JOB EVALUATION POLICY ACT OF 1970

• Document Type: CREST
• Collection: General CIA Records
• Document Number (FOIA) /ESDN (CREST): CIA-RDP72-00337R000400100004-0
• Release Decision: RIFPUB
• Original Classification: K
• Document Page Count: 9
• Document Creation Date: December 16, 2016
• Document Release Date: April 15, 2005
• Sequence Number: 4
• Publication Date: February 3, 1970
• Content Type: REGULATION

Approved For Release
UR 4~ ' T1A- - 37R0004001000
FILE COPY
91ST CONGRESS HOUSE Or REPRESENTATIVES REPORT
2d Session No. 91-823
FEBRUARY 3, 1970.-Committed to the Committee of the Whole House on the
State of the Union and ordered to be printed
Mr. HANLEY, from the Committee on Post Office and Civil Service,
submitted the following
REPORT
The Committee on Post Office and Civil Service, to whom was
referred the bill (H.R. 13008) to improve position classification
systems within the executive branch, and for other purposes, having
considered the same, report favorably thereon with amendments and
recommend that the bill as amended do pass.
The amendments are as follows :
Page 1, line 4, strike out "1969" and insert in lieu thereof "1970";
Page 3, line 19, immediately before the semicolon insert a comma
and the words "to the greatest extent practicable";
Page 6, strike out lines 14 to 17, inclusive, and insert in lieu thereof
the following:
(c) The Commission shall submit to the Committees on
Post Office and Civil Service of the Senate and House of
Representatives once each calendar month, or at such
other intervals as may be directed by those committees,
or either of them, an interim progress report on the then
current status and results of the activities of the Commis-
sion under this act, together with the then current findings
of the Commission.
The first amendment is a technical amendment changing the title
of the act to "The Job Evaluation Policy Act of 1970."
37-008
Approved For Release 2005/04/27
000400100004-0
F91 GUN
 Approved For Releasdr OG5/04/27 CIA-6V2-00337R000400100004-0
The second amendment gives flexibility to the Commission in recom-
mending necessary exemptions to the coordinated plan envisaged by
the act. As originally written, II.R. 13008 appeared to require a coor-
dinated plan without exemptions. The committee felt that some
exemptions may be desirable, though they should be fully justified in
the Commission's final report.
The third amendment requires that the Commission report monthly,
or as otherwise directed, to the House and Senate Post Office and
Civil Service Committees. The intent is to provide these committees
with the information necessary to assure the Co ess that the de-
velopment of the recommendations required by IIR.13008 is carried
on in a completely objective manner by the Civil Service Commission.
It is the purpose of this bill to provide the general framework for the
reform of )osition classification systems throughout the executive
branch of t ne Federal Government. The bill does not change existing
classification laws, but establishes the basic guidelines within which
the Civil Service Commission shall prepare legislation to be presented
to Congress in the future.
H.R. 13008 establishes the intent of Congress that, to the greatest
extent possible, there should be a coordinated classification plan
applicable to all positions in the executive branch, utilizing various
methods of position classification, under the general supervision of
the Civil Service Commission. The Commission is given the authority
to study all executive branch classification systems, including those
not currently under its jurisdiction. Tho plan will be developed by a
separate unit within the Commission and responsible directly to the
Commissioners. Provisions are made for effective consultation with
Congress, departments and agencies, employee unions, and profes-
sional organizations throughout the development of the plan. H.R..
13008 requires that the Commission report to Congress within 2
years after date of enactment, after which the special unit will be
abolished.
General
Position classification is the keystone of sound personnel manage-
ment. A good position classification program should be far more than
it mechanism to set pay for various positions. Ideally, the process by
which the duties and responsibilities of it position are determined, and
the position is thereby assigned a relative value, should have an impor-
tant role in such diverse functions as budgeting, manpower allocation,
determination of recruitment and training needs, performance eval-
uation, and many others. Unfortunately, the position classification
programs of many departments and agencies are being used almost
solely as a pay-setting device.
