adherence to the existing merit system has impeded equitable representation." Is it your view that the Civil Service Commission could legally depart from a rigorous adherence to the merit system? Mr. RAMIREZ. In order to establish affirmative action plans, at times it may be necessary. Mr. ZEIFMAN. Yet Mr. Kator testified that the Civil Service Commission felt itself bound legally to adhere strictly to the merit system. Mr. RAMIREZ. I cannot address myself to the legality of it. Mr. ZEIFMAN. From time to time Congress has expressly provided for departure, so to speak, from the merit system. For example, I think the most common one has been with respect to veterans, where veterans are given some sort of an extra advantage in competing for civil service positions. Is it your view that it would be appropriate for Congress to enact legislation that would provide expressly for preferential hiring, so to speak, with respect to minority groups? Mr. RAMIREZ. I shy away from the word "preferential." I would support very strongly the notion that there be affirmative action plans, plans that reach out, to recruit in order to bring about equal opportunities. So that is the position that I would take. I would like to just add on, if I may, at this time, Mr. Chairman, to the question that Congressman Wiggins asked about the Cabinet Committee and its structure. And add on as to its effectiveness. I believe that the President, because of his concern that in the past the Cabinet Committee had not been as effective as possible at the August 5 meeting he provided new initiatives and tremendous leadership and the counselor he appointed was a very close friend, Counselor Finch, to give it the day-to-day leadership. We are very happy that we have this continual close contact with the White House at that high level and with his assistance we are having a great deal of success with these agencies and the regional areas. It is really a tremendous amount that in the past had not been there, simply because the leadership the Cabinet Committee dealt with at the White House were of a lower stature. But as I say, it is difficult to quantify the outcomes. It is a whole litany and recitation that we could provide of specific actions and activities that have set in motion a momentum in the Federal Government and in the agencies that belong to the Cabinet Committee. This is going to produce optimism. That is why I say in my statement that I realistically predict that we are going to see an increase in closing the gap of the disparities that we presently find. Mr. WALDIE. I have another question, Mr. Chairman. Mr. EDWARDS. Yes. Mr. WALDIE. I noted the recommendations that you make to the committee, Mr. Ramirez, recommendations which seem to me to be generally quite good. Have you made these recommendations to the President and if so, what was the President's reaction? Mr. RAMIREZ. We made the recommendation of the quarterly reports to the President. He has accepted them and called for action on them. Mr. WALDIE. How about the evaluation of every supervisor to include his performance in implementing the President's 16-point program? Mr. RAMIREZ. No, I did not. Mr. WALDIE. Would that be the type of recommendation you would make to the President? I presume that is the purpose of the committee, to make these recommendations, because that would be consistent; would it not? There are no recommendations that you make to us that you would not make to the President? Mr. RAMIREZ. That is correct. Mr. WALDIE. And I would presume then that these recommendations will be made to the President; will they not? Mr. RAMIREZ. That would be fair to assume. Mr. WALDIE. Will they be? Mr. RAMIREZ. Yes; they will. Mr. WALDIE. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Mr. EDWARDS. I might suggest also, Dr. Ramirez, that you communicate to the Civil Service Commission your concern with their own hiring practices with regard to Spanish-surnamed people. The Civil Service Commission is the agency with responsibility for implementing the Executive order, the 16-point program, and yet they have no Spanish-surnamed employees in the GS-16 to 18 levels. In the Government as a whole, 2.9 percent of the employees are Spanish-surnamed and in the Civil Service Commission. 