Ask the Scholar
Document scope · 1 page
Scholar
Ask about this object, its catalog metadata, its source description, or the page inventory.
For page-specific OCR and visual context, open one of the page chats.
Scholar Source Context
Document identity
localId
1668628
label
1974/08/12 HR5094 Upgrading of Deputy United States Marshals (Vetoed) (1)
core
doc
dtoType
document
citationUrl
pageCount
1
Source metadata
id
1668628
sourceUrl
contentType
document
title
1974/08/12 HR5094 Upgrading of Deputy United States Marshals (Vetoed) (1)
citationUrl
collections
White House Records Office: Legislation Case Files
Legislation Case Files
subjects
Department of Justice. (7/1/1870 - )
Civil service
Legislation
Vetoes
thumbnailUrl
largeImageUrl
imageCount
1
hasImages
yes
source
import
hasTranscription
no
Source extras
naId
1668628
coverageEndDate
logicalDate
1974-08-31
month
8
year
1974
coverageStartDate
logicalDate
1974-07-01
month
7
year
1974
levelOfDescription
fileUnit
recordType
description
ocrSource
nara-archive
Single page context
seq
1
pageIndex
0
type
document
mediaId
c9ed8bcab375248e
ocrText
The original documents are located in Box 1, folder "8/12/74 HR5094 Upgrading of Deputy
United States Marshals (Vetoed) (1)" of the White House Records Office: Legislation Case
Files at the Gerald R. Ford Presidential Library.
Copyright Notice
The copyright law of the United States (Title 17, United States Code) governs the making of
photocopies or other reproductions of copyrighted material. Gerald R. Ford donated to the United
States of America his copyrights in all of his unpublished writings in National Archives collections.
Works prepared by U.S. Government employees as part of their official duties are in the public
domain. The copyrights to materials written by other individuals or organizations are presumed to
remain with them. If you think any of the information displayed in the PDF is subject to a valid
copyright claim, please contact the Gerald R. Ford Presidential Library.
Exact duplicates within this folder were not digitized.
Digitized from Box 1 of the White House Records Office Legislation Case Files at the Gerald R. Ford Presidential Library
THE WHITE HOUSE
ACTION
WASHINGTON
August 8, 1974
MEMORANDUM FOR:
THE PRESIDENT
FROM:
KEN COLE
SUBJECT:
H.R. 5094 - Upgrading of Deputy United
States Marshals
Awaiting your action is H.R. 5094, a bill that would upgrade
nonsupervisory Deputy United States Marshal positions by one,
two and three grades.
Background
This bill would legislate changes in the pay structure for some
1,300 nonsupervisory Deputy Marshals, based on a reconstruction
of their grades and steps. It's substantially similar to the
Deputy Marshal upgrading bill you pocket vetoed October 27, 1972
although - unlike the earlier bill - nominal coverage under the
general schedule pay system is retained.
Congressional support for this bill was strong, as evidenced
by the House vote of 319-84 and passage in the Senate by voice
vote. Debate in favor of the legislation pointed out the un-
favorable comparison between starting salaries for D.C. police
and those for Deputy Marshals. Also, the Marshals' expanded
role in crime control, air piracy and other law enforcement
activities were said to warrant the increase.
Recommendations
Roy Ash, Justice and Civil Service recommend disapproval of this
bill.
Bill Timmons and I feel very strongly that you should approve it
today.
The first year cost is estimated at $2 million, too small an
issue to take a stand on.
APPROVE
DISAPPROVE
VETOED
EXECUTIVE OFFICE OF THE PRESIDENT
8/12/74
OFFICE OF MANAGEMENT AND BUDGET
WASHINGTON, D.C. 20503
AUG 7 1974
MEMORANDUM FOR THE PRESIDENT
adidas
Subject: Enrolled Bill H.R. 5094 - Upgrading of Deputy
United States Marshals
Sponsor - Rep. Udall (D) Arizona and 13 others
8/12/2x
10p.m.
Last Day for Action
August 12, 1974 - Monday
Purpose
Upgrades nonsupervisory deputy United States marshal positions
by one, two and three grades.
Agency Recommendations
Office of Management and Budget
Disapproval (Veto message
attached)
Department of Justice
Disapproval (Veto message
attached)
Civil Service Commission
Disapproval (Veto message
attached)
Discussion
H.R. 5094 is substantially similar to the deputy marshal
upgrading bill passed in the 92nd Congress, H.R. 13895, which
you pocket vetoed October 27, 1972. It has the effect of
exempting deputy U.S. marshals from the job evaluation standards
and controls of the General Schedule pay system, although--
unlike the vetoed bill--nominal coverage under that system
would be retained. In another respect, however, the bill is
even more objectionable than the vetoed bill because of its
discriminatory "grade conversion" provisions described below.
Under existing law, salaries for deputy United States marshals
are fixed under the General Schedule (GS) classification and
pay system which governs the pay of some 1.2 million Federal
GERALON
2
white collar employees, including other law enforcement
employees in the Justice Department and elsewhere
throughout the Government.
Prior to June 15, 1973, deputy marshals were classified
at grade levels GS-6 through GS-9, with GS-8 as the typical
journeyman level. They were promoted at one-grade intervals.
Special deputy positions existed at GS-4 and GS-5 to provide
employment opportunities for Vietnam veterans with inadequate
or insufficient law enforcement training or experience to
qualify at the entry level.
On June 15, 1973, the Civil Service Commission issued new
standards for the deputy marshal occupation as a result of
a full-scale study. The new standards recognize the expanded
duties and responsibilities imposed on the Marshal Service
and accord deputy marshals classification and pay treatment
which is consistent with that of other Federal employees.
Under this system, the deputy marshal occupation is classified
at grade levels GS-5 through GS-9 and structured to provide
a two-grade interval progression for promotion, i.e., GS-5,
GS-7, and GS-9, with GS-9 as the full journeyman level. GS-4
was retained as the special rate for trainees and veterans,
and GS-5 as the entry level for more qualified candidates.
As a result of the new standards, large scale upgradings have
occurred. For example, Justice states that prior to the
application of the June 15, 1973 standard, 429 deputy marshals
were in grade GS-9 whereas now 949 are in that grade.
Positions not upgraded were carefully evaluated and found to
be properly classified at existing levels.
H.R. 5094 would legislate changes in the pay structure for
some 1,300 nonsupervisory deputy marshals, based on a
reconstruction of the grades and steps they were in prior to
CSC's 1973 reclassification, as follows:
-- The classification structure administratively defined
by the CSC would be fixed in statute and revised so that GS-5
would be used as a trainee level only, and GS-11, rather than
GS-9, would become the full journeyman level. The GS-4 sub-
entry level would be eliminated.
3
-- Deputies in GS-4, GS-5, GS-7, and GS-9 would be
advanced to GS-5, GS-7, GS-9 and GS-11, respectively. These
persons would be converted to the same step rates of the
higher grades as those they now have in their present grades.
-- "Grade conversion" provisions in the bill would require
that persons who occupied positions at GS-6 and GS-8 would be
advanced to three different grades, GS-7, GS-9, or GS-11,
solely on the basis of their previous step rate. Those in
step 7 or below of their reconstructed grades would advance
to the next grade; those in higher steps would advance three
grades.
During congressional consideration of H.R. 5094, the Justice
Department, CSC and OMB strongly opposed enactment, and
threatened veto as unwarranted and discriminatory.
Arguments for Approval
1. It is argued that CSC's 1973 action in reclassifying
deputy marshal positions is insufficient in view of the
expanded duties and responsibilities imposed in recent years
on marshals, as a result of their increasing role in crime
control, urban strife, air piracy and other law enforcement
activities. The House Committee states that the revision
failed to upgrade deputy marshals to the pay status they
deserve.
2. In the House debate, a comparison was drawn between the
starting salary of $10,000 for D.C. Police privates, and
$6,882, then the sub-entry GS-4 rate for deputy marshal
trainees. The GS-5 trainee rate which would be provided in
the enrolled bill is currently $8,055 and the GS-7 rate is
$9,969.
3. Despite veto of the predecessor bill, and the strong
opposition of the executive branch, there is strong
congressional support for H.R. 5094, as evidenced by the
House vote of 319-84 and passage in the Senate by voice vote.
