Evening star. [volume] (Washington, D.C.) 1854-1972, 1929-01-16
Steward Tells House Com
mittee U. S. Workers
Urge Its Adoption.
FAVORABLE ATTITUDE
SHOWN AT HEARING
Provisions Would Add $2,S73, 900
to Annual Payroll of Fed
eral Government.

Inclusion of provisions of the Brook.
hart-Celler bill in any Federal pay leg
islation enacted at this session of Con-
gress was urged today by Luther C.
Steward, president of the National Fed
Grafton of Federal Employees at a hear
ing before the civil service committee of
the House. This bill would advance
one grade employees in the lower classi-
fications who were elevated only one
step under the Welch act.
Four members of the committee,
Representatives Jeffers of Alabama,
Celler, Bachman of West Virginia and
Woodrum of Virginia, indicated dur
ing the hearing that they were more
favorable to this measure than other
legislation.
Means S2,873,4O0 Increased.
Steward told~th committee that ac-
cording to latest estimates the Brook
hart-Celler bill would add $2,873,40O to
the Government annual pay roll. but
that its retroactive feature, which
would give employees effected the In
crease as Of July 1928, would require
an excess Of $4,300.000 the first year.
Employees in the District, he said,
would get $957.0o0 of the increased
amount necessary under the bill.
The Lehlbach bill, Steward said,
would add about $1.100,0O0 to the
Governments annual pay roll.
Steward appearing for more than
$4,000 Federal workers, declared he
favored the provisions of the Brook
hart-Celler bill because of their sim
plicity and their difficulty of naisinter-
probation Of congressional intent, and
also because they would eliminate neces-
slty OF mathematical salary formula.
The provisions Of this BILL" Steward
said, should be included In any legis-
lation enacted at this session of Con-
gress for adjusting the pay increases
under the WEIGH act"
Steward, the only witness at the ini-
tial session, began by discussing the
provisions OF the Lehlbach bill, the
principal one of which would extend
the powers OF the Personnel Classifca-
Favofs Boards Continuance.
Steward, as well as several members
OF the committee, were critical OF the
present board, but Steward said he
favored its continuance with the irl-
creased powers provided in the Lefll-
bach bill. pending the boards trans
fer TO anothereagency and the reforma-
ton OF the classification act. Admin
istration of the WEIGH act, he said, In
response to a question by Mr.. Jeffers,
should be placed in the Civil Service
Commission. although he did not want
10 advocate such a change at this time.
what assurance have we that the
present personnel board will not mess
up any law We may enact Just. as it
messed up the Welch act?" Mr.. Jeffers
asked.
I'VE don't feel that any added au-
thority granted the board should 20
outside OF the ranges of compensation
SET down In the act" Steward replied.
Doubts Competency.
DO you think the board, If given
all the authority granted in this bill, Is
competent to administer that power?"
Mr.. Jeffers inquired.
Il doubt it very seriously" Steward
responded.
Until Congress gives the duty of ad-
minlstering the classification act to
another agency and reforms the CLASH
ncation act the central agency should
be continued" Steward said. I'm. spite
OF our grievances against the board the
thing OF outstanding Importance is to
NPA-oAA eAAC PAAiS4PkCS VI CldSSl1lCdGtOtl.
Don't tear down the board without
creating something to take its place. It
would undermine the whole structure Of
personel classification"
Explains His Attitude.
Mr.. Jeffers said he could not under
stand Mr.. Stewards idea of protecting
the board when he considered it inca
pable Of administering the Welch pay
act. Steward admitted that his princi-
pal reason in supporting the provision
in the Lehlbach bill to broaden the
powers of the board is to remove the
controller generals Jurisdiction over ad-
ministration of the Welch act.
Mr.. Steward, however, opposed section
2 OF the Lehlbach bill which sets up a
formula for carrying out the relative
position clause of the Welch act. The
correct Interpretation of relative posi-
tion under the act, he said, would necessi-
tate an increase of two rates of all en-
ployes up to and including the sixth
rate and one increase for the seventh
rate. The committee resumed its hear
ing at o'clock following a luncheon
recess.