U.S. GOVERNMENT PRINTING OFFICE

WASHINGTON : 

For sale by the Superintendent of Documents, U.S. Government Printing Office

Internet: bookstore.gpo.gov Phone: toll free (866) 512–1800; DC area (202) 512–1800

Fax: (202) 512–2250 Mail: Stop SSOP, Washington, DC 20402–0001

24–166 PDF 2006

S. HRG. 109–264

ENHANCING COOPERATION BETWEEN EMPLOYERS

AND GUARDSMEN/RESERVISTS

HEARING

BEFORE THE

SUBCOMMITTEE ON EMPLOYMENT AND WORKPLACE

SAFETY

OF THE

COMMITTEE ON HEALTH, EDUCATION,

LABOR, AND PENSIONS

UNITED STATES SENATE

ONE HUNDRED NINTH CONGRESS

FIRST SESSION

ON

EXAMINING ENHANCING COOPERATION BETWEEN EMPLOYERS AND

GUARDSMEN/RESERVISTS, FOCUSING ON CIVILIAN AND VETERAN ORGANIZATIONS TO WORK TOGETHER TO REACH OUT TO SOLDIERS RETURNING FROM THE BATTLEFIELD

OCTOBER 19, 2005

Printed for the use of the Committee on Health, Education, Labor, and Pensions

(

COMMITTEE ON HEALTH, EDUCATION, LABOR, AND PENSIONS

MICHAEL B. ENZI, Wyoming, Chairman

JUDD GREGG, New Hampshire

BILL FRIST, Tennessee

LAMAR ALEXANDER, Tennessee

RICHARD BURR, North Carolina

JOHNNY ISAKSON, Georgia

MIKE DEWINE, Ohio

JOHN ENSIGN, Nevada

ORRIN G. HATCH, Utah

JEFF SESSIONS, Alabama

PAT ROBERTS, Kansas

EDWARD M. KENNEDY, Massachusetts

CHRISTOPHER J. DODD, Connecticut

TOM HARKIN, Iowa

BARBARA A. MIKULSKI, Maryland

JAMES M. JEFFORDS (I), Vermont

JEFF BINGAMAN, New Mexico

PATTY MURRAY, Washington

JACK REED, Rhode Island

HILLARY RODHAM CLINTON, New York

KATHERINE BRUNETT MCGUIRE, Staff Director

J. MICHAEL MYERS, Minority Staff Director and Chief Counsel

SUBCOMMITTEE ON EMPLOYMENT AND WORKPLACE SAFETY

JOHNNY ISAKSON, Georgia Chairman

LAMAR ALEXANDER, Tennessee

RICHARD BURR, North Carolina

JOHN ENSIGN, Nevada

PAT ROBERTS, Kansas

MICHAEL B. ENZI, Wyoming (ex officio)

PATTY MURRAY, Washington

CHRISTOPHER J. DODD, Connecticut

TOM HARKIN, Iowa

BARBARA A. MIKULSKI, Maryland

JAMES M. JEFFORDS (I), Vermont

EDWARD M. KENNEDY, Massachusetts (ex

officio)

GLEE SMITH, Staff Director

WILLIAM KAMELA, Minority Staff Director

(II)

CONTENTS

STATEMENTS

WEDNESDAY, OCTOBER 19, 2005

Page

Isakson, Hon. Johnny, Chairman, Subcommittee on Employment and Workplace Safety, opening statement ......................................................................... 1

Murray, Hon. Patty, a U.S. Senator from the State of Washington, opening

statement .............................................................................................................. 3

Roberts, Hon. Pat, a U.S. Senator from the State of Kansas, opening statement ...................................................................................................................... 6

Prepared statement .......................................................................................... 7

Burr, Hon. Richard, a U.S. Senator from the State of North Carolina, opening

statement .............................................................................................................. 8

Gregg, Hon. Judd, a U.S. Senator from the State of New Hampshire, prepared

statement .............................................................................................................. 9

Kennedy, Hon. Edward M., a U.S. Senator from the State of Massachusetts,

prepared statement .............................................................................................. 10

Hollingsworth, Bobby, Executive Director, National Committee for Employer

Support of the Guard and Reserve, Washington, DC; Dennis Donovan,

Executive Vice President, Human Resources, Home Depot, Inc., Atlanta,

GA; Christine Bierman, Chief Executive Officer, Colt Safety, Fire and Rescue, St. Louis, MO; Lisa Nisenfeld, Executive Director, Southwest Washington Workforce Development Council, Vancouver, WA; and Ronald J. Fry,

Portfolio Management Associate, Wachovia Corporation, and Sergeant First

Class, North Carolina Army National Guard, Charlotte, NC .......................... 12

Prepared statements of:

Mr. Hollingsworth ..................................................................................... 15

Mr. Donovan .............................................................................................. 17

Ms. Bierman .............................................................................................. 21

Ms. Nisenfeld ............................................................................................. 24

Mr. Fry ....................................................................................................... 28

Jeffords, Hon. James M., a U.S. Senator from the State of Vermont, prepared

statement .............................................................................................................. 34

ADDITIONAL MATERIAL

Statements, articles, publications, letters, etc.:

Response to questions of Senator Kennedy and Senator Jeffords by Christine Bierman ................................................................................................. 41

Response to questions of Senator Kennedy and Senator Jeffords by Dennis Donovan ................................................................................................... 42

Response to question of Senator Jeffords by Bob Hollingsworth ................. 42

Response to questions of Senator Kennedy by Bob Hollingsworth .............. 43

Response to questions of Senator Kennedy and Senator Jeffords by Lisa

Nisenfeld ........................................................................................................ 45

(III)

(1)

ENHANCING COOPERATION BETWEEN

EMPLOYERS AND GUARDSMEN/RESERVISTS

WEDNESDAY, OCTOBER 19, 2005

U.S. SENATE,

SUBCOMMITTEE ON EMPLOYMENT AND WORKPLACE SAFETY,

COMMITTEE ON HEALTH, EDUCATION, LABOR, AND PENSIONS,

Washington, DC.

The subcommittee met, pursuant to notice, at 2:00 p.m., in Room

430, Dirksen Senate Office Building, Hon. Johnny Isakson [chairman of the subcommittee] presiding.

Present: Senators Isakson, Burr, Roberts, Murray, and Jeffords.

OPENING STATEMENT OF SENATOR ISAKSON

Senator ISAKSON. I call the Subcommittee on Employment and

Workplace Safety hearing to order and we will get started. We

have members including ranking member Murray on the way. Senator Burr is also coming, but I want to be prompt in beginning so

I will start with my opening statement, and hopefully others will

come in and we will recognize them before we hear from our distinguished panelists.

I would like to start by saying this. I was a member of the Georgia National Guard for 6 years. I ran a company for 22 years and

employed guardsmen and reservists. Now I have served in the U.S.

Senate and the U.S. House and voted to commit our young men

and women in the Reserve to defend freedom around the world.

There is nothing more important to us as a nation than a ready

Reserve that is ready, that is trained, and is staffed to do the jobs

we would never anticipate doing.

There is not a one of us that would have guessed that September

11, 2001 would have ever happened, or that within months after

that we would have guardsmen and reservists deployed in Afghanistan, Iraq, and around the world.

The companies that are here today and those that are here in

support of our men and women are real heroes to me. We are going

to hear from three companies that go above and beyond the call of

duty in the support of their employees who are members of the Reserve and the Guard. The purpose of the hearing is to really focus

the light of day and shine the light, the spotlight, on these great

companies and what they have done.

It is critical that we continue in this difficult world of ours to

have the best trained, best equipped, best staffed Reserve and

Guard anywhere in the world. Because of the employers that we

2

have, we have that, and today, I am proud to commend them to

all of you.

Given the vital role employers play, the National Committee for

Employer Support of the Guard and Reserve, or ESGR, was established in 1972 to promote cooperation between reservists and their

civilian employers and to help resolve any conflicts that may arise

due to employees’ military commitment. Today, we are very pleased

to have Bob Hollingsworth here, who is the Executive Director of

that distinguished committee.

The USERRA Act, which was passed by Congress in 1994, requires minimum requirements of American business, not to discriminate in the hiring of guardsmen and reservists and to ensure

that they have a job waiting when their deployment is complete.

But I am pleased to report that thousands upon thousands of employers like the three represented here today go well above and beyond the call of duty.

Many employers voluntarily offer differential pay to their activated employees. These are payments that represent the difference

in the wages they earn and what they would have earned. In addition, many continue to extend health benefits to the deployed employees and their family members. Beyond even this, we will hear

how some employers take the extra step to show how much they

appreciate the devotion of their employees.

We are happy to have with us today two such corporate role

models, including one from my home State of Georgia, and we welcome Dennis Donovan of the Home Depot, and Christine Bierman

from Colt Safety, Fire and Rescue based in St. Louis, Missouri.

I also understand the importance of reemploying veterans once

back from their tour of duty and I welcome Lisa Nisenfeld from the

Southwest Washington Workforce Development Council to speak to

us today on the efforts that are done in that area.

We in Congress must always be looking for more ways to foster

the important relationship between reservists and employers. Numerous bills introduced in this Congress take different approaches

to this end. I look forward to hearing from all of our witnesses

today on the importance of the contribution they make to our Reserve and Guard.

On a closing comment in my opening statement, I would just like

to add that this morning, ironically, I spent 3 hours at Walter Reed

Hospital with members of the 48th Brigade who are back from Iraq

going through physical therapy and rehabilitation from the limbs

they lost in defense of our country and in defense of freedom. Ironically, three of those I visited guardsmen from Georgia, all of whom

talked of how proud they were to serve the country and how much

they were looking forward to going back to their employers. Having

no idea that I would be conducting this hearing this afternoon, two

of them talked specifically about their employer and about how

much their support had meant to their families while they were deployed in Iraq.

This is the story we want to hear in the Congress. These are the

companies we want to brag about today, and I thank all of our

guests who are testifying on their behalf.

I introduce the distinguished ranking member, Mrs. Murray.

3

OPENING STATEMENT OF SENATOR MURRAY

Senator MURRAY. Thank you very much, Mr. Chairman, and I

want to thank you for hosting today’s hearing on this really critically important issue to the men and women who are serving us

in the Guard and Reserve.

I want to start by saying that our Guard and Reserve members

are playing an extremely important role for our country every day

in Iraq, Afghanistan, now Louisiana and Mississippi, Alabama,

communities across the United States. I want to take a moment

here to thank all of them for their tremendous service.

Guard and Reserve employment is an important issue that our

committee must focus on. Although we have had some successes,

it is clear that we are not providing our Guard and Reserve members all of the resources they need to access and maintain employment once they are separated from active duty.

I want to extend a special thanks, as well, to our panelists who

are here today. Lisa Nisenfeld, who is the Executive Director of the

Southwest Washington Workforce Development Council, comes

from my home State in Vancouver, WA. I was with her last week

talking about these issues. I know from firsthand experience that

Lisa is one of the workforce stars in our State, and under her leadership, workforce programs in the region have more than doubled

their positive outcomes and, in fact, have become a key economic

development resource for growing companies.

Mr. Chairman, I have been working with Guard and Reserve

members throughout my 13 years here in the U.S. Senate and I

know the issues facing them have never been as severe as they are

today. The system simply doesn’t work well enough and is not adjusted for the up-tempo military model where our Guard and Reserve members make up 40 percent of our troops in Iraq. Guard

and Reserve members are doing the jobs of active duty, but they

are getting few of the benefits.

One of the Guard members I recently talked to told me that the

mindset of Guard members was that the VA was for their fathers,

not for them. We have to cut through those kinds of misunderstandings and show our Guard and Reserve members what benefits

they have earned and deserve.

The return of so many OIF and OEF veterans has made veterans’ employment assistance even more important. Since 2001, we

have had over a million troops serving us in Iraq and Afghanistan.

Although the Department of Defense provides services for the active duty component, the Guard and Reserve face some major reintegration hurdles.

Over the past 6 months, I have met with many of these veterans,

especially our Guard and Reserve members in Washington State.

Many of them have talked to me about the difficulty accessing employment assistance once they have been demobilized. Time and

time again, I have sat down with veterans who tell me stories

about struggling to get caught up at work after their deployment,

about having difficulty getting education benefits, or they are

struggling just to find a job to support their families when they return.

4

I have to tell you, Mr. Chairman, those stories really frustrate

me. Last week, in fact, I was with Lisa and we had three Guard

members with us who returned last March and, not one of them

have been employed yet, and it is 6 months after they have returned. They are now days away from losing their unemployment

insurance.

Other Guard members have spoken with me and tell me about

getting behind at their jobs, or not knowing how and where to get

the training they need. Others have told me that they have no idea

that employment services were even available and that USERRA

protected their rights to get back to their old jobs. Others have told

me about employers who were nervous about hiring Guard members, since they might have medical issues caused by injuries or

they may be deployed again in just a few months.

One Guard member in a Senate Veterans’ Affairs Committee

hearing testified to us that he lost his business because SBA programs intended to help small business owners and the self-employed didn’t work with the realities of mobilization. I have also

heard about the Transition Assistance Program, the TAP program,

that it doesn’t work well for the 2-week time frame Guard members

are given to separate and it is too focused on the needs of traditional forces. A finding that we recently got from our May GAO report confirmed what I have heard on the ground out there.

Now, often when people think of veterans’ services, they often

just think of the VA health care system. However, we need to let

people know that there are a large amount of services that are

available to our veterans for benefits and they include employment

assistance. That means there are considerable resources available

to help our veterans meet the employment challenges they face and

I hope that in today’s hearing, we will hear from our panelists

about what is working, what is not, and where we need to make

the changes necessary to improve these services.

Last August, Mr. Chairman, at a Senate Veterans Affairs Committee hearing, General Lowenberg, who is the Adjutant General

of the Washington National Guard, said that he felt many Department of Defense programs don’t work for our Guard and Reserve

members. He said that services provided by the Defense Department and the VA should be revised to fit the nature of a military

now heavily dependent on Guard and Reserve members. The Department of Defense estimates, in fact, that 68 percent of separating service members attended the full TAP seminars, but only 35

percent of our Guard and Reserve members attend.

I hope we hear from our panelists today on what we can do to

provide resources to help veterans and employers. I think it is clear

that Congress needs to look at many programs and services, including interpersonal and life skills training, readjustment counseling,

VA briefings and workshops that are presented before the members’ active duty tour ends, and training sessions and workshops

that continue for up to a year after Guard and Reserve members

release from active duty.

We have got to find some innovative ways of educating our veterans about the many Federal and State benefits to which they are

entitled, along with the growing number of services that are provided by private, nonprofit public service organizations, and I want

5

to hear the panel address how those and other services may or may

not be working for traditional active duty members as well as for

our Guard and Reserve members.

We need to update our resources. The Cold War is over, yet we

are holding on to programs that were built for veterans of that era.

The Department of Defense, the VA, the Department of Labor, and

others need to look at how we can get the right services to veterans

today. We should provide improved services to our Guard and Reserve members after they have separated, whether it is 3 months

or 6 months or a year later. We have to update the TAP program

to work within the realities of what Guard and Reserve members

are going through today.

We should improve the Labor Vets program by expanding its outreach efforts with creative initiatives designed to improve employment and training services for our Guard and Reserve members.

We should place a priority on identifying military occupations that

require licenses or certification or credentials at the local, State,

and national levels. And we should provide programs and funding

that truly help our Guard and Reserve members who run small

businesses or are self-employed as they manage that transition.

Mr. Chairman, I have said many times, I believe how we treat

our veterans when they come home is an important indication of

the character of our Nation. That is why I think it is important for

this subcommittee to look for ways to make the transition to work

and home life smoother and easier for our service members and for

their families.

So I hope that with today’s hearing, we can hear about some of

these current needs and improvements, but I want to end with just

two final thoughts. I want everyone in this room to bear in mind

the story of a young guardsman that I met in August. He is a father of three and he recently returned from Iraq. He lost his job.

He can’t get unemployment. He can’t get the VA or the DOD doctors to figure out what is wrong with him, and he is currently getting food stamps to feed his family.

Today, we are going to hear some success stories, and I applaud

the employers who are doing the right thing. We so appreciate that

and want you to continue. We want to do what we can to make

that happen. But we also have to focus on a lot of these Guard and

Reserve members who are falling through the cracks, just like this

father I talked to.

Second, I have heard for over a year that we did a better job of

taking care of our Guard and Reserve members during and after

the Gulf War. I have heard that from everywhere I go, and I know

that was a war where our Guard and Reserve made up a smaller

percentage of our troops in the Middle East and obviously it was

a much shorter conflict. Helping our Guard and Reserve transition

into civilian life is a fundamental cost of war, and the Service

Members Occupational Conversion and Training Act was developed

as a transitional tool designed to provide job training and employment to veterans discharged after August 1, 1990, the first Gulf

War.

Back then, I think we need to recognize, there was a lot stronger

network that helped our Guard members with reintegration than

there is today. So I hope to hear from our panelists today how we

6

can best change that to provide our veterans today the services

they need, deserves and have earned.