4. The upgrading of deputy marshals which has already occurred
as a result of CSC's new classification standards reduces the
number of upgradings under the enrolled bill, so that its
budget impact would be minimal.
4
Arguments for Disapproval.
1. H.R. 5094 is contrary to the most fundamental principles
of position classification and pay administration. Prefer-
ential upgrading for deputy marshals, regardless of duties
or of the relationship of such work to other Federal
occupations, subverts the principle of equal pay for equal
work which is the basis for the Federal pay system.
2. The proposed pay increases for marshals would blatantly
discriminate against the other 1.2 million Federal employees
under the General Schedule system, and most particularly
against those other law enforcement employees, such as
border patrol and correctional officers, whose pay grades
have been carefully aligned with those of deputy marshals.
3. Legislative job classification for deputy marshals will
become a direct precedent for other occupational groups--
firefighters, building guards, special police groups, et al--
to demand equal special pay treatment in Congress. While
the immediate impact of this legislation will be on law
enforcement groups within the Department of Justice, pressure
for statutory upgrading can be expected from all professional
and occupational categories, with substantial potential
budgetary cost if successful.
4. CSC states that continued congressional upgrading will
eventually dismantle the whole position classification system,
and the result will be "a hodgepodge of irrational misalign-
ments," based entirely on the amount of pressure each group
can bring to bear.
5. The special employment program for Vietnam veterans in the
Marshal Service would have to be reduced, because the bill
eliminates the existing sub-entry level GS-4 position used to
employ veterans who lack sufficient education and experience
to qualify for GS-5.
6. The grade conversion features of the bill would create
irrational pay disparities within the Marshal Service itself.
The bill mandates highly irregular rules for the initial
promotion to grade and to step within grade, with the result
that persons now performing identical work will be placed in
different grades, and those within the same grade will receive
unjustified differentials in pay. Additional upgradings may
well be required to remedy the pay distortions the bill
legislates.
5
7. Deputy marshals cannot fairly be compared with city
policemen, however important, valuable or dangerous their
work may be. The fact that D.C. Metropolitan Police receive
higher pay than marshals, cited as justification for H.R. 5094,
is not valid grounds for the upgrading this bill provides.
CSC emphasizes the fact that GS-11 is simply not warranted
as the journeyman level for deputy marshal work, especially
when compared with the demands of investigative positions
classified at the same grade.
Recommendations
Justice recommends against approval of H.R. 5094, and expresses
particular concern for
"
the chain reaction effect that
undoubtedly will follow if H.R. 5094 becomes law. " The
Department also states:
"
we believe that legislation of this type is
totally unwarranted and unnecessary and that
enactment of H.R. 5094 would irreparably harm
the Federal compensation system.
"
CSC strongly opposes the bill and urges disapproval, citing
the very serious potential dangers of this sort of legisla-
tion". The Commission also states:
"We are convinced that a large number of occupational
pressure groups are watching the progress of H.R. 5094
with great interest. If it is approved we expect them
to move immediately in the same direction. The
eventual result could be the scrapping of the classi-
fication system, and the piecemeal establishment by
Congress of every grade and every step for every
separate occupation in the Federal service."
OMB concurs with Justice and CSC and strongly recommends
disapproval. Both agencies have prepared draft veto messages
and we have also prepared a draft for your consideration,
drawing on the CSC draft.
We are giving consideration as to whether or not it would be
desirable to include in the veto message reference to certain
other objectionable personnel bills which are pending in the
FORD LIBRARY
6
Congress, and will be in touch with your staff on this
matter.
α
Director
Enclosures
FORD LIBRARY 07VHFG
ASSISTANT ATTORNEY GENERAL
LEGISLATIVE AFFAIRS
Department of Justice
Washington, D.C. 20530
AUG 2 1974
Honorable Roy L. Ash
Director, Office of Management
and Budget
Washington, D.C. 20503
Dear Mr. Ash:
In compliance with your request, I have examined a facsimile
of the enrolled bill, H.R. 5094, a bill "To amend title 5, United
States Code, to provide for the reclassification of positions of
deputy United States marshal, and for other purposes."
Positions of deputy United States marshal now are graded
under the general position classification and pay plan established
by the Congress in chapter 51 of title 5, United States Code, to
provide sound and equitable grade and pay relationships among
white collar positions throughout the Government. Under this plan,
the Civil Service Commission prepares Government-wide standards
which define the different grades in terms of the duties, respon-
sibilities and qualification requirements of the positions, and
the Department of Justice fixes the grades and pay of its positions
in accordance with these standards. Significantly, this plan permits
the Department of Justice to base decisions to promote employees on
two fundamental considerations: (1) is there work of the higher
grade to be performed?, and (2) are the employees qualified to perform
the higher level of work? These are management prerogatives essential
to the effective and economical administration of a large and diversified
work force.
H.R. 5094 would, on the other hand, fix the grades and pay of
deputy marshal positions arbitrarily by statute rather than permit
their evaluation under the carefully structured position classifica-
tion system applicable to the positions of most other white collar
Federal employees. Moreover, it would legislate a promotion system
based on seniority which would require the Attorney General to promote
each deputy marshal year after year until he reached the top non-
supervisory grade of GS-11 whether or not there was GS-11 level work
to be done by that employee.
2.
Not to be overlooked, of course, is the chain reaction effect
that undoubtedly will follow if H. R. 5094 becomes law. How
long will the same union which represents many deputy marshals
wait to seek similar legislation for border patrol agents and
correctional officers, whose grades traditionally have been
carefully aligned with those of deputy marshals? Already the
Immigration and Naturalization Service has asked the Acting
Assistant Attorney General for Administration to seek Civil Service
Commission revision of the position classification standard for
border patrol agent positions giving as one basis for this the
recent upgrading of deputy marshal positions under the June 15,
1973 standard cited in H. R. 5094.
Another objectionable feature of H. R. 5094 is the
cost which would be both exorbitant and inflationary. First
year costs are estimated to be $2 million; costs in succeeding
years would have to be determined on an individual basis, but
obviously would be substantial.
In summary, we consider that deputy marshals have been
treated fairly under the existing system. For example, it should
be noted that prior to application of the June 15, 1973 standard,
429 deputy marshals were in grade GS-9, whereas now 949 are in
that grade. For the reasons stated above, we believe that
legislation of this type is totally unwarranted and unnecessary
and that enactment of H. R. 5094 would irreparably harm the Federal
compensation system. Similar legislation, H. R. 13895 of the 92nd
Congress, was disapproved by President Nixon last year because
of the highly preferential treatment if would have accorded
deputy marshals.
The Department of Justice recommends against Executive
approval of this bill.
A proposed veto message is enclosed.
Sincerely
W. Vincent Rakestraw
Assistant Attorney General
FORD LIBRARY
MEMORANDUM OF DISAPPROVAL
I have before me H.R. 5094, a bill "To amend Title 5, United
States Code, to provide for the reclassification of positions of
deputy United States marshal, and for other purposes." This bill
would remove deputy marshals from the General Schedule system and
raise their pay by as much as 24 percent. While I fully recognize
the complexity and importance of the work that is performed by our
deputy United States marshals, I have had to decide not to approve
this bill.
The General Schedule classification and pay system provides for
the equitable compensation of more than 1.2 million Federal employees,
including deputy United States marshals and employees in other law
enforcement occupations with responsibilities similar to those of
deputy United States marshals. A bill such as H.R. 5094, which
would classify positions by statute rather than by an evaluation of
the work performed, defeats the basic principle of equal pay for
equal work, and is unfair to all the other General Schedule employees
whose positions would continue to be classified in accordance with
accepted classification principles.
The Civil Service Commission, working with the Department of
Justice, recently revised the classification standard for the deputy
marshal occupation in recognition of the increasing responsibilities
of the work they perform. I understand that, as a result of this,
FORD
LIBRARY
2.
all positions are now classified in accordance with the new Civil
Service Commission standards, and a substantial number of deputy
marshals have been appropriately upgraded.
This Administration is vitally concerned that we do everything
we can to win the battle against inflation by holding the line on
wage increases that are excessive. The increases afforded deputy
United States marshals as a result of the revised Civil Service
Commission standard provided an equitable level of pay for
these vital employees in relation to other Federal employees.
