Lapas attēli
PDF
ePub

GOVERNMENT PRINTING OFFICE

STATEMENT OF HON. DANFORD L. SAWYER, JR., PUBLIC PRINTER

ACCOMPANIED BY:

WILLIAM J. BARRETT, DEPUTY PUBLIC PRINTER

GARRETT E. BROWN, JR., GENERAL COUNSEL

ROBERT J. MCKENDRY, ASSISTANT PUBLIC PRINTER FOR OPERATIONS WALTER C. DeVAUGHN, ASSISTANT PUBLIC PRINTER FOR ADMIN. ISTRATION

ALLEN R. VOSS, ASSISTANT PUBLIC PRINTER FOR POLICY AND PLANNING

MICHAEL F. DIMARIO, DEPUTY ASSISTANT PUBLIC PRINTER (SUPERINTENDENT OF DOCUMENTS)

WILLIAM F. KLUGH, COMPTROLLER

GERALD E. SEBOLD, DEPUTY COMPTROLLER

W. SCOTT SONNTAG III, DEPUTY CUSTOMER SERVICE MANAGER
JUDY MORTON, LEGISLATIVE LIAISON/PUBLIC AFFAIRS OFFICER
RAYMOND
DESIGNATE

M.

TAYLOR,

SUPERINTENDENT

OF

DOCUMENTS

INTRODUCTION OF ASSOCIATES

Senator MATTINGLY. This afternoon we have the Government Printing Office with Mr. Sawyer, the Public Printer of the United States, and he is going to bring his budget estimate for fiscal year 1983 before us.

We welcome you this afternoon. I would be happy to hear your testimony and your request before we proceed to questioning.

Mr. SAWYER. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. I would like to introduce the people that I have brought with me. Some of them are here for the first time.

Starting from the left to right, your right, my left, at the end of the table, Mr. Walter DeVaughn, who is the Assistant Public Printer for Administration.

Next to him, Mr. Michael DiMario, who is the Deputy Superintendent of Documents.

Next to him is Mr. Allen Voss, who is Assistant Public Printer for Policy and Planning.

Immediately to my right is Mr. Bill Klugh, who is Comptroller of the Government Printing Office.

Mr. Garrett Brown, General Counsel, is the gentleman next to him. Mr. Bill Barrett, who is my Deputy; Mr. Bob McKendry, Assistant Public Printer for Operations; the infamous Scotty Sonntag from our Customer Service Department, well known to everyone in Washington,

(193)

D.C., and then Judy Morton, who is in charge of Legislative Liaison and Public Affairs, and Jerry Sebold from our Financial Management Service.

Senator MATTINGLY. You must have run out of room.

Mr. SAWYER. Though he hasn't been sworn in yet, Mr. Raymond Taylor, the new Superintendent of Documents from the State of North Carolina.

Senator MATTINGLY. North Carolina, it is almost south, almost Georgia. [Laughter.]

All right.

Mr. SAWYER. I have a general statement that I submitted for the record. I will summarize the statement that I have. It will take just a few minutes.

BUDGET REQUEST

The original funds requested for fiscal year 1983 total $135,727,000 to cover those programs that require appropriations directly to the Government Printing Office.

This request consisted of $90,247,000 for the congressional printing and binding appropriation required by Congress; $16,591,000 for the printing and binding appropriation required by law for printing to be distributed without charge to the recipient and $28,899,000 in the salaries and expenses appropriation for the various programs of the Superintendent of Documents.

The request also contains a $303,000 pay raise supplemental for fiscal year 1982 for the Office of the Superintendent of Documents.

REDUCTIONS IN BUDGET REQUEST

Since our original budget request, other actions have taken place which I believe will substantially reduce the funds needed for fiscal year 1983.

We now estimate that the requested funds for fiscal year 1983 can be reduced by about $12.1 million through the savings that will be achieved from these actions. The makeup of these reductions are: $8.5 million in the congressional printing and binding appropriation; $3.1 million in the printing and binding appropriation; and $550,000 in the salaries and expenses appropriation. Also, the $303,000 pay supplemental for fiscal year 1982 salaries and expenses appropriation will not be needed.

These reductions are the result of my rescinding the price increase that was effective March 1 and my commitment to continue to make the Government Printing Office more cost effective by holding the line on prices and reducing our expenses.

For the first 5 months of fiscal year 1982, the printing and binding operation suffered a loss of $4.9 million. This unprecedented loss was of even greater concern when considered in the context of the present major effort to reduce the volume of both the executive and congressional printing.

RESPONSES TO LOSS PATTERNS

Government Printing Office's response to prior loss patterns has been to impose substantial price increases upon the Congress and the agencies. Thus, when we were faced with both the greatest loss and the lowest congressional page volume during any similar period in the last 10 years, our first reaction was to once again raise the rates charged to our customers, the Congress and the agencies.

We initially implemented a 16-percent increase. It quickly became apparent, however, that since we had become far more expensive than the private sector, we were, in effect, pricing ourselves out of the market. It was clear that the only way to assure the Government Printing Office's competitive stance was to follow the path used in the private sector; that is, to cut costs and prices and to improve efficiency. We therefore rescinded the price increase; the printing and binding accounts for a large portion of the legislative budget. By rescinding this 16-percent increase, we will save the Congress approximately $10.7 million in fiscal year 1983.

