The full text on this page is automatically extracted from the file linked above and may contain errors and inconsistencies.
MAR 2 - 1936
Orth west-~r
8020
WO R K S
P R OGRE S S
A D M I N I S T R A T I O N
Harry L. Hopkins, Administrator
Corringt on Gill
Assist ant Administrator
Howard B. Mye rs, Director
Social Research Division
•
RE S E AR CH
B UL LE T I N
CU.rtRKrJT CHAifGES I i THE UP.BAN RELIE:B' POPULATION
AUGUST 19 35
Trend of Employable Persons on Reli ef in Thirteen Cities
by Oc~upati onal Group s
January 15, 1936
Series I, No . 17
.., , tizE.'d by
Original from
NOR HWES~ER~ L~IV!:R.SITY
NORTHWESTERN UNIVERSITY
8026
PREFACE
This is the eighth of a series of reports
on relief accessions and separations in thirteen
selected cities - Atlanta, Baltimore, Bri~geport,
Butte, Chicago, Detroit, Houston, Manchester, Omaha
Paterson, St. Louis, San Francisco,and Wilkes-Barre.
In accordance with the plan followed in the JuneJuly number, the August bulletin (dealing with a
comparatively limited range of topics) presents a
continuous record since January 1935.
Employable persons in relief accessions
and separations are reported by occupations in
which they were usually engaged before coming on
relief and also, in the case of separations, by
occupations in which they were engaged at the time
their cases were closed.
This bulletin summarizes
for the thirteen study-cities the changes in the
e~loyable relief population (1) by occupation of
usual employment, all of the survey cities combined,
(2) by cities, all occupations combined, and (3) by
occupation of usual employment, for each of the
survey cities. In addition, consideration is given
to shifts from one occupational level to another
and to t ile unemplo~rment period p rior to acceptance
for relief.
For the pur po s e of studying net
changes in the load, those who are seeking wo rk as
well as those who are working are included in the
compilations.
As a means of indicating relative
employment opportunities in
the various occupational levels, further analysis is made of employed members of closed cases, by occupation in
which engaged at the time of closing.
------------ -------Prepared by
F. L. Carmichael and John W. Mitchell
under the supervision of
Henry B. Arthur, Assistant Director
Division of Social Research
-----------------Digitized by
Original from
NORTHWESTERN UNIVERSITY
NORTHWESTERN UNIVERSITY
-i-
8026
SUMMARY
Employable personslfon the relief
rolls of the survey cities h aving a
usual occupation decreas ed 5 .1 percent from December 1934 to .Aus1-1st
1935; t his decline differ ed little
from the reduction of the total cas e
load in the se cities (4.7 p ercent) .
Significant differences did occur,
howev er, ainong the various occupational group s of workers. Skilled
worvers decreased most shar ply (9
percent);
unsk illed workers came
next; semi-skilled, next;while white
collar workers decreased lea st .
Changes in the re l ief
load of
semi-sJ,::ilJ.ed wo r kers we".'e different
from ~hose of t he other occupa.tiona.l
groups . Within the per i od cov8rPd
by the study December was the peak
month for semi-skilled
wor1:er s ,
whereas February and March m~r ked
the high points for most of the
occupational group s .
Significant
increas es occurre d in the number of
semi-skilled worke rs on r elief in
July and August, while the other
group s (with the exception of the
white-collar workers in .Augus t) continued to decline .
This
unusual
behavior of the semi- skilled group
is l a rgely a result of wide fluctuations in the Detroit loac!_ ,
caused
in part by seas onal
f act ors affecti ng the auto mobile industry .
i/
employable person, fo~ the
purposes of this bulletin, is define d
as one 16- 64 years of c::.ge who is
working or seeking wo rk. An oc cupa tion of 11 usu9,l 11 em-::iloyment is one
in which a pers on had work(eyclusive
of work relief) for a t leas t 4 consecutive weeks within the l a st t en
ye ars . if he ha d eA'])erienc e in more
than one occupation, tha t in which
he had worked longest was chosen.
An
Employable whit e-collar workers
on relief in the survey cities decreas8 d 5 pe rcen t during t h e four
months ending in July . Th i s is true
in spite of the f ac t that the whitecolla r propo rtion of the total employable relief loa d~/
inc reas ed
conti nuously during the fir s t seven
months of t he ye a r .
From July t o
August th ere was a negligible decline in the proportion , although an
increas e in actual numbers .
turnover
of
employable
The
~sons on reli ef3 / is compar a tively
high among semi-skilled workors, ar. d
compar a tively low among unskilled
workers .
The turnover of l aborers
is somewha t above average ; tha t of
servants, considerably below average .
Change s in the number of emoloyable per s ons on ·r elief r anged , among
the survey cities, from a decre ase
(in eight months) of 41 percent in
Atlanta to an increase of 51 per cent
in Mc'.l.Ilchester.
The Atlanta employab le relief lo a d declined continuously from December to August . Except
for a small increas e in July, the
trend in Butte was simil a r .
In
Mc>nche s ter, on the other harid , increas es occurred in each month exc ep t J anuary; and in Paterson, in
each month except January Emd .August .
'?:} The t erm
en1pl oyable reli ef lo ad"
i s ,.lSed in this report to signify
the number of employab le persons on
r elief .
II
~/ Relief t u r nover, a s t he t erm is
empl oyed here , is the r a tio of (a )
the &verage numb er of
workers in
op enings and closings to (b) the
number of workers under care .
Digitized by
Original from
NORTHWESTERN UNIVERSITY
NORTHWESTERN UNIVERSITY
8026
-iiWhile occupations of curre nt employment
were different in many
instances from those of usu.al employment, shifts toward lo wer levels
wera somewhat more nume rous t han
upward shifts.
White-collar
and
semi-skilled jobs
comprised
ap} TOXimat ely the same proportions of
total jobs held
at the time of
closing (by mcmb3rs of June, July,
and Au.gust closad cases) as whita collar and semi - skilled work3rs comprised of tota l r1orkJrs.
The p.Jrcantage
of skillad jobs to total
jobs was small,1 r t han tha parctJntage
of skilled nork;rs to total workars,
wh~reas th3 rav9rse obtained with
respect to unskilled jobs and u.nskill3d work1rs. This indicat1s that
the shorteg~ of skillJd workers, if
it 1xists, is a rasu.lt of Nlativ1ly
gr'3a ter opportu.ni ti -1 s for t h is group
to find omployrn1nt in oth 1r occupational
l3v3ls
than for oth:u
groups to obtain skill1d jobs, and
that it is not cau.s3d by nlativ0
incraas~s in th1 nu.rnb1r of skill1d
jobs availabla .
1
1
cepted)
than in Jul y and Au.gu s t,
whereas this g rmro was co:npera ti vely
less numerous in Janua ry and February closed cases than in July and
Au.gust closed cases.
The same was
trua in smaller degree of wlli te
caller workqrs; but for semi-skillad
workers thd mova,.aan ts were reve rsed.
For unskillP-d workA rs the differences wara nagligible .
~ un8mploymant period prior to
acceptance for relief - longe r for
na 1n than for r eopenad cases - ,ras
shorter for u.nemploy,3d m1mbers of
ca s0s (nJw and r ci opan-3d ) coming on
r11li ,3f in July and August t han for
thos'3 of January, F0bruary, and March.
Chang8s in th 3 Total Case Load
TnJ nu.rnb ·3r of cas'3s on r'3li ·1 f in
th1 surv1y citi ,1s 1'1as grqat3r in
August than in July . Loss of job , as
in July, accou.nt9d for t h9 majority
of th3 .Augus t op mings, th~ p "3rC9ntag'3 r anging in Au.gust from 36
(Chicago) to 82 (Detroit) . Securing
jobs caused about the same p roFor members of June, July, and
portion of the clo s ings in August as
in July, t he lowest percentage reAu.gust closed cases who reported
ported i n Augus t being 34 (Chicago)
occupations
of
both usu.al and
current employment, the number of
and the highest 82 (Wilkes-Barre ).
Unemployable cases , i.e., cases with
white-collar .jobs in current emp loyno member 16-64 yea rs of age working
men t exceeded the number of employed
or seeking work, were more numerous
workers who had usu.ally been engaged
in Au.gust openings than in August
in whi te-collar work in six of the
closings, similar to the situation
thirtean citias. Without exception,
in July . Tho proportion of new cases
unskilled jobs were more nu..Tie rou.s
in total intake , after de clining to
than unskilled workars who had sea low point in Ju.n8
incraased
cured jobs. Witt only on3 axception
- that of the semi- skilled in Bridge- some':7hat in Jul y , and then declinGd
slightly in Augusti/ .
p ort - both skilled and scmi-skillad
jobs wera less m.1m3rou.s than wara
!/
J or, _:(u,rthe r i _n formation conemployed
skilled and semi-skillad
cerning accessions and separations
workers.
of relief CP.ses,
the re ader is referred.( wi tnou.t addi tiona l discussion
Employable skilled workers were
in t his report) to Tables 13, 14 and
accepted for relief in January and
February in greater proportions (of
15.
the total employable workers ac1
Digitized by
Original from
NORTHWESTERN UNIVERSITY
NORTHWESTERN UNIVERSITY
8026
-1-
CURRENT CF-~GES IN THE URBAN RELIEF FOPULATI ON
AUGUST 1935
Trend of Er,1ployable Persons on Relief in Thirteen Ci ti es
by Occupational Groups
- -The r elief population of the survey cities coutained , as of Decembe r 1934 , approximately 500 , 000
worke r s 16- 64 years of age who r ep ort ed "usual 11 employment i n specified occupati ons .
Increases occurred , on the whole , during
the
first quart e r of 19 35 ,bu t the r e were
marked decreases during the subsequent four months , followed by a
small increase i n August , with the
r e sult that this group of empl oyable
pe r sons on relief was 5 . 1 percent
less numerous in August than in December .
Chan
ief load
b
occupat
__.,
. .. •
Trends in
the occupational characteristics of
-the urban r el ief populati on should
be interpreted with due re gar d to
the r elative importance of the various groups in the ge ne ral ~opul ati on
of urban centers .
While 40 pe r cent
of t he gainful workers in the general population (according to t he 1930
Census) a r e white-collar pe op l e , only
17 or 18 percent of the employabl e
persons on r elief bel ong to the
white-colla r group .
At the othe r
extreme 1 between 35 and 40 pe rcent
of the r elief load are unskilled
worke r s , whe r eas the unski ll ed group
in the gene ral population
constitutes only 20 or 21 percent of the
total .
As shown in Table 1 , these
facts obtain , in r espect to t he relief p opulat ion , whether one r efers
i/
Occupati onal groups distinguished in the ur·oan Current
Change Survey
may be described briefly as foll ows : WHITE-COLLAR WORKERS consis ti ng of (1)
T)rofes s ional pe opl e - teachers ( school) , nusici e.ns and t eache rs of music ,
trained nurses , t echnical enginee r s , de s igners and dr aftsmen, cle r gymen ,
actors and showmen, an.d artists and sculpto r s ; ( 2) p ropr i etor s , manage r s and
officials - wholesale and r e tail deal e rs , builders and buildi ng con tractors
manage r s and officials (manufacturing) , r es taurant and lunch room keepe rs,
and bankers and brokers ;( 3) cl e rks and kindred worke r s - sal esmen and sal e swomen , clerks ( gene ral) , stenogr aphers and typists, bookkeepe r s and accountant s , telephone and t el €·gr aph ope r at ors , messenge r s and offi ce boys ,
and r eal estrct e and insurance agents . SKILLED WORKERS - paint e rs
and
varni she r s (buildin6 ), c~rponters , mech~nics , machinist s and tool makers
brick and stone masons , engineers (stati onary), and electricians .
SE1~ SKILLED WORKERS - ope r atives in manufacturing (iron and steel , textil es ,
clothing , f ood , and aut omobiles) , chauffeurs and truck dr ive r s , semi- skilled
wo r ke rs (building and construction) , dressmake r s and seamst res ses , and delive r ymen (bakeries, st ores , and l aundr ies) .
UNSKI LLED WORKERS consisting
of (1) lab orers - other than manufacturing (mines , quarries , oil and gas
wells , odd jobs , steam and st r eet railroads , roads and streets , stores , and
building and construction) ; manufactur ing (i ro n and steel , machi ne ~~ , and
vehicles ), furna ce men and. smelter men , and farm l aborers; ( 2) se r vunt s laundre sses and launde r ers (not in laundr ies) , waiters and waitresses ,
worke r s in hotels and boardi nt; houses , cooks and chefs , charwomen
and
cl eaners , j ani tors , and port e rs .
Digitized by
Original from
NORTHWESTERN UNIVERSITY
NORTHWESTERN UNIVERSITY
8026
-2-
- t'o the thirteen survey cities, the
seventy-nine cities in which the
1934 Survey of Occupational Characteristics was conduc~~d,or the urban
situation as a whole0.
The four main occu-oational groups
on relief in the survey cities-white
collar, skilled, semi-skilled, and
unskilled - shared in the decrease
of the eight months ending in August.
Skilled workers showed the greatest
net decline(9 percent); white-collar
workers, the least (1 percent). The
proprietary group of white-collar
workers
on relief was
somewhat
larger in August than in December.
whereas the professional group declined more than the white-collar
average.
The turnover
of
semi- skilled
workers on relief was greater tha.Li.
average; that of unskilled ~orkers ,
less than average 9
The two groups
of unskilled workers - laborers and
servants - differed widely , however ,
in this regard, the turnover of laborers on relief being
somewhat
above average and tb.~t of servents
considerably below ~v~rage (Tabl€ 2) .
~ The p r inc,ipal 'c.ifference s ti'eiH''Ioen
the 13- ci ty and the 79-city or t-otnl
urban distributions of the employable relief po-pulation (by occupations of usu.al employment) occur
in the skilled and
semi-skilled
groups , skilled workers comprising a
,smaller propo1·tion ot.' the total for
13 cities than for 79 cities or
total urba.<""1., and. semi-rkilleo workers
a greater proportion.
Among unskilled workers. there is comparative
over-representation of servants in
the thirteen cities and under-representation of laborers, with the proportions for total unskilled not far
different.
It should be noted in this con nection that the white-collar group .comprising 17 percent of all employable persons on relief in thirteen
cities, accounted for only 16 percent of the employable members of
closed cases,whereas skilled workers
who constitute 15 percent of the
total on relief comprised 17 pe rc 8nt
of the total in closed cases .
This
may suggest the.t per ca:pi ta employment opportunities are greater for
skilled workers than for
white
collar workers . Because of possible
differences in the number of employable persons per case , however , and
the fact that the number of workers
separat ed from the relief r olls per
job obtained may be greater for
skilled workers than
for whitecollar workers, these data are not
conclusive on this point . The period of unemployment before acceptance
for relief - longer for the whitecolla,r
group
than
f or skilled
workers , as pointed out in a sultsequent paragraph - has some bear ing
upon the question also.
As shown in Chart 1, the trend of
semi-skilled workers on relief contrasts sharply with the trends of
the ether -0oc1lpa.ti onal groups.
In
Ma;-ch, for -example , the relia:f loa.-d
of semi- skilled workers was 2 percent below the
December
level ,
whereas for each of the other occupational ~roups the March l oad ,~s
.gr~ater than the December l oad. The
de.cline coritin'_y,~d. t :-: ;.:rough
June when
semi- skilled ws 1·k ?. r s on r elief were
5 pe rc E: nt l e· s~ r1ur:ie :.".'ous than in DeSr.1al l i nc.: r ~8.S E- s in
the
cemc e r.
nu,mber of Stmi-ski1lc:d workers on
relief occurre d in July and August
to a point 3 pe rcent below December.
During the fou r months subse quent to
March , the sk illed worker group de-
Digitized by
Original from
NORTHWESTERN UNIVERSITY
NORTHWESTERN UNIVERSITY
105
105
~'
,~
,1·
·-~---·---·-.
-
~,
..... ~
~
C
Q)
-,
.. ~
-- -... ... _
•
......... '-
----
_,_
~
100
,- -, ,_
, ,
.....
u
I..
41
a.
~
--- '
-, -'
~~
~
~
95
ALL OCCUPATIONS
•----•••\\tilTE COLLAR
._ •-•-SKILLED
,--- ---SEMI-SKILLED
•UNSKILLED
0-
'--..
--- ...
._
-- --·~., "' \..'-.
·,"' "'--"" . ,,,,,,,
'· - ~-.
' ---~~
"'- -.._
....
"'-
/
.......
'-'•... ~.
• • •
FEB.
JAN.
MAR.
APR.
MAY
95
~
'-
90
DEC.
100
JUNE
·,. ---·-
90
AUG.
JULY
CHART 1 - TREND OF THE THIRTEEN-CITY AGGREGATE OF EMPLOYABLES ON REL IEF WHO REPORTED USUAL EMPLOYMENT,
BY OCCUPATIONAL GROUPS
I December 1934 thru August 1935:
UNSKILL ED
December 1934
~SEMI-SKILLED~ SKILLED
(71
~
= 1001
WHITE
COLLAR
Percent
100
TOTAL
WORKER S
......
