The full text on this page is automatically extracted from the file linked above and may contain errors and inconsistencies.
U .S. Department o f Labor William E. Brock, Secretary Bureau o f Labor Statistics Janet L. Norwood, Commissioner September 1985 Bulletin 2235 http://fraser.stlouisfed.org Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis The First Hundred ^tears o f the Bureau o f Labor Statistics Joseph R Goldberg and William T. Moye For sale by the Superintendent of Documents, U .S. Government Printing Office Washington, D.C. 20402 http://fraser.stlouisfed.org Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis http://fraser.stlouisfed.org Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis lib rary of Congress Cataloging In Publication D ata Goldberg. Joseph P., 1918The first hundred years of the Bureau ofLabor Statistics. (Bulletin / Bureau of Labor Statistics; 2235) Bibliography: p. Includes index. 1. United States. Bureau of Labor Statistics—History. I. Moye, William T. II. Tide. III. Series: Bulletin (United States. Bureau of Labor Statistics); 2235. HD8064.2.G65 1985 353.0083 ISBN 0-935043-00-4 ISBN 0-935043-01-2 (pbk.) 85-11655 Foreword his volume reports on the first century o f a government agency whose founders hoped that, by publishing facts about economic conditions, the agency would help end strife between capital and labor. The Bureau’s early work included studies o f depressions, tariffs, immigrants, and alchoholism and many assignments to investigate and mediate disputes between labor and management. M ost of these func tions—especially those involving formulation o f policy—passed on to other agencies. The Bureau today remains one o f the Nation’s princi pal economic factfinders. This account o f the Bureau’s history is based on 4 years of research by two historians, Joseph P. Goldberg and William T. Moye. Dr. Goldberg holds degrees in history and economics from the City College o f New 'York and Columbia University and has written exten sively on the maritime industry, collective bargaining, labor law, and labor history. He has served as special assistant to the Commissioner o f Labor Statistics since 1955. Dr. Moye holds degrees from Davidson College and the University o f North Carolina and has been with the U .S. Department o f Labor since 1976, specializing in the history o f the Department and the Bureau o f Labor Statistics. In conducting their research, Drs. Goldberg and Moye had full access to the records o f the Bureau and o f the Department o f Labor and also used the collections of the Library o f Congress, the National Archives, and other public and private institutions. In addition, the authors conducted interviews with recent Commissioners and Secre taries of Labor and others familiar with the work o f the Bureau. A t the Archives, Jerry N. H ess and Joseph B. Howerton provided valua ble assistance, as did Henry P. Guzda o f the Department of Labor Historical Office. T http://fraser.stlouisfed.org Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis m Rosalie K. Epstein, the book's editor, worked closely with the authors in helping them fashion their voluminous research into a book-size m anuscript Several expert readers helped improve the work through thoughtful critiques. They included Richard B. M orris, Gouvem eur M orris Professor o f History Emeritus, Colum bia University; Professor Irving Bernstein, Department o f Political Science, University o f Cali fornia, Los Angeles; Dr. Jonathan Grossman, Historian, U .S. Depart ment o f Labor, from 1962 to 1982; Dr. H.M. Douty, author and economic consultant; Dr. Herbert C . M orton, Director, Office of Scholarly Communications and Technology, American Council of Learned Societies; and several members o f the staff o f the Bureau of Labor Statistics. Book design was supervised by Richard Mathews. Scenobia G. Easterly and Elizabeth M. Johnson assisted with manuscript prepara tion. In writing the book, Drs. Goldberg and Moye had full freedom to interpret events in accordance with their judgments as historians, without conformance to an “official” view o f institutional history. Given the perspective made possible by passing years, the authors offer broader evaluations o f the Bureau’s early history than o f contem porary events. http://fraser.stlouisfed.org Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis Henry Lowenstem Associate Commissioner, Office o f Publications Bureau o f Labor Statistics w Contents I. Origins 1 II. Carroll Wright: Setting the Course 6 III. Charles Neill: Studies for Economic and Social Reform 43 IV. Royal Meeker: Statistics in Recession and Wartime 80 V. VI. VII. VIII. Ethelbert Stewart: Holding the Fort 114 Isador Lubin: Meeting Emergency Demands 140 Ewan Clague: An Expanding Role for Economic Indicators 178 Four Commissioners: An Economy Going by the Numbers 213 IX. History as Prologue: The Continuing M ission 258 Appendix: BLS Publications 262 Source Notes 265 Index 305 http://fraser.stlouisfed.org Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis v http://fraser.stlouisfed.org Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis Chapter I. Origins W hen President Chester A. Arthur signed the bill ereating the Bureau o f Labor in the Department o f the Interior on June 27, 1884, it was the culmination of almost two decades o f advocacy by labor organizations that wanted government help in publicizing and improvin status o f the growing industrial labor force. Those two decades had seen vast changes in the American econ omy and society. A truly national economy was developing, epito mized by the transcontinental railroads. Industry was attracting increasing numbers o f unskilled workers, recruited from among immi grants, freedmen, women, and children, into the urban centers. And, with the emergence o f the industrial worker, unemployment, slum conditions, and labor unrest were on the rise. The altruistic concerns o f social reformers, largely directed against slavery in the pre-Civil War period, increasingly focused on ameliorating the conditions o f American workers—men, women, and children. Some o f these reformers supported the emerging national unions as aids to such amelioration. Further, they challenged the prevailing view that the primary role o f government was to preserve http://fraser.stlouisfed.org Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis 1 The First Hundred Years order and protect property and that control o f the economy was to be left to the captains o f industry. They believed that the state should have an ethical and educational role, one that was indispensable to human progress. It was in this era o f ferment and demands for reform that the Bureau o f Labor was bom . The campaign for a national labor agency The campaign for a national labor agency had begun with the call for a Department o f Labor at the 1867 convention o f the short-lived National Labor U nion.1 In 1869, in response to the growing strength o f a labor reform party in the State, M assachusetts established the first State bureau o f labor statistics. But, under the leadership of labor activists, the new agency stirred controversy which almost destroyed it. In 1873, the governor appointed as chief Carroll D. Wright, a former State legislator who was not associated with the labor reform ers, and Wright soon put the bureau on solid ground. Other States followed suit, and, within 10 years, 12 more States had established labor bureaus. O n the national scene, the Industrial Congress, later renamed the Industrial Brotherhood, carried on the fight but did not survive the depression years o f the mid-1870’s. Then, in 1878, the Knights of Labor adopted the preamble o f the Brotherhood almost verbatim, calling for “the establishment o f Bureaus o f Labor Statistics’* at the various levels o f government.2 That same year, a Select Committee of the U .S. House o f Representatives held hearings on the causes o f the general depression. In their testimony, Hugh M cGregor, later a leader in the American Federation o f Labor, and George E. McNeill, former Deputy C hief o f the M assachusetts agency, called for a Federal Bureau o f Statistics or Ministry o f Labor to gather facts and figures.3 From its founding in 1881, the Federation o f Organized Trades and Labor U nions, later reorganized as the AFL, joined the drive. At its first convention, the Federation urged the passage o f an act estab lishing a national Bureau o f Labor Statistics. The 1883 convention endorsed the creation o f a Department o f Industry and Statistics to collect “such facts as will tend to bring before the United States Congress each year the true condition o f industry in all its depart ments.*’4 http://fraser.stlouisfed.org Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis 2 Origins In Senate hearings on the relationship o f capital and labor in 1883, union leaders testified in favor o f a national Bureau o f Labor Statistics. Samuel Gom pers, chairman o f the legislative committee o f the Federation, felt that Congress should no longer be able to justify its inaction on labor matters by pleading ignorance o f workers’ condi tions. A national Bureau "would give our legislators an opportunity to know, not from mere conjecture, but actually, the condition o f our industries, our production, and our consumption, and what could be done by law to improve both [sic].” He cited the useful role o f existing State statistical agencies as exemplified by a recent investigation of factory working conditions by the M assachusetts Bureau o f Statistics o f Labor under the direction o f Carroll D. Wright.5 Wright appeared as an expert witness. H e administered the Mas sachusetts Bureau, in his words, "as a scientific office, not as a Bureau o f agitation or propaganda, but I always take the opportunity to make such recommendations and draw such conclusions from our investiga tions as the facts warrant.” He stressed that the agency should be free o f political influence. There was need for Federal "investigations into all conditions which affect the people, whether in a moral, sanitary, educational, or economic sense,” thus adding "to the educational forces o f the country a sure and efficient auxiliary.” The resultant statistical progress o f the Nation would indicate "its great progress in all other m atters.”6 In 1884, backed by the powerful Knights o f Labor and the Feder ation, the establishment o f a national Bureau was included in the platforms o f both parties. In the same year, the House passed a bill establishing a Bureau o f Labor, but in the Senate, Nelson W. Aldrich o f Rhode Island secured an amendment putting the Bureau under the Department o f the Interior. Attempts to ensure that the head o f the agency would be identified with workers failed. In the debate on the issue, Representative James H. H opkins of Pennsylvania pointed out, "A great deal o f public attention in and out o f Congress has been given to the American hog and the American steer. I submit, Mr. Chairman, that it is time to give more attention to the American man.”7 H opkins and Senators Henry W. Blair o f New Hampshire and George F. Hoar o f M assachusetts emphasized that the primary function o f the new agency would be to collect information. Southerners provided the main opposition. Senator Morgan of Alabama attacked "the disposition to pry into the affairs o f the people” http://fraser.stlouisfed.org Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis 3 The First Hundred Years that had given rise to the desire to mount an “inquisition” on labor conditions.8 Criticism was also forthcoming in editorials o f The New York Times, which viewed the proposed new agency as “a fine bit of Congressional witlessness,” arguing that the work could and should be done in some existing agency.9 Overwhelming majorities in both houses approved the establish' ment o f the Bureau o f Labor in the Department o f the Interior, and the bill was signed by President Arthur on June 27. The statute provided for a Commissioner o f Labor to be appointed by the Presi dent for a 4-year term, whose mission was to “collect information upon the subject o f labor, its relation to capital, the hours o f labor and the earnings o f laboring men and women, and the means o f promoting their material, social, intellectual and moral prosperity.” The new Bureau was a compromise arrangement, providing only factfinding authority and limited funds. Labor organizations had sought more; opponents had wanted less. Appointing the first Commissioner Activation o f the new Bureau took an additional 6 months, however, as candidates for Commissioner presented themselves and others were offered. The process stirred considerable controversy, and the results set a permanent stamp on the Bureau.10 Initially, the candidates came from labor organizations. Terence V. Powderly, Grand Master Workman o f the Knights o f Labor, applied to Arthur for the position, arguing that the Knights were “the first and the only national organization” pressing for the Federal agency and the group primarily responsible for the establishment o f the various State bureaus.11 Through the Knights’ Journal of United Labor, Powderly urged passage o f resolutions supporting his candidacy. A t a meeting with the President, he presented more than 1,500 petitions requesting his appointment. Considering Powderly too controversial, Arthur looked for other candidates associated with labor. He turned to John Jarrett o f the Iron and Steel W orkers but dropped him because o f the labor leader’s political statements. Then he considered others, such as Miles S. Humphreys, a steel puddler who served in the Pennsylvania legislature and as C hief o f the Pennsylvania Bureau o f Statistics. Apparently the President even wrote nomination papers for John Fehrenbatch, for http://fraser.stlouisfed.org Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis 4 Origins mer General C hief Engineer o f the Brotherhood o f Locomotive Engi neers and, at the time, Supervising Inspector o f Steamboats for the Ohio River District, only to withdraw his name because the Tenure of Office Act prohibited the holding o f two Federal offices at one time.12 In the meantime, at its 1884 convention, the A FL passed a resolu tion to "respectfully but eam esdy protest against the attitude assumed by President Chester A. Arthur in refusing to appoint a chief o f the Labor Bureau o f Statistics.”13 The New York Times declared that the work “ought to be in the hands o f some man o f a judicial turn o f mind who has no interest in the results to be shown other than that o f presenting the absolute truth and such conclusions as spring naturally from the facts and figures.”14 The St. Louis Globe Democrat offered a more specific sug gestion: “A Bureau o f Labor Statistics which the new national institu tion would do well to take for a model has existed in Massachusetts for several years. . . . President Arthur, by the way, might have wisely put Colonel Wright in charge o f the National Labor Bureau, with these inquiries in view on a broad scale.”15 Wright’s name had been presented to Arthur from several sources. One report to the President described Wright as “C hief of the Bureau o f Labor Statistics. N ot a labor man. Excellent statistician, but will not especially gratify Labor. Moderate Republican. No politi cal aspirations.”16 Finally, in January 1885, Arthur named Wright. The New York Times editorialized, “No better appointment could be made, and Mr. W right’s selection in the first place would have been much better than the attempt to win the favor o f the labor organizations of the country by naming for the place someone prominently identified with them.”17 http://fraser.stlouisfed.org Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis 5 Chapter II. Carroll Wright: Setting the Course arroll D. Wright, the first Commissioner o f the agency that came to be known as the Bureau o f Labor Statistics, had little formal training or apparent inclination for labor sta tistics. Yet, by the turn o f the century, he was the most widely known and respected social scientist in the Nation, and per haps in the world. How did he come to play such a prominent role in his country’s service? “Because,” his biographer has responded, “to the confusion and misinformation surrounding labor reform, Wright brought high administrative ability, a nonpartisan interest in facts, and a humane idealism that dignified his character and work.”1 Carroll Wright took office in January 1885 as head o f the newly established Bureau o f Labor. He was to lead the agency for the next 20 years. Over these years, government would play a more active role in social and economic affairs in response to the demands o f labor, social reformers, and the growing Progressive movement, and the services of Wright’s Bureau would be increasingly called upon. Although the Bureau would undergo several metamorphoses which reflected shift ing political forces, Wright’s leadership gave steady direction to its C http://fraser.stlouisfed.org Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis 6 Wright: Setting the Course work in "conducting judicious investigations and the fearless publication o f the results___ ” Wright was bom in Dunbarton, New Hampshire, in 1840, the son o f a Universalist parson and farmer. H is early life gave no hint o f his later career except for its heavy emphasis on religion and civic duty. Wright taught school while he studied at academies, and later read for the law. During the Civil War, at the age o f 22, he enlisted in the New Hampshire Volunteers, making a distinguished record and receiving his commission as colonel in the fall o f 1864. Ill health, which was to plague him periodically the rest o f his life, cut short his service, and he returned to his old neighborhoods in M assachusetts and New Hampshire. Wright established him self as a patent attorney in Boston with a residence in Reading, M assachusetts. He had a brief political career, winning a seat in the State Senate in 1871 and again in 1872, before declining renomination, as was the custom, in 1873. He sought nomi nation to Congress in 1874,1876, and 1878, failing each time. In the meantime, in 1873, Governor William B. W ashburton appointed him C hief o f the M assachusetts Bureau o f Statistics of Labor, which, under earlier leadership, had become embroiled in con troversy. Wright moved quickly to put the Bureau on a solid founda tion o f objectivity and impartiality, soon making an international reputation for him self and the agency. A s Chief, Wright investigated wages and prices, and supervised die M assachusetts Census o f 1875 and the State section o f die 1880 Federal Census. He also directed studies on such social problems as drunkenness, education o f youth, and convict labor. He continued as head o f the M assachusetts Bureau for 15 years, until 1888, a tenure which overlapped his Federal appointment for 3 years. Self-trained, Wright pioneered in the development o f the fields o f economics and sociology in the U nited States. He contributed through statistical reports, papers, lectures, and new professional associations to the pragmatic approach to economic thinking, which had been limited to the narrower abstractions o f classical economics. H is optimistic view o f human prospects made its mark on the direc tion o f economic thought in the U nited States.2 http://fraser.stlouisfed.org Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis 7 The First Hundred years Wright’s views A belief in the ability o f man to study his situation and to devise ways to improve it put Wright in the forefront o f the opposition to the prevailing doctrines o f Social Darwinism. He has been linked to Lester Frank Ward, the great pioneer sociologist, in the “frith that mankind is intelligent enough, or may become so, to play a constructive part in the creation and organization o f his social as well as o f his physical environment.”3 Wright expressed his ethical consciousness in a lecture delivered before the Lowell Institute in 1879 in which he attacked John Stuart Mill and others o f the “old school” as urging, “Love thyself; seek thine own advantage; promote thine own welfare; put money in thy purse; the welfare o f others is not thy business.” In contrast, he spoke hopefully o f the “new school” which sought “the amelioration of unfavorable industrial and social relations wherever found as the sur est road to comparatively permanent material prosperity.” The “new” would combine “with the old question the old school always asks, ‘Will it pay?’ another and higher query, ‘Is it right?’” Wright would repeat this theme many tim es.* U nrest in labor-management relations did not trouble Wright, who saw it as the basis o f continuing improvement in the human condition. But it was the responsibility o f government to provide information to educate those in the midst o f the unrest. In the Eighth Annual Report o f the M assachusetts Bureau (1877), C hief Wright explained, “Any means which the Legislature can adopt which will add to the information o f the people on subjects which concern their daily lives are o f untold v alu e.. . . To popularize statistics, to put them before the masses in a way which shall attract, and yet not deceive, is a work every government which cares for its future stability should encourage and enlarge.” In his 1886 presidential address to the Ameri can Social Science Association, he declared, “With the enlightenment o f the workers o f society, the reforms so much sought for will come as a natural consequence.”5 Wright saw the benefits as well as the evils o f the factory system. He praised the industrialist: “He is something more than a producer, he is an instrument o f G od for the upbuilding o f the race.”6 A t the same time he stated, “The evils o f the factory system are sufficient to call out all the sentiments o f justice and philanthropy which enable us http://fraser.stlouisfed.org Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis 8 Wright: Setting the Course to deal with wrong and oppression; all this I do not dispute, but I claim that, with all its faults and attendant evils, the factory system is a vast improvement upon the domestic system o f industry in almost every respect.”7 He wrote, in The Outline of Practical Sociology in 1899, “Every material improvement by which society is permanently benefitted temporarily hurts somebody or disturbs some interest; every advance in civilization means the temporary discomfort, inconvenience, and loss, even, to some man or some set o f men.” The introduction o f machines displaced some individuals; however, he argued, “Machines not only create new demands in old lines, they also create occupations that never existed prior to their introduction.”8 Thus, society as a whole benefitted. In 1892, before the Buffalo Liberal Club, Wright declared, “In those countries where machinery has been developed to little or no purpose, poverty reigns, ignorance is the prevailing condition, and civilization consequently far in the rear.” In “The Factory as an Ele ment in Social Life,” he stated, “The modem system o f industry gives the skilled and intelligent workman an opportunity to rise in the scale o f employment, in intellectual development, in educational acquire ments, in the grade o f services rendered, and hence in his social standing in his community.”9 H is views on the entry o f women into the factory system were advanced for his time. Although initially he had felt that factory work would degrade women and disrupt the family, he later declared that the results o f various investigations had caused him to change his mind. In one statement, he stressed the independence accruing to the working woman: “A s woman has the power given her to support herself, she will be less inclined to seek marriage relations simply for the purpose o f securing what may seem to be a home and protection. The necessity under which many young women live, o f looking to marriage as a freedom from the bondage o f some kinds o f labor, tends, in my mind, to be the worst form o f prostitution that exists. I cannot see 'much difference between a woman who sells her whole freedom and her soul to a man for life because he furnishes her with certain conveniences and one who sells her temporary freedom and her soul for a temporary remuneration, except this, that the former may be worse than the latter.”10 http://fraser.stlouisfed.org Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis 9 The First Hundred Years He argued that working women had as high a moral standard “as any class in the community” and that “regular employment is condu cive to regular living.”11 In early expressions o f his philosophy, Wright placed great faith in the power o f the individual to bring about reforms. Increasingly, however, at a time o f strong opposition to union organization and collective action, he supported both, although he did not accept all union demands. H e threw out as “absurd” the claim on the part “of great employers that they can. deal only with individual employ ees. . . . ” Rather, “organizations must recognize organizations and the committees o f the two must meet in friendly spirit for the purpose of fairly and honestly discussing the questions under consideration.”12 A nd he saw collective bargaining—“a new force comparatively, and one which expresses the most important principles o f industrial man agement”—as the means for achieving what legislation or socialist revolution or unilateral trade union rules could not do to avoid strikes or satisfy strikers.13 W hile recognizing that strikes were sometimes necessary, Wright constantly urged the use o f voluntary means to avoid or settle them. He favored mediation and conciliation but opposed compulsory arbi tration, which he viewed as an indirect means o f fixing wages and prices by law. Voluntary collective action, then, provided the “practi cal application o f the moral principles o f cooperative work.”14 Wright did not believe, however, that resolution o f the labormanagement problem could be easily achieved. “The Bureau cannot solve the labor question, for it is not solvable; it has contributed and can contribute much in the way o f general progress. The labor ques tion, like the social problem, must be content to grow towards a higher condition along with the universal progress o f education and broadened civilization. There is no panacea.”15 Wright’s frank expression o f his views did not jeopardize his high standing with either labor or business interests. During his tenure as Commissioner in both Democratic and Republican administrations, and after his retirement, he was listened to with respect and was sought after as a commentator on the current scene. http://fraser.stlouisfed.org Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis 10 Wright: Setting the Course Laying the foundation After taking office in 1885, Wright moved quickly to establish professionalism and impartiality in the national Bureau, as he had in Massa chusetts. He firmly spelled out the guidelines: Study all social and economic conditions; publish the results; and let the people, individu ally and collectively, assess the facts and act on them. Facts, not theories, were the foundation stones for constructive action. And facts were to be gained, according to Wright, “only by the most faithful application o f the statistical method.”16 Staff He gathered a small force o f investigators—capable, well-educated men and women who shared his views on the utility o f public educa tion for social reform. If, in the early years, some lacked formal train ing, as did W right him self, others were fresh from European universities. The staff reflected Wright’s broad interests and contacts with various academic, professional, and reform groups. Several went on to careers in other agencies or to academic pursuits, and some carried public administration into the territories gained during the national expansion o f the 1890’s. Among these first staff members was O ren W. Weaver, who served as C hief Clerk from the Bureau’s inception until his death in April 1900. Weaver had worked for Wright in M assachusetts, and Wright had recommended him for the post o f Commissioner o f the national Bureau. G.W.W. Hanger was C hief Clerk until 1913, when he left to become a member of the new Board o f Mediation and Conciliation. Gustavus A. Weber, first a special agent and then head of the division o f law and research work, went on to the Institute for Government Research, which was to become a part o f The Brookings Institution. O ther early staff members included William F. Willoughby and Elgin R.L. Gould. Willoughby, a graduate o f Johns Hopkins, wrote extensively on foreign labor laws and U .S. factory legislation while at the Bureau, and later became Treasurer o f Puerto Rico. Gould, who spent 5 years in Europe conducting several surveys for the Bureau, later played an important role in a number o f political and social reform movements. Wright also reached outside for assistance in special projects. Caroline L. H unt conducted the fieldwork for a study o f the Italians http://fraser.stlouisfed.org Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis 11 The First Hundred years in Chicago, and Florence Kelley served as the expert in Chicago during an investigation o f the slums o f large cities. A t one time, John R. Commons also worked with Wright, on Regulation and Restriction of Output (XI Special Report, 1904). Com mons later criticized Wright’s method o f leadership, writing that he had "developed the military organization o f privates carrying out the detailed orders o f their commander.” The agents, he continued, “were remarkably accurate in copying figures and making calculations. . . . But they had no insight or understanding o f what it was all about.”17 But other contemporaries and associates o f Wright evaluated his influence as broadly leavening in the developing social science field. Walter F. Willcox, in writing o f the need to give practical assistance and experience to students o f theoretical statistics, spodighted "the group o f young men who gathered around Carroll D. Wright” and complained that, after Wright’s retirement, no agencies gave the “opportunity to get a training in statistics which would qualify one to rise to the most important statistical position s.. . . ” And S.N .D . North declared o f Wright, “H is Bureau at Washington has been a university for the education o f experts in statistics, in sociology, in economics, and in industrial studies.”18 C onduct of studies The principles underlying Wright’s methods for the conduct o f origi nal studies were defined and applied early. These were: Firsthand data collection, voluntary reporting, and confidentiality o f returns. Wright explained his data collection methods: “The information under any investigation is usually collected on properly prepared schedules o f inquiry in the hands o f special agents, by which means only the information which pertains to an investigation is secured.” The schedule would avoid the collection o f “nebulous and rambling observations.” Mail collection, though it might be used occasionally, was deemed a failure. “With properly instructed special agents, who secure exactly the information required, who are on the spot to make any explanation to parties from whom data are sought, and who can consult the books o f accounts at the establishment under investiga tion, the best and most accurate information can be secured.” The completed schedules were then scrutinized under strict supervision to ensure internal consistency. The final statistics were carefully checked and rechecked, as were the analytical results presented by the staff.19 http://fraser.stlouisfed.org Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis 12 Wright: Setting the Course Wright’s British counterpart, Robert Giffen, head o f the Bureau o f Labour Statistics in the Board o f Trade, sharply criticized Wright’s methods, especially the use o f field agents. Questioning the accuracy o f their direct inquiries, Giffen declared in 1892, “I think I may say that there are no persons in the world whom I would trust with the kind of inquiries which some o f the American agents m ake... .”20 Cooperation from businessmen was essential to the Bureau, since they were virtually the sole source o f information on many subjects. Wright opposed making reporting mandatory to avoid the appearance o f adversarial relations between the Bureau and business. And with voluntary reporting there were increasingly fewer refusals. Generally, agents were received in friendly fashion, even if information was refused, and substitutions were made for refusing establishments. Cooperation was heightened by the businessman’s knowledge that the Bureau maintained strict confidentiality regarding the identity o f reporters. “The Bureau never allows the names o f parties furnish' ing facts to be given in its reports,” Wright assured respondents.21 Thus, in 1898, he wired a San Francisco businessman: “I pledge my word as a government officer that names o f your plants and o f city and State in which located shall be concealed. This will be done for all plants. If senator or representative should ask for these names, he should not have them.”22 E.R.L. G ould explained to the International Statistical Institute in 1891, "Impartiality, fair-dealing, and a respect for confidence bestowed have not only disarmed suspicion but engen dered even willing cooperation.”23 Wright’s reputation for impartiality and objectivity gave him entree to the business community, through organizations such as the National Civic Federation and the National Association o f Manufac turers. H is contacts were helpful in the planning and conduct of studies. For example, in developing its studies o f production costs, the Bureau sought the advice o f producers in various industries.2* Similarly, his labor contacts helped smooth the way for die Bureau’s investigators. W hen Wright found that unions did not always cooperate, Gom pers urged cooperation. “Let there be light,” Gom pers wrote, “confident that impartial investigations create num berless sympathizers in our great cause.”25 Moreover, Gom pers sup ported putting the census into the Bureau o f Labor, advocated publication o f a regular bulletin, and suggested topics for investiga tions. http://fraser.stlouisfed.org Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis 13 The First Hundred Years Wright sought to expand the scope o f the Bureau’s coverage by joining forces with the State labor agencies. He was one o f the founders o f the National Association o f Officials o f the Bureaus o f Labor Statistics and was its president throughout his term o f office. He envisioned a nationwide network o f collaborating State and Federal agents—“ a powerful chain o f investigators,” he called it. He planned, he said in 1885, to ask Congress to authorize a system whereby the Federal Bureau could compensate State agencies for their assistance and to allow the Federal Bureau to place agents in States without bureaus.26 Although he had little success in carrying out joint studies with the States, the State bureaus drew increasingly on the Federal Bureau’s experience, so that by 1900 the reports o f work in progress in the States demonstrated a substantial degree of uniformity in inquiries covered.27 Achieving departmental status W hile Wright was laying the foundation for his agency, forces were at work to expand its power and influence. The Knights o f Labor under Terence Powderly had been active in the campaign to establish the Bureau. Early in 1886, Powderly asked President Cleveland to increase the powers o f the Bureau and also to have the Commissioner investi gate the railroad strike in the Southwest then in progress.28 In April, Cleveland sent to Congress the first special message dealing with strictly labor matters, recommending that a mediation and arbitration commission be grafted onto the existing Bureau. Congress, however, adjourned without taking action. Powderly persevered, and, at the Knights o f Labor convention in O ctober 1887, he urged establishment o f a Department of Labor with its Secretary a member o f the Cabinet. The next year, he scored a partial success. It was again a Presidential election year with labor difficulties on the southwestern railroads. In June 1888, Congress established a Department o f Labor, independent but without Cabinet status. A separate statute, the Arbitration Act o f 1888, authorized the Commissioner of Labor, with two ad hoc commissioners, to act as a board o f inquiry in railroad disputes. The growing reputation o f the Bureau under Wright had contrib uted to its rise in status. Reflecting Wright’s concerns, the act estab http://fraser.stlouisfed.org Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis 14 Wright: Setting the Course lishing the Department specifically called for studies of the domestic and foreign costs of producing goods, national trade and industrial activity, the causes and circumstances o f strikes, and other special topics. The basic functions o f the agency were not changed, but, for 15 years, it was to be more independent. Any uncertainty regarding Wright’s continuance in the new agency was soon dissipated. Although it was reported that the Knights of Labor and the Federation would oppose his retention because o f his opposition to the Knights o f Labor, his protectionist views, and his Republican associations, in fact, observers in the labor press com mented favorably on Commissioner Wright, his staff, and the Bureau’s endeavors. The National Labor Tribune declared, “Inasmuch as Commis sioner Wright conducted the Bureau with rare skill, energy, and impartiality and not as a politican, there does not seem to be any reason why there should be haste in changing.”29 Powderly later wrote that President Cleveland had offered him the position but he had refused. A t the time, however, in the Journal of United Labor, Powderly disclaimed all interest in the post o f Com missioner. In fact, he declared that the campaign to boom him for the job was a conspiracy by his enemies to embarrass him and the Knights.30 Wright continued as Commissioner, now head o f the Depart ment o f Labor. The Act o f 1888 authorized 55 clerks and experts for the Department and substantially increased its appropriations. U ntil the early 1900’s, Wright presided over the enlarged and independent operation largely without challenge. A sister agency: Bureau of the Census Wright took a prominent part in the establishment of a permanent Bureau o f the Census in 1902. U ntil that time, each decennial census was conducted under temporary arrangements by a Superintendent of the Census appointed by the President. A s early as 1884, during his service as C hief o f the M assachusetts Bureau, Wright had testified before Congress on the benefits to be gained from the creation o f a permanent census agency. Prominent academicians and Francis A. Walker, Superintendent o f the 1870 and 1880 censuses, went beyond merely proposing a permanent agency; they proposed placing it in http://fraser.stlouisfed.org Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis 15 The First Hundred Years Wright’s Department for greater efficiency and to take it out o f the political arena.31 Although there was support for a permanent agency, the 1890 census was still conducted under a temporary arrangement. But the impetus for a permanent agency increased in 1890, and the Secretary o f the Interior recommended establishment o f a permanent census office. In 1891, the Senate called for a report from the Secretary, and, in response, Robert R Porter, then Superintendent o f the Census, also suggested formation o f a permanent agency. In his report, Porter included a letter from Wright supporting the idea.32 W idespread dissatisfaction with the conduct o f the 1890 census, with especially sharp controversy in New Tfork City, focused attention on the shortcomings o f the periodic temporary arrangements. The immediate unhappiness was dissipated when, with the change of administrations and the resignation o f Porter, Cleveland appointed Wright as Superintendent o f the Census, a post he held concurrently with his leadership o f the Department o f Labor from 1893 until 1897.33 "fears later, in a eulogy on Wright, S.N .D . North, first head of the permanent Bureau o f the Census in the Department o f Com merce and Labor, stated that Cleveland appointed Wright “because no other available man was so conspicuously fitted” for the task.3* Calls for legislation continued. In 1892, the House Select Com mittee on the Eleventh Census held hearings on Porter’s report and, in 1893, recommended a permanent Census Bureau, but Congress took no action.35 Two years later, the International Statistical Institute suggested studying ways to conduct a uniform worldwide census at the end of the century, and, in 1896, Congress directed Wright to correspond with various experts on the International Institute’s suggestion and to report on the best organization for the upcoming 1900 canvass. Wright submitted his report with a draft o f a bill providing for an independent office. He opposed putting the work in the Department o f the Interior because the Secretary changed with each administra tion and appointments were subject to political pressures. In his view, the proposed office could include the activities o f the Division of Statistics in the Department o f Agriculture and o f his Department of Labor, but he opposed such a transfer. W hen pressed on the question, he responded, “Personally, I should dislike very much to be put in charge o f census duties.” But he did admit that, from an administrative http://fraser.stlouisfed.org Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis 16 W right: Setting the Course point of view, “the work o f the Department o f Labor and that o f the Census Office could be carried along together.”36 Bills were introduced, one drawn by Wright for an independent agency and one to place census work in the Wright-led Department of Labor. The House Committee on Appropriations, in February 1897, favorably reported the bill putting the work in the Labor Department, characterizing that agency as “admirably equipped for statistical work.”37 However, Congress took no action that session. During the next session, Senator Henry M. Teller o f Colorado commented, “The Census Office ought to be a bureau under some Department, and the Department of Labor is the proper place for this work.” Then he offered an amendment putting the work in the Department of Labor, “out of which ought to grow in that Depart ment a statistical force, and that Department ought to become the statistical department o f this Government.”38 Senator Henry C. Lodge o f M assachusetts stated that he pre ferred that the Census Office be separate and independent but, “if it is to go anywhere,” the Department of Labor was the natural choice. He opposed “jumbling it, with public lands, Indians, Pacific railroads, and every other kind of thing, into a department already absolutely hetero geneous and overloaded.”39 Senator William B. Allison of Iowa favored putting the work in Interior. He pointed out that the Secretary of the Interior was a Cabinet officer. Moreover, in his view, it would not be fair to the Department of Labor as it would interfere with the work o f that agency and the Department officials did not want the new work.40 Some Senators opposed the idea o f a permanent Census Bureau as an extravagance. In a compromise, in 1899, a Census Bureau was attached to the Department o f the Interior specifically to conduct the 1900 census. In 1902, a permanent Census Bureau was formed and, a year later, trans ferred to the new Department o f Commerce and Labor.41 In regard to Wright’s statement that, “Personally, I should dislike very much to be put in charge o f census duties,” there is little but inference from surrounding events to explain his view. It may have been that, in serving 4 years as Superintendent o f the Census while he was also Commissioner of Labor, he had had his fill o f the administra tive burdens and political pressures such a position would bring. http://fraser.stlouisfed.org Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis 17 The First Hundred Years The Departm ent of Commerce and Labor The depression conditions o f the 1890’s led business interests to advocate a Cabinet-level department to further the growth o f industry and foreign and domestic commerce. The National Association of Manufacturers, organized in 1895, had as a principal goal the forma tion o f a Department o f Commerce and Industry which would include the hitherto independent Department of Labor along with other agencies.42 To counter the growing NAM drive, Gompers pro posed a Cabinet-level Department o f Labor for “a direct representative in the councils o f the President.”43 Congress also launched an initiative, creating the U .S. Industrial Commission in 1898 to investigate the Nation’s many social and eco nomic problems, including the growing role o f corporate trusts, rising labor unrest bordering on class warfare, agricultural discontent, the vast influx o f immigrants, and intensified competition in foreign mar kets. The commission reported in 1901 but produced little o f signifi cance. The succession to the Presidency o f Theodore Roosevelt in Sep tember 1901 brought into office an energetic and innovative leader who was prepared to meet the problems o f the day through increased governmental activity. He sought to bridge the contending positions o f business and labor, and in 1901, in his first State o f the Union message, he recommended the creation of a Department o f Commerce and Labor with power to investigate corporate earnings and to guard the rights o f the workingman. Roosevelt’s enthusiasm for such a department, along with his party’s control o f Congress, made the matter a foregone conclusion, but the Democratic minority fought hard. Proponents o f the bill, including Senator M arcus A. Hanna o f Ohio, prominent in the National Civic Federation, saw no conflict between the interests of capital and labor and insisted that the concerns o f labor would be well represented in such a department. All sides in the congressional debate praised Wright, and proponents urged that his role and that of his agency would only gain if transferred to the new department. The A FL and the unaffiliated railroad unions opposed the merger and supported instead the establishment o f a Cabinet-level Department of Labor. Among labor groups, only the almost defunct Knights of Labor favored the merger.44 http://fraser.stlouisfed.org Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis 18 Wright: Setting the Course A t the 1901A FL convention, Gom pers had argued that, on many questions o f national importance, the Cabinet was deprived o f labor representation and had to act without receiving advice on the work ers’ viewpoint. In January 1902, he wrote Senator William P. Frye of Maine, the President pro tempore o f the Senate, that the proposed dual department would “minimize the importance o f labor’s interests and minimize the present Department o f Labor. Against such a proce dure, in the name o f American labor, I enter my most solemn pro test.”45 A t hearings on the bill, Thom as F. Tracy, an A FL representative, did not oppose a Department o f Commerce but asked for a separate Department o f Labor. H.R. Fuller, o f the railroad brotherhoods, declared that a businessman “is not capable to speak for labor, even though he felt honestly disposed to do so.” Andrew Furuseth, o f the Seamen’s Union, stated that the value o f the existing department lay “in the absolute reliability o f the information it furnishes. We do not believe it could remain that under the condition that is proposed.”4^ But the Federation and the brotherhoods did not give Wright and the Department o f Labor their unqualified approval. Tracy expressed some reservations. “W hile they are not all that we would desire, while the Department is limited to a great extent and we would like to see the scope o f the Department enlarged, the statistics and reports that are gathered in the Department o f Labor are very benefi cial and are very useful to the members o f organized labor and are looked at very carefully and closely on many occasions.”47 A t these same hearings, businessmen presented their reasons for establishing a Department o f Commerce. Theodore C. Search, o f the National Association o f Manufacturers, said the role of the agency would be “to assist in every feasible way in the extension o f the export trade o f our manufacturers.” L.W. Noyes explained, “I can conceive o f no other permanent and sure relief to this constandy recurring danger [depression] than the cultivation, establishment, and maintenance of foreign markets for our surplus, and labor will profit more by this department, through this means, than any other class o f individu als.”48 In the congressional debates, it was argued that the proposed organization would promote a more harmonious administration that would make for greater efficiency and service. Further, the new arrangement would provide increased facilities for the Commissioner http://fraser.stlouisfed.org Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis 19 The First Hundred Years o f Labor. Indeed, the House report contended, under the new setup the Bureau would increase the scope o f its activities and be more worthy o f elevation to Cabinet status. Southern Democrats constituted the major opposition. Their main point was that business and labor interests “naturally conflict. One wants what he can get, and the other wants to keep what he has, and, consequendy, the two will always be in natural conflict.” Further, the proposed grouping would place the labor agency “in an overshad owed and subordinate position.” The minority on the House Commit tee reported that they feared “that distrust and suspicion will result in friction or create such relations as would seriously impair the useful ness and efficiency o f the Department.”49 Senator Hanna retorted that it would be unwise to recognize separate interests, “to divide this industrial question by raising the issue that one part o f it is labor and the other part capital. Those interests are identical and mutual.” Similar views were expressed in the H ouse.50 The position o f Wright and the Department on the legislation is difficult to determine. Senator Nelson stated his opinion that the opposition to the bill was “inspired from die inside o f the Department o f Labor.” Yet Senator Lodge stated that, while he had not recently asked Wright, “I have certainly understood in the past that he favored that scheme.” During the debate, Wright him self wrote, “I have declined to give any expression upon the proposed bill creating a Department o f Commerce and Labor. This is in accordance with my long-continued practice o f not making public statements relative to pending legislation, especially when that legislation bears upon this Department.”51 The controversy was partially resolved by changing the agency’s name to the D epartm ent o f Com m erce and Labor. President Roosevelt signed the bill on February 14, 1903, and named George B. Cortelyou the first Secretary. The Department o f Labor became once more the Bureau o f Labor, 1 o f 18 agencies in the new Department. In 1904, it accounted for only 100 o f the Department’s 9,210 employees and about 1.5 percent o f its appropriations.52 In his message to Congress in December 1904, Roosevelt reaf firmed the role o f the Bureau o f Labor in the new Department of Commerce and Labor, giving official recognition and praise to the developmental work o f the Bureau under Carroll Wright. Further, http://fraser.stlouisfed.org Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis 20 Wright: Setting the Course Roosevelt in effect proposed a quasi-policy status for the Bureau’s ongoing factual studies, requesting that the Bureau provide Congress with information on the labor laws o f the various States and be given “the means to investigate and report to die Congress upon the labor conditions in the manufacturing and mining regions throughout the country, both as to wages, as to hours o f labor, as to the labor of women and children, and as to the effect in the various labor centers o f immigration from abroad.”53 This description o f the scope o f the Bureau’s responsibilities coincided with Wright’s formulation. Under the broad statutory authority, Wright held, “The Commissioner can undertake any inves tigation which in his judgment relates to die welfare o f the working people o f the country, and which can be carried out with the means and force at his disposal.”5^ And in practice, Wright and the Bureau initiated most of the studies that were undertaken, although customa rily the Commissioner sought either congressional or, later, depart m ental approval. But increasingly, there were dem ands from Congress, the W hite House, and, later, from social reform groups for specific studies even as the broad social studies o f the early years continued. The Bureau’s work During the 20 years o f Wright’s direction, the Bureau’s investiga tions ranged widely over economic and social developments in the U nited States and also, for comparative purposes, in other industrial nations. Initially, studies were broadly conceived and directed at social issues such as marriage and divorce, temperance, and laboring women and children, but, with periodic economic depressions and a growing industrial labor force, the Bureau was called upon increasingly to deal with more strictly economic issues such as wages, hours o f work, prices, and the cost o f living. In addition, with the growth o f unions and formal collective bargaining arrangements, the Bureau’s reports and articles increasingly reflected these developments. The Bureau’s studies placed Wright and the agency in the fore front o f the movement to develop quantitative methods for studying social and economic problems. Statistical concepts and techniques were developed and refined, although they remained rough hewn, reflecting the early stage o f development o f statistical methods. http://fraser.stlouisfed.org Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis 21 The First Hundred Years The Bureau produced an impressive range and volume o f studies considering the limited resources available. Publications during Wright’s tenure included 20 annual reports, 12 special reports, several miscellaneous reports, and, for 9 years, the bimonthly Bulletin. But the failure o f appropriations to keep pace with the demands on the agency posed a number o f administrative problems, and Wright had to drop work he might otherwise have continued. W hile appropriations rose every year from 1885 to 1893, they did not approach the level of Table 1. Appropriations for Bureau o f Labor, 1885-1905 (in thousands) F iscal year ended June 30 — Total1 Salaries 1885 1886 1887 1888 1889 $25 40 96 114 139 $25 1890 1891 1892 1893 1894 144 150 170 192 159 85 86 101 101 101 1895 1896 1897 1898 1899 170 166 172 180 173 101 101 101 103 103 1900 1901 1902 1903 1904 1905 173 177 178 184 184 184 103 103 103 106 106 106 25 53 53 85 'Includes salaries, per diem, rent, library, contingencies, and special and deficiency appropriations, but not allocations for printing and binding. SOURCES: National Archives Record G roup 257, Bureau o f Labor Statistics, Appropriations Ledger, 1887-1903. Legislative, Executive, and Judicial Appropriations. http://fraser.stlouisfed.org Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis 22 Wright: Setting the Course 1893 during the rest of his term. Table 1 shows the annual funding by fiscal year during Wright’s tenure. In 1892, Wright could say that Congress “has been very liberal.” The Department, he continued, “has met with the most generous confidence on the part of Congress and o f the President and been aided in all reasonable ways in bringing its work to a high standard of excellence.”55 By 1896, however, congressional demands had grown beyond the Bureau’s resources and Wright asked for more funds, declaring, W I am now struggling under two investigations Congress has ordered, and to carry out the third one, which Congress has already ordered, I have not force enough.” Little improvement had occurred by 1902, when Wright testified, “I have not asked for any increase of special agents since the office was established, and I may say further that there has been no increase in the salary appropriations since 1892. It was then $101,000, and it is now $102,000. That is the only increase in 10 years in the salary list o f my Department.”56 T h e first report: Industrial D epressions The Bureau’s first annual report (1886) was on industrial depressions. The study originated in concern over the depressed conditions o f the mid-1880’s and the accompanying labor unrest, particularly in the railroad industry. The report surveyed depressions from 1830 on, covering the U nited States, Great Britain, France, Belgium, and G er many through information obtained directly by 20 Bureau agents in the U nited States and Europe. W orkers’ wages and living costs in the foreign industrialized countries were included. The ongoing depres sion was analyzed in terms of “alleged causes,” and a catalog of “sug gested rem edies” was presented. Am ong the rem edies, W right suggested that capital and labor “treat with the other through repre sentatives” in disputes, and that “the party which declines resort to conciliatory methods o f arbitration [is] morally responsible for all effects growing out o f the contest.” The report noted the advantages o f mechanization, although asserting that in the short run the dis placement o f labor contributed to “crippling the consuming power of the community.”57 The study was a test case, as Wright later described it, conducted under the “critical watchfulness of friend and foe, and with the idea prevailing among labor organizations that the duty o f the new office was in the nature o f propagandism, and not o f the educational func http://fraser.stlouisfed.org Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis 23 The First Hundred Years tions o f gathering and publishing facts.” Wright pointed to the suc cessful conclusion and acceptance o f the report. He saw it as innovative in bringing out for “the first time, the relation o f nations to each other as producers and the various influences bearing upon discontent.”58 Gom pers cited figures from the report at the 1887 A FL conven tion, referring to “one o f the most important facts with which the labor movement has to grapple. The displacement o f labor by machin ery in the past few years has exceeded that o f any like period in our history.”59 A leading contemporary economist found in this first report “a mass o f information o f very considerable value,” while noting two mild criticisms: The subject was too broad and diverse and the statis tics were not sufficiently analyzed.60 In his conclusions, Wright emphasized overproduction/underconsumption and speculative investment. Later, such students o f the business cycle as Alvin H. Hansen praised Wright’s comments on the relation between investment—notably in canals and railroads—and business fluctuations. Hansen referred to Wright’s “penetrating insight into the changing character o f modem industry.”61 The persistent depression o f the early 1890*s gave rise to another important Bureau study, which looked into whether machines were depressing wages and causing widespread unemployment. In 1894, a joint resolution o f Congress called on the Commissioner to investigate the effect o f machinery on costs o f production, productivity, wages, and employment, including comparisons with manual labor. The study took almost 4 years o f difficult work. Agents observed current machine methods for an article’s production and then, with greater difficulty, attempted to secure information on the “hand” production o f the same article. The report provided information on the produc tion time required and the total costs under the two methods. In carefully qualified conclusions, Wright suggested the benefits contributed by the introduction o f machinery to rising wages and broadened employment opportunities. “The general tendency of wages since the introduction o f power machinery and the employ ment o f women and children in its operation has been upward, but it will be difficult to decide positively whether such increase is due absolutely to the use o f machinery, or to a higher standard o f living, or to the increased productivity o f labor supplemented by machinery, or http://fraser.stlouisfed.org Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis 24 Wright: Setting the Course to all these causes combined, or to other causes.” He found further that “there has been a larger increase in the number o f persons required for the production o f the articles considered, in order to meet present demands, than would have been necessary to meet the limited demands under the hand-labor system.”62 Strike investigations and industrial relations studies Turbulence on the railroads, an industry crucial to the economic development o f the country, led to both congressional and Bureau investigations. For an early Bureau study, Strikes and Lockouts (1887), Bureau agents collected information on the M issouri and Wabash strike of 1885 and the Southwest strike o f 1886, and Wright offered the material to the congressional committee investigating the disturbances. Later, Wright devoted an entire annual report to railway labor, the first U .S. study to deal with labor turnover.63 Further studies on strikes and lockouts were published in 1894 and 1901, presenting exhaustive treatments o f strikes during the 19th century. The 1887 and 1894 reports included estimates o f the losses to management and labor because o f lost worktime. A union periodical expressed the criticism in 1895 that “statistics o f losses sustained through strikes by labor are carefully noted, but no estimates are given o f the gains made by labor,” and called on the Commissioner o f Labor to “so far forget him self as to do a litde statistical work from an employee’s rather than employer’s standpoint.”64 The 1901 report contained additional information, including results of strikes ordered by unions as against those not so ordered. This time, the same union periodical welcomed the report for show ing that “the U nited States Government says that only 36.19 percent o f all strikes in 20 years failed, and that most o f the wages lost in strikes is subsequently made up by extra work, and that with the increase in labor unions, has come an increase in successful strikes.”65 In 1904, with President Roosevelt’s encouragement, Wright investigated violence in Colorado mining areas. Drawn-out labor dis turbances had caused the governor to call out the State militia, and the Western Federation o f M iners demanded Federal intervention. Wright’s lengthy report covered some 25 years and 13 strikes in the region and contained an account o f the violations o f civil law and constitutional rights o f the State’s striking miners.66 http://fraser.stlouisfed.org Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis 25 The First Hundred Years The Bureau studied many other aspects o f industrial relations in addition to the causes and effects o f strikes. From the mid'1890’s on, it published extensively on new developments in collective bargaining and State and foreign social legislation and practices such as accident prevention; workmen’s compensation; insurance against sickness, accidents, old age, and invalidity; and union welfare and benefit plans. One o f the most innovative studies was the special report, Regu lation and Restriction of Output, published in 1904. Conducted under the direction o f John R. Commons, the study covered union manage ment relations in the U nited States and England, particularly in the building trades and in the iron and steel, cigar, boot and shoe, and coal industries. It discussed both employers’ objectives o f stable conditions, fair prices, and fair wages, and workers’ efforts, working through unions, to improve wages, working conditions, and skills. It pointed out the restrictive practices o f employers, unions, and nonunion workers.67 Wright’s role in dispute settlement O n several occasions, Wright was called upon in his capacity as Com missioner o f Labor to participate in the settlement o f disputes. The railroad strikes o f the 1880’s had led to passage o f the Arbitration Act o f 1888. In addition to providing for voluntary arbitration, it empow ered the President to establish committees o f three, with the Commis sioner o f Labor as Chairman, to investigate disputes threatening interstate commerce, make recommendations, and publish a report. In 1894, President Cleveland appointed Wright to the investigating com mission on the Pullman strike, and its reports and recommendations bore the imprint o f Wright’s growing awareness o f the importance of labor organizations in balancing employer domination to achieve sta bility and continuity through agreement. The strike began in May 1894, when the recently organized workers at the Pullman factory near Chicago walked out, primarily because town officials insisted on maintaining rent levels on the com pany-owned homes despite wage reductions and layoffs following the depression o f 1893. The American Railway U nion led by Eugene V. Debs, which had advised against the strike, sought arbitration. When Pullman refused, the union voted to boycott Pullman sleeping cars. The general managers o f the railroads retaliated by importing strike breakers. Management also began to attach mail cars to the sleepers so http://fraser.stlouisfed.org Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis 26 Wright: Setting the Course that refusal to service the Pullmans would constitute interference with the mails. The managers thus painted the strike as a fight between anarchy and law and sought Federal Government intervention. President Cleveland and Attorney General Richard Olney obtained an injunction against the strikers, and regular troops were sent in to enforce it. In July, after the strike was broken, the President invoked the Arbitration A ct o f 1888 and appointed an investigating commission consisting o f Wright, John D. Keman o f New 'York, and Nicholas E. W orthington o f Illinois. The commission took extensive testimony in Chicago and Washington before reporting in Novem ber.68 Samuel Gompers, along with Debs and others, appeared before the commission. Gom pers stated his views on strikes when Wright asked him whether sympathetic strike action, such as that in the Pullman strike, was justifiable when it could “paralyze, to any degree, the commercial industry o f the country.” Gom pers replied, “I believe that labor has the rig h t.. . to endeavor to improve its condition.. . . If industry or commerce is incidentally injured, it is not their fault; the better course and the most reasonable course would be for employers to grant the reasonable requests labor usually makes and thus avert the disaster o f commerce or industry that you have mentioned.” The social losses o f widespread unemployment, both persistent and inter mittent, were greater than disadvantages from strikes, he insisted, citing Wright’s earlier reports. He opposed legislation for arbitration, fearing it would lead to compulsory arbitration, with labor at a disad vantage.69 In its recommendations, the Wright-chaired commission cited the quasi-public nature o f railroad corporations as permitting the exercise o f congressional authority over strikes. It urged employers to recog nize unions, stressing that their interests were reciprocal, though not identical. It proposed a permanent commission to investigate and make recommendations in disputes having a major impact on the public, with enforcement by the courts. And it advised that “yellow dog” contracts be outlawed.70 Gom pers praised the commission’s report as trailblazing in an era o f employer opposition to union organization, although he implicitly disagreed about special legislation for mediation and arbitration in the railroad industry, which the railroad unions supported. He wrote, “W hatever may be the ultimate result o f U nited States interference http://fraser.stlouisfed.org Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis 27 The First Hundred Years between the railroad managers and the road laborers o f this country, we have confidence that none today will refuse to bestow a generous meed o f praise on Carroll D. Wright and his companion commission* ers for their lucid and conscientious report on the Chicago strike of 1894. ”71 The commission’s recommendations became the basis for legisla tion dealing with railroad disputes that had a major impact on the public. Wright helped draft and publicly supported the pertinent bills under congressional consideration between 18^5 and 1898.72 Address ing the charge that the proposed measures contemplated compulsory arbitration, he pointed out that they sought, first, conciliation or mediation. Only if these failed to bring about agreement was there provision for seeking a board o f arbitration, with the award final only “if the parties coming before it agree it shall be.”73 In the congressional debates in 1897, Representative Constantine Erdman introduced a letter from Wright stating, “Instead of contem plating involuntary servitude, the bill, it seems to me, places labor and capital on an equality as to the enforcement o f contracts.” Citing protections against yellow dog contracts and blacklists, Wright explained, “Practically, this is a bill o f rights that the workingman, so far as railways are concerned, can not claim at present.”74 But Wright did not leave any illusions about this being a panacea: “The bill, should it become a law, will not solve any phase o f the labor problem, nor prevent strikes entirely, but it will do much to steady the forces involved and afford a powerful and even effective balance wheel in interstate controversies.”75 The resulting Erdman Act o f 1898 revised the 1888 statute by providing for voluntary arbitration and establishing a board of media tion and conciliation composed o f the Commissioner o f Labor and the Chairman o f the Interstate Commerce Commission. Operations of the board were limited since it could function only on the request of the parties, nor did the act include provisions for investigatory com mittees as found in the earlier act. Yellow dog contracts were prohib ited, a provision later voided by the Supreme Court. The arbitration provisions o f the act were never utilized, but the board o f mediation was called upon later; Wright’s successor, Charles P. Neill, was very actively engaged. Wright also figured prominently in the anthracite coal strike of 1902, in which he emerged as Roosevelt’s labor adviser. Roosevelt’s http://fraser.stlouisfed.org Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis 28 Wright: Setting the Course handling of this strike contrasted with Cleveland’s actions in the Pullman strike, introducing the Roosevelt policies of seeking to reduce the impact o f strikes, o f recognizing the right of unions to organize, and of urging the public airing of issues. Wright and Gom pers helped to ensure impartiality on the part of the Federal Government in the investigation of the strike, the dispute-resolving machinery, and the findings and recommendations. The miners had walked out in May when the operators refused to negotiate a new contract. Wright acted as intermediary between Roosevelt and Gompers in discussions o f means of settling the strike. In June, Roosevelt directed Wright to investigate the situation, and the Commissioner prepared a report and recommendations for settling the dispute. Although pleased to have the factfinding report, the Mine W orkers criticized Wright for not visiting the fields and attacked some of his suggestions. The strike dragged on into the fall.76 Frustrated and running out o f patience, Roosevelt called the parties to meet with him. Subsequently, with the miners willing to accept arbitration, Roosevelt prevailed on the mine operators to coop erate, and he appointed a commission. Wright acted initially as recorder, later as a member of the commission and as umpire in the continuing conciliation process. His earlier recommendations were apparent in the commission’s report settling the strike. Roosevelt’s appointment o f Wright to explore the anthracite dis pute was welcomed, with one expression that: “No man in this coun try—and probably there is no man living—has more persistently and intelligently applied him self to the study of labor problems and their remedy than has Colonel W right.” Later, however, as permanent umpire o f disputes under the board of conciliation established by the commission’s award, he was criticized by the U nited Mine W orkers and Gom pers for unfavorable awards.77 Studies on working women and children Wright’s early and continuing concern about the impact o f changing industrial developments on the family, and particularly on the employ ment o f women and children, was reflected in a series of landmark studies. He had conducted the survey Working Girls in Boston in 1884, before leaving M assachusetts. In 1888, the new national Bureau issued Working Women in Large Cities, which covered 17,000 “shop girls” http://fraser.stlouisfed.org Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis 29 The First Hundred Years engaged in light manual or mechanical work in factories and stores, representing about 7 percent o f such employment in 22 cities. Notably, the survey was conducted in large measure by women agents o f the Department, evidence also o f the changing role of women. O f these agents, Wright’s report said, “The result o f the work o f the agents must bear testimony to the efficiency o f the women employed by the Department, and to the fact that they are capable of taking up difficult and laborious work. They have stood on an equality in all respects with the male force o f the Department, and have been compensated equally with them.”78 The study reported on the wages, expenditures, health, moral standards, work environment, family backgrounds, and marital status o f the women. Commenting on the new opportunities and earnings of women, Wright observed, “A generation ago women were allowed to enter but few occupations. Now there are hundreds o f vocations in which they can find em ployment The present report names 343 industries in which they have been found actively engaged.. . . By the progress or change in industrial conditions, the limit to the employ ment o f women has been removed or at least greatly extended, and their opportunities for earning wages correspondingly increased and the wages themselves greatly enhanced. . . . " H e noted, however, that women were willing to work for lower wages than men.79 Depression conditions in the 1890’s raised the question of whether women and children were replacing men, and Wright received congressional authorization for a study o f industrial establish ments. In pointing out the need for the study, he noted the doubling o f the number o f women in gainful employment since the 1870 census and the “serious economical and ethical question as to the reasons for such a vast increase.”80 The scope o f the 1895-96 survey was characterized as covering “specifically the employment and wages o f women and children in comparison with the employment o f men in like occupations, how far women and children are superseding men, and the relative efficiency o f men, women, and children when employed in doing like work.” Agents visited over a thousand establishments, mainly in manufactur ing industries, in 30 States. Current data were collected for almost 150.000 men and women employed during the survey period, while information for some week at least 10 years earlier was collected for 100.000 workers. The published tables provided information on the http://fraser.stlouisfed.org Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis 30 Wright: Setting the Course occupations, hours worked, and comparative earnings o f men, women, and children o f “the same grade o f efficiency,” and the rea sons usually given for the employment o f women and girls. The data confirmed the continued rapid increase o f women in manufacturing employment. Comparisons o f average earnings o f men, women, and children in the same occupation and grade o f efficiency showed that men earned over 50 percent more than women, and that children earned substantially less than adult workers. One academician criticized the report, arguing that its emphasis on manufacturing created a downward bias in reflecting the employ ment o f women and girls, since the vast majority were employed in nonmanufacturing industries. Such coverage, the sociologist con tended, would have shown a much greater increase in the employ ment o f women and girls.81 In the early years of the new century, Wright directed another of the landmark studies on the employment o f children, Child Labor in the United States (Bulletin 52, 1904). Hannah R. Sewall and Edith Parsons investigated conditions for children under 16 years o f age through visits with employers, parents, and youth. Wright also gave considerable attention to the training o f youth. He explained the growing need: “Training in trade schools in the U nited States is intended to supply the place o f the old-time appren ticeship, which has nearly disappeared under the conditions o f pres ent-day industry.” He had studied vocational education back in M assachusetts and, in fact, participated in surveys there after leaving the Bureau. W hile he was Commissioner, two o f the Bureau’s annual reports focused on industrial schools.82 Urban and ethnic studies Several Bureau studies reported on problems o f the burgeoning urban centers. One o f these was conducted during the depression o f the early 1890’s, when Congress directed the Bureau to study the slums of the major cities. Wright noted the reasons for the study: “The popular idea is that the slums o f cities are populated almost entirely by foreign ers, and by foreigners o f a class not desirable as industrial factors and who do not assimilate with our people.” He added, “The alleged tendency o f colored people to crowd into cities becomes a part o f this wide subject and emphasizes the necessity o f the investigation. ”83 In 1894, the Bureau issued The Slums of Baltimore, Chicago, New York, http://fraser.stlouisfed.org Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis 31 The First H undred Years and Philadelphia> which gave figures on nativity, illiteracy, occupa tions, earnings, and health and presented information on liquor, saloons, and arrests. O n the liquor issue, W right had stated earlier, “'fou cannot dis cuss the labor question from either the ethical or economical side without consideration o f the temperance question.”84 He was a mem ber o f the “Committee o f Fifty," a group o f prominent citizens headed by Seth Low studying the liquor problem, and planned a major Bureau study to supplement the committee’s work. In 1897, the Bureau’s Economic Aspects of the Liquor Problem reported on produc tion and consumption, traffic, revenues, and the practices o f employ ers in the liquor industry. In The Housing of the Working People (1895), the Bureau presented data on sanitary laws, building regulations, public interven tion, and model buildings in the U nited States and Europe. The role o f building and loan associations, cooperative methods for saving, and home financing available to wage earners also were subjects o f Bureau studies. In the late 1890*s, Wright turned his attention to other municipal problems. O ne report dealt with public ownership o f public utilities, which was favored by reformers. The report, Wright stated, was intended to provide clarification, not “material for local contention." In 1899, at the direction o f Congress, the Bureau began the a n n u a l series, “Statistics o f C ities," which surveyed conditions in cities with a population o f at least 30,000. This work occupied a disproportionate amount o f the Bureau’s time, and, when the Bureau o f the C ensus was established, W right succeeded in having the work transferred. Even so, W right claimed a constructive influence for the data. “The annual publication o f these statistics. . . has stimulated many cities to reform their methods o f accounting, and this. . . has already had most benefi cial results."85 Ethnic studies o f the condition o f Negroes and o f newly arrived immigrant groups were among W right’s important contribution» W right’s interest in the status o f Negroes under the conditions o f Reconstruction and migration to the cities had been evident in his study o f Negroes as part o f the M assachusetts Census o f 1875. H e had sought to conduct a major study o f Negro labor when the Bureau was established, but had failed to receive authorization.86 However, in the late 1890’s, he provided assistance for and published a number o f http://fraser.stlouisfed.org Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis 32 Wright: Setting the Course regional studies of the condition of blacks in cities and agricultural areas. W.E.B. Du Bois was notable among the black sociologists con ducting the studies, contributing three of the nine articles published in the Bureau’s Bulletin between 1897 and 1903. In 1901, when Representative Leonidas F. Livingston of Georgia introduced a bill appropriating funds for Negro studies in the Depart ment, Wright explained that he certainly had no objections and that in fact, the Bureau had been conducting such work for several years: “Professor Du Bois, whom I presume you know, has done excellent work along this line, and I hope to be able to continue him.”87 However, after the relocation of the Bureau to the new Department of Commerce and Labor, Wright noted obstacles. In August 1903, he wrote Du Bois, “I do not believe it will be possible for us in the near future to take up the question of the Lowndes County Negroes. This is a financial question with us at the present time." 88 Apparently Wright finally found a means of funding a major study of Negroes after he left office. He headed the Department of Economics and Sociology at the newly formed Carnegie Institution which, in 1906, added a division called The Negro in Slavery and Freedom.89 About the time Wright launched the black studies in the Bureau, he also directed investigations of the Italian community. The 1890’s had witnessed an increased influx of Italians into the cities and also a rise in violence, to an extent set off by “native" fear of the so-called “mafia.” In fact, the whole issue of immigration and importation of contract labor continued to arouse considerable passion.90The Italians in Chicago: A Social and Economic Study (1897), based on materials collected by Caroline L. Hunt under Wight’s supervision, presented the general economic conditions of the Italian community. It also provided data on literacy, nativity, diet, size of family, weekly earnings, and unemployment and gave some comparisons with the earlier study of slum conditions. An 1897 Bulletin article, “The Padrone System and Padrone Banks,” also dealt with the Italian community. Many of the subjects of these early Bureau studies were later to come under the jurisdiction of other government agencies. The Cen sus Bureau took up the statistics of cities; savings and loan associations came under the Bureau of Corporations in the new Department of Commerce and Labor; and women and children were to be repre http://fraser.stlouisfed.org Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis 33 The First Hundred Years sented by their own agencies in the Cabinet-level Department of Labor before too long. Tariff studies and price and wage statistics The enactment o f the McKinley tariff in 1890 gave rise to several Bureau studies and stimulated groundbreaking work in the develop ment o f statistical methods and data on wages, prices, and the cost of living. In 1891, to determine the effect o f the new tariff law, the Senate Committee on Finance, headed by Nelson W. Aldrich o f Rhode Island, called on Wright to collect data on prices, wages, and hours of work, and hired Roland R Falkner o f the University o f Pennsylvania to analyze the material. There was the “constant demand from legisla tors and economic students for reliable statistics in regard to the course o f prices and wages in the U nited States,” for, the committee report stated, “W ithout them it has been impossible to judge even with approximate accuracy o f the progress o f the people o f the coun try and the changes which have taken place from time to time in their condition.”91 Wright’s activities had already anticipated the need. The Act of 1888 elevating the Bureau to departmental status had specifically called for studies o f “the cost o f producing articles at the time dutiable in the U nited States” and “the effect o f the customs laws.” 92 Bureau studies o f the cost o f production in the iron and steel, coal, textile, and glass industries in the U nited States and abroad were already well under way. Along with wage data for workers in these industries, cost-ofliving and budget information was collected. The term “cost o f living” referred to family expenditures, and thus the study sought to reflect the standard o f living supported by the actual levels o f family income. In all, 8,544 families were covered. O f these, 2,562 were viewed as “normal” families, defined as families consisting o f a husband and wife, up to five children under the age o f 15, and without other dependents or boarders. Two reports prepared by the Bureau for the Aldrich Committee became landmark sources o f data on prices and wages. Some wholesale price data were assembled for the preceding half century; for the 28 months preceding September 1891, prices were collected for 218 arti cles in 7 cities. Retail price collection was limited to the 28-month period, covering 215 commodities, including 67 food items, in 70 localities. Wage data were also assembled for the preceding half cen http://fraser.stlouisfed.org Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis 34 Wright: Setting the Course tury in 22 industries; for the 28-month period, the data covered 20 general occupations in 70 localities and specialized occupations in 32 localities. Falkner’s methodological innovations related to weighting and indexing the price and wage data. Indexing techniques, although known, had not been used to any extent in analyzing economic phe nomena. To weight the wholesale and retail price indexes, Falkner used the family expenditure patterns developed in the Bureau’s cost of production studies, supplemented by additional budgets developed for the Senate committee. The wage indexes, however, were based on unweighted data.93 The academic community was generally pleased with the recogni tion accorded professional statistical and economic analysis by the Aldrich Committee, although some found fault with Falkner’s meth ods. The Quarterly Journal of Economics referred to the wholesale price statistics as a “monument of thorough and skillful statistical work” and a “careful and complete investigation o f the course of prices.” Frank W. Taussig wrote, “The skill and judgment of Commis sioner Wright have yielded results whose importance and interest to the economist can hardly be overstated. . . . ” Yet Richmond MayoSmith criticized Falkner’s method for risking distortion in the general wholesale price index by placing “undue emphasis upon certain kinds o f commodities” in order to utilize family expenditures as weights.94 Frederick C. Waite said o f the two reports, “Together they consti tute the most valuable contribution to the history o f American eco nomic conditions that has yet appeared.” However, Waite criticized Wright and Falkner for making “a series o f fallacious deductions.” Waite complained that the wage index was based on too few occupa tions and too few returns—and all of them collected in the Northeast. He further alleged problems in the methodology in that Falkner should have used a multiyear base instead o f the single year 1860 and that he should have weighted the wage data in making the index.95 And, in further comment, some critics did not see that the reports would resolve the disputes surrounding the tariff question. The work on wholesale prices, begun for the Aldrich Committee, was developed further by Falkner and the Bureau in 1900 and thereaf ter. They directed their efforts towards overcoming the undue repre sentation o f consumer goods arising from the use o f the weights determined from the family expenditure studies. In 1900, in revising http://fraser.stlouisfed.org Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis 35 The First Hundred Years his indexes, Falkner maintained the weighting system based on family expenditures, but sought to improve the price representation o f spe cific commodities. However, criticism o f his use o f family expenditure weights continued; Taussig commented that these were better suited to retail prices.96 The Bureau’s own W holesale Price Index, covering 1890 to 1901, appeared in 1902, marking the Bureau's entry into the field o f current economic measures. Although the Bureau sought to link its effort as much as possible to the earlier work, the index o f 1902 was based on an entirely new survey and concept. Because a weighting system based on national consumption patterns was not deemed feasible, and weighting by family expenditures was held to miss too many manufac tured items, the Bureau used “a large number o f representative staple articles, selecting them in such a manner as to make them, to a large extent, weight themselves."97 A subsequent revision in 1914, however, turned to computing the weights “from the aggregate values o f com modities exchanged year by year,” utilizing the 1909 Census o f Manu factures.98 To lay the groundwork for an index o f retail prices, the Bureau conducted a massive survey o f family expenditures during 1901-03, 10 years after the Aldrich study. Unlike the earlier surveys, which had covered workers’ families in specific industries and areas, the new survey aimed to be representative o f the conditions o f workers in the whole country. Special agents o f the Bureau visited 25,440 families of wage earners and o f salaried workers earning up to $1,200 a year in the principal industrial centers in 33 States. Native—including Negro—and foreign-bom families were included, without reference to industry. The agents recorded one year’s expenditures on food, rent, principal and interest on homes, fuel, lighting, clothing, furniture, insurance, taxes, books and newspapers, and other personal expendi tures. They also obtained information on earnings o f family members. Detailed data on income and expenditures o f 2,500 families pro vided a basis for determining the relative expenditures, or weights, for the principal items entering into the cost o f living. In particular, weights were determined for the principal articles o f food consumed. The Bureau also obtained information on prices for the period 1890 to 1903 from 800 retail merchants for the same items and locali ties as those reflected in the budgets o f the expenditure survey. This http://fraser.stlouisfed.org Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis 36 Wright: Setting the Course was the first known collection o f retail price data covering a period as long as 3 years. With the expenditure and price data, the Bureau prepared its first weighted retail price index: “Relative Retail Price o f Food, Weighted According to the Average Family Consumption, 1890 to 1902 (base of 1890-1899).” It provided monthly quotations of 30 principal items of food and summarized them in terms o f “average price o f the article” and “relative price,” presenting these as averages and as weighted by consumption. Coverage was soon expanded to over 1,000 retail estab lishments in 40 States. The index was maintained through 1907." Wage data were collected as part o f the same set of surveys. Previously, the agency’s wage work had been sporadic and for specific purposes. In releasing the results of the study in 1904, in Wages and Hours of Labor, the Bureau explained that it had undertaken “a very painstaking and complete investigation which would result in thor oughly representative figures for a period o f years [1890 to 1903] and which would serve as the basis for the regular annual collection and presentation o f data from the establishments covered.” The study covered 519 occupations, “only the important and distinctive occupations which are considered representative o f each industry,” in 3,475 establishments in 67 manufacturing and mechani cal industries. The voluminous data included actual and relative wages and hours by occupation; relative wages by industry; and relative wages and hours for all industries covered, weighted according to census data for aggregate wages in each industry. The new series appeared formally in 1905, as “Wages and H ours of Labor in Manufac turing Industries, 1890 to 1904,” but covered fewer industries and occupations than the original study.100 The wage and retail price survey results were placed in juxtaposi tion in an article in the Bureau’s Bulletin in July 1904, with the observation that, “taking 1903, it is seen that hourly wages were 16.3 percent above the average of 1890-1899, while retail prices o f food were 10.3; making the increase in purchasing power of the hourly wage, 5.4 percent.” There were sharp reactions to this conclusion from labor organi zations, politicians, and academicians, coming as it did at a time of industrial unrest and strikes due to layoffs, wage reductions, and reduced purchasing power following the panic o f 1903—and the Pres idential campaign o f 1904. Representative William S. Cowherd of http://fraser.stlouisfed.org Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis 37 The First Hundred Years M issouri, o f the Democratic Congressional Committee, attacked the Bureau's results and charged Wright with veiling the truth by manipu lating figures to meet party necessities. The Journal o f the United Mine W orkers complained o f methodological problems, arguing that the Bureau should show not only the daily wage but also the number o f days worked. The Official Journal o f the Amalgamated Meat C ut ters and Butcher Workmen castigated Wright and the wage and costof-living figures, alleging that the summary “appears to have been edited solely for political purposes and, to that end, has so many misleading statements that, as a bulletin concerning labor matters, it is entirely unworthy and inaccurate.’’101 The Machinists’ Monthly Journal o f the International Association o f M achinists roundly attacked the figures: “It will take more than the figures given by the Honorable Carroll D. Wright in the July Bulletin o f the Bureau o f Labor to convince the housewives o f the nation that wages have increased in proportion to the increase in prices.”102 Ernest Howard wrote in the Political Science Quarterly, “The effort made by the Bureau o f Labor to find an approximate compensation for the rise o f retail prices in the wage increase among certain classes of labor, most highly organized and aggressive, cannot be accepted as representative o f the general labor experience.”103 More moderate views came from two other sources. Wesley C. M itchell spoke favorably o f the improvements in wage data under Wright, especially in classified wage tables and index numbers. Later, he upheld the “high character” o f the Bureau's index numbers, specifi cally in contrast to a Census report that showed different trends. Nevertheless, even M itchell warned o f shortcomings. The new tables, he said, had met “with more favor than they merit” because they continued Falkner’s “most serious error”—lack o f an adequate system o f weights. The National Civic Federation gave a balanced perspective on the issue under the caption “Statistics That Do Not Apply.” Com menting that “partisan motives, sharply accentuated by a Presidential campaign, have caused both attack and defense o f these data,” it pointed out that the Bureau had not intended that the observations apply to the immediate situation. The statistics “share the fault, per haps inevitable, o f all governmental statistics. They may enlighten in retrospect, but as to the immediate present, they are out o f date.”10* http://fraser.stlouisfed.org Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis 38 Wright: Setting the Course International influences Wright’s interest in developments abroad was apparent early in his career. A s C hief o f the M assachusetts Bureau, he visited England in 1881 to collect material for a factory study. Later, as Commissioner of the Federal Bureau, he sent members o f his staff to Europe and obtained the services o f experts studying abroad to collect information for studies. W right’s reputation and his example, as well as the example o f the State bureaus, influenced the rise o f labor agencies in the European countries. A t an Industrial Remuneration Conference in London in January 1885, several speakers pointed to the American experiments. Charles Bradlaugh, M.R, maintained “there could not be any fair arbitration satisfactory to the men until we had bureaux o f the statis tics o f labour similar to those which had existed for 17 years in M assachusetts, which had been established in Connecticut, and in which an experiment had been made to some extent in W ashington.” Sir Rawson Rawson, President o f the Royal Statistical Society, hoped the conference would impress the government with the importance of following the example o f “the American government or the govern ment o f M assachusetts.”105 The influence o f the U .S. agency was formally recognized in a resolution o f the 1891 convention of the International Statistical Insti tute in Vienna, which expressed the desire “that the governments may be willing to create Bureaus o f Labor on the plan o f those o f the U nited States, where these offices do not exist, either creating a dis tinct Bureau or utilizing the organization o f existing bureaus o f statis tics.” National bureaus o f labor statistics were established in quick succession during the 1890*s and early 1900’s in France (1891), Britain (1893), Spain (1894), Belgium (1895), Austria (1898), Germany, Italy, and Sweden (1902), and Norway (1903). O ther countries, like Den mark (1895) and the Netherlands (1895), established central statistical offices which also collected statistics on labor.106 During hearings before the British Royal Commission on Labour in 1892, Elgin R.L. Gould, a special agent o f Wright’s agency, was called upon to testify. G ould had been in Europe to attend a session of the International Statistical Institute and to collect information for several Bureau studies, and he gave a thorough picture o f the philoso phy and organization o f the agency under Wright. One outcome of http://fraser.stlouisfed.org Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis 39 The First Hundred Years the commission’s activities was the prompt establishment o f the new British Labour Department.107 Shortly after its establishment, the British agency exerted a recip rocal influence on its American counterpart when it began publication o f the monthly Labour Gazette, which Wright used as an example to justify congressional authorization o f a similar publication. In a letter to Representative Lawrence E. M cGann, Wright endorsed the House bill providing for a bulletin, “especially as foreign Governments are now doing precisely what your bill aims to accomplish. The English Department o f Labor, which was established only recently, is now publishing, very successfully and with great acceptance to the indus trial interests o f the country, a labor gazette.”108 Congress approved publication o f a bulletin in 1895. Wright was active in the early international efforts o f economists, social reformers, and government labor officials to provide a bridge between trade union concerns, particularly about working conditions, and national government approaches to labor policy. The first confer ence held under such informal welfare reform auspices was the Con gress for International Labor Legislation in Brussels in 1897. Wright and W.F. Willoughby o f the Bureau staff attended these first discus sions o f international cooperation “in the formulation of labor stand ards and uniform presentation o f reports and statistics regarding enforcement. ”109 In 1900, Wright attended the Congress o f Baris, an outgrowth of the Brussels meetings. From the Baris conference developed the Inter national Labour Office, established at Basel in 1901, and the Interna tional Association for Labor Legislation, which first met at Basel that same year. The next year, Wright helped organize an American section of the International Association. From 1903 to 1909, the Bureau carried $200 in its budget to support the work of the Labour Office, which received generally greater support from European govern m ents.110 The Commissioner also belonged to the International Statistical Institute and the International Institute of Sociology. He was made an honorary member o f the Royal Statistical Society of Great Britain and the Imperial Academy o f Science o f Russia, and a corresponding member of the Institute of France. In 1906, the Italian government honored him and, in 1907, France bestowed on him the Cross of the Legion o f Honor for his work in improving industrial conditions. http://fraser.stlouisfed.org Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis 40 W right: Setting the Course Wright’s other activities W hile at the Bureau and after he left, Wright was active in many pursuits. He served as president o f the American Social Science A sso ciation (1885-1888), the International Association o f Governmental Labor Officials (1885-1905), and the American Statistical Association (1897-1909). He also served as president o f the American Association for the Advancement o f Science (1903) and was active in the Washing ton Academy o f Sciences. He was also president o f the Association for the Promotion of Profit Sharing, a short-lived group established in 1893 to promote industrial partnership between employers and work ers through profit sharing. Shortly before leaving the Bureau, he was superintendent o f the Department o f Social Economy at the Louisiana Purchase Exposition, St. Louis World’s Fair (1904). He also served on the Massachusetts Committee on Relations Between Employer and Employee, whose report favored profit sharing, arbitration, child labor restrictions, workmen’s compensation, and revision o f the laws on injunctions.111 From 1895 to 1904, Wright was honorary professor o f social economics at the Catholic University o f America—where he met the young professor o f political economy, Charles P. Neill, who was to succeed him as Commissioner o f Labor Statistics. For some o f the period he also lectured at Columbian University, later to become George Washington University. He served on the board o f trustees of the newly established Carnegie Institution o f Washington and, in 1904, became head o f its new department o f economics and sociology. Meanwhile, in 1902, he had become the first president o f Clark C ol lege, charged with organizing the undergraduate program for the inno vative institution. After leaving the Bureau, he served as chairman o f the Massachu setts Commission on Industrial and Technical Education. A t the same time, he helped found and served as president o f the National Society for the Promotion o f Industrial Education and was active on several committees o f the National Civic Federation.112 Retirement Carroll Wright retired from government service at the end o f January 1905—the 20th anniversary o f his joining the new Bureau o f Labor in http://fraser.stlouisfed.org Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis 41 The First Hundred Years the Department o f the Interior. Near the close o f his tenure, Wright reaffirmed his view o f the agency’s role: “To my mind, all the facts which have so far been gathered and published by the Bureau bear, either directly or indirecdy, upon the industrial and humanitarian advance o f the age, and are all essential in any intelligent discussion of what is popularly known as the ‘labor question.’” He stressed that labor statistics should relate to the ‘‘material, social, intellectual, and moral prosperity o f society itself,” rather than solely to narrow fields. In response to those who called on the Bureau to become “the instru ment o f propagandism” in the interest o f reform, Wright replied, “W henever the head o f the Bureau o f Labor attempts to turn its efforts in the direction o f sustaining or o f defeating any public mea sure, its usefulness will be past and its days will be few.” He continued: “It is only by the fearless publication o f the facts, without regard to the influence those facts may have upon any party’s position or any parti san’s views, that it can justify its continued existence, and its future usefulness will depend upon the nonpartisan character o f its person nel.”113 Wright died in February 1909 at the age o f 69. http://fraser.stlouisfed.org Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis 42 Chapter III. Charles Neill: Studies for Economic and Social Reform O n December 12, 1904, President Roosevelt appointed Charles P. Neill to succeed Carroll Wright as Commissioner o f the Bureau o f Labor, effective February 1, 1905. The active role already emerging for the Bureau under Wright in the early years o f the Roosevelt administration intensified under Neill as Roosevelt increasingly used the Bureau to further the reform efforts of the Progressive movement. In 1908, the President wrote, “Already our Bureau o f Labor, for the past 20 years of necessity largely a statistical bureau, is practically a Department o f Sociology, aiming not only to secure exact information about industrial condi tions but to discover remedies for industrial evils.”1 A s a major figure in the conservative wing o f the Progressive movement, Roosevelt was concerned with the social problems o f the working population brought on by the increasing industrialization of the economy and the growth o f large-scale enterprises. This concern reflected both a sincere interest in reducing the ill effects o f industrial ization and a desire to forestall the possible alternatives o f social insta bility and radicalism. In relations between capital and labor, neither “government o f plutocracy” nor o f “mob” was to be controlling.2 http://fraser.stlouisfed.org Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis 43 The First Hundred Years Roosevelt regularly expressed his concern with labor problems in his annual messages to Congress. H is policy, innovative for the times, was for limited government involvement in labor-management rela tions to protect the interests o f the public. He saw unions and their federations as accomplishing "very great g o o d .. . when managed with forethought and when they combine insistence upon their own rights with law-abiding respect for the rights o f others.