Due to delays in approval and funding, local agencies are not able to control the timing of their respective training programs. Agencies administering local programs are most often not able to develop a program to suit the needs of individual trainees, with a proper mix of basic education, vocational training, and supportive services required to make the individual job-ready.

For a more effective program, I think there should be a unification of manpower training programs at the local level, nd probably at the State level also, under one prime sponsor or agency, to be responsible for its administration.

At the local level, latitude should be given this prime sponsor or agency to devise a complete training program comprised of both basic education nd vocational training and supportive services to meet the needs of individual applicants.

Latitude needs to be given to the local sponsor to control the timing of the various programs to permit dovetailing the segments of training, so that the trainee can start and go right on through to completion, until he has obtained job-ready status.

As the above figures show, total funds being allocated are entirely inadequate to meet the training needs of disadvantaged in the area. Allocation of funds should be increased to meet this need.

In those occupations in which hand tools are required, such as automobile mechanics, funds should be allocated to buy the trainee an adequate set of tools when he is job-ready, since most disadvantaged individuals are not able to procure such tools without assistance, and therefore frequently have difficulty finding work.

of

To sum it up, a more effective program would result under a unified prime sponsor or agency, with the responsibility and authority to devise specific programs to meet the needs of individuals or group individuals, including the proper mix of various types of training programs and the ability to time such programs so that training may be carried through without delays or interruption.

I would like to add that fully 50 percent of all TEC resources in Corpus Christi are presently being utilized on behalf of the disadvantaged in such services as interviewing, testing, counseling, job development, and placement. Furthermore, for the last several years, in the manpower-training programs TEC administers, at least 95 percent of all applicants served have been disadvantaged, with the preponderance of them being minority group applicants. That is the conclusion of my statement.

Senator NELSON. You gave us some statistics on unemployment. Can you give the committee a breakdown? What is the percentage of unemployment among the Mexican-Americans in this community, for example.

Mr. HAWKINS. We do not have any such breakdown. Our figures are combined for all races, creed, ethnic groups.

Senator NELSON. How are you going to manage a program that aims at solving problems of various groups if you don't accumulate the statistics that tell you what percentage of unemployment among them is?

Mr. HAWKINS. We plan our programs primarily based on the disadvantaged status without reference to individual racial composition. The criteria is with regard to economic status, handicapped status, overage, younger workers, and minority workers.

Of course, our individual records, when we are considering individual trainees, we do have the race designated on the individual application.

Senator NELSON. Do you have the information by geographic area? Mr. HAWKINS. Our unemployment is figured, first of all, for the standard statistical metropolitan area, which is San Patricio and Nueces Counties. Then once or twice a year we calculate unemployment for the other outlying counties.

Senator NELSON. Do you have any statistics on underemployment, for example?

Mr. HAWKINS. Yes, the best figure I have on underemployment, which is the best estimate we can come up with, is the 11,000 in the 12-county area.

Senator NELSON. That is out of a population-employment population of how many?

Mr. HAWKINS. I don't know that I could give you the employable population, but the employed population of our 12 counties is 132,250. Senator YARBOROUGH. I think, Mr. Hawkins, that the information that you have given us is very helpful in the percentages of unemployment. The information you have given us about the Federal funding system which we think is deficient, too. It is on an annual basis and the fiscal year, as you know, starts the first day of July and runs to the 30th of the succeeding June and, due to the lateness of appropriations, you often don't know how much money you are going to have to run for the next year.

Of those you trained, what percentage found jobs?

Mr. HAWKINS. Of those given vocational training, different groups had different variations of success, but it ranged between 50 and 95 percent.

Senator YARBOROUGH. Those that took it, the number who found jobs was 50 to 95 percent, depending on the trade?

Mr. HAWKINS. Yes, sir.

Senator YARBOROUGH. In giving this training, did you first search out where there where jobs open, whether there was a shortage of trained personnel?

Mr. HAWKINS. We made a training needs survey for all training given. A training needs survey is made of local employers. We have to substantiate the fact that there is a good likelihood that those being trained can find suitable employment.

Senator YARBOROUGH. In this area?

Mr. HAWKINS. Yes, sir; before we undertake a program.

