Act of 1923, as Amended HEARING BEFORE A SPECIAL SUBCOMMITTEE OF HOUSE COMMITTEE ON APPROPRIATIONS CONSISTING OF THE CHAIRMAN AND THE CHAIRMEN AND RANKING COMPENSATION UNDER THE CLASSIFICATION ACT OF 1923, AS AMENDED HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES, SPECIAL SUBCOMMITTEE ON APPROPRIATIONS, Wednesday, November 28, 1928. PERSONNEL CLASSIFICATION BOARD STATEMENTS OF CARLOS C. VAN LEER, CHAIRMAN, GUY MOFFETT AND V. G. CROISSANT, MEMBERS OF THE BOARD, W. H. McREYNOLDS, UNITED STATES BUREAU OF EFFICIENCY, AND GEORGE R. WALES, MEMBER OF THE CIVIL SERVICE COMMISSION The CHAIRMAN. Gentlemen, we have with us this morning the members of the Personnel Classification Board. Captain Van Leer, on November 24, this committee addressed to you, as chairman of the Personnel Classification Board, a communication, in which we stated that: The Committee on Appropriations in the course of preparation of the supply bills for next year must include in them considerable sums as estimated to care for the increases due to the amendment of the classification act passed at the last session. In order that we may have a concentrated view of the administration of the new law I will appreciate it if you and your associates will be prepared to come before a subcommittee to give us detailed information concerning the situation. I am extending this invitation to the alternate members actively engaged in the duties of the board and request that you will advise your principal members so that any of them may attend who desire to do so. I think the scope of the hearing should be quite broad, and I am sure the committee will want to know, among other things, the changes which the Welch Act effected in the previous act, the effect of the interpretation of the act by the Comptroller General's decision, the variance of administration of the act under his decision with the interpretation of the act by the board, if any, the difference in administration of the act by the several departments under the comptroller's decision, if such information is possessed by the board, the status of appealed cases, and such additional information as you feel would be helpful to the committee in arriving at a comprehensive understanding of the salary problem. Now, if you will make us a general statement first, the committee will be glad to hear it, and afterwards we will propound questions. Mr. VAN LEER. Mr. Chairman, if you will permit, I would like to have Mr. Moffett make that statement. He is prepared with the data. Mr. MOFFETT. Well, I assume the committee wishes to consider this whole question in rather broad outline. CHANGES IN SALARY CLASSIFICATION ACT BY WELCH ACT The CHAIRMAN. What we would particularly like to know from you would be the changes that were made by the Welch Act in the classification act of 1923, which was amended by the Welch Act. Mr. MOFFETT. The specific changes which occurred involved changes in the description of the grades professional 4, 5, 6 and 7 of the old act, and in grades 11, 12 and 13, and 14 of the clerical, administrative and fiscal services. The CHAIRMAN. From the standpoint of administration by the departments and the Personnel Board, what difficulties were presented by the enactment of the Welch Act? Mr. MOFFETT. In addition, of course, to those changes in phraseology, there was a change in the salary rates applying to each of those grades. The problem presented on the 1st of July was to make an adjustment of the positions in all those upper grades to the new grades in the professions and scientific, and the clerical, administrative and fiscal services. There had been no change in any of the language in the clerical and mechanical service, in the custodial service, in grade 3 of the professional service and below, or in grade 10 of the clerical, administrative and fiscal service, and below; so that quite automatically the positions in those grades under the old law passed over into the same grades in the new law, and the only effect upon those positions was to carry on to them the increase in salaries for the different grades. But with respect to the positions above that level, which was beginning with the pay range of $3,800 to $5,000, it was necessary to make an adjustment from the grades in the old to the grades in the new act. The reason for that is apparent, because, under the old act, in the professional service there were above this critical point four grades while in the new act there were six grades. One grade, however, can be left out of consideration, inasmuch as it was not in the true sense a classification grade, but was a salary grade. That is, grade 9 of the professional service was provided for the allocation of positions, the salaries of which had been fixed by law in excess of $9,000. So there was no question of the exercise of any judgment or discretion in making allocations to that grade, because if Congress fixed the salary of a position of a professional character at more than $9,000 it automatically went into that grade. That was likewise true of C. A. F. 16, of the clerical, administrative, and fiscal service, where a similar provision was carried. All positions in the C. A. F. service, for which Congress had in the past fixed a salary in excess of $9,000 went automatically into that grade without any change in the salary. But in the professional service there remained to be adjusted positions that had formerly been in four grades into five new grades, and, in the C. A. F. service, there remained to be adjusted positions that had formerly been in four grades into five new grades. The Comptroller General, on the 2d of June, issued a decision which undertook to interpret the language of the new act, and to set out with some definiteness the new grades to which positions in the old grades should be assigned. The CHAIRMAN. Right there may I ask you with respect to the interpretation of the act: Did the responsibility for interpreting the act in its bearing upon the departments, rest upon your board? |