OEDCA DIGEST
Vol. XII,  No. 2	Department of Veterans Affairs Washington, DC	Spring  2009

FROM THE ASSOCIATE DIRECTOR

The Office of Employment Discrimination Complaint Adjudication is an independent adjudication unit created by statute.  Located in the Office of the Secretary, OEDCA’s function is to issue the Department’s final agency decision on complaints of employment discrimination filed against the Department.  The Director, whose decisions are not subject to appeal by the Department, reports directly to the Secretary of Veterans Affairs.

Each quarter, OEDCA publishes a digest of selected decisions issued by the Director that might be instructive or otherwise of interest to the Department and its employees.  Topics covered in this issue include race discrimination, unequal pay for equal work, attorney’s fees and compensatory damages, and age discrimination.                                             Also in this issue is EEOC’s recent guidance on the Americans with Disabilities Act for disabled military veterans and their potential employers.

The OEDCA Digest now contains a comprehensive cumulative index.

The OEDCA DIGEST may be accessed both on the internet at: http://www.va.gov/orm/oedca.asp and on the Department of Veterans Affairs Intranet at http://vaww.va.gov/orm/oedca.htm.

KAREN CLEGG

                                                                      MENU.

I.    SUPERVISOR’S REASONS FOR DENYING A CAREER-LADDER PROMOTION NOT SUPPORTED BY THE EVIDENCE

II.   NO “EQUAL PAY ACT” VIOLATION WHERE FACTORS OTHER THAN GENDER MOTIVATED AGENCY’S HIRING DECISION

III.  SECOND ATTORNEY’S FEE CLAIM DENIED AS UNNECESSARY

IV.   COMPLAINT PREVAILS ON AGE DISCRIMINATIONCLAIM ALLEGING CONSTRUCTIVE DISCHARGE

V.    U.S. SUPREME COURT ALLOWS FEDERAL EMPLOYEES TO CLAIM RETALIATION BASED ON A PREVIOUS AGE DISCRIMINATION CLAIM

VI.   VETERANS WITH SERVICE-CONNECTED DISABILITIES AND THE AMERICANS WITH DISABILITIES ACT (ADA): A GUIDE FOR EMPLOYERS
 

                                                                                                  -----------------------------------
 

I.  SUPERVISOR’S REASONS FOR DENYING A CAREER-LADDER PROMOTION NOT SUPPORTED BY THE EVIDENCE
Back To Top Menu

Complainant filed a formal complaint, alleging that he was subjected to race (African-American) discrimination when he was denied a career-ladder promotion and placed on a pre-Performance Improvement Plan and a Performance Improvement Plan.  According to the record, complainant’s Veterans Service Representative position had career-ladder potential to the GS-9 level. 

 While complainant’s supervisor promoted two Caucasian co-workers after one year of successful performance, complainant did not receive a promotion on his anniversary date.  The record does not reflect any performance problems during the period, and two performance evaluations show successful performance. Nevertheless, he was subsequently placed on a pre-Performance Improvement Plan, and then a Performance Improvement Plan. 

The final decision noted that the complainant’s supervisor had a reputation for different treatment of African-American employees that was “common knowledge.”  While the agency stated that it did not question the quality of complainant’s work, only the quantity, complainant’s performance standard did not reference timeliness or quantity.  Further, complainant worked under the close supervision of a coach who did not view complainant as having a problem with productivity.  The record showed that other, comparative employees with performance problems were not placed on a pre-Performance Improvement Plan or a Performance Improvement Plan, but were instead moved to another team.  Complainant’s supervisor also acknowledged that she did not counsel complainant regarding her perception of poor production, and did not provide him with the level of training provided to others. 

Thus, the EEOC concluded that the agency’s stated reasons for the actions lacked credibility, and were a pretext for prohibited race discrimination. 

