Returning soldiers face new adversary

[nosmokes]

original
August 28, 2004

Returning soldiers face new adversary

By Karen McCowan 
The Register-Guard


It was a recipe for trouble.

Although federal law aims to protect the civilian jobs of soldiers called to active duty, hundreds of Oregonians went to war during a recession that forced many companies to lay off workers.

As the state's economy reabsorbs the first 500 returning Iraq War veterans, dozens of soldiers have come home to problems with their jobs - or no job at all.

The veteran's program at the U.S. Department of Labor's Oregon office has already received 30 complaints involving Oregon reservists and National Guard members so far this year. That's up from an average of 23 per year the previous three years.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

U.S. Army National Guardsman Joe Sis missed his family, including daughter Aria, 4, when he was called for duty in Umatilla. A difficult situation was made worse when he found out he had lost his job.

Photo: Kevin Clark / The Register-Guard
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Given the size of recent deployments, military and labor officials say most employers have done a good job complying with federal and state laws intended to protect the jobs of service men and women.

"Generally, employers are more aware of the law than they used to be, maybe because of all the coverage of the war," said Bob Elliott, Oregon executive director of the National Committee for Employer Support of the Guard and Reserve. The Department of Defense-funded organization uses volunteer ombudsmen to try to prevent and resolve disputes between soldiers and their employers.

But that big picture is small comfort for soldiers who have come home to no job and financial uncertainty.
~snip~

[mbperrin]

1. Don't worry, everything will be fine, right?

" Under the law, employers can legally terminate active duty soldiers under hardship circumstances - such as downsizings. But the burden of proof is on employers to show that they meet the exemption.

"Basically, the bottom line is, the person must be treated as if they never left," said Elliott, the executive director of the national Employer Support of the Guard and Reserve program.

TBG said Sis would have been laid off in the spring of 2003 even if he hadn't been away on active duty. A sharp drop in business forced "a massive cut," principal partner John Lawless said."

Ol' John still seems to have a job, don't he? I will never again allow any recruiter to enter my classroom to talk to my kids. I haven't in the last two years, and this pretty well tears it permanently.

[Rose Siding]

2. Why doesn't the military lay down the law for employers

at the time the reserve is called up? Make too much sense?

Couldn't any employer figure out that the right thing to do, if the position must be filled, is to do it on an agreed temporary basis? Who wouldn't respect that? It isn't like the economy is so gang-busters that they couldn't have found anyone to agree to that.

Doing the right thing should *not* be this complicated.

[physioex]

3. I don't think that is the problem....

The fact is many jobs are disappearing. And even if they weren't called to duty, they would have lost their jobs.

[mbperrin]

4. Jobs are disappearing BECAUSE

they were called to duty. When demand declines, output falls, layoffs happen. This is why wars are always bad for the economy at large, and only very good indeed for profiteers and other fellow-travelers!

Little self-serving to claim they'd have been laid off anyway. I note that the partners are still raking it in!

[physioex]

6. I would disagree.....

It has little to do with demand. The fact is many white collar jobs are being offshored along with the manufacturing jobs. I would argue that if these jobs weren't offshored the economy might have recovered by now (lost tax base, less disposable income..etc).....

[Erika]

5. Bush Doesn't dare end the Iraqi fiasco...

The unemployment rates would soar.

[AmandaRuth]

7. new adversary????

uh, the GOP????