POST OFFICE DEPARTMENT APPROPRIATION BILL FOR 1947 FRIDAY, MARCH 1, 1946 UNITED STATES SENATE, SUBCOMMITTEE OF THE COMMITTEE ON APPROPRIATIONS, Washington, D. C. The subcommittee met at 11 a. m., Hon. Kenneth McKellar, (acting chairman of the subcommittee) presiding. Present: Senators McKellar, McCarran, Green, and Willis. POST OFFICE DEPARTMENT STATEMENTS OF J. F. GARTLAND, DIRECTOR OF BUDGET AND ADMINISTRATIVE PLANNING; A. B. STROM, COMMISSIONER OF THE BUDGET; FRANK BUCKLEY, DEPUTY FOURTH ASSISTANT POSTMASTER GENERAL; LOUIS Y. de ZYCHLINSKI, SPECIAL ADMINISTRATIVE AIDE TO FOURTH ASSISTANT POSTMASTER GENERAL; G. W. TREXLER, SUPERINTENDENT, DIVISION OF EQUIPMENT AND SUPPLIES; J. F. BETTERLEY, SUPERINTENDENT, DIVISION OF POST-OFFICE QUARTERS; AND F. C. CORNWELL, SUPERINTENDENT, DIVISION OF FEDERAL BUILDING OPERATIONS Senator MCCARRAN. Senator McKellar, the chairman of the committee, is unavoidably detained in a Cabinet meeting. We hope he will be here any minute. Mr. Gartland, will you please proceed and indicate the next point you desire to develop. Mr. GARTLAND. The next witness will be Deputy Fourth Assistant Postmaster General Buckley. Senator MCCARRAN. He will address himself to what item on what page? Mr. GARTLAND. Page 32, line 20, for the first item, and after that,. page 42, line 13. Senator MCCARRAN. We will take line 20, page 32 first. Mr. Buckley, you may proceed. SALARIES, OFFICE OF FOURTH ASSISTANT POSTMASTER GENERAL Mr. BUCKLEY. We are asking for the restoration of $29,800. Senator MCCARRAN. Can we break that down into items, showing why you need that additional sum that has been taken from the Bureau somewhere along the road? 45 Mr. BUCKLEY. May I introduce Mr. de Zychlinski, administrative aide to the Fourth Assistant Postmaster General, who has charge of the personnel in our Bureau. Senator MCCARRAN. Yes, sir; you may. You may make your responses either jointly or severally. Will you kindly state your name, and the department of the Post Office you are with. Mr. DE ZYCHLINSKI. Louis Y. de Zychlinski, headquarters, Fourth Assistant Postmaster General. Senator MCCARRAN. You may proceed. REASONS FOR REQUESTING RESTORATION OF HOUSE CUT Mr. DE ZYCHLINSKI. The $29,800 reduction by the House represents 11 additional positions requested in the 1947 estimate. That was due to the shortening of the hours of work, holidays that were dormant during the war years, and additional work, due to the fact that during the war years, we were unable to purchase many supplies and render services. DUTIES ADDED BY POSTAL RECLASSIFICATION ACT It is also due, in part, to the enactment of Public Law 134. Mr. DE ZYCHLINSKI. In brief, sir, it entails the addition of work in our Bureau in connection with field-service employees attached to the Division of Federal Building Operations, and the Division of Motor Vehicle Service. The provisions, insofar as motor vehicles are concerned, entail the payment of special-delivery messengers for car hire. The Federal building operation requires additional quarterly reports from postmasters in lieu of yearly allowance for personnel in order that the Postmasters General may be authorized to pay increases provided for under Public Law 134. Senator MCCARRAN. I will speak for myself. Perhaps the other members of the committee think much more rapidly than I do. Will you take an illustrative case and say what the employee does, referring to his hours, referring to his pay, and any additional services that are necessary? Mr. DE ZYCHLINSKI. He would review a report from the postmaster. For instance, in motor vehicles, the number of special-delivery messengers, the number of hours the messenger worked, the car used, whether it was a Government car or a car under other contract or owned by the special-delivery messenger. Insofar as Federal building operation employees are concerned, that would entail a review and analysis of the quarterly requests from the postmasters for salaries and allowances. Senator MCCARRAN. Now, in the past, this same program has gone on, this same work; is that right? Mr. DE ZYCHLINSKI. No, sir. Senator MCCARRAN. This is new service? Mr. DE ZYCHLINSKI. It is new service effective last July. Senator MCCARRAN. That is because of some recently enacted law? Mr. DE ZYCHLINSKI. Yes, sir; Public Law 134. Senator MCCARRAN. You have rendered service under that law up to date? Mr. DE ZYCHLINSKI. Yes, sir; we have. The law was effective July 1, 1945, and it was incumbent upon the Bureau to set it into operation on that date. ADDITIONAL EMPLOYEES ESTIMATED Senator MCCARRAN. Now you find that the law confronts you, you