« PreviousContinue »
group of the Equal Employment Opportunity Coordinating Council is going to make this decision, and they are going to make it in a way that I think is consistent with the Equal Employment Opportunity Act. We have held hearings, and I don't think that there are many people that favor the present guidelines. Those guidelines never applied to us, and since the act was amended to bring in State and local governments as well as the Federal Government, we now need a consistent guideline for all employers. We need more consistency in the whole application of the equal employment opportunity principles in terms of State grant-in-aid agencies so that the Government speaks in one voice with one objective, and I think we will get them.
Mr. Hawkins. Let me ask you this final question, at this time. Does the Civil Service Commission maintain statistical race and sex data on persons rejected by the PACE examination?
Mr. HAMPTOX. No, sir, we don't have any data on people who apply for the test or take it.
Mr. HAWKINS. I am speaking of those who are rejected by the PACE examinations? Do you keep any statistical records on race and sex on those individuals?
Mr. Hampton. No, we do not but we are looking at that to find some way in which we can identify people coming into the testing situation. There has been some resistance from various groups to identification of job applicants.
Dr. HAWKINS. A few minutes ago you said that you were governed by the Griggs decision. In connection with that, it just seems improbable you could evaluate whether the exam operates to exclude minorities and women if you don't keep statistical data on the adverse impact your examinations would have.
Mr. Kator. Could I speak to that, in this way? It is quite true we are not at this point keeping race and sex statistics on the PACE examination. There are other ways of deterinining whether there is an adverse impact on any group. I am sure you will find, in the new draft selection guidelines, if we are able to get them released, there is a new definition of adverse impact, and it is based on selection rates that are actually made. For example, we can look at the occupations normally filled from the PACE exam and determine if, in fact, there has been an adverse impact in terms of the people actually selected for the job. In others words, we look to results. That is definitely not the same as making the identification you are suggesting. It is my understanding, under the uniform selection guidelines we are working on, we will likely go in the direction you suggest.
Mr. Hawkins. You are telling me you will go in that direction. Have you applied that principle in the procedures up to this point? Obriously we are encouraged if you are going to do so but that is in the future. I am concerned about what you are doing now and whether or not your system operates to identify deficiencies and whether allirmative action is being taken to remedy those deficiencies. If you are not operating in this manner now, it just seems to me that you are not in compliance with title VII.
Mr. KATOR. Mr. Hawkins, let me put it this way. There are no minimum qualifications to take the PACE examination and this is one of the problems in keeping the kinds of records of which we are talking and making them meaningful. Under the draft uniform selection guidelines employers will need a change in recordkeeping systems to determine if there is adverse impact. I think I can speak from the standpoint of working closely with the Coordinating Council for over this 2-year period, that what you are suggesting is the direction we will need to move in to determine if there is adverse impact in the examination. Now, what we have been doing up to this point is determining whether there is adverse impact based on the selection of persons into the particular occupations for which that examination is used. For example, in the examination, which was used prior to PACE, the Federal service entrance examination, 17 or 18 percent of the jobs in the occupations filled from that examination were filled by minority persons so we are aware, in terms of that selection rate, there was no adverse impact in the overall selection process. That doesn't mean in terms of the actual rejection rate from the examination there was not an adverse impact. There may well have been. In fact, the court indicated that there was.
Mr. HAWKINS. Let me call on Mr. Buchanan at this point, as I have exceeded my time. You go ahead and do likewise.
Mr. BUCHANAN. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. I want to get back to that merit system thing.
Mr. HAWKINS. I would like to get back to it, too, but I will let Mr. Buchanan pursue his questions.
Mr. BUCHANAN. Mr. Hampton, I have no doubt of the sincerity of your statements or your desire to provide equal opportunity in the Federal Establishment. You ought to be setting an example for the rest of the country. I am going to make a statement and ask you to react, rather than ask a question.
You state, on page 4, in explaining the percentages of minorities in the higher levels of Government employment—you say:
We have confidence that as the pipeline at the GS-14 and 15 levels includes more minorities and women, there will be a natural opportunity for movement into the supergrade levels for such persons since most of these positions are filled from within the service.
