HAZARDOUS DUTY RETIREMENT PROVISIONS FOR FIREFIGHTERS TUESDAY, JULY 23, 1968 HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES, INSURANCE, AND HEALTH BENEFITS OF THE Washington, D. C. The subcommittee met, pursuant to notice, at 10 a.m., in room 209, Cannon House Office Building, Hon. Dominick V. Daniels, chairman of the subcommittee, presiding. Mr. DANIELS. The Subcommittee on Retirement, Insurance, and Health Benefits is meeting this morning to consider the Senate-passed bill, S. 1507, to extend to Federal firefighting personnel the earlyretirement provision of the civil service retirement law applicable to Federal law enforcement personnel. Section 8336(c) of title 5, United States Code, grants special early retirement privileges to employees serving in positions of which the duties are hazardous and primarily involve the investigation, apprehension, or detention of persons suspected or convicted of criminal offenses. After the attainment of age 50 and after having served at least 20 years in such capacity, the employee may retire upon the recommendation of the agency head and the approval of the Civil Service Commission. To make such early retirement economically feasible, an unreduced annuity is provided equaling 2 percent of the employee's high 5-year average salary, multiplied by his total years of service. Without objection, copies of S. 1507 and the related agency reports on an identical bill, H.R. 11524, will be inserted into the record at this point. (S. 1507 and the reports follow :) [S. 1507, 90th Cong., second sess.] AN ACT To include firefighters within the provisions of section 8336(c) of title 5, United States Code, relating to the retirement of Government employees engaged in certain hazardous occupations Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representatives of the United States of America in Congress assembled, That section 8336 (c) of title 5, United States Code, is amended by inserting after "United States" the following: "or are primarily to perform work directly connected with the control and extinguishment of fires or the maintenance and use of firefighting apparatus and equipment". SEC. 2. The provisions of section 8348(g) of title 5, United States Code, shall not be applicable with respect to benefits payable pursuant to the amendment made by this Act. SEC. 3. The amendment made by this Act shall be applicable only in the case of persons retiring after the date of enactment of this Act. Passed the Senate December 15, 1967. Attest: FRANCIS R. VALEO, Secretary. Hon. THADDEUS J. DULSKI, U.S. CIVIL SERVICE COMMISSION, Washington, D.C., August 7, 1967. Chairman, Committee on Post Office and Civil Service, House of Representatives. DEAR MR. CHAIRMAN: This is in further reply to your request for the Commission's views on H. R. 11524, a bill "To include firefighters within the provisions of section 8336 (c) of title 5, United States Code, relating to the retirement of Government employees engaged in certain hazardous occupations." Section 8336(c) grants special early retirement privileges to employees serving in positions the duties of which are hazardous and involve primarily the investigation, apprehension, or detention of persons suspected or convicted of criminal offenses. They may retire after attaining age 50 and serving at least 20 years in such capacity. Retirement in each instance must be recommended by the agency head and approved by the Civil Service Commission. Annuity allowable under this provision equals 2% of the employee's high-5 average salary multiplied by his years of service with an 80%-of-average-salary maximum. H.R. 11524 proposes extending coverage of section 8336 (c) to firefighters, who are now subject to the retirement provisions applicable to employees generally. The bill would operate prospectively, applying only to firefighters in service on or after the date of enactment. The cost of the bill is estimated at $17,500 per employee retiring under the more liberal provisions; assuming about 200 retirements each year, the added annual cost would be $3.5 million. Section 8336(c) was initially limited in application to agents and similar employees of the Federal Bureau of Investigation. Later Congresses extended the provision to other employees but the express purpose was always to strictly limit coverage to persons performing duties involving primarily the investigation, apprehension or detention of criminals or suspected criminals. This restricted purpose is readily apparent in the justifications advanced for the adoption of the more liberal retirement provisions for law-enforcement officers. They were justified, Congress felt, because law-enforcement activity required staff of active, vigorous, physically capable men, and because they would encourage young men to enter and remain in law-enforcement work and older men to leave it at an earlier age. The more generous method of computing annuity in these cases is provided, not as a reward for the type of service performed or for hazards incident to the employment, but because a more liberal formula is needed to make such earlier retirement (with resultant shorter service) economically possible. While most firefighters are doubtless subject to hazards not present in the more sedentary occupations, they are nevertheless clearly outside the purpose for which Congress has consistently reserved the special retirement provisions, namely, that of assuring a young, vigorous Federal law-enforcement organization. We can see no justification for departing from the precedent established by Congress and we accordingly do not favor extending the retirement provisions in question to firefighters. The Commission believes that H. R. 11524 should not be enacted and recommends adverse action on the bill. In connection with an identical bill, S. 1507, the Bureau of the Budget advised that from the standpoint of the Administration's program there is no objection to the submission of this report. DEAR MR. CHAIRMAN: Reference is made to the Committee's request for the views of the Bureau of the Budget respecting H.R. 11524, "To include firefighters within the provisions of section 8336(c) of title 5, United States Code, relating to the retirement of Government employees engaged in certain hazardous occupations." The purpose of the bill is to extend to firefighter employees the early retirement and higher benefit provisions now provided by the civil service retirement system for law enforcement and investigative personnel under section 8336(c) of title 5, United States Code. The more liberal retirement benefits of section 8336(c)—retirement at age 50 