Full text of The Migratory-Casual Worker, Research Monograph VII
The full text on this page is automatically extracted from the file linked above and may contain errors and inconsistencies.
WORKS PROGRESS ADMINISTRATION
DIVISION OF SOCIAL RESEARCH
·-·
THE MIGRATORY- CASUAL
WORKER
By
JOHN N. WEBB
Coordinalor of Urban Research
Research Monograph VII
UNITED STATES
GOVERNMENT PRINTING OFFICE
WASHINGTON: 1937
Digitized by
Google
Works Progress Administration
HARRY
L.
HOPKINS,
Administrator
Assistant Administrator
B. MYERS, Director
Division of Social Research
CORRINGTON GILL,
HOWARD
Digitized by
Google
LETTER OF TRA~SMITT AL
,voRKS PROGRESS ADMINISTRATION,
Wa.~hington, D. C., April 2, 1937.
Sm: I have the honor to transmit a report on the economic and
personal characteristics of migratory-casual workers in agriculture
and industry. The information presented is derived from a study
conducted by the Federal Emergency Relief Administration during
the operation of the Transient Relief Program. This report is one
of a series of investigations being conducted by agencies of the
Government to assist in fulfilling the provisions of Senate Resolution
298, 74th Congress, 2d Session, which directs the Secretary of Labor
"to study, survey, and investigate the social and economic needs of
laborers migrating across State lines."
This study was made by the Division of Social Research, under
the direction of Howard B. Myers, Director of the Division. The
collection and tabulation of the data were supervised by John N.
Webb, Coordinator of Urban Research, with the assistance of
Katherine Gordon and Howar~ R. Ogburn.
The report was prepared by John N. Webb and edited by Malcolm J. Brown and Orin C. Cassmore. Special acknowledgment
is made of the assistance rendered by Greta E. Mueller and Awilda
Shorter in the preparation of the field schedule and in the development of the interviewing procedures. Acknowledgment is also made
to the supervisors in the several cities in which this survey was made,
and to many others who cooperated in the work of preparing this
report.
Respectfully submitted.
CORRINGTON G1LL,
A.ll.~i8lant Administrator.
L. HoPKINs,
Works Progrel/8 Administrator.
HoN. HARRY
III
Digitized by
Google
Digitized by
Google
CONTENTS
Page
INTRODUCTION ___ . _ - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - ._ - -
IX
SUM.MARY __________________ _ _____ _ _ _ _____________________________ _
xv
1
L The migratory-casual worker: A general description ______ _
II. Extent of migration ______ _____________________________ _
Numerical statement __________________ ____________ __ _
Graphic statement_ _____________________ ______ ______ _
Agricultural workers as a group _______ ____ __________ _
Industrial workers as a group _____________________ ___
Workers in specific crops and processes ______ ____ __ _ . __ _
State of principal employment_ _____________ ___ _____ __ _
III. The characteristics of migratory-casual employment _______ _
Duration of jobs ________ ____________ _________ _______ _
Number of jobs ________ _______ ________________ ______ _
Seasonality of employment_ _________ ____ _____________ _
Month of obtaining jobs ___________________ ________ _
Length of migratory period and off-season. _____________ _
Employment and unemployment during the migratory
period __ - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - Yearly earnings _______ ____________________________ __ _
IV. Types of migratory-casual employment_ _________________ _
Amount of employment in specific crops and processes ___ _
Agricultural workers _________________ ____ ___ __ _____ _
Industrial workers ______________________ . ______ ____ _
Combination workers ______________________________ _
Seasonality of employment in specific crops and processes __
Agricultural workers __________________ - ____ __ ______ _
Industrial workers _________ . ________________ _______ _
Combination workers ______________________________ _
1934 changes in specific crops and processes ___ _________ _
V. Some personal characteristics ___________________________ _
Years spent in migratory-casual labor _______ __________ _
Age ______ - _- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - Color and nativity ____________________________ ______ _
Personal histories __________________ ___ ____ __________ _
Wanderlust ____________________________ ____ ______ _
Occupational and physical deterioration ______ ________ _
Attitude toward relief ______________________________ _
Political attitudes _______ __________________________ _
VI. Conclusions ____________ ______________________________ _
APPENDIX. Supplementary tables ____ ______________________________ _ _
CHAPTER
INDEX ________________ _ _________________________________________ _
23
23
27
30
31
34
45
53
53
55
57
59
60
63
67 •
71
71
71
75
76
77
78
80
80
83
85
85
87
88
90
90
93
97
99
103
111
119
TEXT TABLES
Table 1. Number of E,tate-line crossings of 500 migratory-casual workers,
1933-34__________________ ______________________ _______ _
2. Number of States in which employment was obtained during
migration by 500 migratory-casual workers, 1933-34______ ___
V
Digitized by
Google
24
26
VI
Co11te11ts
TEXT TABLES------Contlnnl'd.
3. Number of States designated as place of principal employment,
and proportion of workers included in the five States most
frequently designated, 1933-34___________________________
4. puration of jobs held by 500 migratory-casual workers, 1933-34_
5. Number of jobs held by 500 migratory-casual workers, 1933-34_
6. Duration of migratory period of 500 migratory-casual workers,
1933-34_______________________________________________
7. Median net yearly inrome and employment period of 500 migratory-casual workers, 1933-34_ _ __ __ _ __ _ _ _ __ __ __ _ __ _ __ __ __ _
8. Years spent in migratory casual work by 500 workers__________
9. Age of 500 migratory-casual workers________________________
10. Color and nativity of 500 migratory-casual workers___________
Page
47
55
56
62
70
86
87
89
FIGURES
Figurc> l. Routes of travel during employment, 100 migratory-casual
workers in agriculturc>, 1933 and 1934_____________________
2. Routes of travel during employment, 63 migratory-casual
workers in industry, 1933 and 1934_______________________
3. Routes of travel during employment, 37 migratory-casual
workers in industry, 1933 and 1934_______________________
4. Routes of tra,·cl during employment, 43 migratory-casual
workers in cotton crops, 1933 and 1934____________________
5. Routes of travel during employment, 47 migratory-casual
workers in grain crops, 1933 and 1934_____________________
6. Routes of travel during employment, 47 migratory-casual
workers in fruit crops, 1933 and 1934______________________
7. Routes of travel during employment, 67 migratory-casual
workers in beet and berry crops, 1933 and 1934_ ______ __ __ __
8. Routes of travel during employment, 35 migratory-casual
workers in oil and gas, 1933 and 1934_____________________
9. Routes of tra,·el during employment, 44 migratory-casual
workers in railroad maintenance, 1933 and 1934____________
10. Routes of tram! during employment, 42 migratory-casual
workers in road construction, 1933 and 1934_ _ _ _ _ _ _ __ __ _ _ __
11. Routes of travel during employment, 39 migratory-casual
workers in dam and levee construction, 1933 and 1934_______
12. Routes of travel during employment, 41 migratory-casual
workers in logging, 1933 and 1934_________________________
13. State of principal employment for 500 migratory-casual workers
during 1933 and 1934_____________________ _____________
14. State of principal employment for 200 migratory-casual workers
in agriculture, during 1933 and 1934______________________
15. State of principal employment for 100 migratory-casual workers
in industry during 1933 and 1934_________________________
16. State of principal employment for 200 migratory-casual workers
combining agriculture and industry during 1933 and 1934_ __
17. Average duration of jobs held by 500 migratory-casual workers,
1933-34 ___________________________ ------------------18. Seasonal fluctuation in the activity of 500 migratory-casual
workers, 1933-34 _ _ _ _ __ __ _ _ __ _ __ _ __ __ __ __ __ _ __ _ _ __ _ ___ _ _
19. Months of obtaining jobs in 1933 and 1934, 500 migratory-casual
workers_______________________________________________
Digitized by
Google
28
29
32
33
35
36
38
40
41
43
44
46
48
49
50
51
54
58
61
Contents
VII
FIGURES-ContinuPu
20. Average duration of jobs secured by 500 migratory-casual
workers, by quarters, 1933-34 ________________ 0 _ _ ___ _ _ _ _ _ _
21. Average migratory, employment, and off-season periods; 500
migratory-casual workers; 1933-34___ _ _ _ __ _ __ _ ___ __ __ __ _ __
22. Net yearly earnings of 500 migratory-casual workers, 1933-34_ _
23. Number of jobs, and man-weeks of work of 500 migratorycasual workers; 1933-34 combined _______________________
24. Seasonal fluctuation of employment in all and in selected pursuits,
200 agricultural workers 1933-34 ___________ . ____ .. _ __ _ __ _
25. Seasonal fluctuation of employment in all and in selected pursuits,
100 industrial workers, 1933-34 ______________________ . _ __ _
26. Seasonal fluctuation of employment in all and in selected pursuits,
200 combination workers, 1933-34________________________
Page
62
64
68
73
79
81
82
SUPPLEMENTARY TABLES
(Appendix)
Table 1. Number of migratory-casual workers in 13 study-cities________
2. State of principal employment of 500 migratory-casual workers,
1933-34________________________________________________
3. Month of obtaining jobs, 500 migratory-casual workers, 1933-34_
4. Duration of off-season of 500 migratory-casual workers, 1933-34_
5. Time spent in employment during migratory period by 500
migratory-casual workers, 1933-34_________________________
6. Net yearly earnings of 500 migratory-casual workers, 1933-34_ _ _
7. Man-weeks of employment and number of jobs of 500 migratorycasual workers, classified by type of worker and by specific
crops and processes, 1933-34 ______________ ··---" __ . __ . __ _ _ _
8. Seasonal fluctuation in employment in all pursuits and in selected
pursuits, 200 agricultural workers, 1933-34_ _ _ _ _ _ __ __ __ __ __ _
9. Seasonal fluctuation in employment in all pursuits and in selected
pursuits, 100 industrial workers, 1933-34___________________
10. Seasonal fluctuation in employment in all pursuits and in selected
pursuits, 200 combination workers, 1933-34_________________
Digitized by
111
111
112
113
113
114
114
115
116
116
Google
Digitized by
Google
INTRODUCTION
HIS REPORT on the migratory-casual worker is a byproduct of the
studies of the transient unemployed conducted by the research
section of the Di vision of Research, Statistics, and Finance,
Federal Emergency Uelief Administration, during 1934 and 1935. 1
In the process of determining the characteristics of unattached
individuals and family groups receiving aid from the Transient
Relief Program, it was found that a fairly clear line could be drawn
between those for whom migration was an expedient of a few
months, and those for whom migration was a customary way of
obtaining a living. The distinction-which was fully established
in the report on the transient unemployed-was between a group
of depression transients composed of temporary migrants, and a
permanent supply of mobile workmen made up of habitual migrants.
Because the depression transient represented by far •the more
important problem from the point of view of relief administration,
a report on his characteristics became the first objective of the
study conducted by the research section. When this task was completed, however, there was time for, and interest in, a supplementary
report on the unattached migratory-casual worker. Although much
more limited in scope than the preceding report, it is believed that
this account of the migratory-casual worker will contribute to the
increasing body of knowledge about the more mobile portion of our
working population.
,vhen the Transient Relief Program was initiated in 1933, the
composition of the mobile "army of unemployed" was unknown. The
grave national emergency existing at that time did not permit delay
until the nature and needs of the nonresident unemployed could be
studied. It was common knowledge that migratory-casual workers
were poorly paid and underemployed during the best ·of times; and
it was natural to expect that they comprised a substantial portion
of the needy nonresidents in 1933. But in initiating a relief program
for nonresidents the Federal Emergency Relief Administration felt
that there were valid reasons for making a distinction between
"bona fide transients" and "seasonal migratory workers." It was
T
1 See Webb, John N., The Transient Unemployed, Resenreb Monograph III. Division of
Social Research, Works Progress Administration. Washington. D. C., 19:itl. A SP<'ond
report, dealing more extensively with migrant family groups, Is in proeess of preparation.
n:
Digitized by
Google
X
Introduction
believed that failure to make this distinction would provide a. subsidy to those industries that existed and benefited in some degree
because of the cheap labor supply furnished by migratory-casual
workers. In September 1933, the Federal Emergency Relief Administration sent to the State Emergency Relief Administrations a memorandum (No. A-1) which stated, in part:
Federal funds now available to the several States for the care of
transients require that the utmost vigilance be employed In assuring
that these funds be applied to the treatment of bona fide transient~.
A number of States have, In the past, encouraged the employment of
seasonal migratory workers In rnrloue Industrialized types of agrlcul•
ture " " "· The funds available for transients are • • • not
intended for this type of nonresident
As it turned out, this distinction was unnecessary in the first place,
and impossible of strict enforcement in the second place. As soon
as the Transient Relief Program had been in operation long enough
to permit some study of the migrant population it was discovered
that the depression transient,2 rather than the migratory-casual
worker, made up the great bulk of applicants for nonresident relief.
But even if this had not been the case it is difficult to see how the
distinction between the "migratory worker" and the ''transient"
would have been enforced in practice. Certainly there was little in
outward appearance, mode of travel, and nature of needs to distinguish one type of migrant :from the other. In fact, unless the
migratory-casual worker voluntarily identified himself as such, there
was no way, at the time he applied :for relief, by which transient
bureau officials could be certain that they were following the provisions of memorandum A~l. At least one-half of all unattached
transients given relief remained under care less than 1 week, and a
considerable proportion, only 1 night. Careful investigation o:f an
applicant's claims for relief was impossible unless he remained at the
bureau for 1 week or more, and in practice, an investigation was not
attempted for the more mobile (short-stay) transients. Therefore,
the migratory-casual worker had little difficulty in obtaining aid :from
the transient program when there was no other alternative.
The surprising-and instructive-fact is that only a small proportion of the habitual migratory-casual labor supply made use of
this alternative. The migratory-casual worker is on the margin
of subsistence most of the time and, when in need, is even more
clearly a nonresident in the local poor law sense of the term than was
the depression transient. Nevertheless, the real migratory-casual
• Those eligible for as~lstance under the transient program were defined as "all persons
In nPPd of relief wbo have not resided within the boundaries of a State for 12 consecutive
months."
Dig1t1zed by
Google
Introduction
XI
worker made up only a small fraction of the total transient relief
population. 3
The explanation of this fact is partly economic and partly personal. A substantial portion of the occupations followed by the
migratory-casual worker continued to provide some employment
throughout the depression. The experienced migrant knew where
and when he was most likely to find a job in the grain and fruit
harvests, logging operations, shipping, road construction and maintenance, and other seasonal activities; and he continued to migrate
to those places even though he knew the pay would be less than in
previous. years. This knowledge, plus a strong personal antipathy
to being found in "soup lines", helps to explain why the confirmed
migratory-casual worker kept out of transient bureaus except for
occasional overnight stops or an unusually bad run of luck in finding
employment.
The fact that the confirmed migratory-casual worker did obtain
assistance from the Transient Relief Program makes this report
possible. The 13 cities• which served as the sources of information
for the study of the transient unemployed included the country's
most important centers for migratory-casual workers. During the
first half of 1935, careful records were made of the work histories
and itineraries of migratory-casual workers registered for relief in
the transient bureaus of these 13 cities. Some of the records taken
were unsuited for study because the worker either could not, or would
not, give a complete account of his employment and itinerary during
1933 and 1934. Other records were excluded because the worker
supplying the information was on the margin between the temporary
and the habitual migrant. Still a third type of record could not
be used because the worker had obviously either deliberately misstated his history-a not uncommon occurrence in the experience of
the Transient Relief Program-or had drawn too freely upon his
imagination.
After a careful weeding-out process there were available 500
records suitable for study. All of the 13 cities in the transient relief
survey were represented, but nearly three-fifths of the histo1·ies came
from 4 of the cities-Seattle, Denver, .Memphis, and .Minneapolis.
The number and type of workers interviewed in each of the 13
cities may be found in appendix table 1.
The 500 individuals whose records are used in this report do not
represent a sample of migratory-casual workers in a strict statistical
sense. Indeed, it is difficult to see how such a sample could be
• See The Transient Unemployed, op. l'it .. pp. 66--67.
• Boston, Clllcago. Dallne, Denver, JacksonYlllt> (Fin . ) . K1111s88 City (Mo.), Los Anirelcs,
Memphis, l\llnneapoll~, Xew Orh•an~. Phoenix, Pltt~bur,rh, and Seattle.
Digitized by
Google
XII
Introduction
obtained. The total number of migratory-casual workers is unknown; the membership of this mobile labor supply changes from
month to month; and the individuals that make up this group are
on the move so much of the time that they provide none of the
opportunities common among stable populations for selecting a
demonstrably representative group. 011ly when the migratorycasual worker comes within the range of some fact-finding agency,
such as existed during the survey of the transient unemployed, can
his characteristics be observed without a great deal of difficulty.
No purpose would be served by assuming that the 500 individuals
contributing factual evidence for this report were completely representative of the hundreds of thousands of migratory-casual workers
who, each year, are employed in seasonal activities. But at the sam~
time there is no good reason for believing that the characteristics
of these 500 workers were so peculiar that an account of their work
histories and itineraries would lead to markedly erroneous conclusions. It is true that these workers were receiving relief at the
time the records were taken. But their employment histories provide convincing evidence that their relief was largely incidental. It
is also true that the several cities in which records were taken are
unequally represented in the study, and this circumstance has a
definite effect on the work patterns discussed in chapter II. But
the fact that more satisfactory records could be obtained in, say,
Seattle than in Boston can hardly be considered a disqualifying
bias since Seattle is a well-known concentration point. for migratorycasual workers and Boston is not.
I
The point of this discussion is simply to issue a warning against
accepting the conclusions of the study uncritically. Those responsible for this report are keenly aware of the limitations imposed by
the small number of cases and the met.hods by which these cases
were selected. As far as the records are concerned, they are unusually good. The field work was done by a staff of interviewers
that had a wide experience with, and a real understanding of, the
man on the road. Therefore, it can be said with confidence that
the 500 records are accuratti; and, as the second part of this report
will sho"'., these recrirds present information not available from
other sources.
The plan of this report needs some comment. Chapter I presents
a general and noustatistical description of the migratory-casual
worker and his place in the labor supply. The remaining chapters
are devoted to a statistical description of the 500 workers whose
histories were selected for study. Specifically, the statistical section
of this report is arranged as follows: The extent of migration and
the work patterns of I he 500 workers are presented and discussed in
Digitized by
Google
lntroductwn
Xlll
chapter II; the next chapter is devoted to a discussion of such characteristics as amount, duration, and seasonality of migratorycasual employment, and net yearly earnings; chapter IV carries this
description farther by presenting detailed information on specific
types of work done; ~hapter V deals with some of the personal characteristics of the 500 workers; and the final chapter presents the
major conclusions of the study. For those readers who would like
to obtain a brief statement of the content of this report, a short.
summary of the principal findings follows.
Digitized by
Google
Digitized by
Google
SUMMARY
HIS STUDY of the migratory-casual worker grew out of a survey
of the transient unemployed made during the operation of the
Transient Relief Program of the Federal Emergency Relief
Administration. In the process of determining the characteristics
of individuals receiving aid from the Transient Relief Program, it
was found that a clear distinction could be made between those for
whom migration was an expedient of a few months and those for
whom migration was an established way of obtaining a living.
The distinction was not based upon outward appearance, for in
this respect there was little to distinguish one type of migrantdepression transient, tramp, or migratory-casual worker-from the
other. Instead, the distinction was made principally on the basis
of two characteristics: ( 1) the type of work done and (2) the work
habit or pattern. Considered jointly, these two characteristics made
it possible to distinguish the migratory-casual worker from the
mobile nonworker, or tramp; and from the temporarily mobile jobseeker, or transient unemployed of the depression period.
The true migratory-casual worker travels regularly over a relatively large area and is dependent for a living on work that is
distinctly seasonal or intermittent, and, for the most part, casual in
nature. In brief, it is the combination of habitual migration with
short-time employment that distinguishes the migratory-casual
worker from all other types of workers in the labor supply. Whereever the local labor supply is inadequate or unwilling to harvest the
grain, the fruit, and the vegetable crops, build and repair the highways and the railroads, repair the levees and build the dams for
flood control, fell the logs for lumber, and work the mines and
quarries-in all these pursuits and in others the migratory-casual
worker provides a supply of cheap and mobile labor upon which
these industries are dependent in part, but for which they accept
little or no responsibility.
This study shows that the habitual migratory-casual worker is the
result of a complex of factors. Both economic and personal motivations are involved, and the two are closely interrelated. On the
economic side, the migratory-casual worker is the result of (1) the
progression of the seasons, which provides an irregular sequence of
employment over a large area, and (2) the pool of unemployment,
which rises and falls with business conditions, but which 1s never
T
xv
Digitized by
Google
XVI
Summary
completely drained. This combination of circumstances creates the
mobility that breaks the stabilizing ties of industrial and community
attachment, and at the same time creates a ehaotic labor market
characterized by substandard wages and working conditions.
On the personal side, the migratory-casual worker is the result of
factors that are known but are difficult of precise statement because
of their intangibility and because of the wide variety of workertypes represented. Among migratory-casual workers is to be found
the militant worker who believes that his position in the labor supply
is the result of a failure of the economic system-and particularly of
employers-to accept responsibility for the way in which the productive·process operates. There is also the apathetic worker to whom
the gradual transition from regular employment in industry to a
haphazard search for such employment, and finally to a regular pattern of migration, has brought a lessening of ambition and a lack
of interest in the future. Perhaps it can only be said that, in general, it is essential to the migratory-casual worker that he move,
that no one environment claim him long, that scenes be new and
persons different. These desires, expressed or only vaguely felt, are
the core of his existence and the governor of his activity.
Analysis of 500 work histories for the years 1933 and 1934 has provided information on several important aspects of the mobility and
employment characteristics of the migratory-casual worker. The
more important items of information may be summarized as follows:
Interstate migration was the rule among the 500 workers; in each of
the 2 years-1933 and 1934-about two-thirds of them crossed at least
1 State line, and one-fourth crossed at least 6 State lines.
Migratory-casual workers following agricultural employment exclusively were less mobile than were workers employed principally at
industrial pursuits or those combining in about equal proportions
agricultural and industrial employment.
The number of State-line crossings reported by the 500 workers in
each year was in sharp contrast to the number of States in which they
actually obtained employment. Somewhat over one-half of the 500
workers found jobs in only 1 State and an additional one-fourth
found employment in only 2 States; whereas, about one-half of the
,vorkers had crossed 1 to 10 State lines and 11 to 15 percent had
crossed 11 to 25 State lines.
Maps of the itineraries of these workers show that compactness and
regularity of work patterns were distinctly more pronounced among
agricultural than among industrial workers. This appears to be the
result of the regular and predictable recurrence of agricultural work
opportunities in the same area.
The average duration of jobs was about 2 months (including holidays a11d time lost during employment) in both 1933 and 1934. More
Digitized by
Google
Summary
XVII
jobs lasted 1 to 2 months than any other time interrnl; about one-half
of all jobs lasted from 1 to 3 months; jobs in ahrriculture were shortest
and jobs in industry longest in duration.
The average duration of jobs becomes more significant when considered in view of the number of jobs held. Well ornr three-fourths
of the 500 workers held only 1, 2, or 3 jobs in each of the years 1933
nn<l 1934, and less than one-fifth held more than 3 jobs.
Although there is some demand for migratory-casual workers in
each month of the year, the demand is highly seasonal. At the low
point in the seasonal decline of activity, reached early in the winter,
the 500 workers reported less tha11 600 man-weeks of employment per
month; but at the top of the summertime peak, reached in July, activity had more than doubled, and these workers reported approximately
1,200 man-weeks of employment per month. Despite this increase in
activity, however, during the busiest month of either year, only onehalf of the potential labor power of the 500 workers was utilized.
It is a common practice among migratory-casual workers to spend
part of each year on the road, working or seeking work, and then to
withdraw from the labor market during the period, usually in the
winter months, when the chances of finding work are small. This
practice was followed by a majority of the 500 workers in the study.
The median length of the migratory period was 41 weeks. Workers in
agriculture had the longest off-season period-averaging 13 weeks;
and the combination workers, the shortest-averaging 7 wooks in
1933, and only 4 weeks in 1934.
Necessarily, the migratory-casual worker wastes much time and
motion during his migratory period both because of a scarcity of
jobs and also because of the lack of proper direction to such jobs as
are available. Among the 500 workers, the portion of the migratory
period spent in employment averaged 24 weeks in 1933 and 21 weeks
in 1934.
In exchange for his labor the migratory-casual worker obtains a
meager income at best. When the earnings of the 500 workers were
reduced to net yearly income to exclude the uncertain value of perquisites, it was found that although the range was from maintenance
to $1,350 a year the most frequent earning was between maintenance
and $250 yearly. The agricultural worker had the lowest yearly net
earning, averaging $110 in 1933 and $124 in 1934. Industrial workers averaged $257 in 1933 and $272 in 1934. Workers combining
agricultural and industrial employment earned on the average $223
net in 1933 and $203 in 1934.
An indication of the relative importance of various crops and processes in providing employment for migratory-casual workers was
obtained from employment histories of the 500 workers. The cotton
130766°-37-2
Digitized by
Google
XVIII
Summary
crop was the largest single source of employment among agricultural
workers. Next in importance to cotton was fruit; and sugar beets,
grain, general farm work, vegetables, and berries followed in the
order named. Among industrial workers, logging, gas and oil, and
railroad maintenance were the most important sources of industrial
employment. Migratory-casual workers dividing their employment
almost equally between agriculture and industry found the major
part of their employment in general agriculture, road construction,
logging, shipping, and grain, in the order of their importance.
The difficulty of reducing the. amount of working time lost by
migratory-casual workers during migration by dovetailing jobs in
various short-time operations can be seen from the fact that the seasonal peaks of activity in these pursuits tend to occur together.
Many, in fact, reach their peak within the same month, and the peak
activity of the majority occurred between the months of May and
September.
The 500 workers were veterans of the road; nearly one-half of them
had spent 10 years or more in migratory-casual work, and nearly onefifth, 20 years or more. Most of these workers were between the
ages of 20 and 45 years. Somewhat over three-quarters of them were
native white; slightly less than one-tenth were Mexicans; and the
balance was made up of foreign white-8 percent, Negroes--5 percent, and others--1 percent.
These statistical descriptions of personal characteristics are supplemented by a series of personal history abstracts and autobiographical accounts of some of the 500 workers. The cases presented in this
manner were chosen to represent distinct traits found among migratory-casual workers. The more striking of these are examples of the
peculiar urge called wanderlust, the physical and occupational deterioration, a strong antipathy to relief, and the puzzled concern of
the workers over the forces to which their economic misfortunes may
be attributed.
The evidenc~ of this report points clearly to the conclusion that the
migratory-casual worker, despite his independent attitude and his
pride in his ability to "get by" on the road, is in fact an underemployed and poorly paid worker who easily and frequently becomes a
charge on society. Directly or indirectly, State and local governments are forced to accept some responsibility for individuals in this
group. Hospitalization, emergency relief, border patrols, and the
policing of jungles and scenes of labor disputes are examples of costs
that are borne directly by the public. There is another cost which
cannot be assessed in dollars: the existenoo of a group whose low
earnings necessitate a standard of living far below the level of decency and comfort. The presence of such a group in any com-
Digitized by
Google
Summary
XIX
munity, even though for a short time each year, cannot fail to affect
adversely the wage level of resident workers who are engaged in the
same or similar pursuits.
The solutions most commonly suggested for the problem represented
by the migratory-casual worker are (1) assisting the worker to
establish employment sequences through directed migrations to employments differing as to time of peak operations and (2) stabilizing
the migrant worker through provision of off-season employment in
the communities where his principal migratory-casual employment is
obtained. The shortcomings of these proposals are that they overlook
the fact that the problem of the migratory-casual worker is one aspect
of the general problem of unemployment and economic insecurity.
The direction of workers to jobs, although it may be of assistance in
eliminating some of the needless travel entailed in migratory-casual
work, cannot provide jobs when they do not exist. As for the second
of the proposals mentioned, it is impossible in most cases to find offseason operations to complement the principal seasonal employment
of migratory-casual workers; and although conceivably it would be
possible to devise employment to occupy the workers during the offseason, the experience of the past has been that this procedure has
led to even more than ordinary exploitation.
It is a conclusion of this study that the most promising means of
reducing the intensity of the problem is employment office direction of
migratory-casual workers, supplemented, during periods of depressions, by public works projects to absorb the surplus. It also seems
likely that unemployment insurance will benefit the migratory-casual
worker indirectly by reducing the pressure of resident workmen on
the labor market served by the migrant. Aside from these means,
there does not appear to be any possibility of full or partial solution
short of those eventual and unhurried chant?:es in population patterns
that promise to eliminate the economic function of the migratorycasual worker.
Digitized by
Google
Digitized by
Google
CHAPTER
I
THE MIGRATORY-CASUAL WORKER
A GENERAL DESCRIPTION
H:r-: MIGRATORY-CASUAL workman is a familiar figure in this
country. He is seen along the highways and railroads, in the
camp cars of construction gangs, in the tar-papered shacks on
the sites of dam and levee projects, in open camps along streams and
irrigation ditches. At work, the mobile workman is frequently indistinguishable from the resident workman; en route, he is frequently confused with the confirmed tramp.
During the depr~ssion years this confusion was increased by the
presence of another migrant group--the transient unemployed. In
appearance there was little to distinguish one type of migrant from
the other; they rode the freight trains together, hitch-hiked along
the highways, and kept to themselves except when according to their
standards or needs they applied for work, relief, or "help to get a
cup of coffee," Because in most cases tramps, transients, and migratory-casual workers were indistinguishable, the public attitude was
one of hostility toward all migrants. The burden of caring for the
resident unemployed left communities with little patience and no
funds for the needy nonresident, to whom, worker and nonworker
.
alike, the epithet "bum" was freely applied.
The attitude of hostility toward unattached migrants during the
depression was natural; but it was based upon a confusion of migrant types that must be viewed separately in order to be understood
correctly. The transient was distinctly a depression aspect of widespread unemployment; the tramp is an ever-present result of
personal maladjustment to social and economic processes; and the
migratory-casual worker is a necessary adjunct to those highly seasonal or intermittent industries that cannot, or will not, support a
resident labor force.
It is the unattached migratory-casual worker that is the subject
of this report: the mobile worker as distinct from the mobile nonworker, or tramp; the habitual migratory worker at casual, or shorttime, jobs in seasonal ihdustries as distinct from the temporarily
mobile jobseeker, or transient unemployed, of tho depression years.
The distinction in a particular case may be difficult to make; frequently the depression transient was in the process of becoming an
habitual migratory-casual worker; the migratory-casual worker may
become a tramp when he can no longer compete for employment with
younger men; and the tramp occasionally works side by side with
T
1
Digitized by
Google
2
The Migratory-Casual Worker
the migratory-casual when wages are attractive or needs are pressing. But these distinctions, for all their vagueness in the particular
<'ase, are known and applied after a fashion by employers, and
occasionally by public officials.
For purposes of description an<l discussion, the migratory-casual
worker needs to be defined as clearly as possible to avoid the confusion arising out of the indiscriminate use of the terms "tramp",
"hobo", "migratory", and "transient" to describe the man on the
road. Care should be taken to avoid the subjectivity which ordinarily
creeps into the use of these terms. There is a popular habit of
calling persons "workers" when they are needed to huvest a. ripened
crop, and of referring to them as "bums" during the slack season
that follows. 1 A kindred confusion, befogging much of the thinking of persons who have studied the migratory worker more carefully, arises out of an attempt to distinguish between the various
mobile workers on the basis of a difference in moral fiber. The
essence of the moralistic distinction is that the "good" migrants work
because of their preference, but that the "lower group" works in spite
of its preference. For example:
The distlnctlon between the two types is • • • one se<•ks employment and pursues ch,rnces to work, the other travels 1111d works as
11ttle as possible.'
Despite appearances, this sort of definition is largely or alto~ether
subjective, an<l makes for more confusion than clarity.
Objectively, the migratory-casual worker can be identified by two
characteristics: ( 1) the type of work he does and (2) his work
habit or pattern. Neither characteristic is, in itself, sufficient identification. The term "casual employment" 8 is generally used to
describe unskilled jobs for which the principal qualifications are
bodily vigor and the presence of the worker at the time of hiring.
1 See, for example, the Loe Angeles Tlme8' comm<'nt, Mar. 13, 1036, on the action of the
city of Los Angeles in sending municipal police to the State llne to turn back needy
persons. The Times, In commending the action, says : "If a labor shortage should de\'elop later on. It would be easy to modify the regulations so that seMonai workers might
be ndmlttPd • • •." MeanwhllP, the Times favors "ridding the State of i,ulig~t transient•." I Italics supplied. 1 On this same theme the San Diego Sun, Mar. 23, 1036,
<"ommPnts sardonically: "The only time a bum Is expected to eome to California Is when
we need him as a harvest hand. What right has he to come between seasons?"
• Lescohler, Don D., The Labor Market, The Macmillan C'o., New York, 1010, p. 270.
See also ShlPlds, Louise F., ProhlPm of tht> Automobile "Floater", Monthly Lnbor
Revh•w, \'ol. XXI, no. 4, October 1925, p. 14, who distinguishes "between tbe migratory
workers, who are an economic necessity for harvesting our crops and who deserve the
resped and gratitude of thP communities they serve, and the automobile tramps who work
onl~· long pnough to keep from starving and that stlll lower group--the professional wandering beggars." P<>rsons who know the migratory-casual well feel that there Is no such
sharp distinction between the categories of those who are "an economic nec!'l<Slty" and
those who "work only long enough to keep from starving."
• "The phrase I casual employment J Implies, no doubt, prlmnrlly Rhortness of engagement, and, secondarily, <>ngagem<>nt of first comers." Be\'erldge, Sir W. JI., Unemploy.
ment, Longmnns, Green & Co., '.li'ew York, 1930, p. 98.
Digitized by
Google
3
A General Description
The best examples of casual, as distinguished from migratory-casual,
workers are found in large industrial and transportation centers:
longshoremen on the docks, freight handlers in the railroad yards
and warehouses, truck and transfer helpers, common labor on building and street construction, women day workers, and odd-job men.
Although there is constant shifting from employer to employer when
work is to be had, the movement is confined to one city, or even more
frequently to a particular section of one city. Such workers may
conveniently be thought of as resident-casuals.
In contrast, the migratory-casual moves from place to place over
a relatively large area in search of work that is distinctly casual in
nature. In this case it is the habitual migratory-work pattern, taken
in conjunction with the casual nature of the employment, that is the
distinguishing characteristic of the worker. A migratory-work pattern in itself is not enough; for skilled construction workers, salesmen, accountants, actors, and many others are frequently or persistently migratory in their work habits without becoming part of the
migratory-casual labor supply. In brief, it is the combination of
habitual migration with casual employment that distinguishes the
migratory-casual worker from all other types of workers in the labor
supply.
Despite the difficulty of precise definition, the migratory-casual
worker exists as an objective fact that can be observed wherever the
local labor supply is inadequate or unwilling to harvest the grain,
the fruit, and the vegetables, to build and repair the highways and
railroads, to repair the levees and build the dams for flood control,
to fell the logs for lumber, to work the mines and quarries, and
generally to provide the pool of cheap and mobile labor upon which
many basic industries are dependent in part, but for which these
industries accept little or no responsibility.
Perhaps the best definition of a migratory-casual worker is to be
found in a worker's own account of his migration and employment.
The migratory-casual worker in agriculture, the largest employer of
mobile labor, is clearly defined in the following work history:
July-October 1932. Picked figs at Fresno, Calif., and vicinity. Wages, 10
cents a box, average 50-pound box. Picked about 15 boxes a day to earn
$1.50; about $40 a month.
October-December 1932. Cut Malaga and muscat (table and wine) grapes
near Fresno. Wages, 25 cents an hour. Average 6-hour day, earning
$1.50; about $40 a month.
December 1932. Left for Imperial Valley, Calif.
February 1933. Picked peas, Imperial Valley. Wages, 1 cent a pound.
Average 125 pounds a day. Earned $30 for season. Also worked as
wagon-man in lettuce field on contract. Contract price, 5 cents a crate
repack out of packing house; not field pack. This work paid 60 cents
to $1 a day. On account of weather, was fortunate to break even at
finish of season. Was paying 50 cents a day room and board.
Digitized by
Google
4
The Migratory-Casual Worker
March-April 1933. Left for Chicago. Stayed a couple of weeks. Returned
to California 2 months later.
May 1933. Odd-jobs on lawns, radios, and victrolas at Fresno. Also worked
a.a porter and handy man.
June 1933. Returned to picking figs near Fresno. Wages, 10 cents a box.
Averaged $1.50 a day, and earned $50 in 2 months.
August 1933. Cut Thompson's seedless grapes near Fresno for 7 days at I}~
cents a tray. Earned $11. Picked cotton 1 day, 115 pounds; earned $1.
September-November 1933. Cut Malaga and muscat grapes near Fresno.
Wages, 25 cents an hour. Made $30 for season.
December I 933. Picked oranges and lemons in Tulare County, Calif.
(Earnings not reported.)
January 1934. Picked oranges at 5 cents per box for small jobs and 25
cents per box for large jobs, Redlands, Calif. Earned $30. Picked lemons
at 25 cents an hour.
January 1934. Went to Brawley, Calif. Picked peas at 1 cent a pound.
Picked 125-150 pounds a day for 15-day season.
February 1934. Picked grapefruit at 25 cents an hour, Koehler, Calif.