The obvious moral of this story is that any personnel action a supervisor decides to take or not take should be supported by the facts and fully documented at the time in question.  Moreover, supervisors who consider quantity or timeliness an important performance factor should ensure that the factor is included in the applicable performance standard.  Claims that such factors are “implied” or “understood by all” will generally fail to persuade EEOC judges that the supervisor was acting in good faith. 
 

II.  NO “EQUAL PAY ACT” VIOLATION WHERE FACTORS OTHER THAN GENDER MOTIVATED AGENCY’S HIRING DECISION
Back To Top Menu

Complainants, who served as Medical Records Technicians (MRTs), alleged that the VA discriminated against them on the basis of gender when it hired a male at a higher salary to do the exact same work.  They claimed that the unequal pay for equal work constituted a violation of the Equal Pay Act. 

While complainants established a prima facie case by showing that they received less pay than the male employee for equal work requiring equal skill, effort, and responsibility, the VA satisfied its burden of proving  an affirmative defense – i.e., in this case, that it relied upon factors other than gender in setting the male employee's salary.  Specifically, the VA stated that he was given a higher starting salary to match the salary he last received in the private sector.  Moreover, the complainants failed to rebut the VA’s assertion that it was difficult to find highly qualified applicants for the MRT positions in that locale at that time, and that the male applicant's education and broad private sector experience in the field made him an especially desirable candidate.

Cases such as this are not uncommon.  Although the Equal Pay Act mandates equal pay for substantially equal work, there are a number of defenses available to employers for those situations where differences in pay may be justified.  For example, differences in pay may be justified where the pay scales are based on a seniority system, a merit system, a system based on quantity or quality of production, or “any factor other than sex.”  A bona fide job classification system applied in a gender-neutral way can be a permissible “factor other than sex”.  The other most common “factor other than sex” involves, as occurred in this case, recruiting and retention problems that may require matching private sector salaries, even when the result is unequal pay for equal work. 

Obviously, such pay disparities, even if legally justified, inevitably cause morale problems that often result in the type of complaint filed in this case.
 

III. SECOND ATTORNEY’S FEE CLAIM DENIED AS UNNECESSARY
Back To Top Menu

As shocking and unbelievable as this may seem, attorneys sometimes “pad their bill” when submitting an attorney fee claim to the Federal government after their client has prevailed on a complaint for which they provided legal services.  The following case is a good example.

As a result of an appeal by OEDCA, the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission reduced the amount of fees requested by complainant for a second attorney who assisted in her case.  While the second attorney submitted a bill that included time spent at a deposition and the two-day hearing, the record showed that the attorney did not play an active role at those proceedings.  Aside from sitting in the second chair, he said and did nothing.  Instead, the attorney appeared to be more of a consultant to the first attorney.  The second attorney's billing statement reflected numerous telephone calls to the first attorney; however, there were no calls to the complainant.  Moreover, there was nothing unusually difficult or complex about the case. 

Accordingly, the Commission affirmed OEDCA’s denial of the second attorney's request for 34 hours spent at the deposition and hearing.  With regard to the first attorney, the Commission found that she was entitled to the full amount claimed in preparation for the hearing, as she had presented the case by herself.  However, the Commission reduced the first attorney's claim for some time spent during the pre-complaint process. 

With regard to the issue of damages, both OEDCA and the Commission agreed that complainant was entitled to an award of $10,000.00 in non-pecuniary damages for pain and suffering.  According to the record, the agency denied complainant accommodation for approximately five months causing her to re-injure her rotator cuff.  She was required to undergo extensive medical treatment, including painful injections, and had permanently lost range of motion in her shoulder due to the rotator cuff work injuries.  Further, a co-worker indicated that she saw complainant crying after she had been subjected to harassing treatment by her supervisor. 

Complainants who prevail on one or more claims in a complaint may receive, in addition to back pay and other equitable remedies, attorney’s fees and compensatory damages.  Applicable regulations and case law govern entitlement to and the amount of damages and fees payable in a given case. 
 

