DEAR MR. MURRAY:

• Document Type: CREST
• Collection: General CIA Records
• Document Number (FOIA) /ESDN (CREST): CIA-RDP91-00965R000400110016-8
• Release Decision: RIFPUB
• Original Classification: K
• Document Page Count: 3
• Document Creation Date: December 15, 2016
• Document Release Date: January 9, 2004
• Sequence Number: 16
• Publication Date: April 26, 1960
• Content Type: LETTER

r Approved For Release 2004/05/13 : CIA-RDP91-00965R000400110016-8
Chamber of Commerce of the United States
LEGISLATIVE DEPARTMENT
CLARENCE R. MILES, MANAGER
O F C,9*
1615 H STREET, N.W. ? WASHINGTON 6, D. C.
df141M NAtional 8-2380
April 26, 1960
0
p
CI
The Honorable Tom Murray, Chairman
House Committee on Post Office and Civil Service
Washington 25, D. C.
The Chamber of Commerce of the United States urges the House Post Office
and Civil Service Committee to table consideration of general across-the-board
federal pay raises. We recommend that the Committee devote its efforts to assur-
ing that the pay system for federal employees is equitable and minimizes purely
political considerations in the determination of proper salary rates.
Such action would deal with the fundamental long-term management prob-
lem involved - reform of the federal pay system itself. This course would not be
unfair to federal employees generally, since the average pay for federal employ-
ees exceeds the national average for non-federal workers. Such Committee action
would demonstrate a high degree of fiscal responsibility and statesmanship. If
the Committee and Congress acts expeditiously, appropriate further legislation
could be enacted early in the first session of the 87th Congress.
The National Chamber supports the principle of fair compensation for
career federal employees based on reasonable comparability with salaries in the
private sphere of the economy. The necessity to attract and hold competent and
dedicated employees is a concern not only to the Nation's business community, but
to all Americans. Being both employers and taxpayers, businessmen have a vital
interest in the personnel policies of the federal government, our country's
largest single employer.
One of the most undesirable features of the present pay system for
federal classified and postal workers is its high vulnerability to the fortunes
of politics. It is generally customary for Congress to be subjected to heavy
pressures in election years to enact general increases for federal employees.
Thus, political considerations assume undue emphasis in determining compensation.
This is unjust to both the federal employee and the taxpayer. In the
case of federal employees, the undue emphasis on political expediency aggravates
existing inequities and is a disservice in that the federal employee may become
regarded as a partisan voter first and a civil servant second. From-the stand-
point of the taxpayer, politically motivated pay raises inflate personnel costs
without any true regard for services rendered. There is urgent need to insulate,
insofar as practicable, the determination of federal salaries from partisan
political considerations.
Approved For Release 2004/05/13 : CIA-RDP91-00965R000400110016-8 (over)
 Approved For Release 2004/05/13 : CIA-RDP91-00965R000400110016-8 e
The principle of "equal pay for equal work" is widely accepted. However,
implementation of this principle encounters serious obstacles within the federal
government. On July 15, 1958, in a message to the Congress, President Eisenhower
underscored the problem:
"It is estimated that there are now at least 77 different pay
plans in the Executive Branch. Nearly a million employees
under the Classification Act and another one-half million
employees under the Postal Service have their pay fixed and
adjusted by statute. Another large group, the 770,000 blue
collar employees have their wages adjusted from time to time
by the heads of employing agencies in accordance with pre-
vailing rates. Pay rates under some of the remaining plans
are set by statute and others are fixed by agency heads.
Moreover, when an agency head fixes such rates he operates
under statutory restrictions which vary from one system to
another. It has been found that there are more than 300
different statutes bearing on the pay of federal employees."
Beyond the extreme difficulties of establishing full equity within the
federal pay structure lie the even more complex problems of achieving reasonable
comparability between salaries for government jobs and those in private industry.
The current hearings of your Committee have clearly demonstrated the need to find
sound bases for such comparisons. For instance, there has been testimony attempt-
ing to compare the compensation of obviously non-comparable jobs such as a postal
letter carrier and a meat cutter.
The 86th Congress appropriated $500,000 to the Bureau of Labor Statis-
tics to undertake a nation-wide survey of salary rates for occupations in private
industry represented under the Classification Act. The results of this survey
are expected to be available very soon, probably as early as September of this
year.
Without attempting to prejudge the conclusiveness of this survey, the
National Chamber believes it would be premature to enact across-the-board federal
salary increases prior to a thorough evaluation of the Bureau of Labor Statistics'
findings. The traditional alternative to setting the government's wage policies
in relationship to a realistic private industry base is to enact an arbitrary
increase. This historical pattern ignores sound governmental principles and good
management practice.
Of the many federal pay raise bills before Congress, bills similar to
HR 9883 have attracted the major support of the witnesses representing federal
employees unions. This and similar bills would grant pay increases up to 23%
for .the great majority of postal workers and approximately 12% for classified
white-collar workers. The Budget Bureau has estimated that the additional annual
cost of such pay increases would be more than $1.6 billion each year. Certainly
to vote such an increase without adequate information would not deal with the
real problems in the pay system and would constitute financial irresponsibility.
An argument often advanced to support across-the-board raises for
federal employees is that government salaries are uniformly lower than those
Approved For Release 2004/05/13 : CIA-RDP91-00965R000400110016-8
 Approved For Release 2004/05/13 : CIA-RDP91-00965R000400110016-8
paid by private industry. While there are undoubtedly instances where the
federal employee receives less pay than his counterpart outside the government,
there are many in which the reverse is the case.
Attesting to the fact that federal government employment does not suffer
generally in comparison to that of private industry are the official "quit rate"
statistics. For the calendar year 1959, the Civil Service Commission reports
that this rate for manufacturing industries was 1.25%, while the overall govern-
ment rate was only .7%. Further, the Bureau of Labor Statistics reported that
the "quit rate" for the Postal Service during that year was a very low .57%.
Similarly, the Civil Service Commission reports the average salary of
federal employees in the Executive Branch -- without regard to liberal fringe
benefits provided at taxpayer's expense -- was $5,165 a year as of June 30, 1959.
This compares with an annual rate of $4,584 reported by the Survey of Current
Business as the average for all full-time employees in private industry during
calendar year 1959.
For these reasons, your Committee is urged to take no action on a general
pay raise for federal employees, and to devote its efforts to preparing a plan for
a new pay system based upon sound management principles. Such action would be a
constructive move in the national interest.
I would appreciate your making this letter a part of the official record
of your current hearings on federal pay raise legislation.
Cordially yours,
CLARENCE R. MILES
Manager
Legislative Department
Approved For Release 2004/05/13 : CIA-RDP91-00965R000400110016-8