« PreviousContinue »
generally, whether that is in accordance with what they thought they were fighting for.
General HERSHEY. So far as our administration goes, it would be a great deal more simple for us to keep them in camps. But there was pressure with regard to the need for food 2 years ago last fall, and we got them out on the farms. I happened to get some impressions from men who are coming back home, and who do not like to have boys who have deferments and date girls coming in from factories and farms. There is not much difference between whether a fellow gets out of service by one means or the other. I think there is quite a difference in the absolute part of it, but to the soldier who comes back, the thing he objects to is letting that fellow have liberty that he himself does not have.
I certainly am very open-minded on the question. We were going to send some of these people out to China. I thought that the farther we sent them away the less likely that public relations would be involved. But Congress saw fit to put a rider on one of the bills saying that they could not leave the country. It was a rider, but to me it was the expression of the will of Congress, and I did not care what bill it was on. I brought some of them back from South Africa; they had gotten that far toward China. I brought them back because Congress had spoken. If Congress did not want them on the farms I would not hesitate a moment to take them off.
Mr. Case. I do not know whether you read the testimony or not, but the question came up, which I think was compelling in our attitude, was that the people representing the committee dealing with the conscientious objectors would not agree that if those men went out of the country, they would be subject to military direction. We were willing to make a waiver providing that when they went to China or some place to serve in the Medical Corps they would be subject to the direction of the military commander of that theater. We were not objecting to their going over and being engaged in noncombatant activities, where presumably they would be saving life rather than taking it. But when it was understood that they would be free to be under the direction of whatever agency they might be assigned to, the committee just would not go along on it.
(Informal discussion off the record.)
PAYMENT OF TRAVEL EXPENSE OF INDUCTEES Mr. SNYDER. I have two questions. Here is a boy a hundred miles from the place where he is to take an examination. He is called, and he goes over there and is rejected. He comes back, and in 3 or 5 or i months he goes back again and takes an examination. He is not acrepted, and he goes back, and in 2 or 5 months they call him again, and this time he is accepted. Does he pay the expense of all those ravels back and forth?
General HERSHEY. No, sir. When he is delivered for induction, f he is deferred we pay. We pay his way to the induction station thé day he goes over there.
SHORTAGE OF FARM LABOR Mr. SNYDER. You have made a statement about the extreme shortage of farm labor in 1942. I may be wrong, but I think it was shorter in 1944 and 1945 than it was in 1942. What about that?
General HERSHEY. I do not think there is any question that you cannot take four or five or six million people out of the country without making a great difference. We have taken on an average of somewhat over 40 percent of all men between 18 and 37 years of age in the United States, but we have taken only about 23 percent of all the men between 18 and 37 who are on farms. So, from a comparative basis, we have done fairly well, because we have taken 43 percent more from other sources.
I will agree with you that you cannot help but be more short of laborers now on the farms than in 1942. I am not so sure that we are any shorter of help now on the farms than we thought we were in 1942. I do believe that by a year from this summer there will be a very considerable part of the population now in the Army, coming back.
REEMPLOYMENT OF VETERANS
(See p. 55) Mr. Snyder. You say that when a boy comes back it is your job to get him a job?
General HERSHEY. Congress said I was responsible for his getting his old job back, or another job.
Mr. SNYDER. Suppose he got his old job and it was paying him $120 a month, and he said, “I will not work for $120. I can have this old job back, but I am going to get something better.” Then what is the next step?
General HERSHEY. The local board would refer him to the United States Employment Service. If he wants to say, “I don't want this $120 job and I will find myself a new one” he should do it without interference.
Mr. SNYDER. Suppose he cannot get the job.
General HERSHEY. Then the local board is under obligation to refer him to the United States Employment Service. If he comes back and says, “I have been over there and they don't have anything for me," I am under the obligation, I think, to attempt to do something. That is why I have a reemployment committee in the local boards. We have not had enough experience to know how well it will work or what percentage will come back, but when I delegate something to another agency that the Congress holds me responsible for, I have got to keep a little something somewhere in reserve, so that if it does not work out completely as it should I can still have something, because I have to make an accounting to Congress.
