Two such rules, however, the subcommittee concludes are not made necessary by the conditions of good administration, but are imposed solely to accommodate the procedural system:

(1) Limiting to four times a year the right of disabled veterans and certain other persons to "reopen" examinations. Though this is permissible under the Veterans Preference Act of 1944, we believe the provision has cost the Government the services of many qualified veterans and has, of course, deprived them of the right to receive immediate consideration for Government vacancies, perhaps when they sorely needed employment.

(2) Placing time limits on the filing of applications. Historically, this results in the establishment of a "closed" register from which eligibles will be certified not only for current vacancies but for the life of the register, a period in some cases of several years. (See First process, p. 9.)

(a) It immediately disqualifies persons who may be far better qualified than those who filed, but who for one reason or another were unable to meet the time limitation. This situation may exist before a single appointment has been made.

(b) Of more serious consequence is the long-range effect of the rule. It tends to depress the overall quality of Government employees and reduce productivity to a minimum standard of acceptability. The reason for this is obvious. Though initial appointments may be of high quality, as the register is depleted, appointments are made from among those barely passing. The Government in fact is in the position of hiring the dregs of the market even though highly qualified persons, including veterans, may be lined up waiting to get in.

The subcommittee is cognizant of the numerical rating requirements imposed upon the Civil Service Commission by legislation, and other administrative conditions with which the Commission has had to deal in establishing a workable system. We believe, however, that our recommendations, as set forth in this report, will largely correct these inequitable and costly rules.

UTILIZATION OF FEDERAL EMPLOYEES WHO ARE REDUCED IN FORCE

In terms of availability, the on-duty work force of the Government is an immediate manpower asset. Retaining and utilizing this force is the cheapest and most effective means of manpower management. The force is trained, it is on the job. It does not need finding, examining, and all the loss in time and money associated with the recruiting, appointing, and training processes.

For this reason, the subcommittee inquired into the utilization of this work force as operating programs are cut back. We found that there is no fully effective means for utilizing the services of these employees. They are simply separated through the time-honored reduction-in-force process and left to shift for themselves. Rather than face such treatment again, many turn to private employment. Others pound the streets searching for new Government jobs.

There are two exceptions to this hopeless procedure. The first and most effective, according to our findings, is the ingenuity and initiative exercised by agency personnel officials who are actively recruiting by seeking out agencies who are reducing their force. The Civil Service Commission frequently, but not uniformly, serves as a clearinghouse

for this information. Other clearance methods have been developed locally. The Federal Personnel Council in Philadelphia, for example, under the auspices of the regional civil-service director, has performed a notable service in this respect. The council, through its personnel officers, has additionally taken every means possible for placing qualified workers in industry when their services were not needed in Government.10

The other exception is the displaced-career program which has worked in Washington to some extent but rather ineffectively in the field service. This is the system by which the Civil Service Commission refers the names of displaced employees to hiring agencies for consideration on a priority basis. It is limited to so-called permanent employees, an estimated 55 to 60 percent of our total present work force.

The subcommittee believes that, as a matter of sound management, every means should be employed to facilitate the transfer of qualified employees from retrenching organizations to other Federal organizations having need of their services. Secondly, we endorse the principle of assisting qualified Federal employees to gain suitable employment outside the Government when the Government has no immediate need for their services. By maintaining good will, these people with their skills and qualities constitute a potential asset of the Government. Recommendations

(1) Employees who are reduced in force in any area should register with the appropriate Employment Service office which serves the area. (2) The Employment Service should refer all such reduced-in-force employees for consideration against vacancies reported currently by boards of examiners.

(3) The Employment Sesvice should facilitate the placement in private industry of all reduced-in-force employees who are not placed in other Federal positions.

(4) In general, agencies should aid the Employment Service to plan for the most effective placement of employees to be reduced in force by reporting such retrenchment plans to the Employment Service as early as practicable and otherwise collaborating in plans for employee placement.

