tions of the employees this bill seeks to help through financial recognition of the risks they are asked to take in the pursuit of their duties for our Government. Mr. Chairman, I visualize this bill as covering assignments such as those requiring irregular or intermittent participation in hurricane weather flights, participation in test flights of aircraft during their development period or after modification, participation in trial runs of newly built submarines or in submerged voyages of an exploratory nature such as those under the polar ice fields, and performance of work at extreme heights under adverse conditions.

I believe it is only fair and logical that risks taken by such employees should be recognized by our Government. Additionally, Mr. Chairman, I should like to note that the principle of premium compensation for being asked to take unusual risk in employment has been firmly established both by Government and by private enterprise.

In Government, it is a fact that separate hazardous pay now is authorized for wage board employees in the Army and Air Force for work involved in such situations as described earlier in my testimony. Also, hazardous differentials are paid in most categories to military personnel and Public Health Service personnel required to perform services in these situations. Additionally, on July 12, 1960, an Executive order was issued which gave special hazardous pay to members of the Armed Forces who were involved in undersea exploration and research facilities.

In private industry, pay differentials are provided for in collective bargaining contracts covering employments that fall principally into seven categories. They are high work; work with or near explosives; work involving exposure to fumes, dusts and other irritants; work in extreme temperatures; underground and underwater work; piloting and other flight work, and work requiring exposure to high voltages.

It is obvious that there is an inequity and gap in present law as relates to our Classification Act employees. I think we should act quickly and affirmatively to remove the inequity.

In closing my testimony, I would like to point out that there is a minor point of difference concerning section 2 of my bill. The bill provides that the legislation will become effective on the first day of the first pay period which begins more than 90 days after enactment. I understand that the Civil Service Commission will or has recommended that this section be amended to provide that the 90 days be changed to 180 days. This, I believe, is a reasonable and appropriate recommendation and I urge the members of the subcommittee to take favorable action on H.R. 1159, with an amendment as recommended by the Civil Service Commission.

I would like to express my appreciation to the members and staff of the Civil Service Commission for their assistance and cooperation. Thank you, Mr. Chairman and members for your attention and courtesy.

Mr. OLSEN. I might say at this time, Mr. Wallhauser, that we certainly welcome you here this morning to make this statement. As last year, I am in agreement with you again this year, and I have strong and high hopes that this legislation will pass this committee and the whole committee and the House by unanimous consent.

Mr. WALLHAUSER. Mr. Chairman, I express my appreciation for the never-failing courtesy of you and the members of this subcommittee and all members of the Post Office and Civil Service Committee of the House. I appreciate it very much.

Thank you.

Mr. OLSEN. Thank you.

Mr. Cunningham?

Mr. CUNNINGHAM. I want to thank our colleague for testifying and introducing this legislation. I know that he has done an awful lot of work on it and does seek to remedy a very unfair and serious situation facing our employees.

I congratulate him for bringing it to the committee's attention. Mr. WALLHAUSER. Thank you, Mr. Cunningham.

Mr. CUNNINGHAM. I should also like to commend our colleague, Mr. Daniels, for recognizing the existence of this inequity and for seeking to correct it through the introduction of his bill, H.R. 2478. In the period of time I have been privileged to serve with him on our committee I have observed that he is always in the forefront of the endeavor to improve the working conditions of our Federal employees. His action here is certainly consistent with his continuing concern for the welfare of our vast Government work force.

Mr. DANIELS. I sincerely appreciate your generous comments, Mr. Cunningham. I may say that when this matter was before our committee last year I was deeply impressed with the fairness of extending the application of hazardous duty pay to employees covered by the Classification Act. I was extremely disappointed that Mr. Wallhauser's bill did not pass the Senate before adjournment. This year, in an effort to secure early action on the legislation and to emphasize my full support for Mr. Wallhauser's proposal, I introduce his bill exactly as it passed the House in the 87th Congress. It is certainly my hope and desire here this morning that the subcommittee will favorably report his bill, H.R. 1159, to the full committee. Mr. Wallhauser is to be congratulated on his long and determined effort in behalf of this legislation.

Mr. OLSEN. Thank you very much, Mr. Daniels.

We will now hear from our colleague, Hon. Charles McC. Mathias, Jr., of Maryland.

STATEMENT OF HON. CHARLES MCC. MATHIAS, JR., A REPRESENTATIVE IN CONGRESS FROM THE STATE OF MARYLAND

Mr. MATHIAS. Mr. Chairman and members of the subcommittee, I am Charles McC. Mathias, Jr., Congressman from Maryland's Sixth Congressional District. I appreciate very much the opportunity to appear before this subcommittee in support of H.R. 1159, a bill to authorize the establishment of hazardous duty pay for certain individuals included within the Classification Act of 1949.

