Management of Civilian Personnel in the Federal Government: The Present Situation and Proposals for Improvements

Published by the Government Accountability Office on 1977-06-06.

Below is a raw (and likely hideous) rendition of the original report. (PDF)

                          DOCUMENT REISUME

02559 - (A1612607]

Management of Civilian Personnel in the Federal Government: The
Present Situation and Proposals for Improvements. FPCD-77-36.
June 6, 1977. 42 pp.

Staff study by H. L. Krieger, Director, Federal Personnel and
Compensation Div.

Issue Area: Personnel Management and Compensation (300);
    Personnel Management and Compensation: Training and
    Education Programs (304).
Contact: Federal Personnel and Compensation Div.
Budget Function: General Government: Central Personnel
    Management (805).
Organization Concerned. Civil Service Commission.
Congressional Relevance: House Committee on Post Office and
    Civil Service; Senate Committee on GovernmentalStat.
Authority:  Pendleton  Act of 1883 (P.JL. 89-554; 80       378).
    Lloyd-LaFollette Act. Classification Act of 1923.
    CLassif 4 cation Act cf 1949. Brdget and Accounting act of
     1j21. Retirement Act o( 1320. Economy Act of 1Y9-     aetch Act
    of   1939. Hatch Act of iq43. Ramspect Act of 1940.
    Performance Rating Act of 1950. Annual andl Sick Leave Act of
    1954. Government Employees Incentive Awards Act of 1954.
    Federal Employees Group Life Insurance Act of 1954. Federal
    Employees Health Benefits Act of 1959. Civil Service
    Retirement Act of 1956. Government Employees Training Act
    [of] 1958. Federal Salary Reform Act of 1962. Federal Pay
    Comparability Act of 1970. Intergovernmental Personnel Act
    of 1970. Civil Rights Act of 1964, as amended. H. Rept.
    94-12080. Executive Order 10988. Executive Order 11491.
         Widespread agreement now exists among publ-ic managers
of both political parties, students of Government and some
Government personnel officials, members of congressional
oversight commit-lees, and public service organizations on the
need for Federal personnel systems changes. There is rather
general agreement that the systems must be modified to improve
service delivery, enhance productivity, and rtstore some lost
credibility to the public service. Recent recommendations have
ranged from advocating minor revisions in the existing patchwork
structure to plans for complete personnel reorganization. 'ivil
Recommendations requiring structural changes stressed the
Service CommissLon's (CSC's) role 3n three areas: merit sybten
hiring for the competitive service; the placement of the Federal
appeals system; and coilective bargaining and CSC's roLe in
policy guidance and technical assistance in labor-management
relations. Findings/Conclusions: Personnel functions may be
organized for effective administration by: leaving the
competitive service structure unchanged and tightening up the
operations, particularly those related to merit system hiring;
retaining policy and operations in the CSC and creating a
separate independent appeals (and in 'come proposals,
enforcement) agency; and separating policy, operations, and
appellate functions, shifting policy to Executive Office of the
President, delegating operations to the agencies, and creating
an independent review and appellate board with enforcement
powers. Among those who dant change, there are three major
positions on when and how the alterations should be made:
thorough long-range examination of all Federal personnel
management systems similar to past Hoover Commission studies; a
much shorter study, perhaps by a 90-day task force; and
immediate action by the new administration, including
simultaneous work on a new bill to be presented to the Congress.

Management Of Civilian Personnel
In The Federal Government:
The Present Situation And
Proposals For Improvements
There is widespread agreement among Federal
officials, congressional oversight committees,
and public service organizations on the need
for changes in the civilian personnel systems
of the U.S. Government. This applies particu-
larly t the Civil Service B', *.nrission, its
authority, and its administration.
But the choices emong proposed improve-
d ents and the methods for carrying them
are not s;mple and will not be easily imple-
This staff study summarizes civil service
history, current primary problems, the roles
of those with personnel responsibilities, and
recently proposed revisions for Federal
civilian personnel management.

                                                 JUNE 6, i977

     This staff study describes the roles of the Civil
Service Commission and other organizations that have
authority over and responsiblity for Federal civilian
personnel management.

     We have not attempted in this work to cover all
personnel management issues. We present information on
organizational and structural issues and summarize recent
proposed modifications.

     The choices among needed improvements and the
methods for carrying out selected changes are not simple
ane will not be easily implemented.

     This summary and appendixes I through VI should
assist those who are considering possible revisions in
Federal civilian personnel policies and legislation.

                            Jb /h;r
                            H. L. Krieger
                            Federal Personnel and
                              Compensation Division

SUMMARY                                                      i
       I         BACKGROUND                                 1
                     Basic authority                        1
                     Intent of the Pendleton Act            1
                     History of the Commission              2

                   RESPONSIBILITY                           11
                     Role of the President                  11
                     Role of the Civil Service Commission   12
                     Roles of Federal departments and
                       agencies                             14
                     Role of the Congress                   15
                     Role of OMB                            17
                     Role of the Interagency Advisory
                       Group                                17
                     Roles of other groups with personnel
                       responsibilities                     17

  III            ORGANIZATION OF THE COMMISSION             20


       V         MAJOR RECOMMENDATIONS FOR CHANGE           28
                     Labor-management relations             28
                     Appeals                                30
                     Merit hiring                           33
                     Recruiting for the competitive
                       service                              33

   VI            RECENT REPORTS AND STUDIES                 38


AFGE       American Federation of Government Employees
BPME       Bureau of Personnel Management Evaluation
EPG        Executive Planning Group
FEAA       Federal Employee Appeals Authority
FPM        Federal Personnel Manual
FSEE       Federal Service Entrance Examination
GAO        General Accounting Office
IAG        Interagency Advisory Group
IPMA       International Personnel Management Association
OMB        Office of Management and Budget

     The Federal civilian personnel systems now include close
to 2.9 million employees whose salary and benefits exceed
$40 billion, about 11 percent of the Federal budget.  Approx-
imately 93 percent of the employees work under "merit sys-
tems"--62 percent in the competitive service and 38 percent
in excepted services.  (See app. IV.)

     Personnel management authority and responsibility are
ordered by both the President, through Executive orders,
and the Congress, through laws, often with detailed provi-
sions. 1/ The Civil Service Commission, the Office of Manage--
ment and Budget, the departments and agencies, the Interagency
Advisory Group, and the several organizations responsible for
labor-management relations and pay programs execute these orders.
(See app. II.)

     The general public showed little interest in Federal
personnel operations until recent concern was aroused by
disclosure of merit systems abuses.  In the past, chiefly in
periods of great Government growth, studies were made which
focused on general personnel management improvements; how-
ever, though revisions were often recommended in the overall
organizational structure, the resulting changes were pri-
marily piecemeal a terations to resolve specific problems.
This was Particularly true of how new responsibilities
and duties were assigned to the Commission as it evolved
into a central personnel agency for a vastly expanded
Government. (See apps. I and II.)
     Widespread agreement now exists among public managers
of both political parties, students of Government and
some Government personnel officials, members of congressional

l/Unless otherwise specified, references to personnel
  management or personnel systems apply to Federal civil-
  ian competitive service personnel systems.
oversight committees, and public service organizations
on the need for personnel systems changes. While there is
no agreement on what the specific changes should be or on
how modifications should be introduced or implemented, there
is rather general agreement that the systems must be modi-
fied to improve service delivery, enhance productivity. and
restore some lost credibility to the public service.
Recent recommendations have ranged from advocating minor
revisions in the existing patchwork structure to plans for
complete personnel reorganization. Recommendations requir-
ing structural changes stressed the Commission's role in
three areas:

     -- Discussions of political infiltration of the career
        system examined the Commission's role in its origi-
        nal function--merit system hiring for the co.peti-
        tive service. The basic concept of merit has not
        been seriously challenged, but disagreement exists
        over (1) whether the Commission has deemphasized
        its regulatory role and overemphasized its personnel
        management consultant role, (2) whether the opposite
        is true--that the Commission's procedure for regula-
        ting agency hiring has been too unwieldy and un-
        responsive, and has led to agency attempts to cir-
        cumvent the Commission's rules, or (3) whether the
        roles have varied according to circumstances.
        (See app. V.)

     -- Several groups and studies have recently addressed
        the issues involved in the placement of the Federal
        appeals systems, now under the jurisdiction of the
        Commission. Some authorities have questioned
        whether the Commission's quasi-judicial functions
        are compatible with its other roles. Many employees
        view the Commission as an arm of management; con-
        sequently, though appeals decisions may now be fair
        and just, they often do not have the confidence of
        all concerned. (See app. V.)
     -- Attention, particularly in the Congress, has focused
        on expanding collective bargaining and substituting
        legislation for the current Executive order under
        which the Commission is responsible for policy
        guidance and technical assistance in labor management
        relations. Most bills currently being considered
        provide for an independent central labor relations
        administrative authority. This proposed body's

      relationship co and impact on existing civil
      service laws is uncertain. Should legisla-
      tion be enacted, the interest of many pub-
      lic administration and personnel specialists
      will be to insure that a new personnel management
      system not be superimposed upon the existing
      structure. (See app. V.)
     Among the many recent speeches, investigations.
hearings, studies, and reports addressing the above three
issues and other possible revisions of the personnel systems

    -- The Sharon Merit Staffing Review Ten-a repo,:t, a
       Commission self-inquiry into everyday recruiting and
       staffing operations, conducted in late :97;     ' a
       Commission-appointed group which examired pclitical
       referrals, intrusions into competitive merit hiring
       procedures, and Commission enforcement of merit
       system standards and policies.
    -- A monograph written by Bernard Rosen, former
       Commission Executive Director, also in late 1975,
       at the request of the House Post Office and Civil
       Service Committee, which includes his thorough ap-
       praisal of and recommendations for improving execu-
       tive branch personnel administration.
    -- The Civil Service Amendments of 1976 (H.R. 12080),
       which resulted from House Post Office and Civil
       Service Committee hearings and investigations of
       merit system abuses; the Amendments proposed strength-
       ened merit systems principles and procedures but were
       never reported out of committee.
    --"Blueprint for Civil Service Reform," a late 1976
      report by the Fund for Constitutional Government, a
      group supported by a foundation active in liberal
      causes, which proposes revisions in both Commission
      procedures and structure.
    --The International Personnel Management Association
      testimony on H.R. 12080, in which proposed changes
      reflect the belief that merit system erosion was
      not necessarily the result of an unworkable system,
      but rather the malfunctiol.ing of a workable system.

