number of actual officers in the service as distinguished from the number of positions, because there is district after district in which the service is suffering from the fact that the complement of officers is not full. If we are limited to the number of officers now in the service, we shall be penalized, as members of the staff go into the military service and we are not able immediately to fill the positions. That creates a serious situation. I earnestly hope you will not do that, gentlemen of the committee.

Take the situation in Detroit, where the force is now reduced from six to four. It may go down to three. The strain on the officers is unduly great and the court says that the work is suffering.

Mr. O NELL. Have you finished with this item, Mr. Chandler?

SALARIES, PROBATION OFFICERS

Mr. CHANDLER. May I have 2 or 3 minutes to summarize the considerations bearing on the probation salaries?

Judge Biggs and Judge Knox yesterday referred to the reasons for the increase in the compensation of probation officers. I want to point out that included in this scheme of reclassification, there is a one-step advance for the clerks and stenographers who are now, almost all of them, in grades CAF-2 and 3, and a few in grade 4. The basic salaries for grades 2 and 3 are $1,440 and $1,620, respectively, and there is provided an increase to grades 3, 4, and 5. In other words, the grades are stepped up one.

That is for the reason that the clerks in the probation offices carry responsibilities and need knowledge going considerably beyond typing and stenography. They have to be in charge of the offices for considerable periods when the officers, particularly in the single-district office, are out making investigations, or engaged in their work of supervision; at such times persons come into the offices and need information or guidance. The clerks are the only persons available to give it. Obviously they cannot act as probation officers. At the same time there is a great deal of information in reference to regulations which they should be able to give, and do give. They need to be persons of discretion.

They are used in formulating the probation reports of all kinds. Without any detraction from the very responsible services which secretaries to judges render, who are now employed, as you realize, at basic salaries of $2,600 per annum (exclusive of the wartime addition), the difference between the salaries of the probation clerks and that amount is too great, and an increase is being asked from grades 2, 3, and 4 to grades 3, 4, and 5, with resulting increase in basic salaries from $1,440, $1,620, and $1,880 per annum to $1,620, $1,880, and $2,000, respectively. I submit that that is very moderate and should be allowed. It is really necessary in order to prevent excessive turn-over in the system.

Mr. JOHNSON. You do not have a grade system in effect now? Mr. CHANDLER. We have it in effect, sir. We are not under the Classification Act, but, as a matter of fact, we have it in effect. Mr. O'NEAL. What you mean is that the scale is too low.

Mr. CHANDLER. That is right. Although we are not under the Classification Act, as a matter of convenience and in order that em

ployees in the service of the courts can compare their salaries with those in other branches, we follow a similar scheme.

Mr. JOHNSON. You are doing that now?

Mr. CHANDLER. We are doing it now and we are asking that funds be provided to enable us to increase the scales from 2, 3, and 4, as they are at present, to 3, 4, and 5.

Mr. TIBBOTT. Will this reclassification increase the number of the employees?

Mr. CHANDLER. It will not increase the number of employees. It is designed to give the employees for whom we now have provision fairer compensation. That is the sole purpose of it.

Mr. O'NEAL. It will help you to build up your personnel?

SERVICES RENDERED BY PROBATION (FICERS

Mr. CHANDLER. Exactly. The probation officers, in the last 3 or 4 years, have rendered service which has been of the greatest value in dealing with convicted offenders. The principal outlets for the energies of these offenders along legitimate lines have been employment in war industry and, secondly, admission to the armed forces.

At the beginning of the war and in the beginning of the period of war production. almost all employers in industry turned a deaf ear to applicants for employment who had criminal records. By dint of conferences of probation officers in various parts of the country with employers in their districts, supported by statements issued by the Secretary of War and the Secretary of the Navy, that men should not be rejected for employment in war industries because they had criminal records if at the time they seemed to be scund risks for employment the barriers to employment have gradually been broken down with the result that we have this very commendable showing of over $22,000,000 in wages being earned by probationers in 1943.

