[House Hearing, 110 Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
OPPORTUNITIES EXIST TO IMPROVE SENIOR EXECUTIVE SERVICE DIVERSITY IN
LEGISLATIVE BRANCH AGENCIES
=======================================================================
HEARING
before the
SUBCOMMITTEE ON FEDERAL WORKFORCE,
POSTAL SERVICE, AND THE DISTRICT
OF COLUMBIA
of the
COMMITTEE ON OVERSIGHT
AND GOVERNMENT REFORM
HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES
ONE HUNDRED TENTH CONGRESS
FIRST SESSION
__________
NOVEMBER 13, 2007
__________
Serial No. 110-67
__________
Printed for the use of the Committee on Oversight and Government Reform
Available via the World Wide Web: http://www.gpoaccess.gov/congress/
index.html
http://www.house.gov/reform
----------
U.S. GOVERNMENT PRINTING OFFICE
44-008 PDF WASHINGTON : 2008
For sale by the Superintendent of Documents, U.S. Government Printing
Office Internet: bookstore.gpo.gov Phone: toll free (866) 512-1800;
DC area (202) 512-1800 Fax: (202) 512-2104 Mail: Stop IDCC,
Washington, DC 20402-0001
COMMITTEE ON OVERSIGHT AND GOVERNMENT REFORM
HENRY A. WAXMAN, California, Chairman
TOM LANTOS, California TOM DAVIS, Virginia
EDOLPHUS TOWNS, New York DAN BURTON, Indiana
PAUL E. KANJORSKI, Pennsylvania CHRISTOPHER SHAYS, Connecticut
CAROLYN B. MALONEY, New York JOHN M. McHUGH, New York
ELIJAH E. CUMMINGS, Maryland JOHN L. MICA, Florida
DENNIS J. KUCINICH, Ohio MARK E. SOUDER, Indiana
DANNY K. DAVIS, Illinois TODD RUSSELL PLATTS, Pennsylvania
JOHN F. TIERNEY, Massachusetts CHRIS CANNON, Utah
WM. LACY CLAY, Missouri JOHN J. DUNCAN, Jr., Tennessee
DIANE E. WATSON, California MICHAEL R. TURNER, Ohio
STEPHEN F. LYNCH, Massachusetts DARRELL E. ISSA, California
BRIAN HIGGINS, New York KENNY MARCHANT, Texas
JOHN A. YARMUTH, Kentucky LYNN A. WESTMORELAND, Georgia
BRUCE L. BRALEY, Iowa PATRICK T. McHENRY, North Carolina
ELEANOR HOLMES NORTON, District of VIRGINIA FOXX, North Carolina
Columbia BRIAN P. BILBRAY, California
BETTY McCOLLUM, Minnesota BILL SALI, Idaho
JIM COOPER, Tennessee JIM JORDAN, Ohio
CHRIS VAN HOLLEN, Maryland
PAUL W. HODES, New Hampshire
CHRISTOPHER S. MURPHY, Connecticut
JOHN P. SARBANES, Maryland
PETER WELCH, Vermont
Phil Schiliro, Chief of Staff
Phil Barnett, Staff Director
Earley Green, Chief Clerk
David Marin, Minority Staff Director
Subcommittee on Federal Workforce, Postal Service, and the District of
Columbia
DANNY K. DAVIS, Illinois
ELEANOR HOLMES NORTON, District of KENNY MARCHANT, Texas
Columbia JOHN M. McHUGH, New York
JOHN P. SARBANES, Maryland JOHN L. MICA, Florida
ELIJAH E. CUMMINGS, Maryland DARRELL E. ISSA, California
DENNIS J. KUCINICH, Ohio, Chairman JIM JORDAN, Ohio
WM. LACY CLAY, Missouri
STEPHEN F. LYNCH, Massachusetts
Tania Shand, Staff Director
C O N T E N T S
----------
Page
Hearing held on November 13, 2007................................ 1
Statement of:
Bransford, William L., general counsel, Senior Executives
Association; Shirley A. Jones, president, Blacks in
Government, GAO USACE Chapter; and Lieutenant Sharon
Blackmon-Malloy, president, U.S. Capitol Black Police
Association................................................ 91
Blackmon-Malloy, Sharon.................................. 103
Bransford, William L..................................... 91
Jones, Shirley A......................................... 96
Copeland, Curtis W., Specialist in American National
Government, Congressional Research Service................. 6
Elzy, Nadine, Director, Office of Equal Employment
Opportunity, Government Printing Office; Ronald Stroman,
Managing Director, Office of Opportunity and Inclusiveness,
Government Accountability Office; Teresa Bailey, Director,
Office of Equal Employment Opportunity/Conciliation
Programs, Office of the Architect of the Capitol; Stephanie
Ruiz, Director, Human Resources, Congressional Budget
Office; Dennis Hanratty, Director, Human Resources
Services, Library of Congress; and Daniel Nichols,
Assistant Chief of Police, U.S. Capitol Police............. 22
Bailey, Teresa........................................... 45
Elzy, Nadine............................................. 22
Hanratty, Dennis......................................... 60
Nichols, Daniel.......................................... 71
Ruiz, Stephanie.......................................... 51
Stroman, Ronald.......................................... 29
Letters, statements, etc., submitted for the record by:
Bailey, Teresa, Director, Office of Equal Employment
Opportunity/Conciliation Programs, Office of the Architect
of the Capitol, prepared statement of...................... 47
Blackmon-Malloy, Lieutenant Sharon, president, U.S. Capitol
Black Police Association, prepared statement of............ 106
Bransford, William L., general counsel, Senior Executives
Association, prepared statement of......................... 93
Copeland, Curtis W., Specialist in American National
Government, Congressional Research Service, prepared
statement of............................................... 8
Davis, Hon. Danny K., a Representative in Congress from the
State of Illinois, prepared statement of................... 4
Elzy, Nadine, Director, Office of Equal Employment
Opportunity, Government Printing Office, prepared statement
of......................................................... 25
Hanratty, Dennis, Director, Human Resources Services, Library
of Congress, prepared statement of......................... 62
Jones, Shirley A., president, Blacks in Government, GAO USACE
Chapter, prepared statement of............................. 98
Nichols, Daniel, Assistant Chief of Police, U.S. Capitol
Police, prepared statement of.............................. 73
Ruiz, Stephanie, Director, Human Resources, Congressional
Budget Office, prepared statement of....................... 53
Stroman, Ronald, Managing Director, Office of Opportunity and
Inclusiveness, Government Accountability Office, prepared
statement of............................................... 31
OPPORTUNITIES EXIST TO IMPROVE SENIOR EXECUTIVE SERVICE DIVERSITY IN
LEGISLATIVE BRANCH AGENCIES
----------
TUESDAY, NOVEMBER 13, 2007
House of Representatives,
Subcommittee on Federal Workforce, Postal Service,
and the District of Columbia,
Committee on Oversight and Government Reform,
Washington, DC.
The subcommittee met, pursuant to notice, at 2 p.m., in
room 2154, Rayburn House Office Building, Hon. Danny K. Davis
(chairman of the subcommittee) presiding.
Present: Representatives Davis of Illinois, Norton, and
Clay.
Staff present: Tania Shand, staff director; Caleb
Gilchrist, professional staff member, Lori Hayman, counsel;
LaKeshia Myers, editor/staff assistant; Susan Ragland, GAO
detailee; Teresa Coufal, clerk; and Leneal Scott, information
officer.
Mr. Davis of Illinois. The subcommittee will come to order.
Mr. Marchant, I understand, is having some difficulty with his
flight, therefore, he may get here as we continue, but
currently, he has not made it yet. And we'll just kind of play
that by ear.
So let me thank those of you who have come and I want to
welcome all of the witnesses, all of those who are in
attendance. I want to welcome to you the Federal Workforce,
Postal Service, and District of Columbia Subcommittee hearing
on Senior Executive Service, women and minorities are
underrepresented in most legislative branch agencies. The
hearing will examine diversity at the executive level positions
in legislative branch agencies and explore agency succession
planning efforts, including the extent to which there is
diversity at the GS-15 feeder pool levels or throughout the
agencies' work force. Hearing no objection, the Chair and any
other Members who are here will make opening statements and all
Members will have 3 days to submit statements for the record.
Good afternoon, the subcommittee hearing is being held to
examine diversity in the senior ranks of congressional support
agencies. Democratic legislatures are traditionally supposed to
represent a broad spectrum of the national population to assure
that they will reflect the interest and outlooks of all people.
Therefore, while it is important that the Congress itself
represents the national diversity, it is equally important that
the agencies that support Congress be broadly representative of
the people it serves. Skilled persons reflecting all of the
American people should have a hand in supporting the
legislative process, whether it is to assist the Congress in
making laws, or in overseeing the operations of the executive
branch. Diversity in the senior levels of executive and
legislative branch agencies brings a variety of perspectives
and approaches to policy development and implementation.
Today the subcommittee released a report, the first of its
kind, analyzing the racial and gender diversity of the senior
executive core of six legislative branch agencies: The
Government Accountability Office [GAO]; the Library of Congress
[LOC]; the Congressional Budget Office [CBO]; the Government
Printing Office [GPO]; the Capitol Police; and the Architect of
the Capitol.
The report, which was based on information provided to the
subcommittee by these agencies, found that women and minorities
in the Senior Executive Service [SES], are underrepresented in
most legislative branch agencies. The SES, at each legislative
branch agency, was less diverse in terms of minorities than its
work force at a whole in fiscal year 2007, and less diverse in
terms of women in four of the six agencies.
Some agencies, GS-15 feeder or successor pools, were less
diverse than their SES core. The report also found that in some
agencies the average tolled compensation for minorities and
women in fiscal year 2007 was less than their non minority and
male counterparts. All of these agencies work for us, the U.S.
Congress, while we can provide oversight of these agencies, we
cannot monitor their day-to-day efforts to improve diversity in
their agencies. That is the role of their respective diversity
offices.
Each legislative branch agency has a diversity office that
exists to ensure that the agency's personnel policies and
practices are fair, merit-based and promote the opportunity for
all employees to maximize their contributions to the agency's
mission. What Congress can do is ensure that these offices have
effective programs in place to address the problems raised in
the subcommittee report and the independence to do something
about them.
I will soon formally ask all legislative branch inspector
generals to review the diversity offices of their sister
agencies. The IGs will be tasked with reviewing the programs
the diversity offices have in place to address diversity
concerns, how these programs are being evaluated to determine
if they are yielding the desired results, the accuracy of the
dispute and discrimination data being reported to Congress, and
whether the diversity offices are sufficiently independent of
the agencies general counsel and agency head.
Here are two examples of why it is necessary for Congress
to take action. It is my understanding that employees at the
LOC do not receive written performance appraisals. If this is
the case, then on what basis are employees being promoted? How
can an employee prove he or she was wrongly denied a promotion
if their performance is not being documented? It is the
responsibility of LOC's diversity office to raise these issues
and challenge management on them.
In 2006, GAO restructured its pay bands and promoted
employees based, in large part, on performance ratings. GAO
knew, however, before implementing the restructuring, that
African-Americans were receiving lower performance ratings than
their White counterparts. It comes as no surprise that the
restructuring had and continues to have a negative impact on
African-Americans. GAO's diversity office should have engaged
in challenging management and ensuring that a restructuring did
not take place that negatively impacted a group of employees.
It apparently failed to do so.
I will ask the legislative branch IGs to report their
findings to the subcommittee in June 2008. Their reports will
help determine if agency diversity officers have the
programming and influence to address the disparities raised in
the subcommittee report.
I would like to caution the legislative branch agencies in
comparing themselves to the executive branch when it comes to
diversity in the SES. The executive branch is doing poorly in
that regard and the legislative branch agencies are only doing
slightly better. All of these agencies take pride in saying
that they hire the best and the brightest. If that is the case,
what is then preventing minorities and women from moving into
their top ranks? Today's witnesses are here to help us answer
that question, and I thank them for taking the time to do so.
I will indicate again, though that all Members will have 5
legislative days in which to submit statements for the record
because of their inability to be here today.
[The prepared statement of Hon. Danny K. Davis follows:]
[GRAPHIC(S) NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]
Mr. Davis of Illinois. We will begin with our witnesses and
our first witness is Dr. Curtis Copeland, who is currently a
specialist in American National Government at the Congressional
Research Service within the U.S. Library of Congress. His
specific area of expertise is Federal rulemaking and regulatory
policy. Welcome Dr. Copeland, we thank you for being here and
you know the drill, you've done this so often. So if you would
stand and raise your right-hand.
[Witness sworn.]
Mr. Davis. The record will reflect that the witness
answered in the affirmative. And again, we thank you for your
presence and for the work that you do and you may proceed.
STATEMENT OF CURTIS W. COPELAND, SPECIALIST IN AMERICAN
NATIONAL GOVERNMENT, CONGRESSIONAL RESEARCH SERVICE
Mr. Copeland. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. I am here today to
present the data that were used in the subcommittee's report on
racial and gender diversity and SES and SES-equivalent
positions within six legislative branch agencies: GAO, LOC,
CBO, GPO, the AOC and the Capitol Police. Most of my comments
will be in terms of percentages and will be depicted in figures
shown on these TV screens. However, it is important to realize
that because of the relatively small size of each agency's SES
core, a slight change in the number of minorities or women in
the agencies can substantially effect the resulting
percentages.
Together, the six legislative branch agencies had a total
of 346 SES officials during fiscal year 2007. Of these
officials, 16.8 percent were minorities, about the same
percentages in the executive branch, which had 16 percent.
However, the legislative branch agencies had a somewhat higher
percentage of women in their SES ranks, about 36 percent
compared to 29 percent in the executive branch.
The agencies differed substantially in their levels of SES
diversity, as this first figure shows, less than 8 percent of
the SES core at CBO were minorities compared to about 20
percent at the LOC and AOC. The composition of the minorities
of SES population at the agencies also differed. For example,
four of the six agencies, all except GAO and the LOC, had no
Asian senior executives in 2007. The six agencies differed
greatly in the percentage of their SES who were women, ranging
from less than 12 percent at GPO to more than 40 percent at LOC
and GAO. To put these numbers into context, the subcommittee's
report compared the diversity of the agency's SES core to the
work forces as a whole.
