페이지 이미지
PDF
ePub

COMMITTEE ON APPROPRIATIONS

HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

SEVENTY-FIRST CONGRESS

WILLIAM R. WOOD, Indiana, Chairman LOUIS C. CRAMTON, Michigan.

JOSEPH W. BYRNS, Tennessee. EDWARD H. WASON, New Hampshire.

JAMES P. BUCHANAN, Terss. GEORGE HOLDEN TINKHAM, Massachusetts. EDWARD T. TAYLOR, Colorado. BURTON L. FRENCH, Idaho.

WILLIAM B, OLIVER, Alabama. MILTON W. SHREVE, Pennsylvania.

ANTHONY J. GRIFFIN, New York L. J. DICKINSON, Iowa.

JOHN N, SANDLIN, Louisiana, FRANK MURPHY, Ohio.

WILLIAM.A. AYRES, Kansas. JOHN W. SUMMERS, Washington.

ROSS A. COLLINS, Mississippi. HENRY E. BARBOUR, California,

WILLIAM W. HASTINGS, Oklahoma. ERNEST R. ACKERMAN, New Jersey.

WILLIAM C. WRIGHT, Georgia. GUY U. HARDY, Colorado.

CLARENCE CANNON, Missouri. JOHN TABER, New York.

CLIFTON A. WOODRUM, Virginia. MAURICE H. THATCHER, Kentucky.

WILLIAM W. ARNOLD, Ilinois. FRANK CLAGUE, Minnesota.

JOHN J. BOYLAN, New York.
ROBERT G. SIMMONS, Nebraska.
WILLIAM P. HOLADAY, Illinois.
ROBERT L. BACON, New York.
GEORGE A. WELSH, Pennsylvania.
JOHN C. ALLEN, Ilinois.
RICHARD B. WIGGLESWORTH, Massachusetts.

MARCELLUS C. SHEILD, Clerk

APPROPRIATIONS, DEPARTMENT OF LABOR, 1932

HEARINGS CONDUCTED BY THE SUBCOMMITTEE, MESSRS. MILTON W. SHREVE (CHAIRMAN), GEORGE HOLDEN TINKHAM, ERNEST R. ACKERMAN, ROBERT L. BACON, WILLIAM B. OLIVER, AND ANTHONY J. GRIFFIN, OF THE COMMITTEE ON APPROPRIATIONS, HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES, IN CHARGE OF THE DEPARTMENT OF LABOR APPROPRIATION BILL FOR THE FISCAL YEAR 1932, ON THE DAYS FOLLOWING, NAMELY:

MONDAY, DECEMBER 15, 1930.

STATEMENTS OF HON. WILLIAM N. DOAK, SECRETARY; HON. ROBE CARL WHITE, ASSISTANT SECRETARY; SAMUEL J. GOMPERS, CHIEF CLERK

before us.

Mr. SHREVE. We will now take up that section of the appropriation bill that relates to the Department of Labor. We are very pleased to have with us the new Secretary, Mr. Doak.

Mr. Doak, if you desire to make a statement concerning the department, we will be very pleased to hear you at this time.

Secretary Doak. Mr. Chairman and gentlemen of the committee: I did not come for the purpose of giving you any detailed information. I did come over for the purpose of paying my respects and to get acquainted with the committee, and to assure them of my desire to cooperate in solving properly the problems that we have

I have a very efficient corps of department chiefs. They are thoroughly capable of taking care of the situation and will give you any information that you may need.

Of course, like the head of every other department, I believe that we should have that which is reasonable and proper in the way of appropriations. I have not had an opportunity to go into any of the details, except in a most casual way. I feel quite sure that my associates will be able to furnish you any information that you may desire and I ask you to be just as liberal as you can.

I might say that with the legislation now in process of formulation we may have to come in a little later for a few items in a supplemental appropriation. We can not tell exactly how some of this emergency legislation will affect our appropriations. There are several things that are being mentioned which are being given consideration and which may make it necessary for us to come back for some further appropriations, but on the general appropriation bill I think that all the items have been gone over very thoroughly with the Bureau of the Budget and a plan outlined which for the present I suppose we will have to accept.

1

I considered it not only a privilege but really a duty to come over and meet with the committee and to be present at least during a part of your deliberations.

I appreciate very much your courtesy in giving me an opportunity to make this brief statement.

Mr. SHREVE. Mr. Secretary, we shall be very pleased to have you with us.