.
.
TOTAL
JOBS
......
......
. . .. ... . .. . .
I
I
•
I
I
I
CHART 2 - DISTRIBUTION!! OF EMPLOYED MEMBERS OF JUNE-AUGUST
CLOSED CASES BY USUAL OCCUPATION AND OF JOBS HELD
AT CLOSING BY TYPE OF JOB
!/
I nc l ud i ng a ll workers reporting occupations of
both usua l and current emp l oyment
Digitized by
Original from
NORTHWESTERN UNIVERSITY
NORTHWESTERN UNIVERSITY
8026
-3-
creased most rapidly - approximately
11 percent.
Earlier reports of this series
have called attention to the tendency for white-collar workers to comprise increasing proportions of the
total relief load.While this tendency ~ersisted through0ut the period
covered by this report, except for a
negligible decline in the proportion
in August, a decrease of 5 percent
took place in the actual whitecollar load within a period of four
months - from a March figure 4 percent above December to a July figure
1 percent below (Table 3) .
c4-ang_es, ~n ,the relief load by
cities. 'I'he December-August net drop
in the relief load of employable
persons who reported usual employment in specified occ~pations was
greatest in Atlanta, Ho~ston, Butte ,
and Chicago - approxim~tely 41, 18,
8 , and 7 percent, respectively . For
the first three cities mentioned
this represents a continuation of
the trends observed in the June-July
report of this series, for the seven
months ending in July.
The Chicago
load increased somewhat from July to
August.
There was a net increase
~ver this period of eight months in
five of the cities - Manchester (52
percent), Wilkes-Barre (8 percent),
Omaha (6 percent), San ]'rancisc~ (6
percent, and Pat erson (5 percent).
Turnover was
relatively
low
in
Baltimore and Detroit;
r e l atively
high, in O~aha,
Paterson,
San
Francisco, and Wilkes-Barre (Tables
2 and 4) .
Wide diffe~ences exist, al£long the
survey cities, in the usual occupations of employed members
of
closed cases. The white-collar proportion of total employed members
ranges from 7 ,ercent (Wilkes-Barre)
to 25 pe r cent (San Francisco); the
skilled group, from 10 percent (Butte
and Manchester)
to 27
percent
(Detroit); The se mi-skilled- group ,
from 12 percent (Butte) to 65 percent
(Manchester); and
the
unskilled
grou'9, from 14 percent (Manchest er)
to 68 uercent (Wil ke s-Barre) (Tab le
6) •
Occupational shifts from usual to
~urre~t employment .
Data on
the
occupations of both usual
and
current employment are a vailable on
38,915 memb ers o! June, July, and
Auc;ust closed cases who/were working
at the time of closi!lg~ • Examinetion
of these cases disclos e s a noticeable shift from usual type of occupation to current type of occu~ation .
Twenty-eight pe rc ent
of
persons
usually engaged in white - collar occupatio~s were employed (at the time
of cl osing:) in 11 lower 11 occupational
grou~s . Of th e sidlled workers, 5 . 4
percent had r~sen in the
occupational scalei/, as against 20 . 2
percent who had fallen.
Of
the
persons usually engaged in semiskilled wo r ~ - 9 . 8 percent had risen
and 14 . 7 percent ha.d fallen . And of
the persons usually engaged in un-
y
The reader's attention is called
to the fact that the sample method
has been used extensively in compiling the data for the
larger
cities.
For example, the total of
38,915 - which is on a 100 percent
basis - b.8s been derived from an
actual eount of 22,108 - a 57 percent sample of employed members of
closed cases.
ii A shift from skilled to white collar work, as the t erm is used in
this report, is defined as upward .
Digitized by
Original from
NORTHWESTERN UNIVERSITY
NORTHWESTERN UNIVERSITY
8026
- 4 -
skilled work, 11. 7 percent had risen
in the scale. As would be eryected,
the downward trend is greater on the
whole than the upward trend; 12.8
percent of the total group moved
downwards as against 8.1 percent who
moved upwards in the scale Charts 2
and 3, and ( Table A).
In general,
the four groupsare
fairly stable, unskilled
workers
showing the least shift. The whitecollar workers manifest least stability.
And the skilled and semiskilled groups exhibit roughly equal
degrees of stability~/ .
There were 1123 persons who reported a current occupa tion but who
had never worke0 before and therefore were recorded as having
no
usual occupation.
For this group
the proportion with work in skilled
occupations was very small, whereas
white-collar jobs constitutod a compara ti vely large proportion of the
total.
Although one-sisth of the
jobs currently held by all workers
in the stud.y were in skilled occupations, onl y 6 (0.5 percent) of the
1123 persons holding their first
jobs were in the skilled category.In
contrast, the proportion of the 1123
persons who found white-collar jobs
was nearly twice as great as the
proportion of white-col:ar jobs in
current employment (Table 5).
~/ In view of the fact that the
occupational catee;ories
presented
here are broad and somewhat indefinite, it is probably reasonable to
assume that varying d.egrees of skill
exist within any one category, and
that within the limits of each category, upward and downward shifts occurred.
Evidence to ~rove this,
however, is not available .
Among employed members of June,
July, and AugQst closed ca ses who
reported occupations of both usual
and current em:Jloyment,
skilled.
workersY comprised a greater preportion of total workers than the
skilled jobs held at the time
of
closing comprised of total jobs-19.3
percent of the workers belonged to
the skilled group and 16.9 ~9rcont
of the jobs were skilled jobs.0 .This
suggests
that
opportunities for
other occupational groups to obtain
employment in skilled work are comparatively meager, but that skilled
work ers, in considerable numbers,
succeed in finding work ~n other
occupations. It would appear ,therefore, that the relative shortage of
skilled workers, if it exists , is
cau sed by t he exodus of this greup
into oth er occupatio ns (definitely
exceeding the movement from other
§} The term 11 skilled worker" is used
in this report to signify one whose
usual occupat ion wa s in the skilled
category, regard.less of the character of the job currently hel d.
The
terms 11 whi te--colla.r worker", 11 semiskilled worker"
and
"unskilled
vrorker" are used similarly.
7../ Of all employed persons who reported usual occupa t i ons, 18 .7 percent were skilled workers; and
of
all
j obs for which occupations wPre
indicated,
including those held by
persons who had no u~ial occupation,
1 6 . 4 percent were skilled jobs.
As further evidence of the difficulty encount ered by other group s in
obtaining skilled jobs , semi- skilled
and unskilled workers
got larger
proportions of the white-collar jobs
than of the skilled jobs (Table A,
Section III) .
Digitized by
Original from
NORTHWESTERN UNIVERSITY
NORTHWESTERN UNIVERSITY
TYPE OF JOB IN WHICH CURRENTLY EMPLOYED
UNSKILLED
TYPE OF JOB IN
WHICH USUALLY
EMPLOYED
i:88:3
~
~ SKILLED
SEMI-
SKILLED
r.-:1 WH I TE
t.:..:J COLL AR
NUMBER OF JOBS HELD
DOWNWARD
SHIFT
NO SlilFT
UPWARD
SHIFT
. .. . . . . .. .
WHITE COLLAR
SKILLED
SEMI-SKILLED
UNSKILLED
0
12500
NUMBER
PERCENT DISTRIBUTION
TYPE Of JOB IN
WHICH USUALLY
EMPLOYED
DOWNWARD
SHIFT
NO SHIFT
lJPWARU
SHIFT
. . . .. .. . . . . . .
.......
WHITE COLLAR
.
SKILLED
SEMI-SKILLED
UNSKILLED
ALL GROUPS
0
20
60
40
80
100
PERCENT
CHART,. OCCUPATIONAL SHIFTS FROM TYPE OF JOB IN WHICH USUALLY EMPLOYED TO TYPE OF
JOB HELD AT CLOSING BY EMPLOYED MEMBERS OF JUNE - AUGUST CLOSED CASES.
Digitized by
Original from
NORTHWESTERN UNIVERSITY
NORTHWESTERN UNIVERSITY
8026
- 5 -
Table A
Employed Persons in Closed Relief Cases of Thirteen Cities
Combined , Classified by Occupational Groups of Usu.al and
Curr ent Employment
June-August 19 35
,!
t Q-1
Occupational Group ( rtoaving
I
Occupatio nal Group of Current Employment
of
nown cu r - I
SemiUsual Employment r ent occu-1 , l eUnpation) . Colla r Skill ed skilled skil l ed
Unknown
I
Number of Employed Warters in Sne cified
I,
Oc cupational Grou...£.§_
i
38 , 915?/
15,129
5,980
6,576
11,230
6,116
244
781
4,403
688
409
824
7,509
5,587
689
11,976
665
506
1,767
9,038
13,314
503
239
815
11,757
I.
Total
White-collar
Skilled
Semi-skilled
Unskilled
Unknown
No Usual Occupa tioni
45
1,123
!!
I!
18
324
6
9
368
18
425
I
9,175
1, 406
1,482
2,123
4,164
i
471
256
II . Perc ent Distribu tion of Occupational Group
of Usual Empl oymen~_Current Employment
Total
White-collar
Skil led
Semi-skil led
Unskilled
100 . 0
100.0
100 . 0
100.0
100.0
15 . 4
72.0
5.4
5.6
3. 8
16.9
4. 0
74 . 4
4.2
1. 8
28.8
11.2
9.2
75 . 5
6.1
Unknown
No Usual Occupation
100.0
100.0
40.0
28 .9
0. 5
20 . 0
32 . 8
38 . 9
12.8
11.0
14. 7
88 .31
'
40.0
07 . s I
III. Percent Distribution of OccuDatio nal Group
of Cu:--ren t Employment by UsQal Employment
100.0
1 5. 7
19.3
30.8
34 . 2
Total
White-collar
Skilled
Semi-ski ll ed
Unskilled
Unknown
No Usual Occupati on
Ii 100.0
I
I
I
f
73. 7
6.8
11.1
8.4
100.0
3.7
85.0
7.7
3 .6
100.0
6.1
6.1
80.5
7.3
100.0
5.2
5.4
11. 7
77 . 7
100 . 0
15 . 3
16.2
23 .l
45 . 4
I
l
§;./
Excludes 11unknown 11 in both current and usual occupational groups as well
as 11 no usual 11 employment .
Digitized by
Original from
NORTHWESTERN UNIVERSITY
NORTHWESTERN UNIVERSITY
BC26
- 6-
occu,ation s into skilled work) and
not by rel a tive increeses in the
nu.mb :e r of skilled jobs a,;ail able . The
number of empl oyAd skilled worke rs
(that is, wo"rke rs whose usual oc cupat ions v,e re in t h e skilled category)
among those who rep orted occupa tions
of both usual and current employment
e xceede i the number of skilled job s
held a t the time of closing , in each
of t h e survey cities .
With one excep tion - Bridgeport - the number of
employed
semi - skilled
workers is
gr ea ter than tha t of semi-skilled
jobs held.
Empl oyed white- collar
workers a re more numer ous than the
white- coll a r jobs held in seven of
the t'.nirteen cities .
.As would be
expected , it was in unskilled jobs
tha t t h e
bu1k
of
the worke rs
shifting from oth er groups foun d emp loyment (Chart 4 , and T&ble 5) .
Di st ribution s
of a ll emyilo~red
workers who reporte d
usual occupations,
whether occupations
of
curr en t employment we re known or n ot,
and of all jobs held in speci fied
occu"9ati or_ s , whe ther th e worke rs ha d
usua l oc cu _pation s or not , show the
semi-skilled
and
unski lled p rop ortions - worke rs and jobs -to h s.ve
been more nearly in ag1·eemen t t lwn
was true of the group which r e:p cr ted
both usual and current ocCclf::lti ons .
In a ll cities , however,
eIBr loyed
workers who had been usually enga~ed
in skilled vrork co11<:ti t ut~J. gj_e-3.ter
proportions of the total wh o rep orted occupations of usu9.l em:ploymen t thmi the sl:illed. ,Joos ~1eld a t
th e time of closing comprised_ of
tot al jobs (Tab le 6) .
employable
Dis
bution
-tri
--- - of
persons in openin~s and cl osin s
occupation of u sual empl oyment~ . The
June-July r eport showed tha t the
p rop ortion of employ able pe r s ons in
ac cessions and in sepa r ati ons , who
belonged to R given industrial group
va ried wi dely from one month to
an other . As woul d be exp ec ted,si nce
the seas onal f a ctor is considered of
l ess importance for
oc cupational
groups than for industri al g roups ,
mon th-to-month v ari a tio ns a re less
mar ked for the form er than for the
l atter . Va ri a t i ons of some significance , a-pp e.3-r, however , in the occupational groups .
For
example,
appToxim8.tely 30 percent of the em:9loyab le pe r s ons in c as es opened
during J anu ar y , Februa r y , and. Ma rch
we re semi-skill ed wo r ke r s , a s comp8 r ed wi th 38 pe rcent in June, July,
and .August . On the other hand , semiskilled. worke r s comprised 38 pe rcent
of a ll employ able person s in cases
closed during the first three months
of the pe riod under study and 28
percent during the l as t three months .
The ski°llod worker p roportion for
opened c a s e s was lowes t in April; ar~d
for closed c a s es it was highest in
Apr i l .
Throughout the six months
ending .Augus t 31 , skilled workers
left th e r elief ro J_ls in both relative and actual numbers exceeding
~ -Ern1Jloyable pe r s ons , wh o design a t ,::d oc cupation s of u si.la.l employment , c om~ri se d approxim~tely 88 per
csnt of all emplcyatle
p ersons in
intake and 59 pe r cen t in closings .
For de t a ils, see Tabl e 6 of the June
- July Uroan Curren t Change report,
Se ri e s I, No . 14 .
Digitized by
Original from
NORTHWESTERN UNIVERSITY
NORTHWESTERN UNIVERSITY
Type of
Worker
Emp I oyed
IN)
-
UNSKILLED
~
~ WHITE
~ COLLAR
SEMI-SKILLED ~SKILLED
Type of
Job Held
( J)
Percent
0
w
J
w
J
w
J
w
J
w
J
w
J
w
J
w
J
w
J
w
J
w
J
w
J
w
J
w
J
CHART q_
20
40
60
80
,oo
Al I Cities
Wi I kes-Barre
Butte
Houston
Atlanta
Baltimore
Omaha
St. Louis
Chicago
San Franc I sec
Paterson
Detroit
Bridgeport
Manchester
DISTRIBUTION OF EMPLOYED MEMBERS OF JUNE-AUGUST CLOSED CASES
BY TYP5i9 ~felli9B HELD AT CLOS I NG AND BY TYPE qfrig~~~~~R EMPLOYED,
NORTHWESTERN UNIVERSITY
BY CIT I ES
NORTHWESTERN UNIVERSITY
8021,
- 7those admitted to relief
(Table 7) .
Di st ribution of workers employed
at clo3ing by o ccupation in which
employed. Whita - collar, skilled , and
unskillad jobs were relatively mor0
i mp ortant in provid i ng income sufficient to permit tha closing of re li e f cases during the suinrner than in
Semi - skilled
January and February .
jobs, on tha other hand , made up 49
percent of t he tota l closing s due to
emp loyman t in January a nd 25 percent
It sHould be noted in
in August .
this conne C ti on t ha t the "unknown II
group is large , r a nging f r om 15 to
While this means that
27 pe rcent .
the percentages themselves are unde rstatements of the true proportions
wh ich t he variou s g roups comp r ise ,
t hey are considered indicative of
trand s (Table a) .
Duret ion of unemployment of unemnloyed workers in opene d ca ses . As
would be expected , the u.nemp loyman t
pe riod p rior to acceptance for re liaf was long3r for mamba rs of new
cases than for m0 mb 0 rs of reopened
cases - 15 weeks (me dian for- a ll
t h rough
J anuary
citie s combined ,
com~ared
as
,
cases
new
August) for
with 9 weeks for reopened cases . For
cases opened in January , Februery ,
and March , it was considerably above
the ei gn t mon th s ' ave r age in each
in stance ; for t ho se opened in June ,
Jul y , and Au.gis t , con siderably below.
This change , reinforced by a decline
in the proportion of new cases in
tota l intake between January and
Augus t , caused the me dian period of
unemp loyed
a ll
unemployman t of
memb~rs in int eke to decrease more
did for eithe r the new or
than it
the reope ned cases
White - collar workers reported the
and
longest unemployment periods
semi - ski lled workers the shortest .
Whita-collar workars in new May and
u.nemplcyed
June cases had been
longer t han in t he new case s of
o ther mon t hs . This may be interprer eted as r ef lecting decr ease d
collar
luctan ce on the par t of white
people to acc8pt a relief status ,
caused by the ann ounced plan of
the
giving special attention to
white - collar group (Table 9) .
I ndi vidual Occuna tional Groups
Many of tha diffe rences between
movaments in occupa tional group3 for
cities are s i milar to
individual
t hose occurr in g in t he total loa d
r eflects
for those cities . Tnis
differences in local conditions and
to some extent i n agency policy.
Nevertheless, t he basic question as
to how t he various skill groups a r e
f a ring in t he thirteen cities is
answe red by the data .