UNITED
STATES
CIVIL
COMMINITY
UNITED STATES CIVIL SERVICE COMMISSION
SERVICE
WASHINGTON, D.C. 20415
CHAIRMAN
August 2, 1974
Honorable Roy L. Ash
Director
Office of Management and Budget
Attention: Assistant Director for Legislative
Reference
Dear Mr. Ash:
This is in response to your request for the Commission's views and
recommendation on enrolled bill H.R. 5094, an enrolled bill "To
amend title 5, United States Code, to provide for the reclassifica-
tion of positions of deputy United States marshal, and for other
purposes."
This measure legislates grades for deputy U.S. marshals, placing
them in grades on the basis of the grade and step they were in prior
to June 1973, regardless of their duties or the relationship of dep-
uty marshal work to the work of other Federal occupations. The bill
effectively establishes GS-11 as the full performance grade for
deputy marshal work, and eliminates the possibility of a GS-4 entry
level. The Civil Service Commission strongly opposes this highly
preferential measure and urges that it be disapproved. The bill:
- is contrary to the most fundamental principles of posi-
tion classification and pay administration;
- would subvert the statutory principle of equal pay for
equal work, creating inequities between deputy U.S.
marshals and the other 1.2 million Federal employees
under the General Schedule (especially those in other
law enforcement occupations);
- would place deputy marshals performing identical work in
different grades;
- would establish completely irrational pay differentials
between deputy marshals in the same grade; and
- would stop the present practice of employing veterans
FORD
under special programs starting at the GS-4 level when
&
those veterans do not meet the qualification require-
1188817
ments for the GS-5 level.
2
This enrolled bill is very similar to a previous bill, H.R. 13895,
which was passed by the 92nd Congress but disapproved by the Presi-
dent. Among the arguments for H.R. 13895 was the contention that
the Civil Service Commission standards for this occupation were not
up to date, and did not provide appropriate grades for deputy marshal
work. Since that time, the Civil Service Commission has completed an
occupational study of the deputy marshal occupation. The study found
that the occupation needed substantial restructuring, including a
change from a one to a two-grade interval progression for promotions,
and an increase in the typical journeyman level from the GS-8 to the
GS-9 level. Those changes in the occupation were carried out through
the approval, in June 1973, of new qualification and classification
standards for the occupation.
One of the specific findings of the occupational study was that the
GS-11 level is simply not warranted for the typical journeyman posi-
tion in the Marshals Service. The study included, for example, a
comparison of deputy marshal and investigative positions. The Com-
mission's standard for investigative positions shows that GS-11 in-
vestigators are responsible for the independent handling of an entire
case. The characteristics and specific examples given in the standards
for investigative positions indicate that the full performance level of
deputy marshals does not match the GS-11 level. Deputy marshals are
almost exclusively limited to one aspect of the cases described at this
level, i.e. location and apprehension of the subject. Seizure of prop-
erty is also limited in scope. There is no need to establish any case
concerning the property. The deputy identifies, seizes, and protects
the property. The rest of the case relating to the property is the
concern of others. To place these positions at the GS-11 level would
therefore be in conflict with the principle of equal pay for equal work.
That principle would be even more blatantly violated by the grade con-
version provisions of H.R. 5094. Those provisions would place deputies
performing identical work in different grades by assigning grades based
on the previous within-grade (pay) step held by each deputy. Since
large scale upgradings have occurred by application of the new standard
since June, the bill has now been amended to prevent a "double-jump."
If a marshal has been upgraded under the new standard, the bill re-
quires the Department of Justice to determine where he was prior to
this upgrading, and move him from that point to the grade and step
specified by the peculiar advancement formula provided by the bill.
The formula ignores the fact that grade level alone reflects the level
of work, while the pay step reflects longevity. The bill would in
some instances force the Department of Justice to upgrade deputy mar-
shals to a particular grade based on their previous step. As an ex-
ample, two marshals doing identical work have been advanced to GS-9
FORD LIBRARY
3
under the new standard. The bill passes. The Department of Justice
determines that last June one was in step 7 of GS-8 while the other
(because of longer service) was in step 8 of the same grade. The bill
advances the more senior to GS-11 (for which he is clearly not quali-
fied) with an increase of $68 a year. The more junior remains in
GS-9 but with an increase of $1624 a year. One gets an unwarranted
two-grade promotion; the other gets an unwarranted four-step salary
increase; the more junior now earns $1150 a year more than his co-
worker with longer service; and they are still doing identical jobs.
Under the new standard, we now have about 800 marshals in GS-9, all
working at the same level--doing essentially the same job. H.R. 5094
would leave half of them in GS-9 but move the other half to GS-11.
The 400 left in the correct grade will surely file appeals. The bill
makes no pretense at equity; it openly establishes inequity.
Clearly, the establishment of the principle that a whole occupation
can be inequitably upgraded by preferential legislation--if its lobby
is vocal enough--is simply the thin edge of the wedge leading to the
dismantling of our whole position classification system. Obviously,
all employees would like to be in higher grades. If the deputy mar-
shals succeed in getting preferential treatment, we would expect the
policeman to try the same tactic; if they are successful, then the
firefighters, then the correctional officers, then the translators,
then the IRS officers, and so forth, until eventually the whole clas-
sification structure is a hodgepodge of irrational misalignments.
Then the marshals, having seen their preferential position eroded by
the success of other groups, would be ready to start the process over
again with a special bill to raise them to GS-12.
We are convinced that a large number of occupational pressure groups
are watching the progress of H.R. 5094 with great interest. If it is
approved, we expect them to move immediately in the same direction.
The eventual result could be the scrapping of the classification sys-
tem, and the piecemeal establishment by Congress of every grade and
every step for every separate occupation in the Federal Service.
The bill would also reduce the hiring of veterans by the U.S. Marshal
Service. The Service has encouraged the hiring of veterans through
the Veterans Readjustment Act by filling positions below the normal
trainee level. This practice has permitted the hiring and training of
veterans who could not meet all of the normal entry requirements.
H.R. 5094 would stop this and similar programs by failing to provide
for the possible filling of positions below the GS-5 level.
4
In view of these problems, and the very serious potential dangers of
this sort of legislation, the Civil Service Commission urges that the
President disapprove H.R. 5094. A proposed veto message is enclosed.
By direction of the Commission:
Sincerely yours,
Jayne acting B S pain
Chairman
Enclosure
TO THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES
I am returning to Congress without my approval H. R. 5094, an enactment
"To amend title 5, United States Code, to provide for the reclassification
of positions of deputy United States marshal, and for other purposes".
This enactment would violate fundamental principles of fairness,
creating serious pay inequities between deputy United States marshals
and other Federal law enforcement personnel. Even more illogically, it
would create severe disruption of existing grade and pay relationships
among the deputy marshals themselves - extending so far in some cases
as to place more junior marshals in pay rates as much as $1,150 above
more senior coworkers who now, properly, are at a relatively higher rate.
Some deputies doing identical work would be placed in different pay grades,
and deputies doing different work would be placed in the same pay grade.
The enactment would run directly counter to the principle of equal
pay for equal work. I find no basis for granting this small group
such highly preferential treatment. Our policy must be, and is, to
provide equitable salaries for all Federal employees. The proposed
legislation violates that policy.
The action I am taking today in no way reflects on my appreciation of
these employees. Their work is obviously important, but approval of
this legislation would give this one small group an unwarranted advantage
over other groups of equally dedicated employees.
Accordingly, I am constrained to disapprove enactment of H.R. 5094.
THE WHITE HOUSE
FORD
TO THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES
I am returning without my approval, H.R. 5094, a bill
which would raise the pay of deputy United States marshals
by as much as 24 percent through comprehensive, across-the-
board upgrading.
This bill is similar to H.R. 13895 which I disapproved
on October 27, 1972.
I am disapproving H.R. 5094 because it violates funda-
mental principles of fairness. It would place deputy marshal
positions in salary ranges that would value such work at
higher levels than the General Schedule provides for other
work of comparable difficulty, despite the fact that the
Civil Service Commission has already taken action to remedy
any inequities which may have existed.
Even worse, it would create severe disruption of
existing grade and pay relationships among the deputy marshals
themselves--extending so far in some cases as to call for
paying junior marshals as much as $1,150 above more senior
coworkers. Some deputies doing identical work would be placed
in different pay grades, and deputies doing different work
would be placed in the same pay grade. The bill could also
markedly reduce the present special hiring program for vet-
erans who wish to become deputy marshals and thus run counter
to our efforts to enhance employment for Vietnam veterans.
