(The documents referred to are as follows:) STATEMENT OF HON. WILLIAM J. GREEN, JR., A MEMBER OF THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES FROM THE FIFTH CONGRESSIONAL DISTRICT OF THE STATE OF PENNSYLVANIA Mr. Chairman, I wish to give my support to S. 558 and S. 559 granting a pay increase to postal and classified Federal employees. My position is taken in the belief that the pay increases enacted by the Eightieth Congress are inadequate. Although there have been three increases in the salary of these people since July 1, 1945, I am informed by my constituents that they have been fighting a constantly losing battle with the cost of living. All of us know that prices have risen sharply since 1946. We know, too, that the only recourse Government employees have in the struggle with those prices is to petition Congress. Congress, in turn, has the responsibility to consider those petitions, and to act upon the results of its deliberations. The postal and other Federal employees are asking only that their loyal service be given suitable compensation. They ask only that our recognition of their plight be of such nature as to alleviate their hardship, and that they may be spared the necessity for renewing their petition in each succeeding session of Congress. Many letters have been sent me by members of these groups. Some of the persons involved have come to see me personally to explain their vital need for a return to a level of income which Congress itself considered proper in the prewar years. It is of great significance to me that the persons who have approached me have stressed their desire to regain a lost position rather than to move to some new higher level of income. Last year's increase to postal employees was $120 greater than that for employees in the classified service. I wish to support the classified workers in their efforts to correct this strange action by Congress. In addition to S. 558 and S. 559, I understand your committee is considering S. 1772. One of the provisions of S. 1772 (sec. 3, subsecs. (a) and (b)) is the elimination of the four lowest grades in the postal service. This provision is of benefit chiefly to veterans who had not entered the postal service early enough to receive similar benefits prescribed for a limited period by the act of July 6, 1945 (Public Law 134, 79th Cong.). As a member of the Armed Services Committee, I approve of this effort to grant to veterans benefits which are already enjoyed by those who were fortunate enough to be in the postal service while the veterans concerned were in the armed services. In my opinion, the enactment of S. 558 and S. 559 is necessary in order that employees of the Federal Government may enjoy a decent standard of living. Enactment is necessary in order that Federal service may continue to attract a high caliber of personnel. I sincerely hope that your committee will feel able to approve of this legislation. STATEMENT OF HON. FRANK BUCHANAN, A MEMBER OF THE HOUse of RepreSENTATIVES FROM THE THIRTY-THIRD CONGRESSIONAL DISTRICT OF THE STATE OF PENNSYLVANIA Mr. Chairman and members of the committee, I appear before your committee to ask for favorable consideration on S. 558, a bill to provide for salary increases for employees of the field service of the Post Office Department. While a general decline in economic activity during the first quarter of 1949 has resulted in about $6,000,000,000 (that is the annual rate) decline in gross national product, never-the-less consumer prices rose slightly in March, thus reversing the trend of the previous 5 months. The rise in food prices counted for most of the increase. I might add that unemployment dropped slightly in April for the second straight month. The economic condition of people in the lower income brackets will be affected by the terms of this bill, and because of the past lag in adjustment, there is a very definite necessity for favorable consideration of this legislation. I hope that the Committee on Post Office and Civil Service of the Senate, reports favorably on S. 558, thereby bringing into balance the income of the employees of the field service of the Post Office Department. This legislation would reclassify and establish uniform procedures for computing compensation. I appreciate the fact that the committee in view of the long list of persons appearing has granted me the courtesy of this brief statement. I thank you for your kind consideration. STATEMENT OF HON. HERMAN P. EBERHARTER, A MEMBER OF THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES FROM THE THIRTY-SECOND CONGRESSIONAL DISTRICT OF THE STATE OF PENNSYLVANIA CONGRESS OF THE UNITED STATES, HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES, Hon. RUSSELL B. LONG, Post Office and Civil Service Committee, United States Senate, Washington 25, D. C. MY DEAR SENATOR: I would like to add my voice to those of the many hundreds of thousands who are committed to the support of S. 558, which would in a measure give some relief to loyal employees of the Post Office Department, who are at present being paid much less than their services deserve. If the Senate approves the measure, I will be among those who will give vigorous and ardent support to it. With kindest personal regards, I am Sincerely yours, HERMAN P. EBERHARTER. STATEMENT OF HON. CHARLES R. HOWELL, A MEMBER OF THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES FROM THE FOURTH CONGRESSIONAL DISTRICT OF THE STATE OF NEW JERSEY CONGRESS OF THE UNITED STATES, HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES, Hon. RUSSELL B. LONG, Chairman, Subcommittee on Post Office Classification and Compensation, United States Senate, Washington 25, D. C. DEAR SENATOR LONG: I understand that your subcommittee is presently conducting hearings on S. 558, which provides a salary raise of $650 for postal employees. Most of the postal employees in my district have written to me, requesting that I intercede with your committee on their behalf. Many other individuals have likewise made similar requests, in the interests of justice and equity. I have made an investigation of the situation in my own district, and feel that the increase is justified on the basis of need, especially. With basic living costs so greatly increased, many of the people covered by this legislation are having a hard time to meet expenses. Many are failing to meet expenses, and are going into debt. Yet they hesitate to leave these positions to seek more gainful employment because most of them have several years of service with the Post Office Department, having undertaken jobs with the postal department as young men and progressed within the service over a period of years. They are not really qualified by experience for other jobs, and if they should decide in any great numbers to leave the postal service, because of continued low pay rates, this would certainly jeopardize the efficiency for which the Post Office Department has long been known. I shall appreciate your consideration of this statement of the needs of postal employees in Burlington and Mercer Counties of New Jersey. With kindest regards, I am Sincerely yours, CHARLES R. HOWELL. STATEMENT OF HON. WILLIAM T. GRANAHAN, A MEMBER OF THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES FROM THE SECOND CONGRESSIONAL DISTRICT OF THE STATE OF PENNSYLVANIA CONGRESS OF THE UNITED STATES, Hon. OLIN D. JOHNSTON, Chairman, Post Office and Civil Service Committee, United States Senate, Washington, D. C. DEAR MR. CHAIRMAN: I am strongly interested in the welfare of our postal workers and am very happy to make a statement in behalf of legislation before your committee at this time, in favor of granting increase of salaries for Federal postal employees. Such an increase, of course, is badly needed due to the increased cost of living. I know that the postal workers are having a difficult time making ends meet. In the past few weeks I have had many urgent and sincere letters from them, telling me of their difficulties and appealing for action in order that the great difference between their present salaries and the costs of maintaining their homes and families might be rectified by an increase in salary. The Federal Government has no more loyal workers than the postal employees, and in my experience with them I have never known them to be unreasonable in their requests. I strongly urge your committee to act favorably and promptly upon this legislation in their half, so that these faithful employees may be granted the necessary relief by way of a well-deserved salary increase. Sincerely yours, WILLIAM T. GRANAHAN. AMERICAN FEDERATION OF GOVERNMENT EMPLOYEES, Hon. RUSSELL B. LONG, DEAR SENATOR LONG: You will doubtless recall that last Friday, when I was testifying before your committee, I asked the privilege of introducing an amendment to section 202 (7) of the bill introduced by you. I attach, hereto, the proposed amendment and trust that you will have it placed in the record. Very sincerely, J. G. YADEN, National President. Following is a suggested amendment, for which permission has been granted, to the bill S. 1762, Eighty-first Congress, amending section 202 (7), beginning on page 4, line 6, so that the subsection (7) will then read as follows: "(7) positions and employees in recognized trades or crafts, or other skilled mechanical crafts, including skilled and semiskilled mechanical employees of Public Buildings Administration, or in unskilled, semiskilled, or skilled manuallabor occupations (except such employees in positions to which the Classification Act of 1923, as amended, now applies to the duties of protective and custodial employees, but not the crafts, the mechanics, the skilled and semiskilled employees engaged in the operation of public buildings and associated equipment or the performance of work as aides to scientists or engineers), and employees in the Bureau of Engraving and Printing the duties of whom are to perform or to direct manual or machine operations requiring special skill or experience, or to perform or direct the counting, examining, sorting, or other verification of the product of manual or machine operations.' STATEMENT OF GILBERT HOLOCHER, PRESIDENT, NATIONAL FEDERATION OF POST OFFICE CLERKS, LOCAL 164, CINCINNATI We respectfully submit the following statement in behalf of the veterans credit bill that is to be considered by your committee. "The inability to attract and hold the higher caliber worker is detrimental to the postal service and costly to the Department. With the starting salaries so low that they find it impossible to make ends meet a very great number of new employees are forced to leave the post office to accept more lucrative employment. The traditional