Secretary ALEXANDER. I read the Constitution again before coming here today and advice and consent is very, very clear. As a student of government in my college days I learned that the principal elements of this Government should have a chance to talk to one another so as to obtain a consensus of what is in our best interest. To get the analysis that this committee is getting along with the rest of the Senate, I think is important and should not be affected by dire threats. The CHAIRMAN. I am sorry that I am going to have to leave. The Foreign Minister of Jordan is coming to the Foreign Relations Committee at 3:30. Senator Clark, will you take this over and run it? Thank you very much, all of you. Senator CLARK. The next member is Senator Griffin, if I am not mistaken. Senator GRIFFIN. Mr. Ambassador, were you in Panama on September 10 when General Torrijos spoke to a rally of Panamanians in the downtown district, reporting on the successful negotiations, turning over a copy of the treaties to President Lakas? Did you happen to be there? Ambassador JORDEN. No, sir; I was in Washington on that day. REPORT OF PRESIDENT CARTER APOLOGIES TO PANAMANIAN PEOPLE Senator GRIFFIN. There is one dispatch here, St. Louis Post Dispatch, written by their correspondent Paul Wagman, datelined Panama, describing this particular event and then containing this particular paragraph and I quote: Then the 48-year-old dictator told the crowd that President Jimmy Carter, having read the history of the United States' involvement in Panama, had asked Torrijos to offer apologies in Mr. Carter's name. I wonder if you knew that that had happened? Ambassador JORDEN. It did not happen. Senator GRIFFIN. It did not happen? Ambassador JORDEN. I mean President Carter did not ask to have apologies made. Senator GRIFFIN. I see. You are aware of this and you have checked into that? Ambassador JORDEN. I have heard that report. Senator GRIFFIN. Did General Torrijos make that statement? Ambassador JORDEN. I think he did. I think that that is a little editorial hyperbole on his part. Senator GRIFFIN. Governor Parfitt, you are both Governor and General and also President of the Panama Canal Company. Governor PARFITT. Yes, sir. PANAMA CANAL COMPANY Senator GRIFFIN. The Panama Canal Company has kind of dissolved, I take it. You don't have a Board any more, do you? Governor PARFITT. We do have a Board. The old Board resigned and their resignations were accepted on April 1, 1977. A new Board has been appointed. Senator GRIFFIN. I was not aware of that. How many civilian employees does the Panama Canal Company now have in the Canal Zone? Governor PARFITT. About 13,900, sir. It is a combination of the employees of the Panama Canal Company as well as the Canal Zone Government. CITIZENSHIP OF CANAL COMPANY EMPLOYEES Senator GRIFFIN. What percentage of those are U.S. citizens and what percentage of them are Panamanians? Governor PARFITT. Approximately 74 percent of our total employee staff is Panamanian. Senator GRIFFIN. Seventy-four percent? Governor PARFITT. That is correct. PRESENT RIGHT-TO-STRIKE LAWS Senator GRIFFIN. Under the laws that apply now in the Panama Canal Zone do employees have the right to strike? Governor PARFITT. They do not, sir. Senator GRIFFIN. What is it that prevents it? Is there a law of Congress? Governor PARFITT. No U.S. employee may strike against a Government agency. GOVERNMENT EMPLOYEES STATUS Senator GRIFFIN. They are regarded as Government employees? Governor PARFITT. That is correct. Senator GRIFFIN. If the treaties are ratified will that continue to be the case? Governor PARFITT. It depends on what type of collective-bargaining agreement is reached. If there is a collective-bargaining arrangement such as we have in other Federal agencies I would consider it still would be illegal to strike. Senator GRIFFIN. That is not quite the question. Under the present situation as the laws now apply, employees in the Panama Canal Zone are precluded from striking as a matter of law; is that correct? Governor PARFITT. That is correct. Senator GRIFFIN. What you are telling me is that there may or may not be a collective-bargaining agreement in the future that could be negotiated that would affect the right to strike: is that correct? Governor PARFITT. That is correct, sir. As I understand it, the treaty document contemplated some type of collective bargaining agreement. I can conceive some types that would permit authority to strike but if the collective bargaining arrangement such as that which is extant in the Federal service is implemented, that would not involve the right to strike. I would conceive that to be the case. Senator GRIFFIN. There are lots of situations, particularly where Government employees are involved, where the law can preclude and prohibit strikes, but very seldom does a union negotiating a contract give up the right to strike-not that it has never happened. but very seldom. SECURITY CLEARANCE CONSIDERATIONS Let me ask you this question, Governor Parfitt. Are there positionnow in the Panama Canal Zone, particularly relating to the operation of the canal, or other positions that involve military considerations where employees are required to have security clearance in