codirectors of the equal employment opportunity program. At this meeting we stressed the need for positive action to implement the recommendations which came out of the April 1969 seminar. We also stressed the need for issuing a notification to agencies to designate an individual to be responsible for coordinating the Federal women's program. We further stressed the importance of the incumbent being relieved of other duties in order to devote full time or at least part time to the program. The Commission subsequently issued a letter to agencies (FPM Letter No. 713-15, Feb. 27, 1970), suggesting the designation of a Federal women's program coordinator or committee and that the job be full-time or part-time as the situation demands.

We understand some agencies have not yet complied. Some agencies have assigned the title, Federal women's program coordinator, though not the duties, to individuals who have full-time jobs in totally unrelated fields, and who have not been relieved of any of their regularly scheduled tasks to enable them to devote time to the program.

Other instances reported to us concern people assigned the title of Federal women's program coordinator, with no delegated authority or responsibility for developing or implementing meaningful and workable programs; with no background or program guidelines to follow; and with no training or experience on which to base their actions. Some of these people have turned to members of FEW, desperately seeking advice and guidance in carrying out the assignment.

In many instances little thought was given to the qualifications of the person selected for the task, notwithstanding the fact that, in line with FEW's recommendation, the Civil Service Commission directive states:

In selecting a Federal Women's Program Coordinator for the staff of the Director of Equal Employment Opportunity, particular consideration should be given to persons with empathy for and understanding of the special concerns of women in the employment situation. The right person will provide the kind of input to the Director of Equal Employment Opportunity which will help assure equal opportunity for women employees and applicants.

In checking with our membership across the Nation, we find many field establishments have ignored the program entirely-they have neither a plan of action for equal employment opportunity nor a Federal women's program coordinator.

Over the years I have talked with many directors of personnel and key management officials in many agencies about the whole area of equal employment opportunity. Whenever we discuss the problems of minority groups, it is always in a serious vein. As soon as the subject changes to equal employment opportunity for women, the condescending smiles appear, a few jokes are made about women's socially acceptable role in our society; and I am assured they have some women on their respective staffs in the middle or upper grades and that they are performing their jobs admirably-as though surprised that women could indeed be good workers. I am never told how well the men on the staff perform their jobs. This is taken for granted, of

course.

Discrimination against women in Federal employment comes in a variety of forms. While this is not the forum to air the whole spectrum of discrimination against women, I must, in passing, urge all

of you to consider taking action on existing discriminatory legislation: The Civil Service Retirement Act, the Social Security Act, veterans' pensions, and the matter of overseas allowances. Recently we learned, for example, that the salary differential for married women employees of the Panama Canal Company was eliminated in October 1966, and has never been restored. Why should married women be penalized? Being married doesn't change the cost of living in the area. The Honorable Martha Griffiths has several bills pending on these issues which desperately need the attention of the Congress.

I would like to conclude with a few specific examples. In addition to the numerous oral reports we have received concerning employment discrimination, a number of written reports are in our files from women in Federal agencies across the Nation. For example:

(1) Three women, GS-7, contract assistants, with 22, 17, and 13 years' experience, respectively, were downgraded to GS-4, typists. During the same period men holding identical jobs were promoted. The male employees were permitted to attend courses in procurement. The women were refused the opportunity.

Mrs. GREEN. How recent is this?

Mrs. FIELDS. Within the last 2 years. I think it was December 1968. (2) Innumerable cases of violation of the so-called merit promotion program have been brought to our attention. Only recently we learned of a case involving the assistant director, who was also acting director of a division (a woman), being passed over for promotion to the director's position, and a young man from elsewhere in the agency brought in to become the director. The woman has numerous commendations on her performance over the years and, in fact, her name was on the promotion register. Defeated and disgusted, she has decided to retire.

A somewhat similar case involves an outstanding public information officer-a lady who has been writing more of the speeches for the head of her agency and other top officials for years, in addition to being senior editor on many important documents. When the director's position became vacant, she, as deputy director, was not promoted to the vacancy. Instead, a young man, from outside the agency, with comparatively little experience, none in Federal Government, was brought in to head the department. With no further incentive, she, too, has decided to retire. I am personally acquainted with this individual and can assure you the Government is losing an immensely talented human resource.

(3) Another case concerns an employee with 28 years' service, last promoted in May 1961 to a GS-6 position, which she still holds. In June and August 1968, she was assigned additional duties formerly performed by two GS-9's. She was told she would be promoted. When time passed and the promotion was not forthcoming, she asked a bureau official about it. He replied her age was against her. She is still working, still doing the additional duties, but she has not been promoted.

