408.230 Hiring
and promotion preference in public employment. (1) A public employer shall grant
a preference to a state servicemember, former state servicemember, veteran or
disabled veteran who applies for a vacant civil service position or seeks
promotion to a civil service position with a higher maximum salary rate and
who:
(a)(A)
Successfully completes an initial application screening or an application
examination for the position; or
(B) Successfully
completes a civil service test the employer administers to establish
eligibility for the position; and
(b) Meets the
minimum qualifications and any special qualifications for the position.
(2) The employer
shall grant the preference in the following manner:
(a) For an
initial application screening used to develop a list of persons for interviews,
the employer shall add five percentage points to a state servicemember’s,
former state servicemember’s or veteran’s score and 10 percentage points to a
disabled veteran’s score.
(b) For an
application examination, given after the initial application screening, that
results in a score, the employer shall add the preference to the total combined
examination score without allocating the preference to any single feature or
part of the examination. The employer shall add five percentage points to a
state servicemember’s, former state servicemember’s or veteran’s score and 10
percentage points to a disabled veteran’s score.
(c) For an
application examination that consists of an interview, an evaluation of the
state servicemember’s, former state servicemember’s or veteran’s performance,
experience or training, a supervisor’s rating or any other method of ranking an
applicant that does not result in a score, the employer shall give a preference
to the state servicemember, former state servicemember, veteran or disabled
veteran. An employer that uses an application examination of the type described
in this paragraph shall devise and apply methods by which the employer gives
special consideration in the employer’s hiring decision to state
servicemembers, former state servicemembers, veterans and disabled veterans.
(3) Preferences
of the type described in subsection (1) of this section are not a requirement
that the public employer appoint a state servicemember, former state
servicemember, veteran or disabled veteran to a civil service position.
(4) A public
employer shall appoint an otherwise qualified state servicemember, former state
servicemember, veteran or disabled veteran to a vacant civil service position
if the results of a state servicemember’s, former state servicemember’s,
veteran’s or disabled veteran’s application examination, when combined with the
state servicemember’s, former state servicemember’s, veteran’s or disabled
veteran’s preference, are equal to or higher than the results of an application
examination for an applicant who is not a state servicemember, former state
servicemember, veteran or disabled veteran.
(5) If a public
employer does not appoint a state servicemember, former state servicemember,
veteran or disabled veteran to a vacant civil service position, upon written
request of the state servicemember, former state servicemember, veteran or
disabled veteran, the employer, in writing, shall provide the employer’s
reasons for the decision not to appoint the state servicemember, former state
servicemember, veteran or disabled veteran to the position. The employer may
base a decision not to appoint the state servicemember, former state
servicemember, veteran or disabled veteran solely on the state servicemember’s,
former state servicemember’s, veteran’s or disabled veteran’s merits or
qualifications with respect to the vacant civil service position.
(6) Violation of
this section is an unlawful employment practice.
(7) A state
servicemember, former state servicemember, veteran or disabled veteran claiming
to be aggrieved by a violation of this section may file a verified written
complaint with the Commissioner of the Bureau of Labor and Industries in
accordance with ORS 659A.820.
(8) For purposes
of this section, “disabled veteran” includes a person who is receiving
service-connected compensation from the United States Department of Veterans
Affairs under 38 U.S.C. 1110 or 1131. [Amended by 1977 c.854 §3; 1989 c.507 §2;
1999 c.792 §1; 2007 c.525 §2; 2011 c.82 §1; 2018 c.91 §7; 2021 c.195 §1; 2025
c.137 §2]
Notes of Decisions
Multnomah Cnty. Sheriff's Off. v. Edwards, 399 P.3d 969 (Or. 2017).
· cites it 35× “ORS 408.230 (l)(a)(A). ORS 408.230(2) then sets out how public employers must grant preference for veterans and disabled veterans: “(a) For an initial application screening used to develop a list of persons for interviews, the employer shall add five preference points to a…”
Multnomah Cnty. Sheriff's Off. v. Edwards, 373 P.3d 1099 (Or. Ct. App. 2016).
· cites it 48× “In this case, we consider what ORS 408.230, commonly known as the veterans’ preference law, requires of a public employer that uses an unscored application process in its hiring and promotion decisions.”
Davis v. Tri-Cnty. Metro. Transp. Dist., 45 F. Supp. 3d 1222 (D. Or. 2014).
· cites it 7× “”) § 408.230; (2) discriminated and retaliated against her for filing a worker’s compensation claim, in violation of O.”
