application to some of the complaints which have come to our atten tion. This section reads as follows:

SEC. 402. The Civil Service Commission shall prescribe regulations, not in consistent with this part, to require the submission of statements of financa interests by such employees, subordinate to the heads of agencies, as the C mission may designate. The Commission shall prescribe the form and contes of such statements and the time or times and places for such submission.

At this point, Mr. Chairman, I would like to point out that it is my opinion that the Civil Service Commission did not follow that orde and that it did not perform this mission, because if it had issued un form regulations to be used in every department of the Governme and uniform forms to be used to solicit this information, I do no believe that we would have had the trouble that we are now having I might say that I have not had a single complaint from an employe of the Civil Service Commission itself. Where most of the complaint have arisen are where the form has been supplemented to solicit add tional information over and above that which the Commission re quired. I think I can point that out a little further along in my state

ment.

I have submitted for the subcommittee's information copies of t' forms prepared by the Civil Service Commission and used general throughout the Government service to provide requested data on e ployment and financial interests. They are identified as "Exhibit A and "Exhibit B."

One instance of disregard of individual rights of employees as we as responsibility to the taxpayers, which has come to my attention seems to illustrate the objectives of subsections (a), (b), (c), and of section 1 of the Ervin bill. It happened at a large field installa tion under the Department of Defense. This was an instance of speci indoctrination with racial overtones.

The office chief called meetings of different groups of employe throughout the day. Each group was integrated racially. A record ing was played while employees listened about 30 minutes. It wa supposedly a speech made at a university, which went deeply into th importance of integration of the races in this country. There was dis cussion of the United Nations-what a great thing it was and ho there never could be another world war. The person who reported thi incident made this comment: "Think of the taxpayers' money used tha day to hear that record." I think that speaks for itself.

Senator ERVIN. If I may interject myself at this point, without in terfering with your statement, a Federal employee forwarded to me copy of a notice which appeared on a bulletin board and which stated that on a certain day, at a certain place, a certain professor was make a speech on this general subject of racial integration, and tha all of the employees at the installation were requested to attend, or rather invited to attend, the lecture.

The notice proceeded to state that attendance was purely voluntary and then it had a notation at the bottom to the effect that a record would be kept of all those in attendance or not in atendance.

I would like to ask your opinion as to whether you think that a tice of that kind is calculated to engender in the minds of civil serv ans of the United States the conviction that they are at complete liberty to absent themselves from such a lecture?

Mr. GRINER. Senator, if I had been a Federal employee and I cared anything about my job I would have been at that lecture.

Senator ERVIN. As a matter of fact, do you not agree with me that that is a coercive measure?

Mr. GRINER. Absolutely.

Senator ERVIN. That is one of the reasons why, when I drafted this bill, I used the words that would prohibit the requiring or requesting certain actions on the part of Government employees, because I was taught when I studied the infantry drill regulations very many years ago that, so far as the military are concerned, a request of a superior is equivalent to a command.

I would like to know what your observation has been in reference to whether that statement also applies to civilian employment with the Federal Government.

Mr. GRINER. Yes, sir; and this is especially true in certain departments which I do not care to name right now, but there is a definite inclination-however, I might say that conditions are getting better— that there is a definite inclination on the part of superiors that an order must be obeyed. It must not be questioned, and if you do question it, why, you are in the doghouse, let us face it.

As I say, conditions in that respect, I think, are getting better, and I think we can attribute that to Executive Order 10988 which does give the employees some rights.

Senator ERVIN. Thank you.

Mr. GRINER. At this same field station, a meeting was held of employees in grades GS-13 through GS-15. The chief who called the meeting read a series of Army and DOD regulations and directives and then ordered the assembled employees to complete and sign the confidential statement of employment and financial interests-DOD Form 1555. Said the employee who wrote about this incident:

We were told in no uncertain terms that this was required and must be in by August 18 to the General Counsel's Office. We were told it would be held in confidence, but we learned that at least three persons in the General Counsel's Office would be scrutinizing the forms. We were also told that if questions arose, interviews would follow.

