Measure Read the First Time - S.981

MEASURE READ THE FIRST TIME--S. 981

BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT

A bill (S. 981) to ensure that a Federal employee who takes leave without pay in order to perform service as a member of the uniformed services or member of the National Guard shall continue to receive pay in an amount which, when taken together with the pay and allowances such individual is receiving for such service, will be no less than the basic pay such individual would then be receiving if no interruption in employment had occurred.

Mr. DURBIN. Mr. President, it is with some measure of frustration that I rise to again introduce the Reservist Pay Security Act. This bill allows members of the National Guard and Reserve who are Federal employees to maintain their normal salary when called to active duty by having Federal agencies make up the difference between their military pay and what they would have earned at their Federal civilian job.

This is not a radical concept. Many of the major employers in America offer a similar benefit for their employees in the Guard and Reserve who are mobilized and, due to lower military pay, suffer a loss of income. Companies such as Ford, General Motors, IBM, 3M and, in my own State of Illinois, Sears, as well as the Illinois State government and that of 23 other States provide this same exact security for their workers.

Why do they do this? For two reasons: First, These employers are patriotic members of American society who want to step up and do their part for the country while it is engaged in a war. Second, they want to send a clear message to their employees that they are valued where they work and that the organization is looking forward to their return. The Department of Defense operates a highly respected program known as Employer Support for the Guard and Reserve, or ESGR, which pays tribute to more than 900 such patriotic employers.

It is nothing less than shameful that the largest employer in America, the United States Federal Government, is not on that list because we do not provide a similar benefit for our employees in the Guard and Reserve.

I must note, however, that my colleagues in the Senate have generally recognized this and have joined me to correct this situation by passing the Reservist Pay Security Act. In October 2003, the Senate approved, by a vote of 96 to 3, my amendment to S. 1689, the supplemental appropriations for 2004. In June of 2004, it was agreed to by a voice vote as an amendment to S. 2400, the National Defense Authorization Act for 2005. Most recently, on April 13, the Senate passed this needed measure as an amendment to the supplemental appropriations bill for 2005. That was the third time this measure has passed the Senate. In each of those instances, this measure has been dropped in conference with our colleagues in the House of Representatives. It is unfortunate that some of our colleagues fail to appreciate the need to pass this bill.

The Senate knows this is important. The Reserve Officers Association knows that it is important. The National Guard Association of the United States knows that it is important. The Enlisted Association of the National Guard of the United States knows that it is important. And I can assure you that we in the Senate will not give up on this matter.

Today I introduce this measure with my colleagues, Senators MIKULSKI, ALLEN, LANDRIEU, LEAHY, LAUTENBERG, KERRY, SARBANES, and BINGAMAN. This bill is identical to the Reservist pay amendment to the supplemental with the exception that this measure provides a mechanism for possible retroactive payments for those who have served since October 11, 2002.

Of the nearly 1.2 million members of the National Guard and Reserves, some 120,000--approximately 10 percent--are also Federal employees. As of January 2005, more than 43,000 Federal employees had been activated since September 11, 2001. More than 17,000 are currently on active duty.

Income loss hurts Reserve component retention. Of the top 10 reasons cited for leaving the National Guard/Reserve, income loss was No. 4, trailing only family burden, deployment frequency and deployment length.

This measure has not been scored by CBO. Funds would likely come from existing appropriations. In addition to my own State of Illinois, 23 other State governments have similar salary continuation laws for State employees: Alabama, Alaska, California, Connecticut, Delaware, Florida, Kansas, Maryland, Massachusetts, Nevada, New Hampshire, New Jersey, New York, North Carolina, Ohio, Oklahoma, South Dakota, Tennessee, Texas, Vermont, Virginia, Washington, and Wyoming. Most of these States report that this has required no additional appropriations. The differential was paid from funds already appropriated for government employee pay. With the exception of any retroactive payments, that would be true of our measure as well.

Reservists bring to military service their civilian professional skills and provide their civilian employers with the expertise and experience they have gained in the Armed Forces. This adds value to America.

Last year, the Senate Governmental Affairs Committee saw the value of supporting our citizen soldiers and reported this measure to the floor, but it did not see action as a free-standing bill before the Congress adjourned. I hope we can make it as a freestanding bill or as an amendment on some other legislation this year.

Our bottom line is simply this: Federal employees should not lose income when mobilized for extended duty in the National Guard and Reserve. Major American employers already protect their workers from such loss. It is time for the Federal Government to support our troops by doing the same.

Mr. McCONNELL. Mr. President, I now ask for its second reading, and in order to place the bill on the calendar under the provisions of rule XIV, I object to my own request.

The PRESIDING OFFICER. Objection is heard, and the bill will be read for the second time on the next legislative day.

http://thomas.loc.gov/