This first speaker this morning for the A. F. of L. agrees with me. Restore the Form 57 with a sworn statement. As it stands now there are only misstatements and nothing can happen to them. If they swear to it, it is perjury. In the first place that sworn statement should never have been taken out. An opinion was written which the Congress swallowed in late November 1944, so a lot of riff-raff could be taken on in New York, the OPA, and Veterans' Administration. A person will hesitate when he has to swear to a statement about putting down false references. There are many persons who are on that roll who never saw the inside of a college, but in those days it. was very easy to go to Marcantonio's district and get a birth certificate written or a college certificate issued, a photostat. You know that was done for the draft, false birth certificates, false college certificates for a Federal rating. When I was first interviewed there, this left-wing woman said, "Because you are a veteran of the first war does not necessarily mean you have to go into the Veterans' Administration." I said, "But I was sent here by McNutt's office on Madison Avenue," SO I wrote and filled out some papers and got out on the street. I was still in the Navy. I said, "I only know about insurance." They had a huddle about it. I got in all right. When I was in there about 3 days I saw a letter that disgusted me from a man named Weisberger to the "Commie" union to talk about raising their clerks. They were not working then either. They were standing in the toilets all day talking about how to disturb, with things passing in front of the building on Broadway there, and they are still in the service, a good many of them. Mr. BRAWLEY. Thank you very much for coming by and giving us this testimony. I have several documents here which will be placed in the record at this point. (The documents referred to are as follows:) STATEMENT BY SENATOR HERBERT R. O'CONOR OF MARYLAND, ENDORSING S. 558, TO THE CHAIRMAN AND MEMBERS OF THE SUBCOMMITTEE OF THE SENATE COMMITTEE ON POST OFFICE AND CIVIL SERVICE Mr. Chairman and members of the subcommittee, I wish to go on record in connection with your consideration of legislation to provide for salary increases for Federal employees, including those in the field service of the Post Office Department. Convinced as I have been that pay adjustments are due the efficient workers in the Government service I joined in the introduction of S. 558. I commend its favorable consideration to you and would emphasize the fact that by its enactment employees in the Federal service will be encouraged to make a career of their employment as a result of which the efficiency of departmental functioning will be increased. As one of the authors of S. 498, to provide deserved increases for top officials of the Government, now on the Senate Calendar, I consider it only a simple matter of justice that a general reclassification bill be approved as a companion measure, to afford all categories of Federal workers deserved increases in keeping with the responsibilities of their position, and the increased living costs with which their pay has not kept pace. As to the postal workers, I believe there is no more loyal and hardworking group of employees in the whole Federal structure. By and large no group in government is compelled to work under grtater stress than are the post-office employees. Yet, because the cost of operation of the Department can be scrutinized so definitely in comparison with postal receipts, many benefits accorded to other Federal personnel have been denied them, because of the continuing deficit as shown by the Department. No one is more anxious than I to see the Post Office Department show a balanced budget each year. This does not alter the fact that it is unfair to refuse to its employees benefits equal to those of their governmental functions which do not face the "stigma" of a deficit each year. While a member of the Post Office and Civil Service Committee, I made a thorough study of postal pay structures and regulations as to annual leave, sick leave, longevity, and other important points affecting the employees welfare. As a result I am convinced that new legislation favorably affecting the postal workers' interest is necessary if these loyal governmental servants are to be placed on the same plane as other Federal employees. It is my sincere conviction that there should be an increase granted both in the salary schedules, and in annual and sick leave, to mention but a few points in which inequities now exist. In the light of the above and for other reasons which I will be pleased to develop in person before your subcommittee if desired I bespeak your favorable consideration of this legislation. STATEMENT OF WARREN G. MAGNUSON, SENATOR, STATE OF WASHINGTON Mr. Chairman and members of the subcommittee on Classification and Compensation: During the past several months, I have received hundreds of letters and talked with many Federal and postal employees and the most important subject on the minds of these employees is: When will Congress adjust the salaries of