Full text of Monthly Labor Review : August 1933, Volume 37, Number 2

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

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
This publication is issued pursuant to the
provisions of the sundry civil act (41 Stats.
1430) approved M arch 4, 1921

Contents
Special articles:

Page

Experience under State old-age pension laws in 1932_______________
President’s re-employment agreement______________________________
Code of fair competition for the cotton-textile industry_____________

251
262
265

Employment conditions and unemployment relief:

Study of needy unemployed inPhiladelphia__________________________
Report of Pennsylvania committee on unemployment reserves______

273
277

Industrial and labor conditions:

Effect of the depression on employee stock ownership______________
Vacation policies in 1933____________________________________________
Effectiveness of new cannery code in New York State______________
Compulsory labor service in Germany_______________________________
Changes in public labor policy in Germany________________________

279
283
284
286
287

Insurance and pension plans:

Old-age and invalidity pensions and maternity allowances in Australia.
Operations of salaried employees’ old-age insurance system in Ger­
many________________________________________________

291

2

Health and industrial hygiene:

Experiment in freedom of choice of physician by members of mutual
benefit association______________________________________________

295

Industrial accidents:

Accident statistics of National Safety Council for 1932_____________
Kansas: Fatal accidents, 1932--------------------

297
301

Women in industry:

Woman workers in the third year of the depression_________________

303

Minimum wage:

Illinois minimum-wage law________________________________________
Adjustment of living wage in New South Wales-----------------------------Decision as to basic wage in Queensland-----------------------------------------

306
310
310

Workmen’s compensation:

Employer’s violation of safety order held to warrant additional com­
pensation-------------------------------Bite by infected wood tick held compensable_______________________
Convict working for county held not a county employee-----------------Treaty provisions held controlling when in conflict with compensation
law_____________________________________________________________
Workmen’s compensation in Great Britain during 1931--------------------

313
314
315
316
317

Industrial disputes:

Strikes and lockouts in the United States in June 1933-------------------Conciliation work of the Department of Labor in June 1933-----------Presidential emergency board for dispute on Kansas City Southern
Railway________________________________________________________

320
322
327

Family allowances:

Belgian family-allowance funds, December 1932-----------------------------Family allowances in New Zealand, 1931-32-----------------------------------

328
329

Labor agreements:

Salesmen for the electrical industry provided for in agreements--------

331

Labor turnover:

Labor turnover in manufacturing establishments, second quarter of
1933____________________________________________________________


https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis

h i

332

IV

CONTENTS

Housing:

Page

Building operations in principal cities of the United Stages, June 1933_
Building operations in cities of the United States having a population
of 100,000 or over, first half of 1933--------------------------------------------

334
347

Wages and hours of labor:

Wages and hours of union hotel and restaurant employees--------------Wages and hours of union blacksmiths-------------------------------------------Summary of wage surveys made by the Bureau of Labor Statistics,
1928 to 1932: Part 2.— By industries and States-------------------------Wage-rate changes in American industries-----------------------------------------Wage changes reported by trade unions and municipalities since
April 1933________________________________________________________
Farm wage rates on July 1, 1933---------------------------------------------------Idaho: Mine wages in 1932-----------------------------------------------------------Minnesota: Wages in 1931 and 1932, as shown in accident reports _ _
Virginia: Wages of quarry workers, 1931---------------------------------------Denmark: Wages in 1932---------------------------------------------------Germany:
Earnings in the building trades, August 1932---------------------------Wages in coal mining in 1932------------------------- -----------------------Great Britain: Changes in wage rates and hours of labor in 1932----Java: Wages in the sugar industry, 1929 and 1931-------------------------Soviet Russia: Wages in coal mines of the Don Basin---------------------Yugoslavia: Survey of wages, 1932----------------------------------------------------

350
355
358
369
373
376
377
378
379
379
390
392
393
397
397
399

Trend of employment:

Employment in selected manufacturing industries in June 1933-------Employment in nonmanufacturing industries in June 1933____--------Average man-hours worked and average hourly earnings-----------------Employment in building construction in June 1933-------------------------Trend of employment in June 1933, by States--------------------------------Employment and pay roll in June 1933 in cities of over 500,000 popu­
lation___________________________________________________________
Employment in the executive civil service of the United States, June
1933____________________________________________________________
Employment on class I steam railroads in the United States----------Unemployment in foreign countries-------------------------------------------------

403
416
420
422
424
432
432
434
435

Retail prices:

Retail
Retail
Retail
Retail

prices
prices
prices
prices

of
of
of
of

food on June 15, 1933--------------------------------------------coal on June 15, 1933 -------------------------------------------gas in the United States----------------------------------------electricity in the United States--------------------------------

439
442
445
447

Index numbers of wholesale prices, 1913 to June 1933----------------------

450

Wholesale prices:
Cost of living:

Changes in cost of living in the United States, June 1933----------------Cost of living in the United States and in foreign countries-------------California: Typical family budgets of executive, clerk, and wage
earner in San Francisco, 1932--------

455
466
470

Directories:

Labor offices in the United States and in Canada----------------------------

472

Publications relating to labor:

Official: United States_______._____________________________________
Official: Foreign countries__________________________
Unofficial_________________________________________________________


https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis

491
492
494

This Issue in Brief

In 15 States in which old-age pensions were being paid in 1932 more
than 100,000 aged needy persons were aided in this way. Nearly
$23,000,000 was disbursed in pensions during the year. This was
shown by the Bureau’s annual survey, recently completed. Although
only about 40 percent of the counties in the States which have pension
laws on the statute books have adopted the plan, in California,
Delaware, Massachusetts, and New York the pension system is in
State-wide operation. As would be expected, the acceptance of the
plan is far wider in those States whose law is mandatory (especially
if some measure of State aid is provided) than in those States in which
adoption of the pension plan is left to the will of the county (p. 251).
A code of fair competition for the cotton-textile industry was the first
to be set up under the National Recovery Act. It provides for a mini­
mum wage of $12 per week in the South and $13 in the North for a
working week of 40 hours. Presidential approval was given on July
9 and the code became effective July 17. The text of the code and
the modifications made in it by the President are given in full in
the article beginning on page 265.
The cost of living in the United States declined 2.9 percent between
December 1932 and June 1933, according to the semiannual survey by
the Bureau of Labor Statistics. Food decreased 2 percent; clothing,
1.4 percent; rents, 7.8 percent; fuel and light, 5.4 percent; and miscel­
laneous items, 2.4 percent; while house-furnishing goods increased
0.2 percent. Comparing June 1932 and June 1933, there was a
decrease of 5.5 percent in cost of living as a whole (p. 455).
The vacation policies of companies granting vacation with pay to part
or all of their employees appear to have undergone certain modifica­
tions as a result of the depression. In a study of the plans of 24
companies made by the American Management Association it was
found that half of the companies had made no change in their plans
during the depression, while two companies had gone back to the
plans in force in 1929. Five companies reported that the length of
the vacation had been reduced in certain instances, while six had
abolished vacations entirely for certain classes of employees (p. 283).
The 3 years of the depression have permitted an evaluation of the worth
of employee stock-ownership schemes, although it is perhaps too soon to
judge the movement as a whole. A study of these plans by the
industrial relations section of Princeton University covering 50 repre­
sentative plans from among the large number for which material has
been collected during the past few years leads to the general conclusion
that few such plans have been successful. The risk to employees’
savings in a falling market apparently has more than offset any bene­
ficial results of the plans in the encouragement of thrift and in improv­
ing morale (p. 279).
A survey of 8,722 persons employed on made work in Philadelphia
showed considerably over 90 percent of the men jobless because of business


https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis

v

VI

TH IS ISSU E

IN

B R IE F

conditions beyond their control. Most of the workers had lost their
jobs toward the close of the summer of 1930. Approximately 94
percent had become unemployed since the summer of 1929. The
previous wages of these workers compared quite favorably with the
wages of others in similar occupations in the State. About 40 percent
of the whites and 60 percent of the Negroes had had to resort to
charity before they obtained made work. The outstanding conclusion
of the investigators is that planned cooperative group action is
essential for dealing effectively with problems of unemployment and
destitution (p. 273).
Electrical workers in several cities have recently agreed to a reduction
in their wage scale in order that salesmen may be hired to develop a
market for their labor, through the improvement or modernization of
old buildings, residences, or industrial plants, and maintenance and
repair of commercial and residential buildings. The cities where such
agreements have been made are Chicago, Cleveland, Indianapolis,
Milwaukee, Rockford (111.), and St. Louis (p. 331).
The accidental death rate jor 1932 is estimated by the National Safety
Council to have been 70.5 per 100,000 population as against a rate of
85.5 in 1913. From this it is concluded that the safety movement
can be credited with saving 175,000 lives in its 20 years of existence
(p. 297).
An investigation into the working of the new cannery code in New York
State showed that, though it had been framed by the labor department
and canners jointly, it was widely disregarded. Little effort had been
made to regularize employment, reserve lists were rarely kept of extra
workers to be called upon in case of an unexpected rush of supplies,
and illegally long hours were common. The fact that of 54 plants
visited, 4 were making a special effort and 3 were making some effort
to observe the code is held to prove that it is not impracticable and
that the situation calls for a campaign of education among canners
and the public alike (p. 284).
Compulsory labor service for all young men in Germany will begin on
January 1, 1934. Physical disability is reported to be the only
ground for exemption. Each one subject to the service will be required
to work 6 hours a day for 6 months. One or two hours are to be given
to instruction in political science and certain periods of the day to
sports and recreation. Clothing, food, shelter, and all necessary
equipment are to be furnished by the Government. No wages are
to be paid, but a few cents per day will be given for “ pocket money.”
The men will be engaged on various kinds of public works, including
reforestation (p. 286).


https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis

MONTHLY

L ABOR REVIEW
U. S. BUREAU OF LABOR STATISTICS
VOL. 37, NO. 2

WASHINGTON

AUGUST 1933

Experience Under State Old-Age Pension Laws in 1932

HE results of the survey by the United States Bureau of Labor
Statistics of operations under the State old-age pension laws 1
in the year 1932 are given in the present article. This is the fourth
such survey, the other three having covered the years 1928, 1930, and
1931. Where the law requires the counties to report to some State
official, the data for the whole State were obtained from that official.2
For the other States the necessary information was secured from the
individual counties.3
Although the laws of some of the States— notably those of Massa­
chusetts and New York— allow the setting up of welfare districts by
the cities and towns, most of the laws are on a county basis, and for
statistical purposes the data here presented are given on that basis.
At the end of 1932 there were old-age pension laws in effect in 17
States (containing 34 percent of the population of the United States),
but pensions were actually being paid in only 15. In Kentucky,
where the optional law has been on the statute books since 1926, not
a county was operating under the act in 1932. In West Virginia only
one county had voted to adopt the pension system and pensions be­
came payable there January 1, 1933. In the other States the system
was in effect in greater or less degree. There was State-wide opera­
tion in California, Delaware, Massachusetts, and New York. More
than three fourths of the State population were in territories operating
under the act in Idaho, Montana, and Wyoming, and very nearly that
proportion in New Jersey and Utah. At the other end of the scale
were Nevada and Colorado, where only a negligible proportion of the
population was covered by the protection of the act.
Of the 757 counties in the 17 States which had old-age pension
laws in 1932, reports were received for 738, or 97.5 percent. The
data can therefore be accepted as representative of the pension situ­
ation as of the end of 1932. Of these 738 counties, 293, or about 40
percent, had adopted the pension system. These were, at the close
of the year, assisting 102,537 old people, and had spent during the 12

T

1
Called “ old-age security” in California, “ old-age assistance” in Delaware, Massachusetts, New Hamp­
shire, and Wisconsin, and “ old-age relief” in N ew Jersey and New York.
2
This was done in the case of California, Delaware, Idaho, Kentucky, Maryland, Massachusetts, M on­
tana, N ew Jersey, N ew York, and Wisconsin.
3 1.e., Colorado, Minnesota, Nevada, N ew Hampshire, Utah, W est Virginia, and W yom ing.


https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis

251

252

M O N T H L Y L A B O R R E V IE W

months of 1932 the sum of $22,616,004. Among the individual States,
New York was far in the lead, with nearly 53 percent of the pensioners
and over 68 percent of the total pensions paid. About 82 percent of
the pensioners and more than 91 percent of the total outlay were
accounted for in the three States of California, Massachusetts, and
New York.
As compared with 1931, the year 1932 showed an increase in pen­
sioners of nearly 35 percent and in amount disbursed of nearly 40
percent. How much of this was normal increase and how much due
to the unusual economic conditions it is impossible to determine.4
The average monthly pension in 1932 was $19.38 as compared
with $18.89 in 1931. In no State did the average pension granted
equal the maximum allowable under the law.
The cost of the pension system per inhabitant in 1932 averaged 77
cents, ranging from 4 cents in Maryland to $1.23 in New York. For
1931 the average cost, all States combined, was 64 cents, and the range
was from 6 cents in Maryland to 95 cents in New York.
The weakness of the optional laws putting the whole cost upon the
individual counties was again brought out by the study. In Kentucky,
Nevada, and West Virginia, which have laws of this type, the system
is either nonexistent or practically so, the widest extension under
voluntary legislation being found in Montana where the law has been
in force since 1923 and where now 81 percent of the population is in
counties which have adopted the plan. The practical effectiveness
of the mandatory acts is demonstrated by the fact that the coverage
(i.e., percent of population in counties with system) in the optional
States is slightly over 28 percent as compared with over 91 percent
in the mandatory States, and the latter figure has been kept down by
the delay in putting the mandatory law into effect in Colorado
occasioned by the contest over the constitutionality of the act.
From January 1 through July 1933, old-age pension laws have been
enacted in nine States (Arizona, Arkansas, Indiana, Maine, Michigan,
Nebraska, North Dakota, Oregon, and Washington), but that of
Arkansas has already been declared unconstitutional. All of these
make adoption of the pension system compulsory upon the counties,
and six of them provide for some measure of State aid. In Indiana
and Maine the State will bear half, in Arizona 67 percent, and in
North Dakota and Michigan all of the cost. The Arkansas law pro­
vided that the State and counties should share the cost, each con­
tributing at the rate of 1 percent of their total budget; it was this
provision which caused the law to be held unconstitutional.
4
The New York official in charge of the old-age pensions estimates, however, that approximately one
third of the grants would have been unnecessary had it not been for the depression.


https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis

253

OLD-AGE PENSION EXPERIENCE IN 1932
General Pension Situation at End of 1932

T able 1 gives a summary picture of the pension situation as of the
end of 1932.
T a b l e 1 .— S U M M A R Y OP O P E R A T IO N S U N D E R S T A T E O L D -A G E P E N S IO N L A W S , 1932

Counties in State
Year
of pas­
sage
of
law

State

California. _ ___ ____________ _
_
Colorado-- -------- --_ _ -------- __ _ _ ------Delaware
_ ___
_
_ ___
Idaho- _ _
_ __ __
----- ----- _ __
Maryland-- ___ _ . _________ _______
Massachusetts-__ _ __ __- _ -_ _
M in n esota ___
----------M on tana...
----...........
Nevada. ____________________ ____________
New Hampshire. ___________ ____ _
_
New J e rs e y ___________________ - ___ -----New York _
...........
Utah
_____ ___ _
_ __
___
Wisconsin
W y o m in g _____ _____ ____________________
Total

___

___

1929
1927
1931
1931
1926
1927
1930
1929
1923
1925
1931
1931
1930
1929
1931
1925
1929

Total

58
63
3
44
120
24
14
87
56
17
10
21
62
29
55
71
23
757

N um ­
ber re­
ported
for

58
61
3
42
120
24
5 h

Counties having pension sys­
tem

N um ­
ber

Number
of pen­
sioners
at end
of 1932

Amount
paid in
pensions,
1932

57
4
3
39

12, 520
162
1,565
2 1,403

1 $3, 204, 200
15,993
187, 316
3 83,035

41

135
17,051
7 2, 403
1,254
15
455
7, 848
54,185
1,096

35,426
6 2,058, 075
7 340, 242
183, 303
2,600
59,907
3 497, 327
15,454, 308
59, 586

1,940
505

367,759
66,927

102, 537

22, 616,004

5 h

87
56
14
6
21
62
26
55
71
18

5
44
1
6
17
62
13
1
9 10
16

738

293

1 Estimated from m onthly State reports showing amount of State aid approved (i.e., approximately one
half of total cost).
2 35 counties.
3 15 counties.
4 C ity of Baltimore.
6 System is not, however, on county basis but on city-and-town basis.
6 Data are for period July 1, 1931-May 1, 1932.
7 3 counties.
3 6 months, July to December 1932.
9 1 of these discontinued system in September 1932.

Table 2 shows the situation in those States in which the pension
system was in operation in both 1931 and 1932. Some gains and some
losses occurred. Idaho shows a gain of 8 counties and Minnesota,
Montana, New Hampshire, Utah, and Wyoming a gain of 1 county
each. The apparent gain of 1 county in Wisconsin was lost when one
of those operating under the law discontinued the scheme in Sep­
tember 1932; the system in that State, however, is to be compulsory
and State-wide after July 1, 1933. Setbacks were sustained in Colo­
rado and Nevada.
The number of aged given assistance increased in every State
except Maryland and Nevada, the largest rate of increase having
occurred in Colorado, wdiere despite the fact that the number of
pension-paying counties fell from 7 to 4, the number of pensioners
more than tripled.
The spread of the movement within these States from 1931 to
1932 is shown by the net increase of 10 adopting counties.


https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis

254

MONTHLY LABOR REVIEW

T a b l e 2 .—N U M B E R

OF A D O P T IN G C O U N T IE S , N U M B E R OF P E N S IO N E R S , A N D
A M O U N T P A ID IN PE N S IO N S IN I D E N T IC A L S T A T E S , 1931 A N D 1932

State

Number of
counties with
system
1931

Total

______________________

1932

Number of pen­
sioners at end of--

1931

1932

Amount paid in pen­
sions

1931

1932

57
7
3
31
1
14
4
43
2
5
62
12
9
15

57
4
3
39
1
14
5
44
1
6
62
13
10
16

9,887
50
1,497
698
150
11,076
1,227
1,130
34
246
47, 585
873
1,597
289

12, 520
162
1,565
1,403
135
17, 051
2,403
1, 254
15
455
54,185
1,096
1,940
505

$2, 453,087
2,190
66, 568
4, 224
50,000
904,939
94,068
178,934
7,360
3, 614
12, 007, 352
92, 305
283,848
16, 805

$3, 204, 200
15,993
187, 316
83, 035
35,426
12,058, 075
340,242
183,303
2,600
59,907
15,454, 308
59, 586
367,759
66,927

265

275

76, 339

94, 689

16,165, 294

22,118,678

1 For period July 1, 1931-May 1, 1932.

Colorado.— The old-age pension law of this State,^ passed in 1927,
was optional with the counties. It soon became evident that under
it no progress would be made, for nearly 3 years later, at the end of
1930, only 1 of the 63 counties in the State had adopted the plan,
and it had not yet begun the actual payment of pensions. The
legislature of 1931 amended the act, making its adoption compulsory
upon the counties, effective in January 1932. A few counties, antici­
pating this, adopted the system in 1931, but action was again retarded
by a suit attacking the constitutionality of the law. Thus at the
end of 1931 only 7 counties were operating under the law and 3 of
these ceased operations pending the outcome of the suit. During
1932, therefore, in only 4 of the 63 counties were the indigent aged
afforded the protection of the pension system.
The decision of the Colorado Supreme Court, in the suit mentioned,
held that portion of the act unconstitutional which placed its admin­
istration in the hands of the county courts. This feature was rem­
edied by the 1932 legislature, by charging the county commissioners
with the administration of the act, and the mandatory act as thus
amended goes into effect July 25, 1933. Hereafter the State will
contribute as its share of the cost the proceeds of a tax on beer; the
remainder will be borne by the counties.
Delaware.— Delaware has a State-wide system administered by a
State commission. The value of the pension system has, however,
been limited because of the insufficient funds provided. Thus, the
report of the pension commission states, “ it is utterly impossible
* * * to meet the whole needs of the aged people of our State
with the appropriation given.” There was a waiting list of 1,295
persons at the end of the year, of whom it was estimated that some
828 would be eligible for pensions if funds were available.
Idaho shows the remarkable gain of eight counties over 1931, the
proportion of population covered by the system in 1931 having in­
creased from about three fifths in 1931 to nearly nine tenths in 1932.
The report from the department of public welfare shows, however,

https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis

O LD -A G E

PEN SIO N E X P E R IE N C E

IN

1932

255

that one county had to cease payment of pensions, because the funds
were exhausted, on December 1 and another at the end of June.
Kentucky.— In Kentucky, where the law is optional, even the small
headway made has been lost under the pressure of economic condi­
tions. _ The largest number of adopting counties at any time was
found in 1928, when three counties had formally adopted the pension
system. Only two were paying pensions in i930 and only one in
1931. In 1932 not a single county remained under the pension sys­
tem. It was reported 6 that a petition for the adoption of the system,
signed by more than 100 residents, had been presented to the fiscal
court of Fayette County late in 1932.
Maryland, another State whose law is of the optional type, neither
gained nor lost ground during 1932. As in 1931, at the end of 1932
Baltimore city was the only jurisdiction paying pensions under the
State law.
Minnesota.— This law was passed in 1929, but the question of
adoption by the counties had to be voted upon at a general election,
and to receive a majority of all ballots cast at that election. Thus
necessarily made the expansion of the system a very slow procedure.
By the end of 1931 only 4 of the State’s 87 counties had adopted the
plan and only 3 were actually paying pensions. Another county was
added at the 1932 election, but of these 5 counties only 3 were making
grants at the end of 1932.
The 1933 legislature amended the act so as to make it compulsory,
effective January 1, 1934. It provides, however, that after having
operated under the act for 1 year the matter of the continuance of
the system can be brought before the electorate at a general election,
upon petition of 25 percent of the voters.
Nevada.— In Nevada the optional law remains practically inoper­
ative. At the end of 1930 only one county was paying old-age
pensions; during 1931 it was joined by an additional county which,
however, ceased paying pensions in 1932. The 1932 experience there­
fore shows again only one county actually operating under the law.
New Hampshire.— The law of this State was enacted only in 1931
but was mandatory in form and by the end of the year had been put
into operation in 5 of the 10 counties in the State. Only six counties
reported for 1932 but all had the system in effect and were making
payments under it.
New Jersey.— The New Jersey system, mandatory upon the counties
and under the general supervision of the State department of institu­
tions and agencies, was created by a law of 1931, effective January 1,
1932. Payments began on July 1, 1932, in all but four counties which
because of lack of funds had, as late as April 1933, made no payments.
“ One or two of the other counties” , according to the report of the
State official, “ have lapsed payments temporarily’ ’, but it is expected
that the financial difficulties will be overcome and that payment will
begin shortly.
Utah.— The Utah law was passed early in 1929 and became effective
May 14 of that year. By the end of 1930, 13 of the 29 counties had
adopted the act, but only 12 were paying pensions at the close of 1931.
The reports from the counties of that State for 1932 indicate that 13
were operating under the pension system; these do not, however,
5 Old-age Security Herald, January 1933.


https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis

256

M O N T H L Y LA B O R R E V IE W

include 3 counties which were paying pensions in 1931 but for which
no report has been received for 1932.
Of the 13 reporting counties, 1 ceased payments in September 1932
because of lack of funds, in 1 the payments were temporarily sus­
pended at the time its report was made (lette in April 1933), and in
a third county pensions are paid only “ at intervals when funds are
available.”
The chairman of the board of county commissioners of one county
which has not as yet adopted the plan because its financial condition
would not permit, states, “ We think it a fine thing, however, and as
soon as we can see our way clear we expect to adopt the old-age
pension for the old people of our county.”
West Virginia.— This is a voluntary law whose adoption by the
counties can be accomplished only by submission to the voters at a
general or special election, a majority of all votes cast in the election
being required for adoption. Although this law went into effect in
June 1931, there was no opportunity for taking steps to put it into
actual force until the general election of 1932. At that time, the
reports from the individual counties indicate, the question was sub­
mitted to the voters of Mingo County only; in another county the
citizens presented a petition to the county court asking its inclusion
on the ballot, but this was refused by the court. In Mingo County
the pension system was adopted, effective January 1, 1933.
Wisconsin.-—Old-age pensions have been paid in this State, in vary­
ing numbers of counties, since 1925 when the voluntary law was
passed. Although the law provides that one third of the cost shall be
borne by the State, in 1931 only 9 counties were paying pensions, while
in 1932 10 counties were doing so but 1 of these ceased payments in
September of the latter year.
The act became mandatory on July 1, 1933.
Wyoming.— In Wyoming, at the end of 1930, there were 7 counties
which had adopted the old-age pension plan and 15 had done so by
the end of 1931.
Reports from 18 of the 23 counties for 1932 indicate that 16 have
adopted the plan; this number does not include 2 counties which
reported its adoption in previous years, but from which no report was
received for 1932.
Development of System Under “ Optional” and “ M andatory” Laws, 1932
T a b l e 3 shows the extent of development, classifying the States
according to whether the adoption of the pension system is optional
with the counties or mandatory upon them. For States whose law
is not clearly mandatory or clearly voluntary, the classification was
made on the authority of the officials of the State concerned.
The early old-age pension laws in the United States were nearly all
of the type which left the adoption of the system (as well as its cost)
to the will of the county. A definite trend toward the mandatory
type of legislation has been discernible of late years, however. Of
the 12 laws on the statute books at the end of 1930, 5 were manda­
tory. At the end of 1931, 9 of the 17 laws passed were mandatory
and 2 others had been amended to become compulsory at future dates.6
6
Of the 9 laws passed thus far (July) in 1933, all are compulsory upon the counties; of these, 1 has already
been declared unconstitutional.


https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis

O LD -A G E PEN SIO N E X P E R IE N C E

IN

257

1932

Another definite trend has been toward the provision of State aid,
in increasing proportions of the total cost. At the end of 1928, of the
6 States with pension legislation, only Wisconsin provided for State
aid (to the extent of one third of the cost). At the end of 1930, 4 of
the 12 pension States provided that the State should pay a proportion
of the cost, one half being at that time the maximum proportion. The
year 1932 witnessed no extension of the pension system, it being an
“ o ff” legislative year. The situation at the end of that year was
therefore the same as at the end of the preceding year, with 6 of the
17 States providing for State assistance, 2 to the extent of one third,7
2 one half, 1 three fourths, and 1 all of the cost.8
The relatively greater extension of the compulsory laws and of the
coverage under them is obvious from table 3. More than seven times
as many persons are covered by the mandatory as by the optional acts.
Within the optional States as a whole the adopting counties contain
only slightly over one fourth of the combined population of those
States, while in the mandatory States more than nine tenths of the
population is covered by the act.
T a b l e 3 .—E X T E N T A N D C O V E R A G E OF PE N S IO N S Y S T E M IN S P E C IF IE D S T A T E S ,

1932, B Y T Y P E OF L A W

Counties having pension system
at end of 1932 1
Popula­
tion of
State,
1930

State, and type of law

Optional

Number
of coun­
ties in
State

Number

Popula­
tion

Percent
of State
popula­
tion

M aryland--------------Minnesota______ - ------------------------------M ontana_________ _
------- -- --Nevada___ ________ _ -------- - - - - - - ......
West Virginia ___ __ ---------- - -- ~-------W isconsin------

2, 614, 589
1, 631, 526
2, 563, 953
537, 606
91, 058
1, 729, 205
2,939, 006

120
24
87
56
17
55
71

21
5
44
1
1
10

804,874
1, 059, 482
436,171
2,652
38, 319
1, 097, 277

49.3
41.3
81.1
2.9
2. 2
37.3

Total--------------------------------------------------------

12,106, 943

430

62

3, 438, 775

28.4

5, 677, 251
1, 035, 791
238, 380
445, 032
4, 249, 614
465, 293
4, 041, 334
12, 588, 066
507,847
225, 565

58
63
3
44
14
10
21
62
29
23

57
4
3
39
14
6
17
62
13
16

5, 677, 010
55, 026
238, 380
400,141
4, 249, 614
238, 207
2, 852,850
12, 588, 066
378, 865
181, 936

100.0
6. 3
100.0
89.9
100.0
51. 2
70. 6
100. 0
74.6
80.7

Mandatory

M a ssachu setts.,___
N ew Hampshire

-.-

-----

-------

W yom ing______________________________________

T otal_____________________________________ 29,474,173

327

231

26, 860,095

91.1

Grand total----------------------------------------------- 41, 581,116

757

293

30, 298,870

72.9

1 Includes also those w hich, although they have adopted the system, have not yet put it into effect.
2 C ity of Baltimore.

Among the “ optional” or “ voluntary” States it is seen that the
largest proportion of adopting counties still is in Montana and Wis­
consin in the order named. That the more populous counties are
i In one of these (Massachusetts) a 1931 act provided that the whole cost of the system for 1931 and 1932
should be met from the proceeds of a $1 tax on every male inhabitant over 21 years of age.
8
Of the 9 laws passed in 1933, 6 provide for State aid, 1 to the extent of 1 percent of the total State expenditures (law since declared unconstitutional), 2 to the extent of one half, 1 of two thirds, and 2 all of the cost.


https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis

258

M O N T H L Y L A B O R R E V IE W

the ones which adopted the pension plan is also shown. Thus,
although only 5 of Minnesota’s 87 counties have adopted the pension
plan, these contain more than two fifths of the State population.
The city of Baltimore, which is the only section of Maryland paying
pensions under the law, contains nearly half of all the residents of
the State. Montana (with 81 percent coverage) is the only “ op­
tional” State in which more than half of the population is protected
by the old-age pension law.
At the other end of the scale is Kentucky, in which now not a single
county remains under the pension law, and Nevada and West Virginia
in which less than 3 percent of the population are in counties which
have accepted the pension plan.
Among the “ mandatory” States the coverage is, as would be
expected, very much higher. In the four States of California, Dela­
ware, Massachusetts, and New York the system is practically State­
wide. California had only one mountain county (population, 241)
in which no pensions were being paid at the end of 1932; this county
is reported as being “ a very small, self-sustaining community” which
is “ so fortunate as to have within its boundary no needy person in
receipt of any type of State aid.” In all of these four States a con­
siderable proportion of the expense, ranging from one third in Massa­
chusetts to all of the cost in Delaware, is borne by the State. In
New Jersey, where the law provides that three fourths of the funds
are to come from the State treasury, four counties were unable to pro­
vide the one fourth fixed as their share and in those regions therefore
the act has not yet been put into operation. In the remaining States,
where the whole cost must be met from county funds, the coverage
is in general less wide. The greatest acceptance of the county-fund
plan is in Idaho, where some 90 percent of the inhabitants are pro­
tected by the old-age pension system. Colorado lags among the
mandatory States, but in that State the development of the system
has been hindered by the contesting of the law on the grounds of
constitutionality.
Cost of Pensions, 1931 and 1932

T able 4 shows the proportion of pensioned population and the cost
of the system per pensioner and per capita of population, by States,
in 1931 and 1932.
The proportion the pensioners form of the population in those
counties in which pensions are being paid ranged, in 1932, from
0.02 percent in Maryland (Baltimore) to 0.66 percent in Delaware,
and in every case except Maryland showed an increase over the year
before.
As regards annual amount disbursed per pensioner, New York
(whose law places no limit on the amount of the individual allowance)
continues to hold first place, while Maryland and California follow in
the order named. Utah is at the other end of the scale.
The table shows that, in the States covered, the pension-system
cost in 1932 on an average was 77 cents per inhabitant, the amount
ranging from 4 cents in Maryland to $1.23 in New York. For the
previous year the average cost, all States combined, was 64 cents,
and the range was from 6 cents in Maryland to 95 cents in New York.


https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis

O L D -A G E PEN SIO N E X P E R IE N C E
T able 4 .—

IN

259

1932

COST OF O L D -A G E PE N SIO N S IN S P E C IF IE D S T A T E S , 1931 A N D 1932

Percent pensioners
form of total
p o p u la t io n in
c o u n t ie s w ith
system 4

State

1931
California ._ ___ _________________
Colorado—- _ . . ... _________ _ ____ _
Delaware. _____ .
Idaho.
____ _ _ _ _
Kentucky______ .
. . - .
M a ry la n d ___________________ __________
Massachusetts__________ _ „ ____ ___
M in n esota ..- . . . . . _______ _
Montana_____ __ ___________ __ _______
Nevada_____
__
_ _ ________________
New H am pshire..- _
. _ _____ ______
New Jersey__ ____
N ew Y ork __
. . .
Utah_______________________________
Wisconsin .
W yom ing__________________________ ____
Total _____________ ___

_________

0.17
. 05
.63
. 25
. 12
.02
.26
. 12
.26
.37
.08

A n n u a l a m ou n t
d is b u r s e d p er
pensioner 2

1932
0.22
. 29
.66
. 38

.38
.28
. 15
. 19

.02
.40
.24
.29
.57
. 19
. 28
.43
.29
.18
.28

.28

.39

1931

1932

$248.81

$255.93
98. 72
119. 69
87. 96

88. 94
96. 00
4 333. 33
163. 41
76. 67
158. 35
216. 47
110. 35
255. 33
109. 76
177. 74
69.16

262. 41
143. 28
141. 59
146.17
173. 33
131. 66
8 126. 74
285. 21
54. 37
189. 56
132. 53

227.42

232.55

A vera g e annual
cost per capita of
p o p u la t io n , in
c o u n t ie s w ith
system 3
1931
$0.43
.56
12
4.06
.43
.09
.43
.80
.07

1932
$0. 56
2Q
.79
.44

.95
.30
.26
. 16

.04
.48
.34
.42
.98
.25
5 34
1.23
. 16
.34
.37

.64

.77

1 Based on counties reporting number of pensioners.
2 In counties reporting both number of pensioners and amount disbursed.
3 Based on counties reporting amount spent.
4 Approximate, on basis of total amount appropriated for pensions.
5 Figured on annual basis, although pensions were paid only during last half of 1932.

Average Pension Paid

T able 5 shows the average annual and monthly amounts per person
disbursed in 1932; these are simple averages computed from the num­
ber of pensioners at the end of the year and the amount spent in pen­
sions during the year. For those States for which officials reported a
State average, that figure is also given.
The average pension for 1932, all States combined, was $19.38, per
month as compared with $18.89 in 1931.
Although the average amount of old-age relief granted in New York
fell from $26.80 in 1931 to $23.77 in 1932, that State continues to hold
first place as regards liberality of grants.
It is seen that, with the exception of Delaware, in every State for
which data are available for both 1931 and 1932, the latter year
showed a decrease in the average monthly grant. In the case of New
Hampshire and Utah the amounts have fallen nearly one half. In no
case does the average pension equal the maximum, and in some States
the margin between them is very wide indeed.


https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis

260

M O N T H L Y L A B O R R E V IE W

T a b l e 5 . — C O M P A R IS O N

OF A V E R A G E M O N T H L Y PEN SIO N S, 1931 A N D 1932, W IT H M A X I ­
M U M P A Y A B L E U N D E R L A W , B Y ST A T E S
Average pension, 1932
Computed o n
basis of reported Reported M onthly
b y State average,
disbursement
1931
officials:
Per
Per
Per
month
year
month

State

California______
Colorado_______
Delaware_______
Idaho__________
M aryland______
Massachusetts—Minnesota______
M ontana_______
N evada________
N ew HampshireN ew Jersey_____
N ew Y ork______
U tah___________
Wisconsin______
W yom ing______
Total_____

$255.93
98. 72
119.69
87. 96
262. 41
143. 28
141. 59
146.17
173. 33
131. 66
126. 74
285. 21
54. 37
189. 56
132. 53
232.55
1 N o data.

$21. 33
8. 23
9.97
7.33
21.87
11.94
11.80
12. 18
14. 44
10. 97
10. 56
23. 77
4. 53
15. 80
11.21
19. 38

$22. 08
9.84
23. 72

15. 28
23. 80

$23.16
19. 35
9. 54
10.62
0)
13. 62
16. 89
13. 20
17. 63
20.83
26.80
8.62
19. 67
12. 80

M axi­
mum
payable
under
law

$30. 00
30.00
25.00
25.00
30.00
(2)
30.00
25. 00
30.00
32. 50
30. 00
(2)
25. 00
30. 00
30. 00

18. 89

2 N o limit.

As the table shows, the Utah counties award the smallest amounts,
the State average being only $4.53 per month, while the average in
the various counties reporting ranges from $3 to $14.50. Average
pensions of as low as $3 were also reported by three counties in Idaho.
The tendency in the three States for which monthly averages are
available is shown in table 6.
In Delaware the trend was rather steadily upward from July 1931
to March 1932, and remained on the higher level until June 1932,
when it began an almost imperceptible decline.
In California, during the 8 months for which data are shown, there
has been a slight but continuous decline.
In New York, the average grant in March 1931— the third month
after the payment of pensions began in that State— was very close to
the $30 maximum set in many States. Since that time, however,
the average has fallen steadily by a few cents each month, registering
a decrease of 21.6 percent during the 27-month period covered bv the
table.
T a b l e 6 .— T R E N D IN A V E R A G E PE N S IO N P A ID , B Y M O N T H S , IN S P E C IF IE D S T A T E S

Average m onthly pen­
sion
Year and month
California

Delaware

New
York

$8. 89
8.71
9.06
9.14
9. 37
9.54

$27. 55
27.48
27. 33
27. 21
26.84
26. 65
26. 65
26. 35
26. 33
26. 30

9.75
9. 87
9. 90
9.88

26.24
26.05
26. 00
25. 70

1931

•M arch___
April_____
M a y _____
June_____
July______
August___
September
October-__
November.
December.
1932
January..
February.
M a r c h ...
April____
'N o data.


https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis

A v e ra g e m o n th ly p e n ­
s io n

Year and month
Califo r n i a

1932
M a y __________
June_________
July__________
August_______
September____
October_______
N ovem ber____
December____
1933
January______
February_____
M arch________
April_________
M a y __________

$22. 58
22. 56
22. 52
22.42
22. 20
22. 08
22.00
(>)
0)
0)

21.66

D e là w are

$9. 90
9. 90
9.87
9. 86
9.86
9.86
9. 86
9.84

New
York
$95 35
25 21

24. 70
24. 58
24. 35
24.18
23.94
23. 80
23. 39
23.29
22. 75
22. 07
21.59

O LD -A G E

PEN SIO N E X P E R IE N C E

IN

261

1932

The 1931-32 report of the New York Division of Old Age Security
states that pensions are based upon a budget of minimum expenses
which allows variation for the varying cost levels and standards in
different parts of the State. “ The application of this budget has
resulted in a marked reduction in the individual grants in those
public welfare districts in which allowances for food had been made on
the basis of commodity prices of earlier years.” The head of this
office also stated at the 1933 Conference on Old Age Security that in
his opinion the grants of the early pension period had been much too
liberal, and that part of the reduction which has taken place in the
average grant has been due to the adjustment of such allowances.
At this same conference one of the California administrative officials
stated, as regards the situation in that State, that “ Since the spring
of 1932 there has been throughout the State a noticeable tendency to
decrease the amount of the individual grants. While the lower cost
of living has made it possible to provide adequately for many persons
on a lower budget, the primary reason has been the unprecedented
demands on relief funds in all the counties, and the necessity of spread­
ing relief over a larger group.”
Progress of Old-Age Pension Movement

T able 7 shows, in summary form, the spread of the pension system
since 1923 when the first law still in force (that of Montana) became
effective. It is evident from this table that the widest extension has
occurred beginning with 1930.
T a b l e 7 .—D E V E L O P M E N T OF O LD -A G E PE N S IO N M O V E M E N T SIN C E 1923

Counties with pension sy stem

Year

1923__________________________________________
1924__________________________________________
1925__________________________________________
1926__________________________________________
1927__________________________________________
1928__________________________________________
1930__________________________________________
1931__________________________________________
1932__________________________________________

Number
of State
laws

1
1
3

Percent
of total
Number counties
in States
with law
29
37
i 40

4

l 44

6
6
12
17
17

i 46
52
137
267
293

52
66
i 32
i 35
i 36
15
30
39
40

Number
of pen­
sioners

349
521
> 591
i 936
» 988
1,221
10, 307
76, 349
102, 537

Amount dis­
bursed in
pensions

$22, 870
78,158
i 100, 549
i 172, 789
i 165, 038
222, 559
1, 714,388
16,173, 207
22, 616, 004

1 Figures are for 2 States (Montana and Wisconsin) only.

The development of the pension system in the various States since
the passage of the respective laws is shown in table 8.
2404°— 33------ 2


https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis

262
T able

M O N TH LY L A B O R R E V IE W
8 —D E V E L O P M E N T

OF

PE N S IO N S Y S T E M IN
PA SS A G E OF L A W

S P E C IF IE D

STATES

Number of
counties

N um ­
ber of
pen­
Y ear
sioners
at
end
Adopt­
Total
of year
ing

State, and year of act

------- 1930
1931
1932
Colorado (1927L ----------- -------- ------------------- 1928
1930
1931
1932
1931
1932
1931
Idaho (1931)
_____ - - - 1932
Kentucky (1926)_______
_ -------- ------------- 1928
1930
1931
1932
1928
1930
1931
1932
Massachusetts (1930) ________________________ 1931
1932
Minnesota (1929)-- - . - - - - ------------- -- 1931
1932
Montana (1923)----------------------------------------------- 1923
1924
1925
1926
1927
1928
1929
1930
1931
1932
Nevada (1925)------------------------------------------------- 1928
1930
1931
1932
New Hampshire (1931)------------------------------------ 1931
1932
New Jersey (1931)
- _ ---------------------- 1932
1931
New York (1930)______
-----------1932
Utah (1929)__________________________________ 1930
1931
1932
Wisconsin (1925)------------------------------------------ - 1925
1926
1927
1928
1930
1931
1932
W yom ing (1 9 2 9 ).----- -- -------------------------------- 1930
1931
1932

California (1929)

-----

-----

-----

58
58
58
63
63
63
63
3
3
44
44
120
120
120
120
24
24
24
24
14
14
87
87
56
56
56
56
56
56
56
56
56
56
17
17
17
17
10
10
21
62
62
29
29
29
71
71
71
71
71
71
71
23
23
23

Amount
spent

SIN C E

Average C ov­
annual
erage
amount
of
spent
sys­
per pen­
tem 1
sioner
$226. 85
248.11
255.93
120.00

100.0
100.0
100.0
.9

7,205
9,887
12,520
1

$1, 634,423
53, 087
3, 204, 200
120

50
162
1,497
1,565
698
1,403
30
18
10

2,190
15, 993
66, 568
187,316
4, 224
83,035
8,064
1,164
1,000

87. 96
240.00
64. 68
96.00

10.1
5.3
100.0
100.0
62.6
89.9
1.9
1.0
.3

2
12
1
150
1
135
14 11,076
14 17,051
4
1,227
5
2, 403
29
349
521
37
583
39
584
39
42
693
42
884
44
875
889
44
43
1,130
1,254
44
2
11
2
5
34
2
1
15
246
5
455
6
7,848
21
62 47, 585
62 54, 185
1,107
13
12
873
1,096
13
8
1
352
5
4
295
4
295
989
8
1,597
9
1,940
10
82
7
289
15
505
16

1,800
50,000
35,426
904,939
2,058,075
94,068
340, 242
22,870
78,158
100, 369
104, 863
115,400
146, 510
146, 746
149,100
178,934
183, 303
1,680
900
7, 360
2,600
3,614
59, 907
497,327
12,007, 352
15,454, 308
95, 780
92, 305
59, 586
180
67,926
49,638
66,185
156,510
283,848
367, 759
12,679
16,805
67,927

144.00
333. 33
262. 41
163.41
143.28
76. 67
141. 59
65. 53
150. 02
172.14
179. 56
166. 52
165. 73
167.71
169. 08
158.35
146.17
180. 00
300.00
216.47
173. 33
110. 35
131. 66
126. 74
255. 33
285. 21
84.44
109.76
54. 37
22. 50
192. 97
168. 26
230.40
158. 28
177. 74
189. 56
158. 52
69.16
132. 53

50.5
49.3
39.3
99.6
100.0
40.3
41.3
54.9
63.5
62.7
64.8
78.1
78.4
79.7
76.6
78.1
81.1
17.3
5.1
10. 1
2.9
66.9
51. 2
70.6
100.0
100.0
73.6
62.1
74.6
1.3
8.0
5.6
5.6
35.7
37.3
37.3
35.0
78.0
80.7

57
57
57
1
1
7
4
3
3
31
39
3
2
1

98. 72
88.94
119.69

1 1.e., proportion of State population living in counties which have adopted system.

President’s Reemployment Agreement

NDER the National Recovery Act provision is made for the
establishment of a code of fair competition for each industry
covered. However, as the drafting of such codes, with the necessary
public hearings, etc., necessarily took considerable time, the Presi­
dent, in July, decided to ask employers of the country generally to
agree to adopt a temporary schedule of minimum wages and maximum

U


https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis

P R E S ID E N T ’ S R E E M P L O Y M E N T A G R E E M E N T

263

weekly hours pending the drafting of the regular codes for their
particular industries. Accordingly, an agreement designated as the
“ President’s Reemployment Agreement” (and popularly referred to
as the “ blanket code” ) was drawn up and sent to employers request­
ing voluntary cooperation in this movement to put men to work and
increase earnings.1 Employers signing the agreement were, on or after
August 1, 1933, to receive the posters, etc., which evidenced member­
ship in the National Recovery Administration, and to receive also
for display, consumers’ badges of cooperation. It was further pro­
vided that the insignia adopted, an eagle with spread wings bearing
the letters NRA above it and the words, “ We Do Our Part” , below,
might be used on goods produced or handled.
To facilitate action under the act, cooperating agencies were set up
as follows:
1. District recovery boards composed of seven members for each
district of the Department of Commerce, appointed by the President,
to consider, advise, and report to the administration on the progress
under the act and pass upon such matters as are referred to them.
2. State recovery boards for each State, made up of nine members
each appointed by the President to serve without compensation, to
receive and act on all matters referred to them by the administration
or the district boards.
3. State recovery councils, made up of the presiding officers of State,
labor, manufacturing, trade, civic, etc., bodies that may apply, to
recommend to the boards any necessary action and to request the
services of the boards and the administration when necessary and to
assist the administration.
The reemployment agreement follows:
President’s Reemployment Agreement
(Authorized by section 4(a) National Industrial Recovery A ct)
D u r i n g the period of the President’s emergency reemployment drive, that is to
say, from August 1 to December 31, 1933, or to any earlier date of approval of a
code of fair competition to which he is subject, the undersigned hereby agrees
with the President as follows:
(1) After August 31, 1933, not to employ any person under 16 years of age,
except that persons between 14 and 16 may be employed (but not in manufactur­
ing or mechanical industries) for not to exceed 3 hours per day and those hours
between 7 a.m. and 7 p.m. in such work as will not interfere with hours of day
school.
(2) Not to work any accounting, clerical, banking, office, service, or sales
employees (except outside salesmen) in any store, office, department, establish­
ment, or public utility, or on any automotive or horse-drawn passenger, express,
delivery, or freight service, or in any other place or manner, for more than 40
hours in any 1 week and not to reduce the hours of any store or service operation
to below 52 hours in any 1 week, unless such hours were less than 52 hours per
week before July 1, 1933, and in the latter case not to reduce such hours at all.
(3) Not to employ any factory or mechanical worker or artisan more than a
maximum week of 35 hours until December 31, 1933, but with the right to work
a maximum week of 40 hours for any 6 weeks witinn this period; and not to
employ any worker more than 8 hours in any 1 day.
(4) The maximum hours fixed in the foregoing paragraphs (2) and (3) shall not
apply to employees in establishments employing not more than two persons in
1 The President’s Reemployment Program.


https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis

Washington, 1933.

264

M O N T H L Y L A B O R R E V IE W

towns of less than 2,500 population which towns are not part of a larger trade
area; nor to registered pharmacists or other professional persons employed in
their profession; nor to employees in a managerial or executive capacity, who now
receive more than $35 per week; nor to employees on emergency maintenance
and repair work; nor to very special cases where restrictions of hours of highly
skilled workers on continuous processes would unavoidably reduce production
but, in any such special case, at least time and one third shall be paid for hours
worked in excess of the maximum. Population for the purposes of this agree­
ment shall be determined by reference to the 1930 Federal census.
(5) Not to pay any of the classes of employees mentioned in paragraph (2)
less than $15 per week in any city of over 500,000 population, or in the immediate
trade area of such city; nor less than $14.50 per week in any city of between
250,000 and 500,000 population, or in the immediate trade area of such city;
nor less than $14 per week in any city of between 2,500 and 250,000 population,
or in the immediate trade area of such city; and in towns of less than 2,500 popu­
lation to increase all wages by not less than 20 percent, provided that this shall
not require wages in excess of $12 per week.
(6) Not to pay any employee of the classes mentioned in paragraph (3) less
than 40 cents j)er hour unless the hourly rate for the same class of work on July
15, 1929, was less than 40 cents per hour, in which latter case not to pay less than
the hourly rate on July 15, 1929, and in no event less than 30 cents per hour.
It is agreed that this paragraph establishes a guaranteed minimum rate of pay
regardless of whether the employee is compensated on the basis of a time rate
or on a piecework performance.
(7) Not to reduce the compensation for employment now in excess of the minimun wages hereby agreed to (notwithstanding that the hours worked in such
employment may be hereby reduced) and to increase the pay for such employ­
ment by an equitable readjustment of all pay schedules.
(8) Not to use any subterfuge to frustrate the spirit and intent of this agree­
ment which is, among other things, to increase employment by a universal
covenant, to remove obstructions to commerce, and to shorten hours and to
raise wages for the shorter week to a living basis.
(9) Not to increase the price of any merchandise sold after the date hereof
over the price on July 1,1933, by more than is made necessary by actual increases
in production, replacement, or invoice costs of merchandise, or by taxes or other
costs resulting from action taken pursuant to the Agricultural Adjustment Act,
since July 1, 1933, and, in setting such price increases, to give full weight to
probable increases in sales volume and to refrain from taking profiteering ad­
vantage of the consuming public.
(10) To support and patronize establishments which also have signed this
agreement and are listed as members of N.R.A. (National Recovery Adminis­
tration) .
(11) To cooperate to the fullest extent in having a code of fair competition
submitted by his industry at the earliest possible date, and in any event before
September 1, 1933.
(12) Where, before June 16, 1933, the undersigned had contracted to purchase
goods at a fixed price for delivery during the period of this agreement, the under­
signed will make an appropriate adjustment of said fixed price to meet any in­
crease in cost caused by the seller having signed this President’s Reemployment
Agreement or having become bound by any code of fair competition approved
by the President.
(13) This agreement shall cease upon approval by the President of a code to
which the undersigned is subject; or, if the N.R.A. so elects, upon submission of
a code to which the undersigned is subject and substitution of any of its provi­
sions for any of the terms of this agreement.
(14) It is agreed that any person who wishes to do his part in the President’s
reemployment drive by signing this agreement, but who asserts that some par­
ticular provision hereof, because of peculiar circumstances, will create great and
unavoidable hardship, may obtain the benefits hereof by signing this agreement
and putting it into effect and then, in a petition approved by a representative
trade association of his industry, or other representative organization designated
by N.R.A., may apply for a stay of such provision pending a summary investiga­
tion by N.R.A., if he agrees in such application to abide by the decision of such
investigation. This agreement is entered into pursuant to section 4(a) of the


https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis

CODE FO R C O T T O N -T E X T IL E IN D U ST R Y

265

National Industrial Recovery Act and subject to all the terms and conditions
required by sections 7(a) and 10(b) of that act.
D a te d _________________ ____ , 1933.
(Sign h e re )_________________ _______ ______________
(Name)

(Official position)

(Firm and corporation name)

(Industry or trade)

(Number of employees at the date of signing)

(Street)

(Tow n or city)

(State)

Code of Fair Competition for the Cotton-Textile Industry

HE first code of fair competition to come before the National
Recovery Administration under the newly enacted National
Recovery A c t 1 dealt with the cotton-textile industry. Hearings
were held during the period June 27 to June 30, 1933, and on July 9
the President ordered the code adopted providing for operation under
the conditions fixed, beginning July 17.
Because of the importance of the cotton-textile industry and the
significance of this particular code in establishing methods to be
followed in setting up a totally new kind of machinery for industrial
recovery, much interest attached to the hearings on the code and to
the revisions that were made before it reached final form.
Application for the code was made by a specially formed committee,
known as^the Cotton Textile Industry Committee” , a group of persons
made up of the presidents of the Cotton Textile Institute, Inc.,
the American Cotton Manufacturers’ Association, and. the National
Association of Cotton Manufacturers. These organizations together
have as members practically all of the cotton-textile mills in the United
States and the committee received the authorization of mills repre­
senting two thirds of the cotton spindles and looms in the United
States to act on their behalf.
As presented, the code set a $10 minimum wage for a 40-hour week
in the South and an $11 minimum for the North, these rates to apply
to all unskilled employees “ except learners during a 6 weeks’ appren­
ticeship, cleaners, and outside employees.” Maximum workinghours for any employee, “ except repair-shop crews, engineers, elec­
tricians, firemen, office and supervisory staff, shipping, watching,
and outside crews, and cleaners” , were placed at 40 per week and
shifts per week were limited to 2 of 40 hours each. Following pres-

T

1 For text of act see M onthly Labor Review, July 1933.


https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis

266

MONTHLY LABOR REVIEW

entation of the code, representatives of employers, labor, and con­
sumers were heard publicly both for and against the code as it stood.
In the discussion of the minimum-wage provision, the differential
between North and South was defended on the ground of differences
in the cost of living, the statement being made that climate made
the fuel and clothing bills cheaper in the South than in the North.
It was also pointed out by one witness that the lower productivity of
workers and expense of training in the South justified the lower basic
rate. Other witnesses stated that no adequate statistics are available
to determine cost of living and that there is thus no basis for paying
at a lower rate in one part of the country than in another. Labor
representatives were unanimous in their disapproval of the minimum
wages set, believing the rates unduly low. A rate of 50 cents per hour
was suggested but in general from $12 to $16 per week was stated to
be acceptable, the rates in several instances, however, being proposed
for a working week considerably shorter than 40 hours. Before the
close of the hearings the code was voluntarily revised to provide a
minimum wage of $12 per week of 40 hours in the South and $13 in
the North.
__ . In connection with minimum wages it was suggested by labor wit­
nesses that minima should be set for workers in different skill classes, .
i.e., unskilled, semiskilled, skilled, and highly skilled. This, it was
said, would obviate any tendency to bring the wages of the highly
skilled to extremely low levels.
Pressure for including under the minimum rates of pay the excepted
class made up of cleaners and outside workers was extremely keen.
Opposition to the 40-hour week provision was based on the belief
in many quarters that its adoption would change very little the exist­
ing position with respect to employment. Suggestions were made of
35, 30, and even 27 hours per week to meet present conditions. In
this connection the administrator, General Johnson, raised the point
that the adoption of so short a week would force the cotton-textile
industry into the position of absorbing more than its quota of the
unemployed, that is, more than the normal number of persons em­
ployed in the industry. In a later statement by Dr. Alexander
Sachs, chief of the research and planning division of the National
Recovery Administration, the 40-hour week was described as being
of the proper length to permit employment of 100,000 more persons
in this industry than in 1929. This provision of the code was retained.
Certain witnesses, among them representatives of labor, believed
that no limit should be placed on the use of machine installations
provided the requirements with respect to wages and hours are met.
Others saw in this lack of limitation an impetus to the growth of the
stretch-out system, whereby the worker is assigned additional ma­
chines, or the pace of machines is quickened, so that he may produce
more in a given time. As a result of the opening up of this question
a special committee was appointed by General Johnson on the first
day of the hearing to make a study of the matter and report on it
by July 15.
As a result of this study the code was amended to provide a Cotton
Textile National Industrial Relations Board, composed of one repre­
sentative each of employers and employees and a third representative


https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis

CODE FOR COTTON-TEXTILE INDUSTRY

267

to be appointed by the Administrator of the act, to make proper pro­
vision with regard to the stretch-out system or any other problems of
working conditions. Supplementing this board State boards may be
appointed and industrial relations committees within the plants
where problems arise, the procedure adopted being first to endeavor
to settle questions within the respective plants and failing this to
refer such questions to the State boards or take final recourse to the
national body.
Testimony was offered to support an effort to write into the code
provisions for the prohibition of employment of children under 16
years of age and to limit the work of women to daytime hours.
Later the exemption of children under 16 years of age from employ­
ment was written into the code by the employers. No action was
taken with respect to night work of women. Such a provision was
opposed by the National Woman’s Party as detrimental to the posi­
tion of women in industry and as a violation of their rights to equality.
However, other witnesses, including labor representatives and the
Consumers’ League, voiced disapproval of night work for women and
suggested that the discriminatory effects of such a provision might
be offset if employers would give preference to woman workers in
the first shift of the day.
On July 9 the President gave approval to the cotton-textile code,
the text of his order and the code itself being reproduced in full
below. Under the provisions set forth, this code became effective
on July 17, 1933.
Text of Presidential Approval

F ollowing is the text of the President’s statement giving approval
to the code:
The Cotton-Textile Code, a stenographic transcript of the hearing thereof, a
report and recommendations of the National Recovery Administration thereon
(including a special statistical analysis of the industry by the Division of Plan­
ning and Research) and reports showing unanimous approval of such report and
recommendations by each the Labor Advisory Board, the Industrial Advisory
Board, and the Consumers’ Advisory Board, having been submitted to the
President, the following are his orders thereon:
In accordance with section 3 (a), National Industrial Recovery Act, the CottonTextile Code submitted by duly qualified trade associations of the cotton-textile
industry on June 16, 1933, in full compliance with all pertinent provisions of
that act, is hereby approved by the President subject to the following interpre­
tations and conditions:
(1) Limitations on the use of productive machinery shall not apply to pro­
duction of tire yarns or fabrics for rubber tires for a period of 3 weeks after this
date.
(2) The planning committee of the industry, provided for in the code, will
take up at once the question of employee purchase of homes in mill villages,
especially in the South, and will submit to the Administration before January 1,
1934, a plan looking toward eventual employee home ownership.
(3) Approval of the minimum wages proposed by the code is not to be regarded
as approval of their economic sufficiency but is granted in the belief that, in view
of the large increase in wage payments provided by the code, any higher minima
at this time might react to reduce consumption and employment, and on the
understanding that if and as conditions improve the subject may be reopened with
a view to increasing them.
(4) That office employees be included within the benefits of the code.
(5) The existing amounts by which wages in the higher-paid classes, up to
workers receiving $30 per week, exceed wages in the lowest-paid classes, shall be
maintained.
(6) While the exception of repair shop crews, engineers, electricians, and watch­
ing crews from the maximum hour provisions is approved, it is on the condition
that time and one half be paid for overtime.

https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis

268

MONTHLY LABOR REVIEW

(7) While the exception of cleaners and outside workers is approved for the
present, it is on condition that the planning and supervisory committee provided
by section 6 prepare and submit to the Administration, by January 1, 1934, a
schedule of minimum wage and of maximum hours for these classes.
(8) It is interpreted that the provisions for maximum hours establish a maxi­
mum of hours of labor per week f o r e v e r y e m p l o y e e co v ered , so that under no cir­
cumstances will such an employee be employed or permitted to work for one or
more employers in the industry in the aggregate in excess of the prescribed num­
ber of hours in a single week.
(9) It is interpreted that the provisions for a minimum wage in this code
establish a guaranteed minimum rate of pay per hour of employment regardless
of whether the employee’s compensation is otherwise based on a time rate or
upon a piecework performance. This is to avoid frustration of the purpose of the
code by changing from hour to piecework rules.
(10) Until adoption of further provisions of this code necessary to prevent any
improper speeding up of work to the disadvantage of employees (“ stretch-outs” )
and in a manner destructive of the purposes of the National Industrial Recovery
Act, it is required that any and all increases in the amount of work or production
required of employees over that required on July 1, 1933, must be submitted to
and approved by the agency created by section 6 of the code and by the Adminis­
tration, and if not so submitted such increases will be regarded as a prima facie
violation of the provision for minimum wages.
(11) The code will be in operation as to the whole industry, but opportunity
shall be given for administrative consideration of every application of the code in
particular instances to any person directly affected who has not in person or by a
representative consented and agreed to the terms of the code. Any such person
shall be given an opportunity for a hearing before the Administrator or his
representative, and for a stay of the application to him of any provision of the
code, prior to incurring any liability to the enforcement of the code against him
by any of the means provided in the National Industrial Recovery Act, pending
such hearing. At such hearing any objection to the application of the code in the
specific circumstances may be presented and will be heard.
(12) This approval is limited to a 4 months’ period, with the right to ask for a
modification at any time and subject to a request for renewal for another 4 months
at any time before its expiration.
(13) Section 6 of the code is approved on condition that the Administration be
permitted to name three members of the planning and supervisory committee of
the industry. Such members shall have no vote but in all other respects shall be
members of such planning and supervisory committee.
(Signed) F r a n k l i n D. R o o s e v e l t .
J u l y 9, 1933.
Text of Code for the Cotton-Textile Industry 2

T he textile code itself is reproduced in full below:
To effectuate the policy of title I of the National Industrial Recovery Act,
during the period of the emergency, by reducing and relieving unemployment,
improving the standards of labor, eliminating competitive practices destructive
of the interests of the public, employees, and employers, relieving the disastrous
effects of overcapacity, and otherwise rehabilitating the cotton-textile industry
and by increasing the consumption of industrial and agricultural products by
increasing purchasing power, and in other respects, the following provisions are
established as a code of fair competition for the cotton-textile industry:
I. D e f i n i t i o n s .— The term “ cotton-textile industry” as used herein is defined
to mean the manufacture of cotton yarn and/or cotton woven fabrics, whether as
a final process or as a part of a larger or further process. The term “ employees”
as used herein shall include all persons employed in the conduct of such opera­
tions. The term “ productive machinery” as used herein is defined to mean
spinning spindles and/or looms. The term “ effective date” as used herein is
defined to be July 17, 1933, or if this code shall not have been approved by the
President 2 weeks prior thereto, then the second Monday after such approval.
The term “ persons” shall include natural persons, partnerships, associations, and
corporations.
II. On and after the effective date the minimum wage that shall be paid by
employers in the cotton-textile industry to any of their employees— except learners
during a 6 weeks’ apprenticeship, cleaners, and outside employees— shall be at the
2 As revised and presented to the Administrator prior to close of public hearing, June 30, 1933.


https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis

CODE FOR COTTON-TEXTILE INDUSTRY

269

rate of $12 per week when employed in the southern section of the industry and
at the rate of $13 per week when employed in the northern section for 40 hours
of labor.
III. On and after the effective date, employers in the cotton-textile industry
shall not operate on a schedule of hours of labor for their employees— except
repair-shop crews, engineers, electricians, firemen, office and supervisory staff,
shipping, watching and outside crews, and Cleaners— in excess of 40 hours per
week, and they shall not operate productive machinery in the cotton-textile
industry for more than two shifts of 40 hours each per week.
IV. On and after the effective date, employers in the cotton-textile industry
shall not employ any minor under the age of i6 years.
V. With a view to keeping the President informed as to the observance or
nonobservance of this code of fair competition, and as to whether the cottontextile industry is taking appropriate steps to effectuate the declared policy of
the National Industrial Recovery Act, each person engaged in the cotton-textile
industry will furnish duly certified reports in substance as follows and in such
form as may hereafter be provided:
(а) W a q e s a n d h o u r s o f la b o r. — Returns every 4 weeks showing actual hours
worked by the various occupational groups of employees and minimum weekly
rates of wages.
(б) M a c h i n e r y d a ta . — In the case of mills having no looms, returns should be
made every 4 weeks showing the number of spinning spindles in place, the num­
ber of spinning spindles actually operating each week, the number of s h i f t s , and
the total number of spindle-hours each week. In the case of mills having no
spinning spindles, returns every 4 weeks showing the number of looms in place,
the number of looms actually operated each week, the number of shifts, and the
total number of loom-hours each week. In the case of mills that have spinning
spindles and looms, returns every 4 weeks showing the number of spinning spindles
and looms in place, the number of spinning spindles and looms actually operated
each week, the number of shifts, and the total number of spindle-hours and
loom-hours each week.
(c) R e p o r t s o f p r o d u c t io n , s to c k s , a n d o r d e r s .— Weekly returns showing produc­
tion in terms of the commonly used unit, i.e. linear yards, or pounds or pieces;
stocks on hand both sold and unsold stated in the same terms, and unfilled orders
stated also in the same terms. These returns are to be confined to staple con­
structions and broad divisions of cotton textiles.
The Cotton Textile Institute, Inc., 320 Broadway, New York City, is consti­
tuted the agency to collect and receive such reports.
VI. To further effectuate the policies of the act, the Cotton Textile Industry
Committee, the applicants herein, or such successor committee or committees
as may hereafter be constituted by the action of the Cotton Textile Institute, the
American Cotton Manufacturers’ Association, and the National Association of
Cotton Manufacturers, is set up to cooperate with the Administrator as a planning
and fair practice agency for the cotton-textile industry. Such agency may from
time to time present to the Administrator recommendations based on conditions
in the industry as they may develop from time to time which will tend to effectuate
the operation of the provisions of this code and the policy of the National Indus­
trial Recovery Act, and in particular along the following lines:
1. Recommendations as to the requirements by the Administrator of such
further reports from persons engaged in the cotton-textile industry of statistical
information and keeping of uniform accounts as may be required to secure the
proper observance of the code and promote the proper balancing of production
and consumption and the stabilization of the industry and employment.
2. Recommendations for the setting up of a service bureau for engineering,
accounting, credit, and other purposes to aid the smaller mills in meeting the
conditions of the emergency and the requirements of this code.
3. Recommendations (1) for the requirement by the Administrator of registra­
tion by persons engaged in the cotton-textile industry of their productive ma­
chinery, (2) for the requirement by the Administrator that prior to the installation
of additional productive machinery by persons engaged or engaging in the cottontextile industry, except for the replacement of a similar number of existing looms
or spindles or to bring the operation of existing productive machinery into balance,
such persons shall secure certificates that such installation will be consistent with
effectuating the policy of the National Industrial Recovery Act during the period
of the emergency, and (3) for the granting or withholding by the Administrator
of such certificates if so required by him.
4. Recommendations for changes in or exemption from the provisions of this
code as to the working hours of machinery which will tend to preserve a balance

https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis

270

MONTHLY LABOR REVIEW

of productive activity with consumption requirements, so that the interests of the
industry and the public may be properly served.
5. Recommendations for the making of requirements by the Administrator as to
practices by persons engaged in the cotton-textile industry as to methods and
conditions of trading, the naming and reporting of prices which may be appro­
priate to avoid discrimination, to promote the stabilization of the industry, to
prevent and eliminate unfair and destructive competitive prices and practices.
6. Recommendations for regulating the disposal of distress merchandise in a
way to secure the protection of the owners and to promote sound and stable condi­
tions in the industry.
7. Recommendations as to the making available to the suppliers of credit to
those engaged in the industry of information regarding terms of, and actual func­
tioning of, any or all of the provisions of the code, the conditions of the industry,
and regarding the operations of any and all of the members of the industry
covered by such code to the end that during the period of emergency available
credit may be adapted to the needs of such industry considered as a whole and to
the needs of the small as well as the large units.
8. Recommendations for dealing with any inequalities that may otherwise arise
to endanger the stability of the industry and of production and employment.
Such recommendations, when approved by the Administrator, shall have the
same force and effect as any other provisions of this code.
Such agency is also set up to cooperate with the Administrator in making in­
vestigations as to the functioning and observance of any of the provisions of this
code, at its own instance or on complaint by any person affected, and to report
the same to the Administrator.
Such agency is also set up for the purpose of investigating and informing the
Administrator on behalf of the cotton-textile industry as to the importation of
competitive articles into the United States in substantial quantities or increasing
ratio to domestic production on such terms or under such conditions as to render
ineffective or seriously to endanger the maintenance of this code and as an agency
for making complaint to the President on behalf of the cotton-textile industry,
under the provisions of the National Industrial Recovery Act, with respect
thereto.
VII. Where the costs of executing contracts entered into in the cotton-textile
industry prior to the presentation to Congress of the National Industrial Recovery
Act are increased by the application of the provisions of that act to the industry,
it is equitable and promotive of the purposes of the act that appropriate adjust­
ments of such contracts to reflect such increased costs be arrived at by arbitral
proceedings or otherwise, and the Cotton Textile Industry Committee, the appli­
cant for this code, is constituted an agency to assist in effecting such adjustments.
VIII. Employers in the cotton-textile industry shall comply with the require­
ments of the National Industrial Recovery Act, as follows: “ (1) That employees
shall have the right to organize and bargain collectively through representatives
of their own choosing, and shall be free from the interference, restraint, or coercion
of employers of labor, or their agents, in the designation of such representatives
or in self-organization or in other concerted activities for the purpose of collective
bargaining or other mutual aid or protection; (2) that no employee and no one
seeking employment shall be required as a condition of employment to join any
company union or to refrain from joining, organizing, or assisting a labor organiza­
tion of his own choosing; and (3) that employers shall comply with the maximum
hours of labor, minimum rates of pay, and other conditions of employment,
approved or prescribed by the President.”
IX . This code and all the provisions thereof are expressly made subject to the
right of the President, in accordance with the provision of clause 10 (b) of the
National Industrial Recovery Act, from time to time to cancel or modify any
order, approval, license, rule, or regulation, issued under Title I of said act, and
specifically to the right of the President to cancel or modify his approval of this
code or any conditions imposed by him upon his approval thereof.
X . Such of the provisions of this code as are not required to be included therein
by the National Industrial Recovery Act, may with the approval of the President,
be modified or eliminated as changes in circumstances or experience may indicate.
It is contemplated that from time to time supplementary provisions to this code
or additional codes will be submitted for the approval of the President to prevent
unfair competition in price and other unfair and destructive competitive prac­
tices and to effectuate the other purposes and policies of Title I of the National
Industrial Recovery Act consistent with the provisions hereof..


https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis

CODE FOR COTTON-TEXTILE INDUSTRY

271

Text of Presidential Order
O n a p p l i c a t i o n from the industry the President on July 15 issued
the following order in connection with the cotton-textile code:
A code of fair competition for the cotton-textile industry has been heretofore
approved by order of the President, dated July 9, 1933, on certain conditions set
forth in such order. The applicants for said code have now requested the with­
drawal of condition 12 of said order providing for the termination of approval
at the end of 4 months unless expressly renewed, have accepted certain other
conditions, have proposed amendments to the code to effectuate the intent of
the remaining conditions, and have requested that final approval be given to the
code as so amended and on such conditions.
Pursuant to the authority vested in me by title I of the National Industrial
Recovery Act, approved June 16, 1933, on the report and recommendation of the
Administrator and on consideration,
It is ordered that the condition heretofore imposed as to the termination of
approval of the code is now withdrawn and that the code of fair competition for
the cotton-textile industry is finally approved with the conditions so accepted
and with the amendments so proposed, as set forth in schedule A attached hereto.
A.-— A p p l i c a t i o n to the P r e s i d e n t b y th e C o tto n T e x t il e I n d u s t r y C o m m i t t e e
f o r f in a l a p p r o v a l o f co d e o f f a i r c o m p e t it i o n f o r th e c o tto n -te x tile i n d u s t r y

Schedule

The Cotton Textile Industry Committee, the applicant for the approval of the
code of fair competition for the cotton-textile industry, submitted for the approval
of the President June 16, 1933, and as revised June 30, 1933, accepts the inter­
pretations and conditions to the approval thereof set forth in paragraphs 1, 3, 7,
8, 9, and 13 of the order of the President, dated July 9,1933, and asks the approval
of the President to the following amendments to such code as properly complying
with and effectuating the conditions provided for in paragraphs 2, 4, 5, 6, 10, and
11 of said order of approval, and asks for the final approval by the President of
the code of fair competition for the cotton-textile industry as so amended, and on
the conditions so accepted and with the omission of the condition in paragraph
12 of such order as to the termination of the approval at the end of 4 months.
1. It shall be one of the functions of the planning and fair practice agency
provided for in section 6 of the code to consider the question of plans for eventual
employee ownership of homes in mill villages and submit to the Recovery Ad­
ministration prior to January 1, 1934, its report in the matter.
2. On and after July 31, 1933, the maximum hours of labor for office employees
in the cotton-textile industry shall be an average of 40 hours a week over each
period of 6 months.
3. The amount of differences existing prior to July 17, 1933, between the
wage rates paid various classes of employees (receiving more than the estab­
lished maximum wage) shall not be decreased— in no event, however, shall any
employer pay any employee a wage rate which will yield a less wage for a work
week of 40 hours than such employee was receiving for the same class of work
for the longer week of 48 hours or more prevailing prior to July 17, 1933. It
shall be a function of the planning and fair practice agency provided for in para­
graph 6 of the code to observe the operation of these provisions and recommend
such further provisions as experience may indicate to be appropriate to effectuate
their purposes.
4. On and after the effective date the maximum hours of labor of repair-shop
crews, engineers, electricians, and watching crews in the cotton-textile industry
shall, except in case of emergency work, be 40 hours a week with a tolerance of
10 percent. Any emergency time in any mill shall be reported monthly to the
planning and fair practice agency provided for in paragraph 6 of the code, through
the Cotton Textile Institute.
5. Until adoption of further provisions of this code that may prove necessary
to prevent any improper speeding up of work (stretch-outs), no employee of any
mill in the cotton-textile industry shall be required to do any work in excess of
the practices as to the class of work of such employee prevailing on July 1, 1933,
or prior to the share-the-work movement, unless such increase is submitted to
and approved by the agency created by section 6 of the code and by the National
Recovery Administration.
6. This code shall be in operation on and after the effective date as to the
whole cotton-textile industry except as an exemption from or a stay of the

https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis

MONTHLY LABOR REVIEW

272

application of its provisions may be granted by the Administrator to a person
applying for the same or except as provided in an Executive order. No distinc­
tion shall be made in such exemptions between persons who have and have not
joined in applying for the approval of this code.
Hearings on Complaints
S u b s e q u e n t to the adoption of the cotton-textile code an order
was issued providing that after the approval of any code, hearings
may be given to persons who have not participated in establishing or
consenting to the code but who are affected thereby and who claim
the applications of the code are unjust to them. _ Such persons must
apply for hearing within 10 days after the effective date of the code.
In the meantime the code is in full force.

Temporary Labor Provisions for Other Textile Industries
U n d e r the authority vested in the President under title I of the
National Industrial Recovery Act a number of Executive orders have
been issued regarding labor provisions in other textile industries,
pending adoption of codes.
Textile industry.— Following the President’s approval of the cottontextile code, a series of Executive orders was issued whereby em­
ployees engaged in a number of textile industries were either brought
under the labor provisions of the cotton-textile code or under their
own code pending adoption.
Under Executive orders of July 15, 1933, the rayon-weaving
industry, the throwing industry, the cotton-thread industry, and the
broad silk and rayon weavers division, the converters division, the
special fabrics division, the ribbon division and woven label division
of the Silk Association of America thus became subject to a maximum
work week for employees of 40 hours with minimum weekly pay of
$12 per week in the South and $13 in the North. Subsequent orders
of July 21, 1933, placed the underwear and/or allied products of the
textile-finishing industry under the same provisions with the exception
that persons engaged in textile finishing were ordered to receive
weekly wages a dollar higher, or $13 per week in the South and $14
in the North. The effective date of these orders was set for July 17,
1933, the day on which the cotton code went into effect, with the
exception that for the underwear and allied products industry the
date set was July 24, 1933, and for the textile-finishing industry,
July 31, 1933. The pajama industry came under the cotton code
on July 26, the cordage and twine industry beginning at midnight,
July 27, and the garment industry, July 31, 1933.
By Executive order of July 22, 1933, effective July 24, 1933, the
silk and rayon dyeing and printing industry was placed under its
code pending public hearings on the adoption of the code in final
form; the maximum work week is 40 hours and minimum wages 45
cents per hour for male employees and 35 cents for female employees,
the weekly wages being $18 and $14, respectively, for 40 hours’ work.
The hosiery industry followed the same procedure and was placed
under the labor provisions of its code on July 26, 1933.


https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis

EMPLOYMENT CONDITIONS AND
UNEMPLOYMENT RELIEF
Study of Needy Unemployed in Philadelphia

REPORT lias just been published giving the labor history and
experience of 8,722 persons employed on made work in Phila­
delphia.1 ^The information was gathered by jobless men allocated to
the work in 1931 through the interest of the Philadelphia Emergency
Work Bureau of the Committee for Unemployment Relief. The
survey was carried out under the supervision of the director of the
Philadelphia Community Council.
Data were also secured from 1,439 applicants for work relief in the
same city.
_Summaries of the findings of these two complementary studies are
given below.

A

Study of Persons Employed on Made Work
I r r e s p e c t i v e of whether they were native white, foreign-born
white, or colored, the percentage of persons in this group who lacked
school training was very much in excess of the proportion of illiter­
ates for comparable groups in Pennsylvania as a whole. Their edu­
cational attainments, however, were not entirely inadequate, and the
fact that some of them bad schooling far beyond the average for the
community was an evidence that their difficulties were not altogether
due to lack of education.
Stability on the job.— So far as length of service is a test of success
on the job, this group on made work had a good record, only about
5 percent of the whites and 9 percent of the colored being classed
“ as casual workers who had never had a steady jo b .” More than
one half of the whites and approximately one third of the Negroes
had held the same jobs for 5 years or over. Service records not
uncommonly reached 10, 20, 30, and up to 45 years. Stability on the
worker’s part is no assurance against cyclical unemployment, how­
ever. Workers who had been with the same concerns for many years
found themselves laid off with men who had only a few months’ serv­
ice. Only a negligible proportion of those on made work seemed to
have definitely failed on their former jobs. Considerably over nine
tenths of the men were jobless as a result of business conditions
beyond their control.
In the judgment of the investigator “ no great improvement in the
conditions affecting unemployment can be brought about by action
of the individual worker. It is time that this fact be impressed on
1 Pennsylvania, University of. Wharton School of Finance and Commerce. Industrial Research
Department. Ten thousand out of work, b y Ewan Clague and Webster Powell. Philadelphia, 1933.


https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis

273

274

MONTHLY LABOR REVIEW

the man himself, so that he will not allow his morale to be destroyed
by circumstances over which he has no control.”
Wages.— The previous wages of these people compared quite favor­
ably with the wages of others in similar occupations in the State.
The average full-time weekly earnings reported for the whites were
$32 while that for the Negroes were $25, no deductions being made
for short time or lay-offs during the year.
The weekly earnings of college graduates were more than 60 per­
cent above those of the men who had no formal education, and in
addition employment among the former was much more stable.
Industry’s responsibility.-—Over 3,000 Philadelphia firms were repre­
sented by one or more ex-employees among the 8,722 workers included
in the survey.
Some large firms were very heavily represented, six of them being charged
with over 11 percent of all the men surveyed in this study, or with 14 percent
of those men who could be assigned. A total of 29 firms, each laying off 25 or
more workers, contributed over 30 percent of the assignable workers. At the
other extreme there were 2,368 firms with one man each.
So far as the data contained in this study are concerned, the construction
industry had the heaviest responsibility for unemployment. It was represented
by two and one half times as many men as its proportion of the normal gainfully
employed population of the city. Manufacturing furnished slightly more un­
employed than its normal share of the gainfully employed would have justified.

Most of the workers were common, semiskilled, or skilled laborers.
Approximately 15 percent of the whites and 5 percent of the colored
were able to do work of a supervisory, clerical, professional, etc., char­
acter. Most of the workers had lost their jobs toward the close of
the summer of 1930. Approximately 94 percent had become unem­
ployed since the summer of 1929. Temporary jobs played an insig­
nificant part in keeping up incomes when no permanent employment
was available.
Not every Philadelphia establishment, however, was represented
by made-work employees. Some employers had protected their
workers to some degree against unemployment. Efforts at stabiliza­
tion, however, are often futile in the face of lack of stability in the
whole industry or industry group.
When responsibility has been assigned to the individual employer up to the
limits of his capacity to meet it, and additional responsibility has been assessed
against the group of employers who constitute an industry, there still remains
the largest share of all— that which must be assigned to industrial and business
enterprise as a whole. A discussion of the conditions under which this final
responsibility might be accepted— whether by voluntary, cooperative action of
employers, or by governmental regulation— is beyond the scope of this study.

Prevention of destitution.—According to the report under review it
is basically important to have one or more additional wage earners
in the family as a protection against destitution when the principal
wage earner has no job. While the families of those on made work
were larger than the average Philadelphia family, a very high per­
centage of them had but one wage earner.
On the other hand, 53 percent of the whites and nearly 70 percent of the
Negroes had been able to rely partly upon unpaid rent. Commercial borrowing,
help from friends and relatives, and credit at stores were used freely by both the
white and the colored group. The renting of rooms or doubling up with relatives
occurred in about 10 percent of the families. On the other hand, the wages
earned by members of the family who were not regular wage earners or the amounts
received through pensions, bonuses, and occasional jobs by the chief wage earner
were not important. Finally, about 40 percent of the whites and 60 percent of
the Negroes had had to resort to charity before they obtained made work.

https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis

EMPLOYMENT CONDITIONS— UNEMPLOYMENT RELIEF

275

The investigator found that home ownership was no great protec­
tion against destitution. Although the proportion of home owners
among the white families of the group of workers covered was less
than half that in the population as a whole, there was a substantial
percentage of home owners in the group.
It was found that home ownership was negligible among the Negroes, and was
nearly three times as prevalent among the foreign-born as among the nativewhite Americans. On the other hand, the native-born white and the colored
workers showed a much greater proportion of owners of automobiles. Among the
colored this was five times as prevalent as home ownership; among the native
whites 50 percent greater, while among the foreign-born it was only about one
fifth as common as home ownership. A comparison of home ownership and income
brings out very clearly the fact that smaller incomes are a decided bar to ow ership; the larger the family income, the higher the proportion of home-owning
families.

Persons who had only recently come to Philadelphia were among
the first to need assistance after they were unemployed, as they had
fewer local friends and resources.
Study of Financial Resources of Applicants for Made Work

Somewhat less than 50 percent of the families of the 1,114 white
applicants for made work had savings accounts, 50 percent had insur­
ance, and approximately 25 percent owned their own homes.
The percentages were very much the same for the 325 Negro fam­
ilies for savings and insurance but very different for home ownership.
Except for the last, the principal difference between the two races
was the amounts of the reserves. Approximately 25 percent of the
whole group of families had no reserves whatever.
Home ownership.-—Of 278 families owning or buying homes only 7
realized immediate cash on them in the face of emergency. The
remaining 271 families were too overburdened with mortgages to be
able to get loans on rapidly dwindling equities. The families were
far in arrears in their mortgage interest, taxes, and monthly payments.
“ The attempt to own a home constituted a serious drain on the re­
sources of these families just at the time when they needed them most
for basic necessities.” In this regard the Negroes were not so unfor­
tunate as they had not put their scant earnings in real property. The
foreign born were most seriously affected, as so many of them are
home buyers.
Life insurance was also found to be very inadequate protection in
times of unemployment. Out of 560 American-born white and Negro
families, only 34 were able to get loans or cash in on their policies.
Approximately one half of these policyholders lost their insurance
entirely while they were unemployed.
Self-help period of unemployment.— Savings were found by the inves­
tigators to be the only worth-while kind of reserves in periods of
economic depression and unemployment. The average savings in the
families under consideration were sufficient to carry them for 6 weeks.
Approximately nine tenths of all families borrowed money or deferred
paying bills during these 6 weeks. This provided about 50 percent of
the total amount available for essentials. These debts or credits
meant 3 months’ independence for the average family.
The resources of the Negroes were only half those of the whites.
The former were not only reduced to a much lower standard of living

https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis

276

MONTHLY LABOR REVIEW

during the self-help period of unemployment but were more likely to
have recourse sooner to relief agencies.
All families were forced to reduce their standards of living drastically, the
white to a minimum health level for the bare necessities, the colored to a minimum
health level for food alone.
Both groups tried hard to get along by themselves, through the economic use
of every resource, the constant search for temporary income, repeated reductions
in the standards of living, and help from relatives and friends.
Conclusions

A mong the conclusions reached as a result of the studies summarized
above are:
.
.
The educated man has a definite advantage in the economic world.
Certain types of skills, for example, clerical and professional, bring
more stable employment.
The limitations of any back-to-the-land movement are shown. Less
than 1 percent of these employees on made work reported that they
had had recent farming experience. If those who had grown up on
the farm before entering industry were added the number would not
be great.
Migration for the purpose of improving economic status may be
successful but it also means a considerable risk of destitution.
Without doubt a certain amount of unemployment could have been
averted if many additional firms in construction, manufacture, and
other less fluctuating industries had adopted stabilization programs.
The dismissal wage is particularly “ applicable in cases of tech­
nological unemployment, plant shutdowns, bankruptcies, mergers, or
other changes which make it unlikely that the worker will ever find
another job with that firm or even in that industry.”
For those whose joblessness is presumed to be temporary and
cyclical, temporary coverage is recommended. On the basis of the
Wisconsin act, over 85 percent of the men on made work would have
been eligible for unemployment benefits.
But many firms would disclaim all responsibility for unemployment on the
ground that they themselves were the victims of industrial changes and fluctua­
tions. The degree of stability which can be attained by an individual firm is
very much limited by business necessity. The adoption of an unemployment
insurance system might put a company at a disadvantage in comparison with its
competitors. In other words, just as in the case, of the worker and the family,
individual action cannot solve the problem. The ultimate solution will require,
on the part of industry, some joint or cooperative system which will hold the less
advanced firms in line.

Very small establishments are accountable for a considerable
volume of unemployment. The investigators express doubt as to the
possibility of bringing such concerns in any large number into
employers’ voluntary systems of insurance.
In Philadelphia in 1930-31 made work was used on a large scale
but was not repeated in the following winter.
On behalf of made work it can be urged that, although it is more expensive, it
is much more satisfactory in that it preserves the self-respect of families in a way
that direct relief does not. If well managed, it can be administered in such a way
that the worker will regard it as a real job rather than as charitable relief. Fur­
thermore, there is the additional advantage that if careful planning were done,
some economic and cultural return to the community could be secured from the
labor of those being helped. If an efficiency of no more than about 60 percent
of normal be assumed for made-work employees it would still be true that the

https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis

EMPLOYMENT CONDITIONS— UNEMPLOYMENT RELIEF

277

extra cost of $7 per week noted above would be fully covered by the products of
made work.

The depression has more sharply focused the old-age problem:
“ Probably some system of old-age pensions or retirement allowances
will be necessary.”
The investigators close their conclusions as follows:
All the other findings of this study are of minor importance in comparison with
the one outstanding fact, namely, that cooperative group action, planned in
advance, is the only effective method of dealing with the problems of unemploy­
ment and destitution. Something can be accomplished by the individual action
of the various parties involved (the worker, the family, industry). But there
are clear and definite limits to what each or all of these can accomplish. In fact,
it is only through community coordination that the full fruit of individual initia­
tive can be obtained. The lesson for the community in this unemployment
crisis is therefore, primarily, that intelligent planning is necessary, and secondly,
that the community must be prepared to take any or all steps that the plans may
call for.

Report of Committee on Unemployment Reserves, Pennsyl­
vania 1

HE committee appointed by Governor Gifford Pinchot to
investigate the question of the establishment of unemployment
reserves in the State of Pennsylvania failed to agree upon the advisa­
bility of such reserves, so that no joint report was possible.
The committee was made up of representatives of the public, of
employers, of employees, and of the legislature, the public having 4
representatives including the chairman and each of the other groups
having 3 representatives.
The employers’ group, the chairman, and one other member of the
group representing the public, in submitting their conclusions, stated
that they were opposed to the adoption of any plan of compulsory
unemployment insurance or reserves on the ground that such meas­
ures cannot relieve or prevent depressional unemployment. They
also declared that such unemployment as exists outside of depres­
sional periods does not justify the adoption of these measures, since
in the latter case the benefits to be derived from such a system are
“ so slight as to be wholly outweighed by the objections to embarking
upon a course involving the further participation of the State in the
control of industry and trade, with all its implications of restriction,
bureaucracy, and politics” . This group recommended, therefore,
that the distress arising from unemployment should continue to be
dealt with as an emergency, and further that a careful study should
be made of this form of relief in the light of experience gained during
the present emergency both in this country and abroad. As a result
of such study, it was stated, it should be possible to devise adequate
and properly coordinated machinery for the furnishing of this form
of relief when needed, as well as to provide for made work and the
equitable distribution of existing work.
The group representing the employees, together with two members
of the State legislature, was agreed that the problem of unemploy­
ment relief can be met more satisfactorily by compulsory unemploy-

T

1 Pennsylvania State Committee on Unem ploym ent Reserves.
Street, 1933.

2404°— 33------- 3


https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis

Report.

