Imágenes de páginas
PDF
EPUB

THE COST OF DISCRIMINATION AS REFLECTED IN PUBLIC ASSISTANCE Costs, Los ANGELES COUNTY

Over the last 20 years, from 1940 to 1960, the population of Negroes and Mexican-Americans has increased in Los Angeles County at a rate considerably in excess of the rate of growth of the population in general. Since 1940, the Negro population alone has increased from 75,209 in the county to 461,564, as of April 1, 1960, an increase of more than 500 percent in a 20-year period of time. This rapid population growth has been largely due to immigration, rather than to a natural growth.

While there has been no study conducted to determine the geographical areas from which this migration has come, a careful observer would conclude that the majority of the Negroes moving into the Los Angeles area over the past 20 years have come from the 19 States of the Old South. The MexicanAmerican has come generally from the Southwest area of the Nation.

These groups have been historically a deprived segment of our population. Educational opportunities in the South have been limited, and job opportunities, except in the professions and in menial type positions, have been practically nonexistent. There has never been anything like a full range of opportunity for job experience, apprenticeship training, or educational training for the more technical jobs requiring a high degree of training or experience. When, therefore, the Negro and the Mexican-American moved to this area he was ill-equipped to compete for the available jobs. This fact, together with problems of employment discrimination existing in this area, has produced a social and economic situation that results in large numbers of Negroes and Mexican-Americans applying for public assistance.

In Los Angeles County, for the fiscal year 1961-62, at least $51,162,724 will be expended for one public assistance program-aid to needy children. The major portion of this aid will be dispensed to Negro and Mexican-American persons. Almost 43 percent of the total will go to Negro families. Racial characteristics of the ANC caseload are as follows: 1

Negro.

Mexican-American_

Indian_.

Other nonwhite_.

White___

Percent

[blocks in formation]

These figures begin to take on added significance when it is pointed out that, on the basis of the percentage of these groups in the population of Los Angeles County, the ratio of persons on aid to total county population is as follows: Ratio of persons on ANC to population:

Race:

White: 1 of every 182.6 persons.
Indian 1 of every 34.36 persons.

Mexican-American: 1 of every 21.43 persons.

Negro 1 of every 10.60 persons.

Therefore, of the 102,663 persons currently receiving ANC aid in this county, 30,522 are white, 236 are Indians, 27,996 are Mexican-Americans, 43,672 are Negroes, 237 are other nonwhite.

If all other racial groups and nationality groups in the county occupied places on the ANC rolls in the same proportion to their population as is true for the white population, Los Angeles County would expend, during this fiscal year, $18,131,178. Discrimination, therefore, is costing this county at least $33,031,546 per year.

It should be emphasized that the discrimination referred to here is cumulative discrimination over a period of years, that has existed in all parts of the Nation. This discrimination has resulted in the creation of a large body of citizens who, through no fault of their own, are ill-equipped and unqualified for the highly skilled jobs industry has to offer.

California passed its Fair Employment Practices Act in 1959. Undoubtedly, it has had some effect on the pattern of employment discriminaton that existed in this State. Employment discrimination is still a serious factor that causes unemployment among minority group persons in this State. California, together with other FEP States, is sincerely attempting to deal with this problem.

1 Statistics provided by Los Angeles County Bureau of Public Assistance.

However, the constant influx of persons to this State who, because of discrimination in non-FEP States, are ill-prepared to qualify for the job opportunities available here, results in higher and higher ANC caseloads. It is difficult to envision a cure for this situation in the absence of a Federal FEP law.

APPENDIX D

SUPPLEMENTARY STATEMENT-GENERAL SERVICES

Hon. JAMES ROOSEVELT,

ADMINISTRATION

GENERAL SERVICES ADMINISTRATION,
Washington, D.C., February 16, 1962.

Chairman, Special Labor Subcommittee,
Committee on Education and Labor,

House of Representatives, Washington, D.C.

DEAR MR. ROOSEVELT: As you know, on Tuesday, January 16, 1962, in connection with the hearings on proposed Federal equal employment opportunity legislation, your subcommittee heard certain complainants and agency respondents involving alleged employment discrimination in the General Services Administration.

