Page images
PDF
EPUB

Secretary REDFIELD. As soon as we are ready, they are ready to drop it.

The CHAIRMAN. Those certificates of assurance operate very injuriously to us.

Secretary REDFIELD. Sometimes they do.

The CHAIRMAN. Many times it has nothing at all to do with any advantage or disadvantage that might arise from furnishing these things to her enemies.

Mr. RICHARDS. They are willing to turn that over to us absolutely whenever we are ready to take it up, which will be very soon.

Mr. BYRNS. I do not know whether this has been gone over or not, but when I was called out of the room awhile ago you had just made the statement that you had engaged in this particular activity twenty-odd clerks at the present time.

Secretary REDFIELD. There are 72 persons altogether.

Mr. BYRNS. Now, I notice in this addenda to your estimates which you submit that you propose the employment of 248 persons. That, I take it, is based upon the idea that you will receive an appropriation of $570,000.

Secretary REDFIELD. Yes, sir; of which $150,000 has been given us already by the President.

Mr. BYRNS. Then the fact that you have reduced this particular appropriation does not reduce the number of employees?

Secretary REDFIELD. It does reduce it by 20.

Mr. BYRNS. What proportion of these employees are taken from the civil-service register?

Mr. RICHARDS. All of the clerks, and everyone who is not working at what we consider a nominal salary. A nominal salary is anything less than 50 per cent of what the person earned in his previous position. Everyone else, except those, has to pass an examination, and everyone is taken through the Civil Service Commission.

Secretary REDFIELD. Everyone of that 72 has been through the civil service.

Mr. RICHARDS. Yes, sir; everyone of them has been through the civil service.

The CHAIRMAN. They have taken noncompetitive examinations? Mr. RICHARDS. Where the salary is nominal, or where the $60 per month paid to a man is less than 50 per cent of his former salary. Secretary REDFIELD. Every application was made through the Civil Service Commission. Formal applications were made to the Civil Service Commission, and we got the approval of the Civil Service Commission for all the appointments.

Mr. BYRNS. Take the chiefs of division, the assistant chiefs, administrative clerks, chiefs of section, assistants chiefs of section, and the 50 trade experts-are they taken from the civil service? Secretary REDFIELD. They are all taken in the same way.

Mr. BYRNS. Under noncompetitive or competitive examinations? Secretary REDFIELD. Where there is a competitive list, they would be taken from that competitive list.

Mr. BYRNS. Take these trade experts-are their duties here in Washington?

Mr. RICHARDS. Right here in Washington.
Secretary REDFIELD. We have only two at present.

Mr. BYRNS. You propose to employ 50 of them?

Secretary REDFIELD. That is reduced by 10. There will be 40. That is a mere guess of what may be required. That will depend on whether other classes of things are added by presidential proclamation. For instance, if the President saw fit to include cotton, we would have to get a textile man to look after that, or if he saw fit to include tin plate we would need a man familiar with that business. For the moment there are only two.

Mr. BYRNS. I notice that in this list of salaries you have two chiefs of division at $3,500 per annum. Is not that much higher than any other chief of division receives in your department? If I am not mistaken, it is higher than the salary paid a chief of division in any department, although possibly there may be some exceptions.

Secretary REDFIELD. They are paid the same, I think.
Mr. RICHARDS. We were told that.

Mr. JOHANNES. You are probably confusing this with the classification of division chiefs in the departments who are paid $2,000 per year. Those chiefs of division are really head clerks. Those positions are not in line with this position at all. As a matter of fact. in our department we have chiefs of division getting that much salary. We have them in the Bureau of Foreign and Domestic Commerce. Mr. BYRNS. Getting as much as $3,500 a year?

Mr. JOHANNES. Yes, sir.

Mr. BYRNS. This will be paid out of a lump-sum appropriation? Mr. JOHANNES. Yes, sir.

Secretary REDFIELD. Mr. Richards is the chief of division in charge of the entire work.

Mr. BYRNS. My attention was attracted to the salary fixed by the fact that on the statutory roll chiefs of division get $2,500. That is the highest salary, and I was wondering why this was advanced.

Secretary REDFIELD. This is not in the same class with those positions at all. In this case, the chief of the division is in charge of the whole service. It corresponds to a bureau. It would not be any misnomer at all to call him an assistant chief of bureau, but that would require definite legislation.

