W S R - - OmCIfCS*fc MTOIIMJK- „

a CHtHIES, AHEOWMICES, ETC. ^O q

Salary Trends

FEDERAL CLASSIFIED 

EMPLOYEES, 1939-64

Bulletin No. 1444

UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF LABOR

W. Willard Wirtz, Secretary

BUREAU OF LABOR STATISTICS

Ewan Clague, Commissioner

Digitized for FRASER 

http://fraser.stlouisfed.org/ 

Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
Digitized for FRASER 

http://fraser.stlouisfed.org/ 

Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
Salary Trends

FEDERAL CLASSIFIED

EMPLOYEES, 1939-64

Bulletin No. 1444

M a y 1 9 6 5

CS5J

UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF LABOR b u r e a u o f la b o r s ta tis tic s

W. Willard Wirtz, Secretary Ewan Clague, Commissioner

For sale by the Superintendent of Documents, U.S. Government Printing Office Washington, D.C., 20402 - Price 35 cents

Digitized for FRASER 

http://fraser.stlouisfed.org/ 

Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
Digitized for FRASER 

http://fraser.stlouisfed.org/ 

Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
Preface

This report presents indexes tracing salary trends 

fo r F e d e r a l C la s s ifie d E m p lo y ees fo r the p erio d 1939—64.

It includes m a t e r ia ls p re v io u sly published as 

Wage Movements, Series 3, No. 6, "F e d eral C lassified 

E m p lo y e e s: S a la r y T re n d s, 1939—5 0" arid sev en su p p le ­

mentary reports from the Monthly Labor Review of 

May 1951, May 1952, September 1953, April 1955, February 1959, May 1961, and October 1964, and two additional 

supplem ents fo r 1957 and 1960—61, which brought the o r i g i ­

nal study up to date through 1964. This revised report is 

intended m erely to incorporate the information for the entire period into one document rather than to present any 

information not previously published.

The appendix to this report explains the coverage, 

methods, and source of data used for the studies. A description of the calculation of the indexes is also included.

The salary trends program is directed by Lily 

Mary David, Chief of the Division of Wage Econom ics, 

under the gen eral direction of L. R. L in sen m ayer, A s ­

sistant Com m issioner for Wages and Industrial Relations. 

This report was prepared under the supervision of 

Albert A. Belm an. The analysis for the period I960 to 

1964 was prepared by Jeanne G riest.

iii

Digitized for FRASER 

http://fraser.stlouisfed.org/ 

Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
Contents

Page

Salary trends:

Federal classified employees, 1939—50 _____________________________ 1

Federal classified employees' salary changes:

1950- 51 _______________________________________________________ 6

1951- 52 _______________________________________________________ 9

1951-54 _________________________________________________________ 12

1954- 56 _______________________________________________________ 15

1957 ___________________________________________________________ 20

1955- 58 _______________________________________________________ 22

1958-60 ________________________________________________________ 26

1960-61 ________________________________________________________ 30

1962-64 ________________________________________________________ 37

Appendix: Scope and method of survey 47

Digitized for FRASER 

http://fraser.stlouisfed.org/ 

Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
Salary Trends:

Federal Classified Employees, 1939—50

B a s i c s a l a r y s c a l e s of Federal classified employees increased 55 percent, on the average, between 

August 1939 and July 1950. The merit increases 

in pay within the same grade (occupational classification) added to the rise in basic scales raised 

average salary rates 60 percent for this periou. 

Average salaries showed an 83-percent increase; 

this third measure of salary changes takes into 

account the growth in the proportion of workers 

at higher salary rates as well as basic scale and 

merit increases. The rise in basic scales and salary 

rates, August 1939 to July 1950, lagged behind 

the increase in the Consumers’ Price Index; average salaries rose slightly more than the index.

Salaries discussed here are those of about

800,000 per annum employees subject to the 

Federal classification acts; these workers perform 

mainly clerical, administrative, and professional 

functions.1 The present study is the third in a 

series presenting indexes of wage and salary rates 

of various groups of workers in nonmanufacturing 

employment.2 For Federal classified workers, the 

salary rate indexes reflect changes in basic salary 

scales and merit increases within the same occupational classification. However, shifts in occupational composition resulting from changes and 

expansion in governmental activity during the 

period covered by this repprt have affected average 

salaries as distinguished from salary rates. Consequently, indexes of average salaries, reflecting 

tne combined effect of all these factors, are also 

presented.

Since the effect of either merit increases or 

changes in grade composition on Federal workers’ 

pay will vary from period to period, depending on 

rates of hiring and promotion, there is interest in 

a measure of salaries unaffected by either of these 

lactors. Accordingly, a Civil Service Commission 

measure of basic salary changes alone is incorporated in table 1.

Basic Scales and Salary Rates

Practically all of the 55-percent rise in basic pay 

scales and of the 60-percent increase in average

salary rates occurred after June 1945. Congressional action increased basic pay scales in 

July 1945, in July 1946, and in July 1948; in 

addition, a revision of the classification system in 

October 1949 included some changes in these basic 

scales. Up to June 1945, both basic pay scales 

and average salary rates had risen only about 

1 percent as a result of increased scales for certain 

of the lower grades.3

Most of the rise in average salary rates which is 

attributable to merit increases also occurred after 

the war, although legislation in 1941 provided 

uniform standards for merit increases in pay for 

those remaining in the same position more than a 

specified amount of time.4 During World War II, 

force expansion and rapid turn-over, which required hiring large numbers of workers at minimum grade rates, caused a decline of average pay 

in some grades.5 After the war, reduced Federal 

employment under a policy of seniority retention 

augmented the effect of merit increases; consequently, average salaries in each grade advanced 

somewhat more than basic pay scales.

1 In addition the data include smaller groups in so-called subprofessional 

categories and in craft, protective, and custodial jobs. The other groups of 

Federal civilian employees, excluded from the present report, are the per 

diem workers, postal employees, and the so-called “blue collar” workers 

whose earnings are filed by wage-board action.

^ Previous studies relate to policemen and firemen in large cities (Monthly 

Labor Review, June 1950, p. 633), and urban public school teachers (Monthly 

Labor Review, March 1951, p. 286).

3 Grades CPC (crafts, protective, custodial) 1-8 and P ? (subprofessional) 

1 and 2.

* Prior to 1941, increases in pay to workers within the same grade were 

determined by administrative action subject to certain limitations on their 

effect on individual agency payroll costs. In 1941, they were made automatic, providing a certain efficiency rating was obtained. For a description 

of legislation and regulations affecting salaries and working conditions of 

workers covered by the Classification Acts see Monthly Labor Review, 

March 1951 (p. 296).

5 The contrast between the two periods illustrates the variation in the net 

effect of these merit increases that occur from time to time depending on 

whether Federal employment is expanded or contracted and on whether 

there are opportunities for promotion. New workers or workers promoted 

to new jobs are generally paid at the minimum scales for the grade and hence 

the average salaries for a given grade will be reduced in periods of expansion. 

In periods of contraction workers with greater seniority, who have received 

more merit increases in pay than new workers, are retained; hence, average 

salary rates will increase even in the absence of changes in basic pay scales.

Digitized for FRASER 

1

http://fraser.stlouisfed.org/ 

Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
2

T a b l e 1.— Indexes of basic pay scales, average salary rates, and average salaries of workers covered by Federal Classification

Acts, 1989-50

Period

Basic pay scales 1 Average salary rates 1 Average salaries *

All

workers

General

schedule

Crafts,

protective,

custodial

All • 

workers

General

schedule

Crafts,

protective,

custodial

All

workers

Genera]

schedule

Crafts,

protective,

custodial

Aug. 1939 (base).......................................... 100.0 100.0 100.0 100 100 100 100 100 100

June 30, 1945............. ................................... 101.1 100.2 110.1 3101 3100 3 no (<) (<) (<)

July 1,1946.................................................... 133.8 131.9 146.9 133 131 149 143 136 154

July 1, 1947.................................................... 133.8 131.9 146.9 135 133 152 150 144 154

July 15,1948.................................................. 148.5 145.7 168.3 151 149 176 168 160 178

July 1,1949.................................................... 148.5 145.7 168.3 152 150 177 170 163 180

July 1,1950.................................................... 154.6 151.5 176.0 160 158 189 183 175 192

1 Merit increases in pay witbin the same grade, which affect the averagesalary-rate indexes, compiled by the Bureau of Labor Statistics, have been 

excluded from the basic-pay-scale indexes, compiled by the Civil Service 

Commission. Both these index series exclude the effects of changes in the 

distribution of workers among grades.

* In addition to showing the effect of increases in basic salary scales and of 

merit increases in pay within the same grade, these indexes are influenced by 

shifts in the proportion of workers among grades.

3 Estimated by assuming the same distribution of employees among grade 3 

and steps within grades in 1939 as in 1945—i. e., by assuming that the change 

in basic pay scales and in average salary rates was the same during this period. 

It is known that during this period there was little or no increase in average 

rates because of merit increases.

* Not available.

The effect of merit raises on average salary 

rates in the postwar period was overshadowed by 

increases in basic pay scales, except between 

mid-1946 and mid-1947 and again between mid1948 and mid-1949, when pay scales were not 

changed. Between June 1945 and July 1946, 

salary rates increased by nearly 32 percent almost 

entirely because of 2 pay raises—effective July 

1, 1945, and July 1, 1946, respectively. The rise 

in the 1948 indexes was dominated by the uniform $330 increase in scales put into effect in the 

first half of July 1948. By July 1, 1950, salaries 

had risen approximately 5 percent more (8 index 

points), primarily because of the Classification 

Act of October 1949.

Although the principal objective of the classification act was a realignment of salary scales, it

did provide increases in minimum base rates ranging, in most cases, from $100 to $175% It also 

added 3 grades to the top of the salary scale. 

Over the entire 1945-50 period covered, all but 

about a twelfth of the 58 percent rise in average 

salary rates resulted from increased basic pay 

scales.

Salaries have increased proportionately more 

in the lower than in the higher grades. Most of

the legislation either specifically provided higher 

percentage increases in pay for the lower than the 

higher grades of classified employees or uniform 

dollar increase in salaries regardless of grade; 

the latter, of course, resulted in a higher percentage 

increase for the lower salary levels. Thus, the 

indexes for the crafts, protective, and custodial 

group, whose salaries are at the lower end of

Indexes of Salaries of Classified Federal Workers, July 1950

AUGUST 1939-100

E Z Z 2 I Based on current dollars

Based on dollars deflated by Consumers' Price Index

155

BASIC PAY SCALES

176

152

100- 89 . 88 <

102

AVERAGE SALARY RATES

189

AVER AG E SALARIES

183 175

106 101

192

— I 8— 100

All Classified General C P C

Workers Schedule

All Classified General

Workers Schedule

C P C All Classified General

Workers Schedule

C P C

See footnotes on table I

Digitized for FRASER 

http://fraser.stlouisfed.org/ 

Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
3

the scale (CPC), are higher than those for the 

general schedule (GS). (See table 1.) Basic payscales for the “CPC” group rose 76 percent and 

for the “GS” group (formerly clerical, administrative, fiscal, and professional workers) 52 percent, 

between 1939 and 1950. Salary rate increases 

for these groups averaged, respectively, 89 percent 

and 58 percent.

Within each of the two broad groups, increases 

for the lower salary grades were also greater, 

percentage-wise, than for the higher levels. This 

is illustrated for the clerical, administrative, 

fiscal, and professional group by table 2, which 

shows salary trends for 3 grades within the 

General Schedule (GS-3, GS-9, GS-13). Between 

1939 and 1950, average pay rose 70 percent for 

grade GS-3, compared with less than 40 percent 

for GS-13. Table 2 also shows that for CPC-2 

(the lowest grade in which a substantial number 

of workers are currently employed), pay nearly 

doubled. Changes between 1939 and 1950 for 

all GS and CPC grades are shown in table 3 •

T able 2.— Changes in m inim um and average salaries1for

selected grades under Federal Classification A cts, 1989-50

Service and grade

August

1939

June

1945

Julyl,

1946

Julyl,

1947

Julyl5,

1948

Julyl,

1949

Julyl,

1950

Indexes (August 1939=100)

CPC-2:

Minimum salary rate. 100 111 156 156 187 187 196

Average salary1.......... 100 («) 151 153 183 183 198

Minimum salary rate. 100 100 134 134 154 154 164

Average salary1.......... 100 <*) 133 136 157 158 170

OS-9:

Minimum salary rate. 100 100 130 130 140 140 144

Average salary1.......... 100 (») 130 131 143 144 149

Minimum salary rate. 100 100 127 127 133 133 136

Average salary1.......... 100 (*) 126 127 133 134 137

Dollars

CPC-2:

Minimum salary rate. 1,080 1,200 1,690 1,690 2,020 2,02Q 2,120

Averagesalary1.......... 1,166 (*) 1,756 1,783 2,129 2,139 2,307

Minimum salary rate. 1,620 1,620 2,168 2,168 2,498 2,498 2,650

Average salary1.......... 1,683 (’) 2,238 2,287 2,638 2,659 2,866

Minimum salary rate. 3,200 3,200 4,150 4,150 4,480 4,480 4,600

Average salary1......... 3,298 (’) 4,279 4,334 4,723 4,754 4,923

Minimum salary rate. 5,600 5,600 7,102 7,102 7,432 7,432 7,600

Average salary1.......... 5,793 (*) 7,300 7,345 7,727 7,752 7.931

1 Average salaries were obtained by weighting each salary step within the 

grade by the number of employees at that step. In other words, they 

reflect the effect of increases in basic salary scales and of merit increases in 

pay within the grade for each period.

* Average salary data for individual grades not available.

Average Salaries and Gross Earnings

Changes in the proportion of workers at various 

grades within the classification system resulted in 

a greater rise in the index of average salaries than

was shown in the indexes of salary rates or basic 

salary scales just described. As previously indicated, the combined influence of rate increases 

and changes in occupational or grade composition 

advanced average salaries by 83 percent between 

1939 and 1950. For each period for which data 

are available, the rise in average salaries for the 

entire group of workers covered by this report, was 

greater than the change in salary rates alone.

During World War II, “ gross” earnings of Federal workers (that is, earnings including overtime 

pay) also showed substantially different trends 

from salary rates. During the period when salary 

scales were stable, overtime pay became a major 

source of additional earnings. The workweek for 

employees covered by the Classification Act was 

increased to 48 hours from December 1942 to 

June 1945, with extra pay being provided for most 

employees.^ A 44-hour week was widely substituted in July 19456 7 and the 40-hour week was 

generally introduced in September 1945.8 It is 

estimated that in June 1945, when the 48-hour 

week was still in effect, overtime pay augmented 

earnings of employees under the Classification 

Act by roughly 20 percent.

From September 1945 through mid-1950, overtime was paid only to a limited number of workers 

in emergencies; thus, the recent trend in straighttime and gross earnings can be assumed to be 

practically the same. Since hostilities started in 

Korea, however, the amount of regularly scheduled 

overtime work in some of the defense agencies has 

increased.

Changes in “Real” Salaries

Average salaries of classified employees rose 

slightly more than the Bureau of Labor Statistics’ 

Consumers’ Price Index over the period August 

1939 to July 1950, but salary scales and rates (pay 

for the same type of work) lagged behind living 

costs. Salary scales and rates of classified employees deflated by the CPI, were only about 

nine-tenths as high in July 1950 (the date of the 

latest annual salary survey for Federal workers) 

as they had been in 1939. Since that time, the 

gap between the CPI and salary scales and rates 

has been widened further by rising prices.

6 The workweek had been increased from 39 to 44 hours early in 1942 without 

any increase in earnings. Those receiving basic salaries of over $5,000 were 

not paid overtime; others received time and a half on that part of their salaries 

up to $2,900.

?At that time there was an increase in overtime rates.

8 The increases in salary scales made in 1945 and 1946 were intended at 

least in part to compensate for the reduction in earnings by elimination of 

Digitized for FRASER 

overtime compensation.

http://fraser.stlouisfed.org/ 

Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
4

T A B L E 3 . — C h an ges in m in im u m and a v e r a g e s a la r ie s 1 un d er the C la s s ific a tio n A c ts , by g r a d e , 1939 and 1945—60

Service and grade

August

1939

June

1945

— r a y " ! ; " "

1946

" July i; 

1947

July rsr"

1948

Ju ly - T "*1

1949

" "" Ju ly 1,----

1950

Indexes (August 1939=100)

G eneral Schedule:

----U S^T:-----------

Minimum salary rate z ___________ 100 107 149 149 177 177 190

A verage sa la ry 1 _________________ 100 (3) 151 152 179 180 193

G S-2:

Minimum salary rate „ __ __ __ 100 100 136 136 159 159 170

A verage salary 1 _ _______ ______ 100 (3) 135 138 162 163 177

GS-3:

Minimum salary rate __ __ __ __ 100 100 134 134 154 154 164

A verage s a la r y 1 _ __ __ __ ------- 100 (3) 133 136 157 158 170

GS-4:

Minimum salary rate __ _ 100 100 133 133 151 151 160

A verage s a la r y 1 _ __ __ ___ ___ 100 (3) 133 135 154 155 166

G S-5:

Minimum salary rate __ ____ __ 100 100 132 132 149 149 155

A verage salary 1 _________________ 100 (3) 132 136 154 154 162

GS-6:

Minimum salary rate __ __ __ __ 100 100 131 131 146 146 150

A verage s a la r y 1 _ ____ ____ __ 100 (3) 131 135 150 150 157

GS-7:

Minimum salary rate ____________ 100 100 131 131 143 143 147

A verage s a la r y 1 _ _____________ 100 (3) 130 134 148 149 154

G S-8:

Minimum salary rate ____________ 100 100 130 130 142 141 145

A verage salary 1 _ ____ _________ 100 (3) 129 133 146 147 151

G S-9:

Minimum salary rate ____________ 100 100 130 130 140 140 144

A verage s a la r y 1 _ ____ _________ 100 (3) 130 131 143 144 149

G S -10:

Minimum salary rate ____ __ __ 100 100 129 129 139 139 143

A verage sa la ry 1 _________________ 100 (3) 129 131 141 142 146

GS-11:

Minimum salary rate __ ____ __ 100 100 129 129 138 138 142

A verage sa la ry ____ __ 100 (3) 128 130 140 140 144

GS- 12:

Minimum salary rate ____________ 100 100 128 128 136 136 139

A verage sa la ry 1 _________________ 100 (3) 127 128 136 137 141

GS-13:

Minimum salary rate __________ 100 100 127 127 133 133 136

A verage s a la r y 1 _ __ __ __ __ __ 100 (3) 126 127 133 134 137

GS- 14:

Minimum salary rate ____________ 100 100 126 126 131 131 135

A verage sa la ry 1 _ __ _ ____ __ 100 (3) 123 124 130 130 134

GS- 15:

Minimum salary rate __ __ __ __ 100 100 125 125 129 129 131

A verage s a la r y 1 _ __ ____ ______ 100 (3) 118 118 122 122 125

C rafts, P rotective, and C ustodial:

C P C -1 :

Minimum salary rate __ _________ 100 120 180 180 235 235 252

A verage salary __ ____ __ __ ___ 100 (3) 168 168 218 223 239

C P C -2:

Minimum salary rate __ __ ____ 100 111 156 156 187 187 196

A verage sa la ry __________________ 100 (3) 151 153 183 183 198

C P C -3:

Minimum salary rate ____________ 100 110 152 152 179 179 188

A verage sa la ry __________________ 100 (3) 148 150 177 179 192

C PC -4:

Minimum salary rate __ _________ 100 114 153 153 178 178 186

A verage salary __ __ __ __ ______ 100 (3) 154 157 181 182 194

C P C -5:

Minimum salary rate ____ ______ 100 112 150 150 172 172 178

A verage salary 100 (3) 149 153 176 177 186

C PC -6:

Minimum salary rate ____________ 100 111 147 147 167 167 173

A verage sa la ry _ _ _ _ _ 100 (3) 149 151 172 174 184

C P C -7:

Minimum salary rate ____________ 100 110 145 145 163 163 168

A verage sa la ry __________________ 100 (3) 147 149 168 170 180

C P C -8:

Minimum salary rate __ ____ __ 100 110 145 145 161 161 170

A verage sa la ry __ __ ____ __ __ 100 (3) 147 150 167 169 180

C P C -9:

Minimum salary rate __ 100 100 142 142 157 157 164

A verage salary __ _ _ 100 (3) 144 146 160 162 170

C P C -10:

Minimum sa la ry rate 100 100 140 140 153 153 160

A verage sa la ry __ ____ ____ __ 100 (3) 142 143 156 158 167

See footnotes at end of table

Digitized for FRASER 

http://fraser.stlouisfed.org/ 

Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
5

TABLE 3. — Changes in minimum and average sa la rie s 1 under the Classification A cts, by grade, 1939 and 1945—50— Continued

Service and grade

August

1939

June

1945

— July r;—

1946

------July r,

1947

------ CTy 15,

1948

July 1,

1949

July 1,

1950

Dollars

General Schedule:

GS-1:

Minimum salary rate ----------------------- $1,180 $1,260 $1, 756 $1,756 $2,086 $2,086 $2,240

Average salary 1 -------------- -----------------

GS-2:

1,223 (3 ) 1, 843 1, 858 2, 189 2,205 2, 356

Minimum salary rate ----------------------- 1,440 1,440 1,954 1,954 2, 284 2, 284 2,450

Average salary 1 ----------------------------------- 1,489 (3) 2, 016 2, 053 2,407 2,420 2, 639

GS-3:

Minimum salary rate ----------------------- 1,620 1,620 2, 168 2, 168 2,498 2,498 2, 650

A v e ra g e s a l a r y 1 „ __ __ ___________ 1,683 (3 ) 2, 238 2, 287 2, 636 2, 659 2, 866

GS-4:

M inim um salary rate __ __ -------- 1,800 1,800 2, 394 2, 394 2, 724 2, 724 2, 875

Average salary 1 _______________________ 1, 867 (3) 2,475 2, 526 2, 880 2, 897 3, 103

GS-5:

M inim um salary rate __ ___________ 2, 000 2, 000 2, 645 2,645 2, 975 2, 975 3, 100

A v e r a g e s a l a r y 1 __ __ -------------- ----- 2,099 (3) 2, 772 2, 853 3,227 3, 238 3,405

GS-6:

Minimum salary rate _______________ 2, 300 2, 300 3, 021 3,021 3, 351 3, 351 3,450

A v e ra g e s a l a r y 1 __ _____ __ _______ 2,414 (3) 3, 158 3, 255 3, 626 3, 625 3, 780

GS-7:

M inim um salary rate __ __ _______ 2,600 2, 600 3, 397 3, 397 3, 727 3, 727 3, 825

A v e r a g e s a l a r y 1 __ __ __ _____ ___ 2, 704 (3) 3,527 3,618 4,011 4, 022 4, 154

GS-8:

M inim um salary rate __ __ __ ___ 2,900 2,900 3, 773 3, 773 4, 103 4, 103 4, 200

Average salary 1 _______________________ 3,020 (3) 3,903 4, 021 4 ,4 1 7 4,431 4,553

GS-9:

M inim um salary rate __ _____ __ 3 ,2 0 0 3 , 2 0 0 4, 150 4, 150 4,480 4,480 4, 600

Av e ra g e salary 1 __ _____ ___ 3,298 (3) 4,279 4, 334 4, 723 4, 754 4, 923

G S -10:

Minimum salary rate _______________ 3, 500 3,500 4, 526 4, 526 4, 856 4, 856 5,000

A v e r a g e s a l a r y 1 __ __ __ __ „ __ * 3,620 (3) 4,672 4, 728 5,100 5, 141 5,279

GS- 11:

M inim um salary rate __ _____ ___ 3, 800 3, 800 4 ,902 4 ,9 0 2 5,232 5,232 5,400

Average salary 1 _______________________ 3,974 (3) 5, 091 5, 154 5, 546 5, 566 5, 734

G S -12:

Minimum salary rate _______________ 4,600 4, 600 5,905 5,905 6, 235 6, 235 6,400

A v e ra g e s a l a r y 1 „ __ __ __ _____ 4, 797 (3) 6, 107 6, 107 6, 539 6, 584 6, 759

G S -13:

Minimum salary rate _______________ 5, 600 5,600 7, 102 7, 102 7,432 7,432 7,600

Average salary 1 _______________________ 5, 793 (3) 7, 300 7, 345 7, 727 7, 752 7,931

G S -14:

Minimum salary rate _______________ 6, 500 6, 500 8, 180 8, 180 8, 510 8, 510 8, 800

Average salary 1 6, 850 (3) 8,417 8,473 8, 875 8,917 9, 150

GS-15:

M inim um salary rate __ ___________ 8,000 8,000 9,975 9,975 10,305 10,305 10,500

A v e r a g e salary 1 __ __ __ _____ ___ 8,465 (3) 9,985 9,987 10,321 10,321 10,577

Crafts, Protective, and Custodial:

— C P C -T i-----------------------------------------------

Minimum salary rate _______________ 600 720 1 ,0 8 0 1 ,0 80 1,410 1,410 1,510

Average salary 1 _______________________ 690 (3J 1, 160 1,156 1,502 1,540 1,648

C P C -2:

Minimum salary rate _______________ 1,080 1,200 1,690 1,690 2, 020 2, 020 2, 120

Average salary 1 _______________________ 1, 166 (3) 1, 756 1, 783 2, 129 2, 139 2, 307

C P C -3:

Minimum salary rate _______________ 1,200 1,320 1,822 1,822 2, 152 2, 152 2, 252

A v e r a g e salary 1 __ __ __ _____ ___ 1,290 (3) 1,904 1,929 2, 282 2, 303 2,477

C PC-4:

Minimum salary rate 1,320 1,500 2,020 2, 020 2, 350 2, 350 2,450

Av e ra g e sala ry 1 _ _ 1,400 (3) 2, 159 2, 159 2, 540 2, 549 2, 710

C P C -5:

Minimum salary rate 1,500 1,680 2, 244 2,244 2, 574 2, 574 2, 674

Average salary 1 _______________________ 1,580 (3 ) 2, 354 2,415 2, 778 2, 793 2,943

CPC-6:

Minimum salary rate 1,680 1,860 2,469 2,469 2, 799 2,799 2, 900

Average salary 1 _______________________ 1,721 (3) 2,560 2,607 2 ,9 6 4 2 ,9 9 7 3, 163

C P C -7:

Minimum salary rate _______________ 1,860 2,040 2,695 2,695 3,025 3,025 3, 125

Average salary 1 1,918 (3) 2, 812 2, 867 3,219 3,269 3,460

CPC-8:

Minimum salary rate _______________ 2, 000 2, 200 2, 896 2,896 3, 226 3,226 3,400

Average salary 1 _______________________ 2, 118 (3) 3, 114 3, 184 3, 527 3, 575 3 , ‘812

C P C -9:

Minimum salary rate _______________ 2,300 2,300 3, 272 3,272 3,602 3,602 3, 775

Average salary 1 2,442 (3 ) 3,507 3, 567 3, 911 3,960 4, 161

C P C -10:

Minimum salary rate _______________ 2, 600 2, 600 3, 648 3,648 3,978 3,978 4, 150

Average salary 1 _______________________ 2, 709 (3 ) 3, 850 3, 886

.

4, 222 4,291 4, 523

Average salaries were obtained by weighting each salary step within the grade by the number of employees at that

step. In other w ords, they reflect the effect of incre ases in basic salary scales and of m erit incre ases in pay within the

grade for each period.

