GOVERN MENT
President Urges Federal Pay Reform Proposal designed to make government work more attractive for top scientists, administrators The gap between salaries in private industry and Government is widest at the upper levels. And it is in these brackets, where the top scientists, engineers, experts, and managers are employed, that the Government has the most trouble recruiting and retaining people with the necessary judgment, experience, and competence. So said President Kennedy in a special message to Congress outlining a proposal to raise government salaries and reform the federal pay structure. All government workers would get a pay raise under the President's proposal. But those in lower salary brackets would get only token increases. Those in the higher salary levels would get much larger increases. Says the President, "Although flat increases for lower-paid workers are included as a matter of equity, the essence of this bill's objectives is federal pay reform, not simply a pay raise." However, if Congress reacts as it has in the past, the final version will be more of a general pay raise and less of a salary reform. Higher Top Salaries. The spread between salaries for various levels of work in the federal service, the President says, should be large enough to provide an incentive to take on more responsible duties. Over the years, piecemeal revisions, with primary emphasis on bringing the lower pay levels abreast of changes in the cost of living, have severely compressed the spread between top and bottom salaries. Before World War II, the ratio of highest to lowest salary was 8.8 to 1; now it is 5.9 to 1. Under the Presidents proposal, the ratio would be 9 to 1. As a result of this constriction, the gap between federal and private pay becomes greater as the difficulty and responsibility of the job becomes greater, the President says. A federal employee starting on a professional or administrative career can look forward to a maximum salary increase of no more than 4.25 times his entrance salary; his counterpart in private industry can look forward to an increase 48
C&EN
MARCH
5,
1962
John W. Macy, Jr. Reform is vital
of seven times his beginning salary. The cost of the proposed pay raises would increase the federal payroll by $1 billion. The President proposes to distribute the increases in three annual steps beginning Jan. 1, 1963. Under the plan, the top government salary under the Classification Act, now set at $18,500 a year, would go to $28,000 in 1965. A GS-12 chemist, now earning $8955 a year, would receive $12,190 in 1965. The proposed pay schedules would enlarge the differences between successive pay grades, thus giving more recognition to the differences in responsibilities involved. And the spread between highest and lowest salaries within a grade would be widened to provide more flexible use of withingrade salary increases to reward outstanding performance. The proposal also requires the President to make an annual report to Congress on the relationship of federal salaries to those reported by the Bureau of Labor Statistics for private enterprise, recommending whatever changes in salary schedules, structure, or policy he deems advisable. Such an annual review is needed, the President
says, to prevent federal salary schedules from relapsing to their present conditions. Money Talks. Salary reform is vital to the success of federal programs, John W. Macy, Jr., chairman of the Civil Service Commission, told the Senate Post Office and Civil Service Committee at hearings on the proposed federal pay raise. Low salaries compared to those available elsewhere for comparable responsibilities make it hard for the Government to recruit and retain scientific and professional employees, he says. Professional employees in the federal service can usually count on substantial salary increases in taking jobs outside the Government. For example, Mr. Macy says, 27 professional employees of the Interior Department in grades GS-12 through GS-16 ($8955 to $15,255 a year) left the federal service for salary increases ranging from less than $2500 a year to more than $10,000 a year: three got less than $2500, seven got from $2500 to $5000, 11 got $5000 to $10,000, and six got more than $10,000. And, Mr. Macy points out, 12 of the 27 went to universities and state governments, organizations with which the federal service once competed on more than equal terms. Recruiting Difficult. The top government salary of $18,500 makes it difficult to recruit scientists for high level jobs, Mr. Macy says. For example, he says, year-long attempts to fill the position of director of the Cancer Chemotherapy National Service Center, National Institutes of Health, produced 10 qualified candidates, all of whom considered anything less than $25,000 a year out of the question. The position of chief of the laboratory of virology and rickettsiology of the division of biologic standards, also at NIH, was vacant for four years; 10 qualified candidates refused the available salary. Eight qualified scientists were approached to fill the position of chief surgeon, National Cancer Institute, but all had salaries of more than $19,000. Mr. Macy says: "Salaries are inadequate to attract and hold enough topnotch college graduates, who perceive that a federal career offers them a possible top salary of $18,500 if they are among the few who reach grade GS-18, compared with opportunities in industry ultimately to reach salaries of $35,000 or $40,000 a year without having to become president or chairman of the board."