Mr. RICHARDS. Bureau chiefs get $6,000.

Secretary REDFIELD. In other words, this is not a subordinate officer, but he is at the head of a whole section of that work.

Mr. CANNON. It seems that when you want a clerical man, he takes the civil-service examination, but when you want somebody as an expert, you get him without requiring him to go through an actuai civil-service examination. That is, you find out the man you want to employ. Now, when he comes in at $600 per year, you call that civil service. You say that it is under the civil service, but, as I understand you, in order to get his position that way. he must have been receiving for his services, for which you pay him at the rate of $60 per month, double that amount, or more, in private employment? Mr. RICHARDS. More than double that.

Mr. CANNON. Of course, you want experience and brains

Mr. RICHARDS (interposing). We could not buy the brains of the people in this division, because Congress would not give us money enough to hire these men. Some of these men make $40,000 or $50,000 a year in their business, and they give up their business to come down

here. Some of these people who are actually there now getting $60 per month were earning from $40,000 to $50,000 a year in their private business.

Mr. BYRNS. This estimate that is submitted here does not provide for anybody at the rate of $60 per month.

Secretary REDFIELD. We are inside of that, and that is the reason we are reducing the estimate. On the other hand, the work has increased so rapidly that we added a certain amount, because we could not foresee the future. But as a matter of fact our actual employments are inside of those figures. In practice we are behind this. although in other respects we may exceed it, because we can not say. for instance, that that building will be big enough. We have put in only $24,000 for rent, and I do not know whether that will be enough

or not.

The CHAIRMAN. Why do you not put all this force in the empty space you have up there in the department building?

Secretary REDFIELD. Mr. Chairman, I wish I had the space, and I would be glad to have an investigating committee come up there and find it.

The CHAIRMAN. What buildings of the Department of Justice have you?

Secretary REDFIELD. The middle one. They had the entire frontage on K Street, and we have taken the center building at $24,000. Mr. RICHARDS. Which includes service.

Mr. JOHANNES. That includes charwoman's service, watchmen, elevator conductors, etc.

The CHAIRMAN. What number is that building?

Secretary REDFIELD. That is No. 1435. That is a large building. Mr. RICHARDS. The rent was based on 50 cents per square foot. The CHAIRMAN. The Department of Justice paid $10,000 a year for it.

Mr. JOHANNES. But they provided their own service. The owner has put in about $10,000 worth of repairs to start with.

The CHAIRMAN. He had to do that in order to rent it at all.

Mr. JOHANNES. It could not be rented for $10,000 a year. We are only taking it for six months.

The CHAIRMAN. The Department of Justice rented it for $10,000 a year, and the assessed value of the land and building is $70,000. Mr. JOHANNES. But they are furnishing the service.

Mr. SHERLEY. You can figure just what that amounts to.

Mr. JOHANNES. I do not know just how much it is. I know that the watchmen, charwomen, elevator conductors, and people of that kind are furnished.

Secretary REDFIELD. 1 can only say this, that we had infinite difficulty in getting it. There were three others who stood ready to take it if we did not take it, and there is not another single place in this town

The CHAIRMAN (interposing). There is not another single person who would rent that building for that amount.

Secretary REDFIELD. There were others who would.

Mr. JOHANNES. A man offered him $6,000 for his bargain; that is, he told the owner that he would give $6,000 more than we are to pay. The CHAIRMAN. Was that somebody in the Government service?

4400-17-11

Mr. JOHANNES. Yes, sir.

The CHAIRMAN. That does not mean anything. I have an illustration right here. A man offered to make a lease for $40,000 a year, but when the department found out that they had the authority to make a lease for more they made it at $18,000 a year.

Secretary REDFIELD. We have a lease that you would say is a standard for leases of that kind. I do not believe that we could do any better.

The CHAIRMAN. They get 33 per cent on the assessed value of real estate on the theory of furnishing service.

Secretary REDFIELD. Heat and light are included in the service. Now, in the Commerce Building, where we pay 39 cents per square foot, we provide our own heat, our own light, and our own service. The CHAIRMAN. And you have a modern building?

Secretary REDFIELD. Yes, sir; but that is the lowest rent in Washington, as you have said. You have said that it was a standard or model lease. Now, in this case we have made just as good a bargain for the Justice building at 50 cents per square foot, with these things included, in view of the alterations that they had to make.