H.R. 5094 runs directly counter to the principle of
equal pay for equal work. Our policy must be, and is, to
provide equitable salaries for all Federal employees. I
find no basis for granting one small group highly preferential
treatment.
GERALD FORD LIBRARY
2
Approval of the proposed statutory pay plan, in addition
to being inherently unfair, would also serve as a precedent
for other occupational groups to seek favored treatment in
the Congress. The result could be a welter of costly,
irrational pay systems, which would undermine the classifi-
cation principles which are at the heart of the Government's
merit system.
My action in disapproving this bill in no way reflects
on the very high regard I have for the outstanding men and
women who carry out the important work of deputy marshals.
Approval of this bill, however, would give these employees a
wholly unwarranted advantage over many other groups of equally
devoted Federal employees who also perform valuable service.
I am also disturbed with this bill in that it represents
another in a series of congressional actions to pass a myriad
of unwarranted legislation often requiring unbudgeted increases
in Federal expenditures. The result invariably is that cumu-
lative and subsequently uncontrollable increases occur in
many areas including unwarranted liberalizations in Federal
personnel benefits.
Over the past two years, legislation passed by the Congress
has increased the unfunded liability costs of the Federal
employees retirement system by $2 billion. These actions
will increase outlays in the next fiscal year by $300 million.
Other benefit bills still pending before Congress would create
an additional unfunded liability of about $20 billion and
would further increase 1976 budget outlays by $850 million.
These bills would be directly counter to our present efforts
TORD
LEBRARY
3
to reduce the level of Federal spending and to submit a
balanced budget for fiscal year 1976. They would fuel
inflation precisely when all sectors of the economy must
exercise strict restraint.
It is most important to our Nation to have adequately
paid and motivated Federal employees. Nevertheless,
Congress cannot justifiably continue to pass legislation
which is not fiscally responsible. If we are to deal suc-
cessfully with inflation, the Federal Government as the
Nation's largest single employer must take the lead. If
we expect restraint in the private sector on wage and price
demands we must exercise even greater restraint in the
Government.
I urge the Congress to join me in the fight against
inflation which is our Nation's number one domestic problem.
I would hope that Congress will exercise responsibility in
considering further legislation benefiting Federal
employees.
Accordingly, I feel compelled to disapprove enactment
of H.R. 5094.
THE WHITE HOUSE
August
, 1974
Nindrika
EXECUTIVE OFFICE OF THE PRESIDENT
OFFICE OF MANAGEMENT AND BUDGET
WASHINGTON, D.C. 20503
AUG 71974
MEMORANDUM FOR THE PRESIDENT
Subject: Enrolled Bill H.R. 5094 - Upgrading of Deputy
United States Marshals
Sponsor - Rep. Udall (D) Arizona and 13 others
Last Day for Action
August 12, 1974 - Monday
Purpose
Upgrades nonsupervisory deputy United States marshal positions
by one, two and three grades.
Agency Recommendations
Office of Management and Budget
Disapproval (Veto message
attached)
Department of Justice
Disapproval (Veto message
attached)
Civil Service Commission
Disapproval (Veto message
attached)
Discussion
H.R. 5094 is substantially similar to the deputy marshal
upgrading bill passed in the 92nd Congress, H.R. 13895, which
you pocket vetoed October 27, 1972. It has the effect of
exempting deputy U.S. marshals from the job evaluation standards
and controls of the General Schedule pay system, although--
unlike the vetoed bill--nominal coverage under that system
would be retained. In another respect, however, the bill is
even more objectionable than the vetoed bill because of its
discriminatory "grade conversion" provisions described below.
Under existing law, salaries for deputy United States marshals
are fixed under the General Schedule (GS) classification and
pay system which governs the pay of some 1.2 million Federal
FORD LIBRARY
2
white collar employees, including other law enforcement
employees in the Justice Department and elsewhere
throughout the Government.
Prior to June 15, 1973, deputy marshals were classified
at grade levels GS-6 through GS-9, with GS-8 as the typical
journeyman level. They were promoted at one-grade intervals.
Special deputy positions existed at GS-4 and GS-5 to provide
employment opportunities for Vietnam veterans with inadequate
or insufficient law enforcement training or experience to
qualify at the entry level.
On June 15, 1973, the Civil Service Commission issued new
standards for the deputy marshal occupation as a result of
a full-scale study. The new standards recognize the expanded
duties and responsibilities imposed on the Marshal Service
and accord deputy marshals classification and pay treatment
which is consistent with that of other Federal employees.
Under this system, the deputy marshal occupation is classified
at grade levels GS-5 through GS-9 and structured to provide
a two-grade interval progression for promotion, i.e., GS-5,
GS-7, and GS-9, with GS-9 as the full journeyman level. GS-4
was retained as the special rate for trainees and veterans,
and GS-5 as the entry level for more qualified candidates.
As a result of the new standards, large scale upgradings have
occurred. For example, Justice states that prior to the
application of the June 15, 1973 standard, 429 deputy marshals
were in grade GS-9 whereas now 949 are in that grade.
Positions not upgraded were carefully evaluated and found to
be properly classified at existing levels.
H.R. 5094 would legislate changes in the pay structure for
some 1,300 nonsupervisory deputy marshals, based on a
reconstruction of the grades and steps they were in prior to
CSC's 1973 reclassification, as follows:
-- The classification structure administratively defined
by the CSC would be fixed in statute and revised so that GS-5
would be used as a trainee level only, and GS-11, rather than
GS-9, would become the full journeyman level. The GS-4 sub-
entry level would be eliminated.
KANG FORD LIBRART
3
-- Deputies in GS-4, GS-5, GS-7, and GS-9 would be
advanced to GS-5, GS-7, GS-9 and GS-11, respectively. These
persons would be converted to the same step rates of the
higher grades as those they now have in their present grades.
-- "Grade conversion" provisions in the bill would require
that persons who occupied positions at GS-6 and GS-8 would be
advanced to three different grades, GS-7, GS-9, or GS-11,
solely on the basis of their previous step rate. Those in
step 7 or below of their reconstructed grades would advance
to the next grade; those in higher steps would advance three
grades.
During congressional consideration of H.R. 5094, the Justice
Department, CSC and OMB strongly opposed enactment, and
threatened veto as unwarranted and discriminatory.
Arguments for Approval
1. It is argued that CSC's 1973 action in reclassifying
deputy marshal positions is insufficient in view of the
expanded duties and responsibilities imposed in recent years
on marshals, as a result of their increasing role in crime
control, urban strife, air piracy and other law enforcement
activities. The House Committee states that the revision
failed to upgrade deputy marshals to the pay status they
deserve.
2. In the House debate, a comparison was drawn between the
starting salary of $10,000 for D.C. Police privates, and
$6,882, then the sub-entry GS-4 rate for deputy marshal
trainees. The GS-5 trainee rate which would be provided in
the enrolled bill is currently $8,055 and the GS-7 rate is
$9,969.
3. Despite veto of the predecessor bill, and the strong
opposition of the executive branch, there is strong
congressional support for H.R. 5094, as evidenced by the
House vote of 319-84 and passage in the Senate by voice vote.
4. The upgrading of deputy marshals which has already occurred
as a result of CSC's new classification standards reduces the
number of upgradings under the enrolled bill, so that its
budget impact would be minimal.
4
Arguments for Disapproval.
1. H.R. 5094 is contrary to the most fundamental principles
of position classification and pay administration. Prefer-
ential upgrading for deputy marshals, regardless of duties
or of the relationship of such work to other Federal
occupations, subverts the principle of equal pay for equal
work which is the basis for the Federal pay system.
2. The proposed pay increases for marshals would blatantly
discriminate against the other 1.2 million Federal employees
under the General Schedule system, and most particularly
against those other law enforcement employees, such as
border patrol and correctional officers, whose pay grades
have been carefully aligned with those of deputy marshals.
3. Legislative job classification for deputy marshals will
become a direct precedent for other occupational groups--
firefighters, building guards, special police groups, et al--
to demand equal special pay treatment in Congress. While
the immediate impact of this legislation will be on law
enforcement groups within the Department of Justice, pressure
for statutory upgrading can be expected from all professional
and occupational categories, with substantial potential
budgetary cost if successful.
