The full text on this page is automatically extracted from the file linked above and may contain errors and inconsistencies.
UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF LABOR
W. N. DOAK, Secretary
BUREAU OF LABOR STATISTICS
ETHELBERT STEWART, Commissioner
UNITED STATES
GOVERNMENT PRINTING OFFICE
WASHINGTON: 1931
For sale by the Superintendent of Documents, Washington, D. C.
Price 15 cents per copy
Subscription price per year, United States, Canada, Mexico, $1.50; other countries, $2.25
https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
C E R T IF IC A T E
T h is p u b lic a tio n is issu e d p u r su a n t t o th e
p ro v isio n s o f th e su n d ry c iv il a c t (4 1 S ta ts.
1 4 3 0 ) a p p ro v ed M arch 4, 1921.
C o n te n ts
Special articles:
Page
L abor conditions in th e T errito ry of H aw aii, 1929-1930_____u______
1
C ost of fam ily relief in 100 cities, 1929 a n d 1930, by G lenn Steele,
U nited S tates C hild ren ’s B u re a u _________________________ ______
20
In te rn a tio n a l F ed eratio n of T rad e U nions, by F ritz K um m er, B erlin . _
28
E m ploym ent conditions and relief:
35
U nem ploym ent in th e U n ited S ta te s, 1930 a n d 1 9 3 1 _______________
R ep o rt of A dvisory C om m ittee on E m p lo y m en t S ta tistic s__________
41
Loans as a n unem p lo y m en t relief m e a su re __________________________
43
C onnecticut— R ep o rt of S ta te E m ergency C o m m ittee on E m p lo y
m e n t___________________________________________________________
44
N ew Y ork— R ochester un em p lo y m en t benefit p la n _________________
47
U nem ploym ent in foreign co u n tries________________________________
48
G erm any— A p poin tm en t of F ed eral com m ission to stu d y u nem ploy
m e n t__________________________________________________________
52
G re a t B rita in —
W ork of U nem ploym ent G ran ts C o m m ittee_______ _______ ____
52
C hanges in n u m b ers em ployed, 1923 to 1930___________________
54
In d u stria l and lab o r conditions:
L abor recom m endations in g o vernors’ messages, 1931_______________
58
R e a d ju stm en t of w orkers displaced b y p la n t s h u td o w n s____________
69
Econom ic s ta tu s of th e N egro______________________________________
73
A doption of union -m an ag em en t cooperation in tw o p la n ts __________
78
Increased lab o r p ro d u c tiv ity in coal m ines, 1911 to 1929___________
79
M innesota— L abo r conditions in highw ay co n stru ctio n c a m p s________
80
In d ia — L abor conditions in th e m in es______________________________
83
In su ran ce and benefit p la n s :
D elaw are old-age pension a c t______________________________________
86
Life insurance a n d sick benefits fo r street-railw ay em ployees of
G ary, I n d _____________________ _________________________________
87
H ealth and in d u stria l h y g ie n e :
Incidence of illness am ong a d u lt w age e a rn ers_____________________
88 ~In d u stria l accidents an d safety :
A ccident experience in th e iron a n d steel in d u stry to th e en d of 1929_ _
93
Safety code for in d u stria l lig h tin g __________________________________
1X0
111
New H am pshire— In d u stria l accidents, 1929-30____________________
P ennsylvania— F a ta l accidents in E rie ______________________
111
W orkm en’s com pensatio n :
R ecent com pensation rep o rts—
A labam a____________
X12
Id a h o ________________________________________________________
X12
N ew H am p sh ire______________________________________________
113
S outh D a k o ta ________________________________________________
114
Labor law s and court d e c isio n s:
M erchant m arine a c t applicable to stevedore in ju red on foreign s h ip . _
115
N o rth C arolina— Pow er of in d u stria l com m issioner to com pel te s ti
m ony of w itnesses_______________________________________________
116
Tennessee— In ju ry du rin g noon h o u r held com pensable____________
118
Small lo a n s :
C ost of cred it to th e sm all b o rro w er________________________________
119
Labor aw ards and decisio n s:
R ailw ay clerks— New Y ork C en tra l R ailroad, Buffalo a n d E a s t_____
125
M otion-picture operato rs— Colorado Springs, C olo__________________
125
A n th racite m iners— P e n n sy lv an ia__________________________________
126
h i
https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
IV
CONTENTS
In d u stria l d is p u te s :
Page
S trikes a n d lo ck o u ts in th e U n ited S tates in F eb ru ary , 1931________
127
C onciliation w ork of th e D e p a rtm e n t of L ab o r in F e b ru a ry , 1931____
131
G reat B ritain — E n d of d isp u te in c o tto n -tex tile in d u s try ___________
134
L abor tu r n o v e r:
L ab o r tu rn o v e r in A m erican factories, F e b ru a ry , 1931______________
137
H ousing:
B uilding p erm its in prin cip al cities, F eb ru ary , 1931________________
146
B uilding p erm its in p rin cip al cities in 1930, b y ty p e s of b u ild in g _____
159
B uilding erectio n costs in D e tro it____________________________________
174
Wages an d h o u rs of lab o r :
W ages a n d h o u rs of lab o r in sawmills, 1930________________________
177
R ecen t changes in w ages a n d h o u rs of la b o r________________________
183
F arm w age a n d la b o r situ a tio n on Ja n u a ry 1, 1931________________
186
A bolition of n ig h t em p lo y m e n t of w om en a n d m in o rs in c o tto n textile in d u s try _________________________________________________
187
C onnecticut— W ag e-p ay m en t p lan s in facto ries_____________________
187
N ew Y ork— V acations in m an u fa c tu rin g in d u strie s_________________
189
A ustralia— R ailw ay w o rk ers’ h o u rs in W estern A u stra lia___________
190
C anada— W ages a n d h o u rs of lab o r, 1929 a n d 1930_________________
191
F rance— W ages in M arseille, 1930___________________________________
195
Ita ly — W ages in v ario u s in d u stries a n d localities___________________
195
T rend of em p loym en t:
S um m ary for F e b ru a ry , 1931______________________________________
201
E m p lo y m en t in selected m an u fa c tu rin g in d u strie s in F e b ru ary , 1931_
203
E m p lo y m en t in coal m ining in F e b ru a ry , 1931_____________________
217
E m p lo y m en t in m etalliferous m ining in F e b ru ary , 1931_____________
218
E m p lo y m en t in q u arry in g a n d nonm etallic m ining in F e b ru ary , 193U
219
E m p lo y m en t in crude petro leu m p roducing in F e b ru a ry , 1931______
219
E m p lo y m en t in public u tilities in F eb ru ary , 1931__________________
220
E m p lo y m en t in wholesale a n d re ta il tra d e in F e b ru a ry , 1931_______
222
E m p lo y m en t in ho tels in F e b ru ary , 1931___________________________
223
E m p lo y m en t in canning a n d p reserving in F e b ru a ry , 1931__________
224
E m p lo y m en t in lau n d ries in F e b ru ary , 1931________________________
225
E m p lo y m en t in dyeing a n d cleaning in F eb ru ary , 1931_____________
225
Indexes of em p lo y m en t a n d p ay-roll to ta ls— M ining, quarrying,
crude p etro leu m producing, p ublic utilities, tra d e , hotels, a n d
canning----------------------------------- --------------------------------------------------226
E m p lo y m en t in building co n stru ctio n in F eb ru ary , 1931_____________
228
E m p lo y m en t on Class I steam railroads in th e U n ite d S ta te s _______
228
C hanges in em p lo y m en t a n d p a y rolls in various S ta te s_____________
230
W holesale an d re ta il p ric e s :
R etail prices of food in F e b ru a ry , 1931___________ _________________
237
R etail prices of coal in F e b ru ary , 1931_____________________________
244
C om parison of retail-p rice changes in th e U n ited S ta te s a n d in
foreign co u n tries________________________________________________
246
Index nu m b ers of w holesale prices in F e b ru a ry , 1931_______________
249
Im m igration an d e m ig ra tio n :
S tatistics of im m ig ratio n fo r Ja n u a ry , 1931_________________________
252
P ublications relatin g to lab o r:
Official— U n ited S ta te s____________________________________________
253
Official— Foreign co u n tries_______ .____________________________ ____
254
Unofficial_________________________________________________________
255
https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
T h is I s s u e in B r ie f
The survey of labor conditions in Hawaii, made by the Bureau of
Labor Statistics in 1930, included racial distribution of the workers,
living conditions, hours of labor, earnings^ union wage rates, and
labor productivity on sugar and pineapple plantations; and similar
though less complete data for other industries. Average earnings,
excluding housing and perquisites, on sugar plantations were $1.82
per day, and on pineapple plantations, 22.5 cents per hour, while
m other industries hourly earnings ranged from 21.3 cents in coffee
mills to 85.7 cents in printing and publishing. Page 1.
Accident rates in the iron and steel industry increased in 1929 as
compared with 1928. This was true of both frequency and severity
rates, and represented the first increase in frequency since 1922 and
in severity since 1926. Page 93.
Reported expenditures for family relief in 100 cities in 1930 were
approximately $40,000,000, and represented an increase of 89 per cent
over 1929, according to a survey made by the United States Children’s
Bureau. Page 20.
The, number of able-bodied persons out of a job and seeking work in
the' Jjnited States in January, 1931, was 6,050,000, according to an
estimate of the United States Department of Commerce, based on a
special census of 19 larger cities. This represented an increase of
149 per cent over the census of unemployment made in April, 1930.
Page 35.
Cash loans to workers who are in need of funds because of unemploy
ment have been inaugurated by a number of companies. Such loans
serve to relieve the distress among workers facing protracted lay-offs
in such an emergency as the present, and benefit the employer who
wishes to keep his working force as nearly as possible intact pending
the revival of business activities. The loans are made on the under
standing that they are to be repaid in installments deducted from
future wages and are made either with or without interest. Page 43.
A joint unemployment benefit plan was recently put into effect by I f
plants in Rochester, N. Y. The companies concerned normally em
ploy altogether about 26,000 workers. Stabilization measures which
have eliminated periodic unemployment to a large extent had been
adopted by these firms prior to the present depression, and when it
became necessary to reduce output in the different companies the
managements have, as far as possible, reduced the working hours in
order to reduce the number of lay-offs. Page 47.
The, messages of the governors of 43 States to the 1931 legislatures
contained many recommendations of interest to labor. Among the
measures proposed are those concerned with agricultural relief,
unemployment, workmen’s compensation, hours of labor, woman
and child welfare, injunctions, the employment of aliens on public
works, convict labor, old-age pensions, the regulation of public
utilities, and publicly owned power. Page 58.
https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
v
VI
THIS ISSUE IN BRIEF
" Average hourly earnings in the sawmill industry declined 3.2 per cent
from 1928 to 1930, according to a study by the United States Bureau
of Labor Statistics covering 50,951 wage earners of 324 representa
tive sawmills which in 1930 produced about 94 per cent of the total
lumber output of the United States. Average earnings per hour in
1930 were 35.9 cents, as compared with 37.1 cents in 1928, and full
time weekly earnings averaged $20.28 in 1930 and $21 in 1928.
Both hourly and weekly earnings were about the same as in 1925.
Average full-time hours per week in 1930—56.5—were practically the
same as in 1928, when the average was 56.6, but had declined from
58.1 in 1925. Page 177.
A n old-age pension law was enacted in Delaware in January, 1931.
The law is unique among the old-age pension legislation thus far
enacted in the United States in that the whole cost of the pension
system is borne by the State. Page 86.
There was an estimated expenditure of $1,766,1 f f , 666 for building
operations during the calendar year 1930 in the 311 cities from which
reports were received by the Bureau of Labor Statistics. This is a
decrease of 41.8 per cent as compared with the expenditure in these
same cities during the calendar year 1929. The estimated cost of
new residential buildings decreased 57.6 per cent and the estimated
cost of new nonresidential buildings, 26.1 per cent, comparing 1930
with 1929. In these cities dwelling places were provided in new
buildings for 130,503 families, a decrease of 48.4 per cent in the num
ber of families provided for as compared with 1929. Page 159.
The increased labor productivity in the coal mines of the United
States is shown in figures issued by the United States Bureau of Mines,
giving the number of man-shifts and man-hours required to produce
1 ton of coal in each year from 1911 to 1929 (p. 79). The produc
tion of 1 ton of coal (bituminous and anthracite combined) required
1.919 hours in 1929 as compared with 2.72 hours in 1911. In anthra
cite mines alone the time required in 1929 was 3.694 hours, as com
pared with 3.754 hours in 1911, and in bituminous mines, 1.668
hours in 1929 as compared with 2.472 hours in 1911.
https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
MONTHLY
Ah« 28 I83f
LABOR R E V I E W
U. S. BUREAU OF LABOR STATISTICS
vol.
WASHINGTON
32, n o . 4
a p r il ,
1931
L ab or C o n d itio n s in t h e T e r r ito r y o f H a w a ii, 1929-1930
N COMPLIANCE with the organic law of the Territory of
Hawaii, entitled “ An act to provide a government for the Terri
tory of Hawaii,” the United States Bureau of Labor Statistics in
1930 made a study of the commercial, industrial, social, and sanitary
conditions of the laboring classes in the Territory and presents
herein a summary of the results. The full report is published as
Bulletin No. 534 of this bureau.
The inhabited islands of the Territory and the population of each
as reported for 1930 by the Bureau of the Census are:
I
Population
O ahu_____
H aw aii___
M au i_____
K a u a i____
M olokai__
L a n a i_____
N iih au ____
M idw ay__
K ahoolaw e
202,
73,
48,
35,
5,
2,
887
325
756
806
032
356
136
36
2
T o ta l---------------------------------------1________________ 368,336
The city of Honolulu, on the island of Oahu, with a population of
137,582 in 1930, is the largest on the islands. Hilo, on the island of
Hawaii, with a population of 19,468 in 1930, is the next city in popu
lation. Between 1920 and 1930 the population of the Territory
increased 43.9 per cent; that of Honolulu, 65.1 per cent; and that of
Hilo, 86.6 per cent.
In 1930 there were 5,942 farms on the islands. The number by
islands ranged from 1 on Niihau to 3,422 on Hawaii. There were no
farms on Midway or Kahoolawe.
Racial Distribution of Population
T h e racial distribution, based on the number of each race according
to the June 30, 1929, report of the Governor of Hawaii and the 1930
census, is shown below:
H aw aiian s_________
C aucasian-H aw aiian
A siatic-H aw aiian __
P o rtu g u ese_________
P o rto R ic a n ______ _
S p an ish ____________
O ther C au casia n ___
https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
21,
17,
10,
30,
7,
1,
39,
106
164
903
609
109
915
154
C hinese_____________________ 25, 968
Ja p a n e se ____________________ 141, 515
6, 593
K o re a n _____________________
F ilip in o _____________________ 65, 785
O th e r_______________________
515
[775]
T otal.. _ ______________ 368,336
1
2
MONTHLY LABOR REVIEW
In May, 1929, there was a total of 49,890 adult male employees on
the 41 sugar plantations of the Hawaiian Sugar Planters’ Association
(which includes all except a very few small and unimportant planta
tions on the Hawaiian Islands). The distribution of these employees
by race was, Filipinos, 34,681 or 69.5 per cent of the total; Japanese,
9,208 or 18.5 per cent; Portuguese, 1,654 or 3.3 per cent; American,
1,265 or 2.5 per cent; Chinese, 968 or 1.9 per cent; Porto Rican, 807 or
1.6 per cent; Hawaiian, 548 or 1.1 per cent; Korean, 517 or 1 per cent;
Spanish, 85 or 0.2 per cent; and all other, 157 or 0.3 per cent. Of the
1,636 adult females, 1,384 or 84.6 per cent were Japanese.
A large cannery in Honolulu was found to employ 42.1 per cent
Japanese, 16.4 per cent Hawaiian, 11.7 per cent Filipino, 9.7 per
cent Chinese, 7.6 per cent Portuguese, 6.8 per cent part Hawaiian,
2.6 per cent American, 2.2 per cent Korean; the other 0.9 per cent
was scattered among various races, no one of which constituted more
than one-half of 1 per cent of the total.
As showing the difference between the rural and urban population,
particularly as it affects the Filipino, figures collected for two of the
larger pineapple plantations, which during the peak period of 1929
employed 4,248 persons, show that 30.5 per cent of them were
Japanese, 55 per cent Filipinos, 5.4 per cent Koreans, 4.7 per cent
Chinese, only 0.8 per cent Hawaiians, and 3.6 per cent other races.
Savings Bank Accounts, by Races
I n a n important bank in Honolulu the years ending June 30,
1927, 1928, and 1929, show a relatively small proportion of money de
posited in the savings bank by the Japanese and a relatively large
proportion by the Chinese. The savings deposits in the banks by all
races were a little more than $27,000,000 in 1927, $31,000,000 in
1928, and $35,000,000 in 1929. The deposits of the Japanese, with
a population of more than five times that of the Chinese, were 19.3
per cent of the total deposited by all races in 1927, 19.6 per cent in
1928, and 23.4 per cent in 1929, as compared with deposits by Chinese
of 17.4 per cent of the total in 1927, 16.4 per cent in 1928, and 15.1
per cent in 1929. In this connection a statement was furnished
this bureau by the postmaster at Honolulu showing that, in the last
year for which figures were available, money orders issued in Hawaii
and payable in Japan amounted to $306,930.23, and orders issued in
Japan and paid at the Honolulu office $2,066.25. Money orders
issued in Hawaii and payable in China aggregated $2,849.38, and those
issued in China and paid at the Honolulu office were $162.29. This
shows that while the Chinese in Hawaii are sending very little money
back to China, the Japanese are sending very large sums back to
Japan.
Living Conditions
T h e industrial, social, and living conditions of the city of Honolulu
are a very essential part of those of the Territory as a whole. The
first impression of the city is that of cleanliness and roominess. For
the most part the streets are wide and are kept exceptionally clean.
While the number of automobiles per capita of population is probably
as great as that in any city on the mainland, the width of the streets
prevents congestion and permits of unusual facilities for parking.
https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
[776]
LABOR CONDITIONS IN HAWAII
3
That section of the older part of the city which conforms most
closely to what is usually designated as the “ slum section” contains
many blocks of extreme congestion, but even in these districts not
only are the streets kept clean but the interior of even the more
crowded homes and tenements strikes one as unusually clean and
well kept.
The population is essentially oriental, as indicated by the figures
of racial distribution shown above, and yet racial antagonism is
conspicuously absent except for a feeling of apprehension among the
other races, including the American, because of the growing propor
tion of Filipinos in the population of the city.
Hours and Earnings in Hawaiian Industries
S u g a r plantations, including sugar mills, and pineapple plantations
and canneries, are the outstanding industries in the Hawaiian Islands.
The general impression that they constitute all of Hawaiian industry
is erroneous, as there are many other industries, including building
construction, steam and street railways, road building, steamship
transportation, steam laundries, manufacture and distribution of
electricity and gas, printing and publishing, stock raising, manufac
ture of tin cans, dry docks, dairies, foundries and machine shops,
slaughtering and meat packing, and the manufacture of overalls and
shirts.
Wage figures were obtained covering hours and earnings in 1929 or
1930 for 67,802 wage earners in the above-mentioned industries.
Based on the 1930 census of the islands, this number is 18 per cent of
the total population of the Territory of Hawaii and more than 85 per
cent of all wage earners in all industries on the islands. All indus
tries of importance in the islands were included in the study. The
bureau, in studies in the mainland States, usually collects representa
tive wage figures for from 20 to 50 per cent of the total number of
wage earners in each industry.
Summary data as to average full-time hours per week, earnings
per hour, and full-time earnings per week are shown in Table 1 for
males in each of the 21 industries, for females in each of the 8 indus
tries in which they are employed, and for both sexes combined.
Average full-time hours per week are not shown for sugar plantations
because of the great variation in hours in the different kinds of work.
Adult males on sugar plantations earned in May, 1929, at the basic
rates and with bonus for attendance, an average of $1.84 per day.
This average and the average of $1.30 for females and $1.82 for both
sexes are for May, when averages were as much or more than for any
other month or for the year. The average for both sexes for the year
was $1.66 per day. These earnings and those for females do not
include the perquisites (estimated at a cost of $28 per month to the
plantations) of houses, fuel, water, and medical and hospital service,
furnished without charge by the plantations to employees.
The average full-time hours for all the 3,477 employees on the
pineapple plantations (3,316 males and 161 females) were 60 per
week. The males earned an average of 22.7 cents, the females an
average of 11.6 cents, and both sexes together an average of 22.5
cents per hour. Average full-time earnings per week were $13.62 for
males, $6.96 for females, and $13.50 per week for males and females
https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
[777 ]
4
MONTHLY LABOR REVIEW
combined. The earnings in the table include those at the basic rates
and the bonus combined, but not perquisites.
The average full-time hours of males ranged by industries from 44
per week in printing and publishing, machine shops, and foundries to
66.4 per week in dairies; and of females ranged from 44 per week in
printing and publishing to 60 per week on pineapple plantations, in
pineapple canneries, and in tin-can manufacture.
The average earnings per hour of males ranged by industries, ex
cluding plantations, from 17.4 cents in the making of overalls and
shirts, to 91.5 cents in printing and publishing; of females, ranged
from 14.1 cents in coffee mills to 37.8 cents per hour in printing and
publishing; and of both sexes ranged from 21.3 cents in coffee mills
to 85.7 cents in printing and publishing.
The average full-time earnings per week of males ranged by indus
tries from $7.86 in overalls and shirt making to $40.26 in printing and
publishing; of females ranged from $6.96 on pineapple plantations to
$16.63 in printing and publishing; and of both sexes, ranged from
$11.74 in coffee mills to $37.71 in printing and publishing.
T a b l e 1 .— N U M B E R OF E M P L O Y E E S A N D AVER A G E H O U R S A N D E A R N IN G S IN T H E
T E R R IT O R Y OF H A W A II, 1929-1930, BY IN D U S T R Y
Number of em
ployees
Average full-time
hours per week
Average earnings
per hour
Average full-time
earnings per week
Industry
Fe Total Male Fe T otal Male Fe T otal
Fe
Male male
Male male
Total
male
male
Sugar plantations______ 47, 300 1,474 149,671
Pineapple plantations... 3, 316
161 3,477
Pineapple canneries____ 3,937 3,579 7,516
Building construction...
906
906
Steam railways________
660
660
Road building________
383
383
Longshore labor______
381
381
Steam laundries_______
102
280
178
Tin-can manufacturing..
220
268
48
E lectricity—M anufacture and distribution .
256
256
Street railways.. . . . . .
236
236
Printing and publishing:
Newspaper and book
and job______
. .
194
24
218
Stock raising....................
191
191
Machine shops____
141
141
Gas—M a n u fa ctu r in g
and distribution____
102
102
D ry dock. ___________
94
94
Dairies______ _______
84
84
Coffee m ills_________ _
32
42
74
Foundries _. _______
66
66
Slaughtering and meat
packin g____ ________
26
26
Overalls and shirt making------------------------- 1
16
17
60.0
60.0
49.6
51.1
49.3
54.0
54.0
60.0
(2)
(2) 3$1.84 3$1.30 ‘$1.82 5$11.04 5$7. 80 6$10. 92
60. C 60.0 7.227 7.116 i. 225 113. 62 7 6.96 713. 50
60.0 60.0 .271 .168 .224 16.26 10.08 13. 44
49.6 .506
.506 25.10
25.10
51.1 .446
22 79
. 446 22. 79
49.3 .506
. 506 21. 95
24. 95
54.0 .468
.468 25. 27
25 27
54.0 54.0 .416 .190 .272 22.46 10. 26 14.69
60.0 60.0 .401 .243 .373 24.06 14. 58 22.38
45.1
52.5
44.0
53.0
44.0
48.0
45.0
66.4
55.3
44.0
44.0
55.0
51.0
45.2
45.2
45.1
52. 5
.707
. 544
44.0
53.0
44.0
.915
.275
.685
48.0
45.0
66.4
55.1
44.0
.478
. 578
.299
.307
.649
51.0
.347
45.2
.174
.378
.141
.307
.707
. 544
31.89
26. 62
31. 89
26. 62
.857
.275
.685
40.26 16. 63
14. 58
30.14
37. 71
14. 58
30.14
.478
. 578
. 299
.213
.649
22.94
26. 01
19.85
16. 98
28. 56
22.94
26 01
19 85
11.74
28. 56
.347
17. 70
.298
7. 76
7.86 13.88
17.70
13.74
1Includes 349 male minors, 19 female minors, and 529 minors whose sex was not reported.
2Range, according to kind of work, from 33 to 72—average not computed.
3Per day for adults at basic rates and w ith bonus, but not including perquisites (rental value of houses,
value of fuel, water, medical and hospital service for sickness or accidental injury of any kind) furnished
to employees by plantations without any charge to employees. The value was estimated at $28 per
month or $1 per day.
4Per day for adults and minors combined; minors earned an average of 98 cents per day.
5 For adults but not including perquisites. (See note 3.)
6 For adults and minors; average for minors $5.88 per week.
7A t basic rates and w ith bonus, but not including perquisites. (See note 3.)
https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
[ 778 ]
LABOR CONDITIONS IN HAWAII
£
Sugar Industry
T h e principal industry of the Territory of Hawaii is the growing,
harvesting, and milling of sugar cane. The annual report of the
Governor of Hawaii for the fiscal year ending September 30, 1928,
shows 130,968 acres of land in these islands harvested in sugar cane.
The tons of cane harvested were 7,710,508, from which 897,396 tons
of raw sugar were produced. The tons of cane produced per acre
were 58.87 and of raw sugar, 6.85, while the tons of cane per ton of
raw sugar were 8.59. The average tonnage of cane per acre as applied
to the entire Territory is somewhat misleading, owing to the fact that
the island of Hawaii, which is the largest island of the group and
contains the largest sugar-cane acreage, had a very low yield (49.17
tons) in comparison with the other islands; Oahu, for instance, had
an average yield of 79.35 tons of cane per acre, some of the plantations
and parts of plantations yielding as much as 100 tons per acre.
Hawaiian production of cane per acre, however, is not comparable
with the yield of the other sugar-producing countries of the world.
In Hawaii the normal producing time is 18 months, though in many
instances the period extends to 20 and even 22 months. In all the
other sugar-cane growing countries of the world the rated output of
cane is the number of tons per acre per annum—that is, the yield is
calculated on the planted area and not on the harvested acreage, as
in Hawaii. The yield of raw sugar per ton of sugar cane, however, is
somewhat greater in Hawaii, due both to the development and culti
vation of high grades of cane and to the better methods of milling.
The production of cane sugar in Hawaii in 1929 was 913,670 short
tons. Production in the Hawaiian Islands, which was less than 11,000
short tons each year from 1837 to 1872, reached 57,088 tons in 1882;
108,112 tons in 1886; 221,828 tons in 1896; 289,544 tons in 1900, the
year in which the islands were annexed to the United States; 360,038
tons in 1901, an increase of 24 per cent in the first year the islands
were a part of the United States; 617,038 tons in 1914, the year of
the beginning of the World War; 701,433 tons in 1924; 811,333 tons
in 1927; and reached 904,040 short tons in 1928.
Productivity of labor.—The increase during recent years in output
per man-day or per man-year throughout all the sugar plantations of
Hawaii is remarkable. In so far as this increased production results
from the improvement in types of sugar cane now grown over types
formerly grown, it reaches even to the small growers or farmers who
produce only a few acres of cane and sell such cane to the plantations
having grinding mills.
A plantation on the island of Oahu, with practically the same labor
force, produced 40,000 tons of raw sugar in 1920 and 70,136 tons in
1929. This company in 1922 produced an average of 49.09 tons of
cane per acre; in 1928 the average was 94.07 tons per acre, while on
many of its separate fields the production was over 100 tons per acre.
Measured in tons of 96° raw sugar, 6.68 tons per acre were produced
in 1922 and 12.28 tons in 1928.
Another plantation, on the island of Hawaii, increased its output of
raw sugar from 6.7 tons per man-year in 1900 to 24.22 tons per manyear in 1929. This increase was due to several factors. Several
years ago a pest or blight of some sort practically destroyed the sugar
cane on the island. Since that time the Hawaiian Sugar Planters’
https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
[779 ]
6
MONTHLY LABOR REVIEW
Association has built up a remarkable laboratory for developing
types of cane that will be more adapted to Hawaiian soil, more
prolific in sugar content or yield, and more immune from pests.
Machinery is used at every stage of production, beginning with the
clearing of the ground. Plowing is now done with 4, 5, and 6 disk
plows, arranged in tandem and drawn by 62-horsepower caterpillar
tractors, which plow from 14 to 24 inches deep. The soil is thus
put in a condition which would have been impossible formerly and
at a great deal less expenditure of man power.
Some of the more striking methods by which greater production
has been secured with practically a stationary labor force are the
greater use of much better fertilizers; the more systematic and ex
tensive use of irrigation; the practice—quite general, though not
universal—of burning the blades from the lower part of the stalk
instead of stripping it by hand, as formerly; the use of enormous
cranes, each one of which, operated by two men, performsthe work
of 35 men in loading the cane onto the cars for transportation to the
grinding mill; and more efficient methods of laying tracks upon which
these cars are conveyed to the mills.
The planters’ association has established a bureau which is con
stantly turning out minor labor-saving devices which in the aggregate
do much to increase output of the labor force, if not actually reducing
the force.
Irrigation and fertilization.—It is surprising to learn that land as
rich as that found for the most part in the Territory of Hawaii should
require an enormous amount of fertilizing, and that, with the tremen
dous amount of rainfall common in most parts of the Territory, irri
gation should be necessary. However, when it is realized that from 80
to 90 tons of sugar cane is removed from an acre of land and that 87
per cent of the weight of this cane consists of extractable juice, one is
not unprepared to learn that it requires 4,000 tons of water to mature
the cane for a ton of sugar. When it is realized that in the fertile
fields of Illinois not more than 2% tons of corn per acre, not counting
the stalks—incidentally, neither are the weight of the blade and seed
of sugar cane counted—are taken from the soil, as against 90 tons of
sugar cane per acre from the soil of Hawaii, one can readily believe
that no natural soil fertility could be found anywhere in the world
to stand such a strain unaided.
Source of labor supply.—The source of labor supply for the industry
has shifted many times, being originally the Hawaiian Islands, and
subsequently China, Japan, Portugal, Spain, Porto Rico, and Korea.
The present tendency is to depend almost exclusively upon the
Philippine Islands for plantation laborers.
Unquestionably the sugar plantations of Hawaii are a great boon
to the individual Filipinos who take advantage of the higher wages
paid. Whether or not the Philippine Islands are the better for this
drawing off of their younger and more physically fit male population
raises a question this bureau does not feel called upon to answer.
The social question created in Hawaii is, however, quite distinct
from the problem of labor supply for any one or two or all of its
industries. Employees of the former immigrations were at the outset
single men, or men immigrating for the purpose of severing marital
obligations they no longer cared to carry. The Chinese, however,
https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
[780]
LABOR CONDITIONS IN HAWAII
7
were accepted by the native Hawaiians, and considerable intermar
riage of Chinese men with Hawaiian women occurred. The Ameri
cans had set the example in intermarriage with Hawaiian women even
back in the missionary days. Later on a considerable number of
Chinese women immigrated and became the wives of the Chinese
workers. The Japanese were able in the course of time more or less
to remedy the social situation so far as they were concerned through
the “ picture bride” device.
The Filipino is not accepted by the native Hawaiian girls, nor by
the children of any blends of Hawaiian women with men of former
immigration—at least not to the same extent. There is unquestion
ably a feeling of social antagonism to the Filipino.
This large excess and. continuing large importation of single men
creates a social question which in the long run must become a bigger
problem than either the sugar or pineapple industry or both.
A labor policy more comprehensive than merely securing plenty
of labor for the sugar and pineapple industries must sooner or later
force itself upon Hawaii. This is not necessarily a Filipino question.
While fully 80 per cent of the crimes committed by Filipinos in
Hawaii are directly or indirectly sex crimes, there is no reason to
believe that the same number of young and vigorous single men of any
other race or from any other part of the world, however highly civilized,
would be more observant of the moral code under the same circum
stances.
There is, however, a social side of the labor problems that will
eventually override the purely industrial side, especially when in
dustry is narrow either in its scope or ownership. It must happen—
indeed is now happening—that the employers will have the conviction
forced upon them that married men are better and ultimately cheaper
plantation labor, because safer and better citizens. It is not within
the power of industry to ignore over a long period of time the fact
that man is a social being. Family life stabilizes employment as
well as social conditions, and as the permanent population increases
a wider range of industries will be necessary for the community and
the community will force them upon the islands, even on soil that is
good for sugar, and at a rental or purchase price which will enable
the people to cultivate the soil and develop industries. Eventually
institutions must prove themselves made for man, not man for insti
tutions.
It is neither socially, industrially, nor economically wise for Hawaii
to import such a proportion of its total food supply as it does now.
The tendency in 1-crop or in 2-crop districts to ignore everything
but the principal industry is not of course confined to Hawaii. Cuba,
another sugar-cane country, imports from the United States fruits
which grow wild in Cuba. The distance between Hawaii and the
mainland of the United States, or any other country for that matter,
is so great that importations of articles necessary for the sustenance
of life and the ordinary comforts of living add so greatly to the cost
of these things that eventually these living costs will defeat the
purposes of a cheap labor supply drawn from no matter where.
Earnings in the sugar industry.—A representative sugar planta
tion, one of the 41 covered in the study, had a total of 1,218 em
https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
L781]
8
MONTHLY LABOR REVIEW
ployees, “ not on a monthly basis/’ on its pay rolls in May, 1929, and
an average of 1,262 employees per month in 1929. The plantation
was in operation 27 days in May and 309 days in 1929. This and all
other plantations were on a 6-day week basis. The 1,218 on the rolls
in May worked a total of 25,786 days, or an average of 21.2 days in
the month. This average was 78.52 per cent of the 27 (full-time)
days that the plantation was in operation in the month. The em
ployees on the plantation in 1929 worked a total of 305,943 days.
Based on the average of 1,262 employees per month and the days
worked by employees in the year, an average of 20.2 days per month
was worked in 1929. The plantation was in operation 309 days in
1929, or an average of 25.8 days per month. The average of" 20.2
days per month worked by employees was 78.29 per cent of the
average of 25.8 (full-time) days per month that the plantation was
in operation in 1929.
Average earnings include the earnings of employees at basic rates,
and also a bonus of 10 per cent of such earnings which was paid
monthly to each employee who worked 23 or more days in the month.
In May the bonus amounted to $2,838, or 8.37 percent of the amount
earned by the 1,218 employees at basic rates. In 1929 the bonus
amounted to $32,784, or 8.07 per cent of the amount earned by all
employees on the pay rolls of this plantation in that year. ' In
cluding the bonus, average earnings on the plantation were $1.42
per day in May and $1.44 per day in 1929 and $30.16 per month in
May and $29 per month in 1929.
The 49,671 employees on the pay rolls on the 41 plantations in May
earned, including the bonus, an average of $1.82 per day and $43.31
per month. Averages in 1929 were $1.66 per day and $36.24 per
month. Average earnings ranged by plantations from $1.33 to $2.78
per day in May and from $1.14 to $2.16 per day in 1929; also from
$29.24 to $67.84 per month in May and from $22.58 to $46.75 in 1929.
In May the bonus amounted to $149,573, or 7.47 per cent of the earn
ings at basic rates. The amount paid as bonus in 1929 was $1,452,499,
or 7.24 per cent of the earnings in the year at basic rates.
As already stated, the earnings per day and per month do not
include the value of the perquisites provided. An official of the
Hawaiian Sugar Planters’ Association estimated that the cost per
month to the plantations per family is: House rent, $20; fuel and
water, $4^medical and hospital service, $4; or a total of $28 per
month. ^ Single employees are lodged, 3, 4, or 5 to a house, either in
houses like those furnished to families or in boarding houses. Medical
and hospital services for single employees are estimated to cost $2
per month per person.
The rate for overtime on all plantations was the same as for regular
working time, and the rate for Sunday and holidays for day laborers
was one and one-half times their regular rate.
Average earnings per day in 1929, including the attendance bonus,
are presented in Table 2 for the various kinds of work, for adult
males, adult females, and minors, and also for all employees combined
on 41 sugar plantations in the Hawaiian Islands. These plantations
constitute the Hawaiian Sugar Planters’ Association and include all
on the islands of importance in number of wage earners and number
of tons of raw sugar produced. The bonus amounted to about 7%
per cent of the earnings at basic rates.
https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
[782]
9
LABOR CONDITIONS IN HAWAII
The employees on sugar plantations are of three classes—short-term
contractors, long-term contractors, and day laborers. Short-term
contractors may work at one or more of the 10 different kinds of work
listed in the table under this classification. The contracts are for
short periods and apply to “ planting cane,” “ fertilizing,” “ irrigating,”
“ cutting,” or “ loading,” etc., on one or more fields at a contract
price per acre, per ton, etc. Long-term contractors cultivate cane
during the entire growing period of many months. They are paid
for the number of tons of cane produced at a specified contract rate per
ton. Day laborers, as the term implies, are time workers.
The average earnings of those doing short-term contract work
was $1.85 per day for adult males, $1.43 for adult females, $1.06 for
minors, and $1.83 per day for all employees.
The average earnings of long-term contractors were $2.07 per day
for adult males, $1.55 for adult females, 85 cents for minors, and
$2.05 per day for all employees.
The average earnings of day laborers ranged, by kinds of work, from
$1.08 to $3.53 per day for adult males; from 68 cents to $2.87 per
day for adult females; from 61 cents to $2.33 per day for minors; and
from 90 cents to $3.53 per day for all day laborers.
The above rates do not include the rental value of homes, nor the
value of fuel, water, medical and hospital services furnished by the
plantations without cost to the employees.
T a ble 2 —AVER A G E E A R N IN G S PE R D A Y , IN C L U D IN G BO N U S, OF M E N , W O M EN, A N D
M INORS ON 41 SUGAR PL A N T A T IO N S, 1929, B Y K IN D OP WORK
Average earnings per day
Kind of work
Adult
males
Short-term contracts:
Planting cane— — - ---- . . . ------ ---------- --Fertilizing
------_ ------- -- --- -----Irrigating ____________________ ____ --Cutting cane------------------ _
--------Loading cane___- - -------- ----------- - -- - ------Hauling or Burning c a n e _____ _____ _ -- -- - Cultivating (short term) _
-------- ------ -Construction work-- - ------Other contracts__________ _______
____
Portable track ________ - ------ ------- - --T otal________________________________________
Long-term contractors
-- - ---------- --
------- ---------
Adult
females
Minors
$1.40
1.71
1.43
1.73
2.11
2.09
1.40
2. 62
1.93
2.93
$1.16
1.25
1.22
1.27
1.68
1.36
1.12
1.40
1.31
2.14
$0. 92
1.12
1.09
1.12
1.23
1.12
.97
1.52
1.31
1.76
Total
$1.38
1.66
1.42
1.73
2.09
2. 06
1.38
2. 62
1.89
2. 90
1.85
1.43
1.06
1.83
2. 07
1.55
.85
2. 05
1 .1 0
.83
2.87
.70
.61
.97
1.66
2.33
1.05
.90
1.36
1.89
3.53
D ay laborers:
D ay laborers, field hands----------- --------------Basic-rate day laborers, other— _ _ --- - --- Other unskilled_____
__ _
---- -- ------ -Semiskilled ___ -- --------- -- - - ---------Skilled________________________________________
1.08
1.37
1.89
3.53
T otal_____ ______________ ____ ____ ____ ____
1.51
.88
.75
1.46
Grand total--
1.68
1.19
.79
1.66
___
_____
-
------------------
.6 8
.79
.8 6
Labor cost of various operations.—Labor cos t per ton of cane and per
ton of raw sugar produced was computed by kinds of work for each
of five representative plantations and for the five combined. The
cost of clearing and plowing ranged on the various plantations from
9.7 cents per ton of cane and 91 cents per ton of sugar to 17.8 cents
https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
[783]
10
MONTHLY LABOR REVIEW
per ton of cane and $1,379 per ton of sugar. The average cost of
this operation for all of the five plantations for which data were
obtained was 14.5 cents per ton of cane and $1,102 per ton of sugar.
The cost of preparing and planting ranged by plantations from 7.2
cents per ton of cane and 50.7 cents per ton of sugar to 15.4 cents per
ton of cane and $1,447 per ton of sugar. The average for the five
plantations was 11.4 cents per ton of cane and 86.6 cents per ton of
sugar.
The cost of cultivating ranged from $1.02 per ton of cane and $9,552
per ton of sugar to $1,689 per ton of cane and $12,668 per ton of sugar.
The total average labor cost for all operations on the five planta
tions was $3,745 per ton of cane and $28,389 per ton of raw sugar.
The labor cost of clearing and plowing formed 3.9 per cent of the total
labor cost; preparing and planting, 3 per cent; water supply, 4.6 per
cent; cultivating, 39.5 per cent; fertilizing, 1.4 per cent; harvesting,
23.9 per cent; sugar-mill expense, 9 per cent; salaries, 4 per cent;
and general repairs, etc., 10.7 per cent.
Labor turnover.-—Table 3 shows the number of employees on the
pay rolls of the 41 sugar plantations in each month in 1929, and the
average per month for the year. It also shows the turnover rate, for
the month and for the year, of accessions (the per cent that the
number added to the pay rolls in each month formed of the number on
the pay rolls in that month) and of separations (the per cent that the
number dropped from the pay rolls in each month was of the number
on the rolls in that month).
T a b l e 3 —LABOR T U R N O V E R ON 41 SUGAR P L A N T A T IO N S, 1929, B Y SE X A N D M ON TH S
Adult males
Adult females
Turnover
rate
Month
N um
ber
January________
F eb ru a ry ............
M arch.. ______
April___________
M ay........ ..............
J u n e ... .............
July____ ____ _
A u g u st________
September______
October________
November______
December.............
46, 985
47,123
47, 219
47, 392
47, 300
47, 000
46, 490
46, 017
45,106
44, 572
44, 071
45, 072
1929.............
146,196
Ac
ces Sepa
sion ration
4, 14
2. 76
2. 48
3. 05
2. 43
2. 49
. 10
1.76
1.60
2. 15
2. 24
4. 32
Minors
Turnover
rate
N um
ber
Turnover
rate
N um
Ac Sepa ber
Ac
ces ration
ces
sion
sion
2.32
. 21
. 22
2. 59
2. 79
2. 89
3. 12
2. 84
3. 55
3. 26
3.15
2. 27
1, 426 12.34 4. 70
1, 499 7. 27 3.34
1,513
. 15 4. 43
1,492 5. 23 5.09
1,474 3.53 4. 27
1,569 9. 24 3. 57
1,517 5.41 6.33
1,452 3. 10
. 06
1,280 3. 05 14. 92
, 201 o. 41
. 66
. 43
1,150 4. 96
. 1,180 9.07 7.63
445
446
447
405
368
458
618
476
476
408
421
478
31.58 33.13
1 1,396 73. 35 78. 65
1454
2
2
2
6
8
10
8
1
Total
13.71
4.71
17.45
5. 43
4. 62
21.83
4. 69
5. 88
7. 56
2. 70
7.36
15. 27
Sepa
ration
10.34
4. 48
11. 63
16. 79
5. 98
4. 37
3. 88
. 93
80. 25
17. 40
. 65
2. 51
6
6
111.67 171.37
Turnover
rate
N um
ber
Ac
ces Sepa
sion ration
4. 47
2. 92
2. 73
3.13
2.48
2. 89
2. 24
1.84
1.70
. 18
2. 35
4. 56
2.46
2.27
2. 38
2.78
. 86
2. 92
3.23
3.04
4.64
3.58
3. SI
2. 41
1 48,046 33. 55
35.76
48,856
49, 068
49,179
49, 289
49,142
49, 027
48, 625
47,945
46, 862
46,181
45, 642
46, 730
2
2
1Average for year.
In January, 1929, there were 46,985 adult males on the pay rolls
of these plantations. In the month 1,947, or 4.14 per cent, were
added to the rolls and 1,088, or 2.32 per cent, were dropped from the
rolls. There were 1,426 adult females on the rolls in the month and
176, or 12.34 per cent, were added and 67, or 4.7 per cent, were dropped
from the rolls. There were 445 minors on the rolls in the month and
https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
[784]
LABOR CONDITIONS IN HAWAII
11
61, or 13.71 per cent, were added and 46, or 10.34 per cent, were
dropped from the rolls in the month. The total accessions during
the month were 4.47 per cent of the 48,856 on the rolls and the
separations were 2.46 per cent.
The accessions of adult males in 1929 were 31.58 per cent of the
average number on the rolls in the year; of adult females, 73.35 per
cent; of minors, 111.67 per cent; of all three classes combined, 33.55
per cent. The separations of adult males were 33.13 per cent of the
average number of the men; of adult females, 78.65 per cent of the
women; of the minors, 171.37 per cent of the minors; and of men,
women, and minors together were 35.76 per cent of the average for
all three classes combined.
Regular full-time hours.—The regular hours of operation per day
and per week in 1929, as established by a regular time of beginning
and of quitting work on each day per week, less the regular time off
duty for the midday dinner or lunch, were obtained for each of the
several kinds of work on the sugar plantations in the Hawaiian
Islands.
The regular full-time hours per day ranged by kinds of work from
5% for the employees on one plantation who were engaged in load
ing cane to 12 for the employees on 4 plantations who were employed
at hauling or fluming cane, and also for the sugar-mill workers on 23
plantations. The 10-hour day was much more frequent than any
other, the next in order being the 9-hour day.
Regular full-time hours per week ranged from 33 for the employees
on one plantation who did the work of loading cane to 72 per weely for
employees on 3 plantations who worked at hauling or fluming cane,
and also for the sugar-mill workers on 19 plantations. The 60-hour,
59-hour, and 54-hour week were quite frequent. On many planta
tions the hours per day were less on one of the 6 days per week than
on the other 5.
Pineapple Industry
I n n u m b e r of wage earners, in amount paid as wages, and in value
of products the pineapple industry in the Hawaiian Islands is second
to the sugar industry and includes both the growing and the canning
of pineapples.
Pineapples were introduced and cultivated in the islands to a rather
limited extent during the period from 1886 to 1900, but canning did
not begin until 1901, when about 2,000 cases of 24 cans each were
canned and placed on the market. The Smooth Cayenne variety is
generally grown, because those engaged in the industry consider it
superior in flavor and less fibrous than other varieties. The number
of cases increased from year to year to approximately 50,000 in 1905,
to 625,000 in 1910, to 1,700,000 in 1913, and to more than 9,000,000
cases in 1929, thus showing the rapid growth and the present impor
tance of the industry.
The pineapple industry is a seasonal one. Although pineapples
ripen and are gathered and canned throughout the year, by far the
greatest part of the crop matures and is gathered and canned in
June, July, August, and September. During these months the can
neries operate at capacity six days each week and usually two shifts
per day. In the slack period, which extends over the other months
46860°—31----- 2
https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
[785]
12
MONTHLY LABOR REVIEW
in the year, canneries operate at less than capacity and frequently
on only one day or part of a day in a week.
On the plantations the busy season covers the same period, June
to September. The general work on the plantations, however,
furnishes employment six days each week to employees who do the
various kinds of work necessary in preparing the soil, planting slips,
cultivating the plants, etc.
Pineapple Plantations
Pineapple plantations in the islands have an estimated area, as
stated by the Governor of Hawaii in his report for the fiscal year
ending June 30,1929, of 88,000 acres, or 137% square miles, with 49,356
acres in actual cultivation in that year. The estimated area is con
servative. Plantations are divided into plots of land called “ fields.”
After cultivation and picking of two or three crops, each field is left
uncultivated for a time to rest and recuperate.
The growing of pineapples is highly developed, with production in
some fields of as much as 36 tons of fruit per acre. The plantations,
as well as the canneries, are equipped with modern labor-saving
machinery, a great deal of which is automatic and of a highly special
ized type, particularly in the canneries.
Various types of tractors are used in clearing the land of cactus
and stone, and in plowing, subsoiling, and harrowing.
Each plantation has a well-equipped shop for the repair of tractors,
trucks, and other machinery, and also employees to repair plantation
buildings of various kinds, including the houses owned by the plan
tation and occupied by employees and families rent free.
Hours and earnings.—Table 4 (p. 13) shows for 3,316 males and 161
females on four of the largest pineapple plantations the average full
time and actual hours and earnings in 1929 by occupations.
The regular full-time hours in 1929 of all employees on these plan
tations were 10 per day or 60 per week. The 2,289 adult male field
laborers (comprising the most important occupation on the plantations
in number of employees) actually worked an average of only 16.6 days
and 160.7 hours in the month for which data were obtained, and
earned an average of $31.51—19.6 cents per hour.
Fluctuations in employment and in earnings.—Table 5 (p. 14) shows
for each of two of the most important pineapple plantations in the
Hawaiian Islands the per cent that the number of employees on the
pay rolls in each month in 1929 was of the average number per month
on the rolls in the year; the average number of days that were worked
per employee each month in the year and the per cent that the average
for each month was of the average for the year; the average earnings
per employee per month and per day and the per cent that the average
per month or per day for each month was of the average per month
or day for the year.
Employment—that is, the number of persons on the pay rolls—
was 35 per cent higher in July on plantation A and 28.4 per cent
higher on plantation B than the average per month for the year;
25.8 per cent higher in August on plantation A and 40.8 per cent on
plantation B; 17.7 per cent higher in September on plantation A and
https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
[786]
13
LABOR CONDITIONS IN HAWAII
49.9 per cent on plantation B. During these months more than 85
per cent of the annual crop of pineapples ripen, are picked, sorted as to
size, and delivered to the canneries.
In April employment on plantation A was only 78.2 per cent,
and in January on plantation B only 57.8 per cent, of the average per
month for the year.
T a b l e 4 .—AVER A G E FU L L -T IM E A N D A C TU A L HO U R S A N D
E A R N IN G S OF E M
PL O Y E E S ON FO UR OF T H E L A R G EST P IN E A P P L E P L A N T A T IO N S IN 1929, BY SEX
Occupation and sex
N um
ber of
estab
lish
ments
Aver
N um age
ber of number
em ofdays
ploy worked
ees
in
month
Time actually
Average full
time earn
worked in
Aver
Aver
month
ings—
age
age
actual
earn
earn
ings
Per
ings in
Per
Per Aver
Per
Per
of per
age cent
hour week month month
week month hours
full
time
Average full
tim e hours—
M a le s
Blacksmiths________
Blacksmiths’ helpers..
Carpenters ________
Carpenters’ helpers.-_
Laborers, field1_____
Laborers, held (m i
nors)2____ . . . .
Foremen or overseers.
Painters ........... . .
Plumbers___________
Repairers (auto m e
chanics) __________
Teamsters_________
Tractor drivers_____
Tractor drivers’ help
ers_______________
Truck drivers______
Truck drivers’ help
ers_______________
Other employees____
Total, males___
8 26.4
6 23.5
22 20. 9
8 20.1
4
4
4
3
4 2,289
3
4
2
3
55
185
4
3
4
4
4
262
49
4
4
48
83
4
4
141
134
19
4 3,316
16.6
60.0
60.0
60.0
60. 1
60.0
262. 5
263.3
268.2
265.0
264.1
261. 7
235.4
208. 1
204.6
160. 7
15.6
27.1
15.3
26.3
60.0
60.0
60.0
60.0
270.0
266. 0
270. 0
263.3
150.8
270. 8
152. 5
257. 7
25.3 60.0
21. 7 60. 0
23. 7 60.0
266.8
263. 6
265. 9
255.4
224. 2
270. 8
24. 5
24.2
60.0
60.0
268.8
267.1
20.5 60.0
23. 7 60.3
60.0
18.6
99. 7 $0. 401 $24. 06 $105. 26
89.4
.301 18. 06
79.25
77. 6 .395 23. 70 105. 94
77. 2 .295 17. 70
78.18
60.8
.196 11. 76
51.76
$104. 98
70. 77
82.18
60.34
31. 51
101. 8
.085
.331
.362
.490
5.10
19. 86
21. 72
29. 40
22. 95
88.05
97. 74
129. 02
12.75
89.61
55. 25
126. 34
95. 7
85. 1
.399
.247
.310
23.94
14. 82
18. 60
106. 45
65.11
82.43
101. 80
101.8
276. 1
266. 2
102. 7
99.6
. 241
.305
14. 46
18.30
64.78
81.47
66.54
81.13
264.0
263.4
224.8
241.1
85.2
91.5
.250
13. 26
15. 08
58.34
65. 85
49.77
60.18
264. 5
185.1
70.0
.227
13. 62
60. 04
41.96
55.8
56.5
97.9
.221
55. 47
84.06
F e m a le s
4
135
6. 5
60.0
265. 9
60.4
22. 7
.136
8.16
36.16
8. 22
2
26
16.6
60.0
270.0
160.8
59.6
.077
4.62
20.79
12. 38
Total, fem ales..
4
161
8.1
60.0
266.5
76. 6
28.8
.116
6.96
30.91
8.89
Grand total___
4 3,477
60.0
264.6
180.0
68.0
.225
13.50
59.54
40. 43
Laborers, field2_____
Laborers, field (mi
nors) 2. .....................
18.1
1Include planters, cultivators, fertilizers, fruit pickers, plant gatherers, cultivator contractors, cleaners
up, etc.
2Include plant and slip gatherers, hoers, and weeders.
Length of service of employees.—Table 6 (p. 14) shows the number
and per cent of employees of two representative plantations by periods
of service.
On plantation A, 26.1 per cent of the employees had a period of
service of less than 6 months; 30.8 per cent, 1 and under 2 years;
while one employee, or one-tenth of 1 per cent, had a service of
26 years.
https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
[787]
14
MONTHLY LABOR REVIEW
T a b l e 5 —FL U C T U A T IO N S IN E M P L O Y M E N T A N D E A R N IN G S IN 1929, BY M O N TH S,
ON TW O P L A N T A T IO N S
Average earnings
Average days
worked
Em
ploy
ees—per
cent of
average
for 1929
Plantation and month
Per month
N um
ber
Per day
Per
Per
Per
cent of
cent of
cent of
average Amount average Amount average
for 1929
for 1929
for 1929
P la n ta tio n A
January_________________ _____ _ _
February---- --------- ------- -------------. ---------------- -March____
A pril., . . . . . . .
. . . _____ . . . . .
M ay___ ______ . ---------- . --------June------- -------------------- . ------- . .
July_______________________________
August_____ . . . . ------- . . . . . . .
September----- ------------------------------October
__ ---------- -------------- _ __
N ovem ber.. . . .
. . . ._
December___________ _____________
100.5
16.0
15.9
106.1
81.6
81.1
$50. 08
36. 80
49. 37
48. 94
50. 49
57. 83
58. 83
51.82
50.49
50.80
36.51
36.65
100.0
19.6
100.0
48. 77
J a n u a r y ...------- --------------------- . . .
February. _ _ ------- --------- ------ --------March___ ____ _ ______________
A pril.. . . . . ----------------------------- ..
M ay____ .
----------------- ----------June________ ________________ . . ..
July_______________________________
A ugust____________________________
September. __ _ ___________________
October
November_______________________ __
D ecem ber..
. . .
_ ...
57.8
70. 1
75.8
78.9
72.6
80.7
128.4
140.8
149.9
107.1
117.7
119.9
20.0
24.9
24.0
24.6
25.9
18.6
92.2
84.3
121.7
105.1
114.7
22.2
88.2
17.2
16.8
113.4
119.4
85.7
102.3
79.3
77.4
42.85
37. 94
57.84
48. 99
53. 79
53. 05
54. 75
57. 75
41.93
51. 26
37.53
34.46
107.8
78.9
72.5
2.23
2. 25
2.31
2.18
2.06
97.3
94.5
99.5
97.7
98.2
100.5
100.9
101.4
102.3
105.0
99.1
93.6
Average for y e a r .__________ _.
100.0
21.7
100.0
47.56
100.0
2.20
100.0
Average for year______________
87.0
82.1
79.1
78.2
78.6
108.1
135.0
125.8
117.7
106.4
21.5
15.0
20.8
20.4
20.7
22.0
21.6
20.3
19.6
20.8
101.8
109.7
76.5
106.1
104.1
105.6
112.2
110.2
100.0
103.6
106.3
103.5
104.2
74.9
75.1
120.6
$2.33
2. 45
2.38
2.40
2.44
2.63
2.73
2.55
2.58
2.44
2.29
2.31
93.6
98.4
95.6
96.4
98.0
105.6
109.6
102.4
103.6
98.0
92.0
92.8
100.0
2.49
100.0
90.1
79.8
2.14
2.08
2.19
2.15
2.16
. 21
2
2.22
102.7
75.5
101.2
100.3
103.5
118.6
P la n ta tio n B
18.3
26.4
22.8
110.6
121.6
103.0
113.1
111.5
115.1
121.4
T a b l e 6 —N U M B E R A N D PE R C E N T OF E M PL O Y EE S OF TWO P IN E A P P L E PL A N T A
T IO N S H A V IN G SP E C IF IE D PE R IO D OF SE R V IC E, 1929
Employees having each
classified period of
service—
Period of service
Plantation
A
Employees having each
classified period of
service—
Plantation
B
Period of service
N um Per N um Per
ber cent ber
cent
Less than 6 months___
months and under 1
year___ _
____
and under 2 years . _ _
2 and under 3 years. __ _.
3 and under 4 years____
4 and under 5 years____
5 and under 6 years
and under 7 years.
.
7 and under 8 years____
and under 9 y e a rs..___
9 and under 10 years____
and under 11 years___
and under 12 years___
12 and under 13 years___
13 and under 14 years___
6
1
6
8
10
11
https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
458
26.1
540
187
153
73
90
62
43
37
36
30.8
10. 7
8.7
4. 2
5. 1
3.5
2.5
7
4
.4
.2
2.1
2.1
20 1.1
10 .6
505
44.0
198
167
115
52
59
27
17. 2
14. 5
10.0
4. 5
5.1
2.4
.0
.2
12 1
2
2 .2
4
.3
1
2
.1
.2
Plantation
A
Plantation
B
N um Per N um Per
ber cent ber cent
14 and under 15 years
15 and under 16 years.
16 and under 17 years
17 and under 18 years
18 and under 19 years
19 and under 20 years
and under 21 years
and under 22 years
22 and under 23 years
23 and under 24 years
24 and under 25 years .
25 and under 26 years
26 years . . .
20
21
[788]
5
4
0. 3
3
3
5
.2
.2
.3
.1
.2
.2
.1
.1
.1
1 .2
.1
2 .1
1
3
3
2
2
1
Total____________ 1, 755
11 0.1
.1
100.0 1,148 100.0
15
LABOR CONDITIONS IN HAWAII
Pineapple Canneries
The three most important occupations in canneries in number of
wage earners are the canners (females), male and female laborers, and
trimmers (females). In the present study wage data were obtained for
1,510 canners, 3,499 laborers, and 1,408 trimmers. The number of
wage earners in these occupations form 81 per cent of the 7,516
workers employed in the 5 canneries studied. The earnings of the
canners averaged 16.5 cents per hour, with average full-time weekly
earnings of $9.90; those of the male laborers averaged 23.4 cents per
hour and $14.04 per week, and those of the trimmers averaged 16.1
cents per hour and $9.66 per week.
In three canneries the rate for overtime and for work on Sunday
and holidays was one and one-half times the regular rate and applied
to hourly rate employees; in one cannery this rate applied to all
except monthly rate employees; and in one cannery the rate was the
same as for the regular working time.
Table 7 shows, by occupations, average full-time hours per week,
earnings per hour, and full-time earnings per week for the employees
of the five canneries covered in this study:
T a b l e 7 —AVER A G E FU L L -T IM E H OURS A N D E A R N IN G S P E R W E EK , A N D AVERAGE
1 E A R N IN G S PE R HO U R IN FIV E P IN E A P P L E C A N N E R IE S, 1929, BY OCCUPATION A N D
SEX
N um
Average
Average
ber of Number full-time Average full-time
earnings earnings
of em
estab
hours
ployees per week per week per week
lish
ments
Occupation and sex
Blacksmiths, male _____ __ __ __________ _____
Box makers male
_ _ __ __________ Danners, female
_ __ _______ - - - -- -------Carpenters, male
_ ____ _____ _____________ Electricians, male
_ _______ - ------ ----------Eradicators:
TV!ale
____ _________________ -- —
Female
_____________________
____
___________________________
Fore! allies
Laborers:
]V| ale
________ ______________ _____ _
Female
___________ _ __________ -- -Machinists, male
_ _____ -— - ---------Machine shop helpers, male
~ - - ______
Machine tender operators, male
___________ ___ __
Testers can male
- ________ — --------------Trimmers female
_________ ___________
Truck or tractor drivers, male
__________ _____
Other skilled employees, male
_______ _____ ___ Other employees
Male
---- --------- ------------------ ---------Female---------------------------------------------------- ------
2
2
2
.220
$30. 78
13. 20
9.90
25.68
30.12
.155
.253
.200
. 00
9. 30
15.18
53
60.0
60.0
60.0
60.0
60.0
60.0
60.0
60.'0
60.0
.234
.182
.541
.336
.397
.341
.161
.326
.542
14.04
10. 92
32.46
20.16
23.82
20.46
9.66
19.56
32. 52
270
13
60.0
64.6
.428
.260
25.68
16. 80
31
1, 510
14
60.0
60.0
60.0
60.0
60.0
2
98
248
106
60.0
60.0
60.0
5
S
4
5
3,205
294
5
3
3
5
5
2
2
5
3
3
6
2
12
100
82
34
26
1,408
10
$0. 513
.165
.428
.502
12
employees male
. _ _ __________ _ _
All employees, female------------------------ ---------
\11
5
5
3,937
3, 579
60.0
60.0
.271
.168
16. 26
. 08
\_11employees
5
7,516
60.0
.224
13.44
male and female
__- ______
10
Bonuses.—The average earnings for employees on pineapple planta
tions and in canneries include earnings at basic time and piece rates
and bonuses paid to employees for attendance, service, specified per
cent of earnings at time and piece rates, etc., but do not include
rental value of houses, nor the value of fuel, water, and medical and
hospital service furnished by plantations to employees.
https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
[7 8 9 ]
16
MONTHLY LABOR REVIEW
One plantation and one cannery paid a bonus of 10 cents per day
to each employee with an attendance of 21 or more days per month.
Attendance of 21 days earned a bonus of $2.10 in the month in
addition to earnings at basic rates; of 22 days a bonus of $2.20; of
23 days a bonus of $2.30, etc. Example: An employee whose rate
per hour was 20 cents and who worked 24 days or 240 hours in a
month earned at his basic rate $48 and a bonus of $2.40 for attendance,
or a total of $50.40 in the month.
One plantation and one cannery paid a “ busy-season attendance”
bonus of 10 per cent of earnings at basic rates; during the busy season
in the summer, to males who did not lose as much as 50 hours of the
regular working time and to females who did not lose as much as 70
hours. Employees were also paid a “ service” bonus of 1 per cent
of earnings at basic rates if in service one-half year and also one-tenth
of 1 per cent of earnings for each year of service after one-half year.
One plantation and one cannery paid to all employees except those
who were paid monthly rates an “ attendance” bonus of 25 cents per
day for attendance of 23 or more days per month, a special bonus of
10 per cent of earnings at basic rates, and also a “ quarterly” bonus
based on earnings. Employees at monthly rates were paid the special
bonus of 10 per cent of earnings at basic rates.
One of the four plantations and two of the five canneries had no
bonus systems in operation in 1929.
Race and sex of employees.—Table 8 shows the number and per
cent of males, females, and all employees of each race on the pay
rolls of a representative pineapple cannery in the Hawaiian Islands
in a representative pay period in 1929.
Japanese formed 43.9 per cent of all males of all races on the pay
rolls, and 39.9 per cent of all females, while the total number of
Japanese were 42.1 per cent of all employees of the cannery.
T a b l e 8 .—RACE D IS T R IB U T IO N OF E M PL O Y EE S OF A R E P R E SE N T A T IV E P IN E A P P L E
C A N N E R Y , 1929, B Y SE X
Males
Females
Total
Race
Number Per cent Number
Japanese------ . -------- -------------------Hawaiian.- _______ _____ . -------------Filipino. . ____ . . --------- -------------Chinese_____ . . . .
_____________ . . .
Portuguese.
...
------------------ -----Part Hawaiian. . .
.
. . . ----American.. . . -------------- . . . ----------Korean__ ____ ____
. --------- . . . .
Porto Rican____ . . . ----------...
Spanish __ ___________________ ______
Russian. _______________ . ---------------Negro.. _ _ . . ________ . _. ----------Italian__ ___ __ _ _
_ _ _ _ __ ___
British
. . .............
. . __
. ..
Norwegian_____________
. . .
T otal______________________
____
525
107
220
111
75
62
43
39
7
2
1
1
1
1
1,195
43.9
9.0
18.4
9.3
6.3
5.2
3.6
3.3
.6
.2
.1
.1
.1
.1
100.0
386
248
32
99
89
85
13
8
4
1
1
1
1
968
Per cent Number Per cent
39.9
25.6
3.3
.2
9.2
10
8.8
1.3
.8
.4
.1
.1
.
1
.1
100.0
911
355
252
210
164
147
56
47
11
3
2
2
1
1
1
2,163
42.1
16.4
11. 7
9. 7
7.6
6.8
2.6
2.2
.5
.1
.1
.1
. 05
.05
.05
100. 00
Length of service of employees.—Table 9 shows the number and per
cent of employees of a representative cannery by periods of service.
In the cannery 43.4 per cent of the employees had service of less
than 6 months; 15.8 per cent, 6 months and under 1 year; 12.2 per
https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
[790]
17
LABOR CONDITIONS IN HAWAII
cent, 1 and under 2 years; and 4.6 per cent, 10 and under 24 years.
Only one employee, or one-tenth of 1 per cent of all the employees,
had service of 23 and under 24 years.
T a b l e 9 .— N U M B E R A N D P E R C E N T OF E M P L O Y E E S OF ONE P IN E A P P L E C A N N E R Y
H A V IN G SP E C IFIE D PE R IO D OF SE R V IC E , 1929
Period of service
Employees having
each classified
period of service
Period of service
Number Per cent
Less than 6 months
6months and under 1 year.
1and under 2 years, I
___
2 and under 3 years
3 and under 4 years
4 and under 5 years
5 and under 6 years, . . . _ _
and under 7 years
__
7 and under 8 years
and under 9 years. . . .
.....
9 and under 10 years .
and under 11 years. . . .
and under 12 years
6
8
10
11
13 and under 14 years__
828
301
233
73
62
62
51
28
25
43
43. 4
15. 8
.2
5.9
3.8
3.3
3. 3
2. 7
1. 5
1. 3
2.3
14
.9
3
!7
112
21
17
6
12
1.1
Employees having
each classified
period of service
Number Per cent
14 and under 15 years
15 and under 16 years. ___ _
16 and under 17 years
17 and under 18 years. ___ _
18 and under 19 years
19 and under 20 years________
and under 21 y e a r s __ _ .
and under 22 years
__
22 and under 23 years. ______
23 and under 24 years. ____
24 and under 25 years _
25 and under 26 years
26 years_____________________
20
21
T otal__________________
6
3
0. 3
.4
.4
.1
.1
.2
1
1
1
.1
.1
.1
7
7
2
2
1,906
100.0
Coffee Industry
S e p a r a t e studies were made of the two divisions of the coffee in
dustry, but the report includes figures only as to the mill processes
of hauling, sorting, and polishing the bean. Agricultural data could
not be included because such operations were not going on at the time
the agents of the bureau visited the islands and it was impracticable
to locate coffee producers who employ any considerable number of
workers and retain copies of pay rolls beyond the season’s crop.
A succinct idea of the industry is given in the report of the governor
of the Territory for the fiscal year ending June 30, 1929, as follows:
T he p resen t acreage d ev o ted to coffee p ro d u ctio n on th e island of H aw aii, th e
only island on w hich coffee is pro d u ced on a com m ercial scale, is K o n a d istrict,
5,500 acres; H a m a k u a d istric t, 400 acres; o th e r d istricts, 100 acres.
In K o n a d istric t th e re a re a b o u t 1,200 coffee farm s, a n d a t th e h eig h t of th e
picking season, d u ring th e p a s t year, a b o u t 1,200 m en a n d 850 w om en were
em ployed in th e in d u stry . T he valu e of th e coffee ex p o rted du rin g th e calendar
y ear 1928 w as $1,368,826, th e crop a m o u n tin g to 5,151,266 pounds.
Rice Industry
T h e rice industry in Hawaii dates as far back as 1859, when Mr.
Holstein, of the Hawaiian Agricultural Society, bought a piece of land
in Nuuanu Valley on which to carry out some experimental work on
various crops, of which rice was one. Rice had been introduced
previous to this date, but the first successful attempt was made by
Mr. Holstein. His success took the islands by storm. Taro lands
were acquired by rice planters in rapid succession, and for a time it
seemed as if the islands were to have a taro famine. This lasted only
for a few years, however, as losses and other discouraging factors
began to make their appearance. The taro industry came back with
a boom, reaching its height in 1865, when the rice industry made an
https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
[791]
18
MONTHLY LABOR REVIEW
attempt to regain lost ground. This time it was more successful and
remained so until other industries came into being, when the industry
began to decline.
Although rice is still believed to be the world’s greatest crop (with
a normal annual production of over 300,000,000,000 pounds), in
Hawaii the industry, instead of increasing, is rapidly declining. Rice
is the surest and most regular of the great crops and probably the
most staple food of the greatest number of people. At first glance,
one would think that with the oriental population of the Territory,
the industry should be in a very flourishing condition, but surveys
have proved that each year the total acreage in rice cultivation is
greatly reduced.
Rice culture began in the unrecorded past, yet the methods of
cultivation, in so far as science and technique are concerned, have
seen very little change. This is probably the sole reason why it is a
dying industry, when the pineapple and sugar-cane industries are
advancing so rapidly. In 1907 when the pineapple industry was still
in its infancy, there were at least 10,000 acres of rice under extensive
cultivation, and rice was the second ranking crop in the Territory.
But to-day the Territory can not even produce enough for its own
local consumption and has to import large quantities from California
and Japan.
Almost all of the rice produced here is cultivated by Chinese and
Japanese, and as long as it is cultivated under the same crude methods
employed by the natives in the Orient centuries ago, rice will never
be on a profit-producing basis.
As things stand, the future of the industry looks very dark. A sur
vey has proved that in the last few years the total acreage has de
creased at least 50 per cent, and, as stated above, most of the planters
are Chinese and Japanese, ranging in age from 40 to 65 years. The
future will present another big problem, that regarding the labor
supply. Laborers of oriental descent are absolutely barred from
immigrating into the Territory and no other race is as yet in position
to take up this work.
Union Labor
L a b o r organizations in the Hawaiian Islands are few in number,
small in membership, and, with the exception of the barbers’ union,
have no agreements with the employers.
The trades or occupations that have organizations are machinists,
molders, molders’ helpers, and boilermakers in foundries and machine
shops; hand compositors and linotype operators in book and job and
newspaper printing and publishing; marine engineers in steam navi
gation; carpenters and joiners, plasterers and plumbers in building
construction and repair; and barbers in shops in which Japanese and
Filipinos are not employed. Table 10 shows the number of days
per week on which work was available to the employees in each of
these trades (except boilermakers and plasterers), in the companies
in which they were employed, the regular hours of operation, Monday
to Friday, Saturday, and per week; wage rates per hour, day, week,
or month; and the number of times the regular rate that was paid
for overtime and for any work on Sunday and holidays. Boiler
makers and plasterers are entirely too few in number to warrant
showing any figures for them.
https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
[792]
19
LABOR CONDITIONS IN HAWAII
The members of the machinists’ union were employed in shops in
which work was available 6 days per week. The regular hours of
operation in the shops were 8 each day, Monday to Friday, and 4 on
Saturday, or 44 per week. The wage rates ranged from $7 to $7.84
for a day of 8 hours. For overtime or any time worked in excess of
8 hours, Monday to Friday, and 4 on Saturday, or any work on
Sundays and holidays, a rate of two times the regular rate was paid.
T a b l e 1 0 .— W ORKING T IM E A N D WAGE R A TES OF U N IO N W ORKERS
1930 BY
OCCUPATIONS
Hours
Trade or occupation
M a ch in ists.-_______ _____ _
Molders, floor, hand - _________
Molders’ helpers____________ . . .
Compositors, hand, and linotype
operators___________________ Marine engineers___ _ _______
Carpenters and joiners...... ..............
Plumbers_______________________
Barbers______________________ .
Days
per
week M onday to
Saturday Per week
Friday
6
6
6
6
6
6
6
6
8
8
8
8
8
8%
8U
9H
Wage rates
per day
4
4
4
44
44
44
$7.00-$7. 84
50
4.00-5. 25
4
44
48
48
47
2150. 00-300. 00
4. 50-6. 50
6. 00-7.00
325. 00
8
5
4H
U 'A
58 A
8
i 35. 00-85. 00
Times regu
lar rate for
overtime
and work on
Sunday and
holidays
2
2
2
m
i
1 Per week.
2 Per month.
3 Per week plus 60 cents for each $1 over $35 gross, for chair. Example: A barber in one week did work
amounting to $40. He was paid $25 plus 60 cents for each $1 over $35, or a total of $28.
At the time of the study of conditions in the Hawaiian Islands by
the bureau, the barbers’ union, which does not include any Japanese
or Filipinos, had agreements with six shops only.
The Honolulu Japanese Barbers’ Association, an employers’ organ
ization, consisted at that time of 191 members and employed approxi
mately 200 male and 100 female Japanese barbers. The hours in
these shops were from 7 a. m. to 8.30 p. m., Monday to Saturday, with
one hour off duty at or near noon for lunch, except on busy days,
usually Saturday, when only such time as could be had without
interfering with the trade was taken. The hours were therefore 12^
per day, Monday to Friday, and 13K on Saturday, or 76 per week,
for which they were paid rates ranging from $15 to $25 p6r week and
given two meals per day. The barbers in these shops are not mem
bers of any union.
In 1929 there were approximately 150 plumbers in Honolulu.
About 30 per cent of them were members of the plumbers’ union and
70 per cent were Japanese and other nonunion workers. Members
of the union were paid from $6 to $7 per day. The Japanese plumb
ers worked for contractors of their race and were paid from $3 to $5
per day. In the year 2,402 plumbing permits, at an estimated cost
of $704,695.50, were issued in Honolulu. _ A total of 2,169 permits,
at an estimated cost of $567,196.50, were issued to Japanese contrac
tors, and only 233 permits, at an estimated cost of $137,499, were
issued to contractors who employed members of the union.
The carpenters’ union in Honolulu does not include any Japanese
and in 1929 and early in 1930 its membership was less than 33^ per
cent of the total membership of the union in 1917-18. The union
rate was $6.50 per day of 8 hours, but many members were paid less
https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
[793]
20
MONTHLY LABOR REVIEW
and some as low as $4.50 per day. It was estimated by officials ol
the carpenters’ union that in 1929 and 1930 there were approximately
1,000 Japanese carpenters in the Hawaiian Islands, that they or the
contractors who employed them do practically all of the building of
cottages, repair and jobbing, much of the large contract work, and as
much as 90 per cent of all the carpentry work in Honolulu. The
rates paid Japanese carpenters range from $3.50 to $5 per day, the
latter rate being paid to working foremen.
C o st o f F a m ily R e lie f in 100 C itie s, 1929 a n d 1930
B y G l e n n S t e e l e , U n it e d S t a t e s C h i l d r e n ’s B u r e a u
HE cost of caring for families in need during 1930 in 100 Ameri
can cities may be estimated at more than $40,000,000. An
actual expenditure of $39,397,480 in these metropolitan areas is shown
from reports of public and private relief agencies assembled by the
Children’s Bureau, United States Department of Labor, for the
President’s Emergency Committee for Employment. This amount
represents the cost of the major portion of the relief given in all cities,
but falls short of the entire cost owing to the omission of grants by
agencies from which reports were not available.
The reported expenditure for 1930 is an increase of 89 per cent
over the reported disbursements for the needy in the same area in
1929, when $20,891,726 was given in relief.
The amounts shown were paid out in direct aid to families. Sums
expended by missions, municipal lodging houses or other agencies
providing individuals with temporary shelter or food and expenditures
by agencies giving relief to veterans only were not included. Mothers’
pensions or mothers’ allowances were also excluded 1 from the com
pilation requested by the Committee for Employment, as these
grants, usually given to support the children of widows, are not
appreciably affected by seasonal or economic changes.
While the contributions from the public treasury are somewhat
understated, owing to the omission of mothers’ aid and to the fact
that some private agencies derive funds from public sources, never
theless it was found that the major portion of the expense of caring
for families in want was paid out of public funds. A comparison of
relief given by public and private agencies, based on returns from 75
of the 100 cities, shows that 72 per cent of the amount given in 1930
came from the public treasury as compared to 60 per cent in 1929.
This indicates that the public bore an even larger share of the burden
in 1930, when costs were greater, than in the previous year.
A comparison of the percentages of increase in public and private
expenditures for relief is more striking. Although the exigencies of
1930 taxed the resources of private agencies to the utmost and in
their rally to meet the need 48 per cent more money was raised and
disbursed in 1930 than in 1929, the public departments extended, their
1930 relief grants to a sum 146 per cent greater than that given in the
preceding year.
The proportion of relief given by the public and the increase in
public expenditures in 1930 over 1929 do not loom so large when
T
1Except for 5 cities not segregating mothers’ aid from amounts reported.
https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
[7941
COST OF FAMILY RELIEF IN 100 CITIES
21
Detroit, one of the 75 cities in the group discussed, is omitted from
the calculations. In the Detroit area, where funds for relief are
nearly all derived from taxation, the public expenditure for relief in
1930, $8,680,017, more than equaled the combined contributions,
$8,599,459, from the public treasuries of the 74 remaining cities.
However, if Detroit is omitted from the group, it is still found that
the taxpayer footed the larger part of the 1930 relief bill (56 per cent).
The increase in public expenditures during 1930 over those of the pre
ceding year is sharply reduced (from 146 to 64 per cent) when Detroit
is not considered. While in a countrywide survey of relief conditions,
Detroit can not be erased from the picture of which it forms so impor
tant a part, group findings are greatly influenced by the extended
scale of its relief operations.
Sources of Information
T h e foregoing conclusions on the amount of the relief bill in repre
sentative urban centers and the proportion met by tax and by private
subscription are afforded by a compilation of relief statistics secured
from various sources. In the fall of 1930 the President’s Emergency
Committee for Employment requested the Children’s Bureau to assem
ble information concerning the amount expended for family relief, the
number of families aided, and the number of homeless or transient
persons cared for, by months, during 1929 and 1930, in cities of 50,000
or more population.
As a nucleus of the desired information, the bureau had reports on
relief beginning with July, 1930, from cities participating in its regis
tration of social statistics, a service carried on in cooperation with
community chests. Previous reports from these cities were available
from the joint committee of the National Association of Community
Chests and Councils, and the local Community Research Committee
of the University of Chicago, which transferred the registration
project to the Children’s Bureau July 1, 1930.
This material was supplemented by information from all other
available sources. Statistics for larger cities not included in the
bureau’s registration area were secured through the courtesy of the
Russell Sage Foundation. Reports on relief were also sought by
direct communication to community chests or to family welfare
agencies in all cities of the 50,000 to 100,000 population class not
previously reporting to the Children’s Bureau. Beginning with a
summary for September, 1930, statistics secured from these various
sources have been compiled monthly by the Children’s Bureau for the
employment committee.
With the completion of the December, 1930, tabulation, a picture
was afforded of the trend taken by relief operations over a 2-year
period. For this period data on the cost of family relief, to which this
analysis is limited, were assembled from 60 cities of 100,000 or more
inhabitants and 40 cities in the 50,000 to 100,000 population class.
Of wide geographic distribution, and diverse in economic and indus
trial characteristics, the cities form a representative American group.
For each city, the figures cover the field of operation of reporting
agencies, usually more extensive than that bounded by city limits and
often including the county unit.
https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
[795]
22
MONTHLY LABOR REVIEW
The aggregate expenditures in 1929 and 1930 for the group, and for
each class of cities, with percentages to indicate the increases for 1930,
are shown in the following table:
T a b l e 1 — E X P E N D IT U R E S FOR FA M IL Y R E L IE F D U R IN G 1929 A N D 1930 IN 100 C ITIES
OF 50,000 OR M O R E PO PU L A T IO N
Relief expenditures
Class of cities
1929
Cities w ith population of 100.000 or more
Cities with p o p u l a t i o n o f 50,000 to 100,000
Total
__________
______ _ __
_
_ ___
-- ______
______ -
1930
Per cent of
increase
$18, 643, 729
2, 247,997
$35,848,141
3, 549,339
92. 3
57.9
20, 891, 726
39, 397, 480
88.6
By comparing the advance in relief bills it will be seen that both
the larger cities and those of moderate size were obliged last year to
increase greatly their care for the needy, the sums spent being,
respectively, 92 per cent and 58 per cent higher than in 1929. With
out knowing whether resources have met requirements, it seems safe to
assume that on the whole, the cities of from 50,000 to 100,000
population experienced less severe conditions last year than the larger
industrial centers.
Further evidence to this effect was found when the cities in each
group were ranked according to the percentage of change in relief
expenditures. The array for each class showed that one-half of the
cities of smaller size increased their expenditures for relief by 42 or
more per cent, whereas in one-half of the larger cities 1930 relief
expenditures exceeded those of 1929 by 55 or more per cent.
Monthly disbursements for relief in the group of 100 cities are
shown for the years 1929 and 1930 in Table 2:
T a b l e 2.—M O N T H L Y E X P E N D IT U R E S FOR FA M IL Y R E L IE F D U R IN G 1929 A N D 1930
IN 100 C IT IES OF 50,000 OR M ORE PO PU L A T IO N
Relief expenditures
Relief expenditures
M onth
M onth
1929
January
___
February, _ _ .
March
___
April _
_ _
M ay ______ ___
June____
- ___
__ __ $1, 909,005
1,911,193
_
1, 903,255
_ _ 1, 702,256
___ 1, 590,425
1,464, 685
1929
1930
$2, 914,210
2, 992, 955
3,306,161
3,151,112
2,655,194
2,442,220
J u l y ___ ___ - _____ ___
August _________ __ .
September__
October__N ovem ber___
December_____ __
$1, 531, 708
1,441,941
1,418,523
1,596,836
1,859,455
2, 562,444
1930
$2, 548,072
2, 539,547
2,846,061
3,423,651
4,017,189
6,561,108
To illustrate the course taken by relief operations over the 2-year
period a graphic representation of these figures is given in Chart I.
The graph shows that the expenditures for 1930 are on a much higher
level than those of 1929 and that for the summer months of 1930
relief agencies were obliged to meet monthly bills larger than those of
normal winter months, as expressed by disbursements in January and
February of 1929.
The usual upward sweep of relief as winter approaches is observed
for both years, but the curve for 1930 shows a much sharper ascent
https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
[796]
23
COST OF FAMILY RELIEF IN 100 CITIES
Chart
I.— TR EN D OF EXPENDITURES FOR FAMILY RELIEF IN
1929 A N D 1930
5d
"3
-o
<0
^
$3
d
Z
L
<
ql
<
u
d•D
~0
'dO
< o8-
~D
100
CITIES,
.p
>
O
-Z
0
0 ( 0O
©
T a b l e 3 .— E X P E N D IT U R E S FOR FA M ILY R E L IE F D U R IN G 1929 A N D 1930 B Y PU B L IC
A N D PR IV A TE A G E N CIE S IN 75 CITIES A N D IN T H E SAM E C ITIES E X C L U SIV E OF
D E T R O IT
Relief expenditures
Group and year
B y public depart
ments
Amount
1929:
_
.............
D e tr o it............................
All other cities _ _____________________
Total__________ ______ ____ _______
1930:
Detroit_____ _ _ ______ ___
_- All other cities_____ - --------------Total______________________________
Amount
Per
cent of
total
Total
$1, 778, 322
5, 245,118
94.9
53. 6
$96, 235
4, 541,561
5.1
46.4
$1,874, 557
9, 786, 679
7, 023, 440
60. 2
4, 637, 796
39. 8
11,661,236
8, 680, 017
8, 599,459
97. 7
56.4
200, 378
6,652, 929
2. 3
43. 6
, 880, 395
15, 252, 388
17, 279, 476
71.6
6, 853, 307
28.4
24, 132, 783
1 M ay include public funds expended by private agencies.
https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
Per
cent of
total
B y private agencies 1
[797]
8
24
MONTHLY LABOR REVIEW
than that for 1929 and culminates in a December peak, representing an
expenditure of more than $6,500,000, as compared to the December,
1929, peak expenditure of slightly over $2,500,000.
As has been noted, evidence on the source of relief funds comes
from 75 cities which classified the expenditures of public departments
and of private agencies. Table 3 shows the proportion of aggregate
relief ascribed to each source in 1929 and 1930. This information is
given for the group of 75 cities and for the same group without Detroi t,
to show the average experience of cities in which the public had not
assumed so large an obligation.
The trend taken by relief expenditures of public departments and
of private agencies over the two years is traced in Chart II. Public
expenditures are indicated as well above those of private agencies,
but for the first nine months of 1929 the two curves show a distinct
similarity in contour. Thereafter, public expenditures mount much
more rapidly to meet the winter needs of both 1929 and 1930 than do
the funds provided by private welfare agencies. The graphic presen
tation is based upon Table 4 which gives a summation of public and
private relief grants by months for the 75 cities:
T a ble 4 —M O N T H L Y E X P E N D IT U R E S FOR FA M ILY R E L IE F D U R IN G 1929 A N D 1930
B Y PUBLIC A N D PR IV A TE A G E N C IE S IN 75 CITIES
Relief expenditures
B y public departments
Month
1929
February
March
Mav
June
Tyily
September
OpfnfAPr
Novemhp.r
December
- - - -- --
-- -- - — - - - - —
- — ___ — - -
_ _ _______
-- ------------
___________ _______ - -_____ - ____ -- -- -- --------------------- ------------------------ -_______ — — -
1930
$657,187 $1,340, 535
1, 344, 849
639, 702
1, 519, 399
635, 996
1,418, 818
543, 506
1,088,478
489, 755
874, 983
456, 520
926,049
456,063
1,021, 669
452, 381
1,182, 517
459, 965
1, 646, 560
546,123
1, 962, 398
710, 267
2,953, 221
975,975
B y private agencies i
1929
$472,198
456,124
439,139
387,142
360,966
326, 562
310,712
311, 535
304, 600
347,166
387,153
534, 499
1930
$594,401
571, 96d
576, 579
548,306
495,711
459,247
455,350
451, 698
481, 537
559,886
624,114
1, 034, 515
i M ay include public funds expended by private agencies.
While the aggregate figures give a composite picture of the relief
bill in 100 cities and the method of meeting it in 75 cities, there were
wide variations from city to city. Chart III shows the way in which
each of 24 cities, reporting to the Children’s Bureau for its registration
of social statistics, provided the 1930 funds for its poor. From the
two bottom bars it is seen that in Washington, D. C., for which Con
gress makes no appropriation to provide outdoor relief, and in New
Orleans, La., the entire burden of caring for families in distress was
met by private contribution. On the other hand, in Detroit and in
Springfield, Mass., represented in the two top bars, relief funds were
largely derived from public sources. Intermediate bars show the
varying practices of other cities»
https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
[798]
25
COST OF FAMILY RELIEF IN 100 CITIES
C hart
II.— TR EN D O F FAMILY RELIEF EXPENDITURES BY PUBLIC DEPART
MENTS A N D BY PRIVATE AGENCIES IN 75 CITIES, 1929 A N D 1930
The amounts expended for the upkeep of families in financial need
have been grouped in Table 5 to show the relief bills of 1929 and 1930
in 100 cities, by a regional classification. A comparison of the
increases in the cost of aid in each section, as represented by the
specified cities, is interesting.
T a b l e 5 .— E X P E N D IT U R E S FOR FA M ILY R E L IE F D U R IN G 1929 A N D 1930 IN 100 CITIES
OF 50,000 OR M ORE PO PU L AT IO N , B Y GEOGRAPHIC D IV ISIO N .
Relief expenditures
Geographic division
1929
1930
Per cent of
increase
N ew England .
Middle Atlantic- _
South A tlantic___
_ _
North Central _ _
South Central- _
Pacific and M ountain______ -
$5,213, 268
4,448, 701
687, 570
6,867, 925
387, 246
3,287, 016
$7, 906, 519
7,085, 650
843, 517
18,127, 848
520, 885
4, 913, 061
51.7
59.3
22.7
163.9
34.5
49.5
Total____________ ,
20,891, 726
39,397, 480
88.6
https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
[799]
26
MONTHLY LABOR REVIEW
The cities included in the various geographic sections are as follows:
New E n g lan d : B oston, B rockton, F all R iver, H a rtfo rd , H olyoke, Law rence,
Lowell, L ynn, M alden, N ew B edford, N ew B rita in , N ew H av en , N ew ton,
P o rtlan d , P rovidence, Springfield, Som erville, a n d W orcester.
M iddle A tlan tic: A llentow n, A ltoona, B ayonne, B ethlehem , Buffalo, C hester,
Erie, H arrisb u rg , L an caster, N ew Rochelle, N ew Y ork, N ew ark, N iag ara Falls,
R eading, R ochester, S cran to n , W ilkes-B arre, a n d Y onkers.
South A tlan tic: A sheville, B altim ore, C h arlesto n , G reensboro, H u n tin g to n ,
Jacksonville, N orfolk, R ichm ond, R oanoke, W ashington, D. C., a n d W instonSalem .
N o rth C en tral: A kron, C an to n , C hicago, Cicero, C incinnati, C leveland,
C olum bus, D ay to n , D es M oines, D etro it, E v an sto n , F o rt W ayne, G ran d R apids,
H am ilton, K an sas C ity , M o., K enosha, M adison, M ilw aukee, M inneapolis,
Oak P ark , O m aha, P o n tiac, R acine, Saginaw , Sioux C ity , S t. Louis, S t. P aul,
South B end, T erre H a u te , T oledo, T o p ek a, W ichita, a n d Y oungstow n.
S o u th C en tral: B irm ingham , E l Paso, K noxville, Louisville, M em phis, M obile,
N ashville, N ew O rleans, a n d S hreveport.
Pacific a n d M o u n ta in : B erkeley, D enver, Fresno, Long B each, Los Angeles,
O akland, P o rtlan d , S acram en to , San Diego, San Francisco, a n d T acom a.
In the North Central division of the country, where not quite
$7,000,000 had been provided for relief in 1929, more than $18,000,000
was called for in 1930, an increase of 164 per cent. When Detroit is
eliminated from this section to obviate its weighting of group figures,
it is found that although the increase in expenditures is reduced to 85
per cent, the advance in the 1930 relief bill is still larger than that for
any other section.
In New England, the Middle Atlantic States, and the western
section, the percentages of increase in 1930 over 1929 were somewhat
similar—52, 59, and 50 per cent, respectively. The South Central
division provided 35 per cent more money for its needy in 1930 than
in the previous year and expenditures for cities of the South Atlantic
area had increased less than one-fourth (23 per cent).
While the figures assembled show the actual relief costs reported
and the increases called for during the year just passed, they can not
be interpreted as a precise measure of relief requirements. In 1930
there may have been either less need or less money to meet the need
in those areas in which relief expenses for that year did not greatly
exceed those of 1929. However, in some of the large cities of the
North Central division, where industry is concentrated, increases in
relief bills, varying from 100 to 400 per cent, denote an unprecedented
demand for family aid.
A graphic illustration of the relief problem in one city of this section
has been furnished the Children’s Bureau by the Welfare Federatoin
of Cleveland, Ohio, and is reproduced on page 28.
The heightened relief curve for July, 1929, to January, 1931, may
be compared to a curve for July, 1920, to December, 1922, when con
ditions also called for an advanced outlay for relief, and again to a
curve representing disbursements as calculated for a normal period.
The chart also permits an interesting comparison between the
amount paid out for relief during the winter of 1930 and through
January, 1931, and the amount of money provided therefor in the
budget of the associated charities. Expenditures to meet the winter
needs had leaped to heights far beyond the budget provisions and
could be supplied only by dipping into funds reserved for the remainder
of the year.
https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
[ 800 ]
COST OF FAMILY RELIEF IN' 100 CITIES
27
Additional information accompanying financial reports has come
to the Children’s Bureau from many other parts of the country.
III.— PER CENT OF TOTAL FAMILY RELIEF1 GIVEN BY PUBLIC DEPART
MENTS A N D BY PRIVATE AGENCIES DURING 1930 IN 24 LARGE CITIES
C hart
Percentage of
Metropolitan to ta l re lie f
Area
éiven by public
departments
D etro it
Percentage
40
60
98
Springfield, Mass.
Newarh
Grand Rapids
Buffalo
W ichita
Akron
Columbus
H a rtfo rd
St. Paul
D en ver
New Haven
M inneapolis
Om aha
St. L o u is
K a n sa s City, Mo.
Richmond
C a n to n
C in c in n a ti
L o u is v ille
D ayto n
C le v e la n d
New O r le a n s
W ashington, D.c.
H i Public d e p a r tm e n ts
L__l Private
a g e n c ie s
This supplements the statistical data on the extent of relief with the
story of the problems and difficulties faced by welfare agencies
during 1930 in their effort to keep urban families from privation.
1 Excluding mothers’ aid and veterans’ relief.
46860°—31-----3
https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
[801]
2 8
Chart
M O N TH LY
LABO R
R E V IE W
IV — T R E N D OF FAMILY RELIEF EXPENDITURES OF T H E ASSOCIATED
CHARITIES, CLEVELAND, OHIO
T h .o u sa .n d j
o-fdollar-j
I n t e r n a t io n a l F e d e r a tio n o f T ra d e U n io n s
B y F r it z K ïïm m e r , B e r l i n
Membership
NTERNATIONAL trade-union statistics are not so_ complete as
could be desired. I t has not yet been possible to give the exact
total number of persons throughout the world organized into tradeunions. Several reasons can be advanced to account for this incom
pleteness. In various countries the trade-union movement is still
passing through the initial stages of development, and where this is
I
https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
[802 ]
29
INTERNATIONAL FEDERATION OF TRADE UNIONS
the case the membership returns naturally show considerable fluctua
tion. Moreover, in a number of countries the individual organiza
tions have not combined to form national centers, and the local and
professional groups are not connected with each other, so that it is
hard, sometimes impossible, to state the exact number of members.
In spite of all these difficulties, the secretariat of the International
Federation of Trade Unions (I. F. T. U.) endeavors to give, as far as
possible, complete statistics of the world trade-union movement.
With each succeeding year these statistics have become more and
more complete. According to the latest figures, at the end of the
year 1928 there were slightly over 44,000,000 trade-unionists in the
world, or, to be more exact, in 76 different countries.
T a b l e 1.— D IS T R IB U T IO N OF T R A D E -U N IO N M E M B E R S H IP , 1927 A N D 1928
Membership on—
Per cent of total
Continent
Europe__ _____ . . .
America_______
Australasia_______
Asia__________
Africa___________
Dec. 31, 1927
Dec. 31, 1928
33,936, 784
7,416, 491
991, 652
QQ9 UOl
OQ1
OOy ÖOÄ,
fi Û/I7
u,
ir*/, OOfi
ZvO
i-j nía
k7
J
UIÖ, a
‘ru
t
/
7 4Z,
AO l»“
10/1!
QH ‘ta
AQ7
t
uu,
Total___________
1 46,187,060
1 62 countries.
2 A A IoU,
1 Q H KO K
1927
ÍO. 0
16.1
2.1
8.1
.3
luu. u
1928
80.1
15.7
2.3
1.7
100.0
2 76 countries.
Of these 44,000,000 trade-unionists there were at the end of 1929 a
total of 13,800,567 (of whom 13 per cent are women) in membership
with the International Federation of Trade Unions. This member
ship is distributed throughout 27 countries—22 in Europe and 5
(Argentina, Canada, Palestine, South and Southwest Africa) in other
continents. The five non-European countries embrace nearly 273,000
members, that is, about 2 per cent of the total. From this it will be
seen that the International Federation of Trade Unionsis still primarily
a European organization. Because of this unsatisfactory situation,
the 1927 congress of the International Federation of Trade Unions
adopted^a resolution “ to investigate the causes of the inadequate
manner in which the federation is organized in order that the federa
tion may become an organization of universal scope and influence.”
In pursuance of that resolution invitations to join the federation were
sent to 17 unaffiliated organizations. In the replies to these invita
tions the reasons for nonaffiliation were set forth. In most cases it
was stated that trade-unionism in the respective country was not
yet sufficiently developed to allow of affiliation, particularly as the
various individual unions had not combined to form a national center;
as individual unions it is not possible for them to join the International
* ©deration of Trade Unions because only federations of trade-unions
can become affiliated to this body. Other reasons for nonaffiliation
were failure to recognize the advantages to be gained as a result of
international cooperation, lack of funds, or the fact that the organi
zations were not prepared to bear the expense incident to member
ship in the federation.
https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
[80S]
30
MONTHLY LABOR REVIEW
Table 2 shows the international trade-union membership in the va
rious countries at the end of 1929: .
T a b l e 2 . —M E M B E R S H IP
OF IN T E R N A T IO N A L F E D E R A T IO N
D E C E M B E R , 1929
Country
Tradeunion
member
ship
Argentina.. . .
_. ____________
. . . . . _________ ___
Austria_____
Belgium________________ ._
Bulgaria________________ . .
Canada__
Czechoslovakia............................ ..........
Denmark____ _ . _ _____
___ _ . .
Estonia. _
. . .
.............
France
_
....
Germany
________
Great Britain
Greece
...
Netherlands..
. ___
Hungary.
. . ____________
Italy_____ _________________ . .
82, 000
766,168
528, 380
1,269
156,000
554,074
250,162
5,713
640, 790
5,420, 533
3,673,144
39, 500
255, 384
124, 000
(‘)
OF T R A D E U N IO N S,
Country
L atvia..
Luxemburg...............
Memel
Palestine.
Poland ___
Rumania. __
.
___
South Africa . . . _ ____ ______ . ..
Southwest Africa.
_______________
S p ain .. _
................... ...
.
S w e d e n ..__. . . .
Switzerland
Yugoslavia________________________
Tradeunion
member
ship
23, 556
15,377
1,064
26,049
231, 369
41, 421
8, 212
600
225, 000
508,107
186, 651
36, 044
T otal___ ______________________ 13, 800, 567
1 No data.
Relations with American Federation of Labor.—The International
Federation of Trade Unions has persistently sought to induce the
American Federation of Labor to affiliate, and the European tradeunion movement is constantly stressing the importance of joining
hands with the trade-unions of North America. It would mean a
great addition to the numerical and moral influence of the Amsterdam
International if that body included within its ranks the trade-unions
of the world’s greatest industrial country. However, as yet the rela
tionship between the two organizations has not developed beyond
mutual friendship. The American Federation of Labor has advanced
two objections to affiliation: “ The constitution of the International
Federation of Trade Unions abrogates the principles of complete
autonomy for national trade-union federations, and the affiliation
would place upon the American Federation of Labor a heavy expense,
which it is not prepared to meet.” The soundness of the first objec
tion is greatly questioned by the International Federation of Trade
Unions, which points out that in no instance has the autonomy of any
of its affiliated organizations been jeopardized and that such a step
would never be contemplated. But this intimation has evidently
not allayed the fears of the American Federation of Labor. In any
case, no substantial change has taken place in the relations of the two
organizations.
Relations with Russian trade-unions.—The question of the affilia
tion of the Russian trade-unions to the International Federation of
Trade Unions, or their mutual rapprochement, has been frequently
discussed in the trade-union world of Europe during the last few
years. The proposal has been advanced chiefly by the British
organization. At the meeting of the general council of the Interna
tional Federation of Trade LTnions in January, 1927, the British
body proposed the convening of a conference of representatives of
the International Federation of Trade Unions and of the All-Russian
Trade Union Council without preliminary conditions by either side.
https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
[804]
INTERNATIONAL FEDERATION OF TRADE UNIONS
31
The motion was rejected by 12 votes to 6. Since that time the
desire to come to a working agreement with the Russian trade-unions
has disappeared, mainly because of the attitude of the Russians
toward the British trade-unions during and subsequent to the gen
eral strike. One or two Russian trade-unions were, up to a recent
date, cooperating with individual international trade-union secre
tariats affiliated to the International Federation of Trade Unions,
but this was little more than a paper relationship. The suggestion
of a conference with the Russian trade-union organization was
renewed in 1928 by the trade-union centers of Finland and Norway,
but this also was rejected. In a few smaller countries there may
still exist a certain sentiment for cooperation with the Russians.
This sentiment is extremely restricted, however, and shows palpable
signs of diminution in consequence of the unpleasant experiences
that have marked the previous attempts in this direction. It is
improbable that a further demand for cooperation with the Russians
will be submitted from any quarter to the International Federation
of Trade Unions.
International Trade Secretariats
M e m b e r s of the Amsterdam International are internationally
united in two ways: They are affiliated through their national
centers to the International Federation of Trade Unions and through
their trade-unions to the international secretariats of their respective
trade or industry. There are 27 such secretariats, whose total mem
bership at the end of the year 1929 numbered 13,669,222. These
were distributed, by trade, as shown in Table 3:
T a b l e 3 . —M E M B E R S H IP OF IN T E R N A T IO N A L T R A D E SE C R ET A R IA T S
DECEM BER
31, 1929
Trade or occupation
Building workers___
Clothing workers___
Miners___
Bookbinders____
Typographers. ______
Diamond workers
Factory workers___
Hairdressers..
Glass workers.
Woodworkers. .
Hotel employees. _ .
Hatters . .
Pottery workers__
Land workers.
Teachers _____
Member
ship
1, 009, 771
256, 839
1, 700, 000
92, 000
1188,487
123, 891
595, 000
'9, 572
198, 676
1, 000, 000
76, 500
36, 500
146, 676
332, 340
105, 000
Trade or occupation
Food and drink workers___
Lithographers
Painters
M etal workers
Public service employees.
Postal employees
Commercial, clerical, and technical
employees
Leather workers
Stone workers
Tobacco workers
Textile workers
Transport workers_________
Total
Member
ship
382, 400
62, 303
250, 303
1,841, 389
513, 358
436, 237
779, 729
314,152
123, 774
130, 946
913, 379
2, 250, 000
13, 669, 222
1 End of 1928.
These international secretariats are completely autonomous, but
work hand in hand with the International Federation of Trade Unions,
whose decisions they put into practice. I t is demanded of them, how
ever, that, in decisions and actions where larger issues are concerned,
they act only in unison with the International Federation of Trade
Unions or with the national trade-union center in question. In order
to keep the secretariats in touch with the International Federation of
Trade Unions a conference is held annually between representatives
of the secretariats and the committee of the international, each secre
https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
[805]
32
MONTHLY LABOR REVIEW
tariat sending two representatives. Furthermore, the international
secretariats have advisory votes in the congresses of the International
Federation of Trade Unions. Repeated unsuccessful attempts have
been made to incorporate the secretariats into the organization of the
International Federation of Trade Unions in order to insure their
greater cooperation. At present, in accordance with a decision of the
last congress, the bureau of the International Federation of Trade
Unions is studying how the secretariats may be incorporated into the
organization of the international.
The secretariats deal with the international problems of their trade
or industry and with wage questions and labor conditions, and give
support to financially weak organizations in the event of strikes or
other matters. They also publish journals in several languages,
chiefly in French, English, and German. The annual reports of the
secretariats are excellent sources of information in regard to the inter
national situation of the respective industries, as well as in regard to
the activities and aspirations of their affiliated organizations.
International Trade-Union Congress at Stockholm
T h e fifth congress of the International Federation of Trade Unions,
which took place at Stockholm in the second week of July, 1930, was
attended by 129 representatives and fraternal delegates. Among the
fraternal delegates were representatives from Japan, Australia^ New
Zealand, India, and Egypt. The congress had to^ adopt an inter
national economic program and a social-political one, it had to treat the
question of disarmament and of the trade-union movement in coun
tries without democratic government, and finally, it had to decide
with reference to the removal of the headquarters of the International
Federation of Trade Unions to another country than the Netherlands.
The economic program adopted is divided into two parts, one deal
ing with international and the other with national matters. The first
proposes an international economic board, created by the League of
Nations with the cooperation of the organized workers; the effective
control of trusts and syndicates; the abolition of tariff restrictions and
of embargoes on imports and exports;’the establishment of economic
courts to settle economic conflicts between countries; and the equali
zation of wages by fixing international minimum standards of work
ing conditions. The national section of the program would provide
safeguards for the workers against rationalization; the participation of
the trade-unions in all processes of rationalization; the transference to
other lines of work of employees losing their jobs; and the payment of
unemployment benefits without limit as to time. Under the inter
national’s program the extra profits resulting from rationalization
would inure to the community through the reduction of prices, the
increase of real wages, and a shortening of working hours. Public
services would be increased in scope, and natural resources and the
conveyance of goods would be nationalized. The cooperative move
ment is indorsed and work toward its extension is favored. Finally,
the program demands the formation of national economic councils
and the representation of the trade-unions therein. Labor organiza
tions are urged to strive for publicity on all the internal economic and
industrial activity and arrangements, and for a proper economic
policy.
https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
[ 806]
INTERNATIONAL FEDERATION OF TRADE UNIONS
33
The social-political program, demands the insurance of all working
men and women against illness, invalidity, old age, death, unemploy
ment, maternity, accident, and occupational diseases; vacations;
protective measures for children, juveniles, and women; the technical
and professional education of apprentices; freedom of meetings and
unions; liberty to strike; arbitration courts for settling wage disputes;
special courts for the settlement of other disputes between employers
and workers; and the right of the workers to a voice in the conduct
of the factories.
Following the adoption of the social program, the congress dis
cussed the question of working hours. Complaint was made that
the Washington agreement concerning the 8-hour day, although in
existence for 10 years, had not yet been ratified by most countries.
It was further stated that even the 8-hour day is now too long; the
improvement in the machinery of production makes shorter hours
necessary, from the economic point of view. For this reason the
congress demanded an early introduction of the 44-hour week as the
first step to a further shortening of the working time. For this end
the trade-unions in all countries are to start a strong movement.
The congress put itself on record as opposing war and as urging
the immediate limitation and reduction of military armament and
production and commerce in arms and other war materials, and the
extension of the obligatory arbitration court.
Due to the changes of different European countries from the
democratic form of government to that of a dictatorship a very serious
problem has arisen for the trade-unions. In these countries it is
charged that the workers have been robbed of their trade-union work,
their organizations have been destroyed, and the active members
have been imprisoned or have fled abroad. Under these circum
stances it has become impossible for the workers to improve their
economic position. The consequences are sinking wages and pro
longed hours—in fact the loss of all trade-union gains. Other coun
tries are being influenced by the example of these countries and are
reducing the economic standards of the workers and their public and
other rights. After discussing these matters the congress passed a
resolution pledging active support in the resistance of the workers
against dictatorship and in assisting its victims financially and
morally, in helping toward the reestablishment of trade-unions and
their full rights, and in inducing the League of Nations to provide the
fugitive unionists with passports.
A most important question before the congress was as to the re
moval of the headquarters of the International Federation of Trade
Unions from Amsterdam to another city. The removal had been
determined by the Paris congress three years ago, but its realization
had been hindered by several obstacles; also, some circles of the
international held the opinion that the removal had become unneces
sary because in the interval the grounds on which the decision was
based had been removed. Nevertheless, in Stockholm again it was
argued that in order to imbue the management of the international
with more life and activity its secretariat should be moved into a
country with a highly developed industry and with a strong tradeunion movement. Apart from that, Netherlands capital, situated on
the extreme northwestern point of Europe, necessitates a somewhat
https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
[807J
34
MONTHLY LABOR REVIEW
complicated and expensive connection. Finally, none of the three
world languages is spoken in the Netherlands, resulting in unneces
sary expense and difficulties in recruiting the staff.
As the leading bodies of the international had not been able to
agree regarding the removal, the matter had again to be discussed by
the congress in Stockholm. Berlin was proposed as the future seat of
the international, and this was favored by the German delegation,
provided a majority of the congress—without the German vote as
sented. Berlin was finally named as the future headquarters by a
vote of 55 to 30, and the removal of the office to that city is to take
place in April, 1931.
https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
[808]
EMPLOYMENT CONDITIONS AND RELIEF
U n e m p lo y m e n t in t h e U n ite d S t a t e s , 1930 a n d 1931
Estimated Unemployment in the Continental United States, January, 1931
N THE basis of the special unemployment census made during
the latter half of January, 1931, and covering 19 cities, Robert
P. Lamont, Secretary of Commerce, has estimated that a total of
6,050,000 able-bodied persons in the United States were out of jobs,
able to work, and seeking work at that time.1
The special census of unemployment was undertaken in January,
the month when unemployment normally reaches a seasonal peak,
in order that the maximum unemployment due to the world-wide
business depression might be revealed. For the 19 cities covered in
the special census of unemployment (the details of which are given
later in this article) a 149 per cent increase was reported in the num
ber of persons out of a job, able to work, and looking for a job (class
A) between April, 1930, and January, 1931. By applying this per
centage to the total number of persons out of a job, able to work, and
looking for a job in the United States as a whole as of April, 1930,
or 2,429,062, the total of 6,050,000 is arrived at. This basis of esti
mate of the increase in unemployment between April, 1930, and
January, 1931, presupposes that the percentage increase in unem
ployment since last April has been as great in the rural areas as in
the cities.
In addition to the unemployed falling under class A, the January
census of 19 cities showed that there were 368,149 persons having
jobs but not working and not receiving pay on the day before the
call of the enumerator, excluding those sick or voluntarily idle
(class B). Such tabulations of the census as are complete show that
75 per cent of the workers in class B were employed part time, and
that the remainder had been laid off for more than a week. If this
ratio prevails throughout the 19 cities it would indicate that onefourth of the total of 368,149 persons, or 92,000, had been out of
work for more than a week, although they considered themselves as
having jobs. It is stated by Secretary Lamont that neither the data
available for the April, 1930, or January, 1931, census make it pos
sible to determine accurately the total number of individuals through
out the country who should be regarded as unemployed because of
having been temporarily laid off from their regular jobs. However,
Secretary Lamont states that it appears that an additional 250,000
to 300,000 workers were not working because of lay-off in January,
1931.
The detailed results of the April, 1930, and the January, 1931,
unemployment censuses are given below.
O
1Press release of Mar. 21,1931.
https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
[809]
35
36
MONTHLY LABOR REVIEW
Unemployment Census of April, 1930
I n a p r e s s release of March. 21, 1931, the Director of the Census
has announced the final unemployment returns by classes for the
entire continental United States from the census of April, 1930.
The census of unemployment was designed to cover all persons usually
working at a gainful occupation who were not at work the day
preceding the enumerator’s call. Returns were tabulated by seven
major classes depending upon whether the worker was unemployed
involuntarily or voluntarily, unfit to work or fit to work but unable to
find a job, etc.
.
Table 1 shows in summary the results for the United States as a
whole. Class A (composed of persons out of a job, able to work,
and looking for a job) includes 2,429,062 persons, or 2 per cent of the
total population of the United States (122,775,046). Class B (persons
having jobs but on lay-off without pay, excluding those sick or volun
tarily idle) accounts for 758,585 persons, or 0.6 per cent of the total
population, while classes C, D, E, F, and G account loi relatively
small numbers of the population.
T a b le
1
.—
U N E M P L O Y M E N T R E T U R N S B Y CLASSES A N D SE X , U N IT E D STA TES,
Description of class
April, 1930
122, 775, 046
Class A. Persons out of a job, able to work, and looking for a job:
2, 058, 738
370, 324
2,429,062
Pci ccfil of popiilstion. - - - . .,
,i
•i
«
Class B. Persons having jobs, but on lay-off without pay, excluding those sick or volun
tarily idle:
2.0
627,407
131,178
758, 585
Per cent of ^population—
,,
Class C. Persons out of a job and unable to w oik. 1 otal, botn sex es--.-- ---- --Class D . Persons having jobs but idle on account of sickness or disability: total, botn
Class E. Persons out oi a joo ana nor looKmg ioi w u u . iu w i , uuiu ocaw -- -__
Class F. Persons having jods out voluntarily luie, wituuui
utai, uutu ooaw---- - Class G. Persons having jobs and drawing pay though not at work (on vacation, etc.):
0.6
172, 661
273, 588
87,988
84,595
82,335
Table 2 shows the returns by States, but in this table the statistics
for classes C to G, inclusive, are combined into one total.
https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
[810]
E M P L O Y M E N T C O N D IT IO N S A N D R E L I E F
37
T able 2 .—U N E M P L O Y M E N T R E T U R N S B Y STA TES A N D G E O GRAPHIC D IV ISIO N S,
A PR IL , 1930
Class A: Persons out of a job, able to
work, and looking for a job
State, and geographic division
Total popu
lation
Male
United States................................. ................ .......... . .
[
1
I
1
1
1
I
1
I
I
1
1
1
1
New England:
M aine_____________ _________ __________
New Hampshire_________________________
Vermont.......
- ................................
M assachusetts... . . _______________
Rhode Island.. _ _______ _______ . . . ----C onnecticut... ----------------------------------- .
Middle Atlantic:
New Y o r k ......................
. ...
..
N ew J ersey ... ______ _______________
Pennsylvania____ . . . __________________
East North Central:
Ohio----- -------- ----------------------------------------Indiana________ . . . ------- -------------- . . .
Illinois_______________________________ ..
Michigan___________________________ . -Wisconsin_______________________________
West North Central:
Minnesota------ ---------- --------------------- -Iowa__________________________________ Missouri______________________________ . .
North D akota..
. . . . .
_ . . . ..
South Dakota............ . _____ ____
___
Nebraska____________________________ -Kansas.
________ _______
________
South Atlantic:
. . . . . .
Delaware_____ - . .
Maryland________ _ ----------- -------------District of Columbia_________________ _ . .
Virginia________
. -----------West Virginia------ -- ------- ---------------------
1
1
I
1
1
1
1
1
I
1
1
1
1
1
I
1
1
1
1
I
I
1
1
I
1
Georgia____ - - -----------------------------------Florida_____ . ------------------------------------East South Central:
. .... . .
Kentucky___ ____ _
Tennessee____ . . . ----------------------------------Alabama..................
.
. . .
..........
------ . .
M ississippi______ . ----------West South Central:
Arkansas________ . . . . . ---------- ---- -- Louisiana_________ ____ _ . . .
Oklahoma---------- ------ -- -----------------------Texas____________________________ ______
Mountain:
Montana________________________________
Idaho .. . . . ___
___. .. . . . ..
W yoming________ . ---- .. --------- -----Colorado-----------------------------------------------. ... .
New Mexico___ . . . . .
Arizona__ . . .
....
...
U tah____________________________________
Nevada-------- ----------------------------- - '-----Pacific:
. . . . ---.
_ . ...
Washington__
Oregon__________________________________
California____________ _______
l
1
Total
Per
cent of
popula
tion
122,775,046
2, 058, 738
370,324
2,429,062
2.0
797,423
465,283
359,611
4,249, 614
687,497
1,606,903
11,463
6,866
4,647
93, 579
17,502
32,340
1,956
1,318
646
22, 631
4,935
5,890
13,419
8,184
5,293
116, 210
22, 437
38, 230
1.7
1.8
1.5
2.7
3.3
2.4
12, 588,066
4, 041, 334
9,631,350
298,731
98, 518
180,106
55, 659
17, 787
27,585
354.390
116, 305
207, 691
2.8
2.9
2.2
6, 646, 697
3,238, 503
7, 630, 654
4,842, 325
2,939, 006
140, 697
53, 445
195, 493
140, 653
41,889
19,239
7,269
31, 506
17,159
5,093
159, 936
60, 714
226,999
157,812
46,982
2.4
1.9
3.0
3.3
1.6
2,563,953
2,470,939
3, 629, 367
680, 845
692, 849
1,377, 963
1, 880, 999
38,377
19,109
53,136
5, 220
3,037
12,322
19, 341
6,168
3,231
10, 277
762
479
2,456
2,816
44,545
22, 340
63,413
5,982
3,516
14, 778
22,157
1.7
.9
1.7
.9
.5
1.1
1.2
238,380
1,631,526486,869
2,421,851
1, 729, 205
3,170, 276
1, 738, 765
2,908,506
1,468, 211
2,636
20,495
6,418
21,112
' 19,374
20, 847
8, 346
19,626
24.733
551
3,943
2,581
5,349
2,001
7,774
3,604
8,046
8,387
3,187
24,438
8,999
26, 461
21, 375
28, 621
11,950
27, 672
33,120
1.3
1.5
1.8
1.1
1.2
.9
.7
1.0
2.3
2, 614,589
2,616,556
2, 646, 248
2, 009,821
25,038
15,884
17,461
8,124
4,414
4, 528
3,980
2,674
29,452
20, 412
21,441
10,798
1.1
.8
.8
.5
1,854,482
2,101, 593
2,396,040
5,824,715
10,465
25,043
33,131
63,543
2,355
5,823
4, 202
12,284
12,820
30,866
37, 333
75,827
.7
1.5
1.6
1.3
537,606
445, 032
225,565
1,035,791
423, 317
435,573
507,847
91, 058
9,886
5,414
3,312
19,595
5,117
7,156
7, 755
2,720
1,077
780
407
3,101
537
834
957
168
10,963
6,194
3,719
22,696
5, 654
7,990
8,712
2,888
2.0
1.4
1.6
2.2
1.3
1.8
1.7
3.2
1, 563, 396
953,786
5,677, 251
31,428
21, 356
136, 252
5, 544
4,126
25,435
36,972
25,482
161, 687
2.4
2.7
2.8
\)
https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
Female
[811]
38
M O N T H L Y L A B O R R E V IE W
T a b l e 3 .— U N E M P L O Y M E N T R E T U R N S B Y STA TES A N D GEOGRAPHIC D IV ISIO N S,
A PR IL , 1930—Continued
Class B: Persons having jobs but on lay
off without pay, excluding those sick or
voluntarily idle
State, and geographic division
Male
United States_________ .
