Sizable materiel costs as well as training costs could be saved if we can avoid the necessity of training so many new men to replace officers leaving the service.

Reduced accident rates also accomplish additional savings through decreased public liability payments and death benefits, as well as resulting in improved morale in the service.

In seeking a solution to the problem of turnover, we have looked to field studies to determine what influences military men most in the election of a military career.

(The chart follows:)

Secretary BURGESS. Results of a survey covering approximately 40,000 Air Force officers and men are shown on this chart.

Tangible benefits are important to 33 percent of those surveyed; 51 percent said increased pay is most important. Also, of those not intending to reenlist, 62 percent considered pay most important. Other service studies generally show the same pattern of interests.

Mr. RIVERS. Did you submit Mr. Secretary, some sort of a figure that they could rely on about the increase, 5 percent, 10 percent? Secretary BURGESS. We have generally discussed this pay situation with people in the field who will benefit from it.

Mr. RIVERS. A definite figure?

Secretary BURGESS. No, sir.

Mr. RIVERS. They just complained they weren't getting enough money?

Secretary BURGESS. That is right, complained pay was most important.

Mr. BATES. What is that "16 percent intangible"?

Is that the wife? [Laughter.]

Mr. HARDY. She is very tangible.

Mr. BATES. As important a factor as any is the wife, I think more important than the pay.

Secretary BURGESS. That is right. That is a very important factor. Mr. BATES. You are an ex-serviceman if they don't like it. Secretary BURGESS. That is right.

Mr. WILSON. The second 9 percent there, having to do with decrease in transfers is something that you can't come to Congress about. That is one of the problems within the services.

Secretary BURGESS. I would like to submit there that if we can. stabilize the force, and cut down the turnover, the leaving of people, that will in itself be a stabilizing force to this moving problem. Because as you lost a person you have to move people to take his vacancy. And one of the important elements in this move problem, which we recognize is a deterrent to morale, a very large deterrent, is the nature of the service. But if we can stabilize the force I think we can make creditable gains.

Mr. RIVERS. It is based on what the figures show now, whether or not we get into a shooting war, and the stability of the forces as you envision them today.

Secretary BURGESS. In evaluating the overall personnel instability problem it became evident that the lagging level of military pay had become an important factor.

Military pay has increased less since 1949 than that of industrial workers, salaried business management personnel, or civil servants. It has also lagged well behind the cost of living.

This chart shows increases from 1949 to 1952 on the left; increases from 1949 to 1954 on the right; both superimposed over the corresponding increase in the cost of living.

(The chart follows:)

MILITARY COMPENSATION HAS NOT KEPT PACE WITH PAY OF OTHER MAJOR

The last column on the right shows the effect of the Department of Defense proposal to raise present military pay levels by approximately 6.7 percent over present pay and allowances. Even with this proposed increase, however, the level of military pay would still be below other standards.

Although an overall percentage figure is shown for this comparison, the Department of Defense plan does not call for an across-theboard increase. Instead, the proposal provides for selective increases, at key points in the military career pattern.

This comparison does not reflect payments of overtime to industrial workers or civil servants, nor does it include bonuses paid to salaried personnel. Nor does it reflect pension or retirement plans for any groups nor any other contingent benefits.

This chart shows the percentage increases in military pay since 1908, and the effect of the proposed increases.

(The chart follows:)

INCREASES IN MILITARY COMPENSATION FROM 1908 TO DATE HAVE SERVED TO COMPRESS RANGES IN PAY

Senator BURGESS. In more than 45 years the pay of a major general or rear admiral has been increased 50 percent. The pay of the lowest enlisted grade has been increased by nearly 800 percent. Considering the inflation, our higher ranking officers are paid only about onehalf as much as they were 45 years ago, while the enlisted men are paid about three times as much.

Mr. RIVERS. I want you to make that very full for us because when we had the last pay bill upon the floor if you remember, those of you here, Captain Martineau, General Dahlquist who represented-was here, the two of them representing the Department of Defense, we had a lot of trouble getting our bill through. And over in the Senate, that is the other body, we had trouble over there, that is why they didn't write out a 10 percent across-the-board like we passed and we had to work it out in conference, that is why it was 4 and 14, and they just shot at the higher echelon of brass.

We want to be in a position where Mr. Blandford can have those figures, where we can show over a period of 45 years, 1908 until the time we made the increase, which was 43 years.

Mr. BLANDFORD. We had them in 1949 and the House paid no attention to them and we had them in 1952, and the House did accept the 10 percent increase at that time.

Mr. RIVERS. That is right. But the fact remains the law didn't come out that way. We have to have the figures to put up a good fight, so it can be a consistent one.

Secretary BURGESS. That is what we hope is one of the effects of this chart.

Mr. BATES. I wouldn't want to complicate this any more. But the cost of living applicable to the enlisted men is not a valid figure compared to those of the officers. Because the enlisted men, most of them get their food, clothing and shelter. So if you add those things in, instead of 800 percent it would be considerably higher than it indicates there on that chart. Because if they are paying for their food, clothing and costs you would have had an increase higher.

Mr. BLANDFORD. Is this chart based on basic pay or allowances? Colonel STEPHENS. Pay and allowances except that back in 1908 there were no allowances as such for the enlisted personnel.

Mr. PATTERSON. The enlisted married man under that same pay scale

Colonel STEPHENS. I don't recall what the quarters allowance was or subsistence allowance, but what I had in mind was that the flat rate of $15 in 1908 was all that the man got, he was fed and whether there was any special rate for married people, I am not sure.

Mr. BLANDFORD. Mr. Bates makes the point and I think another chart should reflect that-I think Mr. Kilday suggested this some time ago that we confine ourselves to basic pay. We get into trouble when we get into allowances here, because this figure shows allowances.

Now, when you came along with the Dependents Assistance Act that is when your E-1 went from four hundred-odd percent to eight hundred-odd percent. That is a little distorted.

Would it be possible to have a chart prepared showing the increases in basic pay for all grades since 1908, and let us look at that comparison?

Secretary BURGESS. We will submit that.

Mr. RIVERS. I think that would be very helpful on the floor.
Secretary BURGESS. We will submit that.

Mr. BATES. Even that, Mr. Counsel, the married officers and married enlisted men still have to buy their food outside.

Mr. BLANDFORD. Yes.

Mr. BATES. E-1 and E-2, most of them are unmarried, get their food in kind, therefore, we wouldn't need increased allowances to take care of inflation since that period.

Mr. BLANDFORD. The only thing you can show on all of these charts, is the cost of found, what they call found, for the enlisted personnel who are furnished quarters and food, and that is today worth, I think, about $127 a month or something in that neighborhood. But it is very difficult, unless you are comparing basic pay, to really get an honest comparison of the way basic pay has increased because then you have got to go into the very problem you have raised of certain people being furnished additional compensation in the form of found.

Secretary BURGESS. I think the chart is comparable in that respect.
Mr. BLANDFORD. For the first grades?

Secretary BURGESS. And also over in the officer grades.
Mr. RIVERS. Continue.

Secretary BURGESS. The continuing need for qualified leaders and the increasing requirement for highly trained technicians make it necessary that more men in the middle and higher ranks be retained. It will be noted that the proposed increases are concentrated in those

areas.

The level of military pay is of real importance when measured against compensation for comparable levels of skill and responsibility in civilian careers. This chart shows that the range of civilian pay exceeds that of military pay for comparable responsibilities, particularly in the higher levels.

(The chart follows:)

THE CIVILIAN ECONOMY OFFERS MUCH HIGHER CAREER INCENCIVE GOALS FOR COMPARABLE RESPONSIBILITY