FIELD RECRUITING TRIPS

Probably one of the most important services the United States Employment Service has rendered to Government agencies has been

10 *** The Federal Personnel Council in Philadelphia has established a very workable scheme among its members for utilizing persons being reduced in force by other agencies. These council meetings are held at least once a month and, since it is customary to give at least a month's notice before RIF, any agency having an RIF can announce it at the meeting. In this way, personnel officers receive advance notice of an available source of help. When this office went into RIF last June, as a result of the Servicemen's Indemnity Act, 1,100 persons were put on notice of RIF. The personnel office contacted all the Government agencies in the area and publicized it with the chamber of commerce and with private industrial firms through the Industrial Relations Association. As a result of this publicity, less than 400 of the 1,100 persons went out without having some other employment. As a result of this publicity, and the interviews coming from it, I believe the Government worker was given a great boost in the eyes of the industrial plants that participated. The American Telephone & Telegraph Co. at the time was looking for some long-line operators. When their personnel director was contacted and told of the availability of these persons, he had an attitude that these persons would not fit into the ir scheme of things. When it was pointed out that he would lose nothing by having an individual come up and interview a few of them to see if any of them would fit, he consented to send a representative. This representative was so impressed by the caliber of persons employed by this office, who were being let out, that she called her office and asked for additional assistance. As a result, 5 interviewers spent over a week in this office interviewing persons being reduced in force. Many of the other companies utilizing the employees made available were equally impressed and were free in their praise of the employees they were able to hire."

assistance in field recruiting." 11 This, however, has apparently not worked as effectively as it could.

When applicants are not available locally, and an agency decides it is necessary to recruit elsewhere, it must request approval from the Commission regional office. If the recruiting is planned for outside the region, the regional office must clear with the regional office wherein the recruiting is to be done, which in turn clears with the Employment Service regional clearance officer. That officer clears with the employment service manager in the city where the agency wishes to recruit.

These clearances are intended to accomplish two purposes, i. e., to prevent simultaneous recruiting in one locality by two or more agencies, and to channel information to the recruiting agency as to labor supply and other conditions for their consideration.

With everyone getting into the act, the subcommittee finds there is little or no overlapping of recruiting teams, but the second purpose, the provision of labor market data, is frequently not achieved. In planning a recruiting itinerary, this is probably the most important factor for consideration. For example, the subcommittee staff found a representative of a Washington agency recruiting for stenographers and typists in Dayton, Ohio, a critical shortage city where any hiring by the recruiter would probably be at the expense of the Air Force, the major employer in the area. Upon questioning, the recruiter advised our staff that knowledge of the labor supply situation had not been conveyed to him or his agency in Washington when the trip was planned. He had planned to spend at least a week in Dayton, but when he arrived and learned of the situation, he cut his trip short by 2 days as soon as he was able to adjust his itinerary.

One agency reports:

The role of the Commission could be improved by taking away their power to prevent an installation from recruiting. Last year we were refused permission to enter two regions, even though colleges expressed a desire to talk with our representatives.

The Civil Service Commission has reported that during the period from July 1, 1951 to March 1, 1952, their offices authorized agencies to make a total of 439 field recruiting trips outside of the agencies' local areas. A total of 7,730 man-days were spent hiring or securing applications from 12,960 people. These covered a wide variety of occupations from engineers and physicists to stenographic and clerical occupations for both domestic and overseas positions.

11 A large field station reports as follows:

"The Employment Service disseminates advance publicity, which is written by us, spot announcements on the radio, articles in local newspapers, and provides space for placing posters in their windows and posting lists of jobs for which our recruiting officer has vacancies. The Employment Service sends out individual letters in advance of our recruiter's visit to their claimants and applicants, asking them to call at the office on a particular date. For example, on our last recruiting trip to , the manager sent out about 350 letters. The receptionist or the information clerk makes a preliminary screening of all applicants according to age, sex, and ability to perform the duties of the position. They provide suitable desk space. Where facilities are available, they perform tests of a technical nature which are acceptable to our recruiting officer, such as typists and stenographers. The manager of the Employment Service office gives honest information on applicants. The manager has taken our representatives to service clubs, such as Kiwanis, Rotary, and and veterans' organizations, and explained our employment problems and has given our officer an opportunity to make a short talk and answer questions. During lulls in the recruiting campaign at the employment office, it is not unusual for the compensation officer to take our representative on scheduled trips to meet other applicants.

"The local employment office manager can be of great assistance. By eliminating individuals who are not good employment risks, he can save time, training, and money for Government agencies."

The subcommittee queried agencies as to whether the Civil Service Commission could have recruited successfully for these jobs. The following is a typical response:

All positions were "on order" with the Commission. They were unable to supply adequate eligibles. If they could have the personnel, the funds and the knowledge of the sources, they could probably have recruited successfully for stenographers, typists, and some lower level positions. Recruiting for professional and technical positions requires an intimate knowledge of the organizations, functions and duties of the positions. It is not conceivable that the Commission could acquire and keep current on such information in all agencies serviced.

