Evening star. [volume] (Washington, D.C.) 1854-1972, 1930-02-18
Extension of Retirements.

The Federal Government merely
cuts off its nose to spite its face in
enforcing a blanket and arbitrary rule
governing the limit of extensions under
! retirement. After August 20, 1880, as
the law nos' reads, no employee can be
retained in service beyond the age of
retirement for more than four wears.
The retirement age varies with the type
OF service. But so varying is the effect
OF age upon individuals, and so vary
ing is the value of individuals to the
Government that a mandatory and in
flexible rule fixing four years beyond
! retirement age as the limit of efficient
| service is apt to prove a boomerang
and accomplish more harm than good
The law was evidently framed to get
around the admitted dificulty of retir-
ing superannuated employees whose pos
sible influence and whose appeals to
sentiment acted to retain them in the
service after their usefulness to the
Government was at an end. But the
fact that the law will work to the dis
advantage Of the Government in some
cases is evidenced by moves for its
amendment backed by such agencies as
the Civil Service Commission, the Blu
reau of Efficiency, the Bureau of the
Budget, the Board of Retirement Ac-
tuaries and others. Some Of the de-
partments and independent establish
ments Of the Government are ayerse to
amending the law, but examination of
the theory of retirement systems, as
vel as the many deserving cases that
present themselves, indicates that the
subject should be considered and de-
cided on its merits alone.
Retirement should affect two classes
OF persons-firSt, those who should be
retired for disability, and in some cases
age alone constitutes a disability; sec
ond. those who, having served SUM-
Gent number Of years, are eligible for
optional retirement.
A sufficient number Of cases exist to
show that It is a real disadvantage to
the Government service, as well as con-
trary to reason, to say that at a certain
age man is no longer At or able to
perform the duties Of which years and
ripe experience have made him master.
An article in Sundays Star discussed
a few OF the specific cases In which
compulsory retirement will react to the
disadvantage Of the Government. The
Interstate Commerce Commissions fore
most authority on the cause Of railroad
accidents. James E. Howard, must re-
tire next August under the law, al
though his superiors and those familiar
with the work that he has performed
have characterized the prospective loss
as an "oficial calamity" Henry L.
Bryan, editor Of the Federal Statutes
and well known and beloved Wash.
ingtonian, is another prospective victim
Of the law. David B. Mcleod, editor of
the Federal Budget; Frank Bond, chair
man Of the United State Geographic
Board; DR.. William Tindall, information
officer at the District Building, and
many others whose years spent in pub
lie service have given them unique
equipment will be affected by this In
exorable provision Of law. the workings
Of which in reality should be left to
the discretion Of the authorities. The
Smithsonian Institution and the De-
partment Of Agriculture stand to lose
the services Of scientists whose re-
searches should never be curbed by
the passage Of fixed number of years
The retirement act should be further
amended to allow individual cases Of
extensions to be decided on their merits
II the leeway sought is embarrassing to
administrative officials, it would appear
that such a dificulty could be solved
by placing extension In service beyond
the four-year limit in the hands Of
board or committee constituted so that
suitable investigations could be made
and decisions reached after weighing
the pros and cons necessarily involved
In each case.