day. I have been actively interested in it because we have our own industrial development program.

It came as a great shock to us to find out that this amendment which had been approved had been pulled out and we have to readjust our sights, in fact, we have our council working on this problem today. It is so important to us in our area to retain the momentum we picked up on our industrial development program to stem the flight of industry to the suburbs and they were staying in Philadelphia and very effectively staying, and staying not only as employable factors but also as taxpayers.

We are doing so well that we are rather concerned about the Senate deliberation on this important problem. You will hear more about it from the mayor next week, I think.

Senator PROUTY. Thank you, Mayor Tate.

Senator CLARK. Thank you, Mayor Tate. I hope you understand the friendly thrust of my suggestion when I say to you, I have no doubt I too, have been immensely improved by on-the-job training.

Mayor TATE. Thank you very much. I agree with you, very frankly. It has been a great experience. Thank you very much.

Senator CLARK. Thanks a lot, Mayor Tate.

Our next witness is Mr. Andrew Biemiller, director of the Department of Legislation, AFL-CIO.

Mr. Biemiller, you are an old friend, and we are happy to welcome you back. We look forward to your testimony.

I will ask to have the entire statement placed in the record so that if we interrupt you as you read it, you will still have the continuity of your thought in the record.

STATEMENT OF ANDREW J. BIEMILLER, DIRECTOR, DEPARTMENT OF LEGISLATION, AFL-CIO; ACCOMPANIED BY NATHANIEL GOLDFINGER, DIRECTOR OF RESEARCH; AND KENNETH YOUNG, LEGISLATIVE REPRESENTATIVE

Mr. BIEMILLER. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. I may skip here and there, also.

Mr. Chairman, I am accompanied by Mr. Nathaniel Goldfinger, director of the Department of Research of the AFL-CIO, and by one of our legislation representatives, Mr. Kenneth Young.

Senator CLARK. I am happy to have both of these gentlemen.

Before you start, I would like to note for the record that it was my good fortune yesterday to be at the AFL-CIO Pennsylvania State Convention in Pittsburgh at which Mr. I. W. Abel, the president of the United Steelworkers of America, made a rather impassioned plea in support of this legislation. I was delighted, of course, and flattered to hear him do this.

He asked the convention to pass a resolution endorsing the bill and they promptly did.

Mr. BIEMILLER. I am delighted to hear that.

At the outset, I would like to say that we are indeed pleased to have the opportunity to present our views on S. 3063.

As is well known, the AFL-CIO is firm in its conviction that jobs at decent wages are the most important requirement in our Nation's

search for solutions to the interrelated problems of poverty, deprivation and racial unrest.

The labor movement is committed to the proposition that none of these problems can be solved without full employment.

Because we believe this as strongly as we do, we wish to commend you, Mr. Chairman, for the continuing effort you have been making to keep this issue of employment at the center of the stage.

It is not necessary to parade any new army of statistics to provide evidence that more jobs are urgently needed. Such statistics were placed in the Congressional Record by you, Mr. Chairman, when you introduced S. 3063 on February 29.

At that time, you pointed out:

-11.8 million persons of working age were poor in 1966, either because of joblessness, part-time work, or low wages;

4.6 million poor Americans of working age in 1966 were heads of families in which 122 million children were being reared;

—The unemployment rate-3.8 percent in 1967-conceals almost as much unemployment as it reveals, and ignores "hidden unemployment."

-The number of able-bodied working-age Americans who were jobless in September 1966 was 4.4 million, although the number listed in the regular monthly report by the Buerau of Labor statistics was

2.8 million.

The picture could be filled in further with data on unemployment in the central cities, in the rural areas, among Negroes, Mexican Americans, Puerto Ricans, and Indians, among teenagers especially Negro teenagers and among older workers. It is, to put it mildly, not a pretty picture, as you well know.

We should be clear, however, that the picture would be infinitely worse had we not in recent years enacted the many programs that we did, a number of which-especially those in manpower training and antipoverty fields—were given legislative birth by this subcommittee. There is no need to deny that we have, indeed, made substantial progress in the last few years but, having said so, we must recognize that many of the problems-in all their severity—are still with us. And they require immediate action.

