Full text of Employee Earnings in Nonmetropolitan Areas of the South and North Central Regions, June 1962 : Bulletin of the United States Bureau of Labor Statistics, No. 1416

The full text on this page is automatically extracted from the file linked above and may contain errors and inconsistencies.

Dayt0p * WontgomL
Public

Library^

N O V 2 4 1954

E M P L O Y E E S

E A R N l N G S 'Y f S F 'w

N O N M E T R O P O L IT A N
O F T H E S O U T H

A N D

A R E A S
N O R T H

C E N T R A L R E G IO N S
JU N E

1 9 6 2

Bulletin N o .

1416

UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF LABOR
W. Willard Wirtz, Secretary
BUREAU OF LABOR STATISTICS

E M P L O Y E E E A R N IN G S IN
N O N M E T R O P O LIT A N A R EA S
O F TH E SOUTH AND N O R TH
C E N T R A L R E G IO N S
JU N E

1962

Bulletin N o.1416
October 1964

UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF LABOR
W. Willard Wirtz, Secretary
BUREAU OF LABOR STATISTICS
Ewan Clague, Commissioner

For sale by the Superintendent of Documents, U.S. Government Printing Office, Washington, D.C., 20402 - Price 40 cents









Preface

This bulletin presents estimates of employee
earnings in manufacturing and nonmanufacturing industries
in nonmetropolitan areas of the South and North Central
regions. T h e survey findings relate to June 1962 and, w h e n
c o m p a r e d with those of a similar survey in October I960,
permit an examination of w a g e changes occurring during
a period w h e n the Federal m i n i m u m w a g e increased f r o m
$1 to $1.15, and a $1 m i n i m u m w a g e w a s extended to
workers brought under the provisions of the Fair Labor
Standards Act for the first time on September 3, 1961.
T h e survey, conducted by the B u r e a u of Labor Statistics,
w a s part of a broad p r o g r a m of studies initiated by the
Department of Labor for continuing appraisal of Federal
m i n i m u m w a g e legislation.
The W a g e and H o u r and Public Contracts Divi­
sions participated in the planning of the survey and pro­
vided necessary funds. Their evaluation of the effects of
the increase in the Federal m i n i m u m w a g e in the areas
studied w a s presented in the Report Submitted to the C o n ­
gress in Accordance With the Requirements of Section 4 (d)
of the Fair Labor Standards Act, January 1963.
This study w a s m a d e in the B u r e a u 1s Division of
National W a g e and Salary Income, N o r m a n J. Samuels,
Chief, under the general direction of L. R. Linsenmayer,
Assistant C o m m i s s i o n e r for W a g e s and Industrial Rela­
tions.
T he analysis w a s prepared by Herbert Schaffer,
assisted by B o y d Steele and H a r r y Donoian.

HI




Contents
Page
S u m m a r y ----------------------------------------------------------------------Southern r e g i o n ________________________________________________________________
W a g e changes, O c t o b e r I960— J u n e 1962 ___________________________________
Selected Southern a r e a s -------------------------------------------------------W a g e c h a n g e s _______________________________________________________________
B a r t o w and C h e r o k e e Counties, G a ________________________________________
Beaufort, Tyrrell, and W a s h i n g t o n Counties, N. C -----------------------C h a m b e r s a nd L e e Counties, A l a -----------------------------------------Charlotte and Sarasota Counties, F l a ______________________________________
C o o k e and G r a y s o n Counties, T e x -----------------------------------------Florence County, S. C -----------------------------------------------------G a s t o n County, N. C --------------------------------------------------------H a r r i s o n County, W . V a --------------------------------------------------Hopkins and M u h l e n b e r g Counties, K y -------------------------------------Jones County, M i s s _________________________________________________________
Lake, Pasco, and P o l k Counties, F l a ______________________________________
L o u d o n and M e M i n n Counties, T e n n _______________________________________
Somerset, W i c o m i c o , and W o r c e s t e r Counties, M d ----------------------Un i o n County, A r k ---------------------------------------------------------W a s h i n g t o n County, V a ----------------------------------------------------N o r t h Central r e g i o n ---------------------------------------------------------W a g e changes, O c t o b e r I960— June 1962 ___________________________________
Selected N o r t h Central a r e a s __________________________________________________
W a g e c h a n g e s _______________________________________________________________
A l p e n a County, M i c h ------------------------------------------------------B a r t o n and Rice Counties, K a n s -------------------------------------------Crawf o r d , Franklin, and W a s h i n g t o n Counties, M o _______________________
Elkhart County, I n d --------------------------------------------------------Fayette County, I n d --------------------------------------------------------M a n i t o w o c County, W i s ----------------------------------------------------M a r a t h o n County, W i s -----------------------------------------------------Portage County, O h i o ------------------------------------------------------S a n d u s k y County, O h i o -----------------------------------------------------Whiteside County, 111------------------------------------------------------W i n o n a County, M i n n _______________________________________________________




V

1
2
3
4
7
7
9
11
12
13
15
16
18
19
21
22
23
24
26
27
28
29
30
31
32
33
34
35
36
37
39
40
41
42
43

Contents— Continued
P a g e

Tables:
1.

2.

3.

4.

P e r c e n t a g e distribution of n o n s u p e r v i s o r y e m p l o y e e s b y
averag e straight-time hourly earnings, selected
m a j o r industry divisions a nd industry groups,
nonmetropolitan areas, South, June 1962 ---------------------------Per c e n t a g e distribution of no n s u p e r v i s o r y e m p l o y e e s b y
averag e straight-time hourly earnings, selected
industry groups, selected nonmetropolitan areas,
South, J u n e 1 9 6 2 -----------------------------------------------------Perce n t a g e distribution of n o n s u p e r v i s o r y e m p l o y e e s b y
a verag e straight-time hourly earnings, selected
m a j o r industry divisions a nd industry groups,
nonmetropolitan areas, N o r t h Central region, June 1962 ----------Perce n t a g e distribution of no n s u p e r v i s o r y e m p l o y e e s b y
averag e straight-time hourly earnings, selected
industry groups, selected nonmetropolitan areas,
N o r t h Central region,June 1 9 6 2 ---------------------------------------

45

46

50

51

Appendixes:
A.
B.

Scope an d m e t h o d ofs u r v e y ---------------------------------------------Questi o n n a i r e -----------------------------------------------------------




vi

55
59

Employee Earnings in Nonmetropolitan Areas of the South
and North Central Regions, June 1962
Summary
In nonmetropolitan areas of the South and N o r t h Central regions, straighttime earnings a v e r a g e d $ 1. 49 and $ 1.77 a n hour, respectively, for n o n s upervisory
e m p l o y e e s within the scope of the B u r eau's survey in June 1962. 1 H o u r l y pay
in manufacturing industries a v e r a g e d $ 1 . 5 7 in the South and $ 1 . 9 8 in the N o r t h
Central region.
S u c h earnings e x c e e d e d those in no n m a n u f a c t u r i n g industries
by 18 and 43 cents an hour, respectively.
In the South, m o r e than three-fifths of the factory w o r k e r s e a r n e d less
than $ 1. 50 an hou r and about a fifth w e r e concentrated at or just above the
$1. 15 F e d eral m i n i m u m wage. 2 M o r e than two-fifths of the southern nonfactory
workers, on the other hand, h a d earnings of less than $ 1. 15 an hour. H o w e v e r ,
the proportion of nonfactory w o r k e r s earning $ 2 or m o r e an h o u r a l m o s t equaled
that of factory wo r k e r s , 15 and 17 percent, respectively.
In the N o r t h Central region, f e wer than a tenth of the factory w o r k e r s
w e r e at the $1. 15— $ 1. 20 w a g e interval; nearly half e arned $ 2 or m o r e an hour
and a fifth received at least $2. 50. B y contrast, a l m o s t a third of the nonfactory
w o r k e r s w e r e paid less than $1. 15 an h o u r and f e w e r than a fifth earned
$ 2 or m o r e .
In the 15 southern nonmetropolitan areas for w h i c h data p e r m i t separate
publication, hourly p a y levels ran g e d f r o m $1. 19 to $2. 16 in June 1962. M a n u ­
facturing earnings in these areas w e r e up to 71 cents an hou r higher than in
nonmanufacturing industries, although average earnings for the latter industries
w e r e higher in three of the areas.
M o r e than a fourth of the factory w o r k e r s
earned less than $ 1. 25 an ho u r in nine of the areas. At or just above the $ 1 . 1 5
Federal m i n i m u m w a g e w e r e f e w e r than 10 percent of the factory w o r k e r s in five
areas, f r o m 14 to 20 percent in four areas, and f r o m 24 to 41 percent in the
other six areas. In nonmanufacturing, two-fifths or m o r e of the w o r k e r s earned
less than $ 1 . 2 5 in 13 of the 15 areas, and f r o m a fourth to a l m o s t two-fifths
w e r e paid less than $ 1 in 8 areas.
A m o n g the 11 nonmetropolitan areas of the N o r t h Central region for
w h i c h separate data w e r e available, the c o m b i n e d earnings for all industries
a v e r a g e d f r o m $ 1 . 5 7 to $ 2 . 3 5 an hour.
T h e a v e r a g e pay advantage of factory
w o r k e r s over nonfactory w o r k e r s e x c e e d e d 50 cents an ho u r in six of the areas,
extending up to as m u c h as $ 1. 12 in one area. F e w e r than a tenth of the factory
w o r k e r s earned less than $ 1 . 2 5 in nine areas and a significant proportion at the
$ 1 . 1 5 Fe d e r a l m i n i m u m w a g e o c c u r r e d in only one of the areas.
At least
three-eighths of the factory w o r k e r s e a r n e d $ 2 or m o r e in all but one of the
areas. In nonmanufacturing, f r o m m o r e than a fourth to over two-fifths earned
less than $ 1 . 2 5 in e a c h of the areas, and f r o m about a tenth to approximately
a fifth w e r e paid less than $ 1 in all but one of the areas.

* The survey covered most major industry divisions except agriculture, contract construction, and government.
Other industry exclusions were petroleum and natural gas production, railroad transportation, and nonprofit religious,
charitable, educational, and h u m a n e organizations. See appendix A for a detailed description of the scope and
method of survey and definitions of terms.
2 For ease of reading in this and subsequent discussions of tabulations, the limits of the wage intervals are
designated as at $1.15 an hour or at or just above $1.15 an hour, $1.15—$1. 20, from $1.15 to $1. 20, or between
$1.15 and $1. 20, instead of using the more precise terminology of "$1.15 and under $1. 20. "




1

2

T h e survey indicated that the 1961 a m e n d m e n t s to the Fair L a b o r Stand­
ards A c t 3 h a d raised w a g e s of the l o wer paid w o r k e r s .
In Oc t o b e r I960 in
southern industries w h i c h w e r e generally subject to the provisions of the act prior
to the 1961 a m e n d e m n t s , 4 three-tenths of the w o r k e r s e a r n e d less than $1. 15 an
hour. 5 B y Ju n e 1962, virtually all of the w o r k e r s e a rned at least $1. 15 an hour,
and the proportion at or just a b ove the $ 1 . 1 5 F e d e r a l m i n i m u m h ad increased
f r o m a twentieth to m o r e than a fifth. T h e i m p a c t of the increase in the Fed e r a l
m i n i m u m w a g e varied, howev e r , a m o n g the 15 southern areas, since the proportion
of subject w o r k e r s earning less than $1. 15 an h o u r in O c t o b e r I960 varied f r o m
f ewer than a twentieth to m o r e than three-fifths.

In the N o r t h Central region, about a tenth of the subject w o r k e r s w e r e
paid less than $1. 15 an hour in O c t o b e r I960. T h e proportion at or just above
the $1. 15 Fe d e r a l m i n i m u m increased f r o m 2 to 9 percent b e t w e e n O c t o b e r I960
and June 1962, as those b e l o w that level w e r e r e d u c e d to 2 percent.
In 9 of
the 11 N o r t h Central areas, f e w e r than *a tenth of the subject w o r k e r s earned
less than $ 1 . 1 5 in O c t o b e r I960.

In the s e g m e n t of retail trade w h i c h b e c a m e subject to a $ 1 Fe d e r a l
m i n i m u m wage, nearly three-tenths of the retail e m p l o y e e s in the South and
a l m o s t a fifth in the N o r t h Central region received less than $ 1 an hou r in
June 1961.6 O n e y e a r later, virtually all of the w o r k e r s earn e d at least $ 1 and
the proportions at the n e w m i n i m u m h a d m o r e than doubled in both regions.

In nonsubject industries, excluding retail trade, m o r e than three-fifths
of the southern w o r k e r s and over half of the N o r t h Central w o r k e r s e a r n e d less
than $ 1 . 1 5 and a l m o s t half and nearly two-fifths, respectively, w e r e paid less
than $ 1 an h o u r in Jun e 1962. In the nonsubject s e g m e n t of retail trade, about
two-fifths of the southern e m p l o y e e s and a l m o s t a fifth of the N o r t h Central
e m p l o y e e s ear n e d less than $ 1 in June 1962.

Southern R e g i o n
N o n s u p e r v i s o r y e m p l o y e e s in southern nonmetropolitan areas a v e r a g e d
$ 1 . 4 9 an h o u r at straight-time rates in June 1962 (table 1).
Although hourly
earnings varied f r o m less than 50 cents to m o r e than $3, about seven-tenths of
the m o r e than 3 million e m p l o y e e s in m a nufacturing and nonma n u f a c t u r i n g indus­
tries c o v e r e d b y the s u rvey e arned b e t w e e n $ 1 and $ 2 an hour. A p p r o x i m a t e l y
two-fifths of the w o r k e r s h a d earnings of less than $ 1 . 2 5 an hour, a fifth less
than $ 1. 15, and slightly m o r e than a tenth less than $ 1. A sixth of the w o r k e r s
w e r e clustered at the $ 1 . 1 5 — $ 1 . 2 0 w a g e interval.

o

The amendments (Public L a w 87— 30) increased the Federal m i n i m u m hourly wage from $1 to $1.15 for the
first 2 years and to $1.25 as of Sept. 3, 1963, for workers previously subject to the act. Coverage was also extended
to other employees, primarily in retail enterprises with $1 million or more in gross annual sales and to establishments
which are part of such enterprises with $250,000 or more in sales. The m i n i m u m wage for these employees was set
at $1 an hour for the first 3 years, $1.15 in the fourth year, and $1.25 thereafter.
^ Since data were grouped by industry rather than by individual establishments and workers, the possibility exists
that a few woikers or establishments were classified improperly as to whether they are subject to the Federal minimum.
For example, workers engaged only in intrastate commerce are exempt, as well as others who are exempt under
conditions specified in section 13 of the act.
5
See Wages in Nonmetropolitan Areas, South and North Central Regions, October 1960 (BLS Report 190, 1961).,
^ The October 1960 survey did not include retail trade, but the industry was studied in these areas in June 1961.
See Employee Earnings in Retail Trade, June 1961 (BLS Bulletin 1338-8. 1963).




In manufacturing industries, which employed almost three-fifths of the
workers included in the survey, the pay level was $ 1.57 an hour. All but about
a sixth of the factory workers received less than $2 an hour and more than
three-fifths earned less than $1.50. Over a fifth of the workers were found at
or just above the $1. 15 Federal minimum wage, which was in effect at the time
of the survey, and nearly a third were paid less than $ 1.25, the Federal minimum
which became effective on September 3, 1963.
The six manufacturing industry groups, for which earnings are shown
separately (food, textiles, apparel, lumber, furniture, and paper), comprised
nearly two-thirds of the factory work force studied in southern nonmetropolitan
areas. Except for the paper industry, pay levels were from 11 to 30 cents an
hour below t h e overall manufacturing average. For workers in the remaining
manufacturing industries as a group, average earnings were $ 1.88 an hour.
The influence of the $1.15 Federal minimum wage was most apparent
in the food, apparel, furniture, and lumber industries, where from three-tenths
to more than half of the workers were concentrated at the $1.15—$1.20 pay
interval. In the same industries, from more than half to almost two-thirds of
the workers earned less than $ 1.25, whereas only a sixth in textile mills and
fewer than a twentieth in papermills had such earnings.
In nonmanufacturing industries covered by the survey, the pay level was
$1.39 an hour. More than half of 1.3 million nonfactory workers earned less
than $1.25 an hour, over two-fifths less than $1.15, and about a fourth less
than $ 1. The largest single cluster of workers at a 5-cent wage interval was
approximately a tenth earning between $1 and $1.05 an hour.
Among five nonmanufacturing industry groups for which earnings are
shown separately, hourly pay levels ranged from $1.24 in retail trade to $2.72
in mining. Average earnings exceeded the overall nonmanufacturing average by
48 cents an hour in the transportation and public utilities group and by 15 cents
an hour in the finance, insurance, and real estate group; the wage level in
wholesale trade was the same as the overall average.
The $1. 15 Federal minimum wage had a marked influence on earnings
in wholesale trade, where approximately a third of the workers were concentrated
at the $ 1. 15—$ 1.20 wage interval. Hourly earnings in this interval were paid
to 14 percent of the workers in the finance, insurance, and real estate group,
10 percent in transportation and public utilities, and 5 percent each in mining
and retail trade. The largest single concentration of retail employees, 17 percent,
was found at the $ 1—$ 1.05 wage interval, largely attributable to the recent
coverage of large retail enterprises by a $ 1 Federal minimum wage.
Wage Changes, October I960—June 1962. The all-industry pay level for
southern nonsupervisory workers, excluding those in retail trade, 7 increased
by 7 cents an hour, from $1.50 in October I960 to $1.57 in June 1962. Almost
a fourth of the workers were paid less than $1.05 an hour and a third less than
$1. 15 in October I960. By June 1962, fewer than a tenth of the workers earned
less than $1.15, but almost a fifth were concentrated at the $1. 15—$1.20 wage
interval. During this period, the proportion of workers earning $ 1.25 or more
rose from fewer than three-fifths to nearly two-thirds.
Because retail trade was excluded from the October 1960 survey, it was also excluded from the June 1962
data in these wage comparisons. For this reason, the figures used here differ from those in the tables. Wage
comparisons for retail workers are treated separately for June of 1961 and 1962.




4

In industries which were generally subject to the provisions of the Fair
Labor Standards Act prior to the 1961 amendments, about a sixth of the workers
were paid the 4*/2-year-old $1 Federal minimum wage and three-tenths earned
less than $ 1. 15 an hour in October I960. The tabulation below shows that in
June 1962, 9 months after the $1.15 Federal minimum wage became effective,
virtually all of the workers earned at least the new minimum and the proportion
at or just above the minimum had increased from a twentieth to a fifth. Changes
in the wage distribution diminished at higher levels of pay. The proportion of
subject workers earning $ 1.25 or more an hour, for example, increased from
60 to 69 percent and those earning $ 1.50 or more rose from 38 to 42 percent
between October I960 and June 1962. In nonsubject industries, wages also rose
above the I960 level and the proportion of the lower paid workers was reduced.
Nevertheless, over three-fifths of these workers received less than $ 1. 15 an
hour and almost half, less than $ 1 in June 1962.
A ll industries except
Retail trade (excluding
______ retail trade_____________ eating and drinking places)
Subject______ Nonsubject_______Subject_______ Nonsubject
Average hourly
earnings

Oct.
1960

June
1962

Oct.
1960

June
1962

June
1961

June
1962

June
1961

June
1962

(Cumulative percent)
Under
Under
Under
Under
Under
Under
Under

$ 1 .0 0 ----------$ 1 .0 5 ----------$ 1 .1 5 ----------$ 1 . 2 0 -----------$ 1 .2 5 ----------$ 1 .5 0 -----------$ 2 .0 0 ------------

Number of workers
(in thousands)-------Average hourly
earnings---------------

28
41
51
55
58
73
89

5
36
45
51
54
72
89

44
56
63

70
71
83
93

47
58
63
67
69
80
93

81
83

38
51
58
62
64
78
92

2,160

212

240

160

143

549

574

$1.62

$1.04

$1.10

$1.32

$1.40

$1.14

$ 1.21

52
62

2

1

19
30
35
40
62
81

2

3
24
31
58
80

68

1,925
$1.55

66
68

In the segment of retail trade which became subject to the act in
September 1961, accounting for roughly a fifth of the retail employment in
southern nonmetropolitan areas, average earnings increased by 8 cents an hour
between June of 1961 and 1962. Three months before the $1 Federal minimum
wage became effective for these workers, nearly three-tenths were paid less
than $ 1 an hour. In June 1962, only a twentieth of the workers had such earnings
and the proportion at or just above the $ 1 Federal minimum wage had increased
from about an eighth to more than three-tenths. Changes in the wage distribution
above $ 1 were nominal; 58 percent earned less than $ 1.25 in June 1961 compared
with 54 percent in June 1962. In the exempt segment of retail trade, the hourly
pay level increased by about the same amount as in the subject segment between
June of 1961 and 1962. The proportion of exempt workers paid less than $1 also
declined during this period, but by much less than in the subject segment, from
44 to 38 percent. Moreover, the proportion at the $ 1—$1.05 wage interval re­
mained at about an eighth.
Selected Southern Areas
Wage data are provided separately for 15 nonmetropolitan areas in the
South. The information presented relates to the specified areas only and should
not be considered as representative of any other areas. Each of these areas




5

is a relatively small, homogeneous labor market in which economic activity is
generally dominated by one or two industries. Wages in these, as in all labor
markets, are influenced by a variety of factors such as .the demographic char­
acteristics of the labor force, the supply of and demand for labor, the industrial
composition, the occupational mix, the availability of capital, Federal and state
minimum wage legislation, degree of unionization, regional and sectional wage
patterns, etc. The extent to which these forces act singularly or in combination
with others determines the wage structure in the area. It is not, however, the
object of this report to isolate these wage determinants but rather to summarize
the level and distribution of earnings in each of the areas at the time of the survey.
As shown in the following tabulation, population (according to the I960
census) varied from approximately 50, 000 to 100, 000, except for Gaston County,
N. C. , and the area consisting of Lake, Pasco, and Polk Counties in Florida.
Nonsupervisory employees within the scope of the survey in June 1962 ranged from
4, 800 to 34, 200 but varied from about 7, 000 to 14, 000 in 12 of the areas. Manu­
facturing employment accounted for at least half of the work force in 10 of the
areas. Sarasota was a major resort area and mining was prevalent in the
Hopkins—Muhlenberg area largely accounted for the relatively small proportion
of workers in manufacturing in these areas. Although a wide variety of manu­
facturing activities were found, most common were textiles, food processing,
lumber, and apparel. Retail trade was numerically the most important non­
manufacturing industry studied in all but one of the areas.

Area

Population
(1960
census)

Estimated num­
ber of nonsuper­
visory workers
included in the
survey, June 1962

Percent of
nonsuper­
visory
workers in
manufacturing

Percent of non­
manufacturing
workers in
retail trade

Bartow and Cherokee
Counties, G a ------------------------- —

51,268

7,400

65

54

Textile m ill
products

Major
m anufacturing
industries

Beaufort, Tyrrell, and
Washington Counties, N. C — —
Chambers and Lee
Counties, A l a ----------------------- —

54,022

4,800

50

58

Lumber

87,582

14,000

79

48

Textile m ill
products

Charlotte and Sarasota
Counties, F l a ------------------------

89,489

9,9 00

20

50

Electrical
machinery

Cooke and Grayson
Counties, T e x ------------------------—

95,603

11,600

46

46

Florence County, S. C ---------------—
Gaston County, N. C -----------------—

84,438
127,074

10,100

33,100

51
82

51
47

Harrison County, W. Va----------- —

77,856

12,800

48

35

Hopkins and Muhlenberg
Counties, K y --------------------------—
Jones County, M iss------------------ —

Food and kindred
products
Apparel
Textile m ill
products
Stone, clay, and
glass products

66,249
59,542

7,600
9,100

17
60

22

Lake, Pasco, and Polk
Counties, Fla--------------------------—

289,307

34,200

35

45

Loudon and McMinn
Counties, T enn---------------------- —

Food and kindred
products

57,419

9,3 00

78

50

Textile m ill
products

Somerset, W icom ico, and
Worcester Counties, M d --------—

92,406

14,000

60

66

Union County, A r k -------------------—
Washington County, V a ----------- —

49,518
55,220

7,100
8,400

51
55

40
39

Food and kindred
products
Lumber
Nonelectrical
machinery




53

Apparel
Paper and allied
products

6

All industry-area pay levels for nonsupervisory employees ranged from
$1. 19 to $2.16 an hour in June 1962 (table 2). In nine of the areas, however,
averages clustered within a 15-cent range ($1.37 to $1.52), reflecting the simi­
larity of wage levels in several industries (lumber, textiles, apparel, and food)
which generally dominate manufacturing activities in the area studied. The dis­
persion of individual earnings for the middle half of the area workers varied
widely, as shown in the following tabulation. Such earnings were distributed
over a 34- to 38-cent range in five of the areas, a 44- to 38-cent range in
seven of the areas, and the spread exceeded $ 1 in the other three areas.

Area
Bartow and Cherokee Counties, Ga----------------------------------------------Beaufort, Tyrrell, and Washington
Counties, N. C ---------------------------------------------------------------------------Chambers and Lee Counties, A l a ------------------------------------------------Charlotte and Sarasota Counties, F la------------------------------------------Cooke and Grayson Counties, T e x ----------------------------------------------Florence County, S. C------------------------------------------------------------------Gaston County, N. C --------------------------------------------------------------------Harrison County, W. Va--------------------------------------------------------------Hopkins and Muhlenberg Counties, Ky-----------------------------------------Jones County, M iss---------------------------------------------------------------------Lake, Pasco, and Polk Counties, F la ------------------------------------------Loudon and McMinn Counties, T erm ------------------------------------------Somerset, W icom ico, and Worcester
Counties, M d ---------------------------------------------------------------------------Union County, A r k ---------------------------------------------------------------------Washington County, V a ---------------------------------------------------------------

Interquartile range 1
$1.18—$1.

54

1.02— 1.36
1 .2 5 - 1.61
1 . 12 — 1.82
1 .1 5 — 1.88
1.13— 1.51
1 . 27— 1.62
1 .4 0 - 2.7 2
1 . 19_ 3 .01
1.18— 2 . 0 1
1.16— 1.80
1.18— 1 . 76
1 .1 8 - 1.62
2 . 32
1.17— 1.87

1 . 16_

1 The limits of the interquartile range were determined by interpolation
within a 5- or 10-cent wage interval shown in the tables.

Manufacturing pay levels ranged from $ 1.22 to $ 2.52 an hour. However,
such earnings exceeded $ 2 in only 2 areas and were less than $1.70 in 10 of
the areas. Despite these relatively low earnings, factory workers still averaged
up to 71 cents an hour more than nonfactory workers; the pay differential ex­
ceeded 34 cents an hour in eight areas. On the other hand, sizable concentrations
in the low-wage manufacturing industries, coupled with large employment in
mining in Hopkins—Muhlenberg, Ky. , trucking and public utilities in Gaston, N.C. ,
and public utilities in Somerset—Wicomico—Worcester, Md. , produced in these
areas higher pay levels in nonmanufacturing than in manufacturing.
The proportion of factory workers who earned just the $1.15 Federal
minimum wage in June 1962 varied from fewer than a tenth to more than
two-fifths. Areas with the largest concentrations of workers at the Federal
minimum were those generally dominated by the low-paying manufacturing in­
dustries. However, in areas where manufacturing wage levels ranked among
the lowest but textiles were paramount, such as Chambers—Lee, Ala. , and
Gaston, N. C., fewer than a tenth of the workers were found at the $1. 15—$1.20
wage interval. More than two-fifths of the workers in these areas had earnings
averaging between $ 1.25 and $ 1.50 an hour. In Union County, Ark. , on the



7

other hand, about a fourth of the factory workers were paid the $1.15 Federal
minimum, but the manufacturing wage level was next to the highest among the
areas because almost as many workers were employed in the higher paying
petroleum refining industry as in the lumber industry.
In nonmanufacturing industries, approximately two-fifths or more of the
workers earned less than $1. 25 an hour in 13 of the 15 areas, and from a fourth
to almost two-fifths received less than $ 1 in 8 areas. Where area data were
available for retail trade, earnings appeared to be influenced by the $ 1 Federal
minimum wage although substantial proportions in each of the areas were paid
less than $ 1 an hour in June 1962. The proportions of retail workers earning
between $1 and $1.05 ranged from about a tenth to more than a fourth.
Wage Changes. For each of the individual areas, earnings data for
industries generally subject to the Fair Labor Standards Act prior to the 1961
amendments were available for a period 1 year before the increase of the Federal
minimum wage from $ 1 to $ 1. 15 an hour and 1 month after, and 9 months after.
Pay levels for workers in the subject industries increased in all but four of the
areas between October of I960 and 1961, and were somewhat greater than the
changes recorded between October 1961 and June 1962 in nine of these areas.
Marked reductions in the proportions of workers receiving less than $ 1. 15 an
hour occurred in most of the areas during the period in which the $1.15 Federal
minimum became effective. The magnitude of change, however, varied by area;
the proportions of subject workers with such earnings in October I960 ranged
from fewer than a twentieth to more than three-fifths. The proportion of workers
at or just above the $1. 15 Federal minimum in October 1961 ranged up to a
third and was a tenth or more in 12 of the areas. In all but one of the areas,
this concentration was greater than the proportion paid the 4 V2-year-old $1 Federal
minimum in October I960, and in five of the areas was at least twice as great.
In June 1962, the proportion of workers at the $1.15—$1.20 pay interval had
diminished slightly in nine of the areas. In the nonsubject industries, ex­
cluding retail trade, where earnings data were available, from about a fourth to
three-fourths of the workers earned less than $1.15 in June 1962 in 10 of
the areas.
In retail trade, average earnings increased between June of 1961 and
1962 in 5 of the 12 areas where such data were available. Nevertheless, the
proportion of workers earning less than $ 1 an hour was reduced in each of the
areas. This reduction was accompanied by an increase in the proportion at the
$1—$1.05 wage interval. The extent of the change around the $1 pay level was
more apparent in the four areas where data were available separately for the
subject segment of retail trade.
Bartow and Cherokee Counties, Ga.
An estimated 7,400 nonsupervisory workers in the area were within the
scope of the survey and, as a group, averaged $1.37 an hour at straight-time
rates in June 1962. Median earnings were $ 1.32 an hour. Earnings for the
middle half of the workers ranged from $1. 18 to $1.54 an hour. Nearly a fifth
of the workers were concentrated at the $ 1. 15—$ 1.20 wage interval.
Manufacturing workers, who accounted for 65 percent of the workers
included in the area survey, averaged $1.40 an hour. Earnings for nearly
nine-tenths of the factory workers were compressed within a 45-cent range




8

between $1. 15 and $1.60. A fifth of the factory workers, most of whom were
employed in food processing and apparel plants, were at or just above the $ 1. 15
Federal minimum wage. Another fifth of the factory work force who, for the
most part, were employed in textile mills, received between $1.50 and $1.60.
Together, the three industries accounted for more than four-fifths of the area1s
manufacturing employment.
Nonmanufacturing workers included in the area survey averaged $1.31,
9 cents an hour less than factory workers. Half of the workers earned less
than $1.25 an hour, almost a third less than $1. 15, and an eighth less than
$1. About equal proportions of workers, 14 percent, were at two 5-cent wage
intervals, $1—$1.05 and $1.15—$1.20, which reflected the application of both
the $1 and $1.15 Federal minimum wages to newly protected as well as pre­
viously covered nonmanufacturing employees.
Retail trade, which comprised more than half of the nonfactory workers
included in the area survey, had a pay level of $1.22 an hour. A sixth of the
retail workers earned less than $1 and half less than $1.15. Almost a fourth
were at or just above the $ 1 Federal minimum wage.
Wage Changes. In industries generally subject to the Fair Labor
Standards Act prior to the 1961 amendments, average earnings for June 1962
were $1.42 an hour, 2 cents an hour higher than in October 1961, and 5 cents
higher than in October I960. The increase in the Federal minimum wage from
$1 to $1.15 appeared to have some affect on changes in the distribution of
earnings at the lower pay levels. One year before the effective date, an eighth
of the workers were at the $ 1—$1.05 pay interval and almost a fourth earned
less than $1.15 an hour. One month after the effective date, all but 4 percent
of the workers earned at least $1.15 an hour, and the proportion at the $1.15—
$ 1.20 pay interval had more than doubled, from about a tenth to almost a fourth.
During this 1-year period, the proportion of subject workers earning $1.50 or
more an hour rose from slightly more than a fourth to nearly a third. By June
1962, the proportion concentrated at or just above the $1.15 Federal minimum
wage was reduced to a fifth, and the proportion earning $1.50 or more had in­
creased to somewhat more than a third.
In nonsubject industries, excluding retail trade, average earnings in­
creased from $1. 10 to $1.22 an hour between October of I960 and 1961. The
proportion paid less than $ 1 an hour decreased from a half to a fifth during this
period, while those earning less than $1.15 declined from almost two-thirds to
three-tenths. Almost a fourth of the workers were at the $1.15—$1.20 wage
interval in October 1961, nearly twice the proportion at the $1—$1.05 interval in
October I960. Although average hourly earnings remained at $1.22 in June 1962,
almost a tenth of the workers were concentrated at the $1.25—$1.30 interval,
whereas relatively few workers were found at that interval in October 1961.
In retail trade, a substantial reduction occurred in the proportion of
workers paid less than $ 1, from about two-fifths in June 1961 to a sixth in
June 1962.8 This decrease was accompanied by an increase from fewer than a
sixth to almost a fourth of the workers at or just above $ 1 an hour. During this
period average earnings increased from $ 1. 10 to $ 1.22 an hour.
8 Fewer than a fifth of the workers in June 1961 were em ployed in retail establishments which becam e subject
to the Fair Labor Standards Act in September 1961.




9

All industries except retail trade_______

Retail trade (in ­
cluding eating and
Subject_______________Nonsubject________ drinking places)

Average hourly
earnings

Oct.
1961

Oct.
1960

June
1962

Oct.
1960

Oct.
1961

June
1962

June
1961

June
1962

(Cumulative percent)
Under
Under
Under
Under
Under
Under
Under

$ 1 .0 0 ----------$ 1 .0 5 ----------$ 1 .1 5 ----------$ 1 .2 0 ----------$ 1 .2 5 ----------$1. 5 0 ----------$ 2 .0 0 -----------

Number of workers
(in hundreds)-------Average hourly
earnings---------------

(M

(*)

(!)

