« 이전계속 »
"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 pri
vate) at higher salaries?" Everywhere the cry is the same. There are not enough trained men in the country to fill openings in the field of landscape architecture. This is especially true in the demand for men qualified as technicians in urban planning. Average salaries are not high enough to attract those who are already established in related fields. Various agencies are contracting for landscape architectural services rather than attempting to retain their own personnel, who have been lost to both public and private offices at higher salaries. Many of these openings are unfilled because of a lack of qualified personnel interested in the salaries offered.
The average beginner with a college degree in any of these related fields expects and receives close to $5,000 per year to start. The relatively small number who are graduated each year are quickly placed. A check with the leading landscape schools throughout the country reveals that there has been no appreciable increase in the number of graduates in recent years. Obviously one helpful remedy to the situation would be higher enrollment in departments of landscape architecture throughout the country.
In summation, your Committee on Civil Service, in the interests of alleviating the serious magnitude of the breach between the demand for and supply of professional trained and experienced landscape architects and site planners, rec- . ommend that:
1. Civil-service departments everywhere henceforth recognize and consider landscape architects and site planners to be in the "scarce category' and eligible to receive the same considerations as such in regards to salary adjustments, recruitment, etc., as do the allied professions of architecture and engineering.
2. Schools of landscape architecture throughout the United States increase by every ethical and reasonable means their enrollments and resultant numbers of graduates, without, of course, lessening their present scholastic standards.
3. Landscape architects everywhere be alert to opportunities to demonstrate to one and all by their unselfish devotion to their professional responsibilities the true impression of what a landscape architect is, and what he can do.
GEORGE A. IZAY, Chairman. Mr. NICHOLS. Also, a few minutes ago, I received a letter from one of our Federal Government agencies which is typical of all Government agencies mentioned in my statement. I wish to read this letter:
DEAR MR. NICHOLS: In response to your inquiry about our experience in obtaining qualified landscape architects, we wish to state that we have been generally unsuccessful throughout the country recently. We have had positions open and still unfilled in grades GS-5 through GS-12, ranging from 3 months through 18 months.
The Civil Service Commission is considering raising salaries within the lower grades in the landscape architectural classification. We are sending representatives today to comment in favor of this suggestion at a meeting called by the Civil Service Commission.
We appreciate receiving a copy of your statement to the Committee on Post Office and Civil Service dated May 22. We believe it will be of value to us. Sincerely yours,
CHARLES G. STERN,
Housing and Home Finance Agency.
Mr. NICHOLS. I wish to thank the committee for this opportunity to present our problems of the American Society of Landscape Architects.
Senator YARBOROUGH. I want to congratulate you, Mr. Nichols, on your concise statement and particularly the able short summary which stated the nature and the value of these services to the Government and to society as a whole. I think your summary is as fine as I have seen about any profession.
Are there any questions, counsel ?
Senator YARBOROUGH. Now, gentlemen, at this time we are going to recess. The Senate is in session now and we must recess until 10 o'clock Monday morning.
Thank you all.
(Whereupon, at 12:05 p. m., the subcommittee was adjourned to reconvene at 10 a. m., Monday, May 27, 1957.)
SALARIES OF FEDERAL EMPLOYEES
MONDAY, MAY 27, 1957
UNITED STATES SENATE,
Washington, D. C. The subcommittee met, pursuant to adjournment, at 10 a. m., Hon. Richard L. Neuberger presiding.
Present: Senators Neuberger and Yarborough.
Also present: Senator Watkins and Congressman Davis; H. W. Brawley, executive director; J. Don Kerlin, staff member; and Frank A. Paschal, staff member.
Senator NEUBERGER. The meeting will please come to order. : i
We have a very imposing and impressive and, I might add, lengthy list of witnesses to appear this morning and I would like to point out for the benefit of those who are scheduled to appear that we are going to try to terminate the hearings this morning. I am sure all of you realize that we cannot begin to consider this legislation until the hearings are terminated and that, while I realize that everybody is going to be heard who has requested to be heard, I am sure you may also be aware that it is in the interest of legislation which we are supporting that eventually the subcommittee meet to discuss it. ::
Therefore, I want to make a blanket ruling, if it is agreeable with Senator Yarborough, that all of those who submit statements which are of any reasonable length whatsoever, will find the complete text in the record. Therefore, I do hope that you can paraphrase these statements to some degree without feeling the necessity of reading them in full because we are going to try to adjourn at noon and if the earlier witnesses take too much time, it will be at the expense, and I might add unfairly, of those who are on the hearing list later.
Before we hear the first witness, I should like to point out that I am very grateful to Senator Yarborough for presiding so capably and so faithfully at the hearings last Thursday when I had to participate in executive session of the Senate Public Works Committee.
I notice, Mr. Kerlin, that we have several congressional witnesses listed. Are they here or not? What is the situation on that? Mr. KERLIN. Congressman Davis is ready now, sir.
Senator NEUBERGER. Then our first witness will be the Honorable James C. Davis, Member of the Congress from the State of Georgia. Mr. Davis, we are very pleased to have you here today.