IV.  COMPLAINT PREVAILS ON AGE DISCRIMINATION CLAIM ALLEGING CONSTRUCTIVE DISCHARGE
Back To Top Menu

The complainant, a 67-year-old Staff Nurse, alleged that she was subjected to age discrimination when she was denied performance opportunities and forced to resign.  She began working under a new supervisor in 2002.  Subsequently, for the first time in her career, she received a critical performance appraisal, and was placed on a performance improvement plan for 60 days, during which time agency managers observed her work on the computerized record keeping and medication tracking systems. 

The individuals who observed complainant's work recommended that she receive additional training.  The supervisor, however, failed to provide her with training as recommended, and issued her a notice of proposed discharge.  Complainant chose to retire in lieu of being terminated, and later filed an age discrimination claim.

Ruling in her favor, the EEOC noted that a younger nurse who experienced similar performance problems was provided with additional training opportunities.  The record also showed that the agency exaggerated the depth of complainant's performance deficiencies, and kept critical information from her, such as one of the observer's assessment and recommendation to improve her computer skills. 

In addition, several witnesses testified that complainant's overall job performance was good, and her prior appraisals indicated that her performance was acceptable before the supervisor's arrival.  The Commission found it unlikely that complainant's performance changed as soon as she began working under the supervisor.  The Commission also noted that the supervisor's conclusion that complainant would not benefit from additional training, while younger employees would, indicates that the VA’s stated reason for deciding to terminate complainant was a pretext for age discrimination.  The Commission further concluded that complainant's retirement was involuntary, as she was pressured into deciding whether to retire or face termination and the loss of health insurance and benefits.
 

V.  U.S. SUPREME COURT ALLOWS FEDERAL EMPLOYEES TO CLAIM RETALIATION BASED ON A PREVIOUS AGE DISCRIMINATION CLAIM
Back To Top Menu

The Supreme Court has finally settled an issue that had long divided the lower courts—i.e., whether federal employees can claim retaliation arising out of an earlier claim made under the Age Discrimination in Employment Act of 1967 (ADEA).  In a surprising 6-3 decision, the Court ruled in favor of federal employees, finding that the specific section of the ADEA that pertains to federal sector employment prohibits retaliation as well as age discrimination, even though the word “retaliation” is not mentioned in that section. 

The case involved a 45-year-old postal worker who filed suit claiming that her employer had violated the federal-sector provision of the ADEA, 29 U.S.C. §633a(a) — which requires that “[a]ll personnel actions affecting employees . . . at least 40 years of age . . . be made free from any discrimination based on age” — by subjecting her to various forms of retaliation after she filed an administrative ADEA complaint with the U.S. Postal Service.  Both the U.S. district court and the First Circuit Court of Appeals had ruled that §633a(a)’s prohibition of “discrimination based on age” does not cover retaliation because it does not mention retaliation. 

The Supreme Court, however, gave the ADEA statute a much broader reading and ruled, in essence, that any time Congress proscribes ‘discrimination based on X’ it means to proscribe retaliation as well.
 

Back To Top Menu

VI.  VETERANS WITH SERVICE-CONNECTED DISABILITIES AND THE AMERICANS WITH DISABILITIES ACT (ADA): 
                                                             A GUIDE FOR EMPLOYERS

Introduction

Each year, thousands of military personnel stationed around the world leave active duty and seek to return to jobs they held before entering the service or look to find their first, or new, civilian jobs. According to government statistics, between October 2001 and February 2008, more than 30,000(1) veterans returned home with service-connected disabilities (e.g., amputations, burns, post traumatic stress disorder (PTSD), and traumatic brain injuries).(2) 
At least two federal laws provide important protections for veterans with disabilities. The Uniformed Services Employment and Reemployment Rights Act (USERRA), which is enforced by the U.S. Department of Labor (DOL), sets forth the requirements for reemploying veterans with and without service-connected disabilities. Title I of the Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA), which the U.S. Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (EEOC) enforces, prohibits private and state and local government employers with 15 or more employees from discriminating against individuals on the basis of disability. Title I of the ADA also generally requires covered employers to make reasonable accommodations – changes in the workplace or in the way things are usually done that provide individuals with disabilities equal employment opportunities. Section 501 of the Rehabilitation Act applies the same standards of non-discrimination and reasonable accommodation as the ADA to Federal Executive Branch agencies and the United States Postal Service. 
This guide briefly explains how protections for veterans with service-connected disabilities differ under USERRA and the ADA, and then describes how the ADA in particular applies to recruiting, hiring, and accommodating veterans with service-connected disabilities.(3)
 