    -- Former Commission Chairman Hampton's speech at the
       annual Commission awards ceremony, in January 1976, in
       which he said a complete reassessment is needed of
       what the Civil Service Commission should be.
     --The National Civil Service League testimony on H.R.
       12080, which suggested a thorough examination of the
       existing personnel systems.
     --A National Academy of Public Administration panel
       report to the Senate Watergate Committee in 1974, and
       a panel report on reorganization of the executive
       branch in 1976.  Both recommended a comprehensive
       study of the Federal civil service and action on the
       study's recommendations.

     -- An American Federation of Government Employees
        proposal which calls for restructuring the Civil
        Service Commission.

     -- A bill drafted as iollowun to a Bureaucrat Magazine
        symrosium on the Federal civil service which proposes
        a co-plete reorganization of the present personnel
        structures.  (See app. VI.)

     The specific conclusions and recommendations from recent
reviews can be grouped into three major positions on the way
personnel functions might be best organized for effective

     -- Leaving the competitive service structure unchanged,
        tightening up the operations, particularly those
        related to merit system hiring; perhaps increasing
        the Commission's independenc- by changing the term
        of Commissioners' appointments and by restricting
        the personnel role of the Office of Management and
        Budget; some also suggest adding most excepted
       agencies to Commission jurisdiction.
     --Retailing policy and operations in the Commission and
       creating a separate independent appeals   (and in some
       proposals, enforcement) agency.

     -- Separating policy, operations, and appellate functions,
        shifting policy to the Executive Office of the Presi-
        dent, delegating operations to the agencies, and
        creating an independent review and appellate board
        w~ith enforcement powers.

     There are many variations of heee proposals and some
or all of these same ideas were brought out in past studies
and legislative proposals, for example. by the Brownlow
Commission in 1937, the Hoover Commissions in 1949 and 1955,
and the Clark proposals in 1958.  (See app. I.)

     Those who favor minor revisions of the present system
say the recent abuses resulted from apathy, deliberate
subversion, or the system's failure to Lespond to managers;
they claim the latter two can be remedied by changes in the
examining system. They believe that the problems are and
were with people, and that moving boxes on an organization
chart is not a remedy.

     Those who have proposed separation of functions say
thaL the Commission roles conflict--one cannot be a frien''yv
consultant, leader, and the "cop on the beat"; enforcement
requires insulation and independence. These critics also
view the Commirsion's quasi-judicial functions as conflicting--
one cannot simulteneouslv be an arm of management and a pro-
tector of employees.

     The Commission, as it is now organized and functions,
is said by some to have lost its credibility in both operations
and enforcement. These critics say that day-to-day operations
would remain much the same under new Commissioners. Even
strengthened procedures would still enable agency managers to
circumvent policy, not necessarily out of willful intent to
be evil or to subvert a merit system, but because the system
is on the defensive, and would undoubtedly subject managers
to ever greater constraints.
     Among those who want change. there are three major
positions on when and how the alterations should be made:

     -- Several Groups urge a thorough long-range examination
        of all Federal personnel management systems similar
        to past Hoover Commission studies.

     -- Others in public service or personnel organizations
        favor a much shorter study, perhaps by a 90-day task
        force. These people believe the subject has been
        studied enough but want some voice in reorganization
        planning, particularly in the drafting of new

     -- A third group believes that most, if not all,
        interested parties have been heard in recent in-
        vestigations. They say immediate action is necessary
        because efficiency and morale among personnel adminis-
        trators and especially Federal manaaers who must make
        personnel decisions have deteriorated. These people
        suggest that the new administration, pe-haps working
        with a small group of consultants, should prepare
        changes to be made by reorganization plans, Executive
        order, delegation, and redelegation as soon as
        possible while simultaneously working on a new bill
        to be presented to the Congress. (See app. VI.)
     The choices among the needed improvements and the methods
to implement selected changes in the present personnel systems
are difficult and complex. The time is appropriate, however,
because rarely in the more than 90 years since the passage of the
Civil Service Act has public and Government interest been as
great as it is now.

APPENDIX I                                      APPENDIX I


     The foundation for the present Federal civilian personnel
systems rests partly on a rider to the Appropriation Act of
1871, and primarily on the Pendleton Act of 1883, now incor-
porated along with other important personnel legislation in
title V of the U.S. Code. This code, entitled "Government
Organization and Employees," was enacted3 into law (Public
Law 89-554, Sept. 6, 1966, 80 Stat. 378) after 10 years of
work by the Civil Service Commission with the assistance of
various departments and agencies.  It restates, in conlpre-
hensive form without substantive change, the statutes in ef-
fect before July 1, 1965, that relate to Government employees,
the organization and powers cf Federal agencies generally,
and administrative procedures. Title V is updated annually
with amendments. revisions, additions, and deletions to
personnel law.

     The enactors did not intend to create a central personnel
agercy, but rather to poli-e patronage. The President was
authorized to appoint, with the advice and consent of the
Senate, a Civil Service Commission to be composed of three
commissioners, not more than two of whom were from the same
political party, removable at the will of the President. The
Commissioners were to aid the President by setting rules for
open competitive examinations for testing the fitness of
applicants for public service, with individuals to oe selected
for positions from among those graded highest. The act dele-
gated the authority to recruit and examine personnel to
agencies through boards of examiners operating under Commission
supervision. There was to be complete freedom from political
pressure on those choosing and chosen. Recommendations from
Congressmen on matters other than character and residence were
not allowed. Previous veteran preference laws were reaffirmed.

     The Pendleton Act did not require, but rather authorized,
the President to put jobs under the civil service system, thus
recognizing that the constitution gave the Executive the
APPENDIX I                                     APPENDIX I

power to appoint, and the Cengress the right to set
qualifications on, that power. Although it has been called
an "independent" agency, the Commission was established "to
7id the President, as he may request .. . " and has been
regarded as an arm of the President despite restrictive
legislation and congressional oversight.


     The rider to the Appropriations Act of 1871 and the
Pendleton Act cf 1883 were reactions to the spoils system
spearheaded by a strong civil service reform movement. About
10 percent of the approximately 133.000 Federal employees were
originally included under this act. Added coverage was to be
determined by the President with Commission advice.

     The Commission's job was to screen, examine, and present
a choice of applicants to fill jobs in the agencies covered
under law. General issues of personnel management and
employee concerns played a minimal role in Commission duties
until the early 1900s when President Theodore Roosevelt's
Keep Committee and President Taft's Commission on Economy
and Efficiency directed attention to these areas. The Keep
Committee urged the organization of systems for pay, classi-
fication, pensions, and leave for civil servant-. One of
the Taft Commission's major personnel recom,..r'dations--to
amend the civil service law to create an executive bureau
of personnel--was the first of many public personnel commis-
sion and study recommendations suggesting a central personnel
agency. This era also initiated the still continuing efforts
of the Congress and the executive branch to exert the major in-
fluence over the Commission and Federal personnel functions.

      The first important consideration of employee rights
c'ame in 1912 with the passage of the Lloyd-LaFollette Act,
which gave employees individually and collectively the right
to petition the Congress and to belong to unions. The
act also required that agencies give written notice of
reasons for firing an employee and time for the employee
to answer. This legislation, still the foundation for
Federal labor-management relations, was among the first
successful pressures on the Congress by Government unions.

APPENDIX I                                     APPENDIX I

Additional union influence, also directed to the Congress,
came with passage of the Retirement Act of 1920. Responsi-
bility for administering this act was shared by the Commis-
sion and the Bureau of Pensions in the Department of the
Interior because the Comnission was still viewed primarily
as a policing, not a personnel, agency.

     The Congress also refused to give the Commission sole
responsibility for administering the next major personnel
legislation, the Classification Act of 1923, which was to
insure equal pay for equal work. A special Personnel
Classification Board was established, composed of three
representatives, one from the Civil Service Commission, one
from the Bureau of Efficiency--an independent agency which
reported to the Congress and did efficiency ratings ar,d in-
vestigations of the executive branch--and one from the
Bureau of the Budget (which had just been created by the
Budget and Accounting Act of 1921). Controversy marked the
Board's actions throughout its existence; many problems were
related to joint Commission and Bureau of the Budget (now
the Office of Management and Budget (OMB)) authority, still
a factor in personnel policies and operations. A Personnel
Classification Board report on the Federal service pointed
to lack of coordination and leadership in personnel
activities--a theme repeated in many future studies.

     The Commission assumed full responsibility for position
classification. supervision of efficiency ratings, and
operations created by the Retirement Act after the passage
of the Economy Act of 1932 and the abolition of the Bureau
of Efficiency. According to a Commission report, this
transfer of major personnel functions beyond patronage con-
trol began modern personnel administration in the Federal

     This transfer also began an era of new concerns.
Tremendous growth in Federal employment began in the 1930s
with new agencies created to meet first depression and then
war emergencies. Many of these new agencies were originally
excepted from the competitive service, which caused un-
easiness over the future of the merit system. There was also
increasing concern over management of the executive branch,
which led to establishing the President's Committee on Ad-
ministrative Management (the Brownlow Committee) in 1936.
Among Brownlow's major personnel recommendations were to

APPENDIX I                                     APPENDIX I

     -- extend the merit system upward, outward, and downward
        to cover all non-policy-determining posts;
     -- reorganize the civil service system Us a part of
        management under a single responsible administrator,
        strengthening the Civil Service Commission as a
        citizen Civil Service Board to serve as a watchdog
        of the merit system; and
     -- increase the salaries of key posts throughout the
        service so that the Govern:nent may attract and hold
        in a career service men anc' women of the highest
        ability and character.
Though proposals to extend the merit system were subsequently
adopted, the Brownlow recommendations on Commission reorgani-
zation were not implemented.
     Legislation and Executive orders, however, did greatly
strengthen the Commission at this time. Executive orders in
1938 provided that the Commission
    "initiate, supervise and enforce a system, as
    uniform as practicable, for the recruitment,
    examination, certification, promotion from
    grade to grade, transfer and reinstatement of
    employees in the classified service."
Each Federal agency established a division of personnel
supervision and management headed by a director of personnel
who became a member of a Federal Council of Personnel Admin-
istration (a forerunner of the present Interagency Advisory
     Attention also returned to the original Commission
objective---freedom from political pressure. The Hatch Acts
of 1939 and 1940 were passed because patronage was a problem
again. Voters' coercion and political participation by
Federal employees or State and local Employees paid by
Federal funds were prohibited. Penalties to be administered
by the Commission were severe. The acts also forbade
employing individuals who belonged to organizations advocating
the violent overthrow of the Government.