Worked 8 hours a day on three jobs for a total of 22 days. Also hauled
fertilizer at 25 cents an hour.
March 1934. Worked as helper on fertilizer truck at $2 a day for 20 days,
Brawley, Calif.
June 1934. Worked as circus hand with Al G. Barnes Circus for 4 weeks at
$4.60 a week and board, Seattle to Wallace, Idaho.
July 1934. Tree shaker at 25 cents an hour, averaged $2 a day for 25 days,
near Fresno.
August-October 1934. Picked oranges and lemons at 25 cents an hour, working an average of 6 hours a day, for 60 days, near Fresno.
December 1934. Houseman in hotel, Fresno. Received 50 cents a day and
board for 1 month, ancl 25 cents a day and board for 2 months.
The migratory-casual worker following industrial, iis distinct from
agricultural, employment is equally well defined by the ,vork history
presented below :
June-August 1932. Jackhammer operator, railroad construction, Liberty,
Mo. Wages $4.80 a day.
September 1932. Extra gang laborer, railroad, Hays, Kans. Wages $3.20 a
day.
October 1932. Extra gang laborer, railroad, Cheyenne, Wyo. Wages $4.50
a day.
February-March 1933. Laborer, pipe-line construction, Topeka, Kans.
Wages $3 a day.
April-October 1933. Watchman, building construction, Kansas City, Mo.
Wages $1.25 a day.
February-May 1934. Extra gang laborer, railroad, Wamsutter, Wyo. Wages
$2 a day.
June-September 1934. Extra gang laborer, railroad, Topeka, Kans. Wages
$2.80 a day.
The elements essential to an adequate definition of the migratorycasual worker are explicit or implicit in these two work histories.
There is high mobility, in the case of the agricultural worker,
Digitized by
Google
A General Description
5
amounting to at least 6,000 miles of travel in a single year. There is
a preponderance of seasonal jobs requiring little or I1o skill-jobs
that last at best only a few months, but form a recurring work pattern. Earnings are small, even under the most favorable circumstances the total yearly income of these workers amounts to no more
than is needed for subsistence. And there is implied in these records
another characteristic of the migratory-casual worker which, for
want of a better word, must be designated as wanderlust.'
Still another characteristic of the migratory-casual worker is illustrated by these work histories. The jobs were confined to a small
number of crops and processes. The agricultural worker was primarily a fruit and vegetable worker, despite occasional odd jobs at
other pursuits; and the industrial worker was employed exclusively
on construction and railroad maintenance jobs. Although in general
the migratory-casual worker follows a wider range of employments
than those reported above, still there is a distinct concentration of
principal activities within a comparatively few productive processes.
It may be instructive to identify the most important of these
processes.
The Wheat Harvest.
From central Texas to the Canadian border and west to the
Pacific coast, wheat was once the most important crop requiring a
marked addition to the local labor supply during the harvest season.
The widespread use of harvesting machinery in recent years has
greatly reduced but has not eliminated the use of migratory-casual
workers in the wheat harvest, which, at one time, employed 250,000
of these workers.
Fruit Picking and Packing.
The fruit harvest-apples in Washington and Oregon, citrus
fruits in the Southwest and to a lesser extent in Florida, soft fruits
(prunes, peaches, etc.) along the Pacific coast, and berries in the
Mississippi Valley and on Puget Sound-requires large numbers of
migratory-casual workers for short periods of time. Speed, long
hours, and some skill are necessary to prevent the loss of these
perishable products.~
Vegetables.
Large-scale production of lettuce, peas, beans, melons, spinach,
onions, and similar truck crops in the Southwest, in Washington, and
• The migratory-casual worker would cleRcrlbe this rhnrartNIRtlc inPIPgnntly, but
much more aptly, as an '"ltchlnl( foot."
• For an Interesting account of the "fruit trnrnr" see "Thi' Ernlles.~ Trek" In :\lh?rntory
Labor In California, State Hellef Administration, Division of 8peelnl Surveys and Studies,
San Francisco. 1936, p. 173 tr.
Digitized by
Google
6
The Migratory-Casual Worker
along the eastern seaboard requires migratory-casual workers for
cultivating, harvesting, and packing operations.
Sugar Beets.
In the large sugar-beet areas (e. g., Colorado, California, Montana.
Michigan) the greater part of the planting, cultivating, and harvesting operations are performed by migratory-casual workers. 8
Cotton.
In the Southwest-Texas, Oklahoma, Arizona, and Californiamigratory-casual workers make up an important part of the labor
supply necessary in the harvesting of this basic crop. The extension
of large-scale cotton cultivation into these areas is, compared with the
Eastern Cotton Belt, a relatively recent development. The large land
holdings and the undersupply of seasonal labor in the Southwest are
in sharp contrast to the innumerable small farms and the oversupply
of low-cost labor that exists upon these small holdings between cotton seasons in the Old South. Until a mechanical cotton-picker is
perfected, cotton cultivation in the Southwest seems likely to remain
dependent upon a mobile supply of cheap labor.
Railroad Right-of-Way Maintenance and Construction.
Railroad construction, next to agriculture, is·one of the best examples of the need for a mobile labor supply. The construction of
railroads through sparsely settled or unpopulated areas was possible
only by the employment of men who were willing to live and work
in isolated places. The transcontinental railroads were built by
migratory-casual workers, and, except in the Old South, the extra
gangs of the maintenance-of-way departments continue to depend
upon migratory-casual workers to a large extent.
Construction of Levees, Roads, Tunnels, and Power and Pipe
Lines.
Projects of this type, like the railroad construction of former years,
must have a mobile labor supply willing to live on the job and to
move with it. Frequently seasonal, and almost always intermittent,
construction of this kind cannot depend upon local labor.
Oil and Gas.
Because the peculiar nature of oil and gas deposits operate as an
incentive to immediate exploitation, almost every new strike becomes
• Although this report IA concerned only with the unattached migratory-casual worker,
It should be noted that the migratory family groups are an Important element In the
migratory-casual labor supply or agriculture. Sugar-beet production Is a case In point.
Digitized by
Google
A General Description
7
a boom demanding large numbers of workers in areas frequently
remote from population centers. Once the activity of opening a
field is over, these emergency workers are free to seek work in another
of the fields from Texas to Montana. It is only natural, then,
that many oil !lnd gas field workers should be migratory-casuals.
Additional employment for migratory-casual workers in the oil
fields is provided by the construction of oil pipe lines, and by maintenance work upon them. The approximately 94,000 miles of oil pipe
line,7 stretching largely through sparsely settled areas, require the
services of an extensive body of workers who are willing to keep
constantly on the move.
Logging.
Logging is a traditional pursuit of the migratory-casual worker.
Like much of the work on railroads, levees, and dams, it depends
upon workers who are willing to live together in isolated places
without the conveniences of life which resident workmen enjoy.
The decline in logging operations in recent years and the employers'
policy of bettering the conditions of their camps in order to reduce
labor turnover have combined to reduce considerably the number of
migratory-casual workers employed. 8
This list of agricultural and industrial operations dependent to an
important extent upon migratory-casual workers is by no means
complete. Nevertheless, this list shows that operations requiring a
mobile labor supply have in common one or more of the following
characteristics:
1. A large demand for unskilled or semiskilled labor.
2. Marked seasonnllty or irregularity of operations.
3. Location remote from population centers.
1. Most of the work done by migratory-casual workers is of an
unskilled or semiskilled nature; and the principal requirements for
employment are presence at, or just before, the time of peak operations, and the stamina needed for long hours of manual labor under
all kinds of weather and working conditions. Skill in the form of
manual dexterity rather than that resulting from apprenticeship -and
training is required for some types of employment (e.g., fruit packing) but, on the whole, migratory-casual jobs consist of unskilled
manual work. This fact is reflected in the low earnings of the group
• See The Statletlcal Abstract of the United States, 1935. p. 709.
Thie policy of bettering conditions, originally the result of nggreeslve labor organization ln the lndnstry, has proved to be profitable enough ln terms of reduced labor turnover to persist after the decline ln the strength of organized labor In this Industry. The
policy of making camp life attractive enough In some Instances to Induce workers to bring
their famlllee has also been profitable both through the operation of company-owned
houses and stores and through the stabilizing eft'ect on the worker of famlly and community life.
1
Digitized by
Google
8
The Migratory-Casual Worker
and in the ease with which recruits are drawn from among the
unskilled and inexperienced workers in the resident population.9
2. A second basic characteristic shared by these processes is pronounced seasonality or irregularity of operation. Employment in
agriculture is characterized by seasonality, rather than irregularity,
of labor demand and each year a variety of crops requires a large
labor force for short periods of intense activity. Formerly, sharp
seasonal peaks in employment were caused by the harvesting, and
to some extent hy the planting, of staples. Although in recent years
mechanization (e. g., use of the combine, tractor, etc.) has reduced
the fluctuations in the labor demand of staples, a widespread and
persistent demand for short-time agricultural labor has arisen as a
result of the increase in intensirn cultivation of specialty crops.
When such crops as vegetables, fruits, and berries are grown on :t
large scale, and particularly when they must be harvested and
marketed quickly because of price fluctuation and perishability,
there must be available sufficient workers to carry on peak operations.
Industrial operations using migratory-casual workers are both
seasonal and intermittent in nature. The construction of highways,
railroads, dams, and levees is affected both by weather conditions and
the public's attitude toward construction projects. Excavations and
tills must be made before the rainy season, cement must be poured
before cold weather, and grading must be finished before snow falls.
But the activity and the labor demand of these processes may also
be influenced by public interest or indifference. Bond issues for
construction projects--roads, dams, drainage canals-are frequently
dependent upon the crystallization of public opinion. In some of
the industries employing migratory-casual workers, notably lumbering, operating fluctuations resulting from chan~es in the price of
the finished product are as great as those resulting from weather
conditions.
Some of these industrial processes require a labor force the year
around ( e. g., railroad maintenance) to which additions are made at
t imcs of the year when weather or other conditions permit or require
work to be done. Others ( e. g., packing and preserving fruits and
,·egetables) operate for a part of the year with a large labor force,
which is disbanded completely between seasons of activity. StiJI
other processes ( e. g., construction) are nonreeurrent; the labor
demand begins and ends with the initiation and the completion of
the project.
• The df:'pre.~sion tranRient found a considerable proportion of his employment during
migration at jobs regularly followed by the habitual migratory-easual worker. For further discusNion of this point, see Webb, John N., The Transil'nr Unemployed, Research
Monograph III, Division of Social Research, Works Progress Admlnlsttatlon, Washington,
ll. c., 10:!6, p. 54.
Digitized by
Google
A General Description
9
· 3. Most of_ the agricultural and industrial processes that depend
upon a mobile labor supply are extractive operations, and, almost
of necessity, they are located in areas of low population density.
Such of the construction projects as are not extractive are essential
links between the extraction and the fabrication of raw material,
and, therefore, are more likely to be found in areas of low than in
areas of high population density. The separation of economic funciions geographically has determined to a large extent the present
population pattern, and consequently the distribution of the labor
supply. The result has been that natural and economic forces have
worked together in such a way that many extractive processes are
located in areas sufficiently removed from population centers to make
a mobile labor supply essential to those having seasonal or intermittent peaks of activity.
These characteristics help to explain why certain agricultural and
industrial processes need migratory-casual workers. Because of the
marked seasonality or irregularity of their operations, none of these
processes provides enough continuing employment to support an
adequate resident. labor force, or enough earnings to allow the workers to live on accumulated wages between seasons. Although frequently a portion of the workers needed during peak operations is
drawn from the local labor supply, this source is uncertain. 10
Obviously, a surplus labor force several times the size of that regularly employed cannot exist in the sparsely settled areas, where so
many of these processes are located, for the sake of a few months'
seasonal employment even though the wage for seasonal work may at
times exceed that for permanent employment.11
Efforts to overcome this difficulty through stabilization of the
mobile labor reserve needed only during peak operations within a
fairly restricted area have failed, and of necessity must fail, in most
10 A study of farm labor In the Yakima Valley. Wash.. shows that resident labor
could-but does not-meet all the labor demands of the vaJley during the whole year.
excepting only the months of September and OctobPr, the peak months of the hop and
apple harvests. But, during October, the local labor supply le altogether insufficient.
During the third week of October 1935, resident workers performed less than one-half of
the total work done In the fruit crops. SeP Landis, Paul H., and Brooks, Melvin S.,
Farm Labor in the Yakima Valley, Wash., Rural Sociology Serles In Farm Labor, no. 1,
Washington State College, Pullman, Wash., 1936.
11 Employers requiring a marked lncr!'ase in the working force for seasonal operntlone
are sometimes agreed that it would be desirable to hold these wol"kers In the locnllty
by finding off-season employment for them. This Is particularly true of seasonal operations of longer duration, and of those in which there Is likelihood that workers will not
be available when needed. For exnmple, a lnri,:e sugar-beet rPflnery sPnt a Jetter to
growers and beet workers In which it was stated that: "This company has been, and is,
Interested In the welfare of beet workPrs employed by growers who sell beets to It, not
only during the period when field work Is being don~. but also during other parts of the
year. In particular, in the pust, this company has on sevnal ocPaslons secured work
during part of the period betwpen the enrl of the harvest and the beginning of thinning,
on railroads and elsewhere, for beet workers." Through the Lea\'eS, published by the
Great Western Sugar Co., DenVl'r, Colo., Dec<>mber 1929, vol. XVII, p. 548.
Digitized by
Google
10
The Migratory-Casual Worker
instances. Unless an area has a diversity of productive processes
with seasonal peak labor demands occurring in sequence, there will
not be enough employment to maintain the worker throughout the
year.12 A sequence of this kind within an area so restricted in size
as to aliow the worker to maintain permanent residence is rare
among extractive processes, if it occurs at all.
Therefore, it seems evident that as long as resident workers do
not provide the necessary labor reserve, and stabilization of mobile
workers within restricted areas lacks the economic support of adequate employment sequences, seasonal and intermittent processes in
agriculture and industry must employ migratory-casual workers.
This raises the basic question of why these processes can continue
to benefit from a large and mobile labor supply for which their
responsibility is limited to a few weeks or months of employment during the year. Or, to state the same question from the point of view
of the worker, why a mobile labor reserve continues to exist for the
operation of these processes. From the discussion up to this point,
Clearly,
it is plain that the answer to the question is complex.
both economic and personal factors are involved, and, although the
two are closely interrelated, they must be discussed separately if
their significance is to be assessed accurately.
On the economic side, the migratory-casual worker is the result of
(1) the progression of the seasons which provides an irregular sequence of employment over a large area, and (2) the pool of unemployment that rises and falls with business conditions, but which is
never completely drained.
The great expanse of the country, with its variety of climates and
its low population density in widely separated areas of production,
is a primary factor in an explanation of the continued existence of
the migratory-casual worker. The size and the geography of the
United States produce different climates, and, consequently, different
seasons for the maturing of crops and the operation of subsidiary
seasonal industries ( e. g., canning), and for the initiation of construction and maintenance work. 18 Thus, over a large area there
is a fairly continuous demand for workers to fill short-time jobs, each
of which is inadequate to maintain a resident worker. The result is
obvious. Migratory-casual workers move into these areas to supplement the local labor supply during the peak of operations, and then
move on, frequently across one or more States, to find their next
employment.
I!! Hee ch. IV tor illustrations of pronounced O'l"erlapplng of peak actlvltlee in the
principal processes employing migrntory-casuaJ workers.
u In the Southwest, for example, construction often stops because of summertime
heat; but In the rest of the country summer Is the most Important building season.
Digitized by
Google
A General Description
11
Important as this factor is, it provides an incomplete explanation
for the existence of the migratory-casual worker. Account must
also be taken of the irregularity of employment provided by industry to the urban worker, of the low wages and small opportunity
offered by agriculture to the rural worker; in short, of the insecurity
of life that besets the wage earner at the unskilled and semiskilled
levels. Carleton Parker described the economic conditions creating
the migratory-casual worker in the following words:
The irregularity of industrial employment is as Important an
element as the height of the wage scale • • •. The combination
of low wages, the unskilled nature of the work and its great irregularity, tends to break the habit and desire for stable industry among the
workers. Millions drift into migrating from one imlustrlal center
to another in search of work • • • . The worker slides down the
scale and out of his industry and joins the millions of unskilled or
lost-skilled who float back and forth from Pennsylvania to Missouri
and from the lumber camps to the Gulf States and Ctlllfornia ...
Clearly, the way in which industry is organized and the way in
which it operates have a pronounced effect on the stability of the
working population. Our modern economy, by freeing the majority
of the working population from attachment to the soil has, through
territorial specialization, brought about great concentrations of population in the cities to perform the function of fabricating and distributing goods for consumption and production use. The growth
of the working population in one of the great industrial centers
may be used to illustrate this point. The United States Census of
Population shows that in 1930 the number of gainful workers in
the total United States was approximately one and two-thirds times
as large as in 1900; but, during the same period, the number of
gainful workers in Detroit had increased fivefold.
In this somewhat extreme case of labor concentration, it was a
single industry-automobile manufacturing-which caused a marked
migration of resident workmen because it offered greater opportunity
to the worker. But the employment that caused this migration was,
and is, notoriously insecure of tenure. The worker of slender means
who was attracted by the high wages of the automobile factories
during good times must move again when work is slack. In this
constant attempt at adjustment of labor supply to demand it is not
surprising that a body of habitual migrants is created. This process
was succinctly described by a witness during hearings before the
Commission on Industrial Relations in 1914:
"Parker, Carleton, The Casual Laborer and Other Essays, Harcourt, Bra~e & Co., New
York, 1920, p. 119.
Digitized by
Google
12
The Migratory-Casual Worker
Mr. Page [a lumber mill owner] : "I think the more a man roves,
the more he wants to rove. And I do not think It Is the seasonal work
that causes the roving • • •. I think that the cause is that you
have got 15 jobs and 16 men."••
It is this failure to achieve a balance of workers and jobs that
creates the labor surplus, or pool of unemployment, which has become a permanent feature of modern economic organization. It
might seem that recognition of the social loss resulting from the
surplus would have led to a search for remedial action. Such has
not been the case in the past, and for good reason. A surplus labor
supply is profitable to the employer, and particularly to the employer
whose labor force must be materially augmented because of recurring
or intermittent peak operations.
An oversupply of migratory-casual workers keeps the wage rate
low, permits some selection of the working force, provides immediate
replacements for those who leave before the work is done, and
operates as a check on the organization of workers to improve working con<litions.1• Not only do employers favor the existence of a
surplus labor force but frequently they also assist in creating this
surplus through advertisements for workers, broadcast in the newspapers of their own and neighboring States. Attempts have been
made, and are now being made, to reduce the oversupply of workers
through proper direction of the existing labor force into areas of
demand. But, as the following excerpt suggests, such attempts meet
with difficulties:
Tlw Oregon Department of Labor has estimated that we have enough
workers now resident In the State to harvest all our crops, if these
workers were properly mobilized in the direction where needed • • •·
But It is a slow process to persuade some of our agricultural employers that they do not need a large surplus of floating labor In
order to establish a reasonable wage scale. "
In the interest of maintaining a plentiful supply of migratorycasual worker for seasonal employment, immigrant labor, particularly Oriental and Mexican, has been extensively imported. The
superficial advantages of these auxiliaries are obvious. The ob"Report of the Commission on Industrial Relations, S. Doc. No. 415, 64th Cong., Wash•
lngton, D. C., 1916, vol.
p. 42,,2.
1 • Working and living conditions are generally poor even where a State Inspection system Is maintained. For instance : Only 20 percent of the labor camps Inspected in
California during 1933-34 were rated "good" by the Supervisor of Camp Inspection.
Over a period of 20 years less than 30 percent were rated "good." Migratory Labor in
California, op. cit., p. 78.
Where no inspection or supervision Is maintained, the only force operating to lmpro,·e
poor conditions is the refusal of workers to accept employment, resulting In unusually
high labor turnover.
17 See Problem of the Automobile "l<'loater", op. cit., p. 18.
v;
Digitized by
Google
13
A General Description
jective in each case was a cheap, industrious, and tractable labor
supply as a supplement to the more expensive and incalculable white
worker. First the Chinese, then the Japanese, and finally the Mexican laborer has been recruited for work in the mines, on the railroads, in the orchards, and in the fields. A discussion of the relative
merits of Chinese and Japanese workers during a convention of
employers was the occasion for the following statement:
The Chinese when they were here were ideal. They were patient,
plodding, and uncomplaining in the performance of the most menial
service. They submitted to anything, never violating a contract. The
exclusion acts drove them out. The Japanese now [1907] coming
in are a tricky and cunning lot, who break contracts and become
quite independent. They are not organized into unions, but their
clannishness seems to operate as a union would. One trick is to contract work at a certain price and then in the rush of the harvest,
threaten to strike unless wages are raised. 11
When immigration restrictions stopped the influx of Oriental
workers, the Mexican, free from such restrictions, began to constitute an increasingly important element in the labor forces of railroad construction and maintenance, mining, and agriculture; in
fact, in precisely those industries that depend upon a plentiful supply of mobile workers for unskilled jobs. If Mexican labor proved
to be less industrious than Chinese or Japanese, it was easy to handle,
cheap, and plentiful in supply. During the hearings on a bill in
Congress to restrict immigration from Mexico, a representative from
the Fresno, Calif., Chamber of Commerce testified:
The Mexican is not aggressive • • •. He does not take the
Chinese and Japanese attitude. He is a fellow easy to handle
• • • a man who gives us no trouble at all • • •. He takes
his orders and follows them • • •.'"
It should be apparent that the employer's interest in a plentiful
labor supply is twofold: He desires a mobile labor reserve large
enough to handle peak operations and a labor supply that must
accept low wages, long hours, and poor working conditions without
effective protest. These interests have been furthered by the importation of cheap foreign labor. The pressure on the labor market
exerted by the availability of this low-standard labor supply is
probably much in excess of the actual numbers competing with the
native migratory-casual worker; but the desired effect is achieved,
,. California Fruit Growers' Convention Proceedings, 1007, quoted In !lllgratory Labor
In California, op. cit., p. 22.
"Testimony of FrlssPlle, 8. Parker, "Seasonal Agrkullural Laborers from Mexico", HParlngs Before the Committee on Immigration and Nuturnllzntlon, 69th Cong., 1st sess.,
Washington, D. C., 1926.
130766°-37-3
Digitized by
Google
14
The Migratory-Casual Worker
and when occasion demands, labor recruiting offices are ready to
supply the cheap labor necessary to the maintenance of a low wage
level. The strong economic bias in the employer's attitude toward
the source of a low-wage labor supply is shown by the repeated
statement of preference for white migratory-casual workers qualified
by the complaint that the white worker, and especially the native
white, is undependable as a worker and intractable as a person. 20
The advantages that the employer derives from a large and mobile
labor supply are frequently more apparent than real. Against them
must be set a number of serious disadvantages, some of which are
restricted in effect to employers, while others are felt by ~ntire communities. Irregular employment and low earnings leave the mi~
gratory-casual worker with small reserves to carry him through
periods of unemployment that even in good years covers a consid~
erable portion of his working year. The result is an expenditure
for relief that in effect represents a public and private subsidy to
seasonal and intermittent industries. The lower the wage level,
the higher the public cost. For instance, a field report on migratorycasual clam diggers in the vicinity of Gray's Harbor, Washington,
st.ates in part:
The supervisors of the relief agencies in Aberdeen and Hoquiam,
Wash., were distressed over the chaotic condition of this industry
(clam canneries), both from the client's point of view and from their
own, in the problem of administering relief fairly. In Aberdeen the
experienced clam diggers had been told in advance that their relief
cases would be closed while they were digging. Figures taken from
the books of one of the canneries showed that a majority of the diggers earned between $15 and $30 per month. Most of the diggers
were, of course, relief recipients, and, therefore, relief grants amount
to a subsidization of the industry. No pressure could be brought on
this point, because clam digging is not "full time" employment, because clam diggers can work only during minus tides.n
Another disadvantage of maintaining a large labor surplus is the
cost of recruiting workers willing to accept the wages and working
conditions offered. On this point the Mexican migratory-casual
worker offers the only case from which definite evidence of recruiting costs can be drawn. The average cost of recruiting and shipping
a worker was, according to a study of Mexican labor, $28 in 1920,
"'"White cotton pickers were generally and frankly not wanted in Nueces County,
Tex. [typical cotton region]. Farmers stated: 'People here don't want white pickers.
'l'hey prefer J\lexicans; they are content with whatever you give them. The whites want
more water, etc.. and are trouble makers. If there Is a labor shortage they want
exorbi taut prices • • • you can handle the J\lexkans better ; they're more subservient • • •.'" Taylor, Paul S., An American Mexican Frontier, University of
North Carolina Press, Chapel Hill, N. C., 193-1, p, 130.
21 Excerpt from a field report of one of the Interviewers on the study of migratorycasual workers.
Digitized by
Google
15
A General Description
of which "about 15 percent was spent in soliciting • • • and
85 percent was used for railroad fares and food [en route]." 22
More important than these, in some respects, are two basic disadvantages which are inherent in a migratory-casual labor supply
that is both too large and has little or no direction: ( 1) The labor
turnover is extremely high, even on jobs of short duration; and
(2) there is frequent strife between worker and employer that
promises to increase rather than decrease in bitterness.,
Without an actual or potential oversupply of workers, the low
earnings, long hours, and poor working conditions of the migratorycasual worker could not be maintained. As long as these conditions
exist, there is no incentive for the worker to remain on one job longer
than his immediate needs require. By leaving the job in accordance
with such personal dictates as the amount of his earnings, the difficulty of the work, or his plans for the immediate future, the migratory-casual worker has gained a reputation for instability and unreliability that is not fully merited. Quitting a job before it is completed is the only peaceful protest that the worker has, and this type
of protest makes a large contribution to the high labor turnover
that is charact~ristic of industries dependent upon a migratorycasual labor force.
At times, and with growing frequency in recent years, the protest
of the migratory-casual workers against wages and working conditions has led to open violence. Unfortunately, these outbreaks have
been the only means of focusing public attention on the position of
the migratory-casual worker in the economic order. The "Wheatland
(Calif.) riots 28 of 1914, dramatized by Carleton Parker in his study
of the casual laborer, were the forerunner of the bitter conflicts that
have occurred throughout the regions of intensive crop cultivation
in the United States, especially in the San Joaquin, Imperial, and
Salinas Valleys 2' in recent years. Concerted action by the workers
is met by armed and deputized citizenry, with the issue changing
gradually from spontaneous protest over substandard wages, poor
02 Taylor, Paul S., Mexican Labor In the United States, Valley of the South Platte,
Colorado, University of California Publication In Economics, Berkeley, Callf., 1930, vol. I,
no. 2, p. 133.
.. The Wheatland riots were a result of the vicious policy of recruiting unneeded
workers to keep wages down. mentioned on p. 12. "The Commission of Immigration
nnd Housing went to Wheatland and studied the situation. It brought to light th"
following conditions: overrongestlon of the camps, due to the owner's {a certain Mr.
Durst) advertising for and obtaining twice as many people for his hop harvest than
he needed, so as to be able to depress wages • • • women and children sleeping In
the fields for lack of accommodations • • • Insufficient toilets (9 for 2,800 people) • • • ." Migratory Labor In California, op. cit.. p, 56 .
.. George P. West, writing of the background of the strike of the lettuce packers In
Salinas, Callf., in the New York Times of Sept. 20, 1936, states: "The capitalists • • •
from the Imperial Valley [who started large-scale lettu~e raising In Salinas] brought with
them an attitude toward labor developed by the handling of llexlcnn peons."
For an excellent summary of these conflicts, see Taylor, Paul S., nnd Kerr, Clark,
Uprisings on the Farms, Survey Graphic, January 1935.
Digitized by
Google
16
The Migratory-Casual Worker
working conditions, and unsanitary living quarters, to the right to
organize for the purpose of collective bargaining. 25
An excess of workers beyond actual need may be expected as long
as employers of migratory-casual workers continue to hold that the
advantages of an oversupply of labor outweigh the disadvantages
of high labor turnover, uncertain quality of work, and occasional
strife. In the past, at least, this attitude has been maintained without arousing an effective protest from the worker. The only practicable method by which the migratory-casual worker can control
the supply and improve his position in the labor market appears to
be organization-and organization of the migratory-casual worker
has made slow progress £or obvious reasons.
The migratory-casual worker is an individualist and is inclined
to be impatient of the slow process of organization and negotiation
that has characterized successful union policy in this country.
Moreover, the migratory-casual worker lacks the basic qualifications
for either the craft or the industrial type of organization because
he can claim neither skilled trade nor an attachment to a particular
industry. The high mobility of the migratory-casual worker makes
the unification and expression of group opinion exf::remely difficult;
and low yearly earnings make the collection of dues 26 and the
.building of a war chest a difficult matter. It is indicative of the
nature of the migratory-casual worker and of his position in the
labor market that the "one big union" type of organization, exemplified in this country by the l.W.'\-V., has, until recent years, provided
the only important evidence of susceptibility to organization. The
militancy of the l.W.W., its loose organization, and its insistence
upon the common cause of labor as against the naITOwer craft union
concept appealed to the migratory-casual worker where other types
of union activity failed.
"'In California in 10:13 there were 37 agrlcultnral strikes, Involving 47,575 workers, and
atrectlng nearly every major crop. The strikes were chiefly against the low prevailing
wage of 15 cents per hour, but other demands were pressed for recognition of the
unions, and for abolition of the contract system and other unsatisfactory working conditions. See Hearings Before the Committee on Labor, House of Representatives, on
H. R. 6288, 74th Cong., 1st sees., Washington, D. C., 1935, p. 342 ff.
For an Interesting historical account of labor dlsturbences in California Involving
migratory-casual workrrs, see Migratory Lnbor In California, op. cit., ch. V.
""The difficulty of dues collection from migratory workers Is probably one of the chief
reasons why they have never been organized by old-line labor leaders. Migratory Labor
in California (op. cit., p. 69) quotrs Paul Scharrenberg, former secretary of the California
State Federation of Labor as saying: "The California Federation of Labor has proved
• • • to Its own satisfaction that they could organize the migratory. The problem
has not he<>n to organize him but to keep him organized. • • • It ts due • • •
to the inability of the migratory to funiish his own funds for his organization. • • •
Another probl<'m • • • Is • • • that being so underpaid and being so ignorant
he falls an enHy prey to radicals that have in the past defamed the A. F. of L. and kept
alh·e a distrust for the A. l<'. of L. Any money Invested in union dues '!\1th the A. F. of
L .• the migratory was told, wns a bad Investment. The migratory has often believed
this." The study comments: "This analysis by Mr. Scharrenberg omits to state that the
California Federation of Labor kept ne,·er more than two organizers In the tleld, and
since t be end of the war, none."
Digitized by
Google
A General Description
17
Up to this point, the discussion of reasons for the existence of
a mobile labor supply has been almost entirely in terms of the
economic factors-irregularity of employment, sharp seasonal peaks
in the demand £or unskilled and semiskilled labor, an unorganized
and highly competitive labor market. Although economic £actors
are undoubtedly of primary importance, purely personal £actors,
such as a predilection for new scenes, new £aces, short-time employment, and freedom from the restraints of community life play an
important role in the creation and in the continued existence of
the migratory-casual labor supply. Perhaps this point may be
sharpened by a single consideration. If the economic £actors are
considered alone, and the personal aspects of the migratory workers
assumed to be those of the average workmen, there is provided at
best only a partial explanation of the migratory-casual worker.
Low wages, irregular employment, and an overcrowded labor market
are more nearly the rule than the exception for millions of urban
and rural workers at unskilled and semiskilled pursuits, without at
any time causing them to become migratory-casual workers. Something in addition to adverse economic conditions is needed to create
a migratory population; and here the experience of the past few
years is instructive. During the depression period the insecurity
of urban workers and the insecurity plus the lack of opportunity
among rural workers created a problem of unemployment relief
that was essentially resident, rather than nonresident in nature. 27
Despite the pressure of economic circumstances, only a small portion
of the needy unemployed turned to migration for a solution of their
problem. Thus, there was a highly selective £actor at work that
determined who should migrate and who should not. In this respect,
there is a close analogy between the temporary transient of the
depression period and the habitual migratory-casual worker:_ who
is found on the road in good times and bad.
This selective £actor resides in the individual and in his relationship to society. It is the result of mental processes and emotional
reactions that do not lend themselves to ready description, but the
net result is a distinguishing characteristic of the migratory-casual
worker that can be observed and is known to those in close contact
with this part of the labor supply. Almost of necessity, the employer
knows these purely personal traits, and it is of interest to see the
migratory-casual worker from the employer's point of view.
111 The peak In resident relief occurred In January 1935 when something over 20,000,000
persona received some public assistance. The peak in transient relief occurred In
February 1935 when the mldmonthly census reported 300,460 persons under care. See
the Monthly Report, Federal Emergency Relief Administration, Washington, D. C., December 1935, p. 79.
Digitized by
Google
18
The Migratory-Casual Worker
In the Wenatchee Valley, Wash., the migratory-casual worker is a.
well-known figure and an essential supplement to the local labor
supply when the principal crop--apples---is harvested. An observing employer has provided this description of the migratory-casual
worker:
The wanderers around Wenatchee are a jumble. Many are newcomers on the scene. Many have swung around a wide circle of scenes,
occupations, and climes so many times that they have completely lost
the count. Jake Williams, from Indiana, was picking apples with me
2 years ago. He was then on either the third or fourth lap of a fairly
uniform circuit-and last year he was back for another lap of the
same. As the apple-picking season would close he would head for
Phoenix, Ariz., riding the box cars and figuring out his schedules with
the precision of Vincent Astor or Henry Ford. "I like Phoenix", he
said-''clothes are such a small problem there. And do you know", he
casunlly observed, ''we have now developed to the point where we can
cnll up almost any yardmaster in the country and learn with precision,
almost to the minute, when the next through drag [freight] will be
going our way."
Jake stayed at Phoenix awhile and then he moved on East, varying
his route more or less for change of scene and companionship. He had
a sister in Chicago and so he dropped in at her home for awhile. He
had another sister in Brooklyn and he always had to see her on his
rounds. He roamed over a wide country, simply drifting along. He
had nothing especially in view except to move along. The railroads
carried him free, so why stop very long? Presently a bright and
annual thought came to him very suddenly-why, hell, apple picking
will come on at Wenatchee next month, so why stay in the East? The
red apples are beckoning to him 2,000 miles or so away, but their
beckoning is strong, he needs a change of exercise and food, and he
needs to complete his circuit, and so here he comes again and again.
Jake may have worked a little in the wheat fields and with the
oranges, but, so far as I could learn, he mostly roamed, picked apples,
and roamed again. I would not be sure (nor would he), but I think he
was unmarried.""
This worker may seem, from the employer's description, a little too
carefree, irresponsible, and lacking in a definite social attitude toward
the work he does and the men he works for. The same employer,
with a nice sense of contrast, reports on "New York Harry" :
He claimed to have come from Syracuse, N. Y., In the Finger Laketi
district, where many apples are raised. He had roamed widely and
came to us fresh from the Yakima, Wash., hop fields, where I am
sure he played many tricks and weighed in much dirt. [Note.-Hop
picking is paid by the pound.] His philosophy was summed up in one
advisory statement: "The * * * won't pay you anything for what
you do, and the only chance to get anywhere is to pick (hops, apples,
etc.) 'em dirty, limbs and all." ..
'"l<:x<"erpts from n IPtter In the IIIPs of the Division of Social Research, Works Progress
Administration, Washington, D. C.
Digitized by
Google
A General Description
19
Where one employer is able to understand something of the personal
factor in the migratory-casual worker, there are many more who do
not understand. To this large group, mig1·atory-casual workers are
"a disparate group of misfits, bitten by wanderlust." The employer
disapproves of the migratory-casual worker's independence both for
economic reasons and because it seems to be an open contradiction of
the adage that independence is earned by thrift and industry. The
employer resents the thinly-veiled hostility of the worker and, more
often than not, fails utterly to understand the reason for the constant
and profitless roving about the country. For that matter, it is doubt:ful if the migratory-casual worker himself knows just what it is that
drives him on.
A study of the labor supply in the wheat belt found that the
migratory-casual worker was inclined to be vague about the reasons
for his way of life:
Asked why he has come to the harvest, the sensoned "flouter" probably will answer that "the harvest is a habit", [sic] that he swears each
year he will never come ngain, but cannot seem to resist when the time
comes. It fascinates him with its multitudes, its unknown possibilities,
its chance that "something may turn up." •
Occasionally, a migratory-casual worker has both the urge and the
ability to write for publication what he believes to be the reasons for
his continued wandering. Unfortunately, when the migratory-casual
worker becomes literate, he usually becomes romantic.
With each experience, the fascination of fruit tramping increases, for
it Includes travel, change, new scenes, fresh faces, different food, and
good money. Mickey [his wife] and I have become typical. We hate
the small-town idea of doing the average thing, and we do not want a
house and lot. I don't believe anyone really does. It's just something
real-estate men sell to you."'
The romanticized interpretation of the personal factors in the making of a migratory-casual worker is easily and frequently overdone
by observers as well as by the worker himself. And yet this interpretation cannot be dismissed as having no claim for attention. The
hard and objective facts of irregular employment before migration,
of a gradual shift from haphazard search for steady employment to
a regular pattern of migration, of a lessening of ambition an~ a lack
of interest in saving for the futu~all these fail to explain the personal factor ~dequately. Something else is needed to make the explanation complete. Perhaps it can only be said that it is essential
to the migratory-casual worker that he move, that no one environ• Lescohler, Don D.• Harvest Labor Problems In the Wheat Belt, Bulletin 1020, V. S.