1. How does USERRA differ from the ADA? 

USERRA prohibits employers from discriminating against employees or applicants for employment on the basis of their military status or military obligations. It also protects the reemployment rights of those who leave their civilian jobs (whether voluntarily or involuntarily) to serve in the uniformed services, including the U.S. Reserve forces and state, District of Columbia, and territory (e.g., Guam) National Guards. 
Both USERRA and the ADA include reasonable accommodation obligations; however, USERRA requires employers to go further than the ADA by making reasonable efforts to assist a veteran who is returning to employment in becoming qualified for a job. The employer must help the veteran become qualified to perform the duties of the position whether or not the veteran has a service-connected disability requiring reasonable accommodation. This could include providing training or retraining for the position. See 38 U.S. Code § 4313; 20 C.F.R. §§ 1002.198, 1002.225 -.226. Additionally, reasonable accommodations may be available under USERRA for individuals whose service-connected disabilities may not necessarily meet the ADA’s definition of “disability.” USERRA also applies to all employers, regardless of size. Information on the reemployment rights of uniformed service personnel can be found on DOL’s website at www.dol.gov/vets.
Title I of the ADA prohibits employers from discriminating against qualified individuals with disabilities with respect to hiring, promotion, termination, and other terms, conditions, and privileges of employment. The ADA also prohibits disability-based harassment and provides that, absent undue hardship (“significant difficulty or expense”), applicants and employees with disabilities are entitled to reasonable accommodation. Reasonable accommodations under the ADA range from job-restructuring (e.g., shifting marginal --or minor-- functions that an employee is unable to perform because of a disability to other employees) to reassignment of an employee with a disability to a vacant position, where the employee’s disability prevents performance of the current position or where providing reasonable accommodation in the current position would result in undue hardship. (See Question 7.) Where providing a particular accommodation would result in undue hardship, an employer must consider whether another accommodation would not. Under the ADA, an individual may request a reasonable accommodation any time during the application process or during employment. Additionally, the obligation under the ADA to make a reasonable accommodation is ongoing, meaning that an employer may need to provide an additional or different accommodation from one that it is already providing (e.g., when the nature of a disability or a job changes). Documents explaining Title I of the ADA can be found on EEOC’s website at www.eeoc.gov.

2. Is a veteran with a service-connected disability automatically protected by the ADA?

No. A veteran must meet the ADA’s definition of disability. The ADA defines an “individual with a disability” as a person who (1) has a physical or mental impairment that substantially limits one or more major life activities; (2) has a record of such an impairment; or (3) is regarded as having such an impairment. This definition of disability may differ from the definition used in other laws. For example, the term “disabled veteran” means an individual who has served on active duty in the armed forces, was honorably discharged, and has a service-connected disability, or is receiving compensation, disability retirement benefits, or pension because of a public statute administered by the Department of Veterans Affairs or a military department. See 5 U.S.C.A. § 2108. Nevertheless, many veterans who were wounded or became ill while on active duty meet both the definition of “disabled veteran” and the ADA’s definition of “individual with a disability.”
Under the ADA, an individual with a disability also must be “qualified” for the job the individual has or wants. To be qualified, an individual with a disability must meet the employer’s requirements for the job (such as education, training, skills, or licenses) and must be able to perform the job’s essential or fundamental duties, with or without reasonable accommodation.

3. May an employer ask if an applicant is a “disabled veteran” if it is seeking to hire someone with a service-connected disability? 