APPENDIX I                                        APPENDIX I

      Political loyalty as a precondition of Federal employ-
ment was set back further by the passage of the Ramspeck Act
of 1940, which brought almost all non-policy-determining
positions under the civil service. This act also extended
the Classification Act to cover the Government field serv-
     The Commission's role was expanded in 1944 with the
passage of what is still considered one cf the most impor-
tait pieces of personnel legislation, the Veteran's Preference
Act. Although veterans had some benefits previously, this
law redefined and explained their rights assuring prefer-
ence in hiring and retention in service with additional
rights of appeal. In addition to controversy because many
considered this law an "invasion" of the merit system, there
was--and is--friction because the law gave the Commission
the right to evaluate and if necessary overturn certain
agency management decisions.
     The roles and duties of the Commission were questioncl
at the time; it was acting as a central personnel agency,
but was it? The first Hoover Commission, created to con-
duct a thorough study of the executive branch, including
personnel administration, recommended reorganizing the
civil service, transferring operations to the departments
and agencies, leaving the Commission only responsibility
for setting standards, post-auditing programs, applying
sanctions, and considering employee sppeals. Important
changes resulted from these recommendations: the head of
the Civil S rvice Commission became chairman and was made
responsible for administering the Commission's operations;
decentralization increased and the impetus was cleated for a
new classification system.
     The Classification Act of 1949, with provisions for
"supergrades," revisions of pay rates, and consolidation of
occupational categories also permitted classification to be
delegated to the agencies, a victory in constant agency ef-
forts to retain control over personnel actions.
     As the number of Federal employees alternately expanded
and contracted with changes from war to peace, additional
functions--and controls--were given to the Commission.

     Extremely controversial was the loyalty and security
investigations program initiated in 1947 by Executive order
and revised in 1953. Extremely popular was the initiation
of a Government-wide recruiting program for young people,

APPENDIX I                                   APPENDIX I

particularly college graduates interested in a public
service career rather than "just a job."
     Commission authority over the executive agencies
increased with passage of the Performance Rating Act of
1950 whLch gave the Commission the responsibility for
setting standards and approving all department and agency
performance rating plans.
     Government and public service groups' interest in
personnel management intensified with the growth in
Federal employment and Commission duties. The President's
Advisory Commission on Management Improvement (the Morgan
Commission) met from 1950 to 1952 and made broad policy
recommendations on Federal executive branch management
problems. The adoption of many previously mentioned
Hoover I personnel proposals came from the Morgan group's
work as well as from Temple University followup studies.
     Another report--"Responsibili.y For Personnel Manage-
ment in the Federal Service"--issued in 1952 by che National
Capital Chapter, National Civil Service League, suggested,
as bad other studies, that personnel policy and implementa-
tion be legally made a responsibility of the Chief Executive,
and that a Bureau of Personnel Management be established in
the Executive Office of the President to consolidate all
personnel responsibilities and to evaluate the effectiveness
of the use of funds appropriated for personnel management.
     The Commission was completely reorganized in 1953 to
handle new duties which had been added rapidly by both
legislation and Executive order. Some changes reflected
recommendations from the studies discussed above. Various
units and divisions were consolidated and greater authority
was del-gated to the executive director. Decentralization
was stressed, although primarily in details rather than in
discretion. Commission monitoring was emphasized and
research and planning were given priority. The reorganiza-
tion attempted to recognize Commission responsibility to
plan. execute, control, and inspect Federal personnel
     The independent Federal Personnel Council was also
abolished in the reorganization of 1953, and the agency
personnel directors who had been in this policymaking
group became only consultants for policy formation in a
new Interagency Advisory Group (IAG) under the executive
director of the Commission.

APPENDIX I                                         APPENDIX I

      Despite the Commission reorganization, further studies
were conducted on the civil service systems and personnel
management. The American Assembly, a nonpartisan delib-
erative forum, met in 1954 to discuss Federal Government
service issues such as the organization for personnel
management and the merit system. The research papers and
final report of the Assembly were important in future
personnel changes; for example, in the deliberations of
a secoi:d Hoover Commission whose task force on personnel
proposed detailed personnel management revisions.
     Hoover II's report urged decentralization as had
other studies, and stressed the need for followup audit
and inspection. Other recommendations related to estab-
lishing an experienced senior civil service corps and
making greater distinctions between career and political
      Still another report (issued by the House Post Office
and Civil Service Committee in 1956) produced similar
recommendations--that personnel functions be decentralized
and inspection and audit by the Commission be expanded.
One action taken after this study established staggered
6-year terms for Commission members. Also in the late
1950s the Senate Post Office and Civil Service Cnmmittee
hired a consultant to conduct a thorough study of Federal
personnel. His report recommended creating an independent
board of appeals and also reported that the Commission's
roles of protecting the merit system's integrity and
administering a personnel management system were incompa-
tible. This study's recommendations were the basis for the
Clark bill (introduced in 1958 and again in 1959) which
would have left merit system "watchdog" responsibilities
in the Commission and personnel management administration
in an Office of Personnel Management in the Executive Office
of the President.
     While the studies and reports of the 1950s concentrated
on the structure and Administration of personnel management,
the legislation of the period was primarily focused on
improving fringe benefits for Federal employees. The pas-
sage of the Annual and Sick Leave Act of 1951. the Government
Employees Incentive Awards Act of 1954, the Federal Employees
Group Life Insurance Act of 1954, the Federal Employees
Health Benefits Act of 1959. and improvements in the Civil

APPENDIX I                                            APPENDIX I

Service Retirement Act of 1956 gave the Commission new
operating duties.

The 1958 Government Employees Training Act and a later
Executive order gave the Commission responsibility and
authority for operating training programs, providing
training leadership and guidance, and monitoring agency
training programs to improve the efficiency of Federal
     Competition with the private sector for well-qualified
personnel led to passage of the Federal Salary Reform Act
of 1962, which attempted to set Federal employee pay at a
level comparat'e with private enterprise rates. The princi-
ple was reinforced by the Federal Pay Comparability Act of
1970 providing for an improved permanent system for setting
white collar salaries.
     A consultant role for a Federal Employees Pay Council,
a group representing employee organizations, was included
in the pay legislation. These organizations were growing
rapidly, yet no statutory authority existed for dealing
with them other than the Lloyd-IlaFollette Act of 1912.
In January 1962, Executive Order 10988 set up a Government-
wide system for union recognition under the direction of
the Commission. This was revised and strengthened by
Executive Order 11491. and again amended by other Executive
orders which opened new areas for collective bargaining.
     Besides legislation and Executive orders relating to
employee benefits, both Government and public service
groups in the 1960s continued to seek ways to increase the
efficiency of executive branch personnel operations. Some
of these groups and their recommendations were:
     -- The 1964 Committee for Economic Development
        report. "Improving Executive Management
        in the Federal Government," recommended im-
        provements in executive selection, develop-
        ment, and compensation and increased Presi-
        dential supervision and control over top
        management employees.

      -- The Price (1964), Heineman (1967). and
         Lindsay (1968) Task Force reports, only
         recently released to the public, recommended

APPENDIX I                                      APPENDIX I

       consolidation of like functions into fewer
       departments, decentralization of authority,
       and strengthening management capabilities
       of the Office of the President.
     -- The 1965 revisions of the American Assembly
        1954 report found few of their earlier major
        personnel concerns were fully resolved.
     --The 1969 Ash Council Report proposed that
       the Office of Management and Budget be
       charged with responsibility for advising the
       President on policies and programs for
       recruitment, development, and utilization of
       the men and women who make up the top ranks
       of the civil service, and that a division of
       executive development and labor management
       relations be set up in OMB. These proposals
       were incorporated in the enacted Reorganiza-
       tion Plan No. 2 of 1970.
     Landmark legislation--the Intergovernmental Personnel
Act of 1970--gave broad authority to the Commission to
administer programs to help State and local governments
improve their service through sharing personnel, grants,
training programs, and fellowships, and technical assist-
ance for personnel management improvement.

     The coordinated Federal Wage System, initiated by
Presidential memorandum in 1965, was enacted into law in
1972. The basic policies of the system were set up under
this statute, with the Commission establishing the operating
policies and procedures within the statutory framework.
     In 1972 the Commission's authority and responsibility for
equal employment opportunity were put into law. The act
placed Federal employees for the first time under the Civil
Rights Act of 1964, as amended. The Commission was also
given enforcement responsibility for discrimination and
power to correct noncompliance.

     Other recent laws which require Commission administra-
tion are the Freedom of Information Act, the Privacy Act,
and the Fair Labor Standards Act Amendments.
     Some of the other duties assigned to the Commission in
addition to the significant authorities and responsibilities
from legislation and Executive orders previously discussed
are:  youth opportunity programs, manpower planning, man-
power information systems, employment of the retarded and

                                                 APPENDIX I

                                     health. executive
the mentally restored, occupationalExecutive Institute, job
personnel management, the Federal and assistance in
information service to the public,   of 1965.
administering the Voting Rights Act
     Recent studies and reports on Commission
and duties are discussed in appendix

APPENDIX II                                      APPENDIX II


     Personnel authority and responsibility are divided
among the President, the Congress, OMB. the Commission,
the agencies, the Interagency Advisory Group. and the
several organizations responsible for labor-management and
pay programs.

     The President, under the Constitution and pertinent
statutes, has primary responsibility for executive branch
personnel management. Presidential concern and support for
effective personnel management and mezit principles have
varied with the times and the interests of the incumbent.
Important personnel duties were assigned to OMB by the
President under Reorganization Plan No. 2 of 1970; over the
past 40 years, however, more and mere of the President's
personnel responsibilities have been delegated to the

    According to the Federal Personnel Manual (FPM),

    "The President, through his staff assistants,
    through central staff agencies- and through
    the heads of agencies, performs the following
    -- Formulation of the executive branch civilian
       personnel management goals, policies, and
    -- Recommendation of personnel legislation and
       appropriation requests to the Congress.
    -- Provision of leadership to improve the ef-
       fectivenecs and flexibility of personnel man-
       agement in, and assure its consistency and
       coordination among, the various executive
    -- Prescribing of rules for the practice of
       the merit principle and system in all phases
       of Federal personnel management, and for other
       personnel management matters.

