The CHAIRMAN. Were these jobs published in some kind of Federal Register or something where it indicated there was a job vacant?

Mr. LANTNER. Yes, sir. These were print-outs which were posted both at the personnel offices and should have been posted at the clearinghouse, which is the U.S. Employment Service.

As a veteran I went to the U.S. Employment Service and I had a counselor. My counselor was supposed to have been aware of half of the Federal vacancies at the time. One illustration of this-there finally was one agency which picked my name off the roster as eligible for a job and they said come down for an interview and I called my counselor about this agency. This was part of the Department of Labor. I had already been to three different personnel offices within Labor. I guess there are about eight personnel offices within the Department of Labor. So this was another office. My counselor was not aware of this Department; she was not aware of the vacancy. And this Department is located six floors above her office, above my counselor's office in the same building, and technically my counselor works for the Department of Labor because it is the U.S. Labor Employment Service. She was just unaware. I feel it was not because she was not doing her job. She was aware of every vacancy that came into her office. They had computer printouts listing many jobs and she knew of everyone coming into her Department but she just was unaware of this Department. They hadn't notified her.

The CHAIRMAN. Of course the Labor Department is a huge Department. We all appreciate that fact, but it is the principal Department that is in charge of and has the responsibility for employment in this country. And this counselor that you were dealing with was part of the Labor Department, in the Employment Service, is that right? Mr. LANTNER. Yes, sir.

The CHAIRMAN. She was not aware, not only of the job that you found was available, at least listed as being available, but she wasn't aware of the agency within the Department of Labor that had the job?

Mr. LANTNER. That is correct; and, again, this may be circumstance, but my counselor is now leaving or last Friday was her last day. She has left her job. My new counselor whom I haven't met is on annual leave so as of this week I do not have a counselor for the following week.

Now, as it turns out, I have found a vacancy in private industry. I am very happy. I am working as of next week for the National University Extension Association and it looks like a very exciting job for me. I found this on my own through friends of mine, professional friends of mine. After pounding the pavement and really hoping for a Federal job because this was my goal when I was overseas and when I came back home this was my goal, to get a Federal job and I have now found a job outside of the Government and I am looking forward to it very much.

The CHAIRMAN. You found this job outside the Government purely on your own through friends and word of mouth as it were and were not scared into it or guided into it by any way, shape or form by any of your contacts with the Federal Employment Service? Mr. LANTNER. That is exactly correct, sir.

The CHAIRMAN. In your quest for a job through Federal channels did you narrow your sights to purely Federal employment or did you

make it aware to your counselor that you might also be interested or indeed would be interested in private and civilian type employment? Mr. LANTNER. I made that point to my counselor although I did say that I was hoping for a Federal job.

The CHAIRMAN. Do I take it that it would be a fair summary of this experience of yours in the 2 months that you were to use your words-pounding the pavement, you have been interviewed by 18 different Federal agencies and interviewed more than once by some of them and the experience you have related about the lack of knowledge about whether a job would be opened or not, that is to put it mildly, a rather uncoordinated effort on the part of the Federal Government, at least your contact with them in those 2 months?

Mr. LANTNER. That is putting it very gently, Senator. I would agree with that.

The CHAIRMAN. What were you told at any of these agencies or in any of these interviews as to the value or worth of your military experience, such duties as you performed on those two assignments, one stateside and one in Vietnam, and you related what you did in that capacity as lieutenant (jg.). Did they say that it is valuable or that it is useful or that it is wonderful or what reaction did you get from the people in terms of that service?

Mr. LANTNER. The most popular reaction was simply that is interesting. No one really said that it was valuable.

Now, I have to mention one thing more about one of the agencies I did not go to. I did not go to the Department of Defense and this was a personal choice of mine. It is possible there were Defense jobs open. I did not go there. There probably are communications officers there, but in the Navy being in communications is a step up the ladder where it seems to me that in the civilian world communications is more of a career in itself. I was not interested in staying within communications and also I wanted a permanent job. There was a rift going on and what not. I didn't want to be part of that. So it is possible that there are gencies in Defense that would employ some of my background more readily than others. But as far as the other agencies I went tothey thought it was interesting. The fact that I had worked with enlisted men in the capacity of division officer I thought would have readily applied to many jobs and no one seemed to think this was the

case.