Whit 1- colbr workers . The number
of empl oyeb l e white - collar pers ons
on r 0l i af in the t h irteen citie s ,wh o
r eported usu.al e mpl oymen t , varied
the
within narrow limits duri ng
period January t hrough Augus t - from
88 , 300 in Ma rch to 84 , 000 in July .
of white
proprietary group
The
collar worke rs i nc re ase d in January ,
February, and Ma rch , and decre ased
through
dur i ng the pe riod Ap ril
.August, although for the period as a
whole t he re wa s a small net i n cra ase .
Clerks followed the same pattern,
excep t that a small increase ocThe professional
currad in Augus t .
group is more irregula r, the nu.:.1-L0r
J a nuary ,
on r e li ef in cre as i ng in
and decreasing
M~ rch , and Au 6 ust ,
dur ing t he other five month s , with
an August total 3 pe r cen t celow the
De cember level (Table 3 ) .
From Janua ry through August,
ployable white - collar pe r son ~
Digitized by
Original from
NORTHWESTERN UNIVERSITY
NORTHWESTERN UNIVERSITY
emin
8026
-8opened cases were relatively most
nu.mP-rous in San Francisco, Houston,
and Chicago, and relatively
least
numerous in
Wilkes-Barre
and
Paterson. White-collar jobs held at
the time of closing (by member s of
closed cases) were most important,
relative to total jobs,
in San
Francisco and Atlanta;
least important in Wilkes-Barre, Paterson,
and Manchester . As would be expected
the trend in the proportion of white
-collar workers among opened cases
is the reverse in most i nstances of
the trend for closed cases in the
proportion of white-collar jobs . In
Manchester , for exam1)le 1 29 :->ercent
of the employable persons in January
opened cases
were
wnite- collar
workers, as compared with 5 percent
in August; whereas 8 percent of the
January jobs were white-collar jobs,
as compared with
14
percent in
August.
In Atlanta, the trends are
reversed, the August percentage of
persons in opened cases being the
greater, and of jobs held by members
of ciosed cases, the sma:ler(Table
12)f/.
Skilled workers. The relief load
of employable skilled workers increased in January and February, ani
decreased in each of the following
six months, ranging from a February
figure 2 percent above the December
level to an Au6 u st figure 9 percent
below.
f/
Tables 3 and 12 provirie the basic
data for the discussion of individual occupational groups in this
and following sections, thoueh they
are referred to at this point only .
Detailed city data on changes in the
employable reli ef load
by occupational group s are pr es ented in
Tables 10 and 11 .
Skilled workers in opened cases
were relatively most impo rtant in
Baltimore, Bridgeport, Detroit, and
San Francisco; r elatively least important in Butte, Manchester, and
Wilkes-Barre. Skilled jobs comprised
largest proportions of total jobs
held by members of closed cases in
Detroit, Omaha, and San Francisco .
The skilled grouD constituted 25
percent of the total in J anuary
opened cases in Bridgeport, as compared with 16 percent in August;
whereas the skilled jobs held in
Bridgeport by members of January
closed cases were 5 perc ent of the
tot al, compo.red i,;i th 18 :_oercent in
Aug1..:st.
Semi-skilled worke rs. Contrary to
the general movement, the a 6gregate
of employable s emi-skilled workers
on relief declined on the whole
during the first quarter of the year
and at no time from January through
August was the total as great as in
Decembe r. From a low po int in June,
5 percent below December,an increase
has taken place resulting in
an
August l oad 3 percent below December . March , July, and August are
the o~ly months in which
increases
occurred .
Five of the
cities Manches ter, OIIlRha, Paterson,
San
Francisco, and Wilkes-Barre - show
net increases from January through
August in the number of semi-skilled
wor ke:::-s on reli ef .
_t,n ex..~ mination of the monthly
r ecord o: individual cities shows
that the Detroit data account, in
the main, for the dissiMilarity in
tr end bet~een the semi-skilled and
the other occupational groups . With
s easonal expansion in the automobile
industry in J anuary and February,
se mi -s~illed workers disappeared in
Digitized by
Original from
NORTHWESTERN UNIVERSITY
NORTHWESTERN UNIVERSITY
8026
-9-
l a r ge n1.L~bers from the Detriot relief rolls. Du.ring the three months
June, July, and August, many of them
returned, with the result tha t semisk illed workers on relief in Detroit
were but slightly le s s numerous in
.August than in December (Table 11).
Semi-skilled workers in Detroit
opened cases increased from 37 percent of the tot al in J anua ry to 53
pe_rcent in August , wherea s semiskilled jobs held in this city a t
the time of closing decreas ed from
69 pP rc en t of the total in Janua ry
to 37 perc ont in .August .Semi-skilled
wo r kers in opened c a.ses were relatively most
numerous in the textile
manufacturing centers
- Manchester
and Paterson , and rel a tively l east
numerous in the mining centers-·
Butt e and Wilke s-Barre.
The
same
was true of semi- skilled jobs held
by members of cl os ed cases .
Unskilled workers. The unskilled
group on reli ef in the survey cities
. - increasing in January and March,
and decreasing
in the other six
months - follo ws the all-occupation
pattern of month-to- month changes in
all months except .August. Du.ring
the five months ending in August , a
decline of approximately 9 percent
occurred - from a Ma rch load 3 percent above December to an ·August
lo ad 6 per cent below.
Laborers and
servants - the t wo class es of unskilled workers - a re simil a r
in
their monthly vari a tions, March and
August being the high and low months
in each case.
Relative to the Decemb nr level, the servant group on
relief maintains (throughout
the
pe riod January through August)
a
position higher than tha t of laborers, but a t no time does the difference exceed 2 percent .
The se rv ant
load increased somewhat in Februa ry.
With this exception , both laborers
and servants follow the pattern (of
monthly vari a tions) of the unskilled
group as a whole .
The
proportions of unskill e d
workers in opened cases were l a rgest
in Baltimore, Butte, Houston, Omaha,
and Wilkes-Barre ;
and smallest in
Manchester and Pa t erson.
The same
is true
of unskilled jobs held at
the time of closing by members of
closed c ases . Un skilled worke rs in
Atla~ta opened cases decreased from
40 percent of tot al workers in January to 2n percent in j.11gust, whereas
unskilled jobs in Atlanta increased
from 31 percent of total jobs to 43
pe rcent
Digitized by
Original from
NORTHWESTERN UNIVERSITY
NORTHWESTERN UNIVERSITY
8026
-10-
Table 1
Occupational Distribution of Urban Workers 16- 64 Year s of Age in
Gener al and Relief Popul a tions
Occupational
Group
I
Gener al urb;:in Total urban 79-city
13-city
13- ci ty
pOp lll E. ti on 1 :rel ief pop . reli ef pot ~relief pop , relief pop .
Apr i l 193C.0:/ 1,~ay 1934:£_/ May l 934~ Dec. 1934£/ llllg. 1935
I
Tota l workers
21, 028, 237
3, 485, 000
253 ,111§:,/
503 , 400
477, 6 99
j
Percent Di s t r i bution
All Occupa t i ons
White col l ar
Prof ess ional
Pro pri et ary
Clerical
Skilled.
Semi- ski ll ed
Unskill ed
Labor er s
Servan ts
100. 0
40. 8
7. 0
8. 9
24 . 9
1 6. 8
21. 9
20 . 5
11.7
8.8
100 . 0
16. 3
2. 0
4 .1
10. 2
18.1
26. 9
38.7
23 . 3
15 . 4
100 . 0
17 . 2
2.1
3. 4
11.7
17. 4
28 . 2
37 . 2
20. 6
16. 6
I
!
100. 0
16. 9
1. 8
3. 0
12.1
14 . 9
32.2
36 . 0
17. 8
18. 2
100. 0
17. 6
1. 8
3 ~2
12. 6
14. 2
32 . 6
35 . 6
17. 4
18. 2
I
U. s. Censu s , 1930. Es t ima te d numb er of r ers ons in ga.inful occupations
in ci t ies of 25 , 000 dr more popul a t i on.
Sur vey of Occupa t i onal c:12.r ac t eri st i cs M.q,;r 1934.
See Table 2 , foo tnote§), of t ni s report.
Sample u s ed in t he Surv ey of Occupationa l C~1ar acteristics May 1934
Digitized by
Original from
NORTHWESTERN UNIVERSITY
NORTHWESTERN UNIVERSITY
8026
-11-
Table 2
Employable Workers on Relief in Thirt een Cities Re~orting
Usual Employment in Occupational Gr oups
January- Augus t 1935
i--__
I'
-
~ anuari•-Augus t
Classification
Al+
503,400
!
White-collar
Professional
Proprietors
Clerks
Skilled
Se mi-skilled
Unskill ed
Laborers
'
Servants
8,870
15, 070
60,850
75,190
161,970
181,450
89,640
91,810
I
I
I
-All Cities
Atlanta
Baltimo r e
Bridgeport
Butte
Chicago ·
Detroit
Houston
Manch e ster
Omaha
Paterson
st. Louis
San Francisco
mi:i_kes-Barre
503 , 400
zg ,ooo
41,700
6,300
7,ooo
183,300
85. 900
16,400
3,300
12,800
8 , 400
58,600
32,100
18,600
I
i
84,790 I
i
I
I
I
i
I 159,856
I
I
!
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
1935
iPercent
!change
Ne t
!from
Change ,Dec . 1934
.I
,.
bl - 5 . 1
159,856Q 1185 557Q -25, 701-·,
'
27, '.-,86
28 , Ll-4 7 -161 1- 0 . 5
2, S95
3, 302 307 - 3 . 5
5, 634
5,523 i111 + 0 . '7
19 ,;;i57
19,622 265 - 0 . 4
~0 ,666 - 6,938 - 9 . 2
23,728
54,169
59,460 - 5,291 - 3 . 3
64,347 -10,741 - 5 . 9
53,606
29,498
35,70 7 - 6,209 - 6.9
24,108
28 ,640 - 4,532 - 4 . 9
Workers I
,
on
~ Wor~e rs
Workers
Relief~ in
in
Dec . 1934l Openin 6 s Cl os i ngs
Occupations
-- -- -·- Percent Distribution
3 , 012
9,747
1,740
1,491
53,917
23, 267
4,961
2 ,852
8,119
5, 038
20,081
15,600
10 ,031
1R5,557
14,867
11,762
2,153
2,061
66 ,577
23,573
7,973
1,151
7,375
4,612
21,313
13,612
8,528
-
h
- 25,701 I - :::_
· _l
-11, 855 1-,ro . 9
- 2 ,015 - 4.8
- 413 - 6 . 6
- 570 - 8 . 1
-1 2,660 - 6.9
- ~06 - 3.6
- 3, 012 -18 . 4
+ l, '101 +51 . 5
744 + 5.8
+
+ 5.1
426
+
- 1, 232
1, 988
+ 1,503
+
I
f
2.1
+ 6.2
+
8.1
Workers Workers Workers
in
in
on
Relief OpeningE Closings
100 . 0
16 . 9
1.8
3.0
12 .1
14 . 9
32 . 2
36. 0
17 . 8
18.2
100 . 0
100 . 0
17 . 5
15 . 5
1.8
1.9
3.0
3.5
10 . 7
12 . 1
16 . 8
14 . 9 I
32 . 5
34 . 0
35 . 2
33 . 6
19 . 5
18.5
15 . 7
15 . 1
100 . 0
5.8
8.3
100 . 0
100 . 0
8.0
1. 9
6. 3
6.1
1 .1
1.2
0.9
1.1
35 . 9
33 . 7
14 . 5
12 . 7
4.3
3.1
1.8
0.6
4.0
5.1
2. 5
3.2 I
I
I 12 . 6
11. 5
I 9. 7
7. 3
I
4.6
6.3
I
l.3
1.4
36 . 3
17 . 0
3. 3
0.7
2. 5
1.7
11.6
6.4
3. 7
·-
I
I
l
An e stimate derived fr om the December 1934 ca2e load. in ee.cn city by application
of, first, the average nu,~ber of workers pe r r elief case, and then the occupational
distribution in May 1934. WhiJ e t hese data are app roximations only, they are considered fair bas es for an analysis of relative chan~e.
2../ Totals include "Occupation n0t sp ecified 11 which comprise 367 openings and 2637
closings with a net change of 2270 fr o111 December 1934 to August 1935 .
~/
Digitized by
Original from
NORTHWESTERN UNIVERSITY
NORTHWESTERN UNIVERSITY
-12-
8026
Table 3
Employable Persons§,/ on the Relief Rolls E,./ in the Thirteen Cities
Classified by Occupational Group of Usual Employlllent
January - Auc,u s t 1935
_o_c_cu_p-'_/_;!_~_,~~.;...n_a_l-+---D-e_c_.-1--_J_a_n_
.
L'
I
I Mnr . Apr. l
I .of Emnloyable
;
!
Number
Feb .
Total
i
Hay
June
!
July
Aug.
I
'
Persons
__Total _.Jd__ __ Q03,5'l!)_,5.QS.,.3\10150.5-,.58 7 508_,_6!,L 498 ,]Ql 1489 , 641~
18L._345 i4 75 . 658 4 77 . 699._
White collar 84 , 790
87, 089 87,172 88,308 86,7091 85 , 635 85 , 067! 83 , 987. · 84,329
,Throfessio na] 8 , 870
9,058
8,834
8,921
8,721-j 8,633
8,5~21 8,495
8 ,563
Proprietors 15 , 070
15,83~. 15,969 16 ,363 15,1281 15,809 15 , 529 · 15 , 228 15,181
Cl erks
60 , 850
62,19'7! 62,379 63 ,024 61,860 1 61,193 60,976 60 , 264 60 , 585
Skill ed
75 , 190 j 76,7381 76 , 911 76,906 73,9221 71,718 69,851 68 , 296 68 , 252
Semi-skilled 161,970 1159,9231157 , 748 !158,292 155,412 ,153,879 153 , 753 154 , 553 156 , 679
Unskilled
181,4501 185,253jl85 , 0631186 ,621 184 , 25ljl80 ,156 174,572,170 , 964 170,709
Laborers
89 ,640
91,441 ! 90,846 !1 91,696 90 , 6311 87,960 85 , 641 83 , 655 83 , 431
Servants
91,810 ! 93,812 1 94,217 1 94,925 93 , 620 1 92 ,1 96 1 88 , 931 1 87 , 309 87 , 278
Rel ative Number of Em~loyable Persons:- December 1934 = 100
Total
_______ 1001-·- ··-101! --··-- 100+ . ---- l Ol..l-_._ 991--- 97 _
9!
94 ___ }5
White collar
100
103
103i
104j
102:
101
100
99
99
Professiona]
100 I
102
99 i
100 j
98 1
97
97
96
97
Proprietors
lOOj
105
1061
109 1
1071
105
103
101
101
Clerks
1001
102 1
103 1
104
102
101
100
99
100
Skilled
l OO j
102
1021
102
98
95
93
. 91
91
Semi-skilled
1001
99
97
98
96 ,
95
95
95
97
f.BJnskilled
100 i
102
102
103
1021
99
96
94
94
1
1
100!
102 .
101
102 1
101!
98
96
93
93
' Laborers
Servants
100;
102 11
103 :
103!
102!
10€ 11
971
95
95
Relative Number of Employable Persons:- All Occupations a 100
I
Whit e collar
Professiona:
Proprietors
Clerks
Skilled
Semi-skilled
Un skilled
Laborers
Servants
10~.
o
100 . 0~---·· 100 . o•
16 . 8
17. 11
17 . 2i
1. 8
1.8
1.7·
3. 0 11
3.1
3 .2
12. 01
12 . 2
12 . 3
14. 9 11·
15. 1
15 . 2!I
~2 . 31
31 . 4
31 . 1;
36 . 0
36 . 4
36.5 1
17. SI
18 . 0
17 . 91
l8 . 2i
lP.4
18.61
1
100~ - - 100 . of--100 . 0
17.3
17 . 31
17.4
1.7
1. 7
1.8
3. 2
3. 21
3. 2
12. 4
12. 41
12.4
15 . 1
14. 8i,
14 . 6
31 . 0
3~ .l !
31. 3
36 . 8
3b . 9 1
36 . 7
18 . 0
18 . ll
17.9
18. 7!
18 . 8
18 . 61
100 . 0 • 100 . 0
17. 6
17 . 6
1.8
1.8
3. 2
3.2
12 . 6
12.6
14 .5
14 . 3
3~ . 8!
32.3
3b.l 1
35 . 8
17 . 71
17. 5
18 . 4!
18 . 3
100 . 0
17.6
1.8
3. 2
12.6
14.2
32 . 6
35 . 6
17 . 4
18 . 2
a/ Except those ·wi thout 11 usual 11 employment .
"E/ Derived by a:9-µlication of Current Change Survey data to estimated occupational distribution of workers on relief in December 1934 . See Table 1, footnote §3} •
s;_/ The discreuancy between the total and the summation of occupational groups coincidee
with the net difference between the number of openings and closings whose occupatior
of employment was not ascertainable . In each month the number of wo r kers l eaving
the relief rolls, whos e occupation of usual Am-pl oyJ11ent wn.s not ascertainable , exceeded the nuwber coming on relief . Decreas e s from eacb p receding month are :January 613; Febn'ary 69~ ; March 123; April 163; May 154; June 151; July 244 ;
August 128.