Yes. Although employers generally may not ask for medical information from applicants prior to making a job offer, they may do so for affirmative action purposes. See EEOC Enforcement Guidance: Preemployment Disability-Related Questions and Medical Examinations Under the Americans with Disabilities Act of 1990 (1995) at www.eeoc.gov/policy/docs/preemp.html. An employer, therefore, may ask applicants to voluntarily self-identify as individuals with disabilities or “disabled veterans” when the employer is:
· undertaking affirmative action because of a federal, state, or local law (including a veterans’ preference law) that requires affirmative action for individuals with disabilities; or, 
· voluntarily using the information to benefit individuals with disabilities, including veterans with service-connected disabilities. 
An employer also may ask organizations that help find employment for veterans with service-connected disabilities whether they have suitable applicants for particular jobs and may access websites on which veterans with service-connected disabilities post resumes or otherwise express interest in employment.

4. What steps should an employer take if it asks an applicant to self-identify as a “disabled veteran” for affirmative action purposes? 

If an employer invites applicants to voluntarily self-identify, the employer must indicate clearly and conspicuously on any written questionnaire used for this purpose, or state clearly (if no written questionnaire is used), that: 
· the information requested is intended for use solely in connection with its affirmative action obligations or its voluntary affirmative action efforts; and 
· the specific information is being requested on a voluntary basis, it will be kept confidential in accordance with the ADA, that refusal to provide it will not subject the employee to any adverse treatment, and that it will be used only in accordance with the ADA. 
Information collected for affirmative action purposes must be kept separate from the application to ensure that confidentiality is maintained. 

5. May an employer give preference in hiring to a veteran with a service-connected disability over other applicants? 

Yes. The ADA prohibits discrimination “against a qualified individual with a disability because of the disability of such individual.” However, the law neither prohibits nor requires affirmative action on behalf of individuals with disabilities. An employer, therefore, may--but is not required to--hire a qualified individual with a disability (including a veteran with a service-connected disability) over a qualified applicant without a disability.
Specific rules and regulations govern the hiring of veterans by federal employers. Federal agencies are allowed to use “special hiring authorities” to hire individuals with disabilities outside the normal competitive hiring process, and sometimes are even required to give preferential treatment to veterans, including disabled veterans, in making hiring, promotion, or other employment decisions. See the U.S. Office of Personnel Management’s question-and-answer guide on “Excepted Service—Appointment of Persons with Disabilities and Career and Career-Conditional Appointments” at www.opm.gov/disability/appointment_disabilities.asp and OPM’s “Vet Guide” at www.opm.gov/veterans/html/vetguide.asp; see also OPM’s Disabled Veterans Affirmative Action Program at www.opm.gov/veterans/dvaap.asp. 
Even where employers do not specifically recruit veterans with service-connected disabilities, they should make sure that there is nothing in a job announcement or on an application form that would discourage anyone with a disability from applying. For example, employers should not state in vacancy announcements that applicants must be in “excellent health” or describe how a function must be performed (e.g., “requires extended standing”) but, instead, should describe the actual function to be performed (e.g., “requires frequent lifting of objects that weigh more than 50 pounds”). Often, reasonable accommodations are available that will allow a veteran with a service-connected disability to perform a function in a way that is different from the way it is typically done.

6. What are some specific steps employers may take to recruit and hire veterans with service-connected disabilities? 

In addition to measures specifically applicable to federal employers (see Question 5), there are a number of steps that any employer may take to recruit and hire veterans with service-connected disabilities, such as:
· stating on a job advertisement or vacancy announcement that it is an equal opportunity employer and that individuals with disabilities, including “disabled veterans” or veterans with service-connected disabilities, are encouraged to apply” 
· ensuring that on-line job announcements, recruiting information, and application processes are accessible to individuals with disabilities, including applicants who have service-connected disabilities 
· making written recruiting materials, such as application forms and brochures, available in alternate formats (e.g., Braille, large print, etc.), or assisting veterans with disabilities in completing application materials when necessary 
· sending vacancy announcements to, and asking for referrals from, government, community, military organizations, and One Stop Career Centers that train and/or support veterans with service-connected disabilities 
· posting advertisements and vacancy announcements in publications for veterans 
· attending job fairs and using online resume databases that connect job-seeking veterans with civilian employers 
· surveying other employers to learn about their successful outreach efforts 

7. What types of reasonable accommodations may veterans with service-connected disabilities need for the application process or during employment? 