The CHAIRMAN. Was your tour in Vietnam the last part of your military assignment? That is when you completed that tour you came back and soon thereafter were discharged?

Mr. LANTNER. Yes, sir.

The CHAIRMAN. Either in the tour stateside or the final tour when you were in Vietnam, were you in any way led to believe-by reason of the fact that you were participating in a military endeavor, making a personal sacrifice, et cetera-that you were going to build up some brownie points insofar as when you returned to civilian life it would be helpful to you in getting a job? I mean, what did you do sitting around at night in Vietnam with other lieutenants, ensigns, or other officers talking "Boy, when this is over we are going to go back and get jobs." Was there optimism, specifically generated optimism about employment opportunities or what? What is the psychosis of future employment as regards military people?,

Mr. LANTNER. Well, specifically, Senator, my last duty station, I was the only reservist in the duty. The rest were all regular Navy. I was in an outfit with seven officers and 18 enlisted men. We were a very small liaison outfit serving the Seventh Air Force. We were the Navy's representatives through the Air Force and the men I was working with immediately were all regulars. They knew they had a career in the Navy but in my contact with other junior officers who are also Reserves, as myself, most of them were coming back and many of them were looking for Federal jobs and others were looking for jobs in private industry. But everyone had friends back here and everyone was writing overseas-jobs are very hard to come by. There wasn't much enthusiasm about-let me rephrase that-no one really had high hopes of getting a job immediately. We all knew it would take a good deal of work on our part and a good deal of travel to find a job. Very few people had hopes of finding a job in the particular city they wanted. In my case, I wanted Washington and other people wanted major cities and no one was real sure of finding a job in that one particular area.

The CHAIRMAN. All right. Then so far as these people with whom you had contact, fellow officers, by and large, I take it there was not any great degree of over-optimism about the simplicity of gaining a job once you were discharged?

Mr. LANTNER. That is correct.

The CHAIRMAN. Since you have been back-May 13 was your discharge date and while you were pounding the pavement, have you been on unemployment compensation?

Mr. LANTNER. Yes, sir; I have. And Iwould like to mention, Senator, that the people at the veterans' agencies, the Veterans' center and the civil service representative who was serving at the employment agency-they have been very helpful to me. They helped me get on unemployment compensation immediately and through exposure they have given me-introduced me to your staff members, also staff members of another Senator, and they have a program now where they are putting people's pictures on TV, and reading brief résumés on them. I was coming up later in the week. That exposure has been, I feel, very helpful to me as well as given me a slight amount of confidence. The Veterans' agencies I found to be very helpful. It is unfortunate that they don't have a more direct line to the Government or into employment agencies.

The CHAIRMAN. So even though you think there is a lack of coordination in this huge thing we call the Federal Government in terms of knowing what jobs are available in what Departments, you in no way question the sincerity or the motivation of the people with whom you have been dealing in trying to assist you during this transition period from being a returning veteran to the ultimate goal of getting a job? Mr. LANTNER. Yes; I feel my counselors and the people I have talked to have been sincere. I wish that some of the personnel officers within the Departments were equally sincere because I found that one man in the Department of Labor, this was one of the agencies within Labor, told me had I been to his office 6 days earlier he would have had a job for me. In fact, he hired someone at that time whose qualifications on paper were not as good as mine and he wanted to know why I hadn't come to him earlier. Well, this was the 17th agency I had been to. I

told him I could only go to so many in a given period and why hadn't he advertised his job and he made some kind of excuse there. It might have been an internal promotion, I don't know. He said he wished he had been aware I was looking for a job. At this point of time my name was on a roster. My name was being circulated through civil service channels. I feel he was not sincere with me. I never had an occasion like that with one of the veterans' representatives or my counselor.

The CHAIRMAN. If you do have one-what basic suggestion would you make to this committee, based on your 2 months' experience that would improve the situation as you see it, having gone to 18 different Federal agencies and been on sort of a treadmill until you got this job with private industry, totally unrelated to any of these interviews or contacts that you have had? Do you have any recommendations you would make to us in terms of how this system could be improved?