Now, I am just going to make this statement. So long as you follow what I have found out for 1012 years to be the pattern of giving the lions share of advancement opportunity or movement into those higher grades to persons already within the service and don't let people from the outside have a better shot of getting into these positions, you are not going to get where you need to be in terms of minority groups or women, because you are starting from a base where only the lowest grades have been filled by people in these categories, and some of these people may be able to advance up to a very high levels of civil service and responsible management jobs, but there will be many who will not be in that kind of category. A person who may be excellent at a manual level may not ever get to a management level, and while a good secretary is extremely valuable, one may not be able to run an agency. We haven't had historically enough people at the appropriate grades at high enough level to be able to get to the highest grade level. What I am saying is, in my judgment, nothing would help the civil service more than injections of new blood from outside rather regularly and unless you have a better chance for people on the outside trying to get in, including very prominent black people, women, I don't see any way in the world you will ever achieve equal opportunity in the Federal service.
Mr. HAMPTON. I must concede progress is going to be slow. You have got to look at the nature of the supergrade positions. A large majority of the supergrades are scientific and technical positions, and in those managerial positions, it requires experienced people.
Mr. BUCHANAN. Experienced in the Federal service rather than anyplace else in the world?
Mr. HAMPTON. No. Experienced in whatever the specialty happens to be. Minority supergrades are, on the average, younger then the total supergrade population and have less time in Federal service. Specifically, the median age of minority supergrades is 49 years, compared to 53 years for all supergrades. Minority supergrades have spent an average of 16 years in service, whereas all supergrades have an average of 26 years' service.
The median age for women supergrades is 53 years, which is the same as for the total supergrade population. However, women as a group have spent less time in service than their male counterparts. The median time in service for women supergrades is 20 years, whereas the average for the total supergrade population is 26 years. Thirty-one percent of the women supergrades have entered service since 1961, compared to 18 percent of the total supergrades population who have entered since 1961.
So, what you have in the upper levels, essentially is your most experienced people in the managerial types of jobs. That is inherent in any kind of peer system, but people come in every year. I don't know what the percentage is from the outside. I think it is roughly 12 percent of the supergrade positions filled during the course of the year are from outside of the Federal Establishment, but the key thing here is, I think, that minorities and women were not in the selection range until recently. Now, they are beginning to move into this arena.
Mr. BUCHANAN. From where?
Mr. HAMPTON. From within the service. Also, in the selections from the senior level register, a number of women are coming in. Also, minorities are coming in from the senior level exam. But there are roughly only 1,000 people at that level who come into the Federal Government in any given year, if you take an average, probably slightly below 1,000, but the thing is that people are moving through the system and moving up into the selection range for supergrades. We have had the limitation on supergrades, and there are a number of positions that should be classified at that level. That, in turn, will make a significant difference, I think, in these particular figures, but a career system, essentially, is that people come in at entry levels and move through that system.
Mr. BUCHANAN. But my point is, unless all Americans who might qualify have an equal shot at a good job in the Federal Establishment, whether in or out of the service, unless those outside have at least some kind of a chance, you will never achieve equal opportunity in the Federal service.
Mr. ANDOLSEK. They have a chance, but the farther you go up the Christmas tree, the narrower the tree gets. You have dedicated civil service workers, trying to get a promotion, and someone comes from the outside
Mr. BUCHANAN. The attitudes you have just expressed, I think, is the prevailing attitude.
Mr. ANDOLSEK. Management has a right to go outside or inside and
Mr. HAMPTON. The management of a Federal agency has an opportunity to go outside, if they wish to take it. They don't necessarily want to do that. Another thing is we have merit promotion programs, many of which are part of collective bargaining agreements, that require the agencies to go through certain kinds of procedures within their own agencies to advertise their vacancies. I agree with you that persons outside must have a fair opportunity.
Mr. BUCHANAN. Starting with a pool of mostly men and mostly white in the system, you are riding a white charger promoting the same kind of system you have in unions in the country and many other entities in the country. I know there are equities on both sides-I am not recommending you discriminate against people in the servicebut you have got to get to more people outside of the system if you are ever going to fulfill this requirement.