12

1

1

24
33
38
73
95

4
27
35

22

20

20

21

21

26
46
50
75
99

96

4

10

10

$ 1.22 $ 1. 2 2

$ 1 .10

$ 1.22

94

31
65
94

94

54

55

2

3

$1.40 $1.42

$ 1 .10

68

2

86

41
56
61

16
40
50
58
63
81
97

30
53
58
74
99

51
$1.37

50
62
65
65
70

66

70
86

Less than 0. 5 percent.

Beaufort, Tyrrell, and Washington Counties, N. C.
An estimated 4, 800 nonsupervisory workers in the area were within the
scope of the survey and, as a group, averaged $1.19 an hour in June 1962.
Median earnings were also $1.19 and the middle half of the work force earned
from $1.02 to $1.36 an hour. Half of the workers within this range were con­
centrated at the $1.15—$1.20 wage interval.
The level of pay in manufacturing industries, where half of the. area
workers were employed, was $1.22 an hour. More than three-fifths of the workers
earned less than $1.25 an hour and two-fifths were concentrated at the $1. 15
Federal minimum wage. Nine-tenths of these workers were employed in the
apparel, wood products, and furniture industries, which together accounted for
about three-fifths of the manufacturing employment in the area. About a sixth
of the factory workers earned less than the Federal minimum wage, most of whom
worked i n food p r o c e s s i n g plants.
In nonmanufacturing industries, average earnings were $1.16 an hour.
Half of the nonfactory workers earned less than $1.15 an hour and more than
a third received less than $1. Over an eighth of the workers were concentrated
at the $0.75—$0.80 wage interval and a tenth were at the $ 1—$ 1.05 interval.
Nearly three-fifths of the nonmanufacturing workers were employed by
retail stores, where average earnings of $1. 11 were 12 cents an hour less than
those for other nonmanufacturing workers. Almost three-fifths of the retail
workers earned less than $1.05 an hour, and about a sixth each were at the
$ 1—$1.05 and $0.75—$0.80 pay intervals.
Wage Changes. In industries generally subject to the Fair Labor
Standards Act prior to the 1961 amendments, workers averaged $1.27 an hour
in June 1962, exceeding the October 1961 level by 2 cents an hour and the
October I960 level by 10 cents. The increase in the Federal minimum wage




10

had a m a r k e d influence o n the distribution of individual earnings. In October I960,
three-tenths of the w o r k e r s w e r e paid the existing $ 1 F e d e r a l m i n i m u m and m o r e
than three-fifths earned less than $1. 15 a n hour.
O n e m o n t h after the $1. 15
F e d eral m i n i m u m b e c a m e effective, only a sixth of the w o r k e r s e arned less than
that a m o u n t and approximately a third w e r e at or just above the $1. 15 Federal
minimum.
D u r i n g the O c t o b e r 1960— 61 period, the proportion earning $ 1. 25 or
m o r e an hour rose f r o m about three-tenths to two-fifths.
B y June 1962, the
proportion paid less than $1. 15 an hour w a s slightly re d u c e d and the proportions
at the $1. 15— $ 1. 20 pay interval, as well as those earning $ 1 . 2 5 or m o r e had
increased slightly.

In the nonsubject industries studied, excluding retail trade, average
earnings of 92 cents in O c t ober I960 w a s 8 cents an hour higher in O ctober 1961,
and r e m a i n e d at that level in June 1962.
T h e proportion earning less than $ 1 an
h our d e c r e a s e d f r o m three-fourths in I960 to about three-fifths in 1961.
This
reduction w a s a c c o m p a n i e d by only a s mall increase of 3 percentage points in
the proportion of w o r k e r s at the $ 1— $ 1. 05 pay interval and an increase f r o m a
sixth to a l m o s t a fourth in the proportion earning $ 1. 25 or m o r e .
The pro­
portion of w o r k e r s earning less than $ 1 in June 1962 w a s s o m e w h a t greater than
in O ctober 1961.

Little c hange o c c u r r e d in the level of pay for retail e m p l o y e e s b e t w e e n
June of 1961 and 1962.
Nevertheless, the proportion earning less than $ 1 an
hour d e c r e a s e d f r o m 50 to 43 percent, and the proportion earning b e t w e e n
$ 1 and $ 1 . 0 5 increased f r o m 9 to 15 percent.9

All industries except retail trade____

Retail trade (in­
cluding eating and
Subject_________ Nonsubject_____ drinking places)

Average hourly
earnings

Oct.
1960

Oct.
1961

June
1962

Oct.
1960

Oct.
1961

June
1962

June
1961

June
1962

(Cumulative percent)
Under $1.00----Under $1.05----Under $1. 15----Under $1.20----Under $1.25----Under $1.50----Under $2.00-----

10
40
63
67
71
90
97

8
14
17
51
59
88
97

7
12
13
50
55
88
97

75
81
83
84
84
88
97

62
71
74
74
76
82
96

67
73
76
78
79
80
96

50
59
67
72
73
84
94

43
58
64
69
71
84
98

Number of workers
(in hundreds)--Average hourly
earnings------

31

31

31

2

3

3

15

14

$0.92 $1.00 $1.00

$1.12

$1.11

$1.17 $1.25 $1.27

9 About a tenth of the workers in June 1961 were employed in retail establishments which became subject to
the Fair Labor Standards Act in September 1961.




11

C h a m b e r s and L e e Counties, A l a .
A n estimated 14, 000 nonsupervisory w o r k e r s in the a r e a w e r e within
the scope of the survey and, as a group, a v e r a g e d $ 1 . 4 4 an h o u r in June 1962.
M e d i a n earnings w e r e nearly the s a m e — $1.45.
Earnings for the m i d d l e half
of the w o r k e r s rang e d f r o m $ 1 . 2 5 to $ 1 . 6 1 an hour.

A p p r o x i m a t e l y four-fifths of the area w o r k e r s s u r veyed w e r e in m a n u ­
facturing industries, w h e r e a v e r a g e earnings w e r e $ 1 . 5 1 an hour.
T h e factory
w a g e distribution w a s d o m i n a t e d by the earnings in textile mills, w h i c h accounted
for all but about a sixth of the manufacturing work e r s .
E a rnings for two-thirds
of the factory w o r k e r s w e r e c o m p r e s s e d within a 45-cent range, f r o m $ 1 . 2 5 to
$ 1 . 7 0 an hour and m o r e than a sixth w e r e at the $ 1 . 5 0 — $ 1 . 6 0 p a y interval.
Excluding the textile w o rkers, earnings aver a g e d $ 1. 45 an hour.
Two-fifths of
the nontextile factory w o r k e r s e arned less than $1.25, of w h o m the vast majority
w e r e concentrated at or just above the $ 1 . 1 5 F e d e r a l m i n i m u m wage.
M o s t of
these w o r k e r s w e r e e m p l o y e d in the l u m b e r and food industries.

A v e r a g e earnings for the 2, 900 w o r k e r s in the n o n m a n u f a c t u r i n g in­
dustries included in the a r e a survey w e r e $ 1. 16, 35 cents an hou r less than
those for factory wo r k e r s . S o m e w h a t m o r e than half of the nonfactory w o r k e r s
received less than $1.15 and about three-eighths w e r e paid less than $1. A p p r o x i ­
ma t e l y a tenth of the w o r k e r s w e r e at the $ 1— $ 1 . 0 5 w a g e interval and a like
proportion at the $ 1. 15— $ 1. 20 interval.

Retail work e r s , w h o c o m p r i s e d nearly half of the nonfactory workers,
avera g e d $1.07, 18 cents an h o u r less than the a v e rage of other nonfactory
workers.
Forty-five percent of the retail w o r k e r s w e r e paid less than $ 1, and
15 percent w e r e concentrated at the $ 1— $ 1.05 w a g e interval.

W a g e C h a n g e s . In industries generally subject to the Fair L a b o r St a n d ­
ards Act prior to the 1961 a m e n d m e n t s , average earnings of $ 1 . 5 1 in June 1962
w e r e 5 cents an hou r m o r e than the Oct o b e r 1961 pay level and 9 cents m o r e
than the O ctob e r I960 level.
T h e increase in the F e d e r a l m i n i m u m w a g e f r o m
$ 1 to $ 1 . 1 5 an hou r a p p e a r e d to be a m a j o r factor affecting the change in the
w a g e distribution b e t w e e n Oct o b e r of I960 and 1961.
T h e proportion of w o r k e r s
earning less than $ 1 . 1 5 an h o u r declined f r o m 11 to 4 percent, while the p r o ­
portion at or just above the $ 1 . 1 5 F e d e r a l m i n i m u m doubled f r o m 7 to 14 percent.
Identical proportions of workers, 78 percent, w e r e found earning $ 1. 25 or m o r e
an hour in both I960 and 1961. W o r k e r s with such earnings in June 1962, however,
had risen to 85 percent, while the concentration at the F e d e r a l m i n i m u m w a g e
level diminished to 9 percent.

In retail trade, earnings a v e r a g e d $ 1 . 0 7 a n h o u r in both June of 1961
and 1962. Nevertheless, the proportion of retail w o r k e r s paid less than $ 1 w a s
reduced f r o m 52 to 45 percent, and the proportion earning b e t w e e n $ 1 and $ 1 . 0 5
an hour increased f r o m 12 to 15 percent. 10

10 Fewer than a tenth of the workers in June 1961 were employed in retail establishments which became subject
to the Fair Labor Standards Act in September 1961.




12

All subject industries except
retail trade
Average hourly
earnings

Oct.
1960

Oct.
1961

June
1962

Retail trade (including
eating and drinking places)
June
1961

June
1962

(Cumulative percent)
Under $1.00----Under $1.05----Under $1.15----Under $1.20----Under $1.25----Under $1.50----Under $2.00-----

2
7
11
18
22
68
99

1
2
4
18
22
65
97

Number of workers
(in hundreds)--Average hourly
earnings------

113
$1.42

1
2
11
15
54
95

52
64
70
72
73
83
94

45
60
67
69
71
86
96

118

119

16

14

$1.46

$1.51

$1.07

$1.07

<*>

1 Less than 0.5 percent.

Charlotte and Sarasota Counties,

Fla.

A v e r a g e straight-time hourly earnings for the 9, 900 a r e a w o r k e r s within
the scope of the surv e y w e r e $ 1 . 5 2 an hour in June 1962.
M e d i a n earnings
w e r e 12 cents b e l o w the average.
T h e mid d l e half of the w o r k force earned
b e t w e e n $1. 12 and $ 1 . 8 2 an hour.
A l m o s t a tenth of the w o r k e r s w e r e at the
$ 1— $ 1. 05 w a g e interval and nearly the s a m e proportion w e r e at the $ 1. 25— $ 1. 30
interval.
Manufacturing workers, w h o represented about a fifth of the ar e a w o r k e r s
c o v e r e d by the survey, a v e r a g e d $ 1. 83 an hour. Earn i n g s for about a tenth of
the w o r k e r s w e r e clustered at the $ 1 . 2 5 — $ 1 . 3 0 pay interval.
A l m o s t as m a n y
workers, a third, ear n e d at least $ 2 an hour, as did those w h o earned less than
$ 1. 50. M o s t of the higher paid factory w o r k e r s w e r e e m p l o y e d in plants m a n u f a c ­
turing electrical m a c h i n e r y , w h i c h accounted for a third of the factory work e r s .
T h e fact that Sarasota is a m a j o r resort a r e a accounts for the large
majority of w o r k e r s in n o n m a nufacturing industries, in w h i c h earnings a v e r a g e d
$ 1 . 4 5 an hour. A seventh of the w o r k e r s received less than $1, two-fifths less
than $1.25, a nd about three-fifths less than $1.50.
A p p r o x i m a t e l y a tenth of
the w o r k e r s w e r e at the $ 1 — $ 1 . 0 5 p a y interval.
A b out half of the nonfactory w o r k e r s w e r e e m p l o y e d in retail stores,
w h e r e earnings a v e r a g e d $ 1 . 4 6 an hour.
F e w e r than a sixth of the retail e m ­
ployees earned less than $ 1 and nearly an eighth w e r e concentrated at the
$ 1 — $ 1 . 0 5 w a g e interval.
M o r e than three-fifths of the w o r k e r s received less
than $ 1. 50 an hour.
A v e r a g e hourly earnings for the other nonma n u f a c t u r i n g
w o r k e r s differed by only 1 cent.
A l m o s t half of these w o r k e r s w e r e e m p l o y e d
in service industries, particularly hotels and motels.
W a g e C h a n g e s . In industries subject to the Fair L a b o r Standards A ct
prior to the 1961 a m e n d m e n t s , a v e rage earnings of $1.75 in Jun e 1962 w e r e 5 cents
higher than in O c t o b e r 1961 but 4 cents l o w e r than in O c t o b e r I960. T h e proportion
of w o r k e r s paid less than $ 1 . 1 5 an h o u r declined f r o m 12 to 5 percent b e t w e e n
Oct o b e r of I960 and 1961. T h e proportion at the $1. 15 m i n i m u m in O c t o b e r 1961




13

(7 percent) w a s s o m e w h a t smaller than the proportion at the $ 1 F e d e r a l m i n i m u m
in O ctober I960 (9 percent).
T h e d e c r e a s e in hourly pay levels during this period
w a s largely attributable to a reduction in the proportion of w o r k e r s earning $ Z or
m o r e an hour, f r o m about a third to a fourth. In June 1962, the proportion at
the $ 1 . 1 5 F e d e r a l m i n i m u m w a s slightly red u c e d while the proportion earning
$ 2 or m o r e increased, but w a s still b e l o w that in O c t o b e r I960.
In the nonsubject industries studied, excluding retail trade, average
earnings increased by 2 cents an hour b e t w e e n O c t o b e r of I960 and 1961.
A
small decre a s e o c c u r r e d in the proportion of w o r k e r s earning less than $ 1 an
hour during this period, but in June 1962, the proportion w a s equivalent to
that in I960.
A v e r a g e hourly earnings declined by 4 cents an hour b e t w e e n
O c t ober 1961 and June 1962.
In retail establishments w h i c h b e c a m e subject to the $ 1 F e d e r a l m i n i m u m
wage, accounting for nearly two-fifths of the retail w o r k force, the pay level
w a s 4 cents an hour higher in June of 1961 than in 1962.
D u r i n g this period,
however, the proportion of w o r k e r s earning less than $ 1 an h o u r w a s reduced
f r o m 12 to 1 percent, and the proportion at or just above the $ 1 F e d e r a l m i n i m u m
doubled, f r o m 11 to 20 percent. In retail stores not subject to the Fair L a b o r
Standards Act, little change at and b e l o w the $ 1 level o c c u r r e d during this period.
H o w e v e r , the proportion of w o r k e r s with higher earnings increased.
F o r example,
half of the w o r k e r s e arned $ 1 . 2 5 or m o r e in June 1961 c o m p a r e d with a l m o s t
three-fifths in June 1962.
A v e r a g e earnings during this period increased by
3 cents an hour.

_____ Retail trade________
Nonsubject
(including eating
Subject
and drinking places)

All industries except retail trade
Nonsubject

Subject
Average hourly
earnings

Oct.
1960

Oct.
1961

Oct.
1960

June
1962

Oct.
1961

June
1962

June
1961

June
1962

June
1961

June
1962

(Cumulative percent)
3
5
10
14
40
72

22
43
48
49
49
74
89

18
36
44
48
51
70
89

23
39
47
53
56
73
89

12
23
32
37
41
64
85

1
21
30
37
41
64
89

24
34
42
45
50
66
83

25
32
38
40
42
60
82

34

37

20

21

22

16

15

26

25

$1.79 $1.70

$1.75

$1.31

$1.33 $1.29 $1.54

$1.50

$1.41

$1.44

Under $1.00----Under $1.05---Under $1. 15— -Under $1.20---Under $1.25—
—
Under $1.50----Under $2.00-----

C1)
9
12
14
17
39
67

1
3
5
12
15
43
75

Number of workers
(in hundreds)--Average hourly
earnings------

36

0)

1 Less than 0.5 percent.

C o o k e and G r a y s o n Counties,

Tex.

A v e r a g e earnings w e r e $ 1 . 4 9 an hour for the 11,600 nonsupervisory
a rea w o r k e r s included in the survey in June 1962. M e d i a n earnings w e r e $ 1 . 3 5
an hour. T h e m i d d l e 50 percent of the w o r k e r s h a d earnings ranging f r o m $ 1. 15
to $ 1 . 8 8 an hour. A n eighth of the w o r k e r s w e r e clustered at the $1. 15— $ 1 . 2 0
w a g e interval.




14

Manufacturing industries, w h i c h e m p l o y e d 46 percent of the ar e a w o r k
force included in the survey, paid an a v e r a g e of $ 1 . 6 9 an hour.
M o r e than
half of the factory w o r k e r s e a r n e d $ 1. 50 or m o r e an h o u r and over a fourth
at least $ 2 an hour.
A p p r o x i m a t e l y a fourth of the factory w o r k e r s w e r e e m ­
ployed in food processing— grain milling and edible oil refining— w h e r e average
earnings w e r e 42 cents an h o u r higher than for the other m a nufacturing industries
combined.
O n the other hand, m o r e than a fourth of the factory w o r k e r s earned
less than $ 1. 25 an hour, m o s t of w h o m w e r e concentrated at or just above the
$1. 15 F e d eral m i n i m u m wage. A l m o s t half of these w o r k e r s w e r e e m p l o y e d in
the apparel industry, w h i c h accounted for s o m e w h a t m o r e than a sixth of the
factory w o r k force.

T h e p a y level for the 6, 300 ar e a w o r k e r s s u r v e y e d in nonmanufacturing
industries w a s $ 1 . 3 3 an hour. M o r e than half of the w o r k e r s ear n e d less than
$1.25, three-tenths less than $1, and about a sixth less than 75 cents. Nea r l y
a tenth of the w o r k e r s w e r e at the $ 1— $ 1. 05 p ay interval.

A l m o s t half of the ar e a nonfactory w o r k e r s s u r v e y e d w e r e e m p l o y e d in
retail trade, w h e r e a v e r a g e earnings of $ 1 . 1 8 w e r e 28 cents b e l o w the a verage
of the other w o r k e r s in nonmanu f a c t u r i n g industries.
Two-fifths of the retail
w o r k e r s earn e d less than $ 1 and nearly a sixth b e t w e e n $ 1 and $ 1 . 0 5 an hour.

Wage
C h a n g e s . In industries subject to the Fair L a b o r Standards
Act prior to the 1961 a m e n d m e n t s , a verage earnings of $ 1. 70 e x c e e d e d the
Oc t o b e r 1961 level b y 4 cents an hour and the O c t o b e r I960 level by 9 cents an
hour. B e t w e e n O c t o b e r of I960 and 1961, the proportion of w o r k e r s earning less
than $ 1 . 1 5 an hou r declined f r o m 25 to 3 percent, and w a s a c c o m p a n i e d by a
sharp increase in those at the $1. 15— $ 1. 20 w a g e interval, f r o m 6 to 20 percent.
T h e concentration of w o r k e r s at the $ 1 . 1 5 Fed e r a l m i n i m u m in O c t o b e r 1961 w a s
greater than that at the 4 1/2 -year-old $ 1 m i n i m u m in O c t ober I960.
The p ro­
portion of w o r k e r s earning $ 1. 25 or m o r e also rose during this period f r o m
65 to 71 percent. B y June 1962, the proportion of w o r k e r s earning at least $1. 25
had further increased to 74 percent, while the concentration at the $ 1. 15— $ 1. 20
w a g e interval h ad declined by 2 percentage points.

In the nonsubject industries, excluding retail trade, the proportion of
w o r k e r s paid less than $ 1 an hour w a s m a r k e d l y r e d u c e d f r o m 64 percent in
O c t ober I960 to 44 percent in O c t o b e r 1961. This reduction, however, w a s not
a c c o m p a n i e d by any significant cha n g e in the proportion of w o r k e r s at the $1— $1. 05
w a g e interval. A v e r a g e hourly earnings rose b y 22 cents f r o m the 94 cent level
in O c t ober I960 a nd h a d increased by another 7 cents in June 1962.

In retail establishments w h i c h b e c a m e subject to the $1 F e d e r a l m i n i m u m
w a g d in S e p t e m b e r 1961, about a sixth of the retail w o r k force, a v e r a g e hourly
earnings w e r e nearly the s a m e in June of 1961 and 1962.
T h e proportion of
w o r k e r s paid less than $ 1 an hour, h o wever, d e c r e a s e d f r o m 27 percent in
June 1961 to 4 percent in June 1962. Concomitantly, the proportion of w o r k e r s
at or just above the $ 1 F e d e r a l m i n i m u m w a g e increased f r o m 9 to 32 percent.
In nonsubject retail establishments, on the other hand, the proportion of w o r k e r s
paid less than $ 1 in June 1962 w a s slightly greater than in June 1961.




15

All industries except retail trade
Subject
Average hourly
earnings

Oct.
1960

Oct.
1961

_____ Retail trade________
Nonsubject
(including eating
Subject
and drinking places)

Nonsubject
June
1962

Oct.
1960

Oct.
1961

June
1962

June
1961

June
1961

June
1962

June
1962

(Cumulative percent)
Under $1.00----Under $1.05----Under $1.15----Under $1.20----Under $1.25.....
Under $1.50----Under $2.00-----

(*)
14
25
31
35
50
75

1
2
3
23
29
47
73

1
2
3
21
26
46
72

64
71
80
81
83
89
92

44
53
58
62
63
79
89

45
54
60
63
65
76
87

27
36
47
49
51
68
88

4
36
45
50
51
72
89

42
52
58
64
67
85
95

46
58
65
67
70
85
95

Number of workers
(inhundreds)--Average hourly
earnings------

64

70

72

13

14

15

6

5

29

26

$1.61

$1.66

$1.70

$0.94 $1.16 $1.23 $1.37

$1.38

$1.11

$1.14

1 Less than 0.5•percent.

F l ore n c e County, S. C .
Earnings for the 10, 100 n o n supervisory w o r k e r s within the scope of the
survey a v e r a g e d $ 1 . 3 1 an ho u r in June 1962.
M e d i a n earnings w e r e $ 1 . 2 3 an
hour.
T h e m i d d l e 50 percent of the w o r k e r s had earnings ranging f r o m $ 1 . 1 3
to $ 1. 51 an hour.
Nea r l y a fifth of the w o r k e r s w e r e concentrated at the
$ 1. 15— $ 1. 20 w a g e interval.
M o r e than half of the a r e a w o r k force included in the survey w e r e e m ­
ployed in manuf a c t u r i n g industries, w h e r e earnings a v e r a g e d $ 1. 38 an hour.
Earnings for m o r e than three-fourths of the w o r k e r s r a n g e d f r o m $ 1 to $ 1. 50
an hour. N e a r l y three-tenths of the w o r k e r s w e r e paid the $1. 15 Fed e r a l m i n ­
i m u m w a g e and m o r e than a tenth w e r e at the $ 1. 25— $ 1. 30 p a y interval.
The
m a j o r e m p l o y e r in the a r e a w a s the apparel industry, w h i c h accounted for about
three-tenths of the factory w o rkers.
T h e textile and l u m b e r industries each
e m p l o y e d about a sixth of the workers.
In the n o n m a n u f a c t u r i n g industries surveyed, a v e r a g e
$ 1 . 2 3 an hour.
A l m o s t three-fifths of the w o r k e r s e arned less
hour, a third less than $1, and over a fifth less than 75 cents.
w e r e found at each of two 5 -cent w a g e intervals, $ 1. 15— $ 1. 20

earnings w e r e
than $ 1 . 2 5 an
N e a r l y a tenth
and $ 1— $ 1. 05.

Retail worke r s , w h o accounted for about half of the nonma n u f a c t u r i n g
w o r k e r s included in the survey, a v e r a g e d $ 1 . 1 3 an hour, 20 cents less than
other nonfactory workers.
F o u r t e e n percent of the retail w o r k e r s w e r e at the
$ 1 — $ 1 . 0 5 w a g e interval, 44 percent earned less than $1, and 30 percent less
than 75 cents.
Wage
Changes.
In industries subject to the Fair L a b o r Standards
Act prior to the 1961 a m e n d m e n t s , average earnings of $ 1. 42 in June 1962
w e r e 2 cents a n h o u r higher than in O c t ober 1961 and 6 cents higher than in
O c t o b e r I960. T h e increase in the F ederal m i n i m u m w a g e f r o m $1 to $1. 15 w a s
reflected in the changes in the distribution of earnings. In O c t o b e r I960, about a
sixth of the w o r k e r s w e r e at or just a b ove the $1 Fed e r a l m i n i m u m w a g e and
three-tenths e arned less than $1. 15 an hour.
In O c t ober 1961, f e w e r than a




16

tenth w e r e paid less than $1. 15 and three-tenths w e r e
F ederal m i n i m u m wage.
D u r i n g the O ctober 1960— 61
w o r k e r s earning $ 1. 25 or m o r e increased f r o m 42 to
this proportion w a s further increased to 56 percent,
the $ 1 . 1 5 — $ 1 . 2 0 w a g e interval w a s slightly reduced.

concentrated at the $1. 15
period, the proportion of
52 percent. In June 1962,
while the concentration at

Although the p a y level in the nonsubject industries surveyed, excluding
retail trade, a d v a n c e d by 12 cents an h o u r b e t w e e n O c t o b e r of I960 a n d 1961, the
proportion of w o r k e r s receiving less than $ 1 a n h o u r in the earlier period w a s
a l m o s t identical to that in the later period.
H o w e v e r , three-tenths of the w o r k e r s
in 1961 c o m p a r e d with a fourth in I960 e a r n e d $ 1 . 2 5 or m o r e an hour.
Changes
in the w a g e distribution w e r e relatively m i n o r during the period b e t w e e n O c t o b e r
1961 and June 1962.

In retail establishments w h i c h b e c a m e subject to the $ 1 Fe d e r a l m i n ­
i m u m w a g e in S e p t e m b e r 1961, accounting for a fifth of the retail w o r k force
in 1961 and a fourth in 1962, the p a y level rose b y 10 cents an h o u r b e t w e e n
June of 1961 and 1962.
T h e proportion of w o r k e r s paid less than $ 1 an hour
w a s sharply r e d u c e d f r o m 38 percent in June 1961 to 5 percent in June 1962.
Concomitantly, the proportion of w o r k e r s at or just a b o v e the $ 1 F e d e r a l m i n ­
i m u m w a g e increased f r o m f e w e r than a tenth to a l m o s t two-fifths. In nonsubject
retail establishments, by contrast, the proportion of w o r k e r s earning less than
$ 1 in June 1962 w a s identical to that 1 y e a r earlier.

All industries except retail trade
Subject
Average hourly
earnings

Oct.
1960

Oct.
1961

_____ Retail trade________
Nonsubject
(including eating
Subject___ and drinking places)

Nonsubject
June
1962

Oct.
1960

Oct.
1961

June
1962

June
1961

June
1962

June
1961

June
1962

(Cumulative percent)
Under $1.00----Under $1.05----Under $1.15----Under $1.20----Under $1.25----Under $1.50----Under $2.00----Number of workers
(in hundreds)--Average hourly
earnings------

4
21
31
40
58
76
88

2
6
8
38
48
72
90

2
5
7
33
44
73
91

58
67
70
72
75
84
94

57
63
66
68
70
79
92

56
58
63
65
67
80
92

38
46
53
54
57
73
91

5
42
49
57
59
71
89

61
69
76
78
78
88
98

61
64
69
73
75
82
94

63

65

67

8

9

9

6

7

24

20

$1.36 $1.40

$1.42

$1.01

$1.13 $1.11

$1.30

$1.40

$0.96

$1.03

Gasto n County,

N. C .

A n estimated 33, 100 nonsup e r v i s o r y w o r k e r s w e r e within the scope of
the survey and, as a group, a v e r a g e d $ 1. 47 an h o u r at straight-time rates in
June 1962.
M e d i a n earnings w e r e $ 1 . 4 1 an hour.
Earni n g s for the m i d d l e
half of the w o r k e r s r anged f r o m $ 1 . 2 7 to $ 1 . 6 2 an hour. A b o u t a tenth of the
w o r k e r s w e r e concentrated in eac h of three 5-cent w a g e intervals: $ 1.25— $ 1. 30,
$ 1. 35-$ 1.40, and $ 1. 40-$ 1. 45.




17

Approximately four-fifths of the area workers surveyed w e r e in m a n u ­
facturing industries, w h e r e average earnings w e r e $ 1. 47 an hour. Earnings for
half of the workers w e r e concentrated between $1.25 and $1.50 and all but a
twentieth received less than $ 2 an hour.
The large cluster of workers found
within a 25-cent w a g e range w a s attributable largely to the dominant position of
textile mills in the area, which employed 4 out of 5 factory workers.

W o r k e r s employed in nonmanufacturing industries averaged $1.48, 1 cent
an hour m o r e than factory workers. Although slightly m o r e than three-fifths of
the nonfactory workers earned less than $1.50, about the s a m e as in m a n u f a c ­
turing, nearly half received less than $ 1. 25, m o r e than a third less than $ 1. 15,
and over an eighth less than $ 1. Nearly a sixth of the w o rkers w e r e concentrated
at the $ 1— $ 1. 05 w a g e interval.
At the other end of the pay scale, a fifth of
the workers earned at least $ 2 an hour.

A l most half of the nonmanufacturing workers
retail stores, whe r e average earnings of $1.23 w e r e
the average for other nonmanufacturing workers.
workers earned less than $ 1 an hour, and m o r e
$ 1— $1.05 w a g e interval.

surveyed w e r e employed in
47 cents an hour less than
About a fifth of the retail
than a fourth w e r e at the

W a g e C h a n g e s . In industries subject to the Fair Labor Standards Act
prior to the 1961 a m e n d m e n t s , average earnings of $ 1. 50 in June 1962 w e r e
4 cents higher than in October 1961, but only 3 cents higher than in October I960.
Despite the absence of an upwa r d m o v e m e n t in the pay level between October of
I960 and 1961, changes in the w a g e distribution, in part, reflected the increase
of the Federal m i n i m u m w a g e f r o m $1 to $1. 15 an hour.
In October 1960, a
tenth of the workers earned less than $ 1. 15 an hour. O n e m o n t h after the $1.15
Federal m i n i m u m b e c a m e effective, virtually all of the subject workers earned
at least that amount, and the proportion at the $ 1. 15— $ 1. 20 pay level rose f r o m
6
to 10 percent. During this period, the proportion earning at least $ 2 an hour
decreased f r o m 10 to 6 percent. B e tw e e n October 1961 and June 1962, the p r o ­
portion of workers earning $ 1. 25 or m o r e increased f r o m 79 to 85 percent.

In the nonsubject industries studied, excluding retail trade, average earn­
ings of $ 1. 28 in October I960 w e r e 7 cents an hour higher than in October 1961.
The proportion of workers earning less than $ 1 an hour m o r e than doubled during
this period, f r o m fewer than a fifth to almost two-fifths.
In June 1962, the
proportion earning less than $ 1 w a s reduced to three-tenths, and average hourly
earnings w e r e restored to the October I960 level.

In retail trade, the proportion paid less than $ 1 an hour decreased f r o m
a third to a fifth, and the proportion at the $ 1— $ 1. 05 pay interval increased f r o m
about a tenth to m o r e than a fourth between June of 1961 and 1962. 11 However,
the proportion of wor k e r s earning $1.25 or m o r e w a s sharply reduced f r o m
45 percent in June 1961 to 35 percent in June 1962, which largely accounted for
the 9-cent decrease in average hourly earnings.

li

Approximately

a third of

s u b j e c t to the Fair L a b o r




the w o r k e r s

Standards A c t

in J u n e

in S e p t e m b e r

1961
1961.

were

employed

in retail

establishments w h i c h

became

18

Retail trade (in­
cluding eating and
drinking places)

A ll industries except retail trade
Nonsubject

Subject
Average hourly
earnings

Oct.
1960

June
1962

Oct.
1961

Oct.
1960

June
1962

Oct.
1961

June
1961

June
1962

(Cumulative percent)
Under $ 1 .0 0 -----------Under $ 1 .0 5 -----------Under $ 1 .1 5 -----------Under $ 1 .2 0 - ............
Under $1. 2 5 -----------Under $ 1 .5 0 -----------Under $ 2 .0 0 -----------Number of workers
(in hundreds)-------Average hourly
earnings--------------1

88

33
42
49
52
55
73
90

19
46
56
60
65
80
94

10

1

1

16
26
70
90

11

94

9
15
63
93

18
28
39
41
55
80
95

277

299

295

7

8

9

39

27

$1.47

$1.46

$1.50

$1.28

$ 1.21

$1.28

$1.32

$1.23

1

(>)

(M

4

1

21
68

1

39
49
57
59
62
78
91

30
40
51
56
58
76

Less than 0 .5 percent.

Harrison County, W. V a .
A n estimated 12, 800 nonsupervisory workers w e r e within the scope of
the survey and, as a group, averaged $2.16 an hour in June 1962.
Me d i a n
earnings w e r e $ 2.18 an hour.
Earnings for the middle half of the workers
ranged f r o m $1.40 to $2.72 an hour.
In manufacturing plants, which employed nearly half of the area w o r k
force included in the survey, straight-time earnings averaged $ 2. 52 an hour.
About three-fourths of the factory workers earned at least $ 2 an hour; approxi­
mately two-fifths, $2.50 or m o r e ; and nearly a sixth, $ 3 or more. M o r e than
seven-tenths of the factory workers w e r e employed in the stone, clay, and glass
products industry group, whe r e they averaged $2.62, 36 cents an hour m o r e
than other factory workers.
Nonmanufacturing workers included in the survey averaged $1.81 an
hour.
F e w e r than a sixth of the nonfactory workers earned less
than $ 1 an
hour
and a third less than $ 1. 25. At the other end of the pay scale, m o r e
than
a third of the workers received at least $ 2 an hour and approximately a sixth
w e r e paid $ 3 or more. About four-fifths of the nonfactory workers w h o earned
$ 3 or m o r e an hour w e r e employed in mining, which accounted for about a fifth
of the nonmanufacturing w o r k force. A v erage earnings of $2. 74 for m i n e workers
w e r e $1.22 an hour higher than the average for other nonfactory workers.
In retail establishments, which employed about a third of the nonfactory
workers, average earnings w e r e $ 1. 26, 84 cents an hour less than the average
of other nonmanufacturing industries. Three-tenths of the retail workers earned
less than $1 and a fifth w e r e clustered at the $1— $1.05 w a g e interval.
W a g e C h a n g e s . In industries generally subject to the Fair Lab o r Stand­
ards
Act prior to the 1961 amendments, average earnings of $2.46 an hour in
June 1962 w e r e 2 cents an
hour higher than in October of 1961 and I960.
The
increase in the Federal m i n i m u m w a g e f r o m $1 to $1.15 an hour had little
effect on the earnings distribution since only 4 percent of the workers earned
less than $ 1.15 an hour in October I960.
Relatively few changes occurred in
the w a g e distribution at higher levels of pay during the payroll periods studied.