all Federal and postal employees in keeping with the cost of living and with the American standard of living? Mr. Chairman, I desire to be recorded in favor of S. 558 and S. 559, to grant an across-the-board salary increase of $650 per annum for all Federal and postal employees. According to the Bureau of Labor statistics, and all the other information that I have been able to obtain, I believe that the Federal and Postal employees are entitled to this salary increase. Over the years, Federal and postal employee salary adjustments have always lagged behind when living costs advanced, but too many times, when living costs begin to decline, Government and postal employees salaries are the first to be cut by the Congress. I have also read and analyzed S. 1772 and S. 1790. These bills seek to amend the Reclassification Acts of 1923 and 1945. I am heartily in accord with the principles as outlined in S. 1772 and S. 1790. I desire to be recorded in favor of this legislation and assure you, Mr. Chairman, that when your committee has approved and reported to the Senate, legislation along the lines outlined in this report, I will actively support it. Mr. Chairman, and members of the subcommittee, I appreciate this opportunity of supporting salary increases and improved working conditions for all Federal and postal employees. STATEMENT OF SENATOR Wayne Morse, of Oregon I wish to thank this committee for granting me time to urge the enactment of an across-the-board wage increase for Federal employees. Last Federal wages have not nearly kept pace with the increase in the cost of living the last few years. The gap has been ever widening and since the war, Federal employees have been cashing their War Saving bonds and using their liquid assets to make up the difference between their income and the cost of living. A large percentage of Government employees have been forced to obtain part-time_employment or their wives to seek employment to augment the family income. year the classified Federal employees received an increase of $330 while the Post Office Department employees received an increase of $450, neither of which increases, closed the gap between the increased cost of living and the earnings of Government employees. The Administration bill, S. 1762, provides substantial increases for the higher bracket people and raises the present ceiling of $10,330, by the addition of four grades, to $16,000. This bill woefully neglects the lower paid people. A CAF-3 is raised from $2,498.28 to $2,500, the magnificent sum of $1.72 per year, or 141⁄2 cents per month. A CAF-2 is raised from $2,284 to $2,300, an increase of $16 per year, or $1.33% per month. Certainly a laborer is worthy of his hire and while I believe in economy and efficiency in Government service, I believe also that we should pay reasonable and decent wages to our civil servants. I urge this committee to add a substantial across-the-board increase to Senate bill 1762, that will grant them relief from the increased living costs which their wages have failed to meet. The same conditions apply to postal workers and I would ask that they also be granted a substantial across-the-board increase. The manner of these increases should, in my opinion, be that proposed in Senate bills 558 and 559. STATEMENT OF CONGRESSMAN JAMES G. FULTON OF PENNSYLVANIA I am pleased to enter my testimony on Senate bill 558, the bill to provide for salary increases for employees of the field service of the Post Office Department. The provisions of S. 558 for an increase of $650 to postal employees is necessary to keep these employees on an economic level with employees in private industry. It has been my position that a full days' work deserves a full days' pay. Our postal employees have lagged far behind the other workers in our economy in the past year and this inequity must be made up in order to obtain the highest efficiency in the Department. We should look ahead to the real benefits which will arise through making the postal service a career service. We should once and for all dispose of the idea that working for any department of the Government, and particularly such a responsible Department, requires any sacrifice on the part of the employee to his family. In addition to the bills relating to the increases in salary, I wish to add my support to the reclassification acts affecting Federal employees and employees in the field service of the Post Office Department. Particularly may I mention my support of S. 1772, which was introduced by Senators Langer, Humphrey, McKellar, Ecton, Hendrickson, Frear and Baldwin. This bill would equalize sick and annual leave for postal and Federal employees. It would eliminate the present four lowest salary grades which have placed a terrific burden on the newer employees, mostly veterans. It would provide credit for past service in promotion to the so-called meritorious service grades, which would benefit older employees who would otherwise retire before becoming eligible for such grades. S. 1772 would also take into consideration compensatory time, which is time granted for service performed on