The complainants, Messrs. Glenwood M. Edmonson, a GSA employee, structural engineer, and Alfred D. Dudley, a former GSA employee, electrical engineer, made sworn charges before your subcommittee of racial discrimination practices in the design and construction division, public buildings service, region 3, General Services Administration.

At the conclusion of the day's hearing a motion was made and adopted to the effect that the General Services Administration be asked to prepare a detailed answer to the sworn charges made by Messrs. Edmonson and Dudley.

Pursuant to that motion there is transmitted herewith a statement setting forth General Services Administration's answer to the aforesaid charges.

We sincerely appreciate the opportunity which your subcommittee has afforded us to answer these charges and trust that the information contained in our statement will clarify the situation as well as any misunderstanding which may have existed.

Sincerely yours,

BERNARD L. BOUTIN, Administrator.

General Services Administration's detailed answer to charges of racial discrimination practices in the design and construction division of the public buildings service of its region 3 office sworn to by Messrs. Glenwood M. Edmonson and Alfred D. Dudley before the Special Labor Subcommittee of the Committee on Education and Labor of the House of Representatives on Tuesday, January 16, 1962:

Answer to charges sworn to by Mr. Glenwood M. Edmonson, structural engineer, design and construction division, public buildings service, region 3, General Services Administration

Charge No. 1: "I was nominated by my supervisor, Alfred W. Santelmann, for an outstanding efficiency award, along with a white coworker. Shortly thereafter Mr. Santelmann retired and his successor, Mr. Myron Smith, talked to my coworker, James Lefter, and persuaded him not to pursue the award. I was never consulted concerning my recommendation and I did not receive it." Answer. Attached as exhibit A is copy of GSA Form 1291, dated February 19, 1959. In order for an employee of the General Services Administration to be considered by its Incentive Awards Committee for a performance award, it is necessary that the employee's supervisor complete and forward an original and two copies of this form, through channels, to the head of the appropriate service or staff office. If the head of the service or staff office concurs in the recommendation, the recommendation is signed by him and all copies are forwarded to the Chairman, Incentive Awards Committee, for consideration. Since Mr. Santelmann is deceased we have no way of knowing what he may or may not have

promised Mr. Edmonson. However, this much we do know, there is no record in GSA of this required form having been prepared and forwarded through appropriate channels by the late Mr. Santelmann in behalf of Mr. Edmonson.

In answer to and refutation of the second sentence of Mr. Edmonson's charge No. 1, there are attached hereto, as exhibits B and C, respectively, signed statements by Mr. Myron M. Smith, successor to Mr. Santelmann, and Mr. James Lefter.

Charge No. 2: "During the various recruiting drives conducted by this agency for engineers and architects, interviews have been held at various universities such as Maryland and Virginia Polytechnic Institute, etc., but no interviews have been made at Howard University, nor to the knowledge of the staff in the Howard University Department of Engineering and Architecture has this agency ever requested or interviewed any of its prospective graduates for future employment."

Answer. The region 3 office of the General Services Administration serves the District of Columbia and the States of Maryland, Virginia, and West Virginia. In 1957, this office began its recruiting visits to engineering colleges within the region, exclusive of the District of Columbia. Educational institutions in the District of Columbia were not visited since it was felt that placement officials and students of such institutions were well informed of Government employment opportunities in the District. This is evidenced by the fact that during the period 1957 through 1961 the following numbers of engineers and architects have entered GSA's training program from District of Columbia educational institutions: George Washington University, five; Catholic University, two; Howard University, one. Also, it was felt that interested applicants would automatically apply for employment through the Civil Service Commission or the personnel offices of the various local Federal agencies. Attached as exhibits D and E are copies of two GSA brochures indicating architect and engineer career opportunities which were circulated by the Civil Service Commission to all colleges having engineering schools.

In September 1961, GSA's region 3 office decided to revise its recruiting schedule in order to employ engineers with academic training from a greater cross section of engineering schools. Consequently, on October 26, 1961, a memorandum, copy of which is attached as exhibit F, was written to GSA central office to indicate the new recruiting schedule and request approval to travel to educational institutions outside the confines of region 3. Shortly thereafter the central office approved this proposed expanded recruiting program. Presently recruiting dates have been established for visits to the State College of Agriculture and Engineering of North Carolina; Duke University, North Carolina; and the University of Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania, in addition to the University of Maryland, Howard University, the University of Virginia, and the University of West Virginia. As evidenced by the above-mentioned dates, the revised recruiting program was initiated prior to any knowledge on GSA's part of Mr. Edmonson's allegations.