This bill was introduced in an effort to equalize the salary standards of certain white-collar Federal employees while engaged in extraordinary dangerous work assignments.

The benefits to be derived from favorable action on this proposed legislation are manifold. Incentive would be provided for more Federal employees engaged in research and data-gathering missions to accept extra hazardous duty assignments. Many inequities that presently exist in the Federal pay system would be noticeably diminished.

It is indeed incumbent upon the Congress to take cognizance at this time of the brave and tireless efforts of many Federal employees who willingly accept the uncertainties and perils incident to especially hazardous work assignments undertaken in the line of duty. H.R. 1159 will do much to rectify the existing inequities in the hazardous pay scales. I am happy to recommend passage of this bill.

Mr. OLSEN. Our next witness is Mr. Vaux Owen, president, National Federation of Federal Employees.

Mr. Owen.

STATEMENT OF VAUX OWEN, PRESIDENT, NATIONAL FEDERATION OF FEDERAL EMPLOYEES

Mr. OWEN. Mr. Chairman, I have a statement here that I would like to ask be inserted in the record, and I shall not read the statement. I do want to say, Mr. Chairman, that my organization appreciates the action of Congressman Wallhauser in coming back agin this year and introducing this legislation again when it failed to pass the Congress last year.

We urge favorable report on 1159 by this subcommittee.

The distinguished chairman of this subcommittee I believe was chairman of the committee last year that recommended favorable action on a similar bill with the word I believe "unusual" stricken. We do think that it would be advantageous to leave the word "unusual" in this bill.

We support the statement of the Chairman of the Civil Service Commission regarding amendment to section 2. It will probably take 180 days to get the machinery operating.

Mr. Chairman, we certainly urge favorable report on this legislation.

Mr. OLSEN. Thank you, Mr. Owen.

Your full statement will be placed in the record, and we thank you very much for your participation in bringing this legislation before this subcommittee.

Mr. OWEN. Thank you, sir.

(The prepared statement of Mr. Owen follows:)

STATEMENT BY VAUX OWEN, PRESIDENT, NATIONAL FEDERATION OF FEDERAL

EMPLOYEES

My name is Vaux Owen. I am president of the National Federation of Federal Employees. Our national office is located at 1737 H Street NW., Washington, D.C.

We favor the purpose of H.R. 1159. The purpose is to provide hazardous duty pay for Classification Act employees for irregular or intermittent duty which subjects them to physical hardship or hazard not involved in carrying out the usual duties of their regular positions.

The principle of premium pay for hazardous duty is already recognized for certain categories of wage board employees and they are paid premium pay because of irregular or intermittent hazardous duty assignments. It is also recognized in the regular pay of Classification Act employees where unusual physical hardship or hazard is inherent in the position and when a substantial part of the employee's time is devoted to hazardous duties. This principle having been recognized for wage board employees and for those Classification Act employees who devote most of their time to hazardous duty assignments, it would seem fair and just to apply the principle, under such regulations as the Civil Service Commission may issue, to an employee subject to the Classification Act who is assigned to perform hazardous duties at irregular and infrequent times.

An example of an inequitable situation which this bill would remedy, if enacted is that of a professional engineer subject to the Classification Act, who, under the existing law cannot receive any premium pay for irregular or intermittent duty involving the testing of experimental aircraft, yet at the same time a wage board mechanic, working alongside such an engineer, can be so compensated. Another example would be that of an employee subject to the Classification Act who is required to work at irregular and intermittent times in a radiation hazardous area.

During the second session of the 87th Congress, an identical bill, H.R. 2079, was slightly amended and favorably reported by a subcommittee, the chairman

of which is the distinguished chairman of the present subcommittee. It is respectfully urged that this subcommittee report favorably on H.R. 1159.

I thank the chairman and the members of the subcommittee for the opportunity to appear in favor of this proposed legislation.

Mr. OLSEN. Our next witness is Mr. John McCart, operations director, Government Employes' Council.

Mr. McCart.

STATEMENT OF JOHN MCCART, OPERATIONS DIRECTOR,
GOVERNMENT EMPLOYES' COUNCIL

Mr. MCCART. Good morning, Mr. Chairman.

Mr. Chairman, the organization I represent is comprised of 24 AFL-CIO unions representing workers of the various agencies of the Federal Government, postal, white collar and blue collar.

The council endorses this legislation.