2 The m in im u m was computed by weighting equally the base pay for each of the three grades (S P -1 and 2, C A F - l )

which were combined under the General Schedule. Digitized 

3 A v era g e salary data for individual grades not available.

for FRASER 

http://fraser.stlouisfed.org/ 

Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
Fe d e ra l C la ssifie d E m p lo y e e s’ Sa la ry C hanges, 1 9 5 0 — 51

G e n e r a l s a l a r y i n c r e a s e s legislated by the 

Eighty-second Congress raised the basic salary 

scales for Federal classified workers by 10 percent between July 1950 and July 1951. Because 

of an expansion in Federal employment during 

the period, two other measures of salary change 

for these employees—average salary rates and 

average salaries—showed smaller increases, 8.8 

and 7.8 percent, respectively. (The indexes reflecting these percentage changes are shown in 

table 1.) The effect of the rise in basic pay scales 

on average salary rates was offset in part by a reduction in the proportion of workers receiving 

more than the minimum scale for their jobs. Average salaries were affected by these two factors 

and by an increase in the proportion of workers 

at some of the lower grades or occupations within 

the classified service.

The pay raise voted by Congress on October 24, 

1951, was retroactive to the first pay period in 

the 1952 fiscal year—in the majority of cases, to 

July 8, 1951. Under the act the salary for each 

pay step within a grade was raised by 10 percent 

of the minimum for the grade. A flat $300 increase was given in grades for which the minimum 

was below $3,000; where the minimum was above 

$8,000, the increase was $800.

If this pay scale increase had not been effective 

during the year ending in July 1951, both average 

salary rates and average salaries would have decreased because of the expansion in the number 

of classified employees. Between July 1950, the 

termination date of the previous report on salary 

trends for Federal workers, and July 1951, the 

number of full-time workers subject to the Classification Acts increased by about 200,000 to a 

total of more than a million. Nearly 185,000 of 

the new employees were hired for positions covered by the “general schedule,” which includes 

clerical, administrative, and professional work. 

More than three-fifths of these (about 114,000) 

were placed in three of the lowest pay grades (GS2, 3, and 4). The consequence was an expansion 

in the proportion of workers employed at these 

job levels from 43.7 percent to 46.2 percent of all 

classified workers. The greater number of workers in these pay grades near the bottom of the

Federal scale, therefore, tended to reduce average 

salaries for all classified workers considered as a 

group. Moreover, new employees in the Federal 

service and those who are promoted to more responsible positions are, as a rule, started at the 

minimum pay rate of the grade in which they are 

placed. Consequently, during periods of expansion, the percentage of employees at the lower 

steps within a pay grade grows and the average 

salary for thef grade is likely to decrease.

A 20-percent expansion (20,000 employees) occurred in the “crafts, protective, and custodial 

schedule” during the year ending in July 1951. 

Not only was the proportionate employment expansion somewhat smaller for these employees 

than for clerical, administrative, and professional 

workers, but the change in the distribution of these

T a b le 1.— Indexes o f basic p a y scales, average salary rates,

and average salaries o f em ployees covered b y Federal Classification A cts, 1 9 8 9 -6 1

Basic pay scales* Average salary 

rates1 Average salaries *

Period All All All

employ­ a s CPC employ­ a s CPC employ­ a s CPC

ees ees ees

August 1939-100

August 1939___ 100.0 100.0 100.0 100 100 100 100 100 100

June 30,1945__ 101.1 100.2 110.1 *101 *100 •110 <<) <*) 0)

July 1,1946___ 133.8 131.9 146.9 133 131 149 143 136 154

July 1,1947___ 133.8 131.9 146.9 135 133 152 150 144 154

July 15,1948.__ 148.5 145.7 168.3 151 149 176 168 160 178

July 1, 1949___ 148. 5 145.7 168.3, 152 160 177 170 163 180

July 1,1950____ 154.6 151.5 176.0 160 158 189 183 175 192

July 8,1951____ 170.1 166.5 195.0 174 172 209 198 188 214

Average 1947-49-100

August 1939___ 69.6 70.9 62.0 68 69 60 61 64 58

June 30, 1945__ 70.4 71.0 68.3 *69 *69 *65 (<) (<) («)

July 1, 1946....... 93.2 93.5 91.1 91 91 89 88 87 90

July 1, 1947____ 93.2 93.5 91.1 92 92 90 92 92 90

July 15,1948---- 103.4 103.3 104.4 103 103 105 103 103 104

July 1, 1949....... 103.4 103.3 104.4 104 104 105 104 104 105

July 1,1950___ 107.7 107.4 109.2 110 110 113 112 112 112

July 8,1951____

t

11&5 118.0 121.0 119 119 124 121 121 125

1 Merit increases in pay within the same grade, which affect the average salary rate indexes, compiled by the Bureau of Labor Statistics, have been excluded 

from the basic pay scale indexes compiled by the Civil Service Commission. 

Both these index series exclude the effects of changes in the distribution of 

employees among grades.

* In addition to showing the effect of increases in basic salary scales and of 

merit increases in pay within the same grade, these indexes are influenced 

by shifts in the proportion of employees among grades.

* Estimated by assuming the same distribution of employees among grades 

and steps within grades in 1939 as in 1945, i. e., by assuming that the change 

in basic pay scales and in average salary rates was the same during this period. 

It is known that except for grades 1 through 8 in the CPC schedule and the 

first grade of the present general schedule there was little or no increase In 

average rates between 1939 and 1945.

* Not available.

6

Digitized for FRASER 

http://fraser.stlouisfed.org/ 

Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
7

Table 2.— Percentage increase in basic p a y scales and in

average salary rates fo r Federal classified em p loyees, 

by schedule and grade, 1 9 5 0 -5 1

Schedule and 

grade

Percentage increase

Schedule and 

grade

Percentage Increase

Basic pay 

scales 1

Average 

salary 

rates *

Basic pay 

scales 1

Average 

salary 

rates 1

General Crafts, proschedule tective, custodial

All grades....... 9.9 8.7 All grades___ 10.8 10.3

1________ 13.1 10.2 1________ 19.1 13.5

2.......... 11.7 8.4 2........ ...... 12.9 13.5

3.............. 10.6 8.8 3.. ____ 12.1 12.3

4............. 9.7 9.5 4............... 11.1 11.0

5________ 9.2 8.1 5________ 10.5 7.2

6________ 9.2 8.8 6________ 9.6 8.4

7..... ......... 9.2 8.2 7_______ 8.9 9.1

8............... 9.3 8.5 8________ 8.9 8.7

9........ ...... 9.4 8.6 9________ 9.0 9.6

10............ 9. 5 8.8 10_______ 9.1 10.1

11............. 9.5 8.7

12............. 9.5 8.9

13............. 9.6 9.1

14............. 8.8 8.0

15............. 7.7 6.3

16............. 7.1 7.2

17............. 6.5 6.2

18............. 5.7 5.7

1 Basic pay scales are unaffected by merit increases or employment changes.

1 For individual grades, the average salary rates and average salaries are 

the same. The two concepts differ only when applied to averages for all 

classified employees or for all grades within one schedule (GS or CPC) since 

they differ only in the weight assigned to the various grades in computing 

these group averages. Both measures are affected by changes in pay scales 

and merit increases in pay.

workers among steps within pay grades also differed: the proportion of employees at higher pay 

steps rose in half of the 10 “CPC” grades; in the 

other half the proportion at lower steps increased 

during the year. The greatest employment gain 

was recorded in the CPC-5 grade which increased 

by almost three-fifths.

The salary trend for all classified workers closely 

parallels that for the general schedule, which includes almost nine-tenths of all Federal classified 

workers. Basic salary scales for this general schedule rose 9.9 percent; average salary rates, 8.7 percent; and average salaries, 7.3 percent over the 

year. In each except two of the highest pay 

grades (GS-16 and GS-18), an increase in the 

number of new workers with a relatively short 

period of service (resulting in a decline in the average length of service in the grade) caused average 

salary rates to rise less than basic pay scales. Because average length of service increased in grade 

GS-16, the rise in salary rates was slightly higher 

than the increase in basic pay scales. Since grade 

GS-18 has only one rate, there can be no difference 

in the two measures. In the case of grade GS-2 

average salary rates rose 3.3 percentage points, or 

about a fourth, less than basic pay scales (table 2).

Average salaries for crafts, protective, and custodial workers were 11.1 percent higher in July

1951 than in July 1950. Their basic salary scales 

and average salary rates increased 10.8 and 10.3 

percent, respectively.

The minimum and maximum dollar limits to 

the increase in pay scales provided in the 1951 

legislation resulted in proportionately greater 

and smaller pay increases for workers at the bottom and the top of the salary scale, respectively, 

than for the bulk of the classified workers. Moreover, since the increase in pay for most grades 

was 10 percent of the minimum pay for the grade, 

the percentage increase in basic pay scales for most 

grades was somewhat less—between 9 and 10 percent; the precise increase varied from grade to 

grade, primarily because of differing proportions 

of workers at various pay steps within the grade.

T able 3.— Changes in m in im u m and average salary rates 1 

fo r selected grades under Federal Classification Acts, 

1 9 S 9 -5 1

Service, grade, 

and type of 

salary rate

August

1939

June

1945

July 

1,1946

July 

1, 1947

July 

15,1948

July 

1,1949

July 

1,1950

July 

8, 1951

Indexes (August 1939= 100)

CPC-2:

Minimum. 100 111 156 156 187 187 196 224

Average.— 100 (*) 151 153 183 183 198 225

GS-3:

Minimum- 100 100 134 134 154 154 164 182

Average.— 100 (>) 133 136 157 158 170 185

GS-9:

Minimum. 100 100 130 130 140 140 144 158

Average.— 100 (*) 130 131 143 144 149 162

GS-13:

Minimum. 100 100 127 127 133 133 136 149

Average.— 100 (*) 126 127 133 134 137 149

Indexes (average 1947-49=100)

CPC-2:

Minimum 56 63 88 88 106 106 111 127

Average.— 58 <*) 87 88 106 106 114 130

GS-3:

Minimum. 68 68 91 91 105 105 112 124

Average. — 67 <*) 89 91 105 105 113 123

GS-9:

Minimum. 73 73 95 95 102 102 105 115

Average.— 72 <*> 94 94 103 104 107 117

GS-13:

Minimum- 76 76 97 97 102 102 104 114

Average— 76 (*) 96 97 102 102 105 114

Dollars

CPC-2:

Minimum. 1,080 1,200 1,690 1,690 2,020 2,020 2,120 2,420

Average.— 1,166 (*) 1,756 1,783 2,129 2,139 2,307 2,618

GS-3:

Minimum. 1,620 1,620 2,168 2,168 2,498 2,498 2.650 2,950

Average. — 1,683 <*) 2, 238 2,287 2,638 2,659 2,866 3,119

GS-9:

Minimum. 3,200 3,200 4,150 4,150 4,480 4,480 4,600 5,060

Average.— 3,298 <*> 4,279 4,334 4,723 4,754 4,923 5,346

GS-13:

Minimum. 5,600 5,600 7,102 7,102 7,432 7,432 7,600 8,360

Average... 5,793 (’) 7,300 7,345 7,727 7,752 7,931 8,652

1 Average salary rates were obtained by weighting each salary step within 

the grade by the number of employees at that step. In other words, they 

reflect the effect of increases in basic salary scales and of merit increases in 

pay within the grade for each period. As indicated in footnote 2, table 2, 

average salaries and average salary rates are identical.

* Average salary rate data for individual^grades not available.

Digitized for FRASER 

http://fraser.stlouisfed.org/ 

Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
8

The greater rise in basic salary scales than in 

other measures of salaries during 1950-51 contrasted sharply with the trend reported during 

previous years.1 Over the entire period from 1939 

to July 1951, basic salary scales rose 70 percent 

while average salary rates (table 3) advanced 74 

percent and over-all salaries increased 98 percent 

(table 1).

Average salaries of classified employees and the 

Consumers’ Price Index for moderate-income 

families in large cities increased by the same ratio 

between July 1950 and July 1951. Basic pay 

scales and average salary rates showed a slight 

gain over prices during the same period. For the 

entire span from 1939 to July 1951, however, 

average salaries rose slightly more than living 

costs but average salary rates and basic pay 

scales did not keep pace as shown in the following 

indexes. From July to December 1951, prices 

showed a further rise of nearly 2 percent or about

3.5 index points.

It is possible that there was a similar development during the early World 

War II period when Federal employment expanded sharply; at that time 

average salary rates may have actually declined, but detailed salary information is not available for those years.

Indexes (A ugust 19S9—100)

AU Federal

B asic p a y scales 1

classified

employees

General

schedule

C P C

schedule

Actual___________________ 170. 1 166. 5 195.0

Deflated by CPI,2 July 1951- 91. 2 89.2 104.5

Average salary rates 3

Actual___________________ 174 172 209

Deflated by CPI,2 July 1951. 93 92 112

Average salaries 4

Actual___________________ 198 188 214

Deflated by CPI,2 July 1951. 106 101 115

1 Indexes show the effect of changes in pay scales only. The effects of 

merit increases in pay within the same grade and of changes in the distribution of employees among grades were eliminated by applying identical weights 

to each pay step within a grade in successive periods.

* The Consumers' Price Index was 186.6 in July 1951. Average 1939 was 

used as the base.

* Indexes are affected by changes in salary scales and merit increases. The 

effect of changes in the proportion of employees at various grades was nullified by applying the same employment weights to average salaries in a grade 

in successive years.

4 In addition to showing the effect of increases in pay scales and of merit 

increases in pay within the same grade, indexes are influenced by shifts in 

the proportions of employees among grades.

No changes in method were introduced in this 

supplement to the basic study of salary trends for 

Federal classified employees. Two series of 

indexes are presented, however, for each of the 

salary measures. One is computed on a 1939 base 

for comparison with the indexes previously 

published, and the other uses an average 1947-49 

base in accordance with the current Governmental 

policy of changing indexes to this new base 

wherever possible.

Digitized for FRASER 

http://fraser.stlouisfed.org/ 

Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
Fe d e ra l C la ssifie d E m p lo y e e s’ Sa la ry Changes, 1951— 52

B a s i c s a l a r y s c a l e s of Federal employees covered 

by the Classification Acts were not changed during 

the year July 1951 to July 1952. But merit or ingrade salary increases over the same period did 

raise average pay slightly. This rise in average 

pay, however, was only two-tenths of 1 percent, 

because of the turnover in a number of pay classifications; the lower amounts paid for merit increases in some grades largely offset the higher 

amounts paid in others. Shifts in the proportion 

of employees performing various types of work, 

together with the merit increases, raised salaries 

of Federal classified workers by an average of

2.1 percent.

This average rise of 2.1 percent resulted, in part, 

from the addition of 31,000 professional and 

clerical employees (paid under the general schedule) and a reduction of approximately 3,000 employees in the crafts, protective, and custodial 

group (the CPC schedule). Workers in the 

second group are at the lower end of the Federal 

pay scale. Moreover, within each of the groups 

the number of higher-paid workers expanded 

proportionately more than that of lower-paid 

workers, with a resultant rise in average salaries. 

Among the general schedule workers, employment 

declined in grades 1 and 2, but increased in grades 

3 to 15; and among the CPC workers, employment dropped in grades 2 to 5, but expanded in 

the higher grades. This situation contrasts with 

the previous year when most of the 200,000 

workers added to the Federal classified service 

were hired at the lower grades.

The rise in the proportion of workers in every 

general schedule grade from 3 to 15 caused a 2- 

percent advance in average salaries of all clerical 

and professional workers grouped together. About

56,000 were added to these grades, compared with 

a reduction of 25,000 in grades 1 and 2.

Although there was essentially no change in 

merit or length-of-service pay increases when all 

general schedule grades were averaged together 

(as measured by average salary rates in table 1), 

length-of-service adjustments had significant effects on salaries in individual grades. (See table

2.) In the first 10 pay grades within the general

schedule, merit increases in pay raised average 

salary rates; the change amounted to $3 in grades 

4 and 9 and to as much as $28 in grade IQ.1 In

T a b l e 1.— In dexes o f basic p a y scales, average salary rates

and average salaries o f em ployees covered by Federal

Classification A cts , 1 9 8 9 -5 2

[Average 1947-49-100]

Period

Basic pay scales i Average salary 

rates * Average salaries >

All employees

General schedule

Crafts, protec- | tive, custodial

All employees

General schedule

Crafts, protec­ tive, custodial

All employees

General scheduleCrafts, protec­ tive, custodial

August 1939___ 69.6 70.9 62.0 68 69 60 61 64 58 June 30, 1945__ 70.4 71.0 68.3 >69 >69 >65 (4) (4) (4) July 1, 1946___ 93.2 93.5 91.1 91 91 89 88 87 90 July 1, 1947___ 93.2 93.5 91.1 92 92 90 92 92 90 July 15, 1948-... 103.4 103.3 104.4 103 103 105 103 103 104 July 1, 1949___ 103.4 103.3 104.4 104 104 105 104 104 105 July 1, 1950___ 107.7 107.4 109.2 110 110 113 112 112 112 July 8,1951___ 118.5 118.0 121.0 119 119 124 121 121 125 July 1, 1952....... 118.5 118.0 121.0 119 119 125 124 123 127

1 Merit increases in pay within the same grade, which affect the average 

salary rate indexes, compiled by the Bureau of Labor Statistics, have been 

excluded from the basic pay scale indexes compiled by the Civil Service 

Commission. Both the basic pay scale and average salary rate indexes 

exclude the effects of changes in the distribution of workers among grades.

* In addition to showing the effect of increases in basic salary scales and of 

merit increases in pay within the same grade, these indexes are influenced 

by shifts in the proportions of workers among grades.

1 Estimated by assuming the same distribution of employees among grades 

and steps within grades in 1945 as in 1939. Since it is known that, during 

this period, there was little or no increase in average rates because of merit 

increases, it was reasonable to assume that the change in basic pay scales and 

average salary rates was virtually the same.

4 Not available.

contrast, average salaries decreased in grades 

GS-11 to GS-15, which include about 1 out of 10 

workers in this schedule. These decreases in average salaries in the upper grades were progressively 

greater with each higher grade.2 *

1 Actually the greatest increase in length of service occurred in grade 2, 

although the $25 average increase in this grade was not the largest recorded. 

Merit or length-of-service increases for the first four grades are $80 compared 

with $125 for GS-5 to GS-10, and $200 for most of the upper grades. The 

qualifying period for a merit or lengtb-of-servloe increase is 12 months for all 

CPC grades and for grades GS-1 to GS-10; for higher grades it is 18 months.

2 Because grades 16,17, and 18 are subject to limitations not applicable to

the other grades within the schedule, they are excluded from the general

discussion.

9

Digitized for FRASER 

http://fraser.stlouisfed.org/ 

Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
10

T a b le 2.— Changes in average salary rales 1 o f em ployees

under the Federal Classification A cts , b y grade, 1 9 5 1 -5 2

Schedule and grade

Average annual 

salary rate

Changes in average 

salary rate, 1951 

to 1952

1951 1952 Percent Dollars

General Schedule:

Grade 1................................ $2,596 $2,600 +0.2 +4

Grade 2.................................. 2,861 2,886 +.9 +25

Grade 3................................. 3,119 3.126 +.2 +7

Grade 4................................. 3.398 3,401 +• 1 +3

Grade 5................................. 3,681 3,703 +.6 +22

Grade 6................................. 4,111 4,123 +.3 +12

Grade 7................................. 4,495 4,503 +.2 +8

Grade 8................................. 4,942 4.919 +.1 +7

Grade 9................................. 5.316 5,349 +.1 +3

Grade 10................................ 5,741 5,769 +.5 +28

Grade 11................................ 6.230 6,220 -.2 -10

Grade 12............................... 7,360 7.344 -.2 -16

Grade 13................................ a 652 a 634 -.2 -18

Grade 14... ........................... 9,880 9,855 -.3 -25

Grade 15................................ 11,245 11,180 -.6 -65

Crafts, protective, and custodial:

Grade 1................................. 1,870 1,955 +4.5 +85

Grade 2................................ 2.618 2,637 +.7 +19

Grade 3........................... ...... 2,782 2.805 +.8 +23

Grade 4................................ 3,008 3.037 +1.0 +29

Grade 5................................. 3 154 3,193 +1.2 +39

Grade 6................................. a 428 3,435 +.2 +7

Grade 7................................... 3.776 3.794 +.5 +18

Grade 8................................. 4,145 4.175 + .7 +30

Grade 9.................................. 4.559 4,582 +.5 +23

Grade 10................................ 4.978 5,017 +.8 +39

»Average salary rates were obtained by weighting each salary stop within 

the grade by the number of employees at that step. In other words, the 

change in average salary rates reflects the effect of any legislative Increases in 

basic salary scales and of in-grade merit increases in pay.

Average salaries of crafts, protective, and custodial workers rose 1.5 percent. About half of this 

increase was due to the relatively greater number 

of workers in the higher classifications (grade 6 

and above) in 1952 than in 1951—6,000 fewer 

workers in grades 2 to 5 and about 3,000 more in 

the upper grades. The rest of the increase was 

due to merit or length-of-service increases.

For the entire crafts, protective, and custodial 

service, merit pay raises advanced average salaries by 0.7 percent. Salaries in each grade 

were higher in July 1952 than in July 1951, since 

workers had longer service in each of these grades 

than they had in the earlier year. Employees 

in CPC-5 and CPC-10 showed the largest pay

advance ($39) of any group in which substantial 

numbers were employed (CPC-2 to 10). As a 

result of the addition of 1,800 new employees to 

CPC-6, the $7 annual increase was below that for 

any other CPC grade.

Changes Since 1939

Between 1939 and July 1952, legislative increases in the basic pay scales of Federal classified 

workers amounted to 70.1 percent. Length-ofservice or merit pay raises resulted in a further 

increase of about 4 percent in average salary rates 

over the same period. Changes in occupational 

structure also had a considerable effect on average 

salaries. The proportion of clerical, administrative, and professional employees (whose salaries 

are higher on the average than those of crafts, 

custodial, and protective workers) rose during the 

13-year period from three-fourths to almost ninetenths of all classified workers; moreover, within 

the GS schedule, the proportion of employees in 

higher-pay grades also rose. Adding the effects 

of these changes in occupational structure to those 

of the legislative (basic-salary) and length-ofservice pay increases, average salaries of Federal 

workers rose by 102 percent between 1939 and 

1952. (See chart.)

Over the same period the Consumer Price 

Index rose 92 percent. Thus, only the average 

salary index kept pace with rising prices over the 

13-year period, having risen 5 percentage points 

more than the CPI. In “real” terms (the dollar 

increase reduced by the change in the Consumer 

Price Index), basic pay scales and average salary 

rates of Federal classified workers declined 11.4 

and 9.4 percent, respectively, between 1939 and 

mid-1952.

Digitized for FRASER 

http://fraser.stlouisfed.org/ 

Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
11

Percent Changes in Salaries of Federal Classified Employees and in Consumer Prices,1 August 1939 to Specified

Dates2

Digitized for FRASER 

http://fraser.stlouisfed.org/ 

Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
Fe d e ra l C la ssifie d Em p lo y e e s’ Sa la ry C hanges, 1951— 54

On January 11, 1955, the President of the United 

States sent messages to Congress proposing salary 

adjustments for major groups of Federal civilian 

employees. The increases proposed for Classification Act employees would average about 5 percent, with relatively greater gains for higher 

salaried workers designed to offset in part the previous narrowing of pay differentials. For postal 

employees, raises would average about 6.5 percent including an immediate 5-percent increase 

in basic salary rates and a new salary plan designed 

to offer “incentives for advancement” and “higher 

pay for more difficult and responsible work.”

These proposals would affect more than 900,000 

workers paid under the Classification Act and over

400,000 workers in the postal field service. The 

proposed legislation also included employees covered by the Foreign Service Act and employees of 

the Veterans Administration Department of 

Medicine and Surgery.

This article summarizes recent trends in salaries 

for Federal workers paid under the Classification 

Act,1 including clerical, administrative, and professional employees and some custodial, protective, 

and maintenance workers. The Classification 

Act does not cover other groups of Federal employees such as those working in navy yards or at 

certain Army and Air Force installations whose 

rates of pay are determined by wage boards.1

Salary Trends

The Bureau of Labor Statistics publishes three 

separate measures of earnings of Federal Classification Act workers. (See table 1.) These are 

designed to isolate the effects of the three principal 

factors that affect their average pay, namely, 

statutory changes in basic pay scales, average 

length of service within a given grade, and the 

proportion of workers performing various jobs 

and hence classified in each of the several pay 

grades.

July 1951 to July 1954. Basic pay scales have 

remained unaltered since July 8, 1951, the effective 

date of the most recent increase in salary scales 

enacted by the Congress for classified and postal 

employees.

Average salary rates, which measure the combined effect of any increases in basic salary scales 

resulting from legislation and of merit or length 

of service changes in pay within the same occupation or grade, increased 2 percent between July 

1951 and July 1954. At least in part this rise 

resulted from the reduction of 61,500 in the number of Federal Classification Act employees which 

occurred over this period.2 Since the separated 

workers are customarily those with the least service 

or tenure, their dismissal in substantial numbers 

tends to raise the average length of service of 

workers remaining within a job or grade and hence 

the proportion who have received periodic withingrade pay increases.

Average salaries are affected not only by legislation and merit increases but by changes in the 

proportion of workers among the various pay 

grades. They rose 6.6 percent in the 3-year period. 

This change resulted from increases in the proportion of workers in most grades who had received 

in-grade pay increases and of the decline in the 

proportion of workers in the lower pay grades 

(GS-1 to GS-3; see table 2).

Merit increases between 1951 and 1954 raised 

average salaries from 1 to 3 percent in the general 

schedule grades up through GS-10 except in 

grades GS-5 and GS-2, for which the increases 

were 3.6 and 3.3 percent, respectively. In grades

1 See The Government’s Industrial Employees: I. Extent of Employment, Status, Organization; and, II. Consultation, Bargaining and Wage 

Determination, Monthly Labor Review, January 1954 (p. 1) and March 

1954 (p. 249).

2 The number increased 28,000 from July 1951 to July 1952 then declined

89,000 during the next 2 years.

12

Digitized for FRASER 

http://fraser.stlouisfed.org/ 

Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
13

T able 1.— In dexes o f basic p a y scales, average salary rates, and average salaries 1 o f em ployees covered by Federal Classification

A c ts , 1989—54.

[Average 1947-49=100]

P eriod

B asic p ay scales A verage salary rates A verage salaries

A ll em ­

ployees

General

schedule

C rafts, protective, 

custodial

A ll em ­

ployees

G eneral

schedule

C rafts, protective, 

custodial

A ll em ­

ployees

G eneral

schedule

C rafts, protective, 

custodial

A u gu st 1939................................................................. 69.6 70.9 62.0 68.2 69.3 59.5 61.4 64.2 58.7

Ju n e 30, 1945.............................................................. 70.4 71.0 68.3 >69.0 >69.4 *6 5 .5 (») 0) (J)

Ju ly 1, 1946.................................................................. 93.2 93.5 91.1 90.6 90.8 88.8 87.7 87.5 90.2

Ju ly 1,1947......... ........................................................ 93.2 93.5 91.1 92.3 92.5 90.3 92.3 92.6 90.2

Ju ly 15, 1948................................................................ 103.4 103.3 104.4 103.5 103.5 104.4 103.1 103.0 104.3

Ju ly 1,1949................................................................. 103.4 103.3 104.4 104.2 104.0 105.3 104.6 104.5 105.4

Ju ly 1, 1950..............................................................- 107.7 107.4 109.2 109.6 109.4 112.2 112.6 112.3 112.8

Ju ly 8,1951.................................................................. 118.5 118.0 121.0 119.3 118.8 123.8 121.4 120.6 125.3

Ju ly 1, 1952.................................................................. 118.5 118.0 121.0 119.6 119.0 124.7 124.0 123.0 127.2

Ju ly 'l, 1953................................................................. 118.5 118.0 121.0 120.7 120.0 126.1 127.1 126.3 129.1

Ju ly 1, 1 9 5 4 ................................................................ 118.5 118.0 121.0 121.8 121.1 127.3 129.4 128.8 129.3

* B asic p ay scales reflect only statu tory changes in salaries, while average salary rates show in addition the effect of m erit or in-grade salary increases. A verage salaries m easure the effect not only of statu tory changes in basic p ay scales and in-grade salary increases b u t the effect of changes in the proportion of w orkers 

em ployed in the various p ay grades.