Senator YARBOROUGH. Do you give any consideration to the job opportunities in, say, Dallas when you are in Corpus Christi?

Mr. HAWKINS. We had one experience locally in which we ran a training program for the Houston-Beaumont area. But, in that instance we did not plan a program until we had a certification from that area that they could utilize these particular people.

Senator YARBOROUGH. Do you coordinate in the State to see where the jobs are and train people where they live? Is that carried on? Mr. HAWKINS. Yes. I would like to comment on one project. That was, I think, one of the most completely thought out and well planned projects we have ever had. The Texas Employment Commission, the department of labor, the Texas eductional agencies, and others, actually set up a training program in the valley, in

Harlingen, I believe, McAllen, and possibly over at one or two other points. The members of some 900 families were screened by the TEC, and were further examined and interviewed and accepted by Ling-Temco-Vought's own personnel.

They sent their own supervisory personnel down to conduct the training and everything was well thought out. They were given onthe-job training there in the valley for, I believe, 5 or 6 weeks following which time they moved to Grand Prairie near Dallas in groups on transportation arranged through TEC and they were met in Dallas by personnel from our organization who gave assistance in finding housing and getting them and their children located with respect to schools. and the results have been mostly satisfactory.

I think the last figure I heard was the percentage rate on that group of people was around 85 or 90 percent still up there working.

We have heard reports that, according to Ling-Temco-Vought calculations, many of them have already, through taxes, repaid the cost to the Government of that training. That is what we call a labor mobility project and we consider it one of the finest examples of such a program ever conducted.

Senator YARBOROUGH. How many were trained in that project? Mr. HAWKINS. I think the figure was in the neighborhood of 900 individuals.

Senator YARBOROUGH. 900 and 85 percent are still on the job? Mr. HAWKINS. Yes.

Senator YARBOROUGH. Do you know what percentage were Mexican-American?

Mr. HAWKINS. I think practically all of them. They are doing real well. Some have already been promoted to supervisory positions. Many have been awarded raises to higher levels and the company considers it a most successful operation.

Senator YARBOROUGH. You say they have paid back enough in taxes to pay for the whole training program?

Mr. HAWKINS. That is a report I heard.

Senator NELSON. Any questions from the staff?

Our next witness is Mr. Paul Montemayor of the United Steelworkers of America.

The committee is pleased to have you here before us. Do you have a prepared statement?

Mr. MONTEMAYOR. I have one, Senator.

Senator NELSON. Present your statement as you desire. Everything will be printed in full in the record.

STATEMENT OF APOLONEO MONTEMAYOR, STAFF REPRESENTATIVE, UNITED STEELWORKERS OF AMERICA

Mr. MONTEMAYOR. Thank you.

I would like to present to the committee some data and analyses in regard to the conditions of employment, underemployment and unemployment. These statistics are the latest available to us dealing with five Western States: Texas, New Mexico, Arizona, California, and Colorado. I am not going to read it. I will refer to some of these statistics in it. I have some more, so I might as well give that to you.

Also, Mr. Chairman, in talking about manpower development and training the unskilled, I want to present for the record a contract with

the United Steelworkers of America. It is one of the very few contracts in this Nation that a bilingual-along with this contract, we have the booklet that refers to the one apprenticeship program under the criteria laid down by the National Apprentice Program Committee and also some information regarding when we first talked, in 1957, about the problems of the unskilled in this particular plant and a series of letters and agreements that led to what we now have.

I want to present them to you because we feel that we have a method by which underemployed are people without the education can become journeymen, useful in the community, improve their earning capacity.

Mr. Chairman, I am suffering from a tremendous cold and at times I have a little difficulty talking.

I asked one of the local union people involved in the training program that I hoped to speak with. I would like to request if I could have him join me here and help me present some of the discussion here. Senator NELSON. Certainly.

Mr. MONTEMAYOR. His name is Pedro R. Resendez.

Senator NELSON. The committee is pleased to have you here. You may go ahead and present your statistics in whatever fashion you desire.

Mr. MONTEMAYOR. Last, but not least, we want to talk about service employment, how we feel about the services that TEC has offered here and also a program of recruitment that we were involved in in placing people in industrial jobs in the city of Dallas.

