At the present time, the District Government is unable to comply with any one of these three principles with respect to pay for its policemen and firemen.

Factors establishing the need for a salary increase for District policemen and firemen.

I would like to explain some of the factors which point up this salary need which we feel so strongly about.

First, is the impact of classified pay raises on police and fire salary levels.

The District Government has never used the parity concepts to establish salary levels for its various employee groups as is done in other major cities such as New York or Philadelphia. The District has followed the precept that each pay group must stand alone and justify its own pay levels.

If parity with the classified system had been the sole determinant, a salary increase of 17.4 percent would have been supportable for policemen and firemen effective January 1, 1972. However, the fact that some of the elements which influence Federal classified pay also influence salary levels for District policemen and firemen cannot be overlooked.

In 1970, the District personnel office, at the request of the Chairman of the Senate District Committee, surveyed over 30 benchmark, or key uniformed police jobs ranging from police private in Salary Class 1 to Chief of Police in Salary Class 11. These positions were described and evaluated, and a GS rating assigned.

CHART NO 1

SALARY COMPARISON
POLICE RANK VS EQUIVALENT GS GRADE FEB. 1972

THOUSANDS

36

34

32

30

28

26

24

22

20

18

16

14

12

10

86420

Chart No. 1 on the easel which is before you indicates the disparity between current GS levels and salaries presently paid to police personnel whose duties and responsibilities equate to the GS grade levels

shown. The present police salaries are shown in the light blue. The first phase increase for police in green, and the second phase salary increase is shown in dark yellow, and the divisions are identified across the bottom as police officers: sergeant, lieutenant, captain, inspector, deputy chief, assistant chief, and the Chief of Police.

Second is our competitive salary position with major cities over 500,000 population and local jurisdictions.

Although the extent of recruiting new police officers has slackened somewhat, due to the Department's ability to substantially fill its expanded 5,100-man force, the ability of other law enforcement agencies to proselyte experienced police personnel is disturbing and reflects part of the 16-percent annual turnover of the uniformed police personnel in the District.

I would like to focus, or turn over proof that proves to be extensive and certainly a nonproductive cost. In 1971, 635 resignations were had in the Police Department in Classes 1 through 4, and a total of 898, nearly 900 uniformed personnel leaving the Department for various reasons, including retirement. (See p. 55.)

In the first half of fiscal 1972, it cost the District $928 to recruit each police officer. When the cost of training and uniforms are added, the cost of adding a man goes to $4,080, nearly $5,000, so, obviously, the amount of loss through turnover can be estimated for the 635 policemen who resigned in 1971 at something over $3 million in the cost. Just the cost of replacing those men on the force and the recruiting and training and outfitting.

Chart 2A is before you. That shows currently the District ranks in 16th place for the entrance salaries paid police privates and 13th for the maximum in comparison with 25 cities over 500,000 population. The cities are identified there. It gives the rank of each city for the minimum and the maximum rate of pay is shown in the columns as indicated.

CHART 2A

MINIMUM AND MAXIMUM SALARIES PAID POLICE PRIVATES BY 25 CITIES OVER 500,000 POPULATION

Source: Unpublished survey data from survey conducted by District of Columbia Personnel Office, Pay Systems & Labor Relations Division.

Chart 2B shows 19th place for the minimum and 13th place for the maximum for the fire private; again comparing us with other States, we rank in 19th place in the minimum wage scale and in 13th place among the 25 for the maximum wage for privates.

As you will note by the asterisks, eight cities contemplate higher salaries on or before July 1: Buffalo, Cincinnati, Chicago, Cleveland, New York, Philadelphia, and Pittsburgh. If you use these data as a gauge we fall far short of being competitive.

CHART 2B

MINIMUM AND MAXIMUM SALARIES PAID FIRE PRIVATES IN 25 CITIES OVER 500,000 POPULATION

1 Cities contemplating salary increases on or before July 1, 1972. Source: Unpublished survey data from survey conducted by District of Columbia Personnel Office, Pay Systems and Labor Relations Division.

I believe that it is important to be competitive with cities in the eastern half of the United States. Yet, the District ranks below Chicago, Cleveland, Cincinnati, New York, Philadelphia, and Pittsburgh, in minimum salaries paid and below the median-16th place-when compared to the 25 cities over 500,000 population.

Several of these cities have been fruitful recruiting areas for D.C. policemen in the past. Locally, the District is vulnerable in its ability to compete, as shown by the next Chart. (Chart 3) Every local jurisdiction which is contiguous to Washington pays higher entrance salaries to their police and fire privates than does the District. Here we have identified those jurisdictions, upper for police, the lower for fire Department, talking about privates, talking about entrances, the top wage, and you will see that there the District of Columbia Government is below all of the other jurisidetions in this area, six out of six, in terms of both entrance and top pay for police and firefighters.

I think what this chart shows, gentlemen, is at the present time, the present Government is almost out of the labor market in the ability to recruit highly qualified police candidates.

Chart No. 3 before you indicates that since 1969 all of the 24 cities of over 500,000 population and all of the local jurisdictions have increased salary levels for police. The column on the far right indicates the number of salary increases granted in each of the 25 cities since 1969.

Washington is the only city which shows that there has been no salary adjustment of increase for policemen since 1969. Those figures indicate that the police salaries in these cities have been increased an average of three times, three times in the surrounding jurisdictions. In most of the jurisdictions, they have had two, three and four, and I see one city has had five, and another city has had six increases since

1965.

The significant aspect of the chart reveals that most jurisdictions increased salaries several times between 1969 and 1971. Police salaries have been increased an average of three times since 1969 in the surrounding jurisdictions, thereby placing the District in a position of continuously falling behind.

CHART NO. 3

COMPARISON OF ENTRANCE SALARIES FOR POLICE PRIVATE BETWEEN 1969 AND 1972 FOR 24 CITIES OVER 500,000 AND 5 LOCAL JURISDICTIONS

1 Cities contemplating salary increase on or before July 1, 1972.

* New York is negotiating with the Patrolmen's Benevolent Association on an increase retroactive to Jan. 1,1971. > Retroactive to July 1, 1969. Starting salary prior to July 1 was $8,000.

Source: Survey conducted by District of Columbia Police Association, December 1971, and unpublished data from survey by District of Columbia Personnel Office.

With the July 1969 increase, the District ranked in first place, locally, for minimum police salaries offered. The District is now in last place. (Chart 4). As performance demands on our policemen and firemen have increased, their economic status has diminished and this condition is now causing them a hardship.

Comparisons of only minimum and maximum salaries can be misleading, but there must be the expectation of monetary growth which will allow a policeman or fireman to plan a reasonable standard of living for his family and for himself. In order to professionalize public safety and make it a meaningful career, a policeman or fireman cannot look only at the short salary range which moves him to the maximum quickly but then leaves him with a bleak monetary outlook at a period of time when financial need increases with family growth.