Let me point this out: as you and I well know, any time that a secret gets beyond one person, why, it is no longer a secret, and if three lawyers who are trained to talk by the very nature of their training, review my financial statement they are going to know all about my financial problems and assets and other things, and my supervisor is going to eventually know it, and my fellow employees are going to know it. The big problem will be that when it finally reaches my fellow employees I would not know it myself because it has been through too many hands.

A young lady employee of the Department of Agriculture in Washington recently returned from work and found two cards (punch cards) one of which stated that no questionnaire had been returned to the USDA, and a second card asking for information concerning her race or national origin. On the one card it was stated:

"The Federal Government and this Department want to be sure that every individual whatever his race or national origin gets fair and equal treatment. To do this, we need to know how manw minority

71-994-67- 2

application to some of the complaints which have come to our atten tion. This section reads as follows:

SEC. 402. The Civil Service Commission shall prescribe regulations, not inconsistent with this part, to require the submission of statements of financial interests by such employees, subordinate to the heads of agencies, as the Commission may designate. The Commission shall prescribe the form and content of such statements and the time or times and places for such submission.

At this point, Mr. Chairman, I would like to point out that it is m opinion that the Civil Service Commission did not follow that order, and that it did not perform this mission, because if it had issued uniform regulations to be used in every department of the Government and uniform forms to be used to solicit this information, I do not believe that we would have had the trouble that we are now having. I might say that I have not had a single complaint from an employee of the Civil Service Commission itself. Where most of the complaint have arisen are where the form has been supplemented to solicit addtional information over and above that which the Commission required. I think I can point that out a little further along in my statement.

I have submitted for the subcommittee's information copies of the forms prepared by the Civil Service Commission and used generall throughout the Government service to provide requested data on en ployment and financial interests. They are identified as "Exhibit A and "Exhibit B."

One instance of disregard of individual rights of employees as well as responsibility to the taxpayers, which has come to my attention. seems to illustrate the objectives of subsections (a), (b), (c), and (di. of section 1 of the Ervin bill. It happened at a large field installation under the Department of Defense. This was an instance of special indoctrination with racial overtones.

The office chief called meetings of different groups of employees throughout the day. Each group was integrated racially. A record ing was played while employees listened about 30 minutes. It was supposedly a speech made at a university, which went deeply into the importance of integration of the races in this country. There was dis cussion of the United Nations-what a great thing it was-and how there never could be another world war. The person who reported th incident made this comment: "Think of the taxpayers' money used that day to hear that record." I think that speaks for itself.

Senator ERVIN. If I may interject myself at this point, without in terfering with your statement, a Federal employee forwarded to me a copy of a notice which appeared on a bulletin board and which stated that on a certain day, at a certain place, a certain professor was to make a speech on this general subject of racial integration, and that all of the employees at the installation were requested to attend, or rather invited to attend, the lecture.

The notice proceeded to state that attendance was purely voluntary and then it had a notation at the bottom to the effect that a record would be kept of all those in attendance or not in atendance.

I would like to ask your opinion as to whether you think that a notice of that kind is calculated to engender in the minds of civil serv ans of the United States the conviction that they are at complete liberty to absent themselves from such a lecture?

Mr. GRINER. Senator, if I had been a Federal employee and I cared anything about my job I would have been at that lecture.

Senator ERVIN. As a matter of fact, do you not agree with me that that is a coercive measure?

Mr. GRINER. Absolutely.

Senator ERVIN. That is one of the reasons why, when I drafted this bill, I used the words that would prohibit the requiring or requesting certain actions on the part of Government employees, because I was taught when I studied the infantry drill regulations very many years ago that, so far as the military are concerned, a request of a superior is equivalent to a command.

I would like to know what your observation has been in reference to whether that statement also applies to civilian employment with the Federal Government.

Mr. GRINER. Yes, sir; and this is especially true in certain departments which I do not care to name right now, but there is a definite inclination-however, I might say that conditions are getting better— that there is a definite inclination on the part of superiors that an order must be obeyed. It must not be questioned, and if you do question it, why, you are in the doghouse, let us face it.