COMPARISON OF APPROPRIATIONS, 1931, AND ESTIMATES, 1932 Mr. OLIVER. Mr. Secretary, if you have it convenient, will you kindly insert at this point in the record a statement showing the comparison between the Budget estimates for 1932 and the appropriations made for 1931 ?

Secretary Doak. Here is a statement that we had prepared which gives that information.

(The statement referred to is as follows:)

Comparison of appropriation, 1931 and Budget est imate, 1932

[merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][ocr errors][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][ocr errors][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small]
[ocr errors]

Mr. SHREVE. Your first item is in the Office of the Secretary, - Salaries."

Secretary of Labor, $15,000; Assistant Secretary, Second Assistant Secrt tary, and other personal services in the District of Columbia, $205,460: in a!! $220,460.

For 1931 you had an appropriation of $209,760. There is a cosiderable increase asked for, which you will please explain.

Mr. GOMPERS. The first increase is to take care of some reallocaions. Last year there were four positions reallocated in the office of the secretary, with a total increased expenditure of approximately $1,700.

That was taken up by the transfer of approximately $600 from one of our other appropriations, as provided by law, and by failure o make promotions as vacancies occurred. When people went out from the upper steps of the grades, new ones coming in were appointed at the minimum of the grades, so that we needed only approximately $100 to take care of the reallocations. This year we are ip against the same proposition, and I am afraid we are going to

un short. The department is trying by not making any promotions co take up those allocations and have gotten to the stage where we are going to require very little in order to do it. But for the last vear and a half there have been very few, if any, promotions in he secretary's office, due to the fact that the reallocations took up all the money. In order not to come to the Congress for a deficiency ke handled it in that way.

Mr. SHREVE. You are providing now for promotions in this bill, are you not?

Mr. GOMPERS. These promotions are those which are set out by he Bureau of the Budget. The department did not ask for them primarily. It was part of the scheme, which I suppose was explained o you by other departments, that we were supposed to follow a plan which would show how much it would cost to bring all positions ip to the average of the grades, what it would cost to give everybody 1-step promotions within the average of the grade. The imount required to make 1-step promotions for the office of the Secretary was $4,280 and the Bureau of the Budget allowed us $2,040, for that purpose, also the sum of $2,040 was allowed to take up the increases called for by the Brookhart Act.

These and the reallocations, together with three new positions authorized by the Budget in the department library, consisting of

one grade professional 2, one grade professional 1, and one grade : subprofessional 5, which new positions will cost $6,400, will account for the increase requested.

Mr. GRIFFIN. The amount allowed by the Budget was somewhat larger than the Budget allowed other departments and departed somewhat from the scheme suggested by President Hoover to bring salaries up to the average of the grade. His suggestion in his message was that 30 per cent each year would be allowed. In your case the Budget seems to have allowed you $2,000 on an estimate of $4.000.

Mr. GOMPERS. Our estimate was $4.280. That was to bring everybody up one step. As a matter of fact, in order to bring them to the average of the grade it would have required $6,980. The amount we were speaking about represented i-step promotions. There are many people in the office of the Secretary who are at the minimum of their grade, and their efficiency rating would entitle them to a position in the upper part of the grade. This is just for 1-step step promotions. It is approximately one-third.

Mr. GRIFFIN. The total amount required to bring them all up to the average grade you estimate at $6,980!

Mr. GOM PERS. Y es, sir.

I considered it not only a privilege but really a duty to come over and meet with the committee and to be present at least during a part of your deliberations.

I appreciate very much your courtesy in giving me an opportunity to make this brief statement.

Mr. SHREVE. Mr. Secretary, we shall be very pleased to have you

[ocr errors]

with us.

[ocr errors]

COMPARISON OF APPROPRIATIONS, 1931, AND ESTIMATES, 1932

Mr. OLIVER. Mr. Secretary, if you have it convenient, will you kindly insert at this point in the record a statement showing the comparison between the Budget estimates for 1932 and the appropriations made for 1931 ?

Secretary Doak. Here is a statement that we had prepared which gives that information.

(The statement referred to is as follows :)

[ocr errors][merged small]

Comparison of appropriation, 1931 and Budget estimate, 1932

[merged small][merged small][ocr errors][ocr errors][merged small][merged small][merged small][ocr errors][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][ocr errors][ocr errors][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small]

66

Mr. SHREVE. Your first item is in the Office of the Secretary Salaries."

Secretary of Labor, $15,000 ; Assistant Secretary, Second Assistant Secret tary, and other personal services in the District of Columbia, $205,460; in $220,460.

For 1931 you had an appropriation of $209,760. There is a cosiderable increase asked for, which you will please explain.

« 이전계속 »