Inside they changed the hiring requirements and reporting standards for U.S. government agencies. The most notable include: reducing reporting requirements, holding senior managers accountable for reaching agency objectives (versus whom they are hiring), the elimination of predetermined quotas and monitoring for trends when discharging these groups. This is designed to ensure that all federal agencies are hiring the best person for the job. Instead of someone, who fits into a particular demographic of the population that could be considered to be a minority (based on ethnic, gender or disability). This is important, because it is illustrating how there are two different standards that are used by the federal government when hiring various individuals that fall into these categories. As those who are disabled and have served in the military, are given preference over other minorities, women along with non-disabled veterans. ("Federal Civilian Employment Affirmative Action," 2000) (Muhl, 1999, pg. 48) This is in direction violation of the U.S. Supreme Court's case precedent on affirmative action. What they determined is that employers cannot justify racial classifications by citing societal discrimination. Instead, they have to show that past discrimination occurred and that they must remedy these actions by having these preferences in place. Moreover, they found that each program must be designed to show that it is helping to achieve larger organizational interests. (Muhl, 1999, pg. 48)

In the case of DVAAP, this is highlighting how the federal government is violating previous Supreme Court rulings by giving hiring...

Furthermore, they found that these practices are giving specific benefits to someone who served in the military and is disabled over everyone else through having predetermined quotas that are in place. While at the same time, it is requiring all agencies to report their findings to the OPM. (Muhl, 1999, pg. 48)
This is troubling because, it allowing various levels of discrimination to take place inside all federal agencies through the differences in these policies. Once this occurs, is when these agencies will be able to use this to hire one select group of individuals over another. In the future, this means that many agencies will have higher percentages of disabled veterans in comparison with everyone else. As a result, this will more than likely result in some kind of lawsuit that is directed at the federal government. This is because there are obvious differences between the two programs for everyone else and disabled veterans. As a result, this group should not be given hiring preferences over other qualified individuals. Instead, the federal government should mirror this program with others that they are utilizing when hiring / promoting minorities, women and non-disabled veterans. (Muhl, 1999, pg. 48)

Bibliography

DVAAP. (2011). Feds Hire Vets. Retrieved from: http://www.fedshirevets.gov/hire/hrp/dvaap/index.aspx

Federal Civilian Employment Affirmative Action. (2000). NARA. Retrieved from: http://clinton2.nara.gov/WH/EOP/OP/html/aa/aa08.html

Muhl, C. (1999). Affirmative Action Requirements. Monthly Labor Review, 122 (1), 48.