AMENDMENT TO INCREASE THE MINIMUM WAGE TUESDAY, JUNE 21, 1955 HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES, COMMITTEE ON EDUCATION AND LABOR, Washington, D. C. The committee met at 9:45 a. m., pursuant to recess, in room 429 of the House Office Building, Hon. Graham A. Barden (chairman) presiding. Present: Representatives Barden, Kelley, Powell, Bailey, Perkins, Elliott, Landrum, Metcalf, Bowler, Green, Roosevelt, McDowell, McConnell, Gwinn, Smith, Bosch, Holt, Rhodes, Wainwright, Frelinghuysen, Coon, and Fjare. Present also: Fred G. Hussey, chief clerk; John O. Graham, minority clerk; Edward A. McCabe, general counsel; Russell C. Derrickson, chief investigator. Chairman BARDEN. The committee will come to order. I believe we have listed as the first witness Mr. J. V. Whitfield, president of the Forest Farmers Association. I would like to say to you gentlemen that Mr. Whitfield happens to be from the best congressional district, at least in North Carolina. Will you identify yourself for the record. STATEMENT OF J. V. WHITFIELD, BURGAW, N. C., PRESIDENT, FOREST FARMERS ASSOCIATION Mr. WHITFIELD. My name is J. V. Whiteld. I am president of the Forest Farmers Association, a small timberland owner, and a farmer, and my hometown is Burgaw, N. C. The Forest Farmers Association's headquarters are at Atlanta, Ga. Speaking as president of the Forest Farmers Association and a small timberland owner, I would like to mention several items concerning the proposed amendments to the Fair Labor Standards Act. Frankly, I am greatly concerned, and the 3,700 landowners, operators, and other interested persons affiliated with our association are concerned over certain proposals to increase the present minimum wage of 75 cents as now included in the Fair Labor Standards Act. As we see it, the small owner and the small-businessman stand to lose most should any of these proposals to up the present minimum wage be adopted. Actually, forestry and woods operations, in the first place, do not lend themselves readily to a fixed system of minimum wages and precise recordkeeping as required by the present Fair Labor Standards Act. The smaller the operation the more particularly is this true. Of course, the smallest operations are exempt by the 12-man provision, but all who do not qualify under this provision must comply as best they can. Our members do not work in factories. They are forest landowners and operators. Our business is the raising of timber as a crop. We are forest farmers as the very name of our association indicates. We differ from row crop farmers only in the crop we raise. The Fair Labor Standards Act actually suits our conditions poorly if at all. This has been recognized for rowcrop farmers, and I hope it will someday be realized for timber farmers. We are both in the same category, and the Fair Labor Standards Act should actually not apply to us at all. I wanted to develop this point as background for the committee's consideration before continuing. Considering now the various proposals to increase the minimum wage above the present 75-cent level, I would like to state that our members are strenuously opposed to any move in this direction. First, the vast majority of labor is being paid far above this level. Yet to increase this level would almost certainly mean an across-the-board wage raise for almost all labor in America. Frankly, I believe that such an action could have a disastrous inflationary trend. First, I am forced to ask the question, who is going to pay for this raise? It seems to me and my 3,700 associates of the Forest Farmers Association that the small man must pay a major share of any such compulsory and arbitrary increase. I say arbitrary because such a raise would not be predicated on increased productivity or more efficient work, every eligible laborer would automatically get it. But getting back to who is going to pay it, it seems to have to follow that in the forestry business, timber purchasers could only pay less for timber purchased from us landowners or charge more for their finished products. In actual practice, then, these increases would be passed on to the general public-the small man. Actually, it would result in the laborer also paying for it, since the same factors will affect all operations and industry. Our members feel that every laborer should have a fair wage, but that wage should reflect to a degree his increased efficiency; for an increased wage without increased productivity-particularly on a nationwide basis as these several bills