Posted on February 9th, 2008 by Tim Eavenson | No Comments »
Filed under: . | 
The days of patchwork state statutory control over military leave for families of soldiers may be finally coming to an end. President Bush recently signed a law that expands FMLA leave to cover family members of injured soldiers coming home from war. That, coupled with new FMLA final regulations from the Department of Labor will hopefully give veterans and servicemembers’ families a better understanding of their rights, and give employers a better idea of what they can and cannot allow, without pissing off the Government.
According to the Kansas City Star, the law now gives employees up to 6 months unpaid to care for an injured family member after they get home, and will extend the standard 12-week option to situations where a “qualifying exigency” during active duty service occurs. What’s a qualifying exignecy? Wouldn’t you like to know. From the article:
Although the latter form of military leave won’t become effective until the Secretary of Labor issues regulations defining what a qualifying exigency is, the Labor Department is urging employers to comply with the spirit of the law in the meantime. So employers should use their best judgment about doing so, and “interpret the term broadly….”
The important question in our eyes is whether mental health will be considered a qualified exigency. If not, it’s a shame. I know the likelihood of abuse would shoot up, but the benefit of having a parent or sibling or child there for you as you learn to be a civilian again would be incredible. You would think it would be the least the Feds could do, since they’re cutting funding for Post-Traumatice Stress treatment, which something like 1 in 7 servicemembers may be coming home with.
Finally, an interesting heads-up: FMLA provisions have always extended to spouses or children caring for family members, and the military provision includes these categories, too, but it also allows the servicemember’s nearest blood relative to take off under the Act. This extra category is exclusive to the military portion – the old one is still just spouses and kids.
All the other FMLA regs are coming out, too, but nothing in them is this big (basically, employees are going to have to call and ask for it first – sorry to spoil the suprise), and I have to study for the Bar, so good night for now.
On the web: DOL’s announcement/summary of proposed regs.
Posted on November 12th, 2007 by Tim Eavenson | No Comments »
Filed under: Uncategorized |
[ed. note: This one is for us here in Chicago. All the same, many of the agencies and support organizations mentioned in this post have corollaries in your state. A google search of your state and "veteran aid" will get you started.]
It is encouraging to see members of Congress championing these issues on multiple fronts, but after Veteran’s Day is over, who will still be working for the interests of the soldiers? And, more importantly, what can you do to help? Let us give you a subtle suggestion:
As we briefly noted earlier, the John Marshall Law School has recently formed a Veterans Legal Support Center with the charge of aiding vets in getting the benefits they deserve.
I recently spoke to Ryan Coward, Director of the VLSC, about the situation and what the Clinic is doing to help. That interview, and what YOU can do to help, appears after the jump.
Current Employment: What exactly is the VLSC? Will the Clinic be able to help vets with employment issues?
Ryan Coward: There are two parts of the VLSC. The clinic will consist of students who are actually representing the vets in front of the VA [for benefits]. They will be supervised by an attorney. There will also be a pro bono network of attorneys. These attorneys will represent veterans not only for their VA claims but also for a number of different issues, including USERRA related issues. So, while the Veterans Clinic solely assists with medical and educational benefits, any vet with a employment related issue will be referred to this pro bono network where they can receive the appropriate representation for free.
CE: Are there any other resources out there for unemployed vets coming back?
RC: There are a number of resources for unemployed veterans coming back. About once a month there is a job fair in Chicago strictly for those that were in the military. In addition to these job fairs, prominent groups in the Chicago area that assist veterans with obtaining employment are: the Helmets to Hardhats organization, the Troops to Teachers organization, and the Veterans Leadership Program which is a non-for-profit which helps veterans obtain employment.
CE: When does the Clinic start taking cases?
RC: The clinic is taking cases officially January 1, 2008. However, we are currently accepting test cases and also actively referring cases to the attorneys within the pro-bono network.
CE: Is there anything specific that vets returning from the current conflict should do to protect their former jobs?
RC: Yes. One important thing veterans should do is always communicate with their employers in writing. They should also keep copies of these communications. USERRA does a great job in helping protect returning veterans so that they can return to their jobs. The problem that some returning veterans have is that their employers simply aren’t familiar with the statute. If there were greater awareness about the regulations many of the current issues returning veterans face may never even arise. The good news is that almost all of these disputes are resolvable. When most employers learn that there are certain laws, which they need to comply with, then they are happy to oblige. If for some reason a veteran does continue to have problems, the best organization to contact is the ESGR (Employer Support of the Guard and Reserve).
As Ryan said, for USERRA matters, the VLSC teamed up with the Illinois Supreme Court to match vets with a trained attorney who will act pro bono on their behalf. In order to do this, of course, they need two things some of you can provide: money and licenced lawyers (employment lawyers might be nice, huh?) willing to be trained.
If you are interested in volunteering, visit www.jmvlsc.org or email Mr. Coward at 5coward@stu.jmls.edu. If you would like to donate to the Center, call Scott Kruger, executive director of the John Marshall Foundation, at (312) 386-2806, or email him at 6kruger@jmls.edu.
Posted on November 12th, 2007 by Tim Eavenson | No Comments »
Filed under: Uncategorized |
Senator Edward Kennedy and Former Senator Max Cleland had a commentary in the Boston Globe yesterday about veterans’ job prospects and the success (or lack thereof) of the government agencies in helping those with problems.
The point of the article, in 50 words or less, is that USERRA is a great law that isn’t enforced and therefore isn’t helping. They support this idea with data from a recent DOD survey. From the article:
In a 2006 survey, 23 percent of returning reservists and National Guard members who could not find a job said that their previous employer refused to rehire them – as required by the Uniformed Services Employment and Reemployment Rights Act. About 11,000 veterans came home to find that their former employers would not promptly take them back – in direct violation of that 1994 law. Even if they did get their job back, their employers often failed to provide them with full benefits. For example, more than 22,500 reported improper loss of seniority and seniority-related pay and benefits.
Employees who are denied these rights have to choose whether to accept the short stick or fight through an agency process that the Senators said could last up to seven years. That is, if they even know they have the choice.
From the article:
[R]ecent reports indicate that government agencies charged with enforcing the 1994 act are hamstrung by inefficiency and lack of coordination. Almost half of reservists and National Guardsmen who filed a complaint with the Department of Labor reported being dissatisfied with the handling of their case, and more than one-third reported that the department’s response was not prompt.
The Senators point out that, on top of the inefficiencies in the process, government agency computer systems can’t communicate with each other, so every agency the veteran deals with is isolated to itself. This could make it seriously hard for someone who, say, gets fired because he has to leave for rehab four times a week.
Worse yet, this person may not even know he has any recourse. From the article:
Almost a third of reservists surveyed in 2006 reported not receiving information on their reemployment rights during activation or deactivation. Obviously, veterans cannot exercise their rights if they don’t know those rights exist.
So who’s at fault here? We tend to agree with Senators – the government has got to do more, and finally giving vets preference in House employment is not enough. Most employers aren’t sitting at home thinking up ways to screw veterans. Just like they aren’t trying to be racist. Or pay men more than women. It’s tough to run a business when workers aren’t working, but they’re still costing you money, and businesses are usually kept in line by the government enforcing its laws. This is the case for securities regulation, discrimination, pension benefits. But it seems that vets are pretty much expected to protect themselves. The article puts it better than we could:
These brave men and women stood guard for us, so that we can have a better and safer life – a steady job, a home, and a family. They deserve the same.