Philadelphia, 236 Chestnut

278

MONTHLY LABOR REVIEW

ment insurance than by the present system of poor-relief assistance
which is backed by compulsory contribution through taxation. _ The
group cited the report of the Community Council of Philadelphia and
Delaware Counties and the report of the permanent committee on
unemployment of the Philadelphia Chamber of Commerce, both of
which favored the adoption of a system of State-compelled reserves
for unemployment. The members of this group expressed them­
selves as being very strongly of the opinion that ample expert opinion
and authoritative data are available which would warrant immediate
enactment of legislation to be put into effect when employment has
returned to more normal proportions. If industrial management is
unable to assist in solving the problem of unemployment, the report
says, it will eventually be obliged to abdicate.
A separate statement was filed by one of the members of the group
representing the public who said that he opposed the extreme conser­
vatism of the chairman and the employer group, but also could not
indorse the position of the labor members in favoring the enactment
of an unemployment reserve bill which had been introduced in the
legislature but which he considered did not provide for adequate
reserves or benefits. This bill provided for contributions by em­
ployers only, but he favored rather a system of joint contributions
with State-wide pooled reserves and said that recognition of the need
for establishment of adequate organization and machinery of admin­
istration, including the development of an effective public employ­
ment service, was of great practical importance.
Two other members, who were in disagreement with all these
reports, were of the opinion that further study of the question was
needed, and recommended, therefore, the appointment of a legislative
commission which should make a complete study of the whole problem
and report to the next regular session of the legislature.


https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis

INDUSTRIAL AND LABOR CONDITIONS
Effect of the Depression on Employee Stock Ownership 1

HE industrial relations section of Princeton University has fol­
lowed the trend of employee stock ownership since 1926, when its
first report on the movement was issued. The sharp declines in stock
prices since 1929, when hundreds of thousands of employees were
involved in the purchase of more than a billion dollars of stock, has
necessitated rapid readjustment in the administration of stock-purchase programs and the present study was made to ascertain what
effect the depression had had on the form of the plans or their con­
tinuance. The 3 years of depression have afforded a rigorous test of
these schemes, although it is said to be still too soon to pass final
judgment on the movement as a whole.
Fifty plans, from among the large number regarding which material
has been collected during the past several years, were selected for in­
tensive study, these plans providing, it is said, a fair cross section of
the stock-purchase movement. The general conclusion drawn from
the study is that few plans have been successful. It is said that
“ even at this time it is a safe conclusion that both employers and
employees have lost more from the movement as a whole than has
been gained in improved morale and dollars saved.”
During the years immediately preceding the depression employee
stock ownership attracted much attention and it was the rather general
opinion of employers and students of the subject that these plans
offered the worker a generous opportunity to share in the prosperity
of the industry and to identify himself with it as an investor as well
as an employee— an opportunity which was generally regarded as
being to the employee’s advantage. It was even thought by certain
writers and observers of social and economic trends “ that company
stock-purchase plans might bring about such increased ownership
and control of industry by the workers as would amount to an eco­
nomic revolution.” It became apparent, however, that for various
reasons it was improbable that employees could or would care to
secure any effective control of their employing companies, the principal
reason being the narrow margin for saving possessed by the majority
of employees even in ordinary times and, consequently, the small
amount which individual employees could invest in the purchase of
shares. It is said to be probable, on the other hand, that the increas­
ing diffusion of the ownership of stock served to promote the cen­
tralization of control in industry.
The rapid increase in the number of employee stock-ownership
plans was due first of all to the desire to stimulate employee thrift

T

' Princeton University. Industrial Relations Section.
b y Eleanor Davis Princeton, 1933.


https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis

Employee stock ownership and the depression,

279

280

MONTHLY

labor

r e v ie w

at a time when earnings, eyen in terms of real wages, had risen
considerably so that it was possible for at least the better-paid groups
to save with some degree of regularity. Employers were sincere
in believing that stock-ownership plans offered a desirable means
for employees to save, particularly as they offered the possibility
of increased value of the investment, and in years as prosperous
as those preceding the end of 1929 it seemed improbable that any
considerable part of the original investment would be lost or that it
would be impossible to liquidate securities quickly and without
loss. Among other and less important reasons for the inauguration
of these plans was the tendency, in industrial relations as elsewhere,
toward imitation.
The growth of the stock-participation movement was not without
opposition, however, as organized labor has always opposed it and
writers and students of economic developments— both opponents and
friends of the movement— have pointed out the necessity for caution
regarding the kinds of stock to be sold to employees and the safe­
guards which should be thrown around such an investment.
Effect of the decline in security 'prices.— Examination of the market
prices of the stocks sold under the 50 plans covered in the study
shows that in most cases they have fallen below, in some cases very
much below, the selling prices to employees. The median July stockmarket quotations of 35 stocks sold to employees by 31 of the 50
companies show an average of 98% in 1926, 107 in 1927, 108% in 1928,
and 115 in 1929, from which time the prices dropped to 107 in 1930,
72 in 1931 and 14% in 1932. By the end of December this price had
risen to 18% but was still 80 points below the 1926 median selling price.
The losses to employees represented by these figures are very large
and to such losses must be added lay-offs, part-time employment,
and lower wage rates which employees also suffered. While employee
stockholders include many who are not wage earners in manufacturing
industries and who may be able to hold their stock during a period of
low prices, in general the greatly reduced wages make it difficult if
not impossible for such employees to hold their stock for better prices.
The loss of savings has been shown to have been one of the serious
elements in the unemployment situation and this, together with
reduced earnings, is reflected in company action with regard to stockownership plans. Of the 50 plans on which the study is based, 31
have been given up or suspended for the present, due to a large extent
to the falling prices of securities sold to employees and the reductions
in employee income.
Provisions protecting employees’ investments.— The plans for stock
purchase by employees usually contain one or more provisions for the
protection of funds invested in them against declines in price. During
the past three years in some cases these safeguards have proved
inadequate; in other cases they have cost the companies a great deal
or have involved them in heavy risks; and in a few cases they have
afforded genuine protection up to the present time and to that extent
have justified the sale of company stock to employees.
One of the measures of protection is the use of preferred or deben­
ture stocks or bonds, rather than common stocks. Of the 50 plans
covered in the study, 21 sold common stock; 12, some type of pre­
ferred stock or bond; 8, a choice or combination; and 4, which
formerly sold preferred, changed later to common. A tabulation of
the relative fluctuations in the market quotations of 18 preferred

https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis

INDUSTRIAL AND LABOR CONDITIONS

281

and 17 common stocks shows that the preferred stocks fluctuated
less than the common. They did not increase so rapidly in price
as the common during the years 1927 to 1929 and after that time
did not fall so soon or so far. At the end of 1932 the median quota­
tion of the 18 preferred stocks was 41.4 percent of that in 1926 and
that of the common only 22.3 percent of that in 1926. It would
appear from these indexes that during comparatively short and less
severe depressions the use of preferred stock would be an excellent
protection. On the other hand, however, during the period of rising
prices, from 1926 to 1929, investors in these preferred stocks did not
have an opportunity to sell at as greatly increased prices as did the
investors in common stocks. Also, while the preferred stocks declined
less than the common stocks the drop in prices was still too great
to make them a safe medium for the investment of savings.
There is great variation in the plans in the establishment of the
price at which stock is sold to employees, the amount of individual
installment payments, and the length of the payment period. In
some plans there is a fixed time at which subscriptions may be made,
or a set period, while in others they may be placed at any time. The
stock may be purchased on the market, in which event it is sold to
employees at approximately the price at which it is purchased or if the
treasury stock is secured from the company a price is set by the com­
pany, which may be changed from time to time according to fluctua­
tions of the market or may be announced periodically. The pay­
ments may be completed within a year or extend over 4 or 5 years.
In any of these plans there is danger of serious loss to the subscribers
in a falling market and if the subscription is placed and the stock
purchased to fill it at relatively high prices, either the subscriber or
the company will lose if the value drops sharply before the payments
on it have been completed. But if the payments have been com­
pleted and the stock has become the property of the employee there
is the probability of a heavy loss in a falling market if it becomes
necessary for him to sell.
As a protection against these eventualities stock is frequently sold
to employees at a reduced price, and in the study an attempt was made
to determine how often this is done and how much protection such
differences in price afford. Comparison of the selling prices to
employees of 80 offerings of stock made under 20 plans, with the
market prices of the same stock on the same date during the years
from 1925 to 1929, inclusive, show that in a few cases the market price
was considerably higher than the selling price to employees, but in
general there was no decided protection to employees. Of the 80
offerings, the differences between the selling prices to employees
and the market prices were as follows:
Cases

Selling prices to employees a few points higher than market price on the
same date_____________________________________________________________
Selling and market prices the sam e._____________________________________
Selling prices from 1 to 5 points lower than market prices___________________
From 5 to 9.9 points lower___________________________________________
From 10 to 14.9 points lower________________________________________
From 15 to 19.9 points lower__________________________ ^_____________
20 points or more___________________________________________________

9
5
30
13
7
7
9

The median difference in these 80 cases was 4 points, indicating
that the slight protection afforded to employees would be soon

https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis

282

MONTHLY LABOR REVIEW

absorbed in a pronounced decline in prices, although in some cases
there were other and more favorable safeguards.
Company bonuses and special dividends are offered principally for
the purpose of encouraging employees to hold their stock, but they
serve also as a protection to employee investors by reducing the net
cost of the stock. Only 16 of the plans, however, provided for the
payment of bonuses. Also, in order to receive the bonus an employee
must be able to continue his subscription payments and to hold his
stock, and it is said to be questionable whether encouragement to
hold for 5 years investments made in 1927, 1928, and 1929 was to
the advantage of the rank and file of industrial employees. “ Looking
at the situation now, after the fact, it seems evident that in many
cases the effect of the bonus was to encourage purchasers to keep
possession of their stock during a period of exceptionally high prices,
only to be forced by circumstances to sell it during a period of excep­
tionally low prices.”
Another provision which is aimed at the protection of employee
investors is the practice of a few companies in matching employee
payments toward stock on a percentage basis. These contributions,
which may vary from 20 to 50 percent of the employee payments,
differ from bonuses for holding stock in that they are made on a
percentage basis instead of a fixed amount and do not require the
holding of stock beyond the time when the subscription has been
completed. These plans are generally regarded as thrift plans and,
as such, provide a margin of safety to investors through the reduction
in the cost of the stock.
Provisions for cancellation of subscriptions are very important in a
period when market prices are declining. These provisions depend
to a large extent upon the methods by which the company secured
the stock for sale to the employees. If the usual method of purchase
of stock by the trustees at the outset to fill the total subscription is
followed, the loss in case of a decline is much greater than it would
be if stock is purchased only as it is paid for. Thirty of the 50 plans
covered provide for the cancellation of the subscription on the re­
quest of the employee, but in some cases it is provided that can­
cellation must be for reasons satisfactory to the trustees and in some
other cases it is apparent that withdrawals by those remaining in
service were not looked upon with favor.
Other measures taken to protect the employee investors include
temporary suspension of payments in case of lay-off or part-time
employment; loans to employees on stock or subscription payments
as collateral; and guaranty of the return of the purchase price of
paid-up stock. The repurchase guaranty or the contribution of a
substantial percentage of the cost of the stock sold to employees, it is
said, involves a company in large liabilities or expenditures, but “ may
well be considered the minimum protection to be afforded the rank
and file employee investing his savings in industrial stocks under a
company-sponsored plan.”
Conclusions

I t w a s found, as a result of the study, that as yet comparatively
few changes of importance have been incorporated in employee stockownership plans as a result of the depression. There are, however,
some fairly perceptible trends apparent. The clearest and perhaps

https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis

INDUSTRIAL AND LABOR CONDITIONS

283

the most important is the present tendency toward plans limited to
selected groups of executive employees. This is shown by the fact
that 15 of the plans are more or less clearly limited to higher-paid or
executive groups, and that 8 of these were established fairly recently.
In two of these cases earlier general plans were given up and this plan
was substituted, while in several other instances the general plan had
been retained but had been temporarily suspended.
It seems evident that, as the result of the depression, much stricter limitations
will be placed on the sale of company stock to the rank and file of employees.
Plans limited to groups receiving higher earnings, and therefore better able to
take risks and to invest on a long-term basis, may take the place of many of the
general plans previously in effect. There was, we have seen, a tendency in this
direction as early as 1927 and 1928. The plans established then, however, were
written during a period of prosperity when the distribution of bonuses and suffi­
ciently attractive financial incentives to hold key men were a part of management
thinking. The protection of investment, both for the rank and file and for higherpaid employees, may receive paramount attention in any new plans which may
be established.

Vacation Policies in 1933

RELEASE by the American Management Association dated
. May 22, 1933, gives the result of a questionnaire study of com­
pany vacation policies under the depression.
Twenty-four companies replied to the inquiry. Of these companies
it was reported that during the present year 11 would grant vacations
with pay to all employees meeting the specified service requirements;
4 companies would grant vacations to salaried employees only; 7
would give vacations to salesmen on commission in addition to salaried
employees; and 1 company would give paid vacations to salaried
employees, salesmen on commission, and women classified as wage
earners on piece or hourly rates, provided certain requirements re­
garding attendance were fulfilled. One company, alone, reported that
no vacations with pay would be given during the current year.
Various service requirements were in force which determined the
length of the vacation period for each group of employees.
Fifteen of these companies reported that they would not require
any employees to take vacations without pay this year, while four
others, which were operating on short time, reported that this fact
would not affect their normal vacation policy. Two companies
operating on half time reported that they would require employees to
take their normal vacation periods but would pay for only half the
period; two companies have definite yearly shut-downs during which
employees are not paid; and one company would require all of its
salaried employees to take at least 2 days off each month through­
out the calendar year with corresponding reductions in pay, although
14 of these days might be accumulated and used as vacation without
pay.
In 12 instances it was reported that the vacation policy had not been
changed during the depression, and two companies stated that their
vacation policy was the same now as in 1929, changes made in the
intervening years no longer being in effect. Five companies reported
that the length of the vacation had been reduced in certain instances,
while six had abolished vacations entirely for certain classes of em­
ployees, usually the employees on a wage basis.

A


https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis

MONTHLY LABOR REVIEW

284

Effectiveness of New Cannery Code in New York State

N 1932 the New York Department of Labor adopted a new code
for the regulation of canneries, the terms of which had been worked
out jointly by the department and the canners themselves. A study
made by the Consumers’ League in 1928 had shown that though the
canneries were no longer exploiting child labor, the terms of the laws
regulating hours of work for women were very generally disregarded.
Following the report of this investigation, the State Department of
Labor began negotiations with the canners to help them in regulariz­
ing employment, and from 1929 to 1932 joined with them in studying
the situation and trying to find remedies. There was general agree­
ment upon the necessity for three steps:

I

(a) Systematic recruiting of labor supply to insure an adequate working force
for completing the work in a 10-hour day, and provision for employment of an
extra crew to handle peak loads.
(b)
Adoption by the industry of modern methods of planning production
schedules to utilize equipment and workers effectively within the limits of the
10-hour working day.
(c)
Definite arrangements made to secure regularity of deliveries of raw
product.
These 3 years of work culminated in the adoption of a cannery code, framed
jointly by the Labor Department and the Canners’ Association. This code
embodies the above points and makes the Labor Department’s granting of a
permit for the 12-hour day (allowed by law during the pea season) conditional
upon satisfactory proof from the canner that he has complied with the terms of
the code. After approval by the industrial board in the early spring of 1932,
the code became, in effect, a new law to govern practice in the canning industry.
Observance of Code

I n t h e summer of 1932 the Consumers’ League of New York
undertook an investigation into the extent and manner of the observ­
ance of this code by the canners. The secretary of the league spent
12 weeks in the field, and the league has recently published the results
of the survey.1 Fifty-four plants, approximately one third of those
operating in the season of 1932, were visited, and of these “ four can
be said to have made a special effort to comply with the code, while
three others had made some effort.” With these exceptions there
was an entire failure to live up to the terms of the code, and in fact
the agreement seemed to have been entirely perfunctory. Many of
the plant managers had not even been informed of the terms of the
code, and indifference both to its terms and to the State hour law
was common.
An employer frankly admitted using illegal overtime until midnight and after
during all the weeks of the tomato season in 1931, and added, “ We will do it
again under similar circumstances.” This plant is located in a township where
the welfare organization informed us that over 3,000 people (approximately
one third of the population) were receiving charity relief. * * *
How unimportant the president of a large company regarded the code may be
illustrated by his statement that his organization “ often preferred to pay a fine
rather than waste goods when the amount of overtime did not warrant the trouble
of assembling a second shift of workers.”
i Consumers’ League of New York. W hat the new cannery code has done for the women employed in
N ew York canneries. New York, 150 Fifth Avenue, [1932?].


https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis

INDUSTRIAL AND LABOR CONDITIONS

285

Methods of Recruiting Labor

L ittle change had been made in the methods of recruiting labor.
The seven plants which had tried to apply the cannery code had
attempted to regularize employment by more careful recruiting of
labor, establishing a reserve list of workers who could be called upon
in case of a rush, employment of only men after 10 p.m., the use of
two shifts throughout the season, or the use of cold storage or cracked
ice to preserve overnight an extra supply of raw materials. The
others usually took on those who applied at the gate, or those who had
been employed in former years, engaging a certain number and ex­
pecting them to work shorter or longer ¡hours according to the way
supplies came in. Practically no attempt was made by the industry
to use the State free employment service to secure extra workers in
case of a peak load.
Hours

U nder the State law the normal day for women in canneries is
10 hours, with overtime up to 12 hours permitted under certain cir­
cumstances. Employment of women after 10 p.m. is illegal. In
the plants investigated, illegally long hours were common, in spite
of the drives being made in every community to secure jobs or relief
for the needy. Lack of careful planning i'or the delivery of raw
materials was responsible for irregularity in beginning work, and this
frequently led to overrunning the legal hour for closing. In other
cases the management simply considered it cheaper or more con­
venient to work overtime than to take on more workers and arrange
to keep to the legal hours.
Wages

T he hourly rates paid in the 43 canneries from which data on this
point were secured are shown in the following table:
H o u r l y w a g e ra tes p a i d i n 4 3 c a n n e r ie s

Hourly rate

Number of can­
neries
paying
specified r a t e
to —
Women

8 cen ts,. _____ __________ _______ ______
9 cents____________
10 cents_______________________
12 cents_______ ________ _ .
15 c e n t s , , ______ _ _ ____________
17 cen ts.. _ . ________
____ _____
17pè cen ts.. ____
______
20 c e n t s . . _____ _ ____________
22 cents_____
____ _______
25 cents_________
.
__________

2
i
3
1
24
8
1
2
1

Men

1
8
2
16
12
3
i

The majority of the independent canners explained their wages by saying that
they had to meet the competition of a large plant with many branches whose
rate uniformly in all their plants was 12}^ cents an hour to women and 17J4 cents
an hour to men. * * *
Other excuses offered by the canners for the shockingly low wages were:
(a) The large inventory of unsold goods from the previous year still in their ware
https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis

286

MONTHLY LABOR REVIEW

houses; (&) forced sales to meet bank loans; and (c) the failure of crops in cer­
tain places, part of which loss is borne by the canner, who supplies seeds and
plants to the grower.
The issueg raised by these low wages must be faced; they greatly increase the
difficulty of enforcing the hours law, destroy the possibility of maintaining a
decent standard of living, and throw the burden of support on the community.
Underpaid employees are pnly too willing to work illegally long hours to aug­
ment their pitifully inadequate weekly earnings. Although, obviously, strict
enforcement of the law cuts down earnings, the Consumers’ League believes that
sound public policy requires enforcement of the hours standard. Now, even by
working overtime, earnings are so meager that the worker must have his income
supplemented from other sources— and today that means charity.

Summing up the general situation, the report admits that the show­
ing is disappointing, but holds that the fact that even a small number
of canneries were found making consistent and successful efforts to
regularize employment proves that there is nothing unreasonable in
the code and that its provisions are all practicable. The code is
ignored because public sentiment has not been aroused to support it.
A campaign of education for both canners and communities is ad­
vocated, and the establishment of wage boards and the enforcement
of minimum wage rates which will permit a decent standard of
living is suggested.
Compulsory Labor Service in Germ any1

HE inauguration of a compulsory labor service for all young
German men was announced on May 1, 1933. The service will
go into effect on January 1, 1934, and the present voluntary labor
service will be disbanded on October 1, 1933.
It has not yet been decided whether the class of 1914 or 1915 will
first be called into service. According to responsible officials, there
are 600,000 men in the class of 1914, 480,000 in the class of 1915,
390,000 in the class of 1916, and 300,000 in the class of 1917. The
steady decrease in the size of the classes from 1914 through 1917 is,
of course, due to the declining birth rate of the war years. From
1918 onward the classes show a gradual increase.
According to present plans, one half of the class of either 1914 or
1915 will be called into service on January 1 and will work until June
30, when they will be discharged, and the second half of the class
called to work the remaining 6 months of the year. Thus either
240,000 or 300,000 men will be in service throughout 1934, depending
upon which class is selected. The extension of the length of service
in future years depends almost entirely upon the financial aspects of
the question.
Experience with the voluntary labor service has shown that the
cost per year and per man is about 1,000 marks ($238),2 including
30 or 40 pfennigs (7 or 9 cents) daily for pocket money. At this
rate the outlay for the compulsory labor service in 1934 will be be­
tween 240 million and 300 million marks ($57,120,000 and $71,400,000). Funds for financing the service are to come from three
sources: (1) Savings in unemployment benefits arising out of the
fact that some of the members will be withdrawn from the benefit
rolls, (2) appropriations from the creation-of-work fund, and (3)

T

1 Report from C. W . Gray, American vice consul at Berlin, M a y 26, 1933.
2 Conversions into United States currency on basis of mark (100 pfennigs) at par=23.8 cents.


https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis

INDUSTRIAL AND LABOR CONDITIONS

287

such financial assistance as may be obtained from the States, the
communes, and districts.
The compulsory labor service will be administered by a specially
created department of the Ministry of Labor. Recruiting is to be
done by the district labor offices.
According to the statements of a responsible official, physical dis­
ability is the only ground for exemption from the compulsory labor
service. Wealth, social position, or other influences are to be abso­
lutely disregarded. Members will be required to perform real
manual labor for 6 hours daily. There will be 1 or 2 hours’ instruc­
tion in political science, and certain periods of the day are to be set
aside for sports and general recreation.
In the selection of work to be carried out by members of the service,
the construction of land and suburban settlements will receive prefer­
ence. Other work will consist of general land improvement, water­
ways development, road work, and reforestation.
Members of the compulsory labor service receive no wages but
they will be given an undetermined sum of pocket money not exceed­
ing in any case 30 pfennigs (7 cents) daily. Clothing, food, shelter,
and all necessary equipment are to be furnished by the Government.
According to present plans, members are to be housed in camps
each containing a total of 216 men. Of this number, 174 will be raw
conscripts, 22 foremen (these will largely be picked men who have
shown exceptional ability in the old voluntary labor service), and 12
subordinate leaders. The remaining 8 men will be made up of leaders
of higher classes.
About 60 percent of the men in each camp must be National
Socialists or Steel Helmets who were members of these organizations
before January 30, 1933.
The compulsory labor service does not apply to women but some
consideration is being given to the subject. No definite plan in this
regard has yet been worked out by the authorities.

Changes in Public Labor Policy in Germany 1
Reorganization of the Labor Unions

INCE the coming into power of the National Socialist Party in
Germany, the status of labor, especially of organized labor, has
been fundamentally recast.
On May 2, 1933, the “ committee of action for the protection of
German labor” of the National Socialist Party took possession of the
offices and other properties of the labor unions throughout Germany.
The leading members of the labor unions were arrested and the rank
and file of the unions were ordered to continue their work in the
ordinary way. It was declared that this action was taken in the
interests of the German workers themselves and for the purpose of
preserving the labor unions from financial bankruptcy.
The unions thus seized were put under the charge of the National
Socialist Shop Cell Organization (Der National-Sozialistischen Betriebs-zellen-Organisation).

S

1 Data are from International Labor Office, Industrial and Labor Information, M ay 29, 1933 (p. 272);
Deutscher Metallarbeiter-Verband, Metallarbeiter Zeitung, M ay 27, 1933 (p. 116) and June 10, 1933 (pp. 1
and 129); Zentralverband der Steinarbeiter Deutschlands, Der Steinarbeiter, June 3, 1933 (p. 1); and Verband der weiblichen Handels- und Buroangestellten, Die Handels- und Buroangestellte, June 1933 (p. 1),


https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis

288

MONTHLY LABOR REVIEW

According to the official interpretation, the labor union and the
“ shop cell” are two entirely different things, the former repre­
senting the economic interests and the latter the political interests
of the wage earners in the shop. The cell is not concerned with the
shop management as such. It is interested in the activities and direc­
tion of the “ Labor Front” and the national centers of labor unions.
On May 5, six Government ordinances were published having to
do with the future status of labor unions, as follows: (1) The manage­
ment of the entire labor movement in Germany was placed under one
person appointed by the Government; (2) the money and property of
labor unions were placed in the charge of a treasurer appointed by the
Government; (3) provision was made for a national organizer of labor
unions; (4) the entire labor union press was placed under the authority
of the press and publicity manager of the “ committee of action for
the protection of German labor” ; (5) the existing collective trade
agreements were continued in force until the formation of the “ Ger­
man Labor Front” ; (6) independent action of a general character,
such as conclusion of collective and economic agreements, without
authorization by the “ committee of action for the protection of Ger­
man labor” were prohibited.
Formation of the German Labor Front

A ll wage earners have been organized into one body, the “ German
Labor Front” , under the control of the National Socialist Party.
On May 10, 1933, it was officially announced that a “ Labor Senate”
would be appointed by the Government, with a membership not to
exceed 60.
As regards the purpose of these two bodies it was stated that German
wage earners repudiate international Marxism. As the Marxian .
branches in Germany served as a basis for the second and third
internationals, these branches will now go out of existence. It is
said that relations will be maintained with the workers in other
countries as well as with the International Labor Office in Geneva,
on the condition, however, of equality and of noninterference in the
internal affairs of Germany.
The central office of the Labor Front is to include all the existing
occupational organizations in Germany, to supervise and direct the
activities of the Front, and to decide the disputes that may arise
within it. Subordinate to the central office are 2 labor councils and
2 main occupational organizations, the General Federation of German
Wage Earners and the General Federation of the German Salaried
Employees.
The two federations are financially and administratively inde­
pendent of each other. They are directed to unite under their
authority all wage earners and salaried employees in Germany.
Contributions and benefits are to be uniform as far as possible.
Each body has a director and an executive council. These officials
are to be appointed, not elected, and they have the power of decision
in matters concerning their organization.
The smaller labor council is composed of the chief of the German
Labor Front, the chief of the Federation of Wage Earners, the chief
of the Federation of Salaried Employees, and the heads of various
offices attached to the Labor Front (direction office, social questions

https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis

INDUSTRIAL AND LABOR CONDITIONS

289

office, organization office, propaganda and press office, collective
agreements office, legal department, corporative reconstruction office,
education office, young workers’ office, works sections of both federa­
tions, and the treasury)— about 15 members. The greater labor
council consists of all members of the smaller council and the heads of
the principal labor unions— 60 members in all. The smaller labor
council is to supervise the work of the various subordinate offices
of the Front, but the duties of the greater labor council are to be
defined later.
The first congress of the German Labor Front was held on May 10
and 11, 1933, in Berlin, with participation of 500 workers’ delegates
and of representatives of employers and the Government. This
congress gave formal approval to the steps already taken by the
Government in regard to labor and to the organization of the German
Labor Front. The chairman of the “ committee of action for the
protection of German labor” was chosen as the chief of the Labor
Front, and two assistant chiefs were chosen, one to head the wage
earners’ organization, and the other to head the salaried employees’
organization.
General Federation of German Salaried Employees.—-This organiza­
tion was formed on May 18 and 19, 1933, by a congress of salaried
employees held in Berlin. It includes the German Commercial
Employees’ Union (males only), Union of German Technical Workers
(engineers, chemists, etc.), Foremen’s Union, Union of Office Clerks
(public and private, not engaged in commercial work), Union of
Agricultural and Forestry Employees and Tenant Farmers, Union of
Physicians and Chemists (employed under contract), Union of Mari­
time Employees, Union of Theatrical Employees, and Union of
Woman Salaried Employees.
The organization is managed by an appointed director, an advisory
committee appointed by the director, a general council, and employees’
committees. The general council consists of the director, the adminis­
trative secretary, the advisory committee, and one representative
from each of the affiliated organizations.
The national organization is divided into provincial sections, circles,
and locals. The provincial directors are appointed by the national
director. The directors of the circles are appointed by the provincial
directors and the directors of the locals by the directors of the circles.
On May 18, 1933, the Federal commissioner for economic questions
and the chief of the German Labor Front issued an order requiring
wage earners and salaried employees to observe a social truce for
2 months, until the reconstruction of the economic system on a cor­
porate basis could be completed.
Creation of Office of Labor Trustee

T i-ie decree of May 19, 1933, established the office of labor trustee
( Treuhänder der Arbeit), whose principal duties are the regulation of
wages, hours, and other conditions of labor. These functions were
formerly exercised by the employers’ associations and labor unions.
Thus, collective bargaining between employers and their workers
is ended.
The labor trustees for the various industrial districts in Germany
are to be appointed by the Federal Government, on recommendation

https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis

290

MONTHLY LABOR REVIEW

of the State or provincial governments or at least in agreement with
them. The decisions of these labor trustees are binding on both
workers and employers.
By this step, the Federal Government takes upon itself the responsi­
bility of fixing, through the labor trustees, wages and hours of work,
and of shaping the nation’s general labor policy.
New Definition of Laborer, Employer, and Proletarian

T he new leader of the Union of German Metal Workers, Herr W.
Borger, in his acceptance speech on May 15, 1933, gave the following
official interpretation of the terms “ laborer,” “ employer,” and “ pro­
letarian” from the point of view of the National Socialist Party:
(1) Heretofore the term “ laborer” has been understood to mean
only persons working with their hands and for wages. The National
Socialists, however, regard as laborers all persons who work for the
interest of the German people, whether they work in the universities
or in factories, in offices or in fields, whether they are officials, clerks,
or wage earners, whether they work with brain or hands.
(2) Formerly the term “ employer” was used as meaning the owner
of a factory or shop who hires other people to work for him. The
National Socialists maintain that in a broad sense every person who
buys or orders anything is an employer. “ All members of the Ger­
man Commonwealth are employers as well as laborers. It is merely
the end of a turnover in production. Therefore it is quite senseless
to divide the people into employers and laborers and thereby create
the feeling, on one side, of snobbishness and arrogance, and on the
other of lowness and begging for alms. Actually, there are, in pro­
duction, leaders and their followers— the first group plan and the
second prosecute on the basis of giving and taking.”
(3) To the National Socialists, the “ proletarian” is a moral con­
ception, not an economic one. “ We do not hold that the persons
having no property are proletarians. Proletarians are those persons
who are morally deficient. It follows that the proletarians are
found in all walks of life—in the castles and shanties, in every occupa­
tion and calling. We refute the Marxian notion that the proletarian
is only a hand worker.”


https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis

INSURANCE AND PENSION PLANS
Old-Age and Invalidity Pensions and Maternity Allowances in
Australia

HE annual statement of the Pensions and Maternity Allowance
Office of Australia covering the year ending June 30,1932, shows a
decrease in the amount paid out for pensions and allowances during
the year, coupled with an increase in the number of current pensions,
a decrease in the number of claims for maternity allowances, and a
marked increase in the number of these claims rejected.

T

Old-Age and Invalidity Pensions
T h e age at which men become eligible for the old-age pension is
normally 65, though in cases of incapacity it may be granted at^60;
for women, 60 is the normal age. The number of old-age pensions
current on June 30, 1931, was 172,177. During the ensuing year
25,135 were granted, 12,405 to men and 12,730 to women, but deaths
and cancelations brought the number current on June 30, 1932, to
183,317, a net increase of 11,140 for the 12 months. The Common­
wealth began to pay old-age pensions July 1, 1909, and on June 30,
1910, the number current was 65,492; the present figure therefore rep­
resents a growth of 117,825 during 22 years. The ages of the appli­
cants to whom pensions were given in 1931-32 show that while, as
would be expected, the largest single group was in .the first year of
pensionable age, the elder groups accounted for a considerable pro­
portion. Thus, of the men who were pensioned during the year, not
far from a quarter (23.5 percent) were aged 70 and over, and of the
women a trifle over one third (35.8 percent) were 65 and over, this
proportion being, in each case, at least 5 years over the age at which
the pension might have been claimed.
Invalidity pensions are granted to citizens, aged at least 16, who
have been residents of the Commonwealth for 5 years or more, and
who have become whollv incapacitated or blind while residents.
On June 30, 1931, there were 68,343 of these pensions current, and on
June 30, 1932, the number had risen to 72,292, an increase of 3,949.
At the close of the year the annual liability for old-age pensions was
£7,864,116 ($38,270,721)x, and for invalidity pensions, £3,189,992
($15,524,096), making a total annual liability of £11,054,108 ($53,794,817). The maximum pension payable was £45 10s. ($221.43) a
year; of the old-age pensioners 77.17 percent and of the invalidity
pensioners 88.71 percent were receiving this maximum. The cost ol
administration was 14s. 9d. ($3.59) for each £100 ($486.65) paid out
to or on behalf of pensioners.
i
Conversions into United States currency on basis of par value of pound=$4.8665, shilling=24.33 cents,
penny=2.03 cents.


https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis

291

292

MONTHLY LABOR REVIEW

Table 1 shows the trend in pensions during the last 5 fiscal years:
T able

1 . — P E N S IO N D A T A F O R 1928 TO 1932, B Y Y E A R S

[Conversions into United States currency on basis of par value of pound=$4.8665, shilling=24.33 cents,
penny=2.03 cents]

Number of pensioners

Amount paid out to and for Fortnightly pen­
sion at end of
pensioners
fiscal year

Year ending June 30—

1928_____________________
1929_____________________
1930_____________________
1931____________________
1932. ___________________

Old-age
pensions

Invalid­
ity pen­
sions

139, 367
145, 393
155,196
172,177
183, 317

55, 517
59,148
63, 304
68, 343
72, 292

Total

194,884
204, 541
218, 500
240, 520
255, 609

* English
currency

£9, 790, 346
10,124, 239
10, 791, 325
11, 710, 953
11,125, 956

United
States
currency

$47, 644, 719
49, 269, 609
52, 515,983
56, 991, 353
54, 144, 465

English
cur­
rency

s.

d.

38
38
38
38
33

5
5
5
4
3

United
States
cur­
rency
$9. 35
9. 35
9. 35
9. 33
8.09

The decrease shown in the last year in the amount of the average
fortnightly pension is due to a general cut of 5s. ($1.22) per fortnight
made in July 1931 as a result of the financial emergency act passed
in that year. A. further reduction has been made by an act which
became operative in October 1932 (see Monthly Labor Keview,
February 1933, p. 315), but its effect of course will not become appar­
ent until later data are published. The number of pensioners in
each 10,000 of the population has risen from 224 old-age and 89 inval­
idity pensioners in 1928 to 281 old-age and 111 invalidity pensioners
in 1932, while the cost of administration has changed from £1 4s. 3d.
($5.90) per each £100 ($486.65) paid out to or in behalf of pensioners
in 1928 to 14s. 9d. ($3.59) in 1932.
Maternity Allowances

P ayment of maternity allowances in Australia dates back to Octo­
ber 1912. The allowance was £5 ($24.33) for each viable child,
whether or not it was born alive, provided the mother was a resident
of Australia and neither an aboriginal nor an Asiatic. Originally the
allowance might be claimed regardless of the parents’ means, but the
emergency act of 1931 restricted it to cases in which the income of
the parents for the 12 months preceding the birth did not exceed
£260 ($1,265.29) and also reduced the amount to £4 ($19.47).
During the year ending June 30, 1932, maternity allowances were
granted in 92,410 and refused in 5,229 cases. By far the largest
number of refusals (3,678) were due to the fact that the parents’
income exceeded the limit set by the 1931 act. In the next largest
group, numbering 1,044, the claims were withdrawn or not com­
pleted. One hundred were rejected on the ground “ not viable” ,
and 250 because the mothers were aliens.
Data concerning the operation of the act show that for the year
ending June 30, 1914, the first full year of the act’s operation, the
number of claims granted was 134,998, and the amount paid in allow­
ances was £674,990 ($3,284,839). The effect of the war appears in
the fluctuations in the number of claims approved, which ranged
from 138,855 in 1914-15 to 124,016 in 1918-19, and then in 1920-21

https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis

INSURANCE AND PENSION PLANS

293

shot up to 140,152. Thereafter the trend, while irregular, was on
the whole downward. Table 2 shows the number of claims approved,
the number rejected, the amount paid in maternity allowances, and
the cost of administration for the last 5 years:
T able

2 . —N U M B E R OF C L A IM S A N D A M O U N T P A ID IN M A T E R N I T Y A L L O W A N C E S
A N D COST OF A D M IN IS T R A T IO N 1928 T O 1932
[Conversions into United States currency on basis of par value of pound™$4.8665]

Number of claims

Amount paid in
allowances

Cost of admin­
istration

Year ending June 30—
Approved Rejected

1928______________
1929__________________
1930_______________
1931_____________
1932_______________

135, 784
132, 304
128, 598
126,149
92, 410

English
currency

United
States
currency

1,261 R678, 920 $3, 303, 964
901
661, 520
3,219, 287
821
642, 990
3,129, 111
770
630, 652
3, 069, 068
5, 229
378,022' 1,839, 644

English
currency

£15,489
16, 627
15,157
15, 322
14,180

United
States
currency
$75, 377
80,915
73, 762
74, 565
69, 007

Operations of Salaried Employees’ Old-Age Insurance System
in Germany 1

HE German old-age insurance system 2 for salaried employees
provides for the compulsory insurance of all such employees
whose annual earnings do not exceed 8,400 marks ($2,000).3 These
employees are divided into 10 groups, on the basis of their yearly
earnings, the contributions required ranging from 2 marks ($0.48) per
month in the lowest class to 50 marks ($11.90) in the highest class;
generally the contributions form about 5 percent of earnings. These
contributions are shared equally between employer and employee,
and normally 60 months’ contributions are required before the insured
becomes eligible for benefits under the act.
It is estimated that some 3,600,000 persons were insured under this
system in 1932.
The 1932 report of the system shows a considerable decline in the
amount of contributions (due to the widespread unemployment and
salary reductions) and in total receipts, while at the same time the
number of beneficiaries and the amount paid out in benefits increased.
The average amount of benefit, however, decreased sharply. Whereas,
at the end of 1931, 78.5 percent of the old-age pensioners were receiving
an average monthly pension of 82.25 marks ($19.58) and the average
pension of the other 21.5 percent was 62.73 marks ($14.93), at the
end of 1932 only 39 percent were receiving an average pension of
77.09 marks ($18.35) and the average pension of the other 61 percent
was 60.82 marks ($14.48). Similar reductions took place in the
average benefits of the other two groups of beneficiaries— widows and
orphans. These reductions were the result of the emergency decrees
of December 8, 1931, and June 14, 1932.
Table 1 shows the number of beneficiaries of each class at the end
of 1931 and 1932 and the amounts paid in benefits during these years.

T

1 Data are from report b y C. W . Gray, American vice consul at Berlin, Apr. 22, 1933.
2 Described in detail in Bui. No. 561 of this Bureau (p. 218).
3 Conversions into United States currency on basis of mark at par=23.8 cents.

2404°— 33------- 4


https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis

294

MONTHLY LABOR REVIEW

T able

1 . — B E N E F IT S

UNDER

S A L A R IE D
EM PLOYEES’
S Y S T E M , 1931 A N D 1932

O L D -A G E

IN S U R A N C E

[Conversions into United States currency on basis of mark at par=23.8 cents]
Benefits
Beneficiaries
1932

1931
Class of beneficiary

Pensioners:
Old age and disability---------Survivors,- --Orphans . _ _
___
Total

. ________ _

Persons receiving medical care—

German
currency

150, 300, 000
55, 000, 000
4, 600,000

$35, 771,400
13,090,000
1,094,800

161, 700,000
50, 600, 000
4,700,000

$38,484, 600
12,042, 800
1,118, 600

209, 900,000

49,956, 200

217, 000,000

51, 646,000

7,116,200

21,900,000

5, 212, 200

1932

German
currency

155, 514
72,473
40,258

183, 498
81,037
26, 629

268, 245

291,164

Marks

Marks

(*)

United
States cur­
rency

United
States cur­
rency

1931

29, 900, 000

36,871

1 No data.

The system also contributes toward the pensions of persons covered
by the miners’ insurance act. The number of beneficiaries for whom
such contributions were made in 1932 was 7,416 as compared with
6,653 in 1931.
Table 2 shows the receipts and expenditures of the fund in 1931
and 1932.
T

able

2 . — R E C E IP T S

A N D E X P E N D IT U R E S OF G E R M A N S A L A R IE D E M P L O Y E E S ’
O L D -A G E IN S U R A N C E S Y S T E M , 1931 A N D 1932

[Conversions into United States currency on basis of mark at par=23.8 cents]
1932

1931
Item

German cur­
rency

United States
currency

i N o data.


https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis

523,100, 000
343, 500,000
263,100,000
209, 900,000
29,900, 000
0)
260,000,000
0)

United States
currency

Marks

Marks
Receipts----- ------------- ------------------- Contributions _ _ - - - Expenditures____- - - - - - - - -Benefits_____ ____ ___ __
Medical care----Cost of administration
- - Balance carried over------- . __

German cur­
rency

$124,497,800
81,753,000
62, 617, 800
49,956, 200
7,116, 200
61,880, 000

446, 300, 000
287, 700,000
263, 600,000
217, 000, 000
21.900.000
11.900.000
182, 700,000
2,107,000,000

$106, 219,400
68, 472, 600
62, 736, 800
51, 646, 000
5, 212, 200
2, 832, 200
43,482, 600
501,466, 000

HEALTH AND INDUSTRIAL HYGIENE
Experiment in Freedom of Choice of Physician by Members of
Mutual Benefit Association

A

N ACCOUNT of a year’s successful experience in allowing meml bers of a mutual benefit society freedom of choice in the selection
of physicians and dentists is reported in a recent issue 1of the Journal
of the American Medical Association.
The mutual benefit association in which this plan was carried out
was organized in 1930 among employees of Spaulding Bakeries, Inc.,
Binghamton, N.Y., wholesale bakers of bread and cake products, the
medical service being arranged for at first on a contract basis. After
the association was organized it became apparent that some of the
members would prefer to go to their own physicians for treatment,
and it was found that some were actually doing so while paying dues
to the association. Officials of the company realized also that local
physicians not connected with the association were opposed to this
type of organization and they felt that this opposition was justified,
since under it the personal relationship which should exist between
physician and patient was lost to a large extent. The employees in
general appreciated the benefits and services provided by the associa­
tion, so that it was decided to reorganize the association rather than
to suspend its activities.
As a result of a joint meeting of the officers of the association, the
presidents of the county medical association, the local dental society,
and the Binghamton Academy of Medicine, which was called by the
president of the company, it was decided to try the experiment of
offering freedom of choice of a physician as a basic feature. It was
provided that the plan was to continue for a year, since there was
considerable doubt as to whether or not it could be operated success­
fully. At the close of the experimental period in April 1933 it was
found that the original reserve which had been built up during the
period the first plan was in operation not only remained untouched
but had been substantially increased, and it was expected, therefore,
that the activities of the association would be maintained indefinitely
and possibly extended to the eight other plants operated by the com­
pany in New York and Pennsylvania.
The association uses the facilities of community medical service
agencies and a member of the association has the privilege of consult­
ing any physician he may choose. An employee who is sick obtains
a form from the secretary of the association which he presents to the
physician, or if he is unable to call at the office for the form he reports
the fact later to the secretary. Both house and office calls are allowed.
1
The Journal of the American Medical Association, June 10, 1933:
medicine,” b y Dr. M . S. Bloom.


https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis

“ A new experiment in industrial

295

296

MONTHLY LABOR REVIEW

The members receive both medical and surgical care, including
major and minor operations; eye, ear, nose, and throat service; X-ray
examination; dental service limited to X-rays and extraction; and
laboratory and ward service in the hospital, not to exceed 30 days in
any 1 year at the rate of $3 per day. Benefits are not paid during
hospitalization, but are paid when the patient leaves the hospital,
except in the case of surgical operations. Tuberculosis sanitariums
or institutions for the care of chronic diseases are not included, how­
ever, under the term “ hospital” . The prevailing medical and dental
fees in the community are paid by the association, and although a
committee of physicians was appointed to pass on bills which seemed
to be exorbitant, so far there has been no occasion to consider this
question.
Benefits based on the rate of dues are paid to members absent from
work on account of sickness for a maximum of 10 weeks in any 1 year.
The maximum which may be spent on any one member for medical
services in any 1 year is $350, house and office calls being limited to
$50 and dental service to $25.
The dues of the association are based on the wages received, and
the employees are divided into four classes, the dues ranging from
20 cents per week for class 1 to 45 cents for class 4. The weekly
benefits are respectively $7.50, $10, $15, and $20.
During the first year’s operation of the plan 65 different physicians
and 25 dentists were consulted by the members.
Although the experiment has been of such short duration andhas
been limited to a relatively small group of people, it is said the ex­
perience under the plan indicates that a system of “ small weekly
payments by the employees supplemented by an equal contribution
by the employer makes possible the provision of a very satisfactory
type of medical service, with an acceptable and equitable distribution
of costs and the application of the principle of freedom of choice.”
The success of the plan is ascribed, in large measure, to the coopera­
tion of the doctors and dentists of the community.


https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis

INDUSTRIAL ACCIDENTS
Accident Statistics of the National Safety Council for 1932

A

CCORDING to figures compiled by the National Safety Council,1
l. the accident-prevention movement in the United States can be
credited with saving 175,000 lives since it was started in 1913, when
the accidental death rate was 85.5 per 100,000 population. The suc­
ceeding years, with the exception of 1917, show lower though variable
rates, with the estimated rate for 1932 at the lowest point for the pe­
riod— 70.5 persons killed per 100,000 population.
The total number of accidental deaths of all types during the 20
years, 1913 to 1932, was 1,720,857, but would have been 175,000
larger if the 1913 death rate had continued. It is pointed out that
the reduction would have been far greater except for the enormous
increase in motor-vehicle fatalities, which rose steadily from 4.4 per
100,000 population in 1913 to 27.1 in 1931 and dropped, for the first
time, in 1932 to 23.6. Separate rates are not available for accidental
deaths in gainful occupations for the period, but combined rates in
all except motor-vehicle fatalities show a reduction from 81.1 per
100,000 population in 1913 to 46.9 in 1932.
All Accidents
T h e National Safety Council estimates that the total number of
accidental deaths in the United States in 1932 was approximately
88,000, as compared with 97,415 in 1931. Accidental nonfatal injuries
are estimated at 8,312,000 for 1932, as against 9,403,000 for 1931, and
the wage loss, medical expense, and overhead insurance cost involved
in all deaths and nonfatal injuries at approximately $2,000,000,000
for 1932, as compared with $2,308,000,000 for 1931.
The estimate of the number of deaths in 1932 is derived from reports
of 42 States and the District of Columbia, covering 1931 and 1932
records, with allowances for States not reporting. The estimate of
the nonfatal injuries is based on the indicated ratio of nonfatal to
fatal injuries in each of the four principal types of accidents: Occu­
pational, motor vehicle, other public, and home. It is stated that in
occupational accidents there are about 80 nonfatal injuries for each
death, based on reports of members of the National Safety Council;
in motor-vehicle accidents about 35 nonfatal injuries for each death,
as found in areas where accident recording is most complete; in other
public accidents about 120 nonfatal injuries for each death, according
to available insurance-company data; and in home accidents about
150 nonfatal injuries for each death, also based on available insurancecompany data and verified through a special survey. The average
1 National Safety Council, Inc. Accident facts, 1933 edition.


https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis

Chicago, 20 North Wacker Drive, 1933.

297

298

MONTHLY LABOR REVIEW

for all accidents is given as 1 fatal to about 95 nonfatal injuries,
consisting of 4 permanent and 91 temporary disabilities.
An approximate distribution of the estimated number of injuries
in 1932, by type of accident and extent of disability, is shown in
table 1.
T able

1 — A P P R O X IM A T E D IS T R IB U T IO N OF A C C ID E N T A L IN JU R IE S IN T H E U N IT E D
ST A T E S IN 1932, B Y T Y P E OF A C C ID E N T A N D E X T E N T OF D IS A B IL IT Y
Number of injuries
Extent of disability

Type of accident

Total
Death
Occupational _
M otor vehicle _

_

...............
________________________ _

Total L_

Permanent Temporary

15, 000
29, 500
28,000
18, 000

45.000
85, 000
125,000
60.000

1.155.000
945,000
4,070, 000
2.100.000

1, 215, 000
1,059, 500
4, 223,000
2,178, 000

88,000

312, 000

8,000, 000

8,400, 000

i Items are adjusted to eliminate duplications in figures for industrial and motor-vehicle deaths and
injuries.

It is estimated that 2,500 of the occupational deaths and a propor­
tionate number of nonfatal injuries occurred in accidents involving
motor vehicles, so these appear under both types of accidents, but
the duplication is eliminated in the totals. Temporary injuries shown
in the table include only those causing disability extending beyond
the day of injury.
The combined wage loss, medical expense, and overhead cost of
insurance for the accidental deaths and injuries in 1932 is given as
$2,000,000,000. An approximate distribution of this amount, by type
of cost and type of accident, is shown in table 2.
T a b l e 2 —A P P R O X I M A T E

D IS T R IB U T IO N OF S P E C IF IE D COSTS OF A C C I D E N T A L
IN JU R IE S IN T H E U N IT E D S T A T E S IN 1932, B Y T Y P E OF A C C ID E N T
T yp e of cost
T ype of accident
Wage loss

OccupationalM otor vehicle

- ............. . ..........
__________ _______

Other p u b l i c ____ ____
T o t a l1_________________ ___________

Medical ex­
pense

Overhead cost
of insurance

Total

$370, 000,000
$30, 000,000
500, 000, 000
60, 000,000
390.000.
000 120,000, 000
360.000.
000 80,000, 000

$90,000,000
60,000,000
10,000,000
10,000,000

$490, 000, 000
620, 000,000
520.000, 000
450.000, 000

285, 000, 000

155,000, 000

2,000, 000, 000

1, 560, 000, 000

i Items are adjusted to eliminate duplications in figures for industrial and motor-vehicle deaths and
injuries.

In the absence of accurate information on the proportionate costs in
the various types of accidents, the distribution is based largely on
data for occupational accidents, where the best records are available.
The estimated wage loss for occupational accidents is not the same
as compensation cost, which covers only actual payments in com­
pensable cases, as it includes the loss of wages in all accidents and
deaths and permanent injuries are calculated at their full economic
values. In this table, as in table 1, the figures for occupational and
motor-vehicle accidents overlap, but the duplication is eliminated in
the totals.

https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis

299

INDUSTRIAL ACCIDENTS
Occupational Accidents

T he 15,000 accidental deaths estimated to have occurred in 1932
during the course of gainful employment, including all employees and
self-employed persons and classified by the National Safety Council
as “ occupational’7 deaths, are distributed provisionally as follows:
Manufacturing_________________ 2,
Mines and quarries____________ 1,
Building and construction_____ 1,
Public utilities (gas and electric)

000
800
300
300

800
Steam and electric railways____
300
Seamen and stevedores________
Agriculture___________________ 3, 500
All others 2___________________ 5, 000

Based on 80 nonfatal injuries for each death, a total of 1,200,000
nonfatal injuries is determined for 1932.
Extracts from State records of occupational injuries are presented,
as well as some insurance-company data, besides the experience of
industrial establishments reporting injury rates direct to the National
Safety Council annually. The latter show an average reduction for all
industries in both frequency and severity rates from 1931 to 1932.
Index numbers, calculated from data furnished by identical estab­
lishments for each 2-year period and based on 1926 = 100, give fre­
quency as 45.5 in 1931 and 38.5 in 1932, a decline of 15.4 percent, and
severity as 68.8 in 1931 and 64.7 in 1932, a decline of 6 percent.
Actual rates for 1932, based on data from all establishments report­
ing, are also shown. These are presented by industry in table 3.3
T

able

3 .—

IN JU R Y F R E Q U E N C Y A N D S E V E R IT Y R A T E S F O R A L L E S T A B L IS H M E N T S
R E P O R T IN G F O R 1932, B Y IN D U S T R Y

Industry

A utom obile_____________________ __________________
Cement
- _ ________________ _____ __________
Chemical __________ ________________ _
___
Clay products ___ ____ _ ________
Construction _
_____
Electric railway
_ _
F ood______ _ _____________________________________
Foundry------------------------------------------------------------------Glass______ ______ ^ _______ ____ _________ _ ___
Laundry __
_ ________________
_______ _ __
Lumber___ _____ _ __________________ _____ ____ _
Machinery
_
Marine
M eatpacking. .
. . . . .
_______
. ._ __
M etal products, miscellaneous ______ _ ______ . . .
M ining---------- --- ._ _ __________ . . . _ . _ ___
Nonferrous metals
Paper and pulp ___ _
_____ _____ _
. . ____
Petroleum ___ _. _ __ ______________________ . . . _
Printing and publishing . . . .
...
..
Public utilities . .
___ _____ _______ _________ .
Quarry________________ ____ ____ _
. ____ ____
Railway car and equipment.
.......
Refrigeration
. . .
R ubber_. __ __ _______ _ _ . . . _ ____ ______ . . .
Sheet m etal________________ _______________________
Steel______ ___________
_ . . . ________ . . .
. ...
Tanning and leather _
_ _ . . . ----------- . . . .
Textile.
_ _
Tobacco . .
..
. ______ ______
W oodw orking..
_ _________________
T o t a l1_______ ____________________________ ..

Number
of units

Man-hours
worked

Frequency
Severity
rates (per
rates (per
1,000,000
1,000 hours’
hours’
exposure)
exposure)

69
112
266
30
61
67
283
108
49
41
48
282
56
74
200
138
58
241
101
43
621
118
36
69
53
204
121
57
189
13
109

129, 442, 000
27,939, 000
174,908, 000
7, 308, 000
22,157, 000
152,162, 000
242, 022, 000
33,998, 000
51, 588, 000
8,470, 000
13,157, 000
247,976, 000
106, 379, 000
138, 684, 000
81,901, 000
42,045, 000
59, 772, 000
136,034, 000
565, 760, 000
23, 444, 000
694, 808, 000
7,849, 000
21, 669, 000
26, 259, 000
113, 442, 000
97, 620, 000
212,884, 000
45, 270, 000
163,107, 000
18, 481, 000
28, 290, 000

13.19
4. 65
10. 53
23. 40
57. 90
19.20
15. 27
23.12
8. 76
4. 25
47.96
7.76
17.24
25.50
13. 25
56.68
9. 44
17. 77
12. 28
6.87
9. 82
16. 56
11.12
23.53
9.86
13.13
10.19
10. 60
9.14
1.89
15. 77

1.10
1.80
1.92
.38
4. 44
2.09
1.15
2.46
.73
.06
5.43
.84
2.14
1.13
.97
9.51
1. 58
1.92
1.91
.25
1.83
3.53
1.05
2.04
.71
.88
1.81
.30
.45
.07
1.71

3,937

3, 754,481, 000

13.20

1.59

1 Totals include miscellaneous industries, not shown separately, and eliminate duplications between
marine and petroleum industries.
2Includes hotels, garages, warehouses, junk yards, and all other trade and service industries.
3 Similar data for 1931 were published in the M onthly Labor Review for October 1932.


https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis

300

MONTHLY LABOR REVIEW

The tobacco and laundry industries present the lowest frequency
rates and also the lowest severity rates. Construction, mining, and
the lumber industry have the worst records in both frequency and
severity rates. Some of the other industries show great variation in
the ranking of the two rates; thus, the cement industry, which has
comparatively few accidents and is the third lowest in frequency, has
a proportionately high death rate and ranks eighteenth in severity.
Motor-Vehicle Accidents

F atalities in motor-vehicle accidents for 1932 are estimated at
29,500, as compared with 33,675 in 1931. Reductions were reported
from 43 States, including 15 percent in Pennsylvania, 11 percent each
in Illinois and New York, and 9 percent in California. Delaware,
the District of Columbia, and Oklahoma reported increases. It is
estimated that the nonfatal injuries in 1932 were approximately
1,035,000, as against 1,195,000 in 1931.
The population of the United States increased about 30 percent
from 1913 to 1932. Motor-vehicle deaths increased in the same period
from 4,227 to 29,500, raising the death rate per 100,000 population
from 4.4 to 23.6. The number of motor vehicles, however, was
nearly 20 times larger in 1932 than in 1913, so, based on the registration
of motor vehicles, the death rate per 100,000 cars registered was
306.7 in 1913 and 121.8 in 1932, a decided reduction. The National
Safety Council believes that a better index of motor travel is provided
by the gasoline consumption, but figures for that item are not avail­
able earlier than 1925. Based on a 10,000,000-gallon consumption,
the death rate declined from 25.5 in 1925 to 20.7 in 1932.
Home Accidents

D eaths in home accidents are placed at approximately 28,000 in
1932, as compared with 29,000 in 1931. Nonfatal injuries in 1932
are estimated at 4,195,000, as against 4,350,000 in 1931. About
43 percent of the fatalities are attributed to falls and 19 percent to
burns, scalds, and explosions. A survey conducted by the National
Safety Council indicated that 73 percent of the injuries occurred inside
the house, 34 percent of these in the kitchen, 23 percent on stairs
and in halls, and 13 percent each in the living room and basement. Of
the outside injuries, 24 percent occurred on walks and 14 percent on
porches.
Public Accidents

A ccidents occurring in public places, but not involving a motor
vehicle, were responsible for approximately 18,000 deaths in 1932, as
against 20,000 in 1931, and 2,160,000 nonfatal injuries in 1932, as
compared with 2,400,000 in 1931. Drowning is estimated to have
caused the largest number of deaths (5,800), railroads— not with motor
vehicle—-the second largest (3,000), and falls and firearms following
(2,200 each).
Separate chapters are devoted to steam-railway accidents, based
on data compiled by the Interstate Commerce Commission; aviation
accidents, based on data compiled by the Aeronautics Branch, United
States Department of Commerce; and student accidents, based on
available records of the United States Bureau of the Census and of
school systems.

https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis

INDUSTRIAL ACCIDENTS

301

Fatal Accidents in Kansas, 1932

DETAILED study by the Kansas State Board of Health of the
accidental deaths reported in Kansas in 1932 1 shows that 1 in
every 14 deaths during the year was the result of an accident, and
that of every 7 accidental deaths 1 occurred to a person while in the
course of gainful employment.
The total number of accidental industrial deaths reported in the
State in 1932 was 195, a decrease of 32 deaths, or 14 percent, from the
number reported in 1931. While there was a reduction in the total
number, an increase occurred in the principal type of industrial
deaths— those resulting from injuries received in connection with
agricultural work— which accounted for 105 in 1932, or 10 more than
in 1931. Mining and quarrying were responsible for 20 deaths,
transportation and public utilities for 17, trade for 14, petroleum
production and refining for 13, construction for 9, and manufacturing
for only 5 deaths.
An age distribution shows that 159 of the deaths reported were in
the age group 15 to 64 years, and 28 in that of 65 years or over, while
the other 8 deaths were in the age group 5 to 14 years. These 8
deaths all resulted from agricultural accidents. The 28 deaths in the
age group 65 years or over occurred principally in agriculture, which
accounted for 23 of them. One each were reported for mining and
quarrying, transportation and public utilities, trade, manufacturing,
and nonclassified industries.
The most common cause of fatalities occurring in connection with
agricultural work was farm machinery, with a total of 35, of which 9
are charged to tractors, 3 each to manure spreaders and cultivators,
and 2 each to steam engines, threshing machines, and disks. Injuries
by animals accounted for the next largest number (31), 13 resulting
from kicks, 8 from being gored by bulls, and 7 from accidental falls
from horses. Vehicular accidents were responsible for 10 deaths,
with 6 of these charged to runaway teams and the remainder to over­
turning of wagons otherwise. Falls caused 9 deaths, lightning 8, and
excessive heat 6.
The 20 deaths resulting from mine and quarry accidents occurred
principally in coal mines, which are charged with 16, while 1 is charged
to zinc mines and the remainder to quarries. All of the 13 deaths
reported for the classification, “ other extractive industries” , were
related to the production or refining of oil, 9 of them occurring in the
oil field and 5 in refineries.
Transportation and public utilities show 17 deaths, 10 of which were
sustained by employees of railroads while on duty.
The total number of accidental deaths reported in Kansas during
1932 was 1,419, equal to 7.3 percent of the 19,531 deaths from all
causes which occurred in the State, and the lowest number reported
since 1928. Aside from the 195 industrial deaths, workers were
naturally involved to a certain extent in the deaths resulting from the
other three general types of accidents. Of these, home accidents
ranked highest, with 485 deaths; motor-vehicle accidents second, with
452 deaths; and other public accidents third, with 287 deaths. Deaths
of males accounted for 69.8 percent of all accidental deaths; and in

A

i Kansas.

State Board of Health,


https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis

Kansas accidental deaths, 1932.

Topeka, 1933.

302

MONTHLY LABOR REVIEW

accidents by firearms and drowning and railroad and automobile
accidents those to males occurred in an approximate proportion of
3 to 1.
The following table shows a distribution of the total number of
fatal accidents in the State in 1932, by type of accident.
‘N U M B E R OF A C C ID E N T A L F A T A L IT IE S IN K A N SA S IN 1932, B Y T Y P E OF A C C ID E N T

T yp e of accident
Industrial:
A griculture-........ ...............
M ining and quarrying-----Other extractive industries.
Manufacturing-----------------Construction--------------------Transportation and public utilities—
Trade____________________
Others____________________
Total___________________
M otor vehicles:
Collision with:
Pedestrian_________
Other motor v chicleRailroad train--------Electric car------------Bicycle------------------Horse-drawn vehicle.
Fixed object-----------Noncollision-----------------Total


https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis

Number

105
20
13
5
9
17
14
12
195

T yp e of accident
Public, not motor vehicles:
Railroad______________ ____ Street car-----------------------------Other vehicle_______________
Water transportation-----------Air transportation__________
Falls______ _________________
Burns, scalds, and explosions.
Drowning___________________
Firearms____________________
Others---------------------------------T otal_____________________

88
119
47
4
3
3
62
126
452

Home:
Falls________________________
Burns, scalds, and explosionsAsphyxiation and suffocation
Firearms____________________
Poisons_____________________
Others______________________

Number

59
1

4
3
5
43
6
72
32
62
287
247
102
17
17
44
58

Total---------------------------------

485

Grand total_______________

1,419

WOMEN IN INDUSTRY
W oman Workers in the Third Year of the Depression

NDER the above title the Federal Women’s Bureau has recently
published a study of unemployment and its effects among 109
women who attended the Bryn Mawr summer school in 1932. This
school, conducted for adult workers, offers scholarships to make it
possible for women to attend who could not otherwise meet the
expense. Those receiving the scholarships must have shown some
qualities of leadership and of interest in workers’ education or com­
munity activities, and while the scholarships meet their current
expenses, they must sacrifice their wages, and sometimes have found
it necessary to relinquish their jobs altogether, taking a chance upon
reemployment after the session is over.
During the summer of 1932 the women themselves proposed making
a study of their experience during the depression period as a step
toward understanding the predicament into which they had been
forced by the economic organization in which they lived and worked.
The events of the year ending June 1, 1932, just prior to the school
term, were still vividly in mind, and the facts as to employment and
changes in living and working arrangements could be easily recalled.
The group, numbering 109, was a varied one, representing workers
of a wide range of status and earning power.

U

They had come from 17 States, including such distant ones as Washington,
California, and Alabama, although the eastern industrial States sent the largest
numbers, as in the case of New York with 34 representatives and Pennsylvania
with 24. Almost one half (50, including the 4 workers who had come from foreign
countries to attend the school) were foreign born. The majority of the foreignborn workers had been in the United States 10 years or longer. In age the entire
group ranged from 4 who were under 20 to 3 who were 40 or over; All but 12
were single, and by far the largest number (81) were living at home. More than
half who lived with their families either paid all that they earned into the family
exchequer or contributed as much as half of what they earned to the expenses of
the family. Slightly less than half (50) were trade-union members.

Occupationally, as well as geographically, they represented a
wide range. The most numerous group (57) were in some form of
garment making or millinery, 18 were in textiles, 15 in miscellaneous
manufacturing, 15 in trade, transportation, and clerical work, and 4
in domestic service.
Employment Status During the Year
O n l y 10 had been employed steadily throughout the year, this
group including 7 workers in American industry, and 3 of the 4
foreign workers, among them a Swedish worker in a clothing factory,
a German trade-union official, and a Lancashire cotton weaver. Of
the others, 20 had had a job throughout the whole year, but had had


https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis

303

MONTHLY LABOR REVIEW

304

periods of short weeks, 23 had had times of being without a job but
when employed had worked full time, and 56 had been both wholly
and partially unemployed at different times through the year. Only
39, apart from the 10 who were steadily employed, had had as much as
26 weeks of full employment.
The periods of employment of the majority of the workers (82) were in con­
nection with a single job, 19 held 2 jobs during the year, 5 held 3 jobs, and 1
held 4. Two workers were without any job during the entire year.
Effect on Earnings

T he actual earnings during the year ending June 1, 1932, of the
women studied were as follows:
Number of uorkers

No earnings__________________________
Less than $200----------------------------------$200 and less than $400______________
$400 and less than $600______________
$600 and less than $800______________
$800 and less than $1,000____________
$1,000 and less than $1,200---------------$1,200 and less than $1,400---------------Unknown____________________________

____________

___________________
_____________________
_____A ____________
_____________________
_____________________
__________

____________

_____________________

2

15
27
24
25
7
4
2

3

Total________________________________________________ 109

Low earnings were general throughout the different industries.
There was no single occupational group in which half of the workers
earned as much as $600, and the actual median of the earnings of the
whole body was $480. In the clothing group half earned under
$400, “ yet this group contained many highly skilled and experienced
women, whose earnings only a few years ago, in spite of a highly
seasonal industry, were sufficient to yield a very comfortable living.”
A comparison with the earnings of earlier years brings out clearly the
shrinkage due to unemployment as well as to lower wage rates. A
bulletin (no. 89) of the Women’s Bureau published in 1931 contains a
study of the earnings of 609 woman workers who had attended the
4 summer schools (Bryn Mawr, Barnard, Wisconsin, and the Southern
School) in the summers of 1928, 1929, and 1930. The workers were
drawn in about the same proportion from the industries represented
in the present study. The medians of the earnings and of the full­
time weekly rates for the years covered are shown below:
M E D IA N E A R N IN G S A N D F U L L -T IM E W E E K L Y R A T E S OF W O R K E R S IN S U M M E R
SCHO OLS

Median
earnings

Year and schools covered

1928 (4 schools) _ _ _____ 1929 (4 schools)-.- _
. ------ 1930 (4 schools)_____ _
- --

------

1932 (Bryn M awr) _ _. __________ ____ _ -

$861
887
793
696
480

M edian
full-time
weekly
rates
$21. 65
23.15
20.15
14.50

The effect upon earnings of the fall in weekly rates was intensified
by the amount of short-time work. Only 10, it will be remembered,
had had a full year’s work, and the others had lost time heavily.

https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis

305

WOMEN IN INDUSTRY

The short weeks were very short indeed, many consisting of only 2 or 3 days.
This fact accounts for the small total even in the case of workers employed the
greater part of the year. The weeks counted include all those in which payment
was received for any work, no matter how small the amount.
* * * A worker employed by a large electrical-supply company possessed
ability and experience that enabled her to earn as much as $15 a week; but she
totaled only $360 during the year, although employed 52 weeks, an average of
$6.92. During the greatest number of weeks her pay envelope contained $4.
Effect of Unemployment on Standard of Living

F our elements that go to make up the standard of living—food,
clothing, housing, and medical care—were considered, and the 79
workers who had been without jobs during the year thus summarized
the effect upon these items:
S T A N D A R D OF L IV IN G A N D U N E M P L O Y M E N T

Unemployed workers
with lowered standLower standard in respect of—

Food
_
Clothing____
Medical care

Number

Percent

32
39
40
48

41
49
58
61

_
______

The food standard was considered lower if the worker concerned had
less nourishing food than when in work. The test for a lower standard
of clothing was the absence from the wardrobe of some important
article formerly considered necessary, such as good shoes or a winter
coat. Housing was held to be of lower standard if the family had
moved to secure lower rent, if lodgers had been taken without any
increase in the number of rooms occupied, if a mortgage had been
increased upon a house owned, or if the family had fallen more than
2 months behind in rent or mortgage payments. The postponement
of medical care when it was urgently needed was considered to indi­
cate a lowered health standard.
Savings, of course, had been used when they existed. “ Only 17 of
the 109 workers reported that they had accumulated any savings that
had not dwindled away by the end of the year.” All of these had had
32 weeks of work, or more. Thirty-four workers had been forced to
borrow, the amounts ranging from less than $50 in 7 cases to over
$1,000 in 2. Nearly all these amounts were still owing at the end of
the year.
Prospects for the Future
T h e classification of these workers according to their employment
prospects in July 1932 was as follows:
Number of uorkers

No job in prospect______ ___________________________________
Indefinite prospect, “ when work begins” ____________________
Definite job promised_________________________
No report_____________________________

40
30
38
1

Total________________________________________________ 109


https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis

MINIMUM WAGE
Illinois M inimum-W age Law

LLINOIS has joined the list of States enacting_ minimum-wage
laws for women and minors during the recent sessions of the State
legislatures. The passage of such a law in Illinois makes a total of
seven States (New Hampshire, New Jersey, New York, Utah, Con­
necticut, Ohio, and Illinois) which have passed such laws during the
current year. The complete text of the laws enacted in New Hamp­
shire, New Jersey, New York, and Utah appeared in the Monthly
Labor Review for June 1933 (p. 1259), and those of Connecticut and
Ohio in the July 1933 issue (p. 57). The Illinois act contains the same
general provisions as the other laws passed^ this year, except that
there is a provision whereby the act remains in effect only until July
1, 1935. The complete text of the Illinois law follows:

I

S e c t i o n 1. P u r p o s e o f a c t .-—The employment of women and minors in trade
and industry in the State of Illinois at wages unreasonably low and not fairly
commensurate with the value of the services rendered is a matter of grave and
vital public concern. Many women and minors employed for gain in the State
of Illinois are not as a class equally equipped for bargaining with their employers
in regard to minimum fair wage standards, and “ freedom of contract” as applied
to their relations with their employers is in many cases illusory. Since a very
large percentage of such workers are obliged from their week-to-week wages to
support themselves and others who are dependent upon them in whole or in
part, they are, by reason of their necessitous circumstances, forced to accept
whatever wages are offered them. Judged by any reasonable standard, wages
are in many cases fixed by chance and caprice and the wages accepted are often
found to bear no relation to the fair value of the service rendered. Women and
minors employed for gain are peculiarly subject to the overreaching of inefficient
or unreasonable employers and are under unregulated competition where no
adequate machinery exists for the effective regulation and maintenance of
minimum fair wage standards, and the standards such as exist tend to be set
by the least conscionable employers. In the absence of any effective minimum
fair wage rates for women and minors, the constant lowering of wages by
unscrupulous employers constitutes a serious form of unfair competition against
other employers, reduces the purchasing power of the workers and threatens the
stability of industry. The evils of oppressive, unreasonable and unfair wages
as they affect women and minors employed in the State of Illinois are such as
to render imperative the exercise of the police power of the State for the pro­
tection of industry and of the women and minors employed therein and of the
public interest of the community at large in their health and well-being and in
the prevention of the deterioration of our people.
S eo. 2. D e f i n i t i o n s .— As used in this act:
“ Department” means the department of labor.
“ Director” means the director of the department of labor.
“ Wage board” means a board created as provided in section 6 of this act.
“ Woman” means a female of 18 years or over.
“ M inor” means a female person under the age of 18 years and a male person
under the age of 21 years.
“ Occupation” means an industry, trade, or business or branch thereof or
class of work therein in which women or minors are gainfully employed, but
does not include domestic service in the home of the employer or labor on a farm.

306


https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis

MINIMUM WAGE

307

“ An oppressive and unreasonable wage” means a wage which is both less
than the fair and reasonable value of the services rendered and less than suffi­
cient to meet the minimum cost of living necessary for health.
“ A fair wage” means a wage fairly and reasonably commensurate with the
value of the service or class of service rendered. In establishing a minimum
fair wage for any service or class of service under this act the department and
the wage board without being bound by any technical rules of evidence or pro­
cedure (1) may take into account all relevant circumstances affecting the value
of the service or class of service rendered and (2) may be guided by like con­
siderations as would guide a court in a suit for the reasonable value of services
rendered where services are rendered at the request of an employer without
contract as to the amount of the wage to be paid, and (3) may consider the wages
paid in the State for work of like or comparable character by employers who
voluntarily maintain minimum fair wage standards.
“ A directory order” means an order the nonobservance of which may be
published as provided in section 10 of this act.
“ A mandatory order” means an order the violation of which is subject to the
penalties prescribed in paragraph 2 of section 16 of this act.
S e c . 3. C o n tr a c ts o f e m p l o y m e n t v o id , w h e n . — It is hereby declared to be
against public policy for any employer to employ any woman or minor in an
occupation in this State at an oppressive and unreasonable wage as defined in
section 2 of this act and any contract, agreement, or understanding for or in
relation to such employment shall be null and void.
S e c . 4. I n v e s t i g a t o r y p o w e r s . — The department shall have full power and
authority:
1. To investigate and ascertain the wages of women and minors employed in
any occupation in the State;
2. To enter the place of business or employment of any employer of women
and minors in any occupation for the purpose of examining and inspecting any
and all books, registers, pay rolls, and other records of any employer of women
or minors that in any way appertain to or have a bearing upon the question of
wages of any such women or minors and for the purpose of ascertaining whether
the orders of the department have been and are being complied with; and
3. T o require from such employer full and correct statements in writing when
the department deems necessary, of the wages paid to all women and minors in his
employment.
S e c . 5. I n v e s t i g a t i o n s a u t h o r i z e d - —The department shall have the power, and
it shall be its duty on the petition of 50 or more residents of any county in which
women or minors are employed in any occupation, to make an investigation of the
wages being paid to women or minors in an occupation to ascertain whether any
substantial number of women or minors in such occupation are receiving oppres­
sive and unreasonable wages. If, on the basis of information in its possession with
or without a special investigation, the department is of the opinion that any sub­
stantial number of women or minors in any occupation or occupations are receiving
oppressive and unreasonable wages the director shall appoint a wage board to
report upon the establishment of minimum fair wage rates for such women or
minors in such occupation or occupations.
S e c . 6. W a g e b o a r d s ; m e m b e r s h i p , etc . — 1. A wage board shall be composed of
not more than two representatives of the employers in any occupation or occupa­
tions, an equal number of representatives of the employees in such occupation or
occupations and of one disinterested person representing the public, who shall be
designated as chairman. The director shall appoint the members of such wage
board, the representatives of the employers and employees to be selected so far as
practicable from nominations submitted by employers and employees in such
occupation or occupations. A majority of the members of such wage board shall
constitute a quorum and the recommendations or report of such wage board shall
require a vote of not less than a majority of all its members. Members of a wage
board shall serve without pay, but may be reimbursed for necessary traveling
expenses. The department shall make and establish from time to time rules and
regulations governing the selection of a wage board and its mode of procedure not
inconsistent with this act.
2.
A wage board shall have power to administer oaths and to require by subpena
the attendance and testimony of witnesses, the production of all books, records,
and other evidence relative to any matters under investigation. Such subpena s
shall be signed and issued by a member of the wage board and may be served
by any person of full age. Any circuit court or judge thereof in term time or
vacation upon application of any member of a wage board may, in his discretion,


https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis

308

MONTHLY LABOR R E V IE W

compel the attendance of witnesses and the giving of testimony and the produc­
tion of books, records, and other evidence by attachment for contempt or other­
wise in the same manner as production of evidence may be compelled before the
court. A wage board shall have power to cause depositions of witnesses residing
within or without the State to be taken in the manner prescribed for like depo­
sitions in civil actions in the circuit court.
3. The department shall present to a wage board promptly upon its organi­
zation all the evidence and information in its possession relating to the wages of
women and minor workers in the occupation or occupations for which the wage
board was appointed and all other information which the department deems
relevant to the establishment of a minimum fair wage for such women and minors,
and shall cause to be brought before the committee any witnesses deemed material.
A wage board may summon other witnesses or call upon the department to
furnish additional information to aid it in its deliberation.
4. Within 60 days of its organization a wage board shall submit a report
including its recommendations as to minimum fair wage standards for the women
or minors in the occupation or occupations the wage standards of which the wage
board was appointed to investigate. If its report is not submitted within such
time the department may constitute a new wage board.
5. A wage board may differentiate and classify employments in any occupation
according to the nature of the service rendered and recommend appropriate
minimum fair rates for different employments. A wage board may also recom­
mend minimum fair wage rates varying with localities if in the judgment of the
wage board conditions make such local differentiation proper and do not effect
an unreasonable discrimination against any locality.
6. A wage board may recommend a suitable scale of rates for ^learners and
apprentices in any occupation or occupations, which scale of learners’ and appren­
tices’ rates may be less than the regular minimum fair wage rates recommended for
experienced women or minor workers in such occupation or occupations.
S e c . 7. R e p o r t o f w a g e b o a r d .— A report from a wage board shall be submitted
to the department which shall within 10 days accept or reject such report. If
the report is rejected the department shall resubmit the matter to the same wage
board or to a new wage board with a statement of the reasons for the resubmis­
sion. If the report is accepted it shall be published together wdth such proposed
administrative regulations as the department may deem appropriate to imple­
ment or supplement the report of the wage board and to safeguard the minimum
fair wage standard to be established, and notice shall be given of a public hearing
to be held by the department not sooner than 15 nor more than 30 days after
such publication at which all persons in favor of or opposed to the recommenda­
tions contained in such report or in such proposed regulations may be heard.
S e c . 8. A c t i o n o n r e p o r t o f w a g e b o a r d .— Within 10 days after such hearing the
department shall approve or disapprove the report of the wage board. If the
report is disapproved the department may resubmit the matter to the same wage
board or to a new wage board. If the report is approved the department shall
make a directory order which shall define minimum fair wage rates in the occu­
pation or occupations as recommended in the report of the wage board and which
shall include such proposed administrative regulations deemed appropriate to
implement or supplement the report of the wage board and to safeguard the
minimum fair wage standards established. Such administrative regulations may
include among other things, regulations defining and governing learners and
apprentices, their rates, number, proportion or length of service, piece rates or
their relation to time rates, overtime or part-time rates, bonuses or special pay
for special or extra work, deductions for board, lodging, apparel or other items
or services supplied by the employer and other special conditions or circum­
stances; and in view of the diversities and complexities of different occupations
and the dangers of evasion and nullification, the department may provide in
such regulations without departing from the basic minimum rates recommended
by the wage board such modifications or reductions of or additions to such rates
in or for such special cases or classes of cases as those herein enumerated as the
department may find appropriate to safeguard the basic minimum rates estab­
lished.
S e c . 9. S p e c i a l l ic e n s e s .— For any occupation for which m inim um fair wage
rates have been established the departm ent m a y cause to be issued to a w oman
or minor, including a learner or apprentice, wdiose earning capacity is impaired
by age or physical or m ental deficiency or in ju ry, a special license authorizing
em ploym ent at such rates less than such m in im u m fair wage rates and for such
period of tim e as shall be fixed and stated in the license.


https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis

MINIMUM W AGE

309

Sec . 10. N o n o b s e r v a n c e o f o r d e r s ; p r o c e d u r e .— If the department has reason to
believe that any employer is not observing the provisions of any order made by
it under section 8 of this act the department may, on 15 days’ notice summon
such employer to appear before it to show cause why the name of such employer
should not be published as having failed to observe the provisions of such order.
After such hearing and the finding of nonobservance, the department may cause
to be published in a newspaper or newspapers circulating within the State of
Illinois or in such other manner as may be deemed appropriate, the name of any
such employer or employers as having failed in the respects stated to observe
the provisions of the directory order. Neither the department nor any author­
ized representative thereof, nor any newspaper publisher, proprietor, editor, nor
employee thereof shall be liable to an action for damages for publishing the
name of any employer as provided for in this act, unless guilty of some willful
misrepresentation.
S e c . 11. P o w e r to m a k e m a n d a to r y o r d e r ; h e a r i n g .— If at any time after a
directory minimum fair wage order has been in effect for 9 months the depart­
ment is of the opinion that the persistent nonobservance of such order by one or
more employers is a threat to the maintenance of fair minimum wage standards
in any occupation or occupations, it may give notice of intention to make such
order mandatory and of a public hearing, to be held not sooner than 15 nor more
than 30 days after such publication at which all persons in favor of or opposed to a
mandatory order may be heard. After such hearing the department, if it ad­
heres to its opinion, may make the previous directory order or any part thereof
mandatory and so publish it.
S e c . 12. M o d i f i c a t i o n o f w a g e o r d e r .— At any time after a minimum fair wage
order has been in effect for 1 year or more, whether during such period it has been
directory or mandatory, the department may on its own motion and shall on
petition" of 50 or more* residents of any county in which women or minors are
employed in any occupation reconsider the minimum fair wage rates set therein
and reconvene the same wage board or appoint a new wage board to recommend
whether or not the rate or rates contained in such order should be modified.
The report of such wage board shall be dealt with in the manner prescribed in
sections 7 and 8 of this act provided that if the order under reconsideration has
theretofore been made mandatory in whole or in part then the department in
making any new order or confirming any old order shall have power to declare to
what extent such order shall be directory and to what extent mandatory.
S e c . 13. M o d i f i c a t i o n o f a d m i n i s t r a t i o n r e g u l a t io n s .— The department may at
any time and from time to time propose such modifications of or additions to
any administrative regulations included in any directory o r mandatory order
without reference to a wage board, as it may deem appropriate to effectuate the
purposes of this act, provided such proposed modifications or additions could
legally have been included in the original order, and notice shall be given of a
public hearing to be held by the department not less than 15 days after such
publication at which all persons in favor of or opposed to such proposed modifi­
cation or additions may be heard. After such hearing the department may make
an order putting into effect such proposed modifications of or additions to the
administrative regulations as it deems appropriate, and if the order of which the
administrative regulations form a part has theretofore been made mandatory
in whole or in part then the department in making any new order shall have the
power to declare to what extent such order shall be directory and to what extent
mandatory.
S e c . 14. R ig h t o f r e v i e w .— All questions of fact arising under this act except as
otherwise herein provided shall be decided by the department and there shall be no
appeal from its decision on any such question of fact, but there shall be a right of
review by the courts as provided in section 19 of the “ workmen’s compensation
a ct” , approved June 28, 1913, as amended, from any ruling or holding on a ques­
tion of law included or embodied in any decision or order of the department.
S e c . 15. E m p l o y e r s ’ r e c o r d .— Every employer of women and minor workers
shall keep a true and accurate record of the hours worked by each and the wages
paid by him to each and shall furnish to the department upon demand a sworn
statement of the same. Such records shall be open to inspection by the depart­
ment at any reasonable time. Every employer subject to a minimum fair wage
order, whether directory or mandatory, shall keep a copy of such order posted
in a conspicuous place in every room in which women or minors are employed.
Employers shall be furnished copies of orders on request without charge.
S e c . 16. P e n a l t i e s .— Any employer and his agent, or the officer or agent of
any corporation, who discharges or in any other manner discriminates against
2404°— 33-------5


https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis

310

MONTHLY LABOR R E V IE W

any employee because such employee has served or is about to serve on a wage
board or has testified or is about to testify before any wage board or in any
other investigation or proceeding under or related to this act or because such
employer believes that said employee may serve on any wage board or may testify
before any wage board or in any investigation or proceeding under this act shall
be guilty of a misdemeanor and upon conviction be punished by a fine of not
less than $50 nor more than $200.
2. Any employer or the officer or agent of any corporation who pays or agrees
to pay to any woman or minor employee less than the rates applicable to such
woman or minor under a mandatory minimum fair wage order shall be guilty
of a misdemeanor and upon conviction be punished by a fine of not less than
$50 nor more than $200 or by imprisonment of not less than 10 nor more than
90 days or by both such fine and imprisonment, and each week in any day of
which such employee is paid less than the rate applicable to him under a man­
datory minimum fair wage order and each employee so paid less shall constitute
a separate offense.
3. Any employer or the officer or agent of any corporation who fails to keep the
records required under this act or to furnish such records to the department upon
request shall be guilty of a misdemeanor and upon conviction be punished by a
fine of not less than $25 nor more than $100 and each day of such failure to keep
the records requested under this act or to furnish same to the department shall
constitute a separate offense.
S e c . 17. R e c o v e r y o f w a g e s ; c iv il a c t i o n .— If any woman or minor worker is
paid by his employer less than the minimum fair wage to which he is entitled under
or by virtue of a mandatory minimum fair wage order he may recover in a civil
action the full amount of such minimum wage less any amount actually paid to
him by the employer together with costs and such reasonable attorney’s fees as
may be allowed by the court, and any agreement between him and his employer
to work for less than such mandatory minimum fair wage shall be no defense to
such action. At the request of any woman or minor worker paid less than the
minimum wage to which he was entitled under a mandatory order the depart­
ment may take an assignment of such wage claim in trust for the assigning em­
ployee and may bring any legal action necessary to collect such claim, and the
employer shall be required to pay the costs and such reasonable attorney’s fees
as may be allowed by the court.
S e c . 18. C o n s t r u c t i o n .— If any provisions of this act or the application thereof
to any person or circumstance is held invalid the remainder of the act and the
application of such provision to other persons or circumstances shall not be
affected thereby.
S e c . 19. D u r a t i o n o f a ct .— This act shall remain in effect until July 1, 1935.

Adjustment of Living Wage in New South Wales

N 1932 the New South Wales Legislature adopted an amendment
to the State arbitration act, making it compulsory upon the indus­
trial commission to adjust the basic wage every 6 months in accord­
ance with the variations in the cost of living, the adjustment to be
made and published within 28 days from the end of March and Sep­
tember. (See Monthly Labor Review, April 1933, p. 794.) In
accordance with this amendment the industrial commission, under
date of April 11,1933, reduced the living wage of adult male employees
by Is. 6d. and of adult female employees by Is. a week. The new
rates, published in the New South Wales Industrial Gazette of April
30, 1933 (p. 595), are for male employees £3 8s. 6d. and for females
£1 17s. a week.

I

Decision as to Basic Wage in Queensland

N THE latter part of 1932 the Queensland Employers’ Federation
applied to the Industrial Court for a revision of the basic wage
seeking a reduction from £3 14s. to £3 4s. a week in the case of adult

I


https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis

MINIMUM W AGE

311

male employees, with proportionate decreases for other classes of
workers. The decision, rendered March 1, 1933, was against any
reduction, the reasons for refusing the change being given at some
length. The decision is given in full in the Queensland Industrial
Gazette in its issue for March 25, 1933.
Method of Fixing the Basic Wage
S i n c e 1921, when a basic wage was first determined for Queensland,
the court, the decision declares, in fixing the wage has been guided
by three main considerations: Interstate competition, productivity,
and unemployment— the cost-of-living index being used as a kind of
check upon the results thus obtained. The decision treats of these
three factors consecutively. As to competition, New South Wales
has been the State principally considered, the basic wages of the two
States never having differed by more than 2s. 6d. a week, except during
the years 1930-32. During this time the New South Wales court was
not fully constituted and ceased to function in regard to the basic
wage, while the Queensland court, hoping to reduce unemployment,
made three successive reductions. At the beginning of 1933 the basic
wage of Queensland (£3 14s.) was higher than that of New South
Wales (£3 10s. 6d.). In the latter State, however, the employer had
to meet the added cost of the child-endowment plan, so that the basic
wage, considered as a charge on industry, might be taken as £3 11s. 6d.
a week. This difference did not seem to the court sufficient to call
for a reduction in the Queensland wage.

Productivity
T h e index figure for the value of production per worker in 1921 is
given as 1538, and for the years 1930-31 as 1339, a drop of 12.94 per­
cent. During this period the basic wage was reduced from £4 5s. to
£3 14s., which is also a drop of 12.94 percent, so it could not be said
that a further decrease in the wage would be warranted by the de­
crease in productivity. The court considered that too many other
factors come into play during a decade to make such a long-term
comparison satisfactory, but saw no reason for holding that a shorter
period shows different results.
When we compare the value of production per head in 1928-29, during the
whole of which period the basic wage was £ 4 5s., with the value of production per
head for 1930-31, during which period the basic wage receded to the present rate
of £ 3 14s., we find that the percentage drop in values was less than the drop in
wages. W e have no figures showing the value of production for 1931-32 or a
later period; but we have no reason for concluding that the percentage drop in
values has overtaken or exceeds the drop in wages.
W e are unable to say, then, that a reduction of the basic wage is warranted
by reduced productivity.

Effect of Wage Reductions on Unemployment
I n t h e present emergency, the court holds, wage reductions are the
most important factor of the three, but no case seems to have been
made out for the theory that reducing wages will lessen unemploy­
ment. For the quarter ending December 31, 1932, the percentage of


https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis

312

MONTHLY LABOR R E V IE W

unemployment in each Australian State, according to trade-union
returns, stood as follows:
Percent

Percent

New South Wales. _ 31.9
Victoria__________ 25. 2
Queensland_______ 17. 9

South Australia___________ 32. 2
Western Australia_________28. 9
Tasmania_______________ 28. 3

According to these figures, while the basic wage in Queensland is
the highest in the Commonwealth, the rate of unemployment in that
State is considerably lower than that of any other State, a fact which
seems to the court to suggest strongly that lowering wages does not
necessarily increase employment. Moreover, the experiment has
been tried more than once, with unsatisfactory results.
Since 1930 the Queensland basic wage has been reduced on three occasions
by amounts aggregating 11s. in the hope that unemployment would be reduced
thereby. As to the effect of the first two of these reductions, the director of the
bureau of economics and statistics * * * said:
“ Unfortunately, the reductions that have been made in minimum wage rates
have not had any effect in reducing unemployment.”

The director was not asked to make any similar report upon the
effect of the third reduction, but the table showing the number of
registered unemployed month by month since the first reduction in
the basic wage in July 1930 “ is convincing proof that those reductions
have not increased the amount of employment.”
Cost-of-Living Reduction
T h e employers’ claim, the court states, is based on the argument
that since the figures of the Commonwealth statistician show a reduc­
tion in the cost of living, there should be a corresponding reduction
in the basic wage. The cost-of-living index, however, has hitherto
been used simply as a check on the results obtained from a considera­
tion of the other factors mentioned, and to take it now as the sole
ground for a change in basic wage rates would be to alter fundamentally
the method consistently followed by the court in the past. A further
objection is found in the fact that the method of measuring retail
prices has been changed recently, and the cost of living is not now
based upon the same commodities in the same amounts as it was when
the basic wage was established.

Decision

A c o n s id e r a t io n o f a ll t h e s e m a t t e r s , t h e r e fo r e , le d t h e c o u r t t o
th e c o n c lu s io n t h a t n o s u ffic ie n t c a u s e h a d b e e n s h o w n fo r a c h a n g e
in t h e b a s ic w a g e , a n d t h e e m p lo y e r s ’ a p p lic a t io n w a s d is m is s e d .


https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis

WORKMEN’S COMPENSATION
Employer’s Violation of Safety Order Held to Warrant
Additional Compensation

A

N EM PLO YEE’S serious and willful misconduct in failing to
l provide handholds, as required by the safety order of the State
industrial accident commission, on a ladder to the roof of a belt
house of an oil derrick was held to be sufficient warrant for an award
of additional compensation to an injured employee, under the Cali­
fornia workmen’s _compensation law. {Ethel D. Co. v. Industrial
Accident Commission et al., 21 Pac. (2d) 601.)
The facts in the case show that J. L. Johnston was injured while
engaged in his employment with the Ethel D. Co., a corporation
engaged in the business of producing oil. He had completed his task
of oiling the walking beam, which was above the belt-house roof, and
started to descend the ladder used in going from the floor of the
derrick to the roof of the belt house. In descending the ladder he
placed his right foot on the top rung of the ladder, the left foot being
on the belt-house roof, and prepared to descend with his back to the
ladder as he would in descending steps. His right foot slipped from
the first rung of the ladder and he fell some 18 feet to the derrick floor,
sustaining the injuries in question.
He was awarded compensation in the sum of $1,324.70, to be paid
by the insurance carrier, and an additional award of $662.35 was
made, based on a finding of serious and willful misconduct on the
part of the oil company in its failure to place handholds at the top
of the ladder. This award was based upon the provisions of section
6 (b) of the California workmen’s compensation act (Stat. 1917, p. 834
(as amended 1929, p. 430)), which provides that—Where the employee is injured by reason of the serious and willful misconduct
of the employer * * * or if a corporation, on the part of an executive or
managing officer or general superintendent thereof, the amount of compensation
otherwise recoverable for injury or death, as hereinafter provided, shall be
increased one half.

Subdivision (f) of the General Petroleum Industry Safety Order
1618 provides that “ secure handholds shall be provided at the top of
the ladder.” The violation of this safety order was considered by
the industrial accident commission as constituting serious and willful
misconduct on the part of the employer, and the additional award was
made. Action was instituted in the District Court of Appeal, Fourth
District, California, to review the findings of the commission regarding
the additional award. It was contended that such findings were
lacking in evidentiary support and that such conduct did not amount
to serious and willful misconduct. However, the court reviewed the
facts and held that—
The continued presence upon and about the derrick of so slippery a substance
as crude oil would seem to point unmistakably to the necessity of strict compli-


https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis

313

314

MONTHLY LABOR R E V IEW

ance with the provisions of the commission’s Safety Order 1618, and to suggest
to the person in charge of the oil well that a ladder utilized by workmen should
be provided with secure handholds rather than with such makeshift supports as
the end of a bolt or an upright post supporting a railing. At all events, the
question of whether, under the circumstances, the employer should have known
that the failure to provide more secure and more readily accessible handholds
would be so likely to jeopardize the safety of employees as to evince a reckless
disregard for their safety and a willingness to inflict injury, was a question
of fact to be determined by the referee to whom the evidence in the case was
submitted.
During tne course of the hearing it was suggested by petitioner’s counsel that
the referee visit the scene of the accident and make an inspection of the premises.
This was accordingly done. What the referee observed on this visit was
evidence in the case.

It was further contended, that the failure to provide^ handholds
was not the proximate cause of the injury. The court said that this
contention was not warranted by the evidence. The proximate cause,
according to the company, was the negligent manner in which John­
ston attempted to descend the ladder. One of the referees visiting
the scene of the accident testified that he descended the ladder in
the same manner Johnston had used, because he would have been
afraid to do so in any other manner. The court also said that—
* * * If it be assumed that Johnston was negligent in attempting to
descend the ladder facing outward, it does not necessarily follow that his negli­
gence in this regard was the proximate cause of the injuries which he sustained.
The fact still remains that the ladder was not equipped with secure handholds
and that the post and projecting bolt were not so readily accessible to him as to
afford adequate security for his descent under the circumstances narrated.

Other objections were also rejected by the court and the finding of
the commission granting an additional award, was affirmed, Mr. Jus­
tice Barnard dissenting.

Bite by Infected Wood Tick Held Compensable

TRAVELING salesman, Charles A. Roe, employed by the Boise
Grocery Co., had a specified territory over which he traveled at
regular intervals, either during the day or at night, seeing his custom­
ers whenever it was most convenient to them. In the spring, part of
his territory was infested with wood ticks infected with the virus which
causes Rocky Mountain spotted fever.
On March 21, 1932, while en route to Crane, Oreg., his car stuck in
the mud and Roe secured the aid of another traveling salesman driving
just ahead of him, to get the car out of the mud hole. They worked
until late in the night, gathering rocks in the sage brush at the road­
side and placing them under the wheels of the car. The men spent
the rest of the night sleeping in their cars, and the car was not moved
until 11 o ’clock the next morning.
On March 27, 1932, a wood tick was found imbedded in Roe’s
right leg and there was inflammation and an appearance of infection
where the tick was found.
Roe continued to travel over the territory and on March 31 found a
tick bite on his left shoulder. He was taken sick while at Ontario,
Oreg., and when he returned to Boise, April 5, to enter a hospital it
was found that he had contracted Rocky Mountain spotted fever,
and 11 days later he died.

A


https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis

W O R K M E N ’S COMPENSATION

315

The widow, Della F. Roe, filed an application for an award under
the Idaho workmen’s compensation law and the industrial accident
board rendered a decision in her favor. The case was appealed to the
Supreme Court of Idaho, where the award of the board, affirmed by
the district court of Ada County, was upheld. It was contended
that the salesman did not suffer an accident arising out of and in
the course of his employment. The court, however, concluded that
there was sufficient evidence to warrant the finding that this was
“ an accident” , and the court said that “ it is not necessary to exclude
the possibility, or even some probability, that another cause or reason
may have been the true cause or reason for the damage ” ; the findings
of the board, taken and considered as a whole, were sufficient to sup­
port the award and judgment. In affirming the award, the court
said (Roe v. Boise Grocery Co. et al., 21 Pac. (2d) 910):
The duties of the deceased required him to make frequent regular trips over
the highways, stop at the hotels and visit his customers both to sell and collect;
thus the highways he traveled, the hotels he stopped at, and the stores he visited
became and. were his workshop; they were the places where he constantly spent
his time and worked for his employer. That cannot be said of any member of
the public not performing similar duties nor similarly employed. Consequently,
the deceased was exposed to the danger of being bitten by an infected wood tick
in a greater degree than those who lived in the wood-tick territory and traveled
over the highways traversing it. We think that the rule applied to the servant
who, in the course of the master’s business, passes along a public street, and sus­
tains an accident by reason of the risks incidental to the streets, should also be
applied to a salesman traveling by automobile over the public highways, who
sustains an accident by reason of the risks incidental to the highways.

