 I'm your host Calvin Griffin, and I always, always start out the program with this little intro as far as the, for those of you who may not seen the program before, here we talk about a number of issues that concern our active and also our veterans community, and we try to bring people on that will give you insightful information to what's happening and some of the things that's on the horizon. Today my special guest is Mr. Steve Kelly, he's been a guest before, and he's going to give us some updated information on a lot of things that's going on on the legal side. But before we begin that, just like to share, yesterday I was able to go to Hickam to witness the repatriation of 64 sets of remains from the Korean War. These were Korean soldiers, I think originally what they said, the remains were co-mingled with American remains, and with the technologies that have been developed, they were able to narrow down and be able to return these remains to the Korean families. Here a couple of months ago we talked about the MIA and POW issue, had Mr. Hansen was on the program, and this is an issue that still hasn't been fully resolved as far as the families of the missing individuals. In the future we're going to bring on individuals from the government who will give a better clarification on this issue. We have the different holidays or different commemorative events that honor those Vietnam vets who are still alive, and also a number of other events also. But still these families need closure, and we are trying to go ahead and get that information so we can see what's being done to allow this to happen. But at this moment what I'd like to do is I'm going to do Steve, Steve, how you doing there? In dealing with the POWs and the MIAs, one of the things that brought in my mind is saying that when they were captured or come missing, they were employees of the federal government. So if they're employees to the federal government, do they stop compensation going to them which would go, should go to their families until they find that they're dead or find their remains, and then they give them the survival benefits. But until they retrieve the bodies and stuff and dealing with the issue, they should, don't know if they are discharged from the service, and they should not be discharged from the service because then they were captured or missing in a line of duty. So thereby they should have some type of compensation going to the family based on that. I think when they're in MIA status, they still, up to a certain point, they are, they still, the families still receive the benefits or whatever, to what extent and how long that's going to be a story. Because right now we have, it was a couple months ago, I had, it was a punch bowl and it was a ceremony for a World War II soldier who they just recently identified. And even though the immediate family had passed away, they had the other generations that cheered up. And even for them, it was very emotional as far as having closure, even though like say the immediate family whose brothers and sisters weren't there to acknowledge his return, but this is something that's extremely important to a lot of families. I mean, not knowing where your loved one is, I mean, you know that they're deceased, but the thing is you want to have the opportunity in some form or fashion, a closure to know what's going on. And I think in some cases our government has been a little bit remiss as far as dealing with that. And that's why, as I meant to refer to the program we did a couple months ago, as far as with the POWs in Vietnam, what happened with them afterwards. Because not all of them were brought back. It's nice to think that we can live up to the phrase that no man left behind. But unfortunately, in this case, I don't think that's the case. And I think there's definitely enough information that cooperates on that information. So this still needs to be addressed. And I hope that sometime in the future, we will be able to get some on the program that we'll be able to go ahead and give a better clarification of the situation, how it's being rectified, if the information is going to be released by the government on anything and everything concerning any POWs, MIAs that are still in the books. You know, and it goes, unfortunately, this is not anything new to this generation or past generation, even though in World War Two, there were tens of thousands of POWs and POWs that weren't returned, that went to Russia and went to other places. But again, that's another story. But, you know, as far as getting into, I'll touch on it briefly, but as far as the hard facts, figures, things that are in nature, I want to make sure we're completely accurate when we talk about this issue. So that's what I'll be doing in the future about that. Well, one of the things it kind of bothers me in a sense of, since they were on active duty at the time that they were POWs and MIAs. So did they, the pay stop or what happens to that? When you look at the law, look at the rules and say that their income doesn't come back to them until they come back to the United States. So I think that's wrong. In a sense, if they were POWs or MIAs in the line of duty, they should compensation for the salary and promotion they should have had until they get the body concrete saying that they are no longer living. I agree with you on that one. The thing is, again, at this point, we would assume that our government is doing the right thing when they do go into that status. But from what information is coming out, that may not totally be the case. So again, not to make it disparaging remarks against the government or what they're trying to do as far as the compensation. But there are certain things that need to be cleared up because I think it's very important because if you have young people coming into the military right now and they serve, they want to be assured, at least that they're going to be brought home or whatever effort is going to be made to identify them. Right, exactly. So that's the one point I want to touch on as far as that's concerned. Anyhow, like I say, in the future, we will have people like say, we'll give that definitive