Mr. FOLSOM. Ordinary attrition will take care of some of it. It will take time. Mr. BARRY. I am glad you mentioned that. We always want to accomplish more in a short time than is possible. I am glad you caution us to be patient. Mr. GROSS. I wish the gentleman would remain a minute. Since the foreign giveaway program has been introduced in this discussion, it seems to be historic under its various sugar-coated names and titles-it seems to be historic over there that those who cause the most trouble get the promotions. I do not know how you are going to cure that in the hard core over there in the State Department and in this AID operation. The mission directors who louse up Laos, they are promoted to better jobs. How do you cure that situation, Mr. Folsom, and the people who divulge the corrupt and dishonest practices in some of these countries are fired the honest, capable, intelligent employee is fired? Will this bill you propose here take care of that situation by giving them more money? Mr. FOLSOM. We cannot cure all the ills in the Government by this proposal. My experience is based on Treasury and HEW. I was very much impressed with the caliber of the people we had and the system we had for promotion. I did find we would do a better job if we could pay better salaries for the people in the top management positions. Mr. GROSS. I want to go back to the Eisenhower proposal. Do you recall in the Eisenhower proposal that it proposed the lid be taken off supergrades? Mr. FOLSOM. Yes. Mr. GROSS. It did? Mr. FOLSOM. I think it proposed all the way up. Mr. GROSS. Did the Eisenhower proposal provide increases in the top brackets of $5,000 to $10,000 a year? Mr. FOLSOM. I remember the Cabinet Committee worked on it; we proposed it. I do not remember the final proposals. There were substantial increases in the top grades. Mr. GROSS. Mr. Folsom, is it not a fact the Eisenhower proposal was for a study? Mr. FOLSOM. No, not on an alternative. There was a definite recommendation for an increase in the top grades. Mr. GROSS. Supposing then we settle this by you securing a copy of that and putting it in the record. Mr. FOLSOM. Your next witness probably knows more about that. He worked on the later proposals. He was in the White House at the time. I think he can give you the details of it. As I recall, we recommended increases in the top grades. Mr. GROSS. I do not question you recommended increases. What I am speaking of is the increases proposed in this bill, taking the establishment of supergrades 19 and 20 as this bill proposes and taking the ceiling off supergrades. I do not recall the Eisenhower administration making any such proposal in concrete form to this committee. Mr. FOLSOM. I think we made recommendations for specific increases in certain of the top grades. Mr. GROSS. This is important to me because you say that you supported the President's veto of the last pay increase bill on those grounds. Mr. FOLSOM. Oh, no; on the ground it was a general increase, which is not what he recommended. That is why he vetoed it. Mr. GROSS. I want to know specifically what the substitute was that the Eisenhower administration had in mind. Mr. FOLSOM. I think the next witness can explain that in detail. Mr. DULSKI. Thank you very kindly. We appreciate your coming here. The next witness is Mr. Gladieux, accompanied by Mr. Siciliano. STATEMENT OF BERNARD GLADIEUX, CHAIRMAN, EXECUTIVE COMMITTEE OF THE NATIONAL CIVIL SERVICE LEAGUE, ACCOMPANIED BY ROCCO SICILIANO, MEMBER OF THE BOARD OF THE NATIONAL CIVIL SERVICE LEAGUE Mr. GLADIEUX. Mr. Chairman, my name is Bernard L. Gladieux. I am a vice president of Booz, Allen & Hamilton, management consultants. My office is in New York City. I am here in my capacity as chairman of the board of directors of the National Civil Service League to support H.R. 10480, incorporating the President's recommendations with respect to Federal statutory salary systems. The National Civil Service League, which Mr. Siciliano and I represent, is a nonprofit, nonpartisan citizen organization devoted to improving public management by the adoption of modern personnel policies in government. Instrumental in establishing the first civil service systems based on the merit principle in this country, the league for over 80 years has provided initiative and leadership designed to make public service a trust to the competent, loyal, and dedicated, and to enhance the dignity and prestige of government employment. The leadership of the league consists of a distinguished board of directors composed of business and professional leaders, many of whom have at one time served in high positions of responsibility in the Federal Government. If you wish, I can submit a list of the members of the board of directors of the league so you will know whom Mr. Siciliano and I represent. (The list referred to follows:) President-Nicholas Kelley, Kelley, Drye, Newhall & Maginnes Chairman, Executive Committee-Bernard L. Gladieux, partner, Booz, Allen & Hamilton Treasurer-Weston Rankin, partner, Price, Waterhouse & Co. Vice presidents: Devereux C. Josephs, director, New York Life Insurance Co. James A. Simpson, Lange, Simpson, Robinson & Somerville Charles P. Taft, Headley and Taft Board of directors: Daniel W. Bell, chairman, American Security & Trust Co. Bruce Bromley, Cravath, Swaine & Moore John J. Corson, director, McKinsey & Co., Inc. Walter D. Fuller, Walter D. Fuller Co. William C. Greenough, president, Teachers