Convict Working for County Held Not a County Employee

PRISONER injured while serving a sentence in the county jail
is not an employee of the county and is not entitled to com­
pensation under the Oklahoma workmen’s compensation law. (.Mur­
ray County et al. v. Hood et al., 21 Pac. (2d) 754.)
In October 1930 R. M. Hood was convicted by the county court of
Murray County, Okla., and sentenced to serve a term of 90 days in
the county jail and pay a fine of $50. On December 13, as no further
legal action was taken, he was committed to the county jail.
While doing painting work on the jail on February 7, 1931, he fell
from a ladder and sustained serious injuries. It appeared that, some
time prior to the injury, one of the county commissioners had agreed
with Hood that he would be allowed $1.50 per day to be applied on
his fine if he would perform the work in painting the jail and in addi­
tion thereto $1.50 per day would be allowed his family out of the
county charity fund.
Soon after receiving the injury, Hood filed an application for an
award under the Oklahoma compensation law. He contended that
he was not a prisoner at the time of the injury as he was allowed to
go home at night when he chose; he did, however, have a bed in a cell
at the jail and sometimes remained there overnight. The State
industrial commission awarded Hood compensation and the case was
appealed to the Supreme Court of Oklahoma.
As to whether Hood was a prisoner at the time he was injured, the
court said that “ the most liberal interpretation to be given Hood’s
testimony is that he was allowed privileges which may not always be

A


https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis

316

MONTHLY LABOR R E V IE W

given persons serving a jail sentence on conviction of a violation of
law. The fact that he was made a trusty, or that he was given privi­
leges, did not change his legal status as a prisoner.”
The court then quoted sections from the Oklahoma statutes govern­
ing the employment of prisoners and concluded by saying that—
It seems obvious from the reading of the foregoing sections of the statutes that
a person who has been delivered to a sheriff of the county by commitment issued
in pursuance of a judgment and sentence for conviction of a crime, is by law legally
at the disposal of the county commissioners for employment in such work as is
enumerated in the statutes, which include “ any public work in which the county
has an interest.” It would further appear that the board of county commis­
sioners in such circumstances have no authority to agree to pay to such convict
any sums of money out of public funds for such work, as his services are already
at the disposal of the county by operation of law. No such payments can be
legally made except upon express authority of statute. No siich authority of
law has been cited. It will thus be seen that the parties were attempting to
enter into a contract which was prohibited by law.

The court therefore reversed the award of the industrial commis­
sion and held that Hood was not an “ employee” within the meaning
of that term as used in the Oklahoma workmen’s compensation law.

Treaty Provisions Held Controlling When in Conflict W ith
Compensation Law

N APPLYING the provisions of a State workmen’s compensation
statute, due significance must be given to treaties between the
United States and foreign nations. ( Urbus v. State Compensation
Commissioner et al., 169 S.E. 164.)
On January 14, 1932, Andy Urbus, a citizen of Serbia (now a part
of Yugoslavia) was killed while working in the Davis Coal & Coke
Co.’s mines in West Virginia. The compensation commissioner was
duly notified of the fatality on January 21, 1932, and was informed
that Urbus was an Austrian and that Iris wife_resided in “ the old
country.” No action was taken by the commissioner until March
31, when he received a letter from the consul of Yugoslavia at Pitts­
burgh, stating that he had just heard of Urbus’ death and requesting
the necessary forms for the widow’s use in filing a claim for compen­
sation. These forms were sent through the consul to the widow in
Yugoslavia who executed them on June 3, 1932, and were received by
the commissioner on August 5, 1932. In October the commissioner
entered an award denying compensation on the ground that the
application was not filed within 6 months after the death of the
employee as was required by the West Virginia compensation act
(Code, 1931, sec. 23-4-15).
This decision of the commissioner was appealed to the Supreme
Court of Appeals of West Virginia. It was contended that such a
ruling disregarded the provisions of a treaty between the United
States and Yugoslavia which provided that—

I

In the case of the death of any citizen of the United States in Serbia, or a
Serbian subject in the United States, without having any known heirs or testa­
mentary executors by him appointed, the competent local authorities shall give
information of the circumstance to the consuls or consular agents of the nation
to which the deceased belongs, in order that the necessary information may be
immediately forwarded to the parties interested.


https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis

317

W O R K M E N ’S COMPENSATION

After reviewing the facts in the case the court pointed out that the
Constitution made the provisions of treaties a part of the supreme law
of the land, and that the judges of every State were bound by them.
The case of Papadaki v. Commissioner (160 S.E. 224) was cited in
which case the court had lifted the statutory bar of 6 months “ because
the employer had failed ^to forward application forms to the foreign
claimant and the commissioner had failed to communicate directly
with her or advise the consular officer concerning the death of her
husband.” In concluding the opinion reversing the ruling of the
commissioner, the court said:
While the report of the fatality to the commissioner on January 21, 1932, stated
that Urbus was an Austrian, the commissioner took no steps whatever to investi­
gate that statement. If he had done so and a diligent investigation had failed
to disclose that Urbus was a Serb, the situation would be somewhat different. If
the inaction of the commissioner for 2 months can be condoned, his passivity
for the entire 6 months could as well be overlooked, which would destroy the effect
of the treaty. This cannot be done. It was the commissioner’s duty under our
statutes as well as under the Serbian treaty to take prompt action. We are
therefore of opinion that the interval in which he was inactive should not be in­
cluded in the statutory period * * *.

Workmen’s Compensation in Great Britain During 1931

HE Home Department of Great Britain has recently issued a
report covering the statistics of accidents and compensation
proceedings during 1931 under the acts governing workmen’s com­
pensation and employers’ liability, so far as they relate to seven great
industry groups—mines, quarries, railways, factories, docks, con­
struction work, and shipping. The data on which the report is
based were secured from 131,758 employers, and account for 75.6
percent of the total cases compensated and for 77.4 percent of the
total compensation paid during the year. The following table shows
for each year from 1922 to 1931, the average number of workers
employed throughout the year in these groups, with the number
of compensation cases and the division of these between fatal and
nonfatal cases:

T

T

1 . — N U M B E R OP E M P L O Y E E S A N D OF C O M P E N S A T IO N CASES (F A T A L A N D
N O N F A T A L ) IN S E V E N IN D U S T R Y G R O U PS IN G R E A T B R IT A IN , 1922 T O 1931

able

Year
1922____________ ________ ___
1923_______________________
1924_______________________
1925_________________________
1926____________________
1927_______________
1928______________
1929_____________
1930_____________
1931___

_______

Number of
employees
7, 205, 609
7,342, 311
7, 512, 359
7, 541, 014
7,001, 795
7,403, 222
7,433, 660
7,450,112
7,181, 516
6,913, 974

Number of compensation cases
Fatal
2,489
2, 657
2,878
3,030
2,345
2,567
2,735
2,819
2, 621
2,315

Nonfatal
390, 423
477, 378
487, 442
473, 055
368, 563
455, 852
461, 485
478, 602
458, 509
396, 571

Total
392, 912
480, 035
490, 320
476, 085
370, 908
458, 419
464, 220
481, 421
461,130
398, 886

From this it appears that the average number of workers showed
but slight variation during the decade, reaching its lowest point in
1931, when it was smaller by 8.3 percent than in 1925. The number
of accidents showed a much greater variation, ranging from 490,329
in 1924 to 370,908 in 1926, the year of the prolonged stoppage in the

https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis

318

MONTHLY LABOR R E V IE W

coal industry, a decrease of 24.4 percent. Fatal accidents, however,
reached the lowest figure for the decade in 1931, when they numbered
2,315, the previous low point having been 2,345 in 1926. Nonfatal
accidents, on the contrary, showed a general tendency to increase,
1926 having been the only year in which they fell below the figure
for 1922. The amounts paid in compensation have naturally varied
with the varying rates of accidents and also with changes in the com­
pensation scales.
In 1931 the average amount of compensation in cases of death was £287
[$1,300]; 1 in cases of disablement the average amount (including cases settled by
payment of a lump sum) was £13 12s. [$61.61]. The average amount paid in
lump sums was £95 11s. [$432.85], while the average amount paid in weekly pay­
ments (including weekly pavments made prior to settlement bv a lump sum) was
£9 9s. [$42.81].
These figures may be compared with the corresponding figures for the pre-war
year 1913 and for the year 1923; that is, the year previous to the commencement
of the workmen’s compensation act, 1923, which introduced considerable changes
in the scales of compensation. In 1913 the average payment in cases of death was
£159 and of disablement £5 16s., whilst in 1923 the corresponding figures were
£222 and £13 14s.

Fatal cases accounted for 11 percent of the total amount paid in
compensation in 1931. The percentage which compensation for fatal
accidents formed of the total paid was for shipping, 23.9; for factories,
8.9; for docks, 8.2; for mines, 10.5; for quarries, 14.2; for construc­
tion work, 12.5; and for railways, 24.2.
The number of employees, the number of compensation cases, and
the amount paid in compensation are shown for each of the seven
industry groups in the following table:
T

able

2 —N U M B E R OF E M P L O Y E E S A N D N U M B E R A N D C OST OF C O M P E N S A T IO N
CASES IN 1931, IN G R E A T B R IT A IN , B Y IN D U S T R Y G R O U PS

[Conversions into United States currency on basis of pound at par=$4.8665; average exchange rate for
1931 = $4.53]
Amount of compensation paid
Industry group

Shipping_______________
Factories_______________
D ocks______ _ ----------M ines__________________
Quarries------ _ - -------Construction w ork_____
Railways .
-

Number of
employees

179, 241
4,993, 641
105, 875
862, 314
72, 369
236, 777
463,487

Number of
compensation
cases

7,716
155,142
10, 718
188,712
6, 596
11,742
18, 260

United Sta( es currency
English
currency
£204, 779
2,092,476
287, 582
2,941,189
98,885
191, 726
250, 670

At par

At exchange
rate

$996, 557
10,183,034
1, 399, 518
14,313, 296
481, 224
933, 035
1, 219, 886

$927, 649
9,478,916
1, 302, 746
13,323, 586
447, 949
868, 519
1,135, 535

These figures represent only the actual amount paid to workers or
their dependents. The total cost of compensation includes the ad­
ministrative expenses and medical and legal costs of employers, insur­
ance companies, and mutual indemnity associations, the amounts
placed in reserve, and the profits earned by the insurance companies.
It is estimated that if all charges and expenses were taken into
account “ the total amount paid in the seven great industries in 1931
in respect of workmen’s compensation would amount to rather more
than £7,500,000 [$33,975,000].” The relative burden upon the
various industries varies considerably.
1 Conversions into United States currency on basis of pound at 1931 exchange rate=$4.53.


https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis

319

W O R K M E N ’S COMPENSATION

In the coal-mining industry the charge arising under the act calculated simply
on the basis of the compensation paid, amounted in 1931 to about 3.2d. per ton
of coal raised, as compared with 2.8d. in 1930. Information obtained from the
railway companies indicates that in this industry the amount of compensation
paid in 1931 per £1 of wages would be 0.9d. as compared with 0.8d. in 1930. As
regards shipping, * * * it has been ascertained that of the 17,163,559 tons of
shipping covered by the returns, 1,352,255 tons was laid up for the whole of the
year; the amount of compensation paid per ton of shipping not laid up was 3.Id.
The cost of compensation for 1931 per person employed in each of the seven in­
dustries was as follows: Shipping, 22s. 10d.; factories, 8s. 5d.; docks, 54s. 4d.;
mines, 68s. 3d.; quarries, 27s. 3d.; constructional work, 16s. 2d.; and railways,
10s. lOd. The corresponding figure for all seven industries was 17s. 7d.

The following table shows for 3 years the percentage of nonfatal
cases which had lasted for specified periods:
T

able

3 — D U R A T IO N OF C O M P E N S A T IO N IN CASES OP A C C ID E N T A N D D ISE A SE IN
G R E A T B R IT A IN , 1929 TO 1931
Percent of compensated cases which lasted—
Year

Under 4 weeks

4 and under 13
weeks

13 and under 26
weeks

26 weeks and over

Accident

Disease

Accident

Disease

Accident

Disease

Accident

64. 87
64. 40
64. 09

47. 62
44. 77
43. 33

30. 01
30. 25
29. 26

34.88
35. 21
34. 68

3. 44
3.61
3. 79

5. 43
5. 90
5. 85

1.68
1.74
2.16

1929_________________
1930_________________
1931_________________

Disease
12. 07
14.12
16.14

There is a striking difference in the duration of the cases arising
from the two causes of disablement— accident and disease— the former
being usually terminated in less than 13 weeks while a considerable
proportion of the disease disablement cases last from 13 up to 26
weeks and over. The table does not include cases in which com­
pensation is terminated by the payment of a lump sum. These are
usually cases in which the sufferer is likely to be disabled for a con­
siderable period, and therefore if they were included, the proportion
of cases of long disablement would be higher than the figures shown
here indicate.
In regard to industrial diseases, the report states that compensation
was paid in the seven industry groups in 20 cases of death, to the
amount of £4,184 ($18,954), and in 19,195 disablement cases to the
amount of £612,861 ($2,776,260). The 20 fatal cases included 7 of
lead poisoning, 4 of anthrax, and 6 of epitheliomatous cancer. Min­
ing accounted for the majority of the cases of industrial disease.
Cases of miner’s nystagmus accounted for over 57 percent of the total number;
and cases of this disease together with beat hand, beat knee, beat elbow, and in­
flammation of the synovial lining of the wrist joint and tendon sheaths, numbered
17,007 or 88.5 percent of the total number. Of the remainder, 1,679 or 8.7
percent were cases of dermatitis produced by dust or liquids, 212 or 1.1 percent
were cases of lead poisoning, and 210 or 1.1 percent were cases of skin or other
ulceration or cancer. The remaining 107 cases, or 0.6 percent, included 38 cases
of various forms of industrial poisoning and 20 cases of anthrax.
There were 2,729 new cases and 8,354 continued cases of miner’s nystagmus in
1931. These figures may be compared with those for 1925, the year before the
coal stoppage, when there were 3,445 new cases and 7,890 continued cases. In
1926 and 1927 as a result of the coal stoppage there was a considerable fall in the
number of new cases; the numbers rose again during each of the three years
1928, 1929, and 1930, but in 1931 the number of 2,729 new cases showed a de­
crease of 337 on the figure for 1930.
Cases of dermatitis have increased from 270 in 1919 to 1,679 in 1931. They
occur in a great variety of industries, but chiefly among bakers and confectioners,
dye workers, French polishers, and engineers.

https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis

INDUSTRIAL DISPUTES
Strikes and Lockouts in the United States in June 1933

ATA regarding industrial disputes in the United States for June
1933 with comparable data for preceding months are presented
below. Disputes involving fewer than 6 workers and lasting less
than 1 day have been omitted.
Table 1 shows the number of disputes beginning in each year from
1927 to 1932, the number of workers involved and man-days lost for
these years and for each of the months, January 1931 to June 1933,
as well as the number of disputes in effect at the end of each
month and the number of workers involved. The number of mandays lost as given in the last column of the table refers to the esti­
mated number of working days lost by workers involved in disputes
which were in progress during the month or year specified.

D

T

1 — IN D U S T R IA L D IS P U T E S B E G IN N IN G IN A N D IN E F F E C T A T E N D OF E A C H
M O N T H , JA N U A R Y 1931 TO JU NE 1933, A N D T O T A L N U M B E R OF D IS P U T E S , W O R K E R S ,
A N D M A N -D A Y S LOST IN T H E Y E A R S 1927 TO 1932

able

Number of disputes
M onth and year

Beginning
in month
or year

In effect
at end of
month

July

________________________________

1932

1933

Ju n e1____________________________________
1 Preliminary figures subject to change.

320

https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis

37, 799, 394
31, 556,947
9,975, 213
2, 730, 368
6, 386,183
6, 462, 973

349, 434
357,145
230, 463
158,114
279, 299
242,826

734
629
903
653
894
808
1931

Num ber of workers in­ Number of
volved in disputes
man-days
lost in
disputes
In effect
Beginning
existing in
at end of
in month
month or
month
or year
year

57
52
49
73
115
90
73
79
117
77
62
50

19
29
26
39
45
47
51
36
65
45
39
21

10,150
20, 473
26, 453
27,135
28, 000
18, 795
49,434
11,019
36, 092
34, 384
13,219
4, 145

2, 905
10. 677
28,012
22, 687
15, 603
15, 223
56, 683
14, 759
37, 427
29,380
13, 690
1,318

181,169
223, 660
476, 904
770, 512
400, 509
511,926
612,864
1,157,013
493, 649
1, 052,095
355, 818
150, 064

87
56
64
89
87
69
66
85
85
47
38
35

37
34
30
44
52
46
40
38
33
23
21
12

12, 091
33,713
33, 087
19,187
44, 357
15, 858
20, 890
28,492
17, 824
10, 442
3,460
3, 425

4, 993
31,103
13, 937
21,513
49, 777
24, 138
33, 216
27, 717
7,456
2, 324
1,896
997

132,873
460, 701
736, 782
620, 866
1, 251, 455
943, 338
740, 785
754,423
566,045
147, 059
68,154
40, 492

67
63
91
72
137
122

29
32
41
46
59
87

19,616
10, 909
39,913
23, 077
49, 682
35, 258

8, 790
6, 706
12, 794
19,867
24, 821
36, 757

240,912
109,860
445, 771
535, 039
717, 063
697, 626

321

INDUSTRIAL DISPUTES

Occurrence of Disputes
T a b l e 2 gives by industrial groups, the number of strikes beginning
in April, May, and June 1933, and the number of workers directly
involved.
T able

2 .—IN D U S T R IA L D IS P U T E S B E G IN N IN G IN A P R IL , M A Y , A N D JU NE 1933
Number of disputes beginning Number of workers involved
in—
in disputes beginning in—

Industrial group

April
Auto, carriage, and wagon workers
Bakers___
__
_____ _
Barbers______________
Brewery and soft-drink workers_____
Building trades__ _ _________ _ _ _ _ _
Chauffeurs and teamsters__
___
C loth in gs . __
__ ____
Electric and gas appliance workers
Farm labor _ ________ _ _ _____
F ood workers _. _
_
___
Furniture,- _ _ _ _ . . . _ _ . . . _________
Glass workers
Hotel and restaurant workers .
. . __
Jewelry workers __
_
Laundry workers
. . . _______
Leather
_
.
_____
Longshorem en,. _
_
Lumber, timber, and mill work
_ ____
Metal trades,.
_ _____________ ____
M iners.__ . . _____________ _ __ ____ _
Motion-picture operators, actors, and
theatrical workers
__________________
Paper and paper-goods workers . .
Printing and publishing
R ubber__________________________________
Stone ._
M unicipal workers
_ __ __
Textiles.
. _____ ____ _ .
Other occupations
......... . . . .
Total ____________________ _______

M ay

April

June

1

1
2
2

2
1
1

1
7
1
20

n
2
30

3

1
3
10
3

2
•1
13

2
1
1
1
3
3
9

2
2
2

1
2
1

1
3
7
5
72

6
39
4

3

137

15
i
4
2
G
1
1
1
5
1
1
7

14

1
2
2
43
8
122

M ay

20
18
314
9
13, 290

June
285
23
200

15
2,006
1,200
1, 664
606
16,133

500

238
3, 308
75

1 720
2 085
218

195
45
3, 520

37
9
25
100
38
278
1,990

106
173
50

38
136
232

69
1,425
2, 682
500
23, 077

1,065
19,187
900
49, 682

161

50
1 200
5, 630
1G
40
1,256
5, 565

78
270
950
11,340
718
35, 258

Size and Duration of Disputes
T a b l e 3 gives the number of industrial disputes beginning in June
1933, classified by number of workers and by industrial groups.
T

able3

. —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 JU NE 1933, C L A S S IF IE D
B Y N U M B E R OF W O R K E R S A N D B Y IN D U S T R IA L G R O U P
Number of disputes beginning in June 1933 involving—

Industrial group

6 and
20 and
100 and
under 20 under 100 under 500
workers workers workers

Auto, carriage, and wagon workers .
B arbers.. ._ _
.
__
Building trades, ...........
C lothin g................ . _
_
Electric and gas appliance workers

1
___
.

1
2

1
6
1
1
2
1

500 and
under
1,000
workers

1,000 and 5,000 and
under
under
5,000
10,000
workers workers

2
1
1
6

1
2

4
1

1

1

1
1
1
1
1
1

Total _____

. . ,, , _____________


https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis

1
1
3
1
1

1

3
4
6

1
1

3

1
3

2

9

8

2
1

19
5

1
1
17
2

9

4 >|

49

1

322

MONTHLY LABOR R E V IE W

In Table 4 are shown the number of industrial disputes ending in
June 1933 by industrial groups and classified duration.
T able

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 JU NE 1933, B Y IN D U S T R IA L
G R O U PS A N D C L A S S IF IE D D U R A T IO N
Classified duration of strikes ending in
June 1933
Industrial group
One half
month or
less

Over one
half and
less than
1 month

2
1
1
3

2 and less
than 3
months

2
2

12
1
2
3

2

2
2

1
1
1

2
1
3
2

Total___________________________________________

1 month
and less
than 2
months

2
1

1

1
1
28
7

4

1

2

70

13

5

6

Conciliation Work of the Department of Labor in June 1933
B y H ugh 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 her good offices in connection with 81 labor disputes during
June 1933. These disputes affected a known total of 47,763 employees.
The table following shows the name and location of the establishment
or industry in which the dispute occurred, the nature of 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 be­
ginning and ending, and the number of workers directly and indirectly
involved.
There were 10 cases involving the law on the prevailing rate of
wages. In these cases it is not always possible to show the number
involved, due to lack of information as to total number required be­
fore completion of construction.

T


https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis

L A B O R D IS P U T E S H A N D L E D B Y C O N C IL IA T IO N S E R V IC E D U R IN G T H E M O N T H OF JU N E 1933

Workers in­
volved

Duration
Company or industry and
location

Nature of
controversy

Craftsmen concerned

Cause of dispute

Present status and terms of
settlement
Begin­
ning

Ending

D i­ Indi­
rectly rectly

General industry
Asked 15 percent increase.

Belmont Silk Co., Forty Fort, P a ----------do

Silk w ork ers...

Asked increase in wages..

W yom ing W ool Growers, Chey­ ____d o______
enne, W yo.
C ity Ice & Fuel Co., Cleveland, ____d o______
Ohio.
Corona Chandler Co., Jersey City, Threatened
strike.
N.J.
Sun Co., San Bernardino, Calif----- Lockout____
Bridge workers, Richmond, V a . . . Controversy
Frank Fehr Brewing Co., Louis­ ____d o ______
ville, K y.
Alligator Rubber Co., Akron, Strike______
Ohio.

Sheep shearers.

Wage cut.

Schneider Silk Mills, Swoyersville, Pa.
W yom ing Silk Co., West W yom ­
ing, Pa.
Geo. F. Lee Coal Co., Plymouth,
Pa.
Barbers, Greater New York.
Building, Boston, Mass.
Cherokee Spinning Co., Knox­
ville, Tenn.
Columbus Manufacturing Co.,
Columbus, Ga.
Wheatley Bros. Machine Works,
Kansas City, M o.
Globe Furniture Co., Evansville,
Ind.
Hudson Full Fashioned Hosiery
Co., Charlotte, N .C .


https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis

Strike-

Ice and fuel workers. Wages, working conditions, re­
newal of contract .
Employees......... ....... Asked increase in wages............ .

1933
Unclassified. Settled before com ­ M a y 23
missioner’s arrival.
Adjusted. Returned to work at M a y 24
former rates.
Adjusted. C om prom ised............ . June 15

Adjusted. Accepted 10 percent
cut for 1 year. Union shop.
Adjusted. Allowed 10 percent
increase.
Wages and working conditions----- Pending. Truce for 60 days______
Printers----------Bridge workers.
Working long hours-------------------- Pending__________________________
Wage scale not being paid------------ Adjusted. Scale paid (50 cents per
H od carriers.. .
hour).
Adjusted. Allowed 10 percent in­
Rubber workers.
Hours and rates.
crease for 30 days; then further
negotiations.
Adjusted. Returned
to work
Working conditions____
Lockou t----- Weavers.
without change.
Adjusted. Allowed 9 percent in­
Strike-----. . . ____ d o ...
Asked increase in wages.
crease.
Adjusted. Returned; will follow
do.
Lay-off of m en_________
Miners.
existing agreement.
Adjusted.
Satisfactory com ­
Working conditions____
.do.
Barbers
promise.
Adjusted.
Referred
to arbitra­
do.
Bricklayers,
iron­ Jurisdiction of calking
tion, and decision of commis­
workers.
sioner accepted.
Adjusted. Returned to work at
Wages____ _______ ____________
compromise rates.
___ do______
Wages and working conditions
Adjusted. Allowed 10 percent in­
crease.
Working conditions____________
Unclassified. Settled before com ­
missioner’s arrival.
.. . d o ______ Furniture workers . . Low wages and conditions______
Adjusted. Returned; established
a shop committee.
do______ Hosiery workers. _ Working conditions; alleged dis­ Adjusted. A m icably adjusted by
crimination.
grievance committee.

1933
M ay 25

1,000

M ay 31

200

June 30

500

June

2

June

7

285

June

5

June 15

12

150

M a y 29
M a y 26

June

6

1, 500
11

250

M ay 27

June

9

110

14

M a y 22

June

3

125

M ay 31

130

June 28

300

M a y 16

June

8

600

June

June 13

50

June

6

1

June 15

July

1

650

June

5

June 10

1,100

June

1

June

INDUSTRIAL DISPUTES

Textile workers.

Poe Mill, Greenville, S .C ________

___

9

20

M ay 26

June 16

700

100

June 10

June 27

90

481

CO

IO

CO

L A B O R D IS P U T E S H A N D L E D B Y C O N C IL IA T IO N S E R V IC E D U R IN G T H E M O N T H OF JU NE 1933— Continued

CO

IO

Workers in­
volved

Duration
Company or industry and
location

Craftsmen concerned

W orking conditions; alleged dis­
crimination.
Wage cuts------- -------- ----------------Controversy
Strike.-.

E m p lo y e e s ._____ _ W orking conditions_____________
Textile workers____ Protest low wages_______________

Lockout___

Handbag workers. _. Wages and conditions-----------------

Strike ---

Derrick erectors____

Asked closed shop______________

Textile workers____

W orking conditions_____________
Wages, hours, etc_______________

School building, Turtle Creek, Pa.
Stylecraft Handbag Co., Bridge­
port, Conn.
Building derricks, Huntington
Beach, Calif.
Shoe workers, Salisbury, N .H ____
Dorman Mills, Parsons, W . V a____
Hercules W oven Label Co., M id ­
vale, N.J.
Japanese farmers, Los Angeles,
Calif.
Phillips Jones Shirt Co., Barnesboro, Pa.
Barbers, Portland, Oreg____ _____
Nino Silk Co., Exeter, PaMiners, Nanticoke, Pa___
Suitt Bros. Co., Cambridge, Ohio.

W ages__________________________

___ d o______

__

do
-d o.

__ Vegetable and berry
pickers.
Shirt workers .

.d o .

Barbers -

_do.
_do_

Silk workers.
Miners______

do.

Upholsterers.

Building, Schenley, Pa__________ Controversy
Washington Brewing Co., Colum ­ Strike______
bus, Ohio.
Chamberlain Metal Weather Strip Controversy
Co., South Bend, Ind.
Hollinger Shirt Co., Port Chester, Strike.
N .Y .
S and S Co., Philipsburg, P a______ Controversy


https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis

Cause of dispute

Ironworkers.
Building___
M etal workers.
Shirt workers.
do.

Present status and terms of
settlement

Begin­
ning

Ending

Indi­
D i­
rectly rectly

1933
June 27

62

122

June 15

57

150

Pending_________________________
Adjusted. Reinstated without June 7 June 13
discrimination; increase of 10
percent.
Adjusted. Allowed 40 cents per .__do------ June 11
hour.
Pending__________________ ____

(i)
200

300

1933
Adjusted. Am icably adjusted by June 13
grievance committee.
Adjusted. Former scale restored _ June 12

Adjusted. Agreement concluded;
no discrimination.
Pending_________________________
Unclassified. Adjusted before ar­
rival of commissioner.
Pending_________________________

Wages, hours, union recognition,
discharges.
Protest wage of 6 to 15 cents per ____d o____________________________
hour.
W orking conditions-------------------- Adjusted. Allowed 10 percent in­
crease. Organized.
Hours, wages including weekly Adjusted. Agreement concluded;
terms satisfactory.
guaranty.
Asked increase in wages------------- Pending_________________________
Asked employment of local men _ A djusted. R eturned under terms
of existing contract.
Protest low wages and additional Pending_________________________
cut.
Proposed low wage--------------------- ____ do_____________ ____ _________
Nonunion em ployed------------------ Adjusted. Agreed to employ
union workers.
Objection to calking w ork--------- Adjusted. W ork divided satis­
factorily.
Asked increase in wages-------------- Adjusted. Allowed 10 percent in­
crease.
Unclassified. M any
returned.
Organization___________________
N o further effort to adjust at
this time.

June
June

1
9

10
300

9

60

120

June 13

(!)
55

55

June

June 14

40

10

3, 000

2,000

1

June 24

300

June 15

June 22

380

June 16

June 24

51
2,000

June 12

June 16

(!)
75

June

June 20

3

June

150

1

M ay 10

M ay 10

85

June 22

June 27

200

200

5

MONTHLY LABOR REVIEW

General industry— Continued
Larkwood Silk Hosiery Co., Char­
lotte, N .C .
Tacoma M oving & Storage Co.,
Tacoma, Wash.
Cohen & Duncan, New York City
Cotton mills, Aurora, 111__________

Nature of
controversy

I

2404

Stoneware plant, R ed Wing,
Minn.
Easy-On C ap C o., Cleveland,
Ohio.
Isle R oyal, passenger boat, Chicago, 111.
Lipson Bros., Dress Manufac­
turers, Chicago, 111.
Sterling Specialty Co., Rankin, Pa.
B. Sopkin & Son, Chicago, 111____
Netherland Dairy Co., Syracuse,
N .Y .
E & E Paper Box, Manufacturers,
N ew Y ork City.
Rex Fuel Co., Rexfield, Iowa
Clothing workers, W oodbine, N .J.
Miners, Hocking and Sunday
Creek Valleys, Ohio.
Port Terminal Building, Muskegon Heights, M ich.
Upholsterers, Philadelphia, Pa___
Interstate Hosiery Mills, Inc.,
Lansdale, Pa.
J. Bancroft & Co., Reading, P a ...
Shendle Silk Mills, M ount Car­
mel, Pa.
Jeannette Glass Co., Jeannette, Pa.

Wages and conditions___________

Adjusted.

Compromised________

June 15 .. . d o ------

22

Strike______

Hub-cap workers . . .

Long hours and low wages_______

Adjusted.

Accepted wage cu t___

June 23

July

1

24

Controversy

Sailors___ . . . ._ __

July

2

125

Ladies,
garment
makers.
Employees_________

Protest wage payment in stock-.. Adjusted. Satisfactory wage scale
and signed agreement.
Protest low wages and conditions. Pending___________ _____________

June 14

Lockout

Asked increase in wages_________

June

2

June 21

25

50

June 19

June 30

1,150

150

June 26

June 29

85

15

Mar. 27

June 19

17

4

June 17

June 25

0)
40

70

June

June 13 10, 000

Strike.

Adjusted. Allowed increase of 12
percent. Returned without dis­
crimination.
Long hours and low wages______ Adjusted. Allowed 17^4 percent
increase; 47-hour week.
Asked more equitable agreement. Adjusted. Strike called off; re­
turned to work.
____ d o _____ Paper-box makers.._ Wage cuts and lay-offs__________ Adjusted. W ithdraw proposal to
cut wages. Recognition allowed.
Controversy
W orking conditions_____________ Pending_________________________
Strike .
Clothing workers___ Asked wage increase____________ Adjusted. Allowed increase of 5
cents per hour, 50 cents per day.
. __do_ _ __
Renewal of agreement___________ Adjusted. Allowed $3.28 per day,
38 cents per ton.
Controversy E lectricians...
Fixing of wage scale_____________ Adjusted. Suggested 90 cents per
hour will probably be accepted.
Strike
. ..
Asked $1 per hour minimum; 40- Adjusted. Satisfactory agreement
hour week and no piecework.
concluded.
Controversy Hosiery workers . . . 7 discharged; union recognition Pending___ ______ _______________
asked.
Strike.
Cotton-textile work- Proposed wage cut; conditions. __ Adjusted. Satisfactory agreement
concluded.
____ do______
Asked increase in wages_________ Adjusted. Allowed 10 percent in­
crease; 10 percent additional 4
weeks later.
____ d o______ Glass workers
Asked increase in wages; protest Adjusted. Allowed increase; agreed
speeding-up system.
on conditions.
Controversy
Working conditions_____________ Adjusted. Satisfactory SettlementStrike.
Leather-coat makers. Wages and conditions___________ Pending_________________________

Draymen, Portland, O r e g ____ _
Essany & Durable Leather Coat
Co., Lynnbrook, N .Y .
Queen A nn Candy Co., Ham- Lockout____
m ond, Ind.
W . & J. Sloan, N ew York C ity___ Strike
Southern Pacific Railroad, Hous- Controversy
ton, Tex.
Consolidated Aircraft Corpora­
tion, Buffalo, N .Y .
H osiery workers, Reading, P a. _ _ __ do______
Borden Dairy Co., Bensenville, 111. Controversy

1 N ot reported.


https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis

Bakery workers.

Asked increase in wages_________

175

74

8

Cl

June 26

July

8

12

June

July

1

250

235

7

750

1

June 10
June 27

July

1

180

June

July

5

150

7

June 26

June 30

300

June 15

June 27

(')
(!)

July

2

250

6

102
50

Adjusted. Satisfactory agreement! June 29

Wage cut; renewal of agreement.. Pending_________________________
Building workers___ W age scale______________________ Adjusted. Rates suggested; m ay June 30
be accepted later.
Change in working hours_______ Adjusted. Allowed increase of 23 . . . d o ___
percent and 40-hour week.
Hosiery workers
Protest wages and conditions____ Pending______________ __________ June 15
Vehicle-repair m en .. Protest reduction of force________ Unclassified. Drivers now operat­ __do___
ing distributing plants of their
own.

July

3
e

36

y.

400

300

June 30

375

125

June 30

3, 500
66

8, 500
50

co
to

Cn

Company or industry and
location

General industry—Continued
Bilt Rite Upholstery Co., Moisei
Upholstery C o., Gem Upholstery Co., Philadelphia, Pa.

326

L A B O R D IS P U T E S H A N D L E D B Y C O N C IL IA T IO N S E R V IC E D U R IN G T H E M O N T H OF JU NE 1933— Continued
Workers in­
volved

Duration

Nature of
controversy

Craftsmen concerned

Strike. . . .

Cause of dispute

Furniture-upholstery
workers.

Present status and terms of
settlement

Adjusted. Allowed $1 per hour
minimum, 40-hour week and
satisfactory conditions.
w

D i­
Indi­
rectly rectly

Begin­
ning

Ending

1933
June 21

1933
July 7

Apr. 13

June 20

15

June 1
Apr. 20

June 28
June 20

30 ______
15 ______

Government construction
Controversy Structural-iron work- Rebating of wages; wages not
ers.
paid.

Parcel Post, New York C ity.
_ _ do _ _
French Lick, In d ___ - ___ __ _ do_ _ _ _

Building mechanics.

Hattiesburg, M iss________ __
Tyler, T ex. _______________

__ _ do__ _ _ .

Columbus, Ohio______ _

. __ do_ _

Washington, D .C . (St. Elizabeth’s Hospital and Post
Office).
Redlands, Calif___ ____ _
Pampa, T ex___________ _
Lynn, Mass ___ _ .
Road building, Alexander, N .Y _
La Fruta Dam, Corpus Christi,
Tex.
Buildings, Fort M onmouth, N.J__
Naval Supply Depot, Brooklyn,
N .Y .
Federal Building, St. Louis, M o ..
T otal______________
1 N ot reported.


https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis

__do__ ________ _

_

S tr ik e .____
Controversy
_ _do____

Carpenters and ironworkers.

Lathers, plasterers,
hoisting engineers,
rodmen.
____ d o_____
Bricklayers.
d o_____ R oad builders
. _
___ d o_______ Carpenters and laborers.
____ d o______ Laborers and hod Received 50 cents per hour; alcarriers.
leged prevailing wage was $8
per day.
____ d o______ Masons,
laborers, Prevailing wage not p a id .. ___
and helpers.
____ d o______ Building mechanics Attem pt to secure cut in prevailand laborers.
ing wage.

Adjusted. Subcontractor agreed
to pay all wages.
Adjusted. Conditions satisfactory.
Adjusted. 50 percent of claims
paid.
Adjusted. Rates fixed b y parties
at interest.
Adjusted. Allowed some increases;
satisfactory scale.
Adjusted. Allowed $1 per hour for
plumbers and rodmen; struc­
tural-iron workers, $1.25.
Adjusted. Compromised disputed
jurisdiction.

June 20

July

1

25

June 15

June 27

100

June 13

June 17

June

1

June

6

Pending_________________________
Adjusted. Agreed on prevailing
wage scale.

M a y 22
M a y 19

June 13

Adjusted. Satisfactory SettlementPending_________________________
Adjusted. Satisfactory arrange­
ment suggested b y commissioner.
Pending_________________________

June 3
M a y 23
June 15

June 21

do.
Unclassified.
begun.

5

330 ______

25

June

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

50

0)

50

June 11

51
19

June

Building not yet

75

___

50 ______

(i)

June

35

June 30

800

MONTHLY LABOR R EV IEW

Post offices:
Daytona Beach, Fla___ __ _

INDUSTRIAL DISPUTES

327

Presidential Emergency Board for Dispute on Kansas City
Southern Railway

HE President of the United States in June created an emer­
gency board to investigate the wage dispute between the Kansas
City Southern Railway and its engineers and conductors. The mem­
bership of the board is as follows: Frank P. Douglass of Oklahoma
City (chairman), Otto Bremer of St. Paul, and Charles W. McKay of
Magnolia, Ark.
On April 5, 1933, the Kansas City Southern Railway served notice
on the general chairmen of the engineers, firemen, conductors, and
trainmen canceling the two joint contracts in effect, and stating its
intention of submitting new schedules to the engineers and conductors.
This notice stated that the rates and rules affecting firemen and
brakemen in joint schedules would remain the same.
The new schedules, submitted April 6, provided for rates of pay
on an hourly basis. The representatives of the engineers and con­
ductors stated that the effect of the proposal would be to eliminate
mileage as the basis for compensation, and that it would also wipe
out the basic 8-hour day, time and one half for overtime, and all
special allowances for work performed. The schedules contained no
provision governing seniority.
The organizations invoked mediation but no settlement was reached.
Arbitration was refused by both parties. A strike vote taken by the
organizations was practically unanimous for a strike to be effective
June 14, at 6 p.m.

T


https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis

FAMILY ALLOWANCES
Belgian Family-Allowance Funds, December 1932

N DECEM BER 31, 1932, there were 86 primary family-allow­
ance funds operating in Belgium under the family allowance act
of August 4, 1930 h These funds grouped 83,994 enterprises, em­
ploying 1,273,701 2 workers, of whom 1,025,090 were males and
248,611 were females. The total assessments paid by employers
into the primary funds during the four quarters of 1932 amounted
to 242,526,617 francs ($6,742,240)3. Up to December 31, 1932, the
primary funds had disbursed in family allowances, in accordance with
the scale fixed by law, 229,269,823 francs ($6,373,701). These figures
are from the Revue du Travail of April 1933 (p. 458), Brussels, which
is also the source of the following statistics.
Table 1 shows the number and percent of families in receipt of
family allowances in Belgium, by specified number of child bene­
ficiaries per family:

O

T a b l e 1 .— N U M B E R A N D P E R C E N T OE F A M IL IE S IN R E C E IP T OF F A M I L Y A L L O W

A N C E S IN B E L G IU M H A V IN G S P E C IF IE D N U M B E R OF C H IL D B E N E F IC IA R IE S
D E C . 31, 1932

Families
Number of child beneficiaries per family
Number
1 child.. ___ ____ . . ...................... ...
. _____ . ..
2 children. ...
.
. . . .
. . _
3 children_________ ______________________ ____ _____
4 children .
.
. . .
5 children_________ ________________________________ __
6 children___ ____ . . . . __________ . . . _ _ _ _ _ _ __
7 children________________ ___ ________ _____________
8 children___ ._ ___________________________ ______
9 children____ _ _
_____ _
_ _ _ _ _ _ _ _____
10 children____ _
___
_____ _____ _ _
11 children
12children________ ____ ____ ______________ _______
Total________

_.

_

_ _ _._ _________________

269, 702
130,918
51,22623,140
10,939
5,108
2, 241
846
310
81
21
7
494, 539

Percent

Total number
of child
beneficiaries

54.5
26. 5
10.4
4.7
2.2
1.0
.5
.2

269, 702
261, 836
153, 678
92, 560
54, 695
30, 648
15,687
6, 768
2, 790
810
231
84

100.0

889, 489

(')
0)
(>)
0)

1 Less than one tenth of 1 percent.

The number of children receiving allowances is given in table 2
according to rank in their respective families.
1 For digest of law, see M onthly Labor Review, Washington, December 1930, p. 83.
2T o these should be added 34,125 workers of both sexes Included in a special fund for domestic employees,
making a total of 1,307,826.
3 Conversions into United States currency made on basis of 1 franc=2.78 cents. A royal decree of
N ov. 18, 1931, reduced b y 0.05 franc from the fourth quarter of 1931 the tax employers were obliged to pay
per worker per day. A royal decree of Mar. 10, 1933, restored the previous tax beginning Jan. 1, 1933.

328


https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis

329

FA M IL Y A LL O W A N C E S

T a b l e 2 —N U M B E R OF C H IL D B E N E F IC IA R IE S IN B E L G IU M , C L A S S IF IE D B Y R A N K

IN F A M I L Y A N D B Y A M O U N T OF A L L O W A N C E , D E C . 31, 1932
[Conversions into United States currency on basis of franc=2.78 cents]

M onthly allowance
Number of
child
beneficiaries

Rank in family

Belgian cur­
rency

United States
currency

Francs
First___
___ _ _____________________________ _ _ _ _
Second .
...
_ _
_
___
__ _
T hird____
_____________ _ _ ___________________ - _
F o u rth s
. . . . . . ______ _____ . . . _ _ _ _ _ _
Fifth__________________________________________________
Sixth__________________________________________________
Seventh.
_ _ _ _
__
_ __
________
Eighth
_
_
N in th ..
_. .__ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ ___ _______ _
Tenth_______________________________________________ .
Eleventh.
_ _ ______
_ __ _
_ __
Twelfth____
_____
__
_ _ _____________
Total.

_______ _ _ _ _ _ _

__________ ____ _

494, 539
224,837
93,919
42, 693
19, 553
8,614
3, 506
1, 265
419
109
28
7

15
20
40
70
100
100
100
100
100
100
100
100

$0. 42
.56
1.11
1.95
2. 78
2. 78
2. 78
2. 78
2. 78
2.78
2. 78
2. 78

889, 489

22, 010,195

611,883. 42

Family Allowances in New Zealand, 1931-32

URING the year ending March 31, 1932, the number of familyallowance claims handled in New Zealand under the a c t 1 pro­
viding such benefits totaled 3,722. Of this number, 3,040 were ap­
proved, 350 rejected, and 332 held over. Among the rejected claims
were 146 that represented cases in which the family income including
the allowances exceeded £3 5s.2, beyond which limit such benefits are
not now paid. On March 31,1932, the total number of families receiv­
ing allowances was 7,332. During the year ending on that date the total
amount paid out was £90,100 and the total paid for the 4 years ending
March 31, 1932, was £307,159. In this 4-year period 10,034 family
allowances were granted, of which 2,702 have been discontinued.
The above statistics and the following data are taken from the New
Zealand Official Year Book, 1933 (p. 465).
The number of children in the 7,332 families in receipt of allowances
March 31, 1932, was 34,546, of whom 19,882 were in families having
more than 2 children. The average number of children per family
was 4.71. The number of families receiving allowances during
1931-32, according to the number of children in excess of 2, is shown
in the following statement:

D

Number of children in
excess of 2 :

Number of
families

1____________________________
2
___________________
3
___________________
4
___________________
5
___________________

1, 106
959
520
266
108

Number of children in
excess of 2 — Con.
6
7
8
9

Number of
families

____________________
___________________
___________________
___________________

65
8
5
3

i The Family Allowances A ct was passed in 1926, and came into force Apr. 1,1927.
The allowance is at the rate of 2s. per week for each child in excess of 2, the average weekly income of the
applicant and his wife and children, including allowance, not to exceed £ 4 (reduced to £3 5s. b y sec. 26 of
the National Expenditure Adjustment Act, 1932) plus 2s. for each child in excess of 2. For the purposes of
the act the term “ child ” in general means a child under the age of 15.
The application for the allowance is made b y the father, but in general the allowance is paid to the mother.
2 1 pound at p a r= $4.8665.


https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis

330

M O N T H L Y L A B O R R E V IE W

The weekly incomes of 3,040 families whose claims for allowances
were granted in the year 1931-32 are given below:
Number of

Weekly income of—
families
£ 1 or under_______________________________________________________
95
Over £ 1 and up to £ 2 _____________________________________________
727
Over £2 and up to £ 3 _____________________________________________
971
Over £3 and up to £3 12s_________________________________________ 1 206
Over £3 12s_______________________________________________________ ’ 41
Total-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------3 , 040

The weekly rates at which the allowances were granted were as
follows:
Number of

families
Weekly rate:
Is ________________ __________
6
2s________________ __________ 1, 127
3s
__________
10
4s________________ __________
946
5s________________ __________
9
6s
___ __________
508


https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis

Weekly rate— Continued.
8s________________________
10s______________________
12s_____________________
14s__________________
16s____________________
18s______________________

Number of
families

264
105
52
7
4
2

LABOR AGREEMENTS
Salesmen for the Electrical Industry Provided for in Agreements

LECTRICAL workers in Chicago, Cleveland, Indianapolis,
Milwaukee, Rockford (111.), and St. Louis have agreements with
electrical contractors’ associations which provide that a salesman shall
be hired to develop markets for their labor, through the moderniza­
tion or improvement of old buildings, residences, and industrial
plants. The provisions of these agreements are practically the same.
The Cleveland agreement appeared, in part, in the Monthly Labor
Review for January 1933.
The agreement of Electrical Workers’ Union No. 1 with the electrical
contractors of St. Louis is in the form of an amendment to the original
agreement. It provides for a wage rate of $1 an hour for journeymen
employed on alterations and additions in existing buildings made for
owners or occupants in stores, offices, hotels, private educational
buildings, private hospitals, and churches, except where major
building structural alterations are being made in connection with such
alterations and additions. A wage rate of 75 cents an hour is pro­
vided for alterations and additions to installations in manufacturing
plants, installations and additions on residential buildings, and main­
tenance and repair of commercial and residential buildings. The
reduced rates do not apply on installations in new buildings or build­
ings being added to existing buildings, or where the lighting or power
installation is let separately (the supposition being that such is the
original installation).
Employers may qualify to employ members of Electrical Workers’
Union No. 1 on the class of work and at the wage rate provided for in
the amendment if it employs a salesman who devotes his entire time
to soliciting, estimating, and securing electrical work, or, if one mem­
ber of a firm devotes at least 5 hours each day in soliciting and securing
work.
The employer and the members of the local union are held equally
responsible for seeing that members of the local union are not em­
ployed in any 1 week on work coming under the amendment for more
hours than the rates of wages would accumulate $30 for any pay week,
including overtime. The amendment stipulates that this amount
may be changed from time to time as the work increases. Penalties
are provided for employers operating, and members of the local union
employed, under the terms and conditions of this amendment, when
found guilty of willfully violating or abusing the privileges contained
in this amendment.
331

E


https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis

LABOR TURNOVER
Labor Turnover in Manufacturing Establishments,
Quarter of 1933

Second

/ACCO RD IN G to labor turnover reports received by the Bureau
X jL of Labor Statistics from representative manufacturing estab­
lishments in 148 census industry classifications, the hiring rate for
the second quarter of 1933 was more than twice as high as during
either the first quarter of 1933 or the second quarter of 1932. In
contrast, the lay-off rate for the second quarter of 1933 was less than
half that of the first quarter of 1933, and slightly more than one third
the lay-off rate for the second quarter of 1932.
The rates shown herein represent the number of changes per 100
employees that took place during the 3 months ending June 30, 1933.
The form of average used by the Bureau of Labor Statistics for com­
piling turnover rates is the weighted arithmetic mean. The rates
for manufacturing as a whole were compiled from reports made to
the bureau by establishments employing approximately 1,000,000
persons. In the industries for which separate indexes are shown,
reports were received from representative plants employing at least
25 percent of the workers in each industry as shown by the Census of
Manufactures of 1927.
In addition to the separation rates and the accession rate, the
bureau shows the net turnover rate. Net turnover means the rate
of replacement; that 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 separation rate, because, while more
people are hired than are separated from their jobs, the number
hired above those leaving is due to expansion and cannot justly be
charged to turnover. On the other hand, in a plant that is reducing
its number of employees the net turnover rate is the same as the
accession rate, because while more people are separated from the
pay roll than are hired, the excess of separations over accessions is
due to a reduction of force, and therefore cannot be logically charged
as a turnover expense.
Table 1 shows for industry as a whole the total separation rate
subdivided into the quit, discharge, and lay-off rate, together with
the accession rate and net turnover rates, per quarter for the year
1932, and the first and second quarters of 1933. The accession rate
for the second quarter of 1933 was more than twice as high as the
accession rate for either the first quarter of 1933 or the second quarter
of 1932. The lay-off rate was less than half the lay-off rate for the
first quarter of 1933 and only a little more than one third of the
lay-off rate for the second quarter of 1932. The quit rate was slightly
higher than for either the first quarter of 1933 or the second quarter
of 1932.
332

https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis

333

L A B O R TU R N O V E R
T able

1 —QUARTERLY

T U R N O V E R R A T E S IN R E P R E S E N T A T IV E F A C T O R IE S IN
118 IN D U S T R IE S
Separation rate

Period

Quit

Discharge

1932

1933

First quarter______ 2. 28
Second quarter. - _ 2. 15
2. 10
Fourth quarter_____ 1.77

1. 56
2. 23
—

Total separation rate

Lay off

Net turnover
rate

Accession
rate

1932

1933

1932

1933

1932

1933

1932

1933

1932

0. 58
.49
. 45
.43

0. 38
.52

8.18
12. 92
10. 78
8. 75

10. 14
4.46

11. 04
15. 56
13. 33
10. 95

12.08
7. 21

9. 65
7. 80
12. 55
10. 50

8. 50
20. 86

9. 65
7. 80
12. 55
10. 50

—

—

1933
8. 50
7. 21
—

Table 2 shows the quit, discharge, lay-off, accession, and net turn­
over rates for automobiles, boots and shoes, brick, cotton, iron and
steel, foundry and machine shops, furniture, men’s clothing, sawmills,
and slaughtering and meat packing for the second quarter of 1932
and for the first and second quarters of 1933.
Cotton manufacturing showed the highest quit rate during the
second quarter of 1933; the lowest quit rate was shown by brick
manufacturing. The highest discharge rate occurred in the cotton
manufacturing industry and the lowest in the iron and steel industry.
The brick industry had the highest lay-off rate and the iron and steel
industry the lowest. The highest accession rate occurred in brick
manufacturing and the lowest in the boot and shoe industry. The
highest quarterly net turnover rate, 14.89, was shown by brick manu­
facturing and the lowest, 3.53, by the iron and steel industry.
T a b l e 3 .—Q U A R T E R L Y R A T E S IN S P E C IF IE D IN D U S T R IE S

Boots and shoes

Automobiles
Class of rates

Second First Second Second First Second Second First Second
quarter quarter quarter quarter quarter quarter quarter quarter quarter
1933
1932
1932
1933
1933
1933
1932
1933
1933

Quit___________
Discharge______
Lay off_________
Total separation.
Accession______
Net turnover___

2. 05
.43
15. 77
18. 85
22.02

18. 85

1.50
.61
27.28
29. 39
16. 94
16. 94

2. 49
.97
5. 57
9. 03
29. 52
9.03

Cotton manufacturing
Quit___________
Discharge______
Lay of!________
Total separation
Accession______
Net turnover-..-

2.56
.74
22. 02
25. 32
5. 67
5.67

3. 62
.65
10. 50
14. 77
12.58
12. 58

6.10
1.11
2. 14
9.35
32. 23
9. 35

2. 59
.50
8.81
11.90
4.41
4.41

2.39
. 56
4.09
7.04
9. 54
7. 04

Foundries and machine
shops
0. 97
.39
12. 32
13. 68
5. 79
5. 79

0. 70
. 18
8. 78
9.66
5.99
5. 99

1.31
.47
5.70
7.48
19.08
7. 48

Iron and steel
Class of rates

Quit. - ___ ___
Discharge -__ .
_ __
.
. ... ...
Layoff______ - - - - - - - - - - - Total separation
.
. . . - ____
Accession _ _____ __
Net turnover__
...... ......................

0.84
.55
32. 19
33. 58
24. 04
24. 04

2.50
.54
4.19
7.23
12.15
7.23

0.67
.40
23. 36
24. 43
22.71
22. 71

1.13
.59
13.17
14. 89
46. 30
14.89

Furniture
1.18
.42
19. 38
20. 98
10. 86
10. 86

0. 64
.40
14. 71
15. 75
8.41
8. 41

3. 49
.33
7. 74
11.56
30.71
11.56

M en’s clothing

Second
First
Second Second
First
Second
quarter, quarter, quarter, quarter, quarter, quarter,
1932
1933
1933
1932
1933
1933
1.94
. 17
10.94
13. 05
3.15
3.15

1.33
. 11
5. 38
6. 82
4. 30
4. 30

1.72
. 22
1.59
3. 53
22.03
3. 53

3.25
. 12
15. 28
18. 65
6. 54
6. 54

1.38
. 15
6. 44
7. 97
7. 38
7. 38

2. 53
. 40
2.94
5.87
16. 26
5.87

Slaughtering and meat
packing
Quit________________ _________ _______
_ _
Oischarge________ __________ - ______ _ __ _
L ayoff___________________________ - - - - - - - - - Total separation. - _____
______ - ___
A c c e s s io n ..__ _
Net turn over..
..
_
.
. _


https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis

2. 27
.98
20. 70
23. 95
21. 22
21. 22

1.86
.80
22. 74
25. 40
21. 99
21.99

3. 48
.75
9. 26
13. 49
42.47
13. 49

2.77
.99
17. 16
20. 92
20. 85
20. 85

1.82
.70
15.93
18. 45
16. 89
16. 89

2. 64
.96
8.12
11.72
23.04
11. 72

HOUSING
Building Operations in Principal Cities of the United States,
June 1933

UILDING permit reports received by the Bureau of Labor Sta­
tistics from 762 identical cities of the United States having a
population of 10,000 or over show an increase of 8.7 percent in indi­
cated expenditures for residential building in June 1933 as compared
with May.
The data as compiled in the following tables apply to the costs of the
buildings as estimated by the prospective builder on applying for his
permit to build. No land costs are included. Only building opera­
tions within the corporate limits of the cities enumerated are shown.
The States of Illinois, Massachusetts, New York, New Jersey, and
Pennsylvania, through their departments of labor, are cooperating
with the Federal bureau in the collection of this information.

B

Comparisons, May and June 1933
T a ble
1 shows the estimated cost of new residential buildings,- of
new nonresidential buildings, of additions, alterations, and repairs,
and of total building operations in 762 identical cities in the United
States having a population of 10,000 or over, by geographic divisions.
T a b l e 1 .— E S T IM A T E D COST OF N E W B U IL D IN G S , OF A D D IT IO N S , A L T E R A T IO N S ,

A N D R E P A IR S , A N D OF T O T A L B U IL D IN G C O N S T R U C T IO N IN 762 I D E N T I C A L C ITIE S,
AS SH O W N B Y P E R M IT S ISSU ED IN M A Y A N D JU NE 1933, B Y G E O G R A P H IC D IV IS IO N S
N ew residential buildings
(estimated cost)
Geographic division

N ew nonresidential buildings
(estimated cost)

M ay 1933

June 1933

Per­
cent of
change

New England . . . ______ _________
$1,741,918
M iddle Atlantic___________________
5,619,424
East North C entral.-_____ ________
1, 269, 243
West North Central________________
808, 165
South Atlantic___ _____ ___________
911,233
South Central____ ________________
699, 328
Mountain and Pacific______________
1,936, 048
Total________________________ 12,985, 359

$2,306,156
4, 738,915
1,621,518
1,107, 980
1,301, 871
805, 772
2, 230, 766

+32.4
-1 5 .7
+27.8
+37. 1
+42.9
+15.2
+15.2

14,112, 978

+ 8 .7

Additions, alterations, and
repairs (estimated cost)
Geographie division

M ay 1933

June 1933

$1,146, 089
2,983, 368
1,143, 586
820,962
1,190,912
1, 731,484
32, 304, 760
41, 321,161

$1, 679, 075
4,907, 077
2,241,825
797, 972
1,832,168
877, 213
1,684, 347
14,019,677

Per­
cent of
change
+46.5
+64. 5
+96.0
- 2 .8
+53.8
-4 9 .3
-9 4 .8
-6 6 .1

Total construction (estimated
cost)

N um ­
ber of
Per­
cent of cities
change

M ay 1933

June 1933

Per­
cent of
change

M ay 1933

June 1933

New England_________ ____
$1, 268,856
M iddle Atlantic____________
4,921, 994
East North Central___ . . .
1, 448, 838
814, 038
West North C e n tra l______ _.
South Atlantic_____ _________
1,226,116
South C entral.. .
___ . . .
932, 880
Mountain and Pacific__ __
2, 464, 316

$1, 397, 519
6, 269, 810
1, 684,923
936, 421
1, 238, 565
802, 573
2, 304, 586

+10.1
+27.4
+16.3
+15. 0
+ 1.0
-1 4 .0
- 6 .5

$4,156,863
13,524, 786
3,861, 667
2,443,165
3, 328, 261
3, 363, 692
36,705,124

$5, 382, 750
15, 915,802
5, 548, 266
2,842, 373
4,372, 604
2, 485, 558
6, 219, 699

+29.5
+17.7
+43.7
+16.3
+31.4
-2 6 . 1
-8 3 . 1

106
176
176
70
76
77
81

14, 634, 397

+ 11.9

67, 383, 558

42, 767, 052

-3 6 .5

762

Total_______________ . . .

334

https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis

13,077, 038

335

H O U SIN G

Indicated expenditures for total building operations during June
were $42,767,052, a decrease of 36.5 percent as compared with May.
If, however, we eliminate the $31,000,000 permit for the San Francisco-Oakland Bridge which was issued during May, the June figures
would show a substantial increase over the May figures.
Indicated expenditures for residential buildings increased 8.7
percent comparing June with May. The normal trend of residential
buildings is down comparing these two periods. Residential building
increases were shown in all of the geographic divisions except the
Middle Atlantic.
There was a decrease of 66.1 percent in the cost of new nonresidential
buildings. As explained above, this decrease was due to the issuance
in May of a permit for the San Francisco-0akland Bridge.
Indicated expenditures for additions, alterations, and repairs
increased 11.9 percent in the 762 cities.
Table 2 shows the number of new residential buildings, of new
nonresidential buildings, of additions, alterations, and repairs, and
of total building operations in 762 identical cities of the United
States, by geographic divisions.
T a b l e 3 .—N U M B E R OF N E W B U IL D IN G S , OF A D D IT IO N S , A L T E R A T IO N S , A N D R E ­

P A IR S , A N D OF T O T A L B U IL D IN G C O N S T R U C T IO N IN 762 I D E N T IC A L C IT IE S , AS
SH O W N B Y P E R M IT S ISSU ED IN M A Y A N D JU NE 1933, B Y G E O G R A P H IC D IV ISIO N S

New residen­
tial buildings

New nonresi­
dential build­
ings

Additions, al­
terations, and
repairs

M ay
1933

M ay
1933

June
1933

M ay
1933

June
1933

M ay
1933

Total construc­
tion

Geographic division
June
1933

June
1933

New England----- . . . ---------------------M iddle Atlantic____________________
East North Central_________________
West North Central________________
South A tlantic.............. ............. ..........
South Central_______________________
Mountain and Pacific.........................

411
544
288
257
302
343
618

471
675
359
319
355
348
658

975
1,782
1,557
907
572
451
1,233

996
1,472
1,327
713
474
427
1,229

3,192
6, 574
4,030
2,121
2, 969
2,410
4,868

3,161
6, 482
3,570
1,717
2,933
2, 230
4, 211

4,578
8,900
5,875
3, 285
3,843
3, 204
6,719

4,628
8, 629
5, 256
2, 749
3, 762
3,005
6,098

T otal_________________________

2, 763

3,185
+15. 3

7,477

6, 638
-1 1 . 2

26,164

24, 304
- 7 .1

36,404

34,127
- 6 .3

An increase is shown in the number of new residential buildings for
which permits were issued in June, as compared with May. Decreases,
however, were shown in the number of new nonresidential buildings,
of additions, alterations, and repairs, and also in the total number
of buildings for which permits were issued.
Table 3 shows the number of families provided for in the different
kinds of housekeeping dwellings, together with the estimated cost
of such dwellings, for which permits were issued in 762 identical cities
during May and June 1933.


https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis

336
T

MONTHLY LABOR R E V IE W

3 . — E S T IM A T E D C O ST A N D N U M B E R OF F A M IL IE S P R O V ID E D F O R IN T H E
D I F F E R E N T K IN D S OF H O U S E K E E P IN G D W E L L IN G S F O R W H IC H P E R M IT S W E R E
ISSU ED IN 762 I D E N T I C A L C IT IE S IN M A Y A N D JU NE 1933, B Y G E O G R A P H IC D IV I­
SIONS

able

1-faqiily dwellings

Geographic division

Estimated cost

M ay 1933 June 1933

N ew England____
_ . $1, 648,748 $2,087, 006
M iddle A tlantic__ ______ 1, 988, 404 2, 677, 630
1, 187,143 1, 503,818
East North Central____
749,165 1, 083, 780
West North Central____
840,183 1, 241, 477
South Atlantic___
. _
539,805
667, 833
SouthCentral____ . . . _
M ountain and Pacific___ 1, 619,498 1, 846, 051
T o t a l __ _________

8, 572,946 11,107, 595
+29.6

2-family dwellings

Families pro­
vided for
M ay
1933

June
1933

Estimated cost

M ay 1933 June 1933

M ay 1933 June 1933

Families pro­
vided for
M ay
1933

June
1933

396
447
279
251
280
292
566

436
553
343
316
340
305
596

$68, 670
430, 610
43, 500
14, 500
50, 050
153,023
168, 950

$191,150
621, 600
92, 200
24, 200
47,144
122,939
243,715

28
145
8
6
33
89
66

60
197
19
5
25
83
93

2,511

2, 889
+15. 1

929,303

1, 342.948
+44. 5

375

482
+28. 5

Total, all kinds of housekeeping dwell­
ings

M ultifamily dwellings

Geographic division

Estimated cost

Families pro­
vided for
M ay
1933

June
1933

Estimated cost

M ay 1933 June 1933

Families pro­
vided for
M ay
1933

June
1933

$24, 500
New England _________
M iddle Atlantic________ 3,196, 410
23, 500
East North C en tra l...
32, 000
West North Central____
South Atlantic__________
21, 000
South Central. ___
. .
6,500
147, 600
Mountain and Pacific___

$28, 000
1, 430, 685
25, 500
0
13, 250
0
141,000

6
856
10
15
18
4
84

12 $1, 741,918 $2, 306,156
541 5, 615, 424 4, 729,915
20 1,254,143 1, 621, 518
0
795, 665 1,107,980
911, 233 1, 301, 871
7
790. 772
699, 328
0
66 1,936,048 2, 230, 766

430
1,448
297
272
331
385
716

508
1,291
382
321
372
388
755

T otal___ _______ _ 3, 451, 510

1, 638, 435
-5 2 .5

993

646 12,953, 759 14,088,978
-3 4 .9
+ 8 .8

3,879

4,017
+ 3 .6

Increases were shown in both the indicated expenditures and the
number of families provided for in 1-family dwellings, 2-family
dwellings, and dwellings as a whole. The indicated expenditures for
apartment houses and the number of families provided for in apart­
ment houses, however, decreased, comparing June with May.
Table 4 shows the index number of families provided for, the index
numbers of indicated expenditures for new residential buildings, new
nonresidential buildings, additions, alterations, and repairs, and for
total building operations.


https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis

337

HOUSING

4 - I N D E X N U M B E R S OF F A M IL IE S P R O V ID E D F O R A N D OF T H E E S T IM A T E D
COST OF B U IL D IN G O P E R A T IO N S AS SH O W N B Y P E R M IT S ISSU ED IN P R IN C IP A L
C IT IE S OF T H E U N IT E D S TA TE S

T able

[M onthly average, 1929=100]

Estimated cost of—
Families
provided
for

M onth

New resi­
dential
buildings

Total
N ew non­ Additions,
residential alterations, building
buildings and repairs operations

1930
M a y___________ _________________ _____
June_____________________________________

59.6
54.4

48.5
45.1

90.7
82.5

84.5
74.6

69.3
63.3

1931
M a y _______________________ - ---------------June......................- -----

51.7
43.4

39.8
33.4

58.5
41.7

53.0
56.5

48.8
39.4

1932
M a y _____________________________ _______
June______________________________ _____

11.3
10.6

7.9
7.9

39.3
24.6

27.3
28.2

23.3
17.3

1933
J an u a ry ... --------- --- ------------------------------February____________ _ -------------------------March
_ - ________ - . .
..............
A pril.
_
- ......... .......... - .
___
M a y _______ ____________________________
June.-- . . - - ............. .......- - - - -

4.9
5.6
7.2
7.4
11.9
12.3

3.4
4.6
4.2
4.6
8.1
8.8

26.8
8.9
6.9
9.9
33.8
11.5

16.2
14.2
20.9
22.6
29.8
33.3

14.7
7.9
7.8
9.5
21.7
13.8

The June 1933 index numbers of new residential buildings and of
families provided for were higher than for any month since April
1932. The index number of new nonresidential buildings was con­
siderably lower than for either May 1933 or June 1932. This is also
true of the index number of total building operations. The index
number of additions, alterations, and repairs, however, were higher
than for any month of 1932 or 1933.
Comparisons of Indicated Expenditures for Public Buildings
T a b l e 5 shows the value of contracts awarded for public buildings
by the various agencies of the United States Government and by the
various State governments during the months of June 1932 and May
and June 1933, by geographic divisions.
T able 5 .— V ALU E

OF C O N T R A C T S F O R P U B L IC B U IL D IN G S
A W A R D E D B Y THE
U N IT E D ST A T E S G O V E R N M E N T A N D B Y S T A T E G O V E R N M E N T S , JU NE 1932 A N D
M A Y A N D JU NE 1933, B Y G E O G R A P H IC D IV ISIO N S

State

Federal
Geographic division
June 1933 1 June 1932

M ay 1933 June 19331

June 1932

M ay 1933

$685,114
New England
________ _____
M iddle Atlantic________________ 4,113, 617
1,120,855
East North Central____________
West North Central____________ 1,779,813
South A t la n t ic ------ ------------ --- 10, 212, 342
250, 632
South Central______________ - Mountain and Pacific. . ---------- 1, 365, 477

$22, 356
60, 665
102, 242
20, 265
736, 685
1, 080, 340
105, 050

$11, 651
53, 656
477, 762
190, 891
93, 659
150, 596
61, 089

$703,926
536, 687
363,105
107, 773
261, 211
232, 977
555, 013

$182, 778
446, 520
8, 675
65,188
24, 012
262, 791
11,140

$1,462
1, 761, 209
232,047
329, 213
1,040, 046
320, 014
159,856

19,527, 850

2,127, 603

1, 039, 304

2, 760, 692

1, 001,104

3,843,847

T otal_________

_ - --------

1 Subject to revision.


https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis

338

MONTHLY LABOR R E V IE W

The value of contracts awarded by the various Federal agencies
during June 1933 was $1,039,304, the lowest value of Federal con­
tracts in either 1932 or 1933.
The value of contracts awarded by the various State governments
during June 1933 was $3,843,847, a substantial increase over the
value of State awards in either May 1933 or June 1932.
Comparisons, June 1933 with June 1932
T a b l e 6 shows the estimated cost of new residential buildings, of
new nonresidential buildings, of additions, alterations, and repairs,
and of total building operations in 345 identical cities in the United
States having a population of 25,000 or over for the months of June
1932 and June 1933, by geographic divisions.
T a b l e 6 . — E S T IM A T E D C O ST OF N E W B U IL D IN G S , OF A D D IT IO N S , A L T E R A T IO N S ,

A N D R E P A IR S , A N D OF T O T A L B U IL D IN G C O N S T R U C T IO N IN 345 ID E N T IC A L C IT IE S,
AS SH O W N B Y P E R M IT S ISSU ED IN JU NE 1932 A N D JU N E 1933, B Y G E O G R A P H IC
D IV ISIO N S

New residential buildings (esti­
mated cost)

New nonresidential buildings
(estimated cost)

Geographic division
June 1932

June 1933

Percent
of change

June 1932

June 1933

Percent
of change

New England____________________
M iddle A tlantic. . . . . ------------East North Central________ ____
West North Central __________
South A tla n t ic __________________
South Central . . ______________
Mountain and Pacific-------------------

$991, 405
3,161,915
1, 320,295
820, 245
1,211,927
464, 059
1,593,110

$1,437, 261
3,932, 925
1, 236, 257
934,110
1,102,909
720, 218
1,883, 754

+45.0
+24.4
- 6 .4
+13.9
- 9 .0
+55.2
+18.2

$2,133, 819
9, 043, 421
2, 754,144
2, 222,774
10, 666, 723
1, 233, 702
2,143, 088

$1, 489, 351
4, 593, 759
2,130, 340
693, 258
1, 729,117
734, 516
1, 582,604

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

Total . . ---------------- --------

9, 562,956

11,247, 434

+17.6

30,197, 671

12,952,945

-5 7 .1

Additions, alterations, and
repairs (estimated cost)

Total construction (estimated
cost)

Geographic division

N um ­
ber of
cities

June 1932

June 1933

Percent
of change

June 1932

June 1933

Percent
of change

$1, 091, 355
3, 599,086
1,509, 793
782,911
1,438,412
632,401
1, 340, 281

$1,140, 791
5,910,728
1, 579, 783
778, 051
1,141,773
716, 691
2,106,117

+4. 5
+64.2
+ 4 .6
- 0 .6
-2 0 .6
+13.3
+57.1

$4, 216, 579
15,804,422
5, 584,232
3,825, 930
13, 317,062
2, 330,162
5,076,479

$4, 067,403
14,437, 412
4, 946, 380
2,405,419
3,973, 799
2,171, 425
5, 572,475

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

51
70
92
25
40
31
36

10,394, 239

13,373, 934

+28.7

50,154, 866

37, 574,313

-2 5 .1

345

Indicated expenditures for new residential building and for addi­
tions, alterations, and repairs showed sharp increases comparing
June 1933 with June 1932. There was a decrease, however, in new
nonresidential buildings. Total building operations also showed a
decrease in estimated cost.
Table 7 shows the number of new residential buildings, of new
nonresidential buildings, of additions, alterations, and repairs, and of
total building operations in 345 identical cities having a population
of 25,000 or over for the months of June 1932 and June 1933, by
geographic divisions.


https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis

339

HOUSING
T

7 —N U M B E R O F N E W B U IL D IN G S , OF A D D IT IO N S , A L T E R A T IO N S , AND R E ­
P A IR S , A N D OF T O T A L B U IL D IN G C O N S T R U C T IO N IN 345 I D E N T IC A L C IT IE S , AS
SH O W N B Y P E R M IT S ISSU ED IN JUNE 1932 A N D JU NE 1933, B Y G E O G R A P H IC D IV I­
SIONS

able

New residen­
tial buildings

New nonresi­
dential build­
ings

June
1932

June
1932

June
1933

June
1932

June
1933

Juno
1932

Additions,
alterations,
and repairs

Total construc­
tion

Geographic division

N ew England.. __________________
M iddle Atlantic_____________________
East North Central_______________
West North Central________________
South Atlantic______ ______ _
... .
South Central_______________________
Mountain and Pacific_______________
T o t a l .._____ ______ _ ________
Percent of change_____ . . . . . . .

June
1933

June
1933

201
395
259
215
273
218
442

250
522
266
265
279
297
561

672
1, 477
1,439
673
568
444
1,043

633
1.174
1.174
605
398
331
1,041

2,125
4,910
2,864
1,064
2,870
1,483
3,105

2,445
5, 880
3, 259
1, 528
2,732
1,924
3 ,55S

2,998
6, 782
4,562
1,952
3,717
2,145
4,590

3, 328
7, 576
4,699
2,398
3,409
2,552
5,160

2,003

2,440
+21.8

6,316

5,356
-1 5 .2

18,427

21,326
+15. 7

26,746

29,122
+ 8 .9

Increases were registered in the number of new residential build­
ings, of additions, alterations, and repairs, and of total building
operations comparing June 1933 with June 1932. There was a
decrease, however, in the number of new nonresidential buildings.
Table 8 shows the number of families provided for in the different
kinds of housekeeping dwellings, together with the cost of such
dwellings, for which permits were issued in 345 cities during June
1932 and June 1933, by geographic divisions.
T a b l e 8 .— E S T IM A T E D C O ST A N D N U M B E R OF F A M IL IE S P R O V ID E D F O R IN T H E

D IF F E R E N T K IN D S OF H O U S E K E E P IN G D W E L L IN G S F O R W H IC H P E R M IT S W E R E
ISSU ED IN 345 I D E N T IC A L C IT IE S IN JU N E 1932 A N D JU NE 1933, B Y G E O G R A P H IC
D IV ISIO N S
1-family dwellings

Geographic division

Estimated cost
June 1932 June 1933

New England___________
M iddle Atlantic______ . .
East North C e n t r a l.___
West North Central_____
South Atlantic__________
South Central ____ _
Mountain and Pacific___
T otal___ _________
Percent of change_______

$789,905 $1,319, 611
1,423,103 1,909, 640
1,166,095 1,124, 557
784,995
909,910
1,077,227 1,055,315
431,009
586, 373
1, 262, 660 1, 553, 539
0,934,994 8, 458,945
+22.0

2-family dwellings

Families pro­
vided for
June
1932
173
320
242
209
256
208
412
1, 820

June
1933
231
408
252
262
269
255
507
2,184
+20.0

Estimated cost
June 1932 June 1933

New England________ .
$45,000
M iddle A tla n tic________ 1,337, 300
East North Central_____
24,000
West North C e n tr a l.___
9,500
South A tla n tic...........
128,000
South Central____ ____
8,465
Mountain and Pacific___
199, 500
T otal_____________ 1, 751, 765
Percent of change____ _


https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis

$18,000
1,430, 685
23,000
0
13, 250
0
112,000
1, 596,935
- 8 .8

Families pro­
vided for
June
1932
19
265
3
4
63
6
88
448

June 1932 June 1933
$156, 500
401, 512
130, 200
25, 750
2,000
24 585
100,950
8 il, 497

$99. 650
583, 600
88, 700
24, 200
34, 344
118,845
218, 215
1,167, 554
+38.7

Families pro­
vided for
June
1932
46
106
30
10
3
15
40
250

June
1933
31
181
18
5
15
81
83
414
+65.6

Total, all kinds of housekeeping dwell­
ings

M ultifamily dwellings
Geographic division

Estimated cost

Estimated cost

June
1933

June 1932 June 1933

9
541
16
0
7
0
58
631
+40.8

$991,405 $1,437, 261
3,161.915 3,923,925
1, 320, 295 1,236,257
820, 245
934, 110
1, 207, 227 1,102, 909
464, 059
705, 218
1,563,110 1,883, 754
9, 528, 256 L1,223, 434
+17.8

Families pro­
vided for
June
1932
238
691
275
223
322
229
540
2, 518

June
1933
271
1,130
286
267
291
336
648
3, 229
+28.2

340

MONTHLY LABOR R E V IEW

Increases were shown in indicated expenditures and in the number
of families provided for in 1-family dwellings, in 2-family dwellings,
and in all dwellings combined, comparing June 1933 with June 1932.
In the case of apartment houses, however, there was a decrease in
indicated expenditures, but a substantial increase in the number of
families provided for.
Details by Cities
T a b l e 9 shows the estimated cost of new residential buildings, of
new nonresidential buildings, of total building operations, and the
number of families provided for in new dwellings in each of the cities
having a population of 10,000 or over, for which reports were received
for June 1933.
Permits were issued in June 1933 for the following important
building projects: In Providence, R.I., for a newspaper plant to cost
$500,000; in Sheboygan, Wis., for a county courthouse to cost $350,000;
in Baltimore, Md., for a State hospital to cost over $1,000,000; in
Los Angeles, Calif., for a planetarium to cost $250,000; in the Borough
of Brooklyn for apartment houses to cost over $1,300,000 and for
factory buildings to cost nearly $1,200,000; in the Borough of Queens
for a school building to cost over $500,000; in the Borough of Man­
hattan for additions, alterations, and repairs to cost over $2,500,000;
in San Francisco, Calif., for amusement places to cost nearly $500,000;
and in Chicago, 111., for factory buildings to cost over $500,000.
T

able

9 . — E S T IM A T E D

C O ST OF B U IL D IN G S F O R W H IC H P E R M IT S W E R E ISSU ED
IN P R IN C IP A L C IT IE S , JU NE 1933
N e w E n g l a n d S ta tes

C ity and State

Connecticut:
A nsonia.B ridgeport-Bristol- ------Enfield______
Greenwich _
Hamden ----Hartford------Manchester M iddletow n .
M ilford______
New Britain..
N ew H aven- Norwalk - _
N orw ich-------Shelton--------Stamford____
Stratford____
W allingfordWater bury __
W e s t HartW illim anticMaine:
B iddeford----Portland- . .
SouLli l 01 in­
land
____
W estbrook__

Fam­
New
New
Total
residen­ nonresi­ (includ­ ilies
pro­
dential ing re­
tial
vided
build­
build­
pairs)
for
ings
ings

$10,000
39, 571
6, 700
14, 000
6,115
0
39, 500
38,100
9, 000
12, 500
28, 200
14, 300
2, 450
0
30,410
48, 600
0
6.900
12, 450
840
10 000
0
14. 500

0 $11,165
75,144
$16, 975
14,872
3,410
8, 900
24,100
200
6, 825
350
150
74, 900
13,900
44, 275
2, 375
42, 200 110, 765
310
14, 840
14, 992
51, 762
16i 330
25
17, 595
7, 580
11,753
1,150
9, 615
90,955
2, 725
71,950
4, 089
9,381
225
8, 275
8,000
55, 280
5, 218
2, 265
2 100
17,183
50
3, 225
1,400
24,150

3
12
3
4
3
0
6
9
2
2
8
4
3
0
5
6
0
9
3
1
4
0
4

56,100
5, 300

1,660
1,600

72, 422
23, 750

8
3

87, 400
1,000
2,000

C, 050
425
1,208

101,825
3,075
8, 540

31
2
1

12, 650
1,200

615
450

15,055
1,850

5
1

1 Applications filed.


https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis

C ity and State

Massachusetts:
Arlington-----Attleboro _Belmont
Braintree___
Brockton Brookline___
Cambridge__
C helsea_____
Chicopee____
Dedham
F.asthampton
Everett--- --Fall River___
Fitchburg___
Framingham
Gardner_____
Gloucester___
Haverhill . _Lawrence____
Leominster__
Low ell. __ -.
M alden_____
Marlborough.
Medford -Melrose______
M ilton__ _
N eedham ----New Bedford-

New
New
Fam­
Total
residen­ nonresi­
ilies
dential (includ­
tial
ing re­ pro­
build­
build­
vided
pairs)
ings
for
ings

$97,000
0
86, 300
15, 700
176, 300
8,300
6,000
174,000
17,500
0
6, 000
7, 300
3,100
0
7, 500
1, 100
0
0
14, 000
2,175
0
4, 750
2, 200
1,800
13, 78C
4,500
4, 000
22, 70C
23, 200
51,800
32, 000
1,000

$2, 050 $101, 230
1,760
3,185
2, 700
95, 634
10, 545
39, 320
353,096 856, 631
14,475
26, 650
45,885
22,940
7, 562 196, 312
7, 055
56,955
6, 350
18, 755
40, 250
30, 000
19, 824
2,950
4, 310
210
1,455
5, 505
6, 485
44, 837
11, 270
5, 540
27, 805
19,155
800
2, 375
18,900
1, 550
4, 600
8,975
14, 60C
750
2, 350
30; 500
1,300
8, 423
3, 540
9,170
18,163
6,685
18,945
13, 650
1,450
34, 875
1, 55C
4,700
35,160
3,025
76, 537
3,150
35, 975
3, 525
20, 375

16
0
13
4
41
2
2
13
3
0
2
2
1
0
2
1
0
0
5
3
0
1
3
1
6
1
2
4
4
15
5
I

341

HOUSING
T a b l e 9 . — E S T IM A T E D

COST OP B U IL D IN G S FO R W H IC H P E R M IT S W E R E ISS U E D
IN P R IN C IP A L C ITIE S, JU NE 1933—Continued
N e w E n g l a n d S t a t e s — Continued

C ity and State

New
New
Fam­
Total
residen­ nonresiilies
tial
dential (includ­ pro­
ing re­
build­
build­
vided
pairs)
ings
ings.
for

Massachusetts—
Continued.
Newburyport____ _
0
$1, 20f
N ewton ____ $331, 500
6,056
North Adams
10, 250
1,055
Northampton
12, OOC
700
North Attleboro_______
15, 20f
5, 20C
N orw ood____
G, 300
475
Peabody. . . .
31,925
2, 725
Pittsfield____
37,500
5, 525
P lym outh___
0
20C
Q u in c y _____
25, 200
8, 520
Revere ____
14, 100
6, 815
Salem_______
5, 500
24, 175
Saugus ____ .
2,500
3, 275
Somerville___
0
43,025
Springfield__
14, 500
4,200
Stoneham___
14, 000
1, 505
Sw am pscott..
23, 000
600
Taunton__ __
2,900
460
W altham____
6,000 112,165
W atertow n ...
3, 000
600
Wellesley____
96, 000
9,875
Westfield____
7,050
1,010
West Spring14 085
field
5 500
W eym ou th ...
7, 000
Z, 675
W inchester...
51,100
3, 850

$2, 4Of
381,901
17, 45C
17,025

o
32
3
2

20 40f
10, 775
45, 200
56,170
525
58,148
30, 790
42, 470
9, 300
61, 420
30, 621
16,105
24,495
8, 575
125,805
5,010
112, 725
9, 695

2
2
7
7
0
6
6
1
2
0
6
3
4
4
1
1
9
3

19,’ 275
58,400

2
6

City and State

Massachusetts—
Continued.
W inthrop___
Worcester___
New H a m p shire:
Berlin_______
Manchester...
Rhode Island:
Central Falls
C ra n ston ___
East Provi-

New
New
Fam­
residen­ nonresi- Total
ilies
tial
dential (includ­ pro­
ing re­
build­
build­
vided
pairs)
ings
ings
for

0
$5 400
42,065

$960

$3,420

0

10, 695

83^ 938

12

4,600
7 000

1,905

8,810

2

17,850

4,425

29j 871

12

0
45,700

300
14,725

1,935
65, 665

0
10

10 000
14' 800

3^ 925

21,800

11,400
0
36, 500
33, 600
15, 250
3,200

3,925
64,801
549,050
9,475
9, 300
3,993

21,270
72, 731
703, 600
50,165
26, 245
19,708

3
0
7
30
5
2

0
3, 575
23, 500

0
3, 990
6,825

0
8,965
36, 575

0
3
5

Total____ 2, 306, 156 1, 679,075 5, 382, 750

508

North Providence . . . . .
Pawtucket. .
Providence. .
W arwick____
Westerly____
W oonsocket..
Vermont:
Bennington..
B u rlin g ton ...
R u t la n d .___

M i d d l e A t l a n t i c S ta te s

New Jersey:
Asbury Park.
B ayonne____
Belleville2___
Bloomfield__
Bridgeton___
Burlington__
Camden_____
Clifton______
D over......... . .
East Orange..
Elizabeth____
Englewood__
Garfield_____
H ackensack..
Harrison_____
Hillside T w p .
H oboken____
Irvington____
Jersey C it y ...
Kearny______
Linden______
Long Branch.
Lyndhurst__
M a p le w o o d
T w p _______
M ontclair___
M orristow n ..
N ewark_____
N ew Bruns­
w ic k ...........
N utley______
Orange...........
Passaic______
Paterson------Perth A m boy.
Phillipsburg..

0
$5, 000
0
28,000
1,000
0
0
15, 000
10, 800
6,000
10,000
39,469
0
0
0
0
0
10, 700
34,100
0
2,000
1, 500
0

$6, 000
0
6,150
20,500
90
535
4,120
53,400
875
2, 300
8, 600
1,440
875
2, 300
0
1,475
0
10,185
3,875
300
19, 525
1,735
0

$6, 350
31, 270
7, 475
51,400
1,245
1,025
11, 800
73, 525
13, 675
8, 300
30, 600
45, 054
6, 600
12, 694
675
2, 610
9, 351
29, 735
60, 970
995
21, 525
4,610
10,950

0
2
0
7
1
0
0
4
2
1
2
5
0
0
0
0
0
2
17
0
1
1
0

44,400
35,500
7,800
5, 500

3, 050
2,250
0
36,650

51,095
49,687
13, 547
112,135

5
4
1
1

0
0
0
4,500
20, 600
0
0

975
6, 472
1,850
8,025
3, 376
7, 600
0

5, 333
8,092
1,850
43, 200
59, 221
15, 980
1,500

0
0
0
1
5
0
0

8 N ot included in totals.
2 4 0 4 e— 3 3 — — 7


https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis

N ew Jersey—
Continued.
Plainfield
Pleasantville.
Red Bank
Ridgefield
P a rk .. _
R id g ew ood ...
Rutherford .
South Orange.
South River _
Summit 2_ _
Teaneck Tw p.
Trenton____
Union C ity ..
Union T w p . .
Weehawken
W estfield____
West New
Y ork ______
West Orange.
New York:
A lbany___ .
Amsterdam. _
Auburn . . . .
Batavia_____
Binghamton..
Buffalo______
Cohoes_____
Corning_____
D u n k ir k ___
Elmira____
Endicott . .
Floral Park ..
F reep ort___
Fulton ____
Glen Cove___

$18, 000
0
0

$9, 010
150
2,075

$38, 665
450
3, 618

3
0
0

c
12, 575
0
17,000
0
60,400
35, 000
14, 000
0
68, 080
0
7, 800

720
4,995
200
700
150
1,000
5, 347
29, 625
15,000
5,090
400
11,000

1,620
33, 270
6,136
46, 329
2,019
62,900
48,847
66, 586
27,465
75,120
4,270
23,355

0
1
0
2
0
8
5
2
0
15
0
2

0
11, 000

0
820

4,000
20, 310

0
2

53, 000
10, 900
9, 800
0
39, 675
47,000
4, 500
0
0
7, 500
26, 400
18, 500
16, 500
3,000
0

31, 450
9, 850
1,175
0
4, 026
151, 055
2,318
2, 800
1,225
1,372
4,115
750
2,400
475
2,275

177,840
28, 750
60,025
1, 000
88, 722
269, 899
6, 918
3,280
4, 002
38,196
33,035
22,000
26, 700
3, 475
2,275

8
4
2
0
10
17
3
0
0
2
7
4
3
1
0

342
table

MONTHLY LABOR R EV IEW
9 . — E S T IM A T E D

COST OF B U IL D IN G S F O R W H IC H P E R M IT S W E R E ISSU ED
IN P R IN C IP A L C IT IE S , JU N E 1933—Continued
M i d d l e A t l a n t i c S ta te s — Continued

C ity and State

Fam­
New
New
Total
residen­ nonresi- (includ­ ilies
dential ing re­
pro­
tial
vided
build­
build­
pairs)
for
ings
ings

N e w Y o r k—
Continued.
Glens Falls.— $23, 000
$600 $24,885
G loversville..
7,400
3,290
16,315
0
0
Herkimer____
0
17,000
1,000
22,200
Ithaca_______
975
13,149
Jamestown
4, 500
800
6,000
26,800
Johnson C ity.
4, 715
215
Kenmore____
4, 000
5,395
27, 685
Kingston8, 650
0
3, 850
3,850
Lackawanna..
30,450
5,000
36, 235
L ockport____
3,600
Lynbrook___
0
5, 020
Mamaroneck.
7,000
400
19, 715
0
0
0
Massena____
75,342
M iddletow n..
7,000
67, 042
M ount Ver­
44, 520
8,000
29,800
non_______
Newburgh___
1,350
17, 450
5, 500
12, 510
65,135
33, 500
New Rochelle
N ew Y o r k
City:
The B ronx1. 259,800 138,150 671, 375
B rooklyn1. . 1,632, 000 1,449, 005 4, 239, 345
M anhattan1
C 657, 375 3,174, 816
500, 70C 971, 236 1,815, 022
Queens1___
82,14C
41, 139 189, 718
R ichm ond173,105
23, 200
26, 945
Niagara Falls.
North Tona2,000
1,290
4, 670
wanda_____
1,200
1,200
Ogdensburg..
0
100
375
0
Oneida_____
1,200
5,200
1,500
Oneonta_____
40,
261
5,200
20,
700
Ossining.. . . .
0
0
5, 334
O sw eg o____
7 ,96C
27,715
P e e k s k ill___
11, 50C
Plattsburg___
4, 950
850
9, 320
69C
10,160
Port Chester..
5, 00C
0
c
C
Port Jervis. . .
21,200 183,100 205, 662
Poughkeepsie50C
30C
5, 025
Rensselaer___
65, 946 150,481
Rochester___
39, 500
Rockville
4,540 101, 823
Center. . . .
91,950
Saratoga
5, 300
34,449
25, 500
Springs.. . .
86, 545 164, 373
27, 350
Schenectady..
19,100
50, 300
83, 322
Syracuse_____
T ona w a n d a ..
3, 50C
700
5,685
32, 500
4, 550
72,100
T roy ----------9, 95C
57, 675
U tic a .............
41.50C
6,000
9, 625
1,34C
Valley Stream
11, 50(
23, 535
37,115
W atertow n.. .
81, 945
42,000
26, 500
W hite Plains.
5,850 252, 285
186, 60C
Yonkers_____
Pennsylvania:
Abington
15, 330
1,000
8,500
T w p _______
8,150
21, 220
(
Allentown___
8, 565
(
1,05(
Altoona_____
11, 50C
4, 00C
7, 500
Arnold__ . . .
1 ,19(
1,210
0
Berwick_____
85(
6, 75(
B eth leh em ...
4,000
300
5,090
Braddock____
4, 500
375
9, 79(
4, 50(
Bradford____
100
(
(
Bristol_______
1, 250
4, 250
Canonsburg. _
3,000
1, 000
7,105
4 ,90(
Carlisle______
125
125
Charleroi2___
0
A p p lica tion s filed,


https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis

6
2
0
3
1
2
2
2
2
1
0
1
0
2
2
1
3
68
569
0
160
24
5
1
0
0
3
1
0
3
1
1
0
2
1
2
13
6
6
8
2
7
6
3
2
4
23
3
0
0
2
0
1
1
1
0
1
2
0

C ity and State

New
New
Fam­
Total
residen­ nonresi- (includ­ ilies
tial
dential ing re­ pro­
build­
build,-.
pairs) vided
ings
for
ings

Pennsylvania—
Continued.
Chester______
0
Clairton_____
0
C oatesville...
0
Connellsville.
0
Conshohocken
$3, 800
Coraopolis___
0
D o n o r a _____
0
D u Bois_____
0
Duquesne___
0
Easton______
3, 500
Ellwood C ity.
0
Erie. ______
13, 000
Greensburg...
5,000
Harrisburg__
0
Haverford___
14, 500
Hazleton____
23, 500
Jeannette____
2,500
Johnstown___
0
Kingston____
26, 000
Lancaster-----0
Latrobe. . . .
0
Lower Merion
98,121
M cKeesport—
5,900
M c K e e s
R ocks_____
0
M ahanoy
C ity----------0
Meadville___
8,000
Monessen___
4,000
M ount Lebanon___ __ __
23,000
M unhall_____
0
Nanticoke___
13,000
New Castle...
5,000
New Kensing­
ton________
0
N orristow n...
0
North Braddock. _____
0
Oil C ity_____
c
Philadelphia- 311, 60C
Phoenixville..
2, 00C
P ittsb u rg h ...
68, 50C
Pittston. ___
C
Pottstown___
500
Pottsville —
7,000
Reading-------(
Scranton____
10, 50C
Sharon______
(
Sunbury------(
Swissvale ..
(
Tamaqua____
0
U n ion tow n ...
6, 00(
Upper Darby.
16,495
Vandergrift _.
0
Warren___ _
4 ,00(
W ashington..
0
W aynesboro..
0
West Chester.
3 ,00(
Wilkes-Barre.
47,46(
Wilkinsburg—
0
Williamsport.
600
Y ork ________
25,150

$1,475
140
200
515
65
0
0
0
1,550
20,105
0
5,944
0
7, 600
2, 525
3, 925
0
1,575
5,850
22, 750
0
1,375
175

$4,250
680
850
950
4,045
3,000
0
0
2, 550
31, 547
0
65,169
5, 500
33, 480
38,007
31,965
3,450
8, 547
33,850
33, 565
0
148, 509
15, 347

0
0
0
0
1
0
0
0
0
1
0
3
1
0
2
5
1
0
10
0
0
7
2

0

0

0

6,000
2,900
600

6,000
11,950
5, 450

0
1
1

850
0
0
1,545

24, 570
0
14, 200
10, 345

3
0
5
1

0
8,350

0
14, 275

0
0

0
5, 625
158,12C
5C
41,835
0
3,650
600
6,500
45,10(
2,350
44,069
70(
0
1,00(
1,715
0
1, 40(
15, 125
0
(
23, 241
800
2,069
16,480

750
11, 24C
697, 765
14, 15C
256, 857
0
12,750
9, 25C
25, 490
66,485
2,615
44, 569
70(
0
7,000
21, 659
0
5,95(
15, 275
0
6,865
94, 745
2, 100
13, 908
65, 747

0
0
81
1
14
0
1
1
0
3
0
0
0
0
1
3
0
2
0
0
1
17
0
1
4

Total____ 4, 738,915 4,907,077 15,915,802 1,291

2 N ot included in totals,

343

HOUSING
T

able

9 —E S T IM A T E D C OST OF B U IL D IN G S FO R W H IC H P E R M IT S W E R E ISSUED
IN P R IN C IP A L C IT IE S , JU N E 1933—Continued
E a s t N o r t h C e n tr a l S ta te s

C ity and State

Illinois:
Alton
Aurora
. _
Belleville. __
Berw yn____
Bloom ingtonBlue Island...
Brookfield___
Cairo
Calumet City.
Canton.
Centralia___
Champaign..Chicago___
Chicago Hts._
CiceroDanville ..
Decatur___
E. St. L ou is..
Elgin..
Elmhurst____
Elmwood
Park___
Evanston.
Forest P a rk ..
Freeport...
Granite C ity.
Harvey
Highland
Park___
Joliet
Kankakee___
La Grange___
M a yw ood ___
Melrose Park.
M o lin e ..
M t. V ernon ..
Oak Park____
Ottawa.
Park R id g e...
Peoria.
Quincy.
Rockford
R ock Island _
Springfield. _.
Sterling . .
S treator...
Urbana.. .
Waukegan__
W ilm ette.
Winnetka____
Indiana:
Bedford____
Connersville..
Crawfordsville.
East Chicago.
Elkhart . . .
Elwood ..
Evansville___
Fort W ayne. _
Gary________
Goshen..
Hamm ond___
H untington..
Indianapolis..
Lafayette___
L ogansport.-.
Marion . . .
Michigan
C ity_______
M ishawaka...
M uncie_____
N ew Castle—

New
New
residen­ nonresitial
dential
build­
build­
ings
ings

$4,900
0
1,000
0
1,000
0
(
(
2,500
0
0
976
52, 05C
0
0
4,000
4,200
0
4,000
10,000
0
0
0
0
0
0

Fam­
Total
(includ­ ilies
pro­
ing re­
vided
pairs)
for

$275
$7, 375
4,050
20, 97f
2, 100
4, 101
6 ,15(
7, 251
0
2,450
1,325
5, 671
475
1,351
20(
200
50
2, 760
(
15(
6,201
6, 70(
15, 101
18, 571
834, 36C 1, 045, 372
18, 550
18,750
20f
7, 56C
3,310
35; 100
35,150
46, 550
9,475
11, 865
515
9 ,81C
9,288
19,288
1, 680
8,750
600
1, 100
0
150

1,780
33, 500
4,080
1,800
0
2,100

1
0
1
0
1
0
0
0
4
0
0
1
14
0
0
1
1
0
1
2
0
0
0
0
0
0

1,000
0
8, 000
0
0
0
4,000
0
0
0
19,000
22, 000
4, 900
0
0
20, 650
0
5,000
20, 500
2,000
21,800
0

950
0
0
800
0
275
373
800
1,357
0
500
6,815
2, 375
2,975
6, 750
3,260
900
600
0
0
380
856

3, 366
12, 300
13, 050
800
2,540
525
9,407
1,400
3, 642
1,500
20, 000
41, 065
10, 550
7,800
28, 906
62,038
2,180
6’ 100
22, 350
6,800
23, 540
3,125

1
0
2
0
0
0
1
0
0
0
2
8
1
0
0
8
0
1
3
1
3
0

0
0

0
700

0
900

0
0

0
5, 500
0
0
10,000
4,000
3, 600
0
4,800
0
38,175
0
0
0

5,150
10, 840
430
500
965
7, 826
2,645
175
722
0
31,818
0
425
173, 350

5, 150
16,465
2,730
825
27, 548
20,379
9,420
175
15,052
50
198, 552
1,300
1, 912
181, 659

0
1
0
0
4
1
4
0
2
0
6
0
0
0

0
0
15,500
0

1,630
1,250
3, 233
0

2, 765
1,400
33,968
0

0
0
3
0

2 N ot included in totals.


https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis

C ity and State

Indiana—Con.
Peru________
Richm ond..
South B en d ..
Terre H aute..
Vincennes___
W hiting_____
Michigan:
Ann A r b o r ...
Battle Creek.
Bay C ity___ _
Benton HarDearborn . . .
Escanaba___
Ferndale____
Flint___ ____
Grand Rapids
Grosse Pointe
Park____
Hamtramck _
Highland
Park____

New
New
Fam­
residen­ nonresi- Total
ilies
tial
dential (includ­ pro­
ing re­
build­
build­
vided
pairs)
ings
ings
for

0
0
$1,400
4, 300
0
0

0
$700
6,165
1,580
1,600
600

0
$3,200
18, 720
17,968
3,968
3, 560

0
0
1
2
0
0

0
15,000
0
0

0
24,125
2,495

31, 020
32, 465
16,118

2
0
0

0
16, 100
230 250
3’ 500
0
2,352
4,000

730

19^ 630

6

0
1,055
3, 850
4, 925

7, 400
2, 775
20,077
24,455

2
0
2
1

13, 400
0

500
325

16, 350
4, 720

2
0

0

275

1,960

0

Ironw ood..