know the volume of work and therefore you have estimated that you need these additional employees to carry out that work. Is that correct? Mr. DE ZYCHLINSKI. That is correct, sir. Senator MCCARRAN. Have you anything further to say? Mr. DE ZYCHLINSKI. No, sir. Senator MCCARRAN. This matter was presented to the Bureau of the Budget? Mr. DE ZYCHLINSKI. Yes, sir, for both items, namely the 40-hour workweek and requested additional employees due to the enactment of Public Law 134. Senator MCCARRAN. Will that be the total of the employees under the new law? Mr. DE ZYCHLINSKI. Yes, sir. Senator MCCARRAN. Tell me if I catch the picture clearly: Did the Bureau of the Budget grant these? Mr. DE ZYCHLINSKI. Yes, sir. REASON FOR CUT NOT STATED IN HOUSE REPORT Senator MCCARRAN. Has the House stated any reason? I have not read the House hearings. Have they stated any reason why they cut it off, in view of the fact you were setting it up under the new law? Mr. DE ZYCHLINSK. No, sir; it is not in the report. (At this point, Senator McKellar resumed the chair). Senator MCCARRAN. With the chairman's permission, I might continue with the line of thought. Senator MCKELLAR. You may continue. Senator MCCARRAN. I am trying to find out why the House eliminated this when it was necessary under a newly enacted law. Mr. DE ZYCHLINSKI. I would not know. USE OF OVERTIME CONTEMPLATED TO KEEP WORK CURRENT Senator MCCARRAN. If you do not have these 28 employees, what are you going to do about the law? Mr. DE ZYCHLINSKI. The only thing we can do, sir, insofar as appropriations will permit, is to use overtime, which entails 150 percent cost for every hour of work. Senator MCCARRAN. That is the only way you could put the law into effect? Mr. DE ZYCHLINSKI. No, sir; what I mean in order to keep the work reasonably current this will be necessary. We will try, of course, but we are continually going behind in our work. Senator MCCARRAN. So that overtime would be your solution, after all, you think? 83376-46 Mr. DE ZYCHLINSKI. That would be the only solution without additional help. Senator MCCARRAN. If I catch it right, the granting of these 28 employees would be an economic move on the part of the Congress? Mr. DE ZYCHLINSKI. Very much so. Senator WILLIS. Would the total amount paid for overtime exceed the amount you would have to pay if you employed more men on regular time? So. Mr. DE ZYCHLINSKI. It is our thought that it would, considerably Senator GREEN. If you would not have the money to pay the regular time, and this would be more, how could you pay it? Mr. DE ZYCHLINSKI. We could not, only up to a certain limitation. Senator GREEN. Then you could not do it. Mr. DE ZYCHLINSKI. Not very well; no, sir. Senator MCKELLAR. How much do you have to pay in overtime? Senator MCCARRAN. Mr. Chairman, before you ask that question, I would like to mention that the clerk has called my attention to something. I have failed to get this thing clearly, I am afraid. NUMBER OF PRESENT EMPLOYEES AND ADDITIONAL REQUESTED I understand you were granted the 28 additional people. Mr. DE ZYCHLINSKI. We were, Senator. The 11 are additional positions that we requested for 1947, in addition to the 28. Senator MCCARRAN. I understand. Mr. DE ZYCHLINSKI. The 28 were to cover the 40-hour week, but did not cover the additional work entailed, due to Public Law 134. Senator MCCARRAN. The 28 are not working under Public Law 134? Mr. DE ZYCHLINSKI. We are using them for every possible purpose that we can. Senator MCCARRAN. Were they given to you for the purpose of carrying out Public Law 134? Mr. DE ZYCHLINSKI. It is not my understanding that they were, sir. They were given us due to the reduction of the hourly workweek from 48 to 40 hours. Senator MCCARRAN. Due to the reduction to 40 hours and due to the new act, you find that 11 more than the 28 are necessary? Mr. DE ZYCHLINSKI. Yes, sir; we really feel that they are necessary in order to carry on the additional work. QUESTION AS TO AUTHORIZATION FOR OVERTIME Senator MCCARRAN. Otherwise, you will be confronted with the necessity of overtime. Is that correct? Mr. DE ZYCHLINSKI. I know of no other way to do it, sir. Senator GREEN. As I pointed out while you were speaking, if they have not enough money to hire them and the overtime is going to cost more, they will not have enough money for the overtime. Senator MCKELLAR. How much money for overtime do you have? Mr. DE ZYCHLINSKI. For 1947, sir, we have not estimated on any overtime. Senator MCKELLAR. That does not answer my question at all. That does not mean a thing on earth. Can you not answer that question? |