to $30 monthly rates of unemployment compensation in effect in the State systems offering scarcely a bare subsistence level of living.

Whether the Government employee has relatively short service or has spent many years in the Government service, he faces an acute problem when he loses his job. There must be a job available in private industry to replace the one he has lost. The longer he has been in a Government job, the greater may be his difficulty in transferring to industry. Business enterprise wants young men and women. In very many instances, the individual who is 35 or 40 years old must be able to offer special qualifications or experience. Government employees having any appreciable amount of experience tend to become so highly specialized that their know-how is not desired for many jobs in private employment-certainly not in small business organizations.

Thus the unemployed Government worker has more than the usual problem of readjustment. There seems to be no defensible reason why the Federal Government should provide less favorable conditions for its employees than it has decreed for the employees in private industry. It is a situation of plain equity. It has it practical side, too, for unemployment insurance should contribute materially to stabilizing Federal employment and should assist recruiting in any period in which there is need for temporary expansion.

There seems to be every reason, Mr. Chairman, for bringing Federal and District Government employees under the unemployment insurance system. I urge you most strongly to recommend that such action be taken with a minimum of delay. In closing, I wish once more to express my appreciation for this opportunity to present the views of the AFGE on this vital subject.

Mr. SIMPSON (presiding). We thank you for your appearance and for your presentation.

Are there questions?

I hear none.

We thank you,

sir.

Mr. CAMPBELL. I appreciate the opportunity of appearing before the committee.

Mr. SIMPSON. The next witness is William H. Ryan, president, District No. 44, International Association of Machinists. His testimony is presented by Mr. Leonard Lopez.

STATEMENT OF WILLIAM H. RYAN, PRESIDENT, DISTRICT NO. 44, INTERNATIONAL ASSOCIATION OF MACHINISTS, PRESENTED BY LEONARD LOPEZ

Mr. SIMPSON. Please make your statement as short as you conveniently can, covering the essential points.

Mr. LOPEZ. I would like to extend the apologies of William H. Ryan, who had a previous engagement already scheduled and therefore was unable to be present. I happen to be the assistant to Mr. Ryan.

The Federal agencies and activities in which our membership are employed are: The United States Air Force bases, United States naval shipyards, air stations, ordnance stations and experimental laboratories, the United States Army industrial ordnance activities and de

pots, mail-equipment shops of the United States Post Office, the Alaskan Railroad, hydroelectric installations under the Department of Interior, the Bureau of Engraving and Printing, the Government Printing Office, United States Coast Guard stations, activities under the National Advisory Committee on Aeronautics, and the Panama Canal Company.

Our organization has consistently supported legislation designed to grant unemployment compensation coverage to Federal employees. We believe that Congress should provide this coverage to employees of the Federal Government in the same manner and to the same degree that it has been provided to private industry employees.

As you will note from my previous remarks, the employees whom we represent are employed principally in Federal-activities in which the total employment has fluctuated tremendously during the emergency period preceding World War II to this date, dependent upon the Government's needs to maintain national security and extension of aid to friendly nations.

Mr. FORAND. Are these employees commonly known as the bluecollar workers?

Mr. LOPEZ. Yes, sir; with the added fact we have some supervisors who would be in the classified ranks.

Mr. FORAND. But most of them are the blue-collar workers?
Mr. LOPEZ. Yes.

The fluctuation as evidenced by these employment figures, along with the effects of veterans preference in appointment and retention rights in the Federal service, have caused many career employees and nonveterans to experience unstable tenure in employment. Likewise, these periods of fluctuation in Federal employment have caused many veterans who had hoped for a Federal career in the Federal civil service to refrain from seeking same because they did not desire to subject themselves to a position of employment which would not provide unemployment coverage in case they were reached in reduction in force during those periods when private industries were also reducing personnel.

The gradual effects of the regulations based upon the Veterans Preference Act of May 1944 has brought about the displacement of nonveteran employees by employees with preference, to the extent that the preference employees now constitute approximately 50 percent of the total civilian employment of the Federal Government. If and when the Whitten amendment is repealed by Congress, this balance of preference employees will climb rapidly and cause the separation of a large number of nonveteran career employees. The speed with which this upward balance will take place will be geared to the reduction in force requirements of each agency after the repeal of the Whitten amendment.

Inasmuch as the Defense activities will be expected to reduce their civilian rolls because of reduced defense expenditures, and the prevailing Defense Department policy of contracting larger percentages of Defense work to private industry, it is of paramount importance that Congress give serious consideration to the speedy enactment of unemployment-compensation coverage for Federal employees.

