May I quote from a speech of one of your distinguished colleagues, Senator Hubert Humphrey of Minnesota :

Good government begins and ends with a competent career service, properly compensated both financially and with public respect. The greatest waste in Government today is not the number of people employed, but the loss of trained personnel through heavy turnover caused by a breakdown in employee morale as a result of inadequate compensation, abuse instead of respect, and an unfair ceiling on opportunity by limited top posts to political appointments instead of recognizing and making use of the experience and training of career personnel. A good government personnel officer has a responsibility to protect the rights and interest of employees and to speak up in their behalf, instead of just being a spokesman for his own superiors.

In our Internal Revenue Service, our employees are practically prohibited from doing any outside work because of the fact that the outside work may have an effect on the work they perform in the Service. Accordingly, perhaps more than any other Federal employee, the Internal Revenue Service employee must depend on his pay check for his existence.

I would like to quote from remarks of the Honorable Wilbur D. Mills, chairman of the Subcommittee on Internal Revenue Taxation of the Committee on Ways and Means, before the section of taxation of the American Bar Association, August 25, 1956:

I have thought for some time that Congress should supply more incentives to officials in the Treasury Department and the Internal Revenue Service. I regard it as unfortunate that the best of our young lawyers and tax economists have come to regard the Internal Revenue Service as a training school to be left as soon as their professional pinfeathers have been developed. The subcommittee must think long and hard upon ways and means of securing and keeping men of the same caliber in the Internal Revenue Service as private clients and interests expect and demand to represent them.

I do not mean to imply that there are not now men of the highest professional attainments in the Internal Revenue Service. This is far from true, but every day these men must ask themselves whether or not the rewards of their public service are commensurate with the heavy burdens that they must carry!! Surely, these men must occasionally think that their tasks are unrewarded. Every day they are confronted with problems of a magnitude that the private practitioner never knows. They are damned on all sides. Yes, I admit that we in Congress occasionally exercise the prerogative of criticism and yet fail to meet our duty of constructive suggestion. Accordingly, I am sure that the members of the subcommittee will see to the establishment of a policy which will assure officials of the Treasury Department and the Internal Revenue Service that the tremendous problems which they face are understood, that the job which they are doing is appreciated and which will provide the rewards necessary to obtain and hold men in the service of a caliber equal to, if not higher than, that of their opposite numbers in the outside business world.

I urgently implore you gentlemen to give favorable consideration to an increase for Federal classified employees. I would like to recommend that a percentage basis be used. In this manner, fairness is administered to all and the ratio between different grades can be maintained.

By approving a pay raise you will prove that you are champions of the Federal employees and at the same time you will safeguard the taxpayers' investment in the Federal employees by assuring their retention in the service with adequate compensation.

Mr. Chairman, I want to thank you for the opportunity of appearing here this morning and presenting this brief.

Senator YARBOROUGH. Mr. McCabe, that is a very forceful statement, a very concise statement. I want to congratulate you on it. I

want to congratulate you on your statement for its concise statement of the position overall of the Federal employee, and for the specification of the situation of those in the Internal Revenue Service and the impairment of their ability, or rather, the propriety of their taking outside employment where employees in other branches of Government service might very properly take outside employment.

Mr. MCCABE. Thank you very much.

Senator YARBOROUGH. This is a very effective statement.
Does counsel have any questions?

Mr. KERLIN. You are representing the Government and here is a person representing private industry or a taxpayer

Mr. MCCABE. Yes, sir.

Mr. KERLIN. You have the Government's interest to protect and he has his client's or his employer's interest to protect. What is the relationship between the pay you are receiving in looking after Uncle Sam's interest as compared to the pay he is receiving in looking after his employer's interest?

Mr. MCCABE. Well, that would be hard to say. In some instances we might be talking with a counsel whose income is $100,000 a year or a certified public accountant whose income-well, no later than yesterday, I left Nashville yesterday, I was talking to a certified public accountant in my office whose income was $45,000 or $50,000 a year compared to the average agent's salary of around $6,000.

So, these men making $6,000 must be able to cope with the problems presented to them by men who are making considerably-say 4 to 10 times as much wage.

Mr. KERLIN. Let me phrase my question a little differently.

Has the difference increased in recent years?

Mr. MCCABE. Oh, very definitely. Yes. We know that the average income of the self-employed in that type of work has increased considerably as compared to ours. Is that getting what you want?

Mr. KERLIN. In boxing at least they pit one against the other on the basis of weight.