As this figure shows, none of the agencies SES core had as
high a percentage as their overall work forces. And as this
figure shows the percentage of SES who were women was less than
in the total work force than four of the six agencies, all but
the Capitol Police and the AOC. However, we should recognize
that these two agencies also had the lowest percentage of women
in their overall work forces.
In some cases, there were substantial differences between
the diversity of the agency's work forces as a whole and the
diversity of their SES core. For example, whereas nearly 60
percent of the GPO'S work force was minorities in 2007, the
percentage of minorities in the agency's SES stood at about 12
percent, nearly 50 percentage points lower.
Another way to put these diversity figures into context is
by looking at trends over time. This figure shows the--it soon
will be up--shows the percentage of women in the legislative
branch agencies SES has gone up somewhat since 2002, from less
than 32 percent to nearly 36 percent. However, the trend line
from minorities has been rather flat since 2002 going from
16\1/2\-17\1/2\ percent to 16.8 percent, so the percentage of
minorities in the legislative branch agencies actually went
down by a little less than a percentage point.
Most SESers are hired from the GS-15 ranks, as you
mentioned, so that the diversity of these GS-15 successor pools
can be provide an indication of how diverse the SES may be in
the future.
As this figure shows, the percentage of minorities at the
GS-15 level was somewhat less than the percentage of the SES in
four of the six legislative branch agencies, all but GAO and
GPO. The situation for women was just the opposite. As this
figure shows, the percentage of GS-15s who were women was
greater than the women in the SES in four of the six agencies,
all except the LOC and the AOC.
Finally, the subcommittee's report examined the extent to
which women and minorities, once they got into the SES,
received comparable salaries, bonuses and awards when compared
to non minorities and men.
Table 3, which is on the last page of my written statement,
provides the data on this--these salary comparisons or total
compensation comparisons, it shows that on average, looking
across all of the legislative branch agencies minorities and
non minorities in the SES earned almost exactly the same total
compensation. And women on average received about 1 percent
more than men.
However, there were some substantial difference in SES
total compensation within the agencies. For example, women in
the SES at the LOC received an average of $4,000 per year more
than their male counterparts. On the other hand, at CBO, women
received an average of about $10,000 less than men, and
minorities received about $6,000 less than non minorities.
Mr. Chairman, that concludes my prepared statement. I would
be happy to answer any questions.
[The prepared statement of Mr. Copeland follows:]
[GRAPHIC(S) NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]
Mr. Davis of Illinois. Well, thank you very much. And
again, I want to thank you for being here.
You note in your testimony that the percentage rate of
women increased was slight, about 4 percentage points between
2002 and 2007. If that rate was to continue, how long would it
take for women to become, say, half of the legislative branch
SES?
Mr. Copeland. Right. The percentage of women rose from 31.6
percent to 35.8 percent across the 6 legislative branch
agencies, which is about 8/10 of a percentage point a year. So
at that rate, given that they are currently at 35.8 percent,
the--at that rate, it would take about 17 years for women to
reach the 50 percent mark.
Mr. Davis of Illinois. I guess that's about as long as it
would take a snail to get to Baltimore. Do you know what a
similar rate would be for the executive branch?
Mr. Copeland. Yes, in the executive branch, the percentage
of women in the SES rose from 25\1/2\ percent in 2002 to 28.9
percent. And so at that rate, given the distance between that
current statistic and 50 percent, it would take about 30 years
for women in the executive branch SES to reach 50 percent.
Mr. Davis of Illinois. I mentioned successor pools in my
opening statement, of course you have mentioned successor
pools. Why are these pools so important?
Mr. Copeland. Primarily, because most at least in the
executive branch, GAO has testified before this subcommittee
back in May that most of the people in the SES were drawn from
the GS-15 ranks. And so if you have a successor pool at the
15--at the GS-15 level, which is less diverse, than the current
SES and you draw in proportion to their representation in that
GS-15 successor pool, then your SES in the future will actually
become less diverse.
Mr. Davis of Illinois. And so, in addition to work at the
direct level of the SES, there is also seemingly need to do
some work at the GS-15 successor pool level as well, would you
agree?
Mr. Copeland. I would agree that the subcommittee's report
reaches the conclusion that in order for agencies to achieve
levels of diversity that they currently don't have, they either
have to increase the percentage of women and minorities in
those successor pools, hire from outside of those successor
pools or both.
Mr. Davis of Illinois. Although I know that you can't take
a position about what level of representation there should be
if Congress did decide that SES should mirror the
representation within the agency's work force as a whole, but
what would you see as the advantages or disadvantages if that
was to happen?
Mr. Copeland. Well, certainly the literature suggests that
having a leadership of an agency that is reflective of the work
force as a whole has a number of advantages in terms of morale,
in terms of following the management initiatives and so forth.
The disadvantage of emulating the work force as a whole is
if the work force as a whole isn't very diverse, then emulating
that non diversity would yield a non diverse SES. So in fact,
we have seen that in some of the agencies here, that some of
the agencies in these six legislative branch agencies are much
less diverse than others. And so an agency that is 85 percent
White emulating that would yield an SES that would be 85
percent White.
Mr. Davis of Illinois. I know that for many years now,
we've had great debate and great discussion about the concept
of quotas, and yet we continue to have sort of as a goal the
notion as it was reflected in the Preamble to the Constitution
that all men, and I guess maybe at some point in time, women
crept into that, I guess, if you go with the biblical
definition, they say that when they say men, they also meant
woman, or woman as they called it in some religious groups, but
this notion that if America is to ever become the America that
we all talk about, would it seem likely that some kind of
something close to proportional share of opportunities as well
as other things would ultimately come into being, would that
make sense for the work force?
Mr. Copeland. As you know, CRS doesn't take a position on
any initiatives like that, but that certainly seems to be the
guiding premise between a lot of the affirmative action
programs that are place in agencies now, they are attempting to
try and move toward that as a goal.
Mr. Davis of Illinois. Well, let me thank you very much, we
appreciate your testimony and we appreciate the continuing work
that you and your agency does. We appreciate your being here.
Mr. Copeland. Thank you.
Mr. Davis of Illinois. We will then proceed to our next
panel. I will go ahead and introduce them as they are being
seated. Ms. Nadine Elzy is the Director of Office of Equal
Employment Opportunity for the U.S. Government Printing Office,
and as such, she directs the activities of the affirmative
action programs, and counseling, and complaints processing
divisions within the Office.
Mr. Ronald Stroman is the Managing Director of GAO Office
of Opportunity and Inclusiveness. Mr. Stroman is responsible
for reviewing GAO's human capital policies and practices to
ensure they are fair, merit-based and promote the opportunity
for all GAO employees to maximize their contributions to the
Agency's mission.
Ms. Theresa Bailey is the Director of the Architect of the
Capitol's Equal Employment Opportunity and Conciliation
Programs. She has more than 20 years of progressively
responsible human resources experience primarily in equal
employment opportunity, affirmative employment, diversity and
employee relations.
Ms. Stephanie Ruiz is the Director of Human Resources for
the Congressional Budget Office [CBO]. At CBO, she is
responsible for human resources and payroll-related functions,
including, but not limited to recruitment, EEO benefits and
compensation. She also advises management on matters related to
human resources and contributes to the development of the
agency's budget which is 90 percent compensation.
Mr. Dennis Hanratty is the Director for Human Resources
Services at the Library of Congress. He has served in this
position since August 2005. He has worked in human resources
since 1993, first helping to manage all human resources
functions and then managing human resources planning and
technology.
And Mr. Daniel Nichols was appointed as the assistant chief
of police for the Capitol Police last January. Inspector
Nichols entered duty with the U.S. Capitol Police in 1983.
Assistant Chief Nichols is recognized as an accomplished leader
who builds the effective teams as strong communication skills
and uses innovative approaches to improve the protection of the
capital, the congressional community and visitors.
Thank you all for being here and if you would stand and
raise your right hands.
[Witnesses sworn.]
Mr. Davis of Illinois. The record will show that the
witnesses answered in the affirmative. And please know that
because the other Members are not here, it's not because they
are not interested in the subject matter of what is taking
place. This is our last week before we recess and people are
trying to get as many things done as they possibly can. And so
there's all kinds of activity taking place. There are some
weather-related difficulty, some Members are experiencing in
terms of getting back today, but we shall proceed and thank you
so much and we will begin with you, Ms. Elzy.
STATEMENT OF NADINE ELZY, DIRECTOR, OFFICE OF EQUAL EMPLOYMENT
OPPORTUNITY, GOVERNMENT PRINTING OFFICE; RONALD STROMAN,
MANAGING DIRECTOR, OFFICE OF OPPORTUNITY AND INCLUSIVENESS,
GOVERNMENT ACCOUNTABILITY OFFICE; TERESA BAILEY, DIRECTOR,
OFFICE OF EQUAL EMPLOYMENT OPPORTUNITY/CONCILIATION PROGRAMS,
OFFICE OF THE ARCHITECT OF THE CAPITOL; STEPHANIE RUIZ,
DIRECTOR, HUMAN RESOURCES, CONGRESSIONAL BUDGET OFFICE; DENNIS
HANRATTY, DIRECTOR, HUMAN RESOURCES SERVICES, LIBRARY OF
CONGRESS; AND DANIEL NICHOLS, ASSISTANT CHIEF OF POLICE, U.S.
CAPITOL POLICE
STATEMENT OF NADINE ELZY
Ms. Elzy. Good afternoon, Chairman Davis and members of the
subcommittee. Thank you for inviting the Government Printing
Office to be here. I'm Nadine Elzy, GPO's Director of EEO. My
prepared statement at the same time has been submitted for the
record, and with your permission, I will summarize my remarks.
The head of the agency wanted to be here to testify before
you today, but I'm glad that instead I am able to present the
agency's testimony because for me, it is also a personal
testimony. I am committed personally to insuring EEO.
I came to GPO in December 1997 as the EEO Director. I must
admit that I thought at that point I had stepped backward into
a time warp. I asked another of the senior managers, do you
think GPO is diverse? His response was, well, the agency is
about 60 percent Black. I replied by asking, well, in your
opinion, is the agency diverse, because when I go to a senior
staff meeting, I am the only female and the only minority. I'm
not saying the only Black executive, I meant the only minority
and the only female, period. At that point in GPO's history,
there were no females at the grade 15. There were four Black
males, one Hispanic male and one Asian male at the GS-15. I
define diversity as an organization that reflects the
composition of our Nation.
Let's fast forward 5 years to 2002. In 2002, we had 3,048
employees, of those, 32 were at the grade 15, at that point we
had 1 female, 4 Black males and 1 Asian male. There had been no
changes whatsoever in the representation of females or
minorities in the senior level.
Now let's take one other jump that is to fiscal year 2007
and like at the agency's diversity, GPO now has 23 females, 1
Hispanic, 17 Blacks, 6 Asians and 1 Native American at the
grade 15. These are some of the employees who are in a position
to ascend to GPO's future senior level positions.
In 2002, there was one female in SL as a GPO, in 2004 to
2005, there were five females in SL positions. We currently
have three females, at this level. Females represent 28.4
percent of employees in the Federal executive service. They
currently represent 12 percent at GPO.
In 2002, there was one minority in the SLS. At the end of
fiscal year 2007, we have three minorities employed in the SLS.
Minorities represent 16 percent of employees in the Federal
executive service, and 12 percent of employees in senior pay
level positions at GPO.
Do we have a way to go? Yes. Are we doing better than we
did in 1997 in 2002? Most definitely. We are doing better by
placing qualified minorities and females in positions at the
grade 13 to 15, which will prepare them to become GPO's future
leaders. We also want to ensure that these supervisors and
managers know the agency's perspective on equity in the
workplace. To ensure this, it was required by the head of the
agency that during fiscal year 1997--2007, every manager and
supervisor participate in EEO training. This was included as a
core commitment in fiscal year 2007 for each senior level
service employee.
What are some of the other efforts we have made to improve
our diversity? We have changed our outlook. We realize the
importance of a diverse work force. We have expanded our
college outreach efforts to include other than predominantly
White college campuses. We are visiting Morehouse, Spelman,
Clark Atlanta, Florida A&P, Prairie View, all of which are
historically Black colleges and universities.
We have included recruitment and outreach efforts to the
University of Texas El Paso, New Mexico State, the University
of New Mexico, the University of Miami, California State Los
Angeles, all of which are Hispanic-serving institutions. We
have recruited at the University of California Berkeley, which
is the No. 1 public university in the country and which has a
very diverse population.
In an effort to ensure that our organization is
representative of this country's diversity we have also hired
students from the National Training Institute for the Deaf, the
Rochester Institute of Technology. GPO has one of the largest
percentage of employees with disabilities and those with
targeted disabilities in the entire Federal Government.
Presently almost 7 percent of GPO's population has a disability
and almost 2 percent of those are employees who have targeted
disabilities. The Federal Government's average is less than 1
percent. GPO, ranked as one of the top five agencies for the
employment of people with disabilities in the Federal
Government.
Again, we who are involved in EEO at GPO, and most
especially, the Public Printer Tapella, clearly recognize that
attaining diversity in GPO's management rights has a ways to
go, and we are firmly committed to achieving this goal. As a
result, I no longer feel as though I have walked backward into
a time warp. I feel as though I am part of an agency that is
moving forward with great speed and effort in the right
direction. It is an organization that wants to utilize the
skills and abilities of all of its employees to move us forward
in the 21st century.
Mr. Chairman and members of committee, this concludes my
prepared statement and I will be pleased to answer any
questions you may have.
[The prepared statement of Ms. Elzy follows:]
[GRAPHIC(S) NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]
Mr. Davis of Illinois. Thank you very much and we'll go to
Mr. Stroman.
STATEMENT OF RONALD STROMAN
Mr. Stroman. Thank you, Mr. Chairman, Ms. Norton. Good
afternoon, I am Ron Stroman, the Managing Director of the
Office of Opportunity and Inclusiveness at the U.S. Government
Accountability Office. I am pleased to be here today to address
an issue of such vital importance to GAO and to the Congress;
diversity and our Senior Executive Service. GAO's mandate to
support the Congress in meeting its constitutional
responsibilities and to help improve the performance and insure
the accountability of the Federal Government requires a highly
skilled and diverse work force and leadership team.