information and encourage anybody that's out there. One other thing also I'd like to bring up. Unfortunately, we still have a number of POWs or people are missing as MIA. Let me make that distinction between POW and MIA. As far as MIA, if unfortunately you have a loved one or you know, someone that has one, someone in that status and no matter how long it's been, the Joint Accounting Agency, they have a program set up where you can provide DNA. And some people say, you know, if you really want to know, get in touch with them. I don't have the number right now, but I will pass it on to you. But you can go to the Joint POW MIA up at Hickam. They will give you the you can get the information from them anyhow. But if you do have someone in that status, you know, someone, please donate your DNA. Get a sample of the DNA to them. And it may help them to identify someone like say that a loved one in your family, you know, that no matter how long it's been with the technologies, they are able to go ahead and give you a pretty accurate assessment of, you know, the genetic background, you know, to help bring closure to the families. And even though there's a lot of things that you've been working on in the past, anyhow, just to recap on some of the things you've done, you mentioned, of course, that you, as far as with the legal part of it, there's a lot of things in the legal status. Like say people are not aware of even active duty people and veterans that they may be missing out on certain benefits that are their entitled to their status as a veteran. Can you give us a clarification or point out something that, you know? Well, for the last five years, I've been trying to get the agencies to allow us to be having a status of an employee. So one of the things that I've discovered is that we are outside of being a government employee because they give us the status of saying that we are members of the armed forces. With that title, you're not an employee of the government. So thereby what it does is give the armed forces complete control of what happens to you. So you don't have constitutional rights with the means of that title of being a member of the armed forces. But but Congress made us employees 1948 and 1935, but they don't use. Why did they use that designation as being an employee? I mean, because, you know, as far as when you first told me about it also, a little bit confused between being a service member, a veteran and an employee being in the status of an employee legally. What does that mean? Or is that means you get not only you get compensation for hurt on the job, if you there's a means of Department of Labor is saying if you get hurt for a federal employee, if you get hurt on the job, they're supposed to report to the Department of Labor under OWCP on a form between up to six days, saying you got hurt on the job. OK, so that's for all employees. Since we're not classified as employees, the military departments don't have to do that. And thereby you have a problem getting all your benefits because they don't report your work related injury. To OWCP. OK, but people would say veterans have benefits. So therefore, the status that you're talking about being a veteran status is different from having a status as an employee because the status of a veteran is after employment, meaning that you belong into a sense of an organization. This the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals stipulated that veterans do not have constitutional rights because it's an organization that doesn't belong to the individual. So when I got that from the Ninth Circuit, I had to go do some research. OK, to put that in lead terms for the average individual like myself. I mean, this when you talk in certain legal terms, it goes over my head, you know, and I watched the number of episodes of LA law, but still, I still don't know a lot of things. Anyhow, OK, what I'm saying as far as in lay terms, like say, again, as far as OK, you have the veterans, veterans benefits, as you're saying, right? Veterans benefits are separate from from the other one from being an employee. OK, if an individual out there wants to know as far as their status, that you say as an employee of the government, you will get that. OK, what is the reason why they wouldn't get it? And like say, why would there still be that classification on the books as being an employee because there is not being enforced? There are certain laws that are out there to stipulate that they are members of the armed forces. That's a category entitled to the law. But the other laws to stipulate that you were classified in 1948 as a employee of the government. All the military is an employee, but they don't use that in their modern sense of identifying your status. You're not having that status as an employee of the government. So when you have the status of an employee, it is the matter of duty that you perform, meaning that although you have the rank in grade of the military, that doesn't mean that you're performing duties that are specifically one just to the military. You have two occupations that are being done. One, you have a military obligation. Then you have a civil service classification that you don't even know you have. And in that, they don't separate you as an employee of the federal government. They separate you from the military. OK, if all this is on the books, why aren't. Isn't it forced or why isn't it recognized by there? A lot of people out there say that we want to take care of the veterans, things of that nature. If this is on the books, I know what it's about and it can benefit those who earn this, whatever they're entitled to. All right. Why isn't it being enforced? Because like a lot of things you mentioned go back as far as free World War two, in fact, right after World War one, that you say are in the books that are not being utilized. If they're not being utilized or enforced, OK, why? Why? Because in the sense of in 1916, Congress wrote a statute that stipulated if you get hurt on the job, you have the same status as a civilian. OK, thereby you are a civilian once you get hurt on the job. So they still want to maintain you as being military so they