Charge No. 3: "The design and construction division has refused to hire Negro engineers in the new construction and repair and improvement branches, either in the Government training program (summer students and recent graduates). or qualified Negro engineers and architects employed in the design branch who requested transfer to these branches to fill any of the many vacancies that occurred when the division was reorganized. Negro applicants have never been permitted to serve in the above branches."

Answer. Mr. Edmonson has been an employee in the design and construction division of GSA's region 3 office since October 1957. During the years 1957-61, four Negro engineers and one Negro draftsman have been employed by GSA within the design and construction division of its region 3 office. This division consists of the following four branches: Design, repair and improvements, new construction, and schedules and services.

The design and construction division has not in the past and will not in the future refuse to hire or assign to any of its four branches any qualified architect or engineer because of race, creed, color, or national origin.

Likewise, the design and construction division has not in the past and will not in the future refuse to transfer to any of its four branches any qualified engineer or architect because of race, creed, color, or national origin. Refusal to hire or

transfer qualified architects and engineers because of race, creed, color, or national origin would be contrary to the basic GSA policy on nondiscrimination in employment.

On several occasions Negro engineers have been assigned to serve in the new construction branch of the design and construction division, region 3. We have no knowledge of any of the four Negro engineers mentioned above ever having formally requested a transfer from the design branch to either the new construction branch or the repair and improvements branch.

Charge No. 4: "Qualified Negro engineers have failed to obtain raises above a GS-11 rating in the design and construction division where Negroes have been permitted to be hired. The sole exception being one engineer who entered at a GS-11 and was promoted to a GS-12 by a former assistant chief of the design and construction division."

Answer. As pointed out above during the years 1957-61, four Negro engineers have been employed by GSA in the design and construction division of its region 3 office. They are as follows: Messrs. Glenwood M. Edmonson, Lawrence Shipp, Alfred D. Dudley, and Howard Mackey.

Mr. Edmonson was employed in October 1957 as a structural engineer by transfer from the Veterans' Administration where he had been employed in that capacity at GS-7. Mr. Edmonson was promoted to GS-9 upon his transfer and subsequently was promoted to GS-11 in 1958. He became eligible for the GS-12 level, structural engineer, in December 1959. During the period December 1959 to February 1962 there have been no promotions to structural engineer GS-12 in the design and construction division, region 3 office.

Mr. Shipp was employed as a mechanical engineer GS-11 on January 20, 1958, by transfer from the National Institutes of Health. In June 1958, he was selected for a GS-12 mechanical engineer vacancy through GSA's promotion plan. In September 1960, Mr. Shipp transferred to the National Aeronautics and Space Administration.

Mr. Dudley transferred from GSA's central office to the design and construction division, region 3 office, on June 1, 1959, as a GS-7, electrical engineertrainee. He was subsequently promoted through the training program to a GS-11 on October 10, 1960. He became eligible for a GS-12 level, electricalengineer position, in October 1961. However, 7 weeks later Mr. Dudley transferred to the National Institutes of Health op. November 25, 1961.

Mr. Mackey transferred from the Department of Health, Education, and Welfare to the design and construction division of GSA's region 3 office on June 30, 1958, as an architect (general) trainee at GS-7 level. He was promoted in accordance with the training agreement to GS-11 in November 1959. He became eligible for GS-12 level architect in November 1960. In December 1960 Mr. Mackey was considered for a GS-12 vacancy in the Design Branch in competition with four other GS-11 architects. The promotion panel recommended the selection of one of Mr. Mackey's competitors, which recommendation was followed. In March of 1961, approximately 4 months after he became eligible for a GS-12 level architect position, Mr. Mackey transferred to the National Aeronautics and Space Administration.

Charge No. 5: "Negroes who participated in the training program concurrently with their coworkers failed to obtain promotions available to their fellow participants even when length of Government service was in excess, or when civil service ratings equaled or exceeded the others."