* E stim ated b y a ssum in g the sam e distribution of em ployees am ong grades and steps w ithin grades in 1945 as in 1939. Since there w as little or no increase in 

average rates because of m erit increases during this period, it w as assum ed th at the change in basic p ay scales and average salary rates w as virtually the sam e.

* N o t available.

GS-11 to GS-14, merit increases amounted to less 

than 1 percent; in grade GS-15, an 0.4 percent 

decline in average salaries occurred. In most of 

the CPC grades the increase in average salary 

rates between 1951 and 1954 ranged between 2 

and 3 percent (table 3).

These changes in salaries of Federal classified 

employees compare with the rise of 3 to 4 percent 

in the Consumer Price Index of the Bureau of 

Labor Statistics.3 Among large groups of workers 

in private employment, weekly and hourly pay 

of factory production workers rose by about 15 

percent from July 1951 to late 1954. Similarly, 

the increase in average weekly salaries of women 

office clerical workers in 6 large cities studied by 

the BLS varied from approximately 13 to 19 percent from early 1951 to early 1954.4

August 1989 to July 1954, Statutory changes in 

pay increased basic salary scales for Federal 

Classification Act employees by 70 percent from 

August 1939 to July 1954. These increases in 

basic scales, combined with merit or in-grade 

changes in pay, brought average salary rates 78.5 

percent above 1939. Because of a decline in the 

proportion of workers in the lower pay grades 

(notably, in grades GS-1 and GS-2 and CPC-1, 

CPC-2, and CPC-3), average salaries for all 

classified workers rose by 111 percent from 1939 

to mid-1954; for professional, clerical, and administrative employees covered by the general 

schedule, average salaries rose by about 100

3 T h e increase w as 3.9 percent from Ju ly 1951 to Ju ly 1954 and 3.1 percent 

from Ju ly 1951 to Ja n u a ry 1955.

4 See Salaries of W omen in Office W ork, 1949 to 1954, M on thly L ab or R e ­

view, Septem ber 1954 (p. 972).

Table 2.— Percent distribution o f em ploym ent o f general schedule em ployees by grade, selected periods, 1 9 8 9 -5 4

Item A ugust 1939 Ju ly 1,1946 Ju ly 1,1950 Ju ly 8,1951 Ju ly 1,1952 Ju ly 1,1953 Ju ly 1,1954

T o tal, general schedule:

N u m b er.................................................................................................................. 234,067 893,653 701,824 885,925 917,173 862,556 836,536

P ercen t.................................................................................................................. 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0

G S -1 —............................................................................................................................. 13.1 2.5 1.8 1.4- 0.9 0.8 0.7

G S -2 ................................................................................................................................. 18.1 19.3 14.5 16.6 13.7 12.1 11.4

G S -3 ................................................................................................................................. 14.7 22.8 20.6 21.8 22.1 21.5 21.0

11.5 13.6 14.8 13.9 14.7 15.1 15.1

G S -5 an d G S -6 ............................................................................................................ 17.2 13.9 14.8 14.5 14.8 14.6 14.8

G S -7 and G S -8 ............................................................................................ ............... 10.4 11.6 12.3 11.7 12.6 12.8 12.4

G S -9 and G S —10!_____________________________________________________ 6.8 7.6 9.2 8.7 9.0 9.8 10.5

G S-11............................................................................................................................... 3.8 4.0 5.1 4.8 5.0 5.6 6.0

G S-12 to G S-15........................................................................................................... 4.4 4.7 6.9 6.6 7.1 7.6 8.1

G S-16 to G S-18........................................................................................................... 0) 0) .1 .1 0)

* L ess than 0.1 percent.

Digitized for FRASER 

http://fraser.stlouisfed.org/ 

Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
14

T able 3.— M in im u m and average salaries 1 under the Classification A cts, by grade, 19S 9, 1 95 1 , and 1 9 5 4

Schedule and grade A u gust

1939

Ju ly 8, 

1951 *

Ju ly 1, 

1954

Percent in ­

crease to 

Ju ly 1, 

1954, from—

A ugust

1939

Ju ly

8,

1951

G eneral schedule

G S-1: M in im um salary rate ................... *$ 1 ,180 $2,500 $2,500 111.9 0

A verage sala ry ................................. 1,223 2,596 2,632 115.2 1.4

G S-2: M in im um salary rate ................... 1,440

1,489

2,750 2,750 91.0 0

A verage sala ry ................................. 2,861 2,955 98.5 3.3

G S -3 : M in im u m salary rate ................... 1,620 2,950 2,950 82.1 0

A verage sala ry ................................. 1,683 3,119 3,197 90.0 2.5

G S-4: M in im u m salary rate ............... 1,800 3,175 3,175 76.4 0

A verage salary ................................. 1,867 3,398 3,463 85.5 1.9

G S-5: M in im u m salary rate ................... 2,000 3,410 3,410 70.5 0

A verage salary ................................. 2,099 3,681 3,814 81.7 3.6

G S-6: M in im um salary rate ................... 2,300 3,795 3,795 65.0 0

A verage sa la r y ................................ 2,414 4,111 4,228 75.1 2.8

G S-7: M in im um salary rate ................... 2,600 4,205 4,205 61.7 0

A verage sala ry ................................ 2,704 4,495 4,574 69.2 1.8

G S-8: M in im u m salary rate ................... 2,900 4,620 4,620 59.3 0

A verage salary ................................. 3,020 4,942 5,042 67.0 2.0

G S-9: M in im u m salary rate ................... 3,200 5,060 5,060 58.1 0

A verage s a la r y ............................... 3,298 5,346 5,400 63.7 1.0

G S-10: M in im um salary rate ................. 3,500 5.500 5,500 57.1 0

Average salary ............................... 3,620 5,741 5,879 62.4 2.4

G S-11: M in im um salary rate ................. 3,800 5,940 5,940 56.3 0

Average salary ............................... 3,974 6,230 6,289 58.3 .9

G S-12: M in im um salary rate ................. 4,600 7,040 7,040 53.0 0

A verage sala ry ............................... 4,797 7,360 7,415 54.6 .7

G S-13: M in im um salary rate ................. 5,600 8,360 8,360 49.3 0

A verage salary ............................... 5,793 8,652 8,710 50.4 .7

G S-14: M in im um salary rate ................. 6,500 9,600 9,600 47.7 0

A verage salary ............................... 6,850 9,880 9,940 45.1 .6

Schedule and grade A u gust Ju ly 8, 

1951 »

Ju ly 1, 

1954

Percent increase to 

Ju ly 1, 

1954, from—

1939

A u ­

gust

1939

Ju ly

8,

1951

G eneral schedule—Coi£.

G S-15: M in im um salary rate ................. $8,000 $10,800 $10,800 35.0 0

Average salary .............................- 8,465 11,245 11,197 32.3 4 - . 4

C rafts, protective, and custodial

C P C -1 : M in im um salary rate_______ 600 1,810 1,810 201.7 0

A verage salary ......................... 690 1,870 1,999 189.7 6.9

C P C -2 : M in im u m salary rate _______ 1,080 2,420 2,420 124.1 0

A verage salary ______________ 1,166 2, 618 2,680 129.8 2.4

C P C -3 : M in im um salary rate _______ 1,200 2,552 2, 552 112.7 0

A verage salary ............................. 1,290 2,782

2,750

2,870 122.5 3.2

C P C -4 : M in im um salary rate _______ 1,320 2,750 108.3 0

A verage salary ............................. 1,400 3,008 3,100 121.4 3.1

C P C -5 : M in im um salary rate ........... 1,500 2,974 2,974 98.3 0

A verage salary ............................. 1,580 3,154 3, 282 107.7 4.1

C P C -6 : M in im um salary rate _______ 1,680 3,200 3,200 90.5 0

A verage salary ............................ 1,721 3,428 3, 511 104.0 2.4

C P C -7 : M in im um salary rate _______ 1,860 3,435 3,435 84.7 0

Average s a la r y .......................... 1,918 3,776 3,868 101.7 2.4

C P C -8 : M in im um salary rate ............... 2,000 3,740 3,740 87.0 0

Average salary ............................. 2,118 4,145 4.257 101.0 2.7

C P C -9 : M in im u m salary rate .............. 2,300 4,150 4,150 80.4 0

A verage s a la r y ...........................

C P C -10: M in im u m salary rate ........... ..

2,442 4, 559 4,653 90.5 2.1

2,600 4,565 4,565 75.6 0

A verage salary ........................... 2,709 4,978 5,114 88.8 2.7

1 A verage salaries were obtained b y w eighting each salary step w ithin the 

grade b y the n um ber o f em ployees a t th at step. In other w ords, they reflect 

the effect of increases in basic salary scales an d of m erit increases in p ay 

w ithin the grade for each period.

* E ffective date of m ost recent p ay scale revision.

* T h e m inim um w as com puted b y w eighting equally the base p ay for each 

of the 3 grades (SP -1, SP -2, and O A F-1) which were com bined under the 

general schedule.

* Percent decrease

percent. These increases compare with a rise 

of about 92 percent in the CPI from the year 

1939 to late 1954. For factory production 

workers, weekly pay more than tripled, partly 

because of increased hours of work;5 average hourly 

earnings, excluding premium pay for overtime, 

were 2K to 3 times their 1939 level. Among 

other groups, average salaries of urban teachers 

rose 96 percent from 1939 to 1953 while salary

5 H ours of Federal workers were 40 in 1954 com pared w ith 39 in 1939.

• D a ta for 1954 are not available for teachers nor policemen and firemen.

• T h e following p ay scale increases were granted during the period: A u gust 1,194*— SP-1 and 2 (now p art of G S-1) and C P C -1 through 8 increased 

from $60 to $200; July 1, 1945—20 percent on first $1,200; 10 percent on next 

$3,400; 5 percent on rem ainder, subject to a $10,000 ceiling; July 1, 1946—

14 percent or $250 a year, w hichever w as greater, b u t not more than 25 percent; July 1948—$330 increase in all rates; October 1949—A n average of $140 

a year resulting from the revision of classification structure; J uly 8, 1951—

10 percent, w ith a m inim um of $300 and a m axim um of $800.

8 A verage salary rates, including the effect of m erit increases in p ay , in 

grades C P C -6 , C P C -7 , C P C -8 , and G S-2 also rose more than the C P I.

scales for urban firemen and policemen increased 

about 80 percent. 6

Salary changes since 1939 have been proportionately greater for employees at the lower end 

of the Federal pay scale than for those in the 

higher grades.7 Within the general schedule, a 

GS-15’s minimum pay in 1939 amounted to 5%

times that of a GS-2, the lowest grade in which a 

substantial number of workers are employed; 

the corresponding ratio in 1954 was less than 4.

Minimum salary rates for workers in grades 

CPC-1 to CPC-4 and GS-1 more than doubled 

and the salary scale for CPC-5 also rose slightly 

more than the CPI. 8 For each higher grade the 

percentage gain was progressively less, with the 

GS-15 salary rising about a third and its purchasing power declining about a third during this 

15-year period.

Digitized for FRASER 

http://fraser.stlouisfed.org/ 

Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
Fe d e ra l C la ssifie d E m p lo y e e s’ Sa la ry Changes, 195 4 — 56

B a s i c p a y s c a l e s of Federal white-collar employees increased 7.6 percent between mid-1954 

and mid-1956 as a result of pay-raise legislation 

enacted by Congress in 1955. This increase, 

combined with the effect of in-grade merit or 

length-of-service adjustments and changes in the 

employment pattern, raised average salaries by

10.1 percent.

The Federal Employees Salary Increase Act of

1955.1 * signed by the President on June 28, 1955, 

raised salary scales of about 900,000 workers 

under the Classification Act, retroactive to the 

first complete pay period in March of that year. 

These workers comprise the vast majority of the 

Federal Government white-collar employees except those in the field service of the Post Office Department. Government industrial employees— 

so-called “blue collar” workers—are not covered

by the Classification Act and their rates of pay 

are determined on an area or locality basis by 

various wage boards or committees established 

by the Federal agencies employing them.

The 1955 act also raised the pay of employees 

in the legislative and judicial branches of the 

Government, in the Department of Medicine and 

Surgery of the Veterans Administration and the 

Foreign Service of the Department of State as 

well as certain employees of the District of 

Columbia Government. Also, in 1955, Congress 

enacted the Postal Field Service Compensation 

Act granting employees under it a 6-percent increase in addition to an approximate average

1 Th e act (P u blic L aw 94, 84th Cong., 1st sess.) provided for an across-theboard increase of 7.5 percent b u t contained a stipu lation th at all new rates 

which were not in m ultiples of $5 be rounded to the next higher $5 per annum . 

Because of the rounding, the average increase am ounted to 7.6 rather than

7.5 percent.

T a b l e 1 .— Indexes o f basic p a y scales, average salary rates, and average salaries 1 o f Federal classified em ployees, 1 9 3 9 -5 6

[Average 1947-49=100]

Period

B asic p ay scales Average salary rates Average salaries

All C lassification A ct 

em ployees

General

schedule

C rafts,

protective,

custodial

All C lassification Act 

em ployees

G eneral

schedule

C rafts,

protective,

custodial

All C lassification A ct 

em ployees

General

schedule

C rafts,

protective,

custodial

A u gust 1939_______ ____ _____________ 69.6 70.9 62.0 68.2 69.3 59.5 61.4 64.2 58.7

Ju n e 30, 1945_________________________ 70.4 71.0 68.3 * 69.0 * 69. 4 *6 5 .5 (*) (3) (3)

Ju ly 1, 1946____ _____________________ 93.2 93.5 91.1 90.6 90.8 88.8 87.7 87.5 90.2

Ju ly 1, 1947____ _________ _____ _____ 93.2 93.5 91.1 92.3 92.5 90.3 92.3 92.6 90.2

Ju ly 15, 1948____ ____________________ 103.4 103.3 104.4 103.5 103.5 104.4 103.1 103.0 104.3

Ju ly 1, 1949________________ __________ 103.4 103.3 104.4 104.2 104.0 105.3 104.6 104.5 105.4

Ju ly 1, 1950___ _________________ ____ 107.7 107.4 109.2 109.6 109.4 112.2 112.6 112.3 112.8

Ju ly 8, 1951......... ........................... ............... 118.5 118.0 121.0 119.3 118.8 123.8 121.4 120.6 125.3

Ju ly 1, 1952____ __________ ___________ 118.6 118.0 121.0 119.6 119.0 124.7 124.0 123.0 127.2

Ju ly 1, 1953_________ ________________ 118.5 118.0 121.0 120.7 120.0 126.1 127. 1 126.3 129.1

Ju ly 1, 1954__________________ ______ _ 118.5 118.0 121.0 121.8 121.1 127.3 129.4 128.8 129.3

Ju ly 1, 1955..................................... ............... (4) • 127. 0 (4) (4) * 130. 6 0) (*) * 140.2 (4)

Ju ly 1, 1956......................... ............................ w 127.0 (*) (4) 130.5 (4) (4) 141.8 (<)

1 B asic p ay scales reflect only statutory changes in salaries, while average 

salary rates show in addition the effect of m erit or in-grade salary increases. 

Average salaries m easure the effect not only of statutory changes in basic

pay scales and in-grade salary increases bu t the effect of changes in the proportion of w orkers em ployed in the various pay grades.

* E stim ated by assum ing the sam e distribution of employees am ong grades 

and steps within grades in 1945 as in 1939. Since there was little or no increase 

in average rates because of in-grade increases during this period, it was

assum ed that the change in basic p ay scales was virtually the sam e as in 

average salary rates.

* N ot available.

4 Index discontinued, as the general schedule now covers all Classification 

A ct employees.

4 D a ta have been adjusted to include some em ployees formerly under the 

C P C schedule who are now covered by the general schedule; about twothirds of the em ployees were transferred to wage-board classifications and 

the rem aining one-third to the general schedule.

15

Digitized for FRASER 

http://fraser.stlouisfed.org/ 

Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
16

T able 2.— Percentage distribution o f general schedule

em ployees by grade, selected periods, 1 9 8 9 -5 6

Percent of workers in—

Item

August

1939

Julyl,

1946

Julyl,

1950

July 8,

1951

Julyl,

1954

Ju lyl,

1955

July 1.

1956

GS-1.......................... 13.1 2.5 1.8 1.4 1.1 1.1 0.7

GS-2.......................... 18.1 19.3 14.5 16.6 11.5 10.9 8.9

GS-3.......................... 14.7 22.8 20.6 21.8 21.0 20.9 21.4

GS-4_________ _____ 11.5 13.6 14.8 13.9 15.7 15.8 16.4

GS-5 and GS-6......... 17.2 13.9 14.8 14.5 14.9 14.8 15.2

GS-7 and GS-8_____ 10.4 11.6 12.3 11.7 12.1 11.8 11.9

GS-9 and GS-10____ 6.8 7.6 9.2 8.7 10.1 10.1 10.2

GS-11........................ 3.8 4.0 5.1 4.8 5.8 6.1 6.3

GS-12 to GS-15......... 4.4 4.7 6.9 6.6 7.8 8.4 8.9

GS-16 to GS-18....... . 0) C) .1 .1 .1

Total................ 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0

Number of employees................................. 234,067 893,653 701,824 885,925 863,462 886,512 908,535

* L ess than 0.05 percent.

N o t e : Because of rounding, totals do not necessarily equal 100.

2-percent rise resulting from job reclassifications. 

These two laws enacted within 3 weeks of each 

other constituted the first pay legislation affecting 

white-collar employees of the Federal Government since July 8, 1951.2

This article presents data on the salaries of 

Federal employees under the Classification Act 

in the form of three types of indexes which reflect 

the changes in basic pay scales, average salary 

rates, and average salaries between July 1954 and 

July 1956. In extending the indexes for the 

period studied, only salary trends of employees 

under the general schedule were used since the 

crafts, protective, and custodial schedule was 

abolished effective July 1, 1955, in accordance 

with Public Law 763 (83d Cong., 2d sess.). Of 

the approximately 100,000 employees formerly 

under the CPC schedule, almost two-thirds (employed largely in craft jobs) were transferred to 

wage-board classifications, with their rates of pay 

established on the basis of rates prevailing in 

private industry in the labor market in which 

they were employed. The remainder (mostly 

messengers, guards, and firefighters) were placed 

in general schedule grades 1 through 8. At the

* In 1954 and 1956, there were also som e gains in supplem en tary benefits 

for Federal em ployees. Legislation passed in A u gust 1954 provided Federal 

workers w ith life insurance, including accidental death and dism em berm ent 

benefits, w ith the G overnm ent and the em ployees sharing the prem ium s. 

T h is legislation also set u p 3 additional in-grade (longevity) steps for em ployees in grades G S-11 through G S-15. In addition, retirem ent benefits were 

liberalized b y legislation,, enacted in Ju ly 1956 and effective in October of 

th at year, which increased em ployee contributions.

same time—on July 1,1955—approximately 2,500 

workers formerly under the general schedule were 

transferred to wage-board classifications.

The effect of inclusion in the general schedule 

of the 35,000 former CPC workers on the measures 

of change in salary scales and on changes in 

average salary rates has been minimized by the 

fact that the year-to-year changes in these indexes 

do not reflect shifts in the proportion of workers 

in various grades and hence do not reflect the 

increase in the number of workers in the lower 

general schedule grades resulting from the transfer. 

The index of average salaries, however, does reflect 

the transfer of CPC employees but the effect was 

small since the transferred workers amounted to 

only about 4 percent of the total number under 

the general schedule.

The basic increases authorized by the Congress 

in 1955 amounted to 7.6 percent, as indicated 

earlier. Only slight gains—amounting to 0.2 

percent—resulted from merit or length-of-service 

increases in pay between July 1954 and July 1956. 

Hence, average salary rates, affected by lengthof-service increases as well as by legislative changes 

in basic salary scales, rose 7.8 percent.

Shifts in the number of employees in the 

different pay grades, notably proportionately 

larger numbers in the higher grades, accounted

Table 3.— Percent increases in Federal classified em p loyees*

salaries, in average earnings o f factory production workers

and railw ay office em ployees, and in the C P I , 1 9 3 9 -5 6

and 1 9 5 4 -5 6

Item

A u gust 1939 

to

Ju ly 1956

Ju ly 1954 

to

Ju ly 1956

Federal classified em ployees:

B asic p ay scales (affected b y legislation o n ly ) ... 79.1 7.6

A verage salary rates (affected b y legislation and

in-grade increases)........................................................ 88.3 7.8

Average salaries (affected b y legislation, in-grade 

increases, an d changes in occupational or grade

com position of classified em ployees)..................... 111 10.1

F acto ry production workers:

Average w eekly earn ings.............................................. 230 11.4

Average hourly earnings (excluding o v ertim e).. . 200 8.0

R ailw ay office em ployees (straight-tim e m onthly 

earnings *):

All em ployees..................................................................... 127 7.7

D ivision officers, assistan ts, and staff assistan ts.. 102 14.8

C hief clerks and other su p erv iso rs1..........................

Other clerical em ployees *.............................................

104 9.3

134 6.0

Consum er Price I n d e x ........................................................ 97 1.6

1 C om puted b y B u reau of L ab o r Statistics from In terstate C om m erce C o m ­

m ission M -300 reports. T h e average w as com puted b y d ividin g total com ­

pensation for straigh t tim e actu ally w orked b y the n um ber of em ployees 

who received p ay during the m onth.

1 Professional an d subprofessional assistan ts, supervisory or chief clerks 

(m ajor departm ents), chief clerks (m inor departm ents), assistan t chief 

clerks, and supervisin g cashiers.

» C lerks and clerical specialists, clerks, m echanical device operators (office), 

stenographers an d secretaries, stenographers and typ ists, traveling auditors 

o racco u n tan ts, an d m essengers and officeboys.

Digitized for FRASER 

http://fraser.stlouisfed.org/ 

Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
17

for a further 2.3-percent rise in average salaries 

between mid-1954 and mid-1956, bringing the 

total increase in average salaries to 10.1 percent 

(table 1). The most pronounced change in the 

employment pattern was a decline in the number 

of workers in grades 1 and 2. While about

10,000 new workers, in addition to the 35,000 

transferred CPC workers, were added to the 

general schedule, the total number employed in 

these grades fell by almost 12,000 (from 12.6 

to 9.6 percent of the total). During the same

2-year period, the number of workers classified 

in the two immediately higher grades (GS-3 

and GS-4) increased by about 26,000 (from 

36.7 to 37.8 percent), with the gain being shared 

equally by the two grades. The proportion of 

workers in grades GS-11 through GS-15 also 

rose (table 2).

Salary adjustments for Federal classified employees from mid-1954 to mid-1956 were substantially greater than the increase in the 

Consumer Price Index, but they were somewhat

Digitized for FRASER 

http://fraser.stlouisfed.org/ 

Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
18

T able 4.— M in im u m and average sa la ries1 o f Federal classified em ployees, b y grade, 1 9 3 9 , 1 9 6 0 , 1 96 1 , and 1 9 5 4 -5 6

Schedule and grade

A u gust

1939

Ju ly 1, 

1950

Ju ly 8, 

1951

Ju ly 1, 

1954*

Ju ly 1,

1955

Ju ly 1, 

1956

P ercent change * to Ju ly 1, 1956, from—

A u gust

1939

Ju ly 1, 

1950

J u ly 8, 

1951

Ju ly 1, 

1954

Ju ly 1, 

1955

G eneral schedule:

Q S-1: M inim um salary rate............... 4 $1,180 $2,200 $2,500 $2,500 $2,690 $2,690 128.0 22.3 7.6 7.6 0

A verage salary ............................ 1,223 2,356 2,596 2,624 2,013 2,942 140.6 24.9 13.3 12.1 1.0

G S-2: M in im um salary rate .............. 1,440 2,450 2,750 2,760 2,960 2,960 105.6 20.8 7.6 7.6 0

Average salary ........................... 1,489 2.639 2,861 2,954 3,186 3,157 112.0 19.6 10.3 6.9 - . 9

G S-3: M in im um salary rate ............ .. 1,620 2,650 2,950 2,950 3,175 3,175 96.0 19.8 7.6 7.6 0

Average salary ........................... 1,683 2,866 3,119 3,198 3,446 3,434 104.0 19.8 10.1 7.4 - . 3

G S-4: M inim um salary rate_______ 1,800 2,875 3,175 3,175 3,415 3,415 89.7 18.8 7.6 7.6 0

A verage salary ______________ 1,867 3,103 3,398 3,463 3,738 3.737 100.2 20.4 10.0 7.9 (s)

G S-5: M inim um salary rate .............. 2,000 3,100 3,410 3,410 3,670 3,670 83.5 18.4 7.6 7.6 0

Average salary______________ 2,099 3,405 3,681 3,813 4,129 4,128 96.7 21.2 12.1 8.3 (»)

G S-6: M inim um salary rate_______ 2,300 3,450 3,795 3,795 4,080 4,080 77.4 18.3 7.5 7.5 0

Average salary........................... 2,414 3,780 4,111 4,228 4,566 4,561 88.9 20.7 10.9 7.9 - . 1

G S-7: M inim um salary rate_______ 2,600 3,825 4,205 4,205 4,525 4,525 74.0 18.3 7.6 7.6 0

A verage salary........................... 2,704 4,154 4,495 4,574 4,960 4,967 83.7 19.6 10.5 8.6 .1

G S-8: M inim um salary rate............... 2,900 4,200 4,620 4,620 4,970 4,970 71.4 18.3 7.6 7.6 0

A verage salary........................... 3,020 4,553 4,942 5,043 5,449 5,477 81.4 20.3 10.8 8.6 .5

G S-9: M inim um salary r a t e ............ 3,200 4,600 5,060 5,060 5,440 5,440 70.0 18.3 7.5 7.5 0

Average salary........................... 3,298 4,923 5,346 5,400 5,825 5,831 76.8 18.4 9.1 8.0 .1

G S-10: M inim um salary rate .............. 3,500 5,000 5,500 5,500 5,915 5,915 69.0 18.3 7.5 7.5 0

Average salary............................ 3,620 5,279 5,741 5,879 6,344 6,361 75.7 20.5 10.8 8.2 .3

G S-11: M inim um salary rate_______ 3,800 5.400 5,940 5,940 6,390 6,390 68.2 18.3 7.6 7.6 0

Average salary ........................... 3,974 5,734 6,230 6,289 6,768 6,773 70.4 18.1 8.7 7.7 .1

G S-12: M inim um salary rate_______ 4,600 6,400 7,040 7,040 7,570 7,570 64.6 18.3 7.5 7.5 0

Average salary........................... 4,797 6,759 7,360 7,415 7,975 7,966 66.1 17.9 8.2 7.4 - . 1

G S-13: M inim um salary rate .............. 5, GOO 7,600 8,360 8,360 8,990 8,990 60.5 18.3 7.5 7.5 0

Average salary............................ 5,793 7,931 8,652 8,710 9,381 9,385 62.0 18.3 8.5 7.7 (s)

G S-14: M inim um salary rate............... 6,500 8,800 9,600 9,600 10,320 10,320 58.8 17.3 7.5 7.5 0

A verage salary ............................ 6,850 9,150 9,880 9,941 10,682 10,682 55.9 16.7 8.1 7.5 0

G S-15: M inim um salary rate............... 8,000 10,500 10,800 10,800 11,610 11,610 45.1 10.6 7.5 7.5 0

A verage salary............................ 8,460 10,577 11,245 11,198 12,034 12,052 42.4 13.9 7.2 7.6 .1

G S-16: M inim um salary r a te .............. 00 11,200 12,000 12,900 12,900 12,900 (•) 15.2 7.5 7.5 0

Average sa la r y .......................... 00 11,232 12,044 12,225 13,125 13,135 00 16.9 9.1 7.4 .1

G S-17: M inim um salary rate............... 00 12,200 13,000 13,000 13,975 13,975 CO 14.5 7.5 7.5 0

Average salary............................ 00 12,288 13,045 13,139 14,122 14,134 00 15.0 8.3 7.6 .1

GS-18: M inim um salary rate............... 00 14,000 14,800 14,800 14,800 7 14,800 00 5.7 0 0 0

Average salary ............................ (•) 14,000 14,800 14,800 14,800 7 14,800 00 5.7 0 0 0

1 Average salaries were obtained b y weighting each salary step w ithin the 

grade b y the num ber of em ployees at th at step. In other w ords, they reflect 

the effect of increases in basic salary scales an d of m erit increases in p ay 

w ithin the grade for each period.