could control money in a sense of thereby you are allowed in Congress, allotted you to be at the lowest compensation of being an employee of the government is a GS 15. OK. They don't want to give that. All right. We'll get, you know, we'll get into that a little bit more. But we're going to take a short break. Anyhow, and we'll come back later, we'll go ahead and follow up on this and see if we get a better clarification. So for those again who were out there that don't fully understand what's going on, some of the terminologies or statutes, we're going to try to clarify that. I think it should break. And again, this is Hawaii in uniform and please stay tuned. Hey, Stan the Energyman here on Think Tech Hawaii and they won't let me do political commentary. So I'm stuck doing energy stuff, but I really like energy stuff. So I'm going to keep on doing it. So join me every Friday on Stan the Energyman at lunchtime at noon on my lunch hour. We're going to talk about everything energy, especially if it begins with the word hydrogen. We're going to definitely be talking about it. We'll talk about how we can make Hawaii cleaner, how we can make the world a better place. Just basically save the planet. Even Miss America can't even talk about stuff like that anymore. We got it nailed down here. So we'll see you on Friday at noon with Stan the Energyman. Aloha. Aloha. My name is Mark Shklav. I am the host of Think Tech Hawaii's Law Across the Sea. Law Across the Sea is on Think Tech Hawaii every other Monday at 11 a.m. Please join me where my guests talk about law topics and ideas and music and Hawaii Anna all across the sea from Hawaii and back again. Aloha. OK, you're back with Hawaii Uniform. Again, I'm your host Calvin Griffin and my special guest today is Mr. Steve Kelly. And again, we're going to continue our conversation about getting the clarification of being an employee. If you've served in the military, whether you're a employee or a veteran or a combination of both or, you know, and what some of the things that you may be entitled to that haven't been enforced by that's on the books, but maybe not have not been enforced for whatever reasons. And Steve, you wanted to expand on that. There's a statue which I want to read to you. This is Title 5, Section 61A, whose subsequent to May 1st, 1940, shall have entered upon duty of naval service and the land of naval forces of the United States may voluntary entitlement or enlistment and otherwise shall be entitled to receive in addition to their military pay compensation in their civilian position. Now, we don't know that we're doing this. And why is it being enforced? Because it's not being enforced. The question I would have also, and I think some people may ask, all right, we still have veterans who are alive from very few from World War Two, but they're still alive. Right. All right. Korea, Vietnam. And when we had the draft status, OK, even though they were drafted, where they still consider they still consider they go on active duty. So once you become an employee, you should have benefits as such, because there's a law that says it doesn't matter how short or how long you've been employed, just as long as you sign that dotted line and become an employee of the government, you are having the right to all benefits which Congress didn't outline for you to have. OK. What is some of the ways that, OK, they have that status. Now, there's things that they're entitled to. What form or where would they, what agency would they contact to find out how and, again, or if they qualify under that statute of being a federal employee? You're not going to just the statute then as the attorney general in the letter, which you have in front of you, stipulate that you must apply to the EEOC, which means the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission is based on race, color and sex. And the other is Department of Labor, which gives you saying that there's a law that stipulates when you leave the service, they're supposed to put you back to work as a civilian. There's a statute that says it and they don't do that. So what I did was file for my right to go back to work, not being military, but being a civilian. So I haven't heard back from that because the letter from the Attorney General on June 2 of this year stipulated that retaliation, if you got anything that's wrong with you. And one of the things that we didn't have under the AMA, the American Medical Association, did not put in the DSM, which we're a diagnostic medical manual, is racial problems and then having adjustment, having to deal with stress, having to deal with the racism. There's a medical term and medical action, which they did not allow doctors to evaluate. Racial anxiety was not allowed doctors in the military to write that as a diagnosis when you complain about a problem. OK, that even is up to, I guess, to the current times. Right, exactly. Because we all know that, like I said, as far as the system has not been equitable in the one cases, even in the military, we want to believe that we have a good melting pot, if you want to call it, like I say, a cross-section of people that represent the society. But in the past, there have been certain disparities in how certain ethnic groups have been treated in the World War Two, like, say, for example, recently like that, with some of the black veterans that came back, like, say, they weren't given the benefits that other non-blacks were given. That's the opportunities, education, things of that nature. That doesn't, not blanket, but it wasn't extensive as it was in a lot of cases. All right, so what you're saying now is even now with the, if you had a veteran that went to the EEOC or to the Department of Labor, they would have to find them a job or how does that work? In the sense of the agencies themselves are supposed to have within their peripheral vision of saying, once you are discharged, they're supposed to put you on a priority placement list. And in this, they don't put a lot of veterans on the priority placement list because they don't consider you as being displaced. So here now, if you have a disability, you are displaced because you can't go to