§) "Unknown usual 11 excluded from total.
Digitized by
Original from
NORTHWESTERN UNIVERSITY
NORTHWESTERN UNIVERSITY
8026
-13Table 4
Employable P er s o~s on the Relief Rolls Re~orti~g Usual Employment
Thirt Pc;:i Cities
JanuQry-Aucust , 1935
--
City
Dec .
Jan.
Feb .
··-
Mar.
=
-
=-=~==-==-=====~=======
May
Apr.
June
July
Aug.
- --- ----- All Citi es
Atl anta
:B.al timor e
@ idgepor t
Butte
Chicago
Detroit
Houst on
Manche st e r
Omaha
Paters on
St. Louis
San Francisco
Wilkes-Barre
All Citi es
Atlanta
Baltimore
Bridgepo rt
f·B)tt e Cnicago
Detroit
iioust on
Manchester
Omaha
Paterson
St. Louis
San Francisco
Wilke s-Barr e
All Citie s
.Atlanta
Balt imore
Bridgel')o rt
t ~tte ..
Chi 08gO
Detroit
Houston
Mci.nd. . ester
Om?-ha
Paters on
st . Louis
Sa n Francisco
Wilkes-Barre
Total Number of Employable Per sons§:.!
503 , 400 508,390 505,5571508 ,697 498 , 'iOl 489 ,641 48 1 , 345:475 , 658 477 , 699
29 , 000 28 .511 27,403 26 , 736 25 , 794 24 , 860 20 , 082 18, 201 17,145
41 , 700 42 , 802 43,961 44 , 0 96 42 , 622 43 ,395 40 , 8 70 40 ,1 65 39 , 68 5
6 , 615
6 , 656
6 , 556
6 , 444
6 , 251
6 , 138
6 , 047
5, 887
6 , 300
7 , 000
6,930
6 , 871
6 , 815
6 , 727
6 , 635
6 , 4 72
6 , 478
6 , 430
18 3 ,300 150 , 220 187 , 924 191, 632 184 , 519 176, 641 1 75 , 355, 168 , 775 170 , 640
85 , 900 78 , 692 76 , 4441 76 , 954 76 ,24 7 75,347 76 , 733 81 , 872 85 , 594
16,400 16, 850 17,10 9 16,79 2 15 , 858 15 , 421 1 4 , 538 1 3 , 827 13,388
3,300
3 ,1291 3 , 1741 3, 238
3 , 523
3 , 8 71
4,275
4 ,715
5, 001
1 2 , 800 14 , 041 lf , 789 1 5 , 441 1 4 , 978 1 4 , 830 J. 4 ,11 61 1 3 , 697 13,544
8 , 400
7,170 1 7 , 29 11 7,5 88
7 , 679
1 ,9 21
8 , 446
8 , 8 77
8 , 826
5R , 600 60 , 04~1 59 , 375 · 58 , 075 58 , 692 59 , 437 58 , 580 5 7 , 739 57 , 368
32 ,100 33 , 8411 34 , 9171 3~ ,9 25 3~ , 267 34 , 970 34 , 820 1 3~ , 821 34 , 088
18 , 600 19,5•16 ! 19 , 673 1 19, 849 21 , 3511 21 , 059 20 , 9201 20 , 444 20 ,10 3
Relative Number of Empl 8yable
100
10 1 !
100 !
101
100
98
92
100
103
105
10 6
100
10 5
106
104
100
99
98
97
100
10~
10 3
105
100
92
89
90
100
103
104
102
100
95
96
98
100
11 0 I
116
1 21
1 00
85
87
90
102
10 1
99
100
105
10 91
1U9
100
105
1C6 I
10 7
100
I
9~1
P e rsons
99 I
89
102
102
96
101
89
97
10 7
1171
91
100
107
115
:- December 1934 = 100
97
96/
94
36
631
63
10?
98 1
96
99
97I
95
95
92
93
-96
96
92
88
8 91
95
9~
89
84
117
130
14 3
11s
110
10 7
94
101
106
101
100
99
109
108
108
113
112!
110
95
59
95
93
92
93
100
82
152
106
105
98
10 6
108
Rclati v e Numbe r of Employabl e P 1:;:;rs on s :-T~1i rt ee n- City Aggr e gat e =- 100
l •.-;O
100
100'
100
1 00
100
100
100
10~
6!
6
s6
5
5
•1:
4
81
9
9
8
9
9
8
1
1
11
l
1
1
1
1,
11
1
1
1
1
1
1
11
l
37 j
36
38
36
37
35
36
37 I
17
16
15
15
16
16
17
18
15 I
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
,
1
1
1
1
....
1
1
1
1
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
2 '
1
2
2
2
2
2
2
12
11
12
1~
12
12
12
12
12
7
6
71
7
7
7
7
7
7
·.!:
4
'
4
4
4
:1
4
:,
I
I
3; I
-~ I
I
41
• .1:
~/ Based on e s timate de scr ibed in rr.ble 1, f oo tnote, :9lus t he a:9 plic a ti on of reli ef
I
..
1
turnove r data from Current Change Survey.
Digitized by
Original from
NORTHWESTERN. UNIVERSITY
NORTHWESTERN UNIVERSITY
8026
-14TG.ble ,1a
Em~loyable Work~rs in Ooened and Cl o~ed Relief Cases in Thirteen-City
.Aggrega,te Who Rep orted Usual Employment
Jsnuary - .August 1935
!l
City
Eight
Months
11
I
.At l :J.n t 3.
Balt imore
13ri d;,:e. ;)ort
Mey
Lpr.
June
J uly
.Aug.
Worker3 in Opened Ce ses
I
.All Ci ties
Mar.
J~eb,
159 , 856!37 , S72 23 ,1 68 21,731 12 , 4261 11, 518 17, 431) 22 , 321 23 , 29'..,
II
67
493
78
348
351,
645
363
667
3 , 0121
7191
692 1,152 1,0 1)2
680
9 , 7471 1,894 2 ,1 76 1, 432
172
221
148
1 62
181
1, 7401
462
217
177
I
Butt s
Ch ic ago
Det r c::.t
179
9 ,1 58
1,551
128
9 , 648
2 ,141
191
1,431
1 , 195/
170
1, 019
1,171
182
6 , 495
2 , 721
256
6 , 72')
6 , 561)
187
8 , 697
5 , 371)
l , C)51
968
E;6
161
J., 615,1 1, 223
656
215
1, 2 ) 8
5531
423
573
455
911
232
459
661)
510
51)3
752
418
530
854
537
522
5 , J35
51 71·
2C , ,JS l/ 3 ' 9691 2 , 76 2 2 , 336
15 , EJOI 2 , 7851 2 , 552 1, 812
10 r 31 I 1, 4141 1, 02 91 l , C93
'~
515
2 , 2051
l, 62 61
2 ,14Cj
78 3
2 , 2,88
1 , 565
1,143
846
2 , 011
1,904
975
839
2,1 27
1 , 747
867
474
2,283
1,609
1 , 370
198
1, 491!
E·3 , 9171 10 , 73 5
23 , 267 2 , ~•58
4 , 961
2 , 852
8,llS
Houston
Manchester
Omahn.
Paterson
St . Loui s
San Fr 3.Ilcisco
Wilkes-Bar,e
I
-,
I
I
I
896
Worke r s in Cl ose d Ca ~e:;
I
All Cities
185 , 537122 , 982! 25 , 971 18 , 621 22 , 4221 20 , 57c 25 ,726 28, 008 21, 249
I.
I
l, CY1 l , 2931 1, 427 4 , 856 1, 948 1 , 404
1~,
l '1~6! 1,
9C't
11, , b.....,i
7.,2 1 , ,. 17 1 , 297 2 ,1 90
2,217 1, 857 1, 482
355
277
293
285
308
2 ,15:=;i
147
176 1
3121
~6:il
.Atlanta
Baltimore
Bridger, ort
~531
i
279
184
268!
23'31
I
. 5 , 940 8 ,544
66 , 577 3 , 816111,
464!
23 , 5731 9 , 7661 3 , 7991 1, 63J_ 1,902
:Butte
Chicago
De troit
2 , 0 611
6Clj
277!
374 1
7,97~
1 ,151
7 , 375
Houston
Manchester
Omaha
Paterson
St . Louis
San FranC'isc o
Wilkes-Ba rre
I
4 , El2
21 , 313
13 , 6J.2
8 , 528
7C9 I
1
116
475
416
1, 7471
2 , 5261 3 , 430
1 , 0441 1,476
9( 2
468
i
I
262
8;897
2, C71
345
235
250
7,784 13 , 30C 6, 832
1, 335 1,4211 1, 648
973
151
556
1 , 487
138
1,359
1, 01(
1,115
l O'i
55
l, C5E
225
3 , 63 6
1, 804
917
424
1, 588
2 , 284
546
l,E43
862
1 , 435
638
1, 377
1,221
63
1,171
857
244
1 , 007
321
2 , 868
2 , C54
1,114
4 08
2 , 968
1 , 746
1 , 343
525
2 , 654
2 , 342
1 , 711
-
Digitized by
Original from
NORTHWESTERN UNIVERSITY
NORTHWESTERN UNIVERSITY
8026
- 15T.1.ble 5
Employed Pers ons in Closed Relief Cases in Thirteen Cities, Classified
by Occupational Group of Current and Usual E~ployment
June - August 1935
Number of Employed Persons
I
All
Semi Occu-pa- White Skill- skilltions§:/ Collar ed
ed
City
All
Semi - UnUnskill- Occupa White Skill- s kill- skilltions§:, Colla1 ed
ed
ed
ed
I
"
Percent Distribution
Cur rent Ernpl oymen t
I
All Cities
Atlanta
Baltimore
Bridgeport
38 , 915
3 , 667
2 , 468
661
5,980 6 , 576
613
459
321
410
84
127
11 , 230
833
686
301
Butte
Chicago
Detroit
502
12 , 698
2 , 294
72
42
2,150 2,342
359
571
E4
Houston
Manchester
Omaha
1 , 560
183
2 , 132
248
22
366
234
l '7
432
Paterson
fit . Louis
ban Francisco
Wilkes- Barre
829
5 , 394
3 , 322
3 , 205
67
682
770
226
69
912
6921
269
!
295
107
612
451
1 , 928
766
4411
100 . 0
100 . 0
100 . 0
100 . 0
15 . 4
16 . 7
13 . 0
12 . 7
16 . 9
12 ~5
16 . 6
19 . 2
28 . 8
22 . 7
27 . 8
45 . 6
38 . 9
48 . 1
42 . 6
22 . 5
324 100 . 0
4,234 100 . 0
590 100 . 0
14 . 3
16 . 9
15 . 7
8. 4
18 . 4
24 . 9
12 . 8
31.3
33 . 7
64 . 5
33.4
25 . 7
783 100 . 0
37 100 . 0
722 l UJ . 0
15 . 9
12 . 0
17 . 2
15 ~0
9.3
20 . 3
18 . 9
58 . 5
28 , 7
50 . 2
20 .. 2
33 . 8
100 . 0
8.1
100 ~0 12 . 7
l UO . O 23 . 2
7. 1
10C. O
8.3
16 . 9
20 . 8
8.4
54 . 4
35 . 7
2?,. l
13 . 7
29 !2
34 . 7
32 . 9
70 . 8
15 . 7
14 . 4
11.9
14 !1
19 . 3
1<± ~7
20 . 2
22 ! 5
3/"'\ ..8
25 ! 6
30 . 3
43 ! 6
31 ~2
45 . 3
37 . 6
19 . 8
304 lOG. O 15 . 7
3 , 49 '. .\ 100 . 0 17 . 9
465 100 . 0 16 . 1
10 . 6
20 . 7
27 !0
13 . l
33 . 8
36 ~6
60 . 6
27 . 6
20 ~3
15 . 3
10 . 9
16 . 5
17 . 7
10 . 4
21. 4
19 . 4
65 . 0
29 . 6
47 . 6
13 . 7
32 . 5
8.0
13 . 3
25 . 5
7. 3
11.3
18 . 1
25 . 4
11.0
59. 1
37 . 5
21.6
31.1
25 . 3
67 . 6
242
1 , 872
1,094
2,269
Le.st Usual Em·)loyment
I
38 , 915
3 , 667
2,468
661
6 , 116 7,509
527
541
293
49 9
93
149
11,976
937
7<±7
288
Butte
Chicago
Detroit
502
12 , 698
2,294
79
53
2 , 278 2 , 632
370
619
66
4 ,290
840
Omaha·
1,560
183·
2 , 132
239
20
352
276
19
456
303
119
631
Paterson
St . Louis
San Francisco
Wilke s-l3e r re
829
5 , 394
3 , 322
3 , 205
66
718
848
94
976
8~2
353
490
2 ,022
792
451
233
1
3 , ;~:I
All Cities
Atlanta
Baltimore
I3rid 6 eport
Hous ton
Manchester
15,129
1 , 762
1 ,051
149
13 , 3141100 . 0
1 , 662 10() ~0
929 100 . 0
131 100 . 0
742 100 ~0
25 100 . 0
693 100 . 0
179
1,678
840
2 , 168
100 . 0
100 . 0
100 . 0
100 . 0
I
23 . 8
14 .1
I
§:/ Excludes 11 unknown 11 current and usual occupation as well as
11
no usual" occupation .
Digitized by
Original from
NORTHWESTERN UNIVERSITY
NORTHWESTERN UNIVERSITY
8G26
-16-
Table 6
Employed Wcrkers in Clos ed Relief Cases, Cl~ssified by Occupatio~al
Groun of 12,s t Us ia.l EmT)lo•,rment a1.d of Curre~t E1i1ployment
1
June- August 1935
i
Usual Employment.SJ
City
~
- --
I
I
Current EmuloymentQ/
I
I
I
,
i Semi- I Un.All
i'lhi te Skill.:. skill skill-1 All
White Skill~ skill - I skillTypes Colla.±ed '
ed I
ed
Types , Collar --ed
i
ed ! ed
- -- --+---=-a"'----tt------ - + - - --+-- --+-- - - 4
-~ - - -----t--- -
I Semi-1 Un-
i
1
Number of Workers
All Cities
48 ,090 7,522 8,392 14 ,093 17 , 478 ,40,083
Atlanta
5'±0
566
953 1 , 679 3,737
3,7381
Baltimore
2 , 501·
296
509
753
943 2 ,586
6751
Bridgeport
96
151
581
293
1 35
I
Butte
Chicago
Det r oi t
6111
86
19 , 236 3,198
3 ,057
487
60!
a I
3 , 5 -6
81 5
72
5 , 658
1,127
!
6 , 322
634
348
I
88
82
2 , 282
402
393
5'.?2
6 , 78,~ 13 , 156
622
2 , 426
I
.
6 ,582111,607 15 , 572
459 I
862 1 , 782
410!
730 1 , 098
1 27 !
314
152
I
I
42 .
65
333
2 , 3421 4 , 1 24 4 , 408
57-:l I
817
633
I
Houst on
ManchAster
Omaha
B.4.
Paterson
St. Louis
San Francisco
Wilkes-Barre
1 , 571
186
2 , 227
245
20
367
954
5,404
4 ,618
3 , 312
76
718
1 , 150
243
Butte
Chicago
Detroit
,.
I
100 .o
I
I
100 .o j
22;
1 , 68-:.l
1 , 266
2 , 236
15 . 6
18 . 7
29 . 31
15 . 1 .
20 . 41
22 . 4
9 . 81
18 . 71
26 . 71
I
25 . 51
30.ll
43 . 41
I
J.1.8!
29 . 4!
36 . 9i
I
I
15 . 6
10 . 8
16 . 5
17 . 61
10 . 21
20 . 91
19 . 41
6,; . 5 ·
8 .0
13.3
24 . 9
7. 3
11.41
57.1
37.4
29.6
I
Paterson
St . Louis
San Francisco
Wilkes-Barre
I
100 .o
100 , 0 I
lUO .o
I
100 .o I
'
842
5 ,458 1
3 . 440 II
3 , 2;33 I
Ii
ii
i
14 . l
16 . 6
15 . 9
100 . 0
100 . 0
100 . 0
100 .0
109
5S:5
976 2 ,026
1, 082 1 1,120
367
466
14 . 4
11.8
14 . 2
100 . 0
100 . 0
1()0 . 0
( ::5)
Hous ton
ManchestF:r
Omaha
7441 1 , 623
271
187 I
735 2 ,192 I
305
120
660
268
22
389
234 I
17!
4331
624
813
39
746
68
696
808
235
457
69 I
9121 1 , 950
694!
798
449
2691
248
1 , 900
1 ,140
2 , 280
308
109
I
Percent Distribution
All Cities
100 . 0
Atlanta
Baltimore
Bridgepor t
2?7
19
465
j
36 . 4! 100 . 0 II 15 . 8
11
I'
45 . o!
