Evening star., 1932-02-24
No Preference Given
To Veterans in Fact

10 the Editor OF The Star:
/ have read with q great deal OF
| interest the statement made in a let
| ter published in The Star over the
signature of Mickie Barker, that many
advantages are given the veteran in
search of employment by both private
and Government employers Mr.. Bark
er's letter Is fairly written. but, I be-
lieve, without a knowledge Of the sub
, ject under discussion.
Far from receiving preference
from private employers, IL has been my
experience. and hundreds of cases
come to my desk monthly, that 1t is
much more difficult for a veteran to
obtain a JOB than it is for a non-vet-
eran to obtain one. The reason for
this is that practically all veterans suf-
fer vocational handicap due directly
to their service in the late war. Dur
ing the period of their life that is
usually spent in attending schools of
higher learning, starting at the bottom
in low-paid jobs, or learning a trade
l might say during the time that
Mickie Barker was attending high
school and thereby obtaining advan-
tages that will stand him in good stead
later on-theSe veterans were in the
Army and Navy. They went in as
boys, came out as men, unframed men
in so far as earning a living is con-
cerned and have suffered, vocation
ally, ever since. These claims are
proved by the fact that while the vet
erans are but 10 per cent of the wage
earners of the country, they compose
over IS per cent of the unemployed.
In other words, In proportion three
veterans are out Of work for each two
non veterans Does that lcok as
though they were obtaining preference?
The veteran of the World War who
is not suffering from a disability in
Cured as a result of his service is en-
titled to 5 per cent preference in
the matter of civil service eXamina-
tions Any person who has ever con-
Quoted examinations Of a general ma
ture knows that there can be a 5-point
difference in marking the same papers
by different instructors, so it may be
readily seen that this 5-point prefer
ence amounts to very little.
In order that we may compare the
treatment of tie Government relative
to civil service positions sought by
veterans and non-veterans, let US COM
pare two cases. one of a man who went
in the Army during the war and one
who did not. On April 7, 1917, two
men went into the Government Serv-
ice One became Pvt. John Smith and
the other became Clerk John Smith of
the Bureau Of Fisheries. Both had the
same qualifications as to education.
Pvt. John Smith got $40 per month.
Clerk John Smith got $l20 per month.
Pvt. John Smith goes to France,
fights valiantly and comes back in
1919. The war was over. but the dura-
ton had just begun, and by the time
Pvt. John Smith gets out Of the Armv
1t Is. for one reason or another, April
7, 1922, five years after his enlistment.
Also. on April Z. 1922 Clerk John
Smith decides to resign from his job
because he has an opportunity to make
more money elsewhere.
In April, 1881. the Smiths both lose
their jobs. Both have families to sup
port and both apply to their Govern
ment, which they have served faith
fully, and ask for jobs as clerks.
To Clerk John Smith the Civil Serv-
ice Commission is able to say:
"Oh, yes, Mr.. Smith, you served your
country well for five years and you
are, therefore, entitled to reinstate-
ment without examination"
To ex-Pvt. John Smith the Civil
Service Commission must say:
Sorry, Mr.. Smith. You served your
country well for five years, during and
alCer the WdI buI you served as n
soldier and not as a clerk. Therefore,
the Government cannot give you q
job"
There Is your veterans preference.
I never met a veteran who would not
change places with the man who served
his Government as a clerk, except for
the fact that they know that II it were
not for the veterans there would be
no United States here for the young
men Of today to seek to serve for
patriotism and profit" But with pens
and not guns.
JOHN ARTHUR SHAW.
Director, Veterans Employment Serv-
ice