order to work? Governor PARFITT. We have a few positions which involve the handling of classified information where security clearance is required. We customarily, in certain other protective jobs, likewise require clearance and we do have approximately 580 positions identified as security positions which require that occupant to be a U.S. citizen. Senator GRIFFIN. At the present time? PANAMANIAN HIRING PREFERENCE Senator GRIFFIN. Under the provisions of the treaty if a Panamanian has the skill to perform the job he has to be preferred in hiring; isn't that correct? Governor PARFITT. That is correct. SECURITY DISQUALIFICATION PROVISION Senator GRIFFIN. Is there any provision in the treaty to allow for disqualification on a security basis? Governor PARFITT. There are none, sir. As a practical matter we consider that there would be a number of U.S. citizens until the year 2000 involved and to the extent you are required to handle classified information in your work you would arrange your organization to accomplish it through that medium. U.S. EMPLOYEE RESIGNATIONS INCREASE Senator GRIFFIN. Were you correctly quoted in saying that the resignations of U.S. citizens working in the zone have increased by 60 percent during the last year? Governor PARFITT. That is correct, sir. At the time I stated it is was a correct fact in relation to the prior years. I also stated that although the trend was of considerable significance the numbers were not large enough to be yet alarming. I was more concerned with the trend. Senator GRIFFIN. How do you account for that, Mr. Ambassador? Why is that the case? Ambassador JORDEN. Increased number of resignations? Ambassador JORDEN. I think that there are probably a number of reasons, Senator. As I said in my statement, I think the Americans in the zone have gone through a very trying and nervous period during the treaty negotiations because they felt that their future was being dealt with in ways they didn't know. They didn't know what the rules of the game would be. They didn't know what assurances or guarantees they would have. They felt that if they had a chance to get a good job in the United States or elsewhere they might best take it rather than stay in place and worry and perhaps suffer. I think that there are also a number of employees in the Canal Company who are very nervous about the feature of surrendering jurisdiction to the Panamanian Government. Some of them do not trust that Government and are nervous about how it will deal with them in the future. Those are some of the reasons. But Governor Parfitt lives with his employees more closely than I do and perhaps he could add to that. Senator GRIFFIN. If he cares to. Governor PARFITT. The morale is very poor and has been since the announcement of the beginning of the negotiations of the treaty in 1974. Basically the employees do not support the treaty. It is their conception based on their emotions in their own situation that it is not in the interest of the U.S. Government to consummate this treaty. Aside from that, they have a personal interest. They realize a significant change involved here will adversely impact on them as an individual. So, they object to it on a psychological ground, their overall conception of the interest of the U.S. Government. They are also opposed to it on the ground of how it will impact on them as individuals. They see the treaty as impacting very adversely from the standpoint of transfer of jurisdiction primarily. In the other areas involved they do not feel very comfortable in living under the terms and arrangements most particularly having to do with jurisdiction. PANAMANIAN RELATIONS WITH SOVIET UNION Senator GRIFFIN. Mr. Ambassador, you referred to the fact that there are no diplomatic relations between the Republic of Panama and the Soviet Union, did you say? Ambassador JORDEN. Yes. Senator GRIFFIN. Was there a visit, however, earlier this year from a Soviet delegation, an economic commission of some kind? Ambassador JORDEN. Yes, there have been several, Senator, over the last year. A number of visitors have come to Panama, mostly on their way to Peru, Ecuador, et cetera. But there was an economic mission and they did sign a tentative agreement. PANAMANIAN, SOVIET ECONOMIC AGREEMENT Senator GRIFFIN. What was the general nature of it? Ambassador JORDEN. I don't know the details chapter and verse, but it was an agreement to try to work out an economic arrangement for increased trade, et cetera, between the two countries. Those arrangements, I believe, have not been made but it was a sort of a promise to develop such an agreement. FREEDOM HOUSE HUMAN RIGHTS RATINGS Senator GRIFFIN. Are you familiar, Mr. Ambassador, with the Freedom House and its ratings of various governments around the world with respect to human rights? Ambassador JORDEN. I am aware they make ratings and I have seen some of them, but I don't remember all the ratings. Senator GRIFFIN. You might be interested to know that Panama is right at the bottom along with Cuba as far as this particular organization is concerned. I will ask that the table showing the ratings of all the nations of the world be put in the record at this point. [The information referred to follows:] |