Sgt. COOPER. Another thing, Mr. McMillan, that you have to consider is that we are really a new department now. We have 3,000 men who haven't completed their third year in the department yet. I look around and I don't see too many people that I know anymore, after having been around 30 years.

Mr. MCMILLAN. What do the 3,000 do?

Sgt. COOPER. They are not just as experienced in handling traffic, is what I mean. It takes a long time for a man to know how to handle traffic.

Mr. MCMILLAN. You had the best men in the country, Captain Nichols, Captain Waters, Inspector Wright. What happened to them? Sgt. COOPER. They retired, Mr. McMillan.

Mr. MCMILLAN. Some of them retired. I think you placed them over in some other department, didn't you?

Sgt. COOPER. Yes.

I am sure Chief Wilson will answer that when he gets here.

Mr. MCMILLAN. I am just asking you people who I know do the work down there.

Mr. NELSON. Mr. Chairman, one more question.

PRETRIAL DETENTION

Having had a lot to do with the crime bill, because it was handled in our Committee, and I think we did our little bit in organizing it—and I am sure the Chairman will agree that we worked together closely on it-my question would be this. If we are to repeal the present trial detention, in your judgment would crime increase?

Sgt. COOPER. I think it may have a tendency to. As a matter of fact, things have been going along rather smoothly, we think. And the noknock hasn't been used too much either. The same procedure has been followed.

Mr. NELSON. I am thinking of the present pretrial detention, because mainly in that instance it is usually the repeater who is giving you a problem. I gather from the statement that the gentleman made that if in his judgment the repeater was not held subject to trial, where the judge feels that he is a repeater and his history is bad, if he were not held, your crime problem would be greater, and you would have more crime without this law than you do now.

Sgt. DUNPHY. Yes, sir. Because before this went into effect, Washington was just like many other cities in this country-the statistics bear this out-crime increased and increased. We show a decrease now. And we are keeping these people under detention, and we are bringing them before the courts more rapidly, for their constitutional right, and their trial. And I think it is reflected in the statistics themselves. Mr. NELSEN. Previously the present trial detention was effective by a high money bond, but under the Bail Reform Act you coundn't do this. As a result, there were more and more persons on the streets with moderate bail; they would just get out and do it all over again. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.

Mr. BROYHILL. If the gentleman would yield, I think it is unfortunate that the delegate from the District of Columbia is not here this morning to hear this part of the testimony, because I know he has a

sincere interest in the affairs of this city. I know he has much more important business that keeps him from being here this morning. I think this is regrettable, however, because I think it would be helpful to him to hear this testimony on the part of the police department.

YOUTH CORRECTIONS ACT

Mr. CABELL. The Chair has one more question of you gentlemen who are at the working level of the law enforcement. Do you think the law enforcement would be improved if we were to amend the Youth Corrections Act to the point that you could charge an 18 year old with a felony?

I see some heads nodding.

Sgt. COOPER. We would like to respect fully decline to answer that. Mr. CABELL. All right. Thank you, gentlemen, for a very fine presentation and for your earnestness and dedication to your jobs.

Sgt. COOPER. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.

The Chair will change the agenda just slightly in the interest of time. And the Chair will call Captain Joseph Granados.

STATEMENT OF CAPTAIN JOSEPH GRANADOS, PRESIDENT, LOCAL 36, AFL-CIO, DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA FIREFIGHTERS ASSOCIATION; ACCOMPANIED BY AL RAEDER, RETIRED BATTALION CHIEF

Captain GRANADOS. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. My name is Joseph Granados. I am a Captain of the D.C. Fire Department, and President of the Firefighters Association.

With your permission, I have with me retired Fire Department Battalion Chief Al Raeder, who is a member of our legislative committee.

Mr. Chairman, H.R. 12710 is a bill designed to increase the salaries of firefighters (and police officers) to the degree required to make them competitive with the wages of firefighters in adjacent jurisdictions, firefighters in cities of like population groupings, and federal and district government workers bearing equivalent duties and responsibilities. We earnestly seek its passage.

We feel that in this instance we must address ourselves first to the fact that the increases to be effected by the bill, are, at first blush, contrary to the guidelines laid down by the Pay Board. Initially, let us affirm, without reservation, that we quarrel not with the economic game plan, as we understand it. Future pay increases to an annual maximum of 5.5 percent, coupled with optimum price increases of 2.5 percent yearly, and allowing for a productiviety increase of 3 percent seem to us, in our economic naivete, to be eminently acceptable. Such a plan, however, must be predicated on all facets of labor starting from the same point, within acceptable limits. Such is clearly not the case here. To support this statement, we offer evidence from two main

sources.

JUSTIFICATION FOR PAY INCREASE

First, let us examine our position versus the cost of living. Since Public Law 90-320 became effective on October 1, 1967, we have had increases in salary totaling 13.9 percent. Since 1967 however, the cost

of living has risen in Washington, D.C. from 100 to 124.2 percent as of November, 1971, or a total of 24 percent. Since our last increase, effective July 1, 1969, the cost of living has risen on the 1957-1959 scale from 128.8 to 144.7 (the latter mark being also as of November 1, 1971), while our salary has remained static. Thus, although most increases include not only a segment to compensate for the increased cost of living but also a productivity factor, our wages have signally failed to keep pace even with the cost of living.

Second, a dramatic and disturbing difference in our salaries in comparison with salaries in cities of comparable size, points out the need for a sizeable adjustment.

