Evening star. [volume] (Washington, D.C.) 1854-1972, 1930-03-09
Efficiency Bureau Submits
Facts to Shed Further
Light on Question.
REPORT SHOWS VALUE
OF SPECIAL BENEFITS
Tables Clarity Comparison Between
Pay to Service Officers
and Civilians.
By DONALD A. CRAIG.

Whlle oiuerenCeS OF opinion concern
ing several Of the questions underlying
the proposal for a substantial increase
in the pay Of the Army, Navy, Marine
Corps and allied Government services,
have developed between the Bureau Of
Efdciency and the Interdepartmenta
Pay Board, these differences have not
assumed the character q controversy
over the merits of the pay increase rec
concentrations of the board.
The Efficiency Bureau has confined
itself to comment" upon the boards
report, as requested by President
and figures which it hopes will shed
further light on the question.
The exchange Of opinions between the
bureau and the board have given the
question the appearance of q contro-
versy, but nowhere in the bureaus re-
ports can be found any direct criti-
c1sm, favorable or unfavorable, Of the
proposed increase in pay.
Debate" Presents Documents.
The ofacial debate" If such 1t may
be called, so far as it has proceeded,
consists Of the following documents:
First, the pay boards report; second,
q memorandum for the President"
prepared by the Bureau of Efnciency
and submitted by william H. Mickey
nolds, acting chief of the bureau, which
IL apparently in the nature of ''prelini-
nary" comment on the boards report;
third. comments by the assistant chief
Of staff of the Army on the Bureau of
Ehciency's memorandum; fourth, q re-
ply from the Bureau of Efficiency 20
the comment Of the chief of staff Of the
Army; NTH, comment by the Navy De-
partment upon the original memoran-
dunn Of the bureau, and sixth, q reply
by the bureau to several of the points
raised by the memorandum submitted
by the Secretary of the Navy"
A report by the Bureau Of the Budget
upon the cost Of the proposed increased
pay Is separate document that may
be considered as forming part Of the
debate" although this Is confined to
a statement Of figures without COM
ment.
In its original memorandum the
Efficiency Bureau discusses such mat
tiers as the value of special benefits re-
ceived by the personnel of the Army,
Navy and other four services, including
retirement, medical care, commission
airy privileges and educational advan.
tages furnished free to cadets and mid
midshipmen ct West Point and An
napolis."
Charts Accompany Report.
Several tables and charts accompany
the bureaus report, for the purpose of
showing more clearly the comparison
between compensation paid to service
officers and to civilians. The bureau
has used different methods in collect
ing these comparative statistics than
those used by the interdepartmental
al
ways the same. In some instances they
do not show that civilians are receiving
salaries as much higher than those Of
officers In the various services as In
dicated by the pay boards figures sub
mitted for the same purpose.
The differences apparently are cue
entirely to the differences in the nature
of the inquiries made by the two
agencies. Several members of Con-
gress, to whom these varying figures
were shown by The Stars represent
ative, expressed the opinion that it is
manifeStly impossible to make an &C.
curate comparison between Army and
Navy pay and civilian salaries, and that
apparently both the pay board and the
Efficiency Bureau have been sincere In
their efforts to present the question In
an unbiased manner.
First the Efficiency Bureau presents
to President Hoover table showing the
average annual rates of compensation,
including allowanceS-accordin to the
computations OF the bureaus experts
of commissioned officers of the several
services along with similar figures for
civilian engineers, male college inStruc-
tors and employees In commerce and
business.
Table Shows Pay Schedule.
The percentage Of increase involved
in the new pay schedule proposed by
the nay board for each service Is
worked out in this table as follows:
Army, 47.6; Navy, ISL; Coast Guard,
ASH; Public Health Service, 38.6: Coast
and Geodetic Survey, 40.6, with the
average percentage Of increase for all
groups combined being AIS.
In the lowest grades the present SAL
aries Of officers are somewhat lower
than those listed for civilians! Here
Is the way it runs for those with q
service from one to three years: Army,
1890; Navy. $4,000; Coast Guard.
$2,2l0; Public Health Service, $2,840;
Coast and Geodetic Survey, 81 $40; ci-
william engineers, $4,000: male college
instructors, $2,150: employees In COM
merce and business, $4,000.
The proposed new salaries for officers
in this group are generally higher than
those given in this table for civilians
of the same length of service, as fol-
lows: Army, $3.50; Navy, $3,140; Coast
Guard, So, 400; Public Health Service,
$4,000; Coast and Geodetic Survey,
$500. =
In the higher grades Of officers, with
service from % to 80 years, the COM
parsons are as follows: Present COM
pensation-Army, $6,700; Navy, $7.19O:
Coast Guard, $7,160; Public Health
Service, $6,7S0; Coast and Geodetic
Survey (none given IN this grade);
civilian engineers, $500; male college
instructors, $3.50; employees In COM
merce and business, $10,750. ~
The bureau says the data regarding
college instructors were taken from q
survey recently made by the Bureau Of
Education covering more than $4,000
graduates from Immigrant colleges and
universities.
Only Cash Taken Into Account.
It Is next explained by the bureau
that the allowances In this table take
into account only those paid to the ON
GERS Ia cash, and do not take into ac-
count 'the value Of retirement dement's
or medical and dental attention to
which all commissioned personnel are
uniformly entitled"
The retirement benefit for an oficer
with from one to three years Of service
is estimated at $265 annually, and
medical benefits at SITS annually,
an annual total of $40 For
an officer with service from % TO 80
years the retirement benefits ara esti-