,Job classification is a complex matter which has serious implica-
tions both for departments and agencies which must organize work
efficiently and to employees whose entire careers can hinge on the
classification of their positions. While the public, and many Govern-
ment officials, do not understand the intricacies of job classification,
classification is nonetheless extremely important. to the efficient use
of a large percentage of our tax.dol}ari.,
?sir. n. Rept. 91-823
Approved For Release 2QA5/04/Ilft : CIA-RDP72-00337R000400100004-0
4 ~~
 Approved For Release 2005/04/27: CIA-RDP72-00337R000400100004-0
3
The classification system which applies to the greatest number of
Federal employees was devised more than 40 years ago. While this
system has been expanded and improved considerably, major changes
are needed so that it can better meet the needs of modern
government.
The need for flexibility
In devising the plan mandated by this bill, the Civil Service
Commission should carefully evaluate and analyze all methods of
position classification. The resulting system, furthermore, should not
rely on any one method, but should be so constructed as to utilize
all appropriate methods which can then be coordinated with or
linked to a general set of classification principles. It is emphatically
not the intention of this legislation to force all Federal positions
into one monolithic classification mold, but rather to build into a
coordinated classification system the flexibility which the general
schedule system has heretofore lacked,
No exemptions
H.R. 13008 exempts no agencies or occupational groups from
its provisions. Many of the current exemptions to chapter 51 of
title 5 date back to the passage of the original Classification Act of
1923. While these, and more recent exemptions, may have been
perfectly justified when they were originally proposed, doubts have
been expressed as to whether some exemptions should continue to
exist even under the present general schedule classification system.
The committee has not taken a stand on which exemptions should
be maintained and which are no longer justified. However, develop-
ment of the new plan should include careful study of all existing
exemptions. The report to be submitted to Congress within 2 years
after date of enactment should contain the result of these studies as
well as complete justification for any exemptions from the coordinated
system which the Commission decides to recommend.
Complete objectivity imperative
During the course of the hearings on H.R. 13008, several employee
organizations expressed some skepticism as to whether the Civil
Service Commission would possess sufficient objectivity to compe-
tently carry out its responsibilities under the bill. The committee
shares this concern, for on some occasions in the past, the Commis-
sion has been notably reluctant to recognize the need for change.
The committee, however, feels that there is no practical alternative
to lodging this responsibility within the Commission. Therefore,
H.R. 13008 establishes an independent unit responsible directly to
the Commissioners to develop the recommendations. This unit, it
must be emphasized, should have no formal connection with any
other bureau within the Commission, nor should there be even in-
formal control or supervision by any other Commission bureau.
The new unit should be staffed only by employees who should have
no responsibilities other than those assigned by the Director of the
unit, and every attempt should be made to draw as much of the staff
as possible from outside the Civil Service Commission. It would also
be preferable if the Director of the unit himself could be recruited
from outside the Commission, and, if possible, from outside the
Government. No resource, governmental or nongovernmental, should
be overlooked.
Approved For Release 2005/04/27 : CIA-RDP72-0035'0964b100004-0
 Approved For Release 2005/04/27 : CIA-RDP72-00337R000400100004-0
In formulating its recommendations, the Couuiussion should take
great pains to involve all appropriate departments and agencies,
employee unions, and professions organizations in every pyiase of
the rogram. The Commission should, to the greatest extent possible,
establish advisory groups consistuig of representatives of departments
and agencies to assist it in developing a mode of operation and for-
mulating the plan itself.
Employee organizations
11. R. 13009, as amended, requires that the Civil Service Commission
report monthly to the Senate and House Post Office and Civil Service
t'ommittecs. The committee seriously considered the establislunent
of an advisory committee consisting of employee unions and profes-
sional organizations. However, the committee felt that a small, effec-
tive advisory committee would be too restrictive in membership, and
it committee consisting of all appropriate organizations would be too
unwieldy to be effective.
Therefore, the committee concluded that the most effective way to
assure objectivity on the part of the Commission would be to require
the Commission to file monthly progress reports with the House and
Senate Post Office and Civil Service Committees which would be
Made available to all inter(-,ted parties. This committee intends
to use this provision as the foundation for monthly hearings on the
progress of the Commission's activities. During the course of these
regular hearing,, all interested organizations would be invited to
testify on the development of the Commission's recommendations,
and this testimony would be made public. Thus, the House and
Senate committee, will, in essence, by the advisory group.
Nevertheless, as directed in section 304(d), the Commission is
expected to frequently solicit the views of and consult with all appro-
priate employee organizations. A close working relationship with all
employee and professional organizations is essential to the develop-
nient of the recommendations required by H.R. 1300S.