(4) A widow working on a temporary position with the Post Office Department was passed over three times in favor of men for career appointment, despite making a grade of 94.1 and 10-point veterans preference on the list of eligibles. She has been trying to get one of three rural carrier routes which have since been filled by men, one of

which, incidentally, was her former husband. On questioning why she was not selected, she was told "forget it," she would never get the job because she was a woman.

(5) A woman, working for many years, is now a GS-6, secretary. While holding a full-time job, managing a home, with husband and children, she succeeded in getting a college degree in 1967-a degree she had been working toward intermittently since 1936. She took the Federal service entrance examination and obtained a rating of GS-7. She asked her supervisor repeatedly for an opportunity for advancement, even if only to a GS-7, secretary or staff assistant. Subsequently her name appeared on a promotion certificate for a GS-7, secretary. She was not interviewed, nor selected for the job. She discussed the matter with the personnel officer and was told she was overqualified for a secretary's position, GS-7. When she then raised the point of her eligibility on the Federal service entrance examination for an administrative position, she was told by the personnel officer that he did not think she could compete with the young, "sharp," college graduates just coming out of school. When she protested this attitude, the personnel officer suggested she go to the Civil Service Commission to see if they could find her another position elsewhere. Within the limited time available, I cannot begin to cover all the cases which have been brought to my attention. They are not all at lower levels. I have others at higher grades, too. These are but a very few examples. I cite them as evidence that not only is sex a basis for discrimination, but so is age, when it comes to women. Yet numerous studies have shown that older women are more dependable, have fewer absences than men in the same age groups.

We know of women with degrees in science, education, law, accounting, to name a few fields, who are working as stenographers, clerks, typists, aides, and technical assistants. Many have had to accept such positions for subsistence or to help support families.

Nearly 4 years ago, President Johnson said:

In the next decade alone we will need * * * 1 million additional specialists in the health serrvices; 800,000 additional science and engineering technicians; 700,000 additional scientists and engineers; and 42 million State and local government employees *** The requirements in these fields alone will be 110,000 additional trained specialists every month for the next 10 years.

He went on to say:

That requirement cannot be met by men alone; and unless we begin now to open more and more professions to our women, and unless we begin now to train our women to enter those professions, then the needs of our Nation just are not going to be met.

Unless some instrumentality of the Federal Government-such as the Civil Rights Commission or the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission, referring to the bills S. 245 and H.R. 17555-is given the power and authority to investigate and prosecute cases of sex discrimination, fewer women will be attracted to Government service, and the women in Government will continue to remain second-class citizens, occupying the lowest paid, least rewarding, and least significant positions. The Nation will indeed suffer from failure to utilize the enormous talents of over one-half of our population-the women of the United States of America.

Thank you for your indulgence.

Mrs. GREEN. Thank you.

Without objection, the attachment will be placed in the record at this point.

(The attachment follows:)

[Federal Women's Program Review Seminar, April 1969]
HIGHLIGHTS

The seminar marked the completion of the Federal Women's Program's first 18 months of operation. The meeting produced a wealth of recommendations and gave new impetus and direction to the program as a whole. The delegates provided the FWP staff with the raw materials for many practical and productive endeavors for the near future.

In his speech at the opening session, CSC Chairman Robert E. Hampton outlined the basic responsibilities of the Federal Women's Program. Mrs. Elizabeth Duncan Koontz, newly-appointed head of the Women's Bureau, U.S. Department of Labor, later summed up the problems which must still be resolved before full equality for women workers can become a reality. Panelists from five Federal agencies addressed themselves to selected issues in this field. Four workshop groups, composed of agency delegates, deliberated at length during the course of the day and, at the closing assembly, recommended specific action programs to step up the tempo of FWP activities. Civil Service Commissioner James E. Johnson spoke to the final general assembly of delegates, emphasizing the theme of equal opportunity rather than "antidiscrimination" and the need for moving faster in every phase of the Federal Women's Program.

The participants heeded Chairman Hampton's call to make the seminar a day of identifying problems and working out practical answers to them, The foundations of the Federal Women's Program are well-rooted in legislation, executive orders, and organizational plans. The principal task now, as Chairman Hampton noted, is not in developing additional philosophies, but in implementing existing concepts through innovative action projects.

