Mr. CLAY. May I ask another question just about that. Mr. CLAY. I just had this one question. An attachment to your Federal Personnel Manual System No. 713-22, you articulate as to the policy of the agency in this regulation-"That while the law did not specify any minimum or maximum grade levels for upward mobility levels, generally the greatest opportunity for impact is at the lower grade levels. Therefore, it is anticipated most agency programs will be dealing with programs at the GS-7 or equivalent levels and below." Why is it that you don't have that regulation for the top grades? Mr. KATOR. That is deliberate and we discussed this at the time the equal opportunities legislation was being discussed. The heavy concentration of minorities and women was, at that time, in 1972, even heavier than it is now, in the lower grade levels. It was our concern that we do something at those grade levels to help people gain new skills, get them out of the deadended positions. At the middle and high level positions, you don't have the same type of problem. It is not usually a problem of training persons to get new skills at those levels. We deliberately aimed the upward mobility program at what was the biggest group of minority employees and women to see if we couldn't get the maximum impact for the dollar. Mr. HAMPTON. Let me comment on this. We also have, which is not covered under that particular thing, a new management development effort, an executive development effort, and part of that too is to assure that the kinds of training that managers need to move up, although they are basically entry level people, we have 7, 9, 11, and 13, and have requested agencies to even develop individual development plans for individuals in that particular area to achieve greater utilization of skill. All of our discussions with the agencies, when you go to these training sessions for managers and so forth, that minorities and women are represented there and given these opportunities. That is on the other end of the scale. Mr. CLAY. Doesn't the law require you to deal across the board? Mr. HAWKINS. Do you want to make the vote? Mr. CLAY. Yes. Mr. HAWKINS. The committee is recessed for 5 minutes. [At that point a recess was taken]. Mr. HAWKINS. The committee is called to order. Mr. Hampton, before the recess, I think Mr. Clay had pursued series of questions which I would like to follow up. I have, for example, before me, the breakout in certain professional occupations. For example, in the occupation of general attorney in the Federal service, the average salary is $24,904. The average salary for minorities is $22,656, which is $2,248 below the average, and the average salary for women is $22,081, which is $2,823 below the average. In the contract and procurement series, the average salary is $18,657. The average salary for minorities is $2,966 below that average and the average salary for women is $3,897 below the average. In numerous other occupations, that I will not take the time to mention, we get the same situation, where we get a differential in salary for minorities and women. Now, first of all, may I ask you whether or not this is indicative of systemic discrimination as opposed to the idea that discrimination occurs only in one-on-one situations? |