Page images
PDF
EPUB

TO REGULATE THE TEXTILE INDUSTRY

WEDNESDAY, MAY 12, 1937

HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES,
COMMITTEE ON LABOR,
Washington, D. C.

The subcommittee met in the caucus room, Old House Office Building, at 10 a. m., Hon. Kent E. Keller (chairman) presiding.

Present: Representatives Keller (chairman), Ramspeck, Gildea, Schneider, Welch, Smith, and Wood.

Mr. KELLER. The committee will please be in order.

Last night there was no work done on the bill itself for the simple reason that during the day there was no special discussion of the provisions of the bill. That, however, as I understand, will be proceeded with today, and we will be ready to announce again tomorrow morning concerning the bill itself.

I wish to call your attention to the fact, gentlemen, that we have here an unrevised print of Monday's hearings, and we hope to have an unrevised print of yesterday's testimony and today's, by tomorrow morning. In other words, we are doing our level best to run a daily newspaper here, to keep up with ourselves, so that we can see what we have done and see what the other fellow has done. In other words, we are trying to keep our record up to date. We expect to carry on that way during the rest of the hearings.

I understand, although I was not on the floor at the time, that the chairman of the committee asked for permission for this subcommittee to hold these hearings during the sessions of the House. I understand that 3 days were given to us. Therefore, unless some other announcement is made contrary to it, we will hold our sessions until about 12:15 p. m. and today go over to the floor and be ready to vote on the C. C. C. bill and reconvene here at 2 o'clock.

Mr. Gorman, are you now ready to continue your testimony before the committee?

STATEMENT OF FRANCIS J. GORMAN-Resumed

Mr. GORMAN. Mr. Chairman, Mr. Schneider yesterday asked for comparative wage rates in the textile industry of Canada and the United States. I have a statement here that I would like to put in the record concerning that question. That statement shows the average weekly earnings in selected divisions of the textile industry in the United States and Canada for 1934. That was the last study that was made by the Royal Commission of Canada.

In Canada, in cotton, the average weekly earnings were $14.18; in the United States they were $12.59.

101

In wool, in Canada, $14.79; and in the United States $16.61. In silk, in Canada, $12.92; and in the United States $16.61. For rayon, in Canada, $16.49; and in the United States $19.42. The rayon wage was for 1935. That is rayon yarn making, synthetic yarns.

The source for the Canadian wage figures is the Royal Commission on the Textile Industry, published February 2, 1937, in Ottawa, Ontario.

The source for the United States figures is the United States Bureau of Labor Statistics.

Mr. KELLER. I did not get the dates to which those figures apply. Mr. GORMAN. The study was for 1934, but it was made public this year on February 2, by the royal commission on the textile industry. Mr. KELLER. It was made public in 1937?

Mr. GORMAN. It was made public this year. But the figures relate to the year 1934. I have a more comprehensive statement about the Canadian situation, if the committee wants it.

Mr. KELLER. Did you give your sources?

Mr. GORMAN. Yes.

Mr. KELLER. You may insert that table in the record.

(The table referred to is as follows:)

Average weekly earnings in selected divisions of the textile industry in the United States and Canada, 1934

[blocks in formation]

Source for the Canadian wage figures: Royal Commission on the Textile Industry, published Feb. 2, 1937, in Ottawa, Ontario. Source for United States figures: U. S. Bureau of Labor Statistics.

Mr. GORMAN. I am going to carry on, Mr. Chairman, where we left off yesterday, explaining the labor conditions in the textile industry.

LABOR CONDITIONS IN THE TEXTILE INDUSTRY

It is generally accepted now, I believe by New Deal economists and elected public representatives, that the basic cause of our recurring depressions is the lack of purchasing power among the masses of the population. Corporation profits soar, prices climb rapidly, and suddenly the industrial and economic world discovers that the building has been erected on a bed of sand. They have produced millions upon millions of dollars' worth of capital goods and commodities, and there is nobody with enough money to buy them. Well, in textiles we have this general economic truism carried to its extreme. We literally have thousands of men and women producing sheets, shirts, stockings, and dress materials, without, in turn, enough money with which to purchase these everyday necessities. There is no exaggeration for dramatic effect. It is the simple truth. An examination of the wage structure of the textile industry will bear me out.

In 1935 the average weekly wage for all textiles was $15.77, according to figures from the Bureau of Labor Statistics. In 1936 this had risen to the exalted sum of $16.12, an increase of 2 percent. Wage changes for the major divisions of textiles from 1935 to 1936 were as follows:

[blocks in formation]

Weekly earnings, however, do not complete the tale of mass starvation levels in textiles. The annual earnings are what count, and here is the picture from the Government itself of what happened over a period of years to the annual earnings of textile workers.

This is a table showing the average annual earnings for selected textiles as compared with other selected industries, from the year 1919 until 1936.

It shows, for example, that in 1919 the average annual earnings for cotton were $798; for woolens and worsteds, $1,008; for silk and rayon, $854; and for all manufacturing, $1,162.

We have the tabulation from 1919 to 1936. In 1936 it shows average annual earnings for cotton of $717; for woolen and worsteds, $929; for silks and rayons, $790; and for all manufacturing, excluding textiles, of $1,183.

I am not going to read the other figures intermediate between 1919 and 1936, but will submit the table.

(The table referred to is as follows:)

Average annual earnings for selected textiles as compared with other selected industries

[blocks in formation]

1 The 1936 figures are based on 52 full weeks of work and are therefore high. The preceding figures, computed by the committee, were arrived at on a different basis and are more representative of the actual situation with respect to annual earnings in textiles and the other industries. The textile industry never does average 52 full working weeks per year; 40 weeks would, in our opinion, constitute a good full-time working year for the average textile worker.

Source: Cabinet Committee on Cotton Textile Industry, revised report.

Mr. GORMAN. It is clear, I think, from even this superficial examination of the wages of textile workers that not one branch of the industry herein listed affords its workers a decent living wage. Unfortunately we do not have the 1937 wage figures, but they show increases over 1936 levels.

There has been an increase in all divisions of textiles within the last 4 months, which brings that up somewhat-that last figure.

However, we know that even the meager increases given the textile workers thus far will not be sustained unless a wage floor is set up, and the manufacturers are bound by law not to go below that floor.

If we are agreed that the primary cause of depressions is the drastic decline in mass purchasing power, it stands to reason that when a group of over 1,000,000 workers with dependents running somewhere in the three millions, are placed at a sub-subsistence level, the textile industry in particular and the industrial world in general is bound to suffer.

We have had experience over a long period of time, and we assure you that we are not merely alarmists. We know from life in the textile industry that this industry will continue to be a chaotic, starvation industry unless mandatory regulation is put into effect.

The coal industry admittedly needed the Guffey Coal Act. The textile industry needs an effective and stringent National Textile Act fully as much as coal needed the Guffey Act.

HOURS

A survey of the hours' structure of the textile industry is conclusive evidence that the industry needs a 35-hour week. We have for 4 years maintained, and still maintain, that the 40-hour workweek is too long for textiles. If we are going to the trouble of enacting a law to protect the workers, manufacturers, and consumers in textiles, we should see to it that the provisions are the best possible ones in the light of the existing circumstances and actual needs of those connected with the industry.

True, for purposes of organization and quick contracts the textile workers' organizing committee has agreed to the 40-hour week in some cases, but these contracts are only for 1 year's duration. The 40-hour workweek is certainly not our objective.

Actually, though the workers have worked as many as 50 and 60 hours per week, each principal division of the industry only managed to average slightly over 35 hours per week over a 4-year period from 1933 to 1936 inclusive. The average workweek for the three principal divisions for this 4-year period were: Cotton, 35.1; woolen and worsted, 37.1; and silks and rayons, 35.4.

The reduction and regularizing of the working week will serve as a production stabilizer. We know it will also stabilize employment somewhat if the limitation is no higher than 35 hours. This will act to spread the work over a longer period of time and to more people. Reference again to the pitiful annual earnings of textile workers is enough to remind us that the seasonality of the industry is a drastic thing to the workers attached to it.

The Federal Trade Commission in its various studies of the financial structure of the textile industry from 1933 to date has a section dealing with hypothetical price increases necessary to cover certain percentage reductions in the workweek. For a 12.5-percent reduction (from 40 to 35, for instance) the highest percentage price increase necessary to maintain profits at the same level is only 4.02 percent for one branch only. The other branches are lower.

The Bureau of Labor Statistics reports a 16.9 percent increase in the price of cotton goods from February 1936 to February 1937, a 12.4-percent increase in the price of woolens and worsteds and a 6.6percent increase in silks and rayons. The Daily News Record reports a 4.8-percent increase from May 7, 1936, to May 7, 1937, in 150 denier, 20-40 Fil. rayon yarn and a 10.5-percent increase in 150 denier, 60 Fil. rayon yarn. In other words, prices have advanced sufficiently within the past 12 months to permit an even greater reduction, without loss to the industry, than the 12.5 percent if such were necessary.

STRETCH-OUT

We realize that the stretch-out is a difficult subject for discussion. It is, at the same time, one of the most crucial questions in textiles. There are many factors involved in estimating the proper work-load per worker and it is too complicated for me to go into in any detail here today. A brief explanation of what the "stretch-out" is will throw more light on the necessity for studying work assignments scientifically and regularizing and limiting maximum work loads.

"Stretch-out" was a term applied by a southern cotton-mill worker to an excessive work assignment. He turned to his companions coming out of the mill one day and said: "I feel stretched out from here to here."

Stretch-out, then, means excessive work load or work assignment. All changes in work assignment do not constitute stretch-out. On the other hand, changes in cloth constructions and no attendant change in the work load might easily constitute a stretch-out. It is a phase of the industry which must have exhaustive and patient study, and the stretch-out is an evil that must be eliminated from the scene entirely. There are many different theories on how work assignments can be regulated and limited. Some of these theories have been tried out in the mills, and some of them worked in one place but not in another, and some of them didn't work at all.

Workers tell us, however, that minimum-wage regulation is likely not to mean much more than the paper it is printed on unless there is a provision attending it that limits the work assignment, or provides for the regulation of the work-load. We know this is truethose of us who have worked in the mills-and others familiar with the industry had a chance to see the validity of this statement during the lifetime of the N. R. A. Hundreds of textile manufacturers outdistanced the minimum-wage provisions under the N. R. A. codes by doubling or trippling work assignment.

Some people give up in despair right to begin with and say "There are too many variable factors involved to arrive at a uniform method for controlling work-load." Workers say this is not true. They say that there aren't enough variables in mill management and equipment the world over to prevent us from arriving at a standard test for proper work assignment, providing we go at the business of regulating it scientifically. This is correct. We feel confident that the Commission with the aid of competent textile engineers can arrive at a set of norms. It is our belief, therefore, that the National Textile Act should specifically provide for the study and regulation of work assignment.

« PreviousContinue »