the Classification Act System, they will be forced to operate under a civil service merit concept rather than a one judge, one jury, one hearing officer, which still exists.

May I state, in the Selective Service, if a person has to appeal on, let's say, an adverse action of some kind, in the Selective Service System, they are their own judge and own jury. There are no rights of appeal from the Civil Service Commission. If they are put into the Classification Act, they will get rights which they don't have now. These vestiges, if I can use the term, of the dictatorial operations in some States should disappear.

Mr. HENDERSON. Very good.

Mr. Clay.

Mr. CLAY. Thank you very much. I, too, was very interested in the statement you made on page 3, where you characterize the selective service employees as an isolated class belonging to General Hershey's happy family.

Without trying to put words into your mouth, but are you really saying in the following sentences that, when you moved the happy family into the 20th century, would you be characterizing it really by recognition of labor unions by General Hershey, you drag a concept of a happy family into the first half of the 20th century, and perhaps you would characterize enactment of this bill as bringing itas bringing General Hershey's happy family into the second half.

Dr. WOLKOMIR. Yes. There is one other aspect in that General Hershey really organized, set up, and operated the Selective Service System and in actually was misled by many of his directors, State directors. He really believed he had a happy family. He was not told about the unhappiness, about the majority of his family, and consequently, he was misled.

When the unions started organizing within Selective Service System, a lot of these conditions of employment for the first time were brought to his attention, because of our national rights that we could deal directly with them. Up to that time, all he dealt with were the State directors, who did not tell him the whole story. Once he found out what the true story was, in some areas, as a result the happy family he realized was not so happy.

He accepted the unions readily is what I am trying to say.

Well, not so readily.

Mr. HENDERSON. Thank you very much, Dr. Wolkomir.

Dr. WOLKOMIR. May I inject one other thought?

You raised some questions about this move of civil service em

ployees who were going to lose their positions.

I would like for the record to indicate that we, as an organization. had a lot to do with that. When the Social Security originally went into this new H.R. 1 concept which is the present law concerning the aged, blind and disabled, they indicated to me in a private briefing that their expansion would encompass 8,000 new employees.

Commissioner Ball was approached by me directly, indicating the fact that, "Look, we are going to RIF approximately 4,000 people out of Selective Service, people who are exactly the type you are going to need in your H.R. 1 program." Why not permit immediately recruitment of these people, because some of them are going to be losing their jobs in July, some of them by the end of this calendar year?

We got together with Selective Service and, between the three of us, worked out a system of jobs between these people.

Mr. CLAY. Even though we are talking about maybe 3,000 people losing their jobs, with Selective Service, most of them will be

Dr. WOLKOMIR. Not necessarily. Some of them. I won't say most of them, but some of them will be absorbed by the expansion of Social Security. Their needs are peculiar. In Social Security you have the problem now of State employees who are moving into the Federal sector in order to take care of the aged, blind and disabled programs that the States are now controlling. They are going to fall into one big umbrella of coverage run by Social Security. There may be a transfer of State employees into the Federal sector. They will open all of their 8,000 jobs to others as well, not just selective service employees. These will be primarily the clerical types.

Mr. CLAY. No further questions, Mr. Chairman.

Mr. HENDERSON. Thank you very much, Mr. Clay.

Dr. Wolkomir, we appreciate your appearance this morning.

I know that you are going to be very helpful, as we move the legislation through the process of getting it enacted into law. You always

are.

Dr. WOLKOMIR. Thank you.

Mr. HENDERSON. This morning, on behalf of the American Federation of Government Employees. Mr. Carl Sadler, who was scheduled will not be here. We are delighted to have Mr. James Lynch.

STATEMENT OF JAMES H. LYNCH, ASSISTANT LEGISLATIVE REPRESENTATIVE, AMERICAN FEDERATION OF GOVERNMENT EMPLOYEES

Mr. LYNCH. Thank you very much, Mr. Chairman.

President Webber and Mr. Sadler extend their regrets, but due to another commitment, they could not make it this morning.