STATEMENT OF HON. JAMES C. DAVIS, A REPRESENTATIVE IN
CONGRESS FROM THE STATE OF GEORGIA
Mr. Davis. Thank you very much, Mr. Chairman, and gentlemen of the subcommittee. I will endeavor to follow the outline which the
chairman has just given of not taking up too much time so that others who may follow me will have ample time for their presentation.
I appear here this morning in behalf generally of a salary raise for the Federal and postal employees. I shall not undertake to endorse either of the bills which are before you as to the amount because I have full confidence that you gentlemen will go into the amount of the raise very carefully and that whatever figures you may agree upon, I feel they will be arrived at as a result of your careful study and consideration of all the factors involved.
I do feel that it is time that these Federal and postal employees should have another raise in salary. I base that on many things, on many factors. All of us are familiar with the fact that industry has been granting to its employees just about every year a cost-of-living salary increase and I brought with me this morning a clipping from
the news that 692,000 auto workers received a pay raise of 6 cents hourly, and in the same column that this appears is a news item from my hometown of Atlanta, Ga., which states the telephone workers, 55,000 of them, get a salary increase of from $2 to $4 a week. ; (The above-mentioned articles follow :)
[From the Washington Post and Times Herald, May 24, 1957] SIX HUNDRED AND NINETY-Two THOUSAND AUTO WORKERS' PAY TO RISE 6 CENTS
HOURLY DETROIT, May 23.—Some 692,000 auto workers will get wage increases of at least 6 cents an hour May 29 and June 1 under annual improvement factor clauses in company contracts with the United Auto Workers Union.
The workers will get 6 cents an hour or 242 percent, whichever is greater.
The combined hourly and salaried workers involved include 350,000 at General Motors, 193,900 at Ford, at Chrysler 129,000, at American Motors 13,500, and 6,000 at Studebaker-Packard.
Harlow Curtice, General Motors president, said his firm's increase is effective May 29. The rest are effective June 1.
The annual improvement - factor is an automatic increase written into the contract to benefit workers through gains made in technological progress. It has been part of the industry's contract wage formula since 1948.
All the auto firms have identical clauses giving the same wage increases.
Curtice said the increase will bring to 68 cents an hour the amount added to hourly rated workers' base pay as a result of the wage formula. The annual improvement factor has accounted for 46 cents an hour. Another 22 cents an hour in cost-of-living allowances have been frozen into the base rate,
(From the Washington Post and Times Herald, May 24, 1957)
TELEPHONE WORKERS GET $2 to $4 Boost ATLANTA, May 23.—More than 55,000 telephone workers in 9 Southern States will receive wage increases ranging from $2 to $4 weekly under a new agreement reached by Southern Bell and the Communications Workers of America.
The agreement came yesterday and followed a month's negotiations. It must be ratified by members of the union. In addition to the wage boosts, 37 cities and towns were upped to higher pay classifications, a union spokesman said.
Mr. Davis. I call attention to the fact also that the wage-board employees, the wage-board groups, have received raises almost every year and that only 1 increase has been granted to the 2 groups for whom I would like to speak this morning within the past " 6 years, and the last raise which was granted to them, I believe, carried an average 7-percent increase for the classified and 8-percent increase for the postal employees.
I think that these employees should have an increase which will enable them to maintain their families in keeping with their neighbors; that as an incentive to get new employees, we should grant them an increase at this time because it has been my observation, Mr. Chairman and gentlemen, that the number of qualified high-class people who in the past have applied for these positions has decreased considerably within the last few years.
I do not think that they are getting the applications from the people of the type who ought to hold these jobs that everyone was hoping they would get and I think that a reasonable pay increase at this time would serve as an incentive to increase the applications for qualified people.
Now, generally, that is the endorsement which I would like to give to this legislation. I would like to say that I am a member of the House Post Office and Civil Service Committee and we, on our committee, are holding a meeting on June 6 to take up legislation on this subject over there.
I appreciate very much the opportunity of appearing before you and to state my views on this general subject.
Senator NEUBERGER. Thank you very much, Congressman Davis. We appreciate your coming here.
If there are no questions of the Congressman, we will have as our next witness, Paul Nagle, president of the National Transport Association.
Mr. Nagle, will you proceed.
STATEMENT OF PAUL NAGLE, PRESIDENT OF THE NATIONAL
POSTAL TRANSPORT ASSOCIATION, ON S. 27 Mr. NAGLE. Mr. Chairman, my name is Paul A. Nagle. I am president of the National Postal Transport Association, representing 30,000 employees of the Post Office Department's Postal Transportation Service.
I appear before you this morning in support of S. 27, to provide for an increase in the salaries of postal transportation clerks and other postal employees. S. 27 was sponsored by Senator Johnston for himself and Senators Langer, Neuberger, Young, Humphrey, McNamara, and Magnuson. We want first to express our indebtedness to that distinguished group of sponsors, which includes the chairman of this subcommittee, for having stepped forward in defense of the country's postal employees.
We believe the increases contemplated by S. 27 are equitable and proper in view of (1) the record of postal employee salary legislation under which incomes of postal employees have lagged substantially both in time and in size behind the levels paid to employees in private industry; (2) the way in which it is extremely difficult for postal management to recruit new employees and retain present employees at the existing rates; (3) the need to restore to postal employees the level or standard of living enjoyed by other people in their respective communities.