17 . 0
l CO . O
37 . 'li 100 . 0 I 13 . 5
20 . 01 100 .o ·' 12 . 3
II
100 . 0 11
64 . 3!
35 . 31 10') . 0 j
20 , 5 · l C-0 . 0 !1
I
47 . 4 100 .o I
14 . 5 100 . 0
33 . 0 100 . 0 i
15 . 7
17. 3
16 . 6
16 . 5
11.8
17.7
I
16 . 4 I
29 .o
38 . 0
12 . 31
I
23 . 1
15 , 8 I
18 . 6j
28 . 2
46 . 2
47 . 6
42 . 5
22 . 3
I
6 . o I 12 . 5
17 . 8 I, 31. '1
I
23 . 7 I 33 . 7
I
14 . 4 I 19 . 0
9.1
58 . 3
19 . 8
28 . 5
63 . 8
33 . 4
26 . 0
50 .1
20 . 8
34 . 0
I
18 . 1 "
2:3 . -±
I
11.11
2".: , 3
l<±,1
§;/ Totals exclude thos e for whom .occu:pat ion is
23 . 5
I
8.1
100 . 0
100 . G i' 12 . 8
23 . 5
100 . 0
7. 3
100 . 0
1·
8 . 21
54 . 3
16 . 7j
20 . 21
35 , 7
23 . 2
13 . 9
8 . 31
:1
11 1Jnknown 11
and those who r eport
Usual Occupation" .
"'E../ Excludes 11 Unknown 11 occupation .
Digitized by
Original from
NORTHWESTERN UNIVERSITY
NORTHWESTERN UNIVERSITY
11 No
29 . 4
34 . 8
33 . 1
70 . 5
80 26
-17Table 7.
Distribution of Workers in Opened and Closed Relief Cases by
Occupational Group of Last Usual Employment
January - Augu.s t 1935
Occunational Group
! Jan.
I
Feb,
Mar .
Anr .
I }!.ay
June
Julx_
flJJ..f?. .
I
Workers in Opened Ca ses !27,972 23,168 21,731 12,427 jll,519 117,430 22,322 23 , 2~0
I
Perce~t Dfstribution
I 100 . 0 100 . 0 100 . 0 I 100 . 0 100 . 0 100. 0 100 . 0 100. 0
All Oc cupa tions
White Coll ar
15. 9
15 . 6
15. 6
18 . 7
19 . 3
16. 5
18.2
1 8.9
Professional
1.5
2. 1
2. 1
1.6
2. 2
1. 7
1. 8
1.8
Proprietors
4.4
4. 5
3. 3
3. 1
2.7
3. 0
2. 9
3.5
11.,8
Clerks
12.
7
11.4
12.
7
llel
11 . 0
12. 8
13.1
Skilled
16 . 9
17. 2
14. 6
13. 6
14 . 0
14. 7
12.11 12 . 6
37. 7
3 6. 6
39 . 8
30 . 4
29 . 4
Semi-Skilled
30 . 8
31 . 0 i- 37 . 4
33. n
33. 0
34. 4
35. 6
.
5
30.
3
3C'
Unskilled
33
.
2
40. 8 j
Laborers
17. 4
17. 6
19 . 6
16.
8
16
.
5
1
8. 6
19
.
2
25 . 6 j
13 . 5
Servants
15. 6
16 . C
15. 2
14. 0
14.4
16.8
l4o 0
Unknown
0. 4
0.1
0. 3
0. 2
0. 3
0. 1
0. 2
0. 1
Workers in Clo s ed. Cases 22,9 82 25,971 18,621 22 , 422 i2') ,57 8 25 ,726 28 , CC'7 21 , 249
Percent Distribution
All Occupa tions
100. 0 lC·O. 0 100 . 0 100~0 1co ~r 100. n 1 00 . n lC 0. 0
White Colla r
13. 4
16. 4
15.9
14.5
14. 5
1 6. 0
16. 3
15.5
Profess ional
1.7
1. 7
2. 8
1.5
1.5
1. 8
1.5
1.7
Prop rietors
2. 7 i
3. 3
3. 2
3. 2
3. 6
3, 2
2. 6
2. 0
11.3
11.5
9. 8
9. 4
Clerks
9.7
11. 0
11.2
1 0c6
Skilled
17 . 0
17 . 8
1 6. 3
20. 0
16 . 5
1 6. 7
13. 81 14. 7
30. 0
'15 . 9
34. 6
33 . 0
30. 1
Semi-Skilled
28. 9
28 . 4
26 .1
33 . 2
31.3
42. 2
Unskilled
23 . 7
37. 4
33 . 2
38 . 4
37 . 2
I 13.4
17. 9
18 . 3
18 . 9
23 .7
Laborers
20. 4
21.5
20 . 2
Servants
l'J.31 13 . 4
14. 3
14.7
21.8
17 . 0
15.9
14 . 9
0. 9
0. 9
Unknown
3. 2
0. 7
0. 9
0.7
3. o 1 0. 8
I
I
!
I
__ _I_
I
I
I
I
I
j
.~
Digitized by
Original from
NORTHWESTERN UNIVERSITY
NORTHWESTERN UNIVERSITY
8026
-18-
Table 8
Employed Persons in Closed Relief Cases, Classified by
Occupational Group of Current Employment
J .qnug,ry - .August 1935
Occupational Group
-~Jan.
Feb .
Mg,r·.
,--·I Apr.
May
July
June
.kig.
~{umber of Emnl oyed Persons 171545 1 81503 121866 16,471 14,878 ;l.7!388 1 9,0C9 14 2 468
.All Occupations
100. c 1 00. 0 100. 0 100. 0 I l CO . C 100. 0 100. 0 100. 0
I
I
Percent Dist ribution
White Colla r
Prof E;ssi onal
Proprietors
Clerks
Skilled
Semi- skilled
Unskilled
Labo rers
Servants
Unknown
8.3
0. 6
1. 0
6. 7
9. 0
48.7
19 . 4
11 . 7
7. 7
14. 6
9. 6
1. 0
1. 6
7. 0
9. 2
32 . 9
24. 7
15. 6
9. 1
23. 6
10 . 3
0. 6
1. 9
7. 8
12.3 !
30 . 7
26 . 7
16. 2
10. 5
20 . 0
11 . 6
0. 9
2. 0
8. 7
14. 6
26. 5
26. 8
16. ?
10. 1
20. 51
9. 8
1. 1
1. 9
6. 8
13. 8
23 . 0
26 . 8
18 . 2
12 . 5
1.1
3. 8
7. 6
13. 4
13 . 1
1. 0
3. 7
8. 4
13 . 5
23 . 8
30. 8
17 . 5
13 . 3
18. 8
21. 4
8. 6
31. 0
17.1
13. 9
26 . 6
21.7
I
I
l
I
II
I
I
Digitized by
Original from
NORTHWESTERN UNIVERSITY
NORTHWESTERN UNIVERSITY
1-M
1.1
2. 7
8. 6
12. 5
24 . 7
32 . 8
20. 9
11. 9
17. 6
8J26
- 19Table 9
Du.ra tion of Unemployment.§:/of Unemployed P ersons in R8li ef Int ake of
Tbirteen- ci ty .Aggregate , Classifi ed by Occ--1pati ona l
Group of Usual Ernp loymen t
Janua ry - .Augi.1st 1935
(Number of weel-:s)
=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=---=-=-=-======:;:;:I!=====;:::====::=:==--=:;:====-:-=.::;::-====,=-==-=:-::;:==:..=:;===
Occupational
Gr oup
Eight
Months
II J an.
Feb .
!
Ii
All occupa tions
Whit e- coll a r
Sk illed
Semi- ski lled
Un skilled
12 . 2
1 6. 4
11. 0
"9 . 7
13. 1
Mar .
II
Apr.
I
14. 4
1 6. 7
12. 4
13. 5
14.
9
1
I
Per sons i n New Case s
i
8.41
9. 4
13.,7
8. 8
9. 0
9. 5
1·
j
I
!16. 2
117 . 4
I 15 . 2
!14. 7
1 6. 9
115. 8
116. B
/ 15. 3
!16. 5
14 . 8
1
1
I
Int 8.ke
11 . 6! 9. 6 8 . 3
19. 0 18 . 8 H:t-0
ll1 • 3
7. 2
8. s
7. 8 1 7. 4
12. 4 11 13 . 01 9 . 3
I,
I
I
.All oc cupations
White- coll a r
Skilled
Semi-skilled
Unsl::illed
l
Persons in' Total
14. 8 1 5 . 2 ! 13. 4
17 .1 1 6. 9 117. 0
13 . 8 15 . 4 i 1 2 . 9
14 . 2 I 15 . 2 1 0. 3
14 . 8 I 14 . 2 14. 0
I
.All occupations
14. 9
White-collar
17 . 1
Skilled
14 . 8
I 13 . 8
Semi- ski lled
Unskilled
114. 7
liay IIJu.."le IJuJ.y
16. 4 14. 7
16. 3 1 7. ?,
18 . 9 i 15 . 2
16. 9 1 3 o5
I 15 . 5
13. 7
1 5 . 1114 . 311 . 6
20 . 7: 1 9. Bil6 . 4
1 5 . 91 11. 9 I 9 . 1
13. 0 j 12 . 5j l 0.2
14.2i 14 . 1!1 2 . 1
Pe~s ons ~n Reo~e~ed 9ases:
9 . 4 !11 2. 2 13 . s
15. 2 115. 4 1 7. 7
9 . 0 . 9. 9 jl2. 9
8 . 2 112. 2 I 11 . 8
11.1 : 12. 4 t 4
.8
!
i
l 13 . 7
i 1 8.1
il 3 . 1
13 . 1
12. 5
I
1
11 . 4
1 6. 5
10. 3
8. 2
14 . 3
I
s . 9: s . 21 7 . 2
16 . 5j 17 . 4 11 0 . 1
8 .li 7 . 41 6. 4
7. 4 i 6 . 51 6. 4
1 0 . 2 11 . 91 8 . 5
i
I
13. 1
1 6. 4
14 . 0
11.6
12. 7
I
I
8. 4
9. 8
7. 8
s .1
8. 6
===========:: ::==:!::======~==~=='===:'==='-- §:/
In terms of median weeks .
Digitized by
Original from
NORTHWESTERN UNIVERSITY
NORTHWESTERN UNIVERSITY
8026
- 20-
Table 10
Net Eight-lfo n t h Change in the !l umber of Eroployable Persons en Relief
in Thirteen Ci ties Reporti ng Usu.al Employment ,
Cl a ssified by Occupa tional Group s
J anuar;r - .klgus t 1935
...,-·•
-i:=~
White-Coll ar
City
·- ·
Un skilled
-
Pl'ofess
Tot a l io nal
- 461 - 307
Prop s .
I
Mgrs .
Labor- Ser- Ur..Skill- , sk ill1
e tc.
Clrks
I ed
I Tot a l ~r s
vants known
·- .,..ed
+111 1- 265 - 6938 l - 5291 l- l ') , 741 - 6209 - 4532 - 227')
- 1393 -1 87
- 96 - 10
2
8 -
Atl ant a
Ba ltimore
:Bridgep ort
.All
loc cupaltions
1- 2s , 701
I
1- 11, 855
1- 2 , 015
- 413
- 459
.l. 44
I
- 7
- 747
-130
+- 1
Butte
Chic ago
Detroit
- 570 - 4 6 - 8 - 6
-1 2 , 660 + 69 +450 f 49
- 306 + 180 - 138 +130
- 32
j - 430
I tl 88
-
65
6
t 11
1-194
I +125
j +179
836 - 4791- 1,387
224
120 +1 211 !+
- 209 t 628 + 196
28
-1-244
+ 80
56
i + 60 + 121
ALL CITIES
H9 Eton
il1ru1b hester
Omaha
- 3, 012 - 301
l,7'Jl + 15 7
'
+ 744 + 192
.L
- 42 + 262 -1-
+
+ 23 +
Pater son
·r
426 + 111
'
St .Louis
- 1,232 - 124 - 4 60
6
San Francisco!+ 1 , 988 + 549
Wilkes-Ba rre j+ 1,503 + 249 + 45
-
+
I
-1 795 - 2819 - 5 , 772 -10011 - 4771 ,
- 3 66 I - 389 - 1,179 - 760 1- 41 9 r
68 - 62 6
- 1 61 j- 1551-
-
-
-
1
.,...I
I
!+
92
+475
+148
I
36 - 34 14 281- 446 + 18
- 3231 - 3840 !- 5, 018, - 3662 - 135 6
- 244 I_ 39 6 + 463 - 47 f 51 0
-
I+
536
+ 158
+ 77
1:
' I
IT
i
113 -152 +
5521+
369
I+
I
-
-
846
157
7
541
67
T
203
+
76
15
21
26
640
309
9
11
63
5
86 - 24
llC 543 - 324
867 .,.1063
782 ,. 121 + 661 - 53
9
817
692 + 125 '
-
I
.\r'
,I.
Digitized by
Original from
NORTHWESTERN UNIVERSITY
NORTHWESTERN UNIVERSITY
I
8J2 6
-21 Ta ble 11
Net Chang ~ in E'll_Ployable Persons on Relief Classified by
Occupational Group of Usual Emp loyrr1ent
J!mua ry - Augus t 19 35
A
prta
- - , -- ---- - -- - =7=+=-=====
I
City
J an.
·-
.:-2,299
125
7
162
59
-:·
18
+
+1, 684
4 35
-l75
1 -'1+
Omaha
157
-lPat a rson
- 28
St. Loui s
+ 101
San F r ar.. ci s co -:- 458
Wilke s- Earre + 162
~Wh ite Colla r
Atlant a
Balti more
Bridg ep ort
Butte
Ch icago
Detroit
Hous ton
Manches ter
-
-
I M-3 r.
Feb .
I
·
I
83 I ➔ l, 136
- 179 ! - 99
52
+ 178 I -i12
5
-f
8 I
6
80 i +l, 012
1 - 156 -l- 133
I
I -lo
73 59
iI -¾
2 3 -¼
27
-:- 1 31
11 8
I 7
22
51 -+
- 34 3 - 82
14
+ 309 +
76 ....
9
-l-
I=
..
Profe ss iona l + 188 I
Atlan ta
18 t,' Eal ti more
+
8 -t
Bridg ep ort
11
Bu tte
--.
1
Chicago
+ . 2 36 -t
.IJ e troi t
31 Hous ton
3 ➔
....
Ma nch a s t a r
3 -¾
Omaha
9 -lPat e r s on
0 -:St. Lou i s
- 140
Se n Fr anci s co+
74 1
' --.
Wi l ke s - Bar ;:e I -:32 -!·
234
14
11
764 ! ➔
35 I 68 ', +
135
45
62
.
.
Pro"? ri e tor s
Atl anta
~ Be. lti mo re
Bridgeport
Bu tte
Clli ec:go
Detroit
Houst on
Ma n ches ter
Omana
I+
I7
1~ j
:
I ➔
412 I -+
7 I
33 I +
31 ~
i
-t
97 I -
I-
4
0 I-
4
7
5
2
32
1a
5
339
39
I+
I -:-
104 I -
63
25 33
1 +
11
8
+
-¾
9
....
1
9
1-
T
16 I -
2
394
I
33~ 155 I 18 i 1 l0
3~
9
8
-i-
4
_
-l-
44 +
14
17 Pn ter s on
18 +
10 I 4 ~
St . Lou i s
-.- 10 2 1 -i55 +
6 -+
San Fr~n ci s co , +
77 ➔
41 ~
3 ·Wilk es-::c3arre __ j +___3_8_,_l_..-_ _~_4__
~__
J
June +- J u l 4 Aug .
-
+
-i-
+
+
7
i
2 91
4
~
68
12
-
2:
-¾
9:1
+
3191
33 1 14
4
!
26g
39
5
! -.
11
60 II +
23 1 11
10
I --.
➔
11 1
3 I +
81
22 I -.
7 / +
280 I
178 ·1
-
-
26 l -
14 1
34 I
11
~
3
351 -:-
110
F7
7
14
3
~, +
7
I -
14 1
2
2
5
11
15
3011 _,.
47
39
7~~
7
-
9
13
1
270
-
4
-i-
98
7
...-
48
45
13
1
27
3
20
7
!
~1
11
31
2
10
+
I
3
1 I
2, ..
41
1
-
43 I
8 -:3I +
37 I +
1~
+
14 ! ➔
16 +
4 \_-:-__
1_~j:__
5
19
107
47
~
-
oi ➔
-
-l-
371
344
67
2
12
17 I
2 61
1 3!
6
•
67 I -:•
36 15
15 1
15~i
-
71 I
69 I 7 1
21 ➔
41
O
55
32
-
10I
2351
22 ! 23
55
➔
I
4
+
342
16
3i
110
I-
+
-
+
ol
2i
6
- l, 080 j
- 2301
62
4!
