Legislature(2019 - 2020)BUTROVICH 205
05/09/2019 03:30 PM Senate STATE AFFAIRS
Note: the audio ![]()
and video ![]()
recordings are distinct records and are obtained from different sources. As such there may be key differences between the two. The audio recordings are captured by our records offices as the official record of the meeting and will have more accurate timestamps. Use the icons to switch between them.
| Audio | Topic |
|---|---|
| Start | |
| HB71 | |
| Adjourn |
* first hearing in first committee of referral
+ teleconferenced
= bill was previously heard/scheduled
+ teleconferenced
= bill was previously heard/scheduled
| *+ | HB 71 | TELECONFERENCED | |
| + | TELECONFERENCED |
HB 71-STATE PERSONNEL ACT: VETERANS' EXPERIENCE
3:32:42 PM
CHAIR SHOWER announced the consideration of HOUSE BILL NO. 71
am, "An Act relating to hiring for positions in state service
based on substitution of military work experience or training
for required civilian work experience or training."
CHAIR SHOWER asked the sponsor and her staff to come to the
table to introduce the bill.
3:33:03 PM
REPRESENTATIVE ANDI STORY, Bill Sponsor, Alaska State
Legislature, Juneau, said that HB 71 would ensure that veterans,
former prisoners of war, and members of the National Guard can
use documented military experience to meet the basic
requirements of a state position. Veterans have served their
country and should be honored for their service and sacrifice.
The transition to civilian life often proves to be difficult. In
a 2012 survey, two-thirds of veterans named finding a job as the
greatest challenge in the transition from military to civilian
life. Alaska has the highest proportion of veterans of any
state, so they can expect finding civilian employment to be a
major issue for Alaskan veterans. The current state policy is to
accept experience gained while serving in the military for
meeting the requirements for state jobs. HB 71 would simply put
this current practice into statute, adding a new subsection to
the state Personnel Act. The legislation would provide certainty
to veterans, ensuring that their military experience could
count, regardless of changes in administration or
administrators. She knows as a former member of the Juneau
School Board how changes in superintendents and human resource
personnel directors resulted in practices not being followed if
they were not in adopted policies.
REPRESENTATIVE STORY said she has found that to be the case with
the state also. Policies aren't always followed. By placing this
bill into the state's Personnel Act, compliance should be
increased.
3:35:29 PM
SENATOR MICCICHE thanked the sponsor for the bill. He asked why
the bill includes former prisoners of war. It seems redundant,
but he worries that a prisoner of war may not be a veteran.
MS. STORY said that's the way it is written in statute now.
3:36:17 PM
GREG SMITH, Staff, Representative Andi Story, Alaska State
Legislature, Juneau, said the reason for including that phrase
and members of the National Guard relates to the statutory
reference in line 6 of the bill. There is already an employment
preference in statute for those three groups. The bill maintains
that consistency.
CHAIR SHOWER asked if anyone is in that category of being a
prisoner of war but not a veteran.
3:37:57 PM
KATE SHEEHAN, Director, Division of Personnel and Labor
Relations, Alaska Department of Administration, Juneau, said she
didn't know if they have any current prisoners of war who have
received an employment preference under their current policy or
statute. They are assigned different point values. A veteran
receives a five-point preference. A prisoner of war or a
disabled veteran receives a ten-point preference. With a ten-
point preference, candidates automatically get an interview if
they meet the minimum qualifications. Their practice has been to
give every veteran who meets the minimum qualifications an
interview.
SENATOR MICCICHE suggested the bill should clarify that the
prisoner of war must also be a veteran in order not to include
nonveterans. A verbatim interpretation may cause that risk.
MS. SHEEHAN said she sees the point. It is currently defined
that way in statute.
CHAIR SHOWER said he could envision a scenario of refugees, like
after the Vietnam War, who are classified as prisoners of war
because they were. He asked if the intent was to make this
strictly for military veterans, and whether a slight
modification of the language would be acceptable.
MS. SHEHAN said that makes sense and the Department of Law can
review it.
3:40:33 PM
SENATOR KAWASAKI said the state Personnel Act defines a prisoner
of war as someone who has been a prisoner of war during a
declared war or conflict as determined by the Department of
Defense under federal regulation. It's in several different
parts of the statute. It's been around a long time.
CHAIR SHOWER said he hadn't thought about it before, but it
would potentially open another category of people for this
preference. He is fairly sure that an entire category of
refugees was designated as prisoners of war.
SENATOR MICCICHE said he'd be satisfied if the Department of Law
could let the committee know that the Department of Defense
definition is for U.S. military prisoners of war.
SENATOR COGHILL said he's satisfied with the language as it is
because they have to translate military work experience and
training for nonmilitary work. That's tight enough for him.
CHAIR SHOWER said that's a good point.
3:42:31 PM
At ease
3:44:04 PM
CHAIR SHOWER reconvened the meeting and asked Mr. Wayne if he
could tell the committee whether the phrase former prisoner of
war is defined by the Department of Defense to include only U.S.
veterans. Senator Coghill pointed out that the language says to
substitute military work experience or training. He asked if
that is tight enough to indicate that they do not want to
include nonveterans.