N ew England:
MaineNew Hampshire. _
Vermont_______ .
Massachusetts . . . _
Rhode Island
Connecticut_____
Middle Atlantic:
New York_________ _
N ew Jersey.. . . . __ _
Pennsylvania
East North Central:
Ohio .
_
.
In d ia n a _____ . . . . . . .
Illinois___
Michigan . . . .
Wisconsin.
...
...
West North Central:
Minnesota_____ .
Iowa . . _______
Missouri___
. ... _ .
North Dakota_________
South Dakota
...
Nebraska____ . . . . . . _
Kansas __________ ____
South Atlantic:
Delaware _
. . .
Maryland____ _ __ . . .
District of Columbia___ .
Virginia___ . . . .
West Virginia___ . . __
North Carolina— . . . ___
South Carolina___ . . . _
Georgia . . . ______. . .
Florida _ _____ . . .
East South Central:
Kentucky__ _ ______
____
Tennessee . . .
A la b a m a ________. . .
Mississippi______________ .
West South Central:
Arkansas____________ .
Louisiana_____________
Oklahoma____ ___
Texas____________ . . . . .
Mountain:
M ontana.. . . . ____ .
Idaho______ _______ .
Wyoming. _ ___
Colorado. . . . . . .
N ew Mexico___ _ _ _
Arizona__ .
. .
U tah______
______
Nevada______
____ _ .
Pacific:
W ashington._.
Oregon_______ ______
California___ ________ __
Female
Total
Classes C,
D , E, F,
and G d
Total
Per cent persons
of pop
ulation
627,407
131,178
758, 585
0.6
701,167
5, 756
3,627
2,190
32,347
8,724
9, 552
1,885
1,720
719
12,837
4,966
3,027
7, 641
5, 347
2, 909
45,184
13,690
12, 579
1.0
1.1
.8
1.1
2.0
.8
6,150
3,117
2, 573
27,963
5,192
8,897
59,145
18, 733
105,160
14,480
5, 264
12,641
73, 625
23,997
117,801
.6
.6
1.2
69,254
21,463
58, 330
47, 619
22, 292
48,922
34, 392
14,803
7,011
3, 373
6,930
4, 784
2,291
54,630
25, 665
55, 852
39,176
17,094
.8
.8
.7
.8
.6
42,957
19,958
46,183
29, 202
14; 603
9,132
8,141
14, 341
1,312
895
3, 664
5,272
1, 536
1,042
3, 643
181
101
628
733
10, 668
9,183
17,984
1,493
996
4, 292
6,005
.4
.4
.5
.2
.1
.3
.‘ 3
12,133
10,012
20,449
1,856
1, 762
5; 918
8,090
581
5,883
1,280
6,899
13,057
10, 672
4,109
7,969
4, 253
145
1, 315
396
1,999
902
4,829
3,188
3,981
1,378
726
7,198
1,676
8,898
13,959
15, 501
7,297
11,950
5, 631
.3
.4
.3
.4
.8
.5
.4
.4
.4
1,178
8,848
4,193
14; 252
12; 284
13, 294
8, 650
18,089
11, 224
10,901
7,108
6,873
3,682
1,917
2, 665
1,678
1,013
12,818
9, 773
8, 551
4,695
.5
.4
.3
.2
13,159
11, 679
12; 508
7, 783
4,893
6, 602
7, 257
16,088
638
1,928
768
3,348
5, 531
8, 530
8,025
19,436
.3
.4
.3
.3
6,829
10, 314
10,811
28,139
3,815
1,097
1,059
6, 761
832
1,378
1,955
250
229
178
122
741
87
155
292
26
4,044
1, 275
1,181
7, 502
919
1,533
2,247
276
.8
.3
.5
.7
.2
.4
.4
.3
3,947
2, 606
L430
6; 999
2, 557
3; 595
2, 572
'856
8,154
4, 853
23,127
1, 311
1,112
5,045
9,465
5, 965
28,172
.6
.6
.5
14, 494
9, 280
43; 535
1 Persons out of a job and unable to work; having jobs but idle on account of sickness or disability; out
of a job and not looking for work; having jobs but voluntarily idle, without pay; and having jobs and
drawing pay, though not at work (on vacation, etc.).
https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
[812]
39
EMPLOYMENT CONDITIONS AND RELIEF
Unemployment Census of January, 1931
I n a p r e s s release of March 21, 1931, the Director of the Census
announced the returns from the special census of unemployment taken
in January, 1931, in 19 cities, and the results are here shown, together
with the statistics of unemployment for the same cities as of April,
1930. The canvass of January, 1931, was complete, covering the
entire population of Birmingham, Boston, Buffalo, Chicago, Cleveland,
Dayton, Detroit, Duluth, Houston, Los Angeles, Minneapolis, New
Orleans, New York, Philadelphia, Pittsburgh, St. Louis, San Fran
cisco, and Seattle, with the exception that in New York it was limited
to Brooklyn, Bronx, and Manhattan boroughs. The results are
shown in summary form in Table 1. According to the census of
April, 1930, the total population of these areas was 20,638,981. The
total number of persons in these areas reported as out of a job, able
to work, and looking for a job (class A) in April, 1930, was 775,565,
or 3.8 per cent of the total population, and in January, 1931, 1,930,666,
or 9.4 per cent of the total population. The total number of persons
returned as having jobs but not working and not receiving pay on the
day before the call of the enumerator, excluding those sick or volun
tarily idle (class B) in April, 1930, was 138,572, or less than 1 per cent
of the total population. In January, 1931, the returns in class B
numbered 368,149, or 1.8 per cent of the total population.
In contrast with the returns in classes A and B, the returns in
January, 1931, in classes C to G, inclusive [which are made up of (c)
persons out of a job and unable to work, (d) persons having jobs but
idle on account of sickness or disability, (e) persons out of a job and
not looking for work, (J) persons having jobs but voluntarily idle
without pay, and (g) persons having jobs and drawing pay though
not at work (on vacation, etc.)], showed a marked decrease as com
pared with the returns for the corresponding classes in the census of
April, 1930. In classes C and D, the sick and disabled, a part of the
decrease is attributed to the fact that in the 1931 enumeration hos
pitals and similar institutions were omitted from the canvass.^ The
Director of the Census notes that persons properly belonging in any
of the classes C to G can hardly be regarded as involved in the
economic problem of unemployment.
T a b l e 3 — C O M PA R ISO N O F U N E M P L O Y M E N T R E T U R N S, BY CLASSES, IN 19 C ITIES
A PR IL, 1930, A N D J A N U A R Y , 1931
Description of class
Total population of 19 cities- __________ _______ —
-------------------------------------------------------- -----------
Class A. Persons out o fa jo b , able to work, and looking for a job:
Class B. Persons having jobs, but on lay-off w ithout pay, excluding those sick or
voluntarily idle:
Work.' I N llT T lb e r _____ ________
_
Class D . Persons having j obs hut idle on account ofsickness or disability: MumP ln c o P
P n r o n n c ! o l d o f Cl i n h n n H l U i a h l f t t.O
K d,iiu.
onH iuBtlnekincrfnr
T l her______
_
o i ci ji aou
i u b l u u i v i i i g i u i work!
w w n • ^IV llT
uiali
mvvi_—
Glass J c . persons navm gjoos out voiLuiicuny m i c , w i t u u u t
^ u iu u v i
Class G . Persons having jobs and drawing pay though not at work (on vacation,
G l a s s Jxnh . v e r s o n s o i i u
)
i N o data.
https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
[813]
April, 1930
January,
1931
20, 638,981
(0
775, 565
3.8
1,930,666
9.4
138,572
.7
41,294
368,149
1.8
19,890
46,067
18,806
12,905
24, 811
3, 034
2,387
13,504
4,241
40
MONTHLY LABOR REVIEW
Table 4 summarizes the returns from the unemployment censuses
of April, 1930, and of January, 1931, for each city by classes. In
Table 4 classes C to G, inclusive, have been grouped together. These
figures are taken from a preliminary count and are subject to possible
correction:
T a b l e 4 .— U N E M P L O Y M E N T R E T U R N S B Y CLASSES, C E NSU S OF A PR IL, 1930, A N D
SPEC IA L U N E M P L O Y M E N T CENSU S, JA N U A R Y , 1931
[19 cities]
City and date
Total:
April, 1930...............................
January, 1931____ ______
Birmingham:
1930_________________
1931______________
Boston:
1930__________
1931________________
Buffalo:
1930____________
1931...................... .
Chicago:
1930______________
1931__________ .
Cleveland:
1930________________
1931________ _ . _
Dayton:
1930_______________
1931....................................
Denver:
1930______ _________
1931________________
Detroit:
1930______ ____________
1931____________ . .
Duluth:
1930________________ .
1931________________
Houston:
1930______ _______
1931_____ . . . ___
Los Angeles:
1930______________
1931___________ . .
Minneapolis:
1930_________________
1931---- ---------- -------------N ew Orleans:
1930________ ____________
1931
____ __ ______ _
N ew York City:
Brooklyn—
1930___________________
1931________________ .
Bronx—
1930_________________
1931________________ .
Manhattan—
1930.. ______________
1931 ______
___ ____
Philadelphia:
1930 . . . .
.............
1931_________________
Population
1930
Class B : Persons
Class A: Persons having jobs but
out of a job, able on lay-off w ith Classes
to work, and out pay, exclud C, D ,
looking for a job ing those sick or E, F,
voluntarily idle and G :1
N um
Per
ber of
Per
of
cent of persons
Number cent
Number
popu
popu
lation
lation
20,638,981
(2)
775,565
1,930,666
3.8
9.4
138,572
368,149
0. 7
1.8
132, 576
54; 363
259,678
5,623
22,930
2.2
8.8
1,125
4,940
.4
1.9
2,129
1,070
781,188
26,361
69,682
3.4
8.9
8,653
18,749
1.1
2.4
5,827
3,304
573,076
19,920
50,724
3.5
8.9
2,974
23,077
.5
4.0
3,663
1,621
3,376,438
147,440
369,990
4.4
11.0
20,494
78, 749
.6
2.3
21,980
10,009
900,429
41,184
99, 233
4.6
11.0
9,051
25,400
1.0
2.8
7,698
2,826
200,982
6,664
17,681
3.3
8.8
1,108
3,801
.6
1.9
1,483
668
287,861
9,331
19,922
3.2
6.9
1,466
2,498
.5
.9
2,263
619
1,568,662
76,018
174,527
4.8
11.1
15,979
49,041
1. 0
3.1
10,022
3,625
101,463
5,154
8,130
5.1
8.0
766
1,330
.8
1.3
586
200
292,352
7,350
29,163
2.5
10.0
1,320
2,940
.5
1.0
2,044
1,190
1, 238,048
44,480
98,130
3.6
7.9
6,438
7,974
.5
.6
10,411
2,879
464, 356
13,968
35,158
3.0
7.6
2,432
3,689
.5
.8
3,403
981
458,762
16,616
42,482
3.6
9.3
3,166
6,274
.7
1.4
3,009
1,039
2, 560,401
80,621
205,192
3.1
8.0
13,919
35,935
.5
1.4
10,428
5,522
1, 265, 258
42,416
97,414
3.4
7.7
7,086
12,334
.6
1.0
5,915
2,652
1,867,312
79,191
168,322
4.2
9.0
10,416
.6
12,138
Oj 000
1,950,961
71,156
3.6
13,485
.7
9,849
212,051
10.9
34,673
1.8
6,195
1 Persons out of a job and unable to work; having jobs but idle on account of s ic k n e s s or disability; out
of a job and not looking for work; having jobs but voluntarily idle without pay; and having jobs and
drawing pay though not at work (on vacation, etc.).
2 N o data.
https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
[814]
41
EMPLOYMENT CONDITIONS AND RELIEF
T a b l e 4 .—U N E M P L O Y M E N T R E T U R N S B Y CLASSES, CENSU S OF A PR IL, 1930, A N D
SPEC IA L U N E M P L O Y M E N T CENSU S, JA N U A R Y , 1931—Continued
B: Persons
Class A: Persons Class
jobs but
out of a job, able having
on
lay-off
w ith Classes
to work, and out pay, exclud
looking for a job ing those sick or C, D,
E, F,
Population,
voluntarily idle and G:
1930
N um
Per
Per
ber of
of
Number cent
of persons
popu Number cent
popu
lation
lation
City and date
Pittsburgh:
1930__________________________________
1931
__ ____ ______
St. Louis:
1930__________________________________
1931
___ ________________________
San Francisco:
1930__________________________________
1931
______________
Seattle:
1930__________________________________
1931__________________________________
669,817
20,307
60,026
3.0
9. 0
5,885
19,561
0.9
2. 9
4,890
2,286
821,960
28,022
77,560
3.4
9.4
7,123
15,065
.9
1.8
5,369
1,597
634,394
21,448
41,103
3.4
6. 5
3,019
4,942
.5
.8
5,161
1,190
365,583
12,295
31,246
3.4
8.5
2,667
3,892
.7
1.1
4,308
1, 225
R ep o rt o f A d viso ry C o m m it t e e o n E m p lo y m e n t S t a t is t ic s
N August 12, 1930, President Hoover appointed a committee to
look into the methods used by governmental agencies to measure
employment and unemployment, and to make recommendations for
the improvement of such methods. The committee, known as the
Advisory Committee on Employment Statistics, was composed of
James J. Davis (later succeeded by W. N. Doak), R. P. Lamont,
Harold F. Browne, John P. Frey, P. W. Litchfield, Noel Sargent,
W. M. Steuart, Ethelbert Stewart, Arthur O. Wharton, Leo Wolman,
and Joseph H. Willits (chairman).
Under date of February 9, 1931, Dr. Willits, as chairman of the
committee, transmitted a report to the President in which the com
mittee’s recommendations were set forth in a summary and three
parts: Part I, containing recommendations with respect to the
methods of measuring employment and unemployment; Part II,
proposals concerning the subject of technological unemployment; and
Part III, budgetary and other administrative recommendations.
The complete text of the report of the Advisory Committee on Em
ployment Statistics will appear later as a Bureau of Labor Statistics
bulletin. The summary of the committee’s recommendations is here
reproduced in full.
O
Summary of Recommendations
T h e c o m m it t e e , a s in d ic a te d in th e s u b s e q u e n t p a g e s o f th e r e p o r t,
h a s m a d e t h e fo llo w in g r e c o m m e n d a t io n s :
1. Improvement of the indexes of employment.
(a)
Manufacturing industries. The direct utilization of the present
results obtained by the Federal Reserve Board’s Division of Research
and Statistics for making certain necessary tests and adjustments of
indexes; the tabulation of employment data for some leading cities
and for some entire States.
(b)
Nonmanufacturing industries. The addition of employment
indexes for building and other construction activities; shipping and
stevedoring, garages and automobile service stations, and for certain
of the more important groups in the "white collar” class, such as
[815]
https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
42
MONTHLY LABOR REVIEW
investment bankers and brokers; commercial banks and trust com
panies; mortgage and title companies; advertising agencies; restau
rants, etc.
(c)
The census of manufactures as a source of employment sta
tistics with the collection of data undertaken on an annual basis, the
inclusion of data on the average number of wage earners employed,
by size groups; also monthly employment statistics of wage earners
according to (1) States, (2) leading industries, (3) leading States;
statistics of manufactures by counties, by industries; hours of labor
in manufacturing industries; statistics of automobile repair shops, etc.
2. The measurement of part-time employment through data on
man-hours, with first efforts to be confined to manufacturing indus
tries and railroad transportation, separating wage earners from
salaried employees; collection of data on normal work-week hours;
consideration of desirability of extending work on man-hour data for
periodic adjustment of figures; explicit questions on schedule to
secure the needed data.
3. The Bureau of Labor Statistics and statistical division of the
Interstate Commerce Commission might confer with a view to hasten
ing the monthly publication on the employment and wages paid to
Class I railroad employees, so that they may be included monthly
with the present series of the Bureau of Labor Statistics.
4. For the more satisfactory and reliable measurement of un
employment in the future—
(а) The prompt extension of employment statistics in the direction
and in the manner indicated above.
(б) The continuance of the decennial census of unemployment.
(c) Serious consideration of the desirability of a quinquennial census
of employment.
id) The immediate preparation by the Bureau of the Census of
census monographs on—
(1) Occupational changes.
(2) Unemployment.
(3) Age changes of American workers.
(4) Man-hours.
(5) Changes in employment revealed by the census of manu
factures.
(6) The relation between value of output, value added by
manufacture, and wages.
(7) The distribution of employees by size of establishment.
(8) Employment in distributive trades.
5. In regard to technological unemployment, the collection of
fundamental data and the prosecution of specific studies should be
a continuing part of the responsibility of the Federal Government,
and especially of the United States Bureau of Labor Statistics.
(a) Basic data. The collection of such further basic data by appro
priate agencies as are _necessary _for the continuous and current
measurement of industrial productivity.
(b) Special _studies. Where warranted by basic facts collected,
special intensive surveys of particular industries are to be made for
the purpose of determining the exact processes or machinery respon
sible for the increased productivity and the type of labor affected by it.
https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
[816]
EMPLOYMENT CONDITIONS AND RELIEF
43
6. Two hundred thousand dollars additional be made available in
budget of next fiscal year to the United States Bureau of Labor
Statistics for carrying out the above recommendations.
7. b ifty thousand dollars of the above to be made available at once.
8. More effective coordination of the various statistical services of
the Government to be undertaken, by the appointment of a permanent
coordinating committee composed of the heads of the various statisti
cal services with power to institute investigations and make recom
mendations to some central authority.
9. An extension of the policy of cooperation with responsible out
side agencies to be encouraged both in collection and analysis.
L o a n s a s a n U n e m p lo y m e n t R e lie f M ea su re
REPORT by the President’s Emergency Committee for Employ
ment, issued in mimeographed form February 22, 1931, outlines
the system of loans inaugurated by several companies as a measure
lor the prevention of distress among workers facing protracted lay-offs.
A number of important industrial concerns in different parts of the
country are making cash loans to their workers who are in need of
funds because of unemployment, which are to be repaid from wages
when business improves. These loans are being made in some cases
in the belief that a higher level of employment will be reached in the
near future and because of the desire on the part of the companies to
keep their working forces as nearly as possible intact and ready to
start work as soon as the expected orders begin to accumulate. The
loans, therefore, being based on the expected expansion of operations
which will afford the borrower full wages, are made on a business-like
basis, with or without interest, to be repaid in installments deducted
from future wages.
The great majority of workers who are normally regularly employed
prefer to borrow funds in such an emergency as the present, rather
than to ask for charitable assistance. The effect of this ability to
secure a loan which can be repaid after returning to work is to give
the worker a feeling of self-reliance, while at the same time it prevents
serious hardship. The loans are usually made by company represen
tatives who are in a better position than outside persons to know the
needs of the worker.
As yet there is only limited experience available as to the extent of
losses on such loans, but it seems evident from the reports coming to
the President’s emergency comittee, it is stated, that “ loans to
employees temporarily off the pay roll or on reduced pay are coming
to be considered a sound feature of emergency industrial relations
procedure.”
The five typical loan plans described in the report are those of the
General Electric Co., International Harvester Co., Southern Pacific
Railway, General Tire & Rubber Co., and the Matthews Construction
Co., of Princeton, N. J.
The loan plan of the General Electric Co. was adopted in the
Schenectady plant in 1926, and was incorporated in the general unem
ployment pension plan presented to all the plants of the company for
adoption in the summer of 1930. From the unemployment fund loans
not to exceed $200 may be made to employees who have contributed
A
16860°—31----- 4
https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
[817]
44
MONTHLY LABOR REVIEW
for at least six months to the fund, and repayment of such loans begins
as soon as the contributing employee is given full-time work by the
company. The plan provided that no payments should be made
from the fund for at least six months, and thereafter only to employees
who have made their normal payments for six months, but owing to the
unemployment emergency it was putin operation in December, 1930.
The International Harvester Co. adopted a plan October 30, 1930,
which was to be effective immediately, whereby employees tempo
rarily laid off or on part time equivalent to less than 36 hours per
week may receive loans to defray current living expenses, but which
may not be used for the payment of old debts nor purchases made on
the installment plan. There is a works loan committee and a visitingcommittee in the different plants, the latter of which reports on the
necessity for loans after visits to the homes of unemployed workers.
Loans are made by check weekly, the employee signing an agreement
to repay the loan after reemployment by the company. The plan also
provides for emergency medical assistance through the company’s medi
cal department. No interest is charged on loans made under this plan.
A temporary relief fund was established on the Southern Pacific
system in December, 1930. This is a joint plan, the sources of the
fund being voluntary pay-roll deductions of 1 per cent a month for
six months of the earnings of officers and employees, who feel finan
cially able, supplemented by an equal amount contributed by the
company. Pay-roll deductions did not begin until the last half of
January^ 1931, but the company advanced a sum of money to each
division in December for immediate loans. Five company officers
of each line have charge of the general administration of the fund.
The original subscribers will receive their pro rata share at least once
a year after repayments have been begun.
The General Tire & Rubber Co. recently declared an extra dividend,
half of which was set aside to form a fund to be used to stabilize the
industry, chiefly through the stimulation of sales, and to provide
assistance to employees in times of unemployment in the form of
loans. No loans have been granted as yet, as the plant has been
running full time.
The plan of the Matthews Construction Co. is that of a small
organization which has on occasions previous to this general depres
sion made loans to the workers. No interest is charged the men and
no time limit set on the pay-roll deductions for repayment.
The United States Steel Corporation is another organization which
has extended credit to some of its employees in the present depression,
and the report states that it is probable that numerous other companies
have made similar advances against future pay rolls.
R ep o rt o f C o n n e c t ic u t
S t a t e E m e r g e n c y C o m m itte e
E m p lo y m e n t
on
date of February 19, 1931, the Connecticut State Emer
gency Committee on Employment made a report to Gov.
U NDER
Wilbur L. Cross. The report describes the procedure and achieve
ments of the committee and outlines plans, the adoption of which the
committee hopes would aid in meeting unemployment problems aris
ing from seasonal variations and cyclical depressions in business.
https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
[818]
EMPLOYMENT CONDITIONS AND RELIEF
45
Procedure of the Committee
T h e committee organized its work on the assumption that its duty
lay in (1) cooperating with all agencies in the State and Nation
organized for the purpose of investigating and mitigating effects of
unemployment; and (2) encouraging employers to gather information
and statistics on unemployment and to analyze the data collected in
the hope of finding a practical solution of the unemployment problem.
Since the populous communities in Connecticut already had relief
committees at work, it was not believed necessary for the State
committee to outline commonly known methods of relief. Instead,
the committee set about to develop a register showing which commu
nities had unemployment committees and to disseminate information
as to what unusual things the various relief organizations were doing
so that one community might benefit by the experience of another.
The collection of such information is being continued currently, and
as it is arranged and classified the results will be made known.
Local relief committees were found to have much in common as
regards method of organization. The State committee therefore
found it effective to appoint a group of subcommittees to deal with
major problems, such as registration of the unemployed, classification
of the registrants as to needs, job procurement—both public and
private—collection and distribution of clothing, charitable relief, and
publicity. These subcommittees in turn cooperate in attacking local
problems as conditions require, always making use of the relief sug
gestions already referred to.
The State committee has not restricted itself to working with relief
committees only, but has also used its influence to discourage all un
sound plans for municipal undertakings and public improvements.
In the report of the committee satisfaction is expressed that a growing
tendency exists on the part of municipalities to insist on a return for
funds paid out, thus avoiding the practice of paying wages for
idleness.
Recommendations of the Committee
R ecommendations offered by the committee are designed to meet
present conditions and to build up machinery that may be of service
in meeting and diminishing the severity of future crises. Among the
recommendations stressed in the report of the committee are proposals
to increase public works, to stabilize employment in industrial estab
lishments, and to build up exact information on employment and
related matters.
In the field of promoting public works the committee has taken
active steps, with the result that a $100,000 appropriation for clearing
up State parks and forests was made.
The committee has also used its influence with employers to bring
about stabilized employment. Employers have been urged to inform
their employees that hours of labor for a certain definite period ahead
will be maintained, to recognize actual determined losses as quickly as
possible and take immediate steps to liquidate them, to make neces
sary improvements in plants and equipment, and to distribute the
work among as many workers as possible.
For future control of unemployment the committee has made recom
mendations in detail. Stress is laid upon the need for permanent
https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
[819]
46
MONTHLY LABOR REVIEW
planning boards, which it is believed should be established by commu
nities. Long-range planning is likewise recommended as a function of
employers so that production may be more evenly divided over the
several months of the year. In making this suggestion the committee
does not advocate that employers build up stocks on speculation, but
that they study the market, learn what requirements will be, and offer
inducements to their distributing organizations to contract for goods
needed far in advance of the time the goods will be needed.
Stress is laid upon a proposal looking toward collection of informa
tion and statistics on employment. Such information, if available at
the end of the present depression and covering this period when con
ditions are at their worst, would make it possible to study the causes
and remedies of depression. The committee regards the collection
of accurate information on matters relating to unemployment as
properly within the province of employers’ work and believes that a
large group of employers in the State should agree among themselves
to supply to a central office, for analysis, certain data for one full week
in each month. The information needed is classified under four
headings :
1. T ren d of em p lo y m en t of identical in d u stries over a contin u in g p eriod of
tim e d atin g back to O ctober, 1929.
2. T ren d of p a y rolls of th e sam e em ployers over a co ntinuing period of tim e
d a tin g b ack to O ctober, 1929.
3. T ren d of to ta l a c tu a l hours of em plo y m en t of th e sam e em ployers over a
continuing period of tim e d a tin g back to O ctober, 1929.
4. A record in all in d u stries th a t will show th e precise effect th e p resen t d e
pression has had, a n d is having, upo n th e hours of lab o r of each of its em ployees.
The committee’s report states that analysis of the information
reported under headings 1,2, and 3 would give a picture of the out
ward and general view of unemployment and wage problems in the
State. The information suggested under heading 4, the committee
believes, will give the individual employer and others with whom he is
willing to share the information an intimate view of his unemploy
ment problem. The plan of collection advanced by the committee
for learning the precise effect the present depression has had upon the
hours of labor of employees (heading 4) provides for collecting and
recording the following information :
A. L ist those em ployed in each d e p a rtm e n t of th e business a t th e p eak of
operations of th e p la n t ta k e n as a w hole in 1929, show ing age of each a n d period
each h as been on p ay roll. C o n tin u e th is record m o n th ly fo r each d e p a rtm e n t
u n til i t goes on sh o rt hours, a n d resum e th e record w hen full-tim e o perations are
begun again. (T his in fo rm atio n is im p o rta n t, because it shows w h a t th e stab le
forces of th e business a re a n d in d icates w h a t forces th e m an ag e m en t is m ost
desirous of keeping.)
.
B. W hen shorten in g of hours in a n y d e p a rtm e n t to o k plane in 1929 or 1930,
o btain a list of th e em ployees whose hours w ere shortened, w ith age a n d d ep en d
ents of each, a n d th e re a fte r com pile a w eekly record of th e ho u rs each w orked an d
th e w ages he received so long as he rem ained on th e p ay roll, ad d in g new nam es as
new persons are em ployed. ( I t is im p o rta n t th a t th is in fo rm atio n be ta k e n from
th e reg u lar pay-roll record an d p u t on a special form so th a t th e com posite effect
of th e depression on th e business, d e p a rtm e n t, a n d in d iv id u al m ay be seen a t a
glance.)
In closing, the committee urges that employers hasten to develop a
system of recording and carry their inquiry back to cover at least a
year. It is stated that the committee is cognizant of the work such
an inquiry would entail, but believes that recurring unemployment
should be made the subject of special research.
https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
[820]
EMPLOYMENT CONDITIONS AND RELIEF
47
R o c h e ste r U n e m p lo y m e n t B e n e fit P la n
JOINT unemployment insurance plan providing a permanent
fund for the payment of benefits to their employees in time of
unemployment was put into effect recently by 14 plants in Rochester,
N. Y.
The companies uniting in the adoption of the plan are Eastman
Kodak Co., Bausch. & Lomb Optical Co., Stromberg Carlson Co.,
Rochester Telephone Corporation, the Gleason Works, Taylor Instru
ment Co., Consolidated Machine Tool Corporation, the Todd Co.,
the Pfaudler Co., Vogt Manufacturing Co., Yawman & Erbe Manu
facturing Co., Sargent & Greenleaf (Inc.), Davenport Machine Tool
Co., and Cochrane Bly Co. Of these companies, which are under
separate management and control, one is a public utility and the
others are manufacturing companies, their principal products being
photographic goods, optical goods and instruments, telephones and
radios, thermometers and other recording instruments, machinery,
check protectors and signers, gear cutting machines, auto trimmings,
machinery, office furniture, filing systems, and locks. These com
panies normally employ about 26,000 workers, and vary in size from
approximately 45 to 13,000 employees.
Stabilization methods which have eliminated periodic unemploy
ment to a large extent had been adopted by these firms prior to the
present depression. Some of the methods employed were accurate
forecasting of sales, careful planning, scheduling of production at an
even rate during the year, and building up of inventories during slack
seasons. During the present depression the companies have done
as much repair and maintenance work as possible in order to keep the
workers employed; some have engaged in extensive building opera
tions, and special efforts have been made to stimulate sales. When
it has become necessary to reduce output in the different companies
the managements have, as far as possible, reduced the working hours
in order to reduce the number of lay-offs. It is stated in the agree
ment drawn up by the firms that after careful study of the situation
it appears that the most sensible and practical additional method for
reducing unemployment and lessening its effects lies in creating sub
stantial reserves to be drawn upon for benefits during future periods
of unemployment. It is their belief, also, that such reserves should
be built up and maintained by the industries themselves rather than
under governmental insurance.
Each company will, therefore, make an appropriation annually to
an unemployment reserve fund up to 2 per cent of the pay roll,
depending upon the degree of stabilization effected by that company.
The fund will reach its maximum in five years and any payments
made from the fund after the maximum is reached will be replaced
by appropriations at the regular annual rate. No benefit payments
will be made until after January 1, 1933. In case of a prolonged
period of unemployment, when it appears that the fund will be unequal
to meeting the demands, the management may declare that an emer
gency exists and all officials and employees of the company who are
not receiving unemployment benefits will be assessed 1 per cent of
their earnings. These payments will continue until the management
declares that the emergency is over.
A
https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
[ 821]
48
MONTHLY LABOR REVIEW
Unemployment benefits will amount to 60 per cent of the average
weekly earnings during the last three months of normal employment,
up to a maximum of $22.50 per week. The maximum period during
which unemployment benefits will be paid ranges from 6 weeks for
one year’s service to 13 weeks for service of five years and over.
Unemployment benefits will be payable to eligible employees after
two weeks of unemployment. There is, also, the usual provision in
plans of this kind that payment of the benefit will cease if an employee
refuses to accept any suitable employment which may be offered to
him.
U n e m p lo y m e n t in F o r e ig n C o u n tr ie s
T
HE accompanying table shows detailed monthly statistics of
unemployment in foreign countries, as reproduced from official
sources, from May, 1929, to the latest available date:
ST A T E M E N T OF U N E M P L O Y M E N T IN FO R E IG N C O U N TR IE S 1
Australia
Trade-unionists
unemployed
Date (end of
month)
Per
cent
N umber
1929
M ay___________
June___ - -----July
August
September___ .
October
November
___
December
(2)
40,996
(2)
(2)
52,480
(2)
(2)
56,801
1930
January__ . __
February ______
March_________
April
M a y ...
__
June_______ _ _
July
August
_ ___
September __ ___
October
November
December______
(2)
(2)
63,144
(2)
(2)
80, 595
(2)
(2)
90, 379
(2)
(2)
102, 900
1931
January-
(2)
10.0
12. i
13.1
14.6
18.5
20.5
23.4
-
Belgium
Austria
Canada
Trade-unionists
Com
Unemployment insurance societies
unemployed
pulsory
insur
ance,
W holly unem
Partially unem
number
unem
ployed
ployed
ployed
Number Per cent
in re
ceipt of
Number
Number
Per cent
Per cent
benefit
130, 469
110, 266
104, 399
101,845
104,947
125,850
167,487
226, 567
2,382
2, 559
4,037
3,200
3,492
3,261
6,895
15; 761
0.4
.4
.6
.5
.5
.5
1.1
2.4
8, 686
11,194
16,452
15, 614
16, 714
13, 930
13,176
29, 309
1.4
1.8
2.6
2. 5
2.6
2. 2
2. i
4.6
7, 750
5, 723
6,003
7,159
7, 654
12, 716
19,832
24, 289
4.0
2.9
3.0
3. 5
3.7
6.0
9.3
11.4
273,197
284, 543
239,094
192, 477
162, 678
150,075
153,188
156,145
163,894
192, 778
237, 745
294,845
22, 542
16,085
14,030
13,715
12,119
12, 226
15, 302
17, 747
23; 693
27,322
38, 973
63, 585
3.5
2.6
2.2
2. 2
1.9
1.9
2.4
2.8
3.8
4.3
6.1
9.3
25, 782
31, 222
28, 469
36, 605
38, 761
41,336
48, 580
51,649
61, 623
54, 804
76,043
117,167
4. 0
4.9
4.5
5.8
6.1
6.5
7. 7
8. 2
9.9
8. 5
12. 0
17.0
22, 795
24,175
22,912
18, 581
20,424
21, 380
18, 473
3 18, 232
3 19, 356
3 22, 403
3 28’ 408
3 3L 339
10.8
11.5
10.8
9.0
10.3
10.6
9. 2
9.3
9.4
10. 8
13.8
17.0
331, 239
(2)
(2)
(2)
1 Sources: League of Nations—M onthly Bulletin of Statistics; International Labor Office—International
Labor Review; Canada—Labor Gazette; Great Britain—M inistry of Labor Gazette; Austria—Statistische Nachrichten; Australia—Quarterly Summary of Australian Statistics; Germany—Reichsarbeitsblatt, Reichs Arbeitsmarkt Anzeiger; Switzerland—Wirt. Ü. Social. Mitteilungen, La Vie Economique;
Poland—Wiedomosci Statystlyczne; Norway—Statistiske Meddelelser; Netherlands—Maandschrift;
Sweden—Sociala Meddelanden; Denmark—Statistiske Efterretninger; Finland—Bank of Finland
M onthly Bulletin; France—Bulletin du Marché du Travail; Hungary—Magyar Statisztikai Szemle;
Belgium—Revue du Travail; N ew Zealand—M onthly Abstract of Statistics; U. S. Department of Com
merce—Commerce Reports; and U . S. Consular Reports.
2 N ot reported.
1 Figures computed in the Bureau of Labor Statistics from official report covering membership of unions
reporting and per cent of unemployment.
https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
[ 822 ]
49
EMPLOYMENT CONDITIONS AND RELIEF
ST A T E M E N T
OF U N E M P L O Y M E N T IN FO RE IG N C O U N TR IES—Continued
Czechoslovakia
Date (end of
month)
1929
M ay_____
June_____
July-------A ugust___
September.
O ctober-..
November.
December .
1930
January
February. .
March.......
April____
M a y .........
June_____
July_____
A ugust__
September
October-..
N ovember.
December.
Trade-union in
surance funds—
unemployed
in receipt of
benefit
Number
Per
cent
21, 866
1.9
1.9
19, 436
16, 859
18,674
19,468
16, 248
17,108
30,170
1.6
2.8
39,199
40,550
45,567
42,664
41,098
37, 853
46, 800
52, 694
57, 542
61,213
65,904
3.6
3.6
4.0
3.7
3.8
3.4
4.1
4.7
5.3
5.5
5.9
1.6
1.8
1.9
1. 5
0
1931
January...
February..
D ate (end of
month)
N um
ber of
unem
ployed
regis
tered
419,373
393, 749
395, 202
410, 481
442, 312
498, 604
634, 790
922,681
1930
January—
February...
March____
A pril_____
M a y ..........
June______
July______
A ugust___
September.
October___
November.
December.
1, 004, 787
1,076, 441
995, 972
926, 831
895, 542
896,465
930, 777
984, 384
1,011,820
1,061, 570
1,167, 930
0
0
2 N ot reported.
https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
Finland
France Germany
N um
ber of
unem
ployed
regis
tered
N um
ber of Number
unem of unem
ployed
ployed
regis
in re
tered
ceipt of
benefit
Trade-union unem Number
ployment funds—
unem
unemployed
ployed
remain
ing on
live
register
N um
Per cent
ber
11,135
8,876
9,007
8,958
9,296
10, 664
13,146
16,198
29,671
27,398
26,621
25,164
24,175
28,194
36,302
62,563
10.8
2,169
10.0
1,110
9.6
9.1
8.7
780
609
902
3,065
5,288
6,116
1,624
1,157
1,188
1,859
2,710
4,997
9,495
8,716
570
394
399
403
385
396
577
817
1, 349,833
1, 260,044
1, 251,452
1, 271,990
1, 323, 603
1,557,146
2,035,667
2, 850, 849
19, 282
21,153
20, 376
18, 371
16, 232
14, 975
15,330
15, 687
16, 073
17,307
20,272
24, 429
55, 876
59,363
47,109
33, 471
27,966
24, 807
26, 200
26, 232
27, 700
32, 880
44, 200
71,100
20.3
5,608
4, 580
3,575
2,227
2,065
910
762
1,039
1,414
3,282
5,675
6,163
12,696
11, 545
10,062
7,274
4,666
3, 553
4, 026
5,288
7,157
10, 279
10, 740
9,336
I,
1,683
1,630
1,203
859
1,019
856
964
988
1,663
4,893
II,
3, 217,608
484
3, 365,811
3, 040, 797
2, 786,912
2, 634, 718
2, 640,681
2, 765,258
2, 883,000
3,004,000
3, 252,000
3, 683, 000
4, 384,
952000
27,081
70, 961
28, 536
40,766
4.887.000
4.972.000
10.1
13.0
22.4
21.0
15.6
11.8
9.4
8.7
9.3
9.0
9.0
11.4
15.3
24.6
0
Germany
Great Britain and Northern Ireland
Trade-unionists
Compulsory insurance
W holly unem
ployed
1929
M ay______
June______
July--------A ugust___
September.
October__
November.
December.
Estonia
Denmark
0
Number
1931
January..-
Danzig
(Free
City of)
Partially unem
ployed
Per
cent
N um
ber
9.1
8.5
315,191
308,699
315, 739
322, 824
315,150
319, 489
351, 947
389, 278
8.6
8.9
9.6
10.9
13.7
20.1
22.0
23.5
21. 7
20.3
19. 5
19.6
20. 5
21. 7
22. 5
23. 6
26. 0
31.7
501, 950
593, 380
576,153
553,098
552, 318
578,116
631, 903
670, 466
677, 627
693, 379
721, 658
0
Per
cent
6.8
6.7
6.9
7.0
6.8
7.0
7.6
8.5
11.0
13.0
12.6
12.1
12.0
12.6
13.9
14.8
15.1
15.4
16.1
16.9
Number
unem
ployed
in receipt
of benefit
Wholly unem
ployed
Number
1, 010, 781
929, 579
863, 594
883, 002
910, 245
1,061,134
1,387,079
1,984, 811
900, 562
884, 549
881,189
918, 550
937, 795
992, 769
1,061,618
1, 071, 849
2,482, 648
2,655, 723
2,347,102
2,081, 068
1, 889, 240
1,834, 662
1,900, 961
1,947, 811
1, 965, 348
2,071, 730
2,353, 980
2, 832, 738
1,183, 974
1,211, 262
1, 284, 231
1, 309, 014
1,339,595
1,341,818
1, 405, 981
1, 500, 990
1, 579, 708
1, 725, 731
1, 836, 280
1,853, 575
3,364,770
2, 044,209
0
[823]
Per
cent
Temporary stop
pages
N um
ber
276, 922
279,108
296, 318
280, 332
265, 627
261, 711
8. 8 263, 987
272, 371
7.6
7.4
7.4
7.7
7.9
8.2
336,474
371, 840
10.6 409, 785
10.8 451,506
11.1 516, 303
11.1 569, 931
11.6 664,107
12.4 618, 658
13.1 608, 692
13.9 593, 223
14. 8 532, 518
14.9 646,205
9.8
10.0
16.5
618,633
Per
cent
2.3
2.4
2.5
2.4
2.2
2.2
2.2
2.2
2.8
3.1
3.4
3. 8
4. 2
4.7
5.5
5.1
5.0
4. 8
4.3
5.3
5.0
50
M O N T H L Y L A B O R R E V IE W
ST A T E M E N T OF U N E M P L O Y M E N T IN FO RE IG N C O U N TR IE S—Continued
Great
Britain
Date (end of
month)
Number
of persons
registered
with em
ployment
exchanges
Hungary
Irish Free State
Italy
Trade-unionists un
employed
Compulsory in
surance-unem
ployed
Number of un
employed regis
tered
Social-Demo
cratic
Chris
tian
(Buda
pest) N um
Per
ber
cent
Number Per cent
1929
M ay______
June______
July_____
August___
September^
October___
November.
December..
1,123, 216
1,117,807
1,154,129
1,155, 803
1,181, 862
1, 234, 388
1, 285,458
1, 510, 231
787
787
801
833
783
967
1,033
1, 107
13, 266
13,921
13, 964
14, 007
13, 922
14, 215
15, 910
19,181
8.8
9. 5
9.3
9.5
9.5
9.7
10.3
13.0
24, 256
(2)
(2)
21,834
(2)
(2)
26, 186
(2)
1930
January__
February...
March____
April_____
M ay______
June______
July______
August___
September.
October___
November.
December..
1, 491, 519
1, 539, 265
1, 677,473
1, 698, 386
1,770,051
1,890, 575
2, 011,467
2, 039, 702
2,114, 955
2, 200,413
2, 274, 338
2, 392, 738
1,161
1, 120
983
906
875
829
920
847
874
999
975
935
21, 533
21, 309
21, 016
20,139
19, 875
18, 960
19, 081
21,013
22, 252
22, 914
23, 333
24, 648
14.5
14.8
14.6
13.7
13.6
13.0
13.2
14. 5
16.0
16.7
17.0
31, 592
(2)
(2)
26, 027
(2)
(2)
23, 393
(2)
(2)
20, 775
(2)
(2)
1931
January___
2, 613, 749
953
26,191
Netherlands
Per
cent
9.2
11. 1
9.2
8.2
(2)
(2)
N ew Zealand
Number
1929
M ay_______
J u n e .............
July________
August_____
Septem ber...
October____
N ovem ber...
December__
10, 820
9, 987
12. 030
12, 701
12,517
13,639
20, 941
48, 609
3. 0
2.6
3.1
3.3
3. 2
3.5
5.3
12.3
5, 276
(2)
(2)
5, 226
(2)
(2)
3,018
(2)
1930
January____
February___
March_____
April_______
M ay----------June_______
July________
August_____
Septem ber...
October_____
N ovem b er...
December__
56, 535
50, 957
34, 996
28,421
26,211
23, 678
29, 075
32, 755
35, 532
41, 088
4 46,807
4 72,191
13.9
12. 5
8.6
6.9
6.3
5.5
6.7
7.6
8.2
9.6
11.8
16. 5
(2)
4, 348
(2)
(2)
5,884
(2)
(2)
7, 197
(2)
(2)
8,119
(2)
1931
J anuary____
4 103, 728
23.4
(2)
https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
7.8
26,167
Unemployment
insurance socie Trade-unionists
unemployed
ties—unemployed
Date (end of month)
Number
8.6
Per
cent
9.3
9.4
5.6
8.5
Ì0.9
13.5
15.5
Par
tially
unem
ployed
227, 682
193, 325
201, 868
216, 666
228, 831
297, 382
332,833
408, 748
8, 713
10, 970
13, 503
19, 650
16,835
17, 793
19, 694
21, 349
1,433
1,236
1,205
1,008
1, 582
4,204
8, 479
8,134
466, 231
456, 628
385,432
372, 236
367, 183
322, 291
342, 061
375, 548
394, 630
446, 496
534, 356
642, 169
23,185
26, 674
28, 026
24, 305
22, 825
21,887
24, 209
24, 056
22, 734
19, 081
22,125
21, 788
9, 263
8,825
6,494
3, 683
1,421
779
607
573
1,470
6, 058
8, 608
10, 076
722,612
27,924
(2)
Norway
Trade-unionists (10
unions) unemployed
Poland
N umber
Number
unem
unem
ployed re ployed
registered
maining
with em
on live
register ployment
offices
Number
Per cent
4, 694
4, 337
3, 999
4,245
4,854
5, 682
6, 256
7,693
12. 5
11.3
10.2
10.7
12.1
14.0
15.4
18. 9
18, 000
14, 547
12,417
12,493
15, 525
18,420
20, 546
22,092
119, 877
105, 065
97, 297
90,094
81,848
91,035
125,066
185, 314
7, 786
7,851
7, 503
6, 701
5,239
4, 700
4, 723
5,897
7,010
8,031
9, 396
(2)
19.0
18.9
17.8
15.8
12.2
10.8
10.8
13.4
15.7
18.0
21.4
22, 549
22, 974
22, 533
19, 829
16, 376
13,939
11,997
12,923
17,053
20,363
24, 544
27,157
241,974
274, 708
289, 469
271, 225
224,914
204, 982
193, 687
173, 627
170,467
165,154
209,912
299,797
1 Provisional figure.
[824]
Number
unem
ployed
remain
ing on
live
register
Wholly
unem
ployed
(2)
2 N ot reported.
Latvia
28, 596
(2)
51
EMPLOYMENT CONDITIONS AND RELIEF
ST A T E M E N T OF U N E M P L O Y M E N T IN FO R E IG N C O U N TR IES—Continued
Rumania
Poland
Saar Ter
ritory
Sweden
Industria 1 workers
Date (end of month)
Extractive and
manufacturing
industries—
wholly unem
ployed
Number
Per
cent
Number
Manufacturing
Number
unem
industries—par
unem
ployed
tially unem
remaining ployed
ployed
registered
on live
register
Number
Per
cent
Trade-unionists
unemployed
Per
cent
Number
1929
M ay_________________
June______ __________
July__________________
August- __ ______ September_____ __ _
October__________ ____
N ovem ber____________
December____________
104, 200
91, 000
84, 300
77, 500
68, 700
76, 818
108, 200
166, 240
11.6
10.2
9.7
9.0
8.0
8.9
12.5
19.5
135, 608
98, 708
89, 639
82, 297
70, 055
84, 060
94, 890
94, 601
25.1
18.6
17.7
15.7
13.2
15.3
17.5
18.5
6, 819
5,849
3, 909
3, 714
5,171
5, 481
6, 958
6,866
(2)
3, 762
3,238
3, 398
3,990
5,025
6,408
10, 515
24,452
21, 764
20, 048
19, 914
22, 271
27, 529
33, 581
53, 977
8.1
7.4
6.5
6.3
7.2
8.6
10.4
16.6
1930
January_______ _____
February- ___________
March _______ . ___
April___________ _ _
M ay_______
June_________________
July__________________
A ugust_______________
September__________
October- _____________
November.
December___ . ____ .
219, 333
251, 627
265,135
246, 670
201,116
182, 600
170, 665
150, 650
146, 642
141.422
(2)
0
24.3
27.5
28.7
27.0
23.0
21.6
20.5
18. 3
17.8
17.5
108, 812
120,058
120, 844
113, 594
104, 469
94, 375
70, 597
74, 289
74, 285
91,854
106, 835
95,637
24. 8
28.4
28.9
26.9
24.2
22.2
17.0
17. 1
16.5
14.8
23.6
23.1
12, 622
15, 588
13, 045
13,412
25, 096
22,960
23, 236
24, 209
39, 110
36,147
42, 689
0
11, 307
11, 949
8, 882
7,522
7, 362
6,330
7,095
7, 099
7, 527
9, 013
12,110
15, 245
45, 636
45, 460
42, 278
38, 347
28,112
28, 956
27,170
28, 539
34,963
45, 501
56, 573
282.655
14.2
13.2
12.5
11.1
8.3
8.1
7.8
8.1
9.8
12.5
15. 5
23.0
(2)
18,921
1931
January____
__
(2)
(2)
(2)
Switzerland
Yugoslavia
Unemployment funds
Date (end of month)
Wholly unem
ployed
Number
Per
cent
Partially unem
ployed
Number
Per
cent
Number
of unemployed
registered
1929
M ay_______________________ _____ _______ ________
June________ - ________________________________ July_______________________________________________
A ugust_____________ ____ ___________________________
September_____ _ _________ . - __ - _ - _ ______
October
-- --- _______ .
------ - _
November___ _ _ _________________________ , ________
December__________ _______________________________
(2)
(2)
(2)
(2)
(2)
(2)
(2)
12, 309
(2)
0.7
(2)
(2)
.8
(2)
(2)
4.2
(2)
(2)
0
0
0
0
0
9,805
0
1.0
0
0
.9
0
0
3.3
10, 583
9, 017
7, 652
5, 790
6, 755
4, 739
5, 026
5, 663
1930
January____________________________ _____ ________
February____ .
- - . . . . ____ ____________________
M a rch .. ________ ___ _ ___ _ - ___________________
April______ ______ _______ - . _________________
M ay_______________________________________________
June __________ . . . ___ - -_ . . . . -. -. - - - July________________________________________________
August_______ - - _ - --------- ----------------------------September--------------------------------------------------------------October
- - - _____ . .
. ------ - November------ ------------------------------------------------------December_______
_ ---------------- ------------- ----------
10, 523
9,971
7,882
5,203
5, 356
5, 368
4, 751
5, 703
7, 792
7, 399
11, 666
21,400
4.4
4.1
2.6
2. 1
2. 2
1.7
1.9
2.3
2.5
3.0
4.7
6.6
10, 710
11,445
12, 642
12, 755
13,129
17, 688
15,112
19, 441
26, 111
23, 309
25, 793
33, 483
4.4
4.7
4.2
5.3
5.4
5.7
6.2
7.9
8.3
9.4
10.5
10.4
8,508
9, 437
9, 739
12, 052
8, 704
6,991
7,236
6, 111
5, 973
6,609
7, 219
9,989
2 N ot reported.
https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
[825]
52
MONTHLY LABOR REVIEW
A p p o in tm e n t o f F ed era l C o m m is s io n t o S tu d y U n e m p lo y m e n t
in G e r m a n y
HE Federal Government has recently appointed a commission to
study numerous proposed projects to combat unemployment in
Germany, under the chairmanship of Herr Heinrich Brauns, former
Federal Minister of Labor.1 The other members of the commission
are former high officials connected with labor affairs, economists, and
statisticians, without special representatives from employers and their
workers. It is not expected that the commission will solve the
unemployment problem in its entirety, but it is hoped that it may be
able to work out helpful projects in certain economic fields.
T
W ork o f B r itis h U n e m p lo y m e n t G r a n ts C o m m itte e
N 1920 the British Government passed legislation authorizing
grants in aid of schemes of local works undertaken with a view to
affording employment, and this policy was maintained with varying
degrees of enthusiasm until the coming into office of the Labor Party
in 1929, when a new bill was passed increasing the amounts which
might be advanced and liberalizing the terms upon which they would
be given. The committee which had been administering the earlier
law was retained in office and has recently issued a report covering
the period from June 10, 1929, to August 30, 1930.2 The old bill
was in effect from June 10 to August 30, 1929, but that period is
covered in the present report in order to make the statistics of the
work continuous.
I
Conditions for Receiving Grants
G r a n t s may be made in aid of works of public utility and of works
calculated to promote economic development in the United Kingdom,
provided the committee is satisfied that such works would not be
carried out in the near future without such aid. In other words, it
is not the purpose to help authorities in works which they would
normally do without assistance. Labor for assisted works must be
secured through the employment exchanges, and normally 75 per
cent of the men employed must be ex-service men. Only British
materials may be used on such works, unless a special exception is
made by the committee; this stipulation is taken so seriously that
only once in the course of the year has the committee agreed to the
use of foreign materials, in a case where to enforce the provision would
have necessitated suspension of work for several months while the
material was being prepared.
Kind and Amount of Aid Given
M o s t of the assistance given is for schemes financed by loans. In
the case of nonrevenue-producing schemes, the grant is 75 per cent
of the interest and amortization charges for the first half of the loan
period up to 15 years, and 37% per cent for the second half, again up
to 15 years. For a revenue-producing scheme, the normal grant is
1 Magazin der Wirtschaft, Berlin, Feb. 6, 1931, p. 302.
1 Great Britain. M inistry of Labor. Unemployment Grants Committee.
London, 1930. (Cmd. 3744.)
https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
[8261
Report to Aug. 30, 1930.
53
EMPLOYMENT CONDITIONS AND RELIEF
50 per cent of the interest for 15 years or for the period of the loan,
whichever is the shorter. Special grants of greater value may be
made in the case of large and important revenue-producing schemes
and for such desirable works as rural water supply, baths, and the like.
When schemes are financed otherwise than by loans, in areas where
the average monthly rate of unemployment among adult males
exceeded 15 per cent during the preceding year, the grant is 90 per
cent of the wages of the men taken on for the work, while in other
areas it is 75 per cent of the wages.
From December, 1920, up to August 30, 1930, approval had been
given to schemes financed by loan, involving a capital cost of
£137,589,000 ($669,576,869), and of this amount £40,799,000
($198,548,334), or 29.7 per cent, had been approved under the new
act. The treasury liability on the total amount was £2,900,000
($14,112,850) for the year 1930-31; for the next five years its annual
liability is estimated at £4,070,000 ($19,806,655); for the succeeding
5-year period at £3,070,000 ($14,940,155), and for the next, at
£1,500,000 ($7,299,750). The estimated capital cost of approved
schemes financed otherwise than by loan during the whole period is
£18,013,000 ($87,660,265), of which £971,000 ($4,725,372) had been
approved under the new act. The treasury liability on the whole
amount after March 31, 1930, is estimated at £400,000 ($1,946,600).
During the period December, 1920, to March, 1930, the treasury
had paid out on schemes financed by loans £13,428,058 ($65,347,644),
and on schemes otherwise financed £4,323,809 ($21,041,817), making
a total of £17,751,867 ($86,389,461).
Kind and Cost of Schemes Approved for Aid
T h e following table shows the kinds of schemes approved for
grants, and the estimated cost of each kind passed during the period
June 11, 1929, to August 30, 1930:
E ST IM A T E D COST OF SCH EM ES A PP R O V E D FOR G R ANTS
[Conversions into United States money on basis of pound=$4.8665]
Estimated total cost
Class of work
English
currency
United States
currency
Per
cent of
total
Electricity supply, standardization, etc___
_ _ _ ______
Sewers and sewage disposal---.............................
_ - - ---- -. . .
Roads and footpaths- ____ - Water supply. _________
_ ____ _ _______
Dock and harbor improvements and equipment . . .
Parks,recreation grounds, tennis courts, e tc ..
.
Civic buildings and public institutions.________
Sea d e f e n s e . . . ________ . . .
G a s s u p p ly .._______ ___________ _____ _
Land reclamation and drainage_______
River improvements__ ...1 - ___ . ___ __________ .
Land developm ent..
_________ . . . __
•
Baths and washhouses . ______ __________ . . _ _ . _
Conveniences___ - - - - ____ ____ ____
Tramway construction. _ ________
Cemeteries ________
Sanitation_____________________ , _______ .
_____
Miscellaneous.................................... __________ ____________
£12,226, 000
8,145,000
5, 562, 000
5,340, 000
4, 568, 000
1, 585, 000
1,305, 000
1, 210, 000
788, 000
765, 000
651, 000
556, 000
441, 000
82, 000
43, 000
42, 000
10, 000
116,000
' $59,497,829
39,637,642
27,067,473
25,987,110
22,230,172
7,713,403
6,350, 783
5,888,465
3,834, 802
3, 722, 873
3,168, 092
2, 705,774
2,146,127
399, 053
209,260
204, 393
48, 665
564, 514
28.15
18. 75
12. 81
12 29
10 51
3. 65
3. 00
2. 78
1. 83
1. 76
1. 49
1. 28
1.02
. 19
. 10
. 10
. 02
.27
.Total__________________________________________ ...
43,435, 000
211,376,428
100. 00
https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
[827]
54
MONTHLY LABOR REVIEW
Of this amount, approximately £23,435,000 ($114,046,428) is for
revenue-producing schemes. By far the largest single undertaking
is an electrical enterprise, the ‘'northeast coast frequency scheme,”
estimated to cost £10,000,000 ($48,665,000).
Employment Provided
As
e m p lo y m e n t p r o v id e d , t h e r e p o r t s t a t e s :
A uthorities are req u ired w hen su b m ittin g a schem e to s ta te ap p ro x im ately
th e period d u ring w hich i t will be in o p eratio n a n d to give a n estim a te of th e
average n u m b er of m en to be em ployed d irectly du rin g t h a t period. In m an y
cases th is in fo rm atio n is fa r from reliable, b u t i t is n ot, in th e c o m m ittee’s experi
ence, unreasonable to assum e th a t, ta k in g all schem es to g eth er, th e av erag e d u ra
tio n is 12 m o n th s a n d t h a t 40 p e r c en t of th e c a p ita l co st is sp e n t on lab o r em
ployed on th e site. I t m ay th erefo re be said th a t in resp ect of every m illion pounds
w o rth of w ork ap p ro v ed (ta k in g an av erag e m o n th ly w age p a y m e n t of £ 10 [$48.67])
a b o u t 40,000 m an -m o n th s of em p lo y m en t a re p rovided. A t th e beginning of th e
period covered b y th is re p o rt th e to ta l n u m b er of m en em ployed on ap p ro v ed
schem es w as 8,618. In D ecem ber, 1929, th e n u m b er h a d risen to 15,771; in April,
1930, to 31,318; an d a t th e end of A ugust, 1930, to 40,931.
to
C h a n g e s in N u m b e r s E m p lo y e d in G r e a t B r ita in , 1923 t o 1930
HE British Ministry of Labor Gazette contains in its issue for
February, 1931, an article dealing with changes in the number of
insured persons employed in different trades and industries during
the period 1923 to 1930. Changes in legislative and administrative
conditions for the receipt of benefit have affected the number
recorded as insured and have therefore rendered the figures of later
years not comparable with those of the earlier part of the period.
To meet this difficulty a new series of figures has been prepared,
obtained by deducting the number of insured persons recorded as
unemployed from the total estimated number of persons insured,
which gives for each of 100 industry groups a measure of the change
in the number of insured persons in employment.
T
A p a rt from th e fa c t t h a t th e new series elim inates th e effect of legislative a n d
a d m in istrativ e changes on th e n u m b ers w ith in th e schem e of u n em p lo y m en t
insurance, i t h as th e a d d e d a d v a n ta g e of p roviding a m ore d ire c t m easure of th e
volum e of em p lo y m en t in each in d u stry . T h e im p o rta n c e of th is is seen in
industries such as sh ipbuilding a n d ship rep airin g , w hich h a v e experienced
severe depression fo r several y ears a n d in w hich th e n u m b ers of in su red w orkers
have show n a h eav y decline. In som e such in d u strie s th e n u m b ers unem ployed
classified as belonging to th e in d u stries h a v e decreased since 1923 to a g reater
e x ten t th a n th e nu m b ers insured, a n d th e em p lo y m en t index is th erefo re now higher
in relatio n to th e level of Ju n e , 1923, th a n th e in su red index. _ On th e o th er
hand, th e re are in d u stries, such as coal m ining, in w hich th e decline in nu m b ers
insured h as lagged b eh in d th e decline in em p lo y m en t, a n d th e em p lo y m en t index,
therefore, is now low er th a n th e index of all in su red w orkers.
This point is illustrated by a comparison of the two index figures
for the period of eight years, which gives the following results:
IN D E X N U M B E R S OF PE R SO N S IN S U R E D A N D OF IN S U R E D PE R SO N S IN E M P L O Y
M E N T IN JU N E OF EA CH Y E A R , 1923 TO 1930
Year
1923
______________
1924
- ____________
1925 _________________
1926____________________
https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
Persons
insured
100.0
101. 6
103.5
104.8
Insured
persons
employed
100.0
103.8
102.9
90.2
Year
1927____________________
1928____________________
1929____________________
1930____________________
[828]
Persons
insured
105.6
106.5
108.4
111.2
Insured
persons
employed
108.6
107.2
110.5
' 106.1
55
EMPLOYMENT CONDITIONS AND RELIEF
Up to 1927, inclusive, the figures as to persons insured included all
aged 16 and over, but from the beginning of 1928, all over 64 years
of age were excluded from the list. Estimates, however, of the total
numbers aged 16 to 64, inclusive, in 1926, have been used to provide
a basis for linking up, on a comparable basis, the index numbers
for 1923-1927, with those for later years. As, however, figures are
not available showing the number of persons aged 65 or over who
retired from each industry on obtaining old-age pensions in 1927, it
should not be assumed that the index numbers given necessarily
represent the changes in the total number of workers, insured and
uninsured, attached to any industry.
In the above table the figures for 1926 are affected by the conditions
arising from the dispute in the coal-mining industry. Otherwise, they
reflect the normal course of industry.
I t will be observed from th e ta b le t h a t for 1924, 1927, 1928, a n d 1929— years
of com paratively good em ploym ent— th e index n u m b ers fo r insured persons in
em ploym ent are higher th a n th o se rep resen tin g th e to ta l e stim a te d nu m b ers
insured, th u s show ing t h a t th e in d u stria l im p ro v em en t from th e position a t
June, 1923, h a d absorb ed som e p a r t of th e n u m b ers u n em ployed as well as th e
n a tu ra l increase in th e insured p o p u latio n . On th e o th er h an d , th e depression
in th e coal-m ining in d u stry in Ju n e, 1925, a n d th e general tra d e depression in
1930 h ave produced index nu m b ers fo r persons in em p lo y m en t w hich a re low er
th a n th e corresponding figures fo r th e to ta l estim a te d n u m b ers insured. A t
June, 1929, th ere was an increase in th e e stim ated n u m b er of in su red w orkers
in em ploym ent of 10.5 p e r c en t over Ju n e, 1923. T h e index figure fo r t h a t y ear
is th e highest in th e tab le. A t Ju n e, 1930, it h a d fallen to 106.1, b u t th is was
well above th e figure fo r a n y y ear p rio r to 1927. A t D ecem ber, 1930, how ever,
it h ad fallen to 100.2.
The following table shows, for separate industrial groups, the num
ber in employment in 1923 and 1930, and the index number for June,
1930; the number employed in June, 1923, with the modifications
mentioned above, being taken as 100:
E ST IM A T E D N U M B E R OF IN S U R E D PE R SO N S IN E M P L O Y M E N T IN G R E A T B R IT A IN
A N D N O R T H E R N IR E L A N D IN JU N E, 1923 A N D 1930
Insured persons em
ployed
Industry group
June, 1923
(aged 16
and over)
June, 1930
(aged 16
to 64)
34,888
9,924
9,039
5,265
105, 087
16, 590
56, 965
103, 277
64, 989
12, 978
1,180, 548
56, 240
11,875
233,437
122,821
87, 349
4,487
101, 309
227, 563
4, 428
30, 574
60,855
16,612
14, 508
8, 415
157, 487
24,618
83, 208
145, 250
94, 304
18, 014
1,622,112
74, 554
15, 749
311, 257
161,858
112,602
5,876
131,892
279,107
5, 673
38,433
Index
num
bers,
June,
1930
(June,
1923=
100)
I n d u s t r i e s s h o w i n g in c r e a s e s
Silk and artificial silk
________ ___ ______ - ____________ ___
Flectrical wiring and contracting.. ________________ ___ - _______
Artificial stone, and concrete.
_ ______ _
- -- __ _
Heating and ventilating apparatus
____ _____
__
Tramway and omnibus service. _ ______ _______ .
Scientific and photographic instruments and apparatus.. __ ----------Electrical engineering ------------------------- . -- . --------- ----------Public works contracting, etc_______________ . .
------ ----------- - Electrical cables, wire, and lamps----------------- . . . . . . ------ ------------Paint, varnish, red and white le a d s __________ _
______ _______ _ - Distributive trades
Brick, tile, etc. (making)
___________________ . . __________ _
n iay sand, gravel, and chalk pits
___
_______
Hôte] boarding house, club services
__
Road transport, not otherwise classified
- _____ _______ _
- Furniture making, upholstering, etc. _ _____ ____ ____ _ .
Stationery and typewriting requisites (not paper)
___________
Taundries dyeing and dry cleaning
_____
Bocal government
_______ ___ _
_____ ___ _________ Wall-paper making _ _______ ___ _________ . . .
StonJquarrying and mining-----------------------------------------------------------
https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
[829]
179.4
173.3
167.0
166.1
153.8
152.7
148.8
146.7
146.6
143.7
140. 0
139.9
138.4
136.0
135.3
134.2
134.0
132.7
132.2
132.0
131.3
56
MONTHLY LABOR REVIEW
E ST IM A T E D N U M B E R OF IN S U R E D PE R SO N S IN E M P L O Y M E N T IN GREAT B R IT A IN
A N D N O R T H E R N IR E L A N D IN JU N E , 1923 A N D 1930—Continued
Insured persons em
ployed
Industry group
Index
num
bers,
June,
1930
(June,
1923=
June, 1923
(aged 16
and over)
June, 1930
(aged 16
to 64)
51, 729
79, 268
173, 541
61, 707
10, 619
7, 897
215, 010
18,443
626,440
86,330
104, 206
146,840
50, 887
14, 946
20, 414
20, 910
22,376
12, 447
70, 045
11, 429
83, 732
93, 203
16, 310
106, 481
175, 947
41, 407
23, 070
7,781
50, 976
37, 022
50, 763
48, 476
216,765
25,132
31,802
10, 610
51,692
91, 959
63, 532
27, 388
70, 932
51, 489
160, 027
35, 006
65, 535
99,075
214, 696
76,343
12, 731
9, 414
256,368
21, 709
726, 268
101, 658
122, 070
170, 361
58, 557
16,886
23, 386
23,833
25,171
13,853
76, 411
12, 320
91, 055
99, 496
17, 133
113,192
186, 962
43, 991
24, 290
7,969
53,603
38,163
50, 453
48, 770
224, 790
25, 464
32, 391
10, 597
50, 985
91, 423
63, 988
26, 095
68, 774
50, 951
154,198
33, 743
129.1
126.8
125.2
124.4
123.0
122.6
122.2
121.9
121.8
120.7
119.3
118.6
118.1
117.7
117.5
116.8
116.3
115.5
114.9
111.8
110.5
109.3
108.6
108.0
107.9
107.8
107.2
106.8
105.9
104.9
104. 5
104.3
104.2
104.0
103.6
103.4
102.7
102. 5
102.0
101.4
101. 3
856,619
7,117,505
124.9
625, 737
36, 477
3,950
150, 964
143, 233
25, 790
64,325
24, 484
16, 301
24, 641
129, 070
29,116
110,493
42, 943
16,870
23, 652
21, 962
68, 772
25, 686
15, 906
141, 095
102, 378
28, 786
499,399
35, 707
3, 730
141, 947
137, 327
23, 740
57, 952
22, 373
14,101
21, 734
112, 870
25, 470
97, 540
37,179
14, 578
20, 269
18, 441
58, 433
21, 756
12,821
111, 215
81,152
22, 726
98.7
98.7
98.4
97.5
97.5
94.8
93.5
92.9
90.9
90.2
89.9
89.3
89.0
88.9
100)
I n d u s t r i e s s h o w i n g i n c r e a s e s —Continued
Entertainments and sports____________________
Industries and services, not otherwise classified.__
Motor vehicles, cycles, and aircraft_____________
Shirts, collars, underclothing, etc _______________
Toys, games, and sports requisites_____________
Brushes and brooms__________________________
Printing, publishing, and bookbinding_________
Musical instruments____ _____________________
Building_____________________________________
Food industries, not otherwise classified________
Professional services__________ ________________
M etal industries, not otherwise classified_______
Rubber______________________________________
Cement, lime kilns, and w hiting_______________
Constructional engineering____________________
Iron and steel tubes----------------------------------------Fishing_________ _____________________________
Glass bottles______________ ____ ______________
Stove, grate, pipe, etc., and general iron founding.
Oilcloth, linoleum, etc_________________________
Hosiery_________________ ____________________
Drink industries______________________________
Explosives__________ _______ ___ j _____________
Shipping service_________ ____________________
Tailoring_____________________________________
Tobacco, cigars, cigarettes, and snuff___________
Glass (except bottles and scientific glass)________
Slate quarrying and mining___ ____ ___________
Cardboard boxes, paper bags, and stationery____
Textile industries not given separately__________
Sawmilling and machined woodwork___________
Railway carriages, wagons, and street cars______
Commerce, banking, insurance, and finance_____
Hand tools, cutlery, saws, files_________________
Hats and caps_______________________ ________
Wood boxes and packing cases_________________
Paper and paper board________________________
Chemicals........ .......................................... ....................
Cocoa, chocolate, and sugar confectionery_______
Grain milling_____ ____ _____________ _________
Oil, glue, soap, ink, matches, etc_______________
Marine engineering, etc_______________________
Gas, water, and electricity supply industries____
Brass, copper, zinc, tin, lead, etc..............................
Total___ _______________________________
101. 1
101.1
100. 5
I n d u s t r i e s s h o w i n g d e c re a s e s
General engineering: Engineers’ iron and steel founding.
Tanning, currying, and dressing_______ ____ _________
Lead, tin, and copper mining__________ ____ _____ ___
Shipbuilding and ship repairing__ ____ ______________
Bread, biscuit, cake, etc___ ______ ___________________
Brass and allied metal wares________________________
Pottery, earthenware, etc— __________ ______________
Carpets_________________________________________
Lace_______________________________________________
Bolts, nuts, screws, rivets, nails etc___________ _______
Boots, shoes, slippers, and clogs________ _____ ________
Dress industries not given separately_________________
Dressmaking and millinery__________________________
Watches, clocks, plate, jewelry, etc___________________
Hemp, rope, cord, twine, etc________________________
Woodworking not otherwise classified________________
Wire, wire netting, wire ropes.________ ______________
Linen____________ _____________________ __________
Leather goods______________________________________
Iron ore and iron stone mining, e tc .'._________________
Dock, harbor, river, and canal service____ _____ ______
Textile bleaching, printing, dyeing, etc_______________
Tin plates___________________________ _______ ______
https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
[830]
88.3
87.3
86.5
84.2
83.7
83.2
82.8
57
EMPLOYMENT CONDITIONS AND RELIEF
E ST IM A T E D N U M B E R OP IN S U R E D PE R SO N S IN E M P L O Y M E N T IN G R E A T B R IT A IN
A N D N O R T H E R N IR E L A N D IN JU N E , 1923 A N D 1930-Continued
Insured persons employed
Industry group
Index
numbers,
June,
I n d u s t r i e s s h o w i n g d e c r e a s e s —Continued
Steel melting and iron puddling, iron and steel rolling and forging.
W oolen and worsted
Cotton
Railway service (nonpermanent workers)
Jute
Transport, communication, and storage, not otherwise classified
Pig iron (blast furnaces)
Carriages, carts, etc.
Coke ovens and by-product works.
Coal mining.
National Government.
Mining and quarrying not otherwise classified.
Total.
Grand total, all industry groups.
166,840
250, 755
445, 422
178, 730
36,249
20,639
26,112
24,299
13,982
1, 211, 559
159,964
24,300
126,846
181,605
329,853
129,190
25,872
14,545
17,755
17,032
9,588
813, 711
103, 148
14,841
78.8
75. 3
75.1
74. 5
74.2
73.5
72.6
72.3
71.6
69. 2
67. 2
63.6
4,331,482
3, 376, 446
80. 4
10,188,101
10, 493,951
106.1
Although the index numbers show that for industry as a whole
there was a decrease in the numbers employed between June, 1929, and
June, 1930, quite a number of groups showed an increase during this
year. Among important groups of this class are the tramway and
omnibus service, public works contracting, the distributive trades,
printing, publishing, and bookbinding, professional services, and local
government services. This latter increase, it is explained, is largely
due to the inauguration of works for the relief of unemployment.
The relatively heaviest decreases for the year ending June 30, 1930,
occurred in the cotton textile industry, textile bleaching, dyeing and
finishing, the manufacture of jute, silk and artificial silk (though, for
the whole period 1923 to 1930, silk and artificial silk show a marked
increase), musical instruments, hosiery, linen, and hand tools.
In th e coal-m ining in d u stry th e re has been heav y u n e m p lo y m en t du rin g th e
p a st six years, an d a considerable red u ctio n in th e n u m b ers of insured w orkers
classified as belonging to th e in d u stry . N evertheless th e index nu m b ers based
on insured persons in em p lo y m en t are for n early every y ear low er th a n th o se based
on th e to ta l estim ated n u m b ers insured. I t is clear t h a t th e tra n sfe r of w orkers
from th is in d u stry to o th e r in d u stries has n o t k e p t pace w ith th e decline in
em ploym ent available in coal m ining.
https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
[881 ]
INDUSTRIAL AND LABOR CONDITIONS
L ab or R e c o m m e n d a tio n s in G o v e r n o r s’ M e ssa g e s, 1931
HE legislatures of the following 43 States met early in 1931 and
received the messages of their respective governors: Alabama,
Arizona, Arkansas, California, Colorado^ Connecticut, Delaware,
Georgia, Idaho, Illinois, Indiana, Iowa, Kansas, Maine, Maryland,
Massachusetts, Michigan, Minnesota, Missouri, Montana, Nebraska,
Nevada, New Hampshire, New Jersey, New Mexico, New York,
North Carolina, North Dakota, Ohio, Oklahoma, Oregon, Pennsyl
vania, Rhode Island, South Carolina, South Dakota, Tennessee, Texas,
Utah, Vermont, Washington, West Virginia, Wisconsin, and Wyo
ming. A digest of some of the principal statements and recommenda
tions of special interest to labor in these messages is here presented.1
T
Agriculture
A g r i c u l t u r a l problems, which are closely correlated with labor
problems, were discussed at length by various governors. _Many of
their statements disclose serious conditions in rural districts. For
example, the outgoing Governor of Alabama reported that the agricul
ture of that State suffered substantially in 1930 from the drought
and the extremely low prices of cotton and that the value of farm
products in that year was $50,000,000 less than in 1929, while the
Governor of Arizona declared that the pink boll worm has won the
fight against it, despite the immense expenditure of State and Federal
money to eradicate the pest. The budget of the California Depart
ment of Agriculture, according to the governor of that State, has
risen in a few years from slightly over $1,000,000 to more than
$4,000,000, and the California farmers are earning less for their
investment and labor than ever before in agricultural history.
C alifornia, like all o th e r S tates, has u n d o u b ted ly suffered from th e m o st serious
change w itnessed by a g ricu ltu re in th e la s t 10 years, when, so fa r as foodstuffs
are concerned, w e h av e ceased to be p rim arily a n exporting N atio n . In stead ,
we are now im p o rtin g an enorm ous to n n ag e of soil p ro d u c ts in excess of our to ta l
exports of raw a n d m a n u fa c tu re d ag ric u ltu ra l com m odities.
In Nebraska the unusually low prices of corn, wheat, livestock,
poultry, eggs, and other farm products have cut the farmer’s income
more than one-half. He has, therefore, been compelled to discon
tinue building or repairs, and has had to curtail his patronage of other
lines of business. The solvency of business houses and manufacturing
establishments is menaced. The Governor of Nevada comments on
the severe results of the world-wide depression on our farming and
1Data are from United States Daily, Supplement, Washington, Feb. 16, 1931.
58
https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
[832]
INDUSTRIAL AND LABOR CONDITIONS
59
livestock industries. The Governor of South Carolina views “ with
alarm the distressing condition of agriculture as manifested by numer
ous foreclosures and the exodus of thousands of good, honest people
from the farms into centers seeking other vocations, and the poverty
and desolation in agricultural life generally.-” Attention is called by
the Governor of Tennessee to the farmers’ struggle for existence in that
State, and the Governor of West Virginia announces that agriculture in
his jurisdiction is “ in the most critical period of its history as the
result of the most severe drought ever recorded in the State.”
T he w ide effect of th is d ro u g h t is show n by th e decrease in farm incom e in
W est V irginia of app ro x im ately $30,000,000.“ N o such blow has ever been
experienced by th e farm ers of th is S tate, a n d even w ith th e m o st fav o rab le condi
tions it will ta k e years for W est V irginia a g ricu ltu re to h eal its w ounds.
T h e d ro u g h t has n o t only c u t th e p u rchasing pow er of our farm ers in half,
b u t fo u n d atio n stocks of all form s of livestock h av e been g reatly d epreciated, due
to forced sales of such stock eith er to g et needed cash or on acco u n t of lack of
w ater to carry th e stock th ro u g h th e d ro u g h t period.
Among the recommendations for the improvement of agricultural
conditions were the following made by the governors of the States
indicated:
A r iz o n a . —Revision of the statutes governing cooperative market
ing, wherever recommended by the agricultural interests of the
State, consistent with fairness to the public.
C alifornia. —The greatest possible use of the machinery within
the department of agriculture, so that growers and farmers may be
protected against disorderly selling by adequate market informa
tion. Upon the success of the State’s agriculture depends the wel
fare of its labor and the prosperity of nearly all of its industry. “ The
farm problem must be solved and solved promptly.”
Iow a . —The backing of Congressmen in every effort to stabilize
farm products on a fair price level and to provide an impartial tax
and assessment system reducing farm taxes.
M ich ig a n . —A realization by the rural dweller that the farm is
his home, the relief of the farmer from some of his tax burden, and
production for the home market.
N ebraska. —Tariff reduction, the enactment of the McNaryHaugen Bill or the debenture plan to prevent depressing home mar
kets with surplus farm products, and the memorializing of the Presi
dent and the United States Congress by the State legislature for
passage of the Muscle Shoals bill before adjournment of Congress.
N ew H a m p sh ire.2—The expansion of the bureau of markets and
the establishment of small craft industries for the people in the
winter.
N ew Jersey. —The efficient coordination of supply and demand.
N ew Y o rk. —Long-range planning for the use of the land.
Ohio.—“ Farm life must remain agreeable and profitable even if
it be at the expense of the entire body politic.”
Oklahom a. —The abolition of the State market commission as be
ing too expensive for the service performed.
Oregon 2—Continued legislative backing in the field of cooperative
marketing. Consolidation of all the agricultural functions of the
State in a department of agriculture.
2 Outgoing governor.
46860°—31----- 5
https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
[833]
60
MONTHLY LABOR REVIEW
S outh C arolina. —A marketing system which will insure the farmers
ready and dependable prices for their products and an efficient dis
tribution of such products.
W est V irg in ia . —A continued and expanded educational and regu
latory program on farms in that State, in view of the losses on them
in the past season and of the movement of inexperienced persons back
to the farms. The greatest possible encouragement of agriculture
along all lines, with liberal assistance by various government agencies.
W isco n sin . —Impressing upon the leaders of our many interests
the imperativeness of “ reconsidering the whole question of the pro
portion of goods and services which agriculture should obtain as a
fundamental right.”
Economic Situation
T h e country-wide unemployment is reflected in most of the mes
sages, certain governors reporting^ however, that their particular
States were not so deeply involved in the depression as many other
States. Included in the list of States said to be less adversely situ
ated were Arizona, Maine, Maryland, Montana, Nevada, New
Hampshire, North Dakota, Texas, Utah, West Virginia and Wy
oming. The financial condition of Utah was declared, on the whole,
sound and reassuring, West Virginia was noted as having made ex
ceptional progress in numerous lines in the present biennium, and
Wyoming as having gone forward steadily in the development of
its various resources.
Some of the measures taken to cope with unemployment in various
States and the recommendations made in this connection by the
governors of such States are given below:
A rizo n a . —The immediate amendment of the Highway Code was
recommended in order to restore the State highway departments
full privilege to do work on force account. Necessary new con
struction of highways and improvements and enlargements of State
buildings should be begun as soon as possible and appropriations
made therefor.
C alifornia. —Emphasis was placed on the importance of “ a spirit
of confidence and quick response to courageous leadership” for
bringing about economic recovery. The governor also announced
his intention to aid every prudent, progressive step to enable labor
to receive a fair share of the benefits resulting from machinery, im
proved methods of distribution, and increase of national wealth.
Connecticut. —The creation of an emergency committee on relief,
with wide powers and an adequate appropriation was recommended.
Illin o is. —In 1930 the State paid out approximately $26,000,000 of
its revenue in road and building construction, the records showing
that about 30,000 men were employed directly or indirectly at the
time of the construction season on these projects. Resumption of
work on the Illinois waterway was expected and a governor’s com
mission on unemployment and relief was appointed. As a result of
the cooperation of this commission with various existing agencies and
organizations, the employment situation in Illinois is constantly
improving.
Iow a. —An extension of the existing State-Federal free employment
service was advocated.
https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
[834]
INDUSTRIAL AND LABOR CONDITIONS
61
M a in e . —The transfer of a contingent fund to the appropriation of
the State Department of Labor made it possible to carry on an em
ployment service for four months from the middle of November, 1930.
M a ry la n d . —Surveys of unemployment in Baltimore were made in
1928, 1929, and 1930, respectively. At the time the governor pre
pared his message the State road commission was undertaking ap
proximately $2,000,000 worth of work which under ordinary circum
stances would have been postponed until spring, thus employin«about 800 men who would otherwise be jobless.
The governor indorsed the following principal agencies of relief
as economically sound: (1) Speeding up needed public construc
tion and public works, (2) stimulating industry to accelerate needed
construction and work, (3) staggering employment, and (4) setting
up employment bureaus and agencies. He promised to appoint as
promptly as possible a State commission on unemployment.
M assachusetts .—The authorization of $20,000,000 in Common
wealth bonds was recommended for the construction of needed public
works; also, an appropriation of $300,000 for improving the State
forests, etc., to furnish immediate work for the unemployed, and one
of $1,000,000 as an emergency unemployment relief fund. Further
more, it was recommended that the governor be authorized to appoint
an unpaid commission to make a complete survey of the unemploy
ment problem and means for its relief and avoidance, and that such
commission give special attention to the possibility of adopting some
kind of unemployment insurance.
M ic h ig a n .2 During the few months preceding the opening of the
legislature the inspectors of the State department of labor and indus
try assisted in forming local relief and employment organizations.
The State increased its building program and provided for winter con
struction work—even highway construction when possible under
winter conditions. Convicts were taken off road work so that jobless
men might be employed. Moreover, the State insisted that those
having contracts with it should not cut wages or otherwise take
advantage of the workers.
M in n eso ta . The governor declared himself in favor of appropria
tions for public repairs, improvements, and building construction, and
for the enlarging of the road-paving program. He also advocated
the passing of legislation providing the payment of the highest pre
vailing scale of wages for work carried on directly by the State or
under contract with the State:
T he law should provide for w orking hours p er d ay a n d w orking-days p er
m o n th sim ilar to th e accepted sta n d a rd s p revailing a t th e tim e th e w ork is p e r
form ed in public w ork carried on by th e F ed eral G overnm ent.
Preference should be given to residents of M innesota in em plo y m en t for p ublic
w ork. W henever practical, a n d w henever th e cost is su b sta n tia lly th e sam e,
w ork should be perform ed by h a n d ra th e r th a n by m achines in o rd er to provide
for th e em ploym ent of a g reater n u m b er of persons.
N eva d a .—In the opinion of the governor, the people of this State
have assurance that they can face the future with optimism, in view
of the proposed expenditures in connection with the Boulder Canyon
project in Clark County, the expenditures made at the naval ammuni
tion depot in Mineral County, and the additional highway construc
tion in the State authorized by the United States Congress.
2 Outgoing governor.
https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
[835]
02
MONTHLY LABOR REVIEW
New Hampshire.—In the opinion of the governor “ We can do more
to restore normal conditions by undramatic and unselfish effort com
bined with hard work and a quiet faith than through legislative
panaceas.” An effort has been made to establish local committees
in the communities affected in the State. “ Decentralization is essen
tial in handling this problem, but the first step toward this is coopera
tion among all agencies in local communities, with centralized plan
ning and a single confidential master list of all applicants for help
placed in the proper hands.”
New Jersey.—Thirty-eight representative citizens of the State were
appointed to grapple with the unemployment problem. Among the
activities of this body or its subcommittees are a thorough survey of
employment offices, a study of municipal relief, and the promotion of
the adoption of local relief measures.
New York.—Public works are being speeded to the utmost, accord
ing to the governor, and all available funds are being expended to
provide employment. The governor’s commission on stabilization
of industry has done much to prevent lay-offs and find new jobs for
the unemployed. He requested that this body be made an official
State commission to function for 1931, and that it be given sufficient
funds to carry on emergency activities.
Ohio.—The State plan for the stabilization of industry was reported
by the outgoing governor as having proved so effective that it has
been recommended by the United States Department of Commerce
as a guide for other States. The incoming governor recommended an
immediate reasonable appropriation, limited to 1931, for emergency
relief.
Pennsylvania.—The governor reviewed the activities of the general
State unemployment committee and the various county unemploy
ment committees and referred to the fact that $140,000,000, or 40 per
cent, of the budget has already been recommended for work available
for the relief of unemployment. He called attention to the recom
mendations of the State unemployment committee, some of which
have already been acted upon, for the payment of the going wage rate:
on State construction projects, the employment of residents of the
State on such projects, long-range planning of public works, the im
provement of public employment agencies, the regulation of private
employment agencies, and the better training for high-school and
vocational students to equip them for necessary shifts to differentoccupations.
The governor also joined in the recommendation of the State unem
ployment committee that consideration be given to voluntary unem
ployment insurance and also to compulsory State unemploymentinsurance. In view of the attention at present being paid to this,
matter by many employers, it seemed to him “ that we may reasonably
await the result of their effort before accepting as necessary any type
of compulsory State insurance.”
Rhode Island.—Authorization to appoint a committee of three
residents of the State was requested by the governor, such committee
to cooperate and consult with other agencies within the State which
are at present engaged in improving conditions, especially with
organizations coping with the unemployment problem.
https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
[8361
INDUSTRIAL AND LABOR CONDITIONS
G3
South Carolina.—Two general State unemployment relief commit
tees, one constituted of white and one of colored citizens, have been
set up. Through these committees and the county unemployment
and relief committees organization work is to bo carried into the
various communities of the State. The outgoing governor suggested
that consideration be given to making these organizations permanent.
The incoming governor recommended the reduction of taxes by cutting
down public expenditures.
Utah.—A larger appropriation for the State industrial commission
was favored by the governor in order that this body may exercise its
authorized functions of establishing and carrying on free employment
agencies, licensing and supervising private employment agencies, and
collecting and publishing employment statistics. The State was said
to have acquitted itself well in the advance planning of public works
and was, therefore, able to furnish employment this winter on building
construction and road projects. The governor also pointed out that
employers in Utah “ are making strenuous efforts to keep their men at
work. Some are maintaining their forces intact at the sacrifice of all
profits, if not actually at a loss. Others are keeping as many as possi
ble of their workers on the pay rolls on part time.”
P robably, as th is sense of social responsibility grows, a n d as em ployers see
m ore clearly th a t in ab ility to w ork because in d u stries fail to provide regular
em ploym ent creates a social as well as a n in d u stria l problem , th e y will becom e
read y to cooperate in som e p lan of unem p lo y m en t insurance * * *.
Washington.—Tn the judgment of the governor, “ a beneficial pros
perity can not be manufactured at will.” He declares that “ Property
confiscation is facing us,” and that “ the using of tax moneys to bolster
up the profligate behavior of the past in the business world, and to
build political fences for politicians, is little short of criminal, and
leads to greater distress in the future.”
Wisconsin.—The present essentials for freedom and opportunity are
“ credit, mechanical power, substantial equality of bargaining power,
education, and a government through which social problems beyond
the control of the individual can and will be met and mastered,” the
governor stated.
T o-day w e can n o t m ark tim e w hen new form s of cred it control, new form s of
pow er developm ent a n d d istrib u tio n , a n d new form s of co rp o rate organization
are alm o st daily bringing economic dislocation. * * *
W isconsin an d th is p a rtic u la r legislature m u s t consider * * * m ethods of
increasing th e purchasin g pow er of th e producers on th e farm a n d in th e factory,
to enable th e m to b u y back th e th in g s w hich th e y produce.
A sound financial policy requires th e estab lish m en t of reserves in tim e of pros
p e rity for m eeting cap ital charges in tim es of depression. Sound lab o r policy
requires reserves to m a in ta in th e living sta n d a rd s a n d bu y in g pow er of th e w orker.
T hese should be utilized in periods of depression to be applied in p ro d u ctiv e
em ploym ent t h a t adds to o u r p erm a n e n t w ealth. B u t first, how ever, we m u st
deal w ith th e im m ediate em ergency on th e basis of th is principle.
Hours of Labor
T ub governors of the States specified made the following recom
mendations concerning hours of labor, woman and child welfare,
workmen’s compensation, injunctions, the regulation of private
employment offices, the employment of aliens on public works, and
convict labor:
https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
[837]
64
MONTHLY LABOR REVIEW
New York.— k genuine 8-hour day and a 48-hour week for women
in industry.
Establishment in the State labor department of a special means for
the enforcement of the provisions of the labor law relating to the
8-hour workday on public works.
North Carolina.—A reduction of the 60-hour week to 55 hours, with
sufficient penalties for the violation of this law. _
South Carolina.—The enforced adoption by mills or textile plants of
some fixed uniform hour for starting in the morning, and for recess or
stopping work for dinner, for the convenience of housewives and for
the improvement of general health conditions.
Texas.—Amendment of the 8-hour law to make it applicable to all
labor on public works.
Wyoming.—The amendment and reenactment of section 4308,
Compiled Statutes, 1920, in order to have an 8-hour law “ with teeth. ”
Woman and Child Welfare
Alabama.2—Increase in the staff of the State child welfare depart
ment and in the counties, public financial aid for dependent children
in their own homes, and more adequate facilities for the care of Negro
children.
Iowa.2—The rewriting of the child labor law, as the Supreme Court
has practically annulled the provision concerning theatrical appear
ances.
Nebraska.—Every consideration that law and administration can
offer should be given to the health and welfare of children and the care
of mothers in the State.
Nevada.—Legislation to prohibit employment of children under 16
years of age, with the labor commissioner as the enforcing officer.
New Hampshire.—An immediate emergency appropriation under
the act for the assistance of dependent mothers.
New York.—Setting up for women and children an advisory mini
mum or fair wage board.
North Carolina.—The raising of the educational requirement for the
employment of children 14 to 16 years of age from the completion of
the fourth grade to the completion of the sixth grade.
The prohibition of night work in industry for girls under 18.
South Carolina.—The prohibition of night work for minors under
18 years of age. The prohibition of the employment of minors under
16 years of age in cotton mills or textile plants.
Texas.—A minimum wage law for women and children. Im
provement in the State’s method of handling abandoned, dependent,
and underprivileged children.
Workmen’s Compensation
Alabama.2—Provision for a shorter waiting period, higher com
pensation rates, an increase in medical and hospital benefits, and the
creation of a workmen’s compensation commission.
Arizona.—Compensation for occupational diseases plainly arising
from or aggravated by employment, and the selection of his own
2 Outgoing governor.
https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
[838]
INDUSTRIAL AND LABOR CONDITIONS
65
doctor by the person claiming compensation, provided such doctor
be regularly licensed and reasonably accessible to the claimant.
Iowa?- —Active interest on the part of both employers and em
ployees in the trend of legislative amendments and rulings affecting
compensation costs and benefits, in order to bring about a measure of
stability in such legislation.
K a n sa s. —The penalizing of an employer or insurer who withholds
payment of weekly benefits in cases where there is no reasonable basis
for controversy, and no restriction of the employer’s right to resist
payment in cases where there is actual ground for dispute.
M aine.-— The consideration of legislation looking to the control of
construction, installation, operation, and importation of steam
boilers, in view of the large number of industrial accidents.
M a ry la n d . —A reexamination of the compensation law in order that
desirable changes may be made upon the recommendations of a com
mission _already appointed to report on this subject.
M ich ig a n . —The inclusion of occupational diseases, carefully
limited and catalogued, in the class of compensable injuries.
N evada. —A complete and thorough investigation of the State
industrial commission; more substantial compensation to injured
workmen and their families, based on the number of dependents,
and the granting of the right of appeal to both employers and employees
from decisions of the members of the commission.
N ew M exico. —More equitable provisions for employees.
N ew Y o rk.— Inclusion of all diseases arising from occupational
tasks, and the raising of the compensation limit for all classes of dis
abilities to $25 a week.
Ohio.—The restoration and maintenance of a proper reserve to meet
losses as they occur in the public employees’ fund and to insure equita
ble compensation to public employees. Also the reconstruction of
section 1465-82 of the General Code, in order to secure for the depend
ents of persons killed in their employment equal benefits under the
law. Provision for the use of nonexplosive X-ray films and for author
ization of the State industrial commission to destroy nitrocellulose
now in the commission files after the proper medical interpretation
of such files has been made.2 Some amendment for overcoming the
inability under the present compensation act of pooling for the benefit
of public employees in general, county contributions to the State
insurance fund.3
South C a ro lin a — The enactment of a just compensation law.
Texas. —Workmen’s compensation insurance to protect employees
on highways, especially in view of the fact that because of. constitu
tional limitations the legislature is prohibited from providing for the
dependents of employees who are injured on public work.
Injunctions
M in n eso ta . —Enactment of a law to insure to every person charged
with contempt of court arising out of labor controversies the full
constitutional right of trial by jury, and to provide that no injunction
shall be issued in a labor dispute until and unless a full and adequate
hearing is first granted those sought to be enjoined.
2 Outgoing governor.
https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
3 Incoming governor.
[839]
66
MONTHLY LABOR REVIEW
An amendment to the State antitrust law “ so as to exclude labor
unions from the scope of its operation.”
Wisconsin.—The revision of the State’s legislation of 1917 against
the abuse of injunctions in labor disputes, in the light of the recent
investigation undertaken by the United States Senate Judiciary
Committee and of Wisconsin’s own experience.
Regulation of Private Employment Offices
Iowa,2—The rewriting of the fee-limitation section of the existing
employment agency law to provide a substantially higher limitation.
If exceptions are to be made, their number should be greatly reduced.
Kansas.—Legislation curbing and regulating private employment
agencies.
Michigan.—The supervision of private employment agencies to
be again vested in the State department of labor and industry.
New York.—Strict State regulation of fee-charging employment
agencies.
Employment of Aliens on Public Works
Arizona.—A petition by the State legislature to the United States
Congress to enact promptly legislation for the application of the quota
act to the foreign countries of the North and South American con
tinents.
Salutary penalties under the law for State, county, or municipal
officials knowingly permitting the employment of aliens on public
works, and with impeachment in office automatically following con
viction.
Convict Labor
T h e subject of convict labor was referred to by various governors
in the section of their messages dealing with prison reform, probation,
and parole. The going into effect of the so-called Hawes-Cooper Act
in 1934, which will make it impractical to ship prison-made goods
from State to State, will constitute a pressing problem, in the judg
ment of a number of these officials. The Governor of Indiana
declared that “ the question of employment for the unfortunates in
our penal institutions has become increasingly difficult to answer.
Idle men under prison conditions are potentially dangerous * * *.
It is too often true that dependents of the inmate suffer because his
income as a worker within the walls has been curtailed.” Discussing
the same legislative act, the Governor of Iowa reported that unless
provision is made for employment of prisoners now engaged in con
tract work, the State will be confronted by a serious condition of idle
ness in prison institutions.
The Governor of Maryland visualized a further intensification of
the problem of prison employment. State-use shops in the peniten
tiaries will, nowever, he reported, be continued and extended. Mary
land officials are participating prominently in an organization formed
by 14 Eastern States to aid in the solution of prisoner employment.
In Missouri, only 1,200 prisoners are engaged in remunerative labor,
according to the governor of that State, who thinks that the EfawesCooper law makes the prospect more ominous. He added, however,
Outgoing governor.
https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
[840]
INDUSTRIAL AND LABOR CONDITIONS
07
that the State-use system is in no way an experiment and has been
followed with success in a number of States. It was suggested by the
outgoing Governor of New Hampshire that in 1934 radical changes
may be necessary in the employment of prison labor and the disposal
of prison-made products, while the Governor of Vermont recom
mended that a study be made by proper officials in view of the grave
situation which will result from the prohibition of interstate commerce
in prison-made goods. The Governor of Wyoming referred to the fol
lowing three proposals for the employing of men now occupied in the
shirt factory of the penitentiary: (1) The establishment of one or more
State farms where sugar beets or cultivated crops can be grown;
(2) the use of groups of men to operate stone crushers at points on
the highway system; and (3) to formulate an agreement with the
Western States for the exchange of prison-made goods for State use.
Other Labor Recommendations
Io w a .2—Authority for the State bureau of labor to abolish the
common towel and common drinking cup in favor of sanitary devices.
Kansas.—The repeal of the court of industrial relations act.
The improvement and strengthening of the State department of
labor and the making of surveys to inform capital concerning oppor
tunities in the State; the promotion of an educational safety program
by the department of labor; the separation of the department of labor
from the workmen’s compensation commission or making the com
missioner of labor chairman of the workmen’s compensation com
mission; and an endeavor to establish the department of labor on a
self-sustaining basis through fees for services, especially through the
factory and mine inspection services.
N evada. —Legislation for the better protection of labor against being
defrauded of wages by irresponsible employers and leasing companies
having no property that can be attached to secure the payment of
such wages.
N ew M exico. —A law creating the office of labor commissioner and
the granting to such official reasonable and proper authority to enforce
legislation concerning labor and employment conditions.
Extension of mining regulations to include metal mining.
N e w Y o rk. —Declaration in a statute that human labor is not a
commodity or an article of commerce.
Establishment in the State labor department of special means for
the enforcement of the provisions of the labor law relating to the
prevailing rate of wages and preference to citizens of New York
State on public works.
W yo m in g . —Amendment of the State highway statute so as to
empower the board, commission, or person in charge of any public
work under contract to pay, with consent of both the surety company
and the contractor, any just claims attaching to that work.
Old-Age Pensions
G o v e r n o r s of the following States recommended the enactment of
old-age pension laws: Arizona, Connecticut, Delaware, Idaho,
Michigan, Nebraska, Ohio, Oregon, and Pennsylvania. Since these
2 Outgoing governor.
https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
[841]
68
MONTHLY LABOR R EV IEW
recommendations were made, old-age pension laws have been enacted
in both Delaware and Idaho. Such laws had already been enacted
in Alaska and 12 States (California, Colorado, Kentucky, Mary
land, Massachusetts, Minnesota, Montana, Nevada, New 1 ork, Utah,
Wisconsin, and Wyoming). An old-age security measure has been
introduced in the 1931 session of the Kansas Legislature and it is
reported that a pension bill is being prepared for presentation to
the Missouri State Legislature.
The Governor of Minnesota favored making the old-age pension
law of that State compulsory, while the Governor of Massachusetts
favored an amendment to the old-age assistance law of that Com
monwealth, reducing the age limit, etc. The Governor of New Jersey
expressed the hope that his State will face the problem of the needy
aged in a constructive way, and, in the judgment of the Governor
of New York, the next legislative measure in connection with oldage security in that State should be based on the insurance theory
with a system of contributions beginning at an early age. The Gov
ernor of Wyoming advocated an amendment to the old-age pension
provisions of that State, authorizing county commissioners to make
special levies to provide the necessary funds.
Public Health
T h e governors of 21 States discussed public health problems
ranging from stream pollution to the prevention of mental disorders.
Among the measures recommended or suggested showing newer
trends were: The suggestion of the Governor of California 2 that
public health activities should be extended to provide for the applica
tion of preventive methods for all the people in the State, such methods
in the past being applied chiefly to children and young adults; that
of the Governor of Iowa2 for a director of public health nursing, and
the announcement by the Governor of New York of the early presenta
tion of a report by a special committee appointed by him to study a
new health program for the State.
Public Utilities
A m o n g the governors favoring legislation for the regulation of
public utilities were those of Connecticut, Idaho, Iowa, Kansas,
Massachusetts, Minnesota, Missouri, New Hampshire, New York,
Oregon, Pennsylvania, and Texas.
The matter of public ownership was discussed in a few messages,
the Governor of Idaho declaring that the advisability of cities, and
villages, owning and operating their own utilities, for example, power
plants and water sytems, is unquestionable. The Governor of Iowa
held that municipal ownership of public utilities should not be dis
couraged, and the Governor of Nebraska recommended legislation
permitting the ownership and development of the water power of the
State by governmental units in districts of such size as to make it of
public benefit. The Governor of New York trusts “ that action will
be taken at this session providing for water-power development by a
public agency for the purpose of producing cheaper electricity for the
2Outgoing governor.
https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
[842]
IN D U S T R IA L A N D L A B O R C O N D IT IO N S
69
people of the State.” The Governor of Oregon recommended for
favorable consideration supplementary legislation to the “ People’s
water and power districts constitutional amendment” authorizing the
creation of utility districts for the public development of power.
The Governor of Wisconsin urged a constitutional amendment author
izing the State to provide, if it so desires, a state-wide publicly
owned power system.
R e a d ju s tm e n t
of
W orkers
D isp la c e d
by
P la n t
S h u td o w n s
CONTRIBUTION to the rather limited amount of information
regarding what becomes of workers who are laid off because of
plant shutdowns has been made by the institute of human relations
at Yale University in a study of the readjustment of workers dis
placed when the United States Rubber Co. permanently shut down
its plants at Hartford and New Haven, Conn.1 The study is said not
to have been made with any intention of looking into the causes of
unemployment. It deals, rather, with what is currently described as
technological unemployment, the lay-offs having resulted from the
introduction of more highly mechanized methods, entailing a change
in location of plants. The net result was that workers were laid off
suddenly and had little prospect of being reemployed in the same
industry.
The plants from which workers were laid off were both shut down
in the year 1929, the shutdown of the rubber-footwear manu
facturing plant in New Haven occurring in the spring and that of the
automobile-tire factory in Hartford in the fall. These shutdowns
involved the permanent lay-off of nearly 800 workers in New Haven,
of whom 60 per cent were women, and 1,100 workers in Hartford,
practically all men. Also, in the New Haven plant old-style produc
tion methods were in force, the work was mostly on a group basis,
and workers were largely semiskilled, while in Hartford the plant was
highly mechanized and the workers were highly skilled.
Of this total of approximately 1,900 industrial workers, it was pos
sible for the Institute of Human Relations to make a survey of the
work history of 1,200, excluding foremen and other junior officers,
approximately a year after the lay-off. The survey is said to have
been undertaken for the purpose of answering questions such as the
following:
(1)
What happened to the displaced workers—how long did it take
them to find new jobs, what kind of jobs did they finally obtain, etc.?
(2) How did they and their families meet the problem of unemploy
ment—did nonwage-earning members of the family go out to hunt
jobs, was the standard of living seriously lowered, how many had
recourse to charity, etc..? (3) What similarities and differences in
such results could be traced to the divergent situations in New Haven
and Hartford? (4) Since the company paid some of its workers a
dismissal wage, how effective was this device in facilitating the
readjustment?
The materials for the study came from the records of the company,
showing the work history of the laid-off workers, both the employment
A
1
Quarterly Journal of Economics, Cambridge, February, 1931, pp. 309-46: “ The readjustment of workers
displaced by plant shutdowns,” by Ewan Clague and W. J. Couper.
https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
[843]
70
MONTHLY LABOR REVIEW
by this company and earlier employment; from the records of various
charity organizations to which some workers had had recourse either
prior to or subsequent to the shutdown; and, finally, from direct
field survey of workers laid off both in Hartford and New Haven.
Through the survey an effort was made to ascertain (1) the employ
ment history of the worker and his family as far back as could be
obtained, but with special emphasis on the period since the shut
down; (2) the methods used by the workers in finding work; (3)
changes in family living conditions since shutdown, with reference to
the number of persons in the household, housing accommodations,
illness, insurance, and finance; and (4) the use made of the dismissal
wage. Community aspects of the problem were brought out by fol
lowing accounts in periodicals and local newspapers and through inter
views with employment exchange officers and community leaders.
Duration of Unemployment
W o r k e r s laid off were given a month’s notice of the impending
shutdown in both plants, and the company directed a good deal
of attention toward easing the transition of the displaced workers
from one job to another. Those eligible were pensioned under the
company’s long-established plan. For a second group, composed of
workers'under 45 with 15 years of service, a dismissal wage was paid
based on length of service and current weekly earnings. A few
workers were transferred to other company plants. The remainder
were helped in every way possible to find new work.
Upon interviewing workers a year after the lay-off, it was found
that out of 534 persons from the Hartford plant only 9 had not
looked for work and 83 had not been able to find work. On the other
hand, of the 672 New Haven workers, 84 had not sought work and
68 were unable to find it. These differences are readily explained
on the basis of sex, women having comprised the greater bulk of
those in New Haven not seeking work (69 women and 15 men).
Table 1 shows the total number of workers who secured work in
two months or less, by sex and age groups:
T a ble 1.—N U M B E R OF W OR K ER S
SE E K IN G W O R K A N D N U M B E R F IN D IN G PER"
M A N E N T JOB IN 2 M O N TH S OR LESS, BY A G E GROUPS
N ew Haven
Hartford
Women
Number Number
Number
Number
finding
seeking job
in 2 Number finding Number finding
work
months seeking job in 2 seeking job in 2
work
work
months
months
or less
or less
or less
Men
Age group
In to 19 years __
__ -----20 to 24 years _ - _____ ____________
25 tn 29 years ________ ____ - - - _____
3ft t,r> 34 years _ ______ ___ _ ______
35 to 39 years - - ___ - - - ___
40 to 44 years
__45 to 49 years ____
-50 to 54 years ___
__
55 to 59 years _______ ___
60 to 64 years __- - _____ _
-- —
65 to 69 years
__ — —
Pensioners____________________________
Total
https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
___________ -
9
45
80
90
108
88
50
26
13
8
3
3
5
25
53
56
62
50
28
14
9
3
0
0
23
18
26
28
23
32
30
19
15
6
1
7
17
10
17
19
15
29
15
11
4
2
1
0
77
75
72
33
35
30
17
10
1
1
0
r
58
54
47
24
14
18
8
5
1
0
0
2
523
305
228
140
358
231
[844]
1
INDUSTRIAL AND LABOR CONDITIONS
71
Table 1 shows that there was little difference as between sexes in
the time required to find the first job. Age proved a more important
factor; men over 45 actively seeking work found it in the period of
2 months in only 43 per cent of the cases, while men under 45 were
71 per cent successful. For women the percentages were 44 and 67,
respectively. Greater uniformity in success in finding jobs is evident
for all age groups for Hartford than for New Haven.
In general, the duration of unemployment was much the same in
Hartford and New Haven, and it is stated by the makers of the
survey that this fact is _surprising in view of the fact that efforts
made to place workers in Hartford were more aggressive and well
organized than in New Haven. In both instances shutdowns were
timed to meet the usual seasonal expansion in business, the spring
in New Haven and autumn in Hartfoid. However, both shut
downs coincided with the cyclical decline in business, and it is stated
that emergency programs, community goodwill, and other forms of
cooperation could not in this case seriously modify the usual course
of events.
The average time lost by the working force in New Haven was 4.38
months out of 11 months, or 40 per cent; and in Hartford, 4.33
months in a total of 10 months, or about 43 per cent. For New
Haven the results show that despite the greater tenacity displayed by
older workers, age still appears to be a handicap regardless of sex.
Youth reacted quite differently in the two sexes, the two youngest of
the women’s groups showing a low record of 3.5 months of lost time,
while the young men of this age averaged 4.8 months. In Hartford
the low record for time lost was established by men of 25 to 34.
Statistics of the number of workers employed July 1 , 1930, in
Hartford and March 1 , 1930, in New Haven show that approximately
70 per cent of the men in Hartford and New Haven and 77 per cent
of the women in New Haven were found to be employed at the end of
11 months.
Financial Returns from New Jobs
I n f o r m a t io n obtained as to the number of workers who obtained
new jobs paying as high wages as the old, and as to changes in wage
rates and annual earnings, showed that workers experienced a decided
setback as a result of the shutdowns. Only 61 men in New Haven,
of a total of 191 finding work, were able to get jobs paying as well as
the old ones; as to the women, only 76 out of 311 were successful in
this respect, and women of practically all ages are shown to have
fared worse than men in their new jobs. Hartford results were
even worse, only 37, or 9 per cent, of 420 finding work, having
reported new jobs paying as well as the old.
Table 2 shows the average weekly earnings of workers before and
after the shutdown, by sex and age groups.
Wage rates lor Hartford men, it will be seen, declined more than
for New Haven men—to 70 per cent as compared with 80 per cent of
the wage previous to the shutdown. However, this was due not to
the poor quality of the new jobs but to the higher relative wage level
existing in the Hartford factory; in other words, the decline was
greater because the peak was higher. It is also of interest to note
that in New Haven the average wage rate for men was 50 per cent
https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
[845]
72
MONTHLY LABOR REVIEW
higher than for women in both the old jobs and the new. In New
Haven young men fared better than old, men under 20 having made
a real gain in wages.
T a b l e 3.—AVER A G E W E E K L Y E A R N IN G S B EFO R E A N D A F T E R SH U T D O W N , BY SEX
A N D AGE GROUPS
N ew Haven
Hartford
Average weekly
earnings
Age groups
15 to 19 years
20 to 24 years .
25 to 29 years .
30 to 34 years.-- - - - - - - 35 to 39 years____________
40 to 44 years______________
45 to 49 years ___ ___ ______
50 to 54 years
_
- 55 to 59 years
60 to 64 years
65 to 69 years
Pensioners________________
Total and average
N um
ber re
porting Rubber
com
com
parable pany, Bestwage January paid
job,
rates
to
1929-30
August,
1929
7 $28. 71
33
32.80
35. 52
68
37. 72
81
38.41
81
39. 35
62
40
38. 88
19
36. 55
9
32.61
3
38. 17
1
34. 00
1 49. 50
405
37.15
Men
Women
Average weekly
N um
earnings
ber re
porting
com
Bestparable Rubber
com
paid
wage pany,
job,
rates
1928 1929-30
Average weekly
N um
earnings
ber re
porting
com
Bestparable Rubber
com
paid
wage pany,
job,
rates
1928 1929-30
$22.14
24. 24
25.16
26. 99
26. 95
26. 90
28. 14
22. 87
23. 00
27. 00
25. 00
15.00
22
18
21
27
18
29
23
13
9
3
0
4
$17. 82
27. 08
34. 64
34. 24
33. 92
33. 78
32. 86
33. 58
36. 78
29. 33
$19. 27
24. 97
29. 40
27. 17
25. 97
27. 05
25. 47
24. 50
22. 89
24. 67
28. 50
15.63
26.16
187
31. 42
25. 26
72 $17. 44
69
21. 34
59
22. 08
29
21. 26
25
23. 94
22. 32
23
20. 38
16
8
17.31
1
10. 50
0
0
4
21. 00
$15. 95
16.05
15.83
17. 33
13. 88
15. 70
13. 38
14. 19
14.00
20. 65
15.68
306
14. 13
The final estimate of the position of workers before and after the
shutdown, with regard to earnings, is based upon a comparison of the
annual earnings of the individuals as reported on their 1 9 2 8 incometax cards, when they were still employed by the United States Rubber
Co., and the estimated total earnings of these workers between April
1 , 1 9 2 9 , and April 1 , 1 9 3 0 .
As the latter figures are estimates only,
the writers do not lay undue stress on their value. However, for
those workers included in the comparison, the total 1 9 2 8 earnings
slightly exceeded $ 5 0 0 , 0 0 0 and the post-shutdown earnings were
$26 4 ,0 0 0 .
The Dismissal Wage
O f t h e 7 2 9 workers in New Haven included in this study, 97 are
reported to have received a dismissal wage, the payments ranging
from a minimum of $ 1 3 7 to a maximum of $ 2 , 0 8 8 , the median pay
ment having been about $ 4 2 5 . The amount of the dismissal wage
was equal to one week’s pay for each year of service and hence its
size was contingent on current earnings and length of service with
the company.
No less than 9 0 of the 97 workers (excluding foremen) were inter
viewed in making the survey here reviewed. It was sought to find
out whether the payments facilitated the readjustment of the workers,
or were a mere form of relief which did little more than postpone
disaster. It was found that persons receiving the dismissal wage
proved just as aggressive in looking for work as did their fellow work
ers and found work as quickly as the others. Exceptions to this rule
https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
[846]
73
INDUSTRIAL AND LABOR CONDITIONS
were a few women and older workers who would have retired soon in
any event.
Another point made is that the fewer than a dozen workers who
used their dismissal wage to go into business for themselves failed,
with few exceptions. There were only one or two cases of outstanding
success. One man, for example, opened a shoe-repair shop and has
succeeded by doing a high quality of work. Most workers used their
money for living expenses, only 26 having any of the money on hand
at the end of the year.
In order to determine something of the adequacy of the dismissal
wage, Table 3 was constructed. This table shows percentage com
parisons by age and sex, between 1928 earnings and (1) 1929-30
earnings and (2) 1929-30 earnings plus dismissal-wage payments. By
this means it was sought to find out to what extent the dismissal-wage
payments covered losses in earning power during the year following
the shutdown.
T a b l e 3 —PE R C E N T A G E COM PARISONS W ITH 1928 E A R N IN G S OF (1) 1929-30 E A R N IN G S,
A N D (2) 1929-30 E A R N IN G S PLUS D ISM ISSA L W AGE PA Y M E N T S, IN N E W H A V E N , BY
SE X A N D AGE GROUPS
Men
1929-30
1929-30
Number of
earnings Number of
earnings
1929-30
1929-30
workers
plus
dis
workers
plus dis
earnings
earnings
reporting
missal wage reporting
missal wage
comparable (1928=100
payment comparable (1928=100
payment
per cent)
per cent)
data
(1928=100
data
(1928=100
per cent)
per cent)
Age group
P e r cent
30 to
35 to
40 to
45 to
50 to
55 to
60 to
Women
P e r cent
P er cent
P e r cent
34 years_______ ______ ...
39 years.. . . . .
... .
44 years..
. _____. . .
49 years
____.
54 years __________
59 y e a r s________ ____ _
64 years . . _________
1
3
4
16
16
11
2
16.0
48.3
73.0
42.3
29.3
32. 5
76. 2
54.3
83.5
113.3
79.6
68.9
94.4
136. 7
1
2
4
8
4
1
0
14. 5
31.5
54.9
25.8
53.0
9.5
36.5
73.3
102.4
66.1
122.4
40.7
T otal_________________
53
40. 2
83.9
20
36.3
82.0
Table 3 shows the heavy losses in earning power after the shutdown
for both men and women. Adding to the 1929-30 earnings the total
amount of dismissal wages received, it is found that losses are cut
considerably but not wiped out. The similarity between the percent
ages the 1929-30 earnings, plus the dismissal wage, form of the 1928
wage for both men and women (84 and 82 per cent, respectively),
indicates that the loss was not a matter of sex.
The conclusion drawn from the results shown in Table 3 is stated
to be that the dismissal wage was not quite adequate to cover the lost
earnings of the displaced workers. However, it is reported to have
been a vital factor in facilitating the readjustment of the workers.
E c o n o m ic S t a t u s o f t h e N egro
this title a brief survey of the position of the Negro in
agriculture in the South and in industry in both the South and
U NDER
the North has been presented by T. J. Woofter, jr., of the University
https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
[847]
74
MONTHLY TABOR REVIEW
of North Carolina. The survey was made under a grant from the
Julius Rosenwald Fund of Chicago and the results were issued in
mimeographed form under date of June, 1930.
The Negro in Southern Agriculture
t
T h e report gives a summary of the position of farming and farmers
in the South rather than a special study of the Negro farmer. The
latter, it is explained, usually suffers more severely from the undesir
able features of the situation and is more heavily handicapped than
his white competitor; the general picture is the same for both races,
except that for the Negro the shadows are more heavily accented and
the high lights less frequent.
Taking southern agriculture as a whole, then, Professor Woofter
finds that since 1910 the situation has grown worse. The southern
farmer tends to be a one-crop man, raising mainly cotton, or corn, or
tobacco. This is due partly to a custom of such long standing that
the whole system of credit and share cropping has been built up
around it, partly to an insufficient acquaintance with improved
methods of farming and the value of diversified crops, and partly
to the difficulty of securing money for other crops. Cotton and
tobacco are “ cash ” crops, on which the farmer depends for the money
to pay for clothes, such food as he does not raise on his place, tools,
fertilizer, animals, and feed for the animals. Throughout the former
cotton States (which contain some 5,000,000 rural Negroes) it has
not as yet been possible to discover an effective substitute for cotton
as a cash crop.
In sm all sections such su b stitu te s as peaches, p ean u ts, tru c k crops, a n d dairy
farm ing have been found, b u t expansion along th ese lines is lim ited by th e fact
th a t th e p resen t dem an d for these p ro d u c ts is alread y effectively supplied in
o th er sections of th e co u n try , so t h a t fu rth e r expansion of th e acreage w ould only
e v en tu a te in overproduction.
