If the foregoing is approved, the language contained in the submittal being made by the President to Congress should be modified by placing the following proviso at the end of the clause:

"Provided, That the appropriations made to the Navy Department since March 11, 1941, shall be available for Defense Aid articles or services for the government of any country whose defense the President deems vital to the defense of the United States within the limitation of $2,500,000,000 established in section 301 of Public Law No. 441, Seventy-seventh Congress."

The last item is a change of language under the head of "Pay, subsistence, and transportation," raising the limitation on the number of officers to 23 above the rank of captain, who may receive flight pay. The language proposed is as follows:

"BUREAU OF SUPPLIES AND ACCOUNTS

"Pay, subsistence, and transportation: The number of officers above the rank of captain, who may receive flight pay during the fiscal year 1942, is increased from 9 to 23.”

Sincerely yours,

Mr. WOODRUM. You may proceed, Mr. Piozet.

FRANK KNox.

Mr. PIOZET. It is recommended, Mr. Chairman, that steps be taken to eliminate the limitation on the number of civilian employees that can be hired in the Navy Department.

At the present rate of recruiting to meet the immediate needs, the present authorized ceiling of 15,000 civil employees will soon be reached.

I would like to offer for the record a revised estimate, brought up to date, as of March 15, showing the actual numbers of civil employees employed in the Navy Department during the last 6 months and the anticipated increase, which has been based on studies up to and including June 30, 1943. We have not projected it any further than that.

This is my fifth visit before this committee asking that the limitation be either waived or raised, and each time I have been invited to come back.

Mr. WOODRUM. We are always glad to see you, Mr. Piozet. (NOTE.-The estimate referred to follows:)

1,797 2,024 2, 158 2, 213 2, 233 2, 383 2, 483 2, 583 2, 658 2,708 2,728 2,768 2,808 2, 843 2, 863 2, 873 2, 875

113

113

119

121

123

125

127

129

131

133

135

137

139

141

143

145

147

149

Ships.

1, 102

1, 182

1,400 1,500

1,600

1,700

1,800

1,900

2,000

2,000

2,000

2,000

2,000

2,000

2,000

2,000

2,000

2,000

Medicine and surgery.

244

256

253

11

11

16

16

16

16

16

16

16

16

16

Mr. TABER. How many have you got now?

Mr. PIOZET. At the present time, including the headquarters of the Marine Corps and the Coast Guard, we have 14,970. However, this committee has not included the headquarters of the Marine Corps in the limitation, and I do not believe it has included the Coast Guard, as the Coast Guard has been taken over by the Navy since the original limitation was fixed.

Mr. DITTER. Right at that point, amplify that. Do you mean that the 15,000 does not include the civilian personnel for the Coast Guard or the Marine Corps?

Mr. PIOZET. That is correct, sir. That is my understanding. Mr. DITTER. How many of them are there?

Mr. POIZET. On the 1st of March there were 922 employees at the Marine Corps and 563 at the Coast Guard headquarters.

Mr. DITTER. Then you are over your 15,000 now?

Mr. PIOZET. The number as of the last day of February was 14,970. Mr. TABER. Including both of those outfits?

Mr. PIOZET. Yes, sir; including both of those outfits.

Mr. TABER. That means that you have 1,500 yet to go on your limitation.

Mr. PIOZET. Yes, sir; however, we are now in the fourth week in March, and we have already recruited nearly 1,200 of that number. We will not go over the limitation until we are granted the authority to do so.

Mr. TABER. You are going to have about 1,200 a month?

Mr. PIOZET. We will have approximately 1,200 a month for the next 3 or 4 months, and then the monthly requirements will gradually taper off.

Admiral ALLEN. The language in the supply act limiting the civilian employees states those "in the Navy Department proper."

Mr. WOODRUM. How much of a limitation would take care of you, Mr. Piozet?

Mr. PIOZET. We have projected our estimates to June 30, 1943, and they show approximately 27,000 civilians will be needed; but if you continue to put the limitation on, it is just a matter of coming down here and asking to have it removed or increased. If you want to fix it at 20,000, that number will supply our needs until about the 15th of next July.

Mr. WOODRUM. Then it will taper off?

Mr. PIOZET. It will taper off to between 600 and 800 a month, I believe, instead of the present monthly rate of 1,200.

Mr. WOODRUM. You would rather not have a limit at all, of course? Mr. PIOZET. We would rather not have one, but we are perfectly willing to come here and justify our estimate if you continue a limitation. As I have stated, we still be on the upgrade until June 1943. We cannot see beyond that.

Mr. DITTER. When did you make the first request which resulted in a limitation being written in? That was before the regular committee for the fiscal year 1941, was it not?

Mr. PIOZET. I believe so; yes, sir.

Mr. DITTER. And we fixed the limit at that time at what? Was that when we fixed it at 10,000 or 8,000?

Mr. PIOZET. No, sir; the first limit was 8,500; 7,500 was proposed, but was raised to 8,750 before the bill got out of the committee.

Mr. DITTER. And did you appear before the regular committee at the time the supply bill was up for justification in January with reference to increasing the personnel?

