Leader

Collapse

Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Fed Age Requirement for Veterans

Collapse

300x250 Mobile

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • Fed Age Requirement for Veterans

    As of August 26 OPM has released its official guidance concerning waiving the 37 age limit for veterans for federal law enforcement, positions.

    It also cleared up the retirement question, concerning waiving individuals like myself who will be a 40 plus new agent. I get to serve my 20 years and qualify for full law enforcement enhanced retirement.

    http://www.chcoc.gov/Transmittals/Tr...smittalId=2484

    MEMORANDUM FOR HEADS OF EXECUTIVE DEPARTMENTS AND AGENCIES
    FROM: John Berry
    Director
    Subject: Change in maximum entry-age requirements for Veterans’ Preference Eligibles
    On July 2, 2008, the Merit Systems Protection Board (Board) issued a final decision in Robert P. Isabella v. Department of State and Office of Personnel Management, 2008 M.S.P.B. 146, that affects preference eligibles who apply for federal positions having a maximum entry-age restriction. The Board decided that the agency’s failure to waive the maximum entry-age requirements for Mr. Isabella, a preference eligible veteran, violated his rights under the Veteran Employment Opportunities Act of 1998 (VEOA) because there was no demonstration that a maximum entry-age was essential to the performance of the position.

    Based on the Board’s decision in Isabella, qualified preference eligibles may now apply and be considered for vacancies regardless of whether they meet the maximum age requirements identified at 5 U.S.C. 3307. In order to determine whether it must waive a maximum entry-age requirement, an agency must first analyze the affected position to determine whether age is essential to the performance of the position. If the agency decides age is not essential to the position, then it must waive the maximum entry-age requirement for veterans’ preference eligible applicants. In instances where the maximum entry-age is waived, the corresponding mandatory retirement age for these individuals will also be higher because it will be reached after 20 years of Law Enforcement Officer (LEO) service for the entitlement to an immediate enhanced annuity.

    The same principles set forth above would apply to appointments to other types of positions for which the setting of maximum entry ages are authorized under 5 U.S.C. § 3307. These types of positions are: (1) firefighters, (2) air traffic controllers, (3) United States Park police, (4) nuclear materials couriers, and (5) customs and border patrol officers (subject to the Federal Employees Retirement System, 5 U.S.C. § 8401 et seq. only).

    Agencies are reminded that they are still required to apply suitability, occupational qualification standards, and medical qualification determinations when waiving the maximum entry-age requirements for preference eligible veterans.

    Please contact the OPM Human Capital Officer that services your agency should you have questions concerning this policy change.
    cc: Chief Human Capital Officers
    "From now until the end of the world, we and it shall be remembered. We few, we Band of Brothers. For he who sheds his blood with me shall be my brother." - William Shakespeare ("King Henry V")

  • #2
    No offense....BUT....

    Bush signed into law a thing that said all agencies must take the others Clearences....that's never happened....

    I got butt raped trying to get DHS to take my DOD stuff....along with 38 other people....

    Won't believe it till it starts happening on a full-time daily basis....

    Just sayin....

    Comment


    • #3
      The hiring portion is happening right now. The retiring part will happen in about 20 years. I don't think you will see too many instances where the agency will violate Isabella, simply because it is an easy case to make. The transferring of clearances is a bit more difficult of a case to prove, because the initial granting agency is so "busy" or the old clearance doesn't cover all of the stuff the new agency wants, or whatever excuse du jour they come up with.
      But when a long train of abuses and usurpations, pursuing invariably the same object, evinces a design to reduce them under absolute Despotism, it is their right, it is their duty, to throw off such Government, and to provide new guards for their future security.

      For the intelectually challenged: If the government screws the people enough, it is the right and responsibility of the people to revolt and form a new government.

      Comment


      • #4
        Is there a specific time frame? ie I have 4 years AD meaning I get til I'm 41 to get hired?
        "Rollin and Patrollin the Wild Wild West of Bham"

        Comment


        • #5
          Originally posted by kc12 View Post
          The hiring portion is happening right now. The retiring part will happen in about 20 years. I don't think you will see too many instances where the agency will violate Isabella, simply because it is an easy case to make. The transferring of clearances is a bit more difficult of a case to prove, because the initial granting agency is so "busy" or the old clearance doesn't cover all of the stuff the new agency wants, or whatever excuse du jour they come up with.
          It's actually not as easy as you think to make a case on this. All the agency has to say is that there were more qualified people on the list. Hard to prove they are lying on that one. Now if the come out and say because of age, well that's a different story.

          Comment


          • #6
            Originally posted by manstown View Post
            It's actually not as easy as you think to make a case on this. All the agency has to say is that there were more qualified people on the list. Hard to prove they are lying on that one. Now if the come out and say because of age, well that's a different story.
            Under merit procedures I agree an agency can just not select you.

            Under DEU (public) procedures, the agency is very hamstrung when it comes to vets, because of veterans preference. OPM is critically looking over pass over request. They have found allot of unlawful stuff going on when it comes to VP. For a 30% disabled vet, pass over request have to be sent to the vet and they are given 15 days to respond, most are responding with law suites.

            Let’s say "liquidated damages" are involved.

            I am aware of 23 cases where a vet was denied because of age, all resulted in the agency getting there hand slapped, liquidated damages, and individuals getting letters of reprimand and worse.

