Mr. COOKE. How would the citizens of the District of Columbia, in your thinking, be able to resolve the question of this sort when they have no government, no means and no procedure to vote? I do not want to bring in any other extraneous matter, but I just was wondering how it could be achieved.

Senator CAIN. No. 1, I am not qualified to say because I have not lived in this District long enough to say how feelings of citizens are brought to a head. My mind tells me that much of the legislation we are presently considering comes to us as a result of community meetings held in the past and over a period of months or even years. Mr. COOKE. Years.

Senator CAIN. That is an inadequate response, but I can give you no other for I am not qualified to know how you would actually bring a matter of that character to a head.

But in talking to Doctor Corning, as we continue so to do, we get into the money angle, which brings out the need for consideration by ourselves or preferably by the citizens of the District, and then the doctor could give Mr. Bates and me advice on how that can be handled. Mr. COOKE. That completes my testimony, sir.

Senator CAIN. I take it you have only four broad areas of disagree

ment.

Mr. COOKE. That is right.

Senator CAIN. They are improvement disagreements.

Mr. COOKE. Yes, sir.

Seantor CAIN. That you are merely looking for legislation which is an improved article from your point of view from what we are considering.

Mr. COOKE. I would say that is substantially right.

Seantor CAIN. We appreciate your testimony very much.

Mr. COOKE. In giving this testimony-in addition to what I have testified to-I would like to file this letter which states here in substance what our views are.

Senator CAIN. It will be made part of the record.

Mr. COOKE. Thank you, sir.

(The document referred to is as follows:)

AMERICAN FEDERATION OF TEACHERS,
AMERICAN FEDERATION OF LABOR, LOCAL 27,
Washington, D. C., April 19, 1947.

JOINT SENATE AND HOUSE DISTRICT COMMITTEE,
United States Capitol, Washington, D. C.

GENTLEMEN: Inasmuch as the union proposal made over a period of 20 years, specifically for a single salary scale, and the union recommendations for a liberalized promotion plan and a higher minimum and maximum all have been incorporated in the Board of Education plan and in the bills for salary amendment, we support H. R. 2976 and S. 1008.

We ask further study, however, of a proposed salary class for teachers with preparation beyond that of the master's degree.

In reference to the problem of providing the necessary revenue for the salary increases we recommend the following: (1) Taxing income of individuals working in the District of Columbia but residing elsewhere, and (2) increasing the Federal lump-sum payment to the District of Columbia.

Respectfully yours,

Paul Cooke,

PAUL COOKE, President.
DON GOODLOE,
Legislative Representative.

Senator CAIN. Our next witness is Miss Bernadette L. Dore, legisiative chairman, Association of Elementary Principals.

STATEMENT OF BERNADETTE L. DORE, LEGISLATIVE CHAIRMAN, ASSOCIATION OF ELEMENTARY PRINCIPALS, WASHINGTON, D. C.

Miss DORE. Good morning, sirs. I represent the elementary principals, 53 in number, of divisions 1 to 9 in the District.

Our group agreed upon and voted to accept this bill for teachers' legislation as proposed by Dr. Corning. We endorse it primarily from this standpoint: That it gives to the elementary school teacher the same compensation for the same qualifications as other teachers, and that is the point that our group, as principals, have been working for for many years.

Senator CAIN. That has never been recognized as a principle heretofore in the District?

Miss DORE. No; not until 2 years ago-1945.

Our group is concerned with the professional status of the teachers. The teachers, as a group, must assume and maintain the appearance of a highly paid professional group and must do that for many reasons, as you know. They have got to do it on the salary, in some cases, of unskilled laborers, because in some cases unskilled laborers are getting a higher scale of salary than the school teacher.

I feel that the salary is intimately tied up with the morale of inservice teachers as well as the recruitment of the future teachers, and unless their salaries are placed high enough to attract and to maintain, our future legislators, our future doctors, our future unskilled laborers are placed in a precarious position.

I feel that those are the points that we would like to make in favor of this bill.