propose-is a false increase with little or no benefit even to the laborer himself. Our association has always been against a forced wage. We do not believe it is in consonance with our American way, where a man theoretically has an opportunity to advance by the merits of his personal efforts. Furthermore, I believe adoption of an increased minimum wage could and would mean added unemployment and labor force reductions-not to mention the small-business men who would be forced out of business. Summing up the feelings of our members, we do not believe that to increase the minimum wage would do anyone any real material good and that it could, and likely would, have serious ill effects to our economy, the laborer, the small-business man and the farmer. Therefore, as president of the Forest Farmers Association, I would like to put our organization and members on record as being vigorously opposed to any increase in the present 75-cent minimum wage as provided in the Fair Labor Standards Act. I appreciate the opportunity to present these viewpoints of the Forest Farmers Association, and also appreciate the committee's courtesy in allowing us to be heard. Thank you. Mr. BAILEY (presiding). Mr. Landrum, do you have any questions? Mr. LANDRUM. No, sir. Mr. BAILEY. Mr. Metcalf? Mr. McCONNELL. No questions. Mr. BAILEY. Mr. Smith? Mr. SMITH. When you say Forest Farmers Association, what kind of timber do you raise? Is it pulpwood or what? Mr. WHITFIELD. All types; pine, hardwoods. Mr. BAILEY. As an ardent conservationist, I am curious to knowand it has little bearing on this-what you are doing in the field of reforestation to keep up the supply of timber. Mr. WHITFIELD. We are planting our nursery stock. Our nurseries are being added to, particularly the pine nurseries throughout our southern region, and reforestation is increasing year by year. I do not have all the statistics right before me right now, but every State in our southern region is increasing its reforestation program. Mr. BAILEY. As to the 3,700 members you referred to, what type of employment is that? What is it? Timber operations or tending the forests? Mr. WHITFIELD. Our Association is an association of both the small and large timber owners, the little fellow with a hundred acres or even less, up to several thousand. Mr. BAILEY. There are the owners of the acreage? Mr. WHITFIELD. That is right. Mr. BAILEY. Then what do you do when you market that? Do you market it in blocks? Does somebody come in and pay for a certain amount of it or a certain number of acres? Mr. WHITFIELD. There are several ways you market it. If you are thinning your timber you sell it to a pulpwood concern, and they go in and mark it and they cut out the marked timber. If you sell to lumber people you agree on a price, either a lump sum or selected, cutting selected trees. Mr. BAILEY. Mr. Frelinghuysen? Mr. FRELINGHUYSEN. I wonder whether your organization is against any increase, or is it against too great an increase in the minimum wage? Mr. WHITFIELD. The present wage rate is above 75 cents now, as far as that goes. The laborer is being paid more than 75 cents an hour. If you increase him arbitrarily, for example, to 90 cents or a dollar, you are going to have to increase the other fellow that you are paying a dollar to. Mr. FRELINGHUYSEN. I do not know whether it is arbitrary or not. Would you be against an increase to 90 cents? Mr. WHITFIELD. Under the present setup, as we see it, any increase whatsoever is going to mean an increase all along the line, an inflationary spiral. Mr. FRELINGHUYSEN. I am wondering how much of a readjustment you had to make when we had the increase in 1950 to 75 cents. Mr. WHITFIELD. How much readjustment? Mr. FRELINGHUYSEN. I am wondering how hard a time you timber operators had in adjusting to that minimum. Mr. WHITFIELD. Well, of course, you can keep on increasing as far as that goes. You can increase it up to $10 an hour and get back to the Arabian night's dream of life. Just merely increasing does not necessarily mean increasing the prosperity of the laborer. Mr. FRELINGHUYSEN. I want to assure you I do not belong to that school. I hope my questions do not lead you to think I do. I am wondering if we could not absorb an increase of 15 cents such as President Eisenhower has proposed, whether that is not comparable to what you have already absorbed in 1950 when we established the 75cent minimum. Mr. WHITFIELD. When you increase that you have to increase the others. So it is really more than a 15-cent increase down the line. Mr. FRELINGHUYSEN. I agree with you. We should go cautiously. But I am wondering whether you would not be able to absorb that 15-cent increase now if you were able to absorb an increase to 75 cents 5 years ago. Mr. WHITFIELD. We will just have to wait and see. Mr. FRELINGHUYSEN. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Mr. BAILEY. Mr. Fjare? Mr. FJARE. No questions. Mr. BAILEY. Thank you very much, Mr. Whitfield, for your pres entation. Chairman BARDEN. Mr. Whitfield, may I ask you just a question or two, please, sir. I want to apologize for having to leave, but I had to meet someone. As I understand it, you represent the group that grows the timber. Mr. WHITFIELD. That is right. Chairman BARDEN. Now the great bulk of this timber that is cut is cut by small sawmills? Mr. WHITFIELD. That is right. Chairman BARDEN. Mr. Whitfield, has it not been your experience that when the cost of handling any agricultural commodity increases close to the farmer he is the most convenient one to take the cut, and that means a cut in the product that he is furnishing? Mr. WHITFIELD. Yes, sir. Chairman BARDEN. So what you fear, as I understand it, is that if the rise is more than the purchaser of the timber or the lumber can pass on immediately you know exactly where the ax is going to drop. Mr. WHITFIELD. On the hide of the little timber fellow. Chairman BARDEN. Knowing about every foot of ground that your people occupy down there, I thought that that would be material for the record, in view of the fact that we do have a great number of those operations, and small operations in that area. Thank you, sir. Mr. WHITFIELD. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Rico. Gentlemen of the committee, this is Governor Muñoz, the Governor of Puerto Rico, and I would like for all of you to know him personally as soon as we get an opportunity. A few days ago, after the testimony here in the committee by the garment workers that had a direct bearing on the Puerto Rican question, and in view of the fact that there was an amendment placed by the other body in the piece of legislation that they passed affecting Puerto Rico, Dr. Fernós, the Commissioner here and the man who represents Puerto Rico in the Congress, was somewhat disturbed over the picture because up until that point they had not had an opportunity to express any views on what the other body had done, and, of course, they did not have any opportunity to express any views on what had just happened here. The Commissioner, Dr. Fernós, contacted the Governor, and the Governor said that, while he had no desire to bring the Puerto Rican question up, since the committee had expressed a desire to stick to the one objective we started out with, that he did feel that many people who had been talked about so much probably should have one spokesman at least to express their point of view. I immediately invited him to come before the committee. It is not my position to open up the question and go further into it. But I thought, as a matter of fair play and as a matter of right and a matter of safety, that if the committee was to be called upon to even deal with the question lightly, that the Governor's point of view should be known. And I was sure the committee would be glad to hear from him. I will say that I have known the Governor for many years. I have never known a man who represented a people more sincerely and worked harder for their interests. He has been a good governor. Puerto Rico has been fortunate. He has been a Godsend to the Puerto Rican people. So it is with pleasure that I introduce not only my friend but a gentleman that I admire greatly, the Governor of Puerto Rico. Governor, we will be glad to hear from you. STAEEMENT OF HON. LUIS MUÑOZ-MARÍN, GOVERNOR OF THE COMMONWEALTH OF PUERTO RICO Governor MUÑOZ. Mr. Chairman, I am very appreciative and very grateful for your generous words about myself and about the work that, with the aid of my other good Puerto Ricans, I am trying to carry out to improve the conditions of living in every way for the people of Puerto Rico. I very much appreciate also your invitation and that of this committee to appear before it on this occasion. I understand, as the chairman said, that the committee is not considering, at the moment, Puerto Rico in regard to minimum wage legislation that is up for its consideration. However, since I have some engagements in Europe and I was probably going to be away for more than a couple of months, I thought it would be a good thing to |