19

In the nonsubject industries studied, excluding retail trade, average
earnings w e r e 12 cents an hour higher in October of 1961 than in I960. During
this period, the proportion of workers paid less than $ 1 decreased f r o m 43 to
34 percent and those earning less than $ 1. 15 f r o m 60 to 46 percent. The c o n ­
centration of workers at the $ 1 — $1.05 wa g e interval wa s reduced f r o m 16 to
10 percent while those at the $ 1. 15— $ 1. 20 interval rose f r o m 1 to 6 percent.
In June 1962, the level and distribution of earnings w e r e not significantly dif­
ferent f r o m those in October 1961.
The pay level for retail trade in June 1962 w a s 11 cents an hour below
that in June 1961. Nevertheless, the proportion of w o rkers paid less than $ 1 an
hour decreased f r o m m o r e than a third to three-tenths during this period and the
proportion at the $ 1— $ 1. 05 pay interval increased f r o m fewer than a tenth to
m o r e than a fifth. 12 However, there w a s no significant up w a r d m o v e m e n t above
that level. For example, the proportion of workers earning less than $1. 2 5 an
hour was a tenth greater in June of 1962 than in 1961.

A ll industries except retail trade_______
Subject______________ Nonsubject_____
Average hourly
earnings

Oct.
1960

Oct.
1961

June
1962

Oct.
1960

Oct.
1961

June
1962

Retail trade (in­
cluding eating and
drinking places)
June
1961

June
1962

(Cumulative percent)
Under
Under
Under
Under
Under
Under
Under

$ 1 .0 0 ----------$ 1 .0 5 ----------$1. 15----------$ 1 .2 0 ----------$1. 2 5 ----------$ 1 .5 0 ----------$ 2 . 0 0 -----------

Number of workers
(in hundreds)-------Average hourly
earnings--------------1

10

12

12

22

29

29

43
59
60
61
62
72
85

93

96

96

9

9

9

26

23

$2.44

$2.44

$2.46

$1.16

$1.28

$1.28

$1.37

$1.26

c 1)

C1)
C1)

2

4
5
5

(?)
( 1)
C1)

( l)

4
5

4
5

34
44
46
52
53
67
89

34
44
47
52
54
67
89

68

30
51
58
64
65
75

83

88

35
44
49
52
55

Less than 0. 5 percent.

Hopkins and Muhlenberg Counties, K y .
A n estimated 7, 600 nonsupervisory workers w e r e within the scope of the
survey and, as a group, averaged $2. 10 an hour in June 1962. M e d i a n earnings
w e r e $2. 12. Earnings for the middle half of the workers ranged f r o m $1. 19 to
$3.01 an hour. A l m o s t a tenth of the workers had earnings between $ 1 . 1 5 and
$ 1. 20 an hour.
In manufacturing plants, which employed a sixth of the area w o r k force
included in the survey, straight-time earnings averaged $ 1. 54 an hour. Nearly
two-thirds of the factory workers earned less than $1.50, two-fifths less than
$ 1. 25, and nearly three-tenths w e r e clustered within the $ 1. 15— $ 1. 20 w a g e
internal. About four-fifths of those at the $ 1.15 Federal m i n i m u m w e r e employed
in the apparel and lumber industries, which accounted for almost half of the
factory w o r k force.

*2
to the

Nearly

a sixth of

the

workers

F air L a b o r S t a n d a r d s A c t




in J u n e

in S e p t e m b e r

1961
196 1 .

were

employed

in retail

establishments w h i c h

became

s u bject

20

Nonmanufacturing workers, as a group, averaged $2.21 an hour, which
exceeded the manufacturing average by 67 cents an hour. Nearly three-fifths of
the nonfactory workers earned at least $ 2 an hour and a third $ 3 or more.
Virtually all of the nonfactory workers w h o earned $ 3 or m o r e an hour w e r e
employed in mining, which accounted for about half of the nonfactory w o r k force.
A verage earnings of $2.95 for m i n e workers w e r e $ 1.61 an hour higher than the
average for other nonmanufacturing workers.
In retail establishments, which employed nearly a fifth of the nonfactory
workers, average earnings w e r e $1.17 an hour.
M o r e than three-fifths of the
retail workers earned less than $1. 15, an eighth w e r e found at the $ 1— $1.05
w a g e interval, and about two-fifths earned less than $ 1 an hour.
W a g e C h a n g e s . In industries generally subject to the Fair Labor Stand­
ards Act prior to the 1961 ame n d m e n t s , average earnings of $2.44 in June 1962
w e r e 2 cents lower than in October 1961 but the s a m e as in October I960. The
proportion of workers earning less than $1.15 an hour w a s reduced f r o m 11 to
3 percent between October of I960 and 1961. Eight percent of the workers w e r e
at the $1.15 m i n i m u m in October 1961 c o m p a r e d with 6 percent at the $1 F e d ­
eral m i n i m u m which w a s in effect in October I960. T he proportion of workers
at the $1. 15 Federal m i n i m u m increased to 10 percent in June 1962.
In the nonsubject industries studied, excluding retail trade, average
earnings decreased by 4 cents an hour between October of I960 and 1961. During
this period, the proportion of workers earning less than $ 1 increased f r o m 57 to
61
percent, while the proportion at the $ 1 — $1.05 w a g e interval decreased f r o m
21 to 4 percent. A 9-cent gain in the pay level occurred between October 1961
and June 1962, which reflected a decline in the proportion of workers earning
less than $ 1.
N o change occurred in the level of pay for retail employees between
June of 1961 and 1962. 13 Although the proportion of retail workers earning at
least $ 1 increased by 3 percentage points, the proportion earning $ 1, 50 or m o r e
an hour, decreased by 5 percentage points.
A ll industries except retail trade_______
Subject
Average hourly
e arnings

Oct.
1960

Oct.
1961

Nonsubject
June
1962

Oct.
1960

Oct.
1961

June
1962

Retail trade (in­
cluding eating and
drinking places)
June
1961

June
1962

44
55
61
63

41
55
62

66

69
81
92

(Cumulative percent)
Under
Under
Under
Under
Under
Under
Under

$ 1 .0 0 ----------$ 1 .0 5 ----------$ 1 .1 5 ----------$ 1 . 2 0 ----------$1 .25 --------$ 1 .5 0 ----------$ 2 .0 0 -----------

Number of workers
(in hundreds)-------Average hourly
earnings--------------* Less than

About

a

fifth of the

the F air L a b o r S t a n d a r d s A c t




0.

11

3

2

14
15
23
33

11

12

13
23
32

14
24
32

57
78
81
87
87
91
93

58

57

57

6

6

6

18

14

$2.44

$2.46

$2.44

$0.99

$0.95

$1.04

$1.17

$1.17

( 1)

1

7

1
1

1

61
65
70
72
76
89
97

95

76
91

55
60
67
72
76
86

66

5 percent.

workers

in J u n e

in S e p t e m b e r

1961

1961.

were e m p l o y e d

in retail e s t a b l i s h m e n t s w h i c h

became

subject to

21

J o n e s

C o u n t y ,

M i s s .

A n estimated 9, 100 nonsupervisory workers w e r e within the scope of
the survey and, as a group, averaged $ 1. 60 an hour at straight-time rates in
June 1962.
M e d i a n earnings w e r e $1.58 an hour.
Earnings for the middle
50 percent of the workers ranged f r o m $1. 18 to $2.01. Nearly an eighth of the
workers we r e concentrated at the $ 1. 15— $ 1, 20 w a g e interval.
Manufacturing workers, w h o accounted for three-fifths of the workers
included in the survey, averaged $ 1. 76 an hour.
Earnings for about an eighth
of the workers w e r e clustered within the $1. 15— $1.20 w a g e interval and a fifth
w e r e paid less than $1.25. A s m a n y workers earned less than $1.50, a third,
as there were earning at least $ 2 an hour. W o r k e r s employed by papermills,
m o r e than half of the factory w o r k force, accounted for about three-fourths of
those earning $ 2 or more.
M o s t of the lower paid w o rkers w e r e employed in
the food processing and apparel industries.
Nonmanufacturing workers included in the survey averaged $1.36, 40 cents
an hour less than factory workers.
A fourth of the nonfactory workers earned
less than $ 1 and nearly an eighth we r e at the $ 1— $ 1. 05 w a g e interval.
More
than half of the workers earned less than $ 1. 25 an hour.
Retail trade, which comprised m o r e than half of the nonfactory workers
surveyed, had a pay level of $ 1. 30 an hour.
Nearly three-tenths of the retail
workers received less than $ 1 and about a sixth w e r e paid between $ 1 and $ 1. 05.

W a g e C h a n g e s . In industries generally subject to the Fair L abor Stand­
ards Act prior to the 1961 amendments , average earnings of $1.76 in June 1962
w e r e 5 cents an hour higher than in October 1961 and 10 cents higher than in
October I960. T h e increase in the Federal m i n i m u m w a g e f r o m $1 to $1.15 in
September 1961 appeared to be a factor affecting the change in the distribution of
earnings at the lower pay levels. In October I960, m o r e than an eighth of the
workers w e r e at the $1— $1.05 pay interval and about a fifth earned less than $1. 15
an hour. In October 1961, all but 4 percent of the workers earned at least $1. 15
an hour, and the proportion at the $1.15— $1.20 pay interval had risen f r o m 4 to
16 percent. During this period, the proportion of subject workers earning $1.25
or m o r e increased slightly f r o m 7 3 to 76 percent.
In June 1962, the proportion
at or just above the $1.15 Federal m i n i m u m w a g e w a s almost the s a m e as in O c ­
tober 1961, but the porportion earning $1.25 or m o r e had increased to 78 percent.
In nonsubject industries, excluding retail trade, average earnings d e ­
creased by 3 cents an hour between October of I960 and 1961.
Although the
proportion of workers earning less than $ 1 an hour decreased f r o m 56 to 46 p e r ­
cent, the proportion earning less than $1.50 increased f r o m 78 to 85 percent.
B e tween October 1961 and June 1962, average earnings had advanced by 4 cents
an hour and the proportion of workers earning less than $1.50 an hour w a s reduced
to 82 percent.
In retail trade, earnings averaged $ 1. 30 an hour in both June of 1961
and 1962.
Nevertheless, the proportion of retail wor k e r s paid less than $ 1 an
hour decreased f r o m 35 to 28 percent, and the proportion earning between $ 1 and
$ 1. 05 an hour increased f r o m 4 to 15 percent. 14

*4

About

a fourth of

the

to the Fair L a b o r S t a n d a r d s A c t




workers

in J u n e

of S e p t e m b e r

1961
196 1 .

were

employed

in retail e s t a b l i s h m e n t s w h i c h

became

subject

22

A ll industries except retail trade_______

Retail trade (in­
cluding eating and
Subject______________ Nonsubject_____
drinking places)

Average hourly
earnings

Oct.
1960

Oct.
1961

June
1962

Oct.
1960

Oct.
1961

June
1962

June
1961

June
1962

(Cumulative percent)
Under
Under
Under
Under
Under
Under
Under

$ 1 . 0 0 ----------$ 1 .0 5 ----------$ 1 .1 5 ----------$ 1 .2 0 ----------$ 1 .2 5 ----------$1. 5 0 ----------$ 2 . 0 0 -----------

Number o f workers
(in hundreds)-------Average hourly
earnings---------------

2

2

1

16

3
4

1

21

3
19

56
64
67

46
61
65
71
72
85
97

44
59
63
69
69
82
94

35
39
46
48
50
65
87

28
43
49
51
53
69
87

25
27
37
76

24
38
73

22
68

72
78
85

63

66

64

5

7

8

15

19

$ 1.66

$1.71

$1.76

$1.05

$ 1. 0 2

$1.06

$1. 30

$1.30

20

35

68

Lake, Pasco, and Polk Counties, Fla.
A n estimated 34, 200 nonsupervisory area workers w e r e within the scope
of the survey and averaged, as a group, $ 1, 49 an hour at straight-time rates
in June 1962.
Medi a n earnings w ere $ 1. 36 an hour.
Earnings for the middle
half of the workers ranged f r o m $1. 16 to $1.80. About a tenth of the workers
w e r e concentrated at each of two 5-cent w a g e intervals— $1— $1.05 and $1.15— $1.20.
Manufacturing workers, w h o accounted for approximately a third of the
workers included in the survey, averaged $1.56 an hour.
Three-fifths of the
workers earned less than $1. 50 an hour and almost three-tenths less than $ 1. 25.
Nearly a fifth of the factory workers w e r e at or just above the $1. 15 Federal
m i n i m u m wage.

At the time of the survey, 56 percent of the area factory workers we r e
employed in plants processing food products, primarily fruits.
F ood workers
averaged $1.38, 41 cents an hour less than the average for the other factory
workers.
M o r e than three-fourths of the food processing workers earned less
than $ 1. 50 an hour and about a third less than $1. 25. About a fifth w e r e c o n ­
centrated at the $ 1.15— $ 1.20 w a g e interval and a sixth at the $ 1.35— $ 1.40 interval.
Nonmanufacturing workers included in the survey averaged $ 1. 45,
11 cents an hour less than factory workers.
Three-fifths of the nonfactory
workers earned less than $1.50; m o r e than a third, less than $1. 15; and about
an eighth, less than $1. A sixth of the workers w e r e clustered at the $ 1 — $1.05
w a g e interval, and almost a tenth at the $1. 15— $1.20 interval. M o s t of the n o n ­
factory workers at or just above the $1 Federal m i n i m u m w a g e w e r e employed
in retail trade while the majority of those at the $ 1 . 1 5 Federal m i n i m u m w e r e
in wholesale trade.
W o r k e r s in phosphate mines accounted for m o s t of the
workers earning $ 1. 50 or m o r e an hour.

W a g e C h a n g e s . In industries generally subject to the Fair Lab o r Stand­
ards Act prior to the 1961 amendments, average earnings of $ 1. 65 for June 1962
w e r e 4 cents below the pay levels for October of I960 and 1961. The increase




23

in the Federal m i n i m u m w a g e f r o m $1 to $1. 15 appeared to have s o m e effect on
the earnings of the lower paid workers; the proportion earning less than $1.15 d e ­
clined f r o m 16 to 4 percent between October of I960 and 1961.
During this
period, the proportion of workers at the $1.15— $1.20 pay interval increased
f r o m 3 to 17 percent.
The proportion of workers earning $ 1. 50 or m o r e an
hour, however, w a s slightly greater in I960 than in 1961, 59 and 56 percent,
respectively. B y June 1962, the proportion earning $ 1. 50 or m o r e had decreased
to 50 percent.

A ll subject industries except retail trade

Average hourly earnings

Oct.
1960

Oct.
1961

June
1962

(Cumulative percent)
Under
Under
Under
Under
Under
Under
Under

$ 1 .0 0 --------------------------------$ 1 .0 5 --------------------------------$ 1 .1 5 --------------------------------$ 1 . 2 0 --------------------------------$ 1 .2 5 ----------------------------- —
$ 1 .5 0 --------------------------------$ 2 .0 0 ---------------------------------

Number of workers (in hundreds) —
Average hourly earnings---------------

Loudon and M e M i n n Counties,

2

1

1

9
16
19

2

2

4

4

21

21

41
74

25
44
74

26
50
77

168
$1.69

190
$1.69

$1.65

22

222

Tenn.

A n estimated 9, 300 nonsupervisory workers w e r e within the scope of
the survey and, as a group, averaged $ 1. 49 an hour at straight-time rates in
June 1962. M edian earnings wer e $1.28 an hour. Earnings for the middle half
of the workers ranged f r o m $1. 18 to $1.76 an hour.
Nearly a fourth of the
workers we r e concentrated at the $ 1. 15— $ 1. 20 w a g e interval.
Almo s t four-fifths of the area workers surveyed w e r e in manufacturing
industries, where average earnings w e r e $ 1. 58 an hour. M o r e than a fourth of
the factory workers w ere at or just above the $1.15 Federal m i n i m u m wage.
Nearly two-fifths of the workers w e r e paid less than $ 1. 25 and about three-fifths
less than $1.50. Another fifth earned at least $ 2 an hour, nearly two-thirds of
w h o m w e r e employed in the paper industry, which accounted for about a sixth
of the factory workers.

In textile mills, which accounted for m o r e than a third of the factory
workers, average hourly earnings of $1.31 w ere 42 cents an hour less than the
average for the other factory workers.
All but a sixth of the textile workers
earned less than $1.50 an hour.
Earnings for about half of the workers w e r e
concentrated between $1. 1 5 and $ 1. 25 an hour, with nearly two-fifths at or just
above the $1. 15 Federal m i n i m u m wage.

The pay level for the 2, 000 workers in the nonmanufacturing industries
surveyed w a s $1. 14, 44 cents an hour less than that for factory workers. Ov e r
half of the nonfactory workers earned less than $ 1. 15 an hour, almost two-fifths
less than $1, and m o r e than a fourth less than 75 cents. Approximately a tenth
of the workers w ere concentrated at each of two 5 -cent w a g e intervals— $ 1— $ 1. 05
and $ 1. 15-$ 1. 20.




24

W a g e C h a n g e s . In industries generally subject to the Fair Labor Stand­
ards Act prior to the 1961 amendm e n t s , average earnings of $1.58 in October 1961
w e r e 7 cents higher than in October I960.
T h e increase in the Federal m i n i m u m
w a g e f r o m $1 to $1.15 w a s reflected in m a r k e d changes in the earnings of the
lower paid workers.
In October I960, m o r e than a fifth of the wor k e r s w e r e at
or just above the $1 Federal m i n i m u m w a g e and almost two-fifths earned less
than $ 1. 15 an hour. In October 1961, virtually all of the w o rkers earned at least
the $1.15 Federal m i n i m u m , and about three-tenths w e r e concentrated at the
$1.15— $ 1.20 w a g e interval. Although the proportion earning $ 1 . 2 5 or m o r e in­
creased f r o m about half to three-fifths during the October 1960— 61 period, a p ­
proximately the s a m e proportions w e r e earning $1.40 or m o r e .
The pay level
remained the s a m e between October 1961 and June 1962 and little change occurred
in the distribution of individual earnings.

A ll subject industries except retail trade

Average hourly earnings

Oct.
1960

Oct.
1961

June
1962

(Cumulative percent)
Under
Under
Under
Under
Under
Under
Under

$ 1 .0 0 --------------------------------$ 1 .0 5 --------------------------------$ 1 .1 5 --------------------------------$ 1 .2 0 --------------------------------$ 1 .2 5 --------------------------------$ 1 .5 0 --------------------------------$ 2 .0 0 ---------------------- ----------

1

1

1

23
38
44
49
64
81

2

2

3
32
41
62
79

3
30
39
62
80

Number o f workers (in hundreds) —
Average hourly earnings---------------

$1.51

76
$1.58

78
$1.58

68

Somerset, Wicomico, and Worcester Counties, M d .
A n estimated 14, 000 nonsupervisory wor k e r s w e r e within the scope of
the survey and, as a group, averaged $ 1. 44 an hour at straight-time rates in
June 1962. M e d i a n earnings w e r e $1.26 an hour. Earnings for the middle half
of the workers ranged f r o m $1. 18 to $ 1 . 6 2 an hour.
A sixth of the workers
w e r e at the $1.15— $1.20 w a g e interval.
Hourly earnings for almost three-fifths of the factory workers w e r e
c o m p r e s s e d within a 15-cent range f r o m $ 1.15 to $1.30.
Nearly a fourth of
the workers w e r e concentrated at or just above the $ 1 . 1 5 Federal m i n i m u m
wage, m o r e than a fifth at the $ 1. 20— $ 1. 25 interval, and nearly an eighth at
the $ 1. 25— $ 1. 30 interval.
At the time of the survey, 45 percent of the factory workers w e r e e m ­
ployed in food processing, w h e r e earnings averaged $ 1. 29 an hour. Seven-tenths
of the food workers earned between $1. 15 and $1.30 an hour.
In the apparel
industries, which accounted for m o r e than a fourth of the manufacturing w o r k
force, average earnings we r e just 1 cent above the pay level in food processing.
A l m o s t three-fifths of the apparel workers had earnings between $1.15 and $ 1. 30
an hour.
Nonmanufacturing workers included in the survey averaged $ 1. 50,
10 cents an hour m o r e than manufacturing workers. Although m o r e than threetenths of the nonfactory workers received less them $ 1 . 1 5 an hour, three-fifths
earned at least $ 1. 25, and two-fifths $ 1. 50 or m o re.




25

The pay level in retail trade, which comprised about two-thirds of the
nonfactory workers, w a s $1.41 an hour. A sixth of the retail employees earned
less than $ 1 an hour and about another sixth w e r e at the $ 1— $ 1.05 w a g e interval.
Nearly half of the workers earned less than $ 1. 25.
In wholesale trade, average earnings w e r e identical to the n o n m a n u f a c ­
turing average. Virtually all wholesale trade employees earned $ 1. 15 or m o r e
and a sixth w e r e concentrated at or just above the $1.15 Federal m i n i m u m wage.
Excluding the trade industry groups, average earnings for the other nonfactory
workers w e r e $1.72 an hour.
W a g e C h a n g e s . In industries generally subject to the Fair Labor Stand­
ards Act prior to the 1961 amendments, average earnings of $1.47 in June 1962
w e r e 3 cents an hour higher than in October 1961 and 12 cents higher than in
October I960.
The increase in the Federal m i n i m u m w a g e f r o m $1 to $1. 15
an hour w a s a m a j o r factor which affected the w a g e distribution between October
of I960 and 1961. In October I960, m o r e than a fifth of the workers w e r e paid
the existing $1 Federal m i n i m u m and nearly two-fifths earned less than $1. 15
an hour.
O n e m o n t h after the $1.15 Federal m i n i m u m b e c a m e effective, all
but a twentieth of the workers earned at least that a m o u n t and nearly three-tenths
w e r e at or just above the $1. 15 Federal m i n i m u m . During the October 1960— 61
period, the proportion earning at least $ 1. 25 an hour increased f r o m about
two-fifths to half. B y June 1962, the proportion at the $ 1. 15— $ 1. 20 w a g e interval
w a s reduced to approximately a fifth and the proportion at the $1. 2 0 — $1.25
interval had increased f r o m 15 to 19 percent.
Consequently, the proportion of
workers earning $ 1. 25 or m o r e in June 1962 w a s not significantly different fr o m
that in October 1961.
In retail establishments which b e c a m e subject to the $ 1 Federal m i n ­
i m u m wage, employing nearly a third of the retail workers, average earnings
increased by 11 cents an hour between June of 1961 and 1962. A n eighth of the
workers earned less than $ 1 an hour in June 1961. Nine months after the effec­
tive date of the n e w m i n i m u m , virtually all of the workers earned at least $ 1, and
the proportion at or just above the $ 1 Federal m i n i m u m had increased f r o m an
eighth to about a sixth.
Changes in the w a g e distribution w e r e not limited to
the lower pay levels. During the s a m e period, the proportion of subject retail
employees receiving $ 2 or m o r e an hour increased f r o m about a fourth to a third.
In nonsubject retail establishments average earnings of $1.33 in June 1962
w e r e 3 cents an hour m o r e than 1 year earlier.
Although the proportion of
w orkers paid less than $1 decreased slightly during the 1-year period, about a
fifth of the workers still had such earnings in June 1962.
______________ Retail trade
Nonsubject
A ll subject industries
(including eating
except retail trade
Subject
and drinking places)
Average hourly
earnings

Oct.
1960

Oct.
1961

June
1962

June
1961

June
1962

June
1961

June
1962

(Cumulative percent)
Under
Under
Under
Under
Under
Under
Under

$ 1 .0 0 ----------$ 1 .0 5 ----------$ 1 .1 5 ----------$1. 2 0 ----------$1. 2 5 ----------$1. 5 0 ----------$ 2 .0 0 -----------

99

$1.44 $1.47

1

1

23
37
51
59
74
91

3
5
33
48
71

3
5
27
46
70

88

109

Number o f workers
(in hundreds)-------108
Average hourly
earnings--------------- $1.35




86

12
24
29
32
36
51
74

1

2
19
23
30
31
45
66

26
40
48
50
55
74
89

39
43
49
52
72
91

12

8

26

29

$1.62

$1.73

$1.30

$1.38

21

26

U n i o n County,

Ark.

A n estimated 7, 100 nonsupervisory workers w e r e within the scope of the
survey and, as a group, averaged $ 1. 70 an hour. M e d i a n earnings w e r e 31 cents
an hour less than the m e a n earnings. The middle 50 percent of the w o rkers had
earnings ranging f r o m $1.16 to $2.32 an hour.
A sixth of the workers w e r e
concentrated at the $1.15— $1.20 w a g e interval.

Half of the area workers surveyed w e r e in manufacturing industries,
w h e r e average earnings w e r e $2.01 an hour.
A third of the work e r s earned
less than $ 1. 25 an hour and m o r e than a fourth w e r e concentrated at or just
above the $ 1 .15 Federal m i n i m u m wage.
Virtually all of these workers w e r e
employed in the lumber industry, which accounted for about a third of the factory
w o r k force.
At the higher end of the w a g e scale, a third of the workers we r e
paid at least $2.50 an hour. Nearly all of these workers w e r e employed in the
petroleum refining and chemical industries, which together accounted for m o r e
than two-fifths of the factory workers.

Nonmanufacturing workers included in the survey averaged $ 1. 38,
63 cents an hour less than factory workers.
Three-tenths of the nonfactory
w orkers earned less than $1, m o r e than two-fifths less than $1.15, and Kabout
half less than $1.25.
M o s t of the nonfactory workers earning less than $1.25
w e r e employed in retail stores, which accounted for nearly two-fifths of the
workers in nonmanufacturing industries.

W a g e C h a n g e s . In industries generally subject to the Fair Labor Stand­
ards Act prior to the 1961 amendments, average earnings of $1.97 in June 1962
w e r e 1 cent higher than in October 1961 and 3 cents higher than in October I960.
T h e increase in the Federal m i n i m u m w a g e f r o m $1 to $1.15 an hour appeared to
influence the earnings of the lower paid workers.
In October I960, a sixth of the
w orkers w e r e at or just above the $1 Federal m i n i m u m w a g e and m o r e than a
fourth earned less than $1.15 an hour. In October 1961, virtually all of the subject
workers earned at least $1. 15 and m o r e than a fifth w e r e concentrated at the
$1.15 Federal m i n i m u m wage.
During this period, the proportion of workers
earning $2.50 or m o r e decreased slightly f r o m about a third to three-tenths.
Little change occurred in the w a g e distribution between October 1961 and
June 1962.
A ll subject industries except retail trade

Average hourly earnings

Oct.
1960

Oct.
1961

June
1962

(Cumulative percent)
Under
Under
Under
Under
Under
Under
Under

$ 1 . 0 0 - - .............. — .......... —
$ 1 .0 5 --------------------------------$ 1 .1 5 --------------------------------$ 1 .2 0 ------ ------------ -------------$ 1 .2 5 --------------- ---------- ------$ 1 .5 0 --------------------------------$ 2 .0 0 ---------------------------------

Number of workers (in hundreds) —
Average hourly earnings---------------




1

Less than 0. 5 percent.

(M

1

1

2

2

16
27
32
34
44
54

2

2

24
28
45
58

24
29
43
58

47
$1.94

48
$1.96

49
$1.97

27

W a s h i n g t o n County,

Va.

Average straight-time hourly earnings for the 8, 400 nonsupervisory
workers within the scope of the survey w e r e $1.51 an hour in June 1962. M e ­
dian earnings w e r e $1.42 an hour.
The middle half of the w o r k force earned
between $1.17 and $ 1. 87 an hour. A l m o s t a tenth of the workers w e r e clustered
at the $1.15— $ 1.20 w a g e interval.

Manufacturing workers, w h o represented 55 percent of the area workers
covered by the survey, averaged $1.72 an hour.
Three-fifths of the factory
workers earned at least $1.50 an hour, and nearly three-tenths w e r e paid $ 2 or
m ore.
The majority of workers w h o received $ 2 or m o r e an hour w e r e e m ­
ployed in the machinery industry, which accounted for s o m e w h a t m o r e than a
fourth of the factory workers. F e w e r than a sixth of the manufacturing workers
earned less than $ 1. 25 an hour and about a tenth w e r e at or just above the $ 1. 15
Federal m i n i m u m wage.
M o s t of these workers w e r e employed in apparel and
food processing plants, which together accounted for over a third of the factory
w o r k force.

In nonmanufacturing industries, the pay level for the 3, 800 workers
surveyed w a s $1.26 an hour.
Nearly three-fifths of the workers earned less
than $1.25, almost a third less than $1, and a fifth less than 75 cents. A tenth
of the workers each w e r e at the $ 1— $ 1. 05 and $1. 15— $ 1. 20 pay intervals.

Two-fifths of the nonfactory workers surveyed w e r e employed in retail
trade, where average earnings of $1.17 w e r e 15 cents below the average of the
other workers in nonmanufacturing industries.
M o r e than seven-tenths of the
workers earned less than $ 1. 25; approximately a third, less than $ 1; and a fifth,
less than 75 cents.
A tenth of the retail employees w e r e clustered at the
$ 1. 15— $ 1. 20 pay interval and a sixth at the $ 1— $ 1. 05 interval.

W a g e C h a n g e s . In industries generally subject to the Fair Labor Stand­
ards Act prior to the 1961 amendments, average earnings of $1.71 in June 1962
w e r e the s a m e as in October 1961, but 4 cents an hour higher than in October I960.
The increase in the Federal m i n i m u m w a g e f r o m $ 1 to $1.15 an hour appeared
to be a major factor affecting the w a g e distribution between October of I960
and 1961. Eleven months before the effective date of the n e w m i n i m u m wage, a
sixth of the workers earned less than $1.15 an hour. O n e m o n t h after the effective
date, virtually all of the workers earned at least $ 1. 15 an hour, and the p r o ­
portion at the $ 1. 15— $ 1. 20 pay interval had increased f r o m 5 to 13 percent. The
proportion of workers at the higher m i n i m u m w a g e in October 1961 w a s m o r e
than twice the proportion at the 4*/2 -year-old $ 1 m i n i m u m in October I960. The
concentration of workers at the $ 1. 15— $ 1. 20 pay interval had declined by 3 p e r ­
centage points by June 1962.

In nonsubject industries, excluding retail trade, average earnings in­
creased by 4 cents an hour between October of I960 and 1961.
During this
period, the proportion of workers earning less than $ 1 decreased f r o m 68 to
63 percent, while the proportion earning less than $ 1. 15 decreased by only
1 percentage point.
A 1-cent gain in the pay level between October 1961 and
June 1962 reflected only m i n o r changes in the w a g e distribution.




28

The pay level for retail workers in June 1962 w a s 3 cents an hour higher
than the $1.14 level recorded 1 year earlier. The proportion of retail workers
earning less than $ 1 an hour decreased f r o m two-fifths to about a third, while
the proportion paid between $1 and $1.0 5 increased f r o m an eighth to a sixth. 15

Retail trade (in­
cluding eating and
Subject_______ ______ Nonsubject________drinking places)

A ll industries except retail trade_______

Average hourly
earnings

Oct.
1960

Oct.
1961

June
1962

Oct.
1961

Oct.
1960

June
1962

June
1961

June
1962

(Cumulative percent)
Under
Under
Under
Under
Under
Under
Under

$ 1 .0 0 ----------$ 1 .0 5 ----------$ 1 .1 5 ----------$ 1 .2 0 -----------$ 1 .2 5 -----------$ 1 .5 0 ----------$ 2 .0 0 ------------

Number of workers
(in hundreds)-------Average hourly
earnings--------------1

1

C1)

7
16

1

68

1

63
74
79
81
81
94
98

63
74
77
79
79
91
98

41
53
64
67
82
93

35
52
59
70
72
82
93

10

10

18

15

$0.89 $0.90

$1.14

$1.17

2

2
12

25
41
72

15
19
42
74

17
41
73

76
80
81
82
92
98

53

59

58

6

$1.67

$1.71

$1.71

$0.85

1

21

66

Less than 0. 5 percent.

North Central Region
Nonsupervisory employees in nonmetropolitan areas of the North Central
region averaged $ 1. 77 an hour in June 1962 (table 3). A l m o s t three-fifths of the
2V 4 million employees in manufacturing and nonmanufacturing industries covered
by the survey earned at least $1.50 an hour; a third, $ 2 or m o r e ; and about a
sixth, $2.50 or more. Approximately a fourth of t h e m received less than $1.25
an hour and a sixth less than $ 1. 15.
In manufacturing industries, which employed about half of the workers
included in the survey, the pay level w a s $ 1 . 9 8 an hour.
Nearly half of the
factory workers earned $ 2 an hour or m o r e and about a fifth at least $2.50.
F e w e r than a tenth of the workers w e r e at or just above the $1. 15 Federal
m i n i m u m w a g e and only a slightly larger proportion earned less than $1.25
an hour.
In nonmanufacturing industries, earnings averaged $1.55 an hour. Hourly
earnings of less than $ 1. 50 w e r e paid to nearly three-fifths of the 1. 1 million
nonfactory workers. Two-fifths of t h e m earned less than $ 1. 25; almost a third,
less than $1.15; and a seventh, less than $1. A n eighth of the workers earning
between $1 and $1.05 an hour w a s the largest clustering at any single 5-cent
w a g e interval.
Separate information for three nonmanufacturing industry groups s h o w
that the employees in retail trade, the largest numerically, averaged $ 1. 48,
8 cents an hour less than employees in wholesale trade and 18 cents less than
those in finance, insurance, and real estate. The influence of the dual Federal

15 A twentieth of the workers in June 1961 were employed in retail establishments which became subject to
the Fair Labor Standards A ct in September 1961.




•I

29

m i n i m u m w a g e w a s apparent in the trade industries:
15 percent of those in
wholesale trade earned between $1.15 and $ 1. 20 an hour and 17 percent of those
in retail trade earned between $ 1 and $ 1. 05.
In finance, insurance, and real
estate, fewer than a tenth of the workers w e r e at or just above the $ 1. 15 Federal
m i n i m u m , which w a s slightly smaller than the proportion at the $1.25— $ 1.30
w a g e interval.