19i
985 1
+ 359
- 63
+
27
751
85
157 I
881
-
568
47 6
1so
10
28
242
64
115 I
66 I
103;
34 I
23
251 ..62 30
2s 1 -
+
7J
1 8 I -:12
1 ➔
I34 -
+
0
-1, 127
- 102
- 42
7
12 1
3
2oi
+
+ 17 91i
3
4
3
+
I .
-1, ~74 \ - 102 1 42 24
-
200 I
17 j
+
38
6
6
I
-1,599
- 127
- 179
12
3
+
- 1,048
- 28
- 103
7
44
- 18
..., 1 30
- 227
61 I
➔
y
4
7
4
-i-
2
+
I ➔
21
10
16
60
7
-
3
!
1 __-___3_ 1 ~
Digitized by
Original from
NORTHWESTERN UNIVERSITY
NORTHWESTERN UNIVERSITY
-22Tabl.t. 11
Het Change (cont'd.)
City
Jan.
i Feb.
+-1 , 347 j ::._18 2
72 - 120
86 ... J.05
+
'
14
36 +
+
6
12
+
+l,036 80
- 411 - 128
39 + 27
+
+ 11 + 13
+ 104 + 111
- 32 + 28
64
139 'T
+ 307 i+ 229
+ 92 ,+ 53
+l,548 + 173
71 - 211
+ 228 + 252
+ 87
3
t
8 11
tl,212 72
- 976 - 268
t
54 28
19 +
7
+ 172 l+ 76
1
7 + 64
t 317 + 62
+ 368 ~ 198
+ 161 ~ 107
-2, 047 i -2,175
- 146 ! - 355
+ 328
279
+ 108 1+ 14
+ 14 1+
2
+2,15 2 i-1,112
-4,927 -1,517
+ 84 +
2
113
7
t 420
277
-1,224
30
t 668 22
+ 409 + 235
t 130 +
59
+3,803 - 190
- 1 37 - 348
+ 371 + 445
+ 681-_: 18
- 109
39
tl,900 - 936
779
278
+ 240 It 211
41 !+
23
+ 498 I+ 26s
t
15 't
39
+ 823 + 181
+ 510 + 341
115
Clerks
Atlanta
:J3al timore
Bridgep ort
Butt e
Chi cag0
:Petroit
Houston
M-?.nche st e r
:1aha
Paterson
st . Loui s
San Francisco
Wil ke s-Barre
Skilled
Atlanta
Baltimo re
]ri:igeport
Butte
Chi cago
Detroit
Houst on
Manchester
Omaha
Pat e rson
.... t, . Louis
, .an Francisco
Wilkes-Barre
Semi-skilled
Atl anta
Baltimore
13ridgenort
,.
B1:1,t te
Chicago
Detroit
Houston
Manchester
Omaha
Paterson
St. Loui s
San Francisco
~il ke s-Barre
. Uns k illed
Atl an ta
Baltim0re
:Bridgeport
:Butte
Chi cago
Det roit
Houston
Manchester
Omaha
Paterson
st . Louis
San Francisco
Wilke s-Barre
'
I
I+
I+-
..I.
I
-
+
+
+
+
-
+
+
I
T
-;-
+
-
I-
645
61
36
2
2
580
53
8
25
92
13
106
23
2
+
+
5
173
1
52
14
304
137
91
23
73
t
35
-
t
+
-
292
+
28
+
18
+ 544
- 217
13
42
10
t 952
+ 47
70
3
t 232
+ 195
- 490
39
+
2
+l,558
- 176
+ 98
1
20
+1,480
+ 197
97
+ 19
+ 234
,+ 4 7
- 388
~
18
+ 147
-1,164
-
153
-
16
0
828
-
-
88
4
I
-
-
4
+
3
- 1,620
- 216
- 282
t
30
16 3
24
36
160
37
- 2,880
- 237
- 401
43
+
J.
-
30
- 12
+ 87
- 10 3
+ 53
- 2,984
- 192
- 320
41
+
-
66
-
+
I July
June
.Aug .
I
667 j - 217 I - 712 I
I + 321
- 121 I 4
52
229
26 I= 95
- 39 - 44
1n
18 2
- 9
-+
May
Apr .
Mar .
I
8026
.J..
I
3
773
57
27
8
5
10
146
t 115
- 1
-2,204
- 230
86
45
10
-1,325
- 309
- 101
;I
T
+
11
88
37
85
+ 128
27
-1 ,53~
- 1 29
t
3
75
8
12
-2,327
283
- 130
f 191
18
t 151
+ 198
-q
1 :::>~
1 70
- 2 ,370
- 331
- 569
12
97
- 2,065
128
- 419
+
71
211
15
+ 333
106
+l,235
- 2 , 292
268
27
t 285
+ 46
+ ~22
t 397
+ 191
+
26
- 4 , 09~
- 451
- 103
45
64
- 3 , 017
230
- 267
t
40
82
63
+ 254
t 232
- 289
- - - - - - - ,N
,.,.0, :-±~~~~~1,...,
v ""
ER"'"s"'""'1TY
~----'---
5
20
- 14 750
202
+ 183
+ 101 .J. 328 + 306
- 70 I - 49 - 40
J.
-t5
22
45
59
T"
21
65
7
18
+
28
+
+
46
- 34 i - 30
6
- 32
1- 70 +
I+ 12 - 22 - 37
i -1, 867
-1,555 I 44
- 477
- 268
=-T73
84
- 210
- 145
39
40
28
23
+ 11
0
+ 216
- 606
-1,340
+ 124 ~ 733 1- 531
45
- 183
- 160
+
9
-+
30 I +
29
160 I 95
24
1+ 24 + 34 + 18
239
135
128
262
I
75
67
1 55 , - lC'l II 63
1 26 j + 800 I +2 ,126
-1, 056
- 433
246
28 5
183
117
57
30
30 I 22
0 I
14
+
68
-1,995 I +- 714
41,055
+3 , 307
+2,190
- 175
- 127
36
t 256
+ 327 + 275
- 179
84
~
66
+ 455 + 348
104
- 283
- 292
- 228
12
+ 50
123
+ 82
88
62
I -5, 584
-3, 608
- 255
-2,741
- 949
- 579
- 881
- 315
- 225
1- 31
35
30
187
+ 12
24
- 898
- 2 ,100
t 618
f 152
' 813
~
716
- 338
- 290
- 427
+ 52 + 56 ~
4
26 7
163
75
+ 12 ~
24
+ 27
- 312
- 352
4
T
24
4
- 233
r inal:lf~Qi
- __
25_7___!_-_1_6_8_
+
I
I:
I
I
I
I
I-_
I
-
I
NORTHWESTERN UNIVERSITY
I~
8026
- 23-
Table 11
N2t Change (cont'd. )
City
Feb .
J an .
Labo r ers
.Atlanta
:Ba lti mo re
:Bri dgeport
Butte
Chi cago
Detroit
Houston
M:mchest er
Orr.aha
Paterson
St . Lou is
San Francisco
Wilkes-B a rre
Servants
--- -
.Atl anta
Baltimore
:Bri dg ep or t
:Butte
Chicago
Det roit
Houston
Manchester
Omaha
Paterson
st . Louis
San Fnmc i sc o
Wilkes- Ba rre
Unknown
.Atl an t a
Atlanta
Ba ltimore
Bridgep ort
Butte
Chi cago
Detroit
Houston
Manchester
Omal-ia
P a terson
St . Louis
Sa...11 Francisco
Wilkes- Ba rre
-
+1,801
2J
212
+
45
116
+ 856
547
~. 157
24
318
-1- 25
,f..
359
+- 211
t- 375
595
93
263
t
+ 13
- 45
- 760
- 191
68
+ 16
+
.j.
185
6
+
.;.
1
87
+
- 145
t- 2 , 002
117
159
23
7
1',f-1, 044
232
83
+17
+- 1 80
+ 40
4641
+
,I.
299 I
+ 69 j
.j..
-
-
+
-
-
+
+
-
-
+
-
-
-
--
1-
613
10
13
7
3
+
:,3
,..
....
,..'
-
-
+
+
+ 180
l
+
+
-
-
I+
0
3
96
I+
1
I-
9I 6 -
-
-
30
J.
4
3
541
7
0
-
-
-
-
-
+
12
4-
-
-
-
-
<"") •7
1.47
24
+
-
-
50
-
.l.I
694
15
5
-
+
+
+
July
850 - 1, 065 - 2 , 671 - 2 , 319
67 311
91
1C3
...;4
7 - 417 387
40
27
15
1 6Ll
89
26
8-1
844 -1,1 82 - 1 , 909 - 712
96 83
125 + ' 85
Z72
47
- 178 - 258
27
7 + 47 + 31 +
153
162 208
88
GO
41 5
38 83
236
262 t
92 t
8
71 + 91
13 I 284 - 190
135 I +1,19 6
- 1,305
290
152
3
T
13
- 883
+
June
May
.Apr.
708
109
105
0
6
63 6
101
t
-
+
-
1
+
:.3')
I
4
+
+
-
.1..
T
466
-
254
-
0
+
4-
1 -
l
28
91
,;--
405
255
1 82
5
6
176
S7
143
7
83
-
Mar .
-
-
I+
I:
I+
2
1
()
6
40
4
0
2
5
2
48
13
0
-
I
8~
126
31 II
12 i
J
- 1 , 4241 - 3 , 265
- 3581 - 2 , 430
- 59 494
4
5 2
0 +
- 1 ,108 - 186
67
- 1051 +
169
- 8:1 ~
.j..
25
59
+
6! 17
2~! +
J.
76
1711 14,1
+
32
+
....
5j +
10
-
45
r::;~
...,;)
241
,:).__,
39
-
1 6'70.
5
-
-
-
I
~r::;
+
-
-
8
-
-
+
5
4
5
1-
-
53
52
t
C)
0
21
,_
::,I
8
6
1
-
;J
-
12 1 +
4l 6 117 -
r
1. 810
0
5 2 -
;)
28
1
2
3
92
9
6
0
8
0
0
2
2
.Jmr,.
-
- 1 , 986
192
- 205
- 26
--
u
-
- J , 215
t
-
+
...
+
+-
-
-
388 +
152
40 +
113 10 t
254 1 23 1253 -
-
- 1 , 622
757
110
9
3
+
885
425
+ 1 86
+ 16
-
-
+
-
50
14
98
19
4
t
-
-
+
-
-
24Ll..:
1
0
2
2
160
73
0
+
-
1
-
0
8
2
-
I
Digitized by
Original from
NORTHWESTERN UNIVERSITY
NORTHWESTERN UNIVERSITY
1
0
-.,.
.,.
++.j..
-
..,..
++·f-
-
+
-
-1-
-
-
224
124
175
11
31
41 6
330
164
13
92
16
1 07
153
142
31
455
50
19
7
202
386
126
9
17
11
111
80
26
J 28
3
1
2
4
54
59
1
0
0
3
0
8
1
8G26
- 24 Table lla
:Einployable Persons in Opened Relief Cases Classified by Occupational
Group of Usual Employment
Thirteen Cities
January - August 1935
Jan .
Feb .
Mar.
Apr.
May
Jun.
White Collar
Atlanta
Bal t irnore
Bridgeport
Butte
Chicago
Detroit
Houston
Manchester
Omaha
Paterson
St . Louis
San Francisco
Wilkes- Barre
5,378
95
256
83
37
2,360
446
174
31
234
70
657
735
200
4,338
87
299
44
26
1,800
248
221
28
203
75
474
708
125
4,108
47
204
36
17
2, 088
319
121
42
192
43
434
486
79
1,974
68
97
30
31
296
190
113
21
158
39
367
445
119
1,904
98
87
10
30
196
170
109
23
179
76
408
424
94
3,170
20
81
29
20
1 , 482
261
67
68
120
57
365
49 5
105
3,485
12
153
46
33
1 , 345
644
122
34
132
72
35 6
454
82
3 , 629
10 7
136
29
30
l ,5G3
534
72
29
157
53
377
4G3
79
Professional
Atlanta
Baltimore
Bridgeport
Butte
Chicago
Detroit
Houston
Manchester
Omaha
Pat er son
St. Louis
San Francisco
Wilkes-Barre
586
375
7
9
212
14
3
385
272
42
18
4
19
6
33
118
34
185
13
11
5
6
25
19
13
2
21
6
14
38
12
343
4
8
7
1
135
36
13
6
22
419
14
13
1
5
180
42
5
3
15
9
25
97
10
Pro~rietors
Atlanta
Baltimore
Bridgeport
Butte
Chicago
Detroit
Houston
Manchester
Omaha
Pater son
St . Louis
San Francisco
Wilk es-Barre
1 , 220
13
81
15
8
552
108
58
3
49
19
168
106
40
375
19
26
4
75
30
27
1
30
7
82
338
23
19
5
4
41
32
27
3
32
14
74
n0
50
12
14
City
F,
17
13
4
490 !
12 I
21
2
1
176
26
54
2
160
37
9
1
14
4
36
6
19
9
33
110
16
812
17
87
7
3
304
f..7
38
5
28
20
128
85
23
i
!
I
I
985 I
11
9~
53
5
1
576
81
26
6
36
12
104
57
18
2
-
4
18
20
10
4
19
14
27
72
7
Jul • .
3
8
4
4
180
23
10
10
15
6
24
84
14
579
6
15
4
2
276
36
15
11
16
9
97
81
11
Aug .
8
19
74
10
F97
3
37
9
5
280
140
3C
4
24 I!
18 I
77
58 I
12 \
I
I
UI gIt/Zed b y
NORTHWESTERN UNIVERSITY
I
c n ginal trom ·
NORTHWESTERN UNIVERSITY
628
14
32
5
3
296
93
15
2
31
5
82
42
8
- 25 Table ll a (cont I d~)
Jan .
City
I
Mar ~ I Apr .
F eb .
I May I Jun .
I 1,354 : 2 , 206
Aug .
t----- - 2 , 445 2 , 582
79
5
91
108
23
30
22
27
930 1 , 027
459
4GB
52
79 I
24
24
111
86
39
46
270
260
324
3221
61
60
Jul.
- - - - - - - ---,t-------'----+------+- - - ~--......-- - + - --
3, C36 2 , 748 1 , 414
36
29
58
60
142
191
21
31
35
23
14 1
22
I
196
jl , 320 1 , 3521
201 I 141
: 155
73
86 I
129 j
18
351
17 1
j
I 156 1 143 j 107
?6
27 I
46 1
i
271
294
! 308
1 513 I
247
339 i
95
55!
86 i
Cl erks
Atlanta
Baltimore
Bridgepor t
Butte
Chicago
Detroit
Hou st on
Manchester
Omaha
Paterson
St . Lou. is
San Francisco
Wilk es- Barre
! 3 , 572
76
158
55
25
1 , 536
29 6
98
24
166
45
456
511
126
I
Sk illed
Atlanta
Bal timore
Bridg eport
Butt e
Chicago
Detroit
Houston
Manchester
Omaha
Pat erson
St . Loui s
San Fr ancisco
Wilkes-Barre
4 , 728
118
358
115
17
1 , 776
532
182
14
219
90
513
58 9
20 5
81
424
36
17
I
I 1 ' 7 28
I 340
j 129
16
'
156
94
324
I 471
1 63
S ern i- skilled
Atl anta
Baltimore
Bridgep ort
Butte
Chic ago
Detroi t
Hou st on
Manchester
Omaha
Pa terson
St . Louis
San Francisco
Wilkes- Barre
Unskilled
Atl anta
Baltimore
Bridgep ort
Butte
Chic ago
Detroit
Hous ton
Manchester
Omaha
Pater son
..
St . Lou i s
Digit
San Fr ancis
Wilk es- Bar e RTHWESTE
8 , 511
188
549
163
34
3 , 432
926
213
44
506
20~
1 , 290
694
268
9 , 236
266
715
99
110
3 , l G0
594
482
17
656
153
1 , 476
l
I
I
1 3 , 979
1
Ij
I
I6 , 815
I
I
!
164
567
76
25
1
12 , 880
I 537
I 1 50
72
1 395
l 259
8,;2
662
18 6
! 7,957
'I 313
!' 874
57
I 111
!2 , 752
39 6
467
45
469
109
11,100
ed % 7 h 7C9
N ~fEr SI 55
l
I
!
,
i
I
j
I
.
I
!
61
65
5
22
137
118
72
16
128
48
307
302
73
I
11
58
21
I
14
I
il ,O26
i 202
i 42
i 47
89
I
42
I 244
330
i
I 80
I
-
1
I
13 , 1 671 1 ' 499 11 , 457 ! 2 , 3G4 I 3 , 119
4
11
52
51 i
48 l
99
97 I
18 6
10 2
221
34
33
26
33 I
36
17
1
32
31
8 I
9
I
124 I 834 I 900
1 68
11 ' 36!) I
470 1 , 056
457 i
241
247
91
70
88 i
I
66
55
36
37
30 I
i
29 I
43
109
I
9
10
118
100
! 169
65 1
I
79
6~ I
64
45
1
I
I
217
205
261
21 9
I 236
292 I 291 1, 341
I 364
293
79 I
90.1 11 6 I
I
64
81
I
I
I
I.