Department of Agriculture, Washington, D. C., 1922, p. 18.
'° Whitaker, P. W., "Fruit Tramps", Century Magazine, March 1929.
Digitized by
Google
20
The Migratory-Casual Worker
ment claim him for long, that scenes be new and persons different.
These desires, expressed or only vaguely felt, are the core of his
existence and the governor of his activity. The work he does is a.
means to this end; the industries dependent upon his labor are conveniently dispersed. In an economic sense these industries make his
existence possible and influence his social attitudes, but in a personal
sense he holds himself to be independent of them.
It is this real or fancied independence that has done much to make
a romantic figure of the migratory-casual worker. For many of those
who have felt the urge to break the routine of monotonous tasks, to
throw aside the cautions of thrift and industry, and to take to the
road in order to prove to themselves and to the world that they are in
fact free agents, the migratory-casual worker is an attractive figure.
He is admired but not entirely approved; and he is known not as he
is but as he is reported in fiction and legend. The migratory-casual
worker in the character of the lumberjack is the hero of the woods,
and his great <lee<ls have been the theme of folklore and story of
which "the legend of Paul Bunyan is certainly the greatest of these
creations; for it embodies the souls of the millions of American camp
men who have always done the hard and perilous pioneer labor of this
country." 81
Another well-known legend of the migratory-casual worker is
even more authentic folklore than the Bunyan legend. Strangely
enough, it is the legend of the Negro migratory-casual worker-the
roustabout, the cotton picker, the levee worker, and the railroa.d and
tunnel construction laborer. It is the legend of the Negro John
Henry, who was "six feet tall, didn't know his own stren'th", but
could carry three bales of cotton, one on his head and one on either
shoulder. He was "big and black and mean and his feet didn't
touch de ground-and his home wasn't hyar. His foots was always
itchin' I" 82
The hold that these and similar legends have upon the imagination of a restless nation is no accident. These legends grew up
around the "deacon's seat" in the bunkhouses of the logging camps,
around the campfires in the fields, in the mining camps, and along
the railroad right-of-way. The stories were told by migratorycasual workers to dramatize their lives, and these stories are often
remarkably accurate portrayals of the inward urge to be ever on
the move.
11 SteYens, James,
Paul Bunyan, Alfred A., Knopf, Inc., New York, 1925. See also
Shephard, Esther, Pnul llunyan (reYised edition), Harcourt, Brace & Co., New York, 1925.
"'Bradford, Roark, John Henry. Harper & Bros., N'ew York, 1931. One of the legends
not included In the Bradford account, but widely held to be the original, 1B that John
Henry was a tunnel worker on the B. & 0. Rallroad.
Digitized by
Google
21
A General Description
But there is another, and darker, side to the life of the migratorycasual worker. Old age has little but trouble in store for him.
When younger, he was a better and more dependable workman;
a.ge dulls his skill and sharpens his individualistic and, frequently,
his antisocial tendencies. He has no prospects for the future, and
by the time he has reached middle age has most likely ceased to
worry about them. In most cases, long before he is 60, age will
have permanently removed him from the labor market. Disease
or the hardships of his life will have taken their toll of his strength.
He will then almost certainly become a permanent charge on some
community, as a "park bum", as an inmate of a hospital, asylum, or
jail, or as a panhandler on the street for money to buy cheap liquor
and a little food.
At this point the discussion quits the general approach and turns
to an analysis of the 500 work histories that have been assembled.
The concern of the discussion hereafter shall be to examine some of
the measurable attributes of migratory-casual workers reported for
the 500 workers and to clarify, in terms of their concrete manifestations, the general forces that have been described. Succeeding chapters, for example, will describe numerical'ly such aspects as seasonal
fluctuation in employment, duration of individual jobs, the labor
demand of the crops and processes in which the workers were employed, time spent yearly in employment, and the amount of earnings. Chapter II, beginning this description with an account of
the geography of the migrations of the 500 workers, deals with the
distances they traveled, the paths beaten by their migrations, and
the States in which they obtained the most work.
Digitized by
Google
Digitized by
Google
CHAPTER
II
EXTENT OF MIGRATION
of a year a migratory-casual worker may cross
the continent and return, or he may remain within the limits
of a few contiguous counties in one State. The extent of his
migration during any year depends upon the migratory-work pattern
that he has developed, the employment conditions in the industry or
industries that make this employment sequence possible, and his
disposition toward work and travel.
In measuring and portraying the extent of migration, two methods
have been employed: (1) a quantitative statement of the number
of State-line crossings during the migratory period in each of 2
years-1933 and 1934; and (2) a graphic statement in the form of a
series of maps showing the itineraries of a number of migratorycasual workers during the 2 years combined. The purpose of the
maps is to supplement and illustrate the tabular data on extent
of migration and to show the migratory-work patterns that are
peculiar to several important productive processes.
I
N THE COURSE
NUMERICAL STATEMENT
Interstate migration was the rule among the 500 workers included
in this study (see table 1). By using the device of counting Stateline crossings reported in the actual employment records of these
workers, it was found that in each of the 2 years, 1933 and 1934,
about two-thirds of them crossed at least one State line and onefourth crossed at least six State lines. In weighing the value of this
information as a measure of extent of migration, it must be remembered that the data represent the crossing of State lines rather than
State areas.
Although a substantial majority of the 500 migratory-casual
workers crossed 1 or more State lines during each of the 2 years,
there were enough workers who remained within the borders of 1
State to deserve comment. The 1933 work histories showed that
somewhat less than one-third of the workers had not been outside the
borders of one State, and the 1934 work histories showed this to be
true of about one-fifth of the workers (see table 1). The nature
of these strictly intrastate migratory-work patterns is clearly evident in the vicinity of Seattle, Minneapolis, and Memphis on the illustrative maps to be discussed later ( see figs. 1, 2, and 3).
23
Digitized by
Google
The Migratory-Casual Worker
24
500 MIGRATORY-CASUAL
TABLE 1.-NUMBER OF STATE-LINE CROSSINGS OF
WORKERS, 1933-34
1934
1933
Number or Rtate-line
Type or worker
Type or worker
cr0s.5ings
Total
Agricul•
tural
Industrial
Combi·
nation I
Total
Agricul•
tural
Industrial
Combl•
nation 1
---------1-- - - - - - - - - - - ---- --- ---All workers-·-··········-•---
500
200
100
200
500
200
100
200
Percent distribution
All workers ..... ·-··-······--
100
100
too
100
100
100
100
100
No State line _____ ----·----_.
1 ~late line _____ .____________
2 State lines_-·--------------
29
31
31
'¥7
'¥7
6
19
15
II
IO
I!
12
4 State lines_________________
Htate lines_---------·------
6 to 10 State Jines____________
11 to 15 Stu.le lines ________ .__
16
21
26
31
to 20 EHate lines·-----·---to Z.~ State lines ______ .____
to 30 Rtu.te lines_________ __
to 35 State lines __ ·-·---·-·
Not ascertainable ...•. _......
7
16
i
Ii
i
7
8
6
i
6
15
3
7
4
13
6
6
g
I
13
4
8
4
8
8
6
5
18
5
4
19
II
12
20
15
3
2
1
2
2
4
7
15
3 ilt.ateliues __ • ___ ·---·--··-5
6
13
20
ti
12
6
12
H
-~
4
1
1
(1)
6
2
I
I
a
4
(')
6
12
5
2
I
3
I
g
7
6
15
g
5
(I)
-------- ------------------- -------- ---------- -------- ---------(1)
(')
II
7
H
1 Workers combining agricultural and industrial employment.
• Less than 0.5 percent.
In contrast to the restricted movements of intrastate migrants
was the extensive movement of 11 to 15 percent of the 500 workers
whose employment histories show that they crossed 11 to 25 State
lines. Between these 2 extremes--no State-line crossings and 11 or
more--are to be found over one-half of the 500 workers. Thus, interstate migration appears to be a clearly defined characteristic of the
migratory-casual worker.
In 1933 the three types of workers 1-agricultural, principally
industrial, and combination agricultural and industrial-were, in
terms of State-line crossings, about equally mobile (see table 1). A
similar examination for the year 1934 shows that agricultural workers were somewhat less mobile in terms of State-line crossings than
were the other two types. On this point the evidence is clearer on the
maps showing the itineraries of agricultural and of principally
industrial workers for the 2 years combined.
• Type of worker was determined from the history of employment during the 2 years.
Workers followln,:- ngrlculturnl employment solely during the 2 years, or having only
occnslonal nonagricultural jobs. were classlf!Pd ns ngrlcultural workers. The same
proeedure was followed tor the Industrial group, although there were fewer worl<ers
reporting solely Industrial employment. The third group-agricultural and lndustrlal,...prl'sents workers whose E>mployment during the 2 years was divided so equally between
agriculture and Industry thnt a combination type was the only logical claeslflcatlon.
In the Interest of brevity and com·enieuce, the three groups will frequently be referred
to simply as agricultural, l11duRtrial, and coml»narion workers.
Digitized by
Google
Extent of Migration
25
Although any conclusions concerning the relative extent of migration among the three types of workers must, on the evidence presented
in table 1, be tentative, there are logical reasons for expecting the migration of agricultural workers to be less extensive than that of industrial workers and of workers following both kinds of employment.
Extent of migration is determined in large part by the sequence
of employment which the worker knows by experience to be possible.
The time consumed in travel from job to job during the working
season represents a loss to the worker. Efforts to minimize this loss
would naturally tend to restrict the extent of migration to the
smallest area in which a satisfactory job sequence could be obtained.
Agriculture provides the migratory-casual worker with greater
opportunity for employment sequences within restricted areas than
does industry. The agricultural worker in the Middle West may harvest grain in a number of places in the same State and then double
back for plowing as the season progresses. California boasts that
within her borders a crop matures in each month of the year. Under
favorable crop and employment conditions, a few of the more fortunate migratory-casual workers in that State might begin the year
picking or packing citrus fruits, go on to work in the vegetable, berry,
grain, and hop fields, pick deciduous fruits, or cotton, and return to
the citrus groves again with no longer periods of unemployment
than the time required to move from one crop area to another. By
extending the range of migration to adjoining States to take advantage of the variety of climates and diversified crops, the agricultural
migratory-casual worker can, and often does, establish a migratorywork pattern which he follows year after year with a fair degree of
assurance that employment will be found.
Analogous situations are less frequent among the industrial processes that employ migratory-casual labor. The completion of a dam
or road construction project may necessitate considerable travel to the
site of another project, or may require travel to several projects before
employment is secured. Moreover, in industrial processes there is
less of the regularly recurring employment that follows from the
progression of the seasons.
It would seem, therefore, that insofar as the extent of migration
is a direct result of an established migratory-work pattern, the migratory-casual worker in industry would find it necessary to travel over
R larger area than the agricultural worker. Furthermore, it seems
logical to expect that migratory-casual workers lacking an established
work pattern would have the greater extent of migration since chance
and rumor would be important factors in determining the direction
of their travels. Chance and rumor were found to be important
Digitized by
Google
26
The Migratory-Casual Worker
factors in the wanderings of depression transients 2 whose employment during migration was both casual and noncasual in nature, and
included both agricultural and industrial pursuits. Reference to
table 1 shows that among 200 migratory-casual workers following
a combination of agricultural and industrial employments during
both 1933 and 1934, there was a smaller proportion of intrastate migrants than among either the agricultural or industrial types. Further evidence on the relative extent of migration by type of workers
will be presented in connection with the discussion of selected
itineraries.
TABLE 2.-NUMBER OF STATES IN WHICH EMPLOYMENT WAS OBTAINED
DURING MIGRATION BY 500 MIGRATORY-CASUAL WonKERS, 1933--34
1933
1934
~-
Number or States In which
employed
Type or worker
Type or worker
Total
Total
Ai,ricul-1 lndus- Comhinatlon 1
turn!
trial
All workers __________________
500
-i--
I
200
100
200
Agricul-1 Indus- \Comhinatural
trial
tlon 1
500
~1~,~
Percent distribution
All workers __________________
100
100
100
100
100
100
100
No 8tate •------------------21 State._._-----------------States ______________________
3 States ______________________
4 Stat~-'---------------------5 to 8 State.•
Not ascertainable ____ . ___ . ___
5
4
57
24
10
4
6
4
5
59
51
30
58
1
54
28
g
3
2
52
31
2
I
1
1
55
27
8
3
4
I
1
1
(1)
26
6
4
8
2
1
I ----
24
g
3
I
-·-- ·-
It I
100
6
00
31
8
2
I
2
Workers combinin~ a~ricultural and Industrial employment.
I. e., workers unemployed.
• Les.• than 0.5 percent.
The fact that migratory-casual workers crossed a specified number
of State lines <luring the year provides no information on their
success in finding employment during migration. 8 An investigation
of this point (see table 2) shows that the number of States in which
migratory-casual workers obtained employment during each of the
2 years was in sharp contrast to the number of State-line crossings
during these years (see table 1). Somewhat over one-half of the 500
workers were employed in only 1 State and an additional one-quarter
in only 2 States, whereas about one-half of the workers had crossed
1 to 10 State lines and 11 to 15 percent had crossed 11 to 25 State
lines during the migratory period of 1 year.
• SPe Wf>hb, John N .. The Trnnslent Unemployed, Research Monograph III, Division of
Sodrrl Research, Works Progress Adminl•trntlon, Washington. D. C., 1936, p. 54.
• l<'or the number of jobs obtaln,•d durin~ migration, see table l'i, p. 66.
Digitized by
Google
Zl
Extent of Migration
A comparison of the number of State-line crossings with the number of States in which employment was obtained indicates that much
of the travel reported by these workers did not result in employment,
but was for the express purpose of getting to or from areas in which
their labor might be in demand. There are two factors which help
to explain this result: (1) The established work pattern of the experienced migratory-casual worker includes more than one possibility of employment so that when no work is to be had in an area
there is at least one alternative possibility in another area that
can be acted upon immediately; and (2) it is known that many of
the confirmed migratory-casual workers congregate in such cities as
Seattle, Minneapolis, and Chicago during their off-seasons, and
winter headquarters are frequently at a considerable distance from
the area in which they were employed during the working season.
Whenever either or both of these factors are operative, the extent
of migration as measured by State-line crossings is iucreased relative
to the number of States in which employment is secured.
Further examination of the data in table 2 shows that in 1933
there was little difference among the two types of workers-agricultural and industrial-in respect to the number of States in which
employment was obtained. In 1934, however, the proportion of agricultural workers employed in only one State was distinctly larger
than was true of the other two types. Here, as in the discussion of
State-line crossings, the more compact migratory-work patterns of
agricultural employment have a direct bearing. The data 011 1mmber of States in which employed tend to support the conclusion that
the migration of agricultural workers is more restricted than is that
of industrial workers and workers following a combination of the
two types of employment.
GRAPHIC STATEMENT
Measurement of extent of migration in terms of State-liue crossings clearly establishes the interstate character of the migratorycasual worker; but this device does not disclose the patterns of
migration that are developed. In order to show this important characteristic, a series of maps has been prepared from the itineraries of a
selected number of the migratory-casual workers included in this
study. For the purpose of discussion these maps of routes of travel
during employment are grouped as follows: (1) the routes-without distinction as to type of crop-of migratory-casual workers
following agricultural employment; and-without distiuction as to
type of processes-of workers following industrial employment; (2)
the routes of agricultural workers employed principally in five important crops; and (3) the routes of industrial workers employed
principally in five important industrial processes.
Digitized by
Google
28
t-
z
w
~
>-
0
...J
a..
~
w
l'.)
z
a:
:::>
0
...J
w
~
a:
LL
t-
U)
0
w
t:::>
0
a:
,.;
l
~
w
a:
:::,
~
:::,
~
a:
<
l?
~
(/)
X:
w
a:
a:
_J
~
0
<
(/)
:::,
u<
>a:
<
t-
0
a:
~
l?
0
Q
,t
~
..,
0
z
<
~
..,..,
I
I
l
\
I
'~I
I
)
\
I
..
,- , ,_, ,
I
Th e Migratory-Casual W orker
\
''
~
, '
Digitized by
Google
z
I-
a:
I-
*>
U)
::::,
a
?:
?:
v
I')
!?!
I')
I')
<(
a
z
a:
U)
:<:
\
\
1-,
I
.. ,
I
'
/
E x tent of M igratio n
,
", ' "' \r'
',
'1
I
I
(
I
I
'"' \1 \ . \
J
<(
<(
U)
uI
>
a:
0
co
I')
,.'
J
'- -- - -
I
::::,
3:
a:
w
~
!?!
w
0
>-
g
a..
~
w
C)
z
a:
~
::::,
0
Cl
I
(\J
a:
j
_J
w
~
a:
i...
I-
0
w
1/)
I-
::::,
0
a:
i.:"
130766 °-37- - 4
Digitized
29
JYGoogle
30
The Migratory-Casual Worker
Before considering briefly the maps in each of these three groups
it is necessary to state the limitations of the data upon which these
maps are based, and to describe the method by which they were prepared. The itineraries shown were chosen from among 500 work
histories available; choice was based upon indications in these work
histories that the worker followed either agricultural or industrial
employment with sufficient regularity to permit using his work itinerary as illustrative of one type of employment. Obviously, this
method favored selection of workers who found employment during
migration over those who did not, and to this extent the maps represent the movement of the more successful migrants among the 500
studied.
Having selected the work histories for presentation, the routes of
travel were described by connecting the locations in which employment was obtained by smoothed lines following as far as possible the
direction of the main highways or railroads. Each itinerary was
drawn in fnll, starting with the location of the first job obtained in
1933 and following throughout 19:33 and 19:34, without a break, the
sequence of the jobs during the 2 years. Only by following this
method was it possible to reproduce enough itineraries to define patterns of migration. It is seldom possible to trace the movements of
any one worker on the maps; nor would it be correct to insist that the
composite patterns necessarily follow the identical routes actually
traveled. However, assuming that the worker moved in a fairly
direct line by railroad or highway from one job to another, these
maps are a good approximation of the actual routes of migration.
Agrlcultural Workers as a Group.
The v.-ell-defined migratory-work patterns of workers in agriculture can be seen in figure 1, which shows the routes of travel during
employment of 100 of these workers in 1933 and 1934. On the Pacific
coast, from Seattle to southern California, the locations in which
employment was obtained form clusters through which the connecting lines pass to describe the most definite interstate work pattern
on the map. The strictly intrastate movements which were disclosed
by the data in table 1 on page 24 and in table 2 on page 26 are best seen
on the maps in the vicinity of Seattle and Minneapolis, though they are
also present in California between San Francisco and the environs of
Los Angeles. Between Seattle and Yakima, and between Minneapolis
and the area immediately adjacent, there is a clear description of a
shuttle-like moYement. Both Seattle and Minneapolis are important
concentration points for migratory-casual workers in agriculture,
many of whom go out from and return to these cities year after year
with only occasional trips outside the States in which these cities are
Digitized by
Google
Extent of Migration
31
located. An interesting interstate pattern that involves four Stateline crossings but is still restricted in extent is to be found in the
elliptical cluster of lines connecting Minneapolisi Minn., Fargo,
N. Dak., Aberdeen, S. Dak., and Des Moines, Iowa.
Industrial Workers as a Group.
In contrast with the relatively compact migratory-work patterns
of agricultural workers, shown in figure 1, are the dispersed patterns
of industrial workers, shown in figures 2 and 3. In fact, an attempt
to present 100 itineraries of industrial workers on one map resulted in
such a confusion of lines that patterns could not be distinguished at
all. For this reason the itineraries were divided into two groups:
those in which the routes of travel were restricted to sectional movements (fig. 2), and those in which the movements were both sectiopal
and transcontinental ( fig. 3).
Strictly intrastate work patterns among industrial migratorycasual workers are to be seen in figures 2 and 3 in the vicinity of
Seattle, Denver, and Dallas. When these restricted patterns are excluded it is immediately apparent that the locations in which employment was obtained by industrial workers are much more dispersed
than those of agricultural workers. Even if the itineraries shown in
figures 2 and 3 were combined in one map, there still would be no
such cluster of job locations as that found for agricultural workers
along the Pacific coast in figure 1.
The impression gained from a study of the itineraries of industrial
workers is that there was less retracing of the same routes and
greater distances between stops than was found in the itineraries of
agricultural workers. Thus, if agricultural and industrial workers are to be compared in respect to extent of migration, the device
of measuring State-line crossings needs to be supplemented by maps
in order to determine the distances traveled. For example, the movement between San Francisco and Salt Lake City involves two Stateline crossings, and yet the extent of migration is less than that
between Los Angeles and Portland (Oreg.) (see fig. 3), which only
involves one State-line crossing. On the basis of the evidence in figures 1, 2, and 3, and in view of the logical considerations advanced on
page 25 it may be said that work patterns of migratory-casual
workers in agriculture are not only more clearly defined but are
also more restricted in extent than are work patterns of industrial
workers.
No attempt -yvas made in preparing figures 1, 2, and 3 to differentiate rout~s of travel among agricultural or industrial workers
according to the crop or process that provided employment during
migration. The purpose of this first group of maps was to show
Digitized by
Google
~
Fie. 3- ROUTES OF TRAVEL DURING EMPLOYMENT
••
.
~
37 MIGRATORY-CASUAL WORKERS IN INDUSTRY"
---,--~
1933 AND 1934
~
::,~
~
cS·
..,
-..,
Q
C
~
I
CJ
Q
t,,
i:::
Q
~
~
0
co·
j;j"
""
C
..,~
25_
~
cl
0
0
~,.......
*
SCCTIONAL ANO 'TAAH5cot,n' INCNTAL MOVCMCN T
(v
AT~•1.so.w• ,
Fie. 4 - ROUTES OF TRAVEL DURING EMPLOYMENT
43 MIGRATORY· CASUAL WORKERS IN COTTON CROPS
\
1933 AND 1934
'I
,---·- ---- - --•'
'
-- ,
I
I
j
I
t?j
j - - - - ·-
-
'
----J' ___
~
~
:::
j
-t
C
~
-
c·
:::
0
co·
""
N
~
Sf"
CJ
L EC ENO
• · STo,s (()flt JOBS IN COTTON
o - STOl'S roR JOeS OTM[R THAN IN
COTTON AHO TO Stt:K WOflll",
LOCATION Of JO&S IN OP[N COU NTR Y
SNOWN BY N[A"C5T URBAN C[Nrt"S
0
-
~
(v
"' ' · l l t l .W ll'A.
~
The Migratory-Ccuual Worker
34
the general nature of the itineraries of agricultural and industrial
workers, an<l to provide a basis for comparing the extent of their
migrations. It is possible, however, to go one step further. Maps
have been prepared showing the routes of travel of a selected number of workers according to the crop or process that furnished the
principal employment• during the years 1933 and 1934. Although
this is admittedly a rough means of distinguishing among the
workers, it is the on]y practicable method that can be applied. Among
the 500 migratory-'casual workers, only a few with even a moderate
amount of employment during 1933 and 1934 reported but one type
of crop (e.g., wheat) or one process (e.g., oil and gas production)
as the source of employment. In the maps that follow, the location
of employment in the specific crop or process is distinguished from
all other employment by appropriate symbols. The location of every
job is shown, since the omission of any stops for employment would
distort the itineraries.
WORKERS IN SPECIFIC CROPS AND PROCESSES•
Cotton.
i
I\
\
I
Among the 500 migratory-casual workers who are the basis of this
study, there were 43 who were clearly cotton field workers and who
found enough employment during 1933 and 1934 to justify the reproduction of their itineraries. Although the number of cases is small,
the resulting work patterns are clear, as figure 4 reveals. From Memphis, routes of travel of workers in the cotton crop reach out into
southern Missouri, Arkansas, Mississippi, and Alabama. A second
pattern is to be found in Texas and Oklahoma, beginning at the
southern tip of Texas and extending north into Oklahoma, and
northwest and west across Texas, New Mexico, and Arizona into California. The absence of migratory-work patterns extending through
the Old South can be explained by the fact that the resident labor
supply is generally equal to the needs of the cotton crop in that
re~ion.
Grain Crops.
The routes of travel of the 47 workers in grain form a pattern, as
figure 5 shows, in the central part of the country, running through
• Principal employment wee determined on the basis of job frequency regardless of Job
durntfon . Thus, the workers whotie itineraries ere shown on fig. 4 (cotton crope) had
more job8 In connl'<'llon with the cultlntlon end harvesting of the cotton crop during the
combined period 1933 and 1934 then they had In any other crop. The reason for using
job frequ ency rather than job duration Is that the number, not the duration of jobs,
determines how often n worker mo,·es and where he goes.
• Throughout the Rpeciflc crop end process figures, there Is no duplication In the use of
work his tories. Thus, the itinerary of n worker whose principal employment wns In
colton was used only once. although the itinerary may haye Included subsidiary johs In
grain or other cropH.
Digitized by
Google
F,o. 5 - ROUTES OF TRA VEL
DURING EMPLOYMENT
IN GRA IN CROPS
1933 AND 1934
t"rJ
H
.....
;:i
.....
~
0
, ,' ✓
a::
....
--~ - -,✓ J ., .1
c&·
,- _l-- ,., , --·
(
I
I
'
I
I
0
I
co·
;.
~
0
0
arv
;:i
'
\
N
o·
',
'
I
~
s:)
I
LEGEND
. .. STOPS roR JOBS IN GAA.IN
O• .STOPS r oA JOeS OTHUI
THAN
N GAAIH AHO TO .SCtK WORK
LOCATION OF JOU IN OPCN
COUH'U t r
SHOWN eY NCAACST UABNt
CCNlCR S
4T•l•U •~A.
~
~
f l(,_ 6- ROUTES OF TRAV EL DURING EMPLOYMENT
47 MIGRATORY - CASUAL WORKERS IN FRUIT CROPS
1933 AND 1934
~
(1)
~
~-
0
~
~
-
-
-
- -
-
/
~
I
I
N
I
~
0
'
*.,
...\
CT
}
'<
0
0
rv
Q
(
0
-
-
- -
,.. ___ ... -
cc·
;a;
~
.c:. - ... -
-,
I I
....Q
s::
(1)
LEGEND
t • STOPS
o • STOPS
~
JOIS IN '"UIT
f'OIII J06S OTHt" THAN
IN rNJIT AND TO SC[K WOfllK
LOCATION 0, JOU IN OfltN COUtfTRY
~t«)Wt,,j IY H[AAtST UftlAN C(NTCAS
...,..,,,o,. ,.-.
Extent of Migration
37
the "grain basket" of the double tier of States just west of the Mississippi River. From Texas north to the Canadian border, the itineraries cross and recross in Kansas, Nebraska, Iowa, Minnesota, and the
Dakotas.
Fruit Crops.
Further information on the closely knit work patterns of migratory-casual laborers in agriculture is to be found in figure 6, which
shows the routes of travel during employment of 47 migratory-casual
workers in fruit crops. The movement of migratory-casual workers
up and down the Pacific coast as they pick and pack oranges, grapefruit, peaches, prunes, apples, apricots, cherries, pears, grapes, and
olives produces the best defined pattern to be found among the 500
workers studied. In the State of Washington there is an intrastate
movement connecting Seattle,
enatchee, and Yakima; a less pronounced but analogous intrastate pattern in the vicinity of San Francisco and Los Angeles is obscured by the interstate itineraries that
cover the Pacific Coast States. It seems apparent from figure 6 that
the three States-Washington, Oregon, and California-constitute a
fairly contiguous labor market for the service of the migratorycasual worker who follows the fruit harvests.
There is evidence of a less important but definite movement of fruit
workers in Florida. In the central portion of the State, the "ridge"
section reaching from Tampa to Jacksonville, citrus fruit is an
important winter crop. Florida is an exception to the general rule
that migratory-casual workers are of little importance in the agricultural labor supply of the southern States. It is believed that
further study would show tl;at fruit and winter vegetable workers
in Florida have established migratory-work patterns that are as
definite, though not as numerous, as those found on the West coast.
,v
Sugar-Beet and Berry Crops.
The sugar-beet and berry harvests provide employment for large
numbers of migratory-casual workers, but the nature of the work done
tends to attract migrant family groups to a greater extent than unattached workers. In both these crops the entire family can find
employment within their physical capacities. Because only unattached migrants are included in this report, employment in sugarbeet and berry field work is underrepresented. Nevertheless, the
itineraries presented in figure 7 are instructive. Employment in the
sugar-beet fields tends to be of longer duration than the employment
obtained in other crops. 6 More frequently than not, the beet worker
stays through the season, roughly from May through October, and
• See fig. 24, p. 79 for duration of employment by type o! crop.
Digitized by
Google
t.:,
00
Frc. 7- ROUTES OF TRAVEL DURING EMPLOYMENT
IN BEET AND BERRY CROPS
1933 AND 193
~
~
....
cc;·
.,
Q
.....
.,
cc:
C
r')
.,,Q
i::
Q
~
0
co·
;c.
.,
>;.,
C
N.
~
~
~
0
0
arv
LEGEND
6•
4•
sro,,s roll -'091
IN lttTS
,Olll JOU OT Ht" THAM
IN METS #40 TO SCtJ\ WOIIIK
~
• - ffCMtt
'°" JOlt •tN an•uu
0-, SfON ,01111 JOU OTHO THAN
• ·KMCS AND TO IUK WOlbl.
LOCATION
1HOWN
er
or .10M
tN °"-N C0Ufffll't
JrCMCIT t.ntllAN «NTVIS
...... ,.
Extent of Migration
39
therefore has a relatively restricted extent of migration. Reference
to figure 7 shows that the locations of the jobs obtained by workers
in the sugar-beet fields (black triangular symbols) were confined to
a small area in Minnesota and to a relatively narrow section running
diagonally northwest from Colorado through parts of Nebraska and
Wyoming into Montana.
The itineraries of berry field workers shown on the same map
range over a wider territory, though the locations of employment
have the same tendency to cluster as was found in sugar-beet employment. The berry harvest (strawberries, raspberries, etc.) is of short
duration, and the worker following this crop must move rapidly to
the next area if an employment sequence is to be established. Berry
picking is a poorly paid and a disagreeable employment in most cases;
therefore the unattached worker is likely to resort to it only when
he cannot secure other types of employment.
There are two fairly well defined migratory-work patterns of
berry pickers in figure 7 : One runs north and south from Michigan
to Louisiana with lines running into Arkansas; the other-an intrastate pattern-is confined, as far as berry field work is concerned,
to the State of Washington. The routes of travel describing both
of these patterns show frequent stops ( open circles) for employment
in other crops.
Oil and Gas.
The drilling of oil and gas wells, and the construction of pipe
lines connecting the production areas with refineries and distributing centers are processes that provide the migratory-casual worker
with fairly well-paid, but intermittent, employment. The unattached migratory-casual worker is by nature a "boomer", and word
of a new oil field or of a large pipe-line construction job is enough
to attract workers from all directions. The part that chance and
rumor play in directing the workers' search for employment results
in itineraries that cross and recross and present, in figure 8, a tangle
of lines confined only by the limits of the more important gas and
oil producing regions. These lines run from southern Texas north
through Oklahoma into Kansas and east into Louisiana and
Arkansas. The extreme mobility of workers in gas and oil production can be seen from movements that extend across several
States without a stop for employment of any kind.
Railroad Maintenance.
Railroad maintenance in the form of extra gang work provides
industrial employment for the migratory-casual worker which approaches in seasonal regularity that provided by some of the agricultural crops. As a result, the migratory-work patterns of the
Digitized by
Google
~
0::::,
F1G. 8-ROUTES OF TRAVEL DURING EMPLOYMENT
AND GA S
I
'- -
.....
____ '
-)
I
I
<.
1933 AND 19 3 4
\
'l
~~
t
\
""-3
:::i~
~
c_S·
~
0
~I
C"")
Q
,:,,
s::
Q
~
0
co·
;c;.·
0
;;:;·
*.,
~
~
c;
'<
()
0
~,__
rv
LEGEND
• - .STOP5
, o,- JOBS
IN OIL A NO GAS
O•STOP5 ,-01' JOBS OTHCft THAN OIL
ANO GAS ANO TO SC:[K WORK
LOCATION Of JOB5 IN OP[N COUNTRY
SHOWN BY N[AIIIUT URBAN CCNTUI.S
-' '•.ll N ,W.l'o\.
Fae:. 9-ROUTES OF TRAVEL DURING .EMPLOYMENT
RAILROAD MAINTENANCE
1933 AND 1934
~
~
C
t:::
cS·
-s·
~
::
0
co·
...""25_
cl
0
0
~,.......
rv
LEGEND
.. STO,s ro" JtAlf.JIQo\0 J0I.S
~ STOPS
FON JOSS OTHf.R THAN
IIIAILJIIQM) AND TO SttK WOlllK
or JOIS IN OPtN COUNTitY
SHOWN l'f NCAAUT URIAN C£NTVIS
LOCATION
Af-ZIM.-.AA.
....
~
42
The Migratory-Casual Worke1·
group (fig. 9) are better defined than in the preceding case of oil
and gas field workers. It can be seen from the figure that the locations of employments are grouped in the vicinity of such important
railroad centers as Chicago, Kansas City, Denver, Minneapolis, and
Seattle. Connecting these areas of employment are long lines
of traYel reaching, in some cases, across the country with occasional
jobs at employment other than railroad maintenance. 7
Road Construction.
The fair degree of seasonal regularity of employment in railroad
maintenance is not found in employment on road (highway) contruction projects. Lacking this element, the routes of travel of road
construction workers (see fig. 10) show no clearly defined patterns.
TI1e Middle West was the location of most of the work reported by
the 42 workers following this type of employment, and their routes
of travel run east and west and north and south over this area with
no apparent cause other than chance to explain the design which
results.
Dam and Levee Construction.
Most of the employment secured by the 39 dam and levee construction workers included in the study was on the Mississippi River
between Vicksburg, Miss., and Cairo, Ill. ( see fig. 11). Thus, the
work patterns on this figure are more nearly those of levee than of
dam construction workers.
The construction and repair of levees along the Mississippi is a
never ending task that has seasonnl and intermittent peaks of activity. Projects for flood control and the straightening and clearing of
the riYer channel are in operation somewhere along the river's length
almost continuously. The constant shift in location and the isolation
of these operations make them dependent upon migratory-casual
workers for an important part of the labor supply. Memphis is
centrally located in respect to these operations and therefore is a
recruiting point for such workers.
Logging.
The 41 1tmeraries shown in figure 12 are possibly an inadequate description of the routes of travel normally followed by
loggers. Nevertheless, these itineraries do reveal a tendency to7
The absence of railroad malntrnance jobs In the South and Southwest Is probably to
be ac,·01mted for by : ( 1) the plentiful supply of local labor for seasonal work In the South
and (2) the extensive use of Mexican labor In the Southwest. Mexican migratory-casual
workPrs includt'<I in the study were agricultural rather than Industrial workers.
F'or a disC'Ussion of the l\lexkan migratory-casual laborer In railroad maintenance, see
Taylor, Paul S., Mexican Lubor In the United States, VallPy of the South Platte, Colorado,
Uni\erslty of California Publications In Economics, Berkeley, Cnllt., 1928, vol. VI, no. 2,
pp. 62 tr.
Digitized by
Google
F'IG. 10 - ROUTES OF TRAVEL DURING EMPLOYMENT
1933 AND 193<1,
~
(,:,
:::
~
re
t-s·
::,
0
co·
j;j"
""
25_
cl
0
0
~,.......
rv
LEGEND
•-aTOPS ,ollt ROAD CONSTRUCTION JOIIS
O•l'fOl'S F'OR JOBS OTH[ft THAN A0AD
CONSTRUCTION ANO TO SEEK WORK
LOCAT10N CW JOBS IN OPEN COUNT1IY
SHOWN trr NtARUT UIIIIAN CCN'TERS
................
t;
;:,.
;:,.
PL OY ME NT
TR AV EL DURING EM
F,c . II-R OU TE S OF
EE CO NST RUC TIO N
IN DAM AND LEV
193 3 AND 193 4
I
I
-
... - -
I
- - - -1
""':l
\
:::-
- - - - - - - 7I
~
~
<Q.
-.,
i3
C
c:i:::
r")
Q
~
-
i:::
Q
~
C
*.,
~
0
(0.
;c;c
N.
25_
-5!
C")
0
a.....rv
LEG END
I.CvtC JOBS
• - STOll'S rOR DAM AAIO
OTHCR Tw.N MM
0-ST O,S r~ JOIS
SUK wo,!;K,
A.ND U.Vt t ANO TO
IN OH.N COUNTRY
LOCATION Oif' .J08.5
URBAN CCNTCRS
SHOWN BY NCAACST
Af•HOO.W"'-
45
Extent of Migration
ward the distinct patterns that might be expected of workers in
an industry that, depending upon weather or market conditions, is
seasonal and intermittent in operation.
In two areas, western "\Vashington and northern Minnesota, the
evidence of a regular and recurring migratory-work pattern is clear.
Seattle, Minneapolisi and Duluth are well-known labor markets and
off-season headquarters for woodsmen, and figure 12 shows the movement from these centers into two important areas of lumbering
operations.