I would like to express our thanks to you for your prompt scheduling of these hearings and to the authors of the bills, Congressman Wallhauser and Congressman Daniels, for their continued interest. With your permission, I would like to have my statement inserted in full in the record, Mr. Chairman.

Mr. OLSEN. At this point, without objection, it is so ordered. (The prepared statement of Mr. McCart follows:)

PREPARED STATEMENT OF GOVERNMENT EMPLOYES' COUNCIL, AFL-CIO

Mr. Chairman and members of the subcommittee, the Government Employes' Council, representing 24 unions comprised in whole or in part of employees of the Federal Government, endorses the bill under consideration today.

First, it would be well to emphasize that the measure has a very specific purpose. It does not constitute a salary adjustment for the Classification Act employees involved. It does not revise the classifications of the jobs of these employees. The bill simply permits payment of a salary differential not to exceed 25 percent for classified workers who are exposed to unusual physical hazards on an intermittent basis.

Under the Classification Act of 1949, as amended, the Civil Service Commission and Federal agencies have authority to consider hazards encountered by employees in developing classification standards and allocating the proper grade to a job. In this case, however, the hazard must be an integral part of the position, and the employee must experience a relatively continuous exposure. There is no existing authority for compensating these employees for occasional assignments to highly dangerous situations as a part of their official functions.

Second, the proposal in H.R. 1159 constitutes a logical application to classified workers of a system in effect for many years for other Federal personnel. The pay systems of agencies covering the 800,000 wage board or blue collar provides an hourly differential when employees are assigned to dangerous work or are exposed to highly volatile substances. For example, wage board workers in the military agencies who are required to work at heights exceeding 100 feet, receive the hourly differential so long as that particular assignment continues. When performing normal duties on the ground, the differential does not apply.

Upon approval by Congress, H.R. 1159 would apply to technical and professional employees compensated under the Classification Act when they are required to participate in flights to test aircraft equipment or participate in "test runs" upon the completion or conversion of naval vessels. Under the pay program in effect for many years for blue-collar workers, they are entitled to the hourly differential, while the classified workers on the same mission are not.

H.R. 1159 requires the Civil Service Commission to promulgate regulations governing the application of the new authority to classified employees. This procedure should insure uniformity so that all employees under like circum

stances will receive equal consideration. In the development of these regulations, we assume the Commission will follow the customary pattern of consultation with the employee organizations whose members are to be affected.

Mr. Chairman, our council urges early, favorable action on this meritorious legislation.

On behalf of the member organizations of the council we express appreciation for the prompt scheduling of this hearing and the opportunity to offer this statement.

Mr. MCCART. I would like to make just one or two extemporaneous comments.

First, Mr. Russell M. Stephens, the president of the American Federation of Technical Engineers, had an out-of-town engagement, and this prevented his being here. He has asked me to announce specifically the endorsement of his organization upon this legislation.

Prior to my arrival in Washington, Mr. Chairman, I worked in a naval shipyard.

Mr. OLSEN. That must have been a long time ago.

Mr. MCCART. It sure was. And, as you know, part of the work that is accomplished in these naval shipyards includes the conversion and construction of naval vessels.

At the completion of this work, there are involved test runs and shakedown cruises. I can recall that groups of civilian employees would be assigned to these shakedown cruises and test runs, and these employees would include both the craftsmen and helpers and the classified employees from the design section of the shipyard.

Sometimes these cruises would last as many as 5 or 6 days, and the wage board employees who were assigned to this particular job would be eligible for hazardous pay while their colleagues who were working with them and in some cases overseeing the work of the wage board employees would not be able to have hazardous pay.

I might say, Mr. Chairman, that we fully subscribe to the principle of hazardous pay for the wage board employees.

So I think this points up rather clearly the problem that is involved in the legislation before you. Its purpose has been very clearly explained. There is no need for me to repeat it.

I would express the assumption that in the development of the regulations pursuant to this bill when it becomes law, the Civil Service Commission will follow its customary practice of consulting the employee organizations whose members will be affected by the legislation. That concludes my presentation, Mr. Chairman, except to reiterate that we heartily endorse the legislation you are considering. Mr. OLSEN. Do you have any questions, Mr. Cunningham? Mr. CUNNINGHAM. I have no questions, Mr. Chairman. Mr. OLSEN. Thank you.

Thank you, Mr. McCart, for your participation. It is appreciated. Off the record.

(Discussion off the record.)

Mr. OLSEN. On the record. We have two bills, the bill by our colleague Mr. Wallhauser and the bill by our colleague Mr. Daniels. The language is just a little bit different, as has been pointed out. We will have that resolved.

I see one more witness in the room, Mr. Jaspan of the Postal Supervisors' organization.