Because we have made progress and because the official unemployment rate is lower than it has been since the early 1950's-some persons shrink from any further meaningful effort to deal with those problems. Instead, they repeat that meaningless bit of conventional wisdom which says that "anybody who really wants a job can find one."

It is meaningless because, to whatever extent there are jobs available, they are in highly skilled or professional occupations, which require several years of training; or they are very low wage and dead end; or they involve travel distances which create time and cost barriers. I short, whatever jobs do exist do not provide much of an answer to the problem at hand.

Moreover, it appears to us that all of the talk about the availability of jobs is contradicated by the evidence. The record of this subcommittee's previous hearings in connection with the war on poverty is replete with statements about the need for more jobs, and these statements come from those closest to the scene-local officeholders, program administrators, and the jobless.

Furthermore-and this is to us highly significant-not a single one of the Economic Opportunity Act work programs, that we know of, has had any difficulty in filling job slots for which it has been funded.

These jobs, I would emphasize are by and large in the public service field. Such jobs can be meaningful, more conveniently located and, in most instances, provide wages that will carry the jobholder above the poverty line.

Senator CLARK. Are you going to touch later on your views as to the desirability of having perhaps half of these jobs under the bill allocated to the private sector?

Mr. BIEMILLER. We are going to touch on that problem.

Because jobs are needed, and because jobs in public service employment can meet the need, the AFL-CIO believes strongly that such a program should be enacted by this Congress. We are not alone in this call for action.

Our allies include the Commission on Technology, Automation, and Economic Progress; the Urban Coalition; the 1966 White House Conference on Civil Rights; the President's National Advisory Commission on Rural Poverty; and the President's Commissision on Civil Disorders, among others.

In your speech to the Senate when you introduced S. 3063, Mr. Chairman, you included estimates from the report of the Commission on Automation on the number of jobs which could be created to meet existing public service needs of our society. The total was 5.3 million. Senator CLARK. Do you think that overstates it?

Mr. BIEMILLER. No, sir; we do not.

Thus, the work is there to be done. The Commission on Automation pointed to "the anomaly of excessive unemployment in a society confronted with a huge backlog of public service needs in its parks, its streets, its slums, its countryside, its schools, and colleges, its libraries, its hospitals, its rest homes, its public buildings, and throughout the public and nonprofit sectors of the economy."

The Commission also stated that "employing the unemployed is, in an important sense, almost costless," and that to provide the unemployed with meaningful public service jobs "increases not only their income but that of society."

Jobs, however, are only a part of the problem. A second part involves influencing the employment mix-that is, helping to put into jobs, both in the public sector and the private sector, workers who have been passed over and shunted aside, sometimes for what might be regarded as legitimate reasons and sometimes for reasons not so legitimate.

I think, Mr. Chairman, our views on this two-part problem can best be summed up by quoting from an address delivered by AFL-CIO President George Meany before the National Alliance of Businessmen which met on March 16 to talk about the JOBS program.

As you are aware, the AFL-CIO is cooperating with the effort being made by the NAB.

In his remarks to that group, President Meany pointed out that gradually the country has come to the realization that, despite the steady economic advance that had been made since 1961, "significant numbers of Americans were being left behind." He then went on to say:

And when this phenomenon was examined more closely, it was found that more job opportunities-while still essential-would not be enough. They would not be enough because so many of those who were being left behind, the hard core of the jobless, were simply not equipped for gainful employment.

They were not equipped in terms of education. They were not equipped in terms of work experience the simple disciplines involved in any form of employmentsince they had never been regularly employed. And most important, perhaps, they were not equipped in terms of motivation.

So it is not enough, it will not be enough, to go into the ghettos and say, "Here is a job." The deprived Americans who make up the hard core of the unemployed need to be taught and need to be trained before they can fill a job. And even before that, they must be motivated by the desire to fill one.

What they need, first of all, is confidence; or perhaps a better word is faith. They need to believe that the newly offered opportunity is real; that they can in fact become a part of the American society which until now has been as remote from them as the moon.

