We have encouraged the pay agent to meet more frequently wit the parties and to broaden the base of representation. Therefor we are trying to act as a catalyst in an informal sense at the sam time that we try to remain impartial with our report. DETERMINATION OF MEDIAN PAY FOR EACH GRADE Mr. ROBISON. This has been a complete presentation, Mr. Chai man, so I have few questions. How has the system arrived at wher the "median" should be in the past? Is it automatic? Do you jus count noses among the Federal employees and find the step the mostly fall into? Mr. Rosow. They run off on a computer where the median pa is in each grade. Although it varies from grade to grade, when the first did it in 1962 it came out almost on the nose on a median averag of all 15 grades of step 4. By custom that became the reference point When they looked at the year-to-year changes, they were decima changes, like moving from 4 to 4.1 and 4.2. It kept moving up so tha last year it was at 4.95, very, very close to the fifth step. Our position with the agent, it sounds technical, is that they don't have to use a full step. There are 3 percentage points difference from the fourth to the fifth. There is so much money involved that what they should probably do is to take the actual median Federal salary to the second decimal point. Let us say it is step 4.33. Then they should say that is the actual median salary, measure the difference between the median salary and the outside salary and then construct a new Federal pay schedule. The fourth step and fifth step may be on opposite sides of that reference point, but there is too much money involved. The decision is of such magnitude they should not be frozen into the step procedure. The technicians in the Commission have recognized the validity of this, but have a selling job to do with the unions because this would be more precise. Mr. ROBISON. Thanks for the education. I understand it better now. I hope the Members of Congress are also aware of what the problem is. I have no other questions, Mr. Chairman, except a couple of comments which might be useful. First, I never thought I would live to see a Federal agency which had only one employee. Congratulations on that. We should perhaps give you all the money you ask and send you away before you get any bigger ideas. I also want to congratulate somebody for having chosen Dean McKersie of Cornell, not only my alma mater, but also the university I happen to represent in that part of New York State and in Congress. Any Commission that has Dean McKersie on it has to be a good one. OUTLOOK IF COMMITTEE ABOLISHED Mr. MILLER. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Mr. Rosow what do you feel would take place if your Advisory Committee on Federal Pay went out of business, if it were taken off the books? In priority, what would happen? Mr. Rosow. I would think, Mr. Miller, that probably very little would be visible. I think the greatest disadvantage would be in rupturing the theory of its creation under the Comparability Pay Act of 1970, which was to introduce an impartial group to, in a sense, evaluate the pay agent's recommendations, looking both at the facts and what the Federal employees' interests were. The purpose was to introduce something short of collective bargaining, whereby the Federal employees could present their views to a third party impartially who theoretically had access to the President of the United States who was making the final decision. It also serves another purpose, of giving the Congress an impartial review of the pay agent's recommendations. Since the pay agents are essentially employees of, and largely controlled by, the Executive Office of the President, there had been a great suspicion in the minds of the unions and Federal employees that that office found it difficult to be entirely sympathetic to their views under fiscal constraints and other pressures bearing down on the Federal payroll. I don't see anything earthshaking if the committee were eliminated that would cause any shocks to anyone. I think conceptually it would damage the purpose of the act in trying to create this new avenue. The committee itself may not prove to be the final answer. It may be that the unions and the employees, if they become dissatisfied with their pay or become more militant over time, might feel that if our committee never succeeded in getting their viewpoint across or sensing it or representing it adequately, they would want a more visible and direct method of making their views known. Mr. MILLER. What you are saying is the Federal employees are better satisfied because they have the Advisory Committee on Federal Pay where they can convey the message if they feel that the salary is too low. Is that correct? Mr. Rosow. I hope that that is where they will come out. I think we are still rather invisible to most Federal employees. The Federal Employees Pay Council, largely led by the AFGE, the American Federation of Government Employees, I think does feel some sense of hope that we will provide a vehicle for representing their views. Our relations have been good, but since the President didn't respond to our recommendations in the first report, they weren't particularly exuberant about the outcome. They were rather silent. I think they continue to feel that we are playing a useful function, but it would be, I think, improper for me to claim that Federal employees look to us either with any interest or knowledge. We are still rather invisible in this large and impersonal Government. We hope to fulfill what the law says and provide that role. We are still pretty young. We are just reaching a relationship with the pay agent and with the unions. Mr. MILLER. Thank you. I want to compliment you on a very good presentation. Thank you very much, Mr. Chairman. Mr. Rosow. Thank you, Mr. Miller. Mr. STEED. Thank you for your presentation and your appearance and cooperation. We were glad to have been able to hear you. Mr. Rosow. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Mr. STEED. The committee will stand in adjournment until Monday, May 21. JUSTIFICATION OF THE BUDGET ESTIMATES ADVISORY COMMITTEE ON FEDERAL PAY, SALARIES AND EXPENSES For necessary expenses of the Advisory Committee on Federal Pay, established by 5 U.S.C. 5306, $130,000, GENERAL STATEMENT The appropriation will pay the expenses of the three members of the committe for such time as they spend on committee business, the salary of the committee'r administrative assistant, rent and other expenses of maintaining an office anc conducting meetings with representatives of Federal employee unions and the President's agent, as well as for special studies and services of consultants to assist in evaluating proposals with respect to proposed changes in the pay of 1.3 million Federal white-collar employees. The pay bill for these employees total approximately $17 billion a year. ADVISORY COMMITTEE ON FEDERAL PAY JUSTIFICATION OF APPROPRIATION REQUEST, 1974 The Advisory Committee on Federal Pay was appointed by the President in January 1972 as an independent establishment in accordance with the Federal Pay Comparability Act of 1970 (Public Law 91-656). It consists of three members who are not otherwise employed in the Government of the United States and are chosen for their impartiality, knowledge, and experience in the field of labor relations and pay policy. The committee is responsible for preparing an independent annual report to the President with respect to increases in pay of the approximately 1.3 million Federal employees covered by the General Schedule, those employed in the Bureau of Medicine and Surgery of the Veterans' Administration and the Foreign Service of the United States. Changes in military pay are related to the changes put into effect for these workers. The annual civilian white-collar payroll of the Federal Government now amounts to approximately $17 billion and the total annual payroll directly or indirectly affected by the committee's work including military payrolls-amounts to about $41 billion. In preparing its report, the committee must consider not only the recommendations of the President's pay agent (the Director of the Office of Management and Budget and the Chairman of the Civil Service Commission) but views of organizations representing Federal employees. The members of the committee are paid at a daily rate plus per diem and travel expenses for time spent on committee business. In addition, the committee needs funds to pay for special studies on questions relating to its annual report, as well as for the administrative expenses involved in obtaining the views of employee organizations and the pay agent and maintaining a small headquarters office. ADVISORY COMMITTEE ON FEDERAL PAY, SALARIES AND EXPENSES ADVISORY COMMITTEE ON FEDERAL PAY, SALARIES AND EXPENSES-Continued ARTHUR F. SAMPSON, ACTING ADMINISTRATOR ALLAN G. KAUPINEN, ASSISTANT ADMINISTRATOR G. C. GARDNER, JR., ASSISTANT ADMINISTRATOR FOR ADMINISTRATION WILLIAM E. CASSELMAN, GENERAL COUNSEL WILLIAM A. BUTTS, DIRECTOR OF BUDGET PUBLIC BUILDINGS SERVICE LARRY F. ROUSH, ACTING COMMISSIONER J. F. GALUARDI, DEPUTY COMMISSIONER EXPENSES, U.S. COURT FACILITIES ROWLAND F. KIRKS, ADMINISTRATIVE OFFICER, U.S. COURTS FEDERAL SUPPLY SERVICE M. SHY MEEKER, COMMISSIONER LEWIS E. SPANGLER, DEPUTY COMMISSIONER WILLIAM W. THYBONY, ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER FOR NATIONAL SUPPLY POLICIES AND PROGRAMS CARL YEAKEL, EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR NATIONAL ARCHIVES AND RECORDS SERVICE DR. JAMES B. RHOADS, ARCHIVIST DR. JAMES E. O'NEILL, DEPUTY ARCHIVIST WALTER ROBERTSON, JR., EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR AUTOMATED DATA AND TELECOMMUNICATIONS SERVICE HAROLD S. TRIMMER, JR., ACTING COMMISSIONER SIDNEY WEINSTEIN, ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER FOR AGENCY ASSISTANCE PLANNING AND POLICY LEONARD YONKLER, EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR PROPERTY MANAGEMENT AND DISPOSAL SERVICE THOMAS M. THAWLEY, COMMISSIONER WALTER C. MORELAND, DEPUTY COMMISSIONER BOB ROSS, ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER, STOCKPILE DISPOSAL JOHN P. CANNON, DIRECTOR, PROGRAM MANAGEMENT CIVIL RIGHTS EDWARD E. MITCHELL, DIRECTOR, OFFICE OF CIVIL RIGHTS Mr. STEED. The committee will be in order. The committee is in session today for the consideration of the 1974 budget request of General Services Administration. We are privileged to have our old friend, Mr. Sampson, Acting Administrator, with us today. Mr. Sampson, would you like to identify your associates for the record? I believe there are some people making their first appearance here, and we would like to have their names. If you will identify your associates for the record, then we will be glad to have your opening statement. INTRODUCTION OF ASSOCIATES Mr. SAMPSON. Mr. Chairman and Mr. Robison, we certainly appre ciate the opportunity to appear before you to discuss GSA's portion of the President's 1974 budget. With me today are Al Kaupinen, Assistant Administrator; Jake Gardner, Assistant Administrator for Administration; Bill Casselman, General Counsel; Bill Butts, Director of Budget; Larry Roush. Acting Commissioner of the Public Buildings Service; J. F. Ga luardi, Deputy Commissioner; Ike Friedlander, Executive Director: Robert Rice, Assistant General Counsel; Mr. Sweeney of the US Courts; Mr. Spangler, Deputy Commissioner for the Federal Supply Service; Dr. James Rhoads, Archivist of the United States: Ted Trimmer, Acting Commissioner of the Automated Data and Telecommunications Service; Tom Thawley, Commissioner of the Prop erty Management and Disposal Service; and Ed Mitchell, Director of the Office of Civil Rights. In addition, we have other members of the staff to answer detailed questions. GENERAL STATEMENT Several significant developments took place in GSA during past year. this |