Thank you very much, Mr. Chairman.

Senator ISAKSON. Senator Roberts?

OPENING STATEMENT OF SENATOR ROBERTS

Senator ROBERTS. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. I would like to associate myself with your remarks and that of the distinguished

ranking member. I want to thank you for holding the hearing, and

I would ask permission that my entire statement be made a part

of the record and I will very briefly summarize.

Senator ISAKSON. Without objection.

Senator ROBERTS. We have two of Kansas’ largest employers,

Sprint and Westar Energy, who have made the decision to further

support their citizen soldiers by providing differential pay. I certainly want to bring that to the attention of the committee. We are

very proud of them and we hope that they serve as an example.

I would also point out that I think that Congressional action is

needed to clarify the tax treatment of this important voluntary

benefit. Here is the problem. Under a 36-year-old tax ruling, our

military fighting from foreign operating bases are required to file

quarterly tax returns and submit quarterly tax payments because

IRS rules actually treat a guardsman or a reservist called up to active duty as a, quote, ‘‘terminated employee.’’ This ruling is outdated. It is unacceptable to our service members.

If you stop and think a minute about anybody in the Reserve and

Guard trying to stop the influx of the insurgency at the border in

Anbar Province, or trying to stabilize, say, Falujah, they simply do

not have time to sit down and fill out quarterly tax forms.

I think that we need to take prompt action. Last year, we almost

had the problem fixed. Unfortunately, during consideration of the

2005 Defense authorization bill, the prospective legislation was removed during conference due to objections with regard to an unrelated tax provision, so we got into yet another turf fight. We cannot

allow this IRS ruling to stand.

Earlier this year, three members of this committee, Senator

Gregg, Senator Alexander, and myself joined together to introduce

legislation to clarify the tax treatment for differential pay. We need

to make sure that this voluntary benefit provided by employers

who want to do the right thing does not inadvertently really create

an additional tax reporting burden on our citizen soldiers. Adopting

this bill will relieve that burden and send a message to both Guard

and Reserve families and employers that Congress recognizes the

importance of this voluntary benefit.

Again, Mr. Chairman, thank you for holding this important hearing. I apologize for leaving, but as chairman of the Intelligence

Committee, we have Porter Goss, who is to give his yearly report.

The flak jacket that we were going to provide him is missing and

I have to find it.

[Laughter.]

Senator ISAKSON. Senator Roberts, before you leave, I want to

personally thank you for your leadership on the tax issue and associate myself with your remarks and your support for that change.

You are exactly correct.

7

[The prepared statement of Senator Roberts follows:]

PREPARED STATEMENT OF SENATOR ROBERTS

Mr. Chairman, thank you for holding this hearing to focus on the

relationship between our Nation’s employers and Members of the

National Guard and Reserve. This important relationship is critical

to the success of our armed services and vital to our national security.

As I visit with employers at home in Kansas, and our men and

women in uniform, I am encouraged by the positive news I hear

about steps employers are taking to assist employees called to active duty. While Federal law sets out employment protections for

guardsmen and reservists who are on active duty, I know that

many employers are going above and beyond these requirements.

One way they are doing this is by providing differential pay. Differential pay provides the difference in pay between active duty

military pay and an employee’s civilian pay. It is a voluntary benefit offered by employers to their employees who are members of the

Guard and Reserve and who are called to active duty.

Across the country, many employers recognize the value of their

employees who serve in the National Guard and military Reserves.

As a result, these employers, including two of Kansas’ largest employers, Sprint and Westar Energy, have made the decision to further support their citizen soldiers by providing differential pay.

This income is critical to many families who, faced with the loss

of income because a wage-earner is called to active duty, now have

greater financial security while their family member is deployed. It

means the difference between paying the mortgage or car payment

or struggling to make up the loss in income. It means that a

guardsman or reservist can better focus on their mission without

the added stress of wondering if their family is financially secure.

However, Congressional action is needed to clarify the tax treatment of this important, voluntary benefit.

Here is the problem: under a 36 year-old tax ruling, soldiers

fighting from forward operating bases are required to file quarterly

tax returns and submit quarterly tax payments because IRS rules

treats a guardsman or reservist called up to active duty as a terminated employee. This ruling is outdated, unacceptable and an insult to our men and women in uniform. Prompt action is needed

to correct this situation. Last year, we almost had the problem

fixed. Unfortunately, during consideration of the 2005 defense authorization bill, the proscriptive legislation was removed during

conference due to objections regarding an unrelated tax provision.

We cannot allow this IRS ruling to stand.

Earlier this year, three members of this committee, Senator

Gregg, Senator Alexander, and myself, joined together to introduce

legislation to clarify the tax treatment for differential pay. We need

to make sure that this voluntary benefit, provided by employers

who want to do the right thing, does not inadvertently create an

additional tax reporting burden on our citizen soldiers. Adopting

this bill will relieve that burden and send a message to both Guard

and Reserve families and employers that Congress recognizes the

importance of this voluntary benefit.

8

Again Mr. Chairman, thank you for holding this important hearing to highlight the vital relationship between our citizen soldiers

and their employers.

Senator ISAKSON. Senator Burr?

OPENING STATEMENT OF SENATOR BURR

Senator BURR. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Let me take this opportunity to welcome the panel. I had the opportunity this morning

to spend time with Mr. Donovan and to get some insight as to the

tremendous commitment that Home Depot makes. What we find is

they are not alone. There are a lot of companies around the country

that provide us the opportunity to tap into our Guard and Reserve

at a time like this, where we do have very responsible corporate

citizens, and where we don’t. Hearings like this, Mr. Chairman, are

very helpful to help us fix the system.

I might also point out that the University of North Carolina at

Chapel Hill leads a collaborative effort funded by Congress with

other institutions around the country called Citizen Soldier to look

specifically at the deployment of guardsmen and reservists from

the time that they are notified of that deployment until the time

that they get home. Rather than waiting for an after-action report

by DOD to be done after an event, this is done in real time to try

to evaluate how we can do it better the next time we deploy. I

think that already some of the information that this collaborative

agreement has produced is beneficial to the quality of lives to the

family members and to the troops who are deployed.

It is indeed an honor today, Mr. Chairman, to also introduce a

constituent, Sergeant First Class Ronald Fry. Sergeant Fry has

been a member of the North Carolina Guard since 1985. He was

mobilized in September 2003 and deployed to Iraq for Operation

Iraqi Freedom from February 2004 to December 2004. He served

as a platoon leader for a motorized infantry element during 10

months of combat operations in Tikrit, Bayjl and Najaf.

In peacetime, Ron Fry has been directly responsible for mission

execution, safety supervision, training, near- and long-term planning, and logistical operations of 40 personnel, four self-propelled

howitzers, and a fire direction center. He has multiple military

awards that he has won. Sergeant Fry was selected as the Brigade

Non-Commissioned Officer of the Year in 1990 and the Battalion

Non-Commissioned Officer of the Year in 1990, 1997, 1998, and a

member of the Joint Counter Narcotics Task Force in 1990.

Ron Fry works for Wachovia Bank in Charlotte, North Carolina.

He has worked there since 1998. Wachovia, interestingly enough,

Mr. Chairman, received the 2005 Secretary of Defense Freedom

Award on October 15, 2005. Currently, Ron serves as a Portfolio

Manager Associate for the Credit Products Group at Wachovia Securities and he manages the credit risk of a multibillion-dollar

portfolio of the financial institution’s clients. He is responsible for

all senior debt underwriting for any new or existing clients in the

portfolio.

He received a B.A. in Business Administration in 1998 from Belmont Abbey College in Belmont, North Carolina, and is currently

in the MBA program at Wake Forest University’s Babcock School

9

of Management, an institution that is close to my heart, Mr. Chairman, in it’s Charlotte Master’s program.

Mr. Chairman, it is indeed an honor to introduce not only a good

Wachovia employee and North Carolinian, but a brave American

who has served his country well. I welcome you, Ron.

Senator ISAKSON. Thank you very much, Senator Burr. We appreciate that.

At this time I would like to ask unanimous consent that the

statements of Senators Gregg and Kennedy appear in the record

and that any other statements submitted may be submitted during

the next 10 days and the record held open. Without objection, so

ordered.

[The prepared statement of Senator Gregg follows:]

PREPARED STATEMENT OF SENATOR GREGG

Today, I am pleased that the Chairman has called this important

hearing and I would like to take a few moments to discuss a significant bill that will be discussed today, The Uniformed Services

Differential Pay Protection Act.

Sustained military operations in Afghanistan and Iraq have

brought to light another example of how outdated and burdensome

Government policies can punish generous employers. Employers

that continue to pay their employees now on active duty in the uniformed services are experiencing tax and pension difficulties that

are discouraging this pro-worker, patriotic gesture.

Under current law, employers of reservists and guardsmen called

up for active duty are required to treat them as if they are on a

leave of absence under the Uniformed Services Employment and

Reemployment Rights Act of 1994 (USERRA). The act does not require employers to pay reservists who are on active duty. But as

I have pointed out, many employers pay the reservists the difference between their military stipends and their regular salaries.

Some employers provide this ‘‘differential pay’’ for up to 3 years.

For employee convenience, many of these companies also allow deductions from the differential payment for contributions to their

401(k) retirement plans.

The conflict arises, however, because a 1969 IRS Revenue Ruling

considers the employment relationship terminated when active

duty begins. This ruling prevents employers from treating the differential pay as wages for income tax purposes, resulting in unexpected tax bills at the end of the year for these military personnel.

Further, the contributions made to the worker’s retirement account

potentially invalidate (disqualify) the employer’s entire retirement

plan which could make all amounts immediately taxable to plan

participants and the employer.

The Uniformed Services Differential Pay Protection Act that I

have introduced amends the Internal Revenue Code to clarify that

differential wage payments are to be treated as wages to current

employees for income tax purposes and that retirement plan contributions are permissible. It defines ‘‘differential wage payment’’

as any employer payment to an individual serving on active duty

in the uniformed services for more than 30 days which represents

wages such individual would have received if such individual were

performing services for the employer. The bill treats an individual

10

receiving differential wage payments as an employee and treats differential wage payments as compensation for retirement plan purposes.

In summary, the Uniformed Services Differential Pay Protection

Act upholds the principle that employers should not be penalized

for their generosity towards our Nation’s reservists and members

of the National Guard. Again, I thank the Chairman for bringing

this issue to the attention of the committee during this hearing

today.

[The prepared statement of Senator Kennedy follows:]

PREPARED STATEMENT OF SENATOR KENNEDY

I commend Chairman Isakson and Senator Murray for holding

this important hearing. The longer the war in Iraq goes on, the

greater the toll it places on members of the Guard, Reserves, and

their employers.

Before September 11th, the average number of reservists and

guardsmen on active duty was 35,000. Today over 150,000 are on

active duty around the world, with many on their second, third, or

even fourth tours of duty.

Their continuing deployments strain our troops and their families, but they also cause hardship for their employers. Large companies struggle to find ways to work around their absent employees, but for small businesses, the loss of an individual can mean

the difference between survival and bankruptcy, and for doctors

and lawyers, the time away may well mean that their practice no

longer exists when they return from their deployment.

But the greatest hardship falls on the members of the Guard and

Reserves themselves and their families. In the current economy,

continuing activations can be a severe hardship. When these men

and women leave their civilian jobs behind, they often give up

higher salaries and benefits too. Their families have to find other

ways to meet mortgage payments, buy groceries, and care for their

children without the benefit of their civilian salaries.

To reduce this hardship, our laws provide that service members

returning home are entitled to return to their old jobs, without losing their seniority or benefits. Most employers obey the law, and

as a recent survey by the Department of Defense has found, many

employers actually go above and beyond the law’s requirements to

help reservists and their families. We’ll recognize some of these employers at today’s hearing. Massachusetts protects the salaries of

its State employees called up for duty in the armed forces by paying the difference between their civilian pay and their military pay.

Raytheon, the largest employer in the State, does so indefinitely.

It also continues employee health benefits, so that families don’t

have to change doctors while their loved one is away. Raytheon employees receive credit for their pensions while they are on duty.

Hopefully, now that this issue is being raised, many more employers will follow the example of the companies here today, and

many more soldiers who are bravely fighting in Iraq and Afghanistan or serving in other parts of the world will find their jobs waiting for them when they return.

11

Too many soldiers, however, return to find that they’ve been replaced, or are being demoted to a lower-paying position or a job

with less responsibility.

We’ll hear today from the Department of Defense, which provides

support for over 800,000 members of our Guard and Reserve now

on drilling duty. The Department has over 4,000 volunteers, including 800 ombudsmen, across the country who answer questions and

try to resolve workplace problems. In fiscal year 2004, over 1,400

service members had problems with their employers and filed complaints with the Department of Labor as well.

When I first heard about these types of problems from Massachusetts reservists, they told me they were worried about their jobs

when they returned. Their employers were frustrated when they

left their jobs to serve our country, and they feared they would be

punished for it—by being passed over for promotion, being moved

to another position, or worst of all, being fired.

I asked the Government Accountability Office to study what the

Federal Government actually does to protect the rights of men and

women in uniform, since it’s not enough to have protective laws on

the books. We also need to enforce them. The GAO report I’m releasing today shows that our Federal agencies need to do a better

job. Servicemembers’ rights are at risk of being mired in a bureaucracy that can’t communicate with itself. The four agencies responsible for enforcing the rights of our reservists and National Guard

members have separate tracking systems that are not only not

electronic, but are also incompatible with each other. In some

cases, GAO found that the same servicemembers’ files were being

opened and closed repeatedly—with some complaints taking nearly

2 years to resolve.

GAO has a number of recommendations to address these problems, such as that one agency should be responsible for overseeing

the complaint process from start to finish. We need to consider this

option seriously and I look forward to working with my colleagues

to tackle these challenges and provide the necessary oversight and

assistance to these agencies.

We need to do everything we can to protect the rights of our

service members as they reenter the American workplace. These

men and women have already made tremendous sacrifices, leaving

behind not only their civilian jobs but also their homes, their families, and their communities. They are doing their duty with great

skill and courage, and it’s our job to be sure that the Federal Government does its duty too, so that no one in our volunteer military

suffers on the job for serving their country on the battlefield.

Senator ISAKSON. Now I will introduce three of our panel members and Senator Murray will introduce the fourth. You have just

gotten a wonderful introduction, Sergeant Fry. We appreciate you

being here today.

Senator MURRAY. And I introduced Lisa in my opening remarks,

so she is introduced to the committee.

Senator ISAKSON. First, representing the views of the administration is Bobby Hollingsworth, Executive Director of the National

Committee for Employer Support of the Guard and Reserve. Appointed by President Bush less than 2 months after September 11,

2001, Mr. Hollingsworth serves as an advisor to the Assistant SecVerDate 11-MAY-2000 17:21 Feb 15, 2006 Jkt 000000 PO 00000 Frm 00015 Fmt 6633 Sfmt 6601 24166.TXT SLABOR2 PsN: SLABOR2
12

retary of Defense for Reserve Affairs on all matters involving employer support programs for the Reserve components of the United

States Armed Forces.

Second, I am very pleased to welcome Mr. Dennis Donovan, Executive Vice President of the Home Depot. Mr. Donovan oversees

human resources functions for the Atlanta company’s more than

300,000 associates. In just the Iraq conflict alone, the Home Depot

has catered to the needs of approximately 1,800 associates who

have been called to active duty.

On a point of personal privilege, I have had the occasion over

and over again to witness the commitment of the Home Depot Corporation in the hiring of veterans. This year, they have already

hired 13,000. Last year, they hired 16,000. They are a national

leader in seeking out members of the armed forces and our veterans to serve, and their unparalleled support of the military and the

young men and women who fight on behalf of this country is appreciated tremendously by this Nation and by their families.

Third, we welcome Christine Bierman, founder and CEO of Colt

Safety, Incorporated, a small business from St. Louis, Missouri. A

former teacher turned entrepreneur, she has supported two employees activated by Operation Noble Eagle and Operation Iraqi

Freedom and we are delighted to welcome you here today. To all

of our panelists, we appreciate the example that you set.

I will now open our hearing and ask Mr. Hollingsworth if you

would like to make the first statement. We would like for you to

keep the statement within 5 minutes, if possible. If you go over a

little bit, we will let you fudge.

