We made the proposal to the coaches when they came before the Board of Education, before the officers, that granting time off was the better way to handle the problem. It was better to adjust schedules so as to recognize that the activities I have named are specifically a part of the educational program, and that adjustments in time should be made rather than to make payment. I happen to be in pretty close association with superintendents of other large cities in other States where they are paying, some of them, for this extra service, and there is no greater headache in the world. The minute that principle is adopted here is what happens: Those that are being paid are not being paid enough. Those that are not being paid think they should be. Take it on down step by step and you always find some groups dissatisfied. I think what we should do is to establish a fair load for all peopleand teaching is not confined for any of us to the hours of school that have been mentioned; all of us have added responsibilities. I think, therefore, we should make certain that a fair load of activity is assigned to all teachers, who should not expect the extra pay. The minute the money element enters in, then there is the struggle on the part of everybody to get that money, and quite inevitably. One other proposal that has been mentioned by several witnesses, is the establishment of an extra classification for the people with master's degree, plus 30 hours. This proposal may some day be desirable. I indicated to you this morning, sir, that some day we may come to that. In common practice the country over now, work beyond the master's degree is not widely recognized. Here again I am not arguing against the idea, and if it is imposed, of course, we will accept the change, but our reasoning was that there was danger if we did take that extra step and bring that maximum up $500 higher, it would reach a point where it would be pretty difficult to defend and where it might jeopardize the entire schedule. I might say that that is not a problem which is peculiar to the high school people. If the single salary schedule is to be in effect, and the 30 hours plus the master's degree is granted for anybody, then most certainly it must be for anybody who qualifies anywhere along the line. That increases the potentialities of cost considerably. I would like to make one other observation in general, if I may. This is an earnest request. If it should prove necessary to make alterations in this schedule according to any of the requests that have been made, or because of a limitation of funds, or for any reason, then I would earnestly ask that the whole matter be reviewed in the light of those proposed changes before they are made, because very often when a change in a schedule which has been carefully worked out as to its intricacies and its interrelationships is made in any one respect, then the whole schedule is thrown out of balance. I would earnestly request, therefore, that if changes of even a minor nature are contemplated then the whole schedule should be reviewed with respect to the interrelationship of its parts. May I say something about cost, and I then am through, right on the dot: The cost does seem high. Anything we get that is worth while is costly. I think we ought to review in terms of the cost of the schedule not only the size of the organization we are conducting, but also the importance of the function. 99538-47-66 I do not want to become sentimental, but it is factual that our forefathers, in establishing these schools originally, did so for the specific purpose of teaching the children so that the citizenry would be literate and able to assume its responsibilities in a free country. I think that is the purpose we should keep before us always. While we are of course interested in the financial aspects of education, certainly our first concern is with the human values involved, which I think are tremendously important. Senator CAIN. We all appear to agree that Dr. Corning has brought successfully to a close a very worth-while day, even by way of comparison with the sort of day which more normal people have enjoyed. Mr. Bates and I are anxious to resolve and conclude these hearings as soon as possible in order that we may do something about them. I would say, in that connection, that I take it that Mr. Bates and I are particularly anxious to pass along to you, Dr. Corning, and to the Board, whatever reductions there might be required in your general program, in order that the dollars available, as we see them in the distance, you could fix to the best satisfaction of your problem. We have some seven witnesses remaining. It is Mr. Bates' and my suggestion that we attempt to meet at 10 o'clock Monday morning. Therefore, I shall call the meeting adjourned until 10 o'clock Monday morning. (Thereupon, at 4:35 p. m., the meeting was adjourned to reconvene at 10:00 a. m., Monday, April 21, 1947.) BUDGET REQUIREMENTS OF DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA MONDAY, APRIL 21, 1947 JOINT SUBCOMMITTEE ON FISCAL AFFAIRS OF THE COMMITTEES ON THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA, The joint subcommittee met at 10 a. m., pursuant to adjournment, in the Senate District Committee Room, Capitol, Washington, D. C., Senator Harry P. Cain (chairman of the joint subcommittee) presiding. Present: Senator Cain (chairman of the joint subcommittee); Representative Bates (cochairman of the joint subcommittee.) Senator CAIN. I should like to call our Monday morning session. to order, please, and we will very promptly continue our hearings from where they were dropped on Saturday of last week. If Mr. Paul Cooke, of Local 27, American Federation of Teachers, is here, as he is, we will ask him to come to the table, properly identify himself, and proceed. STATEMENT OF PAUL COOKE, PRESIDENT, AMERICAN FEDERATION OF TEACHERS, AMERICAN FEDERATION OF LABOR, LOCAL 27, WASHINGTON, D. C. Mr. COOKE. My name is Paul Cooke, and I am president of the American Federation of Teachers, Local 27. We can state our position, Mr. Senator, very briefly on the bill. Mr. COOKE. We approve, in principle, of the single salary scale. I think you heard reference to it by another A. F. T. member Saturday, that for more than twenty years the A. F. T. have called for single salary scale. In our published recommendations in December, we advocated a single salary scale. We are very much in agreement with that. At that time we also advocated liberalized promotions to the B and D salary groups, and that has been done in the