                                                  APPENDIX II

     -- Making of appointments to key positions
        authorized by law."

      For almost half of its first 90 years, Ccmmission
duties primarily involved administering practical   competi-
tive examinations  which  allowed se?=ction of politically
neutral civil servants from among applicants graded highest.
Growth during the depression and the war years, in numbers
of people and types of jobs covered by the merit system,
led to a wide range of personnel programs. Most studies
and proposals for the President to better manage the rapidly
expanding Government 4irected their personnel focus toward
efficient management rather than merit system principles.
But rather than set up a policymaking White House personnel
office with operations delegated to the agencies, as was
often recommended, Presidents (at times by congressional
direction) instead delegated responsibilities as neededtheto
 the Commission. Through the addition of these roles,
Commission evolved into, but has never by law or Executive
 order been formally designated, a central personnel agency.
 The scope of Colamission activities has greatly expanded
 and now includes setting policy, issuing regulations,
 giving leadership, guidance, and technical assistance,
 operating programs, evaluating, monitoring, enforcing
 and adjudicating.
      According to the FPM, the Commission has:

      "a.     Staff responsibilities:

              -- The Civil Service Commission is the central
                 pesonnel agency of the executive branch
                 of the Gover-ment. The Commission, as
                 directed or authorized by statute or by
                 order of the President, serves as the per-
                 sonnel management staff agency of the Presi-
                 dent. In this capacity, the Commission:
                -- Executes the many research, planning,
                   development, and evaluation responsi-
                   bilities delegated to it.

                -- Aids the President, as he may request, in
                   the development of the basic rules for
                   the competitive civil service.

APPENDIX II                                          APPENDIX II

              -- Gives leadership, on behalf of the President,
                 to personnel management c;-.ations,    coordina-
                tion, and improvement in t-   executive branch.
              -- Develops and makes legislative, policy and
                 program recommendations to the President.
     "b.   Administrative responsibilities:

           -- The Commission is charged with the administra-
              tion of or has administrative responsibilities
              under a number of statutes. These include pro-
              visions relating to the competitive service, the
              classification of positions under the General
              Schedule, training, the civil service retirement
              system, life and health insurance, incentive
              awards, performance rating, the political
              activities of Federal employees, and veteran
              preference. In this capacity, the Commission:

              -- Develops and issues the specific goals,
                 policies, programs, standards, regula-
                 tions, and procedures which are needed
                 to make the laws, as well as Presiden-
                 tial directives, effective.

              -- Conducts nationwide examining and
                 recruiting activities.
              -- Carries out a number of other important
                 operating activities, such as a suita--
                 bility investigations and retireLrent
              -- Makes decisions on employee appeals.
              --Delegates, as authorized by law and
                consistent with good administration.
                authority to agency heads to act on
                personnel matters in accordance with
                appropriate standards.

              -- Maintains a systtm of agency personnel
                 program inspection and classification
              -- Advises ana assists agencies in developing
                 effective personnel management programs.

APPENDIX II                                    APPENDIX II

     "c.   Surveillance responsibilities:
           -- Some statutes and Executive orders delegate
              authority to act thereunder directly to heads
              of agencies with the provision that the
              exercise of these authorities is subject to
              compliance with standards, requirements, and
              instructions issued by the Civil Service Com-
              mission. The Commission may also have a sur-
              veillance Responsibility which is exercised
              through audit, review, and inspection.'
     As the President increasingly delegated personnel
management responsibilities to the Commission, the Commir-
sion in turn delegated duties to agencies under its jurls-
diction. Most agency personnel director positions and
personnel offices were established in 1938, over 50 years
after the Commission was founded. It was almost 10 more
years (1947) before Executive Order 9830, still in effect
today, clearly set out the agencies' personnel accounta-
bility. The order allows the Commission to delegate
personnel responsibilities to the agencies who (1) in
accordance with standards set by the Commission must
-ooperate with the Commission and (2) may in turn delegate
euthority to appropriate agency officials. A key point
in the Sxecutive order requires the Commission to maintain
an adequate inspection system to determine whether agen-
cies are carrying out Commission instructions and to take
appropriate action to insure compliance. To monitor
personnel actions better, 1969 Presidential instructions
require agencies to establish their own evaluation offices.
     According to the FPM, the head of the agency, either
personally or through subordinate officials to whom he has
delegated authority, should perform the fol'owing functions:
     -- Planning, organizing, directing, coordinating, and
        controlling all personnel managemelnt programs con-
        ducted within the agency.
     -- Determining that personnel management programs
        support the agency's missiors, meet the needs of
        management and employees, and are consistent with
        the basic goals of Federal personnel management.

APPENDIX II                                     APPENDTX II

     -- Insuring that personnel management is
        carried out effectively and efficiently in
        accord with applicable laws, Executive
        orders, Presidential policies, regulations,
        and standards.
     -- Implementing positively and vigorously the
        principle of selection and promotion on the
        basis of ability, merit, and fitness in
        staffing the agency.
     -- Managing the activities of his agency in
        such a manner as to maintain the high
        reputation of the Federal Government as an
        employer and contribute to cordial community
        relations in the localities where it has
     -- Cooperating with the Civil Service Commis-
        sion in the planning, development, execution,
        and review of personnel management matters.
     Just as Presidential interest in and support for effec-
tive personnel management and merit principles have depended
on both the times and the nature of the incumbent, so also
has the role of the Congress. Its powers to investigate,
legislate, and appropriate have at times been used to
closely manage and control and at other times have been of only
slight influence in personnel management. The degree of
legislative oversight and action in the House and Senate
Committees and subcommittees which have jurisdiction
over Commtission activities has also varied over time.
More frequently, other congressional committees have
included personnel regulations in general program legis-
lation, often without consulting the Commission. 1/

l/A 1965 American Assembly study of Federal personnel
  reported that at that time there were more than 1,500
  separate statutes affecting personnel, most of them
  enacted after 1930. In a recent count of statutes in
  Commission files, it was estimated that approximately
  430 statutes affecting personnel have been enacted
  from 1965 to 1976.

APPENDIX II                                 APPENDIX II

Berna&d Rosen, former Executive Director of the Commis-
sion, in a 1975 monograph for the House Post Office and
Civil Service Committee, writes that when committees
other than Post Office and Civil Service initiate personnel
     "* * * Generally, there is little opportunity
     for the Post Office and Civil Service Committees
     or the Civil Service Commission to bring their
     considerable knowledge and expertise to bear in
     such instances, with the rernult that some of
     these legislative initiatives may not be as
     sound as they should be, and the overall system
     is more of a patchwork and has less coherence
     than is desirable."

He recommended consultation on all legislation which impacts
on the civil service.

      Granting or denying appropriations for personnel func-
tionis is one method of control over personnel decisions by
other than oversight committees. One example, Public
Law 94-439, title II, section 204, states:
     "None of the funds contained in this title
     shall be available for additional permanent
     positions in the Washington area if the total
     authorized positions in the Wastington area is
     allowed to exceed the proportion existing at
     the close of fiscal year 1966."
     Other such legislation includes excepting entire
new agencies from competitive service and excepting a
certain percent of personnel positions. A 1973 report to
the Senate Committee on Post Office and Civil Service listed
44 agencies which were completely or in part excepted from
the competitive service. These weze considered to be the
major exceptions of considerable size although there are
numerous exceptions in small agencies with fewer than 100
employees as well as small numbers of excepted positions in
larger agencies. These agencies cite the need for "flexi-
bility" in recruitment, selection,appointment, and removal
as the reason for their original excepted service status
and for continuing such status.

     Exceptions to the competitive service are discussed
in appendix IV.

APPENDIX II                                     APPENDIX II

     OMB has increasingly become involved with personnel
duties in recent years. Besides reviewing and clearing
legislative proposals which affect the personnel management
system, OMB also prescribes and monitors ceilings on Fer-
sonnel and grade controls, defines the manntr in whick
technical and support personnel are contracted and moritors
the use of contractors and its resultant   effects on federal
personnel. Joining  the  Chairman  of the Commission, the
Director of OMB participates  as  the President's agent in
the analysis on which  the Federal  pay comparability princi-
ple is eased and shares in the decisionmaking on the setting
of pay rates under the Federal Pay Comparability Act of
     Reorganization Plan No. 2 of 1970 gave OMB a role in
labor management relations and responsibility for advising
the President on the development of new programs to recruit,
train, motivate, deploy, and evaluate employees in the top
civil service levels. Joint action with     the Commission and
the agencies was to insure that  there  would  be effective
executive management forecasting  and  then  utilization.

     The Interagency Advisory Group, established in 1954 and
composed of top Federal agency personnel officials, is
forum for communication and consultation on personnel  manage-
ment policies and practices. The Executive Director   of the
Commission is Chairman of this group which forms project
committees to study and report on specific issues. IAG
succeeds the Federal Personnel Council, which was similar
but a policymaking rather than advisory body.
      The FPM states that IAG's purpose is to
      "encourage the initiation, exchange and
      development of ideas and proposals on govern-
      ment personnel policies, major projects and
      program changes affecting Federal agencies
      personnel management practices."

