Mr. GLADIEUX. To the extent necessary for our purposes and for the support of particular legislation.

Mr. ROUSSELOT. In a year, how many investigations would you make into various problems?

Mr. GLADIEUX. There is no answer.

Mr. SICILIANO. I might interrupt. We are not an investigative body.

Mr. ROUSSELOT. How do you arrive at your decisions?

Mr. SICILIANO. Most of the individuals who are members of the board of directors have had prior Government experience, or have had extensive private business experience. We have an executive director who has some assistance, and he serves as the administrative as well as the research part of the organization. His sources are the Government to a great extent. He has actually prepared a report for the Senate Committee a few years back.

Mr. ROUSSELOT. Do you maintain close liaison with the Civil Service Commission?

Mr. SICILIANO. Yes.

Mr. ROUSSELOT. And they report to you and give you ideas? Mr. GLADIEUX. They do not report to us. We get information all the time from the Commission and other agencies of Government. Mr. ROUSSELOT. Do they make recommendations to you that they think are needed?

Mr. GLADIEUX. No. It would not be that way.

Mr. ROUSSELOT. Do you hear from individuals within the civil service that come to you and suggest things?

Mr. GLADIEUX. Not particularly. We might get a letter sometime but we do not solicit these. I honestly do not know of any we have received. We may have received some by chance, but we do not normally receive letters from individuals.

Mr. ROUSSELOT. Most of your recommendations do not come from individual civil servants. They come from the Commission with whom you maintain contact, or people who have served in Government and have recommendations.

Mr. GLADIEUX. That is correct.

Mr. ROUSSELOT. How often does your board meet?

Mr. GLADIEUXx. About four or five times a year.

Mr. ROUSSELOT. As a board, they passed on the decisions you pass on to us today?

Mr. GLADIEUX. Yes.

Mr. ROUSSELOT. I have been rather disturbed lately by the amount of mail I have received, and the people who have come into my officeI have not solicited them-who have given me the general impression, and I would like to have your comment on this, Mr. Siciliano, because you have served in the Eisenhower administration in this field, I am very disturbed at the number who came and said they felt there was a hard core of civil servants who seem to dominate a given agency. These have not just been dissident people; they have been people sincerely concerned, and they feel that a lot of employees are overpaid and underworked.

Have you heard this to any great degree?

Mr. SICILIANO. I heard a great deal of this exact type of thing in 1953 when I was appointed Assistant Secretary of Labor. I think

particularly so for the first few months. I do not know if this was true in every change in administration, but it occurred then.

To be very candid with you, most of them turned out to be the kind of employee you referred to, the dissident employee, or the ignored employee, or the one who felt for some reason or the other that his recognition had not been forthcoming.

Mr. ROUSSELOT. I served in the Eisenhower administration in a lesser capacity than you, and I am familiar with the kind of employee that you speak of, but I have been disturbed by the increase in the number that have come to see me lately and I wonder if you have found any increase in this, or whether it was just my office.

Mr. SICILIANO. I cannot really say. I have received a number of people since I left Government service that have come to me, usually hoping that I would represent them.

Mr. ROUSSELOT. You would be concerned about this type of thing because it would relate to merit?

Mr. SICILIANO. Exactly.

Mr. ROUSSELOT. I have received a number of complaints that there seems to be a tendency to force retirement on some people on the basis of mental illness. Have you heard much about this?

Mr. SICILIANO. No, I have not.

Mrs. NORRELL. Just a comment.

If we Congressmen voted ourselves a $35,000 salary, there would be the hardest races you ever saw back home.

Mr. SICILIANO. I have no doubt about that.

Mrs. NORRELL. A lot of our constituents think we are overpaid at $22,500.

MI. SICILIANO. I think Mr. Corbett brought the point out this morning, which is the question of how you handle your constituency when they read about a Federal employee raise. I do feel the Federal employee should not have to be the one that has to take the brunt of this concern all the time. Realizing this is a practical political matter for a Member of Congress in trying to concern himself about explaining to his constituents, yet the Federal employee is suffering every single

year.

