POSSIBLE CONFLICTS BETWEEN CIA CAREER SERVICE PLAN AND STATUTORY RIGHTS OF VETERANS

• Document Type: CREST
• Collection: General CIA Records
• Document Number (FOIA) /ESDN (CREST): CIA-RDP80-01826R000700100021-5
• Release Decision: RIPPUB
• Original Classification: C
• Document Page Count: 3
• Document Creation Date: December 14, 2016
• Document Release Date: October 1, 2002
• Sequence Number: 21
• Publication Date: September 6, 1955
• Content Type: MFR

25X1A9A
25X1A9A
Approved For Release 200
*41101
MEMORANDUM FOR TUE' RECORD
OGC HAS REVIEWED.
-RDP80-018261V700100021-5
CPNFIDENTIAL
6 September 1955
SUBJECT: Possible Conflicts Between CIA Career Service Plan and
Statutory Rights of Veterans
1. As a result of a telephone conversation between mro
of Personnel and Er. Irons of the Civil Service Commission, a meeting
was held in the office of John W. Steele, Room 171% Civil Service
Commission Building, attended by Mr. of Personnel and
Mr0 of the Office or the General Counsel, from
1130 to 1230 nours, september 1955 (4r. Steele may be reached on
Code 171, Extension 5291).
2o The issue for discussion was as followsg
25X1A9A
Under policy to be embodied in a revision of CIA 25X1A
would not credit military service toward the three year eligibility
period for the Career Staff except in those cases where the service
was undertaken at the request of CIA or in the performance of CR
functions; mould this violate any statutory rights of veterans?
30 At the outset, we indicated to Er. Steele that:, although we
could find nothing in the applicable legislation or CSC Regulations
directly in point, since the issue of possible conflict had been
raised internally, we wished to secure his advice as the Veteransl
Preference expert of the Civil Service Commission. We explained to
him generally the concept of the CIA Career Service and told him
that the general philosophy behind such a program had been informally
approved in earlier discussions with the Commission.
4. Mr. Steele agreed that there was nothing in the statutes or
regulations directly bearing on the case. However, he felt that this
was because of the necessary broadness of statutory language and
because in devising regulations, the Commission had not considered
this type of situation. He pointed out that should a case arise
under our Career Service program and be brought to the Commission for
determination of the applicability of Veterans t Preference legislations,
the Commission would have to look to the intent of the statute, which
he felt sure was to prevent the veteran from losing any rights, to
which he would otherwise have become entitled, as a result or his
military service.
DDIUMIHT
io MASI* 111 CLASS. 0
LASSIH1D
CLASS. CHANGED TO: TS S
N IE
EXT CAVW
25X1 DATE: (04191i
LEC
AVM H I
DATE: REA%)
roved For Re
ease 20
IA_RDpc)QAIF
I
CO PY
f14,21-5
Approved ForRelease 2003/04.C80-01826V0700100021-5
Nap,
CONim
WENT.
50 WO Steele pointed out that it was most unlike/7 that a case
arising within CIA would get to the Commission for determination.
Youevers we emphasized that we mished to accord with the law and the
proprieties, whether or not the degree of our conformance was ever
open to question.
6,? Some discussion ensued on the nature of the benefits that
eeuld attach to membership in the Career Service. Mr. Steele
epecifically asked if preference wild be given to Career Employees
in any reduction in force. We replied that, although no overall
RIF plan had as yet been developed for the Agency, it was likely
that retention preference would be granted to meMbers of the Career
Staff. We emphasized the obligation undertaken by those who applied
for an accepted membership in the Career Strafe?the obligation of
unlimited nobility* We stressed the greater value, considering the
functions of this Agency, of a mobile employee, other things being
oqua10
70 We then raised the key point that concerned us, that is, the
extreme case of an individual who, after a few days of civilian
service with CIA, might enter the military and, upon restoration
to CIA civilian employment, mould beeome immediately eligible for .
consideration for the Career Staff. We pointed out that the various
criteria for membership were such that it would be almost impossible
to determine their applicability in such a case, since no one within
CIA would have had a fair opportunity to appraise the individual.
8. Mt. Steele's conclusion was that although we entst count
all military service for eligibility, since eligibility is based
solely upon length of service, and this is the very interest of the
veteran most specifically protected, there could be no objection to
our determining in individual cases that an eligible individual did
not yet meet the requirements of the selection criteria.
9. The overall conclusion of the conference was that the moat
satisfactory phrasing for CIA Regulation would be one counting all
military service in determining eligibility so as to avoid a possible
eonflict. It was also agreed that it would be ciolatory of the
spirit of the law, if not of its letter, to blanket out by adminiee
trative action all those who offered military service as part of
their three year eligibility period, although it is recognized that
there maybe a higher percentage of rejects in this group simply
because of the difficulty of determining their suitability under
established criteria.
!IN 34"frr"7
k -MO 1104-,r`'
'-rove-d For-Release 2003/04/17 : C A-RDP80-01826R000700100021-5
o
Approved ForVase 2003/
-RDP80-0182680p07,00100021-5
PAVEIDE
-0 The poirt ;las made to ?ill': 0 Steele that, CIA was not sure
f-11.a.r,r.E?tr or not IA Ilas subject, to Veterans Preruenoe legl.slations
Skeaele oordiitioned his conclusions upon the assurription
-YIP To WC
wee or that (as we had stnted) wIshed to comply with
1..valoy of the leg,islati..-.3 whether subject to it or notc,
s
isl
?
C 0 P
Approved For Release 2003/04/ DP8001826R000700100021-5
25X1A9A
25X1A9A