 Roles in pay
      Groups having Federal pay responsibilities include:

APPENDIX II                                     APPENDIX II

     -- The Prevailing Rate Advisory Committee, which
        recommends personnel policies and pay for
        Federal Wage System employees.
     -- The Federal Employees Pay Council, which
        recommends white collar pay policy to the
        President's agent (the Chairman of the Com-
        mission and Director of OMB).
     -- The Advisory Committee on Federal Pay, which
        reviews the pay recommendations of the
        President's agent.
     -- The Commission on Executive. Legislative and
        Judicial Salaries, which recommends rates oz
        pay to the President after conducting a
        quadrennial review of pay for Members of
        Congress and top officials of all branches
        of Government.
A President's Panel on Federal Compensation, established
in 1975, reviewed the many Federal pay systems and the
roles of the parties involved in setting Federal pay.
Their recommendations. many of which would require new
legislation, recognized that while the Prevailing Rate
wage-setting process for blue-collar pay is generally
working well, controversy exists over the current system
for setting white-collar pay, and changes are needed.
Roles in labor-management relations

      Federal labor relations programs have evolved in
recene years from amendments to Executive orders first
issued in 1962. The current Executive order, 11491 as
amended, provides for:
     -- A Federal-Labor Relations Council, composed
        of the Chairman of the Commission (who is
        Chairman of the Council), the Secretary of
        Labor, the Director of OMB, and other
        officials named by the President to decide
        major policy issues and make recommendations
        to the President.

APPCNDIX II                                     APPENDIX II

     --A Federal Service Impasses Panel, an agency
       within the Federal Labor Relations Council,
       to consider and settle negotiation impasses.
     -- An Assistant Secretary of Labor for Labor
        Management Relations to supervise elections,
        decide unfair labor practice complaints,
        resolve grievability/crbitrability questions,
        and make appropriate unit determinations for
        the purpose of exclusive recognition.

     -- The Federal Mediation and Conciliation Service
        to provide 3ervices and assistance to Federal
        agencies and labor organizations in resolution
        of negotiation dispute-.

     Under the Executive order, the Commission and OMB are
to provide policy guidance cc the agencies and to periodi-
cally review their labor-management operations. The Com-
mission is also to furnish technical advice and information
programs for the agencies, and to assist in the development
of programs for training agency personnel and management
officials in labor-management relations. The Commission
and the Department of Labor are to develop programs for the
collection and dissemination of informtation appropriate to
the needs of the agencies, organizations, and the public.

APPENDIX III                                    APPENDIX III


     Three Commissioners appointed by the President with the
advice and consent of the Senate serve for overlapping 6-year
terms. The Commission must be bipartisan; the chairman and
the vice chairman, however, are usually members of the same
party as the President, and Commissioners may be removed by
the President. They decide on and review policy, approve
regulations, recommend legislation, monitor political ac-
tivity, and hear appeals. Reporting directly to the Commis-
sioners are:
     -- The Office of the General Counsel, which gives legal
        advice to the Commission and administers and enforces
        the Hatch Act and the standards of conduct for Fed-
        eral employees.

     --The Federal Employees Appeal A'uthority (FEAA), which
       is responsible for providing a one-level appelate

     --The Appeals Review Board, which reconsiders certain
       FEAA decisions and hears certain other types of

     -- The Federal Executive Institute, which holds resi-
        dential educational programs for Federal executives.
     -- The Federal Prevailing Rate Advisory Committee,
        which advises the Commission on blue collar workers'

     -- The Administrative Law Judge, who holds formal hear-
        ings for the Commission.

     -- The International Organizations Employees Loyalty
        Board, which advises on suitability of individuals
        for international organization employment.

     The Executive Director is a career appointee chosen
by the Chairman who conducts the day-to-day Commission
business. Staff offices which report directly to him are:
      -- The Assistant Executive Director, who has responsi-
         bility for the Offices of Federal Equal Employment
         Opportunity, the Federal Women's Program, the 16-
         Point Program for Spanish Speaking Americans, and
         the Upward Mobility Program.

APPENDIX III                                    APPENDIX III

     -- The Interagency Advisory Group, which administers a
        program of communication with personnel directors
        from all departments and agencies.

     --The Office of Administrative Law Judges, which coor-
       dinates the Voting rights program with the Justice
       Department and handles personnel matters for the
       administrative law judges.
     -- The Office of Incentive Systems, which assists depart-
        ments and agencies in operating awards programs.
     -- The Office of Labor Management Relations, which gives
        policy guidance and technical assistance to departments
        and agencies on bargaining with employee unions.
     -- The Office of Public Affairs.
     In 1971, an Executive Planning Group (EPG) made up of
a few of the Commission's top career executives, was estab-
lished as an informal group under the leadership of the
Executive Director to insure lateral coordination of policy
and program initiatives.  EPG does long-range planning and
policy studies for the Commission working through task forces
and standing committees.
     The majority of the Commission's substantive work is
done in 10 Bureaus and by 10 regional offices which also
report directly to the Executive Director.
     The regional offices. conforming with standard regional
boundaries, manage a network of area offices, at least one
in each State. The regions represent the Commission in
the field, carrying out Commission programs and activities
in accordance with the standards, policies, and procedures
established in the central office. Regional directors,
supervised by the Assistant Director for Regional Operations,
while receiving program and policy direction from central
office bureaus and offices, have broad authority in adapt-
ing programs to suit local needs. Attention to personnel
problems resulting from Federal agencies' decentralization
has given increased emphasis and authority to regional opera-
     The following are central office bureaus which carry
out the Commission's policies and activities:

     -- The Bureau of Policies and Standards develops and
        coordinates Government-wide personnel policies,
        manages pay systems, designs classification and

APPENDIX III                                     APPENDIX III

       qualification standards and testing techniques, and
       does staff work on the Commission's legislative
       program. Until 1972 the Bureau was also responsible
       for policy development, but as the result of a
       management study, each bureau and staff office now
       develops policies, regulations, and guidelines for
       its own programs.
     -- The Bureau of Recruiting and Examining develops
        policies for its programs, tests applicants, reviews
        applications, maintains lists of open positions and
        qualified applicants, and certifies eligibles for
        hiring by agencies. This bureau also handles special
        hiring programs for employees who have lost their jobs
        because of reduction-in-force actions, the young,
        the disadvantaged, and the handicapped. The Bureau
        also advises agencies on their merit promotion plans.
     -- The Bureau of Executive Personnel works with agen-
        cies on executive personnel planning, recruiting,
        classifying, training, and evaluating. It allo-
        cates supergrade and equivalent positions among
        the agencies and approves qualifications of indi-
        viduals selected for these positions.
     -- The Bureau of Personnel Investigations checks on
        the background and suitability of Federal employees.
        The nature and extent of the investigation are de-
        termined by the sensitivity of the position to be
        filled. Investigations cover not only security
        fitness but also information about essential abili-
        ties and attributes. The bureau also conducts a
        Government-wide security appraisal program.
     -- The Bureau of Training develops and conducts train-
        ing courses for Federal, State, and local employees,
        assists agencies in developing and presenting train-
        ing programs, and publishes trainilig reports, cata-
        logues, manuals, and statistics.

     ---The Bureau of Retirement, Insurance and Occupational
        Health plans and operates the civil service retire-
        ment system, administers the Federal employees group
        life insurance program, and negotiates with carriers
        the tates and benefits for Federal employee health
        insurance policies. It also is responsible for de-
        veloping occupational health, alcoholism. and drug

APPENDIX III                                     APPENDIX III

       prevention programs and referral services available
       to Federal employees.
     --The Bureau of Manpower Information Services operates
       a Government-wide computerized personnel infornmation
       system from which it produced information for the
       executive branch, the Congress, and the public.
     -- The Bureau of Personnel Management Evaluation (BPME)
        works with agencies to determine the effectiveness
        of their personnel management and their self-evaluation
        systems. It is responsible for assuring that agencies
        comply with merit procedures, personnel laws, rules,
        regulations, and public pulicy. BPME also decides
        classification appeals and houses the clearinghouse
        for productivity and organizational effectiveness.

     -- The Bureau of Intergovernmental Personnel Programs
        administers the Intergovernmental Personnel Act
        passed in 1971 to help State and local governments
        improve their services. The Bureau provides grants
        and technical assistance for personnel management
        improvement and training, arranges personnel inter-
        changes on a temporary basis, and assists in recom-
        mendations for meeting merit system standards, as
        well as other efforts to strengthen State and local
     -- The Bureau of Management Services handles the Com-
        miss.on's internal management functions. The Bureau
        is responsible for developing and operating the
        management-by-objectives planning system, internal
        personnel management, budget and accounting, and
        office services. The Office of Management Analysis
        and Audits coniducts internal audits, recommends im-
        provements, and informs the Chairman and the Execu-
        tive Director about significant findings.

APPENDIX IV                                           APPENDIX IV


      The Civil Service Act required that only a small number
of positions in the executive branch be brought under t)b new
merit system. Increased coverage was to be determined by
the President with the Commission's advice. While few were
willing to challenge merit hiring principles, department and
agency heads often resented having their actions restricted
and monitored. This caused the system's expansion to be
slow. Many jobs were added to the "classified service"
(i.e., positions subject to entrance by competitive examina-
tion under the Civil Service Law) at the end of a President's
term.   This "blanketing in" allowed incumbents (who had en-
tered from outside the classified service, often with politi-
cal clearance) to join the classified ranks which preserved
them from replacement by other political appointees with a
change in administration.
     Increased civil service coverage depended upon the
interest and efforts of the Presidents, which presented (and
still present) a dilemma; the spoils system must not return,
yet the politically faithful must be rewarded. This caused
particular problems for presidents such as Theodore Roosevelt,
who had been a Civil Service Commissioner before being elected
President; Woodrow Wilson, a former Vice President of the Na-
tional Civil Service Reform League which pressed for a strong
merit system, whose party had not been in office for 16 yearE;
and Dwight Eisenhower, who took office after 20 years of op-
posing party control, during which tremendous growth in Fed-
eral employment had taken place resulting from the creation
of many new agencies to meet depression and war emergencies.
Many of these agencies were originally excepted from the com-
petitive service, temporarily lowering the percentage of
covered employees, and were brought into the system under the
Ramspeck Act of 1940 which authorized greatly extended Civil
Service Commission coverage and jurisdiction. By 1952 over
85 percent of all Government positions were in the classified
service. Currently about 93 percent of all Federal civilian
positions are under a merit system--of which 62 percent are
under civil service jurisdiction.
     Unless an executive branch job is specifically excepted
by law or by Commission action, it is presumed to be in the
competitive service and subject to civil service rules.

     The Congress has excepted over 900,000 positions.
Included are the U.S. Postal Service (excepted since July
1971), which employs over 20 percent of all Federal em-
ployees, most positions in the legislative and judicial

APPENDIX IV                                       APPENDIX IV

branch, and among others, positions in the Foreign Service,
the Tennessee Valley Authority, the Federal Bureau of
Investigation, the Atomic Energy Commission, and the Public
Health Service Commissioned Corps.