There is also a suggestion, in figure 12, of two other and less important patterns. One is to be found in the hardwood region near
Memphis, and the other in Maine, in the vicinity of Bangor. The
shortage of work for woodsmen is reflected in the number of jobs
other than in logging ( open circles) that appear in the itineraries,
particularly on the Pacific coast.8
In reviewing the discussion of routes of travel during employment there are several features that seem deserving of restafement in
summary form. The compactness and regularity of work patterns
is more pronounced among agricultural than among industrial workers. This appears to be the result more of the .greater seasonal
factor in agricultural employment-the regular and anticipated
recurrence of work opportunities in the same area-than of any distinction in the nature of the work performed. This argument. is
based upon the evidence in the maps that travel patterns in agriculture were compact ( fruit workers) or dispersed (berry workers),
depending upon the sequence of employment that was provided
within contiguous areas. Much the same result was found among
industrial workers where the compact patterns for railroad maintenance and levee workers are in decided contrast to the dispersed
patterns of road construction workers. Thus, seasonal recurrence
and spatial sequence of employment appear to be the factors determining the extent and regularity of migration; and it is largely
because these factors are more favorable in agriculture than in industry that the combined patterns of agricultural workers (see fig.
1) are more distinct and restricted in extent than are those of the
industrial patterns ( see figs. 2 and 3).
STATE OF PRINCIPAL EMPLOYMENT
Besides illustrating the extent of movement of migratory-casual
workers and, at the same time, showing something of the work patterns that they develop, the route-of-travel maps serve the additional
• Howe,·er, It would haYe he<>n easy for woodsmen to get jobs other than In lo;:;g-lug,
since the slack sPnson in loi::glu;:; cumP in midsummer when employment activity in otller
pursuits was at itH peak. See Hgs. 25 and 26.
130760°--37-5
Digitized by
Google
;:,..
~
Fic. I2-ROUTES OF TRAVEL DURING EMPLOYMEN 1
M IG RATORY- CASUAL WORKERS IN LOGG ING
1933 AND 1934
...,
::::-
~
::::
cc;·
...,
L.
,- .)
1JJ
.,.
-- ....
r
I
-
Q
./
...,C
~
~
>•_,,J
,,
ri
Q
./.:--;--
"'i::
-~
Q
0
cci'
;c;c
;:;;-
...,
::r.-
C
~
-5!
...,
~
()
0
~,..._
(v
LEGEND
• STOPS rOA J0M IN LOGGING
O • .sTOPS ro't ..109,S OTHCII THAN
LOGGING AND TO S CCK WO RK
♦
LOCAT ION Of' JOfl.5 I N OPCJrrf ~
SHOWN IY NCAAUT URBN-f CCNTCAS
""-litl,Wi,,-.
47
Extent of Migration
function of indicating the relative importance of the several States
as sources of employment opportunities. However, the fact that all
employments during migration are recorded on the maps without
any indication of their duration may fail to distinguish properly
the relatirn importance of the Slates in terms of maximum employment obtained.
In order to bring out clearly their importance as sources of
employment, the States in which the maximum amount of employment 9 was secured in each of the 2 years, 1933 and 1934, have been
determined, and are presented in figures 13 to 16 and in appendix
table 2. A summary of the detailed data of appendix table 2 is
presented in table 3 below. This summary table adds to the information presented earlier on the relative extent of migration among
the three types of workers.
TABLE 3.-NUMBER OF STATES DESIGNATED AS PLACE OF PRINCIPAL EMPLOY•
MENT, AND PROPORTION OF WORKERS INCLUDED IN THE 5 STATES MOST
FREQUENTLY DESIGNATED, 500 MIGRATORY-CASUAL WORKERS, 1933-34
Type of worker
Number of States
dl'Signated
1933
1934
Proportion of work•
ers in 5 States
most frequently
designated
1934
1933
------------------1--- --- --- --Total.··•···················- ____ -----·····-------------------Agricultural _________________________ -----------------------·--Industrial. ____________________________________ . ____________ .___
Combination'-·_---------·-----------------------------·-··--1
Numbtr
43
26
29
40
Numbtr
39
Pe,cent
'ZI
52
32
36
40
PtTunt
41
46
5Z
41
29
31
Workers combining agricultural and industrial employment.
A smaller number of States was designated as the location of
principal employment for agricultural than for industrial or for
combination workers, and over one-half of the agricultural workers
were included in the five most important States. Among industrial
workers the location of principal employment included more States,
and there was a smaller proportion of workers included in the five
States most frequently designated. Workers following combination
employment found their principal employment in the greatest number of States, and had the smallest proportion of workers included
in the five States of most importance.
It should be noted that three States-California, Washington, and
Texas-are included among the first five States for the total and
for each of the three types of workers. The fourth and fifth States
were Minnesota and Arkansas for the total and for agricultural
• The duration of all johs In one State, regardleRR of sequencP. for workers of each of
the three types was combined for 1933 and 1934 In determining the maximum of
employment.
Digitized by
Google
48
Th e Migratory-Casua l Worker
workers, Minnesota and Missouri for indu trial workers, and K ansas
and Arkansas for combination workers. The report by States may
be found in append ix table 2, and a graphic representation of the
information appear in figures 13 to 16.
.,
..,z .,~ .,•~
0
..,
C>
.J
CJ)
a:
•
3:
_.I
"'
m
<X
0
(/)
<X
:::::,
<X
0
I
z
"'"'
>a= m
0
!;i z(!)
a= a:
(!)
::i:
:::::,
0
0
0
IO
a:
0
'LL
1-
z
,LLJ
.• .........
...
..
....
....
::i:
>-
g
a.
,--L._ __J
::i:
LLI
........
◄◄◄◄
◄◄◄◄
_.I
<X
a.
0
........
◄◄◄
◄◄◄◄
z
◄◄◄◄
◄◄◄◄
◄◄◄◄
◄◄◄
◄◄◄◄
◄◄◄◄
◄◄◄◄
a:
a.
..=·
◄
◄◄◄
◄◄◄
,C ◄◄
LL
0
LLI
l-
et
I-
(/)
I
"'
!!
LL
◄
◄◄
◄◄
◄◄
1-\p::::
.......
••
,:..
.....
.....
....
••••
◄◄◄◄◄◄
◄◄◄◄◄◄◄◄
Digitized by
..
.;
..'
N
◄
~
*
a: V
0
c
"'Ii
Google
Cl)
a:
I.LI
lll::
0
a:
I')
~!<
V
0
a,
z
ex
ex
~
...J
I')
I')
Cl)
(!)
a,
:::,
ex
'
0
I.LI
:::,
0
► z
a:
0 a:
(!)
~
a:
:::,
~
a:
~ :::,
N
0
0
a: 9
0 a:
(!)
iA,.
ex
I.LI
z z
I-
2
g►
2
0.
I.LI
...J
~
0
a:
z
iA,.
0.
I.LI
0
t;;
~
ai
I
~
Ii:
◄◄
:◄
...••••••
◄◄
◄
◄
◄◄
◄◄
.....
◄◄◄
◄◄◄
◄◄
::◄
◄◄◄
◄
◄
...
Ex t ent of Migration
. ....
:◄
◄◄
z
w
0
.J
"w
..,.., ..,•
◄
!!! !!!
•
...
Digitized by
49
Google
50
en
I
~
(7)
~
~
<l
z
0
(7)
a:
w
*
~
a: V
0
~
.J
<l
~
en
<l
0
0
>a:
0 (!)
I- z
<l
a:
a:
(!) ~
(/)
:I
>0 a:
0 I-
a: ~
0 0
I'- z
I- z
z
w
>-
:I
.J
0
Cl.
:I
.J
w
<l
Cl.
u
z
~
Cl.
I'-
0
w
!;i
en
I-
I
It)
!!
I'-
•
..
........
:.
•
..
•
:.
:.....
Th e Migratory-Casual
......
::◄
•
:.
..
0
_j
•
◄
Google
• ••
...
•••
z
"' "'"' "'•
"'"' !!! !!!
n orker
:.
••
Digitized by
... ..
~=
"-o .,o
!~
0
c ►
ow
.• ."
...." ".,.
-" :.,
:u
w!
0
""
C
o •
.c
ci
..•
,:cc
► =5
0
a
'
N
C
~
..
...-~.. ,
W
........ • ou
=a
:
3z
,c -
U ►►
w •
•
Cl)
a::
~
lLI
a::
0
*
V
(J)
"'
0
~
(!)
"'"'~
z
<{
~
.J
Cl)
<{
::>
I
<{
(.)
>a::
0
I-
z
0
::>
Cl)
I-
>a::
0
<{
a:: a::
::>
(!)
~
0
0
C\I
a::
0
IL.
0
z
I<{
z
lLI
~
IJ.J
~
(!)
<{
(!)
a::
(.)
::>
>- a::
::>
9
a. ~
~
lLI
.J
~
0
~
a::
a.
0
IL.
<{
lLI
I-
I-
I
Cl)
0
<D
~
◄◄
:◄
:•••
◄◄◄
◄◄◄
◄◄◄
..
...
.... ...
◄◄
::◄
::•
...
◄4
◄◄
◄◄
:•
◄◄
◄◄
◄◄
Extent of Migration
◄◄
◄◄
◄◄◄
◄◄◄
◄◄◄
◄◄◄◄
...
::•
Digitized by
51
Google
Digitized by
Google
CHAPTER
III
THE CHARACTERISTICS OF MIGRATORY-CASUAL
EMPLOYMENT
of migratory-casual workers was made during the depression years 1933 and 193-1, it is to be expected
that the characteristics of jobs held during these years would
differ in some degree from those that might have been observed
under more satisfactory employment conditions. An appraisal of
this divergence, and of the probable extent to which the data for
1933 and 1934 would deviate from those of "normal" times, must of
necessity be left for further study. Meanwhile, the data obtained
in this investigation reveal several characteristics of migratorycasual work that are basic, and would persist through both boom
and depression. As pointed out in chapter I, these essential characteristics are: (1) shortness of job duration, necessitating that each
worker secure a number of jobs in order to earn each year sufficient
income for subsistence; (2) seasonality of work, permitting the
worker to devise a rough yearly schedule of jobs which may be repeated year after year; and (3) wide geographical separation of
work, requiring migration from one job to another. The last of
these characteristics has already been dealt with in chapter II;
the first two--duration and number of jobs, and seasonality of employment-are the subjects for discussion in this chapter.
B
ECAUSE THIS STUDY
DURATION OF JOBS
For the 500 workers included in this study. the average duration
of jobs 1 was about 2 months (including holidays and time lost during employment) in both 1933 and 1934 (see fig. 17). As reported
by the workers, more jobs lasted 1 to 2 months than any other time
interval, and about one-half of all jobs lasted from 1 to 3 months.
As may be observed from table 4 only a small proportion of the
1 For the purpose of this study a "job" was defined as a continuous Pmployment In one
district at one pursuit, regardless of the number of employers lm·olved and regardh'es of
time lost on the job because of holl<layR and lay-olTR. A harveAt hand. for examplP. may
have helped with the harvest at a numlJer of neighboring farms. and yet ha,·e b,,..n considered to have bad only one job, providt'd the other conditions werP fulfilled. It should
be borne In mind that the data on duration of jobs are ~lven In t<'rmH of totnl johs, rathrr
than In terms of workers. The bases ot table 4 are thus 1,190 and 1,107 Jobs, rathPr than
600 workers.
53
Digitized by
Google
The Migratory-Casual Worker
54
jobs lasted a very short, or a relatively long, period of time; in 1933
only 6 percent , and in 1934 only 8 percent of all jobs lasted less than
8 days, and the same or a smaller proportion of them lasted longer
than 6 months.
MEDI AN WEEKS DURATI ON
0
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
II
12
1933
1934
1933
1934
1933
1934
1933
193 4
F11.
17-AVERAGE DURATION OF JOBS HELD BY 500
MIGRATORY - CASUAL WORKERS
1933-1934
* Workera
comblnlno aor lculturol
and lnduatrlol efflployment
&F-UH,W . P. A.
The duration of the jobs held by the three groups of workers-agricultur al, industrial, and combination- was not uniform. Jobs in
agriculture were consistently shortest; jobs in industry lasted
longest; and the average duration of jobs of workers who combined
agricultural with industrial employment was intermediate between
these extremes. These differences are to be expected. As will be
explained in chapter IV, the agricultural workers were employed
largely in such short-time seasonal jobs as harvesting; the industrial
workers were most often engaged in logging, construction, or other
work in which the jobs held are naturally of longer duration; and
the third group of workers held in about equal proportions the
shorter jobs of agriculture and the longer jobs of industry.
Not only did migratory-casual workers in industry hold the longest
· jobs, but these jobs were also slightly longer in 1934 than in 1933
(see fig. 17). In contrast, the average length of the jobs held by
the other two groups of workers decreased in 1934. The net result
Digitized by
Google
Characteristics of Migratory-Casual Employment
55
of the changes among the three groups of workers was a decrease in
the average duration of all jobs in 1934 compared with the average
duration in the preceding year.
500
TABLE 4.-DURATION OF JOBS HEU> BY
MIGRATORY-CASUAL WORKERS,
1933-34
1933
1934
-
Duration ol Jobs
Total
All Jobs ...•............ . .....
I
Jobs ol
agricul•
tural
Jobs ol Jobs ol
Indus- comb!•
trial
nation
workers workers workers'
--- ------
1,190
486
228
4i6
Total
Jobs ol Jobs ol Jobs ol
1111rirul- indus- combiturn!
trial
nation
workers workers workerst
--------- --J
1, IOi
471
205
431
l(l()
100
100
8
11
5
100
4
8
8
30
19
12
II
----·
Percent distribution
All Jobs ...•••••••..••.....•..
Less than 8 days ..•..........
8 to 15 days ..................
15 lo 30 days_ ................
1 to 2 months ...•..... _... _..
2 to 3 months ............... _
3 to 4 months ................
4 to 6 months ................
6 months and more ..•.......
Median duration of Jobs held
in weeks 4 _________________
100
100
6
6
5
6
4
3
6
6
30
34
22
32
7
2i
20
23
19
19
20
16
13
10
16
18
8
13
20
11
18
12
12
4
8
6
5
3
g
8. 7
11.2
9.0
8. 7
8.1
11.6
II
6
6
100
8
6
100
5
8
g
7
27
i
4
18
23
20
14
6
--- - - - - - - --- - - - - - - - - - - - 9.2
8.3
Jobs ol workers combining aQricultural and industrial employment.
• Includes 16 Jobs whose duration was not ascertainable, but which were distributed pro rnta, and excludes
1
:lll jobs obtained in the off-season.
• Excludes 35 jobs obtained in the off·season.
• Medians computed for months and convert,id to weeks on the basis of 4.33 weeks per month.
duration of Jobs includes holidays and time Jost on Jobs.
Computed
Among the variations in the duration of migratory-casual jobs,
those related to the three different types of work are much more
striking than those which result from a comparison of 1934 with
1933. Although there was a general decrease in the duration of
jobs from 1933 to 1934, the change was not enough to obscure a
decided similarity of employment duration in the 2 years. This similarity is one indication of the tendency, to be further illustrated
later, for the employment characteristics of individual years to
resemble one another, regardless of how wide the range of variable
elements may be within any single year.
NUMBER OF JOBS
The significance of the fact that the average duration of the jobs
held in 1933 and 1934 was about 2 months becomes clear in the
light of information on the numoer of jobs held during each year.
Few of the 500 migratory-casual workers had anything approaching full employment, and most of them held only 1, 2, or 3 jobs each
Digitized by
Google
The Migratory-Casual Worker
56
year.2 Less than one-fifth of the workers held more than three jobs
in each of the 2 years, and less than one-tenth of them had more
than four jobs during each year (see table 5).
TABLE 5.-Nl':\IBER OF JOBS
500 l\fIGBATORY-CASUAL 'WoRKERS,
HELD BY
1933-34
1934
1933
Type of worker
Numher or jobs
Total
A~rrkulturnl
;
Inrlus-
trial
TYJl'l or worker
Total
C'omhi•
nation
1
AgriruJ.
turnl
Inrlus•
trial
C'omhi•
nation
1
--- --- --- --- --- --- --All workers• ................ I
51kl
200
100
:!()()
1iOO
200
100
:!()()
Prrc't'nt rlistrihutlon
All workers .....•...•.••••.•.
JOO
No Job......................
4
4
I
1 ........ ..........
100
100
100
100
100
100
3
5
20
34
25
9
5
Z7
34
19
9
4
l
I
4
3
26
45
20
5
5
Jjoh........................
24
28
2fl
29
26
2johs........................
31
27
36
30
34
3 jobs. .. . .. ... .. . .... .. .. . ..
2:l
2'.?
20
16
23
4 )ohs ................. _.....
0
9
8
13
7
6 jobs........................
5
6
5
4
6
3
0 )ohs ......... _............. _
2
2
1
2
1
1
7 jobs ..................... _..
I
I
I
I
1
1
8johs ................................... -. ............................... ··-······· .•...... ········--
9jobs........................
(')
I
1 ......... .
1-----------------------
Mi~~t~r~~~~r.0!.i.~~~.~~.1
2.7
2.7
2.6
2.S
2.5
2.6
2.5
2.6
Workers combining e.grirnltnral and inrlnstrial employment.
Excludes 29 johs ohtained in tho oJI•sea.son in 1933, and 35 jobs obtaine•I In the off-season In 1934.
• Less limn 0.5 percent.
t
1
The absence of any considerable portion of workers with four or
more jobs suggests that the depression has had some effect upon
the high labor turnover which in times past has been one of the
characteristies of migratory-casual employment, especially in such
industrial pursuits as tunnel work, logging, and road construction.
High labor turnover, as it existed in migratory-casual work before
the depression, was a direct result of the failure of legitimate protests to correct employment abuses. Faced with low pay and working conditions sometimes fantastically bad, and denied the right or
the opportunity of labor organization, the workers developed the
habit of working only long enough on one job to get a stake and
then going off the job until the stake was spent. Such a practice
was partially dependent upon the probability of securing work
• The proportion of mli,:ratory•cnsual workers that failed altogether to secure work ln
1933 and 10:H cannot be determined here, since this study Is confined to workers who had
some work in one Y<"Ur or the other. Thus, all those ehown in table 5 as ha>·lng had no
work during one of the years bad work during the other. It should not be Inferred from
the smallness of thr proportion of workers In this study who bud no Jobs that migratory•
casual work"r" In gl'nernl were so fortunate in finding employment In 1933 and 1934. The
pr,•sPnt stuuy do<'s not include workPrs who had been unemploy1>d since the beginning of
111:1:i for thi> obvious rPnson that such workers could contribute nothing to a study of
employment patterns <111rlng migration.
Digitized by
Google
Characteristics of Migratory-Casual Employment
57
whenever the stake was exhausted, a condition which practically
vanished during the depression. 3
A comparison of the frequency of jobs per worker in the 2 years
shows that in 1934 there was an increase in the proportion of workers
with only one and two jobs. Yet, as with the variation between the
years in the duration of jobs, the amount of the change was not
great. According to table 5, the median number of jobs per worker
changed but little from 1933 to 1934, and once again the consistency
of the results for the 2 years is worthy of note. Basically, the
work patterns of migrator;Y-casual workers are time-patterns in
which the variations within the year are clearly recurrent. The
explanation of this fact is to be found in an examination of the
relationship between employment and the progression of the
seasons.
SEASONALITY OF EMPLOYMENT
A demand for the labor of migratory-casual workers exists in some
degree throughout the entire year; in each month of both 1933 and
1934 some of the 500 workers had been at work. But, as is well
known, migratory-casual workers are much more active at one season
than at another. The extent to which the peak months provide
more employment than do other months may be observed in figure
18, "·hich shows the number of man-weeks worked by the 500 workers
during each month of 1933 and 1934. At the low point in the seasonal decline of activity, reached early in the winter, the 500 workers
reported less than 600 man-weeks of employment per month. But
at the top of the summertime peak, reached in July, activity had
more than doubled, and the workers reported approximately 1,200
man-weeks per month. However, during this midsummer peak the
workers fell far short of full-time employment.
The consistency of the relationship between migratory-casual employment and the seasons of the year can be seen by a comparison of
the curve of activity for 1933 with that of 1934 (see fig. 18). It will
be observed that the line which represents the activity during each
month of 1934 repeats the essential characteristics of the line for
• The notorius "three-gang system''--one gang lea\'lng, one gang working, and one•
gang arrh·lng on the job--characterlzed much migratory-casual work prior to the de-• •
presslon. Probably the most remarkable record of lnhor turnO\·er on a migratory-casual • •
job was reported by Rev. Oscar H. McGill In the Hearings Before the Commission on • •
Industrial Relations. According to Reverend McGill the labor force employed in building the • •
MIiwaukee tunnel through the mountains east of s.-attlc changed rompletely on an average• •
of every 5 days. Tims, out of 1,000 workers employed, 200 arrt,·ed and departed every• •
day. See Report of Commission on Industrial Relation~. S. Doc. No. 415, 64th Cong.,• •
Washington, D. C., 1916, vol. V, p. 4384.
See also Howd, Cloice R., Industrial Relations In the WPRt Coast Lumber Industry,• •
U. S. Department of Labor, Bureau of Labor Stntistk•. Bulletin 349, p. 38. llowd est!-•
mated that the labor turnover In the logging camps In the Pacific Northwest In 1921 was••
considerably more than 500 percent per year.
Digitized by
Google
Th e Migratory-Casua l Worker
:58
150 0
I
IU5
I~
,,-
,: 1000
,,
1-
z
0
lf
:...
.,
)l
...~
~
z
C
\ ~I\
,7
~
4 0 0 t --+--+-
i-
.
z
:...
I
."
~
1'.
IH4\,I
I
a soo
~
0
w
w
,_
I
I
I
!z
I
I
I
C
r --f-+--+- f -+--+- .- , -
2 1.00
I
,
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
\
0
J
IIAIIJJA
•
0
N
0
MAMJJASO
ALL WORKERS
0
N
200 AGRICULTURAL WORKERS
•oo
f
~ 400
t OO t --+--<-- •
z
:a
z
0
:II
0
..,«
0:
.,...
.".
~
!z
w
..."..,
C
:I
v
w
w
z
C
10 0
2
~
.;/~----- \~~
1\· 1
··••\,_
too
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
\
0 L.....J.......J-..L...J......JL.........L...J.._/._...1...--L--'
J
F
.. A W J J A S O N
O
0
JfllAIIJJAI
O
N
D
200 COMBINATI ON WORK ERS*
100 INDUSTRIAL WORKE R S
F 1G. 18 - SE ASONAL FLUCTUATION IN T HE ACTIVITY OF
500 MIGRATORY - CASUAL WORKERS
193 3 -1934
W Workt n , comblnln9 • orlcultural
AF-2572
ond lnduttd o l t l'l'lplOJ Mt nf
D1g1t1zed
by
Google
'ii. , . A
Characteristics of Migratory-Casual Employment
59
1933.¾ ln both years there was a progressirn rise in activity from
January to July, and in both there was a continual decline after
July. The nature of the late summer and autumn decline is the same
during each year; after July the cune falls off only slightly until
September, but from this point on, it falls off steeply until the
December trough is reached.
The progression of the seasons affected the rnrious types of migratory-casual workers in somewhat different ways, yet the 1933 peculiarities of each group tended, like the ,·ariations for the 500 workers
as a group, to be duplicated in 1934. As shown in figure 18, the
monthly variation in activity among the workers in agriculture
generally resembled that of all workers considered together except
for (1) a later maturing peak season in 1933, which came in September; and (2) a more complete cessation of activity in the winter,
especially in December 1934.
The curve in figure 18 representing the workers in industry shows
that seasonality had much the same effect upon these workers as it.
had upon those engaged only in agriculture. Both the increase in
their activities from January to June, and the decline from September to December are as sharp as that noted for the agricultural
workers, and the wintertime slack period is equally inactive in comparison with the peak season. Again, there is close agreement
between the monthly variations of 1933 and 193-1.
Workers who followed a combination of agricultural and industrial jobs experienced the least seasonal fluctuation in employment.
The currns showing their activity by months lack the pronounced
midsummer peak that is found in the curves for the other two
groups (see fig. 18); they secured more employment in the winter
and spring, but decidedly less in the summer and fall. From April
on, workers in this group found distinctly less employment in 1934
than in the preceding year.
Month of Obtaining Jobs.
In view of the relationship between the progression of the seasons
and the activity of migratory-casual workers, it is evident that
more jobs were obtained in certain months of each year than in
• Although th<' J,:PnPrnl shape of the two curves Is the some, the cur,·e for t!l:!4 falls off
more sharply in th<> lutter part or the year than the cur\'e for tfl:!3. This difl'erence lo
the 2 curves rPpre&•nts n partial collapst', toward the end of tn:14, in the udi\'ity. of the
500 workerR. It nppenrs to be asRodnte!I with the fact that the 500 workers studied were
uniformly affected by advnse comlitions during the smumPr nnd full of lll:14, slnl'e all of
them obtained assistance from trunsknt bureaus at some time during the first 6 months
of 1035. Thus. the dPcllne shown in Ilg. 18 does not nPeess11rily mean a general decline
In the acth·lty of nil mlgrntory•casuul workers, both on and off relief, during these moot:h~.
For this reason 111:33 Is probably more n,•nrly r,•prPsentnll\'e of geoerul conditions of
migratory-casual employment during the depression than Is Hl34.
Digitized by
Google
60
The Migratory-Casual Worker
others. The close relationship between the month and the workers'
success in finding employment may be seen in figure 19, which compares the monthly fluctuations in new jobs obtained in 1933 and
1984. Despite the greater decline in jobs during November and
December 1934,5 the general agreement of the 2 years is close, both
for the 500 workers considered as a group, and for the workers in
each of the 3 component classifications.
Fluctuations in the number of new jobs are governed by the fluctuations in seasonal activity described earlier. The curves showing
monthly activity in terms of man-weeks of employment and the
curves showing the number of new jobs obtained each month are
not, however, identical. This is the result of a third factor, namely,
the duration of johs, which also varies according to the season of
the year. Since the peak of the year's activity in migratory-casual
work comes in the summer, the jobs obtained earlier in the year
tend to last through the months of peak activity, and those obtained
later naturally are of shorter duration. The exact effect of the
season in which a job was obtained upon the duration of jobs may
be seen in the comparison of the median duration of the jobs obtained
at the four different seasons as shown in figure 20. It may also be
observed from this figure that the seasonal variation in the duration of jobs, like the other characteristics of migratory-casual employment, was repeated with little change in each of the 2 years.
LENGTH OF MIGRATORY PERIOD AND OFF-SEASON
It is a common practice for many migratory-casual workers to
spend part of each year on the road, working or seeking work, and
then to withdraw from the labor market during the period when
the chances of finding work are small. For workers following this
practice, the year is divided into two complementary periods: the
migratory period, which they spend in working or seeking work;
and the off-season, which they spend in waiting until the advancement of the season revives employment opport.unities.8 Since these
two periods are adjusted to fit. the yearly rise and fall in the demand
for migratory-casual labor, the off-season ordinarily comes in the
winter, and the migratory period usually covers the spring, summer,
and fall.
• Sec footnote 4, p. 59.
• During th<> Interview each worker was asked whether he followed thle custom. Those
rPplylnlo( In the altlrmath·c• WPre asked to des\.~'11&tP the duration of the migratory and the
off-season periods for the 2 years 19:13-34. !•'or examples of workers with regular migratory and oll'-season periods, see the personal histories of Jes11s Lopez and John Peterson,
pp. 95-97, ch. V.
Digitized by
Google
Characteristics of Migratory-Casual Employment
61
too
I
I
I
11341
ALL~ : , . . . . . - t = : . = t ~
100
ff
~,~~v-
•1/
e ,o
! TO
-.,_
~
◄
=-0
10
10
00
•
-\
.••
10
.
'--::
•
,-----
\~
•
.
\.
~~I&--~..,_,,.,.~•.......
\
""'•~---~--- • -
,•
COMBINATION*-:~--,
__ !:"'___ !,'
_ \ _ _ /_ .,,•--
\
~-&
/:~
-•
, ,,•,...,...
·,
t~3t
--~/,,,
_\ _ _ I
s
.
l
\
IO
1g33t
I
,--•
~ 40
:!;
15
7-
I
',
1934
-
~~
',
.:\
'·
/,"
-v.
\\
\
\
\
\
\
10
••
7
~N.
FEI,
IIAIICH
APIIIL
IIAY
JUNI
JULY
AUi.
Hl'T.
OCT,
DIC.
NOY.
200
100
10
a •o
I TO
~
AGRICULTUR~
10
~=---:>-:~
• 10
~
._ 40
0
ao
ao
;
h
.7L
iv~
2J2
-......... •
-1:::.-:-... ,mt
~-,,,_;~ ~
~,
•-
.--x\ - ·,.3rt
I
INDUSTRIAL · , - , , _ , ' /
I
,.._ /
~.
\\
·
-----=::-----';-
\
•
~
'"---:r-.
.
- \r,
.~
~=-- :s.
•-
7
--
\
i,;~1
••
•
f----
--1 - - - -I.,; . ,
,'"\
.I_ ,,.., I
, ... _ _ _ ,,,'.'.:~,--·--
. --rr--1
10
~:~
I
""'
I
FEI.
MARCH
APRIL
IIAY
JUN£
JULY
AUG.
SEPT.
OCT.
NOY.
DEC.
Fie. 19-MONTHS OF OBTAINING JOBS IN 1933 ANO 1934
500 MIGRATORY-CASUAL WORKERS
... ,....,,,., .......,...,
*••rlltn ce1111ti ■ l•1 ttrlc.ft•r•I
t
N ■ •llltr el Jolt• tltltl■ ed ht Jt•• ■ ry 1911
•• , ....,,,11111111,
AF-2531,W.l'.A.
130766°-37--6
Digitized by
Google
62
Th e Migratory-Casual W orker
14
1933
~ 10
~
a:
:>
8
0
..,..,,.
en
.
;i:
6
z
0
~ 4
JAN. ·
MAR.
APR .·
JUNE
JULYSEPT.
OCT.·
DEC.
JAN.MAR.
APR .JUNE
JULYSEPT.
OCT.DEC.
MON T H OF SECURIN G ~OB
F1a. 20-AVERAGE DURATION OF JOBS SECURED BY
500 MIGRATORY-CASUAL WO RKERS,
1933-1934
AF - 2356, W.P.A.
T ABLE 6.-
D URATIO N OF M IG RA T ORY P E RIOD OF
W ORl<EHS , 1933- 34
500
MI GRA TO RY-CASU AL
Type
Mworker
Tola!
D uration or migratory period
Agricultural
1034
1933
1933
1934
Indus t rial
1933
- - - - - -------!--- -
- -- - - --
.A.II workers . ...... _. ___ . _____ _______ •
500
500
200
200
Combinat ion
1934
JOO
1934.
1933
-- -
1
-
-
-
100
200
200
JOO
100
5
100
5
Percent dist ribu tion
All workers..... . •.. • .•..•.•... . . . ...
No migratory period .. ....... ...... .
Less than 25 weeks . ____. .... . .. .... .
25 to 32 weeks .. _..... -----·--· · · · · ··
33 to 40 weeks . .. .. . . . ...•••. ••. . ... .
41 to 48 week s . . _. .... _____ . .... .... .
40 to 52 week s .. . . . •... .... . . . . . . ....
Median
d suml
or m__
i~ratory
period
in week
__ __ion
__ _____
___ _______
___ _
1
8
i
41
42
JOO
3
5
16
3-3
8
35
4[
41
30
100
3
JOO
3
2
15
30
15
30
4
----- -
100
3
4
Ii
34
100
-- ------------l
7
35
13
32
9
45
39
45
--- -
15
32
- -
0
44
44
I
I
14
26
46
14
25
6
49
45
4S
8
- - - -
Workers combining agricu ltural and industria l e mployment.
T h is does not mean that all workers foll ow a rig id scheme for
apportion ing their t ime within t.he year. About t wo-fifths of the
workers int.his study, for example, had practically no off-season during either 19;33 or 1934 ( se.e table 6) . However, a majority of the
workers regularly remained on the road less than the full year ! and
Digitized by
Google
Characteristics of Migratory-Casual Employment
63
the median length of the migratory period for the 500 workers was
41 weeks in each year ( see fig. 21).
Because each of the three types of migratory-casual employment
has its own peculiar seasonal val'iations, the len~h of the migratory
period for each type of worker varied considerably from the a,·erage
for all workers. The shortest, average migratory period was that of
workers in agriculture, who spent about 39 weeks working or seeking
work. This period was exceeded by that of workers in industry, whose
migratory period averaged 45 weeks. The longest period was that
of workers following a combination of employment in agriculture
and industry, whose migratory period in 1934 was 48 weeks (see
fig. 21).
The length of time represented by the off-season varied, of course,
with the length of the migratory period. Thus, workers in agriculture had on the average the longest off-season, a period of 13 weeks
each year; workers in industry had the next longest, with 7 weeks in
1933 and 8 weeks in 19_34; and workers in the third group had the
shortest off-season, with 7 weeks in 1933 and only 4 weeks in 1934.
Some of the workers had no regular off-se8S0n during either of the
years. Excluding them, the off-season most frequently reported
lasted from 12 to 20 weeks (see appendix table 4).
During the off-season these workers were almost wholly unemployed. A few of them picked up odd jobs, but the total off-season
employment was small. Throughout the 2-year period, the 500
workers secured only 64 jobs during: the off-season; whereas, they
secured 2,297 jobs during the migratory periods of the 2 years (see
table 4).
EMPLOYMENT AND UNEMPLOYMENT DURING THE MIGRATORY
PERIOD
Assuming that a satisfactory year for migratory-casual workers
is one in which employment would cover the greater part of the
migratory period, then the years 1933 and 1934 were decidedly unsuccessful years for the 500 workers included in this study. After
losing an average of about 3 months each year in the off-season, many
workers were also unemployed through a large part of the migratory
period. Some indication of the extent of idleness duriug the migratory period was given when it was pointed. out in the. discussion of
the number and duration of migratory-casual jobs, for example,
that most of the workers held only one, two, or three jobs each year,
and that the average duration of each of those jobs was about 2
months. In addition, it was shown that amon~ the 500 workers, the
busiest month of either year, July 193.'3 (see fig. 18). supplied only
1,250 man-weeks of employment out of approximately 2.160 man-
Digitized by
Google
The Migratory-Casual Worker
64
4
0
8
12
16
NEDI AN WEEKS
20, 24
21
32
31
40
44
48
52
1933
ALL WORKERS
1934
1933
AGRICULTURAL
WORKERS
1934
1933
INDUSTRIAL
WORKERS
1934
1933
COMBINATION
WORKERS "
1934
!1111111 ll
W~
Average Mlqratary Period
~
Avuo91 Portion of Miqratory Period Spent in Employment
A¥1ra91 011-Haeo•
F10. 21- AVERAGE MIGRATORY, EMPLOYMENT,
AND OFF-SEASON PERIODS
500 MIGRATORY-CASUAL WORKERS
1933-1934
• workQra combl nlft O Agr lculhuol
• ,.. ln41nttlol [fftp lOJMe ft t .
AF-2342 . W. P.A .
Digitized by
Google
Characteristics of Migratory-Casual Employment
65
weeks possible. 7 More specifically, a distribution of the time spent
in employment by the 500 workers shows that the median period was
24 weeks in 1933 and 21 weeks in 1934 (see appendix table 5). Thus,
as may be observed in figure 21, in 1933 nearly one-half-and in 1934
exactly one-half-of the migratory period of all workers was spent
without employment. In none of the three groups during either year
did the amount of time employed equal as much as three-fifths of the
migratory period and among workers following a combination of
agricultural and industrial employments during 1934, the productive
portion of the year comprised only 37 percent of the entire migratory
period.
It is not known precisely how the proportion of time lost during
migration in depression years compares with that lost by migratorycasual workers in less stringent periods, since comparable data for
earlier years are not available. Although it seems evident that the
amount of unemployment during migration in 1933 and 1934 was
greater than in normal times, there is little doubt that the unproductive part of the migratory period is large at any time. Necesi;:arily, the migratory-casual worker wastes much time and motion
because of the lack of proper direction into the nearest and timeliest
field for labor. Even for seasonal work in which the date of the
opening of jobs is known in advance, the worker often arrives at the
job t.oo late or too soon. He may be unaware of a labor shortage in
a nearby community, or he may migrate in response to a rumor of a
labor shortage only to find that the rumor had been spread so far that
an oversupply of workers had arrived before him. In addition to
the regular slack winter season there are a number of periods between
jobs when, whether they wish it or not, workers are idle while waiting
for new jobs to begin. Thus, the migratory-casual worker is faced
not only with the imperfect adjustment of the supply of labor to
the demand, but also with the difficulties resulting from the lack of
direction of the workers.
During the depression this situation became acute. Even an
efficient method of controlling the flow of labor in accordance with
rlemand, which would solve many of the difficulties of normal times,
would be of little use during a period when the oversupply of labor
amounts to a glut in the market. 8 With more workers than jobs
• An estimate for comparative purposes arrived at by multiplying 500 workers by
4.33 weeks.
• Of course there were some exceptions. How the lack of proper Information among
migratory-casual workers may result In a labor shortage during a time of widespread
unemployment le 111ustrated by the fact of a shortage of apple harvesters In some parts
of the Wenatchee and Yakima Valleys, Wash., In the fall of 1935. This district had
experienced such a large overNupply of workers during the apple-picking seasons of 1!133
and 1934 that great numbers of workers failed to return In 1935, and a serious and costly
labor shortage resulted.