In the beginning, the selective service boards almost invariably rejected men with criminal records, and after the selective service boards began to accept them, the Army and the Navy enlisting stations would reject them without any investigation into their characters at the time. The probation officers have conducted conferences with the Army and Navy authorities and the selective service boards as a result of which they have been able to pave the way for the admission of over 4,000 men into the armed services.

Mr. O'NEAL. That is a splendid record.

Mr. CHANDLER. They have worked in cases of violators of the Selective Service Act. They have cooperated with the United States attorneys in conferences with these men, sometimes before they were indicted, sometimes after, in order to try to bring them to a realization of their duty to come to the defense of the country. Except in those instances in which the resistance is deep-seated, either because the subjects belonged to Jehovah's Witnesses, or because they are stubborn by temperament, a great many changes of heart have been brought about.

Last year this committee authorized a fund for the reclassification of positions in the clerks' offices. It was not a very large fund comparatively. But you can have no idea of the benefit that we have derived from our ability to make reclassifications in those instances

in which the compensation was particularly inequitable; and more than that, from the sense on the part of the clerks' personnel that their work is recognized and that the Government appreciates what they are doing.

Now, we are in a very difficult time in the probation service. Our men are being drawn away. We ask for recognition for them.

Mr. O'NEAL. I think we have gone into that rather fully. Mr. CHANDLER. You have, and I simply want to urge that you give this matter your most sympathetic consideration.

Mr. O'NEAL. I believe you are for it, Mr. Chandler.

(The statement of the number of positions authorized and the number of persons actually employed is as follows:)

Probation system, United States courts

Total number of positions provided for in estimate for 1945-----

Number of probation officers provided for in the estimate for 1945Number of clerks to probation officers provided for in the estimate for 1945___.

269

181

450

252

168

420

243

174

Number of probation officers actually employed as of July 1, 1943–
Number of clerks to probation officers actually employed as of July 1, 1943_

Total number of persons employed as of July 1, 1943---

Number of probation officers actually employed as of Feb. 15, 1944 Number of clerks to probation officers actually employed as of Feb. 15, 1944---

Total number of persons actually employed as of Feb. 15, 1944____ 417

SALARIES OF CLERKS, UNITED STATES COURTS

Mr. O'NEAL. The next item is "Salaries of clerks, United States courts."

Mr. CHANDLER. This item will not take very long, Mr. Chairman, and then we shall have completed consideration of the appropriations that were referred to by the judges. This item is "Salaries of clerks, United States courts," to be found on page 164 of the committee print and page 46 of the justifications.

Mr. O'NEAL. Your regular appropriation for 1944 is $2,570,280. There was no supplemental. But there was an item under Public Law No. 49 of $375,000, making a total of $2,945,280.

Your base for 1945 is $2,570,280, and you are asking a total estimate of $3,023,710.

Mr. CHANDLER. That is right.

Mr. O'NEAL. The increases asked in your estimate for 1945 are, (1) an increase in compensation in lieu of overtime pay, $388,500; (2) the difference between part-year and full-year cost of withingrade salary increases authorized in 1944, $17,490; (3) reclassification of positions of deputy clerks, $18,000; (4) reclassification of positions of librarians, $4,520; additional temporary employees in the field, $10,000; and salary differential for higher living costs outside the United States, $14,920.

Will you take up those items and discuss them very briefly?

Mr. CHANDLER. The item for additional wartime pay is computed on the same basis, Mr. Chairman, as in the case of the other similar items of appropriations.

The difference between the part-year and full-year cost of withingrade salary increases is computed on the same basis as in other appropriations.

RECLASSISFICATION OF POSITIONS

The next item is $18,000 for reclassification of positions of deputy clerks. We asked last year for $63,000 for reclassification of positions of deputy clerks, and the Congress allowed it in the appropriation for the current year. The Civil Service Commission, between the previous estimate and the time of our appearance before this committee, had made a survey and advised certain standards which we thought, on the basis of our best judgment when this estimate was made up, would cost about $81,000 to carry out. It now appears that with the money which was provided for 1944, namely, $63,000— I think supplemented to some degree by savings that we have been able to make-we have measurably met the civil-service standards.

