Evening star. [volume] (Washington, D.C.) 1854-1972, 1956-02-23
Federal Annuities

It is evident from the tone
and context Of The Star edi-
torial, Federal Employe An
nuities," that the writer is
guilty of the very thing he
cautions Federal employees
against; i.e., taking sides be-
fore becoming fully informed
In regard to the two major re-
tirement proposals currently
under consideration.
There is a basic difference
between the Johnston bill and
the Kaplan plan. This differ
ence is so great as to justify
calling the former the career
service" bill and the latter the
"casual-service" plan. To ap-
preciate the difference. it
should be observed that the
detectives Of the Johnston bill
are: (a) To raise to an ade-
quate level the benefits Of en-
ployes who complete or become
disabled or die while in the
pursuit Of a full career in the
Federal service; and (b) to
provide the Federal Govern
ment with a plan that will en-
able 1t to again compete sue
cessfully in the open labor
market for the acquisition and
retention of its fair share Of
scientists. engineers, doctors
and other types Of professional
personnel and technicians re-
quired to successfully conduct
a multitude Of programs de-
signed to improve and preserve
our national life. welfare and
security. The Kaplan plan. by
contrast, is designed to bring
about a "co-ordinated relation
ship" between the social Sc
curly and civil service retire
ment programs, in order to
assure maximum benefits to
noncareer employees who gravi-
tate between unemployment.
private employment and the
Federal service.
A deep-rooted objection to
the latter plan. even il it were
in the best interest of the
career service, is the WELL
founded fear that the Co
ordhated relationship" will
blossom into marriage" or, II
not that, an illicit relation
ship" between social security
and civil service retirement.
But there are other valid OBJ
jections to the Kaplan plan
only q few Of which are
brought out by way of COM
parison with the Johnston bill
as follows:
The Kaplan plan does not.
as indicated in your lead
sentence. increase materially
the benefits which Federal
employees receive upon retire
ment." except under certain
circumstances that might or
might not apply to any given
employe. and even in such
cases the increased benefits
are nominal at best. The
Johnston bill would substan-
TALLY increase the retirement
benefits of every employe who
retires under 1t. by an easily
determined and known-in-
advance amount.
The Kaplan plan perpet-
yates numerous inequities in
existing law as a result Of
piecemeal legislation enacted
the past couple Of decades.
The Johnston bill recognizes
and corrects these inequities.
The Kaplan plan diminishes
survivorship benefits in some
areas and removes them COM
pletely in others. The Johns
ton bill further extends sur
worship benefits in some
areas and improves them in
all areas.
The Kaplan plan rewards
the casual Government en-
ploye by extending to him pro-
lection equal to that provided
career employees. The Johns
ton bill provides an incentive
to career employees to continue
in the Federal service even in
spite of more lucrative salaries
they might receive elsewhere.
Testimony presented during
the course Of open public hear
ings, voluminous correspond
ence and countless interviews
with employee representatives,
individual employes--and even
high officials of the present
administration who privately
indorSe the Johnston bill but
officially are bound to en-
brace the Kaplan plan--offer
abundant evidence that Fed
eral employees have Endorsed
almost unani ously the
Johnston bill and are opposed
to the Kaplan plan with equal
unanimity. in full knowledge
Of the issues and the merits of
each. Their reasons for sup