4. CSC states that continued congressional upgrading will
eventually dismantle the whole position classification system,
and the result will be "a hodgepodge of irrational misalign-
ments,' based entirely on the amount of pressure each group
can bring to bear.
5. The special employment program for Vietnam veterans in the
Marshal Service would have to be reduced, because the bill
eliminates the existing sub-entry level GS-4 position used to
employ veterans who lack sufficient education and experience
to qualify for GS-5.
6. The grade conversion features of the bill would create
irrational pay disparities within the Marshal Service itself.
The bill mandates highly irregular rules for the initial
promotion to grade and to step within grade, with the result
that persons now performing identical work will be placed in
different grades, and those within the same grade will receive
unjustified differentials in pay. Additional upgradings may
well be required to remedy the pay distortions the bill
legislates.
5
7. Deputy marshals cannot fairly be compared with city
policemen, however important, valuable or dangerous their
work may be. The fact that D.C. Metropolitan Police receive
higher pay than marshals, cited as justification for H.R. 5094,
is not valid grounds for the upgrading this bill provides.
CSC emphasizes the fact that GS-11 is simply not warranted
as the journeyman level for deputy marshal work, especially
when compared with the demands of investigative positions
classified at the same grade.
Recommendations
Justice recommends against approval of H.R. 5094, and expresses
particular concern for "
the chain reaction effect that
undoubtedly will follow if H.R. 5094 becomes law. " The
Department also states:
"
we believe that legislation of this type is
totally unwarranted and unnecessary and that
enactment of H.R. 5094 would irreparably harm
the Federal compensation system."
CSC strongly opposes the bill and urges disapproval, citing
the very serious potential dangers of this sort of legisla-
tion". The Commission also states:
"We are convinced that a large number of occupational
pressure groups are watching the progress of H.R. 5094
with great interest. If it is approved we expect them
to move immediately in the same direction. The
eventual result could be the scrapping of the classi-
fication system, and the piecemeal establishment by
Congress of every grade and every step for every
separate occupation in the Federal service."
OMB concurs with Justice and CSC and strongly recommends
disapproval. Both agencies have prepared draft veto messages
and we have also prepared a draft for your consideration,
drawing on the CSC draft.
We are giving consideration as to whether or not it would be
desirable to include in the veto message reference to certain
other objectionable personnel bills which are pending in the
FORD
6
Congress, and will be in touch with your staff on this
matter.
α
Director
Enclosures
FORD
TO THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES
I am returning without my approval, H.R. 5094, a bill
which would raise the pay of deputy United States marshals
by as much as 24 percent through comprehensive, across-the-
board upgrading.
This bill is similar to H.R. 13895 which I disapproved
on October 27, 1972.
I am disapproving H.R. 5094 because it violates funda-
mental principles of fairness. It would place deputy marshal
positions in salary ranges that would value such work at
higher levels than the General Schedule provides for other
work of comparable difficulty, despite the fact that the
Civil Service Commission has already taken action to remedy
any inequities which may have existed.
Even worse, it would create severe disruption of
existing grade and pay relationships among the deputy marshals
themselves--extending so far in some cases as to call for
paying junior marshals as much as $1,150 above more senior
coworkers. Some deputies doing identical work would be placed
in different pay grades, and deputies doing different work
would be placed in the same pay grade. The bill could also
markedly reduce the present special hiring program for vet-
erans who wish to become deputy marshals and thus run counter
to our efforts to enhance employment for Vietnam veterans.
H.R. 5094 runs directly counter to the principle of
equal pay for equal work. Our policy must be, and is, to
provide equitable salaries for all Federal employees. I
find no basis for granting one small group highly preferential
treatment.
2
Approval of the proposed statutory pay plan, in addition
to being inherently unfair, would also serve as a precedent
for other occupational groups to seek favored treatment in
the Congress. The result could be a welter of costly,
irrational pay systems, which would undermine the classifi-
cation principles which are at the heart of the Government's
merit system.
My action in disapproving this bill in no way reflects
on the very high regard I have for the outstanding men and
women who carry out the important work of deputy marshals.
Approval of this bill, however, would give these employees a
wholly unwarranted advantage over many other groups of equally
devoted Federal employees who also perform valuable service.
I am also disturbed with this bill in that it represents
another in a series of congressional actions to pass a myriad
of unwarranted legislation often requiring unbudgeted increases
in Federal expenditures. The result invariably is that cumu-
lative and subsequently uncontrollable increases occur in
many areas including unwarranted liberalizations in Federal
personnel benefits.
Over the past two years, legislation passed by the Congress
has increased the unfunded liability costs of the Federal
employees retirement system by $2 billion. These actions
will increase outlays in the next fiscal year by $300 million.
Other benefit bills still pending before Congress would create
an additional unfunded liability of about $20 billion and
would further increase 1976 budget outlays by $850 million.
These bills would be directly counter to our present efforts
3
to reduce the level of Federal spending and to submit a
balanced budget for fiscal year 1976. They would fuel
inflation precisely when all sectors of the economy must
exercise strict restraint.
It is most important to our Nation to have adequately
paid and motivated Federal employees. Nevertheless,
Congress cannot justifiably continue to pass legislation
which is not fiscally responsible. If we are to deal suc-
cessfully with inflation, the Federal Government as the
Nation's largest single employer must take the lead. If
we expect restraint in the private sector on wage and price
demands we must exercise even greater restraint in the
Government.
I urge the Congress to join me in the fight against
inflation which is our Nation's number one domestic problem.
I would hope that Congress will exercise responsibility in
considering further legislation benefiting Federal
employees.
Accordingly, I feel compelled to disapprove enactment
of H.R. 5094.
THE WHITE HOUSE
August , 1974
THE WHITE HOUSE
WASHINGTON
August 8, 1974
MEMORANDUM FOR: MR. WARREN HENDRIKS
FROM:
WILLIAM E. TIMMONS
SUBJECT:
Action Memorandum - Log No. 497
Enrolled Bill H. R. 5094 - Upgrading
of Deputy United States Marshals
proposal The Office and of has Legislative no additional Affairs recommendations. concurs in the attached
Bill slud be I
Attachment
signed today
copy of Jeasen staffing Timmons given
to JHJ to show
GERALD FORD LIBRARY
THE WHITE HOUSE
ACTION MEMORANDUM
WASHINGTON
LOG NO.: 497
Date: August 8, 1974
Time:
9:30 a.m.
FOR ACTION: Geoff Shepard
cc (for information): Warren K. Hendriks
Fret Buzhardt
Jerry Jones
Bill Timmons
Dave Gergen
FROM THE STAFF SECRETARY
DUE: Date:
Thursday, August 8, 1974
Time: 2:00 p.m.
SUBJECT:
Enrolled Bill H.R. 5094 - Upgrading of Deputy United
States Marshals
ACTION REQUESTED:
For Necessary Action
XX For Your Recommendations
Prepare Agenda and Brief
Draft Reply
For Your Comments
Draft Remarks
REMARKS:
Please return to Kathy Tindle - West Wing
GERALD FORD LIBRARY
PLEASE ATTACH THIS COPY TO MATERIAL SUBMITTED.
If you have any questions or if you anticipate a
delay in submitting the required material, please
K.R. COLE, JR.
telephone the Staff Secretary immediately.
For the President
THE WHITE HOUSE
RUSH
ACTION MEMORANDUM
WASHINGTON
LOG NO.: 497
Date: August 8, 1974
Time:
9:30 a. m.
FOR ACTION: Geoff Shepard
CC (for information): Warren K. Hendriks
Fred Buzhardt
Jerry Jones
Bill Timmons
Dave Gergen
FROM THE STAFF SECRETARY
DUE: Date:
Thursday, August 8, 1974
Time:
2:00 p.m.
SUBJECT:
Enrolled Bill H.R. 5094 - Upgrading of Deputy United
States Marshals
ACTION REQUESTED:
For Necessary Action
XX For Your Recommendations
Prepare Agenda and Brief
Draft Reply
For Your Comments
Draft Remarks
REMARKS:
Please return to Kathy Tindle - West Wing
PLEASE ATTACH THIS COPY TO MATERIAL SUBMITTED.
If you have any questions or if you anticipate a
delay in submitting the required material, please
Warren K. Hendriks
telephone the Staff Secretary immediately.