STATEMENTS OF BOBBY HOLLINGSWORTH, EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR, NATIONAL COMMITTEE FOR EMPLOYER SUPPORT

OF THE GUARD AND RESERVE, WASHINGTON, DC; DENNIS

DONOVAN, EXECUTIVE VICE PRESIDENT, HUMAN RESOURCES, HOME DEPOT, INC., ATLANTA, GA; CHRISTINE

BIERMAN, CHIEF EXECUTIVE OFFICER, COLT SAFETY, FIRE

AND RESCUE, ST. LOUIS, MO; LISA NISENFELD, EXECUTIVE

DIRECTOR, SOUTHWEST WASHINGTON WORKFORCE DEVELOPMENT COUNCIL, VANCOUVER, WA; AND RONALD J. FRY,

PORTFOLIO MANAGEMENT ASSOCIATE, WACHOVIA CORPORATION, AND SERGEANT FIRST CLASS, NORTH CAROLINA

ARMY NATIONAL GUARD, CHARLOTTE, NC

Mr. HOLLINGSWORTH. Chairman Isakson, ranking member Murray, Senator Burr, and Senator Jeffords, it is indeed a privilege

and we really thank you for the opportunity to come over and talk

about the great things that are happening in America today for the

members of the Guard and Reserve.

Just in the past weekend, the Secretary of Defense recognized 15

employers nationwide by presenting them with the Employer Support Freedom Award, which is the Department of Defense’s highest

award recognizing employers for going above and beyond the requirements of the law to support their employees who serve our

Nation’s National Guard and Reserve.

I am honored to be joined today by Dennis Donovan from the

Home Depot and Christine Bierman from Colt Safety. Both of those

were 2004 recipients of the Freedom Award. And, of course, I am

13

also pleased to have Ronald Fry be here from Wachovia, who is a

2005 recipient. Lisa, it is great to be here with you, as well.

The rigorous selection process for the Secretary of Defense Employer Support Freedom Award begins with the guardsman and reservists or a family member of a guardsman or reservist nominating their employer for this prestigious award. This year, I am

pleased to report to you that we had over 1,500 nominations for

this award.

In 1994, Congress passed the Uniformed Services Employment

and Reemployment Rights Act, or USERRA, as it is more commonly known. It updated the 50-year-old Veterans Reemployment

Rights Act to provide a broader range of protections to incorporate

many court decisions that were relative to the VRR. USERRA prohibits discrimination in the basis of military service and established the conditions under which an employee may return to employment following active duty, active duty for training, or inactive

duty for training.

For guardsmen and reservists to continue to serve knowing his

or her civilian employment is protected by law is extremely important. Knowing that his or her employment supports his or her service to guarantee our national security is equally important.

Employer Support of the Guard and Reserve is a Department of

Defense organization, as you mentioned earlier, that is responsible

for gaining and maintaining support from all public and private

employment for the men and women of the National Guard.

Through an aggressive employer outreach effort, we educate and

inform employers of their responsibilities under USERRA and encourage them to go above and beyond to support their employees

serving in the Guard and Reserve.

We recognize that there are employers within the private and

public sectors that cannot provide differential pay or health benefits because of public policy or fiscal or economic constraints. Going

above and beyond is not limited to differential pay or continuation

of health benefits. There are many things that an employer can do

that carry little or no price tag, and in many cases, these little

things are every bit as meaningful, if not more so, to the employees

serving in the Guard and Reserve.

For example, Army Reserve Lieutenant Chad Souers from

Northport, Alabama, sat down at a computer in Tikrit, Iraq, to

nominate his employer for the 2004 Freedom Award. He acknowledged that his employer, which was Wal-Mart, provided differential

pay and paid his portion of the civilian health insurance, but elaborated on Wal-Mart’s personal touches. His boss, which is Mr. Fred

Twilley, made regular phone calls to Lieutenant Souers’ wife to ensure that she and their infant daughter were coping with his absence. Mr. Twilley and Lieutenant Souers’ Wal-Mart associates invited Mrs. Souers to their store on their wedding anniversary for

a surprise anniversary party. Lieutenant Souers’ Wal-Mart associates sent flowers to Mrs. Souers on Valentine’s Day and on Mother’s Day to help with the pain of separation on these important

days. Lieutenant Souers says, and I quote, ‘‘They have repeatedly

gone out of their way to include my wife and my daughter in the

Wal-Mart family during my absence, only as dear friends could. All

of this has given me the peace of mind when I needed it the most,

14

knowing that there were so many people looking after my loved

ones when I was unable to.’’

In Las Vegas, the Metropolitan Police Department is a public

sector agency that goes above and beyond in supporting its employees of the Guard and Reserve. Sheriff Bill Young has assigned a

family support coordinator to each of the department’s area commands to maintain contact with the families of the deployed

guardsmen and reservists. Not only do his area commanders maintain e-mail contact with the deployed soldiers and airmen and marines and other service members, but they do so with—also, the

members of the employee’s squad.

The Las Vegas Metropolitan Police Department has instituted a

leave donation policy allowing an employee to donate unused leave

so that the guardsmen and reservists may have extra paid leave

when they return from mobilization. To their credit, quotes Captain

Gabriela Hatfield-Cook, ‘‘the officers and employees of the Las

Vegas Metropolitan Police Department stand behind their deployed

comrades without reservation.’’

In another situation, Coast Guard Reserves Chief Warrant Officer Norm Chapman from Olympia, WA, has been a reservist the

entire 18 years he has been employed by the South Puget Sound

Community College. While South Puget Sound Community College

is unable to provide differential pay, Mr. Chapman notes that the

college grants veterans preferential credit points for most positions,

they provide recognition of Guard and Reserve service through various college-wide activities, and upon several occasions, the school’s

automotive department made repairs to his family’s vehicle, reducing the stress on his wife during mobilization. Not only did the college’s public relations department publish stories about his experiences on active duty, but they ensured that he was informed about

the news from the college so that when he was away, which enabled him to return to work with some knowledge of what was happening in his absence.

Mr. Chapman said, quote, ‘‘After the events of September 11, a

few of us employees have been called up more than once and I have

heard nothing but positive words of encouragement from the administrative team. I feel totally confident that my job and position

is fully protected by my employer and that they truly care about

my Reserve participation.’’

Lieutenant General Steve Blum, the Chief of the National Guard

Bureau, frequently says that we recruit the soldier, but we retain

the family. In order for an employee to feel secure in continuing to

serve in the National Guard and Reserve, not only must he or she

be confident that they will return to their job and face no penalty

for their service, but also that his or her employer supports their

service to our national security. The Department of Defense recognizes that we share almost half of our workforce with America’s

employers, and those employers share sacrifices of the guardsmen

and reservists. On behalf of a grateful Nation, the Department of

Defense thanks these employers.

If National Guardsmen and Reservists are indeed twice the citizen, then their civilian employers are twice the patriot. America’s

employers are inextricably linked to our Nation’s security.

15

Thank you, and I am looking forward to answering any questions

you may have.

Senator ISAKSON. Thank you, Mr. Hollingsworth.

[The prepared statement of Mr. Hollingsworth follows:]

PREPARED STATEMENT OF BOBBY HOLLINGSWORTH

Mr. Chairman and members of the subcommittee, thank you for the opportunity

to testify today on the importance of employer support for the Members of the National Guard and Reserve.

This past weekend, the Secretary of Defense recognized 15 employers nationwide

by presenting them with the Employer Support Freedom Award, the Department of

Defense’s highest honor recognizing employers for going ‘‘above and beyond’’ the requirements of law to support their employees who serve our Nation in the National

Guard and Reserve. I am honored to be joined here today by Dennis Donovan of

Home Depot and Christine Bierman of Colt Safety, Fire and Rescue. Both firms are

2004 recipients of the Freedom Award. The rigorous selection process for the Freedom Award begins with a member of the Guard or Reserve, or a family member

of a guardsman or reservist, nominating the employer for the award. I am pleased

to report to you that we had over 1,500 nominations for the 2005 Freedom Awards.

In 1994, Congress passed the Uniformed Services Employment and Reemployment Rights Act, or USERRA as it is more commonly known. It updated the 50

year-old Veterans’ Reemployment Rights (VRR) Act, to provide a broader range of

protections and incorporate many court decisions relative to VRR. USERRA prohibits discrimination on the basis of military service and establishes the conditions

under which an employee may return to employment following Active Duty, for

Training, or Inactive Duty for Training. For a guardsman or reservist to continue

to serve, knowing his or her civilian employment is protected by law is extremely

important. Knowing that his or her employer supports his or her service to guarantee our national security is equally important.

Employer Support of the Guard and Reserve is the Department of Defense organization responsible for gaining and maintaining support from all public and private

employers for the men and women of the National Guard and Reserve. Through an

aggressive employer outreach effort, we educate and inform employers on their responsibilities under USERRA and encourage them to go ‘‘above and beyond’’ to support their employees serving in the National Guard and Reserve.

We recognize that there are employers within the private and public sectors that

cannot provide differential pay or health benefits because of public policy or economic constraints. Going ‘‘above and beyond’’ is not limited to differential pay or

continuation of health benefits. There are many things an employer can do that

carry little or no price tag, and in many cases, these ‘‘little things’’ are every bit

as meaningful, if not more so, to the employee serving in the Guard and Reserve.

Army Reserve Lieutenant Chad Souers of Northport, Alabama, sat down at a computer in Tikrit, Iraq, to nominate his employer for a 2004 Freedom Award. He acknowledged that his employer, Wal-Mart, provided differential pay and paid his portion of his civilian health insurance, but elaborated on Wal-Mart’s personal touches.

His boss, Fred Twilley, made regular phone calls to Lieutenant Souers’ wife to ensure that she and their infant daughter were coping with his absence. Mr. Twilley

and Lieutenant Souers’ Wal-Mart associates invited Mrs. Souers to the store on

their wedding anniversary for a surprise anniversary party. Lieutenant Souers’ WalMart associates sent flowers to Mrs. Souers on Valentine’s Day and Mothers’ Day

to help with the pain of separation on those important days. Lieutenant Souers said,

‘‘They have repeatedly gone out of their way to include my wife and daughter in

the Wal-Mart family during my absence as only dear friends could. All of this has

given me the peace of mind when I needed it the most, knowing that there were

so many people looking after my loved ones when I was unable to.’’

The Las Vegas Metropolitan Police Department is a public sector agency that goes

‘‘above and beyond’’ in supporting its employees who serve in the Guard and Reserve. Sheriff Bill Young has assigned a family support coordinator within each of

the department’s area commands to maintain contact with the families of deployed

guardsmen and reservists. Not only do his area commanders maintain e-mail contact with deployed employees, but so do the members of the deployed employee’s

squad. The Las Vegas Metropolitan Police Department instituted a leave donation

policy allowing any employee to donate unused leave so that guardsmen and reservists may have extra paid leave when they return from mobilization. Army Reserve

Captain Gabriela Hatfield-Cook said, ‘‘To their great credit, the officers and employVerDate 11-MAY-2000 17:21 Feb 15, 2006 Jkt 000000 PO 00000 Frm 00019 Fmt 6633 Sfmt 6621 24166.TXT SLABOR2 PsN: SLABOR2
16

ees of the Las Vegas Metro Police Department stand behind their deployed comrades without reservation.’’

Coast Guard Reserve Chief Warrant Officer Norm Chapman of Olympia, Washington has been a reservist the entire 18 years he has worked for the South Puget

Sound Community College. While South Puget Sound Community College is unable

to provide differential pay, Mr. Chapman notes that the college grants veterans

preference credit points for most positions, provides recognition of Guard and Reserve service through various college-wide activities, and upon several occasions, the

school’s automotive department made repairs to his family’s vehicle, reducing the

stress on his wife during the mobilization. Not only did the college’s public relations

department publish stories about his experiences on active duty, they ensured he

was informed about news from the college while he was away, enabling him to return to work with some knowledge of what had happened during his absence. Mr.

Chapman said, ‘‘After the events of September 11th, a few of us employees have

been called up more than once, and I have heard nothing but positive words of encouragement from the administrative team. I feel totally confident that my job and

position is fully protected by my employer and that they truly care about my Reserve participation.’’

Lieutenant General Steve Blum, Chief of the National Guard Bureau, frequently

says that we recruit the soldier but retain the family. In order for an employee to

feel secure in continuing to serve in the National Guard or Reserve, not only must

he or she be confident that they will return to their job and face no penalty for their

service, but also that his or her employer supports their service to our national security. The Department of Defense recognizes that we share almost half of our workforce with America’s employers, and these employers share the sacrifices of our

guardsmen and reservists. On behalf of a grateful Nation, the Department of Defense thanks these employers.

If National Guardsmen and Reservists are indeed ‘‘twice the citizen,’’ then their

civilian employers are ‘‘twice the patriot.’’ America’s employers are inextricably

linked to our Nation’s security.

Thank you, and I will be happy to answer your questions.

Senator ISAKSON. Mr. Donovan?

Mr. DONOVAN. Good afternoon. I would like to start out by

thanking Chairman Isakson and Senator Murray for inviting the

Home Depot to participate in this subcommittee hearing.

The Home Depot was founded just in 1978. We are the world’s

largest home improvement specialty retailer, the second-largest retailer in the United States. We currently employ more than

325,000 associates. Home Depot operates more than 1,950 stores in

all 50 States, the District of Columbia, Puerto Rico, 10 Canadian

provinces, and Mexico. Our headquarters are in Atlanta, Georgia,

and we are proud to call the chairman of this committee our Senator.

At the Home Depot, we take our support for the military very,

very seriously. One of our core values at the Home Depot is taking

care of our people. Since 2002, the Home Depot has had approximately 1,800 associates called to active duty for the current conflict. Beyond assuring that these associates have a good job when

they return home, the company also implemented an extended and

enhanced leave of absence benefit. The Home Depot equalizes pay

between their military salary and their Home Depot compensation

and we extend health benefits to deployed associates as well as

their family members.

Our company’s support of the military goes beyond our deployed

associates. In September of 2004, the Home Depot joined forces

with the U.S. Departments of Defense, Labor, and Veterans’ Affairs

to launch Operation Career Front. This is an unprecedented program to provide job opportunities for veterans, separating active

duty service members, National Guard, Reserves, and military

spouses.

17

In 2003, the Home Depot hired 10,000 veterans. In 2004, the

company hired more than 16,000 former military personnel, and I

am proud to say that we expect to surpass this number in 2005,

since we have already hired 13,000 veterans through September of

this year.

Home Depot has also hired a significant number of former junior

military officers into our Store Leadership Program. Since 2002, we

have hired a total of 1,147 people into this program. Five-hundredand-twenty-nine of them are former junior military officers. And

out of that number, 125 of the JMOs are academy graduates.

The company also participates in the Marine Corps’ National Fellows Program. This is a 1 year rotation inside of the Home Depot

where the Marine works very closely with the senior leadership

team of the company. Lieutenant Colonel Jim Izen, who is here

with me today, is our fourth Marine fellow.

The Home Depot also collaborates with the military to share best

practices. We are hosting the Army’s Strategic Leadership Program

for the third time on November 16. The focus will be on leadership,

information technology, supply chain, and logistics.

Another one of the core values at the Home Depot is giving back

to the community, and we do this through donations and volunteerism. Giving back to the military community is certainly part of

this. In April of 2003, we launched Project Homefront. While they

were protecting our homeland, we wanted to protect their homefront. This program was designed to help military families with

home repairs while their loved ones were deployed. The Home

Depot donated a million dollars and a million hours of volunteerism to help out during 2003 and 2005, and to date, we have repaired over 1,000 homes. In addition, in July of 2004, the company donated $1 million in

tools and materials to support the U.S. military efforts in Iraq.

I would like to close by saying that we view our support for the

military as our responsibility to our country. We don’t view this as

a cost. We consider this as a valuable investment to our company’s

future. Again, this is something we take very seriously and we will

continue to support those who are defending our rights and protecting our freedoms.

Chairman Isakson, Senator Murray, thank you again for inviting

the Home Depot to be here today.

Senator ISAKSON. Thank you, Mr. Donovan.

[The prepared statement of Mr. Donovan follows:]

PREPARED STATEMENT OF DENNIS DONOVAN

Good afternoon. My name is Dennis Donovan, and I am the Executive Vice President of Human Resources for The Home Depot, Inc.

I would like to thank Chairman Isakson and Senator Murray for inviting The

Home Depot to participate in this subcommittee’s hearing on cooperation between

employers and guardsmen/reservists.

Founded in 1978, The Home Depot is the world’s largest home improvement specialty retailer and the second largest retailer in the United States, with fiscal 2004

sales of $73.1 billion. The company employs approximately 325,000 associates and

has more than 1,950 stores in all 50 States, the District of Columbia, Puerto Rico,

10 Canadian provinces and Mexico. Headquartered in Atlanta, Georgia, we’re extremely proud to call the chairman of this subcommittee our Senator.

At The Home Depot, we feel that our support of the military sets the standard

for corporate America. It is our belief that we must honor our military heroes where

it matters most, not only in our thoughts and prayers, but also in our business pracVerDate 11-MAY-2000 17:21 Feb 15, 2006 Jkt 000000 PO 00000 Frm 00021 Fmt 6633 Sfmt 6621 24166.TXT SLABOR2 PsN: SLABOR2
18

tices, human resource policies, corporate giving and volunteer efforts. It is in our

value proposition to take care of the people who are defending our country. We do

not view our military support as a cost, but rather as an investment. It is not a

burden. It is our responsibility, and one that we live up to proudly each and every

day.

