Evening star., 1934-01-06
Cost of Living and Salaries.

When the pay OF GoVernHleAt "oIA-
ers was cut fiat fifteen per cent, plus
continuance of administrative furloughs
which made this salary reduction much
more than that for many of them, the
action was generally interpreted as a
necessary contribution toward balancing
the Federal budget. Government en-
ployes were asked to make this sacrifice,
and it is probable that most OF them
accepted the pay cut in that spirit.
That is one reason why the Presi-
dents reference to the Government pay
cutting, as contained in his budget
message, is a rather bitter pill for the
Government workers to swallow. The
restoration of five per cent of the cut
is provided for beginning next July
That is better than nothing. But the
whole policy of salary cutting and
salary restoration is linked directly with
cost of living statistics. and the state
ment is made that "it is eminently
fair that, the cost of living having
fallen as compared with 1928, the en-
ployeS Of the Government sustain some
reduction in compensation. This is not
inconsistent with our policy of advocat-
ing an increase in wages for industry.
For wages there had fallen far beyond
any reduction contemplated for Fed
eral employees and in most grades are
even now substantially below compen-
sation paid Federal employees under the
maximum reduction of fifteen per cent"
Fifteen per cent has not, unfortu
nately, been the maximum pay reduc-
ton suffered in Government service. A
great number of employees who have
kept their jobs have been subjected to
the administrative furloughs, which
have run the loss of compensation much
higher than fifteen per cent. The au-
tomato pay promotions in the Army
Navy and Marine Corps are being re-
stored on this ground-that such per-
sonnel has, in some cases, sustained
reduction in compensation of more than
twenty-five per cent" But while it is
eminently fair that the automatic pay
promotions be restored in the services,
it is a little difficult to understand how
those in the services have suffered any
greater reduction than those outside
them.
As long as Government pay was re-
duced to balance the Federal budget
and preserve national credit-although
the contribution was relatively insignif1-
cant-it was difficult for the victims OF
the pay cut to protest.
But when the Government pay re-
duction is so squarely linked with cost
of living statistics as to be determined
hereafter by such an illusory gauge,
then the case is entirely changed. AS
everybody knows, the cost of living"
depends upon what one is able to live
on. The coal mine operator can dem
onstrate that the coal miners cost Of
living is IS a week The cotton mill
owner can demonstrate that his en-
ployes are being paid what it costs
them to live. The Government char
woman is being paid an amount equal
TO her cost of living when she receives
$4oo year, subject to the Is per cent
salary cut. If she spends more than
she receives to live she faces the pros
pect of going to Jail. The cost of living
Of the fifteen-hundred-d dollar -a-year
clerk is probably fifteen hundred dol
lars. But the Federal Government has
not yet attempted, as 1t should do, to
determine the difference between the
cost of living and the cost of existence.
The two terms should not be confused
as meaning one and the same thing.