fiscal service," "professional and scientific service," "crafts, protective, and custodial service," etc.

It is unfortunate that the symbol "GS" still connotes "general service" as distinguished from "general schedule" in many minds, with a resulting feeling that it is an inappropriate symbol for professional, scientific, and similar groups. The symbol "CA" gets completely away from any service or group concept and becomes, as it should, a symbol for a pay level only. The professional or other qualifications of an employee are appropriately recognized in other phases of classification and personnel administration where the important distinguishing criteria are provided. This change in the symbol for grades should remove misgivings and misconceptions that have clouded much thinking in the past.

The increase in the minimum for grade 1 is in keeping with the continued increase in living costs and the steady improvement in the national standard of living and will improve the position of the Government in recruiting for its career service.

The appropriate areas or grades in the structure as improved by S. 734 will provide much needed increases in pay for scientists, engineers, and professional employees.

In S. 734, provision is made for percentage increases in the salary rates of the professional employees in the Department of Medicine and Surgery, Veterans' Administration, who are not under the Classification Act of 1949, as amended. Their positions are subject to the provisions of the act of January 3, 1946, as amended, and special legislation would be required for them if appropriate provisions for them had not been made in S. 734. Their present salary rates are compared with the rates they would get under S. 734, if enacted, in the attached table IV.

5, 600

5,800

4, 730

4,840

5, 160

5, 590

9, 635

12, 800

Section 604 (a) of the Classification Act of 1949, as amended, is amended by S. 734 to provide for initial adjustments to the classification grades provided in S. 734 and for the adjustment of the rates of basic conmpensation of officers and employees to whom the act is applicable. In table V the various rates in the different grades as they now exist are compared with the rates as they would exist under S. 734 if enacted.

Since hearings were scheduled on S. 734 and S. 1326, the Cordiner report has been released. A group of well-known and outstanding businessmen were on the Committee and signed the report. The report covers the findings and recommendations of the Committee on Professional and Technical Compensation in the Department of Defense. While it is limited to the professional and technical groups in the Department of Defense, it parallels in general the revisions in pay structure sought by S. 734. It, like S. 1326, stresses the scientific and professional groups and proposes a salary schedule beginning at the GS-7 level, while S. 1326 proposes a salary schedule beginning at the GS-5 level.

Mr. PASCHAL. May I interrupt? Did you mean GS-7 level or did you mean GS-5?

Mr. OWEN. Seven is the one the Cordiner report begins with; S. 1326 begins with five.

Mr. PASCHAL. You are referring to GS-5 in your statement.

Mr. OWEN. I am referring to both. I am identifying the GS-7 level as being the point at which the Gordiner report begins and GS-5 at which the S. 1326 schedule begins.

Mr. PASCHAL. Thank you.

Mr. OWEN. The salary schedule proposed by the Cordiner report for use pending a proposed revision of the Classification Act of 1949, as amended, is within the framework of the Classification Act and applicable to all employees above grade GS-7, while S. 1326 proposes a new structure limited to scientific and professional positions above grade GS-5. The salary rates proposed by the Cordiner report are compared with present rates and those proposed by S. 734, table VI.