Mr. LASSER. If they are in need and are employable, I believe that those people have to be taken care of in some way. Mr. JOHNSON of West Virginia. Who would you say should determine whether they were in need or employable? Mr. LASSER. At the present time, that is left to the local relief agencies. Mr. JOHNSON of West Virginia. What would you say as to that? Mr. LASSER. I would have the W. P. A. to exercise a little more influence on them. I would have the W. P. A. not leave it entirely to the local relief agencies, but, if possible, to work along with the local relief agencies. In other words, let them determine, on the one hand, whether people turned over to them were in need and were employables, and, on the other hand, whether any employable people in need were being deprived. Mr. JOHNSON of West Virginia. Are you in favor of the Government going into some sort of business that will take care of everybody who is out of work and needs work? Mr. LASSER. Everybody? No, sir; I did not say that. I said that people who were in need and were employable. That is the present provision of the law. The fact of the matter is that when W. P. A. was established, the President stated, and Congress proceeded on the theory, that the division between the functions would be that the Federal Government would take care of employables in need, and that the States and local communities would take care of the unemployables. Now, the Federal Government has failed to carry out its part of the program. Mr. JOHNSON of West Virginia. The Federal Government or the States and local communities? Mr. LASSER. The Federal Government failed to carry out its part of the bargain to take care of the employables in need. As it stands today there are about 1,000,000 employables in need who are not employed, and, meanwhile, the States are carrying not only unemployables but a large number of employables. Mr. JOHNSON of West Virginia. Some of the States, you say, are carrying more than their share of the employable burden? Mr. LASSER. Yes, sir. Mr. JOHNSON of West Virginia. You have come to that conclusion. Mr. LASSER. Yes, sir; as shown by the break-down of the relief system. Mr. O'NEAL. Do you know that 13 States do not contribute a dime for relief? Mr. LASSER. I would not be surprised at that. Mr. O'NEAL. Are they doing their part? Mr. LASSER. As I understand the question, it is, Are they doing their part? Insofar as the bargain is concerned, for one reason or another they may not be able to do their part, but, giving them all the credit in the world, the Federal Government fails to take over the employables, leaving them, with the unemployables, as a charge on direct relief cost. Mr. O'NEAL. You think that employables have gone with the unemployables on direct relief. Mr. LASSER. As I said this morning, I think that some employables under W. P. A. have been made unemployable by bad living conditions, bad wages, and have gone through a process of physical deterioration. Mr. O'NEAL, Colonel Harrington agrees that in many districts there are employables on relief that should not be there. Mr. LASSER. We certainly do not believe that people who are unemployable should be in the work program. Mr. JOHNSON of West Virginia. As I understand your organization, it is composed of certain groups, a group employed by the W. P. A., a group that has been discharged from W. P. A., and a group that has had no employment whatsoever. Is that correct? Mr. LASSER. We will cover those on W. P. A. and those on direct relief; also those seeking old-age pensions. We have a number from the old-age-pension group. They would be in this program. That is about the general category. Mr. JOHNSON of West Virginia. How many do you figure, in number, that would include, or how many would be included in the groups you have named? Mr. LASSER. That is, our total membership? Mr. JOHNSON of West Virginia. Getting at it in that way— Mr. JOHNSON of West Virginia (interposing). I am not talking about your active membership. I am asking about how many members you have that would be covered by those four groups. Mr. LASSER. If you take half of them-what you refer to is our whole membership? Mr. JOHNSON of West Virginia. You do not have all of them. Mr. LASSER. Do you mean how many people we have in the country? Mr. JOHNSON of West Virginia. Yes. Mr. LASSER. I should say 12,000,000 unemployables and W. P. A. workers, and if you want to include the people in the old-age-pension group, I would say another 8,000,000. Mr. JOHNSON of West Virginia. That would be 20,000,000. Mr. LASSER. Yes, sir. Mr. JOHNSON of West Virginia. Do you mean that by your organization you take