3’ 450

100

4,945

3

K alam azoo..

7, 000

2, 250

11, 797

1

Lincoln Park.
Marquette___
Monroe
M uskegon
Muskegon
Heights. __
O w osso... . . .
Pontiac .
Royal O a k ...
Saginaw2
Sault Sainte
Marie. _ . .
W yandotte.. .
Ohio:
Akron_______

0
12, 000
3,500
3,200

5,200
0
575
875

7,745
12j 700
4,075
8, 235

0
4
1
3

0
0
0
0
4,800

0
25
642
170
7, 405

756
135
2,282
295
21,277

0
0
0
0
1

9, 235
9, 500

880
2,390

20, 750
13,820

14
2

11,800
0

61,165

91, 715

2

0
0
0
0
0
0
323, 600
81,000

410
0
0
0
150
5, 720
35, 345
113, 300

897
345
0
0
600
6, 770
430, 250
306, 200

0
0
0
0
0
0
63
17

50, 300
16,000

4, 295
13,400

56,160
48,750

9
5

0
12,500

300
24, 414

3,300
132, 487

0
2

0
0
32,900
3, 500
10,000
0

0
435
0
350
0
300

030
3,270
33, 525
4,600
12 200
300

0
0
7
2
1
0

0
0
0
14,900
0

0
915
10
1,345
150

0
4,845
110
18, 790
2,200

0
0
0
3
0

Ashtabula___
Barberton___
B u cy ru s ____
C am bridge...
Campbell____
Canton
___
Cincinnati___
Cleveland___
Cleveland
Heights____
Columbus___
Cuyahoga
Falls______
Dayton______
East CleveElyria_______
E u c lid ______
Findlay_____
Fremont____
Garfield
Heights____
Hamilton___
fronton______
Lakewood___
Lima________

344

MONTHLY LABOR REVIEW

T a b l e 9 .— E S T IM A T E D C O ST OF B U IL D IN G S F O R W H IC H P E R M IT S W E R E ISSU ED

IN P R IN C IP A L C IT IE S , JU NE 1933—Continued
E a st

C ity and State

N o rth

C e n tr a l S ta te s —

Fam­
New
New
Total
residen­ nonresi- (includ­ ilies
pro­
tial
dential ing re­
vided
build­
build­
pairs)
for
ings
ings

Ohio—Contd.
Lorain - -MansfieldMarion
Massillon --M iddletown.

S h a k e r
Heights____
Springfield .
Steubenville—
Struthers____
Tiffin . . . . . .

Youngstown _
Wisconsin:
Appleton . . .
Beloit___

Continued

C ity and State

0
$14,900
0
0
4,500
0
2 700
0
15, 500
0
0
0
4, 075

$400
620
400
650
1,175
650
150
1.800
1,180
325
4,800
0
530

$1,140
20, 038
2, 400
1,720
8,140
3,390
4, 550
5', 090
17, 680
325
5,680
0
7,980

0
5
0
0
1
0
2
0
4
0
0
0
2

104,800
0
3,500
0
16,000
12, 500
0
0
3,000
4,300
8, 82Î

0
2, 375
2,000
0
0
9, 033
440
150
3, 850
28, 067
(

105, 525
6, 42c
7, 625
0
16,000
33, 755
5,405
2,650
9, 850
42,025

9
0
2
0
4
2
0
0
2
1

15,800
500

675
1,075

50, 450
4,565

4
1

W i s c o n s i n—
Continued.
C udahy_____
Eau Claire__
Fond du L ac.
Green B ay___
Janesville-----Kenosha_____
Madison. . . .
M anitowoc.
Marinette___
M ilw aukee...
Oshkosh____
Racine__ . . .
Sheboygan__
Shore w ood__
South
Milwaukee___
Stevens Point
S uperior-----Tw o Rivers. .
W aukesha___
W ausau_____
Wauwatosa.._
West Allis___

Fam­
New
New
Total
residen­ nonresi- (includ­ ilies
dential ing re­ pro­
tial
build­
build­
pairs) vided
for
ings
ings

0
$17,800
0
21,800
0
0
34, 200
8, 500
4, 800
57,400
13, 730
0
5,000
0

$350
900
2,025
1,185
2, 200
4,910
4,095
2,785
2,040
98,046
625
5,000
355,110
3, 500

$900
25, 825
2, 395
31,714
3, 350
7,410
66, 333
14,183
8, 065
388, 566
17, 475
8, 970
387,520
3, 775

0
5
0
7
0
0
6
3
2
10
6
0
1
0

0
4,500
2,500
0
0
3,000
27, 000
6,500

0
2,525
632
0
1,977
8, 375
550
3, 700

0
12,895
6, 567
704
3,902
15,475
30, 415
12, 630

0
1
1
0
0
1
5
2

Total____ 1,621,518 2,241,825 5, 548, 266

382

W e s t N o r t h C e n tr a l S ta te s

Ames________
B oone_______
Burlington__
Cedar Rapids.
Council Bluffs
D a v en p ort.. .
Des M oines..
D u b u q u e ----. Fort D o d g e ...
Iowa C ity ----Marshalltown.
Mason C it y ..
M uscatine2. . .
Ottumwa____
Sioux C ity___
W aterloo____
Kansas:
Arkansas City
Atchison___
Dodge C ity....
Eldorado____
Emporia_____
Fort Scott___
H utchinson...
Independence
Kansas C ity .
Lawrence____
Leavenworth
M anh attan ...
N ew ton_____
Pittsburg.......
Salina_______
Topeka_____
W ichita_____
Minnesota:
Albert Lea___
Duluth______
Faribault........
H ibbing-------M ankato____

$3, 500
9,000
27, 500
13,800
3, 529
8,300
38,060
0
0
23, 500
0
20,820
0
32, 500
32, 950
9,000

$265
160
490
1,900
3, 542
5,660
32,655
950
1,785
24, 700
30,300
3,310
575
500
1,830
1,010

$5, 565
9, 260
32, 490
75, 217
27, 838
36, 861
81, 285
47,152
2, 635
48,900
36, 600
24,130
575
46,350
37. 605
52,105

1
1
3
5
4
3
20
0
0
5
0
11
0
9
10
3

0
0
0
C
2, 500
0
0
0
4,715
21, 300
6, 500
6,800
1,000
8,000
70(
11,100
4,500

0
3, 250
0
0
275
500
5,925
0
5,785
250
1,450
0
60
600
525
4, 528
1, 630

500
3,250
500
312
17, 275
2,000
9,020
0
21,115
21,850
18, 935
6,800
1,860
9, 260
4, 800
26,033
16, 968

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

4, 700
9, 45(
3, 55(
4, 500
4,200

€
8, 765
650
1, 600
90

4, 700
101, 279
6, 95C
26,198
8, 883

2
6
2
1
2

2N ot included in totals.


https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis

M i n n e s o t a—
Continued.
M inneapolis.. $211,000 $43, 335 $359, 695
1,000
7, 324
3,900
Rochester___
11,973
1,859
4,900
St. C loud____
132,180
40, 231 296,171
St. Paul .. .
1,535
2,335
0
South St.Paul
4,830
2,600
0
W inona_____
Missouri:
C a p e Gira9,050
1,450
7,000
deau_______
14,000
0
14,000
Columbia___
5,100
0
5,100
Hannibal____
800
0
800
Independence
4,830
0
200
Joplin______
74,500
19,800 108, 500
Kansas C ity ..
3,500
0
0
M aplew ood...
40, 200
4,600
0
M oberiy_____
600
100
c
St. Charles.
28, 270
8, 260
7, 500
St. Joseph____
179,15C 479, 653 776, 586
St. L o u i s ___
39,915
2,345
4,350
Springfield___
Nebraska:
175
75
0
Beatrice-------26,850
0
0
Frem ont___
7, 250
2,590
1,30C
Grand Island.
6,000
500
5,500
Hastings____
56,149
7,995
40,075
Lincoln . .
9, 300
0
9, 30(
North Platte.
14,699 101,730
77,501
Omaha.
North Dakota:
3,800
0
3 ,80(
Bismarck____
12, 760
460
2,850
Fargo_______
1,090
0
685
Grand F ork s.
2,570
1,100
700
M in ot_______
South Dakota:
3, 554
2,450
C
Aberdeen____
8, 700
8, 500
C
H u r o n _____
3,590
C
2,
90C
Mitchell . . .
12, 695
1 ,11C
9, 60C
Sioux Falls__
Total____ 1,107,98o| 797,972 2, 842, 373

60
2
1
26
0
0
2
1
0
0
0
20
0
0
0
3
37
3
0
0
2
2
11
2
22
1
2
0
1
0
0
1
7
321

345

HOUSING

T a b i .E 9 ,—E S T IM A T E D COST OF B U IL D IN G S FO R W H IC H P E R M IT S W E R E ISSU ED

IN P R IN C IP A L C ITIE S, JU NE 1933—Continued
S o u t h A t l a n t i c S ta te s

C ity and State

Fam­
New
New
Total
residen­ nonresi- (includ­ ilies
pro­
tial
dential ing re­
build­
vided
build­
pairs)
for
ings
ings

Delaware:
W ilm ington ..
District of Col­
umbia:
W ashington..
Florida:
G ainesville...
Jacksonville .
K ey W est___
M iam i. ____
Orlando ____
Pensacola____
Sanford_____
St. Augustine.
St. Petersburg
Tallahassee.
T am pa. . . ..
West Palm
Beach_____
Georgia:
Athens______
Atlanta______
Augusta_____
Brunswick__
Columbus___
Lagrange.......
M acon______
Rome
Savannah___
Maryland:
Annapolis___
B altim ore...
Cumberland..
Frederick . .
Hagerstown...
Salisbury...
North Carolina:
Asheville . . .
Charlotte____
Concord . . .
Durham_____
F ayetteville..
Gastonia_____
G oldsboro....
Greensboro.
High Point ._
Kinston___ _

$60, 650

$11,100 $121,945

18

364, 400

56,850

545,960

51

11,875
43,600
0
22, 250
0
13,950
0
0
5,800
15,000
4,450

5,425
15, 615
0
12,185
1,000
5,068
13,520
1,000
2, 500
3, 805
7,198

27, 765
141,720
0
84,020
12,355
25, 808
14, 220
3,370
62,010
20, 507
41,413

7
17
0
8
0
11
0
0
3
9
5

5, 544

8,574

15, 438

2

22, GOO
54, 500
21,290
0
2, 800
0
3, 400
9,000
13, 050

2,000
31,855
8, 796
3,000
11,300
0
0
0
3,225

27, 745
117,123
50, 337
5,025
24,475
688
7, 770
10,000
18,325

8
18
8
0
1
0
2
4
5

11, 665
3, 850
5,140
33, 000 1,337, 281 1,848, 481
9, 648
2,500
1,950
25, 570
0
20, 530
7, 210
3, 600
3,315
14,800
10. 875
2,800

1
9
1
0
2
4

10, 890
54,947
5,495
101,855
4, 376
425
2,125
23, 565
16, 625
11,000

4
7
4
10
2
0
1
3
4
1

4, 550
22, 500
3, 300
27, 300
3, 500
0
2,000
10, 250
14,350
4,000

230
27, 200
0
63,000
0
425
125
245
2, 275
0

C ity and State

N o r t h Caro­
lina—Contd.
Raleigh___ __
BoekyM ount.
Shelby______
Statesville___
Wilmington...
Wilson 2 .
WinstonSalem____
South Carolina:
Anderson___
Charleston .
C olu m b ia .. .
Florence_____
Greenville___
Greenwood-..
Rock H ill___
Spartanburg..
S u m ter.........
Virginia:
Alexandria__
Charlottes­
ville. ____
Danville.._ .
Hopewell. . . .
L yn ch b u rg...
Newport
News______
Norfolk______
Petersburg__
Portsm outh..
Richm ond___
Roanoke . . .
Staunton____
Suffolk______
W inchester..
West Virginia:
Bluefield____
Charleston .
Clarksburg.. _
Fairmont... .
Huntington. _
M artinsburg.
Morgantown..
Wheeling____

Fam­
New
New
residen­ nonresi- Total
(includ­ ilies
tial
dential ing re­ pro­
build­
build­
pairs) vided
ings
for
ings

$8, 400
3,000
700
0
10, 500
0

$5,165
5,000
0
0
200
0

$30, 765
8, 050
1,400
1,000
10,700
650

4
1
1
0
4
0

16,000

14, 340

36,980

4

13, 700
10, 000
8,500
3, 525
4,000
6,900
3, 750
0
4, 000

175
2,000
1,430
0
150
25
0
75
350

18, 625
23, 264
15, 476
5, 325
19, 370
8, 524
14, 450
3,670
4.350

7
2
4
2
5
2
1
0
2

26, 600

17,850

49,032

8

23, 262
7,800
0
54,900

2,723
208
0
250

38, 259
11,243
261
62,855

5
2
0
12

8, 650
114, 525
0
9,200
71,150
3,200
1,500
9,500
7, 300

2,150
13,415
3,150
1,330
15,135
6,340
40
110
4, 600

19, 854
146, 953
3, 450
14,755
112,194
12, 645
1,690
13, 282
12, 850

3
33
0
4
17
1
1
3
3

4, 500
13,000
0
0
11,050
0
5,000
26,100

1,330
0
690
3,170
45, 235
300
1,325
7,300

6,648
19, 713
2, 770
3, 650
58,110
3,100
12, 290
38,355

1
2
0
0
3
0
1
4

Total____ 1, 301, 871 1,832,168 4,372,601

372

S o u t h C en tr a l S ta te s

Alabama:
Anniston____
B essem er___
Birmingham..
Decatur. ___
Fairfield_____
Gadsden.. . . .
Huntsville ._
M o b ile ...
M ontgom ery.
Selma___ . . .
Tuscaloosa.. .
Arkansas:
Fort S m ith ...
Hot Springs..
Little R ock ...
Texarkana..
Kentucky:
Fort Thomas
Henderson___

..

0
0
$8,290
0
0
1,000
0
6, 350
13,840
5,670
12, 262

$300
810
4,575
0
0
200
725
5,100
8, 500
0
800

$5,125
1,083
27,479
0
689
3,850
725
23, 553
45, 740
7,080
16, 262

0
0
3
0
0
1
0
5
8
3
4

2,000
1,000
1,000
0
0

0
1, 525
50
2,805
2,200

2,050
6; 683
1, 600
13, 248
3,925

1
1
1
0
0

4,000
0

0
0

4,000
0

1
0

2 N ot included in totals.


https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis

K e n t u c k y—
Continued.
Lexington___
L ouisville.. .
Paducah_____
Louisiana:
Alexandria.- .
Lafayette____
Monroe ____
New Orleans
Shreveport.. .
Mississippi:
Clarksdale
C olum bus.. .
Greenville___
Greenwood--.
G u lfp ort___
Hattiesburg...
Jackson______
Laurel_______

0
$68, 250
2,100

$56.091
88, 250
0

$72, 546
233, 325
2,100

0
12
2

0
0
7.50
46, 530
11, 225

770
125
3, 570
9,050
7, 735

17,233
625
5, 210
100, 649
64,236

0
0
1
11
7

0
0
0
0
3,100
0
12, 745
600

0
0
2,065
0
4,850
75,075
0
40

100
0
7,440
0
8,175
75,575
39,074
840

0
0
0
0
1
0
4
1

346
T

able

MONTHLY LABOR REVIEW
9 . — E S T IM A T E D

COST OF B U IL D IN G S F O R W H IC H P E R M IT S W E R E ISSU ED
IN P R IN C IP A L C IT IE S , JU NE 1933—Continued
S o u t h C e n tr a l S t a t e s — Continued

Fam­
New
New
Total
residen­ nonresi- (includ­ ilies
pro­
dential ing re­
City and State
tial
vided
build­
build­
pairs)
for
ings
ings
Mississippi—
Continued.
Meridian, . . .
V icksburg.. .
Oklahoma:
Ardm ore___
Bartlesville
Chickasha.. .
Enid _______
McAlester ..
0 klahoma
City

Tennessee:
Chattanooga.
Jackson____ .
Johnson C ity.
K ingsport..
Nashville— .
Texas:
Abilene______
Amarillo_____

$2, 750
0

0
$1,450

$5, 350
2,190

3
0

990
1,700
0
0
0

2, 775
0
0
0
1,800

3, 765
2,000
4,050
1,000
1,925

2
Ï
0
0
0

23,500
0
0
6,500

221,825
L 200
0
14,850

274, 678
1’ 300
3| 650
30, 370

3
0
0
1

3,200
0
500
4,000
23, 880
19, 630
24,900

2, 200
1,150
4,500
0
27,882
1, 670
64,549

35, 633
1,350
5,000
4 ,06C
64,80C
133’, 510
133,880

3
0
1
1
9
9
14

0
3,700

475
375

2,055
6, 337

0
3

C ity and State

Fam­
New
New
Total
residen­ nonresiilies
(includ­
tial
dential ing re­ pro­
build­
build­
vided
pairs)
ings
for
ings

Texas— Contd.
A ustin... . . $117, 603 $19,998 $157, 684
864
875
10, 801
Beaumont___
12,000
25, 200
Corsicana____
8, 500
15, 044 168,113
67,400
Dallas. -----0
1,035
610
Del Rio ____
1,100
9,000
12, 400
Denison . .
0
10, 475
1,585
El Paso______
32, 500
39, 650
Fort W orth ...
95,145
Galveston___
25, 550
2,053
37, 598
0
2,499
4,369
Harlingen___
134, 000
71,835 212, 824
9,005
L ubbock____
0
4,225
8,517
798
11,125
Palestine____
850
1,000
2, 350
Pampa______
5,850
50
10, 685
Paris ______
0
1,715
3,165
San A ngelo...
48,900
42,985 116, 639
San A ntonio..
Sherman___
3, 265
0
5, 367
225
Sweetwater...
0
2, 037
2, 30C
2, 300
Tem ple_____
C
11,605
33, 505
17, 400
35, 511
W aco_____ .
17, 500
3,660
0
11,102
Wichita Falls.
5,597

47
1
4
31
0
1
0
21
17
0
91
0
6
1
3
0
23
3
0
0
13
9
0

805, 772

388

Total____

877, 213 2, 485, 558

M o u n t a i n a n d P a c i f i c S ta te s

Arizona:
Phoenix
T u c s o n _____
California:
Alameda___
Alhambra
Anaheim .
Bakersfield
B erkeley.. .
Beverly Hills.
B u rb a n k ...
Burlingame. .
E ureka.. . . .
Fresno_______
Gardena_____
Glendale___
Huntington
Park___ __
Inglewood___
Long Beach
Los Angeles.
M odesto___
M onrovia___
Oakland _. .
Ontario______
Palo A lto..
Pasadena____
P o m o n a ____
Riverside-----Sacramento...
Salinas______
San Bernar­
dino. ___
San Diego___
San Francisco
San Jose. _. .
San Leandro..
Santa Ana. .
Santa Barba­
ra_________

$7, 500
2, 300

$6, 770
2,110

$19,930
16, 017

1
3

7, 350
12,000
0
10, 615
35, 765
110, 500
12, 500
18, 312
0
9, 750
1,000
31,400

3, 360
18, 300
0
17, 360
63,921
11, 750
1,325
0
6,080
17, 598
1, 150
2, 329

23, 409
39, 075
2, 700
30, 875
117, 621
148, 450
17, 310
20,112
22, 578
58, 291
2, 740
41, 329

2
5
0
5
10
18
6
5
0
3
1
10

1,500
32,825
1,200
17, 745
11, 400
3, 500
26, 900 611,000
55, 265
745,975 401, 492 1,659,784
1,900
6, 390
2,150
2,594
0
355
91,000 114, 507 308, 786
100
550
0
2,575
33, 650
25,75C
27, 249
53, 286 116, 435
6,49C
1, 500
1,425
7, 28C
4, 37C
C
6,112
83, 523
48, 30C
32, 105
23, 500
4, 55C

1
5
24
286
2
0
29
0
4
9
1
0
12
3

3,900
182, 990
235, 255
20, 900
5, 00C
9, 70C
5, 850


https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis

1,415
10,385
21, 154 292,136
565, 744 1, 049, 857
52, 845
90,87C
84
6, 885
24, 094
t
15, 845

29,350

2
48
68
6
2
3
3

C a 1i f o r n i a—
Continued.
Santa C ru z ...
Santa M onica
Santa R osa ..
South G a te...
South Pasadena___. . .
Stockton____
Vallejo____ _
W hittier... . .
Colorado:
Boulder_____
Colorado
Springs... .
Denver. _ _
Fort Collins.
Greeley______
P u e b lo ... _
Idaho:
Boise________
Pocatello__ _
Montana:
A n a con d a ...
B illings... . .
Butte________
Great Falls..
Helena______
Nevada:
Reno _______
N ew Mexico:
Albuquerque.
Oregon:
Astoria______
Eugene . . . . .
Klamath
Falls______
Medford . . .
Portland____

$7, 300
31,800
0
1,000

$3,000
2,400
350
18, 235

$11, 246
46, 377
5, 687
32,405

5
11
0
1

6, 200
0
24, 750
8,500

0
16, 804
270
17, 340

10, 036
24, 098
34, 560
29, 695

2
0
11
3

1,500

550

4,040

1

6.950
67, 000
0
2, 500
2, 300

2, 537
50, 285
335
1,295
3,025

19, 986
201,567
1,780
4, 833
10, 525

3
15
0
1
1

3, 50C
0

740
650

9, 250
3,915

1
0

4, 00C
19, 000
C
6,90C
15,600

200
300
230
900
573

4, 200
19, 900
2, 100
18,735
35, 772

1
8
0
3
7

4,500

1,650

15,715

1

5, 500

955

16, 681

2

60C
2, 800

75
940

2, 604
10,023

1
1

C
750
128,800

10, 61C
1,000
39, 295

10,61C
3,895
236,805

0
1
30

HOUSING

347

T a b l e 9 . — E S T IM A T E D

COST OF B U IL D IN G S F O R W H IC H P E R M IT S W E R E ISSU ED
IN P R IN C IP A L C IT IE S , JU NE 1933—Continued
M o u n t a i n a n d P a c i f i c S ta te s —

C ity and State

Utah:
Ogden.............
P rovo_______
Salt Lake
C ity.............
Washington:
Aberdeen____
Bellingham ...
Bremerton___
Hoquiam ____
Longview ___
Olympia_____
Port Angeles.

New
New
Fam­
residen­ nonresi- Total
ilies
tial
dential (includ­ pro­
ing re­
build­
build­
vided
pairs)
ings
ings
for

0
$1,800

$500
95

$1,410
3,745

0
1

24, 675

8, 772

61,350

7

1,415
7,925
100
0
35
0
150

2,539
14,080
23, 000
250
935
8,185
250

0
4
5
0
0

0

2,700
11,150
0

0
0

4, 500

Continued

C ity and State

W ashington—
Continued.
Seattle_______
Spokane___ _
T a c o m a ... . .
Walla W alla..
Wenatchee__
Yakim a_____
W yom ing;
Casper ..........
Cheyenne___

0

New
New
Fam­
residen­ nonresi­ Total
ilies
tial
dential (includ­ pro­
ing re­
build­
build­
vided
pairs)
ings
ings
for

$31,815
6, 300
17,850
4,800
1,950
600

$33, 670 $171, 065
18,118
50, 264
4, 055
33,015
1,515
7,100
0
4, 400
350
5,915

0
15, 000

1,250
141

26
5
8
3
1
1

1,750
20, 235

0
4

Total____ 2, 230, 766 1, 684,347 6, 219, 699

755

H a w a ii

City

Honolulu___________

___

New resi­
dential
buildings

New non­
residential
buildings

$90,413

$28,998

Total (in­ Fami­
cluding re­ lies pro­
vided
pairs)
for

Building Operations in Cities of the United States Having a
Population of 100,000 or Over, First Half of 1933

ABLE I shows the estimated cost of new residential buildings, of
new nonresidential buildings, and of total building operations in 94
cities in the United States having a population of 100,000 or over for
the first half of 1933, as compared with the first half of 1932.
Indicated expenditures for residential buildings decreased 37.9
percent, for new nonresidential buildings 31.9 percent, and for total
building operations 28.3 percent, comparing these two periods.
The number of family-dwelling units provided during the first half
of 1933 decreased 28.6 percent as compared with the first half of 1932.
While the cities as a whole showed a decrease comparing the peri­
ods under discussion, there was a substantial increase in a number
of cities, notably San Francisco. Other cities showing an increase
during this period were: Columbus, Ohio; Duluth, Minn.; Elizabeth,
N.J.; Flint, Mich.; Fort Worth, Tex.; Gary, Ind.; Lowell, Mass.;
Nashville, Tenn.; Providence, R .I.; Rochester, N .Y.; St. Louis, M o.;
St. Paul, Minn.; San Diego, Calif.; Utica, N .Y .; Waterbury, Conn.;
and Yonkers, N.Y.
The largest decrease was registered in the city of Washington,
where several contracts were awarded for large Government buildings
during the first half of 1932.

T


https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis

348

MONTHLY LABOR R E V IE W

T a b l e 1 .— E S T IM A T E D COST OF N E W R E S ID E N T IA L B U IL D IN G S , OF N E W N O N R E S I-

D E N T IA L B U IL D IN G S , A N D OF T O T A L B U IL D IN G O P E R A T IO N S IN 94 C IT IE S OF
T H E U N IT E D S T A T E S H A V IN G A P O P U L A T IO N OF 100,000 O R O V E R , F O R T H E F IR S T
H A L F OF 1933 C O M P A R E D W IT H T H E F IR S T H A L F OF 1932

New residential buildings

Estimated cost

City

First half
of 1932

A kron_____________
A lbany__________ -Atlanta............... .......
Baltimore . ______
Birmingham_______
Boston 1____________
Bridgeport_________
B u ffa lo........... ..........
Cambridge_________
Camden __________
Canton ___________
Chattanooga_______
Chicago- _________
Cincinnati_________
Cleveland__________
Columbus_________
Dallas_____________
D ayton......................
Denver................... . .
Des M o in e s _______
Detroit____________
Duluth____________
Elizabeth...................
El Paso____ _______
E rie___________ ___
Evansville_____
Fall R iver_________
Flint_______________
Fort W ayne_______
Fort W o r t h ............
Gary........... ................
Grand Rapids_____
Hartford...... ..........
H ouston___________
In d ia n a p olis...........
Jacksonville________
Jersey C ity________
Kansas C ity (Kans.).
Kansas C ity (M o.) Knoxville__________
Long Beach________
Los Angeles_______
Louisville__________
L o w e ll......................
L y n n ______________
M em phis__________
M iam i_____________
M ilw a u k ee________
Minneapolis_______
Nashville.................
N e w a rk ___________
N ew Bedford_______
New Haven________
N ew Orleans_______
N ew York:
The Bronx L ..
Brooklyn 1_______
M anhattan1_____
Queens 1_________
Richm ond 1______
N orfolk___________
Oakland___________
Oklahoma C ity____
Omaha_____________
Paterson, _________
Peoria— --------------

$115, 700
627, 080
274,050
1, 395, 000
52,160
1,069, 800
287, 940
385, 540
104,000
19,100
6,950
40,650
666,900
1,465, 655
622, 900
164, 600
405,169
128, 675
1,054, 650
275, 200
1,402, 074
63, 250
100, 000
28,300
173, 400
31, 700
44,850
19,212
62,190
410,945
16,000
80, 700
150, 220
818, 985
425,050
180, 450
166, 200
40, 600
416, 500
93,117
436, 785
4,105, 249
204, 350
37, 800
53, 750
117,910
98, 510
499,950
971, 725
197,800
407, 750
4,000
199, 700
325, 542
2, 707, 290
4,107, 650
2, 400, 000
5, 501, 785
538, 005
449,175
551, 226
309, 200
393, 025
77,125
235,100

i Applications filed.


https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis

Families pro­
vided for in
new dwellings

New nonresidential
buildings

Total construction, in­
cluding alterations
and repairs

Estimated cost

Estimated cost

First
First half
First half First
half of half of
of 1932
of 1933
1933
1932
$46, 550
325,800
166, 880
280, 000
31,210
687, 200
122, 221
125,100
32, 500

0
6, 500

24,650
247,650
1,007, 480
334, 500
81,000
313,032
28, 850
339, 000
124, 365
498, 689
32, 300
55, 000
11,025
52, 650
34,825
16, 400
15,151
32, 700
157, 900
7,100
39, 000
33, 200
667,186
115, 425
126, 750
147,100
34, 670
222, 000
53, 820
201, 965
2,911,855
128,800
14,100
25,980
81,120
106,150
168, 750
562,150
70, 500
682,670
9,500
93, 310
154, 240

7, 249, 560
3,087, 950
48, 000
1, 943, 530
279, 500
353, 550
276, 425

110,100

282,151
59, 600
76, 700

27
53

112

297
30
239
90

11
45
121
78
12

111

155
35
33
7

21

3
14
67

48
4
4

129
280
124
29

222

31
207
71
187
32
16
14
45

11
6
6

14
165

6
21

39
318
79
70
47
31

111

35
169
1,473
46

12

13
55
56
108
251
89
72

1

38
132

716
1,072
471
1, 431
154
128
146
80
105
23
59

0

200
60
16
169

6

77
75
113

21
11
7
15
13
7
7

6
6

79

14
7
316

21

80
43
37
62
26
89
1,181
33

6

9
39
41
34
153
46
382
3
16
58

First half
of 1933

$313, 797
$91, 920
499, 830
143, 440
73,103
2, 251, 946
3,123,981 2, 399, 530
132, 909
37,445
2,048, 724 1, 236, 261
71,714
38, 654
584,158
296, 557
1,021, 265
490, 089
201,162
43, 954
284,880
11,181
30, 290
983,130
3,155, 044 1, 272, 625
350, 560
1, 746, 412
4,906,812
352,400
364, 300 1,351, 600
495,941
331, 969
141, 393
161, 376
320,170
184, 225
1,047, 617
116, 586
4, 640, 388
461, 883
362,562
238, 606
43,800
157, 200
62,121
49, 599
82, 072
29, 603
256, 628
13, 787
10,851
206, 998
53, 558
68, 267
1,225,857
20,857
201,533 1,490,316
3,820
45,120
1,150, 235
83,015
476,984
74,033
723,807
300, 660
947, 555
135, 564
138, 689
60,430
295,112
357,800
47,085
28, 945
73,100
477, 000
1,102,312
46, 968
1, 562,817
392,196
4, 762,140 1,462,867
398, 075
134, 705
9,380
19, 560
30,857
36, 598
624,390
47,190
841,174
128, 680
441, 625
339, 673
1,310,886
136,160
427,165 1, 236, 293
3, 527, 804
412, 773
54, 800
23,490
716, 975
133, 640
447,001
151, 659

1, 641
574,180
1,004 5, 775,105
3 14,873, 322
583 3, 512, 602
101 1,184, 478
110 345, 985
94
563, 727
23 4, 738, 796
86 512, 978
17
461, 495
21 45, 618

1,491,725
2,889, 595

8, 646, 510

1,791, 578
287,091
62, 410
262, 535
582,971
102, 434
80, 805
126,070

First half
of 1932

First half
of 1933

$537,165
1,354, 543
3, 078,150
7, 521, 309
372,375
6,328, 479
463, 552
1, 386, 725
1,465,171
305, 348
309, 358
1,183, 538
5, 332, 282
3, 704, 020
6, 545, 787
965, 061
1,366, 325
378, 397
1,812, 345
1, 483, 092
6,948, 907
515, 921
143,800
149, 276
421,137
372,921
383, 336
148, 970
1, 381, 451
814, 346
28, 745
1,319, 905
1,008,826
1,640, 902
1, 711, 615
520, 516
656,392
113, 535
1, 210, 500
1, 228,181
2, 229, 047
11,307,409
899, 415
91, 775
235, 908
1,175, 330
657, 412
1, 629, 461
2, 743, 541
753,437
4, 649, 215
104,375
1,114,975
1,119,070

$210, 238
808, 773
410, 748
4,585,477
245, 930
3,480, 614
231, 502
828, 671
733, 536
74, 931
28, 066
189, 346
2, 508, 867
1, 789, 661
1, 293, 622
1, 643, 697
1, 067, 579
357,124
901, 327
342, 984
1, 533,082
562, 939
252, 660
93, 691
195,121
160, 335
101,095
150, 258
105, 001
1, 795,198
70, 775
197, 350
302,122
1,055, 542
552, 204
444, 744
652,119
94,445
415,000
220,843
3,965, 235
6, 652, 720
582, 565
92, 860
158, 457
577, 720
435, 828
1, 084,198
1,117,173
1,519,107
1,547,973
120, 395
376, 069
661, 280

4,843,839
13,018, 218
21, 566, 443
10,815, 054
2, 415,117
973, 316
1,440,429
5, 254,171
1,026, 651
780, 624
341,349

9, 888, 253
9, 225, 434
14,992, 243
5,100, 306
783, 435
610, 665
894, 648
793, 439
523, 925
340, 550
242,805

349

HOUSING

T a b l e 1 .— E S T IM A T E D COST OF N E W R E S ID E N T IA L B U IL D IN G S , OF N E W N O N R E S I-

D E N T IA L B U IL D IN G S , A N D OF T O T A L B U IL D IN G O P E R A T IO N S IN 94 C IT IE S OF
T H E U N IT E D ST A T E S H A V IN G A P O P U L A T IO N OF 100,000 O R O V E R , F O R T H E F IR S T
H A L F OF 1933 C O M P A R E D W IT H T H E F IR S T H A L F OF 1932—Continued

N ew residential buildings

Estimated cost

City

First half
of 1932

Philadelphia_______
Pittsburgh _______
Portland (O reg.)___
Providence________
Reading____________
Richm ond (V a .)___
Rochester__________
St. Louis......... ..........
St. Paul....... ..............
Salt Lake C ity_____
San A ntonio.......... . .
San Diego....... ..........
San Francisco______
S cra n ton .......... .........
Seattle._. _________
Somerville_________
South B end________
Spokane ________
Springfield (M ass.)..
Syracuse___________
T a c o m a ___________
T am pa_____________
T o le d o .. . . . ______
Trenton . . . _______
Tulsa______________
U tica_______________
W ash in g ton ......... .
W aterbury_________
W ichita. __________
W ilm ington________
W orcester__________
Yonkers .. . _____
Youngstown_______

Families pro­
vided for in
new dwellings

New nonresidential
buildings

Total construction, in­
cluding alterations
and repairs

Estimated cost

Estimated cost

First First
First half
First half
half of half of
of 1932
of 1933
1932
1933

$1, 378, 305 $1,094, 250
425, 050
260,050
521, 190
269, 700
128, 500
345, 050
13, 000
159, 000
159, 550
285, 700
299, 740
73,100
532, 750
1,321, 050
442, 800
563, 388
46, 500
91, 300
223, 990
157,006
440,230
465, 777
2,539, 033 1,388,095
41, 556
94, 675
144,100
430, 985
14, 000
9,700
10, 700
46,150
110,600
190,060
144, 700
42, 600
121, 700
255, 700
56,430
115, 000
14,000
32, 950
31,350
110, 375
27,900
61, 200
24,050
97, 550
92,800
121,700
4, 232, 200 1,610,100
68, 300
39, 200
120, 300
15, 750
136,850
185, 300
115,940
338,400
811,000
903, 300
25,050
31,925

334
99

121

69
30
82
52
341
105
28
151
173
697
25
203
3

11

64
44
52
54
28
26

11

28
25
769
14
38
44
76
143
7

First half
of 1933

First half
of 1932

First half
of 1933

291 $5, 236, 335 $3, 337, 640 $7, 884, 358 $6, 640,183
4, 042, 250
921,166
80 2,939, 799
163, 255
792,820
78
995, 365
193, 190
2, 047, 854
902, 350
1, 226, 707 1,476, 235
28
303, 236
138, 622
343, 571
26, 375
1 67, 465
716, 489
417,911
48
105, 150
196,137
11 650,016 1,002, 122 1, 327, 591 1,345, 597
2, 600, 054 4,484, 944
132
479, 796 3, 327, 055
1, 631, 565 2,950, 791
90
558, 834 2, 050, 877
266, 409
223,156
78, 254
19
68, 111
590, 846
1, 076, 143
141
312, 727
703, 489
1, 312, 288 1,385,973
162
225, 504
526, 598
5, 668, 911 50, 627,839
434 1, 872, 562 48, 214, 953
1, 837, 277
216, 768
11 1,536, 096
87, 270
809, 737
2, 563, 933
197, 300
93 1, 588, 252
123, 910
485, 170
49, 460
1 402, 222
311, 125
131, 245
80, 970
3
197, 825
248, 725
357, 990
53
52, 565
29, 527
152,611
791, 376
34, 445
20 439, 700
1, 142, 496
325,889
83, 960
25
658,922
154,351
289, 330
37
75, 425
41, 670
224, 782
175,540
14
38, 473
71, 788
249, 576
173, 074
33, 098
5
43, 006
274, 500
239,906
6 146, 428 136, 190
351, 163
178,755
11 175,889 106, 346
207, 210
356,780
117, 600
21, 295
17
5, 060,833
271 38,569, 244 2, 277, 531 44, 037, 364
131, 085
107, 685
31, 725
19
11,825
986, 234
126,137
66, 490
11 792, 463
674, 539
442, 111
152, 592
37
339,180
349, 664
805, 429
314,735
37
101, 436
1, 354, 386 1,413,515
436, 005
117
200, 491
473,
863
193, 233
6 402, 076 107, 857

T otal___ _____ 54,995,807 34,175,842 14, 229 10,157 143,949,890 98,012,930 245,467,403 175,974, 452
—28.3
—31.9
-2 8 .6
—37.9
Percent of ch an ge...
H a w a ii

Honolulu__________

$686,405


https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis

$439,084

399

310

$696, 554

$110,847

$1, 577, 285

$669,396

WAGES AND HOURS OF LABOR
Wages and Hours of Union Hotel and Restaurant Employees

HE wage scales and full-time hours per week in various locals
of the Hotel and Restaurant Employees’ International Union, as
reported to the Bureau of Labor Statistics by these locals, are shown
in the table following. The data cover 15,578 workers.
It will be noted that many of the agreements in effect were made
several years back and that there is quite a wide variation in the
number of occupations shown in different localities. Only occupations
for workers regularly employed are presented as space does not per­
mit showing rates for part-time or extra or special-occasion help.

T

U N IO N S CA LE S OF W A G E S A N D H O U R S OF H O T E L A N D R E S T A U R A N T E M P L O Y E E S

Wage rate per week

Locality and occupation

Date of pres­
ent agreement
At present

Aberdeen, Wash.:
Cooks___________________________
Waiters_________________________
Waitresses_______________________
Albany, N .Y ________________________
Anaconda, M ont.:
First cooks______________________
Second cooks____________________
Female cooks____________________
Waitresses_______________________
Miscellaneous___________________
Bakersfield, Calif____________________
Bellingham, Wash.:
Males:
Chefs________________________
Fry cooks-----------------------------Combination fry and pastry
cooks______________________
Tea-room cooks______________
Kitchen helpers_____________
Waiters______________________
Dishwashers_________________
Combination dishwashers and
waiters_________ ___________
Females:
Head waitresses______________
Waitresses:
Steady work, 8 hours in 12.
Short shift_______________
Short shift, 1 break--------Dishwashers-------------------------Pastry cooks________________
Combination pastry and pan­
try cooks---------------------------Pastry cooks-------------------------Pantry workers..... ............ .......
i Per day.

350

https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis

Jan.
1,1933
____d o_______
____do_______
( 2)

i $5. 00-$6. CO
i 4. 00
i 2. 50
3 30. 00

Hours per week
Under
pre­
ceding
agree­
ment

Under preced­
ing agreement

At
pres­
ent

6. 00-$7. 50
i 4. 50
i 3. 00
3 60. 00

48
48
48
54

48
48
48
54

56
56
56
56
56
i8

(2)
(2)
(2)
(2)
(2)
i 10-16

M a y 22,1929
____ d o . . ........
____d o_______
____d o_______
____d o_______
Sept. 1,1928

40.00
35. 00
28.00
17.50
21.00
i 3.50-6. 65

M a y 1,1929
____ d o_______

i 6. CO
i 5.00

i8
•8

(2)
(2)

____ d o_______
____ d o_______
____ d o_______
____ d o_______
____ d o_______

i 6.00

i
i
i
i

i
i
i
i
i

8
8
8
8
8

(2)
(2)
(2)
(2)
(2)

(2)

(2)
(2)
( 2)

( 2)

(2)

5. 00
4.00
3. 50
3. 50

____ d o_______

i 4. 50

i8

(2)

------ d o _______

21.00

48

(2)

____ d o_______
____ d o .______
____ d o_______
------ d o---------------- d o-----------

18.00
i 2. 50
i 3. 50
24.00

4S
i5
i5
i8
48

(2)
(2)
(2)
(2)
(2)

i 5. 00
i 3.00
30.00

i8
i5
48

(2)
(2)
(2)

____ d o_______
____ d o_______
____ d o_______
2 N ot reported.

i 2. 00

3 Per month.

351

W AGES AND HOUES OF LABOR
U N IO N S CA LE S OP W A G E S A N D H O U R S OF H O T E L A N D R E S T A U R A N T
E M P L O Y E E S — Continued

Wage rate per week
Date of pres­
ent agreement

Locality and occupation

Under preced­
ing agreement

At present

Billings, M ont.:
.............
Chefs —

_ _

_ June

1,1932

Boston, M a s s ..______ _
_____
June —, 1932
Brooklyn, N .Y .:
First un ion -__ _ ____________
0
Second union:
Cooks________
_
Jan.
1,1932
___ ■
Countermen
Buffalo, N .Y .:
First union
0
Second union. _ _
_
_
0
'Third union,
. .
(2)
Casper, W yo.:
Chefs________
______
June 1,1932
Waitresses and kitchen help
Centralia, Wash.:
C ooks_____ ___ ____
________
Waitresses— _______
Chicago, 111.:
First union____________ „ _____
Second union __
____ Oct.
Third union, chefs and cooks____
Colorado Springs, Colo _______ June
Dallas, Tex.:
Steam -tablem en____ _____ . . .
Aug.
Denver, Colo.
_
Detroit, M ich
East St. Louis, 111-- „
Eureka, Calif.:
Chefs _ _ ___
,

__ _

1,1931

_

(2)
Aug. 1,1932
____________ Jan.
1,1932
_________

July

1,1931

Combination pastry and fry cooks.. ____ do_______
Combination fry cooks and wait-

Pantrym en,Countermen

48
18
18
18
18
48
18
48

15. 00-20. 00

25.00

4 10

54

50. 00
35.00-40.00

50.00
35. 00-40. 00

60
60

60
60

20. 00-30. 00
4 25. 00
9. 00

(2)

4 7.00
1 6 00
1 2.50

(2)
(2)

55-60
60
4 10-12

1 3. 00

48
48
48

48
48
48

l 5. 25
4 2. 55

i 6.00
1 3.00

48
48

48
48

18. 00
3 30. 00
3 30. 00-90. 00
12.00

10. 00-30. 00
3 30. 00
340. 00-90. 00
(2)

70
48
54
48

54
48
48

24. 00
18. 00
15. 00
4 1.35-2. 475
12.00
12. 50


https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis

0

49
4 8-9

48
48-54

0

1 5 50
1 3. 00

(2)
(2)

18
18

(2)
0

1 3 50
1 3 00
1 4. 00

(2)
(2)
0

18
18
18

(2)
(2)
0

1,1932

1 6. 075
1 3. 60
1 4 86
1 2 70
1 2. 70
1 3. 375
1 3. 24
1 2. 43
1 2. 43

M ay

1,1932

31. 50
26 95
25. 20
26. 95
26. 95
22. 05
15. 75
12. 60

___

3 Per month.

i 6. 75
1 4 00
1 5 40
1 3 00
1 3. 00
1 3. 75
1 3. 60
1 2. 70
4 2 70
0
(2)
0
0
0
0
0
0

1 5. 40
1 3. 753
1 3. 375
4 2. 25
4 Average.

4 6. 00
4 4. 17
4 3. 75
4 2. 50

60
54

0

48
18
48

June

2 N ot reported.

20 00
15 00
4 1. 50-2. 75
15.00
25. 00-50. 00

60
49

0
0

(2)
(2)
(2)

Helena, M ont.:
First-class hotels:
First cooks
Oct.
1,1920
Dinner cooks.
.
_|____ do_______
Fry cooks . . . . . . .
____ d o_______
Dishwashers . . . ________ | ___ d o_____
i Per day.

60
60
54

(2)

0

1 6. 50-7. 00
5 50
1 6. 00

,

...

T hird cooks _
N ight cook s..
Bakers and pastry cooks, ._
Waiters

48
18
18
18
18
18
18
48

4 25.00
15. 00

___

Galveston, Tex.:
Chefs.—
..

Under
pre­
ceding
agree­
ment

$40.00
30 00
25 00
25 00-30 00
21 00
16. 00
14 50-10 00
15.00

D ay waiters or waitresses
D ay waiters or waitresses, split
time.
, - _
Dish-up men or women _
Fresno, Calif.:
Chefs _____________
Griddle cooks___
. _

At
pres­
ent

$30. 00
21 00
19 00
25. 0()
17. 50
12. 50
14 00
12. 00

(2)
(2)
(2)
—,1925
(2)
1,1930

Hours per week

0

48
48
48
48
48
48
48
48
48

48
48
48
48
48
48
48
48
48

48-10
1 8 10
1 8-10
4 8-10
4 8-10
1 10
48
4 8-10

4 12-14
1 12 14
4 12-14
1 12-14
4 12-14
1 14
4 12
4 12-14

48
48
48
48

5 Various,

0
0
(21
0

352

MONTHLY LABOR R EV IEW
U N IO N S CA LE S OF W A G E S A N D H O U R S OF H O T E L A N D R E S T A U R A N T
E M P L O Y E E S —Continued

Hours per week

Wage rate per week
Date of pres­
ent agreement

Locality and occupation

At present

Helena, M on t.— Continued.
First-class hotels—Continued.
Silver girls__
_ _ _ --------------- Oct.
1920..
Pantry girls____ ____________ ___ d o________

1,

Under preced­
ing agreement

i $2. 25
i 2. 25
i 2. 25

First-class restaurants:

Night fry cooks

__

Second-class restaurants:

1

Third-class houses:

1

Tea rooms:

1

........

____ do_______

. . d o_______

1

Combination fry and pastry cooks. ____ d o_______

1

Pantrymen. _ _ ____ ___________ ____ do_______

(2)

1

j
1
1
1
1
1
I
1

1


https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis

2 N ot reported,

(2)
(2)
(2)
i8
(2
>8 (2))
i8
(2)
i8
)
>8 (2
(2)
i8
(2)
i8
(2)
i8
(2)
18 (2)
i8
(2)
i8
)
»8 (2
(2)
i8
(2
' 8 (2))
i8
(2)
i8
(2)
i8
(2) •
(2)
(2)
(2)70 (2) 84
'

i 4. 50
i 3. 00
i 4. 50
i 2. 25
i 2. 70-3.15
i 2. 25
l 2. 25

i 5. 00
i 4. 00
i 5. 00
i 2. 50
i 3. 00-3. 50
i 2. 50
i 2.50

i 3. 60
i 2.25

l 4. 00
i 2. 50

20. 25
13. 50
25.00
12.00

22. 50
15.00
15. 00-18. 00
15.00

i 8-9

i 12-14

i 5. 50
i 4. 50
i 5. 50
3. 50
i 2. 50
i 3.00
i 2. 50
10. 00-16. 00

(2)
(2)
(2)
(2)
(2)
(2)
(2)18.00

48
48
48
48
48
48
48
i 6-8

(2)
(2)
(2)
(2)
(2)
(2)
(2)l 8

«

3 Per month,

1

‘

(2)

48

(2)

3 110. 60-140. 60
3 90. 60-105. 60
3 68.16-78.16
3 64. 44
3 59. 08-85. 00
3 61. 58-64. 08
16. 00-18. 00
25.00
24. 00

(5)
(5)
(5)
(5)
(5)
(5)
48
i8
48

i 6.00
i 3. 25
•3. 25-6. 50

48
48
63

48
48
63

42.00
18. 00
18.00

48
48
54

48
48
54

20. 00

i9
>9
i9
20-24
20-24
54
i 9-10

(2)
(2)
(2)
(2)

20.00
30, 00-45. 00

A

i8
8
i8

i 6. 75
5. 25
i 5. 50
i 3. 50
i 3. 00
i 3. 00-4. 50
i 2. 50
i 2. 50

Long Beach, Calif. __ ___ _ . . ____
Los Angeles, Calif.:
15.00
First un ion .. _ . . . ----- --------------(2)
Second union:
C h e f s ..______ _______ _____ Apr. 1, 1929-_ a 115. 00-145. 00
3 95. 00-110. 00
3 72. 50-82. 50
3 67. 50
_ ___do____ _
3 62. 00-92. 50
3 65. 00-67. 50
10. 00-12. 00
Third union
___ _
. _
c2)
20.00
Louisville, K y _______________________
(2)
24.00
Marshfield, Oreg____________________
(2)
Marysville, Calif.:
i 5.00
Cooks
.
. . . . .. Jan. 1, 1932-.
i 3.00
_
d o______
i 2. 00-5. 00
Merced, Calif______ _____ . . .
(2)
Modesto, Calif.:
42. 00
July 25, 1932-First cooks__________ .
18. 00
25.00
Newport, K y .. . . . - - - - - - - ----------(2)
N ew York, N .Y .:
First union, waiters and waitresses:
15.00
Full time, day----------------------- June 1, 1932..
17. 50-20. 00
55.
00
Nontipping places............ ....... ____d o_______
10. 00-12. 00
__ _ do_-_
10. 00-12. 00
15. 00
____ d o_______
35. 00-50. 00
i Per day.

Under
preceding
agree­
ment

i 6. 075
i 4. 725
i 4.95
i 3. 15
i 2. 70
1 2. 70-4. 05
i 2. 25
1 2. 25

(2)

Holyoke, M ass________ . _ ___
June 6, 1932. _
Joliet, 111_____ ____________________
Klamath Falls, Oreg.:
Dinner cooks. - _ . ------------------- M a y 1, 1932..

i $2. 50
i 2. 50
i 2. 50

At
pres­
ent

5Various.

(2)
(2)
(2)
(2)
(2)
(2)

(2)
(2)
(2)
(2)
(2)

48
18
48

48
i 12-16

'

j

353

W AGES AND HOURS OF LABOR
U N IO N S CA LE S OP W A G E S A N D H O U R S OF H O T E L A N D R E S T A U R A N T
E M P L O Y E E S —Continued

Hours per week

Wage rate per week
Date of pres­
ent agreement

Locality and occupation

Oakland, Calif.:
First union:
Cooks _ ...................
Waiters___ _ ----------------------Waitresses___________________
Second union:
Chefs.
.
-- . Apr.

i $5. 00- 7. 50
9. 00-21. 00
9. 00-21. 00

(2)
(2)
(2)
14, 1929.

___ do _
____ do__
Pantrymen____
Olympia, Wash.:

--------

Pampa, Tex_. ____
. _ __
Peoria, 111____ _____ . .
Petaluma, Calif.:
Cooks -- -- - - - - - - - -

_ __

- ___ _do______

-

24.00-33.00
21.00
15. 00
21.00
18. 00
8. 00-21. 00
5. 00-20. 00

Dec. —, 1929
____ d o _______
_do______

30. 00-40. 00
24. 00
18. 00
18. 00

_________ 1918
Second union, waiters and wait­
July 1,1931
resses.
Third u n io n .__
. .
(2)
Portland, Oreg.:
June 1,1932
First union____ . . Second union:
. _ _do___ _
____ do__
_ ___do__ _ .
Reno, N ev.:
June 1,1931
Cooks. . .
_
Waiters and waitresses, full shift.. ____ d o_______
Waiters and waitresses, 3 hours or
_do__ _
___ _do___ __
Rochester, N .Y ____________ ________
(2)
Rock Springs, W yo
.
. .
(2)
St. Louis, M o . -.
. . . .
(a)
St. Paul, M i n n ______ - ______ - (2)
Salem, Oreg.:
June 1,1932
Dinner cooks
_do______
__ _do____ _
_do____ _

Assistant cook s...
- . .
P a stry co o k s ... . .
Pantrymen .
_ -----Restaurants:
Pantrymen
Pastrycooks. . . . ______
Third union__________________
• Per day.


https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis

Under preced­
ing agreement

At
pres­
ent

48
48
48

(2)
(2)
(2)

3 115. 00-145. 00 3.$110. 60-140. 60
(5)
a 95.00-110. 00
3 90. 60-105. 60
(5)
3 68.16-78.16
3 72. 50-82. 50
(5)
3 64. 44 . (5)
s 67. 50
s 59. 08-85. 00
3 62. 00-92. 50
(5)
3 61. 58-64. 08
3 65.00-67. 50
(5)

.Tune 1,1932
____ do_ _ .
__ _do___ _
__ _do___ ___ _do___ _
c2)
M a y 1,1932

Pittsburgh, Pa.:

Salt Lake City, Utah. - - - - - - - - - - - - - - San Diego, Calif.:
. _ _
Cooks_____ - - - - Waitresses.
. .
Helpers.. _ __ __ . . . -----------San Francisco, Calif.:
First union, waiters___
- Second union:
Hotels:

At present

27. 00-36. 00
24. 00
18. 00
24. 00
21.00
21.00-50.00
12. 00-35.00

(2)
(2)
(2)
(2)
(2)
(2)
(2)
(2)
(2)

i8
i8
i8
i8
i8
i 8-12
60-70
i 8-9
i 8-9
i 8-9
i 8-9

(2)
(2)
(2)
(2)

Under
pre­
ceding
agree­
ment

•8
■8
i8
i8
‘8
i 8-10
60
(2)
(2)
(2)
(2)

24. 00

18. 00

60

60-72

10.00
28. 00

12.00
38.00

57
60

(2)

i 2. 70

1 3.00

48

60

22. 50-30. 00
13. 50-15. 75
14. 50
i 1.61

■2. 50-3. 00
i 1.00-1. 50
16.00
i 1.91

40
40
36
i8

70-80
70-80
48
i8

48
48

(2)
(2)

i 5. 50-7. 00
i 4.00

(2)
(2)

i 2. 25
i 4. 00
35. 00-50. 00
15. 00
15.00
i 5. 00-7. 00

(2)
(2)

(2)

25.00
15. 00
12. 00
i 4. 00-5. 50

48
40
56
54
48

(2)
(2)
C2)

54

60
48
48

60-70
60-70
60-70
60-70
60-70
72
i9
i8
19

c2)

36. 00
27. 00
18. 90
13. 50-16. 20
16. 20
30.00

20.00

48
48
48
48
48
48

(2)
c2)
(2)

i 5.40
i 2.70-3. 15
i 2. 70-3.15

i 6.00
i 3. 00-3. 50
i 3. 00-3. 50

i9
i8
i9

9. 00-15. 60

10. 50-18. 00

54

(2)
(2)
(2)
(2)

31.35-44. 65
25. 65-38. 95
34. 20-55.10
23. 75-28. 50

33. 00-47. 00
27. 00-41. 00
36. 00-58. 00
25. 00-30. 00

48
48
48
48

48
48
48
48

(2)
(2)
(2)
(2)
Oct. 10,1931

36.10-41.80
28. 50-35.15
24. 70-28. 50
34. 20-55.10
16. 50-19. 00

38. 00-44. 00
30. 00-37. 00
26. 00-30. 00
36. 00-58. 00
18. 00-21. 00

48
48
48
48
18

48
48
48
48
18

M ay

1,1927

2 N ot reported.

3 Per month.

25.00
(2)
(2)
(2)
(2)

4 Various.

(2)

354

MONTHLY LABOR R E V IEW
U N IO N SC A LE S OF W A G E S A N D H O U R S OF H O T E L A N D R E S T A U R A N T
E M P L O Y E E S —Continued

Hours per week

W age rate per week
Date of present agreement

Locality and occupation

At present

San Jose, Calif.:
Cooks___________________________
Waiters_____________
San Pedro, Calif.:
W a iters... ___ - - ____________

Jan.

1,1928

i 3. 00-3. 50
i 3. 00

Santa Barbara, Calif.:
Cooks_-_ ------------- - --_ -----------

M ay 23,1932

i 3. 50-6. 00
i 3. 00
i 2. 00-2. 50
16.00

Class B houses:
8-hour shift, split tim e___ ____ do_______
6-hour shift or split_____ ____ d o_______
Countermen in dairy lunches
and cafeterias:
8-hour shift, split tim e----- ____ do_______
6-hour shift, sp lit.. ___ __ _ ___do __ _ .
Second u n ion .._ .
. --------(2)
South Chicago, 111 . .
(2)
Spokane, Wash.:
M ay 1,1932
Head cooks ------------ --____ d o____

_

_________ 1932

Taft, Calif.:
C o ok s.. -------------- . . . -- ---------(2)
Waiters and dishwashers _ _ . . .
(2)
Tampa, Fla_________________________ N ov. —, 1931
Toledo, Ohio____ . . . ------- ----------(2)
Union City, N.J .
- - - - - (2)
Vallejo, Calif.:
Jan.
1,1932
Cooks.
. .
_ _ _
____ do____ Ventura, Calif.:
Cooks-------- -------------Others.
------ . . . ------Washington, D .C .:
Waiters, full time------ _ -----------Waiters, 2 meals. - - - - - - Waiters, 1 meal. -- - . -----------West Frankfort, 111.:
C ooks-. . . ----------------- --Dishwashers_____


https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis

i 5. 00-7. 50
i 3. 50-4. 00
i 3.00
i 3. 00

Under
pre­
ceding
agree­
ment

48
48

i9
i9
i8
i 8-9

78
78
(2)
(2)
i9
i9
i8
i 8-9

18. 00
15. 00
9.00

(2)
(2)
(2)

(5)
(J)
(5)

(5)
(5)
(5)

21.00
16. 50
10. 50

(2)
(2)
(2)

(5)
(5)
(5)

(5)
(5)
(5)

21. 00
16. 50
30. 00
18. 00-20. 00

(2)
(2)

21.00
12. 00-14. 00

(5)
(5)
48
i8

(5)
(5)

60
i 10. 12

i
i
i
'

i
i
i
i

5. 56
4. 50
2. 75
3. 00

48-56
48-56
48-56
48-56

70-84
70-84
70-84
70-84

25. 00-36. 00
18. 90

25. 00-39. 00
21.00

48
48

48
48

i 5. 85
i 3.60
15. 00-20. 00
i 1. 50
10.00

i 6. 50
i 4.00
20. 00-35. 00
i 2. 00
10. 00

i 3-8
i 3-8
70
50
70

48
48
63
50
70*

5.00
4. 05
2. 475
2. 70

i 6. 50-8. 00
>4.00
i 3.35

i 6. 00
i 3. 00

(2)
(2)
c2)

3 60. 00
3 45. 00
3 30. 00

(2)
(2)
(2)

25.00
15. 00
12.00

(2)
(2)

3 Per month.

48
48
48

(2)
(2)
(2)

i 5.00
i 2. 50

2 N ot reported.

At
pres­
ent

i8
i8

(2)
(2)

c2)
(2)

M ay 1,1931
____ do _
_ ------- -------- ____ do_____ _

1 Per day.

i $5. 00
i 2. 50

i $6. 00
i 3. 50

(2)
(2)

Seattle, Wash.:
First union:
First-class cafes and restau­
rants:
June 1,1932
8-hour shifts, split time .
6-hour shifts, split 9 hours.. ____ d o _______

Helpers.
Stockton, Calif.:

Under preced­
ing agreement

i 8-9
i 8-9
60
i7
i3

10.00

56
56
56

3 Various.

(2)
(2)
(2)
>8-9
i 8-9
(2)
(2)
(2)
i 10
I 10
i 10

355

W AGES AND HOURS OF LABOR

WAGES AND HOURS OF UNION BLACKSMITHS

EPORTS have been received by the Bureau of Labor Statistics
from the various local unions of the International Brotherhood
of Blacksmiths, Drop Forgers, and Helpers, showing the union wage
scale and regular full-time hours of labor per week. These data
are shown in the following tabulation, which covers 2,901 workers.
It will be noted that there is a great variation in the dates of the agree­
ments, some of them being as old as 1919, while others are as late as
February 1933.

R

U N IO N SC A LE S OF W A G E S A N D H O U R S OF B L A C K S M IT H S
Wage rate per hour
Date of pres­
ent agree­
ment

Locality and occupation

Albany, N .Y .:

Feb. 1,1932
____ do______
(0
_________ 1919
Aug. 27, 1927.
Feb. 1,1932

Bedford, Ind.:

Bloomington, 111.:

Brooklyn, N .Y .:
_____________________

Chicago, 111.:

Columbus, Ohio:
Covington, K y .:

Denver, Colo.:

Duluth, M inn.:

Escanaba, M ich.:
i, i ______________________________________________________

i Not reported.


https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis

2 Per day.

$0. 81
.53
.80
2 5.00
.57
.80

40
40
40
24
(0
40

48
48
44
48
30
48
49^
491
/2
48

. 90-1. 00
. 74-, 88
.81

45
45
24-40

___ do_____
do
July 1,1925

.72
.49
.52

.80
.55
.63

28
28
40

40
40
48

M ay 1,1932
___ do________
o)
Feb. 1,1932

2 11. 20
27 . 92
3 1.10
.72

2 13. 20
29. 90
3 1.34
.80

40
40
48
32

40
40
48
48

.99
.72
.74
. 685-, 785

1.10
.80
.81
.755-. 865

28
40
40-48
40

0)
48
48
48

1,1932
1,1932
0)
Feb. 1,1932

Cleveland, Ohio:

$0. 73
.48
.72
2 5.00
.513
.72
.75
.64
.73

Apr.
Feb.

Cincinnati, Ohio:

Under
precedUnder pre­
At
ingceding
present
agreeagreement
ment

0)
(>)
1,1932

Feb.

Buffalo, N Y

At present

Hours per week

0)
(')

.80
.57

.90
.62

40
40

56
56

Feb. 1,1932
_do___
____ do___
____ do_______

.72
.52
.72
.72

.81
.58
.80
.80

40
40
40
32

48
48
48
48

_do___
__ _do_______

.72
.50

.80
(>)

40
40

48
48

_ __do_______
__ __do____ ____ do_______

.72
.50
.522

.80
.57
.58

40
40
28

48
48
(')

Jan. —, 1929
____ d o ______
Feb. 1,1932

.85
.70
.73

* 150. 00
4 120.00
.81

40
40
30

48
48
48

_- __do_______
____ do_______
Apr. —, 1932
(')
Feb. 1,1932

.71
.50
.72
25 .1 0
.72

.79
. 56
.80

40
40
32-40
28
40

48
48
40-56
0)
48

_do_____
____ do_______
N ov. 1,1928 1

.77
.52
2 3. fig 1

40
40
24

48
48
48

3M inimum.

0)

.80

.85
.575
24.85
Per month.

356

MONTHLY LABOR R EV IEW
U N IO N SC A LE S OF W A G E S A N D H O U R S OF B L A C K S M IT H S —Continued

Wage rate per hour

Locality and occupation

Gary, Ind ___________
Granite City, 111.:
Mechanics_______
Helpers__________
Great Falls, M on t___
Hornell, N .Y .:
Mechanics_______
Helpers__________
Huntington, W .V a.:
First union______
Second union____
Jackson, M ich.:
Mechanics_______
Helpers__________
Jacksonville, Fla_____
Jersey City, N.J.:
Mechanics_______
Helpers__________
Kansas City, M o ____
Knoxville, Tenn_____
Lafayette, Ind.:
Mechanics_______
Helpers__________
Lansford, Pa.:
Mechanics_______
Helpers__________
Lima, Ohio:
Mechanics_______
Helpers__________
Ludlow, K y .:
Mechanics_______
Helpers__________
Marquette, M ich____
Meadville, Pa.:
Mechanics_______
Helpers__________
Memphis, Tenn______
Meridian, M iss______
M iddleport, Ohio:
Mechanics_______
Helpers__________
Miles City, M on t____
Milwaukee, W is_____
Minden, La.:
Mechanics_______
Helpers__________
M ount Carmel, 111___
Missouri Valley, Iowa.
Newark, Ohio________
New Orleans, La.:
Mechanics_______
Helpers__________
N ew York, N .Y .:
First union____ ...
Second union_____
Oelwein, Iowa________
Oil City, Pa.:
Mechanics_______
Helpers__________
Owosso, M ich.:
Mechanics..... ........
Helpers__________
Phoenix Ariz.:
Mechanics_______
Helpers_____ _____
Pittsburgh, Pa.:
Mechanics________
Helpers__________
Portland, Oreg_______
Princeton, Ind.:
Mechanics_______
Helpers__________
Ramsey, N .J _________
Ridgewood, N .J______
1 N ot reported.


https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis

Date of pres­
ent agree­
ment

Feb.

At present

Hours per week

Under
Under pre­
precedAt
ceding
ingagreement present agreement

1,1932

$0. 72

$0.80

32

48

July 1,1932
------ d o_______

.72
.55
2 5.00

. 85-, 90
. 60-, 70
2 5.00

24
24

48

16

32

Feb. 1,1932
------do_______

.72
.50

.80
.55

Feb.
Feb.

1,1932
1,1933

.72
.51

.80
.57

40
40

48
48

Feb. 1,1932
____do_______
------do_______

.73
.52
.72

.81
.58
.80

40
40
32

48
48
48

.70
.45

1.00
.75

0)

1.00

. 80-, 85

44
44
48
32

.80
.57

37
37

(0

Feb.

1,1932

. 72-, 765

(')

48

(>)

48
48
48

____do......... .
------ do_____ _

.72
.51

Dec. 5,1930
____do_______

.70
.57

Feb. 1,1932
____do_______

.72
.52

.80
.57

40
42M

Jan. 2,1933
____do_______

0)

.72
.504
.70

.80
.56
.77

32
32

48
48
45

Feb. 1,1932
____do_______
----- do_______
............. .1926

.72
.51
.765
.80

.80
.85
.90

40
40
32
32

48
48
48
48

.86

40

48
48
48
44

Feb. —,1932
-----do_______
___ do_______
________ 1929

.77
.73
.72
«.69

45
45

«

.81
.80
«.85

Oct. 1,1923
Feb. 1,1932
------ do.........

.61
.40
.719
.73
.72

.75
.50
.81
.80
.80

------ do_______
____do______ _

.72
.50

.80
.56

(>)

June 1,1927
Feb. 1,1932
____d o_______

2 5. 74
.785
.71

(>)

40

40
32
48
35

28
40

48
48
(■)
(i)
48
54

40
40
48
2 8
48

32
32

¿8

2 6. 48
.865
.79

40
44
48

48
48
48

1.00
.76

40
40

48

40
40

48
48

48

48

Apr. —,1920
------ do_______

.75
.56

Feb. 1,1932
------do_______

.72
.51

Sept. 1,1928
____do_______

1.125
.875

1.00
. 75

44
44

44
44

Oct. —,1922
------d o_______

.80
.57
.715

.80
.57
.85

30
30
44

48
48
44

.80
.62
2 13. 20
.80

32
32
40
40

48
48
45
48-56

(>)

Feb. 1,1933
------d o_______
Feb.

(‘)

1,1932

2 Per day.

.71

.56
2 11. 20
.72

. 795
. 565

5 Average.

357

W A G E S AND H O U RS OF LA B O R
U N IO N S CA LE S OF W A G E S A N D H O U R S OF B L A C K S M IT H S —Continued

Wage rate per hour

Locality and occupation

Roscoe, C alif-. ______________ .
Roslindale, Mass_________________
Sacramento, Calif _____
St. Albans, V t ____ ____
St. Elm o, T en n .:
Mechanics__________
Helpers
_ _____
Salamanca, N .Y ___ __
Salisbury, N .C .:
Mechanics____________________
Helpers_____________
San Francisco, Calif.:
Contract shops:
Mechanics- _ _____________________
H elpers.-_______
____________
M unicipal shops:
M echanics_________________
Helpers__________ _____
Santa Barbara, Calif _ _
Savannah, Ga_ _ _____
Selma, Ala ........................
Sheffield, Ala.:
M echanics_________________
Helpers.-- _ ___________
Sioux C ity, Iowa:
Mechanics____________
Helpers________
South Connellsville, P a .:
Mechanics________
Helpers _
_____
Spartanburg, S . C ____ _
Springfield, Mass.:
M echanics________
Helpers
_ _________
Syracuse, N .Y _________
Tacom a, W ash.:
M echanics,-. ______
H e lp e rs _________________________
Tom ah, W is.:
Mechanics________________________
Helpers ________ ___
Vallejo, Calif.:
Mechanics_________ _
Helpers ____________
Van W ert, Ohio:
Mechanics _________
Helpers..
______ _
W alkerville, M on t:
M echanics.. _______
Helpers________ _._ ______
Washington, Ind _
West Palm Beach, F l a ...
1 N ot reported.
2 4 0 4 ° — 33


https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis

-8

Date of pres­
ent agree­
ment

Hours per week

A t present

Under
Under pre­
precedAt
ceding
ingpresent
agreement
agreement

(>)
(>)
Feb. 1,1932
Apr. 19,1930

$0. 75
. 775-1. 07
.72
.72

$0. 90
. 775-1. 07
.80
.78

(')
0)
1,1932

.72
.42
.61

Feb.

0)
(>)
(>)
(')
(')
Mar. 1,1932
(')
Feb.

1,1932

Jan. —, 1933
Feb.

1,1932

(>)
(>)
Feb.

1,1932

(')
(')
Sept. 1,1926
Sept. 1,1932

40
32
32
40

48
48
48
48

.82
.52
.68

32
32
42K

48
48
54

. 72
.46

80
.51

32
32

48

2 7.20
25.20

2 7.20
2 5.20

44
44

44
44

2 9.00
2 8. 00
1.00
. 81-. 90
.69

2 9.00
28.00
1.00
. 98-1. 25
.80

44
44
44
32-44
32

44
44
44
44-48
48

.72
. 50

.80
.56

32
32

48
48

. 72
. 50

80
.57

32
32

44

.72
57
. 72

80

28

28

.80

32

48

. 73
48
.73

81
53
.81

32

40

40

48

.72
. 515

.80
. 57

40
40

48
48

. 72
. 515

. 80
.57

40
40

48
48

.92

44
44

40
40

.85
.63

40
40

40
40

48
48
30
44

48
48
48
44

.92
.64
.81
. 56
2 5.00
2 4.25
2 5. 60
1. 125
2 Per day.

(’)

2 6. 00
2 5. 25
.80
1.375

358

MONTHLY LABOR R E V IE W

Summary of Wage Surveys Made by the Bureau of Labor
Statistics, 1928 to 1932: Part 2— By Industries and States

HE table below shows, by State or other geographic unit and by
sex, average full-time hours per week, average hours actually
worked in 1 week, and average earnings per hour for the wage earners
included in the latest studies made by the Bureau of Labor Statistics.

T

A V E R A G E F U L L -T IM E A N D A C T U A L H O U R S P E R W E E K A N D A V E R A G E E A R N IN G S
P E R H O U R B Y I N D U S T R Y , Y E A R , S E X , A N D S T A T E , C IT Y , O R D IS T R IC T
A i r tra n sp o rta tio n , 1 9 3 1

Females

Males

Males and females

Aver­ Aver­ A ver­ A ver­ A ver­ Aver­ Aver­ A ver­ Aver­
age
age
age
age
age
age
age
age
age
full­
hours
full­
hours earn­
hours earn­
full­
earn­
time actually
time actually ings
time actually ings
ings
hours worked
hours worked
hours worked
per
per
per
per
in 1
per
per
in 1
in 1
hour
hour
hour
week
week
week
week week
week

State or other geographic unit

Pilots:
i 110.0
i 110.0
1110.0
i 110.0
1110.0
1 110.0

i 84.1 $7. 284
i 79.4 6. 929
i 78.4 6. 906
i 85.8 7. 199
186.7 5. 565
i 76.2 8. 066

i 110.0

180.4

Copilots:
i 158.4
i 162.0
i 170.5
i 179.1
i 182.7

1. 616
1. 298
1. 162
1. 205
1. 392

i 170.0

1. 341

All others:

South Atlantic____ __________

7.084

48.3
48. 5
48.3
48. 1
49.4
48.3

49.0
51. 1
47.6
48.9
49.5
49.4

.678
.629
.640
.603
.597
.712

48.0
48.0
48.0
48.0
48.0
48.0

48.0 $0. 445
.493
48.0
48.0
.535
48.0
.517
.474
48.0
48.0
.487

48.3
48.5
48.3
48.1
49.3
48.3

49.0
51. 1
47.6
48.9
49.5
49.3

$0. 675
.626
.639
.599
.595
.703,

48.5

49.5

.645

48.0

48.0

.497

48.5

49.4

.640

A i r c r a f t e n g in e m a n u fa c t u r e , 1 9 2 9

50. 2
48.0
49.8
49.7

52.8 $0. 659
.702
48.0
55.7
.748
.784
46.9

48.9

50.3

.706

A i r p l a n e m a n u fa c t u r e , 1 9 2 9

N ew England_____ ____ _________
M iddle Atlantic___ ______________
South Atlantic________ ________
East North Central................... .......
West North Central______________
West South Central______________
Western........... .......... .........................

47.9
47.6
50.6
48. 1
48.3
50.8
46. 5

45.6 $0. 642
.695
48. 1
.641
48. 6
.705
46.6
46.2
.581
50.9
.553
.666
46.0

48.3
47.3
49.7
49.6
49.9
51.8
45.1

45.3 $0. 361
.414
44.9
.318
47.9
.330
42.0
.260
45.8
.342
52.5
.417
43.3

47.9
47.6
50.6
48. 1
48.3
50.9
46.4

45.6
48. 1
48.6
46.6
46. 2
50.9
45.9

$0. 639
.691
.632
.703
.574
.547
.656

T o ta l-,_____ _________ ______

47.9

47.3

.669

47.3

44.9

47.9

47.3

.663

1 In 1 month.


https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis

.380

359

W AGES AND HOURS OF LABOR

A V E R A G E F U L L -T IM E A N D A C T U A L H OU R S P E R W E E K A N D A V E R A G E E A R N IN G S
P E R H O U R B Y I N D U S T R Y , Y E A R , S E X , A N D S T A T E , C IT Y , O R D I S T R IC T —Contd.
B a k e r y in d u s tr y — B re a d , 1 9 8 1

Males

Females

Males and females

Aver­ Aver­
Aver­ Aver­ Aver­ A ver­ Aver­ A ver­ Aver­
age
age
age
age
age
age
age
age
age
full­
hours
full­
hours
full­
hours
time actually earn­ time actually earn­ time actually earn­
hours worked ings hours worked ings hours worked ings
per
per
per
per
in 1
per
in 1
per
in 1
hour
hour
hour
week week
week week
week
week

State or other geographic unit

Atlanta, G a______________________
Baltimore, Md_ _ _
_ _ ___ _ _
Birmingham, Ala_ _______ __ .
Boston, M as& .______ - _______ _
Bridgeport, Conn___ _____
... .
Buffalo, N .Y ______ ___ ______ Charleston, S.O_ . .
_ _
Charlotte, N .C _________ . . .
Chicago, 111.-- _ _ _ _______
Cincinnati, Ohio . . . . . . .
Cleveland, Ohio ...............
Dallas, Tex
. _ _____ _
Denver, Colo _
Des Moines, I o w a . . . _____ _ . . .
Detroit, M ic h ..
_ . . .
Grand Rapids, M ic h .. . . . . .
_
Houston, T ex_____ . . _____ . _
Indianapolis, In d _____ ________
Jacksonville, F la____
Little R ock, A r k .. . _ . _ __ .
Los Angeles, Calif. . . . . .
_
Louisville, K y _ . . .
Manchester, N .H _____ . . . . _
Memphis, T e n n . ___ . . . . . .
Milwaukee, W is
Minneapolis, M in n ____ _____ .
Newark, N .J . _ _
N ew Orleans, L a.
N ew York, N .Y
Oklahoma C ity, Okla . . .
Omaha, N ebr „
Philadelphia, Pa . . . ______
Pittsburgh, Pa__ . . . . . .
Portland, M e ..
Portland, Oreg ________
. _
Providence, R .I . _ _
Richm ond, Va
St. Louis, M o ___ _____ _ . _
Salt Lake City, U ta h ... . . . .
San Francisco, Calif. _
Seattle, Wash
Washington, D.C
Wheeling, W .V a . . _____ _ .
Wichita, Kans . . . . . _______
W ilmington, D el___ _ . . . . . .
Worcester, Mass ___

60.8
65.9
60. 1
53.5
54. 3
57. 1
53.8
55. 5
55. 1
51.7
56.3
63.0
51.9
57.0
55.3
59.2
66.0
59. 1
58. 4
58.3
55.0
56.9
54. 2
60.7
55.5
56.4
52.7
51.7
51.4
59.0
54.8
54. 7
53.6
51.6
50.8
54. 4
56. 1
60. 6
53.9
48.0
48. 7
53. 2
52.8
56.7
55.9
56.7
l

60.9 $0. 338
54.9
.489
59.1
.359
52.5
.523
53. 1
.562
56.9
.585
53.8
.353
54.8
. 384
54.3
.720
48.9
.592
55.4
.550
61.9
.425
50.8
.551
56.8
.422
55.2
.586
56.0
.464
64.9
.385
57.0
.495
58.1
. 364
58.9
.405
53.7
.560
56.7
.465
52.8
. 491
59.4
.422
52.6
.506
55.3
.453
53.5
.610
51.7
.425
49.6
.693
58.0
.490
54. 5
.472
54. 2
. 518
53.4
.526
51. 1
.468
48.6
.603
53. 5
.543
55. 1
.491
60. 1
.594
53. 2
.489
45. 6
.889
46.0
.843
50. 2
.735
50.9
.504
56. 3
.395
55. 7
.490
56.5
.513

40.0
53.8
(2)
47.4

42.0 $0. 286
53. 8
.293
(2)
(2)
46.3
.330

47.3

46.9

.295

50.0
49.8
48.4
51.0
48.0
49.7
53. 1
54.0
(2)
49.6

50.2
43.9
43.3
46.4
43.2
49.7
48.0
43. 1
(2)
44.9

.314
. 264
.329
.418
.258
.244
.319
.238
(2)
.335

54.0
48.0
49.0

54. 0
43.3
49.0

.222
.381
.255

54.0
45.2
51.8
48.0
48.0
(2)

54.0
42.8
49. 1
32. 1
48.0
(2)

.259
.376
.279
.321
.242
(2)

50.0

50.0

.386

53.7
52.8
(2)
(2)
(2)
49.3
(2)
48.0
(2)
(2)
52.5

44. 7
52.8
(2)
(2)
(2)
42.0
(2)
48.0
(2)
(2)
40.0

. 264
.254
(2)
(2)
(2)
.318
(2)
.472
(2)
(2)
.311

(2)

(2)

(2)

59.9
55.9
60. 1
53.4
54. 3
56.8
53 8
55 5
55.4
51. 6
55.8
62.9
51.8
56.6
55.2
58.7
65.9
58.7
58 4
58. 1
54.9
56.7
54 2
60.5
55.3
55.8
52.6
51.6
51. 4
59. 0
54. 7
54. 7
53. 6
51.7
50.7
54.3
56. 1
60.4
53.9
48.0
48.7
53.2
52.8
56. 7
55. 9
56.6

60.1
54.8
59.2
52.4
53.1
56.7
53 8
54 8
54.2
48.7
54.6
61.8
50. 5
56.4
54. 7
54.8
64.8
56. 5
58 1
58.8
53.5
56. 6
52 8
59. 2
52. 5
54.6
53. 2
51.7
49.6
58. 0
54. 4
54 2
53.2
51.2
48.6
53.3
55.0
59.8
53. 1
45.6
46.0
50.2
50.5
56. 3
55. 7
56.5

56.6
53.5
55.8
50.1
49. 4
49.5
54.0
53.1
53. 7
48.0
49.6
53.2
46.6
52.5
54.4
51.9
51.2

56.6
51.5
55.8
47.8
48. 0
46.3
54.0
48.8
50.1
43.3
42.3
40.4
46.4
45.7
42.4
49.6
38.6

$0. 336
.484
.359
. 520
562
. 579
. 711
. 576
.539
.425
.541
. 415
. 571
.385
.490
.400
.556
.462
.416
.505
.435
. 608
.423
.693
490
.471
518
. 522
.460
. 601
.542
.488
. 592
.488
.877
.842
.734
.499
295
490
. 512

B a k e r y in d u str y— C a k e, 1 9 3 1

Atlanta, G a______________________
Baltimore, M d ___________________
Birmingham, Ala_________________
Boston, Mass_____________________
Bridgeport, Conn_________________
Buttalo, N .Y _____________________
Charleston, S .C __________________
Charlotte, N .C ___________________
Chicago, 111_______________________
Cincinnati, Ohio_________________
Cleveland, Ohio__________________
Dallas, T e x ...____ _______________
Denver, Colo_____________________
Detroit, M ich ____________________
Grand Rapids, M ich ........................
Houston, Tex____________________
Indianapolis, I n d ..............................
2

60.4
54.4
58.0
52.2
49. 4
51.9
54.0
56.0
53.4
48.0
50.6
51.0
46.7
54.0
55.0
58.5
50.7

N ot shown for less than 3 wage earners.


https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis

60.4 $0. 257
54.1
.432
58.0
.414
49.9
.516
48.0
.508
47.2
.531
54.0
.456
51.6
.302
53.7
.574
43.4
.574
48.2
.540
44.4
.557
46.1
.590
50.0
.663
54.6
.408
60.7
.452
43.4
.494

50.3
52.6
54.0
48.1

50.3 $0. 243
48.7
.270
54.0
.210
45.7
.308

44.8
54.0
50.5
54.0
48.0
48.8
54.0
46.5
50.9
54.0
48.0
51.5

44.6
54.0
46.3
46.9
43.1
38.0
39.0
46.8
41.1
32.7
43.1
35.3

.351
.198
.220
.283
.287
.312
.265
.256
.368
.249
.258
.266

$0. 253
.357
.306
.417
. 508
.472
.345
.261
.431
. 44¿
.420
.349
.439
.535
.339
.346
.371

360

MONTHLY LABOR R E V IE W

A V E R A G E F U L L -T IM E A N D A C T U A L H O U R S P E R W E E K A N D A V E R A G E E A R N IN G S
P E R H O U R B Y I N D U S T R Y , Y E A R , S E X , A N D S T A T E , C IT Y , OR D IS T R IC T — Contd.
B a k e r y i n d u s t r y — C a k e , 1 9 3 1 — Continued

Males

Aver­ Aver­ A ver­ Aver­ A ver­ Aver­ Aver­ Aver­ Aver­
age
age
age
age
age
age
age
age
age
hours earn­
hours earn­ full­
hours earn­ full­
full­
actually
time
time actually ings
time actually ings
ings
hours worked
hours worked
hours worked
per
per
per
in 1
per
in 1
per
in 1
per
hour
hour week
hour week
week
week
week
week

State or other geographic unit

Little R ock, A r k ____
Los Aneeles, Calif. . . . .
----Louisville, K y ----------------- . . . .
M emphis, Tenn _________
. . . -Minneapolis, M in n ..

.

.

Oklahoma C ity, Okla. .
Omaha, Nebr
Philadelphia, Pa-----.
Pittsburgh, Pa _

Richm ond, V a___

----- ---

...

Males and females

Females

•

-------

Salt Lake C ity, Utah .
. .. .
Seattle, W a s h __
...
Washington, D .C ----- . .
----Wheeling, W .V a ------------------Wichita, Kans.
.. ..
Worcester, Mass
...

(2)
53.6
52.4
54.6
55.0

54.0
50.8
51.0
48.4
48.8
51. 0
50. 7
50. 6
52.0
48.3
48.0
48.8
53.7
48.6
54.0
48.0
48.0
54.0
60.0
54.0

c2)
(2)
52.3 $0. 369
42. 2
.633
.421
50.6
49.9
.479
.457
48.0
53.0
.486
.560
49.7
48.4
.435
45.4
.643
50. 1
.455
.386
51.0
.450
49.0
51.2
.423
.522
48. 4
.545
46. 1
.567
49.0
.373
53. 7
.723
43.9
.465
51. 7
.726
48.0
.830
47.8
.394
43. 1
.303
60.0
.580
55.6

51.0
48.0
51.3
50.9
48.0
49.8
48.0
48.4
48. 0
54. 0
50.8
49.4
51.7
48. 5
48.0
46. 5
51.0
49.9
48.0
48.0
48.0
54.0
54.0
48.0

40.1 $0.262
42.5
.465
32.0
.216
47.6
.273
41.1
.328
46.0
.303
45.3
.301
48.8
.148
.313
46.0
.232
46.8
.240
50.8
.284
41.1
.226
48.9
.312
46.2
.344
47.8
.300
46.5
.234
53.0
.276
38.6
.240
44.8
.481
48.0
.246
45.4
49.9
.258
.198
54.0
.295
40.1

(2)
51.7
50.2
53.9
52.6
51. 2
49.8
49. 5
48.4
48.7
53. 2
50.8
50.3
51. 9
48. 4
48.0
48.2
52.8
49.3
52.7
48.0
48.0
54.0
57.0
50.8

(2)
43.2
42.3
46.5
48. 6
44. 7
46.0
47. 5
48.5
45.5
47. 7
50.9
47. 3
50. 0
47. 3
46.9
48. 3
53.4
41.1
50. 2
48.0
46.9
48. 2
57.0
47.4

(2)
$0. 295
. 547
.390
.364
.401
.303
.437
.374
.583
. 297
.314
.418
. 318
.420
. 452
. 499
.329
. 504
.421
.638
.626
.288
.253
. 454

B o o t a n d sh oe in d u s tr y , 1 9 3 2

M aryland and Virginia----Massachusetts.. . . .

New Hampshire.

..

Pennsylvania ..

-----

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

. ...

W isconsin.. _ -------- ------------------Total

-----

-------

.. .

49.0
53.0
52.9
48.9
48.3
49.5
49.9
49.0
48.4
46.0
47.6
48. 1
51.3
49.4
49.9

47.1 $0.427
47.4
.345
.447
46.3
43.4
.358
41.2
.557
.501
37.3
44. 1
.417
.473
38.7
37.4
.439
.631
32. 2
.536
37.6
.485
40. 2
.408
37.8
37.9
.385
.481
36.8

49.3
52.7
53. 1
48.9
47.9
49.5
49.8
49. 2
48.4
46.5
48.4
47.9
50.6
48.9
49.2

47.9 $0. 272
.216
47. 1
.299
46.0
.218
46.9
.354
41.0
.299
36.3
45.2
.279
40.2
.273
.291
36.7
.421
31.1
38.1
.340
.292
41.3
.248
41.8
.249
35.6
35.6
.336

49. 2
52.8
53.0
48.9
48.1
49. 5
49.9
49. 1
48.4
46. 2
47.9
48.0
51.0
49. 2
49.5

47.5
47.2
46.3
44.8
41. 1
36.9
44.6
39.3
37. 1
31.8
37.8
40.7
39.2
36.8
36.2

$0. 342
.282
.380
.298
.470
.426
.354
.384
.372
.559
.457
.389
.346
.322
.412

48.9

40.0

.493

48.9

40.8

.308

48.9

40.4

.412

C a n e -s u g a r r e fi n i n g , 1 9 3 0

District
District
District
District

1 (Mass., N.J., and N .Y .).
2 (M d . and Pa.)
3 (Ga., La., and Tex.) . .
4 (Calif.)
. . . .
--------

Total. .

