Office Department based on a calendar year rather than on the present promotion plan which requires 2,024 hours of service. This same correction was made in the case of other temporary employees in the postal service by Public Law 35, Eightieth Congress, and this bill would merely place the custodial employees on the same basis. The employees concerned are in favor of this bill. The Post Office Department has submitted a favorable report on the bill and has stated that it will result in no appreciable increase in cost to the Department. The Civil Service Commission and the Bureau of the Budget also submitted favorable reports. The reports are as follows: Hon. Toм MURRAY, OFFICE OF THE POSTMASTER GENERAL, Chairman, Committee on Post Office and Civil Service, House of Representatives. DEAR MR. CHAIRMAN: Further reference is made to your request for a report upon H. R. 1516, a bill to amend the act entitled "An act to reclassify the salaries of postmasters, officers, and employees of the postal service; to establish uniform procedures for computing compensation; and for other purposes," approved July 6, 1948, so as to provide annual automatic within-grade promotions for hourly employees of the custodial service. In the title of the bill the act approved July 6, 1945 (Public Law 134), is shown as "approved July 6, 1948." Public Law 684 (80th Cong.), approved June 19, 1948, provides for automatic promotion for temporary employees in the custodial service after 1 year's satisfactory service in each grade, which includes temporary charmen and temporary charwomen. Consequently, these temporary employees receive greater benefits than permanent or war-service-indefinite charmen and charwomen The measure proposes to amend section 14 (j) of the act approved July 6, 1945 (Public Law 134), as amended, so as to provide annual automatic within-grade promotions for charmen and charwomen on the basis of 1 year's satisfactory service rather than a total of 2,024 hours of satisfactory service in a pay status as now provided. The measure would correct the inequity which now exists by providing permanent and war-service-indefinite charmen and charwomen in the custodial service the same benefits now enjoyed by similar temporary employees in the custodial service and other hourly employees in the postal service. Section 1 of Public Law 35, approved April 15, 1947, provided for annual automatic within-grade promotions for "all substitute employees in the postal service." Charmen and charwomen regularly work about 5 hours per day and probably in some instances such employees will work as many or more hours than some substitute employees benefited by Public Law 35. Enactment of the measure would have no appreciable effect on the promotional cost of such employees over a 3-year period, at which time they reach the maximum grade. The measure merely accelerates the period of time at which such promotions shall be made. It is the opinion of this Department that charmen and charwomen paid on an hourly basis should be granted the same annual automatic within-grade promotion benefits provided for other employees of the postal service paid on an hourly basis. Accordingly, this Department favors the enactment of this measure. I have been advised by the Bureau of the Budget that there would be no objection to the submission of this report to the committee. Sincerely yours. Hon. Toм MURRAY, J. M. DONALDSON, EXECUTIVE OFFICE OF THE PRESIDENT, BUREAU OF THE BUDGET, Chairman, House Committee on Post Office and Civil Service. Old House Office Building, Washington, D. C. MY DEAR MR. MURRAY: This will acknowledge your letter of April 5, 1949. extending an invitation to the Bureau to report upon H. R. 1516, to amend the act entitled "An act to reclassify the salaries of postmasters, officers, and employees of the postal service; to establish uniform procedures for computing compensation; and for other purposes," approved July 6, 1948, so as to provide annual automatic within-grade promotions for hourly employees of the custodial service. Under existing postal legislation, temporary employees in the custodia. service, including temporary charmen and temporary charwomen, and other employees in the postal service paid on an hourly basis, are entitled to automatic promotions after 1 year's satisfactory service in each grade. This entitlement does not seem to have been extended to charmen and charwomen working part time, who continue to be required to perform 2,024 hours of satisfactory service in a pay status before they can be advanced to the pay of the next higher grade. The bill, H. R. 1516, is designed to correct this seeming inequity by according to charmen and charwomen working part time advancement automatically in pay grade following 1 year's satisfactory service in each grade, thus accelerating their promotion waiting period to the same level prescribed in cases of other similarly situated and related personnel. The Bureau has had the opportunity to review the report which the Postmaster General proposes to present on this measure. The report recommends enactment of the bill in the interest of providing uniformity of treatment. The Bureau has also secured the views of the Civil Service Commission with respect to this proposal. The committee will note from the attached copy thereof that the Commission, likewise, recommends approval of the bill, but suggests the possibility that it may be desirable to permit the automatic advancements in pay proposed for this group subject to the same provisions and restrictions that are applicable to substitute postal employees. The provisions the Commission has in mind are set forth in section 2, Public Law 35 of the Eightieth Congress. The Bureau supports the parity treatment proposed in H. R. 1516 and agrees with the recommendation of the Postmaster General and the Civil Service Commission. Sincerely yours, Hon. ROGER W. JONES F. J. LAWTON, Washington 