New York chief. For the most part, though, firemen fall back on a standard line-one that rings true but also absolves them of personal blame: "We're a highly visible sign of authority. We represent the establishment." Whatever the explanation, fire departments across the country are straining to cope with their new problems. But firemen are slow to change, and what seems to them a dazzling innovation may not impress the ghettos. The most conspicuous changes are technical responses to the new harassment. Some departments, for example, are experimenting with limited response to boxes that have a high percentage of false alarms. In Chicago, a “cold box" used to draw four engines, two trucks and two chief's cars; now, response to some boxes may be as little as one engine—which will call for help if there really is a fire. Department officials favor such measures, but they go against the all-or-nothing grain of the firemen themselves-who regard any calculated risks as an affront to their mission. "What if people were hanging from a fourth-floor window, waiting to be rescued?" demands a New York fireman with a show of anger. On another level, fire departments across the country are trying to mend fences with community-relations programs. San Francisco hopes to spruce up its shabby firehouses and hire neighborhood youths for summer jobs. New York firemen are being told to address blacks and Puerto Ricans as "sir," and to be as careful about damage to slum homes as they would be on Park Avenue. Soul: Rapport with the black community has clearly been helped by the wide circulation of a photograph of a Boston fireman giving mouth-to-mouth artificial respiration to a black baby, with a caption reading, "That's Soul!" But the black resentment is deep; even a real-life replay of this scene wasn't enough to warm a Bronx Negro recently. "A kid fell five stories from a tenement fire escape," recalls New York fireman Frank Porr. "He was bleeding from the ears, nose and mouth when we arrived. I gave him cardiac massage and mouth-to-mouth, but he was gone. As I was getting up, this guy comes up to me and says, 'You mean you couldn't save that kid? What if he'd been white?' " In the long run, the best hope for easing tension depends on the energetic recruiting efforts that practically all big-city departments are now pushing in ghetto areas. But it's already plain that there won't be any overnight miracles. Civil-service tests tend to be full of irrelevant questions (sample: What were the original thirteen states in the Union?), and the recruiting process can be as ponderous as a steam pumper (in New York, the tests are given only once every four years). Even worse, few Negroes show much interest in becoming firemen, and even fewer like what they see on the job. In Boston, 90 blacks responded to a ghetto recruiting drive last summer. Only six finished the course, and only three eventually joined the force. The freeze: Firemen profess to be puzzled by this lack of interest, but a black fire fighter in Detroit has one explanation. "They cry about harassment from black people in the streets," he says, "but you wouldn't really believe the harassment they give a black fire fighter in any engine house. They put the 'freeze' on you, they ostracize you, nobody talks to you, nothing***They will also do things like take a picture of an uncivilized black man from Africa, or a naked black woman, and hang it up on the wall and there's some racist, derogatory remark written on it." Unabashed bigotry, of course, tends to decline as the number of blacks on the force rises. But this is obviously going to be a long, slow process in most big cities. Meanwhile, the fireman sits at the burning point of the urban crisis. Like Rip Van Winkle, he is waking to a troubled age, newly afflicted with the uncertainties and self-doubts that overtook his neighbors years ago. In the end he will change, but the process will be painful--and the sad part is that he may well lose his simplistic virtues along with his flaws. Senator EAGLETON. We much appreciate your interest in this matter and the testimony that you have given us this morning will be most helpful. Mr. TURNER. Thank you. Senator EAGLETON. These are the witnesses that we had scheduled for presentation this morning. Are there other witnesses that we have overlooked on this pending bill? Hearing none, then, the meeting of the fiscal affairs subcommittee is adjourned. (Whereupon, at 10:55 a.m., the hearing was adjourned.) INCREASE POLICE, FIREMEN, AND TEACHERS SALARIES WEDNESDAY, NOVEMBER 19, 1969 U.S. SENATE, SUBCOMMITTEE ON FISCAL AFFAIRS OF THE Washington, D.C. The subcommittee met, pursuant to notice, at 9:10 a.m., in room 6226, New Senate Office Building, Senator Thomas F. Eagleton (chairman of the subcommittee) presiding. Present: Senator Eagleton. Also present: John T. McEvoy, staff director: Jack W. Lewis, counsel: James S. Medill, minority counsel; and Edith B. Moore, assistant chief clerk. Senator EAGLETON. Good morning. The Subcommittee on Fiscal Affairs of the Committee on the District of Columbia will now be in order. This subcommittee meeting today is to consider proposed amendments to the D.C. Police and Firemen's Salary Act, S. 2694, to provide increased salaries for teachers and other school officers. This legislation comes as something of a footnote to the District budget because the need for it was not anticipated at the time the budget was planned. In the scale of budget priorities, however, the payment of adequate salaries to teachers, police, and firemen must occupy a high place. Unless we can attract and retain quality people in these positions, progress in all other areas will be jeopardized. Salarv alone will not accomplish this, but without an adequate salary schedule we cannot even begin. On August 11, of this year, this subcommittee heard testimony on the proposed increases for police and firemen. Today we will consider salary proposals for teachers and school administrators. Before we hear from our first witness, Mayor Walter Washington, I will submit for the record a staff memorandum outlining this legislation, and it will be made a part of the record. (The document referred to follows:) U.S. SENATE, COMMITTEE ON THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA, MEMORANDUM FOR MEMBERS OF THE SUBCOMMITTEE ON FISCAL AFFAIRS In re Proposed amendment to S. 2694, Police and Firemen's Salary bill, to increase the salaries of teachers and school officers of the District of Columbia and for other purposes. Hearing: 9:00 a.m., Wednesday, November 19, 1969, room 6226 NSOB. proposed substitute bill, submitted on August 8, 1969, be expanded to also include the District's pay proposals for teachers and school officers. There is accordingly forwarded herewith a revised draft bill, providing for salary increases for teachers and school officers as well as police and