efficiency of the post office which is directly accountable to the skill and knowledge of the long-term employee, is being challenged by the mounting turn-over of personnel. Since a very great percentage of eligibles for postal positions are veterans of World War II, the enactment of a veterans credit bill would go a long way in correcting this evil. It would also extend justice to these veterans who if they had been permitted to enter upon postal careers at the time they were called to the defense of our country would have acquired this credit with the higher salary in the comparative safety and comfort of civilian service. Those who were not called to military duty and who entered the postal service are now receiving several hundred dollars per annum more than these veterans and in this respect, to not enact this corrective legislation is discriminatory against the veteran. Realizing these things, Congress passed similar legislation for the returning veterans of World War I and established a precedant that in all fairness should be continued." "It is our sincerest hope that this committee will render a favorable report, real soon." STATEMENT OF CHARLES J. TURRISI, LEGISLATIVE REPRESENTATIVE, VIRGINIA STATE BRANCH NATIONAL ASSOCIATION OF POSTAL SUPERVISORS NATIONAL ASSOCIATION OF POSTAL SUFERVISORS, Hon. OLIN D. JOHNSTON, BRANCH NO. 132, Norfolk 10, Va., May 19, 1949. Chairman, Senate Post Office and Civil Service Committee, Senate Office Building, Washington, D. C. DEAR SENATOR JOHNSTON: There is now pending for the consideration of the Senate Post Office and Civil Service Committee, S. 892, a bill designed to reclassify the salaries of postal supervisors and to otherwise correct the inequalities existing in Public Law 134 with respect to the salaries paid to such supervisors. Postal supervisors, as a group, do not receive the same benefits accorded other postal employees and supervisors in the CAF classification and other Government agencies which, we feel, is not the intent of the Congress. In this connection, we should like to present the following information which, we believe, justifies our request for relief. First, postal supervisors are in a fixed static salary grade changed only by a promotion to a higher position or by a change in the classification of the post office in which employed, such change could reduce as well as increase salaries depending, of course, on whether or not the office is advanced or reduced in classification. The salaries of other postal workers are not affected by a change in office classification. These employees receive automatic within-grade promotions and after reaching the top automatic grade are advanced three additional meritorious grades based on years of satisfactory service. In the CAF classification supervisors receive automatic within-grade promotions, for each 12 or 18 months of service depending on the grade. The Congress has established the principle of granting these employees such within-grade and meritorious promotions, which in our judgment is sound and just. This practice is followed by industry in general and tends to build morale and creates incentive. We definitely feel that in the interest of fairness and justice these benefits should be extended to postal supervisors. Second, only a $100 differential in salary separates the maximum-grade clerical and carrier employee from the minimum supervisory grade. This small differential, plus the fact that clerical and carrier employees are paid for overtime work, causes these subordinate employees to earn frequently larger wages than their immediate supervisors. This condition can also mean that when retirement annuities are computed, hourly rate or subordinate employees may receive a larger annuity than higher-ranking supervisory employees. Postmaster General Donaldson in his report to the Congress stated, in part, that flat increases granted postal employees in the past have created a situation which has dulled the initiative of employees to prepare themselves for, and to seek, more responsible duties and supervisory positions. That these same flat increases failed to give proper financial recognition for greater ability, more exacting duties, and supervisory responsibility. Third, comparisons have shown that supervisory employees in the CAF classification are generally rated higher than postal supervisors with the same or greater responsibilities; for example, at the naval operating base, Norfolk, Va., the chief telephone operator with 43 operators to supervise is rated as CAF-8 which pays a salary beginning at $4,103.40 and advancing to $4,855.80. This is a higher salary than that received by any supervisory employee in the Norfolk post office, excepting the assistant postmaster and superintendent of mails. Even then the difference is very slight as the assistant postmaster receives a salary fixed at $5,150, has 800 employees under his supervision, and, in addition, is responsible for the proper handling of financial transactions amounting to more than $30,000,000. Another example of the existing inequalities facing postal supervisors is the fact that during the calendar year 1948 three WSI substitute postal employees drew salaries beyond that received by the assistant postmasterdrawing $5,370.74, $5,332.64, and $5,278.69. Fourth, S. 892 is designed to widen the gap between the maximum grade clerical