Reply to OMB trying to change guidance to no back pay

Forum Index » Jobs and Careers

Reply to "OMB trying to change guidance to no back pay "

Subject:

Emoticons





More smilies

Text Color: Font: Close Marks

[quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote]There are so many inaccuracies and the language used is offensive and inflammatory. It is clear none of these authors have served a day in the military.[/quote]

My husband is a 100% disabled veteran and I am APPALLED by the Post article. It is biased and profoundly anti-veteran.

DH is a brain tumor survivor and has memory and serious physical issues; symptoms (including severe headaches) first appeared after he returned from deployment, which included almost 24/7 exposure to burn pits. He has been too sick to work since 2008. We first applied for VA disability in the 2010s, after the VA started the burn pit registry, but he was denied because--even though multiple doctors wrote letters stating that his type of brain tumor was consistent with chemical exposure, and burn pit veterans get brain tumors at a far, far higher rate than the general population--we could not definitively prove it was service connected. We appealed and he was denied. It wasn't until the PACT Act, which includes a presumption of service connection for certain conditions, that he received benefits.

And now the Post publishes this hit job painting all disabled veterans as fraudsters getting paid for acne and ED, without noting the repeated visits with VA-retained doctors and extensive medical review claims are subject to?  And without noting the many, many combat veterans with Stage 4 cancers and other serious health issues who languished with no coverage at all for almost two decades--the literal reason the PACT Act was passed?  Where was the coverage of that, and what the hell agenda does the Post have here?[/quote]

Just because your husband’s VA claim is legit doesn’t change the fact that many VA disability claims are fraudulent. That article is not profoundly anti-veteran because it is profoundly true.[/quote]

So many “disabled” veterans.  It’s the easiest path to a lifetime pension after working for three years from 18-21.

What they need is a windfall elimination clause where if the disabled veteran is able to work and earn a livable wage their disability payments are reduced or rescinded.

There’s a 100% disabled veteran in my neighborhood who works as a commercial airline pilot.  In addition to his disability payments, pension and airline pilot salary the property taxes on his $2 million house are waived due to his disability.  I have 50 similar stories.

[/quote]

That can't be legal under the current laws, is it?[/quote]

It 100% is.  You’d be hard pressed to find a veteran who doesn’t have some form of disability rating (and lifetime monthly payment).  [/quote]

+1 Not to mention the myriad of non-compensation benefits (e.g., hiring preferences, preferential tax treatment) that are given to “disabled” veterans.[/quote]

You might be surprised on this. When RIFs were starting, pretty much all of the vets in my office were surprised to discover that none of them had veterans preference.

There's likely some strong selection factors going both ways here. If you work somewhere that uses the veterans preference or disabled
vet hiring authorities, then you're going to have a very different set of coworkers than at a place that mostly does named direct hires.[/quote]

I don't know what the surprise is - veterans get hiring preferences.  Do they really expect that they will also get preferences in the event of a RIF?  That's absurd.  [/quote]

Huh? They do.[/quote]

Options

	Disable HTML in this message
	Disable BB Code in this message
	Disable smilies in this message

Review message

Search Recent Topics Hottest Topics