SB 10

83(R) - 2013

Vote Recommendation

  • Neutral
  • Neutral
  • Negative
  • Neutral
  • Negative


Leticia Van de Putte

Bill Caption

Relating to employment, higher education, and state purchasing programs for veterans.

Fiscal Notes

No significant fiscal implication to the State is anticipated. No significant fiscal implication to units of local government is anticipated.

Bill Analysis

Summary: This legislation would give preferential hiring treatment in state agencies to veterans, surviving spouses of veterans if they have not remarried and the veteran was killed while on active duty, and orphans of veterans killed while on active duty. Agencies would be directed to give five extra test points to qualifying persons under this legislation in the event that a competitive examination is required for the position sought. This bill would entitle veterans to employment preference until 40% of employees in a state agency are veterans. Under this legislation 20% of prospective employees interviewed for a position would have to individuals eligible for veteran's employment preference. In certain circumstances, agencies would be required to hire an individual entitled to a veteran's employment preference without announcing the vacancy to others. Furthermore this legislation directs that “service-disabled veteran-owned businesses” be made eligible for the Community Rehabilitation Program.

Analysis: This bill would greatly expand employment entitlements to people who may be less qualified than other applicants based on their veteran status or their relationship to a veteran who was killed while on active duty.  This would even require agencies to give the veteran’s employment preference until 40 percent of agency employees are veterans when only about 13% of adults in America are actually veterans. This vast expansion of veteran’s employment preference would unfairly disadvantage more qualified people from being hired for state positions. Texas should appropriately honor veterans and surviving spouses and children. Discriminating against qualified job applicants is not the way to do that. We oppose SB 10.