Both cotton and tobacco are subject to violent fluctuations in
price, and recently the prices of both have been low. Also, the ravages
of the boll weevil have made cotton a more risky crop than formerly.
There has been an actual decrease both in the area of land under culti
vation and in the number of farms actively maintained, accompanied
by a migration of both whites and colored to the cities. The decrease
in number of farms has occurred almost wholly among those ranging
from 20 to 100 acres in size—farms of the size cultivated largely by
Negro tenants—and the shrinkage occurred mainly between 1920 and
1925. The regions in which two cash crops are cultivated, such as
the cotton and tobacco areas of North Carolina and Tennessee, were
considerably more prosperous than those depending on a single
money crop.
Position of the Negro
W ithin th e la s t tw o d e c a d e s th e r e h a s b e e n a d e c id e d c h a n g e in th e
p o s itio n a n d p r o s p e c ts o f th e N e g r o in s o u t h e r n a g r ic u ltu r e .
U p to 1910 th e colored farm ers h a d m ade progress n o t only in th e n u m b er of
farm s w hich th e y c u ltiv ated , b u t also in clim bing th e te n a n t la d d e r from th e
position of d epen d en t lab o rer to t h a t of sem idependent half-share te n a n t, and
on to a position of th ird a n d fo u rth share te n a n t, in d ep en d e n t re n te r of lan d , an d
farm owner. T he n u m b er of ow ners h a d increased in 1910 u n til 219,000 N egroes
https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
[848]
INDUSTRIAL AND LABOR CONDITIONS
75
ow ned th e ir land. W hile th ere were 161,600 Negro ow ners in th e S o u th east in
1910, th is n u m b er decreased to 145,900 by 1925, in d icatin g a surprising pro p o r
tio n who are losing h e a rt a n d m oving to th e city.
There are, of course, numerous examples of fairly prosperous Negro
farmers, but in general, whether as laborer, share tenant, renter, or
owner, his position is far from satisfactory. As a laborer in the old
cotton States of Georgia and South Carolina, his wages are just over
$1 a day, a sum which is declared to be “ totally inadequate, con
sidering the present level of the cost of living.” The croppers and
tenant farmers, and even the farm owners, taken as a whole, are
hardly more prosperous. _Farming, in the area considered, is apt to
be conducted on a credit basis. The farmer’s income is derived
almost wholly from certain major cash crops, marketed only during
two or three months of the year. Farm expenses, however, con
tinue throughout the year. Consequently, unless the income from
the cash crops is sufficient to meet the expenses of the crop to follow,
or unless the farm is capably managed, credit must be obtained.
Even the comparatively prosperous farmers often find it necessary
to secure their fertilizer on credit, and among the less prosperous it
is not uncommon for the local merchant, or, in the case of a tenant
farmer, the landlord, to advance what is necessary to “ make the
crop,” collecting the debt, with interest, when the crop is offered for
sale. Under the best of circumstances, this means a heavy addition
to the cost of supplies; under the worst, it has possibilities of most
serious abuse, tending to produce a condition not far from peonage.
A special study of the system, made by L. C. Gray, points out a few
of its other harmful features.
T he existing system of cred it in m an y places is inim ical to th rift on th e p a rt
of th e borrow er. A good m an y p la n te rs have felt th a t it is desirable to keep
te n a n ts in d e b t ra th e r th a n to encourage th em to g et o u t of debt. T his is p ro b
ably less tru e in m ore recen t years th a n form erly. F u rth erm o re, on acco u n t of
lack of acq u ain tan ce w ith business m ethods a n d fre q u e n t in ab ility to read an d
m ake calculations, th e te n a n t is m ore or less a t th e m ercy of th e lender from
th e sta n d p o in t of accounting. T his difficulty, a n d th e m istru st w hich it gen
erates, to g eth er w ith its inevitable discouragem ent of th rift a n d energy, could
be elim inated by a n organization know n to be engaged in m ak in g loans in th e
in te re st of helping th e borrow er a n d p rom oting his progress.
Unfortunately, the interest charges of this system of credit have
to be deducted from incomes which can ill stand deductions of any
kind and which after debts are paid leave too little for satisfactory
living. In 1927 the North Carolina State Tax Commission made an
investigation into the actual incomes of farmers, finding that the
average cash income was $556 and the average family living from
the farm was $478. These figures, however, were for white-owneroperated farms, and were considerably larger than those found for
Negro farmers in several other studies.
In th e stu d y of St. H elena Island, w hich involved N egro-ow ned farm s, th e
average incom e in cash plus fam ily living w as fo u n d to be $420 in 1928, an d
M r. A rth u r R a p e r’s stu d y of G reene a n d M acon C ounties, G eorgia [showed], th e
average to ta l incom e in G reene C o u n ty [to be] $399, a n d M acon C o u n ty , $448.
T hese incom es include n o t only th e crops sold a n d th e crops consum ed a t hom e,
b u t also th e value of wages received from w ork done aw ay from th e farm .
In view of the situation shown by such figures, it is not surprising
that the agricultural Negro is becoming discouraged and migrating
to the city, even at the cost of giving up whatever he may have
acquired in the country.
46860°— 31-6
https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
[8491
70
M O N TH LY
LABO R
R E V IE W
Summary and Recommendations
T he Negro and White populations of the rural South, the report
finds, are both increasing rapidly in an area which, under the present
methods of agriculture in use, will not support adequately those
already living there. Conditions are not easy for either race, but
the Negro shares the difficulties of the white farmers and has some
additional ones of his own.
T he Negro farm er is first of all a p a rt of th e general so u th ern a g ricu ltu ral
system a n d as such he relies upo n th e one-crop system , is enm eshed in th e te n a n t
organization, is d e p e n d e n t u p o n e x o rb ita n t cred it facilities, a n d has, u p u n til
recently, been su b je c t to u n satisfacto ry m a rk e t conditions. As a one-crop m an
he is su b ject to ruin o u s flu ctu atio n s in th e price of c o tto n a n d tobacco, a n d does
n o t raise a sufficient p ro p o rtio n of his ow n food a n d feed. As a te n a n t th e
farm er assum es a sm all p a rt of th e risk of farm in g a n d gets a sm all p a rt of th e
profits. T he pi ogress m ad e b y N egroes in clim bing th e te n a n t lad d er u p to
1910 has been reversed by th e desertion of th e farm s for th e city. *
*
Because th ese su d d en flu ctu atio n s in price m ake it h a rd to g et ahead, large
pro p o rtio n s of th e farm ers are co n sta n tly in d eb t, a n d for th e ir p ro d u ctio n credit
th e y p ay as high as 37 p e r cent.
_
.
N o tw ith stan d in g th ese adverse conditions, it is possible to find in m an y com
m unities of th e S o u th energetic N egro farm ers who are m aking a living fo r th e ir
fam ilies. T h e problem is to encourage th ese a n d ex ten d th e ir n u m b er so th a t
those who have a special a b ility for farm ing m ay rem ain a n d prospei in agri
culture.
To this end, the report advises strengthening agricultural education
in the schools, extending the work of the farm demonstration agents
and the Federal vocation board, special efforts on the part of all
cooperative projects to include Negro farmers, experiments to discover
better and more economic methods of handling production credit,
efforts to strengthen the present communities of Negro landholders
and to increase their size, efforts to promote more self-sustaining
agriculture, and further research. Each of these recommendations is
discussed at some length, and some are dealt with in special reports.
One suggestion is for the increased use of Negro agents and instructors.
In th e local co m m u n ity th e m o st effective agencies for im proving m eth o d s of
p ro d u ctio n a n d for g iving in fo rm atio n on cooperative m ovem ents a n d cred it
facilities are th e fa rm a n d hom e d e m o n stra tio n agen ts. N egro a g e n ts are especi
ally effective in reach in g N egro farm ers. T h ere w ere in 1929, 329 N egro agents.
T his is n o t a sufficiently larg e n u m b er, b y several h u n d re d , to su p p ly th e m an y
black b e lt counties w hich h av e a sufficient n u m b er of N egro farm ers to_ benefit
from th e ir services. T h e p roblem h ere is th e c reatio n of sufficient local in te re st
in th e counties to secure th e necessary local ap p ro p riatio n s, since a p a r t of th e
su p p o rt com es from th e co u n ty , a p a rt from th e S tate, a n d a p a rt from th e
F ed eral G overnm ent.
Status of the Negro in Industry
I n r e g a r d to the Negro’s industrial position, the report finds that
since 1910 there has been a double movement. In the south
ern cities white men have been competing for the skilled work
Negroes formerly did there and Negroes have moved northward,
entering a wide range of urban occupations. By 1920 about onethird of the Negro population was in cities, and the 1930 census
shows an even larger proportion. The indications are that the move
ment observed from 1910 to 1920 has continued through the latest
decade, and that, on the whole, the Negroes have been retained in
the jobs and plants which they entered during the World War. The
shift of their opportunities as to occupations is thus summarized:
https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
[850]
IN D U S T R IA L A N D
L A B O R C O N D IT IO N S
77
O ccupations losing ground:
A griculture.
Some skilled trades— South.
M unicipal em ploym ent— South.
W aiters, barbers— b o th S outh an d N orth.
D oorm en an d a p a rtm e n t jan ito rs— E ast.
O ccupations gaining ground:
M echanical in d u stry — b o th S outh a n d N o rth (especially steel, autom obiles,
a n d tra n sp o rtatio n ).
B usiness an d em ployees of business houses— b o th S outh an d N orth.
M unicipal em ploym ent— N orth.
D om estic service in su burbs of large cities a n d sm aller cities n o t h ith e rto
p e n e tra te d by Negroes.
The factors tending to produce a worsening of the Negro’s position
are given as population pressure exerted by the whites in the South,
Mexicans in the Southwest and Middle West, and foreign born else
where, political attitudes in the South, closure of many unions to
Negroes, blind-alley jobs, lack of technical training, substitution
of machinery for men, prejudice, the unwillingness of white workers
to mix with the colored, and the inability of plants to provide separate
facilities. As favorable factors are cited the good record made by
colored workers so far, their gradual acquisition of skill on the job and
their attainment of seniority rights, the establishment of trade and
continuation schools, the possession of political rights in the North,
the changing attitudes of some unions, the opening up of new industries
and new occupations to which the white workers have no a priori
claim, the establishment of employment services specially interested
in placing Negroes, as, for instance the work of the National Urban
League service, and the growth of Negro businesses and of white
businesses serving Negroes. Constructive programs designed to fit
the Negro more efficiently into the industrial system must take account
of these factors. The following suggestions are made as to what such
programs might include:
1. The application of the quota system to Mexican immigrants
might protect the Negro from the special competition he meets in
the Southwest and Midwest.
2. The situation as to unions should be bettered by a more effective
policy on the part of the American Federation of Labor in urging
the organization of Negroes by the internationals and locals and by
the abatement of discriminatory practices by these bodies.
3. Trained personnel workers or counselors in vocational and
educational guidance should be established in Negro high schools,
and special efforts shoufd be made to bring about such a basis of
cooperation between industry and education as shall be profitable to
both.
4. Industrial educational facilities,supported by public funds and
aided by such agencies as the Julius Rosenwald fund and the General
Education Board, should be extended.
5. Employment bureaus should be developed which will pay
special attention to the needs of Negro labor. “ Public employment
offices, financed from public funds, can not afford to overemphasize
the needs of any one group of citizens. But the efficiency of these
offices in handling the Negro is often increased by the addition of a
Negro secretary to meet the needs of the group.”
https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
[851]
78
M O N TH LY
LABO R
R E V IE W
A d o p tio n o f U n io n - M a n a g e m e n t C o o p e r a tio n in T w o P la n ts
MONG the collective agreements recently received by the Bureau
Lof Labor Statistics, two provide for cooperation between manage
A
ment and the union. While both agreements have practically the
same object in view, their plans are quite different. In each case
the parties to the agreement seem to realize that systematized
cooperation between union and management will develop a better
working system, speed production, and improve the relationship
between employee and employer.
A summary of the plans as adopted by these two unions and their
employers is given below.
Machinists—Yeomans Bros. Pump Co., Chicago
T h e management of Yeomans Bros. Pump Co., feeling the increased
effect of the competition of nonunion firms, had recently installed
quite a number of modern machine tools and had considered the
advisability of adopting some wage incentive system. Upon counsel
of the representative of the machinists’ union, however, this plan was
dropped. At conferences between the president of the company and
representatives of organized labor the latter suggested, as a possible
way out of the firm’s difficulties, the adoption of a program of system
atized cooperation between the union and the management. This
suggestion was favorably received, and Mr. O. S. Beyer submitted a
plan which was accepted by the management and the union.1
The plan gives a set of principles to be followed if the cooperation
between the union and the management is to be genuine and lasting.
Such cooperation must of necessity imply a willingness of the employ
ees through their union to accept definite responsibility for the success
of the company, and a willingness of the management of the company
to delegate this responsibility to the union as well as to share the
resulting benefits with its employees. The principles are as follows:
1.
A cceptance by th e m an ag e m en t of th e union as necessary a n d help fu l to
the com pany an d its em ployees.
2.
D evelopm ent b etw een th e union a n d m an ag e m en t of a w ritte n a g re e m e n t
governing w orking conditions, hours of em ploym ent, wages, a d ju s tm e n t of
grievances, a n d h an d lin g of disputes.
3.
S ystem atic cooperation betw een th e union a n d th e m an ag e m en t for in
creased o u tp u t, reduced costs, im proved q u ality , g reater efficiency, co nservation
of m aterials, b e tte r w orking conditions, an d th e elim ination of in ju ry , fatigue,
w aste, etc.
4.
W illingness of th e com pany to do all w ith in its pow er to stabilize em ploy
m en t as well as sh are w ith its em ployees from tim e to tim e th e gains arising
from cooperation.
5.
E stab lish m e n t of jo in t conference m achinery re p re se n ta tiv e of b o th un io n
an d m anagem en t to p ro m o te a n d m a in ta in co operative effort.
The plan sets forth the organization of the cooperative machinery,
the representation of union and management, the procedure of the
cooperative conferences, and a number of subjects which might be
considered at the cooperative meetings. It is stated that the specific
purpose of the cooperative conferences is to consider proposals of
mutual helpfulness; therefore, criticisms, faultfinding, and the
handling of grievances should be ruled out of conference procedure.
i The information in regard to the union management agreement between Yeomans Bros. Pump Co. and
the machinists’ union was furnished the Bureau of Labor Statistics by B. M. Squires, of Chicago.
https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
[852]
IN D U S T R IA L A N D
L A B O R C O N D IT IO N S
79
Syrup Workers™W. H. Cargill Co., Columbus, Ga.
T h e cooperative agreement between the W. H. Cargill Co., of
Columbus, Ga., and the Syrup Workers’ Union No. 108, of the
Brewery Workers’ International Union, has for its object the “ re
moving, as far as possible, [of] all causes for misunderstanding and
friction, and of promoting to the greatest possible degree the mutual
helpfulness of the two organizations.”
The union agrees to promote in every possible legitimate way the
distribution and sale of syrup and other products of the company and
pledges its support in a constructive and responsible way to the end
that quality and quantity of production may be maintained, and
further pledges its cooperation in effecting such economies in manu
facturing as may be brought about by introduction of improved
machinery. Realizing that continuity of operation is essential to suc
cessful operation of the factory, it also agrees that in the event of differ
ences which may arise in respect to details of operation, compensation,
hours of labor, working conditions, or any other matter of controversy,
a period of not less than 60 days shall be allowed for the holding of
conferences between the management and the executive committee
of the union.
The company agrees to the recognition of the bona fide trade-unions
of its employees as their proper agents in matters affecting their wel
fare. It recognizes the unions as desirable, not only to the welfare
and protection of their members, but also to the management, inas
much as the cooperation of their members is essential to the continued
and successful operation of its manufacturing plant. The company
also agrees to maintain good working conditions, fair wages, and, as
far as practicable, continuity of emplojmient.
The agreement provides that representatives of both parties shall
meet at regular intervals, preferably once a month, but as often as
necessity may require, for the discussion of any question that may
arise and for the further extension of a spirit of loyalty, helpfulness,
and cooperation.
I n c r e a se d L ab or P r o d u c tiv ity in C oal M in e s, 1911 t o 1929
increase in productivity in the coal mines of the United States
from 1911 to 1929 is shown in the following table taken from the
T HE
United States Bureau of Mines Report of Investigations No. 3082,
dated January, 1931. In 1911 the production of 1 ton of coal required
2.72 hours and 0.323 shift; by 1929 the time had been reduced to
1.919 hours and 0.237 shift. ïn anthracite mines alone the time re
quired in 1929 was 3.694 hours and 0.462 shift as compared with
3.754 hours and 0.473 shift in 1911 ; in bituminous mines it was 1.668
hours and 0.206 shift in 1929 compared with 2.472 hours and 0.288
shift in 1911.
https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
80
M O N TH LY
LABO R
R E V IE W
N U M B E R OP M A N -SH IFTS A N D N U M B E R OF M AN-HOURS R E Q U IR E D TO PR O D U C E
1 TO N OF COAL IN T H E COAL M IN E S OF T H E U N IT E D STATES
[Based upon all employees, surface and underground]
Bituminous
Anthracite
Total
Year
Shifts
Hours
Shifts
Hours
Shifts
Hours
1911
1912
1913
1914
1915
______________________ __________ ____
______ ______ ________ -- ______
___________
___ _ ___ ___
______________________________
______________
___________________
0. 288
.272
.277
.269
. 255
2. 472
2. 357
2. 389
2. 324
2. 208
0. 473
.477
.493
.485
.456
3. 754
3.812
3.948
4. 362
4. 107
0.323
. 304
.312
. 308
. 289
2.720
2. 589
2. 644
2. 684
2. 519
1916
1917
1918
1919
1920
_____________________________________
___________________________________
_______ ______________ _______ _
__ ______ _________ _____
- _____- ______ _______ _____ _____
.257
. 265
.265
.261
. 248
2. 224
2. 222
2. 159
2.104
1.992
.462
.441
.437
.466
.439
3.810
3. 529
3.489
3. 734
3. 510
.288
.292
.290
. 294
.274
2. 462
2.419
2. 359
2. 363
2.205
1921
1922
1923
1924
1925
______ _
_______ __________ - - _____ - _____________ ____
.
_ _____
________ _______
_______________________________________
_________ ____________________ ______
.239
.232
.223
.219
. 221
1. 915
1. 867
1. 805
1. 771
1. 785
.477
.432
.452
.499
.471
3. 822
3.465
3. 623
3. 989
3. 776
.281
.255
.256
.262
.248
2.263
2.055
2. 061
2. 112
1. 994
1926
1927
1928
1929
____ ___________ _____ _____
- -_______ _________ --________________________________
________ ________________ - ____
.222
.220
. 211
.206
1. 799
1. 772
1. 714
1. 668
.477
.465
.462
.462
3.823
3. 714
3. 702
3. 694
.255
.252
.244
.237
2.057
2. 039
1. 971
1.919
L ab or C o n d itio n s in H ig h w a y C o n s tr u c tio n C a m p s in M in n e s o ta
N THE summer of 1930 an investigation was made by the Min
nesota Industrial Commission, following numerous complaints
that road contractors were taking advantage of the unemployment
crisis by imposing upon their workers long hours, low wages, un
reasonably high rates for board, and poor housing, and were requiring
applicants for jobs to pay fees to employment agents. The investi
gators visited 13 construction projects operated by 44 contractors or
subcontractors, most of whom had separate construction camps. The
following are some of the findings in the report of this survey, which
is dated August 19, 1930, and published in the Fifth Biennial Report
of the Industrial Commission of Minnesota, 1929-1930:
Approximately 1,700 persons were employed on the 44 projects
visited, the number of workers on the different operations ranging
from 7 to 131, the average being 33.
I
Wages and Hours of Labor
O n 2 7 of the 38 operations for which hours of work were reported
the regular hours per day were 10; on 5 operations the hours were 11;
on 4 they were 11%; and on 2, from 10 to 11. For a few occupations
the hours of work were reported as from 12 to 17 per day. Cooks
had long hours, in one case the time put in at this work being re
ported as 18 hours per day. Other cooks had a 16-hour day. A few
of the camps had woman cooks, one stating that her work required
16% hours per day.
The hourly wages paid by 29 contractors ranged from 25 to 50
cents; the daily wages of 5 contractors were from $2.00 to $3.50;
the wages per month were from $40 to $50 with board.
https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
[854]
INDUSTRIAL AND LABOR CONDITIONS
81
Deductions from wages.—One contractor who had 50 men under
him deducted $1 per month from their wages for medical service.
This contractor had sublet portions of his project to four other con
tractors who reported that they were required by him to deduct $1
per month from the wages of each of their workers to be turned over
to the head contractor for medical service. These four subcontractors
had 155 workers and could not explain satisfactorily the service
rendered for the money collected in this way. One subcontractor
stated that this deduction was made from the first week’s wages and
that if a worker left his job in less than 5 days, 20 cents was deducted
for each day he was employed.
Labor Supply and Labor Turnover
Six of the contractors secured all their workers through licensed
employment agencies, and five other contractors obtained nearly all
their men from such agencies and made up the rest of their crews
with local workers and transients applying for work on the job.
Fourteen contractors had recourse to licensed employment agents to
secure some of their labor, while 14 other contractors brought old
employees with them, engaged local workers, hired their men on the
job, or used crews made up in these three ways. The fees of licensed
employment agencies for referring workers to these jobs ranged from
$1 to $3. One contractor reported that local men were not satis
factory, and another that local farm labor made poor skinners.
On most of the projects the labor turnover was slight, which was
attributed by the contractor to the scarcity of jobs. One employer
who had been carrying on his operation for several months said that
95 per cent of the crew he started with still remained. In one in
stance, however, a check of a licensed employment agency’s records
showed that 292 men had been referred in less than 4y2 months to a
contractor who never employed over 50 men at one time. It is
suggested that this large turnover might be accounted for at least in
part by the fact that this contractor paid the lowest wages and asked
next to the highest rate for board found to be prevailing on any of
the undertakings covered in the survey.
Charges for Board and Lodging
C o n t r a c t o r s charged employees from $1 to $1.25 per day for
board and lodging, 15 of the 25 reporting this item charging $1 per
day. On other undertakings the workers lived at home or boarded
in town, and in one case with a neighboring farmer.
A com parison of th e foregoing charges for m ain ten an ce w ith th e wages paid
to th e em ployees shows th a t th e h ighest charges were n o t m ade w here th e highest
wages were paid. On th e tw o o perations w here th e charge for m ain ten an ce was
$1.25 a day th e wages p aid were 35 cen ts an hour, a n d on one of th e o perations
w here $1.20 was charged for cam p b o ard a n d lodging only 25 cents an h o u r was
p aid for labor, while am ong th e i5 c o n tracto rs who charged $1 a d ay fo r m ain
ten an ce w ere 3 who p aid 40 cents an h o u r a n d one who p aid 50 cents to drivers,
an d in th e tw o cases w here $1.10 was charged for m ain ten an ce th e wages were
40 cents an d 50 cents a n hour.
https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
[855]
82
MONTHLY LABOE R EV IEW
Living Conditions
M o s t of the camps were suitably located. Several camps, however,
lacked sufficient space, though the investigators found that in some
cases the contractors had paid as much as $100 for 6 weeks’ use of
space which was wholly inadequate. In some crowded camps the
stables were too near the kitchen, and in other camps the horses
had to pass too close to the kitchen door in going to and from the
stables. In some cases camps were so near the construction job or the
road that the kitchen, dining room, and bunk houses were very dusty.
One camp was in a hollow and some of the workers lived in their own
tents which thej^ pitched on the hillside.
Approximately half of the sleeping quarters were good, according to
the report, about a quarter were fair, and the remainder bad. Many
had no window or door screens, and a few had no doors at all. There
were many flies and mosquitoes in the bunk houses. Some of the
sleeping quarters were found to be only partly floored and a few were
without any flooring. Many were dirty and untidy, and in one of
them straw and débris were scattered around. Some were too
crowded.
T he bunks were usually of th e double-deck single ty p e, c o n stru cte d of iron or
steel, w ith springs an d m attresses. A few double-deck double b u n k s w ere found
in som e of th e cam ps. In a b o u t one-half of th e cam ps th e m attre sse s a n d bedding
Were found to be clean or fairly so. In th e o th e r h alf th e b edding w as described
as being “ p o o r,” “ soiled,” “ d ir ty ” or “ very d ir ty .” N one of th e beds con
tain ed sheets, a n d pillows w ere observed in only a few of th e b u n k houses.
T here ap p eared to be a scarcity of w ashbasins in m o st of th e cam ps, a n d in
several th e re w ere none a t all. N o tow els w ere observed in a n y of th e cam ps.
One of th e cam ps, how ever, co n tain ed show er b a th s, w ith h o t a n d cold w ater,
w hich th e em ployees were privileged to use tw o or th re e tim es a week.
T oilets w ere provid ed in m o st of th e cam ps. O nly a sm all p ercen tag e of these
were unclean. F o u r of th e cam ps co n tain ed none, b u t tw o of these h ad to ilets
w here th e w ork was being done. In one cam p th e to ile t consisted of stak es driven
into th e ground a n d b u rla p on th re e sides, a n d in a n o th e r cam p th ere was m erely
a pole restin g on stakes. P a p e r w as found in only a few of th e to ilets a n d in
only a sm all percentag e h ad a n y lim e been used.
Over one-half of the kitchens and dining quarters were reported as
clean and well equipped, and nearly all of these were free of flies.
The remainder of the kitchens and dining quarters might be said to
be fair or poor, the former slightly predominating. In some of them
there were numerous flies. In almost all of the camps there were
well-iced refrigerators for perishable food. Only a few camps had no
refrigerators nor ice. In one camp a deep hole had been dug for a
cellar, and the condition of the food found there was fairly good.
In only one camp was complaint made by the workers concerning the
food served.
The water supply in the camps was reported fairly good. A small
number of camps were close to wells. Several other camps had
pipes connecting with wells or with the municipal water supply. In
nearly all of the camps the water was hauled in thresher tanks or
barrels and kept in wooden barrels or metal tanks, some of which were
left uncovered. In almost all of the operations and camps a dipper
or common drinking cup was used. On two of the undertakings
there were men with sore lips.
In approximately two-thirds of the camps there were covered cans
for the garbage, and in nearly all of the remaining camps it was col
https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
[856]
INDUSTRIAL AND LABOR CONDITIONS
83
lected in uncovered containers. Ordinarily, the garbage was taken
away by farmers, in one case every day, and in other cases several
times per week. In one camp, however, the garbage was piled up on
the ground and was swarming with flies.
Nearly all of the cesspools were covered, though a few were not,
and in several camps the kitchen waste water was poured out on the
ground and flies swarmed around the open pools.
In several camps empty vegetable cans were buried, and in several
others such cans were burned. In the great majority of the camps,
however, the cans were in piles on the ground, frequently too close to
the kitchen and constituting breeding places for flies.
Accidents
T h e investigators made no attempt to find out the number and
character of accidental injuries in connection with the road-construc
tion projects visited. The report of the survey indicates, however,
that there had been minor accidents on many undertakings. One
fatal and two serious nonfatal accidents were also reported. On
other projects only a few of the workers had had minor injuries.
Several contractors reported no accidents. It was noticed that on
certain paving jobs men were suffering from cement burns.
A large number of camps had good first-aid kits and other camps had
small kits, but a number of the projects had no means of rendering
first aid.
.
some camps open boxes of dynamite were carelessly placed, and
m several cases open boxes of this explosive were found lying around
the working field. On one project a pile of boxes of dynamite was
discovered within 3 feet of tracks of passing trucks. In most of the
blacksmith shops in the camps, striking tools with mushroomed heads
and some with defective handles were found. Unguarded pulleys,
belts, and shaft ends were also found in certain shops.
L ab or C o n d itio n s in t h e M in e s o f In d ia
HE report of the chief inspector of mines in India for the jear
ending December 31, 1929, gives figures showing the effect of the
legislation against the employment of women underground. The
average daily number of employees, by sex and place of work, in 1928
and 1929 wTas as follows:
T
T a b l e 1. — AVER A G E D A IL Y N U M B E R OF E M PL O Y EE S IN IN D IA N M IN E S, B Y SE X A N D
PLACE OF W ORK
Males
Females
Place of work
1928
1929
1928
1929
Underground____ _________
Open workings___________
Surface___________________
86,155
,51, 005
52, 430
92, 856
54, 235
51, 954
31, 785
28,453
17, 843
24, 089
28, 728
17, 839
T otal___________ ____
189, 590.
199, 045
78,081
70,656
https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
[857]
84
MONTHLY LABOR REVIEW
While the total number of employees was greater in 1929 than in
1928, the number of female employees showed a marked decrease,
which occurred almost exclusively among those working underground.
T his red u ctio n b y 24 p er c en t w as to som e sm all e x te n t due to th e fa c t th a t
th e em ploym ent of w om en u n d erg ro u n d in m ines o th e r th a n coal a n d sa lt m ines
was p ro h ib ited w ith effect from Ju ly 1, 1929. I t was, how ever, m ainly d u e to
th e fa c t th a t w ith effect from th e sam e d a te th e n u m b er of w om en em ployed
u nderground in coal m ines w as re stric te d to 29 p er c en t of th e to ta l lab o r force
em ployed undergro u n d , w hich w as th e a c tu a l percen tag e so em ployed in 1928.
In t h a t y ear a n d in previous y ears th e percen tag e flu c tu a te d from d ay to day
an d from m ine to m ine. As u n d er th e new regulations, how ever, th e percentage
could n o t exceed w h a t w as form erly th e average, a m ark ed fall w as in ev itab le;
th e percentage for coal m ines w as 23 a n d for all m ines 21, as com pared w ith 29
per cen t a n d 27 per cent, respectively, in 1928.
As far as coal mines are concerned, the permitted percentage of
women employed underground is to diminish annually by 3 until it
is finally extinguished in 1939. In the salt mines, also, the percent
age of woman workers allowed underground is to diminish annually
and end in 1939. In 1929 the number employed underground in
coal mining was 21,880 and in salt mining 333.
Comparative Output of Coal Mines
F i g u r e s are given showing the per capita output of coal in the
different Provinces in 1929 as compared with the average output for
the period 1924-1928, as follows:
T a b l e 2 .—A N N U A L O U T PU T OF COAL P E R PE R SO N E M P L O Y E D , B Y PR O V IN C E A N D
PER IO D
Output (in tons) of coal per person employed—
Underground and in
open workings
Province
1929
British I n d ia .....................- --------- -- . .
............... . . .
Bengal and Bihar------------- ---------- - --- ............. - Assam___________________ - ------- -------- --------------Baluchistan _____________
. . ------------------------Central Provinces. . _______ ______ _ _ .....................
P u n ja b ---- -- ---------- ----------- . -----------------------------
192U1928
193
197
105
69
164
104
180
186
115
57
131
87
Above and below
ground
1929
1924-1928
135
138
78
52
115
58
120
123
74
36
87
51
With the exception of Assam, every Province shows a greater per
capita output in 1929 than in the preceding period, and in Assam the
exception does not hold when the total number of workers employed
in the mines is used as the basis of calculation. The improvement is
ascribed in the main to the increase in the use of coal-cutting ma
chinery. Some comparative figures for other countries are given:
“ In 1928 the output of coal per person employed above and below
ground in the United Kingdom was 253 tons. In 1927 comparative
figures in certain other countries were: Japan, 136 tons; Transvaal,
543 tons; United States of America, 706 tons.”
Warning is given, however, that in comparing these figures the fact
must be borne in mind that both men and women are employed in
the Indian mines, whereas elsewhere the employment of women in
such work is unusual or entirely unknown.
https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
[858]
85
INDUSTRIAL AND LABOR CONDITIONS
Accidents
D u r i n g the year 1929 there were 2 1 2 fatal accidents in the mines
covered by the report, involving the loss of 266 lives—215 males and
51 females. There were also 651 serious accidents, involving injuries
to 672 persons. No record is kept of minor accidents. Serious ac
cidents are defined as “ those in which an injury has been sustained
which involves, or in all probability will involve, the permanent loss
of the use of, or permanent injury to, any limb, or the permanent loss
of or injury to the sight or hearing, or the fracture of any limb or the
enforced absence of the injured person from work for a period exceed
ing 20 days.”
T a b l e 3 .—A C C ID E N T S A N D D E A T H A N D IN JU R Y R A TE S IN IN D IA N M IN E S, 1929
Place of accident
Number of
fatal acci
dents
Death rate per 1,000
persons employed
Male
Underground _
______
Open workings.. _ ________
_ ...
Surface____ . . . ____
153
30
29
1.79
.50
.42
Female
1.66
. 14
.39
Serious injury rate per
Number of 1,000 persons employed
serious
accidents
Male
Female
391
82
178
3.94
1.16
3.06
1.58
.87
1.18
The death rate per 1,000 persons employed, without regard to sex,
was for those employed underground, 1.76; for those in open workings,
0.37; and for those on the surface, 0.42; for the entire force it was 0.99.
https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
[859]
INSURANCE AND BENEFIT PLANS
D e la w a r e O ld -A g e P e n s io n A ct
Y THE approval on January 29, 1931, of an act providing for
the assistance of aged persons, Delaware became the thirteenth
State1 (not including Alaska) to adopt an old-age pension law.
The passage of an old-age pension law in Delaware culminates the
efforts of legislators and public-spirited and interested citizens over a
period of years in that State. An attempt was made by the Legisla
ture of Delaware in 1929 to enact such a law, but the measure failed,
as many of the legislators were of the opinion that further study of
the subject should be made. In the meantime Mr. Alfred I. DuPont,
of Wilmington, Del., inaugurated upon his own responsibility an oldage pension system out of his private funds, and as a result it has been
reported that approximately 1,300 needy aged citizens of Delaware
have been and will continue to be assisted through the private efforts
of Mr. DuPont until the new law goes into effect on July 1, 1931.
This law is unique among the old-age pension laws thus far enacted,
for under it all of the cost is borne by the State.
B
Analysis of Delaware Act
T he Delaware act is analyzed below, showing the principal features
of the law.
Date oj approval.—January 29, 1931; in effect July 1, 1931.
Establishment oj relief— A State old-age welfare commission is
created. The membership of the original commission is appointed
by the governor and selected from each of the three counties (rural
Sew Castle, Kent, and Sussex) and the city of Wilmington; subsequent
vacancies and appointments are to be filled by the chief justice of the
State supreme court. The members of the commission are to serve
without pay, but will be entitled to an attendance fee of $5_for each
meeting held and other expenses in the performance of their duties.
The commission is empowered to adopt necessary rules and regula
tions and to appoint subordinate officers.
Requirements for pension.—To be eligible for benefits under the law
the applicant must be (1) 65 years of age or over; (2) a resident of
the United States for 15 years and a resident of Delaware for not less
than 5 years; and (3) without children or other responsible person to
support him. No one may receive assistance (1) who has disposed of
any property for the purpose of obtaining assistance; (2) who is an
inmate of any public reform or correctional institution; or (3) who
has been a professional tramp or beggar one year prior to making
application.
Application.—Application must be made to the State old-age wel
fare commission.
Benefits.—The amount of assistance allowed is dependent upon
the circumstances in each case as shown by investigation by the com
mission, but is limited to $300 annually, including the applicant’s
income from property or other sources. No amount in excess of $25
per month shall be allowed.
> California, Colorado, Delaware, Kentucky, Maryland, Massachusetts, Minnesota, Montana, Nevada,
New York, Utah, Wisconsin, and Wyoming.
86
https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
[ 860]
INSURANCE AND BENEFIT PLANS
87
When the commission determines that a person is entitled to
assistance, a certificate is to be issued showing the amount of monthly
assistance granted. This certificate shall be valid for one year unless
revoked for cause, and is renewable at the option of the commission.
The amount is payable by the State treasurer to the person named in
the certificate, but if incapable of receiving same (upon the testimony
of at least three credible witnesses) the money may be paid to some
other person for the benefit of the aged person.
Upon death of a beneficiary an additional allowance for funeral
expenses (limited to $100) shall be made. Unpaid installments due
under the certificate are also payable to the legal representative of the
deceased.
Pensioners are prohibited from receiving any other public assistance
except, in cases of extreme emergency, medical and surgical treatment.
Revision or revocation of benefits.—A person receiving relief under
the act must notify the commission of any property or income received
after his case was passed upon, so that the commission may either
cancel the certificate or vary its amount. Certificates obtained im
properly are subject to cancellation by the commission, and the
beneficiary in such a case is thereby disqualified for one year from
making an application for another allowance. The amount of assist
ance ceases and the certificate is canceled upon the pensioner’s ad
mittance to any charitable or benevolent institution. Upon convic
tion for an offense punishable by imprisonment for one month or more,
the beneficiary forfeits assistance during the period of imprisonment.
Assignability of relief, etc.—Relief granted under the act is not sub
ject to assignment, execution, sale or charge, nor to fees allowed attor
neys, etc., in bankruptcy proceedings. The property of qualified
persons under the act is exempt from taxation and assessment for
public purposes.
Reports.—An annual report by the old-age welfare commission is
required to be submitted to the governor, within 90 days after the
close of each calendar year, showing all expenditures and other infor
mation pertaining to the administration of the act. Upon the grant
ing of every application and the issuance of the certificate the com
mission must report the same to the State treasurer.
Appropriation.—An annual appropriation of $200,000 is made by
the act, and all expenses and salaries are to be paid from this appro
priation.
Violations.—Violations of the act are deemed misdemeanors and
punishable upon conviction by a fine of $500 or imprisonment not to
exceed three years, or both.
L ife I n s u r a n c e a n d S ic k B e n e fits fo r S tr e e t-R a ilw a y E m p lo y e e s
agreement of the Gary Railways Co., Gary, Ind., with divi
sion No. 517 of the Amalgamated Association of Street and Elec
T HE
tric Railway Employees, effective until July 1, 1931, contains the
following provision :
T h e com pany shall, a t its own expense, insure em ployees covered b y th is agree
m e n t ag ain st d eath an d to ta l disability in th e am o u n t of $1,000, a n d ag ain st sick
ness in th e am o u n t of $20 p er week, to be p aid for 26 weeks during d isab ility in
an y one year, com m encing on th e e ig h th d ay a fte r th e disability is incurred.
https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
[8611
HEALTH AND INDUSTRIAL HYGIENE
I n c id e n c e o f I lln e s s A m o n g A d u lt W age E arn ers
study, by Dean K. Brundage, of the incidence of
illness among wage-earning adults was published in the Novem
A berSTATISTICAL
and December, 1930, issues of the Journal of Industrial Hygiene,
The study is based on the morbidity experience among a number of
industrial groups at various periods and some studies among the gen
eral population, and forms one of a series of studies in the diseases of
adult life being made by the division of research of the Milbank
Memorial Fund.
As there is more or less vagueness in the term “ case” of sickness it
has been defined for the purposes of the study in terms of a “ waiting
period” ; that is, cases are included if they last longer than ascertain
minimum period such as one, two, or three days, a week, etc,, it being
considered that in most cases comparisons of sickness are valid if based
on an identical waiting period. Of nearly as great importance as the
unit of measurement in comparisons of industrial sickness rates is the
provision, or lack of provision, for sick leave, since it has been shown
to have a decided effect upon the sickness distribution. A comparison
of the frequency of absence on account of sickness in two companies,
one of which paid wages during disability while the other did not,
showed a relatively high rate for cases of short duration in the company
which pays during sickness, while in the second company the larger
proportion of cases were found among those of longer duration. In
the company in which full wages were paid a check on malingering
was made, the company physician calling on all those who reported
themselves as unable to work on account of illness. Over a 3-year
period during which a large percentage of the cases lasting one or two
days were diagnosed it was found that malingering was a negligible
factor in the apparently high rate of short-period illnesses. Owing
to the fact that the pay would not be forfeited, the tendency among
these employees was to remain at home and take care of their ailments,
especially colds and other so-called minor respiratory diseases, with
the result that the amount of disability among such employees was
lessened as well as the -spread to others of communicable disease
checked.
The most frequent causes of disability are the respiratory diseases
(colds, influenza, bronchitis, and tonsillitis) and digestive diseases,
while the most frequent causes of death are the breakdown of the cir
culatory system, the kidneys, and the lungs; the nervous diseases;
and malignant diseases such as cancer. The ratio of the ordinary
respiratory diseases to death in a general population group has been
shown to be 300 to 1 and of diseases and disorders of the digestive
system the ratio was about 200 to 1, while the ratio of illnesses due to
88
https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
[862 ]
HEALTH AND INDUSTRIAL HYGIENE
89
the degenerative diseases, cancer, etc., was only about 10 cases to 1
death. From these figures it will be seen that mortality statistics do
not present a true picture of the general ill health of the people as a
whole.
Diseases Causing Sickness Among Industrial Workers
S t a t is t ic s of the frequency of different diseases lasting one week or
longer among a group of industrial sick-benefit associations, having a
combined membership of 100,000 to 150,000, have been compiled by
the United States Public Health Service since 1920. These figures
have shown the great preponderance of the respiratory diseases and
diseases of the digestive system among the causes of sickness.
During the 8-year period 1921 to 1928, inclusive, respiratory dis
eases caused 42.4 per cent of total disabilities from sickness and non
industrial accidents. In the respiratory group, influenza was by far
the most frequent cause of sickness followed by tonsillitis, bronchitis,
and pneumonia. Diseases of the digestive system came second in the
list of causes of illness, and nonindustrial accidents, third; the remain
ing causes representing only 34.2 per cent of the cases were, in the
order of importance, diseases of the circulatory and genito-urinary
systems, rheumatism, diseases of the nervous system, of the skin, of
the organs of locomotion, epidemic and endemic diseases, and a small
group of unclassified diseases. The contagious and infectious diseases
such as typhoid fever, smallpox, diphtheria, measles, etc., upon which
public health effort is often so largely directed, caused less than 3 per
cent of the cases for which sick benefits were paid among this group.
Approximately the same relative frequency of these broad disease
groups is maintained in records of disabilities lasting one day or longer
instead of more than one week. A study of sickness incidence among
employees of the Edison Electric Illuminating Co., of Boston, showed
that the number of days of disability on account of respiratory dis
eases averaged, over a 10-year period, 3.2 days per year for 'males
and 5.5 days for females, while colds alone resulted in the loss of 1.4
days and 2.1 days, respectively.
Aside from the respiratory diseases, there is little seasonal variation
in the sickness rates, although there is a tendency for the nonrespiratory diseases to be least prevalent in October and November and
most frequent in midwinter.
Factors Affecting Rate of Disabling Sickness
I n d u s t r i a l groups differ markedly from the general population
in age grouping, the younger adult ages predominating. It has been
estimated that in the manufacturing industries of the country as
many as 80 per cent of the men are below the age of 45, and that
probably 90 to 95 per cent of the women are below that age. Also,
there is evidence that industrial workers are not representative of
the general population from a health standpoint, but represent on
the whole a rather favorably selected group. Between the ages of
15 and 50 the sickness rates, it has been shown, tend to rise more
rapidly in the general than among the industrial groups. After the
age of 50, however, the frequency of disabilities among industrial
workers lasting more than one week increases fairly rapidly, as does
also the number of days lost per man per year. There is some evi
https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
[863]
90
MONTHLY LABOR REVIEW
dence that, in addition to the fact that more serious diseases natu
rally tend to occur among older persons, some loss of recuperative
ability begins to show even in the early thirties.
Absence on account of illness is more frequent among female emplovees than among males. The mutual benefit associations records
showed that the frequency of disability lasting longer than one week
among women was 50 per cent higher over a 7-year period than
among the men, and that the rate for a majority of the disease groups
was higher among the women. The rate was twice that of themalerate
for neurasthenia, diseases of the pharynx and tonsils, appendicitis,
the genito-urinary group exclusive of nephritis, for certain general
diseases, and for ill-defined and unknown causes; but among the
women there was a much lower rate for hernia, for pneumonia the
rate was less than half the male frequency, there was less rheumatism,
fewer cases of lumbago and other diseases of the organs of locomotion,
and of diseases of the veins and of the bones and joints. The rate
for nonindustrial injuries per 1,000 persons was about the same for
the two sexes. When disabilities lasting one day and over are in
cluded, the rate is still higher, as short disabilities tend to occur much
more frequently among women.
There is little information relative to racial susceptibility, but such
data as are available indicate that immigrants from warm regions
such as Greece and Italy may be more liable to attack from respira
tory diseases than immigrants from northern Europe or natives of
this country.
Comparisons of such statistics as are available of sickness according
to marital status indicate that for women both the frequency and
the severity rates are higher among the married than among the
single. Records which were kept for the employees of one company
for a period of eight years show that the married women appear to
have been disabled considerably oftener than the single by influenza
and grippe, and by diseases of the nasal fossae, but that frequency of
diseases of the pharynx and tonsils was about the same in the two
groups. In the digestive group of diseases the greatest excess among
the married was in diseases of the stomach, diarrhea, and enteritis,
while among other diseases a considerably higher frequency rate was
found for rheumatic affections. One of the widest differences was
for the genito-urinary group, the rate, especially for the more serious
cases, being much higher among the married. Although it is not
possible to determine definitely the reasons for these differences, the
report states that it is quite probable “ that the double duty of the
married industrial worker, i. e., the factory job in addition to the
homekeeping job involving as it frequently does the strain of child
bearing and the care of children as well as the housework itself, may
result in overwork sufficient to predispose to illness of any nature,
and may thereby exact a toll of incapacitation much greater than
that experienced by the single woman in industry.”
Alcoholism is of comparatively little importance in some industries
while in others it has a decided influence on the sickness rate. It
is often prevalent among workers subjected to especially arduous
working conditions. For example, in the anthracite coal-mining
industry, the annual number of absences of two consecutive days or
longer on account of alcoholism in two mines amounted to 474 per
https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
[864]
HEALTH AND INDUSTRIAL HYGIENE
91
1,000 men for miners engaged in cutting and loading coal, as com
pared with 172 for all other occupations. In the cement industry
the rates varied from 17 per 1,000 in one plant in occupations in
which there was small exposure to dust or heat, to 263 for quarry
labor and 485 for those exposed to heat in the kiln room. Among
these groups in both industries the sickness rate was also definitely
higher than among the other employees. Although these rates were
based on rather small numbers, it appears that drinking was concentrated largely in the groups doing the most laborious and dis
agreeable work. Therefore, reduction in drinking among industrial
employees, the writer says, may be closely connected with an im
provement in working and hygienic conditions.
Industrial Selection
S i c k n e s s rates may be expected to be somewhat lower for an
industrial group than for the general population, since the industrial
group is made up of individuals who are ordinarily able to engage in
work, while the general population includes many invalids and per
sons with physical impairments serious enough to prevent industrial
employment. The securing of comparable data is difficult since
there is no satisfactory way of ascertaining when a person not
employed is actually disabled by sickness and would have remained
at home on account of illness if he had been employed at the time.
Also, m industrial establishments it is comparatively easy to obtain
an exact record of absences from work on account of sickness, while
m &general population this can be secured only by repeated houseto-house canvasses, and even then some of the shorter sicknesses
may be forgotten in the intervals between visits. The study of the
incidence of sickness in Hagerstown, Md., made by the United States
i iibhc Health Service in 1921, serves, however, in the present study
lor a comparison of sickness rates with a group of workers employed
m a rubber factory, kor both groups the sickness incidence for the
age period 20 to 24 was taken as the basis of comparison of the trend
m the age curves of illness. In the general population the trend was
steadily upward while among employees of the rubber company the
frequency rates, based on disabilities lasting two working-days or
longer, rose more slowly from age 25 to 40, declined from then to
age 60, after which the upward trend in frequency of disability was
lesumed. Comparisons with other employees’ groups which were
made in the original study are not included in the present one, but
none of these, it is stated, showed as great a rise in the frequency of
sickness between the ages of 25 and 55 as did the Hagerstown curve.
From the evidence in these studies that illness frequency failed to
increase with age as rapidly among industrially employed persons as
among those in the general population, it is suggested that there
may be a tendency for the sickly to give up their employment, thus
providing a more favorably selected group from the standpoint of
health m middle age and beyond than is found among those in the
earliei years ot industrial life. Proof of a process of the survival of
the fittest was afforded by the recent experience of a public service
company in Massachusetts, which was considering the advisability
of compulsory retirement of all employees over 70 years of age. It
was found from the sickness records of the company that the amount
46860°—31----- 7
https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
[8651
92
MONTHLY LABOR REVIEW
of sickness among its employees over the age of 70 compared very
favorably with that of younger age groups. _
.
The report states that if a process of selection of this sort is really
going on in industry, lower sickness rates among persons with the
longer service should be expected in those industries which are rela
tively free from health hazards. The records of a rubber manu
facturing company in Ohio shows that the frequency of disabling
sickness decreased markedly among persons with the longer employ
ment in the industry, the rate being more than four times as high
among those with less than three months’ service as among persons
having more than five years’ service. More complete records from
a public utility company in New England giving the sickness inci
dence by age groups shows definitely lower rates of sickness for both
males and females in each age group up to 55 and oyer for employees
having more than five years’ service as compared with those having
less than five years’ service.
In further proof of the theory that a process of selection is going on
through the self-elimination from an industry of those less adapted
physically to the particular work or working conditions involved, it
would be expected that the frequency rate of disabling sickness would
be higher among those who quit than among those who remained, pro
vided there was no health hazard which increased the sickness rate
immediately among those who remained. Data covering former
employees of a Portland cement plant and a group of anthracite coal
miners, both of which are dusty trades but in which the effects of the
dust inhalation are delayed, showed greater frequency of disability of
two days or longer from respiratory disease among those who quit
than among those who remained at work up to a period of about
eight years’ service. After that time the respiratory rates were more
nearly equal in the two groups, as the effect of the dust hazard began
to appear even in those relatively the most immune to its effects.
Occupational Health Hazards
R e c o r d s of disability from sickness are available for a few dusty
trades. The highest sickness frequency was found among a group
of gold miners, and the highest respiratory disease rate among the
granite cutters of Vermont. High frequency rates for respiratory
diseases were found in each one of the four dusty trades gold
mining, anthracite mining, granite cutting, and cement manufac
turing. A very definite excess in the incidence of influenza and grippe
was shown in all the four dusty trades. There was a high incidence
of rheumatism among both the gold and coal miners, and diseases
of the skin were unusually prevalent in all the dusty trades studied
except granite cutting.
_
.
In spite of the unusually favorable selection of workers m the steel
industry, due to the fact that the nature of the work demands only
the stronger types of men, pneumonia is unusually high in this
industry. In a study, as yet uncompleted, by the Public Health
Service, it is shown that cases of influenza and pneumonia are abnor
mally frequent in the blast-furnace, coke-oven, and open-hearth
departments, and in the open-hearth department, bronchitis as well.
In each of these departments there is a heat hazard together with
exposure to extremely wide variations in temperature,
https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
[866]
INDUSTRIAL ACCIDENTS AND SAFETY
A c c id e n t E x p e r ie n c e in t h e Iro n a n d S te e l I n d u s tr y t o t h e E nd
o f 1929
N the iron and steel industry as a whole the accident rates, both as
to frequency and severity, showed increases from 1928 to 1929—
being the first increase in frequency recorded since 1922 and the first
increase in severity since 1926. The frequency rate rose from 19.7
to 24.8 per 1,000,000 hours’ exposure and the severity rate from 2.2 to
2.6 per 1,000 hours’ exposure. Slight increases in severity rates from
1928 to 1929 were registered in the following departments: Bessemer
converters, open-hearth furnaces, foundries, heavy rolling mills, plate
mills, rod mills, tube mills, unclassified rolling mills, fabricating shops,
wire drawing, mechanical department, coke ovens, axle works, docks
and ore yards, cold rolling, and unclassified. No change took place in
the rate for sheet mills. One group of plants erecting structural steel
had an increased rate and the other group a decreased rate. The other
11 departments all had a lower severity rate in 1929 than in 1928.
I
Experience in a Selected Group of Companies
T a b l e 1 presents the experience of six companies which were among
the first to undertake active accident prevention and whose record
has been remarkable. As the table shows, from 1913 to 1928 there was
an almost constant decline in the rates. In 1929, however, slight incieases occurred in the rates for five of the plants; there was no change
m the frequency rate in Group A manufacturing miscellaneous steel
products, while a decrease in rates occurred in one plant—that manu
facturing wire and its products.
T a ble
FR E Q U E N C Y R A TES (P E R 1,000,000 H O U R S’ E X PO SU R E ) FOR A
SE L E C T E D GROUP OF PL A N T S, 1913 TO 1929, B Y PR ODUCT A N D YEAR
Year
Fabri
Wire
cated
and its
prod Sheets prod Tubes
ucts
ucts
Miscellaneous
steel products
Total
Group
A
Group
B
1913.
1914.
1915.
1910.
100.3
59.0
53.5
52. 1
61.6
47.2
37.3
34.0
59.3
46. 2
52.4
48.2
27.2
12.5
10. 8
12.4
70.9
50. 7
51. 9
67.6
41.3
27.6
23.0
28.2
60.3
43. 5
41. 5
44.4
1917.
1918.
1919.
1920.
51.3
38.2
32.8
35.3
33.9
25.9
25.8
22. 7
32.5
18.8
12. 5
10.2
9. 1
9. 1
8.9
51.3
42. 0
39.7
35.3
20.5
31.4
23.0
18.6
34.5
28.8
26. 1
22.9
1921.
1922.
1923.
1924.
28.4
33. 8
32. 6
33.4
17.5
16.9
17.2
10.3
7.5
7.9
7.9
6.2
6.1
7.1
7.0
5.1
15.8
14. 5
13.9
11.8
12.1
10.8
9.8
7.9
13.2
13.0
12. 7
10.2
1925-,
1926..
1927..
1928-,
1929..
27.4
24.3
18.0
19.7
21.4
11.4
9.4
8.4
8.7
10.7
4.2
3.9
3.5
4.0
3.1
4.0
3.6
2.5
2. 3
3.0
9.8
6.6
5. 1
5.3
5.3
3.7
3.8
2.7
2.4
3.2
8.2
6.8
5.3
5.6
6.2
https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
[867]
12.0
93
MONTHLY LABOR REV IEW
04
In order to get a complete view of the changes which have occurred
since the safety movement was inaugurated, it is necessary to consider
not only the frequency and severity in departments and production
groups but also the changes in the causes of accidents. ^As shown m
Table 2, a notable decline has occurred in the rate of accidents due to
each of the principal causes of accidents from 1913 to 1929.
T a b le
2 —F R E Q U E N C Y R A TE S (P E R 1,000,000 H O U R S’ E X PO SU R E ) IN A SE L E C T E D
* “ ^ O U P OF PL A N T S, 19 3 A N D 1929, BY C A U SE OF A C C ID E N T
Frequency rates
(per 1,000,000
hours’ exposure)
Cause of accident
1929
1913
Handling objects------------------------------Miscellaneous---- ------ . . . . . ----------------
7.3
2. 3
5.4
4. 5
26.7
12. 9
1.4
.2
.4
.7
2.7
.7
T otal__________________________
60.3
6.2
Machinery--------------------------------------Vehicles.— ------------------------------------Hot substances--------------------------------F alls
____
.
____ —
Table 3 shows the frequency rates in detail for the selected group
of plants since 1915 by cause of accident:
T a b l e 3 .— A C C ID E N T F R E Q U E N C Y R A TES (P E R 1,000,000 H O U R S’ E X PO SU R E ) FOR A
SE L E C T E D GROUP OF PL A N T S, 1915 TO 1929, B Y Y E A R A N D CALSE
Accident cause
I
1915 1916 1917 1918 1919 1920 1921 1922 1923 1924 1925 1926 1927 1928 1929
1.4
.5
0)
.i
1.8
.8
.6
.1
2.2
1.1
.8
.1
2.3
1.0
.7
0)
2.0
.8
.6
0)
1.6
.7
.5
0)
1.5
.7
1.3
.5
1.4
.6
0
(i)
0
.4
1.9
1.5
.2
.1
1.0
.8
.2
.3
1.2
1.0
.1
.2
1.3
1.1
.1
.2
1.2
.9
.1
.2
.9
.7
.1
.2
.9
.7
.1
.1
.8
.6
.1
.2 (0
.9
.8
.6
.6
.1
.1
.2
.1
1.2
.1
2.8 2.5
.2
.3
2.0 1.8
.6
.4
2.8 2.5
.1
.1
.2
.2
. 1 .1
.1
.5
1.2
.1
.8
.2
1.7
.1
.1
.1
.1
.1
.4
.6
1.1 1.2
. 1 0)
.7
.9
.2
.3
1. 5 1.4
.1 .1
.1
.1
.1
(0
.1
.5
.9
.1
.6
.2
1.4
.1
.1
0)
.1
.3
.6
«
.4
.i
i. i
0)
.i
0)
.1
.3
.5
.1
.4
.i
1. 0
.1
.i
0
.1
.1
0)
.4
(0
.4
0
.4
0)
.1
.7
(0
.i
0)
.i
.7
(0
(0
0
0
0
0
2.3
1.4
1.3
1.1
.9
.8
.6
.6
.
.1
5.5
.1
3.9
.1
3.4
.1
2. 9
0
2. 0
.1
2. 3
0)
8.4 6.1 5.5 5.0 4.4 2.6
.7
3. 1 2.1 1.7 1.7 1.3
.7
.6
.5
.9
1.4 1.2
2. 5 2.0 1.4 1.4 1. 1 .8
.1
.1 .1 .1 .1 .1
2.6 2.3
.7
.7
.4
.4
.8
.5
.1
.1
1.9
.5
.2
.3
0)
1.5
.4
.2
.3
0)
1.2
.3
.2
.3
0)
.9
.2
.1
.2
(0
.9
.3
.1
.2
0
1.2
.3
.2
.2
0
3. 1 2.2 1. 5 1.3 1.5
2.9 2.0 1.7 1.4 1.4
7.0 5.4 4. 6 4. 1 3.1
.1
. 1 . 1 . 1 .2
1.1
.8
1.3
.5
.6
.7
1.9
(0
.6
.8
1.8
.1
.3
.6
1. 6
(0
_2
.4
.5
1.1
0
.4
.5
.4
«
.3
.3
.6
0)
.3
.i
0
0
.i
,i
.i
.i
.
.3
.1
1.0
.2
(0
.8
,i
(0
.2
,i
0
.3
.i
(0
.4
c f
.4
Grand total____ 41.5 44.4 34.5 28.8 26.3 22.0 13.3 13.0 12.8 10.2
8.2
6.8 1 5.3
5.6
6.2
Machinery
_ ___ 4.9
W orking machines. 2.6
Caught in ____ 1.7
.1
Breakage.
M oving mate
rial in __ . .8
Cranes, etc__ ____ 2.3
Overhead___ 2.0
Locomotive__ .2
Other hoisting
apparatus__ . 1
Vehicles
. ______ 1.6
Hot su b sta n c e s.___ _ 3.7
.2
Electricity---- -----2.3
Hot metal
1.2
Hot water, e tc ...
3. 5
Falls of persons . .
From la d d e r s .___ . 1
.2
From scaffolds___
.1
Into openings---- . .
Due to insecure
footing. ______ 3.1
Falling material not
.7
otherwise specified
Handling------------------ 20.6
Dropped in han
7.6
dling __
___
2.6
Caught between.
1.4
Trucks___ _____
Lifting _ _ _ _ . 2.5
Flying from tools. _ . 1
Sharp points and
edges. ------------- 3.8
T ools.. _________ 2.6
6.5
Miscellaneous___
Asphyxiating gas.. . 1
Flying, not strik
.6
ing eye__ Flying," striking
eye____________ 1. 7
.4
Heat_ __________
Other___________ 3.7
5.4
2.6
1.7
.1
4.5 4.0 3.3 3.4
2.0 1.8 1.4 1. 5
1.2 1. 1 .9 1.0
. 1 . 1 . 1 .1
.8
2.8
2.5
.2
.7
2.5
2.2
.2
.1
.1
.1
1.7 1.7 1.3
4. 5 3.6 3.0
.3
.3
.4
3.0 2.5 2.1
.8
.6
1.1
3.7 3.2 2.8
. 1 .2
.1
.2
.2
.3
.2
.1
.3
3.1
2.6
2.3
.4
1.9
1.6
.2
2.1
.4
.4
.3
.6
21.5 15.7 12.8 11.7 10.4
.1
6.5
.1
5.8
1.1
.5
.5
.3
.3
.2
.1
.3
1.9
.4
4.1
1.6
.2
2. 2
1.3
.1
2.2
1.1
.1
1.5
.5
.1
.6
.4
.1
1.3
.2
1.6
.1
3.2
JLess than one-tenth of 1 per cent.
https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
.6
2.2
1.9
.2
[ 868 ]
(0
1.1
.1
.7
i
.4
.(
o
IN D U ST R IA L ACCIDENTS AND SAFETY
95
Experience in the Industry as a Whole
T he notable features of Table 4, which follows, is the uniformity
with which the rates decline from period to period. This table in
cludes all the data that it has been possible to assemble for the speci
fied departments. In order to secure a sufficient volume to give a
smooth curve a 5-year moving average has been applied to this group
of rates. The rates are higher than those of Tables 1 and 2 since
this group includes not only plants in which effective safety work
has been done, but also those which have not yet reached a similar
standard.
Contrasting the period 1907-1911 with that of 1925-1929, it is
seen that the frequency rates in the different departments have de
clined as follows: Blast furnaces from 76.1 to 22.0; Bessemer
converters from 101.5 to 13.7; open hearths from 84.2 to 22.6;
foundries from 60.1 to 59.5; heavy rolling mills from 61.0 to 12.1;
plate mills from 69.4 to 19.9; and sheet mills from 44.1 to 25.2. For
the industry as a whole the rate declined from 69.2 to 20.5.
The decline in severity rates from 1907-1911 to 1925-1929 has
been as follows: Blast furnaces from 10.6 to 4.2; Bessemer con
verters from 7.6 to 4.2; open hearths from 7.5 to 4.6; heavy rolling
mills from 4.4 to 2.1; plate_mills from 5.1 to 2.5; and sheet mills
from 3.1 to 1.6. The only increase took place in foundries, whose
severity rate rose from 2.7 to 3.0. For the whole industry the rate
declined from 5.0 to 2.6.
T able 4 .—A C C ID E N T R A TE S IN T H E IR O N A N D ST E E L IN D U S T R Y
M E N T A N D PE R IO D
BY D E P A R T
Frequency rates (per 1,000,000 hours’ exposure)
Period
1907-1911___________
1908-1912___________
1909-1913___________
1910-1914___________
1911-1915___________
1912-1916___________
1913-1917___________
1914-1918___________
1915-1919___________
1916-1920___________
1917-1921___________
1918-1922___________
1919-1923___________
1920-1924.__________
1921-1925___________
1922-1926___________
1923-1927___________
1924-1928___________
1925-1929___________
All de
part
ments
69. 2
65. 1
62. 1
59. 2
53.3
51. 3
48. 2
43. 6
41. 5
41. 1
39. 5
36. 5
34.9
33.6
31. 3
29.9
24. 7
27.4
20. 5
Blast Bessemer
Open
con
furnaces verters
hearths
76.1
67. 7
62. 4
62.3
50.3
47.8
41.4
40. 5
39.0
38.0
36. 3
34. 0
32. 9
30. 7
29.0
28. 7
24.6
27. 1
22.0
101. 5
79. 5
92.3
89. 8
65. 0
76. 1
68.3
60. 7
57. 7
53. 1
47. 0
39.9
30. 5
24. 9
17.0
16. 7
13. 5
15. 3
13. 7
84.2
79.5
78. 6
75.0
67. 6
64.8
58. 4
53.5
50. 5
50. 2
44.8
41.3
33. 0
32. 9
29.9
28. 3
22.9
24. 7
22.6
Foun
dries
Heavy
rolling
mills
60.1
01.5
65.1
63. 6
59.3
57.8
60. 4
57.0
61.0
61.0
63. 1
60.4
61. 7
62.7
63. 1
62.8
55.1
59.8
59. 5
Plate
mills
Sheet
mills
61.0
57.0
51. 7
46. 1
39. 4
37.3
32. 1
31.1
32.4
31.4
29.9
27.6
23.8
21. 2
18. 1
16. 6
13. 2
14. 4
12.1
69.4
60. 8
55. 9
49. 9
44.7
41. 5
36. 6
39.8
39. 2
38.4
37. 6
36. 7
31. 4
29. 4
26. 8
25.6
19.2
21.8
19.9
44.1
47. 9
49.1
51.1
48.1
47. 4
41.3
35.8
32.7
33. 7
33. 4
35. 2
37. 2
35. 1
33. 2
30.6
22.9
26. 7
25.2
4.4
4.2
4.0
3.6
3.4
3.5
3.6
3.4
3. 9
3.5
5.1
4.1
3.8
3.9
3.1
2.8
2.6
2. 6
2. 5
2.6
3.1
2.8
3.0
2.0
2.2
2.3
2.1
1. 8
1. 5
1.8
Severity rates (per 1,000 hours’ exposure)
1907-1911___________
1908-1912___________
1909-1913___________
1910-1914___________
1911-1915___________
1912-1916___________
1913-1917___________
1914-1918___________
1915-1919>__________
1916-1920___________
5.0
4. 3
4. 4
4. 1
3.6
3.7
3.7
3.5
3.6
3. 5
https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
10. 6
8.8
8.3
7.0
6. 2
5.8
5.6
5.4
5.8
5. 7
7.6
7.4
6.7
6.4
5.3
6.1
7.1
7.3
6.9
6.3
[8 6 9 ]
7.5
6. 6
6.8
6.6
5.8
5.5
5. 1
5.8
6. 5
6.3
2.7
3.1
3.5
3.6
3.3
3.1
3.3
3.2
3. 4
3. 2
96
MONTHLY LABOR R EV IEW
T a b l e 4 —A C C ID E N T R A T E S IN T H E IRO N A N D .STEEL IN D U S T R Y , BY D E P A R T
M E N T A N D P E R IO D —Continued
Severity rates (per 1,000 hours’ exposure)— C o n tin u ed
All de
part
ments
Period
1917-1921___________
1918-1922___________
1919-1923
_______
1920-1924___________
1921-1925___________
1922-1926___________
1923-1927___________
1924-1928___________
1925-1929___________
Bessemer
Blast
Open
con
furnaces verters
hearths
3.4
3.1
3.0
2.8
2.7
2.8
2.4
2. 7
2.6
5. 7
5. 5
5.0
4.5
4.6
4.7
4. 1
4.4
4. 2
5.4
4. 2
3. 2
2.6
3.2
4.0
3.7
4. 1
4. 2
5.8
5.3
4. 2
4.2
4.0
4.6
4.3
4.5
4.6
Foun
dries
H eavy
rolling
mills
3.2
2.7
2.7
2.8
3.1
3.2
2.9
3.0
3.0
Plate
mills
3.3
2.9
2. 4
2.3
2.6
2. 6
2.4
2.4
2. 1
2. 5
2. 5
2. 4
2.4
2.6
2.6
2.2
2.4
2.5
Sheet
mills
1. 7
1. 8
19
2. 1
1.9
1. 8
1. 0
1. 7
1.6
Table 5 gives summary data for the industry and for each depart
ment, the frequency and severity rates for 1929 and for the first year
for which data were collected:
T a b l e 5.—C H ANGES IN FR E Q U E N C Y A N D SE V E R IT Y R A TE S SIN C E FIR ST Y E A R D A T A
W E R E C O L LE C T ED , B Y D E P A R T M E N T A N D YEAR
Department and year
The industry:
1907 _________________
1929 __________________
Blast furnaces:
1908___________________
1929___________________
Bessemer converters:
1907___________________
1929............ ................ ...........
Open hearths:
1907___________________
1929___________________
Foundries:
1907___________________
1929___________________
Bar mills:
1915___________________
1929___________________
Heavy rolling mills:
1907___________________
1929___________________
Plate mills:
1907___________________
1929___________________
Puddling mills:
1917-__________________
1929___________________
Rod mills:
1915____________________
1929___________________
Sheet mills:
1907____________________
1929____________________
Tube mills:
1907___________________
1929____________________
Unclassified rolling mills:
1910__ _______________
1929____________________
Fabricating shops:
1907____________________
1929____________________
Forge shops:
1917____________________
1929___________________
Fre
Severity
quency
rates
rates (per (per
1,000
1,000,000
hours’
hours’
exposure) exposure)
80.8
24. 8
7.2
2. 6
101. 3
19.2
16.0
2. 5
134.0
3.3
5.4
2.9
104. 5
19.1
14.4
4.4
65.0
58. 5
3.4
3. 5
60.3
20.1
1.9
1. 7
65. 3
8.9
4.8
2.2
113.7
17.8
9.1
2. 6
47. 1
.3
1. 7
.1
38. 6
21.0
1. 2
4.0
44.8
23.1
4.1
1.8
96.4
18. 5
3.1
1.8
113. 7
23.9
5. 0
2. 4
94.4
25. 9
9. 5
3. 3
80. 4
27.9
4 4
Department and year
Wire drawing:
1910______
1929
Electrical department:
1910___________________
1929
Mechanical department:
1908____________________
1929
Powerhouses:
1917___________________
1929
Yards:
1907___________________
1929
Coke ovens:
1915___________________
1929
Erection of structural steel:
1915____________________
....
/
l
Axle works:
1915 _
1929
Car wheels:
1915
1929
Docks and ore yards:
1915
1929
Woven-wire fence:
1915
1929
N ails and staples:
1915
1929 _
H ot mills:
1923
1929
Cold rolling
1926
1929
Unclassified:
1915
1929___________________
1 Data cover 907 employees.
https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
Fre
quency Severity
rates
rates (per (per
1,000
1,000,000 hours’
hours’
exposure) exposure)
2 Data cover 985 employees.
[870]
77. 6
5. 8
4.3
3 9
62. 7
5. 8
4.2
3 9
91. 3
15. 6
6. 6
2. 7
16.4
5. 0
4.4
66. 6
11. 4
7. 5
2. 7
27. 1
6. 0
3.3
2.2
110.4
i 79. 4
2 62. 2
25.4
' 29. 4
2 24. 5
38 3
56.4
3 4
12
22. 3
72. 1
10
2.8
26.1
8. 9
2 4
59
65. 2
10 5
1 7
41 8
6.1
3.3
43 5
11 7
1. 5
8
38 7
30. 5
1 2
2.9
43. 3
23.0
2 7
2.0
[
IN D U S T R IA L A C C ID E N T S AND SA FE T Y
97
Accidents and Accident Rates, by Year and Period
. Table 6 gives detailed data showing, for each department and for the
industry, the frequency and severity rates in each year for which
data have been collected. The reason for the reputation for hazard
borne by the blast-furnace department is shown by the high rates in
this department; during the 22-year period covered by the figures,
however, an enormous decrease in both frequency and severity rates
has taken place. The Bessemer converter department started with
li equency rates even higher than those of the blast-furnace departhut by 1929 had reduced these to considerably below those
ot the latter department; the reduction in severity has not been so
great.
At the present time the open-hearth process furnishes much the
largest tonnage of steel. Although its accident rates have declined
steadily, both frequency and severity rates are still higher than those
of most of the other departments. Foundries have shown an irregu
lar series of rates, with practically no material improvement. The
bar mills are usually hand operated and, while the severity rate is not
great, there are a good many minor accidents.
A consistent and remarkable decline has been shown in the rates
for both the heavy rolling mills and the tube mills, but plate mills
take the lead among the departments in this respect. The unclassified
rolling mills include a very miscellaneous group. Whatever could
not be otherwise classified is placed here. This grouping is of some
importance, since it shows that the general tendency toward declining
rates is not confined to special types but is quite uniformly distributed!
Fabricating shops are particularly subject to machine accidents,
but have nevertheless shown a rapid decline in rates. The frequency
rates in the wire-drawing shops show notable declines, but severity
remains almost constant. The power houses including boilers have
always had a rather low rate except for an occasional explosion, and
the decline in rates is therefore less conspicuous than in some other
departments. The exposure in the erection of structural steel is not
so large as could be desired, but it shows very clearly that this is highly
hazardous and has not up to the present time improved very materially.
T a b l e 6 .—A C C ID E N T S A N D A C C ID E N T B A T E S IN T H E IB O N A N D ST E E L IN D U S T B Y
1907 TO 1929, B Y D E P A B T M E N T A N D Y E AR
The industry
Frequency rates (per
1,000,000 hours’ exposure)
Number of cases
Year
1907_______
1910______
1911____ _
1912______
1913______
1914 _____
1915 . . . .
1916______
1917_______
Full-year
workers
27, 632
202,157
231, 544
300, 992
319, 919
256, 299
116, 224
166, 646
410, 852
Per Tem
ma
Death nent porary
disa
disa bility
bility
61
106
327
848
204
931
348 1,241
426 1, 200
219
860
87
372
159
728
523 1,268
https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
6, 530
44, 108
34, 676
54, 575
55, 556
37, 390
13,481
20, 655
57, 094
Total
Per
ma
Death nent
disa
bility
6, 697
45, 283
35,811
56, 164
57, 182
38, 469
13, 940
21, 542
58,>, OOÜ
885 J]
[871]
0. 7
.5
.3
.4
.4
.3
.2
.3
•4
1. 3
1. 4
1. 3
1. 4
1. 3
1. 1
1. 1
1. 4
1. 0
Severity rates (per 1,000
hours’ exposure)
Tem
Per Tem
po
ma po
rary To
Death nent rary To
tal
disa
disa disa tal
bility
bility bility
78. 8
72 7
49, 9
60 4
57. 9
48. 6
38. 7
41. 3
46. 3
80. 8
74. 7
51. 5
62. 2
59. 6
50. 0
40 0
43. 0
47. 7 j
4. 4
3. 2
1. 8
2. 3
2. 7
1. 7
1. 5
1. 9
2. 5
1. 7
1. 2
1. 1
1. 1
.9
.9
.7
1. 0
.9
1.1
.8
.6
.8
.7
.6
.5
.6
.6
7. 2
5. 2
3. 5
4. 2
4. 3
3 2
2. 7
3. 5
4. 0
M O N TH LY LA BO R R E V IE W
98
T a b le 6 .—A C C ID E N T S A N D A C C ID E N T R ATES IN T H E IR O N A N D ST E EL IN D U S T R Y ,
1907 TO 1929, B Y D E P A R T M E N T A N D Y E A R —Continued
T h e i n d u s t r y — C o n tin u e d
Frequency rates (per
1,000,000 hours’ expo
sure)
Number of cases
Year
Full-year
workers
1918_______
1919_______
1920_______
1921_______
1922_______
1923............
1924_______
1925_______
1926_______
1927_______
1928_______
1929.............
474, 435
377, 549
442, 685
237, 094
335, 909
434, 693
389, 438
443, 158
436, 692
395, 707
418, 163
509, 700
Ter- Tem
maDeath nent. porary
disa
disa bility
bility
543
419
327
156
236
314
312
277
322
245
229
304
1, 253
848
1,084
527
878
1, 188
1, 133
1, 091
1, 202
1,033
993
1, 781
Per
ma
Total Death nent
disa
bility
54, 293 56, 089
41, 009 42, 276
49, 482 50, 893
21, 279 21, 962
32, 120 33, 234
41, 766 43, 268
34, 481 35, 920
36, 404 37, 772
31, 667 33, 230
22, 060 23, 338
23, 434 24, 656
35, 836 37, 921
0.4
.4
.2
.2
.2
.2
.3
.2
.2
.2
.2
.2
Severity rates (per 1,000
• hours’ exposure)
Per Tem
Tem
ma po
po
Death nent rary To
rary To
tal
disa disa
disa tal
bility bility
bility
0.9
1. 0
.8
.7
.9
.9
1. 0
.8
.9
.9
.8
1. 2
38. 1
40. 2
37. 3
29. 0
31. 9
32. 1
29. 5
27. 3
24. 2
18. 6
18. 7
23. 4
39. 4
41. 6
38. 3
30. 8
33. 0
33. 2
30. 8
28. 3
25. 3
19. 7
19. 7
24. 8
2.3
2. 2
1. 5
1.3
1.4
1.4
1. 6
1. 2
1. 7
1. 2
1. 1
1.2
0.8
.8
.8
.7
.8
.8
.9
.8
.8
.8
.8
1.0
0. 5 3. 6
.6 3. 6
.4 2 7
. 5 2. 5
.5 2 7
.5 2 7
. 5 3. 0
.4 2 5
.4 2. 9
.3 2. 3
.4 2. 2
.4 2.6
2.3
1. 2
.8
1. 1
.8
1.0
.7
1.3
.9
.6
.7
.5
.5
.7
.8
.9
.7
.8
.8
.7
.7
97. 1
85. 5
51. 3
58. 8
58. 1
49. 4
30. 5
39. 4
40. 9
35. 0
38. 0
30. 2
25. 0
29. 4
30. 3
29. 7
23. 1
24. 2
21. 4
20. 2
18. 2
101.3
87.9
52. 9
60. 8
59. 8
51. 0
31.8
41. 2
42. 5
36. 4
39.7
31. 1
26. 0
30. 8
31.7
31. 3
24. 3
25. 5
22. 8
21. 3
19. 2
11. 5
6.9
4.8
5. 4
5. 3
3. 5
3. 5
3. 1
4.4
4.9
5. 7
2.7
3.0
4. 2
3. 6
4. 0
3.1
3. 2
3.4
2. 1
1. 6
2. 7
1. 7
.9
1. 0
1. 0
1. 0
.6
.9
.9
.8
1.0
.9
.5
.4
.1
1. 1
.9
.8
.7
.9
.6
1.8
1. 0
.8
.8
.9
.7
.4
.6
.5
.5
.5
.4
.4
.5
.5
.5
.4
.5
.4
.4
.3
16. 0
9. 6
6. 5
7. 2
7. 2
132.0
127. 7
79. 9
96. 7
77. 9
51. 1
52. 1
69. 5
66. 6
49. 7
43. 2
36. 2
24. 4
16. 3
20. 1
18. 5
7. 9
13. 1
6. 0
7. 1
2. 6
134.0
130. 2
81. 9
99. 1
80. 7
53. 3
54. 5
73. 4
68. 9
51. 4
44. 8
36.8
25. 4
17. 8
21. 5
19.7
9. 2
14. 8
6. 8
7. 8
3.3
2. 1
7.9
2.3
2.8
4. 6
2. 2
1. 3
6.4
6.7
4.4
4.3
1.4
2.3
.8
2. 0
2.8
3.7
2. 7
1.8
1. 6
2.7
0.9
.9
1. 1
1. 0
1. 2
1. 2
1. 4
2. 1
1.3
1.0
.5
.3
.4
.5
.5
.6
.7
4. 7
.3
.2
.1
2. 4
1. 6
1. 1
1. 5
1. 2
.9
.8
1. 2
1. 2
.8
.9
.6
.4
.3
5.4
10.4
4. 5
5. 3
7.0
4.3
3. 5
9. 7
9. 2
B la s t fu r n a c e s
19081910. __
1911.
1912
191319141915191619171918- ___
1919- ___
192P- __
1921...
1922___
19231924 ___
192519261927 _ ___
___
____
1,566
19,389
21,479
27,154
31,988
26, 572
10, 721
14, 905
36, 202
41,449
32,889
35,470
15,486
17,933
29| 698
25, 268
25,819
25,893
22,870
21,697
22,779
9
68
52
73
86
45
19
23
79
102
94
47
23
38
53
50
40
42
39
23
18
11
68
54
87
80
77
23
57
93
72
67
58
24
35
68
66
51
63
58
47
45
456
4,971
3,303
4,790
4,749
3,935
981
1,763
4,430
4,358
3,745
3,214
1,160
1, 586
2, 702
2, 248
1,789
1,881
1,489
1,314
1,246
476
5,107
3,409
4,950
4,945
4,057
1,023
1,843
4,612
4, 532
3,906
3, 319
1,207
1, 659
2,823
2, 364
1,880
1,986
1,586
1,384
1,309
1.9
1.2
.8
.9
.9
.6
.6
.5
.7
.8
1.0
.4
.5
.7
.6
.7
.5
.5
.6
.4
.3
6. 2
4. 5
4. 6
5.8
6. 2
7. 2
4. 0
3.9
5. 1
4. 2
5. 6
4. 4
4. 5
4. 5
3.3
2.5
B e sse m e r converters
1907_______
1910_______
1911_______
1912_______
1913_______
1914_______
1915_______
1916_______
1917_______
1918_______
1919_______
1920_______
1921_______
1922_______
1923_______
1924_______
1925_______
1926_______
1927_______
1928_______
1929_______
967
5,070
5,155
6, 521
6,885
4,470
3,160
4,070
5,979
5,881
6,555
6,907
3,440
4,778
6,080
4,943
4,834
4, 526
4,344
3,803
3,687
https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
1
20
6
9
16
6
2
13
20
13
14
5
4
2
6
7
9
6
4
3
5
5
18
24
37
42
25
21
34
21
18
18
9
6
8
20
10
10
19
7
5
2
383
1,943
1, 237
1.892
1,610
685
494
848
1,194
877
849
750
252
233
367
274
115
178
78
81
29
389
1,981
1, 267
1,938
1,668
716
517
894
1,235
908
881
764
262
243
393
291
134
203
89
89
36
[872 J
1.7
0.3
1. 2
1.3
1. 6
.4
.5
1. 9
2. 0
.8
1. 8
.4
2. 2
.2
1.1
2. 8
1. 2
1.1
1.0
.7
.7
.9
.4
.2
.4
.6
.1
.6
1.1
.3
.5 ' .7
.7
.6
1. 3
.4
.5
.3
.4
.3
.2
.5
6. 2
5.7
2.3
3. 1
1. 6
3. 0
. 3 3.7
. 2 4. 6
. 3 7. 7
. 2 2.3
.3 2. 0
. 1 2.9
¿5
99
IN D U S T R IA L A C C ID E N T S A N T) S A F E T Y
T a b l e 6 .—A C C ID E N T S A N D A C C ID E N T R A T E S IN*THE IR O N A N D S T E E L IN D U S T R Y ,
1907 TO 1929, B Y D E P A R T M E N T A N D Y E AR —Continued
Open-hearth furnaces
Frequency rates (per
1,000,000 hours’ exposure)
Number of cases
Year
1907_______
1910_______
1911 ______
1912_______
1913_______
1914_______
1915_______
1916_______
1917_______
1918_______
1919_______
1920_______
1921_______
1922_______
1923_______
1924_______
1925_______
1926_______
1927_______
1928_______
1929_______
Full-year
workers
2,987
9, 739
10,718
17,355
20, 604
12, 877
5, 969
9, 654
21,457
26,410
22, 685
28, 823
12, 783
19, 805
24, 917
21, 493
22, 837
22, 727
19,143
23, 083
24,067
Per Tem
ma
Death nent porary
disa
disa bility
bility
14
29
18
47
35
14
8
12
47
71
53
43
9
22
42
32
25
51
24
24
37
14
53
45
99
95
41
20
37
86
103
71
70
21
46
74
67
73
67
60
64
78
908
3,028
1,890
4,039
4,368
2,484
832
1,458
3,187
3,983
3,103
3, 164
1,082
1,936
2,145
1,864
1,769
1,322
908
968
1,263
Per
ma
Total Death nent
disa
bility
936
3,110
1,953
4, 185
4, 498
2, 539
860
1,507
3,320
4,157
3, 227
3,277
1,112
2, 004
2, 261
1, 963
1,867
1,440
992
1,056
1,378
1.6
1.0
.6
.9
.6
.4
.4
.4
.7
.9
.8
.5
.2
.4
.6
.5
.4
.8
.4
.4
. .5
1.6
1. 8
1. 4
1.9
1. 5
Severity rates (per 1,000
hours’ exposure)
Tem
Per Tem
po
ma po
Death nent rary To
rary To
disa tal
disa disa tal
bility
bility bility
1.0
.9
1.1
101.3
103. 6
58. 8
77. 6
70. 7
64. 3
46. 5
50. 3
49. 5
50. 3
45. 6
37. 0
28. 2
32. 6
28. 6
28. 9
25. 8
20. 0
15. 8
14. 0
17. 5
104.5
106.4
60.8
80. 4
72. 8
65.8
48. 0
52. 0
51. 5
52. 5
47. 4
38.3
29.0
33.8
30. 2
30.4
27.3
21.8
17. 2
15.3
19. 1
9.3
6. 0
3.4
5. 3
3. 4
2. 2
2.7
2.5
4.4
5.4
4.7
3.0
1.4
2. 2
3.4
3. 0
2.2
4.6
2. 5
2. 1
3.1
4.0
2.4
1.1
1. 9
1. 4
1. 5
.9
.8
1.2
1.4
1.3
.8
.4
.9
1.1
.9
1.0
1.2
1.4
1.1
1.5
1. 4
1.9
1.6
1. 2
.5
1.6
1.1
1.1
.9
.9
.7
.9
1.2
1.3
1.2
1.4
1.1
1. 2
1.6
63. 5
51. 6
48. 6
64. 6
70. 9
64. 9
30. 0
39. 3
71. 4
56. 8
55. 7
63. 2
59. 7
60. 5
61.8
60. 9
64. 5
59. 0
51. 5
44. 5
56.7
65.0
53. 2
50.4
66.8
72. 8
66. 4
30. 5
41. 2
73.0
58. 1
56. 8
64. 2
60. 6
61. 6
63. 2
62. 4
65. 9
60. 6
52. 8
45. 9
58. 5
2. 1
.8
2.7
2.1
1. 7
1.6
0. 3
1.0
1.0
1.5
1.2
1.0
.2
.6
1.0
1.0
.8
.8
.7
.9
.8
1.1
1.3
1.1
1.0
.9
1.4
1.0
.6
.6
.8
.8
.7
.4
.7
.9
.7
.7
.8
.8
.7
.8
.8
.9
.9
.7
.1
.8
3.4
2. 4
4.3
4.4
3.7
3.3
.6
2.9
4. 7
3.2
2. 7
2.3
2.7
2.7
3.0
3.0
3. 7
3.3
2.9
1.8
3. 5
0.7
1.2
1.5
1.0
.5
.4
.9
.9
1.4
.6
59. 5
85. 8
86. 5
43. 9
49. 9
44. 8
39. 8
34. 6
36. 4
23. 2
24. 2
16. 0
30. 0
58. 6
19. 2
60.3
87.4
88. 4
45. 2
50. 5
45. 3
40. 7
36. 1
37. 8
24. 0
25. 4
17. 2
31. 1
61. 2
20.1
0.6
.5
1.0
.7
.5
.2
1.0
.8
.7
.2
.9
.4
1.3
1.2
.2
0.7
1.1
1.0
.7
.7
.5
.6
.5
.6
.5
.4
.3
.4
.9
.4
1.9
4. 2
4.0
3.5
1.6
1. 2
1.6
5.0
1.3
1.7
2.2
1.4
1.7
4.7
1. 7
1.1
1.1
1.3
1.3
1.3
1. 0
.8
.6
.8
1.0
1. 0
1. 1
1.0
1.1
.9
1.1 14.4
1.4 9.8
.9 5r4
1.0 8.2
1. 0 5.8
.8 4. 5
.6 4. 2
.9 4.2
.8 6.4
1.1 7.9
. 8 6. 8
.5 4.3
.5 2.3
.5 3. 6
.7 5. 2
.5 4.4
.5 3.7
.5 6.3
.4 4.3
.3 3. 4
.4 4. 4
Foundries
1907_______
1910_______
1911______
1912_______
1913_______
1914______
1915
1916_______
1917_______
1918_______
1919_______
1920_______
1921_______
1922_______
1923______
1924_______
1925_______
1926_______
1927_______
1928_______
1929_______
939
16,885
13,499
23, 294
24, 605
17, 634
1, 309
L 231
31,805
32,181
24, 220
35, 300
15, 338
22, 770
38, 660
37, 325
35, 570
41, 501
31,136
34, 838
51, 930
1
7
18
23
22
14
1
45
23
15
13
9
12
26
21
27
26
18
15
26
3
78
57
135
118
61
2
6
101
106
62
97
34
59
126
143
128
178
106
130
248
179
2,615
1,970
4, 512
5, 236
3,432
118
145
6,810
5,482
4, 048
6, 688
2, 756
4,134
7,171
6, 820
6, 877
7, 376
4, 769
4, 654
8, 836
183
2. 700
2, 045
4, 670
5, 376
3,507
120
152
6, 956
5, 611
4,125
6, 798
2, 799
4,205
7,323
6,984
7,032
7, 580
4, 893
4, 799
9,151
0.4
.1
.4
.3
.3
.3
.3
.5
.2
.2
.1
.2
.2
.2
.2
.3
.2
.2
.1
.2
1.6
2.8
1.5
1.2
.7
1.2
1.1
1.4
1.1
1.5
1.3
1.2
.9
1.3
Bar mills
1915_______
1916_______
1917_______
1918_______
1919- _____
1920. _____
]921
1922_______
1923
1924_______
1925_______
1926_______
1927
1928_______
1929_______
3,232
3,042
7,472
5,734
4,601
3, 880
1,912
3i 780
4,003
4 ,093
4,471
3, 042
2, 387
3,151
3, 727
https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
1
4
8
6
1
1
7
2
2
1
4
2
7
11
34
18
7
5
5
10
17
7
13
10
8
21
8
577
783
1, 940
756
689
525
228
392
443
285
324
146
215
554
215
585
798
1,982
780
697
531
233
409
460
294
339
157
223
579
225
[873]
0.1
.4
.4
.3
.1
.1
.6
.2
.2
.1
.4
.2
1.0
1. 1
1. 1
2. 2
.7
0.6
2.6
2.1
2.1
.4
.5
3. 7
1.0
.9
.7
2.5
1.1
100
MONTHLY LABOR REVIEW
T a b l e 6 —A C C ID E N T S A N D A C C ID E N T R A TE S IN T H E IR O N A N D S T E E L IN D U S T R Y ,
1907 TO 1929, B Y D E P A R T M E N T A N D Y E A R —Continued
Heavy rolling mills
Frequency rates (per
1,000,000 hours’ expo
sure)
Number of cases
Year
1907_______
1910_______
1911_______
1912_______
1913_______
1914______
1915_______
1916_______
1917_______
1918_______
1919_______
1920_______
1921_______
1922_______
1923_______
1924_______
1925_______
1926_______
19271928_______
1929_______
Full-year
workers
4, 556
9,442
12, 409
16, 258
17, 569
11,985
7,148
10,076
20, 530
19, 807
17, 605
20, 787
9,000
14, 574
16, 602
13,162
16, 553
14, 553
18,171
18, 257
21, 240
Per Tem
ma
Death nent porary
disa
disa bility
bility
8
19
9
20
16
10
10
7
30
24
20
12
3
9
8
18
13
7
13
5
8
10
57
48
41
60
55
24
44
87
67
53
34
15
56
36
39
50
38
41
38
87
874
2,167
1,636
2,395
1,910
899
596
959
1,784
1,900
1,711
1,638
485
752
882
789
747
417
494
451
471
Total
Per
ma
Death nent
disa
bility
892
2, 243
1,693
2, 456
1,986
964
630
1,010
1,901
1,991
1,784
1,684
503
817
926
846
810
462
548
494
566
0.6
.7
.2
.4
.3
.3
.5
.2
.5
.4
.4
.2
.1
.2
.2
.5
.3
.2
.2
.1
.1
Severity rates (per 1,000
hours’ exposure)
Per Tem
Tem
ma po
po
o Death nent rary To
rary Ttal
disa disa tal
disa
bility bility
bility
0. 7
2.0
1.3
.8
1.1
1. 5
1.1
1.5
1. 4
1. 1
1.0
.5
.5
1. 3
.7
1.0
1.0
.9
.8
.7
1.4
610
76. 5
43. 9
49.1
36. 2
25. 0
27. 8
31. 7
29. 0
32.0
32. 4
26. 3
16. 5
17. 2
17. 7
20. 0
15. 0
9. 5
9. 0
8. 2
7.4
65. 3
79. 2
45. 4
50.3
37.6
26.8
29. 4
33.4
30.9
33. 5
33.8
27.0
17. 1
18. 7
18.6
21. 5
16.3
10. 6
10.0
9.0
8.9
3. 5
4.0
1.4
2.3
1.7
1.5
2.8
1.4
2.9
2.4
2.3
1.2
.6
1.2
1.0
2.7
1.6
1.0
1.4
.6
.8
0.3
1. 5
.9
.9
.6
1.0
1.0
1.3
1.0
.9
1.1
.4
.3
.9
.8
.8
1.1
.8
.7
.7
1. 2
1.0
1.0
.7
.7
.6
.4
.3
.5
.5
.5
.5
.4
.3
.4
.3
.4
.3
.2
.3
.3
.2
4.8
6. 5
3.0
3.9
2. 9
2.9
4.1
3. 2
4. 4
3.8
3.9
2.0
1. 2
2. 5
2.1
3.9
3. 0
2. 0
2.4
1.5
2. 2
2. 1
2.7
1. 1
1.6
1.5
1.2
1. 4
1. 1
1. 1
.7
.7
.6
.5
1.4
.9
.9
.9
1.1
7
.7
1.1
110.9
61. 1
44.8
58. 0
44. 5
30. 6
19. 3
31.0
37.7
49. 9
35.0
32. 1
23. 1
31. 2
25. 3
26. 1
21. 5
18. 1
11. 5
13. 3
16.5
113.7
64.5
46. 3
59.7
46.2
32.0
20. 9
32. 3
39.0
50.9
36.0
33.0
23.8
32. 7
26.4
27. 1
22. 8
19.4
12.4
14. 1
17.8
4. 2
4.3
2.3
.8
1.1
1.1
1.0
1.3
1.2
1.7
1. 5
1.5
1.3
.6
1. 1
.9
2. 1
1.1
1.2
.5
1.3
3.7
1.6
1.0
2.0
1.2
1.0
.6
.7
.9
.6
.5
.6
.3
.9
1.2
.6
1.2
1.0
.5
.7
.9
1.2
.7
.6
.8
.6
.5
.3
.5
.5
.7
.5
.4
.4
.5
.4
.5
.4
.4
.2
.3
.4
9.1
6. 6
3.9
3.6
2.9
2.6
1. 9
2.5
2.6
3.0
2. 5
2.5
2.0
2.0
2.7
2.6
3.7
2.5
1.9
1.4
2.6
46.2 47.1
45. 5 46. 4
28.8 29.0
40. 3 42.2
57. 6 58.2
63. 9 65. 5
49. 9 51.7
42. 5 43. 7
38. 8 38. 8
39. 7 40. 3
.3
.3
0.5
2.2
1.2
0.6
.4
.1
.8
1. 1
1.2
2.8
1.5
1.8
.1
0.6
.6
.4
.6
1.0
1.2
.9
.8
.9
1.0
.1
1.7
3.2
.5
2.4
2. 1
2.4
3. 7
3. 5
.9
2.9
.1
Plate mills
1907_______
1910_______
1911_______
1912_______
1913_______
1914_______
1915_______
1916_______
1917_______
1918_______
1919_______
1920_______
1921_______
1922_______
1923_______
1924_______
1925
1926_______
1927 ______
1928_______
1929_______
1,915
3,287
4,390
5,128
5,430
3,476
42, 086
4, 681
6,764
9, 650
11,892
11,928
4, 580
6,198
8, 731
6,454
5, 734
i , 306
8,550
7,997
10,457
4
7
5
2
3
2
1
3
4
8
9
9
3
2
5
3
6
4
5
2
7
12
27
15
25
25
13
9
15
22
19
24
23
7
26
24
18
15
25
19
17
35
637
602
590
893
725
319
121
436
766
1,446
1, 247
1,147
318
581
662
506
370
396
295
319
517
653
636
610
920
753
334
131
454
792
1,473
1, 280
1,179
328
609
691
527
391
425
319
338
559
0.7
.7
.4
.1
.2
.2
.2
.2
.2
.3
.3
.3
.2
.1
.2
.2
.4
.2
.2
.1
.2
Puddling mills
1917- _____
1918- _____
1919
1920_______
1923
1924
1925
1926_______
1927
1928_______
1999
4,129
2,712
1, 619
2,007
1, 620
814
1,108
1, 591
1,040
1,116
504
https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
1
3
1
10
4
1
10
3
4
6
5
1
1
1
572
370
140
243
280
156
166
204
121
133
52
583
377
141
254
283
160
172
210
121
135
52
[874]
.2
0.8
.5
.2
1.7
.6
1.6
1.8
1.0
.3
.3
0.1
.4
.2
1.0
101
INDUSTRIAL ACCIDENTS AND SAFETY
T a&LB 6.—a c c id e n t s a n d a c c id e n t r a t e s i n t h e ir o n a n d s t e e l in d u s t r y ,
1907 TO 1929, B Y D E P A R T M E N T A N D Y E A R —Continued
Rod mills
Frequency rates (per
1,000,000 hours’ exposure)
Number of cases
Year
1915_______
1916_______
1917______
1918_______
1919_______
1920_______
1921_______
1922_______
1923_______
1924_______
1925_______
1926_______
1927 _____
1928_______
1929_______
Full-year
workers
Per Tem
ma
Death nent porary
disa
disa bility
bility
2,062
-2,493
4. 951
3,249
2,463
3, 729
2,099
2; 645
3, 224
2,828
2,907
2,569
2,433
2,582
2,336
7
5
2
1
1
1
1
2
2
1
1
1
10
16
23
11
10
9
6
5
10
7
7
8
1
5
17
229
259
699
350
184
344
126
196
189
127
146
119
84
93
130
Total
Per
ma
Death nent
disa
bility
239
275
729
366
196
354
132
202
200
135
155
129
86
99
148
0.5
.5
.3
.1
.1
.1
.1
.2
.3
.1
.1
.1
Severity rates (per 1,000
hours’ exposure)
Tem
Per Tem
po
ma po
Death
rary To
nent
rary To
disa tal
disa disa tal
bility
bility bility
16
2. 1
1.5
1.1
1.4
.8
1. 0
.6
1. 1
.8
.8
1.0
.1
.7
2.4
37 0
34 6
47. 1
35. 9
24. 9
30. 7
20. 0
24. 7
20. 2
15. 0
16. 7
15. 5
11. 6
12. 0
18.5
38 fi
36 7
49.1
37.5
26. 6
31.6
21 0
25.4
21. 4
15. 9
17. 7
16. 8
11. 8
12.8
21.0
0 7
19
1.4
1.0
1.4
.5
7
.5
1.3
.7
1.0
.7
.1
.9
2.6
0 F
J5
.5
.6 .
.5
.4
4. 7
4.7
3.5
1.4
.8
.6
.7
1.4
1.6
.8
.8
.9
.0
.3
.4
.3
.4
.3
.4
.5
1.8
2.2
1.8
2.7
2.7
1.2
2.0
4.0
1.2
.9
.8
.7
.9
.8
.5
.8
.5
.3
.6
.8
.8
.9
.7
.6
.6
.6
.4
.8
.9
43. 3
59. 6
40. 7
57. 1
47.8
46.8
39. 0
35. 8
33. 4
18. 1
32. 0
40. 1
35. 8
40. 3
27. 6
29. 0
32. 2
22. 1
14. 6
20. 1
22. 1
44.8
61.0
41. 6
58. 0
49. 0
47.8
39.6
36.8
34. 0
18. 5
32. 7
41.0
36. 7
41.3
28. 5
29. 7
32.9
22.8
15. 0
21. 1
23. 1
1.8
2.9
.7
1.2
1.6
.9
.9
.6
.8
.3
.3
1.2
.6
.8
1.0
.5
.6
.4
.2
.5
.7
1.9
.8
.7
.7
.5
.5
.3
.5
.6
.5
.4
.5
.8
.7
.7
.5
.5
.4
.9
.7
0.4
.6
.4
.7
.6
.6
.5
.5
.5
.2
.4
.8
.5
.9
.5
.5
.6
.3
.2
.3
.4
4. 1
4.3
1.8
2.6
2.7
2.0
1. 7
1.6
1.9
1.0
1. 1
2. 3
1. 6
2. 5
2. 2
1. 7
1.7
1.2
.8
1.8
1.8
0. 7
.9
1. 3
1.2
1.3
.9
1.0
.8
.9
.7
.7
1.0
.8
.7
.7
1.0
.8
1.0
.8
.6
.9
95. 5
54. 9
50. 7
42. 0
28. 0
28. 6
8. 5
12. 5
33. 1
20. 3
20. 4
31. 9
19. 1
22. 7
17. 4
17. 2
14. 9
15.9
14. 6
13. 8
17. 5
96.4
55.9
52. 0
43. 7
29.6
29. 7
9.6
13.4
34.3
21. 1
21. 3
33. 1
20. 0
23. 5
18. 2
18.4
15. 8
17.0
15. 6
14. 5
18. 5
1.0
.6
.2
1.3
1.6
1.0
.6
.4
1.7
.9
1.0
1. 1
.5
.6
.6
1.2
.8
.6
1.0
.6
.8
0.6
.4
.8
.8
.7
.6
.6
.3
.5
.4
.6
.5
.5
.6
.6
.6
.6
.7
.4
.4
.7
1.5
.7
.5
.5
.4
.4
.2
.3
.4
.3
.3
.5
.4
.4
.3
.3
.3
.2
.2
.3
.3
3. 1
1.7
1.5
2. 6
2.7
2.0
1.4
1.0
2. 6
1.6
1.9
2.1
1.4
1.6
1.5
2.1
1.7
1. 5
1.6
1.3
1.8
2.8
3.1
1.6
.5
Sheet mills
1907_______
1910_______
1911..........
1912_______
1913_______
1914_______
1915_______
1916_______
1917____
1918_____
1919____
1920_______
1921_______
1922_______
1923_______
1924_______
1925_______
1926_______
1927_______
1928_______
1929_______
2,211
18, 501
29,710
32,087
25, 938
22,187
16,266
24, 722
26, 855
17, 278
19,214
24, 279
15,845
24, 391
29,814
28, 247
32, 043
31,713
34,896
37, 050
43,523
2
28
9
19
21
11
7
13
11
3
3
14
5
10
14
7
10
6
4
10
16
8
52
71
67
67
51
23
62
38
17
32
59
38
66
61
54
56
55
47
92
119
274
3,310
3, 625
5, 497
3, 717
3,113
1,901
2,655
2,687
937
1,854
2,979
1,702
2, 951
2, 390
2, 457
3, 096
2,100
1,537
2,239
2,885
1907_______
1910_______
1911_______
1912_______
1913......... .
1914_______
1915_______
1916_______
1917_______
1918_______
1919_______
1920_______
1921_____
1922_____
1923_______
1924_______
1925_______
1926_______
1927..........
1928_______
1929........... .
2,007
9, 767
13,676
17,080
18, 909
13,906
7,109
11,355
19,819
18. 499
18, 326
22, 666
14, 622
19, 535
24, 766
22, 655
25,511
32, 089
26, 794
22, 218
30, 760
1
3
1
10
15
7
2
2
17
8
9
13
4
6
8
14
10
9
13
6
12
4
25
53
60
72
39
21
26
51
41
39
71
35
40
54
68
64
95
61
41
83
575
1,608
2,080
2,154
1,586
1,195
182
425
1,967
1,127
1,127
2,166
840
1,332
1,292
1,185
1,142
1, 524
1,175
899
1, 613 ,
284
3,390
3, 705
5,583
3,805
3,175
1,931
2, 730
2,736
957
1,889
3,052
1,745
3, 027
2, 465
2, 518
3,162
2,161
1,588
2,341
3,020
0.3
.5
.1
.2
.3
.2
.1
.2
.1
.1
.1
.2
.1
.1
.2
.1
.1
.1
.1
.1
Tube mills
580
1,636
2,134
2, 224
1,673
1,241
205
453
2,035
1,176
1,172
2, 250
879
1,378
1,354
1,267
1, 216
1,628
1,249
946
1,708
1Less than one-tenth of 1 per cent.
https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
[875]
0. 2
.1
«
.5
.3
.2
.1
.1
.3
.1
.2
.2
.1
.1
.1
.2
.1
.1
.2
.1
.1
102
MONTHLY LABOR REVIEW
T a b l e 6 .— A C C ID E N T S A N D A C C ID E N T R A TES IN T H E IR O N A N D ST E E L IN D U S T R Y ,
1907 TO 1929, B Y D E P A R T M E N T A N D Y E A R -C on tin u ed
Unclassified rolling mills
Frequency rates (per
1,000,000 hours’ exposure)
Number of cases
Year
1910_______
1911_______
1912_______
1913_______
1914*-______
1915_______
1916_______
1917_______
1918_______
.1919_______
1920_______
1921_______
1922_______
1923_______
1924_______
1925_______
1926_______
1927_______
1928_______
1929_______
Full-year
workers
14, 434
21. 231
22,909
23, 382
22,873
4, 367
8,082
27,978
37,163
25,106
21,055
12, 068
19, 382
26, 357
21, 664
26, 353
25, 268
21,126
23,889
20, 940
Per Tem
ma
Death nent porary
disa
disa bility
bility
15
16
16
24
11
2
5
10
22
14
16
4
10
11
11
9
5
14
11
7
49
76
76
84
75
14
25
60
74
45
68
36
59
92
77
59
66
105
64
103
4,861
3,388
4, 660
5,051
3, 541
475
922
4,265
4,015
2,967
2, 785
1,479
2, 416
2,830
2,193
1,836
1, 630
1,246
1,636
1,397
Severity rates (per 1,000
hours’ exposure)
Per
ma
Total Death nent
disa
bility
Tem
Per Tem
ma po To
po
o Death nent
rary
rary Ttal
disa
disa disa tal
bility
bility bility
4,925
3,480
4, 752
5,159
3, 627
491
952
4,335
4, 111
3,026
2,869
1,519
2,485
2,933
2,277
1,904
1,701
1,365
1,712
1,507
112.3
53.2
67.8
72.0
51.6
36. 2
38. 0
50.8
36. 0
39.4
44. 1
40.9
41. 5
35.8
33. 5
23. 2
23. 5
19. 7
13.8
22.2
113.7
54. 7
69.1
73. 5
52.9
37.5
39.2
51.6
36.9
40. 2
45.4
42.0
42.7
37.1
34.9
24. 1
24. 5
21.6
14.5
23.9
2.1
1. 5
1. 5
2.0
1.0
.9
1.2
.7
1.2
1.1
1. 5
.7
1.0
.8
1.0
.7
.4
1.3
.9
.7
1.6
1.1
1.0
1.1
.8
.5
.6
.7
.5
.4
.9
.9
.9
1.3
1.3
.5
.7
1.3
.9
1.2
1. 3
.7
.9
1.0
.7
.4
.7
.7
.5
.6
.5
.7
.7
.6
.6
.4
.4
.4
.4
.5
1.9
1.3
1.6
1:4
1. 1
1. 2
1.3
1.7
.9
.3
.5
1.3
1. 2
.8
.8
1.0
.7
1.4
.6
.9
1. 5
91.5
149. 2
55.4
79. 2
80.6
65. 6
41.1
47. 1
59. 2
58. 0
47.3
52.7
50.9
69.6
59.4
28.3
18.2
16. 4
6.4
12. 0
24. 2
94.4
150. 9
57. 1
81. 0
82.1
67. 0
42.7
49.3
60.4
58.6
47.9
54. 2
52. 2
70. 7
60.3
29.4
19. 0
18. 0
7. 1
13.0
25. 9
5.8
2.5
.7
2. 1
2.2
1. 2
1.6
2.8
1.8
1.5
.7
1.6
.8
1.7
.8
.5
.4
.9
.5
.5
1. 2
2.9
1.0
1.0
.9
.8
1.0
.6
.7
.6
.5
.3
1.1
.7
.8
.7
.8
.9
1. 0
.4
.7
1.5
0.8 9.5
1.9 5.4
.6 2.3
.8 3.8
.8 3.8
.7 2.9
.7 2.9
.9 4.4
.7 3.1
.6 2.6
.5 1.5
.6 3.3
.6 2.1
.8 3.3
. 7 2.2
.5 1.8
.4 1.7
.4 2.3
. 2 1. 1
.3 1. 4
.6 3.3
1.3
1.4
.6
.8
1. 1
1.8
1.5
1. 3
1. 0
1. 3
2.0
.9
2.8
78.8
53. 2
39.5
58. 6
39. 5
51.3
50. 2
83. 2
78.5
48. 7
21.9
16.2
24.9
80.4
54.8
40.4
59. 4
41. 0
53.5
51.9
84. 5
79.8
50. 0
24. 1
17.2
27.9
1.5
1. 2
1.8
1.6
1.1
.3
.8
1.0
1.7
.9
15
.9
.4
1.1
.8
1.3
.7
.6
.7
.7
.9
.7
1 2
.8
.7
.5
.4
0. 3
.3
.2
.3
.2
.2
.2
.1
.2
.2
.3
.1
.2
.1
.2
.1
.1
.2
.2
.1
1.1
1. 2
1. 1
1.2
1. 1
1.1
1.0
.7
.7
.6
1. 1
1.0
1.0
1.2
1.2
.8
.9
1.7
.6
1.6
5.0
3.3
3.4
4. 1
2. 5
1.8
2. 5
2.1
2.2
2. 1
2.9
2.3
2.6
2.7
2.9
1.6
1.5
3.0
2. 2
2.4
Fabricating shops
1907_______
1910_______
1911_____ _
1912_______
1913_______
1914_______
1915_______
1916_______
1917_______
1918_______
1919_______
1920_______
1921 _____
1922_______
1923_______
1924_______
1925_______
1926_______
1927______
1928_______
1929_______
2, 081
8,713
19, 530
28,988
30,470
20, 837
3,818
4,980
23, 614
29,166
19, 407
17, 216
12, 908
16,184
22, 547
10,626
15,718
15,467
14, 523
12, 977
20,516
6
11
8
32
34
13
3
7
21
22
6
14
5
14
9
5
4
7
4
3
12
12
33
92
119
104
77
15
25
67
29
27
68
45
41
52
63
35
64
25
35
95
571
3,901
3, 244
6, 890
7,368
4,103
471
703
4,192
5, 077
2, 752
2, 721
1,971
3, 381
4, 019
1,787
857
756
283
466
1,488
589
3, 945
3, 344
7,041
7, 506
4,193
489
735
4, 280
5,128
2,785
2, 803
2, 021
3,436
4,080
1,855
895
827
312
504
1,595
1.0
.4
.1
.4
.4
.2
.3
.5
.3
.3
.1
.2
.1
.3
.1
.1
.1
.2
.1
.1
.2
Forge shops
1917.
1918.
1919.
1920
1921.
1922.
1923.
1924.
1925.
1926.
1927.
1928.
1929.
3,881
6,408
2,169
2,197
902
1,514
2,049
2,272
3, 794
1,790
1,645
2, 691
6,135
https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
3
4
2
1
2
1
3
1
1
3
15
26
4
5
3
8
9
9
11
7
10
7
51
917
1, 009
257
380
107
233
309
567
893
263
108
120
458
935
1, 039
263
385
111
243
319
576
907
270
119
137
512
[876]
0.3
.2
.3
.4
.4
.2
.3
.2
.1
.2
2. 2
2.6
1.0
1.6
1. 2
.7
4. 4
3. 0
2.7
1J)
3.9
5.2
2.6
27
3.3
1 1
2.8
2.0
https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
104
MONTHLY LABOR REVIEW
T a b l e 6 .—A C C ID E N T S A N D A C C ID E N T R A TES IN T H E IR O N A N D ST E E L IN D U S T R Y ,
1907 TO 1929, BY D E P A R T M E N T A N D Y E A R — Continued
Power houses
Frequency rates (per
1,000,000 hours’ exposure)
Number of cases
Year
1917........ .
1918_______
1919_______
1920_______
1921_______
1922_______
1923_______
1924______
1925_______
1926_______
1927_______
1928_______
1929_______
Full-year
workers
4, 552
3, 699
4,093
4, 591
2,344
3, 361
4, 070
4, 511
4, 218
3,446
3,888
2,659
2,652
Per Tem
ma
Death nent porary
disa
disa bility
bility
7
9
11
4
2
6
5
3
3
7
10
2
1
5
4
8
4
3
8
2
4
210
254
213
172
77
115
117
157
183
56
98
23
36
Total
Per
ma
Death nent
disa
bility
224
273
226
177
79
120
127
170
190
62
106
25
40
0.5
.8
.9
.3
.3
.5
.4
.2
.3
0.5
.9
.2
.1
Severity rates (per 1,000
hours’ exposure)
Tem
Per Tem
po
ma po
rary To
Death nent rary To
tal
disa
disa disa tal
bility
bility bility
.5
.3
.6
.3
.3
.7
.3
.5
15. 4
22.9
17.3
12.5
10 9
11 4
9.6
11.6
14.5
5.4
8 4
2 9
4. 5
16.4
24.6
18.4
12.9
11. 2
11 9
10.4
12.6
15.0
6. 0
9 1
3 1
5.0
1.2
1.0
1.6
1.9
1.4
1.6
1. 3
2.4
1.6
1.2
1.6
.9
1.3
.7
1.4
.8
1.0
.7
.9
1.3
1.0
64. 8
43. 0
49.0
57. 8
52. 0
41. 2
36 2
39.4
38. 0
31. 1
33. 7
25. 4
24. 1
22. 4
27. 5
24. 9
32.8
16.0
8.6
7.4
10.2
66.6
44.8
51.0
60.4
54.2
43. 2
37 5
42.3
40. 4
33.0
36. 1
26.6
25.7
23.7
29.4
26. 1
34.3
17.4
10.0
8.8
11.4
3.8
5.0
2.4
4. 1
4.7
2.5
2.6
1.0
1.9
1.4
1.0
1.4
1.1
.5
.7
.8
.7
.6
7.5
6.5
5. 0
6.3
6.4
4. 5
3.1
4.6
4.0
4.9
1.7
2.1
3.8
2.9
2.4
3.1
3.9
2.8
1.1
1.3
2.2
1.7
1.2
1.9
1.3
1.9
.5
1.9
.9
1.6
.6
.9
1.7
1.1
.6
.6
.6
.6
.4
.5
.5
.4
.5
.6
.4
.2
.2
.3
5. 9
6. 9
5.8
7. 4
3.4
4. 4
4. 8
5.2
3. 8
5. 3
4.9
3.9
3.0
2.7
0. 8
.9
.5
.5
.4
.4
.2
.1
.5
.7
.6
.7
.5
.4
.6
25. 9
22.7
25.5
23. 5
23.9
10.0
10.5
10.5
15.5
11.3
6.2
8.6
6.3
5. 1
5.2
27.1
24.4
27.3
24. 7
24. 7
10.6
10.8
10.7
16.3
12.4
7.0
9.9
7.0
5.7
6.0
2.4
4.6
7.8
4.5
2.7
1.4
.7
.6
1.6
2.4
1.1
3.5
1.4
1.4
.9
0.6
.5
.5
.5
.6
.7
.3
0.3
.4
.4
.4
.4
.3
.2
3.3
5. 5
8. 7
5.4
3. 7
2. 4
3.1
4.9
5.4
1.7
1.7
2.9
2.2
1.4
1.7
1.0
.5
.1
0)
0.3
.4
.2
.2
JJ
_2
.i
.2
.3
.1
.4
.6
.3
.4
J2
J2
4.4
5.8
5.7
1.9
1Q
4
3.0
2.0
2. 2
3.
JJ
.5
'a
Yards
1907_______
1910______
1911_______
1912_______
1913_______
1914_______
1915_______
1916_______
1917_______
1918_______
1919_______
1920____
1921_______
1922_______
1923_______
1924_______
1925_______
1926_______
1927_______
1928_______
1929_______
2,618
15,932
9, 085
11. 180
11, 859
7, 879
3, 843
7, 853
15, 732
16, 354
10, 108
12, 087
5,840
7, 969
8, 381
8, 269
7. 683
9, 857
7,198
7, 434
7,830
5
40
11
23
28
10
12
36
33
25
10
6
15
12
10
12
19
10
4
5
10
49
43
64
50
37
15
56
77
62
48
33
22
16
35
19
24
19
19
29
24
509
2,054
1, 336
1, 940
1,807
975
417
929
1, 792
1,526
1,021
922
422
536
693
617
755
474
185
164
240
524
2, 143
1,390
2, 027
1, 885
1,022
432
997
1, 905
1, 621
1,094
965
450
567
740
644
791
512
214
197
269
0.6
.8
.4
.7
.8
.4
.5
.8
.7
.8
.3
.3
.6
.5
.4
.5
.7
.5
.2
.2
Coke ovens 2
1915_______
1916_______
1917_______
1918_______
1919_______
1920______
1921_______
1922_______
1923_______
1924_______
1925_______
1926_______
1927_______
1928_______
1929_______
1,648
2, 195
6, 641
9, 395
9, 022
8, 620
5, 768
6, 554
8, 961
7,506
7, 599
10, 745
10,117
11, 157
11, 299
2
5
26
21
12
6
2
2
7
9
4
19
7
8
6
4
6
10
14
10
11
4
1
14
15
14
22
14
13
21
128
150
508
662
647
518
182
207
416
254
142
277
191
171
175
134
161
544
697
669
535
188
210
437
278
160
318
212
192
202
0.4
.8
1.3
.7
.4
.2
.1
.1
.3
.4
.2
.6
.2
.2
.2
1Less than one-tenth of 1 per cent.
2 Data cover only coke ovens operated in connection with steel works.
https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
LS7SJ
1. 1
1.0
.2
.2
1.1
.9
.9
.7
.5
.3
.1
.2
.2
.2
3.0
3. 5
.6
.1
.
