Monday, March 21, 2005

Regulations Governing VAA

Employment Violations at LANL

From Anonymous:

=====================================================
Dear Doug,

As an outsider to LANL, I have found that the inability to follow the law extends from Group Leaders to the Director's Office. Specifically, Veterans Affirmative Action (VAA) is statutory law, fully regulated, and a required condition of the contract to operate LANL.

For ten years I have unsuccessfully tried to encourage Group Leaders to the Director's Office Program Administrator to read the regulations governing VAA. The LANL Human Resources Manual does have a VAA policy statement but not a single procedure.

[...]

Document

Comments:
I don't know much about regulations governing VAA, but I am aware of one Iraq veteran who was fired on trumped up reasons because this person was about to be called up a second time. This was a reservist.
This case was appealed to Nanos, himself. He did nothing.
So much for patriotism at LANL.
 
EXCUSE ME????? When did this happen, and why was this not highly published???? Are we going to sit around and let these kinds of things get swept under the rug?? Where the hell was the EEOC, and all the other special interest groups that proliferate this institution. THIS IS AN OUTRAGE!
 
Not only does LANL disregard the VAA, but it also totally ignores the American with Disabilities Act. Modifications to facilities are done only when there is an absolute need, many buildings are totally unacessible to the disabled and have no handicapped parking, and discussing these problems with the appropriate person accomplishes nothing.

In contrast, if one travels to DC, one may easily access all public buildings which include modified restrooms. How many restrooms in the Ad building have been modified for handicapped accessibility?

Many problems at LANL come from the support side - facilities, purchasing, HR, etc. And who is responisible for these folks? Marquez? And who appointed Marquez? Nanos? Maybe Nanos needs a "The Buck Stops Here" reminder.
 
To 8:54 AM.
This was reported. EEOC does not handle Veterans' problems. The employee chose not to pursue the matter further, perhaps because this person was given a contractor job in another division, probably was afraid of losing that if further action was taken.
 
How many veterans who had earned the right to wear the Vietnam Service Medal or the Vietnam Cross of Gallantry are in upper management today (division level and above)? How many have been demoted, forced into retirement, fired etc.? When HR does a diversity profile on a division or group can they do veterans' profile? How can a Federal contractor have VAA policies askance of Federal law?

Just asking.
 
Yeah, I am a Vietnam Veteran and feel I have been discrminated against in regards to promotions etc but there is no where to go and if you bring it up its always, oh you have 30+ years experience but this yahoo has a degree in bird hunting.
 
To demonstrate how totally wacked the VAA implementation and enforcement really is:

In 10 years and thousands of communications, LANL HR has not requested my DD-214 once. But OFCCP (the regulator) demands my DD-214 before any VAA investigation.

Then OFCCP investigates and never once demands my DD-214 from any $billion+/annum contractor (this includes LANL, LLNL, SNL, ORNL, NTS, and several others). OFCCP has already demonstrated that the DD-214 is required for any VAA action.

The puny unemployed military veteran is held to a higher standard of proof than the $billion+/annum contractor. This is clearly an outrageous example of flagrant double standard discrimination by the federal agency OFCCP.

On top of all of that, OFCCP in June 2004 declared the University of California a federal agency in order to avoid investigating UC. Incredibly, I have the document where they make that claim.

OFCCP obviously has abdicated their fiduciary duties (along with LANL). What would happen if the entire US military did the same tomorrow?
 
OFCCP bureaucrats would declare a "possum" a "pumpkin" if it allowed them to avoid making a difficult decision.
 
In this case OFCCP avoidance techniques have caught the attention of the House Committee on Veterans Affairs. The recommendations to the House Committee are to transfer 40% of the OFCCP budget to the Department of Veterans Affairs, transfer the entire Veterans Employment and Training Service (and budget) from the Dept of Labor to the DVA. Then assign the responsibility for VAA enforcment to DVA under an Administration containing both the VAA regulatory agency and VETS. Also, OFCCP Director Charles James has been recommended to the House Committee for a competency hearing along with the Directors of NNSA and LANL. And written and verbal apologies to the 3 largest veterans organizations from the Directors have been recommended to the House Committee. The next step is to get this out into the national news media so that it raises the level of discomfort for the House of Representatives as well as the DOE and DOL. There's no way in hell that the national news media could ignore administrators at LANL being completely incapable of compliance with the law, including VAA. I have a hunch that one way or another OFCCP is not going to screw this up any more.
 
Post a Comment

<< Home

This page is powered by Blogger. Isn't yours?