Digitized by
Google
66
The Migratory-Casual Worker
at all times, the market for migratory-casual labor is further crowded
by migrants newly recruited from the general pool of unemployed.
With the jobs normally filled by migratory-casual workers being
preempted by the "homeguard", and with many of the industries
which would ordinarily supply jobs suspended by the depression, the
probability of finding work in areas of usual employment is greatly
reduced.
Despite this increased scarcity of jobs, the workers included in
this report do not appear to have curtailed their migrations in searcI1
of work. According to the averages shown in figure 21, a decrease
in time spent in employment is most often accompanied either by
little change in the average time spent in migration, or else--as in
the case of the combination workers in 1934-by an appreciable
increase. 9 It is easy to see why this was true. One of the unique
characteristics of migratory-casual work is the extreme flexibility
of the labor demand at peak seasons. However acute the oversupply
of labor, the possibilities of obtaining some work are always present.
Many of the crops and processes using migratory-casual laborespecially the agricultural pursuits--can absorb an extremely large
number of workers for a very short time at the height of their season, and at such times an oversupply of labor (from the employer's
point of view) is difficult to imagine. :Moreover, the nature of
migratory-casual employment is such that the sharing of jobs among
all workers is an automatic and inevitable process. The worker
ordinarily secures a number of jobs each year, all of them of short
duration. The chief requirements for obtaining a job are merely
that the worker be on hand, and have no obvious handicaps. If
there are more workers than jobs, a pPrson who has failed to secure
one job stands an equal chance to secure the next, and the probability
of continual failure throughout the migratory period is thereby reduced. These are the characteristics of migratory-casual labor that
make it appealing to so many unemployed persons. The fact that
there is ordinarily, even under the most stringent conditions, some
work to be obtained obscures the inadequacy of that work. 10
• It le nltogPther posslhlt• that the average time spent In ml~ratlon had changed little
during thp <l<'pr.-sslon. The amount of time sp,•nt by the workl'rs studied doee not appear
to b.- in dlsagre,,ment wllh that observed or othPr migratory-casual workers during ocher
prriods. St-e tor example. Hath,rny. Marlon. The Migratory Worker and Family Life,
rnlvPrslty or Chicago Press, Chicago, 19:14, pp. 84-R!l.
1o Some notion of the unique nature of thP seasonal demand in some of the crops
Pmploying mii,:rntory-cnHuai workns may be olltalm•d from a rt'cent study or farm labor
In the Yakima Volley. Wash. According to thlH stndy, "More hired labor was employed
[In hop picking] during the seeond week of SeplPmher than during any other week of the
Y<'Hr. It amounted to about 200,000 days of labor. Only about 29,000 days of labor
were re<1ulred during the next to [the] last week in AuguHt. when pear picking was at Its
height; about OU.000 days of lahor [p<>r week J wt>re requlrl'd when apple picking was at
its height; and an average of around 3,000 days were required tor each of the last 8 weeka
Digitized by
Google
Characteristics of Migratory-Casual Employment
67
YEARI.: Y EAR:'\INGS
In exchange for his labor the migratory-casual worker obtains a
meager income at best. His low yearly earnings are a direct result
of factors that were given a prominent place in the general discussion
of the migratory-casual worker in chapter I. Short-time jobs, seasonal and intermittent employment, work that is principally unskilled and semiskilled, an overcrowded labor market-all these are
c:onditions that make migratory-casual workers one of the most exploited groups in the total labor supply. To say that workers are
exploited is, of course, to pass a judgment on the wages that they
receive. Factual support for this judgment is to be found in a tabulation of the yearly net earnings of the 500 migratory-casual workers
included in the study (see appendix table 6 and fig. 22).
The earnings data shown in appendix table 6 represent the net
cash income received during each- of the 2 years, 1933 and 1934.
The meaning of net cash income requires some explanation. The
yearly earnings of the 500 workers were reported on the field schedules of this study as gross or net. income, depending upon the way
in which the worker could report his earnings more precisely. Gross
income was defined as the total earnings computed in dollars before
deductions were made by employers for housing, meals, transportation, and similar charges; and net income was the total cash wage
actually received after these deductions had been made.11 The money
equivalent of the goods or services received by a considerabie number
of the migratory-casual workers in addition to their cash wages
could be determined only by resort to a highly arbitrary procedure
based upon the assumption that these perquisites were uniform in
number and value. It was decided, therefore, to convert gross earnings into net earnings. 12 Although this procedure was only slightly
less arbitrary than that mentioned above, it. had the distinct advantage of being more immediately based upon data derived from interviews with the workers.
In making the conversion, it was found that the difference between
gross and net earnings was greatest for agricultural workers and
of the calendar yPar 1035, when there was only dairying and general farm work to do."
See Landis, Paul H., and Brooke, MPlvin S., Farm Labor In the Yakima Valley, Wash.,
Rural Sociology Series In Farm Labor, no. 1, Washington State Coll<-ge, Pullman, Wash.,
1936.
11 Nearly one-half of the 500 workers reported that d!'ductlons were made from their
earnings by employers for some of tbe eervkeR Rupp!led.
,. This wae done by dividing each of the three typps of workers---agrlcultural, Industrial,
and comblnntlon-accordlng to whether they reported yearly Income as net or g,•oss.
Statistical frequency dlstrlhutlons were made of net and grosR earnings separately, and a
conversion factor was derived whleh could be liked to <'onvert gross to net earnings.
Statistically, thPre was sufficient evidence of consistency In these dlstrlbutlon11 for the 2
years to justify this process.
Digitized by
Google
The Migratory-Casua l Wo rker
68
30
20
j~,
_10
0
f---- -
~
1,
-
OTAL
·\
.c.
I
I
' . \, :,:_::;;•---.,_.
•
None
1934
~
Molnt1nonc1100
200
300
i
400
onl7
- -,---
- ·- •
I
&00
600
EARNINGS IN
30,---,---
1933
I 'i~-=----=-=:~
I
1000
700
13~0
DOLLARS
, - - - , - - - , - - - , - - -,---
- -- - - , , - - --
-
- ---,
30
I
I
\GRICULTURAL
I •
I
20
.>(\I
~I
1934
+•
, ["""~,,, ••I'
\ ,.
,,,, ,-,
\\ y.\;_
-,· I f'' \.
;I
\I
,. \ •, /
i/\
J, ..,. _,I ~• ...... ,.
10 -
I
'~ •
•
\I /\
0
None Mo.,tenanu 100
on ly
I' '
I ' '•----·--------------•----·- -
,:- --- • , ,
• .., I
',
t NDUSTR 1AL
"',
•-;---•- -•200
300
400
500
600
'
---
I
I
~
700
1000
--..._
-... .. . . . . .. ..... :::--_~.....
EARN INGS . IN DOLLARS
F10. 22- NET YEARLY EARNINGS OF 500
MIGRATORY - CASUAL WORKERS
1933-1934
*·ond
Worktn comblnlno agrlculturtl
lndu11,1a1 1mploym1n1
AF,-2368, W, P . A,
Digitized by
Google
Characteristics of Migratory-Casual Employment
69
]east for workers at a combination of agricultural and industrial
pursuits. The effect of converting gross to net earnings was to
reduce somewhat the yearly earnings of each of, the three groups
of workers; 18 but since conversions were necessary for only about
one-half of the workers, the effect on the total was to accentuate
the smallness of the earnings without invalidating them for use as
a general indication of the range and average amount of income.
Several striking facts are found in appendix table 6. Yearly
earnings for the entire group ranged from maintenance to approximately $1,350 a year, but the most frequent earnings were between
maintenance and $250 a year. According to table 7, the agricultural
worker had the lowest median earning ($110 to $124), so low, in
fact, that even the knowledge that he was likely to receive a larger
part of his earnings in the form of perquisites does not account for
his low earning status in comparison with workers in the other two
groups.a Industrial workers had the widest spread between low
and high yearly earnings, but net incomes of over $500 a year were
few in number and the median earnings were $257 in 1933 and $272
in 1934. The yearly earnings of workers following a combination
of agricultural and industrial employments occupy an intermediate
position between the low of agriculture and the high of industry.
The median earnings of this group were $223 in 1933 and $203 in
1934. The range and the concentration of individual earnings for
each of the three groups are shown in figure 22.
Before attempting a conclusion on the relative earnings of migratory-casual workers in agriculture, industry, and a combination of
the two, it is necessary to take into account the amount of employment obtained during the year. Earlier in this chapter the median
duration of employment during migration was shown. When this
information is brought into comparison with median earnings, a
basis is provided for a conclusion as to relative yearly earnings.
"Had the conversions been to gross instl'ad of net, the median earnings for agricultural
workers would have been approximately $200 In both 1933 and 1934; for industrial workers, approximately $400 In both years ; and for combination workers the median would
have been approximately $275 in 1933 and $220 in 1934.
"A study of farm labor. made during 19.:35-36 in the Yakima Valley, shows that
the yearly cash income of 74 "transient" workers was considerably higher than the agricultural earnings shown In the study. The duta from the Yakima Vnll<-'Y gtudy cannot
be compared directly with the data in this study because of the dlt'l'erence In the years
(1933-34 against 1035-36) and the dit'l'erence In scope of the studies. Nevertheless, it Is
Interesting to observe that In the Yakima Valley, where wages are higher than In many
other sections of the country, the authors found that "The largest percentage of hoth
resident and transient (farm) workers received from $200 to $400 during the course of
1 year, although the percentage of residents falling In this Income group is greater than
for transients." See Landis and Brooks. op. cit.
For a distrlhutlon and a\·erage of yearly earnings, 1930 to 1935, among migrant family
groups following agricultural employment, see Migratory Labor in California, State
Relief Administration, Division of Special Surveys and Studies, San 1''ranclsco, 1936, p. 121.
Digitized by
Google
70
The Migratory-Casual Worker
TABLE 7.-MEDIAN NET YEARLY INCOME AND EMPLOYMENT PERIOD OF
MIGI\ATORY-CASVAL WORKEIIS, 1933-34
11134
1933
Type or worker
AgrieulturaL __________ ----------- ____________________ _
In1lu.-;triaL _... _________________ . _----------- ______ ...
Combinution 1 _ ____ • __________________________________ _
1
500
Medianem- f .
MedianemMedlan net ployment ?. e~tan net ployment
}early
period
}ea~ly
period
earnings
(weeks)
earnings
(weeks)
$110
2,j7
2'l3
23
$124
26
272
203
23
22
24
HI
\Vorkers combining agricuJtural anti industrial employment.
This comparison shows that in terms of averages the higher yearly
earnings of workers employed entirely or partially in industry are
not the result of a longer period of employment during the year.
The obvious conclusion is that work in industrial processes is better
paid than work in agriculture. However, it must be remembered that
compact work patterns ( see ch. II) are less frequent in industrial
employment; therefore, the higher earnings may, in part, represent
a differential necessary to insure an adequate supply of workers for
operations involving a greater range of movement and a lesser certainty of recurrent employment.
The discussion in this chapter has been concerned with the general aspects of migratory-casual emploJ,nent. This general discussion needs now to be supplemented by more detailed examinations.
The employment characteristics of migratory-casual workers are conditioned by activities in a considerable number of particular crops
and processes which behave in ways peculiar to themselves. A complete account of migratory-casual workers and their employment
characteristics must consider these individual pursuits; and it is to
such a consideration that the following chapter is devoted.
Digitized by
Google
CHAPTER
IV
TYPES OF MIGRATORY-CASUAL EMPLOYMENT
HE FACT THAT many crops and industries are dependent upon
a supply of migratory-casual workers is, in each particular
case, the result of a combination of conditions, none of which
is static. As a result, the importance of the various crops and industries as sources of demand for migratory-casual labor is continually
changing.· At about the same time that the spread of cotton cultivation in California in the twenties was creating a new demand for
migratory-casual labor, the use of the combine harvester caused a
marked decrease in the number of migratory-casual workers needed
in the wheat harvest. Mechanization frequently develops to the
point where, as in the case of road, dam, and levee construction,
the demand for manual laborers (e.g., pick-and-shovel men) is materially reduced. Much the same effect on the employment opportunities of the migratory-casual worker follows when the increase of
population within one area provides a supply of resident workers
for the jobs formerly filled by migrants.
In any case, the crops and industries which provided a substantial
part of the migratory-casual employment during, say, a period of agricultural expansion, extensive railway construction, or the discovery of
a new oil field, may decline rapidly in importance when this period is
completed. It is difficult, then, to make generalizations about the specific sources of demand for migratory-casual labor that will hold true
for more than a limited period of time. Certainly, it would be dangerous to attempt more than tentative conclusions on the basis of 500
work histories collected during the depression years, 1933 and 1934.
The following description of migratory-casual employment in specific
crops and industrial processes is therefore intended as no more than an
account of the experience of a particular group of workers during
a 2-year period. Despite their obvious limitations, the data in this
section add measurably to an understanding of the part played by the
migratory-casual worker in agriculture and industry.
T
AMOUNT OF EMPLOYMENT IN SPECIFIC CROPS AND PROCESSES
Agricultural Workers.
Among the 200 agricultural workers studied, the cotton crop was
the largest single source of migratory-casual employment in 1933
71
Digitized by
Google
72
The Migratory-Casual Worker
and 1934 combined. 1 Slightly less employment was supplied by
the fruit and sugar-beet crops, followed, in the order of their importance, by grain, general farm work, vegetables, and berries (see
fig. 23 ).
That cotton should have headed this list is perhaps not altogether
to be expected, since the cotton crop, as an employer of migratorycasual labor, has not generally receiYed as much attention as grain,
fruit, and sugar beets. 2 The ranking position of cotton among t.he
agricultural workers in this study may be an outcome of the depression, or it may reflect the increasing importance of a crop in which
there has been but little replacement of manual labor by machines.
The importance of the fruit crops as employers of the workers studied
needs no emphasis. The position of the sugar-beet crop is equally
well known; it not only employs large numbers of migratory-casual
workers, but also provides a longer working season than any other
of the more important crops employing agricultural migrants. Indeed, the real importance of the sugar-beet industry as an employer
of migratory-casual labor is perhaps not adequately shown here,
since the workers studied were unattached men who may have been
handicapped in securing jobs in the beet fields in competition with an
adequate supply of the cheaper and more "reliable" family labor
preferred by employers.
The effect of the general adoption of the combine harvester upon
the demand for migratory-casual workers in the grain harvest is
reflected in the fact that, as figure 23 shows, grain was surpassed
by cotton, fruit, and sugar beets as an employer of the agricultural
workers studied. Despite the technological change in harvesting
wheat, however, it is important to note that in 1933 and 1934 the various grain crops remained 1 of the 4 chief employments of the 200
agricultural workers studied.
1 Employment In the various pursuits le measuN'd In terms of th!' total man-we('ke employed for the 2 years 19:13 and 1!134. Employment In specific crops and lnduetrlal
processes for the 2 years la frequently combined In the discussions for two reasons:
( 1) As appendix table 7 shows, there was a marked similarity In distribution of employmPnt In the 2 y.-ars; and (2) the amount of information available for the somewhat
detailed descriptions of this section was Increased by the combination without any
Important loss In aceuracy. The Importance of cotton as a source of employment for
mli,:ratory-easual workers comes as much from the duration of the jobs u from the
number of persons It employs.
• Colton ls still usually thought of as a crop belonging excluelt"ely to the Old South,
where grf'at supplies of NPgro labor are available. However, since 1910 there has been
a tremendous increase In cotton acreage and production In the Southwest, where tbe
absence of a supply of cheap resident labor makes the employment of migrants necesSAry.
Over one-half of the total cotton acreage (l'il'i percent) and sllght.ly less than one-half (48
p<'rcent) of the total production for the 1926--30 period was concentrated ln the three
States of Arkansas, Oklahoma, and Texas; and California, New Mexico, and Arizona were
beromlng Increasingly lmportfint cotton producers. See Woofter, T. J., Jr., Landlord and
T,•nant on the Cotton Plantation, Res<>arch Monoi,:raph V, Division of Social Research,
Works Progrt•ss A,Iminlst ration, Washington, D. C., 1936, pp. 38, 39; and Statistical
Abstract of the United States, 1935, pp. 624-626.
Digitized by
Google
Types of Migratory-Casual Employment
73
In comparison with the four crops which led in employment,
the work secured in vegetables and berries was relatively much less
important. Vegetables supplied about one-half as much employment
as cotton, and because the jobs in berries were of short duration,
they were somewhat less important than those in vegetables.
Work on general farms and on dairy and cattle farms represents,
in part, off-season employment between jobs in the highly specialized
and highly seasonal crops that have been discussed above. Jobs in
general agriculture combined with jobs in dairy and cattle supplied
only about as much work as had been secured in fruits alone. Employment in other crops-tobacco, grapes, hops, etc.-was of minor
importance. Thus, excepting the off-season work, practically all the
employment of the 200 agricultural workers ·was secured in 6 cropscotton, fruits, sugar beets, grain, vegetables, and berries.
The description of specific agricultural pursuits as employers of
the 200 agricultural workers has been, up to this point, in terms
of the total man-weeks of work which each supplied. When, in
contrast, the importance of specific crops is stated in terms of the
nu1nber of jobs-a measure which should indicate roughly the relative numbers of workers employed in each at some time during the,
year, regardless of the length of their employment-a somewhat
different arrangement occurs ( see fig. 23). During 1933 and 1934
the fruit crop supplied the 200 agricultural workers with the greatest number of jobs, and probably gave employment, without regard
to duration, to the greatest number of workers. 3 Cotton, which supplied the greatest amount of employment to the workers, was second
in number of jobs supplied. Grain, which was fourth in amount
of work, provided almost as many jobs as the cotton crop, and
presumably affected almost as many workers, though for a shorter
period of time.
The lack of agreement between the amount of employment and
the number of jobs provided by the different pursuits indicates
variations in the length of jobs in the various pursuits. Thus, jobs
in sugar beets were relatively protracted, since, although only about
one-half as numerous as jobs in grain, they provided considerably
more employment. Jobs in vegetables and berries, on the other
hand, are shown to have been of short duration, since they were
more numerous than jobs in either sugar beets or general agriculture,
yet were of minor importance in providing employment. In brief,
a comparison of the number of jobs with the amount of employment, as shown in figure 23, reveals that the longest jobs were
those in sugar beets, in general agriculture, and in dairy and cattle
• See footnote 1. p. 53, ch. III. for the definition of a "Job" as used in this study.
Digitized by
Google
74
The Migratory-Casual Worker
NUMBER OF JOBS SECURED
200 AGRICULTIJRAL WORKERS
ll!O
200
50
0
0
200
MAN·wtEKS OF WORK
400
IOO
IOO
1000
1200
1400
COTTON
rRUITI
SIHIAR • BUTS
IRAIN
GENERAL
AGAICUl.TUR£
VlGETAaLES
HRRIES
DAIRY AND
CATTLE
OTHO
.aJ
100 INDUSTRIAL WORKERS
LOHINI
OIL AND IAS
MIIICULTUIIE
RAILROAD
MAINTENANCE
IIOAD
CONSTIIUCTION
DAN AND
LEVEE
SHll'l'IN8
CDNS~:u1T~ON,II
MINING
(NlTALSI
DTHU
200 COMBINATION WORKERS*
GENERAL
AGRICULTURE
ROAD
CONSTRUCTION
LDGGINI
SEAMEN
GRAIN
COTTON
DAIi
ANO
LEVEE
RAILROAD
MAINTENANCE
DAIRY AND
CATTLE
IIUILDING
CONSTRUCTION
FRUITS
SAWIIILLING
SUGAII• BEETS
A8RlgJ~i.l'AAL!j
INDi1~~~AL !J
Fie. 23- NUMBER OF JOBS AND MAN-WEEKS OF WORK
OF 500 MIGRATORY- CASUAL WORKERS
1933-1934 COMBINED
*
Worlltrl cornltinint 01rlcu1ta,ol
••• industrial einplOJfRHI
Jj Tu11ut, brhlOI, "'' 11•111111119 co•tnlllt•
~
AF 1178,W.P.A.
Not 1l1•ktfl CI01tiU1•
Digitized by
Google
Types of Migratory-Casual Employment
75
farming, and that the shortest were those in the sharply seasonal
crops--berries, vegetables, grain, and fruits.
Industrial Workers.
Logging was the most important source of employment among the
100 industrial workers, in spite of the fact that it has probably been
more affected than any other operation by decasualization consequent
upon long-time and depression changes. In 1933 and 1934 logging
supplied far more man-weeks of work than any other industry (see
fig. 23). Somewhat less important than logging were oil and gas,
agriculture: and railroad maintenance. These pursuits, together with
road, dam, and levee construction, and work as seamen, furnished
practically all the employment secured by the 100 industrial workers.
The remainder of their employment was furnished by other G construction, metal mining, sawmilling, and a miscellaneous assortment
of pursuits of minor importance.
The fact that logging was the most important single industry in
giving employment to the 100 workers suggests that it continues to
be, in comparison with other industries, a large employer of migratory-casual labor. Yet it is well known that the decasnalization of
logging was far advanced as early as the late 1920's. The growth
of urban areas adjacent to logging regions and the betterment of
transportation facilities between the two made it possible, some years
ago, for employers to begin replacing migratory-casual workers with
more stable operatives who could settle their families close by, and
the depression hastened this process. ::N"evertheless, the position of
logging in providing employment for the 100 workers studied shows
that migratory-casual workers, even at the bot.tom of the depression,
could secure work in the logging camps.
The importance of the oil and gas industry in supplying work to
the 100 industrial workers suggests a change in the character of the
employments of migratory-casual workers, as mentioned earlier in
the chapter. After logging operations had passed their peak and
their need for migratory-casual workers was declining, new oil fields
were openmg up and creating a demand for migratory-casual
workers. 8
• The Industrial workns In this study mndP frl'(Juent excursions Into agrleulture for
employment. Howe,·er, Industrial emplo~·ment was RO mul'h the rule among these workers that they are referred to for convenience as Industrial rather than as principally
Industrial workers, which Is a more exact description.
• Construction of tunnels, buildings, end bridges.
• The all-tlmt> high In lumber production occurred in 190!l. At that time oil drilling
produced only about ene-slxth of the amount of petroleum that It produced In 1933. In
1033, lumber production was less than one-third of the HIO!l production. See Statistical
Abstract of the PnltPd States, 1935, pp. 661, 706. Of courHe, It Is not eugi:ested that tbe
developing demand In drilling absorbed the unemployed migratory-casual workers from
logging.
Digitized by
Google
76
The Migratory-Casual Worker
The relatively large amount of employment supplied by railroad
maintenance is to be expected. Unskilled and low paid, requiring
mobility and work in remote districts, section and extra-gang work
has long been an important source of employment for migratorycasual workers. It was affected by the depression largely because
railroad repair work was reduced to a minimum, rather than because
the need declined.
Notable for the fact that they supplied the 100 industrial workers
with little work during 193:-3--34 are: road construction, the construction of tunnels, buildings, and bridges, the mining of metals, and
sawmilling, all of which have at one time required great numbers of
migratory-casual workers. It is highly probable that the position of
these industries as indicated in figure 23 is the result of the conditions
existing in 1933 and 1934. During the depression, road construction
was to a large extent public work, hiring local unemployed and relief
labor. Tunnel and bridge construction projects almost disappeared
during the early years of the depression, and reappeared principally
as public works in 1933. Mining and sawmilling both restricted ti1eir
operation during the depression; moreover, both had been largely decasualized before the depression began.
"\Vhen the various industrial pursuits are rated on a basis of the
number of jobs-rather than on the basis of man-weeks of employment-the changes in order are small (see fig. 23). It appears, therefore, that there was little variation among the different industrial
pursuits in the average length of jobs. It may be observed, however,
that such jobs as these workers obtained in agriculture were somewhat shorter than those in the more important industries; and that
the jobs in levee and dam construction tended to be somewhat longer
than those in other pursuits.
Combination Workers.
The 200 workers whose employment combined agriculture and industry found about equal amounts of employment in each. The single
pursuit which furnished the greatest amount of employment was
general agriculture, followed by road construction, logging, shipping,
and grain (see fig. 2:3).
It will be observed that the order of the agricultural pursuits in
providing work for the combination workers differs markedly from
that described above for the strictly agricultural workers. Thus,
general agriculture, which was the fifth most important pursuit of the
strictly agricultural workers, is the most important pursuit of the
present group; and grain, which was fourth when considered above,
is the second most important agricultural pursuit of the combination
workers.
Digitized by
Google
Types of Migratory-Casual Employment
i7
These differences appear to indicate roughly which agricultural
pursuits were most often combined with industrial work. Thus, as
figure 23 shows, general farm work and work in grain were probably
more often combined with industrial work than with other types of
agricultural employment. The relatively small amount of employment in fruits and sugar beets among the combination workers is
striking. It appears to be associated with the fact that habitual
migratory-casual workers in fruit tend to confine themselves to the
fruit harvest the year around, and with the fact that the peculiar
nature of the sugar-beet season makes any combination of work with
it difficult.1
Similarly, some industrial pursuits appear to be more easily combined with agricultural work. Road construction, which was relatively unimportant as a source of employment for the 100 industrial
workers, is the most important industrial employment of the combination workers. On the other hand, oil and gas ranked second among
the strictly industrial workers, but provided almost no employment
to the combination group.
SEASONALITY OF EMPLOYMENT IN SPECIFIC CROPS AND
PROCESSES
The total amount of employment obtained during 1933 and 1934,
and the relationship of this total to the length of the migratory
period were described for the 500 workers in chapter III. For a
majority of the workers the employment season was short in relation
to the migratory period and the full year. This short working
season, of course, was the result of the fact that the types of jobs
that were open to them-in agriculture, in industry, in combination
employment-not only all tended to be highly seasonal, but also
tended to reach peaks of employment at much the same time.
A study of particular activities in the three general types of employment which the workers followed helps to explain the shortness
of the work season and the difficulty of dovetailing jobs to decrease
the amount of working time lost. Very few of the pursuits afforded
year-round employment. The majority of them were strongly seasonal, and most of them reached their peaks of employment activity
between the months of May and September; during these 5 months
the periods of greatest activity in the several pursuits overlapped
iri such a way that employment was concentrated within those few
months.
• See the discussion of seasonality as It rt>lntes to sugar b<><>ts, p. 78. The sugarbeet season Is difficult to combine with any other work, either industrlnl or agricultural.
In addition, compare the number of stops mnde for jobs other than those In fruit and
Bugar beets as shown in the Itineraries of the fruit and sugar-beet workers, Ogs. 6 and
7, ch. II.
130766°-37-7
Digitized by
Google
78
The Migratory-Casual Worker
Agricultural Workers.
Though infrequently reported, full-year employment sequences
were possible in agriculture because of some degree of activity
throughout the year in fruits, cotton, dairy and cattle, vegetables,
and general agriculture. However, dairy and cattle, vegetables,
and general agriculture (1933 only) were the only pursuits which
eould properly be termed year-round employment in the sense that
their peak months were not strikingly higher than their low months
and that their employment curves were flattened out over a large
proportion of the year (see fig. 24). Of these three, only general
agriculture ranked among the five most important pursuits for agricultural workers in the 2 years combined (see appendix tables 7 and 8).
Eight of the nine principal pursuits in which agricultural migratory-casual workers were engaged showed definite peaks of employment activity of varying degrees of sharpness in both years. One
of the crops, vegetables, had a clearly marked double peak of activity; and in another crop, sugar beets, the high point of activity
resembles a plateau extending through all the summer months.
The extent to which activity in the more important crops overlapped
is indicated by the fact that the high points of employment in fruits,
grain, hops, and vegetables (in 1933) occurred in 3 months, July
through September.
Cotton was the only one of the five leading employments whose
peak months did not overlap those of other important pursuits;
activity reached a high point in October in both 1933 and 1934.
Fruits, with maximum employment reached in the period June
through September, overlapped grain. Employment in both fell
away sharply on either side of these peak months. Employment in
sugar beets remained at the same high level from May to September,
overlapping both grain and fruits, and declined to almost nothing
during the rest of the year. Although general agriculture in 1933
provided some work during the winter, it nevertheless showed a
definite peak in May and somewhat overlapped fruits and sugar
beets. Of the minor pursuits, berries were active from May to
August 1934, and the entire hop season occurred in September of
both years.
In summary, it may be said that of the five most important agricultural pursuits only one, general agriculture in 1933, provided.
anything approaching a year-round level of employment. ThB
others were sharply peaked in the 6 months between May and
October, and the overlapping of their peaks tended to concentrate
employment. in the summer period. In addition, two minor crops,
berries (in 1934) and hops, reached their peaks during the same
6-rnonth period.
Digitized by
Google
Types of, Migratory-Casual Employment
140
140
140
.
.
.
.
=
'50
"
.
.
•,.
,c
,c
,c
l•oo
1100
2
. ,..,.,''
•,.
.,. .
0:
C
5100
:a
1914
,l
0:
.f
'
l!' so
z
•
OJ f MAM J
J A I
10
i
C
•
C
79
ON D
COTTON
4100
l<IO
140
.!!JOO
..
.i•,.
."
..,.
."
C
•
,c
0:
0:
0:
50
100
.
.•,.
.
i40o
:a
•,.
.•I
z
,c
• so
,200
z
'
C
=
•
I
I
,,H
I
'
OJ f
140,---------,
l<IOr----------,
~ 100
•
.
,.•
'
i
;
5
.
.."
.•,.
•
.,.,
z
0100
IOO
0:
50
:I:
I
A S O N D
140,---------,
,c
z
0:
0:
:
:r.
.i
...,
."
:c
,c
MA M J J
VEGETABLES
ALL PURSUITS OF
AGRICULTURAL WORKERS
.
IHI
,: '
IHI
I
F,o.2.4-SEASONAL FLUCTUATION OF EMPLOYMENT IN ALL
AND IN SELECTED PURSUITS
200 AGRICULTURAL WORKERS
1933-1934
AF·UH, W.I! A.
Digitized by
Google
80
The Migratory-Casual Worker
Industrial Workers.
The employment of industrial workers showed the same sharp
seasonality as that of agricultural workers. There was a like tendency for but little year-round employment to exist, and for the more
important sources of employment, with the exception of logging, to
rise to high, overlapping, midyear peaks of activity and to decline
sharply in the late months of the year.
Among the 5 most important industrial pursuits, which together
provided the greater part of all the employment of the 100 industrial
migratory-casual workers, only 1, gas and oil in 1933, furnished an
appreciable amount of year-round employment.
Dam and levee construction also furnished fairly continuous employment during the greater part of the year, although its activity
declined for a short period during the winter months. Seamen ( few
in number) secured fairly consistent year-round employment in 1934,
but in 1933 their employment fluctuated markedly. Bridge, tunnel,
and building construction furnished the 100 industrial workers with
a very smaJl amount of year-round employment opportunity throughout 1933, and only slightly more in 1934.
All of the major industrial pursuits-logging, oil and gas, agriculture, railroad maintenance, and road construction-showed definite
seasonal peaks in both years. Most of the peak activity during the
2 years fell within the months of June, July, and August (see fig. 25
and appendix table 9). Logging alone of the major pursuits did
not reach a peak of employment activity in midyear. During both
1933 and 1934 logging provided the industrial workers with the
greatest amount of employment in March, declined thereafter until
it reached its annual low during the dangerous forest fire months of
midsummer, then began a slow rise to winter activity.
Combination Workers.
Although the workers in the combination group had a much greater
Yariety of jobs than those in the other two groups and were less
affected by pronounced peaks in employment, their work was still
definitely seasonal and was concentrated largely in the midyear
period (see fig. 26 and appendix table 10). This group of workers
had more employment in the winter and spring than did the agricultural group. but much less in the early fall and summer, even though
the most active months for employment were June in 1933 and July
in 1934.
Although the 200 migratory-casual workers who combined agricultural with industrial employment have been treated as a separatea combi11atio11-group in this analysis, the specific jobs they held
were much the same as those described in the discussion of the 200
Digitized by
Google
Types of Migratory-Casual Employment
•
.
,,'
I \
:,:
0
.
.
•,..
IC
IC
."
•
4
~
i
'•a
2
,.----
IN4
.• •
OJ P II A II J J A S O N D
I
I
I
I
I
81
:,:
'II
►
.
.
I •
I
a:
I
IHI
OJ f II A II J J A S O N D
OJ P II A II J J A I O N D
OIL end GAS
AGRICULTURE
LOGGING
IOr---------~
Ir----------,
.I •
i
:,:
.
..
."'
..
.•".
4
C
.. 4
•,.
:::
'I
•
I
.
IC
IC
:
:,:
i. •
.. 40
2
•
i
OJ P II A II J
2
OJ P II A II J J A I O N 0
J A S O N D
SHIPPING
(SEAMEN)
ALL PURSUITS OF
INDUSTRIAL WORKERS
Ir----------,
l•r-----------,
:,:
:,:
►
.
.i •
I •
"'::
"'"'
.,.
.,.
.. 4
'
I
•
,
I
I
,,,
I
'•a
4
IC
::
.,.
•
4
'
a•
OJ P II A II J J A I O N 0
ROAD CONSTRUCTION
F10.
25-SEASONAL FLUCTUATION OF EMPLOYMENT IN ALL
ANO IN SELECTED PURSUITS
100 INDUSTRIAL WORKERS
1933-1934
1TNotl, ....., ... hll.iot C..trNflM
Digitized by
Google
Th e Migratory-Casua l Worker
82
14..----------,
14..----------,
."
...,c
"i
,c
O 10
...
"
"
~
."
L
w
w
~
10
C
:::
~
5
"
"
C
C
"
'
"
\
1933
\
o._.__._._......__._.._L...I_,._......___.
JF WAY
JJASONO
o~.............~~-...._.~......_-:'.'.
JF M A M JJASONO
J f'MAM JJASONO
ROAD CONSTRUCTION
LOGGING
GENERAL AGRICULTURE
14
14
."
.
,c
0
:II
0
"
0
:II
0:
~
~
w
w
:::
~
"
5
C
\
\
F M A
OJ
M J
J
A S
O
"~
:II
0:
~
1933
:::lJ
"
o..._............._....__._.._L...I............__.
JFWAMJJASONO
DAM ond LEVEE CONSTRUCTION
• s
0 N 0
14
0
..
"
a:
w
5
:::
~
"ll
1934
:--,
5
C
11
"
J
ll 10
10
.."
i
C
J
~
z
,c
"
"
COTTON
14..-- -- - - - - - - ,
...
,c
•
O N 0
ALL PURSUITS OF
COMBINATION WORKERS
14..----------,
~
o 10
"ll
C
\
GRAIN
~
w
~
\
:II
AMJJASOND
.
\
25
C
"
10
.
..
"
."
~
;.
"
...,c
"ll
,c
10
0L-L.....L....L......__._J....Jc...Jo"-'-......__,
JFMA M J J A S O N D
0
J F M A M J J
RAILROAD MAI NTENANCE
A S O N 0
DAIRY ond CATTLE
F10 . 26-SEASONAL FLUCTUATION OF EMPLOYMENT IN ALL
AND IN SELECTED PURSUITS
200 COMBINATION WORKERS *
1933-1934
AF-2310, W. P A.
Digitized by
Google
Types of Migratory-Casual Employment
83
agricultural and the 100 industrial workers. Thus, the separate
classification was necessary, not because the work done was different,
but because these 200 individuals were not attached solely, or principally, to either agriculture or industry during the years 1933 and
1934.
The fact that these workers were, in a sense, "free lances", because
they did not appear to be attached to either agriculture or industry,
undoubtedly affected the number and duration of their jobs; but,
as can be seen from figure 26, the jobs that provided the most employment were those that have already been discussed. It would seem,
therefore, that little additional information would be gained on the
nature of specific migratory-casual employments from a description
of the jobs held by the 200 combination workers. The essential information on the jobs held by these workers is presented in figure 26;
and the earlier discussion of these same types of employment applies,
in general, to these workers also,
1934 CHANGES IN SPECIFIC CROPS AND PROCESSES
In presenting information on the amount and the seasonality of the
employment of migratory-casual workers in various pursuits, the general similarity of data for the years 1933 and 1934 has been noted.
In sugar beets, cotton, railroad maintenance, and logging (see figs.
24, 25, 26), the 1934 seasonal variations were practical duplications
of those of 1933. However, for some crops and processes there were
differences both in the amount of employment and in the seasonal
variations; these differences appear to be the result of special factors
operating during 1 of the 2 years.
Factors that probably affected agricultural employment in 1934
were the drought and the crop-reduction program. Evidence of the
effect of these factors is to be found in the striking reduction in the
amount of employment in grain; the drop in the amount of employment in cotton in 1934; and the increase in the importance of berry
picking and general farming jobs during 1934, which suggests that
workers were forced to take less desirable jobs because of the reduction in grain and cotton employment.
There were exceptions, also, to the general agreement of amount and
seasonality of employment among industrial workers. Road construction declined in importance during 1934 as compared with 1933
because such construction depended so much upon public works and
relief grants designed to provide jobs for the resident unemployed.
Railroad maintenance, on the contrary, increased in importance as a
source of employment, probably because transportation lines began
to make badly needed repairs to their right-of-ways.
Digitized by
Google
84
The .lligralory-Casual Worker
This chapter, in addition to presenting more detailed information
on the particular jobs that migratory-casual workers follow, contributes to an understanding of why the supply of workers is gen<•rally in excess of the number that can be given employment at any
time. The seasonal peaks of activity in agricultural and industrial
t>mployments are so sharp in contrast to the troughs, and there is such
a concentration of activity within a few months in the summer and
fall, that clearly a labor supply large enough to meet these peak demands must of necessity go unemployed during much of the year.