King v. Warner Pac. Coll., an Or. Corp., 437 P.3d 1172 (Or. Ct. App. 2019).
· cites it 5× “" As an example, plaintiff cites *164 ORS 408.230, which requires a public employer to accord "preference points" to military veterans in applications for public employment.”
Multnomah Cnty. Sheriff's Off. v. Edwards (Or. 2017).
· cites it 35× “BOLI adopted administrative rules to enforce the requirements of ORS 408.230. Among other things, those rules provide that, “[a]t each stage of the application process, a public employer will grant a preference to a veteran or disabled veteran who successfully completes an…”
Brown v. Dearborn, 628 P.2d 405 (Or. Ct. App. 1981).
· cites it 6× “” "(2) Once a veteran has used the preference provided for in ORS 408.230 and has successfully completed trial service and attained regular employe status, he may not use the preference again.”
Davis v. Civil Serv. Bd., 593 P.2d 1209 (Or. Ct. App. 1979).
· cites it 4× “235(1), which provides: "A veteran is eligible to use the preference provided for in ORS 408.230 only for a position for which application is made within 15 years of discharge or release from service in the Armed Forces.”
Sellers v. Jud. Dept., 500 P.3d 760 (Or. Ct. App. 2021).
· cites it 2× “082 (dis- crimination against uniformed service workers); ORS 408.230 - 408.237 (veterans’ preference in civil service).”
— Or. Rev. Stat. § 408.230(1) — 7 cases
Multnomah Cnty. Sheriff's Off. v. Edwards, 399 P.3d 969 (Or. 2017).
“ORS 408.230 (l)(a)(A). ORS 408.230(2) then sets out how public employers must grant preference for veterans and disabled veterans: “(a) For an initial application screening used to develop a list of persons for interviews, the employer shall add five preference points to a…”
Multnomah Cnty. Sheriff's Off. v. Edwards, 373 P.3d 1099 (Or. Ct. App. 2016).
“In this case, we consider what ORS 408.230, commonly known as the veterans’ preference law, requires of a public employer that uses an unscored application process in its hiring and promotion decisions.”
Davis v. Tri-Cnty. Metro. Transp. Dist., 45 F. Supp. 3d 1222 (D. Or. 2014).
“”) § 408.230; (2) discriminated and retaliated against her for filing a worker’s compensation claim, in violation of O.”
King v. Warner Pac. Coll., an Or. Corp., 437 P.3d 1172 (Or. Ct. App. 2019).
“" As an example, plaintiff cites *164 ORS 408.230, which requires a public employer to accord "preference points" to military veterans in applications for public employment.”
Brown v. Dearborn, 628 P.2d 405 (Or. Ct. App. 1981).
“” "(2) Once a veteran has used the preference provided for in ORS 408.230 and has successfully completed trial service and attained regular employe status, he may not use the preference again.”
— Or. Rev. Stat. § 408.230(1)(a)(A) — 1 case
Multnomah Cnty. Sheriff's Off. v. Edwards (Or. 2017).
“BOLI adopted administrative rules to enforce the requirements of ORS 408.230. Among other things, those rules provide that, “[a]t each stage of the application process, a public employer will grant a preference to a veteran or disabled veteran who successfully completes an…”
— Or. Rev. Stat. § 408.230(1)(b) — 1 case
Multnomah Cnty. Sheriff's Off. v. Edwards (Or. 2017).
“BOLI adopted administrative rules to enforce the requirements of ORS 408.230. Among other things, those rules provide that, “[a]t each stage of the application process, a public employer will grant a preference to a veteran or disabled veteran who successfully completes an…”
— Or. Rev. Stat. § 408.230(2) — 3 cases
Multnomah Cnty. Sheriff's Off. v. Edwards, 399 P.3d 969 (Or. 2017).
“ORS 408.230 (l)(a)(A). ORS 408.230(2) then sets out how public employers must grant preference for veterans and disabled veterans: “(a) For an initial application screening used to develop a list of persons for interviews, the employer shall add five preference points to a…”
Multnomah Cnty. Sheriff's Off. v. Edwards, 373 P.3d 1099 (Or. Ct. App. 2016).
“In this case, we consider what ORS 408.230, commonly known as the veterans’ preference law, requires of a public employer that uses an unscored application process in its hiring and promotion decisions.”
Multnomah Cnty. Sheriff's Off. v. Edwards (Or. 2017).