Mr. RICHARDS. There is a tremendous demand for office space in Washington now.

Secretary REDFIELD. I am ready to compare that lease with any other lease made in Washington at this time, or within the past year.

Mr. BYRNS. I remember that when the Department of Justice was making its effort to secure a new building their statement was that that old building was one of the most unfit buildings in the city of Washington for office purposes.

Secretary REDFIELD. They had to spend $10,000 on it. Every partition had to be taken out, and the whole thing altered all over.

Mr. RICHARDS. Now it is a nice office building. They had it full of cubby-holes, but we have had large rooms made in it for the clerks.

Secretary REDFIELD. He will have to pay out six months' rent before he gets a single dollar back. We are in a position where we can move out at the end of six months. If anybody can tell us where we can do better, we will be ready to move quickly.

I have just received an exact statement concerning this building and rent that I am sure will make you feel differently about it, and I would like to put it in the record. The owner furnishes four watchmen, at $720, $2,280; eight charwomen, at $240, $1,920: two elevator conductors, at $720, $1,440; two laborers, at $660, $1,320; one engineer, at $1.000; and a fireman, at $720, a total of $9,280 for wages. He estimates, and we have checked it up as substantially correct, that the cost of fuel, light, and electricity will be $6,000, making a total of $15,280 furnished by the owner of the building, leaving a net rental of $8,720 to make up the total of $24,000 a year. Mr. BYRNS. I want to ask one other question in regard to these salaries, and that is whether or not it has been done or whether it is proposed to transfer employees to this roll from your regular roll at increased salaries?

Secretary REDFIELD. No, sir; I think not.

Mr. RICHARDS. Transfers have been made in only one or two exceptional cases, as in the case of a man in charge of correspondence,

stenographers, etc. I do not think any have been transferred at an advanced salary. There may have been one or two transfers, but I do not think any of them were transferred at a higher salary. Mr. GILLETT. Does not the law prohibit the transfer of employees to lump-sum rolls at an advanced salary?

Secretary REDFIELD. Yes, sir; when it is an advance over and above the salary for similar work. There have been no such cases as that at all. The only case was that of a chief clerk who had his office moved over there instead of being in the Commerce Building. His office was brought over there, but there was no change in the salary.

BUREAU OF LIGHTHOUSES.

ADDITIONAL COMPENSATION TO DRAFTSMEN-TRANSFERS FROM ONE DEPARTMENT TO ANOTHER.

(See pp. 61, 173.)

The CHAIRMAN. The first item is:

To enable the Commissioner of Lighthouses to pay additional compensation to draftsmen employed on marine engineering work in the Bureau of Lighthouses, the pay of such draftsmen in no case to exceed the rate of $2,000 per annum, fiscal year nineteen hundred and eighteen, $1,200.

We had that item before and gave it to you.

Mr. PUTNAM. That item was included by this committee in the urgent deficiency appropriation bill, but it was cut out in the Senate. I think it was cut out because that deficiency bill was to provide appropriations for military and naval purposes. I think it was not allowed on the ground that it was not a military or naval

matter.

The CHAIRMAN. Have you lost those men yet?

Mr. PUTNAM. We have not a single draftsman left in our marineengineering division, not one; and we have appropriations for four or five vessels.

Mr. SHERLEY. Where did they go?

Mr. PUTNAM. Some of them have gone and, in fact, most of them, into outside shopbuilding companies, and one of them, I think, has gone to the Navy Department.

Mr. SHERLEY. In the instance of the Navy Department, have you called the attention of that department to the fact that the transfer of that man would interfere with your work?

Mr. PUTNAM. We did not do that. I can not say definitely that one of these men went with the Navy Department, but I do know that one of them went to the Navy Department in December.

Mr. SHERLEY. That is just the point. What is happening here is that when a department gets crowded and some fellow in the department happens to know somebody else in another department he tips him off and says, "Here is a chance for you to get a raise in salary; you come over with us." The result is that the entire Government is run as if the departments were rival concerns, competing against each other and stealing men from each other. That is a serious matter, very much more serious than the departments seem to realize. We get it here every hour of the day, and I think it is a matter for the Cabinet to take up with the men under them and forbid them taking men from other governmental employment.

« PreviousContinue »