Mr. LANTNER. Yes, sir; I have been thinking about a question like this for a short while now. So I have thought of just a few suggestions to make. I knew when I was in Saigon that I wanted a Federal job. It is very easy in Saigon to take college boards, law boards, and to get a high school equivalency. The push is on-get your men to take advantage of these educational opportunities or testing opportunities. It seems to me that it would be very easy to offer the civil service entrance exam in Saigon for military people, for Government workers, because I found that the civil service rating was necessary before I could really get by the receptionist at various agencies.

Even though I had done well on law boards, and I have taken other formal exams, they wanted a civil service rating. Now, if I had taken my exam 3 months before I left Saigon I would have come back to the States with a rating in hand and I would have been a few steps ahead of where I was at the time.

Another suggestion, and the structure is already there, they have people trained in administering tests and these are usually sergeants or usually people within the military. So the structure is there; it is just the question of getting the exam over. And what really irks me most is the fact this Labor Employment Service simply did not know of the Federal vacancies. I don't expect them to know of merit promotions; those are in-house promotions but as far as Federal openings, vacancies in general, I felt my counselor should have been informed of these. I believe had she known about this and had she been told about them, because she seemed to know what was going on, she wanted me to report back to her what openings I found that I was qualified for.

It is computerized to an extent already. They have computer printouts. If you walk into the agency you will see a booklet which is one computer printout after another, listing openings. I don't think it would be difficult to put more openings in the booklets. It is all on cards anyhow. It is putting more cards in the pile and I think that would definitely be helpful. It would save many wasted hours, just going from one agency to another.

The CHAIRMAN. Well, I think you are making a good recommendation but let me try this on you as a practical question. You say there is a computer printout and you saw one on the desk of one of your counselors, I take it, it had lots of jobs listed around.

Mr. LANTNER. This is in the lobby, people can walk into the lobby and find the listings right there and thumb through it.

The CHAIRMAN. Hundreds of jobs listed in this calendar?

Mr. LANTNER. Yes, sir.

The CHAIRMAN. And of course you said all the jobs are not listed. But suppose they pumped in hundreds of more job listings, how would you be able to ferret through that list and find those that might be potentially suitable to you? Would it really be a practical thing that you could weed through all this?

Mr. LANTNER. Yes, sir; they have a system now, if you are a shorthand specialist or a stenographer or if you have worked with personnel, they have indexed, you can go to the one booklet that has jobs for you. If you are in social sciences or in engineering and right down the line. If you are a truck driver or if you are a stock clerk, you simply go to the index, find your category and look through the listings; it is computerized so the machinery is set up again. It is just a question of expanding it and making more agencies take advantage of it. I think it would be to the agencies' advantage because if this gentleman I had talked to at Labor was at all honest, he said my qualifications were better than the man he hired. If I had qualifications better than the other man, I would think if I had known about the job I would have been there applying for it and possibly getting the job.

The CHAIRMAN. Thank you very much. I think your testimony has been very helpful. I wish you well in this new job that you finally secured in the private sector. I wish your experience with the Federal Government had been more favorable but we are grateful to you for your testimony; you have been of help to us. Good luck.

Mr. LANTNER. Thank you, sir.

The CHAIRMAN. Mr. Farris, I read into the record some of your background. You were discharged on January 13, 1971, is that correct? STATEMENT OF STEVEN S. FARRIS, VETERAN

Mr. FARRIS. Yes, sir.

The CHAIRMAN. Have you been unemployed since that date?
Mr. FARRIS. Yes, sir.

The CHAIRMAN. And you are receiving unemployment compensation even now?

Mr. FARRIS. Yes, sir.

The CHAIRMAN. Could you, as the earlier witness, Mr. Lantner, describe for us in your own way, at your own pleasure, your experiences in job hunting since you were discharged from the service? By the way, 1425 N Street, in Washington-were you born, raised, and educated in this area?

Mr. FARRIS. No, sir; I wasn't born here but I have been raised here. for about 15 years.

The CHAIRMAN. Washington is your home?

Mr. FARRIS. Yes.

The CHAIRMAN. Go ahead. Tell us in your own way what experiences you have had in job hunting since January of this

year.

Mr. FARRIS. Sir, I have also been to the employment office and to Veterans' Assistance and out of the entire 6 months the only job people have been able to help me were the Veterans' Assistance and they