STATEMENT OF JACOB BAKER The CHAIRMAN. The next witness is Mr. Jacob Baker, president of the United Federal Workers of America, 532 Seventeenth Street NW., Washington, D. C. Mr. BAKER. The United Federal Workers of America vigorously supports and urges the extension of the civil service and the classification of positions to every position in the United States Government. We feel it essential that Congress shall take every possible step to speed this process of extension. We have heretofore given our support and approval to H. R. 4227 and H. R. 3663, providing for the extension of the civil service and the classified service, respectively, both bills introduced by Representative Jennings Randolph. However, it is not important to us as to which bills are passed. What does seem essential is that the process shall be speeded up. If H. R. 960 will get this accomplished more quickly, we shall be happy to support it as strongly as we have these other bills. In the process of extending the classification of positions, Congress can pass an act which will apply directly to all employees in the Government, whether they be stationed in Washington or in the field. This was the case with Congressman Randolph's bill, H. R. 3663. Or, as in the case of H. R. 960, the President may be authorized to extend the Classification Act by Executive order to all positions not now subject to the act. Both acts necessarily provide for executive action of the Civil Service Commission in making classifications and determining the application of the act, but it seems to us that the method provided in H. R. 3663 is a little more certain in its operation. We know of no reason why there should be objection to it, since the will of the Congress, as expressed in this legislation, will be that the act should be extended. We would a little prefer that it be automatic than that it be done when the President gets around to it. We have little doubt that the President will extend the act if given the authority. Every President for years past has taken some steps toward the extension of the classification of positions and the civil service, and we think that will continue to be the case. We simply want to see the chances of delay minimized. We wish to strongly commend to the committee the provisions of H. R. 960 and the other bills we have mentioned which extend the classified civil service to employees throughout the Government by a qualifying examination. There can be no question but that the introduction of an open, competitive examination will result in the disruption of the service. The reason is simple. Examination demonstrates broad skills and credits experience of any kind within the occupation. A stenographer employed in one of these positions to be covered in may be two points lower than a stenographer outside, but the 3 or 5 years' service she has had with the Government is worth a great deal more than the two points. It is essential that an examination be given to be sure that the workers covered in can do the job. It is equally essential that the service not be disrupted. It has been the custom of the Civil Service Commission to make qualifying examinations sufficiently rigid and valid so that the capacity and ability of the persons examined is adequately tested. It has proved itself an excel lent method for bringing positions into civil service. The people in the positions who can do the work are kept on. The functions of the agency continue in smooth and uninterrupted flow without having to break in a complete new force, and the jobs thereafter are filled by open competitive examination. There are two other extremely important objections to the use of the competitive examination for filling as many positions as this: First, the cost would be overwhelming, and second, the time of posting, assembling, conducting the examinations, grading the papers, and creating the registers would be so long that the extension of the act to these positions would be very greatly delayed. Almost all civil-service authorities recognize that the use of the noncompetitive examination for persons already on a job is the effective method that has proved its worth both in this country and abroad, in expanding the civil service. At the hearings of this committee last year this method was commended, and we reiterate that commendation. We wish to commend the plan of boards of review as provided in section VII of the bill. These boards should perform a very useful service and, as they gain experience, should serve as a source of ideas for the continuous improvement of the whole system of rating, and thus for the general improvement of the public service. We should like to make a suggestion in connection with this section as to a short addition that will considerably improve the working of it. It is this: On page 12, line 1, after the word "right," add the following: "to notice in writing, to inspection of any records upon which his rating was based," and then the present language would continue. The present language gives him a right of hearing and review. This inclusion of the information as to the basis of his rating and the right to see the records upon which the rating was based makes it possible for the employee actually to prepare his material for review by the board. The board of review will always have to find a means to get information on cases presented for review. This proposal would establish the method. Both ends sought by this bill-extension of civil service and the classification of positions are valuable. Because so many more employees have civil-service status than have classification, the latter is the most important at