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