1.0
.3
2.2
2.0
2 1
2.2
4.4
105
IN D U S T R IA L A C C ID EN TS AND SA FE T Y
T
able
6 .—A C C ID E N T S A N D A C C ID E N T R A TES IN TH E IRO N A N D ST E E L IN D U S T R Y ,
1907 TO 1929, BY D E P A R T M E N T A N D Y E A R —Continued
Erection of structural steel
Frequency rates (per
1,000,000 hours’ exposure)
Number of cases
Year
Full-year
workers
1915_______
1916_______
1917_______
1918_______
1919_______
1920_______
1921_______
1922_______
1923_______
1924..........
1925_______
1926 ______
1 9 2 7 ...........
1928_______
/
\
Per Tem
ma
Death nent porary
disa
disa bility
bility
803
1,011
1,156
1,234
775
637
573
595
912
1,009
937
774
816
745
907
985
8
10
12
10
5
6
5
5
3
10
9
11
3
9
12
11
7
3
15
3
7
12
4
2
7
10
3
5
7
4
6
5
251
251
442
364
214
204
168
129
234
291
188
180
134
135
198
168
Total
Per
ma
Death nent
disa
bility
266
264
469
377
226
222
177
136
244
311
200
196
144
138
216
184
3.3
3.3
3. 5
2.7
2.2
3.3
2.9
2.8
1. 1
3.3
3.2
4. 8
1.2
4.0
4.4
3.7
Tem
Per Tem
po
ma po
Death nent rary To
rary To
tal
disa
disa disa tal
bility
bility bility
104. 2
82. 7
127. 5
98. 3
86. 8
111. 8
97. 8
72. 3
85. 5
96. 1
66. 9
78. 3
54. 7
55. 9
72.8
56.8
110.4
87.0
135.3
101.8
92.0
121. 7
103.0
76. 2
89. 2
102. 7
71. 2
85. 3
58.8
61. 8
79.4
62.2
36. 6
15. 2
37. 9
1. 6 85. 4
36. 1
44.8
16. 5
7. 5
12.9
. 6 14.2
4. 6
.4
.9
1.7
1.7
. 1 55.1
38.3
15. 2
37.9
87. 0
36.1
44. S
17.9
7. 5
12. 9
15.4
4. 6
1.3
3. 5
56. 4
0.9 21.4
.9 158.0
1.0 64.3
60. 2
2. 3 72. 6
1. 0 46. 7
1. 2 56.7
23. 6
.3 35. 2
.9 42. 2
1. 1 24. 7
1. 2 13. 3
2.4 10. 3
.4
3.0
1.5 70.5
22. 3
159.0
66. 1
60.4
75. 1
47.7
58.6
23. 6
35.8
43.4
25. 8
14. 5
12.7
3.9
72. 1
2.9
1.0
4.3
.8
3.0
6.6
2.3
1. 1
2.6
3.3
1. 1
2. 2
2.9
1.8
2.2
1.7
Severity rates (per 1,000
hours’ exposure)
19.9
19.8
20.8
16. 2
12.9
19. 7
17.5
16.8
6.6
19.8
19. 2
28. 4
7.4
24. 2
26. 5
22.3
4.3
1. 7
4.0
2.0
1.3
3. 7
1. 1
2.5
1. 6
3.4
2. 2
2. 3
1. 1
2. 3
1.5
.9
1.2
1. 7
2. 2
1.4
1. 3
2. 5
1.7
1.8
1. 2
1.9
1.0
1. 3
1.0
It 1
1.4
1.3
3.1
0. 3
.1
.9
1.1
.7
.7
.5
.1
.1
.2
.1
3. 2
.3
.6
25.4
23.2
27.0
19.6
15. 5
25.9
20.2
21. 1
9.4
25. 1
22.4
32. 0
9.5
27.6
29.4
24.5
Axle works 3
1915..............
1916_______
1917_ ............
1918_______
1919_______
1920_______
1921_______
1922 _____
1923_______
1924_______
1925_______
1926- - ........
1928..............
1929_______
191
372
713
609
582
743
242
490
774
516
436
340
191
1,524
1
3
1
1
1
4
1
6
21
17
81
156
63
100
12
11
30
22
6
9
1
252
22
17
81
159
63
100
13
11
30
24
6
13
2
258
1.7
1. 3
.6
3.9
8. 3
3.9
.2
2. 8
.5
.6
Car wheels
1915..............
1916..............
1917_ _____
1918_______
1919_______
1920_______
1921_______
1922_______
1923_______
1924_______
1925_______
1926_______
1927_______
1928_______
1929_______
389
734
1, 296
1,866
1,619
1, 215
' 552
1,102
1,099
1,083
931
792
552
771
3,279
2
3
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
2
4
11
4
2
1
3
3
3
4
1
15
25
348
250
337
353
170
92
78
116
137
69
32
17
7
693
26
352
257
338
365
174
95
78
118
141
72
35
21
9
709
0.9
.8
.2
.2
.6
.3
.3
.4
.1
5.4
4.6
1. 1
1.2
3.6
1.8
1.8
2.6
.6
3 The 1927 record was so small that those figures were included under “ unclassified.”
https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
f 8791
0. 3
1.0
.4
1.0
.9
.5
.2
.3
1.3
1.6
3. 6
.8
1.4
0. 7
2. 1
.9
.6
1.0
.6
.7
.6
.8
.8
.6
.4
.3
.1
.8
1. 0
8.5
5.9
1. 7
3.2
1. 5
4.9
.6
2.8
2.9
1.9
2. 0
3.9
3.5
2.8
106
T
able
M O N TH LY LA BO R R E V IE W
6 .—A C C ID E N T S A N D A C C ID E N T R A TES IN T H E IR O N A N D ST E E L IN D U S T R Y
1907 TO 1929, BY D E P A R T M E N T A N D Y E A R -C on tin u ed
’
Docks and ore yards
Frequency rates (per
1,000,000 hours’ exposure)
Number of cases
Year
1915- _____
1916- _____
1917_______
1918______
1919_______
1920_______
1921_______
1922_______
1923_______
1924_______
1925_______
1926_______
1927_______
1928_______
1929_______
Full-year
workers
115
195
353
368
352
379
235
271
538
340
388
389
603
427
1,001
Per Tem
ma
Death nent porary
disa
disa bility
bility
3
2
1
1
3
»
2
1
1
2
2
1
1
6
2
3
3
4
1
1
1
7
7
16
78
35
39
12
11
7
15
12
7
8
1
7
19
Total
Per
ma
Death nent
disa
bility
9
21
81
37
45
15
11
13
18
16
9
9
4
8
27
5.1
1.9
.9
.9
5. 8
3.4
.9
.9
5 7
1.8
3.7
3.7
1. 9
3. 9
1. 7
.l
.6
.8
2.3
.6
.3
Severity rates (per 1,000
hours’ exposure)
Tem
Per Tem
po
ma po
rary To
Death
nent
rary To
disa tal
disa disa tal
bility
bility bility
20 3 26 1
27.4 35.9
73. 6 76. 4
31.7 33. 5
37 0 42 7
10.6 13. 3
15 6 15 6
8.6 16.0
9 2 11 1
11 8 15 7
6 0
7 7
7
8
.6
1.8
6 2
5 5
6.3
8.9
30.8
11.3
5.4
5.3
22.2
2 3
7.3
.7
.3
10 4
2. 9
7.6
2 Q
14.4
10.3
3.3
2.0
2 6
.2
1Q
3.7
o 1 2 4
! 5 38. 6
1.0 13.0
.3 6.0
5 10 9
. 1 8. 3
5
,'a 30. 1
2 4 1
3 14 7
_3 10 6
3 99
3. 5
C1)
2 0
.2 5.9
Woven wire fence
1915191619171918.
19191920. ___
1921.
192219231924.
1925.
1926.
13271928 _
1929-_
1,552
1,623
1,269
1,531
1, 336
1,097
1,095
1, 528
1,603
1,301
1,290
1,363
1,204
1,534
1,549
1
1
10
18
10
5
4
6
3
6
3
6
1
2
6
2
2
2
294
180
98
77
35
48
79
85
124
63
105
83
47
57
47
304
198
108
82
40
54
82
91
128
69
107
89
49
60
49
2 1
3 7
2 6
1. 1
1.0
18
9
0.2
1 3
.6
.2
15
5
15
6
.2
.4
.4
63
37
25
16
1
0
7
8
65
40
28
17
8.7
9.9
14 6
24 1
18 5
16 4
30 0
IQ 8
25! 8
16 1
27 1
26' 6
20 8
13 0
12.4
10.1
17
27
22
13
1
3
9
1
2
7
3
Q
1.5
1.2
6
6
3
6
2
0
1
0
.6
2 Q
g
7
.5
1 3
~-5
0 5
4
4
2
.2
2
4
4
.2
2
4
3
1 O
1.7
3.4
2.5
1. 2
2.3
3. 1
1.2
1.1
1.9
1. 5
.6
.8
1.1
13.0
10.5
1.3
.8
.2
2
2.3
.7
1.3
1.7
10
2.1
o. 3
1.4
.3
.2
3. 3
2. 4
3.3
1. 4
Nails and staples
1915_______
1916_______
1917_______
1918_______
1919_______
1920_______
1921_______
1922_______
1923_______
1924_______
1925_______
1926_______
1927_______
1928_______
1929_______
1,546
1,993
2, 323
1,916
2,040
2,364
1,718
2, 366
3,404
1, 939
1,925
2,658
1,424
1, 522
1,597
1
1
1
1
1
2
12
10
16
10
8
8
6
10
7
6
6
2
1
2
181
236
184
123
58
164
91
121
131
81
88
100
35
44
29
194
246
201
133
66
172
98
132
139
87
94
102
36
48
29
0.2
.1
.2
.1
.1
.4
2.6
2
2.3
17
13
39.0
3Q 5
26.4
41.8
3Q 7
2$. 8
21 4
1 1
23 1
23 1
10 8
24 2
1.2
1.4
.9
10
10
.3
2
17. 7
17.0
17.4
13 9
15 2
16 4
8 2
9.4
6.1
.4
Q5
19! 0
18.5
18.5
.9
1 2
5
1. 2
.8
.8
14 9
16 2
.6
1.3
1. 2
1 0
16
16 7
)
8 4
10! 5
6. 1
2.6
.2
43.5
37. 1
40. 1
65. 7
26. 3
29.0
11.7
0.6
.3
1.0
3.9
.2
.4
.4
0.4
.5
.7
1.3
.5
.2
.2
.1
. t).
.1
.3
.3
.2
.2
.2
.2
.1
.1
.1
.9
2. 1
2.4
2. 2
1.2
1.8
.3
.2
2.9
.1
Hot mills
1923_______
1924- _____
1925_______
1926_______
1927_______
1928_______
1929_______
6,374
5, 789
7, 773
4,319
8,649
9,749
18, 069
2
1
4
4
1
2
4
9
7
19
15
11
10
9
820
634
913
834
673
836
616
831
642
936
853
685
848
629
1Less than one-tenth of 1 per cent.
https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
[ 880]
0.1
.1
.2
.3
0)
.1
.1
0.5
.4
.8
1.2
.4
.3
.2
42.9
36.6
39. 1
64. 2
25. 8
28. 6
11.4
0. 5
.6
.6
1.6
.3
.3
.2
INDUSTRIAL ACCIDENTS AND SAFETY
107
T a e l e 6 — A C C ID E N T S A N D A C C ID E N T R A TES IN T H E IR O N A N D ST E E L IN D U S T R Y
1S07 TO 1929, B Y D E P A R T M E N T A N D Y E A R —Continued
’
Cold rolling
— ■
Frequency rates (per
1,000,000 hours’ expo
sure)
Number of cases
Year
1926
1927
1928
1929-
Full-year
workers
Per Tem
ma
Death nent porary
disa
disa bility
bility
___________
1,824
___________
1,686
___________
1,837
2,898
1
1
2
2
6
3
11
Total
211
187
170
252
213
194
183
265
Per
ma
Death nent
disa
bility
0.2
.2
.2
■
Severity rates (per 1,000
hours’ exposure)
Tem
Per Tem
po
ma po
rary To Death nent rary T o
tal
disa
disa disa tal
bility
bility bility
0.4
1.2
.5
1.3
38.3
37.0
32. 5
29. 2
38.7
38.4
33. 2
30. 5
0.6
1.0
.8
1.0
.6
.8
.8
1.0
1.0
1.0
.8
.9
1.0
.8
1.1
42. 5
37.4
38. 2
33.9
29. 8
35.7
27.9
28. 7
34. 1
28. 8
26. 8
24. 6
20. 5
20. 8
21.8
43. 3
38. 6
39. 3
35. 2
30. 7
36. 7
28.9
29. 9
35. 3
30. 0
27. 7
25. 7
21. 7
21. 7
23.0
1.2
1.1
1. 4
0.8
.4
.4
1.0
0.4
.6
.4
.5
1.2
2.2
1.0
2.9
Unclassified
1915.
1916.
19171918.
1919.
19201921 _
19221923 _
192419251926.
19271928 _
1929-
21, 547
24, 216
71, 249
97, 513
78, 804
104, 741
53, 403
79,405
95,138
93, 018
132,291
112, 826
95, 957
105, 037
123, 492
16
17
65
79
60
72
36
39
52
66
45
58
49
48
50
41
72
164
284
145
261
134
233
273
285
308
306
282
236
389
2,749
2, 714
8,165
9, 930
7,054
11, 208
4,468
6,848
9,719
8,032
10, 648
8, 325
5,907
6, 538
8,099
2,806
2,803
8, 394
10, 293
7, 259
11,541
4, 638
7,120
10, 044
8,383
11, 001
8.689
6,238
6, 822
8, 538
0.2
.2
.3
.3
.3
.2
.2
.2
.2
.2
,1
.2
.2
.2
.1
1. 5
14
18
16
15
14
13
10
1 1
14
7
1*0
10
.8
0 6
14
^8
^9
7
^9
ft
^8
^9
jj
jj
ft
00
ß
5
4
5
4
5
5
4
9
3
6
.8
2. 7
3.4
3.1
2.9
2.6
2.8
2.2
2.6
2.5
2.8
1.8
2.0
2. 1
2. 2
2.0
Accident Experience of the Various States
. The d.ata are shown, by States, since 1922 in Table 7. This table
is not of very great significance but does tend to show that the influ
ences which determine the rates in the years and States are on the
whole surprisingly uniform. If the rates in any State be examined
from year to year, a strong tendency to decline will be manifest.
T a b i .e 7 .—A C C ID E N T F R E Q U E N C Y A N D SE V E R IT Y R ATES IN THE IR O N AND S T E i? r
IN D U S T R Y , 1922 TO 1929, BY ST A T E A N D YEAR
Number of cases
State and year
Alabama:
1922____
1923_____
1924___
1925_______
1926__
1927______
1928_____
1929,.__ .
Fullyear
workers
Per
ma
Death nent
disa
bili
ty
10, 998
11,915
13, 705
15,244
19, 887
14, 493
13, 258
16, 162
46860°—31----- 8
https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
10
7
16
14
30
12
16
11
51
78
41
46
130
7
76
93
^
SrE E L
Frequency rates (per
Severity rates (per 1,000
1,000,000 hours’ exposure)
hours’ exposure)
Per- Tem
Per- TemTem
mamapora
pora
poranent
nent
Tory Total Death disa ry Total Death
disa ry
disa
disa
disa- tal
bili
bili
bility
bility
bility
ty
ty
1,163
1,348
1,127
508
1, 370
809
954
1,395
1,224
1,433
1,184
568
1, 530
898
1,046
1,500
[8 8 1 ]
0. 30
.20
.39
.31
.50
.28
.4
.2
1.55 35. 25
2.18 37. 74
1.00 27.41
1.00 12. 07
2.18 22. 95
1. 77 18. 61
.19 24.0
1.9 28.8
37.10
40.09
28.80
13.38
25.63
20. 66
26.3
30.9
1.82
I. 18
2.33
1.84
3.02
1.17
1. 77
1.06
1.37
1.56
1.66 1.43
2.4
1.4 1.4
1.6
0. 48
.87
.62
. 19
.39
.36
.6
.4
3.47
3.82
4.01
3. 40
4. 97
3. 45
4.7
3.2
108
MONTHLY LABOR REVIEW
T a b l e 7 .—A C C ID E N T F R E Q U E N C Y A N D SE V E R IT Y R A TE S IN T H E IR O N A N D ST E E L
IN D U S T R Y , 1922 TO 1929, BY STA TE A N D Y E A R —Continued
Severity rates (per 1,000
Frequency rates (per
hours’ exposure)
1,000,000 hours’ exposure)
Number of cases
State and year
Fullyear
workers
California:
1922__________
1923__________
1924....................
1925__________
1926
1927
1928__________
1929__________
Colorado:
1922__________
1923__________
1924__________
1925__________
1926__________
1927__________
1928__________
1929__________
Connecticut:
1922__________
1923__________
1924__________
1925__________
1926__________
1927__________
1928__________
1929
Illinois:
1922__________
1923__________
1924__________
1925__________
1926__________
1927__________
1928__________
1929__________
Indiana:
1922__________
1923__________
1924__________
1925__________
1926__________
1927__________
1928__________
1929__________
Kentucky:
1922__________
1923__________
1924__________
1925__________
1926 _________
1927__________
1928 _________
1929__________
Maryland:
1927_________
1928_________
1929_________
Massachusetts:
1922
_____
1923_________
1924
_____
1925
_____
1926
_____
1927
____
1928
____
1929
___
Michigan:
1922
_____
1923
_____
1924
_____
1925________
https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
Per Tem
Per Tem
Per Tem
ma pora
ma
ma pora
T o
nent pora Total Death nent ry
Death
Total
Death nent
ry
ry
disa disa tal
disa disa
disa disa
bili
bili bility
bili bility
bility
ty
ty
ty
.4
2.2
2. 63
1.19
1.43
1.56
2. 09
1.02
1.1
2.2
0. 80
.75
1.34
.71
1.20
.91
1. 1
1.4
4. 93
3.87
4.15
2. 93
3. 29
1.93
2.6
5.8
37.01
38. 58
37. 48
47.84
50. 59
41.48
50.4
37.8
1.79
3.36
2.81
1.41
.89
2.95
1. 2
1.3
.27
1.22
1.52
.93
1.15
1.75
1.8
2.6
.36
.76
.63
.78
.71
. 51
.6
.6
2. 42
5. 34
4. 96
3. 12
2. 75
5. 21
3.6
4.5
44. 99
28. 01
30. 85
35. 72
42.07
20. 09
22. 3
19.7
47. 19
30. 46
33. 56
38.19
47. 6C
22. 13
23. 2
21.7
1.59
1.88
2.13
1.38
.68
.44
.3
1.38
1.59
1.31
.28
2. 47
1. 58
.7
1.7
.67
.27
.43
.35
.72
.34
.3
.3
3. 64
3. 73
3.87
2.01
3.81
2. 36
1.3
2.0
1.32
1.42
1. 13
1. 12
1.01
.83
1.5
1.5
33. 02
31.20
26. 26
23. 75
25. 87
10. 83
19.5
24.3
34. 56
32.94
27. 58
25. 06
27.1C
11.79
21. 1
25.9
1.34
1.95
1.13
1.12
1.33
.81
.9
.7
1.00
1.63
.98
1. 32
.82
.76
1.5
1.8
.44
.55
.21
.36
.38
. 19
.4
.4
2. 78
4. 13
2. 32
2. 80
2. 53
1.76
2.8
2.9
1.03
.98
.66
.88
1. 11
.71
1.1
1.1
20.05
25. 43
15. 22
21.48
12.09
10. 07
9.5
13.1
21.24
26.58
16.17
22. 61
13.59
10.88
10.8
14.4
.98
1.05
1.72
1.53
2. 17
.60
.8
1.2
.95
.86
.75
.73
.98
.58
.9
.9
.27
.33
.28
.31
.22
. 19
.2
.3
2. 20
2. 34
2. 75
2. 57
3. 37
1.37
1.9
2.4
.48
.6'
. 19
1.70
.26
.37
.3
.3
2. 30 113.89 116. 76
2.3! 115. 22 118.17
1.78 27.68 29. 6C
1.96 25. 28 28.89
2. 67 24. 37 27. 31
1.95 22. 10 24. 42
2.0 18.7 21. 1
1.4 21. 5 23.2
1.43
3.84
1. 15
10. 2C
1. 60
2.25
2.0
1.5
2. 87
4.31
1.58
1.83
2. 57
1. 62
3. 1
1.5
1.82
.87
.39
.39
.25
.35
.3
.3
6. 12
9. 02
3. 12
12. 42
4. 42
4. 22
5.4
3.3
1,08» 1,113
79E
770
718
77'
. 5E
.29
.4
.40 32. 81 33. 82
.5 21.1 21.8
1.1 19.3 20.8
373
260
27:
134
270
24"
191
661
.4:
.2"
. 13
1.7:
1.78
.9"
. 3E
.83
.60
1.0
1.4
91»
933
981 1,011
588
60
1,098 1,10,
.5
.88
. 51
.2'
59.05
63.92
59. 97
30. 70
95.93
54. 76
86.5
64.0
62. 21
65. 42
62.04
31.92
97.82
55.73
87.6
66.4
1.50
1.93
1.38
.66
.1
.4
2. 91
1.18
1.84
1.11
1.86
.97
1.0
2.0
372
482
480
609
683
507
520
541
.30
.56
.47
.24
. 15
.49
.2
.2
.20
1.04
1. 72
1. 10
.96
2. 21
1.6
2.2
36. 51
36. 98
35. 29
46.50
49. 48
38. 78
48.7
35.4
510
446
522
778
366
276
402
449
535
485
568
832
414
304
418
495
.26
.31
.35
.23
. 13
.07
.1
1.94
2. 14
2. 36
2.24
5. 40
1.97
.8
2.0
95
171
126
120
111
121
132
221
2,370
3, 753
2, 934
2, 551
2,916
1,611
1,761
3,453
2, 481
3, 963
3,081
2,691
3,055
1,755
1,907
3,690
.22
.32
. 19
. 19
.22
. 13
.2
.1
18
12
30
25
42
13
13
28
113
67
60
86
133
92
109
152
2, 200
1, 746
1, 591
2,110
1,405
1,302
918
1, 777
2,331
1,825
1,690
2, 221
1,580
1,407
1, 0315
1,957
. 16
. 17
.29
.25
.36
. 10
.1
.2
1,396
2,601
1,734
2, 550
3,744
4, 450
4, 909
5,264
2
5
1
13
3
5
5
4
10
18
9
15
3C
20
30
22
477
899
144
198
273
295
27»
3401
480
922
154
22:
300
326
3i:
360
10,973
12,149
12,424
18
8
10
r
40
5,610
b, 018
7, 58C
6, 645
i . 150
7,230
6', 723
8; 940
7
4
20
20
20
3,921
4,390
2, 45"
4 ,860
i
11
0.25
.32
.23
. 11
1
7
749
35
711
597
611
11
540
522
16
289
278
10
841
825
16
225
229
4
14 1,209 1,224
39 1, 221 1,267
3, 351
4, 164
4, 269
4,243
4,507
4,074
3, 439
4, 764
3
7
6
3
2
6
2
3
2
13
22
14
13
27
16
32
367
462
452
592
668
474
502
506
3, 778
5, 307
5, 639
7,263
2,908
4, 458
5,997
7, 579
3
5
6
5
1
1
1
22
34
40
49
47
27
15
46
23, 926
40, 097
38,147
35, 810
37, 574
49, 576
30,171
47, 548
16
39
21
20
25
20
14
16
36, 682
22, 887
34, 846
32, 743
38, 735
43,120
31, 921
45, 384
4,013
3, 113
2,901
3,018
2,908
1, 370
A, 660
6, 360
3
3
2
1
If
18
13
2
38
li
10
b
337
230
240
120
247
229
171
623
[ 882 ]
.Of
.28
.28
.1
.1
3.28 .52
1.3
.9
2.6 1.3
.58 4.38
.4 2.6
.5 4.4
22. 02
17. 28
11. 92
6. 72
12.54!
11.39
9.6
24.8
2. 48 1.6»
1. 59 1.08
. 79 1.55
.30 .3:
1.42 .78
1.38 .63
.6
.8
.7
.9
• 5c
.57
.29
.2!
.32
.27
.2
.6
4. 65
3.24
2. 63
.84
2.52
2.2
1.6
2.2
1.3 77.72 79. 60
74. 5" 76. 84!
1.90 79.08 81. 52i
.50 74.88 75.66!
3.05 1.29
5.00 l . O f
3. 26 3.30
1.64 .70
.86
. 9;
.90
.92
5. 20
6.98
7. 72
3. 26
1.44
19. 96
15.28
10. 82
6. 32
11.43
10. 50
8.5
23.3
109
INDUSTRIAL ACCIDENTS AND SAFETY
T a b l e 7 .—A C C ID E N T FR E Q U E N C Y A N D SE V E R IT Y R A TES IN TH E IR O N A N D ST E EL
IN D U S T R Y , 1922 TO 1929, BY STA TE A N D Y E A R —Continued
Frequency rates (per
Severity rates (per 1,000
1,000,000 hours’ exposure)
hours’ exposure)
Number of cases
State and year
M ichigan—C ontd.
1926_________
1927 ________
1928____ _ _
1929____
Missouri:
1922________
1923 ___ 1924_________
1925 _ ____
1926____
1927. __ __
1928__ _ __
1929. ___ _
N ew Jersey:
1922_________
1923 .
1924_________
1925________
1926
1927 ___
1928
1929. ____ _
New York:
1922________
1923 __ __
1924 _____ _
1925___ _ _
1926 ___
1927_________
1928
1929. ___ __
Ohio:
1922_________
1923
1924 _ __
1925 ____ _
_
1926____
1927 ____ _
1928..
1929____ _____
Pennsylvania:
1922_________
1923_____
1924._ .
1925 ____
1926__ _ _ _
1927..............
1928..
___
1929_________
Tennessee:
1922_________
1923_________
1924-------------1925 —~—______
1926 ---------- _
1927
__
1928
__
1929_________
Washington:
1922_________
1923_________
1924_________
1925_________
1926___
1927.. . . . __
1928_________
1929_________
Fullyear
worker
Per
ma
nen
Death
disa
bility
5, 64i
3, 48'
3, 12;
8, 681
Per
ma
nent
Tota Death
disa
disabili
bilitj
ty
Tem
pora-
1< 1,08( 1,10,
1(
62(
631
75S
761
5( 1,80, 1,868
4, 67f
4, 25(
1,284
3, 662
3, 215
2, 913
2, 934
4, 367
«
i
3
i
6
4
4
6
1
1
9,785
11,377
6,903
10, 372
9,442
8, 785
16, 531
17, 963
11
9
5
7
7
5
14
6
47
65
51
66
43
45
57
84
1,625
2,141
1, 107
2, 725
1,821
884
1,250
1,553
51,424
77,979
75, 282
86, 820
92, 678
91,377
65, 955
96,360
42
39
57
33
48
37
53
40
125
201
181
150
172
190
181
230
5,268
5, 763
5,223
5, 059
5,630
5,313
5, 066
4,972
102,186
140, 259
154,800
149, 089
196,124
146, 595
147,455
177,191
60
112
54
75
77
103
93
67
1,543
2,258
1, 503
1, 256
1,139
1, 354
1,063
1,819
9
3
1
1
1
1
1
534.
2, 258
1, 503
1,256
2
1, 348
1
763
942.
678 .
1 Less than one-tenth of 1 per cent
https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
0.18
.1'
.2
.3
11 1,631 1, 65C
<
90:
907
266
275
294
297
443
t
452
268
272
2
141
IT
22
716
744
6,597
7, 341
7,175
6,923
7, 896
7, 420
7, 538
9, 403
^
. 4;
37
625
663
47
78(
827
47
772
819
31
769
804
30
568
602
42
331
379
48
387
436
74 1,002 1,007
0.9,
. 9(
.3
2.1
Tem
porary Tota 1 Death
disabilitj
64.1.
59. 2;
80.9
69.3
Per
ma
nen
disa
bility
Tempora- To
disa- tal
bility
65. 2Í
60.3
81.4
71.7
1.0( 0.6'
1.1. .5
.1
1.3
1.6 1.3
0.89
.79
1.0
.9
. 8f 116. 3t 117.64
2.5" 1 01
1.41 4.99
1.17
.76 4.10
.34 1.08
.54 3. 08
. 56 1. 44
.4 1.1
.1
.5
. 2f
.Of
.3:
.i:
.1
2.08
.18
.61
.34
.2
.2
71. 4C
27. 0;
47. 0<
31.1 2
16.4
5.7
1.5C 1. 78
. 5i . 19
1.8C .68
.69 . 19
.1
.7
.3
.1
.05
1.87 31.58 33. 50
.30 1. 20
69. Of
26. 7(
46. 14
30. 67
16.0
5.5
2. 62
2. 45
2. 4
3.8
. 19
.16
.27
C1)
0)
1.49
1.26
1.89
2. 1
2.6
37.03
23. 96
14. 87
17.1
35.5
37. 71
25.38
17.03
19.3
38.1
1.16
1.01
1.62
.3
.2
1.46
.92
1.68
1.3
2.2
. 55 2. 05
2. 74
3. 39
.59 3. 21
.37 2. 30
.30 3. 60
.3 1 9
.6 3.0
1,683
2, 215
1,163
2,799
1,871
934
1,321
1, 643
.43
.26
.24
.22
.24
.19
.3
.1
1.85
1.90
2. 46
2.12
1. 51
1.71
1.2
1.6
64.13 66.42
62. 73 ,64-89
53. 46 56.16
87. 58 89.92
64. 34 66.09
33. 54 35.44
25. 2 26.6
28.8 30.5
2.60
1.58
1.45
1.35
1.48
1.14
1.7
.6
1.82
1.84
2. 03
2.35
.90
1. 32
1 .1
1.4
.99
. 73
.94
.89
.95
. 73
.6
.5
5.41
4.15
4. 42
4. 59
3. 33
3 19
3 4
2.5
5, 435
6,003
5, 461
5, 242
5,850
5,540
5, 300
5,242
.27
. 17
.25
.13
.17
.13
.3
.1
.81
.86
.80
.58
.62
.69
.9
.8
34.15
24.63
23.13
19. 42
20.25
19.38
25. 6
17.2
35.23
25. 66
24.18
20.13
21.04
20.20
26. 7
18.1
1.63
1.00
1.54
.76
1.03
.81
1. 6
.8
. 66
.87
. 98
. 53
.44
. 58
8
.7
. 48
. 39
.36
. 25
. 23
. 32
^5
.3
2
2
2
1
1
1
103 8, 364 8, 527
244 12,188 12, 544
244 8. 382 8,680
218 9, 527 9, 820
204 7, 763 8,044
239 6, 727 7, 069
212 5,066 5, 300
242 8,415 8,724
.20
.27
.12
.18
.13
.23
.2
.2
.34
.58
.53
.49
.34
.54
.5
.5
27.28
28. 97
18. 05
21.30
13. 17
15. 30
14. 5
15.8
27. 82
29.82
18. 70
21.97
13.64
16.07
15. 2
16.4
1.17
1. 60
. 70
1.01
. 79
1. 41
1. 3
.8
. 34
. 59
.34
. 45
. 09
. 53
5
.4
4
19
6
2
1
4
7
6
1
2
3
6
2
2
2
220
437
77
196
32
114
65
193
228
465
86
199
33
116
69
201
80
77
86
78
181
148
69
84
122
186
155
71
86
12? .
1. 33
.67
.27
.30
.25
.2
.55
.25
......
[883]
2. 80 64.50 68.63
1. 33 17.08 19. 07
.53 52.02 52. 82
9. 41 9. 71
.25 28. 07 28. 57
7. 97 2. 26
3. 99 1. 60
1.59 1. 67
1 75
1.48 .44
1.3
1.1
35.4
36.9
1.5
. 13
1. 49
.83 49'89 51. 27 ” 3."31 1. 27
. 15 37. 00 38. 30
1.48 . 96
87
*7 ?Q 7 30.4
1.0 00.0 61.0
.3
77
26
88
54
71
71
? Q
1.8
. 45 1 9fi
1. 03 3 22
. 30 1 34
. 26‘ 1 72
. 20 1 08
. 31 2 25
2 1
.3 1.5
.
¿ . 1Ô
1.03 11.23
. 25 5. 84
.69! 3.95
13!
.48 2.40
1. 3
.9 3.5
.59 6. 58
. 50 . 63
1.49 . 88
1. 15 5. 73
.48 2. 92
1.0
1.0 1 1.3
110
MONTHLY LABOR REVIEW
T a b l e 7 .—A C C ID E N T FR E Q U E N C Y A N D SE V E R IT Y R A TE S IN T H E IR O N A N D ST E E L
IN D U S T R Y , 1922 TO 1929, BY ST A T E A N D Y E A R —Continued
Severity rates (per 1,000
Frequency rates (per
hours’ exposure)
1,000,000 hours’ exposure)
Number of cases
State and year
Fullyear
workers
West Virginia:
1922_________
1923_________
1924_________
1925_________
1926_________
1927_________
1928_________
1929_________
Wisconsin:
1922_________
1923_________
1924_________
1925_________
1926_________
1927_________
1928_________
1929_________
Per
ma
Death nent
disa
bili
ty
Per Tem
Per Tem
Tem
ma pora
ma pora
pora
To
nent
nent
Death
Total
ry
ry Total Death disa ry
tal
disa disa
disa
disa
bili- bility
bili bility
bility
ty
ty
600
770
831
564
1,348
1,315
1,921
1,031
2, 702
9, 336
4,613
7,964
14,124
12,414
13, 938
21, 760
592
749
806
537
1,306
1,279
1,874
985
5,441
4,264
8, 321
6,089
10, 481
3, 992
2,604
7, 353
810
790
728
708
1,275 1,327
1,121 1,157
1, 214 1, 286
671
641
610
595
1, 459 1, 510
0.24
. 29
. 51
.54
.28
.40
.2
.2
0. 74
.46
1.30
.59
.71
.56
.9
.5
2. 2
3.17
2. 58
6. 26
4. 21
2. 46
3. 54
.6
2. 6
1.48 0. 84
1.71 . 54
3. 03 1. 53
3. 26 .67
1. 70 .41
2. 42 .56
1.3
.3
49. 63
56. 90
53.16
74. 33
40. 95
56. 02
78.1
66. 1 68.4
1.39
1.41 1. 23
1. 20 1. 57
.77 2 . 11
1. 14 1.76
.73 2.12
.78 3. 42
3. 45
.81 3.69
.55 3. 45
.59 4. 25
1.23 48. 40
1. 33 55. 34
51.08
2.18 72. 02
2. 10 38. 66
2.17 53. 52
1.9 76. 2
1.
0. 85
.33
1. 70
.28
.35
.56
74. 01
27. 49
60. 05
23. 61
31.86
35. 30
45.9
15.8
73.03
26. 74
58. 24
22. 48
30. 87
34. 34
44.8
15. 1
1.2
2.00
1.6
1. 3
1.8
2.0
.68
2. 2
3.6
S a fe ty C o d e fo r I n d u s tr ia l L ig h tin g
of the “ Code for lighting factories, mills, and other
work places,” prepared under the sponsorship of the Illuminat
A REVISION
ing Engineering Society, has been officially approved as American
standard by the American Standards Association.
The code is described as “ A guide for factory owners and operators
in their efforts to improve lighting conditions in their factories. It
makes available authoritative information for legislative bodies, fac
tory boards, industrial commissions, and others who are interested in
enactments, rules, and regulations for better lighting.”
The relation of suitable illumination and accident reduction is
pointed out. According to the statement of a prominent insurance
official, there is good reason to assume that defective vision or unsat
isfactory lighting installations were contributing factors in over 4,000
fatal and 560,000 lost-time nonfatal industrial accidents during 1928.
This is calculated to mean a loss to the industry of thê services of
35,000 men throughout the entire year from nonfatal accidents alone;
inclusion of the fatal accidents, using the accepted actuarial method
of evaluating these, brings the total loss to 125,000 men annually.
Elimination of accidents due to insufficient or improper lighting is
asserted to be simply a question of purchasing the proper equipment,
installing and operating it under competent direction. Aside from
the reduction of accidents and the corresponding decrease in com
pensation insurance cost, increased production and improved quality
of the product are listed as substantial financial arguments for proper
illumination.
Part II of the code describes the measurement of illumination,
recommended levels for industrial interiors and how to maintain the
proper intensity, avoidance of glare, and regulations for correct
electrical wiring, while Part III consists of suggested minimum regula
tions to be established by State authorities.
https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
[884]
111
INDUSTRIAL ACCIDENTS AND SAFETY
I n d u s tr ia l A c c id e n ts , N ew H a m p sh ir e , 1929 30
HE eighteenth biennial report of the Bureau of Labor of New
Hampshire, for the fiscal period ending June 30, 1930, contains
tabulations of accidents to minors under 18 years of age, which totaled
182 for the two years. Tabulations are also given of all fatal and
severe industrial accidents reported during the period, by cause and
by industry. Figures from the latter are presented in the following
table:
T
FA TA L A N D SE V ERE IN D U S T R IA L A C C ID E N T S IN N E W H A M PSH IR E , JULY 1 1928
TO JU N E 30, 1930, BY IN D U S T R Y
1928-29
1929-30
Industry
Fatal
Automobiles, vehicles, and repairs____
E lectrica l.._______ ____ ____________
Food products______________________
Iron and steel products______________
Laundry___________________________
Leather products_____ ______________
Light, heat, and power______________
Miscellaneous_______________________
Paper and pulp products_____________
Stone and clay products_______ ______
Textile products____________________
Wood products______________________
Mercantile_________________________
Buildings, contracting, and engineering.
Farms______________________________
Hotels, restaurants, and institutions___
Severe
Severe
45
34
22
22
1
141
9
151
59
119
675
104
506
431
95
186
32
40
T otal_________________________
Fatal
2, 616
142
6
175
20
101
458
76
525
444
88
264
22
33
2,410
F a ta l A c c id e n ts in E rie, P a.
to a study by the Manufacturers’ Association of
Erie, Pa., of the accident records for 1930, a total of 68 fatal
ACCORDING
accidents occurred in the city of Erie duiing the year.
l
Traffic accidents were responsible for the largest number, result
ing in 30 deaths, as compared with 26 for 1929. Home accidents
accounted for 28, as compared with 22 for 1929. Industrial accidents
are classed in two groups—business accidents, with six fatalities, and
manufacturing^accidents, with four fatalities. The six fatal accidents
charged to business are described as : Coal wagon driver, hit by train ;
lineman, fall from pole; laborer in scrap-iron yard, hernial injury
resulting fatally; carpenter, hit by falling acetylene-gas tank; painter,
fall of ladder; roofer, fall of platform. Two of the four deaths in the
manufacturing industry were caused by infection resulting from minor
injuries, one by contact with high voltage electric circuit, and one by
being caught under a car of coal while unloading.
The association praises the safety movement conducted by the
department of labor and industry and other departments of the State
of Pennsylvania and the efforts of the National Safety Council, but
emphasizes that, though much has been done, there is much more to
do, as shown by the record for this city of 120,000 inhabitants, because
many of these accidents could have been prevented.
https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
[885]
WORKMEN’S COMPENSATION
R e c e n t C o m p e n s a tio n R e p o r ts
A la b a m a
10-YEAR statistical review of the workmen’s compensation
division of the Bureau of Insurance of Alabama, covering the
A years
1920 to 1929, inclusive, has been issued in mimeograph form.
A compilation of accidents and compensation cost, extracted from
the report, is presented in the following table. The amounts of com
pensation shown for 1920, 1921, and 1922 represent only compensation
and funeral benefits, and do not include any medical expenses, while
the amounts shown for the years 1923 to 1929 include medical benefits
in compensable cases.
C OM PARISON OF A C C ID E N T S R E P O R T E D A N D C O M PE N SA T IO N COST IN A L ABA M A ,
1920 TO 1929, BY YEAR S
Year
1Q?0
1921
1^22
1923
1924
Number of
accidents
reported
Fatal
Total
186
144
231
243
214
6,158
4,299
5, 769
8, 336
7, 661
Amount of
compensation
paid
i $998, 799. 77
i 718, 615.15
i 821,329. 44
1,199, 577. 00
1,438,065. 00
Year
1925_______________
1926_______________
1927_______________
1928_______________
1929_______________
Number of
accidents
reported
Fatal
Total
259
292
195
153
155
7,580
7,821
7,162
6, 691
7, 015
Amount of
compensation
paid
$1, 601,739. 00
1, 705, 370. 07
1, 514, 458. 21
1,421,182. 74
1, 365,469. 58
i Medical benefits not included.
Id a h o
T he seventh report of the Idaho Industrial Accident Board, cover
ing the period from November 1, 1928, to October 31, 1930, shows that
16,375 claims were received during the two years and that the board
passed on 16,251 claims, consisting of 126 fatal, 1 permanent total,
705 permanent partial, and 14,847 temporary total cases, all com
pensable, and 572 rejected claims. A time loss of 270,915 days was in
volved in the compensated cases. Awards were made of $1,381,061.06
for compensation and $293,015.70 for medical expense, a total of
$1,674,076.76. Tables show the distribution of this total as $174,873.38
for self-insuring employers, $729,669.11 for the State insurance fund,
and $769,534.27 for other insurance carriers. The medical expense
stated does not include cost of medical treatment under hospital
contracts, which was provided in approximately 45 per cent of the
closed cases
It is pointed out that the time required for the settlement of claims
was reduced one-fourth during the second year. The average number
of days between the date of application for a hearing and the date of
the hearing was 53.97 in 1929 and 42.97 in 1930, and the average num112
https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
[ 886 ]
113
W ORKM EN’S COMPENSATION
ber of days between a hearing and the decision was 43.40 in 1929 and
28.62 in 1930.
A comparison of the number of claims filed and closed each fiscal
year, 1918 to 1930, with compensation and medical expense awards,
is presented in the following table :
N U M B E R OF CLAIM S FIL E D A N D CLOSED Y E A R L Y IN IDAHO, W ITH A M O U N T OF
C O M PEN SA TIO N A N D M ED IC A L COSTS, 1918 TO 1930
Claims
Awards
Year
Filed
1918
1919
1920
1921.
1922
1923
1924
1925
1926
1927
1928
1929
1930
Closed
Compensation
________
____
________
_____
______
_________
________
_________
___________
______ ____
_____
_
________
3,849
4, 087
5,450
4,547
4,627
6,310
6,401
6,694
7,424
7,839
7,684
8,026
8,349
3,082
3,887
5,086
5, 061
4,163
6,007
6. 653
6,547
7,392
8,160
7,558
7,729
8,541
T otal____________
81, 287
79, 866
$152, 730. 51
389, 540.60
586,863.13
474,459. 23
480,239. 52
614, 767. 04
697, 263. 58
587,265.93
608, 771.25
666, 879. 66
672,978.37
613,046. 97
768, 014. 09
7, 312, 819. 88
M edical1
Total
$17, 360. 74
48,256. 73
70,604. 37
106,392. 27
104,133. 91
106,925.10
96, 586.40
107,457.03
111, 978.16
144,058.85
137, 513.07
132, 595.09
160, 420. 61
$170, 091.25
437, 797.33
657, 467. 50
580, 851.50
584, 373.43
721,692.14
793, 849. 98
694, 722. 96
720, 749.41
810, 938. 51
810, 491. 44
745, 642. 06
928, 434. 70
1, 344, 282. 33
8, 657,102. 21
1 Medical costs under hospital contracts not included.
N ew H a m p s h ir e
I n t h e eighteenth biennial report of the New Hampshire Bureau
of Labor for the fiscal period ending June 30, 1930, the labor com
missioner strongly recommends the enactment of an adequate com
pensation law, eliminating the court system of administration and
providing definite settlement of compensation for industrial injuries,
so as to place New Hampshire on a par with the other New England
States.
It is pointed out that at the last two sessions of the legislature the
proposed legislation for that purpose was rejected, although agreed
to at a conference between manufacturers and organized labor and
reported favorably by the judiciary committee. Provisions advocated
in the report include the establishment of an industrial accident board
to administer the law, compensation payment of at least 66% per cent
of the wages of the injured worker, payment of necessary medical
expenses, a waiting period of not more than one week, a classified
list of injuries, and arrangement for insurance of compensation risks.
Reports received during the two fiscal years under the present law
show occurrence of accidents and amounts paid on account of these,
as follows:
N U M B E R OF A C C ID E N T S R E P O R T E D A N D A M O U N T S PA ID IN N E W H A M P SH IR E ,
1928-29 A N D 1929-30
Accidents
Year
Amount paid
Plants
Fatal Severe Slight Total
1928-29________
1929-30__________
666
662
https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
16
15
2,616
2,410
519
462
Compen
sation
Medical
Hospital
Total
3,151 $275,436. 50 $56, 621.16 $22, 770. 88 $354, 828. 54
2,887 254, 747.87 62, 549.17 20, 978. 50 338,275. 54
1887]
114
MONTHLY LABOR R E V IE W
S o u t h D a k o ta
T h e thirteenth annual report o f the South Dakota Industrial Com
missioner covers the experience under the workmen’s compensation
act of the State for the 12 months ending June 30, 1930.
The total number of accidents reported during the year was 6,120,
an increase of 10.9 per cent over the preceding year. Compensation
payments, however, decreased 2.3 per cent, resulting in a total of
$181,630.59. A 4.2 per cent reduction was experienced in medical
and hospital relief, which aggregated $89,857.24 for the year. Under
the usual policy of the department, nearly all disagreements were
settled without the formality of hearings, to save expense to the State
as well as to the contending parties. Eighteen hearings and review
hearings were held, at a cost of $55.11 per case, but the average
administrative cost was held to 87.77 cents per claim filed, with a
total of $5,371.73. In addition, $2,291.28 was paid to injured em
ployees of the State coming within the jurisdiction of the department.
The report includes recommendations for increases in compensation
benefits for fatal and total disability cases, now limited to $3,000,
which is lower than in most States. It is suggested that gradual
increases be made from time to time, to avoid placing too great a
burden on production costs at one time. It is also advocated that the
medical and hospital relief, now limited to $100 for each class of
service, be increased $100, subject to approval of the commissioner,
in extreme cases where additional medical or hospital services may
he necessary.
One of the tabulations in the report shows the number of injuries
in each group of occupations, under the special classification used by
the commissioner’s office, with the average daily wages for each group.
NUM BER
OP IN JU R IE S R E P O R T E D A N D A V ER A G E D A IL Y W AGES, IN SOUTH
DA K O TA , Y E A R E N D IN G JU N E 30, 1930, B Y O C C U PA T IO N
Employment
Tlftlrp/rs
if.
T ll^ p k ^ m ith s
Ppio.klq.yp.rs
TJridgf*- p.nnst.rnption
Tin trdip.rs
n ip p k s a n d frnnkkpppp.rs
D re a m p,rip.s
D a r p e n t.PXS
D o n ^ tm e tin n wnpU
O n n k s a n d phefs
D a ir ie s
"D ry p le a n e rs
D is h w a sh e rs
P u g i n eers
F,1ppt.fi p.i fin s
F ire m e n
"F arm in g
O lav.iers
Da*"» a n d nil c ita tio n s
D r a in p lp y a tn r^
Top 1a h n r
I m p l e m e n t w nrU s
J a n it o r s
T,umbering
Ua/nn d r ie s
T>ab o r e r s
AT a e b in is ts
https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
Number
of acci
dents
39
23
22
20
9
48
183
117
109
86
74
9
5
28
22
28
25
210
10
59
47
96
56
43
134
21
839
68
D aily
wages
Employment
$4. 09
3. 07
5.61
7 .5 0
5. 08
5. 06
3. 63
4. 15
6. 17
6. 23
3 .6 6
4. 68
4. 21
2. 16
5. 79
5 .1 3
4. 59
2.91
5. 43
4. 39
4. 44
3.9 1
4. 34
3.7 1
3. 79
3 .0 9
4.3 1
4. 66
Mechanics___ _____ - -- Miners____
_ ____ - __ ..
Miscellaneous - _ ___ -Nurses and doctors--------------Plumbers . _
- _____
Painters
_ ______
_Policemen
_ - .
-_ __
Produce p la n ts -- _____ _____
Printers _
-------PilotS- - - - - Quarry work
Roadwork _
- - - - Railroads
Salesmen Sugar refining . .
Threshing
Truck drivers _ ____ — Teamsters__________ _____
Tractor operators
------- -Teachers
TinnersPacking plants
-Telephone workers
Utilities Volunteer firemen .
---W ell drillers------ ---------- -Welders . Waitresses__________________
[ 888]
Number
of acci
dents
479
468
509
10
57
27
9
92
55
3
77
126
75
79
72
100
292
44
29
6
25
473
109
388
11
17
7
49
Daily
wages
$4.84
4. 62
4. 40
3. 62
6. 12
5. 75
4. 48
3. 52
4. 73
6. 66
5.31
5. 10
4. 50
5. 92
5. 55
4 .9 8
4. 21
3. 63
5. 19
4.5 4
4. 76
3. 73
3. 63
5. 24
4. 20
5. 96
6 .0 8
2. 31
LABOR LAWS AND COURT DECISIONS
M erchant
M a r in e A ct A p p lic a b le t o
F o r e ig n S h ip
S te v e d o r e
In ju r e d
on
HE Supreme Court of the United States recently held that an
American stevedore injured while engaged in unloading a private
foreign ship in American waters was covered by the merchant marine
act. (Uravic v. Jarka Co., 282 U. S. 234.) This decision by the highest
court in the land reversed a judgment rendered by the courts in
New York State.
The original action was brought in the State courts of New York
by the administratrix of the estate of the deceased employee, Anton
Uravic. Uravic was an American citizen employed as a stevedore by
the F. Jarka Co., a Delaware corporation. On July 13, 1926, Uravic
was helping to unload a German vessel in New York Harbor, when
he was injured through the negligence of a fellow worker. Section 33
(as amended by an act of June 5, 1920, 41 Stat. 988-1007) of the
merchant marine act provides that—
T
A ny seam an who shall suffer personal in ju ry in th e course of his em ploym ent
m ay, a t his election, m a in ta in an actio n for dam ages a t law, w ith th e rig h t of
tria l by ju ry , an d in such action all sta tu te s of th e U n ited S tates m odifying or
extending th e com m on-law rig h t o r rem edy in cases of personal in ju ry to railw ay
em ployees shall ap p ly ; a n d in case of th e d e a th of an y seam an as a resu lt of any
such personal in ju ry th e personal re p resen tativ e of such seam an m ay m ain tain
an action for dam ages a t law w ith th e rig h t of tria l b y ju ry , a n d in such action
all sta tu te s of th e U n ited S tates conferring or reg u latin g th e rig h t of action for
d e a th in th e case of railw ay em ployees shall be applicable. Ju risd ictio n in
such actions shall be u n d er th e co u rt of th e d istric t in which th e defen d an t
em ployer resides or in w hich his p rincipal office is located.
The Supreme Court of the United States in a previous case, Inter
national Stevedoring Co. v. Haverty, 272 U. S. 50, had decided that
stevedores came within the benefits conferred by section 33 of the
merchant marine act. The main question raised in the case under
consideration was whether the statute applied to a stevedore working
on a foreign vessel, or, in particular, a vessel flying the German flag.
The stevedoring company argued that the act did not apply; that
whenever any provision was to apply to foreign vessels it was ex
pressly stated, and that Congress, if it had intended the act to apply,
would not have left such a regulation to be implied. The petitioners
on behalf of the administratrix, on the other hand, contended that
section 33 of the act was designed to affect the relationship of em
ployer and employee, and that it did not affect vessels as such.
Mr. Justice Holmes delivered the opinion of the court and stated
that the language of the statute was general, and that the right is
given “ any seaman/’ which right would also cover stevedores.
“ There is strong reason,” the court said, “ for giving the same protec
tion to the person of those who work in our harbors when they are
https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
[889]
115
116
M O N TH LY LA B O R R E V IE W
working upon a German ship that they would receive when working
upon an American ship in the next dock, as is especially obvious in
the case of stevedores who may be employed in unloading vessels of
half a dozen different flags in turn.”
The court, in answering the contention that stevedores have their
rights only by an artificial extension of the word “ seamen” and that
a seaman upon a German vessel would not be given the rights claimed
said—
P erhaps it w ould be a sufficient answ er to th e objections th a t, while th e sec
tio n 33 is construed to give th e rig h ts of seam en to stevedores, it does n o t say
or m ean t h a t stevedores a re to be reg ard ed as seam en on th e p a rtic u la r vessel
upon w hich for th e m o m en t th e y h ap p en to be a t w ork. T h ey sim ply are given
th e rig h ts of seam en an d , as th e y are A m erican w orkm en, th e y have th e rig h ts
of A m erican seam en as well on G erm an as on A m erican ships.
The judgment of the New York court was therefore reversed.
P ow er o f N o r th C a r o lin a I n d u s tr ia l C o m m is s io n e r t o C o m p el
T e s t im o n y o f W itn e s s e s
HE North Carolina Supreme Court has upheld the power of the
State industrial commissioner to punish for contempt a duly
sworn witness who refuses to testify in proceedings before him. (In
re Hayes, 200 N. C. 133, 156 S. E. 791.)
This case resulted from the refusal of a physician to answer a ques
tion propounded by the chairman of the North Carolina Industrial
Commission, who thereupon adjudged the doctor in contempt of
court. The physician was arrested and held in custody by the sheriff
upon an order made by the chairman of the board. The case in which
the physician was to testify involved the claim of an employee to
compensation for injuries received while in the course of his employ
ment. At a hearing held in behalf of the employee the physician,
Dr. R. B. Hayes, was present as a witness. The doctor had attended
the employee at the time he was injured and had also filed his report
of the case with the commission. He was therefore a material wit
ness. After the doctor had been sworn and testified, he was examined
by the chairman of the board, who presided at the hearing. The
commissioner ruled that there was but one question to be decided by
him—whether or not the condition of the employee at the date of the
hearing was the result of the accident. He thereupon attempted to
interrogate the physician, who refused to answer unless he received a
fee as an expert witness. The arrest and incarceration of the doctor
followed. He petitioned the Superior Court of Orange County, N. C.,
for release, but this court held that he was not entitled to be dis
charged from the imprisonment to which he had been committed by
the chairman of the board. An appeal was subsequently taken by
Doctor Hayes to the Supreme Court of North Carolina. The main
question in the case, on appeal to the supreme court, was whether the
chairman of the North Carolina Industrial Commission had the power
to adjudge the doctor in contempt and imprison him.
The supreme court reviewed briefly the creation of the industrial
commission, and added that “ it is primarily an administrative agency
of the State, charged with the duty of administering the provisions of
T
https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
[890]
LA B O R L A W S AND C O U R T D E C IS IO N S
117
the North Carolina workmen’s compensation act.” (Ch. 120, Acts of
1929.) Power is expressly conferred—
T o subpoena w itnesses for e ith e r p a rty to a cause, p ending before said com
m ission, to a tte n d a n d te stify a t a hearing before th e fu ll com m ission o r before
an y m em ber thereof. A w itness, w hen a subpoena h as been d u ly serv ed on him ,
is req u ired to a tte n d th e hearing, a n d to testify , a fter he h as been d u ly sw orn.
H is answ ers to questions p ro p o u n d ed to him a t th e h earin g c o n stitu te evidence
from w hich th e com m ission or th e com m issioner presiding a t th e h e arin g finds
th e facts u pon w hich th e a w ard is m ade. W ith o u t such evidence, w hen th e fa c ts
are in dispute, n eith er th e fu ll com m ission n o r th e com m issioner can p erfo rm th e
du ties im posed by th e s ta tu te . If a w itness in a tte n d a n c e a t a h earin g , a fte r
having been duly sw orn, can refuse to answ er a questio n p ro p o u n d ed to him ,
w hich is p e rtin e n t to th e m a tte rs in d isp u te betw een th e p artie s, w ith im p u n ity ,
th e n i t is m anifest t h a t th e N o rth C aro lin a In d u s tria l C om m ission, c re a te d by
s ta tu te to ad m in ister th e provisions of th e N o rth C aro lin a w o rk m en ’s co m p en sa
tion act, a n d to determ in e th e rig h ts a n d liabilities of em ployers a n d em ployees,
su b ject to its exclusive ju risd ictio n u n d er th e provisions of th e a c t, is w ith o u t
ad eq u ate pow er to perform its du ties p rescribed by s ta tu te , to th e people of th is
S ta te an d to th e p arties to a cause p ending before th e said com m ission.
While a provision is made in section 54 (c) of the workmen’s com
pensation act for the superior court to enforce any attendance and
testimony of witnesses, etc., yet the court said that—
T h is provision is clearly n o t a d e q u a te fo r a situ a tio n such as t h a t disclosed by
th e record of th e hearing a t w hich th e p e titio n e r herein, upo n th e fa c ts fo u n d by
th e com m issioner a n d se t o u t by him in th e record, w as a d ju d g ed in c o n te m p t
an d punished therefor. U nder th is provision, in p ro p er cases, th e su p erio r c o u rt
has th e pow er to aid th e com m ission in p ro curing th e a tte n d a n c e of w itnesses a t
hearings before th e com m ission or before an y m em ber or d e p u ty thereof. I t
does n o t, how ever, b y its express term s, or by im plication, deprive th e com m is
sion o r an y m em bei thereof, w hile co nducting a hearing as req u ired by sta tu te ,
of th e pow er to com pel a w itness, in a tte n d a n c e a t said hearing, a fte r h aving been
duly sw orn, to testify.
The courts of North Carolina and of other States have uniformly
held that “ the power to punish for a contempt committed in the
presence of the court is inherent in the court, and not dependent upon
statutory authority.” Without regard as to whether the North
Carolina Industrial Commission is a court or not (much relied upon
by the physician in the negative) the supreme court said that—
We are of th e opinion t h a t th e com m ission or a n y of its m em bers, w hen con
ducting a hearing for th e purpose of deciding questions upon w hich th e rig h ts a n d
liabilities of a n em ployer a n d an em ployee, u n d er th e N o rth C aro lin a w o rk m en ’s
com pensation act, are to be determ in ed by th e com m ission or by one of its m em
bers, has th e pow er to ad ju d g e a w itness Avho h as deliberately a n d p e rsisten tly
refused to answ er a question pro p o u n d ed to him in co n tem p t, an d to pu n ish such
w itness fo r such c o n tem p t by fine or im priso n m en t.
Hearings before an industrial commission are in their nature ju
dicial proceedings, and upon the contemptuous refusal of a witness to
testify the court said that: “ The commission or commissioner pre
siding at the hearing has the power to adjudge the witness in contempt
and to punish for such contempt, within the limitations prescribed
by statute. ”
Although the question raised by the doctor, relative to the right
of refusing to testify without receiving the fee of an expert witness,
was not presented to the supreme court, yet this court, in passing,
said that, while the question had never been decided by that court, it
had been presented and decided by courts in other jurisdictions. In
a few cases the court observed that a witness can not be adjudged in
contempt upon his refusal to give testimony unless he received the
https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
[891]
118
M O N T H L Y LA B O R R E V IE W
expert fee, yet the better opinion was that an expert summoned to
testify who refused to answer questions without compensation other
than his witness fees is in contempt.
The j udgment of the superior court was therefore affirmed.
In ju r y D u r in g N o o n H o u r H eld C o m p e n sa b le in T e n n e s s e e
INJURY to an employee falling to the floor in the employer’s
just after noon hour while watching the employees
A NLplaybuilding
basket ball “ arose out of and in the course of the employment,”
according to a recent decision of the Supreme Court of Tennessee.
(Kingsport Silk Mills v. Cox, 33 S. W. (2d) 90.)
From the facts in the case it appears that on October 2f, 1929,
Virgie Cox, an employee of the Kingsport Silk Mills, fell onto the
floor of the main building while watching the employees engage in a
basket-ball game during the accustomed lunch and recreation period.
The game was being played by permission of the employer and was
encouraged by him as a means of recreation for the employees during
the noon hour. It appeared that the floor was slippery, due to its
smooth surface, and that the fall was purely accidental.
A petition was filed by the employee for compensation under the
Tennessee workmen’s compensation act in the chancery court of
Sullivan County, and this court rendered a decree awarding compen
sation. The Kingsport Silk Mills thereupon appealed the case to the
Tennessee Supreme Court, where the decree awarding compensation
was affirmed. The supreme court found that the lower court was
correct in holding that the accident arose out of and in course of the
employment, and that by reason of the injury in the breaking of the
left thigh joint the employee was permanently and totally incapaci
tated from working at any occupation which would bring her an
income.
The supreme court stated that the underlying principle of the case
is stated in Bradbury’s Workmen’s Compensation (3d ed.) 524, as
follows:
T he relatio n of m a ste r a n d serv an t, in so fa r as it involves th e o bligation of
m aster to p ro te c t th e serv an t, is n o t suspended durin g th e noon hour, w here th e
m aster expressly, or b y fair im plication, in v ites his se rv a n ts to rem ain on th e
prem ises in th e im m ed iate v icin ity of th e w ork.
The court cited a leading Kansas case (Thomas v. Procter & Gamble
Mfg. Co., 104 Kan. 432, 179 Pac. 372), in which it was held that a
17-year-old girl was entitled to recover compensation for an injury
received during the half-hour intermission at noon. In this case the
employee, after eating lunch, was injured while engaged with other
employees in the customary practice, known to and approved by the
employer, of riding on a truck drawn by a fellow employee.
The Tennessee Supreme Court, in comparing the facts in the two
cases, however, stated that the rule would be different “ where, at
such time, an employee is injured while engaged in some forbidden act,
or while in a place where she has no right to be. ”
The decision of the lower court awarding compensation was there
fore affirmed.
https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
F8921
SMALL LOANS
C o st o f C red it t o t h e S m a ll B orrow er
Types of Small-Loan Agencies
HE results of a study of the whole small-loans field, made under
the auspices of the Twentieth Century Fund, are given in a
recent book, Financing the Consumer, by Evans Clark.
The agencies operating in the small-loans field include the follow
ing nine groups:
(1) The unlicensed lenders, i. e., all loan companies operating with
out a license and without any public regulation. This group includes
not only the “ loan sharks” but also concerns charging reasonable
rates but operating in States having no regulatory law. These lend
on the security of wage assignments, chattel mortgages, automobiles,
comaker notes, etc.
(2) Pawnbrokers, making loans on the security of jewelry and
other valuables left on deposit..
(3)
Personal finance companies, which are licensed agencies mak
ing loans of $300 or less, under the authority of such statutes as the
uniform small-loans law. Most of their business is done on the secu
rity of chattel mortgages, although they sometimes take wage assign
ments as security.
(4)
Industrial banks (such as Morris Plan banks), which combine a
small-loan business with the sale of investment certificates on the
installment plan. Their loans are usually made on the security of
comaker notes.
(5)
Personal-loan departments of commercial banks, lending on
the security of comaker notes.
(6)
Credit unions—cooperative credit associations lending only
to members, usually on the member’s shares or on an indorsed note.
(7)
Remedial loan societies, usually organized on a semiphilanthropic basis and doing a limited-dividend small-loan business, on
chattels, notes, or pledges.
(8)
Axias—unlicensed and unchartered voluntary savings and loan
societies, usually among foreign groups, which make loans on indorsed
notes and shares.
(9)
Employers’ loan organizations, set up by employers to supply
credit to their employees.
T
https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
[8931
119
120
M O N TH LY LA BO R R E V IE W
The report estimates that together these small-loan agencies
make loans of about $2,592,500,000 a year to some 14,350,000 bor
rowers, the proportion of loans made by each type being as follows:
Per cent
U nlicensed le n d e rs________________________________________
P aw n b ro k e rs_____________________________________________
P ersonal finance co m panies_______________________________
In d u s tria l b a n k s __________________________________________
C om m ercial b a n k s _______________________________________
C red it u n io n s____________________________________________
R em edial loan societies___________________________________
A xias__________________________________________
E m ployers’ p la n s ______________________________
28.
23.
19.
13.
7.
2.
2.
1.
.
9
2
3
9
3
4
3
9
8
T o ta l______________________________________________ 100. 0
Something of the importance of these groups is indicated by the
figures cited, showing that, measured in terms of invested capital, the
consumer credit agencies rank with the iron and steel, lumber, and
automobile industries.
A spectacular expansion is now taking place in the small-loans
business, but the author points out that nevertheless “ the demand for
credit far outruns the present available supply, presaging a great
expansion of this business in the future.” The need for small credit
is shown by the fact that it is estimated that in New York City one
of every two families borrows from small-loan agencies every year.
Rates Charged by Small-Loan Agencies
I t i s pointed out that a large proportion of the customers of the
small-loan companies are driven to borrow because of dire distress,
and their power to bargain “ is reduced to a minimum by the pressure
of their needs.” The limited number of such agencies still further
restricts the borrower’s choice and bargaining power. “ The typical
small borrower has not the financial leeway that would enable him to
‘shop around’ for a low-priced loan; nor are there usually enough
places in which to shop. He must take what he can get at the only
agency he knows about.”
Also, he is at a distinct disadvantage from the fact that the methods
of calculation of interest and the various charges imposed are so subtle
and so complicated that “ probably not one out of a thousand buyers
or borrowers has the slightest idea of the actual annual rate he is
charged for his credit—let alone how the rates he pays compares with
those of other agencies.”
How much conscious deception is practiced upon the borrower the
author does not attempt to estimate, but he points out: “ That
borrowers are widely deceived is hardly open to doubt.” Thus,
“ character loans” at 6 per cent may be advertised and sound very
attractive to the prospective borrower, if he does not know that 6
per cent on the full amount for the whole period of the note is deducted
in advance and that on a $100 loan he has the use of but $94 while he
pays part of this back each week or month, so that each month he
has paid the full interest but has the use of a constantly decreasing
amount. Often, also, there are concealed charges, as for “ investiga
tion,” etc., which bring up the cost. Or the loan may run only for 10
months but be discounted on the basis of a full year.
https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
[894]
121
SM ALL LOAN S
T h e n e e d o f a u n ifo r m b a s is o f c a lc u la tio n is e m p h a s iz e d , w h ic h w ill
s h o w t h e b o r r o w e r “ t h e r a te p e r y e a r h e h a s to p a y fo r t h e m o n e y o f
w h ic h h e h a s t h e a c t u a l u s e .”
T h e a n n u a l r a t e s c h a r g e d b y t h e v a r io u s t y p e s o f s m a ll-lo a n
a g e n c ie s a re g iv e n in th e f o llo w in g ta b le :
A N N U A L RATES OF IN T E R E S T C H A R G E D B Y SP E C IF IE D T Y PE S OF SM ALL-LOAN
A G E N C IE S
Agency
Credit unions_________ _ _ ___ ____ _ .
Personal-loan departments of commercial banks ____
________ _______ ______ _ ______ _
Industrial banks
Remedial loan societies_______ _ _
. „_ _
Axias__ __ _
________ ______
Personal finance companies __ ___ __ _ ______ . _____ .
Pawnbrokers
_______ _
Unlicensed lenders- _
__
_____
,
Usual
charge
Range o f
charges
P er cent
P er cent
12.0
18.1
17. 3
26.9
28. 5
42.0
36.0
6.09. 417. 312.0-
18.0
22.6
34. 4
36. 0
30. 0- 42. 0
12. 0-120. 0
240. 0-480. 0
One important factor is not considered in these rates, i. e., that the
borrower who pays the lender’s charges in advance has not the use
of that money meanwhile. If he obtains the loan from a discount
company he pays the whole interest in advance, and he has to pay it
even if he should be able to pay off the principal before the end of the
term of the loan, for discount companies do not often rebate any
interest under these conditions. On the other hand, if the borrower
obtains his loan at a pawnshop he does not pay the interest until he
redeems his pledge, and therefore has the use of the interest money
during the full period of the loan. The credit union laws and the
uniform small-loans lawTs provide that the interest shall be calculated
each month and only on the unpaid balance and that no other fees
may be levied. Thus, a man who makes a loan from a personal
finance company, at the rate of 3% per cent interest a month, of $100
to be repaid in monthly installments over a period of a year, does
not pay $42 in interest, as he would if his note were discounted in
advance; he pays $22.75, because he is charged interest each month
only on the amount which still remains unpaid. A man borrowing
the same amount from a credit union at the common credit union rate
of 1 per cent per month would actually pay, not $12, but $6.50, for
the use of the money. In addition, when the interest is calculated
on the unpaid balances, the borrower who wishes to pay off his loan
faster than the regular term is automatically protected against
having to pay interest for the rest of the term.
It is seen that of all the small-loan agencies the credit union’s rates
are the lowest. In addition the member of the credit union makes a
profit from his own loan through his share in the credit union
dividends.
Cost of Operation
T he credit union and pawnshop operate at the least cost of all the
agencies. This is possible for the credit union not only because it
pays no large salaries and often none at all and often has free office
space, but also because, since it lends only to its own members whom
the credit committee knows, it incurs no expenses for investigation
https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
[895]
122
M O N T H L Y L A B O R R E V IE W
and has little or no loss from failure to repay loans. The pawnshop
also operates at low cost, because the security for the loan is always
in its possession and is more than equal in value to the amount
loaned, there is no expense incurred either for investigation or for
collection of the loan, and as the loans are not repaid in installments
there is little bookkeeping to be done. Comaker loan companies,
according to the author, cost from one and a half to two or three times
as much to operate as pawnshops and credit unions because of the
necessity of investigating the borrowers. The “ personal finance
companies cost four to five times as much to run because of the higher
cost of dunning as well as of investigation.” As they lend on chattels
requiring personal inspection and appraisal in each case, and as this
kind of security has a very low resale value and is therefore insecure
because of that fact, the chattel lender must be more sure than any
other lender of the responsibility of the borrower. One of the major
items of expense of the chattel lender is the cost of collection of
delinquent accounts. “ The collateral for these loans is so poor and
it is so unpolitic to force collection on its sale or redemption that these
concerns will go to almost any lengths to avoid foreclosures. Because
they deal with the least responsible class of borrowers, an exceptional
amount of personal ‘dunning’ is required.”
The statement below shows the per cent of loan fund which goes
into operating costs for the various types of small-loan agencies:
Cost (per cent)
of operation
P ersonal-loan d e p a rtm e n ts of b a n k s_______________________
3. 0
C red it u n io n s_____ ______________________________________
1 3. 7
P aw n b ro k e rs:
R em ed ial____________________________________________
3. 5
C om m ercial__________________________________________
8. 4
In d u s tria l b a n k s__________________________________________
9. 9
C h a tte l lo an agencies:
R em ed ial____________________________________________
12. 4
L eading c o m p a n y _______________________________________17. 8
N ew Jersey com p an ies________________________________
21.6
Profits
T h e data for profits obtained were admittedly scattered and un
satisfactory. Figures for the industrial banks show net profits for
the Morris Plan banks amounting to 19.3 per cent of the capital, for
the Citizen’s Systems of 14.8 per cent, and for the Wimsett System
of 16.4 per cent.
Practically no profit data were available for the pawnshops or
personal-loan departments of commercial banks; the author con
siders it probable, however, that the better-run pawnshops would
show “ the largest profits of all the small-loan agencies because, while
their rates are relatively high, their costs of operation are relatively
low,” while he thinks that the personal-loan departments would
show the least profit of all.
With regard to the personal finance companies, the report states
that although these agencies are associated in the public mind with
high profits, “ a search of all the available literature on the subject
1 The data collected by the Bureau of Labor Statistics from 135 credit unions from various sections of
the country for 1929 showed an expense ratio ot only 1.79 per cent.
https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
[896]
SM ALL LOANS
123
* *
has /ailed to reveal any concrete evidence that these con
cerns are making a profit that would be considered unreasonable in
banking or manufacturing circles. Some of them do, however, make
from two to three times as much as is considered a fair rate of return
for a public utility.” Analysis of the returns of all the New Jersey
agencies of this type showed a net return on invested capital (includ
ing surplus) of 10 per cent, while another study, not published, showed
profits of 9.8 per cent for the small independent companies and of
18.4 per cent for the chain companies. The author remarks, in this
connection, “ If the average large company in this State returned 18
pei cent a year, it is probable that the most successful concerns showed
a profit in that State of 20 per cent and over.”
No corresponding data were available for the credit unions, but
dividends paid out of net income in 1928 by 119 credit unions in New
fork State showed that the highest rate was 10 per cent, while the
average rate was 4.8 per cent.
‘‘Ironically enough,” the author points out, “ it is among the reme
dial loan societies—the so-called ‘semiphilanthropic agencies’—that
some of the highest profits are revealed.” Five societies showed a net
profit of 15 per cent or over, another of 24 per cent, and still another of
30 per cent on its capital. Most of these limit their dividends to from
6 to 8 per cent; the result is, therefore, that the remainder goes into
surplus, and the company whose profit amounted to 30 per cent
(though it paid dividends of only 6 per cent) has accumulated a sur
plus “ much greater than its entire paid-in capital.”
Conclusions
A s s u m in g t h a t th e s m a ll- lo a n a g e n c ie s , lik e o th e r b u s in e s s e s , are
e n t it le d to a fa ir p r o fit, a n d t h a t 10 p e r c e n t (fig u r e d o n th e a v e r a g e
lo a n fu n d s ) c o u ld b e c o n sid e r e d “ f a ir ,” th e fo llo w in g c o n c lu s io n s a re
reached:
1 ■T h e prices charged by m o st com m ercial paw nshops a p p e a r to be higher th a n
th e costs of doing th a t k in d of business w arran t.
2. T he prices charged by th o se personal-loan d e p a rtm e n ts of bank's whose charges
are th e low est are p ro b a b ly to o low to carry th is business a t a fair profit, while
those charging th e highest ra te s a re h igher th a n are w arran ted .
3. T he prices charged by th e M orris P lan a n d sim ilar in d u stria l b an k s are som e
w h a t higher th a n th e relativ e cost of th e ir class of business justifies.
4. T h e costs of doing a c h attel-lo an business a re so m u ch g re a te r th a n th o se
u n d e r th e com aker n o te a n d pledge form s of collateral th a t a h igher ra te for th e
personal finance com panies is a n econom ic necessity.
5. T he 3 y2 p er cen t p er m o n th ra te allow ed by m o st S tates for th e ch attel-lo an
business m ay h av e been justified on an econom ic basis d u rin g th e early y ears of
its developm ent, b u t th e p rofitable co n d u ct of th is business by m an y concerns in
S tates w ith a 3 per cen t m axim um an d th e red u ctio n to 2 % p e r cen t by th e H ouse
hold F inance Co. in m aking loans above $100 raise th e p resu m p tio n “th a t 3 y2 per
cent m ay now be higher th a n is econom ically necessary, a t le a st fo r loans ab o v e th e
$100 level.2
6. N o concrete evidence exists of a n y profits am ong th e leg itim ate com m ercial
loan com panies w hich m ig h t be called excessive in com parison w ith th o se in th e
fields of ord in ary business— especially bank in g a n d m a n u factu rin g — alth o u g h
am ong th e m ost efficient larg e chain com panies n e t profits of from 10 to 20 p er
cent on loan fu n d s em ployed a re com m on.
2 This does not mean, of course, that the 334 per cent law should necessarily be amended.
46860°—31-----9
https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
[897]
124
M O N TH LY LA B O R R E V IE W
The report recommends that an investigation should be made of
all the agencies engaged in mass finance, and that provision be made
for continuing statistics, to be gathered by the United States Depart
ment of Commerce.
Because of the public regulation of rates, these agencies have already
been placed more or less in the position of a semipublic utility. The
author recommends—
(1) That they should definitely be given this status, that they be
required to take out a State license before being authorized to do busi
ness, and that they be required to make complete financial and operat
ing reports to the proper State supervising authority.
(2) That they should be required to calculate their rates on the
basis of a single standard of measurement, which would show the
yearly rate charged the borrower for the funds of which he actually
has the use, and to include a statement of this rate in all of their loan
contracts.
(3) That maximum rates of charges should be specified by some State
authority for every small-loan agency, which rate should depend on
the costs.
.
..
(4) That they should be authorized, under strict State supervision
and regulation, to take investments of small amounts at attractive
interest rates from customers and to use these funds as part of their
loan funds. (This recommendation is made because “ one of the major
factors in the high cost of operating small-loan companies has been
the difficulty of obtaining working capital at anything but exception
ally high rates.”)
(5) That “ because credit unions furnish by all odds the most satis
factory and cheapest form of mass finance service, because the smallloan business is intimately connected with public welfare, because the
incentive of private profit does not operate in their advancement, and
because no private commercial interest would be served in so doing,
Government aid should be extended to the credit union movement.”
The precise form of aid would have to be worked out after a thorough
study of the situation, but the report suggests that State financial
aid might be extended for the organization of credit unions and for
educational campaigns showing the advantages of this form of credit.
https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
[898]
LABOR AWARDS AND DECISIONS
R a ilw a y C lerk s— N ew Y ork C e n tr a l R a ilr o a d , B u ffa lo a n d E a st
ARBITRATION board was created by agreement July 10,
1930, to handle a dispute between the New York Central Rail
A N„road,
Buffalo and East, and its clerical and station employees at
Granton Transfer, Weehawken, N. J., members of the International
Brotherhood of Railway and Steamship Clerks, Freight Handlers,
Express and Station Employees.
The carrier selected J. E. Davenport and the employees selected
J. A. Robertson as arbitrators. As these arbitrators were unable to
agree on the neutral member of the board, the United States Board of
Mediation appointed Arthur M. Millard as the neutral member.
The employees at Granton Transfer, Weehawken, N. J., prior to
March 17, 1929, were assigned to 6-day operation and were paid time
and one-half for work performed on the seventh day. Commencing
March 17, 1929, they were regularly assigned to work Sundays and
given a rest day in lieu of Sundays. The employees contended that
they should be paid at the rate of time and one-half for all Sunday
work perfoimed from and including March 17, 1929, and in addition
should be allowed a day’s pay for each week day given as a rest day
since March 17, 1929, and they further asked that the award should
be effective from March 17, 1929.
The board sustained the contention of the employees that the
Sunday operation of Granton Transfer, Weehawken, N. J., is not a
necessary part of the continuous operation of the carrier. On Feb
ruary 10, 1931, the board made the following award:
T he em ployees com ing u n d e r th is ag reem en t to a rb itra te a n d who, com m enc
ing w ith M arch 17, 1929, o r th ere a fte r, were reg u larly assigned to w ork Sundays
a t G ran to n T ransfer, W eehaw ken, N. J., shall be p aid a t th e ra te of tim e a n d onehalf for all S unday w ork perform ed from a n d including M arch 17, 1929, up to th e
effective d a te of th is aw ard.
T he b o ard of a rb itra tio n does n o t affirm a n d denies th e req u est of th e em ployees
t h a t th e y be allow ed a d a y ’s p a y for each week d ay given as a re s t d ay since
M arch 17, 1929.
T h e provisions of th is aw ard shall becom e effective on th e d a te of th e aw ard,
except w here th e S und ay ra te is m ade retro activ e, as n o ted in th e aw ard , an d
shall continue in force fo r th e period of one y ear from th e effective d a te thereof
an d th e re a fte r be su b jec t to 30 d a y s’ notice by e ith e r p a rty to th e other.
M o t io n - P ic t u r e O p e r a to r s— C o lo r a d o S p r in g s , C olo.
Industrial Commission of Colorado, on January 12, 1931,
gave a decision in the dispute of Local No. 62 of the International
T HE
Alliance of Theatrical Stage Employees and Motion Picture Machine
Operators with the Colorado Springs Theatre Corporation.
https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
[899]
125
126
M O N TH LY
LABO R
R E V IE W
The employees protested against the demands of the American
Theatre that only one person be employed in the operation of the
projection equipment during each shift of six hours at the theater.
The findings and decision of the Industrial Commission of Colorado
follow:
M uch evidence w as p resen ted to th e com m ission b y b o th sides a t th is hearin g .
A fter giving th e m a tte r serious consideration th e com m ission is of th e opinion
t h a t th e re is n o t sufficient w ork for tw o m en in th e p ro jectio n b o o th of th is th e a te r
a n d to o m uch w ork fo r one m an.
,
Therefore, i t is th e decision a n d aw ard of th e com m ission th a t th e w ages to
said em ployees rem ain as a t p resen t— $58.38 p e r week fo r one m an a n d $o8.9^
per week for th e second m an on each sh ift of six hours each.
A n th r a c ite M in e r s— P e n n s y lv a n ia
board of conciliation in the anthracite industry was recently
called upon for a decision in a dispute between the Hudson Coal
THE
Co. and certain employees of Loree No. 3 colliery over the payment of
wages to six employees who had been selected to attend the funeral of
an employee who had been killed in Loree No. 3 colliery.
James A. Gorman, umpire of the board of conciliation, made the
following decision:
R esolution a d o p te d b y th e b o ard of conciliation u pon th e 8 th d ay of Ju ly , 1918»
* *
and
in ad d itio n th e re to d irects t h a t th e grievance co m m ittee a n d m ine fo rem an select
six rep resen tativ e s to a tte n d th e funeral, i t being u n d ersto o d t h a t such m en will
be selected as will le a s t cripple th e o p eratio n on th a t day , th e w ages of said rep re
sen tativ es to be p a id b y th e o p e ra to r.”
, ,,
,
T he issue involved in th e p re se n t grievance raises q uestion as to w h eth er or n o t
th e above-quoted section of th e resolution of Ju ly 8, 1918, co n tem p lates th e selec
tio n a n d p a y m e n t of six rep rese n ta tiv e s to a tte n d th e _fu n eral of a deceased
em ployee, com ing w ith in provisions of t h a t resolution, in case such fu n e ra l is
held on d ay on w hich th e colliery w here th e deceased em ployee h a d w orked w as
n o t in o p eratio n on th e d a y of th e funeral.
. . . .
U pon t h a t qu estio n th e policy of th e b o ard of conciliation h as been, in a case
w here th e d e a th of a n em ployee h as occurred as a resu lt of a n accid en t a t a colliery,
to encourage th e b u rial of th e bod y of such a n em ployee on a d ay on w hich th e
colliery w as n o t in o p eratio n a n d to p rovide for th e selection a n d p a y m e n t ot six
rep resen tativ es to a tte n d th e funeral.
In a p revious case, w herein th e c o m p an y defended, to a claim for th e p a y m e n t
of th e $150 b y a n h eir of a n em ployee w ho died as a re su lt of a n accid en t a t a col
liery, a n d in which case th e fu n eral w as held on a d ay on w hich th e colliery w as
n o t in o p eratio n th e co n ciliation b o a rd su stain ed th e grievance.
T he um pire does n o t feel a t lib e rty to do o th e r th a n a c cep t th e co n stru ctio n
placed b y th e b o a rd of conciliation u pon t h a t p o rtio n of th e resolution of July 8,
1918, involved in th e q u estio n a t issue in th e p resen t case.
T he grievance is, therefore, sustained.
entitled “ Resolution in re $150 benefit,” reads, in part, as follows:
https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
[900]
INDUSTRIAL DISPUTES
S tr ik e s a n d L o c k o u ts in t h e U n ite d S t a t e s in F eb ru a ry , 1931
ATA regarding industrial disputes in the United States for February, 1931, with comparable data for preceding months are
presented below. Disputes involving fewer than six workers and last
ing less than one day have been omitted.
Table 1 shows the number of disputes beginning in 1927, 1928, 1929,
and 1930, number of workers involved and man-days lost for these
years, the number of industrial disputes for each of the months
January, 1929, to February, 1931, inclusive, the number of disputes
which began m these months, the number in effect at the end of each
month, and the number of workers involved. It also shows, in the last
column, the economic loss (in man-days) involved. The number of
workdays lost is computed by multiplying the number of workers
affected in each dispute by the length of the dispute measured in
working-days as normally worked by the industry or trade in question.
D
U z ^ D U S T R I A L D ISPU T E S b e g i n n i n g i n a n d i n e f f e c t a t e n d OF E4.CH
M O N TH , JA N U A R Y , 1929, TO F E B R U A R Y , 1931, A N D TOTAL N U M B E R OF DISPT7TFS
\ \ ORKERS, A N D M A N -D A Y S LOST IN T H E Y E A R S 1927 TO 1930
J ’
Number of disputes
Number of workers
involved in disputes
Number
of mandays lost
during
month
or year
Month and year
Beginning
in month
or year
1927:
1928:
1929:
1930:
T o ta l...
T o ta l...
T o ta l...
T otali...
In effect
at end of
month
734
629
903
623
Beginning
in month
or year
In effect
at end of
month
349,434
357,145
230j 463
156,221
192 9
January______________
February_____________
M arch_______________
April_________________
M ay_________________
June________
July_________________
August_______________
September___________
October______________
November____________
December____________
48
54
77
117
115
73
80
78
98
69
61
33
36
35
37
53
73
57
53
43
49
31
32
21
14, 783
22,858
14, 031
32, 989
13,668
19,989
36,152
25,616
20, 233
16,315
10, 443
3,386
39,569
40,306
40, 516
52,445
64,853
58,152
15, 589
6,714
8,132
6,135
6,067
2,343
951,914
926,679
1, 074; 468
1, 429, 437
1, 727,694
1, 627, 565
1, 062, 428
358,148
244, 864
272, 018
204, 457
95, 541
42
44
49
60
64
54
76
51
69
46
43
25
21
33
34
41
30
34
31
32
41
34
28
8
8,879
37, 301
15,017
5,814
9,'281
13, 791
14, 219
15, 902
15, 946
10,842
4, 380
4,849
5,316
6,562
5, 847
5, 711
4, 640
8,499
5, 039
7,161
13,409
15,649
7, 424
5, 385
182, 202
436, 788
289, 470
180; 445
192, 201
150,627
148, 982
144, 530
202,874
336, 250
270, 254
197, 041
63
57
21
46
8,603
28, 996
1, 719
15, 709
172,628
241,983
1930
January______________
February_____________
March_______________
April_________________
M ay_________________
June___________
July_________________
August_______________
September____________
O ctober..____ ________
November_____ ______
December____________
1931
January i_____________
February i...................
1 Preliminary figures subject to change.
https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
[901]
127
128
MONTHLY LABOR R EV IE W
Occurrence of Industrial Disputes, by Industries
T a b l e 2 gives, by industry, the number of strikes beginning in
December, 1930, January and February, 1931, and the number of
workers directly involved.
T
a b ie
2 .—IN D U S T R IA L D IS P U T E S B E G IN N IN G IN D E C E M B E R , 1930, A N D JA N U A R Y
A N D F E B R U A R Y , 1931
1Number of disputes beginning- Number of workers involved
in disputes beginning in—
in—
Industry
Decem
ber
Bakers------------------------------------------- ----
3
TIyiilflirty trades
_ _ __ ___________
Chauffeurs and teamsters
Clothing
- - __
Electric and gas appliance, and radio
5
3
3
Decem
J anuary February
ber
Furniture
-
Leather
__
1
Miners
Motion picture operators, actors, and theTextiles
-- - _______ -- _____
Other occupations---- -----------------Total
2
1
1
__________ ______
501
225
7,113
214
2, 000
1, 600
3,000
920
60
4
30
3
1
1
1
1
_______
14
10
6
880
519
910
188
280
685
730
9
3
9
1
1
2
Fishermen
•
2
1
1
16
3
7
J anuary February
90
45
7, 000
12
1
610
685
28
759
423
6
21
1, 358
2
2
2
5
2
3
1
1
1
10
1
16
1
278
940
25
53
57
4, 849
3
199
16
385
no
9,498
100-
8, 603
28, 996
Size and Duration of Industrial Disputes, by Industries
T a b l e 3 gives the number of industrial disputes beginning in Feb
ruary, 1931, classified by number of workers and by industries.
T \ b l e 3 .— N U M B E R OF IN D U S T R IA L D IS P U T E S B E G IN N IN G IN F E B R U A R Y , 1931,
C L ASSIFIED B Y N U M B E R OF W ORKERS A N D B Y IN D U S T R IE S
Number of disputes beginning in February, 1931,
involving—
Industry
20 and
under
100
workers
2
i
i
i
i
7
1
2
1
1
4
1
1
2
1
1
L a k e rs
B u ild in g tr a d e s
C h a u ffe u rs a n d te a m s te rs
C lo th in g
_ _
____ ______ ______
E l e c t r i c and gas a p p l i a n o p n r u | r a d i o w o r k e r s
F a rm la b o r
F is h e rm e n
F u rn itu r e
L ea th e r
Light heat p o w e r a n d w a t e r
I/O n g s h o r e rp e n a n d f r e ig h t h a n d l e r s
Lumber timber and mill work
M iners
Textiles
__
2
1
2
1
1
1
1
____
_____
O th e r o m ip a tio n s
Total---------------------------------------------------------
https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
100 and 1,000 and 5,000 and
under
under
under
5,000
10,000
500
workers workers workers
6 and
under
20
workers
[902]
10
3
3
10
1
3
17
22
7
1
INDUSTRIAL D ISPUTES
129
In Table 4 are shown the number of industrial disputes ending in
February, 1931, by industries and classified duration.
T a b l e 4 . -N U M B E R OF IN D U S T R IA L D IS P U T E S E N D IN G IN F E B R U A R Y
IN D U S T R IE S A N D C LASSIFIED D U R A T IO N
1931 BY
’
111
Classified duration of strikes ending
in February, 1931
Ind u stry
One-half
m onth or
less
B akers .
B u ild in g trades_______ . . .
C hauffeurs, and team sters.
C loth in g, _ _ ,
E lectric and gas appliance, and radio workers
L ongshorem en and freight handlers
Lum ber, tim b er, and millw'ork
M etal trades______
M in ers_______
T extiles _ _ _
Other occup ation s___ _
Over onehalf and
less than
1 m onth
1 m onth
and less
than 2
m onths
2
g
1
3
5
1
I
2
3
i
T o t a l . , , ____ ____
1
1
2Q
1
2
-
Principal Strikes and Lockouts Beginning in February, 1931
Textile workers, Pennsylvania.—Some 21 upholstery manufacturers
m Philadelphia, members of the United Upholstery Manufacturers’
Association, are affected by a strike of about 2,600 weavers, members
of Upholstery Weavers Union No. 25, which began on February 2
because they refused to accept an arbitration award reducing wages
14 per cent. About 2,400 other employees have also been thrown out
of work because of the strike which is still in progress. The local’s
refusal to accept the arbitration award resulted in its expulsion from
the United Textile Workers, the international union.
Hosiery workers, Philadelphia.—With the alleged purpose of obtain
ing stabilized conditions in the full-fashioned hosiery industry in
Philadelphia and vicinity, a general strike of union hosiery workers in
that area was called by the American Federation of Full Fashioned
Hosiery Workers against the open-shop mills, effective February 16.
Philadelphia is an important manufacturing center for the product
referred to. Some of the mills employ only union labor, while others
are known as nonunion or open-shop mills. The strike is directed
against the last-named mills, and the organization demands that the
workers be paid union rates for an 8-hour day. In calling the strike,
the president of the local stated that “ repeated wage cuts in the non
union mills and other unsound attempts to meet the depressed condi
tions of the industry already have resulted in many spontaneous
strikes” and that if such action were not taken it would be reasonable
to assume that the union shops would again be called upon to take a
reduction, in order that they might compete with open shops. The
number of strikers is estimated to be 3,000, about one-third of whom
are union workers, and the number of mills directly affected is 44.
Although the strike is still in progress, several of the mills are
reported to have signed the union agreement.
https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
[903]
MONTHLY LABOR R EV IEW
130
Textile (woolen) workers, Massachusetts.—-As the result of a disa
greement with the management of- the Washington mill of the Ameri
can Woolen Co. at Lawrence, relative to the number of combs they
should attend, some of the men employed by that mill left their ma
chines on February 16. They demanded, it is said, not only the
restoration of the former working schedule, but provision for time
and a half pay for overtime work. The strike spread to the Wood
and Ayer mills of the company so that by February 19, 138 combers
in the three mills were out. Shortly after the strike began the
National Textile Workers Union assumed .the leadership. At a con
ference with representatives on February 20 the strikers submitted
demands which included the reemployment of strikers without dis
crimination, on the working basis prevailing before they struck, return
to payment of time and a half for overtime work, allegedly taken
from them within the last few months, elimination of efficiency ex
perts, and recognition of the union. Following this conference, offi
cials of the company issued a statement addressed to their employ ees,
saying:
W e are agreeable to th e re tu rn of our em ployees on th e basis previous to M on
day, F eb ru ary 16.
T here w ill be no discrim in atio n of our employees.
W here th e questio n of co st-stu d y program s is being considered, th is will be
done only w ith th e cooperation of th e em ployees involved, h av in g th e b e st in te r
ests of th e em ployees as well as th e em ployer in m in d a t all tim es.
The strike resulted in a temporary shutdown of the mills and affected
directly and indirectly 10,575 workers. The settlement was effected
largely through the activities of a citizens’ committee composed of
the mayor and leading officials and citizens. Mill operations were
resumed on February 27, when most of the workers returned.
Longshoremen, Louisiana.—A strike of 2,000 white and negro long
shoremen in New Orleans began on February 23, affecting members
of the “ New Orleans Steamship Assn.” The strike resulted from
the reduction in wages by some of the steamship lines from 80 cents
to 65 cents an hour, and the refusal by other lines that had been
paying 65 cents an hour to increase wages to 75 cents an hour and
recognize the longshoremen’s union. The places of the strikers, it
is reported, were filled within 48 hours.
Principal Strikes and Lockouts Continuing into February, 1931
N one of the strikes referred to in previous issues of the Labor
Jdeview continued into February.
https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
[904]
INDUSTRIAL D ISPUTES
131
C o n c ilia tio n W ork o f t h e D e p a r tm e n t o f L abor in F eb ru a ry , 1931
B y H u g h L . K e r w in , D
ir e c t o r o f
C o n c il ia t io n
HE Secretary of Labor, through the Conciliation Service, exer
cised his good offices in connection with 37 labor disputes during
February, 1931. These disputes affected a known total of 33,051
employees. The table following shows the name and location of the
establishment or industry in which the dispute occurred, the nature
oi the dispute (whether strike or lockout or controversy not having
reached the strike or lockout stage), the craft or trade concerned, the
cause of the dispute, its present status, the terms of settlement, the
date of beginning and ending, and the number of workers directly and
indirectly involved.
On March 1, 1931, there were 42 strikes before the department
for settlement and in addition 16 controversies which had not reached
the strike stage. The total number of cases pending was 58.
T
https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
[905]
LABOR D ISPU T E S H A N D L E D BY CO N C ILIA TIO N SERV IC E D U R IN G T H E M O N TH OF F E B R U A R Y , 1931
CO
to
Workers
involved
Duration
Nature of
Company or industry and location controversy
S. Maltuz, Newark, N . J.
Lockout.
Craftsmen con
cerned
Bakers.
Controversy Miners______
Upholstery manufacturers, Phila
delphia, Pa.
Strike........... Weavers, etc.
Bakers______
Newark Baking Co., Newark, .'...d o __
N. J.
Miners______
___do_____
Hillman Coal & Coke Co., Jean
ette, Pa.
___
do..............
___do___
J. C. Carr Coal Co., Jeanette, P a .
G a r fie ld -W a s h in g to n School,
Union Township, N . J.
Aaron Schurman Co., Hillside,
N . J.
Mammoth Hosiery Mills, Strouds
burg, Pa.
Chicago Postoffice Equipment
Co., Chicago, 111.
___ do.
Carpenters.
.do_
.do.
Hosiery workers.
.do.
Carpenters_____
Danita Hosiery Mills, Chelten ____do_____
ham, Pa.
Windsor M ills (Inc.), Philadel ____do____
phia, Pa.
.do____
County Building, Media, Pa-----.do____
Fair Play Coal Co., Excelsior
Springs, Mo.
Bricklayers, Grand Rapids, M ich. Lockout..
Hosiery workers _
___ do--------------
Digitized for
https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
Begin
ning
Employer refused to sign contract.
Mine closed; miners asked divi
sion of work of other mines of
company.
Workers refused to abide by 14 per
cent wage cut made by arbitra
tion board.
Dismissal of foreman-----------------cut.
1930
M ay 1
Unable to adjust.
1931
Jan. 29
Pending.
Feb.
Refusal to accept wage cu ts-------Asked increase and improved con
ditions.
Rate of wages__________________
Feb.
5
700
2,600
2
Feb.
3
Feb.
2
Feb. 23
175
Jan. 18
Jan. 20
12
Jan. 26
Feb.
.do.
Adjusted. Miners returned at rate
prior to strike—$1.52 per ton and
$5 per day for day men.
Adjusted. Returned without cut—
$1.50 per hour until June 1, 1931.
Adjusted. Allowed 10 per cent in
crease and improved conditions.
Tentative adjustment-------------------
2,400
8
Jan. 20
.do.
Wages cut 10 to 15 per cent and Pending_________________________
17 workers discharged.
Wages cut to 75 cents per hour Adjusted. Wage cut temporarily
accepted.
from $1.25. Company alleged 50
cents per hour is prevailing
wage.
Asked union wages and recogni Pending.
tion.
Wages cut 25 per cent---------------- ___ d o ...
Bricklayers.
10
_do.
Partially adjusted. Some miners
returned at wages proposed by
company.
Right of employer to engage fore Adjusted. Agreed that employer
should hire foreman and carpenters
man and shop steward.
select shop steward.
___ do___________________________
.do.
Asked union wages, $1.50 per hour
Wages cut $1 per day and 50 cents
per ton.
D i Indi
rectly rectly
Ending
Pending------------
.do.
Stonemasons.
Miners______
Miners____
Tomajko Coal Co., Adamsburg, ___ do___
Pa.
Controversy B uilding___
Building,
Knoxville,
Iowa______
FRASER
Present status and terms of settlement
250
6
10
192
Feb.
3
Feb.
2
Feb.
4
125
Feb.
3
550
Feb.
Feb.
6
5
Feb.
5
Feb. 11
12
27
105
Jan. 29 ...d o ___
22
150
Feb.
7
Feb. 11
Feb.
6
Feb.
9
50
20
100
MONTHLY LABOR R EV IEW
Old Ben Coal Corporation.
Cause of dispute
Edison Co., Detroit, M ich.
Bricklayers.
Kolbe Fisheries, Erie, Pa_
Fish dressers and
house men.
Ohio Mining Co., State of Ohio ..
Arthur Sigmund, N ew Haven,
Conn.
Curtiss Aero & Motor Co., Buf
falo, N . Y.
Dressmakers, N ew York C ity___
Knee-pants manufacturers, New
York City.
[907]
Cleaning and dyeing shops, Phila
delphia, Pa.
Steamship companies, New Or
leans, La.
Wood & Ayer M ill and Washing
ton Mill, Lawrence, Mass.
Building crafts, Michigan City,
lnd.
United States Post Office Build
ing, Savannah, Ga.
Seminary Building, Ossining,
N . Y.
Apex Hosiery Co. and 25 other
firms, Philadelphia, Pa.
D eW itt Clinton School No. 9,
M ount Vernon, N . Y.
School No. 16, M ount Vernon,
N . Y.
Hotel and apartment houses,
Brooklyn, N . Y.
https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
Controversy Miners__________ (>)__________________
Strike_____ Neckwear workers Wage cut______________
Controversy Employees.
Pending--------------------------------------
Feb.
Adjusted. Allowed 65 cents per hour
and all terms as stated in existing
agreement.
Feb. 12
(>)____ __________ ____
Pending_________________________
Alleged wage cut of 10 per cent.
Investigation showed that wages had
been cut. Contractor engaged on
Government contract.
Strike..
Dressmakers____ Working conditions____________
Pending2_________________________
---- do..
Knee-pants mak Working conditions and organiza Partial adjustment.
Organized
ers.
tion.
workers returned; unorganized
still out. Manufacturers gave se
curity for performance of contract.
Controversy Tailors_____
Wages cut about 10 per cent____ Adjusted. Wages restored_______
Strike_____ Upholsterers.
2 workers discharged; 8 others Pending. (Company refused to re
stopped work.
employ workers.)
---- do_____ Silk workers____
Wages cut about 15 per cent; ob ___ do______________
jections to working conditions.
Lockout___ Drivers________
Asked union recognition________ Adjusted. Agreed to recognize union
drivers in individual contracts.
Strike_____ Longshoremen__ Proposed wage cut to 65 cents from Pending2____
_
80 cents per hour.
____do_____ Textile workers.. Combers asked to operate 4 ma
Adjusted. Working conditions satis
chines instead of 2.
factorily arranged; no wage cuts.
Lockout.
Building________ Wages cut $2 per day in violation Pending.
(Temporarily settled.)
of agreement.
Controversy Electricians_____ Prevailing wage alleged to be $1.07
Adjusted. Agreed to continue nego
per hour; men received $1.03.
tiations to satisfactory conclusion.
Strike___
Steamfitiers and Contractor refused to pay car fare Adjusted.
Agreed to pay car fare of
plumbers.
of steamfitters and helpers to
steamfitters and helpers since be
place of employment.
ginning of work on this job to
completion.
------do_____ Hosiery workers.._ Asked union wages and conditions. P end
ing..._______ ____ _______
------do_____ Steamfitters and Janitors doing temporary heat
Adjusted.
No change on this job.
helpers.
work claimed by steamfitters.
Future work to be done by steam
fitters.
------do_____ ----- do...... ............... Sym pathy with workers on DeAdjusted. Returned when D eW itt
W itt Clinton School
Clinton School workers returned.
Controversy Superintendents,
Proposed wage cut and replacing Adjusted. Owners agreed to con
janitors, porters.
of men with women.
tinue w ithout change.
7
Feb. 25
„Feb.(1) 12
Feb.
5
0)
350
Feb. 20
Feb. 18
Feb. 16
Mar.
Feb. 16
Feb. 12
Feb. 24
1
2 , 000
2,000
12
10
Feb. 11
Feb. 19
1,400
246
5
74
Feb. 26
Feb. 23
125
2, 000
Feb. 16
Feb. 27
138 10,000
Feb. 20
Feb. 21
600
10
Feb.
5
Feb. 27
3
40
Jan.
9
Feb. 25
16
Feb. 14
INDUSTRIAL DISPUTES
Tailors, Detroit, M ich_______ _
Commercial Upholstering Co.,
^New York City.
Nanuet Silk M ills, Nanuet, N . Y .
Rate of wages paid ($1.25 per hour)
alleged to be 25 cents per hour
jess than prevailing wage.
Wages cut 15 cents per hour; agree
ment violated.
3, 000
Feb.
5
Feb. 16
Feb.
8
Feb. 10
Feb.
1
Feb.
7
35
40
100
19,916 13,135
1 N ot reported.
1Places of strikers said to have been filled w ithin 48 hours.
CO
CO
134
MONTHLY LABOR R EV IEW
E n d o f D is p u t e in E n g lis h C o tt o n -T e x tile in d u s tr y
date of February 13, 1931, an Associated Press dispatch
announced that the “ Lancashire cotton-mill owners to-day with
U NDER
drew from their stand which has kept 250,000 weavers locked out of
idle plants since January 17.” This statement marks the cessation,
at least temporarily, of a disagreement of well over a year’s standing.
The cotton-textile industry of Lancashire suffered heavily in the
general depression and was especially affected by the rise of the textile
industry in the Far East and by the impoverishment of the great mass
of consumers in India and China. Burnley, which specializes in the
plainest and simplest types of plain grey cloths, was particularly
hard hit, and in an effort to improve the situation an experiment was
undertaken which is thus summarized in the London Economist for
March 29, 1930:
Tw elve m o n th s ago th e em ployers a n d th e o p erativ es in th e B urnley d istric t
cam e to a n agreem en t w hereby 10 firm s s ta rte d a n ex p erim en t in p ro d u ctio n
w hich provided fo r each firm to w ork 4 p e r c e n t of th e ir loom s on th e “ 8 loom s
per w eav er” system . I t w as arra n g e d t h a t th e loom s should be ru n a t a slower
speed an d th e w eavers h av e been assisted b y e x tra h a n d s in clo th carrying, w eft
carrying, a n d oiling a n d cleaning. I t w as agreed t h a t d u rin g th e experim ent
th e w eavers should receive a fixed w eekly w age of 50s. ($12.17), b u t th is was
reduced la s t sum m er, in accordance w ith th e w age re d u ctio n of 6}^ p e r cent, to
46s. lOd. ($11.40). T h e new sy stem h as m e t w ith a considerable a m o u n t of
success. T h e em ployers h av e been enabled to reduce th e ir costs a n d th e w eavers
have received higher wages, as u n d er th e old system of 4 loom s th e av erag e was
from 40s. ($9.73) to 42s. ($10.22) a week. T h e ag reem en t w as for 12 m o n th s a n d
th e period expires a t th e beginning of n e x t week.
From that date up to the latter part of 1930 negotiations continued
between the employers and operatives without any agreement being
reached. The argument of the employers was that the proposed
system would make a reduction in costs of operation, and that the
industry was in such a desperate condition that they simply must
bring down costs or go out of business. To lessen the shock of the
change they proposed that the system should be introduced grad
ually, only a certain per cent of a firm’s total looms being brought
under this plan in each quarter up to the end of 1931. The em
ployees objected on the grounds that the saving in costs would be
too small to affect the general situation of the industry, that the
change would involve a large displacement of labor without any pro
vision for its reabsorption, that it would upset altogether the care
fully worked out scale of wages and would leave the worker without
any safeguard against undue reductions in his earnings. If a plan
for the thorough rationalization of the industry, with proper provi
sions for the workers’ safety, were proposed, they would feel differ
ently, but they did not wish to accept this single move which, they
felt, was unfairly weighted against the employees.
As the end of the year approached, the employers decided that the
time had come to introduce the system, with or without the consent
of the workers, and by the beginning of November, according to the
Economist of November 8, 1930, they had made definite proposals
for the new wage scale:
T h e scale proposed is ra th e r com plicated, b u t w here firm s decide to in s titu te
th e system of eig h t loom s p er w eaver th e w ages will v a ry from 49s. ($11.92) to
58s. 9d. ($14.30) p e r week. T h e w eavers u n d e r th e new sy stem will of course
h av e assistance in w eft a n d clo th carrying. A t th e p re se n t tim e th e 4-loom
w eaver earns a b o u t 40s. ($9.73) a week.
[908]
https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
INDUSTRIAL D ISPUTES
135
On December 6, 1930, the Manchester Guardian reported that the
heads of the Cotton Spinners’ and Manufacturers’ Association and
the Master Cotton Spinners’ Association “ have decided to give a
month’s notice to the Weavers’ Amalgamation of their intention to
bring the new piece price list rates of wages into operation” begin
ning January 5, 1931.
T he new ra te s w ere draw n up in connection w ith th e em ployers’ proposals to
abolish th e restrictio n w hich m ade fo u r o rd in ary L ancashire loom s to a w eaver
th e m axim um . T hey a re based on th e n u m b er of picks in th e clo th a n d th e
w idth of th e cloth, a n d designed for th e op eratin g of 6, 8, or 10 loom s by th e
w eaver. T h e schem e also lim its th e n u m b er of loom s w hich m ay be b ro u g h t
in to it by each firm n ex t year. In th e first q u a rte r it m u st n o t exceed 10 p er
cent, in th e second q u a rte r 15 p er cent, in th e th ird 20 p er cent, a n d in th e la st
25 per cent.
Only a few of the owners were prepared to attempt enforcing the
new system against the operatives’ determined resistance, but when
the 5th of January arrived, these few put the plan into effect, and the
weavers promptly went on strike. On January 9 the Manchester
Guardian announced: “ The strike at Burnley over the more-looms
question is complete, for all the mills of the nine firms who have been
concerned with the experiment are now closed. * * * The num
ber of weavers affected by the strike at the mills of the nine firms at
which the strike has been brought about is 3,400, but the number of
work people directly affected is 4,400.”
The organized employers decided to stand by the firms trying to
introduce the system, and by the morning of the 12th the followingnotice was posted in the weaving sheds of all the employers affiliated
with the Cotton Spinners’ and Manufacturers’ Association and the
Master Cotton Spinners’ Association:
In consequence of tfie actio n of th e A m algam ated W eavers’ A ssociation and
fine N o rth ern C ounties T extile T rad es F ed eratio n in w ith d raw in g th e ir m em bers
em ployed by several c o tto n cloth m a n u factu rers in B urnley a n d elsewhere, we
Hereby give notice tfia t unless th e strik e of operativ es a t th ese m ills h av e been
settled in th e m eantim e, th is mill will close on S atu rd ay , Ja n u a ry 17, u n til
fu rth e r n o tice.1
The operatives maintained the strike, and on January 17th the
lockout was put into force. It was at first supposed that the trouble
could not last long, but as the days lengthened into weeks, the situa
tion became exceedingly serious, and earnest efforts were made to
compose the difference. Numerous conferences were held between
the leaders of the two sides, and the Government intervened in an
effort to bring about a settlement but to no effect. The workers
declared their willingness to accept the change, although still uncon
vinced that it would make any appreciable improvement in the posi
tion of the industry, but demanded that it should be accompanied
with certain guaranties as to earnings, and these the owners would
not give. From the standpoint of the employees, the vital feature of
the new system was the reduction in the earnings per loom operated.
If the system were introduced and half the weavers laid off, the
remainder, they admitted, would earn more than under the present
plan as long as they continued to run more looms, but what assurance
had they that the extra looms would be maintained? If work became
slack, the employer might cut the number of looms assigned to each
1 Manchester Guardian, Jan. 12,1931, p. 9.
https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
[909]
136
MONTHLY LABOR RE VIEW
weaver, and they would find themselves working four or two looms,
with a serious reduction in their piece rates. They would accept the
change at once, they said, if the employers would guarantee a mini
mum wage per loom operated, and a “ fall back” or minimum weekly
wage regardless of the number of looms operated. These terms the
employers refused absolutely.
Various compromises were suggested, but the weavers’ opposition
grew stronger as the struggle continued. It was thought probable
that the fundamental cause was the dislike and fear of breaking up
the family system under which they had worked for generations.
Weaving had become almost a hereditary matter; men and women
alike worked at it, children looked forward to taking it up, and the
household lived on the family earnings, not on a single wage. All
this would be upset by a plan which would at once cut the number of
weavers in half, break up the tradition of the service, and force the
younger members to seek work outside the industry and the region.
However that might be, the rank and file were far more intransigent
than their leaders, and their attitude steadily hardened. A proposal
that the union officials should be given authority to negotiate terms
of settlement upon the basis of further experiment with the morelooms system, with safeguards as to wages, was rejected by a vote of
90,770 to 44,990. A delegation from the more extreme section ignored
the union officials altogether and went up to London to urge the
Government to take over the reorganization of the cotton-textile
industry under the terms of the emergency powers act, and a motion
to this effect was introduced in Parliament. Meanwhile the cor
responding section among the employers was urging that the occasion
should be seized for a general revision of wages, hours, and conditions
in the industry, and suggested a wage reduction of 25 per cent with
an increase of hours to 53 a week.
The cessation of weaving affected the spinning and finishing sections
of the industry, and the number rendered idle leaped upward. And
a cotton exhibition, designed “ to show the world that Lancashire is
still as vigorous and resourceful as ever,” and determined to retain its
place among the industries of Great Britain and of the world was due
to open in London on February 17.
It was in this general atmosphere that the employers, prompted, as
the Manchester Guardian puts it, “ by considerations of much greater
breadth than those which normally hold sway,” called off the lockout.
At a meeting of the two associations of employers, held February 12,
they declared that they were unwilling to accept the responsibility
of continuing the stoppage for an indefinite time.
T hey h av e th erefo re decided t h a t th e 8-looms experim ent a t tn e B urnley m ills
shall be discontinued, a n d recom m end t h a t th e lo ck o u t n otices be w ith d raw n a n d
th a t all m ills be reopened fo r w ork on M onday m orning, F e b ru a ry 16, a t th e
usual tim e in all cases in w hich it is possible to do so.2
Upon receipt of this notice the weavers’ officials at once sent word
to all members to present themselves for work at the reopening of the
mills, and expressed a hope that “ means will be devised by joint con
sultations for machinery to become operative that will prevent a
recurrence of such events as led to the dispute.” 2
s Manchester Guardian, Feb. 14,1931, p. 11.
https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
[910]
LABOR TURNOVER
L abor T u rn o v er in A m e r ic a n F a c to r ie s, F eb ru a ry , 1931
HE Bureau of Labor Statistics presents herewith labor turnover
indexes for manufacturing as a whole and for eight separate
manufacturing industries. The form of average used in the following
tables is the weighted arithmetic mean. Previous to January, 1931,
the bureau had been using the unweighted median of company rates
as a form of average for computing labor turnover rates. The
averages for the months of January to December, 1930, as presented
in Tables 1 and 2 have been recomputed to present the arithmetic
mean.
The form of average was changed because the bureau considers
that the arithmetic mean gives a more representative picture of
actual conditions in industry than the median of company rates. In
using the median a small company had as much influence on the rates
as a large company. In using the arithmetic mean each company
has an influence on the rate in proportion to the number of its em
ployees. In computing the arithmetic mean the number of quits,
discharges, lay-offs, and accessions actually occurring during the
month in all plants reporting are added. The totals of these items
are divided by the total average number on the company pay rolls
during the month. This gives the monthly quit, discharge, lay-off,
and accession rates. The equivalent annual rates are obtained by
multiplying the monthly rates by the number of times the days in the
current month is contained in the 365 days of the year. Since the
month of February has 28 days, the equivalent annual rate is ob
tained by multiplying the monthly rates by 13.04.
The indexes for manufacturing as a whole are compiled from
reports made to the Bureau of Labor Statistics from representative
establishments in over 75 industries employing approximately
1,250,000 people. In the eight industries for which separate indexes
are presented, reports were received from representative plants
employing approximately 25 per cent of the employees in such indus
tries as shown by the Census of Manufactures of 1927. In the
automotive industry, schedules are received from plants employing
nearly 200,000 people. Firms reporting for boots and shoes employ
nearly 100,000 people, and those for cotton manufacturing employ
approximately 125,000. Foundry and machine-shop firms reportinghave approximately 175,000 people on their payrolls. The furniture
industry is represented by firms employing nearly 40,000 people; the
iron and steel industry by firms employing 225,000 people. The
reports received from representative sawmills indicate that there are
approximately 65,000 people on their pay rolls, while slaughtering
and meat packing reports show nearly 85,000 people.
T
https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
[911]
137
138
M O N TH LY
LABO R
R E V IE W
In addition to the quit, discharge, lay-off, total separation, and
accession rates, the bureau presents the net turnover rate. The net
turnover rate means the rate of replacement. It is the number of
jobs that are vacated and filled per 100 employees. In a plant that
is increasing its force the net turnover rate is the same as the separa
tion rate, because whde more people are hired than are separated
from their jobs the number hired above those leaving is due to ex
pansion and can not be justly charged to turnover. On the other
hand, in a plant that is reducing its number of employees the net turn
over rate is the same as the accession rate, for while more people
leave than, are hired the excess of separations over accessions is due
to a reduction of force and therefore can not be logically charged as a
turnover expense.
For the second consecutive month the net turnover rate for manu
facturing as a whole is the same as the separation rate. In other
words, more people were hired during February than were separated
from the pay roll.
Table 1 shows for all industries the total separation rate, subdi
vided into quit, discharge, and lay-off rates, together with the acces
sion and net turnover rates, presented both on a monthly and an
equivalent annual basis.
T a b l e 1.—A V ER A G E LABOR T U R N O V E R R A TE S IN SE L E C T E D
FA C T O R IE S IN 75
IN D U S T R IE S
A .— M o n th ly R ates
Separation rates
Accession
rate
M onth
January_______
F ebruary_____
March
April
M ay
June.
July
\ugu st
September
October
November
December
Average
Lay-off
Quit
Discharge
N et turn
over rate
Total
1930
1931
1930
1931
1930
1931
1930
1931
1930
1931
1930
1. 85
1. 60
1. 94
2. 11
2. 01
1. 85
1.35
1. 40
1. 50
1. 29
. 90
.84
0.74
.74
2.70
2.50
2. 83
2. 57
2. 68
3.00
4.17
3. 99
3.14
2.88
2. 77
2.74
1.95
1.75
0. 54
.62
.60
.53
.48
.46
.32
.36
.36
.32
.24
.21
0.19
.20
5.09
4. 72
5. 37
5. 21
5.17
5. 31
5.84
5. 75
5.00
4.49
3. 91
3.79
2.88
2.69
3.95
3.94
4.15
3. 55
3. 28
2. 92
2. 51
2.71
3.27
2. 56
2. 05
2.13
2. 97
2. 82
3.95
3. 94
4.15
3. 55
3.28
2.92
2. 51
2.71
3.27
2. 56
2. 05
2.13
3.00
1.55
4.97
.43
3.08
1931
2.88
2. 69
3.08
B.—E q u iv a len t A n n u a l R ates
Janu ary______
February______
M arch.. ______
April. _______
M ay. ________
June. ______
July___________
August. _____
September___ _
October. . _ . .
November___
December_____
21.8
20. 9
22. 8
25. 7
23. 7
22. 5
15.9
16. 5
18. 3
15. 2
11. 0
9. 9
A v era g e..
18.7
https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
8.7
9.6
31.8
32.6
33.3
31.3
31.5
36.5
49. 1
47.0
38.2
33.9
33.7
32. 2
35.9
23.0
22.8
6.4
8.0
7. 1
6.5
5. 6
5. 6
3.8
4. 2
4.4
3. 8
2. 9
2.5
5.1
[912]
2. 2
2. 6
60.0
61. 5
63. 2
63. 5
60.8
64. 6
68.8
67.7
60. 9
52. 9
47.6
44.6
46.5
51. 4
48.8
43. 2
38. 6
35. 5
29. 5
31.9
39.8
30. 1
24.9
25.1
59.7
37.1
35.0
36.8
46.5
51.4
48. 8
43. 2
38. 6
35.5
29.5
31.9
39.8
30.1
24.9
25. 1
37.1
33.9
35.0
46860°—31----- 10
INDEXES OF AVERAGE MONTHLY LABOR TURNOVER RATES. 1330 & 1931.