Senator CAIN. Thank you. They will be considered.

Miss DORE. Thank you, sir.

Senator CAIN. May we now hear from a representative of the Federation of Citizens Associations? That designation is immediately followed by the name of Mr. Woolsey W. Hall, president of District of Columbia Federation of Civic Associations. I presume those two are one and the same thing, and that the Civic Associations is for the colored representatives.

We would be very pleased to hear from you, Mr. Hall.

STATEMENT OF WOOLSEY W. HALL, PRESIDENT, DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA FEDERATION OF CIVIC ASSOCIATIONS, WASHINGTON, D. C.

Mr. HALL. My name is Woolsey W. Hall, and I am president of the Federation of Civic Associations. Insofar as we have democratic processes, the two federation presidents are elective heads of their respective communities. I am the head of the colored community which composes this association.

We have come down to endorse heartily the increase in teachers' salaries the minimum to attract and hold the beginners and the maximum to continue the services of those who have developed in our schools.

We rather favor the 12 steps as set out, and as I sat Saturday all day, it was rather a remarkable thing to me that busy gentlemen

of the Congress would give a full day to our little affairs. I was filled with admiration at that.

Senator CAIN. You have not found anything little about them, Mr. Hall, and neither have we.

Mr. HALL. Compared with the great national and international problems.

Senator CAIN. If they were small we would spend less time with them; but they are pretty whopping.

Mr. HALL. I am looking at it from the standpoint of deciding national and international problems.

Senator CAIN. That is right.

Mr. HALL. We do favor, as I say, the full increase. We believe in pay for professional training and professional performance.

Senator CAIN. Mr. Hall, what thought do you have, as one who represents your federation, about the moneys required to improve essential services of the schools?

As a

Mr. HALL. We have given considerable thought to that. matter of fact, I was a member of the tax study committee of Corporation Counsel West that recommended certain forms of taxes, such as an increase in the liquor tax and utility bills, and the seats in the theaters.

Senator CAIN. Let me stop you there for 1 minute. You were a member of his advisory council?

Mr. HALL. They have gotten democratic in the District, and whenever they have any important matter they call us in.

Senator CAIN. Namely, all the legislative proposals for raising

revenue that came to us.

Mr. HALL. We studied them thoroughly.

Senator CAIN. And they had your stamp of approval.

Mr. HALL. Yes; and with, I should say, justification. Personally, I have been amazed that the Congress has not been more generous to the District of Columbia. The war impact has been upon us. We have had much of our land taken from taxation-almost half of it— and General-President-Ulysses S. Grant established a 50-50 plan, and it backed down to 60-40, and then there was a man who came down and took it away from us. I do not know how he did it; he ran everything; he had all the choice appointments, but all of a sudden he savagely cut out our ratio. We are getting a very small percentage compared, I believe, with the service rendered. I think you have gone into that very thoroughly.

Now, the sales tax-we had to be practical about that. We were to study taxation, so, in spite of the fact that all of us felt that the Congress would relieve us by a more generous contribution, we also felt in that connection that there-if there would not be an increase, we should have made some provision for income; and so, among those other taxes, we voted a sales tax, as you have heard from everybody else, as a last resort.

Senator CAIN. It is obvious that you understand that to get what we want in this age we must likewise be willing to meet those obligations.

Mr. HALL. I think so, but I think the Government would
Senator CAIN. We must be willing to meet those obligations.

Mr. HALL. But the Government, I think, would err on the side of liberality in the Nation's Capital and consider the relationships here. Senator CAIN. It is too early yet to tell, as you well know, what the Federal Government could be prevailed upon to recognize as their proper-I do not like to use the word "gift"-their proper share. Mr. HALL. Yes.

Senator CAIN. Of the over-all community, Federal city obligation. Mr. Hall, thank you very much.

Mr. HALL. Thank you, sir.

Senator CAIN. We should like very much to hear from any representative of the Board of Trade. We do not have a particular name outlined.

(There was no response.)

Dr. CORNING. Senator, the Board of Trade representative has been here through Wednesday and Saturday.