W a g e Changes, October 1960— June 1962. Nonsupervisory employees,
retail employees excluded, averaged 5 cents an hour m o r e in June 1962 than in
October I960, $1.90 and $1.85, respectively. During this period, the proportion
of workers earning less than $1.15 an hour declined f r o m 14 to 6 percent.
About two-fifths of the workers received $ 2 or m o r e an hour and approximately
two-thirds $ 1. 50 or m o r e in both the I960 and 1962 survey periods.

In industries generally subject to the provisions of the Fair Labor Stand­
ards Act prior to the 1961 amendments, 4 percent of the workers w e r e at or
just above the $1 Federal m i n i m u m w a g e and 11 percent earned less than $1. 15
an hour in October I960.
In June 1962, only 2 percent of the workers earned
less than the n e w Federal m i n i m u m and the proportion at the $1.15 m i n i m u m
had increased f r o m 2 to 9 percent. Other changes in the w a g e distribution we r e
relatively small.
In nonsubject industries, little change occurred in the dis­
tribution or level of earnings between October I960 and June 1962, as shown in
the following tabulation.

A ll industries except
Retail trade (excluding eating
_____ retail trade__________ _______ and drinking places)_____
Subject______ Nonsubject
Average hourly
earnings

Oct.
1960

June
1962

Oct.
1960

June
1962

Subject
June
1961

Nonsubject

June
1962

June
1961

June
1962

(Cumulative percent)
Under
Under
Under
Under
Under
Under
Under

$ 1 .0 0 ----------$ 1 .0 5 ----------$1. 1 5 ----------$ 1 .2 0 ----------$ 1 .2 5 ----------$ 1 .5 0 ----------$ 2 .0 0 -----------

Number of workers
(in thousands)-------Average hourly
earnings---------------

38
48
53
55
56
72

19
27
35
39
43
64
84

3
30
37
41
62
82

36
42
45
48
67
87

11

2

13
16
28
56

11

13
29
55

86

38
49
54
58
59
73
89

1,428

1,484

129

117

139

154

475

532

$1.91

$1.95

$1.25

$1.24

$1.50

$1.56

$1.40

$1.46

1

1

5

1

21

22

19
35
42
45
48
66
86

In the segment of retail trade which b e c a m e subject to the act in
September 1961, accounting for approximately a fifth of the retail e m p l o y m e n t in
the North Central nonmetropolitan areas, the pay level increased by 6 cents an
hour. About a fifth of these workers received less than $1 an hour in June 1961.
O ne year later, only 3 percent of the workers had such earnings and the proportion
at the $ 1 Federal m i n i m u m w a g e had doubled, f r o m fewer than a tenth to nearly
a fifth. The proportion of workers earning $ 1. 25 or m o r e an hour did not change
significantly, 57 percent in 1961 and 59 percent in 1962.
In that part of retail




30

trade where a $ 1 m i n i m u m w a g e w as not required, average earnings also in­
creased by 6 cents an hour.
However, the proportion of workers earning less
than $ 1 decreased only slightly, f r o m 22 to 19 percent between June of 1961 and
1962, in concert with a small increase, f r o m 14 to 16 percent, in the proportion
at the $ 1 ~ $ 1 . 0 5 w a g e interval.

Selected North Central Areas
W a g e data are provided separately for 11 nonmetropolitan areas in the
North Central region.
A s previously indicated for the southern region, such
information should not be considered as representative of any other area.
A s shown in the following tabulation, population (according to the I960
census) varied f r o m approximately 25, 000 to 75, 000 in 8 of the areas and ranged
f r o m about 90, 000 to above 105, 000 in the other areas. Nonsupervisory e m p l o y ­
m e n t within scope of the survey in June 1962 ranged f r o m 4, 200 to 25, 900 but
w a s no m o r e than 10, 100 in 8 of the areas. Manufacturing e m p l o y m e n t accounted
for m o r e than half of the w o r k force in all but one of the areas. A wide variety
of manufacturing activities w a s found, with the manufacture of transportation
equipment, electrical machinery, and fabricated metal products being the m o s t
common.
Retail trade w as numerically the m o s t important nonmanufacturing
activity studied in each of the areas.

Area

Estimated number
of nonsupervisory Percent of non­
supervisory
Population workers included
(1960
workers in
in the survey,
manufacturing
census)
June 1962

Percent o f non­
manufacturing
workers in
retail trade

Major
manufacturing
industries

Alpena County, M ich ----------------Barton and Rice Counties, Kans—

28,556
46,277

4,200
4, 300

64
16

60
43

Glass products
Transportation
equipment

Crawford, Franklin, and
Washington Counties, M o -------Elkhart County, I n d -------------------

71,559
106,790

1 0 ,1 0 0

25,900

64
75

47
51

Fayette County, I n d ------------------Manitowoc County, W is-------------

24,454
75,215

4,900
15,200

73
73

62
61

Marathon County, W is --------------Portage County, O h io-----------------

88,874
91,798

12,800
8,900

55
57

40
63

Sandusky County, O h i o ------------Whiteside County, 111-----------------

56,486
59,887

8,300
9,000

65
70

66

Winona County, M in n ---------------

40,937

6,700

57

52

Footwear
T ransportation
equipment
Electrical machinery
Fabricated metal
products
Paper products
Rubber and m iscel­
laneous plastics
products
Electrical machinery
Fabricated metal
products
Food and kindred
products

52

All industry-area pay levels of nonsupervisory employees ranged f r o m
$1.57 to $2.35 an hour in June 1962 (table 4). Average earnings exceeded $ 2 in
four areas and w e r e less than $ 1. 80 in four other areas.
The dispersion of
individual earnings for the middle 50 percent of all the area workers varied
f r o m a spread of 61 cents to $1.41 an hour.
Such earnings w e r e distributed
over a 69- to 9 1 -cent range in seven of the other areas and the spread exceeded
$ 1 in the other two areas.




31
Area

Interquartile range 1

Alpena County, M ich ------------------------------- ---------------------------------Barton and Rice Counties, K an s------------------------------------------------Crawford, Franklin, and Washington
Counties, M o -------------------------------------------------------------------------Elkhart County, Ind-------------------------------------------------------------------Fayette County, I n d -----------------------------------------------------------------Manitowoc County, W is------------------------------------------------------------Marathon County, W is --------------------------------------------------------------Portage County, O h io----------------------------------------------------------------Sandusky County, Ohio--------------------------------------------------------------Whiteside County, 111----------------------------------------------------------------Winona County, M in n ---------------------------------------------------------------

$ 1 . 78~$2.68
1. 18~ 1.97

1 The limits of the interquartile range were determined
within a 5- or 10-cent wage interval shown in the tables.

by interpolation

1.20— 1.81
1.61"" 2.52
1.78” 2.47
1.43"" 2.20
1.32“ 2.23
1.37“ 2.4 7
1.42“ 2.5 7
1 . 66 “ 3.07
1.27“ 2.09

In manufacturing industries, w a g e levels ranged f r o m $1.59 to $2.69
an hour. In all but four of the areas, earnings averaged m o r e than $ 2 an hour.
The average pay advantage of factory workers over nonfactory workers exceeded
50 cents an hour in six of the areas, extending to as m u c h as $1. 12 in one
area.
Only in the area with the lowest manufacturing w a g e level w a s the w a g e
differential small.
Factory workers at the $ 1.15— $ 1.20 pay interval w e r e found in significant
n u m b e r s in only 1 of the 11 areas in June 1962. In each of nine areas, fewer
than a tenth of the workers earned less than $ 1. 25 an hour. O n the other hand,
m o r e than half of the workers w e r e paid $ 2 or m o r e an hour in seven areas,
and at least three-eighths had such earnings in 3 of the 4 remaining areas.
In nonmanufacturing industries, f r o m about a fourth to m o r e than
two-fifths of the workers in the 11 areas earned less than $1.25, and f r o m about
a tenth to a fifth received less than $ 1 in all but 1 of the areas.
W h e r e area
data w e r e available separately for retail trade, substantial proportions of workers
in each of the areas earned less than $ 1 an hour in June 1962. The $ 1 Federal
m i n i m u m wage, however, appeared to have s o m e influence on retail earnings
since f r o m 8 to 15 percent of the workers w e r e clustered at the $ l— $ 1. 05 w age
interval.

W a g e C h a n g e s . In industries generally subject to the Fair L a bor Stand­
ards Act prior to the 1961 amendments, pay levels rose during the period after
the Federal m i n i m u m w a g e increased f r o m $ 1 to $ 1 . 1 5 (between October 1961
and June 1962) in the 11 areas, and wer e greater than the w a g e changes occurring
during the period in which the n e w m i n i m u m b e c a m e effective (between October
of 1961 and 1962) in 7 of the areas. In only one area w a s the greater increase
in average hourly earnings in the earlier than in the later period reflective of
the introduction of the $1.15 Federal m i n i m u m wage.
A fourth of the subject
workers in the C rawford— Franklin— Washington, Mo., area earned less than $1. 15
an hour in October I960, c o m p a r e d with about a tenth in one other area and even
smaller proportions in the remaining areas. In the one affected area, approxi­
mately a fifth of the workers w e r e concentrated at or just above the $ 1. 15 Federal
m i n i m u m w a g e in October 1961, whereas no m o r e than a tenth had such earnings
in the other areas. M o s t of the changes in the distributions of earnings between
October 1961 and June 1962 occurred at the higher levels of pay. F e w changes
occurred in the levels and distributions of w a g e s in nonsubject industries, ex ­
cluding retail trade, w h e r e data w e r e available separately for five of the areas.




32

In retail trade, average earnings increased between June of 1961 and
1962 in 4 of the 5 areas w h e r e such data w e r e available.
Reductions in the
proportions of retail workers earning less than $ 1 w e r e relatively small, and
in only 1 of these 5 areas w a s there a significant increase in the proportion at
the $ 1— $ 1. 05 pay interval. However, in three of these areas, w h e r e data w e r e
available separately for the subject segment of retail trade, decreases in the
proportions of workers earning less than $1 between June of 1961 and 1962 w e r e
sharp, but changes at the $1— $1.05 w a g e interval w e r e less pronounced.

Alpena County, M i c h .
A n estimated 4, 200 nonsupervisory workers within the scope of the
survey, as a group, averaged $2.20 an hour in June 1962.
M e d i a n earnings
w e r e 12 cents an hour higher than the average.
Earnings for the middle half
of the workers ranged between $ 1.78 and $2. 68 an hour.
Average earnings w e r e $2.46 an hour for manufacturing workers, w h o
constituted almost two-thirds of the area w o r k force included in the survey.
Nearly nine-tenths of the workers received $ 2 or m o r e an hour and m o r e than a
half earned at least $2.50. The relatively high earnings w e r e largely due to the
presence of plants manufacturing glass, machinery, and paper, w h e r e better than
nine-tenths of the factory workers w e r e employed.
The 1, 500 workers in the nonmanufacturing industries surveyed, as a
group, averaged $1.75 an hour.
Nearly three-fifths of the workers earned at
least $ 1.50 an hour and over a third $ 2 or more.
M o r e than a fourth of the
w orkers received less than $1.25 an hour and a tenth between $1 and $1.05
an hour.
A lmost four-fifths of the workers at this interval w e r e employed in
retail trade, which accounted for three-fifths of the nonfactory workers.
W a g e C h a n g e s . In industries generally subject to the Fair Labor Stand­
ards Act prior to the September 1961 a m e n d m e n t s , average hourly earnings of
$ 2.43 in June 1962 w e r e 6 cents an hour higher than the October 1961 level and
12 cents higher than the October I960 level. The increase in the Federal m i n ­
i m u m w a g e had little or no effect on earnings, since virtually all of the workers
earned at least $ 1. 15 an hour before the increase b e c a m e effective.
M o s t of
the changes in the w a g e distribution affected w o rkers earning $2.50 or m o r e an
hour, w h o represented 38 percent of the subject workers in October I960, 42 p e r ­
cent in October 1961, and 51 percent in June 1962.

A ll subject industries except retail trade
Average hourly earnings

Oct. 1960

Oct. 1961

June 1962

(Cumulative percent)
Under
Under
Under
Under
Under
Under
Under

$ 1 .0 0 --------------------------------$ 1 .0 5 --------------------------------$ 1 .1 5 -------------------- -----------$1 . 2 0 --------------------------------$ 1 .2 5 --------------------------------$ 2 . 0 0 ....... .................— ..........
$ 2 . 5 0 ---------------------------------

Number of workers (in hundreds) —
Average hourly earnings---------------




1

Less than

0.

5 percent.

(l )

1

(M
(M

C1)
( 1)

1

i

2

i

1

2

2

2

18
62

19
58

17
49

33
$2.31

31
$2.37

31
$2.43

1

33

Barton and Rice Counties, K a n s .
Approximately 4, 300 nonsupervisory workers within the scope of the
survey, 16 as a group, averaged $ 1. 57 an hour in June 1962.
M e d i a n earnings
w e r e 7 cents an hour lower than the average.
The middle half of the workers
earned between $ 1. 18 and $ 1. 97 an hour. Approximately a tenth of the workers
w e r e at the $ 1. 25— $ 1. 30 w a g e interval.
Factory workers, w h o comprised a sixth of the area w o r k force surveyed,
averaged $ 1. 87 an hour. All but a seventh of the w o rkers earned at least $ 1. 50
an hour and nearly two-fifths received $ 2 or more. Earnings for about two-thirds
of the workers ranged between $1.50 and $2.20 an hour. The food, structural
clay, and transportation equipment industries accounted for almost three-fifths
of the manufacturing employment.
In the nonmanufacturing industries included in the survey, average
earnings w e r e $1.51 an hour. Nearly three-fifths of the workers received less
than $1.50, a third less than $1.25, and nearly a fifth less than $1.
More
than a tenth of the workers, m o s t of w h o m w e r e employed in hotels and motels,
w e r e paid less than 75 cents.
A n eighth of the workers w e r e clustered at the
$ 1. 25— $ 1. 30 w a g e interval.
W a g e C h a n g e s . In industries generally subject to the Fair Labor Stand­
ards Act prior to the 1961 a mendments , hourly pay levels fluctuated by no m o r e
than 3 cents between October of I960 and 1961 and June 1962.
T h e rise in the
Federal m i n i m u m f r o m $1 to $1.15 appeared to generate a clustering of 8 percent
of the workers at the $1. 15— $1.20 pay interval in October 1961.
A year earlier,
relatively few workers had such earnings and only 3 percent w e r e at or just above
the $1 Federal m i n i m u m in effect at that time. B y June 1962, the proportion at
the $1.15 Federal m i n i m u m w a g e w a s slightly reduced and the proportion at the
$1. 25— $1. 30 w a g e interval had doubled f r o m 6 to 12 percent.
In nonsubject industries, excluding retail trade, the proportion of workers
paid less than $1 in October 1961 w a s greater than in October I960.
This w as
still true in June 1962.

A ll industries except retail trade
Subject________ _____ Nonsubject
Average hourly earnings

Oct.
1960

June
1962

Oct.
1961

Oct.
1960

Oct.
1961

June
1962

(Cumulative percent)
Under
Under
Under
Under
Under
Under
Under

$ 1 .0 0 ------------------------------------$ 1 .0 5 -----------------------------------$1. 1 5 -----------------------------------$ 1 .2 0 -----------------------------------$1. 2 5 -----------------------------------$ 2 . 0 0 -----------------------------------$ 2 .5 0 ------------- -------- - ..............

Number of workers (in hundreds)----Average hourly earnings------------------—
1

Less than

0.

3
5
5

10

8

8

12

10

66

66

67

42
47
53
53
57
93

84

89

88

100

5
$1.15

(! )

1

2

2

2

2

2

21

20

21

$1.82

$1.79

$1.80

51
55
58
58
58
91
97

50
57
59
60
60
91
99

6

6

$1. 17 $1.16

5 percent.

^ Excluded from the survey were the petroleum and natural gas extraction industries which were a major
source of employment in the area.




34

Crawford, Franklin, and Washington Counties, M o .
Nonsupervisory workers within the scope of the survey n u m b e r e d 10, 100
and, as a group, averaged $ 1. 57 an hour in June 1962. M e d i a n earnings w e r e
15 cents below the average. Earnings for the middle half of the workers ranged
between $1. 20 and $1.81 an hour. A sixth of the workers w e r e at the $1. 15— $ 1. 20
w a g e interval.

In manufacturing, which accounted for almost two-thirds of the area w o r k
force surveyed, earnings averaged $ 1. 59 an hour.
Nearly three-fifths of the
w orkers earned less than $1.50 and almost three-tenths less than $1.25. Better
than a fifth of the workers w e r e at or just above the $1.15 Federal m i n i m u m
wage.
M o r e than half of the factory workers w e r e employed in the leather
industry, primarily footwear, where average earnings of $1.51 w e r e 18 cents
an hour less than the average for the other manufacturing industries. A fourth
of the leather workers earned between $1. 1 5 and $ 1. 20 an hour, accounting for
m o r e than three-fifths of the factory workers at that w a g e interval.

Average hourly earnings of $ 1. 57 for nonmanufacturing industries w e r e
only 2 cents an hour less than the pay level in manufacturing.
Although about
the s a m e proportion of nonfactory as factory workers earned less than $ 1. 50 an
hour, m o r e than a third in nonmanufacturing received less than $1.25; a fourth,
less than $ 1. 15; and a sixth, less than $ 1.

In retail trade, which comprised almost half of the nonmanufacturing
w o r k force surveyed, earnings averaged $ 1. 35 an hour. A fourth of the workers
earned less than $ 1, accounting for about seven-tenths of the nonfactory workers
with such earnings.
Fifteen percent of the retail employees w e r e clustered at
the $ 1— $ 1.05 w a g e interval.

W a g e C h a n g e s . In industries generally subject to the Fair Labor Stand­
ards Act prior to the 1961 amendments , average earnings of $1.65 in June 1962
exceeded the October 1961 level by 3 cents an hour, and the October I960 level
by 7 cents an hour.
Changes in the w a g e distribution appeared to reflect the
increase in the Federal m i n i m u m w a g e f r o m $1 to $1.15.
In October I960,
a fourth of the workers earned less than $1.-15 an hour.
O n e m o n t h after the
$1. 15 Federal m i n i m u m b e c a m e effective, virtually all of the workers earned at
least that a m o u n t and the proportion at the higher m i n i m u m had increased f r o m
a twentieth to a fifth, which w a s almost twice the proportion at the $ 1 Federal
m i n i m u m in effect in October I960.
The w a g e distribution in June 1962 w a s
similar to that in October 1961, although the proportion of workers earning $ 1. 25
or m o r e had risen slightly, f r o m 72 to 75 percent.

Average hourly earnings in retail trade w e r e only 2 cents an hour higher
in June 1962 than the $1.33 level in June 1961.
About the s a m e proportion of
workers w e r e paid less than $ 1 an hour in both survey years. 17

17

Fewer than a tenth o f the workers in June 1961 were in retail establishments which became subject to the
Fair Labor Standards A ct in September 1961.




35
A ll subject industries
Retail trade (including
except retail trade_________ eating and drinking places)
Average hourly
earnings

Oct.
1960

Oct.
1961

June
1962

June
1961

June
1962

(Cumulative percent)
Under
Under
Under
Under
Under
Under
Under

$ 1 . 0 0 ----------$ 1 .0 5 ----------$ 1 .1 5 ----------$ 1 . 2 0 ----------$ 1 .2 5 ----------$2. 0 0 ----------$2. 5 0 -----------

Number of workers
(in hundreds)-------Average hourly
earnings--------------* Less than

0.

(*)

( 1)
( 1)

96

81

19

17

$1.65

$1.33

$1.35

25
30
34
81
91

28
81
91

63

74

$1.58

$1.62

1
22

27
41
48
51
53

25
40
44
49
52
85
95

C1)
(J)
(*)
19
25
80
90

12

88

5 percent.

Elkhart County, Ind.
The pay level for approximately 25, 900 nonsupervisory workers within
the scope of the survey w a s $2. 10 an hour in June 1962. M e d i a n earnings w e r e
$2. 12 an hour. Earnings for the middle half of the workers ranged f r o m $1.61
to $ 2. 52.

Factory workers, w h o comprised three-fourths of the workers surveyed,
averaged $2.26 an hour. M o r e than nine-tenths of the workers earned at least
$1.50 an hour; m o r e than two-thirds, $ 2 or m o r e ; and better than three-tenths,
$2. 50 or more. A l m o s t a fifth of the manufacturing workers w e r e engaged in the
production of transportation equipment, numerically the largest industry in the
area.
The furniture, and fabricated metal products industries, together, p r o ­
vided e m p l o y m e n t for about a fourth of the manufacturing workers; and food,
rubber, nonelectrical machinery, and musical instruments manufacturers a c ­
counted for about another fourth. Pay levels in transportation, fabricated metal
products, nonelectrical machinery, and musical instruments exceeded the all
manufacturing average while those for the other industries fell below the average.

In the nonmanufacturing industries surveyed, average earnings w e r e
$1.68 an hour.
About half the workers earned less than $1.50, and about as
m a n y workers earned at least $ 2 an hour, almost three-tenths, as there we r e
earning less than $1.15. A tenth of the nonfactory workers w e r e at the $ 1— $ 1. 05
pay interval and about the s a m e proportion earned less than $ 1 an hour.

In retail trade, which accounted for m o r e than a half of the nonfactory
workers included in the survey, the pay level w a s $ 1. 60 an hour.
Almost
two-fifths of the retail employees earned less than $ 1 . 1 5 and m o r e than an eighth
w e r e at or just above $ 1 an hour. Average earnings in wholesale trade exceeded
the retail trade pay level by 24 cents an hour.
All but about a tenth of the
wholesale trade employees earned at least $ 1. 15 an hour, although nearly a sixth
w e r e concentrated at the $ 1. 25— $ 1. 30 w a g e interval.




36
W a g e C h a n g e s . In industries generally subject to the Fair Lab o r Stand­
ards Act prior to the September 1961 amen d m e n t s , average hourly earnings of
$2.22 in June 1962 w e r e 3 cents higher than the October 1961 average, and
5 cents higher than the October I960 average.
The increase of the Federal
m i n i m u m wag e f r o m $1 to $ 1. 15 had little effect on the w a g e distribution since
virtually all of the subject workers earned at least $ 1. 15 in 11 months before the
higher m i n i m u m b e c a m e effective.
B e t w e e n October I960 and June 1962, the
proportion of workers earning $2.50 or m o r e an hour rose f r o m about a fourth
to three-tenths.
In retail trade, the proportion of workers earning less than $ 1. 25 e x ­
panded f r o m 37 to 44 percent between June of 1961 and 1962 and the proportion
earning between $ 1 and $ 1. 05 increased fr o m 9 to 14 percent. The proportion
of workers earning less than $ 1 remained unchanged during this period. 18

A ll subject industries
except retail trade______
Average hourlyearnings

Oct.
1960

Oct.
1961

June
1962

Retail trade (including
eating and drinking places)
June
1961

June
1962

(Cumulative percent)
Under
Under
Under
Under
Under
Under
Under

$ 1 .0 0 ----------$ 1 .0 5 ----------$1. 1 5 ----------$ 1 .2 0 ----------$ 1 .2 5 ----------$2. 0 0 ----------$2. 5 0 -----------

Number o f workers
(in hundreds)-------Average hourly
earnings--------------1

Less than

0.

2

1

1

3
5
37
76

3
4
37
74

2

3
35
70

15
24
32
35
37
76
90

203

202

215

35

34

$2.17

$2.19

$2 . 2 2

$1.59

$1.60

C1)
1

C1)

(*)
C1)

( l)

15
29
39
42
44
78
90

5 percent.

Fayette County, Ind.
A n estimated 4, 900 nonsupervisory workers within the scope of the
survey, as a group, averaged $ 2. 07 an hour at straight-time rates in June 1962.
M e d i a n earnings w e r e $ 2. 20 an hour. Earnings for the middle half of the workers
ranged between $ 1 .78 and $2.47 an hour.
Factory workers, w h o accounted for almost three-fourths of the workers
included in the survey, averaged $2.28 an hour.
While m o r e than four-fifths
of the workers in manufacturing earned $ 2 or m o r e an hour, earnings for almost
half of t h e m w e r e confined to a 40-cent range between $2. 10 and $2. 50 an hour.
This concentration w a s largely attributable to the w a g e s paid in the fabricated
metal products and electrical equipment industries, which together accounted for
approximately seven-tenths of the factory workers.
T he c o mbined average for
these workers w a s $2.31 an hour.

18

More than a fifth of the workers in June 1961 were in retail establishments which became subject to the
Fair Labor Standards A ct in September 1961.




37

The pay level for workers in the nonmanufacturing industries surveyed
w a s 80 cents an hour less than the average for workers in manufacturing. A l m o s t
three-fifths of the nonfactory workers earned less than $1.50; two-fifths, less
than $ 1. 25; and m o r e than a sixth, less than $ 1 an hour. About a tenth of the
workers w e r e at the $ 1 — $1. 0 5 w a g e interval, of w h o m four-fifths w e r e employed
in retail trade.
W a g e C h a n g e s . In industries generally subject to the Fair L abor Stand­
ards Act prior to September 1961, average earnings of $ 2 . 2 4 in June 1962 w e r e
4 cents an hour higher than in October 1961 and 5 cents higher than in October I960.
Relatively few workers earned less than $1. 15 an hour in October 1960, thereby
minimizing the effects of the rise in the Federal m i n i m u m wage.
The little
change which did occur in the w a g e distribution applied to the proportion of
workers earning $ 2 or more, which increased slightly between survey periods.
A ll subject industries except retail trade

Average hourly earnings

Oct.
1960

Oct.
1961

June
1962

(Cumulative percent)
Under
Under
Under
Under
Under
Under
Under

$ 1 .0 0 --------------------------------$ 1 .0 5 --------------------------------$ 1 .1 5 --------------------------------$ 1 .2 0 --------------------------------$1. 2 5 --------------------------------$ 2 . 0 0 --------------------------------$ 2 . 50 -------------------------------

Number of workers (in hundreds) —
Average hourly earnings--------------* Less than

0.

(M ’

(*)

t1)
(M

1

1

2

1

1
1

2

2

2

27
80

25
76

21

39
$2. 19

38
$2 . 20

40
$2.24

74

5 percent.

Manitowoc County, W i s .
The approximately 15, 200 nonsupervisory workers within the scope of
the survey, as a group, averaged $1.81 an hour in June 1962. M e d i a n earnings
w e r e $ 1. 75 an hour. Earnings for the middle half of the workers ranged between
$ 1.42 and $ 2. 20 an hour.
Manufacturing workers, w h o accounted for almost three-fourths of the
area e m p l o y m e n t surveyed, averaged $ 1. 92 an hour.
About four-fifths of the
factory workers earned at least $1.50 an hour and m o r e than two-fifths $ 2 or
more.
Better than a third of the workers in manufacturing w e r e employed in
plants fabricating metal products, wher e average earnings of $1.81 w e r e 11 cents
an hour less than the manufacturing average. The furniture and the nonelectrical
machinery industries, together accounted for almost three-tenths of the m a n u f a c ­
turing w o r k force. Pay levels in these industries w e r e $ 1. 80 and $2. 19 an hour,
respectively.
In the nonmanufacturing industries included in the survey, average earn­
ings of $ 1. 58 w e r e 34 cents an hour less than those in manufacturing. A l m o s t
a fifth of the nonfactory workers earned less than $ 1 an hour and two-fifths less
than $ 1. 25. Earnings for a tenth of the workers w e r e clustered at the $ 1— $ 1. 05
hourly pay interval and almost the s a m e proportion w a s at the $0. 8 5 — $ 0.90
interval.
In retail trade, which accounted for m o r e than three-fifths of the n o n ­
manufacturing employment, average earnings w e r e $ 1. 53 an hour. A fifth of the




38

retail employees earned less than $ 1 an hour and m o r e than half had earnings
of less than $ 1. 30 an hour. Almost a sixth of the workers were at the $ 1— $ 1. 05
wage interval and an eighth were at the $0.85— $0.90 interval, accounting for the
vast majority of nonfactory workers with such earnings.
W a g e Changes. In industries generally subject to the Fair Labor Stand­
ards Act prior to the September 1961 amendments, average hourly earnings of
$1.91 in June 1962 were 3 cents higher than the October 1961 level and 4 cents
higher than the October I960 level. Eleven months before the rise in the Federal
m i n i m u m wage from $1 to $1.15, fewer than a tenth of the subject workers
earned less than $1.15 an hour. One month after the effective date of the higher
mi n i m u m , virtually all of the workers were paid at least $1. 15 an hour and
4 percent were at or just above this level, approximating the proportion at the
$ 1 Federal m i n i m u m in effect in October I960. Although the proportion earning
$ 2 or m o r e declined during the October 1960— 61 period from 42 to 38 percent,
nearly all of this loss was regained in June 1962.
In nonsubject industries, excluding retail trade, the sa m e proportion of
workers earned less than $ 1 in October 1961 as in October I960, but the pro­
portion earning between $1 and $1.15 an hour increased from 7 to 15 percent.
The 14-cent-an-hour increase in average earnings during this period was attrib­
utable mostly to a rise from 8 to 16 percent in the proportion of workers paid
$2. 50 or m o r e an hour. N o significant changes occurred in the wage distribution
between October 1961 and June 1962.
In the segment of retail trade which became subject to the $ 1 Federal
m i n i m u m wage, accounting for about a fifth of the retail workers, the pay level
increased by 11 cents an hour between June of 1961 and 1962.
The proportion
of workers paid less than $ 1 an hour during this period decreased sharply, from
20 percent in June 1961 to 6 percent in June 1962. The concentration of workers
at or just above the $ 1 Federal m i n i m u m wage expanded from 14 to 19 percent
and the proportion earning $ 1. 25 or m o r e increased from 40 to 44 percent. In
the nonsubject segment of retail trade, on the other hand, the proportion of
workers earning less than $ 1 an hour was greater in 1962 than in 1961, 24 and
20 percent, respectively. Earnings averaged 6 cents an hour m o r e in 1961 than
in 1962.

_________Retail trade____________
Nonsubject
(including eating
Subject_____ and drinking places)

A ll industries except retail trade

Subject
Average hourly
earnings

Oct.
1960

Oct.
1961

Nonsubject
June
1962

Oct.
1960

Oct.
1961

June
1962

June
1961

June
1962

June
1961

June
1962

(Cumulative percent)
Under
Under
Under
Under
Under
Under
Under

$ 1 .0 0 ----------$ 1 .0 5 ----------$ 1 .1 5 ----------$ 1 .2 0 ----------$ 1 .2 5 ---------$ 2 . 0 0 ----------$ 2 . 5 0 -----------

Number of workers
(in hundreds)-------Average hourly
earnings--------------1

Less than




0.

12

8

6

58
93

62
91

59
87

34
39
41
42
42
85
92

110

116

121

6

8

8

5

5

21

21

$1.87

$ 1. 8 8

$1.91

$1.39

$1.53

$1.51

$1.33

$1.44

$1.61

$1.55

1

(])

5

(M

C1)
(M

8

1

10

5

5 percent.

i
3

34
42
49
49
50
79
84

36
43
49
51
52
76
82

20
34
51
57
60
92
98

6

20

25
43
51
56
97

33
39
41
41
82
94

24
37
39
43
44
82
95

88

M a r a t h o n

C o u n t y ,

W i s .

Approximately 12, 800 nonsupervisory workers within the scope of the
survey, as a group, averaged $1.79 an hour at straight-time rates in June 1962.
This average was 4 cents an hour m o r e than median earnings. The middle half
of the workers had earnings ranging from $ 1. 32 to $2. 23 an hour.
Earnings in manufacturing industries, which employed 55 percent of the
workers included in the survey, averaged $2.01 an hour. M o r e than four-fifths
of the workers earned $ 1. 50 or more, of w h o m about half earned between $2 and
$2. 50 an hour.
Most of the workers whose earnings were clustered within
this 50-cent range were employed in the paper industry, particularly papermills,
which accounted for m o r e than a third of the factory work force. Food, lumber,
and nonelectrical machinery accounted for about three-tenths of the workers in
manufacturing industries.
In the nonmanufacturing industries surveyed, average earnings of $ 1. 52
were 49 cents less than those in manufacturing.
Nearly two-fifths of the non­
factory workers received less than $ 1. 25 an hour, m o r e than a fifth less than
$1. 15, and over a tenth less than $1.
Better than a tenth of the workers had
earnings between $1.15 and $1.20 an hour.
In retail trade, which employed two-fifths of the nonfactory workers,
average earnings of $1.46 were 10 cents an hour below the average for the rest
of the nonmanufacturing workers. M o r e than two-fifths of the retail employees
earned less than $1.25 and a fifth less than $1.
A n eighth of the workers
earning between 85 and 90 cents was the largest concentration of workers at any
5-cent wage interval.
W a g e Changes. In industries generally subject to the Fair Labor Stand­
ards Act prior to the September 1961 amendments, average earnings of $1.92 in
June 1962 were 4 cents an hour m o r e than in October 1961 and 6 cents m o r e than
in October I960. The proportion of subject workers earning less than $1.15 an
hour was reduced from 6 percent in October I960 to 1 percent in October 1961.
The proportion at or just above the $1.15 m i n i m u m wage increased from 3 to
8 percent during this period.
By June 1962, this proportion had decreased to
6 percent, while the proportion earning $2 or m o r e increased 4 percentage points
from 42 percent in 1961.
In nonsubject industries, excluding retail trade, average hourly earnings
in June 1962 and October 1961 were 3 and 2 cents an hour, respectively, below
the $ 1. 29 pay level in October I960. The proportion of workers at the $ 1— $ 1. 05
and $ 1. 15— $ 1. 20 wage intervals increased significantly between October of 1960
and 1961, from 5 to 16 percent and from 1 to 9 percent, respectively.
These
increases were accompanied by only slight reductions in the proportion of workers
paid less than $ 1 and $1.15 an hour.
The concentration of workers at the
$ 1— $1.05 and $1.15— $1.20 wage intervals increased further by June 1962, with
little or no change in the proportions paid less than these amounts.
In retail establishments which became subject to the $ 1 Federal m i n ­
imum, employing about a fourth of the retail employees, average earnings in­
creased by 17 cents an hour between June of 1961 and 1962. The proportion of
workers paid less than $ 1 an hour decreased from 12 to 4 percent during this
period and, contrary to the expected pattern of wage changes, the proportion at
or just above the $ 1 Federal m i n i m u m was reduced in half, from 10 to 5 percent.
In the nonsubject segment of retail trade, average hourly earnings remained
unchanged between survey years, and approximately the sa m e proportion of
workers were paid less than $ 1 an hour.




