페이지 이미지
PDF
ePub

Ar. ROONEY. The next item is for travel expenses, page 119 of the tifications and at page 35 of the committee print. The request is $715,000, exactly the same as the amount allowed in the current

al year.

[blocks in formation]

propriation or estimate
oposed suppleinental due to pay increases.

Total available for obligation obligated balance, estimated savings

[blocks in formation]
[blocks in formation]

The next item is for “Salaries of court reporters,” page 37 of the committee print and 124 of the justifications. The request is in the amount of $1,113,500, an increase of $125,300 of the amount appropriated for salaries of court reporters in the current fiscal year. At this point we shall insert in the record pages 124, the lower half of 126, and upper half of 127.

(The pages referred to are as follows:)

[ocr errors]

Statement relating appropriation estimate to current appropriation 1952 appropriation in annual act. Proposed supplemental 1952 due to pay increases

wa

in

[blocks in formation]

The following table shows a comparison of the cost of permanent and temporary employment for the fiscal years 1951, 1952, and 1953 and the savings effected in 1951:

[blocks in formation]

The appropriation requested for 1953, $1,113,500, is $30,900 more than the amount required for the current year of $1,082,600. The increase represents the difference between the annual cost of adjustments in the salary rates for court reporters authorized by the Judicial Conference of the United States at its regular meeting in September 1951 amounting to $125,300 which will fall in 1953 and the part-year cost of the increases this year totaling $94,400. The total amount requested will provide for employment of an average of 223 reporters in the district courts during the coming year at the higher salaries approved by the Judicia! Conference. This is considered to be the minimum provision that will be requisite to insure adequate reportorial coverage for the courts in 1953. An average of 218 reporters were employed during 1951 but the number of active district judges is now higher than it was last year and it is expected that an even greater number will be serving in 1953.

INCREASE IN SALARIES

Mr. ROONEY. What is the reason for the requested increase?

Mr. CHANDLER. The reason for the requested increase is an increase of salaries authorized by the Judicial Conference for court reporters at its annual meeting in September last. The amount on an annual basis is $125,300. This includes an estimated cost for the current vear of $94,400 and an added sum for 1953 of $30,900.

Mr. ROONEY. Did we have this before us on a previous occasion?

Ir. CHANDLER. No. You have never had this. A year ago there

some reference to the fact that up to that time no general increase
he salaries of court reporters had been granted comparable to the
reases for Government personnel generally under the successive
7-increase acts.
sudge Biggs. Not any of them.
Mr. CHANDLER. Not any of the Pay Increase Acts. The managers
behalf of the House of Representatives in a statement filed with the
nference Report on the Pay Increase Act of 1951, said that the pro-
sion for the increase in salaries of supporting personnel of the courts
es not specifically cover United States court reporters, but the com-
ittee of conference feel strongly that the Judicial Conference should
just the salaries of these court reporters to conform to the increases
ovided by the conference substitute. That same opinion has been
pressed by various Members of Congress.

SALARIES OF COURT REPORTERS

!

Mr. ROONEY. What are the grades of these reporters?
Mr. CHANDLER. They are not graded. Their salaries range pres-
ntly from a minimum of $3,000.

Mr. Rooney. Will you insert in the record at this point a state-
nent showing the number receiving each of the various salaries?
Mr. CHANDLER, I shall be glad to.
(Information requested is as follows:)

Statement showing present number and salaries of court reporters and ihe number and

salaries proposed by the Judicial Conference of the United States at its meeting in September 1951

[blocks in formation]

Mr. ROONEY. It is not the fact that these reporters receive further remuneration by way of selling the transcript of the testimony before the courts?

Mr. CHANDLER. They do. The statute so provides.

Mr. ROONEY. And do you have any way of furnishing us with a statement as to what that runs into?

Mr. CHANDLER. Yes. We can do that.
Mr. ROONEY. You do have a record of that?
Mr. CHANDLER. Yes, sir.
Mr. ROONEY. Suppose you do that.
(Statement referred to is as follows:)

18

STATEMENT OF EARNINGS OF COURT REPORTERS FROM OFFICIAL WORK During

FISCAL YEAR 1951

Earnings from official transcript
Range of earnings:

Under $1,000.
Over $1,200 to $2,000.