work. OK, if, again, if you go back, if you, again, if a veteran lives listening now and they go, like, say to these different agencies, the veteran, you guys need to find me a job because that's part of the statute and everything else. And they say, well, I don't care. I never heard of it. We're not going to force it. Then right now they have a program that helps the modern sense of the people who get out of service. So the people from deserts, not from the last conflict, they have this in place for them. But anybody prior to that doesn't get it in a sense of saying, so here when I got out of service in 1978, I did not have the right not only to file an EEO complaint with the EEOC. You can't file a complaint about your discrimination that you're feeling in the racial anxiety because the agency has their own EEO people who don't deal with that. They just deal with the plain race, color, sexism, and that's it. If disability was not on the market line, thereby, you couldn't go in complain about the fact that you did not get adequate treatment, you did not get. Rehabilitation and you did not have the opportunity to go back to work. So now there's a 1970 law that they cannot do that to you. They can't take anything away from you once you go into the hospital. And there's a law that says if you come from the hospital, they got to give you a job. OK, because a job release from the hospital saying that you're OK to go back to work. Well, when I went to court and they said that I was qualified, I didn't know that meant that I could then then go back to the agency and ask for a job. OK, a lot of people ask you have all this information. You've done all the different steps as far as you do diligence, as far as the statutes, legal precedence and everything else. Personally, how has that affected you? How has anything positive come out? Like say, were you able to go and use those statutes, use these different regulations in your favor? Are you still are you still being stonewalled? Or how's it going? Well, with that letter from the Attorney General's office from the Department of Justice, stipulating under the statutes, he's saying what's unconstitutional. Right. So being unconstitutional meaning they took indirect measures to stop you from doing something. OK, again, the question I have is how has it benefited you directly? So actually, you're the one. I mean, I know you for a number of years now. I know your efforts that you've been putting out there. Again, anything positive has come out for you because like say a lot of people like say, well, that's that question. If you're putting the information out, then even like say, there's a lot of stopgaps in the system or whatever it is. Is it just a, you know, a futile attempt to get out there and try to do something you're legally right and they're morally wrong? Or, you know, and the thing is what can be done. But how? Yeah. So what I did was I applied for compensation. OK, I applied for my right that I should have gotten. So that's what that letter stipulates. They retaliated against me. So even in dealing with filing your complaints, even in writing Congress, they didn't do anything. So he is saying that I can go back and take care of this in a sense of saying that long as I follow his direction, go back and apply, go back and apply on a complaint form and outline all the things that were wrong that they I didn't get. So long that I didn't get it. I know a lot of other people didn't get it also. OK. So again, it gets out. I mean, the bottom line is when we get out to we to mention about retaliation, things of that nature, because, you know, if there's something that's on the books and I know for a fact, you know, if you have getting certain benefits under the VA and if you challenge certain things and certain words to verbiage, they will tell you if you challenge it, we may take something away from you. You know, so what you need to do is keep your mouth shut and be happy. Yeah. But see, there's a law that stipulates they can't do that. There's a statute that says that they can't do that. There's it's something again. But we don't we don't know it's on the books that they're saying that they can't make that threat to you. And if that's intimidation, so they're not supposed to do that. There's I have the statute here, you know, now not going to fight. But I can show it to you if you want to if they make a means to saying that we're not going to give you the benefits. It's like that, well, if you got retired from the service, you can't have the benefits, total benefits from the VA. The law that was run and passed by Congress saying they can't do that. They have to give you the full benefit of each one of those laws. Right. And they turn around and make their own rules to say that, OK, we don't want to give these certain people certain benefits. OK. So that's not so thereby they have a CFR, which they follow. But the law that didn't outlines that doesn't allow them to do that. OK, there's a lot more we can get into right now. Like say, I like say this personally, I appreciate what you do. I know you're trying to get the word out there and like say, I know that there's a number of rule blocks you've been running into. Because if you were able to be successful with this, this will have a far reaching effect within veterans and military community. Right. So I understand the way we get down to the wire on this one in the aisle. But we're going to do a follow up on this. And again, I appreciate what you're doing. I keep up the good work. That's the only thing I can say. I hope everything works out all right. But I think we've got about 15 seconds left. But I want to thank you for coming on the program. And real quick, what's your number if you got one to give out? Yeah, people want to get into touch with me. In touch with me, my number is 808-772-6014. Steve Kelly. Great. Okay, Steve, thanks a lot for coming on the program again. No problem. Again, keep up the good work. I want to thank the viewers for your staying tuned to the program. If you have any questions, of course, give us a call or email us. Let us know. We always want feedback. Thank you. God bless. And until that time.