�This Page Declassified lAW EO12958 Postwar Air Force USAM' H?S?OI?lC? ?OD?S -- 85 appointed the Adwsory Commission on Service Pay, better known as the Hook Commission, to investigate the adequacy of the compensation received by members the armed services and the general sound- ness of pay structures. This was a four-man comnnsslon with Charles R. Hook, ARMCO steel executive, actLug as chairman. After completing the most comprehenmve study that had ever been made of this subject, the commission subsrotted its final report to the Secretary of Defense in December 1945.;? The Hook Commissicn's report recom. mended the first comprehensive overhaul of service pay schedules and principles since 1908. Since that date the structures and missions of the armed forces had undergone radical changes. A greater need had de- veloped for technicians in a wide range of skulls (particularly was this true m rela- tion to the Air Force); certain inequities had developed among the services, and tween grades within the services; the value of the dollar and the cost of hvmg had radically changed. These factors were rec- ognized in the report and it attempted to deal with them. ?* The Pay Readjustment Act of !942 had granted increases in the pay and allowances of the personnel of the armed serwces2? In 1946 this legislation was amended to grant further ?ncreases in the pay of offi- cers and enlisted personnel in the armed services and in certain other branches of the uniformed services2 ? Another amend- ment in 194? increased the pay of cadets and midshipmen in the military and naval academiesJ s None of this legislation, how- ever, made any thoroughgoing changes in the system of nullfury pay or in the prin- ciples upon which it was based. Nor did it bnng the pay of mih'tary personne! up to a level commensurate with the great risc in the cost of living or comparable with civil- ian professional and industrial pay. The findings of the Hook Commission, based on painstaking research by the com- mission itself, and on studies which had been in progress for two years within the aervices, were recegmzed as a stable bas?s on Which to develop legislation providing a career compensation plan for the urn- formed serwces. In February 1949 a sub? committee of the House Committee on Armed Serwces began hearings on H. R. 2553, a bill drawn to xmplement the rec- ommendattune of the Hook Commission. These hearings lasted three months. The resulting bill was then reported to the full committee, and ultnnately to the House o! 11epresentatives. After critical scrutiny on the floor of the House the bfil was referred back to the Committee on Armed Services, which reexamined the bill and reported another bfil, H. R. 5007, back to the House. Th?s bill was passed on 15 June 1949 This b?l was supported by the Hook Commiesran although it dxd not conform to the reeommendatxons of the Commission m several respects. After consideration by the Senate Committee on Armed Serwces H. R. 5007 was reported favorably to the Senate on 20 July 19492 ? The Senate added a few amendments to the bill and passed it on 26 September; it was accepted by the House the next day. The House accepted the Sen- ate's amendments, consequently it was not necessary to send the bllt to conference committee. so The bill was signed by the President on 12 October 194?, and became effectxve retroactive to 1 October 1?49. s? Thus was enacted the Career Compensation Act of 1949. The purpose oi this legis!at?/?n .was to estabhsh for the uniformed services'a com- pensation pattern which would tend to at% tract and retain first-class personnel in the armed services, and in the Coast Guard, the Coast and Geodeh½ Survey, and the Public Health Service. It also provided for a complete rowsion of the laws Which gov- erned compensation given to persons re- tired because of physicaI disability Three major changes were made in the pay structure The first was in .the matter of "longevity" increases. Previously an m- divldual remaining in the same grade re- ceived a pay i?crease amountxng to 5 per cent of h?s base pay four eac/? S years of service, up to a total of 30 ? years. ?his principle was considered unsound and a new one w?s established whereby in-grade increases leveled off after a reasonable THIS PAGE Declassflied lAW EO12958