Senator CLARK. Please let me interrupt you to say I agree with you. How are we going to do that? Do we have to hire a corps of psychologists?

Mr. GOLDFINGER. No, Mr. Chairman. I think that the finding of real job opportunities, socially useful job opportunities, is a crucial aspect of this problem. Socially useful job opportunities that are not dead end, the chance to move up.

The kind of thing you indicated before in the parks of Philadelphia. We should start out doing that kind of socially useful work in cleaning up and maintaining the parks and then the opportunity, at least the chance, to move from that kind of job either into the private or public sectors into other kinds of jobs, civil service jobs, private jobs. motivation, does it? How do you get them to take the first step to go Senator CLARK. Yes, but this does not deal with the problem of out and work in the park?

Mr. GOLDFINGER. Here the thing is to offer the opportunity. You can't force anybody to take a job and you can't force anybody in a free society to do anything.

Senator CLARK. How about indoctrination? Reverend Sullivan gives his people a 2- or 3-week course in indoctrination, intended to induce motivation.

I am wondering if that is one of the more difficult things because so many of our conservative friends say they don't want to work, they are not interested in work, all they want to do is sit around and draw welfare.

I don't buy that in most cases, but there are a good many instances where that is true.

How do you go about creating motivation which takes somebody just sitting on the door stoop saying, "I don't want to go work," to do useful work?

Mr. GOLDFINGER. We agree with you that the kind of thing Reverend Sullivan is doing in Philadelphia is crucial. The kind of thing that many of the unions are doing in terms of Outreach programs, to reach out to these people, and to give them the basic concept of work habits and work discipline, all of these are essential.

But I think that the crucial thing is the opportunity to do socially useful work with a chance of moving up.

Senator PROUTY. Mr. Chairman, will you yield at that point?
Senator CLARK, Certainly.

Senator PROUTY. Not long ago one of the more militant Negro leaders in Washington came to my office and we had a long discussion of this particular problem.

He mentioned an experience he had in the District. He arranged employment for some 50 or 75 hard-core unemployed people who had never worked and who had no skills or training of any kind. He arranged with some concern in this metropolitan area to hire on 50 or 75 of these people.

He reported it was an impossible task. He said he finally had to send people around to get them up in the morning in sufficient time to get them to work.

They would not work after they got there. The next day they remained home. They are used to staying up late nights and sleeping a good part of the day. This is another part of the problem which we have to face up to.

I think Stokely Carmichael said something similar with respect to some of the people in the District. We cannot ignore it because it is a basic problem.

Senator CLARK. I don't think it is any answer to say we are providing socially useful work. So what? They don't want it, a lot of them. Mr. BIEMILLER. I would like to interject here that we are well aware of exactly the type of problem you stated, Senator Prouty.

For example, there is going on, at the present time, an experiment between the A.T. & T. and the Communication Workers of America, in which they are recognizing these problems and they are doing exactly what you say.

They are going into the ghettos, they are pulling these people out. The first few days they are at work they make sure somebody goes and gets them and they have a buddy who keeps after them. And they have a counseling service and I think this is exactly what you are going to have to do if we are really serious about reaching our hardcore unemployed.

You even have to teach them habits of normal decency and health and sanitation. We are well aware of these problems.

This is the kind of program that in certain elements of the private sector we are endeavoring to work out and we think in the public sector you may have to do exactly all of these things.

Senator PROUTY. Isn't it also true, Mr. Biemiller, that people out cleaning parks and streets and performing work of that nature in the public sector are not really developing any skills?

Perhaps they are acquiring some idea of work habits and the need and desirability of working-helping themselves but most of them are not going to be really employable, are they?

Mr. BIEMILLER. I think, though, that you put your finger, yourself, on one of the values there. That is the development of a work habit and of a recognition that a certain amount of discipline has to go with it, using that term in its broadest sense.

If you start to work at 8 o'clock, you start to work at 8 o'clock, not at 8:17 or something of that sort, and that you have to get to the job, and so forth.

But you are right, this training has got to go on.

Also, I think in many of these jobs that we are talking about, as they go along you do find ways that people get more interested in