 Increase unless preceded b y a m inus sign.

* D ata include former C P C em ployees transferred into the schedule and 

exclude em ployees transferred from the general schedule into wage-board 

classifications. O nly in grade 1 (where the average w as lowered from $2,632 

to $2,624) did these transfers change the averages b y more than $1.

4 Th e m inim um w as com puted b y weighting equally the base p ay for each 

of the 3 grades (SP -1, S P -2 , and C A F -1 ) which were com bined under the 

general schedule.

8 L ess th an 0.05 percent.

• G rades 16, 17, and 18 were created under the Classification A ct of 1949 

(Oct. 28,1949).

7 Legislation passed in Ju ly 1956 raised the rate for grade 18 to $16,000.

less than the rise in earnings of women office 

clerical workers in five major metropolitan areas.3 

Comparisons with other groups of workers are 

presented in table 3, but no attempt has been 

made to show the increases in either salary scales 

in private industry or in prices that have occurred 

since July 1956.

For the entire period since 1939, salary increases 

of employees under the Federal Classification

3 Straight-tim e weekly p ay of women office clerical workers rose as follows:

Per- Percent cent

A tlan ta ........................ ................. 8.5 L o s A ngeles-Long B each___.. 8.5

C hicago........................ ................. 8.0 N ew Y ork C ity .......................... 9.6

C levelan d.................... ................. 10.6

T h e office worker indexes, based on d ata from the B u reau ’s occupational 

wage surveys, m easure changes in earnings w ithin the sam e occupation and 

hence are m ost com parable to the index of average salary rates for Federal 

em ployees. Inform ation for these cities w as collected in the following 

periods: A tlan ta— M arch 1954 and A pril 1956; Chicago— M arch 1954 an d 

A pril 1956; C leveland— October 1954 an d October 1956; L os A ngeles-Long 

Beach—M arch 1954 and M arch 1956; N ew Y ork C ity—F eb ru ary 1954 a n a 

A p r i l 1 9 5 6 * F o r d a t a c o v e r i n g t h e p e r i o d 1 9 5 4 — 5 7 * s e e f o o t n o t e 

3 , P * g ® 2 1 j.

Act have not kept pace with average salaries of 

railway office employees. Likewise, over the 

same period (1939-56), salaries of employees 

subject to the Classification Act have not increased 

as much as the Consumer Price Index except 

when measured by the index of average salaries, 

which takes into account shifts in the proportions 

of employees within the classified grades. The 

increase, as reflected by this index, amounted to 

111 percent as against a 97-percent rise in the 

Consumer Price Index.

An analysis of the movement of salary rates of 

individual general schedule grades since 1939 

indicates that only in grades 1 and 2 have basic 

salary rates and accompanying within-grade increases been greater than the rise in the Consumer 

Price Index. The rise in average salaries from 

1939 to 1956 amounted to about 140 percent in 

grade 1 and 112 percent in grade 2. It was

Digitized for FRASER 

http://fraser.stlouisfed.org/ 

Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
19

progressively less for the higher grades, with the 

increase in grade 15 amounting to 42 percent 

(table 4 and chart).

These marked differences in salary trends 

among grades resulted from the provision in pay 

legislation of (a) increases that were identical in 

dollars irrespective of grade or (b) uniform percentage increases in some grades combined with a 

minimum and maximum dollar ceiling that resulted in higher percentage increases in the lowest 

grades and lower proportionate increases in the 

higher grades. Only the 1955 legislation provided 

uniform percentage adjustments for all grades 

(except GS-18, where there was no increase until 

1956).4 As a result of this trend, the highest 

salary in the general schedule in 1954 was about 6

times the lowest, whereas in 1939 the ratio was 

almost 9. The adjustments put into effect in 

1955, combined with the 1956 advance in the 

maximum salary for grade 18, did not further 

widen the range of rates for white-collar workers: 

The new maximum rate for grade 18—$16,000— 

was still only 6 times the minimum rate for 

grade l.5

4 P ublic L aw 854 (84th Cong., 2d sess.), approved Ju ly 31, 1956, increased 

basic p ay rates for certain Federal officials, including those in grade GS-18.

5 The top grade in 1939 w as com parable to GS-15 and was GS-18 in 1956; 

the bottom grade in 1939 w as S P -1 . T h e ratio between the top G S-15 salary 

(excluding longevities) and the m inim um G S-1 rate in 1956 was about 4% 

to 1. If the m easurem ent of the spread in grades in 1939 included the C P O 

grades, the narrowing w ould be even more pronounced.

Digitized for FRASER 

http://fraser.stlouisfed.org/ 

Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
Fe d e ra l C la ss ifie d E m p lo y e e s’ Sa la ry Changes, 1957

The following tables and revised footnote 3 bring up to date through July 1957 the

data contained in the article "Federal C lassified Employees’ Salary Changes, 1 9 5 4 -5 6 .”

T A B LE 1. Indexes of b a sic pay s c a le s , av erage sa la ry r a te s, and av erage s a l a r i e s 1 

of F e d e ral c la ssifie d em ployees, 1939—57

(A verage 1947—49 - 100)

P eriod

B a sic pay sc a le s A verage sa la ry rate s A verage sa la r ie s

A ll

C la s s ification A ct 

em plovees

General

schedule

C ra fts, 

protective, 

custodial

All

C la s s ification Act 

em olovees

G eneral

schedule

C ra fts, 

protective, 

custodial

A ll

C la s s ification Act 

em plovees

G eneral

schedule

C ra fts, 

protective, 

custodial

August 1939 ------------------- 69 .6 70.9 62.0 68.2 69. 3 59.5 6 1 .4 64.2 58. 7

June 30 , 1945----------------- 70.4 71.0 68.3 2 69. 0 2 69. 4 2 65. 5 n (3) (3)

Ju ly 1, 1946 ...................... 93.2 93. 5 91. 1 90. 6 90. 8 88. 8 87. 7 87. 5 90.2

Ju ly 1, 1947 ........................ 93.2 93.5 91. 1 92. 3 92. 5 90. 3 92.3 9 2 .6 90.2

Ju ly 15,, 1948 ----------------- 103. 4 103. 3 104.4 103. 5 103. 5 104.4 103. 1 103. 0 104. 3

Ju ly 1, 1949 - - ------- 103.4 103. 3 104. 4 104.2 104. 0 105. 3 104. 6 104. 5 105.4

Ju ly 1, 1950............................. 107.7 107.4 109.2 109. 6 109. 4 112.2 112. 6 112. 3 112. 8

Ju ly 8, 1951 - - ............. 118. 5 118. 0 121.0 1 19. Ir 118. 8 123. 8 121.4 120. 6 125. 3

July 1, 1952 ------------------- 118.5 118. 0 121.0 119. 6 119. 0 124. 7 124.0 123. 0 127.2

Ju ly 1, 1953 - —.................. 118.5 118. 0 121.0 120. 7 120. 0 126. 1 127. 1 126. 3 129. 1

July 1, 1954........................— 118. 5 118. 0 121.0 121. 8 121. 1 127. 3 129.4 128. 8 129. 3

Ju ly 1, 1955------------------- (4 ) 5 127. 0 <!> (4 ) *1 3 0 .6 (4 ) (4 ) s 14 0 .2 (4 )

Ju ly 1, 1956----- ------- (4 ) 127.0 (4 ) <;> 130. 5 (4 ) (4 ) 141.8 (j>

Ju ly 1, 1957—............. .......... (4 ) 127.0 (4 ) (4 ) 130. 6 (4 ) (4 ) 144. 8 (4 )

1 B a s ic pay sc a le s refle ct only statutory changes in sa la r ie s , while average sa la ry rates show in addition the effect of 

m erit or in -grade sa la ry in c re a se s. A verage sa la r ie s m easu re the effect not only of statutory changes in b a sic pay sc a le s 

and in -grade sa la ry in c re a se s but the effect of changes in the proportion of w orkers employed in the various pay g rad es.

2 E stim ated by assum in g the sam e distribution of em ployees among grad es and steps within grad es in 1945 a s in 1939. 

Since there was little or no in c rease in average rates because of in -grade in c re a se s during this period, it was assu m ed that 

the change in b a sic pay sc a le s was virtually the sam e as in average sa la ry ra te s.

3 Not availab le.

4 Index discontinued, a s the general schedule now covers all C lassific atio n Act em ployees.

5 Data have been adjusted to include som e em ployees form erly under the CPC schedule who are now covered by the 

gen eral schedule; about tw o-thirds of the em ployees were tran sferred to w age-board classific atio n s and the rem aining onethird to the general schedule.

T A B LE 2. P ercen tage distribution of gen eral schedule em ployees by grad e, selected p erio d s, 1939—57

P ercent of w orkers in—

Item August July 1, Ju ly 1, July 8, July 1, July 1, July 1, July 1,

1939 1946 1950 1951 1954 1955 1956 1957

GS-1 ...................................... 13. 1 2 .5 1. 8 1.4 1.1 1. 1 0. 7 0. 5

G S -2 .......................................— 18. 1 19.3 14. 5 16.6 11.5 10. 9 8 .9 7.2

G S - 3 ............................................ 14. 7 22. 8 2 0 .6 21. 8 2 1 .0 2 0 .9 2 1 .4 2 0 .8

GS-4 ....................................... 11.5 13. 6 14.8 13.9 15. 7 15. 8 16.4 16.8

GS-5 and G S -6 ........................ 17.2 13.9 14. 8 14. 5 14.9 14. 8 15.2 15. 7

GS-7 and G S -8 ........................ 10.4 11.6 12.3 11. 7 12. 1 11. 8 11.9 11.5

GS-9 and G S - 1 0 -------------- 6 .8 7 .6 9.2 8. 7 10. 1 10. 1 10.2 10. 6

G S-11 .................................. 3. 8 4. 0 5. 1 4. 8 5. 8 6. 1 6.3 6.9 GS-12 to G S-15 ...................... 4 .4 4. 7 6.9 6. 6 7. 8 8 .4 8 .9 9 .9 G S-16 to G S-18 ..................... - - (M (1) . 1 . 1 . 1 . 1

T o t a l-------------------- ----- 1QQ.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100. 0 100. 0

Number of em ploy ees------ 234,067 893,653 701,824 885,925 863,462 886,512 908,535 927,822

1 L e ss than 0. 05 percent.

NOTE: B ecau se of rounding, totals do not n e c e ssa rily equal 100.

20

Digitized for FRASER 

http://fraser.stlouisfed.org/ 

Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
21

TA B LE 3. Percent in c re a se s in F ed eral cla ssifie d em ployees* s a la r ie s , 

in average earnings of factory production w orkers and railw ay office em ployees, 

and in the CPI, 1939 to 1957 and 1954 to 1957

Item

P ercentage in c re ase s

August 1939 ! Ju ly 1954

to j to

July 1957 July 1957

F e d e ral c la ssifie d em ployees:

B a sic pay sc a le s (affected by legislation

on ly )---------------------------------------------------------

A verage sa la ry rates (affected by legislation

and in-grade in c re a se s) -------------------------------

A verage sa la r ie s (affected by legislation , 

in-grade in c re a se s, and changes in 

occupational or grade com position of

cla ssifie d e m p lo y e e s)--------------------——■ -------

F acto ry production w orkers:

A verage weekly e a rn in g s--------------------------------

A verage hourly earnings (excluding

o v e r t im e ) -------------------------------------------------

Railway office em ployees (straigh t-tim e monthly 

earn in gs: 1 )

D ivision o ffic e rs, a ssis ta n ts , and staff

a ssista n ts -------------------------------------------------

Chief cle rk s and other su p erv iso rs 2 ---------------

Other c le ric a l em ployees 3 -----------------------------

Consum er P ric e In d e x ---------------------------------------

79.1 

88. 5

126

244

218

150

117

1 2 0

158

103

7. 6

7.9

12.4

15.9

14.2

18. 3

23. 3 

18. 0 

16. 7

4 .9

1 Computed by Bureau of Labor Statistics from In terstate C om m erce C om m ission 

M -300 rep o rts. The average was computed by dividing total com pensation for straigh t time 

actually worked by the number of em ployees who received pay during the month.

2 P ro fessio n al and su bp rofessio n al a ssis ta n ts , su p erv iso ry or chief clerk s (m ajor 

departm ents), chief clerks (minor departm ents), a ssista n t chief cle rk s, and supervising 

c a sh ie rs.

3 C lerk s and c le ric a l sp e c ia lists, c le rk s, m echanical device operators (office), stenograph ers and se c r e ta r ie s, stenograph ers and ty p ists, traveling auditors or accountants, and 

m essen g ers and office boys.

3 The data on weekly pay of women c le ric a l w orkers, presen ted in footnote 3 on 

page 22, have been rev ised . Straigh t-tim e weekly pay of women office c le ric a l w orkers 

ro se between 1954 and 1957 a s follow s:

P ercen t P ercent

Atlanta ----------------------------- 12.2 Los A ngeles—Long B e a c h ------15.2

C h icago ----------------------------- 13.9 New York C ity ---------------------15.3

C le v e la n d -------------------------- N.A.

The office w orker indexes, based on data from the B u reau 's occupational wage 

su rv ey s, m easu re changes in earnings within the sam e occupation and hence are 

m ost com parable to the index of average sa la ry rates for F ed eral em ployees. 

Inform ation for these cities was collected in the following p erio d s: Atlanta - 

M arch 1954 and A pril 1957; Chicago - M arch 1954 and A pril 1957; Cleveland - 

not surveyed in 1957; Los A ngeles—Long Beach - M arch 1954 and M arch 1957;

New York City - F eb ru ary 1954 and A pril 1957.

Digitized for FRASER 

http://fraser.stlouisfed.org/ 

Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
Federal Classified Employees’ Salary Changes, 1955—58

B a s i c p a y s c a l e s of Federal employees whose 

salaries were determined by the Classification Act 

were raised by an average of 10.1 percent,1 by 

legislation enacted by the 85th Congress in June 

1958. This general pay raise, retroactive to the 

first pay period of January 1958, was the first 

change in salary scales under the Classification 

Act since 1955, except for an increase in the maximum salaries for grades 17 and 18 in 1956. (See 

table 1.) During the period intervening between 

these general pay increases, average salary rates 

rose about 1 percent as a result of in-grade or 

automatic length-of-service adjustments, while 

changes in the proportion of workers in various 

pay grades added about 6 percent to average 

salaries. Hence, the total rise in average salary 

rates from July 1955 to July 1958, reflecting both 

the effect of legislation and in-grade pay increases, 

amounted to 11 percent, and the total rise in 

average salaries, affected by those factors plus 

changes in the proportion of workers in various 

pay grades, was 17.4 percent. The increase in 

average salary rates resulting from in-grade adjustments was concentrated in the year ending 

July 1958 and was traceable mainly to a new

policy of hiring workers in certain fields at rates 

above the minimum for their grade. The increase 

in average salaries attributable to changes in the 

grade composition of the Federal labor force was 

spread over the 3-year period.

Over the period from mid-1955 to mid-1958, 

all three measures of Federal Classified employees’ salaries rose more than the 8-percent 

advance in the Bureau of Labor Statistics’ Consumer Price Index. However, two measures of 

Federal pay—basic pay scales and average salary 

rates—rose less than the earnings of women office 

employees in private industry (whose increases in 

certain major labor markets ranged from 13.7 

to 16.4 percent) and less than the average hourly 

earnings of factory production workers (13.7 percent) .2 The third measure of Federal pay— 

average salaries—increased less than the earnings 

of railway office employees (28.2 percent), but 

more than the earnings of women office workers 

in industry generally. The average salary figure 

for Federal workers is appreciably affected by

1 E ach scale w as raised 10 percent, roun ded to m ultiples of $5.

2 Th e sm aller increase in w eekly earnings of factory production workers w as

due to the temporary reduction in their hours of work during late 1957 and

early 1958.

T a b l e 1 . I n d e x e s o f b a s i c p a j s c a l e s , a v e r a g e s a l a r y r a t e s , a n d a v e r a g e s a l a r i e s 1 o f F e d e r a l c l a s s i f i e d e m p l o y e e s , 1 9 3 9 - 5 8

[Average 1947-49=100]

Period

B asic p ay scales Average salary rates Average salaries

A ll C lassification Act 

em ployees

General

schedule

C rafts, protective, 

custodial

All C lassification A ct 

em ployees

General

schedule

C rafts, protective, 

custodial

All C lassification A ct 

em ployees

General

schedule

C rafts, protective, 

custodial

A u gust 1939................ 69.6 70.9 62.0 68.2 69.3 59.5 61.4 64.2 58.7

Ju n e 30,1945............... 70.4 71.0 68.3 2 69.0 2 69.4 2 65.5 (») (») (3)

Ju ly 1,1946................. 93.2 93.5 91.1 90.6 90.8 88.8 87.7 87.5 90.2

Ju ly 1, 1947................. 93.2 93.5 91.1 92.3 92.5 90.3 92.3 92.6 90.2

Ju ly 15, 1948............... 103.4 103.3 104.4 103.5 103.5 104.4 103.1 103.0 104.3

Ju ly 1, 1949................. 103.4 103.3 104.4 104.2 104.0 105.3 104.6 104.5 105.4

Ju ly 1, 1950................. 107.7 107.4 109.2 109.6 109.4 112.2 112.6 112.3 112.8

Ju ly 8, 1951............... .. 118.5 118.0 121.0 119.3 118.8 123.8 121.4 120.6 125.3

Ju ly 1, 1952................. 118.5 118.0 121.0 119.6 119.0 124.7 124.0 123.0 127.2

Ju ly 1, 1953................. 118.5 118.0 121.0 120.7 120.0 126.1 127.1 126.3 129.1

Ju ly 1, 1954................. 118.5 118.0 121.0 121.8 121.1 127.3 129.4 128.8 129.3

Ju ly 1, 1955................. (4) 8 127.0 (4) (4) 8 130.6 (4) (4) 8 140.2 (4)

Ju ly 1,1956................. (4) 127.0 (4) (*) 130.5 h (4) 141.8 (4)

Ju ly 1, 1957................. (4) 127.0 (*) (4) 130.6 (4) (4) 144.8 (<)

Ju ly 1,1958................. (4) 139.8 (4) (4) 145.0 (4) (4) 164.6 (4)

i B asic p ay scales reflect only statu to ry changes in salaries, while average 

salary rates show in addition the effect of m erit or in-grade salary increases. 

A verage salaries m easure the effect not only of statu to ry changes in basic 

p ay scales and in-grade salary increases b u t the effect of changes in the proportion of workers em ployed in the various p ay grades.

* E stim ated b y assum in g the sam e d istribu tion of em ployees am ong grades 

an d steps w ithin grades in 1945 as in 1939. Since there w as little or n o increase in average rates because of in-grade increases during this period, it

w as assum ed th at the change in basic p ay scales w as virtually the sam e as 

in average salary rates.

* N o t available.

4 Index discontinued, as the general schedule now covers all Classification 

A ct em ployees.

* D a ta have been ad ju sted to include those em ployees form erly under the 

C P C schedule who are now covered b y the general schedule; about tw o-thirds 

of the em ployees were transferred to wage-board classifications an d the rem aining one-third to the general schedule.

Digitized for FRASER 

22

http://fraser.stlouisfed.org/ 

Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
23

T a b l e 2 . P e r c e n t d i s t r i b u t i o n o f g e n e r a l s c h e d u l e e m p l o y e e s b y g r a d e , s e l e c t e d p e r i o d s , 1 9 3 9 - 5 8

General schedule grade A ugust 1939 Ju ly 1, 1946 Ju ly 1, 1950 Ju ly 8, 1951 Ju ly 1, 1954 Ju ly 1, 1955 Ju ly 1, 1956 Ju ly 1, 1957 Ju ly 1, 1958

1_________________________ 13.1 2.5 1.8 1.4 1.1 1.1 0.7 0.5 0.4

2.................... ........... ................. 18.1 19.3 14.5 16.6 11.5 10.9 8.9 7.2 5.8

3____________________ _____ 14.7 22.8 20.6 21.8 21.0 20.9 21.4 20.8 19.5

4 ,................................................ 11.5 13.6 14.8 13.9 115.8 15.8 16.4 16.8 16.9

5 and 6__________________ 17.2 13.9 14.8 14.5 14.9 14.8 15.2 15.7 15.7

7 and 8..................................... 10.4 11.6 12.3 11.7 12.1 11.8 11.9 11.5 11.6

9 and 10_________________ 6.8 7.6 9.2 8.7 10.1 10.1 10.2 10.6 11.3

11_______ ______ _________ 3.8 4.0 5.1 4.8 5.8 6.1 6.3 6.9 7.6

12 through 15____ _______ 4.4 4.7 6.9 6.6 7.8 8.4 8.9 9.9 11.1

16 through 18............. ............ (’ ) (2) .1 . 1 . 1

T o ta l_____ ________ 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0

N u m b er of em ployees........ 234.067 893, 653 701. 824 885,925 1864,126 886, 512 908, 535 927, 822 921,153

1 R evised. N o t e : Because of rounding, totals m ay not equal 100.

3 L ess than 0.05 percent.

changes in grade composition, whereas the change 

in pay of office workers in industry excluded the 

effects of shifts in employment among positions.

T a b l e 3 . P e r c e n t i n c r e a s e s in F e d e r a l c l a s s i f i e d e m p l o y e e s ' 

s a l a r i e s , in a v e r a g e e a r n i n g s o f f a c t o r y p r o d u c t i o n 

w o r k e r s a n d o f f ic e e m p l o y e e s , a n d in t h e C P I , 1 9 3 9 - 5 8 

a n d 1 9 5 5 - 5 8

Item

A u gust 1939 1 Ju ly 1955 

to Ju ly 1958 to Ju ly

1958

Federal classified em ployees:

B asic p ay scales (affected b y legislation o n ly ).. 

A verage salary rates (affected b y legislation

and in-grade increases)_____________________

Average salaries (affected b y legislation, ingrade increases, and changes in occupational 

or grade com position of classified em ployees) . 

F actory production workers:

A verage w eekly earn ings-------- -------------------

Average hourly earnings (excluding overtim e) . 

Office em ployees:

A ll railw ay office em ployees (straight-tim e

m onthly e arn in gs)3_______________ _______

D ivision officers, assistan ts, and staff assistan ts.............. ............. ......................... ..................... ..

Chief clerks and other supervisors 3......................

Other clerical em ployees 4---------------------------

W omen office clerical em ployees, selected cities 

(straight-tim e w eekly sa la r ie s):3

B o sto n ...............................................................................

N ew Y ork C ity ____________________ __________

P h iladelph ia_________________________________

A tlan ta -------------------------------- ------------------

D a llas_____________ ________________ _________

M em p h is------------------------------------------------

C h ic a g o ..........................................................................

C levelan d__________ _________ _______________

M in n eapolis-St. P au l_____ __________________

Los A ngeles-Long B each _____________________

P ortland, Oreg.............................................. ...............

San Fran cisco-O aklan d_________________ ____

Consum er Price In dex....................... ..................... ..........

97.2

109.2

156

262

232

129

135

177

(«)

(•)

00

(•)

(0)

00

(#) (•)

00

00

00

00

1 1 0

1 0 .1

1 1 . 0

17.4

9.4

13.7

21.9

28.5

14.3

15.3

16.4 

16.1 

14.8 

13.7 

15.2

19.6

13.7

14.8

14.5

14.6

8 . 0

3 D a ta for factory production workers and for railw ay office em ployees 

w as com puted from Ju ly 1939.

3 C om puted b y B u reau of L ab or S tatistics from Interstate Com m erce Com ­

m ission M -300 reports. Th e average w as com puted b y dividin g total compensation for straight tim e actually worked b y the num ber of em ployees 

who received p ay during the m onth.

3 Includes professional and subprofessional assistan ts, supervisory or chief 

clerks (m ajor d epartm ents), chief clerks (minor departm ents), assistan t 

chief clerks, and supervising cashiers.

4 Includes clerks and clerical specialists, clerks, m echanical device operators (office), stenographers and secretaries, stenographers and typ ists, traveling auditors or accountants, and m essengers and office boys.

3 Survey periods were as follows: Boston, A pril 1955 and Septem ber 1957; 

New Y ork C ity, M arch 1955 and A pril 1958; P hiladelphia, N ovem ber 1954 

and October 1957; A tlan ta, M arch 1955 and M a y 1958; D allas, Septem ber 

1954 and October 1957; M em phis, F eb ru ary 1955 and Jan u ary 1958; Chicago, 

April 1955 and A pril 1958; C leveland, October 1954 and Ju n e 1958; M inneapolis-St. P au l, N ovem ber 1954 and Jan u ary 1958; L os A ngeles-Long Beach, 

M arch 1955 and M arch 1958; P ortlan d, Oreg., A pril 1955 and A pril 1958; 

San Francisco-O akland, Ja n u a ry 1955 and Jan u ary 1958.