care of 20,000,000 people? Mr. LASSER. Take care of them? Mr. JOHNSON of West Virginia. Yes; in one way or another, through your locals? Mr. LASSER. We help them in matters, and we represent them in bringing forward their economic views and their needs. Mr. JOHNSON of West Virginia. Take the W. P. A. alone: How many do you estimate belong in that group, including those employed, those who have been discharged, and those that ought to be on relief, but are not because of the lack of appropriation? Mr. LASSER. There are 12,000,000 unemployed, and I should say that 8,000,000, in some form or another, are employable and in need. Mr. JOHNSON of West Virginia. How many members do you have in your organization? Mr. LASSER. The total is around 400,000. Mr. JOHNSON of West Virginia. That belong to your organization, and have paid up dues and are in good standing? Mr. LASSER. No, sir; not in good standing. Mr. JOHNSON of West Virginia. How many are in good standing? Mr. LASSER. I would say, perhaps Mr. TABER (interposing). I think you said there were 262,000. Mr. TABER. What is the difference between that number and the 400,000? Mr. LASSER. In 1938, or at the beginning of 1938, we issued a new membership card, and when they reached the locals we reached a membership totaling 260,000. We reached out to a membership totaling 260,000. We reach around 114.000 Mr. JOHNSON of West Virginia. How many in good standing belong to your organization? Mr. LASSER. I should say, perhaps, 150,000. Mr. JOHNSON of West Virginia. What percentage is that of the sum total of which you have been speaking? Mr. LASSER. The sum total of what? Mr. JOHNSON of West Virginia. Works Progress Administration employees, including those that have work, those that have been discharged, and those that have had no work. According to your theory, what percentage of that total does your organization represent? Mr. LASSER. If you want to know what percentage of our organization is in good standing, or the percentage of that to the other figure, it is a matter of arithmetic. Mr. JOHNSON of West Virginia. I want you to state it. I can figure it myself, but I want you to figure it. Mr. LASSER. It is the percentage of 150,000 to whatever the other figure is. I am not here to show my accuracy in arithmetic. I am giving you gentlemen some information and some figures. Mr. JOHNSON of West Virginia. You are not giving me very much. Mr. LASSER. I am not compelled here to work out sums in arithmetic. Mr. JOHNSON of West Virginia. I asked you what your organization consisted of, and you said it consisted of W. P. A. workers. You said it served those who were working, and then you said it also consisted of those who had been working but who had been discharged, for one reason or another. Then there was another group that had never as yet gotten a crumb from the rich man's table. There were three groups. Then I asked how many of those three groups you represented through your organization. Mr. LASSER. I said that our active membership was composed of a group of about 150,000. Mr. JOHNSON of West Virginia. Do you know how many are in those three groups? Mr. LASSER. You asked me the question about how many people there were in the country in those groups, and I said about 8,000,000. Mr. JOHNSON of West Virginia. If there are 8,000,000, how many of that group of people are active members of your organization? Mr. LASSER. The number in good standing is 150,000. Mr. JOHNSON of West Virginia. What percentage is that of the other figure? Mr. LASSER. I do not know what the percentage is. I do not want to be discourteous, but the figures are here. Mr. JOHNSON of West Virginia. Will you figure out what percentage that is? Mr. MCMILLAN. It is the percentage of 150,000 of 8,000,000. Mr. MCMILLAN. It is about one-half of 1 percent. Mr. O'NEAL. It is eight-tenths of 1 percent. Mr. JOHNSON of West Virginia. Your organization, then, represents eight-tenths of 1 percent of those people. Mr. LASSER. You asked how many members we have in good standing, or members who are more or less paid up in their dues, and I said that number was 150,000. I hope the Congressman does not mean to be unfair in the way he is posing his question. I said the active membership was 260,000. We have a total membership of about 400,000, and I should say that we exercise an influence over about one and a half million. Mr. O'NEAL. That is about 1.4 percent. Mr. LASSER. I want to say that I believe the Congressman asked an unfair question. If we had urgently pursued these people in making them pay their dues, and we were to say we had this total number paying dues, then the charge would have