S E P A R A T IO N
QU IT
7.00
R A TES.
LAY"- O F F .
D IS C H A R G E .
TOTAL.
7.00
6.00
6 .0 0
5.00
- \ /
V
[913]
4-.00
1930
3.00
f
\
y
1.00
f3 3 1
\
--- X
V
v.^_
\
ZOO
\
__-\_
1.00
1930.
1931.
-----
0
J. F M A M J J A S 0 N D
https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
J. F M. A H 0. J A. 5. 0 N D.
400
3.00
\
V
\
5.00
\
.1931.
\ x ^''
1930
2.00
A
\
J. F M. A. M. 0. J. A S. 0. H D.
J F MA M J
J
A S 0 N D
LABOR TURNOVER
f
/, \ 1930_/ !
140
https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
MONTHLY LABOR R EV IEW
[914]
141
LABOR TURNOVER
The accession rate for manufacturing as a whole for the month of
February was 2.82 compared with a separation rate of 2.69. Com
paring the February rates with those for January there is a marked
decrease in the lay-off and total separation rates. The accession
rate also declined. The quit rate was exactly the same as the Janu
ary rate, while there was a slight increase in the discharge rate.
Comparing the February, 1931, figures with those for February,
1930, there was a marked decrease in all rates. The quit rate was
less than half the February, 1930, quit rate. The lay-off rate fell
from 2.50 in February, 1930, to 1.75, February, 1931. While the
accession rate is also lower than the February, 1930, accession rate,
it is not nearly so low in comparison as the February, 1931, total
separation rate is in comparison with the February, 1930, total
separation rate.
Table 2 shows the quit, discharge, lay-off, accession, and net turn
over rates for automobiles, boots and shoes, cotton manufacturing,
foundries and machine shops, furniture, iron and steel, sawmills and
slaughtering and meat packing for the months of 1930 and for Janu
ary and February, 1931, presented both on a monthly and an equiva
lent annual basis.
T
a ble
2 — A V ER A G E LABOR T U R N O V E R R A TES IN SP E C IFIE D IN D U S T R IE S
A.—Monthly Bates
g eparation rates
Industry and month
Automobiles:
January___________
February__________
March____________
April______________
M ay______________
J une______________
July______________
August____________
September________
October___________
November_________
December_________
Average_________
Quit
Lay-off
Total
Accession
rate
N et turn
over rate
1930
1931
1930
2.92
4.12
9. 49
3. 85
4 41
4 68
3 98
2 34
2 78
3 69
3 83
4 02
4. 77
3. 43
1930
1931
1930
1931
1930
1931
1930
2.76
1.16
1.81
2.21
2.20
1.59
1.14
1.23
1.29
1.19
.81
.88
0. 54
.74
0. 92
.38
.56
.50
.50
.39
.24
.38
.33
.25
.16
. 17
0.13 ■5.81
. 21 2.31
2. 04
1.97
5. 59
5. 90
9.48
7.66
7. 42
2. 63
1.71
9. 49
3.85
4. 41
4. 68
8. 29
7.88
10. 86
9. 27
9. 04
6. S3
4. 77
4. 74
3.35 13. 50
2. 66 4. 74
6. Ö2
7. 45
3. 98
2. 34
2. 78
3. 69
3. 83
4. 02
5. 95
3. 43
.40
5. 09
7.01
5. 22
1.52
Boots and shoes:
January___________
February__________
March____________
April._____________
M ay______________
June____________ ..
July_______________
August____________
September_________
October____________
November_________
December__________
1.97
1.93
2. 00
2. 48
2.06
1.94
2. 04
2.19
2. 01
1. 71
1.00
1.03
Average__________
1.86
Cotton manufacturing:
January____________
February__________
M arch_____________
April___ __________
M ay---------------------June..............................
2. 07
1.98
2. 27
2. 40
2. 36
2.06
https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
Discharge
1. 23
1. 27
. 78
.70
.65
.68
.53
. 47
.57
.73
.51
.47
.27
.24
3.80
3. 69
27
.31
.55
1.00
1.00
.65
.60
.69
.68
.55
.58
1 97
1.37
1.34
2.13
2. 47
1.82
1. 76
2.84
2. 73
2. 73
4. 38
3.88
-
1.23
2. 40
.40
.34
2.16
1. 92
2. 20
2. 23
2. 07
2.17
[915]
4 f!9
4. 00
3.99
5. 29
5. 06
4. 23
4. 37
5. 76
5. 30
4.91
5. C5
5 15
1931
2.81
4.81
2.00
1.87
4.88
4. 50
5.16
5.31
4.98
4. 81
3.09
3.18
2. 76
3.19
3. 78
4. 74
4. 08
2. 99
2. 05
2. 41
3. 66
4. 50
3. 33
4. 17
4. 27
3. 95
3. 25
2. 92
2. 66
5. 22
5.88
3. 49
4. 00
3. 21
1931
3.09
3.18
2. 76
3.19
3. 78
4. 37
4.08
2. 99
2. 05
2. 41
3. 66
2.81
3. 30
3. 57
3.91
4. 50
3. 33
4.17
4 27
3. 95
3. 25
3. 57
3. 21
MONTHLY LABOR R EV IEW
142
T
a ble
2.— AVER A G E LABOR T U R N O V E R R A T E S IN SP E C IF IE D IN D U S T R IE S —Con.
A.—M o n th ly R ates—Continued
Iron and steel:
January.
February
March
April
M ay
June
July
August.
September
October
November
December
Sawmills:
January.
February.
March
April
M ay
June
July
August
September
October
November
December
https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
[916]
143
LABOR TURNOVER
T
a b le
2 .— A V ER A G E LABOR T U R N O V E R R A TES IN SP E C IF IE D IN D U S T R IE S—Con.
V.—M o n th ly R a tes—Continued
Separation rates
Industry and month
Slaughtering and meat
packing:
January______________
February____ ____ ___
March,
............
April,
M ay_____ , _ ____
June
, ___
July_________________
August
_______ _
September___ _______
October,
___
November. _ _______
December... _____ . .
Average_______ ____
Quit
Discharge
Lay-off
Accession
rate
N et turn
over rate
1930
1931
1930
9.50
5. 02
9.91
7. 39
5.23
8.13
7. 77
8.19
6. 92
6. 34
6.70
7.10
6. 48
6.24
Total
1930
1931
1930
1931
1930
1931
2. 32
2. 37
2. 49
2. 91
2. 84
2. 72
2.08
2. 09
2.26
1.70
1. 12
1.69
1.29
1. 56
0. 91
.96
.86
.75
.79
.88
.79
.72
.65
.73
.56
.57
0.61
.68
6. 68
7.70
7.51
4. 47
4.14
4. 59
5.34
5.14
3. 79
4. 67
4.80
5.59
4.40 9.91
6.48 11.03
10. 86
8.13
7. 77
8.19
8. 21
7. 95
6. 70
7.10
6. 48
7. 85
6. 30 10. 02
8. 72 7. 39
5.23
8. 47
9. 01
10.34
6. 92
6. 34
7. 33
7. 62
7. 30
6.24
5. 37
8. 35
7. 68
7.68
39.5 158.9
34.6 61.8
81.4
90.7
46.8
28.5
32.7
43.4
46.6
47.3
72.4
40.4
34.4 111.7
53.7 50.2
51.9
57.0
46.8
28.5
32.7
43.4
46.6
47.3
58.0
40.4
60.8 !_____ 83.8 1_____ 62.6
62.6
2.22
.76
1930
1931
1931
6. 30
5. 02
B—E q u iv a len t A n n u a l R ates
Automobiles:
January ____________
February __________
M arch,. . . __________
April________ _____
M ay________________
Ju n e,, _____ ____
July-------------------------August_____ _
_
Septem ber,,
______
October _ _____ ___
November______ _ _
December,, _______
Average____
Boots and shoes:
Jan u ary_____________
February
_____ _ . . .
M arch.. . . . . . . . . .
A pril,._ _________ . .
M ay. . . . . ______ . . .
June_______
. . . _.
July---------------- >-------August__ _________
September _ ______
October. .
. . .
November. _ ___ . . .
December..
_____
Average..
.
32.5
15.1
21.3
26.9
25.9
19.4
13.4
14.5
15.7
14.0
9.9
10.4
6.4
9.6
18.3 1_____
4.8
23.2
25. 2
23.5
30. 2
24. 2
23.6
24.0
25.8
24. 5
20. 1
12. 2
12.1
9.2
9.1
7.7
8.3
6.2
5.7
6.7
8.6
6.2
5.5
3.3
2.8
14. 5
16.6
______ 22.4
Cotton manufacturing:
January______________
February
...
March
... . ..
April____ _ ________
M a y .. _______ ____
June. . ._ . . ____
July_________________
August ___ ____ . . .
September_____
October. _ . . . _____
November_____ ____
December___ ______
24.4
25.8
26.7
29.2
27.8
25. 1
22. 5
18.6
22.9
16.6
14.8
6.8
Average____________ 21.8
https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
10.8
5.0
6.6
6. 1
5.9
4.7
2.8
4.5
4.0
2.9
1.9
2.0
2.1
2.7
4.4
4.0
6.6
11.8
13.0
7.7
7.8
8.1
8.3
6.5
7.1
6.5
5.4
5.6
5.6
4.3
2.8
6.3
68.4
30.1
24.0
24.0
65.8
71.8
111.6
90.2
90.3
63.4
46.2
43.4
14.9
17.9
15.8
25.9
29.1
22.1
20.7
33.4
33.8
32.1
53.3
45.7
31.0 111.7
22.3 50.2
51.9
57.0
97.6
95.9
127.8
109.2
110.0
80.3
58.0
55.8
22.1
16.0
28.7
4.7
4.4
25.4
25.0
25.9
27.1
24.4
26.4
39.3
42.1
29.7
24.6
26.5
22. 6
28.3
[917]
47. 3
52.2
47.0
64.4
59.5
51.4
51.4
67.8
64.5
57.7
68.8
60.6
41.0
36.6
57.7
30.6
24.4
57.5
58.6
60.7
64.6
58.7
58.6
68.3
66.1
58.2
46.8
45.6
32.2
56.3
70.3
40.3
37.4
33.6
37.5
46.0
65.8
48.0
36.4
24.1
29.3
43.1
52.7
76.7
41.8
47.1
41.8
53.0
43. 4
49.1
52.0
46.5
39.6
29.1
32.0
55.7
51.1
35.7
17.2
42.0
47.3
40.3
37.4
33.6
37.5
46.0
51.4
48.0
36.4
24.1
29.3
43.1
34.4
34.6
41.0
36.6
41.8
42.0
51.0
53.0
43.4
.49. 1
52.0
46.5
39.6
29.1
32.0
55.7
46.8
35.7
17.2
41.7
42.0
41.8
144
MONTHLY LABOR R EV IEW
T able 2.— A V ER A G E LABOR T U R N O V E R R A TES IN SP E C IF IE D IN D U S T R IE S—Con.
B—E q u iv a len t A n n u a l H ates—Continued
Separation rates _<*
Industry and month
1930
Foundries and
shops:
February
M arch
April
June
July
August
September
October
November
December
Lay-off
Discharge
Quit
1931
1931
1930
1930
1931
Total
1930
1931
Accession
rate
1931
1930
Net turnover rate
1930
1931
machine
______-
17.7
22.1
22.9
22. 0
15. 7
13. 1
11. 9
13. 0
10.0
8.0
6. 1
7.2
_____
Average
____
Furniture:
January __________
February __________
____________
April
M ay.
_ _ _
_____
June
___- ___ _ _
July
_______
August
__
__ _
September. _ _
October
November__
December
.
. ,
Average ___ _ __
Iron and steel:
January______________
February____________
M arch.. __________ _
April
...
M ay_____________ . .
June_____________ .
July. ______________
August __ ______
September _________
October _ . . .
___
November__ . _
D ecember.. _
Average__________
Sawmills:
January______________
February____________
March_____ . . . _____
April___ _____ . . . ..
M a y ... . . . _____
June__ _ ___
July_________________
August . . . _
___
September______
October____ _ _____
November . . . . _ .
December_____ ______
Average_____ _ . . .
Slaughtering and meat
packing:
January_____________
February____________
March_______________
April________________
M ay________________
June________________
July_________________
August______________
September___________
October______________
N ovem ber___________
December____ _____
Average,
https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
14.8
21.1
14. 8
17. 5
14. 2
13.9
13.3
12.1
12.0
8.0
14.1
1
19.6
5.3
4.4
5.3
5.1
4. 7
6. 0
2.8
3.1
2. 7
2.4
1. 6
1. 2
11.4
15. 9
13.9
17.9
17. 3
11.2
15.9
11. 7
12.6
10.9
11. 6
8. 5
10. 1
10. 9
12. 7
27.3
30.9
29.3
35.4
33.4
33.1
24. 5
24.6
27.5
15.2
20.3
10.7
12.5
13.6
19.9
26. 6
10. 1
9.1
9.3
10.7
9.3
8.5
7.9
8.6
6.8
6.7
27.3
27.4
1. 1
2.0
14.6
15.0
14. 4
16.1
20 1
27. 4
27. 0
24. 1
26. 3
26. 5
23. 7
26. 2
21.8
5. 1
6.5
54.6
70.6
67.5
79.8
77.3
72.1
65. 2
64.9
62.7
45.6
46.1
36.0
37.5
i
66. 4
62.1
82. 2
72.5
75. 2
71.9
59. 3
59 1.
59.9
87. 5
90. 5
73.1
16.0
13.4
41.2
44.3
42. 2
48. 7
49. 9
56. 2
47. 9
46.1
46. 6
42. 2
38.8
37.1
45.1
34. 5
38.6
57.2
54. 5
48.1
44. 3
37. 1
26. 6
30.1
29.8
26.7
22.5
24.1
54.6
54. 5
48.1
44.3
37.1
26. 6
30.1
29.8
26.7
22. 5
24. 1
34. 5
37.5
____
_.
!_____
!_____
j_____
36.5 _____ 36.5 !_____
64. 2
57.0
50.3
53. 3
51. 6
52.7
53. 0
40. 6
40. 2
42. 5
72. 0
78. 4
53. 8
3.7
44.7
44.2
45. 8
52.1
41. 3
35. 7
31. 5
35.4
36. 4
26. 6
23. 5
16.4
36. 1
20.0
2.9
4.4
7.8
6.1
5.0
4.7
4.8
5. 6
5. 3
3.5
4.1
5. 2
8.4
9.4
26.5
38.1
34.9
48. 5
55.0
53.9
48.0
46. 5
47. 2
34.9
36. 5
42. 7
6. 7
6. 5
7.4
21.3
24.9
22. 5
27. 5
25. 1
22. 8
18. 1
18.9
17. 6
13. 3
13. 5
9. 7
2. 6
2.9
10.4
10.4
9. 7
9. 3
6.6
5.1
5. 3
5.4
5.5
2.7
3.1
61.7
71.9
40.6
33.8
46. 5
59.9
62.9
86.0
43. 8
30. 2
27.7
47.9
25.5
24.8
65.0
66.4
47.8
47. 2
38.3
31.2
26.7
22. 5
28.2
20. 5
15. 9
16. 5
35. 5
61.7
62.1
40.6
33.8
46. 5
59.9
59.3
59.1
43. 8
30. 2
27 7
47. 9
41.2
44.3
42. 2
47. 2
38.3
31.2
26.7
22.5
28.2
20.5
15.9
__ 16.5
29.7
29.2
25. 5
24.8
35.5
53.2
52.0
41. 7
60. 5
95. 3
65.1
82. 2
71. 7
93. 0
77.4
88.0
87.3
72.3
94.4 111.8 110.9 110.5 117.6 110.5
59. 5 114. 1 81.9 118.8 97.0 114.1
104. 8
93. 1
93.1
117. 6
123.8
117. 6
152. 5
118. 8
118. 8
71.2
112. 5
71. 2
72. 6
126.3
72.6
118.0
79.0
79.0
84.3
84. 3
141.0
112. 5
97.9
97.9
121. 6
60.4
60. 4
53. 1
114. 6
53.1
89. 8
80.8
121. 1
110.9
81.9
78.6
100.4
88.4
54.4
48.7
55.9
62.9
60.5
46. 1
55.0
58.4
65.8
64. 6
51.8 116. 6 74.2 117.9 111.8 116.6
84.5 143.8 113.7 96.4 65.5 96.4
61.6
127.8 _____! 61.6
98.9
103. 1
98.9
91.4
91.4
1C6.0
99.7
125.8
99.7
81.4
81.4
96. 7
74.6
74.6
93.6
89.2
81. 5
81.5
83.6
83.6
89.7
78.8
88.8
78.8
73.4
73.4
92,4
92.3
ICO. 4 _____I 92.3
74.2
65. 5
[918]
LABOR TURNOVER
145
The rates in the above table have been recomputed for these indus
tries for all months for which the bureau has received reports.
The accession rate was higher than the total separation rate for
each industry for which separate indexes are shown except for slaugh
tering and meat packing, which has a higher separation rate than
accession rate. Boots and shoes, cotton manufacturing, sawmills,
and slaughtering and meat packing each had a higher quit rate than
the all manufacturing quit rate. Foundries and machine shops,
furniture, and iron and steel had lower quit rates than that shown for
all industries. The automotive industry had the same quit rate as
that for all manufacturing.
The discharge rate for automobiles, boots and shoes, cotton manu
facturing, foundries and machine shops, furniture, sawmills, and
slaughtering and meat packing were all higher than the discharge rate
for all industries. Iron and steel had a lower discharge rate than that
shown by manufacturing as a whole.
A higher lay-off rate than the all manufacturing lay-off rate was
shown for the following industries: Cotton manufacturing, foundries
and machine shops, furniture, sawmills, and slaughtering and meat
packing. The following industries had lower lay-off rates than that
shown for all industries: Automobiles, boots and shoes, and iron and
steel.
The accession rate for all manufacturing was 2.82. This was ex
ceeded by the accession rate of automboiles, boots and shoes, cotton
manufacturing, foundries and machine shops, furniture, sawmills, and
slaughtering and meat packing. The accession rate for iron and steel
was lower than the all industry accession rate.
The highest quit rate for any industry for which separate indexes
are shown was registered in the slaughtering and meat-packing indus
try. This industry had a quit rate for February of 1.56. The lowest
quit rate, 0.55, occurred in foundries and machine shops. Slaughter
ing and meat packing also had the highest discharge rate, 0.68. The
lowest discharge rate, 0.15, was shown by the iron and steel industry.
The highest lay-off rate was 6.48, which was also registered by the
slaughtering and meat-packing industry. The lowest lay-off rate,
1.03, was shown by the iron and steel industry. Sawmills had the
highest accession rate, 7.44. The lowest accession rate was 2.24 in
the iron and steel industry.
https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
[919]
HOUSING
B u ild in g P e r m it s in P r in c ip a l C itie s , F e b ru a ry , 1931
UILDING permit reports have been received by the Bureau of
Labor Statistics from 342 identical cities having a population
of 25,000 or over for the months of January and February, 1931, and
for 297 identical cities for the months of February, 1930, and for
February, 1931.
The cost figures in the tables below show the costs of the buildings
as estimated by the prospective builders when applying for their
permits to build. No land costs are included. Only building
projects within the corporate limits of the cities enumerated are
shown.
The States of Illinois, Massachusetts, New Jersey, New York, and
Pennsylvania, through their Departments of Labor, are cooperating
with the United States Bureau of Labor Statistics in the collection
of these data.
Table 1 shows the estimated cost of new residential buildings, of
new nonresidential buildings, and of total building operations in 342
cities of the United States by geographic divisions.
B
T a b l e 1 —E ST IM A T E D COST OF N E W B U IL D IN G S IN 342 ID E N T IC A L C ITIES AS SHOW N
BY P E R M IT S ISSU E D IN JA N U A R Y A N D F E B R U A R Y , 1931, BY GEOGRAPHIC D IV I
SIONS
N ew residential buildings
Estimated cost
Geographic division
Families pro
vided for in
new dwellings
New nonresidential
buildings, esti
mated cost
T otal construction
(including altera
tions and repairs),
estimated cost
Jan Feb
January, February, uary, ruary, January, February, January,
1931
1931
1931
1931
1931
1931
1931
February,
1931
$2,843,800 $1,969, 340
19,121,945 14,237,482
4,238,151 5, 220,700
1, 298,171 1, 691,520
2, 217, 450 5, 649,371
3, 000, 238 2,849,055
5,169, 001 5, 652,318
525
3,746
849
328
565
1,006
1,518
302 $1,205, 007 $2,787,056
3,407 15,297,875 16, 377,891
1,067 12,212, 993 11,901,878
434 2, 379,109 2, 857, 979
1,038 2,112,126 2, 648,181
995 6,318, 951 4,.656, 223
1, 558 6, 357, 619 5,066, 741
Total . ________ 37,888,756 37, 269, 786
- 1 .6
Per cent of change
8,537
8,801 45,883, 680 46, 295,949 102, 878, 087 100, 311,856
+ 3 .1
+ 0 .9
- 2 .5
New England. ________
Middle Atlantic ______
East North Central_____
West North C e n tr a l___
South Atlantic___ - __
South Central__ _______
M ountain and Pacific___
$5, 329, 693
44, 403, 799
18, 358, 935
4,145, 037
6, 934,104
10, 234,450
13, 472, 069
$5,744,148
36, 657,094
21, 530,172
5, 088, 966
10,186, 457
8, 521, 693
12,583,326
Permits were issued in these 342 cities during February, 1931, for
building operations to cost $100,311,856, which was 2.5 per cent
less than the estimated cost of the building construction for which
permits were issued during January, 1931. While new residential
buildings decreased 1.6 per cent in estimated cost, new nonresi
dential buildings increased 0.9 per cent comparing February permits
with January permits.
The new residences for which permits were issued during the
month of February were to house 8,801 families, an increase of 3.1
146
[920]
https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
HOUSING
147
]>er cent over the number of families provided for by the new dwellings
for which permits were issued during January, 1931. Increases in
residential buildings occurred in the East North Central States, the
West North Central States, the Soutlq Atlantic States, and the
Mountain and Pacific States. Decreases in new residential buildings
were shown in the New England States, Middle Atlantic States, and
South Central States. Increases in new nonresidential buildings
were shown in the New England States, the Middle Atlantic States,
the West North Central States, and the South Atlantic States.
Decreases in the estimated cost of new nonresidential buildings
occurred in the East North Central States, the South Central States,
and the Mountain and Pacific States.
Comparing February permits with January permits, there was
an increase in the estimated cost of total building operations in the
New England States, the East North Central States, the W^est North
Central States, and the South Atlantic States. Decreases in total
building operations occurred in the Middle Atlantic States, the
South Central States, and the Mountain and Pacific States.
Table 2 shows the estimated cost of additions, alterations, and
repairs as shown by permits issued, together with the percentage of
increase or decrease in February, 1931, as compared with January,
1931, in 342 identical cities by geographic divisions.
T a b l e 2 .—E ST IM A T E D COST OF A D D IT IO N S, A L T E R A T IO N S, A N D R E PA IR S IN 342
m f,
B Y G E O G R A P ^ d i v i s i o n s " P E B M IT S ISSU E D IN JA N U A R Y A N D F E B R U A R Y ,
Estimated cost
Geographic division
Per cent of
increase or
decrease
February,
compared
with
January
January,
1931
February,
1931
N ew England ......................
Middle Atlantic_________
East North Central ____
West North Central____ __
South Atlantic _______
South Central____
M ountain and Pacific..
$1, 280,886
9,983,979
1, 907, 791
467,757
2, 604, 528
915, 261
1,945, 449
$987, 752
6, 041, 721
4,407, 594
539, 467
1,888, 905
1,016,415
1,864, 267
-2 2 .9
-3 9 .5
+131.0
+15.3
-2 7 .5
+11.1
- 4 .2
Total...... ................
19,105, 651
16, 746,121
-1 2 .3
There was a decrease of 12.3 per cent in the estimated cost of the
additions, alterations, and repairs for which permits were issued in
these 342^ cities comparing February, 1931, with January, 1931.
Increases in the estimated cost of additions, alterations, and repairs
were shown in three of the seven geographic divisions, ranging from
11.1 per cent in the South Central States to 131.0 per cent in the
East North Central States. The decreases ranged from 4.2 per cent
in the Mountain and Pacific States to 39.5 per cent in the Middle
Atlantic States.
Table 3 shows the index numbers of families provided for and the
index numbers of indicated expenditures for new residential build
ings, for new nonresidential buddings, for additions, alterations, and
repairs, and for total building operations. These indexes are worked
on the chain system with the monthly average of 1929 equaling 100.
https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
[ 921]
MONTHLY LABOR R EV IEW
148
r p . BTF 3 —I N D E X N U M B E R S O F F A M I L I E S P R O V I D E D F O R A N D O F T H E E S T I M A T E D
c o s t "o f B U I L D I N G O P E R A T I O N S A S S H O W N B Y P E R M I T S I S S U E D I N P R I N C I P A L
C I T I E S O F T H E U N I T E D S T A T E S , F E B R U A R Y , 1930, T O F E B R U A R Y , 1931, I N C L L S I V E
[M onthly average, 1929=100]
Estimated costs of—
Families
provided
for
Month
1930
IVf Gffdi
\ ppi]
A4 ay
Junp
July
Anglist.
Pppt .pmb pr
Ontnbpr
AinyPTTibpr
TJpppmbor
_____ _ _________
_ _ _______________
___________ - - - - -__
_______ - - —
- _______ --- - - --------_ _ _ -- - ---------- - - - - - -- ------__________________
__ ______ _______
__ ___________ __
1931
February____________________________
N ew resi
dential
buildings
N ew non
residential
buildings
43.0
57. 1
62.0
59.6
54.4
49.9
48.7
51. 3
58.3
52.9
45. 0
34.7
47.2
51.0
48.5
45.1
44. 1
43.4
44.4
44.9
42.5
37.6
51.8
87.1
100.1
90.7
82. 5
86. 7
67.2
73.8
53. 5
54. 4
64. 3
.39. 1
40. 3
30.8
30.3
43.4
43. 8
Additions,
alterations,
and repairs
Total
building
operations
81.8
84. 5
74. 6
77.4
58. 6
64.2
58.1
37. 8
53. 6
44.1
66.4
73.8
69.3
63.3
64.8
54.4
58.2
49.7
46.3
50.1
55.5
48. 6
38.9
37.9
57.5
Vv .
b
The index number of families provided for stood at 40.3 in February,
1931, an increase over the preceding month but lower than for
February, 1930. The index number of new residential buildings for
February, 1931, was 30.3, which was lower than for either January,
1931, or February, 1930. The index numbers of additions, alterations,
and repairs and of total building operations were both lower than for
February, 1930, or January, 1931. The index number of new nonresidential buildings, while lower than for February, 1930, was higher
than for January, 1931.
.
The chart on page 151 shows in graphic form the estimated cost ot
new residential buildings, of new nonresidential buildings, and of
total building operations.
Table 4 shows the dollar value of contracts let for public buildings
by the different agencies of the United States Government during the
months of Januarv, 1931, and February, 1931, by geographic divisions.
T
4 —C O NTRACTS L ET FO R PU B L IC B U IL D IN G S B Y D IF F E R E N T D IV ISIO N S OF
T H E U N IT E D STA TES G O V E R N M E N T D U R IN G JA N U A R Y A N D F E B R U A R Y , 1931,
B Y GEOGRAPHIC DIV ISIO N S
a b le
January, 1931
Geographic division
February,
1931
N ew England....................................
M iddle Atlantic..............................
East North Central------------- --West North Central-----------------South Atlantic------------------------South Central___ ; ------------------Mountain and Pacific....................
$8,480
3,490, 599
211, 303
117, 555
2,346, 752
413,972
945,923
$107, 536
113, 230
902, 279
114,600
1,389,117
493,817
313,086
T otal____________________
7, 534, 584
3,433,665
Contracts were let for United States Government buildings during
January, 1931, to cost $7,534,584, and during February, 1931, to cost
$3,433,665. These contracts were let by the following agencies:
United States Capitol Architect; Office of the Quartermaster General,
https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
[922]
149
HOUSING
War Department; Bureau of Yards and Docks, Navy Department;
Supervising Architect, Treasury Department; and the United States
Veterans’ Bureau.
Whenever the contract is let by the United States Government for
a building in a city having a population of 25,000 or over the cost is
included in the estimated costs as shown in the cities enumerated in
Table 8.
Table 5 shows the dollar value of contracts awarded by the different
State governments for public buildings during the months of January,
1931, and February, 1931, by geographic divisions.
T a b l e 5 —C ONTRACTS A W A R D E D FOR PU B L IC B U IL D IN G S BY T H E
D IF F E R E N T
STATE G O V E R N M E N T S D U R IN G JA N U A R Y A N D F E B R U A R Y , 1931, B Y GEOGRAPHIC
DIV ISIO N S
Geographic division
January, 1931
New England . . . — _________
Middle Atlantic_______________
East North Central____ ______
West North Central____________
South Atlantic________________
South Central ________
Mountain and Pacific__________
T otal_____ __________ _
February,
1931
$44, 540
588, 293
268,871
93,029
246,925
247,000
164,141
$101,905
1,045,915
19,452
5,291
154,190
4,120
441, 750
1,652, 799
1, 772, 623
Whenever the contract is let by a State government for a building
in a city having a population of 25,000 or over the cost is included in
the estimated cost as shown in the cities enumerated in Table 8.
Table 6 shows the estimated cost of new residential buildings, new
nonresidential buildings, and of total building operations in 297
identical cities having a population of 25,000 or over for February,
1930, and February, 1931, by geographic divisions.
T a b l e 6 .—E ST IM A T E D COST OF N E W B U IL D IN G S IN 297 ID E N T IC A L C IT IE S AS
SHOW N BY PE R M IT S ISSU E D IN F E B R U A R Y , 1930, A N D F E B R U A R Y , 1C31, BY
G EO G R A PH IC D IV ISIO N S
N ew residential buildings
Estimated cost
Geographic division
Families pro
vided for in
new dwell
ings
N ew nonresidential
buildings, e s t imated cost
T o t a l construction
(including altera
tions and repairs),
estimated cost
Feb Febru
Febru Feb ruary,
Febru
Febru- February, February
ary, 1930 ary, 1931 ruary,
1930
1931
1930
1931 ary, 1930 ary, 1931
N ew England_________ _
M iddle Atlantic________
East North Central_____
West North Central.........
South A tlantic—........ .......
South Central__________
M ountain and Pacific___
$2,053,900 $1,961,340
15,097, 670 14, 207,097
8,411,296 4, 732,276
2,341, 040 1, 691, 520
2, 654,422 5, 586,921
5, 317,443 2, 708, 720
7,072,114 5,261,644
T o ta l...........
Per cent of change.
42,947, 885 36,149,518 9,089
-1 5 .8 .
389
2,534
1, 290
612
545
1, 351
2, 368
300 $3,112,491! $2, 787,056
3,402 15, 709, 797 16, 340,166
957 16, 386, 972 11,176,042
434 2, 585, 775 2,857, 979
1, 021 4, 761, 263 2,319,823
945 3, 906,118 4,269, 075
1,447 4, 917, 987 4, 505,627
$7,353,477
37,481,809
27,626,068
5, 789, 843
9, 799,446
10,426,438
14,441, 085
$5, 720, 578
36, 531, 744
20,237,986
5, 085,466
9, 746, 224
7, 904, 054
11, 546,115
8,506 51, 380,403 44, 255, 768 112, 918,166
- 6 .4
-1 3 .
6, 772,167
-1 4 .3
There was a decrease of 14.3 per cent in the estimated cost of total
construction for which permits were issued in February, 1931, as
https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
[923]
monthly labor review
150
compared with February, 1930. New residential buildings decreased
15.8 per cent in estimated cost comparing February, 1931, with Feb
ruary, 1930, and new nonresidential buildings decreased 13.9 per pent.
The number of families provided with dwelling places in new residen
tial buildings decreased 6.4 per cent in February, 1931, as compared
with the same month of the previous year.
.
An increase in new residential buildings was shown m the South
Atlantic States. All other geographic divisions showed decreases
in this class of building, comparing February, 1931, with January 1931.
Increases in new nonresidential buildings were shown in the Middle
Atlantic States, the West North Central States, and the South
Central States. The other four geographic divisions registered de
creases in nonresidential building.
Comparing permits issued in February, 1931, with those issued dur
ing February, 1930, a decrease in total construction was shown m
each of the seven geographic divisions. These decreases ranged
from slightly more than $50,000 in the South Atlantic States to more
than $7,000,000 in the East North Central States.
Comparing February, 1931, with February, 1930, the number of
family dwelling units'provided showed an increase in the Middle
Atlantic States and the South Atlantic States. The other geographic
divisions showed decreases in family dwelling units provided.
Table 7 shows the estimated cost of additions, alterations, and
repairs as shown by permits issued, together with the percentage of
increase or decrease in February, 1931, as compared with February,
1930.
T
7 .— E ST IM A T E D COST OF A D D IT IO N S, A L T E R A T IO N S, A N D R E PA IR S IN 297
ID E N T IC A L C IT IES AS SH O W N B Y PE R M IT S ISSU E D IN F E B R U A R Y , 1930, A N D FE B R U A R Y , 1931, B Y G EO GRAPHIC DIV ISIO N S
a ble
Estimated cost
Geographic division
N ew England---------------- ------ ----Middle Atlantic__________ ______
East North Central--------------------West North Central------ ------------South Atlantic__________________
South Central---------------------------Mountain and Pacific................ .......
T o t a l . ------ ------- ------------
Per cent of
change, Feb
ruary, 1931,
compared
with Febru
ary, 1930
February,
1930
February,
1931
$2,187,086
6, 674, 342
2, 827, 800
863,028
2, 383, 761
1,202,877
2,450,984
$972,182
5, 984,481
4,329, 668
535,967
1,839,480
926, 259
1, 778,844
-5 5 .6
-1 0 .3
+53.1
-3 7 .9
-2 2 .8
-2 3 .0
-2 7 .4
18,589,878
16, 366, 881
-1 2 .0
Projected expenditures for additions, alterations, and repairs de
creased 12.0 per cent in February, 1931, as compared with February,
1930. Decreases were shown in six of the seven geographic divisions.
The decreases in estimated expenditures for additions, alterations,
and repairs ranged from 10.3 per cent in the Middle Atlantic States
to 55.6 per cent in the New England States. There was an increase
of 53.1 per cent in the estimated cost of additions, alterations, and
repairs in the East North Central States in February, 1931, as com
pared with this class of structure in February, 1930.
Table 8 shows the estimated cost of new residential buildings, new
nonresidential buildings, and total building operations, together with
https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
[924]
HOUSING
151
I N D E X E S OF C O S T OF B U IL D IN G O P E R A T I O N S .
MONTHLY AVERAGE.
NEW
100
»92,9 = 100.
R E S ID E N T IA L .
inn
75
75
4
1930
30
50
/
----- - —*
/
193
\ s
/
25
25
NEW
100
NON R E S ID E N T IA L .
/
/ \
/
1930
75
\
\
\
\
100
s
\ \
\
1
1
/
\
&
\
\
75
\
/• \
'
\
/
1
\
•
\
50
’u—--- /
/
/
50
, 0Q
T 0 7 X t ^ IN C L U D IN G A L T E R A T IO N S X rR EPA IR S
75
' 100
75
/
/ 1930
\ >
S
\
\
/
/
4 __
50
\
\
\ •
50
—
1931
J
25
ó
p/
Z
co
K of > c
<3 £L H
>
o
l i l ^ U l ^ 0 - ^ 3 ^ ! 3 u i O O u J
O * ^ u . E < S - 0 “> < < 0 O 2 T Q
https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
[925]
25
152
M O N TH LY
LABO R
R E V IE W
the number of families provided for in new dwellings in 342 identical
cities in January, 1931, and February, 1931.
Reports were received in the New England States yrom 50 cities
for January and February, 1931; in the Middle Atlantic States, from
70 cities; in the East North Central States, from 93 cities; in the
West North Central States, from 25 cities; in the South Atlantic
States, from 36 cities; in the South Central States, from 34 cities;
and in the Mountain and Pacific States, from 34 cities.
Permits were issued during February, 1931, for the following large
buildings: In New Haven, Conn., a permit was issued for a 1. M. C. A.
building to cost $500,000; in Boston, for an amusement building to
cost $1,250,000; in Watertown, Mass., for a public-utilities building
to cost $750,000; in the Borough of the Bronx applications were filed
for 18 apartment houses to cost over $2,500,000; in the Borough of
Brooklyn, for 14 apartment houses to cost $2,500,000; and m the
Borough of Manhattan, for 3 office buildings to cost over $9,000,000.
In White Plains, N. Y., a permit was issued for a hospital to cost
$550,000, and in Yonkers, N. Y., for a public-school building to cost
$1,250,000. In Chicago permits were issued for four public-school
buildings to cost $6,250,000. In St. Louis a permit was issued for a
hospital to cost $1,000,000, and in Omaha for one to cost $750,000.
In Washington, D. C., permits were issued for three apartment houses
to cost nearly $3,500,000 and for an office building to cost $650,000.
In Oklahoma City, a permit wTas issued for an office building to cost
$1,500,000. The United States Government let a contract for a
post-office building in Albuquerque, N. Mex., to cost $503,000.
T
T
a ble
a b le
8 _E ST IM A T E D COST OP B U IL D IN G S FOR W HICH P E R M IT S W ER E ISSU E D IN
8 . Lb “ 342 P R IN C IP A L CITIES, JA N U A R Y A N D FE B R U A R Y , 1931
New England States
N ew residential buildings
Estimated cost
State and city
January,
1931
Families pro
vided for in
new buildings
Jan
February, uary,
1931
1931
New nonresidential
b u ild in g s , e s t i
mated cost
Total construction
(including altera
tions and repairs),
estimated cost
Feb January, February, January, February,
ruary,
1931
1931
1931
1931
1931
1
Connecticut:
Bridgeport--.
Greenwich..
Hartford___
Meriden____
N ew Britain.
N ew Haven.
Norwalk___
Stamford---Torrington—
W aterbury..
Maine:
Bangor____
Lewiston___
Portland----Massachusetts:
B oston1----Brockton—
Brookline.. .
Cambridge..
Chelsea........
Chicopee___
$216, 884
168,150
101,525
31, 705
19, 935
91,300
93, 000
62, 535
7,650
20,650
$123,300
58,000
14,000
3, 500
0
527, 500
30,000
20, 500
8,000
0
15
8
4
5
0
11
7
5
1
3
10
5
4
1
0
4
5
3
2
0
$19,104
4,050
18, 935
1,530
6.250
24,115
3,150
8,425
775
4,200
0
0
8,800
0
0
4,000
0
0
2
0
0
1
0
9,460
18,200
30, 995
663, 800
11, 500
56, 500
326, 500
8,500
4,000
575,440
10, 500
0
12,000
0
0
164
2
3
72
2
1
151
2
0
3
0
0
158, 280
12, 575
600
20,400
2, 620
3,100
1,319,625
775
250
62,409
425
600
1,094,218
62, 725
70,100
376,125
27,395
1 Applications filed.
https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
$34,035
12, 900
4,900
6,250
18,800
8, 950
4,000
20, 050
$62, 600
96,000
19,000
25,800
0
43, 500
49,000
34,400
5,000
13, 800
[926]
0
0
11, 700
0
0
0
0
10,000
$168, 220
86,000
59, 264
21,870
24, 728
558, 685
49, 850
51,040
23, 570
20, 950
0
13,000
36, 370
2,183, 609
20, 350
15, 925
87, 519
3, 925
800
153
H O U S IN G
T a b l e 8 .— E ST IM A T E D COST OF B U IL D IN G S FOR W HICH P E R M IT S W ERE ISSU E D I N
342 PR IN C IP A L CITIES, JA N U A R Y A N D F E B R U A R Y , 1931—Continued
New England States— C ontinued
N ew residential buildings
N ew nonresidential
b u ild in g s , e s t i
Families pro
mated cost
vided for in
new buildings
Estimated cost
State and city
January,
1931
Massachusetts—Con.
Everett_________
Fall River_____
Fitchburg_______
Haverhill________
H olyoke_________
Lawrence_______
Lowell______
L ynn___________
M alden_________
Medford, ______
N ew Bedford ___
Newton_________
Pittsfield________
Quincy_____ ____
Revere__________
Salem___________
Somerville_______
Springfield______
Taunton________
Waltham _______
Watertown- .
W orcester._____
N ew Hampshire:
Concord _______
M anchester-...... _
Rhode Island:
Central Falls.—. . .
Cranston ______
East Providence..
Newport________
Pawtucket______
Providence______
W oonsocket_____
T otal_________
Per cent of change.
Jan
February, uary,
1931
1931
Feb
ruary, January,
1931
1931
February,
1931
Total construction
(including altera
tions and repairs),
estimated cost
January, February,
1931
1931
$16, 600
2,800
2,500
0
7.000
0
13.500
32.000
21,900
55.500
0
781, 800
25.000
46.300
8.000
0
46, 500
41, 800
6,000
67, 500
36.500
48.100
$7, 000
0
5.000
0
0
0
0
26,800
22, 700
67, 500
5.000
123,000
10, 000
35, 500
7.000
7.500
6.500
21,600
2,600
13.000
7.500
42,100
5
1
1
0
1
0
4
7
5
13
0
84
5
14
2
0
10
8
1
16
6
8
2
0
1
0
0
0
0
6
5
15
1
14
2
11
2
1
2
4
1
3
2
8
$43,050
37, 250
400
30
400
800
10, 675
1,400
350
3,085
3,475
1, 750
300
109,350
100
300
13,000
28, 925
540
1,450
1,300
7,100
$12,000
692
0
3,450
135,100
13,300
250
2, 500
9,250
64,050
104, 500
3, 775
200
9,500
400
300
52, 750
3,000
1,-575
2, 775
750, 900
4, 730
$60,425
49, 530
2, 900
8, 220
25,650
4, 200
42, 550
70, 515
25, 700
64, 635
8, 900
788, 700
35, 850
223, 954
18, 025
6,495
94, 750
108,175
20, 670
94,100
44, 575
115, 570
$23, 700
11,042
23, 600
10,100
140,100
27, 757
9, 660
60, 040
39,460
134, 520
116, 775
135, 785
22, 275
91, 075
17,050
21,045
66. 521
51, 600
21, 825
22,325
761,675
117, 013
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
250
0
630
3,000
2,438
0
25,160
0
32, 500
15.300
0
19, 900
88.100
0
0
54,900
21,200
4, 500
12, 700
79.000
0
0
7
3
0
5
14
0
0
12
5
1
3
10
0
0
438,398
3,040
1,500
2, 670
195, 950
600
100
10,250
52,800
2, 550
1,510
20,150
200
1,850
471, 828
24,906
9,785
66,630
348,900
1,375
1,000
70, 275
82, 005
12,420
18, 920
179, 390
4, 360
2, 843, 800
1,969, 340
-3 0 . 7
525
302
—42. 5
1,205, 007
2,787, 056
+131.3
5, 329, 693
5, 744,148
+ 7 .8
$25, 619
11, 250
1,100
20, 000
4,350
77,150
36, 955
24,100
0
0
19, 750
19,435
1,200
27,450
54, 705
1,000
500
3,200
19,800
11, 200
268, 961
4,846
0
1,000
$103,233
30, 350
14, 513
48, 000
22, 740
28, 850
29, 607
37, 000
19, 800
, 775
77, 514
199,300
2,170
45, 870
419, 516
8, 770
32, 355
38,215
96, 235
11, 090
65, 424
303, 734
63,485
12,450
$86, 951
32, 750
25,125
106, 000
9,685
106, 075
94,642
171,100
Middle Atlantic States
N ew Jersey:
Atlantic City . . .
Bayonne________
Belleville ______
Bloomfield______
Camden ________
Clifton__________
East O ra n g e____
Elizabeth________
Garfield_________
Hoboken________
Irvington ______
Jersey City _____
Kearny ______
Montclair_______
Newark_________
N ew Brunswick. _
Orange__________
Passaic__________
Paterson ______
Perth Amboy........
Plainfield.
____
Trenton_________
Union C ity..........
West N ew York—
$29, 800
0
4,000
35, 000
0
21,000
11,400
28, 000
13, 200
0
63, 000
49, 000
0
27, 600
111, 500
0
0
0
8, 500
6,000
55,400
0
0
0
https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
0
$14,000
16, 985
80, 000
0
27, 600
11.000
147, 000
0
0
15,437
43, 900
6,000
44, 500
34, 000
0
0
0
31, 950
3,600
102, 000
50,000
35, 000
0
17
0
1
6
0
5
2
6
3
0
15
20
0
4
17
0
0
0
2
2
7
0
0
0
[927]
0
8
4
14
0
6
2
48
0
0
2
11
1
5
4
0
0
0
7
1
11
0
17
0
$11, 500
23, 500
3,700
11,000
15,475
2,100
2,780
9,000
5,650
0
' 9,850
51, 765
100
14, 600
78,294
2,100
0
14,000
44,100
300
2,299
275,097
25, 700
0
6
0
15, 350
38,152
110, 885
8,900
83,295
217, 222
23, 825
17,800
23, 925
99, 509
27, 073
385,145
65, 246
46, 785
15,625
154
T
a b le
MONTHLY LABOR R EV IEW
8 —
E ST IM A T E D COST OF B U IL D IN G S FOR W HICH P E R M IT S W ERE ISSU E D IN
342 PR IN C IP A L C ITIES, JA N U A R Y A N D F E B R U A R Y , 1931—Continued
Middle Atlantic States— C o n tin u ed
N ew residential buildings
Estimated cost
State and city
January,
1931
N ew York:
Albany__________
Amsterdam______
Auburn_________
Binghamton_____
Buffalo- __ ____
E lm ira.-- _______
J a m e s to w n ...___
Kingston............... Lockport ______
Mount Vernon___
N ew b u rg h -..........
N ew Rochelle___N ew York City—
The Bronx i .
Brooklyn 1___
Manhattan L .
Queens 1_____
Richmond
Niagara Falls____
Poughkeepsie____
Rochester_______
Schenectady_____
Syracuse________
Troy____________
U tica. _________
W atertown- ____
W hite Plains____
Yonkers. ..............
Pennsylvania:
Allentown_______
Altoona_________
Bethlehem______
Butler___________
Chester..................E a sto n _________
Erie_____________
Harrisburg______
Hazleton________
Johnstown_______
Lancaster_______
McKeesport ___
N a n tic o k e __ ___
New Castle______
Norristown______
Philadelphia_____
Pittsburgh______
Reading_________
Scranton________
Wilkes-Rarre
W ilkinsburg. ___
W illiamsport____
York___1—..........
N ew nonresidential
b u ild in g s , e s t i
Families pro
mated cost
1 vided for in
new buildings
Jan
February, uary,
1931
1931
Feb
ruary, January,
1931
1931
$118, 500
0
9,500
16,300
110, 000
0
4,000
26,000
0
348, 500
0
110,100
15
0
0
5
20
1
3
1
0
58
0
21
2,921, 000 3, 753, 550
3,352,100 3,624, 500
0
6, 565, 000
3,839, 400 3,454, 800
94,200
100, 595
31, 200
21,000
21, 500
23, 500
13, 700
13,700
21, 500
16,000
61, 300
97,300
12,200
0
11,000
16,000
0
0
88,000
91,500
423,000
274,000
683
833
841
923
34
5
2
2
2
20
0
2
0
5
35
8, 000
11,000
5,000
3,500
0
0
60, 900
15,000
0
3,000
7,000
5,000
0
7,200
0
634,200
374, 885
13, 000
4,000
7,225
31, 000
11, 500
17, 750
2
1
0
1
2
0
8
0
0
1
0
4
1
1
0
63
38
0
1
0
5
0
0
T otal_________ 19,121,945 14, 237, 482
—25. 5
3, 746
$106, 500
0
0
15, 500
55, 800
12, 000
11, 500
4,500
0
227, 000
0
330,200
8, 000
6,500
0
4,000
5,000
0
30, 200
0
0
3,500
0
14, 900
6,000
6,750
0
285, 500
167, 400
0
4,700
0
24,000
0
0
13
0
2
4
39
0
1
5
0
62
0
8
$31,000
0
1,300
10,418
559, 542
380
1,115
1,475
0
150,850
300
211,350
956 4,919, 700
925
517,025
0 5,845,513
744,655
860
239, 745
26
2,825
10
8,650
4
21, 482
2
38,350
3
152, 550
12
0
3
109,018
2
150
0
6,000
8
9,950
54
2
3
1
1
0
0
14
3
0
1
2
1
0
2
0
137
82
1
1
2
7
2
5
4,850
6,615
600
8,000
121, 550
0
6,225
12,100
690
4,255
1,953
1,020
0
550
258,756
468,155
148, 590
9,311
8,173
6, 950
30,380
869
12,030
Total construction
(including altera
tions and repairs),
estimated cost
February, January, February,
1931
1931
1931
$3, 500
0
950
2,125
264, 417
252, 876
1, 775
15,375
5,125
3, 750
24,814
3,025
$184, 751
0
5,600
73,190
651, 939
24, 335
36, 225
15, 645
0
389,800
6, 200
556,325
$179, 372
1,000
11,800
32, 993
489, 630
273,115
9, 665
48, 240
7, 535
370,150
28, 314
118, 904
337, 300 8, 005, 910 4, 545, 075
608, 510 4,661, 997 5,672,490
9,133,360 19,249, 878 10,128, 210
1, 583,127 4,938,118 5, 424, 812
213, 231
58,590
368, 268
50, 904
1,580
48,855
358, 300
330, 200
37, 995
138, 996
79,428
59, 632
39, 080
5, 500
85, 800
321,125 1,593, 763
609,383
300
19,100
13, 075
64, 043
2,000
137,438
4, 775
0
2,525
611,800
701,140
108, 950
1,322, 700
305, 200 1, 795,175
11, 900
1,760
16,600
3,500
1,450
10,372
16, 970
27,800
0
1,300
6,350
5,450
0
1,945
1,075
186,165
130, 566
31, 500
4,590
20,232
1,450
70
1,765
22,000
21, 839
10, 819
17, 650
144,450
12, 595
55, 510
40, 825
6, 278
10, 030
15, 278
26, 745
14, 000
11, 245
261, 604
942, 045
581,335
36, 936
69, 253
11,768
57, 630
10,069
18,123
36, 600
18, 638
21, 600
7,300
2, 275
13, 372
96,625
62,295
0
17,410
23,000
23, 075
9, 000
11, 220
6, 084
1, 282, 795
662,881
83, 690
18, 665
40,387
39,375
16, 707
33, 223
3, 407 15, 297,875 16,377,891 44, 403, 799 36,657,094
-1 7 .4
+ 7.1 1........ .........
-9 .0
|
.
East North Central States
Illinois:
A lton___________
Aurora...................Belleville________
Berwyn________ _
$7,860
34,934
4,000
12,000
$36, 950
2,855
10,500
51, 500
3
1
1
2
i Application filed.
https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
[928]
1
1
3
$100
2, 440
300
0
$93,073
850
15,100
4,100
$11,345
41,516
6,880
12,000
$142,043
17, 077
29, 800
58,450
HOUSING
T
a b l e
8 .—
155
E ST IM A T E D COST OF B U IL D IN G S FOR W HICH P E R M IT S W ERE ISSU E D IN
342 P R IN C IP A L CITIES, JA N U A R Y A N D F E B R U A R Y , 1931—Continued
East North Central States— C o n tin u ed
N ew residential buildings
State and city
Estimated cost
January,
1931
Total construction
(including altera
tions and repairs),
estimated cost
Feb
ruary
1931
January,
1931
February
1931
January, February,
1931
1931
1
99
1
2
2
6
1
1
0
10
31
9
1
24
0
4
2
9
6
2
128
0
0
2
9
6
5
0
8
2
5
0
15
0
11
3
10
2
$155,000
2,303,350
6,000
1,000
62, 550
3,850
0
1,000
0
0
1,700
37, 450
10,425
0
50,210
1,600
985
1, 425
13,600
$70,000
7,163,300
159,125
550
26, 600
3,900
2,100
2,500
16,000
20,000
180,100
39,350
910
3,225
500
3,500
228, 720
88, 767
63,300
$159,000
3, 064, 660
53,070
12,015
83,000
17, 950
6,945
27,000
0
76,500
89,390
81,435
23, 625
124, 750
50, 210
35,635
11,980
63, 080
50,530
$84,000
8,176,495
161,875
3, 650
35,250
51, 200
45, 550
71,250
17,000
79, 500
193, 725
64, 701
23,085
90,125
2,100
57,750
248,361
161, 617
83,050
4
0
1
5
3
1
28
1
1
0
1
0
1
2
6
2
2
0
0
11
18
6
53
0
2
0
1
0
1
1
0
1
1,500
33,575
12, 475
8,270
19,382
2,333, 235
75,749
225
7,500
300
5,100
560
1,450
0
23,530
4,105
0
2,100
510
7,890
227,637
3, 650
653.652
75, 010
2,000
5, 500
525
35,400
102,325
21, 500
31,055
1,640
18,989
37,147
25, 289
36,213
66, 379
2,347,185
306, 310
31,910
13,000
7,344
13,675
2,575
9, 730
10, 500
47,835
12,535
5,500
6,239
5,250
74, 908
343; 554
27, 000
987; 375
76, 210
6,000
7,690
7, 725
36,950
112,327
28, 200
37, 471
6,285
2
3
56
167
8
8
0
0
1
8
4
4
1
3
2
5
6
2
40
244
9
1
0
0
3
7
6
1
0
1
1
5
7,800
2,335
480,349
3,485, 216
2, 730
28, 325
4,000
300
500
439,325
2,670
300
63,920
0
76, 705
37,554
1,575
17,625
130,690
622,391
3,642
8, 555
500
800
4,050
3,990
4,242
550
94,425
2,500
19,430
68,000
24,612
116, 590
671,009
4, 996, 059
57, 339
95, 725
4,700
1,400
4, 755
473,409
36,970
14, 358
75,920
39, 700
85,527
59,854
74, 285
34, 205
277, 314
2,024,185
95,878
33, 970
6,510
3, 750
25,455
35.815
31,192
8,945
101,450
6,225
23, 250
88,900
11
0
0
61
30
7
36
6
0
3
2
2
0
2
2
7
0
0
75
47
14
28
9
0
0
2
19
2
6
6
45,394
150
1,225
199, 860
943, 900
1,430
141, 200
19,865
14,060
9,585
2,800
1, 660
675
690
174,425
44,327
643
41,195
143,825
203, 650
11,250
90,900
23,316
3,230
195
375
83,025
300
65,300
7,660
107,819
3,800
17, 461
544,000
1, 366, 500
58,030
365, 200
73,869
14,460
42, 645
22, 390
31, 730
5,150
7,690
190, 226
112, 527
5, 708
62, 715
1, 502,875
2,416,875
127,025
290, 900
102, 791
5,380
1,645
7,565
169, 280
10,275
95, 475
38, 694
February Jan
uary,
1931
1931
Illinois—Continued.
Bloomington........
$4,000
$13,000
C hicago.......... .
629,900
731, 200
Cicero__________
5,000
0
D anville_______
7, 600
0
Decatur________
17, 500
8,200
East St. Louis__
13,100
44,100
E lgin.................
5,000
30,150
Evanston..............
11,000
45,000
Granite C ity........
0
0
Joliet............ ..........
70,000
46, 000
Maywood_______
85,000
11,000
Moline_________
40,000
21,800
Oak P ark..............
12, 000
0
Peoria____ _____
96, 200
76, 500
Q u in cy..................
0
0
Rockford...............
11,000
39, 500
Rock Island_____
5,500
12, 000
Springfield.............
47, 700
60, 200
W aukegan...........
31,000
19,000
Indiana:
Anderson_______
14,000
5,500
East Chicago____
0
0
E lkhart.............
5, ÒUU
0
Evansville-...........
16,200
55, 300
Fort W ayne..........
19,050
87, 650
Hammond______
4,800
21, 500
Indianapolis..........
171, 550
255,225
Kokomo.................
3,000
0
L a fa y e tte .............
2, ÒUU
4,000
Marion...................
0
0
Michigan C ity___
2,000
6,500
M ish aw aka..........
0
0
M uncie........ ..........
3, 000
2,700
Richmond..............
7,000
2, 500
South Bend__
18,400
0
Terre H a u te ...
6,000
1,500
Michigan:
Ann Arbor.......
11, 400
54, 500
Bay C ity ..........
10,000
9,000
Dearborn_____
189, 220
140,424
D etroit_______
1,135, 290 1,152, 300
Flint_________
41,022
48, 696
Grand Rapids___
26,300
4,000
Hamtramck__
0
0
Highland Park___
0
0
Jackson.................
1,600
15,900
Kalamazoo.............
25,500
21,400
Lansing..................
19,900
22, 400
Muskegon..............
10,600
3,000
P on tiac..................
1,600
0
Port Huron_____
4, 500
2,300
Saginaw..................
4,000
400
W yandotte______
19,100
18,600
Ohio:
Akron................... .
24,950
33, 700
Ashtabula_______
0
0
Canton....................
0
0
Cincinnati_______
297,300
428, 750
Cleveland_______
185, 700
236, 500
Cleveland Heights
50, 000
102, 800
Columbus_______
182, 000
158, 900
D a y to n .................
29,300
49,000
East Cleveland__
0
0
Elyria__________
6,200
0
Hamilton_______
6, 975
4,800
Lakewood..............
23,000
81, 800
L im a ......................
0
6,200
L orain ...................
5, 500
21,425
Mansfield................
8,000 1
28,000
40860°—31- ----- 1 1
https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
ixew non residential
b u ild in g s , e s t i
mated cost
Families pro
vided for in
new buildings
[9 2 9 ]
MONTHLY LABOR REV IEW
156
T ujle 8.—E ST IM A T E D COST OF B U IL D IN G S FOR W HICH P E R M IT S W ERE ISSU E D IN
342 P R IN C IP A L CITIES, JA N U A R Y A N D FE B R U A R Y , 1931-Continued
East North Central States— C o n tin u ed
N ew residential buildings
Estimated cost
State and city
January,
1931
Total construction
(including altera
tions and repairs),
estimated cost
N ew nonresidential
b u ild in g s , e s t i
Families pro
mated cost
vided for in
new buildings
Jan Feb
February, uary, ruary, January, February,
1931
1931
1931
1931
1931
January, February,
1931
1931
Ohio—Continued.
Marion__ ______
Massillon ______
M iddletown. ___
N e w a r k ______
N orw ood _____ Portsmouth_____
Springfield______
Steubenville_____
T o le d o _________
Warren.
_____
Youngstown ____
Wisconsin:
Appleton ______
Eau Claire______
Fond du Lac____
Green B ay______
Kenosha ______
M a d iso n _______
Milwaukee ______
Oshkosh________
Racine_________
Sheboygan______
Superior _______
West A llis..............
0
0
0
$3, 700
0
0
0
6, 500
55,700
0
24, 300
0
0
$5, 800
5,400
44, 500
0
23,100
0
65, 500
9,800
25,100
0
0
0
1
0
0
0
2
12
0
6
0
0
1
2
16
0
6
0
13
3
8
$150
0
720
0
0
90
650
400
329,619
875
24, 740
$300
192
1,275
1,700
1,325
376,015
12,310
1,500
117,452
6,000
9,805
$1, 450
1,875
2,320
4, 600
80
12,187
3, 685
8,100
430,127
9, 015
63,301
$2,850
2, 042
12,675
7,100
46 150
378, 540
44,173
3, 250
225,827
29,060
46, 740
8,800
0
0
132,800
10,000
30, 500
172,000
0
19, 700
4,100
8, 300
19, 500
13,300
4, 500
6,725
16, 500
0
32,950
560,400
4,000
27, 300
9,400
1,800
12, 000
2
0
0
41
1
6
CO
0
4
1
3
4
3
7
5
4
0
8
121
2
4
2
1
4
475
18,800
225
78,125
250
2, 350
335, 380
9,500
13,625
575
26,355
1,200
175,654
200
9,400
625
2,060
8, 575
99, 805
10, 809
6, 745
760
250
3,000
9,950
20, 700
1,200
210,925
16, 950
51,405
613, 610
12,177
44,871
80, 863
36,665
24,850
191, 779
6, 200
19. 765
78, 050
9, 730
56, 320
758, 670
20, 603
44, 870
22,095
12, 480
23, 800
T otal. _______
4, 238,151
5,220, 700 ( 849 1,067 12,212,993 11, 901,878 Il8,358,935 21, 530,172
___
+ 17 3
- 2 .5
+23.2 ___ +25.7
1
1
West North Central States
Iowa:
Burlington__
Cedar Rapids
Council Bluffs___
D avenport...
Des M oines.
Dubuque___
Ottumwa__
Sioux C ity ..
Waterloo___
Kansas:
HutchinsonKansas City.
Topeka____
W ichita____
Minnesota:
D uluth____
Minneapolis.
St. Paul____
Missouri:
Joplin_____
Kansas City
Springfield—
St. Joseph—
St. Louis___
Nebraska:
Lincoln____
Omaha____
North Dakota:
Fargo_____
South Dakota—
Sioux Falls..
T otal______
Per cent of change.
https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
0
0
$3, 000
32', 750
59,100
3,000
16,000
36', 200
11,400
$900
28, 000
10,000
34, 300
101, 700
4, 000
11, 000
200,000
10,300
0
0
1
9
12
1
• 4
9
4
1
3
4
8
22
1
2
41
4
$50,275
9, 265
30, 500
150
2,145
6,500
14,250
6, 200
9,000
$7, 750
12, 570
11,000
21, 042
25, 555
500
5, 600
4,245
29,950
$52, 225
36,370
44, 500
41, 695
64, 515
13, 294
30, 750
46,850
29, 700
$13,061
58, 639
34,000
64, 060
136,610
29, 665
21, 700
205, 795
50, 635
23, 800
24, 300
9,150
125,950
7, 900
19, 650
20,950
143, 505
7
11
5
38
3
8
8
46
6,130
545
97,090
57,095
1, 500
13, 258
17, 865
32,095
32,800
31, 745
119,760
202, 600
11, 775
36,978
44,340
183, 535
8,386
317,140
104,160
14, 800
319,925
38,040
2
68
23
3
75
8
1,050
34,080
452, 784
10, 615
171, 530
402, 242
30, 721
407, 255
595,604
66, 728
576,060
490,051
6,000
127,000
5,100
13', 400
246,900
0
114, 500
22,200
1,600
394, 600
2
28
2
5
67
0
28
12
2
110
650
29, 450
3, 225
960
1, 520, 310
5, 250
51, 950
5,750
995
1,178,008
9,183
170, 800
18, 225
16,860
1,943,275
11, 450
229, 200
40, 400
12,415
1,688, 340
31, 500
48; 200
22, 300
111, 100
6
14
6
26
5,705
28,875
22,438
810, 246
53, 580
87,225
52,733
937,896
8,860
0
2
0
0
0
14,505
3,500
36,875
60, 250
8
13
12,875
16,025
51,000
89,400
1,298,171
1,691,520
+30.3
328
434 2,379,109
+32. 3 1
!
"
2,857,979
+20.1
4,145, 037
5,088,966
+22.8
[930]
1
..
HOUSING
T
a b le
8
157
-E S T I M A T E D COST OF B U IL D IN G S FOR W HICH PE R M IT S W ER E ISSU E D IN
342 PR IN C IP A L CITIES, JA N U A R Y A N D F E B R U A R Y , 1931—Continued
South Atlantic States
N ew residential buildings
Estimated cost
State and city
January,
1931
Delaware:
Wilmington_____
District of Columbia:
Washington_____
Florida:
Jacksonville_____
M iam i__________
Orlando_____ . . .
St. Petersburg___
Tampa_________
Georgia:
Atlanta_________
Augusta___ _____
Columbus_____
Savannah_______
Maryland:
B altim o re.____.
C um berland... _.
Hagerstown_____
North Carolina:
Asheville________
Charlotte___ _ . .
D u r h a m ... _____
Greensboro______
High Point______
R aleigh.. _____
Wilmington_____
Winston-Salem__
South Carolina:
Charleston______
Columbia_______
Greenville__ ____
Spartanburg_____
Virginia:
Newport N ews___
Norfolk__ _______
Petersburg _____
Portsmouth_____
Richmond____ _
Roanoke________
W est Virginia:
Clarksburg______
H u n tin g to n ___ _
Parkersburg_____
Wheeling________
Total ________
Per cent of change .
Families pro
vided for in
new buildings
Jan
February uary,
1931
1931
New nonresidential j Total construction
(including altera
b u ild in g s , e s t i
tions and repairs),
mated cost
estimated cost
Feb
February,
ruary, January,
1931
1931
1931
January, February,
1931
1931
$46, 000
$93,350
10
17
$138,400
$20, 596
$257, 116
$393, 318
666, 780
4,165,375
103
600
758,835
711,050
2,896,341
5,496,930
20,500
34, 300
6, 400
44, 700
4,600
55, 600
13, 350
4, 750
13, 300
61,950
8
8
4
9
5
13
10
5
3
9
18,155
39, 735
575
7,500
5,740
20, 755
64,860
1, 600
1,000
37,550
80, 340
107, 775
19, 825
60i 100
35,870
109,965
110, 926
27; 875
24, 950
112,302
105,100
2,877
6,000
10, 000
122,060
6,700
4, 750
28, 600
50
3
2
3
43
4
3
8
44,967
370
10, 535
4,900
67, 273
16, 208
5,000
740
266,686
15, 383
18, 285
16,200
271,823
34; 445
13; 205
32,840
564,000
3, 500
3,800
643,000
4,000
29, 500
176
1
2
210
2
7
83,300
2,475
625
1,197,300
450
1, 655
1,129,100
8^ 175
4 ,6 0 5
2, 297,900
5' 275
31, 505
500
47, 000
20,400
3, 000
347,185
0
8,000
30,000
500
54,450
27, 000
17,086
22, 900
24, 800
12, 500
0
1
12
4
1
70
0
4
1
1
15
8
3
5
2
4
0
0
3,200
1, 740
230
185, 775
3, 551
1,000
1,490
6, 600
2,185
1, 500
7,365
318, 500
1,025
' 500
1,480
1,825
66, 607
56, 270
lb 495
532; 960
5, 751
2b 900
43; 265
27,455
67, 526
31,439
32, 217
346, 800
35, 200
16, 800
15, 985
3, 450
44,000
5,700
8, 900
20, 000
24,000
42, 550
2,000
4^1
13
3
0
4
10
11
2
18, 585
274, 700
300
253,500
8,135
9,175
3, 340
100
28,898
323^ 875
15, 575
263; 900
45,800
39, 605
52 915
4,225
8,658
66,800
12, 000
7,600
63,100
5,600
2, 700
47, 700
0
18,000
50,100
5,800
4
29
1
3
13
2
2
12
0
6
10
2
14, 675
12, 000
10,130
14,822
48, 290
4,300
2,363
9,481
400
5, 750
20,357
6,955
96,819
89, 535
29,070
37; 597
18b 485
12, S75
15,420
158; 826
1,100
31,380
121, 290
26; 206
0
0
12, 500
4,500
3,000
6, 000
8,000
14,000
0
0
3
1
1
1
3
2
13, 770
9, 150
84, 755
40, 051
2,200
600
7,133
87, 000
26,470
10, 950
108; 555
52, 526
14,810
6,890
26,133
105; 176
2, 217,450
5, 649, 371
+154. 8
565
1.038
+83.7
2,112,126
2,648,181
+25.4
1
6, 934,104 10,186,457
+46.9
South Central States
Alabama:
Birmingham,
Mobile_____
Montgomery.
Arkansas:
Little R o ck ..
Kentucky:
Ashland____
Covington__
Louisville___
Newport____
Paducah____
$22, 710
11,350
40, 300
$6,300
8, 500
41,800
12
9
25
25,650
8,850
11
0
14,800
56, 500
0
3, 000
4,300
12, 800
153, 500
0
1,900
0
4
14
0
2
https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
[931]
7
7
22
$273,423
9, 800
3,465
$109, 223
2, 500
15,350
4
53,390
3
5
21
0
3
100, 000
1,000
507,470
750
0
$381,859
27, 696
62,873
$163, 360
26,000
67, 670
16,595
89,995
52, 345
300
2, 600
167,170
300
1,500
102,800
18, 325
603, 920
1,250
3,350
25,100
17, 050
388,495
1,800
5,000
MONTHLY LABOR R EV IEW
158
T
a b le
COST OF B U IL D IN G S FOR W HICH P E R M IT S W ERE ISSU E D IN
342 P R IN C IP A L CITIES, JA N U A R Y A N D F E B R U A R Y , 1931—Continued
8 . —E ST IM A T E D
South Central States— C o n tin u ed
N ew residential buildings
Estimated cost
State and city
January,
1931
Louisiana:
Baton Rouge____
New Orleans ___
Shreveport______
Oklahoma:*
E n id ___________
Oklahoma C it y ...
Okmulgee _____
Tulsa ___________
Tennessee:
Oh attanooga_____
K n o x v ille ______
Memphis _______
N a s h v ille _______
Texas:
Amarillo ______
Au.stin ________
Beaumont _____
Corpus Christi---"Dallas ________
El P a s o ________
Enrt W o r th _____
fl aIves ton _____
TTouston ______
port Arthur ____
San Angelo______
Pan A n to n io ____
W aco
________
W ichita Falls----Total
______
Per cent of change—
N ew nonresidential
b u ild in g s , e s t i
Families pro
mated cost
vided for in
new buildings
Jan
February, uary,
1931
1931
Total construction
(including altera
tions and repairs),
estimated cost
Feb January,
ruary,
1931
1931
February,
1931
$4,590
$32, 583
6,235
80, 209
$27,410
267, 075
34,334
6,366
108,043
125, 242
$131,268
304, 547
289,915
61,077
January, February
1931
1931
56,200
20,505
$16,627
34,472
96,100
38,008
20
13
15
21
27
15
24, 000
434, 600
0
344, 765
24, 700
456, 700
0
183, 750
8
160
0
85
8
184
0
44
3,000
3,537,320
0
78, 928
1,500
1,973,100
4,000
125,335
28,400
4,006,655
2, 350
540,313
26, 200
2,448, 020
4, 395
347,613
27,700
21, 200
56, 550
34,150
38,805
14, 940
73,450
81, 200
12
9
17
16
8
9
30
29
12,800
19, 410
322, 325
65,435
25,100
57,497
68, 510
152,725
65, 544
44,960
462,075
178,691
123,830
90,071
224,167
250,429
64,970
62,441
17, 700
20,725
312,350
44, 275
215, 234
16,400
834, 676
23,879
9, 400
146, 625
17,963
1,000
88, 500
98, 699
15,403
10,950
188,425
71, 775
' 171,925
24,402
759, 300
42,199
5,585
75,875
33, 787
0
23
34
7
25
120
13
64
10
183
9
6
78
8
1
16
53
10
9
92
24
56
10
190
23
7
55
9
0
442,395
53, 532
20, 772
2, 200
58,720
27,277
440,835
4,145
144,900
2, 455
17,485
21,075
400
3,210
269,325
417, 526
2,825
1,650
75,980
4,581
395, 393
28, 215
504,775
4,915
5,150
130,440
23,333
700
507,365
136,871
67,781
33,040
438,094
86, 248
703,157
38,991
999, 701
54,095
32,125
212,965
28,383
8, 710
371.174
528,181
40, 777
18, 705
349.175
97, 709
607,430
78, 912
1,299,750
54, 923
13,100
243,168
69, 594
5,290
3,000, 238
2,849,055
-5 .0
1,006
995
- 1 .1
6,318,951
4, 656, 223 10, 234,450
-2 6 .3
8, 521,693
-1 6 .7
$18,620
8
Mountain and Pacific States
Arizona:
Phoenix____
Tucson_____
California:
Alameda----Alhambra__
Bakersfield..
Berkeley----Fresno_____
Glendale___
Long Beach.
Los Angeles.
Oakland___
P asadena...
Sacramento .
$57,560
27,770
$137,050
4,375
$159,845
117, 024
$205, 560
50,452
39, 450
5
19, 750
30
9,535
9
3,165
13
19, 171
11
94, 050
23
187, 535
89
481 1, 579, 489
89, 240
68
19 1, 058, 071
73,925
16
500
17
360,782
65
241 1, 202, 526
149, 210
11
95, 863
7
1,600
1
10. 758
3,150
3, 135
59, 408
28, 245
26, 725
55, 730
1, 475, 329
691, 901
15,194
473. 891
5,674
160, 179
513, 740
4,000
57, 740
22,720
104,721
87. 800
38. 760
90,060
83,127
244, 210
446, 300
3, 790, 283
663, 172
1, 516, 175
218, 143
37, 621
609, 862
1, 829, 345
220,357
139, 838
8,332
40, 443
72, 300
53,575
156. 709
120, 720
142,165
344, 365
3,677, 072
989, 460
162, 566
607, 781
64, 726
466, 826
1, 690, 363
64, 472
107. 075
32,435
15, 525
840
2
2
2 600
13.100
55,650
233, 200
72
30
320,500
168| 000
Denver____
12, 830
15,225
0
5
0
12,100
Pueblo____
Montana:
200
0
0
o
0
0
B utte_____
47,320
1,385
5
3
7,600
8,400
Great Falls.
2 Schedule received for the first time, February, 1931; not included in totals,
24, 380
494,100
35, 329
54, 210
494, 300
20, 746
2,265
17,950
250
71.795
San Diego___
San Francisco.
Santa Ana___
Stockton_____
Vallejo---------Colorado:
https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
$96 400
50, 500
$61, 900
38; 750
37
15
20 300
61. 650
20, 040
57,150
42 500
138, 600
208 425
1,565, 645
' 502, 075
389, 035
108, 750
27, 930
183, 000
391, 600
60 291
29 700
1,000
22,500
67, 600
36, 750
72; 700
41,700
102, 450
252, 950
1, 624, 032
' 232.025
64 225
89,000
51, 450
245, 550
1, 017, 037
54,582
29, 800
2,400
4
16
9
12
12
40
83
561
157
19
22
10
56
100
17
8
1
[932]
29
12
HOUSING
159
Mountain and Pacific States— C o n tin u e d
N ew residential buildings
State and city
Estimated cost
January,
1931
New Mexico:
Albuquerque........
Oregon:
Portland______
Salem_____
Utah:
Ogden_______
Salt Lake C ity___
Washington:
Bellingham_____
Everett_____
Seattle______
Spokane___
Tacoma___
T otal___
Per cent of change
Families pro
vided for in
new buildings
February, Jan
uary,
1931
1931
New nonresidential
b u ild in g s , e s t i
mated cost
Feb
ruary, January,
1931
1931
Total construction
(including altera
tions and repairs),
estimated cost
February, January, February
1931
1931
1931
$86, 000
$72, 392
24
18
$8,150
$514, 335
$105, 550
$620,084
227,450
6,000
355,300
5,450
55
3
75
3
275, 770
23,485
167,515
4,095
628,580
46,949
663,400
19,889
0
25, 450
1,000
151, 750
0
6
1
54
0
12, 635
450
58,362
6,000
51,584
30,140
231,282
19, 300
12, 600
567, 310
37, 200
42,000
15,000
7,000
505,250
66, 575
24, 000
6
5
176
10
14
6
3
142
21
9
4.625
6,115
285,477
15,980
405,540
320
755
264,750
20,635
155, 055
51,285
21, 025
1, 015, 872
82,980
483, 245
24, 265
21, 610
879,825
199,595
202, 870
5,169, 001
5, 652, 318
+ 9.4
1,518
1,558
+ 2 .6
6, 357, 619
.....
5, 066,741 13, 472,069 12,583, 326
-2 0 .3
- 6 .6
H a w a ii
Hawaii:
Honolulu__
-------------'
$118, 277
Per cent of change
$74,335
59
-3 7 .2
--- ------- ____
39
$49, 726
-33. 9
$29,949
$215,776
$129, 693
-3 9 .8
B u ild in g P e r m its in P r in c ip a l C itie s in 1930: B y T y p e s o f
B u ild in g
Introduction and Summary
HE Bureau of Labor Statistics received reports of building: pernnts issued during the calendar year 1930 from 311 of the 319
cities ot the United States having a population of 25,000 or over,
i t was necessary to send agents of the bureau to only six cities to compde reports from the local records, all of the other 305 cities having
replied to questionnaires sent by mail. The eight omitted cities are
small and six of these have no building code. In collecting reports
lor 1922, agents of the bureau had to visit 33^ per cent of the cities
to compile the data from local records; this proportion was reduced
i nor»1 P^ ceni m .j19128’ to 2'6 Per cent in 1929>and to 1-9 per cent in
1930. thus it will be seen that local building officials are now fully
alive to the value of these figures and are lending their hearty assist
ance to the bureau. The States of Illinois, Massachusetts, New Jer
sey, JNew lork, and Pennsylvania, through their departments of
labor, are cooperating with the United States Bureau of Labor Sta
tistics m the collection of these data.
In studying the following tables it should be remembered that the
costs shown are for the costs of the buildings only and do not include
T
https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
[933]
MONTHLY LABOR REVIEW
160
cost of land. The cost is estimated by the prospective builder at the
time of applying for his permit to build and is recorded on Ins appli
cation. Furthermore, the costs are for buildings m the corporate
limits of the cities enumerated. Much building in the subur s o
W e cities is therefore not included in the figures shown
fable 1 shows the total number of new buildings and the estimated
cost of the different kinds of new buildings for which permits were
issued in the 311 cities from which reports were received for the year
1930 the per cent that each kind forms of the total number, the pei
cent that the cost of each kind forms of the total cost, and the average
cost per building.
m
1
T
1 .
a ble
xrmvrRFR AND COST OF N E W B U IL D IN G S AS ST A T E D B Y PE R M IT S ISSU E D
N U M B E R A N D 3 1 1 ¿ T I E S , 1930, BY K IN D OF B U IL D IN G
N ew buildings for which permits were issued
I
Kind of building
Estimated cost
Per
Number j cent
Amount
Per
cent
Average
per
building
R e s i d e n t i a l b u i ld i n g s
61, 656
7,187
1-family and 2-family dwellings w ith stores comMultifamily dwellings—- -- --- _A
Multifamiiy dwellings wim stuivo luiiiuiliv/u.------
874
3, 019
205
79
11
170
73, 201
29.3
3.4
.4
1. 4
.i
«
(>)
-1
34.8
$306,185, 802
53, 985, 588
20.3
9 A
$4, 966
7 ^12
6,985, 654
28, 322, 912
.5
12 R
. oQ
1.6
tm/
19
7, 993
63 986
5q
313, 641
19 909
166 606
625,900, 986
41. 6
8, 550
43, 375, 341
29, 575,418
2.9
29,914
42, 372
4-0 870
13* 772
346
3 786
214’ 186
228’ 661
1Q7 744
76* 091
12,249, 912
24, 777, 624
N o n r e s i d e n t i a l b u i ld i n g s
Factories and workshops---------- ---------Public garages----------- — ----------
Public works and utilities—
------------Schools and libraries— — — --------Stores and warehouses------ - - — —
1,450
698
2, 679
1,948
97,458
5, 778
272
703
434
603
754
10, 725
267
8,916
4,255
.7
.3
1. 3
.9
46. 4
2. 7
.1
.3
.2
.3
.4
5.1
.1
4. 2
2.0
26, 827, 939
33, 723,157
21, 869,134
58,258, 336
160, 741, 404
85,820,846
45,237,457
126,908, 372
3,864, 937
136, 940
65. 2
879,878,402
58.4
1, 505, 779, 388
100.0
210,141
l Less than one-tenth of 1 per cent.
https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
100.0
127,832,430
5, 913, 967
7 3
i oft
I.
9 9
1 ^
oo. Q
y
in
1U. 7i
k
0. 7i
ft n
8. 4
1 Aft’ f t l f t
360
1,642
14, 337
1,390
m
tv
ft ^
*4
6,425
j
7,166
HOUSING
161
• Periî1ÎÎ!t^ere iss1ued during !930 in these 311 cities for 210,141 build3? <unSnU2Î o r’73,201’.or 34’8Per cent, were residential buildings
ancl 135,940, or 65.2 per cent, were nonresidential buildings. Of the
residential buildings, one-family dwellings were the most numerous
if If urn8 of bmlcbngs comprised 29.3 per cent of the total number
nf 1 Î T /°k S 1Ch Permiî s were issued. Only two other classes
of residential buildings, two-family dwellings and multifamily dwellmgs accounted lor more than 1 per cent of the total number of
buildings. Private garages were by far the most numerous class of
nonresidential buildings, accounting for 46.4 per cent of all buildings
for which permits were issued in these cities. Of the other important
classes of nonresidentmi buildings, stores were the most numerous,
followed by factory buildings. In these 311 cities permits were
issued for 1,450 amusement buildings, but for only 698 churches.
the total estimated cost of all new buildings for which permits
were issued during 1930 in these cities was $1,505,779,388. For the
m a te d ^ o ^ n f6 ^ Collectl<?? .these figures by the bureau the esti“ ed, f st of new nonresidential buildings exceeded the indicated
expenditures for new residential buildings. Kesidential buildings
accounted lor 416 per cent of the total estimated cost of all buildings
and new nonresidential buildings for 58.4 per cent.
One-faimly dwellings accounted for a larger proportion of the total
cost than any other class of buildings, while multifamily dwellings
were next m rank Office buildings accounted for a large/percentafe
ol the total expenditures than any other class of nonresidential build
ings, 1oliowed m order by stores and warehouses and schools and
th o n lf ; P\ bllcbmld1^
buildings for public works and utilities,
schools and libraries, and institutions are usually erected from public
funds either National, State, county, or city. These classes of build
ings together accounted for $316,225,011, or 21 per cent of the total
estimated cost of all buildings for whichVermitS
P were L u ed h rin g
ly p e rÔ fa lfb S n g s
' “ 1929’ ° n lj 12 6 per Cent went for these
The average cost per building of the new buildings for which per
mits were issued during 1930 in these cities was $7,166. The average
cost of the new residential buildings was $8,550, and of the new non^ Sh1pfial4bklldmg^ $M 25- ° mittinS P™ !® garages, sheds, and
stables and barns, the average cost of the remaining nonresidential
buildings was $..9,549 per building. Hotels showed a greater average
cost than any other land of building. In the nonresidential group,
office buildings had the highest cost per building, followed in order by
institutional buildings and public buildings.
https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
[935]
162
MONTHLY LABOR REVIEW
Building Trend, 1929 and 1930
T a b l e 2 s h o w s t h e n u m b e r a n d c o s t o f t h e d iffe r e n t k in d s o f b u ild
in g s fo r 311 id e n t ic a l c it ie s fr o m w h ic h r e p o r ts w e r e r e c e iv e d in 1929
a n d 1930 a n d t h e p e r c e n t o f in c r e a s e o r d e c r e a s e in 1930 a s c o m p a r e d
w it h 1929:
T
2 . — N U M B E R A N D COST OF N E W B U IL D IN G S A N D OF A L T E R A TIO N S A N D
R E PA IR S FO R W HICH PE R M IT S W ERE ISSU E D IN 3 1 1 ID E N T IC A L C ITIES, 1929 A N D
1930, B Y K IN D OF B U IL D IN G
a b le
Buildings for w hich permits were issued
1930
1929
Kind of building
Per cent of
increase (+ ) or
decrease ( —) in
1930 compared
with 1929
N um
ber
Cost
N um
ber
Cost
1family dwellings---------- 104, 798
2family dwellings----------- 12,990
1-family and 2-family dwellings with
1,501
stores combined---- -------------------6,662
Multifamily dwellings------------------Multifamily dwellings w ith stores
565
combined— ------ ----------------------275
Hotels_____________ ____ _________
23
Lodging houses---------------------------138
A ll other------------------- -----------------
$516,296,140
99,140,941
61,656
7,187
$306,185,802
53,985,588
-4 1 .2
-44. 7
-4 0 .7
-4 5 .5
14,262,073
490,957,201
874
3,019
6,985,654
193,174,494
-4 1 .8
-5 4 .7
-5 1 .0
-6 0 .7
34,919, 508
284,604,413
428, 569
37,011,151
205
79
11
170
12.249.912
24,777,624
219,000
28.322.912
-6 3 .7
-7 1 .3
-5 2 .2
+23.2
-6 4 .9
-9 1 .3
-4 8 .9
-2 3 .5
Total residential buildings----- 126,952
1,477,619,996
73,201
625,900,986
—4-j. 3
-5 7 .6
748
Amusement buildings-------- -----855
Churches-------- ---------------------------3,927
Factories and workshops---------------4,071
Public garages-----------------------------Private garages---------------------- ------ 135,637
4,207
Service stations---------------------------274
Institutions---------- ------- ------ -------1,136
Office buildings---------------------------327
Public buildings------ -------------------629
Public works and utilities-------------753
Schools and libraries--------------------10,649
324
12,085
Stores and warehouses __ _____ 4,488
All other------------------------- -----------
43,215,396
40,881,577
141,620,127
49,198,147
48,637,185
19,928,471
75,702, 762
240, 950,145
87, 553,812
45,443, 758
128,897,346
4,456,039
968,941
254,474,954
8, 751,957
1,450
698
2,679
1,948
97,458
5, 778
272
703
434
603
754
10, 725
267
8,916
4,255
43,375,341
29, 575,418
109,491,239
26,827,939
33, 723,157
21,869,134
58,258,336
160, 741,404
85,820,846
45,237,457
126, 908,372
3,864,937
438,425
127,832,430
5,913,967
+93.9
-1 8 .4
-3 1 .8
-5 2 .1
-2 8 .1
+37.3
- 0 .7
-3 8 .1
+32.7
- 4 .1
+0.1
+ 0.7
-1 7 .6
-2 6 .2
- 5 .2
+ 0.4
-2 7 .7
-2 2 .7
-4 5 .5
-3 0 .7
+ 9.7
- 2 .3
-3 3 .3
- 2 .0
- 0 .5
- 1 .5
-1 3 .3
-5 4 .8
-4 9 .8
-32.4'
Total nonresidential buildings. 180,110
1,190,680,617
136, 940
879,878,402
-2 4 .0
-2 6 .1
-4 3 .6
—29.1
-4 1 .8
N um
ber
Cost
R e s id e n tia l b u ild in g s
N o n r e s i d e n t i a l b u i ld i n g s
Total t i p ,w bn il dines __
__ 307,062
Additions, alterations, and repairs.. 276,188
2,668,300,613
367,475,292
210,141
257,289
1, 505,779,388
260,365,278
-3 1 .6
- 6 .8
583, 250
3,035, 775,905
467,430
1, 766,144,666
-1 9 .9
Grand total, all building------
Comparing permits issued in these 311 cities during 1930 with those
issued during 1929, there was a decrease of 19.9 per cent in the
number of total building operations and a decrease of 41.8 per cent
in their estimated cost. New buildings decreased 31.6 per cent in
number and 43.6 per cent in estimated cost, while additions, altera
tions, and repairs decreased 6.8 per cent in number and 29.1 per
cent in estimated cost.
Permits issued for residential buildings show a decrease ol 42.3
per cent in number and a decrease of 57.6 per cent in indicated ex
penditures. All classes of residential buildings showed a decrease
in estimated cost, ranging from 23.5 per cent for “ All other” resi
https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
[936]
163
HOUSING
dential buildings to 91.3 per cent for hotels. The number of buildings
in the residential group showed *decreases in all classes (except in
“ All other” residential buildings, for which there was an increase of
23.2 per cent), the decreases ranging from 41.2 per cent for 1-family
dwellings to 71.3 per cent for hotels.
New nonresidential buildings showed a much smaller rate of de
crease in 1930 as compared with 1929 than did new residential build
ings, having decreased only 24 per cent in number and 26.1 per
cent in estimated cost. Ten classes of buildings in the nonresidential
group showed decreases in. number ranging from 0.7 per cent for
institutions to 52.1 per cent for public garages. Increases in number
were registered in five classes of buildings in the nonresidential group,
these increases ranging from 0.1 per cent for schools and libraries
to 93.9 per cent for amusement buildings. Only two classes of
buildings in the nonresidential group showed increases in the indi
cated expenditure, namely, amusement buildings and service stations;
the decreases for the other classes of nonresidential buildings ranged
from 0.5 per cent for public works and utilities to 54.8 per cent for
stables and barns. It will be noted that the estimated expenditures
for public buildings, public works and utilities, and schools and libra
ries showed very small percentages of decreases in indicated expend
itures. On the other hand, commercial building, such as stores and
warehouses, factories and workshops, and office buildings, showed
relatively large percentages of decrease.
Families Provided for, 1929 and 1930
T a b l e 3 shows the number and per cent of families provided for
by each of the different kinds of dwellings for which permits were
issued in 311 identical cities during the calendar years 1929 and 1930:
T able 3 .—N U M B E R A N D PE R C E N T OF FA M ILIE S TO BE H O U SE D IN N E W D W E LL ING S
FOR W HICH PE R M IT S W ERE ISSU E D IN 3 1 1 ID E N T IC A L C ITIES, 1929 A N D 1930, BY
K IN D OF D W E L L IN G
Kind of dwelling
Number of new
buildings for
which permits
were issued
1929
Families pro vided for
Number
Per cent
1930
1929
1930
1929
1-family dwellings_______ ____________________ . 104, 798
2-family dwellings__________________ ____________
12, 990
1-family and 2-family dwellings with stores combined.
1,501
Multifamily d w e llin g s_____ _ ______________ .
6, 662
Multifamily dwellings with stores combined _____
565
61, 656
7,187
874
3,019
205
104, 798
25, 980
2, 324
111,910
7,754
61*656
14,374
1, 195
50, 299
2,979
41.5
10.3
.9
44.3
3. 1
47.2
11.0
.9
38.5
2.3
Total_____________________________________ 126, 516
72,941
252, 766
130, 503
100.0
100.0
1930
During 1930 permits were issued for 72,941 dwelling houses of vari
ous kinds to house 130,503 families. This compares with 252,766
families housed by the 126,516 dwellings for which permits were issued
in these 311 cities during 1929, a decrease of 48.4 per cent in the num
ber of families provided for.
One-family dwellings provided 47.2 per cent of the living quarters
for which permits were issued during 1930 as compared with 41.5 per
cent of the family dwelling units provided during 1929. Multifamily
https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
[937]
164
MONTHLY LABOE, REVIEW
dwellings, in contrast, showed a decrease in the per cent of dwelling
units provided, dropping from 44.3 per cent of the total in 1929 to
38.5 per cent in 1930. The per cent of families provided for, to be
housed in two-family dwellings, rose from 10.3 in 1929 to 11 in 1930,
while the proportion to be housed in one and two family dwellings with
stores combined remained the same for both years.
The size of apartment houses was practically the same in both years,
the average number of families per building being 16.8 in 1929 and
16.7 in 1930.
The average cost of these apartment houses during 1930, as shown
in Table 1, was $63,986. The average cost of the apartment houses
for which permits were issued during 1929 was $73,695.
Per Capita Expenditure for Buildings
T a b l e 4 shows for 1930 the per capita expenditure for new buildings,
new housekeeping dwellings, repairs and alterations, and for all kinds
of buildings in each of the 311 cities for which reports were received
for the calendar year 1930, the total number of families provided for,
and the ratio of families provided for to each 10,000 of population in
these 311 cities.
Indicated expenditure for all building operations in these 311 cities
during the calendar year 1930 was $1,766,144,666. The total popula
tion of these cities was 47,091,551; thus the per capita expenditure
for all building operations was $37.51. Of this amount, $31.98 was
for new buildings and $5.53 was for repairs and alterations. Of the
amount spent for new buildings, $12.16 per capita was for house
keeping dwellings.
T
a ble
4 . - PE R CAPITA E X P E N D IT U R E S FOR N E W B U IL D IN G S A N D FOR R E PA IR S,
A N D FAM ILIES PR O V ID E D FOR, IN 3 1 1 CITIES, 1930
Families pro
vided for
C ity and State
Akron, Ohio _
_ _
Alameda, Calif______ _____
Albany, N . Y _____________
Allentown, P a ____ _ __ __
Alton, 111_______ ________
Altoona, Pa_ _ _________
Amsterdam, N . Y _
Anderson, Ind_ ____
Asheville, N . C
Ashtabula, Ohio__
Atlanta, Ga _ _ _ __
Atlantic City, N . J __ . . ..
Auburn, N . Y_ __
Augusta, Ga _________ ___
Aurora, 111
___ _ _ .
Austin, Tex
Baltimore, M d_______
Bangor, Me _
.
Baton Rouge, La ___
Battle Creek, M ich._
Bay City, M ic h ___ __
Bayonne, N . J . . .
Beaumont, Tex __ _ ____
Belleville, 111
............
Bellingham, Wash__ _ . .
Berkeley. Calif_____________
https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
Population,
census of
1930
253,653
34, 392
127, 358
92,052
30,142
81, 503
34,683
39, 788
50,167
23, 301
266, 557
65, 748
36, 736
60,204
46, 568
53,118
789, 921
28, 749
31, 465
43, 301
47, 350
85,848
57,483
28, 308
30,602
81, 543
N um
ber
372
145
311
97
58
75
26
51
23
29
714
29
39
124
82
493
1,484
46
73
72
54
104
267
107
108
345
Per
10,000
popu
lation
14. 7
42. 2
24.4
10. 5
19. 2
9.2
7.5
12. 8
4.6
12.4
26. 8
4.4
10.6
20. 6
17. 6
92. 8
18. 8
16.0
23.2
16.6
11.4
12.1
46.4
37.8
35.3
42.3
[938]
Per capita expenditure
For
new
build
ings
$31.18
20.01
59. 32
17.48
26. 86
13. 42
27.86
13. 38
5. 43
11.14
25. 82
6. 29
28. 95
8.41
24. 20
55.88
25. 40
18. 53
21. 96
89.18
17.15
7.91
30. 75
25. 57
20. 36
30. 35
For re
pairs
and ad
ditions
$3. 42
8. 52
11. 38
7.18
9. 52
3. 38
.74
1. 95
3. 38
3. 66
5. 86
15.01
1. 92
3. 48
5.90
6. 90
9. 82
.96
5.31
2. 36
9. 67
1. 32
14. 59
.89
3. 93
6.27
Total
$34. 60
28. 53
70. 70
24. 66
36. 38
16. 80
28. 60
15. 34
8. 82
14.80
31.69
21. 30
30. 87
11. 88
30. 10
62. 79
35. 22
19. 49
27. 27
91. 54
26. 82
9. 22
45. 34
26. 46
24.29
36.62
Per capita
expendi
ture for
house
Rank keeping
of
dwell
city ings only
95
139
18
173
82
245
138
254
294
259
113
196
119
274
125
26
93
217
151
11
158
293
45
161
176
81
$7. 67
13. 56
22. 26
9. 33
7. 58
5.86
3. 69
3.41
1. 49
4. 54
6. 30
2. 27
13. 51
5. 58
8. 84
20. 03
9. 17
5. 39
6. 11
6. 27
5. 82
2. 69
12. 57
17. 02
8. 81
17. 21
165
HOUSING
T
a b le
4 —PE R C A PITA E X P E N D IT U R E S FOR N E W B U IL D IN G S A N D FOR R E PA IR S,
A N D FA M ILIES PR O V ID ED FOR, IN 3 1 1 CITIES, 1930—Continued
Families pro
vided for
City and State
Bethlehem, Pa_______ - -.Binghamton, N . Y _________
Birmingham, A la__________
Bloomfield, N . J - - - . . . Bloomington, 111.
----Boston, M a s s . ------Bridgeport, Conn------ ------Brockton, M ass___________
Brookline, M ass------------- -Buffalo, N . Y ______________
Burlington, I o w a ....... -----Butler, P a . . . ------ . . . ---Butte, M o n t.. ------- ------Cambridge, M a s s . . ---- -- Camden, N .J . . . . Canton, Ohio -------- ------Cedar Rapids, Iowa-----------Central Falls, R . I -------------Charleston, S. C . . .
- -Charleston, W. V a. ------Charlotte, N . C -----------------Chattanooga, T en n. .
. .
Chelsea, M ass______ _ —
Chester, P a _______________
Chicago, 111--------------------Chicopee, M a ss ... ------------Cicero, 111
Cincinnati, Ohio
Clarksburg, W. Va-------- . . .
Cleveland, Ohio— -- ---- Clifton, N . J _ Colorado Springs, Colo-------Columbia, S. C . .. ------- Columbus, G a ..- --- --- - Columbus, Ohio___________
Council Bluffs, Iowa -------Covington, K y ___ - ..........Cranston, R. I . ...................Cumberland, M d. _ -----Dallas, T ex ------- ---------------Danville, 111
Davenport, Iowa
--- Dayton, Ohio______________
Decatur, 111_______________
Denver, C o l o .................... ...
Des Moines, Iowa, . -.
Detroit, M ich_____ .
..
Dubuque, Iowa. -------------Duluth, M in n ._ _ .................
Durham, N . C_ -------- . . .
East Chicago, I n d ----- . . . .
East Cleveland, Ohio------- _
Easton, Pa - East Orange, N . J __________
East Providence, R. I __
East St. Louis, 111________
Elgin, 111__________________
Elizabeth, N . J..
Elkhart, Ind_______ _____
Elmira, N . Y ______
___
E l Paso, T e x _________
- - Erie, Pa ____ --Evanston, 111---- ---------------Evansville, Ind______
Everett, Mass________ . . -Everett, W ash_______ ____
Fall River, Mass_________
Fitchburg, M ass.
------ --Flint, M ich .. __ ------------Fond du Lac, Wis -- _
Fort Wayne, Ind__ _ ___
Fort Worth, Tex __ . . . . __
Fresno, Calif________ _____
https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
Population,
census of
1930
57, 773
76,601
257,657
38,070
30,915
783,451
147, 206
63,695
47, 488
572, 217
26, 719
23, 568
39, 540
113,650
117,172
105, 524
56,078
25, 928
62,419
60,411
82,645
119, 539
44, 827
58,963
3,373,753
43, 981
65, 776
449, 331
28, 863
901, 482
45, 673
33,223
50,195
43,122
289,056
42,023
65,247
43,914
37,713
260,397
36,646
60,728
200, 225
57, 511
287, 644
142,469
1,564, 397
41, 678
101, 231
52, 026
54, 660
40, 279
34, 328
68, 227
29,995
74,024
35,912
114, 551
33,195
47, 381
101,975
115,875
61,766
103,151
48, 298
30,498
114,348
40, 672
156,422
26, 362
115,121
160, 892
52, 558
N um
ber
69
161
166
344
68
1,415
353
69
231
1, 072
18
21
67
159
159
95
91
22
56
217
317
223
6
34
2,741
57
57
1,693
18
1,176
247
56
152
91
575
32
67
273
47
996
47
168
213
79
613
225
4,084
62
82
114
37
56
15
85
133
207
72
222
43
40
470
209
63
174
53
71
33
22
360
37
313
626
107
Per
10,000
popu
lation
11.9
21.0
6.4
90. 4
22.0
18. 1
24.0
10.8
48.6
18.7
6.7
8.9
16.9
14.0
13.6
9.0
16.2
8.5
9.0
35.9
38.4
18.7
1.3
5.8
8. 1
13.0
8.7
37. 7
6. 2
13.0
54.1
16.9
30.3
21.1
19.9
7.6
10.3
62.2
12.5
38.2
12.8
27.7
10. 6
13.7
21.3
15.8
26.1
14.9
8. 1
21.9
6.8
13.9
4.4
12.5
44.3
28.0
20.0
19.4
13.0
8.4
46. 1
18.0
10.2
16.9
11.0
23.3
2.9
5.4
23.0
14.0
27.2
38.9
20.4
[939]
Per capita expenditure
For
new
build
ings
$15. 77
21. 94
6. 69
58. 23
21.11
24.45
14.81
12. 77
68. 37
23. 54
23. 77
5.99
9. 23
87. 54
18. 25
13.04
27. 75
4. 79
15.15
109. 68
27.04
19. 30
3. 02
15. 98
23. 86
6. 42
13. 79
70. 16
14. 77
30. 22
31.20
22. 42
34.02
14.17
15. 92
13.71
6. 80
34.47
5.38
35. 50
7.79
33.11
25.84
32.78
20. 58
26. 10
26. 74
31.67
13.49
18. 44
29.39
19.81
10. 65
32. 24
34. 33
16.73
16. 70
20. 58
12. 45
33.87
25. 05
21.04
36.38
13.02
28. 34
17.87
8. 54
20. 69
22. 00
12. 33
22.76
60. 35
16.13
For re
pairs
and ad
ditions
$2.67
7. 50
2. 70
6. 38
1.55
9.90
2. 98
4. 71
9. 27
2. 37
6. 69
2. 37
.79
9. 80
3. 79
1. 98
8. 49
1. 56
2. 52
4.21
4. 27
5. 24
1.50
3. 34
1.56
1.65
3. 20
3.64
3.05
5. 90
1.48
5.46
3.89
2. 33
3. 51
4. 60
2.84
1.89
1.26
6. 84
2.53
7.43
3. 92
1.84
6.01
1.99
4.18
3.85
7.92
1.68
3. 56
1. 13
5.92
6. 26
8. 14
1.70
3.78
.24
3.43
4.68
3.76
7.46
13.86
4.05
3.39
9.36
1.86
.93
3. 53
2.83
4.16
4.69
9. 22
Total
$18. 44
29. 44
9. 39
64. 62
22. 66
34. 34
17. 79
17.48
77. 64
25.91
30. 46
8. 36
10. 02
97. 34
22. 04
15. 02
36. 24
6. 35
17. 67
113. 89
31. 31
24. 55
4. 52
19. 32
25.42
8.07
16. 99
73.80
17.82
36.11
32.68
27.88
37.91
16. 50
19. 43
18.31
9. 64
36. 36
6.64
42. 35
10. 32
40. 55
29.76
34. 62
26. 59
28.15
30.92
35. 52
21.42
20. 12
32. 95
20. 94
16. 57
38. 51
42. 47
18. 43
20.49
20.81
15.88
38. 54
28.80
28. 50
50. 25
17.07
31.73
27.23
10. 40
21. 62
25. 53
15.16
26. 92
65.03
25. 36
Per capita
expendi
ture for
house
Rank keeping
dwell
of
city ings only
231
130
292
24
184
96
236
239
14
166
122
297
287
9
189
258
85
307
238
4
116
175
310
221
168
298
244
16
235
86
106
146
71
248
219
233
290
83
305
55
285
58
128
94
160
144
118
92
195
210
104
202
246
66
54
232
206
203
253
65
137
140
38
243
112
152
283
191
167
255
155
23
169
$6. 56
8. 45
1. 48
38. 97
12.10
7. 95
9. 83
6.21
48. 32
6.11
3. 10
2. 68
.57
6.36
4. 16
4. 75
6. 16
2. 53
2.58
13.18
15.07
6.19
.59
2.11
5. 68
3. 80
5.18
22. 39
1.44
6.60
23. 82
7.51
9.38
6.32
11.00
2. 64
4.18
27.83
4.17
9. 37
5.45
12. 42
4. 56
7.11
8.67
7.77
12.43
4. 32
2. 72
10. 82
2.91
17.68
3.49
7.40
24. 30
9.41
9. 86
7. 35
6.13
4.54
14. 53
9.93
12.35
6.47
3. 80
5. 86
1.04
2.67
10.64
8. 02
13.50
14.06
7. 52
166
MONTHLY LABOR REVIEW
T able 4 .—P E R C A PITA E X P E N D IT U R E S FOR N E W B U IL D IN G S A N D FOR R E PA IR S,
A N D FA M ILIE S P R O V ID E D FOR, IN 3 1 1 C ITIES, 1930—Continued
Families pro
vided for
City and State
Galveston, Tex__________
Gary, Ind_________________
Grand Rapids, Mich_,
. _
Great Falls, Mont
______
Green Bay, W is. -------------Greensboro, N . C ----Greenville, S. C ------ ---------Greenwich, Conn__ _____
Hagerstown, M d ______ __
Hamilton, O h io ----------------Hammond, Ind-----------------Hamtramck, M ich_________
Harrisburg, Pa_____________
Hartford. C on n .. ------- -----Haverhill, M a s s ___________
Hazleton, P a---- -- ------------Highland Park, M ich______
Hoboken, N . J ------- -----Holyoke, Mass _ _________
Houston, T ex----------- --------Huntington, W . Va ______
Hutchinson, Kans . . . ____
Indianapolis,Ind. ------------Irvington, N .J ___ _______
Jackson, M ich_____________
Jacksonville, Fla___________
Jamestown, N . Y - . ______
Jersey C ity, N . J — . . . ___
Johnstown, P a ____________
Joliet, 111. ________________
Joplin, M o____ ___________
Kalamazoo, M ich. ________
Kansas C ity, Kans_________
Kansas C ity, Mo ------. . .
Kearny, N .J ______________
Kenosha, W is_____________
Kingston, N . Y _____ ___
Knoxville, Term__________
Kokomo, In d __ __________
Lakewood, Ohio____ ______
Lancaster, Pa __________
Lansing, M ich___________
Lawrence, Mass___________
Lebanon, Pa________ ____
Lewiston, M e . . _________ _
Lexington, K y ___________ .
Lima, Ohio____________ .
Lincoln, Nebr__ _____ ____
Little Rock, Ark _ _______
Long Beach, Calif_____ ____
Lorain, O h io ... _
... ...
Los Angeles, Calif____ _
Louisville, K y . .. ___ ___
Lowell, Mass _____________
Lynchburg, V a____________
Lynn, Mass______ ______ „
McKeesport, P a___________
Macon, Ga___ - __________
Madison, W is.. . . . . _____
Malden, Mass ___________
Manchester, N . H . . . _ __
Mansfield, Ohio____
____
Marion, Ind___ ______ ___
Marion, Ohio______________
Medford, Mass____________
Memphis, Tenn____
Meriden, Conn______ _ . _
Miami, Fla___________ . . .
Milwaukee, W is___________
Minneapolis, M inn___ _ _ _
Mobile, Ala_____ ____ . .
Moline, 111___ ___ -.
Montclair, N . J._ _ _______
Montgomery, Ala................. .
https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
Population,
census of
1930
53,427
100, 426
168, 234
28, 553
37, 353
53,422
29,081
33,112
30, 861
52,108
64, 523
56, 283
80, 284
161, 372
48,687
39,078
52, 883
56, 523
56, 555
289, 428
75, 575
27,080
362, 564
56, 745
54, 870
129, 682
45,172
316, 914
66,983
41, 753
33, 452
54,388
122,327
392,640
40,724
50, 242
28,166
105, 797
32, 680
69, 811
60, 596
78, 421
84, 949
25, 568
34,948
45, 723
42, 217
75, 919
81, 679
141, 390
44,483
1,231,730
307,808
100, 300
40, 559
102, 327
54,631
53,866
57,815
58,143
76,834
33,434
24,329
31,005
59, 700
252,049
38,452
110,025
568,962
462, 611
68, 277
32,330
42, 006
66,075
N um
ber
127
131
231
103
113
61
72
203
43
81
152
21
77
61
38
27
5
4
37
2,227
56
105
615
102
61
186
93
238
18
88
36
102
187
864
103
78
41
238
17
248
43
137
19
12
31
85
11
98
283
1,993
83
11,437
428
42
114
103
83
45
179
99
86
97
18
14
249
1,057
64
114
1,729
1,355
191
112
69
280
Per
10,000
popu
lation
23.8
13.0
13.7
36.1
30.3
11.4
24.8
61.3
13.9
15.5
23.6
3.7
9.6
3.8
7.8
6.9
.9
.7
6.5
76.9
7.4
38.8
17.0
18.0
11.1
14.3
20.6
7.5
2.7
21.1
10.8
18.8
15.3
22.0
25.3
15.5
14. 6
22.5
5.2
35.5
7.1
17. 5
2. 2
4.7
8.9
18.6
2.6
12.9
34.6
141.0
18.7
92.9
13.9
4.2
28.1
10.1
15. 2
8.4
31.0
17.0
11.2
29.0
7.4
4. 5
41.7
41.9
16.6
10.4
30.4
29.3
28.0
34. 6
16.4
42.4
[940]
Per capita expenditure
For
new
build
ings
$27.09
8.51
11.97
39.02
30. 21
10.18
27.74
109. 62
17. 21
24. 93
25. 95
20.35
23. 46
30. 51
4. 54
9. 94
9. 76
5. 44
25. 00
57. 96
9. 46
63. 30
17. 06
28. 45
7.20
12.51
12. 58
35.64
6. 20
48. 05
19.10
17.19
10.11
35.06
19. 58
26.41
23. 82
32.50
4. 33
20.19
18. 55
21. 56
4. 44
26.28
33.24
21.58
21.77
19.17
19. 30
86. 73
13. 72
52.49
19.79
7. 59
35. 68
23. 76
13.91
9. 21
34. 96
16. 37
6. 78
17. 84
11.09
18.96
25. 59
31.62
15. 86
9. 96
33.12
23. 34
11.84
36. 84
37. 74
13.95
For re
pairs
and ad
ditions
$5.06
3. 21
5. 40
5. 97
6. 43
4. 16
8. 55
21.32
1.33
4. 86
3.12
2.73
7.91
8. 93
2. 47
2.81
2.05
9.20
5.12
1.69
.72
6. 64
3.49
1.51
5.51
6. 08
4. 75
2.75
4.19
11.13
6.13
4. 35
.93
4.83
1.11
3.13
6.79
1.78
3.72
1.04
4.24
4. 77
2.83
2.84
1.10
5.19
2. 33
1.88
8.27
5. 62
.94
8. 69
2.75
3.84
4. 65
5.28
5. 34
5. 21
5. 65
3.12
3.17
3. 63
5. 07
.79
2.15
6.07
5. 39
7. 46
11.33
5. 74
4. 27
5. 88
8. 45
5.33
Total
$32.15
11.72
17.37
44.99
36.64
14.34
36.29
130.94
18. 54
29. 79
29.07
23. 07
31. 37
39. 44
7.00
12.75
11.81
14. 64
30.11
59. 65
10.18
69. 94
20. 55
29. 97
12.72
18. 59
17. 33
38. 39
10. 38
59.18
25.23
21.54
11.04
39. 89
20.70
29. 54
30. 61
34.28
8. 05
21.23
22.79
26. 33
7.27
29.12
34. 33
26. 77
24.10
21.05
27. 56
92.35
14.66
61.18
22.54
11. 43
40. 32
29.05
19. 25
14. 42
40.61
19. 49
9. 95
21.47
16.16
19. 74
27. 74
37. 70
21.26
17. 42
44. 44
29. 07
16.11
42.72
46.18
19.28
Per capita
expendi
ture for
house
Rank keeping
dwell
of
city ings only
110
276
241
46
80
263
84
3
230
127
133
182
115
62
304
270
275
261
124
29
286
19
205
126
271
228
242
68
284
30
171
193
279
61
204
129
120
98
299
199
183
162
302
132
97
159
177
201
150
10
260
27
185
277
60
135
224
262
57
218
288
194
250
214
148
75
198
240
47
134
251
52
43
223
$7.87
5.18
5.12
13.86
11.30
5.34
9. 26
86. 38
7. 55
6. 95
9. 25
1.40
6. 80
3. 86
2. 30
5.39
.70
.49
3.68
33. 13
3. 22
14. 49
7. 55
7. 93
5. 22
3. 76
9. 21
2.80
1.37
13. 78
4. 39
8. 62
4. 27
7.69
9. 92
15. 07
7.73
6.10
1.50
14. 85
9.31
6.80
.80
5. 61
4. 32
5.00
1.22
6.22
12. 76
38. 08
6. 21
26. 21
7. 57
1.79
12. 46
4. 96
8. 10
1.53
14. 46
7.80
3. 26
13.10
1.38
1. 61
21.44
13. 14
7. 36
4.25
12. 18
10. 71
5. 30
16. 42
22.16
8. 52
167
HOUSING
T
a b le
4 .—PE R CA PITA E X P E N D IT U R E S FOR N E W B U IL D IN G S A N D FOR R E PA IR S,
A N D FA M ILIES PR O V ID ED FOR, IN 3 1 1 CITIES, 1930—Continued
Families pro
vided for
City and State
M ount Vernon, N . Y _______
___ _.
Muncie, Ind___
Muskegon, M ic h ___
___
Muskogee, Okla__ _______
Nashville, Tenn__________
Newark, N . J ____
_ _ .
Newark, Ohio__ _ _ _____
N ew Bedford, Mass______
New Britain, Conn____ ___
N ew Brunswick, N . J ___ _.
Newburgh, N . Y _ _ _____
N ew Castle, P a____________
N ew Haven, Conn_______
N ew London, Conn.
N ew Orleans, La____ _ _____
Newport, K y _____ _________
Newport, R. I __________ __
Newport News, V a_____
N ew Rochelle, N . Y __
________
Newton, M a ss..
N ew York C ity, N . Y ____
Niagara Falls, N . Y . _____
Norfolk, Va________________
Norristown, Pa____________
Norwalk, Conn____________
Oakland, Calif.
_____
Oak Park, 111____________
Ogden, U tah____ .
. . .
Oklahoma C ity, Okla
Okmulgee, Okla______ ___
Omaha, N ebr_________ _ __
Orange, N .J
_ _______
Oshkosh, Wis_____________
Ottumwa, Iowa____________
Paducah, Ky_ ____________
Pasadena, Calif. __ ________
Passaic, N .J ____ ___ ___
Paterson, N . J
Pawtucket, R . I
________
Peoria, 111___________ _____
Perth Amboy, N . J . _ ______
Petersburg, Va,_____________
Philadelphia, Pa___.................
Phoenix, Ariz. _ _ _______
Pittsburgh, Pa____________
Pittsfield, M ass. ________
Plainfield, N . J___________
Pontiac, M ich__ ______
Port Arthur, Tex _ ______
_
Port Huron, M i c h ___ _
Portland, M e____________
Portland, Oreg_____________
Portsmouth, Ohio__________
Portsmouth, Va____________
Poughkeepsie, N . Y ________
Providence, R. I _
Pueblo, C o lo _ ___
_ .
