The Washington times. [volume] (Washington [D.C.]) 1902-1939, 1925-01-06
Pc RS|.(.INVEL
BOARD IS
FLAYED
Luther Steward Cites Opinion
Of Attorney General IN
Scoring Work

One Of the bitterest denuncia-
lions ever made Of the Personnel
Classificativn Board will be
printed Friday by the Federal
Employee, the publication d the
National Federation Of Federal
Employees, IN an article by Luther
c. Steward president Of the or
ganixation.
Members of the board, the en-.
ployes' president declares, "need
primary lessons IN, law and per
sonnet administration. They are
arrogant and have attempted to
substitute their own ideas regard
ing personnel administration for
the well-considered principles
which were accepted by Congress
and Incorporated in the classifi-
cation act"
Cites ''SuperABoner.
The ideas Of the Personnel CLASH
fication Board are Numerically op.
posed to those Of the 100000
Federal employees Of whom there are
$4,000 in the District, beneficiaries
under the classification act as pro-
mulgated by Congress. Steward de-
clares.
The board Is charged with null.
ing Its latest and most high.
handed and ''super-bOner" ON No
vember IS, 1924, when &c submitted
to Attorney General Stone for an
opinion q series Of questions re.
garding the Interpretation Of the
publicity efficiency rating section
Of the bill"
Steward alleges that the board,
after submitting the questions, tried
to liam its own scheme through In
utter disregard Of the law, without
the opinion from the Attorney Gem
eral rendered in advance"
Four Questions Submitted.
The four questions which were
submitted by the board, It 10
charged, were as follows:
~ Can the classification act
reasonably be construed to re-
Quire that the efficiency ratings
Of the employees in any bureau or
office shall be open to inspection
by all employees in that bureau or
office, irrespective OF grade or
class?
(2) Assuming a negative answer
to the first question, would the
requirements of the act reason
ably be met by regulation pro.
viding that each employee shall be
notified of his own rating and
his relative standing in his grade
or class but not permitted to in
. spect the ratings of other en-
ployes in the same bureau or
office.
~ Assuming a negative an
swer to the second question,
would the requirements of the
act reasonably be met by O regu-
lation providing that each en-
ploye shall be notified Of his own
rating and his relative rank with
in the grade or class and shall
upon his request be permitted
to inspect the ratings of all other
employees with whom he Is in
competition--that Is, all other
employees in the bureau or office
who are in his classification
az Assuming an affirmative
answer to the third question,
would the requirements of the
act be met IL the names Of the
employees were deleted and identi.
flying numbers substituted in the
lists made available for inspec-
ton, SO that each employe, al
though able by number to identi.
~ his own rating in the list and
to compare 1t with the percent
age ratings given to all others
of his competing group, would
be unable to identify the per-
centage ratings of other EN-.
ployes?
In rendering his opinion the At
torney General answered the first
question in the affirmative, and
Continued on Page 2, Column 81