this time. We are delighted to see a bill proposed that makes possible the extension of both to the furthest reaches of the Government service. It is highly desirable that the Classification Act should be applied to the field in such a way that salaries for specific duties throughout the whole of the Government service shall be as nearly uniform as possible and practicable. Due to the fact that makeshift classifications, erroneous classifications, and no classifications at all have been applied in the field service, we have at the present time thousands of workers grossly underpaid. The United Federal Workers wishes to point out that there is a specific trend toward the evening up of wages over the whole of the United States throughout all industry, that the differences in the cost of living are continuously diminishing, and for both of these reasons we feel that Government salaries should all be based on the same scale of classification. The passage of this bill will permit this trend to be expressed. in the Government service. In consequence, we urge it strongly. In addition to representing the United Federal Workers of America, I speak also for the C. I. O., as expressed in its resolution adopted at the last convention. The CHAIRMAN. That organization is made up of approximately 4,000,000 workers, is it not? Mr. BAKER. Yes; throughout the United States. Hon. ROBERT RAMSPECK, UNITED FEDERAL WORKERS OF AMERICA, Chairman, Civil Service Committee, House of Representatives, Washington, D. C. MY DEAR MR. RAMSPECK: In the statement which I made before the committee on behalf of the United Federal Workers, we expressed our full and wholehearted support for H. R. 960, extending the classified executive civil service of the United States. At that time, however, a suggestion was made, which the press informs us has received very serious consideration by the committee, and which seems to us to greatly lessen the otherwise completely satisfactory nature of the bill. I refer to the proposal to provide that an employee who otherwise is qualified for being covered into the classified executive civil service, but who fails to pass the qualifying examination, shall lose his position within 6 months. It seems to us that the language of the President's Executive order of June 24, 1938, dealing with this same matter is very much preferable, and we, in consequence, suggest that that language be used, namely: “Any such incumbent who fails to meet the foregoing requirements of this section shall be separated from the service within 30 days (exclusive of leave to which he is entitled) after the Commission reports that he is ineligible for classification unless the head of the agency concerned certifies to the Commission that such incumbent has rendered satisfactory service and that he should be retained although without acquiring a competitive classified status." The conditions set up in the bill for inclusion of the non-civil-service positions within the classified civil service are such that the department head must recommend that the worker be included. He must have worked for 6 months and given satisfactory service during that time. On the score of both experience and executive approval, he stands justified as satisfactory in the position in which he is employed. We expect that the great bulk of these workers will pass the qualifying examinations, but we know that there are awkwardnesses in examination, in the giving of the examination itself, and a dozen other reasons that may result in failure of persons who are quite competent to do the work that they have been employed at and have learned to do. The use of the amendment we suggest would not create any danger of loading the Government with incompetents. The administrative heads will have full authority to handle any situation that develops. What we do make possible is that they are able to continue without change and disruption of the working staff and routine persons who have proved themselves able to do the work, but for one reason or another are not able to pass the examination. This wording suggested by us has the approval of the President and the Civil Service Commission, since it was contained in the Executive order of June 24, 1938. It seems to us highly desirable to use the language which I have suggested in this letter, and in behalf of the United Federal Workers, I strongly urge that this be done. Yours very sincerely, STATEMENT OF CHARLES I. STENGLE JACOB BAker. The CHAIRMAN. The next witness is Col. Charles I. Stengle, president of the American Federation of Government Employees. Mr. STENGLE. I represent the American Federation of Government Employees, which is affiliated with the American Federation of Labor, and The CHAIRMAN. That includes about 3,500,000 or 4,000,000 workers, does it not? Mr. STENGLE. That many or more. I want to state at the outset of what I may say to the members of the committee, that I want to take a little exception to my friend Kaplan's statement that, because he does not represent employee organizations, he is not afraid of questions. I am a former Member of the House of Representatives and I carry the scars of membership. While I am president of an employees' organization, I fear not questions from those who are Members of the Congress, and especially so when I am sure of the ground upon which I stand. We have heard considerable here about examinations and the results of examinations, and if we were to live to be 50 years older we would continue to hear of these peculiar twists in examinations. I prefer to go back to the bill rather than to carry on a discussion as to how somebody failed in an examination or