The Home Depot’s commitment to the men and women who serve our country is

unquestionably strong and very close to the heart. Since 2002, The Home Depot has

had approximately 1,800 associates called to active duty for the current Iraqi conflict.

The Home Depot has implemented an extended and enhanced leave of absence

benefit for our deployed associates. Beyond making sure these associates have a

good job when they return home, The Home Depot equalizes pay between their military salary and what they would have made at The Home Depot as well as extends

health benefits to all of our deployed associates and members of their families.

We feel it is important to take care of our associates while they are away protecting our freedoms, so the company has extended these benefits to our associates for

the duration of the Iraqi conflict. It is extremely important to us that these men

and women are given the opportunity to continue receiving their benefits and have

their pay equalized if their military position pays them less then what they would

be earning if they were not a reservist or guardsman. These individuals should not

have to forgo benefits or income because of their decision to defend our Nation.

Our company’s support of the U.S. military and the men and women serving our

country goes far beyond what we offer our own deployed associates. The Home

Depot has been a long-time proponent of hiring separating military, veterans and

military spouses.

On September 21, 2004, The Home Depot joined forces with the U.S. Departments

of Defense, Labor, and Veterans Affairs to launch Operation Career Front, an unprecedented program designed to provide career opportunities for America’s military

personnel who are interested in transferring their unique skills, knowledge and

abilities into a successful second career.

I was in Washington, D.C. with Bob Nardelli, our Chairman, President and CEO;

Elaine L. Chao, the Secretary of Labor; Dr. David S.C. Chu, the Under Secretary

of Defense for Personnel and Readiness of U.S. Department of Defense; and Anthony J. Principi, the former Secretary of Veterans Affairs to launch this tremendous initiative.

In addition to providing employment opportunities for active, Reserve, National

Guard or veterans, The Home Depot also has a program for military spouses and

dependents. With our network of stores throughout the country, The Home Depot

works with its military associates to provide transfers in the cases of reassignment

of duty stations, retirement or separation.

Operation Career Front is a program that enhances the company’s hiring efforts

within the military community. In 2003, The Home Depot hired 10,000 veterans,

and in 2004 the company hired more than 16,000 former military personnel. I could

not be more proud to tell you that we plan to exceed that number in 2005 as we

already have hired more than 13,000 veterans through September.

Our effort, Operation Career Front, supports America’s military job seekers, including veterans, separating active duty service members, National Guard members,

Reserves and military spouses.

To support the initiative, the U.S. Department of Defense provides a link on its

Web site to enable military members and their families to apply for employment

with The Home Depot, and it lists The Home Depot as a prospective employer on

its job search Web site. The U.S. Department of Defense also makes information

available to interested military personnel and their families outlining the process

to apply for careers with The Home Depot through their Military Transition Assistance and Family Centers.

The U.S. Department of Labor makes Operation Career Front information available to more than 2,000 One-Stop Career Centers throughout the Nation. The U.S.

Department of Labor also supports the initiative utilizing the Local Veterans Employment Representatives (LVERs) as well as Disabled Veteran Opportunity Program (DVOP) specialists located at One-Stops and Transition Assistance Centers

across the Nation.

The U.S. Veterans Affairs Department’s Vocational Rehabilitation and Employment (VA VR&E) division makes Operation Career Front information available to

veterans with service-connected disabilities through its representatives located in

State offices across the Nation.

The Home Depot has also hired a significant number of former military into our

Store Leadership Program. The Store Leadership Program provides individuals who

19

are dynamic and driven with a strong foundation of strategic and technical skills,

placing them on the fast track to store manager positions.

Since the inception of the program in 2002, the company has enrolled 1,147 individuals. Of those enrolled, 529 of them are former junior military officers, with 125

of the JMO’s being Academy graduates.

The Home Depot is always looking for the best, brightest talent available, and we

have found that the former junior military officers that have joined our company

possess tremendous leadership characteristics that have made them invaluable

hires. We have found that these men and women have transferable experience because they have been put in a position where they have had to deliver results, and

where they must act strategically as well as tactically.

In addition, our experience shows us that junior military officers have the ability

to drive excellence and lead through inspiration. Also, they have the self-confidence

and the know-how to engage customers.

The company also is a participant in the Marine Corps Corporate Fellows Program. For the past several years, an officer from the U.S. Marine Corps has been

assigned to The Home Depot for a 1-year rotation working closely with the company’s senior leadership team. The company benefits from the military leader’s experience, and the officer is able to transfer his or her learnings at The Home Depot back

to the Marines. We are proud to say we have our fourth Marine Corp Fellow, Lt.

Col. Jim Izen, currently at The Home Depot.

The company also collaborates with the military to share best business practices.

On November 16, 2005, The Home Depot is scheduled to host the Army Strategic

Leadership Program for the third time. More than 25 senior officers and personnel

will be in Atlanta to meet with Bob Nardelli and the members of the Senior Leadership Team to discuss and share ideas around leadership, logistics, information technology and supply chain management. On November 18, I am slated to meet with

officers and personnel from the Air Force to share best practices.

Taking care of our communities through corporate philanthropy and volunteerism

is one of the company’s core values. Our commitment to the military community is

no exception.

In 2003, we launched Project Homefront, a program designed to help military

families with home repairs while their loved ones were away serving on active duty.

The company pledged $1 million and 1 million volunteer hours from our associates

to complete these home repairs during 2003 and 2004.

In July 2004, The Home Depot donated $1 million in tools and materials to support U.S. military efforts in Iraq. Nearly 100,000 tools and materials, including

shovels, table saws, concrete mixers, safety scaffolding, power generators, light

bulbs, jackhammers, and thousands of letters from associates at The Home Depot

to troops were loaded on nine tractor-trailers in San Diego and taken by the U.S.

Army and U.S. Marine Corps transportation to U.S. military installations in Iraq.

The Home Depot’s support of the military has not gone unnoticed as the company

has received numerous awards and recognition for our efforts and initiatives. The

company received the Employer Support of the Guard and Reserve’s Freedom

Award in 2004 and The Home Depot was the recipient of the Employer Support of

the Guard and Reserve’s Homefront Award in 2003.

In addition, The Home Depot received the No. 1 Ranking in the ‘‘Top 10 Employers for Military Personnel’’ by G.I. Jobs magazine in November 2004.

In June 2005, Bob Nardelli received the Most Distinguished American Award

from the Marine Corps Law Enforcement Foundation.

Recently, the company received the 2005 Veterans of Foreign Wars James R. Van

Zandt Citizenship Award, a commendation from The American Legion, the USO

(United Service Organizations) Patriot Award, the PSC Private Sector Leadership

Award for the Partnership for Public Service, and the Military Officers Association

of America’s Distinguished Service Award.

I would like to close by saying we view our support of the military as our responsibility to our country and as a valuable investment in our company’s future. It is

something we take very seriously at The Home Depot, and we will continue to support those who are defending our rights and protecting our freedoms.

Chairman Isakson, Senator Murray, thank you again for inviting The Home

Depot to participate in this Senate subcommittee hearing.

Senator ISAKSON. Ms. Bierman?

Ms. BIERMAN. Mr. Chairman, members of the committee, and

distinguished guests, as a citizen of this great Nation, I am honored to testify before you today and trust that my ideas and opinions will be considered as we work together to continually improve

20

the way we do business in Government and in the public and private sector.

My name is Christine Bierman, CEO and founder of Colt Safety,

Fire and Rescue, located in St. Louis, MO. Colt Safety is a small,

woman business enterprise celebrating our 25-year anniversary

this year. We warehouse and distribute personal protective equipment and industrial safety supplies. I am a national founding partner of Women Impacting Public Policy, a longtime member of

NAWBO, National Association of Women Business Owners, and

WBENC, Women Business Enterprise National Council, and a

longtime member of the American Society of Safety Engineers.

Our company’s mission is to protect the American workforce. Our

vision is to nurture a successful company, poised to give back to

our family of employees and to the community.

After the devastation to our Nation and our psyche as we

watched the World Trade Towers vanish before our eyes on September 11, how could any American not step up to the plate and

protect and defend this great Nation and to support any and all efforts to that end?

Colt Safety had 2 of our 17 employees activated after September

11. That represents 20 percent of our entire workforce. Master Sergeant Jim Mixco, United States Air Force reservist and 9 year Colt

Safety employee, was called to action to support Operation Noble

Eagle shortly after those towers crumbled. My heart and my patriotic duty, and the fact that Jim was a longtime manager at our

company, guided me to continue his full salary and benefits for the

year he was activated.

Another employee, Specialist Joey Petry from the 203rd Battalion, Fort Leonard Wood, was deployed directly to Baghdad during

our company’s busiest season.

Only after our company received the ESGR Freedom Award and

the Government went out of its way to thank us with Waterford

crystal eagles and Boss lifts to military bases across the country

did I learn that not all employers do what I felt in my heart was

the right thing.

I was moved by soldiers at Fort Benning, GA, who thanked us

from the bottom of their hearts for supporting them in their efforts

to protect us. Over the past year, soldiers have either been given

my name or found us online, contacted me, asking us for advice on

how to help them set up programs at their own companies. It is

my hope that Colt Safety can serve as a role model to other companies that endeavor to do the right thing for our Guard and Reserve.

Former Secretary Wolfowitz said to me as he was handing me

that beautiful crystal eagle that he knew it was easier to do if you

are American Express. He understood the financial impact on a

company our size. I do believe I am the smallest company ever to

win this award. I think I am the only woman-owned business. And

until last Saturday night, I was the first Missouri company to ever

win until Enterprise Rent-a-Car just won.

Colt Safety’s revenue was directly impacted by 50 percent decrease in profits and sales during Jim’s absence. Small businesses

that extend themselves financially in support of our Guard and Reserve must be recognized not only with crystal eagles and conspicuous service medal awards, but also with Government contracting

21

opportunities. Colt Safety and other small diversity companies can

only continue to do the good that we do that is documented in this

testimony when we are afforded opportunities to do business with

the largest procurement agency in the world, the United States

Government.

I am asking you today to author a bill that supports by way of

Government contracts those small businesses, and large businesses, of course, that support our President and our service men

and women. This will encourage and afford others the financial stability to do the right thing.

Thank you for the opportunity to testify today and I will answer

any questions.

Senator ISAKSON. Thank you, Ms. Bierman.

[The prepared statement of Ms. Bierman follows:]

PREPARED STATEMENT OF CHRISTINE BIERMAN

Mr. Chairman, members of the committee, distinguished guests. As a citizen of

this great Nation I am honored by the invitation to testify before you today and

trust that my ideas and opinions will be considered as we work to continually improve the way we do business in Government and in the public and private sectors.

My name is Christine Bierman, CEO and Founder of Colt Safety, Fire & Rescue

located in St. Louis, MO. Colt Safety is a small, woman business enterprise celebrating our 25 year anniversary milestone this year.

Colt Safety warehouses and distributes Personal Protective Equipment (PPE) and

industrial SAFETY Supplies, everything a worker wears or uses in a hazardous environment according to OSHA and NFPA regulations.

I am an advocate for small and diversity businesses and have had the honor of

testifying before local, State and Federal committees many times regarding small

business and OSHA regulatory issues over the past 20 years. I am a National

Founding Partner of Women Impacting Public Policy (WIPP), a long-time member

of National Association of Women Business Owners (NAWBO), a member of Women

Business Enterprise National Council (WBENC) and the American Society of Safety

Engineers (ASSE).

Our Company’s Mission is to profitably meet the safety and hygiene needs of the

American workforce. Our VISION is to strategically and profitably nurture a successful company poised to give back to its family of employees and the community.

After the devastation to our Nation and our psyche as we watched the World Trade

Towers vanish before our eyes on September 11, 2001, how could any American not

step up to the plate to protect and defend this great Nation and to support any and

all efforts to that end.

Colt Safety had 2 of our 17 employees activated after September 11. That represents 20 percent of our entire work force.

Master Sgt. Jim Mixco USAF reservist, 9 year Colt Safety employee and Director

of all Technical Sales and Service at Colt was called to action to support Operation

Noble Eagle shortly after those towers vanished. Jim would serve at Scott Air

Force Base, IL which is 40 miles East of our offices in St. Louis, MO. His duty

would be 24 hours on and 24 hours off.

My heart and my patriotic duty and the fact that Jim was a long-time employee

and responsible for a complete department at Colt Safety led me to choose to continue his full salary and benefits for the complete year that he was activated. Then

Jim’s annual 3 week tour of duty had long been scheduled for March of 2003. Jim’s

unit was deployed to Saudi Arabia as the President presented ultimatums and deadlines to Saddam Hussein.

Needless to say tensions and emotions ran high while Jim was in the Middle East

and terrorist threats and attacks began to escalate.

I was in continual contact with Jim’s wife and frightened children. Jim e-mailed

us periodically from Saudi. I replied that I was worried for his family and we should

do something for his wife. He and I concocted a plan that I would purchase a gift

certificate for a massage at a Day Spa for his wife and put it in a card and sign

it from Jim. When I presented that gift to her on behalf of Jim . . . she cried.

Another employee SPC Joey Petry from the 203d BN Ft Leonard Wood, an hourly

warehouse person was deployed directly to Bagdad after the President declared war

on Saddam Hussein and during our company’s busiest season. Joey’s tour of duty

22

was extended 2 times and lasted 16 months. Joey returned to his position at Colt

until he chose to leave us and go back to college full time.

In October 2004, our Company received the Secretary of Defense ESGR FREEDOM Award. It was then after the Government went out of its way to thank us

with Waterford Crystal Eagles and Boss Lifts to military bases across the country

did I begin to learn that not all employers do what I felt in my heart to be ‘‘the

right thing.’’

I was in awe of the Soldiers at Ft. Benning, GA who thanked us BOSSES from

the bottom of their hearts for supporting them in their efforts to protect us. At first

blush it seemed that they were following orders as they thanked us for supporting

the Guard and Reserve. It was not long into the 3 day visit that I realized that

these thank you words were truly sincere and coming from the depths of their

hearts. I was very moved by this!

I heard stories on that trip to Ft. Benning from soldiers, other bosses and reporters that . . . what a handful of us were doing for our activated employees was the

exception and not the rule.

Just 2 weeks ago a banker came to my office and noticed our Freedom Award.

He told me his horror story of his most recent activation. He said that by law his

former bank had to give him a job upon his return. All of his previous clients were

given to someone else and he would have to find new clients or be out of a job. He

stayed at that bank for 45 days before he sought friendlier employment.

Over the past year, soldiers have either been given my name or found us online

and have called for advice on setting up procedures at their companies. It is my

hope that Colt Safety can serve as a role model to other companies in their endeavors to do the right thing for our Guard and Reserve.

With all of this said, I know that we at Colt Safety have always done the right

thing. We have been a powerful and vocal advocate for supporting our Guard and

Reserve.

Secretary Wolfowitz said to me on stage as he was handing me that beautiful Waterford Crystal Eagle, ‘‘we know it is easier to do what you have done when you

are American Express.’’ He knew that we were probably the smallest business ever

to receive this award and that it may not have been easy for us financially.

Colt Safety’s revenue was directly impacted by Jim’s absence. His 24 on 24 off

schedule translates to less than 50 percent duty to Colt Safety. (This does NOT include his annual 3 week tour of duty which we have paid full salary and benefits

also for the past 9 years). The sales generated in Jim’s technical sales arena, (specifically sales of SCBA’s, breathing apparatus, bunker gear and gas monitoring

equipment to fire departments) were down 50 percent for the year Jim was serving

under Operation Noble Eagle and Operation Iraqi Freedom.

In order to continue the good that we and other companies like us do by going

above and beyond the call of duty, we must continue to be viable businesses. My

request of you today is that you recognize companies like mine, not only with crystal

eagles and Conspicuous Service Medals, but also with Government contracting opportunities. Once the doors of commerce are open to small diversity companies, our

Nation and its leaders will realize growth, quality services and prosperity beyond

our wildest dreams.

I am certain you are aware of the following facts so I will quickly brief you on

them.

Small business is the engine that drives our Nation’s economy! Women

business enterprises:

• Represent 38 percent of all majority-owned, privately held firms in the United

States;

• Generate $3.7 trillion dollars in revenues to the U.S. economy;

• Are growing at twice the rate of all U.S. firms;

• Stay in business longer than all other businesses;

• WBE’s generally employ a more gender-balanced workforce;

• Are more likely to offer flextime, tuition reimbursement and profit sharing;

• There are an estimated 1.2 million firms owned by women of color equaling 1

in 5 or 20 percent of all women owned firms;

• In the State of Missouri, Women-owned firms employ 217,000 people;

• With annual sales approaching $25 billion;

• Yet Women business owners receive less than 2 percent of all Government contracting and Fortune Company dollars.

All statistics are from the Center for Women’s Business Research.

Colt Safety is one small, woman business enterprise that can only continue to do

the good documented in this testimony when we are afforded opportunities to do

business with the largest procurement agency in the world, the U.S. Government.