Quincy, 111.. ___ ______ _
Quincy, Mass______________
Racine, W is_____ ____ ___ _
Reading, Pa_______________
Revere, M ass______________
Richmond, Ind____________
Richmond, V a____________
Roanoke, Va. ___________ _
Rochester, N . Y __ __ _ ___
Rockford, 111_______________
Rock Island, 111 _ __ _____
Sacramento, Calif__________
Saginaw, M ich____ ____ _ _
St. Joseph, M o___ ________
St. Louis, M o______________
St. Paul, M inn___ ______ _
St. Petersburg, Fla----- --------
https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
Population,
census of
1930
60, 869
46, 517
41, 338
32,006
153,153
444,170
30, 471
112,804
68, 095
34, 280
31,243
48, 705
162, 650
29, 794
455,792
29, 7.40
27, 430
34, 285
54, 055
65,295
6,958, 792
75,398
127, 808
35, 837
35, 961
284, 213
63,819
40,243
182, 845
17, 097
214,184
35, 509
40, 075
28,074
33, 541
75, 875
63, 108
138, 267
77, 203
104, 788
44,007
28,487
1, 961,458
47,950
669, 631
49, 675
34,405
64, 897
50,067
31,176
70,810
299,122
42, 536
45,353
40,123
252,029
50,102
39, 221
71, 965
67, 515
110,289
35, 705
32, 561
182,883
69,096
325, 019
85, 831
39,093
93, 685
80, 685
80, 944
817,334
270, 883
39,504
Per capita expenditure
N um
ber
Per
10,000
popu
lation
For
new
build
ings
For re
pairs
and ad
ditions
481
47
81
24
358
750
29
15
42
21
23
49
238
70
258
17
45
91
191
346
36,182
218
220
80
165
1,231
55
113
2,005
1
208
96
60
48
84
214
24
139
149
408
32
37
1, 744
410
1, 349
185
81
50
244
32
no
866
31
71
48
446
61
68
288
174
119
58
76
227
101
232
311
132
388
193
96
1,618
402
73
79.0
10.1
19.6
7.5
23.4
16.9
9.5
1.3
6.2
6.1
7.4
10.1
14.6
23.5
5.7
5.7
16.4
26.5
35.3
53.0
52.0
28.9
17.2
22.3
45.9
43.3
8.6
28.1
109.7
.6
9.7
27.0
15.0
17.1
25.0
28.2
3.8
10.1
19.3
38.9
7.3
13.0
8.9
85.5
20.1
37.2
23.5
7. 7
48.7
10.3
15.5
29.0
7.3
15.7
12.0
17.7
12.2
17.3
40 0
25 8
10.8
16 2
23.3
12.4
14.6
8.1
39.7
33.8
41.4
23.9
11.9
19.8
14.8
18.5
$59.19
6. 97
23.12
16.26
31.67
22. 96
6. 63
6.89
10.57
21.24
31.95
9.26
93.51
102. 78
11. 82
5. 92
31.57
29.23
89.00
74.89
50.80
37. 22
18.10
31.04
56.53
27.02
25.99
21.68
138. 48
1. 21
20.48
34.64
14.19
15.46
9. 66
62. 94
26. 79
9. 45
19. 60
28.49
22. 68
5 80
22 31
62 10
24.75
33. 66
40.23
18.12
43. 73
3.40
16.54
30.80
7. 69
8. 68
10. 36
30. 92
6.41
25.44
33.24
50. 53
17. 51
11.13
16. 72
26.64
34.19
20.34
25. 99
15. 66
26.45
28.81
17. 46
17.19
33.46
14.51
$9. 77
2. 57
5.80
1.47
4. 35
4.91
.76
1.82
2.59
7. 07
7.03
1.45
4. 40
2. 55
2. 41
1.27
11.69
9.17
15. 87
15. 02
8.15
12.33
2. 27
6.10
9.25
4. 94
3.18
3.41
5. 97
1.10
3.43
8. 38
4. 44
3. 33
.25
14.64
6. 47
5. 66
4. 32
4. 30
5. 62
1.70
4.79
6.21
6.20
3.66
7.53
1.60
4.80
1.38
5. 59
9. 53
1.10
3.27
8.20
11.70
4.33
.86
4.61
7.60
4.92
8. 53
2. 37
5. 90
3 53
4.31
7.88
18.31
5.88
4. 53
2. 55
4.01
5.98
5. 67
[941]
Total
$68. 95
9. 54
28. 92
17. 73
36. 02
27. 87
7. 39
8.71
13.16
28. 30
38. 98
10. 72
97.90
105. 33
14. 23
7.19
43.26
38.40
104. 87
89. 90
58.94
49. 55
20. 37
37. 14
65.79
31.97
29.17
25.09
144. 45
2.31
23.91
43.03
18. 62
18.79
9.91
77. 58
33.26
15.10
23. 93
32. 79
28.30
7. 50
27.09
68-32
30. 96
37.33
47. 76
19. 73
48. 53
4.79
22.13
40. 33
8. 79
11. 95
18. 56
42.62
10.74
26. 30
37.85
58.12
22. 43
19. 66
19.09
32.54
37.71
24.65
33.88
33. 98
32. 33
33.34
20.01
21.19
39.43
20.19
Per capita
expendi
ture for
house
Rank keeping
of
dwell
city ings only
20
291
136
237
87
147
301
296
267
142
64
282
8
5
264
303
49
67
6
12
33
39
208
78
22
111
131
172
2
311
179
51
227
226
289
15
103
257
178
105
143
300
153
21
117
77
41
215
40
309
188
59
295
273
229
53
281
163
73
34
186
216
225
107
74
174
100
99
108
101
212
200
63
209
$48. 02
3.27
5.67
1.64
6. 54
7. 97
2.49
1.09
4.61
2. 84
4. 92
6. 67
8.16
15. 33
1.91
2.28
20. 55
7. 21
57. 58
56.15
24. 68
12. 01
6. 70
13. 37
36.06
13. 81
7.13
6.48
40. 85
.06
4.07
18. 66
5. 84
7. 65
4.38
20.81
2.59
4.22
8. 80
16. 96
3.29
3.81
4.02
21 34
9.87
20.01
19.08
2. 70
12. 18
2.36
6. 79
12. 67
3. 72
3. 90
8.47
12 20
2.71
5. 72
16. 50
13.00
6. 62
6.54
6. 85
5.44
7.78
4.26
14.37
11.62
13.15
7.02
3.05
6. 94
6. 85
8.02
168
M O N TH LY
LABO R
R E V IE W
T a b l e 4 .—PE R CAPITA E X P E N D IT U R E S FOR N E W B U IL D IN G S A N D FOR R E PA IR S,
A N D FA M ILIES PR O V ID E D FOR, IN 3 1 1 CITIES, 1930—Continued
Families pro
vided for
Population,
census of
1930
City and State
Salem, M ass____ ________
Salt Tjakft City, Utah
San Antonio, T e x _____ .
San Diego, C alif-__
.
San Francisco, Calif __
San Jose, Calif- - _____ - Savannah, Ga . . . _________
Schenectady, N . Y —. ______
Scranton, Pa- . . . . ----------Seattle, W ash, . . . .
-----Sheboygan, Wis________ . Shreveport, L a . . ______ .
Sioux C ity, I o w a ------- -------Sioux Falls, S. D a k ___ - .
Somerville, M ass-------------South Bend, Ind_____ . .
Spokane, Wash . . .
.. Springfield, 111 - - - Springfield, M ass---------- . .
Springfield, M o.
. . -------Springfield, Ohio . ------ __
Stamford, Conn_____ . . . . .
Steubenville, Ohio ---- -- . .
Stockton, Calif--- - ---------Superior, W is-_— ------Syracuse, N . Y _
Tacoma, Wash_._ _ _ ------Tampa, Fla___Taunton, M ass____________
Terre Haute, In d . _______
Toledo, Ohio____ __ ______
Topeka, Kans. .
Trenton, N . J _____________
Troy, N . Y ________________
Tucson, Ariz ----Tulsa, O k la .___- — _____
Union City, N . J- ----------Utica, N .Y - . Vallejo, Calif--Waco, T ex_____________ _ _
Waltham, M ass____________
Warren, O hio.- ___________
Washington, D . C_
- - __
Waterbury, Conn. _
___
Waterloo, Iowa ______ ___
Watertown, M ass-.
Watertown, N . Y__ ______
West New York, N . J______
Wheeling, W. V a. -- White Plains, N . Y Wichita, Kans
Wichita Falls, T e x ... . . .
Wilkes-Barre, P a _____ . . . .
Wilkinsburg, P a ___
Williamsport, Pa
Wilmington, D e l ________ .
Wilmington, N . C- _______
Winston-Salem, N . 0 ____ .
Woonsocket, R. I __________
Worcester, Mass . ._ ___
Yonkers, N . Y
York, Pa__ . . . .
Youngstown, Ohio________
Zanesville, Ohio____
__
Total, 311 cities
https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
_____
N um
ber
Per
10,000
popu
lation
Per capita expenditure
For
new
build
ings
For re
pairs
and ad
ditions
Total
43, 287
140,058
254, 562
147, 897
625, 974
57, 547
85,007
95, 652
143,428
363,134
39, 249
76,659
79, 212
33, 360
103,604
104,193
115, 514
71, 857
149, 861
57, 507
68,406
46, 282
35, 418
47,951
36,100
207, 007
106, 837
100,910
37, 288
62, 543
290, 787
64, 005
122,610
72, 350
32,198
141, 281
58, 588
102, 633
14, 476
52, 825
39, 425
41, 054
485, 716
99,902
45, 969
34, 913
32,088
36, 916
61, 752
35, 604
109,832
43,614
86,507
29,631
45, 695
104, 941
32,167
75, 288
49,585
196, 395
135,123
55, 237
170, 004
36, 439
56
554
1,135
829
2,206
185
94
169
49
2,583
98
171
179
255
49
193
328
151
284
116
91
109
68
100
47
432
347
91
27
50
372
92
38
99
191
943
41
90
28
106
124
93
1,962
101
137
84
14
2
45
297
736
30
39
79
36
367
52130
22
294
1,042
56
163
39
12.9
39. 6
44.6
56.1
35.2
32.1
11.1
17.7
3.4
71.1
25.0
22.3
22.6
76.4
4.7
18 5
28.4
21.0
19.0
20.2
13.3
23.6
19. 2
20. 9
13.0
20.9
32.5
9.0
7.2
8.0
12.8
14.4
3. 1
13.7
59.3
66. 7
7.0
8.8
19.3
20. 1
31.5
22. 7
40. 4
10. 1
29.8
24. 1
4.4
.5
7.3
83.4
67.0
6.9
4.5
26. 7
7.9
35.0
16. 2
17.3
4.4
15.0
77. 1
10.1
9.6
10. 7
$17.49
27. 56
29. 95
31. 52
31.12
52. 76
11 38
50. 52
16.98
75.13
27.02
11.98
39.02
50.94
10. 60
32 50
25. 78
37. 83
32.83
11.59
9.57
48.91
19.96
21.64
23. 43
20. 35
33. 68
9.63
4.09
7.51
26. 90
36. 09
16. 43
38.45
53.42
53.83
11.22
10.53
17.10
14. 40
42. 18
11. 74
88.81
16. 93
23.15
25. 04
6.41
3. 54
11. 77
157. 41
52. 89
17.91
15. 93
20. 60
24. 23
40.11
19. 04
17. 40
4.17
25. 67
67. 47
23. 52
14. 17
5.41
$9. 37
2. 96
3. 39
5. 17
4. 69
6.38
1.19
5. 29
5. 26
8.46
8.83
8.13
4.06
9.05
2. 72
3 09
5.74
6.42
5. 23
7.80
1. 79
7.73
3. 62
5. 40
3.41
5.73
4. 42
3. 28
11.92
3.47
8.88
1.80
3. 54
3. 34
9.75
5.31
3.93
2. 62
6. 22
7.45
3. 63
4. 78
11. 70
3.46
2.77
2. 58
7.14
2.99
6.37
16.15
4.54
7.42
3. 36
7. 82
3. 75
6. 75
2.51
3.88
2.12
6. 62
5. 71
6. 87
2.31
.44
$26.85
30.52
33. 34
36.69
35. 81
59.13
12. 57
55.82
22.24
83. 59
35. 85
20.11
43.07
59.99
13.32
35 59
31.52
44. 25
38.06
19. 39
11.36
56. 64
23. 59
27.03
26. 84
26.08
38. 09
12. 90
16. 01
10. 98
35. 78
37.89
19. 97
41. 79
63.17
59.15
15.14
13. 15
23.33
21. 85
45. 81
16. 52
100. 52
20. 39
25. 92
27. 62
13.55
6. 53
18. 15
173. 56
57. 43
25. 33
19. 29
28. 42
27.97
46. 86
21. 55
21.28
6. 29
32. 29
73. 18
30. 39
16. 48
5. 85
47,091, 551
130, 503
27. 7
31.98
5.53
37. 51
[942]
Per capita
expendi
ture for
house
Rank keeping
of
dwell
city ings only
156
121
102
79
89
32
272
37
187
13
88
211
50
28
266
91
114
48
70
220
278
36
180
154
157
164
69
269
252
280
90
72
213
56
25
31
256
268
181
190
44
247
7
207
165
149
265
306
234
1
35
170
222
141
145
42
192
197
308
109
17
123
249
76
$7.64
13.46
10. 22
19. 70
14.60
12. 83
3 81
10. 83
1.21
23.80
12. 40
5.47
7.83
27. 95
1. CO
9.27
10. 62
9.10
8. 01
5. 34
4. 68
16. 70
8.48
7.29
4.18
11. 84
9. 78
1.50
2. 57
3.01
5. 00
6.67
1.66
7.49
16. 68
27.42
2. 90
5. 10
6. 46
6. 07
14. 66
7.39
28. 59
4. 75
9. 46
12.52
1.83
.42
3. 56
76. 90
20. 87
2. 66
1. 76
13. 25
5. 41
17. 73
5.37
5. 34
1.26
8. 16
51.28
5.04
4. 29
2. 74
12. 16
169
HOUSING
Building Operations, 1921 to 1930
T a b l e 5 shows for 257 identical cities the estimated expenditures
for new residential buildings, new nonresidential buildings, and total
new buildings; the estimated population as of July 1 each year,
1921 to 1929, and the census of population as of 1930; the number
of families provided for, the ratio of families provided for to each
10,000 of population; the index number of each of these items, and
the index number of families provided for, weighted by population.
T able 5 .—E ST IM A T E D E X P E N D IT U R E FOR EA CH CLASS OF N E W B U IL D IN G S, FA M I
LIES PR O V ID E D FOR A N D RATIO TO PO PU LATIO N , A N D I N D E X N U M B E R S
T H E R E O F , IN 2 5 7 ID E N T IC A L CITIES, 1921 to 1930
N ew residential build
ings
New nonresidential
buildings
Total new buildings
Year
Estimated ex
penditure
1921
1922
1923
1924
1925.
1926.
1927.
1928.
1929.
1930.
Index
number
Estimated ex
penditure
Index
number
Estimated ex
penditure
100.0
$635, 775,199
876, 276, 713
1,070, 596, 718
1,137, 631,080
1, 343, 880,884
1,300, 840, 876
1,231, 785,870
1,135, 549,986
1,146, 958,101
849, 386,873
100. 0
$1, 573, 127,938
2,488, 629, 634
3,071, 583, 618
3,207, 907,852
3,805, 427,154
3, 556, 835, 503
3,137, 789,130
2,994, 979, 737
2, 580, 069,875
1,450, 656, 720
$937, 352, 739
1,612, 352,921
172.0
213. 5
220. 9
262. 6
240. 7
203.3
198.4
152.9
64. 1
2 , 000, 986, 900
2, 070, 276, 772
2,461, 546, 270
2,255, 994, 627
1,906, 003, 2C0
1,859, 429, 751
1,433, 111,774
601, 269,847
Population
Year
1921__________________
1922__________________
1923__________________
1924__________________
1925__________________
1926__________________
1927__________________
1928_________________
1929__________________
1930___________________
137.8
168.4
178.9
211.4
204.6
193.7
178.6
180.4
133.6
Index
number
100.0
158.2
195.3
203.9
241.9
226.1
199.5
19Q.4
164.0
92.2
Families provided for
As estimated
by Census
Bureau
Index
number
36, 575,118
37, 511, 516
38,447,913
39,384,311
40,320, 708
41, 257,106
42, 058,897
42, 767,125
43, 665,235
i 44,850, 467
100.0
102.6
105.1
107. 7
110.2
112.8
115. 0
116.9
119.4
122.6
Number
224, 545
377, 305
453, 673
442,919
491, 222
462, 214
406, 095
338, 678
244, 394
125, 322
Index
number
Ratio to each
10,000 of pop
ulation
100.0
168.0
202.0
197.3
218.8
205.8
180.9
173.1
108.8
55.8
61.4
100.6
118.0
112. 5
121.8
112.0
96.6
90.9
56.0
27.9
Index
number
adjusted
to popu
lation
100.0
163.7
192.2
183.2
198.4
182.4
157.3
148. 1
91.1
45. 5
1 Actual enumeration.
During 1930 permits issued for new buildings showed an estimated
expenditure of $1,450,656,720. This is less than the expenditure for
any of the other years since 1921. The index number of expenditures
for total new buildings stands at 92.2 for the year 1930, if the 1921
expenditures are taken as 100. The peak year was 1925, when the
index was 241.9. Expenditures for new residential buildings de
creased much more rapidly than for new nonresidential buildings.
A peak of 262.6 was reached in 1925, followed by a gradual decline
to an index of 152.9 in 1929; an abrupt decline occurred during 1930
to an index of 64.1. New nonresidential buildings followed prac
tically the same trend, the index number rising to a peak of 211.4
in 1925 and falling gradually to 178.6 in 1928. A slight rise, to
180.4, occurred in 1929; the 1930 index number wTas 133.6.
https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
[943]
170
M O N TH LY
LABO R
R E V IE W
The population of these 257 cities, according to the 1930 census,
was 44,850,467. In 1930, 125,322 families were provided with
dwelling places in new buildings. This is at the rate of 27.9 families
for each 10,000 of population. In 1925, 121.8 families were provided
for to each 10,000 of the population. The population of these 257
cities has increased 22.6 per cent since 1921, but the number of fami
lies provided for has decreased 44.2 per cent. The index number of
families provided for, adjusted to the population, reached a peak of
198.4 in 1925, but fell to 91.1 in 1929 and then to 45.5 in 1930.
The index number of families provided for, adjusted to population,
is obtained by dividing the index number of families provided for by
the index number of the population. In other words, while 55.8
per cent as many families were provided with dwelling places in 1930
as in 1921, the population of these 257 cities increased 22.6 per cent
during this period, and therefore, in proportion to the population,
only 45.5 per cent as many families were provided for in 1930 as
in 1921.
Average Cost of Dwellings per Family, 1921 to 1930
T a b l e 6 shows the average cost per family unit each year, 1921
to 1930, of housing accommodations of each type for which permits
were issued in the 257 identical cities from which reports were re
ceived :
T a b l e 6 .— A V ER A G E COST OF N E W D W E L L IN G S i P E R FA M IL Y IN 2 5 7 ID E N T IC A L
CITIES, 1921 TO 1930
Average cost of new dwellings per family
Year
1921________
1922________
1923________
1924--..............
1925................
1926-..............
1927— ............
1928________
1929-..............
1930...........
Index numbers of cost of dwellings per family
M ulti All classes
M ulti All classes 1-family
2-family
2-family
1-family
family
of dwell
family
of dwell dwellings dwellings2
dwellings dwellings2 dwellings3
dwellings3
ings
ings
$3,972
4,134
4,203
4,317
4,618
4,725
4,830
4,937
4,915
4,993
$3, 762
3,801
4,159
4, 336
4,421
4,480
4,368
4,064
4, 020
3,924
$4, 019
3,880
4, 001
4,418
4, 289
4,095
4,170
4,129
4,402
3,857
$3,947
4, 005
4,127
4,352
4,464
4,422
4, 449
4,407
4,566
4,385
100.0
104.1
105.8
108.7
116.3
119.0
121.6
124.3
123.7
125.7
100.0
101.0
110.6
115.3
117.5
119.1
116. 1
108.0
106.9
104.3
100.0
96. 5
99.6
109.9
106.7
101.9
103.8
102.7
109. 5
96.0
100.0
101.5
104.6
110.3
113.1
112.0
112.7
111. 7
115. 7
111.1
1 Includes only cost of the buildings.
2 Includes 1-family and 2-family dwellings with stores.
3 Includes multifamily dwellings with stores.
The average cost of the 1-family dwellings for which permits were
issued during the year 1921 in these 257 cities was $3,972. There
was a slight increase in the average cost of 1-family dwellings each
year over the preceding year from 1921 to 1928, inclusive, a slight
drop in 1929, and another rise in 1930. The index number of the
cost of 1-family dwellings, based on 1921 equaling 100, stood at
124.3 in 1928, decreased to 123.7 in 1929, and rose to 125.7 in 1930.
The 2-family dwellings for which permits were issued during the
year 1921 cost $3,762 per family. The price increased until a peak of
$4,480 was reached in 1926, since which time a decline in the average
cost of this class of dwellings has taken place each year. In 1929 the
https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
[944]
171
H O U S IN G
average cost was $4,020, and in 1930, $3,924. At the peak, in 1926,
the mdex was 119.1, in 1929 it was 106.9, and in 1930, 104.3.
The curve of per-family cost in the erection of apartment houses
has been more broken than that for either 1-family dwellings or
2-family dwellings. The average per-family cost of the multifamily dwellings for which permits were issued in 1921 was $4,019;
it fell slightly in 1922, rose for each of the years 1923 and 1924, fell
again m 1925 and 1926, slightly increased in 1927, fell slightly in
1928, and rose sharply in 1929. The index number in 1929 was
109.5 as compared with the peak of 109.9 in 1924. The average
cost during the peak year 1924 was $4,418 per family unit. During
1930 the average per-family cost of the multifamily dwellings for
which permits were issued in these cities was $3,857—the lowest
shown for any of the 10 years under discussion.
The average cost of all classes of dwellings for which permits were
issued in these 257 cities was $3,947 in 1921 and $4,464 in 1925, the
peak year. The 1930 cost in these cities was $4,385, which was less
than that for any other year since 1924.
Families Provided for, 1921 to 1930
T able 7 shows the number and percentage distribution of families
provided for in the different kinds of dwellings in 257 identical cities
from which reports have been received each year from 1921 to 1930,
inclusive.
T a b l e 7.—N U M B E R A N D PE R C E N T OF FA M ILIES P R O V ID E D FOR IN D IF F E R E N T
K IN D S OF D W E LL IN G S IN 2 5 7 ID E N T IC A L C ITIES, 1921 TO 1930
Number of families provided for in—
Year
1-family
dwellings
1921____________
1922____________
1923____________
1924___________
1925________
1926_________
1927__________
1928__________
1929_________
1930____ ________
130,873
179,364
207, 632
210, 818
226,159
188, 074
155, 512
136,907
98,164
57,318
2-family
dwellings 1
38,858
80, 252
96, 344
95,019
86,145
64, 298
54, 320
43,098
27,813
15,145
Per cent of families provided for in—
M ulti
All classes
1-family
family
dwellings 2 of dwellings dwellings
54,814
117, 689
149, 697
137,082
178, 918
209, 842
196, 263
208, 673
118,417
52, 859
224, 545
377, 305
453,673
442,919
491, 222
462, 214
406, 095
388, 678
244, 394
125,322
58.3
47.5
45.8
47.6
46.0
40.7
38.3
35.2
40.2
45.7
2-family
dwellings '
M ulti
family
dwellings 2
17.3
21.3
21.2
21.5
1". 5
13.9
13.4
11.1
11.4
12.1
24. 4
31.2
33.0
30.9
36.4
45. 4
48.3
53.7
48.5
42. 2
1 Includes 1-family and 2-family dwellings with stores.
Includes multifamily dwellings with stores.
3
. Reports have been received by the Bureau of Labor Statistics from
257 identical cities continuously from 1921 to 1930. In these 257
cities 125,322 family dwelling places were provided in new buildings
during 1930. This is the lowest number provided for during any
calendar year since the collection of such data by the bureau. During
1925, the peak year, 491,222 family dwelling units were provided
in new buildings in these 257 cities, but there has been a gradual
decrease each year since that time.
The number of families provided for in 1-family dwellings also
reached a peak in 1925 and has been declining steadily since that
time.
46860°—31----- 12
https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
[945]
172
M O N TH LY
LABO R
R E V IE W
The year 1923 saw the peak number of 2-family dwellings erected.
During 1930 the number of families provided for in 2-family dwellings
was less than one-sixth of the number provided for in this class of
dwellings during 1923.
For the years 1921 to 1925, inclusive, a larger percentage of the
total number of family dwellings provided were in 1-family dwellings
than in apartment houses. During the years 1926 to 1929, however,
this situation was reversed, but in 1930, 1-family dwellings again
provided for more families than the apartment buildings.- In 1921,
58.3 per cent of all family dwelling units provided were in 1-family
dwellings, but this percentage decreased each year, with some fluctu
ation, until 1928 when a low point of 35.2 per cent was reached.
In 1930, 45.7 per cent of all family dwelling units provided were m
1-family dwellings.
In 1921 only 24.4 per cent of the family dwelling units were m apart
ment houses. In 1928, 53.7 per cent of all family dwelling units pro
vided were in apartment houses. In 1930, 42.2 per cent of the families
provided for were to be housed in multifamily dwellings. Twofamily dwellings provided for 12.1 per cent of the total number of
families housed in new buildings in 1930.
During the 10 years 1921 to 1930, inclusive, dwelling-places have
been provided in new buildings for 3,616,397 families in these 257
cities reporting. Of this number, 44.0 per cent have been housed in
1-family dwellings, 39.4 in multifamily dwellings, and 16.6 per cent
in 2-family dwellings.
Five Leading Cities, 1921 to 1930
T he five leading cities in total building permit expenditure in 1930
were New York, Chicago, Los Angeles, Philadelphia, and Washington.
In the 10 years 1921 to 1930, New York, Chicago, and Los Angeles
have been among the five leading cities each year. Philadelphia has
been included in the list of five leading cities for every year except
1921, when it was displaced by Cleveland. Detroit has been one of
the five leading cities each year except 1930, when Washington sur
passed it in expenditures for total building operations.
Table 8 ranks the cities according to their total expenditure for
building construction of all kinds as shown by the permits issued.
Table 9 shows what has been done, in proportion to their size, in the
construction of family residential units, in the five cities leading in
this particular feature.
During 1930, permits issued for new dwellings showed that homes
were to be provided for 130,503 families, which is at the rate of 27.7
families to each 10,000 of population. Following is a list of the five
leading home-building cities in proportion to their population for the
years 1921 to 1930, inclusive. The figures show the number of
families provided for per 10,000 population according to the latest
estimates available each year, except 1930, as prepared by the
Bureau of Census. The 1930 ratios are based on the 1930 census
enumeration figures.
https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
[946]
173
H O U S IN G
T a b i e 8 .—FIV E C ITIES L E A D IN G IN T O T A L E X P E N D IT U R E , EA CH Y E A R , 1921 TO 1930
Year and city
1921
N ew York________
Chicago__________
Cleveland________
Los Angeles____. . .
D etroit__________
1922
N ew York________
Chicago__________
Los Angeles..:.____
Philadelphia_____
D etroit__________
1923
New York_______
Chicago__________
Los Angeles______
D etroit_____ ____ _
Philadelphia.____
1924
N ew York_______
Chicago__________
D etroit___________
Los Angeles_______
Philadelphia______
1925
N ew York________
Chicago__________
D etroit____ ____ _
Philadelphia______
Los Angeles_______
Total expendi
ture
$442, 285, 248
133,027, 910
86,680, 023
82, 761, 386
58, 086, 053
645,176, 481
229, 853,125
121, 206, 787
114,190, 525
93, 614, 593
789, 265, 335
334,164,404
200,133,181
129, 719, 831
128, 227,405
836,043, 604
308, 911,159
160,547, 723
150,147, 516
141,402,655
1, 020, 604, 713
373, 803, 571
180,132, 528
171,034, 280
152,646,436
Year and city
1926
New York__ . _ _
Chicago____ ______
Detroit . . .
____________ ._
Philadelphia... _______________
Los Angeles____ _. ____________
1927
. . ..........
New York ____ . .
Chicago... . . . . .
_ _________
Detroit
......... . . .
Los Angeles
. . .
.
Philadelphia___________________
1928
New York____
_ _________
Chicago_____________
______
Detroit. ________ ______ ____
Philadelphia____________ . . .
Los A ngeles...
_________
1929
New Y o r k ._
Chicago____________ .
____
Philadelphia__ __
____ _
Detroit.
______
_.
__ _
Los Angeles........
_ ... _ ...
1930
New Y o rk .. ._
____
_____
Chicago_________ _ _ _ ____
Los A ngeles...
_
______
Philadelphia.._ ___ . . . ________
W ashington... _____________
Total expendi
ture
$1,039,670, 572
376, 808,480
183, 721,443
140,093, 075
123,006, 215
880, 333,455
365, 065, 042
145, 555,647
123,027,139
117, 590,650
916, 671,855
323, 509, 048
129, 260, 285
112, 225, 865
101,678, 768
942, 297, 219
210, 797,640
104,405, 545
100, 567,497
93, 020,160
410,165, 789
85, 749,167
75, 356, 715
53,141, 770
48,823,891
T a b l e 9 .— FA M ILIES PR O V ID E D FOR BY R E SID E N T IA L C O N STR U C TIO N , PE R 10,000
OF PO PU L A T IO N , IN TH E FIVE L E A D IN G CITIES EACH Y E A R , 1921 TO 1930
Year and city
1921
Long Beach, Calif__
Los Angeles, Calif__
Pasadena, Calif_____
Shreveport, La___ :.
Lakewood, Ohio____
1922
Long Beach, Calif___
Los Angeles, Calif___
Lakewood, Ohio____
Miami, F la________
East Cleveland, Ohio
1923
Long Beach, Calif__
Los Angeles, Calif__
Miami, Fla________
Irvington, N. J_____
Lakewood, Ohio____
1924
Miami, Fla.1_______
Irvington, N . J_____
Los Angeles, Calif.2. .
San Diego, Calif____
Long Beach, Calif__
1925
Miami, Fla.1_______
San Diego, Calif____
Tampa, Fla________
Irvington, N . J._........
Los Angeles, Calif.2. .
Families
provided for
per 10,000 of
population
631.9
320. 9
251. 7
249.8
191.3
1,081.0
441. 6
358. 9
268. 1
267.6
1,038. 1
657.4
611. 1
432. 1
381.5
2, 248. 9
501. 2
448. 3
378.0
347.6
1, 342. 0
392.0
379. 3
374.6
331.0
Year and city
1926
St. Petersburg, Fla__ _ _________
Mount Vernon, N . Y ______
. ...
Irvington, N . J__ _
___
White Plains, N . Y . _______
San Diego, Calif
__ _
_____
1927
Irvington, N . J
_________
White Plains, N . Y. _.
_______
Mount Vernon, N . Y __
_ ____
Yonkers, N . Y __________ .
East Orange, N . J_________ . . _
1928
Yonkers, N . Y
____
M ount Vernon, N . Y . . . .
White Plains, N . Y . . . . ______
Long Beach, Calif
Irvington, N . J___________ _____
1929
Long Beach, Calif .
____
Phoenix, Ariz _____ _ _
....
Houston, T e x ______
_________
Pontiac, Mich
______
Wichita, Kans._
. ________
1930
Long Beach, Calif___ _____ . . .
Oklahoma City, Okla_____________
Los Angeles, Calif________
___
Austin, Tex
______ _
_____
Bloomfield, N . J
. . .
_
Families
provided for
per 10,000 of
population
700.3
644.7
398.6
367. 2
339.5
740.5
419.5
414. 8
349.0
338.1
347.6
299.1
298.3
297.4
295.4
306.9
236.3
211. 6
208.8
159.1
141.0
109.7
92.9
92.8
90.4
1 The ratio of families provided for in Miami in 1924 was based on the population as estimated by the
Census Bureau for that year. In the light of the actual census taken by the State enumeration in 1925, it
would seem that the estimate for 1924 was below the actual population for that year, hence the ratio here
shown for 1924 is probably higher than the actual population in that year would warrant.
2 Population not estimated in 1924 or 1925; 1923 estimate used,
https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
[947]
M O N T H L Y L A B O R R E V IE W
174
Prices of Building Material, and Wages
T he Bureau of Labor Statistics collects monthly the wholesale price
of building material and from such figures computes index numbers
Retail prices as paid by builders are not available, but it is believed
that the trend of retail prices follows closely th at of wholesale prices.
The index numbers shown in Table 10 for wage rates in the building
trades are wage rates for union labor only. In many cities the build
ing trades are highly organized, while in others there is much nonunion labor. Although the bureau has no data concerning the trend
of wage rates of nonunion labor in the building trades, it is thought
that it follows that of union wages. Based on 1921, the index number
of wholesale prices in the building trades reached a peak of 111.6 m
1923. I t decreased each year thereafter until a low point of 95.8 was
reached in 1927. There was an increase in each of the next two years,
but a decrease again in 1930, when the index number stood at 97.2
The index number of union wage rates in the building trades has
climbed steadily from a low point of 93.4, reached in 1922, to a high
of 136.2 in 1930, 1921 being the base or 100.0.
T
a b le
1 0.—IN D E X N U M B E R S OF W HOLESALE PR IC ES OF B U IL D IN G M A T E R IA L A N D
OF U N IO N WAGE R A TES IN T H E B U IL D IN G T R A D E S, 1921 TO 1930
Year
1921
_____________
1922
_________ -1923 __________ -1924
_ __________
1925 _______ _________
Wholesale
prices of
building
material
100.0
99.9
111. 6
105.0
104.4
Union wage
rates per hour
in the build
ing trades
100.0
93.4
103.6
112.2
116.3
Year
1926
1927
1928
1929
1930
Wholesale
prices of
building
material
__________
__________
_____________
_____________
...... ................
102.7
95.8
96.2
99.7
97.2
Union wage
rates per hour
in the build
ing trades
124.0
128.5
129.0
130.6
136. 2
B u ild in g E r e c tio n C o sts in D e tr o it
HE table on page 176 shows the cost in cents per cubic foot for
different kinds of buildings for which permits were issued in the
city of Detroit, Mich., at various times from August, 1915, to January,
1931. These figures were compiled by Mr. Joseph P. Wolff, commis
sioner of buildings of Detroit.
In measuring the cubical volume of a building for the purposes ol
determining fees, the department of building and safety engineering
of the city of Detroit uses the following rules:
T
T he cubical volum e of a building for th e purpose of determ in in g fees shall be
measured, as follows! F ro m th e o u tside of th e walls a n d from th e b asem en t flooi
to th e m ean p o in t of a p itch ed roof o r to th e hig h est p o in t of a flat roof, T he
volum e shall include all dorm ers, inclosed porcnes, penthouses, an d o th e r inclosed
p o rtio n s of th e building, b u t shall exclude open porches.
In th e case of buildings w ith o u t b asem en ts th e m easu rem en ts shall be ta k e n
from th e ground line, a n d in th e case of larg e buildings h av in g deep fo u n d atio n s
th e h eig h t shall be m easured from a p o in t below th e b asem en t floor by an a m o u n t
equal to one-fifth of th e d e p th of th e fo u n d atio n .
T h e values as show n in th e following ta b le are presum ed to rep resen t th e low est
cost, exclusive of cost of la n d a n d a rc h ite c t’s fees, b u t inclusive of co n tracto rs
profits, a t w hich a fairly good build in g of econom ic design could be co n stru cted ,
u n d er th e m o st fav o rab le conditions, in th e city of D e tro it. The cost does n o t
include a n y decorations, expensive sto n e o rn am en tatio n , m arb le w ork, h eatin g or
v en tilatio n system s of u n u su al or com plicated designs, special a p p a ra tu s or equip
https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
[948]
HOUSING
175
m en t of an y so rt such as incinerators, refrigeration, com pressed-air piping, etc.
or an y financing cost, b u t th e cost includes h eatin g system s of th e sim pler k in d
a n d an o rd in ary n u m b er of elevators if th e c h a racter of th e building be such as
req u ired elevators.
It will be noted that the cost per cubic foot was lower in January,
1931, than at any time for which figures are shown, with the exception
of August, 1915. Thus, in August, 1915, the cost per cubic foot for
erecting a brick residence in the city of Detroit was 30% cents; by
August, 1920, the cost had risen to 68% cents per cubic foot. In April,
1922, the cost was 33 cents; and in January, 1930, the cost was 44%
cents per cubic foot. In January, 1931, there was a decline of nearly
25 per cent as compared with the cost in the preceding year, the cost
per cubic foot being 34% cents, or only 4 cents per cubic foot higher
than the cost as shown in August, 1915.
The change in the cost of frame residences is even more striking.
In 1915 the cost per cubic foot in Detroit was 21% cents. In August,
1920, this unit cost had risen to 48% cents. By January, 1930, the
cost had declined to 24 cents, while in January, 1931, the cost was
only 20 cents per cubic foot, or 1% cents less than the cost as shown
in August, 1915.
All classes of buildings show marked declines between January,
1930, and January, 1931, and a few show a cubic foot cost in January,
1931, at or below the cost in August, 1915.
https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
[949]
8888
83
\« \c* \c*
VP
^
■§2232- 3 8 8 8 83
\J
38
38
38
^N?
3833
3823
3888
2?
22®
32®
32^
3388
3388
^
3 i5 8 8
re\
co\ rS\
33882 822
33823
88828
822®
832“
MONTHLY LABOR R EV IEW
|£ S 2 2 2
Nffissaspi
“ 883 88
¡3
s
... v*
1^8222
3882
3882
82
88
88
38
88
38
38
s f
S3
S3
s8
f
-H\
88 S3
-------- “ vS----- ----- N-SP. Nrf
'£ * '
|g ]S 2 2 2 8 8 8 2 2 8 38
IQ
Th *0.
3888
8833
8388
3333
8333
8888
Ti'K'qi'To
38^3
3833
823
N H H
82 2
22°°
223
823
222
23®
23SS
lO -71 -P< CO
3833
3388
3338
8388
8383
S338
CC1 NCI
^
Ton o Cl to 0 0
^
»5^ « «
Lt£\
«\
22® 3 3 8 8
COCOCO
833
-^e o c o
335
882
383
383
388
383
X
loouoooo
■»,M M N n
iS ¡S!
_
3 3 8 8 8 8 2 -i~
<3
la s s
82
>C CO
8338
CO CO CO CO
<3
f 88222
8
|S 8 2 2 3
<s
§38222
Q
§32223
¡3
12232“
6
joon n no
o
IN IN H H H
05 CO ■*tt
CO CO CO
m n c o
»O CO TJH
>h C 5 (N h N
i CO CO CO CO rH
n .S
*0 ^
r
P
S
S
!, HTPCOO
(MHHH
i N h OCO
fc®
0\
8-g
ic
A
®®
23
O
7h" C
TfO^CO
OrHH H
0O
5 COHHn
COOMO
C
CO
OH
^ C
C
HO05
rH\ —
H
co-^coo
<N^ r'1
3832
«, S
S3
SS2SSi
s
SjMVNVN \N\N\P»
iJxrL-L rt\7<\7K
•g ?3 g]2 22 3 8 8 2
3282
fg
NCOC
rH
io
r—i
^
io ^ c ^ K M
COCOCOCO
CO O CO
I
8 .S
O h
“
^ fcX),_.0
oA
.
P
n
bco5
3 H
-
---------
COCO
H M 0 0 5 N
o
O 40
P -.S .S .S S a . S '3
*q
t>> r>> r j *q
3
la
o° so
¿11
2g
®.22
ill
,S3o
'c3 ^
—
„
30^
Ilf i
O
m oO S
c3d >y
2 0
£ 5 s2
; ! p LO ! I , I . I a.! 3°2q
2 3 o g"j •o? ®
c oo a
l & S S S g a s l g g| g.
®©©23’TS03 2 rH rS ' S i ® rS ^ £ rH ^ £ ,Si2©pc^SSc
§ 2a £a g
m
[950]
https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
Janu
ary,
1931
January,
1930
Janu
ary,
1929
Janu
ary,
1928
Febru
ary,
1927
Febru
ary,
1926
Febru
ary,
1925
Janu
ary,
1924
Decem
ber,
1922
April,
1922
176
E ST IM A T E D COST P E R CUBIC FOOT OF B U IL D IN G C O N ST R U C TIO N IN D E T R O IT , M IC H .
WAGES AND HOURS OF LABOR
in Sawmills, 1930
STUDY was made in 1930 by the Bureau of Labor Statistics of
hours of labor and earnings of 50,951 wage earners of 324 repre
sentative sawmills in 22 States producing some 94 per cent of the total
lumber output of this country. Wage figures were also collected for
employees of logging camps, but only those for sawmills are given in
the present article.
Table 1 contains summary figures for 1930 along with like data for
each of the specified years from 1910 to 1928 in which studies of the
industry have been made by the bureau.1 From 1928 to 1930 the
decrease in average full-time hours per week in this industry was
from 56.6 to 56.5, in earnings per hour from 37.1 to 35.9 cents, or 3.2
per cent, and in average full-time earnings per week from $21 to $20.28.
The averages for the years from 1910 to 1921 are for wage earners
in the important or “ selected” occupations in the industry only and
are comparable, one year with another, over this period. " Those for
the years from 1921 to 1930 are for wage earners in all occupations in
the industry and are, therefore, comparable one year with another
over this period, but are not comparable with the averages for wage
earners in the important or selected occupations. Two sets of figures
are shown for 1921—the first for 33,115 wage earners in the selected
occupations in 279 sawmills, and the second for 45,667 wage earners
in all occupations in the industry in the same 279 sawmills. Average
full-time hours per week for the 45,667 wage earners in all occupations
in the industry in 1921 were 58 or 0.8 of an hour per week more than
the average for the 33,115 in selected occupations only. Average
earnings were 2.6 cents more per hour and $1.75 more per week in all
occupations than for those in selected occupations.
Index numbers, on the 1913 base, are shown for the purpose of
making comparisons of the increases or decreases in hours and earn
ings from one year to another over the entire period from 1910 to
1930. In order to make the series continuous and comparable the
index numbers for 1921 for selected occupations have been increased
or decreased in proportion to the increase or decrease in the averages
for all occupations as between 1921 and the specified succeeding years.
Average full-time hours per week were 61.3, or an index of 100.3,
in 1910. From that point the index rose to 100.5, in 1911, and then to
100.7 in 1912. In 1913, the year used as the base year or 100, the
average full-time hours per week in this industry were 61.1. The
same average prevailed in 1915, but from 1915 to 1919 a sharp de
crease occurred, the index falling from 100.0 to 91.8, a decrease of
8.2 per cent. Increases to 93.6 in 1921 and to 93.8 in 1923 and 1925
then occurred, followed by a decrease to an index of 91.3 in 1928 and
91.2 in 1930. Hours in 1930 were 8.8 per cent lower than in 1913.
Index numbers of average earnings per hour decreased from 97.3 in
1910 to 95.1 in 1911; increased to 96.2 in 1912; to 100.0 in 1913; and
W ages a n d H o u r s o f L ab or
A
1 Details of the 1930 study will be available later in bulletin form.
https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
[ 951]
177
MONTHLY LABOR R EV IEW
178
dropped 8.6 per cent to 91.4, in 1915. From 1915 to 1919 there was
an increase of 112.9 per cent, to an index of 194.6, followed by a 14.4
per cent decrease to 166.5, in 1921. From that year onward further
alternate increases and decreases took place—an increase of 8.4 per
cent, to 180.5, in 1923; a decrease to 178 in 1925; an increase to 184.9
in 1928; and finally a decrease to an index of 179 in 1930. Hourly
earnings were 79 per cent higher in 1930 than in 1913.
Average full-time earnings per week followed somewhat the same
course as earnings per hour, being modified only by changes from
year to year of average full-time hours per week. They increased
from an index of 97.6 in 1910 to 178.8 in 1919; decreased to 156.5 in
1921; increased to 169.9 in 1923; decreased to 167.6 in 1925; and
increased to 169.7 in 1928. Full-time earnings per week in 1930 were
63.9 per cent higher than in 1913.
T
a b le
1 .—
AVER A G E HOURS A N D E A R N IN G S, W I T
1910 TO 1930
Year
H
IN D E X N U M B E R S, IN SAW M ILLS,
Index numbers (1913 = 100) of—
N um Number Average Average Average
ber of
full-time earnings full-time
of
estab
earnings Full-time Earnings Full-time
per
hours
wage
lish
earnings
per
hours
per week
hour
earners per week
ments
per week
hour
per week
Selected occupations:
1910
........ .........
1911
1912
1913
1915
__________
1919
________
19211_____________
All occupations:
245
299
361
361
348
141
279
23, 316
31, 495
34,884
34, 328
39, 879
18,022
33,115
61.3
61.4
61.5
61.1
61.1
56.1
57.2
$0.180
. 176
.178
.185
.169
.360
.308
$10.99
10. 76
10.89
11. 26
10. 30
20.13
17. 62
100.3
100.5
100.7
100.0
100.0
91.8
93.6
97.3
95.1
96. 2
100.0
91.4
194.6
166.5
97.6
95. 6
96.7
100.0
91. 5
178.8
156. 5
1923
_____
1925 ___________
1928
__________
1930______________
252
299
319
324
4.5 fifi7
45', 068
61,193
58, 007
50,951
58 0
58.1
58.1
56.6
56.5
. 334
.362
.357
.371
.359
19. 37
21.03
20.74
21.00
20.28
93.8
93.8
91.3
91.2
180.5
178.0
184.9
179.0
169.9
167.6
169.7
163.9
i Two sets of averages are shown for 1921 for the industry—one for selected occupations and the other for
all occupations in the industry. The 1910 to 1921 averages for selected occupations only are comparable
one year with another, as are those for all occupations from 1921 to 1930.
Table 2 shows average full-time hours per week, earnings per hour,
and full-time earnings per week for 1928 and 1930 for each of the
important occupations in the industry, and also for the group listed
in the table as “ other employees” (including wage earners in all
occupations other than those in the important occupations). Between
1928 and 1930 there was no change in average full-time hours per
week of wage earners in 4 of the important occupations in the in
dustry, an increase in 6, and a decrease in 13 occupations. The aver
age for “ other employees” increased from 56.3 in 1928 to 57.0 in
1930. Average earnings per hour and full-time earnings per week
were less in 1930 than in 1928 in 22 occupations and more in 1 occu
pation. Average earnings for “ other employees” were less in 1930
than in 1928.
.
.
Average full-time hours per week in the various occupations in
the industry ranged, in 1928, from 55.2 for resaw sawyers, trimmer
loaders, and graders to 57.8 for yardmen, and in 1930 from 55 for
tallymen to 58.4 for yardmen. The averages for wage earners in all
occupations combined were 56.6 in 1928 and 56.5 in 1930.
https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
[9521
179
W AG ES AND HO UES OF LABO R
Average earnings per hour in the various occupations ranged, in
1928, from 29.3 cents for yardmen to 88.7 cents for head band sawyears; in 1930 these same two occupations again represented the
two extremes, their earnings being 24.2 and 88.6 cents, respectively.
The averages for all wage earners in all occupations combined were
37.1 cents in 1928 and 35.9 cents in 1930.
As regards average full-time earnings, those of yardmen were the
lowest and those of head band sawyers the highest in both years,
being $16.94 and $50.29 respectively, in 1928, and $14.13 and $49.53
in 1930. The averages for all wage earners in all occupations com
bined were $21 in 1928, and $20.28 in 1930.
T a b l e 2 .— AVER A G E H OURS A N D E A R N IN G S IN SAW M ILLS, 1928 A N D 1930, BY
OCCUPATIONS
Occupation
Pondmen (including boommen
and slipmen)............. __ _ _ _ _ _ _
Yardmen, log___ _ _ ____
____
Sawyers, head, band_________ _„_
Sawyers, head, circular __ _ _____
Doggers. _____ _____ _
___ __
_ __
Setters.
__ _______ _
Saw tailers (on head saws) __ _
Sawyers, gang__ __
_______ _
Sawyers, resaw _
_____
Edgermen___________ _______
Edger tailers _ ___ ______
Transfer men
______
___
Trimmer loaders____
_____
Trimmer operators__________ ____
Off-bearers (except on head saw) ___
Graders,__ _____________________
Sorters
_________ __
Truckers._ ___________ ___ _____
Stackers_______________ ___. ___
Machine feeders, planers
______
Machine feeders, saws __ ______
Tallym en. _ _ _____
______
Millwrights______________ _______
Laborers. _ . _ __ ________
Other employees______________ _
Total
_ ________
Number
of wage Average full Average earn Average full
of estab Number
time hours ings per hour time earnings
earners
lishments
per week
per week
1928 1930
1928
1930
1928
1930
248 246
86
96
288 286
45
50
281 271
313 322
305 323
76
72
173 163
318 323
272 308
172 177
216 199
318 308
208 195
292 307
274 284
293 310
275 285
240 252
<*> 270
195 218
263 285
314 324
314 319
1,344
283
668
58
961
742
738
121
346
923
708
708
630
585
860
1,562
4,138
3,137
4,317
1,782
0)
680
701
22,026
9,971
1,338
337
597
59
749
684
668
96
307
804
688
675
518
518
615
2,110
3,778
3,010
4,663
1,338
1,583
743
678
16, 744
7, 651
56.9
57.8
56.7
57.6
57.6
56.5
56.4
56. 1
55. 2
56.7
56.7
55. 5
55. 2
55.8
55.9
55. 2
55.5
57.3
57.5
55.7
0)
55.3
56.0
56.9
56.3
56.9 $0. 357 $0. 344 $20. 31 $19. 57
58.4
.293
.242 16.94 14.13
55.9
.887
.886 50.29 49.53
58.0
.740
.666 42. 62 38. 63
57.9
.335
.306 19. 30 17.72
56.5
.468
.451 26. 44 25.48
56.2
.355
.336 20.02 18.88
56.4
.533
.506 29. 90 28.54
55.7
.475
.460 26. 22 25.62
56.4
.470
.461 26. 65 26.00
56.5
.319
.301 18. 09 17. 01
55.2
.341
.344 18.93 18.99
55.8
.379
.366 20.92 20.42
55.8
.429
.398 23.94 22.21
55.8
.317
.315 17.72 17.58
55.2
.503
.474 27. 77 26.16
55.3
.357
.344 19.81 19.02
56.8
.323
.307 18. 51 17. 44
57.2
.371
.364 21.33 20.82
55.5
.373
.365 20.78 20.26
56.8
.314
17.84
0)
(0
.451
55.0
.447 24. 94 24. 59
55.6
.611
.593 34. 22 32.97
56.6
. 291 17.24 16.47
.303
.438
.418 24. 66 23.83
57.0
319
58,007
50,951
56.6
56.5
324
1928
.371
1930
.359
1928
21.00
1930
20.28
1 Included in “ Other employees.”
Hours and Earnings, 1928 a nd 1930, by State
T a b l e 3 shows the average hours and earnings by States in 1928
and 1930.
In Alabama average full-time hours per week increased from 60.5 in
1928 to 60.8 in 1930, but in the same period earnings per hour de
creased from 24.3 to 21.8 cents, while average full-time earnings per
week decreased from $14.70 to $13.25.
Between 1928 and 1930 average earnings per hour decreased in 15
and increased in 7 of the 22 States included in the studies of the
industry in these years.
Average full-time hours per week in 1928 ranged in various States
from 48 to 61.3 and in 1930 from 48.1 to 61.3. Average earnings per
https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
[953]
180
MONTHLY LABOR R EV IEW
hour in 1928 ranged from 22.7 to 56.6 cents and in 1930 from 21.8 to
57.5 cents, while average full-time earnings per week in 1928 ranged
from $13.67 to $28.61 and in 1930 from $12.64 to $29.11.
T able 3 —A V ER A G E HOURS A N D
E A R N IN G S IN
STATES
SAW M ILLS, 1928 A N D
Number of Number of wage Average full
establish
time hours per
earners
ments
week
State
1928
1930
A labam a_____ ______
Arkansas ______ _ ___
California- _ - Florida _____________
Georgia.. ---------- -----.
Idaho - ______
Kentucky---------Louisiana_____________
M aine______ - -----------Michigan. _ _________Minnesota__________
M ississippi,
M on tan a_____
North Carolina _
Oregon__________ __
South Carolina ______
Tennessee... _ ______
Texas_____ - ______
Virginia _
--- ____
Washington West Virginia. ______
Wisconsin_________ _
21
15
14
12
19
5
9
18
12
23
4
16
5
23
14
10
20
11
18
21
10
19
T otal. _________
319
1928
1930
1928
28
15
14
12
29
5
9
19
11
14
4
20
5
32
15
8
17
11
9
21
9
17
3, 747
4, 250
3,496
2, 321
1,813
1, 769
435
5,214
732
2, 381
1, 860
4, 835
1,142
2, 030
4, 362
1,962
1,646
2, 502
850
7, 283
828
2, 549
3, 760
3, 569
2, 650
2,191
2, 107
1,205
500
4, 732
515
1,858
794
4, 405
702
2, 458
3,837
1, 920
994
2, 350
887
6, 398
903
2, 216
60.5
59. 2
56. 1
61.3
59.3
48.0
57. 2
59.4
58.9
59.0
60.4
59. 6
50. 7
60. 2
48.4
60.2
58. 2
58.3
59.7
48. 1
60. 1
59.6
324
58,007
50, 951
56.6
1930
Average earn
ings per hour
1930, BY
Average full
time earnings
per week
1928
1930
1928
60.8
58. 5
53. 7
61.3
58.0
48. 1
57. 3
60.0
59.2
58.3
60.3
59. 7
52.0
59.0
48.6
60. 1
56.8
58.7
59.9
48. 1
59.0
59. 1
$0. 243
.303
.510
.261
.244
.547
.349
.286
.354
.387
.409
.290
.488
.260
.566
.227
.320
. 299
.295
.552
.409
.363
$0. 218
.301
.542
.236
.218
.575
.341
.287
.352
.380
.413
. 282
.504
. 222
.573
. 225
.315
.296
.259
.549
.430
.362
$14. 70
17. 94
28. 61
16. 00
14. 47
26.-26
19. 96
16. 99
20. 85
22.83
24. 70
17. 28
24. 74
15. 65
27. 39
13. 67
18. 62
17. 43
17. 61
26. 55
24. 58
21. 63
$13. 25
17. 61
29.11
14. 47
12. 64
27. 66
19. 54
17. 22
20.84
22.15
24. 90
16. 84
26. 21
13.10
27. 85
13. 52
17. 89
17. 38
15. 51
26. 41
25. 37
21.39
56.5
.371
.359
21.00
20. 28
1930
Hours and Earnings, 1930, by Occupation and State
T h e data in Table 4 are limited to the wage earners in six of the
representative occupations in the industry, and illustrate the varia
tions of hours and earnings of the wage earners in all occupations
in the industry.
Average full-time hours per week for head band sawyers ranged in
the various States from 48 to 60.4 and for all States combined averaged
55.9. By States, average earnings per hour ranged from 66.5 cents
to $1,188 and for all States combined averaged 88.6 cents. Average
full-time earnings per week ranged by States from $39.23 to $57.02,
and for all States combined averaged $49.53.
https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
[954]
181
WAGES AND HOURS OF LABOR
T a b l e 4 .— A VERAGE HOURS A N D E A R N IN G S IN SIX R E P R E SE N T A T IV E OCCU
PA TIO N S, 1930, B Y STATES
Number Number Average
Average
Average full-time
of estab of wage full-time earnings
lish
hours
per
earnings
earners
per hour per week
ments
week
Occupation and State
Sawyers, head, band :
-----...............
Alabama____
Arkansas................... .................................... California________- ........................
- Florida------------------ ----------------------------- -----Georgia----- ------------------ ---------------------------Idaho---------------- ---------------------------------------Kentucky------------- ----------------------------- -------Louisiana . . .
.. --M aine-. M ichigan.. . . . . _ _ _________ ____ __ . Minnesota__
.
_ ...
----M ississip p i____
------ -------------- . --------Montana
- - ___ . ---- ---North Carolina____ . . . . . . . _____
_
Oregon_________________________________ ____
South Carolina------ . -_ . _________ . __ -Tennessee.
----------- _ . . . -------------- -----Texas___ _____ ____ _____ . .
------- ---. . - - . ---- _ _ ------ . - . . .
Virginia. ____
Washington.
. . . . _____________ ________
West V irg in ia ... _________ _____
. . . -----Wisconsin_____ _________. . . ____ _ ._.
Total____________ _______________________
Doggers:
. ..
Alabama-------------- ------- ---------- -----Arkansas.. ------- . . . ------ ---------------- -- ..
California ----------- ----------------- . --------- ..
Florida.
. ------- -- . . . . . ---- ------- . . .
Georgia---------------------- -------------------------------Idaho---------------- ---------------------------------------Kentucky----------- _ -----------------------------------L ouisiana---------- ---------------------------------------Maine______________________________________
Michigan . .
. . ------------------------------ -----M innesota.. .
------------------ --------------- -M ississippi_______________________________ ..
M ontana___. . . . .
.
..
. . ____
North Carolina_________________ _____ _ . . .
Oregon____. -----------------------------------------------South C arolina.. .
. . ...
Tennessee----------------------------------------------------Texas________ . . . . . . . . . . ------ -- ------- . . .
Virginia . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
---- . . .
W ashington.. . . . .
West V irginia.______ _____ _________ ______
Wisconsin---------- ---------------- --------- --------- _
23
15
14
10
22
5
8
16
7
14
3
19
5
21
15
7
17
11
9
19
9
17
34
33
46
20
22
19
10
51
10
27
13
46
13
25
51
14
23
33
14
48
17
28
57.0
58.1
53.3
54.0
57.6
48.0
57.5
60.4
58.9
58.5
60.0
57.9
52.2
59.6
48.9
60.0
56.5
58.8
59.6
48.0
58.3
59.2
$0. 803
.813
1.044
.966
.743
. 944
.777
. 879
.666
.757
.877
.860
.968
.665
1. 135
.794
.872
.841
.666
1. 188
.819
.748
$45. 77
47. 24
55.65
52.16
42. 80
45. 33
44. 68
53. 09
39. 23
44.28
52. 62
49. 79
50. 53
39.63
55. 50
47. 64
49.27
49.45
39. 69
57.02
47. 75
44.28
286
597
55.9
.886
49. 53
27
14
6
10
27
3
9
15
9
13
3
11
1
31
10
6
17
7
9
17
9
17
84
62
11
33
54
10
16
72
16
29
20
28
53
26
22
34
43
22
58
18
34
61.2
58.4
54.5
61.5
58.1
48.0
57.2
60.6
59.3
59.0
60.0
60.0
C) .
59.1
48.9
60.0
56.8
58.5
59.8
48.1
58.4
59. 1
.211
.273
.440
. 196
. 185
.580
.333
.271
.327
. 390
. 515
.267
(>)
. 221
.511
.225
.315
. 292
.247
.491
.410
.390
12.91
15. 94
23.98
12.05
10. 75
27. 84
19. 05
16. 42
19. 39
23.01
30. 90
16.02
0
13.06
24. 99
13. 50
17.89
17. 08
14. 77
23. 62
23.94
23.05
(')
Total------- -------------------------------------------------
271
749
57.9
.306
17.72
Setters:
Alabama. ________ _____ ________ _______
A rkansas_____ . -------------------- --------------_.
. . .
California______
Florida.. ______ _______________________ ____
Georgia---- ------- -- ------ . . . . .
---- . ..
Idaho________ __________________ ______
Kentucky----------- -------- . . . ------. . .
-- ---Louisiana------ --------------------------- ---------- -----Maine____ . . .
_
..............
M ichigan------- . . . _ . . . __________ ______
Minnesota________________ ________________
M ississippi____ . ___________ . . . ------------- .
Montana-------------------- --------- . ____________
North Carolina______________ ______ _______
Oregon_______ . __________________________
South Carolina.. . . . . ............
. ____ . . .
. ................................
Tennessee _______
Texas______________________ ____ ________ . . .
Virginia______________ . . . ---- -- . ----------- .
Washington___
West Virginia. . . . . . . . . .
_____________ __
Wisconsin___________________________________
28
15
14
12
28
5
9
19
11
14
3
20
5
32
15
8
17
11
9
21
9
17
46
31
48
20
30
18
11
GO
19
28
13
54
20
38
59
20
21
33
14
52
19
30
61.0
58.3
52.8
61.0
58.0
48.0
56.4
59.9
59. 1
58.5
60.0
59.4
51.6
58.6
48.8
60.0
56. 5
58.7
59.6
48.0
58.5
59.2
.301
.376
.648
.339
.291
.660
.412
.413
.415
.452
.538
.401
.591
.281
.670
.288
.412
.376
.332
.623
.470
.447
18. 36
21. 92
34. 21
20. 68
16. 88
31. 68
23.24
24. 74
24 53
23. 44
32. 28
23.82
30.48
16.47
32. 70
17.28
23.28
22. 07
19. 79
29. 90
27. 50
26.46
322
684
56.5
.451
25. 48
Total________ . . . . ___________ __________
1 Data included in total.
https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
[955]
182
T
M O N T H L Y L A B O R R E V IE W
a b le
4 .—
A V ER A G E HOURS A N D E A R N IN G S IN SIX R E P R E SE N T A T IV E OCCU
PA TIO N S, 1930, B Y ST A T ES—Continued
Average
Average
Number
full-time Average full-time
of estab Number
of wage hours per earnings earnings
lish
per hour per week
earners
week
ments
Occupation and State
v tailers on head saw:
___________________
Alabama
Arkansas
_ ____________________________
California
__ ____ ________ - -- Florida
______
-- - -- Georgia
--- --- ------ ----------------- -Trjahn
■ _ _ _ ___________________ —
TCenf.nnky
_______ _ -------------- —
Louisiana
-- - ---------- -----------Mainp.
__ __ _______ ____
Michigan _ _ _____ - - - -- - -- -- -Minnesota. ____ ___ _____ _
___ - -- Mississippi
- __ - ___ - __________ Montana
-__ - - -- —
North Carolina _
__ __ __________ _______
Oregon
__ __
____—
South Carolina
_______ ___ _ - Tpnnessee
___
__ ___ _______ _______
Texas
______ __ - -- ------- —
________________ - —
Virginia
Washington _ ___ _ ------ -- _ -----West Virginia
__ _ _ ______
- —
Wisconsin-------------------------------------------- --------
28
15
14
12
29
5
9
19
11
14
3
20
5
32
15
8
17
11
9
21
9
17
42
41
48
22
30
20
10
52
15
27
14
41
12
40
58
17
20
33
14
66
16
30
60.8
58.3
52.9
60.9
58.0
48.0
56.5
60 0
58.9
58.7
60.0
59.3
52.0
58.7
48.9
60.0
56.6
58.5
59.6
48.0
58. 2
59.2
$0.195
.261
.469
.203
. 185
.464
.322
.259
.353
.366
.387
. 254
.497
.221
.521
.223
.292
.261
. 265
.529
.382
.349
$11.86
15.22
24. 81
12. 36
10.73
22.27
18.19
15.54
20 79
21.48
23.22
15.06
25.84
12.97
25.48
13. 38
16.53
15.27
15. 79
25.39
22.23
20.66
Total_______________________________ ______
323
668
56.2
.336
18.88
germen:
Alabama
_ ______ ___ ___ —
.Arkansas
- -- _________ _______ —
California
- __- ___ ________ - -- - Florida
- - ---—
Georgia
--__
______
Tdabo
__
- ______-------- -- -TCent-neky
________ ____ ____ — - Ton isi ana
_ _
-------------Maine
____ ___
Michigan ______ _
_
—
Minnesota
_____ ___ ___ - -Mississippi
-- -- -- ________ -- ---------------- -TVTnotane.
_ __ _
North Carolina
_ _ _ _ __ _____
Oregon
_
_ ______ —
South Carolina
_ _ _
_ _
_ —
Tennessee
__ _ _ __ -- -- - - ---------- -Texas
--- -------- -Virginia
_____ _________ ________ -Washington
_ _ _ __ _____ - -- -------West Virginia
__- _____
_________
Wisconsin-----------------------------------------------
28
15
14
12
29
5
9
19
10
14
4
20
5
32
15
8
17
11
9
21
9
17
56
40
52
31
30
26
10
87
14
28
13
80
13
37
66
21
21
37
14
83
16
29
61.1
57.9
52.6
61.2
57.9
48.0
56.5
60.2
58.8
58.8
60.0
59.1
52.2
58.7
49.0
60.0
56.9
59.0
59.6
48.2
58.2
59.1
.304
.393
.691
.371
.325
.628
.458
.361
.429
.441
. 501
.368
.586
.267
.739
. 335
.412
.383
.318
.679
.507
.451
18. 57
22. 75
36. 35
22.71
18. 82
30.14
25.88
21.73
25.23
25.93
30.06
21. 75
30. 57
15. 67
36. 21
20.10
23.44
22.60
18. 95
32.73
29.51
26.65
323
804
56.4
.461
26.00
28
15
14
12
29
5
9
19
11
14
4
20
5
32
15
8
17
11
9
21
9
17
1,224
1,252
736
904
844
326
195
1,479
135
502
292
1,481
209
794
1,108
617
413
611
380
2,145
321
776
60.6
58.6
53.5
61.7
57.9
48.0
57.8
60.0
59.1
58.2
60.0
59.6
51.5
59.1
48.4
60.0
57.1
58.7
59.9
48.1
58.9
58.9
.179
.238
.436
.178
. 154
.507
.271
.229
.312
.324
.365
.224
.433
.179
.490
. 162
.253
.242
.209
.473
.348
.310
10.85
13.95
23. 33
10.98
8.92
24. 34
15.66
13.74
18.44
18.86
21.90
13. 35
22. 30
10.58
23. 72
9. 72
14. 45
14. 21
12. 52
22.75
20. 50
18.26
324
16, 744
56.6
.291
16.47
Total_____________________________________
iborers:
Ala ham a.
_
_ ___- - -- ---------Arkansas
_____ _ _ ------- ------ ----California
- ___ - __ — -- -- -------Florida
________ ____ - -- - - - —
Georgia
____ ______ __________ - —
Idaho
_
___
- ----------"fTent.neky
______
___- -- ---------Louisiana
______ __ _ ----------Maine
__ _ _
_ _ - - - -------------Michigan
____ _
_ _
_ ----------Minnesota
________ __ _ — --------Mississippi
__ ____ _ _ -- - ---------- —
Montana
_ ___
__- _ _ ------North Carolina
_____
_________ __
Oregon
_ _ ______ ____ __________
South Carolina
____ __________ __- —
Tennessee
____ _______ _____
Texas
---- --- --------- ------------Virginia
__ __ _ _ _ _ _____
Washington
____________ _____
West Virginia
_______________ __ ____
Wisconsin__________________________________
Total
https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
__ ____________ ______
[956]
183
WAGES AND HOURS OF LABOR
R e c e n t C h a n g e s in W a g es a n d H o u rs o f L abor
NFORMATION received by the bureau regarding recent wage
changes is presented below in two distinct groups: Part 1 relates
to manufacturing establishments that report monthly figures regard
ing volume of employment, while part 2 presents data obtained from
new trade agreements and other miscellaneous sources. Although
the effort is made, it is not always possible to avoid duplication of data
as between parts 1 and 2.
I
Part 1. Wage Changes in Manufacturing Industries
T h r e e establishments in three manufacturing industries re
ported wage-rate increases during the month ending February
15. These increases, averaging 5.4 per cent, affected 209 employees,
or 65 per cent of all employees in the establishments concerned.
Two hundred and twenty-eight establishments in 43 industries
reported wage-rate decreases during the same period. These decreases,
averaging 10.3 per cent, affected 39,096 employees, or 84 per cent of
all employees in the establishments concerned.
Fifty-five of the wage-rate decreases were reported by establish
ments in the textile group of industries; 35 decreases were in iron and
steel industries; 55 decreases were in lumber industries.
WAGE C H ANGES O C CURRING B E T W E E N JA N U A R Y 15 A N D F E B R U A R Y 15, 1931
Per cent of in
crease or de
crease in wage
rate
Establishments
Industry
Total
number
report
ing
Employees affected
Per cent of em
ployees
Number
report
ing in
crease or
decrease
in wage
rates
Range
Aver
age
Total
In estab
number lishments
reporting
increase or
decrease in
wage rates
In all
estab
lish
ments
report
ing
In c r e a s e s
Printing, book and job
_____
Fertilizers____ _ _____________
G lass... _______ _ ________
555
207
140
2.0
5.0
6.0
1
1
1
2.0
5.0
6.0
29
15
165
49
15
100
0)
0
8.4
10.6
10.0
10.0
10.0
11.6
9.4
8.0
11.4
10.0
10.0
9.9
25.0
138
109
7
111
89
6,036
5,368
532
3,317
2,700
667
448
169
74
60
100
93
58
86
99
71
99
90
100
73
0
0
(9
1
D ecreases
Slaughtering and meat packing..
Confectionery_________________
Ice cream . _____ __________
Flour_________________________
Baking______________ _______
Cotton goods_______ _________
Hosiery and knit goods.________
Silk goods
. _______________
Woolen and worsted goods_____
Carpets and rugs______________
Dyeing and finishing textiles___
Clothing, men’s __ ____ _____
Shirts and collars______________
208
329
336
401
706
452
354
262
174
28
117
333
113
3
3
1
4
6
21
9
5
13
1
2
2
1
5. 0-10. 0
10. 0-15. 0
10.0
10.0
10.0
7. 5-25. 0
7. 0-20. 0
2. 0-10. 0
10. 0-12. 5
10.0
10.0
9. 0-10. 0
25.0
1 Less than one-half of 1 per cent.
https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
[957]
84
0
1
4
6
1
6
16
2
1
1
184
MONTHLY LABOR REVIEW
W AGE C H A N G ES OCC U R R IN G B E T W E E N JA N U A R Y 15 A N D F E B R U A R Y 15, 1931—Con.
Per cent of in
crease or de
crease in wage
rate
Establishments
Industry
Total
number
report
ing
Employees affected
Per cent of em
ployees
Number
report
ing in
crease or
decrease
in wage
rates
Range
Aver
age
In estab
Total
number lishments
reporting
increase or
decrease in
wage rates
In all
estab
lish
ments
report
ing
D eere ise s
M illinery and lace goods----------Iron and steel_________________
Structural-ironwork.. ------- -Foundry and machine-shop
products.. ------ ---------------- .
Machine tools_______________
Steam fittings and steam and
hot-water heating apparatus.__
Stoves------ -------------------------Lumber, sawmills___ __________
Lumber, mill work_____
. .
Furniture_____________
Leather.
----------- . Boots and shoes____ _ .
_ _
Paper and p u l p _______ _____ _
Paper boxes.. . _ . . . ----------Printing, book and job____ . .
Printing, newspapers.. ----------Chemicals
___________ ______
Fertilizers.*..
_______________
Brick, tile, and terra cotta
Pottery. . _ ------------------------Glass___ _ . . ----------------- .
Stamped and enameled ware----Brass, bronze, and copper prod
ucts-------------------. --------Chewing and smoking tobacco
and snuff. . . ---------- . ----Cigars and cigarettes ______ . . .
Pianos and organs_______ _____
Automobile tires and inner tubes.
Jew elry... . ________ _______
Paint and varnish___ __________
Rubber goods, other than boots,
shoes, tires, and inner tubes__
116
199
176
1
3
6
10.0
5. 0- 7. 5
5. 0-20. 0
10.0
6.8
10.0
30
555
765
73
85
74
1,077
146
19
1
5. 0-15. 0
10.0
10.6
10.0
1,293
42
62
100
106
131
648
340
458
131
298
218
309
555
422
162
207
689
115
140
77
4
2
29
9
17
6
5
4
10
5
5
1
3
3
1
2
3
10. 0-18. 2
9. 0-12. 5
6. 0-17. 5
10. 0-16. 0
3. 0-20. 0
5. 0-11. 0
8. 0-12. 0
8. 0-10. 0
10.0
5.0-20. 0
6. 0-17. 5
10.0
5. 0-16. 7
10.0-11.0
10.0
5. 0-25. 0
10.0
10.2
10.5
11.4
10.8
10.1
9.6
10.0
9.8
10.0
7.2
10.7
10.0
6.7
10.1
10.0
10.8
10.0
563
332
3, 908
300
860
793
2,147
1,288
1, 777
644
521
7
125
251
40
179
554
29
100
99
69
67
100
93
95
88
90
78
100
89
100
75
80
80
156
3
5.0
5.0
45
47
27
190
68
35
152
233
1
6
1
1
2
3
18.0
5. 0-10. 0
10.0
10.0
10.0
10.0
18.0
8.8
10.0
10.0
10.0
10.0
60
1, 750
166
24
232
87
21
69
91
55
85
67
71
1
10.0
10.0
67
100
(0
0)
3
1
0)
2
2
4
1
1
3
2
2
8
1
1
(‘)
(')
1
1
1
3
0)
1
4
3
(!)
2
1
1
1 Less than one-half of 1 per cent.
Part 2. Wage Changes Reported by Trade-Unions since December, 1930
W age and hour changes reported by trade-unions, and in a few
instances received from other sources, are given in the table following.
Since last month changes occurring since December have been reported
for 14,451 workers, 12,687 of whom were reported to have adopted
the 5-day week. Of the changes in wages shown, 1,676 workers
received reductions, nearly 1,000 of these being in the building trades.
Wage increases in building trades were quite irregular in amount,
ranging from 2% cents per hour to 15 cents per hour. Among the
printing trades, with one exception, the increase amounted to $1 per
week.
https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
[958]
185
WAGES AND HOURS OF LABOR
R E C E N T U N IO N W AGE C HANGES, BY IN D U S T R Y , OCC U PA TIO N , A N D LOCALITY
D E C E M B E R , 1930, TO M A RC H , 1931
Hours per week
Rate of wages
Industry, occupation, and locality
jjate oi
change
Before
change
P e r w eek
Barbers, Schenectady, N . Y.___---------------------Building trades:
Bricklayers, masons, and plasterers—
Ann Arbor, Howell, Y psilanti, Mich.,
and v icinity________________________
Fort Worth, Tex., and vicinity------------State of Ohio________ ________________
Carpenters—
Monongahela Valley, P a--------- - ---------Syracuse, N . Y ----------------------------------Electrical workers, Kansas City, M o .. ------Hod carriers and laborers—
Klamath Falls, Oreg., laborers, paving
and g ra d in g ..------ ------- ------------------Syracuse, N . Y ., building laborers---------Plasterers—
Jackson, M is s ..--------------------------------Kansas City, M o-------------------------------Monongahela Valley, P a--------------------Muskegon, M ich------------------------------Muskegon Heights, M ich--------------- ----North Muskegon, M ich----------------------Syracuse, and Onondaga County, N .Y ...
Plumbers and steamfitters—
Alhambra, Pasadena, and South Pasa
dena, Calif______________ __________Campbell and Kenton Counties, K y -----Hamilton County, Ohio-----------------Long Beach, Calif____________________
Clothing: Shoe workers, Haverhill, Mass---------M etal trades: Stove mounters and pattern men,
Belleville, 111....................... ......................................
Miners: Coal miners, Ronda, W. V a---------------Printing trades:
Compositors—
Bismarck, N . D ak., newspaper------------Chester and Media, Pa., job work---Kansas City, M o., newspaper-------------Lincoln, 111.—
Job work_______ '— ............................
Newspaper............................. ................
Orange, N . J., and vicinity—
Job work, day........................................
Job work night----------------------------Spokane, Wash.—
Newspaper, day-------------- ------------Newspaper, night-------- ------ ---------Yonkers, N . Y . —
Job work------------------------------------Newspaper---------------------------------Machine operators, Kansas City, M o--------Mailers, N ew York, N . Y -------------------------
Feb.
9
1 $26.00
P er hour
P e r w eek
2 $26.00
(3)
(3)
P er hour
Feb. 1
Jan. 2
-_.do - -
$1. 57Y i
1.62y 2
1.62 Y t
$1. 50
1.62 Y t
1. 62142
40
44
44
40
40
40
Alar. 1
Jan. 1
Mar. 1
1. 25
1.20
1. 37H
1. 00
1.32
1. 50
44
44
40
40
40
40
Feb.
Jan.
1
1
.56 M
.75
.59
• 82^
48
44
48
40
Feb.
Alar.
Feb.
Dec.
_ .do.
...d o .
Jan.
1
1
1
2
1.50
1.50
162 y2
1.50
1.50
1 50
1. 50
1.25
1. 62K
1. 25
1.00
1.00
1.00
1.65
44
40
40
40
40
40
44
44
40
40
40
40
40
40
Dec.
Alar.
__.do.
Jan.
Jan.
5
1
5
21
1.12^
1.40
1.40
1. 25
1.12H
1.46 M
1. 46M
1. 25
44
44
44
44
40
40
40
40
45
Jan.
1
1
(4)
. 83-1.00
(•)
«48
48
48
48
44
44
47
44
40
38. 00-40. 00
38. 00-40. 00
44
44
44
44
57.00
60.00
44
40
44
40
45
45
8 40
« 40
44
44
44
44
44
44
40
44
P er day
$4. 20-4. 68
$3. 00-4. 00
P e r w eek
P er w eek
-_.do.
.do.
Jan. 9
$46. 56
30. 80-35. 00
45. 00
$46. 56
35. 00-38.00
Jan. 1
__.do.
37. 00-39. 00
37.00-39. 00
__.do.
_-.do. - - -
56.00
59.00
Feb. 1
__.do.
46.50
49.50
Jan. 1
.-.d o .
Jan. 9
Jan. 1
54. 00
54. 00
47. 25
45. 00
.-.d o .
[959]
(4)
48
. 73-. 87M
P er day
1 And 50 per cent of receipts over $32.
2 And 50 per cent of receipts over $36.
3 5^-day week; hours irregular, average
for full day.
4 N ot reported.
5 9 per cent reduction.
3 40-hour week June 15 to Sept. 15.
7 No change in hourly rate.
_
8 Temporary relief measure running 90 days, Feb. 1 to M ay 1,1931.
https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
After change Before After
change change
(7)
(7)
(7)
55. 00
55.00
(7)
46. 00
186
MONTHLY LABOR R EV IEW
F a r m W a g e a n d L ab or S it u a t io n o n J a n u a r y 1, 1931
HE index number of the general level of farm wages on January
1, 1931, was lower than on any other date for which the United
States Department of Agriculture has compiled quarterly data on
farm wages; that is, since 1923. The accompanying table, reproduced
from Crops and Markets for February, 1931, published by that de
partment, shows farm wage rates and index numbers, by years, from
1910 to 1930, and quarterly from 1923 to January, 193i .
T
FA R M WAGE R A TES A N D IN D E X N U M B E R S, 1910-1931
Average yearly farm w age 1
Per month—
Year and month
With
board
1910
_____________________
1911
. . __ __________
______________________
1912
1913
__________________
___ -- - ______
1914
1915
_____ _______ _
1916
_____ -- - - -- - -------___ -_____ ____ _
1917
1918
_______________________
1919
______________________
1920
-- _______ ____________
1921
______________________
1922
---- - - - _____ 1923
-- - ________
— - ______
1924
____ ____ _____ - - - ...............
1925
-- - ___- _____ - -- -- -----------1926 ______ __________ - _______
1927
____ _________________ - 1928
-___ - ____ - - -- -- - -- -- 1929
_
_ ____ - _______ ____ -- 1930
- _________________________________
1923—January
- ________
_____ —
April
-- - - - - - - -- ____ July
_____ __ _
_ _ -------______
October
______
1924—January
_
__________ _ - — —
April
__
--- ------July
_________ _______ _____ _____
October
_ _
__
_ _ _
1925— January
______
___ _ - - ------------April _____ _ _ ____
- __ __
July
______ ______ ____ _______ ________
October
_ _ _ _ __
199.ft—January
_ _________ ____ _
April
_ _ _ ___ ____
_____
___
July
_______________________________
O cto b er__ _ _ _ _
__
—
—
1927—January _ _______ ___ ___
__ _ _ ----April
__ _
-- - _____
July
_______________________________
October
_
_
____
_ _ _ _ — __
1928—January
___ ______
____ ___ _ __
April
_ _ _ _ _ ____
______
July
_______________________________
1929—January
________ _ ____ _ April
_ - __ _ _ _ _
_ _ _ _ — __
July
__________ __________________
October _
_ _ _ _ _ _ —
1930—January ________ ------ ---------- ----------April
____ _____________ -- ---------July
- ____ ______________________ —
October
____ ___ - -- ______- -- ------- --1931 January
______________________ -- — —
$19. 58
19. 85
20.46
21.27
20. 90
21.08
23. 04
28. 64
35. 12
40. 14
47. 24
30. 25
29.31
33. 09
33.34
33.88
34.86
34. 58
34. 66
34. 74
31.14
27. 87
30. 90
34.64
34. 56
31. 55
33. 57
34.34
34. 38
31.07
33.86
34. 94
34.91
31.82
34. 38
36.10
36.00
32. 94
34. 53
35. 59
35. 68
32. 50
34.46
35. 39
35. 75
33.04
34. 68
36.08
35. 90
32. 29
33.83
33.47
31.23
28.03
Without
board
$28.04
28.33
29.14
30. 21
29. 72
29. 97
32. 58
40.19
49. 13
56. 77
65. 05
43.58
42.09
46.74
47.22
47.80
48.86
48. 63
48. 65
49.08
44. 59
40. 50
44.41
48. 61
48.42
45. 53
47. 38
48.02
48.46
45.04
47.40
48. 55
48. 99
46.26
48. 40
49.89
50.10
47.07
48.47
49. 52
49. 77
46. 75
48.44
49.32
49. 60
47.24
49.00
50. 53
50.00
46.80
47.81
47.24
44.28
39.04
Index
numbers
of farm
wages
(19101914=100)
Without
board
Per day—
With
board
$1.07
1.07
1.12
1.15
1.11
1.12
1.24
1.56
2.05
2. 44
2.84
1. 66
1.64
1.91
1.88
1.89
1.91
1.90
1.88
1.88
1.65
1. 16
1.55
1.84
2.02
1. 79
1. 77
1.87
1.93
1.74
1. 77
1.89
1. 95
1.76
1.78
1. 91
1.97
1. 79
1.78
1.89
1.96
1.76
1.78
1.84
1.96
1.78
1.79
1.89
1. 92
1.73
1. 72
1.72
1.61
1.38
$1.40
1.40
1.44
1.48
1.44
1.45
1.60
2.00
2. 61
3.10
3. 56
2.17
2.14
2.45
2.44
2.46
2.48
2.46
2.43
2.42
2.16
1.97
2.09
2.44
2.58
2. 38
2. 34
2.43
2. 51
2.31
2. 33
2.44
2. 53
2. 33
2. 35
2.47
2. 55
2. 36
2. 37
2. 44
2.51
2.34
2.34
2. 39
2. 51
2. 34
2.34
2.43
2.46
2. 27
227
2.23
2.12
1.87
97
97
101
104
101
102
112
140
176
203
239
150
146
166
166
168
171
170
169
170
152
137
148
169
174
159
163
168
171
156
164
170
173
159
166
174
176
162
166
172
175
161
166
170
175
162
167
173
174
159
162
160
150
129
i Yearly averages are from reports by crop reporters, giving average wages for the year in their localities,
except for 1924-1930, when the wage rates per month are a straight average of quarterly rates, April, July,
October of the current year, and January of the following year and the wage rates per day are a weighted
average of quarterly rates. April (weight 1), July (weight 5), October (weight 5), January ofth e following
year (weight 1).
'
https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
[960]
WAGES AND HOURS OF LABOR
187
The comments of the Department of Agriculture on the farm wage
and labor situation on January 1, 1931, as published in Crops and
Markets, are as follows:
A sharp increase in th e su p p ly of farm lab o r to g eth er w ith a fu rth e r decline in
th e dem and for farm w orkers forced th e index of th e general level of farm wages
for Ja n u a ry 1, 1931, to th e low est level on record fo r th a t d a te du rin g th e period
in w hich th e index has been com puted q u a rte rly (1923-1931). T h e w age index,
a t 129 p er c e n t of th e p re-w ar level on th e first of th e y ear, w as 21 p o in ts dow n
from O ctober 1, 1930, 30 po in ts u n d er a y ear ago, a n d 8 p o in ts below Ja n u a ry 1,
1923. T h e seasonal decline of 21 p o in ts from O ctober 1 to J a n u a ry 1 w as th e
largest recorded betw een th o se tw o d ates a n d com pared w ith a n av erage seasonal
decline of 13.9 p o in ts fo r th e corresponding period du rin g th e preceding five years.
D ay wages of farm w orkers n o t pro v id ed w ith b o ard averaged $1.87 for th e
co u n try as a whole on Ja n u a ry 1, while th e division averages ran g ed from $2.99
per day for th e N o rth A tla n tic S ta te s to $1.25 in th e S o u th C e n tra l D ivision.
S cattered rep o rts h av e been received in d icatin g th a t laborers a re willing to w ork
in m an y localities m erely fo r th e ir bed a n d board.
I t is n o t surprising, th erefore, t h a t wages p aid hired farm lab o r du rin g 1930
averaged low er th a n in a n y y ear since 1922. T h e w eighted average index of farm
wages for la s t y ear in d icated a level 152 p e r c e n t of p re-w ar com pared to 170
p er cent in 1929, a n d 146 p e r c e n t of pre-w ar in 1922.
T he supply of farm labor, as re p o rted b y crop correspondents, average 113.8
p er cen t of norm al on Ja n u a ry 1, com pared to 109.6 p er c en t a m o n th earlier,
105.9 p er ce n t on O ctober 1, 1930, a n d 96.7 p er cen t of n orm al a y e a r ago. T he
ad vance in th e supply h as been due to th e long co n tin u ed decline in in d u strial
em ploym ent. An index co m p u ted by th e B ureau of L abor S ta tistic s indicates
t h a t th e level of em plo y m en t in m an u factu rin g in d u stries w as 75.1 p er c e n t in
D ecem ber, 1930, com pared to 79.7 p e r c en t in S eptem ber of th e sam e y ear, 91.9
p er cen t in D ecem ber, 1929, a n d a m o n th ly average for 1926 w hich equaled
100 p er cent.
A lthough a large n u m b er of w orkers form erly em ployed in m a n u factu rin g in
dustries are now available for farm w ork, th e dem an d fo r farm lab o r is th e sm allest
in m an y years due to th e extrem ely low p revailing prices of fa rm pro d u cts. D e
m and w as rep o rted a t 66.6 p e r c en t of n o rm al on Ja n u a ry 1, com pared to 68.9
p er cen t a m o n th earlier, 75.2 p er c en t on O ctober 1, a n d 84.2 p e r c e n t of norm al
a y ear ago. T h e su pply of fa rm w orkers expressed as p er cen t of dem an d was
a b o u t 171 p er ce n t of n o rm al on Ja n u a ry 1 com pared to 159 p er c en t a m o n th
earlier, 141 p er c e n t on O ctober 1, 1930, a n d 115 p e r cen t of n orm al a y ear ago.
A b o litio n o f N ig h t E m p lo y m e n t o f W o m e n a n d M in o rs in
C o tto n -T e x tile in d u s t r y
U
NDER date of March 2, 1931, the Journal of Commerce (New
York) carries the following announcement:
T he C o tto n T extile In s titu te is able to announce to -d a y th a t it has secured an
agreem ent w ithin th e c o tto n m an u fa c tu rin g in d u stry w hereby th e p ractice of
em ploying w om en a n d m inors a t n ig h t will be discontinued, a n d beginning to -d ay
th e policy of o p erating p la n ts on d ay a n d n ig h t schedules, save in tim es of n atio n al
em ergency, w ill be grad u ally w iped o u t. M eanw hile th e policy of reg u latin g o u t
p u t to d em and will be co n tin u ed as a t p re se n t u n til i t becom es e v id e n t t h a t th e
abo lish m en t of n ig h t w ork will b ring a b o u t all th e reg u latio n t h a t will be necessary
u nder p re se n t tra d e conditions. T h e final driv e to secure th e percen tag e of sig
n a tu re s req u ired w as of th e m o st in ten siv e c h a ra c te r a n d w as successful in conse
quence of tra d e a n d public opinion being w orked in h arm o n y to bring th e change
about.
W a g e -P a y m e n t P la n s in C o n n e c t ic u t F a c to r ie s
A
STUDY of methods of wage payment in use in Connecticut
factories was made in December, 1929, by members of the
economics department of Yale University. The results of the study
40860°—31•13
https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
[9 6 1 ]
188
MONTHLY LABOR REV IEW
are given in an article in Factory and Industrial Management
(Chicago) for March, 1931.
The survey disclosed a definite trend toward the basing of wages
on output. Data furnished by 132 firms employing over 88,000
workers, or more than one-fourth of the total number of industrially
employed persons in the State, showed that 52 per cent of these
workers were paid on some kind of an output basis. Of the total,
37.5 per cent were paid piece rates and 14.5 per cent were working
under some form of incentive system, the remainder (48 per cent)
being on day rates. Straight time was the exclusive basis of pay
ment in only 13 plants. Of 104 plants replying to the question as to
the use of incentive plans, 25 reported an increase in number of
workers under such plans; 4, a decrease; and 75, no change. A large
percentage of the reporting plants used some method of time study
or job analysis in setting wage rates.
Table 1 shows the number and per cent of employees who were
working on piece or day rates or under incentive systems in the
industries represented by the 132 firms mentioned above:
T
able
1 .—
N U M B E R A N D P E R C E N T OF E M P L O Y E E S IN EA CH IN D U S T R Y W ORKING
ON PIE C E OR D A Y R A TE S OR IN C E N T IV E SY STEM S
Per cent of employees working on—
Industry
of
Number of Number
establish
workers
ments
Piece rates
Bonus or
other
incentive
systems
Light metal.
Textiles___
Foundry__
Machinery.
Rubber____
Paper_____
Tobacco___
U ats______
65, 400
9,000
2,400
4,000
4, 200
2,400
200
900
80
20
6
9
3
7
2
5
36.2
4G.0
20.1
24.2
73.6
7.7
22.2
70.6
16.8
9.0
13.7
9.6
Total.
88, 500
132
37.5
14.5
6.5
53.4
D ay rates
47.0
45.0
66.2
66.2
26.4
85.8
24.4
29.4
48.0
The number and per cent of employees and the number of plants
working under specified incentive systems are given in Table 2:
T
a ble
3.—N U M B E R A N D P E R C E N T OF E M P L O Y E E S A N D N U M B E R OF PL A N T S
W OR K IN G U N D E R SP E C IF IE D IN C E N T IV E SY STEM S
Employees
System of payment
Number
_ __ ___
13ptl pail x point
_ __________ ____
Emerson bonus
_
_____
_
_
—
T'flqk' ami bonus (details not given)
_
_ _
__
Time premium
_ _
---Group systems
________
__
C L. Stevens point
..
~
Parkbyirst differential bonus
___
_ _
____
Keys-Weaver system
Sherman Co. system
General Electrie Co
George S. May
Miscellaneous___ ____ - ------ ----------------------------Total
- ___- ___
______ -- -- — ----iN o t the sum of the items, but as given in article under review..
https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
1962]
3. 431
2,931
2,230
2,278
236
418
385
248
142
134
93
280
12,806
Per cent
of total
26.8
22.9
17.4
17.8
1.8
3.3
3.0
2.0
1.1
1.0
.7
2. 2
100.0
Number of
plants
9
3
14
7
5
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
i 49
Wag
es and
h o ur s
V a c a tio n s in M a n u fa c tu r in g
of labor
189
I n d u s tr ie s in N ew Y ork S t a t e
HE New York Bureau of Women in Industry conducted a study
m 1925 of vacation policies in manufacturing industries through
out New York State. At that time it was found that while almost all
the plants covered in the investigation granted vacations with pay to
office workers, and many of them to foremen, the practice of giving
vacations to production workers had a much more limited application^
In addition to the fact that fewer plants gave vacation to the wage
eameis, it was also true that the length of such vacations when given
was usually shorter and the period of service required to earn a vaca
tion ordinarily considerably longer than that required of other
workers. In order to determine whether, in the intervening five
years, any marked change had been made in the vacation policies of
firms in the State, a similar study was made by the New York bureau
in the summer of 1930.1
In the 1930 study the vacation policies of 1,050 plants were studied.
It was found that in 661 cases the same policy was in effect as in 1925,
and that of that number 151 firms had extended the vacations with
pay to include production workers. In 1930, 106 other plants had
also extended the practice of giving paid vacations to their production
workers; in 1925, 102 of these plants had given vacations only to office
woikers and. foremen, and 4 plants which gave a vacation to factory
workers in 1930 had given no vacations at the time of the previous
study. Decided changes in the scope of the vacation policies had
taken place, since of the plants which gave vacations only to office
workers in 1930 as many as 35 per cent had given vacations to foremen
also in 1925, while on the other hand 18 per cent of the plants in which
foremen received vacations in 1930 had included only office workers
in the earlier year and an additional 5 per cent had given no vacations
at all at that time. Seventeen of the 36 plants having no vacation
policy in 1930 had given vacations to one or all of the three groups of
workers in 1925. The business depression of the past year is con
sidered to be the probable cause, in most cases, for the abandonment
of these plans.
The fact that plants have a vacation policy for the rank and file of
the workers does not necessarily mean that every worker is included.
For example, 4 per cent of the firms reported that they gave no vaca
tions to hourly workers, and only 39 per cent of the firms employing
pieceworkers gave vacations to this group, while the service require
ment excluded varying percentages of the production workers.
There are two types of vacation policies—the uniform plan, in which
the length of the vacation is not dependent upon the length of em
ployment, being more than twice as frequent as the graduated plan,
in which the length of vacations increases with added years of service
until a stated maximum is reached. Among the companies having a
uniform plan, office workers ordinarily had a 2-week and the factory
workers a 1-week vacation, but since 1925 the number of plants
granting two weeks to the latter group had increased 8 per cent.
Under the graduated plan the majority of plans provided for a mini
mum vacation of between one and two weeks for office workers, fore
men, and production workers. There was no definite increase in the
T
1
New York Department of Labor. The Industrial Bulletin. Albany, December, 1930, pp. 76-78
also Labor Review, September, 1925, pp. 206, 207.
https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
[963]
See
190
MONTHLY LABOR R EV IEW
minimum vacation allowed to office workers under this plan during
the period, but for production workers there appeared to be a trend
toward lengthening the minimum vacations so as to bring them into
line with those of the office workers.
The most usual period of employment required for vacations for
any of the three groups—office workers; office workers and foremen;
and office workers, foremen, and production workers—was one year,
although there was a wide range of variation among different plans.
The time chosen for vacations is usually the summer, partly because
that is the most desirable season and partly because in many instances
the summer is also the slack season. Only 2 per cent of the plants
gave vacations during the fall and winter. Eight per cent of the plants
gave all vacations during a general shutdown, but while this plan
may be advantageous to the employer it has the disadvantage of an
enforced lay-off without pay for those employees not yet eligible for
vacations.
In regard to the attitude of employers toward their vacation poli
cies, the report states that although a few viewed the vacation merely
as a necessary concession, more frequently the employers regarded it
as necessary for the plant workers and as improving the well-being
and the morale of the workers. Among some of the positive effects
experienced were increased productivity, promptness and regularity
of attendance and less absenteeism, and decreased labor turnover.
In most cases, when dissatisfaction with the plan was expressed it
arose from the practical difficulties in the operation of the plan rather
than with the principle involved.
In summing up the results of the study it is stated that, “it must be
regarded as very encouraging that over a 5-year period there has been
a 7 per cent increase in the proportion of plants granting vacations to
production workers. This increase is the more significant in that it
has been measured in a year of industrial depression. A few firms
definitely stated that they had curtailed their vacation policies due
to the depression, but the number that would perhaps have extended
their policies in more prosperous times can not be estimated.”
R a ilw a y W o rk ers’ H o u rs in W e ste r n A u str a lia
A S A result of an application on the part of the Commissioner of
Railways of Western Australia for a revision of existing awards
in regard to conditions of railway service, the State court of arbitra
tion recently amended the existing award so as to permit a 48-hour
week for most railway workers, instead of the 44-hour week they were
working up to December 28, 1930. The amended award \vas pub
lished under date of December 22, and included alterations in certain
special allowances. The changes in regard to hours, as given in the
Industrial News (Perth, Western Australia) for December, 1930, are
as follows:
F o rty -eig h t hours, exclusive of S unday tim e, shall co n stitu te a w eek’s w ork.
N o d a y ’s w ork shall exceed 8 hours 48 m in u tes w ith o u t p a y m e n t of overtim e.
T he provision herein co n tain ed as to h o u rs of w ork shall n o t ap p ly in th e case
of fem ale w orkers, whose h o u rs sh all rem ain as a t present.
In th e case of signalm en whose ho u rs as p ro v id ed for in th e aw ard are 36 per
week, such hours shall be extended to 40 hours p er week in lieu of th e 48 provided
for in clause 2 hereof.
[9641
https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
WAGES AND HOURS OF LABOR
191
While a 48-hour week is thus expressly permitted, it is also provided
that the railway commissioner may employ the workers affected for
44 hours per week, or any less number he may deem advisable, pro
vided that not more than 5 per cent shall be deducted from their
wages as a result of the shorter hours. This arrangement is author
ized, it is explained, “ in pursuance of and for the purpose of carrying
into effect an agreement between the commissioner of railways and
the parties concerned whereby the latter for the purpose of retaining
the principle of the 44-hour week were prepared to forego 5 per cent
of the wages of the workers affected.”
W a g es a n d H o u rs o f L abor in C a n a d a , 1929 a n d 1930
following statistics are taken from a report on wages and
hours of labor in Canada, 1920 to 1930, published as a supplement
THE
to the January, 1931, issue of the Canadian Labor Gazette (Ottawa):
T
a b le
1 .—
IN D E X N U M B E R S OF R A TES OF W AGES OF VARIOUS CLASSES OF LABOR
IN C ANADA, 1921 TO 1930
[1913=100]
1921
1922
1923
1924
1925
1926
1927
1928
1929
1930
Building trades 1____________ 170.5
M etal trades 2___ ______ .
186.8
Printing trades 3_________ _ _ 193.3
Electric railway * .... _ _____ 192. 1
Steam railway 3. __
195.9
Coal mining 6____ _____ . . .
208.3
162.5
173.7
192. 3
184.4
184.4
197.8
166.4
174.0
188.9
186.2
186.4
197.8
169.7
175. 5
191.9
186.4
186.4
192.4
170.4
175.4
192.8
187.8
186.4
167.6
172.1
177.4
193.3
188.4
186.4
167.4
179.3
178.1
195.0
189. 9
198.4
167.9
185.6
180.1
198.3
194. 1
198.4
168.9
197.5
184.6
202.3
198.6
204.3
168.9
203.2
186.6
203.3
199. 4
204.3
169.4
Industry
Simple average.. .
191.2
182.4
183.3
183.7
179.7
180. 5
184.3
187.6
192.7
194. 4
Common factory labor7_____ 190.6
Miscellaneous factory trades 7. 202.0
Logging and saw milling 7____ 152.6
183.0
189.1
158.7
181.7
196.1
170.4
183.2
197.6
183.1
186.3
195. 5
178.7
187.3
196. 7
180.8
187.7
199.4
182.8
187.1
200.9
184.3
187.8
202. 1
185.6
188. 2
202.3
183.9
1 8 trades from 1921 to 1926, 9 for 1927 to 1930.
2 5 trades from 1921 to 1926, 4 for 1927 to 1930.
3 4 trades for 1921 and 1922, 6 from 1923 to 1930.
4 5 classes.
5 23 classes.
6 12 classes.
7 The number of samples has been increased each year since 1920.
Table 2 shows the rates of wages paid and hours worked in various
occupations in six Canadian cities in 1929 and 1930:
T
a b le
2 .—R A TES OF W AGES A N D HOURS OF LABOR PE R W E EK IN V ARIOUS OCCU
PA TIO N S IN SP E C IF IE D C A N A D IA N CITIES, 1929 A N D 1930
Toronto
Winnipeg
Vancouver
Occupation
per
Wage rates Hours
week
per
per
Wage rates Hours
Wage rates Hours
week
week
B u i l d i n g tr a d e s
Bricklayers:
1929____________________
1930____________________
Carpenters:
1929____________________
1930____________________
Electrical workers:
1929____________________
1930____________________
Painters:
1929____________________
1930____________________
https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
P er hour
$1. 30
1.35
P er hour
44
44
Per hour
$1.45
1.45
44
44
$1.35
1.35
40
40
•
1.00
1.10
44
44
1.10
1.10
44
44
1.00
1.00
44
44
1.15
1. 25
44
44
1. 10
1. 10
44
44
1 .12H
1 .\ i y 2
44
44
. 80-, 90
. 85-, 90
44
44
.90
.95
44
44
.90
.90
44
44
[ 965]
m
T
a b le
MONTHLY LABOR REV IEW
R A TE S OF W AGES A N D HOURS OF LABOR P E R W E EK IN VARIOUS OCCU
PA T IO N S IN S P E C IF IE D C A N A D IA N C IT IES, 1929 A N D 1930—Continued
2 —
Winnipeg
Toronto
Occupation
Vancouver
per Wage rates Hours per
Wage rates Hours
week
week
per
Wage rates Hours
week
B u i l d i n g tr a d e s —Continued
Plasterers:
19*29 _____
1930 ......................................
Plumbers:
1929
___________
1930 ......................................
Stonecutters:
1929 _________________
1930 _________ ________Laborers:
1929 . __________ - .........
1930
______ _______
P er hour
P er hour
P er hour
40
40
$1. 35
1.45
44
44
$1. 25-1.30
1.35
40
40
1.25
1.25
44
40-44
1.20
1.25
44
44
1.1 2 ^ -1 . 1 S %
1.25
40
40
1.20
1.25
44
44
1.25
1.25
44
44
1 . 12V2
1.25
40-44
40
. 40-, 65
. 40-, 65
44-60
44-60
. 40-. 50
. 42V6-. 50
44-60
44-60
.
. 50-. 62y 2
50-. 62
44
44
. 60-, 65
. 60-, 65
44-50
44-50
. 60-, 75
. 60-, 77
50
40-50
. 75-, 87H
. 75-, 87
44
44
. 60-, 75
. 60-. 75
44-48
44-48
. 60-, 74
. 60-. 74
50
44
. 75-. 85
. 75-, 85
44
44
. 60-, 74
. 60-, 74
50
40-50
. 75-, 80
. 75-. 85
44
44
45-51
45-54
. 60-, 75
.60-. 75
44-50
44-50
. 75-, 81M
. 75-, 8lj¿
44
44
1.07 H
1.15
44
44
.90
.90
44
44
1.12 K
1.12 'X
44
44
2.60
2.60
48
48
3. 60
3. 60
48
48
i. 63
4. 63
48
48
. 72-, 78
. 72-, 78
44
44
44
44
.97
.97
44
44
. 54-, 56
. 54-, 56
44
44
. 51M-. 59
. 51^-. 59
44
44
.52
.52
44-48
44-48
. 5.5-, 65
. 55-, 65
44
44
.61
.61
44
44
.70
.70
44
44
. 45-. 59
. 45-. 59
48
48
. 35-, 42
. 35-, 42
44
44
. 50-. 59
. 50-. 59
44
44
$1. 32V i
1.37 H
M e t a l tr a d e s
Blacksmiths:
1999
_______________
1930
Boilermakers:
1929
____________
1930
- ___________
Machinists:
1929
_______________
1930
___________
Iron molders:
_____________
1929
1930
_ _______ --Sheet-metal workers:
1929
_ _____________
1930
______
_______
. 55-, 70
. 60-, 70
. 60-, 70
. 60-, 70
S tre e t r a ilw a y s
Conductors and motormen:
19291
______________
19301
____________
Linemen:
1929
_______________
1930
___________
Shedmen:
1929
________________
1930
________________
Electricians:
1929
________________
1930 ___________________
Trackmen and laborers:
1929
_______________
1 9 3 0 ____________________________
.9 2 ^
• 92M
P r i n t i n g tr a d e s
and
________________
1 9 2 9 ____________________
1930 . ________________
Pressmen, news:
1929
_______________
1930
_______________
Pressmen, job:
1929
______ _____ ___
1930 __________________
Bookbinders:
1929
________________
1930
________________
Bindery girls:
1929 __________________
1930 __________________
46.50
47.00
46
46
48.00
48.00
45
45
44-48
39.60
39.60
44-48
44-48
45.00
45.00
44-48
44-48
45. 50
46.50
48
48
45.00
45.00
48
48
48.00
48.00
48
48
36. 00-42.00
36. 00-42. 00
44-48
44-48
39.60
39. 60
44-48
44-48
45.00
45.00
44-48
44-48
36. 00-40. 00
36.00-40. 00
44-48
-44-48
35. 20-42.00
35. 20-42.00
44-48
44-48
45.00
45.00
44-48
44-48
16. 80-18. 00
16.80-18.00
48
48
12. 00-18. 00
12.00-18.00
44-48
44-48
23.00
23.00
44-48
44-48
46.50
47.50
35.00-42.00
35.00-42. 00
1 Maximum rates.
3 1-man car operators, 5 cents extra per hour.
https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
P er w eek
P e r w eek
P er w eek
5
1930 ___________________
Compositors, machine and
hand, job:
oc
1929
o'o'
Compositors, machine
hand, news:
3 1-man car operators,
cents extra per hour.
4 1-manc ar operators, 6 cents extra per hour.
[966]
193
WAGES AND HOURS OF LABOR
T
able
2 .— R A TE S OF W AGES A N D HOURS OF LA BO R P E R W E E K IN V ARIOUS OCCU
PA T IO N S IN S P E C IF IE D C A N A D IA N CITIES, 1929 A N D 1930—Continued
Quebec
Montreal
Ottawa
Occupation
Wage rate
Hours
per week
Wage rate
Hours
per week
Wage rate
Hours
per week
B u i l d i n g tr a d e s
Bricklayers;
P er hour
1929
______________________$1.00
54
1930
______
1.00
44-54
Carpenters:
1929
______
-.60
54-60
1930
______
-.60
44-54
Electrical workers:
1929
______
.50 -.65
54
1930
______
44-54
.50 -.65
Painters:
1929_.........................
54
.50 -.60
1930______________
.50 -.60
44-54
Plasterers:
1929
______________________t1.00
__________54
1930
______
1.00
44-54
Plumbers:
1929..........................
-.60
54-60
1930______________
-.60
44-60
Stonecutters:
1929
_______
.60 -.80
48-60
1930
_______
.60 -.80
44-60
Laborers:
1929
____
-. 45
54-60
1930
_______
-.45
44-60
P er hour
P er hour
$1.20
1.20
24-50
44-50
$1. 25
1.25
. 80- . 85
.85
44-55
44-55
.90
.90
. 70- . 80
. 75- . 90
44-46}*
44-46}*
.80
.80
65- .80
. 65- . 85
44-'
44-49}*
.70
.70
1.00-1.15
1.05
44-49}*
44-49}*
1.00
.85
.90
44
44
1.00
. 75- . 90
. 75-1. 00
44
44
1.05
1. 05
.35- . 40
. 35- . 45
55-60
44-60
. 45-. 50
. 45-, 50
. 60- . 70
.60- .70
44-58
44-58
. 55-, 65
. 55-, 65
. 50- . 85
.50- .85
47-58
47-58
.60-, 75
.60-, 75
44-50
44-50
.50- . 80
. 50- . 80
44-58
44-58
.60-, 70
. 60-, 70
44-50
44-50
. 60- . 82}*
. 65- . 82}*
45-55
44-49
. 55-. 68
. 55-. 68
44-50
44-50
1.00
1.05
44-54
44-54
M e t a l tr a d e s
Blacksmiths:
1929
__
.50 -.60
50-54
1930
_____
.50 -.60
50-54
Boilermakers:
1929
____
.40 -.65
1930
_____
.40 -.65
Machinists:
1929
____
-.60
50-54
1930
_____
-.65
50-54
Iron molders:
1929
____
. 37H-. 57
1930
_____
. 37}*-. 57
Sheet-metal workers:
____
1929
.50 -.65
54
1930
_________________________________
.50 -.65
44-54
.75
.80
1.00
.51
.55
2.50
2.50
.51
.55
.50
.50
.95
S tre e t r a ilw a y s
Conductors and motormen:
1929 >_____
U48
19301________________
2.50
Line men:
1929.
...................... ......................
.45 -.50
1930.
______________________
.45 -.50
Shedmen:
1929
__
.34 -.60
1930
__________
.34 -.60
Electricians:
1929
_____
.48 -.54
1930
________
.45 -.54
Trackmen and laborers:
1929
___
.35
1930
_______
.35
66J *
49-70
47-70
49 M
.31- . 53
. 34- . 57
63-70
63-70
. 39-, 51
. 39-, 51
47
. 51- . 57
. 55- . 61
.55
.55
60
60
.38
.39
. 44-. 48
. 38-, 48
P r i n t i n g tr a d e s
Compositors, machine and
hand, news:
1929
___________
1930
__________
Compositors, machine, and
hand, job:
1929
__
1930
________
i Maximum rates.
https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
P er w eek
P er w eek
$31.00
31.00
$38.00-44. 00
38.00-44.00
31.00
31.00
36. 00-42. 00
36.00-42.00
P e r w eek
$44.00
44.00
44-48
35.00- 40. 00
44-48
35.00- 40.00
2 1-man car operators, 5 cents extra per hour,
[967]
46}*
46}*
44-48
44-48
194
MONTHLY LABOR R EV IEW
T a b l e 2 —R A TE S OF W AGES A N D H OURS OF LABOR P E R W E EK IN V ARIOUS OCCU
PA T IO N S IN SP E C IF IE D C A N A D IA N C IT IES, 1929 A N D 1930— Continued
Occupation
Wage rate
Ottawa
Montreal
Quebec
Hours
per week
Wage rate
Hours
per week
Wage rate
Hours
per week
P r i n t i n g tr a d e s —Contd.
Pressmen, news:
1929
___________
1930
____________
Pressmen, job:
1929
________________
1930
________ ______
Bookbinders:
1929
_____________
1930
- ______________
Bindery girls:
1929
________________
1930
________________
P er hour
P er hour
P er hour
$32.00
32. 00
48
48
$38.00
40. 00
48
48
$43. 00
43.00
48
48
28. 00-32. 00
28.00-32. 00
48
48
36. 00
36.00
48
48
35. 00-40.00
35. 00-40. 00
44-48
44-48
27. 00-35. 00
27.00-35.00
48
48
33. 75
33. 75
48
48
34.00
34. 00
48
48
9. 00-15. 00
9. 00-15. 00
48
48
15. 00
15.00
48
48
13. 50
13. 50
48
48
Rates of wages paid to certain groups of railroad employees are
shown in Table 3:
T a b l e 3.—RA TES OF W AGES OF C A N A D IA N STEA M -RA ILR O A D E M P L O Y E E S, 1927-2S
A N D 1929-30
Engine service (cents
per mile)
Train service (cents
per mile)
Occupation
Occupation
1927-28
Conductors:
Passenger-.- . . Freight, through.—
Freight, w ay-----------Brakemen:
Passenger. _ _ _ _
Freight, through__ _
Freight, w ay------------
1929-30
4. 47
6. 16
6. 68
4. 47-4. 72
6. 16-6. 25
6. 68-7.11
3.13
4.84
5.24
3. 13-3.18
4. 84-4. 91
5. 24-5. 31
Locomotive engineers:
Passenger
Freight—. ________
Locomotive firemen:
Passenger_____ ___
Freight____
__ _
1927-28
1929-30
6.16-7.16
6. 84-8. 76
6. 16-7.16
6. 84-8. 76
4. 56-5. 76
5. 00-6. 51
4. 56-5. 76
5. 00-6. 51
In Table 4 daily wages in coal mining in Canada in September,
1928-29, and in September, 1930, are presented. The 8-hour day
prevails except for surface laborers, machinists, carpenters, and black
smiths in Nova Scotia, whose day is 8% hours.
https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
[968]
195
WAGES AND HOURS OF LABOR
T a b l e 4 . -W A G E S IN COAL M IN IN G IN C A N A D A , SE P T E M B E R , 1928-29, A N D SE P
T E M B E R , 1930
Daily wages 1
Daily wages 1
Locality and occupation
N ova Scoda
September,
1928-29
September,
1930
3 $6. 65
3 4. 15
4.15
3.60
3.65
3. 90
3.35
3. 25
4. 15
3. 85
4. 00
4 $6.69
3 4. 15
4. 25
3.60
4. 73
3.93
3. 45
3. 40
4.15
3.88
4. 05
September,
1928-29
2
6
C'ontract miners___
Alachine miners . . . __
Hand m iners.. . . .
Hoisting engineers. . .
D r iv er s____ _________
Brattieemen..
_ ____
Pumpm en......................
September,
1930
A l b e r t a —Continued
Contract miners. _ ___
Hand miners. _ ____ __
Hoisting engineers . ___
D r iv e r s ._____
Brattieemen__________
Pumpm en____________
Laborers, underground.
Laborers, surface.. . .
M achinists_________ _
Carpenters_____
. _
Blacksmiths____
__
A lb e rta
Locality and occupation
4 7.85
3 5.85-7. 00
3 5. 20-5. 57
5.65-6. 20
4.85-5. 25
5. 20-5. 57
4. 40-4. 95
4 7. 78
« 5.85-7. 00
« 5. 20-5. 57
5.65-6. 20
4. 85-5. 25
5. 20-5. 57
4. 40-4. 95
Laborers, undergroundLaborers, surface_____
Machinists
Carpenters____ _______
Blacksmiths___
V a n co u ver Isla n d
$4. 40-4. 67
4. 15-4. 41
4. 85-5 77
5. 45-5. 77
5. 45-5. 77
$4. 40-4. 67
4.15-4.41
4 85 5 77
5. 45-5. 77
5. 45-5. 77
4 6 75
5 4 81
5 4 52
5.39
4. 13
4. 35
3. 96
3. 97
3. 76
5. 40
4. 83
5. 11
5. 39
4. 13
4. 35
3. 96
3.97
3.76
5. 40
4.83
5.11
7
C ontract, m inera
Machine miners
Hand miners
Hoisting engineers____
D riv ers_______
___
Brattieemen.
.. ..
Pumpmen___ _ _____
Laborers, underground.
Laborers, surface______
___ _
M achinists..
Carpenters. _ ______ .
Blacksmiths
1 Some engineers, pumpmen, firemen, etc., work 7 days per week.
2 In Nova Scotia in most of the mines from February 1, 1928, to January 31,1930, a bonus to be paid quar
terly on profits was agreed upon.
3 Average earnings per day on contract, per ton, etc., certain collieries only; approximate.
4 Average earnings per day on contract, per ton, etc.
5 M inimum rate per day when not working on contract, per ton, yard, etc.
6 Including also 3 mines in Southeastern British Columbia.
7 No figures for Chinese employees included.
W a g es in M a r se ille , F r a n c e
from John S. Calvert, American consul at Marseille,
dated February 11, 1931, gives the wages in effect in that city
A inREPORT
a number of occupations in the latter part of 1930.
The following statement shows the average daily wages in different
occupations in Marseille in 1930, conversions into United States
currency being made on the basis of the exchange value of the franc
for 1930—3.92 cents.
Average daily wages
B ricklayers, skilled ______
B ricklayers, un sk illed ____
S tonem asons____________
C o p p ersm ith s____________
B lacksm iths_____________
B u tc h e rs________________
$1.
1.
1.
1.
1. 37-1.
1.
Average daily wage
53- C a rp e n te rs ..____________ $1. 49-1. 96
37 D itch d iggers____________
1. 29
57 H ouse p a in te rs __________
1. 41
41 T ru c k m e n _______________
1. 57
57 Q uarry w o rk ers__________
1. 37
96 L a b o re rs________________
1. 18
W ages in V a r io u s I n d u s tr ie s a n d L o c a litie s in Ita ly
Wages on Public Works
Bollettino del Lavoro e della Previdenza Sociale, published
by the Italian Ministry of Corporations, Rome, in its issue of
T HE
September-October, 1930, gives (p.311) the following average rates
per hour, paid on public works in Italy as of August 31, 1930.
https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
[969]
196
T
a b le
MONTHLY LABOR REVIEW
1.—R A TE S OF W AGES P E R HO U R PA ID ON PU B L IC WORKS IN VARIOUS CITIES
OF IT A L Y , AS OF A U G U ST 31, 1930
[Conversions into United States currency on basis of lira=5.23 cents]
Laborers
Brick Car Black Joiners Masons Cement Assist
workers ants
layers penters smiths
City
C e n ts
C e n ts
C e n ts
C e n ts
20.9
20.9
15. 7
16.7
18.3
18.3
15.7 1
\ 15.7
to
16.7 1
15.2
14.9
19.9
19.4
16.2
17.5
13.6
16.5
17.8
17.8
14.4
13.3
17.5
17.5
14.4
13.6
15.2
15.2
19.4
15.4
17.0
16.2
18.3
18.3
11.6
11.6
13.1
13.1
19.9
15.8
18.3
f 15.7
\
to
- —
Venice_________
[ 16.7
14.9
Trento____ -- .... ................
19.4
Trieste____ __
....
16.2
Bologna____
. . . ... 15.2
Florence___
17.3
Ancona_____
. . . .
12. 6
15.7
13.6
Aquila_____
15.2
Naples____ . . .
14.1
___
Bari
______ . . .
17.0
Potenza___ _____ __ .
15.7
Catanzaro. _____
__
11.6
Palermo.
. . ... .
13.1
Cagliari___________________
Turin____ ___ ____________
.... ......................
Genoa . .
M ilan__ __
C e n ts
C e n ts
C e n ts
15.7
19.9
14.6
16.7
15.7
20. 9
f 15.7 1
i 13.6
19.4 4 to
1 16.7 )
11.0
14.9
15.2
9.4
14.6
20.9
15. 2
16.2
16.7
13.1
15.4
15.7
10. 5
16.2
15.7
10. 5
13.3
15.7
15. 2
17.0
22.8
11.8
15.2
13.6
10. 5
15.2
20.5
11.5
19.4
15.4
10.5
17.0
17.5
9.7
18.3
15.7
8.1
12.1
11.6
9.7
13.1
19.6
22.0
17.8
20.9
18.8
16.7
18.3
14.6
13.3
19.9
16.2
16.5
16.7
19.6
17.5
13.6
15.2
19.4
17.0
15.7
11.6
13.1
First
class
Second
class
C e n ts
C e n ts
14.6
13.1
14. 6
13.1
12.3
11. 5
13.1
12.3
10.5
14.6
13.6
10.7
11. 5
8.9
14.4
8.6
10. 5
10. 2
10.5
10. 2
9. 3
8.6
9.4
13.9
9.9
9.4
10.5
7.1
9.7
7.6
8.4
7.8
8.4
7.3
Per cent of regulsir rate pa id extra
for
Engi
neers
City
Plumb
ers, gla Wagon
ziers,
and elec drivers
tricians
Chauf
feurs
Overtime
First 2
hours
C e n ts
C e n ts
Turin_____________________
Genoa_______ ____________
M ilan___________ ________
22.0
16.7
22.0
Vernice
15.7
Tfipst^
Bologna
_ _______
Florpncp
Anonna
"Perugia
Bom e
Aquii a
Naples
Bori ___-___ ___
Potenza
___
___Catanzaro
___________
Palermo
Cagliari-----------------------------
15. 2
20. 9
18.0
18 3
19. 4
18.3
24 8
15. 2
20.7
19.9
26. 2
14. 4
13.6
(
l
l
C e n ts
20.9
15.7
14. 1
15.7
22.0
15.7
17.0 1
to
\ ______
19.6 1
11. 2
15. 2
13.9
19. 9
18.0
13.1
16. 0
15.7
16. 7
16. 2
24. 8
14.4
13.1
14.6
10.5
15.7
10.5
20.9
10.5
11.0
11.8
10.5
13.6
C e n ts
25.1
15.7
25.1
16.5
19.9
17.5
17.5
18.3
18.3
19.6
13.1
18.3
14.4
Work on N ight
There holidays work
after
20
15
30
30
30
30
50
35
100
100
50
100
20
20
50
100
25
20
25
30
20
20
20
30
40
25
30
20
20
20
50
75
25
50
50
40
40
15
10
20
15
10
15
20
20
15
10
25
20
20
40
25
50
35
30
Wage Rates of Agricultural Workers
T a b l e 2 shows the average daily wage rates of farm laborers in
Italy in August, 1930, taken from the same official source as above:
https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
[970]
197
WAGES AND HOURS OF LABOR
T
a b le
2 .—R A TES OF W AGES PE R D A Y FOR A G R IC U L T U R A L LABOR IN VARIOUS
SECTIONS OF IT A L Y , A U G U ST , 1930
[Conversions into United States currency on basis of lira=5.23 cents]
Type of district
Mountainous districts. ______ ______________ ____ _
. . ..