recommendations of H. R. 2976, and S. 1088. We also are substantially in agreement with the increase of the minimum and the increase of the maximum. Now, where we recommend that your joint committee make further study is the matter of the $200 increment in the place of the $100 increment; the matter of $2,600 minimum in place of the $2,500 minimum; the matter of attendance officers, about which you heard quite a bit Saturday. Senator CAIN. What do you have in mind about them, may I ask? Mr. COOKE. We want them regarded in the same category as teachers; that is the essence of it. The arguments that you heard were in substantial agreement with that. We want them regarded as teachers. We are in agreement, too, that some recognition should be given to those teachers who have preparation in excess of their M. A. degree in the elementary and high schools. We support that. Now, about where the money is coming from, the union, in assembled body, has supported the increased Federal lump-sum payment. We realized that that is not going to be enough, and we have also advocated income-tax payments by those who work in the District of Columbia who at present do not pay taxes here. We have taken no documented or recorded stand, but the sense of the members is the support of the liquor and gas taxes for increased revenue; to support, if necessary, an increased income-producing realty tax, in excess of $1.75 per hundred. I hope you do not pin me down too closely on the sales tax, sir, but I think that that would be a last resort before the union would support the sales tax for the source of revenue for this bill, and for other services in the District of Columbia. Senator CAIN. I am willing to let the witness pin himself down. Mr. COOKE. I think that is our statement. Although we have made no recorded stand on the sales tax, the sense of the body is, and it is the sense, the thinking of the teachers, rather than to move for the legislation Senator CAIN. That you think and hope Mr. COOKE. That there will be no sales tax. Senator CAIN. That there will be no need for a sales tax. Mr. COOKE. Yes, sir. Senator CAIN. Feeling that revenue is sufficient to do the job and can be raised from other sources which you could more enthusiastically condone and support. Mr. COOKE. You have stated it, sir. Senator CAIN. But you are by no stretch of the imagination freezing the possibility of the need for a sales tax. Mr. COOKE. That is right, too. Senator CAIN. If I understand you correctly. Senator CAIN. You do not like it for a number of understandable reasons, but you have such a tremendous desire and hope for the legislation we are discussing now that if it became necessary on proof, you would be willing to sit down and look at it again. Mr. COOKE. Look at it again, that is right. We feel that the sufficient importance of the teachers' salary might in-the teachers' salary legislation might outweigh the opposition to the sales tax eventually. Senator CAIN. Right. Mr. COOKE. But we do not record that stand now. Here is a matter we want to bring up before the committee. We would like to know-and you have been concerned about this-how to get the $16,000,000 deficit liquidated, and the revenue thereforwe would like to know to what extent the dual nature of the school system here causes additional expenses that might be saved, where there were one school system und not divisions 1 to 9, and 10 to 13. Senator CAIN. Wait a minute. Explain to me what the difference is between 1 to 9 and 10 to 13. Mr. COOKE. As has been stated, 1 to 9 has been established for white pupils, and divisions 10 to 13 for colored pupils, based roughly on the statute of 1906, with which you are probably more familiar that I am. Now, we say this: That the expense of maintaining the dual school system is such that we are considering the various taxes but we might save more money by establishing one school system. You are probably familiar with the Galarza case, where a student, a white student, has been excluded from a colored school by the action of the board, based on this law. Now, in the event this is pushed into court, and it is necessary to establish in the white schools one course-I think it is called costume design-for one student, you can see the tremendous expense that is involved to set up a course there whereas such a course already exists in the divisions 10 to 13 of the colored schools. We say, we point out, what to some extent has been a ridiculous parade of white teachers and colored teachers in the last 2 days talking for the same thing, but representing two groups. We are not concerned about that now. We are concerned with the expense of the dual system in the District of Columbia. We ask whether it is necessary to expend Federal and District funds to set up heads of departments in both divisions, 1 to 9 and 10 to 13; whether that is not a duplication of expense. Now, we are not prepared to document these matters. We are raising this question, however. I have talked informally with Representative Bates about the matter about which we are asking this question, whether this committee is going to consider the excessive nature of maintaining a dual school system. Senator CAIN. I cannot answer that question because I do not know. Mr. COOKE. We would then like to recommend that this committee consider this problem with the purpose of saving money, for one thing. Senator CAIN. Well, we have raised-the ccmmittee has raised the question Mr. COOKE. Yes, sir. Senator CAIN. With the school officials. We are getting certain facts and figures, and you will not misunderstand me when I say that we take for granted that a duplication of service results in excess costs; that is just obvious. My major concern at the moment is an interest of how many dollars we actually are talking about; secondly, the problem of whether or not there should be a dual system of education within the District of Columbia, in my individual opinion, is a matter that I should like to think would be considered and solved by the citizens of the District of Columbia. It is a problem of tremendous dimensions: it is a social problem; it is a long-range objective, and things of that sort, so I think, and I would know that you and I understand each other exactly on that score. Certainly, on a matter of finance, Mr. Bates and I both would not like to get ourselves into a problem of human relations, and conduct and things of that sort, but that is not to close the door. We do not know yet how many dollars we are talking about, and that is important. Mr. COOKE. May I ask one question, sir? |