GAO: Intel Agencies Need to Fix Reemployment Gaps For Reservists

Why it Matters

When the National Guard leave their jobs to answer the call of duty, federal law promises they can return. But a new government watchdog report finds that four of the nation's most powerful intelligence agencies have failed to fully codify those protections in their own internal guidance, leaving a legal safety net with holes in it for the very employees entrusted with the country's secrets.

The Government Accountability Office released its findings on May 21, finding that the Defense Intelligence Agency (DIA), the National Reconnaissance Office (NRO), the National Security Agency (NSA), and the FBI are each missing required provisions in their employee guidance under the Uniformed Services Employment and Reemployment Rights Act of 1994. All four agencies agreed with GAO's recommendations to fix the gaps.

The Big Picture

The Uniformed Services Employment and Reemployment Rights Act (USERRA) is the bedrock of military service employment protections in the United States. Enacted in 1994 and amended since, the law prohibits discrimination against employees based on military service and guarantees that service members can return to their civilian jobs after deployment.

For most federal agencies, the standard USERRA framework applies. But Congress carved out a separate, more detailed set of requirements for seven intelligence community elements, codified under sections 4315 and 4325 of title 38 of the U.S. Code. Those seven agencies are required by statute to include five specific provisions in their internal guidance, among them procedures for the Inspector General (IG) to investigate and resolve alleged violations of the USERRA. That last requirement is particularly significant: without a clear IG pathway, a service member who believes their reemployment rights were violated may have no obvious internal route to seek a remedy.

There are 18 intelligence community (IC) agencies and organizations in total. All 18 have some form of guidance addressing USERRA protections. But the law holds seven of them to a higher, more explicit standard, and GAO found that four of those seven are not meeting it.

What They're Saying

The four agencies cited in the report are not obscure outposts of the federal bureaucracy. The NSA is the nation's signals intelligence powerhouse. The FBI is the country's premier domestic law enforcement and counterintelligence agency. The DIA and NRO are critical nodes in the Pentagon's intelligence architecture. Together, they employ thousands of civilians, a portion of whom are also members of the National Guard or Reserve and may be called to active duty at any time.

GAO's review covered fiscal years 2019 through 2025. During that period, officials from all seven IC elements with distinct statutory requirements reported that every service member who went on military duty for 30 days or more was reemployed upon return. That finding matters: the agencies are not being accused of actively denying reemployment. The problem is structural. The guidance that governs how reemployment works, and what recourse exists if something goes wrong, is incomplete.

The distinction is important. A service member who is reemployed without incident may never need to consult the internal guidance. But a service member who returns to find a demotion, a pay cut, or a hostile work environment needs to know where to turn. If the guidance does not spell out the IG's role in investigating alleged violations, that service member may not know their rights, and the agency may not have clear procedures to follow.

Political Stakes

This GAO study was not requested by a specific congressional committee or individual lawmaker. It was mandated by statute, specifically through a provision in the Senator Elizabeth Dole 21st Century Veterans Healthcare and Benefits Improvement Act, which directed GAO to examine how the intelligence community protects the rights of service members under USERRA.

The act's namesake, former Senator Elizabeth Dole of North Carolina, built a career around veterans' advocacy. The legislation bearing her name reflects a broader congressional push to strengthen the systems that support military personnel and veterans, not just in healthcare and benefits, but in their civilian employment lives as well.

The statutory mandate signals that Congress was not content to assume that the intelligence community was handling these obligations on its own. Lawmakers wanted an independent accounting, and GAO delivered one that found meaningful pitfalls.

Moving Forward

GAO issued four recommendations, each directed through the relevant cabinet secretary to the head of the noncompliant agency.

The Secretary of Defense is directed to ensure that the directors of the DIA, NRO, and NSA each update their guidance to include all five of the IC-specific reemployment provisions required by law. The Attorney General is directed to ensure the FBI director does the same.

All four agencies concurred with the recommendations. All four remain open, meaning the corrective actions have not yet been completed. GAO will track implementation.

The concurrence is notable. None of the agencies pushed back against or disputed GAO's findings. That alignment suggests that the gaps were the product of administrative oversight rather than deliberate resistance, but it does not make the omissions any less consequential for the service members who work within those agencies.

The Bottom Line

The intelligence community occupies a unique space in the federal employment landscape. Its employees often hold security clearances, work in sensitive positions, and operate under rules that differ from the rest of the civil service. That distinctiveness is precisely why Congress imposed heightened USERRA requirements on seven of its elements in the first place.

The GAO report, at 14 pages, is not a sweeping indictment of how the intelligence community treats its military personnel. Officials at all seven agencies with distinct statutory obligations say every qualifying service member was reemployed over a six-year span. But compliance with the letter of the law, including the procedural scaffolding that protects service members when things go wrong, is not optional. Four of the seven agencies have not yet built that scaffolding fully, and the watchdog is now on record saying so.

Access the Legis1 platform for comprehensive political news, data, and insights.