            This is a PPP and it is easy to prove with DEU procedures, because it becomes a question of suitability which can be reviewed by th MSPB, and when the dust clears the agency does not look good.
            "From now until the end of the world, we and it shall be remembered. We few, we Band of Brothers. For he who sheds his blood with me shall be my brother." - William Shakespeare ("King Henry V")

            Comment


            • #7
              Tell that to the FAMS. I know of a few vets that were turned down without any notice and nothing has happened to them. A smack on the hand may not look good to some, but for people applying, they will look at it in another light. Believe me, I am 100% behind your arguments. I have nearly 10 years in FED LE and I have seen some jacked up stuff. But I'm certainly no where near the person to talk to in cases where this occurs. I'm just saying that if there are ways for them to justify their actions, they will find it.

              Comment


              • #8
                I am currently reaping the benefits of the decision. I am well into the selection process for an 1811 Special Agent position with the Secret Service and I will turn 43 years old in a few months. They are one of the agencies that have voluntarily complied with the ruling. Some agencies are not abiding by the decision and probably won't until someone calls them on it.
                Last edited by vader; 09-04-2009, 06:25 PM.

                Comment


                • #9
                  Originally posted by manstown View Post
                  It's actually not as easy as you think to make a case on this. All the agency has to say is that there were more qualified people on the list. Hard to prove they are lying on that one. Now if the come out and say because of age, well that's a different story.
                  In addition to what was stated, the hiring process and decisions are a matter of public record and all of the information about each of the people hired (with privacy exceptions) can be obtained. Just accepting the statement of the agency, who might be attempting to cover their assets, would be a bit foolish on the vet's part. The reason why a vet was passed over must be maintained by the hiring agency. Just that Joe smith was better qualified is an unacceptable reason. Why Joe Smith was better qualified is sufficient. I have no doubt you have seen some very unlawful things when it comes to hiring practices, but just because it happens doesn't mean it is legal. Remember, "Believe none of what you hear, half of what you read and 10% of what you see."
                  Last edited by kc12; 09-04-2009, 02:52 PM.
                  But when a long train of abuses and usurpations, pursuing invariably the same object, evinces a design to reduce them under absolute Despotism, it is their right, it is their duty, to throw off such Government, and to provide new guards for their future security.

                  For the intelectually challenged: If the government screws the people enough, it is the right and responsibility of the people to revolt and form a new government.

                  Comment


                  • #10
                    Originally posted by stillamarine View Post
                    Is there a specific time frame? ie I have 4 years AD meaning I get til I'm 41 to get hired?
                    Nope you have it wrong. If you are a preference eligible vet you do not have an age limit at all as it stands now.
                    But when a long train of abuses and usurpations, pursuing invariably the same object, evinces a design to reduce them under absolute Despotism, it is their right, it is their duty, to throw off such Government, and to provide new guards for their future security.

                    For the intelectually challenged: If the government screws the people enough, it is the right and responsibility of the people to revolt and form a new government.

                    Comment


                    • #11
                      Now I wish CBP would open up another posting in the Detroit area! Right after my Wife was hired and finished FLETC, I applied and was told no because I was over 37 (she was 38). Apparently they lowered the age after she go hired.
                      My OODA Loop: Observe, Over-react, Destroy and Apologize.

                      Comment


                      • #12
                        Originally posted by Gunhand View Post
                        Now I wish CBP would open up another posting in the Detroit area! Right after my Wife was hired and finished FLETC, I applied and was told no because I was over 37 (she was 38). Apparently they lowered the age after she go hired.
                        How long ago did you apply? The Isabella decision was taken in 2006, if I recall correctly, but the law has been on the books longer than that. You applied after July 2008, that's when the age limit went into effect. I think there were only two job announcements since then, one in the fall of 2008 and one in the spring of this year. The statutes of limitations might not have expired, but you'll have to check. You could always file a complaint with the Dept of Labor because your veteran's preference rights were violated. From the sounds of the numbers of people waiting for a job, you might be in for a long wait for another opening. Here is a decent site that explains a lot of the details of veteran's preference.
                        http://www.dol.gov/vets/programs/vet...ference_fs.htm
                        Last edited by kc12; 09-05-2009, 09:29 AM.
                        But when a long train of abuses and usurpations, pursuing invariably the same object, evinces a design to reduce them under absolute Despotism, it is their right, it is their duty, to throw off such Government, and to provide new guards for their future security.

                        For the intelectually challenged: If the government screws the people enough, it is the right and responsibility of the people to revolt and form a new government.

                        Comment


                        • #13
                          Originally posted by Gunhand View Post
                          Now I wish CBP would open up another posting in the Detroit area! Right after my Wife was hired and finished FLETC, I applied and was told no because I was over 37 (she was 38). Apparently they lowered the age after she go hired.
                          I know of someone who filed a complaint with the DOL, then the MSPB for denying a vet his right to apply for his age. Person was expedited through the system. During discovery it was discovered the CBP denied 63 vets. I believe it had to hire them all.

                          You have to file with DOL before 60 days after they deny your application. Then DOL does there song and dance, then you file with MSPB. Then CBP moves pretty quick.
                          Last edited by Scout0315; 09-06-2009, 02:31 AM. Reason: Spelliing
                          "From now until the end of the world, we and it shall be remembered. We few, we Band of Brothers. For he who sheds his blood with me shall be my brother." - William Shakespeare ("King Henry V")

                          Comment

                          MR300x250 Tablet

                          Collapse

                          What's Going On

                          Collapse

                          There are currently 6904 users online. 279 members and 6625 guests.

                          Most users ever online was 19,482 at 12:44 PM on 09-29-2011.

                          Welcome Ad

                          Collapse
                          Working...
                          X