2.3 percent are Spanish-surnamed people, so the agency charged with this huge responsibility is not doing the job in-house. Mr. RAMIREZ. We have communicated this to them and we continue to work closely with them hoping to bring improvement to that area. Mr. EDWARDS. Well, the committee will be very interested in the report of the Civil Service Commission that will be made public this summer. The record to date is not encouraging and you certainly are showing guarded optimism. The 2.9 figure is very unsatisfactory, and it has been in existence entirely too long. The Civil Service Commission, as the action agency, should be encouraged to exercise a lot more action. We thank you very much for your testimony and gentlemen, we are pleased to have you here today. The committee will adjourn now to meet again tomorrow morning in the same room at 10 a.m. (Whereupon, at 11:50 a.m., the subcommittee recessed to reconvene at 10 a.m., Friday, March 10, 1972.) THE FEDERAL EMPLOYMENT PROBLEMS OF THE SPANISH SPEAKING FRIDAY, MARCH 10, 1972 HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES, SUBCOMMITTEE No. 4 OF THE The subcommittee met at 10 a.m., pursuant to recess, in room 2237, Rayburn House Office Building, Hon. Don Edwards (chairman of the subcommittee) presiding. Present: Representatives Edwards of California, Waldie, Sarbanes, and McClory. Staff present: Jerome M. Zeifman, counsel; Alfred S. Joseph III, assistant counsel; and George A. Dalley, assistant counsel. Mr. EDWARDS. The subcommittee will come to order. Subcommittee No. 4, the Civil Rights Oversight Subcommittee of the Committee on the Judiciary of the House of Representatives continues today with its responsibilities-hearings on the very important subject of the Federal employment problems of the Spanish surnamed. Without objection, at this point in the record, I would like to insert the statement of Senator John V. Tunney, of California, Senator Tunney has written to us that he regrets not being able to appear this morning personally. He is unable to attend. He is a member of the Senate Judiciary Committee, and that Committee is having extended hearings, including today, on the nomination of Mr. Kleindienst as Attorney General. Without objection, the testimony will be inserted in the record at this point. (The information referred to follows:) Hon. DON EDWARDS, UNITED STATES SENATE, COMMITTEE OF THE JUDICIARY, Washington, D.C., March 9, 1972. Chairman, Civil Rights Oversight Subcommittee Number 4, House Committee on the Judiciary, Washington, D.C. DEAR DON: I wish to thank you and the members of the House Committee on the Judiciary for allowing me the opportunity to present written testimony on this important matter. I would have preferred my being there on Friday, March 10, but my presence is required in the Senate Judiciary Committee extended hearings on Mr. Kleindienst's nomination. Once again, thank you. Sincerely, (59) JOHN V. TUNNEY. TESTIMONY OF SENATOR JOHN TUNNEY Mr. Chairman and members of the committee, I wish to thank you for providing me this opportunity to submit written testimony. As a member of the Senate Committee on the Judiciary, I am not able to be here with you because of the continuation of the hearings on the nomination of Mr. Kleindienst to be Attorney General. Mr. Chairman, on October 23, 1971, the distinguished Senator from New Mexico (Mr. Montoya) stated in his address before the Coalition Conference of Spanish-Speaking Americans that— Across America, our young men return from the Indochina adventure. All have given their share and more. What rewards and responses do they find? Minimal ones. Frustrating ones. Grudging ones. They were adequate for utilization as cannon fodder in Asia, but are rarely considered good enough to qualify for equal treatment back home. *** In higher government pay-grades, we are virtually ignored and unrepresented. The facts are there for anyone to obtain and study. In grades 16 through 18, we are almost totally excluded in agency after agency. Here is a true national disgrace. We qualify to die for America and he mentioned in holiday speeches, but not to rise near the top by merit in our government Civil Service. In addition, the California State Advisory Committee to the U.S. Commission on Civil Rights recently reported that: Racism has been a major factor in denying the Mexican-American access to our political and governmental institutions in California today. The Committee found much evidence that the *** administrations at all levels of government in California have chosen to accept this condition rather than mobilize our society to combat it. For many years, in spite of large and continually growing numbers in California, the Mexican-Americans have been conspicuously absent from governmental positions in this State. This has been true at all levels of government: municipal, county, state and federal (in those instances where Federal officials work within the boundaries of California). If the facts are correctly reported