25, D. C. UNITED STATES CIVIL SERVICE COMMISSION, Assistant Director, Legislative Reference, Bureau of the Budget, Washington 25, D. C. DEAR MR. JONES: Further reference is made to your letter of April 13, 1949, requesting a statement of the Commission's views concerning H. R. 1516, a bill to amend the act entitled "An act to reclassify the salaries of postmasters, officers, and employees of the postal service; to establish uniform procedures for computing compensation; and for other purposes," approved July 6, 1948, so as to provide annual automatic within-grade promotions for hourly employees of the custodial service. H. R. 1516 amends section 14 (j) of Public Law 134, Seventy-ninth Congress, approved July 6, 1945, so that the charmen and charwomen, working part time would be advanced to the next higher pay grade after 1 year's satisfactory service in each grade. The present law requires such employees to serve 2.024 hours in a pay status before advancement. Until the enactment of Public Law 35, Eightieth Congress, approved April 15, 1947, the law authorized all regular employees to be advanced to the next pay grade "following one year's satisfactory service in each grade.' Substitute employees in some categories were required to complete "two thousand and twentyfour hours' satisfactory service in a pay status" before being eligible for advancement to the next higher grade. Other groups of substitute employees, particuarly in the railway mail service, were advanced through the successive pay grades 'following one year's satisfactory service in the next lower grade Those substitute employees who were required to serve 2,024 hours in a pay status before advancement to the next higher pay grades were limited to one such advancement in each 12 months, but if the employee worked less than 2,024 hours during a year he had to wait until the 2,024 hours was completed, which in some cases took as much as 2 years. Charmen and charwomen working part time were on substantially the same basis as these substitutes, for they were limited to one advancement in pay during each 12 months. but did not receive the advancement until the completion of 2,024 hours of service. Here also, advancement might take more than a year. For example, average employment of 4 hours a day, or 20 hours a week, would require service over a period of 2 years for advancement to the next pay grade Section 1 of Public Law 35 authorized all substitute employees to be advanced in pay "following one year's satisfactory service in each grade until they reach the maximum grade authorized for the respective assignment, without regard to the number of hours they are actually employed in the postal service during the year." The benefits of Public Law 35 did not extend to charmen and charwomen working part time. The purpose of H. R. 1516 is to extend to these employees the same benefits concerning advancement in pay grade. Section 2 of Public Law 35, however, contains a formula for determining what should constitute "one year's satisfactory service" The second proviso of section 2 provides "That the automatic promotion of a substitute employee in the postal service shall be withheld (1) for three months when such employee is absent on leave without pay and not available for duty for ninety days during a calendar year; (2) for six months when such employee is absent on leave without pay and not available for duty for one hundred and eighty days during a calendar year; (3) for nine months when such employee is absent on leave without pay and not available for duty for two hundred and seventy days during a calendar year; and (4) for one year when such employee is absent on leave without pay and not available for three hundred and sixty days during a calendar year." In view of the enactment of Public Law 35, it would be consistent with other provisions of the postal pay laws to extend the same benefits to the charmen and charwomen working part time. It is suggested, however, that it may be desirable to authorize such advancement in pay under the same provisions and the same restrictions as contained in section 2 of Public Law 35 for application to substitutes. This could be accomplished by amending sections 1 and 2 of Public Law 35 to cover charmen and charwomen working part time. The bill does not change the rates of pay for these employees, and these rates would continue, as at present, at from $1.10 to $1.25 an hour. It may be noted, in this connection, that part-time charwomen whose positions are subject to the Classification Act of 1923, as amended, are compensated at a flat rate of $1.10 an hour. As stated above, H. R. 1516 proposes to amend section 14 (j) of Public Law 134, Seventy-ninth Congress, approved July 6, 1945. This act has been correctly cited in lines 3 to 7, page 1. of the bill. However, the date given in line 4 of the title should be corrected by striking out "July 6, 1948” and inserting "July 6, 1945" in lieu thereof. Sincerely yours, HARRY B. MITCHELL, President CHANGES IN EXISTING LAW In compliance with paragraph 2a of rule XIII of the Rules of the House of Representatives, changes in existing law made by the bill, as introduced, are shown as follows (existing law proposed to be omitted is enclosed in black brackets, new matter is printed in italics, existing law in which no change is proposed is shown in roman): SUBSECTION (J), SECTION 14, PUBLIC LAW 134, SEVENTY-NINTH CONGRESS (j) Charmen and charwomen working part time shall be divided into four grades with hourly rates of compensation as follows: Grade 1 $1.10 per hour | Grade 3. $1.20 per hour 1.25 per hour and shall be promoted successively at the beginning of the quarter following [a total of two thousand and twenty-four hours of satisfactory service in a pay status in each grade to the next higher grade until they reach the fourth grade: Provided, That there shall be not more than one increase in the rate of pay of such employees within a period of twelve months] one year's satisfactory service in each grade to the next higher grade until they reach the fourth grade. JUNE 24, 1949.