     Concerned by the number of oepaLate personnel systems,
in 1972 the Senate Committee on Post Office and Civil Service
asked the Commission to report on the reasons for the excep-
tions and whether there was need for continuing the status.
The Committee wrote:

     "Each time we consider legislation affecting
     Government employment in general, we must take
     into account, or make allowances for, different
     systems without really considering why the dif-
     ferences are necessary."
Excepted agency responses -" the Commission's requests for
information strescsd t'e importance of flexibility in re-
cruitment, selection, appointment, and removal. The Com-
misSion, reporting to the Senate Committee, acknowledged:

     "It is to be expected that no agency wants to
     forego freedom to select, promote, and separate
     employees according to policy adopted by the
     agency and come under the policy and procedural
     restrictions of another agency."
In their concluding comments they said,

     "To enable the competitive service to better
     meet the legitimate needs of agencies, the
     Commission believes that, from the technical
     point of view of public personnel managemein.,
     further modification in the characteristics
     of the competitive service may generally be
     considered preferable to the exception of
     agencies or segments of agencies from the
     competitive service."

     Exemptions granted by administrative action ,-f
the Commission are:
     -- Schedule A, positions other than those of a con-
        fidential or policy-determining character for which
        it is not practical to examine.  (This category in-
        cludes attorneys who are exempted by appropriation
        acts prohibiting use of funds to examine for
        attorney positions.)

APPENDIX IV                                       APPENDIX IV

     -- Schedule B, which are positions other than those of a
        confidential or policy-determining character for
        which it is not practical to hold a competitive
     -- Schedule C, positions of a confidential or policy-
        determining character.
     -- Noncareer executive assignment positions in grades 16,
        17, and 18, which involve advocating administratior
        programs and participating in po-icy determination
        or advising the President and political appointees.
     --Civil Service Rule VIII, which cogors overseas
       positions mostly held by noncitizens.
(See p. 27 for chart on distribution of Federal employees.)
     Employees in most excepted merit system agencies and
positions, although not in the competitive service, have
some assurance of continued employment regardless of changes
in political leadership, provided their work is satisfactory.
Agreements also exist between various merit systems which
permit transfer of employees between systems.

     General personnel laws cover varying numbers of em-
ployees. For example:

     --The Incentive Awards Act of 1954 covers 99 percent
       of all Federal employees. The 1 percent not covered
       work for the Tennessee Valley Authority, which has
       its own incentive system authorized by a different
     -- The 1954 Group Life Insurance Act provides that
        virtually all nontemporary employees are automati-
        cally covered unless they do not want to be included.
     --The Retirement Act covers 89 percent of all employees
       and is the largest of many Federal retirement systems.
       Social Security covers 10 percent and the Foreign
       Service Retirement System the TVA Reti;ement Sys-
       tem, and other systems cover the remaining 1 percent.
    --The Annual and Sick Leave Act of 1951 covers 89 per-
      cent of all Federal employees; most of the remaining
      11 percent receive vacation and sick leave under
      different laws.

APPENDIX IV                                                                   APPENDIX IV

       -- The Health Benefits Act of 1959 covers 81 percent of
          all Federal employees with a health benefits program
          in which participation is voluntary.
       -- About 69 percent of all Federal employees are covered
          by the Performance Rating Act of 1$50, which requires
          that employees be given a periodic eating of their
       -- Fifty-one percent of all Federal employees have their
          positions classified according to their duties and
          responsibilities as required by the Classification
          Act of 1949, as amended.

                                       JUNE 1976

MERIT SYSTEM                                                                             38%
                                                                                     OR 1,094,6M
                                                                                   EXCEPTED FROM
                 OR 1,786,000 IN                          .. PSAL

                                                                              249,300 OTHER
                                                                          C   POSITIONS EXCEPTED
                                                                              BY STATUTE

                                                                          70,100 EXCEPTED
                                                                          UNDER RULE VIII

                                                                    3,200 EXCEPTE)
                                                                    UNDER SCHEDULE "B"
                 95,300 EXCEPTED
                 UNDER SCHEDULE "A'"
                                                            1,000 EXCEPTED UNDER
                                                            SCHEDULC "C"

APPENDIX V                                       APPENDIX V


     Major recommendations for personnel management change
have focused on trends in labor-management relations and
the Commission's roles in two areas--merit hiring and the
appeals system.

     As of November 1976, 1,190,478 lonpostal Federal em-
ployees (58%) were represented by unions in exclusive bar-
gaining units. Of these, 1,059.663 (52% of nonpostal Fed-
eral employees) were under collective bargaining agreements.

     In 1883, when the Pendleton Act passed and created the
civil service, Federal employees were not unionized with the
exception of a few craft and postal workers. Federal em-
ployees' legal rights to organize and to petition the Con-
gress were sanctioned in 1912 with the passage of the Lloyd-
LaFollette Act. From that time until 1960, union activity
centered around promoting legislation, such as the Retire-
ment Act of 1920 and the Classfication Act of 1923, to bene-
fit the Federal work force.
     Labor unions in the public and private sectors grew
rapidly in the 1930s, with Federal unionization increases
greatest in jobs that were also most organized in the pri-
vate sector. During this time, although the Federal Gov-
ernment encouraged, and in fact stated in legislation that
"wages, hours, and uther terms anJ conditions of employment
should be negotiable between private sector management and
unions," organizing Government employees was opposed. One
of the strongest advocates of unions in the i ivate sector,
President Franklin D. Roosevelt, at one time said,
     "The very nature and purposes of government make it
     impossible for administration officials Lo represent
     fully or to bind the employer in mutual discussions
     with government employee organizations."
This is a view still held by many people.
     From 1948 to 1960 bills seeking collective bargaining
for Federal employees were introduced in each congressional
session; lacking strong Administration support, they never
passed.  In 1962, on the recommendation of a Task Force on
Employee Management Relations in the Federal Service, a

APPENDIX V                                        APPENDIX V

Government-wide policy on relationships between employee or-
ganizations and agency management was established under Exe-
cutive Order 10988. It provided for a Decentralized system
of bargaining units in each agency under the guidance of
Ft, Commission, established standards fo' several forms of
union recognition (exclusive, formal, anc informal) and
encouLaged participation in employee organizations. Again
reflecting the recommendations of a Presidential Review
Committee on Employee Management Relations in the Federal
service, Executive Order 11491 was issued in 1969. This
Executive order, still in effect as amended in 1971 by
Executive Order 11616 and in 1975 by Executive Order 11838,
established a central body, the Federal Labor Relations
Council, to administer the program and make final decisions
on policy questions and disputed matters. The Federal
Mediation and Conciliation Service and the Federal Service
Impasses Panel are to resolve negotiation disputes and im-
passes. By locating policy-setting in the Council, the
Coanmission's role was revised to make its functions those
of providing advice, technical assistance, and inforimation
services to agencies.

Current status

     Under Executive orders, the Federal labor relations
program and the scope of collective bargaining have steadily
broadened. Government and labor representatives, however,
now tend to agree that a need exists for comprehensive
legislation to govern this important area of employment.

     In his 1975 monograph, former Commission Executive
Director Rosen writes that new substantive changes by Exe-
cutive order are unlikely and a legislative base for labor
relations should be considered.
     The Commission has supported labor relations adminis-
tration by Executive order, but former Chairman Hampton, in a
1976 speech, said,

     "As far as the Federal service is concerned, the recent
     changes in the Executive Order, as far as I know now,
     represent the limits of what can be done by executive
     action. We can learn more about the problems as a
     result of these changes, but in the very near future
     we must face up to the problem that further improve-
     ments in the system can only be achieved by legisla-

APPENDIX V                                        APPENDIX V

     Several labor relations bills have been introduced and
extensive hearings have been held in recent sessions of the
Congress. Although personnel operations would not greatly
change under some of the bills, other proposals would re-
sult in substantial alterations, particularly iL the Commis-
sion's roles.
     Most bills have proposed a Federal Labor Relations
Board or Authority which would make determinations on person-
nel management policies and regulations that relate to more
than one agency. The composition, powers, and duties of the
proposed administrative authorities vary and its relationship
to and impact on e.'isting civil service laws are uncertain.
In comments on bills before the House Post Office and Civil
Service Committee, the Commission questioned whether the pro-
posals would seriously damage its capability "* * * to func-
tion and manage as the central personnel agency of the gov-
ernment and to administer the Civil Service merit principles."
Others have noted that labor-management relations programs
have already become an "add on." A basic concern of thcse
involved is to insure that a second personnel structure is
not superimposed on the existing one, should legislation be



     Shortly after passage of the Civil Service Act, some
agencies removed employees for unknown reasons. This often
amounted to a return of the "spoils system."    To counter
these actions, an 1897 Executive order  for the first time
gave employees the right to know why an  action was taken
and to appeal in their own defense.
      Competitors for employment soon gained an additional
right--the right to have their ratings reviewed by an exa-
miner who had not participated in the original markings. A
part-time employee of the Commission Examining Division
handled all such reviews, but as the number of examinations
and competitors increased, appeals were moved to a Chief
Examiner's Office; as volume again increased, they were moved
to a separate Commission appeals unit.
     The 1912 Lloyd-LaFollette Act, in addition to giving
employees individually and collectively the right to petition
the Congress and to belong to unions, also required that
agencies give written notice of reasons and time for an an-
swer if an employee was to be fired. This legislation

APPENDIX V                                        APPENDIX V

created job retention appeals channels in each agency.
     The Commission, in the 1920s, organized the Division of
Investigations and Review, which held the major functions
of appeals and investigations. Its appellate jurisdiction
extended to examination matters only. No formally established
appellate body in the Commission considered other complaints
until the 3940s.
     In 1944, the Veterans' Preference Act established the
right of veterans to appeal removals and certain other adverse
actions by the hiring agency to the Commission. The next
major appeals cl. nge, Executive Order 10987 of January 17,
1962, established oroad guidelines for appeals systems within
individual agencies and under Commission regulations. Non-
veterans were given rights of appeal to the Commission equiv-
alent to veterans in the companion Executive Order 10988 of
the same date, and carried through in its successor Execu-
tive Order 11491 of October 29, 1969.

