Home Media Center News Releases

Washington, D.C.—The leader of the nation’s largest independent union of federal employees today welcomed a legal victory upholding veterans’ preference rights, but expressed disappointment at the unwillingness of a federal appeals court panel to address the validity of a federal hiring program being used by agencies to sharply undercut the merit-based hiring process.

“I’m pleased that the plaintiff rightly prevailed in his appeal,” said President Colleen M. Kelley of the National Treasury Employees Union (NTEU). “This is an important decision that bolsters veterans’ preference rights, and will help this plaintiff get the fair treatment he deserves.”

At the same time, the NTEU leader said she is “very disappointed that the court failed to address the broader questions raised by NTEU concerning the Federal Career Intern Program (FCIP).”

In remanding to the Merit Systems Protection Board (MSPB) the appeal of a disabled veteran that he was improperly denied his veteran’s preference rights, two members of a three-judge panel of the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit declined to rule on whether the FCIP is a valid exception to merit-based hiring. In a concurring opinion, one judge called that matter “the central issue in this appeal.”

“The FCIP hits hard in NTEU-represented workplaces,” Kelley said, citing its use by U.S. Customs and Border Protection to fill all its entry-level officer positions, as well as increasing use by such high-profile agencies as the Internal Revenue Service, which uses it to fill such key positions as revenue officers and revenue agents, and the Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation, which fills a variety of job openings using the FCIP.

In a rare move reflecting the importance of the issue to the entire federal workforce—as well as to federal job applicants—the appeals court allowed NTEU, which had filed a friend-of-the-court brief in the case, to take part in oral arguments before the three-judge panel last October.

At issue for NTEU is the growing use by federal agencies of the FCIP, which was intended as a limited-use, narrow-focus program aimed at providing structured two-year training and development internships.

Instead, it is the fastest-growing example of how federal agencies are moving away from statutorily-mandated competitive examination and selection requirements. Kelley has been a consistent and vocal critic of that development, which not only narrows the applicant pool—something federal agencies can ill-afford—but forecloses opportunities for promotion and creates a serious perception of unfair and arbitrary treatment.

In the decision made public by the appeals court on Christmas Eve, the three-judge panel reversed and sent back to the MSPB that body’s decision that the Department of Defense had not violated the veteran’s rights when it filled two auditor jobs with FCIP applicants, passing over the veteran, Stephen W. Gingery, who was qualified for the post.

The judge who called on her colleagues to address the validity of the FCIP said in her concurring opinion that the job at issue had not been shown by the government to be a “necessary exception” to the standard procedures of competitive hiring. “This was a primary issue addressed in the briefing and at oral argument…The issue is before this court, and it should be discussed and resolved,” she wrote.

As the largest independent federal union, NTEU represents 150,000 employees in 31 agencies and departments.