In addition to the above losses, we were faced with an excess of personnel because our hiring freeze and cost reduction programs had not reduced the work force and costs to the level required to match the diminished workload.

FURLOUGH OF EMPLOYEES

In order to recoup our losses, I was faced with the unpleasant choice of a furlough and a permanent reduction in force. I, therefore, implemented a furlough which encompasses all Government Printing Office employees for 6 days over the last 7 months of 1982.

Five of the six furlough days either precede or follow a 3-day weekend, and the sixth furlough day is adjacent to a weekend. This will give the employees five 4-day weekends and a 3-day weekend.

I think you can see, we have given this matter a great deal of study and consideration in order to address the fiscal problems brought on by declining work volume and increasing costs and at the same time, to minimize the burden on our employees.

We had originally considered furloughing half of our employees for 13 days; however, by scheduling the furloughs to coincide with periods when Congress is not in session and in-plant work is down, we will be able to close the entire plant and to spread the furlough equally among all employees. I anticipate that our furlough will offset much of the already-incurred $4.9 million loss.

I chose a furlough because it would have a greatly reduced effect upon our employees.

I realize, however, that this is only a temporary measure to cut our losses.

196

LONG-TERM PROBLEMS

Unless we are able in the next 6 months to solve the long-term problems which confront the Government Printing Office, we will be required to implement far more drastic measures, including the elimination of a large number of jobs by a reduction in force. It says here I am confident. I would prefer to change that to I hope we can avoid this most unpleasant consequence, and we can only do it if certain events

occur:

First, we must obtain further "early-out" retirement authority from the Office of Personnel Management. We have already requested this. An internal survey indicates that 495 of our employees would be interested in retiring early. Actually, there are in excess of 1,200 eligible; two, we must tighten up the Government Printing Office internally and make it more competitive and cost effective. I recognize that the solution to much of this problem lies solely with the Government Printing Office and we are proceeding to deal with it.

Three, we must, with the full cooperation of the Joint Committee on Printing: (a) secure the right to produce more Government printing internally-more specifically, the long-run, high-volume work which the Government Printing Office can do most effectively-by altering certain policies under which we now operate; and (b) By obtaining more printing work for the Government Printing Office by preventing agencies from circumventing the requirements of title 44.

WAGES PAID TO CRAFT EMPLOYEES

A major factor in the Government Printing Office's high cost is the fact that the wages the Government Printing Office pays to nongeneral schedule craft and industrial employees far exceed those paid to their counterparts in other Federal agencies or in the private sector. While personnel costs amount to about 25 percent of the total Government Printing Office expenses, they comprise some 80 percent of product costs in-house-where most, I must add, of the Congress' work is done as opposed to 40 to 50 percent in the private sector.

A recent survey has shown that the average wage disparity between the Government Printing Office and other agencies is approximately 22 percent.

In our pending wage negotiations-we should say in our ongoing wage negotiations-we will seek to remedy this disparity and return the Government Printing Office to parity with the rest of the Federal Government. The amount saved from wage reductions will be immediately applied to further reduce the printing costs of the Congress and the agencies on a dollar-for-dollar basis.

A return to parity would save the Congress alone about $9 million and the Government as a whole about $18 million per year.

Senator MATTINGLY. What was that again? Parity would do what? Mr. SAWYER. A return to parity, in other words, bringing the Government Printing Office salaries to the same level paid to either comparable workers in the Federal area or the private sector would save Congress $9 million and the Government as a whole $18 million per

year.

Senator MATTINGLY. What are the figures for the Government as a whole?

Mr. SAWYER. Some 50-odd percent of the work is being done for Congress. The other 50 percent is done for various other Federal agencies. The dollar amounts would break down to $9 million for the other agencies, and $9 million for Congress.

By the way, the humidity in this room is worse than in Georgia and Florida. [Laughter.]

EXCESS PERSONNEL

Another major factor in the Government Printing Office's high cost is an excess of personnel in many areas. Our requested "early out" is directed toward this. I have also implemented plans to hire an independent, private contractor on a bid basis to prepare a study of the Government Printing Office's workload and staffing level, and to make specific recommendations vis-a-vis contracting out versus in-plant production and to make recommendations as to staffing levels for the next decade.

CRAFT SYSTEM REVIEW

As a result of a recent Court of Appeals decision, I have broadened that requested study to include a thorough review of the craft system at the Government Printing Office in order to determine whether that system confers upon a select group a significantly higher salary based upon status rather than upon duties performed and whether it artifically impedes the upward mobility of qualified persons.

If we do all of these things, I hope that we will have averted the need for any more drastic personnel actions, and we will also have made the Government Printing Office more effective and efficient.

This will benefit not only the Government Printing Office, but also the Congress, the agencies, and very definitely the American public.

HIRING FREEZE

In addition to the actions previously mentioned, I have already effected several other actions which will also reduce cost. I initiated a hiring freeze in September 1981 which will be continued to accommodate the lower level of operations and realize savings of our more efficient operational methods.

Since September, we have reduced about 200 people from the payroll with this freeze. Actually, over 400 people have left, but I guess just half of those are retirements.

OVERTIME WORK

Overtime during the first 6 months of fiscal year 1982 was reduced to about one-third of that in a comparable period in fiscal year 1981.

« iepriekšējāTurpināt »