40

A ll industries except retail trade

Subject
Average hourly
earnings

Oct.
1960

Oct.
1961

_________Retail trade____________
Nonsubject
(including eating
Subject
and drinking places)

Nonsubiect
June
1962

Oct.
1960

Oct.
1961

June
1962

June
1961

June
1962

June
1961

June
1962

(Cumulative percent)
Under
Under
Under
Under
Under
Under
Under

$ 1 . 0 0 -----------$ 1 .0 5 ----------$ 1 .1 5 -----------$ 1 . 2 0 ----------$ 1 .2 5 -----------$ 2 . 0 0 -----------$ 2 . 5 0 -----------

Number of workers
(in hundreds)-------Average hourly
earnings--------------1

Less than

0.

9

i
9

7

11

12

10

30
35
50
51
65

60
90

58
88

54
87

96

27
43
52
61
63
90
98

103

100

97

6

8

8

6

6

18

17

$ 1. 8 6

$ 1 .88

$1.92

$1.29

$ 1 .27

$1.26

$1.51

$ 1.68

$1.38

$1.38

C1)
2
6

(M
(M

<!>
(M
i

88

27
46
53
64
67
89
98

12

4
9
15

95

24
79
91

26
39
45
48
50
89
95

27
35
45
50
52
91
97

22

31
33
37
88

20

5 percent.

Portage County, Ohio
Average earnings for the approximately 8, 900 nonsupervisory workers
within the scope of the survey were $1.95 an hour in June 1962.
The median
exceeded the average by 7 cents an hour.
Earnings for the middle half of the
workers ranged between $ 1. 37 and $2. 47 an hour.

Factory workers, w ho accounted for nearly three-fifths of the workers
included in the survey, averaged $2.24 an hour.
Better than seven-tenths of
the manufacturing workers earned at least $ 2 an hour and three-tenths $2.50
or more. About a third of the factory workers clustered between $2 and $2.50
were employed in the rubber and plastics products industry.
These workers
averaged $2.13 an hour.

Workers in the nonmanufacturing industries surveyed averaged 65 cents
an hour less than the factory workers.
M o r e than a fifth of the nonfactory
workers received less than $1, nearly two-fifths less than $1. 15, and over half
less than $ 1. 50 an hour. Almost a tenth, most of w h o m were employed in retail
trade, earned between $1 and $1.05 an hour.

W a g e Changes. In industries generally subject to the Fair Labor Stand­
ards Act prior to the September 1961 amendments, average hourly earnings of
$2.24 in June 1962 were 1 cent higher than the October 1961 level and 10 cents
higher than the October I960 level. The increase in the Federal m i n i m u m wage
from $ 1 to $ 1. 15 had little effect on earnings between October of I960 and 1961,
since only 3 percent of the subject workers earned less than $ 1. 15 an hour before
the higher m i n i m u m b e c a m e effective. Most of the changes in the wage distri­




41

bution occurred at the higher levels of pay. For example, the proportion earning
$ 2 or m o r e an hour increased from 63 to 68 percent. Although the proportion
of workers with such earnings was unchanged in June 1962, the proportion earning
at least $2.50 an hour rose slightly.

A ll subject industries except retail trade

Average hourly earnings

Oct.
1960

Oct.
1961

June
1962

(Cumulative percent)
Under
Under
Under
Under
Under
Under
Under

$ 1 . 0 0 --------------------------------$ 1 .0 5 --------------------------------$ 1 .1 5 --------------------------------$ 1 .2 0 --------------------------------$ 1 .2 5 ------ -------- ----------------$ 2 .0 0 --------------------------------$ 2 .5 0 ---------------------------------

Number o f workers (in hundreds) —
Average hourly earnings--------------* Less than

0.

(M
1

3
4
5
37
75
54
$2.14

(|)
C1)
(M

0 )

( 1)
(M
i

i

2

2

32
71

68

58
$2.23

60
$2. 24

32

5 percent.

Sandusky County, Ohio
Average hourly earnings were $1.97 for the estimated 8,300 nonsupervisory workers within the scope of the survey in June 1962.
The median was
8 cents an hour higher than the mean.
Earnings for the middle 50 percent of
the workers ranged between $ 1. 42 and $2. 57 an hour.

Factory workers, who m a d e up almost two-thirds of the area work force,
averaged $2.21 an hour.
Three-fifths of the factory workers received between
$2 and $2.80 an hour, with a fourth clustered between $2.60 and $2.80.
The
electrical machinery industry (particularly electrical appliances), employing
almost two-fifths of the factory workers, accounted for most of the manufacturing
workers concentrated within the 20-cent range.
Average hourly earnings for the nonmanufacturing industries surveyed
were 68 cents lower than those in manufacturing. Almost a sixth of the workers
earned less than $ 1 an hour; a third, less than $1. 15; and almost three-fifths,
less than $ 1, 50. Over a tenth of the workers had earnings between $ 1 and $ 1. 05
an hour, m o r e workers than at any other 5-cent wage interval. About four-fifths
of the nonfactory workers with such earnings were in retail trade.

W a g e Changes. In industries generally subject to the Fair Labor Stand­
ards Act prior to the September 1961 amendments, average hourly earnings of
$2. 19 in June 1962 were 7 cents an hour higher than the October 1961 level and
6 cents higher than the October I960 level. The proportion of subject workers
earning less than $1. 15 was reduced from 5 percent in October I960 to 1 percent
in October 1961. Workers earning $2 or m o r e an hour, however, declined from
65 to 62 percent during this period.
B y June 1962, the proportion of workers
with such earnings had risen to 66 percent.




4 2

In nonsubject industries, excluding retail trade, average hourly earnings
in June 1962 and October 1961 were 12 and 8 cents an hour, respectively, below
the $1.26 pay level of October I960.
The proportion of workers earning less
than $1 increased from 26 to 37 percent between October of I960 and 1961 and
was virtually unchanged in June 1962.
All industries except retail trade
Subject_______ ______Nonsubject

Average hourly earnings

Oct.
1960

Oct.
1961

June
1962

Oct.
1960

Oct.
1961

June
1962

(Cumulative percent)
Under
Under
Under
Under
Udder
Under
Under

$ 1 .0 0 ------ ---------- -------------------. . .
$ 1 .0 5 -----------------------------------$ 1 .1 5 -----------------------------------$ 1 . 2 0 -----------------------------------$ 1 .2 5 ----------- -------- --------------$ 2 .0 0 -----------------------------------$ 2 . 5 0 ------------------------------------

Number of workers (in hundreds)-----Average hourly earnings------------------ —
1

(i)

(*)
3
5

1
1

(? )
( )
(*)

35
70

4
5
38
69

4
34
64

64
$2.13

56
$2 . 1 2

60
$2.19

6
8

2

26
52
55
55
55
94
98

37
66

69
70
70
86

97

38
65
66

70
70
93
99

4
4
3
$1.26 $1.18 $1.14

Less than 0. 5 percent.

Whiteside County, 111.
The approximately 9, 000 nonsupervisory workers within the scope of the
survey, as a group, averaged $2.35 an hour at straight-time rates in June 1962.
The median was 9 cents an hour less than the mean.
Earnings for the middle
half of the workers extended over a $1.41 range, between $1.66 and $3.07
an hour.

Factory workers, who accounted for 7 of every 10 workers covered by
the study, averaged $2.69 an hour. M o r e than three-fourths earned $ 2 an hour
or more; better than a half, $2. 50 or more; and over a third, at least $3. M o r e
than half of the manufacturing workers in the area were employed in plants
fabricating metal products, with cutlery, handtools, and general hardware being
the major products manufactured. Average hourly earnings in this industry were
$2. 56 an hour.
The primary metals industry, which employed three-tenths of
the factory workers, had a pay level of $3.24 an hour.

In the nonmanufacturing industries surveyed, average earnings were
$1.57 an hour.
Over half of the nonfactory workers earned less than $1.50;
m o r e than one-third, less than $1.25; and about a sixth, less than $ 1 an hour.
The largest concentration of workers at a 5-cent wage interval was a tenth,
earning from $1 to $1.05 an hour. Better than half of the nonfactory workers
earning less than $ 1 and almost two-thirds at or just above the $ 1 level were
in retail trade.

W a g e Changes. In industries generally subject to the Fair Labor Stand­
ards Act prior to the 1961 amendments, average hourly earnings of $2.62 in
June 1962 were 3 cents higher than the October 1961 level and 27 cents higher
than the October I960 level. Earnings for only 3 percent of the workers in O c ­
tober 1^60 were below the $1.15 Federal m i n i m u m wage. Most of the increase




4 3

in average hourly earnings between October of I960 and 1961 was attributable
to a rise in the proportion of the higher paid workers.
For example, a fifth
of the workers earned $3 or m o r e in October I960 compared with about threetenths in October 1961. This proportion had increased to a third in June 1962.

A ll subject industries except retail trade

Average hourly earnings

Oct.
1960

Oct.
1961

June
1962

(Cumulative percent)
Under
Under
Under
Under
Under
Under
Under

$ 1 .0 0 --------------------------------$ 1 .0 5 --------------------------------$ 1 .1 5 --------------------------------$ 1 .2 0 --------------------------------$ 1 .2 5 --------------------------------$ 2 .0 0 -------- -----------------------$2. 5 0 ---------------------------------

Number of workers (in hundreds) —
Average hourly earnings--------------* Less than

0.

C1)
1

3
3
3
37
64

C1)

(*>
C1)
(*)

1
1
2

2

2

2

29
52

26
50

66

68

$2.35

$2.59

70
$2.62

5 percent.

Winona County, M i n n .
A n estimated 6, 700 nonsupervisory workers within the scope of the
survey, as a group, averaged $1.71 an hour at straight-time rates in June 1962.
The median was 7 cents lower than the mean.
The middle 50 percent of the
workers had earnings ranging between $ 1. 27 and $ 2. 09 an hour.
Factory workers, who accounted for almost three-fifths of the area work
force included in the study, averaged $ 1. 84 an hour. Seven-tenths of the workers
earned $ 1. 50 an hour or m o r e and about two-fifths $ 2 or more. Food processing
was the largest single manufacturing industry group in the area, employing 3 of
every 10 factory workers. Food workers averaged $2.01, 26 cents an hour m o r e
than the average for the other manufacturing workers.
In the nonmanufacturing industries surveyed, average
28 cents an hour less than those in manufacturing. Over half of
workers earned less than $ 1. 50 an hour, almost two-fifths less
hour, nearly three-tenths less than $ 1. 15, and about a sixth

earnings were
the nonfactory
than $ 1. 25 an
less than $ 1.

Retail trade workers, comprising better than a half of the nonmanufac­
turing work force surveyed, averaged $1.49 an hour. M o r e than a sixth of the
retail workers earned less than $ 1 an hour and almost a half less than $ 1. 25.
More than a tenth of the workers had earnings at the $1— $1.05 hourly wage interval.

W a g e Changes. In industries generally subject to the Fair Labor Stand­
ards Act prior to the September 1961 amendments, average earnings of $1.85
in June 1962 were 7 cents an hour m o r e than in October 1961 and 5 cents an
hour m o r e than in October I960. Although the pay level declined by 2 cents an
hour between October of I960 and 1961, the proportion of subject workers earning
less than $1. 15 an hour was reduced from 11 to 4 percent and the proportion




44

at or just above the $ 1. 15 Federal m i n i m u m wage increased from 3 to 10 percent.
The proportion of workers earning $1. 50 or more, however, was greater in I960
than in 1961, 67 and 64 percent, respectively. B y June 1962, the concentration
of workers at the $1. 15— $1.20 pay interval was reduced to 7 percent and the
proportion earning at least $ 1. 50 an hour had increased to 70 percent.
In nonsubject industries, excluding retail trade, average hourly earnings
fluctuated by no m o r e than 2 cents during the 20-month period covered by the
surveys. Little change occurred in the distribution of individual earnings during
this period.
In the segment of retail trade which became subject to the $ 1 Federal
m i n i m u m wage, employing a fourth of the retail workers, average hourly earn­
ings went up 11 cents between June of 1961 and 1962.
Almost a fourth of the
workers earned less than $ 1 an hour in June 1961, whereas virtually all subject
retail workers earned at least the $ 1 Federal m i n i m u m wage in June 1962. The
proportion of retail workers at the $1— $1.05 wage interval, however, did not
change significantly, 12 percent in 1961 and 14 percent in 1962, while those with
earnings from $ 1. 05 to $ 1. 25 increased from 11 to 30 percent. In the nonsubject
segment of retail trade, on the other hand, changes in the level and distribution
of earnings were relatively minor during this period.

_________Retail trade____________
Nonsubject
(including eating
Subject
and drinking places)

A ll industries except retail trade

Nonsubject

Subject
Average hourly
earnings

Oct.
1960

Oct.
1961

June
1962

Oct.
1960

Oct.
1961

June
1962

June
1961

June
1962

June
1961

June
1962

(Cumulative percent)
Under
Under
Under
Under
Under
Under
Under

$ 1 .0 0 ----------$ 1 .0 5 ----------$ 1 .1 5 -----------$ 1 .2 0 ----------$ 1 .2 5 ----------$ 2 .0 0 -----------$ 2 .5 0 -----------

Number o f workers
(in hundreds)-------Average hourly
earnings--------------1

Less than




0 .5

31
40
43
48
55
91
96

28
40
45
48
53
92
96

24
36
43
46
47
91
98

15
28
33
45
85
98

24
37
41
43
46
83
96

32
38
40
47
85
97

14
16
65

68

86

88

62
87

26
37
44
46
48
93
98

46

48

47

5

5

5

4

4

12

12

$1.80

$1.78

$1.85

$1.27

$1.28

$1.29

$1.40

$1.51

$1.47

$1.46

1

2

5

3
4
14
17

11

percent.

(*)
(l )
7

11

1

22

T a b le

1.

P e r c e n ta g e D is tr ib u t io n o f N o n s u p e r v is o r y E m p lo y e e s b y A v e r a g e S t r a ig h t -T im e H o u r ly E a r n in g s ,
and I n d u s try G r o u p s , 2 N o n m e t r o p o lit a n A r e a s , 3 South, 4 June 1962

S e le c t e d

M a jo r

M a n u fa c tu r in g
A ve rage

h o u r ly e a r n in g s

1

A ll
in d u s t r ie s

U n d e r $ 0 . 5 0 -----------------------------------------------

1.2

$ 0 . 5 0 a n d u n d e r $ 0 . 5 5 ________________
$ 0 . 5 5 a n d u n d e r $ 0 . 6 0 ________________
$ 0 . 6 0 a n d u n d e r $ 0 . 6 5 ________________
$ 0 . 6 5 a n d u n d e r $ 0 . 7 0 ________________
$ 0 . 7 0 a n d u n d e r $ 0 . 7 5 __________ - _____

1. 0

$ 0 .7 5 a n d u n d e r

$ 0 . 8 0 ________________

$ 0 .8 0 a n d u n d e r
$ 0 .8 5 a n d u n d e r
$ 0 .9 0 a n d u n d e r

$ 0 . 8 5 ________________
$ 0 . 9 0 ________________
$ 0 . 9 5 ____________ ____
$ 1 . 0 0 ________________

$ 0 .9 5 a n d u n d e r

T o tal

.5

re la te d
pro d u cts

N o n m a n u fa c t u r in g
Lum ber
and w ood
p ro d u cts

(6)

-

(6 )

(6)

(6)

.1
.1

(6)

(6)

(6)

(6)

_

.3

(*)

.1

.7

.1

1 .9
1 .3

.1
.1
.1
.1
.1

1.2
1. 6

m ill
p ro d u cts

A p p are l
and

0.2

0. 1

5 .5

T e x t ile

(6 )

1.2
.8

1.1
1.1
.6

$ 1 . 0 0 a n d u n d e r $ 1 . 0 5 ________________
$ 1 . 0 5 a n d u n d e r $ 1 . 1 0 ________________

54
321

F o o d and
k in d r e d
p ro d u cts

.6

_

.4
.5

0. 1

.3

(6)

.9
30.7

3 .4
.5

1.1

-

-

-

1. 8
1.6

0.2

_

(6)

4 .3

0. 1
.1

2 .4

(*)

_

0. 1

.1
.1

_
_

-

-

-

.3
.4

2.6
1.1

.9
.3

_

.9
4 4 .1
1 1 .4

.6

$ 1 . 2 5 ___________ _____

7 .8

1 4 .6

$ 1 .2 5 a n d u n d e r

$ 1 . 3 0 ________________

7 .1

8 .3

5 .3

8 .3

$ 1 .3 0
$ 1 .3 5
$ 1 .4 0
$ 1 .4 5

and
and
and
and

und
und
und
und

er
er
er
er

$ 1 . 3 5 ________________
$ 1 .4 0
______________
$ 1 . 4 5 ________________
$ 1 . 5 0 ________________

4 .3

5 .8
5 .8
5 .8
3 .7

4 .9
2 .3

9 .3

1 1 .4
7 .2

1 2. 8

4 .6

3 .5
3 .2

9 .1
2 .7

9 .4
7 .8

3 .9
2 .5

2 .5
1 .3

$ 1 .5 0
$ 1 .6 0
$ 1 .7 0
$ 1 .8 0

and
and
and
and

under
under
under
under

6 .7

7 .6

6.6

1 3 .0

4 .1

4 .8

4 .1

4 .6
3 .5
3 .5
2 .5

3 .8

6 .9
5 .4

2. 1
1 .4

$ 1 .9 0 a n d u n d e r

$ 1 . 6 0 ______________ _
$ 1 . 7 0 ________________
$ 1 . 8 0 -------------------------$ 1 . 9 0 ________________
$ 2 . 0 0 ________________

1.1

4 .9
2 .9

$ 2. 00 a n d u n d e r
$ 2.10 a n d u n d e r

$ 2 . 1 0 ________________
$ 2 . 2 0 ________________

2. 2
1 .4

2 .3
1 .7

1.5
1 .3

1 .7
.7

$ 2. 20 a n d u n d e r
$ 2 .3 0 a n d u n d e r
$ 2 .4 0 a n d u n d e r

$ 2 . 3 0 ________________
$ 2 . 4 0 -------------------------$ 2 . 5 0 ________________

1 .5
1 .3

1 .7
1 .4

.3

.9

1.2

1.2
1.2
.6

$ 2 .5 0
$ 2 .6 0
$ 2 .7 0
$ 2 .8 0

under
under
under
under

$ 2 . 6 0 -------------------------$ 2 . 7 0 — ................ ......
$ 2 . 8 0 ________________
$ 2 .9 0
______________

1.2
.8
1. 0
1.1

.4
.3

(6)
(6 )
(6)
(*)

$ 2 .9 0 a n d u n d e r

$ 3 . 0 0 ________________

.9

1.2
1. 0
1.2
1. 0
1. 0

$ 3 . 0 0 a n d o v e r _________ _______ _______

4 .0

3 .4

.5

100. 0

1 00. 0

100. 0

N um ber of w orke rs
( i n t h o u s a n d s ) ________________________

3, 118

1 __________

$ 1.49

1 ,7 7 3
$ 1 .5 7

241
$ 1 .3 6

and
and
and
and

A ve rage

1

h o u r ly e a r n in g s

E x c lu d e s

p r e m iu m

p a y fo r o v e r tim e

1.9

.1
.1

.1
.1
.1

5 3 .1
9 .2

p o r ta t io n
a n d p u b lic
u t ilit ie s

-

( 6)
4 4 .7
1 3 .8

and re a l
e sta te

0 .7

0 .3

2 .7

0. 1

.2
.2

.2
.1

2 .5
1 .5
3 .2

( 6)

-

.1

.1
.1

2.1
2. 2

.5

1.2

.8

.5

.9

.1

5 .6
3 .3
3 .1

.5

.4
.4

3 .3
1 .5

2. 2

2. 2

2 .5

1.2

-

(6)

1 1 .4

.1

2.1

1.0

3 .0
8 .3

_

in s u r a n c e ,

tra d e

_

(6)

2.8

R e ta il

.5
.3

_
_
_

_

.1

_
_

F in a n c e ,
W h o le s a le
tra d e

.6

.4
( 6)

.2

( 6)
.5

.8
.2
.2
.8

.5

1 6.9
3 .0

2.8

.7

(6)
4 .5
.5

1 .5
9 .8
3 .2

1.2

4 .3

3 4 .1

4 .6

1 .3
1 3.7

(6)
( 6)

.5

.7

2 .9

6. 1

2.6

6 .4

9 .6
8 .7
5 .3
3 .1

1.1

5 .5
2 .4

1 .4

5 .1

8 .7

.5

2.0

3 .5

5 .4
2 .4

7 .0

3 .1

.2

2. 6
1.6

3 .1
2 .4
1 .4

6. 0

2. 0

.3
.5
.5

3 .8
1 .7

.7

2. 6

2. 1
1.2

9 .6
5 .1

6. 6

1 .3

3 .6

.9
.5

1.0

1.1

.9
.5
1 7 .6

5 .6
3 .4

1 .5

6 .7
3 .4

.4

1 .4

1 0 .5

3 .3
2 .7
1 .5

.4

1.2

.8

.1
.2
.1

.3

.5

.3

.5
.5

12.1
11.0
6. 1

1 .3
1 .5
3 .2

11.8

( 6)

.2
.2

.1

.1

.3

.3

(6)
(6)

.2
(*)

(6)

(6)

.1
.1
.1

(6)

.7
.5
.5

6 .4
4 .6

2 .4
1 .5

2.1
1.1
1.1
1.0
.5

5 .6
2 .3

1.2

2 .9

.5

(6)

1 .4

.6
1.2
.8

1.2

1 .5
2 .3

4 .6
2 .5

2 .9
2 .3

8 .5

6. 1

1. 6

5 .2
3 .2

4 .2

4 .9
3 .2

6. 2

3 .7

2 .5

8 .7

2.0
1.6

2.1

1 .9

5 .0
2 .4

3 .6
1 .4

2 .3
1 .3

1 .9

1 .5
2 .4

.7
.5
.3

2.1

1 .4

1. 0
1. 0

7 .7

2.6
1. 6
1. 6

.7
.4

1 .7

.8

1.1
.6

2 .9
.7

2 .3
3 .9

1. 8
.1

1.1
6 .4

4 .9
4 .3

.3
.4

8.0

2 .4

.1

.3
.5
.3
.3

.8

.3
.5

.1

.1

.2

.3

11.2

4 .6

5 2 .0

7 .9

1.2

1 .9

1. 6

100. 0

100. 0

1 00. 0

1 00. 0

1 00. 0

1 00. 0

1 00. 0

1 00. 0

100. 0

1 00. 0

1 00. 0

410
$ 1 .4 6

237
$ 1.27

141

72

89
$ 2 .7 2

150
$ 1 .8 7

117

$ 1 .3 0

63
$ 2 .2 4

1, 3 4 5

$ 1 .2 7

$ 1 .3 9

718
$ 1 .2 4

75
$ 1 .5 4

_______ L i ) ___

and fo r w o rk on w ee ke n d s,

2 .7

M in in g

2 .3
2 .7

$ 1 .2 0 a n d u n d e r

2. 1

-

_
_

1 5.6
5 .6

1.6

0.1

T o t a l5

_

.5
8 .4
6 .7

3 .5
3 .0

a llie d
p ro d u cts

_
_
_

$ 1 . 1 5 -------------------------$ 1 . 2 0 ________________

2.8

T ran s -

P a p e r and

.

$ 1 .1 0 a n d u n d e r
$ 1 .1 5 a n d u n d e r

4 .6
4 .4

F u r n itu r e
and
fix t u r e s

(6)

(*)

.2

1.1
.6
.6
21.2

(6)

(6)

.4

In d u s t r y D iv is io n s

h o lid a y s ,

a n d la te

$ 1.39

s h ifts .

2 T h e 195 7 r e v is e d e d it io n o f th e S t a n d a r d In d u s t r i a l C l a s s i f i c a t i o n M a n u a l p r e p a r e d b y th e B u r e a u o f th e B u d g e t w a s u s e d in c l a s s i f y i n g e s t a b lis h m e n t s b y in d u s t r y d i v is i o n a n d g r o u p .
M a j o r i n d u s t r y d i v i s i o n s e x c lu d e d f r o m th e s u r v e y w e r e a g r ic u lt u r e , c o n t r a c t c o n s t r u c t io n , a n d g o v e r n m e n t .
A l s o e x c lu d e d w e r e p e t r o le u m a n d n a t u r a l g a s f r o m th e m in in g g r o u p ; r a ilr o a d s
f r o m th e t r a n s p o r t a t i o n g r o u p ; e a t in g a n d d r in k in g p la c e s e x c lu d e d f r o m
r e t a il t r a d e o n a r e g io n a l b a s i s b u t in c lu d e d f o r in d iv id u a l a r e a s ; n o n p r o fit r e l ig io u s ,
c h a r it a b le ,
e d u c a t io n a l, a n d
h u m a n e o r g a n iz a t io n s f r o m th e s e r v i c e s g r o u p .
3
e x c lu d e
ce n tra l

4
T e xas,

5
6

N o n m e t r o p o l i t a n a r e a s a s u s e d i n t h i s s t u d y , r e f e r to a l l c o u n t ie s n o t d e f in e d b y t h e B u r e a u o f t h e B u d g e t
t h o s e c o u n t ie s c o n t a in in g a t le a s t 1 c e n t r a l c it y o f 5 0 ,0 0 0 p o p u la t io n a n d t h o s e c o u n t ie s a r o u n d s u c h c it ie s
c it y .
T h e S o u t h in c lu d e d th e S t a t e s o f
V ir g in ia ,
an d W e st V ir g in ia .
In c lu d e s i n d u s t r ie s in a d d it io n
L e s s t h a n 0 .0 5 p e r c e n t .

NOTE:

A la b a m a ,

to

th o se

A rk a n sa s,

sh ow n

D e la w a r e ,

F lo r id a ,

s e p a r a t e ly .

B e c a u s e o f ro u n d in g , su m s o f in d iv id u a l it e m s m ay not eq u a l 100.




G e o r g ia ,

K e n tu ck y,

L o u isia n a ,

a s S ta n d a rd M e tr o p o lita n S t a t is t ic a l A r e a s .
T h u s , n o n m e t r o p o lit a n a r e a s
w h ic h a r e m e t r o p o l i t a n in c h a r a c t e r a n d e c o n o m i c a l l y in t e g r a t e d w it h th e

M a ry la n d ,

M is s is s ip p i,

N o r th C a r o lin a ,

O k la h o m a ,

So u th

C a r o lin a ,

T e n n e sse e ,

OS
T a b le 2.

P e r c e n t a g e D is tr ib u t io n o f N o n s u p e r v is o r y E m p lo y e e s b y A v e r a g e S t r a ig h t -T im e H o u r ly E a r n in g s , 1 S e le c t e d I n d u s try G ro u p s , 2
S e le c te d N o n m e t r o p o lit a n A r e a s , 3 South, June 1962
B arto w

and C herokee

C o u n t ie s ,

A ve rage

U n d e r $ 0 . 50

h o u r ly e a r n in g s

_

_

_

_

_

1

A ll
in d u s t r ie s

__

M anu­
f a c t u r in g

_

2. 2

_

.6
.6

$ 0 . 6 0 a n d u n d e r $ 0 . 6 5 ______________
$ 0 . 6 5 a n d u n d e r $ 0 . 7 0 ______________
$ 0 . 7 0 a n d u n d e r $ 0 . 7 5 ______________

.
. 3
. 2

$ 0 . 7 5 a n d u n d e r $ 0 . 8 0 ______________
$ 0 . 8 0 a n d u n d e r $ 0 . 8 5 ___ - _________
$ 0. 85 a n d u n d e r $0. 9 0 —
$ 0 . 9 0 a n d u n d e r $ 0 . 9 5 -----------------------

. 8
. 1
. 3
. 8

-

$

1.

2 5 a n d u n d e r $ 1 . 3 0 ----------------------

8.
6.

$ 1 . 3 0 a n d u n d e r $ 1 . 3 5 ----------------------$ 1 . 3 5 a n d u n d e r $ 1 . 4 0 ----------------------$ 1 . 4 0 a n d u n d e r $ 1 . 4 5 ______________

7
3
5. 1
4. 2

9. 1
8. 2
5. 3
4. 5

$ 1 .4 5

a n d u n d e r $ 1 . 5 0 -----------------------

5. 7

7.

$ 1 . 5 0 a n d u n d e r $ 1 . 6 0 ----------------------$ 1 . 6 0 a n d u n d e r $ 1 . 7 0 ______________

16. 8
3. 0

$ 1 .7 0

a n d u n d e r $ 1 . 8 0 -----------------------

$ 1 .8 0

and und er $

$

1.90

and und er $

1 . 90 ----------------------2 . 00 -----------------------

$
$

2 . 00
2 . 10

and und er $
and under $

2 . 1 0 ----------------------2 . 20 -----------------------

$ 2 . 2 0 a n d u n d e r $ 2 . 3 0 ----------------------$ 2 . 3 0 a n d u n d e r $ 2 . 4 0 ----------------------$ 2 . 4 0 a n d u n d e r $ 2 . 5 0 ----------------------$ 2 . 5 0 a n d u n d e r $ 2 . 6 0 ----------------------$ 2 . 6 0 a n d u n d e r $ 2 . 7 0 ----------------------$ 2 . 7 0 a n d u n d e r $ 2 . 8 0 ----------------------$ 2 . 8 0 a n d u n d e r $ 2 . 90 -----------------------

3.
2.
.

1.8
.9
. 3
. 4
.

.

$ 2 . 9 0 a n d u n d e r $ 3 . 0 0 -----------------------

.

S ee fo o t n o t e s at en d o f t a b le .




8

. 3
. 2
. 2

$ 3 . 0 0 a n d o v e r ---------------------------------------

N um ber of w ork e rs
( i n h u n d r e d s ) --------------------------------------A v e r a g e h o u r ly e a r n in g s 1 —
------

6
2
8

1

_

4. 0

4.

6

2. 2

_

_

_

2. 1

2. 8

.7

_

.6
1. 1

_

2

_
_

.7

1.0

1. 3
. 1

. 5
. 5

_
(5)

0. 1

2. 9
5. 0
2. 6
2. 1

4. 0
3. 7

8

_
_
_

.

1.0

16. 3
5. 6
5. 0
3. 7
3. 8

1. 2

_

_

.7

_
_

_
_

5. 6
3. 6
4 .6
2. 8
2. 1

9. 0
4. 1
5. 8
4. 4

2
2
. 6

10. 6

3. 4

9. 5
2. 8

6

.

1

1. 5

13.

6

2 3 .9
2. 9
6. 6
8. 6
4. 8

8. 2
1. 6

8

2. 8

.8
. 4

. 5

1.6

1. 1

7. 5
4. 1

6 .9
4. 4

.
.

.9
3. 5

8

1. 3

1. 1

_

.9
1. 9

.
_

2. 3
1. 2
.4

1. 1

.9

-

15. 2
1. 4
5. 1
2. 6

9. 3
2. 3
4 .9
3. 2

5. 2
3. 7
3. 1

3. 8
4. 4
3. 8

1. 3
1. 2

1 .9
1. 1

8. 0

5. 2

1 .7
2 .4

1. 3

7. 8
3. 1
7. 4

8. 5
2. 9
8. 6

2. 5

4. 2

1 .9

7.

2 .9

2. 3

2. 6

8
8. 8

9. 5

1. 1

3 .9
3. 4

9. 1
10. 5

10. 8

11.6

2. 5
2. 5

6

15. 1

17. 7

4. 2
3. 5

7 .9
4. 3

9. 1
4. 9
5. 6

19. 6
10. 0

5. 2
3. 1

5. 2
6. 2

2. 0
1 .9

.

1. 2

1. 5

.7

. 8
. 1
1. 0

3. 2
1. 3

1. 5
1 .4

2. 1
. 6
. 2
. 1

1. 2

.7
1. 6
.
.

6
1

-

6
.6
. 6
. 2

. 4
-

-

-

. 3

_

_

100. 0

100. 0

100. 0

100. 0

48
$ 1 .4 0

26
$ 1 .3 1

$

1.6

4. 4

8. 5
2. 4

4. 3
3. 3
3. 3
2. 2

4.

1.0
. 8
.9

1.8

1.0

4. 2

4 .9

5. 5

.7
. 1
.3

. 3
. 1
. 2

1. 1
. 1

1.6
. 1

1 .7
. 7

2. 0

1 .9
. 2

.4
.4

-

2 .9

2. 1

.

.3
.2
. 1

.

. 7

. 3

1
2

( 5)
( 5)

( 5)

.6
. 3
. 2

. 7

.4
-

. 5
. 3
. 2

.
-

1

-

_

1

100. 0

14

48

1.22

$ 1 . 19

100. 0

. 3

100. 0

24
$

1 . 22

.

1 . 16

1

.

1

. 5
. 5
. 2
. 2
.
.

1
2

0

( 5)
. 1
.

1

100. 0

100. 0

100. 0

14

140
$ 1 .4 4

$ 1 . 51

24
$

1
2
. 2
. 2

.
.

. 3

.

8

-

.8

( 5)

4.

$

1.11

111

1. 6
1. 2
1. 0
. 2

. 3
(5)
. 1

3. 0

2. 2

9 .9
5. 7
7. 6
4. 5

-

74

1 .9
5

8.

7
2
0
2

-

_

2

.

8 .9
3. 7
5. 0

1.0

(5)
-

. 9
1. 0
40. 7

15.
3.
3.
4.

.4

. 7
.

1. 7
1. 3
1. 1
2. 4

6. 1
4. 4
4. 1

. 7

.

10. 0
2. 2

_

5 .4

_

2. 6

3 .4

1

7

1. 0
.6

. 9
. 2
1. 1
1 .4

0. 1

3. 0

6. 4
2. 8
1. 8

.
-

6

2. 8

R e ta il
tra d e

1 .4

2 .9
2. 5

8

3. 5
3. 6
2. 6

1. 1
2. 3

8
3
3
3

7
3
3

T o t a l4

.9
1. 1
. 7

5.

9 .4

( 5)

.9
13.
5.
3.
2.
2.

9

6. 4

1 .4
24. 7

20. 9
2. 8
3. 6
2. 0

1. 3
. 3

.
.
1.
.
.

0. 1

4. 4

2

$ 1 .3 7

.4

1

9

fa c t u r in g

_

.6

7
5
3

tr ie s

.4

.

7.
2.
4.
3.
2.

in d u s ­

0. 8

1. 2
3. 0

1. 9
4 .6

tra d e

1 .9
.7
1 .3

.