after 20 years' service, on full annuity computed at two percent for all years of service are provided employees whose duties are primarily the investigation, apprehension, or detention of criminals or suspected criminals, or whose duties involve frequent direct contact with such persons. From its inception this preferential retirement provision has been restricted to employees in such occupations in order to strengthen law enforcement activities by making possible early retirement, before completion of a full career, to maintain a relatively younger and more vigorous law enforcement staff. The job of firefighter is not clearly comparable to that of the law enforcement officer and does not fall within the purpose for which Congress reserved the special retirement provisions. There is no apparent need for assuring a younger, more vigorous force than now exists. It has been the Government's longstanding policy to recognize hazard in added pay or higher classification of the job rather than through early retirement provisions. The Bureau of the Budget supports this longstanding policy. Accordingly, for the reasons stated above, the Bureau of the Budget is strongly opposed to extension of section 8336(c) benefits to firefighter personnel and urges that the Committee not give favorable consideration to H.R. 11524. Sincerely yours, WILFRED H. ROMMEL, Assistant Director for Legislative Reference. Mr. DANIELS. The subcommittee is pleased to welcome as the first witness the author of S. 1507, the junior Senator from the State of South Carolina, the Honorable Ernest F. Hollings. TESTIMONY OF HON. ERNEST F. HOLLINGS, A U.S. SENATOR FROM THE STATE OF SOUTH CAROLINA Senator HOLLINGS. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. I appreciate very much the opportunity of appearing in behalf of S. 1507, which includes Federal firemen under the hazardous duty provisions of title 5 of the United States Code. Under section 8336(c) the Congress provided for the retirement and annuity at age 50 and after 20 years' service for this country's public servants who daily risk their lives in the performance of their duties. There is one glaring omission from this group. Although the law covers some 795 U.S. marshals, 2,254 policemen, and 13,125 guards, there are over 11,000 Federal firemen who are not accorded the same benefits. I cannot find any justification for this exclusion. The lot of the Federal firemen is not by any standard an easy one. They are required to work a 72-hour week for 52 weeks a year, minus leave. This includes holidays and Sundays. In fact, I am told the average Federal fireman works 43 Sundays a year. They do all of this for what, in my opinion, is far substandard wages. That is another problem I hope the Congress will deal with soon, but we are not concerned here with the substandard wages, but with the classification of the job of the Federal firefighter. The annual IAFF, International Association of Firefighters, survey contains some interesting statistics concerning the degree of hazard involved in the job of the firefighter. Based on reports from 507 cities of all sizes, the analysis shows 55 line-of-duty deaths per 100,000 firefighters last year, thus again ranking the fire service as one of the most hazardous occupations in the world. This figure is in addition to those deaths attributable to occupational diseases. The firefighters' fatality rate was approximately 21⁄2 times greater than the rate for policemen, listed as 20. 9 duty-deaths per 100,000 men. These statistics compare with a rate of 7.2 on-the-job deaths per 100,000 workers engaged in civilian Federal service, and 20 deaths per 100,000 employees in the overall work force. The survey showed that one out of every eight firefighters, or 12.5 per 100 men, sustained a lost-time injury in 1965. Ranked against 24 other occupations, the lost-time injury rate for firefighters working in major cities was topped only by the rate for those engaged in handling marine cargo. The report further determined that 55.3 percent of the firefighters' deaths, including retirees, in 1965 resulted from heart and lung diseases. I could go on citing figures such as these, but I believe those mentioned will suffice to show that by any statistical yardstick, firefighting is a hazardous occupation. I should like also to make as a second point that my. belief that the fireman is engaged in a hazardous occupation is apparently shared by the Civil Service Commission and the Federal Government. Here is my possession I have, and I would like included in the record, a position description for the GS-4, firefighter (general), under the U.S. Civil Service Commission. I will include the entire document. You will find therein a position summary: "Consequently, this position falls within the category of hazardous duty occupation." I offer this as evider ce that, even though the Civil Service Commission may be opposed to Federal firemen sharing in the benefits of the hazardous duty provisions of title 5, they do admit that firefighting is a hazardous occupation. Nor is this the only place the Civil Service Commission recognizes the hazard of firefighting. In Federal Personnel Manual Letter No. 550-21, which establishes regulations pursuant to Public Law 89-512, an act to establish a schedule or schedules of pay differentials for irregular or intermittent duty involving unusual physical hardship or hazard, the Civil Service Commission has provided us with a cogent definition of hazardous duty. In addition, section 550.902, subsection "D," of the aforementioned regulations, reads as follows: Hazardous duty means duty performed under circumstances in which an accident could result in serious injury or death, such as a duty performed on a high structure where protective facilities are not used, or on an open structure where adverse conditions such as darkness, lightning, steady rain, or high wind velocity exists. I believe this is an accurate description of a major portion of the duties of a firefighter. This same document goes on to say firefighting as an emergency member of a firefighting crew in fighting fires of Federal Government equipment, installations, or buildings is hazardous duty, and an employee pressed into service to help fight these fires is entitled to an extra 25 percent hazard pay during the time he is engaged in these activities. Incidentally, the fireman does not receive this extra pay. Early retirement for hazardous duty became law in 1947, 20 years ago. This means that for 20 years the fireman has been denied the benefit of the law, denied a benefit which, if we are to believe the sta |