been made that we were mulcting the unemployed by taking from $50,000 to $100,000 a year, and now when we are claiming that we do not pursue them for dues, you are trying to make out a case that our organization is not a representative one. Mr. JOHNSON of West Virginia. I want to know what you represent. That is all. Mr. LUDLOW. I believe you stated this morning that there are 280,482 active members of the Workers Alliance. Mr. LASSER. No, sir; 260,000. Mr. LUDLOW. I have noted it down as 280,482. Mr. LASSER. It is 260,000. Mr. LUDLOW. How many members of the Workers Alliance are there on the W. P. A. relief roll? Mr. LASSER. I should say that of the general list of members throughout the country, 75 percent of the total are W. P. A. workers. Mr. LUDLOW. Can you translate that into a figure? Mr. LASSER. I would say, perhaps, 200,000. Mr. LUDLOW. On the W. P. A. rolls? Mr. LASSER. Yes, sir. Mr. LUDLOW. I believe you said this morning that you did not advocate strikes, but that you countenanced strikes as a last resort. Mr. LASSER. Yes, sir. Mr. LUDLOW. How many strikes on Government works have there been in the W. P. A.? Mr. LASSER. From the start? Mr. LUDLOW. Yes. Mr. LASSER. I could not answer that offhand. I know that in the last year there have been very few that have come to our knowledge. I would not say there was five. Most of the strikes occurred in the early part of the program. Mr. LUDLOW. Can you put a memorandum in the record showing the number? Mr. LASSER. I would have to go back over the records, because, we will say, the local at Sacramento, Calif., had a strike, and we would not know about it. The matter might be taken up by the local officers and settled, and would not come to our knowledge. 146462-39-pt. 1-7 Mr. LUDLOW. You said that as a last resort you countenanced strikes; how many of those strikes that were called did you countenance? Mr. LASSER. Since the adoption of this constitution, I do not know of a single one. Mr. LUDLOW. There was not any strike? Mr. LASSER. There was not any since the adoption of this constitution. Mr. LUDLOW. What has been the character of the strikes on Government works? Mr. LASSER. Let us take the one at Camden, N. J., where they arbitrarily changed the working period for the men where the men had to work practically all Saturday. They extended the working period, which meant more carfare necessarily. Our organization attempted to go in and negotiate the matter, and we asked the administrator to hold the new ruling up until we could sit down and discuss it. Mr. LUDLOW. You are speaking about sitting down. Was that a sit-down strike? Mr. LASSER. No, sir; I meant sitting down across the table. The administrator being of a very hard-boiled attitude, refused to do it. He refused to consider the matter at all. It happened that the strike was a spontaneous one, and the men walked off the job. Our people stepped in and told the people to try to be calm and keep on at work, and that we would negotiate the matter. We finally did, and the strike was stopped. We called the people back to work. They went back much against their wishes, because they did not consider that we settled the matter satisfactorily, although we got a number of concessions. Those men are often working under bad conditions, with low wages. Mr. LUDLOW. Do you think that as a general thing it is a good thing to have Government work strikes? Mr. LASSER. We do not think it is a good thing for any workers, because it means a loss of time and money. Mr. LUDLOW. Is there any distinction, in your opinion, between an ordinary strike and a strike on Government work? Mr. LASSER. I would say there is a distinction there; yes, sir. Mr. LUDLOW. Do you have any affiliations with any labor organizations, such as the C. I. O. or the American Federation of Labor? Mr. LASSER. No, sir. Mr. LUDLOW. Have you heard that in building construction by the W. P. A. the regular building crafts maintain that the use of unskilled W. P. A. labor on such construction is now utterly ruining the regular crafts, and that they complain that it is playing havoc generally with the regular craft unions? I understood you to say a while ago that the Government is justified in engaging them in heavy construction work or building construction. Is that your viewpoint? Mr. LASSER. Do you mean whether the Government is justified in doing that? Mr. LUDLOW. Yes. Mr. LASSER. Yes, sir. I would say with regard to the first question, in its bearing upon the construction craftsmen, that there are supervisors and administrators who, in order to save money, will take an unskilled worker and tell him to paint the side of a house, |