“ The role o f the Department o f Commerce and Labor was to secure fair treatment for both labor and capital.3 For Roosevelt, the Bureau o f Labor's investigatory activities and reports were o f great value in furthering his goals. In his 1904 message to Congress, he called attention to the positive role o f government accomplished “merely by giving publicity to certain conditions," and praised the Bureau o f Labor for doing excellent work o f this kind “in many different directions."4 The Bureau retained its broadened role even after Taft took office in 1909. Thus in 1911, in describing the Bureau's activities, Neill wrote o f “the practical nature o f the work which the Federal Govern ment is trying to do to assist in exposing conditions which are danger ous to the life and health o f wage-earners and to furnish the basis for sound legislation for the improvement o f these conditions."5 Demands for legislation mounted during the early years o f the century as the growing strength o f labor unions was challenged by the concerted action o f large corporations. Responding to gains by the American Federation o f Labor and especially the United Mine Work ers, the National Association o f M anufacturers and the Citizens' Industrial Association launched a vigorous campaign for the open shop. A t the same time, the U nited States Steel Corporation drove the remnants o f the iron and steel workers’ union from its plants. In defense against these antiunion moves, the A FL increased its political activities. In 1906, it presented “Labor’s Bill o f Grievances," calling labor’s principal demands to the attention o f the President and the leaders o f the House and Senate. Among the demands were legislation for an 8-hour workday, elimination o f the competition of convict labor, relief from the mounting flow o f immigration, exemp tion o f unions from the antitrust laws, and relief from injunctions, which were increasingly sought by employers to prevent union action in labor disputes. http://fraser.stlouisfed.org Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis 44 N eill: Studies for Economic and Social Reform In the factories and mines, a militant new union, the Industrial W orkers o f the World, emerged to challenge the A FL from the left. Originating in western mining areas, the IWW took up the cause of the unorganized and unskilled, largely immigrant, work force in the factories o f the East. Confrontations o f workers, strikebreakers, police, and militia often erupted into violence. In the turmoil o f the times, Neill, as Roosevelt’s ally in reform efforts, became embroiled in considerable controversy. Although the Commissioner forcefully defended his agency against charges o f parti sanship, declaring that it sought objectivity and balance, his experience provided something o f an object lesson, warning o f the hazards of being closely identified with particular government policies. The second Commissioner Charles Patrick Neill was bom in Rock Island, Illinois, in 1865 and was reared in Austin, Texas. He attended the University o f Notre Dame and the University o f Texas before graduating summa cum laude from Georgetown University in 1891. He then became an instructor at Notre Dame. In 1895, he returned to the East Coast to finish his doctorate at Johns Hopkins, receiving the Ph.D. in 1897. In the meantime, he served as an instructor at Catholic University in Washington, D .C . He was appointed Professor o f Political Economy in 1900, a post he held until he came to the Bureau o f Labor in 1905. It was at Catholic University that Neill met Carroll Wright, who was teaching there while serving as Commissioner o f Labor. Before the House Committee on Agriculture in 1906, Neill briefly summarized his early years: “I was engaged in business as a clerk from the time I was 10 years old to 20, including occupation as a newsboy, a clerk, and other things. I have been a student from the time I was 20 until I was 30, and a teacher from that time on.” He had also worked at the University o f Chicago setdement house at the gate o f the stockyards.6 Neill was active in charitable organizations in Washington before his entry into government service, and was associated with the “new era” o f professionalism in welfare work in that city. In 1900, President McKinley appointed him to the newly created Board o f Charities for the District o f Columbia, which chose him as its vice president.7 http://fraser.stlouisfed.org Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis 45 The First Hundred Years Neill also participated in the educational activities o f the District’s Civic Center, which sponsored studies o f housing conditions, espe cially o f alley dwellings, and o f sanitary conditions in the schools, and which played an important role in the enactment o f child labor and compulsory education laws—causes in which he was prominent as Commissioner.8 Neill first came to Roosevelt’s attention in 1902, when Carroll Wright recommended him for a post on the staff o f the commission set up to mediate the anthracite coal strike. Roosevelt commented in his autobiography, “The strike, by the way, brought me into contact with more than one man who was afterward a valued friend and fellow-worker. O n the suggestion o f Carroll Wright, I appointed as assistant recorder to the Commission Charles R Neill, whom I after ward made Labor Commissioner to succeed Wright him self.. . . ” 9 In 1903, Roosevelt appointed Neill to the new Board of Conciliation and Arbitration for the anthracite industry, where he served first as accountant and later as umpire, replacing Wright. W hen Roosevelt was looking for a new Commissioner o f Labor, a number o f influential men supported Neill for the position. One of them, Edward A. Moseley o f the Interstate Commerce Commission, wrote Marshall Cushing o f the National Association o f Manufactur ers, “I believe he is the sort o f man that should be appointed to a position o f that kind not only because he is a political economist, but will be able to hold the balance with a steady hand.” The Review of Reviews, while commenting that it would be difficult to fill Wright’s place in government and academic reputation, remarked, “The new Commissioner brings good credentials for his work.”10 N eill’s views Neill’s early writings and speeches reflected the view that the better ment o f society could come only from the moral improvement o f the individual. He saw the task o f the social worker as one o f developing the psychic fortitude o f the poor: “We may say what we will about environment. The struggle o f the poor is the struggle o f the interior psychical forces against external environment. Any society is only as strong as the individual members make it.”11 By the time he became Commissioner, he had broadened his view: “It is true poverty is perfectly compatible with sanctity, but http://fraser.stlouisfed.org Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis 46 Neill: Studies for Economic and Social Reform when this happens it is the unusual. Those o f you who have seen something o f low standards o f living amid poor material surroundings know how almost impossible it is to bring up children with decent moral standards. To raise the standards o f living, both material and moral, we must begin with the food, clothing, and shelter. . . . There are certain possibilities in higher standards o f living which the individ ual cannot attain by himself. This requires State action. There must be certain united action to allow the individual to reach the highest standard o f living possible.”12 Neill emphasized the collective social conscience, especially after becoming Commissioner. In a 1906 article, “Child Labor in the National Capital,” he summarized his ideas as follows: “W hose is the responsibility? For whom do these children work? The truth is these child victims are working for us. They are working for me, and they are working for you. We enjoy cheaper products because the rights of children are outraged in order to furnish cheap labor. We cannot turn around and lay the blame entirely on the greed o f the employer. W hatever shameful conditions o f child labor exist, it is due just as much to a lack o f conscience in the community at large as it is to any greed on the part o f particular employers.”13 Neill did not agree with those who believed that capital and labor were “necessary allies and natural friends.” O n the contrary, he argued that industrial disputes were inherent in the very nature o f the eco nomic system. However, he stated, “That strife may be tempered and kept within reasonable limits. . . . The best hope o f industrial peace between these two groups lies in educating each to the realization that antagonistic interests can be compromised and treaties of peace arranged better before than after a test o f strength has been made by an appeal to force. ”14 He saw unions as an avenue for tempering the conflict. “We must either develop a satisfactory process by which, through some form of trade unionism and collective bargaining, the burdens o f industry shall be lightened and the wealth constantly created by the joint toil of brain and arm shall be more widely distributed amongst those who cooperate in its production, or we shall find ourselves face to face with the menace o f Socialism in one form or another.”15 http://fraser.stlouisfed.org Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis 47 The First Hundred Years The Bureau’s investigative work During his first year in office, Neill concentrated on completing stud' ies Wright had begun. But the President soon asked him to undertake several major new investigations on issues o f immediate concern. Packinghouse conditions For over a decade, reformers had been demanding Federal legislation to require the accurate labeling o f preserved foods, beverages, and drugs. Germany and other European countries had roundly con demned American preserved meat and packinghouse products. Veter ans o f the Spanish-American War remembered none too fondly the “embalmed beef* o f the quartermaster. Such legislation had passed the House only to die in the Senate, and Roosevelt urged its adoption in his message to Congress in December 1905.16 Early in 1906, U pton Sinclair published The Jungle, which exposed the unsanitary practices o f the Chicago packers and stirred public indignation. Roosevelt called for action. The Bureau o f Animal Industry o f the Department o f Agriculture, which maintained a staff o f inspectors at the stockyards, immediately launched an investigation. The President directed Neill to make an independent inquiry: “I want to get at the bottom o f this matter and be absolutely certain of our facts when the investigation is through.” Neill, along with James Bron son Reynolds, a reformer from New York City, spent 2Vz weeks gathering information and then submitted a report to Roosevelt, who praised him for his work. In addition, not satisfied with the report of the Animal Industry Bureau, Roosevelt asked Neill to revise it.17 Based on these reports, Roosevelt ordered the Department of Agriculture to prepare a bill establishing more stringent meat inspec tion procedures. Senator Albert J. Beveridge introduced the proposal in May. The so-called Beveridge Amendment quickly passed the Sen ate, where the packers made no fight. The press reported that the packers “were willing to agree to almost any kind of legislation” to prevent publication of the Neill-Reynolds report.18 However, Representative James W. Wadsworth of New York, Chairman o f the Committee on Agriculture, mounted a vigorous opposition in the House. Thereupon, Roosevelt released both reports. A s he transmitted the Neill-Reynolds report, he declared, “The condi tions shown by even this short inspection to exist in the Chicago http://fraser.stlouisfed.org Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis 48 Neill: Studies for Economic and Social Reform stockyards are revolting. It is imperatively necessary in the interest of health and decency that they should be radically changed. Under the existing law it is wholly impossible to secure satisfactory results.” The Neill-Reynolds report had described the poor lighting and ventilation facilities; the “indifference to matters o f cleanliness and sanitation” demonstrated by the privies provided for men and women; and the uncleanliness in handling products.19 The packers retorted in congressional hearings that their procedures were sanitary and wholesome but that they would favor more efficient and expanded inspection. Nevertheless, their defenders in the House treated Neill harshly when he came to testify, prompting him to complain, “I feel like a witness under cross-examination whose testimony is trying to be broken down.”20 In the meantime, the press reported vigorous activities at the packinghouses where “carpenters and plumbers and kalsominers by the score are at work on alterations.” Nevertheless, a great outcry continued in both American and foreign newspapers. O n June 19, Congress agreed to a meat inspection bill, and the President signed it on June 30, the same day he signed the Pure Food Law.21 Violations of the 8-hour law A t the same time that Roosevelt ordered Neill into Chicago on the meatpacking investigation, he asked the Commissioner to investigate alleged abuses o f the law limiting contractors on Federal Government work to an 8-hour day for their laborers and mechanics. The AFL charged that contractors disregarded the 8-hour law with impunity. In response, Roosevelt wrote to Frank M orrison, Secretary of the AFL: “At our interview yesterday, I requested you to bring to my attention any specific cases of violation o f the 8-hour law. . . . I shall at once forward them to Mr. Neill, o f the Labor Bureau, and direct him to investigate them and report direct to m e .. . . My belief is that you will find that with Commissioner Neill personally supervising the enforce ment of the law all complaints will be met.”22 After a thorough inquiry, Neill reported to the President in August that the law was rarely obeyed. In September, referring to the Neill memorandum, Roosevelt issued executive orders putting into effect the Commissioner’s suggestions for improving notification and enforcement procedures. Roosevelt asked Neill to continue his review of enforcement by the contracting agencies and the courts. A year http://fraser.stlouisfed.org Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis 49 The First Hundred Years later, Neill reported that most contractors continued to have their employees work 10 hours a day.23 The Butchers' Journal o f the Amalgamated Meat Cutters and Butcher Workmen declared, “Charles P. Neill, National Commis sioner o f Labor, has come out flat-footed against the greedy and grasp ing contractors on government work and in a letter to President Roosevelt he shows up the contractors in their true light and con demns their persistent efforts to violate the 8-hour law on all govern ment work.”24 The Machinists' Monthly Journal o f the International Association o f M achinists thought politics to be at the root o f the President’s action: “W hether the sudden feverish desire on the part o f the Federal authorities to see that the provisions o f the 8-hour law are strictly enforced has anything to do with the recent decision o f the organized forces o f labor to enter the political field can best be determined by the workers themselves.”25 Immigration laws Immigration laws figured prominently among labor’s grievances, because the unions viewed existing laws as providing draftees for business to restrain wages and prevent unionization. Roosevelt fre quently called on Neill to conduct inquiries, and the issue occasionally found Neill, who supported restriction o f immigration, at odds with his superior, Secretary o f Commerce and Labor O scar Straus, a founder o f the Immigrants* Protective League and a proponent o f an open immigration policy. In June 1906, Roosevelt asked Neill to prepare confidential reports on the immigration situation, with the assistance o f the Com missioner General o f Immigration. Neill also surveyed conditions sur rounding Japanese immigration into the San Francisco area.26 Roosevelt also called on Neill, as well as Straus, when the actions o f the State o f South Carolina under the Immigration Act of 1903 were questioned. The act had made it unlawful to pay for the trans portation o f aliens or to assist or encourage the importation o f aliens by advertising in foreign countries or otherwise. The ban on advertis ing, however, did not apply to State governments, and South Carolina established a Department o f Agriculture, Commerce, and Immigration to encourage immigration into the State. The State Commissioner induced several hundred aliens to migrate, with the understanding http://fraser.stlouisfed.org Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis 50 N eill: Studies for Economic and Social Reform that their passage would be paid from a fund made up o f a State appropriation and individual and corporate contributions. Organized labor charged that mill owners supplied the funds, thereby skirting the letter o f the law in hope o f obtaining cheap labor. W hen the Solicitor o f the Department o f Commerce and Labor upheld South Carolina, Roosevelt called on Straus to review the matter thoroughly, because “many o f the people most affected sin' cerely believe that it is the end o f any effort to stop the importation of laborers under contract in the Southern States, and that this means further damage to laborers in the Northern States.” Roosevelt also advised Straus that he was consulting with Neill, who had “excep tional advantages in the way o f keeping in touch with the labor people and o f knowing their feelings as well as their interests.”27 The Immigration Act o f 1907 was intended to close the loophole. However, a conference called by the President on the interpretation o f the act produced divergent views. Straus commented in his diary, “Commissioner Neill gave a narrow view o f the whole situation which, however, the President did not adopt.” Roosevelt then appointed a committee, with Neill as a member, to study immigration into the South and directed that all reports o f violations o f contract labor laws should be filed with the Commissioner.28 The 1907 act also created a commission to study the whole question o f immigration, and the President appointed Neill to it. Neill wrote later, “W hen the Immigration Commission was created in the spring o f 1907,1 was, against my personal wishes, drafted into service. I had a good deal to do with the planning o f the work of the Commis sion in the beginning, and during the entire period of its existence, I was in close touch with its work.” He helped direct the statistical work and the southern investigation and supervised the general work in Washington, at least in the earlier years o f the commission. A number o f Bureau personnel worked with the commission as well, including Fred C. Croxton, who served as its chief statistician.29 The new act also set up a Division o f Information within the Bureau o f Immigration. Terence Powderly, former leader of the Knights of Labor, was appointed C hief o f the Division, whose func tion was to distribute immigrants to sections o f the country where there were jobs available. Originally, the A FL had viewed this func tion as permitting “workmen lawfully coming to the U nited States.. . a more intelligent choice o f location in which to seek em ploym ent.. . http://fraser.stlouisfed.org Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis 51 The First Hundred Years and if administered fairly [as] calculated to be o f least injury to labor.*30 In a period o f widespread unemployment, however, the activities o f the Division o f Information in helping immigrants find jobs came in for much criticism. The A FL argued that the Department of Com merce and Labor should devote its energies solely to meeting the problem o f the domestic unemployed. Neill reaffirmed an earlier view that “it is useless to talk about any plan to distribute immigrants, other then the single plan o f offering higher wages in the places that want them than they are getting in the places that they are now or in offering them opportunities to take up land that make the opportuni ties actual and really within their reach.*31 In September 1909, Neill wrote President Taft, calling his atten tion to union charges that immigrants were being used to break the unions: “. . . the immigration figures are rapidly mounting up to what they were during the high tide o f immigration 2 years ago, and the labor organizations are convinced that a number o f the large corpora tions are determined to take advantage o f the abundance of labor and the incoming immigrants to break the power o f the unions before there is a full return to prosperity and such a scarcity o f labor as would give an advantage to the organizations.*32 Neill also expressed concern about the influx o f Orientals into Hawaii. A major section o f the third report o f the Commissioner of Labor on Hawaii (1906) was entitled “Orientalization o f Laboring Pop ulation and Its Results.* Neill wrote that “as long as Oriental labor is available, it will be practically impossible to build up a typical Ameri can commonwealth.* Besides, he continued, pointing to the planta tion regimen, “It will always be impossible to secure any body of selfrespecting Caucasian laborers who will work under those conditions.* Neill reported in 1911 that competition had increased between Ameri can and Japanese workers, and that the territorial government and businessmen had attempted to attract Caucasian labor from the main land, with only slight success.33 Strike investigations In the festering industrial unrest o f the period, Neill and the Bureau were called upon to investigate many labor disputes, particularly in the steel, mining, and textile industries, which were later viewed as landmarks in the history o f industrial relations. The Bureau’s reports http://fraser.stlouisfed.org Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis 52 Neill: Studies for Economic and Social Reform on these disputes were comprehensive. In addition to noting the immediate causes of the dispute, they discussed the new developments on the labor scene—the role of immigrant labor, the rise of the IWW, and the growth o f the open shop and company unions. Further, they dealt with the corporate structure of the industry, its business prac tices, and the impact of new technology on the work force. Steel was one o f the most strife-ridden industries. In 1909, Neill was asked to investigate a strike called by unorganized workers, many o f them recent immigrants, at the Pressed Steel Car Company of McKee’s Rock, Pennsylvania, when the company altered the wage system and refused to post rates o f pay. The workers* other grievances included the compulsory use of company stores, extortion by fore men, and a speedup o f work. Moreover, the Austrian consul com plained that employment agencies were importing immigrants as strikebreakers. The IWW gave advice and direction to the strikers, marking its entry into the East.34 The A FL noted Neill’s report on the strike when it directed its executive board to obtain the report “for the purpose of framing national legislation for the proper supervision o f the employment agencies.”35 A t the same time, when the United States Steel Corporation announced that all its plants would operate on an open shop basis, the Amalgamated Association o f Iron, Steel and Tin W orkers struck in protest at a company subsidiary, the American Sheet and Tin Plate Company, the only remaining unionized mill o f U .S. Steel. During the unsuccessful year-long strike, the A FL provided organizing sup port and presented grievances to President Taft and Congress, calling for an investigation o f the activities o f U .S. Steel. Neill reported to Taft on the “bitterness in labor circles” aroused by the company positions in the two steel strikes. He suggested to Taft that, to avoid increasing bitterness, a study o f labor conditions in the steel industry be undertaken and announced immediately. Taft replied that he had no objection to such a study, “but I do not wish it advertised. . . . I am not in favor o f grandstand performances in advance.”36 In February 1910, another walkout by several thousand unorgan ized workers at the Bethlehem Steel Company over the extension of overtime and Sunday work prompted the Secretary o f Commerce and Labor to direct the Bureau to investigate. Ethelbert Stewart of the http://fraser.stlouisfed.org Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis 53 The First Hundred Years Bureau's staff led the study. H e reported that at least half the com ' pany’s workers were required to work 12 or more hours a day, with no premium for overtime or Sunday work, and that a 7-day workweek was common. N o grievance procedure was available to the unorgan ized workers, he reported, and “time-bonus” payments stimulated a speedup in work.37 The Machinists' Monthly Journal described die report as provid ing “reliable information founded upon exact data, carefully and scien tifically collected,” and called on the union’s members to give all possible publicity to the facts in the report. Charles Schwab, Bethle hem Steel’s president, protested that the report was unfair in failing to clarify that these conditions existed throughout the American steel industry. Following a meeting with Schwab and the Secretary o f Com merce and Labor, Neill affirmed that the “shocking” conditions pre vailed in the industry generally, but that U .S. Steel had recently ordered Sunday work reduced to a minimum.38 A month after the publication o f the report on Bethlehem Steel, the Senate authorized the Bureau to examine working conditions in the iron and steel industry. The Bureau's 4-volume study, published over a 2-year span, was based on information obtained through per sonal visits and mail questionnaires to plants employing about 90 percent o f the industry’s workers, the majority o f whom were recent immigrants. The study covered wages, hours o f work, and accidents. It reported continued 6- and 7-day workweeks o f 12-hour days: Onethird o f the 150,000 workers in blast furnaces, steel works, and rolling mills were working 7 days a week, and one-fifth were working 84 hours or more a week. The report questioned the need for Sunday work in view o f the recent action o f U .S. Steel in abolishing most Sunday work. The report also called attention to the dilution o f skills in the industry as mechanical developments spread, adding to the already large proportion o f unskilled workers.39 In commenting on the study, the M achinists' Journal stated, “Gratifying in the extreme and profitable in every way is the report.. . because o f the additional light it throws upon the terrible conditions under which men have to work in that industry.” Pointing out the inadequacy o f craft unions for dealing with the employers, the Journal continued, “There is only one remedy and that is thorough and perfect organization. N ot the organization o f a little aristocracy com posed o f the less than one-twentieth o f these workers who receive fifty http://fraser.stlouisfed.org Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis 54 N eill: Studies for Economic and Social Reform cents an hour and over, but the complete organization o f every worker in the industry along the broadest, the most liberal and demo cratic lines imaginable___ w4° Gom pers cited excerpts from the report to reply to “public opin ion” that labor was well-treated in the industry. Later, in his autobiog raphy, he wrote, “Dr. Neill performed a very comprehensive and valuable piece o f work which caused the officials o f the steel corpora tions to ‘cuss’ him and gnash their teeth.”"*1 The Bureau continued to focus considerable attention on the outbreaks o f industrial violence characteristic o f the period. A con gressional resolution o f June 1911 called on the Bureau to investigate conditions in Westmoreland County, near Pittsburgh, where a strike had been going on in the bituminous coal mines for over a year. The Bureau reported that union efforts at organization had been blocked by the mine operators for two decades and that the introduction of machinery had increased the number o f unskilled jobs for which immigrants were employed.1*2 One o f the most dramatic industrial disputes o f the period began in the textile mills o f Lawrence, M assachusetts, in January 1912. The immediate cause o f the strike was a reduction in earnings announced by the American Woolen Company in response to a new State law reducing the limit on working hours for women and children from 56 to 54 hours a week. The strike was marked by violent confrontations between strikers and the police and militia. Although Congress held hearings, the Bureau conducted its own investigation and prepared a report, which commented on the strike “started by a few unskilled non-English-speaking employees” that developed into an organized action o f 20,000 workers led by the IWW. It noted that wage increases were obtained.43 Friends o f President Taft objected to giving publicity to the poor wages and working conditions in the highly protected textile industry for fear o f exposing the weakness o f the argument that high tariffs kept American wages high. However, the Senate called for the Bureau report, and published it as a Senate Document.44 The widespread industrial unrest prompted concerned citizens to petition Taft to form a commission to make a thorough investigation o f laboring conditions in the country. In a message to Congress, Taft supported the idea, explaining that recent investigations had been “fragmentary, incomplete, and at best only partially representative.” http://fraser.stlouisfed.org Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis 55 The First Hundred Years The country needed, he said, a comprehensive, nationwide study. Neill expressed a similar view in congressional testimony, stating that the Bureau was too small to undertake such a task. But Taft delayed in making appointments and Woodrow W ilson subsequently named the members—after Neill had left the government and the Department of Labor had been established.45 N eill’s mediation activities Although the President and Congress called upon Neill for many tasks, mediation o f labor disputes proved to be his major and most absorbing public work. A s Commissioner, he helped settle some 60 railway controversies, and his involvement in railroad labor relations extended into World War I, when he served on the first Railway Board o f Adjustment. The Erdman Act o f 1898 had provided for a board of mediation for railroad disputes, with the Commissioner o f Labor as a member, but the act’s procedures had been asked for only once during Wright’s tenure. In December 1906, the Southern Pacific Railroad Company applied to the board when it found itself threatened by a jurisdictional dispute between two railway unions. Although one o f the unions was skeptical at first about the board’s role, it viewed the final result favorably, finding that “Mr. Neill applied him self with such diligence to the task o f bringing about an adjustment that he was soon familiar with every detail o f the controversy. He was absolutely fair to all interested.”46 Within a month, the unions agreed to an arbitration panel. This success, coupled with the broadening scope of railroad collective bargaining agreements, spurred use o f the act’s machinery. Neill noted that, in the beginning, the companies viewed him with some suspicion since they presumed him to be pro-labor because of his position. But, he said, “After the first case or two, why, they became convinced o f my fair-mindedness.” He further explained, “There is no occasion to charge either side, as a rule, with unfairness. . . . It is human nature to want to be fair. But it is also human nature to be self-centered. Therefore, each side has an entirely different concep tion o f what is fair.”47 H is colleague on the mediation board, Judge Martin A. Knapp, chairman o f the Interstate Commerce Commission, stated that the function o f the mediators “is to aid a friendly settlement. . . . For this http://fraser.stlouisfed.org Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis 56 N eill: Studies for Economic and Social Reform reason, it has been the conception o f those who have acted in this capacity that their duty is not to determine what setdement they think ought to be made, but to find out what setdement can be made.”48 A s originally viewed, the Erdman A ct provided a tool for dealing with disputes between a single railroad and its operating employees, but the railroad brotherhoods turned to concerted action, in which they organized and negotiated with management on a broader regional basis. This greatly complicated procedures and took considerably more o f Knapp’s and Neill’s time while threatening a more extensive public impact if mediation failed. In addition, legislation was proposed in 1912 to extend coverage under the Erdman A ct to coal companies in interstate commerce and to railway shop craft workers. Widening the board's scope would make further demands on the time o f the Commissioner o f Labor. Thus, in his report for 1912, the Secretary o f Commerce and Labor stated that the Commissioner needed some relief and recom mended an independent board o f conciliation and arbitration, to be named by the President and confirmed by the Senate. This reflected Neill’s concern that, if the Erdman A ct were expanded or if he and Knapp were to undertake cases not properly falling under the letter of the act, “It would be absolutely necessary to create some other machinery.”49 And in testimony before Congress that year, Neill emphasized that the suggested expansion would require a new mecha nism, declaring, “It has been impossible for me to give proper atten tion to this work and even begin to perform my legitimate duties in the Bureau o f Labor. . . . I might add that I would not, under any conditions, be willing to continue to attempt to carry on the work under this act and the work o f the Bureau o f Labor both.”50 Early in 1913, under the pressure o f disputes on eastern railroads, Knapp and Neill worked with a committee from the National Civic Federation and representatives o f the major railroads and the railroad brotherhoods to develop a plan for a separate, permanent board of mediation. Within the year, Congress passed the Newlands Act, which set up a separate Board o f Mediation and Conciliation. From that time on, Commissioners o f the Bureau were no longer occupied with the time-consuming task o f mediating labor disputes. http://fraser.stlouisfed.org Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis 57 The First Hundred Years Work in industrial safety and health U nder Neill, the Bureau was a leading force in the movement to improve industrial safety and health conditions. In 1908, the Bureau highlighted the lack o f information on industrial accidents by publish' ing an article by Frederick L. Hoffman, a consulting statistician for the Prudential Insurance Company, in which he wrote, “Thus far, no national investigation o f the subject o f industrial accidents has been made to determine the true accident risk in industry, and the statisti cal data extant are more or less fragmentary and o f only approximate value.”51 To fill some o f the gaps, the Bureau published reports on railway employee accidents, fatal accidents in coal mining, and acci dent experience in other countries. In addition, Bureau staff developed information on occupational accidents as part o f larger studies. Lucian W. Chaney, the Bureau's expert on accident prevention, prepared Employment of Women in the Metal Trades, a study o f accidents to machine operators, as volume XI o f the Bureau’s massive study on working women and children. In 1912, the Bureau published Chaney’s Accidents and Accident Preven tion as volume IV o f its report on working conditions in the iron and steel industry. Chaney had taken 2 years to collect the data. This publication was the first in a continuing annual series on industrial accidents in iron and steel. Both Neill and Chaney played important roles in the early years o f the National Safety Council. A t the First Cooperative Safety C on gress in 1912, both were appointed to the Committee on Permanent Organization, whose function was “to organize and to create a perma nent body devoted to the promotion o f safety and to human life.” The next year, Neill delivered a paper in which he advocated that the National Council for Industrial Safety become a clearinghouse that would circulate information about accidents and maintain a roster of lecturers. In the speech he declared, “I doubt if there is a commercial nation today, laying any claim to an elementary civilization, that has been maiming and mangling and killing those who attempt to earn their bread in the sweat o f their faces with as little apparent regret and as little thought as we do in the industrial centers o f the United States.”52 The Bureau’s interest in industrial hygiene paralleled its concern with industrial accidents. In 1908, the Bureau published an article on http://fraser.stlouisfed.org Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis 58 N eill: Studies for Economic and Social Reform the subject by George M. Kober, professor at the Georgetown Univer sity Medical School. In the same year, an article by Hoffman, “M ortal ity from Consum ption in Dusty Trades," gave impetus to the fight against tuberculosis. The Bureau also gave increased attention to the problem o f expo sure to industrial poisons. A s late as 1908, the report o f the Lucerne Conference o f the International Association for Labor Legislation included the following comment on the state o f protective legislation in the U nited States: “The protection o f the worker from industrial poisons and dust has hitherto made little progress in the United States. No material on the subject was available and the American Section could do nothing except bring to the notice o f the Govern ments o f the various States the petition o f the International Associa tion requesting the compulsory notification by doctors o f cases of industrial poisoning.”53 In 1904, when the president o f the International Association had written Secretary Cortelyou, head o f the Department o f Commerce and Labor, about a conference to consider, among other things, the use o f white phosphorus in the production o f matches, Cortelyou replied, “I have the honor to state that the Federal Government has no jurisdiction in such matters. They belong definitely and specifically to the several States."5^ Subsequently, in September 1906, Germany, Denmark, France, Italy, Luxembourg, Switzerland, and the Nether lands signed a convention on the prohibition o f the use o f white phosphorus in the manufacture o f matches. In December 1908, the British Parliament passed the W hite Phosphorus Matches Prohibition Act. Neill and the Bureau were instrumental in arousing American concern over phosphorus poisoning. In 1909, the Bureau cooperated with the American Association for Labor Legislation in a study o f the effects o f white phosphorus in match production. John B. Andrews, secretary o f the association, summed up the results: “The investigation o f 15 o f our 16 match factories during the year 1909 proved conclu sively that, in spite o f m odem methods and precautions, phosphorus poisoning not only occurs in this country but exists in a form so serious as to warrant legislative action to eliminate the disease."55 The Secretary o f Commerce and Labor wrote Neill, “W hile this report will no doubt make some stir, I am satisfied that the truth o f this condition ought to be known, especially since we seem to be http://fraser.stlouisfed.org Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis 59 The First Hundred Years behind other countries in giving attention to so serious a condition. If the matter is to be published, kindly urge it as much as possible in order that it may receive attention as early as conditions admit of.”56 After publication o f the report, legislation was introduced to ban phosphorus matches from interstate commerce. The campaign sought to encourage production o f matches by the more modem sesquisulphide process, but this faced three problems: The Diamond Match Company (also known as the "match trust”) held the patent on the process; the technology was more expensive; and the match indus try was localized and not easily subject to Federal regulation under the commerce clause. Therefore, supporters o f the legislation argued the need for a heavy tax to discourage use o f phosphorus by eliminating the economic incentive. In his 1910 message to Congress, President Taft recommended such an approach.57 In the meantime, Diamond moved to sell rights to other compa nies who wished to use the sesquisulphide process. In January 1911, it relinquished the patent to three trustees: Neill, E.R.A. Seligman of Colum bia University, and Jackson Ralston, an attorney for the Ameri can Federation o f Labor. O n January 27, the trustees surrendered the patent. Since the industry could not be forced to adopt the new process, efforts to tax phosphorus matches continued. Finally, in 1912, C on gress passed a law that provided for the tax, ending the phosphorus poisoning problem so far as matches were concerned, but not in other industries.58 The Bureau also focused considerable attention on the problem o f lead poisoning, beginning with three articles in the Bulletin in July 1911. Based on personal investigation o f 22 factories, Alice Hamilton, later a professor at Harvard Medical School, wrote on the white-lead industry in the U nited States. John Andrews wrote on deaths from industrial lead poisoning reported in New 'fork State in 1909 and 1910. And Sir Thom as Oliver, leader o f the British crusade against the employment o f women in white-lead processes, contributed an article on lead poisoning and lead processes in European countries. In 1913, the Bureau published Hamilton’s tentative findings on the effects of lead in the painters’ trade. Neill’s activities included participation both at home and abroad in efforts to establish occupational health standards. The American Association for Labor Legislation, o f which he was a member, took http://fraser.stlouisfed.org Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis 60 N eill: Studies for Economic and Social Reform several steps in the field o f occupational health in addition to the work on phosphorus, such as organizing the National Commission on Industrial Hygiene (1908) and calling the First National Conference on Industrial Diseases (1910). The conference wrote a Memorial to the President which recommended some greatly expanded national efforts.59 Industrial education The Bureau had published studies on industrial education in 1892 and 1902, but in 1908 there was intensified interest from the AFL, which corresponded with educators, academicians, and social workers on the subject. In that year, a committee was formed which included Neill, union officials, and representatives o f public interest groups. A t the committee’s request, the Bureau conducted another study. The A FL termed the Bureau’s effort, published in 1910, the “most comprehensive study o f the whole subject.. . that has ever been made in the United States.” The study provided support for legislative proposals by the A FL for Federal aid to the States for industrial education on the basis that, as Gom pers wrote, “Industrial education, like academic education, is becoming a public function and. . . should be paid for by public funds.”60 Legislation did not come until 1917, however. Social insurance The Bureau’s educational work in the field o f social insurance also began under Wright, who, as early as 1893, had published a study of compulsory insurance in Germany. U nder Neill, the Bureau contin ued to provide information on European and also American practices. In 1908, a study by Lindley D. Clark reported on U .S. employers’ legal liability for injuries to their employees, and the Bureau’s annual report for that year consisted of a study o f workmen’s insurance and benefit funds in the United States. A companion report published in 1909 dealt with workmen’s insurance and compensation systems in Europe. It was in the field of workmen’s compensation that the Bureau exercised, for 8 years, a statutory administrative function. In May 1908, Congress passed a law providing compensation for injuries to http://fraser.stlouisfed.org Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis 61 The First Hundred Years certain artisans and laborers employed by the Federal Government, the first workmen’s compensation act in the United States. Adminis tration o f the law was assigned to the Department o f Commerce and Labor, and the Secretary turned over most of these duties to the Bureau, including the examination and approval o f claims. The cover age o f the act was later widened so that by 1913 the compensation system covered about 95,000 civilian government employees. The Bureau retained this responsibility until 1916, when Congress estab lished the Federal Employees* Compensation Board. A sidelight on the compensation system the Bureau administered is provided by a 1913 magazine article by a former Bureau employee. He noted, first, that the Government treated its employees badly: “The economic and social value o f the welfare work o f large corpora tions need not be exaggerated, but it is a sad fact that the Federal Government has done less o f it (outside the Isthmian Canal) than many o f the soulless corporations.” Second, he noted that, although the Federal act was the first compensation law in this country, several States had subsequently enacted programs that were far superior. Further, he charged that the Bureau had done little to implement improvements.61 The Federal Government’s efforts to establish a pension system for its employees led to several Bureau studies. In examining various proposals, the Senate asked the Bureau for information on domestic and foreign retirement plans. In response, the Bureau prepared a study o f 219 municipal retirement systems and 22 railroad programs. The Bureau also commissioned a report by an outside expert on civil service retirement programs in Great Britain, New Zealand, and Aus tralia. The study on working women and children During 1907, with much encouragement from the AFL and welfare reform organizations, Neill and the Bureau embarked on a massive study o f the working conditions o f women and children. The investi gation joined two campaigns, one for limitation o f child labor and the other to improve the conditions o f the increasing number of working women. http://fraser.stlouisfed.org Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis 62 Neill: Studies for Economic and Social Reform In his annual messages for 1904 and 1905, Roosevelt had pressed for such a study, with special emphasis on child labor and its regular tion by the States. Social reformers from Chicago pushed for an investigation of women’s working conditions, and Mary McDowell and Jane Addams met with Roosevelt in 1905 to ask for a study. Several women’s organizations took up the cause and drew up a proposed bill. In January 1906, Neill wrote to Sophonisba Breckinridge o f Chicago, “The President is very much in earnest in this matter and has said to me since you were here that he is quite anxious to do anything he can to help secure the investigation.”62 In the appropriations hearings on the study, the Commissioner stated, “If there were conditions o f prime importance affecting the family life and morals and citizenship, due to industrial conditions, the national government has just as much interest in finding that out as it has in finding out what is the total amount in savings banks or what is the general increase o f street railways, or nine hundred and ninetynine other things for which large sums o f money are expended in the Census. Here are matters. . . o f tremendous sociological impor tance.”63 The movement toward the study proceeded at the same time that proposals were introduced in Congress to limit child labor. A bill introduced by Senator Albert J. Beveridge prohibited the interstate transportation o f the products o f factories or mines employing chil dren under 14 years o f age. A bill proposed by Senator Henry C. Lodge applied only to the District o f Columbia. Neill, who had been campaigning for a child labor law in the District, wrote to the President, arguing; that, “If Congress has the power to pass legislation o f this kind, some bill embodying the princi ple o f the Lodge or the Beveridge Bill should be passed. . . . Child labor is indefensible from any view point whatever, and is a blot on the civilization that tolerates it.” Either bill, he explained, “would serve both to protect the markets o f any State from being made the dump ing ground for the products o f child labor in other less advanced States, and would assure to the manufacturers o f more progressive States a protection against the competition o f child labor States in outside m arkets.”64 Neither bill won committee approval. However, Congress finally passed a bill applying only to the District o f Columbia http://fraser.stlouisfed.org Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis 63 The First Hundred Years which prohibited the employment o f youth under 16, with some exceptions. Roosevelt signed the limited measure in May 1908. There was even opposition to the conduct o f a study. Congres sional opponents questioned whether the national government had the authority to investigate, contending that Congress lacked author ity to legislate on the subject.65 Another set o f arguments was directed at limiting the scope of the study. Neill was asked, MIs not all this information that you can gather already to be had right here in the Census Bureau—the num ber o f women and children employed and the average wages they receive per annum?”66 Supporters o f the measure responded that the Census Bureau could provide some numbers but not the "thorough investigation as to the effects o f the employment o f women and children upon their health and upon the social conditions o f the people.”67 In January 1907, Congress directed the Secretary o f Commerce and Labor to conduct the investigation, later stipulating that the Cen sus Bureau should do the work. With continuing uncertainty over the status and conduct o f the investigation, the National Civic Federation established a commission o f its own, made up o f representatives of manufacturers and the AFL, to investigate the extent and menace of child labor, expressing concern that "it would be most unfortunate to have the result o f the investigation be a lot o f misleading figures and exaggerated statements o f conditions which would simply serve as socialist propaganda.”68 Roosevelt wrote to Secretary Straus that the Bureau o f Labor should have the work: “I cannot too strongly state that in my judg ment the investigation will be shorn o f a very large part o f the good results we have a right to expect from it, if it is not confided to the Bureau o f Labor.”69 Straus then wrote, “Both the Director o f the Census and the Commissioner o f Labor agree with me thoroughly” that the investigation should be carried out by the Bureau o f Labor. In the end, the Bureau o f Labor was permitted to conduct the study.70 For each o f two consecutive years, the Bureau received $150,000 for the investigation. Eager to have the cooperation o f employers, Neill assured the National Association o f Manufacturers, as he had Congress, that there were no preconceived notions guiding the conduct o f the study and that its purpose was solely to gather facts. The study would take into http://fraser.stlouisfed.org Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis 64 Neill: Studies for Economic and Social Reform account the conditions and practices o f the “best class o f manufactur ers” and avoid the misrepresentation that would result from describing only the worst conditions. “There is no desire to discover the harrowing or unearth the sensational---- * “W hen the important facts have all been brought out, there will be found to be evils to be corrected,” Neill went on to say. “I believe that then it will be found that the members o f this association are just as ready as any body of men in the country to see that justice is done.”71 The A FL and representatives o f welfare organizations offered their assistance in the investigation, and the National Child Labor Committee provided the Bureau with the material it had collected over a period o f 3 years. A s the investigation proceeded, A FL repre sentatives met with Neill to suggest setting up a division in the Bureau to deal specifically with the conditions o f working women and chil dren.72 The Bureau encountered many problems in the conduct o f the study. Although Bureau agents took great care to verify the ages of children under 16, as reported by children and mill officers, there were difficulties in obtaining age information in the southern mills, and frequently, it was reported, working children were hidden from Bureau agents.73 In addition, there were complaints by mill operators about the time required to respond to the questions o f the agents. N eill's designation o f a southerner to conduct the study o f the textile mills was challenged very early by the study’s supporters. McDowell wrote Neill, “I saw M iss Addams. . . and from her learned that the cotton industry had been assigned to a southerner. . . . I did hope so much that you were going to be free to give a body o f facts that would stand the test o f criticism, but already I hear rumors that the cotton industry investigation is discredited. This may be unfair, but natural.”74 Then, when the study finally was published, Neill was attacked from the other side as having slandered the South. Work on the study began in 1907 and continued through 1909. The inquiry was substantially confined to States east o f the M issis sippi, partly because the social and industrial problems dealt with were found mainly in the East, and partly because o f the limitations o f time and money. One aspect o f the study dealt with employment o f women and children in the four industries in which they made up a significant proportion o f the work force—cotton, glass, men’s readymade gar ments, and silk—and also with employment o f women in stores and http://fraser.stlouisfed.org Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis 65 The First Hundred Years factories, in the metal trades, and in laundries. Two studies dealt with child labor problems, focusing on the reasons for leaving school and on the relationship between employment and juvenile delinquency. Three studies gave historical accounts o f child labor legislation, women in industry, and trade unionism among women. Three reports dealt with health questions: Infant mortality in Fall River, causes of death among cotton-mill operatives, and hookworm disease, particu larly in the southern cotton-mill communities. The remaining studies included a survey o f family budgets o f cotton-mill workers, the con nection between occupation and criminality among women, and State enforcement o f labor laws and factory inspection laws. In all, 19 volumes o f studies were published. Among the leading findings o f this landmark report was the disparity between the North and the South in the employment of children. In the textile mills o f the South, where the legal age limit was 12, there were many children at work; there were far fewer in New England. However, in Pennsylvania, although the age limit was 16, enforcement was lax, and a large number o f children were at work in the silk mills. The study showed that, in a substantial number o f cases, chil dren’s earnings were essential to meet pressing necessity. But in many other cases, both in the South and elsewhere, families would not have suffered hardship if child labor were forbidden. The report concluded that, to a considerable extent, child labor seemed to be due “to indif ference or active hostility to the schools on the part o f both parents and children.**75 Another finding concerned the growing substitution o f women for men in industry. The report brought out the paradox that “a process o f substitution has been going on by which men have been gradually taking the leading role in industries formerly carried on chiefly in the home and considered distinctly feminine, such as spin ning and weaving and garment making and knitting. A s the women have been more or less dispossessed in their specialities, they have either gone into work formerly considered men’s, such as the printing trade, or entered newly established industries which had not been definitely taken over by either sex. In both cases they are usually found doing the least skilled or poorest paid work.**76 Among the many pioneering aspects o f the study was the devel opment o f new techniques for analyzing economic and social phenom http://fraser.stlouisfed.org Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis 66 Neill: Studies for Economic and Social Reform ena. The first standard budgets prepared by the Bureau were developed for the purpose o f evaluating the living conditions o f the cotton-mill workers in Fall River and the South in 1908-09. Actual weekly earnings and expenditures for a year were obtained for repre sentative cotton-mill families. From these the Bureau prepared stan dard budgets for a “fair standard o f living,” including some allowance for comfort, and a “minimum standard o f living o f bare essentials,” on which families were living and apparently maintaining physical effi ciency. Commissioner Neill noted: “These standards, it should be emphasized, are the standards found to be actually prevailing among cotton-mill families o f the several communities studied, and are not standards fixed by the judgment either o f the investigators or o f the Bureau o f Labor.”77 The diet o f the Federal prison in Atlanta was compared with the expenditures for food o f the cotton-mill families. The comparison indicated that—for both Fall River and southern families—at least half had expenditures at a standard less than the prison diet.78 The study results influenced the establishment o f the Children’s Bureau, achieved in 1912 after several years o f effort by supporters. Neill had favored its establishment as a separate agency rather than have his Bureau assume the added responsibilities. The intensive stud ies required o f a Children’s Bureau would not duplicate the work of the Bureau o f Labor, he said. Pressure also developed to make special provision for women’s studies. The AFL, for example, called for a special unit in the Bureau of Labor—to be headed by a woman—that would conduct studies relating to the condition o f women in the U nited States. The Bureau established such a section in 1911 under the direction o f Marie L. Obenauer, who published a series o f studies on hours and earnings of women in selected industries in Chicago, the District o f Columbia, Maryland, California, and W isconsin. Controversy over the study findings In 1912, during congressional debate on the establishment o f the Children’s Bureau, southern Senators charged that the study on women and children presented an unfair picture o f southern condi tions. In addition, a former Bureau agent charged that Neill had suppressed his survey o f conditions in southern mills. The agent’s http://fraser.stlouisfed.org Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis 67 The First Hundred Years report, which he later published on his own, held that conditions under industrialization, even if not very good, represented an improvement over the conditions in the rural areas from which the mill workers had migrated.79 Although the Bureau had not published the agent’s study, Sena tor Lee S. Overman o f North Carolina referred to sections o f it as presenting an “obscene and. . . scandalous” picture o f southern rural conditions. A month later, the Senator criticized as “odious” the Bureau’s report on family budgets o f cotton-mill workers. A Washing ton newspaper had reported die study under the headline, “Southern Mills Bad as Prisons (Bureau o f Labor Report)—Families ill fed, poorly clad, and ignored by every class o f society—children all drudges.”80 Neill responded to these criticisms, both as they occurred and later. To charges that he had been unfair to the South, Neill replied, “I designedly placed this under charge o f special agent Walter B. Palmer, him self bom , reared, and educated in the South and known to me to be southern in every respect.” Furthermore, Neill said, he had directed that the southerners on the project staff were to be assigned to the cotton textile study. The Commissioner also pointed out that the study covered virtu ally all the best mills as well as the worst, stating, “I desired to be able to point out that good conditions could be maintained on a commer cial and practical basis by the fact that they did exist in mills that were being profitably conducted.” He stated further that he had been so anxious to avoid any appearance o f focusing attention on the South that he had hoped to present the data by State, without dividing them by region, but that clear differences between the northern and south ern States in age limits, working hours, and the ethnic composition of the work force required presentation by region.81 Neill summed up: The agents “were not sent south to write up sensational material any more than they were sent north to do s o . . . . If the results were sensational, it was due to the facts and not to any desire on the part o f the Bureau to make them sensational.”82 There was much support for the conduct and findings o f the investigation. In the Senate, William E. Borah o f Idaho, sponsor o f the Children’s Bureau proposal, contested Overman: “But the fact remains that a vast amount o f the facts were based upon real investiga tions and brought forth a number o f things which were startling to the country. I do not know whether there are things in them that are http://fraser.stlouisfed.org Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis 68 Neill: Studies for Economic and Social Reform untrue or not; but I know from investigations o f my own, which have resulted since I took charge of this measure, a great many of those things reported to be true are true.”83 The Survey commented on the first publications, “No greater service could be done the various movements against child labor, against the night employment o f women, against unsanitary shop conditions and for higher wages, better hours, more conserving meth ods o f work, than to secure a wide distribution and reading o f these encyclopedic books.”84 Warren M. Persons, in the Quarterly Journal of Economics, wrote, “The first three volumes issued by the Bureau o f Labor on Woman and Child Wage-Earners in the United States set a very high standard of excellence for the series. . . . The investigations seem to have been as careful as they were extensive.”85 Gompers, in his report to the 1911 A FL convention, declared, “The results o f this investigation have fully justified the action o f the American Federation of Labor in behalf o f such an inquiry being made.”86 The National Child Labor Committee also took some pride of sponsorship: “We may fairly claim a large share o f responsibility. . . . We promoted the bill which secured the appropriation for this investi gation and have placed all our available information at the disposal of the U nited States Bureau o f Labor.”87 But criticism of Neill’s conduct o f the study persisted and reap peared when President Taft asked Congress to reconfirm Neill as Commissioner in 1913. The Bureau’s statistical work Neill continually sought to improve the quality o f the Bureau’s statisti cal work. One of his first activities upon becoming Commissioner was to visit the Bureau’s agents in the field. He had heard, he said, “serious charges affecting the integrity” o f their work, and reports o f “a large degree of loafing and considerable drinking.” “I made a trip through the country visiting practically every agent in the field and made inquiries in proper quarters concerning the character o f their work.”88 Collection of data on prices and wages was the primary activity of the field agents; for this, it was essential to be assured o f the represen tativeness of the stores selected for obtaining prices and o f the estab http://fraser.stlouisfed.org Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis 69 The First Hundred Years lishments selected for obtaining wages. The stores were to be those patronized by workers. In his trips to the field, Neill visited many stores to be sure the selection had been the proper one. A s a check on the validity o f the agents' work, Neill decided to switch the territories and industries to which they were assigned. The agents protested that this would undermine the value o f the personal relationships they had established with store proprietors and o f their familiarity with the characteristics o f the industry. Neill felt that cer tainty o f the quality o f the primary material collected overshadowed these considerations, and he went ahead with the reassignments. Neill sought to take the Bureau’s price and wage reports out of the climate o f political campaigns. These reports had been published in alternate years, a pattern which had placed them “at the beginning o f a political campaign and. . . a subject o f discussion in the campaign. This led to attacks upon the report and the charge that it was pre pared for political purposes, and attempts were made to discredit the integrity o f the w ork.” He decided to change the time o f publication to nonelection years. “In this way we felt that it received consideration as a serious scientific study and would not be subject to the charge of being a political document."89 In 1908, Neill undertook an extensive revision and reorganization o f the Bureau’s statistical work. He halted the collection o f data on retail prices and wages, partly because o f the heavy demands on the Bureau’s resources arising from the study on women and children, but also because he felt there were serious shortcomings in the concepts and techniques. Collection o f retail price data was resumed in 1911 and wage data in 1912; information for the missing years was gathered retroactively. In the interim, Fred C . Croxton developed new tech niques for data collection and supervised the reorganization of the field staff. 90 W hen retail price collection was resumed, the new series covered 39 cities in 32 States, generally the cities with the largest population in each region, representing two-fifths o f the urban population and onefifth o f the total population. One innovation was the arrangement whereby retail merchants furnished price information by mail directly to the Bureau each month. Retail dealers selected were those selling largely to the families o f American, English, Irish, German, and Scan dinavian wage earners. Neighborhood stores predominated; few downtown stores were included, no cut-rate stores were priced, and http://fraser.stlouisfed.org Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis 70 N eill: Studies for Economic and Social Reform chain stores were included only where they were so numerous as to be an important factor in the city’s trade. The grade o f articles quoted was that sold in each city in the stores patronized by wage earners. The Bureau cautioned that it had not “attempted to quote prices for an article o f identical grade throughout the 39 cities. For almost every article, this would be absolutely impossible, as the grade varies not only from city to city but also from firm to firm within the same city, and the grade even varies to some extent from month to month within the same store.”91 The Bureau presented “Relative Retail Prices o f Food” for the 15 leading food items, representing approximately two-thirds o f the expenditure for food by the average workingman’s family. The rela tives were presented in two forms—a simple average o f the relative prices for the 15 items, and as indexes weighted according to the workingmen’s expenditure patterns in 1901. A s Neill summarized the results o f the reorganization o f retail price collection, the information was secured from “a larger number of stores, is therefore more representative, is submitted monthly, and is more accurate, and what is more the collection o f this field data from a large number o f stores is now carried on at probably one-third or possibly one-fourth the cost o f the former work.”92 Regular publication o f wage data was not resumed until after Neill left office. But in March 1913 he described the new data collec tion system. One o f the changes was to have the agents specialize in certain industries, whereas formerly they had covered many. Also, they were to become more familiar with the nature o f the work in the various occupations. “U nder the new system which we devised, the agents are required to make a careful study o f systems and occupations in the industries to which they were assigned.” Neill went on to point out, “The importance o f this is suggested by the fact that.. . methods o f production in the U nited States frequently change, so that, while the name remains, the real character o f the occupation has undergone radical change, and this fact should be reflected in the reports on these occupations.”93 The series on industry wages and hours launched in 1913 reflected the improvements developed under Neill, including the application o f statistical techniques for weighting and for constructing indexes. Further, successive reports on individual industries were made more comparable through provision o f data for identical estab http://fraser.stlouisfed.org Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis 71 The First Hundred Years lishments and well-defined occupations, with weights based on the number o f workers at each rate. Similarly, the work on union scales of wages in seven industries was systematized. The studies covered the cities included in the Bureau's survey o f food prices, with indexes for wages and hours derived by weighting each city by the number of union employees in the city. W holesale price collection, begun under Wright in 1902, was maintained throughout Neill’s term. The Bureau priced about 250 articles on an annual basis, generally in the New ’fork market. A t this time the wholesale index was not weighted, in the technical sense. Rather, the Bureau simply priced aa large number o f representative staple articles, selected in such a manner as to make them to a large extent weight themselves." The quotations were collected partly from the standard trade journals and partly from different firms, or from chambers o f commerce, by correspondence. The same source was used year after year so as to maintain the same standard. Strikes and Lockouts was published as the Bureau’s 1907 annual report. It provided data for the 1901-05 period on the number o f employees involved in each strike, the duration o f the strike, and the cause. It also indicated how the settlement was reached—whether by joint agreement or arbitration—and included a summary o f the pre ceding 25 years. A s with price and wage data, collection o f strike statistics was suspended in 1908, and no further information on strikes was collected until 1914. There were several efforts during this period to reorganize and coordinate statistical work on a broader scale, both within the Depart ment o f Commerce and Labor and throughout the Federal establish ment. In connection with one such effort—the Interdepartmental Statistical Committee set up by executive order in 1908—Neill pointed out in answer to the committee’s survey that, within the same Department, both the Bureau o f Labor and the Bureau o f Statistics published wholesale prices—even o f the same commodities. He con cluded, “The subject o f wholesale prices, however, cannot be classed within the province o f the Bureau o f Labor; logically, it should be transferred to the Bureau o f Statistics, provided a sufficient force be given that Bureau to keep this annual investigation at its present standard, or better, to extend and improve it."94 http://fraser.stlouisfed.org Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis 72 Neill: Studies for Economic and Social Reform The committee took no action on Neill’s suggestion. Nor did other attempts to coordinate the government’s statistical work come to fruition during Neill’s tenure. Administration Neill continued most o f the top leadership from Wright’s administra tion, including C hief Clerk G.W.W. Hanger, Charles Verrill, and Gustavus Weber. Ethelbert Stewart continued as one of the principal members of the field staff. Neill had to deal with several personnel problems during his tenure. No retirement system was yet in force for Federal workers, and the Bureau found itself with a large number of elderly employees. Neill explained, “The Bureau has been, and still is, hampered in its work by having a number o f employees who have been long in the service and reached an age when their usefulness in the work of the Bureau is considerably impaired.”95 A t the same time, the Bureau lost some of its best staff members because o f low salaries. In 1908, in line with a govemmentwide directive to improve efficiency, the Bureau moved to put its personnel system on a merit basis and instituted efficiency ratings for its employees. O n the basis of these, Neill made a number o f promotions and demotions, which led some employees to charge him with unfairness and discrimination. The Secretary o f Commerce and Labor found the charges to be groundless, but they came up again 5 years later at Neill’s reconfirma tion hearing.96 Sufficient funding was a chronic problem. The many special stud ies the President and Congress called for, along with the reluctance of Congress to provide additional funds, strained the Bureau’s resources. Regular appropriations remained at close to the same level during Neill’s 8 years; extra funds were granted only for the largest studies. (See table 2.) As noted earlier, Neill suspended some o f the Bureau’s regular data collection programs partly because o f the demands of other, more pressing work. http://fraser.stlouisfed.org Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis 73 The First Hundred Years Table 2. Appropriations for Bureau o f Labor, 1906-13 (in thousands) F iscal year ended Jun e 30 — 1906 1907 1908 1909 1910 1911 1912 1913 Total1 Salaries $184 173 2323 2323 173 176 3191 4270 $106 107 107 107 107 107 103 103 'Includes salarie», per diem and etc., library, and medical examinations, but not allocations for printing and binding. in c lu d e s $150,000 for d ie study on working women and children. ^Includes a deficiency appropriation o f $20,000 for special work. ^Includes $100,000 for d ie Industrial Commission. SOURCES: National Archives Record G roup 257, Bureau o f Labor Statistics, Appropriations Ledger, 1887-1903. Legislative, Executive, and Judicial Appropriations. The Bureau revised its publications program at about the time it introduced its revised price and wage series. Neill had already halted publication o f the voluminous annual and special reports, relying on the bimonthly Bulletin to present more timely information. Since 1895, the Bulletin had presented original work, digests of State reports, summaries and digests o f foreign labor conditions and statist^ cal papers, and summaries o f current legislation and court decisions. U nder the new plan, the Bureau produced the Bulletin at irregular intervals, with each issue devoted to one o f nine subject areas. International activities Neill continued Wright’s interest and participation in international activities. In 1910, he served as the delegate o f the U .S. Government to the Paris International Conference on Unemployment and as a delegate o f the American Association for Labor Legislation to the Lugano Conference o f the International Association. In that year as well, the annual U .S. appropriation for the unofficial International http://fraser.stlouisfed.org Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis 74 Neill: Studies for Economic and Social Reform Labor Office, carried in the Bureau budget, was increased from $200 to $1,000. In 1912, Neill presented a paper at the International Conference on Unemployment. The same year, President Taft appointed him a government representative to the Fifth International Congress of Chambers o f Commerce and Commercial and Industrial Associations. Reconfirmation Neill’s second term as Commissioner expired on Feb. 1, 1913, in the midst o f the transition from the Taft to the W ilson administration. Taft had sent Neill’s name to the Senate for reconfirmation in January, but Democratic capture o f the W hite House and Congress had prompted partisan debate over all Taft appointments. The influence of southern Democrats in the Senate created an additional obstacle for Neill, as his study o f working conditions for women and children in the South remained a sore point. O n March 4, his last day in office, Taft reluctantly signed the bill creating the new Department o f Labor. O n March 8, President W ilson sent Neill’s nomination forward. With reconfirmation before the Senate, two former Bureau employees submitted “Summary o f Charges Preferred Against Charles P. Neill” in the name o f “a large majority of the employees o f the Bureau o f Labor (irrespective o f party affilia tion).” They called for a “thorough and impartial investigation by the U .S. Senate,” explaining that “such an investigation will show extrava gance, maladministration, woeful waste o f public funds, lack o f execu tive ability, evasion o f the Civil Service law, cruelty and injustice to the employees o f said Bureau—especially towards Democrats and old soldiers.”97 A t about the same time, another former employee wrote to the new Secretary o f Labor, William B. Wilson, charging that the previous Secretary had not satisfactorily answered his earlier allegations against Neill. The protestor concluded, “Neill has been the most daringly incompetent public official that has ever been foisted upon an unsus pecting labor contingent or an ambitious President.”98 W hen President W ilson sent die nomination forward in March, Senator Benjamin R. Tillman o f South Carolina wrote the Secretary that his appointment o f Neill “would be a very unwise one to make,” citing Neill’s alleged bias against the South. Overman joined Tillman http://fraser.stlouisfed.org Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis 75 The First Hundred Years in opposition. To this allegation, they added die charge that Neill had demoted or fired Democrats and replaced them with R epublicans." A t Neill’s insistence, Secretary W ilson launched a full investiga tion. A. Warner Parker, Law Officer o f the Bureau o f Immigration, conducted the inquiry, holding hearings and making independent studies. The complainants, along with Neill and the supervisory staff o f the Bureau, testified fully. The investigation again completely absolved Neill. Parker found no basis for the charge o f unfairness to the South. Nor did he find political partisanship in the staff demotions, pointing out that no “cruelty and injustice” had been involved but that Neill had carried out a plan under a Presidential Order. Further, Parker stated that the Bureau had devoted more time and thought to carrying out the reclas sification than was generally true in government The charge o f maladministration had specified that investigations had been started “at great expense and then abandoned.” One o f the studies referred to was a report on Negroes in Lowndes County, Alabama, by W.E.B. Du Bois. Parker stated that the project had not been abandoned and that Neill viewed the work as “a report o f great value.” However, Parker stated, it “contained many o f Professor Du Bois’ personal opinions and also other matter not suitable for a gov ernment publication. . . . Press o f other work in the Bureau has prevented either Dr. Neill or his chief editor from reviewing the work and editing out the objectionable parts.” A s to charges that Neill had been away from his office an exces sive amount o f time, Parker found them exaggerated, noting that Neill’s absence arose from the statutory procedures for railroad media tion under the Erdman Act. Further, in regard to Neill’s administra tion o f the Bureau, Parker wrote, “I was in a position to witness his remarkable familiarity with details, evidenced by the manner in which he could promptly respond to each and every call upon him for records, data, and information.” Thus, Parker concluded, “In closing this report, the evidence accompanying which I feel fully vindicates Dr. Neill o f every charge preferred directly or impliedly in the papers turned over to me, I wish to add that Dr. Neill welcomed the investigation.”100 Neill received many expressions o f support during the reconfir mation proceedings. In January, the Executive Council o f the AFL resolved that “Hon. Chas. P. Neill has served faithfully and ably in the http://fraser.stlouisfed.org Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis 76 Neill: Studies for Economic and Social Reform capacity as Commissioner o f Labor, and that his reappointment be strongly urged.” The railway brotherhoods also urged Neill’s confir mation.101 The Washington Times declared, “To defeat Dr. Neill’s confirma tion now would be equivalent to telling the sweat shop employers of the country that they have nothing to fear.”102 Alexander J. McKelway o f the National Child Labor Committee wired the President: “Failure to confirm Neill would alienate the countless friends o f the reform of child labor and woman labor abuses in the nation.”103 Neill also received support because o f his activities in railroad mediation under the Erdman Act, especially because his commission had expired in the middle of mediation proceedings involving the eastern roads. Before leaving office, Taft had written Senator Borah, pointing out that since February 1 Neill had been powerless to per form his Erdman functions. The President concluded, “The failure to confirm him may very well carry responsibility for serious conse quences.”104 Ralph M. Easley o f the National Civic Federation tele graphed Secretary Wilson: “The Federation never makes political recommendations but it felt that the public exigencies required the reappointment of Dr. Neill. His experience and tact in handling the railroad problems is required at the present time as never before.”105 Not all o f Neill’s opposition came from the South. In a letter to President W ilson, a M assachusetts manufacturer wrote, “He has evi dently felt it necessary to suppress all reports that do not agree with his preconceived ideas concerning labor conditions.”106 President W ilson fought for his nominee. O n March 21, he wrote Tillman, apparently basing his comments on Parker’s preliminary report. “W hatever mistakes Dr. Neill may have made in judgment, he was certainly not guilty o f the charges preferred against him.” Wilson continued, “Circumstances have arisen which make it extremely desir able that I would appoint Dr. Neill in recess in order to make use of his services in arbitrating a pending controversy between the railroad switchmen and the 20 odd railroads that center in Chicago.” The next day, the President made the appointment.107 Tillman had already dropped serious opposition, awaiting only a face-to-face meeting with the Commissioner to confirm his new posi tion. He had “learned the kind of work he is doing and the kind of people who are attacking him,” Tillman said. Also, the Senator explained somewhat enigmatically, “I learned this morning that he was http://fraser.stlouisfed.org Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis 77 The First Hundred Years bom in Texas and is southern to the backbone in his prejudices and feelings.”108 O n May 1, the Senate voted to consent to the appoint ment. Resignation Two weeks after his reconiirmation, however, Neill tendered his resig nation and took a position with the American Smelting and Refining Company to organize and conduct their labor department. In his letters o f resignation to the President and the Secretary, Neill wrote that it was uimpossible for me to make the financial sacrifice required to continue in the Government.” He took the step, he said, “with extreme regret and only because my personal affairs at this time require it.”109 Secretary W ilson received the letter with “a deep sense o f loss.” He commented, “^tbur wide experience and sound judgment o f indus trial affairs would have been o f great value to me in organizing the Department o f Labor and directing its initial efforts in the proper channels.”110 It was a testimonial to the nonpartisan character o f the work of the Commissioner and the Bureau that, particularly in the face o f the charges, the new Democratic administration was prepared to have Neill continue his service. Although the Bureau assumed its role in the new Department o f Labor without his leadership, in many ways Neill had prepared it for its new functions. Later years Neill’s career following his resignation was a full one, including many activities he had begun as Commissioner. Among these were media tion in the coal and railroad industries and work on the Railway Board o f Adjustment. Neill’s work at the American Smelting and Refining Company has been described in the company’s history: “Following the longestablished Guggenheim policy o f engaging the best qualified experts, C.P. Neill, who had been Labor Commissioner under the Theodore Roosevelt, Taft, and W ilson administrations, was engaged to direct the welfare and safety work. He was made chairman o f the Labor Com mittee with Franklin Guiterman and William Loeb, Jr., as associ http://fraser.stlouisfed.org Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis 78 N eill: Studies for Economic and Social Reform ates.”111 Neill resigned from the company in 1915 to become manager o f the Bureau of Information of the Southeastern Railways, a post he held until his retirement in 1939. Neill remained active in National Civic Federation projects directed at labor-management cooperation, mediation, and arbitration. W hen the Federation undertook a survey o f industrial and social conditions, it named Neill as a member o f both the Committee on Plan and Scope and the Child Labor Committee.112 During the rail road and coal strikes o f 1922, he was involved in Federation activities to bring the parties together. In October 1922, as part o f the settle ment o f the coal strike, President Harding appointed Neill to a com mission to investigate both the bituminous and anthracite industries and report to Congress.113 Neill continued his work as umpire for the Anthracite Board of Conciliation until 1928. A t the 50th anniversary dinner of the Board, J.B. Warriner, of the Lehigh Navigation Coal Company and long-time operator member o f the Board, recalled, “Charles P. Neill, the first long-term umpire, was a learned and scholarly man, keen and able, broad minded and liberal. He stands very high in my mind.”114 Neill also continued to be active in civic and social welfare work, particularly concerning women and children. In January 1920, the Supreme Court of the District o f Columbia named him to the Board o f Education for a term expiring June 30, 1921.115 In November 1921, when the National Council o f Catholic Women opened the National Catholic School o f Social Service in Washington, a graduate school affiliated with Catholic University, Neill became its first director. Dur ing the 1920’s, Neill also served as a member o f the Department of Social Action of the National Catholic Welfare Council.116 Charles Patrick Neill died in October 1942. http://fraser.stlouisfed.org Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis 79 Chapter IV. Royal Meeker: Statistics in Recession and Wartime R oyal Meeker, the new Commissioner o f Labor Statistics, faced a different situation in August 1913 from that o f his predecessors. The Bureau o f Labor Statistics was now part o f the newly established Cabinet-level Department of Labor. The Secretary o f Labor, rather than the Commissioner, was labor’s primary point o f contact. Thus, Meeker’s dealings with organized labor were more circumscribed than was the case for Neill or Wright. The influences on Meeker and the Bureau came from a variety of sources. In the early years, concern with unemployment in a deepen ing recession led the Bureau to begin studies on the subject and, in 1916, to start a regular series o f reports on industrial employment. The Bureau also encouraged the activities o f State and municipal public employment offices and the efforts o f Secretary o f Labor Wil liam B. W ilson to establish a national employment service. U pon U .S. entry into the war in April 1917, government pro grams for increasing production, mobilizing the labor force, maintain ing peaceful labor-management relations, and stabilizing prices and wages influenced the work o f the Bureau. With statistics now used in http://fraser.stlouisfed.org Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis 80 Meeker: Statistics in Recession and W artime planning war programs, the Bureau was called upon to expand its conceptual and technical work in the fields o f prices and wages. This led notably to the development o f a cost-of-living index. The necessary resources were provided by Presidential allocations from special war funds. Meeker and the Bureau cooperated effectively with the War Industries Board's Central Bureau o f Planning and Statistics, estab lished to monitor and coordinate the mushrooming statistical activities o f the war agencies. The demands on the Bureau continued after the armistice, partic ularly for information on living costs. But the special funding from the President was now terminated, and the Bureau’s budget was cut as Congress sought to return expenditures to “normal’’ following the war emergency. W hen Meeker resigned in 1920, the Bureau had established a substantial place for itself as a provider o f widely utilized economic data and had become a prototype o f the m odem statistical agency. The third Commissioner Royal M eeker was bom in 1873 in Susquehanna County, Penn sylvania. A s a young man, Meeker worked “on the farms o f Penn sylvania and Iowa, in the lumber woods o f Pennsylvania, in the foundries, machine shops, and factories, and at casual employments in several States”—all apparently before his graduation from Iowa State College in 1898.1 He moved on to Columbia University as a graduate student under E.R.A. Seligman from 1899 to 1903, then spent a year at the University o f Leipzig before returning to his native Penn sylvania as a professor o f history, political science, and economics at U rsinus College during 1904 and 1905. He published his dissertation, “History and Theory o f Shipping Subsidies,” in 1905 and received his Ph.D. from Colum bia the following year. M eeker’s association with Woodrow W ilson began in 1905, when he applied to W ilson, then president o f Princeton, for a position as preceptor in economics. He obtained the appointment and taught, among other subjects, money and banking and transportation. He was named assistant professor in 1908. He was also associated with W ilson in charitable and welfare activities. Meeker served on the executive committee o f the New http://fraser.stlouisfed.org Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis 81 The First Hundred Years Jersey Conference o f Charities and Correction while W ilson served as a vice president. Also, he served on the Board o f Managers o f the New Jersey State Reformatory for Women while W ilson was Governor of New Jersey.2 After the election o f 1912, Meeker offered his services to the President-elect, suggesting, among other things, a survey o f the eco nomic community on the banking reform issue. In this connection, he helped prepare a questionnaire and compiled the results for Wilson. In March 1913, the new President wrote Meeker of the findings, “They are most useful to me, and I warmly appreciate all the trouble you have taken in getting this material together.”3 In June 1913, Secretary o f Labor W ilson recommended Meeker to the President for the post o f Commissioner of Labor Statistics. The President urged his acceptance: “I hope with all my heart we shall see you here a great deal.”"* U pon M eeker’s nomination, The New York Times described him as “a close friend o f President W ilson,” who “has given much attention to labor problems.” The Times also reported that he was frequently consulted by “W ilson Administration leaders on the currency question.” The reference to labor problems may have been an overstatement, for Meeker had said little on the subject before his appointment.5 W hen offered the position, Meeker went to New York to talk with his predecessor, Charles P. Neill. Writing o f the meeting, Meeker said that Neill “strongly advised me to tackle the job” but that he also “expressed the belief that the functions o f the Commissioner are too many and incompatible.” The role o f the Commissioner in mediating and conciliating disputes in the railroad industry definitely caused Meeker to pause. He wrote Secretary W ilson, “I feel then that unless I can be assured that the Commissioner o f Labor Statistics will be relieved o f the duties o f mediator in the disputes covered by the Erdman Act, I must ask you to withdraw my name from consideration as Commissioner.”6 Nevertheless, Meeker wrote the Secretary, “I know the work is hard and the responsibility great; but I should deem it an honor and a pleasure to serve under you and President W ilson no matter what the task.” Passage o f the Newlands Act, which created a new agency for mediation o f labor disputes, cleared the way for Meeker’s acceptance, and the President transmitted the nomination to the Senate on July http://fraser.stlouisfed.org Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis 82 Meeker: Statistics in Recession and W artime 22. The Senate confirmed the appointment on August 11, and Meeker was sworn in the following day.7 M eeker’s views Meeker, like Neill, was associated with the Progressive movement for governmental activism to achieve reform. In 1910, he wrote, “Before all else, the average American must be startled out o f his stupefying faith in the divinely ordained destiny o f his country. The policy of drift cannot possibly bring the ship o f state to any desirable haven, and the sooner the crew are made aware o f this, the better.”8 Meeker carried over into his work as Commissioner his belief in the positive role o f government. It was his duty, he said, “to turn the searching light o f publicity into the farthest and darkest com ers of industry, to make known the successes o f enlightened policies of dealing with labor, to show up wrongdoers, whether they be employ ers o f workers or workers of employers, to aid every endeavor to raise the ethical standards that obtain in the dealings between employer and employee, to bring about kinder feelings between master and man, and to foster the spirit o f cooperative endeavor throughout all indus try.” For Meeker, the Bureau’s role was crucial to ensuring that “the old policies o f antagonism, belligerency, and warfare must give way to the policies o f cooperation, mutual understanding, and peace.” 