有 Over $2,000 to $3,000.

3 Over $3,000 to $4,000

15 Over $4,000 to $5,000. Over $5,000 to $6,000

16 Over $6,000 to $7,000 Over $7,000 to $8,000.

4 Over $8,000 to $9,000 Over $9,000 to $10,000.

1 Over $10,000.

3

[ocr errors]

Total..

194

NOTE.-Four reporters showed a loss from official transcripts.

Mr. CHANDLER. To answer your question very shortly, the conference approved this increase in pay as what in its opinion constituted just treatment of the reporters in relation to the four increases in par which had been granted in recent years to other personnel of the courts.

Mr. Rooney. Have they had any increase in recent years in the amount they have been permitted to charge for transcript?

Mr. CHANDLER. Yes.

Mr. ROONEY. Will you insert the facts with regard thereto at this point?

(The information requested is as follows:)

Approved rates for transcripts charged litigants by official reporters !

[blocks in formation]

1 These rates under the statute (28 U.S. C. 753 (1)) are prescribed hy the individual district courts subject to the approval of the Judicial Conference. The district courts of some districts still prescribe rates todos the maximum.

Mr. CHANDLER. The total increase in the salaries of reporters recently authorized by the Judicial conference on an annual basis is $125,300 on a payroll of $988,000. That is a little over 12% percent.

Mr. ROONEY. What Mr. Preston has in mind is to enquire how they may be compared with other Government employees; in arrivnik at that you have to take into consideration the money they get from transcript earnings.

Mr. PRESTON. The work is on that basis?

[ocr errors]

dge Biggs. Shouldn't there be a deduction for the amount they
nd in preparation of transcripts?
r. ROONEY. Of course.
r. CHANDLER. The information requested as to earnings from
script, will be net earnings after payment of expenses of produc-
t.
r. ROONEY. Most of them hire someone to do the typing.
idge Biggs. Most of them use dictaphones and they have someone
heir typing
Ir. ROONEY. Under this proposal you would increase a court re-
ter's salary from $3,000 to $3,600, from $3,600 to $4,000, from
100 to $4,500, from $4,500 to $5,000, and from $5,000 to $5,500.
udge Biggs, why do you discriminate against the second group and
y allow them $400 when you allow $500 to the $5,000 class?
udge Biggs. All that can be said is that the Judicial Conference
med that a reasonable provision. It had the advice of a committee
nposed of circuit and district judges. The committee and the
licial Conference gave consideration to the conditions in each indi-
lual district, and on the basis of that consideration the conference
ived at its decision.

THE JUDICIAL CONFERENCE

Mr. ROONEY. The Judicial Conference is like the United Nations. ney decide what we are going to pay and we just get the bill. They ways take action which costs us money. Mr. CHANDLER. Will you permit me to say that the Judicial Conrence in the years when other court employees were receiving pay creases granted po general increases in salary to court reporters.

Mr. Rooney. I don't want you to think 'I am wholly against the udicial Conference. They have done a great deal to make the courts in smoothly and properly but I do say they take up many points and se a lot of time on deliberations which ultimately cost the taxpayers honey. Judge Biggs. They do, of course. That is somewhat inevitable. . Che Conference does take action which does save the taxpayers money. There is the subject of elimination of clerks' offices in cases where the ffices handle less than 50 cases a year. Mr. ROONEY. But that originated with this committee.

Judge Biggs. It originated with this committee. But the Conference followed it up pretty vigorously and followed up the subject very vigorously last year.

Take this subject of additional judges. This year the Senate bill provided 20 new judges.

Mr. ROONEY. I think it was 16.

Judge Biggs. Sixteen were recommended by the Conference. Four were added in the Senate. The business of getting additional judges is not as easy as it would seem. It is hard to get them. My personal view is that that number is insufficient.

TOTAL EARNINGS OF COURT REPORTERS

And this business of the court reporters has been agitated by the court reporters from the time of the passing of the Court Reporters' Act. The original statement provided an upward limit of $6,000 a

« 이전계속 »