     Questions on the placement and handling of Commission
quasi-judicial functions led to studies in 1972 and 1973
by the Administrative Conference of the United States, GAO,
and the Nader Public Interest Research Group. At the same
time, the Commission conducted its own study resulting in
the establishment of the Federal Employee Appeals Authority
(FEAA) in 1974. This group reports directly to the Commis-
sioners, as does the Appeals Review Board, which considers
requests, under specific limited criteria, to reopen cases
decided by the FEAA.

Current status

     Our recent letter to former Chairman Hampton listed more
than 20 types of actions and decisions appealable under separate
statutory procedures. Our discussions with agency officials
and employee representatives indicated that the statutory
appeals process is generally perceived to be overly com-
plicated and needs change. The letter to the former Chairman
further stated,

     "In spite of actions taken by the Commission in recent
     years to improve the appellate process, the objectivity
     and independence of the program are often questioned.
     Whether rightly or wrongly, the appeals program is
     frequently viewed as management oriented.

     "Union representatives generally would prefer that all
     matters be subject to negotiated grievance procedures

APPENDIX V                                        APPENDIX V

     and arbitration which is viewed as a fast, fair and
     impartial third party review process.
     "As you know, proposed labor relations legislation
     would make it possible to process matters not sub-
     ject to statutory appeal procedures under negotiated
     grievance systems. Those employees not covered by a
     negotiated procedure presumably could still use the
     statutory appeal procedures."
     Other recent studies and hearings have also discussed
removing the appeals process from the Commission. Former
Commission Executive Director Rosen sees no need to separate
the Commission's roles in appeals from its other responsi-
bilities and believes that the FEAA and the Appeals Review
Board, within the Commission and responsible to the Commis-
sioners, have enough independence.

     The proposed Civil Service Amendments of 1976 (H.R.
12080) included provisions removing certain kinds of appeals
from che Commission. Testifying on the provision:
     -- Then-Chairman Hampton supported the objective of greater
        independence to appeals but urged it be achieved
        by establishing a statutory board within the Com-
        mission to adjudicate all appeals rather than only
        the few types mentioned in the bill.
     -- The President of the International Personnel Manage-
        ment Association agreed with former Chairman Hampton and
        suggested that the Commission's technical expertise
        would not be available to an independent board.

     --The President of the American Federation of Govern-
       ment Employees proposed two new juridical Commissioners
       who, together with the Commission Chairman, would serve
       as an administrative court for all Federal personnel

     -- The National Federation of Federal Employees strongly
        supported removing appeals from the Commission to
        prevent "the judge from aLso being a juror."

    -- The National Academy of Public Administracion represen-
       tative urged consideration of establishing a new and
       separate agency for the monitoring, investigating,
       and adjudicating functions, but added that this pro-
       posed change

APPENDIX V                                            APPENDIX V

             "would constitut:e only a rather small and partial
             response to the very great problems which con-
             front the U.S. Civil Service and the adminis-
             tration of personnel activities. Further,
             there is some danger that establishment of such
             a board at this time might be construed as the
             total and only organizational change that is
             desirable thus inhibiting further study and con-
     -- National Civil Service League officers, while be-
        lieving that credible appeals function performance
        stands in considerable tension with the Commission's
        role as the President's personnel administrator,
        urged a more thorough evaluation of the Federal per-
        sonnel system before creating a new appeals board.
     An independent Personnel Review Board to adjudicate
appeals was proposed in a draft bill written in accordance
with consensus reached at a Bureaucrat Magazine symposium
called to discuss needed improvements in the present per-
sonnel systems.

      Recent merit system investigations and recommenaations
for personnel systems changes were directed primarily to-
ward abuses in competitive service Federal hiring. Because
the questions raised in connection with recruiting proce-
dures--basically the roles and relationship of the Commis-
sion and of the agencies--were typical of those raised in
other functional areas, only recruiting problems are covered


     The merit system of 1883 was created to neutralize the
effects of the spoils system. Minimal standards were devel-
oped which allowed for a selective effort but no positive
recruitment. Vacancies were announced and more than enough
applicants presented themselves. Public employees varied
in ages and backgrounds. Apportionment provisions in the
law assured wide geographical distribution.
     The first need for large numbers and specific types of
employees came at the start of World War I, and recruiting
rules were relaxed to meet the emergency. Procedures were

APPENDIX V                                        APPENDIX V

Mjain modified and recruiting efforts redirected to accommo-
dac* the Government needs during the depression. Recruiting
in tne 1930s also changed to attempt to attract the
"intellectually elite." The first junior professional
and managerial examination came at this time to bring
college graduates into the Government.
     A great demand for public service employees during World
War II required that the Commission institute new recruiting
methods for all types of employees. Commission authority
to handle increased war recruiting activity was in turn
delegated to its regional offices and to agency headquarters
and regional offices.
     Agencies continued some separate recruiting activities
after World War II with the Commission expanding efforts
to attract special groups--particularly college students,
upper-level candidates, and professional and scientific per-
sonnel. Centralized Commission control over registers,
certification, and the "rule of three" procedures which had
been relaxed were brought back. Operating agency officials,
accustomed to exercising discretion in recruiting and hiring,
were allowed to handle primarily procedural details and this
led to increasing unhappiness.
     The Korean War created a need to expand civilian person-
nel again. Broad agency appointing authority was reinstated,
primarily by the Defense agencies. One major difference
from past wartime easing of regulations was the adoption of
the Whitten amendment limiting the size of the permanent
competitive service. Those recruited were hired under tem-
porary appointments and many later had to leave the service
under a reduction in force. To stabilize the career service
during expansion and contraction, the Whitten amendment was
modified in 1954 and a career conditional system was set
up which remains in effect.
     Two other recruiting changes took place about this time.
Agency recruiters under the Commission leadership visited
college campuses and urged students to apply for Government
service, and a new examination, the Federal Service Entrance
Examination (FSEE), which consolidated over 100 different
examinations into one, was introduced. To attract engineers,
physical scientists, and others in demand occupations, the
Commission was allowed to set some pay rates above the mini-

     The Bureau of Recruiting and Examining was established
in 1961 and a nationwide network of area offices was set
up to improve recruiting and examining practices. Services

                                                     APPENDIX V

 offered included job information centers
                                           and automated pro-
 cedures which gave any person from any section
 try a chance to apply for a Federal job.         of the coun-
 changes resulted from equal employment opportunityrecruitment
 Affirmative action goals                             laws.
                          required more positive recruitment
 of minorities and women. New testing ideas
                                              led to the Pro-
 fessional and Administrative Career Examination
 recently replaced the FSEE as the primary         (PACE), which
 service entry for college graduates. The   method  of Federal
 intended to better identify abilities needed            is
                                               for successful
 performance on a wider range of entry jobs.
 Current status

      In recruitment as in other functional areas,
mission has many roles. It issues recruiting       the Com-
gives recruiting advice and technical assistance,
a nationwide network of Federal Job Information    operates
toll-free wide-area telephone services, and      Centers  and
                                             processes appli-
cant information under a new System of Comprehensive
tions for Recruiting and Examining. The               Opera-
                                          Commission also
monitors and evaluates agency recruiting,
ing regulations, and adjudicates recruitingenforces recruit-
                                             decisions when
there are problems.

     Interagency recruiting councils coordinate
visits, conduct training workshops              campus
                                   for new recruiters, and
inform agencies of recruiting and hiring
                                         trends. Because
the Commission and agencies are "partners"
ice recruitment guidelines, many roles are under civil serv-
agency personnel offices.                  duplicated by

      Agency managers establish long- and short-term
requirements, and report projected                    staffing
                                    needs to the Commission
under the Managed Approach to Recruiting
are also authorized to recruit to carry program. Agencies
                                         out staffing plans.
Agency recruits must meet Commission requirements,
on a Commission register, and be certified           be listed
order before they can be hired. Agencies    eligible  in rank
using Commission registers under merit promotion      without
                                                  plans and
are allowed, in cases of great shortage
                                         or under the "quality
approach" (i.e., the case of an extremely
to hire a recruit without going through    talented person)
                                         the registers.
     Other employees may be recruited without
                                               competing with
applicants on Commission registers if they
                                            eitered Federal
service in agencies excepted from competitive
cedures, provided the Commission has, by       examining pro-
nized that particular agency's merit system          recog-
                                             as compatible
with that of the Federal service generally.
cies cite recruiting flexibilities as a great Excepted agen-
                                               advantage in
hiring well-qualified candidates for Federal
APPENDIX V                                         APPENDIX V

     Executive development programs which are geared to re-
cruiting and preparing employees for top jobs are partially
an OMB responsibility. OMB's job is to develop new programs
to recruit for the upper ranks of the civil service. OMB
also influences recruiting in setting manpower ceilings and
imposing budget limitations.
     Reactions to recently exposed merit system abuses led
to a wide range of recommendations to improve recruiting
(and hiring) pr:ocesses and to prevent further political
incursions into the career systems. Suggested changes have
included giving major responsibilities to the Commission,
hoping to insure wide recruiting; retaining the present
partnership with minor modifications and controls; and giving
agencies complete recruiting authority including direct-
hire responsibility, with safeguards to insure the applica-
tion of sound merit principles.

     In response to the recommendations of the Sharon Merit
Staffing Review Team report, the Commission has recently
made some changes in recruiting. The new procedures in-
struct Commission offices to

     "--coordinate closely with hiring agencies in
     developing plans for additional publicity and re-
     cruitment as needed, with a view toward assuring
     optimum results for the resources expended, in-
     cluding assurance that positive efforts are made
     to tap likely t,-urces of minority and women appli-
     cants; and
     "--waive requirements for additional publicity and
     issue recruiting or direct-hire authorities in
     cases where specific publicity within the preceding
     6 months sufficient to assure adequate public notice
     has failed to produce a sufficient supply of well-
     qualified candidates."
     A 1976 Federal personnel directors' conference dis-
cussing procedures questioned whether a practical division
of recruiting might be to make the Commission responsible
for recruitment publicity and the agencies responsible
for all actual onsite recruitment. The conference dis-
cussion paper states, "If recruiting or direct-hire au-
thorities were authorized, these could enhance the tools
agency recruiters have at their disposal."