Mr. Chairman and niembers of the subcommittee, the American Federation of Government Employees represents over 625,000 Federal employees working in every classification system in existence, in every State of the Union, as well as overseas. Consequently, our union is most aware not only of the universal problems that exist in all classification and salary systems but also of the specific and particular problems peculiar to each separate system. One specific problem involves some 6.000 selective service employees working on local boards and appeal boards, who are currently covered under the so-called SG or Salary Grade schedule, which conforms by administrative decision to the eqivalent General Schedule (GS) grade.

The intent of H.R. 6334. introduced by Chairman Henderson, is to make the positions and employees of the local boards and appeal boards of the Selective Service System not only administratively equivalent but to legally establish them under the provisions of law governing the classification system of compensating Federal employees.

The American Federation of Government Employees endorses the purpose of this bill, because it gives full legal cognizance and protec tions to employees who now de facto are classified and paid as General Schedule employees but do not have de jure status. This proposal is

logical from an administrative standpoint and equitable for the employees involved.

We feel there is no sound reason for continuing the exclusion of these employees from the benefits of an orderly system which dictates the grade and pay of nearly 1.3 million other Federal employees. We are pleased to note that both the Selective Service System and the Civil Service Commission share our view and support this bill.

BACKGROUND

In 1966, a joint study was released by the Selective Service System and the Civil Service Commission on the pay of local and appeal board clerical personnel of the System which clearly indicated the need for bringing these positions under such a uniform pay system as that provided by the Classification Act.

Since 1968, as a result of the findings of this joint study, these loyal and dedicated Federal employees of the Selective Service System have experienced a system which offers them greater equity with their General Schedule counterparts. Their pay is linked to the General Schedule payline and their positions have been classified as nearly as possible with civil service classification standards. They also receive such benefits as retirement and annual and sick leave as do other Federal employees.

MATTERS TO BE REMEDIED

These employees, however, continue to suffer in two particular situations. The first situation concerns the denial of the same right of appeal as other civil service employees. The second one results from their nebulous "SG" system which hampers the movement of these employees from one statutory pay system to another. This situation is especially urgent since there is a current phasing down going on at the Selective Service System and the number of positions must be reduced to 4.340 during fiscal year 1974. Thus, the movement of these phased-out employees to other pay systems would be facilitated. H.R. 6334 would correct these situations.

The persons affected by this legislation are clerical employees. They are performing clerical duties much like the duties performed by thousands of other Federal employees who do the same office work for numerous other governmental activities. These selective service board employees are just as much Federal employees as are other workers in the Government service, and they should be treated as such.

Thank you, Mr. Chairman, for the opportunity to present this plea for equity for this fine group of Government employees.

Our organization fully endorses this legislation introduced by you, Mr. Chairman. As has been mentioned earlier, this morning by the other witnesses, and brought up by you. Mr. Chairman, and you, Mr. Clay, we agree and hope that this legislation is enacted as soon as possible to save those dedicated Federal employee's jobs and provide them jobs and positions within other Federal agencies.

I would have no other comments. I just want to thank you and your committee for taking the time and permitting our organization to appear before you today.

Mr. HENDERSON. Well, thank you. The statement is excellent. It typifies the interest of the American Federation of Government Employees in Federal employees throughout the Government. Comparatively speaking-thinking of some of the major legislation that you have worked with us on over the years and have or are now working on— it can be said that this is rather important legislation.

It has been my experience that President Webber and his associates in the American Federation of Government Employees are interested in anything that improves the conditions for the Federal employees. It's a real pleasure to have you before us this morning.

Mr. Clay.

Mr. CLAY. I have no questions, Mr. Chairman.

Mr. HENDERSON. Thank you very much. If there is no objection, I would like to ask unanimous consent that the record include the letter from Chairman Hébert of the Armed Services Committee to Chairman Dulski, relating to the jurisdiction situation and expressing Chairman Hébert's position that they have no objection to this legislation and noting that the Civil Service Commission, Selective Service Director, and the Office of Management and Budget are fully supporting the legislation in its objectives.

I would also like to include in the record a statement by Mr. John A. McCart, Operations Director, Government Employees Council AFL-CIO.