9 Linking morality and business gain, Meeker stressed the need for constructive approaches for dealing with the human factor in indus try. A s he expressed it, “The dissemination o f information bearing on labor, the presentation o f the facts which will enable employers to contrast the statistical results o f the different systems and methods of dealing with labor, is o f the utmost importance and benefit to busi ness.” The Bureau’s publications “have aided business immeasurably by showing that the employer who deals justly with his workers can produce better goods and services at lower prices than the employer who depends for his profits upon low wages, long hours, and bad working conditions.” 10 But much remained to be done. He wrote, “Managers generally seem to regard the workman as a peculiar kind o f peripatetic machine which installs and removes itself when and where needed without cost to the employer, needs no oil or attention, and scarcely ever is worth http://fraser.stlouisfed.org Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis 83 The First Hundred Years conserving or safeguarding because so easily replaceable when broken or worn out.”11 M eeker viewed unemployment as one o f the great hazards o f life and felt that government had a larger responsibility toward the unem ployed than merely “handing out bread and soup.. . . ” He favored the establishment o f a nationwide system o f public employment offices with “the responsibility for the furnishing o f suitable employment for all the unemployed, not merely jobs to the jobless, but economically paying jobs—jobs that pay an American living wage to American workingmen.”12 Meeker set forth his views on this issue in his 1919 testimony supporting a national employment system: “I take it that every man and woman bom in the U nited States is entitled to the privilege of earning a living, and that his job or her job should not be dependent upon any private fee-charging agency w hatsoever.. . . It should be the first and forem ost policy o f our National Government to see to it that every potential worker is an actual worker every working day o f the year outside needed vacation time.”13 H e was also concerned with protecting workers against other hazards. Asserting that “social insurance against property losses” was more common in this country than “insurance against personal hazards o f workers or those in the lower income groups,” Meeker argued that the laboring man should be protected against the hazards o f accident, illness, unemployment, invalidity and old age, and death. He came to view such insurance as one o f the necessities o f life, just like food, clothing, and shelter—and as “essentially a public function” which “should be operated as a social enterprise.” “I do not happen to be a socialist,” he declared, “but, if it is socialism to provide adequate protection to the lives, health, and well-being o f our working popula tion, then let us have some more o f the same.”14 In M eeker’s view, workmen’s compensation provided not only a rightful and proper protection for the laborer but also an economic benefit to business and to society at large. Accidents had always occurred in industry, but the workers had had to shoulder the burden o f this cost o f production. However, said Meeker, the advent of workmen’s compensation had wrought a miracle. Because compensa tion laws prompted safer and more efficient production methods—as managers sought to avoid the cost o f claims—they encouraged gener http://fraser.stlouisfed.org Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis 84 Meeker: Statistics in Recession and W artime ally better business practices. And the bitterest critics o f compensation had become its strongest friends.15 M eeker’s recommendations for workmen’s compensation could be summed up in two words—compulsory and universal. The plans should be funded by the States and operated as a State monopoly or a State-controlled mutual benefit society from which all private casualty companies were excluded. And the plans should cover occupational poisons and diseases and compensate for permanent disabilities.16 He laid out six "minimum requirements’’ for the system. First, industry and government should concentrate on preventing accidents. W hen injuries occurred, the worker must be assured o f adequate medical, surgical, and hospital care to cure or restore him as com pletely as possible. The injured worker should receive adequate com pensation for him self and his family. W hen ready to return to work, he should be retrained, if necessary, for suitable employment. He should then be placed in an appropriate job. And, at proper intervals, he should be reexamined to make sure that the injury had responded to treatm ent.17 Meeker had expressed definite views on child labor before becoming Commissioner, apparendy influenced by his work in the charities and prisons o f New Jersey. Although, like his predecessor, he opposed child labor on moral grounds, Meeker recognized some fun damental economic necessities. Thus, while supporting restrictions on child labor, he also preached die need to improve education and training. In requiring school attendance and prohibiting factory work for children, society must also assure the quality o f their education. “We must be sure that our schools are at least as good educational institutions as our factories,” M eeker warned.18 Meeker advocated a strong, state-controlled school system. In an article in The New York Times in April 1913, he called for the compul sory public education o f all children through the intermediate grades. A ll would be “busy preparing for the great business o f living,” with some beginning to learn trades, others, engineering professions or general culture.19 He believed that many o f the community’s problems with crime and pauperism could be traced to an inadequate school system. A s part o f the remedy, he suggested vocational education, arguing that proper training in conjunction with counseling would help alleviate unemployment problems by giving guidance and resources to the unskilled.70 http://fraser.stlouisfed.org Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis 85 The First Hundred Years H e favored some form o f compulsory civic service for youth and proposed that, as “an antidote and partial substitute for militarism,” all youth on completion o f secondary or technical school be required to enter the service o f the state for a period, serving in private employ ment, government factories, farms, and mines. In addition to aiding youth “to find themselves and to select more intelligently a vocation in life,” such service would diminish industrial strife by “giving sons and daughters o f luxury a saving knowledge o f blisters, backaches, and hunger, the first fruits o f manual labor.”21 Meeker supported government action to protect workers, view ing the state o f trade union organization as inadequate. However, he considered unions to be beneficial institutions, at one time even pro posing that the state oblige “every laboring man to belong to a union, discriminating against non-unionism to the extent o f actually prohibit ing it. . . . Wages and hours o f labor would not be fixed by inflexible statutory enactment, but by bargaining between employers and employees in approximately equal term s.”22 Shortly before he left office in 1920, Meeker warned of the growing bitterness in labor-management relations, lamenting the inability to carry over the cooperative relationships o f the war years into peacetime. He citied the British experience o f securing worker representation on joint industrial councils and works committees. At home, he saw the resumption o f employer opposition to unions and little prospect for continuing such wartime efforts as worker represen tation on shop committees. “We are today exactly where the British were about 30 years ago,” he stated. Meeker’s conclusion was more an appeal: “Before abandoning ourselves completely to pessimism and despair, we should at least try the experiment o f giving the workers a real voice and responsibility in management.”23 Securing the Bureau’s place Meeker entered the Bureau at a time when government agencies were proliferating in response to specialized demands. One o f his continu ing concerns was to secure a clear jurisdiction for the Bureau, both within the new Department o f Labor and in the growing Federal establishment. A t the same time, he sought to establish cooperative arrangements so as to avoid duplication and provide uniformity in the statistical work o f government agencies. http://fraser.stlouisfed.org Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis 86 Meeker: Statistics in Recession and W artime T he B ureau in the D epartm ent of Labor Meeker maintained effective relations throughout his tenure with Secretary of Labor William B. W ilson and Assistant Secretary Louis F. Post and, during the war years, with Special Assistant Felix Frank furter. To a degree, this was helped by the early establishment of the Department Committee on Correlation, under Post, to coordinate the activities of the bureaus within the Department and to work with other departments and commissions on matters relating to labor. In the new Department, the Bureau retained its old responsibilites for labor-associated statistics. In addition, it was given some oversight of the statistical work o f other bureaus. Also, the Commit tee on Correlation set up agreements and procedures to avoid disputes between the Department’s agencies. BLS negotiated one such agree ment with the Children’s Bureau on statistics relating to wage-earning children and another with the Secretary’s Office on procedures for administering the Federal workmen’s compensation system.24 During the period, several bills were introduced to create a Bureau o f Labor Safety in the Department o f Labor, one as early as July 1913.25 Both the interest o f the Department and BLS in the field of safety and their reluctance to see a new agency established were apparent in their correspondence with Congress on the bills. In August 1913, Secretary W ilson wrote Rep. David J. Lewis, Chairman o f the House Committee on Labor, that “much useful work would be performed” by such a bureau but emphasized that the Bureau o f Labor Statistics had “for a long time” studied accident statistics, accident prevention, and compensation, and had issued many reports and bul letins on the subject. The proposed new bureau was not established.26 Meeker also faced an active campaign by women’s groups to establish a separate agency to deal with women’s issues. BLS had had a women’s division since 1911, but its studies had been limited by the failure of Congress to make appropriations for the work. Further, the women’s advocates wanted an agency which would actively promote social reform rather than merely present statistical information. In 1916, Zip S. Falk, Executive Secretary o f the Consum ers League o f the District o f Columbia, wrote Secretary W ilson that women wanted to show “the human story of wage earning women.” The Bureau, she said, published its reports in “an exclusively statistical form .” And Edith Abbott wrote that the Bureau’s 19-volume report on working women and children constituted a superior collection of facts, but a http://fraser.stlouisfed.org Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis 87 The First Hundred Years “commission inquiry would in all probability have been vastly more useful in promoting improvements in the condition o f the working women and children.” Abbott cited the New fo rk State Factory Inves tigation Commission as an example o f what she and her friends wanted—constructive publicity, not just dry facts. 27 Initially, Secretary W ilson and the Bureau opposed the creation o f a separate agency. Ethelbert Stewart, M eeker’s second in command, argued that the Bureau o f Labor Statistics had had a women’s division for several years and that establishment o f a separate agency would cause “duplication or conflict o f jurisdiction.” Besides, he said, women’s concerns were part o f general labor issues. The better proce dure, he explained, would be to create by statute a women’s division within BLS and to appropriate sufficient funds.28 A t first, Secretary W ilson supported the Bureau’s position, but the arguments o f the women’s advocates apparently impressed him, for he soon changed his mind. U pon “mature consideration,” Wilson wrote to Rep. Lewis, “there is a vast field for investigation and study which specially and peculiarly affects women in industry which could be more effectively handled under the immediate direction o f women than under the direction o f men.”29 The House Committee recommended passage o f a bill to estab lish a separate agency, finding that the lack o f statutory support had made for limited funding o f the women’s division in BLS and uncer tainty over its continued existence, finally resulting in successive resig nations from the position o f division chief.30 M eeker reluctantly altered his views. In 1916 he wrote to Mary Van Kleeck, “A s Congress seems disinclined to grant larger appropria tions and larger salaries in the Bureau o f Labor Statistics, I think the only thing for the women o f the country to do in order to bring about the proper consideration o f women in industry is to advocate the establishment o f a Women’s Bureau.”31 Congress failed to act, however, and Meeker sought funds for special studies o f women in industry and to create the statutory posi tion o f chief o f the women's division, but with little success. In July 1918, Secretary W ilson established the Woman in Industry Service as part o f the War Labor Administration, and, in 1920, with Meeker’s full support, Congress created the separate Women’s Bureau.32 http://fraser.stlouisfed.org Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis 88 Meeker: Statistics in Recession and W artime The Bureau in the Federal establishment Shortly after taking office, Meeker wrote Joseph P. Tumulty, private secretary to the President, asking for an appointment with W ilson to discuss his plans for the Bureau. He wanted to know if the Bureau’s program “trespasses upon the preserves o f any other department or bureau.” He also expressed concern that Congress might create addi tional bureaus and commissions in disregard o f the already existing bureaus.33 For several years, Meeker complained to congressional commit tees about duplication o f work by government agencies. In 1914, he pointed out to the House Appropriations Committee, “There are no less than five governmental agencies that are commissioned by law to investigate the cost o f living.” And he wrote the President that C on gress had ordered the Commerce Department to investigate the cause o f rising food prices, emphasizing that only BLS collected retail prices on a regular basis and that, in fact, Commerce had turned to BLS for assistance. A little later, Meeker criticized Commerce for publishing material on wholesale prices: “The work that they do is but a small segment o f the work that we are doing in wholesale prices.”34 O n several occasions, the Bureau complained o f intrusions by the Treasury Department’s Public Health Service. Stewart charged that the Public Health Service had begun studies o f occupational diseases 5 or 6 years after the Bureau had done similar work for the study on women and children. He called the action “a deliberate infringement” and “an act o f trespass” upon the functions o f the Bureau o f Labor Statistics. Before the Senate Appropriations Committee, both Meeker and Stewart criticized the Public Health Service: “They are not well fitted to do that thing___ Their statistics are extremely inaccurate and unreliable because they do not know the occupations.” In 1918, Meeker cautioned Secretary W ilson about an Executive O rder proposed by the Secretary o f the Treasury concerning the functions o f the Public Health Service, alerting W ilson to the poten tial threat to Bureau programs. 'Yet during the war, the Bureau joined with the Public Health Service in a study o f health problems arising from industrial poisons. Despite his continuing concerns, Meeker saw “no reason why there should not be full and cordial cooperation between the Bureau o f Labor Statistics and the Public Health Serv- http://fraser.stlouisfed.org Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis 89 The First Hundred Years M eeker also fought for a role for the Bureau in developing resources for industrial education. In February 1914, he wrote Tumulty that Congress had established a commission to investigate the field and also noted that the National Society for the Promotion of Industrial Education sought a separate investigation. In view o f those activities, he wanted to make the President aware o f the Bureau’s efforts on the subject. A s “the only Federal agency that has ever made a comprehensive study o f industrial and vocational education and guidance,” his Bureau deserved the work, Meeker argued, pointing out that BLS had made the pioneering studies and had invented the terminology.36 Ethelbert Stewart expressed like concerns in writing the Secre tary about the new Federal child labor law. He stated that parents must be convinced that they would profit by keeping their children in school because o f the child’s increased earning power. This meant that schools must make the hope a reality. Training should reflect employ ment opportunities, and the Department o f Labor should have the functions o f developing both the national employment offices and the vocational training resources.37 Early in 1915, at the President’s instruction, Meeker wrote a confidential memorandum outlining the major cases o f overlapping and duplication in the Federal establishment. He listed six agencies competing with BLS: The Bureau o f Mines o f the Department o f the Interior, for accidents in the iron and steel industry; the Bureau of Foreign and Domestic Commerce o f the Department o f Commerce, for wages and prices; the Public Health Service, for occupational health and diseases; the Forest Service and the Bureau o f Chemistry of the Department o f Agriculture, for industrial poisons; and the Bureau o f Education, for vocational education.38 In 1917, the Secretary of Labor pointed out several o f these in his report to Congress on harmonizing the work o f the various government agencies.39 M eeker used various forum s to stress the importance o f coopera tion. In 1914, he told the National Safety Council, “We must get governmental agencies to work together. I regard that as my principal job.” A t the American Economic Association meeting in December 1914, he commented, “I sincerely hope that the proposed joint com mittee o f the Economic Association and the Statistical Society to advise with the statistical Bureaus o f the government will be appointed. Unnecessary duplication o f statistical work should be elim http://fraser.stlouisfed.org Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis 90 Meeker: Statistics in Recession and W artime inated, and the statistical methods used should be standardized and made uniform.”40 The Bureau and State agencies Meeker tried to improve communications with and among State agen cies as well. He wanted to make the Bureau “the center for the dissemination o f useful information regarding developments in the industrial field, to cooperate with the State agencies, and to secure their cooperation in making labor studies. . . .”41 “I have, it seems to me, a very excellent plan which covers cooperation between my Bureau and the various State agencies that deal with labor m atters.. . . You do the work, and I will reap the glory,” he suggested to the Association o f Governmental Labor Officials in 1915. More seriously, he declared his intention to eliminate duplication, to develop informa tion where it was lacking, and to establish uniform statistical defini tions and methods.42 W hen unemployment became a major public concern in 1914, the Bureau began a continuing cooperative relationship with the American Association o f Public Employment Offices and regularly published its proceedings. In addressing the association, Meeker cited the need for national and local information on the employed and unemployed, including industrial and occupational detail. He sug gested that the States were better able to obtain and furnish such information and indicated the kinds o f information to be sought from trade unions and employers.43 In 1916, shortly after the Bureau began its employment series, it arranged with the New York State Depart ment o f Labor for the mutual use o f the employment data collected by that agency. The Bureau’s work: M eeker’s first term Price indexes One o f Meeker’s first projects was revision o f the index numbers of retail and wholesale prices. He later commented, “Long before I took charge o f the Bureau, I had become very suspicious o f the Bureau's index numbers, especially its retail price index. . . . Before I had got settled in the saddle, I set about to revise and recalculate the index numbers published by the Bureau.” He called upon his fellow econo mists; Irving Fisher and Wesley C. Mitchell were among the few who http://fraser.stlouisfed.org Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis 91 The First Hundred Years responded with helpful suggestions. He later thanked them especially: “Had it not been for the sympathy, encouragement, and counsel of Professors Mitchell and Fisher, I should not have had the courage to carry out the recasting o f the Bureau’s index numbers.”44 The Bureau expanded retail price coverage in 1914. To obtain a more realistic measure o f changes in workers’ living costs, it increased the number o f food items priced and added several cloth and clothing items. By 1917, retail prices were collected in 46 cities, as against 39 formerly; for 28 food items, as against 15 earlier; for the new category o f dry goods, 8 items; and, in addition, for anthracite and bituminous coal and gas for domestic use. Also, the method o f computation o f the indexes was altered by shifting the base from 1890-1900 to the most recent year and develop ing a chain index, making year-to-year comparisons easier. Actual prices, rather than averages o f relative prices (percentages), were now used in determining relative change. The Bureau explained the reason for the new method: “W hen averages o f averages o f relative prices are thus piled up, it becomes difficult to comprehend the meaning o f the final average.” U nder the new system, “A percentage based on average or aggregate actual prices o f a commodity reflects more accurately the changes in the cost o f that commodity.”45 The wholesale price index underwent a parallel revision. In 1914, the Bureau increased the number o f price quotations to 340, defined the commodities more accurately, and included more markets. Previ ously unweighted, the index was now weighted by value (price multi plied by quantity marketed) based on the 1909 censuses of manufactures and agriculture. Indexes were rebased and computed in the same fashion as for retail prices. The Bureau published its new wholesale price index in 1915, along with Wesley C . Mitchell’s classic essay, “The Making and U sing o f Index Numbers.” The influences o f both Fisher and Mitchell were apparent in the price index revisions. Fisher advocated chain indexes as more easily comparable than those on fixed bases. Also, Fisher believed that the wholesale price index could be computed from a relatively small num ber o f commodities. Mitchell agreed that chain indexes were more accurate than fixed-base measures and that the series should be an aggregate o f actual prices weighted according to the quantities mar keted. However, he differed with Fisher about the size o f the survey http://fraser.stlouisfed.org Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis 92 Meeker: Statistics in Recession and W artime field: “The more commodities that can be included in such an index number the better, provided that the system o f weighting is sound.”46 Tfears later, before the American Statistical Association, Meeker recommended further improvements in the wholesale index: “In my view, the best way to achieve the ‘best index number’ is, first, to secure more trustworthy and more representative prices from (1) producers and (2) jobbers and wholesalers, and, secondly, to obtain more accu rate statistics and estimates o f quantities o f goods produced, imported, exported, and consumed.” 47 Meeker early showed an interest in developing an international system o f price statistics. In January 1914, the Bureau wrote to the Senate Appropriations Committee that negotiations were underway with England, France, and Canada. In March, Meeker wrote the President, “Plans for putting international statistics upon a common basis have proceeded so far that I think it highly desirable that I go to Europe to confer in person with the leading statisticians there.” He made the trip, but the outbreak o f war in Europe prevented any further work on the project.48 Wage studies Shortly after resuming its program o f industry wage studies, the Bureau was collecting payroll data for all industries that employed at least 75,000 workers. The Bureau surveyed nine major industry groups: Cotton, wool, and silk; lumber, millwork, and furniture; boots and shoes; hosiery and knit goods; iron and steel; cigars; men’s cloth ing; slaughtering and meatpacking; and steam railroad cars. The 1913 study on the cotton, wool, and silk industries gave hourly wage rates and nominal full-time hours per week. The 1914 study for the same industries added data on full-time weekly earnings. Moreover, in line with revisions in the retail and wholesale price indexes, the weighting system for the wage indexes was changed. The new industry relative was constructed as an aggregate compiled directly from employment data rather than as a relative o f relatives. Another innovation in the wage studies was the collection o f data on the extent and regularity o f employment. In a study o f the hosiery industry, the Bureau introduced the concept “variation in employ ment during the year,” appearing in other industry studies as “fluctua tions in employment during the year” and “volume o f employment.” http://fraser.stlouisfed.org Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis 93 The First Hundred Years Productivity measures also were introduced. A study of the lum ber and millwork industry in 1915 presented output per one-man hour, cost per one-man hour, and cost per 1,000 board feet produced for logging and saw mill operations. For the boot and shoe industry, data were presented on “time and labor cost, by occupations in the manufacture o f 100 pairs o f welt shoes, the rate o f wages or earnings per hour, and the number o f pairs worked on per hour.” In 1913, the Bureau published union scales o f wages and hours for 1907 to 1912 for more than 40 trades in 39 important industrial cities. The material consisted o f time rates as stipulated in written agreements and trade union records made available to Bureau agents by local union officials. Later, the series was expanded to cover 56 cities in 35 States for 11 industry groups, and over 100 trades and occupations. The Bureau also constructed index numbers o f wages in the trades and occupations covered, which it compared to retail food price indexes as a cost-of-living measure. In addition to its regular reports, the Bureau was called upon for special wage studies. In 1914, workers in fish canneries around Seattle requested an investigation o f wage conditions which the Bureau had to refuse because o f a lack o f funds. That same year, the Bureau gathered data on wages and conditions in street railways when a strike in Indianapolis pointed up the lack o f available information. During the summer and fell o f 1915, the Bureau conducted a special investiga tion for the Joint Committee on Printing. The Joint Committee was considering pay scales at the Government Printing Office, and the Bureau surveyed wages and hours from employer payroll records in the printing and binding trades in 179 establishments in 26 cities and presented those findings along with the union wage rates for the same occupations and the same cities.49 Cost-of-living studies W hen M eeker came to the Bureau, retail price data were being used to set wage rates for some government work, as, for example, at the Government Printing Office and the Washington Navy Yard. In testi fying on the data, Meeker said, “In order to settle upon what is a fair and reasonable wage, it is necessary to know what a dollar will buy and this is the most accurate information available to both trades-union men and to employers. . . . ” However, since the Bureau had last collected expenditure data in 1901-03, the existing budget information http://fraser.stlouisfed.org Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis 94 Meeker: Statistics in Recession and W artime was obsolete: “It is, in my judgment, extremely necessary that, as soon as possible, provision be made for a new budget survey.”50 In 1914, the Senate Committee on Education and Labor reported in favor o f authorizing the Department o f Labor to develop informa' tion on the cost of living in the District o f Columbia. Meeker had indicated that the proposed survey would cover only nongovernment workers, and that existing Bureau resources would not be adequate for the study.51 The Senate did not take further action, however. In 1916, Meeker testified that a survey would be helpful in determining a minimum wage level but that it would also help answer the pressing question: “W hat does it cost the American family to live?”52 Finally, in December 1916, Congress appropriated $6,(XX) for the investigation. The first phase of the study consisted o f the collection o f data on budgets of 2,110 families in the District during the first half of 1917. In the second phase, the Bureau studied the income and expenditures of 600 white women earning wages o f under $1,100 a year. A s the third phase, in cooperation with the Office o f Home Economics o f the Department o f Agriculture, the Bureau conducted a dietary study of 31 families.53 Beginning in October 1917, the Monthly Labor Review carried a series of articles presenting the findings, one o f which was that w. . . a very considerable proportion o f the low-income families of Washing ton do not buy enough food to maintain the family members in health and strength.” Among the wage-earning women, the Bureau found that the majority “were not only working at distressingly low wages, but a very large proportion o f them were women who had been wage earners for many years.” William F. O gbum , after an intensive exami nation o f 200 o f the budgets, declared that an average family of man, wife, and three children under the age o f 10 needed an income of at least $1,155 to say out o f debt.54 The Bureau published a cost-of-living index for the District in 1919, and, in 1921, added it to the list o f cities included in the national index. Industrial relations The Bureau investigated several major labor disputes during M eeker’s early days in office. Secretary W ilson called on Ethelbert Stewart in the fall o f 1913 to mediate a coal mining dispute involving the Rocke feller interests in Colorado. Later the same year, Meeker sent Walter B. Palmer, who had investigated earlier troubles in Colorado and http://fraser.stlouisfed.org Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis 95 The First Hundred Years Pennsylvania, into Michigan for information on a copper strike led by the Western Federation o f Miners. But such assignments became infrequent once the new Mediation and Conciliation Service was fully organized and were not a regular Bureau function as they were under Neill. The Bureau continued to report extensively on collective bar gaining developments. From 1913 through 1916, it published five bulletins on the subject; four o f these were on collective bargaining in New 'fork City—three on the garment industry and one on the build ing trades. In 1915, the Bureau resumed publication o f data on the number o f strikes and lockouts, including causes and results, based on public sources. Employment and unemployment M eeker’s deep concern for the problems o f employment and unem ployment reflected the growing awareness that the United States lagged far behind other industrial countries in dealing with unemploy ment as a broad social and economic problem. A s Neill had stated in 1912 at an international conference on unemployment, “The subject o f unemployment has, up to the present time, received but a limited amount o f attention in this country.”55 The recession o f 1913-14 spurred the Bureau to consider studies on unemployment. In early 1914, Meeker met with Gom pers and M orrison o f the A FL about possible projects on unemployment which the Bureau could undertake. But later in the year Meeker had to inform Gom pers that the Bureau had done no work because Congress had failed to provide funds.56 In requesting appropriations, Meeker had testified: “We have not anything that is worth the paper it is written on on the question o f unemployment in this country, and, my heavens, it is up to this B u reau... to find out the facts.”57 During the winter o f 1914-15, however, the Committee on Unemployment formed by Mayor John P. Mitchell called upon the Bureau for a series o f field surveys o f unemployment in New fork City. The committee had collected data from employers on the num ber employed in a week o f December 1914 and for the corresponding week o f December 1913. A t about the same time, the M etropolitan Life Insurance Company, in cooperation with the Mayor’s Commit tee, had surveyed its industrial policyholders in Greater New fork. At http://fraser.stlouisfed.org Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis 96 Meeker: Statistics in Recession and W artime the request o f the committee, with personnel borrowed from the U .S. Immigration Bureau and the New York City Tenement House Inspec tion Service, the Bureau covered over 100 city blocks and some 3,700 individual tenement houses in January and February 1915. It found an unemployment rate o f 16.2 percent, which approximated the 18-percent rate reported by M etropolitan. The results were published by the Bureau in Unemployment in New York City, New Ttbrk.58 Meeker then contracted with M etropolitan for studies in 16 cities in the East and Middle West and in 12 Rocky Mountain and Pacific Coast cities. In August and September 1915, at the urging o f the Mayor’s Committee, both the Bureau and M etropolitan conducted surveys in New York City for a second time. The results o f this work were presented in 1916 in a Bureau publication, Unemployment in the United States.59 Meeker declared o f the program: “These studies constitute the beginning o f what should be carried as a regular series o f reports. . . . The Bureau o f Labor Statistics should be in a position to give the fullest information to employers, employees, and the public as to numbers employed and unemployed.” And he complained o f congres sional parsimony: “It is a great pity that no provision has yet been made for the collection and publication of statistics o f unemployment by the Federal Bureau o f Labor Statistics.”60 Meeker gave several reasons for the continuing unemployment, forem ost among them being immigrant labor which had, he said, poured into the country and had caused congestion in many labor markets. Furthermore, he argued, many corporations followed the deliberate policy o f keeping “40 men waiting in line outside the gates o f their plants for every possible job that might be open in their establishment.” In addition, “overspeeded industries” contributed greatly to labor turnover.61 The Bureau’s work on unemployment was only a temporary effort, overwhelmed by the demands o f wartime, which turned labor surpluses into labor shortages. The lasting effect o f the work, how ever, was that the Bureau did undertake a statistical program to reflect changes in employment levels. Beginning with five industries in O cto ber and November 1915, the Bureau introduced the monthly series, “Amount of employment in certain industries,” beginning publication in January 1916. This was the start o f the Bureau’s establishment series on employment and total payrolls. Meeker could say later that http://fraser.stlouisfed.org Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis 97 The First Hundred Years these were the only official figures on employment and unemploy ment.62 The work on unemployment also led the Bureau to the study of labor turnover. A s Ethelbert Stewart explained, the Secretary directed the Bureau to study unemployment, and the Bureau found that the problem o f unemployment was seriously complicated by “men hunt ing for jobs, by the shifting o f the labor force.”63 Labor turnover studies became integral elements of the Bureau’s support o f constructive em ployment practices by management. M eeker commented on the abysmal ignorance o f employers regarding costs to their companies and to men and machines “o f the ill-devised and shockingly wasteful system o f ‘hiring and firing’ men in a steady stream with no attempt to try them out, fit them in, train them and keep them.”64 Meeker and the Bureau actively supported those employers exploring avenues for the regularization of employment through the periodic national meetings o f the Conference o f Employment Manag ers, predecessor o f the American Management Association. The Bureau published the conference proceedings from 1916 through 1918. Meeker said that, “Like all meritorious movements, this move ment to promote the more intelligent treatment o f laborers has spread until it has become nationwide.”65 He stressed that employers could derive the greatest benefit from their wage payments by “shortening the working-day, providing rest periods at convenient intervals, advancing piece and time rates, cutting out all over-time, re-creating in the employee an interest in the job he is doing and helping him to get the most out o f his earnings and leisure.”66 The Bureau made several additional early contributions to the study o f turnover with work on the seasonality and irregularity of employment in the women’s clothing industries, in support o f an effort by those industries in New York City to obtain better informa tion on the question. Extensive field investigations in 1915-16 and a wartime study in 1918 provided the basis for summaries later pub lished in the Monthly Labor Review as “Mobility o f Labor in American Industry.” In 1916-17, the Bureau collected information on corporate wel fare plans from 430 employers in an effort to spread information on ways to reduce turnover by improving working conditions. Also, the http://fraser.stlouisfed.org Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis 98 Meeker: Statistics in Recession and W artime Review carried many articles on specific plans in various companies and industries. Social insurance Royal M eeker’s interest in social insurance showed in much of his work at the Bureau, for he defined it very broadly to encompass most forms o f protective legislation for workers. In 1916, he wrote the President to suggest “bold action on social insurance” that would include a model law for the District o f Columbia and Federal employ ees as well as protection for all workers in interstate commerce. Point ing to the high infant m ortality and accident rates, he urged establishment o f national health insurance and made a strong appeal for support for safety programs.67 Workmen's compensation. A s under Wright and Neill, the Bureau continued to publicize and encourage experiments and improvements in w orkm en’s com pensation program s. The Bureau regularly presented materials in the Monthly Labor Review covering State legis lation and experience. In addition, it published a series o f bulletins on workmen’s compensation laws and programs in the United States and foreign countries. Between 1908 and 1916, the Bureau had direct responsibility for administering the program o f workmen’s compensation for Federal employees. From his earliest days at the Bureau, Meeker sought to have this responsibility transferred. Meanwhile, he suggested improve ments in the system. In his 1915 report to the Secretary, he listed several administrative reforms that should be enacted. He also wrote the President about shortcomings in the program. His complaints included administrative confusion, in that Congress had established three separate systems covering different groups o f Federal workers. Yet he found “the most glaring inadequacy o f the present law” to be its failure to include all employees o f the government. The second great est weakness, in his view, lay in the failure to cover occupational diseases. In 1916, after considering several proposals, Congress created the separate Federal Employees’ Compensation Board to administer the system.68 Industrial safety and health. Actively continuing the efforts begun under Neill to improve industrial safety and health conditions, http://fraser.stlouisfed.org Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis 99 The First Hundred Years M eeker combined research into effects and exposures with efforts to establish a uniform system o f statistical reporting. In a letter to Presi dential secretary Joseph Tumulty in February 1914, Meeker set forth his view o f the Bureau’s role: “It seems to me imperative that the Federal Bureau o f Labor Statistics should act as a central clearing house for State agencies, for the purpose o f standardizing accident and occupational disease statistics. This Bureau should be in a position to furnish at any time advice as to the best methods o f preventing indus trial accidents and occupational diseases."69 In M eeker’s opinion, the Bureau, rather than any other agency or private firm, should be able to say where the hazard lay, just what the danger was, and how best to remedy the situation. M eeker and Charles H. Verrill o f the Bureau staff worked with a committee o f the International Association o f Industrial Accident Boards and Commissions to develop standard methods and definitions for reporting accidents. “N o one State has yet published statistics that are at all adequate to its own needs, and no two States have produced results that are in any way comparable.” To help remedy the lack of adequate statistics, the committee recommended systems for classifica tion by industry; by cause, location, and nature o f injury; and by extent o f disability. The Bureau offered to tabulate and publish State accident statistics and also provided the committee with the benefit o f its experience in developing severity rates for the iron and steel and machine-building industries.70 The Bureau established cooperative arrangements for reporting accidents with the States o f M assachusetts, Ohio, and New 'fork, hoping to extend such arrangements, and it continued the close rela tionship with the National Safety Council begun under Neill. Meeker at one time served as chairman o f the Committee on Standard Forms for Accident Reporting, and, in 1916, he was elected chairman o f the Governmental Section. With the cooperation o f insurance companies, Frederick L. Hoff man produced Industrial Accident Statistics in 1915, which presented data from the Prudential Insurance Company as well as from the Census Bureau, several States, and three foreign countries. In 1917, the Bureau published Louis I. Dublin’s Causes of Death by Occupa tion, which gave figures from the M etropolitan Life Insurance Com pany’s Industrial Department. http://fraser.stlouisfed.org Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis 100 Meeker: Statistics in Recession and W artime The Bureau also continued to publish pioneering studies by Alice Hamilton on exposure to industrial poisons, especially in the lead industry. Hamilton also wrote on industrial poisons in the rubber and explosives industries. The publication o f the report on the explosives industry in 1917 proved especially opportune, coming as it did when “the enormous expansion in the industry. . . has drawn thousands of green workers into occupations which subject them to serious or fatal poisoning.”71 In addition, the Bureau published a study by John B. Andrews on anthrax as an occupational disease, a report by Lucian W. Chaney and Hugh S. Hanna on the safety movement in the iron and steel industry, and one by Arthur R. Perry on preventable death in cotton manufac turing. Meeker acknowledged, however, that much remained to be done. In 1920, shortly before leaving office, he told the Pennsylvania Safety Congress, “It is a shameful confession to be obliged to make, but we don’t know whether the net result o f our efforts to reduce industrial accidents has been more accidents or fewer accidents, a greater or a smaller loss in disability time.” He then urged more effort to establish uniformity in definitions, statistics, coverage, and compensation, work which the Bureau continued.72 The second term: Statistics for wartime needs W hen the United States entered the war in April 1917, the state of Federal statistics was “woefully incomplete and inadequate.” Bernard Baruch, Chairman of the War Industries Board, later observed that “the greatest deterrent to effective action” during the war was the lack o f facts.73 Problems in gathering timely statistics were complicated by the competing demands o f the many independent statistical bureaus. The multiplication o f questionnaires became so great by mid-1918 that complaints from respondents mounted.7^ The need for coordination became increasingly evident, but there was debate as to which agency should have the responsibility. Both Baruch’s War Industries Board and the Labor Department’s War Labor Policies Board, headed by Felix Frankfurter, discussed the issue. One proposal called for establishment o f a temporary organization in the Bureau o f Labor Statistics to collect, compile, and distribute labor statistics for the needs o f the various departments and war agencies. http://fraser.stlouisfed.org Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis 101 The First Hundred Years However, the gathering and distribution o f industrial statistics— including labor statistics—was placed under the charge o f the Central Bureau o f Planning and Statistics o f the War Industries Board, with arrangements for coordination between the Central Bureau and Meeker.75 W hile BLS did not obtain the principal coordinating role, its responsibility for labor statistics was recognized and enhanced. Cost-of-living studies and standard budgets The demands o f the wartime economy finally permitted Meeker to achieve his long-sought goal o f a new, comprehensive consumer expenditure survey. Throughout the war, the government was con cerned with the manner in which wages could be adjusted for the rising cost o f living. Thus, the August 1917 agreement between the Emergency Fleet Corporation and the A FL Metal Trades Department, which established the Shipbuilding Labor Adjustment Board, stated that the Board would “keep itself fully informed as to the relation between living costs in the several districts, and their comparison between progressive periods o f time.”76 G reat Britain had set an early example for revision o f cost-ofliving measurement during wartime. A t first, wage adjustments were based on the retail prices o f food, but these were found unsuitable in a time o f rapidly changing prices, even with more frequent publication. In June 1916, the British Board o f Trade produced a new index number covering all groups o f expenditures and representing the “average cost o f living o f the working classes.”77 In the U nited States, proposals for adjustments tied to an index figured prominently in policy discussions. Some means o f achieving stability in purchasing power had been discussed by economists even before the war. Meeker and Irving Fisher had corresponded on the subject as early as 1912. A t that time, Fisher had promoted the con cept o f a “stabilized” or “compensated” dollar to obtain constancy in purchasing power by adjusting “the number of grains [of gold] which go to make a dollar.” The change would be determined, according to Fisher, “by index numbers o f prices, such as those of. . . the United States Bureau o f Labor.”78 Fisher again promoted the idea as the war economy heated up, focusing on the use o f a price index to adjust wages for the increased cost o f living. In tyiay 1917, he wrote Assistant Secretary o f Labor Post to propose a “half-way” plan for salary adjustment. Fisher suggested http://fraser.stlouisfed.org Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis 102 Meeker: Statistics in Recession and W artime that, since food prices rose twice as fast as general prices, adjustment should be set at half the rise in the Bureau’s retail food price index number. This would, he argued, secure “rough justice.” Meeker rejected the assumption that all items rose at one-half the increase in food prices, recommending instead that wages be adjusted up or down according to the full rise or fall in the food index. That is, until a further investigation into the retail prices o f nonfood commodities could be made, the index numbers o f retail prices o f food should be considered as representing changes in the cost o f living.79 In the meantime, Meeker pressed to begin work on surveys o f the cost o f living o f families in shipbuilding centers for the Shipbuild ing Board. In December 1917, he estimated his need at $50,000 to conduct the surveys, and the President allocated the sum from his National Security and Defense Fund. In May 1918, the President granted M eeker’s request for another $25,000 to complete the surveys.80 During the early months o f 1918, the Bureau scrambled to con duct the surveys in 18 shipbuilding centers, covering family expendi tures in 1917 and 1918. The Shipbuilding Board put the results to immediate use in setting uniform national wage rates for most o f the skilled shipyard trades.81 In February 1918, Henry R. Seager o f the Shipbuilding Board wrote Post that the Board relied on the Bureau o f Labor Statistics for authoritative data on changes in the cost o f living and that it would seriously consider using index num bers if the Bureau decided officially to establish index numbers o f changes in the cost o f living o f wage earners in different parts o f the country. He noted, however, that Meeker was not yet prepared to undertake the task because o f the technical difficulties and said that the Board would wait for the Bureau to take the initiative.82 In March, the policy was developed under which the tripartite National War Labor Board was to administer wartime labor-manage ment relations. Strikes and lockouts were prohibited, and, o f particu lar significance for the Bureau's programs, prevailing wages and working conditions in localities were to be considered in fixing wages. But the “right o f all workers, inducing common laborers, to a living wage” was declared, with minimum rates “which will insure the sub sistence o f the worker and his family in health and reasonable com fort.”83 http://fraser.stlouisfed.org Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis 103 The First Hundred Years By August, die Secretary o f Labor supported an indexing scheme as the way o f standardizing and stabilizing wages. He wrote the Presi dent, expressing the need for "properly weighted family budgets pre pared by the Bureau o f Labor Statistics and a record made monthly of the changes in the cost o f living, the wage rate to rise or fall during the ensuing month one cent per hour for each change o f eight cents per day in the cost o f living shown by the investigations made by the Bureau."84 By June, the National War Labor Board was calling for nation wide data on the cost o f living, and the Bureau, with an allocation of $300,000 from the President, began on the larger task. Meeker pointed out how the new survey would provide much better informa tion than the earlier surveys o f shipbuilding centers. Those studies were done in haste, he said, with time not available to calculate new weights based on quantities consumed, so the old 1901 weights had been used. Also, the number o f articles priced was not adequate; miscellaneous items o f expenditure were not priced at all. Further, specifications for individual items had not been adequately developed to insure future pricing o f identical or closely related items. And the shipbuilding centers were too few and too untypical to be representa tive o f the country as a whole.85 The national study was conducted in 1918-19. Some 12,000 fami lies with incomes o f about $900 to $2,500 in 92 cities in 42 States were surveyed. M ore than 300 agents visited the homes o f wage earners and "sm all" salaried workers, and, on the basis o f interviews with house wives, obtained information on expenditures and income for a 1-year period between July 1917 and February 1919. Data were collected on quantities purchased, as well as costs, in contrast to the 1901 expendi ture study, which had covered only costs. Information obtained by interview was frequently checked against daily expense accounts main tained by the housewives over at least a 5-week period. The first results o f the survey appeared in an article in the Monthly Labor Review in May 1919, with others following for the several regions. These presented “average yearly expense per family" for food, clothing, rent, fuel and light, furniture, and miscellaneous, along with "total average yearly expenses per family." In releasing the results, Meeker acknowledged their shortcom ings. It was unfortunate, he said, that the study had to be conducted in an abnormal period. "Many families not only economized on clothes http://fraser.stlouisfed.org Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis 104 Meeker: Statistics in Recession and W artime and house furnishings but actually skimped themselves on food,” Meeker stated, “both because o f the high prices and because o f the intense Liberty Loan drives.”86 The data showed, Meeker stated, that there was no American standard of living that provided “all the necessaries, many o f the comforts, and a goodly supply o f the luxuries o f life.” Instead, there were many different standards depending on the income and size of families. The lot o f lower income families was especially hard. They needed, he said, higher wages and cheaper food, clothing, houses, medical treatment, and insurance. He concluded, “Let us make the minimum living standard in America one that will support life in decency and health.”87 W hile finding the cost-of-living report “generally illuminating,” The New York Times disagreed with Meeker: “The Bureau o f Labor Statistics cannot be accused of countenancing an unjust wage for the American workman. Quite the contrary, its tendency is to raise an ideal standard, a standard incapable o f being realized in any nation, and especially in the present acute industrial crisis.”88 In 1919, shortly after publishing the results o f the expenditure survey, the Bureau issued its initial report on changes in the cost of living—its first comprehensive set o f cost-of-living indexes for the Nation and for major industrial and shipbuilding centers. Thereafter, indexes were issued semiannually for the Nation as a whole and for 31 cities. Pricing for 1913-17, the period preceding the expenditure sur vey, was based on records o f retail establishments in the 18 shipbuild ing centers. Beginning with December 1917, the Bureau regularly collected data in the 31 major industrial and shipbuilding centers for about 145 commodities and services. Washington, D .C ., was added in 1921.89 Later, an academic critique of cost-of-living studies in the Journal of the American Statistical Association concluded that, while econo mists had for several years debated the difficulties of constructing a cost-of-living index, the substantial correspondence o f the Bureau’s numbers with those o f a wartime pilot study by the National Industrial Conference Board was the best proof that such a measure was practi cable.90 Meeker described the purposes o f the nationwide expenditure study as including the formulation o f standard budgets for use by adjustment boards in setting minimum and fair wage awards. To deter http://fraser.stlouisfed.org Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis 105 The First Hundred "Years mine the adequacy of the market basket utilized in constructing the cost-of-living indexes, he declared, “A standard minimum quantity budget must be agreed upon which will allow a sufficiency of all necessary commodities and services, food, clothing, housing, fuel, fur niture, house furnishings, and miscellaneous to enable the standard family to live healthfully and decently.”91 After the war's end, the Joint Commission of Congress on Reclassification of Salaries called on the Bureau to formulate standard budgets for government employees in the District of Columbia. The commission found, using the Bureau materials, that rates of compensa tion had not kept up with increases in the cost of living.92 The main Bureau work for the commission was published in two articles in the Monthly Labor Review in 1919 and 1920. One presented a total bud get, at market prices, necessary to sustain a level of health and decency for a government employee in Washington, D.C., with a family of five. The budget represented “a sufficiency of food, respectable clothing, sanitary housing, and a minimum of essential ‘sundries’”; but did not include "many comforts which should be included in a proper ‘Ameri can standard of living.'” No provision was made ufor savings other than insurance, nor for vacations, nor for books or other educational purposes.” The cost of the budget was estimated at $2,288 in October 1919. The second budget provided similar material for single men and women.93 The data from the 1918-19 expenditure survey were further used to develop a standard “minimum quantity budget necessary to main tain a worker’s family of five in health and decency.” Constructed with the assistance of the Department of Agriculture and the National Conference of Social Work, the standard reflected requirements for food, clothing, housing, heat and light, furniture and furnishings, and miscellaneous items. The costs of the budget were not calculated by the Bureau.9* The Bureau’s cost-of-living and budget information was cited frequendy and used extensively by parties to wage disputes and by Congress, Federal agencies, private companies, and international con ferences. Its value was recognized by such groups as the Industrial Conference called by President Wilson in December 1919. In their report, the conference participants stressed that “it is vitally important that the government maintain and even extend its machinery for investigating and reporting” on changes in the cost of living. As http://fraser.stlouisfed.org Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis 106 Meeker: Statistics in Recession and W artime important as the wartime investigations were, “Exact and reliable information is equally important during the period o f reconstruction through which we are now passing.”95 Yet, despite appeals by President W ilson and Meeker, Congress was determined to return appropriations to normal after the war. In 1919, the Bureau sought a deficiency appropriation o f $475,000 for cost-of-living work. Congress allowed $12,000.96 Meeker had devel oped the cost-of-living and budget programs to a most promising level of utility—only to have their future threatened by congressional bud get cutting in the postwar retrenchment. The industrial survey Wartime demands intensified the need to speed and expand the gath ering and tabulation o f information on wages and hours, strikes and lockouts, and labor requirements. Requests came from various Federal agencies and from State wage adjustment committees and departments of labor. These requests, and especially those o f the War Department for wage information in the vicinity o f cantonments, required sending agents into localities not previously covered in the Bureau’s wage surveys. M eeker’s attempts to secure funds for expanded surveys between 1916 and 1918 were unsuccessful. In October 1918, with the encouragement o f the Central Bureau of Planning and Statistics o f the War Industries Board, Meeker and others again stressed the need for more complete wage statistics. The Bureau’s regular program permitted only about 10 industry studies on 2-year cycles, and these were largely o f “historical or antiquarian inter est” when finally published. Meeker proposed that 30 or more indus tries be surveyed at least once a year.97 Shortly thereafter, the President allotted $300,000 for an inte grated study o f occupational hours and earnings to reflect wartime conditions and help resolve disputes. Almost immediately, Meeker wrote that, while the work was being planned and organized as quickly as possible, “it is becoming increasingly difficult since the signing of the Armistice to get needed information from employers.”98 The information was obtained, however, and in May 1920 the Bureau presented the results of the survey, which covered wages and hours during 1918 and 1919 for 780 occupations in 28 industries, covering 2,365 establishments in 43 States. Unfortunately, as the Bureau acknowledged, with the sudden change in production requirements http://fraser.stlouisfed.org Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis 107 The First Hundred Years following the war’s end, the data in the report reflected the unsettled conditions o f postwar reconstruction. The Bureau declared that it “could render no greater service to the country” than to have such information continuously available and pleaded for the support o f “accurate, reliable, and strictly impar tial” investigations such as the industrial survey. By that time, how ever, Congress had already refused further appropriations to maintain the program, and only the more limited wage survey program was continued.99 Administration The many activities o f the Bureau under Meeker were conducted with only modest increases in congressional appropriations (table 3). Lim ited funds made for low-paying job classifications and few opportuni ties for advancement, sources o f constant complaint by Bureau officials and others. In surveying the Bureau’s work, Wesley C. Mitchell wrote that the field work in collecting price and wage data was “better on the whole than the office work o f making these data into finished bulle tins.” W hile the clerical force “stood on a level rather above that common to government offices,” BLS lacked an “adequate staff of skilled statisticians.” The weakness o f the organization, as Mitchell explained it, arose from the fact that the Bureau could not offer a satisfactory career to capable men.100 In 1916, Stewart stated, “The one criticism always levelled at the Bureau o f Labor Statistics is that the value o f our material is greatly decreased and, as some o f our very warm friends insist, destroyed by the lapse o f time between the gathering and the final issuing o f the material. Now, it is simply impossible for us to get our work out in reasonable time with the office force we have.”101 And Congress threatened action that would, in the Bureau’s opinion, make matters worse by prohibiting employees from taking outside jobs for pay. Stewart stated that such an amendment would force “fifty percent of the best men in the Bureau” to resign.102 The wartime emergency increased the pressures. Late in 1917, Stewart commented that most o f the Bureau’s positions had not been re-rated since the founding o f the Bureau in 1885 and that “our men who are able to supervise statistical work have left us or are leaving us for better pay in the war agencies.” Turnover increased so much that, http://fraser.stlouisfed.org Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis 108 Meeker: Statistics in Recession and W artime Table 3. Funding for Bureau o f Labor Statistics, 1914-20 (in thousands) F iscal year ended Jun e 30 — 1914 1915 1916 1917 1918 1919 1920 Appropriations Total1 Salaries $185 206 209 in 213 243 322 $102 138 138 138 148 173 217 Special Presidential funds - $75 z625 - 'Includes miscellaneous and deficiency appropriations, but not allocations for printing and binding. 2$50,000 o f this was returned. SOURCES: National Archives Record G roup 257, Bureau o f Labor Statistics, Appropriations Ledger, 1887-1903. Legislative, Executive, and Judicial Appropriations. whereas in 1916 it had been necessary to hire 150 people to fill the 101 permanent positions, in 1917, 222 people had to be hired to fill 108 positions.103 The extensive wartime studies on the cost o f living and the industrial survey had been conducted through allocations from the President’s special fund. The Bureau lost this source after the armi stice and had to cut programs to meet its peacetime budget. In March 1920, a Survey article, “Let There Be Darkness,” stated, “Apparently the Federal Bureau o f Labor Statistics is to be hamstrung by Congress. Its appropriation has been so cut that some o f its most important work must be stopped.”104 Both Stewart and Meeker testified in favor o f plans to solve some o f the long-range personnel problems. In 1916, Stewart spoke in support o f a pension system for civil servants, arguing that the govern ment pays elderly, inefficient employees anyway, pension or no pen sion. Many corporations had established pension programs, he said, “because they had a water-logged pay roll that they had to fix up. In other words, they had a pension roll without a pension system, and they had to devise a pension system in self-defense.”105 Congress did pass a wartime bonus for government employees, but M eeker noted that it did not cover the increase in the cost of living. He argued that wages should keep pace with living costs and http://fraser.stlouisfed.org Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis 109 The First Hundred years with raises in private industry. In fact, he drafted a bill to provide automatic adjustment o f government salaries to changes in the cost of living as measured by Bureau o f Labor Statistics cost-of-living studies and retail price surveys.106 Congress established a pension system in 1920, but it was many years before the concepts o f comparability and periodic adjustment for government salaries were incorporated in stat utes. Publications Meeker instituted a new publications policy in 1915 with the launch ing o f a monthly journal to supplement the bulletins published on an irregular schedule. The Bureau had felt the need for some way to present materials that were important but too brief for publication as separate bulletins. Also, in introducing the Monthly Review, Meeker sought to give more frequent and wider publicity to labor-related activities. He asked officials o f Federal, State, municipal, and private agencies to notify the Bureau o f their business so notices and reports could be published in the Monthly Review. The periodical, he said, would present the current work o f the Bureau, the Department, other Federal agencies, and the various State bureaus. In addition, it would publish materials from such bodies as State industrial commissions, factory inspection commissions, and temporary investigatory commit tees. Furthermore, one o f its special features would be notes and summaries from foreign countries, particularly valuable in providing information on wartime labor policies and experience in the warring European nations. To emphasize the nature o f the subject matter, the Bureau changed the name o f the periodical to Monthly Labor Review with the issue for July 1918.107 The Review encountered difficulties during the war. In July 1918, the Joint Committee on Printing resolved, “That during the continua tion o f the war [the Public Printer] be directed to print only such publications as are required for the essential work o f the Government and which do not delay necessary war printing.” This attitude resulted in cuts in the BLS printing appropriations, and also in later charges that Congress tried to squelch publication o f information about prices and the cost o f living. Meeker complained that the cuts could force the discontinuance o f the Review and asked for a deficiency appropria tion. Secretary W ilson replied that the Department would cover the http://fraser.stlouisfed.org Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis 110 Meeker: Statistics in Recession and W artime shortage from its funds rather than ask Congress for additional money.108 Despite the emergency pressures, the Review expanded greatly over its prewar size, publicizing the first results o f new Bureau surveys on the cost o f living, the new budget studies, and other original work as well much information on conditions in belligerent countries. Its popularity prompted a change in policy. With circulation up from the initial 8,000 in July 1915 to 19,000 in June 1920, the Review was put on a subscription basis in July 1920. Meeker citied the shortage of paper, the high cost of printing and supplies, and the necessity to econo mize.109 During the war, the Bureau cooperated with another agency in the Department, the Woman in Industry Service, in the preparation of publications. The bulletins o f both agencies were edited by the Bureau and issued as joint publications. Reporting on this arrangement to Secretary Wilson, Meeker cited the saving o f cost and time and sug gested that other departmental units also take advantage of the “expert Editorial Division in the Bureau o f Labor Statistics.”110 International activities Interest in labor developments abroad, a concern o f the Bureau from the time o f its founding, increased during M eeker’s tenure, although efforts at developing international standards for statistics were aborted by the war. In 1914, the Bureau issued a bulletin on labor laws and factory inspections in six major European countries and reported on how the start of the war affected food prices in 18 countries. From its beginning, the Review carried articles on the effect o f the war on wages, hours, working conditions, and prices in European countries. In 1917, at the request o f the Council o f National Defense, the Bureau issued a series o f bulletins on British munitions factories, covering hours o f work, fatigue and health, welfare work, and industrial effi ciency, as well as on the employment o f women and juveniles and on industrial unrest. These and other studies provided important background material for the establishment o f war labor agencies and policies in the United States. The importance of the information was evidenced by the sta tioning o f a special representative in Great Britain to keep the Bureau in constant touch with developments there.111 http://fraser.stlouisfed.org Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis Ill The First Hundred Years After the war, at Frankfurter’s request, the Bureau prepared reports on the labor situation in foreign countries for the use o f the U .S. delegation to the Peace Conference. Early in 1919, Meeker went to England as economic adviser to a group o f employers for a study sponsored by the Department o f Labor on the British reconstruction experience. Ethelbert Stewart was also sent to England to help prepare for the W ashington meeting o f the International Labor Conference. The U .S. contribution to the quasi-official International Associa tion for Labor Legislation and its Labor Office through a congressional appropriation to the Bureau for the purpose was continued through out the war. However, with the establishment o f the League of Nations and its International Labor Office, Congress discontinued the subvention.112 Resignation O n May 5, 1920, Meeker wrote President Wilson o f the “flattering offer” he had received to head up the Scientific Division o f the Inter national Labor Office to perform work similar to that o f the Bureau. He felt that this was a fine opportunity to help organize the new ILO, a major office in the League o f Nations. A t the same time, he recom mended Allan H. W illett o f the University o f Pennsylvania, who had directed the industrial survey, as his successor. In his formal letter of resignation to the President a month later, Meeker expressed his commitment to the W ilsonian ideal o f a League of Nations. “I regret very much to sever myself from your Administration, but it seems to me that I can best serve the ideals for which you stand by accepting this position.”113 President W ilson supported Meeker’s decision to go to the ILO but reserved his decision on his successor. The President wrote that, after consultation with Secretary W ilson, he had “come to agree with him that a better appointment would be Mr. Ethelbert Stewart of Illinois.” He went on to say, “I know you would be gratified by the terms in which the Secretary o f Labor speaks of your own work at the head o f the Bureau.”114 In commenting on Meeker’s resignation, Secretary Wilson described him “as an exceptionally efficient administrator o f the Bureau o f Labor Statistics.” He cited as Meeker’s accomplishments, in addition to the Bureau’s regular fact-gathering, which “he has handled http://fraser.stlouisfed.org Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis 112 Meeker: Statistics in Recession and W artime with sound judgment and quiet determination,” first, coordination of the Bureau’s work with that o f the States and standardization of industrial terminology and methods; second, reorganization o f the cost-of-living work on a family budget or market basket basis; and, third, his wartime studies o f wages and living costs, accepted by all the wage boards. The Secretary concluded that, while Meeker’s sympa thies “were always with the workers, he never allowed these sympa thies to distort the facts.”115 Later years Meeker continued his activities in social and labor economics for the next quarter century. From 1920 to 1923, he served as C hief of the Scientific Division of the International Labor Office o f the League of Nations in Geneva. He returned to the U nited States to serve as Secretary o f Labor and Industry for the Commonwealth o f Penn sylvania under the Republican progressive Gifford Pinchot from 1923 to 1924. In 1924 also, he went to China under the auspices o f the Institute o f Social and Religious Research o f New York as a member of the Commission on Social Research in China. In 1926 and 1927, he was a professor o f economics at Carleton College in Minnesota. In 1930, he became associated with Irving Fisher as president o f the Index Number Institute in New Haven, a position he held until 1936. During this period, he also directed a survey o f aged persons for the State o f Connecticut and became a special agent o f the Connecticut Department o f Labor. In 1941, he was named Administrative Assistant and Director o f Research and Statistics o f the Connecticut Depart ment, from which he retired in 1946. He died in New Haven in 1953. http://fraser.stlouisfed.org Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis 113 Chapter V. Ethelbert Stewart: Holding the Fort E thelbert Stewart, appointed in June 1920, was the first Com missioner o f Labor Statistics to come from the ranks. Carroll Wright had hired him as a special agent 33 years earlier, and he had served the Bureau in increasingly responsible posi tions for most o f the period. Although he was 63 when he became Commissioner, he devoted 12 more years to the Bureau, serving dur ing the administrations of Woodrow W ilson, Warren Harding, Calvin Coolidge, and Herbert Hoover. During these years, the political climate was not a favorable one for the Department o f Labor or the Bureau. Congressional and admin istration policies encouraged business interests, and the Department o f Commerce, for 8 years headed by Herbert Hoover, grew in influ ence. Congress also gave some attention to the needs o f farmers, who were suffering from depressed prices, by granting the Department of Agriculture additional funds, mainly for agricultural statistics. Other agencies, however, were subject to economy drives. Following the brief recession o f 1921, there was relative prosper ity during much o f Stewart’s tenure, except in agriculture and in such “sick” industries as coal and textiles. The growth o f the consumer http://fraser.stlouisfed.org Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis 114 Stewart: Holding the Fort durable goods industries—automobiles, radios, refrigerators, and electrie and gas stoves—contributed substantially as mass production, low prices, and installment credit brought these products increasingly into American households. Even with prosperity, however, there was con stant unemployment, attributed largely to technological change. For the first time in a period o f prosperity, organized labor was unable to increase its membership or influence. A combination of factors contributed, including antiunion policies in the growing mass production industries, the continuing craft orientation o f the Ameri can Federation o f Labor, conservative Federal labor policies, and court decisions unfavorable to labor. W hile Stewart fought for funds to modernize the Bureau’s statis tical and analytical work, he was usually rebuffed. Only when concern over unemployment mounted in the late 1920’s did Congress provide additional funds. U nder difficult circumstances, Stewart maintained the Bureau’s independence and objectivity, standing firm against mis use of its reports for political purposes. He broke new ground in the field o f productivity measurement and, with the encouragement and advice o f the professional organizations, achieved some gains in the coverage and reliability o f the Bureau’s traditional employment, wage, and occupational safety programs. The fourth Commissioner Bom in Cook County, Illinois, in 1857, Stewart spent his early years on the family farm. Because o f a stammer, he was “practically barred* from any formal schooling, but he read voraciously and received some private tutoring. A t 20, he moved to Lincoln, Illinois, to publish the Lincoln County Republican, but later sold his interest. After trying several jobs, he went to work at the Decatur (Illinois) Coffin Factory. W hile at the factory, Stewart joined a “workingmen’s club” in Decatur and became involved in politics. In 1885, he ran for city clerk on a workingmen’s ticket and served as an officer at the Illinois State Trades and Labor Convention; he was blacklisted by the coffin com pany for his activities.1 In 1885, Governor Richard J. Oglesby appointed Stewart Secre tary to the Illinois Bureau o f Labor Statistics, apparently at the sugges tion o f Henry Demarest Lloyd, financial editor o f the Chicago Tribune. Stewart had visited Lloyd, impressed by his attacks on the http://fraser.stlouisfed.org Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis 115 The First Hundred years monopolistic power exercised by the giant oil and railroad corpora tions, and they had formed what was to be a lifelong friendship. Also in 1885, Stewart became editor o f the Decatur Labor Bulk' tin, having joined the Knights o f Labor a few months earlier. For several years to follow, he held positions with various labor papers. Stewart was reappointed as Secretary o f the Illinois Bureau of Labor Statistics in 1887 and for successive 2-year terms through 1893. In this capacity he participated in a number o f investigations o f labor conditions in the State. In 1887, he obtained a position as a special agent for the new Federal Bureau o f Labor. In 1889, he wrote Wright about the possibil ity o f securing a permanent position, but the Commissioner appar ently demurred then because o f Stewart’s speech problem. He continued to do fieldwork for the Bureau in the Midwest until 1910. Among other major studies, he worked on Regulation and Restriction of Output with John R. Commons. U nder Neill, he planned and conducted the fieldwork for studies o f the telephone and telegraph industries and the Bethlehem Steel Corporation. In 1910, Stewart transferred to the Tariff Board and in 1912 to the Children’s Bureau, serving as statistician o f each agency. He returned to the Bureau o f Labor Statistics in 1913 to function simultaneously as C hief Clerk, C hief Statistician, and Deputy Com missioner, M eeker’s second in command. In addition to his extended Bureau responsibilities, he served the Department in a variety of capacities. Between 1913 and 1916, Secretary W ilson called upon him to investigate and mediate strikes in coal mining, the garment indus try, and street railways. In 1917, the Secretary appointed him to a board o f arbitration for wage adjustment in New Y>rk Harbor. During the war he served as chief o f the Department’s Investigation and Inspection Service, part o f the War Labor Administration, conducting a number o f brief surveys. In 1919, he went to London to help plan the League of Nations Labor Conference that met in Washington later that year. O n returning from London, Stewart served as a technical adviser to the Bituminous Coal Commission. In 1920, as the special representative o f the Secretary, he investigated deportation cases and, in that connection, advised on bail policy.2 In June 1920, the Secretary recommended Stewart to President W ilson for the position o f Commissioner o f Labor Statistics to suc ceed Royal Meeker. Stewart had not been Meeker’s first choice, but http://fraser.stlouisfed.org Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis 116 Stewart: Holding the Fort the Secretary thought him better qualified, and the President accepted his judgment, issuing a recess appointment. With the change in administrations imminent, the Republican Senate refused to confirm any o f the Democratic President’s appointees, including Stewart. The new Secretary, James J. Davis, renominated Stewart, writing to the incoming President, Warren G . Harding, “The position .. . is a techni cal and scientific one, and I have become entirely satisfied, from con ferences I have held with men qualified to advise in such matters, that Mr. Stewart measures up fully to the standard.”3 The Senate con firmed Stewart in April 1921. Stewart served under Secretary Davis for 10 years and more than fulfilled his expectations. O n Stewart’s 70th birthday in 1927, Davis wrote him, “^bu were represented to me as a fearless fighter for right and justice, and you have proved to be all o f that and more. . . . ” In 1930, Davis noted that he had watched the development o f the Bureau with great interest and commented, MI am becoming more and more impressed, not only with the breadth and scope o f the work o f that Bureau, but by the industry, energy, and enthusiasm with which its work is conducted.”4 Stewart’s views Stewart emphasized the practical over the academic or theoretical. Something o f a muckraking newspaperman early in life, he retained that sense o f the human, o f the person behind the number. A s he him self said, “For 30 years, I have been struggling to put some flesh upon the bony skeleton o f mere tabulation.” He cautioned against “this mania for statistics,” warning that “the only things that make human life human do not lend themselves readily to the statistical method.”5 In discussing the Bureau’s cost-of-living surveys, Stewart once said, “It is accurate by any test to which you can put figures. But, like all similar attempts, it is o f little value because it is impossible to put the necessities and aspirations o f any family into figures. We can easily determine what they spend, but what they should have is a matter of widely varying opinion.”6 Similarly, the use o f such surveys for setting wages only “perpetuates that standard, ossifies conditions, and para lyzes progress.” A s he expressed it, “there is one standard o f the cost o f living—that is the cost, whatever it may be, o f living the maximum http://fraser.stlouisfed.org Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis 117 The First Hundred Years span o f life and living it fully. This cannot be figured from the day's or the year's grocery bill.”7 But statistics could shed light on the human condition, contribut ing to the understanding and remedying o f economic and social problems. Indeed, progress had already been made. Textbooks carried facts and figures compiled by the bureaus, and such education and publicity stimulated passage o f legislation to improve the condition o f workers. Statistics could also help in other ways. Stewart explained, “In the mad effort to produce and sell without any accurate information as to the amount o f each commodity required by the people o f this country or o f the world, we run factories long hours and on night shifts, and the result is to produce unemployment and panics.” Unem ployment could be reduced by use o f consumption statistics to guide production operations. The use o f wage and cost-of-living data to establish a “fair day's work” and a “fair day's wage” could smooth industrial relations.8 Stewart expressed his view o f the Bureau’s independent role in replying to the Secretary regarding an editorial which had objected to the Bureau's reporting on old-age pensions. Stewart declared, uSo long as the subject matter is o f sufficient general interest to justify the publication o f the facts, and so long as the Bureau o f Labor Statistics sticks stricdy to the question o f facts, then all I have to say to this is that anybody [who] dislikes the facts is in hard luck.”9 In reviewing the decade o f the 1920’s, Stewart pointed out the importance o f the Bureau's studies o f the impact o f technology on employment, observing, “Never before did mechanical and industrial changes strike so many industries, processes, and occupations at one and the same time. The working people o f the U nited States are entitled to know what the changing industrial conditions are, where they are, and the nature and extent o f the occupational readjustment which is necessary to meet them without loss o f earning power or industrial status.”10 Earlier, in 1924, Stewart had analyzed some o f the causes of discontent and dissatisfaction among workers—low wages, extensive unemployment and lost time, and plant inefficiency, or, as he put it, “the feeling that their power and energies are being frittered away, that their life and energy are being exhausted in inconsequential and unnecessarily laborious to il” Capitalism, he concluded, had brought http://fraser.stlouisfed.org Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis 118 Stewart: Holding the Fort increased physical comforts but had also “rendered life more hectic, more nerve-wracking, brain and soul wrecking, than any of the sys tems which preceded it.”11 He stressed the importance o f the broader social context when considering a particular social reform. In discussing the limitations of workmen’s compensation laws, he wrote, “If we prize individualism so highly as an ism, let us think of the individual once in a while. . . . If from conditions inherent in an industry, a man loses wages because of an illness contracted by reason o f and in the course o f his employ ment, he is just as much entitled to compensation as if a flywheel split in two and injured his arm.”12 Stewart favored proposed legislation to set wage standards on Federal construction projects. “Is the government willing, for the sake of the lowest bidder, to break down all labor standards and have its work done by the cheapest labor that can be secured and shipped from State to State?” And, when the Bureau developed wage data on municipal street laborers, he found these to reflect “sweatshop condi tions,” even though, as he said, “It is pretty generally agreed that the public, when it acts as an employer, should be a good employer.”13 In regard to the effect o f the minimum wage on the employment of women, he stated, “Anybody who handles the minimum wage law ought to realize that what we should consider is not industry, not administration, not legislation, but the social question, society; it is the question of whether our men are going to decrease 3 inches in height in 25 years as the men in France did. No industry has a right to mold women who are to be the mothers o f our men in such a way as to deteriorate the race.”14 In the same vein, he opposed the “family wage rate,” an experi ment popular in some European circles, in which the worker’s earn ings reflected the size o f the family, arguing that this was too narrowly focused. Society as a whole should pay its share for replacing what he called “the raw material o f which civilization is composed,” so he supported a “social allowance” from the “political and social institu tions.” Given such relief from the costs o f child rearing, more people would marry, and fewer mothers would work outside the home, thereby improving homelife.15 Commenting on the effects o f automatic machine production, Stewart argued, “Let us change our point o f view as to the object of existence. A t present, it is work, work, work; produce, produce, pro http://fraser.stlouisfed.org Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis 119 The First Hundred Years duce; and sell, sell, sell. We have no education along other lines. We do not know what to do with our leisure.” He warned, in recognition o f the likely effects o f technological developments, “The whole machinery o f education should be turned at once toward a study of leisure, and toward teaching the coming generation the use and pur pose o f leisure, for, take it from me, they will have plenty o f it.”16 O n the subject o f leisure, Stewart received considerable news paper coverage for his comments to die Second National O utdoor Recreation Conference in 1926. In discussing the need for public parks and the difficulties o f conducting social life in boarding houses, Stewart observed, “I believe that a girl who works 9 hours in the spindle room o f a cotton factory, or 8 hours a day in a boot and shoe factory at the speed rates which now prevail, can stand a little petting.” This prompted headlines such as "Petting in City Parks Advocated by Labor Department Attache,” “Let ’Em Pet in the Parks,” and “Wants More ‘Petting’ and Fewer Policemen.”17 Stewart was equally forthright in evaluating die problems con fronting industry. Writing on the textile industry in the American Federationist in 1929, he pointed to overproduction, the loss o f for eign markets, the decline in wages, and the rise in night work, coupled with inability to adjust readily to style changes and the hoary and inefficient commission or agent system o f selling. H is conclusion was, “In short, the situation in the textile industry is just as bad or worse than it is in the bituminous coal industry, and the problem is in the hands o f men no more competent to solve it.”18 The Bureau’s work Although the Bureau was recognized as a valuable and capable institu tion by technical experts and professional societies, it found few opportunities to modernize and improve its work during the 1920’s. Only through increased cooperative arrangements with the profes sional associations and State agencies did the Bureau manage to expand some o f its programs. Stewart maintained close relations with the International Association o f Industrial Accident Boards and Com missions, the International Association o f Public Employment Serv ices, and the Association o f Governmental Labor Officials, publishing their proceedings as Bureau bulletins. The Bureau also worked with the American Engineering Standards Committee, publishing an http://fraser.stlouisfed.org Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis 120 Stewart: Holding the Fort extensive series o f its safety codes, and with the Personnel Research Federation and the National Conference on O utdoor Recreation. The professional societies often came to the defense o f the Bureau when its activities were threatened, as in 1922, when the Bureau o f Efficiency recommended centralizing government statistical work in an enlarged Bureau o f the Census. To be retitled the Bureau o f Federal Statistics, it would take over the BLS programs o f wages and hours, accident statistics, and prices. BLS, much reduced in function, would become the Bureau o f Labor Economics.19 The American Economic Association and the American Statist!' cal Association opposed the change. They pointed out that such an increase in responsibilities might swamp the Census staff, that there was in fact less duplication o f statistical work than a “superficial sur vey” might indicate, and that friends o f the Census Bureau should concern themselves more with securing larger appropriations to attract the best professional staff than with expanding its authority.20 Talk o f reorganization o f statistical work subsided during the rest of the decade, and the Bureau’s functions remained intact, although jurisdictional disputes flared from time to time. Stewart and the Bureau also put considerable emphasis on devel oping cooperative relations with the State bureaus and establishing a nationwide network o f reporting agencies. In this way, the Bureau was able to expand some o f its programs despite congressional refusal to increase appropriations. Late in the decade, Stewart outlined several of the cooperative programs, specifically in employment, union wage, building permit, and accident statistics. Joining in one or more o f the programs were New "fork, Illinois, W isconsin, M assachusetts, Mary land, California, New Jersey, Michigan, and Pennsylvania. In the business-oriented 1920’s, the Bureau’s relations with the business community were limited, but Stewart was fairly successful in obtaining cooperation in expanding regular, routine series on wages and employment. H is contacts were mostly with research directors, safety experts, and personnel managers. Cost-of-living and price indexes Not long after he became Commissioner, Stewart was faced with a possible transfer o f the cost-of-living work to another agency. In 1921, Secretary o f Commerce Hoover, with President Harding's support, pressed to have the Census Bureau issue the cost-of-living reports. http://fraser.stlouisfed.org Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis 121 The First Hundred Years Hoover claimed that the shift would result in greater accuracy, econ omy, and efficiency and complained that BLS was not cooperating with the Census Bureau. W hen The New York Times reported the proposed transfer, Secretary o f Labor Davis indicated that no decision had been reached. Hoover, however, replied, “So far as I am aware, there is no dispute over this matter unless it arises from minor employees o f the government who fear that, through any reorganiza tion o f method, their positions and authority might be curtailed.”21 Stewart assured Secretary Davis that BLS was cooperating with the Census Bureau and would continue to do so in every way possible. N o action was taken on H oover's proposal.22 In appropriations hearings, Stewart regularly cited uses o f the Bureau's cost-of-living index in wage adjustments. In 1923, he reported that more than half the settlements in wage controversies were based on the index. However, he was unable to obtain funds to maintain quarterly collection and publication. In his 1923 annual report, Stewart wrote, “It is very plain that the Bureau must continue to make these surveys every 3 months no matter at what cost, and the only immediate problem is how to answer the demand for such surveys from smaller cities and from a wider geographical distribution o f industrial centers." But the director o f the Bureau o f the Budget responded that the President wanted BLS to live within its appropria tion even if the surveys had to be curtailed. In May 1925, the work was put on a semiannual basis. 23 In 1927, Stewart set forth the need for a new family budget study on which to base a revision o f the cost-of-living index to reflect the changes in purchasing patterns, population distribution, and retail establishments since the last survey. He stated, “It is a very serious question as to whether or not the Bureau should continue to collect up-to-date prices to be applied to a 1918 quantity distribution of family purchases and call this an up-to-date cost o f living.” He pro posed a new survey to cover a better variety o f industrial centers, a larger number o f smaller cities, a larger number o f families, and fami lies with a higher income level. Among the influences on consumers which such a study would reflect would be the increased purchase of automobiles and radios, the rise o f installment payment plans, new types and locations o f retail stores, and the growth o f advertising.2* Support for a new study came from outside professional organiza tions, but Congress would not provide funds during Stew art's term. http://fraser.stlouisfed.org Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis 122 Stewart: Holding the Fort However, a limited study was conducted in 1928, when Congress directed the Personnel Classification Board to formulate a wage scale for the government field service. The Board asked for BLS assistance, and the Bureau responded with a survey o f the incomes and expendi tures o f the families o f 506 Federal employees in Baltimore, Boston, New 'fork, Chicago, and New O rleans.25 The Bureau also participated in an innovative cost-of-living inquiry conducted by the International Labor Office in 1930-31. The study originated with a request by the Ford M otor Company for information to help in setting wage rates o f its employees in certain European cities to ensure the same general living standard as that o f its employees in Detroit. The Bureau conducted the work in Detroit, covering a sample o f 100 families. The Detroit budget was then used by the various European statistical agencies, with adjustment for differ ences in national consumption habits, government social insurance payments, and other factors, to determine the cost o f living in those cities relative to Detroit. 