Saturdays, Sundays and holidays, on a basis of 90 minutes for each hour of service in common with practices in private industry, and would also provide salary increases for both substitute and regular employees. I hope that prompt action will be taken not only for the assistance to these deserving employees but also for the good of the postal system and to promote efficient service to the public. STATEMENT OF HON. CARL ELLIOTT, A REPRESENTATIVE IN CONGRESS FROM THE STATE OF ALABAMA We are all aware of the fact that postal salaries have lagged behind those in private industry for many years and presently do not provide, in many cases, a reasonable standard of living for the personnel of one of the few career services of the United States Government. Statements have been made repeatedly regarding the decline in the cost of living, however, according to the latest available statistics prices have only dropped about 5 percent from the all-time high of last August. The saturation point has been reached as far as postal employees are concerned. Many are going into debt and find it necessary to borrow money while others find it necessary for their wives to work and help with the household expenses. Postal employees have never been unreasonable in their requests for legislation to improve their economic welfare and during one period they had to wait nearly 20 years for a wage increase. Something I would like to stress is the fact that postal receipts have increased much faster than the personnel which shows that the per capita unit output is higher. This has been the yardstick used by private industry in granting increases for many years. Surely, the Members of Congress should consider this fact when a bill is enacted, and due credit given for this increased efficiency. I, personally feel S. 558 should be enacted to provide postal employees with a salary commensurate with their ability, efficiency, and their family responsibility. However, I feel that from the bills presently before the committee that you gentlemen will find a solution satisfactory to all those concerned. Since this committee will consider among others S. 1772 a so-called omnibus bill sponsored by seven members of this committee, I should like to take a little additional time to state my reasons for supporting the different provisions of this bill. The elimination of the first four salary grades would give our veterans a break (most of them are in these grades) which they need badly. Recently, one of these boys handed me the following statement: "Since I was discharged from the Army and during the past 3 years in the postal service I have been unable to save any money or to enjoy a vacation. This was due to high rents, high food costs and the fact that Government pay rates have not kept in line with private-industry pay raises to their employees.' Since 1945 postal employees have been trying to have the inequity regarding the longevity or meritorious grades corrected. As you know, gentlemen, the older postal workers were not given credit for all their service when the last three grades were established under Public Law 134, on July 6, 1945. Many of the employees now in the service have as much as 45 or 50 years' service but still cannot reach the top grade under existing law. In fact many of these career men have retired or died during the last 4 years. Such a situation is a poor recompense for a man after a lifetime of service and is eminently unfair. Recently, the Civil Service Commission sent in a report stating that they would not object to granting the same leave privileges to postal employees that are now enjoyed by every other department of our Government. I urge that postal employees be given 26 days vacation and 15 days sick leave. The postal service touches on the lives of the American people more than any other department of the Government. Many people do not have electricity, telephone, telegraph, or even transportation but the United States mail goes everywhere and under all conditions. The postal service has a tradition dating before the adoption of the American Constitution and has an efficiency record unsurpassed anywhere. It will make it easier for these faithful employees to uphold this great American tradition if they are free from the worry of trying to make an inadequate salary provide the necessities of life for their families. I feel that the provisions of S. 1772 will to some degree correct the present salary grades, correct the present inequities in Public Law 134, and provide some reward for faithful service to those in the postal service. Mr. Chairman and members of the committee, I ask your early approval of S.1772. Thank you. Hon. OLIN D. JOHNSTON, CONGRESS OF THE UNITED STATES, Chairman, Post Office and Civil Service Committee, Washington 25, D. C. MY DEAR MR. CHAIRMAN: In behalf of the postal employees as well as postal employees throughout the country, I urge that favorable consideration be given legislation now pending before your committee. In my opinion, the postal employees have been given less consideration than other groups of Federal employees. Their needs are just as