For the President
EXECUTIVE OFFICE OF THE PRESIDENT
OFFICE OF MANAGEMENT AND BUDGET
WASHINGTON, D.C. 20503
AUG 7 1974
MEMORANDUM FOR THE PRESIDENT
Subject: Enrolled Bill H.R. 5094 - Upgrading of Deputy
United States Marshals
Sponsor - Rep. Udall (D) Arizona and 13 others
Last Day for Action
August 12, 1974 - Monday
Purpose
Upgrades nonsupervisory deputy United States marshal positions
by one, two and three grades.
Agency Recommendations
Office of Management and Budget
Disapproval (Veto message
attached)
Department of Justice
Disapproval (Veto message
attached)
Civil Service Commission
Disapproval (Veto message
attached)
Discussion
H.R. 5094 is substantially similar to the deputy marshal
upgrading bill passed in the 92nd Congress, H.R. 13895, which
you pocket vetoed October 27, 1972. It has the effect of
exempting deputy U.S. marshals from the job evaluation standards
and controls of the General Schedule pay system, although--
unlike the vetoed bill--nominal coverage under that system
would be retained. In another respect, however, the bill is
even more objectionable than the vetoed bill because of its
discriminatory "grade conversion" provisions described below.
Under existing law, salaries for deputy United States marshals
are fixed under the General Schedule (GS) classification and
pay system which governs the pay of some 1.2 million Federal
2
white collar employees, including other law enforcement
employees in the Justice Department and elsewhere
throughout the Government.
Prior to June 15, 1973, deputy marshals were classified
at grade levels GS-6 through GS-9, with GS-8 as the typical
journeyman level. They were promoted at one-grade intervals.
Special deputy positions existed at GS-4 and GS-5 to provide
employment opportunities for Vietnam veterans with inadequate
or insufficient law enforcement training or experience to
qualify at the entry level.
On June 15, 1973, the Civil Service Commission issued new
standards for the deputy marshal occupation as a result of
a full-scale study. The new standards recognize the expanded
duties and responsibilities imposed on the Marshal Service
and accord deputy marshals classification and pay treatment
which is consistent with that of other Federal employees.
Under this system, the deputy marshal occupation is classified
at grade levels GS-5 through GS-9 and structured to provide
a two-grade interval progression for promotion, i.e., GS-5,
GS-7, and GS-9, with GS-9 as the full journeyman level. GS-4
was retained as the special rate for trainees and veterans,
and GS-5 as the entry level for more qualified candidates.
As a result of the new standards, large scale upgradings have
occurred. For example, Justice states that prior to the
application of the June 15, 1973 standard, 429 deputy marshals
were in grade GS-9 whereas now 949 are in that grade.
Positions not upgraded were carefully evaluated and found to
be properly classified at existing levels.
H.R. 5094 would legislate changes in the pay structure for
some 1,300 nonsupervisory deputy marshals, based on a
reconstruction of the grades and steps they were in prior to
CSC's 1973 reclassification, as follows:
--- The classification structure administratively defined
by the CSC would be fixed in statute and revised SO that GS-5
would be used as a trainee level only, and GS-11, rather than
GS-9, would become the full journeyman level. The GS-4 sub-
entry level would be eliminated.
subit
BERAER
3
-- Deputies in GS-4, GS-5, GS-7, and GS-9 would be
advanced to GS-5, GS-7, GS-9 and GS-11, respectively. These
persons would be converted to the same step rates of the
higher grades as those they now have in their present grades.
-- "Grade conversion" provisions in the bill would require
that persons who occupied positions at GS-6 and GS-8 would be
advanced to three different grades, GS-7, GS-9, or GS-11,
solely on the basis of their previous step rate. Those in
step 7 or below of their reconstructed grades would advance
to the next grade; those in higher steps would advance three
grades.
During congressional consideration of H.R. 5094, the Justice
Department, CSC and OMB strongly opposed enactment, and
threatened veto as unwarranted and discriminatory.
Arguments for Approval
1. It is argued that CSC's 1973 action in reclassifying
deputy marshal positions is insufficient in view of the
expanded duties and responsibilities imposed in recent years
on marshals, as a result of their increasing role in crime
control, urban strife, air piracy and other law enforcement
activities. The House Committee states that the revision
failed to upgrade deputy marshals to the pay status they
deserve.
2. In the House debate, a comparison was drawn between the
starting salary of $10,000 for D.C. Police privates, and
$6,882, then the sub-entry GS-4 rate for deputy marshal
trainees. The GS-5 trainee rate which would be provided in
the enrolled bill is currently $8,055 and the GS-7 rate is
$9,969.
3. Despite veto of the predecessor bill, and the strong
opposition of the executive branch, there is strong
congressional support for H.R. 5094, as evidenced by the
House vote of 319-84 and passage in the Senate by voice vote.
4. The upgrading of deputy marshals which has already occurred
as a result of CSC's new classification standards reduces the
number of upgradings under the enrolled bill, so that its
budget impact would be minimal.
4
Arguments for Disapproval.
1. H.R. 5094 is contrary to the most fundamental principles
of position classification and pay administration. Prefer-
ential upgrading for deputy marshals, regardless of duties
or of the relationship of such work to other Federal
occupations, subverts the principle of equal pay for equal
work which is the basis for the Federal pay system.
2. The proposed pay increases for marshals would blatantly
discriminate against the other 1.2 million Federal employees
under the General Schedule system, and most particularly
against those other law enforcement employees, such as
border patrol and correctional officers, whose pay grades
have been carefully aligned with those of deputy marshals.
3. Legislative job classification for deputy marshals will
become a direct precedent for other occupational groups--
firefighters, building guards, special police groups, et al--
to demand equal special pay treatment in Congress. While
the immediate impact of this legislation will be on law
enforcement groups within the Department of Justice, pressure
for statutory upgrading can be expected from all professional
and occupational categories, with substantial potential
budgetary cost if successful.
4. CSC states that continued congressional upgrading will
eventually dismantle the whole position classification system,
and the result will be "a hodgepodge of irrational misalign-
ments, " based entirely on the amount of pressure each group
can bring to bear.
5. The special employment program for Vietnam veterans in the
Marshal Service would have to be reduced, because the bill
eliminates the existing sub-entry level GS-4 position used to
employ veterans who lack sufficient education and experience
to qualify for GS-5.
6. The grade conversion features of the bill would create
irrational pay disparities within the Marshal Service itself.
The bill mandates highly irregular rules for the initial
promotion to grade and to step within grade, with the result
that persons now performing identical work will be placed in
different grades, and those within the same grade will receive
unjustified differentials in pay. Additional upgradings may
well be required to remedy the pay distortions the bill
legislates.
5
7. Deputy marshals cannot fairly be compared with city
policemen, however important, valuable or dangerous their
work may be. The fact that D.C. Metropolitan Police receive
higher pay than marshals, cited as justification for H.R. 5094,
is not valid grounds for the upgrading this bill provides.
CSC emphasizes the fact that GS-11 is simply not warranted
as the journeyman level for deputy marshal work, especially
when compared with the demands of investigative positions
classified at the same grade.
Recommendations
Justice recommends against approval of H.R. 5094, and expresses
particular concern for " the chain reaction effect that
undoubtedly will follow if H.R. 5094 becomes law. " The
Department also states:
"
we believe that legislation of this type is
totally unwarranted and unnecessary and that
enactment of H.R. 5094 would irreparably harm
the Federal compensation system.
"
CSC strongly opposes the bill and urges disapproval, citing
the very serious potential dangers of this sort of legisla-
tion". The Commission also states:
"We are convinced that a large number of occupational
pressure groups are watching the progress of H.R. 5094
with great interest. If it is approved we expect them
to move immediately in the same direction. The
eventual result could be the scrapping of the classi-
fication system, and the piecemeal establishment by
Congress of every grade and every step for every
separate occupation in the Federal service."
OMB concurs with Justice and CSC and strongly recommends
disapproval. Both agencies have prepared draft veto messages
and we have also prepared a draft for your consideration,
drawing on the CSC draft.
We are giving consideration as to whether or not it would be
desirable to include in the veto message reference to certain
other objectionable personnel bills which are pending in the
6
Congress, and will be in touch with your staff on this
matter.