While not all veterans with service-connected disabilities will need an accommodation or require the same accommodation, some may need one or more of the following to apply for or perform a job:
· written materials in accessible formats, such as large print, Braille, or on computer disk 
· recruitment fairs, interviews, tests, and training held in accessible locations 
· modified equipment or devices (e.g., assistive technology that would allow a blind person to use a computer or someone who is deaf or hard of hearing to use a telephone; a glare guard for a computer monitor used by a person with a traumatic brain injury; a one-handed keyboard for a person missing an arm or hand) 
· physical modifications to the workplace (e.g., reconfiguring a workspace, including adjusting the height of a desk or shelves for a person in a wheelchair) 
· permission to work from home 
· leave for treatment, recuperation, or training related to their disability 
· modified or part-time work schedules 
· a job coach who could assist an employee who initially has some difficulty learning or remembering job tasks 
· reassignment to a vacant position where a disability prevents performance of the employee’s current job, or where accommodating the employee in the current job would result in undue hardship 

8. How does an employer know when a veteran with a service-connected disability needs an accommodation?

Usually, the process of providing a reasonable accommodation will begin with a request from the individual with a service-connected disability. A family member, friend, health professional, rehabilitation counselor, or other representative also may request a reasonable accommodation on the veteran’s behalf. The request does not have to mention the ADA or use the term “reasonable accommodation” and simply can be an oral or written statement indicating that the individual needs an adjustment or change in the application process or at work for a reason related to a medical condition. A request for reasonable accommodation is the first step in an informal interactive process between the individual and the employer. 
The process will involve determining whether the veteran requesting a reasonable accommodation has a disability (where this is not obvious or already known) and identifying accommodation solutions. Employers should ask the particular veteran requesting accommodation because of disability what is needed to do the job. There also are extensive public and private resources to help employers identify reasonable accommodations for employees with particular disabilities. For example, the website for the Job Accommodation Network (JAN) provides a practical guide for employers on reasonable accommodation, as well as information about accommodations for specific disabilities, including one on “Accommodating Service Members and Veterans with PTSD.” See JAN’s website at www.jan.wvu.edu. 

9. May an employer ask a veteran with a service-connected disability whether a reasonable accommodation is needed if none has been requested?

Sometimes. During the application process, an employer may explain what the hiring process involves (e.g., an interview, timed written test, or job demonstration) and ask all applicants whether they will need a reasonable accommodation to participate in any part of the process. In addition, if an employer reasonably believes that a veteran with an obvious service-connected disability (e.g., a veteran who is blind or missing a limb) who is applying for a particular job will need a reasonable accommodation to do that job, the employer may ask whether an accommodation is needed and, if so, what type. Once a veteran with a service-connected disability has started working, an employer may ask whether an accommodation is needed when it reasonably appears that the person is experiencing workplace problems because of a medical condition. 
Because many veterans may not view their service-related injuries as disabilities, they may not ask, or know that they are entitled to ask, for a reasonable accommodation. As a result, it may be critical for the employer to initiate a conversation with a veteran who is experiencing problems to determine an appropriate accommodation. Working together, the employer and veteran should identify what the veteran cannot do and then discuss ways to address any identified performance issue(s).

10. Where can employers find out more about employing veterans with service-connected disabilities?

This guide includes a list of public and private organizations that can assist employers who want to recruit and hire veterans with service-connected disabilities, or who have more questions about their obligations under USERRA and the ADA. It also includes resources on reasonable accommodation. 