I do not mean to be understood as saying that the salary scales of the clerks of the court are in all respects ideal. They are receiving our continuing study. But we think that to improve the present scales substantially, we should need more money than $18,000, and that $18,000 would not be a sum which we could apply with very much effect. Consequently, sir, we do not ask you to include that item in the appropriation.

Mr. JOHNSON. From what will that come off-what item?

Mr. CHANDLER. It is one of the items of increase shown on page 47 of the justifications.

Mr. JOHNSON. It comes from the total?

Mr. O'NEAL. Yes; it comes out of the total. Now, tell us about reclassification of positions of librarians, $4,520.

Mr. CHANDLER. That is a matter that was presented particularly by Judges Biggs and Maris yesterday.

Mr. O'NEAL. I think we have heard enough on that.

ADDITIONAL TEMPORARY EMPLOYEES, FIELD

What about the item of $10,000 for additional temporary employees in the field?

Mr. CHANDLER. In the appropriation for the fiscal year 1944 there was included the sum of $92,300 for the services of temporary deputy clerks. The principal kinds of work which have called for that are, first, condemnation cases, which involve a great deal of record work, and the handling of large sums of money, as I pointed out to you yesterday; and, second, naturalization cases. There is a very large amount of clerical work involved in the handling of naturalization

cases.

The sum of $92,300 which was allotted for temporary personnel in the present appropriation has proved insufficient and we have run over that to the extent of $16,777 without taking into account the wartime addition to pay. We have not run over the appropriationI want to make that clear; because from savings from the allotment

for permanent personnel, we have been able to meet the deficiency in the sum allotted out of the appropriation for temporary personnel, and we probably shall not need to ask for a deficiency appropriation on that score. But in view of the fact that the call for temporary deputies to handle the naturalization work is continuing, and the condemnation work also, we consider that we should ask for an additional sum of $10,000 for temporary employees in 1945.

NEED FOR TEMPORARY EMPLOYEES

Mr. O'NEAL. What is your authority with reference to temporary help? Can you, within the limits of the amount of money appropriated, employ any number you want?

Mr. CHANDLER. Yes, sir; within the limits.

Mr. O NEAL. You can use up all of the appropriation with temporaries, if you so desire?

Mr. CHANDLER. If we can save money from the allotment for permanent employees, there is nothing to prevent us from using it to pay the compensation of temporary employees. This consideration of temporary employees had to begin, you can realize, 3 or 4 years ago, when the condemnation cases in the Federal courts began to increase. The subccmmittee on the appropriations for the Departments of State, Commerce, and Justice and the judiciary, urged us, as far as we could, to authorize temporary positions rather than permanent positions for the reason that it was believed that the demand might be temporary and that it would be undesirable to establish permanent positions. So that these temporary positions, as they are called, are filled for varying periods within the fiscal year. Mr. O'NEAL. Now that that work has gone down or is going down, do you feel that you can get along with what you have had before, for temporary help?

Mr. CHANDLER. It may go down, but it is not really going down yet. I did say yesterday that it looked as if the condemnation cases filed were leveling off, and also the Immigration and Naturalization Service informs me that it is not expected there will be any increase next year in the naturalization cases. Immediately there is no diminution in the work.

Mr. O'NFAL. So that here is another $10,000 that you could be generous with, Mr. Chandler?

Mr. CHANDLER. I think I will ask my friend, Mr. Whitehurst, who has been very silent, to say something on this item. He did say to me: "If you suggest to the committee that the $18.000 for reclassification of positions might be eliminated, then you must held on to the $10.000." May I have my lawyer speak on that for a moment? Mr. WHITEHURST. We have these calls for temporary deputies pretty continuously. We have a large number of them on the rolls. Mr. O'NEAL. Are they doing largely condemnation work?

Mr. WHITEHURST. Condemnation and naturalization work almost entirely. They are pretty well scattered, in about 40 different districts. We have them all over the country. We ride herd pretty closely on this appropriation all the time and try to keep within its limits. That is a task, with an appropriation of this size, and with as many demands upon it as there are.