This bunching of demand in a few months makes employment sequences covering the year extremely difficult to obtain. The most remarkable thing about the amount of employment secured during the
year, pitiably small as it has been shown to be, is that so much employment was obtained under the circumstances. One explanation of
how the workers managed to extend the period of employment in
highly seasonal operations is that they traveled with the seasons, taking all possible advantage of the fact that climate and geography
alter the timing of even the most seasonal of employments.
Digitized by
Google
CHAPTER
V
SOME PERSONAL CHARACTERISTICS
HERE ARE TWO reasons for reserving until near the end of this
report a discussion of some of the personal characteristics of the
500 migratory-casual workers studied. First, there is the belief
stated in chapter I that although the migratory-casual worker is the
result of a combination of economic and personal factors, the economic factors are of principal importance, and the refore should be
considered first. Second, there is the fact that data on personal
characteristics must be qualified to a greater extent than has been
necessary up to this point, because of the bias occasioned by the
method of selecting workers for study. In choosing cases, preference
was given to those with complete work histories, and consequently
there was a tendency to include only the more successful workers.
This preference undoubtedly affects-the distribution of personal-characteristics data.
Earlier chapters have presented the more important discussions
of the general nature of the migratory-casual worker, his position
in the labor market, the extent of his wanderings, the kind and
amount of work he does, and the earnings that he derives from his
efforts. At this point it should be interesting and valuable to consider some of his personal characteristics. This will be done quantitatively in terms of data on age, color and nativity, and years spent
in migratory-casual employment. And it will be done qualitatively
~n terms of selected personal histories.
T
YEARS SPENT IN MIGRATORY-CASUAL LABOR
Just when a migrant becomes a confirmed migratory-casual worker
cannot be determiried with any pretense of accuracy. The worker
who leaves a settled residence because of economic conditions, personal difficulties, or any one of a dozen motivating forces usually takes
to the road as a means of escaping a situation over which he believes
he has no control. Migration is a time-honored and, frequently, an
effectiv.e device for "changing your luck"; and more often than not
it is a temporary expedient. During the depression, thousands of
persons became transients for relatively short periods of time; 1 but
1 See Webb. John N .. The Transient Unemployed, ReRenr<'h Monograph III, Division of
Social Resear<'h, Works Progress Administration, Wa~hlngton, D. C .. 1936, p. 64 ff.
85
Digitized by
Google
86
The Migratory-Casual Worker
only a small proportion of them found life on the road as satisfactory
in Pxperience as it had seemed in prospect. Among the many who set
out in good times and bad, some would-be migrants get no farther
than their first impulse carries them; others go on for months in a
state of semiadaptation; while a small proportion drifts slowly into
an irrevocable attachment to life on the road.
Because this study of the confirmed migratory-casual worker was
made at a time of social unrest when thousands of temporary
migrants were moving about the country, it was essential to select
individuals who clearly had made a complete break with the sedentary way of life. There were two tests which, if applied jointly,
would distinguish the habitual from the temporary migrant: (1) a,
livelihood that depended upon short-time seasonal or intermittent
employments at casual pursuits, joined with (2) at least 1 year of
migration immediately preceding the time this study was made.
Actually, as table 8 shows, the great majority of the 500 workers in
this report were veterans of the road-men who had "learned the
ropes" before the depression brought temporary recruits by the tens
of thousands.
500 WORKERS
TABLE 8.-YEARS SPENT IN MIGRATORY-CASUAL WORK BY
Type of worlrer
Years spent in migratory-casual work
Total
Awicultural
Industrial
Combina•ion 1
------------------ ------ --- --All workers ___________________________________________________ _
500
200
100
200
Percent distribution
All workers _______________________ ,. __________________________ ..
100
100
100
Less than t year _______________________________________________________ .. ___________________ _
1 to 2 years_____________________________________________________
3
4
2
2 to 4 years____________________________________________________
17
18
14
4 to 6 years_____________________________________________________
14
17
10
6 to 8 years_____________________________________________________
JO
11
8
8 to IO years ___________________________________________________ _
9
8
JO
JO to 15 years ___________________________________________ ______ ._
16
16
16
15 to 20 years _________________________________ .---------------·.
12
10
17
20 years or n1ore ________________________________________ . ______ _
18
15
23
Not ascertainable ______ --,- _______________________ . ___________ .
1
I
1
0
IO
2
17
14
10
9
17
II
19
1
Workers combining agricultural and industrial employment.
Nearly half of the 500 workers had followed migratory-casual
pursuits for 10 years or longer, and a snbstantial proportion for 20
or more years. Workers following industrial employment had the
greafost proportion of "old timers", and agricultural workers the
least. However, the importance of table 8 lies not in the distribu~
tion of workers by years of service, but in the clear evidence that
Digitized by
Google
Some Personal Characteristics
87
the 500 workers were habitual migrants who are not to be confused
with the depression transient or with the nonworking tramp.
AGE
The fact that workers were selected for study on a basis of clearly
demonstrated service in the ranks of the migratory-casual worker
must be kept in mind when examining the age data presented in
table 9. Both the young ( under 20 years) and the old ( 65 years
and over) were few in number. The proportion of younger persons
was directly affected by the selection of workers with at least a full
year on the road and enough employment to allow classification by
type of employment; this procedure tended to exclude all but a few
migratory-casual workers under 20 years of age. The small number
of individuals 65 years and over- is also the result of a selective
process; but in this case it is the natural process of selection imposed
by the strenuous life that migratory-casual workers lead.
TABLE 9.-AGE OF
500
:MIGRATOBY-CASCAL "\\'OBKEBS
Type or worker
Age
All workers ____________________________________________________
Total
Agrlrultural
Industrial
C'omhination 1
-~,~~~
I'en-ent distribution
All workers ___________________________________________________ _
100
100
I
IO
I
100
100
II
IO
8
20
to 19 yl'llrs ____________ --- -- --- --- - --- -- -- . . --- ---------- ---- to 2'4 years _______________ . _____________ . _________ . - - .. --- __ ..
to 29 yenr~-- _______ . _________ . __ . ___________________________ .
to 34 years .. ______________________ __________________ --- ___ . __
Jfl
14
21
16
35 to 44 years______________________________ _ __________________ _
45 to 54 years ___________________________________________ ---- - __ _
55 to 64 years. ________ . ______ . . . _. ___ ... _.. _•.......... ___ . ___ ..
65 years or over. __ ._ ... __ ...... __ ..... ___ ..... _._ .. ----. - --- ---
28
18
9
2
2."i
30
17
13
3
20
31
18
15
20
25
30
I
16
12
15
I
5
1
Workers combining aKrieultural and industrial employment.
Most of the 500 workers were between the ages of 2'0 and 45age limits within which the unskilled worker's efforts are most productive. Comparable age data from a study oi the depression transient indicate that the 500 migratory-casual workers of this report
were older than the depression transient, but younger than the resident (local) homeless population 2 of the large cities.
• Resluent or local homeless persons are a dl8tln.-t and ld<>ntlflahh• group In all large
eltlee. They are to he found on the streets and In the subways. in th.- municipal lodging
hou8"8, the missions, the Sah·ation Army soup kltch<>ns, and In the "shantytowns"; wt>nther
permitting, they ean be •een along the <locks and In the parks. Certain sections of the
large cities are known a'II thelr habitat; tor instance, the Bowery In New York City, the
Digitized by
Google
88
The Migratory-Casual Worker
Group
Median age
45 years and over
lTnattached transients'·-·. __ . ____________ . ____ . ___ .. Zl to 30 years ______ . ____ .____ 12 to 16 peroonl
500 rnigrntory-ca..."-UBl workers________________________ 3i years. __ . _______ ._ .. ____ ._ 29 percent
Local homeless persons'--- __ ._. _____________ . __ .. __ . 42 to 45 years. ___ . __________ . 40 to 411 percent
' Represents the range of monthly values during the period October 11134 through April 11135. See The
Transient Unemployed, op. cit. p. 211.
The reasons for these differences in age are readily found. Transients were newcomers among the mobile labor group; they came
principally from among the younger group of the unemployed resident population; and about one-half of them remained on the road
for 6 months or less. In contrast, the 500 migratory-casual workers
in this study were chosen on a basis of clearly defined work patterns
involving at least a full year of migration. Even though some few
depression transients were included in this selection, it was only in
those cases where the process of adaptation to the life of the confirmed
migrant had gone far enough to leave little question that the worker
would remain on the road. The local homeless of the cities are made
up largely of men who have been wanderers of one sort or another
but who have been forced by age or physical disabilities to abandon
the strenuous life on the road.
COLOR AND NATIVITY
The native-white migratory-casual worker supplies the greater
part of the labor force needed for seasonal and intermittent jobs,
despite efforts to obtain a cheaper and more tractable supply of
foreign-born workers. 8 Among the 500 migratory-casual workers included in this study, the native-white group represented about threequarters of the total, the foreign-born group-white, Oriental, and
Mexican-about one-sixth, and the Negro group, one-twentieth (see
table 10). Because of limitations imposed by the selection of the
cases for study, these proportions should be used only as a rough
indication of the relative importance of the different color and
nativity groups in the total migratory-casual labor supply.
The color and nativity characteristics of the three types of workers
in table 10 show the Mexican to ~ a more important element among
workers following agricultural employment than among those fol"Slave-Mnrket" at We-et Madison and South State Streets In Chicago, and the "Skldroad"'
In Senttle. ThPse sections. of courRe, are also frequented by migratory-casual workers.
Although most of the resident homeless group are casual laborers when they work. and
elthough many of them leave the city tor short periods of time, they are not migratorycasual workers In the sense enwloyed In this report. Rather. they are a "home guard'"
that 1•xlsts pr<'cariously on pnnhandllng, odd jobs, the missions, and city Institutions for
the unattached reHident homeless.
3 The use of Oriental and Mexican workers was discussed on p. 12 ff.
Digitized by
Google
Some Personal Characteristics
89
lowing industrial, or a combination of types of employment. It is
probable that the actual percentages were biased by the fact that
two of the cities in which interviews were made-Denver and Minneapolis-are in sugar-beet areas where the Mexican worker is an
important element in the labor supply for that crop. Other studies 4
have shown that the Mexican is extensively used in industrial employments, such as railroad right-of-way maintenance, and it is likely
that the Mexican migratory-casual worker in industry was underrepresented in this study. None the less, the indication in table 10
that Mexicans are more frequently found in agricultural than in
industrial employment is believed to be a correct statement of the
order of importance.
TABLE 10.-CoLOR AND NATIVITY OF
500 MIGRATORY-CASUAL WORKERS
Type or worker
f'olor and nativity
All workers ________________ --- __ ---- ---- _----- ________________ _
Total
Al!Tirulturnl
500
200
Industrial
Combinalion 1
100
200
Percent distribution
All workers
___ ------------------------------------------- .. -- -._
White
_________________________________________________________
Native _____________________________ - ----- --------Foreign-born ... - ___________________ . ________ . _____________ .
Negro __________________________ . ______________________________ .
Mexican ______________________________________________________ _
Others ___________________ -- --- ----- -- ---- -- -- -- --- - . -- --- --- -- 1
JOO
85
100
78
100
91
00
77
8
73
5
80
II
81
9
5
3
5
15
6
4
5
u
J
2 ----------
JOO
I
Workers combining agricultural and industrial employment.
The small proportion of Negroes among the migratory-casual
workers studied is a reflection of the fact that for them employment.
opportunities on the road are limited. Moreover, the Negro has,
traditionally, been an immobile group in the population. The only
striking example of migration of Negroes in recent years was the
movement of southern Negroes to the industrial centers of the North
during and after the World War as the result of extensive recruiting
activities to supply a cheap labor supply for the heavy industries.
Racial prejudice commonly operates as a check on the mobility
of Negroes by increasing the difficulties of travel, and by limiting the
number of job opportunities. The Negro who travels by highway
or freight train is more likely to encounter overstrict interpretation
of the vagrancy laws than is the white migrant, and racial prejudice
on the part of some employers and many workers places the Negro
• See footnot<' 7, p. 42.
Digitized by
Google
90
The Migratory-Casual Worker
at a competitive disadvantage in finding employment in some parts
of the country. An interesting example of deliberately restricted
employment opportunities is to be found in a report which states
that in several southern States, employment agencies sending Negroes
out of the State for migratory labor assignments were practically
taxed out of existence. 6
It will be recalled that the maps in chapter II showing routes
of travel (by crops and industrial processes) had few lines running
into the States of the Old South. In these States, where the Negro
is most numerous, he provides a ready supply of cheap labor for
agricultural and, to an important but lesser extent, for industrial
operations that otherwise would require a mobile labor reserve for
seasonal and il)termittent peaks of activity.
PERSONAL HISTORIES
The principal advantage of the foregoing statistical description
is that a few of the personal characteristics of all the 500 workers
can be viewed at one time. The principal disadvantage of this procedure is that the results fail to show, or even to suggest, the distinctive personality of any of these workers. Without some indication of what they are as individuals, this report would fall short of its
purpose of describing, in terms of economic and personal factors, the.
confirmed migratory-casual worker.
The purely personal factor will he presented through the device
of brief histories, some of them abstracted from the field interviewer's
report on the worker, and some of them .ju the worker's own wore.ls,
edited solely for length. Since only a few of the available 500
histories could be included, a selection was made of those that seemed
to represent attitudes, habits, and personalities of frequent occurrence among the entire group, and, it is believed, among confirmed
migmtory-casual workers in general.
ll'anderlust.
The constant urge to be on the move, the tendency to treat employment as a means of gratifying this urge, and the real or fancied
independence of the migratory-casual worker are illustrated by the
personal histories of Jack Lamb, John McClosky, and Harr~·
Burnside. 0
• "Jn Alnhnmn a licensP fee of $2,:i00 was rf'qulred, and an additional amount up to
p<'rc•ent of this sum miJ::ht hf' IHlo•d in Pnch county of the State in which the prin,te
ngpnc•y opnated. • • • A bond of $:i,000 wns required In Pnrh county." Harrison.
Hlwlby :\I.. and A~xoelat!'s, Pnblic Employment Ofllces. RussPII SngP Fonndntlon, New York,
l!l:!4, p. 8B. Moreover, "efforts of dt izens to prevent Negro recruiting l for out-of-State
,,mployment] w<'nt as far n• threats of vlolenre to tbe recruiting agent", p. 606.
'Tile names here, and throughout this section, nre fictitious.
r,o
Digitized by
Google
Some Personal Characteristics
91
Jack Lamb, 32 years old, a Cherokee Indian, began work in the
gas and oil fields after he left the Navy in 1926. By following pipeline construction and repair jobs throughout Texas and Oklahoma.,
Mr. Lamb was able to remain employed a good part of the time,
despite the short duration of most of the jobs he secured.
His largest yearly earnings at this work were $900, made in 1929.
Since that time he had earned considerably less, but never less than
$250. In 1934, a fairly typical year for his employment, he held
three jobs: one in Duval County, Tex., lasting 1 month; the second
in Victoria, Tex., lasting 5 months; and a third at Refugio, Tex.,
lasting 2 weeks. His earnings for the year were $550.
Jack Lamb went into migratory-casual work because it appealed to
him. Not liking confinement to a single job or place, he prefers pipeline work to any other because it allows him to leave a job whenever
he wishes, and to obtain another without much difficulty. His frequent periods of unemployment are not unwelcome, for he is extremely fond of fishing and gambling. Mr. Lamb's earnings have
nearly always been adequate for his needs; and if necessary, he could
usually borrow from other pipe-line workers. Accordingly he has
rarely sought relief.
Autobiography of John McClosky
Born in Missouri in 1889. Went to Illinois in covered wagon along with
father, mother, three sisters, two brothers. Father ran hoist at coal mine,
traded horses, peddled fish, crockery, and did jobs of work around Peoria,
Ill. About 189"3 my mother and one sister died of typhoid fever. Dad came to
Seattle. Built and lived in one-room shack at foot of Kinnear Park. Moved
to 6 miles north of Bellingham. On this place I begin to do hard labor, helped
saw stove wood. I hauled wood to Bellingham and peddled it. Then I got a job
as bellboy in Byron Hotel (was awfully green) then went to work for Western
Union, messenger boy.
Ran away from home. Went to Seattle and got a job as deckboy on steamship that went to San Francisco. I got paid off there, got taken in by sights
of the big city. Came to my senses, my boat had sailed. I bad 5¢ left in my
poC'ket. I S)lent it for a new~paper and looked through the ads. Porter wante(I,
Restaurant. Convinced tlle boss I could do the work, $5 a week and board.
Stayed there 10 dnys, had fight with cook, got fired. Got n job on a steamer
to San Diego. Worked 3 months then quit. Got a joh in a fmnily hotel in
San Francisco as bellboy, stayed there 3 weeks nnd got fired for pulling a boiwr.
Went back to San Diego. Left after short time. Got job in Hotel San Rafael,
San Francisco, hellhoy, $15 per month.
About this time I hegun to think of home for the first time. After 4 weeks
I wrote home. Dad had moved to near Blaine, \Yash., on 40 acres of unimproved
land. Headed for home. ~•ent to AhPrdeen on a lumber sehoouer, Seattle on
train, to Blaine on the boat. Stayed awhile. Struck out for Seattle. Got job
as fluukey in logging camp. Newr stayed long in one place. Get few dollars,
go to Seattle, go l>roke--then go baek and work some more. After a while I
would get sick. Go home. Stay a short time. Gone again.
Digitized by
Google
92
The Migratory-Casual Worker
I finally got work in a new shingle mill near my father's ranch. I worked
there in the woods l'ntting shi11gle bolts, and learning to saw and pack shingle!';.
Then I went to Ewrett, ,va!ih., and lh·ecl aron11d there cutting shingle bolt.-;,
sawing, and packing. Worked in shingle mills up and down Puget Sound.
Never stayed long in one plal'e. I put ln 3 years on Vancouver Island sawing
shingles. Spent must of my wi11ters on a trap line in Whatcom County, near
my father's ranch.
In 1!)18 I married (May 3). Wife and I came to Seattle and I longshored
up to the general strike in 1919. Drove a car for my brother-in-law for 18
months. Went east of the mountains logging. Back to Seattle. Peddled handbills from house to house. Worked for junk company. Cut wood on the
beal'h. Worked on a paving job, wheeling sand and gravel to the concrete
mixer.
My wife's health was poorly, and they said the mountain air would help her.
I went up to Lake Wenatchee to cut shingle holts aud took my wife. Stayed
there 2 years while my wife's health greatly Improved. Picked apples in
We11atchee Valley for the first time. Wife wanted divorce. Started same
then changed mind. After another year took another notion for divorce. I
went to San Juan Island and cut cordwood from January to August. When I
came out to Bellingham I found I was divorced.
I worked 2 months mueking on the Cascade Tunnel. Sawed shingles at
Qulleene, Wash. Worked one winter for a coal company in Seattle. Made cedar
shakes one summer at Kerriston, Wash. Was married while there. Wife and I
parted same year. Since then I have been knocking around Washington working
here and there at odd jobs, mostly in the Wenatchee Valley but I have only
aYeraged 4 months work per year since 1928.
Harry Burnside, 40 years old, has been a logger, Great Lakes seaman, harvest hand, general farm laborer, and itinerant peddler in
every State :from Illinois to Washington. Largely as a result o:f his
experiences he had become a remarkably independent and self-reliant
person, jealous o:f his rights and, except in the worst of times, capable
o:f taking care o:f himself. Mr. Burnside supplied the :following
account of his wanderings from January 1, 1933, to February 18, 1935:
Minneapolis, Jan. 1, 1933 by street-car to ,vhite Bear Minnesota by buss
to Stillwater from Stillwater walked payd fare and rode freight to Madison,
Wf;;, When I arrived In Madison Feb. 2 1933 i had accumulated about seven
dollars in cash. i rented a room and boght some paint and other material
and made some articles to sell but to my distress the chamber of comirce and
the Police notified me that i have to pay 5 dollars permit (the five dollars
whic-h i dint have) so after eating a bowl of soup at the relieff station i took
my hu11dles of unsold goods and mounted a blind of Milwaukee passenger train
hea<IP<I for ,vutertown ,vis. when i arrived in Watertown in 2 below zero
WeathPr a brave eitysen (his 1111me is motercicle Mike) told me to stay on
becani-e the dint want no one without money in this town so i stayed on to nex
division. from there i WPnt to Oshkosh Wis by freight. same thing there so I
rode a frpyght to Fond du Lac where i sold my goods [celluloid novelty pins
and ri11g~].
i took a fre~·ght from i,tate of Wis and rode to Margurl't Iowa from Margaret
to Freeport Ill hy way of Dnbnqne Davenport and Moline by freyght and buss.
in Freeport I met a man with a ear selling cleaner. i made a deal with him to
stand half expenses and change oft driving. both of us got along pretty well,
Digitized by
Google
93
Some Personal Characteristics
for a while so went back by way of Moline Rock Island etc to Omaha Neb
when we arrived in Omaha it was about midle of March 1933 so we stayed in
Omaha about 45 days and things went well. from Omaha we went to Abenleen
S. Dak. where our car broke down. my frend sold It for 7 dollars and went
home. we had saved during our travels 72 dollars each. i went to Minniapolis
with intentions to buy myself an old Ford but could not make a satisfactory
deal and it was getting late in August so i decided to visit my sister in Chicago.
i had a few dollars left but not enough to travel as people should so i rode
freyght back to Chicago expecting to get work of some kind (being under the
Elusion of the New administration) but in Chicngo i dint get emploiment or
find my sister, so discurraged and disappointed i had to leave chicago pedling
baskets and what not towards the northwest. when i arrived in Duluth in
November i was in hopes to get work in the woods but all those i had worked
for prevous had shut down or went out of Operation entirely. so i went to
minniapolis to winter. i stayed around there until May 15, 1934 (during that
time 1 spent 4 months in the Minnlapolls Penal Institution for trying to keep
above the grave) i left Minniapolis by fregt train to Fargo to Grand Forks to
Devils Lake to Minot to Kenmore to Egeland to Devils Lake to Caselton to
Valley City to Jamestown to Bismark to Glendive Mont. Miles City to Forsyth
to Helena to Misula to Sand Point to Spokane las week in October. Spokane to
Yakima to Auburn to Tacoma. stayd in Tacoma 3 weeks selling willow
baskets. Tncoma to Seattle by boat staid there 7 weeks Seattle to Portland
by fregt. 2 weeks there. Baek to Tacoma for Chrismas and came by bus to
Seattle. Been here ever since.
Occupational and Physical Deterioration.
The long-time effects of the migratory-casual life upon the workers
could hardly be expected to be other than injurious. Since the work
is largely unskilled, any specialized occupational fitness the workers
may have had is likely to deteriorate through disuse. Many of the
workers studied had suffered in this way; typical cases of deterioration of skill are those of Joe McMathews and Tony Slotnig.
Physically, the effects of migratory-casual workers are likely to be
even more disastrous. Inadequate shelter and diet, strenuous work
under conditions often unhealthful, and lack of medical care, all
contribute to the premature superannuation that is characteristic of
many of the workers over 40 years. Evidence of physical deterioration are to he found in the cases of John Peterson and Jestis Lopez.
Joe McMathews, 46, was the son of a well-to-do Ohio farmer.
During his junior year in college he had a violent quarrel with his
father "over abusing a horse", an<l as a result left home. Soon afterward he married and move<l to San Francisco. There he obtained a
job in a seed house, and was soon promoted to one of more responsi-.
bility, his knowledge of agriculture standing him in good stead.
His wife, however, di<l not like California, and her insistence that he
quit his job and return to the Middle West finally resulted in a
quarrel an<l divorce.
130766°-37--8
Digitized by
Google
94
The Migratory-Casual Worker
After his divorce, Mr. McMathews left the seed house and drifted
into less stable jobs, such as skilled cannery work and crew boss in
the vi11eyards. In 1923, he went into politics and got an appointment as a county highway inspector at $14 a day, but lost the job 9
months later, following an election. He said that he regretted ever
having gone into politics because it had given him a taste for an
l'asy job at big pay and spoiled him.
Failing to get another political job, he became a migratory-casual
worker, and with the exception of 1 year spent in operating a rented
orchard and a second year spent as a faro dealer in a Los Angeles
gambling house, he had remained one ever since. His migrations
had carried him to jobs in nearly all the Mountain and Middle Western States. He had been an oil-field worker, a wheat, lettuce, and
fruit harvester, a bricklayer, a truck driver, a cannery worker, a
cornhusker, a tie cutter, a houseman in a pool hall, a berry picker,
and a trapper. During this period his unskilled jobs became more
and more frequent until, by 1934, he was reduced mainly to picking
berries and trapping.
When interviewed, Mr. McMathews was "stoically patient" about
accepting his ''present condition" and was busy making plans for
the future on the basis of recognition of "past mistakes", that is,
his wandering life during the last decade. He believed that he
could establish himself as an influential member of a "respectable"
community. The interviewer remarked that Mr. McMathews' optimism was probably due to the fact that he intended to return to
Ohio in the spring to marry a childhood sweetheart who had just
inherited a large, fertile farm upon the death of her father.
Joe Md\fathews had "definitely concluded" that the depression
would continue only 1 year longer.
A 11fo/Jior1raphy
of
Tony Slotnig
I was horn in Ohio. 1\1~· folks took me back to the olcl country [Austria]
when I was u baby 11nd I don't know why. l\ly father workNl in the vin!'yards. and I did too. I k<'J>t running away from home and working. My
uncle wrot!' me about how fine everything was over in Ameriea, and I came
over hPre and found It wasn't so fine. (Oh YPS, I did make good money, but
that's all gone now.)
I first went to work in an iron foundry at Verona, Pa., for $1.75 n dny.
Tlwn I got a big job with an irnmlator company doing pieee work, trimming
insulators. I was making as high us $10 a day. I was young and full of
hell and ,v<>nt into the eity evPry night, got drunk, i<tnyed out nil night, uncl
would c·o111e baek to work in the morning too sleepy to see. The imipe<'tor
wonl!l e<>111e along, take a look at an in:-11l11tor anti throw it into the scrap
ill'ap. I told him not to do it awl got mad 1111d hit him oYer the head with
one. Ile <'hasp,J me 11ml I ran and when we passed the cashier's window my
cheek was already waiting for me.
Digitized by
Google
Some Personal Characteristics
95
Then the papers came out all about the big wages Henry Fonl was paying,
and I got hungry for that. Packed up and went to Detroit. Found that
everybody there was a mechanic. ,vorked at common labor until I coul(I
buy some tools, then worked for Ford for 13 months at $5.60 a day during the
war. I quit him because there wasn't enough money in it. Went back to
Detroit and worked as a machinist.
In 1924 I met my wife and got married with her. I worked at piece work
in the Fisher Body Plant, getting as high as $20 a day. In 1926 I went to
work for the C. S. Radio Corporation at $1.50 an hour. In 1929 I got my arm
caught and tore up the muscles in it. I was sick 4 or 5 months. My wife was
in the family way and we had one hell of a time. I signed II petition I was
o. k. and went back to work for 2 months In 1930, then they laid me off because
there wasn't enough work. I had slowed down because my hand got numb
when I tried to use it and I couldn't grasp a lathe like I used to. I had the
case reopened twice trying to get more damages, but the company had smarter
fellows than I had.
Well, my wife went buck to her folks. They forclosed the mortgage on our
house. My wife's brother-in-law and sister had to move in with the old folks
too, making nine of us in the little hom1e. Her folks didn't like me and said
I was a foreigner and a Catholic and didn't have any education. I packed
up and left. They had me arrested for deserting my family, and made me
work for the relief and report to the judge every week. I couldn't stick it, so
came out west in 1933.
I hitch-hiked through the Dakotas, inquired in a pool hall for a job, and
found one on a farm plowing for 50¢ a day. "'orked there 8 weeks and
never got but $4. Was walking around the street hungry when I met a
fellow half drunk who told me about a job he was supposed to go to that I
could have if I wanted it. I sure was lucky he was drunk. I harvested there,
and made about $60. Then I went to Colorado to work in the sugnr beets,
but nothing there but Mexicans. I got a job cutting grapes for Filipino contractors. They hire more mcn than they need so they cun eolleet for boardIng them. We had rice three times a day and slept on the floor like hogs.
I think I owed them hourd when I left. It was terrible there and if the gov•
ernment doesn't believe it, r,·e got the man's name here on a curd and you
can go see for yourself. [He produced u card with the name und address of
the Ylneyard owner on it.]
I started to pick cotton but heard that there was a big strike on and two
people killed, so I got cold feet and left the country. Had a dish-washing joh
for a fellow who got siek, bnt he was only siPk a week. Then I hit the freight
and got in a good job of hnrvesting at Colfax. 'Wm;h. I tri{-d to pick apples,
but couldn't find anything. Went to Moxie, "'ash. and piekP<l ho11s and Rure
made It good-about $25 In two weeks; slipped in lots of IPave'i in the bottom
of the saek. I found a farm job where I have been ever sinc-e. They expected
me to milk 6 cows and kept piling on more work. nil for just tolmcco moncy,
so I quit. I'll do mo!<t anything I can find, though. Think I'll stny in Wn,:hington, hecause If yon go to California, yon cnn't get nothing to do unless yon
are a Filipino or a native son.
Jesus Lopez, 50-year-old Mexican, came to the United States with
his family in 1916. During the first 3 years of his stay he did extragang work on various Middle \Vestern railroads. In 1919--20 the
possibility of larger eamings through the employment of his wife
Digitized by
Google
96
The Migralory-Casual TI,' orker
and children caused him to leave extra-gang work to take his family
to the Texas cottonfields.
He and his family separated and he worked again in extra
gangs until, in 1924, he took the usual migratory-casual method of
protesting against bad conditions-quitting the job. After 4 years
of work in sugar beets (1924-28) he had secured a steady job as a
section hand near Broken Bow, Nebr.
Jesus Lopez lost this job in 1931, when he was 47. "They telI
me I am too old", he said. Unable to get railroad work again, he
turned to the beet fields like many other migratory-casual workers
who were judged to be too old for industrial occupations. After
1932 he had worked mostly in sugar beets, with some apple picking.
Jesus Lopez had not earned more than $75 in any 1 year after
1932. His highest earnings (in 1922) were $500. Since 1928 he
had made his headquarters in Seattle, where he ordinarily spends
July to September and December to May. When interviewed, he
was living in Seattle's shantytown, "Hooverville", and had been
spending his spare time collecting junk to sell and hunting firewood.
John Peterson, 55 years old and in poor health, came to America
from Sweden when he was 20. In Sweden he had been a farm
laborer, and he continued with the same work in America, spending
his time in the Dakotas and in Minnesota doing seasonal farm workplowing, haying, and threshing wheat. In between times he worked
at road construction, street repairs in Fargo and Minneapolis, as a
general farm hand in various places in the Northwest, and as a
logger in northern Minnesota. During all this time he had periods
of ill health caused by an early illness and aggravated by the rigors of
his migratory life. An especially serious illness followed an accident
in which his leg was broken.
A combination of harvest work with logging and construction had
provided him with adequate employment up until 1932, but in 1933
he secured only 3 weeks of harvest work at Fargo, and spent the rest
of the year idle. In 1934 he had had three jobs, which together
lasted less than 6 months; in the spring he had gone to northern
Minnesota as a logger and earned $1 a day for 4 months; late in
the summer he had 1 month of work hauling grain; and shortly
before being interviewed he had worked for a week shoveling snow
in Minneapolis. He had just refused a job in a logging camp paying
35 cents a day.
Throughout his 25 yea.rs of migratory-casual work, Mr. Peterson
has been in the habit of spending the winter idle in Minneapolis,
except for short portions of a few winters spent in logging. However, the mode of living which the miserable earnings of his migratory work forced him to follow had undermined his health so com-
Digitized by
Google
Some Personal Characteristics
97
pletely that he w.as forced at last to leave for a warmer climate.
When interviewed, he was en route to Texas, where he had some
hope that his health would become improved. He wished to spend
the rest of his life in a wanner climate.
John Peterson was very gloomy during the interview. He declared that there would never be any more seasonal work available
in the wheat harvest, and that the future was "very dark'' for all
men of his type. He was unmarried, and thought this situation
fortunate inasmuch as he is no longer able to find enough work even
to support himself.
Attitude Towards Relief.
In general, the habitual migratory-casual worker applied for relief
only when there was no alternative. Pride in his ability to care for
himself, and a dislike of the routine of relief procedures-interviews,
delays, and a scheduled way of living-kept him out of transient
bureaus except for an occasional stop. Three typical expressions of
the dislike of relief are illustrated by the personal histories of
Herbert Randolph, Thomas Stribling, and Thad Carlton.
Herbert Randolph, a 37-year-old veteran, had been following
migratory-casual work for 17 years. During the first part of this
period he was employed largely in logging ~mps on the Pacific
coast and in Idaho, but recently he has been doing work of all sortsmarine fireman, extra-gang laborer, apple picker, and oil-field worker.
He did not have a regular off-season although he said that when
he was working in the logging camps he periodically took lay-offs
of a week or so and then returned to the same job. Otherwise, his
practice was to accumulate $100 and to travel until the money
was gone.
The largest sum he had ever made during a single year was $1,200,
earned in 1924. In 1932 he earned nothing; in 1933 as a seaman,
logger, and section-hand he earned a total of $50; and in 1934, $100
on a logging job at Sand Point, Idaho.
Herbert Randolph had been to Washington, D. C., on the first
bonus march, and said he had been "on the bum" for over a year
after that. Early in 1934 he "just happened to see a cabin that
could be lived in by fixing a couple of windows" in ,vi1atcom
County, Wash. He had repaired it and settled down for nearly a
year.
He was jovial, but rather cynical. He complained of the poor
food served him at the local shelter, and said he guessed he would
have to find some kind of a job "because he just couldn't stand that
stuff." He referred to transient relief as "the bread line", and,
Digitized by
Google
98
The Migratory-Casual Worker
although he had no SJ>Pl'ific plarn; for the future, he was anxious
to l«:>ave the transi«:>nt shPltPI' as soon 11s pm;sihle.
Thomas Stribling, 50 years old, a native Texan, became an
ag1·il'11lt11ral migratory-l'as11al worker in 1927. From 1906 until
1927 Mr. StriLli11g had worked as a painter, carpenter, and cement
finisher. A perio1l of unemployment forced him to seek aid at a
mission in Forth Worth. The mission secured a job for him as a
cotton picker, and he has been following agricultural work in Texas
ever srnce.
In 1!):33, a typil'al year for Mr. Stribling, he worked in six ,different places, on five different· crops: worked as a general farm
laborer at Handley, Tex., during February; picked fruit at Pharr,
Tex., for a month in the spring; cultivated onions at Haymondville,
Tex., through most of the summer; picked cucumbers at. Mathis,
Tex., for 1 month; picked berries at Lindale, Tex., early in the fall;
and from Septemher until December picked cotton at Sebastian and
Corpus Christi. He spent 1934 in much the same way. but despite
the fact that he kept reasonably busy during both 1933 and 1934,
his earnings were only $:300 each year.
Thomas Stribling was excessively apologetic about being on relief.
The onion harwst, which had brought him to Dallas, was late in
1935, and, hndng no funds, he had been forced for the first time
sinee 1927 to ask for help. He seemed to pride himself on the fact
that he had k•arned to lirn on such a small yearly income; he was
even content, for example, to sleep outdoors most of the year.
Thad Carlton, a Negro, 29 years old, became a migratory-casual
worker in rna2, when replaeement of Negro workers by white workers
closed the opportunities for his employment as porter and bellboy
in Chieago. His last "permanent job" was as porter in a night
club in Memphis. When he lost that job, he hitch-hiked to California, partly because of the attraction of the climate, but mainly
in hope of finding hotel work there. He had several jobs as a bootblack and car washer around Los Angeles, and when someone told
him of work in the lettul'e fields, he went there and found a job
cutting, paeking, and loading lettuce.
Tha1l Carlton was working on a truck in the lettuce fields in
Imperial Valley when the shed packers struck for higher -wages.
Since he was a Negro, he was not permitted to join the A. F. of L.
shed-paekers' m1ion, and as a result he had continued to work on the
trnek with armed guards until the strike was over. After the
strike, his employer had sold the crop to a San Diego contractor,
who brought in his own laborers, displacing Mr. Carlton and the
other workers who liYed on the lettuce farm.
Digitized by
Google
99
Some Personal Characteristics
Thad Carlton was proud of his record of being self-supporting
throughout the greater part of the depression and was extremely
"anxious to get off relief."
He described some of the ways of getting work. "You always
hang around a car rack after a rain because they have extra work
washing cars then." He also watched the papers for announcements of conventions, and would follow them up and apply for
work in the hotels where the conventions were to be held.
Political Attitudes.
The difficulty which migratory-casual workers had experienced
in finding employment had various effects upon their thinking.
Almost all of them had been in some measure discouraged by their
experiences; but this feeling of discouragement was mitigated, in
most cases, by a belief that the lack of employment was a temporary
phenomenon connected with the depression, and that the lean years
would pass. There were some, however, particularly among those.
prematurely superannuated, who felt that there was something basically wrong with the economic system, and that their trou hies were
merely symptoms of a widespread and grave ailment affecting all
society.