-Committed to the Committee of the Whole House on the State of the Union and ordered to be printed Mr. WALTER, from the Committee on the Judiciary, submitted the following REPORT (To accompany H. R. 4446] The Committee on the Judiciary, to whom was referred the bill (H. R. 4446) to protect the public with respect to practitioners before administrative agencies, having considered the same, report favorably thereon with amendments and recommend that the bill do pass. The amendments are as follows: " and Page 4, line 22, strike "or", insert a comma after "Columbia", insert after the comma and before the word "and" the words "or of any Federal court". Page 5, line 1. strike "action" and substitute in lieu thereof "section". HISTORY, STRUCTURE, AND PURPOSE Legislation has for years been proposed in the Congress on the subject of admissions to practice before administrative agencies. Some 20 bills have been introduced in recent years.' When the Administrative Procedure Act was before the House in 1946 it was earnestly argued that it should contain something on the subject. But is was too large and important for fragmentary treatment as a mere part of the Administrative Procedure Act. Subsequent experience with H. R. 2657 and H. R. 7100 of the Eightieth Congress, as well as with H. R. 1566 of this Congress, has demonstrated the need for separate and more comprehensive provision. 8. 2941, Mr. Wagner, of New York, 74th Cong., H. R. 9635, Mr. O'Toole, 75th Cong.; H. R. 4798, Mr. O'Toole, 76th Cong., H. R. 605, Mr. O'Toole, 77th Cong.. H. R. 2526, Mr. Walter, 77th Cong.; H. R. 94, Mr. O'Toole, 78th Cong., H. R. 4470, Mr. Wickersham, 78th Cong., H. R. 2323, Mr. Hancock, 78th Cong.. 8. 1945, Mr. Lucas, 78th Cong.; H. R. 5237, Mr. Smith of Virginia, 78th Cong. H. R. 5277, Mr. Capozzoli, 78th Cong.: H. R. 339, Mr. Smith of Virginia, 79th Cong.; H. R. 643, Mr. Wickersham, 79th Cong. S. 92, Mr. Lucas, 79th Cong., H. R. 1206, Mr. Walter, 79th Cong.; H. R. 1387, Mr. Hancock, 79th Cong.; S. 572, Mr. Langer, 79th Cong.; S. 740. Mr. McCarran. 79th Cong., H. R. 3089, Mr. Kefauver. 79th Cong.: H. R 2657 and H. R. 7100, Mr. Gwynne. 80th Cong.: and S 746. Mr Lucas. 81st Cong From the earliest times, those who represent other people in the courts and before executive bodies have been subjected to regulation. A lawyer is merely a person who has complied with traditional requiremeats for a license to practice law. The Government of the United States and its agencies leaves the granting of these permits, at least in the first instance, to the courts of the several States. Territories, dependencies, possessions, and the District of Columbia. But there has been a growing system in the executive branch for the administrative admission to practice, and the administrative control, of both lawyers and nonlawyers. It has come about because, in the creation of new governmental agencies to exercise powers of regulation. there has been a natural development of specialized callings as in the realm of rates and accounting. These new specialists, who operate before administrative bodies, have been necessarily subjected to some control in the matter of their practice there. This dual system of control-one by the courts and the other by some administrative agencies-has produced a number of perennial problems. The study entitled "Admissions to and Control Over Practice Before Federal Administrative Agencies," report of the committee on administrative practice, Bar Association of the District of Columbia, 1938, discusses many of them. Lawyers, although duly licensed and subject to discipline by the courts of both the Federal Government and the several States, have been unnecessarily required. to obtain many special licenses from administrative agencies to do what the courts have already authorized them to do. (See the Final Report of the Attorney General's Committee on Administrative Procedure (1941), S. Doc. No. 8, 77th Cong., p. 124.) In matters of discipline, lawyers have also thus been subjected to the divided control of both the judicial and administrative branches. In addition, agencies often either license nonlawyer specialists or deal with all representatives regardless of their qualifications or standing Again, lawyers are subjected to professional and ethical requirements and disabilities, while with some notable exceptions, nonlawyers are generally either not subject to them at all or are less stringently regulated. Regulation which has been found advisable for the one should surely apply as well to others who undertake to perform similar functions. A nonlawyer who is disqualified from practice before one administrative agency is still left his specialized calling u its nonadministrative aspects or before other administrative agencies. But in the court of his admission to practice. a lawyer, subjected to the same type of discipline, normally loses his right to practice his profession anywhere and everywhere. Even more important, however, is the daily subjection of lawyers to extensively stated and judicially expounded canons of professional ethics for which, again with some notable exceptions, there is often no real or effective counterpart among nonlawyer specialists. This lack not only leaves the latter free to disregard accepted ideas of good professional conduct but, in the administrative field, tends to undermine the application of standards of conduct to any practitioner whether he be lawyer or nonlawyer. If special training and licensing are necessary for practice by lawyers, it is reasonable to suppose that there are similar reasons for controlling practice by nonlawyers. Modern government is so intricate that no man should be permitted to hold himself out as a professional unless he has met professional requirements. To say this is not |