14. 4
3. 5

R e ta il

2 .9

.4
.7
2. 3

1 .4

T o t a l4

1 .9
. 8
1 .7

-

19. 8
10. 2

T e x t ile
m ill
p ro d u cts

1. 9

1.2

1 7 .9
7. 8

4

T o ta l

. 5
. 1
. 3
.4
1 .4

7. 3
3. 0
2. 3
1 .4

0. 3
-

in d u s ­
tr ie s

Nonm anu­
f a c t u r in g
M anu­

0. 2

. 9

5. 0
. 7
2. 6

R e ta il
tra d e

A ll

1. 2

2. 9

$ 1 . 0 0 a n d u n d e r $ 1 . 0 5 ----------------------$ 1 . 0 5 a n d u n d e r $ 1 . 1 0 ____
_______
$ 1 . 1 0 a n d u n d e r $ 1 . 1 5 ------- ------------

A ll

N onm anu­
f a c t u r in g

1. 0

2. 3

-

T o ta l4

C h a r lo t t e a n d S a r a s o t a
C o u n t ie s , F la .

A la .

M anu­
f a c t u r in g

8

_

(5)

C o u n t ie s ,

M anu­
fa c t u r in g

C h am b e rs and Lee

N. C.

. 6
.7
1 .7

3.

-

(5)

a n d u n d e r $ 1 . 2 0 ----------------------a n d u n d e r $ 1 . 2 5 -----------------------

in d u s t r ie s

. 8
.7

-

a n d W a s h in g t o n
Nonm anu­
fa c t u r in g

A ll

R e ta il
tra d e

1 .7

$ 0 . 9 5 a n d u n d e r $ 1 . 0 0 ___ __________

$ 1 .1 5
$ 1 .2 0

T o t a l4

2
2
6

.
.

T y r r e ll,
C o u n t ie s ,

Nonm anu­
f a c t u r in g

0. 8

$ 0 . 5 0 a n d u n d e r $ 0 . 5 5 ______________
$ 0 . 5 5 a n d u n d e r $ 0 . 6 0 ______________

B e a u fo rt,

Ga.

1

2. 6
. 2
2. 6
3. 8

1.6

1. 1

. 7

11. 0
2. 8

1 1 .9
2. 7
4. 3

3. 1
5. 1

3.

8

1 .7

3.

6

3. 0

8 .4
3 .4
3. 7

10. 9
3. 8
4. 8

7
3
5

6. 8
3. 1
4. 1

3. 5
2. 3

8

2. 3

7.
3.
3.
3.
2.

3. 1
2. 3

8.

3

2. 8

8. 8

1. 7
2. 5

5. 0
4 .6

6

3. 9
2. 7

.9
. 1

_

.9
1. 4

2. 5

10. 9
5. 6

3

8 .9
4. 6

6 .4

4. 9
4. 2

3 .9
3. 8

3. 8
2. 5

3. 3
1. 8

3. 8
2. 3

3. 1
1. 7

1. 9
1. 7

2. 8

1. 7

3. 1

1. 3

2. 1
2. 1
1. 1

1.0

1.2

1. 0

1 .4

1. 1

1. 0

. 9
. 4
. 0

.9
. 3
. 5

3. 0
3. 4
3. 3
1 .9

1
2

. 1
. 5

1. 5

1. 8

2 .9
5. 5

. 7

. 5
.

5 .8
1. 0

(5)

.6
. 8

1. 5
1. 0

. 5

.

6

1.2

.4

_

. 3

.3

3. 0

4. 4

2. 6

100. 0

100. 0

100.0

100. 0

100. 0

100. 0

100. 0

94
$ 1 . 52

29
16

14

$

$ 1 .0 7

99
$ 1 .5 2

$ 1 .8 3

80
$ 1 .4 5

40
$ 1 .4 6

.
.

_

1.

1

20

1

.

2

3 .9

T a b le 2.

P e r c e n ta g e D is tr ib u t io n o f N o n s u p e r v is o r y E m p lo y e e s b y A v e r a g e S t r a ig h t -T im e H o u r ly E a r n in g s , 1 S e le c t e d In d u stry G r o u p s , 2
S e le c t e d N o n m e t r o p o lit a n A r e a s , 3 South, June 1962— C o n tin u ed
Cooke and G ra y so n
C o u n t ie s , T e x .

A ve rage

h o u r ly e a r n in g s

1

M anu­
f a c t u r in g

A ll
in d u s t r ie s

T o t a l4

F lo r e n c e

Food
and
k in d r e d

C o u n ty ,

G a s to n C o u n ty ,
N .C .

S. C .
N onra a n u fa c tu r in g

T o ta l4

N onm anu­
f a c t u r in g

A ll

R e ta il
tra d e

in d u s t r ie s

M anu­
f a c t u r in g

N onm anu­
fa c t u r in g

A ll

T o t a l4

R e ta il
trad e

9. 1

12. 6

5. 2

7. 7

in d u s ­
t r ie s

M anu­
fa c t u r in g

4

T o tal

A ll

R e ta il
trad e

in d u s ­
t r ie s

lla r r is o n C o u n ty ,
W. Va.
ISf o n m a n u
a c t u r in c
M anu­
f a c t u r in g
T o t a l4 M in in g

R e ta il
tra d e

p ro d u cts

U n d e r $ 0 . 5 0 _____________________________

1 .9

0. 2

_

3 .4

4. 7

4 .4

_

$ 0 . 5 0 a n d u n d e r $ 0 . 5 5 ________________

1. 9
. 8
2. 0

_

_

3. 5

6. 0

2. 5

.

_
_

_
_

$ 0 . 6 5 a n d u n d e r $ 0 . 7 0 ________________
$0. 70 an d u n d e r $0. 75—
---------------

1 .7

-

-

1. 0

“

$ 0 . 7 5 a n d u n d e r $ 0 . 8 0 -------------------------$ 0 . 8 0 a n d u n d e r $ 0 . 8 5 --------------------------

2. 2

_

_

1. 3
. 7

(5)

-

2. 1
. 8

-

-

$ 0 . 5 5 a n d u n d e r $ 0 . 6 0 ________________
$ 0 . 6 0 a n d u n d e r $ 0 . 6 5 ________________

$ 0 . 8 5 a n d u n d e r $ 0 . 9 0 -------------------------$ 0 . 9 0 a n d u n d e r $ 0 . 9 5 ________________
$

0. 9 5

and under $

1 . 0 0 ________________

$ 1 . 0 0 a n d u n d e r $ 1 . 0 5 -------------------------$ 1 . 0 5 a n d u n d e r $ 1 . 1 0 -------------------------$ 1 . 1 0 a n d u n d e r $ 1 . 1 5 ______________ _
$ 1 .1 5 and u n d er $

1 . 2 0 ______________

_
$ 1 . 2 0 a n d u n d e r $ 1 . 2 5 ________________

$ 1 . 2 5 a n d u n d e r $ 1. 3 0 ________________
$ 1 . 3 0 a n d u n d e r $ 1 . 3 5 ________________

2. 0

1. 5
12. 3

5. 2
1 .4
1. 3

7. 3

8

5. 2

.

6 .4
2. 6

2. 9
2. 1

18. 9
8. 4

27. 9
13. 7

6. 3

7. 6
4. 0
4. 1
2. 7

1. 8
1.2

5. 3
2. 0
3 .4

5 .9
2. 0
2. 7

7 .9
4 .7
4. 0

1 1 .7

2 .9
2. 1

3. 7

2. 9
2. 5

4. 6
3. 7
3. 2
3. 1

2. 8
2. 8
1.8

5. 3
3. 8
2. 7
2. 1

1.8

1. 3

2. 5

1 .9
3. 0

8.2

2. 5

1. 1

1.6

1 6 .4

3.

3. 8
3 .4

4. 5

$
$

2 . 00
2 . 10

and under $
and und er $

2 . 1 0 ________________
2 . 20 __ ____ ____ —

3. 3
4. 0
2. 2

4. 3
5. 5

$ 2 . 4 0 a n d u n d e r $ 2 . 5 0 --------------------------

2.6
1.8

$ 2 . 5 0 a n d u n d e r $ 2 . 6 0 ________________
$ 2 . 6 0 a n d u n d e r $ 2 . 7 0 ________________

1. 6
1. 0

$ 2 . 7 0 a n d u n d e r $ 2 . 8 0 ________________
$ 2 . 8 0 a n d u n d e r $ 2 . 90 ________________

1. 4

__

_____________________

N u m b e r o f w o r k e r s (in h u n d re d s ) —
A v e r a g e h o u r l y e a r n i n g s 1 _________

. . 5

.6

2 .3
3 .4
3. 1

6. 6

1 . 90 — _______ __
2 . 0 0 ________________

8

.4
. 3
.3

2 .4

and under $
and under $

a n d o v e r __________________________

1. 7
1. 3

. 2
. 7
.4
. 3

15. 5
2. 8
4. 0

1 . 80
1.90

T o t a l—

1. 7

0. 6

9. 3
2 .4
2. 3

$
$

00

4. 4
3. 3
1 .4
5. 3
1 .4

1. 4
1 .9

-

4. 5
3. 8

$3.

4. 0
2. 5

_
_
_

0. 4
.4
-

4. 5
3. 8
4. 8

$ 2 . 9 0 a n d u n d e r $ 3 . 0 0 -----------------------

1 .9

. 9

-

a n d u n d e r $ 1 . 5 0 ________________

$ 2 . 2 0 a n d u n d e r $ 2 . 3 0 _________ ______
$ 2 . 3 0 a n d u n d e r $ 2 . 4 0 ________________

. 7

1. 1
1. 1

1.0
. 2
.6
19.2

5. 5
1 .4

_________
$ 1 . 5 0 a n d u n d e r $ 1 . 6 0 ____
$ 1 . 6 0 a n d u n d e r $ 1 . 7 0 ________________
$ 1 . 7 0 a n d u n d e r $ 1 . 8 0 ________________

$ 1 .4 5

2. 4
4 .9
2 .9
2. 6

1. 3
3. 8
1. 4

2 .9
3. 7
2. 8
2. 2

$ 1 . 3 5 a n d u n d e r $ 1 . 4 0 ________________
______
$ 1 . 4 0 a n d u n d e r $ 1 . 4 5 _______

1.6
3. 7
3. 1

1 1 .7
13. 0

5. 2

1. 5

2. 5

1

.9
. 0

(5)

.9

.8

7. 0
4 .6
3 .4

2. 2
1.6
3. 4
2. 8
2. 3

1.6
2. 1
8. 5
2. 0

1 .9
3. 1

2. 1
2. 4
3. 5

2. 8
3. 2
2. 4
2. 6
13. 5

(5 )

0. 1
. 1
. 1
(5)
. 1

1.0
. 2
. 2
. 3
. 2
3. 2

6

2. 9
2. 2

.

5. 1
2. 1

7. 7

3. 9
2. 2

2. 2
1.8

9.
8.

3. 4
2. 5

1. 5
1 .7
1 .4

10. 1
6. 5

1. 9
9 .4
2. 7

3. 5

1 .4

4. 3
4. 1
2. 2

6 .4
3. 6
3. 3
2. 3

3. 8
3. 2

1 .9

1 .9
2. 3
2. 1

.9

2. 4

1 .7

. 7
5 .7

8
1

9. 9

8 .9
6. 3
7. 7

2
1.6

3.

( 5)

0. 1

( 5)

5

_

8
2
6

3
_

_

H

0. 8

(5)
. 3

1.2

1.6
1.8

1. 9
1. 1

3. 2

.9
.9
. 5

1.8

. 4

9
6
2

4. 6
.7

1. 4

. 3

1 .4

10. 9
9. 0

4. 7
3. 8
3. 4
3. 6

3.
4.

8
6

3. 4

4. 3

1.2
1 .4

8
1. 8
2. 0

7 .4
.2

1. 9
3. 8
1 .3

.
.
.
.

2. 8
1 .4

1 .9
1.8
.8

5. 2

4. 1
2. 7
2. 3
2. 2

1 1 .3
1 1 .5

8

. 9

. 7

3. 1
2. 5

1 .4

2. 9
2. 1

2. 9
1 .4

1 .7

5 .9

9.

4. 8
3. 8
3. 0
2. 8
2. 4

1 .9

3. 6
3. 3
6 .4

4. 5
4. 8

2. 7

3. 1

2. 1

1. 9

10. 9
10. 6

2. 1

1.0
1.8
.6
. 1

1. 9
. 7

9

3. 5
. l
. 3

1.6
1.2
.6
. 5

1 .7

. 3

.

2

1.0

. 3

2 .4
1. 5
1. 7

2. 3

. 5
. 5

. 2
. 7
(S)
.4

.
.
.
.

. 2
. 5
. 2

.4
.4

. 3
. 4
. 5

. 3
. 1
. 1

1. 2
1. 6
3. 4

. 3
. 2
. 2

( 5)

1. 1

116

53

$ 1 .4 9

$ 1 .6 9

1 .9

. 9

1 00 . 0

100. 0

13

63
$ 1 . 33

$

$

2 . 01

1.

29
18

.9

100. 0
1 01
$ 1 . 31

1

1. 2

.

6

1. 3

4. 6
2. 6
2. 4
2. 2

. 5

2 .9

2. 5

1. 6

. 3

100. 0

5.

5. 4

5. 3
4. 0
3. 6
2. 9
1. 6

1 .3

1.8

1.2

9
5
3
3

3. 1
4. 0

6

8

100. 0

.

9. 7
6. 8
8. 6
3. 3

7.

.

1.8

1. 5

21.0

. 9

. 3

100. 0

-

1.2

.6

2

8.

0. 1

3. 0
1. 9
1. 2
1.2

.

0. 1

5. 1

1 .3
.4

. 2
1.0

3. 8
2. 5
2. 3

(*)

1. 8
1 .7
. 9
. 8

_
_

(S)
. 1

. 5

( 5)
. 3

4. 3

2. 7

1. 5
1. 1

.4
. 5

1.8

2. 3

8

. 3

.6
.8

3. 3

3. 9

1 .9
1 .3
. 7

.7
. 2

2. 8
-

5. 1
4. 1

1.8
1. 1

9
3
5
4

1. 0

8. 2
3. 2

1 .7
1. 1
.4

2
1
2

-

6
2

.7

.
.
.

1. 5
1 .7

(5)
. 1
7.
6.

1 .4

.9
. 5

. 3

_

9
1. 3
1. 6

26.
3.
6.

1.2
1.6

1.2

(*)

14. 7
3. 3
3. 3

2 .7
1 .5

5
3
3
5

4. 9
. 5

7. 9

9 .9
7. 8

.
.
.
.

2. 5

2. 1

5. 7
1. 1
1. 3

4. 5

.8

1. 4

1. 1
. 1
. 8

1. 1

3. 1
4. 2
2. 1

1. 1

0. 7

.9
. 5

-

( 5)
( 5)

0. 6
. 6

1.2
. 9
. 2

1

7

.

(5)

1. 1

.

.

.

5. 9
3. 2
4. 2
3. 7

1
1

1.2
6

4. 7

3. 9
3. 5

4. 5
5. 8
5. 2
5. 4

3. 0

4. 3

1. 3
1 .7
3. 9
1. 7
2. 7

1. 6
1. 7

1 .9
4. 0
3. 8
2 .4

.

1. 1

.6
.6

. 5
.3
. 1
3.

.

8

.

3
2

1

.9

16. 1

15. 3

58. 2

100. 0

100. 0

100. 0

100. 0

100. 0

100. 0

100.0

100. 0

100. 0

100. 0

100. 0

100. 0

52
$ 1 . 38

49
$ 1 .2 3

25
$ 1 . 13

331
$ 1 .4 7

273
$ 1 .4 7

58
$ 1 .4 8

27
$ 1. 23

128

62
$ 2 . 52

66

$

$ 1 .8 1

14
$2. 74

$

.

1 .7

.

1

3.

1 5 .7

2 . 16

1 .9

23

1 . 26

S e e fo o t n o t e s a t e n d o f ta b le .




<1

fc
00

f a b le

A v e r a g e h o u r ly

Under

_

$ 0 .5 5
$ 0 .6 0

and u n d e r
and u n d e r

.$ 0 .6 0
. $ 0 . 6 5 __

$ 0 .6 5
$ 0 .7 0

a nd u n d e r
a nd u n d e r

$ 0 .7 0
$ 0 .7 5

$ 0 .7 5
$ 0 .8 0

a nd u n d e r
a nd u n d e r

$ 1 .0 0 an d u n d e r
$ 1 .0 5 a n d u n d e r
$ 1 .1 0 an d u n d e r
$ 1 .1 5 an d u n d e r

.

$ 1 . 0 5 ______ ________
$ 1 . 1 0 ___________ ____
$ 1 . 1 5 — ___ —
— —
$ 1 .2 0 _
$ 1 .2 5 _
$ 1 .3 0

___

$ 1 .4 5

and u n d er

$ 1 .5 0 _

$ 1 .5 0

and under

$ 1 . 6 0 _______________

$ 1 .6 0 a n d u n d e r
$ 1 .7 0 an d u n d e r

$ 1 .7 0
$ 1 .8 0

$ 1 .8 0 an d u n d e r
$ 1 .9 0 a n d u n d e r

$ 1 .9 0
$ 2 . 0 0 -------------------------

$ 2 .0 0

_

2 .4

1 .7

2 .1
.1

_

9 .3
.4

0
(5 )
0 .1
-

1 .0
1 .4

T o t a lN u m b e r o f w o r k e r s (in h u n d r e d s )—
A v e r a g e h o u r l y e a r n i n g s 1 ________ __

S ee fo o t n o t e s at end o f ta b le .




.9
2 .8

.6

1 .1

_

.3

-

8 .2
3 .3
2 .5

1 .2

1 .1
1 .0

(5 )
.2

.9

“

l.t
.8
.8
.3

3 .6
1 .2
1 .1
4 .1

0 .1
-

4 .8
1 .4

.4

1 1 .4
2 .0
2 .8
8 .2

1 .2
2 .8
2 8 .5

2 .9
1 .8
1 3 .4

.1
.1

1 .5

3 .7
3 .4
4 .2

1 .7
1 1.8

1 .0
1 .0
1 4.3

Nonm anu­
fa c t u r in g

(5 )

(5)

2 .0

1 .9

_

_

9 .0

_

_

_

_

-

-

.9
.3

4 .2
1 .3

-

-

1 .2
.7
1 .2

0 .1
(5)

(?)
(5)

1 .0

.1

0 .1

.8
1 .0

(5 )
.4

.7
.7

(5)
.2

.1
.7
.1

1 5 .1
2 .6
3 .2
2 .1

1 0 .8

1 .0

1 .1
2 .5
1 1 .8

1 8 .5

.7
1 .2

1 .4
1 .1
1 .5
1 .2
1 .3

1 .0
.5
1 .0

-

-

(5 )
-

0 .1
-

- -

-

4 .7
2 .3
4 .6

_

.

1 .8

0 .2
.4

2 .9
2 .3

1 .0

A
.8
.8
.7

.1

.2
1 .1
.2

.4

.9

.6

.2

.5

1 .9

1 .5
1 .0

1 6 .0
1 .4

3 .1

1 .2

2 .1

1 0 .0

1 .7
2 1 .3

3 .3
8 .1

.8
.7
2 3 .0

3 .1
2 .0
9 .2

.2
.3

.6
.6

2 6 .9
9 .3

3 7 .9
1 3 .3

8 .7

9 .4

3 .2

(5 )

3 .2

2 .9

3 .3

2 .3

1 .9

4 .2

5 .6

5 .8

3 .5

8 .7

1 .0
.1
.1

2 .4

3 .7
1 .6
1 .2

4 .1
3 .0

2 .0

5 .5

3 .1
5 .0

3 .8
5 .5

4 .5
4 .3

1 .8

.3

3 .1

2 .9

3 .5
2 .1

3 .9
2 .2

3 .8

.2

3 .1
2 .1

3 .4

1 .9

1 .5
1 .1

4 .8
2 .8
3 .0
2 .4

8 .1
3 .8
4 .1

1 .6
1 .2

6 .9
5 .7
1 0 .1
6 .5
3 .3

6.6

2 .9
1 .8

3 .8
2 .1
2 .3

1 .7

1 .8

1 .9

3 .4
1 .4

6 .8
2 .0
2 .5
1 .2
.8

.4

4 .0

5 .0

5 .7

4 .2

3 .9
3 .3
2 .3

3 .6
3 .2
3 .0

2 .8
2 .5
2 .1

2 .8

3 .6
2 .7

3 .8
3 .7
3 .0
4 .3
3 .2

3 .1
1 .7

1.1

3 .5
5 .8
5 .0
3 .0

2 .7
4 .1

2 .6

3 .1
3 .2

4 .7
3 .6

7 .1

.1
.1

1. 8

2 .5
1 .0
.4

1.1
.5

3 .9
3 .3

2 .7
1 .2

1 .3

1 .9

.5
.2

1 .9

.8

1 2 .3
4 .6

4 .3
3 .4

3 .9
3 .3
1 .5

1 .8

6 .1
2 .5
5 .4

1 8 .9
6 .7

2 .3
1 .4

2 .8
6 .3
2 .0

2 .6
2 .4

1 .2

3 .1

2 .8

3 .4

1 .5

.7

.6

1 .8
2 .2
2 .2

1 .8
2 .4

2 .2

1 .5

1 .2
1 .0

1 .3
1 .2

.7
.3
.2

1 .7

.6
.7
.3

.3
.5
.6
.4

2 .4

2 .6
.6
.4
.4

.3
.3

2 .0
.5

.1

1.1

.2

.3

(5)

.9
.9
.8
.4

1 .8
.7
1 .3
.5
.3

6 .0

8 .3

2 .4

2 .0

.9
1 .1
.4

5 .6
3 .7
2 .6

8 .3
5 .2

1 .5

2 .3
2 .2

.3

.2

.2

1 .8

2 .6

1 .5
1 .3
.8

1 .4
.3
.4

1 .2

2 .1

1.1

7 .7
9 .4

1 3.0
1 6 .5

.8
.5

.1

.1

.1
.1
.1
.1

2 .5
1 .2
.5

2 7 .3

1.1

3 2 .7

5 8 .9

1 .8

1 0 0 .0

1 0 0 .0

1 0 0 .0

1 0 0 .0

76
$ 2 .1 0

13
$ 1 .5 4

63

34

$ 2 .2 1

$ 2 .9 5

$ 1 .1 7

6 .4
7 .8

1 .3
.6
8 .9
-

1 .4

1 .1
.4
1 .2
1 .0

1 .7
2 .3

3 .0

-

-

.9
1 .3
2 .2
.4

-

.9
1 .9
1 .3

.7
.6

.8
.7
.6
.4

.1

-

.7

.2

1 .5

1 .2

1 .6

1 .6

.2

1 .5

3 .6

4 .3

(5 )

1.1

1 0 0 .0

1 0 0 .0

1 0 0 .0

1 0 0 .0

1 0 0 .0

1 0 0 .0

1 0 0 .0

1 0 0 .0

1 0 0 .0

1 0 0 .0

1 0 0 .0

1 0 0 .0

1 0 0 .0

14

91
$ 1 .6 0

55
$ 1 .7 6

36

19
$ 1 .3 0

342

120

67

222

93

73

$ 1 .4 9

$ 1 .5 6

$ 1 .3 8

$ 1 .4 5

$ 1 .4 9

$ 1 .5 8

26
$ 1 .3 1

20
$ 1 .1 4

.6

1 .0

.9
.6

2 .3
2 .1

2 .2

1 .4
1 .2
2 .2

1 .8
1 .2

2 .3
2 .2

.3
1 .0
3 .1
.2

3 .6

5 .9
1 .2
3 .2

2 .9
2 .0

1 .2
.9
2 .1
.4

1 .5
1 .2
.5

5 .7
3 .7
6 .3
4 .3
2 .6

5 .9
4 .9
3 .8
2 .4

2 .9

.8
4 .8
.5
.4

5 .9
4 .8

7 .4
1 6 .6
9 .6
4 .7

6 .5

1 .5

3 .7

.3

and ove r

4 .0
4 .6

1 .8
2 .0

2 .0
1 .3

.4
-

T e x t ile
m ill
p ro d u cts

1 .7

1 .6

$ 3 .0 0

2 .6
4 .3

3 .4
-

T o t a l4

2 .5
.7
2 .2

.9
2 .6
.4

$ 2 .9 0 __
___
$ 3 . 0 0 _______________

.8

C o u n t ie s , T e n n .
M anu­
fa c t u r in g

4 .5

$ 2 . 2 0 -------------------------

$ 2 .8 0 an d u n d e r
$ 2 .9 0 an d u n d e r

1 .2

A ll
in d u s ­
t r ie s

1 2 .8

$ 2 .3 0 —
$ 2 .4 0 _

„

(5 )

.5

1 .0
.8

L o u d o n an d M e M in n

4 .3
1 .3
2 .4

$ 2 .1 0 _

__

2 .7
1 .6

4 .9

2 .2

8 .3
2 .2

2 .6
1 .4

.8
.5
.8

-

-

3 .2

1 .3

1 .7
4 .0

1 .8

1 .9
1 .5

.9
.7

4 .1

1 .5
2 .5

2 .6
3 .1

-

R e ta il
trad e

1 S e le c t e d In d u s t r y G r o u p s , 2

L a k e , P a s c o , a n d P o lk
C o u n t ie s , F la .
M anu­
f a c t u r in g
A ll
Food
Nonm anu­
in d u s ­
fa c t u r in g
and
t r ie s
T o t a l4
k in d r e d
p ro d u cts

4 .4

-

-

1 .1
2 .2

1 .1
1 .0

_

T o t a l4

.6
1 .0
1 .1
.6

-

and un d er

$ 2 .6 0
$ 2 .7 0 $ 2 .8 0 _ _

M anu­
f a c t u r in g

0 .5

and u n d er
and u n d er

$ 2 .5 0 an d u n d e r
$ 2 .6 0 an d u n d e r
$ 2 .7 0 an d u n d e r

R e ta il
tra d e

A ll
in d u s ­
t r ie s

io n e s b o u n ty ,
M is s .
Nonm anu­
fa c t u r in g

_

$ 2 .2 0
$ 2 .3 0

_

k o p k i n s an ti M u h le n b e r g ,
C o u n t ie s , K y .
Nonm anu­
fa c t u r in g
M anu­
f a c t u r in g
T o t a l4
M in in g

_

$ 2 .1 0

and u n d er

of N o n s u p e r v is o r y E m p lo y e e s b y A v e r a g e S t r a ig h t - T im e H o u r ly E a r n in g s ,
S e le c t e d N o n m e t r o p o lit a n A r e a s , 3 S o u th , J u n e 1 96 2 — C o n t in u e d

1 .7
.1

2 .5

_

D is t r ib u t io n

0 .4

.9

$ 0 . 8 0 . . .........
$ 0 . 8 5 __ _____

$ 1 .2 5

and under

.. .
__

$ 0 .9 0
$ 0 . 9 5 _____ _____— ___

« $ 1 .2 0 a n d u n d e r

P e rce n ta ge

A ll
in d u s ­
t r ie s

e a r n in g s 1

$ 0 . 5 0 _____________

$ 0 .8 5 a n d u n d e r
$ 0 .9 0 an d u n d e r

2.

$ 1 .3 6

-

.1
.1

.5
.3

T a b le 2.

P e r c e n t a g e D is tr ib u t io n o f N o n s u p e r v is o r y E m p lo y e e s b y A v e r a g e S t r a ig h t -T im e H o u r ly E a r n in g s , 1 S e le c t e d I n d u s try G rou p i
S e le c t e d N o n m e t r o p o lit a n A r e a s , 3 South, June 1962— C on tin u ed
So m e rse t,

A ve rage

h o u r ly e a r n in g s 1

A ll
in d u s ­
tr ie s

T o ta l4

W ic o m ic o , a n d W o r c e s t e
C o u n t ie s , M d .
M anu­
f a c t u r in g
Food
and
A p p a re l
T o t a l4
k in d r e d

r

U n io n b o u n ty ,
A rk .

Nonm anu­
f a c t u r in g
W h o le s a le
tra d e

A ll
R e ta il
tra d e

in d u s ­
tr ie s

M anu­
fa c t u r in g

W a s h in g t o n

C o u n ty,

Va.

Nonm anu­
f a c t u r in g

Nonm anu­
fa c t u r in g

A ll
in d u s ­
t r ie s

M anu­
f a c t u r in g

T o t a l4

R e ta il
tra d e

p ro d u cts

Under

$ 0 .5 0

_

-

and under
and under

$ 0 . 5 5 -----------------------$ 0 . 6 0 _______________

$ 0 .6 0 a n d u n d e r
$ 0 .6 5 a n d u n d e r
$ 0 .7 0 a n d u n d e r

$ 0 .6 5
_ ..... —
$ 0 . 7 0 _______ _______
$ 0 . 7 5 _____ _________

$ 0 .7 5

$ 0 .8 0 a n d u n d e r
$ 0 .8 5 a n d u n d e r
$ 0 .9 0 an d u n d e r

$ 0 . 8 0 _______________
$ 0 . 8 5 _______ _______
$ 0 . 9 0 _______________
$ 0 .9 5

$ 0 .9 5

$ 1 .0 0

$ 0 .5 0
$ 0 .5 5

and und er

and under

0 .2

_

1 .8

0 .5

1 .9

2 .4

_

_

_

1 .2

_

1 .8

1 .2

-

-

_

.6

_

.7
1 .7
1 .2

(5)

.1

-

.5
1 .0
.6
1 .6

1 .0
.7

.2

.4

(5)
.1
.4

_
_
_

3 .0
,1 .7
2 .2
1 .3

2 .3

.8
.5
.6

-

1 .2

_

1 7 .3
1 .6

1 .1
.5
.2
.3
.3
.6

0 .5

$ 1 .0 0 a n d u n d e r
$ 1 .0 5 an d u n d e r
$ 1 .1 0 a n d u n d e r

$ 1 . 0 5 _______________
$ 1 . 1 0 ........ _
$ 1 . 1 5 . . .... _ .

6 .2
1 .3

2 .5
.8

2 .2

1 .6

$ 1 .1 5

$ 1 . 2 0 _______________

1 6 .5
1 4.2
1 0.1
3 .4
3 .7
3 .0

and under

-

.1
.1
.2

_
0 .1
-

.8

.9
.6
1 .4
2 .2
1 .6
1 .8
1 .0
1 .0

3 .6

3 .4

1 1 .7

1 .5

2 1 .9

3 5.8

(5 )
3 5 .7
16.1

2 .0
3 .1

2 3 .6

.9
1.3
1 7.4

1 1.8
3 .7
3 .2

1 7 .6
2 .7
2 .1
3 .3

7 .6
5 .6
6 .2
4 .1

7 .6
3 .0
4 .4

1 .6

3 .9

1 .7

3 .0
2 .1
1 .6

5 .7
4 .0
2 .0
1 .2

-

-

1 .2

.6
4 .5
.5
1 .6
9 .0
4 .1

2 .7
4 .2
2 .4

4 .7
1 .8
2 .5

1 .3

2 .3

1 .9
1 .5

6 .6
4 .6
4 .3

1 0 .5
9 .4
8 .7

6 .3
3 .4
4 .0

3 .4
3 .1
2 .1

3 .5
2 .3
1 .4

2 .1

3 .8

2 .6
2 .0

1 .3
1 .2

2 .2

1 .0
1 .8
2 .3
3 .0
2 .4

1 .7

1 .5

.8

.6

1 .8

1 .9

2 .1

.8
.4

1 .1
.1

2 .5
2 .4

2 .7
3 .2

2 .1
2 .2

$ 2 .2 0 a n d u n d e r
$ 2 .3 0 a n d u n d e r

$ 2 . 3 0 _______________
$ 2 .4 0
_. _

.6

2 .7
2 .4

1 .8

3 .1

$ 2 .4 0

and under

$ 2 .5 0

.7

.8

.2

.9
.5

1 .9
.4

$ 2 .5 0 a n d u n d e r
$ 2 .6 0 a n d u n d e r
$ 2 .7 0 an d u n d e r

$ 2 .6 0
$ 2 .7 0
$ 2 .8 0

1 .0
.5

.9
.3

.2
.2
.2
.2
.2

.9
.5
.2

$ 2 .9 0
$ 3 .0 0

.2
.2
.4

.8
1 .2

$ 2 .8 0
S 2 .9 0

.6
.5
.6

1 .1
.8

.5

.7
.3
.6
.6
.1

and ove r

1 .8
1 .0
1 .4

4 .4
2 .0
2 .7
1 .7

2 .3
2 .1
1 .7
2 .2

$ 3 .0 0

1 .0

3 .9
2 .8
2 .2

8 .4

$ 2 . 1 0 ______________ _
$ 2 .2 0
_

-

4 .7
_

9 .8
5 .0
4 .8
6 .6
3 .2

2 .7

.6
1 .2

1 .9
2 .7
2 .4
1 .7
1 .3

.9

.1
_

5 .8

$ 2 . 0 0 _______________

and under
and u n d er

2 .1

-

2 5 .4

$ 2 .0 0 a n d u n d e r
$ 2 .1 0 a n d u n d e r

(5 )
(5)
.1
_

3 .7
1 .4

3 .9

$ 1 .9 0 a n d u n d e r

-----

1 .2
2 .8
.8
2 .0

1 6 .0

3 .7
2 .1

_

.1
(5 )

2 .2

$ 1 .8 0
$ 1 .9 0

(5 )
.1

.6
1 .3
.4

7 .1

5 .8
2 .7

$ 1 .7 0 a n d u n d e r
$ 1 .8 0 an d u n d e r

.5
.4

1 .4
3 .5
2 .5
1 .3

3 .6
6 .5
2 .0

$ 1 .6 0

1 .9
1 .1
2 .1

1 1 .1

3 .4

7 .0
1 .5

$ 1 .5 0 a n d u n d e r

1 .2

8 .6

.1

_

$ 1 .4 0 _ _
........
$ 1 .4 5 . _
$ 1 .5 0
.... _

3 .9
3 .1
2 .8
2 .7

0 .2

1 .6

.7
_

$ 1 .3 5 a n d u n d e r
$ 1 .4 0 a n d u n d e r
$ 1 .4 5 an d u n d e r

5 .0
3 .7
3 .4
3 .1

1 .1
.6

.1

4 .0

2 .4

3 .8
.7
1 .8

$ 1 . 3 0 _______________
$ 1 .3 $

3 .1
2 .4

1 .9
1 .4

_
_
_

4 .1

3 .6
5 .4

.5
1 .4
1 7 .4

$ 1 .2 5 a n d u n d e r
$ 1 .3 0 a n d u n d e r

2 .1

.7

0 .7

1 .5
2 .2

1 .0
2 .1
3 .3

1 .1
2 .6

1 .8
4 .5

4 .1

_

2 .2
4 .1

4 .5
1 .6

(5 )

2 .2

-

3 .2
1 .3

2 .9
4 .5
2 .1

(5 )
.7
8 .5
5 .9

2 .2

6 .6
4 .8

6 .5
6 .7

2 .9
1 .6

2 .8
4 .2

3 .0

1 .8

3 .3
5 .6
2 .4

3 .3

7 .1
5 .1

3 .9
2 .8
4 .0
2 .9
3 .4
2 .0
3 .2

4 .9
4 .8
2 .8
2 .7
2 .4

1 .8

3 .2
3 .0

1 .1

1 .7

1 .5

1 .6
1 .6
.6
2 .7
.4

.9
1 .1
.5
.7

.5
.4

6 .5
6 .9
7 .0

9 .9
1 .1
2 .7
9 .5
2 .0
6 .8
2 .5
2 .2
2 .5
1 .0
7 .9
2 .9
2 .4

1 7 .0
2 .2
5 .3
1 0 .2
2 .0
5 .7
1 .4
2 .4
.5
.8
3 .1
2 .8
.8
3 .0

7 .1
4 .6

2 .0
.6

.5

3 .9
3 .5
5 .4

1 .4
1 .0
.4

.3
.3

4 .8
2 .6

.8
.6

2 .1
2 .6

.8
.3
.5
4 .4
.4

.7
1 .3
.3

.5
1 .2
.5
1 .1
.1
.5
.4

1 .7

.2

.1

.1

3 .9

.2

2 .6

1 2.3

2 1 .6

2 .8

.9

.5

1 .5

2 .9

_

1 0 0 .0

1 0 0 .0

1 0 0 .0

1 0 0 .0

1 0 0 .0

1 0 0 .0

1 0 0 .0

1 0 0 .0

1 0 0 .0

1 0 0 .0

1 0 0 .0

1 0 0 .0

1 0 0 .0

1 0 0 .0

N u m b e r o f w o r k e r s (in h u n d r e d s )..
A v e r a g e h o u r l y e a r n i n g s 1 __________

140
$ 1 .4 4

84

38

22

38

15

$ 1 .7 0

35
$ 1 .3 8

46

$ 1 .5 0

36
$ 2 .0 1

84

$ 1 .3 0

37
.$ 1 .4 1

71

$ 1.2 9

56
$ 1 .5 0

4

$ 1 .4 0

$ 1 .5 1

$ 1 .7 2

$ 1 .2 6

$ 1 .1 7

T o t a l ____

1
2
3
4
5

. ........ .