I
. 6 , 687 i 3 , 851
129
112 I
221
394 1'
70
68
27
16 I
!
441
!2 , 936 j
477
854j
j
I 123 i 109
!1 100 I 272
294
354 !
333
31-'1 j
753
784!
i 461 i 427
171 ! 294
I
7 , 734 5 , 073
152 I 106
304
60 7 j
44
47 !
1 01
86
51 9
1 3,264
265
487
261
324
86
431
344
493
93
100
877
878
462
500
753 1 , 611
I
I
I
I
I
!
4 , 306
226
221
68
20
326
II
51 9
! 11~
334
31 4
i
554
1
978
: 411
! 221
3 , 822
118
27?,
51
103
371
219
256
66
.
I 300
94
7~5
435
NO Rr,
l
!
I
I
lI
3, 415
57
180
23
20
1 , 312
873
79
37
145
58
274
280
77
16 , 581 I 8,897 j 8 , 521
113
26
32
322
329
213
69
102
74
21
24
19 I
i
12 , 100 2 , 025 2 , 822
jl , 507 I 3 , 736 2 , 862
89
47 1 106
t
418
365
I 292
211
225
I 194
234
563
614
772
746
751
421
472
494
167
244; 178
j5 , 282 I 6 , 804 7 , 698
71
25
15
i
363
484
1 295
27
39
36
6
11
166
l 135
12 , 070 2 , 450 3 , 04G
469 1 , 112 1 , 032
178
216
63
46
66
60
j
341
286
! 237
126
125
111
j
86C
764
j 676
445
528
j rigi ~?f(IJl
1 , 047
~STE§ eJ IVE '5~
i
II
l
I
l
I
!
I
8C26
,- 26 Table lla (cont 1 d.)
City
Jan .
Laborers
Atlanta
Baltimore
Bridgeport
Butte
Chicago
Detroit
Houston
Manchester
Paterson
St. Louis
SBn Francisco
Wilkes-Barre
4,871
62
405
67
98
1,536
280
294
5
409
77
639
343
656
Servants
Atlanta
:Baltimore
Bridgeport
Butte
Chicago
Detroit
Houston
Manchester
Omaha
Paterson
St. Louis
San Francisco
Wilkes-Barre
4 ,365
2C4
310
32
12
1,624
314
188
12
247
76
837
424
85
Orna..h.a
Unknown
Atlant a
Baltimore
Bridgeport
Butte
Chic ago
Detroit
Houston
Manchester
--
Feb.
1
1-
-Aug.
3,177
22
160
29
85
246
135
123
56
171
51
364
197
1,538
2,213 2, 92C 3, 669
9
33
51
168 I
173
272
35
24
23
141
85
108
1 84 1,128 , l,255
1C4
242
516
34
134
127
45
45
33
160
108
155
69
62
51
348
276
330
1 64
242 ,
229
704 . 490 I 491
4,337
18
178
21
95
1 , 624
477
96
34
185
75
367
185
I 982
3,487
116
308
11
14
l ,5C4
249
152
23
204
36
534
287
1
49
1,896
84
144
15
16
273
130
138
30
173
42
513
265
73
1 , 609 2,362 I 3,135
10
16
85
99
127
212
16
16
12
18
27 I
'-'"5
187
942,1 ,195
227
596
115
82
129
29
27
21
21
140
129
131
43
49
56
437
400
434
299
328
2741
45
55 I
52
3,361
53
185
35
29
Anr.
4,0 641 4,247
67
36
496
299
40
36
93
72
1,392 1,760
170
238
233
172
28
20
291
289
55
64
344
432
285
213
704
482 I
3,893
246
378
17
18
1,360
22 6
234
17
178
54
668
424
73
119 I
-I
79
Jun,
Jul.
Mar.
1
I
I
I
May .
29
33 I
16
Fi
21
1 , 422
555
82
12
156
51
4 93
260
65
27
-1
16
2
l;
4.
1
8
8
30
1
6
1
1
7
16
2
22
12
14
12
1
3
2
2
1
2
60
24
14
9
Omaha
Paterson
St. ::,ouis
Sen ?rancisco
Wilkes-Barre
~
3
33
22
4
2
1
4
1
41
-1
•..-.w ·
Digitized by
Original from
NORTHWESTERN UNIVERSITY
NORTHWESTERN UNIVERSITY
80 26
- 27 Table llb
Bnployable Persons in Closed Relief Cases Classified by
Occupational Group of Usual Employment
Thirteen Cities
January - August 1935
City
I
Jan . I Feb .
Mar.
Apr .
May
June
July
Aug .
3, 079 I 4 , 255 2 , 972
220 I 266
146
94
121
152
24
41
32
34
23
19 I
676 j 1 , 880 1, 0 76
186
881 ! 40 3 I
80
1
99 I 148
20
15
5 !
77
74
72
98 i
24 !
21
556 ! 822 !
51 6
277 I 3 99 I
472
49 I
38 II
70
3 , 573
195
27 Fi
42
28
1 , 344
218
216
3 , 738
496
?~l
39
48
1 , 240
197
183
2
223
23
I
2 , 978
200
129
34
30
1,323
272
151
11
182
56
229
267
94
4 , 565
242
215
42
52
2 ,330
2'35
185
7
20 8
47
398
418
424
580 I
89 i 11('
3 , 287
1 62
191
61
36
1,132
250
139
31
145
48
39 6
570
126
385 '
30
300
31
14
1
3
88
30
21
1
29
5
2
7
11 2
26
20
2
23
j
White Collar
Atl anta
'Baltimore
Bridgeport
Butte
Chicago
Detroit
Houston
Manchester
Omaha
Paterson
St. Louis
San Fra ncisco
Wilkes- Barre
Professional
Atlanta
Baltimore
Bridgeport
Butte
Chicago
Detroit
Houston
Mc1nchester
Omaha
Paterson
St . Louis
Sa n Francisco
Wilkes-Barre
Pronri etors
Atl an ta
Baltimore
Bridg eport
Butte
Chicago
Detroit
Houston
Manchester
Omaha
Paterson
St . Louis
San Francisco
Wilkes-Barre
!
i
I
398
24
9
2
3
3o
73
15
1
10
724 i
26 .
10
6
6 1
144 I
441
16 I
-1
13 !
278
11
9
7
4
56
12
42
6
4!
5
5
173
44
37?
I
71 !
2
7i
18
102
456
48
13
677 •
3
3
140
101
25
l
62
25
I
I
5j
-I
:336
76
I
I
456
72
15
410
3
5
2
5
120
46
21
100
10 3
20
40
49
19
19
17
40
23
351
26
15
11
2
6
3
7
148
26
60
7
8
7
9
30
11 2
17
591
45
61 0
41
i:;57
55
49
4
33
9
998
76
45
12
675
53
41
18
2
232
43
56
4
3Cl
71
32
248
26
15
66
73
29
44
98
54
2
9
6
6
5
I
7
5
3
44
4
8
I
12
46
!I
1 ~- II
21
30
28
202
57
237
672
58
859
184
63
5
9
296
50
49
5
5
1
18
36
15
45
36
11
56
74
34
6
66
74
8
13
14
2
43
I
6
7
550
42
37
248
48
28
5
6
44
16
98
48
19
38
9
66
10 2
11
~
.:::;t, -
Table llb (contd}
f
City
Clerks
Atlanta
Baltimore
Bridgeport
Butte
Chicago
Detroit
Houtton
Manchester
Omaha
Paterson
St . Louis
San Francis co
Wilkes-Barre
Jan.
Feb.
2,225 2,854
148
178
86
72
19
21
28
13
500 1,400
283
707
59
102
4
13 !
62 I
45
18
77
317 .
372
284
204
34
33
Mc1r.
2,103
90
lOri
29
16
772
148
94
10
51
14
400
316
57
Anr.
2,578
124
213
37
23
1, 024
145
139
22
137
38
184
2,021
113
91
23
19
910
175
99
8
123
38
161
187
74
June
2,423
240
153
31
34
824
101
112
2
154
14
290
400
68
July
3,157
12ri
147
28
41
1, 680
140
128
2
145
28
294
316
82
Aue:.. .
2,261
83
135
32
27
844
153
92
19
90
32
300
356
98
Skilled
Atlanta
Baltimore
Bridgeport
Butte
Chicago
Detroit
Hou::,ton
Me.nchester
Omaha
Paterson
St. Loui3
San Francisco
Wilkes-Barre
3 ,180 3,806
189 I 292
172
1 30
39
2: I
28
564 I 1,800
1,508
Fi08
128
157
9
33
47
80
83
30
19b
262
273
221
44
56
I
4,483 3,661
240
281
417
185
78
77 I
29
27
1,788 1,449
463
550
195
352
13
18
263
206
69
101
241
302
452
163
79
106
4,231
488
312
73
31
1,440
34r,
215
7
269
40
458
416
136
Semi-skilled
Atlanta
Baltimore
Bridgeport
Butte
Chicago
Detroit
Houston
Manchester
Omaha
Paterson
St. Louis
San Franci ::,co
Wilkes-Barre
10,558 8,990
334
519
288
221
62
55
20
23
1,280 3, 99 2
5,853 2, 054
148
129
157
79
86'
118
1,428
289
864
622
427
285
88 I 127
3,172
225
222
78
23
l, 05f;
320
179
7
9n
30
528
33fi
72
6,143
329
407
110
36
1,984
807
193
103
122
119
1,274
500
169
4,674
272
331
62
20
2,240
323
249
7
204
45
396
360
165
8, 097
459
512
132
24
4, 020
429
233
38
309
215
1,038
422
266
3,459
230
264
62
20
1, 096
342
124
28
169
40
402
542
140
6 , 39 5
359
439
126
35
2,108
672
125
143
277
338
1,000
544
229
Uns~illed
.Atlanta
Baltimore
Bridgeport
Butte
Chicago
Detroit
Hounton
Manchester
Omaha
Pat erson
St. Louis
San Francisco
Wilkes-Barre
5,433 8 ,147
403 I
661
344 I 429
31 I
39
219 I 150
1, 260 I 3, fi 8 8
674
1, 373
256
242
58
22
158
201
138
70
919
653
257
368
670
by 297
6,17n
328
509
48
106
l, 784
290
421
24
259
53
1,266
482
606
7,4431 7,917 10, 86f; 10,412
974
487
579 2,756
8731'
799
375 1,176
F-7
96
74
5~1
198
222
167
154
2,5 84 3,388 2,968 4 ,550
449
299
317
393
554
680
490
523
8
15
10
26
449
561
504
382
99
10 8
157
101
988 l,llfi
544
531
546
568
206
532
371, 1,03§1 ginal f?~
800
7,953
G50
588
57
140
2,428
316
408
42
416
99
856
678
1,215
I
I
I
Digitize ~
NORTHWESTERN UNIVERSITY
450
42
l!iav
I
6,7311
366
5,839
355
218
143
628
113
19
32
2,'? 68 2,618
787
760 I
141
239 I
81
49
312
268
187
232
554
581
586
220
124
195
6,707
1,088
498
104
41
2, 032
452
222
36
373
159
1,034
506
162
NORTHWESTERN UNIVERSITY
8026
- 29 -
Tabl e 11 ( cont'd.)
-
City
Feb .
J an .
Mar.
I
May
Ap r.
J une
Aug.
J u lyl
I
Laborers
Atlanta
l➔lt imore
Bri dgep ort
Butt e
Chi cago
Detroit
Houston
Man che ste r
Om$,ha
Pat e rso n
St. Loui s
San Francis co
Wi l kes- Barre
9, 070
82
193
22
214
680
827
1 37
29
91
102
280
1 32
281
Ser va nt s
Atlanta
Bal tir:1ore
l3 r idgeport
f,;ut t e
Ch~ca go
Detro i t
Houst on
Manche st e r
Omaha
Pat erson
St. Loui s
San Franc i sco
Wilkes- Barre
2 , 363
321
1 51
9
5
5 80
546
105
29
67
36
373
1 25
16
Unknown
Atl anta
Bal timore
Br idgep ort
J ut te
Chi cago
Det ro i t
r1o,.1s ton
W.en chester
CJmaha
Pat e r son
St. Lou i s
San Franci s co
Wi l ke s-Barre
4 , 659 3 ,397 4 , 242 4 , 884 5, 239
1 60
103
11 3
1 36
31 6
577
217
233
306
555
I 44
27
75
51
37
1
38
1
49
19
7
98
1
69
I
2 , 152
1,428 2 , 093 1, 840
916
I
36]
21 8
157
1 42
229
1 65
305
219
395
292
12 I
14
9
6
13
I
106
136 I 333 1 2.1.8 i 31 6
92 l
74
67
49 I
26
4.~l
51 2
606
2 or -b II
272
73 i
198 I 226
2 50
268
988 I 680
627 I 569
342 I
'
l
'
I
I
I
3 , 488 12 ,779
501 I 225
196
203
12
11
12
8
1, 536
868
148
313
91
202
10
11
95
1 23
21
27
, 488
660
170
256
43
37
732
10
3
9
1
36
1 51
3
9
6
~
499
4
1
773
15
7
4
3
104
60
158
2
7
6
40
28
1
5, 655 4 ,561
1 42
2Cl
477
353
32
49
I
1 26
1 32
2,470 1, 208
14 7
128
28 ~
260
21
5
277
2 68
59
59
5 84 I 4 74
I
252 j 338
I
744 /1,1 24
3 , 201 3 , 033 5, 627 4 ,757
77 3
374
443 2 , 440
621
322
296
158
25
12
21 I
~- 6
25
22
29
18 I
1,156 1, 295 I 1,128 12, 080
17 5 ·
171
220 I 1 60
21 8 !
28 5
198 i 268
12 I
2 I
5
6
1 81
228
1 88
1 34
34 I
42
32
65
272
47 6
532
266
l
I
1 33 I
29 6
2 80
300 i
4
5
56
34 I
50
l
i
l
!
19 2
5
5
5j
51
50
68
183 I
1~
4
6
119
13
I
1 84
28
II
J. E9
208
21
1 39
40
382
340
91
2 60
1
155
3
2
2
- i
2
3
10 4
23
3, 392
508
2 35
25
14
1, 220
1 60
85
6
1
4
3 I
5 63 II
9
-
I
I
I
2
5
.2
52
14
1,
21 1
~3 II
12 I
61
1,
3
2
18
8
1
1
6
8
2
2
6
2
I
Digitized by
Original from
NORTHWESTERN UNIVERSITY
NORTHWESTERN UNIVERSITY
4
ES
68
1
8
1
-
8026
30 -
Table 12
Oc cupat i o.:ial Distribution of V.1 orke r s in 0:9ened Cases Reporting
Usual Err.ployment and in Closed Cases Currently Emplo~,ed
Thirteen Citi es
Januar y - Augus t 1935
Classificatio
Ii
Whi t e Coll a r
Atlanta
Baltimore
Bridgeport
Butt e
Chicago
Detroit
Houston
Manches t e r
Omaha
Paterson
St . Louis
: San Francisco
Wilkes-Barre
J.:ro f ess i onal
At l anta
Baltimore
Br idgeport
Butt e
Chicago
Detroit
Houst on
Manr.hes t e r
Omaha
Paterson
St . Louis
San Fr ancisc o
Wilkes- Barre
. Proprietors
Atlanta
Baltimo r e
Bri dgeport
Butte
Chicago
Det roit
Houst on
Manches t e r
Omaha
Paterson
St . Loui s
San Francisco
Wi l kes- Barre
--Clo sed Cases
Jan . Feb . Me.r . Apr . Ma;:.1:_uneJ ulyAug .
Opened Cases
J an . ]'e b . Mar . Ap r . May J_uneJul
14~
I
14
18
19
22
18
17
29
14
14
17
26
14
130&
I
14
21
15
20
16
23
17
17
14
17
28
12
1 31
I
14
20
13
22
15
18
20
16
8
19
27
7
19%
13
17
16
21
16
20
1
1
3
2
1
1
1
2
2
1
4
2
3
3
4
*
2
2
3
2
2
2
2
1
2
2
*
*
1
1
1
2
1
2
2
2
1
2
2
1
5
1
1
2
2
3
1
4
2
3
2
1
1
6
4
2
2
1
1
4
2
4
2
2
4
2
4
3
4
5
4
1
1
2
5
3
3
4
3
2
4
3
3
4
17
27
6
2
5
4
2
l
4
,;:
._,
5
4
3
3
4
4
2
4
5
4
3
3
2
4
4
3
3
2
....,
,._,
8
1
6
E
3
3
5
18
5
*,;:
20% 26% 1 8%
1 3 12 13
6 17 21
18 11 13
19 23 20
15 10 1)
19 29 24
7
5 15
20 18 1 8
7
10
9
17 18 17
27 26 26
9
8 11
5
3
3
2
4
3
5
1
31%
14
20
16
17
11
17
5
18
11
17
29
6
6
1
3
4
1
*
3
2
1
3
1
3
1
21d0
14
19
7
14
6
17
8
17
4
20
28
7
22d
, o
1
11
20
14
13
7
19
4
16
5
15
28
4
1
2
1
3
1
1
1
1
"1.