Mr. MCCABE. As a matter of fact, as soon as some of our bright young men attain a certain proficiency they are immediately offered more-I would say salaries that would run sometimes twice as much as they can get in Government service and leave it.

Mr. KERLIN. That is all.

Senator YARBOROUGH. Does counsel for the minority have any questions?

Mr. PASCHAL. No questions.

Senator YARBOROUGH. Mr. McCabe, have you ever had any experience with your employees in the $6,000 category being asked questions of accounting by those in private business earning $50,000, the question being those in one's private business did not know how to solve? Mr. MCCABE. I am sure there have been cases like that.

Senator YARBOROUGH. Thank you for your statement here.

Mr. MCCABE. Thank you, sir.

Senator YARBOROUGH. Gentlemen, we expect to recess at noon.

Mr. Nichols, you are next. I do not want to ask you to compress your statement in those limits. If you care to do so you may offer your testimony now, but that is

Mr. NICHOLS. I can do it.

Senator YARBOROUGH. All right, come around, sir.

STATEMENT OF CHESTER W. NICHOLS, CHAIRMAN, NATIONAL CIVIL SERVICE COMMITTEE, AMERICAN SOCIETY OF LANDSCAPE ARCHITECTS, BOSTON, MASS.; ACCOMPANIED BY HENRY SCHULTHEIS, PRESIDENT, DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA CHAPTER, AMERICAN SOCIETY OF LANDSCAPE ARCHITECTS, WASHINGTON, D. C.

Mr. NICHOLS. Mr. Chairman and members of the subcommittee, I am Chester W. Nichols, national chairman of the civil-service committee of the American Society of Landscape Architects. With me is our local president, Henry Schultheis, the president of the Potomac chapter and a Federal employee working for the Department of the Army.

The landscape architects should be included under the positions listed on pages 19 and 20 of the bill S. 1326, because they are in a very scarce category and they are necessary to the successful prosecution of work programs in many branches of the Federal Government.

The landscape architects plan and design all types of land areas for human use and enjoyment, adapting the physical conditions of a site to the practical requirements of its intended use and appearance, and develops plans suited to the character of the landscape. In every project the landscape architect must consider economical and efficient use of space, together with attaining a satisfactory, pleasing appearance. He makes preliminary studies of the character of the area, determining the kind of development most suitable to the project. He sets forth the facts and his recommendation in a report, which, with a general plan of the proposed landscape architectural treatment, is submitted to his principal. He then prepares working drawings, specifications, estimates of costs and schedules of the materials required. He supervises construction of his work and issues certificates of payment.

There are approximately 2,400 landscape architects and site planners qualified to practice in the United States of which 1,175 are members and associates of the American Society of Landscape Architects. The civil-service committee of the society in 1956 compiled data which acts as indisputable evidence that the landscape architects are much more in demand than is their present supply.

Questionnaires were sent to offices all over the United States employing landscape architects and site planners, to see if they were experiencing any difficulty in obtaining adequate personnel. The replies unquestionably proved they are in a scarce category.

1. One-half answered in the affirmative to the question, "Have you any unfilled positions for landscape architects and site planners?"" 2. Three-fourths answered in the affirmative to the question, "Have you any difficulty in locating acceptable people for landscape architects and planners?"

3. One-half answered in the affirmative to the question, "Are these positions vacant because you have lost employees to other offices (public or private) at higher salaries?"

The 1957 membership list of the American Society of Landscape Architects indicates that 57 percent of the members are employed by private industry and 12 percent by the Federal Government. Nearly all of the data obtained in 1956 and 1957 show that private industry paid higher salaries than the Federal Government and that the vari

ance ranged from $1,000 in the lower grades to $3,000 or higher in the higher grades.

The landscape architect and the city planner are very important to the Federal Government in the site-planning layouts of many Federal installations for the most economical and satisfying use of land. They are employed in the following agencies:

1. National defense: (a) Department of the Army; (b) Department of the Navy, (c) Department of the Air Force.

2. Department of the Interior: (a) National Park Service, (b) Bureau of Reclamation.

3. National Capital Planning Commission.

4. Commerce Department: (a) Bureau of Public Roads, (b) Civil Aeronautics Administration.

5. Veterans' Administration.

6. General Services Administration.

7. State Department.

8. Housing and Home Finance Agency: (a) Urban Renewal Agency, (b) Federal Housing Administration, (c) Public Housing Administration.

