wow I can't understand why the army is treating me like a tard! Oh yeah the VA said if I would have been in a war it would be different! I enlisted in 1979 and I am treated different then these other people. WHY IS THAT? I am very glad of the folks that serve for this great country. On the other hand I think the goverment can suck my#$^. TAKE CARE OF THE PEOPLE THAT WHERE HERE FOR THIS COUNTRY! I am not sure but I have knowledge and know what you will do! Same as a lot of people that have served! We the proud the lost veterans. So just remember how they treat you.I did vote for our President and the as@W*$#&* in office. Take care of all of us!
Sonny, with the kind of attitude that you have I would say that about 99% of your problems are coming from you.
You did not say anything in this post except complain about how you are treated. If you want to be treated nice, you have to act nice. You receive what you give out. STOP and think about it. In other words, you reap what you sow, just like the farmer.
How are you treated different than other people??
"I am not sure but I have knowledge and know what you will do!" Now, if you are not sure, how can you know what someone will do. Who does the YOU refer to here??
May God richly bless and keep you and your family. The Father stands with open Arms ready to help YOU, all you have to do is ask HIM for help.
I served a few years before you. My enlistment included a few days of the Vietnam Era. I for the most part get treated great. I have to say that I have benefited by a few people I knew who trained at one of the facilities I was treated. When the staff found out I was his friend, I was their friend.
I got as Grover says nice treatment, because people knew I was nice. He I once got help right after my discharge navigating the system because of a favor my father did for a person who had worked for the same company before joining the VA. All about being nice to people.
Stop being ****ed off and learn how to be a member of the system. It works for all of us.
While not stated as politically correct as some would like, this man has a point. There are thousands of discarded veterans out there who get no help getting a government job by being veterans. There is a period of time between the last of the seventies and mid-eighties where military people got little to no assistance. For example, I was in from Oct of 78 till May of 87. I am told that since there was no official war on during that time I am not getting veterans preference when it comes to job applications with gov't agencies. This means that even though I served two terms in the middle east while "we weren't there" and numerous other hot spots, I get no benefit with regard to hiring. What's worse, a guy that served as a cook on a coast gaurd cutter off the coast of Va. for two weeks in the Viet Nam days will get preference, even if he was booted out. I understand that there are guys out there that served in some real hell and I feel they deserve preference. I worked in Security in the Air Force and I'd like to quote the last of the evacuation orders for our site in the middle east. "After all pertinant personnel and equipment have departed, security personnel will make there way out any way they can." Would that assignment warrent the term, Risky? Apparently not. I actually had a temp job at the local base, but when it went to a term job we had to reapply and those of us without veterens preference lost our jobs. To be clear, my supervisor considered me one of his best and stated we were replaced with inexperienced people from different carrier fields that knew little or nothing about the job. There were 30 of us on the job, thirteen were released, all those that didn't have veterens preference. In 1987 many first and some second termers were released without any warning because the military was cutting back on manpower, these same guys that were deserted by the military they loved don't even qualify for veteren's preference. That's the definition of shafted no matter how "positive" you are.
i understand your frustation about perceived VA benefits inequality. What i do not understand is you bashing another Service (Coast Guard) to make your point. It would have been the same point if you would have used the example Air Force cooks working at a base in Kansas instead of Coast Guard cooks working on a cutter off the U.S. coast. Do you understand what i mean? we are all in this together. there is/was Coast Guard in wars and Air Force in wars. There is/was Air Force in peacetime and Coast Guard in peacetime. It has nothing to do with specific Service components. there's many, many, many people that never spent one day in any military component doing anything.
Hey now !! No picking on Vietnam Veterans !! O.K Coast Guard, nah, not fair either! Btw, the Coast Guard did serve in Vietnam, I actually did run across them by the Mekong Delta..where it meets the ocean. I'm not familiar with ships or waters, but anyone who served in either the CG or Navy would know. As an Army Vietnam Infantry veteran, I state openly my greatest respect for all the service branches. All of you were fantastic in your time, your service and in your conflicts, whether you served abroad or at home, matters not. To me, you're all my heroes.
I stand humbly corrected. I was trying to make a point concerning the fact that some gi's were at risk during the war and others were not so much at risk. It seems my point wasn't made. I am aware that the coast gaurd served honorably and in harms way during the war and feel no animosity towards them or any other branch. The example I used was to point out that not everyone who was active during those times were in harms way, while they were under the threat of being deployed they were lucky enough not to be. I feel that an airman serving in Kansas or anyone else for that matter that wasn't actually in the battle should not be lumped into the same group as those who went throgh the hell the others did in the war. It just seems ludicrous to say that everyone who served during that time frame, no matter where, deserves full attention while those of us who did things on a smaller scale but sometimes much riskier get no recognition or help at all. All veterens faced the possibility of going to war the whole time they were active. Some got lucky and never fired a round, others weren't so lucky. Maybe veterens preference should only be given out to those with campaign ribbons or some other proof that they were actually in harms way. I knew a guy that served stateside in security in the air force for less than six months before getting out on disability. he then worked twenty years for the post office, all the time collecting his disability checks. Thanks to his 5 point disability and 5 point veterens preference he was the first looked at to join us on the temp job on the base, blocking out much more qualified individuals who didn't have the preference but were cops in the service for years and now needed a job. He collected his retirement pay from the post office, an hourly wage for doing the security job with the DOD, and at the same time collected disability checks for not being able to do the job he was being paid to do with us! It seems like a very twisted system.
So how exactly do you fit in this picture you drew? Did you serve in a war zone? Are you not getting the preference points you're entitled to? I understand your point made of people that actually served in a war zone compared to others who served during that time period but served stateside. However, even if I were to accept your point, and I would surely benefit from it because I did serve with boots on the ground in Vietnam, it would still be dishonorable of me to accept that premise. The simple fact never changes and that is no matter if, when or where you served once you leave the Service Branch, you are indeed a VETERAN. A Veteran does not mean to indicate that any wartime service was performed, it simply differentiates you from others by recognizing that you served in the Armed Forces. That is all. There are many who say, like me, I"m a Vietnam Veteran" simply means that I am a veteran who served in Vietnam. Others may indicate that they were Vietnam Era Veterans, meaning that they served somewhere in the world other than Vietnam. Either way, their service made my service in Vietnam possible. For while I picked up a torch in Vietnam to carry on where the soldier before me left it for me to pick up, the same rule applies to soldiers that served anywhere else, someone had to pick up the slack, pick up the torch and carry on because the one that left to serve somewhere else left it for his brother/sister behind him/her to pick up and carry on. So in essence there is little difference, for we were all soldiers once, no matter where we served, and now a new chapter of the book of life titled "Veteran" I suppose I could be a cold soldier and say "Hey I was there, done that" you don't hold a candle to me" But if I did, then I would demean the service of many others and make it appear their service to be less honorable than mine, and I cannot in good conscience do that. Again, we were all soldiers. Wishing you and your the best and Godspeed.
All veterens are heros to me. My father was a fighter driver in both Korea and Viet Nam. My brothers and I all served at different times and in different branches. I did serve in some hot spots. I served for eight years-seven months without ever being credited for an overseas assignment, even though I was only stateside for a little over four years in reality. I have fond memories and some not so. I have friends that are still around and some I lost along the way. My gripe is not with the term veteran, which we all earned. And while I admit I probably hold war veterans in a higher regard, I think they all deserve credit. That's not my issue. This is... At the local military base (Robins AFB), the hiring process is simple. You are asked a series of questions concerning the job in question and then the application is scored. If you are disabled you get 5 points, deservedly so in most cases. If you were active duty during particular times, 5 more points for what they call "veterens preference". When a job opens on the base the employment office forwards a certain number of applications to the hiring unit. For example if there are four openings they will send up the top twelve applications. That's all that the unit gets to chose from. If a security job opens up for 4 spots, the unit may only get 12 apps out of the hundreds that apply. Lets say the office receives 5 online applications and 7 local, all who qualify for veterens preference without any other qualifications. The first spots go to the 10 pointers, then the 5 pointers, then those without either will be considered if there's any spots left. This means that qualifications aren't even considered if there are enough of those with preference to fill the 12 slots. I recently filled out an app for a social security spot. There were about 80 yes or no questions, all of which I was able to answer yes to. The only question in the whole thing I couldn't answer yes to was, " Do you claim veterens Preference?" I received the same response I always do, "Thanks for the app, we find you to be qualified but didn't forward you app because there were other applicants with better qualifications." That's my gripe. The security job did get replacements for us in the form of people with no experience but veterens preference. Two months later a guy pulled up to the gate and asked the security gaurd to deliver an unmarked package to the commander, which he did! This is an example of how the system insures the right guy for the right job. If you'd like to see who qualifies for veterens preference and what veterens don't, check out USAjobs,com. Even the folks at the VA didn't know this was happening. They just assumed we all qualified because we were all vets. A goverment job means that those of us that were released when the military deserted us in '87 may have a way to parley their military time towards a retirement check so that they wouls see some benefit for their time served. Oh well.
Maybe veterens preference should only be given out to those with campaign ribbons or some other proof that they were actually in harms way.
I am not sure you have a good understanding of harms way. We had someone day on our ship in an accident. Was that in harms way? We had a guy that had what they thought was a heart attack at sea and had trouble getting him to a hospital or doctor. We have had subs sink with all hands lost. So they did not fire a shot, they where in the service of our country at at harms way.
A number of pilots training this year died in accidents, yet they where not in combat. Are the pilots who are stationed in the US any less critical to the war effort or defense of this country?
From time to time someone complain about the preference system. I used my 10 points once for a Ohio State job. I stayed a short time and left for the private sector. My son on the other hand is now a GS-12 at USGS without any preference.
There where periods when the US Congress did not grant the all volunteer military preference. It was know when they joined. This is not the case of a benefit changed after the fact.
You mean to tell me that you're not getting any veteran preference points? At all? Unless something changed very recently, but I admit this is an issue I rarely address, I thought vets were given 5 points for their service, and 10 points for claiming....such and such... Hope to hear from you again. I mean that my friend. Till then I wish you and yours the best and Godspeed.
I will check with the OPM rules as well as Title 4 & 18 USC and get back with you. It is possible that the provisions under them are often misinterpreted because of amendments not being updated from D.C > downhill. It is still a Blue Form, correct?
to the op, ONLY way to get preference points is by being in a hot zone and either the president or congress declaring it a "war"
this somewhat erks the h3ll outta me too cause I was with the Marines in beruit and the explosion of the battalion hdqtrs in 83, I saw action and have a car, but since it was called only a peacekeeping mission, I'm not eligible for the points either
One quick final note on the subject. By harms way I am reffering to any situation where a GI is at risk. This does not necessarily mean at war, Consider a GI that is on a rescue mission during a flood or fire. That's also harms way. That is also why I said the preference should be based on campaign ribbons or some other verifiable action. Men were wounded or killed or in life or death situations during wars and not during them. Those are the guys who Should be given first shot at gov't. jobs like cpl-203, It just seems too arbitrary. And lets not forget that not all injuries or fatalities in the military can be considered harms way. Two guys in my squadron got drunk, crashed into a pond with their car and drowned in less than a foot of water, not exactly harms way, just a tragedy. According to the VA, the OPM is not affiliated with the government and doesn't have to follow the regs a gov't agency does. This is why they can stipulate who qualifies for what they call "Veterans Preference". Nuff said.
OPM is a government agency. They are not part of the VA. They have to follow the rules. The problem is that they are not the hiring authority. Within a department there are hundreds or thousands of people who hire. They all have HR functions, but they are supposed to follow the rules. Do they - sometimes.
U.S. Office of Personnel Management - opm.gov - The director is a appointed by POTUS and confirmed by the US Senate.
The United States Office of Personnel Management (OPM) is an independent agency of the United States government that manages the civil service of the federal government.
OPM was originally founded as the United States Civil Service Commission by the Pendleton Civil Service Reform Act of 1883. The commission was abolished and replaced by OPM on 1 January 1979 following the passage of the Civil Service Reform Act of 1978 and Reorganization Plan No. 2 of 1978 (43 F.R. 36037, 92 Stat. 3783).
