FORT BENNING, Ga. Mar 1 2008–In light of recent allegations by Fort Benning veterans, post officials are now defending changes to Army Regulation 190-56.
The policy mandates that Department of the Army civilian guards and police officers take a physical agility test to keep their jobs.
“This increased fitness requirement reflects the Army’s desire to improve the installation security posture during this time of war…Fort Benning leadership has been sensitive to striking a balance between fulfilling the change in requirements to protect the Community and the potential impacts to the lives of the effected personnel,” said Monica Manganero, Communications Director for the Fort Benning Public Affairs Office.
The veterans affected, though, do not agree, and say they should be grand-fathered into their jobs, regardless of the new policy.
“You hired me knowing I had some limitation. You hired me knowing because I had proof of that, and now you change the rules in midstream,” said Wesley Lee, a Department of Army Guard who has not been medically cleared to take the exam, and may face removal.
“It’s wrong. You do not hire an individual in, change the game plan after they hire on, then fire them if they can’t pass it. It’s ethically wrong,” said James Coker, another Department of Army Guard.
According to Fort Benning, three Department of Army guards who could not pass the physical agility test are now facing possible termination.
The post says they did offer them one-year positions in non-security jobs, but all three refused.
Those guards have brought their labor union, the American Federation of Government Employees into the fight, as well voicing their concerns in Washington.
Congressman Sanford Bishop and his caseworkers have tried to create avenues for the veterans to voice their concerns, and have been involved in several meetings on the topic.
“We would hope that the Army has justification for these kinds of regulations, which unfortunately seems to be adversely impacting a group of people who have given a lot to the Army, Fort Benning and the United States over the years,” said Caroline Burns, Press Secretary for Bishop, the Democrat representing Georgia’s 2nd District.
Congressman Mike Rogers has also been in contact with the AFGE about the possible removals.
“Congressman Rogers has been working to get to the bottom of this to make sure our veterans are being treated as fairly as possible,” said Shea Snider, Spokesperson for Rogers, the Republican representing Alabama’s 3rd District.
Congressman Lynn Westmoreland’s staff has also discussed the problems at Fort Benning.
“Congressman Westmoreland is willing to look into this matter, and to facilitate or take part in meetings between Fort Benning and the guards involved,” said Brian Robinson, Deputy Chief of Staff for Westmoreland, the Republican representing Georgia’s 3rd District.
No matter who supports them, though, the veterans say they will continue their fight until all of their fellow employees are able to keep their jobs.
“It’s degrading…these are senior police officers, and you can’t do no better than this,” said Lee.
The AFGE labor union, who represents the three guards facing proposed removals, has not taken any legal action yet…but they do say the physical agility tests are arbitrary and not validated.
The policy mandates that Department of the Army civilian guards and police officers take a physical agility test to keep their jobs.
“This increased fitness requirement reflects the Army’s desire to improve the installation security posture during this time of war…Fort Benning leadership has been sensitive to striking a balance between fulfilling the change in requirements to protect the Community and the potential impacts to the lives of the effected personnel,” said Monica Manganero, Communications Director for the Fort Benning Public Affairs Office.
The veterans affected, though, do not agree, and say they should be grand-fathered into their jobs, regardless of the new policy.
“You hired me knowing I had some limitation. You hired me knowing because I had proof of that, and now you change the rules in midstream,” said Wesley Lee, a Department of Army Guard who has not been medically cleared to take the exam, and may face removal.
“It’s wrong. You do not hire an individual in, change the game plan after they hire on, then fire them if they can’t pass it. It’s ethically wrong,” said James Coker, another Department of Army Guard.
According to Fort Benning, three Department of Army guards who could not pass the physical agility test are now facing possible termination.
The post says they did offer them one-year positions in non-security jobs, but all three refused.
Those guards have brought their labor union, the American Federation of Government Employees into the fight, as well voicing their concerns in Washington.
Congressman Sanford Bishop and his caseworkers have tried to create avenues for the veterans to voice their concerns, and have been involved in several meetings on the topic.
“We would hope that the Army has justification for these kinds of regulations, which unfortunately seems to be adversely impacting a group of people who have given a lot to the Army, Fort Benning and the United States over the years,” said Caroline Burns, Press Secretary for Bishop, the Democrat representing Georgia’s 2nd District.
Congressman Mike Rogers has also been in contact with the AFGE about the possible removals.
“Congressman Rogers has been working to get to the bottom of this to make sure our veterans are being treated as fairly as possible,” said Shea Snider, Spokesperson for Rogers, the Republican representing Alabama’s 3rd District.
Congressman Lynn Westmoreland’s staff has also discussed the problems at Fort Benning.
“Congressman Westmoreland is willing to look into this matter, and to facilitate or take part in meetings between Fort Benning and the guards involved,” said Brian Robinson, Deputy Chief of Staff for Westmoreland, the Republican representing Georgia’s 3rd District.
No matter who supports them, though, the veterans say they will continue their fight until all of their fellow employees are able to keep their jobs.
“It’s degrading…these are senior police officers, and you can’t do no better than this,” said Lee.
The AFGE labor union, who represents the three guards facing proposed removals, has not taken any legal action yet…but they do say the physical agility tests are arbitrary and not validated.