in the following monograph, "Federal Government Employment of the Mexican-American in California," which I shall submit for the committee's records, I clearly do not think we can allow this deplorable situation to continue. According to this report, 12 of the 27 largest agencies employ no Mexican-Americans in even minor, bureaucratic decisionmaking positions. None of the 27 have more than 3 percent in such positions, and some employ Mexican-Americans in proportion of their availability in the work force. Statewide, Anglos are 20 times more likely than Mexican-Americans to be in even a minor decisionmaking position. Of the 293,770 full-time civilian Federal employees in California, only 5.6 percent-16,506-are Mexican-Americans, as compared with 14.9 percent of the work force. This results in Mexican-Americans being effectively precluded from middle-class Federal jobs or from jobs affecting the economic, employment, and housing problems of Chicanos. This de facto discrimination against Mexican-Americans and their virtual exclusion from better paying, policymaking positions has produced a form of Government apartheid. With 70 percent of the agricultural work force in California being Mexican-American, it is difficult to comprehend, for example, why none of the top 500 employees in the Department of Agriculture is Mexican-American. Nationwide, Federal Government civilian employment shows a similar underemployment pattern for all Spanish-surnamed persons. Of 2,571.504 full-time employees, only 74,449 are Spanish-surnamed. Although Spanish-surnamed persons represent 7 percent of the Nation's population, they constitute only 2.9 percent of all employees. This 2.9 percent Spanish-surnamed figure has remained constant over the last decade. The absence of any Mexican-Americans at agencies such as the U.S. Information Agency-0 of 52-and the Federal Trade Commission— 0 of 59-are reflected in the failure of the Information Agency to achieve credibility in Latin America and the FTC to protect the rights of the Spanish-speaking consumer. This ignominious record strains credulity in that Chicanos capable of leading combat missions should be capable of sufficient training to push papers. The data necessary for this report was made available as a result of the assistance of my office in securing the information on Federal Government employment of Chicanos in 47 Federal agencies located. in California. Item 1: FEDERAL GOVERNMENT EMPLOYMENT OF THE MEXICAN-AMERICAN IN CALIFORNIA : ORGANIZATIONS This monograph was prepared by Public Advocates, Inc., a non-profit California public interest law firm. It was prepared at the request of and under the sponsorship of the Mexican-American Population Commission, The MexicanAmerican Legal Defense and Educational Fund, Inc., and Centro Legal de la Raza. Other organizations sponsoring this report and/or providing vital assistance include: The American G. I. Forum; The Chicano Law Student Association; The Mexican-American Bar Association; The Mexican-American Political Association; The Spanish Speaking/Surnamed Political Association. A. INTRODUCTION AND SUMMARY-DE FACTO DISCRIMINATION The statistics in this monograph are from the official computer tapes of the United States Government, United States Civil Service Commission, Washington, D.C. The individual agency statistics on federal government employment of the Mexican-American in California, published herein, have never been compiled before, much less published. In the opinion of the organizations preparing this report, these statistics have been deliberately suppressed by the U.S. Civil Service Commission because they refute the President's possibly sincere, but definitely inadequate efforts to secure for the Chicano1in civilian employment the equal opportunities that presently exist in the military—that is, population parity and an equal opportunity for leadership. In summary, these statistics show that: 1. Each of the 27 federal agencies employing 100 or more Californians is a de facto discriminator. None employ Mexican-Americans in proportion to their availability in the qualified work force. 2. Of the 293,770 full-time civilian federal employees in California, only 5.6% (16,506) are Mexican-American, as compared to 14.9% of the work force. (Discrimination factor of 170%). 3. If President Nixon issued an Executive Order (pursuant to his Article II Constitutional powers) to enforce population parity in federal civilian employ 1 Chicano is used interchangeably with Mexican-American. La Roza Community includes Chicanos and all other Spanish-surnames, such as Puerto Ricans and all Latins. 77-247-72-5 |