We have selected only those cities in which firefighters were receiving less at appointment that the District in 1969, and are making more now. And we have included Table I to show this.

TABLE 1.-SELECTED COMPARISONS IN DOLLAR DIFFERENCE

Every city of the twenty-five in our population grouping improved its position vis-a-vis Washington, D.C. While we have received no increase, Milwaukee has received six, Philadephia 5, and Chicago, Cincinnati, Kansas City, Missouri, Pittsburgh and San Francisco, 4. Thus, while our salary increases are limited to at most one per twoyear congressional term, other cities have recognized at regular and short intervals the plight of the public safety servant. P.L. 91-297 placed us in 6th position as to minimum salaries and second place as to maximum; currently we are in 15th and 11th place respectively. And we have included Table II.

TABLE 11.-MINIMUM AND MAXIMUM SALARIES PAID FIRE PRIVATES IN 25 CITIES OVER 500,000 POPULATION

TABLE 11-MINIMUM AND MAXIMUM SALARIES PAID FIRE PRIVATES IN 25 CITIES OVER 500,000 POPULATION-Continued

1 Basic salary-add 6 percent night differential ($12,800 July 1971, $13,550 April 1972, $14,300 January 1973).

2 Maximum shown is reached after 7 years; maximum after 16 years will be $13,680 and $14,400 for proposed phase I and II, respectively.

And I might point out that in Table II, compiled by the D.C. personnel office, we have included cities in our population class. If we were to take all cities into consideration, we would find that there are 188 cities that pay their firefighters more than Washington, D.C. and there are 34 in a similar population grouping to use that pay more in the maximum.

Mr. MCMILLAN. Mr. Granados, from what population grouping did you get your figures, from 500,000, to a million?

Capt. GRANADOS. Yes, Mr. Chairman. All over 500,000. And this is a survey that was taken by the D.C. personnel office.

Mr. MCMILLAN. I know that the Committee has some figures here showing New York and Chicago, which of course are not comparable in size to Washington.

I asked the police department the same question, so that we can get our figures together.

Capt. GRANADOS. Mr. McMillan, we did the same thing this year that we have seen it done in each past year. And the city has always made the study in this way, comparing it with the 21, and now it has gone to the 23 and 25 cities with populations of 25,000 or over, so we just did the same way all over again.

Mr. MCMILLAN. I notice in your table II you have cities with a great deal more population than Washington. I am certain you know that this committee desires to give you every dime we can. We want to keep it down to cities as nearly the size of Washington as we can. And I think we should take the pay in the area around Washington into consideration, too.

Thank you. I don't like to break into your statement, but I wanted to bring that out.

Capt. GRANADOS. Yes, sir.

We believe that the evidence, relative to our losing battle with the cost-of-living and the retrogression of our pay position with cities of like size, is a persuasive argument indeed against the necessity of our adherence to the Pay Board guidelines.

In that light, let us examine other justifications for passage of H.R. 12710, turning first to the happenings in the private sector. On July 18, 1969, just after our last increase, the hourly union wage of a bricklayer in the District was $5.95. On October 1, 1971, it had reached $8.35. Six other principal trades in Washington, D.C. have experienced similar wage increases, averaging 33 percent over that time

span. (See table III.) And the figures in that table have been taken from the figures of the Bureau of Labor Statistics.

TABLE 111.-HOURLY WAGES OF SELECTED TRADES, WASHINGTON, D.C.

COMPARABLE SALARIES IN SURROUNDING AREA

We call your attention to the salaries of firefighters in contiguous jurisdictions. We now rank in 6th, or last, place in comparison with our neighbors both as to minimum and maximum salaries. This, mind you, in spite of the fact that our neighbors average number of responses to fires, per company, is not comparable to ours-that hostility toward, and harassment of, firefighters is a phenomenon restricted to the District-that false alarms, as a vehicle of harassment, are almost unknown in the suburbs-and finally that the use of arson on a large and rapidly increasing scale, is a practice virtually confined to the inner city. The passage of H.R. 12710 will place us back in the position we occupied after the passage of P.L. 910298, in the first rank of all six neighboring communties. Considering the disadvantages of working in the inner city, no other rank is tenable for the District, assuming a desire on the part of the District to recruit top rank personnel.

WORK PERFORMED

We believe that, in every sense of the word, our productivity has increased over yesteryear; that is, the amount of work performed per unit of time. In the time span 1967-1971 inclusive, our alarms have increased from 23,105 to 31,532, with false alarms escalating from 6853 to 12,796 (1964 less than 3,000). The astonishing increase is in dollar loss which has risen from 2.95 million in 1967 to 8.39 million in 1971, despite a relatively constant number of real fires in the last three years. The increase is far beyond anything attributed to an increased cost. The inevitable conclusion, from the dollar loss alone, is that we are being menaced with an inordinate number of fires which must be labeled arson, or of suspicious origin. The increase in dollar loss follows because arson fires are generally ones where the fire is burning fiercely and/or in several places on arrival. Thus, our firefighters are responding to a far greater number of major fires, with a concomitant increase in the risk and injury factors.

SALARIES FOR COMPARABLE GOVERNMENT GRADES

Our worsening position relative to our GS, or classified counterparts needs to be emphasized. Since the date of our last increase, classified workers have received cumulative raises of 18.7; the blue collar force, 20 percent, with the inevitable price increases in this area as a consequence. Dating back to 1964, it was recognized that the officer