H illy districts_______________ __________ . _______ ___ ___ ___
Level districts .
. . . . _____________________________ ___ ___
Men
Women
Boys
C e n ts
C e n ts
C e n ts
65-90
67-88
72-95
37-61
3536-
34-55
5334-53
5839-67
Miscellaneous Occupations
S p e c ia l Circular No. 32, issued by the division of regional informa
tion of the Bureau of Foreign and Domestic Commerce, United
States Department of Commerce, under date of August 15, 1930, and
prepared by the office of the commercial attaché of the American
Embassy at Rome with the assistance of American consuls in Italy,
states that the wages of maids, cooks, etc., range from 150 to 400 lire
($7.85 to $20.92) per month. Trained nurses for children receive as
much as 600 lire ($31.38). Male servants are paid from 300 to 500
lire ($15.69 to $26.15) and chauffeurs up to 1,000 lire ($52.30) per
month. Capable stenographic and clerical employees speaking and
writing English readily obtain from 1,200 to 1,500 lire ($62.76 to
$78.45) per month; clerks are paid slightly less. Such employees
working only in Italian get from 600 to 900 lire ($31.38 to $47.07).
Double-salary is paid at Christmas and usually also in the summer.
Wage Rates in Shipyards in the Province of Trieste
T h e following data on wages paid in the shipyards of the Province
of Trieste are taken from a report from Howard A. Bowman, Amer
ican consul at Trieste, containing the provisions of an agreement
entered into October 17, 1930.
Table 3 shows the minimum hourly rates paid in the various
shipyards of the Province:
T able 3 .—M IN IM U M H O U R LY R A TES OF W AGES IN T H E SH IPY A R D S OF T R IE ST E
PR O V IN C E, IT A L Y , O CTOBER, 1930
[Conversions into United States currency on basis of lira=5.23 cents]
Minimum hourly rates
paid at—
Class of workers
Trieste and Nonfalcone
San Roco
shipyards shipyards
Specialized workers. ______________
Qualified workers . . . -------------------Specialized laborers-----------------------Ordinary laborers---------- ------------- .
Apprentices:
Under 16 years___________ . .
16 to 18 years-------- ------------------18 to 20 years---- ---------- -----------Female employees, under 16 years:
Laborers--------------------------------Machine operators_____________
Female employees, over 16 years:
L a b o r e r s . _ ______
.. Machine operators------------------
https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
[971]
C e n ts
C e n ts
17.0
12.8
11.5
11.0
16.7
12.6
11.2
10.5
3.1
6.3
8.4
3.1
6.3
8.4
4.2
3.4
4,2
3.1
6.5
5.2
6.3
5.2
M O N T H L Y L A B O R R E V IE W
198
The overtime rate for the first two hours is 20 per cent over the regu
lar rate, for the next three hours 40 per cent, and thereafter 80 per
cent. The rate for holidays is 45 per cent over the regular rate for
the first eight hours and 75 per cent thereafter. The rate for night
work is 20 per cent extra.
Wages in the Cement Industry
T he wage scale in an agreement made November 28, 1930, between
the employees engaged in the cement industry in Civitavecchia,
Santa Marinella, and Segni and their employers is given in II Lavoro
F a s c i s t a (Rome), December 18, 1930.
The more important scales
are given in Table 4:
T a b l e 4 .— HOU R LY WAGES IN T H E C E M E N T IN D U S T R Y
[Conversions into U. S. currency on basis of lira—5.23 cents]
Civitavec
chia and
Santa Mari
nella
Occupation
Segni
Q uarry
Diggers-----------------------.----------------------Bovs, under 18 years-------------- --- ------
$0.115
. 105
.097
.071
$0.107
.071
F a c to ry
Laborers not in rotation. - - - - - - - . .
Laborers in rotation----- _ ----- . ---Women _ __________________________
Foundry .workers------ - ---------------------
. 120
.105
. 120
.063
.144
.078
.084
.042
. 118
. 146
. 120
.073
. 105
. 120
.097
. 063
. 078
.026
W o rksh o p
Specialized workers------ . ----------Qualified workers.. .
-----Apprentices, 16 to 18 years-----Laborers_____________ ____ - . . . ----Boys, under 16 years----------------------------
Occupational Rates in Rome, October, 1930
T a b l e 5 shows the average rates in effect in Rome, as of July 31,
1930, as given in Capitolium (Rome), issue of October, 1930 (p. 270):
https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
[9 7 2 ]
199
W AG ES AND HOURS OF LABO R
T
a b le
5 .—
R A TES OP PA Y P E R HO U R IN VARIOUS O C CUPATIONS IN ROM E, AS OP
JULY 31, 1930
[Conversions into United States currency on basis of lira=5.23 cents]
Trade and occupation
B u i l d i n g tr a d e s
Bricklayers__________________
Bricklayers’ helpers__________
Carpenters and joiners----------Carpenters’ helpers---------------Blacksmiths and masons--------Mosaic workers________--------Plasterers___________________
Cement workers_____________
W hitew ashes_______________
Building laborers____________
Rate
per
hour
C ts .
17.6
15.3
18.0
16.5
18.0
17. 9
22.2
19. 1
16.2
14.4
E n g in e e r in g tra d e s
Engineers:
Fitters___________________
Turners------- -------------------Molders--------------------------Laborers-------------------------Plumbers, first class___________
Plumbers, second class-----------Plumbers, third class-------------Plumbers’ helpers_____________
Electricians, installers______ _
Electricians, first class------------Electricians, second class______
Electricians’ helpers----------------
18.3
17. 3
16.2
12.0
26.2
20.4
17.0
11.8
22. 1
17.2
14. 1
8.5
W o o d w o r k in g tr a d e s
Furniture makers:
Carvers, first class_________
Carvers, second class______
Carvers, third class------------
22.0
19.4
16. 7
Rate
per
hour
Trade and occupation
W o o d w o r k in g t r a d e s —Continued
Furniture makers—Continued.
Tracers, first class_________________
Tracers, second class---------------------Tracers, third class------------------------Preparers_________________________
Joiners, first class-------------------------------Joiners, second class----------------------------Joiners, third class------------------------------Joiners, machinists____________________
Joiners, preparers-------------------------------Joiners, laborers----------------------------- ----Upholsterers------- ------ ------------------------
C ts .
19.4
18.0
15.4
20.9
19.4
18.0
16. 7
19.4
20.9
11. 2
24.1
P r i n t i n g tr a d e s
20.4
18. 5
23.2
20.4
16. 3
20.4
18.5
Hand compositors, first class-------Hand compositors, second class----Machine hands__________________
M onotype operators, first class____
Monotype operators, second class
Pressmen, first class--------------------Pressmen, second class----------------Typists, first class----------------------Typists, second class-------------------Folders (women), first class______
Folders (women), second class-----Bookbinders (men), first class_____
Bookbinders (men), second class.
Bookbinders (women), first class.
Bookbinders (women), second class
Extra hands, first class----------------Extra hands, second class-------------
12. 8
9. 3
9.5
8.3
18.5
16.0
9.5
8.3
15.5
13.3
An agreement made between the bakers and their employers in
Rome, effective February 16, 1931, provides the following hourly
wage rates: 1
Sm all loaves:
O ven m en_____________________________________________
D ough m ixers_________________________________________
Specialty h elp ers--------------------------•------------------------------Sim ple h elp ers________________________________________
L arger loaves:
O ven m en-------------------------------------------------------------------D ough m ixers___ _____________________________________
Specialty h elp ers______________________________________
Sim ple h elp ers________________________________________
Cents
16. 7
16. 7
13. 1
11. 0
18. 3
18.3
14. 6
12. 3
M a ch in ists and M e ta l W orkers
In II Lavoro Fascista, December 31, 1930, is given an agreement
recently made between the machinists and metal workers of the
Province of Rome and their employers. Two scales are given, one
for Rome and the other for the Province outside the city of Rome.
Pieceworkers are given a rate so that fast workers may receive an
amount 25 per cent in excess of the time rate in Rome and 20 per
cent outside. For overtime 20 per cent extra is paid for the first
two hours, 40 per cent for the next three hours, and 60 per cent
thereafter. • For work on holidays, 40 per cent extra is paid for the
first four hours, then 50 per cent extra. For night work, 15 per
cent extra is paid.
1 Data are from II Lavoro Fascista, Feb. 14,1931.
https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
[973]
200
M O N T H L Y L A B O R R E V IE W
T
a b le
6 .—H O U R L Y W AGES OF M A C H IN IST S A N D M E T A L W ORKERS
[Conversions on basis of lire=5.23 cents]
In Rome
Occupation group
Outside of
city
$0.178
.136
.120
.115
.076
.063
.063
.052
.031
Specialized workers________ . . . ______
Qualified workers
__________________
Specialized laborers..... ............ ........
Common laborers . . . ________________
Apprentices, 18 to 20 years______
....
Apprentices, 16 to 18 years __ _______
Women, Group A
_ .
. . . . ... .
Women, Group B _ .
Boys
_ _ ____ _ ________
____
$0.157
. 126
.110
.105
.068
.047
.052
.047
.026
Wages in Venice, August, 1930
T a b l e 7 shows the wages in various industries and occupations in
the city of Venice, as given in Rivista di Venezia, August, 1930 (p. 14):
T
a b le
7 .—
R A TE S OF W AGES IN VARIOUS O C CUPATIONS IN V E N IC E , A U G U ST , 1930
[Conversions into United States currency on basis of lira=5.23 cents]
Trade and occupation
P r i n t i n g tr a d e s
Hand compositors, first class____________
Linotype operators_____________________
Pressmen, first class___________________ .
Pressmen, second class_________________
Lithographers, first class-----------------------Lithographers, second class_____________
Lithographers, third class_______________
Bookbinders, first class_________________
Bookbinders, second class_______________
Lithographic machine operators, first class.
Lithographic machine operators, second
class------------------------------------------------Lithographic machine operators, third
class________________________________
B u i l d i n g tr a d e s
Painters, first class_________
Painters, second class______
Bricklayers________________
Wage
rate
Trade and occupation
B u i ld i n g tra d e s—
P er
w eek
$10. 72
11. 82
10. 72
8. 84
11. 77
10. 93
10. 25
10. 72
9. 15
4.08
Continued
P er
hour
. 194
. 170
f . 157
< to
l .167
P er
hour
Bricklayers’ apprentices______________
Bricklayers’ helpers under 18 years. -----Bricklayers’ helpers over 18 years----------M asons.. ______ ___ ___ __________
Joiners,
Joiners,
Joiners,
Joiners,
$0.136
. 118
. 123
. 194
f . 157
skilled workers__ . . .
] to
1 . 170
. 144
-----qualified, first class----- .
. 105
qualified, second class ------apprentices, 17 to 19 years_______
.078
3. 56
3.14
Wage
rate
P er
day
M etal workers. . . . .
. . _ __________
M etal workers’ helpers, 18 to 21 years____
Metalworkers’ apprentices, under 18years.
Electricians, first class
_______________
Electricians, second class_______________
Electricians, third class_____________
___ .
Electricians’ helpers___
.
1.18
.89
.37
1. 57
1.36
1.15
.52
The overtime rate in the printing industry is 20 per cent over the
regular rate for the first two hours, 30 per cent thereafter; double
time is paid for night work and for work on holidays. The overtime
rate for bricklayers is 20 per cent above the regular rate. Masons and
joiners receive 20 per cent extra for overtime and 50 per cent extra for
work on holidays. Painters are paid 10 per cent extra for overtime,
15 per cent extra for holidays, and 60 percent extra for night work.
Electricians receive 30 per cent extra for the first two hours of over
time, 50 per cent extra thereafter until midnight, and 80 per cent
extra thereafter.
https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
[974]
TREND OF EMPLOYMENT
S u m m a r y fo r F e b r u a r y , 1931
MPLOYMENT increased less than one-tenth of 1 per cent in
February, 1931, as compared with January, 1931, and pay-roll
totals increased 4.7 per cent, according to reports made to the Bureau
of Labor Statistics.
The industrial groups surveyed, the number of establishments re
porting in each group, the number of employees covered, and the total
pay rolls for one week, for both January and February, together with
the per cent of change in February, are shown in the followingsummary :
E
SU M M A R Y OF E M P L O Y M E N T A N D PAY-ROLL TOTALS, JA N U A R Y A N D FE B R U A R Y
1931
Industrial group
Number on pay
Per
roll
Estab
cent
lish
of
ments January, Febru
1931
ary, 1931 change
Amount of pay roll
(1 week)
January,
1931
February,
1931
1. M a n u fa ctu r in g
14,283 2,877,351 2,899,867 1 + 1.4 $64,691,718 $69,695,860
2. Coal m in in g .
1,459
342,002
337,456
—1.5
7,870,788
8,018,296
Anthracite_____________ .
153
122,417
122, 879
+ 0 .4
3,477, 591
3, 923, 361
Bituminous___________ _
1, 306
220, 245
214, 577
- 2 .6
4, 393,197
4, 094,935
3. M etalliferous m in in g
304
43,596
41,658
- 4 .4
1,066; 104
1,059,126
1. Q uarrying a n d n o il m etallic
m in in g ___
_ _
718
26,293
27,181
+ 3 .4
547,991
591,740
5. C rude petro leu m produ cm g ---------------------------- ----495
25,721
25,149
- 2 .2
902,172
883,582
6. P u b lic u tilitie s____
_ _ __ 12,170
708,508
700,207
- 1 .2 21,315,997 21,333,540
Telephone and telegraph__ 7,965
320, 664
316, 335
- 1 .4
9,230,229
9,083, 707
Power, light, and w a te r __
3,584
242,806
239, 316
- 1 .4
7, 534,010
7, 617, 943
Electric railroad operation
and maintenance, exclusive of car shops. . _ . . .
621
145,038
144, 556
- 0 .3
4, 551, 758
4, 631,890
7. T rad e_______ ____ .
9,553
333,200
323,594
- 2 .9
8,429,653
8,255,815
W holesale.. ......................
1,940
61,851
60, 999
- 1 .4
1,904, 359
1, 923, 752
R etail_______
7,613
271, 349
262, 595
- 3 .2
6, 525, 294
6, 332, 063
8. H o te ls... _______
2,101
154,165
157,116
+ 1 .9 2 2,539,234 2 2,616,234
9. C a n n in g a n d preserving___
792
30,885
30,473
- 1 .3
517,003
545,641
10. L au n d ries________________
321
28, (¡40
27,884
- 0 .6
529,337
523,260
11. D y ein g a n d c le a n in g ___
127
4,635
4,555
- 1 .7
103,614
100; 152
T o ta l______ ____________ 42,383 4,575,056 4,575,140
+ ( 3) 108,513,611 113,623,246
Per
of
change
1 + 7.5
+ 1.9
+12.8
—6 8
- 0 .7
+ 8.0
- 2 .1
+ 0.1
- 1 .6
+ 1.1
+ 1 .8
- 2 .1
+ 1 .0
-3 . 0
+3.0
+5.5
- 1 .1
- 3 .3
+ 4.7
R e c a p it u l a t io n b y G e o g r a p h ic D iv is io n s
G E O G R A P H IC D I V IS IO N
N ew England 4___________
M iddle Atlantic 5_________
East North C entral6_____
West North Central
South Atlantic 8__________
East South C entral9______
West South C entral10_____
Mountain 11______________
Pacific 12_________________
All division s_______
3,087
415,126
420, 925
7, 298 1,404,143 1,405,045
9,856 1, 257, 342 1, 267, 065
4,688
300, 290
296,458
4,604
464, 797
468, 667
2,362
191, 956
191, 816
3,274
184,434
182, 017
1, 641
99, 234
87, 905
5,573
257, 734
255, 242
42,383 4,575,056 4,575,140
+ 1 .4 $9, 676,044 $9, 960, 983
+ 0 .1 36, 094, 375 37, 320, 503
+ 0 .8 29, 552, 356 32, 940, 683
- 1 .3
7, 220, 525
7, 309, 994
+ 0 .8
8, 946, 381
9,146, 665
-0 .1
3,406, 769
3, 356, 856
- 1 .3
4, 271, 203
4, 276, 489
-1 1 .4
2, 573, 675
2, 296, 373
- 1 .0
6, 822,196
6,964, 787
+ (3) 108, 513,611 113,623, 246
+ 2 .9
+ 3.4
+11.5
+ 1 .2
+ 2 .2
+ 1 .5
+ 0.1
-1 0 .8
+ 2.1
+ 4.7
1 Weighted per cent of change for the combined 54 manufacturing industries, repeated from Table 2,
p. 207, the remaining per cents of change, including total, are unweighted.
2 Cash payments only; see text, p. 223.
3 Less than one-tenth of 1 per cent.
4 Connecticut, Maine, Massachusetts, New Hampshire, Rhode Island, Vermont.
5 New Jersey, New York, Pennsylvania.
6 Illinois, Indiana, Michigan, Ohio, Wisconsin.
7 Iowa, Kansas, Minnesota, Missouri, Nebraska, North Dakota, South Dakota.
8 Delaware, District of Columbia, Florida, Georgia, Maryland, North Carolina, South Carolina, Virginia,
West Virginia.
9 Alabama, Kentucky, Mississippi, Tennessee.
10 Arkansas, Louisiana, Oklahoma, Texas.
11 Arizona, Colorado, Idaho, Montana, N ew Mexico, Nevada, Utah, Wyoming.
12 California, Oregon, Washington.
https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
[975]
201
202
M O N T H L Y L A B O R R E V IE W
Employment was practically unchanged in February as compared
with January, the actual increase, as shown by the combined totals,
having been 84 employees, or less than one-tenth of 1 per cent. The
increase of 4.7 per cent in pay-roll totals, however, represents an addi
tion of $5,109,635 to employees’ earnings in February.
The per cents of change shown for the total figures represent only
the changes in the establishments reporting, as the figures of the
several groups are not weighted according to the relative importance
of each industry.
Increased employment in February was shown in 4 of the 15 indus
trial groups: Manufacturing, 1.4 per cent; anthracite mining, 0.4 per
cent; quarrying and nonmetallic mining, 3.4 per cent; hotels, 1.9 per
cent.
Decreased employment was shown in February in each of the
remaining 11 groups: Bituminous coal mining, 2.6 per cent; metal
liferous mining, 4.4 per cent; crude petroleum producing, 2.2 per cent;
telephone and telegraph, 1.4 per cent; power-light-water, 1.4 per cent;
electric railroads, 0.3 per cent; wholesale trade, 1.4 per cent; retail
trade, 3.2 per cent; canning and preserving, 1.3 per cent; laundries,
0.6 per cent; dyeing and cleaning, 1.7 per cent each.
Pay-roll totals were greater in February than in January in manu
facturing, anthracite mining, quarrying and nonmetallic mining,
power-light-water, electric railroads, wholesale trade, hotels, and
canning and preserving.
There were increases in employment in February in 4 of the 9 geo
graphic divisions, the New England division leading with an increase
of 1.4 per cent, followed by the East North Central, South Atlantic,
and Middle Atlantic divisions with less than 1 per cent each.
The notable decrease in employment in February was 11.4 per cent
in the Mountain division and was due to the ending of the season in
the beet-sugar industry and to the decreases in the mining industries,
which also caused the Mountain division to be the only division show
ing decreased pay-roll totals in February.
PER CAPITA W E EK LY E A R N IN G S IN F E B R U A R Y , 1931, A N D COM PARISON W ITH
JA N U A R Y , 1931, A N D FE B R U A R Y , 1930
Per capita
weekly
earnings
in
February,
1931
Industrial group
1. Manufacturing__________________
2. Coal mining:
Anthracite___________________
Bituminous__________________
3. Metalliferous mining_____________
4. Quarrying and nonmetallic mining.
5. Crude petroleum producing______
6. Public utilities:
Telephone and telegraph______
Power, light, and water_______
Electric railroads_____________
7. Trade:
Wholesale___________________
Retail_______________________
8. Hotels (cash payments only") 2~___
9. Canning and preserving-.-!_____
10. Laundries______________________
11. Dyeing and cleaning.___________
Total________________________
[976]
January,
1931'
February,
1930
$24. 01
+6.1
-1 0 .0
31.93
19. 08
25. 42
21.77
35.13
+12.3
- 4 .5
+ 3.9
+ 4.3
- 2 .6
-2 5 . 2
-1 6 .6
-1 1 .3
- 2 .0
1 N°
,
2 The additional value of board, room, and tips can not be computed.
https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
Per cent of change Feb
ruary, 1931, compared
with—
0
28. 72
31.83
32.04
- 0 .1
+ 2.5
+ 2.1
31.54
24.11
16. 65
17. 91
18. 77
21.99
24.83
+ 2.5
+ 0 .2
+ 1 .0
+ 6.7
- 0 .6
- 1 .6
+ 4.7
+ 4 .5
+ 0.3
(9
+ 0.4
- 2 .2
- 4 .5
-10. 7
0
0
0
3 Data not available.
■
TREND OF EMPLOYMENT
203
Per capita earnings for February, 1931, given in the preceding table,
must not be confused with full-time weekly rates of wages; they are
actual per capita weekly earnings computed by dividing the total
number of employees reported into the total amount of pay roll in
the week reported, and the “ number of employees” includes all per
sons who worked any part of the period reported—that is, part-time
workers as well as full-time workers.
Comparisons are made with per capita earnings in January, 1931,
and with February, 1930, where data are available.
For convenient reference the latest data available relating to all
employees, excluding executives and officials, on Class I railroads,
drawn from Interstate Commerce Commission reports, are shown in
the following statement. These reports are for the months of De
cember, 1930, and January, 1931, instead of for February and March,
1931, consequently the figures can not be combined with those pre
sented in the foregoing table.
E M P L O Y M E N T A N D PAY-ROLL TOTALS, CLASS I R A ILROADS
Employment
Industry
Class I railroads...............
Dec. 15,
1930
Jan. 15,
1931
1, 340, 470
1,317, 817
Per
cent of
change
- 1 .6
Amount of pay roll in entire
month
December,
1930
January,
1931
$185, 396, 509
$182, 908,075
Per
cent of
change
- 1 .3
I lie total number of employees included in this summary is approxi
mately 5,900,000, whose combined earnings in one week amounted to
$155,000,000.
1. E m p lo y m e n t
in
S e le c te d
M a n u fa c tu r in g
in d u s tr ie s
in
February, 1931
C o m p a r is o n o f E m p lo y m e n t a n d P a y -R o ll T o t a ls in M a n u f a c t u r in g i n d u s
t r ie s, J a n u a r y a n d F e b r u a r y , 1931
MPLOYMENT in manufacturing industries in February, 1931,
increased 1.4 per cent as compared with January and paj^-roll
totals increased 7.5 per cent. Those changes are based upon returns
made by 13,377 identical establishments in 54 of the chief manu
facturing industries in the United States, having in February, 2,772,219
employees whose combined earnings in one week were $66,567,283.
Regularly manufacturing employment and pay rolls show a marked
upward trend in February, following the customary decreases in
January due to inventory taking and repairs, and the increases in
February this year compare favorably with those in the years prior
to 1930; in February, 1930, the increase in employment was only 0.1
per cent and the increase in pay rolls only 3.5 per cent.
The bureau’s weighted index of employment for February, 1931, is
74.1, as compared with 73.1 for January, 1931, 75.1 for December,
1930, and 90.3 for February, 1930; the index of pay-roll totals for
February, 1931, is 67.0, as compared with 62.3 for January, 1931,
67.4 for December, 1930, and 90.7 for February, 1930. The monthly
average for 1926 equals 100.
E
46860°-—31----- 14
https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
[977]
204
MONTHLY LABOR REV IEW
Eight of the 12 groups of manufacturing industries showed employ
ment gains in February, and 10 groups showed pay-roll gains. The
textile group gained 4.1 per cent in employment, leather 3.5 per cent,
stone-clay-glass 2.3 per cent, and tobacco 10.2 per cent. Pay-roll
gains included 23.5 per cent in the vehicles group, 13.5 per cent in
leather, 11.6 per cent in textiles, 10.5 per cent in stone-clay-glass, and
over 6 per cent each in the iron and steel and the other metals groups.
Decreases were shown in both items in the food and the paper groups,
and in employment alone in the chemicals group and the group of
miscellaneous industries.
Increased employment in February was shown in 31 of the 54
separate industries and increased pay rolls in 43 industries. The
outstanding gains were 13.8 per cent in stoves, 11.9 per cent in cigars,
8.8 per cent in woolen and worsted goods, over 7 per cent each in
millinery and carpets; and about 6 per cent each in both men’s and
women’s clothing, shirts, stamped ware, cast-iron pipe, and hosiery,
and 4.5 per cent in boots and shoes. Automobiles gained 2.4 per cent;
the iron and steel industry, 0.4 per cent; and cotton goods, 0.2 per
cent. In nearly every instance pay-roll increases were much greater
than employment increases. The notable pay-roll increases were 52.5
per cent in automobiles, 24.9 per cent in carpets, 22.3 per cent each in
stoves and stamped ware, and between 11 and 18 per cent each in 8
of the textile industries and in cement and glass.
There were no decreases in employment in February of especial
significance.
Four of the 10 industries surveyed but not included in the bureau’s
indexes reported increased employment in February as compared with
January, these being: Rayon, 0.5 per cent; jewelry, 2.9 per cent; paint
and varnish, 1.2 per cent; and beverages, 1.2 per cent. Decreased
employment in February7 was shown as follows: Radio, 5.4 per cent;
aircraft, 4.8 per cent; rubber goods, 0.2 per cent; beet sugar, 76.1
per cent; cash registers, etc., 2.5 per cent; and typewriters, 1.6 per
cent.
The beet-sugar industry reaches its minimum employment point in
February or March; typewriters and supplies are presented for
the first time in this comparison for January and February.
Six of the 9 geographic divisions reported increased employment
in February, the New England division leading with a gain of 2.3 per
cent, followed by the East North Central with a gain of 1.6 per cent
and the South Atlantic with a gain of 1.3 per cent. The West North
Central and the Mountain divisions both show decreased employment
owing to the beet-sugar industry’s ended season; the Pacific division
reported a drop of 1 per cent.
https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
[978]
TREND OF EMPLOYMENT
205
T 45 lÄ t! 'C O M P A R iSÖ N OF E M P L O Y M E N T A N D PAY-ROLL TOTALS IN ID E N T IC A L
M A N U F A C T U R IN G E ST A B L ISH M E N T S IN JA N U A R Y A N D F E B R U A R Y 1931 BY
IN D U S T R IE S
Industry
Number on pay roll
Estab
Per
lish
cent of
ments January,
February change
1931
1931
Amount of pay roll
(1 week)
January,
1931
February,
1931
Per
cent of
change
Food a n d kindred p ro d u cts.
Slaughtering and meat packing------------------------------Confectionery. ___ _
Ice cream _ _ _
_____
Flour____________________
Baking________ ________
Sugar refining, cane... ___
1,99(1
227,535
225,127
(>)
$5,823,695
$5, 700,956
208
329
336
401
706
16
89,348
35,903
11,672
16,462
64,625
9,525
86,911
36,249
11,730
16,222
64,659
9,356
- 2 .7
+ 1.0
+ 0 .5
- 1 .5
+ 0.1
- 1 .8
2,393,863
657,369
381,050
415,150
1,707, 599
268,664
2, 267,071
641, 791
392,934
415, 863
1,704, 596
278,701
—5 3
—2.4
+ 3.1
+0 2
—0. 2
+ 3.7
Textiles a n d th eir p r o d u c ts..
Cotton goods_____ ______
Hosiery and knit goods. . .
Silk goods_____________ _
Woolen and worsted goods..
Carpets and ru gs._ . . .
Dyeing and finishing textiles___________________
Clothing, men’s . . . .
Shirts and collars_________
Clothing, women’s ____ . . .
Millinery and lace goods___
2,344
452
354
262
174
28
508,278
160, 798
79,807
56, 278
47,155
15,719
528,603
161,116
84,361
58,081
51,328
16,835
(0
+ 0 .2
+ 5 .7
+ 3 .2
+ 8 .8
+7.1
8,823,024
2,291,189
1,269,875
1,006,367
951,707
309,470
9, 788,727
2, 310,380
1,419, 595
1,117,449
1, 103| 568
386,538
(l)
+0 8
+11. 8
-j-11 f)
+16 0
+24.9
117
333
113
395
116
36,020
54, 682
15,951
28,942
12,926
37,023
58,152
16,969
30,866
13,872
+ 2 .8
+ 6 .3
+ 6 .4
+ 6 .6
+ 7 .3
849,600
999,240
210,127
678, 301
257,148
952,180
1.166,169
234,890
801, 756
296,202
+12.1
+16 7
+11.8
- f is 2
+15. 2
1,951
199
42
176
544,129
225,517
8,621
25,212
546,616
226,458
9,105
24, 236
(0
+ 0 .4
+ 5 .6
- 3 .9
12,810,214
5,400,921
175,161
642,074
13,633,965
5,969^ 066
189,102
615,639
+10.5
+8 0
- 4 .1
1,077
74
146
195, 601
24,547
23,373
196, 663
24,382
22,945
+ 0 .5
- 0 .7
- 1 .8
4, 603, 965
481,216
548,935
4, 786,166
487,477
558,062
+4 0
-j-1 3
+ 1.7
106
131
26,814
14,444
26,383
16,444
-1 . 6
+13.8
643, 288
314,654
643, 700
384, 753
+ 0.1
+ 22.3
L u m b er a n d its p ro d u cts___
Lumber, saw m ills..
____
Lumber, millwork______
Furniture________________
1,44G
648
340
458
164,437
87,830
24,404
52, 203
165,320
87,382
24,937
53,001
(>)
- 0 .5
+ 2 .2
+ 1 .5
2,847,183
1,413,061
482,936
951,186
2,955,924
L 424^ 440
506; 467
1,025; 017
0)
+0 8
+4. 9
+ 7.8
L eather a n d its p r o d u cts___
Leather____ _
._ ___
Boots and shoes__________
429
131
298
119,104
22,813
96, 291
123,373
22, 796
100, 577
(0
-0 . 1
+ 4.5
2,144,140
514,163
1,629,977
2,439,845
530, 222
1,909,623
(i)
+3 1
+17. 2
Paper an d p r in tin g ..
Paper and pulp____
Paper b o x e s... ___
Printing, book and job____
Printing, newspapers. . .
1,504
218
309
555
422
211,442
53,460
23,983
54,806
79,193
208,914
53, 360
23,662
53,687
78, 205
(i)
- 0 .2
- 1 .3
- 2 .0
- 1 .2
6,730,935
1,287,481
504,080
1,834, 285
3,105,089
6,700,229
1,338,806
509,303
1,772,703
3,079,417
(I)
+4. 0
+1 0
-3 . 4
- 0 .8
461
100,973
100,103
38,145
10,853
51,975
38,032
10,955
51,116
(')
- 0 .3
+ 0 .9
- 1 .7
2,826,398
979,926
180, 524
1,665,948
2, 891,452
1,017,697
180, 290
1,693,465
(i)
+ 3 .9
- 0 .1
+ 1 .7
1,990,005
2,206,334
(i)
+13.3
+ 6 .2
+ 8 .9
+13.4
Iron a n d steel a n d th eir
produ cts . . ________ ____
Iron and steel____ ____ ..
Cast-iron p ip e..
_______
Structural-iron work
Foundry and machine-shop
products_________ _____
Hardware_____ . . . . . . .
Machine to o ls.._
. ..
Steam fittings and steam
and hot-water heating
apparatus . . . _______
Stoves__________ ____ ____
C hem icals a n d allied prodn e ts __________ . .
Chemicals___ . . .
Fertilizers_____
Petroleum refining...
S to n e, clay, a n d glass prodn e ts ________
Cement___________
Brick, tile, and terra cotta..
Pottery____________
Glass . . . . . .
M etal produ cts, o th er th a n
iron a n d steel
S t a m p e d and enameled
ware________
Brass, bronze, and copper
products__________
T obacco p r o d u c ts..
Chewing and smoking tobacco and snuff.
Cigars and cigarettes_____
162
207
92
1,056
94,545
(!)
+ 1.4
+ 1.4
+ 1 .2
+ 4 .2
112
689
115
140
17,257
26,156
16,856
34,276
17, 490
26,518
17,062
35, 700
233
42,099
42,847
0)
915,257
984,752
77
15,230
16,140
+ 6 .0
290,220
355,368
+22.4
403, 638
487,932
332,036
766,399
457,499
518,080
361,626
869,129
(>)
156
26,869
26,707
- 0 .6
625,037
629,384
+ 0 .7
217
53,195
58,430
(>)
788,090
800,273
(»)
27
190
9,350
43,845
9,356
49,074
+0. 1
+11.9
144,269
643,821
145,662
654,611
+ 1 .0
+ 1 .7
See footnotes at end of table.
https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
96,770
(>)
[979]
206
MONTHLY LABOR R EV IEW
T atîtf 1 — C O M PARISON o f e m p l o y m e n t a n d p a y -r o l l t o t a l s i n i d e n t i c a l
M A N U F A C T U R IN G E ST A B L ISH M E N T S IN JA N U A R Y A N D FE B R U A R Y , 1931, BY
IN D U S T R IE S—Continued
Number on pay roll
Estab
lish
ments
Industry
Vehicles for la n d tran sp or
ta t io n ____________________
Automobiles_____________
Carriages and wagons-------Car building and repairing,
electric-railroad------------Car building and repairing,
steam-railroad--------------M iscellaneous in d u stries..
Agricultural implements---Electrical machinery, appa
ratus, and supplies-------Pianos and organs-----------Rubber boots and shoes—
Automobile tires and inner
tubes__________________
Shipbuilding------------------T o ta l—54 i n d u s t r i e s
used in c o m p u tin g
index n u m b ers o f e m
p lo y m e n t a n d pay
roU__________________
In d u stries add ed sin c e F eb
ruary, 1929, for w h ic h d a ta
for th e in d ex -b a se year
(1926) are n o t a v a ila b le ____
Rayon___________________
Radio_______________ .-___
Aircraft__________________
Jewelry__________________
Paint and varnish-----------Rubber goods, other than
boots, shoes, tires, and
inner tubes------------------Beet sugar----------------------Beverages-----------------------Cash registers, adding ma
chines, and calculating
machines______________
Typewriters and supplies. _
All in d u str ies_________
1,246
206
51
Per
cent of
change
February,
1931
January,
1931
404,014
271,615
755
399,173
265,171
716
0
+ 2.4
+ 5.4
Amount of pay roll
(1 week)
January,
1931
February,
1931
Per
cent of
change
(')
$8,502,629 $11,223,278
7,397,123
4,849, 545
15,891
14,582
+52.5
+ 9 .0
441
29,023
29,027
864,861
878,633
+ 1.6
548
104, 263
102,617
-
1.6
2,773,641
2,931,631
+ 5 .7
494
82
275,067
19,814
272,102
19,340
(>)
- 2 .4
7, 184,972
485,179
7,241,548
483,766
- 0 .3
210
68
160,634
5,800
13,968
160,257
5, 639
13,662
-
0.2
2.8
-
2.2
4, 270,888
140, 761
260,110
4,363,515
130,388
225, 247
- 7 .4
-1 3 .4
37,436
37,415
37,038
36,166
-
1.1
990,466
1,037,568
1,022,540
1,016,092
13,377
2,739,977
2,772,219
61,386,542
66,567,283
(')
906
17
42
41
152
233
137,374
19,889
23, 540
8,865
12,977
14, 520
127,648
19,998
22, 260
8,440
13,349
14,688
3,305,176
404,996
524,143
268,527
292, 275
386,402
3,128,577
406,107
482,874
265,135
274,990
406,600
(3)
+ 0.5
- 5 .4
- 4 .8
+ 2.9
13,095
10,813
10,417
13, 063
2, 586
10,543
-76. 1
+ 1.2
302,433
208, 763
305,822
300, 780
87,422
312,300
- 0 .5
-5 8 .1
+ 2.1
17,543
5,715
17,100
5,621
499,015
112,800
481,386
110,983
- 3 .5
64,691,718
69,695,860
10
45
14,283
2,877,351
2,899,867
+ (2)
- 3 .3
( 3)
+ 1.2
-
0.2
- 2 .5
-
1.6
(3)
(')
+ 2.2
+ 3 .2
2.1
-
+ 0 .3
- 7 .9
- 1 .3
- 5 .9
+5. 2
-
1.6
R e c a p it u l a t io n b y G e o g r a p h ic D iv is io n s
GEOGRAPHIC DIVISIONS 4
1,521
3,598
3,467
1,337
1,721
692
810
301
836
321, 214
856,415
909, 226
161,934
300,298
105,110
86,010
33.719
103,425
328, 725
861,682
923,985
161,259
304,109
105,212
86.479
26, 007
102,409
All division s____ _____ 14,283
2,877,351
2,899,867
New England--------- ----------Middle Atlantic . . . ------- --East North Central----------- - West North C entral... ------South A tla n tic .......... ... ..............
East South Central___-- ---- West South C entral--.
--_
M ountain.-.-----Pacific___ -------
+ 2.3
+ 0.6
+ 1.6
- 0 .4
+ 1.3
+0.1
+ 0.5
-2 2 .9
- 1 .0
$6,957, 295
21,097,922
20,452,837
3,833,806
5,298,459
1,789,399
1,857, 255
815,817
2, 588, 928
$7,278,119
21,981,348
23,812,143
3,917,294
5,540,788
1,879, 826
1,901,609
685, 246
2,699,487
(3)
64,691,718
69,685,860
+ 4 .6
+ 4 .2
+ 16.4
+2. 2
+ 4.6
+5.1
+ 2.4
-1 6 .0
+ 4.3
(3)
1 The per cent of change has not been computed for the reason that the figures m the preceding columns
are unweighted and refer only to the establishments reporting; for the weighted per cent of change, wherein
proper allowance is made for the relative importance of the several industries, so that the ligures may
represent all establishments of the country in the industries here represented, see Table 2.
2 Less than one-tenth of 1 per cent.
„
,, ,
_ ■ ...
___
3 The per cent of change has not been computed for the reason that the figures m the preceding columns
are unweighted and refer only to the establishments reporting.
4 See footnotes 4 to 12, p. 201.
https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
[980]
207
TREND OF EMPLOYMENT
T a b l e 2 .— PE R C E N T OF CHANGE, JA N U A RY , 1931, TO FE B R U A R Y , 1931—12 GROUPS OF
M A N U F A C T U R IN G IN D U S T R IE S A N D TOTAL OF 54 IN D U S T R IE S IN C L U D E D IN
IN D E X
[Computed from the index numbers of each group, which are obtained by weighting the index numbers of
the several industries of the group, by the number of employees, or wages paid, in the industries]
Per cent of change
January to
February, 1931
Per cent of change
January to
February, 1931
Group
Group
Number Amount
on pay
of pay
roll
roll
Food and kindred products____
Textiles and their products. . .
Iron and steel and their products.
Lumber and its products______
Leather and its products______
Paper and printing
Chemicals and allied products..
Stone, clay, and glass products. .
- 0 .8
+4. 1
+0.6
+ 0.4
+ 3.5
—1 2
- 0 .7
+ 2.3
- 1 .8
+11. 6
+ 6 .3
+3. 7
+13. 5
- 0 .6
+ 2.4
+10.5
Number Amount
on pay of pay
roll
roll
Metal products, other than iron
and steel
Tobacco products_______
Vehicles for land transportation.
Miscellaneous industries
+ 1.4
+ 10.2
+0.3
- 1 .1
+ 6.5
+ 1.6
+23.5
+ 0.7
T o ta l—5 4 in d u str ies___
+ 1.4
+ 7 .5
C o m p a r is o n o f E m p lo y m e n t a n d P a y -R o ll T o t a ls in M a n u f a c t u r in g I n d u s
t r ie s , F e b r u a r y , 1931, w ith F e b r u a r y , 1930
T h e level of employment in manufacturing industries in February,
1931, was 17.9 per cent below the level of February, 1930, and pay-roll
totals were 26.1 per cent lower.
Each of the 54 industries had fewer employees in February, 1931,
than in February, 1930, the outstanding decreases having been 43.3
per cent in carriages and wagons; 37.5 per cent and 37.3 per cent,
respectively, in agricultural implements and machine tools; from 20 to
30 per cent each, in carpets, shirts, structural-iron work, hardware,
foundry and machine-shop products, stoves, sawmills, millwork,
furniture, fertilizers, petroleum refining, brick, glass, automobiles,
steam railroad car building, electrical goods, and rubber boots and
shoes. The iron and steel, cotton goods, and shipbuilding industries
lost slightly over 17 per cent each of their employees over the 12month interval.
Among the 12 groups of industries the losses in employment were
over 20 per cent each in lumber, vehicles, iron and steel, and the group
of miscellaneous industries; the losses were between 13.1 per cent and
19.3 per cent each in the leather, textile, chemical, nonferrouc metal,
and stone-clay-glass groups; in the remaining groups the losses were
8.4 per cent in paper, 7.6 per cent in food, and 6 per cent in tobacco.
The smallest decreases in employment in February in the several
geographic divisions, ranging from 15.2 per cent to 16.9 per cent were
in the South Atlantic, New England, Middle Atlantic, and West
North Central division; the greatest decrease, 24 per cent, was in the
West South Central division.
https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
[981]
208
T
a ble
MONTHLY LABOR REVIEW
3 —
C O M PARISON OF E M P L O Y M E N T A N D PAY-ROLL TOTALS IN M A N U F A C
T U R IN G IN D U S T R IE S , FE B R U A R Y , 1931, W ITH F E B R U A R Y , 1930
[The per cents of change for each of the 12 groups of industries and for the total of all industries are weighted
in the same manner as are the per cents of change in Table 2]
Per cent of change
February, 1931,
compared with
February, 1930
Per cent of change
February, 1931,
compared with
February, 1930
Industry
Industry
Number Amount
on pay
of pay
roll
roll
Food a n d kindred p r o d u cts-.
Slaughtering and m e a t
packing. ___ ________
Confectionery___ ______ _
Ice cream . . _ ________
Flour. __________________
Baking______ _ __ _____
Sugar refining, cane ____ _
Textiles a n d th eir p r o d u c ts..
Cotton goods.
___ . . . .
Hosiery and knit goods ._
Silk goods ________ ___
Woolen and worsted goods.
Carpets and rugs. . . . . .
Dyeing and finishing textiles__________________ _
Clothing, men’s __________
Shirts and collars... . . . . .
Clothing, women’s . _____
M illinery and lace g oods...
- 7 .6
- 8 .5
- 9 .8
- 7 .8
-4 .8
- 3 .4
-1 1 .9
- 7 .3
—11.1
-1 2 .5
+ 1.1
-1 6 .1
-1 0 .8
—10. 5
-1 4 .5
-1 7 .4
-1 5 .3
-1 3 .1
-1 1 .8
-2 7 .8
-1 9 .4
-2 2 . 2
-2 6 . 1
-1 8 .2
-1 0 .7
-2 7 .1
- 4 .9
-1 5 . 7
-2 1 .3
- 6 .4
-1 3 .7
-3 . 0
-2 4 .6
-3 1 .0
-1 4 .6
-2 3 .0
Iron a n d steel a n d th eir
p r o d u c ts________ __ _____
Iron and s t e e l __ . . . . . _
Cast-iron pipe__________ _
Structural ironwork__
Foundry and machine-shop
products___ ______ _ _.
Hardware ___
_______
Machine tools
. . . _.
Steam fittings and steam
and hot-water heating apparatus. ________
Stoves ____________ . . .
-1 6 .2
-2 5 .7
-2 6 . 9
-3 5 .5
L u m b er a n d its p r o d u cts___
Lumber, saw m ills..
Lumber, millwork . . . .
Furniture . . . ___. . .
-2 7 .3
-3 0 .2
-2 1 .8
-2 3 .5
-3 7 .3
-4 2 .3
-2 9 .8
-3 2 .4
L eather a n d its p r o d u cts___
Leather . . . . . . . . .
Boots and s h o e s... . . ____
-1 3 .1
-1 3 .7
-1 3 .0
-2 0 .2
-2 0 .3
—20. 2
Paper an d p rin tin g
____
Paper and pulp __________
Paper boxes. . . . _
Printing, book and job____
Printing, new spapers_____
- 8 .4
-1 4 .3
-1 0 . 1
- 7 .8
- 3 .1
-1 2 .2
—21. 5
-1 5 .4
-1 2 .3
- 5 .6
-2 2 .5
-1 7 .3
-1 0 .0
-2 0 .0
-3 5 .4
-3 0 .8
-2 2 . 9
-3 0 .8
-2 0 .1
-2 0 .2
-3 7 .3
—39. 6
-3 5 .6
-4 9 . 9
Number Amount
on pay of pay
roll
roll
C hem icals a n d allied prod_____ . . . _________
u cts
Chemicals
Fertilizers
Petroleum refining
-1 4 .9
—6. 8
—25. 4
—20 4
-1 6 .5
—11 1
—28 8
—19 3
S to n e, clay, a n d glass products
Cement . . . ________ . . .
Brick, tile, and terra cotta..
Pottery _.
Glass
—19.3
-1 3 .9
-2 2 .9
—14. 0
—21. 2
—26.5
—21. 0
-3 2 .8
—24. 4
—25.1
M etal p rod u cts, o th er th a n
iron a n d steel
Stamped and enameled
ware
Brass, bronze, and copper
products
—17.0
-2 6 .7
-1 2 .5
-1 5 .1
-1 9 .0
-3 0 .7
T obacco p rod u cts ________
Chewing and smoking tobacco and snuff.. _____
Vehicles for la n d tra n sp o rta tio n
Automobiles __________
Car building and repairing,
electric-railroad
Car building and repairing,
steam -railroad..____
M iscellaneous in d u str ies. .
Agricultural implements .
Electrical machinery, apparatus, and su p p lies___
Pianos and organs
Rubber boots and shoes___
Automobile tires and inner
tu b e s _______________
Shipbuilding
Total-—54 in d u stries . . .
- 6 .0
-1 8 .3
- 0 .1
- 6 .7
- 9 .3
-1 9 .6
—22. 7
-2 2 . 1
-4 3 .3
—31 i
-3 4 .1
-4 5 .7
-1 1 .5
-1 4 .2
-2 3 .9
-3 0 .0
-2 1 .5
-3 7 . 5
-2 1 .8
-3 0 .4
—47. 3
-3 0 .0
—16 8
-2 6 .4
32 2
—49! 0
-15.1
-1 7 .1
-2 5 .6
-2 2 .8
-1 7 .9
-2 6 .1
94 0
IQ 8
-1 9 .6
-2 5 .6
-1 7 .1
-2 6 .1
R e c a p it u l a t io n b y G e o g r a p h ic D iv is io n s
GEOGRAPHIC DIVISION1
New E ngland.. . _____ . . .
M iddle Atlantic___________ ._
East North Central _____
West North Central.. _
South Atlantic . . . .
East South Central___
GEOGRAPHIC DIVISION—Contd.
-1 5 .8
-1 6 .0
-2 0 . 7
—16. 9
-1 5 . 2
-2 1 .8
-2 2 .4
-2 4 . 9
-3 1 .0
—21. 0
-2 2 .1
-2 9 .1
West South Central
Mountain
Pacific
1 See footnotes 4 to 12, p. 201.
https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
[ 982]
All divisions
27 5
9J\ 9
TREND
209
OF EM PLO YM EN T
P e r C a p it a E a r n in g s in M a n u f a c t u r in g I n d u s t r ie s
A c t u a l per capita weekly earnings in February, 1931, for each of
the 64 manufacturing industries surveyed by the Bureau of Labor
Statistics, together with per cents of change in February, 1931, as
compared with January, 1931, and February, 1930, are shown in
Table 4.
Per capita earnings in February, 1931, for the combined 54 chief
manufacturing industries of the United States, upon which the
bureau’s indexes of employment and pay rolls are based, were 6.1 per
cent higher than in January, 1931, and 10.0 per cent lower than
February, 1930.
The actual average per capita weekly earnings in February, 1931,
for the 54 manufacturing industries were $24.01; the average per
capita earnings for all of the 64 manufacturing industries surveyed
were $24.03.
Per capita earnings given in Table 4 must not be confused with
full-time weekly rates of wages. They are actual per capita weekly
earnings computed by dividing the total number of employees reported
into the total amount of pay roll in the week reported, and the “ num
ber of employees” includes all persons who worked any part of the
period reported—that is, part-time workers as well as full-time
workers.
T a b l e 4 —P E R CAPITA W E EK LY E A R N IN G S IN M A N U F A C T U R IN G IN D U S T R IE S IN
F E B R U A R Y , 1931, A N D C OM PARISON W ITH JA N U A R Y , 1931, A N D F E B R U A R Y , 1930
Per capita
weekly
earnmgs in
February,
1931
Industry
Food and kindred products:
Slaughtering and meat packing __ ___ _ _______
Confectionery _ . . . ______ ___ _. ___
Icecream .. .
..
____ . .
_ ___
_ .
Flour______________________________________ __ . . .
Baking
. . .
...
._
Sugar refining, cane
..
.
____
Textiles and their products:
Cotton g o o d s _____ ___ _______ . . _ .
Hosiery and knit goods___________ . _
Silk goods____________________ . . . . . . . .
Woolen and worsted goods.
.................
....
_____
Carpets and rugs__ . .
Dyeing and fimshing textiles . . . .
....
Clothing, men’s ___ ______________ . .
. . . .
Shirts and collars
. . .
Clothing, women’s
_____________
. .
.. _
____
M illinery and lace goods __ ______ ______ _
..
____
Iron and steel and their products:
Iron and steel. _
. . . _____ . .
. . .
_
....
Cast-iron pipe
.
___ ____
........
. . .
Structural-ironwork. . ______________
Foundry and machine-shop p r o d u c ts ..______
._
_____
Hardware
____ __ ___
Machine tools__
________ . .
_____ _____
__
Steam fittings and steam and hot-water heating apparatus.
Stoves. ...
.
______ . ______ ______ ____ _____
Lumber and its products:
Lumber, sawmills_________________ . __
._ . .
___
Lumber, millwork____
. . . .
Furniture _____ ______
..
..
Leather and its products:
Leather.
______
Boots and shoes_____________________ . _ .
_____
https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
[983]
Per cent of change
February, 1931, com
pared with—
January,
1931
February,
1930
$26. 08
17. 71
33. 50
25. 64
26. 36
29. 79
-2 . 7
-3 . 3
+ 2 .6
+ 1.7
—0 2
+ 5.6
+ 0.9
—8.1
+ 4.5
—4.9
- 3 .6
+ 0.5
14. 34
16.83
19. 24
21. 50
22.96
25. 72
20.05
13. 84
25.98
21.35
+ 0 .6
+ 5 .8
+ 7.6
+ 6 .5
+16.6
+ 9 .0
+ 9.7
+ 5.1
+10.8
+ 7.3
- 5 .6
-1 3 .0
—5 8
+ 1 .5
+ 1.0
+ 1 .9
—10.8
—12. 3
—8. 9
—10. 6
26. 36
20. 77
25. 40
24. 34
19. 99
24.32
24.40
23. 40
+10.1
+ 2 .2
-0 . 3
+ 3 .4
+ 2 .0
+ 3.5
+ 1.7
+ 7 .4
—16.1
- 8 .1
—13. 6
-18. 2
-19. 2
-2 0 .0
-1 2 .8
-1 3 .1
16. 30
20.31
19.34
+ 1.3
+ 2 .6
+ 6.1
-1 7 .2
-1 0 .2
-1 1 .8
23. 26
18.99
+ 3 .2
+12.2
- 7 .9
- 8 .3
210
T
M O N T H L Y LA BO E, R E V IE W
4 .—PE R CAPITA W E E K L Y EA R N IN G S IN M A N U F A C T U R IN G IN D U S T R IE S IN
FE B R U A R Y , 1931, A N D C OM PARISON W ITH JA N U A R Y , 1931, A N D F E B R U A R Y , 1930—
Continued
a ble
Per capita
weekly
earnings in
February,
1931
Industry
Paper and printing:
_ _ ______ __
Paper and pulp
__ _ _ _ ___
Paper boxes
_ _ _ _ _
Printing, book and job
__
_
- ____
Printing, newspapers
___ _____ _
____ _ Chemicals and allied products:
_______ _____
------Chemicals
_ _
Fertilizers
___
__ __ _
Petroleum refining
Stone, clay, and glass products:
Cement
_
_ ____ _ _ _ _
_
Prick, tile, and terra cotta
_______ ____ __ __ ____ __ _
Pottery
__ ______ _
____
_____ ______ __
Glass
Metal products, other than iron and steel:
Stamped and enameled ware
_______
"Brass bronze, and copper products ___
_
Tobacco products:
Chewing and smoking tobacco and snuffCigars and cigarettes
_______ _
- ___
Vehicles for land transportation:
Automobiles
_ ________ __ ___- ___ _____
Carriages and wagons
__ ____
-Car b u i l d i n it a n d repairing, electric-railroad. _
Car b u i l d i n g and repairing, steam-railroad__ __ _ _
Miscellaneous industries:
Agricultural implements
_ __ __ _ _____________
Electrical ma.chinerv, apparatus, and supplies._ _ __ __ ___
Pianos and organs
___- _____ ___ ___ Rubber boots and shoes
___
____
_ _______
__
Autombile tires and inner tubes_____ _________ ____ __ _
Shipbuilding
__
____
_____
__
Industries added since February, 1929, for which data for the indexbase year (1926) are not available:
Rayon
__
______ _ _ ------- ------- -Radio
_____ ____________ -- __________________
______ - - ___
___
Aircraft
_ ____ _
Jewelry
__ ________________ _____ ___________
Paint and varnish
____ __ __ ____
Rubber goods, other than boots, shoes, tires, and inner tu b es.__
Beet sugar
_______ __________ -- - - - - ___
Beverages
_
_____
____
- - _________ - — -Cash registers, adding machines, and calculating machines. —
Typewriters and supplies. _ ____
_
____________
https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
i Data not available.
January,
1931
February,
1930
$25. 09
21. 52
33. 02
39. 38
+4. 2
+2. 4
- 1 .3
+ 0 .4
26. 76
16. 46
33.13
+ 4 .2
- 1 .0
+ 3.4
- 4 .5
- 4 .7
+ 1.1
26.16
19. 54
21. 19
24. 35
+11.8
+ 4.8
+ 7.6
+ 8.9
- 8 .3
-1 2 .8
-1 2 .0
- 4 .7
22. 02
23. 57
+15.5
+ 1.3
-2 .7
-1 4 .7
15. 57
13. 34
+ 0.9
- 9 .1
- 8 .7
-1 3 .7
27.23
21. 05
30. 27
28. 57
+48.9
+ 3.3
+ 1.6
+ 7.4
-1 5 .4
- 3 .9
- 2 .8
- 7 .7
25.01
27.23
23.12
16. 49
27. 61
28. 10
+2. 1
+ 2.4
- 4 .7
-1 1 .4
+ 4.3
+ 1.3
-1 5 .7
-1 0 .2
-1 8 .3
-3 0 .9
-12. 7
- 6 .9
20.31
21.69
31.41
20. 60
27. 68
23.03
33. 81
29. 62
28. 15
19. 74
- 0 .2
- 2 .6
+ 3.7
- 8 .5
+ 4 .0
- 0 .3
+75. 1
+ 0.9
-1 . 1
- 6 .4
-20. 4
-3 . 5
-19. 5
—1.8
-14. 1
2 No change.
[984]
Per cent of change
February, 1931, com
pared with—
( 2)
•
'
- 8 .7
—5.0
-5 . 1
- 2 .4
0)
(>)
(0
0)
211
TREN D OF EMPLOYMENT
In d e x N u m b e r s o f E m p lo y m e n t a n d P a y -R o ll T o t a ls in M a n u f a c t u r in g
I n d u s t r ie s
T a b l e 5 shows the general index of employment in manufacturing
industries and the general index of pay-roll totals, by months, from
January, 1923, to February, 1931, together with the average indexes
for each of the years 1923 to 1930, inclusive.
T a b l e 5 . — G E N E R A L IN D E X E S OF E M P L O Y M E N T A N D PAY-ROLL TOTALS IN M A N U
FA C T U R IN G IN D U S T R IE S , JA N U A R Y , 1923, TO F E B R U A R Y , 1931
[Monthly average, 1926=100]
Employment
Pay-roll totals
1923 1924 1925 1926 1927 1928 1929 1930 1931 1923 1924 1925 1926 1927 1928 1929 1930 1931
Jan__ 106.6 103.8 97.9 ICO. 4
F e b . . . 108.4 105.1 99.7 101.5
Mi r . 110. 8 104.9 100. 4 1C2. 0
A p r... 100.8 102.8 100.2 101.0
M a y .. 110.8 98.8 98.9 99.8
Juno.. 110.9 95.6 98.0 99.3
J u ly .. 109. 2 92.3 97.2 97. 7
A u g... 108. 5 92.5 97.8 98.7
Sept. 108. 6 94. 3 98.9 100. 3
Oct__ 108. 1 95.6 100.4 100.7
N o v .. 107. 4 95.5 100.7 99. 5
D e c ... 105.4 97.3 100.8 98.9
97.3
99.0
99.5
98.6
97.6
97.0
95.0
95. 1
95.8
95.3
93. 5
92.6
91.6
93.0
93.7
93.3
93.0
93. 1
92.2
93.6
95.0
95.9
95. 4
95.5
95.2
97.4
98.6
99.1
99.2
98.8
98.2
98.6
99.3
98.3
94.8
91.9
90.2 73. 1 95.8 98.6 93.9 98.0 94.9 89.6 94.5
90.3 74. 1 99.4 103.8 99.3 102. 2 100. 6 93.9 101.8
89.8
104.7 103. 3 100. 8 103. 4 102.0 95. 2 103. 9
89. 1
105. 7 101. 1 98.3 101. 5 100. 8 93.8 104. 6
109.4 96. 5 98.5 99.8 99. 8 94. 1 104.8
87.7
85. 5
109.3 90.8 95.7 99. 7 97. 4 94.2 102.8
81. 6
104.3 84.3 93. 5 95.2 93.0 91. 2 98.2
79. 9
103.7 87.2 95. 4 98. 7 95.0 94. 2 102. 1
79.7
104. 4 89.8 94. 4 99. 3 94. 1 95. 4 102. 6
78.6
106.8 92.4 100.4 102.9 95. 2 99.0 102.3
76.5
105.4 91.4 100.4 99. 6 91.6 96. 1 95.1
75. 1
103.2 95.7 101.6 99.8 93.2 97.7 92.0
87.6 62. 3
90.7 67.0
90. 8
89. 8
87. 6
84. 1
75.9
73.9
74. 2
72.7
08. 3
67.4
A v___ 108.8 98.2 99.2 100.0 90.4 93.8 97.5 83.7 173.6 104.3 94.6 97.7 100.0 96.5 94.5 100.4 80.3 '6 4 .7
1 Average for 2 months.
Index numbers showing relatively the variation in number of
persons employed and in pay-roll totals in each of the 54 manufac
turing industries surveyed by the Bureau of Labor Statistics and in
each of the 12 groups of industries, and also general indexes for the
combined 12 groups of industries, are shown in Table 6 for February
and December, 1930, and January and February, 1931.
In computing the general indexes and the group indexes the index
numbers of separate industries are weighted according to the relative
importance of the industries.
Following Table 6 are two charts which represent the 54 separate
industries combined and show the course of pay-roll totals as well as
the course of employment for each month of the years 1926 to 1930,
and for January and February, 1931.
https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
[985]
212
T
MONTHLY LABOR R EV IEW
6.—IN D E X E S OF E M P L O Y M E N T A N D PAY-ROLL TOTALS IN M A N U F A C T U R IN G
IN D U S T R IE S , FE B R U A R Y A N D D E C E M B E R , 1930, A N D JA N U A R Y A N D FE B R U A R Y ,
1931
[Monthly average, 1926=100]
a b le
Pay-roll totals
Employment
Industry
G eneral in d e x ,_ ___
Food a n d kindred prodUCts____________ -- ---Slaughtering and meat
packing
---- -----------Confectionery__________
Ice cream _
------ —
Flour___ - ,
_______
---- --------Baking
Sugar refining, c a n e .-----
1931
1930
1931
1930
Febru
ary
Decem
ber
Janu
ary
Febru
ary
Febru
ary
Decem
ber
Janu
ary
Febru
ary
90.3
75.1
73.1
74.1
90.7
67.4
62.3
67.0
9G.5
92.1
89.9
89.3
99.0
92.4
90.9
89.3
102.7
88.1
77.3
101.0
97.7
89.9
96.1
90.6
75.3
92. 1
93.3
79.8
96.6
83. 1
74.3
90.4
90.5
81.4
94.0
83.9
' 74.7
89.0
90.6
79.9
104.4
90.4
75.4
104.8
100.3
92.0
98.6
90.3
74.2
91.5
92.4
79.2
101.7
81. 1
73.9
87.7
89.6
79.3
96.3
79. 1
76.2
87.9
89.5
82.3
91.9
88.7
93.6
97.0
77.1
74.7
83.6
82.5
75.5
73. 2
75.0
81.6
78.6
73.3
79.3
84.3
89.7
84.6
97.4
96.1
68.1
69.1
76.8
77.8
64.8
65.3
64.4
70.8
72.3
65.8
72.0
78.6
84.8
99.3
69.7
65.1
68.8
67.0
74.8
71. 7
80.5
86.1
64.2
52.6
61.9
50.2
71.9
62.8
100.4
89.7
90.8
100.0
95.5
93.1
68.9
72.0
88.8
74.0
92.9
71.2
67. 2
87.8
76.8
95.5
75.6
71.5
93.6
82.4
99.2
83.4
85.6
99.9
94.8
88.1
49.9
59.0
74.4
61.1
85.9
53.9
52.9
72.1
63.3
96.2
62.9
59.1
85.3
73.0
92.9
90.8
67.6
94.7
74.0
75.6
55.4
83.6
71.fi
74.8
53.8
78.9
72.0
75. 1
56.8
75.8
93.5
93.8
65.6
93.3
61.4
61.8
50.8
75.5
56.8
58.8
46.8
67.4
60.4
64.9
50.6
64.6
97.8
86.7
116.5
74.8
71.8
78.3
71.9
69.7
74.4
72.3
69. 2
73.0
97.8
84.0
114.9
62. 2
58.4
62.3
56.9
53.5
56.6
59.1
54. 1
57.6
71.6
80.8
61.7
61.9
60.9
52.7
60.0
60.0
68.3
73.0
52.7
47.6
49.8
38.5
49.9
47. 1
L u m b er a n d its p ro d u cts..
Lumber, sawmills---------Lumber, millwork______
Furniture.- — ________
74.7
72.5
70.1
83.3
58.3
55.3
57.2
66.2
54.1
50.9
53.6
62.7
54.3
50.6
54.8
63.7
71.3
69.8
67. 1
77.2
49.6
47.4
50.4
53.6
43.1
40.0
44.9
48.4
44.7
40.3
47.1
52.2
L eather a n d its p r o d u c ts..
______
Leather.
Boots and shoes________
91.4
89.9
91.8
73.8
76.4
73.1
76.7
77.6
76.5
79.4
77.6
79.9
83.3
90.3
81.3
56.3
71.7
51.9
58.6
69.9
55.4
66.5
72.0
64.9
Paper a n d p rin tin g . . . . .
Paper and pulp________
Paper b o x es________
Printing, book and iob___
Printing, newspapers___
101.0
96. 1
90.9
102.8
109.2
95.7
84.9
87.7
98.0
108.4
93.6
82.5
82.8
96.8
107.1
92.5
82.4
81. 7
94.8
105.8
106.3
99.2
95.3
107.2
113.6
97.9
79.3
87.4
99.8
112.4
93.9
74.9
79.8
97.3
108. 1
93.3
77.9
80.6
94.0
107.2
C hem icals
and
allied
p r o d u cts____________ . . .
Chemicals_____________
Fertilizers_____________
Petroleum refining..........
98.fi
97. 1
99.4
100. 1
85.9
92.2
74.9
82.5
84.5
90.8
73.5
81.0
83.9
90.5
74.2
79.7
100.2
98.4
93.4
103.0
85.2
89.7
70.2
83.6
81.7
84.3
66.6
81.8
83.7
87.5
66.5
83.1
72.9
66.1
fit. 3
62.7
57.5
56. 1
58.8
56.9
69.0
63. 7
55.3
54.0
45.9
44.4
50.7
50.3
57.7
92.4
89.0
53.8
80. 5
72.1
43.9
78.5
67.3
44. 5
79.5
70.1
50.6
86. 5
89.8
42.8
70.3
66.3
32.0
60. 1
59.3
34.0
65.4
67.3
Textiles a n d th eir produ c ts ____
- ---------Cotton goods _ ---- -----Hosiery and knit goods.—
' Silk goods-------- ---------Woolen and worsted
goods__ - -------- ----Carpets and rugs
Dyeing and finishing tex
tiles____ __________ Clothing, men’s-----------Shirts and collars
Clothing, women’s______
Millinery and lace goodsIron a n d steel a n d th eir
produ cts .-- --_ ---Iron and steel---------------Cast-iron pipe___ ---------Structural ironwork Foundry and machine
shop products________
Hardware---------- _ _ ___
Machine tools ____
Steam fittings and steam
and hot-water heating
apparatus........................
Stoves, . - -- _________
S to n e, clay, a n d glass
p r o d u c ts.. _____ _ _____
Cement
..
_ _.
Brick, tile, and terra
c o t t a ________ ______
P o ttery .. _____________
Glass....... .............................
https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
[986]
TREND OF EMPLOYMENT
213
T a b l e 6 —IN D E X E S OF E M P L O Y M E N T A N D PAY-ROLL TOTALS IN M A N U F A C T U R IN G
IN D U S T R IE S , F E B R U A R Y A N D D E C E M B E R , 1930, A N D JA N U A R Y A N D F E B R U A R Y
1931—Continued
’
Employment
1930
Industry
Febru
ary
M etal
produ cts
oth er
th a n iron a n d steel
Stamped and enameled
ware__ ________
Brass, bronze, and copper products_________
T obacco p ro d u cts __
Chewing and smoking
tobacco and snuff,
Cigars and cigarettes____
Vehicles for la n d tra n sp orta tio n ___
Automobiles____
Carriages and wagons___
Car building and repairing, electric-railroad___
Car building and repairing, steam-railroad____
M iscellaneous in d u s tr ie s ,_
Agricultural implements.
Electrical machinery, apparatus, and supplies—
Pianos and organs
Rubber boots and shoes,.
Automobile tires and inner tubes _____
Shipbuilding______
https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
Pay-roll totals
1931
Decem
ber
Janu
ary
1930
Febru
ary
Febru
ary
1931
Decem
ber
Janu
ary
Febru
ary
85.2
72.4
69.7
70.7
85.1
64.3
58 6
62.4
83.1
72.0
68.6
72.7
78.9
64. 6
54. 8
67 0
86.2
72.6
70.2
69.8
87.5
64.2
60.1
60.6
91.1
86.9
77.7
85.6
84.8
82.2
68 2
69 3
93.9
90.7
87. 7
86.8
93.7
75.6
93.8
84.6
97.1
83.3
82. 3
82.2
87 2
65.9
88 1
86.5
91.8
64.2
66.8
70.6
39.5
66.7
69.9
34. 5
66.9
71.5
36.4
89.0
90.2
70. 7
58.8
54.0
40. 1
49.4
38.9
35 2
67.0
61 0
59.'4
38 4
90.1
80.5
79.7
79.7
91.3
79. 8
77 1
78 3
81.6
62.6
63. 1
62.1
87.8
62.4
58.2
61.5
103.6
121.3
83.0
72.9
82.2
77.6
81.3
75.8
105.7
126.4
76.0
59. 0
73.1
66 8
73 6
66 6
112. 1
50.6
92.5
89.2
46.8
76.0
87.9
43.3
69.7
87.7
42. 1
68. 1
115.0
45. 1
93. 0
83. 6
39. 5
65. 2
78 8
33 1
54 7
47 4
80.2
121. 0
67.1
105. 0
68.9
103. 7
68. 1
100. 3
81. 9
124.6
55. 2
105.3
59. 0
98.3
60 9
96! 2
[9 8 7 ]
80 5
30 6
214
https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
MONTHLY LABOR REVIEW
215
TREND OF EMPLOYMENT
MANUFACTURING
INDUSTRIES
MONTHLY INDEXES, I9Z6-I93I..
MONTHLY
AVERAGE
1926 = 1 0 0
PAY-ROLL TOTALS.
10 5
^ . «— • " / f '~
A* ** .
\
\
I9 Z 6
\
r~ ‘ "
\
'
! /
\
X/
100
’
*
N\ \
^
/
V
^ \
V
-
\
95
\
a
\
---- -
— \
/
I9ZS
y\
/
/
\
V
/
\
A
/
/
T \
/
90
\
/
/
v
y \ ' \
/
\
I9 £
- - - - -
/
1 9 2 9
100
95
105
-N
\
\
\
x
/
\V
/
193 0
\
\
V
\
\
85
65
\
\
\
80
80
75
/
75
\
v - — — -a
70
\
\
19 VI
i
\
65
/
60
JA M
FEB
MAR.
https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
APR.
M AY
JUNE
JU LY
[ 989]
AUG.
5E P T
OCT
NOV
DEC
216
MONTHLY LABOR REV IEW
T im e W o rk ed in M a n u f a c t u r in g I n d u s t r ie s in F e b r u a r y , 1931
R e p o r t s as to working time of employees in February were received
from 11,579 establishments in 62 manufacturing industries. Two per
cent of the establishments were idle, while employees in 57 per cent
of the establishments were working full time and employees in 41 per
cent were working part time.
Employees in the establishments in operation in February were
working an average of 90 per cent of full time or 1 per cent more than
in January.
The 41 per cent of the establishments working part time in February
averaged 76 per cent of full-time operation.
T
a ble
7 —PR O PO R T IO N OP FU L L T IM E W O R K E D IN M A N U F A C T U R IN G IN D U S T R IE S
BY E ST A B L ISH M E N T S R E PO R T IN G IN F E B R U A R Y , 1931
Establishments
reporting
Per cent of estab
lishments in
which employ
ees worked—
Average per cent of
full time reported
by—
Industry
Total Per cent
number
idle
Food a n d kindred p ro d u cts_________ .
Slaughtering and meat packing
Confectionery_________ _ ______ _ __
Ice cream___________________________
Flour_____ _________________________
Baking____ __ _ __ _______________
Sugar refining, cane.
Textiles a n d th eir p ro d u cts______ _ __
Cotton goods___ ______ _______ ____
Hoisery and knit goods_______ - ____
Silk goods____ _ ___ _ ___ __________
Woolen and worsted goods___________
Carpets and rugs _
___ .
_ _
Dyeing and finishing textiles
_ _.
Clothing, men’s ________ __ ___ _
Shirts and collars________ _ _ _ ___ __
Clothing, women’s ______ _ _ _ _ _ _ _
Millinery and lace goods. __ _________
Iro n a n d steel a n d th eir p ro d u cts....... .
Iron and steel-.
_ _
Cast-iron pipe _
_ ___ . . . _ _.
Structural ironwork _____ _____ _ _
Foundry and machine-shop products....
Hardware ______ ____ _
Machine tools __ __
Steam fittings and steam and hot-water
heating apparatus._. _
_________
Stoves___ _______ ____
___ ______ _
L um b er a n d its p r o d u cts______ _
Lumber, saw m ills._. _
__
_ __
I,umber, millwork__
_ _______
Furniture________ _ ____________
L ea th er a n d its p r o d u cts____ __ _____
Leather_________________________ ___
Boots and s h o e s ___________________
Paper a n d p r in tin g _____ _ _ _______
Paper and p u lp ._ ______ __ __
Paper boxes_______________ ________
Printing, book and job
Printing, newspapers _ _ __ ________
C hem icals a n d allied p ro d u cts. ________
Chemicals___________ _____________
Fertilizers _ _
_ _ _ _ _
Petroleum refining_____
______
S to n e , clay, a n d glass p ro d u cts_______
Cement. _
__
.
_. ____
Brick, tile, and terra cotta...................
Pottery______
_ . . . ___ __________
Glass___________________ _._..................
1,716
179
280
238
367
669
13
1,879
406
300
238
162
23
109
245
87
235
74
1,735
128
39
165
994
60
133
98
118
1,005
412
252
341
351
105
246
1,222
142
260
449
371
359
131
162
66
715
85
411
102
117
1 Less than one-half of 1 per cent.
https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
[990]
1
1
1
3
(•)
3
5
3
(')
2
1
2
3
1
4
1
7
10
1
1
1
3
2
3
(>)
2
2
2
2
1
5
(!)
1
2
1
10
14
11
3
9
Full
time
Part
time
All oper Establish
ating
ments
establish operating
part
time
ments
81
78
60
83
78
92
46
64
51
64
82
69
35
56
57
67
76
65
30
57
10
38
29
13
20
18
22
39
16
19
8
54
33
43
33
17
29
65
43
41
30
23
31
68
36
79
62
70
87
80
96
97
91
98
95
99
90
93
88
92
97
95
84
90
92
94
96
96
80
86
68
86
80
77
74
80
88
78
87
74
80
81
78
73
76
81
80
76
77
80
80
83
88
71
65
63
78
71
73
68
21
37
40
44
36
38
59
62
58
72
58
52
73
92
74
68
69
95
54
73
46
53
71
78
60
58
53
64
60
39
36
40
27
37
48
27
8
25
30
30
5
36
13
43
44
20
77
82
84
85
83
83
92
91
92
95
92
90
96
99
95
95
94
100
90
96
88
89
95
70
70
73
72
73
73
79
77
79
82
80
79
84
89
81
83
79
91
75
75
75
76
76
217
TREND OF EMPLOYMENT
T
a b le
7.— PR O PO R T IO N OF FULL T IM E W O R K ED IN M A N U F A C T U R IN G IN D U ST R IE S
B Y E ST A B L ISH M E N T S R E PO R T IN G IN FE B R U A R Y , 1931—Continued
Establishments
reporting
Per cent of estab
lishments in
which employ
ees worked—
Average per cent of
full time reported
by—
Industry
Total
Per cent
number
idle
M etal p rod u cts, oth er th a n iron and
a n d s te e l____________________________
Stamped and enameled ware_________
Brass, bronze and copper products___
T ob acco p r o d u cts.......................................
Chewing and smoking tobacco and
snuff_____________________________
Cigars and cigarettes_________________
V ehicles for la n d tr a n sp o r ta tio n ______
A utom obiles.____ ____ ____ _________
Carriages and wagons_______________
Car building and repairing, electricrailroad_____ _____________________
Car building and repairing, steam-rail
road_____________________ ________
M iscella n eo u s in d u s tr ie s ...........................
Agricultural implements_____________
Electrical machinery, apparatus, and
supplies_____________________ ____ _
Pianos and organs............ ..........................
Rubber boots and shoes_____________
Automobile tires and inner tubes______
Ship building................ ..............................
In d u str ie s add ed in 1929 a n d 1930______
Radio______________________________
R ayon_____________________________
Aircraft__ _____ ____________________
Jewelry_____________________________
Paint and varnish___________________
Rubber goods, other than boots, shoes,
tires, and inner tubes______________
Beverages__________________________
Cash registers, adding machines, and
calculating machines...... .......................
All in d u str ie s____________________
204
67
137
205
25
180
1,129
176
44
(>)
1
3
3
0)
5
Full
time
Part
time
All oper- Establishating
ments
establish operating
ments
part time
43
58
35
34
57
42
64
63
87
91
85
85
77
79
76
77
44
33
57
35
43
56
64
42
C5
52
91
84
91
84
89
84
76
76
76
79
396
81
19
97
87
513
427
74
48
44
32
52
55
64
88
87
81
73
76
71
47
28
22
19
67
01
75
71
66
36
60
53
70
78
81
30
38
25
26
29
64
40
88
79
81
80
95
91
96
94
96
82
92
78
71
76
76
85
78
83
77
86
72
81
58
76
42
24
92
94
79
77
68
32
95
84
57
41
90
76
173
57
9
27
87
002
8
38
35
104
172
0)
2
4
2
3
(')
3
6
65
146
34
11,579
O
1 Less than one-half of 1 per cent.
2. E m p lo y m e n t in C oal M in in g in F eb ru a ry , *1931
MPLOYMENT in coal mining—anthracite and bituminous coal
combined—showed a decrease of 1.5 per cent in February, as
compared with January, but pay-roll totals increased 1.9 per cent.
The 1,459 mines reported had in February 337,456 employees whose
combined earnings in one week were $8,018,296.
E
A n t h r a c it e
I n a n t h r a c i t e mining in February there was an increase o f 0 .4
per cent in employment as compared with January and an increase of
12.8 per cent in pay-roll totals.
Employment in February, 1931, was 14.9 per cent lower than in
February, 1930, and pay-roll totals were 17.1 per cent lower.
All anthracite mines reported are in Pennsylvania—the Middle
Atlantic division. The details for January and February are shown
in Table 1.
https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
[991]
218
M O N T H L Y L A B O R R E V IE W
T a rtf 1 —COM PARISON OF E M P L O Y M E N T A N D PAY-ROLL TOTALS IN ID E N T IC A L
Table 1.
M IN E S IN JA N U A R Y A N D FE B R U A R Y , 1931
Number on pay roll
Mines
Geographic division
January,
1931
M iddle A tla n tic .-i- ------ ..
153
123,417
February,
1931
122,879
Per
cent of
change
+ 0.4
Amount of pay roll
(1 week)
January,
1931
February,
1931
$3,477,591
$3,923,361
Per
cent of
change
+12.8
B itu m in o u s C oal
E m p l o y m e n t in bituminous coal mining decreased 2.6 per cent in
February as compared with January while pay-roll totals decreased
6.8 per cent, as shown by reports received from 1,306 mines in which
there were in February 214,577 employees, whose combined earnings
in one week were $4,094,935.
.
Employment in February, 1931, was 10.6 per cent lower than m
February, 1930, and pay-roll totals were 33.1 per cent lower
Details for each geographic division except the New England, from
which no coal mining is reported, are shown in Table 2.
T
a ble
2 .-
-C O M PA R ISO N OF E M P L O Y M E N T A N D PAY-ROLL TOTALS IN ID E N T IC A L
B IT U M IN O U S UOAL M IN E S IN JA N U A R Y A N D F E B R U AR Y , 1931
Number on pay roll
Mines
Geographic division
January,
1931
February,
1931
Per
cent of
change
Amount of pay roll
(1 week)
January,
1931
February,
1931
Per
cent of
change
Mi rid Ip , Atlantic _ _____ Flast North Central
_
- Wp.st North Central- ____South Atlantic
- -"Efl.st, South Central
West South Central
_ _ _
Mountain
_
_ _
Pacific____ . . . -- - --- --
392
170
47
325
210
31
120
11
64,192
32,839
4, 950
53, 905
42, 000
2, 833
17, 878
1,648
62,411
32,103
4, 701
52, 946
42, 065
2,187
16,551
1,613
- 2 .8
- 2 .2
- 5 .0
- 1 .8
+ 0 .2
-2 2 .8
- 7 .4
- 2 .1
$1,220,451
713, 322
101, 297
1,035,020
690, 775
54, 285
525,179
52, 868
$1, 222, 908
667, 210
91, 582
986, 330
645, 753
34, 970
401, 523
44, 659
+ 0 .2
- 6 .5
- 9 .6
—4. 7
—6. 5
-3 5 .6
-2 3 .5
-1 5 .5
__
1,306
220,245
214,577
- 2 .6
4,393,197
4,094,935
- 6 .8
All divisions
.
3. E m p lo y m e n t in M e ta llife r o u s M in in g in F eb ru a ry , 1931
ETALLIFEROUS mines in February showed a decrease in
employment of 4.4 per cent, as compared with January, and a
decrease of 0.7 per cent in pay-roll totals. The 304 mines covered had
in February 41,658 employees whose combined earnings in one week
were $1,059,126.
Employment in February, 1931, was 29.3 per cent lower than in
February, 1930, and pay-roll totals were 41.0 per cent lower.
Details for each geographic division from which metalliferous mining
is reported are shown in the following table.
M
https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
[992]
TREND OF EMPLOYMENT
219
C O M PA R ISO N OF E M P L O Y M E N T A N D PAY-ROLL TOTALS IN ID E N T IC A L METAT
L IFER O U S M IN E S IN JA N U A R Y A N D F E B R U A R Y , 1931
*
Number on pay roll
Geographic division
Mines
Middle Atlantic_____
East North Central
West North Central _
East South Central _
West South Central.
M ountain........
Pacific..
7
47
42
11
62
107
28
.All division s.
304
January,
1931
February,
1931
1,265
10, 611
6,354
2,507
2, 574
18, 076
2,209
1,156
10,699
6,038
2,209
2, 626
16,886
2,044
- 8 .6
+ 0 .8
- 5 .0
-1 1 .9
+ 2 .0
- 6 .6
-7 .5 '
43,596
41,658
- 4 .4
1
4.
E m p lo y m e n t in
Per
cent of
change
Amount of pay roll
(1 week)
January,
1931
February,
1931
Per
cent of
change
$26,265
203, 571
165, 790
40, 229
59, 742
508, 234
62,273
$23, 964
216,415
158, 761
43,110
59, 498
494, 784
62, 594
- 8 .8
+ 6.3
- 4 .2
+ 7 .2
- 0 .4
- 2 .6
+ 0.5
1, 066,104
1,059,126
-0 . 7
Q u a r r y in g a n d N o n m e t a llic
F e b r u a r y , 1931
M in in g in
INCREASE of 3.4 per cent was shown in employment and an
increase of 8.0 per cent in earnings from January to February
A Nbaccording
to reports received from 718 establishments in this industrial
group.
These establishments had in February 27,181 employees, whose com
bined earnings in one week were $591,740.
Employment in February, 1931, was 16.5 per cent lower than in
February, 1930, and pay-roll totals were 26.0 per cent lower.
Details for each geographic division are shown in the following table.
COM PA R ISO N OF E M P L O Y M E N T A N D PAY-ROLL TOTALS IN ID E N T IC A L QTTARRTFSl
AND N O N M ET A L LIC M IN E S IN JA N U A R Y A N D F E B R U A R Y , 1931
Number on pay roll
Geographic division
N ew England. . . . ___
Middle A tlan tic.. ____
East North Central
West North Central___
South Atlantic .
East South Central.. . . .
West South Central_____ __
M ountain_____
Pacific. . . . .
All divisions.
5.
Estab
lish
ments
January,
1931
Percent
of
February, change
1931
Amount of pay roll
(1 week)
January,
1931
Percent
of
February, change
1931
95
118
203
77
89
58
43
3
32
3,443
4,766
6,293
1, 637
4,545
2,567
2,044
57
941
3,325
5,226
6,231
1, 772
4,628
3,001
2,019
51
928
- 3 .4
+ 9 .7
-1 .0
+ 8 .2
+ 1 .8
+ 10.9
- 1 .2
-1 0 .5
- 1 .4
$90,190
104,164
142, 558
32,413
74,408
31, 044
47,377
2,235
23, 602
$88, 920
124, 981
151,820
37, 742
76,008
38,853
48, 062
2,037
25,319
-1. 4
+20.0
+ 6.5
+16.4
+2.1
+25.2
- 2 .8
+ 8 .9
+ 7.3
718
26,293
27,181
+ 3 .4
547,991
591,740
+ 8.0
E m p lo jr m e n t in C ru d e P e tr o le u m P r o d u c in g in F eb ru a ry
1931
EPORTS from 495 crude-petroleum-producing plants in February
showed a decrease of 2.2 per cent in employment with a decrease
2.1
per cent in pay-roll totals, as compared with January figures.
These plants had in February 25,149 employees, whose combined
earnings in one week were $883,582.
Employment in February, 1931, was 19.4 per cent lower and pay
roll totals 21.0 per cent lower than in February, 1930.
R
3146S60
•15
https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
[993]
220
M O N T H L Y L A B O R R E V IE W
Details for each geographic division except New England, for which
no production is reported, are shown in the following table:
COM PA R ISO N OF E M P L O Y M E N T A N D PAY-ROLL TOTALS IN ID E N T IC A L C R U D E
P E T R O L E U M PR O D U C IN G C O M PA N IE S IN JA N U A R Y A N D F E B R U A R Y , 1931
Number on pay roll
Geographic division
Middle A tlantic.-- - --- East North Central-------- -West North Central------------South Atlantic------------- - East South Central___ _ -West South Central----- -M ountain_________- - ---- -Pacific--------------------- --All d iv is io n s _______
Estab
lish
ments
January,
1931
February,
1931
Per
cent of
change
Amount of pay roll
(1 week)
January,
1931
February,
1931
Per
cent of
change
41
5
23
10
5
319
18
74
674
42
79
538
257
19,105
278
4,748
674
37
77
470
241
18, 582
276
4,792
(>)
-1 1 .9
- 2 .5
-1 2 .6
- 6 .2
- 2 .7
- 0 .7
+ 0 .9
$18, 510
782
1,673
14, 227
5,437
654,809
9, 373
197,361
$17, 807
911
1,574
12, 400
5, 478
631,899
9,964
203, 549
- 3 .8
+16.5
- 5 .9
-1 2 .8
+ 0.8
-3 . 5
+ 6.3
+ 3.1
495
25,721
25,149
- 2 .2
902,172
883,582
- 2 .1
i No change.
6. E m p lo y m e n t in P u b lic U tilities in F e b ru a ry , 1931
MPLOYMENT in 12,170 establishments—telephone and tele
graph companies, power, light, and water companies, and
electric railroads, combined—decreased 1.2 per cent in February as
compared with January, and pay-roll totals increased 0.1 per cent.
These establishments had in February 700,207 employees whose
combined earnings in one week were $21,333,540.
Employment in public utilities was 7.4 per cent lower in February,
1931, than in February, 1930, and pay-roll totals were 5.3 per cent
lower.
Data for the three groups into which public utilities have been
separated follow.
E
T e le p h o n e a n d T e le g r a p h
E m p l o y m e n t in telephone and telegraph companies was 1.4 per
cent lower in February than in January, and earnings were 1.6 per
cent lower. The 7,965 establishments reporting had in February
316,335 emplovees whose combined earnings in one week were
$9,083,707.
Employment in February, 1931, was 11.0 per cent below the level
of February, 1930, and pay-roll totals were 7.0 per cent lower.
Details for each geographic division are shown in Table 1.
https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
L99-1J
TREND
Number on pay roll
Geographic division
Estab
lish
ments
N ew England_____
Middle Atlantic___
East North Central.
West North Central
South Atlantic____
East South Central.
West South Central.
M ountain_________
Pacific____________
720
1,229
1, 436
1,312
All divisions _
221
OF EM PLOYM ENT
Percent
of
February, change
1931
January,
1931
Amount of pay roll
(1 week)
January,
1931
February,
1931
$851, 873
3, 283, 285
1, 967, 384
723, 079
554, 432
225, 525
397, 260
174, 451
906, 418
9,083, 707
27, 528
101, 889
72, 087
29,057
20, 477
10, 293
17, 543
7,231
30. 230
-2.7
620
693
482
913
28,287
102, 875
72,653
29, 586
20, 870
10, 464
17,887
7,561
30, 481
0.8
$863, 996
3, 328, 007
1, 994, 783
734, 639
565,664
224, 716
402, 319
186,638
929, 467
7,965
320,664
316,335
- 1 .4
9,230,229
SCO
-
1.0
0.8
1.8
-1.9
-
1.6
-1.9
-4.4
-
Percent
of
change
- 1 .4
- 1 .3
- 1 .4
-
1.6
-
2.0
+ 0.4
- 1 .3
- 6 .5
- 2 .5
-
1.6
P o w er, L ig h t , a n d W a te r
E m p l o y m e n t m power, light, and water plants was 1.4 per c e n t
lower m February than m January, and pay-roll totals were 1.1 per
9?Qtfiifigher‘ i T 16 3’5184 establlst>ments reporting had in February
$7 61769463 07668 Wh°Se COmbmed eamings in one week were
Employment in February, 1931, was 1.0 per cent lower than m
February,1930, and pay-roll totals were 0.7 per cent lower
Details lor each geographic division are shown in Table 2.
Number on pay roll
Geographic division
Estabments
New E n g la n d ___
Middle Atlantic
East North Central
West North Central
South A tlan tic..
East .South Central
West South Central
Mountain. _
Pacific.. .
All divisions
January,
1931
251
356
610
414
275
175
539
118
846
20, 967
62, 282
51,471
28,415
24, 474
7,068
17,487
5,989
24, 653
3,584
242,806
February,
1931
21, 016.
62, 044
51, 236
27, 396
24,196
6,837
17,005
5, 762
23,824
239,316
Per
cent of
change
Amount of pay roll
(1 week)
Per
cent of
change
January,
1931
February,
1931
+ 0 .2
—0. 4
- 0 .5
- 3 .6
- 1 .1
- 3 .3
- 2 .8
- 3 .8
—3. 4
$675, 513
2,029, 551
1,693,160
812, 658
735, 601
172,646
467,162
174, 364
773, 355
$665, 347
2, 022, 497
1, 769, 310
829, 946
731, 310
168, 878
474, 885
176, 532
779, 238
- 1 .5
- 0 .3
+ 4 .5
+ 2.1
- 0 .6
- 2 .2
+ 1.7
+ 1 .2
+ 0 .8
—1.4
7,534,010
7,617,943
+ 1.1
E le c tr ic R a ilr o a d s
E m p l o y m e n t in the operation and maintenance of electric railroads
exclusive of car shops, decreased 0.3 per cent from January to Febru
ary and pay-roll totals increased 1.8 per cent. The 621 establish
ments reporting had in February 144,556 employees whose combined
earnings m one week were $4,631,890.
^ Employment in February, 1931, was 8.9 per cent lower than in
February 1930, and pay-roll totals were 9.0 per cent lower
Details lor each geographic division are shown in Table 3.
https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
[995]
M O N T H L Y L A B O R R E V IE W
222
A N D F E B R U A R Y , 1931
---------------— —
Number on pay roll
Establishments
Geographic division
New E upland
________
____Middle Atla^tifi
E w t North P entrai
____
AVcst North P entrai
_ ____
South Atlantic
_____ East South Central-------------West South Pentral
______
All divisions
_____
January,
1931
February,
1931
Per
cent of
change
Amount of pay roll
(1 week)
January,
1931
February,
1931
Per
change
49
160
199
69
47
11
37
14
35
13, 503
37, 781
43,175
13, 552
11,016
3,650
5,486
2,014
14,861 ^
+ 0 .9
13,630
- 0 .9
37,456
- 0 .2
43,100
13, 546 - 0 )
+0.7
11,092
- 2 .8
3, 547
- 1 .8
5,386
- 2 .3
1,968
- 0 .2
14,831
$485,580
1,216,141
1,380, 229
407, 949
307,933
96,296
143,925
53,320
460, 385
$496, 272
1, 210,486
1,415,604
426, 044
313, 532
94,037
147, 591
56,035
472, 289
+ 2 .2
-0 . 5
+ 2 .6
+ 4.4
+ 1 .8
—2 3
+ 2 .5
+ 5.1
+2 6
621
145,038 1
1
144,556
- 0 .3
4,551,758
4,631,890
+ 1.8
i Less than one-tenth of 1 per cent.
7. E m p lo y m e n t in W h o le sa le a n d R e ta il T ra d e in F eb ru a ry , 1931
MPLOYMENT in 9,553 establishments—wholesale and retail
trade combined-showed a drop of 2.9 per cent in February.as
compared with January, and a drop of 2.1 per cent in pay-roll totals.
Thèse establishments'had in February 323 594 employees whose
combined earnings in one week were $8,255,815.
E
W V in lo s a le T r a d e
E
in wholesale trade alone decreased 1.4 per cent in
February as compared with January, while pay-roll totals increased
1 0 per cent While there were no increases m employment in the
nine geographic divisions, six of the divisions showed increases in
m
p l o y m
e n t
P&The1\,940 establishments reporting had in February 60,999 employees and pay-roll totals in one week of $1,923,752
p Employment in February, 1931, was 10.5 per cent lower than in
February, 1930, and pay-roll totals were 10.1 per cent lower.
Details for each geographic division are shown in 1 able 1.
Number on pay roll
Geographic division
Establishments
February,
1931
January,
1931
Per
cent of
change
Amount of pay roll
(1 week)
January,
1931
371,085
397, 556
109,050
45,388
172, 377
61, 457
325,092
$102,782
314,952
374,348
403,443
110,032
46, 233
171, 640
64, 051
336, 271
- 3 .2
- 0 .4
+ 0.9
+ 1.5
+ 0.9
+ 1.9
- 0 .4
+ 4.2
+ 3.4
1,904,359
1,923,752
+1.0
166
307
291
261
187
59
253
83
333
3,750
9, 441
12,042
13,661
3,802
1,640
5,778
1,813
9,924
3,684
9,427
11,914
13,432
3, 627
1,627
5,704
1,784
9,800
- 1 .8
- 0 .1
—1. 1
—1. 7
- 4 .6
- 0 .8
- 1 .3
- 1 .6
- 1 .2
$106,161
Middle Atlantic _________
Fast North P,entrai _ _ ___
West N nrth Central _ __.
South A tlan tic-------------------East South Central-------------West South Central------------M ountain....................... ............
Pacific......... .................................
All division s--------------
1,940
61,851
00,999
- 1 .4
https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
[9961
February,
1931
Per
cent of
change
TREND
OF EM PLO YM EN T
223
R e ta il T r a d e
E m p l o y m e n t in retail trade in February decreased 3 . 2 per cent
and pay-roll totals decreased 3.0 per cent.
The 7,613 establishments from which reports w^ere received had
m r ebru ary 262,595 employees whose combined earnings in one week
were $6,332,063.
Employment in February, 1931, was 7.7 per cent lower than
I1gbmary; 1930, and pay-roll totals were 9.7 per cent lower.
Details by geographic divisions are shown in Table 2.
T able
COM P ARISON OF E M P L O Y M E N T A N D PA Y -R O L L TOT AT *3 t\ t TTiTrisiT'Tr^ \ t
R E TA IL T R A D E E ST A B L ISH M E N T S IN JA N U A R Y A N D f S
hyS
Geographic division
New E ngland..
Middle Atlantic
East North Central
West North Central
South Atlantic East South Central
West South Central
Mountain____
Pacific____
All divisions
Estab
lish
ments
Number on pay roll
January,
1931
February,
1931
Per
cent of
change
I Amount of pay roll
(1 week)
January,
1931
February,
1931
$282,790
2,011,297
1, 786,604
408, 501
449, 338
149, 574
259, 654
110, 232
874, 073
-5 . 2
- 4 .0
- 2 .6
- 3 .4
-3 .0
- 3 .8
- 0 .6
-4 . 1
- 0 .6
6,332,063
- 3 .0
89
393
2,718
694
1,045
363
271
200
1,840
12,616
78, 722
75, 572
19, 756
20.865
8,002
12,650
5,339
37,827
11,818
76, 736
72, 858
18,889
20, 275
7,652
12, 506
4,948
36,913
- 7 .3
- 2 .4
$298,358
2, 094, 985
1, 834,898
422, 722
463,128
155, 520
261,122
114,941
879, 620
7,613
271,349
262,595
- 3 .2
6,525,294
- 6 .3
- 2 .5
- 3 .6
- 4 .4
- 2 .8
- 4 .4
-
1. 1
Per
cent of
change
8. E m p lo y m e n t in H o te ls in F e b r u a ry , 1931
MPLOYMENT in hotels increased 1.9 per cent in February as
cmnpared with January, and pay-roll totals increased 3.0 per
cent. 1 he 2,161 hotels reporting in February had 157,116 employees
whose earnings m one week were $2,616,234.
Gains in employment were reported in seven of the nine geographic
divisions, the South Atlantic, with its winter-resort hotels, leading
with an increase of 16.4 per cent, accompanied by an increase in pay
roll totals of 17.9 per cent. The East North Central and West North
Central divisions had slight decreases in employment while only one
division, the N ew England, showed any decrease in pay-roll totals
Employment m February, 1931, was 5.5 per cent less than in Feb
ruary, 1930, and pay-roll totals were 9.7 per cent lower.
Per capita earnings, obtained by dividing the total number of
employees into the total amount of pay roll, should not be interpreted
as being the entire earnings of hotel employees. The pay-roll totals
here reported are cash payments only, with no regard to the value of
loom or board iurnished employees, and of course no satisfactory
6stimat6 can be made of additional recompense in the way of tips,
the additions to the money wages granted vary greatly, not only
among localities but among hotels in one locality and among
employees m one hotel. Some employees are furnished board and
room, others are given board only for 1, 2, or 3 meals, while the
division ot tips is made m many ways. Per capita earnings are
E
https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
[997]
M O N TH LY
224
LABO R
R E V IE W
further reduced by the considerable amount of part-time employ
ment caused by conventions and banquets or other functions.
The details for each geographic division are shown in the table
following:
C OM PARISON OF B M P W Y M E N T A O T J ^ R O L L T O T A L S IN ID E N T IC A L HOTELS
Number on pay roll
Geographic flivision
Hotels
February,
1931
January,
1931
Per
cent of
change
Amount of pay roll
(1 week)
January,
1931
February,
1931
Per
cent of
change
N ew England______________
Middle A tla n tic ----------------East North Central------West North Central------------South Atlantic ___________
East South Central- ---------West South Central.- ------M ountain......................... ...........
Pacific_____________________
100
390
409
298
219
98
162
118
367
7,984
47.166
32,365
15,088
15, 099
5,805
9, 658
3, 654
17, 346
7.999
47,345
31,998
15,062
17, 571
5, 959
9, 757
3, 658
17, 767
+ 0 .2
+ 0.4
- 1 .1
- 0 .2
+16.4
+ 2.7
+ 1 .0
+0.1
+ 2.4
$133,144
834, 628
554, 755
213,826
216, 956
71, 383
127, 203
61, 006
326,333
$131,145
843, 758
564,628
217, 677
255, 868
73, 515
128, 228
61, 926
339,489
- 1 .5
+ 1.1
+ 1 .8
+ 1.8
+17.9
+ 3 .0
+ 0.8
+ 1.5
+ 4.0
All division s--------------
2, 161
154,165
157,116
+ 1.9
2, 539,234
2,616,234
+ 3.0
9. E m p lo y m e n t in C a n n in g a n d P r e se rv in g in F eb ru a ry , 1931
canning and preserving industry showed a decrease of 1.3
per cent in employment and an increase of 5.5 per cent in pay-roll
T HE
totals in February as compared with January. Three geographic
divisions, namely, Middle Atlantic, East South Central, and Pacific,
reported increases in both employment and pay-roll totals.
Reports from 792 establishments showed 30,4+3 employees, whose
earnings in one week in February were $545,641. Thirty of the above
establishments were operated in January but not in February, while
9 establishments which had been closed in January were again in
operation in February; 347 other plants remained closed during both
months, hence are not included in this report.
Employment in February, 1931, was 5.7 per cent higher than m
February, 1930, but pay-roll totals declined 5.6 per cent over the
year interval.
. . . .
.
,
Details by geographic divisions are shown in the following table:
C O M PARISON OF E M P L O Y M E N T A N D PAY-ROLL TOTALS IN ID E N T IC A L CANNING
AND PR E SE R V IN G E ST A B L ISH M E N T S IN JA N U A R Y A N D F E B R U A R Y , 1931
Number on pay roll
Geographic division
Establishments
February,
1931
January,
1931
Per
cent of
change
Amount of pay roll
(1 week)
January,
1931
February,
1931
Per
cent of
change
New England _____________
________
Middle Atlantic
East North Central_______
West, North Central________
South Atlantic
________
East South C entral________
West South Central
_ _ __
Mountain
_____________
P a c ific ____________________
58
80
222
43
83
34
31
44
197
1,388
6, 909
6,266
1,115
5,148
1,513
1, 851
879
5,816
1,238
6, 983
6, 054
1,090
4,991
1, 797
1,181
825
6,314
-1 0 .8
+ 1.1
- 3 .4
- 2 .2
- 3 .0
+18.8
-3 6 .2
-6 . 1
+ 8.6
$23,843
135, 707
113, 513
20, 101
63, 657
14. 632
6, 504
23,427
115, 619
$22, 296
149,104
118,168
19, 379
54, 319
16,187
6,228
23,413
136, 487
- 6 .5
+ 9 .9
+4.1
- 3 .6
-1 4 .6
+10.6
—4. 2
. 1
+18.0
All division s_________
792
30,885
30,473
—X. 3
517,003
545,641
+ 5.5
https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
[ 998]
0
TREND OF EMPLOYMENT
225
10. E m p lo y m e n t in L a u n d r ie s in F eb ru a ry , 1931
MPLOYMENT in laundries decreased 0.6 per cent in February
and pay-roll totals decreased 1.1 per cent, as shown by reports
irom 321 establishments which had in February 27,884 employees
whose earnings m one week were $523,260.
q T]îer® ,Wer° in°reases in employment and pay-roll totals in the
oouth Atlantic and the East South Central geographic divisions and
decreases in the remaining divisions.
As data foi February, 1930, are not available no comparison of
employment over the 12-month period can be made.
Details for each geographic division appear in the following table:
E
C OM PARISON OF E M P L O Y M E N T A N D ^ O L L T O T I O S DJ ÏD E N T IC A L LA U N D R IES
Number on pay roll
Geographic division
Laun
dries
January,
1931
New England___
Middle Atlantic.
East North Central. .
West North Central
South A tla n tic..
East South Central
West South Central..
M ountain______
Pacific_____ _
All division s__
February,
1931
Per
cëbt" of
change
Amount of pay roll
(1 week)
January,
1931
February,
1931
Per
cent of
change
30
60
58
46
26
20
13
18
50
1,647
8,605
3,688
3, 500
3,651
1,167
887
1,753
3,142
1,644
8,515
3,683
3,487
3, 697
1,173
859
1, 738
3,088
- 0 .2
- 1 .0
- 0 .1
- 0 .4
+ 1 .3
+ 0 .5
- 3 .2
- 0 .9
- 1 .7
$33, 985
178,918
72, 759
61, 565
51,539
15,626
12, 760
32, 227
69,958
$33, 550
176,566
72, 251
60, 704
51, 690
16,121
12,755
30, 625
68,998
- 1 .3
- 1 .3
- 0 .7
- 1 .4
+ 0 .3
+ 3 .2
321
28,040
27,884
- 0 .6
529,337
523,260
- 1 .1
- 5 .0
- 1 .4
1 Less than one-tenth of 1 per cent.
11. E m p lo y m e n t in D y e in g a n d C le a n in g in F eb ru a ry , 1931
MPLOYMENT in dyeing and cleaning establishments decreased
l-7. P®1, cent m February as compared with January, and pay
roll totals decreased 3.3 per cent, as shown by reports from 127 estab
lishments, having in February 4,555 employees, whose combined
earnings m one week were $100,152.
As data lor February, 1930, are not available, no comparison of
employment over the 12-month period can be made.
E
https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
[999]
MONTHLY LABOR R EV IEW
226
Details for each geographic division appear in the following table:
f ’oivrpA"RTdON OP E M P L O Y M E N T A N D PAY-ROLL TOTALS IN ID E N T IC A L DYEING
d CLEANING E ST A B L ISH M E N T S IN JA N U A R Y A N D FE B R U A R Y , 1931
C0MPAS
Number on pay roll
Geographic division
New England
______
Middle Atlantic
___ -- ■Rast North Central__ ____
West North Central
_____
Smith Atlantic __ ________
Ea«?t South Central-- ______
Wp«?t South Central___ _____
________ Mountain
Pacific— ---------------------------All d iv is io n s
__
Establishments
January,
1931
February,
1931
Per
cent of
change
Amount of pay roll
(1 week)
January,
1931
February,
1931
8
14
21
25
17
6
10
15
11
327
633
1,099
663
586
206
184
224
713
318
622
1,080
652
588
203
183
220
689
- 2 .8
- 1 .7
- 1 .7
- 1 .7
+ 0.3
- 1 .5
- 0 .5
- 1 .8
- 3 .4
$7,979
15, 342
24,104
14, 530
10, 739
3,765
4,363
5,457
17,335
$7,889
14,189
23,887
14, 268
10,560
3,679
4,210
5, 554
15, 916
127
4,635
4,555
- 1 .7
103,614
100,152
Per
cent of
change
- 1 .1
- 7 .5
- 0 .9
- 2 .3
- 3 .5
+ 1 .8
- 8 .2
- 3 .3
—
In d e x e s o f E m p lo y m e n t a n d P a y -R o ll T o ta ls — M in in g , Q u a rry
in g , C ru d e P e tr o le u m P r o d u c in g , P u b lic U t ilit ie s , T rad e,
H o te ls , a n d C a n n in g
HE following table shows the index numbers of employment and
pay-roll totals for anthracite, bituminous coal, and metalliferous
mining, quarrying, crude petroleum producing, telephone and tele
graph, power, light, and water, electric railroads, wholesale and îetail
trade,’hotels, and canning and preserving, by months, from January,
1930, to February, 1931, with the monthly average for 1929 as 100.
T
https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
[1000]
IN D E X E S OF E M P L O Y M E N T A N D PAY-ROLL TOTALS, JA N U A RY , 1930, TO FE B R U A R Y , 1931—M IN IN G , Q U A R R Y IN G , C R U D E P E T R O L E U M
P R O D U C IN G , PU B L IC U T IL IT IE S, T R A D E , H O TELS, A N D C A N N IN G
[M onthly average, 1929= 100J
Anthracite Bituminous Metallifer
mining
coal mining ous mining
Quarrying
and nonmetallic
mining
Crude
petroleum
producing
Telephone
and tele
graph
Power
light, and
water
Year and month
Operation
and main
tenance
of electric
railroads 1
Wholesale
trade
Retail
trade
Hotels
Canning
and pre
serving
Em Pay Em Pay Em Pay Em Pay Em Pay Em Pay Em Pay Em Pay Em Pay E m Pay Em Pay Em Pay
ploy roll ploy roll ploy roll ploy roll ploy roll ploy roll ploy roll ploy roll ploy roll ploy roll ploy roll ploy roll
ment totals ment totals ment totals ment totals ment totals ment totals ment totals ment totals ment totals ment totals ment totals ment totals
95. 7
92.3
90.9
92.7
92.5
90.8
79.6
79.8
83.0
71.9
73.5
80.0
92.7
90.8
89.3
94.0 101.6 105.1
88.6 100.2 101.9
91.3 99.4 105.8
[1001]
99.6 99.7
98.8 100.4
99. 7 102.1
97.1
95.1
94.4
97.8 100.0 100.0
95.7 98.5 98.3
95.4 97.7 99.7
98.9
94. 4
93.9
99.7 100.4 100.3
96.0 102.4 103.8
95.5 102.4 104.4
46.1
45.7
49.7
50.3
51.5
50.8
74.8
65.7
83.0
72.6
66.9
81.5
April________________
M ay ____ . . _. . . . . .
June____ ___________
84. 1
93.8
90.8
75.0
98.8
94.3
94.4
90.4
88.4
81.7
77.5
75.6
89.3
87.5
84.6
88.3
85.6
81.6
87.4
90.8
90.3
85.4
90. 2
90.9
86.8
89.8
90.2
86.6
85.4
87.1
98. 9 103.4 100.7 102.6
99.7 103.2 103.4 104. 5
99.8 103.4 104.6 107.8
95.2
95.2
94.8
97.1
96.0
97.0
97.3
96.8
96.5
97.9
97.4
98.6
97.3
96.7
93.9
97.5 100. 1 100.3
97.3 98.0 98.4
96.8 98.0 98. 1
July_________________
August___ _ ________
September___________
91.6
80.2
93.8
84.0
78.8
91.6
88.0
89.2
90.5
68.9
71. 1
74.9
80.5
79.0
78.1
71.9
71.0
69.9
89.9
89.3
87.7
75.5
85.8
82.5
89.9
87.7
85.0
88.5 100.0 106.6 105.9 106.7
86.0 98.8 102.5 106.4 106.6
84.0 96.8 102.2 105.2 106:1
95.3
92.9
91.8
95.6
92.1
90.5
96.0
95.0
94.8
96.0
93.6
93.6
89.0
85.6
92.0
91.7 101.3
87.6 101. 5
92.4 100.1
October___________ ..
November_______ . . .
December.. . ____
99.0 117.2
97.2 98.0
99. 1 100.0
91.8
92.5
92.5
79.4
79. 1
77. 7
77.2
72.8
70.1
68.6
63.4
59.9
84.7
78.3
70. 2
79.3
66.8
59.9
85.2
83.6
77.4
82.6
80.0
77.2
94.5 100.9 104.8 105.6
93.0 97.9 103.4 103.7
91.6 101.3 103.2 106.3
91.0
89.3
88.8
88.9
87.7
88.6
94.2
92.6
92.0
92.9 95.5 95.1
91.0 98.4 96. 8
91.3 115.1 107.7
97.5
95.2
93.5
95.5 164.7 140.0
93.6 96.7 82.9
91.5 61.6 57.4
93.4
95.3
93.4
81.3
83.2
78.0
84.3
79.3
87.4
85.9
97.9 102.9 103.0 104.3
93.4
93.5
96.0
95.9
95.9
96.2
99.2
98.5 103.9
90.6 89.3
91.0 100.7
93.9
91.5
73.3
68.3
68.3
65.3
55.0
54.6
64.4
66.6
50.4
54.4
74.8
73.2
71.5
70.0
90.5
89.2
86.9
86.6
85.6
87.1
89.5
88.2
87.5
88.4
90.0
87.1
89.4 295.0 2 91.0
86.7 96.8 93.7
A verage________
1931
January. . . _____ . .
February. _____ . _
96.3
94.8
99.2
97.8
98.6
99.7
99.8 126.3 112.7
98.6 185.7 172.0
97.1 246.6 214.8
48.9
48.3
TREND OF EMPLOYMENT
1930
January.- ___________ 102.1 105.8 102.5 101. 4
February_____________ 106.9 121. 5 102.4 102. 1
M a rc h ... _ _______
82.6 78.5 98.6 86.4
96.1
46. 1
48.6
1 N ot including electric-railroad car building and repairing; see vehicles group, manufacturing industries, p. 206, et seq.
2 Revised.
https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
tO
to
228
MONTHLY LABOR R EV IEW
E m p lo y m e n t in B u ild in g C o n s tr u c tio n in F e b ru a ry , 1931
T
HE Bureau of Labor Statistics here presents reports as to employ
ment and pay rolls from establishments engaged in building
construction, in Washington, Providence, and St. Louis, and their
In addition, figures collected by the Illinois Bureau of Statistics
and Research, ^Maryland Commission of Labor and Statistics, ^Massa
chusetts Department of Labor and Industries, and the Industrial
Commission of Wisconsin are presented.
COM PA R ISO N
OP E M P L O Y M E N T A N D PAY-R O LL TOTALS IN
STRUCTION, JA N U A R Y A N D F E B R U A R Y , 1931
N um
ber of
estab
lish
ments
Locality
^VashiriBtnn, T). O _______
Provid^-noo, "R- I __- ____
_______
St Tyon is Mo
Illinois
___ ___
Maryland
__ _________
Ma^sanhn salts
___ __
Wisconsin__________________
Total
__________
February,
1931
6, 635
2,425
4, 003
1,414
1,334
6,444
2,601
440
229
464
66
73
352
75
1,699
Pay roll (one week)
Employees
January,
1931
24,856
BUILDING CON-
6, 334
1,991
3,745
1,514
1,138
5,969
2,169
22,860
Per
cent of
change
January,
1931
February,
1931
Per
cent of
change
- 4 .5
-1 7 .9
- 6 .4
+ 7.1
-1 4 .7
-7 . 4
-1 6 .6
$214,115
71, 416
134, 027
48, 718
32, 604
240, 216
71, 373
$196, 067
52, 038
125, 973
51, 761
29,178
219, 008
57, 462
- 8 .4
-2 7 .1
- 6 .0
+ 6.2
-1 0 .5
-8 .0
812,469
731,487
-1 0 .0
-1 9 .5
The employees included in these reports are such a small part of
the total number of employees engaged in building construction in
the United States that building construction figures are not yet
included in the summary tables.
E m p lo y m e n t o n C la ss I S t e a m R a ilr o a d s in t h e U n ite d S ta te s
HE monthly trend of employment from January, 1923, to
January, 1931, on Class I railroads—that is, all roads having
operating revenues of $1,000,000 or over—is shown by the index
numbers published in Table 1. These index numbers are constructed
from monthly reports of the Interstate Commerce Commission, using
the monthly average for 1926 as 100.
T
T a b l e 1 -IN D E X
1 ABLE 1 .
IJN U -E.-A .
OF E M P L O Y M E N T ON CLASS I STEA M RAILR O A D S IN T H E U N IT E D
ur
ST A TES JA N U A R Y , 1923, TO JA N U A R Y , 1931
[Monthly average, 1926=100]
Month
January___
February-..
March____
April_____
M ay______
June______
July--------August___
September.
October---November.
December.
1923
100. 5
102. 0
105.0
107. 1
108. 2
109.4
107.8
107.3
105. 2
99.4
A verage....------------------------- HM.i
https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
1924
1925
1927
1928
1929
96.9
97.0
97.4
98.9
99.2
98.0
98.1
99.0
99.7
95.8
95.6
96.0
95.4
95. 2 96.7
98.9
96.6
97.8 100 . 2
98.6 101 . 6
99.4 102.9
99.7 102.7
99.9 102.8
100.7 103.4
99.1 101. 2
97. 1 98.2
95.5
95.3
95.8
97.4
99.4
100.9
88.2
88.9
90.1
92.2
94.9
96.1
96.6
97.4
96. Î
96.9
93.0
85.4
85.5
87.0
99.5
99.1
98.9
95.7
91.9
89.3
89.0
89.9
91.7
94.5
95.9
95.6
95.7
95.3
95.3
92.9
89.7
97.5
93.9
93.3
83.5
100. 8
99.0
96.0
98.3
97.9
[ 1002]
100.0
101.0
8 6 .3
88.6
86.5
84.7
83.7
82. 2
80.4
77.0
74.!
73.7
229
TREND OF EMPLOYMENT
Table 2 shows the total number of employees on the 15th day each
of January and December, 1930, and January, 1931, and pay-roll
totals for the entire months.
In these tabulations data for the occupational group reported as
“ executives, officials, and staff assistants” are omitted.
T
a ble
2
.—E M P L O Y M E N T A N D E A R N IN G S OF RAILROAD E M PL O Y EE S—JA N U A R Y
A N D D E C E M B E R , 1930, A N D JA N U A R Y , 1931
[From monthly reports of Interstate Commerce Commission. As data for only the more important
occupations are shown separately, the group totals are not the sum of the items under the respective
groups]
Number of employees at
middle of month
January, Decem January,
1930
ber, 1930
1931
Profession al, clerical, a n d general.
Clerks _____ ____________
Stenographers and typists_____
M a in te n a n ce o f w ay a n d stru ctu r e s _________ __________ . . .
Laborers, extra gang and work
. . . __________
train_____
Laborers, track and roadway
section__________ __________
M a in te n a n ce o f e q u ip m e n t a n d
stores ____________ . . . . . . . .
Carmen._____ _________ _____
M achinists__________________
Skilled trades helpers______
Laborers (shops, engine houses,
power plants, and stores)_____
Common laborers (shops, engine
houses, power plants, and
stores) ___________________
T ran sp o rta tio n , o th er th a n train,
e n g in e , a n d yard. _ . . .
Station agents.
___
Telegraphers, telephoners, and
towermen
Truckers (stations, warehouses,
and platforms) _
Crossing and bridge flagmen and
gatemen__ _________
T ran sp o rta tio n
(yard m asters,
sw itch tend ers, a n d h o stiers)__
T ran sp o rta tio n , tra in a n d en g in e .
Road conductors . . .
Road brakemen and flagmen
Yard brakemen and yard helpers..
Road engineers and motormen__
Road firemen and helpers...