3 D a ta not available.

1958 Legislative and In-Grade Increases

The Federal Employees Salary Increase Act of 

1958 3 was signed by the President on June 20, 

1958. Like the 1955 act, it provided for retroactive payment of the increased scales; the new rates 

were made effective from the first pay period in 

January 1958. This act and other legislation 

passed in May 1958 also raised the pay of certain 

other Federal workers whose rates are determined 

directly by congressional action.4

The rise in classified employees’ average salary 

rates from mid-1957 to mid-1958 resulting from an 

increase in the proportion of workers at the higher 

pay steps within a grade was concentrated in the 

higher pay grades. It occurred despite an increase 

in the number of workers employed in these grades; 

the entrance rates at which new workers usually 

start ordinarily would reduce average salaries 

within a grade. In December 1957, the Civil 

Service Commission increased rates within certain 

scientific and engineering occupations for all employees, even those newly hired, to the top step of 

their respective grades; it was this action that was 

responsible for most of the rise in average salary 

rates traceable to in-grade pay increases. 5

3 P ublic L aw 462, 85th C ong., 2d sess.

4 These workers included legislative an d judicial em ployees, em ployees 

of the D epartm ent of M edicine and Surgery of the Veterans A dm inistration, 

the Foreign Service, theP ostal Field Service, and the A rm ed Forces. M ost of 

the changes affecting the P o stal F ield Service were m ade in a bill signed in 

M a y which provided increases averaging 7H percent, plus an additional 2M

percent “ tem porary” cost-of-living increase for workers in the 6 lowest grades; 

how ever,P ublic L aw 462 extended the cost-of-living increase to the rem aining 

grades of the P ostal F ield Service. C om pen sation of m em bers of the arm ed 

services w as increased b y from 6 to 47 percent, depending on length of service 

and ran k, b y another bill also signed in M ay . The r a y of “ blue-coHar” 

em ployees of the Federal G overnm ent w as not affected b y these bills since 

Congress has delegated authority to set their p ay to wage boards.

5 F o r a description of the C ivil Service regulations raising p ay to the top of 

the grade, see W age C hronology N o . 13, Federal Classification A ct E m plo yees, Supplem ent N o. 2, 1952-58 (in M on thly L ab o r Review , D ecem ber 1958, 

pp. 1382-1389).

Digitized for FRASER 

http://fraser.stlouisfed.org/ 

Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
24

Changes in Employment Among Grades

As indicated earlier, a substantial part of the 

increase in average salaries between mid-1955 and 

mid-1958 was traceable to an increase in the proportion of workers in the higher salaried grades 

(table 2). The most notable changes were a reduction in the proportion of workers classified in grade 

GS-2, from 11 to 6 percent of all classified workers, 

and an advance in the proportion in grades 12 

through 15 from 8 to 11 percent.

A statement by the chairman of the U.S. Civil 

Service Commission, Harris Ellsworth, before the 

Subcommittee on Manpower Utilization of the 

House Committee on Post Office and Civil Service 

in December 1958 mentioned a number of technological and functional factors that have contributed to changes in grade composition of the 

Civil Service during the period since the early 

1940's. He stated that “The adoption of improved 

operating methods and techniques and the mechanization pf work processes have influenced grade

patterns in the Federal service over a period of 

years. Routine tasks best lend themselves to 

mechanization, and thousands of lower grade positions have disappeared because of photocopy 

equipment, letter-writing machines, microfilm, 

addressing machines, and data-processing equipment. . . . As the Government has been forced 

to hire additional scientists in such advanced fields 

as physics, electronics, and aeronautics, the average grade level has been influenced accordingly.” 

He also pointed out that with development of a 

tight labor market, there has been a shift in classification of positions in borderline cases. Finally, 

Mr. Ellsworth indicated that during the depression 

of the 1930's, Government employees' positions 

were classified very conservatively to maintain 

some balance between Government and private 

salaries but that, subsequently, as industrial salaries increased more rapidly than the salaries of 

employees in the Government service, a more 

liberal approach to classification had been 

adopted.

T a b l e 4 . M i n i m u m a n d a v e r a g e s a l a r i e s 1 o f F e d e r a l c l a s s i f i e d e m p l o y e e s , b y g r a d e , s e l e c t e d p e r i o d s , 1 9 3 9 - 5 8

General schedule grade

A u gust

1939

Ju ly 1, 

1950

Ju ly 8, 

1951

Ju ly 1, 

1955

Ju ly 1, 

1957

Ju ly 1, 

1958

Percent change to Ju ly 1, 1958, from—

A u gust

1939

Ju ly 1, 

1950

Ju ly 8, 

1951

Ju ly 1, 

1955

Ju ly 1, 

1957

1: M inim um salary rate---- 3 $1,180 $2,200 $2,500 $2,690 $2,690 $2,960 150.8 34.5 18.4 10.0 10.0

Average salary.................... 1,223 2,356 2,596 2,913 2,951 3,260 166.6 38.4 25.6 11.9 10.5

2: M in im um salary rate___ 1,440 2,450 2,750 2,960 2,960 3,255 126.0 32.9 18.4 i a o 10.0

A verage salary........ ........... 1,489 2,639 2,861 3.186 3,155 3,498 134.9 32.6 22.3 9.8 10.9

3: M inim um salary rate___ 1,620 2,650 2,950 3,175 3,175 3,495 115.7 31.9 18.5 10.1 10.1

Average sala ry _____ ____ 1,683 2,866 3,119 3,446 3,433 3,804 126.0 32.7 22.0 10.4 10.8

4: M in im um salary rate___ 1,800 2,875 3,175 3,415 3,415 3, 755 108.6 30.6 18.3 10.0 10.0

Average salary ................-- 1,867 3,103 3,398 3,738 3, 737 4,126 121.0 33.0 21.4 10.4 10.4

5: M inim um salary rate___ 2,000 3,100 3,410 3,670 3,670 4,040 102.0 30.3 18.5 10.1 10.1

Average salary .................... 2,099 3,405 3,681 4,129 4,128 4, 570 117.7 34.2 24.2 10.7 10.7

6: M in im um salary rate___ 2,300 3,450 3,795 4,080 4,080 4,490 95.2 30.1 18.3 10.0 10.0

Average salary ............ ........ 2,414 3,780 4,111 4,566 4, 541 5,031 108.4 33.1 22.4 10.2 10.8

7: M inim um salary rate___ 2,600 3,825 4,205 4,525 4,525 4,980 91.5 30.2 18.4 10.1 10.1

Average salary _____ ____ 2,704 4,154 4,495 4,960 4,967 5,471 102.3 31.7 21.7 10.3 10.1

8: M inim um salary rate___ 2,900 4,200 4,620 4,970 4,970 5,470 88.6 30.2 18.4 10.1 10.1

Average salary .................. .. 3,020 4,553 4,942 5,499 5,437 5,945 96.9 30.6 20.3 8.1 9.3

9: M inim um salary rate___ 3,200 4,600 5,060 5,440 5,440 5,985 87.0 30.1 18.3 10.0 10.0

Average salary ...... ............. 3,298 4,923 5,346 5,825 5,861 6,460 95.9 31.2 20.8 10.9 10.2

10: M in im um salary rate___ 3,500 5,000 5,500 5,915 5,915 6,505 85.9 30.1 18.3 10.0 10.0

Average sala ry ................... 3,620 5,279 5,741 6,344 6,348 6,959 92.2 31.8 21.2 9.7 9.6

11: M in im um salary rate___ 3,800 5,400 5,940 6,390 6,390 7,030 85.0 30.2 18.4 10.0 10.0

Average salary ------------- 3,974 5,734 6,230 6,768 6,862 7,620 91.7 32.9 22.3 12.6 11.0

12: M inim um salary rate___ 4,600 6,400 7,040 7,570 7, 570 8,330 81.1 30.2 18.3 10.0 10.0

A verage salary ...... ............. 4,797 6,759 7,360 7,975 7,952 8,999 87.6 33.1 22.3 12.8 13.2

13: M in im um salary rate___ 5,600 7,600 8,360 8,990 8,990 9,890 76.6 30.1 18.3 10.0 10.0

Average sa la ry ................... 5,793 7,931 8,652 9,381 9,388 10, 593 82.9 33.6 22.4 12.9 12.8

14: M in im um salary rate___ 6,500 8,800 9,600 10,320 10,320 11, 355 74.7 29.0 18.3 10.0 10.0

Average salary .................... 6,850 9,150 9,880 10,682 10,710 12,042 75.8 31.6 21.9 12.7 12.4

15: M in im um salary rate___ 8,000 10,000 10,800 11,610 11,610 12, 770 59.6 27.7 18.2 10.0 10.0

Average s a la r y ................... 8,460 10,577 11,245 12,034 12,093 13,513 59.7 27.8 20.2 12.3 11.7

16: M in im um salary rate___ (3) 11,200 12,000 12,900 12,900 14,190 (3) 26.7 18.3 10.0 10.0

Average salary .................... (3) 11,232 12,044 13,125 13,189 14,657 (3) 30.5 21.7 11.7 11.1

17: M in im um salary rate___ (3) 12,200 13,000 13,975 13,975 15,375 (3) 26.0 18.3 10.0 10.0

Average salary ........ ........... (3) 12,288 13,045 14,122 14,208 15,768 (3) 28.3 20.9 11.7 11.0

18: M inim um salary rate___ (3) 14,000 14,800 14,800 16,000 17,500 (3) 25.0 18.2 18.2 9.4

Average s a la r y ................... (3) 14,000 14,800 14,800 16,000 17,500 (3) 25.0 18.2 18.2 9.4

» Average salaries were obtained b y weighting each salary step w ithin the 

grade b y the num ber of em ployees at th at step. In other words, they reflect 

the effect of increases in basic salary scales and of m erit increases in p ay w ithin 

the grade for each period.

* Th e m inim um w as com puted b y weighting equally the base p ay for each 

of the 3 grades (SP -1, SP -2 , and C A F -1) which were com bined under the 

general schedule.

* G rades 16, 17, and 18 were created under the Classification A ct of 1949 

(Oct. 28,19(49).

Digitized for FRASER 

http://fraser.stlouisfed.org/ 

Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
25

Salary Changes Since 1939

The 1958 legislation brought the total increase 

in basic scales for Federal Classification Act employees to 97 percent since 1939 (table 3). Over 

the same period, in-grade pay increases also raised 

the level of compensation; together with legislative 

changes, these in-grade changes advanced average 

salary rates about 109 percent. Average salaries, 

reflecting not only these two factors but shifts in 

the proportion of workers in various pay grades, 

increased 156 percent. These measures of change 

can be compared with an increase of 110 percent 

in the Consumer Price Index, 168 percent in the 

monthly pay of railroad office employees, and 232 

and 262 percent, respectively, in the hourly and

6 See Salaries of C ity Public School Teachers, 1955-57 (in Monthly Labor

Review, April 1958, pp. 384-387).

weekly pay of factory production workers. From 

the 1938-39 to the 1956-57 school year, Urban 

teachers’ salaries rose 132 percent.6

Salary increases since 1939 have varied widely 

among the various grades of the general schedule 

with the smallest proportionate increases taking 

place in the top grades and the largest in the lowest 

grades (table 4). Even if comparisons are limited 

to those grades in which significant numbers of 

workers are employed, increases in basic scales 

varied from about 75 percent in grades 13 and 14, 

to 126 percent in grade 2 and 116 percent in grade

3. Only the basic scales for the lowest 3 grades 

and average salaries for the lowest 5 grades kept 

pace with Jiving costs.

Digitized for FRASER 

http://fraser.stlouisfed.org/ 

Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
Federal Classified Employees’ Salary Changes, 1958—60

L e g i s l a t i o n enacted by the 86th Congress in 

July 1960 increased basic salary scales of Federal 

employees covered by the Classification Act1 

an average of 7.7 percent.2 Average salary rates 

rose somewhat less—7.3 percent—because the 

effect of the legislated salary increase was offset 

in part by a reduction in the proportion of workers 

receiving more than the minimum scale for their 

jobs. The general salary increase, combined 

with an increase in the proportion of workers in 

the higher grades between 1958 and 1960, advanced average salaries by 11.5 percent over that 

period. Between 1958 and 1959, the index of 

basic scales remained unchanged, while average 

salary rates declined 0.3 percent and average 

salaries rose 1.8 percent. (See table 1.)

Federal Classification Act employees stationed 

in Alaska and Hawaii are included for the first 

time in the 1960 indexes and other data used for 

this report. With this addition, the total number of Federal employees included in this report 

was increased by 15,676 (1.7 percent) and the

total wage bill by $90,908,1803 (1.6 percent). 

The effect on salary levels of including the Nation’s 

two newest States was minimal; only average 

salary rates were changed, increasing by 0.1 percent. Their inclusion produced minor variations 

in the distribution of employment at the various 

grades, however, because Alaska and Hawaii had 

a higher proportion of Federal employees in the 

five lowest grades and a much lower proportion in 

grades 12 through 15 than did the rest of the 

United States.

1 Salaries were increased by the Federal Employees’ Salary Increase Act of

1960 (P .L. 568). In 1960, there were also gains in the supplementary benefits

provided Federal employees. Legislation enacted by the 86th Congress in

September 1959 provided a voluntary health benefits program for Federal

employees, to be partly paid for by the Government. Effective July 1,1960,

the Government would contribute up to half the cost of employee membership in a choice of several health plans, some of which continued protection

after retirement and provided “ catastrophic” benefits to help finance costs

of chronic or long-term illness or serious accident.

2 Each basic scale was raised 7.5 percent (rounded to the nearest $5) except

the highest grade, which was raised $1,000, or 5.7 percent; in addition, in-grade

increments were increased by amounts from $10 to $25, accounting for a

further 0.2-percent increase.

3 Excluding cost-of-living allowances of 25 percent in Alaska and 17.5 per.

cent in Hawaii provided these employees under Executive Order No.10000,

T able 1. I n dexes of Basic Salary Scales, Average Salary R ates, and Average Sa l a r ie s1 of F ederal Classified

E m ployees, 1939 and 1945-60

[1947-49-100]

Period

B asic salary scales Average salary rates A verage salaries

A ll C lassification A ct 

em ployees

G eneral

schedule

C rafts, protective, 

custodial

A ll C lassification A ct 

em ployees

G eneral

schedule

C rafts, protective, 

custodial

All C lassification A ct 

em ployees

General

schedule

C rafts, protective, 

custodial

A u gu st 1939............................ 69.6 70.9 62.0 68.2 69.3 59.5 61.4 64.2 58.7

Ju n e 30,1945........................... 70.4 71.0 68.3 *6 9 .0 *6 9 .4 *6 5 .5 (3) (*) (*)

Ju ly 1, 1946............................. 93.2 93.5 91.1 90.6 90.8 88.8 87.7 87.5 90.2

Ju ly 1,1947............................. 93.2 93.5 91.1 92.3 92.5 90.3 92.3 92.6 90.2

Ju ly 15,1948........................... 103.4 103.3 104.4 103.5 103.5 104.4 103.1 103.0 104.3

J u ly 1,1949............................. 103.4 103.3 104.4 104.2 104.0 105.3 104.6 104.5 105.4

J u ly 1,1950............................. 107.7 107.4 109.2 109.6 109.4 112.2 112.6 112.3 112.8

Ju ly 8,1951............................. 118.5 118.0 121.0 119.3 118.8 123.8 121.4 120.6 125.3

Ju ly 1, 1952............................. 118.5 118.0 121.0 119.6 119.0 124.7 124.0 123.0 127.2

Ju ly 1,1953............................. 118.5 118.0 121.0 120.7 120.0 126.1 127.1 126.3 129.1

Ju ly 1, 1954............................. 118.5 118.0 121.0 121.8 121.1 127.3 129.4 128.8 129.3

Ju ly 1, 1955............................. (4) «127.0 (4) (4) •130.6 (4) (4) • 140.2 (4)

Ju ly 1, 1956............................. (4) 127.0 (<) (4) 130.5 (4) (4) 141.8 v)

Ju ly 1 ,1 9 5 7 ............................ (4) 127.0 (4) (4) 130.6 (4) (4) 144.8 (4)

Ju ly 1,1958............................. (4) 139.8 (4) (4) 145.0 (4) (4) 164.6 (4)

Ju ly 1, 1 9 5 9 -......................... (4) 139.8 (4) h 144.6 <4) (4) 167.6 (4)

Ju ly 10, I960®.......................... (<) 150.5 (4) (4) 155.6 (4) (4) 183.5 (4

i Basic salary scales reflect only statutory changes in salaries, while average

salary rates show, in addition, the effect of merit or in-grade salary increases.

Average salaries measure the effect not only of statutory changes in basic pay

scales and in-grade salary increases but also the effect of changes in the proportion of workers employed in the various pay grades.

* Estimated by assuming the same distribution of employees among grades

and steps w ithin grades in 1945 as in 1939. Since there was little or no increase

In average rates because of in-grade increases during this period, it was

assumed that the change in basic salary scales was virtually the same as in

average salary rates.

* Not available.

• Index discontinued because the general schedule now covers all Classification Act employees.

• Data have been adjusted to include those employees formerly under the

CPC schedule who are now covered by the general schedule; about two-thirds

of the employees were transferred to wage-board classifications and one-third

to the general schedule.

• Based on data including 15,676 employees in Alaska and Hawaii; cost-ofliving allowances provided these employees were excluded. The addition of

these employees changed only the index of average salary rates, which would

have been 0.1 point lower without their inclusion.

26

Digitized for FRASER 

http://fraser.stlouisfed.org/ 

Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
27

T a b l e 2 . P e r c e n t D i s t r i b u t i o n o f G e n e r a l S c h e d u l e E m p l o y e e s b y G r a d e , S e l e c t e d P e r i o d s , 1 9 3 9 - 6 0

G eneral schedule grade

A u gust

1939

Ju ly 1, 

1946

Ju ly 1, 

1950

Ju ly 8, 

1951

Ju ly 1, 

1954

Ju ly 1, 

1955

Ju ly 1, 

1956

Ju ly 1, 

1957

Ju ly 1, 

1958

Ju ly 1, 

1959

Ju n e 30, 1960

W ithout

A laska

and

H aw aii

W ith

A laska

and

H a w aii1 *

1.......................................................... 13.1 2.5 1.8 1.4 1.1 1.1 0.7 0.5 0.4 0. 4- 0.2 0.3

2.......................................................... 18.1 19.3 14.5 16.6 11.5 10.9 8.9 7.2 5.8 4.7 4.1 4.1

3.......................................................... 14.7 22.8 20.6 21.8 21.0 20.9 21.4 20.8 19.5 18.1 16.7 16.7

4........ ................................................. 11.5 13.6 14.8 13.9 15.8 15.8 16.4 16.8 16.9 16.8 16.8 16.8

5 an d 6_______________________ 17.2 13.9 14.8 14.5 14.9 14.8 15.2 15.7 15.7 16.2 16.8 16.7

7 and 8.............................................. 10.4 11.6 12.3 11.7 12.1 11.8 11.9 11.5 11.6 11.6 11.4 11.5

9 an d 10............................................ 6.8 7.6 9.2 8.7 10.1 10.1 10.2 10.6 11.3 11.7 11.7 11.7

11........................................................ 3.8 4.0 5.1 4.8 5.8 6.1 6.3 6.9 7.6 8.2 8.7 8.7

12 through 15-- ............................. 4.4 4.7 6.9 6.6 7.8 8.4 8.9 9.9 11.1 12.2 13.4 13.2

16 through 18................................. (») (J) .1 .1 .1 .1 .1 .1 .2 .2

T o ta l..................................... 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 1 100.0

N u m b er of em ployees................ 234,067 893,653 701,824 885,925 864,126 886,512 908,535 927,822 921,153 931,105 938,319 j 953,995

i Includes 15,676 em ployees in A laska and H aw aii. N o t e : Because of rounding, totals m ay not equal 100.

* L ess than 0.05 percent.

T a b l e 3 . M i n i m u m a n d A v e r a g e S a l a r i e s 1 o f F e d e r a l C l a s s i f i e d E m p l o y e e s , b y G r a d e , a n d C o n s u m e r P r i c e

I n d e x , S e l e c t e d P e r i o d s , 1 9 3 9 - 6 0

Ju ly 1., 1959 Ju ly 10, 1960 Percent increase to Ju ly 10, 1960, from-- a

G eneral schedule grade 

and A u gust Ju ly 1, Ju ly 1, Ju ly 1, W ithout W ith W ithout W ith

Ju ly 1,1959

Consum er Price Index 1939 1950 1955 1958 A laska

and

H aw aii

A laska

and

H aw aii *

A laska

and

H aw aii

A laska

and

H a w a ii*

A u gust

1939

Ju ly 1, 

1950

Ju ly 1, 

1955

Ju ly 1, 

1958 W ithout

A laska

and

H aw aii

W ith

A laska

and

H aw aii

G e n e r a l Sc h e d u l e

G r a d e

1: M in im um salary rate. 4 $1,180 $2,200 $2,690 $2,960 $2,960 $2,960 $3,185 $3,185 169.9 44.8 18.4 7.6 7.6 7.6

A verage salary ............... 1,223 2,356 2,913 3,260 3,271 3,265 3,548 3,540

3,500

190.1 50.6 21.8 8.8 8.5 8.4

2: M in im um salary rate. 1,440 2,450 2,960 3,255 3,255 3,255 3,500 143.1 42.9 18.2 7.5 7.5 7.5

Average salary ............... 1,489 2,639 3,186 3,498 3,507 3,507 3,762 3,762 152.7 42.6 18.1 7.5 7.3 7.3

3: M in im um salary rate. 1,620 2,650 3,175 3,495 3,495 3,495 3,760 3,760 132.1 41.9 18.4 7.6 7.6 7.6

Average salary ............... 1,683 2,866 3,446 3,804 3,814 3,814 4,111 4,111 144.3 43.4 19.3 8.1 7.8 7.8

4: M in im um salary rate. 1,800 2,875 3,415 3,755 3,755 3,755 4,040 4,040 124.4 40.5 18.3 7.6 7.6 7.6

A verage salary ............... 1,867 3,103 3,738 4,126 4,133 4,133 4,455 

4,345

4,455 138.6 43.6 19.2 8.0 7.8 7.8

6: M in im um salary rate. 2,000 3,100 3,670 4,040 4,040 4,040 4,345 117.3 40.2 18.4 7.5 7.5 7.5

Average salary ............... 2,099 3,405 4,129 4,570 4,561 4,561 4,921 4,921 134.4 44.5 19.2 7.7 7.9 7.9

6: M in im u m salary rate . 2,300 3,450 4,080 4,490 4,490 4,490 4,830 4,830 110.0 40.0 18.4 7.6 7.6 7.6

Average salary ............... 2,414 3,780 4,566 5,031 4,996 4,994 5,402

5,355

5,401 123.8 42.9 18.3 7.4 8.1 8.1

7: M in im um salary rate. 2,600 3,825 4,525 4,980 4,980 4,980 5,355 106.0 40.0 18.3 7.5 7.5 7.5

A verage salary ---------- 2,704 4,154 4,960 5,471 5,448 5,448

5,470

5,893 5,893 117.9 41.9 18.8 7.7 8.2 8.2

g: M in im um salary rate. 2,900 4,200 4,970 5, 470 5,470 5,885 5,885 102.9 40.1 18.4 7.6 7.6 7.6

Average salary............... 3,020 4,553 5,499 

5,440

5,945 5,961 5,960 6,411 6,411 112.3 40.8 16.6 7.8 7.5 7.6

M in im um salary rate. 3,200 4,600 5,985 5,985 5,985 6,435 6,435

6,931

101.1 39.9 18.3 7.5 7.5 7.5

A verage salary ............... 3,298 4,923 5,825 6,460 6,438 6,437 6,931 110.2 40.8 19.0 7.3 7.7 7.7

10: M in im um salary rate . 3,500 5,000 5,915 6,505 6,505 6,505 6,995 6,995 99.9 39.9 18.3 7.5 7.5 7.5

Average salary ............... 3,620 5,279 6,344 6,959 6,938 6,936 7,476 7,476 106.5 41.6 17.8 7.4 7.8 7.8

11: M in im um salary rate . 3,800 5,400 6,390 7,030 7,030 7,030 7,560 7,560 98.9 40.0 18.3 7.5 7.5 7.5

A verage salary ............... 3,974 5,734 6,768 7,620 7,567 7,567 8,107 8,107 104.0 41.4 19.8 6.4 7.1 7.1

12: M in im um salary rate . 4,600 6,400 7,570 8,330 8,330 8,330 8,955 8,955 94.7 39.9 18.3 7.5 7.5 7.5

Average salary ............... 4,797 6,759 7,975

8,990

8,999 8,924 8,925 9,554 9,555 

10,635

99.2 41.4 19.8 6.2 7.1 7.1

13: M in im um salary rate . 5,600 7,600 9,890 9,890 9,890 10,635 89.9 39.9 18.3 7.5 7.5 7.5

A verage salary ............... 5,793 7,931 9,381 10,593 10,524 10,523 11,263 11,262 94.4 42.0 20.1 6.3 7.0 7.0

14: M in im um salary rate. 6,500 8,800 10,320 11,355 11,355 11,355

11,968

12,210 12,210 

12,818

87.8 38.8 18.3 7.5 7.5 7.5

A verage salary ............... 6,850 9,150 10,682 12,042 11,968 12,818 87.1 40.1 20.0 6.4 7.1 7.1

15: M in im um salary rate. 8,000 10,000 11,610 12,770 12,770 12,770 13,730 13,730 71.6 37.3 18.3 7.5 7.5 7.5

Average salary ............... 8,460 10,577 12,034 13,513 13,465 13,464 14,443 14,443 70.7 36.6 20.0 6.9 7.3 7.3

16: M inim um salary rate. (8) 11,200 12,900 14,190 14,190 14,190 15,255 15,255 (8) 36.2 18.3 7.5 7.5 7.5

A verage salary ............... (8) 11,232 13,125 14,657 14,551 14,551 15,648 15,648 (8) 39.3 19.2 6.8 7.5 7.5

17: M in im um salary rate. (8) 12,200 13,975 15,375 15,375 15,375 16,530 16,530 (8) 35.5 18.3 7.5 7.5 7.5

A verage salary ............... (*) 12,288 14,122 15,768 15,670 15,670 16,863 16,863 (8) 37.2 19.4 6.9 7.6 7.6

18: M in im um salary rate . (8) 14,000 14,800 17,500 17,500 17,500 18.500

18.500

18,500 (8) 32.1 25.0 5.7 5.7 5.7

Average salary ............... (8) 14,000 14,800 17,500 17,500 17,500 18,500 (8) 32.1 25.0 5.7 5.7 5.7

Consum er Price Index 

(1947-49=100).................... 59.0 102.9 114.7 123.9 124.9 126.6 114.6 23.0 10.4 2.2 1.4

i M in im um salaries are the salaries paid at the first step in each grade.

Average salaries were obtained b y w eighting each salary step w ithin the grade

b y the n um ber of em ployees at th at step . Therefore, th ey reflect the effect

of increases in basic salary scales and of m erit increases in p ay w ithin the

grade.

* Excludes cost-of-living allowances provided em ployees in A lask a and

H aw aii.

* 1960 d ata w ithout A laska and H aw aii were used to com pute all changes 

except from “ Ju ly 1,1959, w ith A laska and H aw aii.”

4 Th e m inim um w as com puted b y weighting equally the base p ay for each 

of the 3 grades (subprofessional grades 1 and 2 and clerical, adm in istrative, 

and fiscal grade 1) th at were com bined into this general schedule grade.

8 G rades 16,17, and 18 were created b y the Classification A ct of 1949.

Digitized for FRASER 

http://fraser.stlouisfed.org/ 

Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
28

The increased proportions of Federal employees 

in the higher grades continued a trend that has 

been evident for at least the past decade. Since 

1939, the proportion in grades 9 through 15 has 

risen from 15 to 34 percent. This situation is 

directly related to the increasing complexity and 

diversification of governmental activities. To

perform its functions effectively, the Government, 

like American industry, has needed larger numbers 

of highly trained and specialized personnel. To 

a more limited extent, competition for the services 

of workers trained in certain professional fields 

has also tended to inflate the number of employees 

in the higher grades.