In her luncheon address, Mrs. Koontz exposed the "moth-eaten myths" about the female worker which have led to an almost unconscious, reflex-discrimination in job placement of women. Citing statistics on the millions of women who must work in order to support their families, she mentioned the low salaries that most of these women receive. She urged employers to recognize not only the seriousness of the situation but also the valuable contributions which women are able to make in alleviating our country's worker shortage. She listed improved education, better and more extensive day-care facilities for children of working mothers, and more part-time jobs as being among the steps which may be taken immediately. The five panelists, in a discussion moderated by the FWP program manager, told the delegates about successful agency efforts to promote wider utilization of women employees. Mrs. Evelyn Anderson, EEO specialist from the Post Office Department, related how sound management planning, coupled with training sessions, had enabled women to break into previously restricted occupations and had doubled the number of women in top Post Office jobs.

Mrs. Elizabeth Beggs, missile guidance and control technologist and the Navy's FWP coordinator, described how regional-level and command-level FWP coordinators are giving the Navy new ideas about career possibilities for women.

Mrs. Elsa Porter, HEW's personnel and training executive, called for an end to male-oriented personnel policies. She urged a major change in the system whereby the Federal Government budgets for, recruits and employs its personnel. Mrs. Porter feels the process must be far more flexible than it is today. NASA's Patrick Gavin outlined an on-going study on the underutilization of women workers and he told of the false concepts and subtle prejudices found among men who "select women out" of training courses and promotional opportunities.

Miss Rita Vincent, a member of the Federal Executive Board in Cleveland, Ohio, explained how publicity through TV and other media can enhance the career status of women employees. She also described the gains resulting from community projects such as day-care centers, job clinics, and employment counseling of girls at the high school level.

The seminar's four workshops were headed by: Robert R. Fredlund, of the Internal Revenue Service; Samuel Hoston, of HEW; Mrs. Alice Latimer Weeden, an attorney and FWP coordinator for GSA; and J. Robert Webb, from the Department of Justice. These chairmen were very effective with their respective groups of participants-evoking a wide range of observations and recommendations on new directions and priorities for the Federal Women's Program. They also elicited many concrete proposals for action.

Among the many practical measures stressed by the workshops were: Make renewed and repeated efforts to build top agency support and to assure that it is extended to all management levels; provide adequate resources for increased program efforts; clarify the role of the FWP coordinator and select for that assignment qualified persons who are committed to the program and who are in positions with policymaking influence; eliminate barriers to more extensive use of part-time workers; redesign jobs to provide for more effective use of women in solving manpower problems; increase rapport with appropriate organizations supporting equal employment opportunity and develop better information programs at the community level; build acceptance of women workers through management and supervisory training and by relating utilization of women to the attainment of agency objectives and the solution of manpower problems; open the way for greater career advancement to employees in "deadend" positions; build up the "image" of the distaff potential by publicizing achievements of women in top government positions; provide, to girls at the high school level, guidance on occupational opportunities and related educational requirements; consider a reserve-type status for qualified women who temporarily leave government service; improve job counseling for women and use it to motivate career aspirations; promote a broad-scale day-care center program to serve Federal workers; establish separate maternity leave; prepare more women for top level positions by training, job rotation, and special assignments; encourage women to prepare for occupations where employee shortages exist and to open their minds to jobs previously thought of as "for men only," and reorganize the EEO functions within the Civil Service Commission.

The Civil Service Commission believes that these and the other recommendations offered by representatives, male and female, of so many different Federal organizations, are indicative of the increasing agency acceptance of and dedication to the total EEO program. This solid foundation is enabling the Commission to make the Federal Women's Program the basic instrument for the removal of remaining barriers to equality for women employees.

Mrs. GREEN. Before I question you, I will ask Dr. Schuck to come up so we will be sure to hear from her.

Will you come forward and present your statement? Then I do have questions, Dr. Schuck.

STATEMENT OF DR. VICTORIA SCHUCK, PROFESSOR OF POLITICAL SCIENCE, MOUNT HOLYOKE COLLEGE, SOUTH HADLEY, MASS.

Dr. SCHUCK. I am Victoria Schuck, professor of political science at Mount Holyoke College. I am a member of the American Political Science Association Committee on the Status of Women in the Professions. I appear to express my personal support of section 805 of H.R. 16098, cited as the Omnibus Post-Secondary Education Act of 1970.

A number of professional associations are now researching problems of professional women. The American Political Science Association, for example, created a Committee on the Status of Women in the Professions in 1969 in order to obtain information about the problems of women in the profession, to encourage women to become professional political scientists, and to suggest ways of improving the professional position of women.