Court Opinion

ID: 9420174
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2023-08-02 22:53:16.118877+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T17:22:23.061712
License: Public Domain

Mr. Justice Reed,
concurring.
I agree with the conclusion reached by the Court in this case. My disagreement with the opinion is limited *340to that portion of subdivision Second which indicates that the rights of a veteran as to discharge after restoration to employment by the United States differ from the corresponding rights of a veteran restored to employment by a private employer.
The rights to retention of employment of both veterans are governed by the same subsection 8 (c). 54 Stat. 890, 50 U. S. C. § 308. Section 8 (c) specifies the same conditions for retention of employment for all employees whether they are reemployed by the United States or by private employers.
Nothing has come to my attention that indicates to me a congressional purpose to grant to one more rights as to continuity of employment than to the other. The legislation as to both depended upon the same constitutional authority — the War Power. I can see no reason to attribute to Congress an intention to guarantee public employment to a returning veteran regardless of the needs of the public service or to discriminate between equally deserving veterans. Compare Fishgold v. Sullivan Dry Dock & Repair Corp., 328 U. S. 275.
Mr. Justice Frankfurter and Mr. Justice Jackson join in this opinion.