26 The Bureau did expand its collection o f retail prices, a less costly and complex process than a consumer expenditure survey, so that by 1932, it included 42 articles o f food in 51 continental cities o f the U nited States and in Honolulu. The Bureau added electricity to the list o f items priced—gas and coal for household use were already covered—but dropped dry goods. The wholesale price index was revised and expanded several times during the period. In 1921, BLS completed a two-pronged improvement, regrouping the commodities and adding new articles and also shifting to the 1919 Census o f Manufactures for weighting purposes. With data for August 1927, the Bureau issued a revised index in which the weighting base was changed from 1919 to 1923-25 and the price base was shifted from 1913 to 1926. A t the same time, some new articles were added, such as automobiles, tires, rayon, and prepared fertilizer, and some old ones dropped, such as New 'York State hops and Bessemer steel billets and rails. With data for January 1932, BLS completed the third revision o f Stewart’s term, increasing the number o f price series from 550 to 784, with adjustments back to 1926. A t the same time, the Bureau began publication o f a weekly index along with the regular monthly figures. The wholesale price work was very popular. In 1922, the Bureau was providing data in advance o f publication to such agencies as the http://fraser.stlouisfed.org Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis 123 The First Hundred Years Federal Reserve Board, the Bureau o f Standards, the Census Bureau, the Bureau o f Markets, and the Federal Trade Commission. In the private sector, the Review of Economic Statistics based part o f its Index o f Business Conditions on BLS commodity prices.27 The wholesale price index became the focus o f legislative propos als for stabilizing commodity price levels. A 1922 bill inspired by Irving Fisher would have pegged the quantity o f gold weight in the dollar to a BLS index o f wholesale prices to maintain constant purchasing power. In 1926, Stewart testified on a bill to amend the Federal Reserve Act to provide for the stabilization o f the price level for commodities in general. The “price level” was defined as the price at wholesale as reflected in the BLS wholesale price index. Stewart gave considerable evidence on the index and supported the proposal, declaring that the responsibilities “are not burdensome and are entirely acceptable to the Department o f Labor and to the Commis sioner o f Labor Statistics.” In 1932, Stewart again testified on a propo sal “for increasing and stabilizing the price level o f commodities” by using data from the wholesale price index.28 With the onset o f the depression, private research groups pointed out the need for better statistics on prices and living costs. In Septem ber 1931, the Social Science Research Council and the American Statistical Association sponsored a conference on improving the state o f knowledge o f price movements in the U nited States. The limits of the Bureau’s cost-of-living index were noted, since pricing was based on 1918-19 family expenditures, as was the need for more comprehen sive coverage for the retail and wholesale price indexes. The confer ence recommended construction o f the official wholesale and retail price indexes by a single agency, with plans to be developed for a comprehensive family budget study when normal economic condi tions were restored. Stewart agreed with many o f the recommenda tions but noted the time and expense involved in carrying them out.29 Wages and industrial relations Stewart expanded the collection o f wage data, launching studies o f the automobile, airplane, metal mining, cigarette, rayon, and Portland cement industries, among others. In the course o f expanding coverage, the Bureau also focused on some new areas such as bonus systems and pay for overtime, Sundays, and holidays. http://fraser.stlouisfed.org Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis 124 Stewart: Holding the Fort Stewart pointed out, however, that the limited funds permitted surveys o f only about a dozen o f the larger industries every 2 years at best, and that the importance o f information on wages required at least annual reports, particularly for the newer industries. He cited the Bureau’s embarrassment in meeting requests for data needed in tariff discussions with old information or with none at all.30 The Bureau did continue annual publication o f union scales o f wages and hours, now grouped into about 12 trades and occupations in 67 cities. A few new series were begun during Stewart’s tenure. In the late 1920’s, the Bureau started a monthly series on current general wage changes based on questionnaires sent to establishments and unions. Especially valuable were the series begun in 1932 on man-hours worked per week and average hourly earnings, obtained from reports o f the establishments furnishing monthly employment data. Previ ously, only payroll totals had been available. The new information was an important addition to the Bureau's series, particularly for monthto-month changes. Statistics on strikes and lockouts continued to be published quar terly until 1926, when they were issued monthly and supplemented by an annual report. The Bureau also published much information on developments in collective bargaining. Bulletins on bargaining agreements were issued annually from 1925 through 1928. The Monthly Labor Review regularly carried information on labor agreements, awards, and deci sions, and reports by Hugh L. Kerwin, Director o f Conciliation, on the conciliation work o f the Department o f Labor. O ther publications on industrial relations included studies o f meatpacking, the West C oast lumber industry, bituminous coal mining, and apprenticeship systems in building construction. Studies relating to such aspects o f welfare capitalism as the provision o f recreational facilities by employ ers also presented information on vacations, sick leave, medical and hospital services, and group insurance. Two editions o f the Handbook of American Trade Unions were published. These listed union organizations and gave their history, jurisdiction, apprenticeship systems, benefits paid, and membership. Employment and unemployment The Bureau had published a monthly series on employment and payrolls since 1916. During the recession o f 1920-21, in the absence of http://fraser.stlouisfed.org Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis 125 The First Hundred Years measures o f unemployment, the figures gained increased attention. In August 1921, the Senate directed the Secretary of Labor to report the number o f unemployed, and Stewart prepared a response for Secre tary Davis, reporting that “the best estimate that can be made from available sources o f information is that there are at present 5,735,(XX) persons unemployed in the U nited States.” He explained, “These figures relate to the differences in the numbers o f employees carried on payrolls July 1921, as compared with the peak o f employment in 1920,” thus calling attention to the fact that the series was not a direct measure o f unemployment, reflecting only “employment shrinkage.”31 In transmitting Stewart’s figures to the Senate, Davis alleged that die prewar unemployment situation had been worse, that more men and more breadwinners had been out o f work in 1914. The New York Times supported the Secretary’s position, pointing to farmhands drawn into the cities by the lure o f silk-shirt pay but now returned to the farms, and to women factory workers who had returned to “the more normal life o f the home.” The New Republic however, vehemendy disagreed, saying that Commissioners Wright and Neill and Secretary William B. W ilson had established a “tradition of accuracy and impartiality.” It continued, “It remained for the present incum bent, in spite o f the high standing o f many o f his bureau chiefs, to shatter this tradition. M anifestoes by the Secretary o f Labor are no longer taken seriously in this country.” 32 In O ctober 1921, at the urging o f Secretary o f Commerce Hoo ver, President Harding called a conference on unemployment, with Hoover as chairman. Varying estimates o f the extent o f unemploy ment were offered at the conference. The Bureau estimated the “shrinkage o f employment” at 5.5 million. The U .S. Employment Service, which had been conducting its own surveys and issuing reports, estimated the number unemployed at 2.3 million. With such a range o f estimates, the conference, as reported later, “merely voted to announce to the country that the number unemployed was between 3.5 million and 5.5 million, numbers startling enough to challenge attention.”33 In 1922, after the conference adjourned, Assistant Secretary E. J. Henning directed the Employment Service to discontinue the publica tion o f employment statistics in view o f the function being performed by the Bureau. But despite agreements and directives, the Employ ment Service continued to collect such statistics. Stewart noted that http://fraser.stlouisfed.org Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis 126 Stew art• Holding the Fort both New Jersey and Pennsylvania refused to cooperate with the Bureau because o f the duplication o f requests from the two agencies. “It seems imperative,” he said, “that unless the Employment Service gets out of the field, the Bureau o f Labor Statistics must drop this feature of its work.” In 1924, the Secretary again had to chastise the Employment Service, however, saying that its role was to match men with jobs, not to function as a statistical bureau. “O ur Department already has one Bureau which devotes its energies to the gathering of statistics which affect labor. The matter did not end there. The Employment Service contin ued to issue reports on the general industrial situation, although it had stopped collecting payroll data from firms. The American Statistical Association warned in 1924 that these reports “tend to confuse the public mind, particularly when they are not in agreement with the more accurate statements based on payroll data put out by the State and Federal Bureaus o f Labor Statistics.”35 Later, in the charged atmosphere o f the Great Depression, such differences in unemploy ment estimates were to become politically explosive and were, in fact, to hasten Stewart’s retirement. An important outgrowth o f the President’s Conference on Unemployment was a committee appointed by Hoover to study the factors underlying employment and the practical measures that could be taken to prevent or mitigate unemployment. The committee called on the National Bureau o f Economic Research for a study o f business cycles and on the Russell Sage Foundation for a study o f the adequacy o f employment statistics. U nder the direction o f Wesley C. Mitchell, the National Bureau published Business Cycles and Unemployment in 1923, a comprehensive set o f essays by noted economists. The Ameri can Statistical Association assumed the sponsorship o f the study o f employment statistics and appointed a committee on measurement of employment with Mary Van Kleeck o f the Russell Sage Foundation as chairman. The full results o f that study were published in 1926, representing the joint efforts and recommendations o f the three orga nizations. The report, Employment Statistics for the United States, was a landmark in the development o f the role o f professional advisory committees on government statistics. It recommended that BLS func tion as the coordinating agency for the publication o f “a periodic report on employment throughout the nation,” to include data made http://fraser.stlouisfed.org Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis 127 The First Hundred Years available by other Federal agencies and the States. It urged expansion o f the employment series to include nonmanufacturing industries, information on hours worked, and additional data on characteristics of workers. It also recommended careful sampling. The report acknowledged that employment statistics did not pro vide a measure o f unemployment—they did not cover those who had never obtained employment, for example. And it pointed out the need for information on unemployment in local areas, since “the alleviation o f distress can best be achieved in the locality where it is found.” The Bureau had already moved to expand its employment series, but the report served as encouragement and support for further work. By 1927, the Bureau’s monthly reports provided employment and total payroll information for 54 manufacturing industries, covering about 11,000 establishments. O utside experts were now examining the Bureau’s data closely, and they pointed out some major shortcomings. For one thing, the series was still limited to manufacturing establishments and the rail roads, and the shift o f workers into distribution and service industries was not being captured. Further, Federal Reserve Board statisticians found a downward bias o f nearly 2 percent a year in the factory employment figures when comparing them with the Census o f Manu factures. The bias was attributed to the Bureau’s slowness in picking up new industries, and new establishments in older industries. BLS was urged to adjust its data to the biennial census and to apply seasonal adjustment factors. ^ In March 1928, with ominous signs o f increasing unemployment, the Senate passed a resolution sponsored by Senator Robert F. Wagner calling on the Secretary o f Labor to report the extent of unemploy ment and to devise a plan for periodic, permanent statistics. Secretary Davis responded, citing a BLS estimate o f 1.9 million unemployed based on the “shrinkage in employment.” Wagner and others were critical o f the figure, claiming that the number unemployed was three times as large. He proposed three measures dealing with unemploy ment—expansion o f BLS statistical programs, establishment of a nationwide system o f employment offices, and creation of a Federal public works program.37 In May, Congress authorized $100,000 for expansion o f the Bureau’s employment series. With the funds, BLS would be able to double the number o f manufacturing establishments covered and add http://fraser.stlouisfed.org Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis 128 Stew art• Holding the Fort establishments in agriculture, mining, building construction, and wholesale and retail trade. Data collection for some o f these industries began in 1928. In 1928 and 1929, the Senate held landmark hearings, chaired by Senator James Couzens o f Michigan, on Wagner’s comprehensive pro posals on unemployment. Stewart testified on the "shrinkage o f employment” and, as he had over the years, stressed that the Bureau’s employment index was not an unemployment measure. H e stated that a census o f unemployment was necessary, from which the employ ment data could be adjusted to reflect current unemployment. To questions as to whether unemployment matters, including a count o f the unemployed, were a State rather than a Federal Government function, Stewart responded that, while he did not intend the latter to assume all o f the responsibility, it was the Federal Government’s responsibility to undertake a complete survey. He pointed out that unemployment, in affecting purchasing power, affected commerce, which he saw as a Federal, not a State, concern. Furthermore, techno logical displacement o f labor was a world problem.38 The Senate Committee had the benefit o f advice from many technical advisers, including representatives o f the American Statisti cal Association. Isador Lubin, later to become Commissioner o f Labor Statistics, was economic adviser to the committee, on assignment from The Brookings Institution. Lubin and other technical witnesses sup ported Stew art's view o f the need for a census o f unemployment as a benchmark for the employment series, approved o f the BLS effort underway to expand the reporting sample, and agreed that coverage of part-time employment should be added. 39 Congress authorized the census o f unemployment, and Secretary o f Commerce Robert P. Lamont created an advisory committee to plan it. J. Chester Bowen, BLS C hief Statistician, served on the panel, as did William A. Berridge, o f the M etropolitan Life Insurance Company and Arynefcs Joy, o f the staff o f the Federal Reserve B oard.40 A s public concern with unemployment intensified following the stock market crash o f O ctober 1929, the differing reports o f the Bureau o f Labor Statistics and the U .S. Employment Service again became a subject o f debate. The Employment Service emphasized hiring prospects, and its figures showed a more optimistic forecast. The BLS data on employment and labor turnover provided a more accurate picture, but the figures appeared after the Employment Serv http://fraser.stlouisfed.org Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis 129 The First H undred Years ice releases. The administration highlighted the Employment Service figures, despite criticisms from New 'fork State Industrial Commis sioner Frances Perkins and others, and downplayed the more objec tive B LS data.*1 Another incident grew out o f President Hoover’s request to Stewart for an experimental weekly employment index. In January 1930, basing his statement on the first weekly returns, President H oo ver announced, “The tide o f employment has changed in the right direction.**2 A number o f public figures attacked Hoover’s statement. Frances Perkins said the numbers were based on too short a time period and did not correspond to data collected by her office. She further noted that the President had not quoted Stew art Secretary Davis responded, “Unfortunately there is developing an inclination in some quarters to make politics out o f our employment situation even to the extent o f questioning the accuracy o f the statement that the latest figures show an upward trend in em ploym ent* Senator La Follette, however, said o f the administration that all it had done amounted to publishing “optim istic ballyhoo statem ents.” In a February editorial, The New fork Times noted that the Bureau’s regular monthly numbers for January confirmed Perkins rather than Davis.*3 Further incidents followed. In June, Secretary o f Commerce Lamont released some very preliminary returns from the Census o f Unemployment conducted in April. In a protest against what he viewed as attempts to reduce the unemployment count by separating those laid off from those with no jobs at all, Charles E. Persons, the man in charge o f the Census tabulations, resigned. Perkins again complained o f misleading interpretations given to the public. In July, following release o f preliminary data on Greater New fo rk City, Per kins declared that “a more accurate count* would have revealed more unemploym ent.** These events, and the growing crisis, spurred action on improv ing employment statistics. In July, Congress enacted a bill sponsored by Senator Wagner directing the Bureau to “collect, collate, report, and publish at least once each month full and complete statistics o f the volume o f and changes in em ploym ent* Additional appropriations were provided. A t the same time, President Hoover announced the appointment o f a committee on employment statistics to advise him “on methods by http://fraser.stlouisfed.org Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis 130 Stewart: Holding the Fort which we should set up statistics o f employment and unemployment,” later adding the consideration o f "technological unemployment.”45 Joseph H. W illits o f the W harton School o f Finance and Com merce served as chairman o f the committee, which included, among others, the Secretaries o f Labor and Commerce, the Director o f the Census, the Commissioner o f Labor Statistics, representatives o f the A FL and the National Association o f M anufacturers, and academic experts. Among the technical advisers were W A . Berridge, Meredith Givens, Ralph Hurlin, Bryce Stewart, and Ewan Clague. Thus, the committee constituted a “blue ribbon” panel o f government and pri vate compilers and users o f such statistics. After conducting several studies, the committee issued its report in February 1931. W hile noting the Bureau’s efforts to expand the scope and samples o f the series, the committee called for further improvements. In the manufacturing sector, it urged the Bureau to adjust its series to the Census o f M anufactures to correct the down ward bias reported by the Federal Reserve Board statisticians. It also called for data by city and State, especially where State agencies were not collecting such inform ation. Sam pling coverage should be improved to take account o f the rise o f new firms and new industries. The committee commended BLS for launching data collection in nonmanufacturing industries but called for further effort to include building construction and the growing “white collar” fields. O n the measurement o f hours worked and part-time employment, BLS should concentrate initially on manufacturing and railroads to gain experience for covering other industry sectors.46 The committee stressed the importance o f accurate employment data for the measurement o f unemployment. In the absence o f some system o f universal registration o f the unemployed, nationwide unem ployment censuses would provide the best measure, but these were costly and had other shortcomings. Therefore, the committee recom mended the continuation o f a decennial census o f unemployment, possibly a quinquennial census, to which the employment series, with the recommended improvements, could be benchmarked.47 The committee gave considerable attention to the subject o f tech nological unemployment, noting the difficulty o f relating labor dis placement to specific causes. Ewan Clague, who earlier had directed the development o f industry productivity measures by the Bureau, was asked to prepare a preliminary survey. The committee stressed the http://fraser.stlouisfed.org Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis 131 The First H undred Years importance o f technological advance in any discussion o f employment and unemployment, and recommended that fundamental data collec tion and case studies "should be a continuing part o f the responsibility o f the Federal Government and specifically o f the Bureau o f Labor Statistics.”4® BLS had already begun many o f the proposed programs. But the committee gave sanction and direction to a specific, comprehensive plan o f action, and the Bureau’s activities intensified rapidly. By 1932, summary reports covered 64,000 establishments in manufacturing and nonmanufacturing industries. With the assistance o f several cities and States, the Bureau developed a series on construction industry employment, covering some 10,000 firms. Also, the Bureau developed a series showing the trend o f employment in States, using data from State agencies to supplement BLS figures, as well as a series on employment in cities with a population o f more than 500,000, cover ing 13 such cities by supplementing the monthly survey. However, an experimental survey o f State, county, and city government employ ment and earnings proved unsatisfactory when reports declined sub stantially due to economy measures taken by those jurisdictions during the depression years. Federal civil service employment was reported beginning in 1932. The Bureau did not begin to benchmark its employment series to the Census o f M anufactures until 1934.49 Industrial safety and health The Bureau continued its campaign for improvement o f industrial accident statistics. Its objective was to “do for the entire field what has been done for the iron and steel industry”, referring to the Bureau’s regular reports on accident rates in that industry begun in 1910. A s M eeker had said earlier, Secretary Davis declared in 1923, “It is not greatly to the credit o f our people that nobody knows with any substantial degree o f accuracy how many industrial accidents occur annually in the U nited States. No one knows even the annual number o f industrial fatalities. The difficulty in obtaining reliable data is due largely to the incomparability and incompleteness o f the accident statistics published by the various States.”50 Thus, the Bureau encouraged States and industries to adopt a uniform method o f recording and reporting accidents. Stewart urged a strong statistical program to identify “where it will pay you to get busy.”51 http://fraser.stlouisfed.org Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis 132 Stewart: Holding the Fort In the late 1920’s, Stewart pushed for congressional authorization for a Division o f Safety within the Bureau to act as a “clearinghouse for the information the States are gathering.”52 Although the authori zation was never received, in 1926 the Bureau began an annual survey o f industrial injuries in a group o f manufacturing industries, based on State records and reports from establishments. With data for 1930 covering about 25 percent o f the workers in some 30 manufacturing industries, it reported average frequency and severity rates. Articles and bulletins covered a variety o f related studies, including a survey o f health in the printing trades and the mortality experience o f union typographers, as well as several studies o f indus trial hygiene and industrial poisoning. In addition, the Bureau cooperated with the American Engineer ing Standards Committee to write and publish safety codes. It also sponsored meetings such as the Industrial Accident Prevention C on ference that convened in W ashington in July 1926 with 33 States represented, a major step forward in cooperation. In 1926, the Bureau published a bulletin on phosphorus necrosis in the fireworks industry, the result o f one o f its investigations. Following this, through agree ments with manufacturers, BLS was successful in eliminating the pro duction and sale o f small articles o f fireworks containing white or yellow phosphorus.53 Social insurance Social insurance and various forms o f protective legislation continued to be an active interest o f the Bureau. In the early 1920*s, reports were published on workmen’s compensation, family allowances, legal aid, cooperatives, a minimum wage, women workers, and child labor. Later in the decade, the Bureau concentrated on a relatively new field, pension and retirement systems. Following passage o f amendments to the Federal retirement system in 1926, the Bureau launched a survey o f 46 State and municipal plans, publishing the results in 1929 along with information on public service retirement systems in Canada and Europe. It followed with many other studies o f domestic and foreign experiments. The Bureau also published material in a related field, care for the elderly under private auspices. The Review presented articles on homes for the elderly operated by fraternal, religious, and nationality organizations, including one on homes for “aged colored persons.” http://fraser.stlouisfed.org Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis 133 The First Hundred Years The Bureau also cooperated with fraternal organizations in a survey of conditions in almshouses and “poor farms” around the country, devel oping the results in cooperation with the National Fraternal Congress. Productivity and technological change The study o f productivity and the effects o f technological change made important strides under Stewart. The Bureau had published studies on productivity in the lumber and shoe industries during M eeker’s years, but, in general, as Stewart observed in 1922, “Few statistical subjects are more discussed, there is none upon which we know less.”54 Productivity was an issue in labor-management relations in the 1920’s. Wage adjustments recognizing the increased productivity of American industry became a goal o f labor, formally stated by the AFL in 1925: “Social inequality, industrial instability, and injustice must increase unless the workers* real wages, the purchasing power o f their wages, coupled with a continuing reduction in the number o f hours making up the working day, are progressed in proportion to man’s increasing power o f production.” 55 Among spokesmen for management, there were divergent views on the role o f productivity. Some contended that there were restric tions and inefficiencies in the work rules sought by labor; others reluctantly accepted the “economy o f high wages” which would make for increased purchasing power to improve both standards o f living and the demand for the increasing output o f American industry.56 Stewart explained that the Bureau’s work would not involve “what a man can do or what he ought to do. It is proposed simply to record what he does, as a matter o f statistics.” He had no sympathy with the use o f such information “to drive men” in an “unreasonable speed-up,” but believed that it was as important for industry to know “the time cost o f production” as it was to know the labor cost or the material cost.57 In 1922, Stewart signed an agreement with the Babson Statistical Organization for a joint project on productivity, with the construction industry as the first subject. The study could not be carried out successfully, however, because o f the great variation in materials among contractors and the lack o f adequate records. Several other studies were completed and published—for longshoring and the shoe, brick, and paper boxboard industries—but the project was abandoned http://fraser.stlouisfed.org Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis 134 Stewart: Holding the Fort in 1924 because o f a lack o f funds and a shortage o f staff equipped to handle the complex technical work.58 The groundwork for a more sophisticated program o f industry productivity measures was laid in 1926, when Stewart brought Ewan Clague from the University o f W isconsin to direct a special project. For data on output, the work drew on the biennial Census o f Manu factures supplemented by more current figures available from the Department o f Commerce. Employment data came from the Bureau’s monthly series. In 1926, the Bureau published output per man-hour measures for the steel, automobile, shoe, and paper industries. In 1927, measures were published for 11 additional industries. More extensive case studies o f particular industries, such as the glass indus try, also included output per man-hour measures. Stewart cautioned that, while labor time was used as the unit for measurement, this did not mean that the increased output was due to the efforts o f labor alone, or at all. “The increased output per man hour in a given industry may have been due to more skillful and efficient labor, to new inventions, improved machinery, superior man agement, or any one o f a number o f factors; but the Bureau in these general summaries makes no attempt to determine the relative impor tance o f these factors.”59 Later, as concern grew over the effects on employment of increased productivity and technological change, the Bureau devel oped information on the displacement o f workers. In the early 1930’s, Bureau studies covered the effects o f new technology in the telephone and telegraph industry; the amusement industry, in particular the effect o f sound motion pictures; street and road building; agriculture; cargo handling; iron and steel sheet production; cigar making; and the automobile and tire industries.60 Administration During Stewart’s 12 years, the leadership o f the Bureau changed little. Charles E. Baldwin was Stewart’s second in command throughout, first as C hief Statistician and C hief Clerk, then as Assistant Commis sioner. W hen Baldwin became Assistant Commissioner, J.C . Bowen succeeded him as C hief Statistician. Only two men served as Chief Editor under Stewart, Herman L. Amiss and Hugh S. Hanna. All four had been in the Bureau since at least 1909. http://fraser.stlouisfed.org Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis 135 The First H undred Years Stewart complained o f underclassification o f positions. A s C om ' missioners had before him, he testified to Congress, “Clerks competent to do the work o f the Bureau o f Labor Statistics cannot be had at these rates." This was one reason for the relatively poor attraction of the Bureau for young professionals in these years.61 Perversely, even congressional attempts to improve pay for govem m ent employees affected the Bureau negatively. In 1927, Stewart informed the House Committee on Appropriations that, although Congress had increased the per diem paid to field agents, the Budget Bureau had granted less than half the amount needed to cover the increase. The liberalization resulted, he said, “in still further reducing our possible field w ork."62 O n one occasion, however, Stewart and Secretary Davis were able to gain some ground in improving the status o f Bureau personnel. In September 1923, Stewart wrote Davis to complain that the Personnel Classification Board had rated BLS as a “minor bureau." In turn, Davis wrote the Board, “There are four separate counts under each of which it would appear a distinct injustice has been done in that the real status o f the Bureau has not been adequately considered. . . . I cannot consent to the relegation o f the personnel and work o f the Bureau o f Labor Statistics to a Departmental clerical status." C on cerned for the general treatment o f economists, sociologists, and tech nical statisticians, the American Statistical Association, the American Economic Association, the American Sociological Association, and the American Association for Labor Legislation joined in protest. Reversing itself, the Classification Board established the “Economic Analyst G roup" in the professional and scientific service.6^ Congress routinely refused funds for expansion o f the Bureau’s programs. In Stewart’s first 4 years, the budget was at about its level in 1919 (table 4). In fact, Congress often reacted to Stewart’s requests for increased appropriations with suggestions for reductions instead. He was pressed, for example, to justify the cost o f field visits for data collection in the wage and price programs when collection by mail would be cheaper. http://fraser.stlouisfed.org Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis 136 Stewart: Holding the Fort Table 4. Appropriations for Bureau o f Labor Statistics, 1921-33 (in thousands) Total1 Salaries 1921 1922 1923 1924 $248 242 242 242 $173 173 173 173 1925 1926 1927 1928 1929 288 285 294 300 2419 215 215 220 220 220 1930 1931 1932 1933 396 399 3580 450 273 273 (4) (4) Fiscal year ended June 30 — ’ Includes salaries, miscellaneous, library, and deficiency and supplemental appropriations. in c lu d es deficiency appropriations o f $119,000. ^Includes supplemental appropriation o f $140,000. 4Not available separately; total given as ‘ salaries and expenses.* SOURCES: Legislative, Executive, and Judicial Appropriations. The Budget o f the United States Government. And the Monthly Labor Review was in jeopardy in 1921, when Congress, seeking to rein in government publications, put a require ment in an appropriations bill for specific congressional authorization for such journals. Approval for the Review was held up, and the need for economy was not the only reason given. Representative Stevenson o f South Carolina, from the Joint Committee on Printing, declared that a Department o f Labor pursuing its “legitimate functions” and publishing materials “legitimately to be used by the institutions o f this country” would have no difficulties. However, “a magazine that reviews books and prints commendations o f soviet literature and all that sort of thing . . . we do not propose that it shall be further published at the expense o f the voters o f the U nited States.” Never theless, Congress passed the necessary authorization in May 1922.64 http://fraser.stlouisfed.org Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis 137 The First Hundred Years The disposition o f C ongress changed somewhat later in the decade. The Bureau’s appropriation was increased by about 20 percent in 1925, with slight additional increases until 1929, when, with a weaken ing economy and growing unemployment, Congress granted a sub stantial deficiency appropriation for work on employment and unemployment statistics. Deficiency and supplemental appropriations were given for this work during the next years, but they often came too late in the fiscal year to be allocated, so that the Bureau of the Budget would delete the amount from new requests.65 International activities The reporting o f economic conditions abroad never flagged under Stewart. Bureau publications frequently presented statistics and reports on legislation and industrial developments in foreign coun tries. However, U .S. rejection o f membership in the League of Nations in 1920 greatly limited BLS participation in international agencies. The Bureau moved to drop the annual allocation o f $1,000 from its budget for the International Association for Labor Legisla tion. Stewart noted that the association had merged with the Interna tional Labor Organization, one o f the constituent agencies o f the League o f Nations, to which the U nited States did not belong. Even so, the Bureau maintained “a friendly cooperation” with the ILO, especially while former Commissioner Meeker was there.66 Stewart did attend the meetings o f the International Institute of Statistics in Rome in 1925 as a member o f the U .S. delegation. He attended only one other international meeting, a session o f the ILO Conference o f Labor Statisticians in 1931. Stewart was there primarily because o f the Bureau’s work on the international study o f wages and the cost o f living for the Ford M otor Company. Stewart explained his reluctance to join in such functions: “If we send delegations to one of their conferences or conventions, I do not believe that we can escape the implication that we are as a country refusing to enter the League o f Nations by the front door but are in fact crawling in through the back door.”6? http://fraser.stlouisfed.org Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis 138 Stewart: Holding die Fort Retirement O n July 1, 1932, Commissioner Stewart, then 74 years old, was retired involuntarily under the Economy Act o f 1932, which required automatic separation o f retirement-age Federal employees after July 1932 unless specifically exempted by the President. Stewart’s term ran until December 1933, but Secretary Doak’s refusal to recommend an exemption resulted in his termination. Observers generally attributed his retirement to factors other than age. The following incident, reported in Time, was also cited in other newspapers as the main reason: “Last spring, Secretary o f Labor Doak told newsmen that he had been supplied departmental data which showed that employment was increasing throughout the land. Fooled before by such cheery statements from politically minded Sec retaries, the reporters went to Commissioner Stewart to check up. The white crowned, white whiskered old man telephoned Secretary Doak that the statistics given him warranted no such declaration. Thereupon Secretary Doak recalled the newsmen, told them to disre gard his earlier statement, and then, in front o f them gave Statistician Stewart a tongue-lashing for daring to contradict his chief. It was Secretary Doak who refused to certify Mr. Stewart’s indispensability to the President, thereby depriving him o f his job.”68 Stewart him self wrote that he had been considering retirement but “it was the cheap, boorish method employed that hurt me.” The San Francisco News was more caustic: “In the city named for George Washington, it seems they fire people for telling the truth. Stewart has been in continuous government service for 45 years. He is recognized as one o f the ablest men in his line in America, and his honest work on employment is particularly needed now. But, unfortunately for him and the country, he is too candid.”69 For a year, from July 1, 1932 until July 6, 1933, Charles E. Baldwin served as the Acting Commissioner, and he tried to follow Stewart’s policies. Ethelbert Stewart died in 1936. http://fraser.stlouisfed.org Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis 139 Chapter VI. Isador Lubin: Meeting Emergency Demands I sador Lubin was sworn in as Commissioner o f Labor Statistics in July 1933, in the midst o f the worst depression in the Nation’s history. The Bureau expanded greatly during his tenure, first to meet the needs o f the New Deal agencies set up to deal with the emergency and then to provide the information needed for guiding the economy during the war years. Through the force o f his personal ity and the breadth o f his knowledge and experience, Lubin provided the impetus for the Bureau’s development into a modem , profession ally staffed organization equipped to deal with the many tasks assigned. The fifth Commissioner Isador Lubin was bom in 1896 in W orcester, M assachusetts, the son o f Lithuanian immigrants. Helping out in his father’s retail clothing business, Lubin learned o f the uncertainties confronting factory work ers in the early years o f the century. He attended Clark College in W orcester and, with the goal o f an academic career, accepted a fellow ship at the University o f M issouri. There he established a close rela tionship with Thorstein Veblen. http://fraser.stlouisfed.org Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis 140 L ubin: M eeting Emergency Dem ands With U .S. entry into the war in 1917, Lubin, along with many other young academicians, was drawn into government service. For several months, he and Veblen were employed in the Food Adminis tration, preparing studies dealing with food production and farm labor problems. In one study, they interviewed local leaders o f the Indus trial W orkers o f the World—widely viewed as radicals threatening the war effort—and reported that some o f the grievances o f the group were legitimate and that the agricultural workers involved were not receiving fair treatm ent.1 Lubin then joined the War Industries Board's Price Section at the invitation o f its head, Wesley C . Mitchell. For a year, he was involved in studies analyzing wartime fluctuations in the prices o f rubber and petroleum and their products, and the general effect o f wartime gov ernment price floors and ceilings. After his service in Washington, Lubin received an appointment as an instructor in economics at the University o f Michigan and later was put in charge o f the labor economics courses. He returned to W ashington in 1922 to teach and conduct studies at the new Institute o f Economics, which became The Brookings Institution in 1928. Among the studies he led were broad-gauged analyses o f the American and British coal industries, dealing with the economic, social, and psychological influences on mine operators and unions, including the competitive effects o f nonunion operations, national efforts at selfsufficiency in coal production, and alternative sources o f energy.2 In the late 1920’s, Brookings was a prime source o f advice and research on the growing problem o f unemployment. Lubin became a leading participant in studies o f technological unemployment and of the British experience in dealing with unemployment. In 1928, he was assigned by Brookings to assist the Senate Committee on Education and Labor, which was considering legislation to deal with unemploy ment. He became economic counsel to the committee and, working closely with Senator James Couzens, the committee chairman, organ ized and directed the hearings, laying out the subject matter and selecting representatives o f government, business, unions, and the economics profession to testify. Brookings then assigned Lubin, at the request o f Senator Robert Wagner, to assist in hearings on three bills in the spring o f 1930. One called for expanded monthly reports on employment by the Bureau of Labor Statistics; another, for advance planning o f public works to be http://fraser.stlouisfed.org Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis HI The First Hundred Years activated during business depressions; and the third, for establishment o f a Federal-State unemployment insurance system. Frances Perkins, New York State Industrial Commissioner, was among the witnesses Lubin assembled. Only the bill on employment statistics was enacted immediately. Lubin helped organize the National Conference o f Professionals held in W ashington in March 1931 at the call o f a bipartisan group of Senators led by Robert M. La Follette, Jr., to discuss a legislative program to combat the depression. The conference participants included governors, members o f Congress, farm and labor leaders, businessmen, economists, social workers, and others. He also worked actively with Senators La Follette and Costigan in late 1931 and 1932 on bills proposing Federal relief and public works programs, again serving as economic counsel. In August 1932, Senator Wagner asked Brookings to grant Lubin a leave o f absence to work in his campaign for reelection. Lubin’s 5 years o f experience with measures to deal with unemployment proved valuable in Wagner’s successful campaign, in which Wagner stressed his efforts to ease the burdens o f the depression.3 In 1933, Frances Perkins, Secretary o f Labor in the new Roosevelt administration, was looking for a Commissioner o f Labor Statistics to fill the vacancy created by the retirement o f Ethelbert Stewart. Lubin was on the list o f candidates submitted by the Ameri can Statistical Association, and, knowing o f his broad interests and experience, Perkins chose him as her nominee. Her biographer has stated, “W hen she offered him the post, she told him that he had been chosen because she thought he would remember that statistics were not numbers but people coping or failing to cope with the bufferings o f life.”4 Lubin’s views Lubin was prominent among those economists who saw the need for an increased role for government in economic affairs, particularly after the onset o f the depression. A s early as 1929, in reporting on the result o f the study he conducted for the Senate Committee on Educa tion and Labor, Lubin stressed that the so-called absorption o f the “dispossessed” worker by “newer” industries was a “slow and painfully prolonged process.” Further, many displaced workers were being http://fraser.stlouisfed.org Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis 142 Lubin: M eeting Emergency Dem ands forced into unskilled trades, with lower earnings and consequently reduced standards of living. “A t the same time, they are being made to bear the burden of unemployment for which they are in no way responsible and over which they have no control.” Lubin’s assessment was that “unemployment is the result o f industrial organization, and not of individual character.”5 In testifying on unemployment insurance measures in 1931-32, Lubin stated that society was partly responsible for unemployment, resulting as it did “from the general disorganization o f the economic system due to the fact that those persons who direct our system are not doing the job as well as it should be done.” National corporations and industries and employed consumers benefiting from depressed prices should bear their share of the burden.6 It was his view that underconsumption resulting from the inequi table distribution o f income had been a major factor contributing to the Great Depression. A t the opening hearing o f the Temporary National Economic Committee in 1938, Lubin stated, “A more equita ble distribution is more than an ethical problem. . . . To me it is a problem o f keeping the gears o f the economic machine constantly in mesh.” W hat was needed, he believed, was to so distribute income “that it will pull into our homes, through a higher standard o f living, the goods, that is the clothing, food, entertainment, education, and so forth, which our economic machine must turn out at a rate considera bly higher than at the present time---- ”7 Lubin supported the establishment o f minimum wages and maxi mum hours to protect the competitive system while making it possible for American workers to maintain a decent standard o f living. In reviewing the industry codes established under the National Industrial Recovery Act, he frequently protested against the inadequate provi sions on wages, hours, and child labor, and sought to include mini mum standards for health and safety in the codes. W ith the establishment o f adequate standards, Lubin stated, “Employers with a social conscience are assured that they will no longer be compelled to conform to the standards o f competitors with blunted social sensibili ties.”8 A t the final T N EC hearings in 1941, Lubin stressed the need for viewing the economy as a whole. “No set o f measures that can be recommended will be adequate unless there is a fundamental underly ing and continuing commitment that the goal o f national economic http://fraser.stlouisfed.org Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis 143 The First H undred Years policy is the full utilization o f our resources, both o f men and m ated' als. . . W hen economic progress involved losses as well as gains, Lubin deemed it proper “that the cost o f progress, which benefits the community as a whole, should be borne by the community. . . He called for defense contracts to require special dismissal funds to cover employees affected by cutbacks in defense industries in the postwar reconversion period.9 He believed events had demonstrated that government leadership and participation were required to meet violent economic dislocations, whether in peace or in war, since private enterprise did not adapt readily to such dislocations. No single program, neither the discour agement o f economic concentration nor the indiscriminate spending o f public funds, would bring a solution o f these problems. “There is no panacaea that will guarantee the creation o f full employment in a free democracy.”10 Lubin and the New D eal years W hen Lubin assumed the leadership o f the Bureau, he and Secretary Perkins were in agreement that the Bureau’s staff and programs needed to be improved to keep up with the economic and social needs o f the times. M ore and better information on employment and unem ployment was o f vital importance. More price data were needed by the agencies administering the National Industrial Recovery Act and the Agricultural Adjustm ent Act to determine whether consumers were being faced with unwarranted price increases. The National Recovery Administration also needed expanded and more current industry wage and hour studies for use in its code-formulating activities. And the new era o f industrial relations ushered in by the National Labor Relations Act, as well as the division between the A FL and the C IO , called for more information on unions and collective bargaining devel opments. Lubin added another dimension to the task: “Not only must raw data be improved but the Bureau must be enabled more fully to analyze the material it now has, so that evidence may be available as to where the recovery program is having the greatest effect and where it is falling down.”11 Both Lubin and Perkins showed immediate interest in improving the Department’s statistical program. U pon her appointment, Perkins http://fraser.stlouisfed.org Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis 1H L übin: M eeting Emergency Dem ands called on the American Statistical Association to establish a committee for advice “regarding the methods, adequacy, usefulness and general program o f the Bureau o f Labor Statistics.” This committee, whose membership included Ewan Clague and Aryness Joy, became part of the broader based Committee on Government Statistics and Inform a' tion Services (C O G SIS) sponsored by the Social Science Research Council and the A SA .12 Lubin readily acknowledged the role o f outside experts in die “work o f revision and self-criticism”, reporting that “the Bureau has followed a consistent policy o f consulting with recognized technical experts, and o f constantly soliciting the opinions o f employers and labor union officials regarding possible improvements to provide greater service.”13 A t an informal meeting o f labor union research staff members in 1934, Lubin announced die creation o f a Labor Informa tion Service for the use o f local union officers and members. Relations with union research staff continued on an informal basis until June 1940, when a more formal relationship was established. In mid-1934, Perkins reported that the Department’s statistical work “is perhaps better than at any time during its history and repre sents the best technical standards, as to method, coverage and inter pretation.”14 Lubin and Perkins also were interested in improving the coordi nation o f Federal statistical work. Immediately after his appointment in July 1933, Lubin participated in the setting up o f the Central Statistical Board, which Roosevelt established by Executive O rder at the end o f July. Subsequently, Lubin and Perkins endorsed legislation for a permanent board, which was established by Congress in 1935 for a 5-year period to ensure consistency, avoid duplication, and promote economy in the work o f government statistical agencies. The technical board was responsible to a Cabinet-level Central Statistical Committee composed o f the Secretaries o f Labor, Commerce, Treasury, and Agri culture. Lubin urged Perkins to press her claim as chairman o f die committee with Roosevelt, and she was so designated. Lubin served as vice-chairman o f the technical board. W hile Lubin worked towards the improvement o f statistical pro grams, Secretary Perkins encouraged a broader role for the Commis sioner, giving him many special assignments, among them the chairmanship o f a labor advisory board to the Public Works Adminis tration. In this capacity, he dealt for almost 3 years with questions http://fraser.stlouisfed.org Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis 145 The First Hundred Years relating to the referral o f union and nonunion workers to construc tion projects, job opportunities for Negro skilled workers in view of their exclusion from building trades unions, observance o f arbitration awards, and determination o f wages. Lubin also served as chairman o f a board set up to settle a strike o f citrus workers in Florida in early 1934. The board included repre sentatives o f the National Recovery Administration, the National Labor Board, and the Department o f Agriculture. The board’s report called on the Department o f Agriculture to insist that the marketing agreement approved for the citrus industry include provisions encour aging steady employment and recognizing the right o f labor to organ ize and bargain collectively. In submitting the report to Agriculture Secretary Henry Wallace, Lubin urged that he establish an office to deal with agricultural labor problems. W hen Wallace took no action, Lubin proposed that the Bureau study the farm labor area. The effect o f inadequate knowledge about these workers, according to Lubin, was their exclusion from all existing laws.15 W hen a strike threatened in the auto industry in November 1934, Leon Henderson, C hief Economist o f the National Recovery Administration, asked Lubin’s help in an investigation. The Bureau conducted a study o f wages in the industry, including analyses of annual earnings, employment patterns, and seasonal fluctuations in production. Henderson and Lubin personally interviewed industry representatives. Among their recommendations was one accepted by the auto manufacturers, that new models be brought out in Novem ber, rather than in December, to achieve greater regularization of employment.16 Early in her administration, Perkins named Lubin chairman o f a departmental committee to promote U .S. membership in the Interna tional Labor Organization. A t the same time, she agreed to an ILO request to have Lubin serve on its advisory committee on labor statis tics. Following U .S. entry into the ILO in August 1934, Lubin was the first U .S. delegate to its governing body. The Bureau was given responsibility for the administrative arrangements for continuing U .S. representation in Geneva, with funds for the purpose included in the Bureau budget. ^ Lubin continued to attend meetings o f the gov erning body. Perkins frequently asked Lubin to participate in economic discus sions at the W hite House. He prepared analyses for her and for the http://fraser.stlouisfed.org Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis 146 Lubin: M eeting Emergency Dem ands Central Statistical Committee she headed. Elected secretary to the committee, Lukin regularly prepared an economic report, which was abstracted for presentation to the National Emergency Council. In 1936, Perkins wrote the President that “the value o f this arrangement would obviously be enhanced by Dr. Lubin’s membership in the National Emergency Council. May I recommend and request that you designate him?”18 Lubin was soon given other W hite House assignments. He partic ipated in the discussions the President held with business, labor, and government policy officials on measures for dealing with the major economic downturn o f 1937. Soon after, he was the first witness in hearings on unemployment. In 1938, when Congress established the Temporary National Economic Committee to investigate monopolistic practices, the President asked Lubin to call off a lecture commitment to be on hand to help with preliminary arrangements.19 Lubin was designated as the Department o f Labor representative to the TN EC , with A. Ford Hinrichs, the Bureau's C hief Economist, as alternate. Lubin had a large part in planning the work o f the committee, in preparing analyses, and in making recommendations. The Bureau prepared several monographs for the committee, with Special Assistant Aryness Joy directing the staff work, which included both analytical and case study approaches. Lubin's full-time direction o f the Bureau came to an end in June 1940 when Secretary Perkins, at the request o f Sidney Hillman, head o f the Labor Division o f the National Defense Advisory Commission, assigned Lubin to serve as Hillman’s economic adviser. Lubin retained his position as Commissioner. In a memorandum to Hinrichs, named Acting Commissioner, Lubin stated, “In general, you are authorized on your own responsibility and without reference to me to represent the Bureau o f Labor Statistics in any matters which may arise and to make any decisions that may be necessary either with reference to policy or internal administration. ” However, he would continue to be available to Hinrichs “on all matters o f fundamental policy.”20 Lubin's responsibilities grew under the Defense Advisory Com mission, then under the Office o f Production Management, and later under the War Production Board. Within a year, he was called to serve in the W hite House as special statistical assistant to the President. O n May 12, 1941, Secretary Perkins wrote the President, “I am very glad to comply with your request to assign to your office and for your http://fraser.stlouisfed.org Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis 147 The First Hundred Years assistance Mr. Isador Lubin____W hile Mr. Lubin will, I know, give you great assistance, his entire staff in the Department o f Labor will be at his disposal to assist him in the inquiries he will make for you.”21 Lubin remained as Commissioner on leave until his resignation from government service in 1946. Hinrichs and the war years Hinrichs served as Acting Commissioner for 6 years, supervising the wartime activities o f the Bureau. H e communicated with Lubin on a regular basis, but generally to meet Lubin’s needs at the W hite House. H is relations with Secretary Perkins were more formal than Lubin’s had been. A. Ford H inrichs was bom in New 'fork City in 1899. He received his doctorate at Colum bia University and taught there and at Brown University, where he was director o f the Bureau o f Business Research. In 1930 and 1932, he travelled to the Soviet Union, Italy, and Germany to study state economic planning.22 O n his entry into the Bureau as C hief Economist, Hinrichs con' ducted a study o f wages in the cotton textile industry requested by the National Recovery Administration for the development o f industry codes. Later, he made a more intensive survey o f the industry for the use o f the Wage and H our Administration. In early 1940, Hinrichs was designated Assistant Commissioner, shortly before becoming Act ing Commissioner. W hen Hinrichs took over the leadership o f the Bureau in the midst o f the national defense buildup, it had significantly enhanced its role as the factfinding agency o f the Federal Government in the fields o f employment, prices, wages, industrial relations, industrial safety and health, and productivity. It had an extensive file o f data on economic trends and a staff trained to collect data accurately and economically. With U .S. entry into the war, the agencies administering war production and stabilization programs needed a vastly more detailed body o f economic data. U nder Hinrichs, the Bureau became the factfinding arm o f the Office o f Price Administration, the National War Labor Board, the War Production Board, the War and Navy Departments, the Maritime Commission, and, to a lesser extent, other agencies. It supplied detailed information on employment conditions and provided estimates, by occupation and region, of the amount of http://fraser.stlouisfed.org Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis 148 Lubin: M eeting Emergency Dem ands labor needed to meet war production schedules. For price control and rationing programs, it provided data on wholesale and retail prices and the cost o f living; for wage stabilization programs, it provided data on wages, hours, and the cost o f living. Agencies such as the OPA and the W LB used the statistics from the Bureau to monitor the effectiveness o f their administrative activities. The wartime work had a lasting impact on the Bureau’s programs in improved quality, the expansion o f regional and local data, and the development o f more advanced statistical techniques. The Bureau’s work The cost-of-living index The Bureau’s cost-of-living index figured in legislation immediately upon Roosevelt’s entry into office. O n March 20, 1933, Congress passed the Economy Act, which reduced Federal Government salaries by 15 percent on the basis o f a drop o f more than 20 percent in the cost o f living since June 1928. Later in the year, as required under the act, the Bureau conducted a survey o f the cost o f living o f Federal employees in the District o f Columbia, comparing prices paid in 1928 and December 1933. Grouping expenditures for those earning under $2,500, over $2,500, and for single individuals living in rented rooms, the study found price declines averaging about 15 percent, except for the single individuals, for whom restaurant prices had not fallen as much as unprepared foods used at home.23 The national cost-of-living index underwent early improvement with the help o f the Advisory Committee to the Secretary. By 1935, the index, still based on the 1917-19 expenditure survey, was pub lished quarterly, calculated from food prices in 51 cities and other commodity and service prices in 32 o f the large cities. Beginning in 1935, the national index was calculated by applying population weights to the data for the 51 cities. The number o f food items was increased from 42 to 84, with a better representation o f meats, fruits, and vegetables, and with weighting to make them representative of other foods whose pattern o f price movements was similar. Pricing was based on written specifications, ensuring comparability from city to city and over time, and trained local personnel were employed on a contract basis to collect some o f the data. The rent index was revised http://fraser.stlouisfed.org Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis 149 The First H undred Years to make it more representative o f wage earners and lower salaried workers. Lubin pressed for authorization to conduct a new nationwide family expenditure survey and was able to obtain a special appropria tion. Ethelbert Stewart had regularly, but unsuccessfully, asked for such authorization. The expenditure survey was conducted in 1934-36, covering 12,903 white families and 1,566 Negro families in 42 cities with a population o f 50,000 or more. Limited funds made it necessary to restrict the survey to large cities. The families included had incomes of at least $500 per year, were not on relief, and had at least one earner employed for 36 weeks and earning at least $300 or a clerical worker earning a mmnmum o f $200 per month or $2,000 per year. The income o f all the families averaged $1,524-$1,546 for white families and $1,008 for Negro families.24 The results showed a significant increase in expenditures for radios and used automobiles, and also reflected increased purchases of readymade clothing, gasoline, fuel oil, and refrigerators, better food and nutrition habits, better lighting in homes, use o f dry cleaning and beauty shop services, and more automobile travel. D ata derived from the survey were incorporated in a revised costof-living index for wage earners and lower salaried workers in 33 large riripM* which was issued for the first quarter o f 1940. One innovation was the inclusion o f outlets representative o f those patronized by Negro wage earners and salaried workers in cities where they consti tuted an important sector o f the population.25 Alm ost simultaneously with the expenditure survey, BLS and the Bureau o f Home Economics joined in a nationwide survey o f expendi tures o f urban and rural consumers for the W orks Progress Adminis tration. The Central Statistical Board and the National Resources Committee sponsored the survey and led in the planning. A t the opening o f the T N E C hearings, Lubin called attention to the evidence from the survey that 54 percent o f the 29 million American families had incomes below $1,250 a year.26 The requirements o f the defense preparedness programs soon called for additional data on prices and the cost o f living. In 1940, the National Defense Advisory Commission asked the Bureau to act as its statistical agency in the field o f prices and to summarize price develop ments. Shortly thereafter, the Bureau was providing information on http://fraser.stlouisfed.org Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis 150 L ubiti: M eeting Emergency Dem ands current price developments, special-purpose index numbers for warassociated products, additional pricing o f such basic items as industrial chemicals and essential oils, cost-of-living price collection in additional cities and more rapid issuance o f reports, and rent and housing surveys in defense production areas. Special studies were undertaken o f commodities in short supply during the period o f “voluntary” price regulations by the Office o f Price Administration. The national index was now issued monthly, based on price and rent reports for 20 o f the 34 large cities for which quarterly data were issued. By the end o f the year, the Bureau also had initiated indexes for 20 additional represen tative small cities to compare changes in the cost o f living in large and small cities. In 1941, with the rising cost o f living, the Bureau adopted a policy o f keeping the index as up to date as possible. In 1942, con sumer goods which were no longer available, such as refrigerators, automobiles, sewing machines, and new tires, were dropped. In 1943, the relative weights o f rationed foods were changed to take account o f their reduced availability. A lso, com modity specifications were changed more frequently than in normal periods, and, with the intro duction o f Federal rent control, the Bureau began to obtain informa tion from tenants rather than from rental management agencies. In addition, the Bureau conducted tests to determine whether the prices reported to field agents were those actually paid by consumers. The validity o f the cost-of-living index was further tested by an important economic study, the Survey o f Family Spending and Saving in Wartime, notable for its use o f probability sampling techniques. The survey was made primarily for the use o f the Treasury Depart ment in formulating its tax and war bond programs and for OPA and the War Production Board for decisions on rationing, price, and allo cation policies. Data were obtained from a representative sample o f 1,300 city fiunilies on income, spending, and savings in 1941 and the first part o f 1942. The survey tested the relative weights in the cost-ofliving index, establishing that they were substantially correct as o f 1941. A smiliar study in 1945, covering 1944, resulted in minor changes in specifications and weighting patterns.2? The cost-of-living index had come in for review at the Bureau’s annual conferences o f union research directors from their inception in June 1940. Originally, these were basically technical reviews o f the shortcomings o f the index in view o f changes in the availability and http://fraser.stlouisfed.org Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis 151 The First H undred Years quality o f commodities, additional expenditures by workers required to shift work locations, and rising prices in booming localities. Some participants called for a BLS pamphlet o f questions and answers about the index, including what it showed and could not show. Lazare Teper, Research Director o f the International Ladies* Garment Work ers’ U nion, suggested that the Bureau point out that the index under stated price rises due to quality deterioration and other wartime conditions, so that employers and unions could make appropriate adjustments in their negotiations.28 Later, when wage controls appeared imminent, some research directors asked the Bureau to either replace the index or supplement it by developing budgets for maintaining a working class family in “health and decency." Hinrichs contended that this was a matter for the War Labor Board to decide and not the Bureau. However, if the unions wished to press their case with the board, the Bureau was prepared to furnish them with the information on family income, expenditures, and savings from the survey conducted in 1941 and early 1942.29 The Bureau issued the pamphlet “Questions and Answers on the Cost-of-Living Index" in A pril 1942. The description o f the index was relatively simple and clear. The pamphlet described the adjustments made for the disappearance and rationing o f civilian goods. O n the index’s coverage, it stated, “A cost o f living index can only measure the general change in the particular city o f the goods and services customarily purchased by workers. It obviously cannot cover every conceivable increased cost which individual families experience." Among the costs which “by their nature cannot be covered in any measure o f average living costs" were costs o f maintaining the family at home while a wage earner worked at a distant job; commuting costs to distant jobs; higher costs, especially o f rent and utilities, in cities to which workers migrated for defense jobs; and inconveniences caused by limited or disappearing goods. Shortly after passage o f the Economic Stabilization Act, in a letter to William H. Davis, chairman o f the National War Labor Board, Hinrichs described the problems the Bureau freed in preparing the index. You should be aware o f the feet that we are experiencing considerable difficulty in the compilation o f our indexes because o f the many changes in kinds o f consumer goods available. Moreover, as the rationing program is extended to more and more commodities, it will http://fraser.stlouisfed.org Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis 152 Lubin: M eeting Emergency Dem ands be necessary promptly to take account o f the resulting changes in wage-earners’ spending, if the cost o f living is to be truly representa tive. We expect to make every effort to keep the index on the soundest possible basis and we will wish to discuss with your staff, from Hmp to time, some o f the policy problems which will arise in this connec tion.”30 Davis replied, “We are much concerned that the Bureau’s Costof-Living Index should not be open to attack on technical grounds. There have already been some comments by trade union representa tives in cases before this Board, alleging that the index did not reflect the full rise in the cost o f living. O ur general policy is now based on the assum ption that the cost o f living will not rise substantially, and we must be in a position to prove that this is in fret the case by reference to an official index which is not open to serious question. W hile this is a technical problem that the Bureau must handle in its own way, it is very important to us that the index faithfully show changes in actual prices o f wage earners’ purchases under rationing or any other system o f control o f buying which may be instituted by the government.”31 U nions had begun to collect retail price data in 1941 to demon strate that tighter price controls were needed and that wage controls would reduce workers’ real income. By late 1942, following the impo sition o f wage controls, the union studies were receiving much public attention. The Bureau and the standing committee o f union research directors discussed the studies in December 1942, at which time it was decided to have two union research directors work with the Bureau to keep the unions and the public generally informed on die uses and limitations o f the index.32 The effort at public education was extended in early 1943. Aryness Joy W ickens made trips to a number o f cities where price surveys had been done, meeting with members o f the public and union offi cials to explain the uses o f the index, the methods o f gathering and compiling price data, and the BLS materials available on changes in food prices. The Bureau gave advice on how to collect prices compara ble to cost-of-living figures in cities it did not cover in the index. One result was that in Detroit, where union figures had differed substan tially from BLS data, a new union survey following BLS techniques showed no significant divergence.33 http://fraser.stlouisfed.org Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis 153 The First H undred Years By June 1943, in view o f the 24-percent rise in the index over January 1941, as against the 15-percent general wage increase permit ted by the Litde Steel wage stabilization formula, the union research directors intensified their arguments. They now questioned the use o f the cost-of-living index for wage adjustments, contending that what was needed were studies o f workers’ expenditures and a determina tion o f the cost o f an adequate standard o f living. To those who insisted that the shortcomings o f the index should be announced, and specifically to the labor members o f the War Labor Board, Hinrichs replied, “If our index carries within it such serious shortcomings as to invalidate the policy conclusions based on it, then the thing to do is not to announce the shortcomings o f the index, but to scrap it alto gether or malr* it better. O ur job is to make it better so that nobody else will scrap it.” A s to telling the War Labor Board members about the shortcomings, Hinrichs said he had not been invited to do so. uIf asked, I am not going to avoid the question o f any o f the shortcom ings. I have, o f course, discussed our index with members o f the staff o f the War Labor Board, but it is not our function to ask for a formal discussion with the Board.” H e stressed that the unions should not put “all their eggs” in the cost-of-living basket and suggested that other B L S material could be used by the labor unions to support rem ands before the stabilization agencies.34 A t Hinrichs* request, Secretary Perkins asked the American Sta tistical Association “to review and appraise the cost o f living index with reference both to its construction and its uses.” Frederick C. M ills, o f Colum bia University and the National Bureau o f Economic Research, was appointed to head a committee o f experts, which heard from labor organizations, employer associations, consumer groups, and government agencies. The committee also conducted special field studies and tests o f Bureau procedures, utilizing Bureau staff. The principal conclusions o f the M ills Committee sustained the Bureau’s position. These were: “First, that within the limitations established for it, the C ost o f Living Index provides a trustworthy measure o f changes in the prices paid by consumers for goods and services. Second, that many o f the difficulties and doubts which have arisen concerning the index have their origins in attempts to use it uncritically for purposes for which it is not adapted.” The committee’s assessment was that the index was useful for public policy dependent on measuring the average trend in consumer http://fraser.stlouisfed.org Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis 154 L ubin: M eeting Emergency Dem ands prices nationwide, but, for other policy uses, more specific indexes were required. If a policy o f relating wage adjustments to actual living costs o f workers were adopted, indexes for particular areas, industries, population groups, and income levels would be needed.35 The M ills Committee report was released in October 1943. Chairman Davis o f the National War Labor Board wrote to Perkins, “I think this will be very helpful to the whole stabilization program. I was not only gratified to have my own conviction about the index confirmed, but I also think the committee’s statement o f the proper use to be made o f the index will be helpful.”36 The report was only the first stage in a prolonged scrutiny of wage stabilization policy and the cost-of-living index. With labor press ing for relaxation o f the wage stabilization policy, President Roosevelt suggested that the War Labor Board set up a tripartite committee to explore the widespread “controversy and dispute as to what the cost o f living is,” and that agreement by such a committee could “have a salutary effect all over the country, because today all kinds o f exagger ated statements are made.”37 The board acted immediately to appoint the committee, known as the President’s Committee on the C ost o f Living, with Davis as chairman. A t the initial meeting, the committee adopted a motion by George Meany o f the A FL to investigate a number o f specific ques tions: The cost o f living in O ctober 1943 compared with January 1, 1941, May 15, 1942, and September 15, 1942; how the index figure was arrived at; whether there were any changes in the methods of securing or computing the figures; and concrete suggestions for improving the securing o f figures. The Bureau promptly provided the information, along with a description o f the preparation o f the index.38 In January 1944, the labor members o f the War Labor Board submitted a report stating that, by December 1943, the true cost of living had risen at least 43.5 percent above January 1941, whereas the BLS index had risen only 23.5 percent. The report stressed that the BLS index understated price rises because o f deterioration o f quality and disappearance o f low-priced merchandise. It also noted the absence o f consideration o f room rent, food bought in restaurants, and costs in moving from one city to another. In general, it charged that the index was inaccurate.39 http://fraser.stlouisfed.org Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis 155 The First H undred Years The Bureau submitted a comprehensive statement in reply, observing that “there is conclusive evidence that they are absolutely wrong in asserting that the rise in the cost o f living is nearly twice as great as the Bureau o f Labor Statistics shows it to be.” The Mills Committee reaffirmed the conclusions o f its October report.40 The comments on the wide discrepancy o f 20 percentage points impelled Davis to call on a committee o f technical experts for an unbiased study. Wesley C . Mitchell, o f the National Bureau o f Eco nomic Research, was designated as chairman. O ther members were Sim on N. Kuznets, o f the War Production Board, and Margaret Reid, o f the Budget Bureau’s Office o f Statistical Standards. In June 1944, before the M itchell Committee was ready with its report, the Bureau held its fifth annual conference with union research directors. W hile in previous years only research directors had been invited, this time other union officers also were included, among them George Meany. Meany addressed the conference. Meany’s biog rapher has described what followed: “W hat he said was a bombshell, and a well-publicized one, for advance texts went to the press.” He charged the administration with failing to keep down living costs and deciding that “the next best thing to do was to keep down the cost of living index. In this policy the Bureau o f Labor Statistics obsequiously acquiesced. We are led to the inescapable conclusion that the Bureau has become identified with an effort to freeze wages, to the extent that it is no longer a free agency o f statistical research.”41 Shortly after the conference, the Bureau issued its regular monthly cost-of-living release, which now contained a brief explana tory statement: “The BLS index indicates average changes in retail prices o f selected goods, rents, and services bought by families o f wage earners and lower-salaried workers in large cities. The items covered represented 70 percent o f the expenditures o f families who had incomes ranging from $1,250 to $2,000 in 1934-36. The index does not show the full wartime effect on the cost o f living o f such factors as lowered quality, disappearance o f low-priced goods, and forced changes in housing and eating away from home. It does not measure changes in total ‘living costs’—that is, in the total amount families spend for living. Income taxes and bond subscriptions are not included.”42 The release was greeted in the American Federationist with the headline, BLS admits its index gives faulty view o f true rise in living http://fraser.stlouisfed.org Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis 156 Lubin: M eeting Emergency Dem ands costs.” The article continued, “Mr. Meany and other labor spokesmen had exposed the injustice o f using the BLS figures as a guide to computing living costs and as a basis for establishing wage rates.”43 The report o f the Mitchell Committee also appeared at this time, stating, MO ur examination o f the methods used by the BLS and the other information we have gathered . . . leads us to conclude that the BLS has done a competent job, under very difficult market conditions, in providing a measure o f price changes for goods customarily purchased by families o f wage earners and lower-salaried workers living in large cities.” The committee estimated that the Bureau’s index in December 1943 understated hidden price rises by only 3 to 4 percentage points, mainly due to quality deterioration. The committee's one explicit recommendation was that the name o f the index be changed.44 In November 1944, Davis submitted the report he had prepared as chairman o f the President’s Committee on the C ost o f Living. In it, he drew on the M itchell report in finding that “the accuracy o f the index figures for what they were intended to measure is confirmed. They are entitled to the good reputation they have long enjoyed. . . . They are good basic figures for use in the formulation o f fiscal and other governmental policies and for observing the effects o f such policies.” With the “searching” studies conducted for the committee, “no such substantiated criticism o f BLS methods has survived.” He did recognize that the 3 to 4 percentage points for the hidden increases, plus 0.5 o f a point if small cities were also covered in the index, would bring the official rise o f 25.5 percent in the index from January 1941 to September 1944 to about 30 percent. The industry members generally concurred in the chairman’s conclusions, but the labor members issued separate statements. For the C IO , R.J. Thomas strongly endorsed changing the name o f the index. For the AFL, Meany clarified the policy issues o f the index, indicating that the A FL had never endorsed basing wages on the cost o f living: “The estab lished wage policy o f this country has always been based on raising wages as increases in productivity made this possible.”43 The findings o f the President's Committee on the C ost o f Living were an important element in the recommendations made in February 1945 to the Director o f Economic Stabilization for maintaining the Little Steel formula as the standard for general wage increases for wage stabilization. In a dissenting statement, the A FL contended that wage earners had borne the brunt o f the wartime anti-inflation program:46 http://fraser.stlouisfed.org Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis 157 The First H undred Years In the early postwar period o f continuing wage-price controls, the wage adjustment standard was relaxed. Regulations permitted adjustments for a 33-percent rise in the cost o f living from January 1941 to September 1945, including a 5-point adjustment over the official cost-of-living index to allow for continued deterioration of quality and unavailability o f merchandise. The Bureau explained the 5point adjustment in its monthly release but did not include it in the index. In February 1947, in recognition o f the disappearance o f some o f the wartime market factors, the Bureau discontinued the explana tion. Following Meany’s appearance at the research directors’ confer ence, Secretary Perkins ordered the annual conferences terminated. However, informal relations with the members o f the former standing committee continued; Hinrichs actively sought and received their advice on Bureau programs. Formal relations were not reestablished until 1947, when Commissioner Clague set up both labor and busi ness advisory councils. Changing the name o f the cost-of-living index as proposed by the M itchell Committee was the subject o f a conference with union research directors in January 1945, who, as early as 1940, had raised a question regarding the tide. They agreed on a new tide, “Consum er’s Price Index for M oderate Income Families in Large C ities.’’ Hinrichs submitted the proposal to Secretary Perkins, indicating that it met with Bureau approval. Perkins opposed any change, however, pointing out that the “C ost o f Living” tide was widely used in other countries and was well understood. She believed that the index under the new name would be no more acceptable to its critics and, in fact, would create even more confusion. In a few months, Secretary Perkins was succeeded by Lewis B. Schwellenbach, and, in July 1945, he agreed to the new tide.47 Stan dard budgets In 1936, the W orks Progress Administration published two budgets giving quantities necessary for families for “basic maintenance” and for “emergency standards o f living.” These budgets were intended to appraise relief needs and set WPA wage rates. The Bureau updated the budgets periodically for 33 cities by applying changes in prices and rents reported to the Bureau for the cost-of-living index. In 1943, with the base o f the estimates long out o f date, they were discontinued. http://fraser.stlouisfed.org Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis 158 Lubin: M eeting Emergency Dem ands In 1945, the House Appropriations Committee directed the Bureau to prepare a family budget based on current conditions, or to “find out what it costs a worker’s family to live in large cities in the U nited States.” A technical advisory committee o f outstanding experts in the fields o f nutrition and consumption economics helped develop the standards and procedures. The Bureau prepared the list o f items and quantities to be included in the budget, priced them in 1946 and 1947, and developed dollar totals for 34 large cities. The results were published in 1948. A s formulated, the budget for a city worker’s family o f four was an attempt to describe and measure a modest but adequate American standard o f living.48 Wholesale prices Lubin called for expansion o f the Bureau’s wholesale price work in 1933 to aid in the analysis o f changes in the economy, both in specific industries and in major economic sectors. Immediate improvements included more detailed commodity specifications and broader com modity and industry coverage. In 1937, the index was changed from the “link-chain” formula used since 1914 to the “fixed-base” tech nique. Between 1933 and 1939, the number o f individual commodities priced increased from about 2,300 to 5,000; the number o f firms reporting increased from about 750 to 1,500. The requirements o f wartime gave a new orientation to the wholesale price program. The extensive use o f the indexes in escalator clauses in large war contracts and in preparing price regulations made it necessary for the Bureau to hire price specialists with a thorough knowledge o f particular commodity fields, to increase staff training, and to develop new techniques o f price analysis. In a project con ducted with the cooperation o f the WPA, new groupings o f commodi ties were developed, including separate indexes for durable and nondurable goods; producer and consumer goods; and agricultural and industrial goods. Wages The long-established program o f periodic industry and union wage surveys continued under Lubin. In addition, the monthly series on average hourly earnings and average weekly hours in selected indus tries begun in 1932, based on the establishment survey, was expanded. http://fraser.stlouisfed.org Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis 159 The First H undred Years The Bureau had to recast its priorities to meet the urgent demands for information required to establish and administer the N R A codes. In place o f the periodic studies o f major industries, the Bureau had to conduct hurried and limited studies o f industries such as cigars, cigarettes, tobacco, boys’ hosiery, and silk. More comprehen sive studies, dealing with working conditions as well as wages, covered such diverse subjects as the cotton textile and petroleum industries, the onion fields o f Ohio, and editorial writers on newspapers. With the end o f the N RA , the regular program was resumed and new studies were undertaken. A t the request o f the engineering socie ties, the Bureau conducted a study o f employment, unemployment, and income in the engineering profession. Also, special analyses were made to provide information on earnings and hours of Negro workers in the iron and steel industry and in independent tobacco stemmeries. In its regular industry survey program, the Bureau made efforts to expand coverage to include annual earnings, earnings by age and length o f service, and information on personnel policies. Annual earn ings data proved difficult and costly to obtain, however, and this work was soon curtailed. Several industry wage studies during the period included broad analyses o f the industry’s structure, including its competitive features, technology, demand, and profits. In his introduction to a study of cotton goods manufacturing, Lubin observed, “The more specific the economic application o f the facts with reference to wages, the more intensive should be the preliminary study o f the industrial back ground.”49 The passage o f the Walsh-Healey Public Contracts Act in 1936 and the Fair Labor Standards A ct in 1938 resulted in a substantial increase in the wage program. The Bureau provided summary data on wages and hours to the Department’s Wage and H our and Public Contracts Divisions for the setting o f minimum wages, and, during 1938 and 1939, developed frequency distributions of wages in about 45 industries, primarily low-wage consumer goods industries.50 Another reorientation o f the Bureau’s work was required when the defense program got underway in 1940. With the emphasis on war production, the Bureau shifted to occupational wage studies of heavy industries such as mining, smelting, and fabrication o f nonferrous metals; shipbuilding; machinery; rubber; and aircraft. In addition, a http://fraser.stlouisfed.org Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis 160 Lubin: M eeting Emergency Dem ands number o f disputes coming before the National Defense Mediation Board required the collection o f wage data by occupation and locality. Such data were increasingly needed by the National War Labor Board, especially after it was given wage stabilization authority in O ctober 1942. In May 1943, the Director o f Economic Stabilization authorized the board to establish, by areas and occupational groups, brackets based on “sound and tested going rates” for decisions in cases involving interplant wage inequity claims. Wage increases above the bracket minimum were permitted only in “rare and unusual” cases and cases o f substandards o f living.51 By agreement with the board, the Bureau was to be “one o f the instrum entalities” for the collection o f occupational wage rate data within various labor markets in each o f the 12 War Labor Board regions. The Bureau was required to establish regional offices to serv ice the needs o f each board, with the program in the field subject to the general direction o f the tripa|tite regional boards. The regional boards had authority to designate the occupations and industries to be covered and to interpret and evaluate the data. In practice, the boards relied substantially on the Bureau's expertise in the preparation o f occupational patterns and job descriptions for the surveys. The Bureau met the challenge o f the board's requirements for occupational wage rate data by industry for virtually all U .S. labor markets. W ithin 6 months, with board funds, the Bureau collected data from over 60,000 establishments in 400 localities—an unprece dented volume o f information for such a short period o f time. By 1945, pay rates in key operations had been collected from more than 100,000 establishments, and some 8,000 reports on an industry-local ity basis had been transmitted to the board. The data collection included supplementary information such as overtime and shift-work provisions, the prevalence o f union agreements, paid vacations, bonuses, insurance, and pensions. U sing the summary reports, the regional boards established wage brackets covering tens o f thousands o f board determinations in interplant wage inequity situations. A major issue arose over the board’s proposal that “data secured by the Bureau in carrying out this project will be used and published, if at all, by or under the direction o f the Board.” Secretary Perkins, in opposing the rigid limitation on the Bureau’s right to publish the material, cited the Bureau’s mandate to make its information available as widely as possible, its importance for maintaining good public rela http://fraser.stlouisfed.org Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis 161 The First H undred Years tions, and the use o f its own funds for some o f the work. The matter was finally resolved with the understanding that the Bureau would submit any proposed release or article to the authorized representative o f the board, seeking advice on the content and timing o f releases. Any disagreement would be referred jointly to the Secretary o f Labor and the chairman o f the NW LB.52 A t first, the release procedure created problems for the Bureau. The unions contended that they needed the data in bracket-setting cases, even though they had been submitted to the War Labor Board. A satisfactory arrangement was developed whereby unpublished infor mation was sent in response to requests, with the requesting party obliged to advise the Bureau o f the intended use o f the information in any wage negotiations or official procedure leading to wage determina tion, to insure that the Bureau's position was impartial.53 The occupational wage work provided the basis for developing an overall urban wage rate index to measure the impact o f the stabiliza tion program on basic wage rates. Data from the Bureau’s regular programs were inadequate for the purpose. The weekly earnings series for example, failed to take account o f the increased importance of payroll deductions. W hile estimates were made for these deductions, the series developed was affected by such factors as the effects of overtime pay; changes in the relative importance o f regions, industries, and individual establishments; and changes in occupational structure. G ross average hourly earnings, subject to the same influences, were adjusted to eliminate the effects o f overtime pay and interindustry shifts in employment, but the resultant straight-time hourly earnings index continued to be affected by changes in the relative importance o f residual factors. The urban wage rate index, first published in 1944, provided a better measure o f basic wage rate changes. Field representatives col lected the data directly for specific and well-defined key occupations; the same establishments were covered; and fixed weights were used for each occupation, industry, and area. The index was continued until 1947.54 A s the war was coming to an end in 1945, plans were made to meet anticipated requirements for wage statistics during the reconver sion period. The Bureau decided to conduct a large number o f nation wide occupational surveys on an industry basis, including regional and http://fraser.stlouisfed.org Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis 162 Lubiti: M eeting Emergency Dem ands locality breakdowns when feasible. Between 1945 and mid-1947, 70 manufacturing and 11 nonmanufacturing industries were studied. Industrial relations The great impetus given to union growth and collective bargaining by the N RA and the National Labor Relations A ct stimulated the Bureau to gear up to provide information to ease the adjustment to new labor' management relationships. In 1934, the Bureau began publication o f the Labor Information Bulletin and also established a separate Indus trial Relations Division which began the collection and analysis o f collective bargaining agreements. Within a few years, a file o f 12,(XX) agreements was developed. Thereafter, efforts were made to improve the sample and to maintain it on a current basis. Strike statistics also were improved and made more current. In conjunction with the National Labor Relations Board, the Bureau undertook a study o f company unions in 1935. David Saposs, who had just completed a study on the subject for the Twentieth Century Fund, was hired as director o f the study. A t an informal meeting with BLS, A FL representatives expressed some reservations about the project, suggesting that the Bureau should place its emphasis on studying collective bargaining agreements rather than on what they viewed as merely “an arm o f m anagem ent”55 After the study was completed, Lubin reported to Secretary Per kins that union officials were urging him to issue the report as soon as possible. “Somehow or other a rumor has been spread that the bulle tin may be suppressed.”56 The preliminary report, appearing as an article in the Monthly Labor Review entitled “Extent and Characteristics o f Company U nions,” stirred up a tempest. The National Association o f Manufac turers advised Lubin that some o f its members, including those who had cooperated in supplying information to the Bureau, felt that in many respects the study “attempts to establish standards for employee representation plans which may result in misleading conclusions as to their functions and operations.” They met with Lubin, and immedi ately thereafter the Journal of Commerce reported, “Although resent ment in industrial circles against the recent study on company unions prepared by the BLS continues high, it now seems doubtful that an organized boycott will result.”57 http://fraser.stlouisfed.org Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis 163 The First Hundred Years With the war emergency, the Bureau’s ongoing analysis o f collec tive bargaining provisions proved valuable to government agencies, employers, and unions as collective bargaining received encourage ment under wartime policies. In 1942, the Bureau published Union Agreement Provisions (Bulletin 686). Based on the Bureau’s file of several thousand agreements, it analyzed and provided examples of clauses for some 28 principal labor contract provisions. The demand for the bulletin was so great that it was reprinted four times. During the war years, die War Labor Board called on die Bureau for special studies on the prevalence o f certain contract provisions, including maintenance-of-membership clauses, seniority rules, and grievance procedures. The Bureau also developed statistics on strikes in defense industries and for specific cases before the board. It also provided considerable information to die War and Navy Departments, the Conciliation Service, and the War Production Board. Employment and unemployment Establishment data. The Bureau’s employment statistics were o f cru cial importance in assessing the extent o f the industrial recovery from the G reat Depression and, later, in monitoring the defense and war programs. The monthly reports based on establishment payrolls were improved and expanded, incorporating recommendations o f the Advi sory Committee to the Secretary o f Labor. Benchmarking to the bien nial C ensus o f M anufactures was finally implemented in 1934 and carried out on a regular schedule thereafter. In 1938, State, county, and municipal employment was included. Sampling was improved both on an industry and regional basis. Between 1933 and 1940, coverage increased from 70,000 representative private establishments employing 4.5 million workers to 148,000 establishments employing 8.4 million. By 1939, 17 States were cooperating in obtaining employ ment and payroll data in manufacturing establishments. In 1937, in cooperation with the Women’s Bureau, BLS began semiannual collection o f separate data for men and women in those industries in which large numbers o f women were employed. The information was analyzed and published by the Women’s Bureau. In 1940, with the growing defense program, Lubin pointed out the likely increase in the employment o f women, as in the first World War. He called for wider collection and more detailed analysis o f the employment conditions and earnings o f women.58 Regular monthly