Mr. STURHAHN. Yes, sir; we get some from the State Department. Mr. PRESTON. I would like to know the total of the amount of funds you get. Mr. POPE. During the current fiscal year, a total of $205,702 has been transferred to us. That has come from the Philippine rehabilitation program, cooperation with American Republics program, and working funds from the Army and Navy. During 1950, we expect to have about $42,838 transferred for the same reason. We perform housekeeping functions for these same activities. Mr. POPE. Yes, sir. Mr. PRESTON. Are they shown in this break-down in the justifications under the heading "Business management"? Mr. POPE. Yes, sir; they are included in this money. RATIO BETWEEN MANAGEMENT AND OPERATIONAL PERSONNEL Mr. PRESTON. I believe you said in California you had 97 employees in business management and had in the region 1,600 employees. Is that right? Mr. POPE. That is right. Mr. PRESTON. That is one in business management for every 16 people. That is the ratio, is it not? Mr. POPE. About one for every 60. There are about 97 business management employees and about 1,600 total. Mr. PRESTON. One for every 60? Mr. POPE. Yes. Mr. PRESTON. My mathematics must be failing me, if that is right. Mr. POPE. You are correct, sir. Mr. PRESTON. It is about 1 for every 16. Is not that a pretty high ratio of the division between administration and operation? Mr. STURHAHN. On a percentage basis, I would not say so at all. On a percentage basis, comparing the total of business management against the total of CAA people, the man-year percentage is 8.2. On the fund basis, it is 4.4. Mr. PRESTON. It is 8.2 on the percentage basis? Mr. STURHAHN. Of people. Mr. STURHAHN. Yes, sir. Mr. PRESTON. As a matter of fact, I would not be very proud of that figure if I were running the agency, on a percentage basis-8.2 from the administrative standpoint. Mr. LEE. On the expenditure of funds for this function, we have a steadily decreasing percentage for business management compared with the other employees of the organization. We are now down to 4.4, whereas it has been higher percentages in previous years. It has steadily decreased in relation to total funds. Mr. STURHAHN. I might add that 4.4 is based on money for salaries and expenses. On the total program it is 2.7. Mr. PRESTON. Of the over-all program? Mr. STURHAHN. Of the over-all program. But we do not like to show that, because the construction programs vary from year to year. Even though it is a higher percentage, we would rather quote the percentage on salaries and expenses which is a continuing program. Mr. PRESTON. Well, that 2.7 makes your ANDB figure look pretty large. Is not that the figure of ANDB? Mr. POPE. It was 2 percent. Mr. PRESTON. That makes a figure of 3.5 for the Federal airport program look out of line, if you have an over-all figure of 2.7, does it not? Mr. POPE. No, sir. That money for the Federal-aid airport program also includes engineers and planning people. It goes far beyond the normal administrative type of activity that we are talking about in business management. Mr. PRESTON. In other words, you do not charge engineering up to operations but charge it up to administration in the airport program? Mr. POPE. Yes; by virtue of the limitation set forth in the FederalAid Airport Act for the payment of personnel and related administrative costs, we are required to show it that way. Mr. PRESTON. I do not know whether you really ought properly to charge that to administration when it is really an operational function. Mr. POPE. You are perfectly correct. I think that is part of the reason why there is a difference between the REA figure and the Federal-aid airport figure. The Federal-aid airport figure includes a lot more than the REA estimate, since it includes the engineers and planning people and other types of people required to carry out the program. Mr. STURHAHN. And REA, incidentally, has no engineering cost; all of the engineering is borne by the local sponsor. Mr. PRESTON. But they certainly have a very large engineer division here in Washington to review the estimates prepared by the field engineers. You would not deny that, would you? Mr. STURHAHN. I am just quoting what Mr. Neal of the Department of Agriculture told me this morning. He said they had no engineering cost in the total of administration expenses of $5,670,000. Mr. PRESTON. That is probably true, because they have got the operations where they should be. It would be impossible to operate REA without a large engineering force in Washington to review the field estimates. Mr. STURHAHN. I think he meant they have no construction engineers in the field, such as we have in airports. Mr. PRESTON. True. Mr. POPE. One further point in answer to your question: during the past 3 years our operating programs have increased about 34 percent; during this same period business management has increased 12 percent, including project audit. We are actually falling behind, because we are not increasing business management proportionately. I do not think we should increase business management at a rate of 100 percent of the increase in the other programs, but it should be a larger increase than we have been allowed. Mr. PRESTON. I think that is as it should be. I do not think that is any special accomplishment. Any business organization can add personnel without necessarily having to increase the administrative staff. They can increase and decrease and still operate with the same administrative staff. Mr. POPE. As we add people, we increase our pay-roll problems and leave problems, and increase the number of people required to recruit and handle our personnel problems. There is some relationship between the growth in the programs and the growth in business management. It is not fully comparable, but I think an increase of 12 percent is too low to permit us to do the type of job required of us. NUMBER AND LOCATION OF FULL-TIME EMPLOYEES OF CAA Mr. ROONEY. Awhile ago, in pointing out the various locations on the map, you told us the number of personnel at Seattle and Los Angeles, and the number of business-management people. Will you complete for the record at this point the chart showing the number at each of the regions? Mr. STURHAHN. Yes, sir. You want that for 1949 and 1950? Mr. STURHAHN. Yes, sir. (The information requested is as follows:) Distribution by location of total CAA full-time positions 1 Includes 19 positions in 1949 and 20 in 1950 at CAA hangar paid from "Salaries and expenses," CAA. 2 1950 includes positions for Philippine rehabilitation and cooperation with American Republics; 1949 includes positions for Philippine rehabilitation, cooperation with American Republics, and workin? funds commerce. TRANSFERS TO SALARIES AND EXPENSES Mr. ROONEY. At page 41 of the committee print there is a statement of transfers, one from the establishment of air navigation facilities, Civil Aeronautics Administration, $804,000; another from air navigation development, CAA, $56,600; a third from Federal aid airport program, Federal Airport Act, CAA, $625,500; and a fourth from construction of public airports, Alaska, CAA, $100,000. These four items constitute the total of transfers to be received by business management; is that correct? Mr. POPE. No, sir. Some of those are for other functions. Of the total of $1,586,100, $415,600 is for operation of aircraft. We discussed that when we covered that item. One hundred and thirty thousand dollars is for the interfunctional activity, which appears later in the budget, and $20,000 is for printing and binding. Therefore, the net for business management is $1,020,500. I would be glad to file a statement in the record on that if you would like to have it. Mr. ROONEY. It might be well for you to do so. Mr. POPE. Yes, sir. (The matter referred to is as follows:) 88465 49- -27 |