congressional_record: CREC-1998-11-12-pt1-PgE2309-4
Data license: Public Domain (U.S. Government data) · Data source: Federal Register API & Regulations.gov API
This data as json
| granule_id | date | congress | session | volume | issue | title | chamber | granule_class | sub_granule_class | page_start | page_end | speakers | bills | citation | full_text |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| CREC-1998-11-12-pt1-PgE2309-4 | 1998-11-12 | 105 | 2 | FAIR TREATMENT FOR ADMINISTRATIVE LAW JUDGES | HOUSE | EXTENSIONS | ALLOTHER | E2309 | E2310 | [{"name": "George W. Gekas", "role": "speaking"}] | [{"congress": "105", "type": "HR", "number": "1240"}, {"congress": "105", "type": "HR", "number": "1252"}] | 144 Cong. Rec. E2309 | Congressional Record, Volume 144 Issue 152 (Thursday, November 12, 1998) [Congressional Record Volume 144, Number 152 (Thursday, November 12, 1998)] [Extensions of Remarks] [Pages E2309-E2310] From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov] FAIR TREATMENT FOR ADMINISTRATIVE LAW JUDGES ______ HON. GEORGE W. GEKAS of pennsylvania in the house of representatives Thursday, November 12, 1998 Mr. GEKAS. Mr. Speaker, my colleague Congressman Benjamin Gilman and I introduced in the 105th Congress, H.R. 1240, a bill to provide pay parity for the 1400 Administrative Law Judges (ALJs) with other members of the federal executive branch workforce. The bill was referred to the Civil Service Subcommittee of the Government Reform and Oversight Committee, chaired by Congressman John Mica. Chairman Mica supported the bill by including it in the Subcommittee's draft Civil Service Reform Bill, which did not pass this Congress. The provision to grant ALJs a cost of living adjustment (COLA) when federal employees in the General Schedule receive a COLA became necessary when ALJs as part of the Executive Schedule were denied regular COLAs when Members of Congress restricted COLAs for themselves. ALJs have had only two COLAs in the last eight years, even though they make salaries more like the general schedule employee, rather than the salaries of Cabinet Secretaries, Members of Congress or Federal District Court Judges. More importantly, the only merit-selected administrative judiciary in the world are forever prejudiced by the lack of annual COLAs because their retirement pay will be reduced as a result. During this Congress, we learned a great deal about how unfair the treatment for ALJs is because they are included in the agency budget request for the COLA granted the executive workforce. This is not an appropriation [[Page E2310]] request but simply the authority to access the funds already granted to the agency. There was bipartisan and widespread support for H.R. 1240 to be included in the FY'99 Treasury, Postal Service, and General Government Appropriations bill at the urging of the American Bar Association, Federal Bar Association, Association of Administrative Law Judges and the Federal Association of Administrative Law Judges. The House Judiciary Committee included H.R. 1240 as an amendment to H.R. 1252, the Judicial Reform Bill of 1998. Despite all of this support, ALJs will be the only federal employees in their hearing offices to not receive a 3.6 percent COLA, as hearing office clerks, secretaries and staff attorneys all benefit from the annual COLA and increase in their retirement as well. This disparity between ALJs and other federal employees has not gone unnoticed by the Administration and the Office of Personnel Management (OPM). OPM commented on H.R. 1240, when it was included in the Civil Service Subcommittee draft, stating that OPM supports a COLA for ALJs but at the discretion of the President, who would determine the amount, giving ALJs equal treatment with federal employees in the Senior Executive Service (SES). I support this result in the assurance that ALJs receive their well-deserved COLAs. Unlike ALJs, the SES this year will most likely receive a COLA at the President's discretion. Unfortunately, OPM's proposed statutory change for ALJ fair treatment was not received until the eve of the FY'99 Treasury, Postal Service & General Government Appropriations markup. Mr. Speaker, I am including for the Record the proposed text of OPM's draft legislation to ensure fair treatment for ALJs. My colleague on the bill, Mr. Gilman, and I pledge to work with the Administration and OPM to enact this suggested change for ALJs in the 106th Congress. We regret that it was unable to be resolved this year but the attached proposal is a good start to correcting this inequity. Text of OPM proposal follows: PAY FOR ADMINISTRATIVE LAW JUDGES Sec. . Section 5372(b) of title 5, United States Code, is amended-- (1) in paragraph (1) by striking the second sentence and inserting the following: ``Within level AL-3, there shall be 6 rates of basic pay, designated as AL-3, rates A through F, respectively. The rate of basic pay for AL-3, rate A, may not be less than 65 percent of the rate of basic pay for level IV of the Executive Schedule, and the rate of basic pay for AL-1 may not exceed the rate of basic pay for level IV of the Executive Schedule.''. (2) in paragraph (3)(A) by striking ``upon'' each place it appears and inserting in each such place ``at the beginning of the next pay period following''; and (3) by adding at the end the following new paragraph: ``Subject to paragraph (1), effective at the beginning of the first applicable pay period commencing on or after the first day of the month in which an adjustment takes effect under section 5303 in the rates of basic pay under the General Schedule, each rate of basic pay for administrative law judges shall be adjusted by an amount determined by the President to be appropriate.''. ____________________ |