employee and the minimum grade supervisory employee and will also provide longevity within grade promotions to postal supervisors. This bill, if enacted into law, will grant to postal supervisors the same benefits extended to all other Federal employees and by widening the gap between subordinate and supervisory postal groups establish a more equitable and just salary schedule. In conclusion, we hope that we have shown our request is just and reasonable. It is our aim and desire to eliminate or correct these conditions which tend to lessen interest and destroy the morale of postal supervisors. Surely, it is not the intent of Congress to discriminate against a particular group of Federal employees by denying to them the benefits which have been extended to others. We confidently feel that the Members of both branches of Congress are desirous of being fair and wish to treat all Government employees alike. The passage of S. 892 will remedy a great injustice to a faithful and loyal group of postai employees, We respectfully solicit your support on behalf of this legislation. Respectfully submitted. CHARLES J. TURRISI, Legislative Representative, Virginia State Branch, NAPS. STATEMENT OF L. F. KNEIPP, EXECUTIVE OFFICER, ORGANIZATION OF PROFESSIONAL EMPLOYEES OF THE UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE My remarks are in no sense the official views of the Department of Agriculture, from which I retired more than 2 years ago. I appear before you as the executive officer of the Organization of Professional Employees of the Department of Agriculture to present certain points which the majority of the 2,900 members of that organization deem important enough to merit the attention of the members of the Senate Committee on Post Office and Civil Service. To save time I will refer to the organization by its abbreviated title of OPEDA. Over the years OPEDA consistently has favored abandonment of the existing maximum salary limit of $10,000; the adoption of a limit sufficiently above that figure to permit the development of a pattern of grades and pay steps which would correspond with the variations in degress of capability and responsibility which characterize the Federal structure of government. Accordingly, it regards with deep gratification the emphasis on that objective in the bill S. 1762. Only a small proportion of the members of OPEDA anticipate their eventual personal enjoyment of salaries exceeding $10,000 per year. Their advocacy of a readjustment of the classification structure, such as contemplated by S. 1762. in the main is motivated by the belief that the more attractive the top and related positions in a bureau are made, the better will be the prospects for the ambitious men and women who hope to find satisfying careers in the Federal service, even though only a minor part of them can hope to pass, or even approach, the $10,000 level of salary. These people know that whether they personally are to advance to new goals of achievement, or to stagnate in disappointment, largely will depend on the quality of the leadership of the organization of which they are a member. If the organization is sympathetically sensitive to sound public opinion and interest; is in the forefront of scientific or technical progress; is willing to at least test every new principle or idea that offers promise of public advantage; its individual members will grow in accomplishment, in prestige, and in earning ability. An organization characterized by high intelligence, ideals, and ethics, high standards of accomplishment, a dominant sense of public service and responsibility, stimulates individual capacity for increasingly important service, so that the very fact of membership in it is a hallmark of competence, a proof of qualification for wider fields and greater responsibilities. If the organization clings to outmoded standards, principles, or procedures; is insensitive to current social and economic trends; its members will learn little, gain little in capacity or competence, have little to offer in the way of skilled service that the world wants to buy. An organization deficient in ideals and ethics, or which subordinates them to selfish aspirations; one which regards its functions as legalistic obligations rather than as opportunities for creative service; which adheres to tradition and precedent in preference to the testing of new discoveries of science or new techniques; which tolerates or even encourages mediocre thinking or accomplishment; can offer career people little in the way of opportunity other than advance within its own narrow limitations. Now, what marks the difference between the one type of organization and the other? In the great majority of cases it is the leadership of the man at the head of the organization, his immediate assistants, and the key men in the various echelons. They are the ones who must transmute the approvals of Congress into definite patterns of action and accomplishment with maximum faith and efficiency. If such leaders possess all of the requisite qualities and attributes, the success of the organization is reasonably assured; if they lack the requisite qualities and attributes, then the public fails to receive the protection, or the service, or the social or economic advantage or progress, for which it is paying and which is demanded by its best interests. |