3:45:21 PM
DAN WAYNE, Attorney, Legislative Legal Services, Legislative
Affairs Agency, Alaska State Legislature, Juneau, said he agrees
with Senator Coghill. If the person does not have military
experience, then that experience will not count for employee
qualifications, even though that person may have been a prisoner
of war.
SENATOR MICCICHE said there is apparently a Department of
Defense (DOD) definition in statute. The committee would like to
know if that requires some military service, so as to not open
it up to nonmilitary prisoners of war, whether they be
immigrants or some other classification.
MR. WAYNE said the AS 39.25.159 definition for prisoner of war
is a person who has been a prisoner of war during a declared war
or other conflict as determined by the Department of Defense
under federal regulations. The department would determine
whether someone was a prisoner of war on a case-by-case basis.
3:47:23 PM
SENATOR KAWASAKI summarized the question as if there is a
civilian contractor who drives a truck and becomes a prisoner of
war but has no military career, that person could be considered
a prisoner of war under HB 71 and existing statute.
MR. WAYNE said he doesn't know if DOD regulations would
determine that person was a prisoner of war.
SENATOR MICCICHE asked if anything in the bill or AS 39.25.159
requires that it must be a U.S. veteran or prisoner of war.
MR. WAYNE said the way both AS 39.25.159 and the bill are
written, it doesn't say the prisoner of war must be a member of
the military or a former member of the military.
SENATOR MICCICHE asked if this bill gives a work preference to
veterans of Uruguay's military or if it clarifies that it is
talking about the U.S. He asked if that is anywhere in the
regulations.
MR. SMITH said that the term "veteran" under AS 39.25.159 means
a person with 181 days or more active service in the armed
forces of the United States who has been honorably discharged
after having served during any period, as listed in the statute.
CHAIR SHOWER said that does define U.S. military. The only place
it could be defined as something other than the intent is for
former prisoner of war.
SENATOR MICCICHE said he'd like to clarify that the intent of
this committee is that HB 71 is for crediting work experience or
training for U.S. veterans or U.S. former prisoners of war and a
member of the U.S. National Guard. But it's not extended.
SENATOR MICCICHE said, "I think the intent is clear. I don't
think we have to drag this out. If we had more time this
session, I might have amended the bill for including the word
and clarifying former prisoner of war, but I think the intent is
important to clarify. So, unless there is strong disagreement
from the committee, I think that probably serves the purpose of
legislative intent."
3:51:04 PM
CHAIR SHOWER asked if there is a simple word change for a
conceptual amendment.
SENATOR KAWASAKI asked Ms. Sheehan to describe how the military
work experience is compared to nonmilitary work experience.
MS. SHEEHAN said an applicant lists prior job experience. There
is a large section for listing duties because military job
titles are not always clear. The same goes with training and
special training and licenses someone may have. They try to make
the best match to state requirements. An applicant has a chance
to explain it all. They can dive deeper into any questions
during the interview process.
SENATOR KAWASAKI asked how often this military preference is
used now.
MS. SHEEHAN replied often. The policy requires an interview for
veterans with ten points, but the practice is to interview all
veterans as long as they meet the minimum qualifications. If
there is any questions about that, they err on the side that the
person does meet the requirements or they ask for more
information before the interview.
CHAIR SHOWER clarified that the intent is to codify current
practice into law.
3:53:46 PM
SENATOR REINBOLD clarified that in AS 39.25.159 it is a U.S.
military veteran who has served greater than 181 days and was
honorably discharged.
MR. SMITH answered that's correct.
SENATOR REINBOLD said it is in statute, so she is satisfied.
CHAIR SHOWER said the intent is clearly on the record. This is
for a U.S. military veteran, not someone from another country.
3:55:02 PM
CHAIR SHOWER opened public testimony and found none and closed
it. He asked the will of the committee.
3:55:33 PM
SENATOR COGHILL moved to report HB 71, A.A, from committee with
individual recommendations and attached fiscal note(s).
CHAIR SHOWER stated that without objection, HB 71 AM, A.A,
passes from committee. He thanked Representative Story for
codifying something that is important for veterans. Considering
military suicides, it is a big deal to let veterans know that
they are open for business for them.
SENATOR REINBOLD said SB 11 just passed out of a committee. They
put HB 113 into that bill. This fits perfectly with that bill.
SB 11 is Senator Kawasaki's and Representative Jackson's bill
that deals with military licensure and preference.
| Document Name | Date/Time | Subjects |
|---|---|---|
| SSTA OFFICIAL AGENDA MEMO.pdf |
SSTA 5/9/2019 3:30:00 PM |
agenda |
| HB 71 - Sponsor Statement.pdf |
SSTA 5/9/2019 3:30:00 PM |
HB 71 |
| HB 71 - Ver. A.A.PDF |
SSTA 5/9/2019 3:30:00 PM |
HB 71 |
| HB 71 - Explanation of Changes ver A to ver A.A.pdf |
SSTA 5/9/2019 3:30:00 PM |
HB 71 |
| HB 71 - Minimum Qualifications SOP04.pdf |
SSTA 5/9/2019 3:30:00 PM |
HB 71 |
| HB 71 - Fiscal Note - DOA.pdf |
SSTA 5/9/2019 3:30:00 PM |
HB 71 |