-------- ---

-----

61.8
60.6
60.4
47.8

55.7 $0.524
60.6
.490
.303
53.8
.633
48.4

49.3
53.6
54.0
48.0

39.3 $0. 362
. 262
48.7
43.8
. 191
.422
41.3

61.0
60.0
59.9
47.8

54.6
59.6
52.9
48.0

$0.516
. 475
. 295
.622

59.3

55.1

.472

51. 5

43.0

.289

58.7

54.2

.461

C ig a r e tte i n d u s t r y , 1 9 3 0

North Carolina
Virginia_______
Kentucky_____

49.9
50.0
51. 7

46.8 $0. 358
45.7
.425
.462
47.8

49.8
49.9
51. 6

44.5 $0. 260
.294
39. 6
42. 4
.273

49.8
49.9
51.7

45.5
42.4
44. 6

$0. 303
.359
.356

Total____

49.9

46.5

.378

49. 9

43.2

49.9

44. 7

.318

2 N ot shown for less than 3 wage earners.


https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis

.268

361

W A G ES AND HOURS OF LABOR

W E R A G E F U L L -T IM E A N D A C T U A L HOU RS P E R W E E K A N D A V E R A G E E A R N IN G S
P E R H O U R B Y IN D U S T R Y , Y E A R , S E X , A N D S T A T E , C IT Y , O R D IS T R IC T —Contd.
C o a l m i n i n g , a n th r a c ite , 1 9 3 1

Males and females

Females

Males

Aver­ Aver­ Aver­ Aver­ A ver­ Aver­ A ver­ A ver­ A ver­
age
age
age
age
age
age
age
age
age
hours earn­
hours earn­ full­
hours earn­
full­
full­
time actually ings
time actually ings
time actually ings
hours worked
hours worked
hours worked
per
per
per
in 1
per
per
in 1
per
in 1
hour
hour week week
hour week week
week week

State or other geographic unit

Miners and miners’ laborers:

3 76. 5 $0. 927
3 68. 2 1. 093
3 74. 6 1. 055
3 68. 5 1. 140

All fields
A ll others:

All fields

3 74. 5

.987

3 99. 7
3 104. 4
3 100. 5
3 98. 6

. 659
. 655
. 667
.655

3 100. 1

.660

C oal m in in g , b itu m in o u s, 1 9 3 1

Miners and loaders:

4 51. 8 5$0.431
4 50. 3 3.740
4 49. 4
3 .869
4 39.9
« .956
4 39.4
3 .617
4 47. 0 3 .569
4 56.9
5.506
4 62. 5 5.567
4 56. 0 5.372
4 69. 1 5 .515
4 61.2
5.572

A ll others:

-----

-

Total

4 56. 5

5.599

3 64.0
3 62. 6
3 65. 4
3 69. 4
3 55.7
3 58.5
3 71.4
3 77.3
3 66. 6
3 76.5
3 72.9

.402
.777
.789
.783
.646
.534
.544
.610
.393
.452
.532

3 69.8

.595

C o tto n g o o d s m a n u fa c t u r e , 1 9 3 2

A la b a m a -.- _- - - - - - - - - - Connecticut.
- Georgia - ___ _____
- - - M aine.-- -------------- -------------------Massachusetts.- - - - - - ------N ew Hampshire-- -- --_ - --------N ew Y ork--_ - - - - - - ----North Carolina. - - . _ ----------------Rhode Island.
-------- - South Carolina -_
Virginia-- -------------T o t a l -------

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

55.3
53.4
56. 0
54.2
49. 5
54. 1
48. 1
54.0
53. 1
54. 4
53.5

50.2 $0. 231
40.3
.348
46.6
.237
48.8
.328
45.2
.370
.348
46.1
36.7
.401
.285
45.5
.306
47.3
.229
43.3
.291
50. 5

55.3
53.7
55.9
54.0
48.0
53.7
48.0
54.3
52.9
55.0
53.0

47.9 $0.181
.284
38. 1
.198
42.6
46.2
.253
41.2
.296
.288
43.9
.324
34.7
.211
42.5
.249
45.7
39.6
.185
47.0
.229

55.3
53.5
56.0
54.1
48.8
53.9
48.1
54.1
53.0
54.6
53.3

49. 3
39. 4
45.4
47.5
43.4
45. 0
35. 7
44.5
46. 6
42.1
49.2

$0. 213
.322
.226
.293
.338
.320
. 365
.263
.281
.215
.268

53.7

45. 5

. 284

53.0

42.2

.234

53.4

44.3

.266

3 In half month.
4 In half month, based on time at face, including lunch,
3 Based on time at face, including lunch.


https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis

362

MONTHLY LABOR R EV IEW

A V E R A G E F U L L -T IM E A N D A C T U A L H O U R S P E R W E E K A N D A V E R A G E E A R N IN G S
P E R H O U R B Y I N D U S T R Y , Y E A R , S E X , A N D S T A T E , C IT Y , O R D I S T R IC T —Contd.
D y e i n g a n d f i n i s h i n g o f te x tile s , 1 9 3 2

Males

State or other geographic unit

Connecticut. ______ _ _ _ _____
Massachusetts.. _ . ._ _________
N ew Jersey
_ .
N ew York _ _ . . . . _ _____ _
North Carolina___ . . . ___________
Pennsylvania . . . . . . . . . .
_
Rhode Island
South Carolina______ _ _________
Total.

____ ______________

Females

Males and females

A ver­ Aver­ Aver­ Aver­ Aver­
Aver­ A ver­ Aver­
A ver­
age
age
age
age
age
age
age
age
age
hours
hours
hours earn­
full­
full­
full­
earn­
earn­
time actually ings
time actually ings
time actually ings
hours worked
hours
worked
hours
worked
per
per
per
per
per
in 1
per
in 1
in 1
hour
hour
hour
week week
week week
week
week
54.5
49.0
50. 3
48.9
54.4
52.2
52.9
55. 2

53.8 $0. 485
52.1
.379
49.8
.476
.417
45.7
.296
48.3
53.4
.497
50.8
.453
61. 2
.278

53.9
48.0
48.7
48.7
54.5
51.7
52.9
55.0

49.6 $0.349
. 286
43. 2
.352
40.6
38.4
.285
.232
43.7
44.6
.338
44.2
.316
.210
58.5

54.4
48.9
50.1
48.9
54.4
52. 1
52.9
55. 1

53.3
50.8
48.7
44.8
46.8
51.7
50.0
60.9

$0.472
.367
. 463
.403
.276
.471
.439
.270

51.4

51.1

.418

51.2

43.5

.291

51.3

49.9

.400

43.2
34.7
45.6
28.5
36.0
30.8
29.5
35.0
37.1
30. 4
35.8
41.4
40. 6
33.8
33.2
32.9
35.3
37.8
34.9
33.3
34.7
36. 5
32.5
31.7
33.6
36.7
37. 8
35.1

$0.423
.743
.600
.589
.403
.646
.557
. 600
.455
. 519
.401
. 558
.543
.690
.581
.589
.577
.567
.604
.594
.610
. 675
.605
.597
.469
.515
.698
.583

F o u n d ries, 1 9 3 1

Connecticut.,
Illinois_______ - .
- - - - Indiana_________ - _ _ _ _

Michigan

- - -

N ew Jersey- - _ ----------N ew Y ork -. _
Ohio____
_____ _ _ --- ______
Pennsylvania _ _____ _
Rhode I s l a n d .- ______ __________
Tennessee___ ________ - _ ______
W iscon sin.__ _

___________

Total____ __

_____ _ _

53.8
45. 4
48. 0
50. 7
50. 9
49.6
51. 1
53. 6
56. 0
51 2
52. 4
48. 3
49. 9
47. 2
52. 1
51. 2
51.9
50. 7
48.9
49.2
51.0
47. 2
51. 1
50.4
49. 0
49. 0
47.9
51.5

43. 2 $0. 423
34. 7
.743
. 600
45. 6
.589
28.5
. 403
36. 0
30.9
.647
.559
29.7
.600
35.0
37.1
.455
30. 3
. 521
. 401
35. 8
41. 4
.558
. 543
40. 6
.690
33.8
.582
33.3
32. 9
. 589
35. 3
.577
37. 8
.567
35.1
.608
33.2
.599
.610
34.7
. 675
36. 5
.606
32.5
.597
31.7
.471
33.4
36. 7
. 515
.698
37. 8
.584
35.1

50.3

33.5

.601

(2)

(2)

50.3
49. 7

24.7 $0.409
.472
22.7

(2)

(2)

(2)

51.4

20.9

.448

48. 2
46.9
44.5

25.7
38.0
30.5

.380
.403
.438

50.3
50.9
50. 0

29.3
32.3
48.3

.447
.460
.318

48.7

32.3

.430

53.8
45. 4
48. 0
50. 6
50.9
49.6
51.1
53. 6
56.0
51.1
52.4
48. 3
49.9
47.2
52.1
51. 2
51.9
50. 7
48.9
49. 2
50.9
47.2
51.1
50.4
49.0
49.0
47.9
51.5

48.7

29.4

.422

50.3

33.5

.600

38.4 ■f0. 470
32.7
.208
31.9
.375
32.1
.233
.232
37.3
40.3
.350
38.9
.436
37.2
.295
37.2
.277
37.2
.434
34.0
.336
. 176
46.3
.314
41. 5
.241
46.9
. 141
38.8

42.2
41. 6
34. 2
39.0
43.1
42.4
41.1
39.7
40.3
35.5
38.9
48.0
41.9
46.4
44. 6
50.9
37.3

$0.521
.241
.488
.394
.383
.471
.581
.449
.425
.580
.469
.286
.425
.413
.266
.236
.420

41.1

.411

(2)

F u r n itu r e in d u s tr y , 1 9 3 1

California___
Georgia______ ___
________
Illinois___________________________
Indiana. ----------- ------------------------K entucky-------- -------------------------Maryland- - ___ _______
Massachusetts
M ichigan-- - ____ _______________
M issouri-_
_ - - -N ew Jersey____ ________________
N ew York _
______ . - ___
N orth C a r o lin a -.___ -- _______
Ohio_____________ _______________
Pennsylvania -Tennessee______________________
W iscon sin.-. _
Total

------ -------- -.

.

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

47.4
55.0
50. 1
51.6
54.3
49.5
48. 6
51.0
50.8
49.0
51. 3
54. 2
53.8
53.3
52. 7
55.0
53.6

42.5 $0. 525
42. 4
.244
34.5
.498
39.2
.399
43.4
.389
42.6
.482
41.3
.594
39.9
.461
.432
40.5
35.4
.589
39. 1
.475
48. 1
.288
4L 9
.435
46.4
.418
45.8
.289
50. 9
. 236
37. 7
.430

44.8
55.0
50. 1
51. 1
52.9
49.0
46.4
51.8
49.8
45.5
48.6
49.4
49. 7
50.6
50.7
50.0

33.6

.297

47.2
55.0
50.1
51. 5
54.2
49.5
48.4
51.0
50.8
48.8
51. 2
54. 1
53.5
53. 2
52.3
55. 0
53.3

51.9

41.4

49.8

36.3

.314

51.8

2 N ot shown for less than 3 wage earners.


https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis

.416

363

W AGES AND HOURS OF LABOR

A V E R A G E F U L L -T IM E A N D A C T U A L H O U R S P E R W E E K A N D A V E R A G E E A R N IN G S
P E R H O U R B Y I N D U S T R Y , Y E A R , S E X , A N D S T A T E , C IT Y , O R D I S T R IC T — Contd.
G a s o l i n e -f i ll i n g s t a ti o n s , 1 9 8 1

Aver- Aver­ Aver­ Aver­ Aver­ Aver­ Aver­ Aver­ Aver­
age
age
age
age
ageage
age
age
age
hours earn­
hours earn­ full­
full­
hours earn­
fulltime actually ings
time actually ings
time actually ings
worked
hours
worked
hours
hours worked
per
per
per
in 1
per
in 1
per
in 1
per
hour
hour week
hour week week
week
week week

State or other geographic unit

Burlington, V t -------- ------- -------- ---

St. Louisj M o . . . ---------------- -- --

Meridian, M iss------------ ----------

Males and females

Females

Males

--

53.9
04.6
57.3
56.4
64.4
55.3
65.1
62.4
68.4
54.6
57.9
63.2
57.8
53.0
64.2
60.2
72.7
62.5
60.5
64.0
61.7
57.0
56.7
67.0
70.0
61.1
58.8
60.9
59.9
65.7
58.4
54.3
62.8
51.8
60.6

53. 2 $0.418
.285
60.7
57.3
.351
56.4
.438
.284
64.4
55.2
.491
.315
64.9
62.4
.354
67.5
.296
51.3
.603
57.2
.470
.371
63.3
.469
57.7
.494
53.1
.319
63.7
.412
60.7
.254
72.7
.396
62.3
60.0
.371
65.2
.329
62.1
.337
.332
56.4
.405
56.3
.304
66.8
.226
70. 0
.399
60.7
.380
59.5
.348
60.9
59.8
.503
.352
65.8
.432
58.7
54.4
.443
.354
62. 5
52. 8
.439
57.8
.449

—

_________

—

—

—

—

1

H o s ie r y in d u str y , 1 9 3 2

Eastern Pennsylvania, excluding
Eastern Pennsylvania, including

54. 8
55.4
51.0
49.6
54.8
48.2
50.8
49.6
50.0
47.7
48.1
55.0
48.2

53.1

39.2

.299

53.6

41.0

.385

51. 2
53.5
54.1

38.9
40.8
46.4

.327
.228
.209

51.6
63. 6
54. 6

40.6
43.6
49. 5

.419
. 287
. 259

39.6

.292

51.9

41.3

.376

40.8 $0. 209
.301
47.0
.427
39.5
. 644
42.7
.341
43.7
.643
44.5
42.4
.536
.518
42.7
.464
41.9
.654
44.3
.767
44.3
.378
44.3
.621
42.0

54.2

43.4

.486

51.7

Virginia____ ____ — ............ ............

52.1
54.0
55.5

42.9
48.7
54.7

.533
.380
.330

T otal-----------------------------------

52.2

44.1

.494


https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis

42. 5 $0. 138
. 181
40.8
.259
33. 5
40.4
.379
40.0
.237
42. 2
.348
.272
40.4
.320
37.8
.268
39.3
.380
39.3
.377
46.9
.238
39.9
.373
38.6

54. 6
55. 4
50.7
49.7
54.5
48.0
50.7
49. 2
49.5
47.7
48.1
55.0
48.3

55.4
55.4
51.8
49.4
55. 4
48.6
51.1
50. 2
51.3
47.7
48.3
55. 1
48.2

42. 1
42.9
35.2
41.4
41.2
43.1
41.0
39.7
40.0
41.2
39.3
41.7
39.9

$0. 155
.225
.313
.501
.273
.476
.361
.402
.326
.493
.518
.297
.476

364

MONTHLY LABOR REV IEW

A V E R A G E F U L L -T IM E A N D A C T U A L H O U R S P E R W E E K A N D A V E R A G E E A R N IN G S
P E R H O U R B Y I N D U S T R Y , Y E A R , S E X , A N D S T A T E , C IT Y , O R D I S T R I C T — Contd.
I r o n a n d s teel i n d u s t r y (c o m m o n l a b o r e r s ), 1 9 3 1 5a

Males

State or other geographic unit

Females

Males and females

Aver­ Aver­
Aver­ A ver­ Aver­ Aver­ A ver­ A ver­ A ver­
age
age
age
age
age
age
age
age
age
full­
hours
full­
hours
hours
full­
time actually earn­ time actually earn­ time actually earn­
ings
ings
ings
hours worked
hours
worked
worked
hours
per
per
per
per
in 1
per
in 1
per
in 1
hour
hour
hour
week week
week week
week week

Blast furnaces:
Eastern 6______ ____ ______
Pittsburgh 8_______________
Great Lakes and M iddle W est9.
Southern 10..................................

60.3
59.7
58. 2
61.0

7 74.5 $0. 368

7 67.1
7 75.5
7 94.5

.441
.439
.253

Total_______________________

59. 5

7 76.7

.384

Bessemer converters:
Pittsburgh___________________
Great Lakes and M iddle West.

57.1
58.9

7 61.0
7 80.4

.452
.452

63.2
55.6
58.3
57.1

7 81.6

.355
.458
.446
.349

T otal.____ _________________
Open-hearth furnaces:
E astern..-________ ___________
Pittsburgh___________________
Great Lakes and M iddle W est.
Southern_____________________

7 66. 2

7 74.6
7 90.1

Total_______________________

57.5

7 72.4

.436

Puddling mills: A ll districts______

54.3

7 60.0

.386

Blooming mills:
Eastern______________________
Pittsburgh___________________
Great Lakes and M iddle WestSouthern_____________________

59.1
53.8
57.0
60.7

7 88.2
7 75.0
7 65.7
7 87.5

.376
.475
.466
.339

Total_____ _______ _________

55.6

7 72.3

.460

Plate mills:
Eastern_______ _____ _________
Pittsburgh___________________
Great Lakes and M iddle W est.

63.2
49.3
57.4

7 81.6
7 48.2
7 55.8

.339
.492
.450

Standard rail mills: All districts-. .

58.0

7 72.6

.406

Bar mills:
Eastern— ____ _______________
Pittsburgh___________________
Great Lakes and M iddle W estSouthern_____________________

56. 5
51.1
56.2
56.9

7 56.2
7 57.4
7 60. 6
7 90. 9

.327
.472
.421
.271

54.2

7 64. 2

.394

Total.................... ............. .......

Total_____ _________________
Sheet mills:
Pittsburgh______________ ____
Great Lakes and M iddle W estTotal. ______ _______________
Tin-plate mills: A ll districts______

. SaWage studies of the iron and steel industry do not show average earnings b y State or district except
m the case of com m on laborers.
6 New Jersey and the eastern parts of Maryland, New York, and Pennsylvania.
7 In 16-day pay period.
8 Includes plants in Pittsburgh, western Pennsylvania, those along the border line of Ohio from Youngs­
town south to Bellaire, and those located in the “ panhandle” of West Virginia.
9 Includes plants along the Great Lakes and in inland territory, including Colorado.
10 Alabama, Georgia, Kentucky, Tennessee, and Virginia.


https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis

365

W AGES AND HOURS OF LABOR

A V E R A G E F U L L -T IM E A N D A C T U A L H O U R S P E R W E E K A N D A V E R A G E E A R N IN G S
P E R H O U R B Y I N D U S T R Y , Y E A R , S E X , A N D S T A T E , C IT Y , OR D I S T R I C T —Contd.
L e a th e r i n d u s t r y , 1 9 8 2

Males

Females

Males and females

Aver­ A ver­ Aver­ Aver­ Aver­ Aver­ Aver­ A ver­ A ver­
age
age
age
age
age
age
age
age
age
full­
full­
hours earn­
hours earn­
hours earn­ full­
time actually
time actually ings
time actually ings
ings
hours worked
hours worked
hours worked
per
per
per
in 1
in 1
per
in 1
per
per
hour week
hour
hour week
week week
week
week

State or other geographic unit

Delaware _ .
-----Illinois and M issouri-__ . . . -------Massachusetts and N ew Hampshire___ _______________________
M ichigan-.- _
New Jersey. ______ _ . . . ______
New York
. _
Ohio__________ _ _ _____________
Pennsylvania ____ . . - - - - - W isconsin______________________ _
Total_______________________

50.4
49.9
49. 6

39. 7 $0. 467
40. 2
.499
41. 4
.382

51.1
49.3

39.9 $0. 280
37.5
. 278

50.7
49.8
49. 6

39.8
39. 7
41.4

$0. 401
. 464
. 382

48.6
54.0
50. 5
49.8
54. 1
50.8
51.0
50. 9
52. 1

43.0
45. 1
44. 5
42. 5
29. 0
45.0
44.9
33. 1
39.9
42. 1

.553
.369
.559
.533
.309
.501
.478
. 372
.425

48.0
54.0
51. 7
48.0

41. 6
43.8
43. 7
44. 1

.319
.250
.330
.342

50.0
49.9

45.9
41. 1

.305
.342

50.8
50.0

41. 1
40.9

.289
.303

42.8
45.0
44.4
42.5
29.0
45. 1
44.6
33. 1
40.0
42.0

. 523
.359
. 524
.529
. 309
.477
.468
.372
.411

.493

48.6
54.0
50. 7
49.8
54. 1
50. 7
50.9
50. 9
51.9
50.4

40. 1
39. 2
36. 5
37.0
42. 6
37.6
35.7
34.3
47. 6
36. 7
43. 2
39. 2
41. 3
41.8
38.7
37. 6
39. 4
40. 2
40.7
40. 3
37. 5
41. 2
35.9
34. 9
35. 3
39. 1
42.8
36.4
38. 2

$0. 596
.753
. 647
.659
. 462
.655
. 543
. 569
. 543
.551
.524
. 548
.658
.644
.631
.601
. 562
.594
.677
.674
.622
.724
.614
.591
. 567
.603
.729
.615
. 634

50.4

•47x

M a c h in e sh op s, 1 9 3 1

Connecticut

---------

Illinois___
I n d ia n a -.------- _ _ _ -----------------

M aine..

----- ---

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

Massachusetts--------- ------------------Michigan _
_ - - - New Hampshire- N ew Jersey - ___ - - - - - - New York _ ____________________
Ohio____ - . -- _ ---------------------Pennsylvania_____ _ . ------------- .
Rhode Island. __ _________ ______
Tennessee________________ ______
W isconsin_________
- T otal-- - __________________

54.0
45.1
48. 0
49.3
51. 2
49. 5
51.1
52. 2
52.9
48.9
51. 4
48. 1
48.4
48. 2
51.5
49. 2
51.3
48.8
49. 4
49. 2
49.9
46. 2
51. 2
50. 4
49.0
48. 0
47.6
51. 2
49.8

40.1 $0. 596
39. 2
. 753
36. 5
. 647
37.0
.659
42. 6
. 462
37.6
. 657
35.8
.543
34. 3
.569
47.6
.543
36. 7
. 551
43. 2
.524
39.4
.550
41. 3
. 658
41.8
.646
38.5
.645
37. 6
.601
39. 4
. 562
40. 7
.600
40. 7
.679
40. 3
.680
37. 4
.628
. 724
41. 2
35.9
.616
34.9
.595
35. 2
.568
39. 1
.603
42.8
.729
36. 3
.617
38. 2
.637

50. 0

27.0

.380

47. 7
52.3

38.7
41.9

.448
.398

48.0
50.0
48. 1
49. 4

31.6
39.0
38.6
41. 4

.431
. 423
.473
.347

46.4
50.8
(2)

35.6
36. 2
(2)

.397
.453
(2)

45. 5
49. 2

38.8
38.8

.378
.408

54. 0
45. 1
48. 0
49.3
51. 2
49.6
51. 0
52. 2
52. 9
48. 9
51. 4
48. 1
48. 4
48. 2
51. 5
49. 2
51. 3
48. 7
49. 4
49. 2
49.9
46. 2
51. 1
50.4
49. 0
48.0
47. 6
51.1
49.8

(2)

(2)

50.9
50.0

34.7 $0. 373
27. 2
.471

M e n ’ s c lo th in g i n d u s t r y ,

Baltimore__
- --- - ------B oston. -------- _
Buffalo
_
Chicago - - - - - .
Cincinnati- ----C leveland.. . ------ ---------------------Milwaukee. ------------- Newark -___ - -- - - - - Northeastern N ew Jersey, excluding Newark - - - - - -------- --New York, N .Y -------- . . _ _
Philadelphia __________ -- - - Eastern Pennsylvania, excluding
Philadelphia . . __________ Rochester
-------- ------------- - St. L o u is ..- ___________________ T o t a l.. . . .
. . . -_ -

1932

44. 0
44. 0
44.3
44. 0
44. 1
44. 2
45.0
44.2

37. 7 $0. 461
39. 4
.616
40. 2
.507
32.8
.758
.641
33.7
36. 1
.516
35. 7
.515
41.4
.579

44. 3
44. 1
44. 1
44.0
44.0
44. 0
46. 0
44. 2

41. 6 $0. 248
38.4
.320
.314
37. 4
31. 2
.531
30. 7
.397
36. 1
.377
34. 1
.357
41. 1
.343

44. 2
44. 1
44. 1
44. 0
44.0
44. 1
45.7
44. 2

40. 7
38. 9
38.3
32.0
31.8
36. 1
34. 6
41.3

$0. 295
.480
.378
. 649
.486
.410
.406
.488

44.5
44. 2
44.1

43.9
43.5
'40.4

.540
.670
.602

44. 6
44.6
44.0

41.4
42.6
39.3

. 302
.356
.346

44. 6
44. 3
44.0

42.5
43.3
39.9

.411
.583
.490

52.0
44.0
44. 3
44.3

41.0
24.4
42. 7

.293
.713
.486
.641

51.6
44.0
44. 1
44.5

37.6
25. 1
43. 1
36.0

. 165
.431
.303
.361

51.7
44. 0
44. 1
44. 4

38.8
24.8
43.0
37.3

.210
. 546
.349
.506

>N ot shown for less than 3 wage earners


https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis

(2)

38.6

366

MONTHLY LABOR R E V IEW

A V E R A G E F U L L -T IM E A N D A C T U A L H O U R S P E R W E E K A N D A V E R A G E E A R N IN G S
P E R H O U R B Y IN D U S T R Y , Y E A R , S E X , A N D S T A T E , C IT Y , O R D I S T R IC T —Contd.
M e ta llife r o u s m in in g , 1 9 3 1

State or other geographic unit

Western mixed ores:

Northern iron:

Males and females

Females

Males

Aver­ Aver­ Aver­ Aver­ Aver­ Aver­ A ver­ A ver­ Aver­
age
age
age
age
age
age
age
age
age
full­
hours earn­
hours earn­
hours earn­ full­
full­
time actually ings
time actually ings
time actually ings
worked
hours
hours worked
hours worked
per
per
per
in 1
per
in 1
in 1
per
per
hour
hour week
hour week
week
week
week week

48.8
50. 2
51.7
47. 5
48. 2
55.6
53.9
56.0
52.5

43.8 $0. 679
48.4
.593
48.4
.597
44.0
.581
46.0
.681
49.9
.625
50.8
.459
.674
46.9
47.8
.515

50.7

46.6

.608

49. 4

33. 7

.443

50.8
56.0

28.3
39.6

.602
. 545

54.3

35.9

.560

58.4
48.2

32.0
43.3

.372
.477

51. 6

41. 6

. 559
1

M o t o r v eh icle m a n u fa c t u r e , 1 9 3 2

Illinois
Indiana__
.
Michigan.
_ .
...
New Jersey.. . . . ____________
New York .
________
Ohio _______ ___________________
_________
Pennsylvania
Wisconsin__________ ____ . ------Total

43. 4
51.0
47.7
43. 2
47. 3
49.4
52. 5
50. 5

22.9 $0. 663
32.7
.493
32. 1
.684
31.6
.678
31. 1
.591
34.3
.575
33.4
.484
27.5
.557

44. 0
50.9
51.0
50.0
47.3
48.6
51.8
50.0

25.0 $0. 320
31.3
. 276
31. 2
.366
32.5
.320
26.7
.388
.410
28.5
29. 2
.317
30.2
.324

43.4
51. 0
47.8
43.2
47.3
49.3
52.5
50. 5

23.0
32.7
32. 1
31.6
31.0
34. 0
33.4
27.6

$0. 659
.485
.670
.677
.585
.569
.482
.550

48.3

31. 9

50.5

30.7

.361

48.4

31.9

.628

.638

M o t o r -v e h i c l e r e p a i r g a r a g es , 1 9 3 1


https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis

50.
51. 1
50. 8
54. 0
57. 2
51. 2
54. 1
53. 8
57. 0
52. 4
52. 9
57. 7
54. 2
52. 4
57. 5
53. 7
54. 2
49. 9
57. 1
54. 8
53. 9
56. 7
53. 5

OO

Philadelphia, P a __
Atlanta, G a _______
Houston, T ex --------Baltimore, M d ____
Birmingham, A l a . .
Boston, M ass______
Burlington, V t ____
Charleston, S .C ___
Charlotte, N .C ____
Chicago, 111________
Cleveland, Ohio___
Des Moines, Iowa^Detroit, M ich _____
Hartford, C on n ____
Huntington, W .Va.
Indianapolis, Ind__
Jacksonville, Fla__
St. Louis, M o _____
Kansas City, Kans,
Lincoln, N ebr_____
Little R ock, A r k __
Louisville, K y -------Manchester, N .H ..

50.8 $0. 618
.551
50. 2
.552
49.6
52.9
.546
. 482
55. 2
48.4
.607
. 544
53. 1
.465
53. 1
.485
55. 7
.732
48.3
45.4
.648
52.2
. 570
49.9
.681
51. 3
.646
.482
56.8
.552
48.5
53.0
.508
.659
48.3
55.3
.493
.507
53.3
52. 1
.476
52. 4
.483
53. 6
.531

367

W AGES AND HOURS OF LABOR

A V E R A G E F U L L -T IM E A N D A C T U A L H O U R S P E R W E E K A N D A V E R A G E E A R N IN G S
P E R H O U R B Y I N D U S T R Y , Y E A R , S E X , A N D S T A T E , C IT Y , O R D IS T R IC T —Contd.
M o t o r -v e h i c l e r e p a i r g a r a g es , 1 9 3 1 — Continued

Males and females

Females

Males

Aver- Aver­ Aver­ Aver­ Aver­ Aver­ Aver­ Aver­ Aver­
age
age
age
age
age
age
age
age
age
hours earn­
full­
hours earn­
hours earn­ full­
fulltime actually ings
time actually ings
time actually ings
hours worked per
hours worked
hours worked
per
per
in 1
per
in 1
per
in 1
per
hour
hour week
hour week week
week
week week

State or other geographic unit

54. 1
59.3
54 3
55. 1
49. 5
49. 7
54. 5
54.7
52. 3
53 3
53. 6
54 3

46. 4 $0. 520
.327
57. 3
. 604
48. 7
.631
50. 5
. 497
48. 0
.697
50. 2
. 598
50. 4
. 535
52. 7
.599
51. 1
. 575
53.3
.584
51. 9
. 593
51.1

P o r tla n d cem en t in d u s tr y , 1 9 3 2

District 2 (N .Y .)___ _________ District 3 (Ohio, W . Pa., and W .
Va )
District 4 (M ich .)_______ . ____
D istricts (111., Ind., K y., and Wis.)_
District 6 (Ala., Fla., Ga., Tenn.,
District 7 (Iowa and E. M o .)-------District 8 (Kans., W . M o., Nebr.,
and Okla.)__
___________ ____
District 9 (T ex .)__________________
District 10 (Colo., M ont., and
U tah)__________________________
District 11 (Calif.)
________
District 12 (Oreg. and W ash.)__ __
Total-------- -------------------------

60. 3
58.0

39. 4 $0. 416
.415
41.9

58.4
67.5
54. 1

45.0
59. 1
43.9

63.8
69.4

60.3
58.0

39.4
41.8

$0.416
.415

58.4
67.3
54.0

45. 0
59.0
43.5

.412
.369
.408

(2)

63.8
69.4

52.4
58.6

.314
.355

16.6
36.2

.335
.255

57.7
61.8

49.1
49.9

.358
.348

(2)
48.0
48.0

(2)
47.9
32.1

(2)
.564
.375

54.5
54.3
51.3

53.4
49.4
44.0

.465
.491
. 564

48.6

27. 2

.386

59.0

45.7

.401

.312
.283
.251
.282

12 54. 8
12 51.7
12 85.5
12 67.9

.481
.423
.411
.449

(2)

.412
.369
.408

48.0
48.7

42.7 $0. 263
21.4
.379

52. 4
58.7

.314
.355

(2)

(2)

57.7
61.9

49.3
50.0

.358
.348

48.0
50.4

54.5
54.3
51.3

53.4
49.4
44.2

.466
.491
.566

59.1

45.8

.401

P o ttery

in d u stry, 1 9 3 2

Semi vitreous ware:
Group 1 11____
Group 2 13____
Group 3 » ____
Group 4 13____

n 56. 3
12 53. 0
12 88. 2
12 68. 4

.569
.513
.465
.537

12 52. 3
12 49. 8
12 78. 6
12 67. 0

T otal_______

12 59.3

.535

12 54.6

Vitreous ware:
Group 1 16____
Group 2 u ____
Group 3 18-------

12 42. 7
1244.3
12 5 1. 7

.536
.544
.559

12 33. 6
1239.6
12 52. 6

Total-----------

(2)

(2)

12 57.6
.274
.271
.246

12 39. 4
1241.9
12 52. 1

.456
.410
.441

1243.7

2 N ot shown for less than 3 wage earners.
u Includes potteries in East Liverpool, Ohio, and nearby potteries in West Virginia directly across the
Ohio River from East Liverpool.
12 In 2 weeks.
13 Includes potteries in Ohio outside East Liverpool and in Pennsylvania, Illinois, and Indiana.
14 Includes potteries in Maryland, Tennessee, and Virginia.
15 Includes potteries in West Virginia other than those near East Liverpool, and those in N ew Jersey.
16 New York.
12 Pennsylvania.
is Ohio and West Virginia.


https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis

368

MONTHLY LABOR R E V IE W

A V E R A G E F U L L -T IM E A N D A C T U A L H O U R S P E R W E E K A N D A V E R A G E E A R N IN G S
P E R H O U R B Y IN D U S T R Y , Y E A R , S E X , A N D S T A T E , C IT Y , O R D IS T R IC T —Contd.
R a y o n a n d oth er s y n t h e ti c y a r n m a n u fa c t u r e , 1 9 3 2

Males

State or other geographic unit

District 1 19----_
_ _ __
District 2 20_ _ _ _ _ _ _ _
_____
District 3 21
_ _ _ _
Total

Females

Males and females

Aver­ Aver­
Aver­ Aver­ A ver­ Aver­ Aver- Aver­ Aver­
age
age
age
age
age
age
age
age
age
fullhours
hours
full­
hours
full­
time actually earn­ time actually earn­ time actually earn­
ings
ings
ings
hours worked
hours worked
hours worked
per
per
per
in 1
per
per
in 1
per
in 1
hour
hour
hour week
week week
week week
week
50.3
50.3
48. 1

51.4 $0. 401
47.1
.503
.382
47.9

50.3
47.3
47.4

48.1 $0. 264
43.6
.319
44.3
.275

50.3
49. 1
47.8

49.8
45.6
46.4

$0. 335
.430
.341

48.6

47.9

47.6

44.3

48.2

46.4

.359

.408

.283

S a w m ills, 1 9 3 2

West Virginia

______

T otal___

60.3
59. 3
52.2
59.8
58.9
49.0
58. 1
59.4
59.0
57.8
59.2
51.9
58.6
48.0
60.0
58. 5
59.8
59.4
48.0
59.4
58. 5

47.7 $0.136
.193
37.7
39. 7
.410
41.4
. 174
. 134
42.5
38.7
.427
41. 5
.268
. 197
36.6
49. 5
.272
37.2
.296
. 152
45.9
.444
31.4
42.5
. 160
.412
39.9
46.7
. 133
38.8
.217
36.4
.221
43. 1
. 167
.376
35.0
43.1
.325
40.3
.300

55.8

40.1

.256

S i l k a n d r a y o n g o o d s m a n u fa c t u r e , 1 9 3 1

Connecticut__
_ _
__ _
M aryland.
_
_______
MassachusettsNew Jersey____________ ____ _
_
New Y ork. _ _ _ _ _
_ _____
North Carolina_________ _______
Pennsylvania___ _ _______ _____
Rhode I s la n d -___ ____ _ _______
South Carolina, Alabama, and
Georgia..
.
._ ____________
Tennessee__
Virginia...... ...................
__ _

51.0
56.0
50. 2
47.5
51.3
55.3
52.2
50.3

49. 7 $0. 522
51. 7
. 310
43.0
. 459
43.7
.597
48. 1
.502
51. 2
.419
49.5
.474
47. 1
.553

49.3
50.0
47.6
46.9
48. 7
55. 2
50. 5
49.7

45.7 $0. 385
44. 5
.230
42.4
.278
41.3
.410
44.4
.335
47.8
.314
42.4
.324
42.6
.418

50. 2
51. 5
48.9
47.2
49.7
55.2
51. 2
50.0

47.8
46.3
42.7
42.4
45.8
49.9
45. 4
45.0

$0. 459
.253
.367
.500
.400
.382
.393
.495

55. 1
56.8
53.8

51.7
53.0
50.2

.294
. 218
.323

55.6
56. 1
54. 1

49.0
48. 1
47.6

.240
. 181
.265

55.4
56.4
54.0

50.4
49.9
48 8

.268
. 196
.292

T otal____ ____ ____ ___ __

51. 5

48. 4

.485

50.0

43.2

.335

50.7

45. 5

.406

46.2 $0. 372
39.9
.332
40.5
.319
43.4
.161
43. 4
.359
36. 7
.257

47.7
48. 2
53. 1
55.5
48.8
47.8

49.6
48. 0
46.0
43.8
46.8
39. 0

$0. 476
.497
.467
.273
.468
.370

S l a u g h t e r i n g a n d m e a t 'p a c k in g , 1 9 3 1

California _.
_ ________ ___
Colorado. . . . .
____
Connecticut and Massachusetts.
Florida and Georgia. . . . . .
Illinois
. . . ____ _ _
Indiana. _________________ ___ _

47.8
48. 3
54.0
55. 5
48.8
47.8

50.3 $0. 498
49.6
. 525
47. 2
.496
43.9
.286
47. 5
.488
39.5
. 392

47.7
48.0
49. 1
55.9
48.9
47.9

19 1 plant in Connecticut, 1 in Massachusetts, 1 in New Hampshire, and 1 in Rhode Island.
201 plant in Delaware, 2 in New York, 2 in Ohio, and 1 in Pennsylvania.
21 1 plant in Georgia, 1 in Maryland, 1 in North Carolina, 3 in Tennessee, and 4 in Virginia.


https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis

369

WAGES AND HOUES OF LABOR

A V E R A G E F U L L -T IM E A N D A C T U A L H O U R S P E R W E E K A N D A V E R A G E E A R N IN G S
P E R H O U R B Y I N D U S T R Y , Y E A R , S E X , A N D S T A T E , C IT Y , OR D I S T R I C T —Contd.
S l a u g h t e r i n g a n d m ea t p a c k i n g , 1 9 3 1 — C ontinued

Females

Males

State or other geographic unit

..........................
Iowa
Kansas.. Maryland
M ichiganMinnesota and South Dakota.
Missouri. ______________________
N e b r a s k a .-___ ___ .
_
N ew Jersey and N ew York . _ ___
Ohio and W est Virginia. _
Oklahoma
.
.
...
Oregon and Washington
Pennsylvania. _
___ _
Texas. ________________ . .
Wisconsin__________________ .
T otal. . . . ________

Males and females

A ver­ A ver­ A ver­ Aver­ A ver­ A ver­ Aver­ A ver­ A ver­
age
age
age
age
age
age
age
age
age
hours earn­ full­
hours
full­
hours earn­ full­
earn­
time actually ings
time actually
time actually ings
ings
hours worked
hours
hours worked
worked
per
per
per
per
in 1
in 1
per
per
in 1
hour
hour
hour
week week
week
week week
week

_____

49.1
48.1
53.8
58.0
49.8
49.0
48.0
52.3
51.2
46. 2
48.9
52.3
48. 1
48. 1

45.7 $0.438
.448
44.3
52.9
.489
47.6
.465
46.2
.475
47.2
.471
42. 1
.456
. 519
43.8
.494
49.3
42.0
.416
47.0
.498
53.7
.473
.444
41.9
49.7
.498

49.7
48.0
47.8
54.0
49. 4
49. 2
48.0
50.3
49. 1
46. 3
46. 6
50.0
48. 3
48.0

44. 5 $0. 293
41. 7
.318
49.9
.286
44. 7
.293
40.8
.307
42. 8
.331
39. 1
.314
40. 3
.309
43. 3
.310
40. 1
.258
39.8
.335
. 292
46. 5
40.3
.277
45.4
.325

49.2
48.1
52. 7
57.0
49. 7
49.0
48.0
52. 1
50. 9
46. 2
48. 6
51.8
48. 1
48. 1

45. 5
43.9
52. 4
46.9
45. 5
46. 8
41. 7
43. 4
48. 3
41. 7
46. 3
52. 3
41. 7
49. 1

$0. 416
.428
.454
.425
.456
.460
.439
. 494
. 468
.394
.484
. 443
.423
.475

49.2

45.9

48.9

42.4

.321

49. 2

45.4

.449

U n d erw ea r

.470

(k n itte d )

in d u stry, 1 9 3 2

Connecticut . ________ _________
Georgia____________________
Illinois. ___________ _______
Indiana. ___________
___ _ . . .
Massachusetts_______ . . . _______
Michigan
Minnesota.
. . . __________
N ew Hampshire and Vermont
N ew York
North Carolina.. _ . ___ ___ ___
Pennsylvania.._ _________ _ ____
Rhode Island . . . _____________
Tennessee.. . _________ ________
V irginia._ . . .
_ .
Wisconsin.

50.1
56.2
(22)
48.7
48.6
50. 5
48.3
49.9
49.8
52.9
53.5
51.6
54.9
50.0
50.0

35. 1 $0. 500
. 199
53.3
(22)
(22)
. 464
40. 1
42. 4
.518
43. 1
. 425
40. 4
. 567
40.3
.478
41.4
. 427
50. 5
.268
.411
49.8
49.7
.468
39.4
.287
.366
47.0
.562
45.1

50.0
55.9
(22)
47. 8
48.0
52. 1
48. 0
49. 5
49. 1
53.4
52.4
51.0
54.8
49.6
49.9

31.7 $0. 345
52.3
. 168
(22)
(22)
29. 2
. 266
32.2
. 329
42. 3
.237
34.5
.380
32.6
.253
34. 6
.257
44. 4
. 181
. 269
40.8
43.0
.270
. 201
32.0
. 207
35.9
.272
38.9

50.0
56. 0
(22)
48.0
48. 1
51. 9
48. 0
49. 6
49. 2
53. 3
52.6
51. 1
54.8
49.7
49.9

32.4
52. 5
(22)
31. 1
33. 6
42. 4
35. 1
34.2
36. 2
45.9
42. 1
43.9
33.7
38.3
39.7

$0. 382
. 174
(22)
.311
.363
. 255
.402
.309
.301
.205
.294
.300
.224
.250
.316

T ota l._ . . . _ _ __ _ _ __ . . .

51. 1

43.4

50.6

36.8

50.7

38.0

.292

.408

.260

W o o l e n a n d w o r s te d g o o d s m a n u fa c t u r e , 1 9 3 2

Connecticut.
Maine _ ________ . . . . . _____
Massachusetts _ . . . .
._ _
New Hampshire
New Jersey.. ______ _
___
New York
.
. .
Pennsylvania______ . .
Rhode Island . . . . . . .
. _____
Vermont .
Southern District . . . . . .

49.5
54. 1
49. 1
52.9
49. 6
51. 2
53. 2
48. 1
55. 7
56.0

38. 1 $0. 480
45.3
.438
39.5
.450
45. 3
.407
51.0
.523
39.6
.452
.472
45. 4
.474
41.7
57. 1
.364
46.0
.255

49.7
53.8
48.0
53.5
48. 7
49.6
53.4
48.0
54.0
55.5

29.3 $0. 316
36.4
.336
35.6
.332
. 289
37. 1
.409
45. 1
32. 6
.319
41. 2
.278
37. 5
.354
53. 1
.263
.211
43.8

49.6
54.0
48. 6
53.2
49. 1
50.4
53.3
48.0
54.9
55.7

35. 4
42.3
37.8
41.0
47.8
35.8
43. 1
39.7
55. 3
44.9

$0. 439
.408
.400
.351
.465
.387
.368
.421
. 321
.234

Total ._ ________ _ _

50.6

43.1

50.0

38.5

50.3

40.9

.394

...

.447

.327

22 Included in total to avoid presenting data for 1 establishment in 1 State.

Wage-Rate Changes in American Industries
Manufacturing Industries

N THE following table is presented information concerning wagerate adjustments occurring between May 15 and June 15, 1933, as
shown by reports received from manufacturing establishments supply­
ing employment data to this Bureau. Of the 17,952 manufacturing
establishments included in the June survey 17,546 establishments, or

I


https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis

370

MONTHLY LABOR R E V IE W

97.7 percent of the total, reported no change in wage rates over the
month interval. The 2,584,762 employees not affected by changes in
wage rates constituted 92.2 percent of the total number of employees
covered by the June trend of employment survey of manufacturing
industries.
Increases in wage rates were reported by 350 manufacturing estab­
lishments in 46 industries, averaging 8.8 percent and affecting 213,444
employees or 7.6 percent of the employees in the establishments con­
cerned, during the period May 15 to June 15. This is the largest
number of establishments reporting wage-rate increases to the Bureau
since January 1930. Increases were reported in such important
industries as cotton goods, which reported increases averaging 11.5
percent and affecting 76,212 workers, automobiles, boots and shoes,
woolen and worsted goods, and rayon. The increases in wage rates
reported in June represent in practically all instances a partial restora­
tion of former wage scales.
Decreases in wage rates were reported by 58 establishments in 24
of the 89 industries surveyed. This is the smallest number of estab­
lishments reporting wage-rate decreases since December 1930 and
represents only 0.3 percent of the total number of establishments
covered. These decreases averaged 9.2 percent and affected 4,505
employees or 0.2 percent of all employees in the establishments
surveyed.
T able l .- W A Q E

CHANGES

Industry

All manufacturing industries____
Percent of total _________
Food and kindred products:
Baking______________
Beverages___ __________
Butter___________________
Confectionery__________
Flour__ __ __________
Ice cream__________________
Slaughtering and meat packing------------------------------------Sugar, beet__________
Sugar refining, cane_____
Textiles and their products:
Fabrics:
Carpets and rugs________
Cotton goods___________
Cotton small wares___
Dyeing and finishing textiles_________________
Hats, fur-felt____________
Knit goods______ ______
Silk and rayon goods____
W oolen and worsted
goods____ ____ _______
Wearing apparel:
Clothing, men’s_________
Clothing, women’s______
Corsets and allied garm ents............ _ _ ............
M en’s furnishin gs._____
M illinery______________
Shirts and collars........... .


https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis

IN

M A N U F A C T U R I N G IN D U S T R IE S
E N D IN G JU NE 15, 1933

Estab­
lish­
ments
report­
ing

Total
number
of em­
ployees

17, 952 2,802, 711
100.0
100.0

Number of establish­
ments reporting—

D U R IN G

M ONTH

Number of employees
having—

No
Wage Wage
N o wage Wage Wage
wage
in­
de­
in­
de­
changes creases creases changes creases creases
17, 546
97.7

350
1.9
5
5

7
1

1
3
3

1

4

1

960
357
317
318
420
323

59, 379
23,073
6, 058
33, 225
15,513
11, 907

948
351
317
316
417
320

250
57
11

93, 092
4,089
6,113

245
57
11

27
651
113

11,842
279,784
10,146

27
544
112

152
35
438
242

36, 249
5, 451
112,378
47, 507

141
35
432
233

11

236

71,062

193

42

398
476

63, 908
25,854

391
474

5
2

34
76
139
118

5, 719
7,844
9, 690
16,431

34
75
139
113

58 2,584, 762 213, 444
92.2
.3
7.6

5

25
308

28
8

1,178

35

l l ’, 852

55

92, 716
4, 089
6,113

323

53

86
5,706

5,’ 451
107 488
43| 170

4, 337

1

54, 512

16,379

171

2

62, 714
25, 758

1,064
96

130

5, 719
7, 831
9, 690
15,542

889

6
9

1

59, 326
22, 757
6 058
32, 012

11,842
203 572
10, 060

107
i

4, 505
.2

13

371

W AGES AND HOURS OF LABOR
T a b l e 1 —W A G E

C H A N G E S IN M A N U F A C T U R I N G IN D U S T R IE S
E N D IN G JUNE 15, 1933—Continued

Industry

Iron and steel and their products, not including machinery:
Bolts, nuts, washers, and
rivets_____________________
Cast-iron p ip e.— . . _______
Cutlery (not including silver
and plated cutlery) and
edge tools........ - ____ ______
Forgings, iron and steel..........
Hardware____________ _____ _
Iron and steel...... ...................
Plumbers’ supplies__________
Steam and hot-water heating
apparatus and steam fit­
tings______________________
Stoves____________________
Structural and ornamental
metalwork______ ______
Tin cans and other tinwareTools (not including edge
tools, machine tools, files,
and saws)________ ____ ___
W irework_____ __________
Machinery, not including transportation equipment:
Agricultural implements____
Cash registers, adding machines, and calculating
machines_________________
Electrical machinery, apparatus, and supplies________
Engines, turbines, tractors,
and water wheels. _____
Foundry and machine-shop
products
..........................
Machine tools_______________
Radios and phonographs___
Textile machinery and parts.
Typewriters and supplies___
Nonferrous metals and their
products:
Aluminum manufactures___
Brass, bronze, and copper
prod ucts.. ____________ _.
Clocks and watches and timerecording devices........... .......
Jewelry___________________ .
Lighting equipment________
Silverware and plated ware.
Smelting and refining—copper, lead, and zinc________
Stamped and enameled ware .
Transportation equipment:
Aircraft_________ ________
Automobiles_______
Cars, electric and steam railroad_____________
Locom otives______ ____
Shipbuilding_______ ______
Railroad repair shops:
Electric railroad_________
Steam railroad___________
Lumber and allied products:
Furniture___________________
Lumber:
M ill work_____________
Sawmills______ ______
Turpentine and rosin _____
Stone, clay, and glass products:
Brick, tile, and terra cotta___
C e m e n t ..____ .
Glass____________ _________
Marble, granite, slate, and
other products_______ ____
Pottery.......................................


https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis

Number of establishments reporting—

Estab­
lishments
report­
ing

Total
number
of em­
ployees

70
36

9,672
4,713

68
36

129
65
106
205
68

8,698
6,046
21,861
199, 580
8,469

129
65
104
204
68

93
159

14, 649
17,843

93
157

182
60

12,904
9,102

128
67
75

D U R IN G

M ONTH

Number of employees
having—

No
Wage Wage
Wage
N o wage Wage
wage
indeindechanges creases creases changes creases creases

2

9, 414
4, 713
8,698
6,046
21, 757
199, 471
8, 469

2
1

14, 649
17, 752

258

104
109

1

i

75

16

177
60

1

4

12, 738
9,102

29

137

7,003
6,194

126
67

1

1

6, 639
6,194

361

3

6,844

74

i

6,836

8

38

13, 768

38

282

90,885

279

3

90, 588

297

91

16, 210

88

3

15, 734

476

1,044
145
29
50
17

100,837
10, 753
11,313
7,688
8,000

1,035
145
29
48
17

6

97, 366
10, 753
11,313
7,516
8,000

3, 408

13, 768

3

2

63

172

27

5,319

27

177

26,187

176

1

26,117

70

27
133
51
51

7, 327
7,340
2,741
7,311

26
133
51
51

1

5.311
7,340
2,741
7.311

2, 016

44
89

9,932
13, 510

41
89

3

9,181
13,510

751

24
234

6,652
192, 625

24
213

42
11
96

4,170
1,491
22,484

42
11
96

391
508

20,123
66,842

382
508

447

44, 532

439

460
610
24

18,410
62,480
1, 367

452
596
24

663
124
191

18,484
15, 336
41,479

654
124
190

5

216
117

4,850
15, 213

214
117

5,319

6,652
150, 221

21

42,404

4,170
1,491
22, 484
7

19, 350
66,842

6

2

6
ii

2
3
4

2

1
2

84

689

43, 702

720

110

16,519
59, 633
1, 367

1,877
2,483

14
364

18,077
15, 336
41,449

314

93

4,781
15, 213

30
69

372

MONTHLY LABOR R E V IE W

T a b l e 1 —W A G E

C H A N G E S IN M A N U F A C T U R I N G IN D U S T R IE S
E N D IN G JU N E 15, 1933—Continued

Industry

Number of establish­
ments reporting—

D U R IN G

M ONTH

Number of employees
having—

Estab­
lish­
ments
report­
ing

Total
number
of em­
ployees

330
153

111,861
27,303

142

20
11

316
389

21, 427
78, 527

315
377

1
8

4

764

43, 403

759

1

465

68, 013

461

2

110

21, 461

112
45
30
202
350
131
23
98

No
Wage Wage
Wage
Wage
N o wage
wage
in­
in­
de­
de­
changes creases creases changes creases creases

Leather and its manufactures:
Leather. ............................... .
Paper and printing:
Boxes, paper.............................
Paper and p u lp __ __________
Printing and publishing:
Book and jo b ___________
Newspapers and periodicals___________________
Chemicals and allied products:
Cottonseed, oil, cake, and
meal_____ _____
________
Fertilizers__________ _____ _
Paints and varnish__________
Petroleum refining__________

86, 410
22,230

25, 451
5, 073

75, 774

21, 280

147
1,520

1,233

4

42, 707

9

687

2

67,617

243

108

2

21,144

317

3, 073
6,859
3, 298
6, 078
16,446
50,183
30, 303
15, 087

111
45
30
202
345
131
12
98

1

3,033
6,859
3,298
6,078
16, 275
50,183
18,159
15; 087

40

9

8,965

9

99
45

20, 022
51,826

98
43

32
205

10,155
42,870

32
204

4

1

11

167

153

4

12,144

Rubber products:
Rubber goods, other than
boots, shoes, tires, and inTobacco manufactures:
Chewing and smoking toCigars and cigarettes________

8,965
1
2

19,415
51,428

1

10,155
42, 790

607
398

80

Nonmanufacturing Industries
D a t a concerning wage-rate changes occurring between May 15 and
June 15, 1933, in 15 groups of nonmanufacturing industries are
presented in the following table.
No change in wage rates was reported in the anthracite mining
industry. Both increases and decreases were reported in 11 of the
remaining 14 industries over the month interval. The average per­
cents of increase reported were as follows: Dyeing and cleaning, 30.7
percent; canning and preserving, 24.9 percent; laundries, 20 percent;
quarrying and nonmetallic mining, 18 percent; wholesale trade, 12.6
percent; bituminous coal mining, 10.6 percent; metalliferous mining,
10.5 percent; banks, brokerage, insurance, and real estate, 9 percent;
hotels, 8.8 percent; retail trade, 6.6 percent; and electric-railroad and
motor-bus operation, 2.5 percent. The average percents of decrease
reported were as follows: Telephone and telegraph, 20 percent; crude
petroleum producing, 14.9 percent; hotels, 14.6 percent; laundries,
14.1 percent; quarrying and nonmetallic mining, 13 percent; power
and light, 12.2 percent; banks, brokerage, insurance, and real estate,
11.8; retail trade, 11.2 percent; wholesale trade, 10.2 percent; electricrailroad and motor-bus operation, 6.7 percent; and bituminous-coal
mining, 4 percent.


https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis

373

WAGES AND HOURS OF LABOR
T able 2

.—W A G E

Industrial group

C H A N G E S IN N O N M A N U F A C T U R IN G IN D U S T R IE S D U R IN G
M O N T H E N D IN G JU N E 15, 1933

Estab­
Total
lish­
number
ments
of
report­ em ploy­
ing
ees

Anthracite m ining............... ..........
160
Percent of total______ ____
100.0
Bituminous-coal mining_________ 1,480
Percent of to ta l.____ _______
100.0
Metalliferous mining____________
278
Percent of total_____________
100.0
Quarrying and nonmetallie min­
in g--------------------------- --------------- 1,135
Percent of to ta l.____ _______
100.0
Crude petroleum producing_____
256
Percent of to ta l.____ _______
100.0
Telephone and telegraph________
8,286
Percent of tota l.....................
100. 0
Power and light.................. ............ 3,181
Percent of total_________ . . . .
100.0
Electric-railroad and motor-bus
operation and maintenance.......
572
Percent of total_____________
100.0
Wholesale tr a d e ...____ _________
3, 025
Percent o f t o t a l ................... .
100.0
Retail trade________ ____________ 17, 879
Percent of total_____________
100.0
Hotels__________ _____ _________
2, 656
Percent of total_____________
100.0
Canning and preserving_________
818
Percent of total_____________
100.0
Laundries________ ____ _________
945
Percent of total_______ ____ _
100.0
Dyeing and cleaning____________
337
Percent of total______________ 100. 0
Banks, brokerage, insurance, and
real estate_____________________ 4, 320
Percent of to ta l.......................
100.0
1

Number of establish­
ments reporting—
No
Wage Wage
wage
in­
de­
changes creases creases

53, 984
100.0
185, 709
100.0
21, 509
100.0

160
100.0
1,390
93.9
270
97.1

32,149
100.0
23,119
100.0
249,412
100. 0
195, 665
100.0

Number of employees
having—
No
wage
changes

Wage
Wage
in­
de­
creases creases

89
6.0
8
2.9

i
0. 1

53, 984
100. 0
166,829
89.8
20, 820
96.8

1,116
98.3
252
98.4
8, 278
99.9
3,164
99.5

17
1.5

2
0.2
4
1.6
8
0. 1
17
0. 5

31, 802
98.9
22,945
99. 2
249, 293
100. 0
194,519
99.4

336
1.0

133, 213
100.0
77, 536
100.0
363, 296
100.0
132,178
100.0
43,145
100. 0
55,495
100.0
11,858
100.0

561
98. 1
2, 998
99. 1
17,843
99.8
2,644
99.5
813
99.4
942
99.7
335
99.4

1
0.2
14
0.5
6
0)
8
0.3
5
0.6
1
0. 1
2
0.6

10
1.7
13
0.4
30
0.2
4
0.2

129,153
97.0
77,169
99.5
362, 865
99.9
131, 792
99. 7
42,830
99. 3
55,460
99.9
11,827
99. 7

916
0.7
243
0.3
164
0)
271
0.2
315
0. 7
13
(0
31
0. 3

162,325
100.0

4,277
99.0

27
0.6

160, 798
99.1

1,094
0.7

2
0.2

16
0.4

18,804
10. 1
689
3. 2

76
(')

11
0)

174
0 8
119

O
1,146
0. 6
3,144
2.4
124
0.2
267
0. 1
115
0.1
22
0)

435
0.3

Less than one tenth of 1 percent.

Wage Changes Reported by Trade Unions and Municipalities
Since April 1933

HANGES in the wages and hours of labor of trade-unionists and
municipal employees which occurred during the period April to
July 1933, and which have been reported to the Bureau during the
past month, are tabulated in the table following. The tabulation
covers 26,491 workers.

C

R E C E N T W A G E C H A N G E S B Y IN D U S T R Y , O C C U P A T IO N , A N D L O C A L IT Y , A P R IL
TO JU L Y 1933
Hours per
week

Rate of wages
Industry or occupation and locality

Bakers:
Holyoke, Mass.:
Foremen________________________
Second hands____________________
Third hands......................... ............
St. Louis, M o.:
Shops employing 5 men or more:
Foremen____________________
Ovenmen and spongers______
Assistant spongers___________
First bench hands___________
Bench or machine hands_____
Helpers______________________
Shops employing less than 5 men:
Foremen____________________
Second hands.______ ________
2 4 0 4 ° — 3 3 --------9


https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis

Date of
change

M ay

1

Before
change

After
change

Per week

Per week

$41.00
36. 00
32.00

Before After
change change

$35. 00
30. 00
26.00

48
48
48

48
48
48

-__do____
--_d o____
-_-d o____
---d o ____
--.d o ____

44. 00
40.00
38. 00
37.00
36.00
29. 00

39. 60
36. 00
34.20
33. 30
32. 40
26.10

48
48
48
48
48
48

48
48
48
48
48
48

-__do____
__do____

40.00
36.00

36.00
32.40

54
54

54
54

374

MONTHLY LABOR R E V IE W

REC E N T W AGE

C H A N G E S B Y I N D U S T R Y , O C C U P A T IO N , A N D L O C A L IT Y , A P R IL
TO JU L Y 1933—Continued
Hours per
week

Rate of wages
Date of
change

Industry or occupation and locality

Barbers, N ew York, N .Y . (B ronx)__ ________
M ay 26
Apr. —
Brewery workers, St. Louis, M o . ____ __
Building-trades workers:
Asbestos workers, Denver, Colo
_ _ _ ____ _ Apr. 1
Bricklayers and masons:
Denver, C o l o ___
June 1
Sewer layers and caisson workers _ _ __ -__do____
Des Moines, Iowa
_____ __ . ___ M ay 10
Grand Rapids, M ich.:
Marble setters .

_______ _ _

Carpenters:
Alexandria, Va_ . __ . . . . . __________
.
Des Moines, Iowa
___________ _______
Grand Rapids, M ich . _ _
. . ____
Superior, W is____________________________
Washington, D .C ____ . . . ____
____
Cement finishers, Des Moines, Iowa__________
Electrical workers:
Cedar Rapids, Iowa ______________ __ _
Denver, C olo..
...
New York, N .Y
_ _
_ _ _
Painters:
. . _ _
Colorado Springs, C olo____
Denver, Colo., sign painters___
_ ...
Jacksonville, Fla., sign painters .
Marblehead, Mass., and vicinity____ _
Plasterers, Jacksonville, Fla_________ _
Plumbers:
Lafayette, In d .. _________ ___ __
____
Superior, Wis ____ __________
________
Sheet-metal workers, Indianapolis, I n d ... _. _
Structural-iron workers, Des Moines, Iow a___
Chauffeurs and teamsters, St. Louis, M o.:
Coal drivers:
Less than 5 t o n s ..______
.
_______

Clothing workers, Philadelphia, Pa.:
Ladies’ garment workers:
Cutters, operators, pressers, and finishers..
Metal workers, Hamilton, Ohio:
Molders and coremakers._____ _ .
. . . ____
Motion-picture operators and theatrical workers:
Cleveland, Ohio, stage employees
Rochester, N . Y ., motion-picture operators:
Receiving up to $50 per week.
. _ _____
Receiving over $50 per week. ___ _
Paper-mill workers:
Deferiet, Norfolk, Raym ondville and Waddington, N .Y _________________ ________ . . .
International Falls, M in n ________________ . .
Printing and publishing workers:
Compositors and machine operators:
Bloomington, 111., job w o r k ...
. . ____
Champaign-Urbana, 111.:
Newspaper, day
. ...
Newspaper, night. ________________ .
Cincinnati, Ohio:
Newspaper, day. .
______
Newspaper, night. _______________ .
Grand Rapids, M ich.:
Newspaper, d a y . __ _ __________
Newspaper, night .
.
.
Hartford, Conn.:
Newspaper, day
. .......
. . . _.
Newspaper, night . _____ ______ .
1 A nd 50 percent of receipts over $50.
2 And 50 percent of receipts over $35.
3 N ot reported.


https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis

Before
change

After
change

Per week

Per week

i $35. 00
32. 50

Before After
change change

2 $25. 00
34.00

Per hour

Per hour

56/
44

56/
44

.87/

40

40

1.31 /
1.50
1.25
1. 37H
1. 25

1.00
1.25
1.00
1 .1 2 /
1.00

40
40
40
40
40

40
40
40
40
40

1.00

Apr.

1

1. 3 7 /
1. 25
1.25

1.25
1.00
1.00

40
40
44

40
40
44

Apr.
Apr.
Apr.
M ay
Apr.
M ay

14
15
—
1
14
1

l. m i
1.00
1.00
1.10
1. 371/2
1.12J4

1.00
.75
.80
1.00
1.00
1. 00

40
40
44
40
40
40

40
40
44
40
40
40

f
.95 \
1.121/
1.65

.70
.90
.90
1.40

44
40
40

44
30
40

Apr. 15

.90
1. 25
1.2D /
1.00
.96
1.00

.60
1.00
1.10
.75
.75
.6 2 /

40
40
44
40
40
44

40
40
44
40
30
44

June 21
Apr. 1
M ay 25
M ay 1

1.25
1 .1 2 /
1.00
1 .1 2 /

.75
.90
.90
1.00

44
40
44
40

40
40
44
40

60
60
60
60
60

60
60
60
60
60

48

44

58-24

58-24

June 13
M ay 10
Apr. 13
June 19
Apr. 1
M a y 15
Apr. 1

Per week
Apr. 20

M ay

9

27.00
30. 00
30. 00
31. 50
31.50

Apr. 10
Apr.

4

67. 50
(3)
0

Per day
5. 40

Per week
50. 56
0
0

Per hour
M ay 14
M ay 1

25. 50
28. 50
28. 50
30. 00
30.00

6.00

Per week
Apr. —
__ d o. __

Per week

0

0

Per day

. 36- 1. 2 1 /
. 38- 1. 4 9 /

)

Per hour
. 35- 1 .1 5 /
. 35- 1. 36

0

0

0
0

0
0

48
0

48
0

Apr.

1

1.00

.90

44

44

June
___do

3
-_

1.00
1.14

1.00
1.14

88
«7/

88
87 /

Per week

Per week

Apr. 21
_ _ d o __

55. 25
59. 00

55. 25
59.00

45
45

48
48

Apr. 7
.. .d o ____

42.00
44. 00

38.00
40.00

48
48

48
48

M ay 16
___do_ __

49.00
52. 00

44.10
46. 80

48
48

48
48

4 10 percent increase.
5 Actual hours worked.
6 10 percent reduction.

7 15 percent reduction.
8 Hours per day.

375

W AGES AND HOURS OF LABOR

R E C E N T W A G E C H A N G E S B Y IN D U S T R Y , O C C U P A T IO N , A N D L O C A L IT Y , A P R IL
TO JU L Y 1933— Continued

Hours per
week

Rate of wages
Date of
change

Industry or occupation and locality

Printing and publishing workers—Continued.
Compositors and machine operators—Contd.
Long Beach, Calif.:
Newspaper, day_ - - ------------------M ay 13
Newspaper, night------ . ------------- -__do -Seattle, Wash.:
Newspaper, day_
- - ----------- _
June
Newspaper, night
_ _ ----_ - _do
Stockton, Calif.:
Job work
_ _ - _ - - - -- M ay
Newspaper, night

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

Before
change

After
change

Per week

Per week

$45. 00
48.00

Per day

.

Apr.

Street-railway workers:
Des Moines, Iowa, 1-man car operator. .
Rochester, N .Y ., operators, motormen, conductors and m echanics.. .
. __________
Salt Lake City, Utah:
Bus operators... . . . ___ . . . . . . . . . .

M ay

87
87

87
87

1

8.00
8. 00
8. 50

7. 50
7. 50
8.00

44
45
45

44
45
45

50.00

44

44

7.50

Per day
■7.00

48

48

Per week

Per week
48
42
46 Y

48
42
461/2

(3)

(3)
(3)

2

52.00

1

Apr. 7
do____
Apr. 18
M ay

. . . .

Toll operators, evening

___________ . . . .

Per week

42. 00
42. 00
49.00

38. 00
38. 00
45.00

Per month

Per month

1

76. 00

Per hour

82.50

Per hour

Apr.

1

.603

.543

(3)

M ay

1

.55

.53

48

Apr.

1

.49
.49
.49

.47
.47
.47

0
(3)
(3)

(3)
(3)
(3)

11. 50
14. 50
14. 90
15. 80
17. 60
22.10
18. 10
20. 80
22. 60
17. 10
19. 80
21. 60
20. 80
22.10
20. 30
20. 30

12. 60
13. 55
14. 05
14. 90
16. 70
20. 75
17. 60
20. 00
21.75
15. 70
18.10
19. 90
20.10
20. 75
19.10
19.10

(3)
(3)
(3)
(3)
(3)
(3)
(3)
(3)
(3)
(3)
(3)
(3)
(3)
(3)
(3)
(3)

(2)
(3)
(3)
(3)
(3)
(3)
(3)
(3)
(3)
(3)
(3)
(3)
(3)
(3)
(3)
(3)

30.00
35.00

(6)
25. 00
30.00

48
48
48

48
48
48

Telephone operators, Bloomington and Normal, 111:
Evening op era tors______ _ . . . . . .
__ _do___
___do____
-__do____
-_-d o____
-__do____
--_d o____

D ay operators.

Per day
7. 75
8. 20

Per day
Pressmen, Portland, Oreg . . .
------------Stereotypers:
Grand Rapids, M ich.:
Newspaper, d a y __________
___
Newspaper, night _
Youngstown, Ohio, newspaper___
_ ..
Steamboatmen, Detroit, M ich.:
Firemen, wheelsmen, watchmen, oilers, cooks,
and stewards___________
______ . . . . .

41
41

8. 621/S
9. 12/2

- ___do_ _

. _ ...

42
42

8
_

Per week
Eleetrotypers, St. Louis, Mo__

$41. 00
44.00

Before After
change change

Per week

---d o ____
___do____
. -_ d o___
---d o ____
---d o ____

_________________ _ ---d o ____
-__do____

Municipal employees:
Apr. 2
Am ityville, N .Y
.
.
. . . . . . . .
/
Street cleaners and maintenance men_____ -__do____ \

(3)

Per week

48

Per hour
Andover, M ass. . . . . . ____________________ Apr. 1
Bath, M e., highway and sewer department:
Laborers______________ . . . . ----- ----- --- Apr. 15
Bellevue, Pa. .

. . . . . . . ___________ _____

Apr.

9 .56 J4

Per day

3.00
3. 50
(3)

1

Per hour

(6)

Per day
2. 85
3.15
(i°)

Per hour

. 50
(3)

Per day

Des Moines, Iowa:

Truck driver
3 N ot reported.
6 10 percent reduction.
8 Hours per day.


https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis

..._do____

.40
(6)

48

48

48
48
(3)

48
48
(3)

50
(3)

50
(3)

88
88
88
88
88

88
88
88
88
88

Per day

5. 60
5. 40
7.40
6. 40
5. 70

9 Minimum.
1014 percent reduction.

4. 60
4.40
6.40
5. 40
4. 70

»

376

MONTHLY LABOE R E V IE W

REC E N T W AGE

C H A N G E S B Y IN D U S T R Y , O C C U P A T IO N , A N D L O C A L IT Y , A P R IL
TO JU L Y 1933—Continued
Hours per
week

Rate of wages
Date of
change

Industry or occupation and locality

M unicipal employees—Continued.
Fremont, Ohio, teachers and other school em­
ployees, _ _______. . . ------- ------- ------------- --Galena, 111 . . . . .
----- --- -------------- Hudson Falls, N .Y ___________________________
Lancaster, Pa., teachers and janitors.,
-----.
McKeesport, Pa., teachers and other school

July
M ay
Apr.
July

Before
change

After
change

(3)
(3)
(3)
(3)

(•)
(6)
(6)
(6)

(3)
(3)

(e)
(!2)

1
1
1
1

__ do_

Before After
change change

(3)
(3)
(3)
(3)

(3)
(3)
(3)
(3)

'i 5-5JS ii 5-5M
(3)
(3)

Per year
__ do___ $1,000-5, 500
Reading, Pa., teachers and janitors .
Scranton, Pa., school employees receiving over
__ do____
$1,000 per year_______
_______
____
(3)

3 N ot reported.
6 10 percent reduction.

_______ , . , -----

Apr.

86-9

8 6-9

(6)

(3)

(3)

Per hour

Per hour
Unadilla, N .Y ., laborers.

(6)

8 Hours per day.
11 Days per week.

44

$0. 30

.35

1

44

1810 to 20 percent reduction.

Farm Wage Rates on July 1, 1933

A

N ADVANCE of approximately 7 percent in the general level of
L farm wage rates between April 1 and July 1K 1933, is reported
by the United States Department of Agriculture in a press re]ease
dated July 12. This increase was somewhat greater than the usual
seasonal advance, which amounted to only about 4 percent for the 6year period from 1924 to 1929. The greater-than-seasonal advance
is attributed by the Department of Agriculture to the decline in the
supply of farm labor and the sharp rise in prices of farm products
which greatly stimulated the demand for agricultural workers during
the harvesting season. The supply of farm labor dropped from 125.8
percent of normal on April 1 to 116.2 percent of normal on July 1.
The following table, compiled from the press release mentioned
above, shows average farm wage rates in the several geographic
divisions and in the United States as a whole on July 1, 1933, as
compared with July 1, 1932, and with the annual average for.the
period 1910-14.
A V E R A G E F A R M W A G E R A T E S ON J U L Y 1, 1932 A N D 1933, A N D A N N U A L A V E R A G E
F O R P E R IO D 1910 T O 1914, B Y G E O G R A P H IC D IV IS IO N
Per month
W ith board

W ith board

W ithout board

A n­
A n­
A n­
A n­
nual
nual
nual July 1, July 1, nual July July aver­ July July aver­
July
1,
July 1,
aver­ 1,1932 1,1933 age, 1,1932 1,1933 age,
1932
1933 aver­ 1932
1933
age,
age,
19lO19101910-14
1910-14
14
ll

Geographic division

New England____ .
M iddle Atlantic .
East North Central
West North Central ,
South Atlantic,
East South Central.,_
West South C entral,.
M ountain,, _ _ _ _ _ _
Pacific______________

Per day

W ithout board

$29. 01 $24. 73 $24. 23 $48. 30 $42. 87 $37. 54 $1.59 $1. 37 $1. 27 $2. 31 $1.96
25.41 21.18 22. 08 41. 27 34. 51 33. 19 1.48 1.25 1.23 2. 06 1. 73
.96 1.31 1.44 1.31
20. 32 17.03 23. 79 29. 93 25. 71 32. 86 1.06
.92 1.44 1.43 1. 27
21. 58 17. 26 26. 02 30. 83 25. 89 36. 45 1.04
.84
.62
.60
.81
.79
12. 30 11.53 14. 65 18. 59 17. 52 20. 96
.81
.75
.73
.55
.55
11.55 11.01 14. 65 16. 86 16. 05 20. 72
.99
.85
.87
.67
.67
13. 64 13. 08 17. 65 20. 05 19. 57 25. 33
26. 94 24. 17 32. 36 39. 95 35. 52 46.15 1.21 1.08 1. 50 1.67 1.51
31.40 28. 29 33. 33 50. 92 46. 27 47.97 1. 34 1.21 1. 50 2. 01 1.79

United States,, 18.00


https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis

15. 84

20.41

27.10

24. 27

29. 09

.89

.82

1.10

1. 23

1.12

$1. 71
1.62
1.68
1.85
1.05
1.04
1.26
2. 04
2.06
1.43

WAGES AND HOURS OF LABOR

377

Mine Wages in Idaho, 1932

HE mine pay roll in Idaho throughout 1932 was the lowest in
the State’s history. None of the producing lead-silver-zinc
mines continued to operate normally. The great majority of the
smaller mines were shut down and some were in operation only a
sufficient number of days each month to keep the mines open. Nearly
all development undertakings were idle and only a few new enter­
prises were begun, all construction being restricted to small expendi­
tures at gold mines. These are the employment conditions recorded
in the report of the mining industry of Idaho for 1932.1
It is also pointed out in this report that it is very difficult to get
accurate and complete statistics as to the numbers employed in the
mines. A great many men are hired by small companies and pros­
pectors not working continuously and making no returns to the
inspector of mines. The reported pay roll covered 3,400, and 200
was added to include lessees and small companies making no reports.
This gives a total of 3,600, which figure represents the number of men
employed but not at full time. Some of the mines were in operation
only 12 days per month, others 16 days, and one 20 days for part of the
time. A small number of gold mines were in operation full time.
An agreement adopted November 16, 1925, provided that miners
in the Coeur d ’Alene district should receive a basic wage of $3.75
per day when lead was seliing in New York under 5}£ cents per pound,
and bonuses ranging from 25 cents per day when lead was selling for
5 and under 6 cents per pound to $2.25 per day when lead was selling
for 9>£ and under 10 cents per pound.
During the year under review the selling price of lead was so low
that the basic wage of $3.75 would have been in effect in the Coeur
d’Alene district. The parties to the agreement waived this provision
and maintained for a time a basic wage of $4.75, but later on in the
year the rate was cut to $4.25. In May one important operator
reduced output 50 percent and cut wages to the basic rate of $3.75.
It is not possible, the State mine inspector declares, to give the
average wage scale maintained throughout Idaho for the year, as it
was subject to variation, based on miners’ pay, from $3.75 per day in
producing lead-silver mines to $5.50 per day in producing gold mines.
Various development enterprises paid their workers in part cash and
part stock. Hardly any two companies were paying the same rate.

T

1 Idaho. Inspector of mines. Thirty-fourth annual report of the mining industry of Idaho for the year
1932. Boise (?), 1933.


https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis

378

MONTHLY LABOR REVIEW

Wages in Minnesota in 1931 and 1932 as Shown in Accident
Reports

HE accompanying wage statistics for the fiscal years ending
June 30, 1931, and June 30, 1932, are reproduced from a more
extensive table published in the twenty-third biennial report of the
Department of Labor and Industry of Minnesota:

T

A V E R A G E W E E K L Y W A G E S IN V A R IO U S IN D U S T R IE S AS S H O W N B Y A C C ID E N T
R E P O R T S , 1930-31, 1931-32

Year ending June 30,
1931

Year ending June 30,
1932

Number
of cases
filed

Number
of cases
filed

Industry

Farming _
_ .
_ _ * __ ._
Operating agricultural machinery .

__

_

Quarrying____ . _____ _ . . . ________________________
Stone products_____________________ . _ _______ _
Clay products_________________- . ____ _____ _______
Brick and tile
Glass products
......................
. ___
Ore reduction and s m eltin g_____
. ______ . _ _ _ _
Rolling mills and steel works
__
... .
Structural iron and steel. _ _ _ . . _ __________
Metal products_______________ ______________________
Foundries.. . _
____ _ . . . _ _ __ _ ___________
Machinery and instruments___ ______ _ ____ ____ .
Agricultural machinery and implements. _ _
___ ____
Vehicles... . . . . . . ____ __________________________
Logging-----------------------------------------------------------------------S a w m ills.___ _
Planing and lath mills_____
_. ___ _ _____ . . . _ _
W oodworking.
.
_____
.
Leather and fur. _____________________________________
Boots and shoes. . . .
. . . ___ . . . . . . . . . . . . ____
_____ . . . ____ . .
Rubber and composition goods.
Chemicals and allied products . . .
___ _ _
Paper and paper products.
. ..
___ _____________
Printing and publishing _ ____
__ _____ _ ____
Textiles
Clothing and furnishings .
Laundering, cleaning, and d yein g..
Flour and grist m ills. _ _
. . .
____ _ _ _____ . .
Bakeries . . . .
Dairy products_______ _______ . . . ___ ___________ _
Slaughtering and meat p acking...
.
. . . . . . .
Brewing and b ottlin g.. . . . _ ___ _ ____
___ _
Other food products .
. . . ___ . . . . . . .
Miscellaneous manufacturing___ __
. _____
___ _
Wrecking and m oving _
. . . . .
Grading, excavating, foundations___ . . . . . .
. . . ___
Erecting _ __ _ _ _____ _______________ _____ _ . . .
Finishing, equipping, and installing
Electric railways.. . _____ ___ ____________ _ _______
Bus and truck lin es.. _ . . . .
_ ___________ _ _ .„
Garages
. .
.
. . .
Grain elevators
____ . . .
Cartage and s to r a g e .____
. _______ . . . .
Stockyards.
___
___ _
_ . . _ .
Telephone and telegraph . . . ________ ____ _______
Transportation b y water
_ .
Public utilities. ___________________________ ________
Offices . .
. . . . .
. . . .
_ ..
...
Stores
.....
____
.
___
Yards not otherwise classified ___ ______________
_ _
L um beryards___ .
. . . . ______ . . . . . . . . . . .
Salesmen and outside agents. _ . . _________ _ ____ .
Domestic service .
_ ___
Personal service
. _____ . _____ ____
_
Professional service_____________________
Municipal and public service___ ._ ___ _ __________
Miscellaneous industries ______________________ _ . . .
Aviation
. .
___________
.
Total_____ __ ________ _______ _
1 N ot exact sum of items, but as given in report.


https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis

Average
weekly
wages

Average
weekly
wages

437
36
910
226
863
40
76
52
5
35
47
1,529
605
1,948
138
332
456
193
284
949
121
59
82
843
606
642
280
344
458
566
506
875
963
292
1,192
119
103
1,244
4, 210
1,580
407
130
2, 937
332
2, 857
96
292
25
2,168
260
3, 988
852
248
61
2, 630
295
190
2,344
57
17

$21. 37
24. 27
30 41
28. 50
29.84
23. 90
25. 84
31.65
27. 60
30. 94
30. 44
27. 33
28. 49
28. 43
28.19
28. 03
17. 99
24. 59
26.91
25.31
25. 69
22. 28
25. 35
26. 07
24. 62
28. 33
22.31
24.14
24.28
28. 75
25. 54
30. 22
25. 78
26. 51
24.80
26.87
22.95
26.05
32.29
36. 73
26.11
32. 36
29.68
30.47
25. 67
34. 14
26.18
31.00
33.84
30. 48
23. 56
26. 74
28. 69
31.78
21.69
21.16
23. 98
29.96
30. 80
38.41

478
83

$18. 69
23. 06

303
684
15
33
50
9
18
47
1,168
330
1,274
64
193
345
65
175
674
107
42
74
589
579
663
268
222
457
461
526
1,152
730
310
936
66
182
2,170
2,616
1,245
556
183
2, 570
225
2, 541
76
272
53
1,237
279
3,896
722
296
121
2,315
225
311
2,828
87
31

26. 61
28. 27
26. 20
23. 66
29. 58
32. 77
33. 77
32. 36
25. 86
26.68
27. 22
25. 48
27. 51
15. 33
20. 43
23. 75
23.03
25. 04
19.61
24. 51
24.17
23.37
26.11
19.40
21.15
22.15
26. 48
23.07
28. 53
23.98
25. 66
23.93
27.16
20. 56
26. 06
30. 23
33. 58
26.10
29.56
27. 26
27. 56
23. 55
27. 92
27. 04
27. 60
31. 28
25. 86
23. 34
25. 72
27. 22
37. 39
19. 60
22. 68
2 2 .11
28. 55
27. 21
31.70

1 44, 433

27.81

i 38, 531

25.81

379

WAGES AND HOURS OF LABOR
Wages of Quarry Workers in Virginia, 1931

HE following wage statistics for Virginia quarries in 1931 are
taken from the thirty-fifth annual report of the department of
labor and industry of that State for the 12 months ending September
30, 1932:

T

W A G E S A N D H O U R S OF Q U A R R Y W O R K E R S IN V IR G IN IA , 1931
Average hourly
wages

Average number of
wage earners

Occupation

W hite Colored Total
Stone quarries:

27
7
102
83
10
5

$0. 47
.46
.33
.36
.29
.47

29

104
48
478
16
15
6
3
78

.44
.58
.29
.51
.40
.34
.30
.33

4
3

3
2
18
7

.54
.30
.35
.35

10
4
77
4
3
1
8
230

.45
.50
.25
.45
.35
. 50
.20
.30

6
1
10
7
2

.37
.60
.29
.26
.31

32
15
182
3
1
29

.53
.58
.30
.47
.25
.29

Engineers, firemen, brakemen, motor102
47
275
16
12
6
3
49
Slate quarries: *

3
2
14
4

Engineers, firemen, brakemen, motormen,
6
4
12
4
2
1
5
173
Sand and gravel:

4
1
9
5
2

Engineers, firemen, brakemen, motormen,

25
15
149
2
1
26

W hite Colored White Colored

27
7
122
108
19
5

20
25
9
2
1
203
3

4
65
1
3
57
2
1
2
7
33
1
3

Average hours
per day

$0.31
.28
.32
.34
.45
.29

8.6
8.4
8.9
9.2
8.9
9.3

.33

8.9
9.0
9.1
9.0
9.2
8.8
9. 0
9.2

.30
.28

9.0
10.0
8.0
8 .2

.34

.25
.23
. 25
.23
. 20
.40
.35
.39
.35
.31
.60
.30

8.2
8.2
8.2
8 .2
9.0
8.0
9.0
10.0
9.7
10.0
9. 1
9. 2
10. 2
9.1
9.9
9. 1
9.5
10.0
9.6

8.8
8. 2
8.6
8.5
9.0
9.0
9.3
8.9

8.0
8.2
10.0
9.7
10.0
10.0
10.0
10.0
10.0
9.0
9.1
9.1
10.0
10.0

The average number of days operated in 1931 by the 32 reporting
firms engaged in stone quarrying was 190, and by the 4 State quarry
firms, 179. The 15 sand and gravel firms averaged 208 days of oper­
ation in the same year.
Wages in Denmark in 1932 1

/ALMOST all Danish industrial workers are organized in trade
unions, and nearly 62 percent of all employers of industrial
labor in Denmark are organized in an association called “ The Em­
ployers’ Association” . Both the workers’ and the employers’ organ­
izations are recognized by law. The Employers’ Association deals'
directly with the trade unions, and the association members employ
union labor only. Representatives of the trade unions and the
1 Report prepared at the request of the U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics, b y E . Gjessing, American vice
consul at Copenhagen, in April 1933.


https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis

380

MONTHLY LABOR REVIEW

Employers’ Association have met from time to time in the past to
draw up agreements regarding wage schedules and shop conditions.
After these agreements had received the sanction of both parties,
they were usually strictly adhered to until new agreements took their
place.
Prior to 1922 the agreements were usually binding for an indefinite
number of years, and wages were adjusted every 6 months according
to the cost-of-living index figures published by the Danish Statis­
tical Department. Owing to the difficulties and disputes occasioned
by the semiannual adjustment of wage schedules, the above form
of agreement was abandoned and others for a fixed wage and for 1
or 2 years’ duration only were substituted. The same difficulties
were experienced with the short-term as with the long-term agree­
ments. Negotiations over new agreements caused delay and serious
tension in the labor market. By the law of January 30, 1933, which
makes lockouts and strikes unlawful for 12 months from the date of
the law,2the collective agreements of 1931, which continued unchanged
in 1932, were retained for 1933. At the end of this year a committee
of prominent men, established by the law, will submit recommenda­
tions for legislative action for the passage of a law laying down rules
for future agreements between employers and workers.
By the agreements of 1931, which, as stated, were continued with­
out any change in 1932, wages in the trades affected were reduced,
nominally from 5 to 8 percent, but actually only about 5 percent.
The lowest wage schedules were not changed, but rates for piece­
work were reduced by 6 to 8 percent. By increasing the working
tempo, pieceworkers were, however, able to counteract this reduc­
tion in part, so that the actual reduction of wages on piecework
amounted to but 3 to 4 percent. In the wage agreements of 1931
the workers secured the privilege of a vacation of 6 working days
with pay for the working year, or such part of this time as was rep­
resented by the fraction of the year they had worked at one place.
As this privilege meant a gain to the worker of approximately 2
percent on the total annual earnings, the wage reductions in the 1931
agreement do not, therefore, actually amount to more than from 3
to 4 percent.
In the agreement of 1931, as well as in previous agreements, a
certain minimum wage is fixed below which it is considered no worker
can subsist, especially in Copenhagen. This has for the last 5 years
been 1.10 kroner3 for men and 0.70 krone for women per hour.
These rates are unaffected by changes in the higher schedules. In
some cases the bare subsistence rates are set at lower figures. The
higher rates vary widely. There are minimum rates above the level
of the bare subsistence rates, normal rates, and rates for piecework.
Within the same trade the rates are not uniform or based on the
same principle, but vary according to local conditions and customs.
The wage rates for workers in Copenhagen and vicinity differ from
those in the provincial towns in the same trade. There is such a
multiplicity of rates within each trade for special kinds of work
under various conditions that a clear picture of earnings in the vari­
ous trades can be obtained only by giving average earnings.
2 See M onthly Labor Review, June 1933, pp. 1312, 1313.
s Krone at par=26.8 cents in United States currency; average exchange rate in December 1932=17cents-


https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis

WAGES AND HOURS OF LABOR

381

Hours of Labor

T he 8-hour working day (with a 48-hour working week) is almost
universally observed in Denmark’s industries, except agriculture.
The Danish labor organizations, backed by the present Government,
are, however, endeavoring to introduce a compulsory 40-hour working
week, with a view to improving the unemployment situation. A bill
for the compulsory 40-hour working week at enterprises started by
the Government to relieve unemployment is now under considera­
tion by the Danish Parliament. Coupled with this proposal is
another for the abolition, as far as feasible, of all overtime work.
This latter proposal is made for the same reason and with the same
object in view as the first—namely, to ration the opportunities for
work so that a larger number of workers may be employed and
general unemployment lessened.
Age Differences

E xcept in the textile industry, no age differences are recognized
in the fixing of wages. Aged workers are usually protected as far
as possible by their trade unions, so that they are not discriminated
against by employers.
Overtime Rates

T here is at present a uniform method of paying for overtime in
nearly all trades in Denmark. The first hour of overtime is paid for
at the rate of 25 percent above the regular hourly wage, the second
hour at 33 percent, the third and fourth hours at 50 percent, and the
hours thereafter at 100 percent above the regular rate. On holidays
the rate for overtime is 50 percent above the regular wage for the first
4 hours, double rates being paid thereafter.
Deductions From Wages

T here is no special wage tax levied in Denmark, but the incometax rates^ on small incomes are quite heavy. The income-tax rates
increase in proportion to the income, the minimum taxable income
being 800 kroner ($214 at par; $136 at rate of exchange in December
1932) a year.
Wage workers do not contribute directly towards accident insur­
ance, invalidity, or old-age pensions, the expenditures for which are
covered by general taxation. They do, however, contribute to sick
benefit associations, which are supervised by the Government, and
toward unemployment insurance. The last-mentioned item is quite
considerable in amount, especially when unemployment is rife.
Each trade union administers (under State supervision) its own fund,
which is raised through contributions of trade union members and
State and municipal contributions. Contributions to the unemploy­
ment fund are compulsory upon trade-unionists.
The contributions of the State and municipalities are proportionate
to the average yearly earnings of the members of the unemployment
funds. In accordance with the law of July 1, 1927, which is still
applicable, the State contributions range from 10 percent on earnings
of over 4,000 kroner to 40 percent on those of 1,500 kroner or less;

https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis

MONTHLY LABOR REVIEW

382

the contributions of the municipalities range from 5 to 30 percent,
respectively.
.
,. . ^
.
,,
Under the present law, in the trades with the highest earnings the
members pay about 87 percent of the total unemployment benefits,
and in those of the lowest average earnings the members pay only 59
percent. A bill is under consideration by which the State contribu­
tions will be materially increased in order to lessen the burden of the
trade unions, which experience difficulty in raising sufficient funds
to meet unemployment relief during the present period of serious
economic conditions.
.
The following figures regarding unemployment contributions m
the form of membership fees have been obtained from the Danish
Bureau of Labor.
T u îie 1 -A V E R A G E Y E A R L Y E A R N IN G S A N D U N E M P L O Y M E N T C O N T R IB U T IO N S
l able l .
W O R K E R IN D E N M A R K , 1931-32 A N D 1932-33
rConversions into United States currency on basis of krone at par= 26.8 cents; at exchange rate in December
1932=17.0 cents]

Average yearly earn­
ings, 1931-32

Average yearly contribution

1932-33

1931-32
Occupation

Dan­
ish
cur­
rency

United States
currency

At
par

Kroner
M e ta lw ork ers,.- - - - - - Joiners________ - -----------C a rp en ters.--------W ood industry workers.-

2, 664
2, 775
2, 673
2,272

A t ex­
change
rate

Danish
cur­
rency

At
par

Kroner
$714
744
716
609

$453
472
454
386

i In 1932-33 this will be more than doubled.