.

__

S e e f o o t n o t e 1, t a b l e
S e e fo o tn o te 2, t a b le
S e e fo o t n o t e 3, t a b le
In c lu d e s in d u s t r ie s in
L e s s t h a n 0 .0 5 p e r c e n

NOTE:

1.
1.
1.
a d d it io n
t.

B e c a u s e o f ro u n d in g ,




to

th o se

sh o w n

s e p a r a t e ly .

su m s o f in d iv id u a l it e m s m a y n ot eq u a l 100.

T a b le 3.

P e r c e n t a g e D is tr ib u tio n o f N o n s u p e r v is o r y E m p lo y e e s b y A v e r a g e S t r a ig h t -T im e H o u r ly E a r n in g s , 1 S e le c t e d M a jo r
In d u s try D iv is io n s and In d u stry G ro u p s , 2 N o n m e t r o p o lit a n A r e a s , 3 N o r th C e n t r a l R e g io n , 4 June 1962

Cn
O

N o n m a n u fa c tu r in g
A ve rage

Under

$ 0 .5 0

_

a nd u n d e r

$ 0 .5 0

A ll

h o u r ly e a r n in g s 1

_

$ 0 .5 5

in d u s tr ie s

_

....

_

0 .4

(6 )

0 .7

(6 )

__

.3
.2
.4

.6
.4

$ 0 .5 5 a n d u n d e r
$ 0 .6 0 a n d u n d e r

$ 0 .6 0 _
$ 0 .6 5

$ 0 .6 5 a n d u n d e r
$ 0 .7 0 an d u n d e r

$ 0 . 7 0 _______________________________
$ 0 . 7 5 _______________________________
$ 0 .8 0
$ 0 .8 5

1 .7

$ 0 .8 5

and under

$ 0 . 9 0 __ ____________________________

$ 0 .9 0 a n d u n d e r
$ 0 .9 5 a n d u n d e r

$ 0 . 9 5 _______________________________
_ __ _
$ 1 .0 0
_ ____ __

1 .0
.8
.5

$ 1 .0 0 a n d u n d e r

$ 1 . 0 5 ___________ __ ________ ______

6 .1

$ 1 .0 5
$ 1 .1 0

and under
and under

$ 1 .1 0
$ 1 .1 5

$ 1 .1 5
$ 1 .2 0

and under
and under

$ 1 .2 0
$ 1 .2 5

1.1
1 .7
7 .1
2 .7

$ 1 .2 5 a n d u n d e r
$ 1 .3 0 a n d u n d e r
$ 1 .3 5 a n d u n d e r

$ 1 .3 0
$ 1 .3 5
$ 1 .4 0

$ 1 .4 0 a n d u n d e r
$ 1 .4 5 a n d u n d e r

$ 1 .4 5 _ _
$ 1 .5 0 _

$ 1 .5 0 an d u n d e r
$ 1 .6 0 a n d u n d e r

$ 1 .6 0
$ 1 .7 0
$ 1 .8 0
$ 1 .9 0
$ 2 .0 0

.6

__

__

___

_

__
_

-

___

_

__

__

_

_

$ 2 .2 0 _
$ 2 .3 0

. _ .....

_

$ 2 .5 0 a n d u n d e r
$ 2 .6 0 a n d u n d e r
$ 2 .7 0 a n d u n d e r

$ 2 . 6 0 __________ _____ ________ ____
$ 2 .7 0
$ 2 .8 0

a nd u n d e r

$ 3 .0 0 ..

Total _

.

.

. ..

N u m b e r o f w o r k e r s fi n t h o u s a n d s ) .
_ ............ .
A verage hou rly e a rn in g s 1
...... _

1

See

fo o tn o te

1,

ta b le

1.

2
3

See
See

fo o tn o te
fo o tn o te

2,
3,

t a b le
ta b le

1.
1,

4
O h io ,
5
6

T h e N o r t h C e n t r a l r e g io n in c lu d e d
So u th D a k o ta ,
a n d W is c o n s in .
In c lu d e s i n d u s t r ie s in a d d it io n
L e s s t h a n 0 .0 5 p e r c e n t .

NOTE;

B e c a u s e o f rou n d in g ,




to

th e

0 .4

0 .6

.8
.4

(6 )

_

C )

3 .6

1 .2

3 .2

_

1 .3
2 .0
1 .6

.1
(6 )

1 .6
2 .3
2 .1

.4
.4

_
-

_

(6 )

1 .1

2 .4

1 .1

(6 )

0 .3
.1

1 2 .2
2 .2
3 .4

3 .7
1 .4

1 6.9
3 .0

4 .7

3 .4

5 .3
3 .0

1 5 .0
4 .0

4 .2
4 .0
3 .0

2 .8
3 .8

8 .9
2 .8
4 .0
2 .9
3 .4

6 .0
4 .6
5 .0
4 .0
4 .1

5 .1
4 .6

7 .0
4 .5
4 .4

1 0 .7

5 .5
4 .8
5 .8

3 .2
2 .2
3 .2

5 .9
6 .1
5 .6

1 .7
2 .2
1 .4

.5
1 .0
8 .4
2 .9

7 .5
2 .8
3 .7
2 .6
2 .3

9 .8
5 .8
6 .1
5 .3
3 .5
8 .2
7 .5
7 .7
3 .6
3 .3

6 .9
4 .1

4 .9
5 .6
4 .2
2 .4

3 .7
3 .3
1 .9

3 .0
2 .3

3 .0
1 .5

2 .6
2 .6

1 .9
1 .3

4 .0
2 .0
1 .3
2 .6

3 .0

4 .9
4 .7

1 .1

1 .7

.9

.8

3 .1

4 .3

1 .8

3 .1
2 .0

5 .0
2 .8
2 .0
1 .4

1 .1
1 .1

2 .7
.5
.6

1 .3
.7
.7

1 .2
2 .4

.9
.7

.4
.2

.4
.4

.8
.7
.2

4 .6

5 .2

4 .0

1 .9

2 .9

4 .1

1 0 0 .0

1 0 0 .0

1 0 0 .0

1 0 0 ,0

1 0 0 .0

1 0 0 .0

2, 2 88
$ 1 .7 7

1, 181

1, 1 0 7

$ 1 .9 8

$ 1 .5 5

113
$ 1 .5 6

686
$ 1 .4 8

71
$ 1 .6 6

sta te s

th o se

and re a l
e sta te

0
( )
(b )

2 .9
2 .3

1 .1

.

F in a n c e ,
in s u r a n c e ,

.9
1 .1
1 .3

-

7 .2

1 .5
$ 2 .9 0

(6 )
0 .3
_

4 .5
2 .6
2 .6
2 .4
2 .2

3 .9
3 .2

$ 2 . 3 0 and u n d e r $ 2 . 4 0

_

5 .8
2 .7
3 .2
2 .7
2 .2

4 .0
...

R e ta il
tra d e

.8
1 .0
1 .0

.1
8 .8
2 .4

4 .6
$ 2 .1 0 a n d u n d e r
$ 2 . 2 0 a nd u n d e r

W h o le s a le
tra d e

(6)

0
( )

.5
.5

$ 0 .7 5 a n d u n d e r
$ 0 .8 0 a n d u n d e r

$ 1 .7 0 an d u n d e r
$ 1 .8 0 a n d u n d e r
$ 1 .9 0 an d u n d e r

T o tal 1
5
4
3
2

_

---- _

M a n u fa c tu r in g

of

show n

Illin o is ,

In d ia n a ,

Io w a ,

K an sa s,

s e p a r a t e ly .

s u m s o f in d iv id u a l ite m s m a y n ot e q u a l 100.

M ic h ig a n ,

M in n e s o ta ,

M is s o u r i,

N e b rask a,

N o rth

D a k o ta ,

T a b le 4.

P e r c e n ta g e D is tr ib u t io n o f N o n s u p e r v is o r y E m p lo y e e s b y A v e r a g e S t r a ig h t -T im e H o u r ly E a r n in g s , 1 S e le c t e d I n d u s try G ro u p s
S e le c t e d N o n m e t r o p o lit a n A r e a s , 3 N orth C e n tr a l R e g io n , June 1962
A lp e n a C o u n ty ,
M ic h .

A ve rage

h o u r ly e a r n in g s 1

A ll
in d u s tr ie s

M anu­
f a c t u r in g

b a rto n

Nonm anu­
fa c t u r in g

A ll
in d u s tr ie s

U n d e r $ 0 . 5 0 _____________________________

0 .1

_

0 .4

$ 0 . 5 0 a n d u n d e r $ 0 . 5 5 ________________
$ 0 . 5 5 a n d u n d e r $ 0 . 6 0 _________
____

_

_

_

.5

_
_

_
_
_

_
.

.7
4 .2

1 .9
.5

1 .8
1 .7

.6
.4
1 .3

3 .2

$ 0 . 6 0 a n d u n d e r $ 0 . 6 5 _____
________
$ 0 . 6 5 a n d u n d e r $ 0 . 7 0 ________________
$ 0 . 7 0 a n d u n d e r $ 0 . 7 5 ________________
$ 0 . 7 5 a n d u n d e r $ 0 . 8 0 ________________
$ 0 . 8 0 a n d u n d e r $ 0 . 8 5 ________________
$ 0 . 8 5 a n d u n d e r $ 0 . 9 0 --------- -------------$ 0 . 9 0 a n d u n d e r $ 0 . 9 5 ________________
$ 0 .9 5

$ 1 . 1 5 a n d u n d e r $ 1 . 2 0 ________________
$ 1 . 2 0 a n d u n d e r $ 1 . 2 5 ________________
and
and
and
and
and

under
under
under
under
under

_____
$ 1 . 3 0 ________
_____
____
$ 1 .3 5 —
$ 1 . 4 0 ________________
__ ___________
$ 1 .4 5
$ 1 . 5 0 — ______ _____ _

$ 1 . 5 0 a n d u n d e r $ 1 . 6 0 ________________
$ 1 . 6 0 a n d u n d e r $ 1 . 7 0 ________________
$ 1 . 7 0 a n d u n d e r $ 1 . 8 0 ________________
$ 1 . 8 0 a n d u n d e r $ 1 . 9 0 ________________
$ 1 .9 0 a n d u n d e r $ 2 .0 0
_____________
$ 2 . 0 0 a n d u n d e r $ 2 . 1 0 ________________
$ 2 . 1 0 a n d u n d e r $ 2 . 2 0 ________________
$ 2 . 2 0 a n d u n d e r $ 2 . 3 0 ______ - ________
$ 2 . 3 0 a n d u n d e r $ 2 . 4 0 ________________
$ 2 . 4 0 a n d u n d e r $ 2 . 5 0 ____

__

____

$ 2 . 5 0 a n d u n d e r $ 2 . 6 0 ________________
$ 2 . 6 0 a n d u n d e r $ 2 . 7 0 ________________
$ 2 . 7 0 a n d u n d e r $ 2 . 8 0 ________________
$ 2 . 8 0 a n d u n d e r $ 2 . 9 0 ________________
$ 2 . 9 0 a n d u n d e r $ 3 . 0 0 ________________
$ 3 .0 0

.2
.1
.5
.2

a n d u n d e r $ 1 . 0 0 ---------------------------

$ 1 . 0 0 a n d u n d e r $ 1 . 0 5 ________________
$ 1 . 0 5 a n d u n d e r $ 1 . 1 0 ________________
$ 1 . 1 0 a n d u n d e r $ 1 . 1 5 ________________

$ 1 .2 5
$ 1 .3 0
$ 1 .3 5
$ 1 .4 0
$ 1 .4 5

.7
.2

a n d o v e r _________________________
T o t a l -------------------------------------

N um ber of w o rk e rs
( i n h u n d r e d s ) ______________
A ve rage

-------

3 .7
.6
1 .2
1 .2
1 .4
2 .4
.5
2 .2
1 .3
.9
3 .0
2 .4
2 .8
3 .3
3 .7
6 .2
5 .3
5 .1
5 .1
6 .5
8 .1
7 .8
7 .7
6 .4
4 .6

.
_
_
0 .2

.1

-

-

.1
.1
.2
.1
.1
.7
.3
.3
.6
.3
1 .2

1 .0
.6
.4
4 .0
1 .3

_
0 .7
_
_

N onm anu­
fa c t u r in g

C ra w fo rd ,

A ll
in d u s t r ie s

0 .5

0 .5

.4

.6
.4
.5

_

.8
5 .0
2 .2

-

2 .0

.7
.3

3 .8

1 .3

1 .6
1 .2
.7
.5

.5
.7
.4
.4
2 .4
.1

_
_
_
.7
_
_

iT r a n k lin ,
C o u n t ie s ,

a n d W a s h in g t o n
Mo.

M anu­
f a c t u r in g

T o ta l4

fc lk h a r t C o u n ty ,
In d .

Nonm anu­
fa c t u r in g

Le ath e r

T o t a l4

Nonm anu-

R e ta il
tra d e

A ll
in d u s ­
tr ie s

f a c t u r in e
M anu­
f a c t u r in g

T o t a l4

(5)

1 .4

1 .1

(5 )

2 .3

0 .2

_
_

_
_

1 .2
.8
1 .5

1 .8
3 .3

.1
.2

_

.9
.5

_

_
-

2 .9
1 .6

.1
.4

(5 )

-

1 .9
.7

.7
.2

3 .8
1 .2

4 .3

.7

1 .4

1 .8
1 .2
1 .2

2 .7
2 .7
.8

.3
.1

( 5_)
5

.6
.1

5
(5 )

(5)

_

_

(5 )

0 .1
_

(*)

-

W h o le ­
s a le
tra d e

R e ta il
tra d e

0 .2

_
_

1 .5
.2
.7
.4

1 .5

-

1 .8

2 .8

0 .7

1 .1
.4
2 .4

4 .6
2 .1

_
_

.8
2 .1

.4

-

.6

4 .9
1 .8

2 .6

4 .6
1 .6
1 .4
5 .4

.1

2 .1

4 .6

5 .6

7 .1

2 .8

3 .2

1 .0

.5

1 .9
2 .5

1 0 .6
1 .7
2 .8
3 .5

8 .5
4 .3

8 .1
5 .6
6 .2
4 .2

7 .0

9 .4

2 .3
1 .1

7 .5
2 .2

.9

7 .4
2 .2

2 .6

1 .9
3 .4
4 .4
1 .5

3 .6
1 .4

1 4.2

5 .6
7 .1
4 .7
5 .0

7 .4
1 .4

1 .8

1 .7
.7
1 .8
4 .4
1 .1

1 2 .4

.9
5 .4
2 .4

1 .6
2 .3
2 .2

1 .9
1 .7
1 .2

1 .6
1 .4
1 .1

2 .7
2 .5
1 .3

2 .9
2 .0
1 .8

1 .9
2 .2
1.1

6 .2
5 .0
6 .4

6 .3

8 .2

6 .1
6 .7
3 .5
3 .4
1 .3

5 .4

4 .9
4 .4

4 .1
4 .1

7 .1

9 .7
7 .1

5 .5
4 .3

5 .9
4 .1

6 .0
4 .7
4 .3

6 .0
2 .1
3 .4

4 .4
2 .4
2 .3

5 .8
3 .1

4 .0

3 .8
5 .4

1 .1

1 .9
3 .0
3 .3
2 .9
5 .4

.1

6 .8
.2

1 4 .9
.5

.7
1 6 .5

(5 )
(5 )
0 .2
2 2 .2

.2
2 4 .7

1 .6
6 .2

5 .2
4 .2
3 .5

4 .6

5 .0
4 .5

5 .4

1 1 .0
5 .1
1 5 .1
7 .4

2 .9

3 .0

8 .6

1 .9

6 .8
6 .0
5 .6
4 .0
2 .3

6 .8
6 .7
6 .0
7 .1
9 .4

5 .3

4 .6
3 .5
3 .5
2 .2
1 .2

1 0 .0
1 0 .0

3 .5
2 .2
3 .2

1 .8
2 .4

1 .8
.8

1 .5
1 .1

1 .3
.9

.8

1 1.3
1 1.2

2 .4

1 .2

1 .3

1 .7

1 .7

1 .5
1 .4

8 .6
6 .7

2 .6
1 .0

.6
.8

2 .9
.8
.7
1 .0
.4

2 .3

1 0 .7

2 .6
1 .8
2 .5

.6
1 .3
.4

.6
.6
.1

2 .9
3 .5
1 .6
1 .5

1 .6
1 .3

4 .9
4 .2
3 .1

4 .8

1 .8
1 .4
.6
.9

3 .3

7 .2
5 .7
6 .8
4 .4

5 .8
5 .1
4 .1

2 .9

2 .8

2 .8
2 .3
2 .1

2 .8
2 .2

4 .3

2 .5

(5)

3 .6
5 .2

.6
1 .5
1 .5

0 .1
1 .3

5 .0
3 .8
2 .9
.7

.9
3 .1

3 .6
.6
3 .5

1 .7
1 .5

2 .6
.1

.5
.4

1 .1
1 .6
.6
2 .7

.1

1 .1

.5

1 .7
1 .0

3 .8
6 .5
4 .6

6 .9
5 .7

5 .9
7 .0
7 .0

6 .9
8 .5

1 .0
.8
_

7 .2
3 .1

8 .4

.1

2 .8
1 .2

3 .1

8 .7

3 .8
3 .3
3 .4
1 .5

9 .7
2 .1

2 .9

5 .8

4 .9
1 .6
1 .3

5 .1
5 .5
2 .5
2 .4
5 .3
1 .5
3 .1
2 .7
2 .0
3 .6
1 .0
2 .4
1 .0
.3

3 .0
7 .1
3 .0
3 .2
3 .1
4 .1
.2
.2

13.7
2 .7
8 .2
2 .2
2. 1

1.1
3 .3
2 .2
1 .0
3 .1
.5
1 .2
.6
.3

4 .5

3 .6

6 .2

2 .2

1 .0

2 .4

3 .6

2 .7

.4

5 .3

2 .0

8 .9

1 0 .1

5 .4

5 .6

4 .7

1 0 0 .0

1 0 0 ,0

1 0 0 .0

1 0 0 .0

1 0 0 .0

1 0 0 .0

1 0 0 .0

1 0 0 .0

1 0 0 .0

1 0 0 .0

1 0 0 .0

1 0 0 .0

1 0 0 .0

1 0 0 .0

1 0 0 .0

1 0 0 .0

15
$ 1 .7 5

43
$ 1 .5 7

7
$ 1 .8 7

35
$ 1.5 1

101
$ 1 .5 7

65

36
$ 1 .5 1

36
$ 1 .5 7

17
$ 1 .3 5

259
$ 2 .1 0

193
$ 2 .2 6

67

$ 1 .5 9

$ 1 .6 8

9
$ 1 .8 4

$ 1 .6 0

________

42

27

$ 2 .2 0

$ 2 .4 6




1 .4

M anu­
f a c t u r in g

(b o u n tie s ,

5 .0
6 .3
5 .2

.9
.7
2 .0
4 .1

h o u r l y e a r n i n g s 1 __________

S ee fo o t n o t e s at en d o f t a b le .

1 0 .0
1 .6
3 .0
3 .1

0 .4

an d R ic e
K an s.

34

cn
to

T a b le

4.

P e rce n ta ge

D is t r ib u t io n

of N o n s u p e r v is o r y E m p lo y e e s b y A v e r a g e

S e le c t e d N o n m e t r o p o lit a n A r e a s , 3 N o r t h
F aye tte

C o u n ty,

h o u r ly e a r n in g s 1

A ll
in d u s ­
tr ie s

U n d e r $ 0 . 5 0 _____________________________
$ 0 . 5 0 a n d u n d e r $ 0 . 5 5 --------------- ---------$ 0 . 5 5 a n d u n d e r $ 0 . 6 0 ___________ - ___
______
_
$ 0 .6 0 a n d u n d e r $ 0 .6 5 — —

(5 )
0 .6
.2
.9

-----------a n d u n d e r $ 0 .7 0 —
$ 0 . 7 0 a n d u n d e r $ 0 . 7 5 --------------------------

(5 )
.1

$ 0 . 7 5 a n d u n d e r $ 0 . 8 0 --------------------- $ 0 . 8 0 a n d u n d e r $ 0 . 8 5 . — ____ _____ __

1 .7
.1
.2

$ 0 .6 5

$ 0 .8 5

a n d u n d e r $ 0 . 9 0 -------------------------$ 0 . 9 0 a n d u n d e r $ 0 . 9 5 ________________
$ 0 . 9 5 a n d u n d e r $ 1 . 0 0 ________________
$ 1 .0 0
$ 1 .0 5
$ 1 .1 0
$ 1 .1 5

and
and
and
and

under
under
under
under

$ 1 . 0 5 --------- -------------$ 1 . 1 0 ________________
$ 1 .1 5
---- ---------------- $ 1 . 2 0 — ---------------------

$ 1 . 2 0 a n d u n d e r $ 1 . 2 5 --------------------------

.1
.5
2 .9
1 .0
.8
.8
.7

$ 1 .2 5 a n d u n d e r $ 1 .3 0 —
-------------------$ 1 . 3 0 a n d u n d e r $ 1 . 3 5 -------------------------$ 1 . 3 5 a n d u n d e r $ 1 . 4 0 ------------ .------------$ 1 . 4 0 a n d u n d e r $ 1 . 4 5 -------------------------$ 1 . 4 5 a n d u n d e r $ 1 . 5 0 --------------------------

2 .2
.5

$ 1 ,5 0
$ 1 .6 0
$ 1 .7 0
$ 1 .8 0

2 .0

and
and
and
and

und
und
und
und

er
er
er
er

$ 1 . 6 0 ---------------- -------$ 1 . 7 0 . ------------------------$ 1 . 8 0 ------------------------$ 1 . 9 0 --------------------------

$ 1 . 9 0 a n d u n d e r $ 2 . 0 0 -------------------------$ 2 .0 0

a n d u n d e r $ 2 . 1 0 --------------------------

$ 2 .1 0
$ 2 ,2 0
$ 2 .3 0
$ 2 .4 0

and
and
and
and

under
under
under
under

$ 2 . 2 0 . -----------------$ 2 .3 0 —
—
--------$ 2 .4 0
-----------------$ 2 . 5 0 ---------------- - —

$ 2 . 5 0 a n d u n d e r $ 2 . 6 0 -------------------------$ 2 . 6 0 a n d u n d e r $ 2 . 7 0 -------------------------$ 2 . 7 0 a n d u n d e r $ 2 . 8 0 . ------- —
------$ 2 . 8 0 a n d u n d e r $ 2 . 9 0 -------------------------$ 2 . 9 0 a n d u n d e r $ 3 . 0 0 ---------- --------------$ 3 . 0 0 a n d o v e r --------------------- ------------------

Num ber

.8
1 .5
1 .5

3 .6
2 .8
1 .7
5 .0

M anu­
f a c t u r in g

_

N onm anu­
f a c t u r in g

A ll
in d u s ­
t r ie s

M anu­
fa c t u r in g

_

T o ta l 4

R e ta il
tra d e

_

0 .1

(5)

2 .4

_

_

_

_

_
_

.9
3 .4

(5 )

_
_

(5 )

_
_

-

.2
.5

-

_

-

6 .3
.5

_

.9
.5

.1
.1
.3
.1
.8
.3
.4
.5
.3
1 .6
3 .1
1 .8
1 .6
6 .4

A ll
in d u s ­
tr ie s

M anu­
f a c t u r in g

_

_

0 .2
-

_
_

P o r t a g e C o u n ty ,
O h io

Nonm anu­
f a c t u r in g
T o t a l4

R e ta il
tra d e

Rubber

Nonm anu­
f a c t u r in g

_

_

_

_

0 .4
_

_

.

.

_

_

0 .2

_
_

_
_

0 .6
1 .8

_

1 .5
.6

.1

0 .1

.1

0 .3

.8

_

.2

.1

_

(5 )

.6
.3

_

-

.3
.1

.1

(5 )

-

-

2 .9
.2
8 .7
3 .7

1 .0
.3
1 2 .1

.3

_

2 .4

.

.

5 .6

.2

.3

1 .2

2 .8
1 .1
.5

6 .3
2 .3

1 2 .8
4 .0

1 .8
1 .7

_
_
_

_
_
_

2 .9
4 .3

3 .8
2 .2

.1
_

.7
.3

.5

o
(5 )

-

1 .1

2 .4

.5

(5 )

-

5 .8
1 .3
3 .4

8 .0
2 .3

4 .0
1 .3
1 .4

_

.

.

0 .2

0 .5

1 .8
.8

.7

1 .1
.5

3 .4

.6

2 .3

5 .6
1 .4
3 .5
1 .5
1 .0

_

1 .0
(5 )

2 .4

1 0.8
3 .8
2 .6
2 .2
2 .2

2 .8
.3
1 .2

0 .2

1 4 .6

2 .7

.1

.9
4 .4

.6
1 .5

(5 )

2 .9
2 .4

9 .9
.9
3 .7
5 .2
1 .7

5 .5

6 .6
2 .8

3 .0

1 1 .0

5 .9
5 .1

1 .9

3 .9

2 .6

6 .1
1 .1

3 .6
2 .7

2 .2
2 .4

2 .6
3 .1

2 .9

1 .6

2 .0

7 .1
3 .6
4 .5
3 .2
3 .1

7 .0
1 .5
5 .3

2 .6

7 .9
1 .6
2 .7
.8
1 .7

4 .4

1 .9
4 .0
4 .7

7 .3
2 .7
3 .4
2 .2

3 .1

9 .7

9 .0
3 .1

9 .6
2 .2

5 .7

5 .0
6 .3

6 .7
5 .5

6 .4

4 .6
3 .3

3 .6
3 .0
3 .3

5 .8

4 .6
4 .4
3 .1

.1
.3
2 .1
2 .7
2 .2
2 .6
2 .2
3 .4

5 .0

7 .8

1 0 .0
9 .5

5 .7
2 .1

6 .9

7 .7

.9

5 .9
4 .6

6 .8
5 .3

1 4.6
.5
2 .4
.2
.4

5 .2

5 .7

4 .0

5 .9
4 .6
3 .5
5 .2

7 .1
5 .6
4 .3

2 .7
2 .1
1 .2

6 .8

.8

4 .2

5 .1

2 .4

2 .8

.9
1 .0

1 .1

1 .9
1 .2
.4

.9

1 .1
.6

.8
1 .7

7 .0
1 2 .3
1 3 .4

6 .7
5 .7
3 .0
4 .2

8 .2
7 .3
3 .5
5 .3

.7

.9

1 .7

1 .6

2 .2

2 .3

1 .7

1 0 0 .0

1 0 0 .0

1 0 0 .0

1 0 0 .0

49
$ 2 .0 7

36
$ 2 .2 8

13

152

$ 1 .4 8

$ 1.81

-

T o t a l4

.

.6

1 .1

t r ie s

M anu­
f a c t u r in g

_

1 .9

2 .5
1 .0
1 .6

A ll
in d u s ­

0 .3

9 .0
9 .2

8 .8

S e le c t e d In d u s t r y G r o u p s , 2

C o n t in u e d

-

1 0 .5
6 .5
1 0 .4

1 3 .9

1962—

0 .2

0 .1
.8
.1
2 .3

(5)

H o u r ly E a r n in g s ,

M a ra th o n C o u n ty,
W is .

Nonm anu­
f a c t u r in g

_

0 .1

June

M a n it o w o c C o u n ty ,
W is .

In d .
A ve rage

S t r a ig h t -T im e

C e n t r a l R e g io n ,

2 .5

1 .8

2 .9
3 .5
2 .8
2 .5

5 .9
5 .3
5 .2
4 .1

2 .7
2 .5

5 .9
4 .8

5 .1

7 .3

6 .1
5 .7
6 .4

8 .9
1 0.6

3 .9

5 .8

1 .5

3 .1

.6
.1

4 .3
3 .0
2 .5

.5
.2

2 .0
1 .7
1 .2
.4

3 .9

2 .0

1 0 0 .0

1 0 0 .0

111
$ 1 .9 2

41
$ 1 .5 8

4 .8
2 .6
2 .4

3 .9
1 .3
2 .2
1 .4
1 .2

2 .6
1 .3
1 .2
1 .3

2 .7
2 .5

3 .8
5 .1

4 .8
3 .0
5 .1
2 .7

6 .6
3 .3

3 .6
1 0 .4
3 .4

2 .9

4 .0

4 .8

6 .6

2 .5
2 .5
1 .8
1 .4
1 .5

3 .1
2 .1

6 .5

6 .9
1 0 .4

3 .0
3 .6

5 .0

1 .3

4 .3

1 .1

7 .6
3 .5
3 .0
1 .8
2 .8
4 .6
2 .0
1 .6

6 .9
7 .2

1 .9
.5
4 .3

2 .9

6 .1
1 .0
1 .8
.4
2 .0

4 .9

5 .4

4 .4

4 .2

1 0 0 .0

1 0 0 .0

1 0 0 .0

1 0 0 .0

1 0 0 .0

23

89
$ 1 .9 5

51
$ 2 .2 4

16
$ 2 .1 3

$ 1 .5 9

4 .7

7 .9
8 .6
9 .8
6 .7

.7

4 .8

7 .9

1 .8

1 .2

.8
.7

.6
.6

6 .1
4 .7
3 .5

.9
.6

1 .5
.3

.5
.2

2 .5
2 .1

2 .4

2 .3

2 .5

1 .2

1 0 0 .0

1 0 0 .0

1 0 0 .0

1 0 0 .0

25
$ 1 .5 3

128

70

$ 1 .7 9

$ 2 .0 1

58
$ 1 .5 2

$ 1 .4 6

1 .5
.7

1 .8
1 .5
2 .6
2 .8

9 .4
3 .2
3 .0

1 1 .6

.7
1 .3

9 .0

_

3 .9
1 .1

5 .8
6 .3

7 .4
7 .5
4 .5
2 .4

.8
2 .2
2 .7
1 .1

of w o rk e rs

( i n h u n d r e d s ) ---------------------------------------A v e r a g e h o u r l y e a r n i n g s 1 -----------------

S e e f o o t n o t e s at e n d of table.




38

T a b l e 4.

P e r c e n t a g e D i s tribution of N o n s u p e r v i s o r y E m p l o y e e s b y A v e r a g e S t r a i g h t - T i m e H o u r l y E a r n i n g s , 1 S e l e c t e d I n d u s t r y G r o u p s ,
Selected N o n m e t r o p o l i t a n A r e a s , 3 N o r t h C e n tral Region, J u n e 1962— C ontinued
S a n d u sk y C o u n ty ,
O h io

A ve rage

h o u r ly e a r n in g s 1

A ll
in d u s t r ie s

Under

_

$ 0 . 5 0 --------------------------------------------

$ 0 . 5 0 a n d u n d e r $ 0 . 5 5 --------------------$ 0 . 5 5 a n d u n d e r $ 0 . 6 0 ---------------------

(5)

$ 0 . 60 an d u n d e r
$ 0 . 65 a n d u n d e r

$ 0 . 6 5 --------------------$ 0 . 7 0 ----------------------

1 .0
. 2

$ 0 . 70 an d u n d e r

$ 0 . 7 5 ---------------------

1 .0

$ 0 . 75 an d u n d e r

$ 0 . 8 0 --------------------$ 0 . 8 5 --------------------$ 0 . 9 0 --------------------$ 0 . 9 5 ---------------------

M anu­
f a c t u r in g

_

_

W h ite s id e

Nonm anu­
f a c t u r in g

_

A ll
in d u s ­
tr ie s

0. 2

(5 )

. 1
. 2

-

2. 8

. 2

. 5

-

2 .9

. 8
. 5

_

_

W in o n a C o u n t y ,

C o u n ty ,

M in n .

111.