APPENDIX V                                       APPENDIX V

     Mr. Rosen, in his monograph, proposed

     "* * * requiring that the Job Information Centers
     system be used as an integral part of the recruiting
     process for all positions in the competitive service
     and for those positions excepted from the competi-
     tive service by statute whose incumbents are per-
     mitted by the Commission to transfer into the service
     without competitive examination."
     Former Commission Vice-Chairman Sheldon, in a recent speech,
urged redefining Commission-agency roles and developing mure
effective coordination. She suggested changes in "name re-
quest" procedures, saying,

          "Once agency officials have spent their time
     and money on recruiting, they cannot reasonably be
     expected to remain neutral in trying to get their
     candidate certified and appointed. Public personnel
     policy ought to be compatible with the realities of
     human behavior." 1/
She proposed to use name request procedures only when the
Commission has authorized agency recruitment under criteria
which clearly indicates a need for direct agency involvement.
     The Commisison's Bureau of Recruiting and Examining is
now conducting a long-range study on recruiting.

1/Through the 3rd quarter of fiscal year 1976, 53 percent
  of all mid-level and 73.9 percent of the senior-level
  selections were through name request recruiting and
  certification procedures.

APPENDIX VI                                       APPENDIX VI

     The Sharon Merit Staffing Review ream Report, a Commis-
sion self-inquiry which examined problems directly related to
Commission and agency staffing procedures, recommended revi-
sions in day-to-day Commission operations and practices to
remedy political incursions into merit hiring. The Commission
has tightened some procedures, as recommended by task forces
set up to act on the Sharon report, by revise. ig staffing op--
erations, monitoring and evaluating Commission and agency
practices closer, and initiating further study of some issues.
Additional changes which require action by the Commissioners
or legislation are expected. Although the original Commis-
sion response to the Sharon report acknowledged that some of
the problems resulted from emphasis on their consultant role
and deemphasis of their policeman role, the question of
whether these two roles are compatible was not addressed.
Very few of the Sharon task force proposals require changes
in Commission organization.
     A 1976 speech by former Chairman Hampton suggested it may
be time for a "complete reassessment of what the Civil Service
Commission should be." He said:

          "About the Civil Service Commission itself--the
     Commission is continually being called upon to perform
     a variety of roles, some of which are unrelated to our
     basic mission. The CSC i3 viewed by some as having au-
     thorities and responsibilities it does not have, and it
     is viewed by others as exercising authorities they do
     not believe we do have. There is controversy about
     having both aa enforcement role and a judicial role.
     Additionally, there is controversy about having both
     a personnel advisory function as well as an enforcement
          "The Commission is viewed by some as not having
     enough independence and by others as having too much
     independence. In between various assumptions, too
     many people want us to have roles and functions that
     do not fall into any particular mold but, from my
     point of view, there needs to be a complete reassess-
     ment of what the Civil Service Commission should be.
     I would hope that in the near future there would be
     an effort to examine all sides of these issues."
     A"thorough appraisal of the organization for executive
branch personnel administration"was conducted in 1975 by
Bernard Rosen, former Commission Executive Director, at the

APPENDIX VI                                       APPENDIX VI

request of the House Post Office and Civil Service Committee.
He concludes, in a monograph written for the Committee, that:
     -- The merit system is serving the people well.

     -- The Commission, in its present state, would provide a
        sound legal and organizational structure for dealing
        with Federal personnel management if it had greater
        and direct enforcement authority, direct responsibi-
        lity to the President, increased accountability to the
        Congress, greater professional independence, and ne-
        cessary resources.
     -- The Commission's many roles, particularly the two
        which have often been called inherently conflicting--
        protector of the merit system and leader in personnel
        management--not only do not conflict but are mutually

     Under Mr. Rosen's legislative proposals for a Civil
Service Reform Act, the structuve of the Commission would re-
main as it is but the relationships to t:,e President, OMB,
the Congress, and to both excepted agencies and those under
Commission jurisdiction would be changed. He urged legisla-
tion which would:
     -- Remove OMB's personnel functions stemming from Reor-
        ganization Plan No. 2 of 1970 and clarify the Commis-
        sion's role as the central personnel agency (a role
        not now assigned by legislation). He cited problems
        with OMB which he believes weaken the professional
        independence of the Commission.
     -- Require the Commission to present its views and its
        budget and ceiling requests not only to the President
        and OMB but also directly to appropriate congressional

     -- Change the Commissioners' terms of appointment--their
        length, salaries, and the power to remove them.
     -- Broaden Commission authority and responsibility for
        some areas over ll executive branch personnel.

     -- Strengthen the Commission's roles in oversight of
        merit system integrity.

     -- Broaden the scope of collective bargaining creating a
        statutory base for labor relations.

APPENDIX VI                                      APPENDIX VI

     He concludes that the appeals system (the Federal Em-
ployees Appeals Authority and the Appeals Review Board in-
stituted in 1974) appears to have earned the confidence of
appellants and agency officials, and makes no recommendation
for change in that area.
     No bill has yet been written to implement Mr. Rosen's
specific recommendations.
     One bill, the Civil Service Amendments of 1976 (H.R.
12080, later amended as H.R. 13891) resulted from 1975-76
House Post Office and Civil Service Committee hearings and
investigation of the merit system. T'Ia bill proposed to
remove one role from the Commission- its quasi-judicial
role in certain appeals. It streng.nened the Commission's
regulatory and enforcement role by putting into law authority
now derived from Executive orders.
     The bill would not only have changed some of the Com-
mission's roles but also suggested changes in relationships
although somewhat different from those suggested by Mr. Rosen.
It transferred certain authorities for regulating the merit
system from the President to the Commission. The intent of
this provision, as described by Chairman Henderson, was as
Mr. Rosen's, to avoid having the Commission "go through any
Prtsident's agency like OMB to get those rules and regulations
cleared for implementation."
     In some other shifts in relationships, the bill assigned
responsibility for porconnel management to agency heads, as-
signed merit system compliance responsibility to agency per-
sonnel directors, who would report directly to the agency
head, and gave agency heads rather than the Commission au-
thority to approve qualifications of their candidates for
noncareer executive assignments.    The bill, which was never
reported out of committee, did  not  include changes in labor
management relations.  The lame  committee  did, however, have
other bills before it on that  subject.

     Hearings on H.R. 12080 brought out several other plans
for reorganization of Federal personnel management.
      The American Federation of Government Employees (AFGE)
testitied on a plan they had proposed earlier which called for
e five-member Commission with two separate groups of two Com-
:nissioners of equal rank, each group sharing the Commission
Chairman as a member. One group. chosen on a nonpartisan
basis, would have two juridical members, and they, with the
Chairman, would deal exclusively with judicial matters.

APPENDIX VI                                      APPENIDIX VI

The other co-equal body, composed of the Chairman plus two
members, would be chosen on a bipartisan basis as is done et
present and would handle administrative-legislative matters
much as the Commission does today. AFGE also strongly urged
renioving personnel authority from OMB.

     The International Personnel Management Association (IPMA)
also testified at hearings on H.R. 12080 on possible personnel
systems changes. IPMA's president suggested that the erosion
of the merit system was not necessarily the result of an un-
workable system but rather the malfunctioning of the system.
She recommended that the Commission retain its many roles but
that merit safeguards be strengthened. IPMA, most of whose
members are personnel specialists, also recommended that
agency personnel directors report directly to agency heads--
increasing the top management's responsibility for personnel
nanagement--and that the appeals process be simplified and
improved by vesting appeals authority in one body. with that
body retained in the Commission.

     The National Civil Service League, testifying on H.R.
12080, suggested a far-reaching examination of the existing
personnel systems but also offered a tentative proposal for
further study: placing personnel management functions under
a single head in the Executive Office of the President and
assigning investigative, ombudsman, and appeal functions to a
separate agency. This proposal has been studied by past com-
missions, and has had support from public administration
groups. According to League testimony, a central pers)nnel
department unambiguously within the executive branch reflects
the League's basic conviction that merit lies in allowing
the Executive and his managers to fully exercise their execu-
tive and managerial powers and responsibilities. Recognizing
recent serious abuses of executive power, the League said
they perhaps resulted from inflexibilities of the system, and
thus, despite the abuses, flexibility within its le3itimate
limits is still called for.
     A National Academy of Public Administration panel, report-
ing to the Senate Select Watergate Committee in 1974, recom-
mended that "appropriate bodies in the Congress conduct or
advocate and support a thorough and comprehensive study of
the Federal Civil Service and consider and act upon The rec-
ommendations which it produces."
     National Academy members did not present a specific
model for change when testifying on H.R. 12080, but said that
the bill constituted only a small and partial response to the
very great problems which confront the civil service and the

APPENDIX VI                                      APPENDIX VI

administration of personnel activities. They feared that
changes made under the bill might be construed as the total
and only desirable organizational changes, and thus inhibit
further study and consideration. They urged that action on
the bill be delayed pending reexamination of the whole per-
sonnel system.
     A 1976 National Academy of Public Administration panel
report on reorganization of the executive branch again rec-
ommended a thorough reexamination of the Federal personnel

     Two other recent reports are:
     -- The Blueprint for Civil Service Reform, a report by
        the Fund for Constitutional Government (a group sup-
        ported by a foundation active in liberal causes), pro-
        poses revisions in both Commission procedures and
        structure. In addition to recommending that the Com-
        mission and the Congress study ways to tighten or eli-
        minate civil service loopholes, the report recommends
        removing merit system policin' functions from the Com-
        mission, claiming, contrary to Mr. Rosen's monograph
        statement, that enforcement clashes witi personnel
        management duties. This study also proposes a new
        judicial body to deal with merit system violations.
        The report does not discuss whether other employee ap-
        peals would be brought to the proposed new body.

     -- An informal draft bill to "strengthen the protection
        and management of the Federal merit system" was pro-
        posed as a followup to a Bureaucrat Magazine symposium
        on the Federal service. Fourteen persons participated,
        all but ore of whom had served in the Federal Govern-
        ment in both career and noncareer positions. The draft
        bill, similar to the Clark bill of 1958, provided for
        (1j a Personnel Review Board to audit administration
        of civilian personnel laws and regulations and to hear
        appeals, and (2) an Office of Personnel Management in
        the Executive Office of the President to handle the
        present duties of the Civil Service Commission with
        the exception of the appeals functions which are trans-
        ferred to the Board.