75. 40 $20. 21
122. 20 32. 75
97. 30 26.08
65.00 17.42

A t ex­
change
rate

Danish
cur­
rency

At
par

Kroner
$12.82
20. 77
16. 54
11.05

Per­
cent
of
yearly
in­
come,
A t ex­ 1931-32
change
rate

United States
currency

United States
currency

146. 90 $39. 37
130. 00 34.84
10 1. 80 27. 28
97.90 26. 24

$24.97
22.10
17. 31
16. 64

1 3.0
2 4.4
2 3.6
1 3.0

2 In 1932-33 this will be materially increased.

Contributions by members have increased rapidly during the last
few years, although yearly earnings have decreased. There are no
statistics covering average yearly earnings during 1932-33, nor are
there any general statistics^ regarding the contributions towards
unemployment relief, so that it is impossible to state what percentage
of the average yearly earnings unemployment _contributions by
members represent. The total membership contributions are, how­
ever, known. During the fiscal years 1930—31 and 1931—32 they
amounted to 18,236,500 and 19,522,000 kroner, respectively, and they
will be considerably larger in the fiscal year 1932—33, for which year,
however, no statistics are available. The unemployment figures on
January 1, 1931, 1932, and 1933, were 27.5 percent, 31.1 percent and
43 percent, respectively. There are about 320,000 organized workers,
each of whom has, according to the above figures, paid 60 kroner
annually in membership fees towards unemployment relief.
The textile workers have during the last few_years enjoyed a high
degree of protection, and unemployment in this trade has not been
severe, In the fiscal year 1932-33 the textile workers paid about 3
percent in unemployment relief while during previous years the per­
centage was about 4.

https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis

WAGES AND HOURS OF LABOR

383

Average Hourly Earnings in Specified Industries

T he figures in table 2 are taken from Statistiske Efterretninger, of
the Danish Statistical Department, issue of April 23, 1932. The table
contains the average hourly rates in agreements between the Em­
ployers' Association and the labor organizations. At present, many
organized workers are accepting employment with independent
employers at wages 10 to 20 percent lower than those shown.
The average hourly earnings given for various industries are for
the year 1931. As there were no changes in wage schedules in 1932
and 1933, the rates in the table apply to the present time. In 1931,
when the new schedules went into effect, however, the Danish
currency was on a gold basis. On September 29, 1931, Denmark
abandoned the gold standard with a resultant fall in the value of the
crown. The cost-of-living figures have, however, dropped so much
that the purchasing power of the Danish crown in Denmark on
January 1, 1933, was about the same as it was on January 1, 1932,
and January 1, 1931.
T a b l e 3 .—A V E R A G E H O U R L Y E A R N IN G S IN D A N IS H IN D U S T R IE S IN 1931

[Conversions into United States currency on basis of.krone (100 0re) at par=26.8 cents; at average exchange
rate for December 1932=17.0 cents]

Earnings per hour
Copenhagen
Industry and class of worker

Provinces

United States
currency

Danish
cur­
rency

United States
currency
Danish
cur­
At ex­ rency
At ex­
At par change
A t par change
rate
rate

Food industries
Bakeries: Skilled workers.
Breweries: Unskilled workers . _
Chocolate factories:
Skilled workers- __________
Unskilled workers. . . . . . __ . . . . _
W omen . ______________ ____
Chicory factories:
Unskilled workers_________ . __
W om en. _ _____ ____ ______ _
Canning factories:
Unskilled workers____________ . . . . .
W om en___________ ____________
.
Flour mills:
Skilled workers. _______________ .
Unskilled workers________________ . . . . .
Condensed-milk factories:
Unskilled workers________ . . . ___ ____ _
W om en. ____________ . . . _____ _ _____
Alcohol factories:
Unskilled workers_____________ ____ _ .
W om en_______
_______
_____ . . . _
Sugar factories:
Unskilled workers___________________ . .
W om en_________________________ ____ ______

Qre

Cents

151
142

Cents

40.5
38.1

25.7
24.1

123
132

33. 0
35. 4

20. 9
22 4

145
115
71

38.9
30.8
19.0

24.7
19.4
1 2 .1

134
111
61

35.9
29.7
16.3

22. 8
18. 9
10. 4

142
89

38.1
23.9

24.1
15.1

109
71

29.2
19.0

18.5
1 2 .1

146
84

39.1
22.5

24.8
14.3

102
63

27.3
16. 9

17.3
10.7

140
131

37. 5
35.1

23.8
22.3

122
110

32.7
29.5

20.7
18. 7

118
82

81 fi
22. 0

13'9

<j)re

137
112

36.7
30.0

23.3
19.0

133
109

35.6
29.2

22.6
18. 5

181
84

48.5
22.5

30.8
14.3

118
60

31.6
16.1

20.1
10.2

153
130
128
104

41.0
34.8
34.3
27.9

26.0
2 2 .1
21.8
17.7

146
128
124
91

39.1
34.3
33.2
24.4

24.8
21.8
2 1 .1
15. 5

208
122

55.7
32.7

35.4
20.7

118
79

31.6
2 1 .2

20.1
13.4

Tobacco industry

Cigar factories:
Skilled workers, m a le..
. _ ____ _________
Unskilled workers, male_________ __________
Skilled workers, female_____ _ . ___ _
Unskilled workers, fe m a le .____ ____ _ _ ____
Cigarette factories:
Unskilled workers, m a le _____ . . _ ________ _
W o m e n . . . ___
_ __________________


https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis

384

MONTHLY LABOR REVIEW

T a b l e 2 .—A V E R A G E H O U R L Y E A R N IN G S IN D A N IS H IN D U S T R IE S IN 1931— Continued

Earnings per hour
Copenhagen

Provinces

United States
currency

Industry and class of worker
Danish
cur­
rency

United States
currency
Danish
cur­
A t ex­ rency
A t ex­
A t par change
A t par change
rate
rate

Tobacco industry—Continued
Cents

Cents

47. 4
30. 8

30.1
19. 6

(5re
132
96

Cents

177
115

35. 4
25. 7

22. 4
16. 3

218
129
82

58.4
34. 6
22. 0

37.1
21. 9
13. 9

185
128
82

49.6
34.3
22.0

31. 5
2 1. 8
13. 9

135
78

36. 2
20.9

23. 0
13.3

157
78

42.1
20.9

26. 7
13. 3

118
73
179

31. 6
19. 6
48.0

20.1
12. 4
30.4

117
60
120

31.4
16. 1
32.2

19.9
10. 2
20.4

118
76

31. 6
20.4

20. 1
12.9

102
70

27.3
18.8

17.3
11. 9

125
87

33.5
23.3

21.3
14.8

115
78

30.8
20.9

19.6
13.3

177
89
143

47.4
23.9
38.3

30.1
15. 1
24.3

187
90

50.1
24.1

31 8
15.3

153
90

41.0
24.1

26.0
15.3

125
72

33. 5
19.3

21 3
12 2

154
159
77
192

41. 3
42. 6
20. 6
51. 5

26.2
27.0
13.1
32.6

139
152
72

37.3
40. 7
19.3

23 6
25 8
1 2 .2

186
247
181
143
173
178
195
246
200
199
161
213
121

49.8
66. 2
48. 5
38. 3
46.4
47. 7
52.3
65. 9
53. 6
53.3
43.1
57.1
32.4

31. 6
42. 0
30. 8
24. 3
29.4
30.3
33.2
41. 8
34.0
33.8
27. 4
36.2
20. 6

133
172
131
118
124

35. 6
46. 1
35.1
31. 6
33.2

22 6
29. 2
22 4
20 1
2 1 .1

139
155
131
158
121
141
116

37. 3
41. 5
35.1
42. 3
32.4
37.8
31.1

23 6
26 4
22 3
26 9
20. 6
24. 0
19. 7

160
166

42.9
44.5

27.2
28.2

136
142

36. 4
38.1

23. 1
24. 1

152
139
85
136
168
105
156
149
173
165
167
119

40. 7
37. 3
22. 8
36. 4
45. 0
28.1
41.8
39.9
46.4
44. 2
44. 8
31.9

25. 8
23. 6
14. 5
23.1
28. 6
17. 9
26. 5
25. 3
29. 4
28. 1
28. 4
20.2

121
107
70
132
127
125
132
120
124
124
136
104

32. 4
28. 7
18. 8
35. 4
34. 0
33. 5
35. 4
32. 2
33. 2
33. 2
36. 4
27.9

20.6
18 2
11 9
22 4
21 6
21. 3
22. 4
20. 4
21. 1
2 1. 1
23 1
17.7

(¡)re

Smoking-tobacco factories:
Chewing-tobacco factories:

Cents

Textile industry
Upholsterers:
Rope makers:

Sack factories:
Textile factories:

Clothing industry

Shoemakers, factory hands:
Journeyman tailors:

Building trades
Machine joiners
Linoleum workers

_

_ _ _ _ _ _ _

Woodworking industry
Brush makers:

Unskilled woodworkers____________________ _ ______


https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis

385

WAGES AND HOURS OF LABOR

T a b l e 2.—A V E R A G E H O U R L Y E A R N IN G S IN D A N IS H IN D U S T R IE S IN 1931— Continued

Earnings per hour
Copenhagen

Provinces

United States
currency

Industry and class of worker
Danish
cur­
rency

United States
currency
Danish
cur­
A t ex­ rency
A t ex­
A t par change
A t par change
rate
rate

Leather industry
Tanneries:
Journeymen .
--- - ________
Unskilled workers-------------------- _ __ ----------- _ -_

Ore

Cents

162
158
92
154

43.4
42.3
24. 7
41.3

187
169

50. 1
45.3

171
130
100

Cents

Ore

Cents

Cents

152
137

40. 7
36.7

32.0
28.7

130
120
152
152

34. 8
32. 2
40.7
40.7

22 1
20.4
25.8
25.8

45.8
34.8
26.8

29.1
22. 1
17.0

131
110
73

35.1
29. 5
19.6

22.3
18.7
12.4

181
134

48.5
35.9

30.8
22.8

113
103

30.3
27.6

19.2
17.5

174
163
179
144
148
193
205
164
172
183
166
158
174
130
89

46.6
43.7
48. 0
38. 6
39.7
51. 7
54.9
44.0
46. 1
49.0
44. 5
42. 3
46.6
34.8
23.9

29.6
27.7
30. 4
24. 5
25. 2
32.8
34.9
27.9
29.2
31.1
28. 2
26.9
29. 6
22 .1
15.1

144
137
150
129
134
174
162
135
142
149
139
139
142
118
75

38. 6
36.7
40. 2
34.6
35.9
46.6
43.4
36. 2
38.1
39.9
37.3
37.3
38. 1
31. 6
20.1

24.5
23.3
25.5
21.9
22.8
29.6
27.5
23.0
24.1
25.3
23. 6
23.6
24. 1
20. 1
12.8

108

28.9

18.4

122

32.7

20.7

117
68

31.4
18.2

19.9
11.6

98
68

26.3
18.2

16.7
11.6

142
115
80
127
65
126

38.1
30.8
21.4
34. 0
17. 4
33.8

24. 1
19.6
13.6
21. 4
1 1 .1
21.4

139
118
69

37.3
31.6
18.5

23.6
20. 1
11.7

113

30.3

19.2

136
77

36.4
20.6

23. 1
13. 1

212

56.8

36.0

135
78
149
161

36. 2
20.9
39. 9
43.1

23.0
13.3
25.3
27.4

117
66

31.4
17.7

19.9
1 1 .2

111
63

29.7
16.9

18.9
10.7

140
79

37.5
2 1.2

23.8
13.4

137
71

36.7
19.0

23.3
1 2 .1

131
73
134

35. 1
19. 6
35.9

22. 3
12. 4
22.8

132

35.4

22.4

128
89

34.3
23.9

21.8
15.1

107
65

28.7
17.4

18.2
1 1 .1

27.5
26.9
15. 6
26. 2

25.8
23.3

Stone, day, and glass industries
Cement casting factories: Laborers
. _ _ ____
Glass cutters_________
- - ----Ceramic industry:
Skilled workers
- - - - - - - - __________ _______
Unskilled workers. - - - - - - - - - - _
----W omen- . . . ----------------------------------- - . ----Stonecutters:
Skilled workers
----- ----- . ______ ____
Unskilled workers________ - - - - - - - -------------

Metal industry
Tinsmiths________ ____ -----Electricians. __________
________
-- . . .
Moiders___ __ _____________________________________
Gold and silver smiths and electroplaters - . _
___ _
Brass workers. -_
..
Coppersm iths.-. ........................................
Painters . _____ - - - - - - - _
_
_
Metal grinders - - - - - - - __ -------- - _ -----M etal pressers___ . . . . . . --------------- -------------- ..
Ship’s carpenters- ----------- -------- --- ----------------Smiths and machinists ______ ________ _____ - - W oodworkers.
Various skilled workers. -- - - - - - - - ____ - - - - - ___
_____ _ _ .. . . . ---------- -------------Laborers____ __
W om en______ _
______
_ _ .
-------

Chemical and related industries
Electricity, gas, and water works: Unskilled workers.
D ye and lacquer factories:
Unskilled w ork ers-------------------------- ------------------W om en___ __________ __ -------------------------------Dyeing establishments:
Skilled workers______ _____ . -------------- _ -------Unskilled laborers_______________________________
W om en .. _ . . . ------ -----------------------------------Foodstuff factories: Unskilled workers----------- -------Rubber factories:
Unskilled workers______________ _
-------... -------------------------W om en. . ______________
Insulation installers------------------------------------- ------------Chemical industry:
Unskilled laborers..----------------------- . _ -------W om en .. _ ___ _
-------------- Edible-oil and margarine factories:
Unskilled workers________- . ------------------ . . . . .
W om en.
_ ____ ______
-- - ---------------------Mineral-oil factories:
Sulphuric-acid factories: Unskilled workers---------------Soap factories:
Unskilled laborers_______________________________
W o m e n ..____ _______ ________
. . . ----------------


https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis

386

MONTHLY LABOR REVIEW

T a b l e 2 .—A V E R A G E H O U R L Y E A R N IN G S IN D A N IS H IN D U S T R IE S IN 1931—Continued

Earnings per hour
Copenhagen
Industry and class of worker

Provinces

United States
currency
Danish
cur­
rency

Paper factories:
PaPer industrV
_____
_ _ _ _ .
Workmen .
_ __
W om en__________________________________ __ ___
Paper-goods industry :
Unskilled laborers..................
W om en.
_ . ____________________ . . .
Paper-box factories:
Unskilled laborers
_
___ _
W om en____ _______ _____________ ______________

Danish
cur­
rency

Cents

Cents

32.7
25.5

20. 7
16.2

122
82

32. 7
22. 0

20. 7
13.9

71

19.0

1 2 .1

119
90

31.9
24.1

20.2
15.3

133
82

35.6
22.0

22. 6
13.9

177
95

47.4
25. 5

30.1
16.2

134
73

35.9
19.6

22.8
12.4

172
180
181
133
88

46. 1
48.2
48. 5
35. 6
23. 6

29. 2
30.6
30.8
22. 6
15.0

160
147
158
124
71

42. 9
39.4
42. 3
33.2
19.0

27.2
25.0
26.9
2 1 .1
1 2 .1

...

130
87

34.8
23.3

22. 1
14.8

112
71

30.0
19.0

19.0
1 2 .1

Longshoremen _
Warehouse workers
Conductors and motormen . . . . . . . ____
Unskilled workers, railroad and street-car lines_______

172
118
149
117

46.1
31. 6
39.9
31.4

29. 2
20. 1
25.3
19.9

159
114
147
107

42. 6
30.6
39.4
28.7

27.0
19.4
25.0
18. 2

$19. 80
14. 03
14. 57
15. 72
13. 70
15. 55

$12. 56
8. 90
9.24
9.97
8.69
9.86

...
___
...

(fire

A t ex­
A t par change
rate

122
95

RnnkhindprsPrinting and bookbinding
Journeymen____ __
____
. . . .
Women
_
.
...
_
Printing establishments:
Typographers... _ .
_ _ _________ . . .
Lithographers. . . .
. . . . .
Chemigrâphers______ _ _ ____ . . . ___ _
Unskilled workers_______________
__
_
W om en. . . .
. . . _______ _____________
Lithographing establishments:
Unskilled workers_______. . . . . . _______ _ .
W omen _
_
. .

Ç)re

A t ex­
A t par change
rate

United States
currency

115
80

Cents
30.8
21.4

Cents
19. 6
13.6

Harbor and transportation workers

Earnings per week

Miscellaneous
Foremen__________ _ _ . . . _____
...
Drivers. . . .
. . . . _______ _ _
Chauffeurs. . ______ . . .
Stokers
.....
Messengers____ __
_____
_ ________ . _
Night watchmen. _________

Kroner
97. 24
58. 44
58. 29
62. 15
50. 32
57. 87

Kroner
$26. 06
15. 66
15. 62
16. 66
13. 49
15. 51

$16. 53
9. 93
9.91
10. 57
8. 55
9. 84

73.89
52. 34
54. 37
58. 66
51. 13
58. 02

The rates in the above table are but slightly below those of 1930
and the earnings, as far as purchasing power in the domestic market
is concerned, are at present about equal to those of 1930.
Average Yearly Earnings in Various Industries

T he Danish Bureau of Labor and the Danish Statistical Depart­
ment have published the average yearly earnings of workers in the
various trades and industries, and these are shown for 1931-32 in
table 3. The figures were obtained from the heads of the various
labor organizations. The yearly earnings were computed by multi­
plying the average working hours by the average hourly earnings of
each member of the union and deducting therefrom an amount equal
to the total sum lost through unemployment and sickness (but not
the contributions for unemployment benefits, amounting at present
to about 5 percent of the average yearly earnings).

https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis

387

WAGES AND HOURS OF LABOR

T a b l e 3 — A V E R A G E Y E A R L Y E A R N IN G S IN S P E C IF IE D O C C U P A T IO N S IN D E N M A R K ,

1931-32
[Conversions into United States currency on basis of krone at par=26.8 cents; at exchange rate December
1932=17.0 cents]

Average yearly
earnings

Occupation group or class
of worker

Dan­
ish
cur­
rency

Average yearly
earnings

United States
currency

At
par

A t ex­
change
rate

4, 852 $1, 300
2, 286
613

2, 444
Carvers and stucco workers. 2,015
Plumbers and tinsmiths___ 3, 249
2, 041
3, 204
3, 240
2, 630
Coopers. -------------- . . . . . 2, 344
2, 286
4, 282
Female workers________
1,487
2, 339
2, 341
Electricians___________ . . . 2, 902
2, 362
Tallymen, watchmen, etc.,
permanently em p loyed ... 3, 447
2 ,12 2
2, 431
2,909
Glass workers.. . . . . . .
Gold, silver, and electroplate workers ----- -- . . . 2,132
Brass and metal w orkers.. . 2,796
1,964
l ’ 607
1,938
3, 238
Boiler and engine tenders. 2,811
Coppersm iths____________ 3,805
2, 247
W icker workers___________ 1,347
Agricultural workers______ 1,117

Dan­
ish
cur­
rency

United States
currency

At
par

A t ex­
change
rate

Kroner

Kroner
Common laborers__ - Bakery and confectionery

Occupation group or class
of worker

$825
389

655
540
871
547
859
868
705
628
613
1,148
'399
627
627
778
633

415
343
552
347
545
551
447
398
389
728
253
398
398
493
402

924
569
651
780

586
361
413
495

571
749
526
431
519
870
753
1,020
602
361
299

363
475
334
273
329
550
478
647
382
229
190

2, 991
Leather and skin workers. _ 3, 159
Painters__________________ 2, 950
2,091
2, 664
M etalw orkers______
2,611
Metalpressers. ______ . . .
3, 455
2, 972
2, 922
2, 582
Paper-industry workers___ 2,518
1, 739
2,902
Saddlers and paperhangers. 2, 901
2, 816
1,774
Chewing-tobacco factory
2, 280
Tailors__________________ . 2,155
2, 723
Butchers________________
2, 775
2, 370
Stone-industry workers___ 2, 360
Stucco workers------ ------------ 3, 905
Candy, chocolate, and biscuit workers___________ . 1,764
1, 380
2, 210
1, 573
1,875
2, 328
Tobacco workers . . . ___
W ood-industry workers___ 2, 272
2, 673
W atch and clock m ak ers... 2,969

$802
847
791
560
714
700
926
796
783
691
675
466
778
777
755
475

$508
537
502
355
453
444
587
505
497
439
428
296
493
493
479
302

611
578
730
744
635
632
1,047

388
366
463
472
403
401
664

473
370
592
422
503
624
609
716
796

300
235
376
267
319
396
386
454
505

Earnings in the Textile Industry

T he wage schedules in the textile industry for the various classes
of workers have remained unchanged practically since 1928 and have
not been affected by changes in the cost-of-living index figures and in
the gold value of the Danish crown. In 1931 textile workers, together
with other workers, gained the privilege of a summer vacation of 6
working days with pay. Piecework is customary in the Danish
textile industry but there are minimum rates for timework per hour.
The earnings of timeworkers are usually slightly higher per hour
than the wage rates.
Table 4 shows the average earnings per hour of the various workers
in the different branches of the textile industry working on piece­
work, on work part piece and part time, and on timework.


https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis

388
T

MONTHLY LABOR REVIEW

able

4 — AVERAGE

HOURLY EARNINGS IN THE DANISH TEXTILE INDUSTRY,

1932

[Conversions into United States currency on basis of krone (100 ¡¿re) at par=26.8 cents; at December
1932 exchange ra te = 17.0 cents]

Average hourly earnings on—
W ork part time and
part piece

Piecework
Sex, and type of plant
Dan­
ish
cur­
rency

United States
currency

At
par

Dan­
ish
A t ex­ cur­
change rency
rate

Tim ework

United States
currency

At
par

Dan­
ish
A t ex­ cur­
rency
change
rate

United States
currency

At
par

A t ex­
change
rate

Cents

Cents

Males
(¡)re

Cents

118. 7
133. 8
141.3
130.6
162.0
160.4

Cents

31.8
35.9
37.9
35.0
43.4
43.0

20.2
22.7
24.0
22.2
27.5
27.3

160.0
171.3
138. 1

42.9
45.9
37.0

27.2
29. 1
23.5

Cotton spinneries______ ______ ___
81.1
Cotton weaving m ills............ .......
95.0
W ool yarn and other yarn mills___ 102.8
Cloth m ills .............................
94.5
Knitting m il l s ____ ________ _
94.9
Dyeing works___________ ____
82.2
Netting and curtain factories..........
Special weaving mills__________
113.8
Cotton-wool factories_______
98.6
All others________________
76.7

21.7
25.5
27.6
25.3
25.4
22.0

13.8
16.2
17.5
16.0
16.1
14.0

30.5
26.4
20.6

19. 3
16.8
13.0

Cotton spinneries______ _____ __ .
Cotton-weaving mills_____________
W ool yarn and other yarn mills___
Cloth m ills. ____________ ______
Knitting mills________ _____
Dyeing works___________
Netting and curtain factories._ . . .
Special weaving mills_________
Cotton-wool factories _______
Other textile works_______ . . . _

{Ire

Cents

Cents

111.9
105.2
113.4
113.5

30.0
28.2
30.4
30.4

19.0
17.9
19.3
19.3

100.2
114.3
105.5
100.4

111. 5

29.9

19.0

128.5
110. 3

34.4
29.5

66.6
68.5

17.8
18.4

tyre

26.9
30.6
28. 3
26.9

17.0
19.4
17.9
17.1

10L 4
113 0

28. 8
30 3

18 3

21.8
18.8

106.3
1 1 1 .6

28! 5
29.9

18.1
19.0

11.3
11 .6

62.0
70. 5
68. 4
62.9
69.1

16.6
18.9

10. 5
12.0

16. 9
18. 5

10 7
11 7

63! 7

lì! 1

10.8

Females

79.7
72.6

21.4
19.5

13.5
12.3

84. 8

22.7

14.4

74.4

19.9

12. 6

18 3

Wages in Agriculture
A g r i c u l t u r e is the chief source of livelihood in Denmark and more
workers are engaged in this activity than in any other. The majority
of the workers^ are owners or part-owners of land or are so closely
connected by ties of blood with their employers that there is no such
sharp distinction between employers and workers as in the urban
districts. Comparatively few of the agricultural workers in Denmark
are, therefore, organized in special workers’ organizations. There are,
at present, according to the Danish Bureau of Labor, approximately
18,500 organized agricultural workers, as against about 300,000
unorganized workers.
The 48-hour working week is not observed in agricultural work in
Denmark. In accordance with an agreement between various
farmers and the organized agricultural laborers of Denmark, the
following working hours are observed:

Apr. 1 to Oct. 31 __
Nov. 1 to Nov. 14_
Nov. 15 to Nov. 30
Dec. 1 to Feb. 28__
Mar. 1 to Mar. 14_
Mar. 15 to Mar. 31


https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis

Hours per day
-

10
9
8/2

8
9
9y2

389

W A G E S AND H OURS OF LA B O R

According to the Statistical Yearbook of 1932, issued by the
Danish Statistical Department, the average wages paid agricultural
laborers during the year May 1, 1931, to April 30, 1932, were as
follows:
T a b l e 5 .—W A G E S

OF A G R IC U L T U R A L W O R K E R S
A P R . 30, 1932

IN

D E N M A R K , Y E A R E N D IN G

[Conversions into United States currency on basis of krone at par=26.8 cents; exchange rate April 1932
was 20.5 cents]

Rate per season, with
board and lodging
Class, age, and sex of worker

Season
Danish
currency

Farm laborers, male:
Under 17 years___
17 to 21 years_____
21 years and over.
Foremen_____________
Stable foremen_______
Farm laborers, female:
Under 18 years___
18 years and o v e r ..

Apr. 1-Oct. 31____
N ov. 1-Mar. 31__
Apr. 1-Oct. 31____
N ov. 1-Mar. 31__
Apr. 1-Oct. 31____
N ov. 1-Mar. 31__
Apr. 1-Oct. 31____
N ov. 1-Mar. 31___
Apr. 1-Oct. 31____
N ov. 1-Mar. 31__
Apr. 1-Oct. 31____
N ov. 1-Mar. 31__
Apr. 1-Oct. 31____
N ov. 1-Mar. 31__

United
States
currency

Kroner
244. 00
138. 00
350. 00
184. 00
408. 00
209. 00
461. 00
250. 00
471. 00
351. 00

$65. 39
36. 98
93. 80
49. 31
109. 34
56. 01
123. 55
67. 00
126. 23
94. 07

198.00
164. 00
251. 00
206. 00

53.06
43.95
67.27
55.21

Rate per day, with
board
Farm laborers engaged for fixed periods 1

Summer season__
Harvest season___
Winter season____

3.49
3.95
2.67

$0.94
1. 06
.72

Rate per day, without
board
Farm laborers engaged from day to day____________

Summer season, ,
Harvest season___
Winter season____

3. 89
4. 36
2. 80

$1.04
1.17
.75

1But not for season.

During the fiscal year under review, the wage rates of agricultural
laborers fell about 7 percent from those obtaining during the previous
fiscal year (May 1, 1930, to Apr. 30, 1931), if measured in Danish
kroner. In the above schedules board is included, and also lodging
on the farm, except for farm laborers engaged from day to day.
No statistics are published regarding wages of workers in the Dan­
ish agricultural industries engaged in dairying and bacon production.
The employers and workers in these industries are not affiliated with
the Danish Employers’ Association or the amalgamated trade unions.
Each class has its own organization, however. There are associations
of owners and managers of dairies and bacon factories, respectively,
and the workers in these establishments have formed organizations in
the same manner. These bodies together decide upon the wage sched­
ules to be maintained. In 1932 new agreements between the employ24040— 33------10


https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis

M O N T H L Y L A B O R R E V IE W

390

ers and workers were made regarding wage rates in these industries,
and a reduction of about 5% percent from the rates of 1931 was
made. The wage rates appear in table 6:
table

6 . —A V E R A G E H O U R L Y A N D W E E K L Y E A R N IN G S IN D A N IS H S L A U G H T E R ­

HOUSES A N D D A IR IE S , 1932
[Conversions into United States currency on basis of krone at par—26.8 cents; at average exchange rate
for December 1932=17.0 cents]

Average earnings
Amount
Class of establishment and worker

United States currency

Period
Danish
currency

A t par

A t exchange
rate

Kroner

Slaughterhouses :

Per hour-

Dairies, trained dairymen 1------------------------------------------

Per week__

1. 26
.741/4
42. 00

$0.34
.20
11. 26

$0. 21
. 13
7.14

1 Rate includes pay for work on Sunday.

For the male workers in the slaughterhouses there is a minimum
weekly wage of 58 kroner and for the females one of 34.15 kroner.

Earnings in the Building Trades in Germany, August 1932

HE Federal Statistical Office of Germany made a comprehensive
investigation of the actual earnings of workers engaged in the
building trades in Germany in August 1932.1 The investigation
covered 623 establishments with 15,178 workers, of whom 35 percent
were masons, 26.6 percent underground workers, and 24.3 percent
helpers. Piece-rate workers formed 7.8 percent of the underground
workers, 3.8 percent of the masons, 3.1 percent of the helpers, and 0.7
percent of the carpenters. Of all the workers covered, 98.8 percent
were over 20 years of age.
Table 1 shows actual earnings per hour and per day, the union
rate per hour, the percent that actual earnings form of union rates,
and the hours of labor per day for specified occupations in the cities
of Berlin, Hamburg, Leipzig, and Munich, and in the agreement dis­
tricts of Mecklenburg, Pommern, and Stettin, Western Germany,
and Baden and Vorderpfalz.

T

1 Germany.
243-244.

Statistisches Reichsamt.


https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis

Wirtschaft und Statistik, 2. April-Heft, Berlin, 1933, pp.

W A G E S AND H OURS OF LA B O R

391

T a b l e 1 .— A V E R A G E A C T U A L H O U R L Y A N D D A I L Y E A R N IN G S A N D H O U R S OF L A B O R

IN B U IL D IN G T R A D E S IN G E R M A N Y , B Y D IS T R IC T A N D O C C U P A T IO N , A U G U ST
1932
[Conversions into United States currency on basis of mark (100 pfennigs) at par=23.8 cents]

Actual earnings
per hour

District and occupation

Rate

Union rate
per hour

Actual earnings
Percent
per day
actual
Hours
earn­
of
ings
labor
German United German United form of German United
per
States
States
States
cur­
cur­
cur­
union
day
cur­
cur­
cur­
rency
rency
rate
rency
rency
rency
rency

Berlin:
Pfennigs
Masons___ _____ - . _ Tim e—
109. 4
D o ________________ Piece..
121.3
Do. i______________ T im e..
103.4
Carpenters____________
110. 1
Helpers.............................
90.7
D o _____
______ Piece _.
115.8
Underground workers. _ T im e..
75.0
Hamburg:
Masons________________ ___do__
113.4
Carpenters____________ __-do__
116.0
92. 9
Underground workers..
75. 6
Leipzig:
Masons________________ ___do-98.8
Carpenters_________ . . . ___do_98.8
84. 6
Underground w orkers.. -_-d o-_
79.2
Munich:
98. 0
D o ________________ Piece..
132.4
Carpenters__ ________
T im e..
97.9
80. 7
Underground w orkers.. Piece..
76.3
Mecklenburg:
Masons______________ . T im e..
69.8
Carpenters____________ __ do__
68. 5
Helpers________________ ___do__
58.9
Underground workers. . ___do__
52.2
D o ________________ Piece..
60.8
Pommern and Stettin:
M a son s_________ _____ T im e..
86.3
Carpenters____________ ___do__
85.3
70. 1
54. 8
D o . _______________ Piece..
50.1
Western Germany:
Masons____________ . . . T im e..
87.9
Carpenters____________ ___do__
92.2
73. 9
62.7
73.8
D o ._______________ Piece..
Baden and Vorderpfalz:
88.9
Masons .
. . . ___ _ T im e..
75. 3
Do. 1______________
93. 7
Carpenters____________ __-do_73. 5
Underground workers.. _--do__
73.0

Cents Pfennigs

Cents

Marks

26.0
28.9
24.6
26. 2
21. 6
27. 6
17.9

109. 0
109. 0
105. 0
110.0
90.0
90.0
72.0

25.9
25.9
25.0
26. 2
21.4
21. 4
17.1

100.0
111. 3
98. 5
100.0
100. 3
128. 0
102.4

8. 51
9. 20
7. 86
8. 57
7.15
9. 07
5. 96

$2.03
2.19
1.87
2. 04
1. 70
2. 16
1.42

7.78
7. 59
7. 61
7. 78
7. 88
7. 84
7. 95

27.0
27. 6
22.1
18. 0

111.9
113.9
91 0
73. 0

26. 6
27. 1
21 7
17. 4

100.7
100.0
101 1
101.8

8. 96
9. 22
7 42
6. 05

2.13
2.19

7. 90
7. 95

1.44.

8. 00

23. 5
23.5
20. 1
18.8

98.0
98. 5
82 0
77.0

23.3
23.4
19 5
18. 3

100.4
100.2

7. 63
7. 72

1.82
1.84

7. 72
7.81

102.7

6. 30

1. 50

7. 96

23. 3
31. 5
23. 3
19. 2
18.2

97. 0
97.0
97.0
80. 0
74.1

23 1
23. 1
23.1
19 0
17.6

100 3
136. 5
100.4
100 2
100. 5

7 92
10. 48
7. 84

2. 49
1.87

7. 92
8. 01

6. 33

1. 51

8. 30

16. 6
16. 3
14.0
12. 4
14. 5

69.9
68.9
58.4
51.7
51.2

16.6
16. 4
13.9
12.3
12. 2

99.7
99. 3
100.3
100.6
118.8

5. 58
5. 46
4. 72
4.21
4. 82

1. 33
1.30
1. 12
1. 00
1.15

8. 00
7. 97
8. 01
8. 08
7. 93

20. 5
20.3
16. 7
13. 0
11.9

84.3
84.6
70. 0
51. 9
46.4

20. 1
20. 1
16. 7
12. 4
11.0

102. 0
100.4
99 6
105. 6
108.0

6.93
6. 93
5 75
4 46
3.91

1.65
1. 65
1 27
1 06
.93

8. 02
8.12

20.9
21.9
17. 6
14. 9
17.6

89.5
92.0
74. 7
60. 3
61.0

21. 3
21. 9
17. 8
14. 4
14. 5

98.1
99.8
98 7
102. 2
120.0

7. 43
7. 77
6 33
5. 39
6.08

1.77
1.85
1 51
1 28
1. 45

8. 45
8. 43
8 59
8. 23

21. 2
17.9
22.3
17. 5
17.4

88.7
77. 2
88.9
74. 6
67.3

21. 1
18. 4
21. 2
17. 8
16.0

98.8
97. 5
100.3
98. 3
100.3

7.18
6. 09
8.41
5. 97
6. 41

1.71
1. 45
2. 00
1 42
1. 53

8.08
8 09
8. 98
8 12
8. 78

7.81

1 19 to 20 years of age.

The percent of decrease in actual hourly and daily earnings and in
union rates in August 1932 as compared with August 1929 is shown
in table 2. The greatest decrease in earnings occurred in Berlin,
for masons, amounting to 53 percent in hourly earnings and to 52.8
percent in daily earnings; the decrease in union rates was from 28
to 29.2 percent. On an average the earnings in all occupations and
agreement districts have decreased by about one third from August
1929 to August 1932; that is, during the period of three years.


https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis

392
T able

MONTHLY LABOR R E V IE W
2 .—P E R C E N T OF D E C R E A S E OF A C T U A L H O U R L Y A N D D A I L Y E A R N IN G S
A N D U N IO N R A T E S IN A U G U S T 1932 AS C O M P A R E D W IT H A U G U S T 1929

Percent of decrease in—
District and occupation

Hourly
Union
earn­
rates
ings

Daily
earn­
ings

53. 0
39.4
33. 5

29. 2
29. 1
29.1

52. 8
40.0
44. 7

31. 6

28.0

32.5

48. 6
34. 2
32. 4

28. 3
28.0
29. 5

48. 3
34. 1
32. 8

35. 9

32. 4

38. 5

Percent of decrease in—
District and occupation

Hourly
earn­ Union
rates
ings

Daily
earn­
ings

Mecklenburg:

Berlin:
Carpenters

-------

Underground

Underground

work-

Hamburg:
C arpenters___
Underground

C arpenters________

work-

. ...

-

Carpenters
Underground

30. 2
30.6
28. 7

29. 5
29.6
28. 7

29.1
30. 2
28. 2

30.8

30.6

32. 2

29.5

36. 2

33. 4
29.9
34. 3

30. 7
29.9
30.7

34. 2
30.7
35. 2

36. 2
28. 7
28. 9

28.7
28. 6
28.7

35.8
28.9
29.8

33.0

33.8

34.8

work-

33.5

33.2

33.9

34.2
32. 1
33.1

31.1
30.7
30. 7

34.3
35.4
35.0

25.1

25.3

28.4

34.4
30.6
33.6

33.1
32.4
32.0

35. 7
27.6
35. 6

30.6

33.3

34.2

work-

Baden and Vorderpfalz:

Munich:

Underground

33.4

work-

C arpenters____ _
Underground

work-

Carpenters- . . . . . . . .

36.1
35.5
35.5

work-

Western Germany:

Carpenters

34. 6
34.1
34. 5

Pommern:

Leipzig:

Underground

36. 2
35.3
35. 2

Carpenters
Underground

_______
work-

Wages in German Coal Mining in 1932

HE following table shows the earnings of coal-mine workers in
Germany in the months of March, June, September, and De­
cember 1932.1

T

A V E R A G E CASH E A R N IN G S IN C O A L M IN IN G IN G E R M A N Y IN 1932
B i t u m i n o u s co a l

(S t e i n k o h l )

[Conversions into United States currency on basis of mark at par=23.8 cents]

M arch 1932
Class of workers

Adult males, per shift:
Underground workers:

Surface workers:
Skilled
__________________

All workers:

i Germany.

Statistiches Reichsamt.


https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis

Ger­
man
cur­
rency

United
States
cur­
rency

June 1932
Ger­
man
cur­
rency

United
States
cur­
rency

Marks

Marks

September 1932 December 1932
Ger­
man
cur­
rency

United
States
cur­
rency

Marks

Ger­
man
cur­
rency

United
States
cur­
rency

Marks

7. 66
6. 03

$1.82
1.44

7. 66
6.01

$1.82
1.43

7. 64
6.00

$1.82
1.43

7. 63
5.98

$1.82
1. 42

6. 94

1. 65

6. 93

1. 65'

6. 92

1. 65

6.91

1.64

6. 86
5,69

1.63
1. 35

6.77
5. 65

1.61
1.34

6.78
5.63

1.61
1.34

6. 80
5. 66

1.62
1.35

6.11

1.45

6.06

1.44

6.04

1. 44

6. 07

1.44

133. 00
6. 65

31. 65
1. 58

133. 00
6. 62

31.65
1.58

137-00
6.62

32.61
1.58

147. 00
6.62

34.99
1.58

Wirtschaft und Statistik, 2. März-Heft, Berlin, 1933, pp. 179-180.

393

WAGES AND HOURS OF LABOR

A V E R A G E C A SH E A R N IN G S IN C O A L M IN IN G I N G E R M A N Y IN 1932—Continued
L i g n i t e co a l ( B r a u n k o h l )

March 1932
Ger­
man
cur­
rency

Class of workers

United
States
cur­
rency

T o t a l . .- ............... ............ ........ .
All workers:

Ger­
man
cur­
rency

September 1932 December 1932

United
States
cur­
rency

Ger­
man
cur­
rency

Marks

Marks

Marks

Adult males, per shift:

June 1932

United
States
cur­
rency

Ger­
man
cur­
rency

United
States
cur­
rency

Marks

5.60
6.49
7.13

$1.33
1.54
1. 70

5. 47
6. 52
7.20

$1. 30
1.55
1.71

5. 58
6. 38
7.17

$1. 33
1.52
1.71

5. 64
6. 34
7.14

$1.34
1.51
1.70

5.93

1.41

5.85

1.39

5.90

1.40

5. 86

1.39

120. 00
5.86

28. 56
1.39

132.00
5. 47

31.42
1. 30

132.00
5.81

31.42
1.38

129. 00
5. 64

30.70
1.34

Changes in English Wage Rates and Hours of Labor in 1932

HE British Ministry of Labor publishes in its Labor Gazette for
April 1933, a discussion of the changes in wage rates and hours
of labor which took place in 1932 in the industries concerning which
it receives information. The Ministry, it is explained, has no power
to compel the giving of such data, and certain important classes of
workers, such as agricultural and Government employees, domestic
servants, and shop assistants and clerks, are entirely omitted, so that
the subject is by no means completely covered. Data are received,
however, from a number of sources, both official and private, and it
is believed that the information received is sufficiently comprehensive
to give a trustworthy picture of the prevailing tendencies.

T

General Trend of Wage Rates

T here was a slight decline in 1932 in the average level of wage
rates.
* * * In all the industries and services for which statistics are available
the changes reported to the department as taking effect in 1932 resulted in an
aggregate net decrease of £251,800 1 [$1,225,385] in the weekly full-time rates
of wages of 1,949,000 work people, and in a net increase of £2,600 [$12,653] in
those of 33,500 work people.
The net result of all the changes reported was, therefore, a decrease of £249,200
[$1,212,732] in the weekly full-time wages of the work people in the industries
covered by the statistics. It is estimated that the average decrease for all these
industries, including also agriculture, was equivalent to between 1 )4 and 2 percent
of the wage rates in operation at the beginning of the year.
Wage Changes in the Various Industry Groups

T he following table shows, by industry groups, the number of
workers affected by increases and decreases in wage rates and the
net effect of these changes upon the weekly rates.
1 Conversions into United States currency on basis of par value of pound=$4.8665.


https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis

394
T able

MONTHLY LABOR R E V IE W
1 — NUM BER

OP W O R K E R S A F F E C T E D A N D N E T R E S U L T S OF W A G E IN ­
C R E A SE S A N D D E C R E A S E S IN G R E A T B R I T A I N IN 1932

[Conversions into United States currency on basis of par value of pound=$4.8665; exchange rate of pound
for 1932=$3,506]

Estimated net
Number of per­ weekly amount Estimated net weekly
decrease in wage rates
sons affected by— of change in
of all affected
wage rates
Industry group

United States
Net in­
creases

Coal mining______ ____ __________________
Other mining and quarrying______________
Brick, pottery, glass, etc__________________
Iron and steel____________________________
Engineering___ __________________________
Shipbuilding_____________________________
Other metal__________ _____ _____________
Textile___________________________________
Clothing_________________________ _______
Food, drink, and tobacco_________________
W oodworking, furniture, etc______________
Paper, printing, etc........... ..................... .........
Building, public works contracting, etc___
Gas, water, and electricity supply________
Transport_____________________ ____ _____
Public administration services____________
Other____________________________________

20,000

4,800
500
800
900
850

1,700
1,350
1,600
1,000

English
Net de­
InDe­
cur­
creases creases creases
rency

17, 000
14, 500
19.000
111,000
8,000
28.000
53.000
498.000
43, 000
17.000
27, 500
3, 000
520, 000
51, 000
363.000
150, 000
26.000

£985 £1,150
700
2,150
50
2,100
9, 450
10
1,800
4,850
75
5, 225
100 64, 300
5, 700
2,600
4,200
625
340 48,800
5, 750
200 66, 000
100 23,000
4, 100
40

£165
1,450
2,050
9, 440
1,800
4,850
5,150
64,200
5,700
2, 600
4,200
625
48, 460
5, 750
65, 800
22, 900
4,060

A t par

A t ex­
change
rate

$803
7,056
9,976
45,940
8, 760
23, 603
25, 062
312,429
27, 739
12, 653
20, 439
3,042
235,831
27,982
320, 216
111,443
19, 758

$578
5,084
7,187
33,097
6,311
17, 004
18,056
225,085
19,984
9,116
14, 725
2,191
169,901
20,160
230, 695
80, 287
14,234

It will be noticed that wage increases were few and affected a rela­
tively small number of workers. The principal increase was among
the coal miners in North Staffordshire, where a percentage addition
was made to basis rates, equivalent to about 2/ percent on current
rates of wages.
The most numerous body of workers receiving wage decreases was
the building operatives, who, with the exception of the painters in
Scotland, had their wages reduced by %d. [1 cent] per hour in the case
of craftsmen and by }id. or }{d. per hour in the case of laborers, in
nearly all districts in Great Britain. Wages of men employed by
electrical contractors in England and Wales were reduced by }{d. per
hour. _Large bodies of workers in the transport trades also underwent
reductions, dock laborers at most ports having a decrease of lOd.
[20.3 cents] per day, while employees in the mercantile marine had
cuts amounting in most cases to 18s. [$4.38] a month for those on
monthly, and 6s. a week for those on weekly rates. Most classes of
navigating and engineer officers and of sea-going wireless operators
had reductions of 10 percent of their monthly or weekly rates of pay.
Tramway employees received reductions varying with the area in
which they worked and the amount they earned, and coal tippers,
railway police, underground railway employees in London, and com­
mercial road transport workers generally accepted decreases. The
textile workers sustained serious reductions.
potton operatives employed in the manufacturing section of the industry sus­
tained a reduction of 15}^ percent in the percentage addition paid on standard piece
price lists, equivalent in most cases to a reduction of 8.493 percent on current
wages while the operatives in the preparing and spinning sections sustained a
reduction of 14 percent on the standard piece price lists, equivalent in most cases
to 7.67 percent off current wages. In the latter case certain modifications were

https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis

395

WAGES AND HOURS OF LABOR

made in the reduction applied to some of the lower-paid workers. Work people
in the bleaching, dyeing, finishing, etc., industries sustained net decreases amount­
ing to between 1 and 1y2 percent on their previous rates in Yorkshire, and to 7d.
and 4d. per week for men and for women, respectively, in Lancashire and Scotland.
Other work people in this group who sustained reductions included woolen opera­
tives at Leicester and in certain parts of Yorkshire, cotton and woolen operatives
in Glasgow and the west of Scotland, silk workers at Leek, hosiery workers at
Hawick, and work people employed in asbestos manufacture. The minimum
rates fixed under the trade boards acts for work people in the made-up textile
industry were reduced by Id. or l}4d. per hour for men, and by ]/2d. per hour for
women.
Methods by Which Changes Were Arranged

T he above table shows only the net changes, but during the year
certain bodies of workers both received increases and sustained
reductions, so that the gross changes for the year amounted to £11,900
($57,911) in increases and £261,100 ($1,270,643) in decreases per
week. Of the gross increase, 35.1 percent resulted from the operation
of sliding scales based on cost-of-living figures, 37.4 percent from
sliding scales based on selling prices, proceeds of the industry, etc.,
8.8 percent was brought about by conciliation machinery, 16.4 per­
cent by direct negotiation, 1.5 percent by arbitration, and the re­
mainder by joint industrial councils and trade boards. Of the gross
decrease, 23 percent was due to sliding scales based on cost-of-living
figures, 4.3 percent to sliding scales based on selling prices, proceeds
of the industry, etc., 1.1 percent by conciliation machinery, 22 percent
by arbitration, 25.1 percent by direct negotiation, 22.6 percent by
joint industrial councils, and 1.9 percent by trade boards. One
sixth (16.9 percent) of the gross reduction followed disputes causing a
stoppage of work.
Comparison With Previous Years
I n t h e following table the number of workers recorded as affected
by changes in rates of wages, and the net amount of increase or
decrease in 1932, in the industries for which statistics are available,
are shown in comparison with similar figures for previous years:
T

a b l e 2 .—N U M B E R OF W O R K E B S A F F E C T E D B Y C H A N G E S IN W A G E R A T E S , A N D
C H A N G E S IN T O T A L A M O U N T OF W A G E S P A ID IN G R E A T B R IT A IN , 1915 TO 1932

Number of workers affected
b y—

Net weekly amount of
change in rates of wages

Year
Increases
1915
1916 ________________________
1917 ________________________
1918
1919__________________________
1920_ ________________________
1921_ ________________________
1922- ________________________
1923. _______________________
1924__________________________
1925__________________________
1926__________________________
1927__________________________
1928__________________________
1929__________________________
1930__________________________
1931__________________________
1932__________________________


https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis

4, 305, 000
4, 848, 000
6.362.000
6.924.000
6, 240,000
7,867, 000
78, 000
73, 700
1, 202,000
3,019,000
873,000
420, 000
282, 000
217,000
142,000
768, 000
47, 000
33, 500

Decreases

250
75
100
500
7, 244,000
7, 633,000
3,079,000
481, 500
851, 000
740, 000
1, 855,000
1,615,000
917, 000
1,100,000
3,010,000
1, 949, 000

Increases
£867,100
885, 250
2,986, 200
3, 434, 500
2, 547, 200
4, 793, 200
13, 600
11,450
169, 000
616, 000
80,900
133, 000
30, 700
21,800
12, 900
59, 500
5,150
2,600

Decreases

£50
5
60
180
6, 074, 600
4, 221, 500
486,000
62,100
159, 000
83, 700
388, 500
163, 800
91,700
116, 100
406, 300
251, 800

Net weekly in­
crease or de­
crease in wages
paid to workers
affected
+£867,100
+885, 200
+2,986,195
+3,434, 500
+2, 547,140
+4, 793,020
-6,061,000
- 4 , 210,050
-317,000
+553,900
-78,100
+49, 300
-357, 800
-142,000
-7 8 , 800
-5 6 , 600
-401,150
-249, 200

396

MONTHLY LABOR REVIEW

Any conclusions to be drawn from this table, it is explained, must be
modified by the following considerations:
A small amount of change in any year indicates little more than the fact that
wages were almost stationary; in 1925, for example, the inclusion of agricultural
laborers would have converted the small reduction in wages shown in the table
into a slight increase. Further, the fact that the changes reported relate mainly
to organized workers results in the figures being influenced, over a series of years,
by fluctuations in the strength of the workers’ organizations. This is particularly
the case during the period since 1914, in which such fluctuations have been very
considerable. The movement toward the negotiation of wage changes on a
national basis since the war period has also tended to make the figures more com­
prehensive, for such changes do not escape notice, whereas, when separate arrange­
ments are made in each locality, it is possible that some of the changes, especially
among those affecting only the smaller districts, may not be reported. It should
be observed also that, during the war period, the number of female workers in
industry was above the normal and the number of male workers considerably
below normal; and as the amounts of increases or decreases in the rates of wages
of female workers are generally smaller than those agreed upon for males in the
same industry, the aggregate amount of the changes in those years was lower
than it would have been if the pre-war proportions of male and female employees
had been maintained. The relative levels of wages at the end of 1914 and 1932,
therefore, cannot be accurately ascertained by deducting the aggregate amount of
the reduction shown in the years 1921-32 from the aggregate amount of increase
recorded in 1915-20. The figures, however, illustrate the general trend of the
movements in money rates of wages over the whole period.
Changes in Normal Hours of Labor

D uring the year, 6,000 workers had their hours increased by an
average of about 2% hours per week, and 3,750 had their working
time reduced by about 1% hours per week. The following table
shows the variation in working hours in the industries for which
information is received for each of the years 1915-32, with the
aggregate net amount of the change in weekly hours.
T

able

3 .—

C H A N G E S IN N O R M A L W E E K L Y H O U R S OF L A B O R , IN G R E A T B R IT A IN ,
1915 TO 1932

Year

Approximate num­
ber of workers
whose hours of
labor were—

Aggregate net
increase or
decrease in
weekly hours

Year

Increased Decreased
1915__________
1916__________
1917__________
1918__________
1 9 1 9 .-.............
1 9 2 0 -..............
192 1 -...............
1922..................
1923........... .

620
1,300
2,400
1,750
1,150
2,000
31, 500
16, 000
325, 000

20, 500
22,000
32, 000
148, 000
6, 305, 000
570, 000
12, 900
302, 700
9,600

-6 3 , 000
-100,000
-120,000
-568,000
-40,651, 000
-2,114, 000
+14, 500
-9 3 , 000
+108, 750

1924
1925 _____
1926 .
1927
1928__________
1929__________
1930__________
1931
1932 .............

Approximate num­
ber of workers
whose hours of Aggregate net
increase or
labor were—
decrease in
weekly hours
Increased Decreased
13,150
1,300
934, 200
18, 700
1,400
4,050
13,175
294, 000
6, 000

16,150
3, 925
340
1,700
2,000
1,050
349, 225
111,000
3, 750

+12, 500
-11,750
+3,985, 000
+59,000
-200
+8, 750
-873, 500
+142,000
+7, 000

Since the widespread reductions in hours of labor in the years 1919 and 1920
there has been comparatively little movement in working hours apart from those
of building-trade operatives and coal miners. The former constituted the great
majority of those for whom changes were recorded in the years 1922 and 1923,
while coal miners form the majority of the totals shown for the years 1926, 1930,
and 1931.


https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis

397

W A G E S AN D H OURS OF LA B O R

Wages in the Sugar Industry of Java, 1929 and 1931

T

HE average daily wages paid in the sugar industry of Java in
1929 and 1931 are shown in the following figures taken from the
Statistical Abstract for Netherland Indies, 1932.1

A V E R A G E D A I L Y W A G E S OF W O R K E R S IN T H E S U G A R IN D U S T R Y IN JA V A , 1929
A N D 1931
[Conversions into United States currency on basis of Dutch cent at par=0.4 cent]
1929
Class of worker
Dutch cents

1931

United
States
currency

Dutch cents

United
States
currency

Regular workers
Professional laborers
. . _.
Helpers__________ _____ . _
T otal________________

..
_ _____________

115
58

$0. 46
.23

113
57

$0. 45
.23

85

.34

87

.35

63
46
35
41

.25
. 18
. 14
. 16

61
45
35
40

. 24
. 18
. 14
. 16

Season laborers

Factory foremen__________________
Factory coolies, m a le ___ . .
Field watchers- _ ______
____
Railway coolies___ _____ _

Total, male____________ __ __
Factory coolies, female___ _

______

Grand total- _____ . ______

46

. 18

44

18

37

. 15

36

. 14

56

. 22

54

.22

Wages in Coal Mines of the Don Basin, Soviet Russia

SOVIET Government decree published on May 22, 1933,2 pro­
vided for reorganization of the administration of coal mines
owned and operated by the Soviet Government in the Don Basin,
and set increased wage rates for certain groups of workers therein,
beginning June 1, 1933.
The new wage and salary rates are shown in the following tables.

A

T a b l e 1 . — B ASIC

D A IL Y R A T E S IN D O N B A SIN C O A L M IN E S , JU N E 1, 1933

[Conversions into United States currency on basis of ruble at par=51.5 cents] «
Daily wage
rates
Occupational group

Rus­
sian
cur­
rency

United
States
cur­
rency

Daily wage
rates
Occupational group

Rubles
Laborers, general- Brakemen. - _
Drainage men
- . _______
Plate men, inside. _ _____ _
Bailers____________ . . . __
Pum p men, inside..
Plate men, outside . .
.. _
Pillar m e n _ _ ____
Cagers...
____ _______
___
Electricians_______ .
. . . _.

1. 75
3. 50
3. 00
3. 00
3. 00
3. 50
3. 50
3. 50
5. 75
4. 80
4. 10

$0. 90
1. 80
1. 55
1. 55
1. 55
1. 80
1. 80
1. 80
2. 96
2. 47
2. 11

Slaters... . . . .
Tim berm en__
Firemen and screeners
Machine miners. _________ .
Machine miners’ helpers .
Pick miners_______ ]_
.. ..
Drivers, inside... .
Loaders and shovelers___ .
Loaders, boom ___ . .
Wagoners . . . ______ _______ .

Rus­
sian
cur­
rency

United
States
cur­
rency

Rubles
4.10
4.10
4. 10
7. 70
5. 30
6. 40
4. 50
4. 50
4. 50
4. 50

$2. 11
2. 11
2. 11
3. 97
2. 73
3. 30
2. 32
2 32
2. 32
2.32

“ The gold value of ruble in international financial transactions amounts to 51.5 cents on basis of gold
dollar. But there are no available data to show the value of the ruble in domestic transactions; that
is, in relation to prices of commodities in home markets, socialized and private.
1 Netherland East Indies. Departement van Landbouw, Nijverheid en Handel. Centraal Kantoor
voor de Statistiek. Indian report, 1932; II, Statistical abstract for N .I. Batavia, 1932, p. 182.
2 Soviet Union (U .S.S.R .). Izvestia (Official D aily of the Soviet Government), Moscow, M a y 22,
1933, pp. 1 and 2.


https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis

398

MONTHLY LABOR R E V IE W

Table 2 shows the monthly productivity bonuses paid, in addition
to wages, to specified classes of workers.

.

T a b l e 2 —M O N T H L Y

P R O D U C T IV IT Y BON U S F O R C O A L -M IN E W O R K E R S IN T H E
D O N B ASIN

M onthly bonus
Russian currency

Occupational group

Minim um

Maximum

Rubles

Rubles

25
15
15
15
0)

20
20
15
20
15
20

(3)
1 20 percent of basic wage.

United States currency

(2)

M inim um

Maximum

50
25
25
20

$12. 88
7. 73
7. 73
7.73

$25. 75
12.88
12. 88
10. 30

30
30
20
50
25
30

10. 30
10. 30
7.73
10. 30
7. 73
10. 30

15. 45
15. 45
10. 30
25. 75
12.88
15. 45

(•)

2 30 percent of basic wage.

3 15 percent of basic wage.

Table 3 gives the new monthly rates of the administrative and
technical forces.
T a b l e 3 .— M O N T H L Y S A L A R IE S OF A D M IN IS T R A T IV E A N D T E C H N IC A L P E R S O N N E L

IN D O N B A S IN C O A L M IN E S , JU N E 1, 1933

M onthly salaries
Occupational group

Russian currency

United States currency

M inim um 1Maximum 1 M in im u m 1Maximum i
Chief engineers:
Class I mines.. ___ _
...
_____ . .
Class II mines__ __
_
....................
Class III mines . __________ . . . . . . _______ . .
Assistant chief engineers:
Class I mines ______________ _ __ ___ . . . _ __
Class II mines
_____
.. .. -----______ _
Electrical mechanics:
Class I mines _. __ ____________ ______ _ ____
Class II m ines.
___ _____
- _ __
Class III mines . . _________ - - .
: ..
_
Bosses, ventilation:
Class I mines _______ _ - _ - -------- _
Class II mines- - ___ - - - - - - ____
Class III mines ___ ________ - ____ _..
Bosses, transportation, in large m in es.. . _________
Section bosses:2
Class I m ines. ____ __ __ ___ _______ .
_
Class II mines
____ _______ - - - - _ ----------Class III mines. „
________ ____
___ _
Assistant unit bosses:
Class I mines _________________ ___ ____________
Class II mines
----- _ _ _ _ _ _
Inspectors, technical - - - - - - - .
- Inspectors, common
Economists, production
. . .
Engineers, construction work

Rubíes

Rubles

650
600
500

1,100
850
700

$334. 75
309. 00
257. 50

$566.50
437. 75
360. 50

450
450

900
800

231. 75
231. 75

463. 50
412.00

450
350
325

750
650
500

231. 75
180. 25
167.38

386. 25
334. 75
257. 50

325
300
300
300

650
500
450
650

167. 38
154. 50
154. 50
154. 50

334. 75
257. 50
231. 75
334. 75

350
325
325

700
650
550

180. 25
167. 38
167. 38

360. 50
334. 75
283. 25

325
300
300
175
225
350

550
450
550
450
450
700

167. 38
154. 50
154. 50
90. 13
115.88
180. 25

283. 25
231. 75
283. 25
231. 75
231. 75
360. 50

1 Between the minimum and the maximum there are 2 more salary rates, which are not quoted in this
table.
2 In the reorganized administration of coal mining in the Don Basin a section represents a separate manage­
ment unit of inside mining operations at 1 larger or several smaller adjacent veins—under a section boss
or chief.


https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis

399

W AGES AND HOURS OF LABOR

T a b l e 3 — M O N T H L Y S A L A R IE S OF A D M I N I S T R A T I V E A N D T E C H N IC A L P E R S O N N E L

IN D O N B A S IN C O A L M IN E S , JU N E 1, 1933—Continued

M onthly salaries
Occupational group

Section production foremen:
Class I mines____________ _ ..
.. ... _ _
Class II mines
_ ________
...
( ’ lass III mines__________ ______ _
. ... .
Transportation foremen:
Class I mines
____ . . . . . .
Class II mines . . .
_
______
Class III mines . . .
_
__
__
Ventilation foremen:
Class I m ines. . . . . . .
___ _____
Class II m ines. ___ _
____ __________
_____
Class III m ines. . ______________ ____
_ ._ ____
Construction foremen:
Class I m ines.
_
. . .
Class II m ines. . . .
_ ...
Fitters and electrical fitters:
Class I mines_______ _
_ _______________ _____
Class II mines __________________ . _ . _ ______
Class III mines____________ _
________
_ _ _ _____________ . _.
Surface forem en ______

Russian currency
M inim um

Maximum

Rubles

Rubles

United States currency
M inim um

Maximum

200
175

400
350
300

$103. 00
90.13

$206.00
180. 25
154.50

175
160
160

825
275
250

90.13
82.40
82. 40

167. 38
141. 63
128. 75

150
150
140

350
300
250

77.25
77.25
72. 10

180. 25
154. 50
128. 75

200
175

400
350

103. 00
90. 13

206. 00
180. 25

250
175
175
100

475
400
350
275

128. 75
90. 13
90. 13
51.50

244. 63
206.00
180. 25
141.63

The salaries of the engineers and technicians with special high
qualifications may be increased up to 1,500 rubles ($773) per month.
In the mines producing coal for coke the salaries of the adminis­
trative and technical personnel are to be increased by 10 percent over
those in other mines beginning June 1, 1933.

Survey of Wages in Yugoslavia, 1932 1

N Yugoslavia there were comparatively few changes in the rates of
wages in 1932 as compared with those current in 1931. In the
mining industry there was a general, though small, decrease in wages
of practically all workers, while inspectors and clerks in all classes
suffered a loss in wages of 15 percent.
The Yugoslav law provides for an 8-liour working day and a 48-liour
week. Overtime is permissible up to a limit of 2 hours per day and
8 hours per week, the rate of pay for such work being time and a half.
Deductions from wages for social insurance are authorized by a
law put into effect in 1922. Road and general taxes are levied on
workers’ wages, there being different rates for married workers, with
and without dependents, and single workers.
Tables 1 to 4 show in detail the wages current in the mining,
sugar, textile, and woodworking industries of Yugoslavia as of 1932.
Table 1 covers daily wages in the mining industry, as well as the
allowances and deductions made for the various classes of employees.

I

1 This article was prepared from report b y Reed Paige Clark, American consul at Belgrade, Feb. 2,1933.
and Egmont C. von Treskow, American consul at Zagreb, Apr. 7, 1932.


https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis

400

MONTHLY LABOR R E V IE W

T a b l e 1 .— W A G E S IN T H E M IN IN G IN D U S T R Y OF Y U G O S L A V IA , 1932, B Y K IN D

OF

M IN IN G
[Conversions into United States currency on basis of dinar at par=1.76 cents; at average exchange rate
for December 1932=1.34 cents]

Daily allowances

Daily wages
United
States cur­
rency
K ind of mining

Yugo­
slav
cur­
rency

Dinars
Coal:
B la ck ,, -- - - _ 32.40
37.40
Brown______
37. 40
Lignite38. 20
Iron: Iron ore.
Copper:
Copper ore----------- 25.10
Crude copper____ 23. 20
P y rite........... ........ 31.20
Lead:
Lead ore_______ _ 48. 45
Crude lead_______ 67. 00
31. 70
Bauxite ________
Magnesite________ - 26. 75
31.18
Chrome ore__ - - Salt__________________ 41.80

At
par

D aily deductions

United
States cur­
rency

Government taxes

Insurance

Yugo­
United
United
slav
States cur­
States cur­
cur­
rency
rency
Yugo­
Yugo­
A t ex­ rency At A t ex­ slav
slav
change
par change cur­
cur­
rate rency
rate
At ex­ rency
At
A t A t ex­
par change
par change
rate
rate

Dinars a s .

as. Dinars Cts.

Cts.
43.4
50.1
50.1
51. 2

0. 38 0.7
3.51 6.2
2. 48 4.4
5. 75 10. 1

0.5
4.7
3.3
7.7

0. 43
.83
.83
.83

0.8
1.5
1.5
1.5

0.6
1.1
1.1
1.1

1.17
1.38
1.38
1.38

2. 1
2.4
2.4
2.4

1.
1.8
1.8
1.8

44.2
40.8
54.9

33.6
31. 1
41.8

9. 82 17.3
9.82 17.3
9. 82 17.3

13.2
13.2
13.2

.43
.43
.92

.8
.8
1.6

.6
.6
1.2

1.38
1.38
1.66

2.4
2.4
2.9

1.8
1.8
2.2

85.3
117.9
55.8
47.1
54.9
73.6

64.9
89.8
42.5
35.8
41.8
56.0

1.61
2. 53
2. 53
.45
.45
3. 23

2. 2
3.4
3.4
.6
.6
4.3

1.05
1.66
.33
.33
.33
.90

1.8
2.9
.6
.6
.6
1.6

1.4
2.2
.4
.4
.4
1. 2

1.66
1.66
1.00
.83
1.00
1.38

2.9
2.9
1.8
1.5
1.8
2.4

2.2
2.2
1.3
1. 1
1.3
1.8

2.8
4. 5
4.5
.8
.8
5.7

Cts.

Dinars Cts.

Cts.
57.0
65.8
65.8
67.2

Cts.

Table 2 gives wages in the sugar industry of Yugoslavia in 1932.
T a b l e 2 —M O N T H L Y A N D H O U R L Y W A G E S IN T H E S U G A R IN D U S T R Y OF Y U G O ­

S L A V IA , 1932, B Y O C C U P A T IO N
[Conversions into United States currency on basis of dinar at par=1.76 cents; at average exchange rate for
December 1932=1.34 cents]

Wages

Deductions

United States
currency
Occupation

Period
to
which
figures
apply

Yugo­
slav
currency

Dinars
Refinery
workers
and
handlers of raw material-- M onth 1. 850. 00
Sugar boilers______________ -__do_ _ 1,800. 00
Stokers___________________ ---d o-_. 1,800. 00
(1,600. 00
to
Independent craftsmen----- ---d o -.. {
11,800. 00
Hour__
5. 50
Electricians___________
4.00
.-_do_-Porters_______________
Supervisory mechanics.
-_dO--2.00
5.00
Boiler men____________
-_do___
5.50
Bricklayers___________
--d o__(
3.50
Common laborers,
•j
to
—
do___
manent.
[
4.00


https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis

}-

At
par

A t ex­
change
rate

Government taxes

Yugo­
slav
cur­
rency

Insurance

United
States cur­
rency

Y u go­
slav
cur­
rency
A
t
ex­
At
par change
rate

At
par

A t ex
change
rate

$0. 68 44.71 $0. 79
.68 44.71
.79
.68 44.71
.79
.54 1
>44. 71
to
.79
.68 I
.01
.02
1.17
.01
1.00
.02
.01
.69
.01
.01
1.17
.02
.01
1. 17
.02

$0. 60
.60
.60

Dinars

$32. 56 $24. 79 51.00 $0. 90
31.68 24. 12 51.00
.90
31.68 24. 12 51.00
.90
28.16 21.44 40. 00
.70
to
to
to
to
31.68 24. 12 51.00
.90
.10
.07
.80
.01
.07
.05
.50
.01
.04
.03
.42
.01
.09
.07
.80
.01
.10
.07
.80
.01
.06
.05 ]
to
to
1 .50
.01
.07
.06 1

United
States cur­
rency

Dinars

.01

1.00

.02

.60
.02
.01
.01
.02
.02
.01

401

W AGES AND HOURS OF LABOR

Wages in the textile industry for 1932 are as follows:
T a b l e 3 — W A G E S IN T H E T E X T I L E IN D U S T R Y OF Y U G O S L A V IA , 1932, B Y O C C U P A ­

TIO N S
[Conversions into United States currency on basis of dinar at par=1.76 cents; at average exchange rate for
December 1932= 1. 34 cents]

Hourly wages
Males
Occupation

Females

United States
currency
Yugoslav
currency
At par

W e a v e r s __
Spinners_______ _ _ _ _____
_______ . _
Painters_______
Finishers... _ . . _________ . . .
Teaselers_________________ _____ _
Spoolers... ____________ ________ .
Knitters__ _____________ . . . .
Tailors... ______________________

Dinars

2. 50-4. 50
2. 50-4. 50
2. 00-5. 00
2. 00-5. 00
2. 00-4. 00

United States
currency
Yugoslav
currency

A t ex­
change
rate

Cents

At par

Cents

4.4-7. 9
4. 4-7. 9
3. 5-8. 8
3. 5-8. 8
3. 5-7. 0

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

Dinars
0
0
7
7
4

A t ex­
change
rate

Cents

2.00-4. 00

3. 5-7. 0

2. 7-5.4

2.50-3 00
3 00-3 50
3. 00-5. 00

5. 3-8. 8

4. Ö-6.’ 7

Hourly deductions
Government taxes
Weavers........ ..........................
Spinners_____
___ _
P ainters_______
________ . _
Finishers___________
Teaselers_________ . _________ .
Spoolers__________ ____________ _
K nitters.. . . . . .
T a ilo r s _____ _______

0. 25-0. 75
.25- . 75
. 16- . 50
. 16- .50
. 16- .50
. 25- . 33
. 25- . 50
. 16- . 50

0. 4-1. 3
. 4-1. 3
.3 - .9
.3 - .9
.3 - .9
.4 - .6
.4 - .9
.3 - .9

Insurance

0. 3-1. 0
.3-1.0
.2 - .7
.2 - .7
.2 - .7
.3 - .4
.3 - .7
.2 - .7

0. 83-1. 66
. 83-1. 66
.69-1.17
.69-1.17
. 69-1.17
. 83-1. 00
. 83-1.17
. 69-1. 38

1. 5-2. 9
1. 5-2. 9
1. 2-2. 1
1. 2-2. 1
1. 2-2. 1
1. 5-1.8
1. 5-2. 1
1. 2-2.4

1.1-2 2
1. 1-2. 2
. 9-1. 6
.9-1 6
.9-1 6
1.1-1. 3
1. 1-1. 6
.9-1.8

Wages in the woodworking industry underwent no change in 1932,
remaining at the level shown in table 4.
T a b l e 4 —W A G E S

IN T H E W O O D W O R K IN G IN D U S T R Y
O C C U P A T IO N S

OF Y U G O S L A V IA

1932

BY

[Conversions into United States currency on basis of dinar at par=1.76 cents; at average exchange rate
for December 1932=1.34 cents]
Daily wages

Daily deductions

United States
currency
Occupation

Yugoslav
currency

Dinars
Sawyers____ - .
Sawyers’ helpers____
Workers on circular
saws______________
Mechanics_________
Blacksmiths . . .
Tool sharpeners.
D ay laborers
. _ „

At par

At exchange
rate

Cents

Cents

Government taxes

Insurance

United States
United States
currency
currency
Yugo­
slav
Yugoslav
cur­
At ex­ currency
A t ex­
rency A t par change
At par change
rate
rate

Dinars Cents

Cents

Dinars

Cents

. 35-, 66
. 50-, 92
. 33-, 75
. 42-, 92
. 16- 33

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

1. 00-1. 66
1.17-1. 66
1. 00-1. 66
1. 00-1. 66
. 58-1. 00

1. 8-2. 9
2.1-2.9
1.8-2. 9
1. 8-2. 9
1.0-1. 8

31.50-45. 60 55. 4-80. 3 42. 2-61. 10. 33-, 66 0. 6-1. 2 0. 4- . 9 1. 00-1. 66 1. 8-2. 9 1. 3-2. 2
29. 60-32. 60 52.1-57.4 39. 7-43. 7 . 33-, 42 .6 - .7 . 4- . 6 1. 00-1.17 1.8-2.1 1.3-1. 6
32. 00-41. 50
36. 70-49. 50
31. 60-44. 50
34. 00-49. 20
18. 00-29. 00


https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis

56. 3-73. 0
64. 6-87.1
55. 6-78. 3
59. 8-86. 6
31. 7-51. 0

42. 9-55. 6
49. 2-66. 3
42. 3-59. 6
45. 6-65. 9
24.1-38. 9

. 6-1. 2
. 9-1. 6
. 6-1. 3
. 7-1. 6
.3 - .6

1. 3-2. 2
1. 6-2. 2
1. 3-2. 2
1. 3-2. 2
. 8-1. 3

402

MONTHLY LABOR R EV IEW

Table 5 gives the daily wages paid in the chemical, leather, and
metallurgical industries of the Zagreb district in 1932.
T a b l e 5 .—A V E R A G E

D A I L Y W A G E S IN T H E C H E M IC A L , L E A T H E R A N D M E T A L ­
L U R G IC A L IN D U S T R IE S OF T H E Z A G R E B D IS T R IC T , Y U G O S L A V IA , 1932 B Y
O C C U P A T IO N S
’
’

[Conversions into United States currency on basis of dinar at par=1.76 cents; at average exchange rate for
December, 1932=1.34 cents]
Daily wages

Deductions for-

United States
currency
Occupation

Yugo­
slav
cur­
rency

Insurance

At ex­ Yugo­
At par change slav
cur­
rate rency

Government taxes

United States
currency

United States
currency

Y ugoslav
At ex­ currency
A t par change
rate

A t par

A t ex­
change
rate

Chemical industry
Coppersmiths, fitters, and
coopers. _
__ _
___
Stokers and technical helpers..
Unskilled workers
_ .
Unskilled workers, females___

Dinars

Dinars Cents

Cents

Dinars

Cents

87. 50
61.70
37. 50
31.25

$1. 54
1.09
.66
. 55

$1.17
.83
.50
.42

1.97
1.97
1.39
1.18

3. 5
3.5
2. 4
2. 1

2.6
2. 6
1.9
1. 6

1. 42-2. 50
. 50-1.97
0 - .50
0 - .33

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

1. 9-3. 4
. 7-2. 8
0 - 7
0 - .4

51. 25
51.00
37. 50
31.25

.91
.90
.66
.55

.69
.68
.50
.42

1.97
1.97
1.39
1.18

3. 5
3. 5
2.4
2.1

2.6
2.6
1.9
1.6

.25.250 0 -

. 92
. 92
.50
.33

.4-1.6
. 4-1. 6
0 - .9
0 - .6

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

72. 93

1. 28

.98

1.97

3.5

2.6

. 92-1. 92

1.6-3. 4

1.2-2 6

72. 56
66. 12
46. 41
28. 42

1. 28
1.07
.82
.50

.97
.89
.62
.38

1.97
1.97
1. 64
.98

3.5
3. 5
2.9
1.7

2.6
2. 6
2.2
1.3

. 92-1.92

1. 6-3. 4

1.2-2. 6

. 16- . 75
0 - .33

. 3-1. 3
0 - .6

.2-1 0
0 - .4

Leather industry
Tanners . . . .
____ __
Shoemakers.. _
________
Unskilled workers. _ . . . _ _
Unskilled workers, females__

Metallurgical industry
Drayers________________
Machine locksmiths, mechanics, and molders___
Casters . _ .
. . . ___ _
Unskilled workers______
Unskilled workers, female


https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis

TREND OF EMPLOYMENT
Trend of Employment, June 1933

HE Bureau of Labor Statistics of the United States Department
of Labor presents in the following tables, data compiled from
pay-roll reports supplied by cooperating establishments in 17 of the
important industrial groups of the country and covering the pay
period ending nearest the 15th of the month.
Information for each of the 89 separate manufacturing industries
and for the manufacturing industries combined is shown, following
which are presented tabulations showing the changes in employment
and pay rolls in the 16 nonmanufacturing groups included in the
Bureau’s monthly survey, together with information available con­
cerning employment in the executive Civil Service and on class I
railroads.

T

Employment in Selected Manufacturing Industries in June 1933
Comparison of Employment and Pay-Roll Totals in June 1933 with M ay 1933
and June 1932

M PLOYM ENT in manufacturing industries increased 7 per­
cent in June 1933 as compared with May 1933 and pay-roll
totals increased 10.8 percent over the month interval. Comparing
June 1933 with June 1932, increases of 9.2 percent in employment
and 9.7 percent in pay-roll totals are shown over the 12-month period.
The index of employment in June 1933 w^s 62.8 as compared with
58.7 in May 1933, 56 in April 1933, and 57.5 in June 1932; the pay­
roll index in June 1933 was 43.1 as compared with 38.9 in May 1933,
34.9 in April 1933, and 39.3 in June 1932. The 12-month average
for 1926 equals 100.
The percents of change in employment and pay-roll totals in June
1933 as compared with May 1933 are based on returns made by
17,952 establishments in 89 of the principal manufacturing industries
in the United States, having in June 2,802,711 employees whose
combined earnings in one week were $50,408,132.
The gains of 7 percent in factory employment and 10.8 percent in
pay rolls in June mark the third consecutive month in which both
employment and earnings have increased. The increase in employ­
ment in June combined with the increases of 1.6 percent in April and
4.8 percent in May represents a gain of 14 percent in employment
since the bank holiday in March. These combined increases have
brought the level of employment in June to the highest point reached
in the last 15 months and for the first time since October 1929 indicate
more workers on manufacturing-establishment pay rolls in the cur­
rent month than were employed in the corresponding month of the

E


https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis

403

404

MONTHLY LABOR R E V IEW

preceding year. The June 1933 employment index, however, is still
36.8 percent below the level of June in the index base year 1926.
The increase of 10.8 percent in pay rolls in June combined with the
increase of 4.5 percent in April and 11.5 percent in May represents a
total increase of 29 percent over the March low and brings the June
1933 pay-roll index to a point 9.7 percent above the level of June
1932. The pay-roll index in June 1933 remains 56.8 percent below
the level of the June 1926 pay-roll index.
The broadness of the current expansion is indicated by the increases
in employment in 79 of the 89 separate manufacturing industries
surveyed, while 80 industries reported increases in pay rolls over the
month interval. The 10 industries in which decreased employment
was reported between May and June were industries usually affected
by seasonal decreases at this period.
Thirteen of the fourteen groups into which these 89 manufacturing
industries are classified, reported gains in employment and pay rolls
over the month interval, the lumber-products group reporting the
most pronounced gain, 13 percent, due to increases of 15.1 percent in
employment in sawmills, 10.8 percent in furniture, and 9.6 percent in
millwork. The stone-clay-glass and the rubber-products group
reported gains in employment of 11.7 percent each. In the stoneclay-glass group, the brick and cement industries reported gains in
employment of nearly 15 percent and the marble-slate-granite
industry reported a slightly larger gain. In the rubber-products
group, the most pronounced gain was in the rubber tire and tube
industry which reported an increase of 14.7 percent in number of
workers over the month interval coupled with an increase of 26.4
percent in pay rolls. The textile-products group reported an increase
of 10.1 percent in employment and 16.1 percent in pay rolls, the largest
gain in employment in this group being reported in the woolen and
worsted goods industry (23.3 percent). The cotton-goods industry
reported a gain in employment of 15.7 percent, knit goods 7.8 percent,
and silk and rayon goods, 4.9 percent. In the wearing-apparel division
of the textile group gains in employment of 8.1 percent and 9.7 percent
were reported in the men’s clothing and the shirt and collar industries,
respectively, while the women’s clothing and the millinery industries
both reported seasonal declines. The combined totals of the indus­
tries comprising the iron and steel group showed gains of 9.8 percent
in employment and 22 percent in pay rolls, each of the 13 industries
in this group reporting substantial increases in employment coupled
with more pronounced gains in earnings. The cast-iron pipe industry
reported the greatest increase in employment (19.9 percent) and the
iron and steel industry reported a gain of 9.6 percent in employment
coupled with an increase of 25.1 percent in pay rolls. The machinery
group, under which heading is classified such important industries as
agricultural implements, electrical machinery, foundries and machine
shops, machine tools, radio, and textile machinery, reported an in­
crease of 8.1 percent in employment, the gains in employment in
these separate industries ranging from 5.3 percent in the electricalmachinery industry to 15.6 percent in the textile-machinery industry.
The nonferrous metal group reported an increase of 7.3 percent and
the transportation group reported a gain of 6.4 percent. In this
last-named group, the automobile industry reported increases of 8
percent in employment and 7.1 percent in earnings. The leather
https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis

TREND OF EMPLOYMENT

405

products group reported an increase of 4.4 percent in employment
from May to June due to the combined increases of 10 percent in the
leather industry and 2.9 percent in the boot and shoe industry. The
food group reported a gain of 4 percent in number of employees, the
beverage industry in this group continuing to report substantial
additions to its already greatly expanded total. The level of em­
ployment in the beverage industry in June 1933 measured by changes
in the Bureau’s indexes is 95.9 percent above the level of the corre­
sponding month of 1932, due almost entirely to legalizing the manu­
facture of beer. This is not the only industry in which expansions
of large proportions have occurred over the year interval, although
in the beverage industry the expansion represents the addition of
new workers to the industry, while in the woolen-goods industry,
for instance, in which employment shows a gain of 89.6 percent from
June 1932 to June 1933, the gain represents a return of employees
to plants previously operated due to recently increased activity.
In this 12-month comparison, the cotton-goods industry also shows
an increase in employment of nearly 60 percent and the rayon industry
shows a gain of 65.8 percent in employment over the year interval.
The radio and the silk-goods industries both show increases of 44
percent over the year interval and 13 additional industries showed
increases of more than 20 percent in employment. In 31 of the 89
industries the level of employment in June 1933 was still below the
level of June 1932.
In table 1, which follows, are shown the number of identical estab­
lishments reporting in both May and June 1933 in the 89 manufac­
turing industries, together with the total number of employees on the
pay rolls of these establishments during the pay period ending nearest
June 15, the amount of their earnings for 1 week in June, the percents
of change over the month and year intervals, and the indexes of
employment and pay roll in June 1933.
The monthly percents of change for each of the 89 separate indus­
tries are computed by direct comparison of the total number of
employees and of the amount of weekly pay roll reported in identical
establishments for the 2 months considered. The percents of change
over the month interval in the several groups and in the total of the
89 manufacturing industries are computed from the index numbers of
these groups, which are obtained by weighting the index numbers of
the several industries in the groups by the number of employees or
wages paid in the industries. The percents of change over the year
interval in the separate industries, in the groups and in the totals are
computed from the index numbers of employment and pay-roll totals.

2 4 0 4 ° — 3 3 ------- 11


https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis

406

MONTHLY LABOR R E V IEW

T a b l e 1.—C O M P A R IS O N OF E M P L O Y M E N T A N D P A Y R O L L S IN M A N U F A C T U R IN G

E S T A B L IS H M E N T S IN JU N E 1933 W IT H M A Y 1933 A N D JU N E 1932

Industry

F o o d a n d k in d red p r o d ­
u c t s _____ . __________
Baking________________
Beverages ______ ____
Butter_________________
Confectionery________
Flour
..........
Icecream ___
Slaughtering and meat
packing.
___ . . .
Sugar, beet.. _
Sugar refining, cane____
Textiles a n d th eir p r o d ­
u c ts ________ ___________
F a b rics.. _ ._ . ____
Carpets and rugs___
Cotton goods______
Cotton small wares.
Dyeing and finish­
ing textiles______
Hats, fur-felt______
Knit goods. _ _____
Silk and rayon goods
W oolen and wor­
sted goods. _____
Wearing apparel_____
Clothing, men’s___
Clothing, wom en’s..
Corsets and allied
garments.. ____
M en’s furnishings..
Millinery__________
Shirts and collars...
Iron and steel and their
products, n o t includ­
ing m achinery_________
Bolts, nuts, washers,
and rivits____ _______
Cast-iron pipe_________
Cutlery (not including
silver and plated cut­
lery) and edge tools. _.
Forgings, iron and steel
Hardware . . . .
...
Iron and steel_________
Plumbers’ supplies___
Steam and hot-water
heating apparatus and
steam fittings________
S t o v e s .____ ________
Structural and orna­
mental metalwork___
Tin cans and other tin­
ware. _ ______ _____
Tools (not including
edge tools, machine
tools, files, and saws)..
W irework_____________
Machinery, n o t includ­
ing t r a n s p o r t a t i o n
equipm ent_____ ______
A g r i c u l t u r a l imple­
m ents..
__________
Cash registers, adding
machines, and calcu­
lating machines...........
i N o change


https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis

Employment
Estab­
lish­
ments
report­
Percent of
ing in
change
both
Number
M ay
on pay
and
June
June roll June M ay
1932
1933
to
1933
June to June
1933
1933

3,013
96C
357
317
318
42C
323

252,449
59, 379
23, 073
6, 058
33, 225
15,513
11, 907

250
57
11

93, 092
4, 089
6.113

3,135
1,894
27
651
113

Percent of
change
Amount
of pay roll
(1 week)
June 1933

M ay
to
June
1933

Em ­ Pay­
June ploy­ roll
ment
totals
1932
to June
1933

+ 3.9
+ 1.9
+14.8
+ 5.9
- 4 .7
- 5 .4
+15.6

- 0 .3
-1 0 .8
+102. 7
-1 4 .9
- 5 .1
- 8 .3
-1 7 .1

86.5
79.3
160.8
102.0
73.6
82.8
78.0

69. 7
63.7
151.6
75.7
48.6
62.6
58.8

1,877, 733
84,327
148,454

+ 4.3
+ 6.9
+ 1 .0

- 1 .4
+ 1.4
+ 3.1

90.3
48.9
78.3

72.6
36.2
68.8

+ 4.0 + 6.9 $5,187,093
+ 1.4 - 3 .8
1, 257, 218
+18.1 +95.9
670, 232
+ 7 .8 -1 .4
124, 259
- . 7 +12.9
414, 022
- 1 . 4 (0
308,967
+15.8 - 7 .9
301, 881
+ 3 .2 + 4 .8
+12. 1 +23.2
+ .5 + 4.8

Index num­
bers (average
1926=100)

Pay-roll totals

703,865 +10.1
574,419 +13.3
11, 842 +15.5
279, 784 • +15.7
+ 9.9
10,146

+37. 7
+47.0
+13.7
+59.8
+24.6

9,176,541
7,506,648
207, 823
3,109, 403
154, 215

+16.1
+21.2
+28.7
+24.0
+ 12.8

+49.7
+65. 1
+61.5
+84.9
+38.6

80. 7
85.4
59.1
91.7
89.2

52.7
60.1
42.3
65.1
66.4

+ 5 .0
+ 1.9
+ 7.8
+ 4.9

+13.3
+21.5
+19.4
+44. 9

678, 283
104,884
1,448, 570
605, 924

+ 9.1
+20.4
+10.4
+10. 1

+21.6
+58.1
+21. 4
+57.8

81.0
68.5
89.2
59.7

60.2
43.8
59.6
39.3

152
35
438
242

36, 249
5, 451
112,378
47, 507

236
1,241
398
476

71,062
129,446
63, 908
25,854

+23.3 +89.6
+ 1 .5 +16.1
+ 8.1 +25.0
-8 .1
+ 5.2

1,197, 546
1, 669,893
813,116
368, 771

+37.1 +121.2
+ 2.4 +15.9
+18.5 +42.5
-1 3 .8
- 7 .4

93.3
69.4
69.9
68.2

72.1
38. 0
36.9
33.9

34
76
139
118

5,719
7, 844
9, 690
16, 431

+ .3
+1. 8
+ 7.9 + 10.9
- 3 .6 -2 3 .5
+ 9.7 +18.4

82,196
87,960
147,058
170, 792

+ 1.7 + 8 .2
+13.3 + 4 .8
- 4 .3 +20.5
+19.1 +26.1

100.8
63.0
68.8
65.1

77.5
37.4
42.4
43.0

1,368

326,734

+6. 6

5,870,338

+22.0 +33.8

58.5

36.0

70
36

9, 672
4,713

+12.6 +13.9
+19. 9 - 6 . 1

175, 708
60, 575

+30.0 +32.5
+21.7 - 8 .0

73.0
29.4

47.3
16.1

129
65
106
205
68

8,698
6, 046
21,861
199, 580
8,469

+ 4.1 -1 2 .0
+ 12.4 + 8.4
+ 8 .2
+ 9 .6 + 8.2
+15.4 +21.2

159,994
111,483
327,161
3,657,410
157,404

+12.8
+23.6
+19.8
+25.1
+24.4

-1 0 .1
+26.5
+ 9.7
+54.1
+39.1

60.6
63.1
52.6
59.4
77.1

41.7
39.2
29.5
35.9
51.9

93
159

14,649
17,843

+ 8.8 +18.7
+ 9.6 +15.3

264, 566
328,444

+15.3 +22.4
+14.8 +33.9

40.0
53.4

25.1
33.6

182

12,904

60

9,102

128
67

7,003
6,194

1,771

266,298

75

6,844

38

13,768

+ 9.8

+ 3.7 -1 7 .4

196, 593

+ 5 .9

-2 2 .5

39.4

21.0

+ 6.9

+ 2.9

181,805

+10.2

+ 7.5

78.9

50.3

+ 8 .8 - 3 .5
+12.2 +11.3

124,954
124, 241

+28.9 + 6 .4
+21.1 +32.8

63.0
104.3

40.0
87.5

- 3 .8

5,135,608

+2 .3

48.2

31.3

+ 8.9 +25.3

+ 8.1

116, 275

+18.2 +32.3

27.7

21.7

+ 9.3

338,193

+11.3 +12.6

70.6

53.5

-.7

+15.9

TREND OF EMPLOYMENT

407

T a b l e 1 .— C O M P A R IS O N OF E M P L O Y M E N T A N D P A Y R O L L S IN M A N U F A C T U R IN G

E S T A B L IS H M E N T S IN JU N E 1933 W IT H M A Y 1933 A N D JU N E 1932-Continued

Industry

M a c h in e r y , n o t in c lu d ­
in g t r a n s p o r t a t i o n
e q u ip m e n t— Continued
Electrical machinery,
apparatus, and sup­
plies.............................. .
Engines, turbines, trac­
tors, and water wheels.
Foundry and machineshop p ro d u c ts............
Machine tools...................
R a d i o s a n d phono­
g ra p h s..........................
Textile machinery and
parts...... ........... ...........
Typewriters and sup­
plies...................................
N o n ferro u s m e ta ls a n d
their p ro d u c ts__________
Aluminum
manufac­
tures....... .........................
Brass, bronze, and cop­
per p roducts..............
Clocks and watches and
time-recording devices
Jewelry_________________
Lighting equipment____
Silverware and plated
ware__________________
Smelting and refining—
copper, lead, and zinc..
Stamped and enameled
ware............ .....................
T ra n sp o rta tio n
e q u ip ­
m e n t ___________ ________ _
Aircraft..............................
Automobiles____________
Cars, electric and steam
railroad.............. .............
Locomotives____________
Shipbuilding___________
R ailroad repair s h o p s____
Electric railroad________
•Steam railroad__________
L u m b e r a n d allied p ro d­
u c ts _______ _______________
Furniture_______________
Lumber:
Millwork___________
Sawmills___________
Turpentine and rosin.. .
S to n e , clay, a n d glass
p r o d u c t s ................... .........
Brick, tile, and terra
cotta__________________
Cement_________ _____ _
Glass_____________ ______
Marble, granite, slate,
and other p ro d u cts...
Pottery________________ _

Index num­
Employment
Pay-roll totals
bers (average
Estab­
1926=100)
lish­
ments
report­
Percent of
Percent of
ing in
change
change
both
Number
Amount
M ay
E m ­ P a y­
on pay
of pay roll
and
June
(1 week)
M ay
June ploy­ roll
June roll June M ay
ment
1933
totals
to
1932 June 1933
to
1932
1933
June to June
June toJune
1933
1933
1933
1933

282

90,885

+ 5.3

+10.9

-1 0 .5

49.8

36.6

91

16, 210

+10.0

-5 .8

335,388

+16.7

+ 1.1

42.4

27.9

1,044
145

100,837
10, 753

+ 8.2
+12.1

-.9
-9 .6

1, 788, 699
213,708

+18.7
+30.3

+ 4.6
-.5

46.5
31.2

27.3
20.2

29

11,313

+13.3 +44.1

177,796

+ 5.2 +21.3

92.1

65.5

50

7,688

+15.6 +20.2

161,059

+40.8 +72.3

62.5

47.2

17

8,000

- 2 .0

-8 .3

122,946

+ .3

54.0

31.7

599

79,667

+ 7.3

+ 3.9

1,416,606

+12. 6 +11.9

55.8

38. 5

27

5,319

+ 5.7 +11.8

93, 849

+12.1 +47.7

52.2

35.3

177

26,187

+11.9 +11.2

498,639

+19.5 +30.9

57.7

40.2

27
133
51

7, 327
7, 340
2,741

+12.0
+ 6.5
+ 7.2

99, 002
128,826
50, 652

+21.8
+ 6.9
+14.2

- 8 .4
(0
- 5 .7

40.0
36.0
64.8

23.9
22.9
47.8

- 5 .9
+ .6
- 5 .4

+ 4.2

51

7,311

+ 1.9

-.7

130,135

+ 5.6

+ 1.9

60.2

37.0

44

9,932

+ .6

- 6 .1

194,047

+ 6 .0

- 3 .7

56.8

38.6

89

13, 510

+ 7.6

+ 8.6

221,456

+10.8

+ 6 .9

67.1

43.4

407
24
234

227,422
6, 652
192, 625

+ 6.4 -1 5 .4
+ 2 .6 +27.8
+ 8 .0 -1 3 .4

5,166,260
183, 909
4, 439, 784

+ 5.7 -1 2 .6
+ .3 +15.1
+ 7.1
- 8 .1

49.9
251.2
52.8

39. 0
233.1
42.1

42
11
96

4,170
1,491
22,484

-1 3 .3 -2 0 .0
+ 7.8 -4 1 .1
+ 1.0 -3 1 .5

62, 817
28,062
451, 688

-1 9 .7 -3 3 .6
+ 9 .9 -5 2 .4
+ ( 2) -4 0 .2

15.2
10.6
57.5

7.5
6.8
39.6

899
391
508

86,965
20,123
66, 842

- 6 .8
- 9 .2
- 6 .6

2,004,699
500, 672
1, 504, 027

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

45. 0
63.0
43.6

34.9
49.8
33.7

1,541
447

126,789
44, 532

+13. 0 + 5.6
+10.8 +12.8

1,634,603
599,300

+20. 7 + 3 .3
+17.8 +16.7

39.9
48.5

21. 6
25.8

460
610
24

18,410
62,480
1,367

+ 9.6
-.5
+15. 1 +3.1
+12.7 +14.5

264,307
754,322
16, 674

+ 16.1
+25.1
+ 6.4

- 5 .4
-.5
+ 5 .2

36.3
36.9
50.4

21.1
19.2
38.3

1,311

95,362

+11.7

+ 5.7

1,593,451

+16.8

+ 3.0

46.0

27.8

663
124
191

18,484
15, 336
41,479

+14.5 - 7 .0
+14.9 + 2.9
+10.0 +22.1

221,885
260, 439
786,738

+27.4 -1 0 .9
+ 19.0 -1 2 .0
+13.2 +20.5

27.7
42.7
70.6

12.3
23.4
52.9

216
117

4,850
15, 213

+17.2
+ 5.1

91, 246
233,143

+24.8 -1 6 .5
+11.6 +10.4

38.4
61.8

22.7
34.9

1 No change.
2 Less than one tenth of 1 percent.


https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis

-1 6 .4 $1, 881, 544

-2 .6
- 1 .0
- 2 .7

- 8 .8
+ 6.4

408

MONTHLY LABOR R E V IE W

T a b l e 1 . — C O M P A R IS O N OF E M P L O Y M E N T A N D P A Y R O L L S IN M A N U F A C T U R I N G

E S T A B L IS H M E N T S IN JU N E 1933 W I T H M A Y 1933 A N D JU N E 1932— Continued

Employment
Estab­
lish­
ments
report­
Percent of
ing in
change
both
Number
M ay
on
pay
and
June
June roll June M ay
1932
to
1933
1933
June to June
1933
1933

Industry

Leather and its m a n u ­
factures______ _____
Boots and shoes............
Leather......................... .
Paper and printing--------Boxes, paper----------------Paper and pulp-----------Printing and publish­
ing:
Book and jo b .-- -Newspapers and
periodicals_______

Percent of
change
Amount
of pay roll
(1 week)
June 1933

+ 4.4 +13.2 $2,297,320
+ 2.9 + 10.1 1, 753, 439
+10.0 +26.7
543, 881

483
330
153

139,164
111, 861
27, 303

1,934
310
389

211,370
21, 427
78, 527

+1.9
+ 6 .6
+ 3.4

-1 .3
+ 6.5
+ 5.5

Index num­
bers (average
1926=100)

Pay-roll totals

M ay
to
June
1933

Em­
June ploy
ment
1932
to June
1933

Pay­
roll
totals

+13. 0 +27.9
+11.6 +24.0
+17.4 +40.3

78.9
78.5
80.3

55.5
52.7
65.4

78.9
73.6
77.3

61.9
61.4
54.1

5,034,286
376,913
1,463, 641

+ 2.7
+10.0
+ 7.7

- 8 .6
+ 6 .2
+ 8.4

764

43,403

+ 1.1

-1 0 .3

1,085,045

+ .6

-1 6 .9

67.4

52.2

465

68,013

-.3

- 1 .5

2,108,687

- . 1 -1 2 .3

96.2

77.5

1,101
110

152,788
21, 461

+ 2.1 +13.9
+ 6.7 +12.8

3,428,132
518,131

+5 .6 + 6.8
+ 8 .6 +12.2

78. 9
94.3

64.5
69.1

112
45
3C
202
350
131

3, 073
6,859
3,298
6, 078
16,446
50,183

+20.4 +17.2
- 5 .0
+ 1.3
+ 5.8
+ .5
-3 4 .2 +36.3
+ 6.7 + 5.7
+ 1.7
(>)

33,150
139, 574
66,932
74, 723
371, 531
1, 383, 551

+26.3 + 4.9
—6. 4
+ 4.7
ò
+ 9 .0
-2 4 .0 +11.2
+ 7.7 . + .8
- 8 .1
+ 1.7

27.9
67.0
75. 4
44. 3
76.4
64.7

27.7
66.1
51. 2
27.9
62.3
54.6

23
98

30, 303
15,087

+ 5.4 +65.8
+ 3.8 + 4 .0

516,631
323,909

+10.4 +66.2
- 8 .1
+ 5.6

154.9
99.5

130.1
83.2

Rubber products------------Rubber boots and shoes.
Rubber goods, other
than boots, shoes, tires,
and inner tubes-----Rubber tires and inner
tubes.......................... -

153
9

80,813
8,965

+11. 7 + 4.1
+ 6.1 -2 4 .4

1,785,260
157,107

+6 .5
+ 1.7

70.4
42.2

54.4
36.0

99

20,022

+ 8 .0

+ 9.4

369, 863

+17.5 +14.6

88.1

61.3

45

51,826

+14.7

+ 8.8

1, 258,290

+26.4

+ 4.3

71.6

56.2

Tobacco m anufactures.
Chewing and smoking
tobacco and snuff-----Cigars and cigarettes—

237

53,025

+3 .3

-3 .8

677,935

+3. 7

- 9 .4

68.4

50.3

32
205

10,155
42, 870

+ 3.9
+ 3.2

+ .8
- 4 .5

136, 394
541, 541

+ 1 .6
+ 4.1

- 1 .9
-1 0 .5

90.1
65.6

71.9
47.7

2,802,711

+ 7.0

+ 9.2 50,408,132

+10.8

+ 9.7

62.8

43.1

Chemicals and allied
products______________ Chemicals________ Cottonseed, oil, cake,
and meal___________
Druggists’ preparations.
Explosives_____________
Fertilizers_____________
Paints and varnishes—
Petroleum refining------Rayon and allied prodSoap..................................