23

Thank you for the opportunity to testify before you today. I would be happy to

answer any questions.

Senator ISAKSON. Ms. Nisenfeld?

Ms. NISENFELD. Mr. Chairman and members of the subcommittee, thank you for the opportunity to talk with you today about employment issues for returning Reserve and National Guard soldiers.

The efforts of many employers to assure continued employment

for our returning National Guard and Reserve veterans in both the

public and private sectors is truly outstanding. These organizations

well deserve the Nation’s recognition and thanks.

Much more needs to be done, however, to make sure that all our

returning National Guard and Reserve soldiers are employed and

economically stable. The challenges facing these heroes are complex.

Last spring, 700 Oregon National Guard soldiers returned home,

many of them residents of Southwest Washington. Fully 40 percent

of them were unemployed upon return. Another group of 700 is

scheduled to return next month, and of these, at least 30 percent

anticipate being unemployed. An equal number, another 30 percent, describe themselves as underemployed. This occurs as our region’s economy is in the midst of a strong recovery. So while the

employment prospects for the public at large have improved, the

options for our reentering service people are not as bright.

In Washington State, citizen soldiers demobilized from the Washington National Guard’s 81st Brigade, demonstrating a 40 percent

unemployment rate among 1,000 returnees. The largest number of

these unemployed soldiers were jobless when they entered the

Guard. That is especially true because we were in the midst of a

recession at that time. To them, the challenges of securing gainful

employment are even greater. They tend to be young people who

have little, if any, college education. Some of them were students.

Others were downsized during their period of service. The transition for these soldiers has been very, very difficult.

Upon first returning to civilian life, they are provided with a substantial amount of information regarding employment and education resources in their communities. That information, however,

often falls upon deaf ears because the soldiers aren’t ready to jump

into a job. They face many pressing issues—reintroduction to their

families, housing, deaths, and health challenges. So the usefulness

of the information presented at demobilization is often limited.

Further, those who worked low-wage, low-skilled jobs are no

longer satisfied with that. During their deployment, they learned

many technical skills, lived in intense and demanding situations.

They developed a maturity unlike that of others their age. Their

expectations for work and family change substantially, yet they

often come home to minimum-wage jobs, debts, and challenging

family situations. They may have physical and mental challenges,

as well, resulting from their service. So they are given 3 weeks or

less to decompress prior to entering civilian life.

How can we help solve these challenges? There are a variety of

possibilities. First, we should consider providing a military salary

and benefits during the transitional years so individuals can afford

to go to school. A wide variety of resources are out there to help

pay the tuition and fees for veterans returning to school, yet many

24

have young families and financial obligations which preclude fulltime education. They simply can’t afford the cost of living.

Our economy needs these young people to pursue higher education and technical credentials, so this would be a sound investment.

No. 2, encourage civilians and veterans’ organizations to work together to reach out to returning soldiers. Congress has funded a

comprehensive system of one-stop employment centers throughout

the country. These centers consider returning veterans to be their

top priority populations for services. For the most part, however,

these programs are not connected directly to the various military

organizations that are demobilizing soldiers. These programs stand

ready to actively reach out to returning veterans as well as their

dependents, yet most are mystified about who to call and how to

connect. Our system regularly mobilizes resources to deal with

large layoffs and plant closures. Surely, our experience in rapid response can be applied to working with these men and women.

Making these connections is especially challenging for Army Reserve units, such as the 104th Division in Vancouver, because they

draw soldiers from 12 States. They need to better understand how

to connect with these local workforce systems. This is especially

critical because their soldiers separate from the military one or two

at a time, requiring much individual work.

The best part about this strategy is that it is already paid for.

Let us make the most of the resources already out there.

A third option is to provide tax credits to assist small employers

when National Guard and Reserve soldiers are deployed. In our experience, employers want to do the right thing. Small employers,

however, have a difficult time bearing the substantial cost of training an employee to replace a deployed soldier. The result of this is

some hesitation in hiring members of the Guard or Reserve. A tax

credit to cover a portion of the replacement training costs would be

very helpful.

Finally, assure that military credentials are fully transferrable.

This already occurs in many arenas, but remains a challenge in

others. It will require close coordination between the military and

State licensing authorities for many occupations, especially in industries such as health care and transportation, where demand is

high. Both classroom and hands-on experience should be

transferrable.

I look forward to continuing our work with Senator Murray on

these issues and I thank all of you for your commitment to the success of our returning soldiers. I would be happy to answer any

questions.

Senator ISAKSON. Thank you, Ms. Nisenfeld.

[The prepared statement of Ms. Nisenfeld follows:]

PREPARED STATEMENT OF LISA NISENFELD

Mr. Chairman and members of the subcommittee, thank you for the opportunity

to talk with you today about employment issues for returning Reservist and National Guard soldiers.

The efforts of many employers to assure continued employment for our returning

National Guard and Reserve veterans in both the public and private sectors is truly

outstanding. These organizations well deserve the Nation’s recognition and thanks.

Much more needs to be done, however, to make sure that all our returning National

25

Guard and Reserve soldiers are employed and economically stable. The challenges

facing these heroes are complex.

Last spring approximately 700 Oregon National Guard soldiers returned home,

many of them residents of southwest Washington. Fully 40 percent of them were

unemployed upon return. Another group of 700 is scheduled to return next month.

Of these, at least 30 percent anticipate being unemployed. An equal number consider themselves to be ‘‘underemployed.’’ This occurs as our region’s economy is in

the midst of a strong recovery. So while the employment prospects for the public

at large have improved, the options for our reentering service people are not as

bright.

In Washington State, citizen soldiers demobilized from the Washington National

Guard’s 81st Brigade also demonstrated a 40 percent unemployment rate among

1,000 returnees. The largest number of these unemployed soldiers were jobless when

they entered the Guard. To them, the challenges of securing gainful employment are

even greater. They tend to be young people who have little, if any, college education.

Some of them were students. Others were ‘‘downsized’’ during their service.

The transition for many of these soldiers has been very, very difficult.

Upon first returning to civilian life, they are provided with a substantial amount

of information regarding employment and education resources in their communities.

That information, however, often falls upon deaf ears because the soldiers aren’t

ready to jump into a job. They face many pressing issues: reintroduction to their

families, housing, debts, and health challenges. So the usefulness of the information

presented at demobilization is often limited.

Further, those who worked low-wage, low-skilled jobs are no longer satisfied with

that. During their deployment they learned many technical skills, living in intense

and demanding situations. They developed a maturity unlike that of others their

age. Their expectations for work and family have changed substantially, yet they

often come home to minimum wage jobs, debts, and challenging family situations.

They may have physical and mental challenges as well, resulting from their service.

So they are given 3 weeks (or less) to decompress prior to re-entering civilian life.

How can we help solve these challenges? There are a variety of possibilities.

1. Provide military salary and benefits during a transitional year so individuals can afford to go to school. A wide variety of resources are out there to

help pay tuition and fees for vets returning to school, yet many have young families

and financial obligations which preclude full-time education. Our economy needs

these young people to pursue higher education and technical credentials, so this

would be a sound investment.

2. Encourage civilian and veterans organizations to work together to

reach out to returning soldiers. Congress has funded a comprehensive system

of one-stop employment centers throughout the country. Those centers consider returning veterans to be their top priority population for services. For the most part,

however, those programs are not connected directly to the various military organizations that are demobilizing soldiers. These programs stand ready to actively reach

out to returning vets as well as their dependents, yet most are mystified about who

to call and how to connect. Our system regularly mobilizes resources to deal with

large layoffs and plant closures. Surely our experience in ‘‘rapid response’’ can be

applied to working with these men and women.

Making these connections is especially challenging for Army Reserve units such

as the 104th Division in Vancouver because they draw soldiers from 12 States. They

need to better understand how to connect with local workforce systems. This is especially critical because their soldiers separate one and two at a time, requiring much

individual work.

The best part about this strategy is that it is already paid for. Let’s make the

most of the resources that are already out there.

3. Provide tax credits to assist small employers when National Guard and

Reserve soldiers are deployed. In our experience, employers want to do the right

thing. Small employers, however, have a difficult time bearing the substantial cost

of training an employee to replace a deployed soldier. The natural result of this is

some hesitation in hiring members of the Guard or Reserve. A tax credit to cover

a portion of the replacement training costs would be helpful.

4. Assure that military training credentials are fully transferable. This already occurs in many arenas, but remains a challenge in others. It will require close

coordination between the military and State licensing authorities for many occupations, especially in industries such as healthcare and transportation where demand

is high. Both classroom and hands-on experience should be transferable.

I look forward to continuing our work with Senator Murray on these issues. I

thank all of you for your commitment to the success of our returning soldiers. I

would be happy to answer any questions.

26

Senator ISAKSON. Mr. Fry?

Mr. FRY. I would like to thank Senator Burr for the introduction.

Mr. Chairman and members of the committee, I have the honor to

speak to you as a representative of both the Wachovia Corporation

and as a citizen soldier.

When reservists deploy, they must rely on a support network

that includes the businesses that they work for or own. In my experience, that level of support varies widely. I would like to detail the

outstanding support that I received as I prepared to mobilize, mobilized, deployed, and redeployed in support of Operation Iraqi Freedom and to relate to the committee what that level of support

means on a personal level.

At the time of my initial alert, Wachovia’s existing corporate policy was already what I consider generous, providing for continued

full pay and benefits for 6 months in the event of activation. In

March of 2003, the corporation extended this policy to 1 year in

recognition of the sacrifices being made to support the war on terror as more Wachovia employees joined the active ranks. Wachovia

has since continued to extend that policy in subsequent months in

support of our employees called to extended active duty for Operations Enduring Freedom and Iraqi Freedom.

Let me explain what these benefits meant to my family. As an

active duty Sergeant First Class, my pay was less than half of

what I had been making at Wachovia, even factoring in the additional allowances for the combat deployment. To compound this,

my wife had to leave her job, which involved night and weekend

work that she would no longer be able to perform since I was not

there to care for our children. Day care was not available during

those periods, and her employer would not grant her a leave of absence, so she was forced to resign and subsequently lost her benefits.

I was faced with the prospect of losing two-thirds of our annual

income and benefits for my family while being halfway around the

world and not being able to do anything about it. While Tricare

health benefits began upon my activation, they involved a change

in medical service providers and new and unfamiliar paperwork.

Without the financial support from Wachovia and the extended

benefits, we would have been in serious trouble. Not having to

worry about my family’s financial condition or health benefits gave

me a great sense of relief and made it easier to focus on my duties.

I was initially concerned that the one-year policy would leave a

period where I would only have the Army salary. However, the extensions to the policy ensured that I was covered for the entire period of my service. The company also maintained the employer

matching of my 401(k) funds, allowing me to continue pursuing our

savings goals. Wachovia also counted my military service as qualifying toward the company-funded pension plan. I was also paid my

full incentive plan bonus for 2003, even though it could have been

prorated to exclude the 3 months that I was on active service.

These measures ensured that my future financial goals weren’t derailed by the deployment.

During the call-up process, I had a lot of questions and was relieved to find the answers readily accessible. Wachovia has the entire military policy on its Web site with frequently asked questions

27

and linked me to a human resources representative whose support

allowed me to plan thoroughly for the change. My Wachovia management team worked with me throughout the process and expedited it, when possible. My employer didn’t just make policy that

benefited reservists, they made it easy to access and receive these

benefits. The company continued to count my years of service while

I was gone, and when I returned, paid me retroactively for a raise

that I would have received in 2004 had I not been activated.

My coworkers sent me a copy of a corporate newsletter applauding deployed Wachovia reservists that was published in the fall of

2004. There, I learned I worked for a company that the ESGR had

named an outstanding employer, although by that time, I already

knew that I worked for an outstanding employer.

I also learned that on October 13, 2004, Wachovia teamed with

the Charlotte Chamber of Commerce and the ESGR to sponsor a

salute to the troops in the atrium of Wachovia’s corporate headquarters. This public demonstration of Wachovia’s ongoing support

makes me very proud to be a part of this company.

Upon my return to work in March of this year, I submitted a letter to the ESGR detailing the level of support that I had received

from Wachovia and was pleased to see this letter included on

Wachovia’s military support webpage that was used as a source of

information in consideration for the 2005 Secretary of Defense

Freedom Award. Wachovia subsequently was awarded this honor

here in Washington last Saturday, on October 15, 2005. Upon the

announcement of the Freedom Award, the military’s highest honor

for a civilian employer, Wachovia interviewed several recently deployed reservists and broadcast our stories of support through company print and visual media.

CEO Ken Thompson stated in a release at that time, ‘‘Wachovia

is proud to support the men and women who are serving our country and we are honored to receive an award that demonstrates our

unwavering commitment to them. Their selfless service exemplifies

the values that we work hard to live up to every day—integrity, respect, teamwork, service, personal excellence and accountability,

and winning.’’

I would also like to relate the level of support that I received

from the employees of Wachovia. Soon after the deployment, my

department made me aware that they were starting a fund to donate airline miles so that my family could visit relatives while I

was deployed. My wife and two sons were able to travel to Pennsylvania during the summer months and visit relatives thanks to

their generosity.

During deployment, I received from current and past coworkers

more than 50 large and unbelievably well-stocked care packages

that I was able to distribute to my battery. The flood of donations

became so overwhelming that I started to donate large quantities

of items to other units attached to the 1st and the 33rd Field Artillery whose soldiers were not as fortunate as us to have such a dedicated support channel. The regular Army soldiers were amazed

when I told them I had received all the items from work, and I was

proud to tell them about the company and my experience.

The care packages included disposable cameras, food items,

toiletries, games, books, magazines, signed banners of support,

28

sunblock, lip balm, insect repellant, and curiously, a 12-and-a-half

pound box of sugar packets, which the coffee drinkers in the platoon took as a godsend. I also received Wachovia office forms in

case I was missing work too much. I can’t begin to imagine the effort involved, and I am sincerely grateful.

I received countless letters and e-mails extending support and

prayers and discovered that my colleagues had told our clients

about my experiences. Some of these clients, in turn, also started

to send letters, e-mails, and packages to support me and my soldiers in the field.

Upon returning, I received an outpouring of support, not only

from my teammates, but also from individuals throughout the corporation, as I learned that my team had been sharing my correspondence from Iraq throughout the company. I had an ever-larger group praying for my unit’s safe return and I am still struck

when someone whom I don’t recognize will come up to me and

thank me for my service and share with me that they, too, were

praying for our safety.

Upon my return to work in March of this year, my Wachovia

teammates helped me raise over $2,000 for a severely wounded soldier in my platoon. My business unit donated over $1,000 to a local

nonprofit, VALOR, which was conducting a fundraiser for my

wounded soldier. And through the Wachovia charity matching

funds program, We Give, the corporation donated a matching

amount.

Again, I take great pride in detailing the encouragement and assistance that I received as I deployed with the 30th Brigade, North

Carolina Army National Guard to Operation Iraqi Freedom. Over

the 17 months of the deployment process, Wachovia was more than

an employer with deployed reservists. Wachovia was a partner to

me in the deployment. The company has created a culture of encouragement for its reservists consistent with our core values.

The experiences of the soldiers in my unit who did not receive

the same level of support made me all the more grateful for my experience. It also made me acutely aware that more could be done

to convince the employers of the thousands of reservists still on or

entering active duty to fight the war on terror how vital their support is to the citizen soldiers at home and downrange. Thank you.

Senator ISAKSON. Thank you, Mr. Fry.

[The prepared statement of Mr. Fry follows:]

PREPARED STATEMENT OF RONALD J. FRY

Mr. Chairman and members of the committee, I have the honor to speak to you

as a representative of both Wachovia Corporation and as a citizen soldier. When reservists deploy, they must rely upon a support network that includes the businesses

that the reservists work for or own. In my experience, that level of support varies

widely. I would like to detail the outstanding support that I received as I prepared

to mobilize, mobilized, deployed, and redeployed for Operation Iraqi Freedom, and

relate to the committee what that level of support means on a personal level.

At the time of my initial alert, Wachovia’s existing corporate policy was already

what I considered generous, providing for continued full pay and benefits for 6

months in the event of activation. In March 2003, the corporation extended this policy to 1 year in recognition of the sacrifices being made to support the war on terror

as more Wachovia employees joined the active ranks. Wachovia has since continued

to extend that policy in subsequent months in support of our employees called to

extended active duty for Operations Enduring Freedom and Iraqi Freedom.

29

Let me explain what these benefits meant to my family. As an active duty Sergeant First Class my pay was less than half of what I had been making at

Wachovia, even factoring in the additional allowances for combat deployment. To

compound this, my wife had to leave her job which involved night and weekend

work that she would no longer be able to perform since I was no longer there to

care for our children and daycare was not available during those periods. Her employer would not grant her a leave of absence, so she was forced to resign and subsequently lost her benefits.