http://fraser.stlouisfed.org Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis 164 Lubin: M eeting Emergency Dem ands reporting on the employment o f women in manufacturing industries was begun in June 1943. Separate turnover figures for women also were published. Defense production programs required the expansion o f industry coverage and reclassification to take account o f industries manufactur ing war materiel such as guns, tanks, and sighting and fire-control equipment. Sixty-seven industries were added to the 90 manufactur ing industries previously covered. By 1945, reports were received from 180 industries covering 148,000 establishments and representing 12.5 million workers. Turnover rates were also compiled and analyzed for all employees and for women employees in 125 mining and manufac turing industries. To aid in dealing with recoversion problems, the Bureau received a supplemental appropriation in 1945 permitting collection o f data in all States for construction o f State and area employment estimates comparable to the BLS national series. W hile the program was short lived, it served to develop close relationships with State agencies, facilitating establishment o f the cooperative program that replaced it.59 Throughout the 1930’s, the Bureau sought to provide additional measures which would serve as indicators o f overall employment trends. Beginning in 1936, two series o f estimates o f nonagricultural employment were developed. The first, “total civil nonagricultural employment," showed the total number o f individuals engaged in gainful work in nonagricultural industries, including proprietors and firm members, self-employed persons, casual workers, and domestic servants. The second, “employees in nonagricultural establishments,” was limited to employees only. The totals for both series were benchmarked to the 1930 Census o f Occupations, with periodic adjustments to the various industrial censuses and the newly devel oped Social Security tabulations. Persons employed on WPA and National 'Vbuth Administration projects, enrollees in the Civilian Conservation Corps, and members o f the Armed Forces were not included. Beginning in 1939, similar estimates were prepared for each o f the 48 States and the District o f Columbia.60 Census of unemployment. The Bureau participated in an experimental census o f unemployment in 1933 and 1934. Along with the Secre tary’s Advisory Committee and the Central Statistical Board, the Bureau provided professional direction for a trial household census in http://fraser.stlouisfed.org Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis 165 The First H undred Years three cities. The Central Statistical Board set up an interdepartmental committee, chaired by Lubin, to supervise the study, which was con' ducted with resources provided by the Civil W orks Administration. W hile the results were not published, the study was significant for its trailblazing application o f methods by which the theory o f sampling could be used under practical conditions for developing Federal economic and social statistics. The experience gained was to influence the development o f techniques for measuring unemploym ent61 Although the Advisory Committee recommended that the Bureau be responsible for unemployment estimates, later developmen tal work was carried on by the WPA, which, in 1940, initiated a national monthly sample survey o f households, “The Monthly Report o f Unemployment** Drawing on an innovation in the 1940 census, the survey made use o f a new concept—the “labor force**—in place of the earlier “gainful workers’* concept The new concept included only persons who were actually working or seeking work; formerly, persons who had had a paid occupational pursuit were included whether or not they were at work or seeking; work at the time o f the survey.62 The Bureau contrasted the new series with its own nonagricultural employment series. It viewed the latter as providing “a means o f throwing into proper perspective the significant fluctuations in basic industrial and business employment, where changes are measured currently with a high degree o f accuracy. ** The WPA monthly sample survey o f individual households, on the other hand, was viewed as the only satisfactory method o f directly measuring the fluctuations in the size o f the labor force and in unemployment, including in the employment total agricultural workers and such temporary and casual employment as the summer vacation employment o f students not caught directly by B LS reporting techniques.63 With the termination o f the WPA in 1942, the Bureau o f the Budget transferred the work to the C ensus Bureau, which continued to publish the results, retided the “M onthly Report on the Labor Force,** until 1959, when responsibility for the survey was turned over to BLS. Labor requirements studies. In association with its work in obtaining reports o f employment and payrolls from contractors involved in the vast system o f Federal public works projects, the Bureau obtained monthly reports o f all expenditures for materials by the Federal Gov- http://fraser.stlouisfed.org Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis 166 June 27, 1884. CH A P. 127—An act to establish a Bureau o f Labor. Be it enacted by the Senate and House o f Representatives o f the United States o f America in Congress assembled, That there shall be established in the Department of the Interior a Bureau of Labor, which shall be under the charge of a Commissioner of Labor, who shall be appointed by the President, by and with the advice and consent of the Senate. The Commissioner of Labor shall hold his office for four years, and until his successor shall be appointed and qualifed, unless sooner removed, and shall receive a salary of three thousand dollars a year. The Commissioner shall collect information upon the subject of labor, its relation to capital, the hours of labor, and the earnings of laboring men and women, and the means of promoting their material, social, intellectual, and moral pros perity. The Secretary of the Interior upon the recommendation of said Commissioner, shall appoint a chief clerk, who shall receive a salary of two thousand dollars per annum, and such other employees as may be necesary for the said Bureau: Provided, That the total expense shall not exceed twenty-five thousand dollars per annum. During the necessary absence of the Commissioner, or when the office shall become vacant, the chief clerk shall perform the duties of Commissioner. The Commis sioner shall annually make a report in writing to the Secretary of the In terior of the information collected and collated by him, and containing such recommendations as he may deem calculated to promote the effi ciency of the Bureau. Approved, June 27, 1884 On June 27, 1884, President Chester A. Arthur signed the bill establishing a Bureau of Labor in the Department of the Interior. http://fraser.stlouisfed.org Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis William H. Sylvis, president of the iron molders union, first set the goal of establish ing a national labor bureau at the 1867 convention of the National Labor Union. Terence V. Powderly, as G rand Master Workman of the Knights of Labor, cam paigned for establishment of a national bureau and sought the post of Commissioner. Representative Jam es H. Hopkins of Pennsylvania sponsored the bill establish ing the Federal Bureau during the Presidential election year of 1884. Samuel Gompers, president of the A m eri can Federation of Labor, counseled with and supported the Bureau while leading the fight to establish the Department of Labor. http://fraser.stlouisfed.org Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis Carroll D. Wright, Commissioner, 1885-1905 Kellogg Building, first home of the Bureau of Labor http://fraser.stlouisfed.org Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis Charles P. Neill, Commissioner, 1905-13 National Safe Deposit Building, home for 20 years, 1890-1910 G. W.W Hanger, Acting Commissioner, 1913 Royal Meeker, Commissioner, 1913-20 BLS administration and finance office, 1920 http://fraser.stlouisfed.org Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis Ethelbert Stewart, Commissioner, 1920-32 Department of Labor Building, 1917-35 http://fraser.stlouisfed.org Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis Charles E. Baldwin, Acting Commissioner, 1932-33 lsador Lubin, Commissioner, 1933-46 BLS tabulating room, about 1935 http://fraser.stlouisfed.org Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis A. Ford Hinrichs, Acting Commissioner, 1940-46 Lubin and Senator O ’Mahoney opening hearings of Temporary National Economic Committee, 1938 Top BLS staff, July 1946 http://fraser.stlouisfed.org Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis Ewan Clague, Commissioner, 1946-65 Clague explains chart on wholesale prices. http://fraser.stlouisfed.org Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis Aryness Joy Wickens, Acting Commissioner, 1946 and 1954-55 Faith Williams (second from left), Chief of the Office of Foreign Labor Conditions, meeting with Swedish statistical group, 1950’s BLS tabulating room, 1950’s http://fraser.stlouisfed.org Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis Arthur M. Ross, Commissioner, 1965-68 Geoffrey H. Moore, Commissioner, 1969-73 Ben Burdetsky, Acting Commissioner, 1968-69 and 1973 http://fraser.stlouisfed.org Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis Julius Shiskin, Commissioner, 1973-78 Janet L. Norwood, Acting Commissioner and Commissioner, 1978 to present Norwood presents economic data to Joint Economic Committee. http://fraser.stlouisfed.org Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis MONTI U S Dei Bureau < August 1 relation w c a p ^ n- and ^ raTprospenty^ ^ p t e t ó d » “ nJ£d u c men ,a? ‘L Uectuah Ss ttaatti is ct ^s h d the pubUc b> P and tua\, and m PubU„^ployment SeC° rS^ «S\ t hi, , i_\î/* nroerams pubUc p r o e m s and and Ppn Bureau » ^ « h i c h Pla ment payment^ BureaU a tstatistics' i s t i « ’ _, fnr umely and a« the n! Cthe Bureau 'B«**f p *iia\ Whereas « * omic and soc'a e pubhc ne "J Sleader « SBureau ^ u me?. meets tuedata £ in ^the ^ Æ m * ± L *»the ^m aSn ^ Sre^^fronic S S a f services: tO S * the BureauBas 1 m— ^ - J - * ' V -W '1“ * „ad ReS°nT A rnerlca H W*" 1 S StaÎ ^ m e n d a t io f§ ^ ^ ^ * the es 5 5 the Nation APPROVED — ■'------ ^ 1 — ^ ,« X " JUL - 9 Q Commemorating the centennial, Congress recognized the contributions of the Bureau of Labor Statistics with a Joint Resolution, featured on the cover of the Monthly Labor Review for August 1984. http://fraser.stlouisfed.org Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis i Lubin: Meeting Emergency Dem ands em m ent or government contractors, in order to estimate the employment created by such public expenditures. O ut o f this developed studies o f the indirect labor involved in the fabrication o f certain basic materials, including steel, cement, lumber and lumber products, and bricks. O ther studies covered the electrification o f the Pennsylvania Railroad, several power projects, and houses constructed by the Ten nessee Valley Authority.84 The records o f almost 40,000 federally financed construction projects completed between 1935 and 1940 were analyzed to determine the types and cost o f labor and materials required to carry out a given dollar volume o f construction contracts. The techniques developed in these studies proved useful in projecting labor requirements for planned expenditures for defense facilities.65 Occupational outlook studies. The defense effort also spurred the establishment o f the Bureau’s occupational oudook program. The original impetus came from the recommendation, in 1938, o f Presi dent Roosevelt’s Advisory Committee on Education that an occupa tional outlook section be set up in the Bureau to provide information to aid in career counseling. In 1940, under congressional authoriza tion, the Occupational O utlook Service was established. Soon, however, it was occupied with developing projections of manpower supply and needs for defense industries, including the aircraft industry. Calling attention to the need for authentic informa tion on demand and supply o f certain labor skills Mto avoid all sorts of wild schemes which we may not be able to forestall and which may later rise to plague us,” Lubin indicated that the recently authorized funds for occupational outlook investigations could be used legiti mately for this purpose. In mid-1940, at Sidney Hillman’s request, the President asked Congress to provide the Bureau with an additional $150,000 for the development o f data on occupational skills needed by private industry in meeting military procurement needs.66 After the war, the occupational outlook program began to revert to its original function—studies for the guidance o f young people. With demobilization, requests for oudook information came from the Army, the Navy, the Office o f Education, and others. The Veterans Administration called on the Bureau for appraisals o f the employment outlook for use in counseling veterans at its guidance centers. The Bureau developed analyses o f over 100 occupations. Studies were also made o f the occupational realignments during the war, which were http://fraser.stlouisfed.org Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis 167 The First Hundred Years used in planning the demobilization o f the 11 million members o f the Armed Forces and the 12 million workers in the munitions industries. Research on postwar employment problems. The study o f postwar labor problems was begun as early as 1941, when the House Appropriations Committee provided funds for research on the provision o f jobs for workers displaced from war production. A division for research on postwar problems was established in the Bureau, which initially conducted studies o f the impact o f the war effort on employment in individual localities and industries. Subsequently, in the study o f post war full employment patterns, a major technical innovation—the “input-output” concept—was utilized. This involved the study of interindustry relationships throughout the economy in 1939, the last year before the expansion o f munitions production. Funded by the Bureau, the work was conducted at Harvard University in 1942 and 1943 under Wassily Leontief and was then transferred to Washington. The input-output tables and techniques were utilized in developing both wartime attack targets and subsequent reparations policies for Germany; for estimates o f postwar levels o f output and employment in U .S. industries; and to forecast capital goods demand. The results of the program were published in 1947 as Full Employment Patterns, 1950. The study spread knowledge o f the input-output concept within the government.67 Productivity and technological change In 1935, the Bureau applied to the WPA for funds to conduct studies o f productivity in 50 industries. The American Federation o f Labor supported the proposal as filling a gap which had been experienced in developing the N R A codes and as necessary in collective bargaining for dealing with the problem o f technological unemployment.68 At about the same time, the WPA developed its own program. In cooper ation with the WPA National Research Project on Reemployment O pportunities and Recent Changes in Industrial Techniques, the Bureau conducted several labor productivity surveys in important industries. By 1939, all o f the surveys were completed. Lubin’s annual report for 1939 stated, “The Bureau expects to carry on further researches in the important field o f labor productiv ity, in which it was a pioneer.”69 This resolve was underscored when, at the urging o f the unions, Congress authorized the Bureau to “make http://fraser.stlouisfed.org Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis 168 L ubiti: M eeting Emergency Dem ands continuing studies o f labor productivity” and appropriated funds for the establishment o f a Productivity and Technological Development Division, which was organized at the start o f 1941. One o f its earliest activities was to update the indexes constructed by the National Research Project. During the war years, the division maintained annual indexes of productivity for some 30 industries and compiled collateral information on technological developments and other factors affecting employment and production in various industries. It provided infor mation on technological developments in a monthly summary for the use o f U .S. agencies and those o f allied governments. Industrial estab lishments in 31 war industries were surveyed on the extent o f absen teeism, with a monthly series continued for almost 2 years. Also, in the face o f shortages, surveys o f productivity were made in the rubber and gasoline industries. Industrial safety and health Compilation o f data on the frequency and severity o f industrial inju ries had begun in 1926. W hen Lubin became Commissioner, about 1.4 million workers in 7,000 establishments were being covered. By 1944, 57,000 establishments were reporting annually. The much larger volume o f reports was still being handled by the same number o f staff members as in 1926; the enlarged coverage was made possible by radical changes in the methods o f collecting and processing the data. The impact o f industrial accidents on war production, with the resultant loss o f manpower, produced demands for more current information. The annual schedule on which reports had been issued previously could not meet this need. In 1942, the Bureau undertook to collect and publish monthly data on injuries in almost 10,(XX) establishments in industries o f particular wartime importance. These were used by government agencies to pinpoint the plants and indus tries with high accident rates. Several special studies were conducted during the war, including an examination o f the effect o f long work hours on efficiency, output, absenteeism, and accidents. A study o f operations at the Frankford Arsenal in 1941 showed that, when extended hours required exertion beyond the normal physical strength o f the workers, there were more accidents, greater spoilage o f material, greater turnover, and decidedly http://fraser.stlouisfed.org Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis 169 The First Hundred Years less production in the extended hours than in the regular hours.70 Further studies were made in 1943 and 1944. The Bureau conducted detailed studies o f accidents in the foundry, longshoring, and slaughtering and meatpacking industries. The Bureau’s data were made available to the Department’s Labor Standards Division, and to the Maritime Commission for safety drives. Administration Funding The Bureau grew substantially under Lubin’s direction. W hen he took over in 1933, the Bureau’s budget had just been reduced in a govemmentwide economy drive. Emergency funds made up for a further reduction in the regular budget in 1934. In succeeding years, congressional appropriations and funds transferred from other agen cies permitted expansion and improvement o f the Bureau’s programs. By 1941, the regular budget had increased to over $1 million, more than double its level in 1934, and the staff had grown from 318 full time employees to 810 (690 in W ashington and 120 in the field). There was a large increase in funding for the Bureau’s activities during the war (table 5). Between 1942 and 1945, Bureau resources doubled, and at one point the number o f full-time employees totaled almost 2,000. Congress maintained the regular appropriation for sala ries and expenses at close to the prewar level but granted supplemen tal and national defense appropriations. In 1945, the Bureau received funds to expand its regional offices for the collection o f State employ ment and payroll data comparable with national figures and also to cover occupational wage studies previously financed by the National War Labor Board. Both o f these activities were terminated in 1946, however, when Congress failed to provide further funding. A s the war neared an end, the Bureau began planning for a reduction in its operations, and by 1946 had cut its staff by about 12 percent from the wartime peak. Supplemental appropriations, granted for expansion o f work on foreign labor conditions, industrial rela tions, and productivity, partially made up for the reduction in wartime funds. http://fraser.stlouisfed.org Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis 170 L ubin: M eeting Emergency Dem ands Table 5. Funding for Bureau o f Labor Statistics, 1934-46 (in thousands) Fiscal year ended Jun e 30 — Total1 S alaries an d expenses Regular 1934 1935 1936 1937 1938 1939 $ 440 2949 zl,284 2,529 1,114 1,999 $ 414 528 885 850 784 814 1940 1941 1942 1943 1944 1945 1946 3,215 3,103 2,677 4,292 4,463 5,507 5,435 1,012 1,108 1,081 1,207 1,312 1,312 1,492 N ation al defense - _ - $288 1,001 1,365 2,672 2,781 'In clu d es special an d w orkin g fu n d s in addition t o app ropriation s for salaries an d expenses. in c lu d e s special appropriation fo r revision o f the co st-o f-liv in g index. SOURCE: The Budget o f die United S tates Government. Staff In the early days o f the New Deal, the Bureau found itself without , adequate staff to meet the vastly increased demand for data. W hen the National Recovery Administration called upon the Bureau for infor mation needed to develop and assess the industry codes, personnel had to be detailed from inside and outside the Department. A s Secre tary Perkins stated at an appropriation hearing in 1933, “The Bureau o f Labor Statistics has turned itself inside out in order to get this information and to make it available. . . in a form that was easily understood and readily used by people who had the responsibility of taking some action.” Lubin added that every labor group involved in any N RA code had had to go to the Labor Department for informa tion.71 Lubin indicated the lengths to which ingenuity had to be applied to make up for the shortage o f staff: “I do not want to appear to boast, but I think I am one o f the few officials who have actually gone out and borrowed people from other departments o f the Government and http://fraser.stlouisfed.org Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis 171 The First Hundred Years put them to work during their spare time getting materials for which we would otherwise have to pay.**72 In appropriation requests and in public statements, Lubin stressed the need to improve the professional qualifications o f the Bureau’s staff and to establish professional job categories at adequate levels to assure recruitment and retention o f such personnel. He pointed out that he was the only trained economist on the Bureau’s staff. The work o f the Bureau’s “highly efficient technical statisti cians,” he wrote the House Appropriations Committee, required the addition o f economists to permit full analyses o f the current economic problem s facing the country.73 Lubin was always on the alert for capable staff. He brought into the Bureau persons o f outstanding professional capacity who were authorities in their fields. M ost had had advanced graduate study at top universities. A. Ford Hinrichs, director o f Brown University’s Bureau o f Business Research, came as the Bureau’s C hief Economist; Aryness Joy joined the staff from the Central Statistical Board. Throughout the period, there was internal training o f the staff o f a quality equal to that in the best American universities. Lubin encouraged young economists to seek employment in gov ernment. Before the American Economic Association, he proselytised for the role o f government economists. He contrasted the circum scribed environment o f the academic researcher with the opportuni ties offered by Federal economic research for breaking down the barriers between economics, sociology, and political science.74 As a measure of his success in improving the Bureau’s staff, he was able to report as early as 1937 that “more liberal appropriations by a Congress sympathetic with its work made possible a very considera ble strengthening of its personnel.”75 O rganization Lubin made several organizational changes just before he went on leave in 1940. To distribute the workload more evenly and reduce the pressure on top officials, he reorganized the Bureau into three, rather than two, principal areas. The former line positions o f C hief Econo mist and C hief Statistician, each responsible for the activities o f all the divisions o f the Bureau in his field, were altered, with the C hief Statistican made a staff position and the other eliminated. Instead, the divisions were grouped under three branch chiefs who were to be http://fraser.stlouisfed.org Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis 172 Lubin: M eeting Emergency Dem ands responsible to the Assistant Commissioner, a new position. The three branches were Employment and Occupational O utlook, Prices and C ost o f Living, and W orking Conditions and Industrial Relations. During the war, when Hinrichs was Acting Commissioner, the posi tion o f Assistant Commissioner was not filled, however, and Hinrichs relied on the branch chiefs directly. Wartime requirements resulted in the establishment o f field offices. Before 1941, the only full-time field staff were those involved in the collection o f retail prices. Between December 1941 and mid1942, 8 field offices were established for price collection and 12 for wage analysis. All the activities in each region were consolidated under one regional director in 1944. Early in 1945, the collection o f employ ment statistics was added to regional office duties, but this was discon tinued in 1946 when Congress failed to renew appropriations. By the end o f the war, the permanent value o f the regional offices was well established. Cooperation and consultation Lubin’s facility for inspiring confidence and gaining cooperation was o f great value to the Bureau. H is open and straightforward approach in his dealings with labor and business groups and the press made him influential in all o f these areas. He maintained personal relationships with many corporate executives, and they exchanged views frankly on major issues o f the day. He was intimately involved in resolving issues which might threaten the Bureau’s activities, and, generally, his direct ness and persuasiveness kept the incidence o f such occurrences low. For example, he played a major role in resolving reporting problems arising from the role permitted trade associations by the National Recovery Administration. Companies were submitting their data directly to these associations, and some were refusing to continue to submit reports to the Bureau and other government agencies.76 W hen, at Lubin’s request, Secretary Perkins brought the problem to the attention o f the N RA director General Hugh Johnson, Johnson ordered industries under N RA codes to furnish data directly to the Bureau and the Federal and State agencies cooperating with the Bureau.77 Some industry representatives questioned the order, contending that the code authorities—the trade associations—should be encouraged to get the information and provide it to the government. http://fraser.stlouisfed.org Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis 173 The First Hundred Years Lubin addressed a meeting o f trade association executives and explained that direct government collection was necessary in the interest o f uniform and timely reporting.78 Further, meeting with represen tatives o f State governments and interested Federal agencies on the N RA order, Lubin cautioned on the need for maintaining and improving reporting relationships based on the established practices of voluntarism and confidentiality in reporting. W hile “under this order we have for the first time legal authority to secure these data,” Lubin stated, “we don’t want to use that pow er. . . , we would rather it would be a cooperative venture. . . . We have no intention o f imposing any burdens on them that they couldn’t easily handle. We expect, how ever, to continue on the old basis o f absolute confidence. These data are confidential and not to be used for enforcement purposes.”79 In another episode, in January 1936, the Automobile Manufac turers’ Association advised the Bureau that information for individual companies in the industry would no longer be furnished directly to the Bureau, and that individual plants would not be identified, except by a code to make monthly comparisons for individual plants. The arrangement was a source o f constant irritation to the Bureau. Lubin wrote the association that he viewed this “as a one-way proposition, with the Bureau being placed in the position where it can have only what the association says it should have and not what it feels it needs for its own use. It seems queer that after 15 years o f a cooperative relationship with the leading firms in the industry, they should suddenly stop giving us reports on their own initiative. It is hard for us to believe that they were not specifically told not to give us the reports.” He went on to state, “I frankly cannot continue in the uncomfortable position I find myself in o f warding off questions con cerning our automobile figures.” Lubin continued to press the matter. The problem was finally resolved at the end o f 1937, when the Automobile M anufacturers’ Association authorized the forwarding of the individual reports to the Bureau. “I am sure this arrangement will prove to our mutual advantage,” Lubin wrote.80 Through his wide contacts with industry executives, he was also able to overcome other occasional reporting problems. Lubin also worked to maintain good relations with labor groups. Early in his administration, he asked labor union research staff mem bers to meet with BLS and the Advisory Committee to the Secretary o f Labor. Relations with union research staff members continued on http://fraser.stlouisfed.org Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis 174 Lubin: M eeting Emergency Dem ands an informal basis until June 1940, when a formal advisory relationship was established. Perkins and Lubin set the keynote for the relationship. Perkins saw this avenue o f exchange o f information as helping trade unions “to make contributions to the . . . solving o f the industrial problem and the economic problem o f the nation as a whole.” Lubin urged the importance o f continuing the relationship “so that we will have direct access to the people who are using our data.”81 Annual conferences were held between 1940 and 1944. A stand' ing committee was appointed each year and there were frequent dis cussions o f the concerns o f the research directors. The arrangement worked satisfactorily under Hinrichs until it came to an abrupt end in the midst o f the controversy over the costof-living index. Lubin and Hinrichs depart Lubin resigned as Commissioner o f Labor Statistics in January 1946, giving “personal obligations” as his reason for leaving government service. President Truman accepted his resignation but stated that he would continue to regard him “as a public servant whom I shall feel free to call upon whenever the occasion warrants___ For 13 years you have, without hesitation, given o f your time and energy to the service o f your government. You built up the Bureau o f Labor Statistics into an institution that has commanded the respect o f all recognized lead ers in the field o f economics and statistical science, as well as o f labor and management throughout the country.”82 Truman shortly appointed Lubin as the U .S. representative to the U N Economic and Social Council. In 1955, New Y>rk Governor Averell Harriman called on Lubin to serve as State Industrial Com missioner. In 1960, Lubin joined the economics faculty at Rutgers University. He served as economic consultant to the Kennedy and Johnson administrations, and to the Twentieth Century Fund. Lubin died in 1978 at the age o f 82. Ford Hinrichs had continued as Acting Commissioner during 1945 at the request o f Secretary Perkins’ successor, Lewis Schwellenbach. He had considered resigning when press reports cited the new Secretary as being critical o f BLS, but Schwellenbach denied these as inaccurate and persuaded him to stay on. In September 1945, http://fraser.stlouisfed.org Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis 175 The First H undred Years Schwellenbach indicated he would recommend Hinrichs for the com ' missionership when Lubin left.83 O n Lubin’s resignation the following January, Philip Murray of the C IO submitted the name o f Murray Latimer for the commission' ership. A FL President William Green and some railway officials also supported Latimer. Som e press reports indicated that Hinrichs was being replaced by a union-supported candidate; the cost-of-living con' troversy o f 2 years earlier figured prominently in these stories and editorials.8* There was a groundswell o f support o f Hinrichs from the profes sional and academic community. Lubin urged Schwellenbach to nomi nate Hinrichs, advising, “Failure to nominate Hinrichs will, in my opinion, be grossly unfair to him as well as an admission by this administration that it has no faith in the Bureau.” He also stressed that the commissionership had never been considered a political posi tion.85 Wesley M itchell and Frederick C . M ills reiterated the findings o f their technical committees on the Bureau’s “highly competent” work under Hinrichs on the cost-of-living index, in the face o f the “extraordinarily difficult” wartime conditions. M itchell’s description o f Hinrichs’ performance was characteristic: “H is courage in countering the criticisms made by the labor union statisticians commanded my respect H e is a man o f rare competence in his field and o f rare integrity.”86 H inrichs again considered resigning but, at the urging o f the Bureau staff, stayed on to avoid serious consequences to the Bureau’s budget and operations. Schwellenbach also requested that he stay, again stating that his personal preference was to nominate Hinrichs, but that this was not immediately possible. In May, Hinrichs indicated that he could not appear before the Appropriations Committee in support o f crucial postwar budgetary actions unless there were assur ances that the forthcoming selection o f the Commissioner would be based on professional competence and not on support by a special interest group. Schwellenbach responded in terms proposed by Hinrichs, giving “my full assurance that I will not recommend to the President the name o f any person concerning whose professional competence and integrity there will be the slightest doubt, and that such recommendation will only be made after consultation with the President o f the American Economic Association and the American Statistical Association.”87 http://fraser.stlouisfed.org Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis 176 Lubin: M eeting Emergency Dem ands O n July 1, 1946, Hinrichs tendered his resignation to Schwellenbach. In it, he noted that he had continued to maintain satisfactory informal relations with a number o f unions, and that the establish' ment o f a formal consultation procedure required careful consider' ation, one o f the im portant problem s calling for the prom pt appointment o f an excellent Commissioner. In accepting the resigna' tion, Schwellenbach acknowledged that Hinrichs’ appointment as Commissioner unow is not possible.” H e reiterated his assurance of the selection o f the next Commissioner, “given as the result o f firm conviction on my part that the Bureau o f Labor Statistics shall be free and independent and one upon which everyone can rely.”88 A t a press conference on his retirement, Hinrichs stressed the importance of maintaining the Bureau’s nonpolitical and impartial position: “\b u can’t run this organization under any political obligation from the outside. The man must be selected from the inside for his ability and competence. Later he should be cleared with the unions to be sure he enjoys their confidence.”89 The search for the new Commissioner was already underway, with Edwin E. Witte o f the University o f W isconsin canvassing the professional associations regarding the several men under consider' ation. By the end o f July, there was agreement on Ewan Clague.90 Hinrichs subsequendy served in the Economic Cooperation Administration and its successor agencies, as statistical adviser to the governments o f Pakistan and Taiwan, and, later, as Director o f Gradu ate Business Studies at Syracuse University. He died in 1979. http://fraser.stlouisfed.org Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis 177 Chapter VII. Ewan Clague: An Expanding Role for Economic Indicators E wan Clague took office in August 1946, a difficult time for the Bureau. T he legacy o f wartime controversies, the appointment o f a new Secretary o f Labor, and the departure o f Lubin and Hinrichs had created a stressful transition. Then the sweep o f the Republican Party in the fall congressional elections brought government budget reductions in which the Bureau shared heavily. About 700 o f its 1,700 employees had to be dismissed, a loss which removed a generation o f middle management personnel. The economy also was undergoing the strains o f transition. With the end o f the war, as workers faced reduced earnings and uncertainty over employment prospects, labor-management difficulties mounted, leading to the highest strike activity on record in 1946. The onset of inflation in 1947 after the removal o f price controls intensified the economic uncertainty. New opportunities as well as problems accompanied Clague into office. With passage o f the Employment Act o f 1946, Congress had created two agencies—the Council o f Economic Advisers in the Exec utive Branch and the congressional Joint Economic Committee— which were to introduce the regular scrutiny o f economic indicators http://fraser.stlouisfed.org Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis 178 C lague: An Expanding Role for Economic Indicators to the highest levels o f policymaking and thus heighten the impor tance of the Bureau’s work. Further, the innovative agreement between General M otors and the United Auto W orkers in 1948 calling for the use of the Consum er Price Index and productivity measures for adjusting wages increased public concern with the Bureau’s statistics. The growing use o f statistics for government and private actions affecting millions o f Americans was the subject o f the 1952 presiden tial address to the American Statistical Association by Aryness Joy W ickens, the Bureau’s Deputy Commissioner. She warned that the statistical profession was “scarcely prepared, and certainly not organ ized, to meet the serious responsibilities placed upon us by these new uses o f statistics.” She contrasted these “awesome” uses with the purely descriptive and analytical purposes for which they were cre ated, and called upon the statistical and related professions not merely to be competent, fair, and honest, but “to be able to prove to a statistically unsophisticated public that, in fact, our statistics are trust worthy.”1 Maintaining public confidence was a paramount consideration for Clague as he adapted and extended the Bureau’s programs to meet changing needs during his long tenure. Almost immediately upon his appointment, he established formal advisory relations with the trade unions; contacts with the unions had been curtailed as a result o f the wartime controversy over the cost-of-living index. And shortly there after, following expressions o f interest from business organizations, he formed a business advisory committee. The committees consisted pri marily o f technicians in the fields o f economics, statistics, and labor relations. Clague later suggested that it was through their experience with these advisory groups that General M otors and the Auto Work ers gained sufficient confidence in the Bureau’s statistics to adopt the CPI for wage escalation in 1948.2 Clague’s success in keeping the Bureau’s statistics trustworthy was attested by the findings o f the various commissions, committees, and teams o f experts which examined the Bureau during his many years in office and upheld the integrity and impartiality o f its work. http://fraser.stlouisfed.org Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis 179 The First Hundred Years The sixth Commissioner Commissioner Clague came to office as a trained economist and an experienced civil servant, an outsider but one with roots and connec tions in the Bureau. H is ties with the Bureau extended back some 20 years when he had joined the BLS staff to conduct pioneering produc tivity studies. In the early 1930’s, he had participated in major exami nations o f Bureau activities, serving on President Hoover’s Advisory Committee on Employment Statistics and Secretary Perkins’ Advisory Committee to the Secretary o f Labor. Clague was bom in Prescott, Washington, in 1896, the son of immigrants from the Isle o f Man. He attended the University of Washington and, after serving as an ambulance driver during World War I, moved on to the University o f W isconsin where he studied under John R. Commons. O n Commons’ recommendation, Commis sioner Ethelbert Stewart brought him to the Bureau in 1926 to help develop productivity indexes. W hen that project ended, Clague worked under W.A. Berridge at the M etropolitan Life Insurance Company. He then joined the Insti tute o f Human Relations at Yale University, where he studied the effects on workers o f the shutdown o f rubber mills in Hartford and New Haven. He moved to Philadelphia as Director o f Research and Professor o f Social Research at the Pennsylvania School o f Social Work. W hile in Philadelphia, he made a number o f studies for the Lloyd Committee on Unemployment Relief and the Philadelphia County Relief Board. In 1936, Clague returned to Federal employment, serving first as Associate Director o f Research and Statistics o f the new Social Secur ity Board and then as Director. In 1940, he became Director o f the Bureau o f Employment Security, a post he held until his appointment as Commissioner o f Labor Statistics. The Bureau’s role Clague gave as his first priority for the Bureau in 1947 “maintenance o f the many recurrent statistical series,” but he also noted the Bureau’s continuing responsibility for a wide variety o f comprehensive investi gations dealing with many phases o f American labor and industry. http://fraser.stlouisfed.org Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis 180 C lague: A n Expanding Role for Economic Indicators And he referred to the Bureau's role as a special statistical service agency for Congress and other government agencies.3 H oover Com m ission Early in his administration, Clague's view o f the role o f the Bureau was affirmed and strengthened by the findings o f the Hoover Commission—the Commission on Organization o f the Executive Branch o f the Government—established by Congress in 1947. The commission was set up to examine the amalgam o f emergency agencies and expanded programs developed under the New Deal and during the war, with the charge to recommend organizational arrangements to provide economy, efficiency, and improved service. The commission called on the National Bureau o f Economic Research for a study o f the various statistical agencies, which was conducted by Frederick C . M ills and Clarence D. Long. Mills and Long praised the cooperative program in which the Bureau, the Social Security Administration, and the State agencies joined to produce the employment statistics. They also spoke well o f the reimbursable work the Bureau performed for other agencies which solved some problems o f overlapping jurisdiction. However, they pointed out duplication in other areas and noted the competition between BLS and the Bureau o f the C ensus over the monthly report on the labor force.* The commission generally accepted the recommendations o f the National Bureau. It called on the Office o f Statistical Standards in the Bureau o f the Budget to designate the responsibilities and fields of operation o f each o f the major special-purpose statistical agencies. Census was recommended as the service agency for the primary col lection and tabulation o f statistics on a repetitive basis "for which highly specialized knowledge o f the subject matter is not required in the collection process." For the special role o f BLS, the commission recommended transfer to the Bureau o f the "prevailing wage” surveys conducted by other agencies in setting the pay o f government bluecollar workers.3 Clague wrote the U nder Secretary that the Bureau stood to gain from the recommendations and urged that he take action to secure the prevailing wage and labor force surveys. O n the other hand, he strongly opposed any transfer to Census o f responsibility for collect ing statistics on the volume o f construction, rents, or food prices.** http://fraser.stlouisfed.org Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis 181 The First Hundred Years The Bureau in a growing Department The Hoover Commission also provided support for the growth o f the Department o f Labor over the following decade. Following the com mission’s recommendations to restore lost functions and delegate new responsibilities to the Department, Congress transferred three agen cies into the Department from the Federal Security Administration— the U .S. Employment Service, the Bureau o f Unemployment Com pensation, and the Employees’ Compensation Appeals Board. The reorganization also strengthened the Secretary’s authority over all the Department’s agencies. Clague supported the reorganization and saw it as a formalization o f existing operating relationships between the Bureau and the Secretary’s office. Soon after Secretary M itchell's appointment in 1953, he set up a team o f consultants to evaluate the Department’s programs, adminis tration, and organization. The team included J. Douglas Brown of Princeton University; Clark Kerr o f the University o f California; Eli Ginzburg o f Colum bia University; and Cyrus Ching, former Director o f the Federal Mediation and Conciliation Service. Reporting late in 1954, the consultants made extensive recom mendations on the Departm ent's programs. For BLS, they called for enhancement o f the Bureau's series, increased appropriations for its work, and the designation o f the Commissioner as the Secretary’s chief statistical adviser. But, in commenting on the role o f the Bureau in the Department, they observed that, while the Bureau devoted much o f its efforts to the development o f statistical materials which had some bearing on important departmental programs, “it has also proceeded in terms o f its history, traditions, and inclinations, with the result that much o f its work is not closely geared into the major programs o f the D epartm ent”7 For better coordination within the Department, the consultants recommended the establishment o f a Committee on Statistics and Research, to be headed by the U nder Secretary. The committee would centralize decisionmaking and work towards eliminating duplication in statistical work. The committee was established but apparently met only twice. M itchell did make Clague his statistical adviser, as recom mended.8 M itchell gave his own view o f the Bureau in an article which followed the consultants’ report. He pointed to the “high regard” and “fine reputation” which the Bureau had earned with employers, work http://fraser.stlouisfed.org Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis 182 C lague: An Expanding Role for Economic Indicators ers, and the general public. But he also stressed that “facts and figures must meet the growing needs o f the country and the economy” and cautioned against “stagnation and self-satisfaction,” concluding, “O ur goal must be constantly to increase the usefulness o f the work o f the Bureau o f Labor Statistics to all our people.”9 A t various times, Department officials suggested the establish' ment o f a periodical which would absorb the Bureau's periodical, the Monthly Labor Review, arguing for a “popular” journal representing all the Department’s activities. In 1957, following the report o f another team o f consultants which had stated, “We have encountered frequent expressions o f hope that the M LR could be made more flexible and provocative o f new ideas,” George C . Lodge, Director o f the Depart ment's Office o f Information, proposed recasting the Review as the Department’s monthly periodical.10 Clague, expressing the view o f the BLS executive staff, opposed the proposal on the grounds that it was inappropriate for the Office o f Information to direct a research joum aL The U nder Secretary accepted this view while directing that the Review planning board include representatives from other agencies in the Department, which should be encouraged to publish in the Review. He later established a departmental publications committee to set general guidelines and provide oversight.11 The issue o f making the Review a departmental publication arose again in the 1960's during a comprehensive review o f departmental publications for reducing costs. In January 1964, Secretary Wirtz advised the Director o f the Bureau o f die Budget, “The Monthly Labor Review, heretofore a BLS publication, is being made a departmental publication.” The move, he said, would save money by eliminating pressure for new periodicals and facilitating the consolidation o f existing releases and rep o rts.12 A ssistant Secretary Daniel Patrick Moynihan, as chairman o f the Department’s advisory committee on publications, pursued the idea through various formulations. In December 1964, he reported to the Secretary's staff meeting that “a new proposal” had been developed “for transfer o f the Monthly Labor Review" to the Office o f the A ssis tant Secretary for Policy, Planning and Research. The Review, Moyni han argued, had become too closely associated with BLS and faced the danger o f humming isolated from the rest o f the Department.1^ http://fraser.stlouisfed.org Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis 183 The First H undred Years Clague successfully opposed such a shift, charging that it would ruin the Review’s reputation for objectivity, as it would become a policy and program organ for the Department. He did accede, how ever, to the creation o f an expanded planning and advisory committee to counsel the Commissioner and the editor. Meanwhile, the Department was expanding as Congress, con cerned with manpower and labor relations issues in the late 1950’s, passed the Welfare and Pension Plans Disclosure Act in 1958 and the Labor-Management Reporting and Disclosure A ct in 1959—legislation for which the Bureau had conducted much o f the early research. To administer the 1959 act, the Department created the Bureau o f Labor Management Reports. B LS proposed a broad program o f labor-man agement research, but the Commissioner o f the new bureau decided instead to encourage private research by universities, a position from which BLS could not move him .14 In 1962, when the establishment o f the Labor-Management Serv ices Administration was under consideration in Secretary Arthur J. Goldberg’s term, Clague again asserted the Bureau's role in basic factfinding in the field o f labor-management relations. Later on, the Bureau was called upon for support services on a reimbursable basis.15 The formation o f new agencies within the Department aroused heated controversy over jurisdiction, especially after the creation of the Office o f Manpower, Automation, and Training and passage o f the Manpower Development and Training A ct o f 1962. In 1963, Clague put the issue in stark terms. In referring to a draft o f a departmental order establishing the Manpower Administration, he expressed the belief that BLS “has a most vital role to play in making certain that the new organization operated successfully” but that the proposed order “appears to be an attempt to restrict severely the role o f this Bureau.” Continuing, he posed the choice: The new agency could be primarily a coordinating and promotional organization or it could combine coordination with substantive research responsibilities. If the Depart ment chose the latter, he argued, it faced the prospect that the agency would arrogate to itself “functions, personnel, and budget to the detriment o f other Bureaus in the Department.”16 A s Robert J. Myers, Clague's Deputy Commissioner, described it later, the discussions resulted in an improved, although not entirely satisfactory, statement o f BLS responsibilities. The establishment in 1964 o f the Coordinating Committee on Manpower Research “has http://fraser.stlouisfed.org Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis 184 C lague: An Expanding Role for Economic Indicators been quite useful in resolving jurisdictional questions and other problems that have arisen.” Congress also had become concerned about jurisdictions, and a subcommittee o f the House Appropriations Committee asked for a comprehensive statement from the Department. In February 1964, in “Programs in Manpower Research and Statistics,” the Department laid out the responsibilities o f the various agencies.17 With the launching o f the “war on poverty” in 1964, the Depart ment again gained new responsibilities, To meet the policy and admin istrative needs o f the poverty programs, it called on the Bureau for data on the characteristics o f the unemployed and the nature and extent o f poverty. The Department considered cutting funds for the Bureau’s regular programs, presumably without eliminating “abso lutely essential economic data,” to provide the resources for concen trating on the problem o f unemployment.18 The Bureau did establish an Office o f Economic Research to examine such social issues as poverty and the condition o f minorities. The office contributed sub stantially to Assistant Secretary Moynihan’s much publicized report on the Negro family. In 1965, the Department proposed another survey o f BLS admin istrative procedures and programs. Clague asked for emphasis on the program aspect o f the study, stressing that, for many years, the Bureau had faced competing demands from the Department o f Labor, other Federal agencies, Congress, and the general public. The strain on the Bureau’s resources had been intensified, Clague stated, by employ ment ceilings and limitations on average salaries and the number o f supervisory personnel.19 A study was conducted by the management consultant firm o f Booz-Allen and Hamilton, who later reported that Department offi cials had become “quite critical o f the Bureau’s capacity to respond to current economic and manpower problems and to supply innovative program ideas for their solution.” Therefore, the report called for a “thoroughgoing examination o f the Bureau with the objective o f bringing its product more in line with the thrust and emphasis o f current lines o f social and economic advance.”20 The climate within the Department at the time is suggested by Secretary W illard Wirtz’s final report, for fiscal 1968, which provided an assessment o f the Department’s policies, programs, and administra tion over his 5-year term. The activist emphasis in the manpower http://fraser.stlouisfed.org Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis 185 The First Hundred "Years program is evident in the following excerpt from his report: “Infinitely more than before, most o f the gain was atmospheric, attitudinal: reflected in the identification o f a 'manpower program’ instead o f an ‘employment service,’ in attacking not just ‘unemployment’ (as an economic fact) but ‘poverty* (which is human) and in striking (even if only for one administrative generation) the phrase ‘labor market* from the Department lexicon. It was, in any event, the unifying and dignify' ing theme in the history o f the Department o f Labor, 1963 to 1968, that wage earners—and those seeking that status—are people. Not statistics, not drones.**21 Wirtz’s appraisal o f the administration o f the Department also commented on the relationship between the “two governments’* in the Federal Executive Branch—the political and the professional. It concluded: “(1) that a stronger central executive authority over both ‘policymaking* and ‘operations’ was required, and (2) that better com ' munications had to be developed between the two governments.** A s Wirtz described the communications problem, particularly in regard to research activities, “Various efforts to develop a flow o f ideas and suggestions up the lines have been largely unsuccessful. The prevailing notion is still that what is asked for will be supplied, but that volunteering anything is not worthwhile. Attempts by the Secre tary’s office to draw on the ideas incubating in the Bureau o f Labor Statistics and in the research unit o f the Manpower Administration are still disappointing. A first staff draff o f testimony for a congres sional committee hearing is characteristically sterile. **22 Although these criticisms reflected the dissatisfaction o f top pol icy officials with the Bureau’s stance, and its position in the Depart ment in terms o f staff and budget was relatively diminished, the Bureau’s reputation for integrity and technical competence was secure. The Bureau’s work Employment and unemployment statistics The Bureau had published national employment figures since 1916, based on surveys o f payrolls o f a sample o f nonfarm establishments. In 1945, as part o f the reconversion statistics program, the Bureau began to develop a national series that would yield estimates for each State. In some States, State agencies collected the data; in others, BLS http://fraser.stlouisfed.org Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis 186 Clague: An Expanding Role for Economic Indicators regional offices compiled the figures. All the data were sent to Wash ington for construction o f the national series. However, with the budget cuts o f 1947, the Bureau shifted to complete compilation by State agencies under cooperative agreements. By 1949, all States were participating. BLS provided the technical guidance and standards and reimbursed the State agencies for half the direct personnel cost of the program. The Bureau o f Employment Security also shared in the cost. In 1954, the program took over from the Federal Reserve Board the preparation o f seasonally adjusted esti mates of employment.23 Another source o f data on employment was the monthly survey o f the labor force, a survey o f households which the Census Bureau had conducted since 1942. This survey, unlike the payroll survey, provided a direct measure o f unemployment as well as employment. Increasingly, the publication and analysis o f data from these two surveys, differing in concept and method, caused confusion and con troversy. The substantial rise in unemployment in 1953 focused atten tion on the lack o f coordination between the different agencies responsible for the figures. The matter came to a head when the Census Bureau had to reduce and restructure its survey program because o f a cut in funds, and discrepancies cropped up even between its own new and old unemployment figures. Noting these difficulties, the American Federation o f Labor urged that BLS be given responsibility for the unemployment count, con cluding, “We believe issuance by the Bureau o f Labor Statistics o f a single figure based upon statistically sound procedure will restore confidence in the measurement o f unemployment and bring to an end the present uncertainty.” The Joint Economic Committee called for better coordination and the Council o f Economic Advisers also expressed concern. The confusion contributed to the formation o f the Federal Statistics U sers’ Conference.24 The controversy also gave momentum to efforts to issue a joint monthly news release, a course urged, for example, by W ickens and Clague in February 1954. Secretary o f Labor Mitchell and Secretary of Commerce Weeks agreed to a unified release, planned with the assist ance of the Council o f Economic Advisers and the Bureau of the Budget. The new report on employment and unemployment appeared in May 1954 with data for April. For the next 5 years, representatives http://fraser.stlouisfed.org Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis 187 The First Hundred Years o f BLS, the Bureau o f Employment Security, and the Census and Budget Bureaus met monthly to produce the release.25 A lso in 1954, the Bureau moved to establish a Federal-State cooperative program for labor turnover statistics. For a number of years, BLS had published a national series based on turnover rates for selected industries which reported directly to the Bureau. U nder the new agreements, as in the employment statistics program, the State agencies collected the data and transmitted the figures for the national series to BLS; BLS provided guidance and money; and the Bureau of Employment Security also allocated funds. The system proved popu lar, producing figures useful in both analysis and operations, and within 10 years all States were participating. The recession o f 1957-58 again stirred criticism o f the occasional divergence o f the figures o f the various agencies in the unemployment release, and, in 1959, BLS finally achieved a long-sought goal. Secre tary Mitchell negotiated an exchange between BLS and Census in which BLS gained responsibility for financing and analyzing the household survey (Current Population Survey) and publishing the results, while Census took over the BLS surveys on housing and construction activity.26 Census continued to conduct the Current Population Survey under a contract with BLS. That same year, BLS instituted a formal press conference to release the monthly employ ment and unemployment figures. With recurrent recessions, pressure mounted for a reexamination o f the whole program o f employment and unemployment statistics. In November 1959, the A FL-CIO complained that part-time and dis couraged workers did not appear in the monthly totals and that, moreover, a national figure masked conditions in the severely depressed areas. In May 1960, Senator Gale W. M cGee o f Wyoming, speaking for the Senate Special Committee on Unemployment Problems, supported the BLS request for increased appropriations to expand surveys and conduct studies, citing the need for data on parttime and discouraged workers; on frictional, structural, and cyclical causes o f unemployment; on the composition o f the labor force; and on the effect o f foreign trade on employment.27 Unemployment became a major issue in the 1960 election cam paign. W hen organized labor and the Democrats blamed the incum bent Republicans for the high rate, Secretary Mitchell responded by pointing to the record level o f employment and arguing that teenagers http://fraser.stlouisfed.org Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis 188 C lague: An Expanding Role for Economic Indicators and those idled for short periods added considerably to the count of unemployed. Both Senator Henry M. Jackson o f Washington, chair' man o f the Democratic National Committee, and George Meany, president o f the A FL'C IO , asked the Department to release the O cto ber figure before the general election. Mitchell refused, saying that the normal schedule would call for a later release date.2® However, the October unemployment figure did became public before the election. Bernard D. Nossiter, writing in The Washington Post on November 3, 1960, noted that, in fact, in 1954, 1956, and 1958, President Eisenhower had announced favorable figures before the voting. Then Nossiter stated—correctly, as it turned out—that unemployment had reached 6.4 percent, the highest since the reces sion year o f 1958.29 Clague promised a review o f procedures “to develop better ways o f keeping the confidentiality o f the data under better control.” And, during 1961, the Department began announcing the release dates for each month a year in advance.3® With unemployment mounting to almost 7 percent in 1961, Sec retary o f Labor Arthur J. Goldberg proposed various legislative pro grams to deal with the unemployment problem, focusing even more attention on the BLS figures. In the fall o f 1961, Reader’s Digest published an article accusing the Department o f manipulating the data, charging that the Bureau exaggerated the figures to build support for the legislative agenda.31 This prompted the Joint Economic Com mittee to call hearings and moved President Kennedy to establish the President’s Committee to Appraise Employment and Unemployment Statistics. U nder the chairmanship o f Robert A. Gordon o f the U ni versity o f California, the committee made an extensive study o f techni cal and program issues, including concepts and definitions, sampling, seasonal adjustment, State and local statistics, labor force dynamics, and comparison and reconciliation o f the various series. The Gordon Committee report, Measuring Employment and Unemployment, was issued in 1962. O n the charge o f manipulation, the committee "unanimously and categorically concluded that doubt concerning the scientific objectivity o f the agencies responsible for collecting, processing, and publishing employment and unemploy ment statistics is unwarranted.’’ The committee commended the Bureau for its policy o f publishing release dates in advance, but it also called for a sharper distinction between the release o f the statistics, http://fraser.stlouisfed.org Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis 189 The First Hundred Years with technical explanation and analysis, and policy-oriented comment, stressing the need to “publish the information in a nonpolitical con text.”32 For the household survey, the Gordon Committee also recom mended implementation o f sharper definitions and collection of more data on persons not in the labor force. It suggested developing ques tions to determine if a person had taken specific jobseeking steps within a definite time period and that BLS publish data on those working part time and whether that was voluntary. For the establishment survey, the committee called for improve ments in the benchmark data, strengthened sampling techniques, and preparation o f estimates o f standard error. In addition, the committee urged improvement o f State and local statistics and development of job vacancy and occupational employment series.33 In January 1963, BLS and the Bureau o f the Census added ques tions to the Current Population Survey designed to refine information concerning family relationships and availability for part-time work. In addition, BLS and Census undertook several research programs to develop and test other proposed changes. Early in 1963, following up on the committee recommendation for a greater separation between technical explanations and policyoriented comment, the Department announced that Bureau profes sionals would release the figures and that administration officials would make separate political statements. Clague was obliged to protest to Secretary Wirtz on several occa sions when President Johnson commented on favorable employment figures before their official release. O n one such occasion, Gardner Ackley, Chairman o f the Council o f Economic Advisers, wrote mem bers o f the W hite House staff urging them to avoid “accidental prema ture” release and to respect the BLS procedures as recommended by the G ordon Committee, thus avoiding any political implications.3* Job vacancy statistics Beginning in the 1950’s, BLS conducted several studies to determine the feasibility o f collecting statistics on job vacancies—twice at the urging o f Arthur Bum s, Chairman o f the Council o f Economic Advis ers. In 1956, the Bureau surveyed about 100 plants to determine whether such information was available. Since only six were maintain ing job vacancy data, it was found impractical to initiate a program.35 http://fraser.stlouisfed.org Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis 190 Clague: An Expanding Role for Economic Indicators In the early 1960’s, Bum s returned to the idea, supported by a recommendation from the G ordon Committee, and in 1964 the Bureau again undertook feasibility studies. Clague personally surveyed programs in Israel and Great Britain, and the Division o f Foreign Labor Conditions investigated reporting systems in Great Britain, the Netherlands, West Germany, and Sweden. In the summer o f 1964, Secretary Wirtz proposed to the President and received approval for a series o f pilot surveys on job vacancies in 20 labor market areas. BLS cooperated with the Bureau o f Employment Security and State agen cies to conduct the surveys, after which it concluded that collection was feasible and technical problems could be solved.36 The National Bureau o f Economic Research and the National Industrial Conference Board actively supported the effort with their own conferences and projects. However, some criticisms o f the pro gram were voiced. The Bureau o f the Budget, for example, objected to the combining o f operating and statistical programs, the increased reporting burden on employers, and the high cost and hasty plan ning.37 The BLS Business Research Advisory Committee pointed to diffi culties in establishing objective definitions and in obtaining accurate reports from employers and strongly opposed collaboration with the Bureau o f Employment Security. The BLS Labor Research Advisory Committee expressed similar concern for defining terms and concepts and argued that vacancy statistics would be misused to “deflate” unem ployment figures. The AFL-CIO opposed increased appropriations for the program, calling instead for continued research and investigation at the current level o f funding.38 Secretary Wirtz responded to the allegation that the program provided “a device to centralize control o f all job hiring in the U .S. Employment Service or to police compliance with Title V II o f the Civil Rights A ct o f 1964.” He stated that workers would be referred to employers only in response to a specific request, as in the past. The program, as Wirtz expressed it, had only one purpose—“to help reduce the still-too-high burden o f unemployment on all sectors of our society.”39 The request to expand the program was not approved by C on gress, but the Bureau continued the experimental program and explored additional techniques. http://fraser.stlouisfed.org Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis 191 The First Hundred Years Labor force studies The many demands for new measurements and for improvements in concepts and methodology reflected increasing concern for man' power, or labor resource, issues. In the mid-1950’s, analysts suggested that the traditional cyclical problems o f the economy were being compounded by long-term structural problems o f technological change and economic dislocation.40 Secretary Mitchell encouraged research directed at the changing composition o f the labor force, particularly the emerging problems o f youth. In 1955, the Department published O ur Manpower Future, 1955-1965, and, in 1960, its sequel, Manpower—Challenge of the Sixties. In 1960, the Bureau issued the results o f a joint study with the Department, School and Early Employ ment Experiences of Youth. Also, at the request o f the Senate Commit tee on Labor and Public Welfare, the Bureau updated and expanded Employment and Economic Status of Older Men and Women, which it had initially published in 1952. Moreover, BLS produced a number of studies as part o f the Department’s older worker program.41 In addition to its work on youth and older workers, BLS under took studies o f labor resource issues such as job mobility, the second ary labor force, labor surplus areas, and plant closings. Also, in line with its responsibility for the Monthly Report on the Labor Force, the Bureau began publishing data from the Current Population Survey on educational attainment, marital and family characteristics o f workers, and multiple jobholders, among other topics.42 Meanwhile, at the request o f the Armed Forces, the Bureau produced two projections o f military manpower requirements. It also conducted several surveys o f personnel resources in the sciences in cooperation with the Defense Department. Expanding activities in space research and technology, spurred by the Soviet challenge embodied in the launching o f Sputnik in 1957, increased the demand for such information. In 1959, the Bureau joined with the National Science Foundation to launch an annual canvass o f scientific and technical personnel.43 Consumer prices Soon after the war, as goods reappeared on store shelves, BLS adjusted the weights and components o f the Consum er Price Index. It also revised its calculations o f food prices and, during the postwar infla tionary surge, conducted special weekly telegraphic surveys o f food http://fraser.stlouisfed.org Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis 192 Clague: An Expanding Role for Economic Indicators prices for prompt release. However, as a result o f budget cuts in 1947, the Bureau dropped a number o f cities, eliminated some items, and reduced the frequency o f pricing.'** The Bureau was saved from a further slash in its appropriation the following year by the General M otors-United Auto W orkers con tract, which stipulated the use o f the Consumer Price Index for wage escalation. The importance o f the Bureau’s product to stability in this crucial industry was apparent even to congressional budget cutters. In 1949, Congress approved funds for a major revision o f the CPI. An important feature o f the revision was a survey o f dwelling units to correct for the acknowledged understatement o f the rental component o f the index arising from its failure to cover new units. The Bureau o f the Budget proposed that BLS contract with the Cen sus Bureau for the fieldwork in the dwelling unit survey, in line with the Hoover Commission recommendation that agencies use the Cen sus Bureau to collect primary data. In response, BLS pushed for formulation o f a govemmentwide policy and posed three specific objections: The loss o f training experience, the threat to confidential ity, and the delay the change would cause. Department support for the BLS position apparently settled the question for 20 years/5 Before the CPI revision was well underway, the outbreak o f the Korean War and the subsequent rapid inflation required a change in the Bureau’s plans. In October 1950, to avoid a repetition o f the World War II controversy over the use o f the CPI in adjusting wages, the Bureau announced a program for a temporary revision. It would draw on the field surveys already conducted on rents to ensure ade quate coverage o f new rental units and also on the results o f several continuing expenditure surveys conducted between 1947 and 1949. The Bureau held emergency discussions with its labor and busi ness advisory committees, as well as with the American Statistical Association’s technical advisory committee to BLS on prices. All agreed that the interim revision should produce improvements in the index, but there were differences on the particulars. The A SA and the business advisers suggested that the interim revised index should be linked to the existing series as o f January 1950; the labor advisers asked for June 1950 and also preferred a more comprehensive revi sion. The Bureau adopted the January 1950 linking date and issued the interim revised indexes in February 1951, reflecting revision o f city http://fraser.stlouisfed.org Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis 193 The First Hundred Years population weights, correction o f the rent index, addition o f new items, and revision o f market basket weights.46 Shortly thereafter, in April, the United Electrical, Radio and Machine W orkers, an unaffiliated union since its expulsion from the C IO for Communist domination, issued the “U E C ost o f Living Index,” threatening a repetition o f the World War II cost-of-living controversy and disruption o f the stabili2ation program. Attacking the “fundamental pro-employer, anti-labor character o f the BLS index,” the U E charged that the BLS index still had the shortcomings alleged in the earlier controversy and understated the substantially higher price level calculated by the union.47 A s a result o f the charges, the House Committee on Education and Labor established a special subcommittee to study the CPI, under the chairmanship o f Representative Tom Steed of Oklahoma. The subcommittee heard testimony from Bureau officials and a variety of government, academic, business, and union representatives, including members o f the Bureau’s advisory committees. The hearings became a comprehensive examination o f the development, concepts, construc tion, and use o f the CPI. The relationship between the interim revi sion and the comprehensive revision was brought out, and there was a full discussion o f the unresolved issues, including population coverage and the treatment o f taxes, housing costs, quality changes, and new products. Before the subcommittee issued its report, Soviet delegates to the U nited Nations Economic and Social Council in Geneva attacked the CPI, citing the U E report. U .S. delegate and former Commissioner Isador Lubin informed the Council o f the situation. And Clague, writing to Representative Steed, pointed to Communist attacks on cost-of-living indexes in several western countries and predicted their continued criticism o f such measures as part o f the “party line.”48 In its report, issued in O ctober 1951, the Steed subcommittee noted several technical problems with the CPI and made a number of suggestions, including the development o f estimates o f place-to-place differences, annual sample surveys o f family expenditures, and direct measures o f homeowner costs. The report specifically rejected the U E criticisms, stating that the index was “the most important single statis tic issued by the Government,” meriting “the widespread confidence which the users have expressed in it.” It concluded, “It is imperative http://fraser.stlouisfed.org Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis 194 C lague: An Expanding Role for Economic Indicators that adequate financial support be given to the Bureau o f Labor Statis tics for this work.”49 The Bureau came up against another problem when the time arrived to publish the new CPI and discontinue both the "interim index” and the “old series.” In January 1953, in issuing the figures for December 1952, Clague noted that this was the last appearance o f the old series, which had been published along with the interim index. The A FL, the railroad unions, and a number o f manufacturers called for continuation o f the old series to allow adequate time for parties to escalation agreements to convert to the new measure. The UAW, however, seeking to reopen the automobile contracts, opposed exten sion o f the old series; the automobile manufacturers supported exten sion. The dispute finally came to President Eisenhower, who directed BLS to carry the old series for another 6 months and provided the funds.50 Later in 1953, BLS introduced the revised CPI. It covered a modernized market basket and an increased number o f items. In addition, coverage had been expanded to include small urban places. Towns with a population as small as 2,500 were now included in the sample o f cities priced; previously, no cities with a population under 50,000 had been included. The treatment o f housing costs also had been changed. The Bureau previously had used the rent index to approximate all changes in the cost o f shelter, but, by 1950, 49 percent o f the wage-earner and clerical-worker families owned their homes—up from 30 percent at the time o f the previous survey in the 1930’s—and the homes were much better equipped with “m odem conveniences.” Therefore, the Bureau began to measure all items connected with acquisition and operation o f a home and calculated a housing index.51 The Bureau went to some lengths to make available to the public the detailed information from the consumer expenditure survey con ducted as part o f the revision program. W hen Congress rejected requests for appropriations to publish the results, the Bureau sought private financing and secured a grant from the Ford Foundation for work by the W harton School, which published 18 volumes o f statisti cal data.52 In 1953, to provide the opportunity for questions and clarifica tion o f the monthly CPI data, the Bureau began to hold a formal press conference for release o f the figures. http://fraser.stlouisfed.org Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis 195 The First Hundred Years In the late 1950’s, shifting demographic and buying patterns prompted renewed criticisms o f the CPI, especially as prices began to creep upward. Further, labor disputes in the steel industry, the 195758 recession, and debates over ‘‘administered” prices all focused atten tion on the index.53 Business economists, for example, complained that BLS included too many luxury items: “Actually, the index represents what the aver age urban family spends to live, not what it actually costs to supply its reasonable needs.” In the process, the critics continued, BLS ignored the bargain-hunting and substitution habits o f American consumers. They pointed to specific problem areas, such as treatment o f quality change and introduction o f new products.54 In view o f these and other concerns—and just as BLS was start ing another major revision—the Bureau o f the Budget sponsored a comprehensive review o f government price statistics by a committee o f the National Bureau o f Economic Research headed by George J. Stigler o f the University o f Chicago. The committee surveyed the Consum er Price Index, the W holesale Price Index, and the Indexes of Prices Received and Paid by Farmers, studying such technical aspects as weight revision, specification pricing, sampling, and seasonal adjust ment. In regard to the CPI, the committee discussed a broad range o f issues such as the basic concept, population coverage, and treatment o f quality change, government services, and taxes.55 The committee’s report, issued in 1961, recommended periodic weight revisions, increased use o f probability sampling, more prompt introduction o f new commodities, and more funds for research. The committee also advocated restructuring the W holesale Price Index and emphasizing actual transaction prices. A s a major field o f expan sion, the group suggested the need for export and import price indexes. For the CPI, the panel urged inclusion o f single persons and nonfarm rural workers and renewed the call for development o f a more comprehensive index for the entire population. Inclusion of single persons had been considered by BLS during planning for the 1953 revision but had been rejected because o f the great heterogeneity within that population group.56 The committee also recommended additional research on two controversial and complex aspects o f the CPI. First, it suggested that BLS investigate the feasibility o f constructing an index based on rental http://fraser.stlouisfed.org Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis 196 C lague: An Expanding Role for Economic Indicators housing units, but representative o f owner-occupied houses, which could be substituted for the homeownership components introduced in the previous revision. This prompted a union economist to argue that the homeownership components measured “prices prevailing in the marketplace” and that use o f a rental equivalent would introduce “subjective estimates.”57 The second research area concerned the committee’s recommen dation to modify the CPI “in the direction o f a welfare index”; that is, from the fixed-market-basket concept to the constant-utility or welfare or “true cost o f living” approach. The committee urged research to develop such an approach to account more accurately for the intro duction o f new products; changes in product quality, consumer tastes, and relative prices; and product substitution by consumers. W hile recognizing that the complexities involved might require die produc tion o f both the CPI and a “true cost o f living” index, the committee favored the continuous modification o f the CPI to the extent that a welfare index could be produced on a monthly basis. Clague and the Bureau staff opposed outright any alteration o f the CPI fixed market basket or replacement by a welfare index. They stressed the necessity o f maintaining the CPI as a pure price index in view o f the many purposes it served, arguing that hybridization by shifting toward the welfare concept would destroy “the usefulness o f the index as an acceptable, unambiguous measure o f change in consumer prices.” However, Clague saw a welfare index, if one could be developed, as complementary to the C P I.58 By the time the committee made its report, BLS was deep into its revision program, but it did incorporate some o f the committee’s ideas in the new index issued in March 1964. It expanded population cover age to include single-person families, introduced probability sampling techniques in selecting items for pricing, and developed a system for measuring sampling error. It also established a division o f price and index number research. And it returned to many o f the unresolved issues in planning for the next CPI revision in the late 1960’s.59 The usual local concerns arose during the planning for the 1964 revision. Writing to Clague in 1960, a top officer o f the Department pointed to a particular difficulty. Noting that 32 cities would be dropped in the new sample, he pointed out that 8 o f these were in districts which had Congressmen on the appropriations committee. “I have explored thoroughly the probability sampling technique, and I http://fraser.stlouisfed.org Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis 197 The First Hundred Years am not impressed by its purity to the extent that a little practicality cannot also be taken into consideration in the selection o f cities.” The official reminded the Commissioner o f “the problems we encountered when cities were changed as a result o f the last revision.”60 Many letters over the period concerned New Orleans, San Diego, Phoenix, Denver, and others. A s one response, BLS frequently tried to arrange for a local university to continue the work with BLS assistance. This avenue was used in responding to requests from Scranton and Portland in the early 1960’s, but, after much discussion, the Secretary directed BLS to continue those surveys itself. A t one point, in view o f the continuing controversies, Secretary Wirtz suggested eliminating all city indexes. In response, Clague noted that the national series depended on the city data, in that BLS first prepared the city indexes and then combined them to derive the national figure. The Commissioner recommended studying the issue in planning for the next comprehensive revision.61 Standard budgets In 1945, the House Appropriations Committee had directed BLS to determine the living costs o f workers in large cities and the differences between cities. In 1948, the Bureau published Workers’ Budgets in the United States, reporting “a modest but adequate standard o f living” for families o f 4 persons in 34 cities in 1946-47. BLS priced the budget several times before discontinuing it in 1951, when the list o f goods and the quantities had become obsolete. In 1959, Congress authorized BLS to update its standard budgets. The Bureau priced its revised list o f articles in the fall o f the year in 20 large cities then included in the Consum er Price Index, publishing interim budgets for a city worker’s family and a retired couple in 1960. Although based on a new list o f commodities, the revisions were considered interim because the basic data reflected patterns in the 1950 consumer expenditure survey, soon to be replaced by the I96061 survey. In 1963, recognizing the need to examine basic standard budget concepts while adjusting to the results o f the more recent survey, BLS established the Advisory Committee on Standard Budget Research with representatives from industry, labor, State agencies, and academic and private research organizations. Publication o f a new and greatly http://fraser.stlouisfed.org Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis 198 C lague: A n Expanding Role for Economic Indicators expanded series began in 1966 with City Worker’s Family Budget (Bub letin 1570'l).62 Wholesale prices During Clague’s tenure, the Bureau regularly produced three measures o f price movements in primary markets—the comprehensive monthly index, a weekly estimate o f trends in the monthly series, and a daily commodity index. The Bureau completely revised the monthly program in 1952 and changed weights in 1955, 1958, and 196L BLS had introduced the daily data for the Treasury Department during the 1930’s and developed them into a series covering 28 commodities. With the 1952 revision, it issued a new series reporting prices for 22 items, either raw materials or commodities very close to the initial stage o f production.63 In February 1952, BLS issued a revised W holesale Price Index. Assisted by the advisory committee o f the American Statistical Associ ation, the Interagency Price Committee o f the Bureau o f the Budget, and its own business research advisory committee, the Bureau more than doubled the number o f commodity series and shifted the base period from 1926 to an average o f 1947-49. In the process, BLS added new major groups, split other groups into their component parts, and added new special-purpose indexes. During the 1950’s, BLS twice developed industry-sector price indexes—in 1953 as part o f the input-output project and in 1959 for the Census Bureau. In its 1961 report, the Stigler Committee criticized the W holesale Price Index as having a universe that was never clearly defined, with ease of collection a major determinant o f which prices to include. To provide a more meaningful concept for economic analysis, the com mittee proposed a revision to achieve three major objectives: To cover every important sector o f the economy dealing in commodities; to provide maximum detail in price reporting; and to develop price indexes for the subgroups o f commodities most useful in economic analysis. After the Stigler Committee recommendation, BLS launched a program to develop a time series o f industry prices.64 Wages and industrial relations For many decades, BLS had conducted studies o f wage rates by occu pation and industry, but experience during World War II emphasized http://fraser.stlouisfed.org Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis 199 The First Hundred Years the need for local labor market data. Thus, after the war, industry surveys gave greatly increased attention to local area information. Following the budget cuts o f 1947, however, BLS severely reduced the number o f industry surveys and restructured the program to produce two types o f surveys: The longstanding industry surveys and a new series o f community or area surveys. The industry surveys provided data on occupational levels and trends for the Nation as a whole and regions, while the community surveys covered several occupations common to a number o f industries in a metropolitan area.65 In 1959, the Bureau announced a revamped and enlarged wage program. In the industry series, BLS proposed to cover 50 manufac turing and 20 nonmanufacturing industries on a regular cycle. The area program, previously limited to about 20 major labor markets, would be expanded to 80 areas chosen to represent all Standard M etropolitan Statistical Areas. A stimulus for this expansion was the proposal for a pay compara bility program for Federal civil service and postal employees which would require national data on white-collar salaries in private indus try. A n interagency committee established by the Bureau o f the Bud get concluded that the 80-area survey design was appropriate, and, in 1960, BLS conducted a survey o f professional, managerial, and clerical occupations. With the enactment o f the Federal Salary Reform A ct of 1962, this National Survey o f Professional, Administrative, Technical, and Clerical Pay, or "white collar” survey, was used as a basis for comparing the pay o f Federal and private sector employees.66 A lso as part o f the community wage survey program, BLS pro vided other Federal agencies with information to assist in determining rates for blue-collar workers. In the late 1940’s, concerned for duplica tion among various Federal wage-setting boards, the Bureau o f the Budget had suggested that BLS serve as the collecting agency in com munities where it made wage surveys. State and local governments used such data, too.67 The Bureau conducted a number o f studies on the effect o f the Federal minimum wage. After the rate rose from $0.40 to $0.75 per hour in January 1950, BLS worked with the Wage and H our and Public Contracts Divisions o f the Department on a project to survey the economic effects, covering industries such as southern sawmills, fertilizer, wood furniture, seamless hosiery, and men’s dress shirts. W hen the rate rose to $1.00 in 1956, the Bureau again cooperated in a http://fraser.stlouisfed.org Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis 200 C lague: An Expanding Role for Economic Indicators study. In the late 1950’s, the two agencies sponsored a broad program o f industry wage studies as part o f a continuing appraisal o f minimum wage legislation by the Wage and H our Division and Congress.68 Congress called on BLS for a special study o f earnings in retail trade to help in determining whether the industry should be covered by the Fair Labor Standards A ct and, if so, what the minimum rate should be. Congress acted to increase the minimum wage but did not extend coverage. BLS published the results o f its retail trade survey in late 1957.69 Health and other employee benefit plans were a growing area of study for the Bureau. During World War II and its aftermath, supple* mental or “fringe” benefits increasingly were used to raise workers’ pay. Wage controls restricted direct cash increases, and congressional failure to raise Social Security contributions prevented the system from providing health and other benefits. Therefore, labor unions pressed for health and welfare benefits in collective bargaining negotia tions. Early BLS benefit studies were largely descriptive rather than statistical. In the late 1940’s, the Bureau conducted several sample surveys o f health, insurance, and retirement plans as part o f a joint program with the Social Security Administration and the Public Health Service. In 1953, BLS contracted with the National Bureau of Economic Research for a feasibility study on supplementary benefits. By 1959, the Bureau had worked out technical and conceptual problems to begin a program on employer expenditures for supple mentary compensation. Starting with individual industries, reports later covered all employees in the private nonfarm sector. In the 1960’s, as benefits continued to grow in importance, the Council of Economic Advisers asked for more frequent and detailed surveys. With departmental support, BLS put forward a plan to expand and refine its program, which was pending on Clague’s retirement.70 In 1959,'when Congress passed the Welfare and Pension Plans Disclosure Act, BLS expressed concern over whether the administra tive regulations would assign the Bureau “responsibility for the con duct o f substantive research in the field o f employee benefits and pension plans, a responsibility which we now have and exercise in a modest way to the benefit o f the Department.’’71 Reports filed under the act with the Department’s Bureau o f Labor Standards provided a wealth o f information. In cooperation with Labor Standards, BLS http://fraser.stlouisfed.org Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis 201 The First Hundred Years launched a regular program o f sample studies o f pension and retire* ment plans filed. It also published digests o f health and welfare and pension plans derived from its industrial relations activities and analy ses o f collective bargaining agreements. The provision o f information on collective bargaining increased during Clague’s tenure. With the rapid increase in prices and wages after the war and the need for the most current information on collective bargaining developments, the Bureau began to issue a monthly report, Current Wage Developments, which listed by com pany and union the negotiated changes in wages and supplementary benefits. In 1953, the list was limited to agreements affecting 1,000 or more production and related workers. Beginning in 1954, a statistical summary o f wage changes was prepared on a quarterly basis to supple ment the listing. In 1959, another statistical summary was introduced covering changes in wages and benefits in manufacturing for both union and nonunion workers. The Bureau introduced a series o f wage chronologies in 1948, each providing detailed information on changes in wages and benefits o f a specific company and union, whether through collective bargain ing or unilateral management decisions. During the Korean emer gency, the Wage Stabilization Board found these and the Current Wage Developments reports particularly useful in their review o f wage settlements. Throughout the period, the Bureau maintained a file o f collective bargaining agreements, as required by Section 211 (a) o f the Labor Management Relations A ct o f 1947. Even before passage o f the act, BLS had begun publication o f in-depth studies on provisions o f collec tive bargaining agreements, the Bulletin 908 series, continuing through 19 collective bargaining subjects before ending in 1950. Hav ing issued many individual studies o f contract provisions in the meantime, BLS launched a major new series in 1964 with a study of grievance procedures in major collective bargaining agreements (Bulle tin 1425-1). In succeeding years, the Bureau produced studies on such subjects as severance pay, supplemental unemployment benefit plans, seniority, safety and health provisions, and wage-incentive provisions. Productivity and technology U nder Clague, the Bureau resumed its work on productivity indexes for selected industries which had been interrupted by the war. A new http://fraser.stlouisfed.org Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis 202 Clague: An Expanding Role for Economic Indicators program o f detailed industry reports, based on direct field surveys, supplemented the series. However, funding cuts in the early 1950’s forced the Bureau to drop field collection and to rely on available secondary sources. The General M otors-United Auto W orkers contract o f 1948, with its provision for wage adjustment based on an annual "improve* ment factor” as well as on the Consum er Price Index, was a major stimulus to the development o f productivity measures for the economy as a whole. It was also a harbinger o f the “guideposts” policy set forth by the Council o f Economic Advisers in the 1960’s. Both the Council and the Joint Economic Committee «p re sse d continuing interest in the measurement o f national productivity. The Bureau of the Budget and the A FL also pressed for such measures. The Bureau’s development o f productivity measures for the economy was a long and arduous process, partly because productivity measurement was a very sensitive area o f labor'management relations. Concern with the policy implications o f the figures, in addition to the novelty and complexity o f the technique and the lack o f adequate data, made for extended discussions with the Bureau’s business and labor advisory groups. One issue was the effect on collective bargaining o f comparisons between economywide productivity indexes and the productivity developments in specific industries, particularly in the automobile and steel industries. Both labor and management in the auto industry were critical o f the emphasis given to the broad meas ures, but the consensus within both o f the Bureau's advisory groups was finally that such productivity measures were needed. In 1955, the Bureau published its first productivity indexes for the manufacturing sector as a whole, reflecting the relationship o f output to man-hours o f production workers for the period 1939-53. Building on this experience, the Bureau worked toward development o f indexes for the total private economy. These were published in 1959, covering the period 1909-58.72 The importance o f productivity measurement was heightened in 1962, when the Council o f Economic Advisers, in its annual report to the President, offered wage and price guideposts for noninflationary behavior in collective bargaining, basing them on the Bureau’s data. The wage guidepost suggested was that “the rate o f increase in wage rates (including fringe benefits) in each industry be equal to the trend rate o f over-all productivity increase.” O n