Insurance & Annuity Association Louis A. Johnson, Steptoe & Johnson Robert S. Kerr, Jr., Kerr, Conn & Davis Joseph I. Lubin, Eisner & Lubin James P. Mitchell, on leave Samuel H. Ordway, Jr., vice president, Conservation Foundation. Winston Paul, trustee Don K. Price, dean, Graduate School of Public Administration, Harvard Harold S. Shefelman, Weter, Roberts & Shefelman Rocco C. Siciliano, Wilkinson, Cragun & Barker Sidney W. Souers, Chairman, General American Life Insurance Co. Charles B. Stauffacher, executive vice president, Continental Can Co. James E. Webb, on leave Watson W. Wise, Wise Operating Companies Mr. GLADIEUX. Beginning with the drafting of the Pendleton Act in 1883, the league has over the years participated in the consideration of improved public service legislation. We welcome this opportunity once again to express our views. The policy of the league on this particular legislation is best expressed in the following official letter of the league to the President, signed by Mr. Kelley and myself, dated April 18. This is a rather short letter, and I would like to read it into the record if you do not mind, since it represents the official position of the league on this matter. DEAR MR. PRESIDENT: On behalf of the National Civil Service League, we commend the perceptive leadership embodied in your recent proposal to the Congress on "Reform of Federal Statutory Salary Systems." The board of directors of the league strongly endorses this proposal, as now incorporated in H.R. 10480. If enacted, the proposed plan would, in our judgment, represent the most striking advance in statutory provisions governing Federal pay since the enactment of the first Classification Act in 1923. We recognize that 1962 is a crucial year regarding Federal salary policy. Pay reform, in accordance with your proposal, would (1) strengthen career incentives, (2) initiate the concept of Federal-private enterprise salary comparability as a continuing principle of Federal salary policy, and (3) make significant strides in the direction of a continuing program of executive initiative. We consider it imperative that the central purpose of your executive compensation proposal be approved this year in recognition of the appropriate role of executive leadership in personnel management. We also wish to go on record as expressing our conviction that the top compensation levels incorporated in your plan represent the minimum requisite to attracting and retaining administrative and professional talent of the capacity and stature required for preserving our position of world leadership. This means that the excessive leveling factors which in other years have served to compress the Federal salary structure must be avoided in any future legislation. In view of the transcendent importance of the salary issue and its relation to total personnel policy, we urge the administration to continue vigorously and aggressively to bring the matter into clearer public and congressional understanding. We believe that each member of your administration should fully appreciate and reflect the President's concern on this issue. We hope that plans are maturing which will include personal appearances by the leaders of vital Federal programs so that the Congress will understand more clearly the critical importance of a sound and equitable pay plan to essential national programs. We understand that special treatment of distinct employee groups at various classification levels is being urged on the Congress at this time when general compensation is under consideration. In the perspective of a record extending over 80 years of supporting progressive efforts to improve the status of all levels of public service, the league declares unequivocally that the paramount need of our times in the Federal service is the strengthening of the top career ranks. This can best be achieved by adhering to the principle of comparability, thereby establishing a salary pattern more commensurate with relative weight of responsibility and assuring the compensation standards required to maintain effective leadership. We would deplore any legislation that merely perpetuates present inadequate differentials. All key career groups are included in your plan, and therefore separate actions for special groups would be inappropriate, inequitable and unnecessary. Our purpose in writing this letter is to offer our warm and unfailing support of what you are doing to bring this important issue to the American public. We wish to cooperate in any way possible, and shall be ready to discuss any aspect of the matter with you or any member of your administration. In the meantime, we intend to express our willingness to present the views of the league on H.R. 10480 before appropriate committees of the Senate and House of Representatives. Sincerely yours, NICHOLAS KELLEY, President. The President replied in a very nice letter dated May 2 to Mr. Kelley. I can read it very quickly. DEAR MR. KELLEY: It is indeed gratifying to have your letter of April 18 in which you express your support for this administration's proposals for reform of Federal policy on statutory salaries. I certainly share your belief that the paramount personnel problems within the Federal service are those that relate to the upper career ranks, both professional and managerial. It is for this reason that I have emphasized the need for establishing a fundamental principle of comparability of Federal salaries