DEAR MR. CHAIRMAN: Transmitted herewith is a copy of H.R. 6334, which proposes to bring all employees of local boards and appeal boards of the Selective Service System under the classification provisions and the General Schedule of title 5. United States Code.

At the present time these employees are Federal employees for all purposes except position classification and pay. Ordinarily, these employees would be subject to the classification and pay provisions of title 5, as are most other Federal employees. However, section 10(b) (4) of the Selective Service Act now exempts employees of local boards and appeal boards from the Classification Act and the General Schedule. Therefore, in order to accomplish the purpose of this legislation it will be necessary to amend certain provisions of the Military Selective Service Act (50 App. U.S.C. 460 (b) (4)).

The Civil Service Commission. Selective Service System and Office of Management and Budget have furnished their views on H.R. 6334. The three agencies fully support the objectives of this legislation. I am forwarding copies of their reports.

Since matters relating to the Selective Service System generally fall under the jurisdiction of your Committee. I would appreciate having your comments on the proposed legislation.

It is my understanding that our Subcommittee on Manpower and Civil Service intends to hold hearings on this matter at the earliest practicable date.

With kindest regards,

Sincerely,

THADDEUS J. DULSKI, Chairman.

Hon. THADDEUS J. DULSKI,

U.S. HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES,
COMMITTEE ON ARMED SERVICES,
Washington, D.C., June 1, 1973.

Chairman, Committee on Post Office and Civil Service, Cannon House Office Building, Washington, D.C.

DEAR MR. CHAIRMAN: This will acknowledge your letter of May 10, 1973 with regard to H.R. 6334, a bill which would bring all employees of local boards and appeal boards of the Selective Service System under the classification provisions and the General Schedule of Title 5, United States Code. Put another way that proposal would include the above-mentioned employees within the Civil Service system for all purposes.

As you correctly note, at the present time these employees are Federal employees for all purposes except for position classification and pay. This is so because Section 10(b) (4) of the Selective Service Act exempts employees of local boards and appeal boards from the Classification Act and the General Schedule. To carry out the provisions of the proposed legislation the bill would amend 50 App. USC 460 (b) (4). Also that amendment would remove a provision limiting executive secretarial positions to a period of ten years per period of appointment. I note that the Civil Service Commission, the Selective Service System and the Office of Management and Budget fully support the legislation and its objectives. This proposal was brought to the attention of the House Armed Services Committee membership since this committee has exclusive jurisdiction over legislation affecting the Selective Service System. Without derogating from this committee's jurisdiction in the premises, it has been agreed that no objection will be entered to the Committee on Post Office and Civil Service taking action on H.R. 6334. Such approval is taken in consideration of your interest in Civil Service Commission matters and legislation that comes within the purview of Title 5, United States Code.

For information purposes. a copy of this correspondence has been made available to the Committee on Rules and the Select Committee on Committees. With best regards, Sincerely,

F. EDWARD HÉBERT, Chairman.

STATEMENT OF JOHN A. McCART, OPERATIONS DIRECTOR,
GOVERNMENT EMPLOYEES COUNCIL, AFL-CIO

Mr. Chairman and members of the subcommittee, the Government Employees Council and its 30 affiliated unions representing more than 1 million classified, postal, and wage grade employees desires to express its full support of the pending bill.

For some years, the council has advocated treating clerical employees of selective service local and appeal boards in the same fashion as other employees in like occupations in the executive branch with respect to pay and job grading. In 1967, for example, we urged the House Post Office and Civil Service Committee to act favorably on a bill similar to H.R. 6334. The following year, the GEC presented a similar position to the Senate Post Office and Civil Service Committee.

In fairness, it must be noted that some progress has been made toward the goal in recent years. As a result of a joint study by the Civil Service Commission and Selective Service Commission in 1966, certain changes were introduced in the salary and classification practices applicable to selective service employees. In 1968, a determination was made that their basic pay would be related to equivalent jobs in the General Schedule and that their positions would be graded under Civil Service Commission classificaton guidelines.

Nevertheless, there remain two important deficiencies in these areas. H.R. 6334 solves these problems.