For the record, I have several copies of each of these items that we are going to offer.

Senator YARBOROUGH. Before we go further, seeing this fine statement, I think you have been holding out on me, Paul, all these years. I have known you as Paul Montemayor. I am advised that the Spanish for Paul is Pablo. I see from your statement that your name is Apoloneo which, I am told, means Apollo.

Mr. MONTEMAYOR. Yes, sir; my name is Apoloneo. Everybody calls me Paul because this is an Anglo-guided society. However, you ought to see when they try to pronounce my name.

Senator, the report I have here of several pages deals with some statistics in the Southwest. But, as you well know, there is little available current employment and unemployment statistics for the Spanish-speaking American. This is one of the many gaps which exist in information on this group of citizens. The Department of Labor, which monthly publishes a variety of labor market studies, has persisted in presenting all data on a white, nonwhite basis, making it impossible to assess the employment picture for the Spanishspeaking American on a timely basis. I have accumulated a summary of the available data, however, and I would like to submit it for inclusion in the record at this point.

This data reveals, among other things, the following unemployment comparisons between the general population and the Spanish-speaking population in 1966.

In New York metropolitan area, 4 percent of the general population is unemployed while East Harlem, where Puerto Ricans are concentrated, has a 9-percent unemployment rate.

The San Antonio metropolitan area has a general unemployment rate of 4.2 percent, but the East and West sides, composed of 84 percent Spanish-speaking Americans, have a rate of 8.1 percent.

In the Phoenix metropolitan area the general unemployment rate is 3.1 percent, that for the Salt River Bed area, of which 30 percent is Spanish-speaking Americans, the rate is 13.2 percent.

The data also shows the following comparisons for 1960 for the Southwest in general.

Of Spanish-speaking males, 8.5 percent were unemployed compared to 4.5 percent other white, and 9.1 percent nonwhites.

Of Spanish-speaking females, 9.5 percent were unemployed compared to 5 percent other white, and 8.1 percent nonwhites.

Of the Spanish-speaking Americans employed, 20.5 percent were in white collar jobs compared to 56.7 percent of other whites.

Of the Spanish-speaking Americans employed, 7.5 percent were in blue collar jobs compared to 43.3 percent for other white persons. Poverty is a way of life with the Spanish-speaking American. In many cases his own ancestors came from poverty in Mexico or other Latin American countries and the poverty cycle has never been broken. Poverty is simply inherited from generation to generation.

Senator NELSON. May I interrupt. What is the source of your statistics? The employment service, as I understood it, didn't have this kind of a statistical breakdown. Where did you get yours?

Mr. MONTEMAYOR. Dr. Sheppard of the Upjohn University has done a survey for the National Urban Coalition. Also the interagency committee has planned, all along, that one of their functions was to assist the Congress and the Senate in gathering the data to show the Congress and the Senate the tremendous need for attention in the Southwest.

Does that answer your question?

Senator NELSON. Yes.

Mr. MONTEMAYOR. Taking the five states in the Southwest, the total population had 19.7 percent of their families in poverty; 15.9 percent of the Anglo families were in poverty; with the percentage of Spanish-speaking American families over double that of the Anglo, at 34.8 percent of families in poverty.

Of the urban population in the Southwest, 16.8 percent of all the families are living in poverty; 13.3 percent of the Anglo families are living in poverty; and 30.8 percent of the Spanish-speaking American families are living in poverty.

The same contrast exists in percentage of rural nonfarm families living in poverty, with the percentages being 30.1 percent for total population, 24.2 percent for the Anglo population, and 50.2 percent for the Spanish-speaking population, and 58.7 percent of the Spanishspeaking population.

These statistics in themselves are cold enough and no further explanation should be required. It is even more revealing, however, when we remember that these are income figures per family, not per person. Considering the large size of Spanish-speaking families, it is easy to visualize that the Spanish-speaking family with an income less than $3,000 is living in greater poverty than the Anglo family with the same income.

In Texas, for example, where the median income of the Spanishspeaking family is $2,941 and that of the total population $4,884, the average family size of a Spanish-speaking family is 4.63 and that of the total population is 3.33. Thus, the Spanish-speaking head of household not only has a significantly lesser income, he has more individuals to feed with that less money.