TOPICS
TOPICS
Bush seeks hiring preferences for spouses of veterans
President Bush announced Monday that he would ask Congress to pass legislation creating hiring preferences at federal agencies for spouses of military service members.
In his 2008 State of the Union address, Bush also put pressure on Congress to further limit earmarks in spending bills. He said he would veto any spending measure that did not cut the number and cost of earmarks in half.
Bush also said he would issue an executive order Tuesday directing agencies to ignore earmarks that are not explicitly approved by Congress. That, the White House said, was designed to end the congressional practice of including earmarks in report language on bills, rather than in the actual text of legislation.
"The people's trust in their government is undermined by congressional earmarks," Bush said.
The hiring preference proposal would extend preferences that already are in place for veterans to their spouses. Such a measure could prove challenging for agencies to implement. Last September, a House subcommittee held a hearing to examine whether the complexity of existing veterans preference laws was hindering federal agencies' compliance with the laws.
In his speech, Bush also said he would seek legislation allowing service members to transfer unused education benefits under the Montgomery GI bill to their spouses or their children.
"Our military families ... endure sleepless nights and the daily struggle of providing for children while a loved one is serving far from home," Bush said. "We have a responsibility to provide for them."
Bush also praised the efforts of federal employees in homeland security agencies. "Dedicated men and women in our government toil day and night to stop the terrorists from carrying out their plans," he told the assembled members of Congress. "These good citizens are saving American lives, and everyone in this chamber owes them our thanks."
In the address, Bush also renewed his pledge to trim federal spending, saying his proposed fiscal 2009 budget, due out next week, would eliminate 151 "wasteful or bloated programs" involving total spending of more than $18 billion.
"In all we do," Bush said in the speech, we must trust in the ability of free people to make wise decisions, and empower them to improve their lives and their futures."
"The secret of our strength, the miracle of America," Bush said, "is that our greatness lies not in our government, but in the spirit and determination of our people."
COMMENTS
- I am a military spouse x’s 15/yrs. I met my spouse in high school, went to UC Berkeley, graduated, and moved back home. I worked getting my B.A., Master's, and doctoral degree. I have had a job from the age of 15 yrs. old. I moved overseas and was unemployed x’s 3/yrs. I PCS'd with my husband to a foreign Country and I remained, while he was sent to war. I was pulling duty on foreign soil, while he was fighting for our Country. I was unable to get a job, because the hiring system (GS, MCCS...) was corrupt and included so much of "who you know..." that I could never break into the system. I am a trained/educated individual, who has come across many road blocks due to poor hiring practices of many government contractors, GS, and MCCS entities. I hear, "you are too qualified, we have hired someone within, you need veteran's preference for that position, or we were required to advertise the position, but someone has already been selected from within...." The list of fragmented excuses just goes on and on. There is a significant financial impact that each move has on us. Should we live in two separate homes/places in an effort for me to continue to be employed would also be financially difficult as well as place an extreme amount of stress on any relationship. Our government should look upon military spouses as a benefit. We help to retain and maintain the military force by encouraging our spouse(s) to stay in the military! The military culture can be difficult and is made more challenging by moves that require the spouse to leave his/her job. We are part of the military framework and must not be excluded or overlooked re: spousal preference and employment. I am in the one percent of the U.S. population to have a Ph.D., which makes it ludicrous that I cannot get a job within the GS or MCCS system! I am qualified for the position(s) I apply for. As a matter of fact, I apply for positions that are below the General Schedule (GS) for which I should be applying and still no job-- go figure! My questions are, “who oversees the hiring practices of these government employment offices?” And, “why shouldn’t spouses have government-wide hiring preference?” Military spouses endure all kinds of hardships, esp. those dealing with transition/employment. Summer Watson, Ph.D. Posted March 27, 2009 7:55 PM
- The term “Unrealistic Expectations” comes to mind. The preference policies always require that: 1. The individual first qualify by education, experience, and status. a. Depending on the job, experience may substitute for some education. b. In most cases, experience requires the individual to have worked in the grade preceding the one offered. This will ensure the individual hired possesses the required expertise. c. All successful organizations make every effort to promote from WITHIN first. The miss-guided call this intelligent business practice “The Good Ole Boy Network.” Keep this in mind, most “Good Ole Boys” started out as “Good LITTLE Boys” in the organization. The employees feel a sense of LOYALTY from the company and therefore want to stay. The company feels as though they can depend on and trust the employee, therefore; rewards the employee with the promotion. Loyalty is a characteristic both the employer and employee cherish. Prospective employees need to keep this in mind when applying for available positions. The more responsibility, longevity, and dedication, the position requires, the more difficult it will be for a transient employee will have securing this position. If the prospective employee is not transient, then they must be humble enough to take a lower position and prove themselves before having the ability to get “THE JOB I DESERVE.” News Flash: One may have to take a position in the organization which is below their expectations. Getting your foot in the door and establishing a presence within the organization will allow you to fulfill one of the qualifications of the highly sought after positions. It’s much easier to become a supervisor as a result of a promotion from within than to be hired from the ranks of the unemployed…. Will Posted February 3, 2009 12:14 PM
- I am sorry to say, but the spouse and prior military preferences are pretty much nonexistant without many of the reasons for hiring espoused here: I am not only a spouse, but retired Air Force. On top of that, I am working towards a master's degree, I was originally a military linguist (Russian and Spanish), I was a student on this base twice, and I have a major computer background in the same systems they use. I appear to be qualified, because my name has appeared on two lists; however, from conversations I have had with prior-enlisted co-workers and acquaintances within this system, there are three reasons I probably have not been hired: 1. I do not "know anyone"--what they mean by this is I did not retire from here, so I am "not known." In fact, I have heard comments from military members that they would prefer to hire prior military from this base over "outsiders". My wife is currently stationed here, but that appears irrelevant, as well. 2. There is little work to be had on this base, so they hire a) people they know and b) people moving from out of area, regardless of experience and knowledge [I've seen this one myself]. 3. I never applied for disability, which knocks my chances even lower, although I am both spouse and retired military. USAJOBS only complicates this, by not providing access to actual people. Preferences are in place--they need to be appropriately exercised and the "good old boy network" that brings in people who don't know the job at all is what needs to be wiped out. haidozo Posted November 26, 2008 3:48 PM