α.
a
Director
Enclosures
ASSISTANT ATTORNEY GENERAL
LEGISLATIVE AFFAIRS
Department of Justice
Washington, D.C. 20530
AUG 2 1974
Honorable Roy L. Ash
Director, Office of Management
and Budget
Washington, D.C. 20503
Dear Mr. Ash:
In compliance with your request, I have examined a facsimile
of the enrolled bill, H.R. 5094, a bill "To amend title 5, United
States Code, to provide for the reclassification of positions of
deputy United States marshal, and for other purposes."
Positions of deputy United States marshal now are graded
under the general position classification and pay plan established
by the Congress in chapter 51 of title 5, United States Code, to
provide sound and equitable grade and pay relationships among
white collar positions throughout the Government. Under this plan,
the Civil Service Commission prepares Government-wide standards
which define the different grades in terms of the duties, respon-
sibilities and qualification requirements of the positions, and
the Department of Justice fixes the grades and pay of its positions
in accordance with these standards. Significantly, this plan permits
the Department of Justice to base decisions to promote employees on
two fundamental considerations: (1) is there work of the higher
grade to be performed?, and (2) are the employees qualified to perform
the higher level of work? These are management prerogatives essential
to the effective and economical administration of a large and diversified
work force.
H.R. 5094 would, on the other hand, fix the grades and pay of
deputy marshal positions arbitrarily by statute rather than permit
their evaluation under the carefully structured position classifica-
tion system applicable to the positions of most other white collar
Federal employees. Moreover, it would legislate a promotion system
based on seniority which would require the Attorney General to promote
each deputy marshal year after year until he reached the top non-
supervisory grade of GS-11 whether or not there was GS-11 level work
to be done by that employee.
2.
Not to be overlooked, of course, is the chain reaction effect
that undoubtedly will follow if H. R. 5094 becomes law. How
long will the same union which represents many deputy marshals
wait to seek similar legislation for border patrol agents and
correctional officers, whose grades traditionally have been
carefully aligned with those of deputy marshals? Already the
Immigration and Naturalization Service has asked the Acting
Assistant Attorney General for Administration to seek Civil Service
Commission revision of the position classification standard for
border patrol agent positions giving as one basis for this the
recent upgrading of deputy marshal positions under the June 15,
1973 standard cited in H. R. 5094.
Another objectionable feature of H. R. 5094 is the
cost which would be both exorbitant and inflationary. First
year costs are estimated to be $2 million; costs in succeeding
years would have to be determined on an individual basis, but
obviously would be substantial.
In summary, we consider that deputy marshals have been
treated fairly under the existing system. For example, it should
be noted that prior to application of the June 15, 1973 standard,
429 deputy marshals were in grade GS-9, whereas now 949 are in
that grade. For the reasons stated above, we believe that
legislation of this type is totally unwarranted and unnecessary
and that enactment of H. R. 5094 would irreparably harm the Federal
compensation system. Similar legislation, H. R. 13895 of the 92nd
Congress, was disapproved by President Nixon last year because
of the highly preferential treatment if would have accorded
deputy marshals.
The Department of Justice recommends against Executive
approval of this bill.
A proposed veto message is enclosed.
Sincerely,
W. Vincent Rakestraw
Assistant Attorney General
FOR
GERALD.
MEMORANDUM OF DISAPPROVAL
I have before me H.R. 5094, a bill "To amend Title 5, United
States Code, to provide for the reclassification of positions of
deputy United States marshal, and for other purposes." This bill
would remove deputy marshals from the General Schedule system and
raise their pay by as much as 24 percent. While I fully recognize
the complexity and importance of the work that is performed by our
deputy United States marshals, I have had to decide not to approve
this bill.
The General Schedule classification and pay system provides for
the equitable compensation of more than 1.2 million Federal employees,
including deputy United States marshals and employees in other law
enforcement occupations with responsibilities similar to those of
deputy United States marshals. A bill such as H.R. 5094, which
would classify positions by statute rather than by an evaluation of
the work performed, defeats the basic principle of equal pay for
equal work, and is unfair to all the other General Schedule employees
whose positions would continue to be classified in accordance with
accepted classification principles.
The Civil Service Commission, working with the Department of
Justice, recently revised the classification standard for the deputy
marshal occupation in recognition of the increasing responsibilities
of the work they perform. I understand that, as a result of this,
2.
all positions are now classified in accordance with the new Civil
Service Commission standards, and a substantial number of deputy
marshals have been appropriately upgraded.
This Administration is vitally concerned that we do everything
we can to win the battle against inflation by holding the line on
wage increases that are excessive. The increases afforded deputy
United States marshals as a result of the revised Civil Service
Commission standard provided an equitable level of pay for
these vital employees in relation to other Federal employees.
UNITED
SENIS
CIVIL
COMMINITY
UNITED STATES CIVIL SERVICE COMMISSION
SERVICE
WASHINGTON, D.C. 20415
CHAIRMAN
August 2, 1974
Honorable Roy L. Ash
Director
Office of Management and Budget
Attention: Assistant Director for Legislative
Reference
Dear Mr. Ash:
This is in response to your request for the Commission's views and
recommendation on enrolled bill H.R. 5094, an enrolled bill "To
amend title 5, United States Code, to provide for the reclassifica-
tion of positions of deputy United States marshal, and for other
purposes.'
This measure legislates grades for deputy U.S. marshals, placing
them in grades on the basis of the grade and step they were in prior
to June 1973, regardless of their duties or the relationship of dep-
uty marshal work to the work of other Federal occupations. The bill
effectively establishes GS-11 as the full performance grade for
deputy marshal work, and eliminates the possibility of a GS-4 entry
level. The Civil Service Commission strongly opposes this highly
preferential measure and urges that it be disapproved. The bill:
- is contrary to the most fundamental principles of posi-
tion classification and pay administration;
- would subvert the statutory principle of equal pay for
equal work, creating inequities between deputy U.S.
marshals and the other 1.2 million Federal employees
under the General Schedule (especially those in other
law enforcement occupations);
- would place deputy marshals performing identical work in
different grades;
- would establish completely irrational pay differentials
between deputy marshals in the same grade; and
- would stop the present practice of employing veterans
under special programs starting at the GS-4 level when
those veterans do not meet the qualification require-
ments for the GS-5 level.
2
This enrolled bill is very similar to a previous bill, H.R. 13895,
which was passed by the 92nd Congress but disapproved by the Presi-
dent. Among the arguments for H.R. 13895 was the contention that
the Civil Service Commission standards for this occupation were not
up to date, and did not provide appropriate grades for deputy marshal
work. Since that time, the Civil Service Commission has completed an
occupational study of the deputy marshal occupation. The study found
that the occupation needed substantial restructuring, including a
change from a one to a two-grade interval progression for promotions,
and an increase in the typical journeyman level from the GS-8 to the
GS-9 level. Those changes in the occupation were carried out through
the approval, in June 1973, of new qualification and classification
standards for the occupation.
One of the specific findings of the occupational study was that the
GS-11 level is simply not warranted for the typical journeyman posi-
tion in the Marshals Service. The study included, for example, a
comparison of deputy marshal and investigative positions. The Com-
mission's standard for investigative positions shows that GS-11 in-
vestigators are responsible for the independent handling of an entire
case. The characteristics and specific examples given in the standards
for investigative positions indicate that the full performance level of
deputy marshals does not match the GS-11 level. Deputy marshals are
almost exclusively limited to one aspect of the cases described at this
level, i.e. location and apprehension of the subject. Seizure of prop-
erty is also limited in scope. There is no need to establish any case
concerning the property. The deputy identifies, seizes, and protects
the property. The rest of the case relating to the property is the
concern of others. To place these positions at the GS-11 level would
therefore be in conflict with the principle of equal pay for equal work.
That principle would be even more blatantly violated by the grade con-
version provisions of H.R. 5094. Those provisions would place deputies
performing identical work in different grades by assigning grades based
on the previous within-grade (pay) step held by each deputy. Since
large scale upgradings have occurred by application of the new standard
since June, the bill has now been amended to prevent a "double-jump."
If a marshal has been upgraded under the new standard, the bill re-
quires the Department of Justice to determine where he was prior to
this upgrading, and move him from that point to the grade and step
specified by the peculiar advancement formula provided by the bill.