I was faced with the prospect of losing two-thirds of the annual income and benefits for my family while being halfway around the world and not able to do anything

about it. While Tricare health care benefits began upon my activation, they involved

a change in medical service providers and new and unfamiliar paperwork. Without

the financial support from Wachovia and the extended benefits, we would have been

in serious trouble. Not having to worry about my family’s financial condition or

health benefits gave me a great sense of relief and made it easier to focus on my

duties.

I was initially concerned that the 1 year policy would leave a period where I

would have only the Army salary. However, the extensions to the policy ensured

that I was covered for the entire period of my service. The company also maintained

the employer matching of funds in my 401(k), allowing me to continue pursuing our

savings goals. Wachovia also counted my military service as qualifying towards the

company funded pension plan. I was also paid my full incentive plan bonus for 2003,

even though it could have been pro-rated to exclude the 3 months that I was deployed in that year. These measures ensured that my future financial goals weren’t

derailed by the deployment.

During the call-up process I had a lot of questions, and was relieved to find the

answers readily accessible. Wachovia has the entire military policy on its Web site

with Frequently Asked Questions and linked me to Human Resources representatives whose support allowed me to plan thoroughly for the change. My Wachovia

management team worked with me throughout the process and expedited it when

possible. My employer didn’t just make policy that benefited reservists; they made

it easy to access and receive these benefits.

The company continued to count my years in service while I was gone, and when

I returned paid me retroactively for a raise that I would have received in 2004 had

I not been activated. My coworkers sent me a copy of a corporate newsletter applauding deployed Wachovia reservists that was published in the fall of 2004. There

I learned that I worked for a company that the ESGR had named an ‘‘Outstanding

Employer,’’ although by that time I already knew that I worked for an outstanding

employer.

I also learned that on October 13, 2004 Wachovia teamed with the Charlotte

Chamber of Commerce and the ESGR to sponsor a salute to the troops in atrium

of Wachovia’s corporate headquarters. This public demonstration of Wachovia’s ongoing support makes me very proud to be a part of this company.

Upon my return to work in March of this year, I submitted a letter to the ESGR

detailing the level of support that I had received from Wachovia, and was pleased

to see this letter included on Wachovia’s Military Support web page that was used

as a source of information in consideration for the 2005 Secretary of Defense Freedom Award. Wachovia subsequently was awarded this honor here in Washington

last Saturday, on October 15, 2005.

Upon the announcement of the Freedom Award, the military’s highest honor for

a civilian employer, Wachovia interviewed several recently redeployed reservists

and broadcast our stories of support through company print and visual media.

CEO Ken Thompson stated in a release that ‘‘Wachovia is proud to support the

men and women who are serving our country and we are honored to receive an

award that demonstrates our unwavering commitment to them. Their selfless service exemplifies the values we work hard to live up to every day—integrity, respect,

teamwork, service, personal excellence and accountability, and winning.’’

I would also like to relate the level of support that I received from the employees

of Wachovia.

Soon after the deployment my department made me aware that they were starting a fund to donate airline miles so that my family could visit relatives while I

was deployed. My wife and two sons were able to travel to Pennsylvania during the

summer thanks to their generosity.

During the deployment I received from current and past co-workers more than 50

large and unbelievably well stocked care packages that I was able to distribute to

my battery. The flood of donations became so overwhelming that I started to donate

large quantities of items to other units attached to the 1/33rd Field Artillery whose

soldiers were not as fortunate to have such a dedicated support channel. The ReguVerDate 11-MAY-2000 17:21 Feb 15, 2006 Jkt 000000 PO 00000 Frm 00033 Fmt 6633 Sfmt 6621 24166.TXT SLABOR2 PsN: SLABOR2
30

lar Army soldiers were amazed when I told them I had received all the items from

work, and I was proud to tell them about the company and my experience. The care

packages included disposable cameras, food items, toiletries, games, books, magazines, signed banners of support, sun block, lip balm, insect repellant, and curiously,

a 12.5 pound box of sugar packets (which the coffee drinkers in the platoon took

as a Godsend). I also received Wachovia office forms in case I was missing work too

much. I can’t begin to imagine the effort involved, and I am sincerely grateful.

I received countless letters and e-mails extending support and prayers, and discovered that my colleagues had told our clients about my experiences. Some of these

clients, in turn, also started to send letters, e-mails, and packages to support me

in the field. I returned to an outpouring of support from not only my teammates

but also from individuals throughout the corporation, as I learned that my team had

been sharing my correspondence from Iraq throughout the company. I had an ever

larger group praying for my unit’s safe return, and am still struck when someone

whom I don’t recognize will come up to me and thank me for my service and share

with me that they too were praying for our safety.

Upon my return to work in March of this year, my Wachovia teammates helped

me raise over $2,000 for a severely wounded soldier in my platoon. My business unit

donated over $1,000 to a local non-profit, VALOR, which was conducting a fundraiser for my wounded soldier, and through the Wachovia charity matching funds

program, We Give, the corporation donated a matching amount.

Again, I take great pride in detailing the encouragement and assistance that I received as I deployed with the 30th Brigade, North Carolina National Guard to Operation Iraqi Freedom. Over the 17 months of the deployment process Wachovia was

more than an employer with deployed reservists; Wachovia was a partner to me in

the deployment. The company has created a culture of encouragement for its reservists consistent with our core values. The experiences of the soldiers in my unit who

did not receive the same level of support made me all the more grateful for my experience. It also made me acutely aware that more can be done to convince the employers of the thousands of reservist still on or entering active duty to fight the war

on terror how vital their support is to their citizen soldiers at home and downrange.

Thank you.

Senator ISAKSON. I thank all the members for their testimony. To

Wachovia and to Colt and to Home Depot, you are shining examples to the business community, and the contribution you are making to our country and to our men and women who work for you

and serve as guardsman or reservists is appreciated by your Nation

very much.

Ms. Bierman, tell me how you would envision the contract preference proposal that you made working.

Ms. BIERMAN. I don’t know if I would call it a preference, but I

just think some kind of a bill——

Senator ISAKSON. That was my word, that wasn’t yours.

Ms. BIERMAN [CONTINUING]. Right. First off, we have been soliciting the Federal Government for 25 years and most recently for 4

years to help rebuild Iraq, now help rebuild the Gulf Coast, and the

Federal Government, FEMA, Homeland Security, and the DOD. I

was actually—it was kind of their idea when I met and I had a

meeting with Secretary Rumsfeld. We were invited back to have a

meeting with him in his private conference room last year after the

awards and one of the under secretaries said, ‘‘We owe you.’’ And

I said, ‘‘Well, I never thought of it that way, and I don’t want any

handouts, but just help us get Government contracting opportunities, which we are working on anyway.’’

So that has come up. That particular under secretary actually

took me to the Chief Procurement Officer for all chem-bio personal

protective gear and it didn’t go anywhere. But I just think there

needs to be a bill. There are bills out there. We have bills for small

business. We have set-asides. I don’t like that term. I don’t like

goals and I don’t believe anyone owes us anything.

31

But in this particular case, in order for me to continue the good

that I do—I am a contributor to society and a good employer, and

to continue—this has all cost me money, coming to receive these

awards. You were kind enough to pay today, but most of the time

I come to Washington, DC, it is on my—all the time, it is on my

dime. I cannot continue to be a profitable, viable company without

growing my business and the best way to grow the business is with

the largest procurement agency in the world, the Federal Government.

So I have been actively seeking contractual agreements there for

4 years and I could use a little help, and I know I am not alone.

I think there needs to be some kind of a bill or a sponsorship or

names of those of us that have supported the Guard and Reserve

specifically in this case, that our name goes before those buying

agencies, that they take a really good, hard look at us.

Senator ISAKSON. Your testimony that when you lost 20 percent

of your employees due to deployment, in that same year, your profit reduction was 50 percent, that was a significant contribution

that Colt made to the United States Armed Forces. Your recommendation is intriguing and certainly what Colt has done, and

obviously what Home Depot and Wachovia, but in particular many

small businesses do certainly is something that ought to be known

and be a part of that process. The awareness alone of the contribution you are making ought to be a qualification at least for application purposes or knowledge purposes, if not anything else.

I wanted to ask that question because I would like to follow up

with you on that and see if there are not some ways that we can

elevate the visibility of those that are providing goods and services

that are also going above and beyond the call of duty on our men

and women in the Guard and the Reserve.

Ms. Nisenfeld, you made a comment—I think I heard it right—

that said there are lots of one-stops around the country, and I don’t

know whether you were referring to the Department of Labor onestops or private one-stops.

Ms. NISENFELD. Yes, the Department of Labor under the Workplace Investment Act.

Senator ISAKSON. OK. You then said, I think, and tell me if I

misheard this, that there wasn’t a good connection between them

and the military.

Ms. NISENFELD. Right. There are agreements between the Employment Service and the VA and other agencies to work together

and there are veterans’ reps in each agency. I think it would be

more helpful if we were simply given names of soldiers as they return and let us go find them and seek them out rather than wait

for them to show up on our doorsteps. There is a significant veterans’ presence in each one-stop center, but we need to go beyond

that. We need to use all of our resources to get these folks employed.

Senator ISAKSON. Mr. Hollingsworth, can you help make that

happen?

Mr. HOLLINGSWORTH. Sir, I can certainly take that message back

to the Secretary. We are more in the employer relationship business. We are not in the employee information business for the

32

guys, but I think that is a great idea for us to take back and pursue.

I know that General Blum has worked very diligently with that

for the Guard because he has made a corporation with some folks

called Helmets to Hardhats so that when they return, there is a

job opportunity there for them. I think that this is something that

we need to do more of. I think it is a no-cost item, it is just a matter of information flow and I would take that back, sir.

Senator ISAKSON. I thought it was an excellent suggestion and

the Department of Labor and the Department of Defense are two

parts of the same Government. I know Senator Murray, Senator

Jeffords, Senator Burr, and myself worked on The Workforce Investment Act and the one-stops and employment issues and there

ought to be a good connection so that the one-stops have that information and we can find those jobs for those veterans.

My time has expired. We will go back and do a second round if

other members would like to. Senator Murray?

Senator MURRAY. Thank you very much, Mr. Chairman.

Sergeant Fry, let me start with you. First of all, thank you so

much for your service and pass my thanks on to Wachovia for really an incredible outpouring of support from them, and it sounds

like your fellow employees, as well. Were you fortunate within your

unit or were there a lot of members of your unit who had similar

situations, or were there others who came back home and haven’t

been able to find a job?

Mr. FRY. There is a wide variety of experience within my unit

and I can speak to probably a battalion-sized element, maybe between 500 and 600 troops. We had troops that were receiving full

differential and partial differential in pay. There were 7 of us out

of 108, so that is not common.

Now, again, probably 30 percent of my troops were either college

students who were fresh out of high school or were unemployed, so

that skews the numbers slightly. But of the troops we had that

were activated, I am going to guess that probably half of those in

the senior levels, even more so, were impacted financially.

Senator MURRAY. Mr. Hollingsworth, are the employers you are

talking to interested in hiring Guard and Reserve members?

Mr. HOLLINGSWORTH. Yes, ma’am. As a matter of fact, there is

just an incredible outcropping of support for these young Guards

and Reserves coming back, not only the folks who are just returning normally but I have had opportunities to talk to many of the

businesses out there that are making slots available for the folks

that have had some severe injuries and they have promised that

they will ensure that no one in this country that sacrificed will go

without employment.

Senator MURRAY. Have any of them mentioned to you any of the

roadblocks or incentives that we can provide that would help encourage them to do that?

Mr. HOLLINGSWORTH. No, ma’am. They are all willing to do it.

There is nothing that the guys have said, we need to be

incentivized about, at all. We are just willing to do it because we

care about these young guardsman and reservists.

Senator MURRAY. Ms. Nisenfeld, has that been your experience?

33

Ms. NISENFELD. I would say we have had more mixed experience.

Employers certainly are anxious to tell, say that they support our

troops. When it comes down to individual businesses, particularly

small businesses, they are hesitant, and it is mostly fear of redeployment that we are hearing about.

Senator MURRAY. I have heard that a lot, too, especially seeing

the history of 13 and 14 months gone, back for 90 days, back out

again to the Gulf Coast or a short time later back to Iraq.

What can we do, and I have asked both Mr. Hollingsworth and

Ms. Nisenfeld, what can the Federal Government do to help businesses manage that aspect of hiring a Guard or Reserve member?

Mr. HOLLINGSWORTH. Senator Murray, I will go first, if it is

okay, Lisa. One of the things that, as I go around the country talking to employers, that I ask them, we are the employer advocate

within the Department of Defense, so I try to solicit information

from employers so I can take it back and keep our Department informed as to what the atmosphere is out there toward Guard and

Reserve service.

Continually, I will hear employers say, and I am talking large

and small employers, both public and private, that if you will give

us one thing, and that is predictability, we can manage the rest.

So, if you can tell us when they are going to go, when they are

going to come back, and give us advance notice on both of those

items, we can manage the rest. That is what our Department has

really emphasized.

Secretary Rumsfeld has said that we will give 30-day notice and

certainly the Department of the Army, which is the largest employer, user out there of these shared manpower assets, they are

really working hard to develop a predictable model so that employers will clearly know exactly when they can expect these young

men and young women to leave and come back.

Senator MURRAY. I am certain if that is implemented, that would

help a lot. Is there anything else, Ms. Nisenfeld?

Ms. NISENFELD. I think that something on the order of an on-thejob training subsidy for replacement workers would be helpful, and

this could be a very short-term approach to work with folks who

normally we would expect to be training people for long-term positions. In this case, we would know that that person was going to

be there for a short period of time. That would be an expected outcome. So just a little slight tweak to the system, we could provide

that assistance.

Senator MURRAY. Thank you. I see my time is running out, Mr.

Chairman. I have to get back to the floor. I am managing the

transportation bill, so I apologize, but I would like to submit some

of my other questions for the record.

Senator ISAKSON. Without objection.

Senator MURRAY. And I would like to thank all of the panelists

for being here today.

Ms. BIERMAN. Could I quickly respond to your original question,

Senator Murray, are small businesses and companies looking to

hire or not? It has always been our policy, and, of course, way before we got into the war situations, but I always look for guardsmen and reservists because we do highly technical—repair SCBAs

and breathing apparatus and gas monitors and sell them and reVerDate 11-MAY-2000 17:21 Feb 15, 2006 Jkt 000000 PO 00000 Frm 00037 Fmt 6633 Sfmt 6601 24166.TXT SLABOR2 PsN: SLABOR2
34

pair them. I mean, those guys are so smart. They know this stuff.

They have a mechanical background. So, like my last four technicians have been from the Guard and Reserves. So that is something I seek out just because of the knowledge, the work ethic that

these folks have.

Senator MURRAY. Thank you very much, Mr. Chairman.

Senator ISAKSON. Thank you, Senator Murray.

Senator Jeffords?

Senator JEFFORDS. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. I would like to

thank the witnesses for sharing their thoughts and insights. I

would also like to submit my opening statement for the record, Mr.

Chairman.

Senator ISAKSON. Without objection.

[The prepared statement of Senator Jeffords follows:]

PREPARED STATEMENT OF SENATOR JEFFORDS

Mr. Chairman, I would like to thank you for holding today’s

hearing on this very important issue. I would also like to thank the

witnesses for being here today.

Vermont has a long and proud tradition of a fine militia and dutiful citizen soldiers. The Green Mountain Boys, famously led by

brothers Ethan and Ira Allen, first organized to protect their land

claims against New York. In 1775, the Green Mountain boys captured Fort Ticonderoga from the British Army without firing a

shot. We Vermonters still refer to our National Guard as the Green

Mountain Boys.

Today, there are hundreds of them currently serving in Afghanistan and Iraq. When Members of the Army or Air National Guard

are called to active duty, they make a great many sacrifices.

Today’s hearing will help us better understand some of those sacrifices, and the sacrifices made by those employers and family

members who do not wear the uniform, and still are strongly affected by this call to duty.

Employers, especially those in rural areas and those who operate

small businesses, struggle to make due without key employees for

extended periods of time during deployments. This is a hardship

felt all across our country.

In Vermont, particularly in those communities that have a very

high proportion of Guard members or Reserves serving in Iraq or

Afghanistan, this strain on employers is felt acutely. A May 2,

2005, article from the Los Angeles Times tells the story of how

long-term deployment is affecting soldiers, employers, and families

in the small town Enosburg Falls, Vermont. Because so many of its

citizens have been activated, Enosburg’s men and women have felt

the pains of separation more than most.

I ask unanimous consent that a copy of this article be printed as

part of this hearing’s record.

The reality of most families today is that both parents work outside the home, and managing the day-to-day life of families is a

two-person job. When a soldier, airman, Marine, or sailor is deployed, family structures and their daily functioning are often severely affected. Any absence, especially absences of several months

due to a deployment overseas, can be debilitating.

35

The employers of family members are also affected, as the employee attempts to cope with greater burdens and fewer hands. In

an effort to help families cope with this hardship, Senator Feingold

and I introduced the Military Family Support Act of 2005 this

morning.

