12th August 2024: digital purchasing is currently unavailable on Cambridge Core. Due to recent technical disruption affecting our publishing operation, we are experiencing some delays to publication. We are working hard to restore services as soon as possible and apologise for the inconvenience. For further updates please visit our website: https://www.cambridge.org/news-and-insights/technical-incident
We use cookies to distinguish you from other users and to provide you with a better experience on our websites. Close this message to accept cookies or find out how to manage your cookie settings.
Published online by Cambridge University Press: 02 September 2013
The most significant development of recent years in the field of public personnel administration in the United States is the rapid spread of the merit system. After receiving lip service for decades, the merit system has made more gains in the last three years than at any previous time since the passage of the Pendleton Act by Congress in 1883. Tangible proofs of this progress are to be found in the state and municipal civil service systems which have been established and in the personnel developments of 1938 and 1939 in the federal government.
1 Civil Service Agencies in the United States: A 1937 Census. Civil Service Assembly Pamphlet No. 11 (Chicago, 1938), p. 10Google Scholar.
2 Ibid., pp. 12–14. Additional data collected by Civil Service Assembly for supplementary census.
3 Fifty-fifth Annual Report of the United States Civil Service Commission (1938), p. 1Google Scholar.
4 Public Resolution No. 1, 76th Congress, 1st Session.
5 Since appointed as one of the President's six assistants authorized in the Reorganization Act of 1939.
6 June 25, 1938, c. 678, par. 1, 52 Stat. 1076.
7 It should be pointed out that in several of the agencies, e.g., the Tennessee Valley Authority and the Farm Credit Administration, exempted from the civil service laws and rules, departmental merit systems were established.
8 Sept. 1, 1937, c. 896, par. 4, 50 Stat. 889.
9 The President's Committee on Administrative Management, Report, with Special Studies (Washington, Government Printing Office, 1937), p. 7Google Scholar.
10 Cong. Rec., 75th Cong., 3rd Sess., p. 10527.
11 Cong. Rec., 76th Cong., 1st Sess., p. 15005.
12 For summaries of the Alabama, Rhode Island, and New Mexico civil service laws, see the Civil Service Assembly News Letter, April, 1939, p. 7Google Scholar. For an account of the adoption of the Minnesota law and a summary of its provisions, see “Minnesota Adopts the Merit System,” by ProfessorShort, Lloyd M., Good Government, May–June, 1939, pp. 25–29Google Scholar. The Hawaiian law is summarized in ibid., pp. 30–31.
13 There are probably a dozen additional cities with civil service for fire and police departments. They are omitted for lack of reliable information.
14 On June 27, 1939, the governor of Pennsylvania vetoed a bill (S. B. 420) providing for a state civil service commission to administer the three departmental merit systems now established in the state government. By another bill (H. B. 445), a civil service commission was created; but its powers were eliminated by the veto. In his veto message, the governor stated that several objectional features in S. B. 420 led him to decide to continue the departmental merit systems. News release, Governor's Office, Harrisburg, Pa. (June 27, 1939.)
15 Civil Service Assembly News Letter, January, 1939, p. 5Google Scholar.
16 Draft of a State Civil Service Law, Sec. 6 (a), p. 12.
17 Ibid., p. 13.
18 An interesting feature of this law is the provision that the minority member of the Civil Service Commission be approved by the chairman of the state central committee of the party opposing that of the governor. (Sec. 4.)
19 The President's Committee on Administrative Management, op. cit., pp. 11–12.
20 The 1939 session of the New York legislature passed a bill authorizing a committee to study the extension of the facilities of the state department of civil service to other local governments.
21 Information from California state personnel board.
22 Proceedings of the Thirtieth Annual Meeting of the Civil Service Assembly (Chicago, 1938), p. 36Google Scholar.
23 Brooks, Earl, In-Service Training of Federal Employees (Chicago, Civil Service Assembly, 1938)Google Scholar.
24 June 8, 1936, c. 541, par. 6, 49 Stat. 1489.
25 Herges, E. P., “Safety and Accident Prevention in the Federal Service.” Proceedings of the Thirtieth Annual Meeting of the Civil Service Assembly (Chicago, 1938), p. 48Google Scholar.
26 John A. Lentz, “Safety and Accident Prevention in Cincinnati,” ibid., p. 47.
27 Richard H. Smith, “Safety Does Pay,” ibid., p. 45.
28 The New York City civil service commission estimates that a scoring machine will do the work of 12 examining assistants. Civil Service Bulletin, May, 1939, p. 141Google Scholar.
29 Matter of Fink v. Finegan, 270 N. Y. 356, 1 N.E. (2d) 462 (1936).
Comments
No Comments have been published for this article.