Government was willing to gamble that its citizens who sought to produce would produce and were therefore worthy of financial support.

The same kind of spirit is needed today. The hand up that is needed in our area of influence should not be regarded as a handout. It is wrong for Government to pressure industry to build plants in the ghetto if the ghetto residents are not going to share in the operation, ownership and control of these plants.

Look around us in this country today and observe the tiny, infinitesimal number of black businesses that are involved in the Nation's business. Simple proportional mathematics will tell us that there should be ten times the number of successful minority businesses that we have today. How else can the ghetto develop natural leadership based on legitimate power?

But few and far between are those elements of our society that are willing to believe that we have the training and the mental capability to succeeed.

There is a near total lack of faith on the part of the majority population is anyone who is not white. White men weigh other white men's ideas on the basis of the merit of the concept; but they weigh black men's concepts on a scale seared by a mistrust of color. The result is an unequal balance of judgment that a great nation can ill afford.

I hope that these remarks are of some value to the committee and that I might be able to elucidate further if there are specific questions that the committee might wish to direct to us.

Thank you very much.

Chairman PROXMIRE. Thank you, Mr. Burrell, for a fine statement. Mr. Mangum?

STATEMENT OF GARTH L. MANGUM, CODIRECTOR OF THE CENTER FOR MANPOWER POLICY STUDIES

Mr. MANGUM. Senator Proxmire, Senator Jordan, I appreciate this opportunity. I am particularly impressed that this committee set up as the watchdog of the Employment Act of 1946 implies by this hearing that the achievement of 32 percent unemployment as a national average is not all that is meant by the promise of "maximum employment" and "a job for everyone able and seeking to work."

Chairman PROXMIRE. I see your statement is 19 pages. If you want to skip any part of it, the whole statement will be printed in the record.

Mr. MANGUM. Thank you, Senator. I promise to skip a good bit of it.

I would like to start by referring directly to the employment recommendations of the Civil Disorders Commission, which are six in number:

Consolidating and concentrating employment efforts, opening the existing job structure, creating a million new jobs in the public sector within 3 years, creating 1 million new jobs in the private sector within 3 years, developing urban and rural poverty areas, and encouraging business ownership in the ghetto.

I notice the absence of remedial basic education and training for ex

isting jobs. I would like to make some comments on the potential in that area as well.

The Commission was rightly concerned by the problem of administering the current manpower programs. The services available within them are rather extensive, not in numbers of slots, but in the types of services. But they are fragmented and scattered among a large variety of programs and agencies, so that it is very difficult to focus the available services on the needs of individuals. There is a tendency to run the programs for the good of the programs rather than to direct them to the needs of particular clients. There has been a lot of concern about this problem in the last couple of years. There has been considerable progress, but this still remains a very basic problem, and one which can be cleared up ultimately only by the Congress which structured the series of programs in the first place.

It is interesting to note that while the Commission, in looking at this problem of concentration and consolidation, and decrying the fact there was such a variety of agencies and programs involved, still praised the emergence of two new instrumentalities, and suggested a third.

Looking at the existing programs, there are basically two types. Those which provide basic education and skill training to prepare the uenmployed to compete more effectively for existing jobs, and those which provide income through work relief, misnamed as work experi

ence.

The absence of any recommendation to expand the basic education and skill training area may be a result of the focus on the hardcore of the unemployed. There is an assumption that the hardcore unemployed are not motivated by the opportunities to go through a basic education and skill training program, and then hunt a job thereafter. It is thought that motivation can be supplied best by putting people directly on the payroll, and then having them receive the training afterwards under the direction of the employer.

Actually, there seems to be no a priori justification for the choice. of on-the-job as opposed to other kinds of training. In fact, it seems that there is considerable potential in each, and the tradeoffs between them probably vary considerably by location and the particular situation.

I am interested, however, to see that the Commission's report focuses very heavily on recommendations for employing the hard-core unemployed, while it itself describes its typical rioter as a young Negro male having more education than his neighbors, and being already employed, but employed in a menial job.

Now, if it is true that the frustrations festering in the ghettos are generated by the lack of opportunities to rise within them, or to emerge from them, then it may well be that these pressures can be cooled as much by offering opportunities to those just below the margin of successful employability, as it might be by trying to pick up people from the bottom of the ladder and bring them up. Since we would assume taking people from below the margin and lifting them above the margin would cost less per head, we may be making a tradeoff of between fewer hard-core employed being served or a larger number of the less hard-core.

It is notable under the current situation that we do have facilities for basic education and training which are not being fully utilized. The skill centers which have been established under the Manpower Development and Training Act, for instance, which are mostly in the inner city areas, do have a good record of enrolling ghetto residents. Compared to other training programs outside the skill centers, there is a very noticeable difference in the degree of minority group membership, lack of education, all the other criteria of the disadvantaged. These facilities, which were established with Federal funds, are currently operating at about half capacity due to the lack of funds to bring people into all the available training stations.

The enrollments in the institutional training segment of our manpower programs is falling. We have to recognize that any service we provide costs money that cannot be used for some alternative. And the very important opportunity costs of each of these two different approaches must be recognized.

I do not think a great deal of comment on the very important area of opening access to jobs is required. The need to remove artificial barriers to jobs is something we are all committed to, though we may not do an awful lot about it.

There have been some interesting experiments, particularly the efforts of a group called the Workers Defense League in New York, now spreading their activities into 30 cities, where they work simultaneously with employers and young Negroes. They have worked with the employer to try to get him to lower his hiring standardsthose which were artificial and unrealistic-while at the same time they have worked with the employees to help them to leap over these barriers, in many cases merely training them to succeed in tests. You remember there was one very interesting case in which a local union became very disturbed because nearly 100 percent of all the young people who had gone through this program successfully passed a test that even high school graduates had a great deal of difficulty with. These people went into the courts to say there must have been some conspiracy and chicanery involved but they had to admire those who were successful.

