jobs for the same or better pay, with nearly the same retirement benefits and without risk of personal harm. A larger annuity will encourage capable young men and women to assume the risk of personal injury and to undergo the physical and mental stress inherent in law enforcement activities. The legislation before this committee will not only motivate top quality people to accept hazardous assignments, but will also motivate them to remain in enforcement work throughout their Government service. Reduction in turnover reduces the costs of recruiting and training new agents and is a significant factor in developing a team of experienced personnel for day-to-day operations and emergency situations. Mr. Chairman and members of the committee, the bill, H.R. 9281, before you is not asking you to reward the agents for hazardous duty, although I can see no objection to that. This balanced bill provides a means to achieve and maintain a youthful and vigorous organization to meet the urgent demands of our Federal Government. It will raise the professional level and stature of Federal investigators. It will give management the means to attract the best and to keep them for 20 years by making it economically feasible for law enforcement personnel to retire at age 50. I strongly support this legislation and urge you to vote favorably for its adoption. Mr. Chairman, I will be pleased to answer any questions that you or the other members of the committee may have. Senator BURDICK. Thank you for your testimony this morning. Under current law, the personnel covered by H.R. 9281 may retire at age 50 after 20 years if the agencies and the Commission approves of the degree of hazard to which the employee has been subjected. H.R. 9281 would delete this approval requirement. What is the rationale behind the removal of the requirement? Mr. ROSSIDES. Well, the idea that you have to go to the Commission to determine and say which of the items of work of a particular agent is more hazardous than another agency's first of all, it is not feasible. All of the work, except maybe some of the supervisory work, is hazardous. You should have a general rule where they know themselves that in this area of work, it is hazardous. Let us take an IRS agent, Intelligence agent. Someone says that is just tax work. Why is that hazardous? Let me tell you, those agents in the Treasury IRS narcotics trafficker program that we initiated, they have to go into some of the roughest areas of this Nation. Theirs, if anything, would be more hazardous than some that seem to be more dangerous. I think there should be uniformity and not trying to pick and choose and create classes within the enforcement community. Senator BURDICK. Any questions? Mr. DUPONT. No, Senator. Senator BURDICK. Thank you very much. [A biographical sketch of Hon. Eugene T. Rossides follows:] BIOGRAPHICAL SKETCH OF EUGENE T. ROSSIDES Camera Cope Eugene T. Rossides is a senior partner in the New York and Washington law firm of Rogers & Wells. Mr. Rossides served as Assistant Secretary of the United States Treasury Department for Enforcement, Tariff and Trade Affairs, and Operations from 1969 to January, 1973. While at the Treasury, Mr. Rossides' responsibilities included direct supervision of the U. S. Customs Service, U. S. Secret Service, Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco & Firearms, Consolidated Federal Law Enforcement Training Center, Bureau of the Mint, Bureau of Engraving and Printing, Office of Law Enforcement, Office of Tariff and Trade Affairs, Office of Operations, Office of Foreign Assets Control, and policy guidance for Internal Revenue Service law enforcement activities. Mr. Rossides served as the law enforcement policy advisor to the Secretary of the Treasury. He served as United States Representative to INTERPOL from 1969 to January, 1973, and was one of its three Vice Presidents (1968--1971). Early in his law career, Mr. Rossides served as a Criminal Law Investigator in the Rackets Bureau on the staff of New York County District Attorney Frank S. Hogan. For two years (1956--1958), Mr. Rossides was an Assistant Attorney General for the State of New York, having been appointed by the then Attorney General, Jacob K. Javits, who assigned him to the Bureau of Securities to prosecute stock frauds. From 1958 to 1961, he served as Assistant to Treasury Under Secretary Fred C. Scribner, Jr., before returning to the practice of law in New York City. A native of New York, Mr. Rossides graduated from Erasmus Hall High School and received his A. B. Degree from Columbia College in 1949. He received his LL.B. Degree from Columbia Law School in 1952. Mr. ROSSIDES. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Senator BURDICK. Our next witness is Mr. Joseph Gamble, former special agent in charge, Federal Bureau of Investigation. Welcome to the committee, Mr. Gamble. You may proceed as you wish. STATEMENT OF JOSEPH GAMBLE, FORMER SPECIAL AGENT IN CHARGE, FEDERAL BUREAU OF INVESTIGATION Mr. GAMBLE. Gentlemen, I am very pleased to be given the opportunity to voice my support of H.R. 9281, which would improve the retirement benefits of special agents of the FBI and other Federal law-enforcement and firefighting personnel. Thank you for inviting me. It was my privilege to have been associated with the FBI from 1951 until March 1972, when I retired as a special agent. During that time, I served in the capacities of investigator, supervisor, inspector, assistant special agent in charge, and special agent in charge of several Bureau field divisions. In this regard, I would like to enter into the record a formal statement which sets forth in detail my views on the merits and need for this legislation. Senator BURDICK. Without objection. Mr. GAMBLE. Briefly, I am acutely aware of the demands made on the Federal law-enforcement officer, both physically and mentally. In my opinion, they are greater today than in 1947 when legislation was first enacted, giving FBI agents a preferred retirement formula in order to maintain a young and vigorous investigative force. These benefits were later extended to other Federal lawenforcement and firefighting personnel. One cannot serve the public as an officer of the law and expect to work a normal 8-hour day. Rather, one must accept long hours and oftentimes the expending of efforts certainly above and beyond the ordinary. Too often, he is the object of threats or actual violence directed against him by the criminal elements he is sworn to combat. Inherent with his position are stresses and tensions which frequently have an adverse effect on his overall health. The demands on law-enforcement officers provide no alternative to maintaining a working force which is composed of young vigorous officers capable of functioning under such conditions for extended periods. Incumbents who find they cannot meet the rigors of the job when they reach that point in age when the qualities of vigor and stamina begin to wane should retire and give way to the younger man. To keep a person working in such a demanding profession when he has obviously passed his peak, performancewise, is not doing him a favor, nor does it permit optimum efficiency. To enable incumbents to step down, there should be available a retirement plan which provides an annuity which will reasonably permit them to meet their financial responsibilities. The present 2 percent computation factor no longer permits the law-enforcement officer to retire at the early age intended when legislation was first enacted in 1947. Many States and local jurisdictions have recognized the need to encourage law-enforcement officers to retire earlier through enactment of laws which provide appropriately liberalized retirement benefits. H.R. 9281 would establish the annuity computation factor at 212 percent for each year of total service which does not exceed 20 years, plus 2 percent for each year of service exceeding 20 years. This is the same factor which is afforded members of the Washington, D.C. Metropolitan Police Department, the D.C. Fire Department, the U.S. Park Police, the Executive Protective Service, and certain segments of Secret Service, for each of the first 20 years of service, as provided by Public Law 91-509, enacted in 1970. Under that law, such personnel are able to retire after 20 years service, regardless of age, and enjoy a 3-percent computation factor for each year of service over 20. The provisions of H.R. 9281 are conservative by comparison. However, it is my firm belief that, if passed, this legislation will sufficiently motivate Federal law-enforcement personnel who meet the age requirement for retirement, to do so, and thus insure a more youthful, active, and productive investigative force. This and other provisions of the legislation, particularly the compulsory retirement age of 55, unless waived by the agency head, will give management the necessary means to achieve the essential objective of maintaining a young man's investigating force. Thank you. Senator BURDICK. You certainly hit the high spots. I appreciate it and commend you. I assure you that I was ahead of you in your testimony here. We will read it all very carefully. Mr. GAMBLE. Thank you. [Prepared statement of Mr. Joseph H. Gamble follows:] |