M anu­
fa c t u r in g

(5 )

_
_

Nonm anu­
f a c t u r in g

0. 5
.4
. 7

-

. 8
2. 6

(5 )

1 .6
3. 8
3. 3

A ll
in d u s tr ie s

_
(5)
0. 1
. 5
. 2
. 5

2. 3

1. 1

_

2. 2
3. 0
1 .2

1. 0
. 5
. 5

_

. 2

. 2

0. 2

. 2

3. 0
.4

. 2

1 .9

1 .8
1 .4

1 1 .9
2. 6
3. 8
5. 7
2. 7

. 1

9 .8
1 .4
2. 8
3. 4
2. 0

. 8
1 .4
5. 3
5. 3

3. 7
1 .3
2. 6

2. 7

5. 7

2. 0

. 5

5. 5

1. 1
2. 2

1 .7
3. 4

3. 5

1. 1
1 .4

1 .8
1 .7

.4
. 5
2. 1

3. 3

1 .4
1 .5

1. 3
1 .4
2. 1
1. 2

.

3

3. 4

-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

4. 2
4. 0

3 .5
4. 2

5. 6

3. 3

4 .0
4. 1

3. 7
3. 5

3 .4

3 .9

3 .9
3. 9
5. 1
2 .4

4. 9
4. 1

4
7
4
8

5. 4

3 .9
4. 5

2.
3.
3.
4.

$ 2. 0 0 a n d u n d e r
$ 2 .1 0 and u n d e r
$ 2 .2 0 and u n d er

$ 2 . 1 0 --------------------$ 2 . 2 0 -------------------- $ 2 . 3 0 ---------------------

5. 3

6. 3
4. 7
9 .3

3. 6
4. 0
2. 2

4. 5
3. 3
5. 2

$ 2 .3 0 and u n d e r
$ 2. 4 0 a n d u n d e r

$ 2 . 4 0 --------------------$ 2 . 5 0 ---------------------

7 .9
3. 0

1. 7
. 8

4. 2

$ 2 .5 0
$ 2 . 60
$ 2 .7 0
$ 2 . 80

and
and
and
and

$2.
$2.
$ 2.
$2.

5. 8

2. 8

2. 5

1. 1

2. 5

.9
. 8

$ 2 .9 0

and u nd er

$ 0 . 80 an d u n d e r
$ 0 . 85 an d u n d e r
$ 0 . 90 a n d u n d e r

. 8
.8

$ 0 . 9 5 a n d u n d e r $ 1 . 0 0 --------------------$ 1 .0 0 a n d u n d e r
$ 1 .0 5 and u nd er
$ 1 .1 0
$ 1 .1 5
$ 1 .2 0
$
$
$
$

$ 1 . 0 5 --------------------$ 1 . 1 0 ---------------------

--------------------a n d u n d e r $ 1 . 2 0 --------------------a n d u n d e r $ 1 . 2 5 ---------------------

1 .2 5 a n d u n d e r $ 1 . 3 0
1 . 3 0 a n d u n d e r $ 1 .3 5
1 . 3 5 a n d u n d e r $ 1 .4 0
1 .4 0 a n d u n d e r $ 1 .4 5

$ 1 .4 5

and und er

$
$
$
$
$

and
and
and
and
and

1 .5 0
1. 6 0
1 .7 0
1. 8 0
1 .9 0

$ 1 .5 0

under $ 1 .6 0
under $ 1 .7 0
u n d e r $ 1 .8 0
u n d er $ 1 .9 0
u n d e r $ 2 . 00

under
under
under
under

6 0
7 0
8 0
90

0. 1

4. 2

_

.9
1 .4
3. 2

and u n d er $ 1 .1 5

-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

4.4
6. 7
5. 7
2. 2
4. 8
10. 1
6 .4
1 .6

---------------------------------------------------------------------------------

_

1 .0
.4
. 1

-

_
_

. 8
1 .4
. 7

3. 5

1. 7
1. 7

-

0
(5 )
.5

4. 1
5. 1
3. 1
6. 5
4. 1
5. 6

.9
.9
2. 5
. 8
. 2

Nonm anu­
f a c t u r in g
M anu­
f a c t u r in g

T o tal 1
4
3
2

R e ta il
tra d e

_

_

(5 )
0. 2

0. 1
_

_

1. 1
.4

-

1. 2

1. 6
. 7
. 1

2. 2
2. 1

1. 7
2. 8

5. 7

7. 6
2. 3

_
_
_
_

_
_
(5 )

1 .8
.4

. 5

9
8
1
8
4

10. 7
3. 0

6. 5
4. 5

7.
1.
3.
3.
6.

4. 7

4. 0

5. 6

6. 3

3. 0
2. 7

3. 9
3. 0

1 .9
2. 4

1. 6
2. 3

4. 0
2. 8

4. 6

3. 3

3. 4

2. 0

3. 0
2. 2

3. 7
3. 7

7. 5
6. 6
5. 7

7. 1
8. 8
5. 8

8. 0
3. 8
5. 6

4. 9
4. 0

5. 5
4. 2

6. 5
3. 5

4. 3
5. 1

6. 1
4. 7
5. 0

8. 8
6 .4
6. 1

2. 6
2. 5

2. 9
1 .5

3. 7

1. 0

2. 1

1. 8
. 7

1. 6
1. 8

1. 1
. 7

. 6
. 1

1 .9
1. 1

1 .9
2. 1
1 .4

. 9
1. 7

. 3
. 1

. 7

. 1

2. 1

3.
3.
2.
2.

1
7
2
1

3 .4

1 .8

1 .4

3. 6
2. 8

2 .9
2. 8
3. 8
3. 8

1. 7
3. 1
. 5

1. 3
1 .5

1. 7

2. 6

3. 5

. 5

0. 1
. 1
. 1

3. 7

4. 5
3. 1
8. 2

7. 5
4. 1
4. 8
3. 3
3. 3
3. 7
1. 6
4. 7
1 .5
. 3

$ 3 . 0 0 ---------------------

1 .9

1 5 .0
9 .4
2. 1
2. 0

-------------------------------------

3. 3

3. 2

3. 5

26. 0

3 5 .4

3 .9

2 .9

2. 2

3. 8

1. 8

T o t a l -----------------------------------------------

100. 0

100. 0

100. 0

100. 0

100. 0

100. 0

100. 0

100. 0

100. 0

100. 0

N u m b e r of w orke rs
( i n h u n d r e d s ) ---------------------------------------A v e r a g e h o u r l y e a r n i n g s 1 -----------------

83

54

90
$ 2 . 35

$ 2 . 69

27
$ 1. 5 7

67

$ 2 . 21

29
$ 1 .5 3

63

$ 1. 9 7

$ 1. 71

38
$ 1 .8 4

29
$ 1 .5 6

$ 1 .4 9

$ 3 . 00 a n d o v e r

1
2
3
4
5

S e e footnote 1, table 1.
S ee footnote 2, table 1.
S e e footnote 3, table 1.
Includes industries in addition to those s h o w n separately.
L e s s than 0. 05 percent.

N OTE:

B e c a u s e of r o u n d i n g ,




sums

of i n d i v i d u a l i t e m s m a y

15

cn
n o t e q u a l 100.




A

Scope

p p e n d i x

A .

S c o p e

a n d

M

e t h o d

o

f

S u r v e y

of S u r v e y

T h e s u r v e y c o v e r e d e s t a b l i s h m e n t s w i t h o n e or m o r e e m p l o y e e s located in n o n ­
m e t r o p o l i t a n a r e a s of the S o u t h a n d N o r t h C e n t r a l r e g i o n s of the U n i t e d States.
Auxiliary
units affiliated w i t h a n d s e r v i n g the v a r i o u s e s t a b l i s h m e n t s (i.e., w a r e h o u s e s , central offices,
laboratories, a n d p o w e r p l a n t s ) w e r e also included.
M a j o r in d u s t r y g r o u p s wit h i n the s c o p e
of the s u r v e y w e r e :
(1) M i n i n g (except p e t r o l e u m a n d natural gas);
(2) m a n u f a c t u r i n g ;
(3) t r a n s p o r t a t i o n (except railroads), c o m m u n i c a t i o n , electric, gas, a n d sanitary services;
(4) w h o l e s a l e trade; (5) retail t rade (eating a n d drinking p l a c e s w e r e not c o v e r e d o n a regional
basis, but w e r e in 26 selected areas); (6) finance, insurance, a n d real estate; a n d (7) s e r v i c e s
(except nonprofit,
religious,
charitable,
educational,
and h u m a n e
organizations).
Major
ind u s t r y g r o u p s e x c l u d e d w e r e agriculture, contract construction, a n d g o v e r n m e n t .
T h e 1 957
r e v i s e d edition of the S t a n d a r d Industrial Classification M a n u a l p r e p a r e d b y the B u r e a u of
the B u d g e t w a s u s e d in classifying e s t a b l i s h m e n t s b y industry.
T h e data for this s u r v e y reflect e a r n i n g s of n o n s u p e r v i s o r y e m p l o y e e s (except outside
s a l e s p e r s o n s ) for a p a y roll p e r i o d e n d i n g n e a r e s t J u n e 15, 1962.
In 26 of the selected areas,
data w e r e also obta i n e d for a pa y r o l l p e r i o d e n d i n g n e a r e s t O c t o b e r 15, 1961, for all i n d u s ­
tries e x c e p t retail trade.

Sample

Design

T h e s a m p l i n g p r o c e d u r e a d o p t e d for this s tudy c o m p r i s e d t w o stages.
First, all
n o n m e t r o p o l i t a n counties in the S o u t h a n d N o r t h C e n t r a l r e g i o n s w e r e stratified b y location,
m a j o r industry, a n d e m p l o y m e n t .
A s a result, strata w e r e d e v e l o p e d for a r e a s in w h i c h
the p r e d o m i n a n t e c o n o m i c activity, in t e r m s of e m p l o y m e n t , w a s agriculture, coal m i n i n g ,
m a c h i n e r y manufacturing,
textile m a n u f a c t u r i n g ,
food processing,
etc.
Equal e m p l o y m e n t
size of strata w a s m a i n t a i n e d as n e a r l y as possible.
F r o m e a c h str a t u m ,
one s a m p l i n g
unit, w h i c h w a s a single c o u n t y or a. c o n t i g uous g r o u p of counties, w a s selected w i t h p r o b a ­
bility p r o p o r t i o n a t e to its size to r e p r e s e n t the entire s t r a t u m .
Thirty-five n o n m e t r o p o l i t a n
a r e a s in the South, a n d 31 in the N o r t h C e n t r a l r e g i o n w e r e c h o s e n for study.

T h e s e c o n d stage i n v o l v e d the selection of e s t a b l i s h m e n t s in e a c h of the 66 s a m p l i n g
unit areas.
State a g e n c i e s w h i c h a d m i n i s t e r the u n e m p l o y m e n t i n s u r a n c e l a w s f u r n i s h e d e s ­
t a b l i s h m e n t listings s h o w i n g location, e m p l o y m e n t , a n d i n d u s t r y classification. E s t a b l i s h m e n t s
w i t h f e w e r t h a n four e m p l o y e e s , h o w e v e r , w e r e not inc l u d e d b e c a u s e t hese l a w s do not c o v e r
s u c h e s t a b l i s h m e n t s in m a n y States.
F o r the 26 n o n m e t r o p o l i t a n a r e a s s h o w n separately,
a stratified s a m p l e d e s i g n w a s e m p l o y e d w i t h variable s a m p l i n g ratios d e p e n d i n g o n indus t r y
division a n d e m p l o y m e n t size. A s p e r s o n a l visits w e r e e m p l o y e d , the m o s t efficient allocation
of the s a m p l e w a s n e c e s s a r y .
F o r the r e m a i n i n g 4 0 s a m p l i n g areas, w h e r e i n f o r m a t i o n w a s
solicited b y a m a i l questionnarie, all e s t a b l i s h m e n t s within s c o p e of the s u r v e y e m p l o y i n g
20 or m o r e w o r k e r s a n d one-fifth of th o s e e m p l o y i n g f e w e r than 2 0 e m p l o y e e s w e r e selected.
Retail tra d e in the 26 a r e a s w a s t reated in the s a m e m a n n e r as the other industry
grou p s .
T h e regi o n a l e s t i m a t e s for retail trade, h o w e v e r , w e r e a p r o d u c t of the B u r e a u ' s
n a t i o n w i d e retail s u r v e y c o n d u c t e d in J u n e 1962.

Method

of Collection

P r i m a r y data u s e d in the tabulations w e r e o btained largely b y m a i l q u e s t i o n n a i r e s
w i t h the e x c e p t i o n of the O c t o b e r 1961 a n d J u n e 1 9 6 2 data s h o w n for the 26 selected areas.
B e c a u s e the s t u d y r e q u i r e d data collection for t w o payroll p e r i o d s in t hese areas,
the
B u r e a u ' s field e c o n o m i s t s m a d e p e r s o n a l visits.
D a t a collection for a s a m p l e of the n o n ­
r e s p o n d e n t s to the m a i l q u e s t i o n n a i r e w a s also c o n d u c t e d b y p e r s o n a l visits.




55

56
Method

of E s t i m a t i o n

D a t a collected for e a c h s a m p l i n g unit w e r e w e i g h t e d in a c c o r d a n c e w i t h the p r o b a ­
bility of selecting that unit.
F o r example, w h e r e
1 out of 5 e s t a b l i s h m e n t s w a s
selected
a m o n g the size g r o u p w i t h 4 to 19 e m p l o y e e s , it w a s c o n s i d e r e d as r e p r e s e n t i n g itself a n d
4 others,
and w a s
g i v e n a w e i g h t of 5.
D a t a for e s t a b l i s h m e n t s w i t h 1 to 3 e m p l o y e e s ,
w h i c h w e r e not i n c l u d e d in the u n e m p l o y m e n t a g e n c y listings, w e r e i m p u t e d to the establish­
m e n t s w i t h 4 to 19 e m p l o y e e s .
D a t a o b t a ined b y p e r s o n a l visits f r o m a s a m p l e of n o n r e ­
s p o n d e n t s to the m a i l q u e s t i o n n a i r e w e r e w e i g h t e d to r e p r e s e n t all other n o n r e s p o n d e n t s .
R e g i o n a l e s t i m a t e s for all industries (except retail trade) w e r e o b tained b y w e i g h t i n g
e a c h set of s a m p l e a r e a dat a in a c c o r d a n c e w i t h the probability of selection of that area.
T h e w e i g h t is the ratio of e m p l o y m e n t in the s t r a t u m to that in the s a m p l e area.
Retail
tr a d e e s t i m a t e s for the r e g i o n w e r e d e r i v e d f r o m the B u r e a u ' s n a t i o n w i d e indus t r y study.
T h e e s t i m a t e s of e m p l o y m e n t levels a n d p e r i o d - t o - p e r i o d c h a n g e s a r e subject to
s o m e e r r o r b e c a u s e of the o m i s s i o n of e s t a b l i s h m e n t s n e w to the u n i v e r s e s u b s e q u e n t to the
c o m p i l a t i o n of the e s t a b l i s h m e n t listing, w h i c h w e r e c o m p l e t e d in a d v a n c e of the s u r v e y s .
In addition, the l a c k of p r e c i s e i n f o r m a t i o n for e s t a b l i s h m e n t s w i t h f e w e r t h a n four e m ­
p l o y e e s m a k e s it n e c e s s a r y to r e g a r d w i t h s o m e r e s e r v a t i o n s m a l l e m p l o y m e n t c h a n g e s
b ased on samples.

Definition of T e r m s
E s t a b l i s h m e n t is g e n e r a l l y defined as a single p h y s i c a l location w h e r e b u s i n e s s is
con d u c t e d .
B e c a u s e the s u r v e y w a s
c o n d u c t e d o n a c o u n t y a r e a basis (as o p p o s e d to a n
i n d u s t r y basis), d a t a w e r e r e q u e s t e d for all e s t a b l i s h m e n t s of the r e porting unit located
wit h i n the specified area.
A u x i l i a r y units, s u c h as w a r e h o u s e s , offices, repair shops, a n d
laboratories, w e r e also i n c l u d e d in the s u r v e y as p a r t of the r e p o r t i n g units.
N o n s u p e r v i s o r y e m p l o y e e s include s u c h w o r k e r s as m i n e r s ,
production w o r k e r s ,
office a n d clerical w o r k e r s , inside s a l e s p e r s o n s , r o u t e m e n , r e p a i r m e n , m a i n t e n a n c e w o r k e r s ,
installation m e n ,
cafeteria e m p l o y e e s , custodial w o r k e r s , truckd r i v e r s , etc. W o r k i n g s u p e r ­
v i s o r s w h o s p e n d less t h a n 2 0 p e r c e n t of their t i m e at s u p e r v i s o r y duties a r e also classified
as n o n s u p e r v i s o r y .
E x c l u d e d f r o m this g r o u p a r e outside s a l e s p e r s o n s , f o r c e - a c c o u n t c o n ­
struction w o r k e r s , a n d executive, a dministrative, professional, a n d s u p e r v i s o r y pe r s o n n e l .
Employment.
T h e e s t i m a t e s o f ,the n u m b e r of w o r k e r s within the s c o p e of the s u r v e y
a r e i n t e n d e d as a g e n e r a l g u ide to the size a n d c o m p o s i t i o n of the labor force inclu d e d in
the s u r vey.
T h e a d v a n c e p l a n n i n g n e c e s s a r y to m a k e a w a g e
s u r v e y r e q u i r e s the u s e of
lists of e s t a b l i s h m e n t s a s s e m b l e d c o n s i d e r a b l y in a d v a n c e of the payroll p e r i o d studied.
E a r n i n g s D a t a . F o r p u r p o s e s of this study, e a r n i n g s data relate to s traight-time
ear n ings, e x c l u d i n g p r e m i u m p a y for o v e r t i m e w o r k , a n d for w o r k o n w e e k e n d s , holidays,
a n d late shifts.
Cos t - o f - l i v i n g a n d incentive p a y m e n t s , s u c h as tho s e resulting f r o m p i e c e ­
w o r k or p r o d u c t i o n b o n u s s y s t e m s , a r e c o n s i d e r e d p a r t of the w o r k e r ' s r e g u l a r pay, but
nonproduction payments,
s u c h as
C h r i s t m a s or y e a r e n d b o n u s e s ,
a r e not.
E a r n i n g s of
w o r k e r s p a i d o n a n incentive or s a l a r y basis w e r e c o n v e r t e d to a n h o u r l y rate b y dividing
the total s t r a i g h t - t i m e e a r n i n g s r e p o r t e d b y the n u m b e r of h o u r s pa i d for d u r i n g the payroll
period.
G r o u p a v e r a g e h o u r l y e a r n i n g s for industries, excl u d i n g retail trade, p u b l i s h e d in
this r e p o r t w e r e o b t a i n e d b y dividing the s u m of the h o u r l y e a r n i n g s b y the n u m b e r of indi­
viduals r e p r e s e n t e d in the g r o u p total.
G r o u p a v e r a g e h o u r l y e a r n i n g s for retail t rade w e r e
o bt a i n e d b y dividing the s u m of the h o u r l y e a r n i n g s b y the n u m b e r of h o u r s w o r k e d .
This
p r o c e d u r e w a s u s e d b e c a u s e of the w i d e variation of w o r k s c h e d u l e s for retail e m p l o y e e s .
N o n m e t r o p o l i t a n A r e a s . T h e t e r m " n o n m e t r o p o l i t a n a r e a s " as u s e d in this bulletin
r ef e r s to t h o s e cities a n d c o u n t y a r e a s not defined as S t a n d a r d M e t r o p o l i t a n Statistical A r e a s .
U n d e r the s p o n s o r s h i p of the B u r e a u of the B u d g e t ,
certain criteria,
s u c h as population,
m e t r o p o l i t a n c h a r a c t e r , a n d integration h a v e b e e n e s tablished to m a k e it p ossible for all
F e d e r a l statistical a g e n c i e s to utilize the s a m e b o u n d a r i e s in publishing statistical data for
analyzing metropolitan p r o b l e m s .
N o n m e t r o p o l i t a n a r e a s w o u l d , therefore, e x c l u d e counties
containing cities w i t h p o p u l a t i o n s of 50, 0 0 0 or m o r e , as we l l as t hose a djacent counties that
a r e f o u n d to b e m e t r o p o l i t a n in c h a r a c t e r a n d e c o n o m i c a l l y a n d socially integrated w i t h s u c h
counties.
F o r a m o r e detailed d e s c r i p t i o n of m e t r o p o l i t a n areas, see S t a n d a r d M e t r o p o l i t a n
Statistical A r e a s , p r e p a r e d b y the B u r e a u of the B u d g e t ,
1961.




57
Industry G r o u p s .
T h e definitions of the ind u s t r y g r o u p s u s e d in this bulletin a r e
c o m p l e t e l y defined in the 1 9 5 7 r e v i s e d edition of the S t a n d a r d Industrial Classification M a n u a l ,
p r e p a r e d b y the B u r e a u of the B u d g e t .
South a n d N o r t h Central Regions.
T h e States inclu d e d in e a c h r e g i o n are: S o u t h —
A l a b a m a , A r k a n s a s , D e l a w a r e , District of C o l u m b i a , Florida, G e o r g i a , K e n t u c k y , Louisiana,
Maryland,
M i ssissippi,
N o r t h Carolina,
Oklahoma,
S o u t h Carolina,
Tennessee,
Texas,
Virginia, a n d W e s t Virginia; a n d N o r t h C e n t r a l — Illinois, Indiana, Iowa, K a n s a s , M i c h i g a n ,
M i n n e s o t a , M i s s o u r i , N e b r a s k a , N o r t h D a k o t a , Ohio, S o u t h D a k o t a , a n d W i s c o n s i n .
Subj e c t a n d N o n s u b j e c t Industries.
T h e s e t e r m s a r e defined as t hose industries
g e n e r a l l y subject to a n d t h o s e g e n e r a l l y not subject to the p r o v i s i o n s of the F a i r L a b o r
S t a n d a r d s Act.
Retail t r a d e w a s
tr e a t e d
s e p a r a t e l y b e c a u s e of its e x e m p t i o n pri o r to
S e p t e m b e r 1961.
B e c a u s e data w e r e g r o u p e d b y indus t r y rather th a n b y individual e stablish­
m e n t s a n d w o r k e r s , s o m e w o r k e r s or e s t a b l i s h m e n t s m a y b e i m p r o p e r l y classified as to
w h e t h e r t h e y w e r e subject to the act.
T h e industries i n cluded in e a c h g r o u p a n d w ithin the
s c o p e of the s u r v e y a r e listed b e l o w w i t h their r e s p ective S t a n d a r d Industrial Classification
C o d e s (as defined b y the B u r e a u of the Budget):
Subj e c t i n d u s t r i e s — M i n i n g (10— 12 a n d 14): M a n u f a c t u r i n g (19— 39); m o t o r freight trans­
portation a n d w a r e h o u s i n g (42); w a t e r t r a n s portation (44); t r ansportation b y air (45); pipeline
tra n s p o r t a t i o n (46); t r a n s p o r t a t i o n s e r v i c e (47); c o m m u n i c a t i o n (48); electric, gas, a n d sa n i ­
t ar y s e r v i c e s (49); w h o l e s a l e t r a d e (50); retail tra d e — includes only those retail e n t e r p r i s e s
w i t h $1 m i l l i o n or m o r e in a n n u a l sales, e s t a b l i s h m e n t s w i t h $250, 0 0 0 or m o r e in a n n u a l
sales w h i c h a r e par t of s u c h enterprises, a n d gasoline s e r v i c e stations w i t h $250, 0 0 0 or
m o r e in a n n u a l sales.
E x c l u d e d a r e f a r m e q u i p m e n t a n d m o t o r vehicle dealers, as w e l l as
foo d s e r v i c e w o r k e r s in this retail g r o u p (52— 57 a n d 59); finance a n d i n s u r a n c e (60— 6 4 a n d
67); m i s c e l l a n e o u s b u s i n e s s s e r v i c e s (73); a n d m i s c e l l a n e o u s s e r v i c e s (89).
N o n s u b j e c t i n d u s t r i e s — L o c a l a n d s u b u r b a n transit a n d i n t e r u r b a n p a s s e n g e r t r a n s ­
portation ( 4 l ) T r e t a I l t r a d e - - d n c l u d e s retail e s t a b l i s h m e n t s w i t h less th a n $250, 0 0 0 in a n n u a l
sales w h i c h a r e par t of e n t e r p r i s e s w i t h $1 million or m o r e in a n n u a l sales, retail e n t e r ­
p r i s e s w i t h less t h a n $1 m i l l i o n in a n n u a l sales, gasoline s e r v i c e stations w i t h less t han
$250, 0 0 0 in a n n u a l sales,
f a r m e q u i p m e n t a n d m o t o r vehicle dealers, a n d food s e r v i c e
w o r k e r s in this retail g r o u p (52— 57 a n d 59); eating a n d drinking p l a c e s in the 26 selected
a r e a s onl y (58); real estate (65 a n d 66); hotels a n d other lodging p l a c e s (70); p e r s o n a l
s e r v i c e s (72); a u t o m o b i l e repair, a u t o m o b i l e s e r v i c e s a n d g a r a g e s (75); m i s c e l l a n e o u s repair
s e r v i c e s (76); m o t i o n pi c t u r e s (78); a m u s e m e n t a n d r e c r e a t i o n
services,
except m o t i o n
pictures (79); m e d i c a l a n d other health s e r v i c e s (80); legal s e r v i c e s (81); educational s e r v i c e s
(82); m u s e u m s ,
art galleries, botanical a n d zoological g a r d e n s (84).







A p p e n d i x B.

Questionnaire

BLS 2704
(Rev. *62)

Budget Bureau No. 44—R1167.
Approval expires 6-30-6 3.

U.S. D E P A R T M E N T O F L A B O R
Your report will be
held in confidence

B U R E A U

W A G E S
C O M P A N Y

O F L A B O R STATISTICS

W a s h i n g t o n

A N D

SALARIES

O F

25, D.C.

NONSUPERVISORY

E M P L O Y E E S

___________________________________________

IDENTIFICATION:

This report should cover all establishments of your com­
pany located in the county specified above. Include
auxiliary units such as warehouses, offices, repair
shops, and research laboratories, etc. Do not report
data for any establishment located outside of the aesignated county.

1.

T YPE

OF

BUSINESS:

_______.

______________

__ ____________________________________

Indicate y o u r m a j o r b u s i n e s s activity (e. g. , eating a n d drinking places, contract
construction, m i n i n g , m a n u f a c t u r i n g , w h o l e s a l e trade, etc.) a n d y o u r principal
p r o d u c t o r s e r v i c e b a s e d o n v a l u e of sales o r receipts (e. g. , c r u d e p e t r o l e u m ,
s e a m l e s s h o s i e r y , g r o c e r i e s , etc.).
T y p i c a l e x a m p l e s of p r o p e r entries are:
M i n i n g — coal; m a n u f a c t u r i n g — textile m a c h i n e r y ; banking; a u t o m o b i l e rep a i r shops;
restaurants,
2.

P A Y R O L L

etc.

_____________________________________ __

PERIOD:

T h e e m p l o y m e n t , w a g e , a n d s a l a r y d a t a r e p o r t e d sho u l d c o r r e s p o n d to y o u r payr o l l
p e r i o d (for e x a m p l e , w e e k l y , b i w e e k l y , o r m o n t h l y ) e n d i n g n e a r e s t
Jane 15,1962
Indicate the da t e s for the p a y r o l l p e r i o d used.
If the length of the p a y r o l l p e r i o d
v a r i e s a m o n g e m p l o y e e s , e nter the dates affecting the greatest n u m b e r .
F r o m ________________________________ ,

3.

E M P L O Y M E N T
REPORT:
A.

IN

1962,

ESTABLISHMENTS

to __________________________________ , 1962.

A N D

AUXILIARY

UNITS

C O V E R E D

T o t a l ------------------------------------------------------------------

BY

_ _ _ _ _ _ _

Enter total number o f employees (full-tim e and part-time) who received pay for any part o f' the payroll
period. Do not include proprietors , members o f unincorporated firm s , unpaid fam ily workers , or pensioners .
B.

N o n s u p e r v i s o r y e m p l o y e e s (except outside s a l e s m e n ) -----------

_

_

_

_

_

Enter total number o f wage and salary employees (full-tim e and part-time) below the supervisory le v e l who
received pay for any part o f the payroll period. Working supervisors who spend le ss than 20 percent o f
their time at supervisory duties should be c la s s ifie d as nonsupervisory. Include such workers as miners ,
production w orkers , o ffice and c le ric a l workers , salesp ersons , routemen, repairmen , maintenance workers ,
in sta lla tio n menf cafeteria employees , w aiters , cu sto d ia l workers , truckdrivers, etc. Do not include outside
salesm en , force-account construction workers , and executive , adm inistrative , p ro fe ssio n a l , and supervi­
sory employees.

4.

D o y o u w a n t a c o p y of the B u r e a u * s r e p o r t o n this s u r v e y ? ______
Name

a n d title of p e r s o n furnishing d a t a

Yes]

|

No 1

_____________________________________________

(Please type

or print)

BLS USE ONLY
Schedule
number




Area

Reg.

State

City
size

SIC
code

Est.
size

Weight

Special
charac.

|

60

5.

WAGES

A ND

SALARIES

OF

NONSUPERVISORY

EMPLOYEES:

W a g e da t a a r e r e q u e s t e d for the payroll p e r i o d end i n g n e a r e s t J u n e 15, 1962.
T h e total n u m b e r of e m p l o y e e s for w h o m data a r e r e p o r t e d s hould c o r r e s p o n d
wit h the n u m b e r of n o n s u p e r v i s o r y e m p l o y e e s e n t e r e d in i t e m 3 - B o n p a g e 1.
E a r n i n g s d a t a s h o u l d b e r e p o r t e d for e a c h of th e s e w o r k e r s . If h o u r l y rates o r
e a r n i n g s a n d h o u r s a r e identical for t w o o r m o r e w o r k e r s of the s a m e sex, y o u
m a y m a k e a c o m b i n e d entry.
D o not, h o w e v e r , r e p o r t a g g r e g a t e e a r n i n g s a n d
h o u r s for s e v e r a l w o r k e r s .
Instructions for entering da t a for different m e t h o d s
of w a g e p a y m e n t a r e listed below.

Method

of W a g e

Payment

U s e c o l u m n s 1, 2, a n d 3. E n t e r e a c h s t raight-time h o u r l y
rate in the e s t a b l i s h m e n t in c o l u m n 3; the n u m b e r of e m ­
p l o y e e s of the s a m e s e x at e a c h rate in c o l u m n 2; a n d
indicate w h e t h e r the e m p l o y e e is m a l e ( M ) o r f e m a l e (F)
in c o l u m n 1.

U s e c o l u m n s 1, 2, 4, a n d 5.
E n t e r e a c h straight-time
s a l a r y rate in the e s t a b l i s h m e n t in c o l u m n 4; the n u m b e r
of h o u r s w o r k e d d u r i n g the s a l a r y p e r i o d in c o l u m n 5;
the n u m b e r of e m p l o y e e s of the s a m e s e x for e a c h salary
rate a n d h o u r s e ntry in c o l u m n 2; a n d indicate w h e t h e r
the e m p l o y e e is m a l e ( M ) o r f e m a l e (F) in c o l u m n 1.

Straight incentive
(piecework, bonus,
or c o m m i s s i o n s )

Incentive ( p i e c e w o r k ,
bon u s , o r c o m m i s s i o n )
plus s a l a r y
(or h o u r l y rate)

U s e c o l u m n s 1, 2, 4, a n d 5. E n t e r for e a c h e m p l o y e e total
s t r a i g h t - t i m e incentive e a r n i n g s in c o l u m n 4; the n u m b e r
of h o u r s w o r k e d d u r i n g the incentive p a y p e r i o d in c o l ­
u m n 5; the n u m b e r of e m p l o y e e s of the s a m e s e x for e a c h
e a r n i n g s a n d h o u r s e n t r y in c o l u m n 2; a n d indicate w h e t h ­
e r the e m p l o y e e is m a l e ( M) o r f e m a l e (F) in c o l u m n 1.
If a v e r a g e h o u r l y e a r n i n g s e x c l u d i n g o v e r t i m e a n d shift
p r e m i u m p a y a r e readily available, e n t e r s u c h a v e r a g e s
for e a c h incentive w o r k e r in c o l u m n 3 a n d lea v e col­
u m n s 4 a n d 5 blank.
U s e c o l u m n s 1, 2, 4, a n d 5. E n t e r for e a c h e m p l o y e e total
s t r a i g h t - t i m e s a l a r y (or h o u r l y rate) a n d incentive e a r n ­
ings in c o l u m n 4; the n u m b e r of h o u r s w o r k e d d u r i n g the
s a l a r y a n d incentive p a y r o l l p e r i o d in c o l u m n 5; the n u m ­
b e r of e m p l o y e e s of the s a m e s e x for e a c h e a r n i n g s a n d
h o u r s e n t r y in c o l u m n 2; a n d indicate w h e t h e r the e m ­
p l o y e e is m a l e ( M ) o r f e m a l e (F) in c o l u m n 1.
If the
incentive e a r n i n g s c o v e r a p e r i o d l o n g e r t h a n the s a l a r y
p a y r o l l p e r i o d rep o r t e d , a d d o n l y the p r o r a t e d a m o u n t
of the incentive e a r n i n g s that c o r r e s p o n d w i t h the h o u r s
r e p o r t e d in c o l u m n 5,

NOTE:
E X C L U D E P R E M I U M PAY FOR OVERTIME A N D FOR W O R K O N WEEKENDS,
HOLIDAYS, A N D L A T E SHIFTS F R O M A L L W A G E A N D S A L A R Y D A T A R E P O R T E D .




E x a m p l e s of h o w to r e p o r t for different m e t h o d s
a r e s h o w n o n e n c l o s e d e x a m p l e sheet.

of p a y

61

5.

W A G E S

A ND

SALARIES

OF

NONSUFERVISORY

EMPLOYEES:—

Continued

NOTE:
E X C L U D E P R E M I U M PAY FOR OVERTIME A N D FOR W O R K ON
HOLIDAYS, A N D L A T E SHIFTS F R O M A L L W A G E A N D S A L A R Y D A T A

F)

Number
of
work­
e rs

Straighttime
hourlyrate

Straighttime
salary or
incentive
earnings

(1)

(2)

(3)

(4)

Sex
(M
or




$

$

Number
of h o u r s
worked
during
salary or
incentive
payr o l l
period
(5)

Sex N u m b e r
(M
of
work­
or
ers
F)

(1)

(2)

Straighttime
hourly
rate

....

Straighttime
sala r y or
incentive
earnings

(4)

L3)
$

WEEKENDS,
REPORTED.

Number
of h o u r s
worked
during
sala r y or
incentive
payroll
period
(5)

$

U.S. GOVERNMENT PRINTING OFFICE :19640-746-502




BUREAU OF LABOR STATISTICS REGIONAL OFFICES