I would like to spend time on the question of jobs in the public and private sectors as recommended by the Commission.

Essentially there are two approaches to creating jobs in the public sector for the hard core or the diasadvantaged. One is the new careers approach, fostered by the Federal Government in a program first introduced by Congressman Scheuer, and bearing his name, in which attempts are made to restructure jobs in the public sector in professional activities, to provide subprofessional aides for all kinds of professionals in health services, education, and recreation. The objective to build a career ladder where people enter at some level within their existing capabilities, but hopefully by restructuring jobs will be able to move up into useful and satisfying careers.

The experience in this program is as yet very slight. It has actually been underway for only a few months. It is much too early to see what will happen. One thing that is noticeable already is that this program is selecting, or what is called "creaming," the available groups rather strictly. It appears at the moment that this will turn out to

be a very useful device for taking people with considerable potential, but who have in the past not had the opportunity or not taken the opportunity for education, and now will have an opportunity to exercise that potential they had all along. I would guess it is likely to be a relatively small but important group.

The other method is that which now carries the name of the "Government as employer of last resort."

It is interesting that this proposal has been endorsed by every major national commission exploring any subject related to this area since the National Commission on Technology, Automation, and Economic Progress, first made that proposal in early 1966.

I think it is important, however, to note that the Automation Commission did not propose the Government as employer of last resort as a single panacea for taking care of the total problem, but as one of a kit of manpower tools that they thought would be necessary to have a comprehensive program.

As that Commission viewed the situation, it thought that the first step was to expand aggregate demand to the maximum that was possible within acceptable limits of price increases that of course has been done since the proposal was originally made. But the next step was to provide remedial education, training, mobility assistance, improved labor market services, whatever other programs could be provided to increase the ability of the unemployed and underemployed to compete for existing jobs. But then they said there will still be some people left over at acceptable levels of aggregate demands. If we are really going to make the Employment Act of 1946 mean what it says, we should have a floor, a guarantee under all employment, and that would be the Government acting as employer of last resort.

They stressed that even that should be accompanied by basic education, by skill training, by every other possible service, to make it possible for that to be a temporary resort for individual, even though it would need to be permanent as to program, to allow people to move up from that floor into a more satisfactory long-term commitment.

Because any recommendation of this kind always brings the immediate reaction, "that sounds like the WPA," I have gone to the trouble to dredge up some data which go way back to the 1930's, to show that this program does not deserve the reputation that it has long carried in this country. In fact, it was probably one of the highest return investments we ever made. The table appearing in my prepared statement (p. 193) points out some of the concrete public facilities that were created by this program, to say nothing of all the current services, the art, the writers' projects, and all, in addition to the employment. It is possible to have a program of this sort, and have it very productive.

We have had some experience in recent years with the Neighborhood Youth Corps, work experience and training program, and other programs which essentially are the employer-of-last-resort type programs. But one thing noticeably missing from them in contrast to the experience of the 1930's is that there has been very little attention to the productivity of the workers involved. The purpose has been to provide income and some kind of useful activity for people. But there has been little attempt to assure that they produced something worthwhile.

It is notable under the current situation that we do have facilities for basic education and training which are not being fully utilized. The skill centers which have been established under the Manpower Development and Training Act, for instance, which are mostly in the inner city areas, do have a good record of enrolling ghetto residents. Compared to other training programs outside the skill centers, there is a very noticeable difference in the degree of minority group membership, lack of education, all the other criteria of the disadvantaged. These facilities, which were established with Federal funds, are currently operating at about half capacity due to the lack of funds to bring people into all the available training stations.

The enrollments in the institutional training segment of our manpower programs is falling. We have to recognize that any service we provide costs money that cannot be used for some alternative. And the very important opportunity costs of each of these two different approaches must be recognized.

I do not think a great deal of comment on the very important area of opening access to jobs is required. The need to remove artificial barriers to jobs is something we are all committed to, though we may not do an awful lot about it.

There have been some interesting experiments, particularly the efforts of a group called the Workers Defense League in New York, now spreading their activities into 30 cities, where they work simultaneously with employers and young Negroes. They have worked with the employer to try to get him to lower his hiring standardsthose which were artificial and unrealistic-while at the same time they have worked with the employees to help them to leap over these barriers, in many cases merely training them to succeed in tests. You remember there was one very interesting case in which a local union became very disturbed because nearly 100 percent of all the young people who had gone through this program successfully passed a test that even high school graduates had a great deal of difficulty with. These people went into the courts to say there must have been some conspiracy and chicanery involved but they had to admire those who were successful.

I would like to spend time on the question of jobs in the public and private sectors as recommended by the Commission.

Essentially there are two approaches to creating jobs in the public sector for the hard core or the diasadvantaged. One is the new careers approach, fostered by the Federal Government in a program first introduced by Congressman Scheuer, and bearing his name, in which attempts are made to restructure jobs in the public sector in professional activities, to provide subprofessional aides for all kinds of professionals in health services, education, and recreation. The objective to build a career ladder where people enter at some level within their existing capabilities, but hopefully by restructuring jobs will be able to move up into useful and satisfying careers.

The experience in this program is as yet very slight. It has actually been underway for only a few months. It is much too early to see what will happen. One thing that is noticeable already is that this program is selecting, or what is called "creaming," the available groups rather strictly. It appears at the moment that this will turn out to