This bill would allow Federal employees who are caring for the

dependents of deployed service members additional flexibility in accessing the leave to which they are already entitled. This bill would

also establish a pilot program, run by the Department of Labor, to

provide businesses with guidance on how to be more flexible in administering leave for employees who are caregivers for dependents

of our activated service members.

The goal of the Military Family Support Act is to make life a little easier for those who remain behind. Our deployed soldiers are

able to give their best only if they are confident that their families

are doing okay on the home front.

We must do our best to assist in this effort for those who are already giving so much to for their country.

Mr. Chairman, thank you, and I look forward to hearing the testimony of our witnesses.

Senator JEFFORDS. America’s employers are proud of our men

and women in uniform and we are proud of the efforts employers

are making to keep the home fires burning while the troops are

away. Employers, especially those in rural areas, those who operate

small businesses, struggle to make do without key employees for

extended periods of time during deployments. This is a hardship

felt across the country.

In Vermont in particular, in these communities that have a very

high proportion of guardsman or reservists serving in Iraq or Afghanistan, the strain on employers, therefore, is acute.

The reality of most families today is that both the parents work

outside of the home, managing the day-to-day life of families and

two-person jobs. When a soldier, airman, or sailor is deployed, family structures and their daily functioning are often severely affected. The employers of family members are also affected as the

employees attempt to cope with greater burdens and fewer hands.

In an effort to assuage this hardship, Senator Feingold and I introduced the Military Family Support Act of 2005 this morning.

Our bill would allow Federal employees who are caring for dependents of deployed service members additional flexibility in accessing

the leave to which they are already entitled. This bill will also establish a pilot program run by the Department of Labor to provide

businesses with the guidance on how to be more flexible in administering leave for employees who are caregivers for dependents of

our men and women serving overseas.

The goal of the Military Family Support Act is to make life a little easier for those who remain behind. Our deployed soldiers are

able to give their best only if they are confident that their families

are doing okay at home.

I understand that the witnesses have not had an opportunity to

study this legislation. However, I would appreciate each of your reactions to my description of this legislation, and it will be available

to you. I guess I am just going to go on to questions here. Do you

see this legislation as necessary and helpful as I have described it?

36

Do you see any problems with the OPM implementing the Federal

employee provisions of this bill? Is it your experience that most employers are willing to be flexible in this regard? If so, for how long,

and how do you think this program will be greeted in the private

sector? Do you have copies? No, you don’t. Sorry.

Senator ISAKSON. Does anyone want to take a stab based on the

Senator’s description?

Mr. HOLLINGSWORTH. Sir, I would just like to say that anything

that we do for those families, that really does provide some really

needed assistance to them, but it will have an impact financially

on the employers and I think we need to look very closely at that.

I would defer an answer as to how that would impact our employers to some of our colleagues here because they have a little bit

better knowledge of their impact upon them from a financial perspective.

But certainly we applaud anything that our employers do. They

lean forward in such a terrific manner already and I just want to

express my appreciation to all of those great Americans out there

that have done what they have for our Guard and Reserves.

Senator JEFFORDS. Thank you. Any other comment? I understand

without a copy before you, I guess it is a little difficult.

Thank you, Mr. Chairman.

Senator ISAKSON. Thank you, Senator Jeffords.

I am going to continue with a few more questions. I will be

happy to let Senator Jeffords or any other Senator who comes in

ask a few more, too, but there have been some very beneficial suggestions made and a couple of them haven’t been mentioned and

I want to follow up on them.

Ms. Nisenfeld, again, I want to make sure I heard it right, because I was writing and listening at the same time, but you made

a comment with regard to those leaving the military once they are

coming home, and I think you were referring to reservists and

guardsmen, because that is the focus of this, and I think you said

the usefulness of the information provided them as they left was

not helpful at the time and what you meant were they were leaving, they were going home, they were getting out, so they get a

whole lot of information and then there was nothing to follow. Is

that correct?

Ms. NISENFELD. That is correct. Sometimes, there are employment seminars down the road that have been funded in a variety

of places and some of the soldiers participate in that. But at the

time of separation, they are pretty much thinking about what they

are going to do in the next 20 minutes, not long-term.

Senator ISAKSON. Right. Lieutenant Colonel Izen, I am going to

ask Mr. Donovan if he will share his microphone with you for just

a minute. I don’t want to catch you off guard. I know you weren’t

expecting it.

First of all, we have thanked Mr. Fry for his service. We want

to thank you and all the members here for their service to the

country. But in light of that statement, and I know you are still

associated with the Marine Corps and you aren’t out looking for

employment, but are you familiar in the Corps or any other branch

of the service with how they are provided information and how

much follow-up there is beyond severance?

37

Lt. Colonel IZEN. Sir, I am more familiar with, on the active duty

side of the house, the TAP programs that were already addressed.

I did serve as an advisor to a Reserve unit for 3 years. We mobilized reservists, but I left before we started bringing them back. I

believe that Ms. Nisenfeld had it right. There are some programs

that are out there, but generally speaking, these are National

Guardsmen and Reservists that have been pulled away from their

families and they are excited about getting home and it is very difficult to provide meaningful instruction in that short period of time.

Senator ISAKSON. Sergeant Fry, or Mr. Fry, whichever you would

prefer me to address you by, you were nodding your head vigorously there. Do you want to make a comment?

Mr. FRY. It is a very quick process, Senator. When we came

back—it took us 3 weeks of State active duty and 5 months of Title

X Federal active duty to deploy to Iraq, and most of my troops were

released, unless they were in a medical hold status, within about

7 days. After a 4 day family leave with almost 16 months receiving

family separation allowance, you have to remember, when the

guardsman deploys, they leave their families to go to training

bases. They don’t have the opportunity the active duty does. As

they train up for deployment, their family is with them. So having

been separated for almost 16 months, it is very hard to get them

to focus on the benefits that they are receiving.

Once separated, we have had follow-ups, and most of those are

medical, dental, and counseling, but we have not received in my

unit, in my experience, having been back now over 6 months, we

have not received any vocational or educational or other work-related information from the Government except on a one-off basis.

Now, the local Veterans’ Departments, once your name is in that

database, they will contact you, and myself and my unit members

have been contacted through the local veterans’ organizations and

VA.

Senator ISAKSON. That is a very helpful point that you have

made and both your comments lead me to believe there probably

would be some things we could do to help get the branches of the

service to have maybe a 90-day or 180-day after-severance period

where they go back to the service men who had been deployed or

the reservists and say, did you remember X, Y, and Z is available,

and Senator Murray made a good comment.

Since the liberation of Iraq and since Operation Enduring Freedom, we have come to recognize that there needed to be some

equalization of benefits for guardsmen and reservists with regular

active duty personnel, particularly because of the tremendous dependence we have had in this battle, and I think this is an area

we can help. I think in active duty, there is better follow-up

postseverance than there probably is in the Guard and Reserve and

that is probably because we have been more used to having to do

it with regular duty people and not used to having such a large

component of our Reserves called up. So I appreciate that suggestion.

A second suggestion that you referred to was a tax credit. I think

I heard this right. You were talking about a tax credit to small

businesses for the training of the person that fills the role of the

reservist when they are called up, is that correct?

38

Ms. NISENFELD. Yes.

Senator ISAKSON. So in other words, if I was—well, Ms. Bierman

is a small business person. If she lost one of her people for a 9-

month or 12-month deployment, then she could get a tax credit for

the cost to train that person’s replacement who is hired just for

that temporary period of time, is that correct?

Ms. NISENFELD. That is correct. We have a standing formula for

that, which is half the wage for 6 months in the Workforce Investment Act system. That would be a simple formula to apply.

Senator ISAKSON. And you would do that at a small business

threshold?

Ms. NISENFELD. I think it is most acute for small businesses.

Senator ISAKSON. OK. Yes, ma’am?

Ms. BIERMAN. I believe the SBA had a program, and it was like

a $50,000 loan or something like that, and we found out about it.

Deputy Secretary Melanie Sablehouse had said, ‘‘Christine, you

need to go after this,’’ and I think I missed the date by a couple

of days. It was a year you had to go back. And it was actually,

frankly, it was a loan. I don’t need any more loans.

Senator ISAKSON. There is a lot of difference between loans and

credits.

Ms. BIERMAN. You had to fill out tons and tons of paperwork to

do it. It wasn’t worth my time and energy and it would not have

even covered the loss that we had in direct result to the sales and

service in Jim’s department, which was—but on two really positive

notes, Jim, our Master Sergeant, Jim Mixco, who was a 9 year employee and director of all my technical sales and service, I mean,

he sells directly to Homeland Security and fire departments and

highly technical equipment, he was ready to retire, but then there

was the stop-loss so he couldn’t retire.

He has gone on to, after all this is over, he has actually reenlisted and he is going to school now to get a degree in business.

So he is always calling me on weekends now, tell me about this,

how did you start the company? So he is writing all these papers.

So he has reenlisted, but I keep hoping they don’t take him away

for very long, but reenlisted. He is going back to school.

And then my young man, Specialist Joey Petry, has now left our

company. He was an hourly employee in my warehouse and he has

left the company to go to school full-time and I guess they are

going on the GI Bill. So I think those are both very positive things

that came out of the things that the Government has to offer our

guardsmen and reservists.

Senator ISAKSON. Well, it is a meaningful recommendation. I was

sitting here thinking about what Home Depot and what Wachovia

would think about a benefit, i.e. a tax credit for a small business

that you might not propose for a larger one, but as I think about

it, it is one thing for a company that has 325,000 employees today,

and it will go to 400,000 probably over the next 2 years. Actually,

when you hire that replacement to take the job the guardsman did

while they are activated, by the time that guardsman comes back,

you need that trained employee and you are probably not going to

replace that replacement. They will probably work somewhere in

the system.

39

The same thing would probably be true with the bank, whereas

if it is 2 of 17 people, that is a huge impact on the business, and

if you hired somebody, you probably wouldn’t keep them once the

person came back. So it is a worthwhile suggestion.

And again, with your comment of the State of Washington, the

81st Brigade, 40 percent were unemployed, but I think you said

most of those were unemployed when they were called up, too,

most of them probably would have been more employable in a

small business than a large business, I would guess.

Senator Jeffords, did you have any further questions?

Senator JEFFORDS. Yes. Mr. Fry, you mentioned that your wife

had to quit her job when you were deployed because she could not

get child care during nontraditional hours. How typical is this of

a problem? Do you think that this is a widespread problem for activated guardsmen and reservists?

Mr. FRY. Senator, I have noticed that at least in a handful of instances, we probably had four or five troops within my companysized element that had similar problems. Child care, when you take

one of the parents out of the equation, child care becomes increasingly difficult. If you are like the majority of my unit, around a

metropolitan area, most of the guardsmen are not from that area.

Most of their families are not from there. In some of the more rural

units, yes, you have a much wider network of support. But around

metropolitan areas where most of the National Guard and Reserves

are, yes, that becomes a problem.

There were at least five of us that had similar circumstances.

And while the reservist is covered by Federal legislation, the

spouses, they can’t get a leave of military absence because they are

not in the service.

Senator JEFFORDS. Do others have comment on that?

Ms. NISENFELD. Senator, any health care professional who has to

work odd shifts will tell you that getting odd-shift child care remains very difficult, even in urban areas. So soldiers who have

spouses in those industries are—I totally agree with Sergeant Fry.

They are having a very difficult time.

Senator JEFFORDS. Any other comments?

[No response.]

Senator JEFFORDS. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.

Senator ISAKSON. Thank you, Senator Jeffords.

I have one last question. There was one last suggestion that was

made about fully-transferrable military credits for employment certification. I take it what you meant by that was if they are a mechanic in the military or if they are a teacher in the military or

something that requires certification in the private sector, that the

military experience be prima facie evidence of alternative certification in the private sector, is that correct?

Ms. NISENFELD. That is correct, and there has been much

progress on that topic nationally, I understand. It has been something of a challenge to get the different branches of the military,

what the training consists of and then kind of reconcile one with

the other. But for things that require State certification, driving

trucks and many health care occupations, we really need to reconcile those two, and there are many different licensing boards to

contend with in every State.

40

Senator ISAKSON. Yes, and there are many different professional

organizations that are into turf protection, and that is not a criticism of anybody, but I know—and I chaired the State Board of

Education in Georgia, where we developed a Troops to Teachers

Program where we gave alternative certification to retired military

personnel to go into the classroom and teach on a fast-track method because of their experience and it worked extremely well, but

there was a lot of reluctance by everybody else to let somebody else

go in a different way or an alternative way.

All those suggestions are very good. I want to thank Mr. Hollingsworth for his being here today and hope he will take the suggestion with connecting the one-stops and DOD together. I think

that was an excellent suggestion.

To representatives of Wachovia and Home Depot and Colt, thank

you again for what you do for your country and for your employees

who are serving our country.

Ms. Nisenfeld, thank you for your very valuable suggestions. You

are probably the closest person to seeing the problem and putting

a face on it of anybody here, because these other people are the solution. You see a lot of the ones who are suffering because there

aren’t as many employers as we need doing these good things.

We want to thank you all for your contribution to your country.

Thank you for coming to this hearing and testifying today.

Unless there is other business, and I am the last one standing

and I don’t think there is, this meeting is adjourned.

[Additional material follows.]

41

ADDITIONAL MATERIAL

COLT SAFETY, FIRE, RESCUE,

November 12, 2005.

RESPONSE TO QUESTIONS OF SENATOR KENNEDY AND SENATOR JEFFORDS BY

CHRISTINE BIERMAN

QUESTIONS OF SENATOR KENNEDY

Ms. Bierman, you are very generous to continue the salary and benefits of your

reservists. As you testified, losing 20 percent of your workforce to deployments was

obviously a strain on your firm. Many small businesses may not be able to survive

the loss of a few reservists.

Questions. At what point does the loss of reservists threaten the viability of a

small business? What is the greatest hardship you faced as a result of the deployment of two of your employees?

You suggested that the Government should increase the number of contracts to

small business who support their reservists. What other incentives could the Government offer to encourage employers to do the right thing for their reservists?

Answer. I will be very honest with you . . . the loss of Master Sgt. Jim Mixco

directly impacted our business financially. That coupled with rising health care

costs and fuel surcharge increases etc. almost took us down after 25 years in business.

We continued paying Jim’s full salary as other costs of doing business escalated.

Being the forever optimist and certain we would close at least one of the many Government contracts we had been working on, we continued down the same path.

After winning the Secretary of Defense Freedom Award, we were actually told by

an undersecretary at the Pentagon that ‘‘We Owe you and with what you have to

sell, fits right in with what we buy.’’

He then was kind enough to seek out yet another avenue for me to call on for

business. That call was with the Chairman of the Joint Chem Bio Warfare program.

The person who specifies exactly what is worn by the soldiers. A few of those items

are off the shelf items sitting in my warehouse on any given day. The Brigadier

General told me I would have to go back to FedBiz Ops to look for opportunities.

That is an area I had been soliciting since my first year in business 25 years ago.

That is the infamous Government maze of an outsider and a small business trying

to get their foot in the door. Agencies continue to give billions of dollars of NO BID

contracts to the same big businesses and are not even questioned or held accountable for not meeting diversity or small business goals. These agencies can lose billions of dollars of tax payers dollars and not account for any spending . . . with no

questions asked.

I will never understand it . . . but while it is has begun to affect me personally

and professionally, I am having great difficulty remaining quiet on the subject and

have spoken to my Senator and the House Small Business Committee and the leaders office regarding these issues.

Not even increasing, but affording a few contracts to small businesses like mine

who go above and beyond the call of duty in supporting our Guard and Reserve, will

assure our viability in business so that we can continue to do the good that we do.

It will afford us the wherewithal to continue to be CONTRIBUTORS in our society.

In addition to offering quality services at better prices and accountability when

spending tax payers dollars.

QUESTION OF SENATOR JEFFORDS

Question. Please provide any comments you have in regard to the programs proposed in the Military Family Support Act of 2005, S. 1888. I would greatly appreciate having your insights as to how you would take advantage of this legislation

or how this legislation could be improved. Thanks for your assistance.

Answer. Both of Colt’s employees who were activated and have now returned, are

taking advantage of the GI Bill and enrolled in college. This is a very good thing.

We as an employer did our part while they were gone to stay in touch with their

families and offer support in their absence. Employers large and small can continue

to support their Guard and Reserve when they too are compensated. And I do not

mean with hand outs. It just makes sense that the largest procurement agency in

the world, the U.S. Government would be happy and lucky to do business with those

that have given extraordinarily to our citizen soldiers.

42

Again I am asking your committee to author a bill that will compensate by way

of Government contracts, those specifically small businesses that support our Guard

and Reserve specifically in the way that Colt Safety, Fire and Rescue has done.

