodoropoulos; and Greg Wilmoth.
[End of section]
Footnotes:
[1] See section 204 of Pub. L. No. 108-454, 118 Stat. 3598, 3606-3608,
38 U.S.C. § 4301 note.
[2] Pub. L. No. 103-353, 108 Stat. 3149, 38 U.S.C. §§ 4301-4334.
[3] GAO, Military Personnel: Improved Quality Controls Needed over
Servicemembers' Employment Rights Claims at DOL, GAO-07-907
(Washington, D.C.: July 20, 2007).
[4] USERRA rights extend to servicemembers who are federal employees,
prior employees of, and applicants to federal executive branch
agencies. Servicemembers include members of the National Guard and
Reserves. For purposes of this testimony, we are using the term
servicemember, although individuals who are not servicemembers (or who
have merely applied to become a servicemember) may also be protected by
USERRA's discrimination and retaliation prohibitions.
[5] The USERRA Information Management System is a Web-based case
management and reporting tool implemented by VETS in October 1996 that
allows for automated collection and investigator input of information
regarding USERRA claims and generation of reports for analysis of
USERRA operations and outcomes.
[6] OSC 2000 was implemented by OSC in July 1999 and was designed to
capture and record data from the initial filing of a claim until the
closure and archiving of the case file and allows for queries that
create a number of management and workload reports.
[7] The period of the sample was from the start of the demonstration
project on February 8, 2005, through July 21, 2006. Unless otherwise
stated, the data were sufficiently reliable for the purposes of our
review.
[8] See section 130 of Pub. L. No. 110-92 (Sept. 29, 2007).
[9] See section 204 of Pub. L. No. 108-454, 118 Stat. 3598, 3606-3608,
38 U.S.C. § 4301 note.
[10] An independent, quasi-judicial agency in the executive branch,
MSPB serves as the guardian of federal merit principles.
[11] DOL is also to inform claimants that they may file a complaint
directly with the MSPB. If DOL/VETS cannot resolve nonfederal USERRA
claims, DOL is to inform claimants that they may request to have their
claims referred to the U.S. Attorney General. The Department of Justice
prosecutes nonfederal sector USERRA claims.
[12] The period of the random sample covered February 8, 2005, through
July 21, 2006.
[13] GAO, Office of Special Counsel Needs to Follow Structured Life
Cycle Management Practices for Its Case Tracking System, GAO-07-318R
(Washington, D.C.: Feb. 16, 2007).
[14] The remaining five claims were still at DOL as of September 30,
2006.
[15] Because of the data limitations concerning the reliability of
investigations' closed dates in VETS's database, it was not possible to
isolate the length of time for the two additional reviews.
[End of section]
GAO's Mission:
The Government Accountability Office, the audit, evaluation, and
investigative arm of Congress, exists to support Congress in meeting
its constitutional responsibilities and to help improve the performance
and accountability of the federal government for the American people.
GAO examines the use of public funds; evaluates federal programs and
policies; and provides analyses, recommendations, and other assistance
to help Congress make informed oversight, policy, and funding
decisions. GAO's commitment to good government is reflected in its core
values of accountability, integrity, and reliability.
Obtaining Copies of GAO Reports and Testimony:
The fastest and easiest way to obtain copies of GAO documents at no
cost is through GAO's Web site [hyperlink, http://www.gao.gov]. Each
weekday, GAO posts newly released reports, testimony, and
correspondence on its Web site. To have GAO e-mail you a list of newly
posted products every afternoon, go to [hyperlink, http://www.gao.gov]
and select "E-mail Updates."
Order by Mail or Phone:
The first copy of each printed report is free. Additional copies are $2
each. A check or money order should be made out to the Superintendent
of Documents. GAO also accepts VISA and Mastercard. Orders for 100 or
more copies mailed to a single address are discounted 25 percent.
Orders should be sent to:
U.S. Government Accountability Office:
441 G Street NW, Room LM:
Washington, DC 20548:
To order by Phone:
Voice: (202) 512-6000:
TDD: (202) 512-2537:
Fax: (202) 512-6061:
To Report Fraud, Waste, and Abuse in Federal Programs:
Contact:
Web site: [hyperlink, http://www.gao.gov/fraudnet/fraudnet.htm]:
E-mail: fraudnet@gao.gov:
Automated answering system: (800) 424-5454 or (202) 512-7470:
Congressional Relations:
Gloria Jarmon, Managing Director, JarmonG@gao.gov:
(202) 512-4400:
U.S. Government Accountability Office:
441 G Street NW, Room 7125:
Washington, DC 20548:
Public Affairs:
Chuck Young, Managing Director, youngc1@gao.gov:
(202) 512-4800:
U.S. Government Accountability Office:
441 G Street NW, Room 7149:
Washington, DC 20548:
