NAVY PAY VERSUS A CIVILIAN SALARY

Not all of a seaman's pay is "velvet," of course. He still may have to pay for such things as haircuts, laundry, tailor, smokes, soap, tooth paste, razor blades, movies, and miscellaneous ship's service items. The normal average cost of such out-of-pocket expenses (not counting splurges of entertainment) is $15 per month. That leaves $35 a month clear out of starting base pay-or $420 a year that even an apprentice seaman can put away in the bank.

Under existing income tax rates and exemptions, do you know how much money the average single civilian has to earn in order to salt away that sum? The figure will surprise you, but it comes, not from the Navy, but from an independent unbiased civilian authority-Barron's National Business and Financial Weekly. In the April 24, 1944, issue, this publication made a searching analysis of the comparative figures under the heading, "Army-Navy Pay Tops Most CiviliansUnmarried Private's Income Equivalent to $3,600 Salary."

Mr. BRADLEY. Do you care to say anything more on that particular subject?

Mr. BUTLER. There is just one remark which I would first like to discuss with the chairman if I may before inserting it in the record. Mr. BRADLEY. Very well.

(Discussion off the record.)

Mr. BRADLEY. As you read these rules it states $125 in each port is paid if it is under attack. That is an additional bonus. I do not say for a minute that these people did get these circumstances very frequently, but surely, there would be nothing wonderful about a ship being under attack, let's say, three or four times a month, which would be $125 each time in addition to regular pay. That in itself certainly would run up to $600 a month.

Mr. BUTLER. Of course, a vessel

Mr. MALONEY. There is an additional voyage bonus.

Mr. BUTLER. A vessel could not make that many port calls because they did not go into port, turn around and come back.

Mr. BRADLEY. They did in the Alaskan sector; we know that. Mr. BUTLER. That is true, but they were not subjected to port attack in very many instances in the Aleutians.

Mr. BRADLEY. That is true, but they did receive $125 port bonus in each port, as I understand it, in the Alaskan sector, making it possible to receive such a payment every 2 or 3 days.

Mr. BUTLER. I would not doubt some instances might be verified, Mr. Chairman.

Mr..BRADLEY. For instance in the Alaskan service.

Mr. BUTLER. But when we consider the over-all picture, undoubtedly you will be able to find only a very few men, with respect to the hundreds of thousands of men who served in the merchant marine, who did that.

Mr. BRADLEY. I do not doubt you are exactly right. I wanted to bring out the fact it was possible, easily possible. But I do not believe it occurred in every many instances.

Mr. MALONEY. On these voyage bonuses I do not yet get it clear. You said there was 100-percent monthly bonus with a minimum of $100 and another classification of 40 percent.

What distinguished those two classifications?

Mr. BUTLER. For instance, in the 100-percent bonus, bonus would be trans-Atlantic, Europe, Asia, and elsewhere, and in the low bonus or 40-percent category would be voyages between ports in the United States, Canada and Alaska and South America and Central America.

At that time the enemy subs had not become so active immediately adjacent to our shores.

Mr. MALONEY. Then one other question. On this last bonus in the danger area and the attack bonus, was there any change of that?

Mr. BUTLER. Yes; that was changed to a vessel-attack bonus which was a form of compensation in addition to the wages and bonus for Voyage by which

Mr. MALONEY. In addition to the attack bonus, too?

Mr. BUTLER. The vessel-attack bonus took the place of the portattack bonus.

Mr. MALONEY. When did that take effect?

Mr. BUTLER. April of 1944.

Mr. MALONEY. Would that vessel-attack bonus mean that if the vessel was attacked en route to

Mr. BUTLER. On the high seas between ports the attack would be compensated for by payment of $125 to crew members. That form of enemy action had not been compensated for prior to the installation of the vessel-attack bonus since prior to that time the vessel had to be in a port under attack and it was, of course, discovered a great many vessels were being attacked at sea in convoy by land-based bombers or by enemy raiders or by submarine.

Mr. MALONEY. Actually, the port-attack bonus remained practically because, if there were six or seven ships in a port, and that port were attacked, you could not pick out what ship was being attacked, could you?

Mr. BUTLER. We could under the terms and limitations of the vesselattack bonus. It was very restrictive in its nature. The vessel had to be damaged or destroyed or a crew member had to be injured or killed, so that during an attack on a convoy, let us say, en route between two ports, only one or two vessels of a 100-vessel convoy might receive the payment by reason of an enemy attack by dive bombers on the whole convoy.

Mr. MALONEY. That would apply equally as well in the port, too? Mr. BUTLER. That is correct, sir.

(Discussion off the record.)

Mr. BRADLEY. Would you now go into this question of tabular data regarding the differences of pay, and so forth, as regards the merchant marine and the armed services? I am interested to have you present for the record tables to be put in the record. You may take them, if you wish, from the last year's report, but I want this report to show specifically the data on which we finally make our decision.

Mr. BUTLER. On page 262, part 1, the hearing on 3246, there was presented a table showing the average monthly earnings of the crew of a commercially operated Liberty cargo vessel in the Southwest Pacific area; that is a vessel operated by War Shipping Administration. Mr. BRADLEY. Does the Maritime Commission still consider these tables in the last year's hearings on pages 256 to 265, inclusive, under the heading of "Data, unemployment and wages of seamen"? Do they still consider those as accurate and applicable to the present hearing?

Mr. BUTLER. Yes, sir.

Mr. BRADLEY. Then with your permission we will insert these in the record for this year's hearings. The top of page 256 to the bottom of page 265, the tables the Maritime Commission presented last year and considers still applicable.

(The tables referred to above are as follows:)

DATA ON EMPLOYMENT AND WAGES OF SEAMEN

PERCENTAGE DISTRIBUTION OF EMPLOYMENT OF SEAMEN
IN SELECTED OCCUPATIONS
October 1, 1943 thru September 30, 1944

Occupation

Annual earnings of seamen in selected occupations whose employment in the
maritime industry ranged from 8 to 11 months, Oct. 1, 1943, through Sept. 30,
1944

A Worked in rating during entire part of year employed.

B Worked in rating during major part of year employed, and on higher-paid job(s) rest of work year.
C Worked in rating during major part of year employed, and on lower-paid job(s) rest of work year.
1 Includes port work as well as voyage.

2 Average net income is average gross income minus income-tax deductions and social-security tax with-
held at source. Cost of room and subsistence not included.

3 Includes explosives and penalty cargo bonuses and other minor earnings.

SCOPE, PROCEDURE, AND SOURCES

The survey covers the 12-month period, October 1, 1943, through September 30,
1944. This period was selected as the one which would provide the most com-
plete and at the same time the most recent data available. Although the scope
of the study was limited by time and personnel, it is believed that the coverage
is sufficiently representative to throw authoritative light on the duration of
employment and annual earnings in the maritime industry.

Seventy vessels (56 cargo and 14 tankers)1 which began voyages about October
1, 1943, distributed according to type,' union contract, and initial voyage area,
were selected. From records filed with the United States Coast Guard in Wash-
ington, D. C., the name, social-security number, Z-number, age, nationality, and
rating of each of the some 3,200 seamen sailing on these 70 vessels at the beginning
of the period under discussion were transcribed from the vessels' articles to an
individual employment card. The different ratings held during the period by
each of these seamen, together with their subsequent sign-on and sign-off dates,
and the names of the ships on which each sailed during the period, were then
transcribed from Coast Guard records to the employment-record card set up
for each seaman. There were also transcribed from various sources data
relative to the port employment, hospitalization, repatriation, and in-training
time of these seamen.

3

After ascertaining the names of the companies for which each of the 3,200
seamen had worked during the year, filed men in Boston, New York, Philadelphia,
Baltimore, New Orleans, Los Angeles, San Francisco, Seattle, and other ports
transferred from the various companies' voyage and port pay-roll records to an
earnings' schedule specific information as to the wages, overtime, war-risk bonus,
penalty-cargo bonus, and explosives bonus earned by more than 1,200 of the
3,200 seamen, together with data on Federal old-age benefit, income, and other
tax deductions made against each man's earnings. Time and personnel did not
permit determination of the earnings of all of the 3,200 men for whom employ-

1 Approximate ratio of cargo to tanker vessels under American flag controlled by War
Shipping Administration about October 1, 1943.

243 Liberty type, 6 C-1, 5 C-2, 2 C-3, and 14 tankers.
3 Ship operator, R. M. O., and Coast Guard records.