Respectfully submitted,

CHRISTINE J. BIERMAN

RESPONSE TO QUESTIONS OF SENATOR KENNEDY AND SENATOR JEFFORDS BY DENNIS

DONOVAN

QUESTION OF SENATOR KENNEDY

Question. What would you recommend that a model employer adopt to show support for guardsmen and reservists? Could you cite examples from your current employer, and past employer?

Answer. Each organization should adopt practical policies that they can fully support and develop programs that make sense for their own organization, recognizing

that all employers are different and have differing abilities to accommodate the

needs of their workforce in this area. At The Home Depot, we feel it is extremely

important to support those who are defending our rights and protecting our freedoms. Since 2002, The Home Depot has had approximately 1,800 associates called

to active duty for the current Iraqi conflict. The Home Depot has implemented an

extended and enhanced leave of absence benefit for our deployed associates. In 2004,

the company joined forces with the Departments of Defense, Labor and Veterans Affairs to launch Operation Career Front, an unprecedented program that supports

America’s military job seekers, including veterans, separating active duty service

members, National Guard members, reservists and military spouses. Our support

of the military stretches into our community efforts, as well. Through our Project

Homefront program, the company donated $1 million and our associates gave back

1 million volunteer hours to repair the homes of deployed associates. Our commitment is something we take very seriously at The Home Depot.

QUESTION OF SENATOR JEFFORDS

Question. Please provide any comments you have in regard to the programs proposed in the Military Family Support Act of 2005, S. 1888. I would greatly appreciate having your insights as to how you would take advantage of this legislation

or how this legislation could be improved. Thanks for your assistance.

Answer. We have found that the model where Government gives the companies

the flexibility to do what makes sense for each organization works very well. We

view our support of the military as our responsibility to our country, and as a valuable investment in our company’s future. All of the policies and programs we have

developed to support the men and women who are defending our freedoms have

been on our own accord. We were not told to implement these programs, but rather

we chose to do so because our company feels it is important to take care of people

who are defending our country.

RESPONSE TO QUESTION OF SENATOR JEFFORDS BY BOB HOLLINGSWORTH

Question 6. Please provide any comments you have in regard to the programs proposed in the Military Family Support Act of 2005, S. 1888. I would greatly appreciate having your insights as to how you would take advantage of this legislation

or how this legislation could be improved.

Answer 6. While commenting on this legislation is not in my area of expertise or

responsibility, I conferred with members of the Personnel and Readiness staff and

this is our response. The purpose of the act is to permit employees to use sick leave

(including leave received under a leave transfer program) in the same manner as

annual leave, in order to serve as a ‘‘caregiver.’’

Current title 5 provisions limit use of sick leave to specific circumstances—e.g.,

caring for a family member who is incapacitated by a medical condition, attending

to a family member who is receiving an examination or treatment. This proposal

would permit a ‘‘caregiver’’ to use sick leave in the same manner as annual leave

is used—i.e., it does not restrict use of sick leave to specific circumstances.

A number of civilian employees, especially those employed by the Department of

Defense, have close working/personal relationships with soldiers deployed to Iraq

and Afghanistan. In many instances, the employees are spouses who are relatively

new to the organization and who have not accrued large amounts of annual and sick

leave. When a deployed soldier depends on an individual at home to assume family

responsibilities, it is in the best interest of the Department to allow an employee

43

(designated by the soldier as a caregiver) access to all of his or her available sick

and annual leave. The caregiver can use the leave to accomplish the legal, financial,

parental, and medical duties normally performed by the deployed soldier. Access to

more personal leave (and any leave received under a leave transfer program) makes

it less likely affected employees would be placed in a leave-without-pay status or

forced to resign when performing duties necessary for the support of a deployed soldier and his or her family.

Current provisions require that an employee be dealing with a ‘‘medical emergency’’ in order to be a recipient of donated leave. This proposal would deem ‘‘caregiver’’ status to be a medical emergency—thereby qualifying employees designated

as caregivers to receive donated leave. This leave could then be used in the same

manner as annual leave.

Enactment of the enhanced leave flexibility would enable designated caregivers to

more effectively fulfill their roles, and would thereby help maintain the readiness

of the Armed Forces by helping to ensure adequate caregiver coverage during potential periods of prolonged deployments. This benefit will enable our Armed Forces to

prepare for their family’s well-being and security during their deployment, and will

go a long way in easing the stress and burden associated with deployment.

As a matter of policy, the Department of Defense (DOD) would encourage supervisors and managers of civilian employees to approve caregiver leave requests to the

maximum extent possible without causing an adverse impact on mission accomplishment. The Department also would publicize caregiver leave user eligibility for DOD

Component leave transfer programs to its workforce and encourage the Military Departments and Defense Agencies to ensure full employee support and participation.

The legislation could be improved with the following changes:

• Do not require qualified employees to exhaust their personal sick and annual

leave accounts prior to using leave transferred to them as required under the provisions of subchapter III of chapter 63 of title 5, United States Code (U.S.C.). Currently, 5 U.S.C. 6333(b) reads ‘‘A leave recipient may use annual leave received

under this subchapter . . . except that any annual leave, and sick leave, accrued

or accumulated by the leave recipient and available for the purpose involved must

be exhausted before any transferred annual leave may be used.’’

• Allow leave donors to donate sick leave as well as annual leave to caregiver

leave recipients. Sick leave transfer is currently not possible under 5 U.S.C. 6332,

which reads ‘‘Notwithstanding a program under which annual leave accrued or accumulated by an employee may be transferred to the annual leave account of any

other employee if such other employee requires additional leave because of a medical emergency.’’

• Expand the definition of member of the Armed Forces in section 2(a)(1)(E) of

the Military Family Support Act of 2005, S. 1888 to provide coverage to Department

of Defense civilian employees deployed in support of contingency operations. Civilian

employees require the same degree of family support as do the active duty members

with whom they serve.

• Delete the age requirement. This is an artificial limitation and may likely stand

in the way of obtaining the services of a skilled and appropriate caregiver. As long

as the Federal employee is deemed to be a suitable caregiver by the individual requiring the care, the Federal employee should be permitted to use sick leave to provide the care, regardless of age.

We suggest that the committee consult with the Department of Labor and the Office of Personnel Management on the impact of the provisions that affect them.

RESPONSE TO QUESTIONS OF SENATOR KENNEDY BY BOB HOLLINGSWORTH

Question 1. General Hollingsworth, thank you for those positive stories about employers and the variety of ways they’ve supported our troops. How have the longer

deployments—15 months and longer—affected employers, especially small or nonprofit businesses?

Answer 1. Employer hardships increase the longer the employee is gone. The

smaller the business, the more significant the absence. Overall, many managers indicate 1 year is the maximum, not the optimum, period of leave.

In a recent survey of Reserve component employers sponsored by the Henry M.

Jackson Foundation for the Advancement of Military Medicine and the Uniform

Services University of Health Sciences entitled Attitudes, Experiences and Intentions

of Employers of Reserve Component Members Concerning Employee Participation in

the National Guard and Reserve, roughly 15 percent of employers report a negative

effect on operations as a result of the temporary loss of employees due to military

service. Overall, the survey concludes that support for the Reserve components is

44

very high, and appears to be durable, among all types of organizations and categories of managers.

Employers’ main concerns appear to center around the uncertainty of the timing

and the durations of instances in which they temporarily lose an employee to military duty, not with the burden of compliance. Most suggestions made by employers

for improving their compliance with USERRA relate in one way or another to receiving adequate advance notice of the pending temporary loss of an employee and limiting the amount of time they are away from the job.

Question 2. GAO has just completed a report suggesting that the four agencies

involved in protecting the rights of Service members are actually not serving our

troops well. The agencies have incompatible information collection systems. Because

no one agency is responsible for tracking complaints from start to finish, the claims

can languish for months, or even years. Shockingly, GAO found that despite a requirement to collect information about reservists’ civilian employers, the Department of Defense still lacks this information on nearly 40 percent of reservists.

Obviously, complete information about civilian employers of reservists and National Guard members is a vital part of protecting Service members’ rights and educating employers about their responsibilities. Would you support (1) having one

agency perform oversight of complaints and (2) increasing collection of this critical

information about civilian employers?

Answer 2. Yes, ESGR strongly supports having one agency perform oversight of

complaints. Currently, the collection systems are incompatible. The infrastructure of

the data bases differ which creates a challenge for sharing and tracking data. The

Department of Labor (DOL) has enforcement authority and many years of experience and expertise in dealing with the complaint process for Service members. DOL

has an established system for data collection; therefore, it is uniquely qualified to

oversee the complaint process and the collection of data.

Concerning the second question, supporting increased collection of critical civilian

employer information, Department of Defense answers with a strong yes. We have

made the process as painless as possible by utilizing a web based application.

Question 3. GAO conducted a survey of the ombudsmen, who are all volunteers

performing the invaluable task of helping Service members resolve problems with

their reemployment. The role will only grow in importance as more National

Guardsman and Reservists return. GAO found that although nearly 100 percent of

participants said they had completed basic ombudsman training, two-thirds said

they hadn’t had any advanced ombudsman training, and 80 percent had no mediation training.

What plans do you have to increase the level of training for the ombudsmen and

volunteers, and how can we assist in giving volunteers the level of training they

need to support returning Service members more effectively?

Answer 3. ESGR is pleased that GAO substantiated our statement—nearly 100

percent of the ESGR Volunteer ombudsmen (711 as of December 7, 2005), have received basic ombudsman training.

Before January 2005, mediation training was considered ‘‘advanced’’ training and

provided as a separate course. However, in January 2005 the ombudsman basic

course was modified to include mediation training.

To provide mediation training to those ombudsmen who have completed the early

version of the basic ombudsman course, our initiatives include developing web based

interactive learning products. Our Strategic Plan for fiscal year 2006 identifies numerous training requirements and we are seeking resources to support the development of these distance-learning products.

Finally, we are validating training needs by seeking input from those volunteers

we serve. A training subcommittee has been chartered to validate assumptions

made by the National Committee and to guide the comprehensive training needs of

the entire organization.

Question 4. Your testimony discussed examples of businesses that offer differential pay. Do you have any statistics about Service members who haven’t been able

to get differential pay or other benefits? Are there areas we should be pursuing to

help Guard members and Reserves whose employers can’t offer costly benefits for

long periods of deployment?

Answer 4. Many employers choose to go ‘‘above and beyond’’ what USERRA requires in supporting their employees who serve in the Reserve components. Differential pay is an example of an ‘‘above and beyond’’ human resource policy. ESGR

encourages employers to go ‘‘above and beyond,’’ but we recognize that differential

pay can carry a substantial price tag for the employer. Other examples of ‘‘above

and beyond’’ support include recognition for employees who serve in the Reserve

45

components and frequent communication with the employee and the employee’s

family while he or she is deployed.

We are currently conducting surveys to determine how many employers go ‘‘above

and beyond.’’ Over 4,400 employers have signed ESGR Statements of Support indicating that they have employment policies that go ‘‘above and beyond’’ the requirements of USERRA.

The number one request we receive from employers is that we provide them predictability. They want to know when the guardsman or reservist will be needed, approximately how long they will be gone, and when they will return to work. The

Department of Defense has made great strides to provide at least 30 days notice

of activations. We encourage Reserve component members to communicate frequently with their employers before the activation, during the activation, and after

the activation.

Question 5. Have you heard examples of families who have no health insurance

while one parent is deployed and the other parent works at home or works only

part-time without benefits?

Answer 5. I am not aware of any such examples. Employers of Reserve component

members activated for less than 30 days must continue to provide their normal

health insurance benefits. When a Reserve component member is activated for more

than 30 days, the member and his or her dependents qualify for military healthcare

benefits.

RESPONSE TO QUESTIONS OF SENATOR KENNEDY AND SENATOR JEFFORDS BY LISA

NISENFELD

QUESTIONS OF SENATOR KENNEDY

On February 28th in Boston, I organized a Veterans Employment Summit, with

leaders in the business community, State and Federal agencies, representatives

from the Massachusetts National Guard and members of our armed forces to discuss

the economic and health care challenges faced by soldiers and their families returning from Iraq and Afghanistan. Central to the discussion were the employment opportunities available to soldiers, and the most effective way to put the new skills

they’ve learned overseas to good use back home in Massachusetts.

Questions. I understand you’ve worked closely with veterans in Washington State

to help them find jobs. What programs have worked well for you? What should we

be doing to see that our veterans and reservists know about all the opportunities

available to them?

Answers. Many efforts are underway in Washington State to better connect the

State’s workforce development system with soldiers returning from active duty. We

have raised particular concerns about returning National Guard and Reserve soldiers because the current pattern of deployment for these forces is unprecedented.

Most Americans assumed that these individuals would simply return to their prior

activities, not fully understanding the complexities of their lives following deployment. Because of this, it is difficult to say that any programs or strategies have

worked well—it is simply too soon to say.

It is encouraging to note, however, that the Senate’s interest in this subject has

engendered substantial activity in the States to address these issues. Senator Patty

Murray has shined a light on these problems in Washington State, moving officials

throughout the State to close gaps and align resources to help these soldiers reenter their lives and communities with good jobs.

Washington officials have discovered a way to cross bureaucratic hurdles and provide contact information on returning soldiers, including National Guard and Reserve members, to local One-Stop Employment Centers. In our region we will be actively and repeatedly reaching out to these individuals when they come home and

for several months afterwards. We will not simply wait until they show up on our

doorstep. We want them to know that we appreciate the sacrifices they have made

for our Nation and that we will do our part to help them succeed. They are the highest priority customers for services under the Workforce Investment Act and we will

work with them and track results for at least a year following employment.

Washington officials are also working across agency lines to promote focused hiring programs among employers, to recognize exemplary employers (in concert with

Federal efforts) and to assure that State and local human services efforts are working together on these issues. We recognize that there is a well-developed system to

help traditional veterans and it is our intention that the State’s efforts will complement and augment these services.

46

A significant concern that many have voiced recently relates to mental health

issues and the returning civilian soldiers. Many are not ready to jump back into jobs

as soon as they return home. They need time to decompress and to address the

many challenges that may have come up at home during deployment. Others may

not experience mental health issues for several months following their return.

The current system of health care for veterans is overloaded and has difficulty responding to these mental health needs in a timely manner. If these mental health

issues are addressed in a timely manner, they are less likely to become major barriers that could eventually affect all aspects of the soldier’s life eventually.

We suggest that the Congress consider providing limited term mental health

vouchers, similar to those provided to Hurricane Katrina victims, allowing community mental health centers to provide counseling for returning soldiers. Such counseling would occur in concert with employment services from the One-Stop Employment Centers. More serious cases would then be referred to the Veterans Administration for follow up.

QUESTION OF SENATOR JEFFORDS

Question. Please provide any comments you have in regard to the program proposed in the Military Family Support Act of 2005, S. 1888. I would greatly appreciate having your insights as to how you would take advantage of this legislation

or how this legislation could be improved.

Summary of S. 1888

To allow Federal employees who are caring for the dependents of deployed service members additional flexibility in accessing the leave to which they are already entitled. To establish a pilot program, run by the Department of Labor,

to provide businesses with guidance on how to be more flexible in administering

leave for employees who are caregivers for dependents of our activated service

members.

The goal of the Military Family Support Act is to make life a little easier for those

who remain behind.

Answer. We have anecdotal evidence that some caregivers have been forced to

leave their jobs to care for others while the caregiver’s spouse is deployed, although

it isn’t clear how extensive this problem is. When this situation occurs, the following

elements may be helpful:

• Assign the caregiver similar high priority to that received by veterans in the

Nation’s One-Stop Employment system. An immediate family member in such a situation would often benefit from a job with a different schedule or improved arrangements for dependents.

• Consider allowing unemployment benefits for caregivers who must leave their

jobs because of a deployment.

• Provide a technical support hotline for caregivers to learn about their options

before deciding to leave a job. With some coaching, some people will be able to work

with their employers to work out a more flexible employment arrangement. A hotline arrangement might work (if publicized appropriately through the military) because caregivers often have difficulty leaving the home.

• Consider expanding the ‘‘soldier and family support’’ model used by the Army

Reserve. In our region a single staff person is responsible for hundreds of families

across 12 States. This model (perhaps with some increase in staffing) should be considered for use with National Guard units as well. Further, these representatives

can be assisted by One-Stop and other community resources if they are given some

assistance in learning about the availability of those resources in various areas.

Extending sick leave benefits for Federal employees is a good thought, but will

have very little impact in our region. It will probably be more significant in areas

with many Federal employees.

It is less clear, however, that proposing to provide technical assistance to employers about how to apply sick leave benefits to caregivers will be a successful strategy.

Some of the national human resource associations would probably be willing to step

forward and help get information out to companies throughout the country—at little

or no cost to the Federal Government. It is probably more critical to assure that

the families of our service men and women know that their communities stand

ready to support them through these difficult times and provide them with information on where to turn for help.

Thank you for caring about these matters and please do not hesitate to contact

me if you have further questions or concerns.

[Whereupon, at 3:25 p.m., the subcommittee was adjourned.]

47

Æ