Federal employment statistics show that in the year 1953, involuntary separations from the Federal civilian service numbered approximately 155,000.

The Wage Board employees who are in the blue-collar group (employed in navy yards, arsenals, air stations, et cetera) dropped from 760,000 in January 1953 to 651,000 by the end of that year. Among this group of 109,000 former Government employees were many who were unsuccessful in securing employment and were forced to undergo severe economic adjustment and hardship because of the absence of unemployment compensation.

The legislative history of unemployment-compensation coverage or Federal employees shows that the Ways and Means Committee of the first session of the 83d Congress favorably reported by almost unanimous vote H. R. 5118. We respectfully implore this committee to give speedy consideration to this very important legislative matter with the aim of favorably reporting a bill containing the provisions of H. R. 6537 and H. R. 6539.

I make no mention of the latest because at the time the statement was made it was evidently not introduced.

Our desire, of course, would be to have Congress enact legislation granting unemployment coverage to Federal employees on a uniform national basis which would be comparable to the more liberal State laws which set the weekly unemployment benefits for employees of private industry. However, we realize that many problems would arise when attempting to work out an unemployment compensation system especially applicable to Federal employees. This organization therefore believes that it would be advisable and more logical, at the present time, to apply the same coverage to Federal employees as that in effect for employees in private industry.

We subscribe to the feasibility of the worker's right to benefits to be determined under the unemployment insurance laws of the State in which the Federal worker has his official residence when he becomes unemployed or, if he has been working out of the country, his benefits to be determined by the laws of the State in which he resides at the time of filing his claim. We further subscribe to the principle of basing unemployment Federal workers benefits upon the unemployment compensation law of the District of Columbia for those filing claims in United States Territories and possessions that do not have unemployment compensation systems.

Mr. Chairman, in behalf of the people who I am privileged to represent, I wish to express appreciation to you and the committee for the opportunity to testify on this legislation. I also express to you my personal thanks for your very kind attention. Thank you.

Mr. SIMPSON. We, too, are pleased to have you before us.
Are there any questions?

If not, we thank you.

The next witness is Mr. Thomas G. Walters, operations director, Government employees council of the American Federation of Labor. Inasmuch as I mentioned to the other gentlemen that time is important, I do likewise to you and ask you to conserve time as much as you can and at the same time get all your evidence before us.

STATEMENT OF THOMAS G. WALTERS, OPERATIONS DIRECTOR, GOVERNMENT EMPLOYEES COUNCIL OF THE AMERICAN FEDERATION OF LABOR

Mr. WALTERS. I would like to say that Mr. E. C. Halbeck, the legislative representative of the National Federation of Post Office Clerks, would like very much to have the privilege of filing a statement within the next couple of days, as he was detained this morning to appear before other committees.

Mr. SIMPSON. Yes, sir.

Mr. WALTERS. Mr. O. A. Burrows, Washington representative of the IBEW is on the west coast. I would like for the record to show if he were present he would support H. R. 6537 and H. R. 6539. That is likewise the position of the Government employees council. Even though H. R. 6537 and H. R. 6539, introduced by Congressman Forand and Congressman Mason, respectively, perhaps, are not the ideal solution, what our people are interested in at the moment is coverage in order to protect those who are let out of the service through no fault of their own.

With that brief statement and the prepared statement that will be made a part of the record, I would like to recommend at the earliest convenience of this committee the adoption of the provisions of H. R. 6539 in order that the Federal employees might be covered under the Unemployment Insurance Act.

Mr. SIMPSON. Without objection the statement to which you have referred will be included in the record at this point. We, of course, have noted the comments you have made likewise for the record.

We thank you for appearing before the committee this morning. (The statement referred to follows:)

STATEMENT OF THOMAS G. WALTERS, OPERATIONS DIRECTOR, GOVERNMENT EMPLOYES' COUNCIL, A. F. OF L., ON H. R. 6537, H. R. 6539, AND H. R. 7054

Mr. Chairman and members of the committee, by way of introduction, my name is Thomas G. Walters, operations director of the Government employees' council of the American Federation of Labor, 100 Indiana Ave. NW., Washington 1, D. C., phone EXecutive 3-2820 and 3–2821.

The Government employees' council of the American Federation of Labor is made up of 23 national and international unions whose membership, in whole or in part, are civil service employees. The total Federal employee membership of the Government employees' council is more than 500,000 members.

Mr. Chairman and members of the House Ways and Means Committee, on behalf of the 23 member unions who compose the Government employees' council I am happy to express to you our thanks and appreciation for scheduling and holding hearings on legislation that provides for Federal employee coverage under the Unemployment Insurance Act.