Changing the job evaluation and ranking systems of the Federal
Government is a delicate and time-consuming task. It raises many
questions and doubts in the minds of employees subject to the sys-
tems. It breaks patterns of thought and action with which personnel
officials have become comfortable-perhaps too comfortable.-over the
past 47 years. Nevertheless, the task must be begun. H.R. 13008
represents the first legislative step toward much-needed and major
reforms in the stricture of and concepts behind job evaluation and
ranking as it is utilized in the executive branch. The end result will
hopefully be a system or systems which will provide greater cross-
agency equity and will recognize the need for modern and flexible
personnel management in the Federal Government today.
Origin of position classification by law
The first Classification Act, passed in 1923, was one of the most
significant milestones in the history of Federal personnel nia.nagenient.
'f'ire Classification Act of 1923 was the culmination of several years
Approved For Release 2005/04/27: CIA-RDP72-60'3-3'rT1 i0 400100004-0
 Approved For Release 2005/04/27 : CIA-RDP72-00337R000400100004-0
5
of study by Congress and the executive branch into the chaotic and
inconsistent classification and compensation practice extant in the
Government at that time.
The catalyst in the move toward a more comprehensible and con-
sistent system was the Congressional Joint Committee on Reclassifi-
cation of Salaries established in. 1919 by section 9, Public Law 65-314.
The Commission was "to investigate the rates of compensation paid
to civilian employees by the municipal government and the various
executive departments and other governmental establishments in the
District of Columbia, except the Navy Yard and the postal service,
and report by bill or otherwise as soon as practicable what reclassifica-
tion and readjustment of compensation should be made so as to pro-
vide uniform and equitable pay for the same character of employment
throughout the District of Columbia in the services enumerated."
The Classification Act of 1923
The Classification Act of 1923 established the basic principles upon
which classification is based today: (1) That there should be equal
pay for equal work, and. (2) that the basic unit for classification and
pay should be the position itself, rather than the incumbent of the
position. The classification methods developed pursuant to this act
are, essentially, the methods still used by the Civil Service Commission.
Originally, the 1923 act applied only to positions in Washington.
However, subsequent to that, it was applied sporadically to some
field installations. The Classification Act of 1949 provided that all
positions subject to it would be treated in the same way whether in
the District of Columbia or the field.
Exemptions from the Classification Acts
With the adoption of the Classification Act of 1923 and its sub-
sequent amendments, the Congress and the executive branch extended
the same ranking system to a majority of positions in the executive
branch. However, at the time of an subsequent to the passage of the
act, there were complaints from various departments and agencies that
the Classification Act was too rigid, for certain groups of positions, to
meet their personnel needs. Exemptions were made to provide more
flexibility in assignments and pay for the complaining agencies, and
separate ranking systems were authorized. Among the groups for which
separate authorizations were provided are the postal field service, the
Foreign Service, the Department of Medicine and Surgery in the
Veterans' Administration, the Public Health Service, the Atomic
Energy Commission, and the Tennessee Valley Authority. Except
for the Classification Act (general schedule), the systems are admin-
istered by the agencies in which they exist, with no review by the Civil
Service Commission. No effective provision has been made for assuring
consistency among the various systems in evaluating and ranking
positions.
Establishment of the Subcommittee on Position Classification
In 1967, the Post Office and Civil Service Committee established
the Subcommittee on Position Classification chaired by the Honorable
James M. Hanley of New York. The first activity of this subcommittee
was to hold hearings on various bills affecting classification in the
Postal Field Service. (See "Reclassification of Certain Positions in
H. Rcpt. 91-823
Approved For Release 2005/04/27 : CIA-RDP72-00337R000400100004-0
 Approved For Release 2005/04/27 : CIA-RDP72-00337R000400100004-0
6
the Postal Field Service," Committee on Post Office and Civil Service,
U.S. House of Reeresentatives, serial No. 90-13).
While the hearings centered on the postal field service, it soon
became clear that the subcommittee should conduct an extensive
investigation of position classification throughout the Federal Govern-
ment. The Post Office and Civil Service Committee authorized the
investigation, which commenced early in 1968.
The "Report on Job Evaluation and Ranking in the Federal Government"
The study was completed and published early in 1969. (See "Re ort
on Job Evaluation and Ranking in the Federal Government," H. Rep.
No. 91-28.) It was the first such study conducted by Congress since
the enactment of the Classification Act of 1923, and was the most
comprehensive study conducted by any group since the enactment of
the Classification Act of 1949.