As I say, conditions in that respect, I think, are getting better, and I think we can attribute that to Executive Order 10988 which does give the employees some rights.

Senator ERVIN. Thank you.

Mr. GRINER. At this same field station, a meeting was held of employees in grades GS-13 through GS-15. The chief who called the meeting read a series of Army and DOD regulations and directives and then ordered the assembled employees to complete and sign the confidential statement of employment and financial interests-DOD Form 1555. Said the employee who wrote about this incident:

We were told in no uncertain terms that this was required and must be in by August 18 to the General Counsel's Office. We were told it would be held in confidence, but we learned that at least three persons in the General Counsel's Office would be scrutinizing the forms. We were also told that if questions arose, interviews would follow.

Let me point this out: as you and I well know, any time that a secret gets beyond one person, why, it is no longer a secret, and if three lawyers who are trained to talk by the very nature of their training, review my financial statement they are going to know all about my financial problems and assets and other things, and my supervisor is going to eventually know it, and my fellow employees are going to know it. The big problem will be that when it finally reaches my fellow employees I would not know it myself because it has been through too many hands.

A young lady employee of the Department of Agriculture in Washington recently returned from work and found two cards (punch cards) one of which stated that no questionnaire had been returned to the USDA, and a second card asking for information concerning her race or national origin. On the one card it was stated:

"The Federal Government and this Department want to be sure that every individual whatever his race or national origin gets fair and equal treatment. To do this, we need to know how manw minority

71-994-672

group employees there are; what kind of jobs they hold, what grade level their jobs are and other things that will show whether or not there is discrimination ***. All employees are asked to help by checking the block on the other side of this card which describes your race or national origin. Your answer will be kept confidential." On the other side of the card, and I have a sample of it here, was a series of blocks opposite the categories: American Indian, Negro, Oriental, Spanish American, and then, none of these. The card was to be mailed to a designated official of the Group Status Survey, USDA, at an address in Ogden, Utah. The young lady who received this card which was received by other employees as well-stated emphatically that she had "no intention of completing these forms with the information requested."

Another individual, an engineer at the Kennedy Space Center in Florida, was asked to fill out a form revealing his financial interests. Said this man:

I consider it a personal insult to be told that the Government has so little confidence in my ability to follow the established policies that it is necessary to invade my personal privacy to check up on me. I have discussed this with the personnel office to try to determine how my wife owning a house and some farm land in another state can be considered as being any possible conflict with my job in Florida.

I was told that all had to be reported, as any holdings must be checked out so the legal office can pass judgment on conflict of interest and employment. Employees with as much as 25 years of civil service have refused to fill out this form. The personnel office has informed me that disciplinary action will have to be taken and with the limited talent available for manned space flight NASA cannot afford to lose the valuable experience these people have. This one thing has had the worst effect on morale I have seen in some years in the Cape Kennedy

area.

Now, Senator, I have been wondering just what an engineer who sits down at a desk and does his work most of the time, where the conflict of interest might arise. Why is that man required to fill out this form? I do not have the answer. I wish I did.

An engineer employed by one

Senator ERVIN. I might say

Mr. GRINER. (Continuing). By one of the Federal commissionsSenator ERVIN. Excuse me just a moment. I might say it excited my curiosity. I have read a number of the financial questionnaires, and many of them require the man not only to disclose all assets, all of the liabilities and all of the property of himself and his wife, but many of them go so far as to require him to disclose all of the holdings of all of the members of his family, and if you take them literally, a person would have to file with the Federal Government a statement of the toys which belonged to his little child. They would have to disclose what Santa Claus brought for Christmas.

Mr. GRINER. Senator, we had a call that came to my office from an individual who refused to give his name, and stated that he was required to state the assets of his wife and mother in law, and he says, "I went home that night and told my wife and mother in law that I was being required to do that," and he says, "You know what they told me?" If you will excuse the language, Senator, I will put it in the record "They said, 'you go back and tell our Government to go to hell. I will not disclose it. It is none of their business." "