On June 1, 1954, the Government employees' council office mailed the following memorandum to the member unions of the council. This being a copy of the notice being received from the committee:

"JUNE 1, 1954.

"Chairman Daniel A. Reed announced that the Committee on Ways and Means would hold public hearings on unemployment compensation beginning June 8, 1954.

"Legislation on which the hearings will be held are:

"H. R. 8857 by Mr. Reed of New York, a bill to extend and improve the unemployment compensation program;

"H. R. 6539 by Mr. Mason and H. R. 6537 by Mr. Forand, bills to amend the Social Security Act to provide unemployment insurance for Federal civilian employees, and for other purposes;

"H. R. 8585 by Mr. Baker, a bill to assist in alleviating the effects of unemployment resulting from Federal tariff or trade policy by establishing a temporary program of supplementary grants for States which provide for liberalization of their unemployment compensation payments to persons unemployed because of Federal tariff or trade policy;

"H. R. 7054 by Mr. Dingell, a bill to amend the Social Security Act to provide unemployment insurance for Federal civilian employees, and for other purposes. "Those desiring to appear before the committee should communicate with the clerk of the Committee on Ways and Means, room 1102, New House Office Building, by June 2, 1954. Statements may be submitted to the clerk for the record in lieu of an appearance. These statements should be received not later than June 14, 1954."

H. R. 6537 and H. R. 6539 and H. R. 7054 are the bills listed on the above notice that directly provide for the coverage of Federal employees under the Unemployment Insurance Act, and with that thought in mind the major portion of this statement will be devoted to these three bills.

For many years the Government employees' council has urged the Congress to make it possible for Federal employees to be covered under the unemployment insurance provision of the Social Security Act. After several conferences with Congressman Noah Mason and Congressman Amie Forand, H. R. 6537 and H. R. 6539 were introduced by Congressman Forand and Mason, respectively. These bills provide for the coverage of Federal civilian employees under the unemployment insurance provision of the Social Security Act. We realize that the contents of H. R. 6539 and H. R. 6537 are not ideal but the great concern of the people we represent is to be covered by the provision of the Unemployment Insurance Act in order that those who are dismissed from the Federal Service through no fault of their own will have some type of unemployment insurance coverage.

Other bills affecting Federal employee coverage and the amount of money they would receive, provided they qualify for unemployment insurance, are before this committee. I especially refer to H. R. 7054, introduced by Mr. Dingeli, and H. R. 9430 introduced by Mr. Foreand. These bills compose many provisions that the Federal employees would be happy to embrace 100 percent, but we at this moment specifically endorse and recommend the early approval of the provisions of H. R. 6539 introduced by Congressman Mason, and the companion bill H. R. 6537 by Congressman Forand.

According to the notice mailed on June 3, 1954, from this committee, H. R. 9430 is not listed as on the agenda for the hearing today, but we desire the record should show that we endorse and support the provisions of H. R. 9430, but trust that the coverage of Federal employees under the Unemployment Insurance Act will not be unnecessarily delayed in order to work out a more nearly perfect solution than is provided for in H. R. 6539 and H. R. 6537. The Federal employees of the United States Government are most anxious to obtain coverage under the provisions of the Unemployment Insurance Act.

Section 1510: This section authorizes the funds necessary to carry our Federal unemployment insurance from appropriated funds.

Section 252 of title 2 of the Canal Zone Code states: "The corporation shall reimburse the civil service and Canal Zone retirement and disability funds for Government contributions to the retirement fund applicable to the corporation's employees, and the employees' compensation fund, Bureau of Employees' Compensation, Federal Security Agency, for the benefit payments made to the corporation's employees, and shall also reimburse other Government agencies for any payments of a similar nature made on its behalf."

The bookkeeping involved in reimbursement of funds paid an ex-Panama Canal Company employee would be tremendous. Also the question would arise if the Panama Canai Company was responsible under this section for funds paid an ex-employee.

To prevent future questions on this matter, we respectfully request that language be added to the lgislation to nullify any effect of section 252 of title 2. of the Canal Zone Code as far as Federal unemployment insurance is concerned We greatly appreciate the opportunity of appearing before this committee in support of Federal employees being covered under the unemployment insurance provisions of the Social Security Act.

Mr. SIMPSON. The final witness is Mr. Howard E. Munro, legislative representative of the Central Labor Union and the Metal Trades Council of the Panama Canal Zone. I repeat my request that you conserve time while not limiting yourself unduly.