In general, the study pinpointed serious dificiencies in three major
areas of classification. (1) It was felt that the structure of the general
schedule system was lacking the flexibility necessary to meet the
needs of modern government. (2) The existence of a multitude of
unrelated classification sy=stems throughout the Federal Government
resulted in significant and, in many cases, deletorious inconsistencies
in the methods of selection and appointment, promotion, conditions
of work. and paof employees in comparable positions. (3) The
administration of-classification systems specifically and the conduct
of personnel management generally needed to lie significantly im-
proved in all departments and agencies.
hear ?Igs
llettrim_s began on 1LR. 13008 on August 5, 1969, and were con-
cluded on December 16, 19G9. The Subcommittee on Position Classifi-
cation heard testimony from 58 witnesses representing 34 employee
unions, professional organizations, and departments and agencies. All
witnesses agreed on the general intent of H.R. 13008, though there
was some relatively minor disagreement on a few specific provisions
of tbo bill.
sh:CTION-BY-SECTION EXPLANATION OF H.R. 13008, AS AMENDED
Section 101: Outlines the major findings of the "Report of Job
Evaluation and Ranking in the Federal Government."
Section 201: Establishes the sense of Congress that-
(1) The executive branch should operate under a coordinated
job evaluation and ranking system for all civilian positions, to
the greatest extent practicable,
(2) Such a system should utilize a variety of job evaluation
and ranking methods, and
(3) The Civil Service Commission shall exercise general super-
vision and control over such a system.
Section 301: Establishes a separate unit within the Civil Service
Commission which shall report directly to the Commission and which
shall prepare a comprehensive job evaluation and ranking plan for
the executive branch. The section also outlines five elements which
must be included in the plan.
nn. Rept. 01-823
Approved For Release 2005/04/27 : CIA-RDP72-00337R000400100004-0
 Approved For Release 2005/04/27 : CIA-RDP72-00337R000400100004-0
7
Section 302: Requires that the Commission consider all recognized
methods of job evaluation and ranking in developing the plan.
Section 303: Authorizes the Commission to secure from any execu-
tive agency the information and suggestions necessary to develop the
coordinated plan.
Section 304: (a) Requires that the Commission submit to the
President and the Congress an interim report of its activities under
the act within 1 year after date of enactment.
(b) Requires that the Commission shall complete its activities within
2 years after date of enactment. The Commission's recommendations,
including a draft of proposed legislation, shall then be submitted to
the President who shall submit the report and his own recommenda-
tions to the Congress.
(c) Requires that the Commission report monthly, or as otherwise
directed, to the House and Senate Post Office and Civil Service
Committees.
(d) Requires that the Commission periodically consult with appro-
priate employee and professional organizations.
(e) Provides that the organizational unit established by section 301
shall cease to exist upon submission of the Commission's report to
Congress.
COST
This legislation will result in no increased cost to the Government.
ADMINISTRATIVE RECOMMENDATIONS
EXECUTIVE OFFICE OF THE PRESIDENT,
Hon. JAMES M. HANLEY,
BUREAU OF THE BUDGET,
Washington, D.C., August 5, 1969.
Chairman, Subcommittee on Position Classification, Committee on Post
Office and Civil Service, House of Representatives, Washington, D.C.
DEAR MR. CHAIRMAN: This will reply to the committee's request
for the views of the Bureau of the Buget on H.R. 13008, a bill to
improve position classification systems within the executive branch,
and for other purposes.
The bill would authorize the Civil Service Commission to develop
a comprehensive job evaluation plan for positions in the executive
branch.
The Bureau of the Budget concurs in the views expressed in the
report which the Civil Service Commission is submitting on H.R.
13008 and accordingly recommends its enactment.
Sincerely yours,
WILFRED H. ROMMEL,
Assistant Director for Legislative Reference.
Approved For Release 2005/04/27 : CIA-RDP72-00337R000400100004-0
 Approved For Release 2005/04/27 : CIA-RDP72-00337R000400100004-0
8
U.S. CIVIL SERVICE COMMISSION,
Washington, D.C., August 4, 1189.
H011. THADDEI;S J. DUES&I,
Chairman, Committee on Post Office and Civil Service,
house of Representatives, Cannon House Office Building
DEAR Mn. CHAIRMAN: This is in further response to your request
for the views of the U.S. Civil Service Commission on H.R. 13008, at
bill to improve position classification systems within the executive
branch, and for other purposes.