with those in the private economy and for making immediate adjustments to help repair the compression in the salary scales that has taken place over the past 17 years. It is my firm intention and the intention of those who will assist in working with the Congress on this proposed legislation to press vigorously for this reform. The heads of various Federal program activities will participate in this process. It is reassuring and most helpful to know that the support of your outstanding organization on this proposal is assured. Thank you very much for your letter. Sincerely, JOHN F. KENNEDY. I would just like to reemphasize our view that the creation of two new top administrative grades and the establishment of a ceiling of $24,000 advancing to $28,000 by 1964, as proposed by the legislation, represents the minimum required for leadership posts in the Federal establishment of today. The league is prepared to support even higher levels for executive pay act positions. The transcendent level of responsibility carried by our top appointed executives fully justifies compensation in a substantially higher range than present limitations. We recognize that it is unrealistic to apply the doctrine of full comparability to these higher level positions. Nevertheless, it is imperative that the great disparity between the salaries of top executives in Government and business be reduced. Fully understanding and accepting the reasoning of the Randall Commission and of the President in proposing this major reform of statutory salary systems, we would like to place the full weight of our historic citizens' movement in favor of this progressive legislation. I should now like to introduce Mr. Rocco Siciliano, who will give you a more explicit statement in support of this legislation. Mr. Siciliano is best known for his outstanding service as special assistant to President Eisenhower for personnel management, in which position he played an important role in developing the salary studies upon which the proposal of the present administration is based. He is a former Assistant Secretary of Labor in Charge of Manpower and Employment, is now a partner in the law firm of Wilkinson, Cragun & Barker, and is a member of the board of directors of the National Civil Service League and will speak on behalf of the league. Mr. DULSKI. May I ask you a question? When this panel was created, were you hired as consultants? Mr. GLADIEUX. You mean to the National Civil Service League? Mr. GLADIEUX. It has been in existence since 1883. I do not fully understand your question about consultants. I happen to be a consultant myself, but it has no relationship to the National Civil Service League. I am in a private capacity in my position with the league. Mr. DULSKI. The league prepared all the data submitted to the President? Mr. GLADIEUX. No. I think Mr. Siciliano's statement will clarify this. The league did not prepare the material and data upon which this legislation was based. Mr. Siciliano, who knows this story thoroughly, will clarify this matter. Mr. SICILIANO. On behalf of the National Civil Service League, I am appreciative of this opportunity to appear, and discuss Federal salaries with you today. In particular, the league is pleased to comment on the President's proposal for Federal salary reform incorporated in H.R. 10480. As has been indicated, for some time it was my particular assignment as an assistant to President Eisenhower to be concerned with the status of all Federal employees and with the means and ways of raising even further the levels of their effectiveness. Thus it is also with great personal interest that I comment on the proposals by President Kennedy calling for an overall reform of the very antiquated systems of compensation which have developed over the past 40 years. The National Civil Service League is pleased to strongly endorse the proposal of the President, as now incorporated in H.R. 10480. As Mr. Nicholas Kelley, the league's president, has stated in his letter to President Kennedy: "If enacted, the proposed plan would in my judgment represent the most striking advance in statutory provisions governing Federal pay since the enactment of the first Classification Act in 1923." The position of the National Civil Service League on this legislation can be simply stated. The league believes that this proposal "would (1) strengthen career incentives; (2) initiate the concept of Federal-private enterprise salary comparability as a continuing principle of Federal salary policy; and (3) make significant strides in the direction of a continuing program of executive initiative." A bit of recent history might be pertinent. In 1958 and again in 1959 President Eisenhower requested the Congress to conduct an overall study of all the compensation systems in the Federal Government. This was in the form of two special messages which were sent to the Congress in which he requested there be created a public commission made up of so many Members of the Congress, so many members of the executive branch, and so many members from the general public. This would be a commission which would undertake a massive study of the type that has not yet been done, and in fact, the last known such study was in the early twenties, which led to the Classification Act of about 1922. There has been no such study since over a period of 40 years. He simply proposed at that time, those 2 years, 1958 and 1959, that this study be undertaken. |