the price side, the Council http://fraser.stlouisfed.org Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis 203 The First Hundred Years suggested that price increases were warranted only if an industry’s productivity rose less than the average for the economy.73 The labor requirements program authorized by Congress in 1959 added a significant new project to the Bureau’s productivity work. In this program, BLS estimated the employment generated by—or labor hours required for—various types o f government, or governmentfinanced, construction, such as schools, hospitals, public housing, and college housing. This expanded the work begun in the 1930’s to measure the volume o f employment created by new construction.7* The role o f labor costs in international trade was another subject o f study for the Bureau. Increased competition in foreign trade, bal ance o f payments problems, the outflow o f gold, and other factors raised the question o f whether the U nited States was pricing itself out o f world markets. Bureau studies examined unit labor costs at home and abroad and the effects on collective bargaining and employment. A s part o f its activities, BLS also prepared materials for the "Kennedy Round" o f tariff negotiations. The Bureau was also called upon to study the effects of—and adjustments to—automation and technological change. It conducted a series o f case studies on the introduction o f automatic technology and also produced two major studies o f office automation. Then, for the President’s Advisory Committee on Labor Management Policy, it pre pared a major study on technological trends in 36 industries. The Bureau also studied retraining programs and published case studies of workers displaced by the new technologies. The continuing sensitivity o f the productivity issue in labormanagement relations was reflected in the Bureau’s difficulty in con ducting the automation studies despite the approval o f its advisory groups. Management in the railroad and automobile industries proved reluctant to arrange for them. And Clague wrote o f difficulties with union research directors who, feeling labor had an important stake in automation studies, demanded review o f texts, participating compa nies, and other aspects o f the work. In 1959, the research director of the A uto W orkers attacked the BLS “surrender to big business" in the development o f productivity materials, charging that the Bureau had succumbed to business pressures to “downgrade, obscure, and con ceal" the facts, urging the Joint Economic Committee to investigate.75 http://fraser.stlouisfed.org Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis 204 Clague: A n Expanding Role for Economic Indicators Industrial safety and health Continuing its long interest in industrial safety and health, BLS expanded its annual series o f injury-frequency and injury-severity measures covering manufacturing and nonmanufacturing industries, and its monthly series (collected quarterly) for manufacturing. By 1966, the annual program covered over 650 industries and industry groups, and the monthly (quarterly) covered 140 manufacturing and industry groups. BLS also conducted intensive studies o f injury rates and accident causes in selected industries, surveying about one indus try a year. Amendments to the Longshoremen’s and Harbor W orkers’ Compensation A ct passed in 1958 provided more work for BLS. These amendments authorized the Secretary o f Labor to issue regula tions protecting the health and safety o f employees, including require ments to maintain records. The Secretary delegated the administrative functions to the Bureau o f Labor Standards, and BLS acted as its agent in collecting and compiling data.76 International activities During the late 1940’s, the Bureau cooperated with various overseas projects o f the U .S. Government. W orking with the European Recov ery Program, it planned and conducted a number o f productivity studies and gave technical assistance to European governments for developing their own economic statistics. During 1950 and 1951, about 80 European labor statisticians took 3-month courses with BLS under arrangements made by the Organization for European Eco nomic Cooperation and the Economic Cooperation Administration. The Gift of Freedom, a Bureau publication which presented a wide range o f statistics on the economic and social status o f American workers, was reprinted in several foreign languages for distribution abroad.77 The Bureau published information on foreign labor conditions and statistics, introducing the monthly publication, Labor Developmerits Abroad, in 1956 and a series on labor law and practice in various countries in 1961. The Bureau also developed a considerable amount o f material in collaboration with the International Cooperation Administration/Agency for International Development, including descriptions o f labor conditions—primarily in developing countries— and a Foreign Labor Information Series. These were intended for the http://fraser.stlouisfed.org Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis 205 The First Hundred Years use o f Foreign Service staff, labor specialists assigned abroad, and participants in technical and exchange programs, as well as business men and others.78 BLS also developed several technical manuals, in cooperation with IC A /A ID , to help foreign countries develop statisti cal programs relating to consumer prices and the labor force.79 In the early 1960’s, BLS and the Department’s Bureau o f Interna tional Labor Affairs collaborated to publish Labor Digest, a series of brief notes on labor conditions around the world. Economic growth studies Since the 1930’s, BLS had worked with Wassily Leontief o f Harvard to develop “input-output" or interindustry analysis. Following the war, with W. Duane Evans heading the project, the Bureau projected employment patterns to 1950. Congress showed special interest in the BLS projections for steel, made in 1947. A t the initial request o f the National Security Resources Board and the military establishment, the Bureau joined a cooperative pro gram with other Federal agencies, universities, and research institu tions which was later financed by the A ir Force. A s part o f the project, BLS produced a 450-sector input-output table based on the 1947 Census o f M anufactures.8® During the Korean War, the program became controversial when some employers called it state planning, a step toward a planned economy. With the armistice, the new administration sought ways to cut the defense budget, and A ir Force funding was halted. Evans and BLS tried without success to arrange private financing for continuing studies. But in the late 1950*s there was renewed interest in inputoutput studies as a means o f analyzing economic problems.81 In 1962, the Bureau joined with other government agencies and private organizations in a wide-ranging program o f studies for the analysis and projection o f economic growth trends. The program represented an effort to develop a more comprehensive and integrated framework than had previously been available for analyzing the impli cations o f long-term economic growth, particularly the implications for employment. O ther participants in the research program included the Office of Business Economics o f the Department o f Commerce, the Depart ment o f Agriculture, the Bureau o f Mines of the Department o f the Interior, Harvard University, George Washington University, the http://fraser.stlouisfed.org Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis 206 C lague: An Expanding Role for Economic Indicators Council o f State Governments, and the National Planning Associa tion. Guidance was provided by an interagency coordinating commit tee consisting o f representatives from the Departments o f Labor and Commerce, the Budget Bureau, and the Council o f Economic Advis ers. The chairman o f the Council headed the committee.82 A s one aspect o f the research, BLS developed projections o f the industrial distribution o f employment based upon the input-output tables prepared by the Commerce Department. In late 1966, the Bureau published the 1970 projections o f demand, interindustry rela tionships, and employment developed by BLS and the other partici pating agencies.83 Administration Funding After recovering from the slash in fiscal year 1948, the Bureau’s regu lar appropriations for salaries and expenses showed litde if any increase in the early 1950’s. They began to rise in die late 1950’s, then grew substantially in the 1960’s with the expansion in the Bureau’s programs (table 6). Congress provided separate funds for two revisions o f the CPI within the period. O utside funds, also called working funds or intragovemmental advances and reim bursem ents, added considerably to Bureau resources as other agencies funded statistical work done on their behalf. Normally providing from 4 to 7 percent o f the Bureau’s total budget, these payments mounted during the Korean War and later, in the 1960’s, when the Department undertook new programs. The Atomic Energy Commission, the Air Force, the Office o f Naval Research, the National Security Resources Board, the Veterans Administration, and the National Science Foundation, among others, underwrote Bureau activities. Management A s had happened before in the Bureau’s history, in 1950 Congress had occasion to investigate complaints lodged by employees and for mer employees o f the Bureau. They alleged that the Division o f Prices and C ost o f Living “was overstaffed, poorly supervised, and steeped in an atmosphere o f employee discontent.” In the report presenting its findings, the House Subcommittee on Overstaffing in the Executive http://fraser.stlouisfed.org Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis 207 The First Hundred Years Table 6. Funding for Bureau o f Labor Statistics, 1947-65 (in thousands) F iscal year ended Ju n e 30 — Total1 Salaries an d expenses 1947 1948 1949 2$6,826 4,218 4,579 $6,268 3,945 4,362 1950 1951 1952 1953 1954 6,990 8,702 9,149 7,077 6,081 5,569 5,722 5,701 5,766 5,593 1955 1956 1957 1958 1959 5,974 6,802 7,481 8,159 8,597 5,441 6,407 6,875 7,463 7,989 1960 1961 1962 1963 1964 1965 11,394 13,350 15,970 17,655 19,831 20,373 10,520 11,118 12,667 14,590 16,345 18,542 •in cludes appropriation s for C P I revision (1950-52 and 1960-64) and m iscellaneous, w orking, and tru st funds. ^Includes $15,000 for a study o f conditions in H aw aii SOURCE: The Budget o f the United States Governm ent Departments and Agencies concluded that funds for the revision of the CPI had been “dissipated through gross overstaffing, inferior plan' ning, untrained supervision, and improvident administration.”8* Secretary Tobin immediately wrote the subcommittee chairman o f “the overall efficiency and economy o f the Division’s work” in turning out some o f the country’s “most important and most closely scrutinized statistics.” W hile challenging the charge o f dissipation of funds, Tobin acknowledged some problems o f administration, which had been compounded by congressional delay in funding. He stated that, after great effort, the revision program was now back on sched http://fraser.stlouisfed.org Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis 208 C lague: An Expanding Role for Economic Indicators ule, and was urgendy needed to avoid die controversy which had developed during World War II. Clague pointed out that an attitude survey had demonstrated that the vast majority o f BLS employees were satisfied. U pon assurance that the Bureau would improve its management, the matter was dropped.85 R econiirm adon Clague’s administration was interrupted for about a year when Secre tary M itchell proposed his reappointment for a third term in 1954. Since Clague was a legal resident o f Pennsylvania, his nomination required the assent o f both Pennsylvania Senators, but Senator Edward Martin, the senior Senator, objected. Senator M artin’s objection centered on two pieces o f information he had received about Clague’s activities in the early 1930’s—a news paper clipping quoting Clague as saying that the economic future of the country would be state socialism, and his contribution to a college which the Attorney General had later listed as a Communist institu tion. Delayed by M artin’s objection, the appointment also became entangled with difficulties surrounding the appointment o f another Department official, and confirmation proceedings were held up for almost a year. In the interim, Secretary Mitchell named Clague as his special assistant, and Aryness Joy W ickens, Clague’s Deputy Commis sioner, served as Acting Commissioner. A highly respected statistician, W ickens had had a long career in government before joining the Bureau in the late 1930’s. U nder Lubin, Hinrichs, and Clague, she had moved steadily upward, from C hief o f the Price Division to A ssistant Com m issioner to Deputy Commissioner. During the year o f Clague’s absence, the work o f the Bureau went on largely unaffected. In July 1955, Clague finally had his confirmation hearing, and he was able to reply to Senator M artin’s implied charge o f association with radical causes. He informed the committee that the remark quoted—from an extemporaneous speech—was intended as a chal lenge to the audience and not as an espousal o f socialism. H is contri bution ^o the college had been pledged in the 1920’s to help provide education for poor students.86 Senator Martin had already informed the committee that he was no longer going to oppose the nomination. In addition, the committee had received letters from supporters. Stephen M. DuBrul, Executive- http://fraser.stlouisfed.org Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis 209 The First Hundred Years in-Charge o f the Business Research Staff at General M otors, praised Clague’s integrity, open-mindedness, courage, and determination. William F. Sullivan, President o f the Northern Textile Association, noted Clague’s "splendid record o f accomplishment” as well as his objectivity and impartiality. Leo Teplow, Industrial Relations Consult ant to the American Iron and Steel Institute, commented that Clague enjoyed “the wholehearted confidence o f both management and labor.”87 Earlier, A FL President George Meany had spoken with Sec retary M itchell in support o f reappointment.88 Newspaper columnists and editorials also supported Clague. H is confirmation took only half an hour. Confidentiality Early in his tenure, Clague reaffirmed the voluntary nature o f the BLS reporting process and the necessity for strict confidentiality o f the data provided by respondents. He saw the Bureau’s dependence on volun tary cooperation as “a great asset in a democracy” rather than a limita tion, as some others had viewed it .89 In the early 1960’s, a serious challenge arose to the Bureau’s policy o f confidentiality. U nder the provisions o f the Public Contracts A ct o f 1936, government suppliers were required to pay at least the locally prevailing minimum wage, and the Secretary o f Labor had been making determinations o f the prevailing minimum in various indus tries from data collected in BLS wage surveys. Interested parties had won the right to judicial review o f the Secretary’s decisions. The Baldor Electric Company and 10 other suppliers in the electrical machinery industry brought the Department to court, challenging the Secretary’s determination on the grounds that they had been denied access to documents underlying the BLS tables. Throughout, the Bureau, supported by the Department, argued its fundamental policy that it operated on the basis o f voluntary reporting, that granting access would break confidentiality and endan ger its whole system o f data collection. The Federal District C ourt and the C ourt o f Appeals for the District o f Colum bia upheld the manu facturers, ruling that refusal o f access to BLS documents breached their legal right to rebuttal and cross-examination.90 Rather than imperil the foundation o f the Bureau’s data gather ing system, the Secretary revoked his determination, and none have been issued since. Over the years, the policy o f confidentiality has http://fraser.stlouisfed.org Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis 210 Clague: An Expanding Role for Economic Indicators been maintained, and other influences on wages, such as minimum wage setting under the Fair Labor Standards A ct and the general extension of collective bargaining, have lessened the importance o f the Public Contracts Act. It now serves mainly as a statement o f the government’s intent to be a good employer.91 Retirement O n September 14, 1965, Secretary Wirtz announced Ewan Clague’s retirement, saying, “Ewan Clague has built his ideals and his compe tence and integrity into the traditions and strength o f the Bureau of Labor Statistics and the Department o f Labor. He stands preeminent in his field. H is colleagues have paid him every honor they command. . . . The staff o f the Bureau is both his compliment and his legacy to the future.”92 Clague later described the understanding he had had with Secre tary Wirtz: “W hen I was confirmed for a fifth term in August 1963, Secretary o f Labor W. W illard Wirtz and I reached an agreement that we should be on the lookout for a successor. W hen Professor Arthur M. Ross o f the University o f California at Berkeley, one o f the names on our joint list, became available in the summer o f 1965,1 submitted my resignation, and Ross was appointed Commissioner.”93 Observers praised Clague and his accomplishments. Senator Wil liam Proxmire, a close observer o f BLS from his post on the Joint Economic Committee, referred to his “ 19 immensely productive years,” noting the “steady improvement in quality and the constantly more accurate and detailed picture o f our economy” provided by BLS data during Clague’s tenure. A t Ross’ nomination hearing, Senator Wayne M orse, veteran o f economic stabilization programs and major labor-management crises, commented that he could always place com plete reliance on Clague’s work.94 The New York Times declared, “Integrity has been the dominant characteristic o f the Bureau’s approach to all its assignments.” Under Clague, it continued, the Bureau had achieved “a remarkable degree of professional detachment and trustworthiness.” The Washington Post editorialized in the same vein, commending Clague for his probity— his determination “to maintain the integrity o f the BLS as an objective agency at times when there were pressures to twist results in conform ity with political preconceptions.”95 http://fraser.stlouisfed.org Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis 211 The First H undred l&ars Clague had an active career for many years after his retirement. Initially, he served as a consultant to Secretary Wirtz. Later, he con ducted and published research studies on labor force subjects, including the all-volunteer army, older workers, and coal miners. He has continued to be active in civic affairs. http://fraser.stlouisfed.org Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis 212 Chapter V ili. Four Commissioners: An Economy Going by the Numbers T here were four Commissioners o f Labor Statistics in the two decades following Clague’s departure as a variety of circumstances produced limited terms for Arthur M. Ross, Geoffrey H. Moore, and Julius Shiskin. Janet L. Norwood was well into her second term in 1984. W hatever the length o f service, the head o f the Bureau faced relentless demands as public interest in the Bureau’s statistics heightened with continuous inflation, rising unemployment in four recessions, and the increased use o f BLS data in evaluating national economic policies and distributing public and private funds. The economic climate and escalating uses of statistics In 1966, the chairman o f the Joint Economic Committee stated, in introducing the hearings on government price statistics, that they would cast some light on “whether or not we have inflation.. . The annual rate o f increase in consumer prices at that time was about 2 percent.1 By the end o f 1968, there was no longer any doubt about inflation—consumer prices had risen almost 5 percent over the year. The inflationary boom o f the late 1960’s was accompanied by a drop in unemployment, which fell below the 4-percent goal set in the early 1960’s. In 1969, however, unemployment started to rise, and the economy began to suffer from both inflation and high levels o f unem http://fraser.stlouisfed.org Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis 213 The First Hundred Years ployment at the same time. Moreover, labor disputes in longshoring, steel, and railroads compounded the problems. In August 1971, when less drastic measures had failed to stem the inflation, President Nixon, having already moved to restrain excessive price and wage increases in the construction industry, imposed direct wage and price controls. During the freeze and the ensuing control period, the Bureau was called upon frequently to supply data to the stabilization agencies—the C ost o f Living Council and the Pay Board. Controls lapsed in 1974, and inflation resumed its upward course, accompanied by rising unemployment, as the oil embargo and world wide food shortages helped push the country into the steepest reces sion in the postwar period. A s the Council o f Economic Advisers described the decade o f the 1970’s, “Each time inflation accelerated... a temporary boost in employment was achieved at the cost o f a subse quent recession. Moreover, the recessions became more serious.”2 In recognition o f these economic conditions, Congress passed several countermeasures to stimulate the economy and enacted the Full Employment and Balanced Growth A ct o f 1978, which reaffirmed and enlarged on the commitment o f the Employment A ct o f 1946. The 1978 act obligated the Government to reduce the rate o f inflation while also reducing unemployment to 4 percent.3 Meanwhile, another increase in oil prices led to a third inflationary wave, which lasted into 1982 before moderating. The economy was also undergoing a variety o f structural changes during the period. Commissioner Norwood, during her years in office, highlighted these trends: The larger number o f young workers and the dramatic increase in the participation o f women; the continued employment expansion in the service-producing sector and in whitecollar occupations; the decline in the automobile, steel, and textile industries; and the general slowdown in productivity growth.4 The economic and social developments added to the importance o f the Bureau’s work in monitoring changes in the economy. And still other uses for the Bureau’s data were developing which directly affected the pocketbooks o f millions o f Americans. With mounting inflation, pressures increased for indexation—tying money payments to price indexes—as a means o f ensuring fairness. A s President Nixon stated in 1969 in reference to social security benefits, “The way to prevent future unfairness is to attach the benefit schedule to the cost o f living.. . . We remove questions about future years; we do much to http://fraser.stlouisfed.org Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis 214 Four Commissioners: An Economy Going by the Numbers remove this system from biennial politics; and we make fair treatment o f beneficiaries a matter o f certainty rather than a matter o f hope.”5 A s early as 1962, Congress had linked Federal civil service retire' ment benefits to changes in the Consum er Price Index. This was followed by indexing arrangements for a growing number o f Federal programs. All major retirement and disability plans came to be adjusted on the basis o f the CPI, and components o f the CPI were used to adjust payments for the food stamp program, the rent subsidy program, school meals, and nutrition programs for the elderly. In 1981, the Congressional Budget Office estimated that “almost a third o f Federal expenditure is direcdy linked to the CPI or related price measures. . . . A one'percent increase in the CPI will automatically trigger nearly $2 billion o f additional Federal expenditures, at 1981 program levels.”6 In addition, wages o f millions o f workers under collective bar' gaining agreements were linked to the CPI. Also, under 1981 legisla tion, Federal income tax rate brackets were scheduled for linkage to the CPI beginning in 1985. The Bureau’s data also were used in Federal wage determinations. U nder acts passed in 1962 and 1970, changes in the pay levels recorded in the BLS annual survey o f professional, administrative, technical, and clerical pay in the private sector entered into the Fed' eral pay-setting process. Area wage survey data played a role in setting wage rates for Federal blue'collar workers and for employees o f govem m ent contractors. The BLS measure o f changes in national average wages affected some benefits under the social security program and workers’ compensation payments for longshore and harbor workers. In 1980, the Minimum Wage Study Commission recommended index' ing the Federal minimum wage to this BLS measure.7 Further, unem ploym ent rates estim ated by the States according to Bureau specifications determined the eligibility o f States and local areas for funding under various Federal programs. Additional proposals for indexation were made, although not everyone supported the automatic adjustment procedure. Its growth alarmed some policymakers and legislators, who held that indexing reinforced inflation and m ultiplied the problem s arising from mushrooming Federal budget deficits. W hether or not indexation would continue to be adopted, the uses already established by legisla tion focused the public’s attention on the Bureau’s measures.8 http://fraser.stlouisfed.org Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis 215 The First Hundred Years The four Commissioners The four Commissioners responded to the challenges facing the Bureau in different ways. Ross, a professor o f labor-management rela tions, saw it as his mandate to shake up and modernize a staid, old-line organization, and he sought to develop more data and analysis perti nent to social policy. M oore, a foundation research economist and expert business cycle analyst, emphasized production o f sound figures and their neutral, objective release. Shiskin, a civil servant with long experience in government economic and statistical activities, stressed maintenance o f the integrity o f the data and independence for BLS from the policy concerns o f the Departm ent Norwood, also a career civil servant, protected and enhanced the quality and scope o f the Bureau’s core programs in the face o f widespread budget cuts. With inflation mounting substantially and consequent controversy over the Consum er Price Index, Norwood addressed the criticisms on their technical merits, applying the findings o f the Bureau’s long-term study o f the CPI in making revisions in the homeownership component. She stressed the impartial and independent public-service role o f the Bureau in meeting these difficult problems, while giving the Bureau a more “human” face in her increased attention to data on minorities and women. Arthur Ross, October 1965—July 1968 Arthur M. Ross succeeded Ewan Clague in October 1965. Ross had been a professor o f industrial relations at the University o f California at Berkeley and had served as director o f its Institute o f Industrial Relations from 1954 to 1963. For over 20 years, he had served on various public and private boards and commissions and as an arbitra tor in several industries. Less o f a bureaucrat than other Commission ers, one who had been a user rather than a producer o f statistics, his philosophy was reflected in his comment that BLS products “will not simply be raw data but will be usable to labor, management, and to other custom ers.”9 Personally, Ross brought a concern for the disad vantaged and a commitment to social programs, pressing for research and surveys to identify and measure problems in slum areas. From the beginning, Ross projected a new style and direction. In remarks at his swearing-in ceremony, he outlined six principal tasks for the Bureau, including maximum service to the Department; http://fraser.stlouisfed.org Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis 216 Four Commissioners: An Economy Going by the Numbers increased analysis and interpretation; programs matched to new trends in the economy and labor force; improved technical quality, especially with enhanced computer capability; more effective communication of BLS activities; and development o f new data and analysis on social issues and policy problem s.10 Supported by Secretary Wirtz in this determination to reinvigorate the Bureau, Ross used the results of extensive management surveys by the private firm o f Booz-Allen and Hamilton to reorganize the Bureau’s operations.. Ross’ views made for a crowded agenda o f activities for the program offices, ranging from new measures o f poverty and related problems to a “master plan” to integrate and improve all the Bureau’s price programs. The reorganization made for delay in putting the plans into practice, however, and they were not far along when, in the summer o f 1968, Ross decided to return to academic life and accepted a post at the University o f Michigan. Rather than submit a new nominee in an election year, Secretary Wirtz named Deputy Commissioner Ben Burdetsky as Acting Com ' missioned Burdetsky had been with the Department since 1955, and Ross had brought him into the Bureau in 1966 to manage the reorgan' ization. Burdetsky served as Acting Commissioner until March 1969, when Geoffrey Moore was designated Commissioner. Geoffrey Moore, March 1969-January 1973 Geoffrey H. Moore came to the Bureau from the National Bureau of Economic Research, where he had been the Vice President for Research. The immediate past president o f the American Statistical Association, Moore had also lectured on economics at New Tibrk University and Colum bia University. Throughout his term, Moore worked closely with Arthur Bum s and Julius Shiskin. Bum s was Counselor at the W hite House and, later, Chairman o f the Federal Reserve Board, while Shiskin was C hief Statistician o f the Office o f Management and Budget. Bum s had been M oore’s teacher at Rutgers. Shiskin and Moore had been class' mates there and, afterwards, professional collaborators in the develop' ment o f the Index o f Leading Indicators. Early in his tenure, Moore stated his aims for the Bureau: BLS data should be relevant, timely, accurate, and impartial. In keeping with these guidelines, M oore listed specific program s needing improvement, including local area data, public sector labor relations, http://fraser.stlouisfed.org Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis 217 The First Hundred Years the W holesale Price Index, occupational safety and health statistics, and construction industry series. He also called for the development o f a general wage index.11 Moore was able to make progress on many o f these objectives during his term and, in addition, to integrate into the Bureau four programs on employment statistics that were transferred from the Manpower Administration in a govemmentwide reorganization o f sta tistical activities. But, as described later, he was faced with a succession o f events during his last 2 years in office that put the Bureau and its staff in the midst o f a political maelstrom. Moore left office in January 1973, shortly before his first term was to end. President Nixon accepted his pro forma resignation, which had been requested along with those o f other political appointees, including Secretary o f Labor Hodgson, at the start o f Nixon’s second term. With M oore’s departure, Ben Burdetsky again served as Acting Commissioner. Moore returned to the National Bureau o f Economic Research. W hile at the National Bureau, he also served as adjunct scholar at both the Hoover Institution and the American Enterprise Institute. In 1979, M oore started the Center for International Busi ness Cycle Research at Rutgers University as part o f the School of Business. In 1983, he moved the center to Columbia University as part o f the Graduate School o f Business. Moore has continued to write and testify on the quality o f BLS data. Julius Shiskin, July 1973-October 1978 Julius Shiskin, an economist and statistician, was appointed Commis sioner in July 1973. He was already familiar with BLS operations and problems through his earlier work in the Office o f Management and Budget and the Census Bureau. A s head o f the Office o f Statistical Policy o f OM B, he had sought to establish procedures for ensuring that the release o f statistical data would be free o f political considera tions. He had also proposed the guidelines for the reorganization of government statistical activities in 1971. A t his nomination hearing, called upon for his view o f the Com missioner’s independence, Shiskin cited the 4-year term and prom ised, “I would not resign before that upon request.” Later, in refusing to submit a pro forma resignation when Gerald Ford succeeded to the Presidency, Shiskin again noted the 4-year term and likened the posi http://fraser.stlouisfed.org Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis 218 Four Commissioners: A n Economy Going by the Num bers tion to that o f Federal Reserve Governors. He reminded the commit' tee that charges o f politicization had followed the replacement of Moore and pointed out that Ewan Clague had served under four Presidents without submitting a resignation.12 Shiskin committed him self to improving the basic data and expanding the analytical work o f the Bureau while maintaining the highest professional standards. In addition, he re-emphasized tradi tional BLS neutrality, observing, "Policy is not a role for professional statisticians.”13 Shiskin served under three Presidents and four Secretaries o f Labor. He encountered new and difficult problems, largely as a result o f the Bureau’s assumption o f responsibility for local area unemploy' ment statistics. He also faced contention on concepts and methodol' ogy in the revision o f the Consum er Price Index. Shiskin followed a policy o f openness and full discussion o f the Bureau’s data and methods. Faced with charges o f inadequacies in the unemployment data, he campaigned for a national commission to conduct a comprehensive review o f employment and unemployment statistics, and he appeared before the Joint Economic Committee almost every month to provide the opportunity for questions about the Bureau’s latest figures. He was closely associated with the estab lishment and funding o f the program o f continuing consumer expen diture studies. Shiskin’s success in improving the data and in maintaining the credibility o f the Bureau was reflected in the support for his renomination in 1977.14 With his reappointment by President Carter, Shiskin became the first Commissioner since Clague to start a second term. After a long period o f illness, he died in office in October 1978. Janet Norwood, May 1979— Secretary Ray Marshall named Janet L. Norwood the Acting Commis sioner during Shiskin’s illness, and President Carter nominated her for Commissioner in March 1979. She was confirmed in May. A graduate o f Douglass College o f Rutgers University, Norwood received a Ph.D. at Tufts University. Subsequently, she taught at Wellesley and conducted research in international economics at Tufts. The first woman to serve as head o f the Bureau, Norwood was also the first Commissioner since Ethelbert Stewart to be appointed from the ranks. She had worked in the Bureau since 1963, primarily http://fraser.stlouisfed.org Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis 219 The First Hundred Years in the price office, where she renewed and redeveloped the interna tional price program and managed the consumer price program. M oore had named her Associate Deputy Commissioner for Data Analysis in 1972, and, under Shiskin, she had become, first, Deputy Commissioner for Data Analysis in 1973 and, then, in 1975, the Deputy Commissioner. The Department recognized her professional accomplishments with the Secretary’s Award for Distinguished Achievement (1972), the Secretary’s Special Commendation (1977), and the Philip Am ow Award (1979). In 1984, the American Society for Public Administration and the National Academy o f Public Administration honored Norwood with their National Public Service Award.15 Norwood stated that her role was not to theorize or predict the future, but to provide accurate statistics that were relevant to the country’s economic and social needs. She warned the Bureau against a “built-in bias against change.” “We ought to be the ones who are out there letting people know o f changes which we think could be consid ered.”16 During her tenure, the economic and political climate has kept public attention focused on BLS statistics. In her first term, inflation accelerated and unemployment rose to its highest level in more than 40 years. Members o f the Carter administration criticized the Bureau’s method o f computing the CPI, claiming that it overstated the true rate o f inflation. Candidate Reagan charged the President with “jimmying” the Producer Price Index, and President Reagan, referring to the seasonal adjustment o f unemployment figures, complained that the statisticians in Washington had “funny ways o f counting.”17 Norwood was forced to rethink program priorities as both the Carter and Reagan administrations launched drives to cut government expenditures and employment. During fiscal year 1982, the Bureau suffered a 12-percent budget cut and lost about 10 percent o f its work force through attrition. Norwood protected the Bureau’s core pro grams—those relating to major national concerns—by winnowing out programs o f more limited application, some o f which required sub stantially more funding to bring up to Bureau standards o f validity and reliability. A t the same time, Norwood obtained the resources needed to proceed with long-range plans for improving the scope and quality of data on consumer prices, producer prices, employment and unem http://fraser.stlouisfed.org Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis 220 Four Commissioners: An Economy Going by the Numbers ployment, and wage and benefit costs. She put into effect many major recommendations o f the National Commission on Employment and Unemployment Statistics. Moreover, she began work on two concep tually complicated programs—multifactor productivity measures and another comprehensive revision o f the CPI. Also, under her leader ship, the Bureau assum ed responsibility for adm inistering the resources for national labor market information programs. In 1983, Norwood was reappointed by President Reagan, and the Senate confirmed her by voice vote without holding hearings. Secre tary Donovan hailed the action as assuring that “the work o f the Bureau will continue under the highest standards o f professionalism and integrity.” Facing her new term, Norwood commented, “The challenges will be even greater over the next 4 years.”18 Public release of statistics During Clague’s tenure, the procedures for releasing BLS data had been changed from informal arrangements—primarily news releases and occasional press briefings at no set dates—to formal press confer ences for the major Bureau series on dates scheduled in advance. Despite these new procedures, separating the release o f BLS data from political considerations remained a continuing concern. Just at the time Moore became Commissioner in 1969, Arthur Bum s, as President Nixon's adviser, addressed the need to preserve the credibility o f government statistics. Bum s’ view was reflected in a memorandum the President sent to the Office o f Management and Budget within 3 weeks after taking office, stating, “The prompt release on a regular schedule o f official statistics is a matter o f vital importance to the proper management o f both private and public affairs.” In addition, it stipulated that Mas a rule, new figures should be released through the statistical officer in charge.”19 This program was vigorously pursued by the head o f the Office of Statistical Policy o f OM B, Julius Shiskin, who called for a rule, to be followed in all agencies, “that the written press release must come out at least 1 hour before any policy commentary.”20 The BLS press conferences for technical briefings were also con sidered. M oore, Bum s, and Shiskin agreed that these briefings should be discontinued, since they invited questions on economic policy and outlook—matters beyond the responsibility o f career service statistical http://fraser.stlouisfed.org Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis 221 The First Hundred Years officers. Shiskin drafted a memorandum recommending discontinu ance, arguing, “The confidence o f the public in the integrity o f the statistical agencies o f the government can best be maintained if all the statistics are routinely released on schedules in advance, in the form of written press releases without press conferences.” However, press officers at the W hite House and the Department o f Labor argued that discontinuance during a period o f inflation would be construed as politically motivated, and the press conferences were continued.21 The issue took on new dimensions beginning in late 1970, when, with the continuing rise in unemployment, the Bureau’s assessment of the contribution o f the General M otors strike to an increase in the unemployment rate differed from that o f the administration. Then, in February 1971, at the BLS monthly press briefing, a Bureau spokes man labeled the decline in the unemployment rate—from 6.2 to 6.0 percent—as “marginally significant.” Secretary Hodgson, in a press release issued simultaneously, characterized the decline as o f “great significance.” The next month, the Secretary’s press release called a 0.2 percentage point decline in the unemployment rate “heartening” while the Bureau described the situation as “sort o f mixed,” since employment and hours worked were also down. Shortly after, Secretary Hodgson announced that there would be no more monthly BLS press briefings. A s Moore outlined the new procedures, the statistics would be issued in written releases, reporters could phone technicians to ask questions, and the Secretary would wait at least an hour to make his statement.22 M oore and Shiskin, along with Hodgson, explained that these arrangements would preserve the neutrality and objectivity o f the statistics and put the Bureau in conformity with the practices o f other statistical agencies.23 However, there were immediate charges of politicization, and these set off a round o f congressional hearings and reports, as well as investigations by the Joint American Statistical Association/Federal Statistics U sers’ Conference Committee and by the Industrial Relations Research Association. Several other events also raised the charge o f politicization. In July 1971, now functioning without the press briefing, the Bureau issued the unemployment data for June. The release warned that the published figures possibly overstated the decline in unemployment because o f technical problems with the seasonal adjustment factors. The warning, according to a later report o f the Industrial Relations http://fraser.stlouisfed.org Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis 222 Four Commissioners: A n Economy Going by the Numbers Research Association, "evoked dismay and anger within the Adminis tration. These reactions were duly reported in the press, and the Department o f Labor was privately told o f President Nixon’s anger concerning the incident.” Subsequently, the unemployment figures calculated with the revised seasonal adjustment factors showed a drop o f half that originally reported.24 Shortly after the July incident, the Office o f Management and Budget issued guidelines for the reorganization o f Federal statistical activities, citing the proliferation o f such activities and the recent recommendations o f the President’s Advisory Council on Executive Organization.25 In the fall o f 1971, in response to the OM B directive, M oore announced several changes in the Bureau’s organization and personnel. The Office o f Manpower and Employment Statistics, whose chief had been the Bureau spokesman at press briefings on the employment situation, was split into two separate units. In line with the OM B guidelines, the Bureau abolished the positions o f C hief Economist and C h ief Statistician, and the incumbents left the Bureau. In their place, two new offices were established, each headed by a Deputy Commissioner. The Deputy Commissioner for Statistical Operations and Processing was a Bureau staff member. The Deputy Commissioner for Data Analysis was new to the Bureau, having come from the President’s Commission on Federal Statistics. M oore characterized the reorganization as an effort to improve the management o f the Bureau’s programs and a refinement o f earlier organizational changes made by Ross. But, coming on the heels o f the termination o f press briefings, the changes were attacked as politically inspired. Lawrence F. O ’Brien, chairman o f the Democratic National Committee, alleged that the W hite House was attempting to stack BLS with “political appointees.” The Washington Post editorialized, “The Nixon Administration is bringing hand-picked political appoin tees into the Bureau o f Labor Statistics.’’ A s the Post noted, the reorganization appeared to many as retribution.26 With the termination o f the press briefings, the Joint Economic Committee began monthly hearings on the employment situation. A t the first several o f these, the committee heard testimony from officials o f the Bureau, the Department, and the Office o f Management and Budget relating to the press briefings and the reorganization. It received reports from the American Statistical Association and the Industrial Relations Research Association, and also called upon Ewan http://fraser.stlouisfed.org Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis 223 The First H undred 'Years Clague and Robert A. Gordon, who had been chairman o f the Presi dent’s Committee to Appraise Employment and Unemployment Sta tistics in the early 1960’s. The House Committee on Government Operations concluded, based on a study and hearings by a subcommittee, that the reasons given for terminating the press briefings were unpersuasive and rec ommended that Hodgson immediately reinstitute the briefings and “make it clear in a departmental directive that the traditional objective role o f the BLS must be maintained.” In "additional views,” 4 o f the committee’s 16 Republican members supported M oore’s view that the new procedures should be given an opportunity to be tested before reaching final judgment on the termination.27 The Committee on Post Office and Civil Service also issued a report, following an investigation by the staff o f its Subcommittee on Census and Statistics. The staff had interviewed 65 individuals inter ested in Federal statistics, including present and former employees of government agencies, users o f Federal statistics, labor representatives, news media, and members o f congressional staffs. W hile accepting the subcommittee finding that there was "no supportive evidence o f conspiratory politicization o f Federal statistics,’' the committee held that an incumbent administration under the decentralized statistical system could "politically influence and utilize the various statistical agencies.” This warranted "constant vigil, to insure the continuation o f public confidence in the reliability and validity o f Federal statistics and to avoid creating a credibility gap in government information.” The staff also recommended studying "the feasibility and desirability o f estab lishing one central independent agency to. . . reduce the opportunity for an incumbent administration to exercise a partisan effect,” among other reasons.28 M oore welcomed the report as supporting the Bureau "on every point that had been raised.” Hodgson reiterated his commitment to the “scientific independence and integrity” o f the Bureau and pointed to the procedures established to protect them.29 Shortly thereafter, however, Moore was involved in a political issue which was unprecedented for a BLS Commissioner. In Novem ber 1972, following his landslide reelection victory, President Nixon called on all Presidential appointees to submit their resignations. Although his term extended to March 1973, M oore, believing he had http://fraser.stlouisfed.org Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis 224 Four Commissioners: An Economy Going by the Numbers no option, submitted his. Contrary to his expectations, it was accepted, becoming effective in January. M oore’s removal caused an immediate outcry. Senator Proxmire, pointing to the traditionally nonpolitical nature o f the commissioner' ship, warned, “If the preparation o f our basic statistics becomes further tainted with suspicion o f political manipulation, it could lead to a serious credibility crisis.” The Industrial Relations Research Associa tion viewed the acceptance o f M oore’s resignation “with particular con cern .. . because this termination under these circumstances repre sents a sharp break with the long-established tradition that this posi tion has not been regarded as a political appointment.”30 The Committee on the Integrity o f Federal Statistics, a joint committee o f the American Statistical Association and the Federal Statistics U sers’ Conference, reported, “During the past 2 years, the integrity o f the Federal statistical system has come into question. . . . Specific steps should be taken to allay the growing fears concerning politicization. . . and to ensure and maintain a high level o f credible, professional, statistical work.” Among the specific recommendations were that “heads o f statistical agencies should be career professionals o f demonstrated competence. . . free o f political influence,” and that they have direct control o f their program planning, budgetary priori ties, and publications.31 Soon after these events, the Office o f Management and Budget developed further the requirements for separating the technical release process from policy and political statements through a succes sion o f directives added to the one first issued in 1969. The rule requiring a 1-hour delay between the technical release and any policy statement, already widely in effect, was formally stipulated by OM B in April 1972, along with the requirement for written releases. In O cto ber 1974, the circulation o f data before their official release (BLS data had been given in advance to the W hite House and several agencies) was restricted to the Chairman o f the Council o f Economic Advisers specifically for briefing the President; other principal advisers would be notified at the same time as the media, subject to the 1-hour rule on political comment. These provisions were continued in later revisions o f the directive.32 The procedure for clearance o f Bureau releases within the Department o f Labor paralleled the OM B requirements. In 1969, the Bureau was given authority for final clearance, although in the early http://fraser.stlouisfed.org Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis 225 The First Hundred Years 1970’s departmental officials participated in the clearance procedure. In 1970, for example, Secretary Hodgson asked Moore to hold review meetings in the Secretary’s office as a convenient way to “keep himself informed.” After several months, the meetings were moved to the Commissioner’s office, with the departmental group attending.33 Then, in 1974, in a move complementing a revision o f the origi nal OM B directive, Secretary Brennan specified that data should not be “available to me or any other official o f the Department o f Labor outside the BLS until it is released to the press about one hour before public release.” In 1981, an OM B directive specifically included the Secretary as one o f the principal economic advisers to receive indica tors at the same time as the press. Norwood testified in 1979, “There is no further review outside the Bureau. The Bureau’s work Consumer prices In 1964, under Clague, the Bureau had completed a major revision of the CPI. In 1966, Commissioner Ross presented to the Joint Eco nomic Committee’s Subcommittee on Economic Statistics a “master plan” for a comprehensive system o f price indexes which included improvements in the CPI to fill gaps, update statistical techniques, and extend coverage to the entire population. In addition, the proposal provided for review—between major revisions—o f such elements as outlet and reporter samples and item and specification samples, with appropriate reweighting. Furthermore, it called for experimentation with new approaches to shelter costs, substitution, new products, quality change, taxes, and annual consumer surveys.35 Planning for the next CPI revision, started in 1968, reflected extensive discussion of such issues. The issue o f quality change had already been brought to Ross’ attention in several controversies involving the automobile industry. The U nited A uto W orkers, with automatic cost-of-living adjustments in their contracts, kept close watch on the CPI. In 1966, with con tracts up for renewal the following year, UAW President Walter Reuther attacked the “Big Three” automakers for their use of BLS data for “unjustified price increases” and called for improvement in the BLS technique o f adjusting the CPI for quality change.36 In 1967, Senators Warren Magnuson and Walter Mondale also questioned the http://fraser.stlouisfed.org Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis 226 Four Commissioners: An Economy Going by the Numbers BLS technique in their efforts to determine the cost o f higher safety and pollution standards for automobiles. They also criticized the posh tion o f the manufacturers in maintaining that they could not provide Congress with cost estimates, although they had furnished them to the Bureau. The Bureau refused to give Congress details and specific figures because the industry had submitted them in confidence, but it did offer summary data. In addition, it moved to refine the quality adjustment process with a continuing research program.37 Implementation o f the plans for the CPI revision began under M oore. In 1970, the Office o f Management and Budget directed that the Census Bureau—rather than BLS, as before—conduct the prereq uisite consumer expenditure survey, hoping that this would increase efficiency since the Census Bureau was the agency specializing in the collection o f data from households. In another change from previous procedures, data were collected at quarterly intervals during the year rather than in a single annual review on the assumption that consum ers would be more likely to recall details o f their expenditures over the shorter time span. The quarterly interviews involved about 20,000 families. A separate sample o f about 20,000 families was asked to complete a 2-week diary to provide additional detail. These innova tions and other factors complicated and delayed the project, and data collection was not completed until 1973—approximately 2 years later than planned. A “point-of-purchase” survey, to improve item and outlet samples by determining where people bought various goods and services, was conducted in 1974, covering some 23,000 families. Commissioner Shiskin had to resolve several major conceptual problems before the revision o f the CPI could be carried through. One concerned the population to be covered. From its inception, the CPI had been based on the expenditures o f urban wage earners and salaried workers. There had been proposals, notably from the Stigler Committee, for extending coverage to the entire urban population, in view o f the expanded use o f the CPI as a broad economic indicator. The growing use o f the CPI for indexation also pointed up the need for wider coverage. In April 1974, Shiskin announced plans to proceed with an index representing all urban consumers and to drop the traditional index. The announcement sparked a lively controversy. The BLS Labor Research Advisory Council, while not opposing the broader index, strongly objected to the discontinuance o f the traditional measure. http://fraser.stlouisfed.org Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis 227 The First Hundred Years The Business Research Advisory Council supported the broader concept but suggested that the Bureau explore the possibility o f publish' ing more than one index.38 George Meany o f the A FL-C IO criticized Shiskin’s decision, maintaining, “The CPI should remain firmly grounded in the experi ence and needs o f low- and middle-income workers. . . . We have no objection to the Bureau o f Labor Statistics developing a separate index covering additional occupational categories, if funds are available.” Leonard W oodcock, o f the U nited Auto W orkers, also attacked the decision and further complained o f the “secretive” way in which BLS reached its determination, alleging that the labor advisory group had only been given one opportunity to discuss the question.39 Senator Proxmire introduced a bill requiring BLS to produce the traditional CPI, whether it compiled other indexes or not. Citing the role o f the CPI in collective bargaining, he stated, “If the BLS is allowed to dismantle the present Consum er Price Index in favor o f a more broadly based index, it will create absolute chaos.” Shiskin, while acknowledging the problem, responded that, after all, the unions would have 3 years to adjust agreements to the new index. Moreover, he continued, BLS would produce “a whole family of indexes” if Congress would provide the money.40 The Subcommittee on Economic Statistics o f the Council on Economic Policy supported the broader coverage and recommended that BLS compile both the broad and the traditional CPI for a period o f 3 years before deciding the next step. Shiskin then sent the Secretary a revised plan for congressional action to allow for the production o f two indexes, a new Consumer Price Index for A ll U rban Consum ers (CPI-U ) and the traditional Consum er Price Index for Urban Wage Earners and Clerical W orkers (CPI-W ), both to be calculated for at least 3 years. Congress provided an increased appropriation for the additional work in the fiscal year 1976 budget.41 In 1978, the Bureau published the new C P I-U along with the traditional, though revised, CPI-W . The CPI-W was based on the buying patterns o f about 40 percent o f the civilian noninstitutional population; the C P I-U , on about 80 percent. The C P I-U added coverage o f the self-employed; professional, managerial, and technical workers; short-term and part-time workers; and the unemployed, retirees, and others not in the labor force. http://fraser.stlouisfed.org Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis 228 Four Commissioners: An Economy Going by the Numbers Even before the work was completed, the Office o f Management and Budget sought legislation making C P I-U the index for govern ment programs, arguing that it Mis the best measure that we now have in the country in a technical sense.” And later, the General Account ing Office also recommended the change. Congress did require use of the C P I-U to escalate tax rate brackets starting in 1985. However, most Federal programs and collective bargaining agreements contin ued to make use o f the traditional CPI-W .*2 Another thorny problem facing Shiskin was the method o f mea suring homeownership costs. In the 1953 revision, the Bureau had changed from a rent-based method to an “asset” formulation based on five specific costs associated with homeownership: House prices, mort gage interest, property taxes, insurance, and maintenance and repair costs. Then, the Stigler Committee had recommended investigating the development o f an index based on rental housing representative o f owner-occupied homes. The Bureau was already studying the issue o f which method to use for the upcoming revision when, in the late 1970’s, house prices and mortgage interest rates rose more than other market-basket costs. This focused increasing attention on die BLS method o f measure ment. Critics felt that the investment aspects o f homeownership should be removed from the cost o f shelter. Furthermore, BLS found that the data provided by the Federal Housing Administration on home prices and interest covered only 6 percent o f the housing mar ket—a small and unrepresentative sample. In planning the revision, the Bureau explored alternatives to measure only the “flow o f services” and to exclude the investment aspects o f homeownership. One alternative, the so-called user-cost approach, included the prices for all five components but adjusted the result for appreciation and the cost o f equity. Another approach, rental equivalence, provided for a survey o f a sample o f rented homes similar in type and location to owned homes, using the rental price to represent the cost o f shelter.*3 Neither o f the Bureau’s research advisory groups found these proposals acceptable. A s one labor adviser wrote in 1975, “To price only the ‘services’ is to price an abstraction which has no concrete existence and for which there are no market transaction prices.” Such a procedure, the economist continued, was at variance with die char acter o f the index and even with the treatment o f other durable goods. http://fraser.stlouisfed.org Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis 229 The First Hundred Years Specifically, she contended that the rental equivalence measure depended on faulty assumptions, since the rental market and the home-purchase market differed gready. And the user-cost measure also rested on many theoretical assumptions.44 During 1976, at the Commissioner’s request, the Bureau’s advi sory groups formed a Joint Technical G roup on Homeownership in the Revised CPI. The panel met four times between March and December 1976, and its spokesman reported to Shiskin: “We believe BLS has not yet found a satisfactory user-cost approach. . . . Further research on user cost should be continued.’’ The Subcommittee on Economic Statistics also failed to reach a consensus. In April 1977, citing “widespread disagreement,’* Shiskin announced that BLS would continue the existing treatment while also continuing research.45 In 1978, soon after the revised CPI was issued, the Bureau received authorization and funds for a continuing, rather than a peri odic, consumer expenditure survey, a goal it had sought for 25 years. It also was able to institute a continuing point-of-purchase survey, planned to cover one-fifth o f the CPI areas each year, thereby updat ing the entire sample o f outlets for pricing within 5 years.46 Labor advisers had expressed fears that a continuing consumer expenditure survey would be used to revise the CPI market basket too frequently, violating the concept o f a fixed market basket. They argued that, out o f economic necessity in periods o f rapid inflation, workers would substitute products—“trade down”—and, therefore, frequent revision would “understate price increases.’’47 Responding to this argument, Shiskin saw the continuing survey as having both immediate pertinence and a longer range use in deciding when a major revision o f the CPI would be called for. He insisted that the data would only be used for a revision after an appropriate number of years. He also urged the continuing survey as a means o f avoiding the substantial startup costs o f periodic surveys. The Subcommittee on Economic Statistics o f the Council on Economic Policy gave the proj ect top priority, saying that a continuing survey would facilitate revi sion o f the CPI, help keep weights and market baskets more current, assist in revising family budget estimates, and provide valuable data for analysis o f spending patterns.48 The resurgence o f inflation in 1978—about the time Norwood became Acting Commissioner—and its acceleration in the following 2 years intensified concern about the rising costs of the indexation http://fraser.stlouisfed.org Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis 230 Four Commissioners: A n Economy Going by the Numbers process. Attention centered on the CPI, and specifically on its hom e' ownership components. In 1979 and 1980, the Council o f Economic Advisers pointed out that shelter costs, which had a substantial weight in the index, were rising faster than most other components o f the CPI and questioned the Bureau’s treatment o f the purchase o f homes and the associated costs o f home financing. The Council described the Bureau’s exploration o f alternative treatments o f this component and the fiulure o f any o f these to satisfy major users o f die CPI. It sug gested that using a rent index to represent the costs o f using the services o f a house might provide a better measure o f changes in the cost o f living to the average consumer, particularly in periods o f sharp changes in costs o f homes and home financing.'49 A t hearings o f the House Budget Committee’s Task Force on Inflation in December 1979, government, labor, and management wit nesses discussed the housing component. In her testimony, Commis sioner Norwood discussed the problems o f altering the index at that time. The following month, Norwood announced that, although no change would be made in the official index, the Bureau would publish five experimental measures for the CPI in the monthly release, using alternative approaches to homeownership costs. Based on the exten sive staff analysis for the CPI revision, these included three flow-ofservices measures—one based on rent substitution and two on out lays.50 The treatment o f homeownership continued to be debated. Some members o f Congress urged President Carter to appoint a special panel o f economists to study the homeownership issue. Others, espe cially in the Senate, suggested shifting from the CPI to some other measure as the indexing mechanism. Alfred Kahn, chairman o f the Council on Wage and Price Stability, frequently attacked both the homeownership component and congressional inaction on severing the linkage» between the CPI and the entitlement programs.51 Presi dent Carter’s last economic report in January 1981 stated that the CPI had overstated significantly the actual rise in the cost o f living because o f the way it treated housing and mortgage interest costs.52 The New York Times exhorted Carter to change the housing measure: “Since the index has been overstating inflation, it has trig gered billions in excessive increases in wages and pensions. Thus the index not only measures inflation but contributes to it.” Early in 1981, the General Accounting Office recommended that BLS substitute for http://fraser.stlouisfed.org Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis 231 The First Hundred Years the homeownership component some measure o f the cost o f consum ing housing services—either rental equivalence or nominal outlays.53 Norwood testified before several congressional committees examing the effect o f the CPI on Federal expenditures. During the debate, she maintained: “It is for the Congress—Congress and the administra tion—to determine what the purpose o f the indexation should be.” She noted that escalation “sometimes produces results that were not anticipated.” A s to the CPI itself, she pointed out that BLS had raised the housing issue during the revision process but had been unable to obtain a consensus among its advisory groups and users. Summarizing, she concluded, “Some people would like an index that doesn’t go up so much, and other people would like an index that goes up more. And when they don't have that which they want, they feel there must be something wrong with the indicator itself.”54 In O ctober 1981, Norwood announced that BLS would shift to the rental equivalence approach for the housing component. Noting that B LS had called attention to the issue over a period o f 10 years, she cited immediate factors requiring implementation o f the change before the next overall revision o f the index. There had been changes in the financial markets affecting the availability, arrangement, and rate o f mortgage money. In addition, the FH A sample caused increasingly serious estimation problems. Furthermore, the Economic Recovery Tax A ct o f 1981 directed use o f the C P I-U to adjust income tax brackets. This, Norwood said, obliged the Bureau to produce “a CPI which reflects the experience o f consumers to the fullest extent possi ble.”55 The change, Norwood said, would be implemented at different times in the two CPI's. It would be introduced into the C P I-U with the data for January 1983, largely because the Economic Recovery Tax A ct mandated advance announcement o f tax bracket changes by December 15, 1984, based on C P I-U data for the prior 2 years. For the CPI-W , widely used in collective bargaining, the shift would be delayed until January 1985 to provide time to adjust the provisions of labor-management contracts.56 Both the change and the split timetable sparked controversy. Alm ost immediately, bills were introduced in Congress, one requiring continuance o f the current methods for 5 years beyond the change dates and another requiring congressional approval o f changes that http://fraser.stlouisfed.org Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis 232 Four Commissioners: An Economy Going by the Numbers would cause “reduction o f benefits to retirees and disability programs.”57 Business spokesmen generally supported the changes as “a web come improvement in the accuracy o f the CPI that is long overdue.” The BLS Business Research Advisory Council favored the shift but recommended that the Bureau produce “one single measure at the earliest possible date.” Labor union representatives, still critical o f the rental equivalence approach, welcomed the 2-year grace period that allowed further study and evaluation.58 The com plete im plem entation o f the rental equivalence approach, following full public discussion and improvement o f the rental sample, was carried out on schedule and without further con troversy. In fiscal year 1984, the Bureau received funds to begin another major revision o f the CPI, scheduled for completion in 1987. A s planned, the CPI for January 1987 would include a new market basket and reflect data from the 1980 Census o f Population; improved meas ures o f price change, especially homeownership and rental costs; mod ernization o f the computer system; and enhanced error measurement and quality control.59 Standard budgets BLS issued new standard—or family—budgets during 1967 and 1968 for a family o f four and for a retired couple, using data from the 1960-61 consumer expenditure survey. Bach o f these budgets was calculated at three levels—a medium or moderate standard, a lower, and a higher. Federal and State governments wrote the budgets into legislation on social security, unemployment insurance, public welfare, and employment and training programs. The Bureau, however, increasingly questioned its role in making the normative judgments underlying the series. A s Moore wrote in 1969, “I do not think the BLS should set itself up as an authority on what is adequate or inadequate, what is a luxury and what is not, etc., no matter how reasonable the position may seem to us.” Thus, in 1971, Moore proposed to suspend preparation o f the estimates for a few years until data from the next consumer expenditure survey became available. A t that time, suggested Moore, the Bureau would “expand its program o f publishing and analyzing data on actual spend ing patterns for families o f different sizes and types at different http://fraser.stlouisfed.org Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis 233 The First Hundred Years incomes and expenditure levels and for different regions and sizes of place.”60 “Consistent and considerable pressure” forced BLS to continue issuing estimates for use in a variety o f social programs. For example, Nelson A. Rockefeller, Governor o f New 'fork, wrote, “The possibil ity that the Bureau o f Labor Statistics will discontinue periodic publi cation o f family budget data threatens New fo rk and many other States with the loss o f a valuable, irreplaceable administrative tool.” Therefore, M oore suggested that either the Office o f Management and Budget or an interagency committee set the standards for which BLS could collect the prices. Later, Shiskin argued that an operating agency such as the Department o f Health, Education, and Welfare should develop the standards, rather than a statistical agency. Although OM B accepted the idea, HEW refused to take the responsi bility.61 Moreover, a lack o f funds compounded the problem. Shiskin posed the dilemma faced in 1974: “The Bureau’s professional reputa tion and credibility are dependent on the maintenance o f data o f high quality, fot, in this case, the Bureau has no resources with which to protect the quality o f this program.”62 In 1978, after considering a number o f alternative approaches to the standards issue, the Bureau contracted for a complete review o f the family budget program with the W isconsin Institute for Research on Poverty, which then appointed the Expert Committee on Family Budget Revision. In its 1980 report, the committee, recognizing the problem confronting the Bureau, recommended four new budget standards to be defined on the basis o f actual expenditures o f families at different income levels, rather than the older procedure based on judgments as to the adequacy o f quantities and expenditures. In 1981, however—as part o f a substantial program reduction required during the fiscal 1981 budget cycle—Norwood decided to halt the production o f these data for lack o f the additional resources needed either to implement the recommendations o f the Expert Committee or to bring the quality o f the budgets up to Bureau technical standards.63 Wholesale prices In 1976, BLS started the first comprehensive revision o f the W hole sale Price Index by surveying index users to determine their needs and their views o f shortcomings in the measure. The Bureau had substan http://fraser.stlouisfed.org Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis 234 Four Commissioners: A n Economy Going by the Numbers tially revamped procedures twice, in 1914 and 1952; it had instituted a major expansion and reclassification in 1967; and it had most recently reweighted the index in January 1976. But BLS wanted a “general price index” that would be more broadly based and more accurate, utilizing probability sampling.6* Critics had pointed to inadequacies from time to time. Jules Backman and Martin Gainsbrugh, in 1966, had noted several short' comings. O thers wrote o f out-of-date weights, double and triple counting, and list (rather than transaction) prices. Also, such groups as the National Association o f W holesaler Distributors pushed for a change o f name to more accurately describe the data. In 1975, Albert Rees, director o f the Council on Wage and Price Stability, attacked the index for presenting “totally inadequate data” and announced that Richard Ruggles o f Yale would lead an examination. Ruggles issued his report in 1977, proposing a number o f improvements in the pro gram.65 The outside recommendations for improvement in the index were taken into account in the extensive planning for the multiyear revision o f the series. To set the measure on a firmer theoretical foundation, the revision plans were based on a model o f a fixed-input output price index. The new system consisted o f four major compo nents: Industry output price indexes, detailed commodity price indexes, stage-of-processing price indexes, and industry input price indexes. It rested on collection o f actual transaction prices, expansion o f coverage, and elimination o f multiple counting o f price changes.66 In 1978, to emphasize that the index was a measure o f change in selling prices received by producers at the level o f the first significant commercial transaction in the U nited States, the Bureau changed its name from W holesale to Producer Price Index. The Bureau continued to introduce new producer price indexes, with the goal o f covering all 493 industries in the mining and manu facturing sectors. By 1983, the Producer Price Index Revision program covered 191 industries, accounting for almost 60 percent o f the value o f all domestic mining and manufacturing production, with over 18,000 price quotations for over 3,500 commodities. BLS used probability sampling techniques to select companies by size and loca tion and to identify individual items and transaction terms for the firms. Estimates o f sample error were also being constructed. Budget http://fraser.stlouisfed.org Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis 235 The First Hundred Years cuts, however, postponed completion o f the project as well as further developmental work on new indexes for the services sector. Petroleum prices. O n several occasions during 1973, when major petroleum exporting countries imposed an oil embargo, the New England congressional caucus complained to the Secretary o f Labor of the failure o f BLS to provide “adequate wholesale or retail price data” on petroleum products—even at a time o f acute shortages. The Secre tary initially responded by noting that BLS had been working on the problem for more than a year, contacting companies and helping them develop reporting procedures, but that response had so far been disap pointing. In December, the Secretary reported that the first data would soon be published. Indeed, on December 21, with the release of CPI figures for November, BLS presented the expanded and improved gasoline component, along with monthly retail gasoline price meas ures.67 But continued difficulties in developing voluntary reporting from the companies—especially on wholesale prices—at a time of shortages and embargoes encouraged those demanding mandatory reporting of energy statistics. In March 1974, the Joint Economic Committee rec ommended, “U nless corporations producing petroleum products pro vide full and immediate cooperation with the requests o f the Bureau o f Labor Statistics, Congress should provide BLS with authority to require submission o f corporate data with appropriate safeguards to prevent competitive injury.”68 However, following considerable discussion, the Bureau’s Busi ness Research Advisory Council upheld the principle o f voluntary reporting and offered to encourage increased participation. The petro leum industry representative to the Business Advisory Council on Federal Reports made a similar offer.69 In June 1974, in presenting the W holesale Price Index for May, the Bureau introduced improved data for refined petroleum products. Even so, the New England congressional caucus still complained of the lack o f detail specific to their region. Commissioner Shiskin explained that more detail was not feasible, as BLS collected statistics from a sample and would not issue numbers that would identify reporters.70 http://fraser.stlouisfed.org Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis 236 Four Commissioners: An Economy Going by the Numbers Export and import prices Following World War II, BLS had started development of indexes of prices for U .S. exports and imports, but had terminated the work in 1948 due to budget cuts. Research on concept and methodology resumed in the late 1960’s. The Bureau published export price indexes in 1971 and import price indexes in 1973. A s o f June 1982, coverage accounted for 71 percent o f the value o f exports and 96 percent of the value o f imports. By the end of 1983, BLS had expanded coverage to 100 percent o f the value o f products in U .S. foreign trade—but with less detail than originally planned because o f budget reductions.71 Employment and unemployment statistics The Gordon Committee—set up in 1961 to review employment and unemployment data—had called upon the Bureau for major improve ments in its statistics. During the next 20 years, recurring recessions and the legislation passed to alleviate them increased the demand for more detailed and accurate employment data. In addition, the reorgan ization of government statistical activities gave the Bureau added responsibilities; in 1972, it took over from the Manpower Administra tion the preparation and publication o f local area unemployment sta tistics, occupational employment statistics, employment and wage data for workers covered by unemployment insurance, and data on the characteristics o f the unemployed. The Bureau also expanded its anal ysis and publication o f labor force data relating to minorities, women, and families. In the 1980’s, the Bureau worked to carry out the recommenda tions o f another group o f experts empaneled to review the govern ment’s statistics—the National Commission on Employment and Unemployment Statistics. The National Commission, headed by Sar Levitan, issued its report, Counting The Labor Force, in 1979, after extensive public hearings, preparation o f 33 background papers, and much discussion. “By and large,” the commission stated, “the most important national statistics are timely, objective, and reasonably accu rate, and they have unquestionably played a crucial role in guiding policy formulation. The commission’s review o f existing data, how ever, has led it to several areas in which the information system might be improved.” The commission’s 90-odd recommendations covered all the Bureau’s employment and unemployment statistics programs.72 http://fraser.stlouisfed.org Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis 237 The First Hundred Years Secretaries o f Labor Ray Marshall and Raymond Donovan, as required by the law establishing the commission, submitted reports to Congress evaluating the desirability, feasibility, and cost o f each recommendation. U nder Norwood, a number o f major recommendations were put into effect, but others were found to be too costly or imprac tical, and implementation o f others awaited the results o f testing and the development o f programs. Current Population Survey. In January 1967, the Bureau put into effect some o f the major recommendations o f the Gordon Committee for the CPS. It introduced sharper definitions; a minimum age o f 16, rather than 14; and a larger sample. One element o f the new definitions proved controversial. Under the new terminology, persons were classified as unemployed only if they had searched for work within the previous 4 weeks and were currently available for work. If no job search had been conducted, a person was classified as “not in the labor force” rather than unem ployed. U nion economists charged that the new procedure, which had been tested in a survey o f 13,000 households in September 1966, would aggravate the “existing undercount” o f unemployment by excluding those who were discouraged—those who were no longer searching because they believed no work was available. They advo cated increased efforts to identify and learn more about discouraged workers. Although the new definition o f unemployment remained in force, the Bureau did add a series o f questions to the CPS designed to collect data on discouraged workers. The results were published quar terly thereafter.73 The size o f the CPS sample, increased in 1967, had to be decreased in 1971, but the Bureau obtained funds to increase it sub stantially in 1978 and again in 1980, largely to provide the detail needed to improve State and local estimates. In 1981, the sample had to be reduced again but remained considerably higher than it was before 1980. New methods o f seasonal adjustment were introduced in 1973 and refined in 1980. In 1976, the Bureau—to allay outside criticism o f the unemploy ment concept—began to publish in its monthly release on the employ ment situation an array o f unemployment rates, U - l through U -7, each based on a different definition. The U -5 rate remained the official http://fraser.stlouisfed.org Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis 238 Four Commissioners: An Economy Going by the Numbers definition, but, as Shiskin explained, “No single way o f measuring unemployment can satisfy all analytical or ideological interests.”74 A s the National Commission had recommended, the Bureau added military personnel stationed in the U nited States to the national labor force and employment figures, although not to the State and local data, and included them in the computation o f the overall unemployment rate. Further, all industry and occupational data in the CPS were classified according to a new system developed for the 1980 census. In addition, the estimation methods were revised along the lines the commission had recommended. BLS also added monthly questions to the CPS on the school attendance o f 16- to 24-year-olds, another recommendation o f the commission, to learn more about their work and school choices and their labor market attachment. The commission had also recom mended improving the identification o f discouraged workers by col lecting more specific information on recency o f job search, current availability, and desire for work, but the Bureau postponed this work indefinitely because tests o f the feasibility o f introducing pertinent questions into the CPS questionnaire were inconclusive. Discouraged workers continued to be counted as outside the labor force and excluded from the official unemployment figure, in line with the com mission’s recommendation reached after much debate. The commission had called upon BLS to prepare an annual report containing national data on economic hardship associated with low wages, unemployment, and insufficient participation in the labor force. The Bureau issued the first report, Linking Employment Problems to Economic Status, in January 1982, with annual reports thereafter. Congress, in the Job Training Partnership Act o f 1982 (PL97-300), specifically authorized the Secretary o f Labor to develop such information. In the early 1980’s, the Bureau started a major project to redesign the CPS in cooperation with other Federal sponsors o f household surveys and the Census Bureau. By July 1985, an entirely new sample will have been phased in, based on materials from the 1980 census.75 Establishment survey. The Bureau continued to expand its monthly series on employment, hours, and earnings in nonagricultural estab lishments. In 1965, it had covered a sample o f 135,000 establishments; by 1975, the sample had grown to 160,000 and by 1983, to 190,000. http://fraser.stlouisfed.org Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis 239 The First H undred Years In 1979, the National Commission criticized the sample design and other basic statistical underpinnings o f the establishment survey, but urged caution in making major changes that might disrupt eco nomic series essential for current analyses and as building blocks for important indicators. Basic shortcomings noted by the commission included inadequate sample size, poor documentation, and lack of quality control measures. With the support o f the Secretary, BLS established a long-range project for a full-scale modernization o f the survey. M ajor changes would await development o f an overall system atic redesign. The commission specifically recognized the inadequacy o f indus try detail for the large and growing service-producing sector o f the economy, and the Bureau moved to improve the sample. Cooperating State agencies responded with a buildup o f coverage so that, by 1984, BLS expanded publication o f industry detail in the service sector by 82 additional industries.76 Occupational employment statistics. The Vocational Education Act of 1963 required the States to develop information on future occupa tional requirements for use in planning education and training pro grams. To help State officials, the Bureau prepared a series of occupational projections for the year 1975, published in Tomorrow's Manpower Heeds (1969). Also, at the urging o f the G ordon Committee, the Bureau began to develop occupational statistics through industry studies. Then, in 1971, BLS mailed questionnaires to 50,000 manufacturing establish ments, marking the start o f the Occupational Employment Statistics survey conducted in cooperation with the Employment and Training Administration and the State employment security agencies. Between 1971 and 1981, the Bureau completed three survey cycles for manufac turing; various nonmanufacturing and service industries; and govern ment services. By 1982,48 State agencies had joined the effort. Since 1980, the survey has been an important source o f data for the Bureau’s national industry-occupational matrix, one o f its basic tools for occupational employment projections and occupational out look studies. Local area unemployment statistics. Among the Bureau’s most intrac table problems has been the inadequacy o f local area unemployment http://fraser.stlouisfed.org Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis 240 Four Commissioners: An Economy Going by the Numbers data. Before the program was turned over to the Bureau, the figures had been used primarily to identify areas o f labor shortage or surplus by the Bureau o f Employment Security and its successor agencies. They had been developed through a complicated series o f computa tions—the 70-step or Handbook method—relying heavily on data derived from administrative records o f the unemployment insurance system. Beginning with passage o f the Comprehensive Employment and Training Act (CETA) in 1973 and later under additional legisla tion, these data were incorporated in the formula used for the regular and direct distribution o f Federal funds to States and local areas. The Bureau, assigned technical and publication responsibility for the data, found them o f questionable quality for the new purpose. Shiskin summarized the difficulties: “These unemployment statis tics have been severely criticized because they lack conceptual uni formity and consistency, are o f uneven reliability, and cannot be fully reconciled with data from the national survey o f employment and unemployment. ”77 In 1974, BLS instituted new procedures to improve the data, including benchmarking the annual estimates to the Current Popula tion Survey and improving the Handbook procedures to provide greater uniformity among the States in concepts and methods. States facing reduced C ETA funding challenged the new procedures. New Jersey attacked the methodology, Maryland attacked the implementa tion, and both charged specifically that the Secretary o f Labor, in instituting the changes, had violated the advance-notice requirement o f the Administrative Procedures A ct and had exceeded his authority. The Bureau’s statistical methods were upheld in the New Jersey case. In the Maryland case, a lower court upheld the Department position that it was not required to give advance notice in the Federal Register o f changed methods for gathering unemployment statistics, but the decision was reversed by the U .S. Court o f Appeals for the District o f Columbia. In so ruling, the court found that “the develop ment o f statistics no longer serves merely informational purposes” in view o f their use in allocating billions o f dollars under the C ETA program.78 The Bureau continued efforts to improve the data, although it recognized the limited possibilities in view o f the lack o f funds. Shiskin acknowledged many shortcomings, stating in 1977, “W hen you get to those very small areas we’re talking about, we worry about http://fraser.stlouisfed.org Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis 241 The First Hundred Years whether we’re giving any better than random numbers.” He estimated that accurate State-by-State figures would require an additional annual appropriation o f $40-$50 million—which still would not provide dependable city and county data.79 In 1978, BLS again introduced improvements. The monthly unemployment rates for 10 States and 2 metropolitan areas were now drawn directly from the Current Population Survey. With these revi sions, Congress, in reauthorizing C ETA , provided that the Secretary should ensure that areas within Standard M etropolitan Areas and central cities would not lose funds as a result o f changes in statistical methodology.80 In addition, the Bureau and the States began work to standardize the underlying unemployment insurance claims data to provide greater consistency with the concept o f unemployment used in the CPS. In 1979, after reviewing the local area unemployment statistics program, the National Commission concluded, “There is no way, at reasonable cost, to produce accurate employment and unemployment statistics for thousands o f areas every month.” Thus, it suggested “only incremental” improvements: Expansion o f the CPS, enhance ment o f the Handbook procedures, and congressional review o f the allocation formulas.81 The very large sums o f money required for a major overhaul constituted a critical obstacle. Even so, in 1982, Norwood commented, “The local unemployment statistics program is one which clearly needs more w ork.”82 The Bureau continued an intensive research effort. Job vacancy statistics. The Bureau continued its efforts to develop job vacancy statistics, although methodological and conceptual problems and budget restraints plagued the program from the beginning. In 1967, the Bureau began collection o f job vacancy data in Phoenix and Oklahoma City in connection with the regular labor turnover survey. A t about the same time, however, funding for the turnover program was cut in half as part o f general budget reductions.83 Shortly after assuming office in January 1969, President Nixon, at the urging o f A rthur Bum s, directed BLS to develop plans for a national system o f job vacancy statistics. Building on the Bureau’s earlier efforts, Commissioner Moore developed a Federal-State coop erative program o f statistics on job openings and labor turnover. The http://fraser.stlouisfed.org Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis 242 Four Commissioners: An Economy Going by the Numbers first data on job openings were published in 1970. BLS had to termi nate the program in 1974, however, after the Manpower Administra tion withdrew its supporting funds on the basis that the data were not useful to the placement activities o f the State employment security agencies.84 In the late 1970’s, Congress authorized the Bureau to plan for a survey o f job openings. A pilot study demonstrated that, while a national program could be developed, the cost would be “in excess of $25-$30 million a year”—twice the budget for the national household survey. Then, the labor turnover program, which had been the vehi cle for the pilot study, became a casualty o f the 1982 budget cut, in view o f its overall technical limitations, particularly its failure to cover service industries, where turnover rates were highest.85 This checkered history reflected the difficult and controversial nature o f job vacancy statistics. The Labor Research Advisory Council expressed grave reservations because o f the difficulty in defining basic terms and the belief that industry would use vacancy statistics to “deflate” unemployment figures. Somewhat more supportive o f the program, the Business Research Advisory Council nevertheless opposed connections with local employment offices and sought assur ances that the Employment Service would not use vacancy data to direct referrals. In its report, the National Commission “found no evidence that useful job vacancy statistics can be collected in a costeffective manner.”86 Poverty and urban problem s BLS accomplished some o f its most innovative work in special surveys related to poverty and urban problems. In February 1966, the Bureau canvassed food prices in six large cities for the National Commission on Food M arketing and also for Esther Peterson o f the President’s Committee on Consum er Interests on the question, “Do the Poor Pay More?”8^ A t about the same time, the Bureau launched a new quarterly series o f data on conditions in urban poverty neighborhoods. Begin ning with data from the Current Population Survey o f March 1966, the Bureau compiled special tabulations o f poverty tracts and com pared the findings with characteristics o f other city dwellers. Census had developed the classification system for the Office o f Economic Opportunity, basing it on 1960 census data for cities o f 250,000 popu http://fraser.stlouisfed.org Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis 243 The First Hundred Years lation or more and for a range o f variables such as income, education, skills, housing, and family conditions. Then, in response to a directive o f Secretary Wirtz that the Bureau and the Manpower Administration "provide the information necessary for a concerted attack on individual and social problems,” the agencies conducted a series o f pilot projects. The Manpower Administration financed a joint BLS-C ensus survey o f slum areas in six large cities covering the period July 1968 through June 1969, a study specifically designed for use in the President's Concentrated Employment Program o f jobs and training activities. In October 1969, BLS published Urban Employment Survey: Employment Situation in Poverty Areas of Six Cities, following with special articles in the Monthly Labor Review. The Bureau conducted a second urban employment survey but, despite its desire to continue the work, was unable to reach agreement with the Manpower Administration on methodological issues and policy priorities.88 In 1971, M oore announced that BLS would suspend production o f the quarterly series on poverty areas the following year to improve accuracy by allowing for introduction o f 1970 census data when they became available. The suspension was criticized by Senator Hubert Humphrey and George Meany because it would occur in a Presiden tial election year. Roy W ilkins, chairman o f the Leadership Confer ence on Civil Rights, wrote the Secretary, “The BLS has enjoyed a deserved reputation for integrity. Recent developments have raised doubts. . . . The decision to abandon the ghetto unemployment data . . . reinforces these doubts and raises new questions o f political interference with B L S.”89 In 1973, once data from the 1970 census had been introduced, BLS resumed publication o f the quarterly data but based solely on an income definition o f poverty. Earnings statistics Since 1947, BLS had published a series on gross and spendable average weekly earnings based on the establishment survey. Spendable earn ings were derived by adjusting average gross weekly earnings o f all production or nonsupervisory workers for Federal taxes and Social Security payments for a worker with no dependents and for one with three dependents. Adjusted by changes in the CPI, “real” gross and spendable earnings series were developed to indicate changes in the purchasing power o f money earnings. In 1982, the spendable earnings http://fraser.stlouisfed.org Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis 244 Four Commissioners: An Economy Going by the Numbers series was discontinued because o f conceptual inadequacies. Many critics—among them former Commissioner M oore—had faulted the series as “misleading” because it rested on the unwarranted assump tion that a worker with three dependents had the same weekly earn ings as the average for all workers. The National Commission had recommended discontinuance, explaining, “This hybrid figure does not measure what it purports to measure.”90 Instead, the commission urged development o f earnings statistics derived from the Current Population Survey. BLS then published quarterly reports o f median earnings o f workers and their families derived from the CPS. Some observers characterized these statistics as “soft,” noting that they were based on subjective, oral responses, in contrast to the “hard” numbers derived from establishment reports. Furthermore, the CPS samples were rather small, with a substantial nonresponse rate, and the statistical variance for earnings was rela tively high.91 Earnings data were also derived from the reports filed by employ ers covered by the unemployment insurance program. From these reports, BLS developed and published statistics on average annual pay by State and industry. The data were used by the Employment and Training Administration and State agencies to construct projections of total and taxable wages and by the Commerce Department in develop ing the personal income estimates in the gross national product accounts. For a number o f years, up to data for 1975, BLS also published another series on annual earnings, developed from a 1-percent ran dom sample o f the records o f the Social Security Administration and the Railroad Retirement Board. W ages, benefits, an d industrial relations In 1965, the Bureau’s wage program included three principal types of surveys which produced occupational wage information: Area wage surveys, in dustry wage surveys, and the national survey o f professsional, administrative, technical, and clerical pay (the PATC or white-collar survey). Although differing in industrial, geographic, and occupational coverage, and originating for different purposes at differ ent times, they were developed into an integrated program based on common concepts and definitions, a common set o f administrative forms, and a single manual of procedures. http://fraser.stlouisfed.org Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis 245 The First Hundred Years In the area wage survey program, statistical techniques were improved in the early 1970’s. By 1982, the program included about 70 Standard M etropolitan Statistical Areas, statistically selected to rep' resent all metropolitan areas o f the U nited States, excluding Alaska and Hawaii. The Bureau also conducted wage surveys in 86 areas on behalf of the Employment Standards Administration for use in administering the Service Contract A ct o f 1965. The act required payment o f the prevailing wage by employers providing services to the Federal Gov ernment under contracts o f $2,500 or more. For several years after World War 13, BLS added detail to its area wage surveys for use by the Department o f Defense and other agencies in setting wage rates for their blue-collar employees. However, in 1965, President Johnson directed the Civil Service Commission to work towards developing a uniform system for all Federal agencies. In the negotiations that followed, BLS rejected proposals that it actively participate in these surveys, noting a potential conflict o f interest and violation o f confidentiality, since representatives o f employee unions and agency management customarily participated in the detailed plan ning and conduct o f the surveys. Therefore, under the Coordinated Federal Wage System, established administratively in 1968 and enacted into law in 1972, BLS provides some statistical support, but local wage survey committees, consisting o f management and labor representa tives, conduct the studies.92 Various groups have suggested that BLS become the data collec tion agency for both the white- and blue-collar pay systems. This was the recommendation o f the Federal Job Evaluation and Pay Review Task Force in 1971. In 1979, the General Accounting Office recom mended that BLS work with the Office o f Personnel Management to improve the system.93 Industry wage surveys, conducted in each industry on a 3- or 5year cycle, covered about 40 manufacturing and 25 nonmanufacturing industries by 1982. Following the budget cuts for fiscal year 1982, the program was reduced to 25 manufacturing and 15 nonmanufacturing industries. The PATC survey was made the basis for carrying out the princi ple o f comparability o f Federal and private-sector pay under legislation passed in 1962 and 1971. The Bureau acts as the data collector for the http://fraser.stlouisfed.org Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis 246 Four Commissioners: An Economy Going by the Numbers President’s Pay Agent, which sets the specifications for the survey and makes the recommendations on pay adjustment.94 Several investigations o f the Federal pay system have touched on matters relevant to the Bureau’s role. In 1973, the General Account' ing Office, after a review o f the comparability process, emphasized the need to expand the coverage o f the PATC survey and to clarify the definitions and terminology. In 1975, the President’s Panel on Federal Compensation (Rockefeller Panel) called for the inclusion o f data from State and local governments, a change which would require amending the Federal pay laws. A lso at that time, the Council o f Economic Advisers urged the separation o f managerial or political interests— those o f the President’s Pay Agent and the Federal Employees Pay Council—from the technical side o f pay comparability, with the Bureau assigned responsibility for developing a mechanism for deter' mining the wage rates and benefits o f workers doing "comparable work” to that o f government employees.95 With increases in appropriations, BLS extended the occupational coverage o f the PATC survey from 72 occupational work levels in 1975 to approximately 100 such categories in 1982. However, critics still complained that the survey covered mainly large, high paying firms, and also objected to the continued exclusion o f State and local government workers.96 The review groups also had recommended that the Federal pay comparability system be expanded to include benefits. The Office o f Personnel Management, in developing its Total Compensation Comparability project, called on the Bureau to gather data on benefit plans in the private sector. The Bureau conducted a pilot project in 1979 and then developed an annual survey o f the incidence and characteris tics o f employee benefit plans in medium and large firms. The Bureau added another type o f occupational wage survey in 1970 with a program o f surveys o f wages and benefits o f municipal government employees. The series eventually covered 50 occupations in 27 large cities before it was eliminated in the budget cuts o f fiscal year 1981. Economic policymakers had long felt the need for a current, broadly based measure o f change in wage costs in the economy, com ' parable in scope to the consumer price and employment measures. The urgency increased with the wage-price spiral o f the Vietnam era. In 1969, the Bureau asked Albert Rees o f Princeton University to http://fraser.stlouisfed.org Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis 247 The First Hundred Years make recommendations for improving its measures o f wage change. W hile questioning whether a new series could be developed on a cost' effective basis, Rees suggested that the Bureau develop an index from the «risfing data on average hourly earnings in the establishment survey, adjusted to exclude overtime payments in manufacturing and employment shifts between high' and low-wage industries. He also stressed the importance o f obtaining information on the changes in the earnings o f government employees.97 The Hourly Earnings Index was developed in 1971, responding to the Rees suggestion. W hile it represented a step forward, the index was limited to earnings o f production workers, excluded supplemen tary benefits, did not adjust for part-time workers, and did not provide separate detail for occupational groups. Pressure continued for the development o f a broad, general wage measure to serve as an economic indicator. Shiskin explained that government officials responsible for monitoring the economy and evaluating the effectivenesses o f economic policies had pressed BLS to produce a measure which included benefits. Although the labor advis ers questioned the proposed measure, complaining o f the lack o f tfa well-constructed, theoretical framework,” they participated in the technical, development o f what came to be called the Employment C ost Index.98 The Employment C ost Index, measuring quarterly changes in wages and salaries, was first published in 1976. Designed as a fixed weight index at the occupational level, it eliminated the effects of employment shifts among occupations. Developed in stages, the ECI included benefits in 1980 and, by 1981, presented indexes by occupa tional group and industry division for State and local government workers as well as for the private nonfarm sector. It also provided detail by collective bargaining status, region, and area size. In October 1980, the Office o f Management and Budget designated the ECI a “Primary Federal Economic Indicator.”99 The series on current changes in wages and supplementary bene fits agreed to in collective bargaining continued as an indicator in this more limited but significant sector. Since 1982, BLS has followed about 1,900 bargaining situations involving actions covering 1,000 workers or more. Initially limited to wage adustments, the series now covers changes in total compensation in agreements covering 5,000 workers or more in all industries and 1,000 workers or more in http://fraser.stlouisfed.org Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis 248 Four Commissioners: A n Economy Going by the Numbers construction. Also, beginning with 1979, BLS has published data on total compensation under negotiated agreements covering 5,000 w ork' ers or more in State and local government employment. Bureau wage programs o f long standing were eliminated during the budget tightening o f 1979-82, however. The series o f wage chro nologies, which provided a continuous record o f wage and benefit changes negotiated in about 30 major firms or associations o f firms, was discontinued, along with the series on union wage rates and benefits in the building and printing trades, in local transit and truck ing, and in grocery stores. Industrial relations programs were also substantially affected. The Bureau's file o f collective bargaining agreements was maintained only for contracts covering 1,000 workers or more, and, while the file continued as a basis for BLS reports on wage negotiations, in-depth studies o f contract provisions were no longer conducted. The direc tory o f unions and employee associations was discontinued, and strike statistics were reduced in coverage. Productivity an d technology Economic conditions focused increasing attention on the productivity o f U .S. industry and its workers. Concern over the consequences o f technological change and foreign competition, the use o f productivity improvement factors in collective bargaining agreements, and the implementation o f wage-price guidelines as national economic policy gave productivity measurement heightened importance. With the slow rate o f productivity increase during the 1970's, productivity measures remained in the spotlight. To meet the demand for more information, the Bureau's ongoing work on productivity measures was expanded. The number o f indus tries for which BLS prepared productivity indexes increased to 116 over the period, reflecting in part extended coverage in trade and services. Productivity measures for the economy as a whole and major sectors, first published on an annual basis in 1960, were introduced quarterly in 1968. Innovative work was stimulated by the National Academy o f Sciences Panel to Review Productivity Statistics, which recommended in 1979 that BLS “experiment with combining labor and other inputs into alternative measures o f multifactor productivity." The General Accounting Office seconded the suggestion in a 1980 report.10® http://fraser.stlouisfed.org Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis 249 The First Hundred Years In 1983, die Bureau published its first multifactor productivity indexes for major sectors o f the private economy, covering the period 1948-81. These estimates measured the annual change in output per unit o f combined labor and capital input. The Bureau explained that this “more inclusive measure” represented the first step in trying to quantify the contribution o f a number o f major factors underlying productivity change. Comparing movements o f the multifactor index with those o f the more familiar measure—output per hour o f all persons—would indicate how much o f the growth or falloff in output per hour was due to changes in the use o f capital—capital productiv ity—and how much was due to a combination o f the other factors, Le., changes in technology, shifts in the composition o f the labor force, changes in capacity utilization, and so forth.101 The Bureau also played a leading role in developing statistics on productivity in the Federal Government. The Joint Economic Com mittee initiated the project in 1970 by asking the General Accounting Office, the Office o f Management and Budget, and the Civil Service Commission to establish a task force to collect information and con struct indexes. B LS provided assistance and, in 1973, assumed full responsibility for collecting data and developing measures. By 1982, the program covered about 450 organizational units in almost 50 Federal departments and agencies.102 Meanwhile, BLS continued its interest in the impact o f automa tion and technological change. In 1966, it released an expanded and updated version o f its study o f 36 major industries. It followed with new studies on computers, railroads, and energy, while continuing to update the earlier work in a series o f publications. The Office o f Productivity did lose one o f its programs in the latter part o f the period. Since 1959, the Bureau had surveyed various types o f federally assisted construction to determine labor and materi als requirements in order to estimate the total employment generated. O ver the years, it had conducted some 28 studies, covering, for exam ple, highways, hospitals, college housing, Federal office buildings, and sewers—extending the scope to include private housing construction. The data were used in projecting training needs and occupational outlook, shortages and surpluses in labor supply, material demands, and input-output matrixes. During the 1982 budget austerity, BLS eliminated the program, largely because o f the time lag between survey http://fraser.stlouisfed.org Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis 250 Four Commissioners: An Economy Going by the Numbers dates and publication and the extensive use o f estimation and imputation.103 Econom ic grow th and em ploym ent projections Since the 1960’s, the Bureau had produced projections of the labor force, industry output, and employment. The Bureau prepared projec tions on a 2-year cycle covering five areas: Labor force, aggregate economic performance, industry final demand and total production, industry employment levels, and occupational employment by indus try.104 The Bureau continued to publish revised editions of the Occupational Outlook Handbook, a comprehensive reference volume for career guidance first produced in 1949 at the urging o f the National Vocational Guidance Association and with the financial support of the Veterans Administration. In 1957, BLS had added the Occupational Outlook Quarterly to supplement the biennial Handbook. The projections work was coordinated with the occupational outlook programs, although the functions were located in separate offices. In November 1979, the Bureau brought the work together under the umbrella o f the Office o f Economic Growth and Employ ment Projections, making for closer integration o f the work on labor force, industry output, employment, and occupational projections.105 Industrial safety and health Historically, BLS had conducted frequent studies o f occupational safety and health problems and had worked closely with safety and inspection groups. By 1966, it was publishing both quarterly and annual statistics on the frequency and severity o f work injuries in many industries. Passage of the Occupational Safety and Health Act o f 1970 greatly altered the field of industrial safety statistics. The act directed the Secretary o f Labor to issue regulations requiring covered employers to maintain accurate records o f work-related deaths, injuries, and ill nesses. In 1971, the Secretary delegated to BLS the responsibility for developing the underlying statistical system, in coordination with the Assistant Secretary for Occupational Safety and Health. The Bureau moved quickly to construct a cooperative FederalState program to gather statistics necessary under the new law, provid ing grants to States for planning and development. The specialized http://fraser.stlouisfed.org Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis 251 The First Hundred Years treatment formerly accorded the collection o f data on occupational injuries o f longshore workers was discontinued, superseded by the more comprehensive program. By 1976, the annual survey o f occupa tional injuries and illnesses had become the largest annual sample survey conducted by the Bureau. In the following years, BLS sought to reduce the reporting burden on employers while refining the sur vey. In 1982, it sampled about 280,000 establishments in 48 participat ing States. The Bureau also developed procedures to provide additional information from State workers' compensation records on the charac teristics o f the injuries and illnesses and the workers involved. The Supplementary Data System, introduced in 1976, became fully opera tional in 1978, and by 1982,34 States were participating in the cooper ative program .106 h i addition, to help fill gaps in the knowledge o f how and why on-the-job accidents occur, in 1977 the Bureau began a series o f direct surveys o f injured workers. Each survey in the Work Injury Report program was designed to cover a specific type o f accident being studied by the Occupational Safety and Health Administration and the National Institute for Occupational Safety and Health. From 1978 on, the Bureau conducted four such studies each year, publishing, for example, Accidents Involving Eye Injuries and Back Injuries Associated with Lifting. International activities In the 1960’s, with the growing importance o f foreign trade and concern for competition in world markets, the Bureau published two studies presenting international comparisons o f unit labor costs, one for the manufacturing sector as a whole and the other covering the iron and steel industry. The Bureau also participated in a joint project o f the Department o f Labor and the Japanese Ministry o f Labor, a comparative study o f wages in Japan and the U nited States. Janet Norwood, as C hief o f the Wage and Labor C ost Section o f the Office o f Foreign Labor and Trade, led B LS activities for the project.107 However, in 1969, B LS dismantled the Office o f Foreign Labor and Trade and distributed its constituent units throughout the Bureau. Then in 1972, as a result o f budget cuts and staff reductions, one o f the units was abolished and the periodical Labor Developments Abroad, begun in 1956, was suspended. To fill the gap, the Monthly http://fraser.stlouisfed.org Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis 252 Four Commissioners: An Economy Going by the Numbers Labor Review expanded its coverage o f foreign labor conditions. The Office o f Productivity and Technology continued the work on interna' tional comparisons o f employment, earnings, and productivity. The Bureau continued to provide training and technical assist' ance to developing countries. The training programs for foreign tech' nicians were restructured in the early 1970’s, when it became apparent that the developing countries no longer needed basic statistical train' ing as much as they needed more advanced training on practical applications. A t the recommendation o f a 1972 task force representing the U .S. Agency for International Development and the Department o f Labor, BLS instituted short-term seminars on specific topics in applied labor statistics. By the early 1980’s, about a dozen seminars o f 4 to 8 weeks duration were being held each year. Moreover, the BLS international training program held two seminars overseas in 1977. Since then, about 20 such seminars have been conducted throughout the world on various topics in labor statistics. Administration Funding Generally, the Bureau’s budget fared relatively well until Federal appropriations tightened in the 1980’s. BLS appropriations increased about eightfold between 1966 and 1985, although this reflected man dated salary increases in addition to growth in programs and person nel (table 7). The number o f staff positions increased by one-third over the period. In 1983, the Bureau was given full financial responsibility for the labor market information system, and an initial sum o f $20.4 million in unemployment insurance trust funds was included in the Bureau’s budget for fiscal year 1984. With the tightening o f the Federal budget in the 1980’s, Nor wood gave priority to assuring the quality and adequacy o f the Bureau programs providing major national indicators. O ther programs were trimmed to accommodate to the loss o f funds. In fiscal year 1982, when Congress added a cut o f 4 percent to the 12 percent proposed by the administration, the Bureau considered furloughing its work force as other agencies had done, but managed to avoid that step through advance planning o f new hires and replacements. With sup port from labor and business groups and the Joint Economic Commit- http://fraser.stlouisfed.org Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis 253 The First Hundred Years Table 7. Funding for Bureau o f Labor Statistics, 1966-85 (in thousands) F iscal year ended — Jun e 30 — 1966 1967 1968 1969 1970 1971 1972 1973 1974 1975 1976 September 30 — 19772 1978 1979 1980 1981 1982 1983 1984 1985 Total1 S alaries an d expenses $21,995 23,519 24,311 27,071 30,433 32,644 42,033 48,874 53,261 62,324 75,841 $19,967 20,588 20,985 21,933 24,653 28,096 37,300 44,451 48,635 54,422 65,846 90,363 93,410 103,869 124,395 121,792 120,170 130,001 157,740 173,260 75,617 84,015 94,752 102,890 111,081 113,067 121,743 137,340 152,860 ’Through fiscal year 1984, includes the direct appropriation together with advances and tran sfers o f Federal funds and paym ents from trust funds. For fiscal years 1984 and 1985, includes, in addition to the direct appropriation, the trust fund supplem ent o f $20.4 m illion transferred to B L S for managem ent o f the labor m arket inform ation program . The 1985 figure does not include other advances and transfers. ^Includes funds fo r transition quarter. SOURCE: The Budget o f the U nited States Government. tee, Congress appropriated supplemental funds to restore the initial administration levels. Management In 1966, Secretary Wirtz’s management consultants, Booz-Allen and Hamilton, recommended that BLS become “a more integral part of the Department.” Also, characterizing BLS as too compartmentalized and inflexible to meet new demands, the consultants suggested stronger central leadership for the Bureau, with a C hief Economist http://fraser.stlouisfed.org Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis 254 Four Commissioners: An Economy Going by the Numbers responsible for products and planning and a C hief Statistician responsible for standards and techniques.108 Ross accepted these recommen dations and put them into effect, also separating the operations functions from the program and planning functions in the Bureau’s regional offices. Implementing another Booz-Allen recommendation, the Bureau established a central Office o f Publications to help the Commissioner and the program offices plan, prepare, and disseminate public informa tion. The Office used computer languages created by the Bureau’s systems staff to generate photocomposed statistical tables, charts, and text, making the Bureau a pioneer in the photocomposed production o f statistical publications from existing data bases.109 Moreover, BLS now makes available major data series at the time o f initial release through electronic news releases and, more comprehensively, through magnetic tape. Indeed, the Bureau had emphasized improving its electronic information systems. Booz-Allen had stressed the need for broader and more aggressive use o f electronic data processing and had recom mended the centralization o f all data collection and processing, which were then being conducted separately in the various program offices. BLS had installed a second-generation computer system in 1963. U nder Ross, the Bureau encouraged computer language training for its professionals to promote expanded use o f the computers for analy sis and interpretation and worked with the Department to plan a system based on a third-generation facility. During the early 1970’s, the Office o f Systems and Standards developed Table Producing Language (TPL), a system designed to select, restructure, cross-tabulate, and display data. Installations around the world have acquired this tabulating system, including com mercial enterprises, State and municipal agencies, major universities, and other national statistical agencies. In fiscal year 1978, BLS initiated LA BSTA T (LABor STATistics), its greatly expanded data base or general pool o f statistical information which gives users direct on-line computer access to more than 150,000 time series. Meanwhile, the Bureau had moved into time-sharing on main frame computers at the National Institutes o f Health and, later, with a commercial computer center. This boosted processing capabilities in major programs and greatly increased opportunities for analytical research, while also facilitating transmissions between BLS headquar http://fraser.stlouisfed.org Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis 255 The First Hundred Years ters and the field offices—without committing scarce resources to expensive and soon-outdated equipment. Having already reorganized under Ross, the Bureau largely con formed with proposals issued by the Office o f Management and Bud get several years later for improving the organization o f all Federal statistical activities. In 1971, when OM B called for centralized data collection and processing activities within the statistical agencies and the establishment o f separate units for planning and data analysis, M oore replaced the positions o f C hief Economist and C hief Statisti cian with two Deputy Commissioners, one in charge o f data analysis and the other in charge o f statistical operations. Shiskin altered the arrangement somewhat by establishing a single Deputy Commissioner in 1975.110 During her term, Norwood refined the BLS organizational struc ture. She enlarged the role o f the Office o f Research and Evaluation, which she expanded in 1982, reflecting increased interest in mathe matical statistics and concern for improving the quality o f the Bureau’s data. In 1982, she also created the position o f Deputy Commissioner for Administration and Internal Operations. In 1983, she announced the recombination o f the two program offices dealing with employ ment statistics, forming the Office o f Employment and Unemploy ment Statistics.111 Field operations The tremendous growth in demand for local data and the accompany ing expansion o f Federal-State cooperative programs enhanced the role o f the Bureau’s regional offices. In 1967, as part o f the Depart ment’s effort to establish uniform regional organizations and bounda ries, BLS changed the location o f one o f its regional offices from Cleveland to Kansas City. In 1968, it established new offices in Phila delphia and Dallas, for a total o f eight. The incoming Nixon administration pushed decentralization of government activities, prompting the Department to issue orders to its agencies to delegate authority to the field. In 1973, when the Bureau’s regional directors were designated Assistant Regional Directors, Shiskin complained o f the “apparent subordination o f the Bureau staff to political appointees,” namely the Department o f Labor Regional D irectors.112 In 1975, Secretary Dunlop made a change, establishing Regional Commissioners along with Regional Solicitors and Regional http://fraser.stlouisfed.org Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis 256 Four Commissioners: An Economy Going by the Numbers Administrators. A t about the same time, Shiskin created the position o f Assistant Commissioner for Field Collection and Coordination in the national office. The regional offices now exercise several basic functions: They collect and process primary data required for the Consum er Price Index, the Producer Price Index, the Employment C ost Index, the international price program, and the occupational wage survey program. They supervise and assist cooperating State agencies in collect' ing labor force and occupational safety and health statistics and also assist in the preparation o f area estimates o f labor force, employment, and unemployment. In addition, they disseminate Bureau publications and data. The Regional Commissioners represent the CommiS' sioner and the Bureau in the regions and advise the Department’s Regional Director. A dvisory groups The Business and Labor Research Advisory Councils, established in 1947, continued to play active roles as advisers and disseminators of the Bureau’s data. M ost recently, Norwood has stressed the im por' tance o f their role and her desire to see that they become more helpful to the Bureau in carrying out its mission. Over the years, there have been proposals for extending the Bureau’s formal advisory arrangements. Moore proposed setting up some means o f obtaining advice from the staffs o f universities and research institutes, but these were not implemented. In 1979, the final report o f the National Commission on Employment and Unemploy ment Statistics contained a proposal for a panel “broadly representa tive o f the data-using community.” In his comments on the report, Secretary M arshall noted that BLS sought means o f obtaining advice from State, county, and municipal leaders, as well as C ETA prime sponsors, State employment security agencies, and others interested in State and local statistics. However, in his report on the National Commission recommendations, Secretary Donovan rejected the sug gestion for a “new permanent advisory council.”113 http://fraser.stlouisfed.org Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis 257 Chapter IX. History as Prologue: The Continuing Mission T he mission o f the Bureau o f Labor Statistics since its found' ing 100 years ago has been to collect information on eco' nomic and social conditions and, in the words o f Carroll Wright, the first Commissioner, through “fearless publica tion o f the results,” to let the people assess the facts and act on them. It was the belief o f its founders that dissemination o f the facts would lead to improvement o f the life o f the people. O n the occasion o f the Bureau's centennial, Janet L. Norwood, the tenth Commissioner, summed up the Bureau’s past—and continu ing—role: “The Bureau stands for— —Commitment to objectivity and fairness in all o f its data gathering and interpretive and analytical work; —Insistence on candor at all times; —Protection o f confidentiality; —Pursuit o f improvements; —W illingness to change; and —Maintenance o f consistency in the highest standards o f perform ance.” http://fraser.stlouisfed.org Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis 258 History a s Prologue: The Continuing Mission These principles, Norwood stressed, must be steadfastly applied in monitoring “our programs to ensure that they remain accurate, objective, and relevant. We must modernize our statistical techniques because a statistical agency that does not constandy move ahead in the use o f new techniques quickly moves backward.” A s an institution, the Bureau has evolved from the original and sole labor agency in the Federal Government, with a broad factfinding scope, to one among many specialized labor agencies. Serving as a quasi-Department o f Labor during its first two decades, it was called upon to study and report on issues such as the violent strikes and lockouts o f the period and the harsh conditions o f employment for women and children. Today, the Bureau is a general-purpose statistical agency, gathering, analyzing, and distributing information broadly applicable to labor economics and labor conditions. W hile the focus and perspectives o f Bureau studies have changed over the years, most areas o f investigation have remained germane— the course o f wages and prices, the state o f industrial relations, problems o f unemployment and the effects o f technological and demo graphic change, and safety and health conditions in the workplace. Some areas o f study, such as child labor, have been rendered unneces sary by legislation. In others, newer, specialized agencies have taken over the work the Bureau began. The Bureau’s role has been to provide data and analyses that contribute to the development o f policy without crossing the line into policy formulation, but the line is a fine one. Certainly Neill and Lubin, through their personal relations, advised Presidents and Secre taries on specifics o f labor and economic policy. A nd at times the Bureau has found itself in the midst o f controversy, its findings and objectivity challenged by one set o f partisans or another. Wright’s wage and price studies were attacked as products o f political manipula tion, and, during World War II, labor unions challenged the cost-ofliving index because o f their dissatisfaction with the government’s wage stabilization policies. Professional integrity is essential to a government agency which provides information for public and private policy needs, and the Bureau’s institutional probity has been a constant concern o f the Commissioners and their staffs. Over the years, the Bureau’s objectiv ity has been affirmed and reaffirmed upon review o f its work by congressional committees, Presidential commissions, and professional http://fraser.stlouisfed.org Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis 259 The First Hundred Years associations o f economists and statisticians. A ll noted areas needing improvement, but none found reason to question the independence and integrity o f the Bureau. For the first half-century o f its existence, the Bureau’s appropria tions changed only when special funding was provided for particular programs, such as the woman and child study o f 1907-09, and devel opment o f a cost-of-living index during World War I. The emergency demands o f the depression o f the 1930’s and the accompanying social legislation also led Congress to increase appropriations to expand and improve the Bureau’s statistics. And, similarly, World War II needs generated increased resources and programs. After the war, the climate was vastly different. Government pol icy concerns required data produced on a frequent and regular basis. The Employment A ct o f 1946, which established the congressional Joint Economic Committee and the Council o f Economic Advisers, epitomized the new conditions. A s government social and economic policies developed and expanded, legislation frequently incorporated Bureau statistics as escalators or other administrative devices. There was now a regular demand for new and improved statistics, with support for resources to make them available. W hile increases in resources have not always been forthcoming, and programs have been cut on occasion to make room for new and expanded series, the postwar trend has been one o f provision o f funds for such expansion and improvements. Bureau programs have changed to meet changing conditions. Ongoing statistical series such as the Consum er Price Index have been adjusted periodically to assure that concepts and coverage reflect altered societal patterns. Along with regular planned revisions, the Bureau has made interim revisions, as in the case o f the treatment of the homeownership component in the CPI. New series, including the Employment C ost Index and the multifactor productivity indexes, have been developed. Meeting these vastly increased requirements has been made possi ble through the development o f sophisticated statistical techniques of sampling and the computerization o f statistical operations. Bureau personnel now include mathematical statisticians, computer program mers, and computer systems analysts as well as economists and clerical staff. http://fraser.stlouisfed.org Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis 260 History a s Prologue: The Continuing Mission In addition, close coordination with other Federal agencies and with the States, evolving from Wright’s early efforts, has improved the quality o f the data and efficiency in collection and processing. Bureau respondents generally have given their full cooperation because o f the assurance o f confidentiality for reported information, a guarantee which has been assiduously enforced. In its communication with the public, the Bureau has emphasized frankness regarding limi tations o f the data and the provision o f detailed information on con cepts and methods. There has been a constant striving to improve the timeliness, regularity, and accuracy o f the data and their public presen tation. W hile well established, the principles have needed regular reiter ation, particularly during unsetded times. There have been many occasions when the messenger has been buffeted by the storms of rapid economic and social change. This has been especially true when the Bureau’s data have been used in implementing and monitoring policy, as in the wartime use o f its cost-of-living index for wage stabili zation. O n other occasions, Bureau staff efforts to explain technical limitations have collided with policymakers’ unqualified use o f the data. In such circumstances, the Bureau has been sustained by the widespread recognition that its nonpartisanship and objectivity must be assured and protected. Congress, successive Secretaries o f Labor, the Bureau’s labor and business advisory groups, the professional associations, and the press have supported the independence and impartiality o f statistical research in government agencies. The roots o f this independence and professionalism are deep and strong. The tradition o f impartiality has been underwritten by both Democratic and Republican administrations over die century o f the Bureau’s existence, during which Commissioners have been selected for their technical competence without regard to partisan considera tions. The Bureau faces great challenges in the years ahead as the phe nomena it measures grow in complexity in the dynamic economy of the U nited States. It will require openness to new methods and techniques and adherence to the standards already set to carry out its mission during the next century. http://fraser.stlouisfed.org Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis 261 Appendix: BLS Publications F rom its beginning, the Bureau o f Labor Statistics has com ducted a substantial publications program. Initially, the Bureau published annual reports, issuing 25 volumes for the years 1885-1910. Each presented the comprehensive findings o f a specific survey or study, covering such topics as strikes and lockouts, convict labor, industrial education, and technological dis placement o f workers. Supplementing these, the Bureau conducted special investiga tions, frequently at the direction o f Congress, producing 12 special reports between 1889 and 1905. These covered such subjects as mar riage and divorce, slum condititions, social insurance, and labor legis lation. The Bureau also provided Congress with reports on such topics as labor disputes and pension systems, later published as House or Senate documents. Two notable examples were the 19-volume Report on Condition of Woman and Child Wage-Earners in the United States (1910-13) and the 4-volume Report on Conditions of Employment in the Iron and Steel Industry (1911-12). From 1895, when Congress authorized publication o f a periodi- http://fraser.stlouisfed.org Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis 262 Appendix: BLS Publications cal, until 1912, the Bureau issued the bimonthly Bulletin. This presented original work, digests o f State reports, summaries and digests o f foreign labor and statistical papers, and summaries o f cur rent legislation and court decisions. In 1912, the Bureau discontinued the annual reports and the bimonthly Bulletin, issuing instead a series o f bulletins, published irregularly, each covering a specific program area. In 1915, BLS intro duced the Monthly Review, changing the name to Monthly Labor Review in 1918. Over the years, BLS added such periodicals as Labor Information Bulletin and Labor Developments Abroad and published such special volumes as Activities of the Bureau of Labor Statistics in World War II (1947), The Gift of Freedom (1949), and BLS Centennial Album (1984). A t present, BLS publishes bulletins, numbered continuously from 1895; reports, a series started in 1953; and one quarterly and five monthly periodicals. These periodicals, reflecting the importance of the major recurring statistical series, are CPI Detailed Report, Current Wage Developments, Employment and Earnings, Monthly Labor Review, Occupational Outlook Quarterly, and Producer Price Indexes. In addition, BLS issues some 200 national and 1,300 regional news releases each year and summaries o f survey results in advance of fuller publication in bulletins, providing timely distribution o f the Bureau’s latest data. There have been several special sections in the Monthly Labor Review giving historical perspective: “50 'fears’ Progress o f American Labor” (July 1950), “Seventy fears o f Service—The Story o f B L S” (January 1955), and “Fifty fears o f the M LR” (July 1965). The Bureau has published subject indexes for the M LR—Bulletins 695 (1941), 696 (1942), 1080 (1953), 1335 (1960), 1746 (1973), and 1922 (1976). In addition, there are indexes to each volume, now presented annually in the December issue. The Bureau also has produced numerical listings and subject indexes for the bulletins and reports, including BLS Publications, 1886-1971, Bulletin 1749 (1972) and BLS Publications, 1972-77, Bulle tin 1990 (1978). Periodically, BLS has published bulletins explaining its statistical methods and procedures, beginning with Methods of Procuring and Computing Statistical Information of the Bureau of Labor Statistics, Bulletin 326 (1923). In the 1950’s, the Bureau issued two editions of http://fraser.stlouisfed.org Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis 263 The First Hundred Years Techniques of Preparing M ajor BLS Statistical Series, Bulletin 993 in 1950 and Bulletin 1168 in 1954. U nder the title BLS Handbook of Methods, the Bureau continued with Bulletins 1458 (1966), 1711 (1971), 1910 (1976), and 2134-1 (1982) and 2134-2 (1984). BLS published Handbook of Labor Statistics, Bulletin 439, in 1927 as a compendium o f historical data, issuing the most recent edition, Bulletin 2217, in 1985. In sheer volume, the largest number o f bulletins have presented wage data, published currently as Industry Wage Surveys and Area Wage Surveys (previously Occupational Wage Surveys). Two major series on contract provisions were the 19-volume set, Collective Bargaining Provisions, Bulletin 908 (1947-50), and the 21-volume series, M ajor Collective Bargaining Agreements, Bulletin 1425 (1964-82). In 1947, the Bureau issued the first Directory of Labor Unions in the United States, Bulletin 901, publishing the last edition in 1980. One o f the Bureau’s most popular bulletins is the Occupational Outlook Handbook, which it revises every 2 years—most recently as Bulletin 2205 (1984). In recent years, BLS has expanded its analysis and publication of labor force data on women, minorities, and families. For example, in 1978, it introduced the quarterly report Employment in Perspective: Working Women and, in 1980, another quarterly report, Employment in Perspective: Minority Workers, with data on blacks and Hispanics. http://fraser.stlouisfed.org Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis 264 Source Notes C h a p te r 1. O rig in s 1Jam es C . Sylvis, The Life, Speeches, Labors an d Essays o f W illiam H. Sylvis (Philadelphia: Claxton, Remsen & Haffelfinger, 1872), p. 74. 2 Terence V. Powderly, Thirty Years o f L abor (Colum bus, Ohio: Excelsior Pub lishing H ouse, 1889), pp. 302-303. 3 U . S. C ongress, H ouse, Select Com mittee on D epression in Labor and Busi ness, Investigation Relative to the C au ses o f the G eneral Depression in Labor an d Business (46C, 2S, 1879), pp. 8-9,118-119. 4 American Federation o f Labor, Proceedings, 1881, p. 4, and Proceedings, 1883, p. 14; Joseph P. Goldberg and William T. Moye, “The A FL and a National B L S,” Monthly L abor Review, M arch 1982, pp. 21-29. 5 U . S. Congress, Senate, Com m ittee on Education and Labor, L abor an d C ap i tal (48C, 1885), Vol. I, pp. 8 7 ,2 7 1 ,327,382,790-791,1142. 6 Ibid., pp. 570-571; ibid., Vol. m , pp. 278-280. 7 Congressional Record (48C, IS), Apr. 19,1884, p. 3140. 8 Congressional Record (48C, IS), Mar. 7, 1884, pp. 1675-1676; Apr. 19, 1884, p. 3139; May 14,1884, p. 4157. 9 The New York Times, Feb. 10,1884, p. 6; Apr. 10,1884, p. 8. 10Jou rn al o f U nited Labor, May 25, 1884, p. 702; Powderly, Thirty Years, pp. 314-315. 11 National Archives Record G roup (NARG) 48, Secretary o f the Interior, Appointm ents Division, Powderly to President A rthur, June 30,1884. 12 N A R G 48, Secretary o f the Interior, Appointm ents Division, Anonymous, re. labor question and appointm ent o f a Com m issioner, stam ped received Mar. 16, 1885; The New York Times, July 24, 1884, p. 4; July 29, 1884, p. 4; Aug. 15, 1884, p. 5; Nov. 27,1884, p. 1. 13 A FL, Proceedings, 1884, p. 14. ^ The New York Times, July 1,1884, p. 4. 15 N A R G 48, Secretary o f the Interior, Appointm ents Division, Henry Feuer bach to President A rthur, Aug. 14,1884. 16 N A R G 48, Secretary o f the Interior, Appointm ents Division, W right to Secre tary, Aug. 26, 1884; Anonym ous, Mar. 16, 1885; and National Labor Convention, July 30, Chicago, received O ct. 18,1884. 17 The New York Times, Jan. 20,1885, p. 4. Chapter II. Carroll Wright 1James Leiby, Carroll Wright and Labor Reform: The Origin of Labor Statistics (Cambridge: Harvard University Press, 1960), pp. 204-205. 2Joseph Dorfman, The Economic Mind in American Civilization, Vol. Ill, 1865-1918 (New \fork: Viking Press, 1949), pp. 123-130. http://fraser.stlouisfed.org Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis 265 The First Hundred Years 3 W endell D . M acdonald, "T he Early H istory o f Labor Statistics in the U nited States,” Labor History, Spring 1972, p. 275; Read Bain and Joseph Cohen, "Trends in A pplied Sociology,” in George A . Lundberg, Read Bain, and N ek A nderson, eds., Trends in American Sociology (New ìb rk : H arper and Brothers, 1929), p. 350. 4 C arroll D . W right, The Relation of Political Economy to the Labor Question (Boston: A . W illiams and C o., 1882), pp. 11-12,16-17. 5 M assachusetts Bureau o f Statistics o f Labor, Eighth Annual Report, 1877, p- vii; W right, Popular Instruction in Social Science (Boston: G eo. E. C rosby & C o., 1886), p. 11. 6 W right, "T he Factory System as an Element o f Civilization,” Journal of Social Science, Decem ber 1882, p. 125; M assachusetts Bureau, Sixteenth A nnual Report, 1885, p. 26. 7 W right, “Factory System ” (1882), p. 110. 8 W right, Outline of Practical Sociology (New "fork: Longm ans, G reen and C o., 1909, seventh edition, revised), pp. 251,256-257. 9 W right, "T h e Relation o f Invention to Labor,” The Liberal Club, Buffalo (Buf falo: The M atthews-Northup C o., 1893), p. 32; W igh t, "T he Factory as an Element in Social Life,” Catholic University Bulletin, January 1901, p. 64. 10 W right, Relation of Political Economy, pp. 25, 27; W igh t, “W hy Women Are Paid Less Than M en,” Forum, July 1892, p. 637. 11 W right, “D oes the Factory Increase Immorality?” Forum, May 1892, pp. 344-349. 12 W right, Outline, p. 295. 13 W igh t, The Battles of Labor (Philadelphia: G.W . Jacobs & C o., 1906), pp. 174, 176. 14 W igh t, Batdes of Labor, p. 186; W right, Outline, p. 299. 15 M assachusetts Bureau, Eighth Annual Report, 1877, p. v i 16 W right, “T he W orking o f the U nited States Bureau o f Labor,” Bulletin (54), Septem ber 1904, p. 978. 17John R. Com m ons, M yself (New Tbrk: T he M acmillan C o., 1934), p. 93. 18 W alter F. W illcax, "Developm ent o f the American C ensus Office since 1890,” Political Science Quarterly, Septem ber 1914, p. 11; S.N .D . N orth, “The life and Work o f C arroll Davidson W right," Am erican Statistical A ssociation Journal, June 1909, p. 461. 19 W right, “T he W orking,” pp. 976-977. 20 G reat Britain, Royal Com m ission on Labour, Fourth Report, 1893-1894, Voi. X X X IX , Pt. 1, Minutes of Evidence (c.7063.1) (London: H er Majesty’s Stationery Office, 1893), pp. 478,491,493. 21 W right, “T he W orking,” p. 977. 22 N ational A rchives Record G roup 257, B LS, Telegrams, 1897-1902, W right to J. B. C rockett, Mar. 30,1896. 23 E.R .L. G ould, “The Progress o f Labor Statistics in the U nited States,” Interna tional Statistical Institute Bulletin (Rome, 1892), p. 188. 24 W right, “A Basis for Statistics o f C ost o f Production,” A SA Journal, June 1891, p. 258. 25 American Federationist, June 1897, p. 76. http://fraser.stlouisfed.org Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis 266 Source Notes 26 W right, “The W ork o f the U .S. Bureau o f Labor,” A ssociation o f Officials o f Bureaus o f Labor Statistics, Proceedings, 1885, pp. 129,132-133. 27 Leiby, Carroll Wright, pp. 80-82. 28 H enry Jones Ford, The Cleveland E ra (New Haven: Yale University Press, 1921), pp. 131-132; D enis Tilden Lynch, Grover Cleveland (New "fork: H orace Liveright, Inc., 1932), p. 328. 29 N ational Labor Tribune, Feb. 25, 1888, p. 1; June 30, 1888, p. 1; Journal of United Labor, Sept. 20,1888, p. 2702. 30 Terence V. Powderly, The Path I Trod, ed. by Harry J. Carm an, Henry David, and Raul N. Guthrie (New Y>rk: Colum bia U niversity Press, 1940), pp. 230-232; Journal of United Labor, May 5,1888, p. 2672. 31U . S. Congress, H ouse, Select Com m ittee on the Tenth C ensus, Result of the Tenth Census (House Report 2432, 48C , 2S, 1884), p. 3; H ouse, Com m ittee on the C ensus, Permanent Census Bureau (House R ep t 262, 57C , IS , 1902), A ppendix A, Part 1, H istorical Summary. 32 W right with W illiam C . H unt, The History and Growth of the Untied States Census (Washington: Governm ent Printing Office, 1900), p. 81; U .S. Congress, Senate (52C, IS , 1891), Senate Executive Docum ent No. 1, Letter from the Secretary o f the Interior, A Permanent Census Bureau, pp. 65-66. 33 W illcox, “Developm ent,” pp. 444-445. 34 S.N .D . N orth, “T he Life," p. 459. 35 W illcox, “Developm ent,” p. 443. 36 Ibid., pp. 445-446; W right and H unt, The History and Growth, pp. 82-83; H ouse, Com m ittee on Appropriations, Hearings, Permanent Census (54C, 2S, 1897), pp. 3, 7 ,11. 37 Senate, Com m ittee on the C ensus, Permanent Census Service (54C, 2S, 1897), p. 28; H ouse, Com m ittee on A ppropriations, Report The Twelfth and Subsequent Censuses (House R ep t 2909, 54C , 2S, 1897), p. 2; H ouse, Com m ittee on the Census, Permanent Census (House R ep t 262), H istorical Summary. 38 Congressional Record (55C, 2S), Jan. 5,1898, p. 316; Feb. 21,1898, p. 1965. 39 Ibid., pp. 1965,1967. 40 Ibid., p. 1965. 41 W right and H u n t The History and Growth, p. 84. 42 A lbert K. Steigerwalt, The N ational Association o f M anufacturers, 1895-1914 (Ann A rbor: Bureau o f Business Research, Graduate School o f Business Adm inistra tion, U niversity o f Michigan, 1964), pp. 83-84. 43 Am erican Federation o f Labor, Proceedings, 1896, p. 81; Proceedings, 1897, p. 22; Library o f C ongress, American Federation o f Labor Papers, Sam uel Gom pers Letterbooks, Gom pers to Frank H all, New O rleans, Feb. 10,1899. 44 U .S. Departm ent o f Com m erce and Labor, Organization and Law of die Department of Commerce and Labor (Washington: Governm ent Printing Office, 1904), pp. 501 and 520; Henry F. Pringle, Theodore Roosevelt (New Y>rk: H arcourt, Brace & C o., 1931), pp. 244-246; Thom as Beer, H anna (New Y>rk: O ctagon Books, 1973), p. 275. 45 A FL, Proceedings, 1901, p. 27; Congressional Record (57C, IS), Jan. 22,1902, p. 863. http://fraser.stlouisfed.org Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis 267 The First Hundred Years 46 H ouse, Com m ittee on Interstate and Foreign Com merce, Hearing, Department of Commerce (57C, 1902), pp. 30 ,4 0 ,1 0 5 . 47 Ibid., p. 34. 48 Ibid., pp. 6 ,2 2 . 49 Ibid., pp. 506,547-548,552. 50 Ibid., p. 501. 51 Ibid., pp. 492, 495; N A R G 257, B LS, Letters Sent, Wright to Fawcett, Jan. 31, 1902. 52 Francis E. Rourke, “T he Departm ent o f Labor and the Trade U nions," The Western Political Quarterly, 1954, p. 660. 53 The Works of Theodore Roosevelt, Presidential Addresses and State Papers (New \o rk : RF. C ollier & Son Publishers), VoL HI, pp. 126-127. 54 W right, “The W orking* (1904), p. 975. 55 W right, “T he W orking o f d ie Departm ent o f Labor," Cosmopolitan, June 1892, p. 236. 56 H ouse, Com m ittee on A ppropriations, Hearings, Legislative, Executive, and Judicial Appropriations, F Y 1897 (54C, 1896), p. 83; ibid., F Y 1903 (1902), p. 290. 57 U .S. Com m issioner o f Labor, First Annual Report, Industrial Depressions (1886), pp. 290-293. 58 W right, “T he W orking," Cosmopolitan, p. 233. 59 A FL, Proceedings, 1887, p. 9. 60 Richm ond Mayo-Smith, “The National Bureau o f Labor and Industrial D epressions,” Political Science Quarterly, Septem ber 1886, p. 441. 61 Com m issioner o f Labor, First A nnual Report, p. 291; Alvin H. Hansen, Busi ness Cycles and N ational Income (New York: W.W. N orton &. C o., Inc., 1951), pp. 64-65,222-224. 62 Com m issioner o f Labor, Thirteenth A nnual Report, H and and Machine Labor (1898), pp. 5-6. 63 M acdonald, “C arroll D . W right and H is Influence on the B L S," Monthly Labor Review, January 1955, p. 8. 64 Locomotive Firemen’s M agazine, A ugust 1896, pp. 99-100. 65 Locomotive Firemen’s M agazine, Septem ber 1903, pp. 457,460-461. 66 Senate, A Report on Labor Disturbances in the State of Colorado, from 1880 to 1904, Inclusive (Senate Doc. 1 22,58C, 3S, 1905). A lso, N A R G 257, BLS, Letters Sent, May 17 to July 20, 1904, G . W. W. H anger to President, June 15, 1904; and July 21 to Sept. 24,1904, W right to President, S e p t 8,1904. 67 Com m issioner o f Labor, Eleventh Special Report, Regulation and Restriction of Output (1904), p. 27. 68 Clyde O . Fisher, Use of Federal Power in Settlement of Railway Labor Disputes, Bulletin 303 (Bureau o f Labor Statistics, 1922), pp. 18-19. 69 U . S . Strike Com m ission, Report on the Chicago Strike of June-July, 1894 (1895), pp. 194-201. 70 Ibid., p. 52. 71 American Federationist, December 1894, p. 231. http://fraser.stlouisfed.org Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis 268 Source Notes 72 H ouse, Com m ittee on Labor, Carriers Engaged in Interstate Commerce (House Rept. 1754, 53C, 3S, 1895), W right to L. E. M cGann, Feb. 1, 1895, p. 4; Locomotive Firemen’s M agazine, M arch 1895, p. 262. 73 H ouse, Labor, Carriers (1895), p. 4. 74 Congressional Record (54C, 2S), Feb. 26,1897, pp. 2388-2389. 73 H ouse, Com m ittee on Labor, Carriers Engaged in Interstate Commerce and Their Employees (House Rept. 4 5 4 ,55C, 2S, 1898), pp. 2-3. 76 U nited M ine W orkers o f Am erica Journal, Sept. 11,1902, pp. 1, 2 ,4 . 77 “O ur Splendid Labor Com m issioner,” Current Literature, December 1902, p. 689; “Colonel W right’s Inconsistent Awards,” American Federationist, November 1903, p. 1156; UMW A Journal, A pril 21,1904, p. 4. 78 Com m issioner o f Labor, Fourth Annual Report, Working Women in Large Cities (1888), p. 10. 79 Ibid., pp. 70, 73. 80 A ssociation o f Officials o f Bureaus, Proceedings, 1895, p. 21. 81 Com m issioner o f Labor, Eleventh Annual Report, Work and Wages of Men, Women and Children (1895-96); H . L. Bliss, “Eccentric Official Statistics, HI,” Ameri can Journal of Sociology, November 1897. 82 Com m issioner o f Labor, Seventeenth Annual Report, Trade and Technical Edu cation (1902), p. 10. 83 Congressional Record (52C, IS), May 20,1892, p. 4474. 84 W right, Relation of Political Economy, p. 33. 85 Com m issioner o f Labor, Fourteenth Annual Report, Water, G as, and ElectricLight Plants Under Private and M unicipal Ownership (1899), p. 7; A ssociation o f Officials o f Bureaus, Proceedings, 1902, p. 77. ^W righ t, “The Industrial Progress o f the South,” A ssociation o f Officials o f Bureaus, Proceedings, 1897, p p . 116-117; Leiby, Carroll Wright, p. 107. 87 N A R G 257, B LS, Letters Sent, Jan. 2 to Feb. 26, 1901, W right to Reuben S. Sm ith, W ashington, D .C ., Feb. 8,1901. 88 N A R G 257, BLS, Letters Sent, Aug. 11 to O c t 28, 1903, W right to D u Bois, Aug. 24,1903. 89 Dorfm an, The Economic Mind, pp. 350-351. 90 John Higham, Strangers in the Land (New 'fork: Atheneum , 1971), pp. 90-91. 91 Senate, Com m ittee on Finance, Retail Prices and Wages (Senate Rept. 986, 52C, IS , 1892), p. I. 92 25 Stat. 183. 93 Senate, Com m ittee on Finance, Retail Prices and Wages; and Wholesale Prices, Wages, and Transportation (Senate Rept. 1394,52C, 2S, 1893). 94 “Retail Prices under the M cKinley A c t" Quarterly Journal of Economics, O cto ber 1892, p. 105; “N otes and M emoranda,” Quarterly Journal of Economics, O ctober 1893, p. 104; Frank W. Taussig, “Results o f Recent Investigations on Prices in the U nited States,” A SA Journal, December 1893, pp. 487-488; Mayo-Smith, Science of Statistics, part II, Statistics and Economics (New Tfork: Colum bia University Press, 1899), pp. 207,316-317. http://fraser.stlouisfed.org Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis 269 The First Hundred Years 95 Frederick C . Waite, Prices and Wages (Washington, 1894), pp. 7-12. A n address delivered before the N ational Statistical A ssociation at the Colum bian U n i' versity in Novem ber 1894. 96 Roland P. Falkner, “W holesale Prices: 1890 to 1899," Bulletin (27), March 1900, p. 270; Taussig, in "N otes and M emoranda,” Quarterly Journal of Economics, May 1900, p. 432. 97 “C ourse o f W holesale Prices, 1890 to 1901," Bulletin (39), M arch 1902, p. 234. 96 W esley C . M itchell, “The M aking and U sing o f Index Num bers,” Index Num bers of Wholesale Prices in die United States and Foreign Countries, Bulletin 284 (Bureau o f Labor Statistics, 1921), p. 127. 99 Com m issioner o f Labor, Eighteenth A nnual Report, Cost of Living and Retail Prices o f Food (1903); “Retail Prices o f Food, 1890 to 1904," Bulletin (59), July 1905. 100 Com m issioner o f Labor, Nineteenth Annual Report, Wages and Hours of Labor (1904); “Wages and C ost o f Living,” Bulletin (53), July 1904, p. 703; “Wages and H ours o f Labor in M anufacturing Industries, 1890 to 1904,” Bulletin (59), July 1905, pp. 1-3; H arry M. Douty, The Development of Wage Statistics in the United States (Ithaca: C ornell University, New fo rk State School o f Industrial and Labor Relations, Bulletin N o. 64,1972), pp. 11,18-19. id “W ages and C ost Living,” 1904, pp. 722-723; The New fork Times, Aug. 8, 1904, p. 5; UMW A Journal, Dec. 29, 1904, p. 4; Amalgamated M eat C utters and Butcher W orkmen, Official Journal, A ugust 1904, p. 22. 102 International A ssociation o f M achinists, Machinists’ Monthly Journal, Septem ber 1904, pp. 776-777,823. 103 Ernest Howard, “Inflation and Prices,” Political Science Quarterly, March 1907, p. 81. 104 M itchell, “M ethods o f Presenting Statistics o f W ages,” A SA Journal, Decem ber 1905, pp. 328, 330; and “The Trustworthiness o f the Bureau o f Labor’s Index Num ber o f W ages,” Quarterly Journal of Economics, May 1911, p. 613; National Civic Federation, Monthly Review, Sept. 15,1904, p. 8. 103 E. H . Phelps Brown and M argaret H . Browne, “C arroll D. W right and the Developm ent o f British Labour Statistics,” Economica, A ugust 1963, pp. 279-280. 106 W right, “The Evolution o f W ige Statistics,” Quarterly Journal of Economics, January 1892, pp. 185-186; G.W.W. Hanger, “Bureaus o f Statistics o f Labor in Foreign C ountries,” Bulletin (54), Septem ber 1904, p. 1023. 107 G reat Britain, Royal Com m ission (c.7063.1), Minutes of Evidence, pp. 435-464. 108 Brown and Browne, “C arroll D . W right,” p. 283; H ouse, Com m ittee on Labor, Report, Bulletins of die Department of Labor (House Rept. 1752, 53C, 3S, 1895), W igh t to L. E. M cGann, Feb. 1,1895, p. 1. 109 Jam es M yers, “American Relations with the International Labor Office, 1919-1932,” A nnals of the American Academy of Political and Social Science, March 1933, p. 135. 110 Hanger, “Bureaus o f Statistics,” pp. 1080-1086; Historical Survey of Interna tional Action Affecting Labor, Bulletin 268 (Bureau o f Labor Statistics, 1920), pp. 54, 87,89-90. http://fraser.stlouisfed.org Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis 270 Source Notes 111 M assachusetts, Com m ittee on Relations Between Employer and Employee, Report (1904). 112 M assachusetts, Com m ission on Industrial and Technical Education, Report (1906); W right, “The W ork o f the National Society for the Promotion o f Industrial Education,” A n n als o f the A m erican A cadem y o f Political an d Social Science, January 1909, p. 13. 113 Wright, “The W orking” (1904), pp. 987-989. Chapter III. Charles Neill 1 Theodore Roosevelt, The Letters of Theodore Roosevelt, selected and edited by Elting E. M orison and others (Cambridge: Harvard University Press, 1952), Vol. V I, p. 1301, to P. H. Grace, O ct. 19,1908. 2 U . S. President, Message, Beginning of die First Session of the Fifty-ninth Congress (Dec. 5,1905), pp. 14-15. 3 President, Message, Beginning of the First Session of die Fifty-seventh Congress (Dec. 3,1901), pp. 10 and 12. 4 President, M essage, Beginning of the Third Session of die Fifty-eighth Congress (Dec. 6,1904), p. 5. 5 W illiam Howard Taft Papers, M anuscript Division, Library o f Congress, C harles P. Neill to Rudolph Forster, A ssistant to Secretary to President, S e p t 12, 1911. 6 U .S. Congress, H ouse, Com m ittee on Agriculture, Hearings: Beveridge Amend ment (59C, IS , 1906), pp. 94-95. 7 G eorge M. Kober, com piler, Charitable and Reformatory Institutions in the District of Columbia (69C, 2S, Senate Docum ent 207, 1927), pp. 9-11, 20; Constance M cLaughlin Green, Washington, Capital City, 1879-1950 (Princeton: Princeton U ni versity Press, 1962), p. 73. 8 Catholic University, C harles P. Neill Papers, Neill—A rticles, Neill, “The Eco nomic Evolution o f Soceity,” in “The Evolution o f Industry” (Washington: The University Extension Com m ittee, Civic C enter Lectures, 1900); Green, Washington, p. 71; W alter F. Dodd, The Government of the District of Columbia (Washington: John Byrne & C o., 1909), p. 269. 9 Roosevelt, Theodore Roosevelt, An Autobiography (New \b rk : The Macmillan C o., 1919), p. 509; Richard G . Balfe, “C harles P. Neill and the U nited States Bureau o f Labor,” Ph.D. dissertation (University o f N otre Dame, 1956), pp. 38-39. 10 Balfe, “C harles P. N eill,” p. 58; Catholic University, Neill Papers, C orrespon dence, 1895-1942, Edward A . M oseley to M arshall Cushing, Nov. 22, 1904; and Review of Reviews, January 1905, p. 9. 11 National Conference o f Charities and Correction, Proceedings, 1901, p. 376. 12 Neill, “Standard o f Living,” Charities and Commons, July 22, 1905, pp. 942-943. 13 N eill, “C hild Labor at the National C apital,” in Annals of the American A cad emy of Political and Social Science, M arch 1906, pp. 270 ft; Charities and Commons, http://fraser.stlouisfed.org Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis 271 The First Hundred Years Mar. 3, 1906, pp. 795 ff.; and National C hild Labor Com mittee, Child Labor, A M enace to Industry, Education, and Good Citizenship: Proceedings, 1906, pp. 12 ff. 14 N eill, “The Prospects o f Industrial Peace," Collier’s Weekly, Aug. 22,1903, p. 9. 15 N eill, “Som e Ethical A spects o f the Labor M ovem ent," in his The Social Application of Religion (Cincinnati: Jennings and Graham , 1908), pp. 6 9 -7 0 ,7 6 ,8 3 . 16 Review of Reviews, July 1906, pp. 6-12; and William H . Harbaugh, Power and Responsibility, The Life and Times of Theodore Roosevelt (New 'fork: Farrar, Straus and Cudahy, 1961), pp. 255-260. 17 Roosevelt, The Letters, V ol V , p. 190, to Jam es W ilson, Secretary o f Agricul ture, Mar. 22, 1906; Theodore Roosevelt Papers, M anuscript Division, Library o f Congress, Roosevelt to “My D ear Com m issioner N eill,” Mar. 22,1906; Balfe, “Charles P. N eill,” pp. 79-82. 18 Current Literature, July 1906, pp. 1-9. 19 U . S. Congress, H ouse, Special Com m ittee to Investigate the Conditions in the Stock Yards o f Chicago, Conditions in Chicago Stock Yards (59C, IS , H ouse Doc. 873,1906); H ouse, A griculture, Hearings: Beveridge, pp. 261-271. 20 H ouse, A griculture, Hearings: Beveridge, p. 128. 21 Current Literature, July 1906, p. 8. 22 American Federationist, May 1906, pp. 293-296; Roosevelt, The Letters, Vol. V , pp. 190-191, to Frank M orrison, Mar. 22,1906. 23 Roosevelt, The Letters, VoL V , pp. 379-380, to Neill, Aug. 21, 1906; Theodore Roosevelt Papers, Neill to the President, Aug. 16, 1906, and Press Release, Sept. 19, 1906; Taft Papers, Neill to Taft, Aug. 28,1907. 24 Amalgamated M eat C utters and Butcher W orkmen, Butchers’ Journal, Septem ber and O ctober 1906, p. 1. 25 International A ssociation o f M achinists, M achinists’ Monthly Journal, Novem ber 1906, p. 981. 26 Roosevelt, The Letters, V ol V , p. 323, to Neill, June 28, 1906; and Balfe, “Charles P. N eill," pp. 116-119. 27 Naom i W iener Cohen, A D ual Heritage, The Public Career of O scar S. Straus (Philadelphia: T he Jewish Publication Society o f America, 1969), pp. 158-160; O scar S. Straus Papers, M anuscript Division, Library o f Congress, Correspondence, Roosevelt to Straus, Jan. 18,1907. 28 Straus Papers, Diary M aterials, Vol. I, 1906-1907, p. 54, Mar. 12; Balfe, “C harles P. N eill,” pp. 116-118. 29 Taft Papers, N eill to C harles D . H illes, Secretary to the President, Apr. 10, 1911; H ouse, Com m ittee on Appropriations, Legislative, Executive, and Judicial Appropriation Bill for 1910, Hearings, p. 12. 30 American Federation o f Labor, Proceedings, 1907, p. 40. 31 U . S. Departm ent o f Com merce and Labor, Labor Conference (Washington: Governm ent Printing Office, 1909), p. 26; Neill, “D istribution o f Im migrants,” N ational Civic Federation Review, M arch-A pril 1907, p. 10. 32 Taft Papers, Neill to the President, Sept. 11,1909. 33 U . S. Com m issioner o f Labor, “Third Report o f the Com m issioner o f Labor on Hawaii,” Bulletin (66), Septem ber 1906, p. iii; and "Fourth Report o f the Com mis sioner o f Labor on Hawaii,” Bulletin (94), May 1911, pp. 762-763. http://fraser.stlouisfed.org Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis 272 Source Notes 34 Selig Perlman and Philip Taft, History of Labor in the United States, 1896-1932, Vol. IV , Labor Movements (New \b rk : The M acmillan C o., 1935), pp. 262-265; The New York Times, Sept. 7,1909, p. 1, and Sept. 11,1909, p. 1. 35 A FL, Proceedings, 1909, p. 209. 36 Perlman and Taft, Labor Movements, pp. 139-143; Taft Papers, Neill to the President, Sept. 11,1909, and Taft to Neill, S e p t 13,1909. 37 U .S. Bureau o f Labor, Report on Strike at Bethlehem Steel Works, South Bethle hem, Pennsylvania (61C, 2S, Senate Doc. 521,1910), pp. 10-16. 38IAM , Monthly Journal, June 1910, p. 499; The New York Times, May 12, 1910, p .9 . 39 Bureau o f Labor, Report on Conditions of Employment in the Iron and Steel Industry (62C, IS , Senate Doc. 110). 40 IAM , Monthly Journal, Septem ber 1911, p. 836. 41 “Report on Wages and H ours in the Iron and Steel Industry, Issued by the U . S. Bureau o f Labor,” American Federationist, M arch 1912, p. 227; Sam uel Gom pers, Seventy Years of Life and Labor (New 'fork: E. P. D utton, 1925), V ol II, pp. 129-130. 42 Bureau o f Labor, Report on the M iners* Strike in Bituminous Coal Field in Westmoreland County, Pa. in 1910-11 (62C, 2S, H ouse D oc. 847, 1912), pp. 5-10, 14-18. 43 Bureau o f Labor, Report on Strike of Textile Workers in Lawrence, M ass, in 1912 (62C, 2S, Senate Doc. 870, 1912), pp. 7-9; H ouse, Com m ittee on Rules, The Strike at Lawrence, M ass., Hearings (62C, 2S, 1912), p. 3. 44 Balfe, “C harles P. N eill,” p. 150. 45 Survey, Dec. 30, 1911, p. 1407; Jan. 13, 1912, p. 1563; Mar. 9, 1912, p. 1898; President, Message Concerning the Work of die Interior Department and Other M atters (Feb. 2, 1912), pp. 11, 12; H ouse, Com m ittee on Labor, Hearings: Industrial Commis sion (62C, 2S, 1912), pp. 25-26. 46 Timothy Shea, “The Southern Pacific Strike,” Brotherhood o f Locom otive Firemen and Enginemen, Locomotive Firem en an d Enginem en’s M agazine, February 1907, p. 265. 47 H ouse, Com m ittee on Interstate and Foreign Com merce, The Erdm an Act, Hearings on Amendments (62C, 2S, 1912), p. 38; Sam uel P. O rth, "T he Battle Line o f Labor,” The World’s Work, Novem ber 1912, p. 60. 48 M artin A . Knapp, “Governm ent M ediation in Railroad Labor D isputes,” National Civic Federation, Proceedings, 1912, pp. 29,31. 49 D ept, o f Com merce and Labor, Reports, 1912, pp. 15-16; Neill, “M ediation and A rbitration o f Railway Labor D isputes in the U nited States,” Bulletin (98), January 1912, p. 26. 50 H ouse, Com m ittee on Interstate and Foreign Com merce, Erdm an Act (1912), pp. 21,42. 51 Frederick L. Hoffman, “Industrial A ccidents,” Bulletin (78), Septem ber 1908, p. 417. 52 National Safety Council, Transactions, 1912, pp. 3-8; and 1913, pp. 75-79 and 101-103. 53 International A ssociation for Labor Legislation, Report o f the 5th General Meet ing, Lucerne, 1908, A ppendix N o. 1, “Report o f the Board,” p. 47. http://fraser.stlouisfed.org Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis 273 The First Hundred Years 54 N ational A rchives Record G roup 40, D ept, o f Com merce, Office o f the Secretary, Secretary Cortelyou to Dr. H . Scherrer, President, International A ssociation for Labor Legislation, May 2,1904. 55 John B. Andrews, “Phosphorus Poisoning in the M atch Industry in the U nited States,” Bulletin (86), January 1910, pp. 31, 145-146; H ouse, Com m ittee on Interstate and Foreign Com m erce, Hearings: Health Activities of die General Government (61C, 2S, 1910), p t V I, p .4 0 8 . 56 N A R G 40, D ep t o f Com merce, Office o f d ie Secretary, Nagel to Neill, Apr. 21,1910. 57 Survey, June 11, 1910, p. 427; D e c 23, 1911, p. 1397; N A R G 40, D ep t o f Com m erce, Office o f the Secretary, Taft to Nagel, May 16, 1910, and P. Tecumseh Sherm an to Neill, May 27,1910; and D on D . Lescohier, Working Conditions, Voi. m o f History of Labor in the United States, 1896-1932 (New "fork: The Macmillan Com pany, 1935), pp. 361-362. 58 Survey, Apr. 13,1912, p. 86; and Lescohier, Working Conditions, p. 362. 59 International A ssociation for Labor Legislation, Report, Lugano, 1910, p. 14; Andrews, "R eport o f W ork: 1910, Am erican A ssociation for Labor Legislation," American Labor Legislation Review, January 1911, pp. 96-98. 60 A FL, Proceedings, 1910, pp. 41 and 274. 61 Isaac M. Rubinow, “A ccident Com pensation for Federal Em ployees,” Survey, Aug. 16,1913, pp. 624-627. 62 N A R G 257, B L S, General Letter Book, V oi I, Jan. 3, 1905-M ay 16, 1905, p. 303, Neill to Lawrence O . M urray, Mar. 21,1905; VoL m , O c t 2 8 ,1905-M ay 5,1906, pp. 209-210, Neill to Sophonisba P. Breckinridge, Jan. 29, 1906; and H ouse, A ppro priations, Legislative, Executive, and Judicial Bill for 1907, Hearings (Feb. 24,1906), pp. 622-623. 63 H ouse, A ppropriations, L E J for 1907, p. 621. 64 Roosevelt Papers, ca. Jan. 15,1907, C . P. Neill, “Memo on C hild Labor." 65 H ouse, A ppropriations, L E J for 1907, p. 617; Congressional Record (59C, 2S), Jan. 21,1907, p. 1458. 66 H ouse, A ppropriations, L E J for 1907, pp. 617-618. 67 Congressional Record (59C, 2S), Jan. 21,1907, pp. 1457-1458. 68 Balte, “C harles P. N eill,” p. 130. 69 Roosevelt, The Letters, V oi V , pp. 594-595, to O scar S. Straus, Feb. 20,1907. 70 N A R G 40, D ep t o f Com m erce, Office o f the Secretary, Straus to Tawney, Feb. 21,1907. 71 The New York Commercial, May 22, 1907, p. 1, quoted in Balte, “C harles P. N eill,* p. 133. 72 National C hild Labor Com m ittee, Third Annual Report, 1907, p. 11; American Federation of Labor Records: The Sam uel Gompers E ra (Microfilming Corporation o f America, 1979), Convention Files, 1909 Convention, Res. 67, Woman and C hild Labor, G om pers to Executive C ouncil, D e c 21,1909. 73 Bureau o f Labor, Report on Conditions of Woman and Child W age-Earners in the United States (61G, 2S, Senate D oc. 645), Voi. I, Cotton Textile Industry (1910), pp. 14-15,192-195. http://fraser.stlouisfed.org Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis 274 Source Notes 74 Catholic University, Neill Papers, Bureau o f Labor Data, Mary McDowell to Neill, Sept. 28,1907. 75 Summary of the Report on Condition of Woman and Child Wage Earners in the United States, Bulletin 175 (Bureau o f Labor Statistics, 1915), p. 32. 76 Ibid., pp. 28-29. 77 Report on Condition, Vol. X V I, Fam ily Budgets of Typical Cotton'M ill Workers (1911), p. 9. 78 Ibid., pp. 25,133-137, and 178. 79 Thom as R. Dawley, Jr., The Child that Toileth Not, The Story of a Government Investigation (New York: Gracia Publishing C o., 1912); Daniel J. B. M itchell, “A Furor O ver W orking Children and the Bureau o f Labor,” Monthly Labor Review, O ctober 1975, pp. 34-36. 80 Judson M acLaury, “A Senator’s Reaction to Report on W orking Women and C hildren,” M LR, O ctober 1975, pp. 36-38; Congressional Record (62C, 3S), Jan. 24, 1912, p. 1249, and Feb. 26,1912, p. 2438. 81N A R G 174, Dept, o f Labor, Charges vs. Chas. P. Neill, O riginal Transcript, Mar. 15,1913, pp. 36-41. 82 Ibid., p. 30. 83 Congressional Record (62C, 3S), Jan. 24,1912, p. 1249. 84 “M ore Reports Needed,” Survey, Aug. 5,1911, p. 638. 85 W arren M. Persons, “Recent Publications on Women in Industry,” Quarterly Journal of Economics, May 1911, pp. 601,602,608. 86 A FL, Proceedings, 1911, p. 35. 87 “Seventh A nnual Report, 1911,” Child Labor Bulletin, June 1912, p. 200. 88 N A R G 174, D ep t o f Labor, Charges vs. Chas. P. Neill, Original Transcript, p. 44. 89 Ibid., p. 48. 90 Ibid., pp. 46-51; Retail Prices, 1890 to 1911, Bulletin 105, part 1 (Bureau o f Labor, 1912), p. 4; Retail Prices, 1907 to December 1914, Bulletin 156 (Bureau o f Labor Statistics, 1915), p. 359. 91 Retail Prices, Bulletin 105, pp. 4-6; Retail Prices, 1890 to June 1912, Bulletin 106 (Bureau o f Labor, 1912), pp. 5-6; The Consumer Price Index, History and Techniques, Bulletin 1517 (Bureau o f Labor Statistics, 1966), p. 2. 92 N A R G 174, D ep t o f Labor, Charges vs. Chas. P. Neill, Original Transcript, p. 51. 93 Ibid., pp. 51-52. 94 N A R G 40, D ept, o f Com m erce, Com m ittee on Statistical Reorganization, “Replies to the Q uestions o f the Interdepartm ental Statistical Com m ittee,” p. 7. 95 N A R G 257, B LS, General Correspondence, 1908-15, probably by Neill in January 1910. 96 N A R G 40, D ep t o f Com merce, Office erf the Secretary, A ssistant Secretary and Solicitor to Secretary, Dec. 13,1909. 97 N A R G 174, D ept, o f Labor, Charges vs. Chas. P. Neill, Exhibits, Exhibit A , G eo. A. Traylor to Sen. Lee S. Overman, Mar. 3, 1913, with “Summary o f Charges Preferred A gajnst Charles P. N eill.” http://fraser.stlouisfed.org Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis 275 The First Hundred Years 98 N A R G 174, D ep t o f Labor, Charles P. N eill, W illiam S . Waudby to William B. W ilson, Mar. 11,1913. 99 N A R G 174, D ep t o f Labor, Charges vs. Chas. P. N eill, Tillm an to W. B. W ilson, Mar. 8,1913; and N eill, Overm an to President Mar. 21,1913. 100 N A R G 174, D ep t o f Labor, Charges vs. Chas. P. Neill, Report, "prelim inary” dated Mar. 20,1913, and "final” dated Mar. 27,1913. 101A FL Records (M CA), Executive C ouncil Records, M inutes, Jan. 22, 1913, p. 42; N A R G 174, D ep t o f Labor, Neill, A . B. G arretson, telegram to W. B. W ilson, Mar. 7,1913. 101 N A R G 174, D ep t o f Labor, Neill, editorial, Washington Times, Mar. 11,1913. 103 Ibid., A . J. McKelway, telegram to President Mar. 11, 1913; National Child Labor Com m ittee, Proceedings, 1913, p. 155. 10* Taft Papers, President to Sen. Borah, Feb. 27,1913. 105 N A R G 174, D ep t o f Labor, N eill, Ralph M. Easley, telegram to W. B. W ilson, Mar. 6,1913. 106 Ibid., C linton Ahrord, President W orcester Loom Com pany, to the Presi d en t Mar. 15,1913. 107 W oodrow W ilson fbpers, M anuscript Division, Library o f Congress, W ilson to B. R. Tillm an, Mar. 21,1913; N A R G 174, D ep t o f Labor, Neill, Com m ission, dated Mar. 22,1913. 106 W oodrow W ilson Papers, Tillm an to W ilson, Mar. 24, 1913; Catholic Univer sity, N eill Papers, Correspondence re Charges, B. R Tillman to Prof. D. D . Wallace, Mar. 13,1913; N A R G 174, D ep t o f Labor, N eill, Jam es M. Barker, Secretary, Senate, May 1,1913. 109 The New York Times, May 14, 1913, p. 2; N A R G 174, D ep t o f Labor, Neill, N eill to the President May 12,1913, and Neill to the Secretary o f the same date. 110 N A R G 174, D ep t o f Labor, Neill, Secretary to Neill, May 14,1913. 111 Isaac F. M arcosson, M etal M agic, The Story of the American Smelting & Refining Company (New Tfork: Farrar, Straus and Com pany, 1949), p. 264. 112 National Civic Federation, N ational Civic Federation Review, Dec. 1, 1913, p. 2. 113 M arguerite G reen, The N ational Civic Federation and the American Labor Movement, 1900-1925 (W ashington: The Catholic U niversity o f Am erica Press, 1956), pp. 456,457; Review o f Reviews, Novem ber 1922, p. 467. 114 A nthracite Board o f Conciliation, Addresses by John L. Lewis and J. B. Warriner a t 50th Anniversary Dinner, delivered O c t 1, 1953 (Hazleton, Pennsylvania), pp. 16,19. 115 C atholic University, Neill Papers, Correspondence, 1895-1942, Suprem e C ourt o f the D istrict o f Colum bia to Dr. C harles P. Neill, Jan. 9,1920. 116 John O ’Grady, Catholic Charities in the United States, History and Problems (W ashington: National Conference o f Catholic Charities, 1930), pp. 336-338 and 340-341. http://fraser.stlouisfed.org Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis 276 Source Notes Chapter IV. Royal M eeker 1 Royal M eeker, “The Relation o f Workmen’s Com pensation to O ld Age, Health, and Unem ployment Insurance,” International A ssociation o f Industrial A cci' dent Boards and Com m issions, Proceedings, 1916, Bulletin 210 (Bureau o f Labor Statistics, 1917), p. 248. 2 W oodrow W ilson Papers, M anuscript Division, Library o f Congress, M eeker to W ilson, May 10, 1905; W ilson to M eeker, S e p t 13, 1911, and Jan. 3, 1912; and National Archives Record G roup 174, D ep t o f Labor, M eeker, M eeker to W. B. W ilson, Aug. 21,1913, and Aug. 28,1913. 3 W ilson Papers, W ilson to M eeker, Dec. 3, 1912; M eeker to the President, Mar. 21, 1913; and the President to M eeker, Mar. 26, 1913; also Ray Stannard Baker, Woodrow Wilson, Life and Letters: President, 1913-1914 (Garden City, New \fork: Doubleday, Doran &. C o., Inc., 1931), pp. 146-147. 4 W ilson Papers, President to M eeker, June 23,1913. 5 The New York Times, July 23, 1913, p. 6; N A R G 257, Bureau o f Labor Statistics, General Correspondence, 1908-15, C . H . Verrill to M rs. Elizabeth L. Otey, O c t 10, 1913. 6 N A R G 174, Dept, o f Labor, M eeker, M eeker to W. B. W ilson, June 23,1913. 7 Ibid., M eeker to W. B. W ilson, July 7, 1913; W ilson Papers, President to M eeker, June 23,1913. 8 M eeker, “The Promise o f American Life,” Political Science Quarterly, Decem ber 1910, pp. 689,695,697,699. 9 M eeker, “The Work o f the Federal Bureau o f Labor Statistics in Its Relation to the Business o f the C ountry,” Annals of the American Academy of Political and Social Science, January 1916, pp. 265 and 271. 10 Ibid., pp. 263 and 265. 11 Ibid., p. 264. 12 M eeker, “A ddress,” Proceedings of die American Association of Public Employ ment Offices, Bulletin 192 (Bureau o f Labor Statistics, 1916), pp. 42-47. 13 U . S. Congress, Joint Com m ittees on Labor, Hearings, N ational Employment System (66C, IS , 1919), pp. 326, 333. 14 M eeker, “Social Insurance in the U ntied States,” National Conference of Social W ork, Proceedings, 1917, pp. 528, 534-535; comments, Proceedings of die Con ference on Social Insurance, Bulletin 212 (Bureau o f Labor Statistics, 1917), p. 912; and “Distributing the Burden o f Sickness,” American Labor Legislation Review, June 1918, p. 158. 15 M eeker, comments, Proceedings of die Conference on Social Insurance (212), pp. 911-912. 16 Congress, H ouse, A ppropriations Com mittee, Legislative, Executive, and Judi cial Appropriation Bill, 1915, Hearings, p. 770; M eeker, “Lacks in Workmen’s Com pensation,” American Labor Legislation Review, March 1919, pp. 35, 39-44; “Social Insurance,” National Conference, Proceedings, 1917, pp. 531-533; and “The Relation o f W orkmen’s Com pensation,” pp. 245-247. http://fraser.stlouisfed.org Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis 277 The First Hundred Years 17 M eeker, “Minimum Requirem ents in Com pensation Legislation," IA IA BC, Proceedings, 1919, Bulletin 273 (Bureau o f Labor Statistics, 1920), p. 14 (also in Monthly Labor Review, Novem ber 1919, pp. 280 ff). 18 Senate, Com m ittee on the D istrict o f Colum bia, Hearings, Child Labor in the District of Columbia (66C, 2S, 1920), pp. 5 9,61. 19 M eeker, “Com pulsory C ivic Service," The New York Times, Apr. 6,1913, V , 4. 20 M eeker, “The Connection o f O ur School System and O ur Prison System ,” n.d., pp. 5-6. 21 M eeker, “Com pulsory C ivic Service." 22 M eeker, “A Plan for M ore Effective Cooperation Between State and Federal Labor O ffices," A ssociation o f Governm ental Labor Officials o f the U nited States and Canada, Proceedings, 1915, p. 83; “T he Promise o f American Life,” p. 697. 23 M eeker, “Em ployees’ Representation in Management o f Industry,” American Economic Review, M arch 1920 (Supplem ent), pp. 96 and 101. 24 N A R G 174, D ep t o f Labor, Departm ent Com m ittee on Correlation, M inutes o f M eeting, Apr. 1, 1914, p. 2; Interm ediate Report N o. 2, May 28, 1914, p. 2; M emorandum, W. B. W ilson, Secretary, Aug. 14,1914. 25 Senate, Report, Bureau of Labor Safety (Senate R ep t 712, 63C , 2S, 1914); H ouse, Com m ittee on Labor, Report, Bureau of Labor Safety (House R ep t 44, 64C, IS , 1916), p. 1; N A R G 174, D ep t o f Labor, Bureau o f Labor Safety, “A ctivities o f the Federal Governm ent A long the Lines o f Safety and Sanitation,” apparently by F. H. Bird, m arked C . M. E. 12.15.14. 26 N A R G 174, D ep t o f Labor, Bureau o f Labor Safety, Secretary to Rep. David J. Lewis o f M aryland, Aug. 27,1913. 27 N A R G 174, D ep t o f Labor, W omen's Bureau, Secretary to M iss Agnes Nestor o f N ational Women’s Trade U nion League, May 24, 1916: M iss Zip S . Falk to the Secretary, July 19, 1916; Edith A bbott, review, Summary of die Report on Condition of Woman and Child Wage Earners in the United States (that is, BulL 175, 1916), American Economic Review, Septem ber 1916, pp. 663-664. 28 N A R G 174, D ep t o f Labor, Women’s Bureau, Stew art to Secretary, June 27, 1916, transm itted by Secretary to Rep. Lewis, June 28. 29 N A R G 174, D ep t o f Labor, Women’s Bureau, Secretary to Rep. Lewis, July 26,1916. 30 H ouse, Com m ittee on Labor, Woman’s Division in Department of Labor (House R ep t 1205,64C , 2S, 1916), pp. 3-4. 31 N A R G 257, B L S, General Correspondence, 1916-24, M eeker to Mary Van Kleeck, Dec. 15,1916. 32 H ouse, A ppropriations, LE J for 1918, p. 495; Joint Com m ittees on Labor, Hearings, Women’s Bureau (66C, 2S, 1920), p. 40. 33 W ilson Papers, M eeker to Tumulty, O ct. 20,1913. 34 H ouse, A ppropriations, L E J for 1915, p. 750; W ilson Papers, M eeker to Presi d en t Aug. 15,1914; Senate, A ppropriations, L E J for 1916, p. 227. 35 N A R G 174, D ep t o f Labor, D ep t Com m ittee on Correlation, Stew art “Report on Jurisdictional Conflict Between the Bureau o f Labor Statistics and the Public H ealth Service, A Bureau in the Treasury D epartm ent” pp. 1, 7, 14; Advisory http://fraser.stlouisfed.org Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis 278 Source Notes Council, M eeker, for the Secretary, June 24, 1918; Senate, A ppropriations, L E J for 1916, p. 228. 36 W ilson Papers, M eeker to Tumulty, Feb. 4 and Feb. 6,1914. 37 N A R G 174, D ept, o f Labor, C hild Labor Law, Stewart to Secretary, Sept. 12, 1916. 38 W ilson Papers, M eeker to President, Feb. 16,1915. 39 U . S. D ept, o f Labor, Report Relating to Section 10 of Act Creating die Department of Labor (64C, 2S, H ouse Docum ent 1906,1917). ^ M eek er, “A ddress," National Safety Council, Proceedings, 1914, p. 76; com ments, “The Statistical W ork o f the U nited States Governm ent," American Economic Review, M arch 1915 (Supp.), p. 173. 41 M eeker, “A Plan for M ore Effective Cooperation,” p. 80. 42 M eeker, “Introduction,” IA IA BC , Proceedings, 1916 (210), p. 6. 43 M eeker, “A ddress,” American Association of Public Employment Offices (192), pp. 46-47. 44 M eeker, comments, “The Statistical W ork," p. 174. 45 Retail Prices, 1907 to December 1914, Bulletin 156 (Bureau o f Labor Statistics, 1915), pp. 357,364. 46 Irving Fisher, assisted by Harry G . Brown, The Purchasing Power of Money (New York: Macmillan C o., 1913), pp. 203,228; Wesley C . M itchell, “The Making and U sing o f Index Num bers,” Bulletin 173 (Bureau o f Labor Statistics, 1915), pp. 112-113. 47 M eeker, “O n the Best Form o f Index Num ber,” American Statistical A ssocia tion Journal, Septem ber 1921, p. 915. 48 Senate, Appropriations, LE J for 1915, p. 92; W ilson Papers, M eeker to Presi dent, Mar. 23, and July 8,1914. 49 N A R G 174, D ep t o f Labor, Stew art to Secretary, Jan. 9, 1914; Senate A ppro priations, LE J for 1916, p. 185; Union Scale of Wages and Hours of Labor, M ay 1, 1915, Bulletin 194 (Bureau o f Labor Statistics, 1916), p. 222; H ouse, Appropriations, Further Urgent Deficiency Bill, F Y 1916 (64C, IS , 1916), p. 240. 50 H ouse, A ppropriations, LE J for 1915, pp. 741,743. 51 Senate, Com m ittee on Education and Labor, Report, Cost of Living in the District of Columbia (Senate Rept. 3 7 7 ,63C , 2S, 1914), pp. 1-2. 52 H ouse, Com m ittee on the D istrict o f Colum bia, Hearing, Authorizing and Directing the Department of Labor to M ake an Inquiry into the Cost of Living in the District of Columbia (64C, IS , 1916), p. 25. 53 H ouse, Com m ittee on the D istrict o f Colum bia, Hearings, Minimum Wage for Women and Children (65C, 2S, 1918), p. 14. 54 “C ost o f Living in the D istrict o f Colum bia, Second A rticle: Summary o f Family Expenditures,” M LR, Novem ber 1917, p. 2; “C ost o f Living in the D istrict o f Colum bia, Fourth A rticle: W age-Earning Women, W ho They A re and W hat They D o.” M LR, January 1918, p. 7; W illiam F. O gbura, “A nalysis o f the Standard o f Living in the D istrict o f Colum bia in 1916,” A SA Journal, June 1919, p. 389. 55 International A ssociation on Unem ployment, Reports, Ghent: Statistics of Unemployment, pp. 83-84. http://fraser.stlouisfed.org Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis 279 The First H undred Years 56 Am erican Federation o f Labor Papers, Sam uel Gom pers Letterbooks, Manu script D ivision, Library o f Congress, G om pers to M eeker, S e p t 9 and S e p t 12,1914. 57 H ouse, A ppropriations, L E J for 1915, p. 759. 58 “Com m ittee to D eal with Unem ploym ent," Survey, Dec. 12, 1914, p. 281; "New "fork's Program for Unem ploym ent,” Survey, Dec. 26, 1914, p. 329; Unemploy ment in New folk City, New fork, Bulletin 172 (Bureau o f Labor Statistics, 1915), pp. 6- 8. 59 Unemployment in die United States, Bulletin 195 (Bureau o f Labor Statistics, 1916), p. 6; N A R G 257, B L S, G eneral Correspondence, 1908-15, Shillady to Stewart, July 7,1915. 60 M eeker, "T he W ork," Annuls, January 1916, p. 268; "A Problem in Eclipse,” The Annalist, Jan. 3,1916, p. 9. 61 H ouse, Com m ittee on Labor, Hearings, N ational Employment Bureau (64C, IS , 1916), pp. 29-30; Proceedings of die Conference on Social Insurance (212, 1917), p. 838. 62 M eeker, "T h e C ost o f Industrial A ccidents," M LR, A pril 1920, p. 9. 63 Stew art, "Inform al Rem arks,” Proceedings of die Conference of Employment M anagers’ Association of Boston, M ass., Held M ay 10, 1916, Bulletin 202 (Bureau o f Labor Statistics, 1916), p. 8. 64 M eeker, “T he W ork,” Annals, January 1916, p. 267. 65 M eeker, “Introduction,” Proceedings of Employment M anagers’ Conference, Bulletin 1% (Bureau o f Labor Statistics, 1916), p. 5. 66 M eeker, “Introduction,” Proceedings of the Employment M anagers’ Conference, Philadelphia, Pa., April 2 and 3, 1917, Bulletin 227 (Bureau o f Labor Statistics, 1917), p. 5. 67 W ilson lepers, M eeker to President, Mar. 3,1916. 68 H ouse, Com m ittee on the Judiciary, Hearings, Federal Employees’ Compensa tion (63C, 2S, 1914), p. 19; Hearings, Federal Employees’ Compensation (64C, IS , 1916), pp. 29-30; D e p t. o f Labor, Reports of the Department of Labor, 1915, pp. 97-98; W ilson Papers, M eeker to President, Nov. 15,1915. 69 W ilson Papers, M eeker to Tumulty, Feb. 6,1914. 70 M eeker, "Introduction,” IA IA BC, Proceedings, 1916 (210), p. 5; Report of Com mittee on Statistics and Compensation Insurance Cost, Bulletin 201 (Bureau o f Labor Statistics, 1916), pp. 8-9; D ep t o f Labor, Reports of die Department of Labor, 1916, pp. 146-147. 71 D ept, o f Labor, Reports of the Department of Labor, 1917, p. 167. 72 M eeker, "T he C ost o f Industrial A ccidents,” p. 4. 73 Joseph Dorfm an, The Economic M ind in American Civilization, Vol. HI, 1865-1918 (New fo rk : V iking Press, 1949), p. 477. 74 N A R G 1, War Labor Policies Board, War Industries Board, Memorandum Regarding Conference on Industrial Survey, O ct. 5,1918; Bernard M. Baruch, Ameri can Industry in the War, A Report of die W ar Industries Board (Washington: Govern ment Printing Office, 1921), p. 45. 75 N A R G 1, W LPB, Com m ittees, Statistics Com m ittee, M eetings o f June 5, 13, and 19, 1918; Bureau o f Labor Statistics, etc., Frankfurter to Gay, June 29, 1918; and http://fraser.stlouisfed.org Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis 280 Source Notes Zenos L. Potter, “The C entral Bureau o f Planning and Statistics,” A SA Journal, March 1919, pp. 275-276. 76 W illard E. H otchkiss and Henry R. Seager, History of the Shipbuilding Labor Adjustment Board, 1917 to 1919, Bulletin 283 (Bureau o f Labor Statistics, 1921), p. 10. 77 George E. Barnett, “Index Num bers o f the Total C ost o f Living,” Quarterly Journal of Economics, February 1921, p. 241. 78 W ilson Papers, Fisher to M eeker, O ct. 7, O ct. 24, Nov. 1, Nov. 9, Nov. 12, Nov. 22, and Dec. 11, 1912; Fisher, “A Com pensated D ollar,” Quarterly Journal of Economics, February 1913, pp. 214, 220-221. 79 N A R G 174, D ept, o f Labor, Fisher to Post, May 15,1917; M eeker to A ssistant Secretary, July 21,1917. 80 W ilson Papers, M eeker to President, Nov. 27, 1917; Nov. 28, 1917; Dec. 1, 1917 with initials “W W ” dated Dec. 5, 1917; and May 8, 1919; N A R G 257, BLS, A ppropriations Ledger, 1913-19. 81 H otchkiss and Seager, History (283,1921), pp. 24, 33, 39, and 44; U . S . Ship building Labor Adjustm ent Board, Decision as to Wages, Hours and Other Conditions in Pacific Coast Shipyards (Oct. 1,1918), pp. 1 ,3 ,5 -6 . 82 N A R G 174, D ep t o f Labor, Seager to Post, Feb. 27,1918. 83 N ational W ar Labor Board, Bulletin 287 (Bureau o f Labor Statistics, 1921), pp. 31-33. 84 N A R G 174, Dept, o f Labor, Wage Stabilization Conferences, Secretary to President, Aug. 7,1918; Secretary to John R. A lpine, A cting President, A FL, S e p t 13, 1918; and Frankfurter to Secretary, O c t 15,1918. 85 M eeker, “The Possibility o f Com piling an Index o f the C ost o f Living,” Ameri can Economic Review, M arch 1919 (Supp.), pp. 109-115. 86 M eeker, “W hat Is the Am erican Standard o f Living?” National Conference o f Social W ork, Proceedings, 1919, p. 165. 87 Ibid., p. 172. 88 “The Am erican Standard,” editorial, The New York Times, O c t 29,1919, p. 12. 89 H ugh S. Hanna, “Summary o f Increased C ost o f Living, July 1914 to June 1919,” M LR, O ctober 1919, pp. 989-996; “Index Num bers o f Changes in Wages and C ost o f Living,” M LR, November 1919, pp. 191-193; “Changes in C ost o f Living in the U nited States,” M LR, June 1920, pp. 76-79. 90 Barnett, “A C ritique o f Cost-of-Living Studies,” A SA Journal, Septem ber 1921, p. 909. 91 M eeker, “W hat Is the Am erican Standard?” National Conference, Proceedings, 1919, pp. 164-165; “Need for and U ses o f a Standard Minimum Quantity Budget,” National Conference o f Social W ork, Proceedings, 1920, p. 83. 92 H ouse, Congressional Joint Com m ission on Reclassification o f Salaries, Report (66C, 2S, 1920, H ouse R ep t 686), pp. 40-41,178-179,196. 93 “Tentative Q uantity-Cost Budget Necessary to Maintain Family o f Five in W ashington, D .C .,” M LR, December 1919, pp. 22-25; “Q uantity-Cost Budget Neces sary to M aintain Single Man or Woman in W uhington, D .C .," M LR, January 1920, pp. 35 ff. 94 “Minimum Quantity Budget Necessary to M aintain a W orker’s Family o f Five in H ealth and Decency,” M LR, June 1920, pp. 1-18. http://fraser.stlouisfed.org Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis 281 The First Hundred Years 95 D ep t o f Labor, A nnual Report, 1920, p. 263. 96 U . S. President, Address, The Cost of Living (Aug. 8, 1919), p. 8; Senate, Secretary of die Treasury, Letter: Estimate of Appropriation to Investigate Cost of Living (Senate R ep t 108, 66C , IS , 1919), p. 2; N A R G 174, D ep t o f Labor, M onthly Report o f Bureau, Louis F. Post, M emorandum for die Secretary, S e p t 27,1919. 97 N A R G 1, W LPB, War Industries Board, M eeker and Lam son, “Memorandum in re the N eed for M ore Com plete Wage Statistics,” O ct. 28,1918. 96 Ibid., Secretary o f Labor and Chairm an, War Industries Board, to President, Nov. 4, 1918, and M eeker to Secretary, Nov. 5, 1918; Bureau o f Labor Statistics, etc., M eeker to Gay, Nov. 26,1918. 99 Industrial Survey in Selected Industries in the United States, 1919, A Preliminary Report, Bulletin 265 (Bureau o f Labor Statistics, 1920), pp. 5 ,24. 100 W. C . M itchell, comments, "T he Statistical W ork,” American Economic Review, M arch 1915 (Supp.), p. 182. 101 H ouse, A ppropriations, L E ] for 1918, pp. 490-491. 102 N A R G 257, B L S, General Correspondence, 1916-1924, Stewart to Hon. Reed Sm oot, Feb. 15,1917. 103 H ouse, A ppropriations, L E J for 1919, pp. 1011-1013; LE J for 1920, p. 589. 104 Survey, Mar. 27,1920, p. 798. 105 H ouse, Com m ittee on Reform in the C ivil Service, Hearing, Retirement of Employees in the Federal Classified Service (64C, IS , 1916), pp. 7-8. 106 N A R G 257, B L S, General Correspondence, 1916-1924, M eeker to Senate Com m ittee on A ppropriations, Jan. 22,1919. 107 “Introductory,” M LR, July 1915, p. 6. 108 The Official Bulletin, July 8, 1918, p. 9; N A R G 174, D ep t o f Labor, Secre tary’s Cabinet, M eeker, Memorandum for the Secretary, Aug. 10, 1918; Bureau o f Labor Statistics, 1916-21, Secretary, Memo for the Com m issioner, O ct. 5,1918. 109 N A R G 257, B L S, General Correspondence, 1916-1924, M eeker to Secretary, May 15,1920; M eeker, "Announcem ent,” M LR, July 1920, p. ii. 110 N A R G 174, D ep t o f Labor, M eeker to Secretary, May 24,1919. 111 D ept, o f Labor, Reports of die Department of Labor, 1919, pp. 216-217. 112 H ouse, A ppropriations, LE J for 1922, p. 1275. 113 W ilson Papers, M eeker to President, May 5, 1920; M eeker to President, June 16,1920. 114 W ilson Pipers, W. W ilson to M eeker, June 19,1920. 115 “A nnouncem ent," M LR, A ugust 1920, p. H. Chapter V. Ethelbert Stewart 1 C hester M cA. D esder, “A Coffin W orker and the Labor Problem, Ethelbert Stew art and Henry Dem arest Lloyd,” L ab or History, Summ er 1971. 2 National A rchives Record G roup 174, Departm ent o f Labor, C h ief C lerk’s File, Louis F. Post, A ssistant Secretary, to A ll Officers and Employees o f the Bureau of http://fraser.stlouisfed.org Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis 282 Source Notes Im migration and Immigration Service in the Departm ent o f Labor, Mar. 11,1920, and various correspondence between Post and Stewart in M arch and A pril 1920. 3 W arren G . H arding Papers, M anuscript Division, Library o f Congress, O hio H istorical Society Microfilm, Jam es J. Davis to the President, Mar. 17,1921. 4 Ethelbert Stew art Papers, University o f N orth Carolina, Southern H istorical C ollection (Microfilm), General Correspondence, Apr. 22,1927; Jam es J. Davis Papers, M anuscript Division, Library o f Congress, "Introductory Statem ent o f Secretary o f Labor Jam es J. Davis before the M eeting o f the Advisory Com m ittee on Employment Statistics, O ct. 22,1930." 5 Stewart, "T he Value o f Labor Statistics,” International A ssociation o f G overn' mental Labor Officials, Proceedings, 1918, pp. 64-65. 6 G ilbert E. Hyatt, "A Human Statistician,” The Locomotive Engineers Journal, January 1927, p. 17. 7 Stew art Papers, Speeches and Essays, Undated, "C ost o f Living For W hat?” pp. 4 ,6 . 8 Stewart, “The Value,” IA G LO , Proceedings, 1918, pp. 62-63; “The Future o f Labor Statistics,” IA G LO , Proceedings, 1921, pp. 1 5,19,21. 9 N A R G 257, Bureau o f Labor Statistics, Correspondence with Secretary o f Labor, 1925-27,1929, Com m issioner, Memo for Secretary, Aug. 8,1929. 10 Stew art, "N eed for Statistics as a M easure o f Industrial Changes,” American Federationist, January 1930, pp. 89-90. 11 Stewart, “T he Value,” p. 64; “The Wastage o f M en," IA G LO , Proceedings, 1924 (also Monthly Labor Review, July 1924), p. 4; Stewart Papers, Speeches and Essays, Undated, “The Wage System and the Interest System ,” pp. 3-4. 12 Stewart, “O ccupational D iseases and Workmen’s Com pensation Laws,” MLR, February 1930, p. 95. 13 Stewart, “Long W orking H ours o f C ertain M unicipal Em ployees," M LR, A ugust 1929, p. 1; U .S. Congress, H ouse, Com m ittee on Labor, Employment of Labor on Federal Construction Work, Hearings (71C, 2S, 1930), pp. 16-17. 14 Stewart, “D iscussion: Women and Children in Industry," IA G LO , Proceedings, 1923, p. 41. 15 Stew art, “A Family W age-Rate vs. A Family Social Endowment Fund,” Social Forces, Septem ber 1927, pp. 121,123-125. 16 Stewart, “Ultim ate Effects o f Autom atic Machine Production,* M LR, March 1929, p. 49. 17 Stew art Papers, Speeches and Essays, “Report to Second National O utdoor Recreation Conference,” p. 6; Baltimore Sun, Jan. 21, 1926; Washington Daily News, Apr. 16,1926; Jefferson County Union, Fort A tkinson, Wts., Apr. 23,1926. 18 Stewart, “Present Situation in Textiles," American Federationist, June 1929, p. 690. 19 Bureau o f Efficiency, Report on die Statistical Work o f the United States Government, 1922, pp. 5-16. 20 “Final Report o f the Joint Com m ittee o f the American S tatistical and the American Economic A ssociations to the D irector o f the Census, 1922,” American Statistical A ssociation Journal, M arch 1923, pp. 641-642. http://fraser.stlouisfed.org Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis 283 The First H undred Years 21 The New York T im «, May 11, 1921, p. 3; Jan. 11, 1922, p. 11; “The Labor Departm ent A ttacked,” Survey, June 25,1921, pp. 426-427. 22 N A R G 174, Departm ent o f Labor, C h ief C lerk’s File, H erbert H oover to the Secretary, June 18, 1921; Stew art, Memorandum for the Secretary, June 20, 1921; Secretary to the Secretary o f Com m erce, June 21,1921. 23 Departm ent o f Labor, A nnual Report, 1923, p. 59; N A R G 174, D O L, C hief C lerk’s File, Lord to Secretary, May 22, 1925, and Stew art to C h ief C lerk, May 26, 1925. 24 D ept, o f Labor, Annual Report, 1927, pp. 59-61. 25 U .S. Personnel Classification Board, Closing Report of Wage and Personnel Survey, 1931, pp. 231-232; Report of Wage and Personnel Survey, Field Survey Division (70C, 2S, H ouse D oc. 602,1929), pp. 365-367. 26 H ugh S. Hanna, “T he International C ost o f Living Inquiry,” Annuls of the American Academy of Political and Social Science, M arch 1933, pp. 162-164. 27 H ouse, A ppropriations, Departments of Commerce and Labor Appropriation Bill, FY 1923, Hearings (67C, 2S, 1922), p. 780; W arren M. Persons and Eunice S. Coyle, "A Com m odity Price Index o f Business Cycles,” The Review of Economic Statistics, Novem ber 1921; and articles in subsequent years. 28 H ouse, Com m ittee on Banking and Currency, Stabilization, Hearings (69C, IS, 1926), pp. 605, 615, 619-621; Stabilization of Purchasing Power of Money, Hearings (67C, 4S, 1922); Stabilization of Commodity Prices, Hearings (72C, IS , 1932), p. 262. 29 “A C onstructive Program for Price Statistics,* A SA Journal, M arch 1932, pp. 74-78; Senate, Com m ittee on M anufactures, Establishment of N ational Economic Council, Hearings (72C , IS , 1931), pp. 583 ff. 30 Com m issioner o f Labor Statistics, A nnual Report, 1930, p. 26. 31 Congressional Record (67C, IS), Aug. 5, 1921, p. 4695; N A R G 174, D O L, C h ief C lerk’s File, Stew art to Secretary, Aug. 12, 1921, and Secretary to President o f the Senate, Aug. 12,1921. 32 The New York Times, S e p t 15,1921, pp. 14 and 29; “‘Normalcy* in Unem ploy m ent,” New Republic, O c t 11,1922, p. 163. 33 Ralph G . H urlin and W illiam A . Berridge, eds., Employment Statistics for the United States (New fo rk : R ussell Sage Foundation, 1926), pp. 24-30. 34 N A R G 174, D O L, C h ief C lerk’s File, H enning to D irector General o f Employment Service, June 3, 1922, and Secretary, M emorandum for Mr. Jones, Mar. 4,1924; N A R G 257, B L S, G eneral Correspondence, 1916-1924, Stew art to Henning, Aug. 2,1922. 35 “Com m ittee on Governm ental Labor Statistics o f the American Statistical A ssociation, Report for 1924,” A SA Journal, M arch 1925, p. 96. 36 foul H . D ouglas, review o f Employment Statistics for die United States, Journal of Political Economy, A ugust 1928, p. 523; Royal M eeker, "T he Dependability and M eaning o f Unem ployment and Employment Statistics in the U nited States,” H arvard Business Review, July 1930, p. 396; Miriam E. West, Employment Indexes in die United States and C an ad a (American Statistical A ssociation, Com m ittee on G ov ernm ental Labor Statistics, 1929), p. 8; “M iscellaneous N otes,” A SA Journal, Septem ber 1928, pp. 324-325; Berridge, “Employment and the Buying Power o f Consum ers,” The Review of Economic Statistics, Novem ber 1930, pp. 1 8 6 ,187n. http://fraser.stlouisfed.org Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis 284 Source Notes 37 Congressional Record (70C, IS), Mar. 26, 1928, pp. 5337-5338; The New 'York Tim es, Feb. 16,1928, p. 2; Mar. 27,1928, p. 1; Mar. 28,1928, p. 13; and Apr. 21,1928, p. 16. 38 Senate, Com m ittee on Education and Labor, Unemployment in the United States, Hearings (70C, 2S, 1929), pp. 179-187; also Causes of Unemployment, Report (70C, 2S, Sen. R ep t 2072,1929), p. XV. 39 Senate, Education and Labor, Unemployment, pp. 491-517. 40 The New York Times, July 14, 1929, p. 20, and July 16, 1929, p. 12; DepL o f Labor, Annual Report, 1930, p. 89. 41 Joseph W. Duncan and W illiam C . Shelton, Revolution in United States Govern ment Statistics, 1929-1976 (U .S. Departm ent o f Com merce, Office o f Federal Statisti' cal Policy and Standards, 1978), pp. 23—24; John Bruce Dudley, “Jam es J. Davis, Secretary o f Labor U nder Three Presidents, 1921-1930," Ph.D. dissertation (Ball State University, 1971), p. 275. 42 The New Ybrk Times, Jan. 22, 1930, p. 1; Mary V m Kleeck, "Employment Statistics,” IA G LO , Proceedings, 1931, pp. 77-78; Berridge, "T he Employment Situa tion,” New York Times Annalist, Feb. 21,1930. 43 The New Ybrk Times, Jan. 23,1930, p. 11; Jan. 24,1930, p. 35; Feb. 9,1930, p. 1; Feb. 20,1930, p. 24. 44 The New York Times, June 28, 1930, p. 17; July 16, 1930, p. 15; “A n Expert on H oover’s ‘Experts,’* Neu; Republic, Aug. 20, ,1930, p. 4. 45 The New Ybrk Times, July 30,1930, p. 5; Aug. 3,1930, p. II, 18; Aug. 4,1930, p. 14; Aug. 21,1930, p. 40. 46 U .S. Advisory Com m ittee on Employment Statistics, Report, 1931, pp. 6-7, 9-12,16-18. 47 Ibid., pp. 19,22. 48 Ibid., pp. 24-25. 49 Com m issioner o f Labor Statistics, Annual Report, 1932, pp. 1-5; Revised Indexes of Factory Employment and Payrolls, 1919 to 1933, Bulletin 610 (Bureau o f Labor Statistics, 1935). 50 D ep t o f Labor, A nnual Report, 1923, pp. 59,61. 51 Stewart, "N eed o f a M ore Definite Background for Statistics in the Chem ical Industry," National Safety Council, Transactions, 1926, pp. 541, 544; Charles E. Baldwin, “How to Make Statistics U niform ," IA G LO , Proceedings, 1925, p. 149. 52 H ouse, Com m ittee on Labor, Division of Safety, Hearings (69C, IS , 1926), p. 16. 53 Congressional Record (69C, 2S), Jan. 27,1927, p. 2392. 54 Stewart, .“Efficiency o f Am erican Labor,” IA G LO , Proceedings, 1922, p. 7. 55 Irving Bernstein, The Lean Years: A History of the American Worker, 1920-1933 (Boston: H oughton Mifflin, 1960), p. 103; American Federation o f Labor, Proceedings, 1925, p. 271. 56 D on D . Lescohier, Working Conditions, VoL III o f The History of Labor in the United States, 1896-1932 (New 'Ybrk: The Macmillan C o., 1935), p. 334; Joseph Dorfman, The Economic Mind in American Civilisation, VoL IV , 1918-1933 (New Ybrk: V iking Press, 1959), pp. 66-67. http://fraser.stlouisfed.org Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis 285 The First Hundred Years 57 Stewart, “Efficiency o f Am erican Labor," p. 7, 17; “Labor Efficiency and Pro duction,” M LR, A ugust 1922, p. 110. 58 Stewart, “Labor Productivity and C osts in Certain Building Trades,” MLR, Novem ber 1924, p. 1; D ep t o f Labor, A nnual Report, 1924, p. 155. 59 D ep t o f Labor, A nnual Report, 1927, p. 61. 60 Com m issioner o f Labor Statistics, Annual Report, 1932, pp. 6-11. 61 H ouse, A ppropriations, Hearings, Legislative, Executive, and Judicial Appropri ation BUI, 1922 (66C, 3S, 1920), p. 1272. 62 H ouse, A ppropriations, Appropriations, Department of Labor, 1928, Hearings (69C, 2S, 1927), pp. 22-23. 63N A R G 257, BLS, General Correspondence, 1916-1924, Com m issioner to Secretary, Sept. 17, 1923; Secretary to F. J. Bailey, Chairman, Personnel Classification Board, Jan. 21, 1924; “Classification o f Statistical W orkers in Governm ent Service,” A SA Journal, M arch 1924, pp. 91-92; “Report o f the Com mittee on Personnel Classification in the Federal Governm ent,” A SA Journal, March 1925, p. 118. 64 “The Labor Departm ent A ttacked,” Survey, June 25, 1921, p. 426; Congres sional Record (67C, 2S), Dec. 7,1921, p. 119. 65 H ouse, A ppropriations, Department of Labor Appropriation Bill for 1933, H ear ings (72C, IS , 1932), pp. 31-34. 66 H ouse, A ppropriations, Appropriation, 1922, p. 1275. 67 N A R G 174, D O L, C h ief C lerk’s File, Stewart, Memorandum to The Acting Secretary, June 2,1928. 68 “The Cabinet: Tin C an,” Time, July 11, 1932, p. 7; “Looking for a Job, Ethelbert Stew art Retired A fter 45 'fears," The Evening Star (Washington), July 2, 1932; The New York Times, July 3,1932, p. 3. 69 Stew art Papers, General Correspondence, Stewart to von Klein Smid, undated draft, July 1932; Clippings, “H onesty Penalized,” San Francisco News, July 14,1932. Chapter V I. Isador Lubin 1 Isador Lubin, “Recollections o f Veblen,” in C .C . Qualey, e d , Thorstein Veblen: The C arleton College Veblen Sem inar Essays (New "fork: Colum bia University Press, 1968), pp. 139-141. 2 Lewis Lansky, “Isador Lubin: The Ideas and C areer o f a New Deal Labor Econom ist,” Ph.D. dissertation (Case W estern Reserve University, 1976), pp. 50-60; Isador Lubin, M iners’ W ages an d the C ost o f C oal (New York: McGraw-Hill, 1924); Lubin and H elen Everett, The British C oal D ilem m a (New fe>rk: The Macmillan C o., 1927). 3 Lansky, “Lubin,” pp. 100-102. 4 George M artin, M adam Secretary: Fran ces Perkins (Boston: H oughton Mifflin C o., 1976), pp. 302-303. 5 U .S. C ongress, Senate, Com m ittee on Education and Labor, Unemployment in the United States, H earings (70C, 2S, 1929), pp. 491-517. http://fraser.stlouisfed.org Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis 286 Source Notes 6 Senate, Select Com m ittee on Unem ployment Insurance, Unemployment Insur ance, Hearings (72C, IS , 1932), pp. 475-486. 7 U .S. Congress, Temporary National Economic Com mittee, Investigation of Con centration of Economic Power, Hearings, Part 1, Economic Prologue (75C, 3S, 1939), p. 79; The New York Times, Dec. 21,1938. 8 Senate, Education and Labor, F air Labor Standards Act of 1937, Joint Hearings (75C, IS , 1937), pp. 309-363. 9 T N EC , Investigation of Concentration of Economic Power, Final Report and Recommendations (77C, IS , Senate Doc. 35,1941), pp. 517-557. 10 Ibid., pp. 51-52. 11 Departm ent o f Labor, Annual Report, 1933, p. 41. 12 Advisory Com m ittee to the Secretary o f Labor, "Interim Report," A pril 1934, pp. 1-2; Social Science Research Council, Com mittee on Governm ent Statistics and Inform ation Services, Report on Government Statistics (New \b rk : SSR C , 1937), pp. 77-78. 13 Dept, o f Labor, Annual Report, 1935, p. 64. 14 Dept, o f Labor, A nnual Report, 1934, p. 9. 15 National Archives Record G roup 257, Bureau o f Labor Statistics, Lubin letters to Secretary Wallace, Mar. 26, Apr. 13, Apr. 16,1934. 16 "R eport on Labor Conditions in the Autom obile Industry,” Monthly Labor Review, M arch 1935; Lewis L. Lorwin and A rthur W ubnig, Labor Relations Boards (W ashington: The Brookings Institution, 1935), pp. 367,380-381; N. A . Tolies and M. W. LaFew er, "Wages, H ours, Employment and Annual Earnings in the MotorVehicle Industry, 1934,” M LR, M arch 1936, pp. 521-553; Senate, Education and Labor, F air Labor Standards, p. 336. 17 N A R G 257, BLS, Lubin to Perkins, Nov. 22,1933; The New York Times, Aug. 21, 1934; Jan. 30, 31, 1935. T his continued for a dozen years, until a separate Bureau o f International Affairs was established in the Departm ent in 1946. 18 N A R G 174, Departm ent o f Labor, Perkins Files, Perkins to Roosevelt, Mar. 30,1936. 19 The New York Times, Nov. 9, 11, 14, 1937; Jan. 4, 5, 1938; N A R G 257, BLS, Roosevelt to Lubin, June 16,1939. 20 N A R G 257, B LS, Lubin to H inrichs, July 1,1940. 21 N A R G 174, D O L, Perkins File, Perkins to President Roosevelt, May 2,1941. 22 A. Ford H inrichs and W illiam A . Brown, Jr., “The Planned Economy o f Soviet R ussia,” Political Science Quarterly, Septem ber 1931, pp. 362-402. 23 “Adjustm ent o f Federal Salaries to the C ost o f Living,” M LR, February 1934, pp. 376-379. 24 Faith M. Williams and A lice C . H anson, Money Disbursements of Wage Earners and Clerical Workers, 1934-36, Summary Volume, Bulletin 638 (Bureau o f Labor Statistics, 1941), p. 1. 23 "Changes in C ost o f Living from December 15, 1939 to M arch 15, 1940,” M LR, July 1940, p. 139; "T he Bureau o f Labor Statistics, New Index o f C ost of Living,” M LR, A ugust 1940, p. 383. 26 T N EC , Hearings, p. 79; The New York Times, Dec. 21,1938. http://fraser.stlouisfed.org Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis 287 The First Hundred Years 27 Fam ily Spending and Saving in Wartime, Bulletin 822 (Bureau o f Labor Statis tics, 1945); “Expenditures and Savings o f C ity Fam ilies in 1944," M LR, January 1946. 28 Bureau o f Labor Statistics A nnual Conference with Research D irectors of National and International U nions, Proceedings, 1941, p. 62. 29 B LS A nnual Conference with Research D irectors, Proceedings, 1942, pp. 43, 69. 30 N A R G 257, B LS, H inrichs to William H . Davis, O ct. 16,1942. 31 N A R G 257, B LS, Davis to H inrichs, O c t 21,1942. 32 Kathryn S. A m ow , The Attack on the Cast-ofiLiving Index (Washington, D .C .: Com m ittee on Public Adm inistration C ases, 1951), p. 61. 33 Ibid., pp. 61-62. 34 B LS A nnual Conference with Research Directors, Proceedings, 1943, p. 64. 35 Special Com m ittee o f the Am erican Statistical A ssociation, “A n A ppraisal o f the U .S. Bureau o f Labor Statistics Cost-of-Living Index, Released O ct. 10, 1943,” Am erican Statistical A ssociation Journal, December 1943, pp. 387-405. 36 N A R G 257, B LS, Davis to Perkins, O ct. 19,1943. 37 Office o f Economic Stabilization, Report of die President's Committee on the Cost of Living, 1945, p. 2. 38 Ibid. 39 Ibid., p. 3; G eorge Meany and R. J. Thom as, Cost of Living, Recommended Report for the Presidential Committee on the Cost of Living (Washington: C ongress of Industrial Organizations, 1944), p. 4. 40 Office o f Economic Stabilization, Report, pp. 3-4. 41 Joseph C . G oulden, Meany (New fo rk : Atheneum Publishers, 1972), pp. 113-114. 42 “C ost o f Living in Large C ities, May 1944,” M LR, July 1944, p. 180; Am ow, The Attack, p. 134. 43 American Federationist, Weekly News Service, June 20,1944. 44 “Report o f the Technical Com m ittee A ppointed by the Chairman o f the President's Com m ittee on the C ost o f Living, June 15, 1944,” in Office o f Economic Stabilization, Report, pp. 261-263 and 295. 45 Office o f Econom ic Stabilization, Report, pp. 12-35. 46 William Green, “Am erica’s Wage Policy,” American Federationist, March 1945, pp. 3-4. 47 N A R G 257, B LS, H inrichs to Perkins, Jan. 31, 1945; Perkins to H inrichs, Memo o f February 8,1945. 48 Workers’ Budgets in the United States: City Fam ilies and Single Persons, 1946 and 1947, Bulletin 927 (Bureau o f Labor Statistics, 1948). 49 A . F. H inrichs, Wages in Cotton-Goods M anufacturing, Bulletin 663 (Bureau o f Labor Statistics, 1938), p. X I. 50 D ep t o f Labor, A nnual Report, 1936, p. 77; 1939, pp. 74-75. 51 Federal Register, May 18,1943, p. 6490. 52 N A R G 174, D O L, Perkins Files, Davis to Perkins, June 1,1943, and Perkins to Davis, June 16,1943. 53 N A R G 257, B LS, Standing Com m ittee o f U nion Research D irectors, Subcom mittee on the Release o f Wage Inform ation, Aug. 26,1943. http://fraser.stlouisfed.org Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis 288 Source Notes 54 Robert J. Myers, Harry O ber, and Lily Mary David, “Wartime Wage Move m ents and U rban Wage-Rate C hanges,” M LR, O ctober 1944, pp. 684-705; Activities of the Bureau of Labor Statistics in World W ar II (Bureau o f Labor Statistics, 1947), pp. 90-92; H . M. Douty, “A Century o f Wage Statistics: The B LS Contribution,” M LR, Novem ber 1984, p. 21. 55 N A R G 257, B LS, A . F. H inrichs to Lubin, Apr. 2,1935. 56 N A R G 257, B L S, Lubin to Perkins, S e p t 3,1935. 57 “Extent and Characteristics o f Com pany U nions: Preliminary Report,” M LR, O ctober 1935, pp. 865-876; N A R G 257, B LS, N oel Sargent, Secretary, National A ssociation o f M anufacturers to Lubin, O c t 11, 1935, and Lubin to Sargent, O c t 14, 1935; Journal of Commerce, O c t 15,1935. 58 D ept, o f Labor, A nnual Report, 1940, p. 100. 59 Procedures Used in Compiling Monthly Statistics Relating to Employment and Pay Rolls (Bureau o f Labor Statistics, May 1945), p. 1; D ep t o f Labor, A nnual Report, 1946, p. 57. 60 Handbook of Labor Statistics, Bulletin 694 (Bureau o f Labor Statistics, 1942), pp. 182-183. 61 Joseph W. Duncan and W illiam C . Shelton, Revolution in United States Govern ment Statistics, 1926-1976 (U .S. Departm ent o f Com merce, Office o f Federal Statisti cal Policy and Standards, 1978), p. 38. 62 Lester R. Frankel and J. Stevens Stock, “O n the Sam ple Survey o f Unem ploy m ent,” A SA Journal, M arch 1942; John E. Bregger, "T h e C urrent Population Survey, A H istorical Perspective and B L S’ R ole,” M LR, June 1984, pp. 8-9. 63 Handbook, pp. 183-184. 64 For example, Herman B. Byer, “Employment Created by PWA C onstruction,” M LR, O ctober 1936, pp. 838-845. 65 D ept, o f Labor, Annual Report, 1941, pp. 82-83. 66 N A R G 257, B LS, Lubin to Secretary, Jan. 26,1940; President to Secretary, Jan. 26,1940; William H. M cReynolds to Sidney Hillm an, June 21,1940. 67 Jerom e Cornfield, W. Duane Evans, and M arvin Hoffenberg, “Full Employ ment Patterns, 1950,” Part 1, M LR, February 1947; ftr t 2, M LR, M arch 1947; Duncan and Shelton, Revolution, pp. 109-111; Activities in World W ar II, pp. 81-84. 68 N A R G 257, B LS, Boris Shishkin to Lubin, Aug. 23, 1935, enclosing copy o f letter from William G reen to Perkins, Aug. 20,1935. 69 D ept, o f Labor, Annual Report, 1939, p. 77. 70 Activities in World W ar II, p. 144. 71 H ouse, A ppropriations Com m ittee, Department o f Labor Appropriation Bill for 1935, Hearing (73C, 2S, 1934), p. 11. 72 Ibid., p. 55. 73 Ibid., pp. 71-72. 74 Lubin, “Governm ent Employment as a Professional C areer in Econom ics,” American Economic Review, M arch 1937 (Supplement). 75 D ept, o f Labor, Annual Report, 1937, p. 77. 76 N A R G 174, D O L, Perkins Files, Secretary to die President, Aug. 23, 1933; Secretary to Hugh Johnson, Aug. 7, 1933; Resolution o f the Central Statistical Board, Aug. 14, 1933. http://fraser.stlouisfed.org Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis 289 The First Hundred Years 77 R uth A ull, The Content o f NIRA A dm inistrative Legislation, Part A , Executive an d A dm inistrative O rders (Office o f National Recovery Adm inistration, Division o f Review, W ork M aterials No. 35,1936), p. 18. 78 N A R G 257, B LS, Roscoe Edlund, A ssociation o f American Soap and Glycer ine Producers, Inc., to Lubin, Mar. 22,1934; Lubin to Edlund, Apr. 4,1934. 79 N A R G 257, B LS, transcript o f meeting May 19,1934. 80 N A R G 257, B LS, Lubin to Andrew C ourt, Apr. 13, 1936; Lubin to Stephen DuBrul, General M otors, Apr. 13, 1936; D uBrul to Lubin, July 28, 1937; Lubin to D uBrul, July 30, 1937; C ourt to Lubin, Aug. 17, 1937; Lubin to C ourt, Aug. 21 and Sept. 11,1937; Lubin to W. J. Cronin, Dec. 2,1937. 81 B LS A nnual Conference with Research Directors, Proceedings, 1940, p. 1. 82 N A R G 174, D O L, Schwellenbach Files, Lubin to President, Jan. 22, 1946, and President replies, Jan. 24,1946. 83 M artin, M adam Secretary, pp. 464-465; N A R G 257, BLS, Office o f Publica tions, Statem ent o f Lewis B. Schwellenbach for release Sept. 6,1945. 84 N A R G 174, D O L, Schwellenbach Files, M urray to Schwellenbach, Jan. 29, 1946; The New York Tim es, Jan. 26, 1946; Mar. 29, 1946, p. 42; Mar. 30, 1946, p. 14; New York H erald Tribune, Feb. 25,1946. 85 N A R G 174, D O L, Schwellenbach Files, Lubin to Schwellenbach, Feb. 26, 1946; and Lubin to Jim Abraham son, Feb. 27,1946. 86 N A R G 174, D O L, Schwellenbach Files, Letters to Schwellenbach from Wes ley C . M itchell, Feb. 27, 1946; Frederick C . M ills, Feb. 28, 1946; other letters from Royal M eeker, Mar. 13, 1946; W illiam A . Berridge, M etropolitan Life Insurance C o., Mar. 4, 1946; Senator Wayne M orse, Mar. 29, 1946; J. J. M oran, American U nion o f Telephone W orkers, Apr. 2, 1946; and M orris L. C ooke to the President, Mar. 19, 1946. 87 N A R G 174, D O L, Schwellenbach Files, M emorandum from Hinrichs to the Secretary, May 22,1946; Schwellenbach to H inrichs, May 23,1946. 88 N A R G 174, D O L, Schwellenbach Files, H inrichs to Schwellenbach, July 1, 1946; Schwellenbach to H inrichs, July 2,1946. 89 The W ashington Post, July 3,1946. 90 N A R G 174, D O L, Schwellenbach Files, Edwin E. W itte to Schwellenbach, July 26,1946. Chapter V II. Ewan Clague 1Aryness Joy Wickens, "Statistics and the Public Interest,” American Statistical Association Journal, March 1953, pp. 1-14. 2 Ewan Clague, The Bureau of Labor Statistics (New 'fork: Frederick A. Praeger Publishers, 1968), p. 26. 3 Clague, “The Program of the U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics,” International Statistical Conference, Proceedings: International Statistical Institute, 1947, pp. 182-183. http://fraser.stlouisfed.org Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis 290 Source Notes * Frederick C . M ills and Clarence D. Long, The Statistical Agencies of the Federal Government (New "fork: National Bureau o f Economic Research, 1949), pp. 54, 57-59, 97-99, and 128-129. 5 U .S. Com m ission on Organization o f the Executive Branch o f the Govern ment, Department of Labor, March 1949, pp. 16-17. 6 National Archives Record G roup 257, Bureau o f Labor Statistics, Ewan Clague to the U nder Secretary, Feb. 10,1950. 7 N A R G 174, U .S. Departm ent o f Labor, M itchell, 1954, Leo W erts to John J. Gilhooley, Nov. 4, 1954, covering “Recommendations o f Program &. Organization Consultants, 1954,” including “Recommendations Concerning Employment and Unem ploym ent Statistics (9/13/54).” 8 N A R G 174, U SD O L, Deputy U nder Secretary, M itchell, Secretary’s Instruc tion N o. 57, “Responsibility for Statistical Standards,” July 14, 1955; Records o f Deputy U nder Secretary M illard C ass, Sam uel R. Pierce, Jr., to C ass, Aug. 31, 1955, and U nder Secretary to C ass, May 12, 1960, covering “B LS Statem ent on C onsult ants’ Recom m endations.” 9 Jam es P. M itchell, “A Prefatory N ote,” Monthly Labor Review, January 1955, p. n. 10 N A R G 257, BLS, D ep t o f Labor Publications Program, “The Scope o f this Report” (apparently Novem ber 1956) and Lodge and C ass, “Departm ent o f Labor Publications Program ,” Feb. 26,1957. 11 N A R G 257, B LS, M LR Planning Com m ittee, 1951—, U nder Secretary to Clague, “Monthly Labor Review," O ct. 18,1955; D ep t o f Labor Publications Program, Lawrence R. Klein to Philip A m ow , “O ct. 3, 1957, M eeting o f the Departmental Publications Com m ittee,” O ct. 4,1957. 12 N A R G 174, U SD O L, W. W illard Wirtz, 1964, “Introduction, The C ost o f Departm ental Publications” (apparently John W. Leslie, Jan. 8, 1964); N A R G 257, BLS, Dept, o f Labor Publications Policy, Wirtz, memorandum for Kermit Gordon, D irector, Bureau o f the Budget, Jan. 23,1964. 13 N A R G 174, U SD O L , Wirtz, 1964, “N otes on Secretary’s Staff M eeting, Dec. 28, 1964”; N A R G 257, B LS, Monthly Labor Review, “M inutes o f D iscussion on Proposal Relating to M onthly Labor Review, M arch 17,1965.” w N A R G 257, B L S, Robert J. Myers to A ssistant Secretary Daniel P. Moynihan, Nov. 3, 1964, “The Research Program o f BLM R”; Clague to M orris Weisz, Mar. 12, 1965, “BLM R H istory —your memorandum o f D ec 30.” 15 N A R G 257, B LS, D ivision o f Wages and Industrial Relations, 1951-1964, Clague to W erts, “Labor-M anagement Relations Program for the Departm ent,” Sept. 27,1962. 16 N A R G 257, B LS, Clague to Werts, "D raft No. 3—Manpower Administration," Jan. 21,1963. 17 N A R G 257, B LS, M yers to A rthur M. Ross, “Secretary’s O rders Governing Manpower Research,” O ct. 8, 1965; U .S. Congress, H ouse, Subcommittee o f A ppro priations, Hearings, Departments of Labor and Health, Education, and Welfare Appro priations for 1965 (88C, 2S, 1964), pp. 291 ff, “Programs in Manpower Research and Statistics.” http://fraser.stlouisfed.org Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis 291 The First Hundred Years 18 N A R G 174, U SD O L , W lrtz, 1964, M oynihan, M emorandum for the Secre tary, Nov. 27,1964. 19 N A R G 257, B LS, Clague to W erts, Feb. 23 and May 7,1965. 20 Booz-Allen and H am ilton, Bureau of Labor Statistics, General Review (confi dential report), 1966, pp. 7 and 14. 21 U .S . D ep t o f Labor, A nnual Report, 1968, p. 23. 22 Ibid., p. 6. 23 John P. W ymer, "Industry Employment Statistics in the U nited States, Fifty "fears o f Developm ent," Employment and Earnings, January 1966, pp. viii-x. 24 H ouse, Subcom m ittee o f A ppropriations, Hearings, Departments of Labor and Health, Education, and Welfare Appropriations for 1955: Testimony of Members of Congress, Interested Organizations, and Individuals (83C, 2S, 1954), p. 37, statement o f National Legislative Com m ittee, Am erican Federation o f Labor; N A R G 174, U SD O L , M itchell, 1954, Clague to Secretary, "Statistics o f employment and unem ploym ent," Mar. 15,1954. 25 N A R G 257, B L S, D iv. o f Manpower and Employment Statistics, Clague for the Secretary, Feb. 12, 1954, and News Release, "Com bined Employment Release A nnounced,’' fo r A pril 25,1954; Office o f Program Planning, W ickens to Clague, Feb. 15,1954. 26 M itchell, General O rder No. 99, May 18, 1959, "O peration o f the M onthly Report on the Labor Force”; N A R G 257, B LS, M RLF—H istorical File on Com bined Release and Transfer o f Functions to B L S, M aurice H . Stans, Bureau o f the Budget, Memorandum for Secretary Strauss and Secretary M itchell, "C onstruction and Labor Force Statistics,” signed by M itchell and Strauss on Nov. 18, 1958; U SD O L , BLS, News Release (U SD L 2864), July 14,1959, "T he Employment Situation: June 1959.” 27 N A R G 257, B L S, Productivity, Clipping, Wail Street Journal, Nov. 20, 1959, "Agency U rged to Revise W xf It Figures Jobless”; Senate, Subcom m ittee o f A ppropri ations, Hearings, Labor-Health, Education, and Welfare Appropriations for 1961 (86C, 2S, 1960), pp. 1034,1037-1039; Daily Labor Report (230), Nov. 25,1959, p. BB1; (133), July 12,1961, pp. B1-B3. 28 The New York Times, following dates in I960: Aug. 2, p. 20, Aug. 17, p. 64-, S e p t 21, p. 26; O ct. 16, p. 1; O c t 29, p. 12; Nov. 2, p. 80; Nov. 4, p. 23; Nov. 8, p. 19; Nov. 11, p. 1. 29 Bernard D . N ossiter, "D elay Seen for Unem ployment Report,” The Washing ton Post, Nov. 3, 1960, p. 25; dipping, "Delayed Report Show s R ise in Unem ploy m en t” 30 N A R G 257, B LS, Clague to the U nder Secretary, Nov. 9, I960; and Release o f Statistics I, Clague to the U nder Secretary, Feb. 20,1961. 31 Jam es Daniel, "Let’s Look at Those ’Alarming’ Unem ployment Figures,” Reader’s Digest, Septem ber 1961. 32DLR (219), Nov. 13, 1961, pp. A 5 and A 7; U .S. President’s Com m ittee to A ppraise Employment and Unem ploym ent Statistics, M easuring Employment and Unemployment, 1962, pp. 12,20, and 212. 33 M easuring Employment, pp. 14-1 5 ,1 7 ,2 3 ,2 5 -2 6 ,1 5 1 -1 5 2 . 34 N A R G 174, U SD O L , W. W illard Wlrtz, 1964, Wlrtz, Memorandum for the President, not sent, filed June 4,1964; Wlrtz, 1965, Clague to Secretary, June 10,1965, http://fraser.stlouisfed.org Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis 292 Source Notes and G ardner Ackley, M emorandum for Members o f die W hite H ouse Staff, July 2, 1965. 35 N A R G 257, BLS, Job Vacancy Statistical Program I, Seym our L. W olfbein to Clague, Jan. 12, 1956, and Clague to Charles Stewart, Nov. 6, 1956, covering Clague to U nder Secretary, Nov. 6,1956. 36 Ibid., Clague to Moynihan, July 18, 1963; Clague to Moynihan, O ct. 28, 1963; Myers to M oynihan, July 7, 1964; and Wirtz to the President, July 28, 1964; Presi dent’s Com m ittee, M easuring Employment, pp. 199-202; Raymond A . Konstant and Irvin F. O . W ingeard, “Analysis and U se o f Job Vacancy Statistics, Part I,” M LR, A ugust 1968, pp. 22-23; “Part II,” Septem ber 1968, p. 21. 37 N A R G 257, BLS, Job Vacancy Statistical Program I, Clague to Moynihan, Dec. 17,1963; Kermit G ordon to Wirtz, Sept. 5,1964. 38 Ibid., BLS statement, “Job Vacancy Research Program ," June 9, 1964, and Van Auken, Memorandum to the Job Vacancy Files, Nov. 9, 1964; DLR (112), June 11, 1965, pp. A 4-A 5. 39 N A R G 257, B LS, Job Vacancy Statistical Program I, Secretary, Memorandum to A ll Employers, Nov. 5,1964. 40 J. E. M orton, On the Evolution of Manpower Statistics (Kalamazoo, M ich.: The W. E. U pjohn Institute for Employment Research, 1969), p. 64. 41 D ept, o f Labor, Annual Report, 1959, p. 8; B LS bulletins, Employment and Economic Status of Older Men and Women, Bull. 1213 (1956), p. HI; Older Workers under Collective Bargaining, part I, Hiring, Retention, Job Termination, Bull. 1199-1 (1956); Older Workers under Collective Bargaining, part II, Health and Insurance Plans, Pension Plans, Bull. 1199-2 (1956). 42 Am ong the reports were: V incent F. Gegan and Sam uel H . Thom pson, “W orker M obility in a Labor Surplus A rea," M LR, December 1957; Robert L. Stein, “Unem ployment and Job M obility,” M LR, A pril I960; Impact on Workers and Com munity of a Plant Shutdown in a Depressed A rea, Bull. 1264 (Bureau o f Labor Statis tics, 1960). 43 B LS bulletins, M ilitary Manpower Requirements and Supply, 1954-60, Bull. 1161 (1954); M ilitary Manpower Requirements and Supply, 1959-63, Bull. 1262 (1959); Scientific Research and Development in American Industry, A Study of Manpower and Costs, Bull. 1148 (1953); BLS Handbook of Methods for Surveys and Studies, Bull. 1458 (1966), p. 41; Employment of Scientific and Technical Personnel in Industry, 1962, Bull. 1418(1964). 44 Techniques of Preparing M ajor BLS Statistical Series, Bull. 993 (Bureau o f Labor Statistics, 1950), pp. 1 and 5; The Consumer Price Index, Report 517 (Bureau o f Labor Statistics, 1978 rev.), p. 4; D ept, o f Labor, Annual Report, 1947, p- 54; H ouse, Com mittee on Education and Labor, Special Subcom mittee, Hearings, Consumers* Price Index (82C, IS, 1951), p. 19. 45 N A R G 257, B LS, CPI, Revision of, W tckens to Secretary, S e p t 23,1949. 46 N A R G 257, B LS, C ost o f Living, Clague to the Secretary, S e p t 25, 1950; George W. Brooks to Clague, Nov. 3, 1950; Price Division, “Statem ent by the Com m issioner on the Interim Adjustm ent o f the Consum ers’ Price Index,” Feb. 20, 1951, BLS statem ent, “Interim Adjustm ent o f Consum ers’ Price Index," Apr. 11,1951. http://fraser.stlouisfed.org Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis 293 The First Hundred Years 47 N A R G 257, B LS, Price Division, Clague to die Secretary, Apr. 24, 1951; “U E C alls U .S. Price Index ‘Fraud’; A sks Senate Probe," U E News, Apr. 30, 1951, p. 1; Harvey A . Levenstein, Communum, Anticommunism, and the CIO (W estport, Conn.: Greenwood Press, 1981), pp. 299-301. 48 N A R G 257, B LS, Price Division, Lubin to Clague, cable, Aug. 6, 1951; also Clague to Lubin, cable, Aug. 6,1951; Clague to Rep. Tom Steed, Aug. 8,1951. 49 H ouse, Subcom m ittee o f Education and Labor, Hearings, Consumers’ Price Index, pp. 202, 207-208, 275, 278, 280-282, and 358 and Report, Consumers’ Price Index (82C, IS , Subcom m ittee Rept. No. 2, 1951), pp. 32-33, 35, 36, and 39; Senate, Com m ittee on Public W elfare, Subcom m ittee on Labor and Labor-M anagement Rela tions, Report, Study of Wage and Price Indexes (82C, IS , Com mittee Print, 1951). 50 N A R G 257, B LS, Clague, “Statem ent Concerning the Resum ption o f the ‘O ld Series’ Consum ers’ Price Index," before Senate Com mittee on A ppropriations, Feb. 23, 1953 (typed); Price Division, W alter P. Reuther to Secretary (wire), Jan. 26, 1953; “First Labor Issue Put to Eisenhow er," The New York Times, Jan. 29,1953. 51 H elen Hum es Lamale, “H ousing C osts in the Consum er Price Index," MLR, February 1956, pp. 189-191; U .S. Congress, Joint Com m ittee on the Economic Report, Report, The Consumers’ Price Index (80C, 2S, Joint Com mittee Print, 1949), p. 6. 52 D ep t o f Labor, A nnual Report, 1953, p. 63; N A R G 257, BLS, Price Division, “Efforts to Secure O utside Financing for the General-Purpose Tabulations o f the Bureau o f Labor Statistics 1950 Study o f Consum er Expenditures,” Jan. 12, 1954; N A R G 174, U SD O L , M itchell, 1956, W. Duane Evans to Secretary, O ct. 8,1956. 53 N A R G 257, B LS, Price Division, Clague, “W hat Consum er Price Index Really Is,” Journal of Commerce, Aug. 16, 1956, with introductory note by H . E. Luedicke; clipping, “The C ost o f Living, The Index is M isleading &. Incom plete," Time, Nov. 11, 1957; Joint Economic Com m ittee, Hearings, Relationship of Prices to Economic Stability and Growth (85C, 2S, 1958), and Hearings, Employment, Growth, and Price Levels (86C, IS , 1959). ^ N A R G 257, B LS, Price Division, Clipping, J.R W ., “Newsletter: Commodity Report—Price Indices N ot Telling Real Story," Journal of Commerce, Aug. 8, 1956; DLR (179), Sept. 14,1960, p. A10. 55 Joint Economic Com m ittee, Subcom m ittee on Economic Statistics, Hearings, Government Price Statistics, Part I (87C, IS , 1961), p. 2, with report and papers from Price Statistics Review Com m ittee following: The Price Statistics of the Federal Govern ment, Review, Appraisal, and Recommendations. 56 Joint Economic Com m ittee, Hearings, Price Statistics, I, pp. 5-6; The Consumer Price Index: History and Techniques, Bull. 1517 (Bureau o f Labor Statistics, 1966), pp. 8-9; N A R G 257, B LS, C PI, Revision of, Hollander to Clague, June 14, 1951; H ol lander to Clague, May 26, 1952, “Treatm ent o f single-person consum er units in the revised C onsum ers’ Price Index.” 57 Joint Economic Com m ittee, Hearings, Price Statistics, I, pp. 47-48; Hearings, Price Statistics, II, p. 680. 58 Joint Economic Com m ittee, Hearings, Price Statistics, I, pp. 52 and 55; H ear ings, Price Statistics, II, p. 560. http://fraser.stlouisfed.org Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis 294 Source Notes 59N A R G 257, BLS, Consum er Price Index—General, BLS statement, “Major Changes in the Consum er Price Index,” Mar. 3, 1964; The Consum er Price Index, Rept. 517, p. 5. 60 N A R G 257, BLS, Revision o f the CPI, Jam es E. Dodson to Clague, Sept. 14, 1960. 61 N A R G 257, BLS, Price Division, H erbert Bienstock to Walter G . Keim, Jan. 3, 1964; John R. Howard to Sen. M aurine Newberger, Feb. 20, 1964; W. W illard Wirtz, M emorandum to Clague, Nov. 10, 1964; Clague to Secretary, Nov. 18, 1964; Clague to Secretary, Feb. 4, 1965, “Elim ination o f Consum er Price Index for Individual C ities.” 62 N A R G 257, BLS, Price Division, BLS Statement, “The Budgets in Their H istorical Perspective,” January 1965; City Worker’s Fam ily Budget For a M oderate Living Stan dard, A utum n 1966, Bull. 1570-1 (Bureau o f Labor Statistics, 1967), pp. vi-vii. 63 N A R G 257, BLS, Price Division, BLS, “Review o f the BLS W holesale Price Index,” O ct. 24, 1957; A llan D. Searle, “W eight Revisions in the W holesale Price Index, 1890-1960,” M LR, February 1962, p. 180; Techniques o f Preparing M ajor B LS Statistical Series, Bull. 1168 (Bureau o f Labor Statistics, 1954), pp. 82 and 93; B LS H andbook o f M ethods for Surveys an d Studies, Bull. 1910 (Bureau o f Labor Statistics, 1976), p. 127. 64 Joint Economic Com m ittee, H earings, Price Statistics, I, p. 64; H andbook, Bull. 1910, p. 123. 65 H.M . Douty and Toivo P. Kanninen, “Community Approach to Wage Stud ies,” M LR, O ctober 1949, pp. 366-367 and 369; Techniques, Bull. 1168, p. 97. ^K an n in en , “New Dim ensions in BLS Wage Survey W ork,” M LR, October 1959, pp. 1081 and 1083-1084; N A R G 257, BLS, DW IR, Douty to Clague, June 19, 1959, covering additional m aterials; and Bureau o f die Budget, “Design for a Survey o f W hite-Collar Pay in Private Industry,” Sept. 17,1959. 67 Clague, The Bureau, pp. 99-100; Joseph P. Goldberg, “The Governm ent’s Industrial Employees, part II, Consultation, Bargaining, and Wage Determ ination,” M LR, March 1954, p. 253; N A R G 257, BLS, DW IR, C ass to HoUeman, “State Wage Collection Program s,” Mar. 9,1962. 68 Harry S. Kantor, “Economic Effects o f the Minimum Wage,” M LR, March 1955, pp. 307-308; L. Earl Lewis, “75-Cent Minimum Wage: Effects on Fertilizer Industry,” M LR , January 1951; Norman Sam uels, “Effects o f the $1 Minimum Wage in Seven Industries,” M LR, March 1957; Factory W orkers’ Earnings, M ay 1958, Bull. 1252 (Bureau o f Labor Statistics, 1959); Industry W age Survey, Hotel an d Motels, June 1961, Bull. 1328 (Bureau o f Labor Statistics, 1962); Industry W age Survey, E atin g an d D rinking Places, June 1963, Bull. 1400 (Bureau o f Labor Statistics, 1964). 69 N A R G 174, U SD O L, M itchell, 1956, Mitchell to Sen. Paul H. Douglas, Jan. 31, 1956; N A R G 257, BLS, DW IR, B LS statement (no date), “Retail Trade Wage Survey”; H ouse, Subcom mittee o f A ppropriations, H earings, Second Supplem ental Appropriation Bill, 1956 (84C, 2S, 1956), p. 341; Employee Earnin gs in Retail Trade in October 1956, Sum m ary Report, Bull. 1220 (Bureau o f Labor Statistics, 1957). 70 Problems in M easurem ent o f Expenditures on Selected Items o f Supplementary Employee Rem uneration, M anufacturing Establishm ents, 1953, Bull. 1186 (Bureau o f http://fraser.stlouisfed.org Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis 295 The First H undred Years Labor Statistics, 1956), p. iii; Employer Expenditures for Selected Supplementary Remu neration Practices for Production Workers in M anufacturing Industries, B u ll 1308 (Bureau o f Labor Statistics, 1962); N A R G 257, B LS, DW IR, William J. Carson to A lbert L. M oore, Jr., Aug. 26, 1953; Division o f Wages and Industrial Relations, 1965-1971, W alter W. H eller to Wirtz, Nov. 11, 1964; Clague to Moynihan, Dec. 4, 1964; Wirtz to Ackley, "Statistical Program o f Fringe Benefits,” Dec. 28,1964. 71 N A R G 257, B L S, Division o f Wages and Industrial Relations, 1951-1964, Douty to Clague, July 22,1958, "Review o f draft.” 72 Joseph W. D uncan and W illiam G . Shelton, Revolution in United States Gov ernment Statistics, 1926-1976 (U .S. Departm ent o f Com merce, Office o f Federal Statistical Policy and Standards, 1978), pp. 96-97; Clague, The Bureau, pp. 117-119; Trends in Output per M an-Hour and Man-Hours per Unit of Output—M anufacturing, 1939-53, R p t 100 (Bureau o f Labor Statistics, 1955); Trends in Output per M an-Hour in the Private Economy, 1909-1958, Bull. 1249 (Bureau o f Labor Statistics, 1960). 73 Economic Report of the President, January 1962, together with the Annual Report o f the C ouncil o f Econom ic Advisers, pp. 186-190. 74 N A R G 257, B L S, Reorganization o f the Productivity Division, Leon Green berg to Henry J. Fitzgerald, S e p t 11, 1959; Techniques, B u ll 1168, p. 30; Labor Requirements for School Construction, Bull. 1299 (Bureau o f Labor Statistics, 1961); Labor and M aterial Requirements for College Housing Construction, Bull. 1441 (Bureau o f Labor Statistics, 1965). 75 N A R G 257, B LS, D ivision o f Productivity and Technological Change, 1953-63, N at W einberg to Clague, Apr. 8, 1953, and Clague to W alter C . Wallace, Dec. 10, 1959; Productivity Division, Clague to C ass, Feb. 27, 1957; Productivity; UAW Controversy—B L S Productivity Report, “T he Bureau o f Labor Statistics’ Sur render to Big Business.” 76 Handbook, Bull. 1458, p. 208. 77 D ep t o f Labor, A nnual Report, 1949, pp. 69 and 75; A nnual Report, 1951, pp. 208-209. 78 Foreign Labor Publications, mimeograph (Bureau o f Labor Statistics, 1962) pp. i-ii; Labor Law and Practice in Honduras, R p t 189 (1961); "Sum m ary o f Labor Conditions in Burm a,” mimeograph (December 1952); Foreign Labor Information: Labor in Argentina, mimeograph (June 1959); Labor in the Sudan, R ep t 182 (Bureau o f Labor Statistics in cooperation with International Cooperation Adm inistration, 1961). 79 Each prepared by B LS for Agency for International Developm ent The Fore casting of Manpower Requirements, R p t 248 (1963); Conducting a Labor Force Survey in Developing Countries, R p t 263 (1964); Computation of Cost-of-Living Indexes in Developing Countries, R p t 283 (1964). 80 D ep t o f Labor, Annual Report, 1947, p. 59; Annual Report, 1950, p. 177; D uncan and Shelton, Revolution, p. 111. 81 Clague, The Bureau, pp. 128-130. 82 Ibid., pp. 130-131; Duncan and Shelton, Revolution, p. 114; Handbook, Bull. 1458, pp. 220-221. 83 Projections 1970, Interindustry Relationships, Potential Demand, Employment, Bull. 1536 (Bureau o f Labor Statistics, 1966). http://fraser.stlouisfed.org Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis 296 Source Notes 84 N A R G 257, B LS, D ivision o f Prices and C ost o f Living, 1950-1964, Edward D. Hollander, File Memorandum, July 6, 1950; H ouse, Com mittee on Post Office and Civil Service, Subcom m ittee on Overstaffing in the Executive Departm ents and A gen' cies, "Investigation o f Employee Utilization in die Executive Departm ents and A gen' d e s,” Preliminary Report, part II, "T he Prices and C ost o f Living Division, Departm ent o f Labor” (81C, 2S, 1950, Com m ittee Print), pp. 49 and 55. 85 N A R G 257, B LS, D ivision o f Prices and C ost o f Living, 1950-1964, M aurice J. Tobin to Rep. John Bell W illiams, Dec. 21,1950; Hollander to Clague, et als., "Results o f Employee A ttitude Survey,” Feb. 7,1951. 86 Senate, Com m ittee on Labor and Public W elfare, H earing: N om ination of Ew an C lague (84C, IS , 1955), pp. 2 -4 ,6 , and 8. 87 Ibid., pp. 12,15, and 18. 88 N A R G 257, BLS, Bert Seidm an to Ewan Clague, Sept. 7,1954. 89 Clague, “The Program ,” 1947, p. 179. 90 “A ppeals C ourt Delays O rder Setting A side W alsh-Healey Determ ination,” DLR (76), Apr. 18, 1963, p. A7; “A ppeals C ourt Affirms Injunction Against WalshHealey Determ ination,” DLR (128), July 1,1964, p. A l. 91 “Wirtz Revokes M otors-Generators Wage Determ ination Struck Down by C ourts,” DLR (187), Sept. 24, 1964, p. A10; H erbert C . M orton, Public C ontracts an d Private W ages, Experience under the W alsh-Healey A ct (Washington: The Brookings Institution, 1965), pp. 89,114, and 131. 92 DLR (176), Sept. 14,1965, pp. A 9-A 10. Chapter V III. Four Commissioners 1U.S. Congress, Joint Economic Committee, Subcommittee on Economic Statis tics, Government Price Statistics, H earings (89C, 2S, 1966), p. 3. 2 Econom ic Report o f the President, February 1984, together with the Annual Report of the Council of Economic Advisers, p. 201. 3 Econom ic Report o f the President, Jan u ary 1979, together with the Annual Report of the Council of Economic Advisers, pp. 167-169. 4 U.S. Department of Labor, Bureau of Labor Statistics, Janet L. Norwood, Statement before the Subcommittee on Econom ic Stabilization, Committee on Banking, Finance, an d U rban A ffairs, H ouse o f Representatives (Feb. 17,1983), pp. 2 ,4 ,5 ,6 , and 16. 5 Weekly Com pilation o f Presidential Docum ents, Sept 29,1969, pp. 1319-1320. 6 U.S. Congress, Congressional Budget Office, Indexing with die Consum er Price Index: Problems an d A lternatives, June 1981, p. xiii; Norwood, Statem ent before the A ppropriations Subcommittee, H ouse o f Representatives, F Y 1984 Appropriations (Mar. 15,1983), p. 2. 7 Minimum Wage Study Commission, Report, May 24,1980, p. 84. 8 For a detailed and comprehensive catalog of indexation, see U.S. Congress, Senate, Committee on the Budget, Indexation o f Federal Program s (97C, IS, Commit tee Print, 1981), prepared by the Congressional Research Service. http://fraser.stlouisfed.org Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis 297 The First H undred Years 9 Daily Labor Report (182), S e p t 21,1965, p. A 4; U .S. Congress, H ouse, Subcomm ittee o f A ppropriations, Hearings, Departments of Labor and Health, Education, and Welfare Appropriations for 1967 (89C, 2S, 1966), pp. 677 and 681. 10 DLR (204), O c t 21,1965, pp. E1-E2. 11 Geoffrey H . M oore, “Long-Range Program Objectives for B L S," Monthly Labor Review, O ctober 1969, pp. 3-6. 12 Senate, Com m ittee on Labor and Public Welfare, Hearing, Nomination of Julius Shiskin (93C, IS , 1973), p. 12; National Archives Record G roup 257, BLS, U nder Secretary, Shiskin, Memo for the Secretary, “Pro Forma Resignation,” Aug. 13, 1974. 13 Senate, Labor and Public W elfare, Hearing, Shiskin (1973), pp. 3 ,8 . 14 Office o f Publications files, Shiskin, (photocopy) May 19, 1977, Senator Proxmire to the President; Senate, Com m ittee on Human Resources, Hearing, Nomi nation o f Julius Shiskin (95C, IS , 1977), pp. 1-2,26. 15 Senate, Labor and Human Resources, Hearing, Nomination of Dr. Janet L. Norwood (96C, IS , 1979), pp. 8-9. 16 Ibid., p. 6; Forbes, June 11, 1979, p. 155; Philip Shabecoff, “She Takes H er Com puters H om e,” The N ew York Tim es, July 22,1979. 17 “Republican Claim s Index Was M anipulated,” Washington Star, O c t 7, 1980, p. A l; “Fact and Com m ent: U nfortunately that Price Index D rop Is a Phony,” Forbes, O c t 27,1980, p. 25. 18 DLR (114), June 13,1983, p. A2. 19 “Release o f Statistics by Federal Agencies: The President’s Memorandum to the D irector o f the Bureau o f the Budget, Feb. 8, 1969,” in Weekly Compilation of Presidential Documents (Feb. 14,1969), p. 248. 20 Joint Econom ic Com m ittee, Current Labor M arket Developments, Hearings (92C, IS , 1971), pp. 338-339. 21N A R G 257, B LS, Release o f Statistics I, draft, July 22, 1969, “Policy on the Presentation and Interpretation o f Governm ent Statistics,” signed by Shiskin, with holograph note: “U sed at mtg. 7/28/69—w /H erb Klein, M. M ann, and J. Shiskin,” with typed note attached, "Proposal made to Dr. Burns (with m inor revisions).” 22 N A R G 257, B L S, Discontinuance o f Press Briefings, M oore, memorandum for the Secretary, “Proposed Procedure for H andling B LS Price and Employment Releases,” Mar. 15,1971; Senate, Subcom m ittee on A ppropriations, Hearings, Depart ment of Labor and Health, Education, and Welfare and Related Agencies Appropria tions for Fiscal Year 1972 (92C, IS , 1971), pp. 113-114. 23 N A R G 257, B L S, Discontinuance o f Press Briefings, GH M , “Statem ent by Secretary Explaining Change in Procedure for Releasing Price and Employment Sta tistics,” Mar. 16,1971; Senate, Subcom m ittee o f A ppropriations, Hearings, Appropria tions for Fiscal Year 1972, pp. 113-114. 24 Joint Econom ic Com m ittee, Federal Statistical Programs, Hearings (93C, IS , 1973), p. 26. 25 N A R G 257, B L S, Reorganization, O ctober 19711, Shultz (OM B) to Secretar ies, “Reorganization,” July 15,1971. 26 DLR (189), S e p t 29,1971, p. A16; N A R G 257, B LS, Reorganization, O ctober 19711, (copy) "N ixon O usting Labor A nalysts,” Washington Post, S e p t 29,1971. http://fraser.stlouisfed.org Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis 298 Source Notes 27 H ouse, Com m ittee on Governm ent O perations, Report, Discontinuance of Monthly Press Briefings by the Bureau of Labor Statistics, Department of Labor (92C, IS, H ouse Report 92-759,1971), p. 10. 28 H ouse, Com m ittee on Post Office and C ivil Service, Subcom mittee on Census and Statistics, Report, Investigation of Possible Politicization of Federal Statistical Program s (92C, 2S, H ouse Rept. 92-1536, 1972), letter o f transm ittal and pp. 1-2, 8-9, and 11-12. 29 Dept, o f Labor, BLS, News Release (U SD L 72-693), O ct. 6, 1972, “Statem ent by Com m issioner o f Labor Statistics;” Jam es D . H odgson, “Statem ent o f Policy by the Secretary o f Labor Concerning the Role o f the Bureau o f Labor Statistics,” Nov. 10, 1972. 30 “Secretary o f Labor, Rem arks o f Press Secretary, Nov. 29, 1972,” in Weekly Compilation, Dec. 4,1972, pp. 1707-1708; DLR (242), Dec. 14,1972, p. A6; (244), Dec. 18, 1972, p. A 9; (5), Jan. 8, 1973, p. A12; Daniel J. Balz, “C ivil Servant, Statistician Named C h ief o f Troubled Bureau o f Labor Statistics,” N ational Journal, July 7, 1973, p. 995. 31N A R G 174, U SD O L , Brennan, 1973, Secretary to John H . A iken, Mar. 21, 1973, covers “M aintaining the Professional Integrity o f Federal Statistics, Final R eport,” American Statistical A ssociation/Federal Statistics U sers’ Conference Com mittee on the Integrity o f Federal Statistics, 1973. 32 N A R G 257, B LS, Discontinuance o f Press Briefings, Bureau o f the Budget, C ircular A-91, “Prompt Com pilation and Release o f Statistical Inform ation,” Feb. 12, 1969; M oore, Memo for the Secretary, “Proposed procedure,” Mar. 15, 1971; OM B C ircular A-91, Revised, Apr. 26,1972. 33 N A R G 257, B LS, Reorganization, O ctober 1971 I, M oore to Robert A. G ordon, Dec. 9,1971. 34 N A R G 174, U SD O L , Brennan, 1974-5, Secretary to Senator Praxmire, Oct. 30, 1974; Senate, Labor and Human Resources Com m ittee, Hearing, Norwood (1979), p. 22. 35 Joint Economic Com m ittee, Subcom m ittee on Economic Statistics, Price Statis tics (1966), p. 3; DLR (102), May 25,1966, pp. B22-B24. 36 N A R G 257, B LS, C PI—Q uality Change I, TOdter P. Reuther to Secretary, Sept. 27,1966. 37 Ibid., M agnuson and M ondale to Ross, July 28, 1967; M agnuson and Mondale to Ross, O ct. 2,1967; R oss to M agnuson and M ondale, O ct. 12,1967. 38 N A R G 257, B LS, C PI Revision #4, M ark Roberts to Members o f the Labor Research Advisory C ouncil, Mar. 29, 1974; D ept, o f Labor, B LS, News Release, Apr. 5,1974, “Revised Consum er Price Index to Reflect Expenditures o f M ore Am ericans;” The Consumer Price Index: Concepts and Content Over the Years, Report 517 (Bureau o f Labor Statistics, 1978), p. 10. 39 DLR (61), Mar. 28,1974, p. A 5; (68), Apr. 8,1974, pp. A 12-A 13. 40 DLR (68), Apr. 8,1974, p. A ll; (79), Apr. 23,1974, pp. A17 and A19. 41 N A R G 257, B LS, CPI Revision #4, Gary L. Seevers, Chairman, Subcom mittee on Economic Statistics, Council on Economic Policy, Memo for Shiskin, Family Definition in the Consum er Price Index, Apr. 16,1974;" Seevers (CEA), Edgar Fiedler (Treasury), Jack Carlson (OMB), and Joseph Duncan (OMB), Memo for The Troika, http://fraser.stlouisfed.org Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis 299 The First H undred Years "Coverage In the Revised C P I," May 10, 1974; Shiskin, Memo for the Secretary, "A Revised Plan for the 1977 C P I," May 14,1974; N A R G 174, U SD O L, U sery, 1976-77, Secretary to H on. Jam es T. Lynn, Jan. 18,1977; DLR (101), May 23,1974, p. A4. 42 H ouse, Com m ittee on Governm ent O perations, Hearings, Consumer Price Index for All-Urban Consumers (95C, 2S, 1978), p. 6; U .S. Com ptroller General, A CPI for Retirees Is Not Needed Now But Could Be in die Future (General Accounting Office, G G D 82-41,1982), p. iiL 43 Norwood, CPI Issues, Report 593 (Bureau o f Labor Statistics, 1980), pp. 1-2; Consumer Price Index (R p t 517,1978), pp. 13-14. 44 N A R G 257, B L S, C PI Revision—Homeownership Com ponent, Roberts to Shiskin, July 7,1975, enclosing Anne D raper to Roberts, "Labor Criticism s o f Flow o f Services Pricing o f Homeownership Com ponent o f Consum er Price Index;* Joseph P. G oldberg to M embers o f the Price Com m ittee o f the Labor Research Advisory C ouncil, Mar. 31,1977, covering D raper to Roberts, "Hom eownership Com ponent o f the Consum er Price Index,” Mar. 21,1977. 45 Ibid., N oel A . M cBride to Shiskin, Jan. 6, 1977; K. G . \& n A uken, Jr., to M embers o f the Business Research Advisory C ouncil and Its Com m ittee on C on sum er and W holesale Prices, Jan. 12, 1977; Shiskin to Lyle E. Gramley, C ouncil o f Econom ic Advisers, Apr. 15,1977. 46 BLS Handbook o f Methods, Bulletin 2134-1 (Bureau o f Labor Statistics, 1982), p. 38; N A R G 257, B L S, Consum er Expenditure Surveys, H elen H . Lamale to Chase, "Plans for C ontinuing Expenditure Surveys,” Mar. 14,1966. 47 N A R G 257, B L S, C PI Revirion #5 , Roberts, Lazare Teper, and Draper, July 29, 1974, attention: Joseph P. Goldberg, "June 1974 B L S Paper on C E X ." 48 N A R G 257, B L S, CPI Revirion #7 , Shiskin to Robet Ferber, O ct. 24, 1975; Division o f Prices and C ost o f Living, 1973-1975, Burton G . M alkiel, Council o f Econom ic Advisers, M emo for Rudy Penner, "T h e Continuing Consum er Expendi ture Survey,” Nov. 1,1975. 49 Economic Report of die President, January 1979, pp. 43-44; Economic Report of the President, January 1980, pp. 39-40. 50 D LR (14), Jan. 21,1980, pp. X lff. 51 DLR (242), Dec. 14, 1979, p. A ll; (37), Feb. 22, 1980, p. A15; (40), Feb. 27, 1980, p. A 9; (47), Mar. 7,1980, p. A 8; (67), Apr. 4,1980, p. A2. 52 Economic Report of the President, January 1981, p. 10. 53 "Take a Parting Shot at Inflation” (editorial), The New York Times, Dec. 4,1980, p. A 30; C om ptroller G eneral, Measurement o f Homeownership Costs in the Consumer Price Index Should Be Changed (General A ccounting Office, PAD 81-12,1981), pp. iv, v, and 55. 54 D ept, o f Labor, News Release (U SD L 80-303), May 9, 1980, "N orw ood U rges U sers to Become Better Inform ed A bout Indexation;” H ouse, A ppropriations, H ear ings, Departments of Labor, Health and Human Services, Education, and Related Agencies Appropriations for 1982 (97C, IS , 1981), pp. 1072-1073. 55 D ept, o f Labor, News Release (U SD L 81-506), O ct. 27,1981, "Statem ent o f Dr. Janet L. N orw ood.” 56 U SD O L News Release (U SD L 82-327), S e p t 17. 1982, "N orw ood Says CPI Change W ill Im prove Inflation M easure.” http://fraser.stlouisfed.org Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis 300 Source Notes 57 DLR (238), Dec. 11,1981, pp. A 13-A 14. 58 Dr. Jam es A .C lifton, for Cham ber o f Com merce o f the U nited States, “State m ent,” before Senate Com m ittee on Governm ental Affairs, Apr. 20, 1982, p. 1; DLR (28), Feb. 9,1983, pp. A 11-A 12. 59 H ouse, Appropriations, H earings, D epartm ents o f Labor, H ealth an d H um an Services, Education, an d Related Agencies A ppropriations for 1984 (98C, IS , 1983), pp. 306-307. 60 N A R G 257, BLS, Standard Budgets, M oore to Popkin, “M easuring Retired C ouples’ Living C osts in U rban A reas,” Dec. 2,1969; M oore to U sers o f BLS Budgets and Interarea Living C ost Indexes, “Im proved Program for the BLS Family Budget Estim ates and Interarea Indexes o f Living C osts,” Dec. 15,1971. 61 N A R G 257, BLS, Standard Budgets HI, Nelson A . Rockerfeller, Governor of New "fork, to Secretary, O ct. 4, 1972; M oore, Memo to Shiskin, “Standard Family Budgets,” O ct. 27, 1972; Shiskin to William A . M orrill, May 22, 1973; M orrill to Shiskin, Aug. 14, 1973; U nder Secretary, Burdetsky, Memo for the U nder Secretary, “Backlog and Priorities,” May 19,1973. 62 N A R G 257, B LS, U nder Secretary, Shiskin, Memo to U nder Secretary Schu bert, “B LS Family Budget Program ,” Sept. 6,1974. 63 N A R G 257, B LS, Standard Budgets III. W. John Layng to Norwood, “Revision o f Family Budget Program ,” Apr. 27, 1976; H arold W. Watts, “Special Panel Suggests Changes in B LS Family Budget Program ,” M LR, December 1980, pp. 3-10. 64 John F. Early, “Im proving the M easurement o f Producer Price Change,” M LR, A pril 1978, pp. 7 and 9; C ouncil on Wage and Price Stability, The W holesale Price Index, June 1977; DLR (115), June 14,1977, p. A10. 65 Joint Economic Com m ittee, Subcom mittee on Economic Statistics, Inflation an d the Price Indexes (89C, 2S, Joint Com m ittee Print, 1966), p. 38; Government Price Statistics, A Report (89C, 2S, 1966), pp. Ill, 16-17; DLR (101), May 23, 1975, p. A12; (131), July 8,1975, p .A 6 . 66 H andbook o f M ethods (1982), p. 43; Early, “Improving the M easurement,” pp. 7ff. 67 N A R G 174, U SD O L, Brennan, 1973, Thom as P. O ’Neill, Jr. and Silvio O . C onte to Secretary, May 31, 1973; Secretry to O ’Neill and Conte, June 25, 1973; O ’Neill and C onte to Secretary, O ct. 29, 1973; Secretary to O ’Neill and Conte, Dec. 5,1973; Dept, o f Labor, News Release (U SD L 73-601), Dec. 21,1973. 68 Joint Economic Com m ittee, Report, A R eappraisal o f U.S. Energy Policy (93C, 2S, Joint Com m ittee Print, 1974), pp. 2 and 27. 69 DLR (40), Feb. 27, 1974, p. A l; N A R G 257, BLS, W holesale Price Index II, Robert H. Stewart, Jr., to Petroleum Industry Advisers, Mar. 18,1974. 70 “A New O il Index Creates C onfusion,” Business Week, June 22, 1974; N A R G 174, U SD O L , U sery, 1976-77, Edward P. Boland and Silvio O . C onte to Secretary, Feb. 23,1976; Shiskin to Boland and C onte, Mar. 16,1976. 71 The Department o f L abor during the A dm inistration o f President Lyndon B. Johnson, Novem ber 1963-Jan u ary 1969, chap. V , “Data Collection and A nalysis” (typescript, U SD O L H istorian’s Office), p. 585; H andbook o f M ethods (1982), p. 62; Dept, o f Labor, A n nual Report, 1982, pp. 22-23. http://fraser.stlouisfed.org Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis 301 The First Hundred Years 72 National Com m ission on Employment and Unemployment Statistics, Count ing the L abor Force (1979), p. 2. 73DLR (234), Dec. 2, 1966, pp. A 10-A 11; Paul O . Flaim, “Persons N ot in the Labor Force: W ho They A re and W hy They D on’t W ork," M LR, July 1969. 74 Shiskin, “Employment and Unem ployment: The Doughnut or the Hole?” M LR, February 1976, p. 4. 75 Senate, Subcom m ittee o f A ppropriations, H earings, D epartm ents o f Labor, H ealth an d H um an Services, Education, an d Related A gencies A ppropriations for Fiscal Year 1982 (97C, IS , 1981), p. 429; John E. Bregger, “Labor Force Data from the C PS to U ndergo Revision in January 1983,” M LR, November 1982, pp. 3-4. 76 National Com m ission, Counting, pp. 153-55 and 158-59; Thom as J. Plewes, “Better M easures o f Service Employment G oal o f Bureau Survey Redesign,” M LR, Novem ber 1982; Harvey R. Hamel and John T. Tucker, “Implementing the Levitan Com m ission’s Recom mendations to Improve Labor D ata,” M LR, February 1985. 77N A R G 257, B LS, U nder Secretary, Shiskin, Memo for U nder Secretary, “Unem ployment Statistics for State and Local A reas,” Feb. 1,1974. 78 DLR (66), Apr. 4,1974, pp. A 4-A 5; (171), Sept. 2,1980, p. A10; M LR, O ctober 1977, p. 72; A pril 1978, p. 52. 79 H ouse, Com m ittee on Governm ent O perations, H earings, Intergovernm ental Antirecession A ssistance A ct o f 1977 (95C, IS , 1977), p. 94; The New York Times, May 25,1977, p. V I,5. 80 Norwood “Reshaping a Statistical Program to Meet Legislative Priorities,” M LR, Novem ber 1977, pp. 6-11; M artin Ziegler, “Efforts to Improve Estim ates o f State and Local Unem ploym ent,” M LR, November 1977, pp. 12-18; 92 Stat. 1952. 81 National Com m ission, Counting, p. 15. 82 M yron Struck and Kenneth E. John, “Labor Departm ent Statistics Found Less and Less Reliable,” Washington Post, Sept. 17,1982, p. A13. 83 The D epartm ent during Johnson, chap. V , “Data A nalysis," pp. 564-567. 84 N A R G 257, B LS, JO L T S IV , President to Secretary, Jan. 30, 1969; Budget W rite-up, Feb. 28, 1969; M oore, for the U nder Secretary, Nov. 21, 1972; The D epart ment o f L abor H istory D uring die A dm inistration o f Presidents Richard M. Nixon an d G erald R. Ford, Jan u ary 1969 to Jan u ary 1977, vol. II, chap. V , “Data Collection and A nalysis” (typescript U SD O L H istorian’s Office), p. 23. 85 Senate, Appropriations, H earings for F iscal Year 1982, pp. 455 and 472; Dept, o f Labor, Secretary o f Labor, F in al Report on the Recommendations o f the N ational Com m ission on Employment an d Unemployment Statistics, O ctober 1981, p. 3; Dept, o f Labor, A nnual Report 1982, p. 22. 86 N A R G 257, B LS, Job Vacancies II, Chester E. Johansen to Lester S. Kellogg. Jan. 18, 1965; DLR, (99), May 20, 1966, Special Supplem ent, pp. 1-2; National Com m ission, Counting, p. 122. 87 N A R G 174, U SD O L , Wirtz, 1966, Esther Peterson to the Secretary, “Briefing Memo—BLS Survey to Determ ine to W hat Extent ‘the Poor Pay M ore’,” Jan. 10, 1966; N A R G 257, BLS, Division o f Prices and C ost o f Living, 1965-1968, June 12, 1966, U SD O L , BLS, “A Study o f Prices Charged in Food Stores Located in Low and H igher Income Areas o f Six Large C ities, February 1966.” http://fraser.stlouisfed.org Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis 302 Source Notes 88 Jam es R. Wetzel and Susan S. Holland, “Poverty Areas o f O ur M ajor C ities,” M LR, O ctober 1966, p. 1105; N A R G 257, BLS, Survey Program for U rban Poverty A reas #2, Wirtz to Stanley Ruttenberg and R oss, July 12, 1966; Ross to Secretary, Dec. 22, 1967; M alcolm R. Lovell, Jr., to Philip M. H auser, July 17, 1970; Daniel S. W hipple, “Employment Am ong the Poor o f Six Central C ities,* M LR, O ctober 1973. 89 DLR (204), O ct. 21, 1971, pp. A 8-A 9; The New York Times, O c t 26, 1971, p. 66; N A R G 257, B LS, Survey Program for U rban Poverty A reas, Roy W ilkins to Secretary, Nov. 22,1971. 90 Flaim, “The Spendable Earnings Series, H as It O utlived Its Usefulness?” M LR, A pril 1982, p. 86; DLR (178), Sept. 11, 1980, p. A12; National Com m ission, Counting, p. 206. 91 National Com m ission, Counting, pp. 206-208. 92 BLS H andbook o f M ethods for Surveys an d Studies, Bulletin 1458 (Bureau o f Labor Statistics, 1966), p. 114; Harry A . Donoian, “A New A pproach to Setting the Ray o f Federal Blue-Collar W orkers,” M LR, A pril 1969, pp. 30 and 32; Com ptroller General, D eterm ining Federal Com pensation, C hanges Needed to M ake die Processes M ore Equitable an d C redible (General A ccounting Office, FPC D 80-17,1979), p. 29. 93 President’s Panel on Federal Com pensation, Report to the President, 1975, pp. 23-24; Com ptroller G eneral, Wages for Federal Blue-C ollar Employees A re Being Determ ined A ccording to the Law , B ut Improvements are Needed (General Accounting Office, FPC D 80-12,1979). 94 84 Stat. 1946 (Ja n . 8,1971), also as 5 U .S.C 5305. 95 Com ptroller General, Improvements Needed in the Survey o f N on-Federal S a la ries U sed a s B asis for Adjusting F ederal W hite-Collar S alaries (General Accounting Office, B-167266, 1973), pp. 2 and 30; President’s Panel, Report (1975); N A R G 257, B LS, W hite C ollar (PATC) II, Paul MacAvoy, C ouncil o f Economic Advisers, to Shiskin, Sept. 23, 1975; George L. Stelluto, “Federal Ray Com parability, Facts to Temper the D ebate," M LR, June 1979, p. 20. 96 N A R G 257, BLS, W hite C ollar (PATC) II, Jam es L. Blum, Memo for Shiskin, “Follow-up on PBR C Decision on PATC Survey," S e p t 14,1973; Shiskin to David P. Taylor (OM B) and Raym ond Jacobson (C SC ), Jan. 8, 1974; H andbook o f M ethods (1982), p. 69; D ept, o f Labor, News Release (U SD L 82-241), July 12, 1982, “W hiteC ollar Salaries, M arch 1982." 97 N A R G 257, B LS, Rees Review o f Wage Program, A lbert Rees (Princeton University), “Im proving M easures o f Wage C hanges,” A ugust 1969; DLR (160), Aug. 19,1969, p. A12. 98 N A R G 257, B LS, Employment C ost Index, Roberts to Shiskin, Mar. 25, 1975, covering Roberts, Oswald, and Burkhardt to Joseph W. Duncan (OMB), Mar. 25, 1975; N A R G 174, U SD O L, U sery, 1976-77, Shiskin to Senator Roman L. Hruska. 99 V ictor J. Sheifer, “Employment C ost Index, A M easure o f Change in the ‘Price o f Labor’,” M LR, July 1975; “How Benefits W ill Be Incorporated Into the Employ ment C ost Index,” M LR, January 1978. 100 Rees, “Im proving the C oncepts and Techniques o f Productivity M easure m ent,” M LR, Septem ber 1979, p. 23. 101 D ept, o f Labor, B LS, News Release (U SD L 83-153), Apr. 6, 1983, “Bureau o f Labor Statistics Introduces Its First M easures o f M ultifactor Productivity;” Trends in http://fraser.stlouisfed.org Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis 303 The First Hundred Years M ultifactor Productivity, 1948-81, Bulletin 2178 (Bureau o f Labor Statistics, 1983), p. . 2 102 H andbook o f M ethods (1982), p. 101. 103 Robert Ball, “Employment C reated by C onstruction Expenditures,” M LR, Decem ber 1981, pp. 3 9,42; L abor an d M aterial Requirements for H ospital an d N ursing Home Construction, Bulletin 2154 (Bureau o f Labor Statistics, 1983), pp. iii, 37, 63; D ep t o f Labor, A nnual Report, 1982, pp. 23,31. l0* Employment Projections for 1995, Bulletin 2197 (Bureau o f Labor Statistics, 1984), p. 10. 105 “B rief H istory o f Bureau o f Labor Statistics Projections,” M LR, A ugust 1981, p. 14. 106 Norm an Root and David M cCaffrey, “Providing M ore Inform ation cm Work Injury and Illness,” M LR, A pril 1978; R oot and Michael H oefer, “The First W ork' Injury D ata Available from New B L S Study,” M LR, January 1979. 107 Senate, Labor and Human Resources, H earing, Norwood (1979), p. 9. 108 D ep t o f Labor, A n n ual Report, 1968, pp. 2, 4; Booz-Allen and Hamilton, B ureau o f L ab or Statistics, G en eral Review (confidential report, Mar. 22, 1966), pp. 76, 78; Booz-Allen and H am ilton, U .S. D epartm ent o f Labor, The O rganization an d M anagem ent o f die Bureau o f L ab o r Statistics (December 1966), pp. 5 ,1 4 ,6 1 -6 2 . 109 D iscussion o f com puters at B L S is based on The Development an d U ses o f Table Producing L an gu age, Report 435 (Bureau o f Labor Statistics, 1975), and Infor m ation Processing a t B L S, Report 583 (Bureau o f Labor Statistics, 1980). 110 N A R G 257, B L S, Reorganization, O ctober 19711, Shultz (OMB) to Secretar ies, "Reorganization,” July 15,1971; DLR, (189), S e p t 29,1971, p. A16; (202), O c t 19, 1971, p. A10. 111 D ep t o f Labor, B L S, Norwood, “Management Decision, Memorandum # 8 ,” June 26,1982; Norwood, Memorandum, “Organizational Changes," Jan. 4,1983. 112 N A R G 257, B L S, A sst Regional D irector Classification, Shiskin to U nder Secretary, A u g 22,1973. 113 National Com m ission, Counting, p. 272; Secretary, Interim Report on the Rec om m endations o f the N ation al Com m ission on Employment an d Unemployment Statis tics, Mar. 3,1980, p. 43; Secretary, F in al Report (1981), p. 6. http://fraser.stlouisfed.org Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis 304 Index Abbott, Edith, 87 Addam s, Jane, 63 Adm inistration: Booz-Allen and Hamilton Survey, 254-255 Clague, 207-209 Lubin, 170-175 M eeker, 108-111 M oore, 217-218, 223, 256 Neill, 69-70, 73-76 Norwood, 220-221, 256 Recent period, 1965-85, 253-257 Reorganization, 1971, 223, 256 Ross, 216-217,255 Shiskin, 219 Stewart, 120-121,135-138 W right, 11-14, 21-23 Adm inistrative Procedures Act, 210, 241 Advisory Com mittee on Education (1936), 167 Advisory Com m ittee on Employment Statistics (1930), 130-132,180 Advisory Com m ittee to the Secretary o f Labor (1933), 145,149,164,165,166, 174,180 Advisory groups (BLS) (See also Business Research Advisory Council and Labor Research Advisory Council), 257 A FL-C IO , 188,191 Agency for International Developm ent, 205-206, 253 A gricultural Adjustm ent A ct, 144 Agriculture, Dept, of, 9 0 ,106,146, 206 Bureau o f Anim al Industry, 48 Office o f Home Economics, 95,150 Aldrich, N elson W., 3, 34 Aldrich Com m ittee (Senate Com mittee on Finance), 34-35 Amalgamated A ssociation o f Iron, Steel, and Tin W orkers, 4, 44,53 http://fraser.stlouisfed.org Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis Amalgamated Meat C utters and Butcher W orkmen, 38,50 American A ssociation for Labor Legisla tion, 4 0 ,5 9 -6 1 ,7 4 ,1 3 6 American A ssociation o f Public Employ ment Offices, 91 American Economic Association, 90, 121,136,172,176 American Engineering Standards Com mittee, 120-121,133 American Federation o f Labor, 44,45, 51-52,115,144 A m erican Federationist, 120, 156 BLS program s, 4 9 ,5 3 ,6 1 ,1 3 1 ,1 6 3 , 168,187,203 Conventions, 2 ,5 ,1 9 ,2 4 ,6 9 ,1 3 4 C ost o f living, CPI, 102,157,195 “Labor’s Bill o f Grievances,” 44 Role in BLS development, 3 ,1 8 , 76 Woman and child labor study, BLS, 6 2 ,6 4 ,6 5 ,6 7 American Management Association (Conference o f Employment Manag ers), 98 American Sm elting and Refining Com pany, 78 American Social Science A ssociation, 41 American Sociological Association, 136 American Statistical A ssociation, 121, 124,129,136 Advisory Com mittee to the Secre tary o f Labor, 145 B LS presidents of, and speakers to, 4 1 ,9 3 ,1 7 9 ,2 1 7 BLS press conferences, 222,223 Com m ittee on Governm ent Statis tics and Inform ation Services, 145 Employment statistics, 127-128 M ills Com m ittee on cost-of-living index, 154-156 M oore’s resignation, 225 305 The First Hundred Years Recommendations for appointment, 142,176 Technical advisory committee to B LS on prices, 193,199 Am iss, Herman L., 135 Andrews, John B., 59-60,101 A nthracite coal strike (1902), 28-29,46 Appropriations, 260 Clague, 178,193,207-208 Lubin, 170-172 M eeker, 81,107,108-109 N eill, 73-74 Recent period, 1965-85,220,234, 249,253-254 Stewart, 115,122,125,136-138 W right, 22-23 A rbitration A ct o f 1 8 8 8 ,1 4 ,2 6 ,2 7 ,2 8 A rthur, Chester A ., 1 ,4 ,5 A ssociation for the Prom otion o f Profit Sharing, 41 Autom obile M anufacturers’ A ssociation, 174 Babson Statistical Organization, 134-135 Baldor Electric Com pany, 210 Baldwin, C harles E., 135,139 Baruch, Bernard, 101 Berridge, William A ., 129,131,180 Bethlehem Steel Com pany, 53-54,116 Beveridge, A lbert J., 48,63 Blacks, B LS projects: D u Bois, W .E.B., 32-33,76 Family expenditure survey (1934-36) and revised cost-of-living index (1940), 150 Lubin, 145-146 Office o f Economic Research, 185 Wage studies, 160 Booz-A llen and Ham ilton surveys, 185, 217,254-255 Borah, W illiam E., 68, 77 Bowen, J. C hester, 129,135 Breckinridge, Sophonisba P , 63 http://fraser.stlouisfed.org Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis Brennan, Peter J., 226 Brookings Institution, The, 11,129,141, 142 Budget, Bureau o f the (See also Office o f Management and Budget), 136,138, 203,207 Blue-collar surveys, 200 C ost-of-living index, 122 CPI, 193,196 Interagency Price Com m ittee, 199 Job vacancy statistics, 191 Release o f em ploym ent/ unemployment figures, 188 Stigler Com m ittee, 196 Survey o f professional, adm inistra' tive, technical, and clerical pay (PA TQ , 200 Unem ployment statistics, 166,181, 187-188 Budgets, standard, BLS. See Prices and living conditions Budgets, WPA, for "basic maintenance” and "emergency” standards (1936), 158 Bulletin, 22,40, 74 Burdetsky, Ben, 217, 218 Bureau o f Labor Statistics: Independence and integrity, 258-261 Clague, 179, 204, 209-210, 211 Dept, o f Labor field organiza tion, 256-257 H inrichs’ nomination, 175-177 Homeownership cost measure ment, 230-233 Korean War controversy, 194 Monthly Labor Review , 183-184 M oore, 218, 224-225 Neill, 45 ,6 4 -6 5 ,6 7 -6 9 , 70, 75-78 Reader’s D igest charges, 189-190 306 Index Release o f statistics, 188-190, 221-226 Shiskin, 218-219 Stewart, 117,118,126,139 U rban poverty area studies, 244 W orld War II controversy, 151-158 W right, 3 ,1 1 ,2 3 -2 4 ,3 7 -3 8 ,4 2 , 258 Investigations and exam inations of: Advisory Com m ittee on Employment Statistics, 131-132 Advisory Com m ittee to the Secretary o f Labor, 145 “Charges vs. C harles P. N eill,” 73,75-77 Com m ittee on Governm ent Statistics and Inform ation Services, 145 G ordon Com m ittee, 189-190 H ouse Subcom m ittee on Overstaffing, 207-209 Joint Economic Com mittee, 189 M ills Com m ittee, 154-156 M itchell Com m ittee, 156-158 National Com m ission on Employment and Unem ploy ment Statistics, 219, 237-238 President’s Com m ittee on the C ost o f Living, 155-157 Steed Com m ittee, 194-195 Stigler Com m ittee, 196—197 Legislation: Organic A ct, 1 8 8 4 ,1 ,3 -4 Independent departm ent, 1888, 14-15,34 Dept, o f Com merce and Labor, 1903,18-21 Dept, o f Labor, 1913, 75 Role, 258-261 http://fraser.stlouisfed.org Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis Booz-A llen and Hamilton reports, 185,254-255 Clague, 180-181 in Dept, o f Commerce and Labor, 20-21 in Dept, o f Labor, 80,87-89, 182-186 H oover Com m ission, 181 in indexation, 232,260 M eeker, 83,100 Neill, 44 in New Deal years, 144-148 Norwood, 220,258-259 Organic A ct, debates, 3 Program and organization con sultants (1954), 182 Roosevelt, Theodore, 20-21, 43-44 Ross, 216 Shiskin, 219 Standard budgets, 233-234 Wirtz’s view, 185-186 in W orld War 1 ,101-108 in W orld War II, 148-149 W right, 21,42 Bum s, A rthur E , 190-191,217, 221, 242 Business Research Advisory Council, BLS, 179,257 CPI, housing costs, 229-230, 233 CPI, interim revision (1950-51), 193 CPI, population coverage, 228 Job vacancy statistics, 191,243 Petroleum prices, 236 Productivity indexes, 203 W holesale price index revision (1952), 199 Carnegie Institution o f W ellington, 33, 41 Carter, Jimmy, 219,220,231 Catholic University o f America, 41,45, 79 307 The First Hundred Years Census, Bureau o f the, 3 2 ,3 3 ,3 8 ,6 4 , 100,124,131,199 Bureau o f Efficiency recommenda tions, 121 C ost-of-living reports, 121-122 CPI, 193,227 C urrent Population Survey, 188, 190,239 Establishm ent of, 15-17 Exchange with B LS (1959), 166,188 M onthly Report on the Labor Force, 166,181,187 Shiskin an official, 218 Unem ployment statistics, 130,181, 187-188 U rban poverty area studies, 243-244 C ensus o f M anufactures, 36 ,9 2 ,1 2 3 , 1 2 8 ,1 3 1 ,1 3 2 ,1 3 5 ,1 6 4 ,2 0 6 C entral Bureau o f Planning and Statis tics, War Industries Board, 81,102, 107 Central Statistical Board, 145,150, 165-166 Chaney, Lucian W , 58,101 Q u id labor, 2 9 -3 1 ,4 7 ,6 2 -6 9 ,8 5 -8 6 ,9 0 Children’s Bureau, 6 5 ,6 7 ,8 7 ,1 1 6 Citizens’ Industrial A ssociation, 44 C ity W orker’s Family Budget, 159, 198-199 C ivil Service Com m ission (See also Office o f Personnel Management), 246,250 Clague, Ewan, 1 3 1 ,135,145,158,177, 219,221,224 Bureau program s, 186-205 Institutional environment, 178-186 Reconfirmation, 209-210 Retirement, 211-212 C lark, Lindley D ., 61 C lark College (W orcester, M ass.), 41,140 Cleveland, G rover, 14,15, 27 Collection procedures, 12-13, 70-71 Collective bargaining, B L S studies. See Wages and industrial relations http://fraser.stlouisfed.org Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis Colorado mining areas, 25,95-96 Com merce, Dept, of: Economic growth studies, 206-207 Employment and unemployment statistics, 129,130,131 H oover as Secretary, 114 Income estimates, 245 Price studies, 89,90 Productivity data, 135 Com merce and Labor, Dept, of, 34,44, 64 Bureau o f Labor in, 33,62, 72-73 C ensus in, 16,17 Establishm ent of, 18-21 Com m ission on Industrial Relations, U .S. (1913), 55-56 Com m ission on Organization o f the Executive Branch o f the Government. See H oover Com m ission Com mittee on Governm ent Operations, H ouse, 224 Com mittee on Governm ent Statistics and Inform ation Services, 145 Com mittee on Post Office and Civil Service, H ouse, 224 Com mittee on the Integrity o f Federal Statistics, 222, 225 Com m ons, John R., 12, 26,116,180 Com pany unions, B LS study, 1935,163 Com parability, Federal pay (See also National Survey o f Professional, Adm inistrative, Technical, and Clerical Pay under Wages and industrial rela tions), 109-110,200,215,246-247 Com prehensive Employment and Train ing A ct (1973), 241-242 Confidentiality, voluntary reporting, BLS policies, 12-13,174,193, 210-211, 227,236,246,261 Congressional Budget Office, 215 C ongress o f Industrial Organizations, 144,157,194 308 Index Consum er expenditure studies and surveys: Continuing expenditure survey, 193,194,230 C ost-of-production studies, 34 D istrict o f Colum bia, surveys, 95, 106,149 Federal employees, 106,123,149 for Ford M otor Company, 123,138 National surveys for cost-of-living studies, 36-37,102,104-106,122, 124,150,195,227 Shipbuilding centers, 103,104 Survey o f Family Spending and Sav ing in Wartime, 151 Survey o f U rban and Rural C on sum ers (1935-36), 150 Consum er price program s, 192-198, 226-233 A djustm ent following World War D, 192-193 C arter adm inistration criticism , 220 C ity coverage, 197-198 C ost-of-living index, 1919-45, 102-107,117,122,124,149-158 Consum er’s Price Index for M oder ate Income Fam ilies in Large C it ies (Consum er Price Index for U rban Wage Earners and Clerical W orkers), 1945-78,157,158,196, 216 Consum er Price Index for A ll U rban Consum ers and Consum er Price Index for U rban Wage Earners and Clerical W orkers, 1978,228-229,232-233 General M otors, contract with U nited A uto W orkers, 179,193 Homeownership cost measurement, 193,194,195,196-197,216, 229-233 Indexation uses, 149,179,214-215, 229 http://fraser.stlouisfed.org Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis Interim or tem porary revision (1951), 193-194 Korean W ff controversy, 194-195 M ajor revisions: 1940,1953,1964, 1978,1987,150,193,195, 197-198,221,227-230,233 “O ld series” continuation (1953), 195 Population coverage, 194, 195,196, 227-228 Quality change, 7 1 ,155,157,158, 194,196,226-227 Ross “m aster plan”, 217,226 Stigler Com m ittee, 196-197 Wartime adjustm ents (W W II), 151 “Welfare index" proposals, 197 W orld War II controversy, 151-158 176 Coordinated Federal Wage System , 246 Cortelyou, George B., 2 0,59 C ost-of-living program s, BLS, 34-35, 36-38,94-95,102-107,121-124 C ost-of-production studies, 34-35 Council o f Economic Advisers: Bureau program s, 187,201,207,247 Economic reports, 214,231 Establishm ent and influence of, 178, 260 Guideposts policy, 203 Release o f data, 225 Council o f National Defense (World War D. HI Council on Economic Policy, Subcom mittee on Economic Statistics, 228, 230 Couzens, Jam es, 129,141 C raxton, Fred C ., 51, 70 Current Population Survey, household survey, “M onthly Report o f Unem ployment,” “M onthly Report on the Labor Force", 187,238-239 Exchange with C ensus, 166,188 G ordon Com mittee, 190,238 309 The First Hundred Years H oover Com m ission, 181 Labor force studies, 192 Local area unemployment statistics, 241-242 National Com m ission on Em ploy' m ent and Unem ployment Statis tics, 239 Redesign project, 1980’s, 239 Spendable earnings series, 245 U rban poverty area studies, 243-244 Davis, Jam es J., 1 1 7 ,122,126,128,130, 132,136 Davis, W illiam H ., 152-153,155-157 D ebs, Eugene V., 26-27 Diamond M atch Com pany, 60 Dispute settlem ent: Lubin, 146 N eill, 56-57 Stewart, 95-96,116 W right, 26-29 D istrict o f Colum bia: Board o f C harities, 45 Board o f Education, 79 Budget studies by B LS, 95,10 6 ,1 4 9 C ivic Center, 46 Federal employee surveys by BLS, 149 D oak, W illiam N „ 139 Donovan, Raym ond J., 221,238,257 Dublin, Louis I., 100 D u Bois, W .E.B., 32-33,76 D uBrul, Stephen M ., 209-210 D unlop, John T., 256 Earnings, gross and spendable, 244-245 Economic Cooperation Adm inistration, 177,205 Economic growth and employment pro jections (See also Input-output studies and O ccupational outlook studies), 206-207,251 Economic hardship, annual report, 239 http://fraser.stlouisfed.org Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis Economic Recovery Tax A ct o f 1981, 215,229,232 Economic Research, Office o f (BLS), 185 Economic Stabilization A ct o f 1942,152, 161 Economy A ct o f 1932,139 Economy A ct o f 1933,149 Efficiency, Bureau of, 121 Eight-hour law abuses, BLS studies, 49-50 Eisenhower, Dwight D ., 189,195 Electronic data processing, 255-256,260 Employment A ct o f 1946,178, 214,260 Employment and unemployment statis tics (See also Current Population Sur vey, Job vacancy statistics, Labor turnover statistics, National Com m is sion on Employment and Unem ploy ment Statistics, and Unemployment, B LS programs), 237-243 Establishm ent or payroll series, vol ume o f employment, 97-98, 125-132,164-165,186-190, 239-240 Cooperative program with State agencies, 91,165, 186-187 Funding for expansion, Wagner resolution, 128-129,130, 141-142 G ordon Com m ittee, 190 H oover Com m ission, 181 National Com m ission on Employment and Unem ploy ment Statistics, 219, 240 Reconversion program, 165, 186-187 "Shrinkage,” as measure o f unemployment, 126, 128-129 Suggestions for improvements, 1920’s, 127-132 Extent and regularity studies, 93 310 Index Labor m arket inform ation, 218,221, 237,253 Occupational employment statistics, 190, 240 Employment C ost Index. See Wages and industrial relations Employment offices, public, 8 4,90 Employment Security, Bureau of: Clague, 180 Cooperative program in em ploy' ment statistics, 187 Job vacancy statistics, 191 Local area unemployment statistics, 241 Release o f em ploym ent/ unemployment figures, 188 Employment Statistics for the United States (1926), 127-128 Erdman A ct (1898), 2 8 ,5 6 ,5 7 ,7 6 -7 7 ,8 2 Ethnic studies, B LS, 31-33 European Recovery Program, 205 Evans, W. Duane, 206 Fair Labor Standards A ct o f 1938,160, 201, 211 Falkner, Roland P., 34-36,38 Federal employees’ com pensation act o f 1908,6 1 -6 2 ,8 7 ,9 9 Federal Em ployees’ Com pensation Board (1916), 6 2 ,9 9 Federal Reserve Board, 124,128,131, 187,219 Federal Salary Reform A ct o f 1962, 200 Federal Statistics U sers’ Conference, 187,222,225 Field operations, 69-70 ,1 6 1 ,1 7 0 ,1 7 3 , 253,256-257 Fisher, Irving, 9 1 -92,102-103,113,124 Ford, G erald R ., 218 Ford M otor Com pany, 123,138 Foreign Labor C onditions, D ivision of; Office o f Foreign Labor and Trade (BLS), 191,205-206,252-253 http://fraser.stlouisfed.org Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis Frankfbrd Arsenal, 169-170 Frankfurter, Felix, 87,101,112 Full Employment and Balanced Growth A ct, or Humphrey-Hawkins A ct (1978), 214 General Accounting Office: Coordinated Federal Wage System , 246 CPI, homeownership costs, 231-232 C P I-U for indexing, 229 M ultifactor productivity, 249 National survey o f professional, administrative, technical, and cler ical pay, 247 Productivity in the Federal Government, 250 General M otors, contract with U nited A uto W orkers, 1948,179,193,203 George W tshington University (previ ously Colum bian University), 41 Giffin, Robert, 13 G ift o f Freedom , The, 205 Goldberg, A rthur J., 184,189 Gom pers, Sam uel Bureau activities, 1 3 ,2 4 ,5 5 ,6 1 ,6 9 , 96 Dispute settlement, 27-28,29 Establishm ent o f Bureau and D ep t o f Labor, 3 ,1 8 ,1 9 Gordon, Robert A ., 189,224 G ordon Com mittee, 189-190,191, 237, 238,240 G ould, Elgin R. L., 11 ,1 3 ,3 9 Governm ent Printing Office, 94 G reat Britain, 1 3 ,39-40,59,86,102, 111, 112 Green, William, 176 G uideposts policy, 203 Hamilton, A lice, 60,101 Hanger, G.W.W., 11, 73 Hanna, Hugh, S., 101,135 311 The First H undred Years H anna, M arcus A ., 18,20 Harding, W irren G ., 7 9 ,1 1 7 ,1 2 1 ,1 2 6 Hawaii, Com m issioner’s report on condì' tions in, 52 H ealth, Education, and W elfare, D ep t o f (now D ep t o f H ealth and Human Services), 234 Hillm an, Sidney, 147,167 H inrkhs, A . R>rd, 147,172,173 Adm inistration, 148-149 Resignation, 175-177 W orld War II controversy, 152,154, 158 H odgson, Jam es D ., 218,2 2 2 ,2 2 4 ,2 2 6 H offinan, Frederick L , 5 8 ,5 9 ,1 0 0 H oover, H erbert C ., 114,121-122,126, 127,130-131 H oover Com m ission, 181,182,193 H opkins, Jam es H ., 3 H ourly Earnings Index, 248 H u n t C aroline L ., 11,33 Illinois Bureau o f Labor Statistics, 115, 116 Im migrants' Protective League, 50 Immigration Com m ission, U . S . (1907), 51 Im migration issues, B L S studies, 31-32, 3 3,50-52 Indexation, use o f B L S statistics for: C ost o f living, C PI, 149,179, 214-215,227,229,230-231 General, 179,260 Local area unemployment statistics, 241 W holesale prices, 159 Industrial Com m ission, U .S. (1898), 18 Industrial Conference (December 1919), 106-107 Industrial Congress, later Industrial Brotherhood, 2 Industrial Depressions, F irst A n nual Report (1886), 23-25 http://fraser.stlouisfed.org Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis Industrial education, BLS studies, 31,61, 90 Industrial Relations Research A ssocia tion, 222,223,224,225 Industrial W orkers o f the W orld, 45,53, 55,141 Input-output studies, interindustry anal ysis, 168,199,206-207 Interior, D ep t o f the, 1 ,3 ,4 ,1 6 ,1 7 ,4 2 , 90,206 International A ssociation o f M achinists, 3 8 ,5 0 ,5 4 International influences, activities, 39-40, 74-75,111-112,138,146,205-206, 252-253 C ongress for International Labor Legislation (1897), 40 C ongress o f Paris (1900), 40 International A ssociation for Labor Legislation, 4 0 ,5 9 ,7 4 ,1 1 2 ,1 3 8 International A ssociation o f Gov ernm ent Labor Officials, 14,41, 91,120 International A ssociation o f Indus trial Accident Boards and Com m issions, 100,120 International A ssociation o f Public Employment Services, 120 International Conference o f Labor Statisticians, ILO , 138 International Conference on Unem ployment (1910, 1912), 74-75 International Labor Conference, \lbshington (1919), 112,116 International Labor O ffice/ Organization, League o f Nations, 1 1 2 ,113,123,138,146 International Labour Office, 40, 74-75,112 International Statistical Institute, 13, 1 6 ,3 9 ,4 0 ,1 3 8 Interstate Com merce Com m ission, 28, 56 312 Index Iron and steel industry, conditions o f employment in, 54-55,58 Jarrett, John, 4 Job Training Partnership A ct o f 1982,239 Job vacancy statistics, 190-191,242-243 Johnson, Lyndon B., 190,246 Joint Com m ission on Reclassification o f Salaries, U . S . Congress, 106 Joint Com m ittee on Printing, U .S. C on gress, 94,110,137-138 Joint Economic Com m ittee, U .S. C on gress: Bureau program s, 187,203,250, 253- 254 Establishm ent of, 178,260 G ordon Com m ittee, 189 M andatory reporting, 236 Press briefings, m onthly hearings, 219,223 R oss plan for prices, 213, 226 Joy, A ryness (W ickens), 129,145,147, 172 Kelley, Florence, 12 Kennedy, John F., 189 Knapp, M artin A ., 56-57 Knights o f Labor, Jou rn al o f United L abor, 2 ,3 ,4 ,1 4 -1 5 ,1 8 ,5 1 ,1 1 6 Kober, G eorge M ., 59 Labor, Dept, of, issues: Booz-A llen and Hamilton, 185,217, 254- 255 Bureau o f Labor Safety, Division o f Safety, 87,133 C ity coverage, CPI, 197-198 CPI, revision o f 1949-53,193 Employment statistics, 126-127, 129-130 Field organization, 256-257 Release or clearance procedures, 188-190,221-226 http://fraser.stlouisfed.org Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis Schwellenbach and H inrichs, 175-177 Securing the Bureau’s place, 86-89, 182-186 Stewart’s retirement, 139 W ilsh-H ealey challenge, 210-211 War on poverty, 185 Labor, D ep t of, agencies: Bureau o f Labor Management Reports (BLM R), 184 Employment and Training Adm inis tration (ETA), 240,245 International Labor Affairs Bureau (ILAB), 206 Investigation and Inspection Service (World W it I), 116 Labor-M anagem ent Services Adm inistration (LM SA), 184 Labor Standards Bureau (Employment Standards Adm inistration) (LSB), 170,201-202,205,246 Manpower Adm inistration, 184, 186,237,243,244 M ediation and Conciliation Service, 96,125 O ccupational Safety and H ealth Adm inistration (OSHA), 251-252 Office o f Inform ation and Public Affairs (OIPA), 183 Office o f Manpower, Autom ation, and Training (OM AT), 184 Program and organization consult ants (1954), 182 Wage and H our and Public C on tracts Divisions, 148,160, 200-201 Ww Labor Policies Board (World W ffI), 101 Woman in Industry Service (World Wu I), 88, 111 Women’s Bureau, 6 5 ,6 7 ,8 7 -8 8 ,1 6 4 Labor force studies, 192 L abor Inform ation Bulletin, 163 313 The First Hundred Years Labor Inform ation Service (BLS), 145 Labor-m anagem ent relations, B L S activi ties: in D ept, o f Labor, 95-96,184 Lubin’s role, 145-146 M eeker’s views, 8 2 ,8 3 -8 4 ,8 6 N eill’s activities, 5 6-57,79 N eill’s views, 47 Productivity, annual im provement factors, 179,203-204 Supplem ental or fringe benefits, 248-249 W right’s role, 26-29 W igh t’s views, 8-1 0 ,2 3 Labor Management Relations A ct o f 1947 (Taft-Hartley), 202 Labor Management Reporting and D is closure A ct (1959), 184 Labor m arket inform ation. See Employ m ent and unemployment statistics Labor requirem ents, B L S studies. See Productivity and Technology Labor Research Advisory Council (BLS), 179,257 Conferences, annual and inform al, 145,151-153,156,158,174-175, 177 C ontinuing expenditure surveys, 230 CPI, housing costs, 229-230,233 CPI, interim revision (1950-51), 193 CPI, population coverage, 227-228 Employment C ost Index, 248 Job vacancy statistics, 191,243 Productivity indexes, 203-204 Labor turnover, B L S series, 98,129-130, 165,188,242,243 La Bollette, Robert M ., Jr., 130,142 Lawrence, M ass., textile strike (1912), 55 Lead poisoning studies, 60,101 Leontief, W ssily, 168,206 Levitan, Sar A ., 237 Lewis, David J., 8 7,88 http://fraser.stlouisfed.org Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis liq u o r issue, 32 Little Steel form ula, 154,157 Lloyd, H enry Dem arest, 115 Local area unemployment statistics. See Unem ployment, B LS program s Lodge, H enry C ., 1 7,20,63 Long, Clarence D ., 181 Longshorem en’s and H arbor W orkers’ Com pensation A ct, 1958,205,252 Lubin, Isador, 129,194,259 Bureau program s, 151-172 Early career, 140-142 New Deal activities, 144-148 Resignation, 148,175 Views, 142-144 M cDowell, Mary, 63,65 McKee’s Rock, Pa., 1909 strike, 53 McKinley, W illiam, 34,45 NcNeill, George E., 2 M anpower Developm ent and Training A ct, 1962,184 M arshall, F. Ray, 238,257 M artin, Edward, 209 M assachusetts Bureau o f Statistics o f Labor, 2 ,3 ,7 ,8 ,1 1 ,2 9 ,3 9 M ayo-Sm ith, Richm ond, 35 Meany, George, 155-157,189,210,228, 244 M ediation and Conciliation, U .S. Board of, 11,57 M eeker, Royal, 116,138 Early career, 81-83 First term , 92-102 International activities, 111-112 Resignation and later years, 113-114 Views, 83-86 W rtim e emergencies, 101-106 M etropolitan Life Insurance Company, 96-97,100 M ichigan copper strike, 1913,96 M ills, Frederick C ., 154,176,181 314 Index M ills Com m ittee (American Statistical Association), 154-156 Minimum wage (See also Fair Labor Standards A ct o f 1938), 95,105,119, 143,200-201,215 M itchell, Jam es R, 182,187,188-189, 192,209 M itchell, Wesley C .: B LS, 108 C ost-of-living controversy, W orld W arH, 156-158 Employment statistics im prove' m ents, 127 H inrichs’ nomination, 176 Lubin’s work, W orld War 1 ,141 Price statistics, revision, 91-93 Wage statistics, 38 M itchell Com m ittee, 156-158 M ondale, W alter F., 226-227 Monthly L abor Review, 110-111, 137-138,183-184,252-253 M oore, Geoffrey H ., 216,217-218,220 Advisory councils, 257 CPI revision, 227 Job vacancy statistics, 242-243 Release o f statistics, 221-226 Reorganization, 223, 256 Resignation, 219,224-225 Spendable earnings series, 245 Standard budgets, 233-234 U rban poverty area studies, 244 M orrison, Frank, 4 9 ,9 6 Moynihan, Daniel R, 183,185 M urray, Philip, 176 M yers, Robert J., 184 National A ssociation o f M anufacturers, 1 3 ,1 8 ,1 9 ,4 4 ,6 4 ,1 3 1 ,1 6 3 National Bureau o f Economic Research, 1 2 7 ,1 5 4 ,1 8 1 ,1 9 1 ,1 9 6 ,2 0 1 ,2 1 7 ,2 1 8 National C hild Labor Com m ittee, 65,69, 77 http://fraser.stlouisfed.org Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis National Civic Federation, 1 3 ,1 8 ,3 8 ,4 1 , 5 7 ,6 4 ,7 7 ,7 9 National Com m ission on Employment and Unemployment Statistics: Advisory groups, 257 Earnings, 245 Employment and unemployment statistics, 237-238,239,240,242, 243 General recommendations, 221 Shiskin cm establishm ent of, 219 National Conference o f Social W ork, 106 National Conference on O utdoor Recre ation, 120,121 National D efense Advisory Com m ission, W orld W arn, 147,150 National Fraternal Congress, 134 National Industrial Conference Board, 105,191 National Industrial Recovery A ct, 143, 144 National Labor Relations A ct o f 1935 (Wagner Act) (See also Labor Managem ent Relations A ct o f 1947), 144,163 National Labor Relations Board, 163 N ation al L abor Tribune, 15 National Labor U nion, 2 National Recovery Adm inistration (NRA), 1 44,146,148,160,163,171, 173-174 National Research Project on Reemploy ment O pportunities and Recent Changes in Industrial Techniques, WPA, 168-169 National Resources Com mittee, 150 National Safety Council, 5 8 ,9 0 ,1 0 0 National Security and Defense Fund, President's, 103,109 National Society for the Promotion o f Industrial Education, 4 1,90 National Wfor Labor Board, W orld War I, 103,104 315 The First Hundred Years National War Labor Board, W orld War H, 148-149,152,154-158,161-162, 164,170 Neill, Charles R, 2 8 ,4 1 ,8 2 ,9 6 ,1 1 6 ,2 5 9 Bureau statistical program s, 69-73 Early career, 45-46 Investigations, 48-56,58-62 M ediation activities, 56-57 Reconfirmation and resignation, 69, 73,75-78 Views, 46-47 Woman and child study, 62-69 New England congressional caucus, 236 Newlands A ct (1913), 57,82 New Tibrk City, Com m ittee on Unem ployment, 96-97 New \b rk State Departm ent o f Labor, 91 Nixon, Richard M ., 214,218,224,242 N orth, S.N .D ., 12,16 Norwood, Janet L ., 216,219-221, 258-259 Advisory councils, 257 A ppropriations, 220-221,234, 253-254 Com parative wage study with Japan, 252 Homeownership costs, 216,230-233 Local area unemployment statistics, 242 National Com m ission on Employ ment and Unem ploym ent Statis tics, 238 Organization and management ini tiatives, 256 Release, clearance o f statistics, 226 Standard budgets, 234 Structural changes in economy, 214 O benauer, M arie L., 67 O ccupational employment statistics. See Employment and unemployment sta tistics http://fraser.stlouisfed.org Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis Occupational outlook studies (BLS), 167, 251 O ccupational Safety and H ealth Act, 1970,251 Occupational safety and health statistics (BLS), 5 8 -6 1 ,6 6,89-90,99-101, 132-133,169-170,205,251-252 Annual survey o f industrial injuries, manufacturing, 5 8 ,133,169,205, 252 Bureau o f Labor Safety, Division o f Safety, 87,133 Safety codes, 133 Office o f Management and Budget (for merly Bureau o f the Budget), 218,248, 250 CPI revision, 227 Release o f statistics, 221-222, 225-226 Reorganization, 1971,223,256 Standard budgets, 234 Office o f Personnel Management, 246, 247 Office o f Price Adm inistration, World W arfl, 148-149,151 O gbum , William E , 95 O il embargo, 214,236 O lder worker program (Dept, o f Labor), 192 O liver, Sir Thom as, 60 Organization for European Economic Cooperation, 205 Overman, Lee S., 68, 75 Packinghouse conditions, Neill-Reynolds report (1906), 48-49 Palmer, Walter B., 68,95-96 Panel to Review Productivity Statistics, National Academy o f Sciences, 249 Paris Peace Conference (1919), 112 Parker, A . Warner, 76-77 Parsons, Edith, 31 316 Index Pension systems, BLS studies. See Social insurance Perkins, Frances, 154,158,161,171 H inrichs, 148 Lubin, 1 4 2 ,1 4 4 ,145,146,147,163, 173,175 New "fork, 130 Perry, A rthur R ., 101 Personnel Classification Board, 123,136 Personnel Research Federation, 121 Phosphorus poisoning, 59-60,133 Post, Louis E , 8 7,102,103 Postwar employment problem s, BLS studies (World War II), 168 Poverty studies (BLS), 243-244 Powderly, Terence V , 4 ,1 4 ,1 5 ,5 1 President’s Advisory Com m ittee on Labor Management Policy, 204 President’s Advisory C ouncil on Execu> tive Organization (Ash Council), 223 President’s Com m ittee on the C ost o f Living, 155-157 President’s Com m ittee to Appraise Employment and Unem ploym ent Sta tistics (G ordon Com mittee), 189-190 President’s Panel on Federal Com pensa tion (Rockefeller ftmel), 247 Press conferences, 188,195, 221-226 Prevailing wages, 119,181, 210 Prices and living conditions (See also Consum er expenditure studies and surveys, Consum er price program s, and C ost-of-living programs): Export and im port price indexes, 196,220,237 International system (1914), 93 Petroleum prices, 236 Producer Price Index, 235-236 Retail prices, 34-38, 70-71,91-92, 123,124 Ross "m aster plan”, 217, 226 http://fraser.stlouisfed.org Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis Standard or family budgets, 34-35, 36,66-67,105-106,158-159, 198-199,233-234 W holesale prices, 34-36, 72.-73, 91-93,123-124,159,196,199, 234-236 Probability sampling, 151,166,197,235 Productivity and technology (See also Technological displacement), 134-135, 168-169,202-204,249-251,253 A nnual improvement factors, 179, 203-204 European recovery program, 205 Labor requirem ents, 166-167,204, 250-251 Multifiactor productivity, 221, 249-250 Productivity indexes, 94,135,169, 203,249 Productivity in the Federal Govern ment, 250 U nit labor costs, 204,252 Progressive movement, 6 ,4 3 ,8 3 Proxmire, William, 211,225,228 Prudential Insurance Company, 58,100 Publications (See also Bulletin and Monthly L abor Review), 22,74, 110-111,205-206,255 Public H ealth Service, 89,201 Pullman strike (1894), 26-27 Railroad Brotherhoods, 18,56-57, 77, 195 Railroad strikes in the Southwest, 14, 23, 25 Reader’s D igest, 189-190 Reagan, Ronald W , 220,221 Reconversion statistics program, 165, 186-187 Rees, A lbert, 235,247-248 Release procedures (See also Press confer ences), 188-190,221-226 Reuther, Walter, 226 317 The First Hundred Years Reynolds, Jam es Bronson, 48-49 Rockefeller, N elson A ., 234,247 Roosevelt, Franklin D ., 142,145,149, 155,167 Roosevelt, Theodore: Bureau o f Labor, role of, 43-44 D ept, o f Com m erce and Labor, establishm ent of, 18,20-21 N eill, investigations requested, 4 3 -4 6 ,4 8 ,4 9 ,5 0 -5 1 ,6 3 -6 4 W right, strike investigations requested, 25,28-29 R oss, A rthur M ., 211,226 Adm inistration, 216-217 Booz-A llen and Ham ilton reports, 254-255 Ruggles, Richard, 235 Saposs, David, 163 Schwab, Charles, 54 Schwellenbach, Lewis B., 158,175-177 Seager, Henry R ., 103 Seasonal adjustm ent factors, 128,187, 222-223,238 Seligm an, E.R A .., 60,81 Service C ontract A ct o f 1965 (McNam ara-O ’Hara), 246 Sewall, H annah R ., 31 Shipbuilding Labor A djustm ent Board, 102,103 Shiskin, Julius, 216,218-219,220,256 C ontinuing expenditure survey, 219,230 C PI revision, 219,227-230 Employment C ost Index, 248 Field operations, 256-257 Local area unemployment statistics, 219,241 Petroleum prices, 236 Relation to B um s and M oore, 217 Release o f statistics, 218, 221-222 Standard budgets, 234 Unem ploym ent rates, 238-239 http://fraser.stlouisfed.org Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis “Sick" industries, 114,120 Sinclair, U pton, 48 Social insurance, B LS studies, 26,61-62, 84,99,133-134,201-202 Pension systems, 133-134, 201-202 W orkers’ com pensation, 84-85,99, 119 Social Science Research Council, 124, 145 Social Security Adm inistration, 180,181, 201,245 South Carolina D ep t o f Agriculture, Com merce, and Immigration, 50 Southern Pacific Railroad Company, 56 Sputnik, 192 Stabilized or com pensated dollar, 102, 124 State statistical agencies: Cooperation, 14 ,9 1 ,1 0 0 ,1 1 0 ,1 2 1 , 132,261 Early examples, 2, 3, 39 Federal/State cooperative program s, 165,181,186-187,188,242-243, 251-252,256 Statistical coordination, Federal: The Bureau in the Federal establish' ment, 72-73,89-91,260-261 Bureau o f Efficiency recommenda tions, 121 C entral Statistical Board, 145 Com m ittee on Post Office and Civil Service, H ouse, 224 C PI, revision o f 1949-53,193 Hoover Com m ission, 181 M onthly Report on the Labor Force, 181 National Recovery Adm inistration, 173-174 Need for in W orld War 1 ,101-102 Office o f Management and Budget, 1971,181,233,256 Steed Com m ittee, H ouse Com mittee on Education and Labor (1951), 194-195 318 Index Stewart, Ethelbert, 8 8 ,8 9 ,9 8 ,1 1 2 ,1 5 0 , 180, 219 Adm inistration, 120-121,135-138 Bureau program s, 120-135 Early career, 53, 73, 95,108-110, 115-117 International activities, 112,138 Retirement, 139 Views, 90,117-120 Stigler, George J., 196 Stigler Com m ittee, 196-197,199, 227, 229 Straus, O scar S., 5 0-51,64 Strike studies and statistics. See Wages and industrial relations Survey o f Family Spending and Saving in Wartime, 151 Taft, W illiam Howard, 4 4 ,5 2 ,5 3 , 55-56, 60,69, 75, 77 Tariff legislation, 34,55 Tariff studies, B LS, 34, 204 Taussig, Frank W , 35, 36 Technical advisory committees: Employment and unemployment statistics, 131-132,189-190 Joint Technical G roup on Homeownership, 230 National Com m ission on Employ ment and Unem ployment Statis tics, 219,237-238 Prices, 193,199 Productivity, 249 to Secretary o f Labor, 145 Standard budgets, 159, 198, 234 Technological displacement, unemploy ment, automation, BLS studies: Advisory Com m ittee on Employment Statistics, 131-132 Clague, 192, 204 Lubin, 141,142-143 Recent period, 1965-85, 250 http://fraser.stlouisfed.org Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis Stewart, 118,135 Wright, 24-25 Temporary National Economic Com mit tee, U .S. Congress, 143-144,147,150 Thom as, R.J., 157 Tillman, Benjamin R ., 75, 77-78 Tobin, M aurice J., 208 Treasury Departm ent, 151,199 Truman, Harry S, 175 Tumulty, Joseph P., 8 9 ,9 0 ,1 0 0 Unemployment, BLS program s (See also Current Population Survey): C ensus o f Unemployment, 1934, 165-166 Economic hardship annual report, 239 Local area unemployment statistics, 128,240-242 Monthly Report on the Labor Force, 166,181,187-188 Surveys, 1915,96-97 Unemployment rates, array of, 238-239 Unemployment, issues (See also Techno logical displacement): C ensus o f unemployment, 129-131 Conference on Unemployment, 1921,126-127 Couzens Com mittee, 1928-29,129, 141 Discouraged workers, 188, 238, 239 “Labor force* concept, 166 Lubin’s views, 141 Presidential election o f 1960, 188-189 Press conferences, releases, 221-226 Reader’s Digest charges, 189-190 Wagner proposals, 128-129, 141-142 War on poverty, urban problem s, 243-244 \bu th unemployment, 192 319 The First Hundred Years Unem ploym ent insurance, 143 U nited A uto W orkers (See also General M otors), 179,204 CPI, “old series", 195 CPI, quality change, 226-227 U nited Electrical, Radio and Machine W orkers, 194 U nited M ine W orkers o f America, 29, 3 8,44 U nited States Steel Corporation, 44, 53-54 U rban studies, B LS, 31-34,243-244 U .S. A ir Force, 206,207 U .S. Employment Service, 84,126-127, 129-130,182 Van Kleeck, Mary, 88,127 Veblen, Thorstein, 140,141 Verrill, Charles H ., 73,100 Veterans Adm inistration, 167-168,207, 251 Vocational Education A ct o f 1963,240 Wage adjustm ent, escalation, and stabili' zation: D ispute settlem ent, 105-107,122 Federal employee pay, 149,215 GM -UA W contract, 179,193,203 New C PI in agreem ents, 195,228 Productivity factors, 134,179, 203-204 Stew art’s view, 117-118 Wartime stabilization, 102-104, 152-158,161,194 W age-price freeze (1971), 214 Wages and industrial relations (See also Labor-m anagem ent relations, BLS activities), 199-202,245-249 Blue-collar survey, 181,200, 215, 246 Collective bargaining agreement file, 163,164,202,249 http://fraser.stlouisfed.org Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis Collective bargaining settlem ents analysis, 2 6 ,9 6 ,1 2 5 ,1 6 4 ,2 0 2 ,2 4 9 Current W age Developments, 202 Employment C ost Index, 247-248 Industrial survey (1919), 107-108 Minimum wage adm inistration, 160, 200 - 201, 210-211 National Survey o f Professional, Adm inistrative, Technical, and Clerical Pay, 200,215, 246-247 National War Labor Board, W W II, 161-162,164 N R A codes, B LS surveys, 146,148, 160 Strike studies and statistics, 25, 5 2 -5 6 ,7 2 ,9 6 ,1 2 5 ,1 6 3 ,1 6 4 ,2 4 9 Supplem ental or fringe benefits, 201-202,247,248-249 U nion scales o f wages, 7 2 ,94,125, 249 U rban wage rate index, 162 Wage chronologies, 202,249 Wage studies, 3 5 ,3 7 -3 8 ,7 0 -7 2 ,9 3 , 124-125,160,162-163,199-200, 245-249 W agner, Robert F., 128-130,141-142 W alker, Francis A ., 15 W alsh-Healey Public Contracts A ct o f 1936,160,210-211 War Industries Board, W orld War 1 ,81, 101,102,107,141 War on poverty, 185,243-244 War Production Board, W orld War II, 147,148,151,164 Weaver, O ren W., 11 Weber, G ustavus A ., 11, 73 W elfare and Pension Plans D isclosure A ct, 1958,184,201-202 W elfare plans, corporate, 98-99 W estern Federation o f M iners, 25,96 W estmoreland County, Pa., coal mining strike (1910-11), 55 320 Index W harton School o f Finance and Com merce, 195 W holesale prices. See Prices and living conditions W ickens, A ryness Joy, 153,179,187, 209 W ilkins, Roy, 244 W illett, A llan H ., 112 W illoughby, W illiam F., 11,40 W ilson, W illiam B.: D ispute settlement, 95 M eeker, 8 0 ,8 2 ,8 7 ,1 1 2 -1 1 3 N eill, 75-76,78 Publications, 110-111 Stewart, 116 Women’s Bureau, 88 W ilson, W oodrow, 56, 75, 77, 81-82, 106-107,112,117 Wirtz, W W illard: Booz-AUen and Ham ilton studies, 217,254 Clague’s retirem ent, 211-212 Dept, o f Labor, 185-186 Monthly Labor Review, 183 http://fraser.stlouisfed.org Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis 321 Release o f statistics, 190 Statistical program s, 191,198, 244 Women and children, B LS studies, 9, 2 9 -3 1 ,5 8 ,6 2 -6 9 ,7 5 ,8 7 ,1 6 4 -1 6 5 Women’s Division, BLS, 67,87-88 W oodcock, Leonard, 228 W orkers’ com pensation. See Social insur ance W orks Progress Adm inistration (later Work Projects Adm inistration), 150, 158,159,165,168 W right, C arroll D ., 2 ,3 ,5 ,4 5 ,4 6 ,5 6 ,6 1 , 7 2 ,1 1 4 ,1 1 6 ,2 5 8 ,2 5 9 Bureau program s, 21-38 D ep t o f Commerce and Labor, 18-21 Early career, 7 International activities, 39-40 O rganizing the Bureau, 11-14 Relation to Bureau o f the Census, 15-17 Views, 8-10