All em p lo y ees___
https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
____
265, 857
239, 506
149, 212
24, 558
131,874
22,248
331, 292
38,971
Total earnings
January,
1930
December,
1930
January,
1931
235, 591 $39, 395, 737 $35,480, 420 $34,973, 691
128,984
22,087
20, 973,488
3,254,434
18,416, 619
2,938,400
18,058,607
2,914,072
274, 479
267,432
32,263,102
25, 481,474
25,103, 747
24,148
23,521
2, 745, 655
1, 627,868
1,617,582
168, 235
141, 546
138,058
12,320,188
9, 343,103
9, 293,881
439,317
375,160
93, 719
53,434
96, 883
78, 647
48,077
82, 391
373,867
62, 231, 641
47, 968, 887
77,931
48,415
82, 082
15,111,916
9, 247,500
11,855,902
11, 217,057
7,215, 944
8, 821,751
48,101, 279
36, 796
31, 558
30,945
3, 675,724
2,998,569
2,933, 231
50,168
40,251
40,213
4,136,880
2,990,203
3,024,306
186, 578
168, 939
29,050
28,298
164, 623
23, 982, 703
21, 537, 554
28,135
4, 731,270
20, 990.452
4,547,678
4,524,263
22, 774
20, 737
20, 557
3,624,983
3, 292,425
3, 252,937
29,380
25,151
23,060
2,810,322
2, 259,704
2,094,385
20,116
19, 226
19,156
1, 568,308
1,502,394
1,489,237
11,098. 393
7,355,065
8,867,905
21,428
19, 027
18,799
4,284, 856
3, 746, 253
3, 670, 711
299, 588
263. 359
33, 626
65, 564
51,103
40,194
40, 809
29, 707
57, 720
44, 611
35, 344
36, 289
257, 505
63, 045, 259
29,133
56,491
43,605
34, 535
35,605
8, 391,578
11,857,868
9, 264,949
11, 360,607
8, 338, 512
51,181, 921
50. 068,195
6,939, 799
9^505; 914
7,443,911
9, 242,135
72A 785
6,822, 757
9, 287| 511
7, 204,577
9,117, 246
6 ,6I4; 068
1, 544,060 1, 340, 470 1,317,817 225, 203, 298 185, 396, 509 182,908,075
[1003]
MONTHLY LABOR REV IEW
230
C h a n g e s in E m p lo y m e n t a n d P ay R o lls in V a r io u s S ta te s
HE following data as to changes in employment and pay rolls
have been compiled from reports received from the various
State labor offices:
T
P E R C E N T OF C H A N G E IN E M P L O Y M E N T A N D PA Y ROLLS IN SP E C IF IE D STA TES
Monthly period
Per cent of change,
December, 1930, to
January, 1931
Per cent of change,
January to February,
1931
State, and industry group
State, and industry group
Employ
ment
Employ
ment
Pay roll
- 6 .7
-2 8 . 1
-1 1 .2
- 4 .9
-1 2 .9
-1 5 .1
+ .0
-1 0 .6
- 1 .5
- 4 .2
+ 10.5
+ 5.5
- 7 .0
—5. 4
+2.1
- 2 .3
+2. 8
+12.1
-1 4 .6
-1 0 . 2
+1. 5
-4 .9
Trade, wholesale and re
tail __________________
Services_______________
Public utilities_________
Coal mining----------------■
Building and contracting
-1 0 .0
+ .1
- 2 .4
+• 8
-26. 3
- 7 .9
-, 1
+ .2
-5 . 7
-2 5 . 7
- 4 .8
-1 . 1
- 1 .5
+ 5.6
+8.6
+ 4.4
+1. 1
- 1 .9
+ 2 .7
- 8 .9
-2 . 5
- 1 .7
+ 2 .0
+ 7.9
+12.2
+ 2 .0
- 1 .4
+ 1 .7
All
nonmanufac
turing_____
- 3 .7
- 2 .2
All industries..
- 2 .3
- 3 .4
convey anees .
https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
All manufacturing. .
4*»
Oi Ox
- 9 .5
-3 5 .9
-4 7 .1
+ 6 .6
January to February,
1931
Iow a
+ 3 .0
- 8 .5
- 1 .6
-1 1 .2
+ 6 .3
- 2 .0
-16. 3
+ 8 .9
- 2 .1
- 2 .4
+ 1 .0
- 3 .0
- 6 .4
- 3 .9
Food and kindred prod
ucts--------------- ---------Textiles________________
Iron and steel works-----Lumber products---------Leather products---------Paper products, printing,
and publishing----------Patent medicines, chemi
cals, and compounds - . .
Stone and clay products .
Tobacco and cigars------Railway-car shops--------Various industries--------
+1.1
+ 2 .3
All industries.
- 9 .8
-.5
-3 . 2
- 6 .1
+5.3
- 4 .6
- 3 .9
- 3 .9
-10.1
-1 5 . 7
- 1 .9
- 5 .3
Iliinois
products.
- 1 .6
- 4 .8
- 6 .5
+10.7
- 2 .3
C alifornia
All industries-
+ 4.6
+ .2
- 6 .9
+4.1
-36. 2
-3 3 .0
+ 2 .8
December, 1930, to
January, 1931
Stone, clay, and glass
products_______
Metals, machinery, and
conveyances------Wood manufactures
Leather and rubber goods
Petroleum producing and
refining________
Printing and paper goods
Textiles--------------Clothing, millinery, and
laundering_____
Foods, beverages, and
tobacco_________ _
M otion pictures___
Miscellaneous--------
-1 6 .8
+ .4
1 J-*
1
-6 . 5
-1 2 . 6
- 4 .4
+18.2
- 7 .4
- 6 .6
Wood products...............1 Furs and leather goods..
Chemicals, oils, paints,
etc___________________
Printing and paper goods
Textiles________________
Clothing and m illinery. .
Food, beverages, and
tobacco______________
Miscellaneous--------------
+ 1
O©
Illin o is—Continued
A rkansas
Auto dealers, garages - Auto bodies, wood parts. Bakeries and cafés--------Beverages--------------------Brick and tile------ --------Candy and confections..
Cooperage, heading, ve
neer _____________ - —
Cotton compresses, gins,
and products_________
Coal m ines------------------Furniture manufacture...
Flour, grain, feed, ferti
lizer________ ____ ____
Glass factories--------------Handles, hubs, spokes—
Hotels_________________
Laundries_____________
Lumber mills__________
Machinery,
foundries,
parts, smelters________
Newspapers and printers
Packing houses------------Petroleum products------Sand, gravel, stone------Textile mills, garments _.
Public u tilities------------Wholesale and retail-----Miscellaneous...................
Pay roll
+.7
M aryland
Food products....................
T e x tile s..................... ........
Iron and steel, and their
products...........................
Lumber and its products.
Leather and its products..
Rubber tires........................
Paper °nd printing-------Chemicals and allied
products........................ .
[1004]
+• 8
+ 6.2
-.1
+ 9.6
+ .8
+• 8
+ 3.9
-.8
+ .1
+ 8.8
-.6
+ 9 .8
+ 2.3
- .6
+ 6 .2
+ 5 .0
TREND OF EMPLOYMENT
231
PE R C E N T OF C H A N G E IN E M P L O Y M E N T A N D PA Y ROLLS IN SP E C IF IE D ST A TES—
Continued
Monthly period— C o n tin u ed
Per cent of change,
January to February,
1931
State, and industry group
Per cent of change,
December, 1930, to
January, 1931
State, and industry group
Employ
ment
Employ
ment
Pay roll
M aryland—Continued
M ichigan
Stone, clay, and glass
products_____ . ____
Metal products other
than iron and steel____
Tobacco products_______
Transportation
equipm ent___ _____________
Car building and repairing---------------------------Miscellaneous. _______
Paper and printing_____
Chemicals and allied
products____________ .
Stone, clay, and glass
products_________ ____
Metal products, not iron
and steel____________ _
Iron and steel products,,_
Lumber and its products.
Leather and its products.
Food and kindred produ cts______________ .
Textiles and their products____________ ____
Tobacco products...
Vehicles for land transportation____ _____
Miscellaneous___ _____ _
-HO. 1
+ 1.1
- 2 .6
-.9
+1.1
- 4 .9
+17.4
+27.0
- .2
- 5 .1
-.6
-1 . 5
All manufacturing..
+2.5
+ 6 .5
Retail establishments___
Wholesale establishments.
Public utilities_________
Coal m ines_____________
Hotels_________________
Quarries_______________
Building construction___
- 2 .8
- 1 .2
-1 . 7
+ .7
- 7 .5
+8.1
-14. 7
-6 .7
-.9
-1 4 .1
-1 3 .5
+ 6 .6
+11.1
-1 0 .5
Employment—i n d e x
numbers (1925-1927 =
100)
Decernber, 1930
January,
1931
M a ssa ch u setts
Boot and shoe cut stock
and findings______ ._
Boots and shoes___ _____
Bread and other bakery
products____________
Clothing, m en’s ________
Clothing, w om en’s . . . . .
Confectionery__________
Cotton goods___________
Dyeing and finishing textiles_______ ____ ____
Electrical machinery, apparatus, and supplies.
Foundry and machineshop products.................
Furniture______________
Hosiery and knit goods.
Leather, tanned, curried,
and fin ish e d .___ _
Paper and wood pulp___
Printing and publishing..
Rubber footwear.......... .
Rubber goods, tires, and
tu bes.. . _____________
Silk goods______________
Textile machinery and
parts______________ __
W oolen and w orsted goods.
All industries.........
https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
73.6
53.9
76.3
65. 9
102.9
47.7
98.5
100.2
50.8
100.6
56. 0
91.3
95.4
50.4
91.0
89.6
74.3
71.0
92.4
82.1
63. 7
88.6
72.9
59.5
87.1
83.4
101.4
81.2
90.1
82.1
100.8
78.4
63.9
75.2
61.5
74.7
67.2
57.4
63.9
56.5
69.9
69.4
All industries_____
Pay roll
- 0 .9
- 1 .4
- 2 .9
- 6 .5
-1 5 .2
-1 9 .5
-1 9 .0
+2. 7
- 3 .6
- 4 .4
-9 . 8
+ 2.6
-1 1 .1
- 8 .6
- 6 .7
-, 1
- 3 .2
-3 2 .9
-1 9 .7
-2 9 .2
- 1 .2
-4 1 .9
-4 4 .2
-4 2 .0
- 2 .9
-34.1
N ew Jersey
Food and kindred products_________________
Textiles and their products_________________
Iron and steel and their
products______
Lumber and its products.
Leather and its products,.
Tobacco produ cts______
Paper and printing_____
Chemical and allied products___________ _____
Stone, clay, and glass
products____ _______
Metal products other
than iron and steel___
Vehicles for land transportation, . . . _______
Miscellaneous.......... .
_
All industries____
*
- 3 .8
- 2 .6
- 1 .4
- 7 .3
- 3 .5
- 6 .9
+5.0
- 4 .2
-3 . 7
- 7 .2
-1 9 . 1
+ 1.0
-6 . 1
- 5 .8
-2 .1
- .7
- 3 .7
- 8 .5
-.8
- 6 .2
-1 4 .5
-1 4 .3
-1 4 . 2
-10. 2
- 5 .2
-7 .0
January to February,
1931
N ew York
Stone, clay, and glass____
Miscellaneous stone
and minerals____
Lime, cement, and
plaster_________
Brick, tile, and pottery.............................
Glass---- -----------------
[1005]
- 2 .1
- 6 .3
- 6 .0
-1 3 .4
- 5 .8
- 6 .1
- .3
+ 2.4
- 4 .2
+1.4
MONTHLY LABOR R EV IEW
232
P E R C E N T OF C H A N G E IN E M P L O Y M E N T A N D PA Y ROLLS IN SP E C IF IE D ST A TES—
Continued
Monthly period— C o n tin u ed
Per cent of change,
January to February,
1931
Per cent of change,
January to February,
1931
State, and industry group
State, and industry group
Employ
ment
Employ
ment
Pay roll
N ew Y ork—Continued
N ew Y ork—Continued
Metals and machinery---Silver and jewelry —
Brass, copper, and
a lu m in u m ----------Iron and steel----------Structural and architectural iron_____
Sheet metal
and
hardware____ — —
Firearms, tools, and
c u tle r y ---- ------Cooking, heating, and
ventilating apparatu s------- --------------Machinery, including electrical apparatus------ ------------Automobiles, carriages
and airplanes-. .
Railroad equipment
and repair _____
Boat and ship building----------------------Instruments and appliances_____ ___
Wood manufactures.
Saw and planing
mills_____ . . . ---Furniture and cabinetwork____ _ __
Pianos and other musical instruments__
Miscellaneous w ood. .
Furs, leather, and rubber
goods. ------------- . . . .
Leather____________
Furs and fur goods —
Shoes_______________
Other leather and
canvas goods_____
Rubber and gutta
percha............. ...........
Pearl, horn, bone, etc.
Chemicals, oils, paints,
etc___________________
Drugs and chemicals.
Paints and colors____
Oil products ___
Miscellaneous chemicals _____________
Paper
______
__
Printing and paper goods.
Paper boxes and tubes
Miscellaneous paper
g o o d s___—
Printing and bookmaking. . ______
Textiles___
.
____
Silk and silk goods...
Wool manufactures..
Cotton goods . . . . .
Knit goods (excluding
silk)______________
Other textiles _ . _.
Clothing and m illinery..
M en’s clothing__
M en’s furnishings...
-.4
+ 2 .4
Clothing and millinery—
Continued.
Women’s clothing----Women’s underwear—
Women’s headwear.—
Miscellaneous sewing.
Laundering and clean
ing—
Food and tobacco----------Flour, feed, and ce
real______________
C anning and preserv
ing—
Other groceries______
Meat and dairy prod
ucts______________
Bakery products____
Candy----- ------ -------Beverages__________
Tobacco____________
Water, light, and power—
- 8 .3
-1 7 .5
All industries.
- 1 .8
+ .3
-.9
-2 . 5
+ 4 .9
+ 4 .8
- .6
-.4
- 3 .7
+ .9
-1 3 .7
-3 .9
+ 1 .8
- 5 .2
+ 7 .0
-.6
+ 8 .6
- 8 .4
+11.3
+10.7
+14.2
+ 5 .8
+ 2.9
+ 3 .5
+ 5 .9
+ 2.4
- 1 .2
-.9
-3 . 1
- 1 .4
-2 .0
-3 .0
- 5 .5
- 3 .8
- .9
-.3
-.6
+ 2 .3
+ .9
+ .4
- 1 .4
+ 3 .2
+ 0 .2
- 2 .1
+ 1 .5
+16.9
+. 5
+ 6 .3
+1. 8
+14.0
- 3 .2
- 6 .3
+ .6
-.1
- 1 .1
—4. 5
+ 2 .7
- 2 .1
—.8
0)
+ 2.1
.
+12.1
- 2 .4
+ 2.1
-.6
+ 4 .5
- 7 .7
+10.8
- 6 .1
- 2 .1
+ 9 .4
- 4 .7
+27.6
- 3 .4
+ 13.6
+ •6
+ 5 .4
+ 8 .6
+ .7
+14.2
- 1 .3
+15.6
+16.4
+11.7
+ 7.6
+ 7.2
+10.9
- 2 .2
+22.7
+ 9 .9
+18.1
+1-1
- 2 .7
+ 4.2
- 2 .3
+ .5
- .4
- 6 .8
- 3 .6
+ 1.3
- 5 .3
- .4
- 2 .9
- .2
+ 7.3
+ 1 .0
+56.0
+ .3
- 4 .8
+ 2 .0
+5.1
+ 1.9
+11.2
-.3
+ 1 .5
+ 3.2
- 3 .2
- 3 .0
+ 2 .9
-1 3 .5
+ 2.5
.0
+ 2.4
- 4 .1
+ 4.6
-2 0 .0
+ 1 .0
+ .5
+2. 5
+ 4.3
+ 6 .0
+ 4 .4
+ 1.2
-.0
- 1 .9
-1 2 . 7
O k lah om a
Cottonseed-oil mills_____
Food production:
Bakeries____________
Confections_________
Creameries anddairies.
Flour mills_________
Ice and ice cream____
Meat and poultry----Lead and zinc:
Mines and m ills..——
Smelters____________
Metals and machinery:
Auto repairs, etc____
Machine shops and
foundries_________
T ank con stru ction
and erection---------Oil industry:
Producing and gaso
line manufacture...
Refineries__________
Printing: Job work--------Public utilities:
Steam-railway shops. .
Street railways--------Water, light, and
power-----------------Stone, clay, and glass:
Brick and t ile .______
Cement and plaster...
Crushed stone______
Glass manufacture—
Textiles and cleaning:
Textile manufacture—
Laundries, etc---------Woodworking:
Sawmills___________
Millwork, etc_______
» Change of less than one-tenth of 1 per cent.
https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
Pay roll
[ 1006 ]
All industries...........
+ 1 .0
- 4 .7
- 5 .1
-1 1 .8
+ 1 .6
+ .3
- 4 .8
+ .6
+ 2 .8
- 1 .0
- 4 .2
- 5 .1
- 4 .8
- 3 .6
-8 .8
-2 3 .9
-3 1 .4
- 7 .4
—1.3
+ 7 .5
-1 9 .2
+ 6 .8
-.3
+12.4
+ 5.7
- 4 .5
+18.9
- 2 .9
-1 0 .2
- 2 .2
- 2 .6
- 3 .4
- 1 .3
- 2 .5
Tr
end
233
of em ploym ent
PER C E N T OF CHA N O E IN E M P L O Y M E N T A N D PAY ROLLS IN SP E C IF IE D ST A TES—
Continued
Monthly period— C ontinued
State, and industry group
Index numbers (19231925= 100)—em ploy
ment
Per cent of change,
January to February,
1931
State, and industry group
January,
1931
February,
1931
Employ
ment
P en n sy lv a n ia
Metal products___
T ransportation equip
m ent___ ____ _
Textile products___ __
Foods and tobacco______
Stone, clay, and glass
produ cts__________
Lumber products______
Chemical products______
Leather and rubber prod
ucts________
Paper and printing_____
All manufacturing,.
Pay roll
Texas—Continued
76.3
76.6
57.2
86.9
97.5
2 53. 2
91.1
105. 0
56.9
49.0
86.0
58.3
57.0
88.4
90.6
94.9
94. 0
94.4
78. 7
80.2
Paper-box manufacture. _
Cotton-textile mills_____
Cement plan ts... _____
Commercial printing. . . .
Newspaper publishing..
Quarrying_____ _____
Public utilities ___
Retail stores______
Wholesale stores . . .
Hotels____________
Miscellaneous_______
All industries ._ . . .
- 0 .4
+5. 2
+ 9 .8
-1 . 7
- 1 .3
-10. 6
-1 . 5
+ .7
- 1 .4
+• 3
+3. 6
-.4
Decemb er, 1930, to
January, 1931
Pay roll
W isconsin
M etal products________
Transportation equip
m ent______. . . _
Textile products____ .
Foods and tobacco.. .
Stone, clay, and glass
products_______ . . .
Lumber products...
Chemical products
Leather and rubber prod
u c ts .. ______
Paper and printing .
All manufacturing..
62.7
63.3
41. 5
70.5
89.9
2 40. 5
82. 2
95. 2
32.3
31.1
83.2
44.4
47. 5
89.3
83.1
96.0
65.3
88.3
99. 7
68.3
+14.8
- 9 .6
Nonm anual
Per cent of change,
January to Febru
ary, 1931
Employ
ment
Texas
Auto and body works__
Bakeries______________
Confectioneries________
Pure food products_____
Ice cream factories_____
Flour m ills____________
Ice factories___________
M ea t p a c k in g and
slaughtering_________
Cotton-oil mills________
Cotton compresses______
M en’s clothing manufac
ture _________________
Women’s clothing manu
facture_______________
Brick, tile, and terra
cotta________________
Foundries and machine
shops________________
Structural-iron works__ _
Railroad car shops______
Electric-railway car shops.
Petroleum refining______
Sawmills______________
Lumber mills__________
Furniture manufacture,-.
M anual
Logging-----------------------Mining:
Lead and zinc____
Iron.. . . .
Stone crushing and quarrying------------------------Manufacturing:
Stone and allied industries_______ ..
M etal__________
Wood_________
Rubber._. . . . .
Leather.
___
Paper
____ . . .
Textiles __________
Foods________
Printing and publishing---------------------Chemicals (including
soap, glue, and ex
plosives) ____ __
All manufacturing..
Construction:
B u ild in g ______
H ighway_______ _.
Railroad...
___
M arine dredging,
sewer digging_____
Communication:
Steam railways. . . .
Electric r a ilw a y s .__
Express, telephone,
and telegraph_____
Light and power ____
Wholesale trade . .
Hotels and restaurants .
Laundering and dyeing...
+4. 2
+-1
-4 . 7
+ 5 .8
+ 11.2
- 5 .8
+ 1 .9
- 4 .5
+ 5 .2
-1 2 . 7
+ 1.0
-1 .7
-
8.6
+ 3 .2
-
1.8
- 1 .4
+ 1.1
+• 4
+10.9
Pay roll
Manufacturing, mines,
and quarries. . . . ___
Construction _______
Communication
...
Wholesale trade.. . . . . .
Retail trade—sales force
only_________________
M isc e lla n e o u s professional services________
2 Preliminary figures.
https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
[1007]
-.1
+ 1 .2
- 4 .8
- .5
- 5 .3
- 5 .6
-1 3 .3
- 5 .8
- 7 .4
- 2 .0
+ 6 .8
- 4 .9
-2 .0
- 1 .3
-1 5 .4
- 2 .6
-9 .0
-4 . 1
-2 .8
-3 .9
-1 2 .3
-3 .0
-2 4 .6
- 5 .8
- .4
-4 .2
- 8 .3
- 1 .8
- 7 .1
- 6 .5
-1 5 .0
-3 5 . 2
-1 4 . 7
-1 0 .2
-3 8 .9
-1 8 .2
-3 0 .0
-4 3 .5
- 7 .5
- 5 .3
- 9 .0
- 7 .1
- .7
- 3 .9
- 7 .1
- 5 .0
- 1 .3
- 8 .6
- 6 .7
-1 3 .4
- 1 .7
- 3 .0
- 1 .5
- 2 .1
- 1 .6
-4 . 2
- 6 .5
-.9
-2 2 .1
-1 7 .9
+ 1.1
-1 9 .5
- 9 .3
MONTHLY LABOR R EV IEW
234
T E R CENT OF C H A N G E IN E M P L O Y M E N T A N D PA Y ROLLS IN SP E C IF IE D ST A T ES—
Continued
Yearly period
Employment—i n d e x
n u m b e r s (19251927=100)
Per cent of change,
January, 1930, to Jan
uary, 1931
State, and industry group
State, and industry group
Employ
ment
January,
1930
Pay roll
C alifornia
M a ssa c h u setts—Con.
Stone, clay, and glass
products_____________
Metals, machinery, and
conveyances . . ---------Wood manufactures------Leather and rubber goods.
Chemicals, oils, paints,
etc........................... ...........
Printing and paper goods.
Textiles___ ___. . .
Clothing, millinery, and
laundering-----------------Foods, beverages, and
tobacco . . . ---------. . .
M iscellaneous3--------------
Furniture.............. ............ Hosiery and knit goods. __
Leather, tanned, curried,
and finished................... .
Paper and wood pulp----Printing and publishing __
Rubber footwear________
Rubber goods, tires, and
tubes_________________
Silk goods______________
Textile machinery and
parts_________________
W o o len an d w o r ste d
goods________________
All industries--------
All industries_____
Public u tilities.. . -----Wholesale and retail------
-2 8 .7
-3 4 .9
-2 2 . 1
-1 7 .5
-2 3 .4
—29. 9
—23. 7
-2 9 .3
-3 3 .8
- 8 .2
- 7 .6
-3 7 . 2
-1 0 .6
—16. 7
-1 1 .5
—16. 7
- 8 .4
- 7 .5
- 8 .1
-. 2
-2 0 .3
-2 5 .3
- 8 .4
- 0 .4
-1 0 .2
-1 3 .0
Illinois
Stone, clay, and glass
products------- ----------Metals, machinery, and
conveyances--------------Wood products___ _ . . .
Furs and leather goods—
Chemicals, oils, paints,
etc_______________
Printing and paper goods.
---Textiles.............. .
Clothing and millinery. . _
Foods, beverages, and
tobacco____________
76.3
January,
1931
61.0
107.2
65.2
94.5
78.0
50.7
79.9
95.3
111.8
89.9
85.5
85.1
99.5
78.3
72.9
90.1
78.3
All manufacturing..
97.8
77.0
Trade, wholesale and
retail.. . . . .
. . . ..
Public utilities---------- ..
Coal mining____________
Building and contracting.
All industries_____
81. 7
105. 2
77.2
53.9
68.9
95.9
88.3
31.4
97.0
80.4
M a ssa c h u setts
Boot and shoe cut stock
and findings--------------Boots and shoes..
-----Bread and other bakery
products...
------------Clothing, men’s . ..............
Clothing, women’s --------Confectionery---------------Cotton goods
_____
Dyeing and finishing textiles.
..
_____
Electrical machinery, apparatus, and supplies...
Foundry and machineshop products________
104. 5
82.2
76.3
65.9
100. 2
65.7
96.6
90.9
69.5
100.6
56.0
91.3
95.4
50.4
95.0
89.6
89.7
71.0
104.8
88.6
72.9
59.5
107.4
94.0
107. 5
94.7
90.1
82. 1
100.8
78.4
88.4
95. 2
61. 5
74. 7
89. 1
63.9
69.2
85.9
56.5
69.4
Employ
ment
M ich igan
Paper and printing-------Chemicals and allied
products_____________
Stone, clay, and glass
products_____________
M etal products, not iron
and steel_____________
Iron and steel products...
Lumber and its products.
Leather and its products.
Food and kindred prod
ucts_________________
Textiles and their prod
ucts-------------- , . ............
Tobacco products............
Vehicles for land trans
portation_____________
Miscellaneous__________
All industries_____
N ew Jersey
Food and kindred products__________________
Textiles and their products-------------------------Iron and steel and their
products___ _________
Lumber and its products.
Leather and its products.
Tobacco products_______
Paper and printing--------Chemicals and allied
products-------------------Stone, clay, and glass
products_____________
M etal products, other
than iron and steel____
Vehicles for land transportation_____________
Miscellaneous_____ _____
All industries_____
3Includes motion pictures
https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
98.3
81.9
Per cent of change,
January, 1930, to
January, 1931
E m p lo y m e n t—ind ex
numbers (1925-1927=
100)
January,
1930
January,
1931
'[ 1008 ]
Pay roll
-1 1 . 5
-1 6 .9
- 4 .7
-1 7 .9
-3 0 .1
-4 4 . 5
-24. 3
—24. 6
-3 3 . 0
- 4 .9
-3 6 . 4
-3 4 . 6
—45. 4
-1 8 .5
-1 3 .2
-1 8 .0
-1 6 .8
+8. 2
-20. 6
+ 5.6
-2 1 .4
-36. 2
-5 3 .3
-3 7 .8
-2 1 .4
-4 6 .2
-1 7 .6
-16. 6
-1 2 .0
-20. 2
-2 5 .7
-1 6 .3
-1 5 .5
-1 1 .3
- 6 .2
-3 3 0
-2 4 7
-2 5 . 1
—20. 7
- 6 .8
-1 2 .2
-1 6 .4
-1 2 . 7
-2 3 .6
-2 6 .4
-35. 1
- 4 .2
+17.7
-1 3 .4
-1 5 .2
+ 2 .0
—2]. 2
TREND OF EMPLOYMENT
235
PKR C E N T OF CHA N G E IN E M P L O Y M E N T A N D PA Y BOLLS IN S P E C IF IE D ST A TESContinued
Yearly period— C o n tin u ed
Per cent of change,
February, 1930, to
February, 1931
Per cent of change,
February, 1930, to
February, 1931
State, ai-d industry group
State, and industry group
Employ
ment
Employ
ment
Pay roil
New York
Stone, clay and glass___
Miscellaneous stone
and minerals_____
Lime, cement, and
plaster______ ____ _
Brick, tile, and pot
te r y .____ ________
Glass______________
Metals and machinery..
Silver and jewelry___
Brass, copper, and
aluminum________
Iron and steel_______
Structural and archi
tectural iron______
Sheet metal and hard
ware_____________
Firearms, tools, and
cutlery___________
Cooking, heating, and
ventilating appara
tu s___ ____ _______
Machinery, includ
ing electrical appa
ratus_____________
A u t o m o b ile s , car
riages, and airplanes.
Railroad equipment
and repair________
Boat and ship build
ing—
Instruments and ap
pliances__________
Wood manufactures_____
Saw and planing mills
Furniture and cabi
network_________
Pianos and other m u
sical instruments. _.
Miscellaneous wood
Furs, leather, and rubber
goods________________
Leather____________
Furs and fur go o d s...
Shoes______________
Other leather and
canvas goods_____
Rubber and gutta
percha____________
Pearl, horn, bone, etc.
Chemicals, oils, paints,
etc___________________
Drugs and chemicals.
Paints and colors____
Oil products________
Miscellaneous chem
icals ___________
Paper________________ "
Printing and paper goods.
Paper boxes and tubes
Miscellaneous paper
goods......................
Printing and bookmaking___________
Textiles_______________'
Silk and silk goods__
Wool manufactures.
Cotton goods ______
Knit goods (exclud
ing silk)____ ______
Other textiles_______
46860°—31------16
https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
Pay roll
N ew Y ork—Continued
-1 3 .9
-2 2 .0
-1 6 .0
-2 5 .3
- 3 .8
-1 0 .3
-2 0 .0
-1 1 .3
-22. 4
-2 2 .8
-3 1 .5
-16. 7
-3 0 . 2
-34. 6
-1 5 . 7
-2 0 . 1
-2 4 . 7
-2 6 . 1
-2 4 . 6
-3 3 . 4
-1 4 .6
-2 1 .5
-1 8 .4
-2 8 .9
-1 7 .5
-3 1 .7
-2 3 . 1
-2 9 . 2
-3 7 .4
-4 5 .5
Clothing and m illinery...
M en’s clothing_____
M en’s furnishings...
Women’s clothing.. _
Women’s underwear.
Women’s headwear..
Miscellaneous sew
ing—
L a u n d e r in g a n d
cleaning_________
Food and tobacco______
Flour,
feed,
and
cereals___________
Canning and pre
serving___________
Other groceries______
Meat and dairy prod
ucts______________
Bakery products____
Candy_____________
Beverages__________
Tobacco_________ _
Water, light, and power. _
All industries.._
- 7 .9
-2 3 . 7
-2 2 .5
-2 0 . 8
-2 9 .2
O k la h o m a
Cottonseed-oil m ills ..
Food production:
-2 9 .3
Bakeries________
Confections_________
-2 6 . 4
Creameries
and dairies
-2 4 .8
Flour mills________
-1 4 .9
Ice and ice cream___
Meat and poultry.. _
-2 9 .6
Lead and zinc:
Mines and m ills____
-2 8 .8
Smelters___________
-2 1 .8
Metals and machinery:
-1 8 .3
Auto repairs, etc__
-3 0 . 3
Machine shops and
+6. 8
foundries........ .........
-1 5 .2
T ank construction
and erection______
-2 7 .8
Oil industry:
Producing and gaso
-2 9 . 5
line manufacture .
-2 8 .2
Refineries_________
-1 1 . 7 Printing: Job work_____
Public utilities:
- 9 .4
Steam-railway shops .
-T9. 8
Street railways______
-1 1 .0
WTater, light, and
power____________
-1 2 .1
-2 7 . 4 Stone, clay, and glass:
Brick and tile_______
-1 0 .8
Cement and plaster.
-1 9 . 1
Crushed stone............
Glass manufacture__
-1 0 .0
Textiles and cleaning:
-1 0 .2
Textile manufacture..
Laundries, etc______
-2 7 .6
-2 5 .7 1 Woodworking:
-1 9 .8
Sawmills___________
-3 3 .3
Millwork, etc_______
-2 1 .4
-2 8 .0
-2 8 .6 !
-3 4 .8 1
-2 2 .4
-1 9 .8
-1 7 .4
-14. 4
-1 1 .3
-2 0 .9
- 6 .9
-1 1 . 1
-11. 0
-2 5 .8
+2. 5
- 8 .0
-1 3 .3
-2 1 . 6
-1 9 .4
- 7 .3
- 2 .0
-16. 5
- 9 .4
- 6 .8
-1 0 .8
- 8 .0
-1 1 .6
-1 1 .3
-3 0 . 5
[1009]
All industries.
-13. 2
-1 3 .9
-2 5 . 0
- 9 .4
-9 . 6
10.0
-
-1 7 .4
-3 . 2
-
-1 7 .2
-2 3 . 9
-2 7 .7
-1 0 .3
-1 6 . 0
-1 0 .9
-2 2 .4
-
0.2
10.8
-1 4 .3
7. 2
-1 0 .4
-17. 0
-17. 2
—
-1 7 .9
1.2
-1 3 .9
-1 3 .0
-1 4 .8
- 7 .2
-1 4 .7
-3 . 1
-10. 4
- 22. 1
- 7 .3
-2 5 .5
-1 1 . 5
-3 . 7
+21. 6
-1 4 . 9
- 5 .2
- 8 .3
-1 9 .8
-3 0 .2
+ 18.8
-2 9 . 4
-2 . 5
-1 5 . 2
-37. 1
- 1 .3
-40. 1
-3 9 .5
11.6
-
- 0 .4
- 3 .9
- 5 .3
-
-1 5 .7
-44. 5
-4 0 . 1
-5 8 .6
-3 5 .3
-4 4 .9
-° 0 . 4
+ 1.6
—2. 5
-2 6 . 2
- .4
- 9 .5
-34. 8
—lo. 5
-3 6 . 8
-1 9 .8
-1 7 . 1
-2 8 .4
-4 3 .0
-12. 5
+5. 2
+ 3.4
-4 0 .2
-19. 1
+38. 3
+ 4.9
+38. 6
—5. 4
+23. 5
-1 0 .9
-39. 1
-2 1 . 7
-40. 0
-39. 3
-14. 6
-2 2 .3
MONTHLY LABOR REV IEW
236
P E R C E N T OF C H A N G E IN E M P L O Y M E N T A N D PA Y ROLLS IN SP E C IF IE D ST A TES—
Continued
Yearly period—C o n tin u e d
Per cent of change,
February, 1930, to
February, 1931
Index numbers (19231925= 100) — employ
ment
State, and industry group
State, and industry group
February,
1930
Employ
ment
February,
1931
Texas
P e n n sy lv a n ia
Metal products-------------Transportation equip
m ent—
Textile products-----------Foods and tobacco______
Stone, clay, and glass
products-------------------Lumber products----------Chemical products-------Leather and rubber prod
ucts__________ ______
Paper and printing-------All manufacturing..
96.4
100.1
2 53. 2
91.1
105.0
63.2
81.1
98.3
58.3
57.0
88.4
100.1
94.0
94. 4
84.0
105.5
99.5
97.0
Pay roll
M etal products_________
Transportation eq u ip
m e n t._______________
Textile products-----------Foods and tobacco______
Stone, clay, and glass
products-------------------Lumber products_______
Chemical products-------Leather and rubber prod
ucts_________________
Paper and printing-------All manufacturing.
100.3
63.3
86.6
109.0
103.7
2 40.5
82.2
95.2
82.1
87.2
104.3
44.4
47.5
89.3
102.6
88.3
99.7
113.1
Auto and body works _
Bakeries_____________
Confectioneries_______
Pure food products______
Ice cream factories______
Flour m ills__ ......................
Ice factories____________
Meat packing and slaugh
tering—
Cotton-oil mills_________
Cotton compresses______
M en’s clothing manu
facture_______________
Women’s clothing m anu
facture_______________
Brick, tile, and terra cotta.
Foundries and machine
shops________________
Structural-iron works----Railroad car shops______
Electric-railway car shops
Petroleum refining______
Sawmills_______________
Lumber mills__________
Furniture manufacture,,.
Paper-box manufacture,
Cotton-textile mills_____
Cement plants_________
Commercial printing____
Newspaper publishing---Quarrying__________
Public utilities--------Retail stores________
Wholesale stores_____
Hotels______________
Miscellaneous_______
68.3
2 Preliminary figures.
https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
[1010 ]
All industries.
-2 4 .4
-1 7 .5
+ 3 .8
6.6
-
- 4 .3
-1 8 .3
-1 6 .7
-1 4 .2
-3 3 .0
+ 2.8
+ 2. 8
-3 3 .9
-3 6 .4
-2 7 .8
-2 5 .1
-1 2 .9
2 2 .6
-
-2 0 .5
2 2.8
-
-1 9 .7
+ 8.6
-1 4 .2
-
8. 1
- 1 .4
-4 .8
-1 8 .0
+ 2 .9
- 7 .3
-8 .7
- 6 .6
-1 6 .4
-1 5 .2
Pay roll
WHOLESALE AND RETAIL PRICES
R e ta il P rices o f F ood in F eb ru a ry , 1931
HE following tables are compiled from simple averages of the
actual selling prices1 received monthly by the Bureau of Labor
statistics from retail dealers.
i J i n l n 1 shSw? for the United ^ates retail prices of food February
lo, 1930, and January 15 and February 15, 1931, as well as the
percentage changes m the year and in the month. For example the
^ taioQPoriCo^?er P°Und T°f round steak was 43 3 cents on February
15, 1930; 37.5 cents on January 15, 1931; and 35.9 cents on February
lo, 1931 these figures show decreases of 17 per cent in the year and
4 per cent m the month.
1^rpke cost of various articles of food combined shows a decrease of
17'° PCJ Cent February 15, 1931, as compared with February 15, 1930
Janumy L illis 0/ 4‘3 P6r CCnt Februai'J 15> 1931, as compared with
T
[Percentage changes of five-tenths of 1 per cent and over are given in whole numbers]
Average retail price on—
Article
Sirloin steak.
Round steak.
Rib roast___
Chuck roast—
Plate beef___
Pork chops...
Bacon, sliced.
Ham, sliced..
Lamb, leg of.
Hens_______
Salmon, red, canned___________
Milk, fresh________________
Milk, evaporated____________
Butter______________________
Oleomargarine (all butter substi
tutes).
Cheese________________
Lard___________________ H I” ” '"'
Vegetable lard substitute____I” ” H
Eggs, strictly fresh_______
Bread____________
Unit
Feb. 15,
1930
Jan. 15,
1931
Feb. 15,
1931
C e n ts
C e n ts
C e n ts
Pound.
----- do.
----- do.
-----do.
___ do.
48.6
43.3
36.0
29.5
20.8
42.5
37.5
31.5
24.4
16.7
.d o .
-do.
.d o .
.d o .
.d o .
35.2
42.6
54.0
38.1
38.2
---- do_____
Quart_____
16-oz. can__
Pound_____
------ do_____
31.9
14.1
10.3
47.0
26.2
Per cent of increase
(+ ) or decrease
( - ) Feb. 15,1931,
compared with—
Feb. 15,
1930
Jan. 15,
1931 '
41.0
35.9
30.5
23.3
15.9
-1 6
-1 7
-1 5
-2 1
-2 4
—4
-4
—3
—5
-5
29.8
40. 2
50.6
31.4
32. 7
27.6
39.2
49.3
31.1
31.7
-2 2
-8
-9
-1 8
— 17
-7
-3
—3
—1
-3
34.4
13.3
9.8
37.7
23.7
34.3
13.0
9.6
36.3
22.7
+8
-8
-7
-2 3
-1 3
- 0 .3
—2
-2
—4
-4
----- do.
36.9
32. 1
31.2
-1 5
-3
----- do.
17.1
15.7
14.5
-1 5
-8
----- do.
24.4
23.8
23.7
-3
0 .4
D ozen.
47. 2
36.1
27.2
-4 2
-2 5
Pound.
8.8 1 1
8. 2 1
8.0
-9
1
-2
1 In addition to monthly retail prices of food and coal
bureau publishes periodically the prices of
gas and electricity for household use in each of 51 cities. ,Athe
t present this information is being collected in
June and December of each year.
https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
[ 1011 ]
237
238
T
MONTHLY LABOR R EV IEW
1.—AVER A G E R E T A IL PR IC ES OF S P E C IF IE D FOOD A R TIC L ES A N D PE R C E N T
OF INC R E A SE OR D E C R E A SE F E B R U A R Y 15, 1931, C O M PA R E D W ITH JA N U A R Y 15, 1931,
A N D F E B R U A R Y 15, 1930—Continued
a b le
Average retail price on—
Unit
Article
Feb. 15,
1930
Jan. 15,
1931
Feb. 15,
1931
C e n ts
C e n ts
C e n ts
Percent of increase
(+ ) or decrease
( - ) Feb. 15,1931,
compared with—
Feb. 15,
1930
Jan. 15,
1931
F lo u r.. ...................................... . ..
Pound____
__ _ d o__ _ _
Corn meal.............................__
Rolled oats____
. do
Cornflakes___ _________ _
_ _ . 8-oz. package..
28-oz. package.
Wheat cereal .
. . . . __________
5.1
5.3
8.8
9.4
25.6
8. 5
9.3
25.2
4.0
5. 0
8.4
9.3
25.2
-2 2
—6
-5
-1
-2
0
-2
-1
0
0
Macaroni____
._ . . . . .
Pound___ ___
Rice__ . . . ___ . . . . . _____ . ___ do______
_ _ d o ____ _
Beans, n avy............ ..........................
____ ______. . . _ __do_______
Potatoes. . . . .
__ _do__ ____
Onions . .
. . . . . . . ____. . . .
19. 5
9.6
12.3
3.9
5.1
18. 2
8.9
9.2
2.9
3.9
18. 0
8.9
8.9
2.7
3.6
-8
-2 8
-3 1
-2 9
-1
0
-3
Cabbage ___ . . . .
Pork and beans
Corn, canned
. . . ______ . . . .
Peas, canned. .
...................
__do __ ___
No. 2 can
- do_ _
. _ _do__ _ _
6.7
11.3
15. 5
16.5
4.3
10.5
14. 7
15.5
4.3
10.3
14. 5
15.4
-3 6
—9
-6
-7
-1
Tomatoes, ca n n ed ............... . ............
Sugar__
______ _____________
T ea .. .. . . .
............................
Coflee . . .
...... .............. ...........
_ __ d o __ ____
P ou n d ..
__do___ ____
__ _ d o _______
12.6
6. 5
77.9
42.7
11. 2
5.9
76.7
37.8
11.0
5.9
76. 5
37.3
-1 3
-9
-2
-1 3
-2
0
Prunes . . . .
Raisins. _. . .
B ananas.. _ . .
Oranges. . .
____do__ ____
__ __do__ _
Dozen_____
____d o __ ____
18.3
12.2
31.3
49.4
12.9
11.3
29.1
32.5
12.7
11.3
28. 7
31. 5
-3 1
-2
..
...........................
...... ................ . ........
________________
_____ ____ ___
Weighted food ind ex..
______
4.0
-7
-8
0
—2
-1
- 0 .3
-1
-8
-3 6
0
-1
—3
—17. 0
-4 . 3
—7
Table 2 shows for the United States average retail prices of specified
food articles on February 15, 1913, and on February 15 of each year
from 1925 to 1931, together with percentage changes in February of
each of these specified years compared with February, 1913. For
example, the retail price per pound of sirloin steak was 23.9 cents in
February, 1913; 38.5 cents in February, 1925; 40.6 cents in Feb
ruary, 1926; 40.9 cents in February, 1927; 44.8 cents in February,
1928; 47.8 cents in February, 1929, 48.6 cents in February, 1930;
and 41.0 cents in February, i931.
As compared with February, 1913, these figures show decreases of
61 per cent in February, 1925; 70 per cent in February, 1926; 71 per
cent in February, 1927; 87 per cent in February, 1928; 100 per cent
in February, 1929; 103 per cent in February, 1930; and 72 per cent
in February, 1931.
The cost of the various articles of food combined showed an increase
of 31.2 per cent in February, 1931, as compared with February, 1913.
https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
[10121
239
W H O L E S A L E A N D R E T A I L P R IC E S
T
.—AVER A G E R E T A IL PR IC ES OF SP E C IF IE D FOOD A R TIC L ES
PE B B U A R Y 1? f 9?3B R U A R Y 15
C E R T A IN SP E C IF IE D
a b le
2
°F
A N D
P E P
p e m
t
YBAMCOMPArI d W ITH
[Percentage changes of five-tenths of 1 per cent and over are given in whole numbers]
Per cent of increase Feb. 15 of each
specified year compared with Feb.
15, 1913
Average retail prices on Feb. 15—
Article
1913 1925 1926 1927 1928 1929 1930 1931 192£ 1926 1927 1928 1929 1930
1931
as as. as. as. as. as.
Sirloin steak__pound. 23.
Round steak___ d o ... 20.
Rib roast............do___ 18.
Chuck roast___ do___ 14.
Plate beef_____ do___ 11.
Pork chops____ do___ 18.
Bacon, sliced___ d o ..i. 25.
Ham, sliced____do___ 25.
Lamb, leg of___do___ 18.,
Hens....................do___ 20.'
Salmon, red, canned
----------------- pound..
Milk, fresh___ quart.
8.1
Milk, evaporated
---------16-ounce can
Butter---------- pound.. 41.2
O le o m a r g a r in e (all
butter substitutes)
----------------- pound..
Cheese......... .......do___ 22.2
Lard__________ do___ 15.4
Vegetable lard substi
tute------. . .p o u n d ..
Eggs, strictly fresh
------------------ dozen.. 31.5
B read..............pound.. 5.6
Flour_________ do___ 3.3
Corn meal_____ do___ 2.9
Rolled oats___.d o ...
Corn flakes
8-ounce package..
Wheat cereal
.28-ounce package
Macaroni____ pound
Rice---------------- do___ 8.6
Beans, navy___ do___
Potatoes______ do
1.5
Onions...... ..........d o___
C a b b a g e........... do___ —
Pork and beans
-------------No. 2 can ..
Corn, canned__ do___
Peas, canned___do___ —
Tomatoes, canned
-------------No. 2 ca n ..
Sugar, granulated
-------------- .p o u n d .. 5.5
Tea---------- ------ do___ 54.3
Coffee_________ do___ 29.8
Prunes________ do.
Raisins________ do
Bananas __.dozen
Oranges. ______ do___
All articles combined 1
38.
32.'
28.
20.4
13.
30.
40.
48.1
38.3
36.1
40.
34.
29.
22.
14. e
36.3
48.1
53.6
38.4
38.
40.
35.
30.
22.'
14.1
35.1
48.
56.7
37.3
38. £
44.
38.1
33.1
25.'
17. £
29. £
43.7
51.2
37. £
37.2
47.
42.]
35.
28.'
20.
33.
42.7
53.7
40.3
39.7
O s.
O s.
48.
43.
36.
29.
20.
35.2
42.
54.
38.1
38.2
41.
35.
30. £
23.3
15.
27.6
39.2
49.3
31.1
31.7
6
5
5
3
1
6(
5f
8f
10'
74
7
6
5
4
2<
92
92
111
101
88
7]
72
62
52
32
96
9C
123
102
86
31.4 37.6 33.2 35.4 31.7 31.9 34.3
13.9 14.2 14.1 14.3 14.3 14.1 13.0
56
60
11.2 11.6 11.4 11.5 11.4 10.3 9.6
50.6 54.5 58.8 56.3 58.5 47.0 36.3
23
30.2 31.2 29.0 27.6 27.6 26.2 22. 7
36.4 37.5 37.6 39.2 38.2 36.9 31.2
22.8 22.2 19.6 18.3 18.4 17.1 14.5
8
8
7
7
5
56
102
102
8C
10(
104
88
92
86
7£
67
111
118
92
102
IK
91
98
81
86
67
113
106
85
72
74
62
56
41
46
55
94
68
53
58
61
61
58
46
32
43
37
42
14
112
64
48
69
44
69
27
77
19
72
19
66
11
41
i6
70
70
94
90
39
68
91
79
40
68
70
76
37
64
61
79
56
61
55
83
50
57
55
83
» 14
43
21
72
26
35
26
19
14
12
3
73
280
153
100
53
160
80
40
38
75
22
40
72
36
43
67
29
42
63
20
43
66
18
43
43
7
41
25
71
25.8 25.6 25.2 24.9 24.7 24.4 23. 7
53.4 43.8 44.2 43.1 49.1 47.2 27.2
9.5 9.4 9.4 9.2 9.0 8.8 8.0
6.4 6.3 5.6 5.3 5.1 5.1 4.0
5.5 5.2 5.1 5.2 5.3 5.3 5.0
9.2 9. 1 9.1 9.0 8.9 8.8 8.4
11.0 11.0 10.9
9.7
9.5
9.4
9.3
24.6 25.4 25.4 25.6 25.5 25.6 25.2
20.3 20.3 20.1 20.0 19.6 19.5 18.0
10.8 11.6 10.8 10.2 9.8 9.6 8.9
10.4 9.6 9.2 10.1 13.8 12.3 8.9
2.6 5.7 3.8 3.0 2.3 3.9 2.7
6.3 5.9 5.7 5.2 8.2 5.1 3.6
5.0 6.4 4.9 4.5 5.9 6.7 4.3
12.6 12.2 11.7 11.3 11. 8 11.3 10.3
17.7 16.7 16.1 15.8 15.9 15.5 14.5
18. 5 17.7 17.1 16.8 16.7 16.5 15.4
13.8 12.3 12.2 11.8 12.7 12.6 11.0
7. 7
74.8
52.1
17.1
14.6
36.8
44.7
1
6.7
76.1
51.3
17.2
14.5
35.7
46.5
7.5
77.4
49.9
15.8
14.4
34. 7
47.1
7.1
77.3
48.6
13.6
13.6
34.8
51.0
6.6
77.6
49.5
14.2
11.6
33.3
43.6
6.5
77.9
42.7
18.3
12.2
31.3
49.4
5.9
76.5
37.3
12.7
11.3
28. 7
31. 5
56.3 66.8
1
1 Decrease.
Beginning with Jan. 1, 1921, the index numbers showing the trend in the retail cost of food have been
composed of the articles shown m Tables 1 and 2, weighted according to the consumption of the average
' Fr,?ni January, 1913, to December, 1920, the index numbers included the following articles: Sirlofn
steak, round steak, rib roast, chuck roast, plate beef, pork chops, bacon, ham, lard, hens, flour, corn meal
eggs, butter, milk, bread, potatoes, sugar, cheese, rice, coffee, and tea.
Table 3 shows the trend in the retail cost of three important groups
of food commodities, viz, cereals, meats, and diary products, by years
from 1913 to 1930, and by months for 1929, 1930, and 1931. Thé
articles within these groups are as follows :
Cereals: Bread, flour, corn meal, rice, rolled oats, corn flakes, wheat
cereal, and macaroni.
https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
[1013]
240
M O N T H L Y L A B O R R E V IE W
Meats: Sirloin steak, round steak, rib roast, chuck roast, plate
beef, pork chops, bacon, ham, hens, and leg of lamb.
Dairy products: Butter, cheese, fresh milk, and evaporated milk.
T
a b le
3 .—IN D E X N U M B E R S OF R ETA IL COST OF CEREA LS, M EA T S, A N D D A IR Y
PR O D U C T S FOR TH E U N IT E D STATES, 1913, TO F E B R U A R Y , 1931
[Average cost in 1913=100.0]
Year and month
1913: Average for year..
1914: Average for year..
1915: Average for year—
1916: Average for year..
1917: Average for year..
1918: Average for year—
1919: Average for year.,
1920: Average for year.,
1921: Average for year..
1922: Average for year_.
1923: Average for year..
1924: Average for year..
1925: Average for year.,
1926: Average for year..
1927: Average for year..
1928: Average for year_.
1929: Average for year..
January. .
February,
M arch__
April----M ay____
June____
Cereals Meats
Dairy
prod
ucts
Year and month
100.0
100.0
100.0
106. 7
103.4
99.6
108.2
137.0
172.8
184.2
185.7
158.1
150.3
149.0
150.2
163.0
171.3
169.9
179.2
188.4
180.9
180.3
182.8
187. 5
191.2
192.4
97.1
96.1
103.2
127.6
153.4
176.6
185.1
149.5
135.9
147.6
142.8
147.1
145.5
148.7
150.0
148.6
151.9
152.6
152.4
148.9
147.5
146.8
121.6
126.8
186. 5
194.3
198.0
232.1
179.8
159.3
156.9
160.4
176.2
175.5
170.7
167.2
164.1
164.1
164.1
164. 1
164.1
163. 5
163.0
1929—Continued.
July----------------------August_____________
September_________
October____________
November_________
December__________
1930: Average for year---January-----------------February__________
M arch------------------April------------ -----M a y _______________
June_______________
July---------------- -----August------------------September-------------October----------------N o v e m b e r ..---------D ecem ber.-.----------1931:
.January---- -- ---- --- February _. —. . . . _ .
Cereals Meats
Dairy
prod
ucts
163.5
164.7
165.2
163.5
163.6
162.9
158.0
162.9
161.6
160.9
160.3
159.8
160.1
158.6
156.9
156.4
154.4
152.4
195.9
196.0
194.2
189.2
184.1
181.8
175.8
183. 6
183.1
183.0
183.3
181.5
179.9
175.2
169.9
173.3
171.1
164.0
146.8
147.1
148.1
149.3
147.0
144.9
136.5
138.9
138.5
137.6
138.9
137.0
133.7
133.9
137.4
138.8
137.8
135.3
147.1
159.5
153.4
123.6
151.6
144.6
161.6
129.8
120.2
In d e x N u m b e r s o f R e ta il P r ic e s o f F o o d in t h e U n ite d S t a t e s
I n T a b l e 4 index numbers are given which show the changes in
the retail prices of specified food articles, by years, for 1913 and 1920
to 1930,2 by months for 1930 and 1931. These index numbers, or
relative prices, are based on the year 1913 as 100, and are computed
by dividing the average price of each commodity for each month and
each year by the average price of that commodity for 1913. These
figures must be used with caution. For example, the relative price
of sirloin steak for the year 1930 was 182.7, which means that the
average money price for the year 1930 was 82.7 per cent higher than
the average money price for the year 1913. As compared with the
relative price, 196.9 in 1929, the figures for 1930 show a decrease of
14.2 points, but an increase of 7.2 per cent in the year.
In the last column of Table 4 are given index numbers showing
changes in the retail cost of all articles of food combined. Since
January, 1921, these index numbers have been computed from the
average prices of the articles of food shown in Tables 1 and 2, weighted
according to the average family consumption in 1918. (See March,
1921, issue, p. 25.) Although previous to January, 1921, the number
of food articles varied, these index numbers have been so computed
as to be strictly comparable for the entire period. The index num
bers based on the average for the year 1913 as 100.0 are 132.8 for
January, 1931, and 127.0 for February, 1931.
2
For index numbers of each month, January, 1913, to December, 1928, see Bulletin No. 396, pp. 44 to
61; and Bulletin No. 495, pp. 32 to 45. Index numbers for 1929 are published m each Labor Review,
February, 1930, to February, 1931.
https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
[1014]
W H O L E S A L E A N D R E T A IL P R IC E S
T able 4 .
241
IN D E X N U M B E R S OF R E TA IL PR IC ES OF P R IN C IP A L A R TIC L ES O F F O O D
BY Y EAR S, 1913, 1920 TO 1930, A N D B Y M O N TH S FOR 1930 A N D 1931
[Average for year 1913=100.0]
Year and
month
Sirloir Rounc Rib Chuct Plate
steak steak roast roast beef
1913__________ 100.0 100.0
1920_________
172.1 177.1
1921._________ 152.8 154.3
1922
___________
147.2 144.8
1923
___ 153.9 150.2
1924
___ 155.9 151.6
1925
___________
159.8 155.6
1 9 2 6 ----..
162.6 159.6
1927
___________
167.7 166.4
1928
___________
188.2 188.3
1929
___________
198.9 199. 1
1930
_
182.7 184.8
January___ 192.9 195. 5
February._ 191.3 194.2
M arch.. . 190.6 192.8
April. _ _ . 190.2 193.3
M ay______ 190.2 192.8
Ju n e.. __ . 188.6 191.5
July______ 182.3 184.3
August__
175. 6 176.7
September _ 177.2 178.0
October___ 175.2 176.2
N ovem ber. 170. 5 170.9
December.. 168.9 169.1
1931: January.. 167.3 168.2
F ebruary.. 161.4 161.0
Year and month
100.0
167. 7
147.0
139.4
143.4
145.5
149.5
153.0
158.1
176.8
185.4
172.7
183.3
181.8
181.3
181.3
179.8
177.3
171.7
163.1
166.7
164.1
160.6
159.6
159.1
154.0
Lard
Eggs
1913________
100.0
1920
_
186.7
1921
_
113.9
1922
___________ 107.6
1923
___________ 112.0
1924
___________ 120.3
1925
___________ 147.5
1926
___________ 138.6
1927
___________ 122.2
1928
___________ 117.7
1929
___________ 115.8
1930
___________ 107.6
January__ ____ 108.9
February
108.2
March. . . . .
107.0
A p r i l . . . ___
106.3
M ay______ .
105.7
June . . .
105.1
July_____________ 103.2
August. __ . . .
104.4
September
110.8
October _ . .
112.0
November
110.8
D ecem ber..
105.7
1931: January________ _ 99.4
February. . . . .
91.8
100.0
197.4
147.5
128.7
134.8
138.6
151.0
140.6
131.0
134.5
142.0
118.8
160.6
136.8
102.3
100.0
97.7
97.4
101.7
112.5
124. 9
129.9
140.3
120.6
104.6
78.8
100.0
163.8
132.5
123.1
126.3
130.0
135.0
140.6
148.1
174.4
186.9
170.0
184.4
184. 4
182.5
182.5
179.4
175.6
166.3
155.6
160.0
158.7
154.4
153.8
152.5
145.6
100.0
151.2
118.2
105.8
103. 6
109.1
114. 1
120.7
127.3
157.0
172.7
155.4
172.7
171.9
170.2
i 168.6
1 164.5
160.3
149.6
138.8
142. 1
I 142.1
139.7
139.7
138.0
131.4
Bread Flour
100.0
205.4
176.8
155.4
155.4
157.1
167.9
167.9
166.1
162.5
160.7
155.4
158.9
157.1
157.1
157.1
157.1
157.1
157.1
155.4
155.4
153.6
151.8
151.8
146.4
142.9
100.0
245.5
175.8
154.5
142.4
148.5
184.8
181.8
166.7
163.6
154.5
142.4
154.5
154.5
151.5
148.5
145.5
.145. 5
139.4
136.4
133.3
130.3
127.3
124.2
121.2
121.2
Pork
chops Bacon Ham
Hens
Milk Butte Cheese
100.0
201.4
165.2
157.1
144.8
146.7
174.3
188.1
175.2
165.7
175.7
171.0
168.1
167.6
171.9
176.7
171.9
174.3
173.8
174.8
185. 2
180.5
156.2
149.5
141.9
131.4
100.0
193.7
158.2
147.4
144.8
139.6
173.0
186.3
174.8
163.0
161.1
156. 7
157.0
157. 8
157.8
157.4
156.7
156.7
156.7
155.6
158.1
157.8
155.9
153.0
148.9
145.2
100. 0
206.3
181.4
181.4
169.1
168.4
195.5
213.4
204.5
193. 7
204.1
198.5
199. 3
200.7
201.1
200.4
200.7
200.7
200.0
198.1
198.9
197.4
193.7
191.4
188.1
183.3
100.0
209.9
186.4
169.0
164.3
165.7
171.8
182. 2
173. 2
175.6
186.4
166.7
178.4
179.3
179.8
179.3
175.6
167.6
161.5
158.7
159.6
158. 7
153.1
150.2
153.5
148.8
100.0
187.6
164.0
147.2
155. 1
155.1
157.3
157.3
158.4
159.6
160.7
157.3
159.6
158.4
157.3
157.3
157.3
157.3
157.3
157.3
157.3
157.3
157.3
151.7
149.4
146.1
100.0
183.0
135.0
125.1
144.7
135.0
143.1
138.6
145.2
147.5
143.9
120.4
121.9
122.7
121.9
125.6
120.9
113.1
114.1
123.8
127.2
124.8
118.5
111.0
98.4
94.8
Corn
meal
Rice
Pota
toes Sugar
Tea
All ar
Coffee ticles
'
100.0
216.7
150.0
130.0
136.7
156.7
180.0
170.0
173.3
176.7
176.7
176.7
180.0
176. 7
176.7
176.7
176.7
176.7
176.7
176.7
176.7
176.7
173.3
173.3
170.0
166.7
100.0
200.0
109.2
109.2
109.2
116.1
127.6
133.3
123.0
114.9
111.5
109.2
110.3
110.3
109.2
110.3
109.2
109.2
109.2
109 2
110.3
109.2
106.9
105.8
102.3
102.3
1 22 articles in 1913-1920; 42 articles in 1921-1931.
https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
[1015]
100.0
370.6
182.4
164.7
170.6
158. 8
211. 8
288.2
223. 5
158. 8
188.2
211.8
229.4
229.4
229.4
241.2
252.9
247.1
194. 1
182.4
188.2
182.4
170.6
170.6
170.6
158.8
100.0
352. 7
145. 5
132.7
183.6
167.3
130.9
125.5
132.7
129.1
120.0
112.7
120.0
118.2
116.4
114.5
114.5
110.9
110.9
110.9
107.3
105.5
107.3
107.3
107.3
107.3
100.0
134.7
128.1
125.2
127.8
131.4
138.8
141.0
142.5
142.3
142.6
142.5
143.4
143.2
142.8
142.5
142.5
143.0
142.6
142.3
142. 1
141.9
141.4
141.4
141.0
140.6
100.0
157.7
121.8
121.1
126.5
145.3
172.8
171.1
162.1
165.1
164.8
136.2
147.0
143.3
140.6
138.9
137.2
136.2
135.6
134.6
132.6
131.2
129.9
129.2
126.8
125.2
100.0
188.2
153.9
148.9
167.0
159.7
166.1
165.6
170.1
174.2
171.9
158.8
169.2
167.0
164.7
162.9
162. 0
157.9
155. 2
153.4
154.8
154.8
152.9
150.2
145.2
141.2
100.0
203.4
153.3
141.6
146.2
145.9
157.4
160.6
155.4
154.3
156.7
147.1
155.4
153.0
150.1
151.2
150.1
147.9
144.0
143.7
145.6
144.4
141.4
137.2
132.8
127.0
MONTHLY LABOR REV IEW
242
The curve shown in the chart below pictures more readily to the
eye the changes in the cost of the food budget than do the index
numbers given in the table.
C o m p a r is o n o f R e ta il F o o d C o s t s in 51 C itie s
5 shows for 39 cities the percentage of increase or decrease
in the retail cost of food 3 February, 1931, compared with the aver
age cost in the year 1913, in February, 1930, and January, 1931.
For 12 other cities comparisons are given for the 1-year and the
1-month periods; these cities have been scheduled by the bureau at
different dates since 1913. The percentage changes are based on
actual retail prices secured each month from retail dealers and on the
average consumption of these articles in each city. 4
Effort has been made by the bureau each month to have all sched
ules for each city included in the average prices. For the month of
February 99.2 per cent of all the firms supplying retail prices in the
51 cities sent in a report promptly. The following-named 41 cities
had a perfect record; that is, every merchant who is cooperating with
the bureau sent in his report in time for his prices to be included in
the city averages: Atlanta, Birmingham, Boston, Buffalo, Charles
ton (S. C.), Chicago, Cincinnati, Cleveland, Columbus, Dallas, Den
ver, Detroit, Fall River, Indianapolis, Kansas City, Little Rock,
Louisville, Manchester, Memphis, Milwaukee, Minneapolis, Mobile,
Newark, New Haven, New York, Norfolk, Omaha, Peoria, Phila
delphia, Portland (Me.), Providence, Richmond, Rochester, St.
Louis, St. Paul, Salt Lake City, San Francisco, Savannah, Scranton,
Seattle, and Springfield (111.).
T able
3 For list of articles see note 2, p. 230.
,. . .
., „„„
4 The consumption figures used for January, 1913, to December, 1920, for each article in each city are
given in the Labor Review for November, 1918, pp. 94 and 95. The consumption figures which have been
used for each month beginning with January, 1921, are given in the Labor Review for March, 1921, p. 26.
https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
[ 1016]
City
Percent P e r c e n t a g e d e
crease, February,
age
1931, compared
increase,
with—
February,
1931, com
pared
Febru January,
with 1913 ary,
1930
1931
Atlanta_____
Baltimore___
Birmingham.
Boston_____
Bridgeport.. .
Buffalo_________
B utte__________
Charleston, S. C_
Chicago________
Cincinnati______
Cleveland.
Columbus.
Dallas....... .
D enver___
Detroit___
Fall R iv e r...
Houston____
Indianapolis.
Jackson ville.
Kansas City.
Little R ock..
Los Angeles..
Louisville___
M anchester..
M emphis___
M ilwaukee...
https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
City
27.6
32.5
30.6
28.8
16.5
16.1
14.9
17.7
14.6
4.3
4.7
4.4
4.5
4.2
MinneapolisMobile_____
Newark_____
New H aven..
New Orleans.
29.0
32.4
38.8
35.2
18.0
17.2
14.9
16.1
16.6
3.6
2.1
4.1
4.2
4.2
New Y o r k ...
Norfolk_____
Omaha......... .
Peoria______
Philadelphia.
28.1
11.9
26.9
17.8
18.8
15.5
18.3
17.8
3.7
5.9
4.5
5.6
5.7
Pittsburgh____
Portland, M e_.
Portland, Oreg.
Providence___
Richmond____
19.3
19.0
21.2
12.0
18.1
4.7
6.0
6.4
3.9
4.2
Rochester____
St. Louis_____
St. Paul______
Salt Lake City.
San Francisco..
20.7
16.8
20.3
18.4
20.7
18.5
5.1
2.3
5.0
4.4
6.1
4.0
Savannah____
Scranton........ .
Seattle_______
Springfield, 111.
Washington___
21.8
20.5
22.6
26.1
19.1
15.5
20.2
23.1
17.7
28.1
[1017]
Percent P e r c e n t a g e d e
crease, February,
age
1931, compared
increase,
with—
February,
1931, com
pared
with 1913 Febru January,
ary, 1930
1931
29.0
16.2
17.1
14.2
13.0
17.5
4.0
6.6
2. 9
3.5
4. 2
1Ô .T
14.3
15.2
20.4
19.5
16.4
2.7
5.6
5.7
3.9
3.6
12.3
26.!
32.5
17.0
16.4
19.8
18.4
17.1
3.8
3.7
1.9
4.2
5.0
8.7
28. 7
16.2
18.4
18. 1
17.3
14.7
2.3
3.5
5.8
2.4
3.3
16.2
17.2
17. 6
19. 4
15.6
3.6
5.0
2.8
4.2
5.2
27.0
33.7
26.7
33.2
18.0
33.9
19.9
35.8
M O N T H L Y LA B O K E E V IE W
244
R e ta il P r ic e s o f C oal in F e b r u a ry , 1931L
HE following table shows the average retail prices of coal on
February 15/1930, and January 15 and February 15, 1931, for the
United States and for each of the cities from which retail food prices
have been obtained. The prices quoted are for coal delivered to con
sumers, but do not include charges for storing the coal m cellar or
coal bin where an extra handling is necessary.
In addition to the prices for Pennsylvania anthracite, prices are
shown for Colorado, Arkansas, and New Mexico anthracite in those
cities where these coals form any considerable portion of the sales
for household use.
.
The prices shown for bituminous coal are averages ol prices ol the
several kinds sold for household use.
T
AVERAGE R E TA IL PR IC E S OF COAL PE R T O N OF 2,000 PO U N D S, FOR H O U SEH O LD
USE, ON F E B R U A R Y 15, 1930, A N D JA N U A R Y 15 A N D F E B R U A R Y 15, 1931
1930
City, and kind of coal
United States:
Pennsylvania anthracite—
S to v eAverage p rice.. -----Index (1913=100)_____
Chestnut—
Average price------- - Index (1913=100)_____
Bituminous—
Average price---------------Index (1913=100)_______
1931
1931
City, and kind of coal
Feb.
15
Jan.
15
Feb.
15
$15.33 $15.12 $15. 09
198.4 195.8 195. 3
$15. 00 $14. 88 $14. 85
189.6 188.1 187. 6
$9.04
166.4
$8.87
163.2
$8.83
162. 5
Cincinnati, Ohio:
Bituminous—
Prepared sizes—
High volatile________
Low volatile_________
Cleveland, Ohio:
Pennsylvania anthracite—
Stove-------------------------Chestnut______________
Bituminous—
Prepared sizes—
High volatile_________
Low volatile_________
Columbus, Ohio:
Bituminous—
Prepared sizes—
High volatile_________
Low volatile_________
Dallas, Tex.:
Arkansas anthracite—Egg_.
Bituminous, prepared sizes
Denver, Colo.:
Colorado anthracite—
Furnace, 1 and 2 mixed-.
Stove, 3 and 5 mixed-----Bituminous, prepared sizes_
Detroit, Mich.:
Pennsylvania anthracite—
Stove_____________ ____
Chestnut______________
Bituminous—
Prepared sizes—
High volatile_________
Low volatile..'_______
Run of mine—
Low volatile_________
Fall River, Mass.:
Pennsylvania anthracite—
Stove-------------------------Chestnut______________
Houston, Tex.:
Bituminous, prepared sizes
Indianapolis, Ind.:
B itu m in ou sPrepared sizes—
High volatile—.............
Low volatile_________
Run of mine—
Low volatile_________
Feb.
15
Jan.
15
Feb.
15
$6.30
8.78
$6.30
8. 53
$6.30
8. 53
15.17
14.75
14. 56
14.44
14.56
14. 38
6.81
7.08
9.93
9.94
Atlanta, Ga.:
Bituminous, prepared sizes. $7.79 $7.60 $7. 52
Baltimore, Md.:
Pennsylvania anthracite—
6.09
6.05
Stove--------------------------- 14. 25 14.25 14.25
8.13
8.38
Chestnut__________ ____ 13. 75 13. 75 13. 75
Bituminous, run of mine—
15. 50 15.00
7.82
7.75
High volatile---- ------------ 7.89
12.92 12.58
Birmingham, Ala.:
7.36
7.38
Bituminous, prepared sizes. 7.66
Boston, Mass.:
15. 06 15. 25
Pennsylvania anthracite—•
15. 06 15. 25
Stove
---------- -- 16. 25 16. 25 16. 25
10.44 10.21
Chestnut______________ 15.75 15.75 15.75
Bridgeport, Conn.:
Pennsylvania anthracite—
16.00 14.92
Stove----------------- 15.50 14. 75 14. 50
15. 50 14.92
Uhp.st.mit
__________ 15.50 14.75 14.50
Buffalo, N . Y.:
Pennsylvania anthracite—
7.41
8.32
9.24
Stove - ______________ 13. 77 13.79 13.79
10.15
C hestnut______________ 13.32 13.29 13.29
7.50
8.00
Butte, Mont.:
Bituminous, prepared sizes 11.09 10.48 10.47
Charleston, S. C.:
16. 50 16. 50
9.67
9.67
9.67
Bituminous, prepared sizes
16. 25 16.25
Chicago, 111.:
Pennsylvania anthracite—
13.60 12.20
16. 85 16.40 16.40
Stove
___________
16.40 16. 30 16. 30
Chestnut
__________
Bituminous—
Prepared sizes—
5.93
6.01
8.09
8.41
8.09
High volatile - _____
9.17
8.75
Low volatile_________ 12.04 11.89 11. 95
Run of mine—
8.00
Low volatile_________
8.25
8.00
1 Prices of coal were formerly secured semiannually and published in the March and September
of the Labor Review. Since June, 1920, these prices have been secured and published monthly.
https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
[1018 J
6.66
9.91
5.91
8.13
15.00
12.58
15.25
15.25
9.90
14.58
14.58
7.38
8.98
7.50
16.50
16.25
12.00
5.92
9.17
7. 05
issues
WHOLESALE AND RETAIL PRICES
245
A V ER A G E R E TA IL PR IC ES OF COAL PE R T O N OF 2,000 PO U N D S FOR HOUSEHOLD
USE, ON F E B R U A R Y 15, 1930, A N D JA N U A R Y 15 A N D F E B R U A R Y 15 1931-Oontd
1930
City, and kind of coal
Feb.
15
Jacksonville, Fla.:
Bituminous, prepared sizes $14. 00
Kansas City, Mo.:
Arkansas anthracite—
Furnace________ ______ 12. 55
Stove No. 4____________ 13. 67
Bituminous, prepared sizes. 7.15
Little Rock, Ark.:
Arkansas anthracite—Egg__ 13. 50
Bituminous, prepared sizes. 10.05
Los Angeles, Calif.:
Bituminous, prepared sizes 16.50
Louisville, Ky.:
Bituminous—
Prepared sizes—
High v o la tile................ 7.03
Low volatile_________
9. 50
Manchester, N . H.:
Pennsylvania anthracite—
Stove__________________ 17.00
Chestnut______________ 17.00
Memphis, Tenn.:
Bituminous, prepared sizes. 7.87
Milwaukee, Wis.:
Pennsylvania anthracite—
Stove__________________ 16.30
Chestnut______________ 15.85
Bituminous—
Prepared sizes—
High volatile____ _____ 7. 68
Low volatile_________ 11.00
Minneapolis, Minn.:
Pennsylvania anthracite—
Stove__________________ 18.30
Chestnut______________ 17.85
B itu m in o u sPrepared sizes—
High volatile_________ 10. 57
Low volatile_________ 12. 39
Mobile, Ala.:
Bituminous, prepared sizes. 9.47
Newark, N . J.:
Pennsylvania anthracite—
Stove__________________ 13. 96
Chestnut______________ 13.46
N ew Haven, Conn.:
Pennsylvania anthracite—
Stove__________________ 15.17
Chestnut______________ 15.17
N ew Orleans, La.:
Bituminous, prepared sizes. 10. 96
N ew York, N . Y.:
Pennsylvania anthracite—
Stove..................... ..........
14. 58
Chestnut_______ ______ _ 14.08
Norfolk, Va.:
Pennsylvania anthracite—
Stove__________________ 14. 00
Chestnut_________
14.00
Bituminous—
Prepared sizes—
High volatile_________
7.25
Low volatile______ . . . .
8.50
Run of mine—
Low volatile_________
6.50
Omaha, Nebr.:
Bituminous, prepared sizes. 9. 69
Peoria, 111.:
Bituminous, prepared sizes. 6.78
Philadelphia, Pa.:
Pennsylvania anthracite—
Stove__________________ 15. 00
Chestnut___ __________ 14. 50
1931
Jan.
15
1930
City, and kind of coal
Feb.
15
$10. 00 $10. 00
12.44
13. 50
6. 79
12.44
13.50
6. 77
13. 50
10.05
13. 50
10.05
16. 50
16. 50
6.24
8. 75
6.28
8.75
16.83
16.83
16.83
16.83
7.44
7.52
15.75
15. 50
15.75
15. 50
7.70
10. 57
7.74
10.60
16. 90
16.90
16.90
16.90
9. 85
12.63
9.69
12.91
9.59
9. 59
13.90
13.40
13.85
13. 35
14.90
14.90
14.90
14.90
10.93
10.93
14.17
13. 67
14.17
13. 67
15.00
15.00
15.00
15.00
7.38
10. 00
7.38
10.00
7.00
7.00
9.68
9. 71
6.43
6.33
14.00
13. 50
14.00
13.50
Feb.
15
1931
Jan.
15
Pittsburgh, Pa.:
Pennsylvania anthracite—
Chestnut________ _ . . . $15.00 $14 50
Bituminous, prepared sizes
5.36
4.91
Portland, Me.:
Pennsylvania anthracite—
S t o v e . ______ _
16. 80 16 80
Chestnut____ _
16. 80 16. 80
Portland, Oreg.:
Bituminous, prepared sizes. 13. 32 13. 38
Providence, R. I.:
Pennsylvania anthracite—
Stove_____________
216.00 216 00
Chestnut__ _____
216. 00 216.00
Richmond, Va.:
Pennsylvania anthracite—
Stove_____ _________
15. 00 15 no
Chestnut_______
____ 15.00 15.00
Bituminous—
Prepared sizes—
High volatile_________ 8. 38
8. 75
Low volatile_________
9.11
9.83
Run of mine—
Low volatile_________
7.25
7. 50
Rochester, N . Y.:
Pennsylvania anthracite—
Stove__________________ 14. 75 14. 50
Chestnut____________
14. 25 14.00
St. Louis, Mo.:
Pennsylvania anthracite—
Stove_____ ________
16.70 16.23
Chestnut_______
16. 45 15. 98
Bituminous, prepared sizes. 6. 75
6. 40
St. Paul, Minn.:
Pennsylvania anthracite—
Stove . . _________
18. 30 16. 90
Chestnut____
...
17. 85 16.90
Bituminous—
Prepared sizes—
High v o la t ile ...___ _ 10.29
9.58
Low volatile_________ 12.63 12. 66
Salt Lake City, Utah:
Bituminous, prepared sizes. 8.38
8.47
San Francisco, Calif.:
New Mexico anthracite—
Cerillos egg____________ 26.00 26.00
Colorado anthracite—
Egg----------------------------- 25. 50 25. 75
Bituminous, prepared sizes. 16.88 17.00
Savannah, Ga.:
Bituminous, prepared sizes. 10. 24 310. 53
Scranton, Pa.:
Pennsylvania anthracite—
Stove _______ ________ 10. 28 10.18
C h estn u t___________ _
9. 92
9.88
Seattle, Wash.:
Bituminous, prepared sizes. 10.79 10. 79
Springfield, 111.:
Bituminous, prepared sizes. 4. 34
4. 34
Washington, D . C.:
Pennsylvania anthracite—
Stove _____________
15. 73 15. 73
Chestnut______ . . . .
15. 23 15.23
Bituminous—
Prepared sizes—
High volatile_______
i 8. 63 1 8. 61
Low volatile. _____ .
11. 43 11.43
Run of mine—
M ixed_____________
i 7.75 i 7. 81
Feb.
15
4.
75
16.80
13. 26
216 OO
216. CO
15 00
15! 00
8.75
9.83
7. 50
14. 75
14. 25
16.20
15. 95
6.37
10. 90
16.90
9.58
12. 86
8.16
26.00
25. 50
16. 88
10. 53
10.18
9. 88
10.68
4. 34
15. 73
15.23
1 8. 61
11.43
1 7.81
1 Per ton of 2,240 pounds.
2 The average price of coal delivered in bin is 50 cents higher than here shown. Practically all coal is
delivered in bin.
3 All coal sold in Savannah is weighed by the city. A charge of 10 cents per ton or half ton is made. This
additional charge has been included in the above price.
https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
[ 1019]
246
M O N T H L Y L A B OH R E V IE W
C o m p a r iso n o f R e ta il-P r ic e C h a n g e s in t h e U n ite d S ta te s and
in F o r e ig n C o u n tr ie s
HE principal index numbers of retail prices published by foreign
countries have been brought together with those of this bureau
in the subjoined table after having been reduced, in most cases, to a
common base, namely, prices for July, 1914, equal 100. This base
was selected instead of the average for the year 1913, which is used
in other tables of index numbers of retail prices compiled by the
bureau, because of the fact that in numerous instances satisfactory
information for 1913 was not available. Some of ^ thv countries
shown in the table now publish index numbers of retail prices on the
July, 1914, base. In such cases, therefore, the index numbers are
reproduced as published. For other countries the index numbers
here shown have been obtained by dividing the index for each mondi
specified in the table by the index for July, 1914, or the nearest
period thereto as published in the original sources. As stated m the
table, the number of articles included in the index numbers loi the
different countries differs widely. These results, which are designed
merely to show price trends and not actual differences in the several
countries, should not, therefore, be considered as closely comparable
with one another. In certain instances, also, the figures are not
absolutely comparable from month to month oyer the entire period,
owing to slight changes in the list of commodities and the localities
included on successive dates.
T
https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
[ 1020]
W H O L E S A L E A N D R E T A IL P R IC E S
247
I N D E X N U M B E R S OF R ETA IL PRIC ES IN T H E U N IT E D ST A T ES A N D IN OTHER
C O U N TR IE S
Country___
United
States
Canada Belgium
Number of
localities...
C o m m o d i
ties i n eluded___
42 foods
Czecho
slovakia
Den
mark
Entire
country
100
(foods,
29 foods 56 etc.)
53 foods
Finland
France
(except
Paris)
France
(Paris)
Germany
13 (11
foods)
F'oods
320
36 foods
13 (11
foods)
Govern
Central
Federal
Bureau Depart Ministry Office of
ment
Comput
of Indus Statis
Bureau Ministry Ministry j Statisof
Labor
ment
of
Statis
ing agency. Statistics
try
and
of
of
Labor
of
Labor
!
tical
Labor
tics
tical De
Labor
Bureau
partment Statistics
Base=100__
July,
1914
July,
1914
April,
1914
July,
1914
July,
1914
J anuaryJune,
1914
August,
1914
1089
1035
1052
1156
i 401
1 395
i 401
1 428
376
380
360
383
127
123
126
134
1130
1137
1145
1165
i 442
i 435
' 451
‘ 471
408
409
421
433
137
144
154
151
July,
1914
October,
1913July, 1914
1924
January..
April___
July____
October..
146
138
140
145
145
137
134
139
480
498
493
513
836
829
837
877
200
1925
January..
April___
July------October..
151
148
156
158
145
142
141
147
521
506
509
533
899
901
916
875
210
1926
January..
April___
July____
October..
161
159
154
157
157
153
149
147
527
529
637
705
854
832
876
888
159
1090
1085
1105
1126
i 503
i 523
i 610
>647
480
503
574
624
143
142
145
145
1927
January..
April___
July------October..
156
150
150
153
153
116
147
148
755
774
790
804
914
923
962
907
156
152
153
152
1092
1069
1102
1156
i 586
i 572
1 553
1 526
592
580
557
520
151
150
157
152
1928
January..
April___
July____
October..
152
149
150
153
151
146
146
152
813
807
811
834
913
905
943
907
152
152
153
146
1126
1119
1155
1183
1 522
>530
1 536
i 562
530
532
2 111
2 115
152
151
154
152
1929
January___
February...
March____
April........ .
May______
June______
July---------August____
September..
October___
November..
D ecem ber..
151
151
150
148
150
151
155
157
157
157
156
155
152
150
151
148
147
147
148
157
157
157
158
159
856
859
862
860
864
867
874
879
889
894
897
897
900
911
913
901
906
907
925
900
886
879
880
880
147
1156
1141
1135
1118
1104
1103
1116
1131
1128
1137
1123
1090
2 122 !
2 122
2 123
2 125 1
2 127
2 127
2 123
2 123
2 122
2 124
2 125
2 125
153
156
159
154
154
154
156
155
154
154
153
152
1930
January___
February...
March____
April______
M ay....... .
.1une______
J u ly ...........
August____
September..
October___
November..
Decem ber..
152
150
147
148
147
145
141
141
142
141
138
134
160
159
157
151
151
150
147
144
140
139
138
136
895
890
879
870
867
866
869 i
872
874
875
872
859
872
865
853
851
852
2 124
2 121
2 120
2 119
2 120
2 120
2 122
2 127
2 129
2 129
2 131
2 132
150
148
145
143
142
143
146
145
142
140
138
135
886
857
£39
830
818
810
1 For succeeding month.
https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
[ 1021 ]
194
215
177
150
149
146
145
140
137
133
1048
1022
1006
975
945
937
969
995
976
944
934
903
2 117
2 118
2 118
2 120
2 118
2 116
2 127
2 132
* In gold.
248
MONTHLY LABOR R EV IEW
IN D E X N U M B E R S OF R E TA IL BRICES IN T H E U N IT E D STA TES A N D . IN OTHER
C O U N T R IE S—Continued
Nether
United
lands STorway Sweden Switzer King
land
(The
dom
Hague)
C ou n try ..-
Italy
Number of
localities.
47
1
31
49
33
C om m od
ities in
cluded—
20
foods
and
char
coal
Foods
Foods
50 (43
foods, 7
fuel and
light)
Foods
M in
Central Central
C o m p u t ofistry
Na Bureau Bureau
ing agen tional of Sta of Sta
cy—
tistics
Econ tistics
omy
Base= 100- _
1913
1924
527
January---527
April----- 538
July--------556
October___
1925
609
January---606
April-- _
605
July______
645
October___
1926
658
January---633
April-.- --„ 645
July______
662
October—
1927
629
January---606
April--- -540
July--------530
October___
1928
531
January---522
April-516
July______
536
October___
1929
565
January---565
February571
M arch..
566
A p r il____
563
May ____
564
J u n e , ___
558
July_____
553
August___
547
September
546
October-—
551
November
554
December1930
548
January. —
536
February 525
March___
522
A p ril-- .
510
M ay------509
June-- --507
July_____
506
August _ 508
September
October. — ‘ 513
512
November
482
December.
1921
July,
1914
Aus
tralia
New
Zealand
9
1
30
25
21 foods 24 foods 17 foods
M inis
Labor
try of
Office
(revised) Labor
July,
1914
India
(Bom
bay)
July,
1919
46 foods
59 foods
and
groceries
Bureau Census
Office
of Cen Labor of Cen- I and
sus and Office sus and 1 Statis
tics
Statis (revised) Statis
tics
Office
tics
1914
July,
1914
July,
1914
July,
1914
3 82. 5
3 81.7
3 80.8
3 82.3
230
240
248
264
163
159
159
172
173
169
170
174
175
167
162
172
120
122
117
120
154
143
151
156
155
150
148
146
150
150
148
145
3 80.2
3 86.7
3 81.3
3 79.3
277
276
260
228
170
170
169
166
172
169
169
168
178
170
167
172
120
124
120
119
152
153
152
148
148
152
156
157
147
149
151
155
3 76. 6
3 80.1
3 73.5
3 75 7
216
198
198
191
162
158
156
157
165
161
159
160
171
159
161
163
116
119
117
120
151
150
155
153
155
163
159
153
154
151
149
147
3 76.3
3 77.0
3 76.5
3 79. 5
180
169
175
173
156
151
151
155
158
156
157
159
167
155
159
161
116
119
119
119
155
151
154
148
158
151
152
159
148
145
144
143
3 81. 6
3 79.4
3 76. 2
3 75.5
170
171
173
163
153
154
157
153
159
156
157
158
162
155
157
157
119
119
116
115
151
140
143
142
154
154
152
150
147
144
147
149
158
157
158
156
156
156
157
161
160
160
159
157
150
151
152
150
149
149
151
151
151
150
148
147
157
157
156
154
154
155
155
156
158
158
157
157
159
156
157
150
149
147
149
153
154
156
159
159
115
115
117
119
119
118
116
115
114
113
112
112
146
146
146
145
143
144
145
146
146
147
147
148
161
161
160
162
160
161
160
161
162
165
164
155
149
148
146
147
148
147
146
146
147
147
147
147
156
154
152
152
151
151
151
151
151
150
149
147
145
144
142
140
140
140
140
139
139
137
136
134
155
154
153
152
150
151
152
152
152
152
151
149
157
154
150
143
140
138
141
144
144
143
144
141
112
111
111
113
113
112
109
108
107
108
108
103
145
143
139
138
137
137
136
133
134
127
123
116
153
151
151
151
150
149
147
146
141
138
135
134
14(
14,
143
14'
14'
14,
14
14
14
13
13
13
76.0
72.3
74. 5
73.1
69.7
68.8
71.6
69.0
3 Second month following.
https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
July,
1914
Social
Board
630
South
Africa
[ 1022 ]
W HOLESALE AND .RETAIL PRICES
In d e x N u m b e r s o f W h o le sa le
249
Prices in F eb ru a ry , 1931
index number of wholesale prices computed by the Bureau
Statistics of the United States Department of Labor
T ™otshowsLabor
a further recession in February. This index number which
includes 550 commodities or price quotations weighted according to
the importance of each article and based on prices in 1926 as 100 0
declined from 77.0 in January to 75.5 in February, a decrease of 2
per cent. J.he purchasing power of the 1926 dollar in February was
Farm products as a group decreased 4% per cent below the January
level, due to lower prices for most grains, beef cattle, hogs, poultry,
eggs, hay, onions, potatoes, and wool. Eggs in particular showed
radical price decreases in the month. Milk also averaged somewhat
lower than m January. Sheep, lambs, and cotton, on the other hand
were somewhat higher than in the preceding month.
hoods were 3% per cent lower than in January, with declines in
iresh and cured meats, lard, dressed poultry, dried fruits, coffee, and
sugar. _ Butter and flour in most markets showed little change, butter
becoming firmer and flour prices weaker toward the end of the month.
Both butter and eggs in February were at lower levels than at any
time since pre-war days.
Hides and skins showed a further price drop, with leather, boots
and shoes, and other leather products declining slightly.
In the group of textile products there were small decreases among
cotton goods, silk and rayon, and woolen and worsted goods, while
https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
[10231
MONTHLY LABOR REVIEW
250
advancing prices of burlap caused a small increase among other
textiles.
.
.
.
Anthracite coal and coke were stationary in price, while bituminous
coal and petroleum products moved slightly downward. Among
metals and metal products there was a negligible increase in iron and
steel, while nonferrous metals declined appreciably. Automobiles
showed a small price decrease, while agricultural implements and
other metal products were unchanged in price.
Building materials were down as lumber, brick, and cement declined
in price. Structural steel and paint materials, on the contrary, ad
vanced in price in the month.
.
Chemicals and drugs, including fertilizer materials and mixed tertilizers, were somewhat cheaper than in January.
House-furnishing goods also moved downward, with slight declines
in furnishings.
.
,
In the group of miscellaneous commodities, cattle feed, paper and
pulp, and crude rubber again moved downward, while no change m
the price level was reported for automobile tires and other articles
in this group.
.
Raw materials as a whole averaged lower than m January, as did
also semimanufactured articles and finished products. .
In the large group of nonagricultural commodities, including all
articles other than farm products, and among all commodities other
than farm products and foods, February prices averaged lower than
those of the month before.
IN D E X N U M B E R S OF W HOLESALE PR IC ES BY GROUPS A N D SUBGROUPS OF COM[1926=100.0]
Groups and subgroups
February,
1930
January,
1931
February,
1931
Purchasing
power of
the dollar,
February,
1931
92.1
77.0
75.5
$1.325
Farm products---------------Grains_______________
Livestock and poultry.
Other farm products._.
98.0
89.0
101.3
98.9
73.5
62.4
75.2
76.0
70 1
60.4
69.6
73.7
1.427
1.656
1.437
1.357
Foods.......................................
Butter, cheese, and m ilk.
M eats______ _______ ___
Other foods.........................
95.5
97.4
105.1
89.2
80.1
85.2
88.4
73.4
77.1
83.3
83.6
70.8
1.297
1.200
1.196
1.412
Hides and leather products...
Hides and skins................
Leather........ .....................
Boots and shoes________
Other leather products __.
103.9
99.0
107.7
103.8
105.8
88.6
64.4
90.8
95.1
102.4
86.6
57.7
89.0
95.0
102.0
1. 555
1.733
1.124
1.053
.980
Textile products-------------------Cotton goods------------------Silk and rayon------- ------ Woolen and worsted goods _
Other textile products-------
88.3
93.8
74.9
93.2
72.2
71.0
77.3
50.1
82.1
57.5
70.4
76.9
48.8
81.7
59.0
1.420
1.300
2.019
1. 221
1.695
Fuel and lighting materials.
Anthracite coal....... ........
Bituminous coal---------Coke...................................
G a s ...---------- ------------Petroleum products-----
78.8
91.2
91.4
84.2
94.0
05.7
69.8
88.9
88.1
83.8
95.8
50.4
69.6
88.9
87.8
83.8
1.437
1.125
1. 139
1.193
50.2
1.992
All commodities.
1 Data not yet available.
https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
[1024]
(0
WHOLESALE AND RETAIL PRICES
251
IN D E X N U M B E R S GF W H O LESALE P R IC E S B Y GROUPS A N D SU BG R O U PS OF
C O M M O D IT IE S—Continued
February,
1930
Groups and subgroups
January,
1931
February,
1931
88.9
88.4
Metals and metal products.
Iron and steel_________ '
Nonferrous metals__
Agricultural implements.
Automobiles___________
Other metal products___
100. 9
91.8
89.3
93.1
103.8
98.4
67.4
94.7
98.7
95.0
94.7
98.0
95.0
Building materials_________
Lumber____________
Brick__________ IIIIIII"
Cement___________ H I"
Structural steel.-”11111111
Paint materials_________
Other building materials.
95.7
91.9
83.3
92.7
91.9
93.0
106.5
82.9
76.0
81.7
90.5
83.0
70. 2
95.5
81.8
73.2
81.5
87.9
84.3
70.9
95.6
92.3
97.9
82.2
85.0
65.0
81.1
89.1
100. 2
88.1
66.1
Purchasing
power of
the dollar,
February,
1931
$1.125
1.131
1.513
1.056
1.020
1.053
1.222
1.366
1.227
1.138
1.186
1.410
1.046
Chemicals and drugs__________
Chemicals___________IIIIII
Drugs and pharmaceuticals.
Fertilizer materials______
Mixed fertilizers______
89.5
96.2
83.6
87.0
65.1
81.4
90.4
House-furnishing goods.
Furniture_________
Furnishings______ .
97.0
96.6
97.3
91.1
95.5
87.3
90.8
95.5
86.7
M iscellaneous.____________
Cattle feed___________ IIIIIH
Paper and pulp____
Rubber_____________IIII.IIIIII
Automobile tires___________ IIIIIH .I "
Other miscellaneous_________ 111111111"
78.5
107.5
87.0
32.8
55.2
108.5
64.7
75.0
83.6
17.1
45.7
86.1
63.9
71.6
83.1
16.1
45.7
85.1
Raw materials________
Semimanufactured articles"!
Finished products_____
Nonagricultural commodities____ 11111111"11
All commodities less farm products and foods".
2.188
1.175
91.8
92.1
92.6
90.6
89. 6
72.9
73.4
80.5
78.2
77.8
70.6
72.3
79.3
77.1
77.1
1.416
1.383
1.261
1.297
1.297
46860°—31----- 17
https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
68.6
[1025]
1.217
1.176
1. 538
1.233
1.122
1.101
1.047
1.153
1.565
1.397
1.203
6 . 211
IMMIGRATION AND EMIGRATION
S t a t is t ic s o f I m m ig r a t io n fo r J a n u a r y , 1931
B y J . J. K u n n a , C h i e f S t a t i s t ic i a n U n i t e d S t a t e s B u r e a u
of
I m m ig r a t io n
HE inward movement to the United States of 12,815 aliens during
January, 1931, was the smallest for any month since the WorldWa ,
or since March, 1918, when 11,074 aliens entered the country. Of the
12 815 arrivals for January last, only 4,091 came to take up permanent
residence in the United States, the larger number, or 8,724 being of
the visiting class or nonimmigrants. Of the latter class 5,441 came
here for a visit or were passing through the country on their way
elsewhere, and 3,283 were returning to their homes here after a tem-
T
P°The exodus^f aliens from the United States now exceeds the influx,
4 397 emigrants having departed during January to make their homes
again in some foreign country, as against 4 091 immigrants or new
comers for the month. January also saw a large outward movement
of aliens leaving for a visit to their native land. In this month 17,16.
nonemigrants lift for foreign lands, of ^ “ « f f . h P ^ s U f t e r “
intention of returning to their homes m the United states alter a
S o r t visit abroad. Nearly one-half of these visitors to their native
land were Greeks, Italians, Portuguese, and Spanish, and the vast
majority of these were male laborers.
Immigration from Europe has dropped from an average of 12,287
nermoifth during the last fiscal year to 2,555, a decline of nearly 80
ner cent and in the case of Canada the decrease was from 5,292 to
867 or 83 per cent, while the number of immigrants admitted from
Mexico dwindled from a monthly average of 1,059 last year to 182
in January last. Comparatively few unskilled workers now come
from Mexico, the vast majority of the present-day immigrants from
that country being women and children.
IN W A R D A N D OU TW A RD P A S SE N G E R M O V E M E N T FR O M JU L Y 1, 1930, TO JA N U A R Y
Outward
Inward
Aliens
de
barred
Aliens admitted
Period
1930
July--------August----September----October---November.
December..
1931
January—
United
States Total enter
citizens
ing 1 E m i
N on
Immi imm i Total arrived
grant
grant grant
13,323
14, 816
17,792
13,942
9,209
6,439
4,091
T otal__ 79,612
Aliens
de
United
ported
States
after
citi Total land
zens
ing 2
Nonde
emi Total
parted
grant
Aliens departed
29, 789
34, 540
47,151
37, 246
22, 241
16,378
38,822
69,957
80,900
40, 702
22,381
28, 535
881
837
929
854
734
806
4,818
5, 245
5,100
5,352
4,951
5,450
55, 366 82,772
88,372 122,783
56, 526 86, 230
32,988 61, 278
24,420 48, 656
21,140 44,193
1,440
1,208
1, 552
1,526
1,405
1,377
8,724 12,815
19,844
693
4,397 17,169 21, 566 24,885 46,451
1,517
16, 468
19, 724
29,359
23, 304
13,032
9,939
120, 548 200,160 301,141 501,3011
22, 588
29,166
24, 604
22,938
19, 285
17,603
27,406
34,411
29, 704
28, 290
24, 236
23,053
5,734 35,313 153,353 188,666 303,697 492,36C 10,025
■
I5 5 S S S 2 i S S S ^ . ? >
TiS^taSrt2ffSI^«
Illegally, and later being deported.
252
https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
[1026]
PUBLICATIONS RELATING TO LABOR
O fficia l— U n ite d S t a t e s
0 a B S S r % Z $ 3 % S F c “j “ “ !ttee on E m p lo ym e n tR eview ed in th is issue.
I daho^—U n c ^ s tria ^ ^ c c id e n t ^Board.^
w ™ -»
19.
Seventh report, from November
to
R eview ed in th is issue.
M ic h ig a n .— D ep a rtm e n t of L ab o r a n d In d u stry . Labor and Industry, Val. I No
1 . Lansing, December, 1930. 88 pp.
y
’
T his in itial num ber of a b u lletin w hich th e M ichigan D e p a rtm e n t of L ab o r
a n d In d u s try plans to issue q u a rte rly co n tain s in fo rm atio n on th e inspection
woi v of th e d ep artm e n t, em ploym ent a n d earnings of em ployees in various
industries, in d u strial accidents, a n d w orkm en’s com pensation.
MmWAUKEE.— C itizens’ C om m ittee on U nem ploym ent a n d th e P ublic E m plov-
Z ^ t w s a i ,an 7 Z a< Z 2
MlT S o r r l o f t p ^
report’JwhJ
C om m ission-
Fif th biennial report, 1929-1930. St. Paul
. D a ta f™m th ls re P°r t » on lab o r on highw ay co n stru ctio n , are published in th is
issue of th e L abor R eview .
Bulletin No. 55, Vocational series
[1929?] 9^hpp iUus Tep°rt’ ^°r the Penod end™g June 30, 1929. Jackson
M 1Ssiss!ppi.— B oard fo r V ocational E d u catio n .
()ffi c e of In d u s tria l C om m issioner. Thirteenth annual report
for the twelve months ending June 30, 1930. [Pierre, 1930?] ¿1 vv
P ’
R eview ed in th is issue.
1
S o uth D ak o r a .
U n ited S t a tes .— Congress.
H ouse of R ep resen tativ es.
C o m m ittee on th e
Je
■
0m2S%pm W o m i S >J ^ . r mStin9 “ SUb3ti‘Ute theref0r[
Technical bulletin No. 213: Perquisites and
wages of hired farm laborers, by Josiah C. Folsom. Washington, 1931. 58 vv. •
TiXO/'pSy Cfiavts•
t'tr'y
D e p a rtm e n t of A griculture.
D e p artm en t of Com m erce.
regularization of employment.
Selected bibliography: Industrial plans for the
Washington, 1931. 5 pp.
9
J
. P rePared for th e P re sid e n t’s E m erg en cy C om m ittee for E m p lo y m en t b y th e
in d u strial relatio n s section of P rin ceto n U niversity.
•
Unemployment: Industry seeks a solution. A series of radio addresses
merit. ^ w Z s M n g Z ^ S L «
***”* ' Emergency Committee for Employ-
~iqvo Jv T nrT0i ? 0re-gn a n d /d o m estic Com m erce. Commerce yearbook,
charts. V 1 IL ~ Fore^ n countries. Washington, 1930. 701 pp.; maps,
T he volum e covers over 60 foreign countries. T he su b jects tre a te d include
production, re ta il a n d w holesale prices, p o p u latio n , tra d e , a n d econom ic a n d la b o r
conditions, alth o u g h n o t all topics are covered fo r each co u n try .
j Trrade Promotion series, No. 105: The coal industry of the world
Tw o*6?** reference to international trade in coal, by H. M. Hoar. Washington,
1930. 328 pp.; maps, charts, illus.
y ’
https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
[1027]
253
t0
M O N T H L Y L A B O R R E V IE W
254
of C om m erce. B u re a u of M ines. Technical paper480: Intensities of odors and irritating effects of warning agents for inflammable
and poisonous gases, by S. H. Katz and E. J. Talbert. Washington, 1930. 37
pp., diagrams.
.
U n i t e d S t a t e s .— D e p a rtm e n t
T he stu d y covered th e effect of a large n u m b er of odorous or irrita tin g su b
stances w ith a view to th e selection of th e m o st prom ising w arning-giving su b
stances for use in gas.
______________ Technical paper 482: Toxic gases from 60 per cent gelatin explo
sives, by G. St. J. Perrott and others.
Washington, 1930. ^ 30 pp.
T h e explosives used in th e se te s ts are th o se largely used in b lastin g rock gang
w ays a n d w ater tu n n e ls in a n th ra c ite coal m ines. T h e te sts show ed th e conditions
w hich affect th e p ro d u ctio n of toxic gases.
_____ D e p a rtm e n t of L abor. B ureau of L abor Statistics. BuJUtinNo: 531.
Consumers’, credit, and productive cooperative societies, 1929. Washington,
1931. 150 pp.
, __
t
__________C hildren’s B ureau. Publication No. 199: Child labor m New Jersey
PartS: The working children of Newark and Paterson. Washington, 1931. 94pp.
B ased on a stu d y of w orking children in th e tw o N ew Jersey cities, m ad e in
1925. Some general conclusions w ere th a t, except fo r girls in N e v a r , lose
going to w ork h ad been no m ore freq u e n tly re ta rd e d th a n children of th e sam e
ages w ho rem ained in school, a n d a group a t le a s t as larg e as am ong children
stay in g in school h a d been ad v a n c e d b ey o n d th e av erag e so t h a t th e y ap p e a re d to
h av e been capable of fu rth e r school train in g . R e ta rd a tio n a p p e a rs n o t to have
been a d isad v an tag e in in d u s try fo r all groups in all respects.
In N ew ark it h ad
n o t affected w ages u n fav o rab ly , n o r w as i t associated w ith a n u n u su a l a m o u n t of
unem ploym ent, th o u g h re ta rd e d children sh ifted from position to positio n som e
w h a t m ore th a n others. I n P a te rso n a positive relatio n , on th e whole, w as
show n betw een re ta rd a tio n a n d low wages, u n e m p lo y m en t a n d lack of steadiness,
b u t th e num bers of children in th e groups w ere to o sm all to su p p o rt definite
conclusions.”
____ G overnm ent P rin tin g Office. Labor: Child labor, employers’ liability wages
insurance, women, strikes. List of publications relating to above subjects for sale
by Superintendent of Documents, Washington, D. C. Washington, 1931. 3i
pp. (Price list S3— 16th ed.)
____ In te rs ta te C om m erce Com m ission. B ureau of S tatistics. Forty-third annual
report on the statistics of railways in the United States for the year ended Decem
ber SI, 1929, including also selected data relating to other common carriers
subject to the interstate commerce act for the year 1929. II ashmgton, 1930.
272 pp.; charts.
O ffic ia l— F o r e ig n C o u n tr ie s
Rapport
sur le fonctionnement de VOffice Général des Assurances Sociales, des Offices
Supérieurs et des Offices d’Assurance durant l année 1929. Compte rendu
des opérations des institutions d’assurances sociales pendant l année 1923.
Strassburg, October-November, 1930. Bulletin, Nos. 10-11, pp. 14‘ 358.
Alsace-Lorraine (France) .— Office G énéral des A ssurances Sociales.
T h e re p o rt of th e social in su ran ce office of A lsace-L orraine for th e y ear 1929
gives sta tistic s reg ard in g th e o p eratio n of sickness, in v alid ity , old-age, a n d acci
d en t-in su ran ce funds.
C a n a d a .'— B ureau of S tatistics. In te rn a l T ra d e B ranch. Prices and price indexes,
1913-1929. Ottaiva, 1930. 216 pp.
Includes statistic s of dom estic a n d foreign w holesale a n d re ta il prices, security
prices, prices of services (stre e t ca r fares, h o sp ita l charges, gas, electricity, a n d
telephone rates, etc.), a n d ex p o rt an d im p o rt valuations.
_____ D e p a rtm e n t of L abor. Wages and hours of labor report, No 14: Wages
and hours of labor in Canada, 1920 to 1930. Ottawa, 1931. 104 PP-
W age statistics from th e p u b licatio n are given in th is issue of th e L abor Review .
https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
[1028]
P U B L IC A T IO N S R E L A T IN G TO L A B O R
255
L ord P riv y Seal. Statement of the principal measures taken by
H. M. (government in connection with unemployment. London, 1930 22 vv
( Cmd. 3746.)
G rea t B r it a in —
A su m m ary of th e em ergency m easures ta k e n w ith a view to m o d eratin g
distress a n d resto rin g m ore n o rm al conditions. T hese h av e included a p ro g ram
of em ergency w orks of p ublic u tility w hich will p rovide em p lo y m en t fo r m ore
th a n 500,000 m an-years, v arious social m easures which, i t is sta te d , h av e m a in
ta in e d th e w ell-being of th e p o p u latio n to a n e x te n t w hich com pares fa v o rab ly
w ith th e experience of a n y previous depression, a n d a v a rie ty of step s to im prove
technical eq uipm ent, to increase th e efficiency of B ritish business o rganization,
a n d to p u t B ritish in d u s try in a stro n g er position fo r com peting in w orld m ark ets.
T his policy is being activ ely continued, a n d th e need fo r re a d ju stin g th e balance
of B ritish econom ic life to a lte re d p o stw ar conditions h as been recognized by
th e in tro d u ctio n of m easures designed to resto re a g ricu ltu re to a m ore prosperous
condition.
'
° f L abour.
U nem ploym ent G ra n ts C om m ittee.
30, 1930. London, 1930. 16 pp.
{Cmd. 3744.)
Report to August
*
D a ta from th is re p o rt a re given in th is issue of th e L ab o r Review.
iN M A .—
Annual report for the year ending December
Chief In sp ec to r of M ines.
31, 1929. Calcutta, 1930. 182 pp.
C ertain d a ta , show ing lab o r conditions in th e m ines of In d ia, ta k e n from th is
rep o rt, are given in th is issue of th e L ab o r Review.
of L ab o r a n d In d u stry . Report
on the working of the factories and shops act, 1912, during the year 1929
Sydney, 1930. 26 pp.
N e w S o u t h W a l e s ( A u s t r a l i a ) .— D e p a rtm e n t
R ep o rts a t th e end of N ovem ber, 1929, show ed th a t as com pared w ith 1928
th ere h a d been a decrease of 3,723 in th e n u m b er of persons em ployed in factories.
M ale em ploym ent h a d decreased b y 2,630 a n d fem ale em p lo y m en t b y 1,093.
Extract from report for the year ended
December 31, 1929. Section 1-E: Industrial hygiene. Sydney, 1931. 4 pp.
-D ir e c to r G eneral of P ublic H ealth .
T his re p o rt briefly review s th e re su lts of in v estig atio n s of h e a lth h a z a rd s in
several in d u stries m ad e d u rin g 1929. A m ong th e h a zard s in v estig ated w ere th e
dan g er from lead in th e m an u fa c tu re of storage b a tte rie s a n d from san d sto n e d u ct
in th e co n stru ctio n of tu n n els, a n d th e h a zard s b o th to custom ers a n d clerks from
th e use of X -ray m achines in shoe shops.
C en tra l de S ta tistiq u e . Budgets des familles ouvrières Résultats del enquête effectuée à Varsovie, à Lôdz, dans le Bassin de Dabrowa et en
Haute Silésie, 1927. Warsaw, 1930. J±9 pp.
P o l a n d .— Office
C ontains results of a n in v estig atio n of fam ily b u d g ets of w age earners in 1927,
in W arsaw , Lodz, th e B asin of D abrow a, a n d in U p p er Silesia.
D ep a rtm e n t. Fifteenth annual report on
factories, wage boards, shops, etc., for 1929-30. Hobart, 1930. 20 pp.
V i c t o r i a ( A u s t r a l i a ) . — G o v ern m en t S ta tist.
Victorian yearbook 1928-29
Melbourne, 1930. 712 pp.
T a s m a n i a ( A u s t r a l i a ) . — In d u stria l
C o ntains d a ta on cooperative societies, tech n ical schools, friendly societies,
conditions of lab o r in factories a n d w orkshops, in v a lid ity a n d old-age pensions,
v ario u s accident relief funds, im m igration, la n d settle m e n t, etc.
U n o ffic ia l
A r c h iv io d i S t u d i C o r p o r a t iv e
Vol. I, No. 1. Pisa,
Pacini Mariotti, 1930.
T he first volum e of a q u a rte rly m agazine, ed ited in collaboration w ith professors
in th e F a c u lty of L aw a n d School of C o rp o rativ e S tu d y of th e U n iv ersity of Pisa.
C o n tain s articles relativ e to th e various phases of corp o rativ e theory.
https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
[1029]
256
MONTHLY LABOR R EV IE W
, J e a n ". Les accidents du travail et la loi 'pénale.
Paris, Les Pi esses
Universitaires de France, 1930. 198 pp.
B
edour
A discussion of th e F ren ch w o rk m en ’s com pensation law of 1898 prin cip ally
from th e sta n d p o in t of d ishonest practices in th e m a tte r of claim s a n d of o th er
difficulties w hich arise in its operation.
, E dw ard.
Labor and the Sherman act. New York and London, Harper
& Bros., 1930. 332 pp.
B e v e r i d g e , W. H .
Unemployment—a problem of industry (1909 and 1930)..
New York, Longmans, Green & Co., 1930. 514 pp.; charts. (Neiv edition.)
B
erm an
C
a l if o r n ia
,U
n iv e r s it y o f .
H eller C o m m ittee fo r R esearch in Social Econom ics.
Cost of living studies, III: The food of twelve families of the professional class,
by Mary Garringe Luck and Sybil Woodruff. _ Berkeley, Calif., 1931. (Uni
versity of California Publications in Economics, Vol. 5, Ho. 4, pp. ¿41 - ^ 0.)
T his stu d y u n d erta k e s to find o u t w h a t th e food sta n d a rd s of people in co m fo rt
able circum stances are, b o th as to cost a n d n u tritiv e q u ality .
C
, E va n s.
Financing the consumer. New York, Harper & Bros., 1930.
358 pp.; charts.
lark
D a ta from th is book, show ing th e cost of lo an s to th e sm all borrow er, are given
in th is issue.
o n E d u c a t io n .
Education and leisure. _Addresses delivered at the
fourth triennial conference on education held at Victoria and , ancouver, Canada,
April, 1929. London and Toronto, J. M. Dent & Sons (Ltd.), 1930. 285 pp.,
illus.
C r o o k , W il f r id H a r r is .
The general strike: A study of labor’s tragic weapon
in theory and practice. Chapel Hill, University of North Carolina Press, 1931.
649 pp-
C
onference
I n th is w ork, th e w rite r sta te s in his in tro d u ctio n , th e te rm general strik e is
used “ to im ply th e strik e of a m a jo rity of th e w orkers in th e m ore im p o rta n t
industries of a n y one lo cality o r re g io n .” H e h a s tre a te d th e general strik es of
h isto ry as of th re e ty p e s— th e p o litical g eneral strik e, w hich aim s to ex a c t som e
definite p olitical concession from th e existing g o v ern m en t; th e re v o lu tio n ary
strike, w hich aim s a t th e definite o v erth ro w of th e existing g o v ern m en t o r in d u s
tria l system ; a n d th e econom ic strik e, p e rh a p s th e m o st com m on form .
D artm outh C ollege.
A mos T u ck School of A d m in istratio n a n d F inance.
C om m ittee on R esearch. A reading list on business administration. Han
over, N. H., 1930. 4%PPIncludes a section on in d u stria l relatio n s a n d personnel ad m in istratio n .
F
, H erm an.
Racial factors in American industry. New York, Harper
& Bros., 1931. 318 pp.
eldm an
T his volum e is described as “ a re su lt of studies p a rtic ip a te d in by m em bers
a n d friends of T h e In q u iry , a n a tio n a l org an izatio n fo r th e p ro m o tio n of coopera
tiv e studies of problem s in h u m a n relations. ” T h e racial g roups a re ta k e n up in
order: T h e N egro, rep resen tin g th e b lack races; th e C hinese, Jap an ese, a n d F ili
pinos, representing th e yellow races; th e M exicans a n d In d ia n s, re p resen tin g th e
red race; a n d th e im m ig ran ts of th e w h ite race. Special consideration is given to
th e difficulties each group faces, th e progress w hich i t h as m ade, th e opinion of
observers as to its capacities, th e causes of th e opposition it h as m et, a n d th e
m ethods w hich h a v e been used e ith e r to re s tric t its in d u stria l o p p o rtu n itie s o r to
develop its possibilities. T h e second p a r t outlin es a g eneral p ro g ram designed
to rem edy th e cond itio n s of in d u stria l p reju d ice w hich o ften h a m p e r new com ers
in th e field, a n d w hich are a p t to be especially m ark ed w here such fa cto rs as differ
ences of color a n d language e n te r in.
F
W il l ia m T r u f a n t , a n d C a t c h in g s , W a d d il l .
Progress and plenty:
Two-minute talks on the economics of prosperity. Boston and New York,
Houghton Mifflin Co., 1930. 214 PP-
o ster ,
https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
[1030]
257
PUBLICATIONS RELATING TO LABOR
F
, J. G eorge
E d ito r. A philosophy of production: A symposium
New York, The Business Bourse, 1930. 259 pp.
^
'
r e d e r ic k
C° n m m e r
N ‘W
Y °rk
^
Library bulletin No. 7: Semiannual
remew [of current literature on industrial relations, 1930] and five-day week—
^Mimeographed!) a^hy‘ ^
F ° r *’ 166 Broadway> January, 1931. 35 pp.
I n d u s t r ia l R
e l a t io n s
R
.
Fortpflanzungsschädigung der erwerbstätigen Frau und ihre
Leipzig, J. A. Barth,-1930. 124 pp.; diagrams.
H
üstner
Abhilfe.
C
( I n c .).
o unselo r s
e in z
D eals w ith in ju rio u s effects of in d u stria l em plo y m en t upo n
p o te n tia l m others, a n d suggests p rev en tiv e m easures.
LANS
GA^
r
NS 1 SVERGE'
w om en as
Berättelse verksamhet 1929. Stockholm,
A re p o rt on lab o r unions a n d th e ir activ ities in Sweden du rin g 1929, including
conventions, tra d e agreem ents, unem ploym ent, publications, social insurance
relatio n s to in te rn a tio n a l organizations, etc.
N
U n iv e r s it y .
C o m m ittee on Social a n d E conom ic R esearch. Industry
semes, Bulletin No. 2: Rayon and cotton weaving in Tientsin, by H. D. Fong
Tientsin, November, 1930. 79 pp.; diagrams.
*
g’
ankai
S urveys th e in d u stry selected fo r s tu d y u n d er th e following headings: H isto ry
a n d localization, in d u stria l organization, w eaving a n d m ark etin g , w orkers an d
apprentices, pro sp ect a n d retro sp ect.
T he ^ a ta for th e in d u stry u n d er review a re arran g ed along lines sim ilar to
th o se followed in B ulletin No. 2 of th e sam e series.
N
a t io n a l
C
onference
PreL 1931.
of
S
o c ia l
z f o p p " 5'’ ^
ork.
Proceedings at the 57th annual ses8~U ’ 193°‘ Chi™9°> University of Chicago
W
Old age a n d u n em p lo y m en t w ere am ong th e m o st freq u en tly discussed su b jects
a t th is la te s t conference of social w ork, fo u r p ap ers being grouped u n d e r th e
g eneral cap tio n "E c o n o m ic old a g e ” a n d seven p ap ers dealing d irectly w ith th e
s u b je c t of unem plo y m en t. In clu d ed am ong th ese seven c o n trib u tio n s a re fo u r
u n d er th e classification " C u rr e n t problem s of u n e m p lo y m e n t” a n d th re e en titled ,
respectively, " C a n m an ag e m en t p re v e n t u n em p lo y m e n t? ” , "A n a tte n m t to
m eet a n u n em ploym en t em ergency,” an d a " R e p o rt of a survey of unem ployN
I n d u s t r ia l
C o n f e r e n c e ’ B oard
( I n c .).
Elements of industrial
pension plans. New York, 247 Park Avenue, 1931. 48 pp.
J
*
a t io n a l
* P
m 0n° g rap h in ten d ed to p re se n t th e in fo rm atio n m o st essential for
in d u s tria l executives who a re considering th e estab lish m en t of a pension p lan
o r th e reo rganization of one alread y in operation.
N
a t io n a l
U
rban
L
eague
.
D e p a rtm e n t
of R esearch
an d
In v estig atio n s
[19301\mei80erppW m American labor unions- New York, 1133 Broadway
PRIN^
Memorandum: Comymmt %nSUranCe- Urinceton, January, 1931. 15 pp.
0 N 7 UNI7 ERSITY- , In d u s tria l R elatio n s Section.
(M Leo^aP ZdT6^
G \ T ;> EniTOR. Management problems, with special reference to
l264tppÜechartUStry' Chapd HlU' University of North Carolina Press, 1930.
https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
[1031]
MONTHLY LABOR R EV IEW
258
W
, C a r o l i n e F.
The early New England cotton manufacture: A study in
industrial beginnings. Boston and New York, Houghton Mifflin Co., 1931.
349 pp.; charts.
.
are
T he com plexity of m odern in d u stria l life, th e a u th o r observes, m akes i t difficult
to single o u t a n d stu d y its v arious elem ents. B u t m an y of th ese w ere p re se n t
in a sim pler form in th e early stages of in d u strializatio n . T h e p re se n t stu d y is
an effort to id en tify certain of these, to learn th e ir origin, a n d to follow th e ir
developm ent.
W o o f t e r , T . J., j r .
A study of the economic status of the Negro. [Raleigh, N. C.,
1930?] Various paging. (Mimeographed.)
R eview ed in th is issue.
https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
o
[1032]
@FedFRASER