Answer. Since Mr. Edmonson did not enter into GSA employment as a trainee it is assumed that the above charge has reference to Messrs. Alfred D. Dudley and Howard Mackey who were participants in the architect and engineer training program of the region 3 office.

The résumé of the promotion history of Messrs. Dudley and Mackey (given above under answer to charge No. 4) reveals that they were promoted in accordance with the training agreement to the GS-11 level. Further, that Mr. Dudley left GSA approximately 7 weeks after he became eligible for a GS-12 level electrical engineer position. Also, that Mr. Mackey approximately 1 month after becoming eligible for a GS-12 level architect position was given due consideration by the promotion panel. Approximately 4 months after becoming eligible for a GS-12 level architect, Mr. Mackey transferred to another agency.

[ocr errors][ocr errors][ocr errors]

Charge No. 6: “Negro engineers and architects who are assigned office projects located in certain areas of the region (West Virginia, Virginia, and Maryland) as a rule are not permitted to travel to the site to make the necessary inspection of the building site or equipment. A substitute coworker is generally sent instead. The substitute need not be in the same field and on occasion is not associated with the project.

Answer. Qualified architects and engineers employed in the design and construction division of GSA's region 3 office are frequently sent on field trips for various purposes in connection with repair and improvement projects and new construction. The Chief of the branch involved selects the appropriate architect or engineer for these field trips and racial considerations are not factors in the selections.

It should be pointed out that Mr. Edmonson has been sent by the chief of the design branch on field trips to the States of Maryland, Virginia, and West Virginia. Mr. Dudley while employed by GSA was sent on field trips by the chief of the design branch to Baltimore, Md., Annapolis, Md., and Parkersburg, W. Va. Charge No. 7: "Recently, a Negro applicant with a U.S.C.S. civil engineer rating of 95 was turned down for employment despite the fact that there were several openings within the division. The applicant had a very satisfactory performance rating and extensive experience. He was told that no vacancies existed. Another Negro graduate electrical engineer was not hired although the chief electrical engineer strongly recommended his employment. The vacancy existed as the section was understaffed and under a great deal of pressure from a heavy workload."

Answer. To date the General Services Administration has been unable to positively identify the unnamed persons referred to in the above charge and consequently is in no position to make any specific comments with respect to their seeking employment with this agency.

Charge No. 8: "A recent directive was issued by the General Services Administration Commissioner John L. Moore on nondiscrimination. The directive stated that one-third of its employees were Negroes. The directive did not state the percentage of these employees who are custodial workers."

Answer. The "recent directive" referred to above by Mr. Edmonson is a memorandum (copy of which is attached as exhibit G) which was issued under date of October 16, 1961, by the then Administrator of General Services, Mr. John L. Moore. The memorandum is addressed to all the employees of the General Services Administration and is on the subject of nondiscrimination in employment. The memorandum was issued for a threefold purpose:

First: To assure each and every employee that the Administrator of General Services intends to cooperate with the President of the United States in eliminating discrimination in employment within the Federal Government;

Second: To inform all employees of the establishment of a full-time staff for implementing the policy of equal employment opportunity in the General Services Administration; and

It was

Third To advise all aggrieved employees of their right to be heard. not the purpose of the memorandum to show a statistical breakdown of Negro employment by occupations. The memorandum does not state that one-third of GSA employees are Negroes, as alleged by Mr. Edmonson. Rather, it stated that "over one-third of our employees are members of the minorities."

Answer to charges sworn to by Mr. Alfred D. Dudley, former electrical engineer, design and construction division, public buildings service, region 3, General Services Administration

Charge No. 1. "I was promoted through the training program of the General Services Administration on schedule with my other coworkers to the grade of GS-11. The white trainees with me received promotions to GS-12 but I was told that I could not advance as fast as I had been and it was implied that I would not receive a GS-12 within that division even though vacancies existed." Answer. As previously pointed out (bottom p. 3 under Charge No. 4) Mr. Dudley transferred from GSA's central office to the design and construction division of region 3 office on June 1, 1958, as a GS-7, electrical engineer-trainee. During the course of the training program all participants are fully informed

« AnteriorContinuar »