Total, 89 industries. 17,952

+22.5
+10.6

1 N o change.

Per Capita Earnings in Manufacturing Industries
P e r capita weekly earnings in June 1933 for each of the 89 manu­
facturing industries surveyed by the Bureau of Labor Statistics and
for all industries combined, together with the percents of change in
June 1933 as compared with May 1933 and June 1932, are shown in
table 2.
These earnings must not be confused with full-time weekly rates of
wages. They are per capita weekly earnings, computed by dividing
the total amount of pay roll for the week by the total number of
employees (part-time as well as full-time workers).


https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis

409

TEEND OF EMPLOYMENT

T a b l e 2 —P E R C A P IT A W E E K L Y 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

JU N E 1933 A N D C O M P A R IS O N W IT H M A Y 1933 A N D JU NE 1932

Industry

Food and kindred products:
B a k in g ..__________ ____________
.
Beverages_______________ ______ ______
Butter__________________ ___________
Confectionery__________________________ _____
Flour______________________________
Ice cream_____ ____ _______ _________
Slaughtering and meat packing____________ . .
Sugar, beet_________________ ____________________
Sugar refining, cane_________ __________
Textiles and their products:
Fabrics:
Carpets and rugs____________________________ ___________
Cotton goods_____ _____ ____ __________________ _____
Cotton small wares_____________________________ ____
Dyeing and finishing textiles___ . . . __________ .
Hats, fur-felt.
_____________
________
Knit goods_________________________________ . .
Silk and rayon goods____________________________
W oolen and worsted goods______________ _________________
Wearing apparel:
Clothing, m en’s............................................... ..............................
Clothing, wom en’s ___ ________ _______________________ .
Corsets and allied garments_______________________________
M en’s furnishings............................................... ...............
M illinery.. ______________________ _____ __________
Shirts and collars___________________ _________ _____
Iron and steel and their products, not including machinery:
Bolts, nuts, washers, and rivets____________________ _____ ____
Cast-iron pipe. . _____ _________________ . _______ _____
Cutlery (not including silver and plated cutlery) and edge tools.
Forgings, iron and steel___________________ ___________________
Hardware_______ _____________________ _____
Iron and steel______ _______________________
Plumbers’ supplies.. ________________________
Steam and hot-water heating apparatus and steam fittings
Stoves_______ . . . . _______ _____ . . .
Structural and ornamental metalwork___________ _
T in cans and other tin w a re ____________ _ _______ _
Tools (not including edge tools, machine tools, files, and saws)..
Wire work__ ________________________ ________
Machinery, not including transportation equipment:
Agricultural im plem ents... ___________________ _____ _______
Cash registers, adding machines, and calculating machines_____
Electrical machinery, apparatus, and supplies_______________
Engines, turbines, tractors, and water wheels . . ____________
Foundry and machine-shop products........ ........................ .......... ...
Machine tools_______________________
Radios and phonographs_________________ _____________ ____ _
Textile machinery and parts_________________________________ .
Typewriters and supplies........... ....................... ............ ........ ..........
Nonferrous metals and their products:
Aluminum manufactures. _ ___________________ ____ _________
Brass, bronze, and copper products______ __________ ______ _
Clocks and watches and time-recording devices_____ __________
Jewelry____ _________________________________________________
Lighting equipment________ ______ ___________________________
Silverware and plated ware______ ___________________________
Smelting and refining—copper, lead, and zinc__________________
Stamped and enameled ware_______________________ ____ _____
Transportation equipment:
Aircraft___ __________________________ ____ _ __________ . . .
Automobiles__________________________________________________
Cars, electric and steam railroad_______________________________
Locomotives_____ ____________ ____ _________ ______ _________
Shipbuilding . . __________________________________ __________
Railroad repair shops:
Electric railroad_________________ ______________ _____ _____ _
Steam railroad________________________________________________
Lumber and allied products:
Furniture_____ ____________ . . .
___ _ ______ ______
Lumber:
M illwork________ ________________________________________
Sawmills. ----------------- -----------------------------------------------------Turpentine and rosin ... ______________________________________


https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis

Per capita
weekly
earnings
in June
1933

Percent of change com­
pared with—
M a y 1933

June 1932

$21.17
29.05
20.51
12.46
19.92
25.35
20.17
20. 62
24. 28

+i.i
- 4 .6
+ .5

- 7 .3
+ 3 .5
-1 3 .8
-1 5 .9
- 8 .3
- 9 .8
- 5 .8
-1 7 .4
- 1 .3

17.55
11.11
15. 20
18.71
19. 24
12. 89
12.75
16.85

+11.4
+ 7.1
+ 2 .6
+ 3.9
+18.2
+ 2 .5
+ 4 .9
+11.2

+41.2
+15.9
+ 10.9
+ 7.4
+30. 3
+ 2 .0
+ 9 .0
+16.8

12. 72
14.26
14. 37
11.21
15.18
10. 39

+ 9 .6
- 6 .2
+ 1.3
+ 5.1
-.7
+ 8 .6

+13.8
-1 1 .9
+ 6 .4
- 5 .5
- 2 .1
+ 6.6

18.17
12.85
18. 39
18.44
14.97
18. 33
18. 59
18. 06
18.41
15. 24
19.97
17.84
20.06

+15.4
+ 1.5
+ 8 .3
+10.0
+10.7
+14.2
+ 7.8
+ 6 .0
+ 4.7
+2. 1
+ 3 .0
+18.5
+ 8 .0

+16.5
- 1 .9
+ 2.1
+16.4
+ 9 .0
+42.3
+14.8
+ 3 .2
+16.0
- 6 .0
+ 4.4
+10.3
+19.2

16. 99
24. 56
20. 70
20. 69
17. 74
19. 87
15.72
20.95
15.37

+ 8.6
+ 1.8
+ 5.2
+ 6 .0
+ 9 .7
+16.3
- 7 .1
+21.8
+ 6 .4

+ 5 .3
+13.5
+ 7 .6
+ 7 .0
+ 5 .2
+ 9 .8
-1 5 .7
+43.1
+ 9 .6

17.64
19.04
13.51
17. 55
18. 48
17. 80
19. 54
16. 39

+ 6 .0
+ 6 .8
+ 8 .7
+. 3
+ 6.6
+ 3.5
+ 5.5
+ 3 .0

+32.2
+17.5
- 3 .0
—. 6
-.i
+ 2.3
+ 2 .8
- 1 .4

27. 65
23. 05
15. 06
18.82
20.09

-2 . 2
-.9
- 7 .4
+ 1.9
-1 .0

—9. 8
+ 6 .2
-1 7 .2
-1 9 .3
-1 2 .7

24.88
22.50

- 1 .5
+ .8

- 9 .9
- 1 .2

13.46

+ 6 .3

+ 3.3

14. 36
12.07
12.20

+ 6 .0
+ 8 .6
- 5 .6

- 4 .7
- 4 .0
- 8 .1

+ 0 .5
- 2 .7
- 1 .8
- 4 .0
- 4 .0

410

MONTHLY LABOR R E V IE W

T a b l e 2 .—P E R C A P IT A W E E K L Y 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

JU N E 1933 A N D C O M P A R IS O N W IT H M A Y 1933 A N D JU N E 1932— Continued

Per capita
weekly
earnings
in June
1933

Industry

Stone, clay, and glass products:
Brick, tile, and terra cotta. - _______ ___________________________
C em en t..______ ______ ____ _______________________________ . .
G la ss _____________ ________ ________
P o t t e r y ...___ 1
.............. 1 ........... .................. .................
Leather and its manufactures:
Leather______ _______ ______________________ ________________
Paper and printing:

Explosives-*-..2_________ _______ _____ _

___________________

Soap . _______ .*_____________________________ _________ ____
Rubber products:
Rubber goods, other than boots, shoes, tires, and inner tubes__
Tobacco manufactures:

M ay 1933

June 1932

$12. 00
16.98
18.97
18. 81
IS. 33

+11.2
+ 3 .6
+ 3 .0
+ 6 .5
+ 6 .2

- 4 .1
—14. 6
—1. 7
-8 . 6
+ 3 .8

15. 68
19.92

+ 8 .5
+ 6 .8

+13.0
+11.0

17. 59
18. 64

+ 3 .2
+ 4.1

-. 1
+ 2 .5

25.00
31.00

-.5
+ .1

- 7 .3
-1 1 .3

Printing and publishing:
Chemicals and allied products:

Percent of change com ­
pared with—

24.14
10.79
20. 35
20.29
12.29
22. 59
27. 57
17. 05
21.47

+ 1.7
+ 5 .0
+ 3 .4
+ 8.4
+ 15. 5
+ 1.0
+ (')
+ 4 .8
+ 1 .7

-.6
-1 0 .4
- 1 .6
+ 6.3
-1 7 .9
-4 . 5
-8 .0
-. 1
- 1 2 .0

17. 52
18.47
24.28

+ 4 .2
+ 8 .8
+10.3

+34.5
+ 4 .6
- 4 .2

13.43
12. 63

-2 . 3
+ .9

-3 . 2
- 6 .2

17. 99

2 + 3 .5

2+.4

1 Less than one tenth of 1 percent.
2 Weighted.

General Index Numbers of Employment and Pay-Roll Totals in Manufacturing
Industries
G e n e r a l index numbers of employment and pay-roll totals in
manufacturing industries by months, from January 1926 to June 1933,
together with average indexes for each of the years from 1926 to 1932,
and for the 6-month period, January to June 1933, inclusive, are
shown in the following table. In computing these general indexes
the index numbers of each of the separate industries are weighted
according to their relative importance in the total. Following this
table are two charts prepared from these general indexes showing
the course of employment and pay rolls from January 1926 to June
1933, inclusive.


https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis

411

TREND OF EMPLOYMENT
T

able

IN D E X E S OP E M P L O Y M E N T A N D P A Y R O L L S IN M A N U F A C ­
T U R IN G IN D U S T R IE S , J A N U A R Y 1926 T O JU NE 1933

3 .— G E N E R A L

[12-month average, 1926=100]

Employment

Pay rolls

M onth
1926 1927 1928 1929 1930 1931 1932 1933 1926
January_____
February___
M arch______
A pril________
M a y ________
June........ .......
July_________
August______
S eptem ber...
October..........
Novem ber__
December___
Average.. .

100.4
101. 5
102.0
101.0
99. 8
99. 3
97.7
98. 7
100. 3
100. 7
99. 5
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
98.4
95.0
92.3

90. 7
90.9
90. 5
89.9
88. 6
86. 5
82. 7
81.0
80.9
79.9
77.9
76.6

74. 6
75.3
75.9
75.7
75.2
73.4
71.7
71.2
70.9
68.9
67.1
66.7

64.8
65.6
64. 5
62. 2
59.7
57.5
55.2
56.0
58.5
59.9
59.4
58.3

1927 1928

56.6 98.0 94.9
57. 5 102.2 100.6
55. 1 103.4 102. 0
56.0 101.5 100.8
58.7 99.8 99.8
62.8 99. 7 97.4
95.2 93.0
98.7 95.0
99.3 94.1
102.9 95.2
99.6 91.6
99.8 93. 2

100. 0 96.4 93.8 97.5 84.7 72.2 60. 1 157.8 100. 0

89.6
93.9
95. 2
93.8
94. 1
94. 2
91. 2
94.2
95.4
99.0
96.1
97.7

1929 1930 1931 1932

1933

94.5
101.8
103.9
104. 6
104.8
102.8
98. 2
102. 1
102.6
102.4
95.4
92.4

35.8
36.4
33.4
34.9
38.9
43.1

88. 1
91. 3
91.6
90.7
88.6
85.2
77.0
75.0
75.4
74.0
69.6
68.8

63. 7
68. 1
69.6
68.5
67.7
63.8
60.3
59.7
56. 7
55.3
52. 5
52.2

48. 6
49. 6
48. 2
44.7
42.5
39.3
36.2
36.3
38. 1
39.9
38.6
37.7

96. 5 94.5 100.5 81.3 61.5 41.6 137.1

1 Average for 6 months.

Time Worked in Manufacturing Industries in June 1933
R e p o r t s as to working time in June were received from 13,848
establishments in 89 manufacturing industries. Three percent of
these establishments were idle, 56 percent operated on a full-time
basis, and 42 percent worked on a part-time schedule.
An average of 90 percent of full-time operation in June was shown
by reports received from all the operating establishments included
in table 4. The establishments working part time in June averaged
77 percent of full-time operation.
A number of establishments supplying data concerning plant­
operating time have reported full-time operations, but have qualified
the hours reported with a statement that, while the plant was op­
erating full time, the work in the establishment was being shared
and the employees were not working the full-time hours operated by
the plant.


https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis

412

MONTHLY LABOR R E V IE W

MANUFACTURING INDUSTRIES.
MONTHLY INDEXES 1926-1933
M ONTHLY

AVERAGE!

192.6=100.

EMPLOYMENT

05

00

95

90

1930 '
65

80

75

70

65

60

55

50

45

40

35
JA N .

FEB.


https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis

MAR.

APR.

MAY

JUNE

JULY

AUG.

SEPT

OCT.

NOV

DEC.

413

TREND OF EMPLOYMENT

MANUFACTURING
MONTHLY

M ONTHLY
10 5

.•>

.V-

:i r
u

100

192.7

35 V *
/

r '

'l 9 Z 8 "

f- -

90

/ I9 3 0

INDUSTRIES.

INDEXES
AVER AG E:

1 9 26-1933.
1 9 2 .6 = 1 0 0 .

PAY-ROLL TOTALS.
''v
¡*3 ZL*
—
\
.*■
\\
//
\
\ /
V /I 9 2
V \
& A
/
V -X
\\
\
"X \ / /
""\ \\ \
V
\
-

105

100

95

90

V

\

85

\

85

\
\

60

80

\
75

\\
V--—-s.

\

V

/

/

75

N

1331

70

65

V

\

/
\

70

‘
\

\

65

\

\

60

"N

60

\

*‘\.
\

55

55

\ *N
—.

" \

1332.

50

V

50

V.**••

**
*
45

45

N
40

40

\

1333

**

\

35

35
JAN

MAY

FEB.


https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis

33.+

JUNE

JULY

AUG.

SEPT.

OCT.

NOV.

DEC.

414

MONTHLY LABOR R EV IEW

T a b l e 4 .— P R O P O R T IO N OF F U L L T IM E W O R K E D IN M A N U F A C T U R I N G IN D U S T R IE S

B Y E S T A B L IS H M E N T S R E P O R T IN G IN JU NE 1933

Percent of estab­
lishments oper­
ating—

Establishments
reporting
Industry
Total
number

Percent
idle

Food and kindred products___________
Baking______________________________
Beverages____________________________
Butter_______________________________
Confectionery________________________
Flour________________________________
Icecream ______________ ____________
Slaughtering and meat packing______
Sugar, beet___________ ____ - ........ ........

2,482
764
288
249
270
388
261
204
48
10

Textiles and their products____________
Fabrics:
Carpets and rugs...............................
Cotton goods______ ____ ___ _____
Cotton small wares_______________
Dyeing and finishing textiles_____

2,543
15
616
96
142
19
381
219
218
293
296
29
54
80
85

3
17

Knit goods_______________________
Silk and rayon goods_____ _______
Woolen and worsted goods- _____
Wearing apparel:
Clothing, men’s . . ............... ..............
Clothing, women’s . ____ ________
M en’s furnishings________________
Millinery................................... ........
Shirts and collars_________ ______
Iron and steel and their products,
not including m achinery___________
Cast-iron p ip e ... ________________ . .
Cutlery (not including silver and
plated cutlery) and edge tools_______

1,032
56
33

0)
0)

Part
time

All oper­ Estab­
lish­
ating es­
ments
tablish­
operating
ments
part time

73
80
84
78
40
68
71
72
96
90

26
19
14
21
59
32
28
28
2
10

94
97
98
97
83
91
95
97
100
98

79
82
79
85
72
73
84
88
80
83

4

74

22

96

83

20
1
1
2

47
84
63
67
68
79
67
84

33
15
36
31
32
19
29
15

88
98
93
96
95
97
95
98

71
88
79
87
76
84
83
87

70
61
59
70
63
74

26
22
41
24
35
25

95
93
91
97
93
96

80
73
79
88
80
84

34
29
15

62
71
61

82
85
70

72
78
63

1
(>)

Full
time

Average percent of
full time reported
by—

3
1
1
1
2

2
5
1

6
3
1
4
24

106
36
60
136
53

2
10

37
22
25
40
55

62
78
73
50
45

82
79
78
81
89

71
73
70
67
75

80
131

3
4

21
37

76
60

69
84

60
73

131
54

2
6

31
61

66
33

84
94

77
83

108
48

1

24
42

75
58

80
88

73
80

1,325
49

1

31
29

68
71

80
82

70
74

63

37

89

70

202

1

24

76

80

73

72
792
115
24
32
9

3
1
3

22
33
23
50
41
22

75
66
75
50
59
78

79
78
79
91
91
77

73
67
73
82
82
69

Nonferrous metals and their products.
Aluminum manufactures_____________
Brass, bronze, and copper products___
Clocks and watches and time-record-

487
19
138

1

36
58
34

63
42
66

85
91
86

76
76
79

Jewelry__ ___________________________
Lighting equipment__________________
Silverware and plated ware _________

20
113
42
48

20
31
21
33

80
66
76
65

72
80
82
83

65
71
76
74

Hardware. ________ _____________ . . .
Iron and steel_____ ____ _____________
Steam and hot-water heating apparatus and steam fittings______________
Stoves _______________ ____________
Structural and ornamental metalwork________ ______ _______________
Tin cans and other tinware__________
Tools (not including edge tools,
machine tools, flies, and saws)_______
Machinery, n o t including transportation equipm ent ______. . . _______

1

Cash registers, adding machines, and
Electrical machinery, apparatus, and
supplies____________________________
Engines, turbines, tractors, and water
wheels. .............. ...... .........................
Foundry and machine sh op p rod u cts..
Machine tools_________________ ____ _

1 Less than one half of 1 percent.


https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis

30

3
2
2

415

TREND OF EMPLOYMENT

T a b l e 4 —P R O P O R T IO N OP F U 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

B Y E S T A B L IS H M E N T S R E P O R T IN G IN JU NE 1933—Continued

Percent of estab­
lishments oper­
ating—

Establishments
reporting
Industry
Total
number

Percent
idle

Full
time

Part
time

Average percent of
full time reported
b y—
All oper­ Estab­
lish­
ating es­
ments
tablish­
operating
ments
part time

Nonferrous metals and their products—Continued.
Smelting and refining—copper, lead,
Stamped and enameled ware________
Transportation equipm ent............. ......
A utom obiles.................... ............ ............
Cars, electric and steam railroad_____
Shipbuilding............................................
Railroad repair shops__________________
Steam railroad............. ................... ........

35
72
291
23
137
35
7
89
725
334
391

83
35

17
64

97
88

82
81

1

51
57
48
14
57
66

45
43
45
74
43
33

90
95
92
75
84
94

78
87
80
70
63
81

1

44
65
26

56
35
73

89
94
84

80
84
79

1
5
7
11

0)

Lumber and allied products _________
Furniture....................... ..........................
Lumber:
Mill work _______________________
Sawmills________________ _______ _

1,110
347

2
2

46
47

52
51

87
87

75
74

305
437
21

1
2

39
50
48

60
49
52

85
88
92

75
75
83

Stone, clay, and glass products.. ___
Brick, tile, and terra cotta___________
C em en t..____ _______________________
Glass________ _____________________
Marble, granite, slate, and other
p ro d u c ts .._________ _______________
P o t t e r y ................ .......... ....................... .

698
197
74
144

18
40
15
8

47
26
77
78

35
34
8
14

89
83
97
97

73
70
72
78

183
100

13
5

39
33

48
62

86
82

75
73

Leather and its m anufactures________
Boots and sh oes..____ _______________

357
240
117

2
3

55
50
66

43
47
34

92
91
93

82
82
81

Paper and printing____________________
Boxes, paper_________ _____ _________
Paper and p ulp ______________________
Printing and publishing:
Book and jo b __ __ _____________
Newspapers and periodicals _____

1,622
261
305

1
1
3

54
40
53

45
59
45

91
88
88

80
79
74

46
77

54
23

89
97

80
88

Chemicals and allied products________
Chemicals. . . _ . . . ________________
Cottonseed, oil, cake, and m e a l.. ___
Druggists’ preparations-. -----------------

838
80
58
29
12
156
310
95
11
87

2
1
10

67
73
55
55
17
69
69
69
82
62

32
26
34
45
83
30
31
27
9
38

95
97
93
93
84
94
95
96
98
93

83
87
82
84
81
79
83
88
80
82

127
8

1

48
38

51
63

90
91

80
85

88
31

1

45
58

53
42

88
96

77
86

211

Fertilizers . . ._ ____________________
Paints and varnishes_________________
Petroleum refining___________________
R ayon and allied products___________
Rubber products______________________
Rubbergoods, other than boots, shoes,
tires, and inner tubes. .............. .......
Tobacco m anufactures________________
Chewing and smoking tobacco and
Cigars and cigarettes.------------------------Total, 89 industries.._____ _______
i Less than one half of 1 percent,


https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis

651
405

(0
(>)

1
1
3
9

6

35

60

84

75

32
179

7

59
30

41
63

88
83

71
75

13,848

3

56

42

90

77

416

MONTHLY LABOR R EV IEW

Employment in Nonmanufacturing Industries in June 1933

HE general improvement in the employment situation between
May and June 1933 was also reflected in the nonmanufacturing
industries surveyed monthly by the Bureau of Labor Statistics.
Increased employment was reported in 13 of the 15 nonmanufacturing
industries appearing in the following table and increased pay rolls
were reported in 10 industries. Data for the building-construction
industry are not presented here but are shown in more detail under the
section “ Building construction.” The increases in employment in
June 1933 in most instances were contrary to the May-June trend in
the preceding years for which data are available, and, while two indus­
tries reported declines in employment, the decrease (8.5 percent)
reported in June in one of these industries (anthracite mining) was not
as pronounced as in previous years while the decrease in employment
in the other (telephone and telegraph) was only 1.3 percent.
The most pronounced gains in employment and pay roll over the
month interval in these 15 nonmanufacturing industries were seasonal
increases in the canning and preserving industry, which reported the
usual sharp May to June pick-up with the beginning of its active
season. The quarrying and nonmetallic mining industry also reported
substantial increases in both employment and pay rolls, which were
partly seasonal. The bituminous-coal mining industry showed
practically no change in employment and the anthracite mining
industry reported a decrease in number of workers. Both of these
industries, however, reported very substantial gains in total weekly
earnings between May and June due to sharply increased production.
Four of these fifteen nonmanufacturing industries, crude petroleum
producing, bituminous-coal mining, dyeing and cleaning, and canning
and preserving reported more employees on the pay roll in June 1933
than in June of the preceeding year.
In the following table are presented employment and pay-roll data
for the nonmanufacturing industries surveyed, exclusive of building
construction.

T


https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis

TRE N D

417

OF EM P LO YM E N T

T a b l e 1 — C O M P A R IS O N OF E M P L O Y M E N T A N D P A Y R O L L S IN N O N M A N U F A C T U R ­
I N G E S T A B L IS H M E N T S IN JU N E 1933 W IT H M A Y 1933 A N D JU N E 1932

Industrial groups

Pay-roll totals
Employment
Estab­
lish­
ments
Percent of
Percent of
report­
change
change
Amount of
ing in Number
pay roll
both
on pay
(1
week),
M ay roll, June M ay to June
M a y to June
1932 to June 1933 June 1932 to
1933
and
June
June
June
June
1933
1933
1933
1933
1933

Coal mining:
160
Anthracite______ ______
B itum inous-. ----------- . 1,480
278
Metalliferous mining_______
Quarrying and nonmetallic
1,135
mining _ ----------------256
Crude petroleum producingPublic utilities:
Telephone and telegraph- 8,286
Power and lig h t-.
_ 3,181
Electric - railroad and
motor-bus operation
572
and maintenance - Trade:
3,
025
Wholesale_____________
Retail______________ --- 17, 879
Hotels (cash payments only)1 2,656
818
Canning and’ preserving-----945
Laundries -- - . - ----------337
Dyeing and cleaning... . . Banks, brokerage, insurance,
4, 320
and real estate____ . . . . .

53,984
185, 709
21, 509

- 8 .5 -2 5 .5 $1, 362,059
+ •1 + 1.3 2,311, 622
405, 531
+ 5 .0 - 2 .2

Index num­
bers, June
1933 (average
1929=100)
Em­
ploy­
ment

Pay­
roll
totals

+14.3
+ 8 .4
+ 7.6

-8 . 3
+ 7 .0
- 9 .0

39.5
61.3
31.5

34.3
29.2
18.3

32,149
23,119

+ 8 .9
+ 1 .8

- 4 .4
+ 7 .0

490, 314
625,436

+15.2
- 2 .5

- 8 .3
- 9 .4

47.3
58. 0

27.5
40. 6

249, 412
195, 665

- 1 .3
+ .4

-1 3 .4
- 7 .1

6,499, 606
5, 563,489

- 2 .8
~ ( 2)

-1 8 .9
-1 3 . 2

69.2
77. 3

66.6
69.9

- . 4 -1 7 .4

133, 213

+ .3

- 9 .4

3, 534, 593

69.3

58.0

77, 536
363, 296
132,178
43,145
55,495
11, 858

+ 2.3
+ 1 .7
+ 2 .5
+22.2
+ 3.3
+ 4.5

- 1 .7
- 1 .4
- 5 .6
+ •2
- 6 .2
+ .6

1, 984, 691
6,891, 677
1,640, 566
494,176
815, 970
202, 981

-.3
+ 1.8
+ 1.1
+ 15. 3
+ 4.1
+ 5 .2

-1 3 .4
-1 1 .3
-1 8 .0
-9 . 4
-1 7. 3
-1 3 .8

75.7
78.3
73.6
55. 6
76.0
85.6

57.3
60. 5
52. 3
36. 7
56. 7
56.7

164,899

3 + 1.0

3-.7

5,351,127

8+1.3 3- 6 .3

3 97. 4

3 84.7

1 The additional value of board, room, and tips cannot be computed.
2 Less than one tenth of 1 percent.
3 Weighted.

Per capita weekly earnings in June 1933 for 15 nonmanufacturing
industries included in the Bureau’s monthly _trend-of-employment
survey, together with the percents of change in June 1933 as com­
pared with May 1933 and June 1932, are given in the table following.
These per capita weekly earnings must not be confused with full-time
weekly rates of wages; they are per capita weekly earnings computed
by dividing the total amount of pay roll for the week by the total
number of employees (part-time as well as full-time workers).
T a b l e 2 —P E R

C A P IT A W E E K L Y E A R N IN G S IN 15 N O N M A N U F A C T U R I N G IN D U S ­
T R IE S IN JU NE 1933 A N D C O M P A R IS O N W IT H M A Y 1933 A N D JU NE 1932
Per
capita
weekly
Industrial group

Coal mining:

Public utilities:

Trade:

Banks, brokerage, insurance, and real estate,. - ------ - - -

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

i The additional value of board, room, and tips cannot be computed.


https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis

Percent of change
June 1933 com ­
pared with—

in
June
1933

M ay
1933

$25. 23
12. 45
18. 85
15. 25
27. 05

+24.9
+ 8.3
+2. 4
+ 5 .7
-4.-2

-f-22. 9
+ 5.5
- 6 .9
- 4 .1
-1 5 .4

26. 06
28.43
26. 53

- 1 .5
-.4
-.7

- 6 .4
- 6 .6
- 8 .8

25. 60
18.97
12.41
11.45
14. 70
17.12
32. 97

- 2 .6
+. 1
- 1 .4
- 5 .7
+ .8
+• 6
2 + .3

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

2 Weighted.

June
1932

418

M O N T H L Y L A B O R R E V IE W

Indexes of Employment and Pay-Roll Totals for Nonmanufacturing Industries
I n d e x numbers of employment and pay-roll totals for 1 5 nonmanuiacturmg industries are presented in the following table. These
index numbers show the variation in employment and pay rolls by
months, fiom January 1930 to June 1933, in all nonmanufacturing
industries with the exception of the laundry, dyeing and cleaning,
and the banks, brokerage, insurance, and real-estate industries for
which information over the entire period is not available. The
Bureau has secured data concerning employment and pay rolls for the
index base year 1929 from establishments in these industries and has
computed index numbers for those months for which data are available
from the Bureau’s files. These indexes are shown in this tabulation

IN D E X E S OP E M P L O Y M E N T A N D P A Y R O L L S F O R N O N M A N T J F A f’TTTRT'vr'
J U N E S19^I1ES’ J A N U A R Y T O D E C E M B E R 1930, 1931, A N D 1932, A N D J A N U A R Y TO

T able 3 .

[12-month average, 1929=100)
Anthracite mining
M onth

Employment

Bituminous-coal mining

Pay rolls

Employment

Pay rolls

1930 1931 1932 1933 1930 1931 1932 1933 1930 1931 1932 1933 1930 1931
1932 1933
January___ . . . . .
February_______
M arch__________
April____________
M a y _____ _____
June_____
July_____________
August______ _ _
September . . .
October______ __
Novem ber______
December_______
Average___

102.1
106.9
82.6
84. 1
93.8
90.8
91.6
80.2
93.8
99.0
97.2
99.1

90.6
89.5
82.0
85.2
80.3
76. 1
65. 1
67.3
80.0
86.8
83.5
79.8

76.2
71. 2
73.7
70.1
66.9
53.0
44.5
49.2
55.8
63.9
62.7
62.3

52.5
58.7
54.6
51.6
43.2
39.5

105.8 89.3
121. 5 101.9
78.5 71.3
75.0 75.2
98.8 76.1
94.3 66.7
84.0 53.7
78.8 56.4
91.6 64.9
117.2 91.1
98.0 79.5
100.0 78.4

61.5
57.3
61. 2
72.0
58.0
37.4
34.5
41.4
47.0
66.7
51.0
56.2

43.2
56.8
48.8
37.4
30.0
34.3

93.9
91.5
88.8
85.9
82.4
78.4
76.4
77.0
80.4
81.3
81.1
81.2

80.8
77.4
75.2
65.5
62.6
60.5
58.6
59.4
62.4
67.0
69.4
70.0

69.8
69.3
67.6
63.7
61.2
61.3

101.4
102.1
86.4
81.7
77. 5
75.6
68.9
71.1
74.9
79.4
79.1
77.7

73.3
68.3
65.2
58.6
54.4
52.4
50.4
50.6
53.6
56.2
54.6
52.3

47.0
47.0
46.8
33.9
30.7
27.3
24.4
26.4
30.2
37.8
38.0
37. 7

36.1
37.2
30.7
26.6
26.9
29.2

93.4 80.5 62.5 150.0 95.3 75.4 53.7 ‘ 41.8 93.4 83.2 67.4 165.5 81.3
57.5 35.6 >31.1
Metalliferous mining

Jan u a ry............
February_______
M arch__________
April____________
M a y ____________
June____________
July____________
August__________
September______
October_________
N ovember______
December_______

102.5
102.4
98.6
94.4
90.4
88.4
88.0
89.2
90.5
91.8
92.5
92.5

95 7
92. 3
90. 9
89. 3
87. 5
84. 6
79. 0
78.1
77. 2
72. 8
70.1

68.3
65. 3
63. 5
63.9
62. 4
60. 0
56. 2
55. 8
55. 5
53. 8
52. 8
51. 2

49.3 32.4
46.9 31.5
45. 0 30.0
43.3 29.4
38.3 30.0
32. 2 31. 5
29. 5
28.6 —
29.3 _____
30.5 _____
31.9 ____
33.3

92.7
92.5
90.8
88.3
85.6
81.6
71.9
71.0
69.9
68.6
63.4
59.9

55.0
54.6
52.8
51.4
49.3
46.1
41.3
40.2
40.0
37.4
35. 1
34.3

Quarrying and nonmetallic mining
29.7
27.8
26.5
25.0
23.8
20. 1
16.9
16.5
17.0
18.0
18.7
18.7

18.1
17.8
17.4
16.4
17.0
18.3

79.6
79.8
83.0
87.4
90.8
90. S
89.9
89.3
87.7
84.7
78.3
70.2

64.4
66.6
70.0
76. 1
75.0
72.3
71.0
68.9
66.6
64.5
59.3
53.9

48.9
47.4
46.0
48.6
50.6
49.5
49.5
51.1
52.4
52.4
49.4
42.3

35.1
34.8
35. 1
39.3
43.4
47.3

71.9
73. 5
80.0
85. 4
90.2
90.9
85. 5
85.8
82.5
79.3
66.8
59.9

50. 4
54. 4
58. 2
62. 6
62. 3
60. 1
57. 3
55.1
51.2
48. 7
43. 3
36.9

30. 2
29. 6
28. 7
30 0
32. 3
30. 0
29 1
29 7
30. 5
30 1
27.1
22 .1

18 1
17 4
17 8
20 2
23. 8
27 5

Average___ 83.2 59.1 36.5 130.8 78.0 44.8 21.6 117.5 84.3 67.4 49.0
139.2 79.3 53.4 29.1 120.8
Crude petroleum producing
January_________
February_______
M arch__________
April____________
M a y ____________
June____________
July_____________
August__________
September______
October_________
Novem ber______
December_______
Average___

92.7
90. 8
89. 3
86. 8
89. 8
90. 2
89. 9
87. 7
85. 0
85. 2
83. 6
77. 4

74.8
73. 2
72. 2
69. 8
67.8
65. 0
65. 3
62.4
61. 2
60. 4
57. 6
58. 2

54.9 57.2
54. 4 57.0
51. 4 56. 5
54. 9 56. 8
54. 5 56.9
54. 2 58. 0
55. 4
57.4 _____
56.2
56. 8 —
56. 5 _____
57.2 —

94.0
88.6
91.3
86.6
85.4
87.1
88. 5
86.0
84.0
82.6
80.0
77.2

71.5
70.0
73.2
66.3
64.7
62.7
59.2
56.3
55.2
54.4
52.0
54.9

46.5 39.9 101.6
46.9 41.7 100.2
43.2 42.5 99.4
44. 5 40. 1 98.9
47.1 41.6 99.7
44.8 40.6 99.8
44.6
100. 0
42.9
98.8
41.9
96.8
42. 5
94.5
42.4
93.0
41.7 —
91.6

87.4 65.7 55.3 157.1 85.9 61.7 44.1 1 4 I . I

1 Average for 6 months


https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis

Telephone and telegraph
90.5
89.2
88.6
88.1
87.4
86.9
86.6
85.9
85.0
84. 1
83.5
83.1

83.0 74.6 105.1
82.0 73.9 101.9
81.7 73.2 105.8
81.2 72.3 103.4
80.6 70.1 103.2
79.9 69.2 103.4
79.1
106.6
78.1
102. 5
77.4
102. 2
76.2
100.9
75.5
97.9
74.8 —
101.3

96. 3
94.8
97.9
95.0
94.1
95.0
93.3
92.3
92.1
91. 6
89. 7
92.7

89.1 71. 7
89. 6 71. 9
88. 2 71. 6
83. 4 67 8
82. 8 68. 5
82.1 66. 6
79. 6
79.1
75. 9
75. 7
74. 3
73.5 _____

97.9 86.6 79.1 17 2.2 102.9 93.7 81.1 >69.7

TREND

419

OF E M P LO Y M E N T

'T atut' 3 —IN D E X E S OF E M P L O Y M E N T A N D P A Y R O L L S F O R N O N M A N U F A C T U R I N G
I N D U S T R IE S ,' J A N U A R Y TO D E C E M B E R 1930, 1931, A N D 1932, A N D J A N U A R Y T O

JU NE 1933—Continued
Electric-railroad and motor-bus operation
and maintenance 2

Power ana lignt
M onth

Pay rolls

Employment

Pay rolls

Employment

1930 1931 1932 1933 1930 1931 1932 1933 1930 1931 1932 1933 1930 1931 1932 1933
99.6
98.8
99. 7
100. 7
103.4
104. 6
July
________ 105.9
106.4
105.2
104.8
103.4
December_______ 103.2

99.2
97.8
96. 7
97.1
97.6
97.2
96.7
95.9
94.7
92.7
91.3
90.3

89.3
87.2
85.5
84.8
84.0
83.2
82.3
81.5
81.0
79.9
79.1
78.4

77.7
77.4
76.9
76.9
76.9
77.3

—

99.7 98.6
100.4 99.7
102.1 102.4
102.6 97.6
104.5 98.7
107.8 98.3
106.7 97.4
106.6 96.2
106.1 94.3
105.6 93.2
103.7 93.3
106.3 91. 2

88.4
86.0
85.4
82.4
84.2
80.5
78.7
76.6
74.7
74.4
73.2
73.2

73.0
71.6
71.9
69.4
69.9
69.9

___
______
—

97.1
95.1
94.4
95.2
95.2
94.8
95.3
92.9
91.8
91.0
89.3
88.8

86.9
86.6
86.4
86.8
85.9
85.3
85.6
84.8
84.0
82.7
81.5
79.9

79.5
78.9
77.6
78.0
76.9
76.5
75.6
74.1
73.5
72.3
71.8
71.4

70.6
70.4
69.8
69.5
69.1
69.3
______
—
—
—

97.8
95.7
95.4
97.1
96.0
97.0
95. 6
92.1
90. 5
88.9
87.7
88. 6

85.6
87.1
88.1
86. 6
85. 1
84.8
83.3
81.9
81. 2
79. 0
79.7
77. 8

75.4 60 9
74. 8 60. 6
73. 6 59. 4
71.8 58.1
72. 2 58. 2
70.2 58. 0
66. 4 —
63.8
62. 5
61. 5
61.7 —
61. 9 —

......

Average----- 103.0 95.6 83.0 177.2 104.3 96.7 79.8 >71.0 93.4 84.7 75.5 169. 8 93.5 83.4 68.0 159.2
Retail trade

Wholesale trade
F eb ru a ry ,. -- - M arch. -------- --April. . . . -------M a y ........- ............
June . . .
July-------------------September........ .
October-------------N ovem ber______
December_______
Average—

100. 0
98. 5
97. 7
97. 3
96. 8
96. 5
96.0
95. 0
94 8
94. 2
92. 6
92.0

89. 5
88. 2
87.4
87.4
87.1
87.1
86.8
86.5
86.1
85. 2
84. 1
83.7

81.8
80.9
79. 8
78.9
77.9
77 0

75.3 100.0
74.1 98.3
73.1 99.7
73.3 97.9
74.0 97.4
75.7 98.6

76.4
77.1
77.8
77.6
77.0 —

93.6
93.6
92.9
91.0
91.3

87.5
88.4
89. 1
85. 2
84.7
84.1

74.1
72.5
71.3
68.9
69.7
66.2

82.1
81.4
79.9
79.7
77.8

63.2
63.1
63.9
63.3
62.6

61.7
58.6
57.1
56.0
57.4
57.3

—

98.9
94.4
93.9
97.3
96.7
93.9

90.0
87.1
87.8
90. 1
89. 9
89.1

85.6
92.0
95.5
98.4
115.1

81.8
86.6
89. 8
90.9
106.2

84.3 76.9
80.5 73.4
81.4 71.4
81.6 78.6
80.9 77.0
79.4 78.3
74 fi
72.6
77.8 ____
81.3 ____
81.7 ____
95.2 —

99.7
96.0
95. 5
97.5
97.3
96.8
91 7
87.6
92.4
95.1
96.8
107.7

89.4
86.7
87.5
88.3
88.0
87.6
83. 3
80.3
83.5
84.6
85.4
94.1

78.0 62.7
73.7 58.4
73.4 55.1
72.7 60.4
71.1 59.5
68.2 60. 5
63. 3
60.7 ____
64.6 —
67.1 ____
66.9 —
73. 6 —

96.0 86.6 78.2 174.3 95.9 83.6 67.0 158.0 95.9 89.4 80.9 175.9 96.2 86.6 69.4 159.4
Canning and preserving

Hotels
January-------------February-----------M a rch .... April____ ____ __
M a y ......................
June____ -- - July_______ August--------------September______
October-------------N ovem ber______
December-----------

100. 4
102. 4
102. 4
100. 1
98.0
98.0

95.0
96.8
96.8
95.9
92.5
91.6

83.2
84.3
84.0
82.7
80. 1
78 0

73.8 100.3
73.8 103.8
72.4 104.4
71.9 100.3
71.9 98.4
73.6 98. 1

91.0
93.7
93.4
89.9
87.7
85.4

73.9
73.9
72.4
69.6
67.0
63.8

100. 1
97. 5
95. 2
93.5

Q2 8
90. 6
87.4
84.9
83.1

77. 6
77.0
75.4
74.3
73.2

98.6
97.1
95.5
93.6
91.5

83.8
81.9
79.7
77.1
75.4

59.6
59.1
58.6
57.5
56.6

55.7
55. €
53.5
51.7
51.8
52.1

46.1
45.7
49.7
74.8
65.7
83. t

48.9
48.3
53.0
59.6
56.0
70.6

185.7
246.6
164.7
96.7
61.6

142.9
180.1
108.1
60.8
40.7

35.0 34.1
37. 1 35.1
36.3 33.2
47.0 49.2
40.5 45.5
55.5 55.6
73 f
99.0
125.3 ______
81. 1
50.5
33.7 ........

50.3
51.5
50.8
72.6
66.9
81.5
112.7
172.0
214.8
140.0
82.9
57.4

46.1
48.6
50.3
57.1
56.0
58.6
74. i
104.7
129.4
77.6
48.1
36.9

31.8 24.8
32.7 25.9
31.9 24. 2
37.9 33. 5
36.0 31.8
40. 5 36.7
47.5
65.6
75.1 ______
51.8 ______
34.4 ______
25.6

Average----- 99.2 91.7 79.0 172.9 98.5 85.4 64.5 153.5 103.9 80.9 59.5 142.1 96.1 65.6 42.6 129.5
Dyeing and cleaning

Laundries

Employment

Pay rolls

Employment

Pay rolls

B anks, brokerage,
insurance, and real
estate
E m ploy­
ment

Pay rolls

1931 1932 1933 1931 1932 1933 1931 1932 1933 1931 1932 1933 1932 1933 1932 1933
90.5
90.0
89.5
90.5
April........... .
M a y _________ - 90.3
91.0
91.8
90.2
89.3
88.1
86.2
N ovem ber__
December_______ 85.3
January_________

84.7
82.9
82.0
82.0
81.4
81.0
80.3
78.9
78.6
77.5
76.2
75.9

75.4
74.4
73.0
73.4
73.5
76.0

86.6
85.6
85.6
86.8
86.5
87.1
87.4
84.6
84.1
81.8
78.9
77.4

76.4
73.3
71.6
71.4
70.6
68.6
66.3
63.9
62.9
61.2
59.1
58.7

57.9
55.5
52.9
54.0
54.5
56.7

88.9
87.4
88.0
95.7
96.7
99.0
98.6
93.5
95.3
94.2
90.1
84.9

82.1
80.5
80.6
83.3
84.5
85.1
82.4
79.5
83.3
82.3
78.0
75.2

73.0
70.9
71.2
81.1
82.0
85.6

______

77.7
75.1
75.6
86.3
86.6
89.1
86.2
80.0
82.6
81.4
74.7
67.9

65.8 46.6
62. 2 42.4
61.7 41.0
65.9 54.6
67.3 53.9
65.8 56.7
60.0
56.3 ______
61.0 ______
58.8
52.3 ............
48.4 —

98.6
98.6
99.1
98.8
98.2
98.1
98.5
98.7
98.6
98.7
98.2
98.0

97.6
97.0
96.8
96.3
96.4
97.4

94.0 85.5
93. 5 84.7
93.3 84.1
92.4 83.3
93.2 83.6
90.4 84.7
90.1
88. 5 —
______
87.3 —
______
86. 5
86.0 ............
........ 85.7 —

Average___ 89.4 80.1 174.3 84.4 67.0 155.3 92.7 81.4 177.3 80.3 60.5 149.2 98.5 196.9 90.1 184.3
1 Average for 6 months.
,
.
,
,
,
2 N ot including electric-railroad car building and repairing; see transportation equipment and railroad
repair-shop groups, manufacturing industries, table 1.


https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis

420

M O N TH LY LA B O R R E V IE W

Average Man-Hours Worked and Average Hourly Earnings

N THE following tables the Bureau presents a tabulation of man­
hours worked per week and average hourly earnings, based on
reports supplied by identical establishments in May and June 1933
in 15 industrial groups and 74 separate manufacturing industries.
Man-hour data for the building-construction group and for the insur­
ance, real estate, banking, and "brokerage groups are not available, and
data for several of the 89 manufacturing industries surveyed monthly
are omitted from these tables due to lack of adequate information.
The total number of establishments supplying man-hour data in
these 15 industrial groups represents approximately 50 percent of the
establishments supplying monthly employment data.
The tabulations are based on reports supplying actual man-hours
worked and do not include nominal man-hour totals, obtained by
multiplying the total number of employees in the establishment by
the plant operating time.
Table 1 shows the average hours worked per employee per week and
average hourly earnings in 15 industrial groups and for all groups
combined. The average hours per week and average hourly earnings
for the combined total of the 15 industrial groups are weighted aver­
ages, wherein the average man-hours and average hourly earnings in
each industrial group are multiphed by the total number of employees
in the group in the current month and the sum of these products
divided by the total number of employees in the combined 15 indus­
trial groups.
In presenting information for the separate manufacturing industries
shown in table 2, data are published for only those industries in which
the available man-hour information covers 20 percent or more of the
total number of employees in the industry at the present time. The
average man-hours and hourly earnings for the combined 89 manu­
facturing industries have been weighted in the same manner as the
averages for all industrial groups combined, table 1.

I

T able 1 —A V E R A G E HOURS W O R K E D PE R W E E K PE R E M P L O Y E E A N D A V E R A G E

H O U R L Y E A R N IN G S IN 15 I N D U S T R IA L G R O U PS, M A Y A N D JU N E 1933

Average hours per
week

Average hourly
earnings

Industrial group
M ay 1933 June 1933 M a y 1933 June 1933

Manufacturing____ _ _ _ _ _ _
Coal mining:
Anthracite_____ _______ ______
Bituminous________________________ _
Metalliferous mining_________________
Quarrying and nonmetallic mining_____ _______________
Crude petroleum producing_______________________________ _
Public utilities:
Telephone and telegraph_____
_________
Power and light__ _________
_ _____________
Electric-railroad and motor-bus operation and maintenance_
Trade:
Wholesale_______ _______ _______________ ______
R eta il.._______ ___________ ____
Hotels___________ ____________________________
Canning and preserving___________ _______________ __
Laundries_________ ___ ________
Dyeing and cleaning_______________________________________
Total_____

_

__ ___ _ ___


https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis

_

Hours

Hours

Cents

Cents

40.8

42.6

42.0

41.9

25.2
26.0
38.5
38.6
43.5

31.2
28.5
40.0
40.9
42.6

81.3
45.8
47.3
37.3
64.7

81.7
45.6
47.0
37.6
62.9

37.5
46.1
46.2

37.5
46.0
46.4

72.0
61.7
57.1

71.1
61.7
56.7

47.3
44. 9
51. 6
42.8
42. 6
47.0

47.1
45. 0
50. 6
42.6
42.4
47.4

54.3
41. 6
22. 9
34.2
33. 3
36.4

53.2
41.3
23.1
31.2
33. 2
36.6

42.3

43.3

44.2

43.9

421

TRE N D OF EM P LO YM E N T

Per capita weekly earnings, computed by multiplying the average
man-hours worked per week by the average hourly earnings shown in
the following table, are not identical with the per capita weekly
earnings appearing elsewhere in this trend-of-employment compila­
tion, which are obtained by dividing the total weekly earnings in all
establishments reporting by the total number of employees in those
establishments. As already noted, the basic information upon which
the average weekly man-hours and average hourly earnings are com­
puted covers approximately 50 percent of the establishments report­
ing monthly employment data.
T a b l e 2 .—A V E R A G E H O U R S W O R K E D P E R W E E K P E R E M P L O Y E E A N D A V E R A G E
H O U R L Y E A R N IN G S IN S E L E C T E D M A N U F A C T U R I N G IN D U S T R IE S , M A Y A N D

JUNE 1933

Average hours per
week

Average hourly
earnings

Industry
M a y 1933 June 1933 M ay 1933 June 1933
Food and kindred products:

Textiles and their products:

Iron and steel and their products, not including machinery:
Cutlery (not including silver and plated cutlery) and edge

Steam and hot-water heating apparatus and steam fittings.
Tools (not including edge tools, machine tools, files, and
Machinery, not including transportation equipment:
Cash registers, adding machines, and calculating machines,.

Nonferrous metals and their products:

Transportation equipment:

Railroad repair shops:
Steam railroad. - -------------- ----------------------------- ---------- -----2 4 0 4 °— 33---------12


https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis

Hours

Hours

Cents

Cents

46.5
48.5
40.3
49.2
52.1
47.9
45.1
54.7

46.7
47.7
38.0
46.9
53.1
48.2
47.3
54.1

42.0
60.8
32.8
41.6
48.1
42.3
51.9
43.4

42.2
60.1
34.3
42.0
46.3
41.6
47.9
44.0

40.7
47.9
44.2
48.0
44.1
40.6
45.5

44.4
49.1
46.3
50.8
47.0
42.0
48.3

38.6
21.6
33.4
37.0
29.9
29.8
33.0

38.2
22.6
33.4
37.0
29.4
30.3
34.3

34.1
32.2

40.7
31.9

42.7
38.7

42.6
38.5

40.3
32.0
34.0
32.7
40.9
35.7
38.2
33.8

42.9
40.0
38.0
37.9
43.1
38.0
39.3
35.2

46.1
48.0
41.7
48.8
43.6
48.1
45.3
42.1

46.0
46.0
41.1
48.2
43.2
47.6
44.9
41.6

32.1

38.6

44.4

45.0

32.6
38.7
34.5
35.3
32.6
31.1
44.2
31.7
33.9

36.6
40.7
37.8
37.3
35.9
36.3
42.1
42.8
35.1

46.4
63.9
55.2
54.6
49.9
53.3
38.8
54.4
44.7

45.8
62.0
53.0
53.9
49.6
53.7
37.7
52.4
45.0

39.9
38.2
36.1
33.7
37.6
39.6
39.7

43.1
41.4
41.5
36.5
38.2
41.2
41.6

41.3
46.5
37.1
46.9
44.7
47.2
38.9

40.2
46.0
35.6
44.1
44.6
47.9
38.5

46.2
40.8
38.1
32.7

42.0
40.4
39.9
31.5

62.0
57.0
50.2
56.3

63.4
57.1
49.6
55.0

44.4
36.9

43.9
36.7

56.4
63.0

56.3
62.7

422
T

MONTHLY LABOR R E V IE W

2 —A V E R A G E H O U R S W O R K E D P E R W E E K P E R E M P L O Y E E A N D A V E R A G E
H O U R L Y E A R N IN G S IN S E L E C T E D M AN U F A C T U R IN G IN D U S T R IE S , M A Y A N D
JU N E 1933—Continued

able

Average hours per
week

Average hourlyearnings

Industry
M ay 1933 June 1933 M ay 1933 June 1933
Lumber and allied products:
F u r n itu r e .._______ ____ __________ ______
Lumber:
M illw o r k .._____ _____________________________________
Sawmills_______________________ ______________________
Stone, clay, and glass products:
Brick, tile, and terra cotta___ ______________ _____ _______
C em ent.. __________
. ________ . ........................... ...
Glass____ . ______ _______________________ _______ _______
Marble, granite, slate, and other products.............................
Pottery_________ _ _______________________ ____ _____ _
Leather and its manufactures: Leather______________ ________
Paper and printing:
Boxes, paper_______________ ________ ___________ ______
Paper and pu lp __________ ____ _ ________ __________ . .
Printing and publishing:
Book and job ____ _____ _____________
___ _ ______
Newspapers and periodicals_______________ . . . ______
Chemicals and allied products:
Chemicals_________________ _ ___________ _. __________
Cottonseed, oil, cake, and meal________ __________ _____ _
Druggists’ preparations___ ____ ______ ____ ______________
Explosives........................................... .........................................
Fertilizers________ __________ ______ ______ _______________
Paints and varnishes________ . . . . _ . . . ______ _ . . . . . .
Petroleum refining________________________________________
R ayon and allied products______ . . ________ _______ ___
Soap___ ____ _________ ____ .
. __________________
Rubber products:
Rubber goods, other than boots, shoes, tires, and inner
tubes___________________________________________________
Rubber tires and inner tubes______________________________
Tobacco manufactures:
Chewing and smoking tobacco and snufli__________ _______
Cigars and cigarettes_____ . . . _____________ _______ _ _ . .

Hours

Hours

Cents

Cents

36.4

39.7

33.3

32.2

40.5
39.7

43.3
43.0

32.5
27.5

32.6
27.6

33. 7
37.5
39. 0
34.6
34.5
44.3

36.8
38.7
42. 1
35.7
35.0
46.6

31.9
41.0
45. 0
49.9
39.9
39.8

31.9
40.6
44.0
50.2
40.0
41.0

42.3
43.3

44.9
46.8

40.5
41.4

40.0
39.9

36.8
41.4

37.2
41.0

66.9
72.7

66.4
73.1

43.3
53.0
37.8
35.0
40.8
46.6
39.3
44.6
42.9

44.6
58.9
40.3
36.5
45.1
47.6
39.6
45.3
43.8

54.9
21.4
46.2
55.0
25.0
47.0
63.0
37.5
45.9

54.3
19.7
46.3
54.3
26.8
46.9
63.2
38.3
45.2

40.7
37.7

43.3
42.0

41.2
58.4

42.8
57.9

44.3
42.3

41.4
42.3

31.5
29.4

32.1
29.7

Employment in Building Construction in June 1933

M PLOYM ENT in the building-construction industry increased
6.1 percent in June as compared with May and pay rolls in­
creased 4.4 percent over the month interval.
The percents of change of employment and pay-roll totals in June
as compared with May are based on returns made by 10,325 firms
employing in June 78,445 workers in the various trades in the buildingconstruction industry. These reports cover building operations in
various localities in 34 States and the District of Columbia.

E


https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis

TREND OF EMPLOYMENT
em plo ym en t
s t r u c t io n

an d

to tal

pay

r o l l in

423
th e

b u il d in g

co n

IN D U S T R Y IN I D E N T I C A L F IR M S , M A Y A N D JU NE 1933

Locality

Alabama: Birmingham___________
California:
Los Angeles 1_________________
San Francisco-Oakland i ______
Other reporting localities 1___
Colorado: Denver________________
Connecticut:
Bridgeport-.................................
Hartford.......................................
N ew H a v en ..............................
Delaware: W ilm ington....................
District of Columbia_______ ____
Florida:
Jacksonville.......................... .......
M iam i_________________ _____
Georgia: Atlanta........ .................... .
Illinois:
Chicago L ____ ________ ______
Other reporting localities i____
Indiana:
Evansville_____________ ______
Fort W ayne...................... .........
Indianapolis_____ _____ _____
South B e n d .................................
Iowa: Des M oin es.._______ _______
Kansas: W ich ita ...............................
Kentucky: L o u is v ille ......................
Louisiana: N ew Orleans........... ........
Maine: Portland__________________
Maryland: Baltimore 1____________
Massachusetts: All reporting local­
ities 1_____ ________ _____________
Michigan:
D etroit...........................................
Flint______________ ________ _
Grand R apids..............................
Minnesota:
Duluth........................................ .
Minneapolis...................... ............
St. Paul___________ ________ _
Missouri:
Kansas C it y 2. . ............. ......... .
St. Louis................................. ......
Nebraska: Omaha....... ......................
New York:
New York C ity 1______________
Other reporting localities 1_____
North Carolina: Charlotte________
Ohio:
Akron............................................
C incinnati3.......... ..................... .
C le v e la n d ....................................
D ayton......... ................... ..............
Youngstown______ ____ _______
Oklahoma:
Oklahoma C ity_____ ____ _____
Tulsa__________________________
Oregon: Portland_____________ ___
Pennsylvania:4
Erie area 4_____________________
Philadelphia area1................. .
Pittsburgh area 1______________
Reading-Lebanon area 1_______
Scranton area 1_____ ____ _____
Other reporting areas 1_________
Rhode Island: Providence_________
Tennessee:
Chattanooga___________________
Knoxville______________________
Mem phis______________________
Nashville______________________
Texas:
D allas.________________________
El Paso_______________________
Houston......... ................................
San Antonio___________________

N um ­
ber of Number on pay roll Percent Amount of pay rob
firms
of
report­
M ay 15 June 15 change M ay 15 June 15
ing

Percent
of
change

69

299

302

+ 1.0

$3,666

$4,106

+12.0

27
28
18
186

721
815
691
595

779
805
629
619

+ 8.0
- 1 .2
- 9 .0
+ 4.0

16,171
18, 212
13, 778
11, 269

15, 685
15,959
14, 267
12,036

- 3 .0
-1 2 .4
+ 3.5
+ 6.8

130
206
170
113
503

524
837
894
919
7,706

543
977
974
994
8,327

+ 3.6
+16.7
+ 8.9
+ 8.2
+ 8.1

11, 257
18, 345
21, 515
17, 699
206, 972

11, 287
21,858
23, 060
19,467
233,378

+ .3
+19.1
+ 7.2
+10.0
+12.8

51
78
139

295
516
1,164

375
637
1,273

+27.1
+23.4
+ 9.4

4, 860
7,818
17,932

5,833
9,743
18,072

+20.0
+24.6
+ .8

134
81

2,298
465

2,050
595

-1 0 .8
+28.0

77, 793
9,992

39,983
13,390

-4 8 .6
+34.0

49
84
164
33
99
66
121
119
103
103

303
234
854
92
419
305
811
1, 295
400
663

282
262
1,047
101
570
313
881
1,156
384
665

- 6 .9
+12.0
+22.6
+ 9.8
+36.0
+ 2.6
+ 8.6
-1 0 .7
- 4 .0
+ .3

4, 304
3,452
15,425
1,260
7. 494
4,022
12, 394
18, 578
8,281
9,195

4,371
3, 654
20,497
1,607
10, 574
5,144
15,512
18,622
7,907
9,983

+ 1.6
+ 5.9
+32.9
+27.5
+41.1
+27.9
+25.2
+ .2
-4 . 5
+ 8.6

720

4,312

4,395

+ 1.9

106,114

105, 854

-.2

450
48
96

2,317
131
299

2,855
222
367

+23.2
+69.5
+22.7

43,147
1,934
4,261

54, 642
3,152
5,659

+26.6
+63.0
+32.8

48
196
150

264
1,199
673

278
1,249
779

+ 5.3
+4. 2
+15.8

3, 709
24, 261
12,290

3, 793
26, 707
13,984

+ 2.3
+10.1
+13.8

249
489
134

1,319
2, 579
872

1,311
2,480
1,151

-.6
- 3 .8
+32.0

29,478
62,899
15,471

26, 509
64, 307
20,252

-1 0. 1
+ 2.2
+30.9

299
209
40

5, 256
4,718
204

4,871
4,849
231

- 7 .3
+ 2.8
+13.2

167,881
117, 388
2, 578

160, 526
118, 236
2,954

- 4 .4
+ .7
+14.6

76
423
544
116
71

204
2,249
2,492
398
263

295
2,134
2, 614
522
267

+44.6
- 5 .1
+ 4.9
+31.2
+ 1.5

2, 764
52, 883
57, 216
6, 663
4,890

4,264
47, 844
63,018
9,439
4,972

+54.3
- 9 .5
+10. 1
+41.7
+ 1.7

76
53
161

294
251
602

395
223
726

+34.4
-1 1 .2
+20.6

4,285
3, 465
10, 229

6,193
3,198
13, 607

+44.5
- 7 .7
+33.0

28
516
251
52
41
333
234

146
4, 599
1,716
254
225
2,297
1,258

177
4,879
1,800
278
232
2, 579
1,333

+21.2
+6.1
+ 4.9
+ 9.4
+3.1
+12.3
+ 6.0

2,432
77, 669
35, 629
4,132
5,170
35, 794
26,314

2, 271
86, 652
35, 027
4, 629
5,188
41, 338
27, 876

- 6 .6
+11.6
-1 . 7
+12.0
+• 3
+15. 5
+ 5.9

41
46
80
64

303
430
373
709

285
364
453
1,040

- 5 .9
-1 5 .3
+21.4
+46.7

5,828
4,985
6, 070
9,742

5,096
4,680
6, 375
12,800

-1 2 .6
-6 . 1
+ 5.0
+31. 4

158
25
140
119

1,189
167
787
886

1,257
141
823
905

+ 5.7
-1 5 .6
+ 4.6
+ 2.1

18,020
1,810
12,160
10, 731

18, 249
1,736
12,103
12,046

+ 1.3
-4 . 1
-. 5
+12.3

1 Data supplied b y cooperating State bureaus.
2 Includes both Kansas City, M o., and Kansas City, Kans.
3 Includes Covington and Newport, Ky.
4 Each separate area includes from 2 to 6 counties.


https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis

­

424

MONTHLY LABOR REV IEW

C O M P A R IS O N OF E M P L O Y M E N T A N D T O T A L P A Y R O L L IN T H E BU ILD IN G CON­
ST R U C TIO N IN D U S T R Y IN I D E N T IC A L F IR M S , M A Y A N D JU NE 1933—Continued

Locality

N um ­
ber of Number on pay roll Percent Amount of pay roll Percent
firms
of
of
report­
M ay 15 June 15 change M ay 15 June 15 change
ing

Utah: Salt Lake C ity ___________
76
Virginia:
N orfolk-Portsm outh... _ _____
86
Richm ond_________ __________
143
Washington:
Seattle____ _______ __________
148
Spokane_____ _______ _________
46
Tacom a_______ __________ . . .
71
West Virginia: W heeling__________
45
Wisconsin: All reporting localities 1_
60
Total, all localities. __ ______
10, 325

350

364

+ 4 .0

$4,816

$5,809

+20.6

781
758

962
898

+23.2
+18.5

12, 762
13, 596

15, 666
17,047

+22.8
+25.4

466
134
153
138
780
73,910

541
175
125
193
887

+16.1
+30.6
-1 8 .3
+39.9
+ 13. 7

8,167
2,160
2, 669
2,531
12, 852

9, 736
2,811
1,901
3, 707
14,100
+ 6.1 1,591,529 1, 661,948

+19.2
+30.1
-2 8 .8
+46.5
+ 9.7

78, 445

+ 4 .4

1 Data supplied by cooperating State bureaus.

Trend of Employment in June 1933, by States

N THE following table are shown the fluctuations in employment
and pay-roll totals in June 1933 as compared with May 1933,
in certain industrial groups by States. These tabulations have
been prepared from data secured directly from reporting establish­
ments and from information supplied by cooperating State agencies.
The combined total of all groups does not include building-construc­
tion data, information concerning which is published elsewhere in a
separate tabulation by city and State totals. In addition to the
combined total of all groups, the trend of employment and pay rolls
in the manufacturing, public utility, hotel, wholesale trade, retail
trade, bituminous-coal mining, crude-petroleum producing, quarry­
ing and nonmetallic mining, metalliferous mining, laundry, and
dyeing and cleaning groups is presented. In this State compilation,
the totals of the telephone and telegraph, power and light, and elec­
tric-railroad operation groups have been combined and are presented
as one group— public utilities. Due to the extreme seasonal fluctu­
ations in the canning and preserving industry, and the fact that
during certain months the activity in this industry in a number of
States is negligible, data for this industry are not presented separately.
The number of employees and the amount of weekly pay roll in May
and June 1933 as reported by identical establishments in this indus­
try are included, however, in the combined total of “ All groups.,,
The percents of change shown in the accompanying table, unless
otherwise noted, are unweighted percents of change; that is, the
industries included in the groups, and the groups comprising the
total of all groups, have not been weighted according to their relative
importance in the combined totals.
As the anthracite-mining industry is confined entirely to the State
of Pennsylvania, the changes reported in this industry in table 1,
nonmanufacturing industries, are the fluctuations in this industry by
State totals.
When the identity of any reporting company would be disclosed by
the publication of a State total for any industrial group, figures for
the group do not appear in the separate industrial-group tabulation,
but are included in the State totals for “ All groups.” Data are not
presented for any industrial group when the representation in the
State covers less than three establishments.

I


https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis

425

TREND OF EMPLOYMENT

C O M P A R IS O N OF E M P L O Y M E N T A N D P A Y R O LLS IN ID E N T IC A L E S T A B L IS H M E N T S
IN M A Y A N D JU NE 1933, B Y S T A T E S
[Figures in italics are not compiled b y the Bureau of Labor Statistics, but are taken from reports issued b y
cooperating State organizations]
Manufacturing

Total, all groups

State

Amount
N um ­
N um ­
ber on
of pay
Per­
ber of
roll (1
pay
cent of week),
estab­ roll,
change
lish­
June
June
ments
1933
1933

492 57, 515
Alabama_________
8,155
Arizona__________
419
1 4SI 14, 74S
Arkansas_________
California____ ____ 24,950 212,668
819 28, 502
Colorado________
Connecticut______
Delaware- ---------Dist. of Columbia.
Florida _________
Georgia............. —

1,103 142,133
134 10,094
629 30, 885
544 21, 734
656 84, 588

+11.9
- 3 .1

$642, 394
165, 598

N um ­
Amount
N um ­
ber on
of pay
Per­
Per­ ber of
roll (1
pay
cent of
cent of estab­
week),
roll,
change
change lish­
June
June
ments
1933
1933
+15.4
- 2 .5

200
59

203,459

+2.8

181

+ 1.4 4, 895,898
+ .8
570,166

+ 1.2
-.4

841
125

+ 7.0 2,709,905
209,261
+ 8.6
730,115
333,174
- 2 .6
+13.2 1,019, 038

+13.9
+ 9.2
+ 1.1
- 4 .6
+13.9

+2.6

113, 571

+11.5

+ 8.6 2,182,979
804,078
+ 3.6

+10.0
+ 3.8

6,567
183
Idaho____________
Illinois___________ 8 1,709 291,841
116,
050
1,211
Indiana__________
1,187 42,800
Iow a .......................
4 986 60,895
Kansas— ............. -

+ 9.9

821 61, 065
Kentucky_______
509 30,021
Louisiana________
532 42,860
Maine ______ _
3 815 76, m
M aryland________
Massachusetts----- 88,185 345J48

+ 4.6
+ 1 .8
+ 8.5

Michigan______ _
Minnesota........ —
Mississippi_______
Missouri________
Montana........... —

+5.2 6,041,226

+7.0

40,706
2,053

9,949

+16.3
-1 1 .2

$451,321
40,486

+23.6
-1 1 .6

+6.6

119,776

+4.8

77, 543
10, 540

+ 4 .4 1,698,854
200,181
+ .8

651 121,858
6,916
49
3,935
56
126 11, 847
310 72, 068

+ 7.9 2,188,038
142,854
+ 5 .8
129,019
+ .1
151, 333
+• 4
+16.0
758, 365
+21.2

54, 374

3,144

+6.8 3,483,292

+13.1

85,146
23,875

+ 9 .6 1, 631,935
444,050
+ 5 .7

+12.4
+ 7 .4

24,282

+4-3

490,276

916,972
441, 881
716,252

194
210
175

23,606
18, 627
35,948

+ 8 .0
+ 5 .0
+ 8.3

400, 388
250, 777
578,875

+3.8 1,455,146
+ 4.3 7, i30,029

+ 9.7
+ 2.5
+11.5
+ 7.7
+ 5.7

1, 536 241,010
1,064 60, 744
8,622
376
1, 210 108, 524
350
8, 539

+ 7.0 5, 370, 223
+ 3.7 1, 244, 566
+13.4
106, 188
+ 3.4 2,186, 062
200, 685
- 1 .6

+ 6.3
+ 3 .0
+ 14.0
+ 5 .0
-.4

419 200,273
268
70
521
50

Nebraska________
Nevada__________
New Hampshire - .
New Jersey...........
New M exico_____

723 21, 685
141
1, 405
492 36, 483
1,486 175,151
190
4, 564

+ 2.3
447,489
34, 783
+ 4 .5
+7.C
576, 332
+ 4.9 3,866,865
+ 2.1
74, 068

+ 1.1
+ 5.0
+12.3
+6.1
+ 2.4

New Y ork _______
North C arolina.North Dakota____
Ohio ___________
Oklahoma________

7,941 511,787
889 123, 346
3,799
355
5,003 390,186
714 25,221

Oregon.. ----------Pennsylvania____
Rhode Island____
South Carolina___
South Dakota------

707 27,782
5,111 584, 511
891 59,796
325 57,352
257
5,533
735

65,190

+17.5
+12.0
+ 1.9
- 2 .4
+21.5

38

413

Tennessee-----------Texas_____ ____
Utah_____________
V erm on t............. Virginia—. ........—

+ 4.7
+ 1.0

546
445

1,093 183, 4 7 4

+4.0

+2.9 1,334,950

Per­
cent of
change

+32.9

+2.5

+14.7
+ 7 .3
+ 13.0
948, 754 8 +8.1

449 61, 842 8 +4.0
+ 7.5 3,048.308
1,140 170,030

+11.3

+8.2 4,915,185

+16.2

28, 546
5,256
61, 501
2,383

+ 3 .8
566, 244
+20.9
56, 102
+ 5.7 1, 167, 562
- 1 .7
48, 747

+ 6 .3
+34.5
+ 8.9
+ 4.1

122
24
183

10,452
295
32, 303

+ 3.6
- 3 .7
+15.6

25

438

214,412
+ 3.3
- 1 .0
7,156
485, 632
+ 7.8
+ 5 .7 3,436, 580
+ 3.3
7,276

+ 2 .5 12,179, 487
+12.7 1,437, 441
77,442
+ 6.6 7, 739, 703
+ 3.4
478, 338

+ 3.3 8 1,690 312,606
526 118, 598
+ 15.5
1,031
59
+• 7
+11.6 1,908 283,106
106
9, 618
+ 2.9

+13.3 1,365, 235
+ 3.4
23,025
+ 8 .4 5,598, 711
+ 6 .6
175,934

+16.5
+ 3.9
+ 15.6
+ 6 .0

+9.1
511,186
+ 3.6 10, 759, 075
+10.2 1, 111, 161
+7.1
573,439
+ 3.4
129,353

+ 8.4
+ 9.3
+17.2
+ 13.9
-2 .8

+13.6
271,438
+ 5.8 5 , 393,763
+12.4
831,138
522, 422
+ 7 .6
+ 4.6
35, 718

+22.8
+22.8
+15.7
- 5 .4

896, 560

+ 8.3

642,891

+11.3

77,004
96,219
812,181

+ 3.5
+28.9
+ 7 .0

+ 6.7

+3.7 1,247,158

790

58,174

34^
376
1, 274

12,006
9, 532
80,437

229, 990
+ 1.2
184, 692
+11.6
+ 3.2 1, 236, 338

1,152 48,786
W ashington... . . .
85J 92, 558
West Virginia____
«
1,060
133,186
Wisconsin______
5,521
198
W yom ing________

+5.6
962,947
+1.8 1,496, 700

+7.2 2,335,020
-4 .1

121,890

1679 162,825

158

16, 432

260
182
46

47,987
54,098
1,953

1,748 331,418

+4-9 6,861,385

+8.1

+12.3

+ 6 .4

+13.2

+3.7

388

31,232

+• 2
+18.5
+ 5 .2

87
114
410

4, 077
5,016
55, 540

+ 8 .7
+4- 4
+ 4 .5
+16.0
+ 3.6

234
169

23,913
34, 721

+ 9.9
+ 5.3

438,933
671,994

+ 9.0
+ 8 .6

26

1,241

- 1 .2

33,315

+ .8

+ 2.9
+ 7.8

+11.1
+ .4

265

48,934

696, 206

+4-3

781 105, 702 8 +11.7 1,808,073 8 +19.5

* Includes automobile dealers and garages, and sand, gravel, and building construction.
2 State report not received.
2 Includes building and contracting.
4 Includes transportation, financial institutions, restaurants, and building construction.
5 Weighted percent of change.
6 Includes construction, municipal, agricultural, and office employment, amusement and recreation,
professional and transportation service.
7 Includes laundries.
8 Includes laundering and cleaning.
8 Includes construction, but does not include hotels and restaurants.


https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis

426

MONTHLY LABOR R EV IEW

C O M P A R IS O N OF E M P L O Y M E N T A N D P A Y R O LLS IN ID E N T IC A L E S T A B L IS H M E N T S
IN M A Y A N D JU N E 1933, B Y S T A T E S —Continued
[Figures in italics are not compiled b y the Bureau of Labor Statistics, but are taken from reports issued b y
cooperating State organizations]
Wholesale trade

State

Amount
Amount
N um ­ N um ­
N um ­ Num ­
of pay
of pay
ber of ber on
Per­
Per­ ber of ber on
Per­
Per­
roll
(1
pay
roll (1
pay
estab­
cent
of
cent
of
estab­
cent
of
cent of
roll,
week),
roll,
week),
lish­
change
change lish­
change
change
June
June
June
June
ments
ments
1933
1933
1933
1933

Alabama_________
Arizona.............
Arkansas_________
C alifornia.-. . . . .
Colorado_________

17

409

2 151
29

5,121
937

+ 2.1

Connecticut______
Delaware________
Dist. of Columbia.
Florida______
Georgia----- ----------

57
9
32
47
33

1,209
118
419
742
448

+ 1.4
+ 3.5
+ 1.9
-.4
+ 1 .4

111

+ 2 .8
- 1.9
+ 1 .5
+ 1.4

Idaho____________
Illinois____ ____ _
Indiana. ________
Io w a .. ________
Kansas__________

16
22

8

567
188

SO

1,656

55
34

1,029
1,034

+ 2 .0
+5.C

-3 .1

$12, 633
4, 85C

-1 2 .2
—2. £

64
181

9,347

-7 .4

131

145,310
25, 405

1,377

- 2 .2
+ .5

-4 .5

519,407
76, 758

+ .6
+ 4.3

32,842
2, 36S
+ 2.4
12,309 + ( 10)
17, 505
-.3
12,358
—1.5

112
£
402
70
27

4, 857
129
10, 732
995
1,956

+ 5.4
-1 0 .4
+ 1.3
- 5 .7
-.6

92,121
2,109
215, 582
18,199
29, 594

+ 3 .5
+ .2
+ 1 .4
—5.7
- 2 .5

275

-A
+4.0

5,995
3,079

408,362

2,969

38,211

24, 977
24, 498

- 2 .0

-4 .5
- 1 .0

32

132
164
124

19, 733

+2.1

298

5,121

22
31
17

410
718
412

+ .7
-.7
(»)

8, 759
15, 014
9, 733

+ 1.1
- 2 .2
+ 1 .2

30
51
68

1,908
2, 871
1,022

- 1 .5
-. 1
-.8

Nebraska________
N eva d a .. _______
New H am pshire..
New Jersey______
New M e x ico .. . ..

-1 .6
+1.3

15, 411
368,886

1,582
3,888
116
4, 501
203

+ 1 .3
+ 1.3
+ 2 .7
+ 3.3

36
7
15
25
8

870
95
175
554
136

New Y ork . __ . . .
North Carolina__
North D akota___
O h io ____ .
Oklahoma_______

450
17
16
242
57

Oregon___________
Pennsylvania____
Rhode Isla n d .. ._
South Carolina___
South Dakota___

53
130
43
15
10
33
15
5
42

90
29

46
9

+ 4 .4

+10.4
+ .9
+ 3.4

87,664

+3.6

27,831
39,774
18, 211

+ 4.1
+ 1 .4
-.4

38
4,262

5, 811
60,719

-.5

39, 613
102,981
2,105
108,146
5, 566

+ 1 .2
+ 1 .5
- 2 .7
-.5
-. 1

149
283
56
133
85

10,168
8,012
410
6, 804
843

-.3
+ 4.1
+ 4.3
+ .5
+ 2.6

170,916
125,003
4,103
126,059
17,209

+ .2
- 3 .9
+ 2.1
+ 4 .6
+ .3

+ 4.1
+ 2.2
- 1 .7
- 1 .2
+18.3

21, 779
2,846
4, 538
16,161
4,328

+ 1.6
- 4 .6
- 1 .1
- 1 .2
+ 7.6

190
40
73
411
47

1, 704
230
813
7,201
243

+ 1.5
+ 6.0
+ 5 .2
- 1 .2
+ 3 .8

30, 789
5,420
11,910
155, 945
5, 349

+ .9
+ 8.3
+ 6 .0
- 1 .0
+ 1 .3

12, 510
238
212
4, 945
822

+ 3 .9
+ .8
+ 1 .0
+ 2.1
-.2

364,108
5,331
5, 874
119,166
19, 340

-. 1
- 3 .8
-.9
+ 1.4
- 3 .9

3,996
171
34
1, 576
99

69, 607
540
424
32,950
1,618

+ 1 .7 1,445, 875
+ 3.1
10, 615
+ 4 .2
6, 437
+ 2.6
584,810
+ 1.4
24,890

+ .7
+ 3.1
+ 4 .5
+ 3 .9
- 2 .8

1,108
3, 601
956
206
130

+ 1 .7
+. 9
+ 2.6
+ .5
+ 5 .7

29, 434
94, 299
22,088
4, 546
3,373

-.8
-.2
+ 3 .2
-.9
- 2 .5

203
344
482
14
12

2,167
26, 334
4,629
397
117

+ 1.4
+ 2 .5
-.2
+ 1.5
- 6 .4

- 2 .1
+ 2 .0
+ .2
+ 1.7
- 8 .3

+ 6.4

73

51

6,428

3,243

- 1 .9

-3 .3
+4.1
+ 5.9

82
41
479

+2.2

663
444
4, 680

+ 2.2
+ 4.5
+ .2

- 1 .5
-.5

420
49

613

+ 9.5

12, 769

+2.5

68,605

457
119
962

+ 1.6
+ 5.3
+16.7

10,493
2, 789
21,972

2,108
584

+ 4.3
+ 4.8

1,753
58

State report not received.


https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis

4, 625

95,567
50, 756

-.8
+1.4

2,822

w

-.3

-.9
+ 6 .8

42,585

58
58
5
59
12

- 2 .1
-.3

27,041
4,006

+2.6

M ichigan________
Minnesota_______
Mississippi_______
Missouri. . . .
M ontana_______ .

2 2 ,0 0 4

972
270

1,869

747
14,076

$29,669
27,223

- 3 .8
+ 2.5

69

35
735

Washington____ .
West Virginia___
Wisconsin______
W yom in g.__ _ . . .

2,013
1,580

+ 4.3
+ .4
++

Kentucky-----------Louisiana______ .
M aine___________
M aryland.. _ _. .
Massachusetts-----

Tennessee________
Texas_________ ..
Utah_____________
Verm ont_________
Virginia__________

Retail trade

52, 749
14, 773

+3.1

38,093

+ 3.6

1,618

-3 .8
+ 2.3

53
44

5,999
860

+11.2
91,287
+1.4 1,210,574

- 1 .3
+ 4.4

41, 549
489, 220
92, 631
3,636
1,895
47,454

- 1 .4

105,417

+1.5

13, Î03
6, 346
82,988

—1.7
- 1 .0
+ .9

110,354
13,705

8,750

+2.7

217

123,142

+ .9

5,111

i° Less than one tenth of 1 percent.

+10.4
+1.8

n N o change.

- 2 .0
-. 1

+1.6
+ 1.5

427

TREND OF EMPLOYMENT

C O M P A R IS O N OP E M P L O Y M E N T A N D P A Y R O LLS IN ID EN T IC AL E S T A B L IS H M E N T S
IN M A Y A N D JU NE 1933, B Y S T A T E S —Continued
[Figures in italics are not compiled b y the Bureau of Labor Statistics, but are taken from reports issued
b y cooperating State organizations]
Metalliferous mining

Quarrying and nonmetallic mining

State

Amount
N um ­
N um ­
of pay
ber on
Per­
ber of
roll (1
pay
cent of week),
estab­
roll,
lish­
change
June
June
ments
1933
1933

N um ­
N um ­
ber on
Per­ ber of
Pay
cent of estab­
roll,
change lish­
June
ments
1933

17
3
10
240
3

639
49
416
1,043
15

+ 6.5
-2 3 .4
+31. 6
+ 7.5
+ 7.1

$6,951
642
3,863
21,324
187

- 0 .7
-1 4 .3
+19.2
+13.1
-2 1 .4

25

263

+6.1

5,025

+ 4.2

16
23

906
1, 073

+23.8
+ .4

9,877
10i 093

+17.2
+ 6.9

22
64
25

477
1,480
' 345

9, 376
24i 290
4, 888

+ 9.9
+25.7
+28.3

17

757

+19. 3
+16.2
+10.9
+ 5 .3

37
13
8

935
656
278

8, 743
7,179
6, 566

+36.7
+13.1
+52. 2

U

231

+23. 2
+ 3.0
+30. 5
- 21.2

S', 718

-8 .6

Missouri. _______
M ontana.............. .

47
29
9
46
8

1,305
397
130
1,106
92

+16.9
+ 5.0
- 1 .5
+18.8
- 6 .1

18,760
6,166
1, 461
13i 383
1,038

+16.9
- 5 .9
+25.4
+14.1
-1 7 .9

5

212

-3 1 . 8

3, 255

-1 3 .9

New Jersey______

13
32

144
512

- 1 .4
+ 7.3

3,110
9i 492

+ Ï. 2
+13.6

80
11

2,167
196

+ 4.1
- 8 .0

44, 350
li 727

+ 3 .2
+ 9 .0

131
20

3, 222
' 190

+ 7.5
-1 7 .7

45, 490
1, 555

+19.6
-1 4 .0

5
149

71
5,005

+ 7.6
+10.9

1,038
74,557

- 5 .0
+33.4

6
6

82
40

-2 4. 8
+ 2.6

785
804

-1 6. 2
+41.5

30

1,410

812

+10.6

14,483

17, 502

6
38
26

83
2,128
li 361

(»)
+11.5
+ 3.8

i, 271
41, 272
U, 834

+ 3 .6
+6. 7
- 6 .0
+15. 5
+17.7

18
19

220
664

+12.8
+25. 5

Alabama_____ _ Arizona_________
California _______
Colorado_________

K ansas.-. _______

Michigan _______
M in n e so ta ______

Oklahoma______
Oregon.

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

Tennessee________
Utah_____________

21

u

181

+ 5.3

18,644

+64.5

2 State report not received.


https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis

3,107
8, 966

2, 370

+ 8 .4

Per­
cent of
change

Amount
of pay
roll (1
week),
June
1933

Per­
cent of
change

9
19

1,050
2, 073

+51.5
+ 1 .0

$11, 588
45, 973

+64.9
+ 7 .3

25
17

1,690
898

+ 7.5
+ 1 .2

42,536
22,273

+ 1 .9
+ .6

7

1,904

+ 2.5

31, 792

- 3 .4

11

464

+22.4

8,418

+65.4

38
32

2, 761
641

-2 3 .0
-1 4 .3

34,181
8, 692

- 3 .1
+ 4.1

13
15

1,594
1,780

+ 2 .0
+ 17.8

16, 584
47, 666

+71.2
+12.1

14

176

+23.1

4, 668

+25.4

3
5

6
932

-1 4 .3
+11.2

146
15, 616

- 5 .2
+6. 5

31

1,204

+ 6.5

18, 720

+20.7

4

48

853

-1 1 .6

0 1)

4

211

+ 6.6

2,978

+21.9

12

1, 977

+ 2.1

34, 637

- 1 .9

+ 4 .2
+41.3

1

+60.4

11 No change.

428

MONTHLY LABOR R EV IEW

C O M P A R IS O N OF E M P L O Y M E N T A N D P A Y R O LLS IN ID E N T IC A L E S T A B L IS H M E N T S
IN M A Y A N D JU NE 1933, B Y S T A T E S —Continued
[Figures in italics are not compiled b y the Bureau of Labor Statistics, but are taken from reports issued
b y cooperating State organizations]

Bituminous coal mining

State

Alabama_______ .
Arizona____ _ _
Arkansas_______ .
C aliforn ia_____
Colorado_______ _

Amount
N um ­ N um ­
of pay
ber of ber on
Per­
roll (1
pay
estab­
cent of
roll,
week),
lish­
change
June
June
ments
1933
1933

Crude petroleum producing
N um ­
Amount
N um ­
of pay
Per­ ber of ber on
Per­
roll (1
pay
cent of estab­
cent of
roll,
week),
change lish­
change
June
June
ments
1933
1933

48

8, 687

S

m

52

3, 375

34

6 ,1 3 3

-1 .0

8 9 ,0 4 9

+ 6 .3

5, 309
1,107

+ 1.7
-1 2 .8

86, 474
18, 051

+ 3.1
- 9 .3

+0. 2

$72, 432
2 ,5 4 7

(“ )

- 4 .0

46, 723

Per­
cent of
change

- 1 .3
(“ )

-1 1 .9

9
240

381
6,792

+ 2.4
+ .9

$8,131
199,874

8
5

157
31

+ 6.1
- 8 .8

2,845
512

-1 . 7
- 1 .7

Connecticut--.
Delaware
Dist. of Columbia.
Florida____
Georgia___ ____
Idaho__________
Illinois_________
Indiana______ Iow a_______ _____
Kansas . . ______

48
23

9 ,7 6 6

-2 7 .6

30

1,129

-.5

23,956

- 6 .9

270, 724

+12.3

5
8

209
111

-.9
-1 1 .2

2,966
2, 674

- 5 .9
-6 .2

7 ,6 7 6

+ 1 1 .4

+ 5 .6

503

+ 4.8

1,448
465

- 5 .7
-3 4 .6

15,128
12,258

+ 2.5
-1 2 .4

4

38

+31.0

1,037

+48.4

1,673

- 4 .4

21,343

- 2 .3

13

1 ,3 0 2

-3 .3

K e n t u c k y .-.____
Louisiana________
Maine _______ M aryland.
. _
Massachusetts . .

159

23,955

+ 2.5

13

1 ,1 6 0

M ichigan________
Minnesota_______
Mississippi.. ___
Missouri_________
M ontana_________

3

19

21
11

Nebraska________
N evada. _______
New Hampshire
New Jersey______
N ew M exico_____

14

New Y o r k ... ___
North Carolina___
North Dakota____
Ohio
____
Oklahoma________
Oregon. __
„ _
Pennsylvania____
Rhode Island— .
South Carolina.. .
South D akota. . . .
T e n n e ss e e ..____
Texas____________
( tah_______ ____
Verm ont______ _
Virginia________ _
W ashington.. _ __
West Virginia___
Wisconsin____ _
W y o m in g ___ _

- 4 .8
- 6 .7

5

47

+14.6

1,366

- 6 .9

4

67

- 1 .5

1,481

- 5 .5

(•I)

- 2 .2

559
71, 508

-1 4 .5
- 4 .9

5
81
20

188
9,883
354

-1 6 .1
-.5
- 6 .8

2, 772
123,998
5,485

-7 .3
-.8
+ 1.0

6
55

51
3, 343

452

56,888

+ 2.1

687, 228

+16.1

23

604

+ 4 .0

13, 207

-3 .0

2Q
5
17

2,401
314
1, 340

- 3 .3
+ 8.3
- 8 .7

22,195
6, 472
24,795

+20.7
+22.8
- 2 .9

S

7 ,6 3 7

+ 6 .4

2 6 0 ,9 7 9

+ 6 .7

36

8, 059

+ 2.1

101,173

+ 7 .6

10
347

1,279
47,290

-.2
-.6

19, 870
598,839

+ 9.5
+10.4

8

305

- 5 .9

7,074

—6. 2

33

3,041

- 7 .8

60, 957

-. 1

7

159

+11.2

3,784

- 2 .2

2 State report not received.


https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis

11 No change.

429

TREND OF EMPLOYMENT

C O M P A R IS O N OF E M P L O Y M E N T A N D P A Y R O LLS IN ID E N T IC A L E S T A B L IS H M E N T S
IN M A Y A N D JU NE 1933, B Y ST A T E S —Continued
[Figures in italics are not compiled b y the Bureau of Labor Statistics, but are taken from reports issued by
cooperating State organizations]

Hotels

Public utilities

State

Amount
N um ­ N um ­
of pay
ber of ber on
Per­
roll (1
pay
cent of
estab­ roll,
w eek),
lish­
change
June
June
ments
1933
1933

89
Alabama____ _
Arizona________ _
67
Arkansas_________
52
C a lifo r n ia .,,____ 2 1,263
Colorado_________
196
Connecticut______
Delaware____ . .
Dist. o f Columbia.
Florida__________
Georgia__________

135
28
21
184
186

Idaho_________ . .
Illinois.____ _____
Indiana.. _______
Iowa_____________
Kansas___________

131
423

55

77

1,719
1,182

+ 1.2
+. 4

6,856

293
150
166

6,173
4, 138
2,671

-24.5

-.7
-2 .1

1,156,644
129, 583

- 2 .8
- 2 .7

234
66

9,907
1,488

-.7
- 2 .0
-.5
- 1 .8
-.2

279, 703
28, 774
227, 414
97, 518
172, 002

-.3
- 5 .9
+ 1.2
- 7 .2
- 5 .3

26
6
51
59
28

1,028
252
3,803
1,052
1,128

+ 1.4
12,284
1, 772,321
-0 °)
+ .2
200, 454
+ 1.7
198, 431
+ 5.8
157,033

- 5 .5

+ 1.0
- 1 .4
+ 5.7

24
42 45
81
73

-.2
+ 1.3
+ 3.0

K entucky-----------Louisiana________
M aine_____
___
Maryland . . ___
Massachusetts___

is 134

12,289
44,262

-4
+ .3

M ichigan----------Minnesota---------Mississippi----------M is s o u r i..--------M ontana--------------

411
225
190
184
100

20, 300
11, 609
1,611
18, 942
1,763

- 1 .1
+• 2
+ 2 .2
-1 .1
- 8 .1

Nebraska----------N evada----------- --N ew Ham pshire-.
New Jersey---------N ew M exico_____

299
36
140
265
49

5,482
376
2,131
21,023
480

-.3
-3 .1
-2 . 2
-.4
+ 1.7

N ew Y ork _______
North Carolina.. .
North Dakota____
Ohio_________ . . .
Oklahoma________
O regon __________
Pennsylvania------Rhode Island. . . .
South Carolina___
South Dakota____
Tennessee________
Texas______
Utah_____________
Verm ont_________
Virginia__________
Washington--------West Virginia. _ . .
W yom ing____ . .