4
1
4
1
21
1 ' *
1
3
1
1
2
2
21
*
l I 2
E j 3
11 1
....,
G
2
1
1
I
6
20d
16d
15~;o
1o 21~0 1 6 1o 1 8d
1o
1o
1
11
13
10
13
8
14
3
16
12
26
12
11
lQ
14
10
12
6
17
14
13
26
12
8
12
15
10 ··
14
11
18
9
14
28
6
8
5
6
2
3
1
2
1
2
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
*
1
*
6
*
*
2
1
*
2
J.
l
4
4
*
*
4
1
1
1
2
2
*
*
*
1
15
14
17
17
13
16
5
15
8
13
27
7
1
1
8
1
1
2
2
1
1
1
11
13
14
17
17
16
14
19
7
14
21
7
1
1
3
1
1
2
2
1
3
2
2
1
5
2
2
1
1
2
1
1
2
l
*
1
4
2
3
*
*
1
3
1
*
1
2
1
8
5
4
6
6
6
5
6
10
8
6
2
3
3
1
...,
2
3
3
7
3
2
4
\...
rz.
2
1
1
2
1
4
1
7
2
3
3
2
2
~
2
::I'
1
1
3
4
5
4
3
4
3
4
*
1
3
3
5
2
.5
1
1
3
1
2
2
3
3
5
3
2
2
2
4
4
4
2
E
*
2
1
4
5
9
2
4
l
3
5
r...,
3
3
3
2
3
4
4
1
3
3
3
1
2
4
3
4
4
1
~
G
3
V
4
2
2
1
2
l
0
2
4
5
4
4
3
3
1
4
4
3·
3
*
3
3
1
1
1
1
1
*
...,
3
2
1
4
3
4
1
....,
3
3
5
2
1
1
11 ngin ~
NORTHWESTERN UNIVERSITY
15
12
16
18
20
16
13
20
9
11
23
NORTHWESTERN UNIVERSITY
2
3
8026
-31-
Table 12 (cont 1 d. )
Cl as sific a tion
Open ed. Cas es
Clos ed CasG s
-J an .Feb . 1~9,r. ADr. MayJuneJuly A1!&. J an. Feb . Mar. lm_r. MayJu..'1eJuly.ffilg.
Clerks
:Atlanta
Baltimore
Bridgepo rt
Butte
Chicago
Detroit
Houston
Manchester
Omaha
Pa terson
St . Loui s
Se,n Franc isco
Wilkes-Barre
12
13
14
12
9
23
10
9
12
18
9
9%
9
16
12
14
10
13
11
13
9
11
20
8
Skilled
Atlanta
Baltimore
Bridgeport
Butte
Chicago
Detroit
Houston
Manchester
Omaha
Paterson
St . Louis
San Francisco
Wilkes-Barre
18
19
25
9
17
21
17
13
14
17
13
21
14
Semi- skilled
.&tlan t a
Baltimore
Bridgeport
Butte
Chic ago
Detroit
Houston
Manchester
Omaha
Pate rson
St . Louis
San Francisc o
Wilke s-Barre
28
29
35
17
32
37
20
42
31
39
33
25
19
11~
..,__,o
8
8~
10% 12%
I
10
13
11
14
9
13
16
12
5
13
19
5
8
12
12
14
12
13
4
12
5
12
21
4
10
3
13
13
10
13
4
14
6
13
19
6
13
20
17
9
19
22
13
10
13
18
12
18
16
14
15
15
7
14
22
13
14
14
12
10
20
14
13
20
17
12
21
13
10
11
9
9
18
10
15
20
10
12
21
16
6
13
8
8
5
25
26
36
14
31
35
16
45
32
48
31
26
18
31
28
38
13
30
40
19
46
29
60
34
25
16
37
31
39
14
31
40
20
64
33
66
34
26
14
9
19
7
'-~ 6
33
42
12
32
<~5
20
74
34
70
41
26
19
14% 7%
8 9
12 14
8 11
16 14
8 7
18 15
10 5
13 11
5 5
12 12
17 18
8 7
14
15
19
4
13
17
24
8
17
8
11
18
8
41
31
43
10
32
56
20
64
29
73
37
26
25
23%
9
16
12
1 2·
9
12
5
13
8
12
20
4
6.
16
15
12
15
16
13
7
14
9
12
17
7
16
18
16
11
15
16
19
7
17
12
39
29
46
9
30
57
21
73
30
32
32
47
11
33
53
21
67
35
27
21
14%
12
14
5
11
5
11
6
14
3
15
22
6
4
11
22
3
5
16
15
13
3
12
11
18
7
10
2
]_?,
10
17 17
G 11
13
12
15
5
14
3
9
17
4
79
25
50
34
26
12
14
14
14~;
9
11
10
10
6
14
3
11
34
29
45
8
136
169
I
i25
167
31
91
39
28
,17
9
36
33
45
8
40
63
27
72
29
79
44:
33
14
8% 7cf.,o
12% 145&
9
9
9 10
6
7
11 12
7
8
10
8
3
4
11 12
6 10
9
9
18 18
5
6
9%
8
6
8
11
7
9
6
14
6
10
21
3
71
I
7
8
12
11
8
11
2
10
5
8
19
6
9
6
12
11
11
11
4
13
6
7
18
6
10
13
11
13
11
13
4
10
14
5
24
18
22
10
18
14
16
5
18
14
13
6
11
19
19
8
20
20
17
5
20
13
15
18
10
24
19
16
6
20
25
17
24
20
19
21
18
6
10
14
23
7
22
25
16
15
22
10
17
19
9
14
17
15
10
18
24
16
2
17
9
15
20
9
17
15
18
8
14
22
10
10
20
6
18
22
7
41
35
45
14
39
58
24
75
22
61
41
28
18
32
31
51
7
37
44
18
82
19
47
39
26
20
27
27
48
9
38
39
16
45
27
23
24
41
14
29
36
23
56
30
45
35
22
14
22
28
45
10
32
27
20
59
29
i19
36
23
17
25
31
52
13
33
37
13
59
26
63
37
25
11
9
43
33
24
10
i
Digitized by
Original from
NORTHWESTERN UNIVERSITY
NORTHWESTERN UNIVERSITY
7
8
6026
- 32 -
Table 12 ( cont'd.)
·--
Cpened Cases
Classification
Closed C:ises
..
J 2n: ~;e b. lv'i~r . Anr . M~JuneJ"ul;t:Aug. Jan. Feb. Mar . .A.nr. MayJun~JulyA ~
Unskilled
---Atlanta
J.l timore
:Bridgeport
Butte
Chien.go
De troit
Houston
Mancheste r
Omaha
Pn,terson
St. Louis
San Francisco
Wilkes-'Barre
40%
38
22
56
29
24
46
16
41
30
38
28
52
49%
40
27
62
30
26
48
28
38
20
40
28
54
42%
43
27
67
34
23
49
20
41
19
38
28
69
30%
42
24
53
36
22
47
20
38
18
40
28
75
241&
40
31
61
36
19
45
15
33
12
33
28
66
10
23
19
5v
15
11
24
17
24
10
16
11
47
10
21
20
56
18
11
26
9
24
12
15
12
64
6
22
16
45
17
11
22
13
19
10
17
12
72
25
22
50
18
9
22
10
18
6
15
10
62
19%
43
21
74
32
17
27
13
36
13
34
30
56
37%
42
18
65
36
17
42
13
38
15
36
30
63
2o~sl
36
18
62
35
19
43
9
40
27
33
28
7f
3:i.%
44
31
83
3?
14
40
19
42
4
32
28
65
6
24
l "±''
59
17
9
15
7
16
7
14
13
50
13
24
10
.:
v6
19
8
26
9
21
8
16
13
57
6
5
18 25
14 20
51 81
19 19
9 110
23 23
6 10
22 120
16
3
16 10
12 12
72 EO
26%
41
23
70
34
18
39
19
41
13
32
23
77
16% 29%
36 38
20 18
66 74
31 29
20 - 25
46 53
17
6
45 44
23 25
32 33
33 30
70 62
33ib
42
28
72
27
26
53
19
34
30
31
3C'
79
49%
48
22
63
32
26
43
24
33
36
35
32
70
48%
40
28
f4
33
28
48
26
35
32
37
34
66
43;£
43
17
55
3G
24
62
17
34
24
31
33
75
10
28
24
63
18
14
32
10
22
17
17
12
77
8
23
18
54
22
15
27
17
19
24
18
16
67
11
25
17
56
17
13
27
13
18
20
20
18
62
10
30
11
57
19
12
37
10
21
14
18
19
71
23
14
4
9
10
12
21
10
12
13
14
18
2
42
25
4
37
15
11
33
13
8
8
10
11
16
7
14
12
17
17
3
16
16
21
13
16
12
17
17
4
8
17
12
24
7
13
10
14
13
4
Labore rs
----Atlanta
Baltimore
ridgeport
~ utte
Chicago
Detroit
Houston
Manchester
Omaha
Paterson
St. Louis
San Francisco
Wilkes-Barre
9
22
15
11
28
5
25
15
16
12
45
.
7
I
I
Serva!'lts
5
24
14
65
22
12
29
11
19
8
11
10
74
5
23
16
7
27
15
6J
6 0--
17
14
27
10
23
11
14
14
67
17
15
34
4
26
16
17
17
57
11
14
13
6
14
6
19
7
22
13
18
20
22
10
Il
I
Atlanta
Baltimore
31
17
8 Pridgep ort
Butte
Chicago
Detroit
Houston
Manchester
Omaha
Paterson
St. Louis
San Francisco
Wilkes-Barre
15
13
18
11
15
15
21
115
38
17
8
10
15
15
24
11
15
10
24
17
6
7
7
6
32
22
24
20
6,
8
lJ.
16
12
23
11
17
7
23
16
4
8
19
11
25
7
19
8
23
16
3
17
15
10
11
18
10
23
5
15
5
18
18
4
13
18
7
15
15
24
18
7
10
18
3
9
13
6
20
16
4
17
7
20
17
6
20
17
6
6
15
18
4
ll
16
10
20
2
18
11
22
16
5
25
18
!10
I 2
18
4
17
20
17
9
5
13
6
10
12~
!
1
22
16
I 5
22
5
21
13
4
8
I
r,
._
4
9
12
10
20
3
18
10
16
13
5
I
*
Less than one-h-%\-Ji'tiRti bf>ne percent .
NORTHWESTERN UNIVERSITY
Original from
NORTHWESTERN UNIVERSITY
6
Tab- 13
Reasons for Orening and Clos i ng Rel i e f Cases
At1 gust 193 5
-
--
-
--
z
I-<
--l
I
~
-f-)
~g
0
..p
~
--j lO
m rt
•H
r-i
r-1
h!)
c(l
Q)
.l..)
'O
•H
~
~if,s e load , August 1935 15,1 631 _23 , 343
~ ccessio ns - - - - - - I
m
(Rate
2
. 4
::0
/
i
~
, Number
3G2
39 7
s!eparations
(Ra t e
e
5
1,159 1 , 249
(Number
I
I
!
....:::
3
128
+>
::s
s:l
Q
'
G
245
6
213
7
24 6
6!
11
8 , ·1381 4 , 33 2
I
4
5j
6 , 34,i i l , ;j05
....:::
8
,Zi
3,566 12, 557
9
452
319
7
75 7 i
5
8
177
968
{/)
I
Q)
~
s:l
r-l
en
•H
~
6 , 378 38 , 688 34 , 601 13 , 342
7 .
4
S...
ro
Cl)
-P
P-,
r:Q
µ.,
.
Q)
..µ
t\S
ro
.s
3 , 610 136 , 101 43 ,1 25 10,219
S...
~
ro
:::s
0
i--1
en
ro
0
C
~
•;-i
0
~
C)
{/)
~
Q)
....:::
Cl]
Q)
(_)
i:q
4 , 275
h
..µ
•H
Q)
h
h
•H
+'
{/)
~
0
0
C)
+>;:5
h
er;
~
-------
..µ
•H
0
h!)
o:!
0
C)
{/)
<J)
Q)
+>
-
!
h
0
p...
~
s:l
-·
~
+>
H
Q)
~ las s ification
~
i
829
7
420
5
5
1, 913 1 1, 641
1,144
7
418
6
2, 258
l,3 oJ8
7
2,3-J4
9
10
Percent Distribution
I
I
All r easons-o nenin ,,.
0
Loss of job
Decreased hours or p ay
&:!; ril~e
~p letion of r esour c e s
hic reas ed needs
~e,e r re asons
00.&iown
m 3·
100 1
--s31
7
1
31
I
z:::::;;
1
~ i ll r eas ons - clo sing
~b s ecur ed
Mc r eased hours or pay
S~ ri ke end ed
Client failed to re p o rt
Dec re ased nee ds
Resour ces di scovere d by
100 1
351
13 ,
a g e r. r✓ y
Other r easolls
.liL :J W "ICI _
i -!J·,;. t's t, 1·1au
01!e - } ,aJ f
_J_
of one
14
-,
1
37
62
12
-
-
co
_l_QQ
71
6
*
8
1
14
8
:;;o ru
__ I 0Q
-1
9 '
2
15
_l O_Q
57
3
100
36
6
15
2
23
13
1
44
-
-
-
_100
I
57
66
100
51
4
4
Ji) ,)
6
-
10
*
2
25
-i
perce nt .
_1 00
64
100
78
2
5
7
11
-
*
7
·*
1
22
15
1
1
100
34
7
100
45
3
-
-
-
1
1
11
10
1
*
3
20 .
4G
291
- I - __--=---.L ___ - - * -'--·
4
82
(
4
-
8
-1.QQ_I
I
-
-
-
I
100
43
3
-
-
1) 0
35
4
1
33
1
3
56
-
-
_Jon
57
70
t3l)
11
s
,'7__.
5
-
*
*
12
11, 0
49
_lQQ
_lQQ_
_lQ_Q
61
58
6
12
1
8
35
13
2
15
-
19
1
-
_.llli2_
8
1
25
2
-
___l00
55
11
1
22
-
31
-
62
13
1
7
-
18
*
22
_l_QQ_
-
-
2
,., 'Z
'-''-'
-
I
I
1;1
I
-:
-
2
10
1
15
-
2
v
10
*
*
15
2: I
".I
22
-
l CO
-
10
-
5
-
...100.
82
4
-,.,
'-'
1
11
-
- 34~80 26
Table 14
Ope!led a.n<1. CL)S':l d Relief Ca sos Havi ng No Employab le Membe r s
Augus t 1 935
Opened Cases
Clo sed Cases
Unemployable
Total
Total
Numbe r
Percent
9
1 8 ,938
1,779
9
8
91
10
3
10
1 52
1 33
18
13
11
8
1,159
1,249
245
213
8 ,438
4,632
32
1,219
159
15
14
3
246
6 ,344
1,505
32
764
73
13
12
5
452
319
829
52
10
59
12
3
7
757
177
968
73
10
72
10
6
7
420
1 , 943
1 , 641
1,142
43
171
113
15
10
9
7
418
2 , 258
2,304
1, 308
24
1 88
194
46
6
Tot a l
Number
21,356
1,9 82
302
897
1 28
I Atlanta
BFJltimor e
Br idgeport
But t e
Chicago
De t r oi t
Houst on
Mancheste r
Omaha
Paterson
St. Louis
San Francisco
Wilkes-Barre
I
s
Unemr loyable
Percent
l
7
8
8
4
Tabl e 15
Percent of House~1olds in Rel ie f I ntake Receiving
First Public Relief
J anuar y-Augus t 1935
Mar .
A1;r .
~ay
J une
J uly Aug.
so%
48
19
43%
42
20
39%
35
15
30%
32
35
26'70
26
39
27%
31
38
32
45
42
34
51
39
23
53
30
25
25
31
19
36
22
22
45
26
27
41
28
43
59
53
47
51
69
46
49
69
46
27
66
49
40
66
53
46
52
51
53
46
45
52
45
55
59
60
50
50
61
62
57
44
58
60
41
40
58
63
35
33
54
!50
49
2,5
53
47
61
38
46
49
65
52
50
46
38
City
J e.:i .
Feb .
Atlanta
Baltimo!'e
Bridgepo rt
48t
I
43
41
47
32
Butte
Chicago
Detroit
44
44
42
Hous t on
Manchester
Omaha
Paterson
St . Louis
San Francisco
Wilkes- Bar re
54%
Hi gh ... ...... .•.•••. 63 .... 69 •.•. 69 . ..• 66 ••.• 66 .... 61 .. . . 65 • ..• 52
Low ••... . .... .. . . . .• 41 .. . . 32 ...• 19 .•.• 20 . .. • 15 .. . . 19 ...• 22 •.•• 27
Median •..... .. . ..... 48 • . .• 50 .. . • 48 . .•• 42 .• . • 39 .. . • 36 •• . • 45 • ••• 41
Digitized by
Original from
NORTHWESTERN UNIVERSITY
NORTHWESTERN UNIVERSITY
Digitized by
Original from
NORTHWESTERN UNIVERSITY
NORTHWESTERN UNIVERSITY
@FedFRASER