The formula ignores the fact that grade level alone reflects the level
of work, while the pay step reflects longevity. The bill would in
some instances force the Department of Justice to upgrade deputy. mar-
shals to a particular grade based on their previous step. As an ex-
ample, two marshals doing identical work have been advanced to GS-9
3
under the new standard. The bill passes. The Department of Justice
determines that last June one was in step 7 of GS-8 while the other
(because of longer service) was in step 8 of the same grade. The bill
advances the more senior to GS-11 (for which he is clearly not quali-
fied) with an increase of $68 a year. The more junior remains in
GS-9 but with an increase of $1624 a year. One gets an unwarranted
two-grade promotion; the other gets an unwarranted four-step salary
increase; the more junior now earns $1150 a year more than his co-
worker with longer service; and they are still doing identical jobs.
Under the new standard, we now have about 800 marshals in GS-9, all
working at the same level--doing essentially the same job. H.R. 5094
would leave half of them in GS-9 but move the other half to GS-11.
The 400 left in the correct grade will surely file appeals. The bill
makes no pretense at equity; it openly establishes inequity.
Clearly, the establishment of the principle that a whole occupation
can be inequitably upgraded by preferential legislation--if its lobby
is vocal enough--is simply the thin edge of the wedge leading to the
dismantling of our whole position classification system. Obviously,
all employees would like to be in higher grades. If the deputy mar-
shals succeed in getting preferential treatment, we would expect the
policeman to try the same tactic; if they are successful, then the
firefighters, then the correctional officers, then the translators,
then the IRS officers, and so forth, until eventually the whole clas-
sification structure is a hodgepodge of irrational misalignments.
Then the marshals, having seen their preferential position eroded by
the success of other groups, would be ready to start the process over
again with a special bill to raise them to GS-12.
We are convinced that a large number of occupational pressure groups
are watching the progress of H.R. 5094 with great interest. If it is
approved, we expect them to move immediately in the same direction.
The eventual result could be the scrapping of the classification sys-
tem, and the piecemeal establishment by Congress of every grade and
every step for every separate occupation in the Federal Service.
The bill would also reduce the hiring of veterans by the U.S. Marshal
Service. The Service has encouraged the hiring of veterans through
the Veterans Readjustment Act by filling positions below the normal
trainee level. This practice has permitted the hiring and training of
veterans who could not meet all of the normal entry requirements.
H.R. 5094 would stop this and similar programs by failing to provide
for the possible filling of positions below the GS-5 level.
4
In view of these problems, and the very serious potential dangers of
this sort of legislation, the Civil Service Commission urges that the
President disapprove H.R. 5094. A proposed veto message is enclosed.
By direction of the Commission:
Sincerely yours,
Jayne acting B S pain
Chairman
Enclosure
TO THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES
I am returning to Congress without my approval H. R. 5094, an enactment
"To amend title 5, United States Code, to provide for the reclassification
of positions of deputy United States marshal, and for other purposes".
This enactment would violate fundamental principles of fairness,
creating serious pay inequities between deputy United States marshals
and other Federal law enforcement personnel. Even more illogically, it
would create severe disruption of existing grade and pay relationships
among the deputy marshals themselves - extending so far in some cases
as to place more junior marshals in pay rates as much as $1,150 above
more senior coworkers who now, properly, are at a relatively higher rate.
Some deputies doing identical work would be placed in different pay grades,
and deputies doing different work would be placed in the same pay grade.
The enactment would run directly counter to the principle of equal
pay for equal work. I find no basis for granting this small group
such highly preferential treatment. Our policy must be, and is, to
provide equitable salaries for all Federal employees. The proposed Thiomeasure
legislation violates that policy.
The action I am taking today in no way reflects on my appreciation of
these employees. Their work is obviously important, but approval of
this legislation would give this one small group an unwarranted advantage
over other groups of equally dedicated employees.
Accordingly, I am constrained to disapprove enactment of H.R. 5094.
THE WHITE HOUSE
TO THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES
I am returning without my. approval, H.R. 5094, a bill
which would raise the pay of deputy United States marshals
by as much as 24 percent through comprehensive, across-the-
board upgrading.
This bill is similar to H.R. 13895 which I disapproved
on October 27, 1972.
I am disapproving H.R. 5094 because it violates funda-
mental principles of fairness. It would place deputy marshal
positions in salary ranges that would value such work at
higher levels than the General Schedule provides for other
work of comparable difficulty, despite the fact that the
Civil Service Commission has already taken action to remedy
any inequities which may have existed.
Even worse, it would create severe disruption of
existing grade and pay relationships among the deputy marshals
themselves--extending so far in some cases as to call for
paying junior marshals as much as $1,150 above more senior
coworkers. Some deputies doing identical work would be placed
in different pay grades, and deputies doing different work
would be placed in the same pay grade. The bill could also
markedly reduce the present special hiring program for vet-
erans who wish to become deputy marshals and thus run counter
to our efforts to enhance employment for Vietnam veterans.
H.R. 5094 runs directly counter to the principle of
equal pay for equal work. Our policy must be, and is, to
provide equitable salaries for all Federal employees. I
find no basis for granting one small group highly preferential
treatment.
2
Approval of the proposed statutory pay plan, in addition
to being inherently unfair, would also serve as a precedent
for other occupational groups to seek favored treatment in
the Congress. The result could be a welter of costly,
irrational pay systems, which would undermine the classifi-
cation principles which are at the heart of the Government's
merit system.
My action in disapproving this bill in no way reflects
on the very high regard I have for the outstanding men and
women who carry out the important work of deputy marshals.
Approval of this bill, however, would give these employees a
wholly unwarranted advantage over many other groups of equally
devoted Federal employees who also perform valuable service.
I am also disturbed with this bill in that it represents
another in a series of congressional actions to pass a myriad
of unwarranted legislation often requiring unbudgeted increases
in Federal expenditures. The result invariably is that cumu-
lative and subsequently uncontrollable increases occur in
many areas including unwarranted liberalizations in Federal
personnel benefits.
Over the past two years, legislation passed by the Congress
has increased the unfunded liability costs of the Federal
employees retirement system by $2 billion. These actions
will increase outlays in the next fiscal year by $300 million.
Other benefit bills still pending before Congress would create
an additional unfunded liability of about $20 billion and
would further increase 1976 budget outlays by $850 million.
These bills would be directly counter to our present efforts
3
to reduce the level of Federal spending and to submit a
balanced budget for fiscal year 1976. They would fuel
inflation precisely when all sectors of the economy must
exercise strict restraint.
It is most important to our Nation to have adequately
paid and motivated Federal employees. Nevertheless,
Congress cannot justifiably continue to pass legislation
which is not fiscally responsible. If we are to deal suc-
cessfully with inflation, the Federal Government as the
Nation's largest single employer must take the lead. If
we expect restraint in the private sector on wage and price
demands we must exercise even greater restraint in the
Government.
I urge the Congress to join me in the fight against
inflation which is our Nation's number one domestic problem.
I would hope that Congress will exercise responsibility in
considering further legislation benefiting Federal
employees.
Accordingly, I feel compelled to disapprove enactment
of H.R. 5094.
THE WHITE HOUSE
August
, 1974
(Gergen)
August 12, 1974
TO THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES
I am today returning to the Congress without my approval
H. R. 5094, a measure that would require the reclassification and
upgrading of deputy United States marshals.
A bill substantially similar to this legislation was passed
by the Congress and then pocket vetoed by Presiden Nixon in
October, 1972. Since that time various departments of the
executive branch have consistently argued that such legislation
would be unwise and discriminatory.
That opposition has been based upon the view that by singling
out deputy United States marshals for significant salary increases,
the Government would be creating serious pay inequities with other
Federal law enforcement personnel, thus violating fundamental
principles of fairness. In addition, H.R. 5094 would severely
disrupt existing grade and pay relationships among the deputy
marshals themselves. In some cases, under this legislation,
junior marshals would be paid $1, 150 a year more than their
senior colleagues. Some deputies doing identical work would be
placed in different pay grades, while deputies performing different
jobs would be placed in the same pay grade.
-2-
I fully appreciate the fine service performed by our
deputy U.S. marshals, and I am aware that the Congress was
prompted by a desire to ensure that their pay matched the
increasing responsibilities they have assumed in recent years.
But I also believe that this legislation would run directly
counter to the
principle of equal pay for equal
work that underlies our civil service system. Our policy has
been and must continue to be one of fundamental fairness to
all Federal employees. For that reason, I am returning this
legislation without my approval.
# # #