“BOLI adopted administrative rules to enforce the requirements of ORS 408.230. Among other things, those rules provide that, “[a]t each stage of the application process, a public employer will grant a preference to a veteran or disabled veteran who successfully completes an…”
— Or. Rev. Stat. § 408.230(2)(a) — 3 cases
Multnomah Cnty. Sheriff's Off. v. Edwards, 373 P.3d 1099 (Or. Ct. App. 2016).
“In this case, we consider what ORS 408.230, commonly known as the veterans’ preference law, requires of a public employer that uses an unscored application process in its hiring and promotion decisions.”
Multnomah Cnty. Sheriff's Off. v. Edwards, 399 P.3d 969 (Or. 2017).
“ORS 408.230 (l)(a)(A). ORS 408.230(2) then sets out how public employers must grant preference for veterans and disabled veterans: “(a) For an initial application screening used to develop a list of persons for interviews, the employer shall add five preference points to a…”
Multnomah Cnty. Sheriff's Off. v. Edwards (Or. 2017).
“BOLI adopted administrative rules to enforce the requirements of ORS 408.230. Among other things, those rules provide that, “[a]t each stage of the application process, a public employer will grant a preference to a veteran or disabled veteran who successfully completes an…”
— Or. Rev. Stat. § 408.230(2)(b) — 3 cases
Multnomah Cnty. Sheriff's Off. v. Edwards, 373 P.3d 1099 (Or. Ct. App. 2016).
“In this case, we consider what ORS 408.230, commonly known as the veterans’ preference law, requires of a public employer that uses an unscored application process in its hiring and promotion decisions.”
Multnomah Cnty. Sheriff's Off. v. Edwards, 399 P.3d 969 (Or. 2017).
“ORS 408.230 (l)(a)(A). ORS 408.230(2) then sets out how public employers must grant preference for veterans and disabled veterans: “(a) For an initial application screening used to develop a list of persons for interviews, the employer shall add five preference points to a…”
Multnomah Cnty. Sheriff's Off. v. Edwards (Or. 2017).
“BOLI adopted administrative rules to enforce the requirements of ORS 408.230. Among other things, those rules provide that, “[a]t each stage of the application process, a public employer will grant a preference to a veteran or disabled veteran who successfully completes an…”
— Or. Rev. Stat. § 408.230(2)(c) — 3 cases
Multnomah Cnty. Sheriff's Off. v. Edwards, 399 P.3d 969 (Or. 2017).
“ORS 408.230 (l)(a)(A). ORS 408.230(2) then sets out how public employers must grant preference for veterans and disabled veterans: “(a) For an initial application screening used to develop a list of persons for interviews, the employer shall add five preference points to a…”
Multnomah Cnty. Sheriff's Off. v. Edwards, 373 P.3d 1099 (Or. Ct. App. 2016).
“In this case, we consider what ORS 408.230, commonly known as the veterans’ preference law, requires of a public employer that uses an unscored application process in its hiring and promotion decisions.”
Multnomah Cnty. Sheriff's Off. v. Edwards (Or. 2017).
“BOLI adopted administrative rules to enforce the requirements of ORS 408.230. Among other things, those rules provide that, “[a]t each stage of the application process, a public employer will grant a preference to a veteran or disabled veteran who successfully completes an…”
— Or. Rev. Stat. § 408.230(2)(e) — 1 case
Multnomah Cnty. Sheriff's Off. v. Edwards, 373 P.3d 1099 (Or. Ct. App. 2016).
“In this case, we consider what ORS 408.230, commonly known as the veterans’ preference law, requires of a public employer that uses an unscored application process in its hiring and promotion decisions.”
— Or. Rev. Stat. § 408.230(3) — 2 cases
Multnomah Cnty. Sheriff's Off. v. Edwards, 399 P.3d 969 (Or. 2017).
“ORS 408.230 (l)(a)(A). ORS 408.230(2) then sets out how public employers must grant preference for veterans and disabled veterans: “(a) For an initial application screening used to develop a list of persons for interviews, the employer shall add five preference points to a…”
Multnomah Cnty. Sheriff's Off. v. Edwards (Or. 2017).
“BOLI adopted administrative rules to enforce the requirements of ORS 408.230. Among other things, those rules provide that, “[a]t each stage of the application process, a public employer will grant a preference to a veteran or disabled veteran who successfully completes an…”
— Or. Rev. Stat. § 408.230(4) — 3 cases
Multnomah Cnty. Sheriff's Off. v. Edwards, 399 P.3d 969 (Or. 2017).
