[Congressional Record (Bound Edition), Volume 147 (2001), Part 7]
[Extensions of Remarks]
[Page 9336]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office, www.gpo.gov]



  INTRODUCTION OF THE ``MERIT SYSTEM PROTECTION BOARD ADMINISTRATIVE 
                    DISPUTE RESOLUTION ACT OF 2001''

                                 ______
                                 

                          HON. GEORGE W. GEKAS

                            of pennsylvania

                    in the house of representatives

                        Wednesday, May 23, 2001

  Mr. GEKAS. Mr. Speaker, today I have introduced the ``Merit Systems 
Protection Board Administrative Dispute Resolution Act of 2001.'' 
Support for ADR enjoys a rare consensus among those knowledgeable with 
formal litigation and administrative dispute processes. Resulting 
savings redound to the benefit of those involved and more broadly, to 
the taxpayers at large.
  The MSPB is an independent adjudicatory body that hears appeals from 
Federal agency personnel disputes. MSPB judges hear a broad range of 
complex cases that affect thousands of Federal employees and the 
agencies for which they work. Over the last decade, MSPB judges have 
seen their jurisdiction steadily increase without a corresponding 
increase in resources. Last year, the Board handled nearly 8,000 cases 
with a staff of only 71 administrative judges. This bill would help 
reduce this caseload by establishing a pilot, three year early 
intervention ADR program at the Board. A chief strength of the program 
is that it makes ADR available to parties before their positions harden 
in preparation for formal litigation before the Board.
  Until 1990, MSPB judges received compensation equivalent to that 
provided Immigration, Social Security and Administrative Law Judges. 
Since 1990, however, the wage disparity between MSPB judges and other 
administrative judges has detrimentally affected the Board's ability to 
attract and retain top judges. Over the last four years alone, the 
Board has lost nearly 20 percent of its judges to other adjudicatory 
agencies.
  The Conference Report to the 1999 Omnibus Appropriations Act 
recognized the need to accord pay equity to MSPB, Immigration, and 
Administrative Law Judges. Last year, I introduced, and the House 
passed legislation to address this recognized inequality. Like the 
previous legislation, the current bill restores a measure of fairness 
to MSPB judge compensation vis-a-vis Immigration, Social Security and 
Administrative Law Judges.
  Passage of the MSPB Administrative Dispute Resolution Act of 2001 
will combat debilitating MSPB attrition rates and reduce costs to 
taxpayers by ensuring the success of the early intervention ADR 
program. Support for ADR is broad and its benefits are clear, and I 
urge prompt passage of the bill.

                          ____________________