firemen, which the Commissioner recommends be substituted for the purview of S. 2694. The revised bill also contains, for your information, the revenue proposals which have been recommended to the House to finance the costs of the proposed salary increases. Title I of the draft bill, entitled the "District of Columbia Police and Firemen's Salary Act Amendments of 1969," is identical to the Commissioner's proposal of August 8, 1969, with the exception of the effective date. The title provides salary increases averaging approximately 12% at an estimated full fiscal year cost of $9.25 million. The title is made effective in January 1970. The Commissioner's salary proposal is in line with the policy of keeping police and firemen's salary rates competitive in the upper quartile of major cities, in reasonable alignment with Classification Act employees, and above the rates of pay of other police and firemen in the Washington Metropolitan Area. This proposal also sets salaries according to certain ratios, so that there is a specific relationship betwen salaries at various levels. The remaining sections of the title contain provisions or reducing the number of subclasses in the salary schedule, and for revising the method of salary placement of certain officers and members who are promoted to a higher class from one of the subclasses of a lower class. The title also contains certain technical amendments to the existing law to clarify changes in determining longevity step increases made by the salary schedules. The Commissioner also proposes the repeal of a special provision of existing law applicable only to deputy chiefs. An analysis of the provisions of title I of the Commissioner's proposed bill is presented in Exhibit A (attached). The Commissioner recognizes that there is a need for an increase in salaries of police and firemen. A study of the trend in police and firemen's pay levels, contained in Exhibit B (attached), conclusively shows the dramatic change in police and firemen's salaries since 1967, the date of the last major pay increase for District police and firemen. In view of this study, the District is proposing the pay plan set forth in title I of the draft bill, Exhibit C (attached). The District of Columbia Council endorses this proposal. Title II of the District's proposal contains salary increases for teachers and school officers designed to improve and strengthen the competitive salary position of the District of Columbia Public Schools and provide District teachers and school officers incentives for continued professional growth and development. This is necessary in order that each child have the benefit of teachers qualified to develop him to the limit of his potentialities. The District recommends that title II also be effective in January, 1970. I attach an analysis of the provisions of title II (Exhibit A-1) and a study justifying the pay increases provided in the title (Exhibit B-1). The Commissioner strongly urges that Congress enact this much needed raise for District public school teachers and officers. The District of Columbia Board of Education and the District of Columbia Council endorse this proposal. Title III of the bill which has been submitted to the House is also attached for your information. This title provides revenue sources for the costs of the proposed pay increases for policemen, firemen, teachers, and school officers which can not be absorbed through administrative actions of the departments and Board of Education. As indicated in the table below, the net cost-after absorption-would be $10.8 million for the last half of fiscal year 1970 and $20.2 million on a full-year basis beginning in fiscal 1971. As a means of financing the full year costs the District proposes that the individual income tax be increased. Since it is estimated that the proposed income tax increases would provide only $5.6 million for fiscal year 1970, it is also proposed that the balance of the 1970 costs be made up through a one-time increase in the Federal payment of $5.2 million. The cost comparisons and proposed financing for fiscal year 1970 and on a fullyear basis are outlined in the table below: Authority for the income tax increases must originate in the House which has not yet held hearings on this salary legislation. The Senate can initiate legislation to increase the Federal payment, however. JACK LEWIS, Counsel. Senator EAGLETON. We welcome you this morning, Mayor Walter E. Washington, Mayor-Commissioner of the D.C. Government; accompanied by Deputy Mayor Thomas Fletcher; Assistant Corporation Counsel Tom Moyer; Donald Weinberg, Chief, Pay Systems and Labor Relations Division; and apparently there are a few others. STATEMENT OF HONORABLE WALTER E. WASHINGTON, MAYORCOMMISSIONER, DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA; ACCOMPANIED BY THOMAS FLETCHER, DEPUTY COMMISSIONER; TOM MOYER, ASSISTANT CORPORATION COUNSEL; DONALD WEINBERG, CHIEF, PAY SYSTEMS AND LABOR RELATIONS DIVISION; KENNETH BACK, FINANCE OFFICER; JOHN EATON, PERSONNEL OFFICER; AND JAMES R. MANDISH, PERSONNEL OFFICE Senator EAGLETON. Mr. Mayor, you may proceed. Mayor WASHINGTON. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. It is always good to appear before this committee." As you realize, we are also backed up with members of the Board of Education and the Acting Superintendent and other members of their staff, who will be available for direct questioning. We regard this, Mr. Chairman, as again an opportunity to bring before you a critical matter involving the increase of salaries for the District of Columbia teachers and school officers. This involves an increase of some 15 percent. We are about to present a letter detailing the proposed legislation, but that letter is not cleared as yet by the Bureau of the Budget, and will be submitted at a later time. Senator EAGLETON. Fine. The record will remain open to receive that letter. (The letter referred to follows:) GOVERNMENT OF THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA, EXECUTIVE OFFICE, Washington, D.C., November 21, 1969. Hon. THOMAS F. EAGLETON, Chairman, Subcommittee on Fiscal Affairs, Washington, D.C. DEAR SENATOR EAGLETON: The Commissioner of the District of Columbia by letter dated August 8, 1969, reported on S. 2694, 91st Congress, a bill "To amend the District of Columbia Police and Firemen's Salary Act of 1958 to increase salaries, and for other purposes." By letter to the Commissioner dated October 8, 1969, you requested that the district expedite its submission of its proposals for teacher pay in order that the Congress would have time in this session to consider such proposals and revenue proposals to pay for the salary increases. The Commissioner, after conferring with the Board of Education and the District of Columbia Council is now in a position to submit these teacher pay proposals. The Commissioner recommends that the |