9. Post Office Department.

In summary, landscape architecture, as an independent profession in the United States, has had an uninterrupted history of service for almost as long a period of time as that of the allied professions, architecture, and engineering. Recently, the emphasis has shifted from the designing of private properties and parks to much broader concepts of land planning and public use to meet the demands of Government and the changing ways of life. At the present time, at least 18 colleges. are preparing students in landscape architecture. Collateral training in various phases of both civil engineering and architecture enable landscape architects to collaborate efficiently with engineers and architects. All three professions frequently work together on large projects. The gradual urbanization of the country has brought increasing new problems. The division of design responsibility places the emphasis on the engineer if the problem is predominantly engineering. If buildings are the main concern, the job is primarily the responsibility of the architect. In the same manner, the landscape architect is primarily responsible where large land areas are involved and site planning economies will save large construction costs.

This situation has been recognized by the United States Civil Service Commission with the result that professional job classifications and pay scales, grade for grade, are equivalent in the three professions of engineering, architecture, and landscape architecture. Since the landscape architects are equally important to the satisfactory and efficient completion of many essential programs of the Government, and are similarly in short supply, it is believed to be in the best public interest and in line with the express purpose of S. 1326 to include series GS-1041 with the other classifications listed on pages 19 and 20 of the bill.

Mr. NICHOLS. I wish to add to this statement a letter written by the national society signed by Bradford Williams, corresponding secretary, dated April 9, written to Senator Olin D. Johnston, and also the survey made by our committee in 1956 which copy was also sent to Senator Johnston. I will see that this subcommittee receives. copies of both.

Senator YARBOROUGH. Do you desire that, Mr. Nichols, to be added

to your testimony?

Mr. NICHOLS. I do.

Senator YARBOROUGH. That will be so ordered.

(The letter referred to is as follows:)

AMERICAN SOCIETY OF LANDSCAPE ARCHITECTS,

Boston, Mass., April 9, 1957.

Hon. OLIN D. JOHNSTON.

Chairman, Post Office and Civil Service Committee,

Senate Office Building, Washington, D. C.

DEAR SENATOR JOHNSTON: By direction of the board of trustees of the American Society of Landscape Architects, I am writing to bring to your attention the serious shortage of professionally trained landscape architects and site planners throughout the country.

This shortage has been revealed in a report by our committee on civil service, of which I enclose a copy for your attention.

In order that you may be informed as to the importance and the diversity of the fields of activity in which landscape architects and site planners engage, I also enclose a copy of our statement entitled "The Landscape Architect and Land Planning."

Our board have instructed me to express their hope that your Senate Committee on Post Office and Civil Service will take an early opportunity officially to recognize landscape architects and site planners as being, with architects and engineers, in short supply, and therefore as meriting special consideration with regard to salaries, recruitment, and similar factors governing their employment. Sincerely yours,

CIVIL SERVICE

BRADFORD WILLIAMS,
Corresponding Secretary.

Committee function: To survey the field of governmental agencies recruiting landscape architect personnel; to inform itself as to the degree of landscape architectural emphasis laid on such recruiting; and to suggest the society, through the board of trustees, methods by which the appropriate landscape architectural positions in Government agencies may be filled with landscape architects of competence and character.

On April 3, 1956, because of difficulties in procuring engineers and architects for Federal Government agencies, the starting grades of GS-5 through GS-7 in those professions were increased; and again, on June 26, 1956, all architects and engineers in grade GS-9 through GS-11 were granted increases. Landscape architects were not included.

Research into the reasons why landscape architects were left out while engi neers, architects, and scientists were given salary increases in Federal civil service revealed the following:

1. The landscape architect was not discussed, as no one knew what he was or what he did; therefore

2. It was not disclosed that there is a very definite shortage of landscape architects and planners.

In an effort to help eliminate this alarming apathy on the part of civil-service departments everywhere, your Committee on Civil Service have for their 1956 report endeavored to compile evidence which will act as indisputable support of the contention that landscape architects are much more in demand than is their present supply.

The members of the committee were very cooperative and they in turn found that many of those whom they contacted in their quest for information were most anxious to find some relief for a readily obvious shortage of properly trained and experienced personnel in the profession of landscape architecture. One needs only to scan the announcements of employment opportunities as published to members of the society to recognize immediately the heavy demand today for landscape architects.

A summary of your committee's findings reveals that of the over 100 agencies scattered all over the United States which were consulted and which employ landscape architects or planners: