News

AGC Comments on Proposal to Change VETS-100 and VETS-100A Forms

In response to a request for comments from the U.S. Department of Labor’s Veterans’ Employment and Training Service (VETS), AGC submitted comments regarding proposed changes to the employer reporting requirements for federal contractors as outlined by the Vietnam Era Veterans’ Readjustment Assistance Act (VEVRAA).

Currently, contractors with contracts or subcontracts of $25,000 or more that were entered into prior to December 1, 2003, are required to annually report  the total number of employees and new hires who identify as belonging to one of the veteran categories protected under VEVRAA.  The form used to report the information is the VETS-100 form.   Contractors with contracts or subcontracts of $100,000 or more that were entered into on or after December 1, 2003, are required to report the same information using the VETS-100A form. 

The VETS proposed rule includes two major changes to those reporting requirements.  First, VETS recommends rescinding the regulations implementing the reporting requirements for contracts or subcontracts entered into before December 1, 2003.  This would be rescinded as such contracts probably no longer exist.  DOL’s Office of Federal Contract Compliance Programs (OFCCP) made the same change when implementing its revised regulations governing the affirmative-action requirements of contractors under VEVRAA.  Second, for the remaining covered contracts and subcontracts, contractors would be allowed to report, in the aggregate, the total number of employees and new hires who are protected veterans, instead of breaking down the number into specific categories of protected veterans.  The existing regulations require contractors to disclose the number of employees who have identified as disabled veterans by specific job category at each hiring location. 

Because the proposed rule decreases the reporting burden for federal contractors, AGC supports the recommended changes with two exceptions.  First, since a sample of the form used to report the required information was not released for review with the proposed rule, AGC suggested that VETS make all efforts to ensure the form’s ease of use for employers.   In addition, AGC offered to assist VETS during the design and review process.  Second, instead of the proposed effective date of one year after the effective date of the final rule, AGC requested that VETS align the effective date for compliance with the date that contractors and subcontractors must also comply with the written affirmative-action program requirements of OFCCP’s recently revised veterans rule.  As such, AGC recommended a compliance date of one year after the effective date of the final rule, or an effective date that is identical to the start of the company’s next affirmative-action plan cycle, whichever is later.

AGC will continue to monitor for any new developments and will notify members once final regulations are issued. 

For questions, please contact Tamika C. Carter, PHR, at cartert@agc.org.