Image provided by: SEIU Local 503; Salem, OR
About The Oregon state employee. (Salem, Oregon.) 1944-195? | View Entire Issue (Dec. 1, 1944)
9 in any agency by taking and passing one, instead of four, examinations. Al so, one, instead of four, eligibility lists would be established. This results in at tracting more applicants to take the test. As larger lists of ehgible employees are established, the agencies are able to select better employees and examina tions are held less frequently. As much of a consolidation as could be made under our present law was effected July 1, 1944, resulting in a more efficient operation of each State agency. It is estimated the cost of op eration will be reduced $ 7 2 0 0 .0 0 the first year, and further reduced in suc ceeding years. The Committee on Oc tober 16, 1944, unanimously requested the Attorney General of the State of Oregon to prepare, and he now is, the necessary bills to be submitted to the 43 rd Legislative Assembly, which bills are designed to enable a complete con solidation of the merit systems of the four State agencies. » » * * * On the Main Question, the Committee Renders a Divided Report: The majority report being: "A fter hearing all arguments pro and con, it is our opinion that a merit system would practically freeze in their positions, State employees to the point where' it would be almost impossible to discharge one for any reason after he had quahfied under a merit system ex amination. Therefore, we do not think that such a law would be fair to our elected public officers who are held responsible for the efficiency of their officers. For a further reason, to adopt a merit system at this time would not be just to our boys and girls now in the Armed Services.” J. N. Jones Lew Wallace W. W. Chadwick The minority report being: "We recommend that the State of Oregon adopt a merit system for the selection, protection and removal of its employees. The law need not freeze employees into their position but should provide that an employee may be discharged by his superior. If such employee feels that he has been arbi trarily discharged, he may appeal, not to a Court, but to the Merit System Commission, whose decision shall be final. The burden of proof as to the employee’s right to keep his position must always be placed upon the em ployee. As a merit system is designed to select only qualified employees, it will not reduce, but will enhance the efficiency of elected public officers. "The present law gives no prefer ence to veterans of the Armed Services. The law should provide that all State employees hired subsequent to Septem ber 14, 1940, the date the National Guard was mobilized into the United States Army, should be temporary em ployees until six months after the ter mination of this war. Thus, the veterans would not only have an equal oppor tunity, but the advantage of the es tablished veterans preference. "A merit system selects only quali fied and competent state employees. Their promotions, demotions, lay-offs, and discharges are made objectively and on a basis of merit, free from per sonal, political, or religious considera tions. The seven to ten thousand state employees should not be employed by the state on a personal basis without any set standard for qualifications, but should serve the state after competitive tests prove their ability. Instead of the 64 departments using any method at any time, there should be a fixed norm to determine competency for all em ployees in all departments. (Continued on page 35) When They Buy Advertising.