 
RESOURCES

Laws Protecting Veterans with Service-Connected Disabilities

ADA

Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (EEOC)
www.eeoc.gov/ada/adadocs.html 

EEOC’s website provides enforcement guidance and other policy documents on the ADA.
USERRA

The Department of Labor (DOL)  www.dol.gov/vets 
DOL, through the Veterans’ Employment and Training Service, provides information for employers on USERRA, including a resource guide and fact sheet.
Recruiting

President’s National Hire Veterans Committee – Hire Vets First
www.hirevetsfirst.gov 
This comprehensive career website is designed to help employers find qualified veterans, as well as help veterans to make the most of a national network of employment resources.

One Stop Career Centers
www.hirevetsfirst.gov - onestop_emp.asp; 
Careeronestop,  www.servicelocator.org

The One Stop Career Centers serve the needs of those looking for jobs and employers seeking employees. They assist businesses with recruitment, training, and retention of skilled workers. There are nearly 2,000 One Stop Career Centers nationwide.

Employer Assistance and Recruiting Network (EARN)
www.earnworks.com, 1-866-EARN NOW (327-6669)

Funded by the U.S. Department of Labor’s Office of Disability Employment Policy (ODEP), EARN is a national toll-free and electronic information referral service to assist employers in locating and recruiting qualified individuals with disabilities who are seeking jobs. 

Occupational Information Network (O*NET) Online
www.online.onetcenter.org

Through the Department of Labor, employers may access a comprehensive database that helps align military skills, knowledge, and training with workplace needs. Information on reasonable accommodation also is available. 

Vocational Rehabilitation
www.va.gov

The U.S. Department of Veterans Affairs supports a nationwide employment training program for veterans with service-related injuries. There are 56 regional offices which administer this program.

State Veteran Employment Services www.dol.gov/vets/aboutvets/contacts/main.htm

The U.S. Department of Labor (DOL), through its Veterans Employment Training Service (VETS), helps support a network of local employment service professionals dedicated to assisting veterans with service-related injuries in locating and securing employment. 

Veteran Service Organizations (VSOs)      www1.va.gov/vso/
Many of the national VSOs, such as Disabled American Veterans, AMVETS, Paralyzed Veterans Association, and Blinded Veterans Association, offer employment-related services to veterans with service-related injuries in various localities and can be an excellent resource for locating job seekers.
Reasonable Accommodation
EEOC Enforcement Guidance: Reasonable Accommodation and Undue Hardship Under the ADA (2002)
www.eeoc.gov/policy/docs/accommodation.html

This extensive guidance clarifies the rights and responsibilities of employers and individuals with disabilities regarding reasonable accommodation and undue hardship and provides practical examples of the types of accommodations that may be needed to enable a person with a disability to be considered for a position, perform the essential functions of a job, or enjoy the equal benefits and privileges of employment.

Job Accommodation Network (JAN)   www.jan.wvu.edu
JAN provides a variety of resources for employers seeking to hire employees with disabilities. JAN also provides lists of possible accommodations based on specific disabilities as well as links to various other accommodation providers.
Department of Defense Computer/Electronic Accommodations Program (CAP)    www.tricare.mil/cap
CAP provides assistive technology and services to individuals with disabilities, federal managers, supervisors, and IT professionals.

Footnotes
(1) According to the U.S. Department of Defense (DoD), as of February, 2008, 30,960 military personnel serving in the Global War on Terror (combining Iraq, Afghanistan, and surrounding duty stations) have been wounded in action. See DoD Personnel and Procurement Statistics at http://siadapp.dmdc.osd.mil/personnel/CASUALTY/castop.htm.

(2) The term “service-connected” means, with respect to disability or death, that the disability was incurred or aggravated, or that the death resulted from a disability incurred or aggravated, in the line of duty in the active military, naval, or air service. See 38 U.S.Code § 101. 

(3) In this document, the terms “veteran with a service-connected disability” and “disabled veteran” are synonymous. The terms “disability” and “individual with a disability” have the same meaning in this document as they do in Title I of the ADA. For more information about the relationship of these terms to one another, see Question 2.