The educational committee of the Board of Trade unanimously endorsed this program, and I think they were here to testify to that. I presume they have been unable to appear this morning.

Senator CAIN. Well, it is the testimony we are most interested in rather than the endorsement. We rather hope they have studied this problem thoroughly on their side so that we will have some inter locking views.

Dr. CORNING. Yes, sir.

Senator CAIN. Mr. J. C. Turner, Central Labor Union, American Federation of Labor.

Mr. Turner, you are getting to be a friend of long standing. We have seen you before.

STATEMENT OF J. C. TURNER, REPRESENTING THE WASHINGTON CENTRAL LABOR UNION, AMERICAN FEDERATION OF LABOR, WASHINGTON, D. C.

Mr. TURNER. Mr. Chairman, my name is J. C. Turner.

The Washington Central Labor Union is very happy to come before this joint committee to express its deep appreciation for the support Congress has given us in our fight for the single salary schedule and for better pay for teachers.

As all who were in Washington 2 years ago know, our American Federation of Labor teachers' unions, backed by the Washington Central Labor Union and the American Federation of Labor itself, led the fight for a single salary schedule in our Washington schools. We asked for the same pay for all who have the same professional qualifications, regardless of where they may be working in the school

system.

In 1945, we were attacked for trying to improve that very bad bill of 1945 which the teachers joint legislative committee sponsored. We did save the tenure for the teachers then; we did get them a small raise over the objections of those who were pushing the bill to give big raises only to those on top.

Then in 1946 labor again fought for the single salary schedule— yes; fought-and thanks to our good friend Senator McCarran, a clause was written into the 1946 bill requiring the school authorities to make a study of the inequities in the present school law, and to bring in a report thereon.

The bill now before the Congress does approach two of the gravest inequities imposed on our teachers. It does raise the salaries of teachers, and it does give the single-salary schedule for most teachers. True, it does not raise salaries enough. It is hard to see how the Congress of the United States can say, "We shall pay a minimum salary of $2,600 to all professional workers except teachers, even though these teachers are the only group of professional workers who are required to have a college degree.'

Gentlemen, we do not think the schedule proposed in this bill is high enough, and we are here to inform you that just as soon as the tax question has been settled, that we are coming back to ask for the $2,600 minimum for teachers that the Federal Government now grants to all other professional workers.

But we must face the fact again that Congress mandated the school officials to bring in a report on how to wipe out inequities here in our schools.

Salaries, of course, are of basic importance; and you have then granted the single-salary schedule to most of the teachers.

This is a great victory for Washington teachers, and we are very proud that the teachers unions and the Washington Central Labor Union and the American Federation of Labor have carried this fight against terrific opposition, even abuse, until others dared to pick up and fight with us instead of against us.

But this proposed bill carries a grave injustice in that it expressly denies the benefits of the single-salary schedule to one group of teachers, a very important group, the attendance officers and childlabor inspectors.

For some reason our school officials have decided to persecute these employees. I am a member of the executive board of the Council of Social Agencies. We are actively interested in the problems of juvenile delinquency.

This group, therefore, is interested in raising standards in our schools. But it realizes, realistically, that the teacher who must deal especially with the potential delinquent has the hardest job of all; that teacher is the attendance officer.

This bill provides that all teachers except those who treat with the potential delinquent-that is, the staff of the attendance departmentshould be paid on a single-salary schedule.

We here plead that the personal animosity of certain officials toward certain other persons-for that is the real reason for this discrimination-should not continue to deprive the employees of the attendance department of their just and proper rights.

Why are these people denied their leave the law gives them 10 days a year-so that those who do not like them say "That means 2 days a month."

The same officials who got special legislation to deny these fine workers the leave rights given to teachers, or the leave rights given to every other Government worker, now are asking for a special law to deny these women the salary that is offered to every other group in the system.

On that score, let us stop this sort of petty persecution.

In the first place, why should Washington treat its attendance officers worse than any other big city does? We have helped these