As I say, this compression has been occurring until we are finally going to have one salary, it looks like. We are now down to 5.8 to 1 when in 1939 it was 8.8 to 1. This is really beginning to be quite ab, surd, this kind of compression. Someone sometime has to face up to this and do something.

Mr. OLSEN (acting chairman). The committee will now adjourn and reconvene tomorrow, May 23, to hear Hon. Luther Hodges, Secretary of Commerce, and Hon. James E. Webb, Administrator, National Aeronautics and Space Administration.

(Whereupon, at 12 noon, the committee adjourned, to reconvene Wednesday, May 23, 1962.)

REVISION OF MAJOR FEDERAL STATUTORY SALARY

SYSTEMS

WEDNESDAY, MAY 23, 1962

HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES,

COMMITTEE ON POST OFFICE AND CIVIL SERVICE,

Washington, D.C.

The committee met, pursuant to notice, at 10 a.m., in room 215, House Office Building, Washington, D.C., Hon. James C. Davis (acting chairman) presiding.

Mr. DAVIS. The committee will come to order, please.

Today the committee will resume its hearings on legislation pending before the House Post Office and Civil Service Committee to provide pay increases for postal and other Federal employees.

This morning it is our pleasure to hear from two more distinguished officials of the executive branch of the Government, the Honorable Luther Hodges, Secretary of Commerce, and the Honorable James E. Webb, Administrator of the National Aeronautics and Space Administration.

Secretary Hodges is accompanied by Hon. John H. Hollomon, Assistant Secretary of Commerce for Science and Technology, as well as Dr. A. V. Astin, Director of the National Bureau of Standards, and Dr. F. W. Reichelderfer, Chief of the Weather Bureau.

Unfortunately, Secretary Hodges has to attend a meeting at the White House at 10:30. Following his departure those assistants who have accompanied him will be available for additional testimony and to answer questions of the members of the committee.

We will hear first from the distinguished Secretary of Commerce. STATEMENT OF HON. LUTHER H. HODGES, SECRETARY OF COMMERCE; ACCOMPANIED BY HON. JOHN H. HOLLOMAN, ASSISTANT SECRETARY OF COMMERCE FOR SCIENCE AND TECHNOLOGY; DR. A. V. ASTIN, DIRECTOR, NATIONAL BUREAU OF STANDARDS; AND DR. F. W. REICHELDERFER, CHIEF OF THE WEATHER BUREAU Secretary HODGES. Thank you, Chairman Davis and members of the committee. I am glad you have mentioned the fact that Dr. John H. Hollomon, who just recently has been made Assistant Secretary of Commerce for Science and Technology in the Department of Commerce, is here. He comes to us from the General Electric Co. laboratories and he has first-hand information from the other side on this matter of salaries for top people. I am sure he will be able to add greatly to your questions and answers. And of course Dr. Astin and Dr. Reichelderfer will be here with us.

I want to express my thanks for this opportunity to submit the Department's views on H.R. 10480, the proposed Federal Salary Reform Act of 1962.

Our position on this bill is very simple: We are for it, and we strongly recommend its enactment.

Our reasons for this position may be summarized as follows:

1. The bill would bring the Classification Act salary system back into touch with reality, as I see it. It would do this by establishing the principle that Federal salary rates shall be comparable with private enterprise salary rates for the same levels of work.

Private business has long recognized the desirability of paying salaries comparable with those paid by their competitors. The Government itself had long followed the same principle in paying comparable salaries to so-called blue-collar workers in the trades and crafts. Why the Government has waited so long to adopt this sensible approach to the salaries of Classification Act employees is difficult to understand. Over a period of years, however, Classification Act salaries have increasingly gotten out of line with salaries paid elsewhere in our country. As the Bureau of Labor Statistics data show, Classification Act salary rates have lagged behind the rates paid outside the Federal Government by up to 24 percent for GS-15 alone.