The diversity of our leaders increases the range of
perspectives and problem solving approaches and creates higher
value solutions for the Congress and for the American people.
It is also true that it is important giving the increasing
numbers of African American, Hispanic, Asian, women, Members of
Congress, we issue reports of concern to those communities. It
is important that we have representation of those communities
involved in those report making processes.
The Office of Opportunity and Inclusiveness was created by
the comptroller in 2001 to transform the agency's diversity
management practicers. Since then, we worked closely with the
agency's top managers to improve diversity management practices
at GAO. As an indicator of our success, GAO's analyst and
specialist population is more diverse than the relevant
civilian labor force, specifically the percentages of GAO
analysts and specialist staff as of October 2006 exceeded the
2000 relevant labor force percentages for African-American,
Hispanic, Asian Americans, as well as for women.
The diversity of our leadership team has also improved over
the years. In fiscal year 2000, minorities represented 14
percent of the SES and SL core. As of fiscal 2007 about 18
percent of the SES SL members were minorities. Similarly the
representation of minorities as a Band III, the SES feeder pool
increased from 12 percent in 2000 to 19 percent in 2005. And
the representation of women in the SES as well as at the Band
III and Band II levels increased.
Figure 2 and 3 in my testimony illustrates changes in the
percentages of minorities and women respectively. We have made
progress--although we have made progress, we still have work to
do. We are committed to improving the representation of all
minorities on the leadership team, in particular, the
representation of Hispanic and Asian-American staff should be
improved.
As shown in table 1 of my testimony, percentages of GAO's
Hispanic staff members at the SES level, and Asian staff at
Band III level were lower than government wide percentages.
However, for both these groups the percentages in the feeder
pool staff at the lower level either equals or exceeded the
government wide percentages.
We therefore expect that we will be prepared to move these
staff into senior management positions. GAO is also--ONI is
also working closely with the GAO executive committee and teams
managing directors to ensure sufficient opportunities of being
developed.
One of GAO's strategic objectives is to build and maintain
a work environment that is fair and unbiased and inclusive and
that offers the opportunity for all employees to realize their
full potential. Several efforts and processes support our
strategic commitment to diversity.
As shown in figure 4 of my testimony our work force
planning and recruitment processes, training opportunities,
reviews of human capital processes and the selection process
for the Senior Executive Service helped to support and maintain
our efforts at diversity in the Senior Executive Service.
Our agency's top leadership is fully committed to creating
an environment that is fair and unbiased and has value
diversity. Having a diverse work force and leadership cadre is
an essential strategic component to GAO's success. While the
diversity of our work force and leadership team has improved,
there are areas that still need to be addressed. Our efforts to
enhance diversity and Senior Executive Service coupled with
incorporating our core diversity principles into our human
capital processes should enable us to continue to improve
diversity of our future leadership team. Thank you, Mr.
Chairman.
Mr. Davis of Illinois. Thank you very much, Mr. Stroman and
we will proceed to Ms. Bailey.
[The prepared statement of Mr. Stroman follows:]
[GRAPHIC(S) NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]
STATEMENT OF TERESA BAILEY
Ms. Bailey. Good afternoon, Mr. Chairman, and members of
the subcommittee. Thank you for this opportunity to discuss the
AOC's efforts to identify, attract, hire and retain a diverse
work force, as well as training to promote current stats to
rise through the ranks to our executive level positions,
thereby increasing diversity among the senior level management.
The ALC is firmly committed to equal employment opportunity
and affirmative employment. We recognize the inherent value of
diverse and inclusive work force because we all benefit from
working in an environment that brings together people with
different background, skills and experiences.
As one of our core values we strive to integrate diversity
at every level as we carry out our mission to serve Congress
and the American people. Even before the launch of our first
strategic plan in 2003, the AOC has been dedicated to employing
a diverse work force consisting of individuals with a variety
of skills and institutional knowledge. We have defined our
strategic goals and strategies in our human capital plan, which
is an important component of our strategic plan.
The human capital plan outlines activities that will ensure
we are adequately addressing the needs of our work force while
at the same time addressing the future needs of our
organization by developing strong leaders and managers. One of
the ways we are assisting our work force is developing the
skills they need to become effective managers and grow their
careers is through participation in our leadership development
program. This program establishes parameters and competencies
for the training and development of supervisors, managers and
executives, and helps develop the skills needed to perform
effectively in these positions.
In addition, the program's participants serve as a pool of
well-trained and qualified applicants for consideration for
higher more senior managerial positions.
In 2006, we enhanced our agency leadership development
program through employee participation and the Council For
Excellence and Government Fellowship Program with the selection
of three staff members. This development program is designed to
improve the performance and accountability of government
workers and is targeted specifically for those at GS-14 and GS-
15 levels. Next year which will have two more employees
participate in this program.
Additionally we proactively worked to recruit diverse new
hires by expanding our outreach efforts to attract a diverse
candidate pool. AOC career opportunities are advertised
nationwide in OPMs, USAJobs Web site. We also have contracted
for system for implementing our human capital strategy. One of
the tools that we utilize heavily is the Contractors
Association with various diverse organizations, societies,
colleges and universities, and professional associations that
allow us to electronically distribute an unlimited number of
vacancy announcements. In addition, our recruitment manager
conducts training sessions with staff on how to most
effectively use our resources.
The AOC has also participated in a number of recruitment
events to increase awareness of job opportunities in our
agency. This past summer, we attended the federally Employed
Women's Job Fair Conference, and Mayor Fenty's D.C.-wide Job
Fair. Over the past several years, we have been participating
and Representative Albert Wynn's annual job fair, and later
this week, we will be attending the Asian Job Fair.
We are now finalizing our affirmative employment program,
which further delineates our commitment to equal employment
opportunity. Once the policy is implemented, we will develop an
affirmative employment plan that will identify specific action-
oriented strategy efforts to achieve a more diverse work force.
While the AOC utilizes an array of recruitment sources and
techniques to generate an adequate pool of diverse, qualified
applicants for job vacancies, our efforts under the affirmative
employment plan will be expanded to include targeted
recruitment initiatives, cooperative efforts with colleges and
universities and stronger partnerships with national
professional associations and local community organizations.
Mr. Chairman, I am pleased to note that our efforts have
borne fruit. A comparative analysis of AOC-wide and work force
data between 2002 and 2007 shows that at the GS-15 and SES
equivalent levels the AOC has made significant progress in the
recruitment and selection of women candidates making up 23.1
percent and 35.76 percent those ranks respectively. This is an
increase over the 2002 levels of 7.7 percent in the GS-15 ranks
and 20 percent of the SES equivalents.
Persons of color now represent 12.8 percent of GS-15
positions and 21.4 percent of SES equivalent positions. The AOC
is deeply committed to our goal in attracting and retaining a
diverse work force. However, we do recognize that we still have
work to do. Throughout programs and initiatives we will
demonstrate our actions speak volumes, and our work force will
better reflect our society and we will be even more successful
as a result of the rich diversity of our employees.
This concludes my statement, I will be happy to answer any
questions subsequently you may have.
Mr. Davis of Illinois. Thank you very much.
[The prepared statement of Ms. Bailey follows:]
[GRAPHIC(S) NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]
Mr. Davis of Illinois. And we will go to Ms. Ruiz.
STATEMENT OF STEPHANIE RUIZ
Ms. Ruiz. Mr. Chairman, Ms. Norton. The Congressional
Budget Office leadership shares your interest in a work force
diversity and is strongly committed to a representative work
force. We think this is an important issue, and thank you for
bringing attention to it.
Today I will address the following key issues, the benefits
of and the need for CBO's recruitment of a diverse work force
at all levels, the challenge of recruiting staff skilled in the
fields necessary to carry out the analyses CBO does for the
Congress, the aggressive diversity recruiting efforts CBO
undertakes annually, and finally CBO's recent progress toward
greater work force diversity.
CBO needs representative work force at all levels because
the broad range of our analytical product benefit from diverse
experiences and viewpoints of all of its analysts. Perhaps the
less obvious reason is that given the specialized nature of our
work, CBO managers must have substantive knowledge of the
policy areas in which their analysts work and experience with
the methodologies used to perform these analyses.
The needs for substantive experience coupled with CBO's
small size and flat organizational structure results in the
majority of CBO's staff managers being promoted from within.
Therefore, we must recruit a diverse work force at all levels
so junior staff can gain the requisite expertise to take on
broader roles in our agency. Roughly 80 percent of CBOs work
force professional staff hold Ph.D.s or has Masters degrees
generally in economics or public policy. The demographics of
individuals completing Ph.D.s in economics poses a tremendous
challenge in achieving a diverse work force at CBO.
In 2005, there were approximately 1,000 individuals who
completed a Ph.D. in economics in the United States. Only 30
percent of them are women. Foreign nationals made up the
majority, more than 2/3, and although we can hire some foreign
nationals, this limits the overall pool and the diversity over
the pool from which we can draw.
Even more striking is that among the 284 U.S. citizens that
entered the labor market from those 1,000 Ph.D.s, only 4.3
percent were members of underrepresented minority groups.
That's 44 people in the entire Nation. The numbers are even
more disheartening given the small share of the new Ph.D.
economist who enter government service, only 16 percent in
2005.
Recruiting Master's level employees is somewhat less of a
problem given the demographics, the National Association of
Schools of Public Affairs Administration reports that of those
completing MPPs and MPAs in 2005, 57 percent were female and 28
percent minorities. Not surprisingly, given these statistics,
CBO must be both aggressive and creative in its recruiting
efforts in order to achieve a diverse staff.
CBO makes special efforts to reach out to women and
minority candidates, we provide information on relevant
employment opportunities to such groups as women and
international security and the committee on the status of women
in the economics profession.
In college recruiting we--we target historically Black
colleges and universities, HBCUs and Hispanic serving
institutions, HSIs that have programs from which CBO may draw
candidates. We host a substantive internship program that is
focused on graduate students and is managed with an eye toward
diversity. CBO interns perform analyses and are introduced to
the challenge and reward of public service. One goal over the
program is to encourage these interns to consider CBO
employment full-time upon graduation. And results suggests that
we have been successful, about 8 percent of our current work
force are former interns. In the past 5 years, the intern class
has been between 36 and 50 percent female, and in most years,
it has been approximately 30 percent minority.
Since most students who pursue Ph.D.s in economics were
economics undergraduates, CBO does a number of things to
encourage underrepresented--underrepresented economic students
to pursue advance degrees and to prepare them for CBO
positions. Specifically we present information to Morehouse/
Spelman's joint economic club, we meet with Howard on economics
majors and we participate annually in programs designed to
increase minority representation and Master's and Ph.D.
programs, including the public policy international affairs
program, which prepares under represented students for advanced
degrees leading to careers in public service. And the American
Economics Association Summer Program and Minority Scholarship
program which prepares talented under graduates for doctoral
programs in economics and related disciplines.
In the end, a few students from underrepresented groups
enter advanced degree programs in economics and public policy,
we have little hope of recruiting staff and grooming future
managers who are representative of the rich diversity of the
U.S. population. Like his predecessor, CBO's new Director Peter
Orszag is committed to diversity. During his short tenure, 48
percent of the CBO staff hired have been women, including one
female SES equivalent and 9 percent has been minorities.
As the Human Resources Director, I know that he and our new
Deputy Bob Sunshine have reached out to female candidates for
positions. Last June, Dr. Orszag personally addressed the
American Economics Association Summer Minority Scholars when
they visited CBO for seminars about the agency and our work and
met informally with CBO economists.
Despite our efforts, CBO's work force is not as diverse as
we would like it to be. CBO's most valuable resources are
strong staff and in pursuit of that end we dedicate a great
deal or resources to our recruitment program, including
speaking with students from more than 60 campuses. An important
focus has been and must continue to be the recruitment of a
diverse work force at all levels within an organization.
Thank you, again, for the opportunity to discuss this
important issue. I would be delighted to hear any ideas you or
others may have to improve the results of our diversity program
and to take whatever questions you may as well.
[The prepared statement of Ms. Ruiz follow:]
[GRAPHIC(S) NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]
Mr. Davis of Illinois. Thank you very much. And we'll go to
Mr. Henratty.
STATEMENT OF DENNIS HANRATTY
Mr. Henratty. Mr. Chairman, thank you for the opportunity
to discuss diversity throughout the Library of Congress--the
Library's senior level diversity has increased dramatically
since 1990. Then only 12.4 percent of our senior level work
force was minority compared with 20 percent today. The
Library's current executive committee is comprised of 29
percent minorities and 57 percent women.
The Library has made a concerted effort to build and
nurture diversity throughout its work force, even as the size
of the Library today reflects nearly 1,200 fewer staff than
when Dr. Billington was sworn in as Librarian of Congress 20
years ago.
As of June 2007, the latest date for which governmentwide
statistics are available, minorities comprised 20 percent of
the Library's senior leadership. In comparison, 15 percent of
SES executives governmentwide are minorities. Also for the same
period, 44 percent of the Library's senior leadership positions
are held by women, compared with 29 percent of SES executives
governmentwide. The Library also exceeds government wide levels
of racial and gender diversity for the key GS-13 to GS-15 pay
cluster, the Library's future leaders. Diversity at the
Library's senior level has remained fairly constant in recent
years. We've hired 42 permanent employees at the senior level
since fiscal year 2002. Of these 19 percent were minorities and
45 percent were women.
By most measures diversity has improved among the ranks of
the higher general schedule grade levels. Those who along with
those recruited from outside the agency will be the next
generation of Library senior managers. At the GS-15 level,
minority representation has increased from 13 percent in 2002
to 17 percent in 2007. While the percentage of Hispanics in
this group has remained below that in the general population,
the number of Hispanics at the GS-15 level in the Library has
more than doubled at the same period. The percentage of women
has remained stable.
The Library's effort to achieve a diverse work force are
evident through the entire process of recruiting, screening and
collecting new employees to fill vacancies. The Office of
Workforce Diversity develops target recruitment plans in
collaboration with our service units based upon an analysis of
the Library's work force profile. The information is used to
identify specific areas to focus our targeted recruitment
efforts.