Mr. SNYDER. Suppose this boy comes back, having failed to find s job at $180 a month, or what not, and says, “I will not do anything, then what?
General HERSHEY. If he waits over 90 days he will lose his right to take the job.
Mr. Ludlow. Do you know how many veterans have been restored to their jobs?
General HERSHEY. No; I do not. We have done some selective work on it. In the State of Pennsylvania, we have reasonably good figures on it, but it runs quite differently in different places. There have been places where the proportion of people who asked for their jobs back was as low as 10 or 15 percent, and we have had selected groups that ran as high as 50 or 60 percent. I do not believe our
information is too accurate now, for three or four reasons.
One reason is that it is selective in the first place. In the second place, the men who have come back, up to date, are not typical soldiers. They are people who have been discharged for some particular reason, and they are not the run-of-the-mine we will have when demobilization starts Whether or not it will make much difference, I do not know. I merely hesitate to believe all information I get.
Mr. RABAUT. They are not typical of the ones that you call discharged soldiers ?
General HERSHEY. No. Over half of them have been let out on certificates of disability. Some are let out for inaptitude, and some for other reasons.
Mr. RABAUT. You said they were not typical soldiers. General HERSHEY. I did not mean it in that sense. Mr. Ludlow. Suppose a boy comes back physically disqualified as the result of the war and is not able to hold his old job.
General HERSHEY. Then we have got to find him something else. One of the "outs” was that he had to be able to hold his job, or he could not legally demand it. But I think the large companies, so far, have tried and do try pretty hard to place them. Whether that will survive the onslaught of a lot of people I do not know, but up to date there has been a very good attitude toward the veteran.
Mr. Ludlow. Suppose a boy comes back with a dishonorable discharge; do you have an obligation there as well?
General HERSHEY. No. I do not have an obligation as Director of Selective Service. I have not introduced into the picture the fact that I am on the board of the United States Employment Service. The difference is that under section 8 the restoration to a job goes only to a man who has satisfactorily completed his service. The Ğ. I. bill applies to everyone who does not have a dishonorable discharge.
(See p. 60) Mr. WIGGLESWORTH. You say there are 8,000 of these conscientious objectors?
General HERSHEY. Approximately.
Mr. WIGGLESWORTH. As far as their cost to the Federal Government is concerned, is that largely or wholly taken care of by outside organizations? General HERSHEY. We are asking for $1,325,000 total. Mr. WIGGLESWORTH. That is the cost to Uncle Sam?
General HERSHEY. Yes. The offset of whatever they earn, which goes eventually into the Treasury, would be an offset to that expense.
Mr. WIGGLESWORTH. You say that a thousand of them are on iarms. They are all doing the same kind of work, are they not?
General HERSHEY. Yes. There are 1,994 in mental hospitals acting as attendants; 862 on farms; 204 that are guinea pigs in consection with malaria, lice, heat, testing out clothing for the Army, and that sort of thing. We have 163 on sanitary projects. The Department of Commerce has 112 doing some work on aircraft of one kind or another. We have 83 doing miscellaneous things. There are 3,418 who are detached-service people. In the Department of
Agriculture camps we have 3,095; in Department of Interior camps, 1,049; and we have a total of 351 in so-called Government camps, 3 in number.
Mr. WIGGLESWORTH. What pay, if any, do they receive? General HERSHEY. None of them get any pay. We allow the fellow who works on a farm $15 a month for personal expenses.
Mr. WIGGLESWORTH. He does not get the prevailing wage? General HERSHEY. It is paid, but it goes into the Federal Treasury, all but this minimum that he is allowed for expenses plus certain expenses for medical or dental care, hospitalization, and insurance. The man in the camp gets $5 per month. The man in the church camp, however, is wholly supported, except for supervision, by religious bodies.
INCREASE FOR NATIONAL HEADQUARTERS
Mr. WIGGLESWORTH. Looking hurriedly at these projects, I note project 1, national headquarters. Although there is a reduction in your personnel, you have an increase of $144,000 in your other obligations. What is the explanation of that?
Colonel MITCHELL. There is an increase, sir, of $27,330 under “Communication service.”
Mr. WiGGLESWORTH. Why should that be increased?
Colonel MITCHELL. It is attributable entirely to the low ebb of activity during the first 6 months of the current fiscal year. Our estimate for next fiscal year is just about the average of our experience from the beginning.
PRINTING AND BINDING
Mr. WiggleSWORTH. There is an increase in printing and binding? Colonel MITCHELL. Yes; $68,000 under “Printing and binding, which may be attributed entirely to the fact that we printed certain forms last year which did not need to be reproduced during the current year, but will have to be reproduced next year.
SUPPLIES AND MATERIALS
Mr. WiGGLESWORTH. You also have an increase for supplies and materials. Will you explain that?
Colonel MITCHELL. That is due entirely to the purchase of envelopes; and the same thing holds true with respect to envelopes that holds true with respect to printed matter. There was a surplus purchased last year. Cur obligations this year will be relatively low.
Mr. WIGGLESWORTH. Project No. 2, State headquarters. That is a decrease all along the line?
Colonel MITCHELL. Yes, sir.
Mr. WIGGLESWORTH. Project No. 4, appeal boards. There is an increase there of $61,900, although your personnel in terms of positions seems to be the same. What is the explanation of that?
Colonel MITCHELL. There has been a steady decrease in the work loads and in the personnel in the appeal boards. We feel, however, that in the future each man that is up for consideration-his employer and his family are going to put up a greater battle for his cotninued deferment, and we anticipate a very substantial increase in the volume of appeals.
Mr. WIGGLESWORTH. Page 19 of the justification shows 528 positions.
Colonel MITCHELL. That is due to the fact that at the beginning of the current fiscal year we had that many positions. That had gone down, but now we anticipate going back up. It gives us a monetary increase of $61,900 next year over the current year.
Mr. WIGGLESWORTH. Project 5, medical advisory board. That is just the same as this year.
Project 6, veterans' personnel. You have an increase both in the personnel and the other obligations. I am not clear just what that project is.
General HERSHEY. That is the reemployment.
Mr. WIGGLESWORTH. There, again, the personnel is apparently the same. I suppose that is explained in the same way? Colonel MITCHELL. Yes, sir.
General HERHSEY. In the first half of this fiscal year we reoriented ourselves to be ready for the last half of the fiscal year, but the reduplication of work in December made another reorientation necessary.
Mr. WIGGLESWORTH. The increase in travel-what is that? Colonel MITCHELL. It is due entirely to a step-up in the general activities. I might state that not until the 1st of July of this year did we consider earmarking personal services or travel in National and State headquarters.
CAMP OPERATIONS Mr. WiGGLESWORTH. Project 7, camp operations. There is no change in personnel, but there is an increase of $ 101,000 in other obligations. That seems to be travel and other contractual services.
Colonel MITCHELL. Yes, sir. There is an increase of $24,000 under ravel, which may be attributed to the closing of three camps here in the East and moving men to camps located in the West. It appears that they are running out of work projects in the three eastern camps.
Informal discussion off the record.)
RESEARCH AND STATISTICS
Mr. WiggLESWORTH. Project 8, research and statistics. That is maging down quite a little. Is that work still vital?
General HERSHEY. I believe so. We are still bound to report each month where the deferments are and all that sort of thing. It involves even in rather slack times tabulating some 700,000 different hanges in registrants during each month. Sometimes it runs well ever 2,000,000 changes in the classification actions during the month.