JUNE 18 (legislative day, MAY 28), 1940.-Ordered to be printed Mr. BULOW, from the Committee on Civil Service, submitted the following REPORT [To accompany H. R. 960] The Committee on Civil Service, to whom was referred the bill (H. R. 960), "extending the classified executive civil service of the United States," having considered the same, report favorably thereon with amendments and recommend that the bill as amended do pass. The amendments are as follows: (1) On page 3, line 1, strike out all of paragraph (b). (2) Add the following new paragraph to section 2: That from and after the effective date of this Act any person who shall have served for four years as a clerk or assistant clerk to a Senator, Representative, Delegate, or Resident Commissioner, or as a clerk or assistant clerk to a standing committee of the Senate or House of Representatives or as a clerical or administrative employee under an officer of the Senate or House of Representatives and who terminates his services without prejudice, shall acquire, upon such tests of fitness as the Civil Service Commission may prescribe, a classified civil service status for transfer to a position in the classified civil service notwithstanding any contrary provisions of the civil-service laws or regulations: Provided, That any individual who may hold such a position in the legislative branch must obtain such transfer within two years from the date of separation of service, and nothing in this Act shall be construed to impair any right of transfer provided for under the civil-service laws or regulations made thereunder. (3) On page 7, line 13, strike out the semicolon, insert a comma and the following: including those offices and positions transferred under the provisions of the Act of Congress approved April 3, 1939, to the Department of State by part 1, section 1, of Reorganization Plan No. II, effective July 1, 1939. (4) On page 7, line 17, strike out the semicolon, insert a comma and the following: including those offices and positions transferred under the provisions of the Act of Congress approved April 3, 1939, to the Department of State by part 1, section 1, of Reorganization Plan No. II, effective July 1, 1939. (5) On page 7, line 18, strike out all of paragraph viii, lines 18 through 23. (6) Renumber correctly remaining paragraphs beginning with viii of section 3 (d). Amendment No. (1) strikes out the much-discussed Keller-Nichols amendment relative to the apportionment of appointments in Washington. Briefly stated, the Keller-Nichols amendment would prohibit the appointment, transfer, or promotion of any person to any position brought within the competitive classified civil service pursuant to H. R. 960 if such person is a resident of a State which is in excess of its quota or appointments under the apportionment "unless and until the quota of all * has become filled." * Your committee has given thorough consideration to this proposition and agrees with the Civil Service Commission that this amendment is administratively impossible and would work to the detriment of the public service. The Commission in reporting at some length in opposition to this amendment said: With respect to any group of positions which may be included in the classified service by H. R. 960, the Commission is vested with no administrative discretion in the matter of the apportionment. The amendment under consideration operates as an absolute prohibition against the certification, appointment, promotion, or transfer to these positions of persons from States which are in excess of their quotas. If only the names of eligible States which have exceeded their quotas appear on a particular register, such eligibles could not be certified and the Commission would be required to hold a new examination in order to recruit eligibles from States which have not received their quotas of appointments. If eligibles from such States did not qualify in sufficient numbers, presumably, the Commission would be required to reannounce the examination over and over again until a sufficient number of such eligibles has qualified. The detriment which would result to the public service from such a situation is obvious. There is enclosed a copy of the latest statement of the condition of the apportionment as of February 29, 1940. You will note that 16 States and the District of Columbia have exceeded their quotas, West Virginia, Maine, and Montana being only one appointment in excess, and Vermont having received exactly its share. This means that if the amendment in question is enacted into law appointments to positions which are classified under H. R. 960 will be limited to residents of 31 States, Alaska, the Virgin Islands, Puerto Rico, and Hawaii. As these States reach or exceed their quotas, eligibility for appointment will be further restricted to the residents of fewer and fewer States, so that it is not inconceivable that a point will be reached where there will be encountered serious administrative difficulty in recruiting eligibles to fill vacancies for these positions. Under the Commission's procedure, apportionment figures are compiled for the guidance of the Certification Division twice a month. During the semimonthly period, a State which is only slightly in arrears of its quota may receive a sufficient number of appointments so that it will be slightly in excess of its quota at the end of the half-month period. Under the apportionment law, such a result is permissible since appointments are required to be apportioned only "insofar as the conditions of good administration will warrant.' Under the amendment contained in section 2 (b), however, strict mathematical observance of the apportionment is mandatory and any appointments which would bring a State in excess of its quota would, presumably, be illegal. The Commission would, therefore, be required, in the first place, to maintain its records of the apportionment on a daily basis, a task which is, from an administrative point of view, practically impossible. On an active competitive register, such as that for stenographer and typist, there may, for example, be several eligibles within reach for certification for appointment, all residents of a State which is only one appointment in arrears of its quota. Under the Commission's present procedure all such eligibles will be certified since appointments are not charged to a State's quota until the proposed appointee actually enters on duty. In order to maintain an exact observance of the apportionment, the Commission would be required, at least insofar as the positions affected by H. R. 960 are concerned, to place a charge against a State's quota when eligibles from the State are only certified for appointment. If the number certified completes the quota of the State, no additional eligibles from that State could be certified. If the eligibles certified should decline appointment, or be unable for some reason to report for duty, other eligibles from the same State would thus have been unjustly deprived of opportunities for appointment. Adverting now to the status of incumbents of positions which are brought into the classified service by the so-called "covering in" process, it is believed that a few specific examples will serve to illustrate the administrative problems with which the Commission will be faced. The President, for example, issues an order pursuant to H. R. 960 placing all positions in the Federal Housing Administration in the competitive classified service. There are, let us say, 6 residents of the State of Maine employed in that agency, but on the date of the order the State of Maine is only 1 appointment in arrears of its quota. Which one, if any, of these 6 employees is to be considered for a classified status? Let us assume, also, that the President on the same day issues an order placing the Agricultural Adjustment Administration under the competitive classified service, and this agency also has 6 employees who are residents of the State of Maine. Which one of these 12 employees, if any, and in which agency, is entitled to be considered for a classified status? To illustrate further the administrative complications which may arise, let us suppose that under the circumstances stated a vacancy exists in the position of statistical draftsman in the Agricultural Adjustment Administration which cannot be adequately filled by promotion. Eligible No. 1 on the Commission's competitive register for the position of statistical draftsman is a resident of the State of Maine. May such an eligible be appointed, thus filling the State's quota, or, under the law, is one of the employees of the Administration from the State of Maine required to be given a classified status noncompetitively, and the State's quota filled in that manner? One other matter regarding the amendment in question should be mentioned. It will be noted that the amendment affects not only the classification of the incumbents of positions, and new appointments to such positions, but is applicable also to transfers and promotions as well. This means that if a vacancy occurs in any position classified pursuant to H. R. 960, and the only persons employed in the particular agency who are qualified for promotion are residents of States which have exceeded their quota of appointments, the promotion of such employees is absolutely prohibited by the law. As a result, the vacant position would be required to be filled by the appointment of some person outside the particular agency. The Commission believes that such a situation would prove a serious obstacle to the efficient administration of personnel. No one thing can be more destructive to the morale of personnel than the knowledge that they are precluded by law from advancement within the organization in which they are employed. The Commission believes that the amendment in question will bring not only serious administrative complications and injustices in individual cases, but will result in material loss to the efficiency of the public service. S. Repts., 76-3, vol. 3—— -72 Your committee strongly favors the strict enforcement of the Condition of the apportionment, Feb. 28, 1933, and Jan. 31, 19401 1 Although the apportioned classified civil service is by law located only in Washington, D. C., it never- |