This bill directs the Civil Service Commission to prepare a core-
preliensive plan for a coordinated position classification system appli-
cable to all civilian positions of the executive branch. Thelill includes
a statement of congressional policy as to characteristics of the job
evaluation system that should be planned. It also directs all de art-
ments and agencies to cooperate fully with the Civil Service Com-
mission, esta dishes a time schedule for completion of the project,
and requires consultation with employee organizations during the
preparation of the plan.
The Civil Service Commission favors enactment of H.R. 13008.
No significant updating of the general schedule system has been
made since 1949. No substantial changes have been made in the basic
structure of the postal field service system since its inception in 1955,
although some revisions have been made to specific aspects of the
system. No effort has been made to integrate other job evaluation
Plans in various individual agencies into it coordinated system appli-
cable throughout the executive brunch.
The report prepared last, year by the Subcommittee on Position
Classification revealed the need for adopting a coordinated plan cover-
ing all civilian positions. lit addition. the Civil Service Commission
is cenlstaiitly confronted with numerous kinds of problems that arise
directly from the existence of different systems in different agencies.
Identical kinds of jobs are now given different job titles, placed in
different grades, and are paid at different rates by different agencies.
The processes of recruiting and examining applicants, promoting and
transferring employees, evaluating employee experience, planning
nua.I1po er treed,, and even the more mundane task of preparing
statistical reports. all are unnecessarily made more difficult by the
lack of it coordinated job eN aluation plan.
The Commission in general concur, in the objectives set forth in
If. It. 1:3008 for a comprehensive, coordinated position evaluation
plan. Meeting these objectives should result in a plan that will clinii-
nate ilnnecessarv discripancies in the evaluation of jobs from agcnCy
to tgency. Changes in work technology, occupational characteristics,
11?0graun needs, labor market conditions occur so frequently and are
often of such significance that. the e lordiliatcd plan should provide
flexibility permitting the executive branch to make appropriate adjust-
lnents. The objectives leave room for the Civil Service Commission to
devise evaluation methods within the coordinated system that, will be
a-ppropriatte for the individual needs of different occupations. Authority
to supervise and control the. system to be developed must be centralized
if effective coordination is to be achioved and maintained.
For some time we have been planning ways and means for ukidati.ng
the various job evaluation plans currently used in the executive branch.
H. Rept. 111-S23
Approved For Release 2005/04/27 : CIA-RDP72-00337R000400100004-0
 Approved For Release 2005/04/27 CIA-RDP72-00337R000400100004-0
We have concluded that the task of developing a new plan must be
assigned to a new unit to be established for this purpose in the Com-
mission's Bureau of Policies and Standards. We From to staff this now
unit with a group of outstanding specialists both from within the Com-
mission's regular staff and others recruited or borrowed for the project.
The importance of this area is such that the Commission will keep in
direct contact with the work of the group.
The assignment of authority to the Civil Service Commission to
obtain information and suggestions from all agencies is highly desirable,
particularly with respect to those current systems not now under the
Commission's Jurisdiction. The time schedule appears reasonable and
appropriate. It should be feasible to complete the plan as scheduled if
funding problems do not create unforeseen delays. The requirement
that the plan be forwarded to the Congress by the President with his
recommendations is essential.
In summary, the Commission welcomes the opportunity at this time
to develop a coordinated job evaluation plan for the executive branch.
It will be possible under H.R. 13008 to prepare a plan that will-
Result in all civilian positions of the executive branch being
classified under a coordinated system;
Avoid unnecessary and unjustified differences among agencies
in the evaluations of similar jobs;
Take advantage of the best current practice and knowledge
in the field of job evaluation;
Give full consideration to the essential differences and needs of
the various occupational categories;
Provide adequate flexibility so that the executive branch can
make necessary adjustments in the system as conditions and needs
change in the future;
Assure fairness and equity in the evaluation of the jobs of
all civilian employees;
Facilitate other personnel and management functions.
The Bureau of the Budget advises that from the standpoint of
the administration's program there is no objection to the submission
of this report.
By direction of the Commission.
Sincerely yours,
ROBERT E. HAMPTON, Chairman.
H. Rept. P1-823
Approved For Release 2005/04/27 : CIA-RDP72-00337R000400100004-0