Increase in Average Salary Rates1 of Federal Classified Employees/ by Grade/ August 1939

to July 1960

1 A verage salaries were obtained b y w eighting each salary step w ithin the D a ta exclude 15,676 em ployees in A laska and H aw aii, 

grade b y the n um ber of em ployees at th at step . Therefore, they reflect the ^Grades 16, 17, an d 18, which were created b y the C lassification A ct of

effect of statu to ry changes in basic p ay scales and in-grade salary increases. 1949, are om itted.

Digitized for FRASER 

http://fraser.stlouisfed.org/ 

Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
29

At the other end of the scale, the introduction

of mechanization and improved techniques had

reduced the number of employees in some of the

less skilled positions,4 even as governmental

activities were expanding. Between 1958 and

1960, the proportion of employees in grade 2 was

reduced almost 2 percentage points, and in grade 3

almost 3 percentage points (table 2). The number

of employees in these two grades, which comprise

21 percent of all classified employees, declined

from 233,052 to 195,170, or 16 percent.

From 1958 to 1960, increased proportions of

employees in the lower steps of the various grades

(mostly new workers or workers promoted into

the lower steps of higher grades) caused average

salary rates, affected by statutory changes and

in-grade increases, to rise less than basic pay

scales— 7.3 percent as compared with 7.7 percent.

Near the top of the scale, in grades 11 through 14,

for example, the increase in average salary rates

was more than 1 percentage point under the increase in basic pay scales. (See table 3.)

Since the period from July 1958 to July 1960

was one of relative price stability, average salaries

(affected by statutory changes and in-grade

increases combined with the number of workers

in various pay grades) of employees under the

Federal Classification Act system rose more than

did the Consumer Price Index, 11.5 percent as

compared with 2.2 percent.

Long-Term Trends

Between 1939 and 1960, basic pay scales of

Federal employees were slightly more than

doubled by legislative action; the increase in

these scales averaged 112 percent. Average salary

rates rose 125 percent in this period, while the

index of average salaries rose 186 percent.

The increase in salaries has varied widely among

Federal pay grades, as indicated by the accompanying chart. While average salaries in the

lowest general schedule grade advanced 190 percent, the corresponding increase for grade 15 (the

highest grade in effect during the whole period)

was about 70 percent. Only in the seven lowest

pay grades did average salaries keep pace with

the Consumer Price Index, which advanced 115

percent from 1939 to July 1960. Dollar increases

also varied widely among pay grades, ranging from

$2,325 for the lowest general schedule grade to

almost $6,000 for grade 15.

These marked differences in salary trends among

grades have resulted from legislation that provided identical dollar increases for all grades, or a

percentage increase combined with minimum and

maximum dollar ceilings that brought about

higher percent increases in the lower grades, or a

scale of decreasing percent increases for the higher

paid employees. This situation was particularly

prevalent between 1939 and 1951. Since 1955,

the existing relationship between the grades has

been maintained to a much greater extent than

in the earlier years by across-the-board percent

increases. In 1939, the basic salary of the highest

grade, equivalent to GS-15, was about four times

as great as that of the equivalent of the GS-4,

the grade with the highest concentration of

employees in 1960. By 1960, the basic salary of

the GS-15 was only about three times that of the

GS-4.

4 In some agencies, automation has had such an “unfavorable outcome for

employees” that more than one-third of them have been laid off, according

to testimony before a congressional committee in 1959 and 1960. These

hearings were conducted by the Subcommittee on Census and Government

Statistics of the House of Representatives Committee on Post Office and

Civil Service to determine the extent of office automation in the Federal

Government and to explore the implications of these technological changes

for Federal clerical workers. Material presented in these hearings concerning

the impact of office automation on employees (primarily clerical) was summarized in Office Automation in the Federal Government (in Monthly Labor

Review, September 1960, pp. 933-938).

Digitized for FRASER 

http://fraser.stlouisfed.org/ 

Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
F e d e r a l C l a s s i f i e d E m p l o y e e s ’ S a l a r y C h a n g e s , 1 9 6 0 — 6 1

About 1 million workers are now employed under the Classification Act of

1949— about 43 percent of the 2.3 million Federal civilian employees. Of

these, slightly more than a fifth are employed in professional occupations. Most

of the remainder are in clerical or administrative work; a few are doing custodial work.

The attached tables and charts bring*

up to date information on the pay of

workers covered by the Classification

Act. Three measures of change in pay

are presented: (1) Basic pay scales,

reflecting only legislative changes in

pay; (2) the change in average salary

rates, influenced both by legislative

changes and by changes in the proportion of workers receiving pay above the

minimum of the grade as a result of

in-grade increases; and (3) changes in

average salaries, influenced not only by

these factors but by changes in the proportion of workers in the various pay

grades.

During the period from July 10, I960,

to July 1, 1961, basic pay scales were

not revised. With an expansion of approximately 3 percent in the total number of workers employed under the Classification Act, plus promotion of some

workers to higher grades and a consequent increase in the proportion of workers at entrance rates within their grade,

the average number of step or in-grade

increases remained unchanged. Consequently, average salary rates were the

same at the end as at the beginning of

the period. However, an increase in

the proportion of workers employed in

grades 5 and 6 and grades 11 through

15 raised average salaries approximately 1. 2 percent (table 1).

Since the beginning of World War II, 

the three m easu res of pay trends have 

diverged substantially. In 1939, r e la ­

tively few workers were paid m ore than 

the minimum rate for their grade; until

1941 there was no legislative requirement that all workers with satisfactory

ratings receive automatic increases in

pay. As a consequence of legislation

approved August 1, 1941, the proportion

of workers paid above the minimum of

the grade is substantially greater today

than it was in 1939, and average salary

rates have risen more than have basic

salary scales----124.4 compared with

112.4 percent. Marked changes in grade

structure in the Federal Service, summarized in table 2, increased average

salaries much more than salary rates.

Over the 22-year period, the index of

average salaries rose 189 percent. The

change in grade structure reflects both

a substantial increase in the proportion

of professional workers, growing out of

the increased need for highly trained

specialists, 1 and a concurrent mechanization of routine clerical and bookkeeping tasks which has reduced the need

for workers in the lower pay grades,

as well as a liberalization of classification reflecting a tightening of the labor

market.

Increases in average salaries since

1939 have been proportionately greater

in the lower pay grades than in the

higher ones (table 3). Some of the legislative increases in salaries were proportionately smaller for the higher pay

than for the lower pay grades, while

others that established a uniform percentage increase in pay for the middle

pay grades included a dollar minimum

and maximum that resulted in lower

percentage increases for the highest pay

than for the lowest pay grades. From

1939 to 1961, average salaries rose

188.6 percent in grade 1, and 138.6 percent in grade 4, but 70.4 percent in

grade 15. As a consequence of the

greater increase in pay for lower

* Professional workers now make up more than

22 percent of the classified employees, compared with

fewer than 13 percent in 1949.

Digitized for FRASER 

30

http://fraser.stlouisfed.org/ 

Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
31

grades, the maximum pay in the classified service now for grade 18 is 5.8

times the minimum entrance salary

(grade 1), whereas in 1939 the maximum salary paid in the top grade that

existed at that time (grade 15) was

7. 1 times the minimum pay for grade l.2

From 1939 to 1961, all three measures

of change in salaries of Federal classified workers lagged behind the increase

in factory workers ' average weekly and

hourly earnings; basic pay scales and

average salary rates also rose less than

did average monthly pay of railroad office employees, and, as shown by other

Bureau reports, city public school

teachers, or firefighters and police patrolmen; basic salary scales did not

keep up with the rise in the Consumer

Price Index (tables 4 and 5). During

the past decade, however, all three

measures of Federal pay rose more

than the Consumer Price Index; average

salaries of Federal workers, reflecting

changes in grade structure, rose somewhat more than did factory workers ' or

railroad office employees ' pay or weekly

earnings of women office clerical workers in 1Zmajor metropolitan areas from

1951 or 1952 to 1961. Basic pay scales

and average salary rates, however, continued to lag behind pay of these three

groups and all three measures of Federal pay failed to keep pace with pay

of city public school teachers or firefighters and police patrolmen.

u Maximum pay in grade 15 at present is 4. 7 times

the minimum for grade 1.

Digitized for FRASER 

http://fraser.stlouisfed.org/ 

Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
32

Table 1 Indexes of basic salary scales, average salary rates, and average salaries * of Federal

classified employees covered by the general schedule, ^ 1939 and 1945—61

Period

(1957-59 s 100) (1947-49 = 100)

Basic

salary

scales

Average

salary

rates

Average

salaries

Basic

salary

scales

Average

salary

rates

Average

salaries

August 1939---------------------------- 52.3 49.5 4 0 .4 70.9 69.3 64 .2

June 30, 1945 ------------------------ 5 2 .4 349 .5 ( 4 ) 71.0 36 9 .4 ( 4 )

July 1, 1946 -------------------------- 6 9 .0 6 4 .8 55 .0 93 .5 90.8 87 .5

July 1, 1947 -------------------------- 6 9 .0 66 .0 58.2 93.5 92 .5 92 .6

July 15, 1948 ------------------------ 76.2 73.9 6 4 .8 103.3 103.5 103.0

July 1, 1949 -------------------------- 76.2 74.2 65. 7 103.3 104.0 104.5

July 1, 1950 -------------------------- 79.3 78.1 70.6 107.4 109.4 112.3

July 8, 1 9 5 1 -------------------------- 87.1 84.8 75.8 118.0 118.8 120.6

July 1, 1952 -------------------------- 87.1 84.9 77.4 118.0 119.0 123.0

July 1, 1953 -------------------------- 87.1 85. 7 79.4 118.0 120.0 126.3

July 1, 1954 -------------------------- 87.1 86 .4 81.0 118.0 121.1 128.8

July 1, 1955 2 ------------------------ 93. 7 93.2 88.2 127.0 130.6 140.2

July 1, 1956 -------------------------- 93. 7 93.1 89.2 127.0 130.5 141.8

July 1, 1957 -------------------------- 93. 7 93.2 91.1 127.0 130.6 144.8

July 1, 1958 -------------------------- 103.2 103.5 103.5 139.8 145.0 164.6

July 1, 1959 -------------------------- 103.2 103.2 105.4 139.8 144.6 167.6

July 10, 1960 5 - ---------------------- 111.1 111.1 115.4 150.5 155.6 183.5

July 1, 1961s ------------------------ 111.1 111.1 116.8 150.5 155.6 185. 7

Basic salary scales reflect only statutory changes in salaries.

Average salary rates show, in addition, the effect of merit or in-grade salary increases.

Average salaries measure the effect not only of statutory changes in basic pay scales and in-grade salary increases, but also the effect of changes in the proportion of workers employed in the various pay grades.

^ Data for Classification Act and Crafts, Protective, and Custodial employees have been incorporated into the

General Schedule indexes. Since July 1, 1955, the General Schedule has covered all Classification Act employees.

At that time about one-third of the approximately 100,000 employees formerly covered by the Crafts, Protective,

and Custodial schedule were transferred to the General Schedule; the remaining two-thirds were transferred to wageboard classifications along with approximately 2,500 workers formerly under the General Schedule. There were only

minor differences among the indexes in the years prior to 1955.

3 Estimated by assuming the same distribution of employees among grades and steps within grades in 1945 as

in 1939. Since there was little or no increase in average rates because of in-grade increases during this period, it

was assumed that the change in basic salary scales was virtually the same as in average salary rates.

4 Not available.

3 Based on data including 15,676 employees in Alaska and Hawaii in 1960, 15, 784 employees in 1961. Costof-living allowances provided these employees, were excluded. The inclusion of these employees did not affect basic

salary scales.

In 1960 it changed only the index of average salary rates which would have been 0.1 point lower without their

inclusion. In 1961 average salary rates and average salaries would have been 0. 3 and 0. 2 points lower, respectively,

without inclusion of employees in Alaska and Hawaii.

Digitized for FRASER 

http://fraser.stlouisfed.org/ 

Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
33

Table 2. Percent distribution of general schedule employees by grade, selected periods, 1939—61

General schedule

grade

August

1939

July 1,

1946

July 1,

1950

July 8,

1951

July 1,

1954

1 ---------------------------------------------------- 13. 1 2.5 1.8 1 .4 1.1

2 --------------------------------------------------- 18. 1 19.3 14. 5 16.6 11. 5

3 --------------------------------------------------- 14. 7 22.8 20.6 21.8 21.0

4 --------------------------------------------------- 11.5 13.6 14. 8 13.9 15.8

5 and 6 ---------------------------------------- 17.2 13.9 14. 8 14.5 14.9

7 and 8 ---------------------------------------- 10.4 11.6 12.3 11. 7 12. 1

9 and 10 -------------------------------------- 6 .8 7.6 9. 2 8. 7 10. 1

1 1 ------------------------------------------------- 3 .8 4 .0 5. 1 4 .8 5 .8

12 through 15 ------------------------------ 4 .4 4. 7 6. 9 6 .6 7.8

16 through 18 ------------------------------ - -

(M (*)_ . 1

T o ta l---------------------------------- 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0

Number of

employees -------------------------------- 234, 067 893,653 701,824 885,925 864,126

July 1, July 1, July 1, July 10 July 1,

1956 1958 1959 I960 2 19612

1 --------------------------------------------------- 0. 7 0 .4 0 .4 0.3 0 .2

2 --------------------------------------------------- 8 .9 5.8 4. 7 4.1 3. 5

3 --------------------------------------------------- 21.4 19. 5 18. 1 16. 7 15. 7

4 --------------------------------------------------- 16.4 16.9 16. 8 16.8 16. 8

5 and 6 ---------------------------------------- 15.2 15. 7 16. 2 16. 7 17. 1

7 and 8 ---------------------------------------- 11.9 11.6 11.6 11.5 11. 5

9 and 10 -------------------------------------- 10.2 11.3 11. 7 11. 7 11. 7

1 1 ------------------------------------------------- 6.3 7.6 8. 2 8. 7 9. 2

12 through 15 ------------------------------ 8. 9 11. 1 12.2 13. 2 14.0

16 through 18 ------------------------------ . 1 . 1 . 1 .2 . 2

T o ta l----------------------------------

Number of

employees --------------------------------

100.0 100.0 100. 0 100.0 100.0

908,535 921,153 931,105 953,995 . 988,241

1 Less than 0. 05 percent.

2 Beginning in 1960, data include employees in Alaska and Hawaii. In 1960 these employees numbered

15,676; in 1961 they totaled 15,784.

NOTE: Because of rounding, totals may not equal 100.

Digitized for FRASER 

http://fraser.stlouisfed.org/ 

Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
34

Table 3. Minimum and average salaries1 of Federal classified employees, by grade,

and Consumer Price Index, selected periods, 1939-61

General schedule grade

and

Consumer Price Index

August

1939

July i,

1950

July 1,

1955

July l,

1958

July 10,

1960 2

July 1,

19612

1:

General schedule grade

Minimum salary rate ■*-------— ------- ----- - $1,180 $2,200 $2,690 $2,960 $3,185 $3,185

Average salary------------------------------------— 1,223 2,365 2,913 3,260 3,540 3,524

2: Minimum salary rate---------------------— — 1,440 2,450 2,960 3,255 3,500 3,500

Average salary-----------------------------------— 1,489 2,639 3,186 3,498 3,762 3, 754

3: Minimum salary rate------------------------------ 1,620 2,650 3,175 3,495 3, 760 3, 760

Average salary---------------------------------------- 1,683 2,866 3,446 3,804 4,111 4,102

4: Minimum salary rate — — -----— - — ------- 1,800 2,875 3,415 3,755 4,040 4,040

Average salary --------------------------------------- 1,867 3,103 3, 738 4,126 4, 455 4,456

5: Minimum salary rate------------------------------ 2,000 3,100 3,670 4,0 40 4,345 4,345

Average salary ---------- -— --------- — - — — 2,099 3,405 4,129 4,570 4, 921 4, 931

6: Minimum salary rate — -------------------- --— 2,300 3,450 4,080 4,490 4, 830 4, 830

Average salary -------- ----------------— -------- 2,414 3,780 4, 566 5,031 5,401 5,456

7: Minimum salary rate-----— ------- — -------- 2,600 3,825 4, 525 4, 980 5,355 5, 355

Average salary--------------------------------------- 2,704 4,154 4,960 5,471 5, 893 5, 890

8: Minimum salary rate — — — — ------------ 2,900 4, 200 4,970 5,470 5, 885 5, 885

Average salary — -------------------------- ------- 3,020 4, 553 5,499 5,945 6,411 6,444

9: Minimum salary rate — -------------------------- 3,200 4,600 5,440 5,985 6,435 6,435

Average salary------------------------------ -------- 3,298 4,923 5,825 6,460 6,931 6,929

10: Minimum salary rate------------ -— ----------- 3,500 5,000 5,915 6,505 6,995 6,995

Average salary-------------------------------------- 3,620 5,279 6,344 6,959 7,476 7,487

11: Minimum salary rate - — — — —— — — 3,800 5,400 6,390 7,030 7,560 7,560

Average salary-------— --------- — --------------- 3,974 5,734 6,768 7,620 8,1 07 8,071

12: Minimum salary rate — -------— — « — — 4,600 6,400 7,570 8,330 8,955 8,955

Average salary — — ----------------— — ------- 4, 797 6,759 7,975 8, 999 9,555 9,505

13: Minimum salary rate — ---------- — 5,600 7,600 8,990 9, 890 10,635 10,635

Average salary ------------ — - — — - — 5,793 7, 931 9,381 10,593 11,262 11,194

14: Minimum salary rate — — -------- -------- — 6,500 8,800 10,320 11,355 12,210 12,210

Average salary------ - - ----- ----- — ------------- 6,850 9,150 10,682 12,042 12,818 12,742

15: Minimum salary rate -------- -------------— - 8,000 10,000 11,610 12, 770 13,730 13,730

Average salary — ------------— — — — —— 8,460 10,577 12,034 13,513 14,443 14,407

16: Minimum salary rate---------- ------- ------- — (4 ) 11,200 12,900 14,190 15,255 15,255

Average salary------------------ — ------ — ----- (4 ) 11,232 13,125 14,657 15,648 15,656

17: Minimum salary rate ---------- — -------------- (4) 12,200 13,975 15,375 16,530 16,530

Average salary-------— ---------- ----------------- (4 ) 12,288 14,122 15, 768 16,863 16,852

18: Minimum salary rate — - — -------------------- (4) 14,000 14,800 17,500 18,500 18,500

Average salary — — — -----— — - — - — — ... (4) 14,000 14,800 17,500 18,500 18,500

Consumer Price Index (1947-49=100) ------ 59 .0 102.9 114. 7 123.9 126.6 128.1

Minimum salaries are the salaries paid at the first step in each grade. Average salaries were obtained by

weighting each salary step within the grade by the number of employees at that step. Therefore, they reflect the

effect of increases in basic salary scales and of merit increases in pay within the grade.

2 Excludes cost-of-living allowances provided employees in Alaska and Hawaii.

3 The minimum was computed by weighting equally the base pay for each of the 3 grades (subprofessional

grades 1 and 2 and clerical, administrative, and fiscal grade 1) that were combined into this general schedule grade.

4 Grades 16, 17, and 18 were created by the Classification Act of 1949.

Digitized for FRASER 

http://fraser.stlouisfed.org/ 

Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
Table 4. Percent change in minimum and average salaries* of Federal classified employees by grade,

and Consumer Price Index, selected periods, 1939—61

35

General schedule grade Percent increase to July 1, 1961, from^—

Consumer Price Index August 1939 July 1, 1950 July 1, 1955 July 1, 1958 July 10, 1960

Is Minimum salary rate 3— — ---------------------- 169.9 44 .8 18.4 7.6 0

Average salary - - — ------------------- — ----- — 188.6 49 .8 21.2 8.3 - .5

2: Minimum salary rate — ------------ --------- ----- 143.1 42.9 18.2 7.5 0

Average salary-----— — ------ -------------------- 152.1 42.3 17.8 7.3 - . 2

3: Minimum salary rate ------------ ------ — ------- 132.1 41 .9 18.4 7.6 0

Average salary -------------------------- -------- 143. 7 43.1 19.0 7.8 - . 2

4: Minimum salary rate - - - — - - - - - - — — - 124.4 40.5 18.3 7.6 0

Average salary---------------- ---------------— ----- 138.6 43.6 19.2 8 .0 ( 4)

5: Minimum salary rate — — --------------— - — 117.3 40.2 18.4 7.5 0

Average salary — -----— ----- — ------------ — - 134.9 44.8 19.4 7; 9 .2

6: Minimum salary rate-------------------------------- 110.0 40 .0 18.4 7.6 0

Average salary--------------------- -— — --------- 126.1 44. 4 19.5 8 .5 1 .0

7: Minimum salary rate — --------— -------------- 106.0 40 .0 18.3 7.5 0

Average salary — -------------- ----------------------- 117.8 41.8 18.8 7 .7 1

8: Minimum salary rate---------------------- --------- 102.9 40.1 .. 18.4 7.6 0

Average salary------------------- ------- ------- ----- 113.4 41.5 17.2 8 .4 .5

9: Minimum salary rate----------— ------------- — 101.1 39.9 18.3 7.5 0

Average salary-------------------- ----------- --------- 110.1 40 .8 19.0 7.3 (4)

10: Minimum salary rate---------------- ----- ----- — 99.9 39.9 18.3 7.5 0

Average salary — ------------ ------------------------ 106.9 41.8 18.0 7.6 .1

11: Minimum salary rate — — -------- -------- ----- 98.9 40 .0 18.3 7.5 0

Average salary--------------------- ------------------- 103.1 4 0 .7 19.2 5 .9 - .5

12: Minimum salary rate — — -------— — ------- 94. 7 39.9 18.3 7.5 0

Average salary-------------------— ----- ------- — 98.1 40.6 19.2 5.6 - . 5

13: Minimum salary rate ------------------- — ------- 89.9 39.9 18.3 7.5 0

Average salary ---------- ----- ---------------— ----- 93.2 41.1 19.3 5. 7 - . 6

14: Minimum salary rate -------------- ----------------- 87.8 38.8 18.3 7.5 0

Average salary — — - — ------------ ----- — - — 86.0 3:9.3 19.3 5 .8 - . 6

15: Minimum salary rate-*— ------------------------- 71.6 37.3 18.3 7.5 0

Average salary----------------- -------- --— ------- 70.4 36.3 19.8 6. 7 - .3

16: Minimum salary rate — — - — -------------- — <5) 36.2 18.3 7.5 0

Average salary -------- --------- -— ----- — ------ ( 5) 39.4 19.3 6 .8 . 1

17: Minimum salary rate - - — -----— --------------- ( 5) 35.5 18.3 7.5 0

Average salary — — ------------ ---------------- — ( 5> 37.1 19.3 6 .9 - .1

18: Minimum salary rate — — -------- ----- — ----- ( 5) 32.1 25 .0 5. 7 0

Average salary ---------------------------------------- ( 5) 32.1 25.0 5. 7 0

Consumer Price Index (1947-49=100)------------- 117.1 24.5 11. 7 3 .4 1.2

1 Minimum salaries are the salaries paid at the first step in each grade. Average salaries were obtained by

weighting each salary step within the grade by the number of employees at that step. Therefore, they reflect the

effect of increases in basic salary scales and of merit increases in pay within the grade.

2 1961 data for the continental United States only were used for comparisons except between 1960 and 1961.

3 The minimum was computed by weighting equally the base pay for each of the 3 grades (subprofessional

grades 1 and 2 and clerical, administrative, and fiscal grade l)th at were combined into this general schedule grade.

4 Less than 0. 05 percent.

5 Grades 16, 17, and 18 were created by the Classification Act of 1949.

Digitized for FRASER 

http://fraser.stlouisfed.org/ 

Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
36

Table 5. Percent increases in Federal classified employees' salaries, in

average earnings of factory production workers and office employees,

and in the Consumer Price Index, 1939-61 and 1951-61

August 1939 1 July 1951

Item to to

Federal classified employees:

Basic pay scales (affected by legislation only)---------------------------

Average salary rates (affected by legislation and

in-grade increases)--------------------------------------------------------------------

Average salaries (affected by legislation, in-grade increases

and changes in occupational or grade composition)-------------

Factory production workers:

Average weekly earnings------------------------------------------------------------

Average hourly earnings (excluding overtime)-------------------------

Railway office employees (straight-time monthly earnings): 2

All railway office employees----------------------------------------------------

Division officers, assistants, and staff assistants-----------------------

Chief clerks and other supervisors 8 ------------------------------------------

Other clerical employees 4----------------------------------------------------------

City public school teachers 5 ----------------------------------------------------------

Firefighters and police patrolmen ^ ------------------------------------------------

Consumer Price Index-----------------------------------------------------------------------

Percent change in weekly earnings of women office clerical

workers, selected cities, 1952—61: 7

Atlanta-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Boston---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Chicago-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Cleveland---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Denver ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Los Angeles—Long Beach--------------------------------------------------------------

Memphis-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Milwaukee-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Minneapolis—St, Paul-------------------------------------------------------------------

New York C ity-----------------------------------------------------------------------------

Philadelphia--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

San Franc is co-Oakland---------------------------------------------------------------

July 1961 July 1961

112.4

124.4

189.1

295.5

265.4

27.6

31.0

54.1

47.1

48.1

184.4

150.1

152.1

187.2

173.5

151.1

117.1

44.4

50.7

43.6

38.7

59.0

56.9

15.5

(8)

(8) (8)

(8)

(8)

(8)

(8)

(8)

(8)

(8)

(8)

(8)

44.1

45.8

44.8

51.3

51.9

51.2

38.8

46.3

47 .0

45.5

49.6

45 .6

1 Data for factory production workers and for railway office employees were computed from July 1939.

2 Computed by the Bureau of Labor Statistics from Interstate Commerce Commission M-t300 reports. The average

was computed by dividing total compensation for straight-time actually worked by the number of employees who received pay during the month.

8 Includes professional and subprofessional assistants, supervisory or chief clerks (major departments), chief clerks

(minor departments), assistant chief clerks, and supervising cashiers.

4 Includes clerks and clerical specialists, clerks, mechanical device operators (office), stenographers and secretaries, stenographers and typists, traveling auditors or accountants, and messengers and office boys.

5 Public school teachers in cities of 50,000 inhabitants or more. Data refer to school year ending in June.

6 Maximum salary scales in cities of 100,000 or more.

7 1952 data taken from surveys made during the second 6 months of 1951 and first 6 months of 1952.

8 Data not available.

Digitized for FRASER 

http://fraser.stlouisfed.org/ 

Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
Fe d e ra l C la ss ifie d Em p lo y e e s’ Sa la ry C hanges, 1 9 6 2 — 6 4

T h e p r i n c i p l e of, comparability of pay with 

private industry for employees covered by the 

Federal Classification Act was established by the 

Federal Salary Reform Act of 1962, and the principle of periodic review of salaries to maintain this 

relationship was implemented in the Government 

Employees Salary Reform Act of 1964.1 In addition, the 1964 legislation substantially raised the 

limits on salary rates in the top grades of the 

Classification Act by increasing salaries of Congressmen and appointed administrative and 

judicial officials.

The two acts together increased basic salary scales 

of the 1.1 million employees under the Classification Act an average of about 14.5 percent, with 

smaller increases in the lowest pay grades and 

advances up to about one-third in grade 18 

(table 1). Salaries for the highest grades had 

lagged substantially behind those for comparable 

work in private industry.