whether stenographers are as good in Congressmen's offices as they are outside. I prefer to place our organization and the American Federation of Labor exactly on record in favor of the Ramspeck bill. Now that does not mean that we advocate at all times this system of preparing examinations and the holding of them. We have heard of the idealistic and the realistic and the practical, but every member around this table knows from experience that there are times when the idealistic is impossible of attainment, and this is one of those times. Now let us look at this bill from the standpoint of the Government. We have been talking of the employees' standpoint only. We have here an investment on the part of the Government in agencies of various kinds for the purpose of carrying on what we believe to be or hope to be something that will improve the conditions of the Government and under that the conditions of business and the livelihood of our people. Now the Government either by political or other methods has set up various agencies from time to time within the last 6 years. Possibly there have been more agencies set up by this administration than any other administration in the history of the country. It must be said, parallel to that, that there have been more reasons for setting up agencies than we have had existing for many, many years. The conditions of the times, the repressions, the depressions, and other "pressions," that have been bumping back and forth ever since the World War have made it necessary to stop somewhere and try to begin to set things in order for this Government. Now the Government, because of that condition, set up these various agencies and when it did so they were on an emergency basis, because there was actually an emergency existing. Nobody knew then and nobody knows how long that condition will continue. The Government wanted to start these agencies immediately in order to meet conditions that were actively and menacingly affecting the welfare of all our people. It could not have physically gone to the Civil Service Commission and ordered eligible registers for all these positions and gotten results by way of eligible registers in less than 3 years. We were called upon to acknowledge an emergency, but we must likewise acknowledge that because of some ideal we must not continue that emergency and the suffering produced by it until we can approach the ideal by way of competitive examinations. What would you and I have done? The Government, obviously, needed help. Naturally, then, the Democrats, as would the Repub licans if they were in power, sought their qualified constituents or the qualified constituents sought them, and they went into this operation of appointment. Mrs. ROGERS. Why did they not take persons qualified and already under civil service? Mr. STENGLE. They did take many who were qualified by civil service. They did not take civil-service employees because the jobs themselves were not in the classified service. Mrs. ROGERS. These employees could have been furnished from the civil-service registers, no doubt. Mr. STENGLE. Many hundreds were appointed from c vil-serv ce registers to jobs in these emergency agenc es. Mrs. ROGERS. And more were appointed from without the civil service. Mr. STENGLE. That is right; because the positions were not classified. The stenographic market is always so high that stenographers can get jobs at any time. The Civil Service Comm ssion held an examination for stenographers 2 years ago and 60,000 competed. The Commission has anounced another stenographic examination. The stenographers marry and get out of the service and go elsewhere and there are always vacancies in the stenographic groups. Mrs. ROGERS. I believe that we should have the merit system regardless of which party is in power. Mr. STENGLE. I agree. You know my sentiments well on this subject; but I do not think we are going to reach Utopia th s year. Mrs. ROGERS. But let us try for it. Mr. STENGLE. We have been trying for it under both administrations for many years; but we have progressed only slightly. This is not a question of partisanship. Mrs. ROGERS. No; it is not and it should not be. Mr. STENGLE. You have just had on the stand Mr. Kaplan, who represents an organization that is about 85 percent Republican, and he urges the enactment of this bill; therefore the bill is not partisan. I know what I say about that organization, because I am a former secretary of the Municipal Civil Service Commission of New York and I dealt with the members of that organization over a period of 5 years. They are idealistic, and I do not blame them, but they are getting practical. We have all got to get practical when we find important problems must be served. Here is a bill that will stabilize the service; that will take us many steps towards the ideal we have in mind, and that is that all Government positions outside of policy-forming positions should be filled on the basis of tests for merit and fitness. The This is a step in the right direction. Whichever party comes into power in 1940 may have some other ideas they want to set up, and we will be here to help, so long as things go in the right direction. right direction is pointed out in the pending bill. First, it extends the merit system to include all agencies not now under civil service. Secondly, it would extend the Classification Act to the field service and make the latter service commensurate or at least equal to the service we have here in the District of Columbia departmental service. When your dear husband, Mrs. Rogers, and I were in Congress together in 1923 we voted for the Classification Act. We would |