Evening star. [volume] (Washington, D.C.) 1854-1972, 1931-05-02
A Drastic Retrenchment Policy

One is the administrations advice to
industry, so recently and 50 well ex-
pressed by Secretary Lamont ct Atlantic
City, against reducing wages. Another
is President Hoover's recommendations
for salary increases as made in the last
budget message.
AS for the first, there is difference,
of course, between not increasing wages
and in reducing wages. The heretofore
prevailing practice in promotions In the
Government service, however. Is such
that the difference becomes a matter
Of splitting hairs. Promotions have not
been made unless the employe has
earned the right. by efficiency and skill.
to increased compensation. If he earns
a higher salary and the Government
saws 1t cannot be paid because Of the
Treasury deficit. lower cost OF living,
etc, the Government is pursuing the
identical tactics adopted by hard
pressed employers who reduce salaries.
In his latest message to Congress on
the budget President Hoover pointed
out that under the 1928 classification
act there has developed "a wide diff
ference among the several departments
and establishments as 10 the relation
ship which the average Of existing sal
aries bears to the compensation rates
provided by law for the various grades
of positions" Favoring an appropria-
ton for the fiscal year 1882 to begin
the elimination of inequalities in pay,
eventually to require about $14,440,0 600.
President Hoover suggested that thirty
per cent Of this amount be made imrne-
diately available. while the percent
age" he wrote. has been arbitrarily
chosen and might be modified without
affecting the purpose of eliminating dis
crepancies between and within the va
rious departments and establishments.
I believe any general deviation from the
general principle stated or any applica-
ton Of it to one department and not to
another will defeat the purpose OF pro-
viding equal compensation for equal
work. which was the expressed intent
of Congress In enacting the classifica-
ton act of 1928"
It is true that Congress failed to act
on this proposal, and it is true that the
Executives responsibility in the matter
is ended when he points to the need
and asks for the appropriation. If Con-
eress does not supply the money, which
does not grow on trees, the Executive
branch cannot be expected to do 1t.
But Congress also refused to accept the
specific prohibitions against salary In
creases proposed by Chairman Wood
and the Appropriations Committee OF
the House. The amendments carrying
such prohibitions were decisively beaten.
And the Senate at least, only yielded to
the House In the fight for salary pro-
motions on the understanding that as
many as could be made by the utiliza-
ton Of 1apsed balances and ether econ
omies would be made. In prohibiting
further salary promotions the executive
branch Of the Government has In etiect
taken the very step that the legislative
branch refused to take.
Increases provided by law will con-
tinue to be made. These constitute
about one-fourth of the salary promo
tons, outside the postal service, and
are made by individual reallocations
from one grade to another by action OF
tn. Personnel Classification Board.
The remaining three-fourths affected
by the new policy, are the promotions
within grades, based on efficiency rat
ings or resulting from deaths, retire
ments or removal of those occupying
the higher salary steps. The term for
this class Of promotions is efficiency
promotions" If the Government aban-
dons efficiency promotions" 1t thus re-
moves an obvious incentive to efficiency.
The administration desire for econ
omy is naturally shared by the tax
PAYERS. But the economy derived By
cutting of promotions Is relatively small
and effected at the expense Of low
salaried Government workers. A policy
not TO I'll vacancies when no real ne
cessity exists is perfectly sound. 1t
should be followed in fat years as we'll
as l.an, as nobody wants a beehive In
Washington full of drones. But failure
to I'll vacancies is one thing. Failure
/ to hold out the hone for increases in
salary earned by efficient work is an
other If vacancies are not filled.
| portion Of the salaries thus saved could
! we'll be spared TO increase the compen-
( sation Ct those remaining TO carry on
| additional work
The salary incr-ases now prohibited
are small. The total savings. yet to BE-
I computed, are relatively small. AS much
cannot be said for the moral effect On
the employees and tie country ct large
OF this drastically severe departure in
retrenchment
A carefully worded explanation Of the
new policy. With du, emphasis made
upon what must BE- It's emergent but
temporary character, would have soft
cred blow that has fallen with harsh
suddenneSs on the Government per-
sonnet.
May Day casualties are no longer
shocking. when compared with the