Their conceptions of the nature of the ailment, and its cause and
cure, were various. As may be ohsened in their personal histories, their diagnoses and suggested cures had little in common.
Arthur Hagen, a native Kansan, 44 years old, spent most of his
life following the wheat harvest as a migratory-casual worker.
Beginning in 1912, he harvested wheat each summer from Kansas
to Canada, and occasionally worked between times on extra gangs
and in ·logging camps. After the war he continued to follow the
wheat, and fiHed in between seasons with general farm work near
Sioux ·City, Iowa.
Arthur Hagen gave an account of the good wages and large labor
demand in the wheat harvest before the war, when the shortage and
inefficiency of farm machinery had to be made up in manpower. So
great was the need for help that he_ often worked 40 days consecutively. His principal method of finding jobs was to ask the country
storekeepers to tell where there was a shortage of workers. The
extreme casualness of harvest employment is shown by the fact that
although he returned each season to the same locality, and often
threshed on a farm several years in succession, he seldom knew his
employers' names.
As the fanning country in Montana opened up, about 1915, he
began going there because ''men are scarcer and wages higher in a
new country." After 1923 he no longer went into Canada, and by
Digitized by
Google
100
The Migratory-Casual Worker
19:W he said that harvest work was "no g;ood at all because by then
they had a combine for every quarter-section and didn't need many
men." Nevertheless, he continued to make the trip into the Dakotas
each summer, although he had secured no harvest work whatever
since 1931. In 1933 and 19:34 he had been almost altogether without
work of any sort, and had secured only four jobs lasting an average
of a week apiece during these 2 years.
Arthur Hagen freely expounded his plan for "running the country",
which he had often wanted to write up, except that "his ·spelling
bothered him too much." His plan, as he explained it, was to pay
everyone over 40 years of age $200 a month, to be raised by a manufacturers' tax on the goods which would be sold when the recipients
of the payments began to spend. Meantime, every relief client was
to be fingerprinted and his record filed at a "National Bureau of
Identification." Each relief client would then be issued a statement
certifying that he was "homeless." Afterwards, whenever the client
wanted relief again, he would present his certificate and his fingerprints and be granted assistance without delay.
Arthur Hagen felt that unless profound economic changes were
made, his generation would probably never return to work. He was
afraid, however, that there would be a war before those changes
could be made.
Sylvanus Spenser, 43 years old, had been an agricultural migratory-casual worker around the Dakotas for several years after he
was discharged from the Army. Subsequently he had secured a job
as a moving-picture operator. When he lost that job in 1929, he
jumped a freight and, resumed following the harvest and odd construction jobs through the West and Southwest. In 1933 and 1934
he held nine different jobs: picking cotton near Buckeye, Ariz.;
digging potatoes at Idaho Falls, Idaho; doing odd jobs in a hospital
at Joplin, Mo.; picking strawberries at Fayetteville, Ark.; painting
houses in Tulsa, Okla.; harvesting wheat in North Dakota; and
picking wild blackberries and working at an orphanage in Joplin.
Sylvanus Spenser declared that he didn't know what was going
to happen to the country; also, that "he'd hate to say what he
thinks will happen to the country." He read a great deal in the
newspapers and listened to speeches over the radio (he thought
Father Coughlin and Huey Long were both "very fine men") but
spent most of his time looking for work. His opinion that the condition of the country was hopeless had not destroyed his hope of finding "steady work some place", and when interviewed, he was en route
to the Yakima Valley, Wash., to seek work in the fruit harvest.
Digitized by
Google
Some Personal Characteristics
101
John Hill had been a butcher for 14 years when the war began.
After he returned from the war he was restless, and, finding that
ex-service men were "getting the breaks" on construction jobs, he
sold his butcher shop and became a migratory-casual worker. Since
1922 he has been employed almost continuously on construction jobs
throughout the West-on hydroelectric developments at Skagit, Rock
Island, and Renton, Wash. ; on tunnel jobs at San Francisco and
Malone, Calif., and at Cascade Tunnel, \Vash. From 1931 to the
middle of 1933 he was a machine driller at Boulder Dam, and in
the last months of 1933 he worked on highway construction near Las
Vegas. In 1934 he worked on road construction at Kingman, Ariz.,
and in the fall, worked for 3 months on an irrigation tunnel near
Casper, Wyo. Late in 1934 he secured a short job on a tunnel at
Fort Peck Dam, Mont.
John Hill never worked more than a few months on a construction
job without taking time off to rest and "get the smoke out of his
lungs." When working on Cascade Tunnel, "a very smoky job", he
would work 2 mont.hs, then go to Seattle for a month's rest. ·while
working in the Southwest, he habitually took time off periodically
and went either to the jungles, where he slept in the open and "sunned
himself" until he was rested, or else went to Las Vegas, where he
frequently lost his money gambling before he had time to rest on
his savings.
John Hill said that he had never "felt the depression" (when interviewed at a transient bureau he was en route to a construction job
at Grand Coulee Dam, Wash.). Because of his strength and health,
and his slcill as a machine miner, combined with his wide acquaintance with contractors throughout the West, John Hill had never
been out of work long. Despite these advantages, however, he had
never made more than $1,200 net during any year. His best years
were in 1929 and 1930 when wages were high and when, living near
town, he could take rest periods easily without losing too much time
from work.
John Hill said that he "wasn't worried about politics", and that
like 19 out of 20 of his fellow-workers, he had no voting residence"a person's vote doesn't count anyway", he said.
George Zimmerman, 37 years old, was 1 of 11 children of German
immigrant parents. Since his first job as a cement worker, secured
when he was 13 years old, he has held over 100 migratory-casual
jobs. Most of them have been in the eastern Washington fruit
harvest, in fruit and fish canneries, and in the grain harvest of the
Big Bend country of eastern Washington.
Digitized by
Google
102
The .Uigratory-Casual l\-'orker
At one time, spring-cultivation work had enabled him to maintain
a fairly complete year-round work pattern. but in the last few years.
he reporte{l, cultivation johs had heeome almost entirely mechanized.
His sea!-ons were now beginning in June, with apple thinning.
Georg-e Zimmerman had several times attempted to leave migratory-<·asual work. He had had occar,;ional jobs in Seattle warehouses~
had once taken a correspondence course in automobile repairing.
an<l had subsequently worked at the trade in Seattle for a short
period. At another time. he had for 3 months sold automobiles.
But his lack of education and his German accent always handicapped
him, and because his early training made farm jobs the easiest to
fin,l and the best paid he could get. he had eventually confined himself entirely to them. His highest earning years were in the early
1!)20's. Since 1!)30 hr ha,1 newr made more than $300 a year and
had earnrd only $125 in 1934.
Georg-e Zimmerman expressed fear that the depression would lead
to war. "TJwn questioned further as to his attitudes, he wrote this
reply:
Not heinA" a writer, an,1 hPlng more m'<erl to watching nnd studying, I mny
not convPy my ldPas as I si>e them. But I will do my hest to that end.
In ordPr to hp ahle to gin• work to mon> persons we mui<t know ns muc-h
ns possihlP ahout the C'll\Jse of unemployment. lndm~trlallsm <'lalms the regninlng of forc>lgn mnrkds will Pnd the depression and unemployment. But tlwy
do not. !Pll us that forplgn c•otmtr!Ps are trying to do the same thing, trying
to prod11<•P all thPir own needs and restore prosperity by exporting thrir
Rllrplm;, So no hPlp thPre.
1-!omp of 011r unem11lo)·mp11t. If< only for a time, caui<ed b)· temporary deprt>S1;!on. B11t most of tho;ie unpmp]O)'(>(I will never find work again yet. The
reason for this iR 11111<'hl11Ps, whieh hnve taken the plac>e of men in every
brnnl'h of ln1lustr;v 1111!1 farming. Mm·h of the labor they displace Is not again
nhsorheli hP<'IIUse employeri< do not ln<'rP11se the wegPi< of the men the~· kPep
c,nough tn stimulete thPm to huy products of other lndui<trles, or lower prtee,;
eno11gh to lncrc>11Re demnncl to where production Increases will reemploy
luld-ofl' nwn.
But IPt us not. hlarn<> thP machlne--to do away with It would he to Increase
prf)(hwtlon cost, prleei<, whl<'h would dP<'reni<e consumption and cause more
um•rnployment. It Is the Rystem whl<"h Is at fnult.
Put more profit In thp hands of tlw employees, i;o they c-an hny back that
whi<-h Is prothw(>(] hy thPlr lahor. Qre('(!y employers will not do this, so
governnwnt must: govPrnmPnt of thP people, by the people, for the people.
All peop](' hnw the> ril{ht to a ehnnee to enrn a decent living and our govPrnnwnt must prp\·ent 1111)· minority from causing depression by uncontrolled
use of mom•;v and profit.
I do not say divide the we11lth. But we should make a reasonable limit to a
J)Prson',i Wt>nlth. I ht'lle\'t> In irnvPrnment owneNlhlp of all natural resources
null 11uhlil' 1<Prvlng ln1<tlt11tloni<. I cornp to this coneluslon through more than
20 ye11rs of work, study, and observation nll over the United States.
Digitized by
Google
CHAPTER
VI
CONCLUSIONS
HE EVIDENCE OF this report points clearly to the conclusion that
the migratory-casual worker, despite his independent attitude
. and his pride in his ability to "get by" on the road, is in fact an
underemployed and poorly paid worker, who easily and frequently
becomes a charge on society. Directly or indirectly, State and local
governments are forced to accept some responsibility for individuals
in this group. Hospitalization, emergency relief, border patrols,
and the policing of jungles, shantytowns, and scenes of labor disputes are examples of money costs that are borne directly by the
public. Moreover, it must be remembered that many of the local
homeless of the large cities who are dependent on public or private
assistance-those who fill the municipal lodging houses, missions,
and cheap flop houses at night, or sleep on park benches, docks; and
in subways-are discards from the ranks of the migratory-casual
worker, since by reason of age, habits, or infirmities, they are no
longer able to make a living on the road.
There is another cost t.hat cannot be assessed in dollars: the existence of a group whose low earnings necessitate a standard of liYing
far below the level of decency and comfort. The presence of such
a group in any community, even though for a short time each year,
cannot fail to affect adversely the wage level of resident workers
who are engaged in the same or similar pursuits.
The social and economic problem growing out of inadequate employment at low wages is, of course, not confined to the migratorycasual worker. Millions of resident workers have been, or are now,
dependent upon unemployment relief because of these same inadequacies. The problem of the migratory-casual worker is one aspect
of the general problem of economic insecurity, but, because of the
economic function involved, its relation to the larger problem is
peculiar.
The migratory-casual worker exists because of the labor demand of
agricultural and industrial processes that operate seasonally or intermittently in areas where the resident population does not supply the
necessary labor force. The demand arises from operations associated
with the progression of the seasons; and the supply comes from
among the more mobile individuals that compose the general pool of
unemployed.
T
103
Digitized by
Google
t<H
The Migratory-Casual Worker
This integral relationship of the migratory-casual worker tq the
total lahor supply is sometimes overlooked. The thinking that has
from time to time been given to a solution of the problem presented
has o,·eremphasized the u11iqne character of migratory-casual employnwnt. Solutions corumonly suggested are: ( 1) assisting the worker
to establish employment sequences through dovetailing employment
in processes differing as to time of peak ope.rations; and (2) stabilizing the migra11t worker through off-season employment in related or
nonrelated operations.
These proposals are not. entirely consistent, since the line of
thought in (1) is based upon the assumption that a mobile labor force
is essential to these processes, while in (2) this assumption is denied.
Public employment offices would provide the mechanism for facilitating employment sequences, while it is primarily the employer, perhaps aided by employment offices, who would arrange the off-season
employment necessary for stabilization.
There is sufficient evidence in this report to permit a critical examination of both these proposals. Any plan to develop employment sequences extending over a major part of the year runs counter
to the fact shown in chapter IV that both agricultural and industrial
processes employing mobile labor reach their peaks of labor demand
at about the same period of the year-late spring to early fall-and
that for a good number, the peaks of employment coincide. Under
these circumstances, employment sequences exceeding one-half of the
year are impossible for all the workers employed during the summer
months. This conclusion does not overlook the fact that some
workers follow logging in the winter and harvesting in the summer, or that some extra-gang workers fill in the winter as general
farm hands. These and similar sequences occur, but by the very
nature of the unequal labor demand of the summer, as against that
of the winter months, all, or even a substantial proport.ion, of the
mobile reserve cannot secure such sequences of employment.
Another objection must be raised against dependence upon public
employment offices to spread employment among migrants. During
periods of depression, when the general pool of unemployment rises
by reason of wholesale layoffs of resident workers, the effectiveness of
employment offices in directing the movement of the migratorycasual worker would be seriously restricted. When there is a general
surplus of workers, employment offices, like business establishments,
haw little market for their offerings. The experience of the past few
years shows that resident workmen turn migrants in sufficient numbers to provide serious competition to the habitual migratory-casual
worker in those seasonal operations-particularly in agriculturethat continue in good times and in bad. During such times what is
needed is not employment office direction of the labor reserve, swollen
Digitized by
Google
Conclusions
105
with newcomers, into areas where it will compete for the jobs ordinarily held by habitual migratory-casual workers. Instead, what is
needed is the diversion of the surplus into such channels as public
works, for the purpose of lessening the progressive disorganization
of the labor market.
Although it is a conclusion of this study that the direction of the
migratory-casual worker by employment offices would not provide a
basic solution of the problem, plainly such direction could assist
materially in reducing the intensity of the problem. By anticipating
local demands for seasonal labor, and exchanging this information
with other offices in the same area, they could do much to restrict the
extent of migration illustrated in chapter II of this report. Furthermore, if these offices could become the means of impounding the surplus of mobile workmen through diversion to public works projects
during depressions, migratory and resident workmen alike would
benefit. Any such procedure would, of course, run counter to the
deeply rooted custom that "residents come first" which is to be found
in the settlement laws on the statute books of most of the States.
The second of the proposals mentioned above--stabilization of the
migratory-casual worker-needs but scant attention here. It is obviously unworkable except in such industrial operations as lumbering,
where the seasonality of employment is largely the result of market
conditions that conceivably could be controlled. Mention was made
in chapter I of the efforts of a large sugar-beet company to find offseason employment for its migratory workers. Because of the relatively long employment season in sugar beets it would seem to provide
an exceptionally favorable opportunity for attempting stabilization.
But here, as elsewhere, stabilization would depend on some seasonal
operation-{lxisting or to be devised-that complements the principal
employment season. The difficulty of finding existing off-season
operations seems to be self-evident; and operations devised to use this
off-season excess of labor have generalJy led to even more than
ordinary exploitation.1
No doubt something could be done toward stabilization of agricultural workers in some States, such as California, which have an
almost continuous growing season. Some relative degree of stabilization might be achieved through the staggering of the planting. However, two careful students of agricultural labor point out that:
Reorganization of crop plantings In order to regularize demand for
farm labor, and so to stabilize it, has long been urged in California. But
considerations of market, soil, and climate, rather than conservation
1
As an example of how operations planned to
UR<'
migratory workers during the oll'-
season, see the testimony concPrning the Grays Harbor Commercial Co., In the Report of
the Commission on Industrial Rewtlons, S. Doc. No. 415, 04th Cong., Washington, D. C.,
1916., vol. V, p. 4285 If.
Digitized by
Google
106
The Migratory-Casual Worker
of labor power aml the human resoun:-es of the Iahorer, continue to
govern. On the whole thPy impede stabilizution. 2
No mention has been made up to this point of the possible effect,
of the unemployment immrance provision of the Social Security Act on
the problem of the migratory-casual worker. In its present :form unemployment insurance can be of little or no direct benefit to this
group. In the first place, agriculture, the largest employer of migratory-casual workers, is an "uncovered industry." In the second place,
migratory-cns11al workers in the covered industries are either specifically excluded from benefits (e.g., in Massach11setts) or, what in
most cases amo11nts to the same thing, will be excluded because of
failure to meet the requirement of a minimum period of employment
in covered industries within the State 3 (see ch. III on duration of
jobs). Even workers having employment in covered industries in
<•xcess of the minimum requirement may be excluded because this
{'tnployment was held in two or more States.•
Asi-uming, as seems reasonable, that coverage will be broadened,
there arises the nice problem of how the migratory-casual worker,
with his preponderantly short-term jobs and frequent movement
across State lines, would be handled administratively under an insurance plnn. Moreover, the yearly earnings of migratory-casual
workers in both agriculture and industry are so small (see ch. III)
that benefits would be of little help even if the other difficulties could
be surmounted.
Inclire<'tly, however, unemployment insurance should work to the
benefit of the migratory-casual worker. l!t has been pointed out repeatedly in this report that the general instability of industrial employment creates a pool of unemploy('d from which come many of the
migratory-cns11nl workers. ) Insofar as unemployment insurance for
resident workmen re1luces'1:i1is source of pressure on the labor market
it will assist the migratory-easunl w01·ker, particularly during depressions. Moreover, the unemployment-insurance laws of many States,
hy rewarding the reduction of labor turnover, may tend toward
• Tnylor. Pnul S .. and Ya•<'Y, Tom, Contemporary Rackground of California Farm Labor.
Rurnl Soclolog~·. ll•'<'Pmb<'r 1036, pp. 416-417.
• At the ti111e this report wus written, 36 Stutes had un .. mployml'nt compPnsatlon laws
In effeet. All of them containPd a pro\'lsion for n minimum period of employml'nt In
co,·erl'd Industries within th!' State durlnJC the preceding 52 weeks. The most liberal
pro\'IHion wns 1:1 WPPks, and the ]past lihPral, 26 weeks.
• SPe Burns, Eveline M., Towards Sodnl Security, "'hlttlesey House, New York, 1036,
pp. 1'4-85.
"'.\llgratory workers will have difficulty In obtaining benefits evPn If they work for a
time In Stat<'s with ,,,mpenMtlon laws • • •. Even a worker who has had jobs In
two Stntes, both providing unemploymPnt rompl'nsatlon, may lose hie rights. His perlud
of work in Pach State muy be too short to permit him to l'inlm benefits. although when
ad,led together they would amount to the minimum period required by the laws of either
State.''
Digitized by
Google
Conclusions
107
stabilization of both employment and workers; 5 and it may well be
that the covered industrial processes thus affected may, in becoming
less seasonal and intermittent, reduce the necessity for the migration
of workers.
Because of its essentially seasonal nature, agricultural employment
presents the major problem that must be solved if the migratorycasual worker is to improve his status. The prospects here are not
encouraging, although it should be noted that in many sections of
the country the increase of population density has brought with it
a solution of a kind. For instance, the New Jersey truck farms are
as dependent upon seasonal labor as are those of the Imperial Valley
in California. But New Jersey farmers can draw upon the local
unemployed of Philadelphia, Camden, and other lesser urban centers
for workers that more nearly resemble underpaid commuters than
they do the agricultural migratory workers of the West. 6
Thus, the population pattern may, in its development, reduce or remove the need for the habitual migrant. Certainly the function of
the migratory-casual worker decreases in importance or disappears
when a surplus of labor is available locally. It will be recalled
that few of the 500 migratory-casual workers in this study made
excursions into the Old South, where the supply of Negro workers
is adequate to handle all seasonal work.
In summary, there does not appear to be any immediate solution of the social and economic problem presented by the
habitual migratory-casual worker. The most promising means of
reducing the intensity of the problem appears to lie in some degree
of employment-office control involving a high degree of cooperation
among offices, employers, and workers; and, during depression periods, the diversion of the surplus to public works. However, the
possibility of the workers themselves improving conditions through
unionization cannot be ignored. It is trne that organization is extraordinarily difficult because of the high mobility and the low earnings of these workers; but the recent success of union campaigns
• I. e .. through the operntlon of the merit-rating clauses, the lndlvidunl-plant-reserve
plans. and guaranteed emplo~·ment.
"Opinions dllfer greatly as to how far unemployment will bt' reduced by these methods.
The most serious kinds of unemployment arP, after all, outside the control of any Individual employer • • •. At most he can control minor fluctuations. Some ways of
stabilizing production mny be quite costly and may e,·en counterbalance any gain through
a reduction In hie payroll tax." See Burns, Eveline M., op. cit., p. 74.
• This use of urban laborers is already under way In California, according to Taylor
and Vasey (op. clt., p. 408) :
"The tenuousness of the conn!'ctlon of California farm laborers with the fnrm Is further
emphasized by their residence. While 74.4 percent of paid fnrm lnborers In Mississippi
nnd 77.4 percent In Iowa resided on the fnrm In 1930, only 4:3.5 petcPnt re•lded on tbe
farm In California.· In Mississippi 5.2 percent, and in Iowa 7.6 percent of paid farm
laborers hnd urbon residence. But In California 28.6 percent were urban."
Digitized by
Google
108
The Migratory-Casual Worker
among the loggers in the Pacific Northwest and in :Minnesota, the
seamen on both coasts, and the fruit and vegetable workers of California shows that organization of migratory-casual workers is far
from impossible.
Aside from the means summarized above there does not, on the
basis of this study, appear to be any other possibility of full or par. tial solution-except for the contingency of unforeseen economic developments-short of those eventual and unhurried changes in population patterns that promise to eliminate the economic function of
the migratory-casual worker. This solution can be fully approved
only by those who oppose any attempt to alter the working of the
"natural Jaws'' of our economy.
Digitized by
Google
APPENDIX
109
130766°-a1-9
Digitized by
Google
Digitized by
Google
APPENDIX
TABLE
1.-
13
UMBER OF MIGRATO RY-CASUA L WORK E RS
STUDY · CTTIES
T ype o r worker
All
C ity
workers
Agricultural
I udu~trial
Cnmbl·
nation 1
- - - - - -- - - -- - - - - - - -- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - T otal .. ... . . .... .... .. . . .... ...... . ... . . .. .. ..... ... .......... .
500
100
200
200
B oston, Mass . .. .• ••.. .. .... . . ..... . .. .... . . ..•.. ... .•.• • ... .••
C hica~o, Ill. .. ..... .. .................. . . ............ .. ...... . .
D allas, T ex .. . .. .. ... . . . .... . . .. . . . . ... ... .. ...... . .......... .
D enver, Colo .. .... . .. ... . ..... .. ..... . .... . ... ..... .......... .
17 • • ••• • ••• . • •• • •• ••• .
12
I
5
11
12
30
79
18
20
41
J acksonville, Fla ..• ... . .. .. .... . ... ... ..... .. ... ...... .... . ....
K ansas City, !\Io ...... .... .. ...... . ..... .. ............. .. ... .
Los Angeles , Calif.. ..... . .. ... .. .. ... . ...•.................. . .
M emph is, Tenn .... .. . ... . ........ . ...... . ... . ... . .. .. . . .. .. . .
24
21
56
62
4
2()
Minneapolis, Minn . . ... ... ..... . . . . .... . . . ...... .. ..... ... .. .
l'< ew Orlea ns, La . . . ... .. ..... . . ... .... . .............. . ... ... . . .
P hoenix, Ariz . ..... ............... . ............... . ..... . ... . . .
P ittsb urgh , P a.. .... ... .. ...... . . .. . . . .... ..
. . ....... . .
Seallle, W as h •. .. . .............. ·······••-.
61
1
6
35
25
13
JO
JO
24
16
12
II
5
i
17
4
00
i
5
33
15
20
24
17
6
36
17
4
37
Workers combining agricultural and industrial employment.
T ABLE 2.-STATE OF PmNCIPAL EMPLOYMENT
WORK ERS, 1933- 34
1
OF
500
1933
State or principa l employ•
meat
1
1034
T ype of wor ker
All
workers
MIGRATORY-CASUAL
Type of worker
All
work -
Agricul•
turn!
Lndus- Combina•
trial
t ion •
ers
Agricul·
tural
Indus• Comb lna •
tria l
Lion •
- - - -- - - - - - - 1 - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - T otal ..•. .•. . . ..•. ....... •• ..
500
200
JOO
Alabama ..... . •....... . . . . ..
A rizona . __ __________ __ ___ __ _
A r kansas ... .... •. •....•.....
Ca lifornia .. . .. .. .... .. ... .. .
Colorado . .•.. •.. ... .. . .. . . ..
4 ••• ••• • •. •
2
7
6 . •• •••••.
30
13
5
48
27
19
10
C onnecticu L . .. . . ••.....••..
F lorida .. . ....•... ... ... ... .•
G eorgia .• . ...•... .. .. . . ... ..
Id aho . ...... .•. .. .. . .. ... •..
IUinois .. ....•.•.•.. . . . ......
l ··· ··· · ··· ... • ••••
10
4
5
I ••• .• •.•
6
3 ••• ••• .•
4
2
I ndiana • • .............. . ....
Iowa . ..... .. ........ •. . .....
Kansas .. . ... .. ..• ....... •- ..
500
2
l
3
13
12
13
8
29
51
20
I
6
4
3
2
3
4
4
I
9
16
2
I
~~~~~~:.·::::::::::::::::::
10
M aine ......•.. ..... ..... .• .•
Maryland ... •.•. .•.• . .. . ..• .
M assach usetts . ... •.. ...•....
M ichigan . .. .. .. ... ... .... .• .
Min nesota ....•. .... ... . ... .
1 ••· ••••• • • •••• ••· ·
3
ll
7
42
26
6
200
2
2
200
100
200
I
I
2
2
14
13
10
II
4
9
2
29
10
-- --- II
--- ----------- ------I --- -- --- --7
3
4
I ---- -- -3
2 -----5
3
2
2
I
2
8
2
14
4
10
2
2
4
4
3
l
2
9
I
3
3
I
4
2
6
l . .... ..... ..•........ . . . .. ... . ......
3
~
I
3
3
10
6
I
3
8
4l
27
8
6
11 1
Digitized by
Google
The Migratory-Casual Worker
112
TABLE
2.-STATE
OF PalNC'IPAL EMPLOYMENT OF 50() M:IGJLATOB.Y-CA6UAL
WORKERS, 1933-34-Continued
Ul33
State of prinripal employment
All
workers
Type of worker
Agrlcultural
Type or worker
All
Indus- Comblna- worlrtrial
tion
en
Agrlcultural
Indl15- Comblnatrial
tion
-----------1---- ---- --- ---- --- ---- ---1----
~::,~~f!'.i::::
:::::::::::: ::
Montana . ..... ________ ____ . _
Nehmska. _______ . . ____ _____ _
Nevada __________ _. __ ____ _..
New llampshire ___ . ___ ____ _
New Mexico ____ ___________ _
New Jersey _________________ _
New York ___ _____ __________ _
North Carolina _____________ _
6
22
10
13
4
I
5
I
11I
6
4
2
9
2
4
8
4
I
I
2
__________ ________
6
6
I
I
2
3
I ------- --·
7I
_____ ___ 2__ _______2 _
North Dakota __ ____ . _______ _
Ohio ______ ___ ___ ______ _____ _
Oklahoma. ______ __. ___ . _____
15
g
1
5
4
16
I
Orei;ton • • ____ . ___________ .. __
8
10
3
4
2
2
3
4
5
6
Penns;,-lvania __ __ __________ _
South Dakota ______ ___ ___ ._.
Tennessee_. _____ ___________ _
Tex8S ______ ___ . ___ . ___ _____ _
8
I
2
5
Utah ________________ _______ _
Washington_ .. _______ ______ _
32
I
49
West Virginia .• ____ __ ______ _
Wisconsi n _________ _________ _
Wyoming ___ _______ _______ __
.>.la.ska_. __ ____ . ___ ._._. ____ _
I
9
II
1
Not ascertainable _.. ____ _. __ _
7
No State•- -- - -· · ____ __... __ _
22
4
8
I
15
23
g
1
12
14
--------------- 5-1
l
2
4
5
2
3
fl
8
3
2
6
5
3
3
7
l ·--- - ----- -------J
10
2
2
6
I
l ---·······
6
l -------S
1
l -- --- ---- - -------10
4
17
10
8
3
4
2
3
-5·
Ii
2
6 -------2
e
•
2
I
- . -
•••
I
-
- --.
31
I
14
7
l
JO
53
24
12
17
9
2
4
a
1
a
8
3
8
6
16
14
16
5
15I . ___ ___ ___
5 ________
3
6
6
II
22
71
6
9
2
11
1 Maximum employment In a State.
• Workers combining nirricultural and Industrial employment.
•I.e., workers unemployed.
TABLE 3.-MONTH OF OBTAINING
Joas, 500
1933-34
MIGRATORY-CASUAL WORKERS,
1933
Month
All jobs
1934
Jobs of Jobs of 1obs of
Jobe or 1obs or Jobe or
agricul- Indus- comhlagricul- Indus- combiLura!
nation All Jobs tural
nation
trial
trial
workers workers workers•
workers workers workers•
- - - - - - - - - - - - --- --- - - -
Total. _______________ ____ ____
I, 100
486
228
4i6
11,107
I 471
'205
1431
January . __. • ___________ _____
February ____. . ____ _______
March ________ ___ .. _________ _
April _____ ___ ________________
May _________ __-- --- ------- -June ________________________
t 131
• 33
12
12
• 60
18
83
23
12
21
48
13
55
15
14
30
19
27
31
36
20
37
57
26
July ______ __ ____ ___ ___ · -•-- - August. . . __ ___ ____ -- - ___ ____
Septem her __. .. .. .. .. _.. _..
October. . - -- ---- · -· ·· .... • . .
November ... . . . . ______ _____ _
December ______ .. __ . __ . ____ .
123
l02
145
19
15
23
40
11
38
10
7
22
43
Not ascertainable ____ .. ______
26
44
• 38
14
78
26
00
36
Iii
118
54
23
27
51
25
42
53
· 62
81
115
I~
57
46
46
126
55
39
50
39
IOi
133
91
39
7
20
Ii
24
12
12
9
27
23
7
8
2
16
6
118
7,5
i6
49
24
40
45
37
70
42
7
30
41
52
42
ti
6
1 Johs of workers comhining agricultural and industrial employment.
• Includes &l Johs which were continuations of Jobs obtained in 1933.
, Includes 27 Jobs which were continuations or Jobs ohtained In 1933.
• Includes 9 jobs which were continuations or jobs obtained in 1933• Incluries 28 jobs which were continuations or Jobs ohtained In 1933.
• An unknown number of January jobs were oontinuatlons of jobs obtained in IV32.
Digitized by
30
Google
113
Appendix
TABLE 4.-DURATI0N OF OFF-SEASON OF 500 MIGRATORY-CASUAL WORKERS,
1933-34
1933
193-4
Type of worker
Duration or oa-season
Total
Type of worker
Total
Agrlcul•
tural
Indus•
trial
Agrlcul•
tural
Combl•
nation 1
Indus•
trial
Combl•
nation 1
- - - - - - - - - --- - - - - - - - - All workera .... . . . . . .. ..... . .
500
100
200
500
200
200
100
200
Pero,nt d istribution
All workers ........ . .. . .. . . ..
100
100
100
100
100
100
100
100
Less than 4 weeks . ..... . ... .
41
4li
46
42
35
9
8
30
33
Z2
49
6
34
15
16
3
5
3
13
1
26
14
l
7
30
44
8
35
8
11
13
7
7
to 11 weeks . . .. . . .. . . .. . ...
12 to 19 weeks . ...... . .... . ..
20 to ZT weeks . .. . ... .... .. ..
28 to 51 weeks ..... ... ... .. . .
4
52
weeks ................. . . ..
Median duration of off-8e8•
son In weeks ...... . . .. . ....
1
7
15
17
9
32
15
25
14
l
------ -3
4
5
3 -------5
---------- - - - --- - - --- - - - ----2
4
11
13
4
8
Worltera combining agricultural and Industrial employment.
TABLE 5.-TIME SPENT IN EMPLOYMENT DURING MIGRATORY PERIOD BY 500
MIGRATORY-CASUAL WORICERS, 1933-34
Type of worker
Time spent In employment
Total
11133
Agricultural
11134
Industrial
11133
193-4
11133
Combination
11134
11133
1
11134
------------- - - - - - - --- --- --- - - - --- - - All workers ... .. . .. •• . • ••.•••........
500
500
200
100
200
100
200
200
Percent distribution
All workers.... . ...... . ..... . . . . . ... .
100
100
100
100
100
100
100
100
No employment... . ... . . .. . . ........
Less than 10 weeks...... . . ... ... . ...
10 to 20 weeks..... . ... . . . . . ..... . ...
21 to 32 weeks................. .. ....
33 to 40 weeks........ .... .......... .
40to62weeks............ ... . ..... ..
~
14
24
29
14
12
·5
19
26
32
11
7
4
13
7T
29
14
12
5
18
24
36
10
7
3
8
28
7T
15
17
3
15
21
43
10
8
5
18
20
31
14
10
31
23
1n weeks ..... _. __ . _. .... .......... _
2•
21
23
22
26
24
23
18
5
23
12
6
::::::::~;·I~·-:;~~:~:· __2_.:.:. :. :.:. : __1_ ~ __2_.:.:. :. :.:. : __2_.:.:. :. :.:. :
1
I
W orken combining agricultural and industrial employment.
Digitized by
Google
The Migrato ry-Casual Worker
114
TABLE 6 .-
500 MIGRATORY- CAS UAL \ VORKERS ,
N ET YEARLY EARNINGS OF
1933- 34
1033
Amount of earnings
1934
Type of worker
Type of worker
All
work-
Agricu ltural
ers
Industrial
Combi•
nation 1
All
workers
Agricul•
tural
Ind us•
t rial
Combi•
nation
1
---- -- - ---- --- ---Total.. ...... .. ..........•...
500
200
100
200
500
200
JOO
200
Nooe __ __ ___ ___ __ ____
Maintonanoe on ly · - •
$0 to $-19 ...
$50 to $00 .••. _.. -
18
2
47
79
6
l
24
II
I
II
2
5
12
41
20
14
25
69
21
2
49
74
69
9
$100 Lo $149 .•.. . •• • ·••· ·· ····
l
l
6
6
8
7
23
---------------- ----250 lo $299 ... -- ----- ------$300 t o ~49 ..
$350 lo $399 ...... -----------
61
24
48
34
18
8
5
2
16
9
14
21
21
12
13
5
18
10
23
24
14
IO
4
46
21
27
19
10
23
4
4
8
6
7
12
$400 to $400 •....• .• •••...••.•
$500 lo $599 ..••. .
$600 to $690 ..•.••..•.. ...••..
$700 lo 990 ...........•... ...
$ 1,000 lo $1,350 • • .. . •••••.•• .•
24
20
6
5
18
27
8
14
I
5
5
I
9
3
9
II
3
12
7
3
5
13
9
2
2
Not ascertainable .... ....... .
23
$ 150 to $ 100 •.
$200 to $24 9 ..
-- ---------
1
3~
18
5-~
1
3
14
4
12
17
18
30
37
39
63
20
3
12
22
9
6
6
I
5
2
2
6
Workers combining agriculturnl nod industrial employment.
T ABLE 7 .- MAN-\ VEEJ{S OF EMPLOYMENT AND NUMBER OF Jons OF 500
MIGRATORY·CASUAL \.Vo111rnns, CLASSIFIED HY TYPE OF \.VotU{ER AK D BY
SPECIFIC CROPS AND PnoCESSES, 1933- 3-l
Number of Jobs
J\Ino•weeks of employment
'f ype of worker nnd pursuit
Total
1933
1934
T otal
1933
- - - - - -- -- - - -- -- -- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -All workers ........... ... •·-···•·· ···· .. .
Agricultural workers:
All agricul tural workers ..... . .... .......... .
Colton ...•........................... . •.. . . .
Fruits ..... ... . . -• ..................... • .
Sugar beets .. ..... .... _. __ ......... .. . ..... .
G rain ____ ________________ ________________ _
1934
- - --
2,297
I, JOO
), 107
21 ,128.5
JI, I 2. 0
9, ~6. 5
957
486
471
8,171. 5
4, 264.5
3,907. 0
156
193
87
69
700. 0
Pi
96
40
77
32
48
46
46
42
37
46
51
15
34
697. 0
00,. 0
600. 0
443. 0
362. 0
300. 0
195. 0
266.5
611. 5
621. 0
86
I , 401. 5
I, 318. 0
1,253. 0
I, 121. 5
935. 0
687. 0
611. 0
41 8. 0
426. 5
154
;?
64.5. 0
518. 5
492. 0
325. 0
General agr iculture ...... . . .... . ...... ... .
Vegetables. ..... . ..... . . ....... ........... .
Berries . .. . .. ------ .... . --- .. - - - --- --- - - . - -- .
Dairy and cattle ................ _ ...... . .
Other, n . e. c.1 ••• • • •• .• ••••••••• • • ..••.•.•••
04
97
22
76
Industrial worke rs:
All industrial workers . .... ............ ..... .
433
228
2().5
4,767.5
2, 522.5
2,245. 0
68
-~9
36
31
31
21
21
16
32
006. 0
28
585. 0
33
549. 0
516. 0
445. 0
424. 5
406. 0
206. 0
203. 0
527. 0
476. 0
297. 0
244. 0
229. 0
295. 0
217. 5
240. 0
116. 0
JOO. 0
308. 0
430. 0
288. 0
305. 0
287. 0
150. 0
Logging.... ... ...... . . . ... .. .............. . .
Oil nnd ga.s . .. . . ........ _. . ... ..•. . . •. . ... . .
Agriculture .. .. ......... ... ........... ..... .
Railroad mnin tenancx, ...... ......... ·- ..
Road construct ion .... .. .......... ....... .
Dam and levee . . ............ ..••...... ... . . •
f.;eamcn ___ _____ _____ __ ____ ______ . ____ . -- ----
Other construction 1 .. · · · ·· ·····•- .• •• •. ••••
Metals (mini ng) . .. ... ..................... .
Other, n . c. c.1 ___ _____________________ _____ _
69
64
46
34
30
41
22
23
46
17
23
12
II
26
25
13
14
18
JO
12
20
Digitized by
Google
311. 0
223. 0
160. 0
207. 0
166.0
90. 0
103. 0
219. 0
Appendix
115
TABLE 7.-MAN-WEEKS OF EMPLOYMENT AND NUMBER OF JOBS OF 500
MIGRATORY-CASUAL WOHKERS, CI.ASSIFIED BY TYPE OF WORKER AND BY
SPECIFIC CaoPs AND PROCESSES, 1933-34-Continucd
Man•weeks of employment
Number of Jobs
Type of worker and pursuit
Total
Combination workers: •
All combination workers ______ ·········-··--
~I~ - - - - - - - - Total
1933
1934
907
476
431
8,189.5
4,395.0
3,794.6
56
31
46
40
52
49
34
15
16
18
2.'i
910. 0
842. 0
800. 5
778. 0
660. 5
465. 0
430. 0
385. 0
385. 0
357. 5
348. 0
237.0
181. 0
~5
901. 5
465.0
486. 0
416. 0
460. 0
409. 0
280. 0
233. 0
130. 0
218. 0
146. 0
195. 5
141.0
106. 0
224. 5
485. 0
445. 0
356. 0
384. 5
318. 0
251.5
186.0
197.0
255. 0
167.0
211. 5
152. 5
96. 0
75. 0
284. 0
416. 5
General agriculture_-·-·-·-··-··· .. ····-·· __
R08d construction.·------·-·-·········-···Logging ..... -. _________ .. _....... _.. -· .... __
Seamen.... ·-·-·--··--···-···-····- ... --····
Grain._-·_._ ... ___ ·-._ .. ·-·····- .. _... _·-. __
Cotton __ . __ -·-·-------···.··········-··· ....
Damandlevee ___ ._ --·---··-·············-·
Railroad maintenance_····-··- ... ·--·.·--···
Dairy and cattle ____ ···--···· .... _-·····-···
Building construction.... __ ._._. _____ .. __._.
Fruits_ - . ············-·----·-· -- --- ·- ... --··
Sawmllllng .. ······-- -·. ··- .. __ ... _. -· ___ .. _
79
78
95
88
61
r,
48
34
42
57
25
28
99
90
~~~ ::rcuit"wiii,·n: e.-.,.-,::: :: ::::::: :: ::::
Other Industrial, n. e. c.•-·-·-·---·--····-·--
33
38
43
39
r,
12
32
16
22
20
26
31
17
17
45
45
8
II
54
45
Not elsewhere clBSSifled.
• "Other construction" represents workers in tunnel, bridge. and building construction.
• Workers combining agricultural and industrial employments.
1
TABLE 8.-SEASONAL FLUCTUATION IN EMPLOYMENT IN ALL PURSUITS AND
IN SELECTED PURSUITS, 200 AGRICULTURAL WORKERS, 1933-34
Man•weeks of employment
Selected p11n1ults
Month and year
All
pur•
suits
Cotton Fruits
Sugar
beets
Gener• VegeDairy
Grain alagri• tables
Berries and
culture
cattle
Hops
- - - --- --- - - - - - - --- - - - --- --/93S
1anuary ·- _____ -···February .•......••.
March._ ... ·-·-----
ti';;~·-:::::::::::::
1une·-·-··-·--····1uly···-··-·--···-·
August._.····-----·
September_-····-··
October.········-·November.-·······
December ... _......
162
18-i
208
263
41
40
39
49
26
4
39
4
9
15
100
104
35
39
397
55
60
460
46
86
519
527
fi2
56
110
127
118
58
110
95
76
68
37
21
102
48
35
35
4
555
461
328
186
88
9S
26
29
9
7
30
4
12
22
68
37
52
65
56
13
20
23
26
38
100
142
30
31
24
55
41
41
32
35
17
11
9
2
96
68
74
12
4
20
48
30
39
32
24
26
18
13
17
58
50
49
9
11
4
9
13
17
26
28
17
17
22
24
4
9
34
4
J9J~
1anUBrY---·.. ---·February __________
March .. ····--·tfa~l.·:::: :: : : : : :: ::
June ...... ---·---··
Inly ... _..... _.....
August·--·----··--.
September .. -----··
October... _.-----·November._--·--·December_ ... --·--
216
240
270
304
420
439
481
459
465
358
1811
64
36
43
47
35
30
43
53
88
IOI
65
2'l
r,
II
46
49
49
13
111
108
78
103
97
53
32
16
100
104
101
74
21
11
13
17
21
29
89
109
91
57
4,'i
26
9
52
58
75
80
71
52
32
2.'i
16
II
9
II
35
56
37
11
18
14
Ii
30
3.'i
3l'
28
6
4
30
42
73
67
59
19
II
22
28
26
38
30
22
22
9
11
4
13
2
2
----- --------
Digitized by
e
36
11
--------
Google
The Migratory-Casual Worker
116
TABLE 9.-SEASONAL FLUCTUATION IN EMPLOYMENT IN ALL PURSUITS AND
IN SELECTED PURSUITS, 100 INDUSTRIAL WORKERS, 1933--34
Man-weeks of employment
Selected pursnlts
Month and year
All
riurts
Dam and
Oil and Agrl, Railroad
levee oougas
culture malnt&nance structlon
Log-
SU
ging
Road
Other
construe- construetlon
tlon
Bea-
men
--- --- --- - - - - - - --- --- --1/13S
January .. __ .........
February __ .... -····
March- ...... -••··-·
ti':~.·_::::::::::::::
June--···-······-···
JulY----··----·--·-·
August._-·-----····
Beptember.-- .. •-·-·
October ___ ..........
November._ .... -...
Deoember--.--.---·
136
169
171
216
232
281
62
52
22
56
27
29
--------------7
4
0
9
17
48
35
35
31
33
35
14
28
39
284
35
270
278
192
175
118
22
30
35
37
39
30
23
29
12
16
11
33
38
47
21
13
4
----------
02
122
1116
165
39
0
48
13
17
13
36
4
7
9
15
---------13
26
22
13
37
54
36
48
46
54
41
39
40
26
8
34
10
4
4
30
35
37
39
29
18
2
4
4
4
g
17
26
10
11
0
15
30
22
26
26
28
22
30
23
17
17
22
26
H
23
30
28
33
13
4
4
4
13
2S
34
17
35
311
36
15
26
4
4
IIS
Ui
18
10
0
2
1~.
January .. ·-·····-··
February····----···
March ..............
tl'a~I.._:: ::::::::::::
223
61
50
36
275
30
JulY----··---··----August •. -······-·-·
Beptember..... -... October __ . __ ........
November ..........
December _____ ....
281
242
26
244
200
June. _______ ........
149
22
28
36
30
86
26
22
31
22
17
g
4
JI
II
27
116
45
4
1
0
13
13
4
8
8
la
IO
8
g
15
II
22
JO
23
22
30
26
30
24
15
20
13
13
7
g
24
g
22
13
----------
24
22
12
4
10
7
4
4
2
4
4
TABLE 10.-SEASONAL FLUCTUATION IN EMPLOYMENT IN ALL PURSUITS AND
IN SELECTED PURSUITS, 200 CoMBINATION WORKERS,1 1933-34
Man-weeks of employment
Month and year
Belected pursuits
Allfiur- General Road
SU ts
construec::ri;1tlon
ore
241
275
366
35
23
39
52
87
61
52
48
40
51
27
17
22
19
36
103
36
56
32
22
49
32
13
7
30
36
52
39
45
50
45
g
39
65
116
56
39
26
37
22
26
4
0
13
13
31
454
JulY----··-····--··--·
August---···-•····-·Beptember·-·-········
October_____ ··-------November---··---·--n-mber_···-------·
439
434
37
36
388
378
39
Ue~'.·.::::::::::::::::
298
362
362
357
8
13
13
24
17
61
JUDe------·····---····
306
13
26
361
425
1~.
4
28
26
~'-:::::::::::::::::
307
239
39
43
4
II
4
43
65
54
48
January···-·····----··
February_.··-·-·----·
March·-------·-···-··
Dam and Railroad Dairy
Grain Cotton levee con- mainteand
structlon nance
cattle
--- - - - - - - --- - - - - - - - - - ---
19"
January ___ -------·-··
February--·-·----·-·March-.---··-···-·--·
Logglng
35
Ii
17
26
99
63
43
24
June·-·-·-------·-···-
a12
JulY·--··-·········-·August_--···-··-··--·
Beptember-···-···-···
October------··--·-···
November .... ----·•-December. __ --···---_
411
403
332
43
28
28
43
36
27
36
24
290
27
22
183
83
15
5
24
26
37
40
4
6
26
45
34
26
16
8
4
12
17
22
22
22
28
29
17
54
30
37
28
Ill
18
10
26
10
4
9
13
17
17
23
13
4
11
7
0
18
4
22
0
22
18
22
15
30
20
14
17
30
19
17
13
37
36
29
31
18
8
13
17
39
28
6
0
g
12
4
4
30
28
• Workers combinlna: a,rlcultural and Industrial employment.
Digitized by
Google
17
17
22
26
19
HI
17
15
13
17
17
22
30
24
26
22
17
18
13
13
4
INDEX
117
Digitized by
Google
Digitized by
Google
INDEX
Page
Age, by type of worker _______________________________________________ 87-88
Agricultural pursuits:
Characteristics of________________________________________________
7-9
Employment in specific ___________________________________ 71-75, 114-115
Followed by migratory-casual workers____________________________
5-6
Located in areas of low population density________________________
9
Seasonality of ______________________________________________ 8,77-79, 115
Unskilled labor, use oL__________________________________________
7-8
Agricultural workers:
Age ______________________________________________________________ 87-88
Color and nativity ________________________________________________ 88-00
Definition________________________________________________________
24n
Duration of jobs _____________________ ---------------------------- 53--55
Earnings:
·
Compared with duration of emplo~·menL ______________________ 69--70
Hours worked, migration, and________________________________
3---4
NPt ~,early ________________________________________________ 67-70, 114
Employment:
Amount of in specific crops ____________________________ 71-75, 114-115
Cotton crop largest source of_ _________________________ 71-72, 114-115
Duration of, compared with earnings __________________________ 69--70
Duration of jobs _____________________________________________ 53-55
Hours worked, earnings, migration, and______________________
3---4
Man-weeks of, by type of work, per mouth ______ 57-59, 74, 79, 114-115
Month of obtaining job8 ______________________________ 59----60, 61,112
Number of jobs held _________________________________________ 55-57
Number of jobs secured, by "type ___________________________ 74, 114-115
Period, length of_ ____________ ------------------------- 62-{i3, 64,113
Routes of travel during __________________________ 28, 30-31, 33, 34-39
Seasonality of:
In specific ('rops _____________________________________ 77-79, 115
Of all agricultural workers _______________________________ 57-60
States, number of in which secured ___________________________ 26-27
States, of principal ________________________________ 47-48,49, 111-112
Work history________________________________________________
3-4
Work patterns and itineraries in specific crops (sec also
Itineraries) ____________________________________ 28,30-31,33,34-39
Foreign-born___________________________________________________ 12-14, 88-90
Itineraries and work patterns ( src also Itineraries) ___ 28, 30-31, 33, 34-39
)Iexican,_ _______________________________________________ 12-13,88-89
Migration, extent of ______________________________________________ 24,25
Migratory period, length of________________________________ 60, 62-6.3, 64
Nativity__________________________________________________________
___ -------------------------------- --------------- _______ 88-90
N'egroes
88-90
Number studied--------------------------------------------------
111
119
Digitized by
Google
120
Index
Agricultural workers-Continued.
Page
Off-season, length oL _________________________________________ 63, 64, 113
Seasonality of employment:
In specific crops __________________________________________ 77-79, 115
Of all agricultural workers ___________________________________ 57--59
State-line crossings_______________________________________________
24
States, number of in which employment was secured _______________ 26-27
States, of principal employment_ _______________________ 47-48, 49, 111-112
Unemployment, durin~ migratory period _______________________ 63-66, 113
Work history of typical__________________________________________
3-4
Years spent as migrants __________________________________________ 85--87
Agriculture, general :
Jobs, number of secured in __________________________________ 74, 114-115
Largest source of combination employment_ _______________ 74, 76, 114-115
Man-weeks of work in _______________________________________ 74, 114-115
Seasonal ftuc•tuntlon of employment In ________________________ 77-79, 115
Attitudes of workers:
Poli ti cal --- _______ ------ __ ---- - - - ---- ----- __ - ____ ---- __ ___ ___ ___ 99--102
Toward relief---------------------------------------------------- 97-99
Autobiographical accounts of typical migrants ________________________ 90-102
Berry crops :
Itineraries of workers in __________________________________________ 37-89
Jobs, number of secured In __________________________________ 74, 114-115
Man-weeks of work Ju _______________________________________ 74, 114-115
Seasonal fluctuation of employment in ____________________________ 79, 115
Beveridge, Sir W. H., Unemployment__________________________________
2n
Bradford, Rourk, John Henry_________________________________________
20n
Urooks, M. S., and Landis, Farm Labor In the Yakima Valley, Washington ________________________________________________________ 9n, 67n, 6911
Burns, Eveline M., Towards Social Security____________________________
106n
California State Relief Administration, Migratory Labor In California__
6n,
12n,13n,15n,16n,69n
Casual employment, definition_________________________________________
2-3
Characteristics, personal, of migrants, see Personal characteristics of
migrants.
Cheap labor supply ___________________________________________________ 12-14
Chinese labor _____________ ---------------------------------___________
13
Cities, list of included In study _____________________________________ xin, 1).1
Color and nativity characteristics, by type of worker__________________ 88-00
Combination (agricultural and industrial) workers:
Age ______________________________________________________________ 87--88
Agriculture, general, largest source of employment_ _________ 74, 76, 114-llu
Color and nativity------------------------------------------- _____ 88-00
Definition________________________________________________________
24n
Duration of jobs ________________________________________________ 53-55
Earnings:
Compared with duration of employment_ _______________________ 69-70
Net yearly _______________________________________________ 67-70,114
Employment :
Agriculture, general, largest source of________________ 74, 76, 114-115
Amount of in specific processes ___________________ 74, 76-77, 114-115
Duration of, compared with earnings __________________________ 69-70
Digitized by
Google
121
Index
Combination (agricultural and industrial) workers-Continued.
Employment-Continued.
Page
Duration of jobs ______________________________________________ 53--55
Man-weeks of, by type of work, per month ____ 57-59, 74, 82, 114-115
Month of obtaining jobs _______________________________ 59--60,61,112
Number of jobs held ________________________________________ 55-67
Number of jobs secured, by type _______________________ 74, 114-115
Period, length of____________________________________________ 64,113
Seasonall ty of :
In specific proceases _______________________________ 80,82,83, 116
Of all combination workers_______________________________ 57--60
States, number of in which secured __________________________ 26-27
States, of prineipaL _______________________________ 47--48, 51, lll-112
Foreign-born _________________________________________ --- ------ _____ 88-90
Mexican ____________________________________________________ 12-13,88-89
Migration, extent of__________________________________________ 24, 25---26
Migratory period, length of_ ________________________________ 60, 62--63, 64
Nativity _______________________ _______ ____ ________ ____ ___________ 88----00
Negroes__________________________________________________________ 88--00
Number studied------------------------~------------------------111
Otr-season, length ot_ ________________________________________ 63, 64, 113
Seasonality of employment:
In specific processes__________________________________ 80,82,83,116
Of all combination workers ___________________________________ 57--59
State-line crossings_________________________________________________ 24
States, number of In which employment was secured____________ 26-27
States, of principal employment _______________________ 47--48,51,111-112
Unemployment during migratory period ________________________ 63-66, 113
Years spent as migrants _________________________________________ ~ 7
Conclusions of study :
Diversion of labor supply needed ___________________________ 104-105, 1CY7
Employment offices as aids to migrants ______________________ 104-105, 107
Employment sequences, establishment of________________________ 104-105
Population density, increase atrects migrants_____________________
107
Solutions of migrants' problems__________________________________
104
Stabilization of migrants___________________________________ 104, 10!>-106
Underemployment and poor wages________________________________ 103
Unemployment insurance, etrect on migrants _____________________ 106-l(Y7
Wage level, etrect on resident labor supply_________________________
103
f'ost of recruiting- workers ____________________________________________ 14-15
Cotton crop :
Itineraries of workers In __________________________________________ 33, 34
Jobs, number of secured in _________________________________ 74, 114-115
Largest source of agricultural employment_ ______________ 71-72, 114-115
lian-weeks of work fn ______________________________________ 74, 114-115
Requires migratory-casual workers________________________________
6
Seasonal fluctuation of employment in ___________________ 79, 82, 115, 116
Crops:
And processes :
Amount of employment In, by type of worker _________ 71-77, 114-115
1934 changes in employment in speciffc __________________________ &'3-84
Seasonality of employment in combination of_ ________ 80, 82, 83, 116
Followed by migratory-casual workers____________________________
5-7
Digitized by
Google
122
Index
Crops-Continued.
Specific:
Page
Employment in _______________________________________ 71-75, lH-11;";
Seasonality of emplo~·ml'nt in ____________________________ 77-79, 115
Dam and IPYN' c-onstruetion, see LP\"('(> am! dam eonstruetiou.
DPnsity of 11op11lation, inc-n•use of, aids migrants_____________________
107
Destinations of migratory-<"nsual workers, see Itineraries; l\llgration.
Deterioration, 0<·eupational 11nd phy,;kal, of selected migrants--------- 93--07
Direction of workPrs, ln<"k of_________________________________________
65
Distances travP!ed, see ltlnerariPs; Migration.
Diwrsion of labor supply needl'CL ______________________________ 104-105, 107
Duration of employment, see Employment, duration of.
Earnings:
Compared with duration of Pmploynwnt, hy tnie of worker ________ 6'9-70
Hours worked, migrntion. and___________________________________
3--4
How detPrmined for study ________________________________________ 67, 69
Net yenrly, hy tnie of workpr_ ________________________________ 67-70, 114
RPfll'<·t PXJ)loitu lion of workPrs ______________ --------------------67
Economic faetors affPeting migrants _________________________________ 10.-16
Employment (1we a/110 um!Pr Agrieultural workers; Combination workers;
Industrial workers) :
Amount of in s1-·lfle eroJ>s nm! processes, hy tnie of worker __ 71-77, 114-11:;
Casmli, dPflnition ____________ -------------------------------- ______ 2-3
Duration of:
Compared with earnings, by type of worker _________________ ~ 69----70
Johs, by type of worker ______________________________________ 53-55
SPnsonnl varintion In ____________________________ 57-59, 63-66, 77-8:J
During migratory period, by tnie of worker ____________________ 63-66, 113
Jobs, dPfinition of_______________________________________________
5311
Location of and migration to, by type of worker _________________ 27-51
Man-wel'ks of, by type of work, per mouth ____ 57-oO, 7-1, 77-83, 114-115, 116
Migrntlon to, by type of worker __________________________________ 27-51
Month of ohtnining, by tnie of workPr _____________________ 59--60, 61,112
NumbPr of johs held, hy type of worker __________________________ 55-57
NumhPr of jobs sPeured, by tnie ______________________ 73-75, 76, 114-115
Period, length of, by tn)(' of workPr -----------=----------- 62-63, 64, 113
Iloutes of travel during _________________________________________ 27-46
SPnsonal, rlimate fnctor in producing_____________________________
10
SPasonnlity of, by tnlt' of worker __________________ 57-60, 77-83, 115, 116
States, 11111nher in whlrh sccurPd, hy tnie of worker ________________ 26-27
Stall's, of principal, by tn•e of workrr ________________ 45, 47-61, 111-112
TyJ)('S of, followed by migrants____________________________________
5-7
Work historil's of typical migrants________________________________
3-4
Work patt(•rns and itenernries (sec also ltennarieR) _______________ 27--46
Working conditions:
Dne to ovPrsnpply of workers________________________________
15
Protests against_ ____________________________________________ 15-16
Years s1wnt in migratory-cu;;unl work, by type of worker ____________ 85-87
Employml'nt histories, by type of worker, earnings, bours worked, extent
of migration ____________________ --------------------------------___
3-4
EmploymPnt offlcps, as aids to migrants __________________________ 104-105, 107
Digitized by
Google
123
Index
Page
Employment sequences, establishment of ____________________________ 101--105
Employments and processes followed by migrnnts_____________________
5---9
Farm work, general, see Agriculture, general.
Foreign-born migrants, numher, by type of worker---------------------- 88--90
Frisselle, S. P., Seasonal Agriculturnl Laborers from l\.frxieo___________
1311
Fruit crops :
Itinernries of workers in ________________________________________ 36, 37
Jobs, number of secured in ___________________________________ 74, 114--lHi
Man-weeks of work In ______________________________________ 74, 114--115
Require mlgratory-easual workers________________________________
5
Seasonal fluctuation of employment iu ____________________ 79, 82, 115, 116
Grain crops :
Itineraries of workers in ____ ---------------------------------- 34, 35, 37
Jobs, number of secured in ____________ --------------------- 74, 114--115
Man-weeks of work in ______________________________________ 74, 114--115
Seasonal fluctuation of employment in __________ -·--------- 79, 82, 115, 116
Great Western Sugar Company, Through the Lenn•><-------------------tln
Habitual migrants, distinguished from temporary______________________
86
Harrison, S. M., and Associates, Public Employment Office><-----------OOn
Hathway, Marlon, The Migratory Worker and Family Life______________
66n
Hearings Before the Committee on Labor______________________________
16n
Histories, personal, of selected migrants ______________________________ 90-102
Howd, C.R., Industrial Relations in the West Coast Lumber lndn><try___
57n
Immigrant labor-----------------------------------__________________ 12-13
Income, see Earnings.
Independence of migraut:-1, illustrated hy personal hi>,torle!< ____________ 00-9.1
Industrial pursuits:
Characterb1t!C"s of________________________________________________
7-9
Employment in speelflc ________________________________ 74, 75-76, 114--115
Employment irregular____________________________________________
11
Followed by migratory-casual workers_____________________________
6-7
Located in areas of low population density________________________
9
Seasonality _________________________________________________ S,80,81,116
Unskilled labor, use of_ ______________________ ,____________________
7-8
Industrial workers:
Age ----------------- -------- _______________________ ··--- _________ 87-88
Color and nati\'lty __________ ----------------- ____________________ 88--90
Definition________________________________________________________
2411
Duration of Jobs _________________________________________________ 53--5~
Earnings:
Compared with duration of employment_ _____________________ 69-70
Hours worked, migration, and________________________________
4
Net yearly _______________________________________________ 67-70,114
Employment:
Amount of in specific processes ____________________ 74, 75-76, 114--115
Duration of, compared with earnings ________________________ 69-70
Duration of jobs _____________________________________________ :,3-55
Hours worked, earnings. migration and________________________
4
Logging, largest source of ____________________________ 74, 75, 1,14--115
Digitized by
Google
Index
124
Imlnstrinl workers-Continued.
Employment-Continued.
Page
Man-weeks of, by type of work, per month ________ 57~59, 74, 114-115
Month of obtaining jobs ______________________________ 59-60, 61, 112
Number of jobs held---------------------------------------- 55-57
Number of jobs secured, by type ________________________ 74, 114-115
Period, length of____________________________________________ 64,113
Routes of travel during __________________________ 29, 31, 32, 34, 39-43
Seasonallty of:
In spe<"ific processes __________________________________ 80,81,116
Of all industrial workers _________________________________ 57-60
States, number of ln which secured ___________________________ 26--27
States, of principal_ ______________________________ 47---48, 50, 111-112
Work history________________________________________________
4
Work patterns nnd itl'neraries ____________________ 29, 31,32, 34, 89-45
Foreign-born _____________________________________________________ 88-00
Itineraries and work patterns (see also Itineraries) ____ 29,31,32,34,39-46
Mexican ___________ -------------------------------·- --------- _____ 88--89
Migration, extPnt of______________________________________________ 24, 2,'l
Migratory period, length of_________________________________ 60, 62--63, 64
NativitY--------------------------------------------------------- 88-00
Negroes ______________ ------------------------------------·----- ___ 88-00
Number studied _________________________________ -------·------____
111
Off-senson, length of__________________________________________ 63, 64,113
Seasonality of employment:
In specific processes _____________________________________ 80,81,116
Of all industrial workers _____________________________________ 57-60
State-line crossings ______________________________ -----___________
24
States, number of in which employment was secured ________________ 26-27
States, of principal employment_ _______________________ 47-48, 50, 111-112
Unemployment during migratory period ______________________ 63--00, 113
Work history of typical__________________________________________
4
Years spent as migrnuts------------------------------------------ 85-87
Interstate migration, extent of ________________________________________ 23-24
Intrastate migration, extent of ________________________________________ 23-24
Itineraries :
And work patterns----------------------------------------------- 27-45
Of workers In specific crops and processes:
Berry crops __________________________________________________ 37-39
Cotton crop __________________________________________________ 33,34
Fmlt crops __________________________________________________ 36, 37
Grain crops _______________________________________________ 34,35,37
Levee and dam construction __________________________________ 42, 44
Logging lnd111-1trY------------------------------------------ 42, 45, 46
Oil and gns production _______________ .________________________ 39, 40
Rnllroad maintenance _____________________________________ 39, 41, 42
Road construction ____________________________________________ 42,43
Sugar-bc<>t crop ___________ ------------- ___ ------------- ______ 87-39
S<>lec-tion of for study-------------------------------------------30
Jnpanese labor_______________________________________________________
Jobs, see Employment.
K<>rr, Clark,
111111
Tnylur, Uprisings on the Forms_______________________
Digitized by
Google
13
15n
Index
125
Labor supply:
PageCheap _________ ___ _____ ___ ____ __ ___ _______ __ __ _____ _____ _________ 12-14
Chine«e__________________________________________________________
13
Diversion of as aid to migrants ____________________________ 104-105, 107
Japanese_________________________________________________________
13
Mexican ___________________________________________________ 12-13,88--90·
Mobile, advantages to employers __________________________________ 13-75
Negro ___________________________________________________________ 88--00
Resident:
103
All'ected by migrants' wage leveL----------------------------9Not supported by certain industries-------------------------12
Surplus---------------------------------------- -----------------Unskilled, predominant among migrants--------------··-··--------7-8Limdis, Paul H., and Brooks, Farm Labor in the Ynkima Valley,
Washington _________________________________________________ 9n,67n,6Hn
Lescohier, Don D.:
Harvest Problems in the WhPat Belt_____________________________
19n
Labor lfarket, The_______________________________________________
2n
Levee and dam construction :
Itineraries of workers in _________________________________________ 42,44
Jobs, number of secured in __________________________________ 74, 114-11:\
Man-weeks of work in----------------------------~--------- 74,114-115
Requires migratory-casual workers________________________________
6
Seasonal fluctuation of employment in ________________________ 81, 82, 116Locatlon of operations requiring migratory-ca,mal workers______________
9
States of principal employment--------------------------- 45-51, 111-112
Logging industry:
Itineraries of workers in ______________________________________ 42, 45. 4(1
Jobs, number of secured in ___________________________________ 7-1, 114-115
Largest source of indw,trial employment_ _________________ 74, 75. 114-115
Man-weeks of work in _______________________________________ 74, 114-115Requires migratory-casual workers________________________________
7
Seasonal fluctuation of employment in _________________________ 81, 82, 116Man-weeks of employment, per month, by tYP<'-- iii-59, 7-t, 79, 81. 82, 114-115, 116
Mexican labor:
Merits of________________________________________________________
13
Proportion of among migrants, by type of worker ___________________ 88-89
Migrants (see also Agricultural workers; Combination workers; Industrial workers; Migratory-casual workers) :
Habitual and temporary_::_________________________________________
86
Types____________________________________________________________
1-2
Years spent as, by type __________________________________________ _ 85--87
Migration (see also Itineraries):
Employment and, histories _______________________________________ _
3-4
Extent of, by type of worker _____________________________________ _
24
Interstate ------------------------ ---------- - - ---- --------- - - -- -- - 2:3-24
Intrnstate ____________ • -------------- ----------------· ----------- 23--24
Migratory periods:
Employment during _______________________________________ 03-66. 113Length of______________________________________________ 60.62-6a,64
Unemployment during _____________________________________ 6.1-66, 113State-line crossings, by type of worker _____________________________ 23-24
130766°-37--10
Digitized by
Google
1W
Inde.i·
Migration (s,.,, a/.~o lti11PrariPs)-Contiuued.
Htates In whieh employment was found during _________ 26-27, 45-51, 111-112
,vork pnttPrm; uud itineraries during ______________________________ 27-4:\
Migratory-casual workPrs ( Hee a/.~o Agri<'nltnral workPrs: Combinntion
workers: lndustriul workeri<):
AldPd by Trnm,iPnt Helief Progr111n ________________________________ x-xI
Defl11ilion and identilieation______________________ ____ _____________
1-5
Employments followed b~·--------------------------------------- __
5-9
Indistinguishable from trump!< und trnnsienti<______________________
1-2
N111nbn of studied, by tYJ)(.'_______________________________________
111
Seni<onul industries 1111d operntlo11s rPquirp________________________
1. 8
.\lohility ( 11cc also Migration; IthwrariPs) :
Created by circmnstan<"PS________________________ ___________________ xn
State-line crossings, by tnie of worker _____________________________ 23-24
\Vnnderhu,t, personal histories depldh1g ___________________________ 90-93
Natidty characteristics, by type of workPr ----------------------------- 88-00
Xegrocs, proportion of among migrants, hy tnie of worker ____________ ~')O
:N'onresidents, Trurn,iPnt Helief Progrnm distlnguishP,L ___________________ 1x-x
:'\nmbPr of jobs, 11ec Employment.
l'\nmber of workers studied, hy tnll•-----------------------------------111
Oeenputional and physical deh•riorntion, of i<Pleetnl migrants ___________ 93-97
Off-sea,mn, length of_ _______________ ------------------------------ 63, 64,113
Oil nnd gas production:
Itineraries of workers in ________________________________________ 39, 40
Jobs, number of St'enrP<l in ___________________________________ 74, 114-115
Man-weeks of work in _______________________________________ 74, lH-115
Requires migratory-cai-<11111 workPrs_ ___________ ___________________
r,-7
Semmunl fluctuation of e11111loyment In ____________________________ 81,116
Orgnnfzation of workers _________________________________________ 16, 107-108
l'arker, Carleton, 'l'he Cnsnnl LahorPr 1111<1 Otlwr Es,-ny,.;________________
1111
Per,;onal churncterii<ti<-s of migrants ____________________________ 17-21. 85-102
Age ______________________________________________________________ 87-88
Color and 1111 th·it~· ------------ ______ ------- _______________________ 88~')0
Histories of selected migrnuts ____________________________________ 90-102
Years spent In migratory--casuul work ______________________________ 8;"'>-87
Physical, occnpatlonnl and, deterioration, of selected migrants ___________ 9:3-97
Political attitudes of selected migrants ________________________________ 99-10'2
Popnlntion density, Increase affects migrntory-cai-11111 worken,____________
lOi
Power and pipe-line construetion, requires migratory-cnsnal workers_____
6
Problems of migrants, solutions _____________________________________ 104-105
Proeesses:
And crop.'!:
Amount of employment in, by type of worker ___________ 71-77, 114-115
193-! changes in employment in specific _________________________ 83-8-!
SPnsonality of employment in comhl1111tion "of ____________ 80, 82, 83, llH
And employments followed by migratory-ea;mal workers____________
5-9
Industrial:
I•:mploynJPnt in ~flPeific _____________________________ 74, 75-76, 114-11:i
Sea:,;onulity of PlllJlloynl\'nt in _____________________________ 80, 81,116
Digitized by
Google
Index
127
Page
Progression of seasons and employment, see Seasonality of employmeut.
Protests against working conditious ___________ _______________ _________ 15-lu
Pursuits, see Agricultural pursuits; Industrial pursuits.
Race, see Color and nativity.
Racial discrimination, check on moblllty ___________________________ ____ 89-90
Railroad maintenance:
Itineraries of workers in ______________________________________ 39, -U, 42
Jobs, number of secured in __________________________________ 74, 114-115
Man-weeks of work In ___________________ __ _________________ H, 114-115
Requires migratory-casual workers _________ __________________ ·- --6
Seasonal fluctuation of employment In ____ _____________________ 81, 82, 116
.R£elief attitudes toward, of selected migrants ___________________________ 97-iin
kPport of the Commission on Industrial Relations _______________ 1211, a711, 10511
Resident labor su11ply :
A.ft'ected by migrants' wage IeveL__________________________________
103
Not supported by certain industril's________________________________
0
Road construction:
Itineraries of workers in ____________ ______________________________ 42, i3
Jobs, number of secured in ______________________________ __ __ H, 114---11:-i
Man-weeks of work in ___________________ _____________ ______ 74, 114-115
Requires migratory-casual workers________ ________________________
6
Seasonal fluctuation of l'mployment in _____ _____________ ______ 81, 82,116
Routes of tr,wel, see Itineraries.
Seasonal industries and operations, require migratory-casual workerR____ 1, 8
Seasonality of employment:
Climate produces_________________ _____ ___________________________
10
In specific crops and procesRes ___________________________ _ 77-8~.115, 116
Of various types of workers ___________________________ __ _________ 57--60
Shephard, Esther, Paul Bun~·an _______ _______________ ------------ ----2011
Shields, Louise F., Problem of the Automobile '"Floater··--------------- 2n, l:.!n
Solutions of migrants' 11roblems__________ --------------------- - ------104
Source of data for report_ _______________________________________ xi-xii, 111
Stabilization of migrants ________________ ______ ____________ 9-10. 104. 105--106
State-line crossings, by type of worker_ _______________________________ 23--24
States, number of in which employment was secured. hy type of worker __ 26---27
States, of principal employment, by type of workt•r_ _________ 4:i,47-51 , 111-11:!
Statistical Abstract of the United StntPs _________________________ 711, 7:!n, 75n
Stt'vens, JamPs, Paul Bunyan_______________ __________________________
2011
Sugar-beet crops:
Itineraries of workers in _________________________________________ 37-:~!)
Jobs, number of secured ln ____________ ______________________ H, 114-115
Man-weeks of work in ______________________________________ 74.114--11.5
Require migratory-casual workers______________________________ __
6
Seasonal fluctuation of employment ln ____________________________ 7!1. 11:i
Summary of report_ _______________________ -------------------------- XY-xix
Surplus labor supply_________________________________________________
12
Digitized by
Google
128
Index
Taylor, Paul S.:
Amerienn Mexican Frontier, An_________________________________
14n
Mt>xi<·nn Luhor in the UnitPd Statl's, Vulley of the South Platte,
Colorado ________________ ---------- ___________________________ 15n, 42n
and Knr, Uprisings on the Farms_________________________________
15n
and Vasl'y, Contemporary Baekground of California Farm
Labor ___________________________________________________ 100n, 107n
Temporary migrants, distinguished from bahituaL_____________________
86
Time spent in migratory-easual work, by years and type of worker ______ 8.'>-87
Tramp, di!itingnished from migratory-casual worker____________________
1
Transient bureaus of 13 cities, source of data_________________________
xi
Transient Relief Program:
Initiated, distinguishes between nonresidents______________________ b:-x
Relation to migrutory-<'astml workerf!_____________________________ x-xi
Turmel l'onstruetlon, requirPR mlgrutory-<'asual workers________________
6
Typ<•s of workers, definition__________________________________________
24n
Unemployment :
During migratory period, hy type of worker ___________________ ~6, 113
Insurance, etl'eet 011 migrants ___________________________________ 106-107
Surplus labor supply_____________________________________________
12
Unskilled workers, predominant among migratory-casual workers________
7-S
Va><ey, Tom, and Taylor, Contemporary Background of California Farm
La hor _______ ------------------------ ----- --------- - _---- - ------ 10611, 107n
Vegetable crops:
Jobs, 1111mher of secured in __________________________________ 74, 114-115
Man-weeks of work in _______________________________________ 74.114-115
Hequlre migratory-casual workers_________________________________
5-6
SPaso1111l fluetuation of employment in ____________________________ 79,115
Wage le,·el, migrants', effect on resident labor supply___________________
103
Wages, see Earnings.
Wanderlust, personal histories depicting _______________________________ 90-93
Webb, John N., The transient Unemployed ___________ ixn, xin, Sn, 26n, 85n, 88n
,VI1cat harn•i,t, rPqnires migrutory-eni,11111 work('rs, s,,c also Grain crops__
5
Whitaker, P. W., Fruit Trumps_______________________________________
19n
Woofh'r, T. J., Jr., Lnndlord and Tenant on the Cotton Plantation_______
72n
,vork, see Employment.
Work bh;tori('s, by type of worker, earnings, hours worked, and extent
of migration_______________________________________________________
8-4
Work patterns and itineraries, by type of worker, 11ce also Itineraries_ 27-45, 46
Worker type, definition______________________________________________
24n
Working conditions:
Due to oversupply of workers ___________________________________ _
15
Protests against_ _______ -------------- ___ - --------- --------------- lr>--16
Yf'ars spent in migratory-('a,mnl work, hy type of worker _______________ 85-87
0
Digitized by
Google
@FedFRASER