great, their responsibilities, in many instances, greater, and their tasks, arduous. These employees are entitled to a decent living wage so that they may properly support their families, and it seems to me that if they are granted an increase in salaries and given other benefits which are accorded to other Government employees the incentive to work in the Post Office Department will be increased, and the morale of the present employees, raised. Sincerely yours, VITO MARCANTONIO. PORT WASHINGTON, N. Y., May 9, 1949. Hon. ROBERT C. HENDRICKSON, Senate Office Building, Washington 25, D. C. DEAR SENATOR: The passage of the S. 558 or similar legislation is essential if letter carriers are to give their best efforts to expediting the delivery of the mails. A survey of conditions in this office has brought to light the following facts: (1) of the 11 married regular carriers less than one-half own and occupy their own homes, 3 rent apartments and the other 3 find it necessary to live with in-laws. (2) At least 9 or 82 percent find it necessary to augment their income by their own or their wives' efforts. (3) Of the seven cars owned by this group only one is new, and that belongs to a couple who are both regulars. The other six have an average age of 14 years. We believe this helps to prove the present pay rate is an existing rather than a living wage. Acting Postmaster General V. C. Burke [New York Herald Tribune, May 7, 1949] stated, "The Department is opposed to a general raise unless the rates are raised to offset such a raise." A failure to raise rates then would penalize letter carriers twice for subsidies granted by the Government, we would not only have to carry the losers but we would have to pay the postage too. There appears to be a move on foot to raise the pay of the top-salaried employees before considering the situation of the lower-paid group. We do not question their claim to a raise but it is difficult to find any justice in improving the situation of those best off before that of another group less fortunate who are having difficulty in getting by. The consistent under payment of employees is a doubtful economy especially when thay are regularly handling valuables sufficient to more than alleviate their troubles. If only a small percentage should succumb to temptation the situation could become chaotic rapidly and destroy the public's faith in the Government's finest service. This is not a matter of fantasy; in Italy, pilfering has risen to such a point that mail of any value, even personal letters, are registered to insure delivery. Respectfully yours, ARTHUR J. ALLEN, Secretary, Branch 1537, N. A. C. L. WASHINGTON STATE FEDERATION OF The Honorable WARREN G. MAGNUSON, Senate Office Building, Washington, D. C. DEAR SENATOR MAGNUSON: In behalf of the several thousand employees of the Federal Government in the State of Washington, whom I represent, I wish to take this opportunity to request your favorable consideration of Senate bill No. 1762, introduced by Senator Long, prepared by the Civil Service Commission, and having for its purpose a revision of portions of the Classification Act of 1923, as amended. As you undoubtedly know, the Classification Act of 1923, as amended, as it now exists, is an unwieldy instrument and definitely in need of simplification and thorough overhauling. The Long bill, as introduced, goes a long way toward correcting the inefficient arrangement now existing. However, in order to further simplify and reduce the administrative problems now existing, the overlapping in the lower grades should be eliminated. These grades should touch, but should not overlap. We are definitely in favor of the addition of grades at the top of the salary structure. Although the large majority of Federal employees will not benefit directly by this provision, indirect benefits will be obtained in providing an incentive to career employees to work toward future advancements. Also by paying a more realistic salary to these top administrative personnel, the entire executive branch of the Government, including the lower-income groups, will be greatly benefited. This will be accomplished by having top supervision who are satisfied, and in the large majority of cases will know their jobs better. This will result in a better working environment and correspondingly more efficient operations from the top supervisor down to the lowest clerk. We do not feel that the clerical-mechanical service should be eliminated as proposed in the bill, but that this service should be integrated into the general schedule which is a perfectly simple classification matter, because in a large majority of cases no comparable work is performed outside of the Government and consequently the positions cannot satisfactorily fit into the wage board procedure. We feel that at least $300,000,000 a year should be allowed for distribution into the formula of S. 1762 for the correction of existing conditions, needs and necessities. By providing salaries now that are sufficiently attractive to hold and bring in high caliber administrators and supervisory personnel it is entirely possible |