The Library's merit selection system keeps the goal of a
diverse work force at the forefront throughout the process and
includes two discrete areas where the diversity of the
applicant pool is examined. First we create a recruitment plan
for each individual vacancy, identifying underutilized groups
in the Library's population compared with the civilian labor
force.
Second, we compare the pool of applicants to be considered
for an interview with the underutilization data that's been
identified in the recruitment plan. When the applicant pool
contains members of underutilized groups, they will be added to
create a list of up to 12 ranked candidates instead of
forwarding the names of only 7 candidates.
We also fill permanent positions through targeted
recruitment outside of our merit selection plan. For example,
under the HACU cooperative education program, qualified
students may be converted non competitively to permanent
conditional positions following successful completion of a
minimum of 640 hours of career-related work at the Library. The
Library also provides staff development program to enhance our
staff's opportunities to advance to management positions.
For example, our leadership development program selects
staff and grades GS-11 through GS-13 from diverse backgrounds
for a year-long training and development program to prepare
them to compete for leadership and management positions at the
Library. Since the program's inception in 1995, six leadership
development classes have graduated 57 staff, of those, 65
percent have been minorities and 70 percent of the graduates
have been women, 54 percent have received new jobs or
promotions since they graduated from the program, and a full
two-thirds of these were minorities.
Another example is the comprehensive development intern
program which we can conduct periodically as resources permit.
The program has been an excellent means for staff, including
minorities, to move from clerical and technical to professional
positions in grades GS-9 through GS-12 for example four
African-American women have moved to professional ranks in my
own office human resources services through this program.
Finally let me reassure the committee that my office tracks
to completion of annual performance appraisals throughout the
Library and works with service units to ensure that any
performance appraisals that are not completed on time will be
completed during the next quarter. Our new master labor
agreement with AFSCME Local 2477, the employee's union,
contains a comprehensive performance management article that
includes performance planning, midyear reviews, annual reviews
and individual development plans.
And management and labor are working collaboratively to
implement these provisions throughout the year. I will be happy
to answer any questions that you may have about the library's
diversity employment or its senior level system.
[The prepared statement of Mr. Hanratty follows:]
[GRAPHIC(S) NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]
Mr. Davis of Illinois. Thank you very much, Mr. Hanratty.
And we will go to Mr. Nichols.
STATEMENT OF DANIEL NICHOLS
Mr. Nichols. Good afternoon, Mr. Chairman.
Ms. Norton, how are you? Thank you for the opportunity to
testify before you today on the important matter of diversity
in the workplace. The vision of the Chief of the U.S. Capitol
Police encompasses the importance of including a wide variety
of perspectives and approaches, including policy development
and its implementation within the department.
Currently, our department is comprised of 2,085 employees,
80 percent of which are sworn law enforcement officers, and 20
percent are civilian employees. U.S. Capitol Police values and
champions diversity at all levels of the department. Diversity
brings to us a wider variety of perspectives and approaches to
enrich our decisionmaking. According to the latest Bureau of
Justice Statistics Bulletin for Law Enforcement Officers, the
U.S. Capitol Police sworn work force is comprised of 34.7
percent minority representation. Currently, at our SES
equivalent positions, 43 percent are occupied by women and
minorities. While we will be never be complacent in our
efforts, we are proud of our achievements regarding diversity.
Our ability to maintain a diverse work force differs
between our sworn and civilian populations. With regard to
sworn employees, to obtain optimum diversity at the SES
equivalent level requires planning many years beforehand.
Because we do not hire supervisory/managerial sworn employees
from external organizations, our succession planning and
efforts to enhance the diversity of the pool of sworn employees
must be concentrated on recruitment efforts for entry level
sworn positions and retention of those employees. In the 2002
to 2006 time period, we have found that our recruitment efforts
for entry level sworn positions have resulted in minority race/
ethnicity representation ranging between 36 to 38 percent.
Our recruiting program of the department is a nationwide
effort. While a significant number of applicants are from the
Washington metropolitan area, which is itself a diversified
employment market, our recruiters travel nationwide to targeted
recruiting events that are geared toward women and minority
candidates. In addition, a continual nationwide advertising
campaign complements the recruiting efforts of the department.
From September 2002 to September 2006, the department's
work force has undergone significant changes both in terms of
size and diversity. The sworn overall leadership ranks
increased by 16 percent in size, and the population from which
to select new leaders grew by almost 30 percent. Within the
overall leadership group, the U.S. Capitol Police increased its
minority representation to 30 percent, which represents a 13
percent increase over this 4-year period.
Within the civilian side of the police department, we have
professionalized the ranks of our administrative processes and
functions. In 2002, women and minorities representation in
civilian SES equivalent positions was 40 percent. Today that
percentage has increased to 47 percent. Our efforts in
developing a strategic human capital plan includes the
development of a department work force plan as well as a
succession plan. The department is actively working to
incorporate strategic work force diversity principles into
planning tools that we believe will facilitate our goal of
becoming the Federal Government's premiere law enforcement
agency. We believe we have been successful to date, but clearly
we strive for continued growth, responsibility and new
opportunities for both the department's sworn and civilian work
force.
Mr. Chairman, Ms. Norton, that concludes my statement, and
I will be pleased to answer any questions you may all may have.
[The prepared statement of Mr. Nichols follows:]
[GRAPHIC(S) NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]
Mr. Davis of Illinois. Thank you very much. And I want to
thank each one of our witnesses. And I have one question I
would just like for each one of you to take a shot at
answering. I have noted that all of your agencies hire the best
and the brightest. We all work with a diverse network of
associations and universities when looking for new hires. We
all collect diversity and appraisal data, and have programs in
place and programs that we are developing to support diversity,
and yet we all have poor records. Would you venture an opinion
or a guess as to why? I mean, it is kind of like asking, why
have we not made any more progress than what we have made?
Perhaps we begin with you, Ms. Elzy.
Ms. Elzy. I think we have made significant progress in the
last 5 years as far as our feeder pool. I think that, from my
perspective, GPO was a very male-dominated organization because
of the trades and the crafts that it traditionally was.
However, if you have noticed, we have made significant changes
in our Grade 15 feeder pool. We went up from 2002 when we had 3
percent females to almost 30 percent in 2007. Minorities in the
Grade 15 went from 19 percent to almost 32 percent. So we have
been really striving to ensure that we will have a more diverse
pool of individuals who will be prepared to move into the
senior level positions.
Mr. Davis of Illinois. All right.
Mr. Stroman.
Mr. Stroman. Certainly it is a complicated question, Mr.
Chairman. Let me say that our biggest problems at the SES level
are with Hispanics and Asians. And certainly, given the
increase in the demographic changes within the Hispanic and
Asian community, I think that has created a need for us to
reach out and develop processes to reach out to the Asian and
Hispanic community. If you look at our feeder pool, however,
numbers for the SES with regard to both of those organizations,
both of those groups, they look reasonably good.
On the other hand, I think, you know, the reality is that,
you know, for GAO, like much of the Federal Government, up
until the early 1970's, we were a segregated institution. And
the Federal Government was a segregated--where we were
segregated up until the early 1970's. It was really as a result
of the Civil Rights Act of 1964. It was as a result of
litigation that took place in the 1970's and 1980's that really
forced the changes that we are--that we have made thus far. We
are in the process of trying to put into place processes within
the human capital processes that I think are needed to make
these changes.
And quite honestly, Mr. Chairman, you know, when you look
at the composition of our offices, we are trying to do this
without much in the way of legislation which would empower us
to do that. Most of our offices are structured in a way which
says that--which we have statutory and legislative
responsibility to process complaints of discrimination. There
is very little that gives us the authority to implement
diversity principles within the human capital processes. We are
trying to implement that and do that. But there is no real
legislation which allows us to do that. It is as a result of
our efforts, I think, working with senior managers, but I think
much of the work is hamstrung by that lack of legislative
hammer that would be helpful in implementing.
Mr. Davis of Illinois. Ms. Bailey, based upon your vast
human resources experience?
Ms. Bailey. Well, I do think that we have made progress as
well over the last 5 years. But I think one of the primary
factors hindering our ability to further diversify senior level
staff is the fact that we are dealing with a very competitive
marketplace. We are competing against other government agencies
and private sector employers who are offering things that we
are not in a position to do. So what it means for us is trying
to figure out a way how we can distinguish ourselves as an
employer of choice and also developing methods so that we can
build name recognition. Not a lot of people know what the AOC
or who the AOC is. So that is one of the areas that we need to
focus our attention. Then, I think, if we get there, we can
better attract diverse talent.
Mr. Davis of Illinois. Ms. Ruiz.
Ms. Ruiz. Similarly to my colleagues on the panel, I would
say that we, too, have made definite efforts and have had
successes in improving our diversity. In 1997, 10 years ago,
the minority makeup of our professionals and management staff
was 5.6 percent, and now, as of January this past year, it was
13.8 percent. So it has more than doubled. So we have seen
strides. And I will point out to you another thing, which is
that we are very much struggling against the demographics that
I described. In the early 1970's, there were less than 10
percent women in Ph.D. economics programs. We are delighted
that number has increased to 30 percent in 2005 and anticipate,
hope, expect that it will continue to do so.
And to that end, you don't see many other agencies of 230
employees going out and making grass roots efforts to grow
pools. When we are at Morehouse, we have senior executives who
are saying to these young men, saying, please consider these as
options. These are interesting and exciting options.
And then, like my colleague at the AOC, we struggle against
competitive markets. Any Ph.D. economist coming into the market
who is worth their salt can go to Wall Street and make
significantly more than any of our economists. A few years ago,
we had a terrific financial economist, and he took an
opportunity that was almost twice as much compensation as our
director was making. Our current director took a pay cut to
come to CBO. The reality is, we can't compete at that level.
Despite all of that, I am very encouraged. Dr. Orszag, our
new director, is very committed to this. Recently, on his own
initiative, he started some discussions with some economists
that he knows about how to increase our pool and things we
could do differently and more things we can do. And so I am
very excited by that and encouraged by it.
Mr. Davis of Illinois. Thank you very much.
Mr. Hanratty.
Mr. Hanratty. Mr. Chairman, historically the largest
challenge that the library has had in terms of ensuring
diversity of its senior level was to ensure the diversity of
the GS-15 successor pool. And in 2002, minorities comprised 13
percent of that successor pool. But today that number is 17
percent. And this is largely a consequence of promotions.
During that same period of 2002 to 2007, minorities accounted
for 21 percent of all promotions at the library to GS-15. So I
think that this bodes very well for the future.
Mr. Davis of Illinois. Thank you very much.
Mr. Nichols.
Mr. Nichols. Thank you, sir. Your question really drives to
the heart of the challenge that we face. If you look at the
history of the U.S. Capitol Police, we have been a structure of
sworn employees for our history up until about 10 years ago,
when we started to civilianize. When we started the
civilianization effort, we were able to bring talent and
diversity from outside the organization into very senior
civilian positions that had never existed before.
But clearly the decisions that were made 20 to 30 years ago
with regard to diversity aren't where we are today. And we are
still struggling with those decisions. The feeder group that we
have has to walk in the front door and then be filtered up
through the police department as a means of competitive testing
and promotional processes. If you look at our history, we
didn't even bring female police officers on the police
department until the early 1970's. So we have only had the
experience of female officers--actually, the first African
American female officer was brought on about 30 years ago. So
we are still trying to struggle with the feeder group and bring
people up through the ranks. And that does impact the sworn
diversity at our top executive level of the police department.
Mr. Davis of Illinois. Well, thank you all very much.
Ms. Norton.
Ms. Norton. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
I must thank you for the steadfastness you have shown ever
since you have come to Congress as ranking member and now as
the Chair of this subcommittee in pressing this issue of
minority representation where one might most expect it, in the
Federal Government. Mr. Chairman, almost all these agencies
boasted about their minority representation have been the
subject of lawsuits. We take special note of them here in the
Congress, because, frankly, it is a matter of some
embarrassment that we who are here, particularly in this
committee and subcommittee, trying to get the private sector to
do the right thing often see lawsuits against our own agencies.
Mr. Chairman, I am going to have a bill for next year that
would allow Federal workers--and legislative workers may be
different--to apply directly to the EEOC like everybody else.
The agency I chaired, I see no reason for the disparate
treatment at least for Federal workers. We, of course, passed
the bill that said that all laws that apply to us should apply
to everyone. That is why Mr. Stroman's comment about how you
need some laws; you don't need any more laws than the private
sector needs--you are held under Title 7 the way everybody else
is, so I don't see why you would need more legislation to
proceed. Somehow others have been able to improve the top
ranks. We are even beginning to get Blacks who are CEOs who can
be fired because they have not produced enough revenue, as we
have seen from two recently. The figures on the percentage of
women and minorities are impressive.
To tell you, as a native Washingtonian since my father's
time, for decades the Federal Government has had a larger
percentage. It was a little bit ahead of the private sector.
The more you are able to show large numbers in the ranks, the
greater the burden on you to show why they are not rising
through the ranks like everybody else does. And we have seen it
both for women, slight improvements; for minorities, virtually
none.
By the way, Ms. Bailey, you mentioned that you had gone to
a number of local job fairs, and I commend you for that. As
somebody who has had a job fair where literally we have had up
to 10,000 residents come every year, we have never seen the AOC
there.
And I think, Mr. Chairman, that Chairman Brady has taken--
this is the chairman of the Administration Committee--is to be
commended, because the first time I have seen any movement from
AOC at all was when they had a special forum for small
businesses at the Congressional Black Caucus weekend. And we
need to see some action on employees as well. And I am pleased
that Chairman Brady has taken this special interest.
Mr. Stroman, before I ask you questions about what has been
a most troublesome issue in this committee, may I ask you, do
you understand that you don't need any more laws than other
Federal agencies have in order to try to improve the ranks of
the SES and of minorities in general at GAO?
Mr. Stroman. Yes. Let me address that, Ms. Norton. What I
mean is that all of the civil rights offices in the executive
committee to our legislative branch committees are essentially
focused on complaint processing. I mean, when you look at the
legislation that we have in place now, most of the----
Ms. Norton. Excuse me, who are focused on complaint
processing?
Mr. Stroman. Yes, ma'am.
Ms. Norton. Who are?
Mr. Stroman. The civil rights offices within the executive
and legislative branch offices, the statutory legislation
essentially gives them the authority to process complaints of
discrimination. What we are talking with regard to increasing
diversity requires oversight over the human capital processes
within each of the agencies. And that is what I mean.
Ms. Norton. I am not sure I understand.
Mr. Stroman. OK.
Ms. Norton. If anything, they shouldn't have jurisdiction
to process their own complaints. And that is exactly what I am
going to take from them.
Mr. Stroman. No, no, I understand that. But I am saying,
when you look at the statutory legislation of each of the civil
rights offices, the legislation itself empowers them to process
complaints of discrimination. It says nothing about personnel
practices. It says nothing about recruitment. It says nothing
about your ability to review ratings.
Ms. Norton. Mr. Stroman, I am not sure what you are
referring to. As a former Chair of the EEOC, I am here to tell
you that they and the private sector at least in one respect
are held to the same standard. And that is the standard of
Title VII.
Mr. Stroman. No, I understand that, Ms. Norton.
Ms. Norton. Maybe if you would like to suggest some more
legislation you need. I am distressed to hear you talk about
the complaint process because that has been precisely the
problem with the legislative branch agencies. And what we are
talking about is not a complaint process, but whether these
agencies are conscious of the need to reach out to overcome
these disparities and whether they are conscious about what
others in the Federal Government and in the private sector have
done to help minorities rise. And I don't think--if you need
more legislation, I think you will find a subcommittee and a
committee willing to give it.
Actually, I have a question for you about a very troubling
GAO issue. I am wondering whether your office alerted GAO
management of the disparities in ratings between African
Americans and Caucasians when the Comptroller General was
involved in the new effort to restructure that agency, creating
huge turmoil, where this committee noted that African Americans
had received consistently lower performance ratings than their
White counterparts and the danger of using those ratings in the
appraisal of effort that was underway some months ago.
Mr. Stroman. Yes. The answer is, yes, Ms. Norton. In fact,
we were--our office put into place a process to publicize those
ratings.
Ms. Norton. So you alerted the management that the process
they were going through would build in these disparities?
Mr. Stroman. We alerted management to the consequences of
moving forward with the reorganization.
Ms. Norton. Why did GAO proceed to restructure the bands in
2006 if your office alerted management that it would have a
negative and perhaps ultimately an illegal effect on African
Americans?
Mr. Davis of Illinois. Ms. Norton, could I just, before he
answers, I understand the Second Chance is coming up, and I am
going to ask Mr. Clay if he would take the Chair until I run
over and make a statement, since it is my bill.
Mr. Clay. Mr. Chairman, would it be possible for Ms. Norton
to take the Chair? I do have a doctor's appointment. I just
wanted to get my 5 minutes in.
Ms. Norton. Ms. Norton is going down to speak on the Second
Chance.
Mr. Davis of Illinois. I will run and do it and then come
back.
Ms. Norton. You only have 20 minutes. We may have to
recess. I will keep going here. And my office needs to tell me
when Mr. Davis begins because his bill, Second Chance bill, is
enormously important. I am sorry, Mr. Stroman, you were about
to answer my question.
Mr. Stroman. Yes, ma'am. As I indicated, yes, we did alert
the Comptroller.
Ms. Norton. But you don't know why they went ahead. They
ignored you is what you are saying?
Mr. Stroman. There was a decision made that the best way to
deal with it would be to bring in an independent, outside
contractor to review and to look at the underlying causes for
the disparity.
Ms. Norton. So why didn't they stop until the independent--
--
Mr. Stroman. It was a decision that the Comptroller General
made to go forward with the reorganization, Ms. Norton.
Ms. Norton. Well, you have recently hired a consulting
firm----
Mr. Stroman. Yes, ma'am.
Ms. Norton [continuing]. To conduct an independent
assessment of the factors that could influence rating
differences----
Mr. Stroman. That is correct.
Ms. Norton [continuing]. Between African Americans and
others. But this committee learned that a study was recommended
by Blacks in Government in 2004. So you had noticed that people
were watching, recommended a study. You have gone ahead. Why
wasn't a study conducted when you had this notice from an
outside organization as well that a study of the kind you have
now authorized would be necessary to keep a disparate effect
from resulting?
Mr. Stroman. Well, all I can tell you, Ms. Norton, is that
the discussion with regard to contractors came up with regard
to the reorganization. And at that point, it was the decision--
--
Ms. Norton. Well, let me ask you this, Mr. Stroman. Will
the study----
Mr. Stroman. Yes, ma'am.
Ms. Norton [continuing]. Include a review of the impact
that the Band II restructuring has had on African Americans?
Mr. Stroman. We know what the impact is. The question
becomes, what are the causes of the disparities within the
ratings? The impact has been, it has had certainly a
disproportionate impact on African Americans at the Band II-B
level. That there is no question about.
Ms. Norton. Who is selecting the employees who will
participate in the focus groups that are being interviewed by
the consulting firm?
Mr. Stroman. Yes, ma'am, the contractor. It was a random
selection process by the contractor.
Ms. Norton. This subcommittee had a very troublesome
hearing about essentially the report that denied COLAs in 2006
to people after the survey was done. And it is bad enough that
we have disparate impact, but then these employees were said to
be, colloquially, overpaid, and so, for the first time in the
history of the Federal Government, there have been employees
who have been denied their COLAs. And as I understand it, they
continue to be denied their COLAs even though this committee in
the strongest terms has indicated that was unacceptable. What
are you doing to see to it that these employees get their COLAs
the way 2 million other employees of the Federal Government get
their COLAs and to therefore mitigate the continuing disparate
impact of the original action taken?
Mr. Stroman. Well, that, Ms. Norton, you would have to
address to the Comptroller.
Ms. Norton. Yeah, what is your office recommending? It is
going to have a disparate impact. The COLAs have caused a
conflagration in, of all places, the GAO. You have a union--I
love unions, but that is a bad way to get one--you have a union
now because the employees rose up against the way in which this
was implemented both for African Americans and for others. You
are the EEO office. What are you doing to see to it that
African Americans and others who may be in this group do not
continue to have their COLAs denied? That is all I am asking. I
know that you are--I didn't ask you what GAO was doing. You are
the guy in charge of the EEO. What are you doing?
Mr. Stroman. I understand. We are having--we are having
discussions with the Comptroller General. Ultimately, he has to
make the call with regard----
Ms. Norton. I know who is in charge, Mr. Stroman. I'll tell
you who is going to have to make the call, Mr. Chairman, and
the Chair. The Congress of the United States is going to have
to make the call because it is an outrage that nothing has
happened thus far. And you know what, liability is building up
for us, Mr. Chairman. If you keep denying COLAs to people who
should have received them, then there are going to be more and
more employees wanting their COLAs going back to when they
didn't receive them. And you know what, I got a hard time
telling them that there is no basis to get COLAs you should
have received 5 years ago because somehow or the other the
Treasury of the United States is going to have to come up with
them now. And Mr. Chairman, I will be back.
Mr. Clay [presiding]. Thank the gentlelady from the
District of Columbia. Let me start with Ms. Elzy. Let me ask
you about what steps does GPO plan to take to increase the
representation of minorities and women in its SES?
Ms. Elzy. We have a lot of things in place where we are
trying to--we have a fellows program, so we can give them
additional skills, individuals who are interested in
progressing into leadership positions. And as I previously
stated, we are doing very well as far as the promotion and
hiring of individuals into the 13 to 15 grade level. And it
significantly increased over the last 5 years.
Mr. Clay. And how does this differ from what GPO has done
in the past?
Ms. Elzy. In the past, I think it was a big cultural change
for GPO to go ahead and have minorities and females in more
leadership positions. And I do think that they are making a
significant change. There has been an increase from 1997 to
2005 and, again, from 2005 to 2007 in both SES and Grade 15.
Mr. Clay. And what does GPO plan to do to increase the
representation of Asian American officials in the SES ranks?
Ms. Elzy. We have recently promoted more Asians into the
Grade 15 and also into the Grades 13 to 15.
Mr. Clay. All right. Thank you so much for that. Let me go
to Ms. Bailey. What steps does the AOC plan to take to increase
the representation of minorities and women in its SES?
Ms. Bailey. The AOC has and will continue to engage in a
number of efforts to affirmatively recruit minorities and women
into their SES and GS-15 positions. In the 11 months that I
have been there, I have been working to develop and implement
the agency's Affirmative Employment Program. And that will
include and has included a number of good faith efforts to
increase our diversity. And they include targeted recruitment
initiatives for women, minorities and persons with
disabilities; expanding our recruitment efforts when the pool
fails to identify sufficient diversity in the applicant pool
for any given position. We are building partnerships with
professional associations. Right now we are heavily recruiting
for the CVC, to staff that. We have been working with the
American Association of African American Museums, for example.
We are cooperatively working with colleges and universities.
And I think it is important to note that, earlier this year,
the leadership determined that all of our senior leaders would
be required to attend a mandatory training program in EEO in
diversity so they would understand what the goal is and the
commitment is to diversity, to increase diversity at those
levels.
Mr. Clay. What did you find? What was the situation when
you came 11 months ago to the AOC? What did you find that was
just glaring disparities? Did you see any glaring disparities?
Ms. Bailey. Well, in the absence of analyzing our work
force data, because that has not yet occurred, I am not really
in a position to determine or share with you what the numbers
reveal. But I do recognize that there is some work to do just
based upon the report that came out today in our own cursory
analysis of the data from 2002 to 2007.
Mr. Clay. Now the architect hires the people who wear the
blue shirts; right?
Ms. Bailey. Correct.
Mr. Clay. Don't you employ them?
Ms. Bailey. Correct.
Mr. Clay. OK. Let me share with you one of my concerns. As
a college student, I worked on the Hill in the late 1970's. And
I came back 17 years later. And some of the same people still
worked there making the same salary. Now does the COLA apply to
them, too, where they have missed years of COLAs?
Ms. Bailey. No, they have been entitled to, as far as I
know--I probably would need to check further--but I have not
heard nor am I aware that they have not gotten the COLAs that
all the other employees are entitled to. But I will be happy to
research that information.
Mr. Clay. Would you, Ms. Bailey? Because I have heard from
numerous employees of the Architect who say that they are
attempting to raise a family and they make woefully low
salaries. And these are people that I have known for almost 30
years who have worked in this position. And that should be
looked at.
Ms. Bailey. I will do that.
Mr. Clay. The whole salary structure in your office is
woefully insufficient. And if you have somebody working 30
years and they are making $24,000 a year, there is something
wrong.
Ms. Bailey. I agree. I agree.
Mr. Clay. And so it tells me that perhaps they didn't
receive COLAs either. I would love for you to report back to
this committee.
Ms. Bailey. I will do that, sir.
Mr. Clay. Let me also ask you, minorities and women in the
AOC's GS-15 level successor pool comprised a smaller percentage
than its SES corps. Now the report, I want to say said that--
what does AOC intend to do to improve minority and female
representation at the GS-15 level? Go ahead and try to answer.
Ms. Bailey. Pretty much what I have already outlined. We
are going to make sure that we develop targeted recruitment
initiatives for candidates at that level; really build our
partnerships with professional associations with the
backgrounds that we are looking for.
Mr. Clay. Ms. Bailey, can you pull the mike closer, please?
Ms. Bailey. Sure.
Mr. Clay. It is hard to hear.
Ms. Bailey. As I said before, we are going to be targeting
specific recruitment initiatives for women, minorities at that
level, building our partnerships with professional associations
in the fields that we are looking for. We know that is an area
that we need to address. And that serves as the feeder pool for
our SES equivalents. And so we are ready and prepared to make
the necessary--or implement the necessary actions to increase
diversity at those levels.
Mr. Clay. At 7.9 percent of the top positions filled with
minorities, what has been the obstacles in the past of
recruiting qualified bona fide minorities?
Ms. Bailey. As I said earlier, in the 11 months that I have
been there, I really believe it is our ability to compete with
the labor market the way that it is. I think we need to do some
work in establishing ourselves as an employer of choice and
getting people to recognize what the AOC is and what we do. I
don't think there is a lot of name recognition for our agency.
So that is one of the areas that we need to work on and
develop.
Mr. Clay. OK. Thank you for that response.
Ms. Ruiz, we understand from your testimony that CBO faces
challenges in improving its minority and female representation
in SES corps. The report just released from this committee says
that an applicant pool is devoid of diversity, your applicant
pool. What do you all--in what ways do CBO's planned efforts to
increase its representation differ from what it has done in the
past?
Ms. Ruiz. Yes, sir. A couple of things. No. 1, I came to
CBO as an H.R. Specialist in 1999. And that was the first time
that the agency put together a comprehensive recruitment plan.
And since that time, we have established a very solid,
comprehensive recruitment plan that we review and analyze every
year. A big component of that is grass roots outreach to
students from HBCUs, large flagship institutions that have
minority populations that are greater than others, and other
individuals who would be underrepresented in the economics
pool.
The reality is, it takes about 5 to 7 years to get a Ph.D.
And so any efforts that we would be--any results that we would
be seeing from those efforts would just now be coming to
fruition. And we are seeing increases in the diversity. The
pool is nearly devoid. I wouldn't say that there are no
minority candidates. In 2005, there were 44 individuals who
completed Ph.D.s in economics.
The second part of our problem is compensation. Like my
colleague from the AOC said, we are public service. And so we
have to rely on our organization's importance to the Congress,
the service that we provide to the public and other kinds of
things like that. As Dr. Orszag said--Dr. Orszag is our new
director--as he said recently, he has to make CBO an exciting
and creative and challenging place to work because individuals
coming out of Ph.D. programs in economics can go to Wall Street
and earn twice what they make at CBO. They can go into academia
at the top schools and make more than they make at CBO. So we
have that challenge as well to face.
Mr. Clay. Well, right now, have you worked outside of the
box to try to attract economists and Ph.D.s to your agency?
Ms. Ruiz. Yes, sir. There are a couple of organizations.
The American Economics Association is the primary economics or
professional association for economists. The AEA, the American
Economics Association, does a couple of things. They have a
committee on the status of women in the economics profession,
and we work with them, provide them all of our announcements,
talk with them about creative ideas to increase women within
our work force. More importantly, we think, they provide a
summer program to top talent undergraduate students identified.
Principally, these are students who have economics undergrads,
but oftentimes math as well, because that is a strong leader to
economics. And what they do is they take these students onto
campuses across the country. The campus rotates. It was
recently at Duke. I believe it has moved to California for the
coming year. And they provide students a couple of things,
academic preparation in econometrics and higher statistical
math to help them prepare for Ph.D. programs, and they
introduce them to employers who will be able to show them the
benefits of pursuing a degree in economics. CBO for the last 5
years has participated in that program 4 of the last 5 years.
We have done everything from send staff to do seminars there
about our work. Three of our directors in the past years have
actually gone to the program and met with the students or met
with the students individually when they have come to CBO. Last
summer, we were delighted that the folks were at Duke, and so
they were able to bring up about 50 students and faculty to
CBO. We hosted them for a luncheon and informal meetings,
dialog with our economists. And then we did a seminar. Dr.
Orszag, our new director, spoke with them about CBO and the
importance of our work. And then two of our more junior
economists presented work to show how exciting and dynamic the
types of things we can do can be.
Mr. Clay. How many of those students are on track to come
in to join your agency?
Ms. Ruiz. Well, we have all of their contact information,
and they are still undergraduates, sir. So if they left
undergraduate programs last year and entered econ programs, the
yield rate from this program I wouldn't know the rates of, but
I would expect that it is not 100 percent.
Mr. Clay. Do you offer internships to these students?
Ms. Ruiz. Yes, sir, we do.
Mr. Clay. How many do you give a year?
Ms. Ruiz. We have had one intern from the AEA's summer
minority program and--or excuse me, from a similar program, the
PPIA, which is similar, but for students pursuing masters
degrees. And generally, our internship program we manage with
an eye toward diversity. And in fact, our intern pool in the
last 5 years has been between 30 and 50 percent--excuse me,
between 36 and 50 percent female, and generally around 30
percent minority, the low number being 21 percent, the high
number being 36.5 percent. And interestingly, sir, if I could
add----
Mr. Clay. Sure.
Ms. Ruiz [continuing]. We have been very successful when we
have worked with students on campuses or in PPIA or similar
programs to then have those folks come on as internships and
then have them join us as full-time employees. We find that it
is about establishing a relationship with the student that can
start earlier. We are more successful in that regard than in
just going out and talking to masses.
Mr. Clay. OK. Thank you for that response.
Let me go to Mr. Stroman. The first payouts under GAO's new
pay system began in January 2006. The number of resignations by
African Americans at GAO in 2006, 20 of them, was 90 percent
higher than the average of the previous 7 years, which was 11
per year on average. Also, 2006 evidenced the second highest
number of transfers to other agencies by African Americans in
the last 8 years. What, other than the implementation of GAO's
new pay system, could be causing those trends?
Mr. Stroman. Well, I have to take a look at who actually
transferred, Mr. Clay, but certainly I would suspect that the
reorganization played an important role in those decisions.
Mr. Clay. Well, it is 20 in 2006. On average, it is 11 per
year. GAO's new pay-for-performance system was approved in 2004
and began to be implemented shortly thereafter. The average
number of resignations by GAO women since 2004 was about 20
percent higher than in the previous 5 years. And the number of
women transferring to other agencies has increased each year
since 2004. So what steps does GAO plan to take to increase?
Mr. Stroman. Well, again, Mr. Clay, I would need to look at
the statistics. I believe----
Mr. Clay. I am just sharing with you the statistics.
Mr. Stroman. No, I understand. What I am saying, though, is
I believe that the women who left were in the administrative
classifications. But I need to go back and take a look at that.
And I think certainly there are limiting opportunities in the
administrative field than there are in the professional field.
But I would certainly, again, be happy to provide that to you
for the record.
Mr. Clay. OK. Next question. GAO had the lowest percentage
of Hispanics in its SES among the six legislative branch
agencies specifically. How does GAO plan to address this gap?
Mr. Stroman. Well, again, if you look into our feeder pool,
which is immediately under the GS--I mean the SES, our feeder
pool numbers are at governmentwide levels. So we believe that
the feeder pool puts us in a very good position. And if you go
down below that to the Band II and the Band Is, the percentages
of Hispanics in those bands are even higher. So over the next
several years, we think that the feeder pools will allow
ascension into the SES at a commensurate level.
Mr. Clay. So you have representative levels of----
Mr. Stroman. Yes. At the level immediately below the SES,
there's representative levels. And below that level there's
even higher representation.
Mr. Clay. OK. Thank you so much for that response.
Turning to Mr. Hanratty, although the Library of Congress
had a slightly higher percentage of minorities in its SES than
did the other legislative branch agencies in fiscal year 2007,
the percentage of minorities in the SES decreased each year
except for fiscal year 2007, when it remained steady. Has the
Library made any effort to identify what factors contributed to
this downward trend? And if so, what have you found?
Mr. Hanratty. Yes, Mr. Chairman, I believe that the
principal factor that was contributing to the downward trend
was the relatively comparatively small feeder pool at the GS-15
level. And that is an issue that we have addressed. We have
made substantial gains since fiscal year 2002. As I mentioned
previously, we have gone from 13 percent to 17 percent of
minorities at the GS-15 level. So that, as senior level
positions emerge, we have a much stronger feeder pool. And so
that is--in our opinion, that is the principal factor that
contributed to the downward trend between 2002 and 2007. And I
believe we have addressed that.
Mr. Clay. Would you say, I guess, the smaller feeder pools
in the past were a result of the culture of the Library and the
people that made the decisions to supply these feeder pools or
to select those who would be on track for promotions?
Mr. Hanratty. No, I wouldn't say it is a consequence of a
cultural issue. I think we had--in 2001, we completely revamped
our merit selection system. And that was in response to our
settlement agreement from the early 1990's. And we built in a
number of additional checks and balances that did not exist in
that previous system. For example, creating recruitment plans
at the individual vacancy level. And second, ensuring that, at
the applicant pool stage, that the pool is enriched with
underutilized candidates. So I think those factors have really
resulted in the increase that you are now seeing at the GS-15
level. And I believe that will bear fruit in the coming years
with respect to the senior level as well.
Mr. Clay. If we called you back here next year would
representation of minorities in the SES, would you be able to
come back here and tell us that it has increased?
Mr. Hanratty. I would certainly hope so, Mr. Chairman.
Mr. Clay. And would it have increased exponentially?
Mr. Hanratty. I can't say for certain. But we will
certainly do our very best, and we are doing our very best
right now to ensure that we have as strong a minority presence
at the senior level as possible.
Mr. Clay. OK. If I were to walk over to the Library and
just pick out any employee and talk to them, what kind of
reaction would I get from say an African American female who
had been there 20 years? What kind of reaction? What kind of
evaluation of the agency would she give me?
Mr. Hanratty. Well, I can't say, Mr. Chairman. But I feel
confident that we have put into place a number of excellent
programs to enhance minority representation at the Library. I
mentioned at the beginning of my testimony the close
collaboration that we have established with the AFSCME Local
2477. That is the employees union. They are representing the
paraprofessional employees at the Library of Congress. As a
result of this close collaboration that we have with AFSCME
Local 2477, we are developing as we speak a career development
program aimed specifically at that GS-2 to GS-8 level. We hope
to have a pilot in place within the next few months. And then
following the successful review of that pilot, to implement
that program on a larger scale at the end of the fiscal year.
So we are taking very aggressive steps in trying to ensure that
opportunities exist not merely for those at the top but also
throughout the ranks of the Library of Congress.
Mr. Clay. OK. Let me ask you about pay. Minority SES
officials at the Library received on average $1,699 less than
nonminorities in fiscal year 2007. Why do you think that is and
what does the Library intend to do to address this issue? And
what role does the Library's Performance Review Board play in
issuing performance-based pay and awards? And are there
minority and women members on that board?
Mr. Hanratty. We have a Performance Review Board, Mr.
Chairman, that reviews the appraisals from each of the service
units. And it is specifically designed to ensure equity and
consistency across ratings. So that is a check and balance that
exists right in the system right now. The disparity that you
indicated in terms of total compensation between minorities and
nonminorities again is a relatively small percentage. We are
talking about 1 percent in terms of total compensation. But the
point I would like to make is that it is going to be very
difficult to achieve equity across minorities, nonminorities,
men, women, at any given slice of time because we may be having
employees coming into the senior level system at a relatively
low level as opposed to those who have been in the system for a
number of years and have reached the statutory cap for pay. So
you could have two individuals who are coming into the system
or who are being rated at the same time in the system; one
might have a pay several thousand dollars lower than the
employee who has been there for several years. So you have that
built in factor that will be very difficult to address in any
particular year.
Mr. Clay. Mr. Hanratty, that is an interesting way to
explain the facts. Now you say it is 1 percent. But I bet you
it makes a difference to the people who get the 1 percent less.
And you have thrown out some facts that may or may not be true,
whether time served and all of that. Just as I explained to Ms.
Bailey, there are people who have been here for 30 years and
haven't received adequate pay increases. And I am willing to
bet it is the same at the Library. This is about equity and
fairness. This is about paying people what they are worth,
paying them what they deserve. Now how do you think those
employees feel who are getting $1,700 less a year than their
counterpart? That is probably not too rewarding for them. And
it probably has an effect on morale when you are paying
somebody who does the same job less. This is about equity and
fairness. And so, I mean, I hear what you are saying, but it
certainly doesn't make it right. And it is not a good reason. I
would ask that the Library take a look at pay equity.
Mr. Hanratty. We will.
Mr. Clay. Thank you.
Mr. Nichols, you testified that the sworn Capitol Police
work force is comprised of 34.7 percent minority
representation, in contrast to the data that the USCP provided
to us, which showed that minorities comprised 38.7 percent of
the work force. Similarly, you state that 43 percent of Capitol
Police SES positions are occupied by women and minorities. The
data from Capitol Police in fiscal year 2007 showed 3
minorities, which is 13 percent of the SES, and 6 women, which
is 26.1 percent, which ads up to 39.1 percent, not 43 percent.
Further, your statement begins by stating that the department
is comprised of 2,085 employees. And 80 percent of 2,085 is
1,668, which according to your statement is the number of sworn
law enforcement officers. However, the information provided to
the subcommittee was that the number of staff was 2,001 at the
Capitol Police. Can you explain these differences?
Mr. Nichols. I would have to go back and look at the
information that was provided to the committee. The question I
have is if the two recruit classes were included in the
statistical information that was provided to you. Because they
haven't been sworn in as police officers yet. They shouldn't be
carried on our rolls, because they haven't been sworn in as
police officers. That may account for the disparity on the
sworn side.
Mr. Clay. And that is explainable. I mean, that is
understandable. Your total number of SES total in the
department is what?
Mr. Nichols. Twenty-one.
Mr. Clay. Twenty-one?
Mr. Nichols. Yes, sir.
Mr. Clay. All right.
Mr. Nichols. And if I could explain, that is also broken
down between sworn and civilian. That is the total SES
complement of the police department.
Mr. Clay. I see.
Mr. Nichols. So the SES equivalent for a sworn is a deputy
chief or above.
Mr. Clay. What steps does the Capitol Police plan to take
to increase the representation of minorities and women in its
SES? Are there some who are on track now to be promoted?
Mr. Nichols. There are some who are on track now. I have
had--you asked the person who preceded me what somebody would
say if you talked to them about their feelings on their agency.
I have had these conversations. I think that the one thing that
we have to do is to build confidence in the promotional process
that it is fair and open and that the door is open. If you want
to take advantage of going up through the ranks of the police
department, regardless of your gender or ethnicity, that the
opportunity is there. Perhaps we haven't done a good job of
imparting that level of confidence in the minority officers in
the past, but we have to do that.
We are also on a track, the chief and I, when we were
lieutenants on the police department recommended to the chief
at the time that we partner with Johns Hopkins University so
that we can start to mentor and groom officers at various
official levels and give them the skills and capabilities to
move up in an agency that is as complex as the U.S. Capitol
Police has become. We are a legislative law enforcement agency,
but when you get up to the very high levels, it is a business
that we are running. And you have to understand the business
concepts in addition to the law enforcement concepts. So we are
trying to lay the foundation and make sure that we have a
diverse group of people who are eligible to go through that
program as well as many others.
The other thing that I have seen, Mr. Clay, is the
mentoring that should be done by the people at my level and the
people immediately below me with the feeder group needs to be
embraced. And we really need to facilitate that better, to
share with the younger officers who are coming up through the
ranks the experience that we have had, how we make these
decisions, how the different pieces of the agency work together
and talking to people of different aspects of the police
department. I can tell you that the mentoring side of our
agency is not where it needs to be.
Mr. Clay. Has the chief embraced a mentoring program or a
mentoring process?
Mr. Nichols. It is something that we are looking at right
now. There are various ways. One, as I said, we have done the
educational side. We have gone to the FBI National Academy. We
have a fellowship with the International Association of Chiefs
of Police. We have partnered with Johns Hopkins University,
which the chief and I both graduated from. We are looking at
George Washington University. And we are also looking at the
military college.
So we are laying the foundation for the education. We are
bringing transparency and fairness to the promotional process.
But the next piece of the pie that we need to fill is the
mentoring. We have a good model we want to follow with the Air
Force National Guard, Air National Guard, that is probably a
good fit for U.S. Capitol Police.
Mr. Clay. How about the part of your statement that you do
not hire supervisory managerial sworn employees from external
organizations? I mean, that may be an obstacle to actually
increasing your ranks at the GS-15 level and above.
Mr. Nichols. Well, it is something we want to look at, Mr.
Clay, but what I don't want to do is bring in--somebody on the
sworn side, bring in somebody from a GS-15, because that means
we are taking away a position from a career U.S. Capitol Police
employee who can move up and fill that position either himself
or herself. So what we really want to do on the sworn side is,
and even to a large extent on the civilian side, but especially
on the sworn side because of the way we are structured, is make
that career path within the U.S. Capitol Police open and
inclusive and transparent so that people engage in the
promotional process. I think that the conversations I have had
with people is, the one thing that has probably worked against
us over the years is that, that there is a perception, whether
it is real or not, there is a perception that certain people
won't get promoted no matter how well they do in the process.
Well, we need to work on that perception, because that chills
the effect of people moving up through the ranks. So to bring
somebody from the outside will just further delay our ability
to bring people up from within.
Mr. Clay. Thank you for that response.
Let me thank the entire panel for their responses. And we
hope that when we invite you back we, will have better data to
look at. Let me thank you all again for being here. This panel
is dismissed, and we will set up for panel three. Thank you.
Thank you for joining us.
Panel three consists of three witnesses, and they are:
William Bransford, who is currently the general counsel and
lobbyist for the Senior Executives Association. Mr. Bransford
is a partner in the law firm of Shaw, Bransford, Veilleux &
Roth, PC, where he has practiced since 1983. His practice is
concentrated on the representation of Federal executives,
managers and employees before the U.S. District Courts, the
Merit Systems Protection Board, the EEOC and the Office of
Special Counsel.
Welcome, Mr. Bransford.
Also we have Ms. Shirley Jones, who is the current
president of the GAO Chapter of Blacks in Government. She was
first elected president in 2005 and was re-elected in January
2007. Ms. Jones is assistant general counsel in the Office of
General Counsel at the U.S. Government Accountability Office.
In this role, she is responsible for supervising the legal
support for the strategic issues mission team work related to
tax policy and administration.
Welcome, Ms. Jones.
Lieutenant Sharon Blackmon-Malloy is president of the U.S.
Capitol Black Police Association. She has served in this
capacity for 8 years. Lieutenant Blackmon-Malloy joined the
U.S. Capitol Police force in October 1982 and, after 25 years
of dedicated law enforcement service, retired last month.
Welcome to all three.
And it is the policy of the Oversight and Government Reform
Committee to swear you in. Would you all please stand and raise
your right hands?
[Witnesses sworn.]
Mr. Clay. Let the record reflect they have answered in the
affirmative.
We will begin with Mr. Bransford.
STATEMENTS OF WILLIAM L. BRANSFORD, GENERAL COUNSEL, SENIOR
EXECUTIVES ASSOCIATION; SHIRLEY A. JONES, PRESIDENT, BLACKS IN
GOVERNMENT, GAO USACE CHAPTER; AND LIEUTENANT SHARON BLACKMON-
MALLOY, PRESIDENT, U.S. CAPITOL BLACK POLICE ASSOCIATION
STATEMENT OF WILLIAM BRANSFORD
Mr. Bransford. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. The Senior
Executives Association appreciates the subcommittee's focus on
the important topic of how to promote diversity in the senior
ranks of Government.
We believe the SES of the future must fully represent the
diversity of America. It is not only the right thing to do, but
achieving diversity will pay dividends by producing a
Government led by executives who are even better to respond to
and provide services to all Americans. SEA believes this is
achievable only through proper data, a strong pipeline and,
most of all, strong central leadership on this issue.
Legislative branch agencies tend to follow the same
guidelines as those in the executive branch when it comes to
career executive personnel. We understand that the systems vary
in different agencies, but merit selection plans apply, and
general principles of requiring executive leadership
qualifications are also applicable.
Executive and legislative branch agencies also share
similar problems when it comes to their SES corps. Both have
concerns about diversity and developing the pipeline of
candidates being trained and recruited to become a part of the
SES.
SEA has stated its support in the past for greater
collection of data on the SES. We would like to see OPM, the
Office of Personnel Management, be a greater guide for the SES
by collecting better data. Consolidating policies and programs
into one office and acting as a clearinghouse for agencies in
need of guidance, the central office will be invaluable in
guiding the SES to greater diversity.
A central OPM SES resource office can provide best
practices for both executive and legislative branch agencies.
SEA believes that legislative branch agencies could be required
to meet periodically with a central SES resource office at the
Office of Personnel Management. Without such an office, as is
currently the case, there will continue to be no central voice
of leadership on SES matters, and many agencies will continue
to implement SES policy differently on issues ranging from
diversity to pay and performance issues.
SEA would also suggest legislative branch agencies consider
a council which provides coordination for sharing best
practices on diversity and addressing pipeline issues. This
would contribute to ensuring best practices when it comes to
hiring a diverse work force, not to mention the cohesiveness of
the SES corps and general work force best practices as a whole.
SEA believes that structural changes to hiring practices
can help and should focus on both the selection process and
pipeline development. SEA supports a proven model to allow for
what we have termed Executive Resources Board Diversity
Subcommittees. It is modeled after a process developed by
former Secretary of Energy Bill Richardson, which proved
successful during his tenure.
This subcommittee would have oversight responsibility,
including authority to review SES selections and to reverse any
selection that it deemed did not provide significant outreach
to or consideration of minority and women candidates. Further,
this subcommittee would be responsible for ensuring a diverse
pipeline through guiding minority outreach and leadership
development for SES recruitment.
We believe that Executive Resources Board Diversity
Subcommittees consisting of agency senior executives, a
majority of whom must be either minority or female, would be an
effective way for legislative branch agencies to assure a
diverse Senior Executive Service. Such a strong leadership
group would provide proactive monitoring and management of
diversity.
SEA applauds Chairman Davis for taking the first steps to
address issues concerning diversity, proper oversight and
providing much needed data on the SES corps. SEA believes it is
necessary to begin improving the candidate pipeline, addressing
pay concerns, and, most of all, have better leadership if we
are going to achieve diversity in the SES.
Thank you very much. I look forward to your questions.
[The prepared statement of Mr. Bransford follows:]
[GRAPHIC(S) NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]
Mr. Clay. Thank you so much for your testimony.
Ms. Jones, you may proceed.
STATEMENT OF SHIRLEY JONES
Ms. Jones. Mr. Chairman, thank you for this opportunity.
For the last 3 years, I have served as the president of the
GAO Chapter of Blacks in Government. I am here to share the
chapter's efforts to ensure equal opportunity and to effect
change that will lead to increased diversity at all levels, but
particularly at the SES and equivalent levels where the most
important agencies decisions are in fact made.
I believe that the broad issues that I will present here
will be similar to those present at other agencies where
African American staff are underrepresented at the management
level.
These views in no way represent the views of the U.S.
Government Accountability Office.
Comptroller General David Walker previously made a
statement regarding diversity at GAO that our chapter agrees
with. In his July 24, 2006, CG chat, he said, ``America's
strength is its diversity. As a public-sector employer and as a
public servant with public trust, GAO has the responsibility to
lead by example and reflect the diversity of this country.''
This quote is particularly noteworthy for two primary
reasons. First, if we are to achieve equal opportunity and the
level playing field that BIG and African American staff have
spoken out about, then there must be a strong demonstrated
commitment to diversity from top management.
But the quote was also important because, along with it,
Mr. Walker also acknowledged that there continues to be a
significant difference between the average performance
appraisal scores between African American staff and Caucasian
staff at GAO. This acknowledgement was particularly important
to our BIG chapter because this is a longstanding issue that
our chapter had brought to GAO management even before Mr.
Walker's tenure but particularly in the 2 years preceding his
acknowledgment.
For example, prior to the restructuring at GAO and split of
GAO's Band II, our chapter wrote a letter to Comptroller
General Walker in 2004 stating our concern that African
American staff, in particular, would be at a distinct
disadvantage in the placement decisions. We specifically noted
that GAO's appraisal data showed that African American
employees at all band levels were consistently receiving the
lowest performance appraisal scores. In that 2004 letter, we
recommended that GAO initiate a study before proceeding with
the restructuring to determine why African Americans
consistently receive the lowest appraisals in the agency.
Performance appraisal scores for 2003 through 2005 were
ultimately, however, one of three major criteria used to make
placement decisions and was the primary criterion that kept a
large percentage of staff from being placed into Band II-B.
In that letter and on numerous other occasions since then,
we have also voiced concerns about African American staff being
infrequently assigned analyst-in-charge opportunities, thereby
preventing them from gaining valuable leadership opportunities.
So with a history of expressing concerns about the
significantly lower appraisal scores, lack of individual
control over staffing assignments and other issues that would
prevent African American staff from advancing, Mr. Walker's
acknowledgment was particularly important. I personally
believed and hoped that it signaled a commitment to initiate
change at the agency that would enhance diversity.
In conclusion, I believe the significant difference in
appraisal scores and diversity issues in general are of
personal concern to Comptroller General Walker. Our concern
continues to be, however, that this commitment from top
management has to also be evident in the action of front-line
managers who are deciding on appraisal scores, making analyst-
in-charge decisions, staffing individuals to high-risk and
high-visibility jobs and making other professional development
decisions that may disparately impact African American staff.
I also think that Mr. Walker and the agency took a positive
step in rolling out a formal mentoring program. It is clear,
however, that mentoring itself is not a cure. Rather, as this
hearing indicates, in addition to mentors it is critical that
African Americans and other minority staff who share our
diverse traits are represented at the SES and upper-management
levels so they can, in turn, serve as sponsors and advocates.
Finally, our chapter is particularly encouraged by GAO's
decision to bring in an outside consultant to study the
differences in appraisal scores. We are hopeful that the study
will, in fact, make some actionable recommendations that will
ultimately lead to greater diversity.
Mr. Chairman, this concludes my prepared statement. I will
be happy to answer any questions you may have.
[The prepared statement of Ms. Jones follows:]
[GRAPHIC(S) NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]
Mr. Clay. Thank you very much, Ms. Jones.
Ms. Blackmon-Malloy, you may proceed.
STATEMENT OF SHARON BLACKMON-MALLOY
Ms. Blackmon-Malloy. Thank you. Good afternoon, sir, Acting
Clay and the committee members. My name is Sharon Blackmon-
Malloy. I am a recently retired lieutenant from the U.S.
Capitol Police force, and I am also the current president of
the U.S. Capitol Black Police Association.
I am here today to speak about the serious
underrepresentation in the upper-level ranks, in the ranks of
captain and above in particular. I would like to provide some
recommendations about correcting this problem. I thank you for
this opportunity to speak about these issues. And I have
previously submitted my testimony in its full capacity to the
subcommittee.
The U.S. Capitol Police Force, where I worked for a period
of 25 years, is entrusted with the responsibility of securing
and protecting the U.S. Capitol, the House and State office
buildings and adjacent grounds, Member of Congress, their
staffs and a multitude of visitors to the U.S. Capitol campus.
The Capitol Police Black Police Association was formed in
1990. In the early 1990's, our mission was to increase
diversity in our police force and remedy discrimination
practices in the area of hiring, job assignments, promotions
and training. And as you can see today, we are still fighting
those same struggles.
It should be noted that between the period of 1990 and 1993
in this agency, members of the Black Police Association
testified in Congress several times about diversity and other
related topics. In 1993, there was only 29 percent of the U.S.
Capitol Police force African American, as compared to September
2006 in which it remained 29 percent. See attached data in my
full text testimony. Thus, there has been no change in African
American representation within this force over a 13-year
period.
There has been no progress in the upper ranks of captain
and above, where an African American woman has never served. In
fact, it took 176 years for an African American woman to be
promoted to the rank of lieutenant, which occurred in November
2004. I hope that it will not take another 176 years for an
African American woman to achieve the rank of captain in this
U.S. Capitol Police force. I also hope that our recommendations
for a greater diversity and less discrimination will not fall
on deaf ears this time around.
Recommendations: To start effecting change, Congress must
have the will and the commitment to provide oversight and
ensure responsibility and accountability for noncompliance and
seriously enforce those measures. We don't need any more laws.
Just like Congresswoman Eleanor Holmes Norton stated, the laws
are on the book. We need to enforce what we have and abide by
them.
And if that does not occur, we need to--for instance, there
could be a series of penalties for an agency's violations in
the area of diversity and discrimination. And some of the
consequences could start with salary decreases. Then you are
going to promote and proceed to demotions, demotions in a
particular rank. And if that doesn't work, removal from the
force, because if you're not complying with what we have in
place, then your organization shouldn't be condoning it, nor
should Congress continue to allow it to happen.
We took some data from the Office of Personnel Management,
and it gives us a wealth of knowledge and opportunity and gives
you examples of how you can go about creating that diverse work
force. We don't have it at this time. So there are resources
out there, a multitude of resources, that could assist us in
overcoming these issues, so 20 years from now, my daughter is
not sitting here testifying before your kids, telling you that
we told you about this 20 years ago.
We can look at the area of recruitment to start, and that
was some of the OPM data. In the area of recruitment, we had a
White, male lieutenant who stayed in that rank for 20 years or
more. Now, that is clearly unacceptable. It is mainly the norm
with this agency, and that cannot continue. You cannot have a
commander of recruiting stay in a position for that amount of
time and expect change to come. It is just not going to happen
until those things are remedied.
Hiring: We can ask our human resources division what can we
do better to ensure that we are complying with the Nation as a
whole and looking at the standards in which we are required to
hire a diverse group. We want this Nation to look like--we want
the Capitol Police force to look like the Nation that it
represents. But if you look at it today, that is clearly not
happening.
Then how do you retain them once you hire them? There is a
wealth of information that is in my testimony. It will take too
much time to go into it.
And commitment, commitment is the foundation for a
successful effort to build a diverse, high-quality work force.
This must be communicated through actions that will start from
the top management, because if you're not committed and you're
not demonstrating commitment to this change, it is not going to
happen. So it starts from the top, and it filters down.
And that's what we're asking you to help us do today. We
need to encourage our leadership that creates an environment of
inclusion and valued differences, clearly assign adequate
resources to diversity activities. And if you ask our offices
today if, do we feel as though we're included in the
decisionmaking process, 99 percent are going to say no, because
we feel isolated. We are isolated from the rank lieutenant on
down. And there's a disconnect between the rank of captain and
above. So we have a long way to go.
We need to ensure that our employees are trained in the
intercultural communications to address differences. What is
your difference that's so different from mine? And if you
really look at it, we are no different from each other, if you
only gave each other the opportunity to share those thoughts
and ideas, and we can grow from learning from each other. But
if you keep it separate, then we will be back here another 20
years from now.
In conclusion, we are seeking a serious commitment from
Congress, and this branch of Government is a natural place to
start. We do not need the last plantation operating on the
doorstep of Congress. Agencies like the U.S. Capitol Police
force and the Federal Government in general should be a Nation
and a world leader in promoting equality and justice for all.
It is my hope that our leaders will take pride in ensuring
that 15 years from now we do not find ourselves testifying
before Congress concerning the underrepresentation of women and
minorities within any branch of Government.
Mr. Chairman, this concludes my formal testimony. And,
again, I would like to thank you for giving me an opportunity
to appear before this subcommittee. And I will be available for
any questions that anybody might have. Thank you.
[The prepared statement of Lieutenant Blackmon-Malloy
follows:]
[GRAPHIC(S) NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]
Mr. Clay. Thank you, Ms. Malloy. Now, I want to know how
you really feel.
Let me ask you, you spent how many years----
Ms. Blackmon-Malloy. Twenty-five years, sir.
Mr. Clay. Twenty-five years, and you made it to the rank of
lieutenant.
Ms. Blackmon-Malloy. Yes, sir.
Mr. Clay. And you said there had never been an African
American female above that rank?
Ms. Blackmon-Malloy. That's correct, sir. Actually we
have--in 2004, when I did obtain the rank of lieutenant, there
was never a lieutenant even in that rank. So the ranking
structure goes from sergeant lieutenant, then captain, then
inspector and so forth.
Mr. Clay. Let me ask you, I assume you retired because you
had the time. What were your impressions of your total
experience on the Capitol Police Force? You said you started in
1982?
Ms. Blackmon-Malloy. Yes, sir.
Mr. Clay. OK. And then, what were your feelings the day you
left about your total experience with the force?
Ms. Blackmon-Malloy. I can start from the beginning, if you
want, briefly----
Mr. Clay. No, we don't have that kind of time, but----
Ms. Blackmon-Malloy. It's going to be really brief. I can
tell you my experience when I walked in the door.
Mr. Clay. Yes, go ahead.
Ms. Blackmon-Malloy. And I walked in--I was here
approximately 6 months; I knew then that we had some issues.
And so I dedicated my entire career, for the most part, to
trying to effect change, and that's what I've done.
The day that I left, I walked away with pride and joy.
There have been changes. And the most progressive chief that we
have had was Chief Terrance Gainer. And under his leadership,
we had better morale, we had more promotions and we had more
training. So we did progress during my 25-year tenure, so I
want to make sure that is stated in the record as well.
Mr. Clay. You know, Mr. Nichols testified that there are
African American Capitol Policemen that are on track to be at
the SES level. How much stock do you put in that?
Ms. Blackmon-Malloy. Without taking a lot of time--I can
give you an example. The last captain's promotion process, we
did have outside contractors. And, you know, thanks to our
efforts, we have been able to obtain that over the years. And
with those outside contractors, it was the captains process--
and I have competed in all processes. And at one point I
called--I was doing the fellowship program, so I called back
and I was trying to get some assistance, some mentorship that
we need to get to the next rank. And I found that the majority
of people that was in a position to mentor me, they were part
of the process. They had to excuse themselves from assisting.
So it has been that way throughout my entire career, either
as far as promotions--there is just too many--there is not
enough African Americans willing to reach back and pull someone
with them. So we have to struggle on our own and do the best
that we can, while we sit back and watch other people, in
particular White males, sail through the process. They
accelerate their promotion track, if you want to call it. And
there's not a diversity program or there's no diversity program
in place where you see them moving and they get promoted.
So it can happen. It can happen in the next 6 months; it
can happen the next year. It doesn't have to take 20-something
years. So it definitely can happen.
Mr. Clay. And I couldn't agree with you more. I hope 20
years from now your children are not here telling my children
this same story. It should not be generational. If it is a
culture change that's needed in the Capitol Police, then that's
what ought to take place.
And that's upon us, Mr. Chair, to impress that on the
hierarchy of the police force.
Thank you for your response.
Ms. Jones, what do you think is the cause for significant
difference in ratings between African Americans and Caucasian
staff at each band level at GAO? I heard you say top management
and front-line management must also be diverse, too, or
culturally sensitive.
Ms. Jones. Right.
Mr. Clay. Is there much cultural training over there or
sensitivity training given at GAO?
Ms. Jones. I can't speak to that. I'm not sure if there is
sensitivity training. I'm sure it's available. I don't know if
they are taking advantage of it.
Mr. Stroman, from the previous panel, has in the past cited
insufficient or poor communication between African Americans
and supervisors. I agree that's one of the reasons for the
differences in appraisal scores, but I would like to offer a
couple more reasons.
First, I believe--I would like to believe, as Mr. Walker
does, that there's not widespread intentional bias against
African American employees. But I do believe the infrequent
assignment of African Americans as analysts-in-charge and
assigning them to high-risk and high-profile jobs, the lack of
those opportunities for African American staff leaves their
supervisors to place less value on their work.
Also, I believe the performance appraisal system itself is
a large factor. Putting aside the subjectivity of any
performance appraisal system, GAO's system allows employees to
be rated without the assistance of written narratives. Now, I
don't want to dismiss GAO's decision to do away with a written
narrative, because I know they did do it in consultation with
the Employee Advisory Council. And that was because they wanted
to cut down on the amount of time that people were spending on
doing the performance appraisals. But that has also had the
unintended effect of allowing these appraisal scores to
basically be unjustified.
So I believe those are two very important reasons for the
low appraisal scores for African Americans.
Mr. Clay. Thank you for that response.
Mr. Bransford, in your written statement you indicate that
OPM should play a more prominent role in improving both
executive and legislative branch diversity.
Given the different roles of the branches of Government,
would you support the idea of the legislative branch agencies
council you envision be a clearinghouse and liaison with OPM?
Mr. Bransford. Yes, sir, Mr. Clay, I would. I think the
idea of the council, of getting legislative branches together
would help. But I think OPM, governmentwide, has the potential
to provide tremendous leadership and information. And I think
we can be creative, and it can do nothing but help.
Mr. Clay. Thank you for your response.
And I will turn it over to the chairman, Mr. Davis.
Mr. Davis of Illinois [presiding]. Thank you very much, Mr.
Clay. And let me say I hope you will be here 20 years from now
to carry on. I don't intend to be. But, no, let me thank you
for taking over the duties and handling the rest of this
hearing.
Mr. Bransford, let me ask you, you indicate that this
council may be able to coordinate best practices and give
people the opportunity to see and know what's taking place and
what's going on in other places.
How would you feel about the requirement that promotions be
based upon recommendations that a panel of at least three
individuals would sit on and that at least one of them must be
a woman and one of them must be a minority, and that this panel
could make recommendations and suggestions relative to
promotions?
Mr. Bransford. Mr. Chairman, that, of course, is present in
the legislation that's been introduced for the executive branch
agencies as a requirement to come into the SES whenever a
vacancy announcement is posted for an SES position.
The Senior Executives Association has concerns about
putting that in as the only way to get into the SES. And we are
suggesting and hoping to make a case that agencies either have
a panel, as you suggest, as a clearinghouse or a diversity
subcommittee, as we also suggest; one or the other. In other
words, they exercise active, aggressive leadership to make sure
that the SES is diverse or they have a clearinghouse, whatever
that agency culture is.
The concern we have is that putting a requirement of a
minority and a woman, three people on a panel, would delay the
process, would be a bureaucratic exercise and, we think, over
time, would lose its effectiveness.
I understand the concept and the principle, but we do think
it is a good option. And we think that if an agency doesn't do
an executive panel as a clearinghouse to get into the SES, then
it ought to demonstrate aggressive leadership to promote
diversity, one or the other.
Mr. Davis of Illinois. Ms. Jones, we just listened to
testimony a few minutes ago from representatives who suggested
that part of the problem is that many highly qualified, well-
trained females and African Americans have other options and
that there's competitiveness in terms of where people go. We
heard testimony about people leaving and going out and earning
two, three times more than they would have been earning in the
agency or more than what the director earns.
Do you think there is a pool of qualified individuals who
work for the Government who could move up to these ranks?
Ms. Jones. Chairman Davis, I definitely think there is a
highly qualified pool that exists currently in the Government
and outside the Government.
The statements that the previous panelist made in that
regard I hear all the time. I recruit for GAO, and I strongly
disagree with that statement. There are highly qualified
African Americans and other minorities who want to be dedicated
public servants. Of course there are going to be highly
qualified candidates that will choose the higher-paying jobs
over public service, but there are just as many who would
forego those salaries and work here, just as I do.
Mr. Davis of Illinois. Lieutenant Malloy, based upon your
analysis, if things don't change, most of us would probably be
gone by the time there is some serious movement within the
ranks of the Capitol Police.
You made some recommendations and some suggestions that I
certainly find intriguing and concur with, but do you think
that there's anything else that could be done on the
recruitment end that would assist in the upward movement of
individuals within the department?
Ms. Blackmon-Malloy. Yes, that's correct. I think
currently--I met with Assistant Chief Nichols before I left the
force, and that was one of the issues that we had raised. And
they are working to make improvements in that area as we speak.
So there is something in place; it just has to actually be
implemented.
Mr. Davis of Illinois. How do you feel about this notion of
panels where at least there are representatives from the most
affected minority groups being on the panel that make
recommendations?
I have friends who are police officers, and many of them
can't get sergeant because the supervisor won't recommend them.
I have one friend who's got a doctorate's degree who is just
frustrated to death because he can't get beyond the rank of
patrolman in the Chicago Police Department, because he can't
get a recommendation from his supervisors for merit selection
to move up to the ranks of sergeant. I mean, I haven't been
able to figure it out. I interact with him quite frequently. He
seems to be a pretty intelligent guy. He's about 50 years old,
you know, about as responsible as you can get. But he has a
doctorate's degree and can't make sergeant in the police
department.
So how do you feel about this notion of individuals on
panels?
Ms. Blackmon-Malloy. Yes, in response to your question,
with our agency I think for the last 6 years we've used outside
agencies as far as promotion process for sergeants and
lieutenants. And we do have outside panels who are a diverse
group, so we have accomplished that mission without our ongoing
efforts to effect change.
But once you get past the rank of lieutenant, that rank,
which is underrepresented by African American women--it
currently has three White females and one Hispanic--the problem
we are facing now is we do have an outside promotion process
company comes in. Then there's a two-part process. There's an
oral review panel, and then after which there's an evaluation.
But in the evaluation period you have your same supervisors
that you work with sitting on the panel. So that's another
hurdle we have to work to overcome.
We support outside panels 100 percent, and it has been
effective over the past 6 years or so. But when we get behind
the rank of lieutenant, then we're back to square one again,
because the agency is involved in making the decisions, and
they are your supervisors. And that clearly should not be
acceptable in 2007.
Mr. Davis of Illinois. Let me ask each one of you--and
perhaps this might be my last question. How important a role do
you think that subjectivity ought to play in the movement of
individuals from one level of employment to the next level? Is
subjectivity a major factor or does it play a major role, in
your mind.
Mr. Bransford. Mr. Chairman, what my experience has taught
me is the higher you go in Government, the more subjectivity
comes into the process. And I don't think it can be eliminated
completely.
But I was somewhat stunned to learn that written comments
at GAO were eliminated and that there is a problem with
accountability. I think most of my experience, particularly at
the executive level or the GS-15 level, in performance
appraisals there are comments, there are justifications for
them. And I think that even though subjectivity comes into it,
there needs to be some accountability, some way to judge
whether that subjectivity that is being exercised is
reasonable.
Mr. Davis of Illinois. Ms. Jones.
Ms. Jones. I agree with Mr. Walker that, in our system,
there has to be some level of subjectivity because we don't
make widgets, so you just can't count productivity in that
manner.
Where I disagree with the agency is in their oversight. Our
agency believes it has some oversight over the appraisal
process, but it is obviously somewhat broken. So there needs to
be more management oversight and sufficient controls in place
to ensure that there's equity in rewarding and recognizing
staff through these appraisal scores but also in ensuring that
they have opportunities to be on the jobs at GAO that are more
highly valued.
Mr. Davis of Illinois. Lieutenant.
Ms. Blackmon-Malloy. Yes, I think I can speak for the
majority of the agency employees when it comes to subjectivity.
We all agree that is going to be with us, but if there is no
documentation to support what you are saying, then we are back
to square one again, where we are bringing in our own biases.
But if there is a process in place and you can clearly the
document why this person shouldn't receive A, B, C, or D, and
it is documented and it can be articulated as such, then, yes,
we will support it. But anything different than that, then
there's going to be problems.
Mr. Davis of Illinois. Well, let me thank all of you for
being here, for participating and for your testimony and for
your answers.
I can't help but be struck by the testimony that you were
giving when I came in. And it reminded me when there was an
effort to abolish slavery, and every time somebody would come
up with a good plan, there would be a lot of buts about it, a
lot of things that could happen, until finally Frederick
Douglass got a little agitated and suggested that there were
those amongst us who would profess a love for freedom but yet
deprecate agitation. And he was of the opinion that when we do
that, it means that we want the rain without the thunder and
the lightening.
And so I guess in some instances we want to make sure that
we have a diverse work force, but we don't want to do anything
different than what we've been doing all along. Or we want
individuals to feel like they can rise to the top based upon
merit, based upon preparation, based upon hard work, but
somehow or another they just never get there.
Well, I can assure you that this committee intends that
there be some movement on this issue, certainly during the time
that I'm chairman of it.
And it's agonizing, quite frankly. I have seen personally
so many instances of discrimination. I have seen some of the
brightest people that I've ever encountered be stymied, because
they just reached the point of knowing that, in that particular
situation, they will never be able to go beyond a certain
level. And so, they are never able to experience the
fulfillment of the American dream or the notion that to every
man and every woman is chance, is golden opportunity to become
whatever his manhood, womanhood, talent and ambitions combined
to make him or her. That's sort of the promise of America.
And so, we appreciate all of you helping us, hopefully to
move in the direction of that promise. It's been a good
hearing.
I want to thank our staff for their staff work.
Thank all of you for being here.
And this meeting is adjourned.
[Whereupon, at 4:42 p.m., the subcommittee was adjourned.]