nter the classified service has been better defined and
made more practical, the number of names to be certified from the
eligible lists to the appointing officers from which a selection is made
has been reduced from four to three, the maximum limitation of the age
of persons seeking entrance to the classified service to 45 years has
been changed, and reasonable provision has been made for the transfer
of employees from one Department to another in proper cases. A plan
has also been devised providing for the examination of applicants for
promotion in the service, which, when in full operation, will eliminate
all chance of favoritism in the advancement of employees, by making
promotion a reward of merit and faithful discharge of duty.
Until within a few weeks there was no uniform classification of
employees in the different Executive Departments of the Government. As a
result of this condition, in some of the Departments positions could be
obtained without civil-service examination, because they were not within
the classification of such Department, while in other Departments an
examination and certification were necessary to obtain positions of the
same grade, because such positions were embraced in the classifications
applicable to those Departments.
The exception of laborers, watchmen, and messengers from examination and
classification gave opportunity, in the absence of any rule guarding
against it, for the employment, free from civil-service restrictions, of
persons under these designations, who were immediately detailed to do
clerical work.
All this has been obviated by the application to all the Departments of
an extended and uniform classification embracing grades of employees not
theretofore included, and by the adoption of a rule prohibiting the
detail of laborers, watchmen, or messengers to clerical duty.
The path of civil-service reform has not at all times been pleasant nor
easy. The scope and purpose of the reform have been much misapprehended;
and this has not only given rise to strong opposition, but has led to
its invocation by its friends to compass objects not in the least
related to it. Thus partisans of the patronage system have naturally
condemned it. Those who do not understand its meaning either mistrust it
or, when disappointed because in its present stage it is not applied to
every real or imaginary ill, accuse those charged with its enforcement
with faithlessness to civil-service reform.
|