Search results
Results from the WOW.Com Content Network
The Uniformed Services Employment and Reemployment Rights Act of 1994 (USERRA, Pub. L. 103–353, codified as amended at 38 U.S.C. §§ 4301–4335) was passed by U.S. Congress and signed into law by U.S. President Bill Clinton on October 13, 1994 to protect the civilian employment of active and reserve military personnel in the United States called to active duty.
3. Appreciate the values, leadership and unique skills service members bring to the workforce and will encourage opportunities to employ Guardsmen, Reservists, and Veterans; 4. To continually recognize and support service members and their families in peace, crisis and war.
That 1940 law gives individuals the right to reemployment after military service or training. Wright served on an interagency task force which recommended that Congress revise the VRR. In 1994, Congress passed the Uniformed Services Employment and Reemployment Rights Act (USERRA) to make those changes. [ 3 ]
In this podcast episode, Medical News Today shares three actionable resolutions that can help improve brain, heart, and metabolic health in the new year via diet, sleep, and exercise.
An off-duty New York City cop has been arrested for allegedly raping and strangling someone close to him, sources told The Post Saturday. Samuel Sierra, 35, was arrested around 7:20 p.m. Friday ...
After he did not return to New England, Elliott reunited with the Cowboys in April on a one-year, $3 million deal. The Cowboys had hoped Elliott could give their backfield a boost, but the ...
Staub v. Proctor Hospital, 562 U.S. 411 (2011), is a United States Supreme Court case in which the Court held that an employer may be held liable for employment discrimination under the Uniformed Services Employment and Reemployment Rights Act (USERRA) if a biased supervisor's actions are a proximate cause of an adverse employment action, even if the ultimate decision-maker was not personally ...
In a letter to YSI sent in summer 2012, the state told the company that the contract would end because the DJJ was “moving away from large institutional models” and toward smaller, community-based programs. Still, the letter added, “We strongly encourage your participation” in an upcoming bid for new contracts.