It is not unusual on a recruiting trip for a personnel office representative to be accompanied by one or more operating supervisors. A large field station reported:

Inclusion of the latter personnel (operating supervisors) are considered necessary. Applicants are not satisfied to discuss employment with only representatives of the personnel office; they desire firsthand knowledge of the "ins" and "outs" and "whys" and "wherefores" of the job. They want this explained in technical terms. Too frequently personnel office representatives cannot meet this requirement. It is doubted if the Civil Service Commission could have undertaken this recruitment successfully because of inability to talk in terms of specific job requirements.

Some agencies have reported that in the main recruitment of scientific personnel has been performed by operating officials alone. The Civil Service Commission and the Bureau of the Budget with an eye on the 7,000 man-days reported above, requested funds in the Commission budget for fiscal year 1952 to station Civil Service Commission representatives in major labor market areas "to prevent duplication, overlapping and poor recruiting practices." Congress did not authorize such funds, and this request was trimmed in the 1953 estimate to provide funds for Commission representatives to be stationed in 185 major Employment Service offices. In the opinion of the subcommittee, this would serve no purpose other than to duplicate staffs already available in the Employment Service offices. We doubt, in view of the above, that field recruiting by agencies would be trimmed to any appreciable degree, if at all, by the addition of 200 Commission advisors "to direct and coordinate" the work.

Broader use of the total resources and facilities of the Employment Service, as contemplated in part 11 of this report, appears to be the best practicable means whereby recruiting travel can be diminished. A continuous and positive program by the Employment Service of recruitment locally across the Nation would inevitably reduce recruiting travel for the skilled trades, clerical and unskilled occupations, etc. Recommendations

(1) Unnecessary "clearances" of proposed recruiting trips which serve only to delay and obstruct agency planning should be eliminated. We have been unable to find any constructive purpose served by the superimposition of Civil Service Commission clearances.

(2) A more effective clearance channel should be established between the agencies and the Employment Service to assure that the recruiting agency is supplied with current information on labor market conditions to aid in planning the itinerary. The Bureau of Employment Security, in cooperation with the Civil Service Commission, should establish operating procedures to implement these recommendations.

PAYMENT OF APPLICANT AND APPOINTEE TRAVEL EXPENSES

The subcommittee has found that a common deterrent in recruiting which in many instances has proven costly to the Government is the lack of authority of agencies to pay an applicant's travel expenses to be interviewed for Government employment. This is due particularly in scientific, professional, and key administrative positions where the Government's competitive position with industry is adverse. Numerous instances have been reported to us of qualified and specialized people accepting jobs, frequently better paying, in private industry rather than pay Government interview travel expenses out of their own pockets. Agencies get around this by sending operating officials to interview the applicant at his hometown, often in teams of 2, 3,

or more.

This is doubly expensive to the Government, since the actual cost is greater than would have been necessary to bring the applicant to the installation, and it takes operating personnel away from productive work.

We have found that the practice of paying an applicant's travel expenses is common in industry. We believe that the Government can ill-afford, especially in scarce scientific, professional, and key administrative categories, to work at this disadvantage when, as an alternative, it is costlier.

What has been said above applies also to authority to pay for the movement of a new employee's family and household goods to his first duty station, which is frequently a deciding consideration in an applicant's decision to accept the employment offered.

Recommendations

(1) The Civil Service Commission is requested to draft standards, and recommendations for any necessary legislative action, for Senate review, whereby agencies could authorize and pay for the invitation travel expenses of applicants in certain circumstances. To prevent abuse, such standards could well include a provision for certification by the travel issuing authority that the travel is (a) less costly than an alternative method, or (b) otherwise in the best interests of the Government. Prior to issuance of such travel authority, the agency board could certify that on the basis of a review of the applicant's application and other data, he appears to be among the best qualified applicants available for the position vacancy.

(2) Standards of a similar nature based upon the best interests of the Government should be drafted by the Commission for the movement of a new employee, his dependents, and household goods, to the first duty station.

PART 4-THE EXAMINATION OF APPLICANTS

Applicants for positions in the competitive service are examined for some or all of the following characteristics:

(1) Aptitude.-Does the applicant have the ability to learn the duties of the job?

(2) Achievement.-To what extent does the applicant possess the skills, experience and/or education required for successful job performance?