May I show you why this is important to us in the Department of Commerce? In the area of science and technology alone, the Department has research and development programs for which more than $100 million is budgeted in fiscal 1963, exclusive of facilities. The Department has seven bureaus which are engaged in scientific activities: The National Bureau of Standards, the Weather Bureau, the Coast and Geodetic Survey, the Patent Office, the Bureau of Public Roads, the Maritime Administration, and the Area Redevelopment Administration.

Over half the personnel of the Department are professional employees, technicians, and support personnel.

Commerce is the largest employer of physical scientists in the Federal Government-it has more than one-fourth of all physical scientists in the entire Federal Government. Commerce ranks high among all agencies of the Government in the employment of virtually all types of scientists and engineers.

At the present time we face what appears to me to be a crisis in carrying out our programs. Our research and development activities have increased markedly in the last 2 years. The National Bureau of Standards budget for fiscal 1963, exclusive of facilities, is up approximately 50 percent. The Weather Bureau budget for research and development is up more than 100 percent. The Coast and Geodetic Survey R. & D. budget is up almost 100 percent. Other R. & D. budgets also show marked increases.

In carrying out the scientific and engineering programs of the Department, it is vitally important to get and keep scientists and engineers of first-class ability. This is crucial in getting effective results and in getting them efficiently. In my opinion, and this is based on my experience in private industry, you get just what you pay for. First-class talent produces first-class results; second-class talent produces mediocre results; and you don't get first-class talent for secondclass pay. I just say ordinarily that is true, Mr. Chairman. Some

times you get a patriot who is willing to serve for a short time, but for longtime service you cannot get them.

But here is what confronts us. A confidential survey of 61 GS-15 and Public Law 313-type scientists in November 1960, showed that more than half of the 61 scientists received $15,000 or less, and none received more than $19,000 a year, but more than half of the 61 had received offers of employment outside the Government of $25,000 or more. One had received an offer of $50,000; 4, $33,000; 8, $30,000; 1, $28,000; 2, $27,000; and 16, $25,000.

Within our own Department, there has been a continuing loss of well-qualified personnel, especially at the senior levels. Dr. Astin, Director of the National Bureau of Standards, who is here, has lost, within the last year or two several outstanding employees including a senior physical chemistry adviser, his best microwave experimentalist and a right-hand man in the field of science administration. Dr. Astin advises me that many of his senior staff members are currently receiving extremely attractive offers from outside the Government. He reports that the temptations of these offers are currently being resisted by these staff members in the hope that the Congress will enact the pending pay reform bill.

In the Weather Bureau, the decade of the 1950's has seen a steady loss of some 24 well-qualified senior-level employees who had been identified for future leadership in the Bureau. Seventeen of these went to nongovernmental positions, all at increased salaries.

In our Patent Office, we have a loss each year of 20 percent of the professional examining corps. This loss is attributed largely to the more attractive salary rates paid outside the Federal Government. I would just like to add frankly I do not think it is entirely on account of salaries it is more a training situation, but largely it is due to

salaries.

Our failure to keep Classification Act salary rates in line with salary rates outside the Federal Government results in a serious loss of valuable human resources.

In what I have just said, I have given emphasis to scientific and technical personnel, because I believe that the problem of providing adequate pay is most critical in this area. I want to make clear, however, our wholehearted support for the basic pay adjustment system proposed for all groups of employees subject to the Classification Act. 2. One of the best features of this bill, in my opinion, is the provision for systematic annual review of salaries.

For about the last 20 years, as I understand it, salary fixing under the Classification Act has given rise to annual or biennial controversies among employees and employee organizations. After much pulling and hauling, some kind of improvised change in the salary schedules is enacted. The results of this periodic tumult are reflected in our present inadequate salary system.

Chairman Davis, I might say parenthetically I had the same situation as Governor of North Carolina. Many times action was taken across the board without regard to the merit of the particulrar situation, low and high.

The proposed bill, as I see it, not only would straighten out our salary system but should keep it straightened out which is equally important. It would do this in accordance with a sensible policy