Establishment of Comparability

The most basic revision since 1923 in the salary 

structure under the Classification Act was passed 

by Congress on October 5, 1962, and signed by 

President John F. Kennedy on October 11. The 

law included, in addition to salary increases, 

changes in salary structures, and administrative 

flexibilities under the four major pay systems. 2 

The act provided that determination of Federal 

salary schedules should be based on the principles

1 F or a discussion o f the m ajor features o f the 1962 and 1964 legislation, see 

Monthly Labor Review, O ctober 1964, pp . 1155-1164.

Statutory pay systems are the Classification Act, 

Postal Field Service, Foreign Service, and Department 

of Medicine and Surgery in the Veterans Administration.

a This figure does n ot include the effect o f changes in the distribution of 

workers am ong steps w ithin each grade that resulted from provisions that 

lengthened the tim e required to reach the m iddle and top steps o f the low er 

grades and reduced the tim e required to advance am ong the low er steps in 

the higher salary grades. T he effect o f changes in the distribution o f workers 

am ong steps w ithin each grade from 1962 to 1963 resulting from these p rovisions cannot be distinguished from the norm al operation o f provisions for 

m erit increases.

4 Estim ated on the basis of 1963 em ploym ent. A t the tim e the bill was 

drafted, it was estim ated that the increases w ould average 5.5 percent in 

1962 and 4.1 percent in January 1964.

« T his provision superseded a similar but more lim ited authority in 1954 

amendments to the Classification A ct. See Wage Chronology: Federal

Classification Act Employees, 19H-60 (B L S R eport N o. 199), p. 19.

of equal pay for substantially equal work and of 

comparability of Federal salary rates with those 

in private industry for the same levels of work. 

The system of classification of jobs previously in 

effect had followed the principle of equal pay for 

equal work within a pay system but there had 

been no method of equating pay for equal work 

among the various systems. The new legislation 

set up specific procedures for relating Federal 

salaries to pay in industry and provided for interrelating salary levels among the various pay 

systems.

Two new salary schedules were provided. The 

first, effective October 14 or 21, 1962, depending 

on the pay period dates in each agency, raised annual salaries of Classification Act employees an 

average of 5.6 percent.8 The second, effective the 

first pay period after January 1, 1964, raised salaries for grades 1 through 15 an average of 4.1 percent.4 Salaries for grades 16, 17, and 18—limited 

by those established for members of Congress-were 

not increased in January 1964. An additional step 

increase was given each employee on the payroll 

in the three lowest grades, thus providing these 

workers with greater increases than the Administration had proposed without permanently 

changing the salary schedule. This change raised 

average salary rates of all Classified Act employees three-tenths of 1 percent. In contrast 

with previous postwar increases, however, the 

legislation provided for proportionately higher 

total increases for the higher grades, ranging from 

about 5 percent for employees in grade 3 (including 

the previously mentioned step increase) to about 

17 percent for those in grade 15.

Another step towards establishing levels of pay 

that would be competitive with private industry 

authorized the President to raise rates of compensation for any occupation or in any area where 

higher rates in private enterprise significantly 

handicap the Government’s recruitment or retention of well-qualified workers.5 However, the 

minimum salary rate established under this provision may not exceed the seventh salary rate 

prescribed by the legislation for the grade. Previously, the maximum pay for the occupation could

37

Digitized for FRASER 

http://fraser.stlouisfed.org/ 

Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
38

not exceed the maximum regular step (step 7 

in most grades) for the grade. The Civil Service 

Commission acted quickly under this authority to 

set up a special pay scale for about 38,000 engineers 

and scientists in grades 5 through 11 and for certain grades in other occupations, principally for 

pharmacologists and medical officers.

The governmentwide quota of positions that 

could be allocated to the top three grades (16 

through 18) was increased from a total of about

2,000 to 2,400 “in addition to any professional 

engineering positions primarily concerned with 

research and development and professional positions in the physical and natural sciences and 

medicine which may be placed in such grades.”

The 1962 legislation also revised the amount 

and timing of salary increases within a grade. 

Greater uniformity among grades was introduced 

in the percent increases by providing greater 

dollar increments in successively higher grades. 

Longevity increases were abolished, but the 

number of within-grade rates in each grade was 

revised to equal the former total of regular plus 

longevity rates. Within-grade pay increases were 

not to be automatic; advancement was to depend 

upon whether an employee's work was “of an 

acceptable level of competence as determined bv 

the head of the department.”

Uniform waiting periods were established in 

all grades. The former schedule had provided 

annual step increases for workers in grades 1 

through 10, 18-month increases in grades 11 

through 17, and longevity increases at 3-year 

intervals in grades 1 through 15. (No longevity 

increases were provided in grades 16 through

is.)

The law also authorized additional within-grade 

increases (if department funds were available) 

in recognition of high quality work, with a limit 

of one such merit increase a year.

Other changes included authorization to pay 

a supervisor of wage board employees at a salary 

rate in his Classification Act grade that exceeded 

the rate paid those he supervised, up to the 

maximum of his grade. Salary retention benefits, 

under which employees whose jobs were downgraded through no fault of their own retained 

their old salaries for 2 years, and previously 

available only to employees in grades under 16, 

were made available to the three top grades as 

well. An employee brought with his position

under the Classification Act from another Federal 

system was to retain his salary even though his 

position was put into a lower salaried grade. 

The increase in salary for an employee promoted 

to a higher Classification Act grade was to equal 

at least two (formerly one) within-grade steps 

in the grade from which he was promoted.

The Administration's proposal for an annual 

report to Congress by the President on the 

relationship of Federal salaries to those in private 

industry was enacted. The President was required to direct an appropriate agency or agencies 

to submit to him annual comparisons of Federal 

employees' salary schedules with private enterprise rates for the same level of work,6 as determined by the Bureau of Labor Statistics annual 

surveys of professional, administrative, and clerical pay, and, after getting comments from such 

Government employee organizations as he considered appropriate, to prepare for Congress an 

annual report incorporating the comparisons and 

any recommendations he might have for revision 

of salary schedules or compensation policy.

1964 Salary Legislation

An omnibus bill was passed by the House of 

Representatives on June 11,1964, providing salary 

increases for the Vice President, members of Congress, Federal judges, Cabinet members, and other 

appointed officials, as well as for Classification 

Act, Postal, and other groups of employees in the 

executive, legislative, and judicial branches of 

Government. Like an earlier House bill (defeated 

by a rollcall vote in March), this bill was an attempt to implement the comparability principle 

of the 1962 legislation. By increasing salaries of 

members of Congress (by $7,500 to $30,000) and 

of appointed administrative and judicial officials, 

the bill raised the limits on pay for employees in 

the top grades of the Classification Act. On 

July 2, the Senate approved a bill that differed in 

provisions for Classification Act employees in 

several respects. The Senate bill provided slightly 

larger increases for grades GS-9 through 12, “In 

order to bring this middle-management group 

closer to comparability . . . .” It provided an 

effective date of July 1 for all salarv increases, in

6 Executive Order 11073 delegated this responsibility to the D irector of the 

Bureau of the B udget and the Chairman of the C ivil Service Comm ission.

Digitized for FRASER 

http://fraser.stlouisfed.org/ 

Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
39

place of House provisions making most increases 

effective after passage but deferring the effective 

date of raising salaries above $22,000 to January 

1965, when Congressmen’s salaries were to advance above $22,500.

The Senate limited to 249 the number of hearing 

examiner positions to be exempt from the 2,400 

positions authorized for grades GS-16, 17, and 18. 

Both bills allowed appointments above the minimum salary rate at grade GS-13 or higher for 

applicants with exceptional qualifications, but 

the Senate required Civil Service approval in each 

instance, whereas the House would have allowed 

such appointments under general Civil Service 

authorization.

The compromise bill signed by the President on 

August 14 incorporated all the Senate changes for 

Classification Act workers and provided salary 

increases for these workers ranging from about 2.8 

percent to 22.5 percent and averaging $287 or 4.2 

percent.7

Salary Changes

Average salary rates increased 6.1 percent from 

July 1962 to July 1963; this included the effects of 

the extra step increase to all incumbents in grades 

1, 2, and 3, which raised average salary rates 

approximately three-tenths of a percent, as well 

as some changes in the distribution of workers 

among steps within various grades resulting from 

revisions in the time required to progress from one 

step to another and changes in average length of 

service within each grade. Information on 

changes in average salary rates since July 1963 

is not yet available.8

7 E stim ated b y assuming the same distribution of em ployees b y grade and 

step in 1964 as in 1963. T he effect o f increases in p ay for workers in grades 11 

through 16 resulting from addition o f pay steps to these grades has been 

om itted from the estim ates; inform ation on the num ber oPworkers affected 

b y these increases is n ot available. Since the proportion o f workers in the 

existing top steps o f these grades is relatively small, the effect on the 

overall indexes w ould b e , m inor.

8 Indexes o f average salary rates for 1964 were estim ated on the assum ption 

that they changed b y the same percentage as basic salary scales.

From July 1961 to July 1963, average salaries 

increased about 3.7 percent as a result of changes 

in the proportion of employees in the various pay 

grades. Information is not yet available on the 

effect of further changes in the proportion of 

workers in various pay steps and grades from 

mid-1963 to mid-1964.

T a b l e 1 . I n d e x e s o f B a s i c S a l a r y S c a l e s , A v e r a g e

S a l a r y R a t e s , a n d A v e r a g e S a l a r i e s 1 o f F e d e r a l

C l a s s i f i e d E m p l o y e e s C o v e r e d b y t h e G e n e r a l

S c h e d u l e ,2 1 9 3 9 a n d 1 9 4 5 - 6 4 3

[1957-59=100]

D ate

Basic 

salary 

scales i

Average 

salary 

rates 1

Average 

salaries 4

A ugust 1939.................................................. 52.3 49.5 40.4

June 30, 1945........ ......................................... 52.4 4 49.5 («)

July 1,1946..................................................... 69.0 64.8 55.0

July 1,1947...................................................... 69.0 66.0 58.2

July 15, 1948................................................. 76.2 73.9 64.8

July 1, 1949.............................. ................... - 76.2 74.2 65.7

July 1, 1950.................................... —........... 79.3 78.1 70.6

July 8,1951..................................................... 87.1 84.8 75.8

Ju ly 1,1952..................................................... 87.1 84.9 77.4

July 1, 1953................................................... 87.1 85.7 79.4

July 1, 1954..................................................... 87.1 86.4 81.0

July 1, 1955 a.................................................. 93.7 93.2 88.2

July 1, 1956.................................................... 93.7 93.1 89.2

July 1, 1957...................— _________ _____ 93.7 93.2 91.1

July 1, 1958......................................... ......... 103.2 103.5 103.5

July 1, 1959..................................................... 103.2 103.2 105.4

July 10, 1960 3.............................. ................. 111.1 111.1 115.4

July 1,1961..................................................... 111.1 111.1 116.8

July 1, 1962..................................................... 111.1 111.0 118.1

July 1, 1963,.................................................. 117.3 117.8 128.1

Jan. 5,1964................. ..................... .............

July 5, 1964....................................................

8 122.1 8 122.6 133.4

8 127.2 8 127.7 8 142.7

* B asic salary scales reflect only statutory changes in salaries. Average 

salary rates show statutory changes and the effect of merit or in-grade salary 

increases. Average salaries measure the effect not only of statutory changes 

in basic p ay scales and in-grade salary increases, bu t also changes in the proportion of workers in the various grades.

2 D ata for the General Schedule and Crafts, Protective, and Custodial 

Schedule em ployees have been incorporated into a single index. Since July 

1, 1955, the General Schedule has covered all Classification A ct em ployees. 

A t that tim e, about one-third of the approxim ately 100,000 em ployees formerly 

covered b y the Crafts, Protective, and Custodial Schedule were transferred 

to the General Schedule; the remaining two-thirds were transferred to wageboard classifications, along w ith approxim ately 2,500 workers form erly under 

the General Schedule. There were on ly m inor differences am ong the indexes 

in the years prior to 1955.

8 Beginning w ith 1960, data include em ployees in Alaska and Hawaii. 

Inclusion of these em ployees did not affect basic salary scales; average salary 

rates and average salaries were affected b y negligible amounts.

4 Estim ated b y assuming the same distribution of em ployees am ong grades 

and steps w ithin grades in 1945 as in 1939. Since there was little or no increase 

in average salary rates because of in-grade increases during this period, it 

was assumed that the change in basic salary scales was virtually the same as 

in average salary rates.

8 N ot available.

8 Estim ated b y assuming the same distribution of em ployees am ong grades 

and steps within grades in 1964 as in 1963.

Digitized for FRASER 

http://fraser.stlouisfed.org/ 

Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
40

T a b l e 2 . P e r c e n t I n c r e a s e s i n S a l a r i e s o f F e d e r a l C l a s s i f i e d E m p l o y e e s a n d O t h e r S e l e c t e d O c c u p a t i o n a l

G r o u p s a n d i n t h e C o n s u m e r P r i c e I n d e x , 1 9 3 9 - 6 4 , 1 9 5 4 - 6 4 , a n d 1 9 6 2 - 6 4

Item

Federal classified em ployees: 7

Basic salary scales 2--------------------------------

Average salary rates 2 2_________________

Average salaries 23----------------------------------

F actory production w ork ers:4

Average w eekly earnings_______________

A verage hourly earnings (excluding 

overtim e)_________________________ ______ __

R ailw ay office em ployees (straight-time 

m onthly ea rn in gs):3

A ll railway office em ployees____________

D ivision officers, assistants, and staff

assistants______________________________

Chief clerks and other supervisors •____

Other clerical em ployees 7..........................

A ugust 

1939 to 

July 1964

July 1954 

to July 

1964

July 1962 

to July 

1964

Item

August 

1939 to 

July 1964

July 1954 

to July 

1964

July 1962 

to July 

1964

Office clerical workers, selected cities

143.2 46.0 14.5 (straight-time w eekly earnings): 8

158.0 47.8 15.0 A tla n ta _________________________ _______ (9) 47.3 7.1

253.2 76.2 20.8 B o s to n _________________________ _______ _ (9) 47.0 5.4

C h ica g o ------------------------- --------------------- (9) 39.8 4.8

Cleveland_______________________ _______ (9) 73 39.0 5.2

338.3 48.4 7.4 D en ver_____________ __________________ (9) 48.8 7.7

Los A ngeles-Long B each_______________ (9) 48.0 6.0

296.7 41.0 6.1 M em p h is._______________________________ (9) 42.9 5.3

M ilw aukee_____ _________________________ (9) 43.0 6.2

M inneapolis-St. Paul____ ______________ (9) 41.2 5.4

N ew Y ork C ity _________________________ (9) 46.2 6.6

205.4 44.7 2.3 Philadelphia____________________________ (9) 46.1 5.8

San F rancisco-O akland_______________ (9) 45.2 6.4

157.3 46.0 1.0

163.1 41.3 1.2 C ity public school teachers 77_______________ 195.1 49.4 7.1

209.4 40.2 2.0 Firefighters and police patrolm en 72_______ 184.4 50.6 8.5

Consum er Price Index 73........................... ......... 124.9 15.2 2.6

1 Changes in the earnings of Federal em ployees are based on the salary 

schedule effective July 5, 1964.

2 See footnote 1, table 1.

3 Estim ated b y assuming the same distribution of em ployees am ong grades 

and steps within grades in 1964 as in 1963.

4 Changes in the earnings of factory production workers were com puted to 

June 1964.

* Changes in the earnings of railw ay office em ployees were com puted to 

D ecem ber 1963 b y the Bureau of Labor Statistics from Interstate Com m erce 

Com m ission M-300 reports. Averages were com puted b y dividing total 

com pensation for straight-tim e actually w orked byth e num ber of em ployees 

who received pay during the m onth.

« Includes professional and subprofessional assistants, supervisory or 

chief clerks (m ajor departm ents), chief clerks (m inor departm ents), assistant 

chief clerks, and supervising cashiers.

From 1939 to July 1964, legislation raised basic 

salary scales of Classification Act employees by 

about 143 percent. Average salary rates increased 

158 percent, while estimated average salaries rose 

253 percent.

Both the 1962 and 1964 acts were designed to 

provide comparability of pay for Government 

employees with private industry and, hence, provided for substantial “catchups” in pay for workers 

in the higher Classification Act grades. Consequently, from 1962 to 1964, all three measures of 

increases in Federal pay rose faster than the Consumer Price Index (CPI) or the earnings of other 

groups of workers shown in table 2. From 1954 

to 1964, basic salary scales and average salary 

rates rose by about the same relative amounts as 

earnings of other groups and more than the CPI,

• T he inform ation on railway em ployees is included since it is the only

series showing trends in earnings of a substantial group of office workers

prior to 1952.

10 T his was the increase in salaries of em ployees on the rolls at the tim e the 

legislation became effective; it included the effects of both the change in pay 

scales and an additional increase equivalent to one step w ithin the pay grade 

to those on the rolls at that time in grades 1, 2, and 3. T he change in average 

salaries in each grade also included the effect of changes in the distribution 

of workers among pay steps resulting from actual changes in average length 

of service in the grade and changes made b y the 1962 legislation in the length 

of tim e required to progress among grade steps. Increases in average rates 

that w ould becom e effective for em ployees not on the rolls at the time the 

1962 legislation went into effect were 3 to 3.5 percent in the three lowest grades.

7 Includes clerks and clerical specialists, clerks, m echanical-device operators 

(office), stenographers and secretaries, stenographers and typists, traveling 

auditors or accountants, and messengers and officeboys.

8 Data for 1954 refer to w om en and were taken from surveys m ade during 

the second half of 1953 and the first half of 1954; data for 1964 refer to both 

m en and w om en and were taken from surveys m ade during the second half 

of 1963 and the first half of 1964.

8 Not available.

Increase from 1955 to 1964.

11 D ata refer to public school teachers in cities of 100,000 inhabitants or m ore 

in 1963 and 50,000 inhabitants or m ore in earlier years, and to school years 

ending in June of 1939,1953, and 1963.

12 M axim um salary scales in cities of 100,000 inhabitants or m ore.

73 Changes in the consum er price index were com puted to June 1964.

while average salaries rose more than earnings of 

other workers.

Despite the larger increases in recent years, 

both basic salary scales and average salary rates 

have risen less since 1939 than pay of other 

workers. Average salaries have risen more than 

the straight-time monthly earnings of all railway 

office employees,9 but less than the average hourly 

or weekly earnings of factory production workers, 

both of which are also affected by changes in 

composition of the labor force.

Increase Variation Among Grades

In contrast to previous postwar increases, the 

1962 and 1964 legislation provided for proportionately larger salary increases for the higher grades. 

Increases ranged from about 5.2 percent in the 

average scales in grade 3 to about 17 percent in 

grade 1510 in the 1962 legislation and from 2.8 

percent in grade 2 to 22.5 percent in grade 18 in 

1964 (tables 3 and 6). Combining the effect of 

the two acts, increases in average salaries ranged 

from about 7.6 percent in grade 2 to 33.8 percent 

in grade 17.

Early in 1962, the Civil Service Commission 

and the Bureau of the Budget found that rates

Digitized for FRASER 

http://fraser.stlouisfed.org/ 

Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
41

in the lowest levels of the Classified Service were 

equal to or higher than those for comparable work 

in private industry, as reflected in a Bureau of 

Labor Statistics survey for 1961.11 In higher 

grades, the differential in favor of private industry 

ranged from 14 percent in grade 7 to 32 percent 

in grade 15.

The larger increases provided the higher grades 

also were designed to give greater recognition to 

differences in responsibility and greater incentive 

to prepare for higher responsibilities; previous 

postwar increases had either been uniform in 

percentage terms to all grades or, frequently, 

greater proportionately in the lower grades, thus 

narrowing the spread between grades. The ratio 

of the minimum salary in the highest and lowest 

grade had narrowed from 8.8 to 1 in 193912 13 to 

5.8 to 1 prior to passage of the 1962 legislation.

The October 1962 schedule raised the ratio to 6.2 

to 1, but it dropped slightly to 6.1 to 1 when the 

January 1964 schedule did not change salaries of 

grades 16, 17, or 18. When the 1964 legislation 

became effective, the ratio rose to 7.2 to 1.

Although the 1962 and 1964 legislation increased 

basic salary rates of Classified workers in all grades

11 See Summary Analysis of President’s Proposal for Reform of Federal Statutory Salary Systems (U .S. House of Representatives, Com m ittee on Post

Office and C ivil Service, 87th Cong., 2d sess., 1962, Com m ittee Print), 

pp. 9-10.

13 In 1939, the equivalent of GS-15 was the top grade. Grades 16, 17, and 

18 were created b y the Classification A ct of 1949. T he salary for Grade 18 

has been used in comparisons for years other than 1939.

The 1939 ratio is based on the m inim um salary in the subprofessional 

schedule which was com bined with the professional and the clerical, adm inistrative, and fiscal schedules into one general schedule in 1949. T h e ratio 

based on what was then the equivalent of the present m inim um rate (G S-1) 

in the general schedule was 7.1 to 1.

M axim um pay in grade 15 was five times the m inim um for grade 1 in both 

1958 and 1960. T h e ratio rose to 5.5 to 1 in October 1962, 5.8 to 1 in January 

1964, and 6.4 to 1 under the schedule that became effective in July 1964.

T a b l e 3 . M i n i m u m a n d A v e r a g e S a l a r i e s 1 o f F e d e r a l C l a s s i f i e d E m p l o y e e s , b y G r a d e , a n d C o n s u m e r P r i c e

I n d e x , S e l e c t e d D a t e s , 1 9 3 9 - 6 4

General schedule grade and Consum er 

Price Index

A ugust

1939

July 1, 

1950

July 1, 

1958

July 10, 

1960

July 1, 

1961

July 1, 

1962

July 1, 

1963

Jan. 5, 

19641

July 5, 

19641

General schedule grade:

1: M inim um salary rate............................. *$1,180 $2,200 $2,960 $3,185 $3,185 $3,185 $3,245 $3,305 $3,385

Average salary........................................ - 1,223 2,356 3,260 3,540 3,524 

3,500

3,474 3,643 3,652 » 3,765

2: M inim um salary rate............................. 1,440 2,450 3,255 3,500 3,500 3,560 3,620 3,680

Average salary..................... .................... 1,489 2,639 3,498 3,762 3,754 3,712 3,846 3,884 *3,994

3: M inim um salary ra te ............................ 1,620 2,650 3,495 3,760 3,760 3,760 3,820 3,880 4,005

Average salary............... ........................... 1,683 2,866 3,804 4,111 4,102 4,079 4,241 4,291 * 4,513

4: M inim um salary rate............................. 1,800 2,875 3,755 4,040 4,040 4,040 4,110 4,215 4,480

Average salary.......................................... 1,867 3,103 4,126 4,455 4,456 4,444 4,675 4,779 5,084

5: M inim um salary ra te.—.................— 2,000 3,100 4,040 4,345 4,345 4,345 4,565 4,690 5,000

Average salary........................................... 2,099 3,405 4,570 4,921 4,931 4,932 5,158 5,269 5,598

6: M inim um salary rate.............................. 2,300 3,450 4,490 4,830 4,830 4,830 5,035 5,235 5,605

Average salary....... ................................... 2,414 3,780 5,031 5,401 5,456 5,490 5,732 5,950 6,261

7: M inim um salary rate............................. 2,600 3,825 4,980 5,355 5,355 5,355 5,540 5,795 6,050

Average salary.......................................... 2,704 4,154 5,471

5,470

5,893 5,890 5,884 6,153 6,357 6,626

8: M inim um salary rate............................. 2,900 4,200 5,885 5,885 5,885 6,090 6,390 6,630

Average salary.......................... — .......... 3,020 4,553 6,945 6,411 6,444

6,435

6,430 6,797 7,112 7,386

9: M inim um salary rate............................. 3,200 4,600 5,985 6,435 6,435 6,675 7,030 7,220

Average salary......... ................................. 3,298 4,923 6,460 6,931 6,929 6,945 7,370 7,702 7,935

10: M inim um salary rate............................. 3,600 5,000 6,605 6,995 6,995 6,995 7,290 7,690 7,900

Average salary........................... ............... 3,620 5,279 6,959 7,476 7,487 7,492 8,089 8,518 8,776

11: M inim um salary rate............................. 3,800 5,400 7,030 7,560 7,560 7,560 8,045 8,410 8,650

Average salary......... ................. ................ 3,974 5,734 7,620 8,107 8,071 8,133 8,712 9,017 4 9,289

12: M inim um salary r a te ........................... 4,600 6,400 8,330 8,955 8,955 8,955 9,475 9,980 10,250

Average salary................... ....................... 4,797 6,759 8,999 9,555 9,505 9,451 10,155 10,680 11,003

13: M inim um salary rate........... ................. 5,600 7,800 9,890 10,635 10,635 10,635 11,150 11,725 12,075

Average salary........... ........... - ................. 5,793 7,931 10,593 11,262 11,194 11,132 11,935 12,541 4 12,965

14: M inim um salary rate............................. 6,500 8*800 11,355

12,042

12,210 12,210 12,210 12,845 13,615 14,170

Average salary.......................................... 6,850 9,150 12,818 12,742 12,679 13,740 14,545 4 15,182

15: M inim um salary rate..... ....................... 8,000 10,000 12,770 13,730 13,730 13,730 14,565 15,665 16,460

Average salary........................................... 8,460 10,577 13,513 14,443 14,407 14,356 15,679 16,835 4 17,755

16: M inim um salary rate....... ..................... (») 11,200 14,190 15,256 15,255 15,255 16,000 16,000 18,935

Average sala ry ............................. - ......... (*) 11,232 14,657 15,648 15,656 15,662 17,103 17,093 *20,367

17: M inim um salary rate....... ..................... (») 12,200 15,375 16,530 16,530 16,530 18,000 18,000 21,445

Average salary........................................... (*) 12,288 15,768 16,863 16,852 16,846 18,732 18,729 22,539

18: M inim um salary r a t e ............................ (») 14,000 17,500 18,500 18,500 18,500 20,000 20,000 24,500

Average salary------------------------------------ (') 14,000 17,500 18,500 18,500 18,500 20,000 20,000 24,500

Consumer Price Index (1957-59=100).............. 48.1 83.9 101.0 103.2 104.4 105.5 107.1 107.6 •108.2

i M inim um salaries are the salaries paid at the first step in each grade. 

Average salaries were obtained b y weighting each salary step w ithin the 

grade b y the num ber of em ployees at that step. Therefore, they reflect 

the effect of increases in basic salary scales and of merit increases in pay w ithin 

the grade. A verage salaries for 1964 were estim ated on the basis of 1963 em ­

ploym ent data, and hence do not reflect any changes that occurred from 1963 

to 1964 in the distribution o f em ployees am ong and within grades.

* T h e m inim um was com puted b y weighting equally the base pay for each 

of the three grades (subprofessional grades 1 and 2 and clerical, administrative, and fiscal grade 1) that were com bined into this General Schedule grade.

* Average salaries for July 1964 do not reflect the fact that em ployees paid 

above the m axim um rate (above step 10) of grades 1,2, and 3 as a result of the 

extra step increases received in October 1962 received smaller increases in

July 1964 than other em ployees in these grades since they reverted to the 

rates for step 10 of these grades under the July 1964 schedule. Increases of 

affected em ployees were thus $105 ($125 in grade 3) lower than they w ould 

have been if a salary rate for the equivalent of step 11 had been m aintained. 

This change affected about 6 percent of the em ployees in grades 2 and 3 and 

about 12 percent of those in grade 1, but only about 1 percent of all General 

Schedule em ployees.

