During 1956 employee turnover in the Detroit Post Office was equivalent to 12 percent of our total work force. A considerable amount of money was expended in the processing and training of these employees. Terminal interviews indicated that many of these people accepted a position in the postal service as a stopgap until a more remunerative position in private industry became available. Also, as you know, it is equally important that we recruit and hold capable administrators, in order that we have effective management within our postal field service. Almost daily it is being called to our attention that highly competent postmasters and postal supervisors are leaving our service to accept positions in industry offering higher salaries and greater opportunities for the future. The postmasters and supervisors of the postal field service are trapped in this salary squeeze because as managers they must be available for duty at all times, hence their opportunity to supplement their incomes by obtaining part-time outside employment is very limited.

We sincerely hope that the Congress will see fit to approve a salary increase in this session, as it will not only bring the salaries of the postal employees in balance with the cost of living, but it will enhance morale to the extent that the quality of our great service to the Nation will be very much improved. Thank you very much.

STATEMENT OF JACK W. BAIN, PRESIDENT OF THE FEDERAL TRIAL EXAMINERS CONFERENCE, ON S. 1326

I am Jack W. Bain, president of the Federal Trial Examiners Conference, a professional organization of those serving as hearing examiners under section 11 of the Administrative Procedure Act. The conference supports S. 1326, the bill introduced by Senator Johnston to establish scientific and professional positions in the Government, with compensation more comparable than it now is to that paid by private industry for similar positions. This is consistent with our favoring salary increases in 1953 before the Commission on Judical and Congressional Salaries, and in 1956 for various executives of the Government. As examiners, we preside at hearings and make initial decisions in judicial and legislative proceedings affected by the Administrative Procedure Act. We are thus in an excellent position to appraise the importance of having able and efficient scientific and professional personnel to prepare and present for the record as showing of the public interest. It may be evident to all thinking persons, but we know from actual experience, that it is just as essential for a proper ultimate conclusion to have an efficient presentation by the Government as by any other party or interest. For such presentation, the Government must have scientists and professionals at least equal to those available to others. Anyone who buys food and clothing for a family knows that living costs have not stood still for the last year or so, and it is a matter of common knowledge that bidding by private industry makes it increasingly difficult for the Government to obtain and retain these essential employees. We are sure that many others will present conclusive evidence on this, however, and we shall limit our presentation to a brief outline of why hearing examiners are properly included among the employees covered by S. 1326.

Other than the Congress, the courts, and the members of the regulatory agencies, there is no group of officials or employees whose work more vitally affects more individuals and more varied business enterprises than the 300 or so hearing examiners. For example, in the 12-month period ending October 1955, initial decisions issued by hearing officers in 1,533 motor-carrier cases of the Interstate Commerce Commission became effective, and recommended decisions had been issued by that agency's hearing examiners in a majority of the 1,200 motor-carrier cases in which agency decisions were issued during that period. The Interstate Commerce Commission hearing examiners also heard and issued recommended decisions in a majority of the 527 rail, freight forwarder, and water-carrier cases decided by that agency in the same period. A hearing examiner at Civil Aeronautics Board recently issued an initial decision involving $20 million in Government subsidies to certain international air carriers. In another proceeding, which consumed 274 days of hearings, 2 of that Board's examiners were given the responsibility of initially deciding the future of the important irregular air-carrier industry, and which, if any, of the approximately 60 such carriers should receive renewed licenses. A hearing examiner at the Federal Communications Commission heard and wrote the initial decision in the proceedings relating to the divestment by the Western Union Telegraph Co. of its international telegraph operations in accordance with sec

tion 222 (c) (2) of the Communications Act of 1934, as amended. At the time of the hearing, Western Union placed a value of approximately $18 million on its cable system. Individual examiners at Federal Communications Commission have heard and written the initial decisons in all of the contested television applications. The sums of money involved in rate and fare proceedings over which hearing examiners of the Interstate Commerce Commission preside may reach astronomical amounts. Two of its hearing examiners issued the recommended decision in the War Materials Reparations Cases (294 I. C. C. 5), in which the Government sought $2 billion in reparation from the railroads.

Hearing examiners conduct hearings and render initial or recommended decisions for the other Federal agencies responsible for implementing the regulatory acts of Congress relating to transportation by land, water, and air, competition and advertising in business, the various media of communications, shipping to and from foreign countries, the great securities, commodity futures, and livestock markets of the country, etc.

As indicating the importance of the hearing examiner to the agencies, former Interstate Commerce Commissioner Clyde B. Aitchison stated before a congressional committee:

"The examiners whom we send out are oftentimes the only persons whom the general public see. They are, as far as the general public are concerned, the Commission. On their tact, their skill, their demeanor, and their honesty depends our honor, the success or failure of our work, and the future of our professional careers as members of the Commission" (S. Doc. 248, 79th Cong., 2d sess., p. 127).

In an address before the President's Conference on Administrative Procedure, June 10, 1953, Hon. Herbert Brownell, Jr., Attorney General of the United States, stated:

"Again, there are about 215 Federal district judges, while Federal administrative agencies employ about 273 hearing examiners. And it is fair to assume that the matters involved in those administrative hearings were at least as important to the persons involved and to the general welfare as those which were tried in the courts."

The hearing examiner, to whom is first presented the work done by many of the scientific and professional employees included in the bill, and who must exercise complete independence in weighing the evidence and drawing conclusions, is assuredly in an appropriate position to be grouped with other valuable employees, as in S. 1326. If he were left out, there would result even further disparity than now often exists, wherein some who present data to the examiner are in higher pay brackets, and enjoy more prestige in this way at least, than the examiner.

We sincerely thank the committee for allowing us to make this presentation.

SUPPLEMENTAL STATEMENT OF H. B. WHITMORE, PATENT OFFICE SOCIETY

With your permission, we should like to submit also for your consideration a proposed simple amendment to section 803 (a) of the 1949 Classification Act which would have the double benefit of remedying an unforeseen bad situation developing under that section as it now stands, and also accomplishing a part of your purpose here.

Section 803 (a) permits the Civil Service Commission to set the minimum rate for a given grade at a higher rate within the grade, when employees cannot otherwise be secured. In scarcity fields of employment, Federal pay is so far behind that the Commission has had to set as the minimum rate the top rate permitted by the Classification Act.

By this, the beginner in a grade is paid overnight the same salary as men who got there only after years of slow progress, and who are far more experienced and valuable. The unfairness is apparent. Especially in the senior journeyman of GS-12, except for perhaps a longevity increase or two, this is the end. There is no higher level, no incentive to remain, no future. Inevitably, the best men leave.

It is suggested that this could be avoided by amending section 803 (a) to read as follows (changes in italics):

"SEC. 803. (a) Whenever the Commission shall find (1) that a sufficient number of qualified eligibles for positions in a given class or category cannot be se

cured or retained in one or more areas or locations at the minimum existing rate for such class, and (2) that there is a possibility that a sufficient number of such eligibles can be secured or qualified personnel retained by increasing the minimum rate for such class or category in such areas or locations to one of the higher rates within the grade in which such class or category is placed and further by increasing the step increase rates for that grade by an equal amount, the Commission may establish one or more of such rates as the minimum rate and step increase rates for that class or category, in each area or location concerned." Instead of compressing a grade upward to a single dead level, the section as amended would permit shifting each step a fixed amount higher.

It would restore to these scarcity categories the sound principle of the Classification Act that the man worth more is paid more.

It would end the widespread resentment against current violation of this principle.

It would restore the incentive of future step increases.

It would accomplish in part one purpose of S. 1326, giving better pay to upper level positions, where the disparity and need for salary increases is greatest. It would thereby keep in Government many valuable men who otherwise could not afford to remain.

Further, it would do all of these things simply, immediately, within the principles of already existing laws, in the interim while any needed further study of Federal salaries is being completed.

As the only Commission studies needed would be those already required by the existing section 803 (a), no administrative burden would be added to anyone.

It would give the Commission greater flexibility, yet within limits fixed by Congress.

Until such a measure as S. 1326 is enacted therefore, we commend to your consideration as an interim measure this much needed and wholly beneficial amendment to section 803 (a) of the present Classification Act.

STATEMENT OF CHARLES E. PUSKAR, EXECUTIVE SECRETARY-TREASURER, NATIONAL ASSOCIATION OF POSTMASTERS OF THE UNITED STATES AND POSTMASTER AT IMPERIAL, PA., ON S. 27

Mr. Chairman and members of the committee, my name is Charles E. Puskar. I am the executive secretary-treasurer of the National Association of Postmasters of the United States, representing over 90 percent of the postmasters of the Nation who are members of our association.

The National Association of Postmasters is grateful to Congress for having enacted Public Law 68 2 years ago, which gave all postal workers annual step increases in salary within the level of their salary range and corrected many inequities in the preexisting salary structure of the postal service. We feel that the time has come now for a further adjustment in the postal field service salary schedule and the fourth-class office salary schedule, to meet the increased cost of living during the past 2 years and to keep pace with salaries paid in private industry.

In order to keep the percentage ratio between levels on an equitable basis, we recommend a straight percentage increase through all levels and steps in the postal field service salary structure, rather than a flat increase across the board. The presently existing ceiling of $16,000 in the postal field service schedule should be raised in order to maintain the present differential in all levels and to eliminate compression in the top levels.

As postmasters and responsible citizens, we are greatly concerned about the mounting deficit in the postal service, and we are hopeful that Congress will enact a postal-rate-increase bill so that the cost of the mail service, including a salary increase for postal workers, will be paid by the users of the mail service, instead of the taxpayers of the Nation. However, in fairness to the half million dedicated men and women in the postal service, we do not feel that the salary bill should be contingent upon the passage of a rate bill. Therefore, we are hopeful that Congress this year will enact both a bill to increase salaries to meet the increased cost of living, and a bill to increase postage in order to eliminate the postal deficit.

I thank the committee for the opportunity to present this statement, and your consideration of our recommendations will be deeply appreciated.

STATEMENT OF JOHN F. FIXA, PRESIDENT, NATIONAL ASSOCIATION OF POSTMASTERS OF THE UNITED STATES, AND POSTMASTER AT SAN FRANCICO, CALIF., ON S. 27, S. 734, AND S. 1326

My name is John F. Fixa. I appear before you in the dual capacity of postmaster of San Francisco and president of the National Association of Postmasters of the United States. This association has a paid-up membership of 34,000 postmasters of every class of office. This represents over 90 percent of

the postmasters throughout the country.

This association favors an increase in pay to help postmasters meet the increased cost of living and to keep pace with salaries paid for like responsibilities and work in private industry. Definitely we do not favor "an across-the-board flat pay increase."

For many years we worked for annual step rate increases which finally came about in the passage of Public Law 68 and we should not want to have the percentage ratio between levels destroyed by a flat increase. Rather we prefer a straight percentage increase throughout all levels and steps as in the postal field service schedule and fourth-class office schedule.

We believe postmasters like all other postal employees are a group dedicated to the best interests of the postal service and to the people we serve, and therefore it is only fair that this devotion to duty should be rewarded with a fair rate of pay so that we may enjoy the same standard of living as those in private industry.

The San Francisco Post Office employs approximately 4,200 employees and with an operation as large as mine we are beset with hiring problems and a heavy turnover by reason of our inability to compete with outside rates of pay. I am informed the hiring problem in other cities is much more acute than in mine. We believe the only solution to the vexatious problem of obtaining high quality employees is through an upward readjustment of our pay schedules.

Mr. Chairman, you and the members of your committee have always been most kind and considerate in recognizing our problems and for this we are most grateful. I appreciate having this opportunity of again making presentation in behalf of the 34,000 members of the National Association of Postmasters of the United States.

Hon. RICHARD NEUBERGER,

ENGINEERS' AND SCIENTISTS' ASSOCIATION
OF THE SPECIAL DEVICES CENTER,

Chairman, Subcommittee on Pay Legislation,
Senate Office Building, Washington, D. C.

May 27, 1957.

DEAR SENATOR: In my appearance before your subcommittee I had mentioned the situation in the Air Tactics Branch at the United States Naval Training Device Center as an example of the attrition at the Center. I also mentioned that the last senior project engineer of that branch was seriously contemplating leaving.

I would like to amend my statement on the basis of information I have received upon my return. The last senior project engineer is now leaving for private industry after 14 years of Federal service at a salary increase of $2,800. I trust that this additional information will impress upon your committee, and the Congress as a whole, of the serious threat to our defense effort presented by the present low-pay schedule for scientists and engineers.

Sincerely yours,

M. FISCHER, President.

STATEMENT OF PAUL M. CASTIGLIONI, LEGISLATIVE REPRESENTATIVE, NATIONAL FEDERATION OF POST OFFICE MOTOR VEHICLE EMPLOYEES, ON S. 27

Mr. Chairman and members of the committee, my name is Paul M. Castiglioni. I am the legislative representative of the National Federation of Post Office Motor Vehicle Employees and at the outset we want to express our appreciation for the opportunity of presenting our views on this most vital subject of postal salaries which you now have under consideration.

I am appearing before you in support of S. 27 because we believe the increases proposed in S. 27 are both equitable and completely justified. You are no doubt familiar with the latest report of the Bureau of Labor Statistics

which indicates that for the past 7 months the cost of living has increased each month until now it has reached a new alltime high. I feel certain that the members of this committee are also fully aware that most of the rank and file postal employees have received but one salary increase since 1951 and that amounted to only 8.2 percent. With living costs being what they are today, it is just about impossible for postal employees to decently support a family or attempt to provide an education for their children on their present salaries. The truth of the matter is that ever so many of our vehicle service employees now find it absolutely necessary to have part-time jobs in addition to their postal positions, and in many other cases wives are forced to work to help provide the necessities of life.

Because the salaries of postal employees have lagged so far behind the salaries paid people in private industry, the Post Office Department is finding it increasingly difficult to recruit people possessing the experience and qualifications for employment in the post office vehicle service. To obtain a position of automobile mechanic in our service, a man must have at least 3 years of previous experience as a mechanic, yet all that we can offer is a starting salary of $3,880 a year. In today's labor market this same man can pick from a dozen places in private industry, in most cities where the starting salary is far in excess of $5,000 a year.

While we don't have the figures to prove it, we believe the turnover in the vehicle service is greater today than ever before. We base this statement on the reports we receive monthly from our 143 locals on men resigning from the service. These people are for the most part attracted by the higher salaries paid in private industry and as a result their stay with us is but a short one. As a prime example permit me to cite what took place in the city cf Los Angeles this spring. The city decided to take over their own trash collection. They purchased a fleet of trucks and the Los Angeles civil service advertised for drivers at starting salaries ranging from $4,260 to $5,280 per year with just as many or more fringe benefits than postal employees receive. The starting salary of a driver in the postal service is $3,660 a year and the highest salary he can ever possibly earn is $4,710 and that only after 25 years of service. The net result, about 30 of our best drivers in that city have left us and now are working for the city of Los Angeles.

Mr. Chairman, we believe a salary increase that will permit our people to keep abreast of living costs, maintain a decent standard in their homes and to educate their children properly is long overdue. Certainly ours, the richest government in the world should not require or expect its employees to work for substandard wages.

We have every confidence in our belief that the pople of our great country expect our Government, through the Congress of the United States, to remedy this situation and therefore we trust that this committee will give this matter its prompt and favorable consideration.

X