Mr. KATOR. May I try to respond. I am not sure that your formula for success would do what you have in mind, particularly at the supergrade level. At the supergrade level, we are dealing in large numbers of scientific and engineering kinds of positions. Now, the agencies are required to look outside the agency in filling the job. This is part of their merit search. The likelihood of their finding people who are qualified, at these levels, in the outside work force for engineering and scientific occupations, either from minority groups, or women, is frankly limited. That goes back to the point we were talking about, on the educational problem. In engineering and architecture, for example, only 1.2 percent of persons in the Nation's work force who have those kinds of skills are minority. That, of course, is at all levels; and in the Federal Government, 6.1 percent of persons in those occupations are minority. Our effort has been to assure the minority people who are already in the Federal Government--and no one has ever indicated there are not skilled minority people in the Federal Government who do not-have an opportunity to move into these higher level jobs. We think that is a better formula for success, and more likely to make minorities and women available to move into the supergrade jobs.
Mr. BUCHANAN, Supergrades—I am dealing with the entire structure of the service. What about the lower levels? How many opportunities do people from the outside have?
Mr. KATOR. They all get in that way.
Mr. Clay. Will the gentleman yield? Mr. Kator, apparently you have changed your position from that of March 3, 1971, before the General Subcommittee on Labor, Committee on Education and Labor, page 368. In response to the precise question, you said, "And we are going to do everything we can to make sure in the supergrade levels, if it means that the pipeline has to be fuller, we are going to get fuller. If it means bringing in people literally from outside, from universities and colleges and bringing them into the Government service at 16 or 18 level, that will be done."
Mr. KATOR. Yes; I said that.
Mr. KATOR. No; I haven't changed my position. I didn't have the work force statistics available to me at that time. That is still our policy. Agencies are required, in filling supergrade positions, to make a search outside. They have to show us the people they are hiring are the best qualified for the job, and they have to show us the kinds of employment search they made, and that means to go to the outside.
Mr. CLAY. You were honest that day when you said, this is something we are working on, but it will not happen overnight.
Mr. KATOR. No; it will not happen overnight.
Mr. HAMPTON. I don't think, sir, we can ignore the fact of what you have in the pipeline. We have some other interesting data I think we can pull together which you ought to see, because it relates to percentages in the general population in the United States of certain kinds of professional qualifications.
Mr. BUCHANAN. I don't doubt your sincerity. I think that there is a fundamental flaw in the system. I think, on the basis of 10 years of experience, watching people trying to get into the system and failing with what I thought were high qualifications—and I don't think you know who has tried to get in and not made it--where somebody within an agency has been selected over that person—I don't think you have that information.
Mr. HAMPTON. We wouldn't have that information.
Mr. BUCHANAN. I think this is something you really need to look into. I am convinced of two facts. One is, the bureaucracy would be immeasurably improved by injections of fresh blood from the outside and number 2, persons trying to get into the system from the outside face inherent problems, including minorities and women.
Mr. HAMPTON. One of the things we have found is the competition for minority and women professionals is fierce. You have agencies outside of the Government, private institutions, educational institutions that have Government contracts are recruiting continuously in this area, and the pool that you have to call upon is very small, particularly for minorities. We run into this on college campuses. We are talking about entry jobs there, not talking about higher levels. The other is the salary freeze we have had on for 6 years is convincing people $36,000 is a lot of money, and it looks very good in various places, but when you look at private employers, what they are paying and offering, they are not only getting the best professionals, they are taking some of the ones we have out of the system. We also have another thing in the system—Government agencies raiding one another because of minorities. They spend a few years with us, become well trained and ready to move up, and another agency picks them off. We are in competition even among ourselves. I think the effort is there. There is nothing in the system that says you can't bring minority people into the upper levels. As a matter of practice, from a pragmatic point of view, it just doesn't happen to the extent it should because of the factors I mentioned.
Mr. BUCHANAN. Now, I certainly agree with what you say about the education system. Discrimination against women starts at the kindergarten level, and we do have a problem. Let me cite one case. A woman had a very specific background in employment for the job for which she applied in the Federal Establishment, but she was a mayor's wife of a major city; therefore, her employment was part time, and she accepted a more token salary than what her services were worth-great volunteer activities—widely known. She applied for a job for which she was eminently qualified. She couldn't even get a rating because she had been a first lady assisting the mayor on a variety of activities, and the inability to count anything along that line-she couldn't get a rating, she couldn't get in the back door for a job, for which I am convinced she was eminently qualified. That is one of a lot of cases.