“ORS 408.230 (l)(a)(A). ORS 408.230(2) then sets out how public employers must grant preference for veterans and disabled veterans: “(a) For an initial application screening used to develop a list of persons for interviews, the employer shall add five preference points to a…”
King v. Warner Pac. Coll., an Or. Corp., 437 P.3d 1172 (Or. Ct. App. 2019).
“" As an example, plaintiff cites *164 ORS 408.230, which requires a public employer to accord "preference points" to military veterans in applications for public employment.”
Multnomah Cnty. Sheriff's Off. v. Edwards (Or. 2017).
“BOLI adopted administrative rules to enforce the requirements of ORS 408.230. Among other things, those rules provide that, “[a]t each stage of the application process, a public employer will grant a preference to a veteran or disabled veteran who successfully completes an…”
— Or. Rev. Stat. § 408.230(5) — 2 cases
Multnomah Cnty. Sheriff's Off. v. Edwards, 373 P.3d 1099 (Or. Ct. App. 2016).
“In this case, we consider what ORS 408.230, commonly known as the veterans’ preference law, requires of a public employer that uses an unscored application process in its hiring and promotion decisions.”
Davis v. Tri-Cnty. Metro. Transp. Dist., 45 F. Supp. 3d 1222 (D. Or. 2014).
“”) § 408.230; (2) discriminated and retaliated against her for filing a worker’s compensation claim, in violation of O.”
— Or. Rev. Stat. § 408.230(6) — 2 cases
Multnomah Cnty. Sheriff's Off. v. Edwards, 399 P.3d 969 (Or. 2017).
“ORS 408.230 (l)(a)(A). ORS 408.230(2) then sets out how public employers must grant preference for veterans and disabled veterans: “(a) For an initial application screening used to develop a list of persons for interviews, the employer shall add five preference points to a…”
Multnomah Cnty. Sheriff's Off. v. Edwards (Or. 2017).
“BOLI adopted administrative rules to enforce the requirements of ORS 408.230. Among other things, those rules provide that, “[a]t each stage of the application process, a public employer will grant a preference to a veteran or disabled veteran who successfully completes an…”
— Or. Rev. Stat. § 408.230(7) — 3 cases
Multnomah Cnty. Sheriff's Off. v. Edwards, 399 P.3d 969 (Or. 2017).
“ORS 408.230 (l)(a)(A). ORS 408.230(2) then sets out how public employers must grant preference for veterans and disabled veterans: “(a) For an initial application screening used to develop a list of persons for interviews, the employer shall add five preference points to a…”
Davis v. Tri-Cnty. Metro. Transp. Dist., 45 F. Supp. 3d 1222 (D. Or. 2014).
“”) § 408.230; (2) discriminated and retaliated against her for filing a worker’s compensation claim, in violation of O.”
Multnomah Cnty. Sheriff's Off. v. Edwards (Or. 2017).
“BOLI adopted administrative rules to enforce the requirements of ORS 408.230. Among other things, those rules provide that, “[a]t each stage of the application process, a public employer will grant a preference to a veteran or disabled veteran who successfully completes an…”
— Or. Rev. Stat. § 408.230(l) — 1 case
Davis v. Tri-Cnty. Metro. Transp. Dist., 45 F. Supp. 3d 1222 (D. Or. 2014).
“”) § 408.230; (2) discriminated and retaliated against her for filing a worker’s compensation claim, in violation of O.”
— Or. Rev. Stat. § 408.230(l)(b) — 1 case
Multnomah Cnty. Sheriff's Off. v. Edwards, 399 P.3d 969 (Or. 2017).
“ORS 408.230 (l)(a)(A). ORS 408.230(2) then sets out how public employers must grant preference for veterans and disabled veterans: “(a) For an initial application screening used to develop a list of persons for interviews, the employer shall add five preference points to a…”
— Or. Rev. Stat. § 408.230(l)(c) — 1 case
Davis v. Tri-Cnty. Metro. Transp. Dist., 45 F. Supp. 3d 1222 (D. Or. 2014).
“”) § 408.230; (2) discriminated and retaliated against her for filing a worker’s compensation claim, in violation of O.”
Annotations are extracted automatically from the opinions in the
Syfert caselaw corpus and ranked by authority, recency, and
treatment. Dots show Syfertize treatment of the citing case itself.