4 Estimates of July 1964 average salaries do not reflect the effects of the p ay 

steps that were added to the salary schedule for grades 11 through 16 b y the 

1964 legislation. Average salaries for these grades m ay be revised substantially when later data are available.

* Grades 16,17. and 18 were created b y the Classification A ct of 1949.

• Index for June 1964.

Digitized for FRASER 

http://fraser.stlouisfed.org/ 

Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
42

relatively more than the CPI rose, increases in 

entrance salaries in grades above GS-11 since 1939 

and in average salaries above GS-12 still lagged 

behind the overall increase in the CPI. Since 

1939, increases in entrance rates amounted to 187 

percent in grade 1 and 106 percent in grade 15. 

Average salaries in grade 1 rose 208 percent from 

1939 to July 1964, compared with 110 percent in 

grade 15. (See chart.)

Other features of the legislation were intended 

to provide uniform ranges in percentage terms between minimum and maximum salaries among 

grades. The size of the step increases within the 

higher grades was widened, and in 1964 pay steps 

were added in grades 11 through 16, bringing the 

number of steps to 10 in grades 1 through 15 and 

to 9 in grade 16 (table 4). In July I960, the 

pay range within a grade as a percent of the 

minimum salary varied from 6.3 percent in GS-17 

to 22.8 percent in GS-5. The spread changed to

11.1 percent in GS-17 and 30.7 percent in GS-5 by 

January 1964. As a result of the most recent 

legislation, the range varied from 14.0 percent in 

grade 17 to 31.3 percent in grade 13. Except for 

grade 17 (and grade 18 for which there is a single 

rate), the 1964 legislation resulted in practically 

uniform percentage ranges in all grades—from 

29.7 percent in grade 5 to 31.3 percent in grade 13.

Employment Shifts

Since 1939, part of the increase in average 

salaries has resulted from changes in the distribution of Federal employment among grades. 

As indicated in table 5, page 44, there has been a 

substantial decrease in the proportion employed in 

the lower grades and a growth in the higher grades. 

In 1939, 31 percent of all Classification Act 

employees were in grades 1 and 2; 57 percent were 

in the first four grades. By July 1963, only 3 

percent were in grades 1 and 2 and 33 percent in 

grades 1 through 4. Over the same period, the 

proportion of employees in grade 12 or above rose 

from about 4 to 17 percent. The median grade 

rose from GS-4 in 1939, GS-5 in 1954, and GS-6 

in 1961, to GS-7 in 1963.

Increase in Average Salary Rates 1 of Federal Classified Employees, by Grade,2 August 1939 to July 1964

1 Average salaries were obtained b y weighting each salary step within the 

grade b y the num ber of em ployees at that step (1964 average salary rates were 

estimated on the basis of 1963 em ploym ent data). Therefore, they reflect 

the effect of statutory changes in basic pay scales and ingrade salary increases.

2 Grades 16, 17, and 18, w hich were created b y the Classification A ct of 

1949, are om itted.

These pronounced changes in the employment 

pattern reflect a number of factors, including the 

effect of mechanization of many accounting and 

office processes and the increases and changes in 

demands for Government services which have 

attended the growth in population and complexity 

of the economy. The growth in demands for 

Government services and the resulting new legislation have not only increased the number of

Digitized for FRASER 

http://fraser.stlouisfed.org/ 

Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
48

T able 4. Number o f W ithin-Grade Increases and Salary Panges as Percent of 

M inim um Salaries, S elected Periods, 1949-64

Number Range as percent of minimum salary 2

of increases 1

General Oct. 1949 July 1951 Mar. 1955 schedule Oct. 1955 

to Jan. 

1964

grade 1949, July Longevity

July 1964 Exclud­ Includ­ Exclud­ Includ­ Exclud­ Includ1951 ing ing ing ing ing ing

1 ........................... 9 9 9 2 1 .8 32. 7 19. 2 28.8 19.0 28.4

2 ----------------- 9 9 9 19.6 29.4 17. 5 26.2 17.2 25. 8

3 ------------------ 9 9 9 18. 1 27. 2 16.3 24.4 16.1 24.1

4 ------------------ 9 9 9 16. 7 25.0 15. 1 22. 7 14. 9 22.4

5 ----------------- 9 9 9 24. 2 36.3 2 2 .0 33.0 22. 1 33. 1

6 ----------------- 9 9 9 21. 7 32.6 19. 8 29.6 19.9 29.8

7 ----------------- 9 9 9 19.6 29.4 17.8 26.8 17.9 26.9

8 ----------------- 9 9 9 17.9 26.8 16.2 24.4 16.3 24.4

9 ----------------- 9 9 9 16.3 24.5 14.8 2 2 .2 14.9 22.3

1 0 ................. - 9 9 9 15.0 22.5 13.6 20.5 13. 7 20.5

11 ------------- 5 8 9 18.5 - 16. 8 - 16,8 26.9

1 2 ---------------- 5 8 9 15.6 - 14. 2 - 14.2 22. 7

1 3 ---------------- 5 8 9 13. 2 - 1 2 .0 - 1 2 .0 19.1

1 4 ---------------- 5 8 9 11.4 - 10.4 - 10.4 16. 7

1 5 ---------------- 4 7 9 1 0 .0 - 9.3 - 9.3 14.9

1 6 ---------------- 4 4 8 7.1 - 6 . 7 - 6 . 7 -

1 7 —.............-

1 8 ----------------

4 34 4 6 .6

-

6 .2

-

36 . 2

-

Range as percent of minimum salary2

Jan. 1958 July 1960

Oct.

1962

Jan.

1964

July

1964 Longevity

Exclud­ Includ­ Exclud- Including ing ing ing

1 - ------------------- 19.3 28. 9 19.8 29. 7 29. 1 28.6 30.6

2 --------------------- 17.5 26.3 18.0 27.0 26.5 26. 1 30.6

3 --------------------- 16. 3 24.5 16.8 25. 1 26.4 26.3 30.3

4 --------------------- 15. 2 22. 8 15. 6 23.4 30. 7 29. 9 30.1

5 --------------------- 22.3 33. 4 22. 8 34.2 31. 5 30. 7 29. 7

6 --------- ----------- 2 0 .0 30. 1 20.5 30. 7 30.4 30.1 30.2

7 ......................... 18. 1 27. 1 18.5 27. 7 30.1 30.3 29.8

8 --------------------- 16.5 24. 7 16.8 25. 2 30.3 29.6 29.9

9 --------------------- 15.0 2 2 .6 15.4 23. 1 30.3 29.4 30.5

1 0 ------- ----------- 13. 8 2 0 .8 14.2 21. 2 30.2 29. 8 30.8

1 1 ------------------- 17. 1 27.3 17.2 27. 5 26.4 26.6 30. 7

1 2 ------------------- 14.4 23.0 14.5 23. 2 26.6 26. 5 31. 2

1 3 ------------------- 12. 1 19.4 1 2 .2 19.6 26.2 26.3 31.3

1 4 ------------------- 1 0 . 6 1 6 . 9 1 0 . 6 1 7 . 0 2 6 . 5 2 6 . 4 3 1 . 1

1 5 ---------------------------- 9 . 4 1 5 . 0 9 . 5 1 5 . 1 2 3 . 1 2 3 . 0 31.2

1 6 .................................. 6 .8 - 6 .8 - 12.5 12.5 27. 7

1 7 ---------------------------- 6 .2 - 6.3 - 11.1 11.1 14.0

1 8 ---------------------------- " - “

1 Including longevity increases.

2 Longevity steps were provided for em ployees in grades 1—10 until Septem ber 1954 when they were extended 

to em ployees in grades 11—15. Longevity steps, as such, no longer exist; they were incorporated into the regular 

pay schedule in October 1962.

3 In M arch 1955, 3 w ithin-grade increases above the m inim um salary were provided for grade 17, m aking 

the range 4 .6 percent o f the m inim um salary. The 6 .2 percent range becam e effective in July 1956 when 1 step 

was added to grade 17.

Digitized for FRASER 

http://fraser.stlouisfed.org/ 

Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
44

Table 5. Percent Distribution of General Schedule Employees by Grade, 

Selected Periods, 1939-631

General

schedule

grade

Aug.

1939

July 1, 

1946

July 1, 

1950

July 8, 

1951

July 1, 

1954

1 ---------------------------- 13.1 2.5 1 .8 1.4 1. 1

2 -------------- ------------- 18.1 19.3 14.5 16.6 11.5

3 ---------------------------- 14. 7 2 2 .8 2 0 .6 2 1 .8 2 1 .0

4 --------- ------------------ 11.5 13.6 14.8 13.9 15.8

5 and 6 ------------------ 17.2 13.9 14.8 14.5 14.9

7 and 8 ----------------- 10.4 1 1 .6 12.3 11. 7 1 2 .1

9 and 1 0 ---------------- 6 .8 7.6 9.2 8. 7 1 0 .1

1 1 ................. .............. 3.8 4.0 5.1 4. 8 5.8

12 and 13 -------------- 3. 9 4.0 5.8 5.4 6.3

14 and 15 - ............... . 5 . 7 1 .1 1 .2 1.5

16 through 1 8 --------- - - (2) (2) . 1

Total —-------- 1 0 0 .0 1 0 0 .0 1 0 0 .0 1 0 0 .0 1 0 0 .0

Number of

employees —------- 234,067 893,653 701,824 885,925 864,126

July 1, July 10. July 1, July 1, July 1,

1958 I9601 1961 1962 1963

1 ........... ........................ 0.4 0.3 0 .2 0 .2 0 .1

2 ................. - .............. 5. 8 4.1 3.5 3.4 2. 7

3 .................................. 19.5 16. 7 15. 7 15. 1 13. 7

4 ---------------------------- 16.9 16.8 16.8 16.6 16.3

5 and 6 — —----—— 15. 7 16. 7 17.1 17.0 17.1

7 and 8 ------------------- 1 1 .6 11. 5 11.5 11. 1 1 1 .1

9 and 1 0 ---------------- 11.3 11. 7 11. 7 12. 1 12.5

1 1 ............................— 7.6 8 . 7 9.2 9. 1 9. 8

12 and 13 -------------- 8.9 1 0 .6 1 1 .1 1 1 .8 12. 7

14 and 1 5 -------------- 2 .2 2 .8 2.9 3.3 3.8

16 through 1 8 --------- . 1 .2 .2 .2 .3

Total -----------

Number of 

employees -----------

1 0 0 .0 1 0 0 .0 1 0 0 .0 1 0 0 .0 1 0 0 .0

921,153 953,995 988, 241 1,039,224 1,083,633

1 Beginning in 1960, data include employees in Alaska and Hawaii.

2 Less than 0. 05 percent.

NOTE: Because of rounding, totals may not equal 100.

Digitized for FRASER 

http://fraser.stlouisfed.org/ 

Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
45

T a b l e 6. P e r c e n t I n c r e a s e in M in im u m a n d A v e r a g e {Sa l a r ie s 1 o f F e d e r a l C l a s s if ie d E m p l o y e e s , b y G r a d e ,

AND IN THE CONSUM ER PRICE IN D E X , SELECTED D A T E S TO JU LY 5 , 1 9 6 4

General schedule grade and Consumer Price Index

Percent increase to July 5,1964 from—

Aug. 1,1939 July 1,1950 July 1,1958 July 10,1960 July 1,1961 July 1,1962 July 1,1963 Jan. 5,19641

General schedule grade:

1: Minimum salary rate_____ ______________ ______ 186.9 53.9 14.4 6.3 6.3 6.3 4.3 2.4

Average salary________________ _____ ___________ 2 207.8 2 59.8 2 15.5 2 6.4 2 6.8 2 8.4 2 3.3 23.I

2: Minimum salary rate___________________________ 155.6 50.2 13.1 5.1 5.1 5.1 3.4 1.7

Average salary_________________ ____ ___________ 2 168.2 2 51.3 2 14.2 2 6.2 2 6.4 2 7.6 23.8 22.8

3: Minimum salary rate............... - _ .______ ________ 147.2 51.1 14.6 6.5 6.5 6.5 4.8 3.2

Average salary_____ ____________________________ 2 168.2 2 57.5 2 18.6 »9.8 2 10.0 2 10.6 2 6.4 *5.2

4: Minimum salary rate--------------------------- ------------ 148.9 55.8 19.3 10.9 10.9 10.9 9.0 6.3

Average salary-------------------------------------------------- 172.3 63.8 23.2 14.1 14.1 14.4 8.7 6.4

5: Minimum salary rate___________________________ 150.0 61.3 23.8 15.1 15.1 15.1 9.5 6.6

Average salary----------- -------------------------------- ------- 166.7 64.4 22.5 13.8 13.5 13.5 8.5 6.2

6: Minimum salary rate----------------------------------------- 139.3 59.6 22.6 14.0 14.0 14.0 9.3 5.2

Average salary______________________ _____ _____ 159.4 65.6 24.4 15.9 14.8 14.0 9.2 5.2

7: Minimum salary rate___________________________ 132.7 58.2 21.5 13.0 13.0 13.0 9.2 4.4

Average salary___________ ______________________ 145.0 59.5 21.1 12.4 12.5 12.6 7.7 4.2

8: Minimum salary rate___________________________ 128.6 57.9 21.2 12.7 12.7 12.7 8.9 3.8

Average salary-------------- ---------- --------------------------- 144.6 62.2 24.2 15.2 14.6 14.9 8.7 3.9

9: Minimum salary rate____ ______________________ 125.6 57.0 20.6 12.2 12.2 12.2 8.2 2.7

Average salary----------- ---------------------------------------- 140.6 61.2 22.8 14.5 14.5 14.3 7.7 3.0

10: Minimum salary rate-------------- -------------------------- 125.7 58.0 21.4 12.9 12.9 12.9 8.4 2.7

Average salary__________________________________ 142.4 66.2 26.1 17.4 17.2 17.1 8.5 3.0

11: Minimum salary rate___________________________ 127.6 60.2 23.0 14.4 14.4 14.4 7.5 2.9

Average salary-------------------------------------- ---------- »133.7 »62.0 3 21.9 8 14.6 3 15.1 3 14.2 3 6.6 3 3.0

12: Minimum salary rate__________________________ 122.8 60.2 23.0 14.5 14.5 14.5 8.2 2.7

Average salary__________________ ______ - ............ » 129.4 3 62.8 3 22.3 3 15.2 8 15.8 3 16.4 3 8.4 3 3.0

13: Minimum salary rate___________________________ 115.6 58.9 22.1 13.5 13.5 13.5 8.3 3.0

Average salary_____________________ _____ ______- 3 123.8 *63.5 3 22.4 «15.1 3 15.8 3 16.5 »8.6 3 3.4

14: Minimum salary rate__________ _________ - ........ . 118.0 61.0 24.8 16.1 16.1 16.1 10.3 4.1

Average salary__________________________________ 3121.6 3 65.9 3 26.1 3 18.4 3 19.1 3 19.7 310.5 >4.4

15: Minimum salary rate___________________________ 105.8 64.6 28.9 19.9 19.9 19.9 13.0 5.1

Average salary__________________________________ 3 109.9 3 67.9 *31.4 3 22.9 3 23.2 3 23.7 3 13.2 « 5.5

16: Minimum salary rate------------------------------------- (4) 69.1 33.4 24.1 24.1 24.1 18.3 18.3

Average salary_______________________ __________ (4) 3 81.3 3 39.0 3 30.2 3 30.1 3 30.0 3 19.1 >19.2

17: Minimum salary r a t e -------- ----------------------------- (4) 75.8 39.5 29.7 29.7 29.7 19.1 19.1

Average salary____________ _____ __________ ____ (4) 83.4 42.9 33.7 33.7 33.8 20.3 20.3

18: Minimum salary rate_________________ ______ (4) 75.0 40.0 32.4 32.4 32.4 22.5 22.5

Average salary_________________________________ (4) 75.0 40.0 32.4 32.4 32.4 22.5 22.5

Consumer Price Index (1957-59=100)----------------------------- 124.9 29.0 7.1 4.8 3.6 2.6 1 1.0 8.6

1 See footnote 1, table 3.

2 See footnote 3, table 3.

3 See footnote 4, table 3.

Government employees,13 but have created a demand for new types of workers.14

From 1951 to 1961, the Federal Government 

experienced a 32-percent decline in subprofessional 

mathematical and statistical employees, a 100- 

percent increase in mathematicians, and a 13- 

percent increase in statisticians. The growth of 

scientific activities of the Government has resulted 

in greatly increased needs for scientists and engineers and related professional people.15 For 

example, the number of scientists and engineers 

working on NASA programs grew from 8,400 (or 

less than 1 percent of the estimated 1.2 million in 

the country) in 1960 to 43,000 (or about 3 percent 

of the total) by 1963.

New legislation (e.g., regulating collective 

bargaining) increased the employment of hearing 

examiners, lawyers, etc. New laws and a growing 

population have also created a need for more 

social security claims examiners, food and drug 

inspectors, etc. This has been reflected in an 

increase in employement in legal and kindred

4 Grades 16,17, and 18 were created by the Classification Act of 1949.

5 Increase to June 1964.

occupations. Increases occurred also in the number of highway engineers, specialists in business 

and industry, and professionals in the field of 

education. The number of medical officers rose as 

Congress provided for increased medical research 

and public health services and as war veterans 

sought an increasing amount of Government medical assistance.

Government has shared with private industry 

the trend toward increasing employment of whitecollar workers and a decrease in the relative 

importance of blue-collar employees. Clerical, 

administrative, and professional employees represented 26 percent of Federal civilian employment 

in 1939, 42 percent in 1958, and 46 percent in 1963.

*> From 1939 to 1963, Federal civilian employment, excluding employees of 

the Central Intelligence and National Security Agencies for which data are 

not available, increased to 4 from 3 percent of total nonagricultural employment.

i* See “ Government and Manpower Requirements,” M on th ly Labor

R eview , April 1964, pp. 407-413.

is For an analysis of white-collar occupational groups, see O ccupations o f

Federal W h ite-C ollar W orkers, October SO, 1960 (U.S. Civil Service Commission, 1963, Pamphlet 56-4;.

Digitized for FRASER 

http://fraser.stlouisfed.org/ 

Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
Digitized for FRASER 

http://fraser.stlouisfed.org/ 

Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
Appendix. Scope and Method of Survey

This group of indexes is designed to m easu re trends in salaries of an important 

group of workers in nonmanufacturing employment. The indexes consist of three m easures 

of the m o v e m e n t of F e d e r a l c la s s ifie d e m p l o y e e s ’ s a la r ie s ; one index r e fle c ts the m o v e m e n t 

caused by statutory changes in basic salaries, the second, these statutory changes in com ­

bination with m erit or ingrade salary increases, and the third index m easures the effect 

of statutory changes, ingrade increases, and changes in the distribution of em ployees among 

the various pay grades.

C o v e r a g e . The F e d e r a l e m p lo y e e s c o v e r e d by the indexes p re se n te d h ere are the 

per-annum workers whose salaries are established by the Federal Classification Acts of 

1923 and 1949. The w orkers under study are engaged m ainly in clerica l, adm inistrative, and 

professional functions, but sm aller groups in subprofessional categories and in craft, p r o ­

tective, and custodial jobs are also included. Excluded from the study are (1) m em bers of 

the A rm ed F o r c e s , (2) b lu e -c o lla r w ork ers whose wages are fixed by wage board action, 

(3) postal em ployees, and (4) per diem em ployees subject to the C lassification Act and the 

clerical-m ech an ical hourly em ployees of the Bureau of Engraving and Printing. (The last 

w ere covered by the C lassification A ct of 1923 but are not subject to the current act. )

Two broad pay schedules w ere established by the C lassification A ct of 1949 for the 

w orkers covered by this report— the General Schedule, covering w orkers perform ing c le r ica l, a d m in istra tiv e , fi s c a l, s u b p r o fe s s io n a l, o r p r o fe s s io n a l fu n c t io n s ,1 and the C P C S ch ed ­

ule, covering craft, protective, and custodial w orkers.

Each schedule con sisted of a s e r ie s of salary grades into which w ork ers w ere 

c la s s ifie d in a c co rd a n ce with their duties. Each sa la ry grade had a m inim u m rate and a 

series of additional pay steps which workers who had m et certain standards received after 

specified periods of time. 2

Beginning in 1955, only salary trends of em ployees under the general schedule were 

u sed , as the c r a ft s , p r o te c tiv e , and cu stod ia l schedule was a b olish ed effe ctiv e July 1, 1955.

About two-thirds of these em ployees were transferred to wage-board classifications and the 

remaining one-third to the general schedule. Inclusion in the general schedule of about 

35, 000 form er CPC workers affected the three m easures of salary change only slightly. 

The indexes for 1955 w ere adjusted to include these fo rm e r CPC em ployees.

F e d e r a l C la s s ifica tio n A ct e m p lo y e e s stationed in A la sk a and Hawaii w e r e included fo r 

the first time in the I960 indexes and other data used for that report. Average salary rates 

w e r e in c r e a s e d 0. 1 p e r c e n t by the in clu sion of 15, 676 w o r k e r s in the co u n try 's two new est 

States. Only m inor variations in the distribution of em ploym ent at the various grades r e ­

sulted from the additions, mainly because of the relatively small number of w orkers involved.

S o u rce of Data. Data on s a la r ie s of C la ssifie d F e d e r a l w o r k e r s have been c o lle c te d 

from the em ploying agencies at varying tim e intervals by the U. S. Civil S ervice C om m ission. 

The e a r lie s t c o m p le te study was m ade in January 1937 and the next in A ugust 1939. In 

the interim between August 1939 and July 1946, two studies w ere m ade (in 1942 and 1944) 

which could not be used for index purposes because data were not com plete with regard to 

distribution of em ployees among various within-grade steps. F or each year since 1946, however, data have been collected and tabulated in a m anner which m akes possible their use 

in the construction of a series of indexes.

1 Prior to the A ct o f 1949 these workers were divided into three services— clerica l, administrative, and fiscal, professional, and 

subprofessional. The indexes for these earlier periods give proper weight to the services that were com bin ed into the general schedule.

2 For the entire CPC services and GS-1—10, six additional pay steps were provided at 52-w eek intervals follow ed by three further (longevity) steps at 3-year intervals. For grades G S-11—17, additional pay steps were provided at 78-w eek intervals: Five steps 

for grades GS-11—14, four steps for grades GS-15—17, until September 1954, when three longevity steps at 3-year intervals were added 

to grades GS-11—15. Beginning in October 1962, em ployees in grades GS-1—17 m aintaining acceptable levels o f perform ance progressed to the next higher step after 1 year in steps 1, 2, or 3, after 2 years in steps 4, 5, or 6, and after 3 years in steps 7, 8, 

or 9. Longevity steps, as such, no longer exist,* they were incorporated into the regular pay schedule in October 1962. There are no 

additional pay steps for grade G S-18.

47

Digitized for FRASER 

http://fraser.stlouisfed.org/ 

Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
48

January 1937 was originally con sidered for use as the base period for the Federal 

classified w orker indexes, since this was the earliest date for which com plete information 

was available. However, in view of the econom ic significance of 1939, indexes of wages 

and earnings for various groups of workers typically make use of this latter year as the 

base period where p ossible. To facilitate com parisons with these other groups, 1939 has 

been used as the base year for indexes for Federal w orkers. Actually the use of the 

1939 base does not substantially alter the indexes. The b asic pay scales in effect w ere 

identical for 1937 and 1939 and the distribution of em ployees within grades and among grades 

was virtually the same in the two periods.

Data for 1939, 1946, and 1947 include both full- and p art-tim e em ployees; how ever, 

data for part-tim e w orkers are converted to full-tim e rates. M oreover, the number of 

p a r t -t im e w o r k e r s is r e la tiv e ly sm a ll (only on e-ten th o f 1 p ercen t of the total in 1948 and 

1949, the only periods for which a breakdown for the two categories is available). Hence, 

their inclusion or exclusion could not appreciably affect the distribution of workers among 

pay grades and steps. Consequently, in none of the indexes was any adjustment attempted 

for this variation in coverage.

Index C o n stru ctio n . In con stru ctin g the a v e ra g e s a la r y rate in d ex es, the e ffe c t of 

changes in occupational or grade structure has been eliminated by the "chain" method of 

index construction. First, averages for each grade were computed for each period by 

multiplying (weighting) each pay step within the grade by the number of people employed at 

that step in the grade. Next, an average for all grades com bined was computed for each 

year; the individual grade averages for each pair of su ccessive years were multiplied by the 

num ber of people in the grade in the latter yea r. (In the fir s t instance, 1939 and 1946 w ere 

paired because of the absence of data for the intervening y e a r s .3)

Finally, the percentage relationship between the overall average for each pair of 

years was computed and linked to the index for the preceding period. For exam ple, the 

1946 index was obtained by multiplying 133 percen t (the percen tage relationship of 1946 to 

1939) by the 1939 index, which, as the base year, was 100. Sim ilarly, the 1947 index of 

135 was com puted by m ultiplying the p ercen tage relationship betw een 1946 and 1947 (101.86) 

by 133. The sam e m ethod o f linking w as u sed fo r each s u c c e s s iv e p air o f y e a r s — 1947—48, 

1948—49, 1949—50. The use o f this m ethod show s the e ffe c t o f in grade r a is e s and any

changes in basic pay structure which m ay have occu rred but eliminates the effect of shifts 

among grades.

The indexes of average salaries differ from the salary rate indexes in one im p ortant respect, th ey reflect the effect of employm ent shifts among grades, which were elim ­

inated in the rate in d exes. In com puting the av era g e sa la ry in d exes, each sa la ry rate 

(including all within-grade steps) was multiplied by the number of people at that rate in each 

period to produce an overall average for the period. This average was then sim ply divided by the overall average for the base period.

For individual grades, the salary rate and the average salary indexes are identical 

in that the same method was used for computing grade averages. (Each within-grade step 

was w eighted by the em p loym en t at that step. ) D iffe r e n c e s in the s a la r y rate indexes and 

the average salary indexes occu r only when the individual grade averages are combined into 

broader groups.

The basic pay scale index (constructed by the U.S. Civil Service Com m ission through 

1952) differs from the average salary rate index only in the computation of the grade averages. 

The sam e distribution of w ork ers at pay steps within a grade is assum ed fo r each pair of 

y e a rs. This index thus rem ains unaffected by shifts in pay steps within a grade. Like the 

salary rate indexes, it also excludes the effect of shifts in occupational or grade structure 

f r o m one p e r io d to another. In sh ort, the b a s ic pay s c a le in dexes r e fle c t only changes in 

salary scales voted by Congress.

3 Although there were no com plete salary surveys betw een 1939 and 1946, it seem ed desirable to present an estim ated index 

o f average salary rates for a period late in the war but prior to the increases in pay scales m ade in July 1945 and July 1946. Consequently the estim ate for June 1945 was prepared. For this estim ate, the sam e distribution o f em ployees among grades and among 

steps within grades was assumed for 1945 as for 1939, as it is known that little or no change due to m erit increases occurred over 

the period. Virtually the entire change reflected in the 1945 estim ated index was caused by the pay raise given the workers in the 

CPC grades and in SP-1 and 2 in August 1942.

A U .S . GOVERNMENT PRINTING O FFICE : 19 6 5 0 - 7 7 4 - 9 1

Digitized for FRASER 

http://fraser.stlouisfed.org/ 

Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
BUREAU OF LABOR STATISTICS REGIONAL OFFICES

Digitized for FRASER 

http://fraser.stlouisfed.org/ 

Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis