Of this increase, $350,000 is to provide for the shift of 43 positions from the salaries and expenses part of the program, $1,200 is for the postage rate increase and $2,200 is for the extra day of pay in 1960.

In 1959, the Congress made a separate direct appropriation for this part of the program for which funds had been requested in the "Salaries and expenses" appropriation. The purpose of the direct appropriation as stated in the House committee report was not to place “employees who are policing the program in the position of being dependent, upon fees paid by those policed, for their salaries." By making this transfer in the estimates, all compliance activities will be paid by direct appropriation and carry out fully the intent of the Congress.

There is a corresponding decrease in positions and funds requested for 1960 in the salaries and expenses, Mexican farm labor program request so that in the aggregate there is no increase in the number of positions in 1960.

My statement on the salaries and expenses, Mexican farm labor program, covers the activities of the whole program.

STATEMENT ON THE 1960 APPROPRIATION REQUEST FOR THE MEXICAN FARM LABOR

PROGRAM

Mr. Chairman, for the Mexican farm labor program we are asking for the same number of positions as we had in 1959.

However, we are asking for an increase in the compliance activities part of the program and a corresponding decrease in the salaries and expenses part. The reason for this shift is because in 1959, the Congress made a separate direct appropriation for compliance activities so as not to place "employees who are policing the program in the position of being dependent, upon fees pad by those policed, for their salaries."

The compliance function is carried out by a group of field employees called foreign labor service representatives. These employees all do two general kinds of work. They investigate complaints of workers and they secure adherence to the terms of the individual work contract, the international agreement with Mexico and with Public Law 78. Those are compliance functions. The same individuals also do work which is classified as facilitating the supplying of workers. This work consists of such things as (1) visiting employers and workers at the place of employment to explain and interpret the terms of the international agreement with Mexico and the work contract; (2) inspecting housing and feeding facilities for workers; and (3) working with local community leaders and chambers of commerce to establish community acceptance of the program and to set up recreational, educational and church facilities for the workers.

Because only a part of their work could be classified as compliance work, the cost of the foreign labor service representatives was divided between two budget activities, one of which was the compliance activity. When the Congress made an appropriation from the general funds of the Treasury only for that part of the cost which had been requested in the compliance activity, it left the balance of the costs for these individuals to be paid by transfer from the farm labor supply revolving fund. To carry out fully the intent of the Congress we are therefore requesting that all employees performing compliance activities be transferred to that appropriation.

For the "Salaries and expenses" appropriation we are requesting $1,336,700. This is a decrease of 43 positions and $350,000 from the amount required for fiscal year 1959 because of the shift of these costs to the compliance activities appropriation, partially offset by the mandatory increases of $2,700 for postage rate change and $4,000 for extra day of work in 1960.

The appropriation language provides for reimbursement of the full amount for the salaries and expenses part of the program from the farm labor supply revolving fund. This fund is maintained by fees paid by employers for contracting Mexican workers. Under the law employers are required to reimburse the United States for expenses incurred in an amount not to exceed $15 per worker. From August 1, 1948 to January 14, 1959 the fee for contracting a worker was $15 and for recontracting a worker it was $7.50. As you know the law does not contemplate the building up of this fund beyond what is needed for the expenses of bringing the Mexican workers to this country and returning them to Mexico. The balance in the fund on December 31, 1958, was adequate for this purpose but was continuing to grow. Therefore, effective January 15, 1959, the fee for contracting a worker was reduced to $12 and the fee for recontracting a worker was cut to $6.

This program is carried out under Public Law 78 as implemented by an agreement with Mexico. Foreign workers are required to supplement the supply of domestic workers during peak agricultural production periods. These workers are needed because the number of domestic agricultural workers has been decreasing over a period of years due to the trend of migration from rural to urban areas.

When the need for foreign workers is determined, requests for workers are transmitted to three migratory stations in Mexico. The workers are recruited by the Mexican Government and are instructed to report to the migratory stations where they are examined for physical condition, ability to perform farm work, and admissability under the immigration laws. The workers selected arethen transported to the appropriate reception center for the area in which they are to work. At the reception centers, which are in the United States, these workers are screened by he Public Health Service and the Immigration and Naturalization Service before being contracted to employers. During the past year the Public Health Service started giving serology tests to all Mexican workers at the reception centers before the beginning of their employment in the United States. From the time workers are accepted at the migratory stations to the time they are contracted to employers and after their return to the reception center by the employer after completion of the work contract, Mexican workers are provided transportation and medical care by the Department. However, the costs for these services are paid from the revolving fund.

We expect that the number of Mexican workers contracted in 1959 will about equal the number for 1958. With more normal production we expect that American employers will need 400,000 Mexican workers in fiscal year 1960. Foreign workers are brought in only when domestic workers are not available where and when needed. If domestic workers become available they are given jobs in preference to foreign workers.

The Department made a vigorous effort to reduce the use of Mexican labor in 1958 because of the rise in domestic unemployment. From January to May 1958, 25,000 fewer Mexicans were contracted than in the same 1957 period. However, by the end of the calendar year, because of the all-time record production in agriculture, the number of Mexicans contracted for agricultural work reached 432,857 for calendar year 1958 as compared to 436,049 in 1957. Mexican workers were employed in only 24 States in 1958 as compared to the 28 States where they were employed in the year before. Also through vigorous recruitment efforts we were able to make 9,282,300 placements of domestic workers in agriculture in 1958, which was in increase of 713,000 from 1957.

This past year has been an extremely active one. For example, some intensive work was carried on in the field of wages during the calendar year. The Bureau made 43 earning surveys in 18 crops in 17 areas involving 257 associations and 345 individuals. A new and more accurate formula for determining prevailing wages was introduced during the year. Field surveys, in which this formula was used, indicated that foreign workers employed at piece rates were earning less per hour than the hourly rate of pay for domestic agricultural workers in the area. Therefore, the Department has adopted wage policies which assure the Mexican workers the opportunity to earn at piece rates, at least as much as the rate he would receive by the hour. This policy is designed to avoid adverse effect on domestic wage rates. A great deal of work has been carried on with committees of employers to promote self-policing with respect to wage policies.

A good start has been made in the gathering of accurate information on the earnings of agricultural workers but it is a vast area about which no segment of Government is well informed. We expect to continue our efforts in this field so that we may have the facts on which to base decisions and programs. We are working with employers to get improvements in the quality of food served Mexican workers during their employment in the United States. We have prepared instructions for food preparation and have issued standard menus to employers and feeders of Mexican workers. In addition, our field staff has been inspecting feeding establishments to see that food is handled properly, is wholesome, and is served under sanitary conditions. Continued emphasis will be placed on this aspect of the program in 1960 in an attempt to make all establishments meet the minimum standards prescribed.

We have had some success with our efforts to get employer associations to do self-policing with reference to proper feeding, housing, and the payment of prevailing wage rates. We will continue these efforts during the coming year.

41001-59- -6

PROGRAM ADMINISTRATION

Mr. GOODWIN. The increase represents $3,900 for higher postage and $6,200 for the extra workday in 1960.

Senator HILL. The only increase you have had is for this extra day and for the extra postage?

Mr. GOODWIN. That is right, except that we are requesting an important transfer of $350,000. We are proposing to transfer $350,000, the cost of 43 field positions now carried in the "Salaries and expenses" appropriation for the Mexican farm labor program, to the compliance activities appropriation in 1960.

Until this year, 1959, the entire cost of administering the Mexican farm labor program had been financed by direct appropriation from the general funds of the Treasury. In 1959, however, the Congress approved a separate direct appropriation to finance the compliance activities of the program and directed that all other costs of salaries and expenses be derived by a transfer from the farm labor supply revolving fund.

The source of that fund is charges levied on individual employers for contracting Mexican workers.

HOUSE REPORT

The House Appropriations Committee in reporting out the direct appropriation for compliance activities stated that it was done so as not to place

employees who are policing the program in the position of being dependent upon fees paid by those policed for their salaries,

They felt that the salaries of the persons who are really policing this program should not be dependent on those who are being policed. Psychologically it is not good. It is to carry out this expressed intent of the Congress that the transfer of charges for the 43 field positions from one appropriation to the other is recommended to this committee.

The compliance function is carried on by the farm labor service representatives. These employees all do two general kinds of work. They investigate complaints and secure adherence to the terms of the individual worker contract, the international agreement with Mexico, and with Public Law 78. Those are compliance functions. The same individuals also do work to facilitate the supplying of workers needed. Since only part of their work could be classified as compliance work the cost was formerly divided between two activities of a single budgeted program, one of which was the compliance activity. We are now proposing that all employees doing compliance work be charged to the "Compliance activity" appropriation.

BASIS OF BUDGET

The budget request was based on contracting about 400,000 Mexican nationals during 1960. It now looks as though more than 440,000 will be contracted during 1959.

We estimate that with normal growing conditions about the same number of Mexican nationals will be needed in 1960 as in 1959, in other words, about 440,000.

According to our reports there will be an increase in cotton acreage and no significant decreases in any other part of the farm economy.

With this high workload, it will be difficult for us to get through on this amount, but we will do our very best to do so.

Senator HILL. I may say that Secretary Mitchell in his statement this morning went into this matter in some depth, as you have, Mr. Goodwin. Senator Byrd, do you have any questions on this item?

Senator BYRD. I believe not at this time.

Senator HILL. Thank you very much. And we appreciate this, sir. Senator BYRD. Mr. Chairman, did we include all Mr. Goodwin's statements?

Senator HILL. They will all appear in full in the record.

Mr. GOODWIN. As a matter of fact, we have introduced for the record, if the committee approves, statements that are more complete than the summaries I gave you.

Senator HILL. We have your statements in full in the record.

INTRODUCTION OF NEW STAFF MEMBERS

Mr. GOODWIN. Mr. Chairman, may I introduce two new members of my staff, since we last appeared before you.

One is Mr. Curtis, our Deputy Director, who took Mr. Keenan's place.

And Mr. Norwood, who is Assistant Director in charge of the Employment Service.

Senator HILL. Good. We are happy to have you here, gentlemen. Mr. GOODWIN. He was formerly State director from Florida, Mr. Chairman.

Senator HILL. It is nice to have you.

Thank you, gentlemen, very, very much.

Mr. GOODWIN. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.

Senator HILL. The committee will stand in recess now until 2 o'clock this afternoon.

(Thereupon, at 11:55 a. m., the subcommittee was recessed, to reconvene at 2 p. m., same day.)

AFTERNOON SESSION (2 P. M., MONDAY, APRIL 27, 1959)

The subcommittee reconvened at 2 p.m., upon the expiration of the

recess.

Senator HILL. The committee will kindly come to order.

We have with us the Bureau of Employees Compensation, Mr. McCauley.

We shall be delighted to have you proceed, sir.

BUREAU OF EMPLOYEES COMPENSATION

STATEMENT OF WILLIAM MCCAULEY, DIRECTOR, ACCOMPANIED BY LEROY T. MINOR, ADMINISTRATIVE OFFICER; AND THEODORE SCHWARTZ, CHAIRMAN, EMPLOYEES COMPENSATION APPEALS BOARD

APPROPRIATION ESTIMATE

"SALARIES AND EXPENSES

"For necessary administrative expenses and not to exceed [$99,000] $102,000 for the Employees' Compensation Appeals Board, [$2,810,600 $3,080,000, together with not to exceed [$47,400] $51,700 to be derived from the fund created by section 44 of the Longshoremen's and Harbor Workers' Compensation Act, as amended (33 U.S.C.906)."