Mr. PIOZET. Yes, sir; this past January.

Mr. DITTER. And at that time what was the amount that you requested?

Mr. PIOZET. I asked that the limitation be removed at that time. The justification is contained on page 289 of the hearing held January 15, 1942.

Mr. DITTER. And what did the regular committee do with it?
Mr. PIOZET. They fixed a limitation of 15,000.

Mr. DITTER. To what extent would your figures be changed if your civilian personnel worked on a basis of, for instance, 48 hours, or 56 hours, rather than on a 40-hour week?

Mr. PIOZET. We are now working 48 hours, and have been for quite a while. If the hours were reduced to 40, we would have to request a further increase of the limitation.

Mr. DITTER. Does that 48-hour week apply to all personnel?

Mr. PIOZET. To practically all civilian personnel. There are a few exceptions. It is not necessary in certain instances, like the scientific forces of the Naval Observatory and some of the personnel of the Library, to work them in excess of 40 hours. The war effort would not be enhanced to any extent and therefore we have not permitted work in excess of 40 hours for these groups. Extra hours would require the payment of overtime which is not considered necessary.

Mr. DITTER. What was the size of the civilian personnel employed during the first World War? What was the highest number that you reached in the way of civilian employees during the first World War days?

Mr. PIOZET. Are you speaking of the Navy Department proper or of the service as a whole?

Mr. DITTER. I am talking about the comparable item to the item that you are now attempting to justify.

Mr. PIOZET. Speaking from memory, it was somewhere between 7,000 and 8,000.

Mr. DITTER. So that at the present time we are almost 100 percent over what we had at the peak in the World War days.

Mr. PIOZET. Yes, sir.

Mr. DITTER. And in addition thereto you envision some sort of an astronomical figure, to which even no limitation should be applied? Mr. PIOZET. Yes, sir.

Mr. DITTER. Well, why is there a necessity for such a large staff of civilian employees today as against those that were necessary during the first World War?

Mr. PIOZET. There are many items that require a larger staff. Of course, the Navy is much larger; the personnel of the Navy is much larger. At the present time our civilian forces in the field service are in excess of 345,000, whereas during World War No. 1 they hardly exceeded 125,000.

Mr. TABER. What is the comparison in enlisted strength?

Mr. PIOZET. I am not familiar with that, but I believe it is now in excess. I am not responsible for the military end.

Admiral ALLEN. It will be. As of March I have a figure of 411,000 men in the Navy.

Mr. DITTER. As of today?

Admiral ALLEN. Yes, sir; now. In the last World War, speaking from memory, it seems to me that we had five-hundred-odd-thousand officers and men.

Mr. TABER. And you think you will go beyond that?

Admiral ALLEN. We expect to have over a million a year from now. Mr. PIOZET. In addition, there are many laws now on the statute books that require additional civilian personnel to administer that were not in effect during World War No. 1. Among them are the Retirement Act, the Classification Act, and so forth.

Mr. JOHNSON of West Virginia. Who puts those laws on the books?
Mr. PIOZET. The Congress of the United States passed them.
Mr. DITTER. You mean some of the Congress did.

To what extent is enlisted personnel being utilized for activities of a civilian character?

Mr. PIOZET. We are utilizing them in the Department mainly on Admiral King's staff, the Commander in Chief of the United States Fleet. It is a mobile unit that has been brought into the Department. It can be utilized either with the fleet or here at headquarters.

Mr. DITTER. Is it not a fact that at many stations, and even here at the Department itself, there are other activities than those of Admiral King's office in which enlisted men carry on part of the clerical work?

Mr. PIOZET. Not to any large extent except in the Communications Service, where they use radio operators, and in the Bureau of Medicine and Surgery for servicing the naval dispensary.

Admiral ALLEN. You are confining yourself to the Department. Do you want me to answer that for the field?

Mr. DITTER. I would be delighted, Admiral.

Admiral ALLEN. Mr. Ditter, the Secretary, about 6 months ago, directed the bureaus to get enlisted men out of the shore establishments wherever it was practical. That applied to activities such as the training stations, the Naval Academy, and receiving ship personnel all over the United States. In the last supplemental, you will remember, there were funds to replace a great many of those bluejacket employees with civilian employees. Now, in the Navy Department, when Admiral King came there, he had two reasons to retain enlisted men. He wanted to make his set-up an all-Navy set-up, and also for secrecy purposes he did not wish to have employees in his organization that were not subject to court martial. So that accounts for enlisted men in the Navy Department.

Outside of that, we used to have limitations, and you have lifted them. We have Hospital Corps men in the Navy Department. The radio men down there cannot be replaced very well. There are enlisted men in the Bureau of Navigation and some in Naval Intelligence. Mr. DITTER. I have been impressed with the great effort and purpose of the Secretary or somebody in his outfit to build up a colossal civilian personnel, and I confess that I have not seen the justification for what has happened or what is presently requested as we compare activities today with what they were in the old days.

Admiral ALLEN. It is true that there are more employees, but there is another factor that enters into it. In the first place, you are appropriating much more money than we had in the last World War. When you convert that money into material there is an overhead that takes