139, 910
88, 728
73,049

-2 .7

- 2 .2
- 2 .6
+ 2.9

32

35
24
28

327

- 6 .5
+ 1.8
+21.5

- 1 .4
- 1 .6
-.9
+. 3
+ 5 .2

183
823
43
70
129

5,496
58,428
3,378
1,682
918

-.9
129, 698
- 1 .0 1, 517, 374
+ 4.4
96, 084
+ 2.9
33, 400
+ 3 .0
22,836

244

4,167

+ .9

168,968

+ 2 .0

63
121
179

1, 588
981
5, 569

(»)
+2.1
+ 1.0

33, 855
25, 370
129, 272

- 2 .2
+ 5 .4
- 4 .0

12
25
32

9,457
5, 626

-.6
-1 . 2

- 4 .3
-2 .9

86
41
42 46
14

48

412

+ 2 .2

2 State report not received.
Less than one tenth of 1 percent,
n N o change.
12 Includes restaurants.


https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis

9,904

+ 1 .2

16,012
19,458
9,924

- . 8 3, 008, 587
96, 331
+ 1.4
1,699
33, 248
1,132
- 1 .4
27, 306
31, 306 + ( 10)
794, 280
+ 4.8
128, 056
5, 778

241,067
142, 643

3,670

- 9 .8
+ 2 .0
+40.3

1, 578
1,908
922

880
96
170
484
245

256,298

- 3 .5

- 4 .7
-.7

44
14
17
77
16

- .2

-(10)
- 7 .3
- 7 .1
- 3 .1

7,303

-3 .3
+ 2.3
- 6 .9
+ .2
-.7

10, 023

13, 414
2, 981
53, 647
9,915
8,598

1 .2

720

132, 988
10, 464
56, 542
591, 769
9,904

200
124

- 1 .4
+ 3.3
- 3 .7
- 7 .1
- 2 .8

+ 2 1 .1

4, 851
2, 935
527
4, 661
409

™42

- 2 .9
+ 4.9

29, 626
20, 018

105
75
19
95
29

90, 355

146,881
18, 982

140, 877

+ 1.7
+ .8
- 5 .2
- 1 .4
-1 1 .8

+ .7

- 1 .3
+ 5 .7

- 3 .3
- 6 .2

575, 045
302, 577
31, 302
496, 468
49,019

6,329

-17.5

+26.2

1,187
3,303

115

- 1 .0
- 4 .7

4,224

2, 968
2, 231

24
84

329, 938
,

1 2 2 2 ,6 8 4

$8, 633
5, 756

Per­
cent of
change

9,747

+ 4 .2
+1-4

H

- 0 .4
- 6 .5

530

9,341
1,059
7,915
3,876
6,403

27

1,049
418

13

44,081
5,196

635

23
19

+4.2

+ 2 .2

8, 536
9,189

- 3 .5
- 4 .2

38,356

1,613

6 6 ,1 4 6

$33, 804
29, 515

N um ­
Amount
N um ­
ber on
of pay
Per­ ber of
Per­
roll (1
pay
cent of
cent of estab­
roll,
week),
lish­
change
change
June
June
ments
1933
1933

-

14,348
46,900

-2 .3
- 1 .2

+11.6
+ 1.1
+ 9.1
+ 1.0
+ 3 .0

47,866
32, 339
3, 689
53,310
5,505

+ 6 .5
- 6 .0
+ 7 .9
-.8
+ 2.0

1, 502
162
335
4, 240
335

-.3
+20.0
+24. 1
+12.9
+ 9.8

14, 031
2, 650
3, 502
49, 224
3, 407

- 5 .1
+22.9
+19.2
+ 6 .4
+ 9 .6

271
33
24
153
51

28, 808
1,110
388
8, 754
1,149

-. 1
- 3 .0
-.3
-.7
+ .5

432, 716
9, 571
3, 825
104, 446
11,102

- 1 .1
- 1 .8
-.5
-.6
- 3 .3

- 8 .0
- 1 .8
+ 7 .2
-.7
- 2 .7

57
181
18
14
19

951
9, 507
395
428
323

+ 5.4
+ 1.7
+ 3.9
-.9
- 1 .2

11, 307
113, 504
5,165
3, 066
3, 617

+ 1 .5
+ 1.3
+ 2 .0
- 1 .5
+ .3

- 3 .2

41

2,331

+ 5 .0

-3 .9
- . 8

43

2,914

-2 .7

-2 .5

+ .2

-

1 .6

446
559
1,818

+3. 2
+ 6 .5
- 2 .4

2,262
1,118

+ 1 .9
+3. 2

1,381

168

+3.6
+ 3 .7

19, 435

+ 3 .0

5, 479
5,619
19,068

+ 4 .5
+ 7 .8
-.4

24,985
11,694

+ 2 .0
+ 2 .2

32, 500

-5 .1

( 15)

2,223

is Includes steam railroads.
14 Includes railways and express.
15 Data not supplied.

+ 3 .9

430

MONTHLY LABOR R EV IEW

C O M P A R IS O N OF E M P L O Y M E N T A N D P A Y R O LLS IN ID E N T IC A L E S T A B L IS H M E N T S
IN M A Y A N D JU NE 1933, B Y S T A T E S —Continued
[Figures in italics are not compiled b y the Bureau of Labor Statistics, but are taken from reports issued b y
cooperating State organizations]
Laundries

State

Alabama..
A rizon a ...
Arkansas..
California.
Colorado..
Connecticut_____
Delaware________
Dist. of Columbia.
Florida__________
Georgia........ .........
I d a h o ...
Illinois-.
Indiana.
Iowa___
Kansas..
Kentucky_____
Louisiana_____
M aine________
Maryland_____
Massachusetts.

Dyeing and cleaning

N um ­
Amount
N um ­
of pay
ber of ber on
Per­
pay
roll (1
estab­
cent of
roll,
week),
lish­
change
June
June
ments
1933
1933
5
1C

481
379

$3, 548
5, 08E

+ 3.9
- 1 .1

3

101

- 7 .3

$1, 062

- 7 .2

5,89C
574

105,647
7, 388

+ .1
+ .5

Ï5
10

864
151

- 1 .5
+10.2

16,995
2,690

- 3 .5
+18.4

1,289
304
2,437
325
663

+ 4.0
+ 5.2
+ 7 .6
-.6
+ 1 .2

20, 988
4, 759
36, 617
2, 924
5, 736

+ 8 .8
+ 6.7
+ 8 .6
- 7 .5
- 1 .4

11
3
5

244
46
144

+ 8 .0
+ 9.5
+25.2

4, 996
737
2, 429

+ 7.7
+18.5
+17.8

5

113

-.9

1,172

+ 4 .2

+3.2

21,119

+ 3 .i

18,310
2, 869

+2.9
11

200

+ 1 .0

3,079

- 4 .6

5

240

+ 4 .8

3,514

+ 3.6

77

8

405
2,007

+ 5.0

+ .2

5,229
33,891

+7.2
+7.3

15
9

617
320

+ 3.7
+ 6.3

10,879
5,141

- 1 .3
+ 7 .7

12

428

+ 7.3

6,993

+ 3 .0

4

107

+ 2.9

1,856

+ 2.3

8

259

+ 8.4

6,466

+12.5

15

553

+ 8.6

11, 227

+ 9.1

39
3

1,665
73

+ 4.1
+ 5.8

27,977
768

+ 6.0
+ 3 .6

20
5

1,129
342

+ 2.8
+11.0

20, 204
6,031

+ 6 .0
+ 6 .9

- 1 .6
+ 6 .6

S69

2 105
8
28

4

Per­
cent of
change

+ 3.4
(»)
+ .5
-.6
+ .7

13

18
7
12

Amount
N um ­ N um ­
of pay
Per­ ber of ber on
Per­
roll (1
pay
cent of estab­
cent of
roll,
w eek),
change lish­
June change
June
ments
1933
1933

1,621

3,3^5

¡«26
IS
3
16 37

1,437
207

987

+1.2

16

1,053

+47.3

9,491

+ 6 .4

17

350

+2.C

4, 566

+ 4.1

+ 2.9
+ 2.7

15, 648

+ .3

25
m

1,896
3,732

+5.9
+1.9

28,061
59,632

+7.6
+3.6

M ich igan,.
M innesota..
Mississippi.
Missouri___
M on tana...

19
11
5
34
14

1, 318
720
244
2,510
316

+ 1.5
+ 3.9
(" )
+3.-8
C11)

15, 643
11,455
2, 241
33, 730
5, 415

+ 6.7
+ 8.1
+ 1.6
+ 4.7
+ 2 .8

Nebraska______
Nevada________
NewHampshire.
N ew Jersey____
N ew M exico___

6
3
16
25
4

521
37
272
2,802
192

+ 7.9
- 2 .6
+ 4.6
+ 2.3
- 2 .0

7,126
684
3, 994
55, 288
2,852

+11.7
- 2 .4
+ 4.9
+ 5 .7
-.9

N ew Y ork _____
North Carolina.
North Dakota...
Ohio____ ______
Oklahoma_____

70
12
10
78
7

6,870
755
198
4,050
601

+ 3 .5
+ 3.9
+ .5
+1.1
+ .3

114, 889
7, 677
2, 927
58, 473
7,169

+ 5 .0
+ 4 .6
+ 1.4
+ 3 .2
- 3 .6

Oregon_________
P enn sylvania...
Rhode Isla n d .. .
South C arolinaSouth D a k ota .._

38
18
8
7

2, 902
1,082
286
129

+ 4 .2
+ 1 .8
+ 1.1
00

41,821
18,412
2,571
1,681

+ 5.2
+ 7 .0
+ 2.8
-.8

Tennessee .
Texas____
U tah_____
V erm ont..
V irginia...

12
22
7
4
10

848
1,204
503
46
735

+ 5 .2
+ 4 .6
+ 1 .4
- 9 .8
+10. 0

6,861
12,418
6,859
582
8,292

+ 3 .0
+ .4
+ 3 .9
- 1 .9
+10.9

15
7

456
109

O')
+ 1.9

6,937
2,037

20

269

+ 7.6

3,692

+ 9.4

W ashington...
West Virginia.
Wisconsin____
W yom ing____

14
17

608
600

(»)
+ 2 .2

+1.9

1,104
7, 514

110
191

(“ )
+ .5

1,638
2, 433

+ 8.8
-.5

+ 2.6

+2.9

9
8

80

12, 617

-.8
+ 3.9

1,396

+ 6.3

16 28
4

977

2 State report not received.


https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis

11 N o change.

16 Include dyeing and cleaning.

431

TREND OF EMPLOYMENT
C O M P A R IS O N

OF E M P L O Y M E N T A N D P A Y R O L L S IN ID E N T IC A L E S T A B L IS H ­
M E N T S IN M A Y A N D JU N E 1933, B Y S T A T E S — Continued

[Figures in italics are not compiled b y the Bureau of Labor Statistics, but are taken from reports issued b y
cooperating State organizations]
Banks, brokerage, insurance, and real estate
State

Am ount of
Number N um ber on Percent of pay roll (1 Percent of
of estab­ pay roll,
change week), June change
lishments June 1933
1933
15
28
18
1,112
25

338
192
216
22, 611
1,027

- 0 .3
- 2 .0
+ .5
+ .9
-1 .0

$9, 240
5, 325
5,255
741, 777
34,452

- 4 .2
-1 .2
+■4
+ 2.1
- 1 .0

57
14
42
16
22

2,012
550
1,316
419
625

-.2
+ .7
+ .7
-.9
+ 2.1

72,483
19, 220
48, 766
15,005
20, 240

+ 1 .5
+ 3 .2
+ 1 .3
+ .3
+ 1 .5

15
85
37
18

125
9,036
1,137
1,079

- 3 .1
-.2
+ .3
+• 3

3,146
318,898
38, 591
34, 654

- 2 .1
+ .8
+ 1 .3
-.3

+1.8

U, 866

+2.3
+• 6
-2 5 .2
(»)
+ .4
-.1

H

Utah

............... - __________________ _____

li N o change.


https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis

798

18
10
12
22
222

664
417
178
841
8,029

+ .5
-4 7 .5
+ 3 .5
+ .7
-.2

24,165
15,565
4, 654
32, 267
255,103

128
51
16
82
18

2,000
2,649
165
4,689
204

- 1 .3
+ 3 .4
+ .6
+ .7
- 1 .4

63,574
74, 300
3,709
142,118
6,310

- 7 .5
+ .3
-.8
+ .1
- 1 .3

17,642

+ .5

13

487

-.4

33
100
15

286
12,226
82

-.3
+ .4
- 1 .2

625
22
35
246
19

47,188
180
206
8,068
457

+ 2 .0
-.6
-.5
+ 5.1
+ .2

1,656, 628
3,867
4, 923
257,067
13, 670

+ 1.7
-.4
- 2 .1
+ 4 .8
+ 1.1

16
804
28
8
26

394
23,345
981
87
182

- 7 .5
+ .3
+ .1
(“ )
+ .6

13,145
734, 606
39, 007
2, 550
4,492

- 9 .7
+ .4
+ .3
+ .6
-.2

26
19
14
25
31

888
1,224
444
2D
1,291

+ .1
- 1 .2
-.4
+1.1
+ 1 .6

31, 763
33, 002
15, 680
6,018
41, 752

+ 1 .9
-.4
- 2 .0
- 1 .1
+ 1 .8

31
40
17
9

1,154
591
918
8(

+ •1
+ 1 .2

37, 846
17, 065
30, 780
2, 350

-.9
+ .4
-1 .2
+ 1 .8

+1+

6, 769
365,005
2,479 .

-.6
+ 1 .6
+ 1.1

432

MONTHLY LABOR R E V IE W

Employment and Pay Roll in June 1933 in Cities of Over
500,000 Population

N THE following table are presented the fluctuations in employ­
ment and pay-roll totals in June 1933 as compared with May
1933 in 13 cities of the United States having a population of 500,000
or over. These changes are computed from reports received from
identical establishments in each of the months considered.
In addition to including reports received from establishments in the
several industrial groups regularly covered in the Bureau's survey,
excluding building construction, reports have also been secured from
other establishments in these cities for inclusion in these totals.
Information concerning employment in building construction is not
available for all cities at this time and therefore has not been included.

I

F L U C T U A T IO N S IN E M P L O Y M E N T A N D P A Y R O L L IN JUNE
W IT H M A Y 1933

Cities

New York C ity ________
Chicago, 111 . _ ________
Philadelphia, Pa________
Detroit, M ich ___________
Los Angeles, Calif_______
Cleveland, Ohio_________
St. Louis, M o _________
Baltimore, M d _________
Boston, Mass____________
Pittsburgh, P a__________
San Francisco, Calif_____
Buffalo, N .Y . . . . ___ __
Milwaukee, W is_______

Number of
establish­
ments re­
porting in
both
months

M ay 1933

June 1933

5,125
1,818
852
533
851
1,127
515
559
3, 069
421
1, 161
396
472

306, 295
195, 760
125, 828
143, 263
64, 073
85, 502
62,188
44, 116
91, 439
53, 922
47, 346
37, 337
37,143

308,271
203,829
129, 667
154, 879
65, 758
90, 291
64, 606
45, 078
92, 111
55, 245
47, 730
39, 079
39, 821

Number on payroll
Percent
of
change

+ 0.6
+ 4.1
+ 3.1
+ 8.1
+ 2 .6
+ 5 .6
+ 3 .9
+ 2 .2
+ 0 .7
+2. 5
+ 0 .8
+ 4 .7
+ 7 .2

1933 AS C O M P A R E D

Amount of pay roll
(1 week)

M a y 1933

June 1933

$8, 070, 546
4, 592, 200
2, 661, 428
3, 383, 848
1, 471, 501
1, 725, 746
1, 321, 457
835, 801
2, 208, 306
1,123, 987
1,130, 996
802, 510
720, 474

$8,090,373
4,826,514
2, 762, 415
3, 555, 774
1, 544, 485
1, 856, 085
1, 376, 215
862, 735
2,205, 261
1,154, 507
1,142, 597
845, 025
787, 331

Percent
of
change

+ 0 .2
+ 5.1
+ 3.8
+ 5.1
+ 5 .0
+ 7 .6
+ 4.1
+ 3 .2
- 0 .1
+ 2 .7
+ 1 .0
+ 5 .3
+ 9 .3

Employment in the Executive Civil Service of the United States,
June 1933

Comparing June 1933 with June 1932, there was a decrease of 12,799
employees in the executive Civil Service of the United States. Com­
paring June 1933 with May 1933, there was a decrease of 8,474
employees.
These figures do not include the legislative, judicial, or Army and
Navy services. The information as shown in the table was compiled
by the various departments and offices of the United States Govern­
ment and sent to the United States Civil Service Commission where
it was assembled. The data were tabulated by the Bureau of Labor
Statistics and published here by courtesy of the Civil Service Commis­
sion and in compliance with the direction of Congress. No informa­
tion has as yet been collected relative to amounts of pay rolls. In­
formation is presented for the District of Columbia, for the Federal
service outside of the District of Columbia, and for the Government
service as a whole. Approximately 12 percent of the total number of
Federal workers are employed in the District of Columbia.


https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis

433

TREND OF EMPLOYMENT

T able 1.—E M P L O Y E E S IN T H E E X E C U T IV E C IV IL S E R V IC E OF T H E U N IT E D S T A T E S ,
JUNE 1932, M A Y A N D JU N E 1933

District of Columbia

Outside the District

Entire Service

Perma­ Tem po­
rary 1 Total
nent

Perma­ Tem po­ Total
rary 1
nent

Perma­ Tem po­ Total
rary 1
nent

Item

Number of employees:
June 1932_______________
65, 619
64, 249
M ay 1933_______________
June 1933____ __________
63, 067
Gain or loss:
June 1932-June 1933_____ -2.5 5 2
- 1 , 1S2
M ay 1933-June 1933___
Percent of change:
- 3 .9
June 1932-June 1933 ___
M ay 1933-June 1933-.. _
- 1 .8
Labor turnover, June 1933:
260
Additions______________
1, 442
Separations_____________
0.41
Turnover rate per 100_______

3,174
2,311
2,370

35,877 578,231
37, 600 573,906
35,922 565,432

32, 703 509, 438 542, 354
35, 289 507, 346 536, 306
33, 552 499,995 529,510

68, 793 476, 735
66, 560 472,057
65,437 466,443

-804 - 3 , 356 -1 0 , 292
+45 -12,799
+849 -9,443 -12,844
+59 -1,123 - 5 ; 614 -1,737 -7,351 -6,7 9 6 -1,6 7 8 -8 ,4 7 4
-2 5 .3
+ 2.6

- 4 .9
- 1 .7

- 2 .2
- 1 .2

+ 2.6
- 4 .9

- 1 .9
- 1 .4

- 2 .4
- 1 .3

+ 0.1
- 4 .5

- 2 .2
- 1 .5

452
393
16.79

712
1,835
1.08

1,661
7, 275
0. 35

15, 598
17, 335
45.32

17, 259
24, 610
3.43

1,921
8,717
0. 36

16,050
17, 728
43.66

17,971
26,445
3.15

1 N ot including field service of the Post Office Department.

Comparing June 1933 with June 1932, there was a decrease of 3.9
percent in the number of permanent employees in the District of
Columbia. Temporary employees decreased 25.3 percent during
this period. The total Federal employees in the District of Columbia
decreased 3,356, or 4.9 percent. Comparing June 1933 with May
1933, there was a decrease of 1.8 percent in the number of permanent
employees and a increase of 2.6 percent in the number of temporary
employees, which makes a decrease of 1.7 percent in the total Federal
employees in the District of Columbia.
Outside the District of Columbia, the number of permanent em­
ployees decreased 1.2 percent and the number of temporary employees
decreased 4.9 percent; the total Federal employment decreased 1.5
percent, comparing June 1933 with May 1933.
Table 2 shows employment and the pay rolls in the Emergency
Conservation Corps, sometimes known as the Forest Service.
T able 2 .—E M P L O Y M E N T A N D P A Y R O L L S IN T H E E M E R G E N C Y C O N S E R V A T IO N
C O R P S, M A Y A N D JU NE 1933

Number

Reserve officers—L in e...
_____________________ . _
Reserve officers—M edical_______ _____________________

Payrolls
M ay

M ay

June

June

186, 973
1,045
472
2,623

272, 219
1,132
867
7,236

$5, 839,173
0)
(0
378,421

$8, 501, 403

191,113

281,454

6, 217, 594

9,374,996

8

873,593

i Data not available.

On May 31, there were in the Emergency Conservation Corps
186,973 enrolled personnel. On June 30, there were 272,219 enrolled
personnel. In addition to the men enrolled for forest duty, there were
a supervisory and technical civilian force and line and medical Re­
serve officers in the Emergency Conservation Corps.


https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis

434

MONTHLY LABOR R EV IEW

There were 191,113 persons employed in the Emergency Conserva­
tion Corps as a whole on May 31, 1933. By June 30 this number had
increased to 281,454. The pay of the enrolled personnel is $30 per
month, except that 5 percent of the members of each company are paid
$45 per month and an additional 8 percent paid $36 per month.
The pay rolls as shown for the enrolled personnel were figured on this
basis. For the month of June, the civilians in the Emergency Con­
servation Corps were paid over $9,000,000. Pay-roll data, however,
were not available for either the line or medical reserve officers.

Employment on Class I Steam Railroads in the United States

EPORTS of the Interstate Commerce Commission for class I
railroads show that the number of employees (exclusive of
executives and officials) increased from 926,222 on May 15, 1933, to
945,173 on June 15, 1933, or 2 percent. Data are not yet available
concerning total compensation of employees for June 1933. The
latest pay-roll information available shows an increase from
$102,257,898 in April to $108,411,242 in May, or 6 percent.
The monthly trend of employment from January 1923 to June 1933
on class I railroads— that is, all roads having operating revenues of
$1,000,000 or over—is shown by index numbers published in the
following table. These index numbers are constructed from monthly
reports of the Interstate Commerce Commission, using the 12-month
average for 1926 as 100.

R

T a b l e 1.—IN D E X E S

OF E M P L O Y M E N T ON CLASS I S T E A M R AIL R O AD S IN T H E
U N IT E D S T A T E S , J A N U A R Y 1923 T O JU NE 1933
[12-month average, 1926=100]

M onth

1923

1924

1925

1926

1927

1928

1929

1930

1931

1932

January______
... _
February_____________
M arch.............................
A pril_______ ________
M a y __________________
June______ ___________
July__________________
August___________ _ _
September.________
October_______ _ . . .
Novem ber____________
D ecem ber.....................

98.3
98.6
100.5
102.0
105.0
107.1
108.2
109.4
107.8
107.3
105.2
99.4

96.6
97.0
97.4
98.9
99.2
98.0
98.1
99.0
99. 7
100.8
99.0
96.0

95.6
95.4
95.2
96.6
97.8
98.6
99.4
99.7
99.9
100.7
99.1
97.1

95.8
96.0
96.7
98.9
100.2
101.6
102.9
102.7
102.8
103.4
101.2
98.2

95.5
95.3
95.8
97.4
99.4
100.9
101.0
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

88.2
88.9
90.1
92.2
94.9
96.1
96.6
97.4
96.8
96.9
93.0
88.8

86.3
85.4
85.5
87.0
88.6
86.5
84.7
83.7
82. 2
80.4
77.0
74.9

73.3
72.7
72.9
73.5
73.9
72.8
72.4
71.2
69.3
67.7
64.5
62.6

61.2
60.3
60.5
60.0
59.7
57.8
56.4
55.0
55.8
57.0
55.9
54.8

53.0
52.7
51.5
51.8
52.5
53.6

A v e r a g e ........... . 104.1

98.3

97.9

100.0

97.5

92.9

93.3

83.5

70.6

57.9

1 52.5

* Average for 6 months.


https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis

1933

435

TREND OF EMPLOYMENT

Unemployment in Foreign Countries

HE following table gives detailed monthly statistics of unem­
ployment in foreign countries, as shown in official reports from
June 1931 to the latest available date:

T

S T A T E M E N T OF U N E M P L O Y M E N T IN F O R E IG N C O U N T R IE S
Australia

Date (end of month)

Trade-unionists
unemployed

Number

Percent

118,424
0)
(>)
120, 694
0)
0)
118, 732

27.6

1931
June..........
July---------August___
September.
October__
November.
December .

28.3
28.0

Austria

Belgium

Compul­
sory in­
surance,
number
unem­
ployed
in receipt
of benefit

Unemployment-insurance societies
W holly unemployed Partiallyunemployed
Number

0)
0)
120, 366
(>)
(0
124, 068
0)
(>)
122, 340
0)
0)
115, 042

28.3
30.0
29.6
28.1

1933
January..
February.
M arch___
A pril____
M a y ____
June____

109,182

Canada
Date (end of month)

1931
June________________________
July________________________
August
_____
September___________ _____
October____________ ______
Novem ber
.
____
Decem ber________ _____ ___
1932
January. _________ _______
February. _ ----- . . . . . . . . .
M arch..
- - _ ___ ...
April...
...
.. .
M a y _______________________
June_______________________
July________________________
A ugust___________ ________
September _______
_______
October____________________
Novem ber.
Decem ber. __________ . . 1933
January___ _ _ _ _
-----February .
. . . . . . . . .. .
M arch___________ _________
A pril____ _ . ------------------June_______________________
1 N ot reported.


https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis

26.5

Percent

62, 642
64, 644
70,893
74,175
82,811
93, 487
128,884

8.9
9. 1
9.9
10.3
11.3
13.3
17.0

101,616
116, 747
120, 669
119,433
122, 733
134, 799
159,941

358,114
361, 948
352, 444
303, 888
271, 481
265, 040
266, 365
269,188
275, 840
297, 791
329, 707
367,829

153,920
168, 204
155, 653
152, 530
160, 700
153, 659
169,411
167, 212
163,048
157,023
154, 657
171,028

20.0
21.3
19.4
18.8
18.9
18.7
19.6
19.5
18.3
17.7
17.7
18.6

179, 560
180, 079
185,267
183, 668
191, 084
173, 819
174, 646
170, 081
166,160
148, 812
144, 583
155, 669

23.2
22.8
23.0

397,920
401, 321
379, 693
350, 552
320,955
307,873

207, 136
201, 305
195, 715
180, 143

22.1

196, 237
185, 052
186, 942
187, 222

20 . 9

21. 0
20. 1
18.2

Danzig
(Free
C ity of)

Czechoslovakia

Percent Number
of trade- of unem­
unionists ployed
unem­
on live
ployed
register

Number

191,150
194, 364
196, 321
202,130
228,101
273, 658
329, 627

1932
Jan uary...
F ebruary..
M arch____
A pril_____
M a y ______
June______
July______
August___
September.
O ctob er.. .
November.
December.

Percent

Trade-union insur­
ance funds—un­
employed in re­
ceipt of benefit

Number
of unem­
ployed
registered

14.4
16.3
16.8
16.6
16.8
19.2
21.1

22.6

22.5
21 . 2
20.3
19.9
18.9
16.8
16.3
16.9
19. 3
19. 2
18. 8

Denmark
Trade-union unem­
ployment funds—
unemployed

Number

Percent

220, 038
209, 233
214, 520
228, 383
253,518
336, 874
480,775

82, 534
82, 759
86, 261
84, 660
88, 600
106, 015
146, 325

6.6
6.6
6.9
6.7
6.9
8.2
11.3

19, 855
20,420
21, 509
22,922
24, 932
28,966
32,956

34, 030
36,369
35,060
35, 871
47,196
66, 526
91, 216

11.3
11.8
11.8
12.1
16.0
22.3
30.4

22.0
583,138
20.6
631, 736
20.4
633, 907
555, 832
23.0
22.1
487, 228
466, 948
21.9
21.8
453, 294
21.4
460, 952
486, 935
20.4
22.0 ■ 533, 616
608, 809
22.8
25.5
746,311

186, 308
197, 621
195, 076
180, 456
171, 389
168, 452
167, 529
172,118
170, 772
173, 706
190, 779
239, 959

14.0
14.8
14.6
13.3
12.6
12.3
12.2
12.5
12.3
12.4
13.5
16.9

34,912
36, 258
36,481
33, 418
31,847
31,004
29,195
28, 989
30,469
31,806
35, 507
39, 042

105, 600
112, 346
113, 378
90, 704
79,931
80, 044
92,732
95, 770
96, 076
101, 518
113, 273
138, 335

35.1
37.3
37.5
29.9
26.1
25.6
29.5
30.5
30.4
31.8
35.6
42.8

872, 775
920.182
877,955
797, 516
726, 629
674, 497

300, 210
305, 036
295, 297
264, 530

20.5
20.7
20.2
17.9

40, 726
39,843
38, 313
36, 205
33,372

141, 354
139,831
116, 762
95, 619
84, 201

43.5
42.8
35.4
28.9
25.4

16.3
16.2
15.8
18.1
18.3
18.6
21.1

25.5
24. 3
25.1
24.5
23.8

Number

Percent

436

MONTHLY LABOR R EV IEW
S T A T E M E N T OF U N E M P L O Y M E N T IN F O R E IG N C O U N T R IE S — Continued
Estonia

Finland

Number
unem ­ Number
ployed of unem­
remain­
ployed
ing on
regis­
tered
live
register

Date (end of month)

France

Germany
Trade-unionists

Number
of unem ­
ployed
in receipt
of benefit

Number
of unem ­
ployed
registered

Percent
wholly
unem­
ployed

Percent
partially
unem­
ployed

Number
unem­
ployed in
receipt of
benefit

1931
June___________
July---------------------------------August_____________
September
October
November
December____ __

931
634
933
2,096
5, 425
7, 554
9,055

6,320
6, 790
9,160
12,176
14, 824
18, 095
17, 223

36, 237
35, 916
37, 673
38, 524
51, 654
92,157
147,009

3,954, 000
3,976, 000
4, 215, 000
4, 355, 000
4, 623, 480
5,059, 773
5, 668,187

29.7
31.0
33.6
35. 0
36.6
38.9
42. 2

17. 7
19. 1
21. 4
22. 2
22.0
21.8
22.3

2,353, 657
2, 231, 513
2, 376, 589
2, 483, 364
2, 534, 952
2, 771,985
3,147, 867

1532
January.. . . .
...
February
M arch________ . .
A p ril.. ____ .
M a y . ______ _. _ _
June_____ ___ . .
July_______________________
August_______
September_____ . .
October________ . . .
November
. .
December___ .

9,318
9,096
8, 395
6,029
4,896
3,137
2, 022
3,256
5,957
8,901
10,715
13. 727

20, 944
18,856
17, 699
16, 885
13,189
12, 709
13, 278
16, 966
18, 563
19, 908
21, 690
20, 289

241,487
293,198
303, 218
282, 013
262,184
232, 371
262, 642
264, 253
259, 237
247, 090
255, 411
277,109

6, 041, 910
6,128, 429
6,034,100
5,934, 202
5, 582, 620
5,475, 778
5,392, 248
5, 223, 810
5,102, 750
5,109,173
5, 355, 428
5, 772,852

43.6
44.1
44. 6,
43.9
43.3
43. 1
43.9
44.0
43.6
42.9
43. 2
45.1

22.6
22.6
22.6
21.1
22.9
20. 4
23.0
23. 2
22. 7
22.6
22. 1
22. 7

3, 481, 418
3, 525, 486
3,323,109
2,906, 890
2,658, 042
2, 484,944
2, 111, 342
1,991, 985
1. 849, 768
1,720, 577
1,768, 602
2,073,101

16, fill
15,437
14, 512
11,680
4,857

23,178
20, 731
19, 083
17, 732
13,082

315,364
330, 874
313, 518
309,101
282, 545
256,197

6, 013, 612
6, 000, 958
5, 598, 855
5,331, 252
5,038,640
4, 855,951

46.2
47.4
52. 7
46.3
44. 7

23.7
24. 1
22. 2
22. 6
21.6

2. 372,066
2,455,428
2,165, 891
1, 938, 910
1,801,930

1933
January________ _
February
March____ ______ .
April_______________ .
M a y ____________ _
June____________ .

Great Britain and Northern
Ireland

Great
Britain

Hungary

Trade-unionists
unemployed
Number
of persons
Temporary
registered
stoppages
with em ­ Christian
Social
ployment (Buda­
Dem o­
pest)
exchanges
Per­
cratic
Number
cent

Compulsory insurance
Date (end of month)
W holly unem­
ployed

1931
June.- . . _______________
July----------------------------------August____________ ______
September. ....
. . . ___
October___________________
November .
....
December.
1932
January ._
._ _____ _ _
February. . . . . . . . .
March .
....................
April . . . .
M a y . . ___ _________ ____
J u n e ...
._ . . . . . .
July______________________
August___ ____ ___ _____
S eptem ber... . .
. . . _.
October
..
. .
November . . . .
D e cem b er___ _ . _ __ . . .
1933
January. _ ._ ____________
February _______________
M a r c h ... ________________
April____ ______ ______ _
M ay... . . .
. . . . ____
J u n e ... . _____________

Compulsory in­
surance—
number
unem­
ployed

Number

Per­
cent

2, 037, 480
2, 073,892
2,142,821
2, 217, 080
2, 305, 388
2, 294, 902
2, 262, 700

16.4
16.7
17.3
17.9
18. 1
18.0
17.7

669, 315
732, 583
670, 342
663, 466
487, 591
439, 952
408,117

5.4
5.9
5.4
5.3
3.8
3.4
3.2

2, 629, 215
2, 662, 765
2, 732,434
2,879, 466
2, 755, 559
2, 656,088
2, 569,949

751
876
941
932
1,020
1,169
1, 240

23, 660
26,329
28,471
28, 716
28,998
29,907
31,906

21, 427
21, 647
21, 897
23, 427
26, 353
30, 865
30, 918

2,354,044
2, 317, 784
2, 233, 425
2, 204, 740
2.183, 683
2,145,157
2,185, 015
2, 215, 704
2, 279, 779
2, 295, 500
2, 328, 920
2, 314, 528

18.4
18. 2
17.5
17.3
17. 1
16.8
17. 1
17.4
17.9
17.9
18.2
18.1

500, 746
491,319
426, 989
521, 705
638,157
697, 639
735, 929
731,104
645, 286
515,405
520,105
461, 274

4. 0
3.8
3.3
4. 1
5.0
5.5
5.8
5. 7
5.0
4.0
4.0
3.6

2, 728,411
2, 701,173
2, 567, 332
2, 652,181
2, 741, 306
2, 747,343
2,811,782
2.859,828
2,858, Oil
2, 747,006
2, 799,806
2,723, 287

1,182
1,083
1,024
961
922
960
940
947
1. 022
1,091
1,072
1,106

32,711
32, 645
31, 340
30, 057
28, 835
28, 372
28, 297
28,186
27,860
28, 654
29, 336
30, 967

31,95S
31,162
30, 866
32, 252
35, 874
2 66, 912
2 77, 648
2 57, 081
2 80, 923
2 70, 067
2 102, 747
2 102, 619

2,422, 808
2, 394,106
2, 310, 062
2, 200, 397
2, 128, 614
2,029,185

18.9
18. 7
18.0
17.2
16. 6
15.8

532,640
520, 808
511, 309
536, 882
497, 705
468,868

4.2
4. 1
4.0
4. 2
3. 9
3.7

2,903, 065
2, 856, 638
2, 776,184
2, 697,634
2, 582, 879
2, 438,108

1,178
1, 210
1,131
1,080
1,104

31,431
30,955
29, 771
28, 521
26, 778

2 95, 577
2 88, 747
2 82, 503
2 70, 039
2 65, 296
2 60, 578

2 Registration area extended.


https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis

Irish Free
State

437

TKEND OF E M P LO Y M E N T
S T A T E M E N T OF U N E M P L O Y M E N T IN F O R E IG N C O U N T R IE S —Continued

573, 593
637, 531
693, 273
747, 764
799, 744
878, 267
982, 321

24, 206
25, 821
30, 656
29, 822
32, 828
30, 967
32, 949

391, 377
406, 923
418, 596
425, 526
439, 014
454, 675
470,736

5.6
5.8
6.0
6.0
6.0
6.5
6.7

1,584
2,169
4,827
7, 470
13, 605
18, 377
21, 935

59, 573
69, 026
70,479
72, 738
84, 548
107, 372
147,107

11.7
13.3
15.3
15.7
18.0
18.5
27.8

1, 051, 321
1,147, 945
1, 053, 016
1, 000, 025
968, 456
905, 097
931, 291
945,972
949, 408
956, 357
1, 038, 757
1,129, 654

33, 277
26, 321
31, 636
32, 720
35, 528
31,710
33, 218
33, 666
37, 043
32, 556
36, 349
37, 644

485, 885
485, 290
473, 757
482, 366
483,109
481, 589
510, 901
509, 580
505, 969
503, 958
484, 213
463,403

6.9
6.9
6.8
6.9
6.9
6.8
7.2
7.1
7.0
7.0
6.7
6.4

26, 335
22, 222
22, 912
14, 607
7, 599
7, 056
7,181
9, 650
8, 762
13, 806
17, 621
17, 247

145,124
139, 956
119, 423
121, 378
112, 325
113, 978
123, 947
116, 524
126, 510
128, 961
142,554
188, 252

27.0
25.4
21. 6
21.7
22. 5
22.8
24. 6
22.9
24.9
25.2
27. 6
31.5

1, 225, 470
1, 229, 387
1, 081, 536
1, 025, 754
L 000,128
----------- . ' 883! 621

33, 003
34, 506
29,129
51,871
45', 183

444,032
438, 250
424, 287

6.1
6.1
5.8

14, 777
13, 886
13, 087
10,377
5! 931

226, 709
187, 652
165, 367
147, 531
123,447
117', 805

37.6
31. 1
27.3
24. 3
25. 3
22.5

1933
January. _ _ ________________
F e b ru a ry ____
. __________
M arch
. . . . . .
Ju n e... . . ------ .

Netherlands

Unemployment in­
Official estimates, Number
Number of unem­
surance societies—
ployed registered
unemployed
unem­
unemployed
ployed
remain­
Partially
W holly
ing on live Number Percent
unem­
unem­
Number Percent
register
ployed
ployed

Date (end of month)

1931
June __ _ ______
.
----July__________________________
A u g u st... ___
______ ^ _
September__________ ________
October________ . . .
_ ____
N ovem ber
. _
D ecem ber. ____ __ . . . _____
1932
January . ___________ _____
February. . . . . . ________
M a rch ..
...
- - - - - - ____
A p r il-.. ------------------- _ -------.
. ..
M a y ... ---------June.-________ - .
July__________________________
August..
. ----------- _ -.
September _.
O ctob er.-------------------- -----------November _______ ______
__
Decem ber______ _.
_______

Latvia

Japan

Italy

N ew Zea­
land

Date (end of month)

1931
July ...
October_____ _________________
November
December
..
____
1932
January------------ . . .
_ .
February . -------- .
M a rch .. . . . . . .
. .
.. .
April
M a y . ___________ . -------- ------June----------------- ----- --------------July-----------------------------------------August-------------- ---------- . . ----_ _ _
September____ . . . .
October_________ _ _ _ _ -------November
December.
_ _
1933
January. .
----- ..
-...
F e b ru a ry ... _ _ _
---------

Norway

Number
Trade-unionists (10
unem­
unions) u n e m ployed
ployed
registered
by em­
ployment
Number
Percent
exchanges 4

Poland

Rumania

Number
unem­
ployed
remaining
on live
register

Number
unem­
ployed
registered
with em­
ployment
offices

Number
unem­
ployed
remaining
on live
register

274, 942
255| 179
246! 380
246! 426
255! 622
266, 027
312, 487

28, 093
29! 250
22! 708
22', 909
28, 800
43, 917
49, 393

45, 264
47, 772
50, 033
51,375
50, 266
47, 535
45,140

3 9,048
10, 577
12,633

3 19.6
22.8
27.2

22, 736
20, 869
22,431
27, 012
29! 340
32, 078
34,789

45, 677
44,107
45, 383
48, 601
53, 543
54, 342
55, 203
56, 332
55, 855
54, 549
52,477
52, 533

14,160
14, 354
15, 342
14, 629
13, 465
12, 603
12, 563
13, 084
14, 358
15, 512
16, 717
20, 735

30.4
30.6
32.5
30.8
28.3
26.2
• 25.9
26.9
29.3
31.6
34. 2
42.4

35, 034
38,135
38, 952
37, 703
32,127
28, 429
26, 390
27, 543
31,431
35, 082
38, 807
41, 571

338,434
350, 145
360, 031
339, 773
306, 801
264,147
218, 059
187, 537
147,166
146, 982
177, 459
220, 245

51,612
57, 606
55, 306
47, 206
39, 654
33, 679
32, 809
29, 654
21, 862
28,172
30, 651
38,471

3 51, 698
3 49, 971
3 51,035
3 52, 096

19, 249
19, 673
18, 992

39.3
40.0
38.5

40, 642
42, 460
42, 437
39,846
35,803
30, 394

264, 258
287. 219
279, 779
258, 954
235, 356
224,566

44,797
45, 371

3 Provisional figure.
4 Includes not only workers wholly unemployed but also those intermittently employed.
3 Strike ended.


https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis

438

M O N T H L Y L A B O R R E V IE W
S T A T E M E N T OF U N E M P L O Y M E N T IN F O R E IG N C O U N T R IE S —Continued

Saar
Territory

Sweden

Yugo­
slavia

Switzerland

Unemployment funds
Date (end of month)

Number
of unem­
ployed
registered

Trade-unionists
unemployed

Number

Per­
cent

W holly unem­
ployed

Number

Per­
cent

Partially unem­
ployed

Number

Number
of unem­
ployed
registered

Per­
cent

1931
June______________ .
July____________________
August______ _________
S eptem b er.._ . . . _ . . .
October_______________
N o v e m b e r... _ . . . _ ._
December____ _____ ____

15,413
17, 685
20, 205
21,741
24, 685
28, 659
35, 045

45, 839
46,180
48, 590
54, 405
65, 469
79, 484
110,149

12. 1
12.4
12.7
13.7
16.4
19.9
27.2

12, 577
12, 200
9, 754
15,188
18, 000
25, 200
41,611

3.6
3.3
3.6
4.0
4.8
6.6
10.1

34, 266
39, (»0
33, 346
42,998
47, 200
51, 900
61, 256

9.7
11.3
12.4
11.2
13.2
14. 4
14.9

4,431
6, 672
7, 466
7, 753
10, 070
10, 349
14; 502

1932
January_______
February______ ________
M a rc h ..
_ ._
April_____ _____ ____
M a y . ___ _____ _ ____
J u n e..
. _
...
July____________________
August.
.
. . .
September .
October. _ _ ______ ._
_ ._
Novem ber_____
December......... ..........

38, 790
42, 394
44, 883
42, 993
42, 881
40,188
39, 063
38,858
40, 320
40, 728
41,962
44, 311

93, 272
93, 900
98, 772
82, 500
75, 650
79, 338
77, 468
80, 975
86, 709
92, 868
97, 666
129, 002

24.5
23. 0
24.4
21.0
18.9
19. 5
19.4
20.0
20. 7
22.2
23.8
31.4

44, 600
48, 600
40, 423
35, 400
35, 200
33, 742
35, 700
36, 600
38, 070
42, 300
50, 500
66, 053

10.6
11.3
9.0
7.7
7.6
7. 1
7.5
7.6
7.8
8. 7
10.3
13.3

67, 600
70,100
62, 659
58, 900
54, 500
53, 420
54, 000
53, 400
52, 967
52,100
55, 700
59, 089

14.8
15.0
14. 0
12. 6
11.5
13.3
11.4
11. 1
10.8
10.6
11.3
11.9

19, 665
21,435
23, 251
18, 532
13, 568
11,418
9, 940
11,940
10, 985
10,474
11, 670
14, 248

1933
January ____
February___ ______
March _ _
April. .
.
M a y . _ _______ ____

45, 700
45,101
42, 258
40, 082
37, 341

120,156
118, 251
121,456
110, 055
93, 360

28.8
27.4
28. 4
26. 1
22.2

83, 400
81, 800
60, 698
49, 100

17.0
16. 5
12.0
9.8

56, 000
57, 400
52, 575
47, 400

11.4
11.6
10.4
9.6

23, 574
25, 346
22, 609
19, 671
15,115


https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis

RETAIL PRICES
Retail Prices of Food on June 15, 1933

HE following tables are compiled from simple averages of the
actual selling prices of the 15th of each month as reported to
the Bureau of Labor Statistics of the United States Department of
Labor by retail dealers in 51 cities. Comparable information by
months and years, 1913 to 1928, inclusive, are shown in Bulletins 396
and 495, and by months and years, 1929 to 1932, in the January,
February, and April 1933 issues of this publication.
Indexes of all articles, combined, or groups of articles combined,
both for cities and for the United States, are weighted according to the
average family consumption. Consumption figures used since Janu­
ary 1921 are given in Bulletin 495 (p. 13). Those used for prior dates
are given in Bulletin 300 (p. 61). The list of articles included in the
groups, cereals, meats, and dairy products, will be found in the May
1932 issue of this publication.
Table 1 shows index numbers of the total weighted retail cost of
important food articles and of three groups of these articles; viz,
cereals, meats, and dairy products, in the United States, 51 cities
combined, by years, 1913 to 1932, inclusive, and by months of 1932
and 1933. These index numbers are based on the year 1913 as 100.

T

T a b l e 1 .— I N D E X N U M B E R S OF T H E T O T A L R E T A IL C O ST OF F O O D A N D OF C E R E A L S ,

M E A T S , A N D D A I R Y P R O D U C T S IN T H E U N IT E D S T A T E S B Y Y E A R S , 1913 T O 1932,
IN C L U S IV E , A N D B Y M O N T H S , J A N U A R Y 1932 T O JU N E 1933, IN C L U S IV E
[1913=100]

Year

1913____________
1914
1915___ ________
1916 .
1917
1918
1919
1920
1921.......................
1922. .
1923
1924
1925.......................
1926........ ............ .
1927____________
1928 . . .
1929 .
1930
1931
1932

All food Cereals Meats

100.0
102. 4
101. 3
113. 7
146. 4
168. 3
185. 9
203. 4
153.3
141.6
146. 2
145. 9
157.4
160. 6
155.4
154.3
156. 7
147.1
121. 3
102.1


https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis

100.0
106. 7
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
158. 0
135. 9
121.1

100.0
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
175.8
147.0
116.0

Dairy
prod­
ucts
100.0
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
136. 5
114. 6
96.6

M onth

All food Cereals Meats

Dairy
prod­
ucts

1932

D ecem ber.. . . .

109. 3
105.3
105. 0
103.7
101. 3
100.1
101. 0
100.8
100.3
100.4
99.4
98.7

126.4
125.0
124.3
122.9
122.6
122.5
121.2
120.4
119.2
119.0
118.0
114.8

123.4
117. 3
118.9
118.6
115.3
113.4
122.6
120.1
119.2
114.6
109.1
103.2

106.5
102.9
101. 9
97.4
94.3
92.6
91.4
93.1
93.5
93.8
93.9
95.9

1933
January. _____
February____ __
M arch___ ______
A pril___________
M a y .. ________
June____________

94.8
90.9
90.5
90.4
93.7
96.7

112.3
112.0
112.3
112.8
115.8
117.2

99.9
99.0
100.1
98.8
100. 1
103.8

98.3
90.3
88.3
88.7
92.2
93.5

February_______
M arch................ _
M a y____________
J u l y ...................
August_____ _
September______

439

MONTHLY LABOR R EV IEW

440

TREND OF RETAIL PRICES OF FOOD
160

140

120

100

80
JAN.

FEB ,

MAR.

APR.

MAY

JUNE

JU LY

AUG.

SEPT.

OCT.

NOV.

DEC.

Table 2 shows index numbers of the total weighted retail costs of
important food articles and of cereals, meats, and dairy products in
the United States based on the year 1913 as 100 and changes in June
1933 compared with June 1932 and May 1933.
T a b l e 2 —I N D E X N U M B E R S OF T H E

T O T A L W E IG H T E D R E T A I L C O ST OF F O O D
A N D OF C E R E A L S , M E A T S , A N D D A I R Y P R O D U C T S F O R T H E U N IT E D S T A T E S ,
A N D P E R C E N T OF C H A N G E , JU NE 15, 1933, C O M P A R E D W IT H JU NE 15, 1932, A N D
M A Y 15, 1933

Percent of change June 15,
1933, compared with—

Index (1913 = 100)
Article

June 15, 1932 M ay 15, 1933 June 15, 1933 June 15, 1932 M ay 15, 1933
100.1
122.5
113.4
92.6

93.7
115.8
100.1
92.2

96.7
117.2
103.8
93.5

- 3 .3
- 4 .3
- 8 .5
+ 1 .0

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

Table 3 shows the average retail prices of 42 principal food articles
for the United States, 51 cities combined, and index numbers for 23
food articles based on the year 1913, for June 15, 1932, and May 15
and June 15, 1933.


https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis

441

RETAIL PRICES

T a b l e 3 .— A V E R A G E R E T A IL P R IC E S A N D I N D E X N U M B E R S OF P R IN C IP A L A R T I ­

C LES OF FO O D IN T H E U N IT E D S T A T E S F O R T H E Y E A R 1913 A N D B Y M O N T H S JU NE
15, 1932, A N D M A Y 15 A N D JUNE 15, 1933

Index number (1913 = 100)

Average price

Sirloin steak__________ - - - _______ poun d..
d o___
Round steak______________ ___
R ib roast---------------------------- __________ d o___
__________
d
o___
Chuck roast_______________
Plate beef................................ __________ d o___
Pork chops________________
Bacon, sliced______________
Ham, sliced....... ............ ........
Lam b, leg of----------------------H ens._____________________

__________ do----_ ________ do___
___ __ ___do___
__________ do
__________ d o-----

_____ 16-oz. ca n ..
M ilk, fresh________________ ................ quart..
___ 14^-oz. ca n ..
Butter. __________________ ________ poun d..
______ _ d o----Cheese----------------- ------------Lard_________ ____________

__________ d o___
Eggs, strictly fresh________ _________ dozen..
B read.____ _______________ ________ pou n d..
Flour....................................... _____ ___do_ -do _
Corn meal____ _ ____ ..
___ _____ do_ __
_-.8-oz. package28-oz. package..
_______ pou n d..
_ do
R ice_______________________ ___
______ __do___
Potatoes___________________ _ ________ d o___

Year June
1913 15,1932 M ay
15

June
15

Cents

Cents

Cents

32.8
28.4
23.5
16.9
10.7

28.4
24.6
20.8
15.1
10.0

29.7
25.8
21.3
15.4
10.0

100.0
100.0
100.0
100.0
100.0

129.1
127.4
118.7
105. 6
88.4

111.8
110.3
105.1
94.4
82.6

116.9
115.7
107.6
96.3
82.6

21.0
27.0
26.9
18.9
21.3

19.7
23.2
34.9
24.3
24.1

18.0
21.3
29.6
21.4
21.5

18.5
22.6
31.5
22.7
21.4

100.0
100.0
100.0
100.0
100.0

93.8
85.9
129.7
128.6
113.1

85.7
78.9
110.0
113.2
100.9

88.1
83.7
117.1
120.1
100.5

25.8
10.8
6. 8
24.1
14.9

18.6
10.0
6.5
28.2
12.8

19.0
10.2
6.7
28.1
13.0

22.3
7.8
19. 6
20.8
6.9

22.3
8 9
18. 5
20.3
6.5

3.2
3.9
7. 6
8.6
22. 5

8.9
38.3
22.1
15.8
34.5
5.6
3.3
3.0

8.7
1.7

5.5
__________ do_. _
__________ d o___

d o___

June
15

25.4
22.3
19.8
16.0
12.1

____ ______d o___
Sugar----- 1________________

Year June
1913 15,1932 M ay
15

Cents

_____ __ _do___

Tea_______________ _______
Coffee____________ _______

1933

1933

Article

54.4
29.8

100.0

121.3

112.4

114.6

100.0

62.9

73.6

73.4

23.1
9.7
18. 5
20.0
6.6

100.0
100.0

100.9
49.4

100.9
56.3

104.5
61.4

100.0
100.0

60.3
123.2

58.8
116.1

58.0
117.9

3.4
3.5
5.6
8. 2
22.3

3.4
3.6
5.6
8.2
22.4

100.0
100.0

97.0
130.0

103.0
116.7

103.0
120.0

15.4
6.6
5.0
2.0
4. 7

14.4
5.8
5.1
1.7
3.9

14.4
6.0
5.3
2.3
4. 6

5.4
7. 2
10. 6
12.8
9. 5
4.9

5.2
6.4
9. 8
12.7
8.7
5.3

4. 6
6.5
9.8
12.8
9. 0
5.4

71.0
29.7
9.4
11.4
22.9
33.5

64.4
27.0
9.0
9.1
22.4
26.0

63.4
27.0
9. 2
9.2
23.6
28.0

100.0

75.9

66.7

69.0

100.0

117.6

XÖÖ.Ö

135.3

100.0

89.1

96.4

98.2

100.0
100.0

130. 5
99.7

118.4
90.6

116.5
90.6

Table 4 shows index numbers of the weighted retail cost of food for
the United States and 39 cities, based on theyear 1913 as 100. The
percent of change in June 1933 compared with June 1932 and May
1933 is also given for these cities and the United States, and for 12
additional cities from which prices were not secured in 1913.


https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis

442

MONTHLY LABOR REVIEW

T a * le 4 — IN D E X

N U M B E R S OF T H E T O T A L W E IG H T E D R E T A I L C O ST OF F O O D
A N D P E R C E N T A G E OF C H A N G E JU N E 15, 1933, C O M P A R E D W IT H JU NE 15, 1932, A N D
M A Y 15, 1933, B Y C IT IE S A N D F O R T H E U N IT E D S T A T E S

Index (1913 = 100)
C ity

Percent of
change June
15, 1933,
compared
with—

June M ay June June
15,
15,
15,
15,
1932 1933 1933 1932

Index (1913= 100)
City

M ay
15,
1933

June M ay June June M ay
15,
15,
15,
15,
15,
1932 1933 1933 1932 1933

United States____

100.1

93.7

96.7 - 3 .3

+ 3 .2

Minneapolis ____

99.3

Atlanta__________
Baltimore________
Birmingham_____
Boston _______

100. 1
102.5
98.1
99.9

90. 5
97.2
93.3
93.1

95.8
99. 6
97. 6
98.1

- 4 .4
-2 .8
- .4
- 1 .8
-3 . 6

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

Newark__________
N ew H aven_____
N ew Orleans____

104.8
107.3
95.7

____

104.7

96.8 100.4 -4 .1
—4. 9
Charleston, S .C .. 104.4 93.0 94. 5 - 9 .5
Chicago__________ 108.6 100.0 102.4 - 5 .7
C in cinnati.-.......... 99.4 92.9 96.7 - 2 .7

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

..

95.9

88.1

Dallas.....................
Denver__________

92.4
93.5

90.8
91.0

92.1 - 3 .9
- 4 .3
94.0 + 1 .7
93.1 - .4

+ 4 .6
+ 3.0
+ 3 .5
+ 2.3

Detroit___________
Fall River_______

95.5
98.4

90.8
90.4

Buffalo___

Cleveland____

Indianapolis_____

96.0

86.2

94.0 - 1 .5 + 3 .6
93.6 - 4 .8 +3. 6
- 1 .9 + .9
92.8 - 3 .3 + 7 .7

acksonville______
Kansas C ity_____
Little R ock _____
Los Angeles_____

92.8
97.8
85.4
89.9

85.7
94.0
82.9
86.1

87.6
98.2
83.3
88.0

92.7
Louisville...... ........
Manchester........... 99.0
92.1
M em phis________
Milwaukee_______ 103.3

- 5 .6
+ .3
- 2 .5
-2 .1

+ 2 .2
+ 4 .5
+ .5
+ 2 .2

90.6 94.0
92.5 97.0 - 2 .1
86.1 89.3 - 3 .0
97.9 100.0 - 3 .2

+ 3 .8
+ 4 .8
+ 3.8
+ 2.1

Percent of
change June
15, 1933,
compared
with—

90. 1 93.9 - 5 .4
—2 3
93.0 96. 5 - 7 .9
97.1 100. 1 - 6 .7
91.7 93.9 - 1 .8

+ 4 .2
-j- 2 7
+ 3 .8
+ 3 .0
+ 2 .5

New York________ 108.7 101.6 103. 5 - 4 .8
N orfolk________ _
—10 9
Omaha_______ .
92.3 87.5 92. 2 «
—2 2
Philadelphia_____ 104.7 95.5 99.0 - 5 .4

+ 1 .8
+ 2.1
+ 5 .4
4-2 6
+ 3 .7

Pittsburgh_______
Portland, M e ____
Portland, Oreg___
P rov iden ce______
R ichm ond______

94.1 - 3 .1
-5 . 2
90.2 - 3 . 5
99. 1 - 3 .6
97.8 - 3 .8

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

-5 . 2
95.9 100.1 - .1
—5. 5
87.1 83.0 87.8 +0. 7
104.4 101. 6 103.4 - 1 .0

+3. 7
+ 4 .4
+4 0
+ 5.7
+ 1 .8

—3. 3
99.4 102.2 - 4 .4
96.9 100.3 - .5
— .8
106.1 100.2 102. 7 - 3 .3

+3. 6
+ 2 .8
+ 3.5
+4 1
+ 2 .5

Rochester________
St. Louis_________
St. P a u l ._______
Salt Lake C ity___
San Francisco____
Savannah________
Scranton_________
Seattle___________
Springfield, 111__
W ashington.. . . .

97.2

92.4

93.5
102.9
101.6

88.0
95.4
95.2

100.2

106.9
100.8

Hawaii:
Honolulu _____
Other localities..

—9.9 + •5
-1 2 .0 + 1 .4

1No change.

Retail Prices of Coal on June 15, 1933

ETAIL prices of coal as of the 15th of each month are secured
from each of the 51 cities from which retail food prices are
obtained. The prices quoted are for coal delivered to consumers but
do not include charges for storing the coal in cellar or bins where an
extra handling is necessary.
Average prices for the United States for bituminous coal and for
stove and chestnut sizes of Pennsylvania anthracite are computed
from the quotations received from retail dealers in all cities where
these coals are sold for household use. The prices shown for bitumi­
nous coal are averages of prices of the several kinds. 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.
Table 1 shows for the United States both average and relative
retail prices of Pennsylvania white-ash anthracite coal, stove and
chestnut sizes, and of bituminous coal in January and July, 1913 to 1931,
and for each month from January 1932 to June 1933. An average price
for the year 1913 has been made from the averages for January and
July of that year. The average price for each month has been divided
by this average price for the year 1913 to obtain the relative price.

R


https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis

443

RETAIL PRICES

Table 2 shows average retail prices per ton of 2,000 pounds and
index numbers (1913 = 100) for the United States on June 15, 1932,
and May 15 and June 15, 1933, and percentage change in the year
and in the month.
Table 3 shows average retail prices of coal for household use by
cities on June 15, 1932, and May 15 and June 15, 1933, as reported
by local dealers in each city.
T a b l e 1 .— A V E R A G E A N D

R E L A T IV E P R IC E S OE C O A L F O R T H E U N IT E D S T A T E S
ON S P E C IF IE D D A T E S F R O M J A N U A R Y 1913 T O JU NE 1933

Pennsylvania an­
thracite,
white
ash—
Stove

Year and month

Pennsylvania an­
thracite,
white
ash—

Bitumi­
nous

Chestnut

$7.73 100.0 $7.91 100.0 $5.43 100.0
7.99 103.4 8.15 103.0 5.48 100.8
7. 46 96. 6 7.68 97.0 5. 39 99.2
7.80 100. 9 8. 00 101.0 5.97 109.9
7. 60 98.3 7. 78 98. 3 5.46 100.6
7. 83 101. 3 7. 99 101.0 5..71 105.2
7. 54 97. 6 7. 73 97.7 5. 44 100.1
7.93 102. 7 8.13 102.7 5.69 104.8
8.12 105. 2 8.28 104.6 5. 52 101.6
9.29 120. 2 9.40 118.8 6.96 128.1
9.08 117.5 9.16 115.7 7.21 132.7
9. 88 127.9 10.03 126.7 7.68 141.3
9. 96 128.9 10.07 127.3 7.92 145.8
11. 51 149. 0 11. 61 146.7 7.90 145.3
12.14 157. 2 12. 17 153.8 8.10 149.1
12.59 162. 9 12. 77 161.3 8.81 162.1
14.28 184. 9 14. 33 181.1 10. 55 194.1
15.99 207. 0 16. 12 203.8 11.82 217.6
14.90 192. 8 14. 95 188. t 10.47 192.7
14.98 193. 9 15. 02 189.8 9 .8t 182.0
14. 87 192. 4 14. 92 188.5 9.41 174.6
15. 43 199. 7 15. 46 195. a 11.18 205.7
15.10 195. 5 15. 05 190.1 10.01 184.7
15. 77 204. 1 15. 76 199.1 9. 75 179.5
15.24 197. 2 15. 10 190.7 8.94 164.5
15. 45 200.0 15. 37 194. 2 9. 24 170.0
15.14 196. 0 14. 93 188. 6 8.61 158. 5
9. 74 179.3
01
0)
01
01
15.43 199.7 15.19 191.9 8. 70 160.1

Chestnut

A v­ Rel­
erage ative
A v­ Rel­ A v­ Rel­ price price
erage ative erage ative
price price price price

A v­ Rel­
erage ative
A v ­ Rel­ A v ­ Rel­ price price
erage ative erage ative
price price price price
1913: A v. for yr
January..
July_____
1914: January..
July_____
1915: January.
J u ly .. . . .
1916: January.
July--------1917: January..
July. . . .
1918: January..
July_____
1919: January.
July
1920: January..
J u ly .. . . .
1921: January.
July--------1922: January..
July_____
1923: January..
J u ly .. . . .
1924: January..
July_____
1925: January..
July
1926: January.
July____

Stove

Year and month

Bitumi­
nous

1927: January____
July. ------1928: January____
July. ------1929: January____
July. ------1930: January____
July. ------1931: January-----July. ------1932: January____
F eb ru a ry ...
M arch_____
April -------M a y . . ____
June___ . . .
J u l y ............
August-----September..
October-----N ovem ber..
D ecem ber-.

15.66 202.7 15.42 194.8
15.15 196.1 14.81 187.1
15.44 199.8 15.08 190. 6
14.91 192.9 14.63 184.9
15. 38 199.1 15.06 190.3
14.94 193.4 14. 63 184.8
15. 33 198.4 15. 00 189.5
14.84 192.1 14. 53 183.6
15.12 195.8 14.88 188.1
14.61 189.1 14. 59 184.3
15.00 194.2 14. 97 189.1
14.98 193.9 14. 95 188.9
14. 54 188. 2 14.45 182.6
13. 62 176. 3 13. 46 170.0
13.30 172.2 13.11 165.6
13. 36 173.0 13.16 166.3
13. 37 173.0 13.16 166.2
13. 50 174.8 13.28 167.9
13.74 177.9 13. 52 170.8
13. 79 178.5 13.58 171. 5
13.83 178.9 13. 60 171.9
13.87 179.5 13. 65 172.5

9.96 183.3
8.91 163.9
9.30 171.1
8.69 159.9
9.09 167.2
8. 62 158.6
9.11 167.6
8. 65 159.1
8. 87 163.2
8.09 148.9
8.17 150.3
8.14 149.7
8.01 147.4
7. 85 144.5
7.60 139.9
7. 53 138.6
7.50 138.0
7. 52 138.4
7.54 138.7
7.60 139.9
7. 59 139.7
7.51 138.3

1933: January____
F eb ru a ry ...
M arch_____
A pril__ . . .
M ay_______
June.. ___

13.82 178.9 13. 61 171.9
13. 75 178.0 13. 53 171.0
13.70 177.3 13.48 170.4
13. 22 171.1 13. 0C 164.3
12. 44 161.0 12.25 154.8
12.18 157.6 12.00 151.6

7. 46 137.3
7.45 137.0
7. 43 136.7
7.37 135.6
7.17 132.0
7.18 132.1

1 Insufficient data.
T a b l e 2 .—A V E R A G E

R E T A IL P R IC E S A N D I N D E X N U M B E R S OF C O A L F O R T H E
U N IT E D S T A T E S , A N D P E R C E N T OF C H A N G E ON JU N E 15, 1933, C O M P A R E D W IT H
JU NE 15, 1932, A N D M A Y 15, 1933.

Average retail prices on—
Article

Pennsylvania anthracite:
Stove:
Average price per 2,000 pounds-----------------TndeY G 9 1 3 —1001
____
____________
Chestnut:
Average price per 2,000 pounds--------------------TnHpY ('1913 —1001
Bitum inous:
Average price per 2,000 pounds________________
Tndpv (1 9 1 3 — 100)
_________________


https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis

Percent of increase
( + ) or decrease ( —)
June 15, 1933, com ­
pared with—

June 15,
1932

M ay 15,
1933

June 15,
1933

June 15,
1932

M a y 15,
1933

$13. 36
173.0

$12.44
161.0

$12.18
157.6

- 8 .8

- 2 .1

$13.16
166.3

$12. 25
154.8

$12.00
151.6

- 8 .8

- 2 .0

$7. 53
138.6

$7.17
132.0

$7.18
132.1

- 4 .6

+ 0.1

444

MONTHLY LABOR REVIEW

T able 3 .— AVERAG E

R E T A I L P R IC E S OF C O A L P E R T O N OF 2,000 P O U N D S , F O R H O U SE ­
H O L D USE, JU N E 15, 1932, A N D M A Y 15 A N D JU NE 15, 1933, B Y C IT IE S
1932

1933

1932

C ity, and kind of coal

Atlanta, Ga.:
Bituminous, prepared size; .
Baltimore, M d .:
Pennsylvania anthracite:
Stove__________________ _
Chestnut______________ .
Bituminous:
Prepared sizes:
Low volatile_________ .
R un of mine:
High volatile________ _
Birmingham, Ala.:
Bituminous, prepared size: _
Boston, Mass.:
Pennsylvania anthracite:
Stove...... .......................... .
Chestnut______________ .
Bridgeport, Conn.:
Pennsylvania anthracite:
Stove.......... ..................... .
Chestnut______________ .
Buffalo, N .Y .:
Pennsylvania anthracite:
Stove__________________ .
Chestnut_________ ____ .
Butte, M ont.:
Bituminous, prepared sizes
Charleston, S.C.:
Bituminous, prepared size,
Chicago, 111.:
Pennsylvania anthracite:
Stove...... ........................
Chestnut______________
Bituminous:
Prepared sizes:
High volatile________
Low volatile.......... ......
Run of mine:
Low volatile_________
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.:
Denver, Colo :
Colorado anthracite:
Furnace, 1 and 2 mixed..
Stove, 3 and 5 mixed____
Bituminous, prepared sizes.
Detroit, M ich.:
Pennsylvania anthracite:
Stove_________________
Chestnut_____________
Bituminous:
Prepared sizes:
High volatile________
Low volatile________
R un of mine:
Low volatile________
Fall River, Mass.:
Pennsylvania anthracite:
Stove...... ........................
Chestnut.........................


https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis

June
15

M ay
15

June
15

$5.70

$5.30

$5. 55

12.21
11.75

11. 50
11.25

11.50
11.25

8.56

8.31

8.44

6.96

6. 79

6.79

4.98

4.49

4.46

13.25
13.00

12.85
12.60

12.75
12. 50

13.00
13.00

12. 75
12. 75

13.00
13.00

11.88
11.63

11.65
11.40

11. 65
11.40

9.88

9. 71

9. 71

9. 50

8. 67

8. 67

15.30
15.05

13.33
13.15

12.16
11.95

7.53
8.97

6.92
8.63

7.02
8. 63

6.95

6. 52

6. 52

4.90
6. 75

4. 75
6. 25

4. 75
6. 25

13. 56
13. 31

12. 69
12. 44

12. 06
11.81

6.17
8.32

5. 26
7.46

5. 26
7.46

5. 06
6.13

4.60
5. 58

4.61
5. 54

14. 00
10. 25

14. 00
10. 75

13. 00
10.00

14. 75
14. 75
7.64

14.31
14.31
6. 76

14. 50
14. 50
7. 21

13.00
12. 79

12.83
12.71

11.25
11.25

6. 06
6. 68

5.83
6. 63

5. 83
6. 67

6.19

5.88

5.88

14. 00
13. 75

13.50
13. 25

13. 50
13.25

1933

City, and kind of coal
June
15
Houston, Tex.:
Bituminous, prepared sizes. $9.40
Indianapolis, Ind.:
Bituminous:
Prepared sizes:
High volatile... .
4 £4
Low volatile................... 6.71
R un of mine:
5. 70
Jacksonville, Fla.:
Bituminous, prepared sizes. 9. 50
Kansas City, M o.:
Arkansas anthracite:
Furnace_________________ 10.81
Stove no. 4 . ______ ___ 12.33
Bituminous, prepared sizes
5.85
Little Rock, Ark.:
Arkansas anthracite, egg__ 11.75
Bituminous, prepared sizes
8.33
Los Angeles, Calif.:
Bituminous, prepared sizes. 15. 25
Louisville, K y .:
Bituminous:
Prepared sizes:
Low volatile__________
6. 75
Manchester, N .H .:
Pennsylvania anthracite:
Stove___________________ 14. 50
Chestnut________________ 14. 50
Memphis, Tenn.:
Bituminous, prepared sizes
6. 73
Milwaukee, W is.:
Pennsylvania anthracite:
Stove_____________ _____ 14.45
14.20
Bituminous:
Prepared sizes:
fi 97
Low volatile________
8. 78
Minneapolis, M inn.:
Pennsylvania anthracite:
Ifi 75
16. 50
Bituminous:
Prepared sizes:
9 fiO
11.87
Mobile, Ala.:
Bituminous, prepared sizes. 7. 72
Newark, N.J.:
Pennsylvania anthracite:
Stove__
. . . .
___ _ 11.75
_ 11.50
Chestnut____________
N ew Haven, Conn.:
Pennsylvania anthracite:
13 fi5
Chestnut___________ . . .
13. 65
New Orleans, La.:
Bituminous, prepared sizes
8. 64
New York, N .Y .:
Pennsylvania anthracite:
Stove____ ______ _____ .
11.92
C hestnut... _______ . . . 11.67
Norfolk, Va.:
Pennsylvania anthracite:
Stove __________ _______ 12. 50
Chestnut_______
____
12. 50
Bituminous:
Prepared sizes :
High volatile.. _______
6. 50
Low volatile________ _ 7.50
R un of mine:
Low volatile__________
6. 50
Omaha, Nebr.:
Bituminous, prepared sizes
8. 69
Peoria, 111 :
Bituminous, prepared sizes
6.08

M ay
15

June
15

$9. 60

$9. 70

6! 70

6. 70

5. 94

5. 94

9. 00

8. 75

10. 67
12. 50
5. 54

10. 33
12. 25
5. 59

10.75
7. 72

10. 25
7. 50

15. 25

15.13

6. 56

6. 75

14.00
14.00

14.00
14. 00

5. 66

5. 68

12. 96
12. 71

12. 36
12.11

8. 87

8. 90

l i 70

13. 50

li! 50

11. 50

6. 72

6. 50

10. 25
10.00

11.38
11.13

12. 90

12. 90

8. 07

8.07

11. 50
11.25

11. 55
11. 30

12.00
12.00

12. 00
12. 00

6. 00
7.00

6.00
7. 00

6. 00

6. 00

8. 35

8. 37

5.92

5. 92

RETAIL PRICES

445

T a b l e 3 .—A V E R A G E R E T A I L P R IC E S OF C O A L P E R T O N OF 2,000 P O U N D S , F O R H O U S E ­

H O L D USE, JU N E 15, 1932, A N D M A Y 15 A N D JU NE 15, 1933, B Y C IT IE S — Continued

1932

1933

1932

C ity, and kind of coal
June
15
Philadelphia, Pa.:
Pennsylvania anthracite:
Stove_______ ______ _ . $11.00
Chestnut____________ . _ 10. 75
Pittsburgh, Pa.:
Pennsylvania anthracite:
Chestnut________________ 13. 25
Bituminous, prepared sizes. 4. 39
Portland, Maine:
Pennsylvania anthracite:
Stove___________________ 15. 36
Chestnut...................... . 15. 12
Portland, Oreg.:
Bituminous, prepared sizes. 11.98
Providence, R .I.:
Pennsylvania anthracite:
S to v e ... . . .
. . . . . . . 114. 00
Chestnut_______ _______ >13. 75
Richmond, Va.:
Pennsylvania anthracite:
Stove. ______
_____
12. 75
Chestnut____ ________ .
12. 75
Bituminous:
Prepared sizes:
High volatile__________ 6. 67
Low volatile. .
____
7.15
R un of mine:
Low volatile . . . ____
6.25
Rochester, N .Y .:
Pennsylvania anthracite:
Stove___ ___ _ ______ .
12. 63
Chestnut ._ _________
12. 38
St. Louis, M o.:
Pennsylvania anthracite:
Stove. . . . . . . . . . .
14. 72
Chestnut_____________
14. 72
Bituminous, prepared sizes. 5. 48

M ay
15

June
15

$10. 75 $10. 88
10.50 10. 63
12. 75
3. 56

12.25
3. 47

13. 50
13. 25

13.49
13.24

11.26

11.53

113. 20 113. 20
112. 95 112. 95
12. 25
12.25

12. 25
12. 25

6. 67
7. 15

6. 67
7.15

6. 25

6. 25

11.60
11.35

11.85
11.60

14.10
13. 85
4. 36

13. 94
13. 69
4. 39

1933

C ity, and kind of coal

St. Paul, M inn.:
Pennsylvania anthracite:
Bituminous:
Prepared sizes:
High volatile______
Low volatile______ . .
Salt Lake City, Utah:
Bituminous, prepared sizesSan Francisco, Calif.:
New Mexico anthracite:
Cerillos egg____ ____ ___
Colorado anthracite:
Egg-------------------------------Bituminous, prepared sizes.
Savannah, Ga.:
Bituminous, prepared sizes.
Scranton, Pa.:
Pennsylvania anthracite:
Seattle, Wash.:
Bituminous, prepared sizes
Springfield, 111.:
Bituminous, prepared sizes
Washington, D .C .:
Pennsylvania anthracite:
Stove___________________
Chestnut—......................
Bituminous:
Prepared sizes:
High volatile__________
Low volatile__________
Run of mine:
M ixed____ ____________

June
15

M ay
15

June
15

$1fi 75
16. 50

14. 70

13. 55

9. 50
11.87

8. 78
11.51

8. 92
11. 51

7.42

7.01

7. 06

25. 00

25.00

25.00

24. 50
15.00

24. 50
15. 00

24. 50
15.00

2 8. 37

3 7.94

2 8.04

8.48

7.63

7. 63

10. 17

9. 87

9. 33

4. 34

3. 68

3. 68

313. 56 312. 92 312. 92
313. 26 312. 66 312. 66
3 8. 29 3 7.97
3 9. 86 3 9. 31

3 7.97
3 9. 31

3 7. 50

3 7.40

3 7. 40

1 The average price of coal delivered in bins is 50 cents higher than here shown. Practically all coal is
delivered in bins.
2 All coal sold in Savannah is weighed b y the city. A charge of 10 cents per ton or half ton is made. This
additional charge has been included in the above price.
3 Per ton of 2,240 pounds.

Retail Prices of Gas in the United States

HE net price per 1,000 cubic feet of gas for household use in
each of 51 cities is published in June and December of each year
in conjunction with the cost of living study. The average family
consumption of manufactured gas is estimated to be 3,000 cubic feet
per month. In cities where a service charge or a sliding scale is in
operation, families using less than 3,000 cubic feet per month pay a
somewhat higher rate than here shown; while those consuming more
than this amount pay a lower rate. The figures here given are believed
to represent quite closely the actual monthly cost of gas per 1,000
cubic feet to the average wage-earner’s family.
From the prices quoted on manufactured gas, average net prices
have been computed for all cities combined. Prices and index num­
bers showing the trend since April 1913 are shown in table 1. The
index numbers are based on the price in April 1913.

T


https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis

446

MONTHLY LABOR REVIEW

T a b l e 1 .— A V E R A G E P R IC E P E R 1,000 C U B IC F E E T

OF M A N U F A C T U R E D GAS A N D
I N D E X N U M B E R IN S P E C IF IE D M O N T H S OF E A C H Y E A R 1913 A N D 1928 T O 1933 F O R
T H E U N IT E D ST A T E S

Date

1929—December______________

Average
net price

$0.95
1.22
1. 21
1.21
1.18

Index
(April
1913=
100.0)

Date

100.0
128.4
127.4
127.4
124.2

Average
net price

$1.18
1.15
1.15
1.15
1.15

Index
(April
1913=
100.0)
124.2
121.1
121.1
121.1
121.1

Table 2 shows the net price of manufactured gas in December
1932 and June 1933, by cities.
T a b l e 2 .—N E T P R IC E P E R 1,000 C U B IC F E E T OF M A N U F A C T U R E D GAS B A S E D ON A

F A M I L Y C O N S U M P T IO N OF 3,000 C U B IC F E E T ON D E C E M B E R 15, 1932, A N D JUNE 15,
1933, B Y C ITIE S

City

Baltimore_____
Birmingham___
Boston________
Charleston, S.C.
Cleveland_____
D etroit..............
Fall River_____
Indianapolis___
Jacksonville___
Manchester____
M ilwaukee____
Minneapolis___
Newark..............
New H aven___
N ew Y ork_____

Dec. 15,
1932

June 15,
1933

$0. 85
.80
1.16
1.45
1. 25
.77
1. 14
.95
1.92
1.34
.82
.96
1.21
1.13
1.23

$0.85
.80
1.16
1.45
1.25
.77
1.14
.95
1.92
1.34
.82
.96
1.21
1.13
1.21

City

Norfolk. _
Omaha- _
__
___
Philadelphia___
Portland, M aine_________ .
Portland, Oreg______________
Providence_______________ -_
Richm ond. - ____________
R ochester___- _____________
St. L ou is.- - . . . __________
St. Paul
--.
- - ______
Savannah____ __
-----Scranton - - Seattle___
- _____________
W ashington-- - - - - - - - - - - Honolulu, T .H ______________

Dec. 15,
1932
$1. 28
.79
.88
1.42
1.17
1.13
1.29
1.00
1 1.30
.90
1.45
. 1.40
1.48
.93
1.73

June 15,
1933
$1.18
.79
.88
1.42
1.17
1.13
1.29
1. 00
1 1. 30
.90
1.45
1.40
1.48
.93
1.68

1 Price based on 24 therms.

Table 3 shows by cities net prices in December 1932 and June 1933,
for natural gas, and for mixed manufactured and natural gas (pre­
ponderantly natural gas). These prices are based on an estimated
average family consumption of 5,000 cubic feet per month.
T

3 —N E T P R IC E P E R 1,000 C U B IC F E E T OF N A T U R A L GAS A N D OF M I X E D M A N ­
U F A C T U R E D A N D N A T U R A L GAS (P R E P O N D E R A N T L Y N A T U R A L GAS) B A S E D
ON A F A M I L Y C O N S U M P T IO N OF 5,000 C U B IC F E E T ON D E C E M B E R 15, 1932, A N D
JU NE 15,1933, B Y C IT IE S

able

C ity

B u ffa lo _________________ _ .
Butte__________________ _
C h ica go.-____ ______________
Cincinnati......................... ........
Cleveland_______________ . . .
Columbus___________________
Dallas____ ______ ___________
Denver______________________
Houston_____________________
Kansas C ity__ _____ ________

Dec. 15,
1932
$1. 09
.65
.70
1 1.32
.75
.60
.48
.79
.99
.75
.95

June 15,
1933
$1.09
.65
.70
1 1.32
.75
.60
.55
.79
.99
.75
.95

C ity

Dec. 15,
1932
$0. 65
.84
.38
.95
1. 24
.95
2 1. 95
. 60
.99
. 97
2 2.00

June 15,
1933
$0. 65
.82
.45
. 95
1. 24
. 95
2 1. 95
. 60
. 99
. 97
2 2. 00

1 Price based on 40 therms which is the equivalent of 5,000 cubic feet of gas of a heating value of 800 B.t.u.
per cubic foot.
2 Price based on 50 therms which is the equivalent of 5,000 cubic feet of gas of a heating value of 1,000
B .t.u. per cubic foot.


https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis

RETAIL PRICES

447

Retail Prices of Electricity in the United States
Explanation of Prices

HE following table shows for 51 cities the net rates per kilowatthour of electricity used for household purposes in December 1932
and June 1933. These rates are published in June and December of
each year in conjunction with the cost of living study. For the cities
having more than one tariff for domestic consumers the rates are
shown for the shedule under which most of the residences are served.
Several cities have sliding scales based on a variable number of
kilowatt-hours payable at each rate. The number of kilowatt-hours
payable at each rate in these cities is determined for each customer
according to the watts of installation, either in whole or in part, in
the individual home. The number of watts so determined is called
the customer’s “ demand.”
In Baltimore the demand is the maximum normal rate of use of
electricity in any half-hour period of time. It may be estimated or
determined by the company from time to time according to the cus­
tomer’s normal use of electricity and may equal the total installation
reduced to kilowatts.
In Buffalo the demand consists of two parts—lighting, 25 percent
of the total installation, but never less than 250 watts; and power,
2 percent of the capacity of any electric range, water heater, or other
appliance of 1,000 watts or over and 25 percent of the rated capacity
of motors exceeding one half horsepower but less than 1 horsepower.
The installation is determined by inspection of premises.

T

T a b l e 1 — N E T P R IC E P E R K IL O W A T T -H O U R F O R E L E C T R I C I T Y F O R H O U S E H O L D

USE ON D E C E M B E R 15, 1932, A N D JU N E 15, 1933, F O R 51 C IT IE S

C ity

Measure of consumption, per month

Next 25 kilowatt-hours____________________________________
Next 25 kilow att-hou rs...____ _____ __________________ ____ _
Next 175 kilow att-hours____________________________________
Next 70 kilowatt-hours______________________________________

Next 120 hours’ use of demand 6 ________

... . . . . .

. ...

Butte______________
Charleston, S .C ___

Next 25 kilowatt-hours_________________________ ____________
Next 100 kilowatt-hours________________ _____ ____ _________
First 100 kilowatt-hours_____________ __________ ____________
Next 3 kilowatt-hours per room __ ______ ________ ___________
First 6 kilowatt-hours per room; minimum, 4 rooms__________
Excess........ ....................................... ................................... ........ .......

Dec. 15,
1932

June 15,
1933

Cents

Cents

i 100. 0
2 5.0
3 3.0
4 6. 7
4 3. 4
7. 7
7.5
5.0
3.0
5. 3
5. 0
4.0
1.5
8.0
4.0
3.0
9.0
7.0
5.0
3.0
10.0
5.0
3.0

100.0
6.0
4.5
3.0
5.0
3.4
7.7
7.5
5.0
3.0
5.3
5.0
4.0
1.5
8.0
4.0
3.0
9.0
7.0
5.0
3.0
10.0
5.0
3.0

1 Service charge.
2 First 50 kilowatt-hours.
2 Next 150 kilowatt-hours.
4 First 20 hours use of demand—m inimum 25 kilowatt-hours. For determination of demand see explana­
tion of prices.
4 Next kilowatt-hours equal to 8 times the consumption at the primary rate—minimum 200 kilowatthours.
6 For determination of demand see explanation of prices.


https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis

448

MONTHLY LABOR REVIEW

T a b l e 1 .— N E T P R IC E P E R K IL O W A T T -H O U R F O R E L E C T R I C I T Y F O R H O U S E H O L D

USE ON D E C E M B E R 15, 1932, A N D JU N E 15, 1933, F O R 51 C IT IE S — Continued

Measure of consumption, per month

City

Cleveland:
Company A .
Company B .
Columbus______
Dallas _.
Denver.
Detroit.
Fall River—
Houston.......
Indianapolis.
Jacksonville.
Kansas C ity.
Little R ock —

Los Angeles.
L ouisville-- .
Manchester.

M em phis__
M ilwaukee.

Minneapolis.
M obile_____

N ewark.

N ew H a ven ..
N ew Orleans.

New Y ork:
Com pany A 9_
Com pany B ...
Com pany C 9.
Norfolk.
Omaha.

First 240 kilowatt-hours.
E xcess._____ __________
Service charge--------------First 600 kilowatt-hours.
First 50 kilowatt-hours—
Next 75 kilowatt-hours..
First 800 kilowatt-hours.
First 40 kilowatt-hours—
Excess.
First 3 kilowatt-hours per active room; minimum, 3 room s.
Next 50 kilowatt-hours-------------------- ---------------------------------Excess .
First 25 kilowatt-hours----------------------- ------------- -----Next 75 kilowatt-hours...................................................
First 3 kilowatt-hours per room; minimum, 4 rooms
Next 100 kilowatt-hours................................................
First 50 kilowatt-hours........ ..................... .....................
Next 60 kilowatt-hours................................. ..................
First 500 kilowatt-hours----------- -----------------------------First 5 kilowatt-hours per active room; minimum, 3 room s----Next 5 kilowatt-hours per room
Excess.
Service charge for 4 rooms or less. For each additional room
10 cents is added.
First 6 kilowatt-hours per room ----------------------------------------Next 6 kilowatt hours per ro o m ....................................................
Excess .
First 35 kilow att-hours..-------- ------- ---------------------------------------Next 140 kilowatt-hours--------------------------------------------------------First 30 kilowatt-hours plus balance of consumption up to 6
kilowatt-hours per room.
ExcessFirst block: 3 rooms, 15 kilowatt-hours; 4 rooms, 18 kilowatthours; 5 rooms, 21 kilowatt-hours; 6 rooms, 24 kilowatt-hours;
7 rooms, 27 kilowatt-hours; 8 rooms, 30 kilowatt-hours.
Next block: Number of kilowatt-hours equal to the first block
First 6 kilowatt-hours per room; minimum 4 rooms---------------Next 6 kilowatt-hours per room ---------- ---------- ---------, ............ —
Excess_________
First 9 kilowatt-hours for each of the first 6 active rooms and
first 7 kilowatt-hours for each active room in addition to the
first 6.
Next kilowatt-hours up to a total of 150 kilowatt-hours---------Excess.
First 3 kilowatt-hours per active room; minimum, 2 room s.
Next 3 kilowatt-hours per active room -------------------------------Excess.
Service charge for house of 3 rooms—consumption of 5 kilowatthours included, 10 cents extra for each additional room; not
more than 10 rooms counted.
Next 45 kilowatt-hours....................................................... ..........
Next 150 kilowatt-hours---------------------------------------------------------First 20 kilowatt-hours-----------------------------------------------------------Next 20 kilowatt-hours-----------------------------------------------------------Next 10 kilowatt-hours-----------------------------------------------------------Excess of 50 kilowatt-hours----------------------------------------------------First 400 kilowatt-hours______________________________________
Service charge------------------------------------------------------------- --------First 20 kilowatt-hours------------------------------------------- --------------Next 30 kilowatt-hours----------- -----------------------------------------------Next 150 kilowatt-hours________________ ____ ________________
10 kilowatt-hours or less-------------Next 5 kilow att-hours..................
Excess__________________________
10 kilowatt-hours or less-------------Next 21 kilowatt-hours--------------Next 89 kilowatt-hours-------- ------10 kilowatt-hours or less-------------Next 5 kilowatt-hours...................
Excess____________ ____ ________
First 100 kilowatt-hours-------------First 10 kilowatt-hours per room .
Next 160 kilowatt-hours..............

7 First 40 kilowatt-hours.
8 Next 200 kilowatt-hours.
9 Rates are subject to adjustment under coal clause.
mills per kilowatt-hour.
i° All current.


https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis

Dec. 15,
1932

June 15,
1933

Cents

Cents

7 5.0
8 4.0
30.0
3.0
6.0
5.0
5.8
6.0
5.0
9.0
3.6
2.3
8.0
5.0
7.0
4.0
6.3
6.0
7.0
6.5
4.5
2.5
50.0

4.0
2.8
15.0
2.9
6.0
5.0
5.8

7.0
5.0
3.0
4.8
2.5
7.6

7.0
5.0
3.0
4.8
2.5
7.6

3.0
10.0

3.0
10.0

6.0
7.0
5.0
3.0
6.2

6.0

2.9
1.9
7.6
7.1
2.9
80.0

2.9
1.9
7.6
7.1
2.9
80.0

5.0
3.0
9.0
8.0
7.0
3.0
5.3
25.0
9. 1
7.8
6. 5

5.0
3.0
9.0
7.0
6.0
3.0
5.3
25.0
9. 1
7.8
6.5

100.0
6.0
5. 0

100.0

i 99 .5

100.0
6.0
5.0
7.0
5. 5
3.0

6.0

5.0
9.0
3.6
2.3

8.0

5.0
7.0
4.0
6.3
6.0
7.0
6.5
4.5
2.5
50.0

7.0
5.0
3.0
6.2

6.0
5.0
95.0
9.0
4.0
100.0
6.0
5.0
7.0
5.5
3.0

For the months shown there was a deduction of 5

449

RETAIL PRICES

T a b l e 1 .— N E T P R IC E P E R K IL O W A T T -H O U R F O R E L E C T R I C I T Y F O R H O U S E H O L D

USE ON D E C E M B E R 15, 1932, A N D JU N E 15, 1933, F O R 51 C IT IE S — Continued

Measure of consumption, per month

City

Dec. 15,
1932

June 15,
1933

Cents

Cents

9.0
6.0
3.0

9.0
6.0
3.0

75.0
i i 6. 0
123.O
9.0
8.0
7.0
3.0
7.0
5.0
4.0
3.0
8.0

75.0
5. 5
3.0
9.0
7.0
6.0
3.0
7.0
5.0
4.0
3.0
8.0

5.0

5.0

2.0

2.0

5.5

5.5

3.0
1.8
5.5

3.0
1.8
5.5

3.0
1.8
50.0
6.5
4.0
7.0
100.0
5.5
13 4.0

3.0
1.8
50.0
6.0
4.0
7.0
100.0
5.5
4.0

6.7
2.4
6.7

6.7
2.4
6.7

2.4
8.6
7.1
2.9
90.0
7.0
40.0
4.5

2.4
8.6
7.1
2.9
90.0
7.0
40.0
4.5

,,
, , , , ----------------------............. ............ --- ,,

3.5
100. 0
6.0
3.0
100.0
5.0

3.5
100.0
6.0
3.0
100.0
5.0

40 kilowatt-hours
, , , , . , -------------------------200 kilowatt-hours
____________ ,
, ----------------40 kilowatt-hours.. . . ------ ------------- . . .
200 kilowatt-hours____
.
----------------. . . . . . . . .

5.5
2.0
5.5
2.0

5.5
2.0
5.5
2.0

First 30 kilowatt-hours____ . . . . . . . . . ------------------------Next 30 kilowatt-hours.. _________
...
. . . . ---------Next 40 kilowatt-hours___ _ . . _____ ____
Company B ___ First 30 kilowatt-hours . . . . . . . . . -------------------- . . .
Next 30 kilowatt-hours_____ .
. . . . . . ---------------------Next 40 kilowatt-hours___ . . . . . .
_ __ _ _ . . . ------. . . .
.
. . . . ------Washington, D . C . . First 50 kilowatt-hours___ _
Next 50 kilowatt-hours. . . .
...
.
. . . .
Honolulu, H awaii-. First 100 kilowatt-hours ______ - - - - - - . . . . .

5.0
4.0
3.0
5.0
4.0
3.0
3.9
3.8

5.0
4.0
3.0
5.0
4.0
3.0
3.9
3.6
7.5

Peoria----- ---------

-

First 4 kilowatt-hours per active room; minimum 2 rooms____
Next 4 kilowatt-hours per active room ------------ ----------------------

Philadelphia:
Company A ----- M inim um charge including use of first 10 kilowatt-hours-------Next 40 kilowatt-hours-------------------------- ------- ---------- --------------Next 150 kilowatt-hours___________________________________ Company B ----- First 20 kilowatt-hours-------------- ---------------------------- ------------Next 20 kilowatt-hours------------------------------------------------------- .
Next 10 kilowatt-hours ---------------------------------------------------------Excess of 50 kilowatt-hours---------------------------------------- ----------Next 15 kilow att-hours---------------------------------------------------------Next 20 kilowatt-hours_______________________________ ______ _
Portland, M e---------

Portland, Oreg.:
Company A ___

Company B ___

First 3 rooms, 15 kilowatt-hours; 4 rooms, 18 kilowatt-hours;
5 rooms, 21 kilowatt-hours; 6 rooms, 24 kilowatt-hours; 7
rooms, 27 kilowatt-hours; 8 rooms, 30 kilowatt-hours.
Next 3 rooms, 35 kilowatt-hours; 4 rooms, 42 kilowatt-hours;
5 rooms, 49 kilowatt-hours; 6 rooms, 56 kilowatt-hours; 7
rooms, 63 kilowatt-hours; 8 rooms, 70 kilowatt-hours.
First 30 kilowatt-hours for a connected load of 600 watts or less.
For each additional 25 watts of connected load add 1 kilo­
watt-hour.
Next 40 kilowatt-hours---------------------------------------------- ------- -----First 30 kilowatt-hours for a connected load of 600 watts or less.
For each additional 25 watts of connected load add 1 kilo­
watt-hour.
Next 40 kilowatt-hours----------------- ------------- - -----------------------Next 60 kilowatt-hours, ---------------------- ------------------------------Next 30 kilowatt-hours , -----------------------------------------------------Service charge including first 12 kilowatt-hours_______________
Next 48 kilowatt-hours----------- ------------------------- --------------- .
Next 34 kilowatt-hours-------- ---------- ------------------- ------------- -------

St. Louis:
Company A ----Company B -----

First 9 kilowatt-hours per active room-----------

-----

First 4 rooms or less, 18 kilowatt-hours; 5 or 6 rooms, 27 kilowatt-hours; 7 or 8 rooms, 36 kilowatt-hours.
First 3 kilowatt-hours per room, minimum 2 rooms___________
. ------- ---------Next 3 kilowatt-hours per room ________

Salt Lake C ity -------

Service charge—consumption of 11 kilowatt-hours included, , ,
First 30 kilowatt-hours for residence of 6 rooms, 5 kilowatthours added for each additional room.
Next 140 kilowatt-hours----------------------- ----------- --------- ------First 50 kilowatt-hours____
Next 150 kilow att-hours........

Seattle:
Company A ___
Company B -----

First
Next
First
Next

Springfield, 111.:
Company A ___

11 Next 38 kilowatt-hours.


https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis

I2 Excess.

7.5

13 Next 90 kilowatt-hours.

WHOLESALE PRICES
Index Numbers of Wholesale Prices, 1913 to June 1933

HE following table presents the index numbers of wholesale
prices by groups of commodities, by years, from 1913 to 1932,
inclusive, and by months from January 1932 to date:

T

I N D E X N U M B E R S OF W H O L E S A L E P R IC E S
[1926=100]

Year and month

1913__________________
1914__________________
1915__________________
1916__________________
1917__________________
1918__________________
1919__________________
1920__________________
1921__________________
1922__________________
1923__________________
1924__________________
1925__________________
1926__________________
1927____ _____________
1928__________________
1929__________________
1930__________________
1931__________________
1932__________________
1932:
January______ . . .
February___ ._ __
____
M arch____
A pril. _. _________
M a y______________
June--------- . . . . . .
July---------------------A ugu st.- ________
September________
October__________
Novem ber ______
D ecem ber.. _____
1933:
January
February
M a rch ... . _
A pril.
. _ _
M a y ______________
June...
. . ._

Hides Tex­
Farm
and
prod­ Foods leather tile
ucts
prod­ prod­
ucts
ucts

Fuel Metals Build­ Chem ­ House- Misand
furand
icals
ing
celnishlight­ metal mate­ and
laneprod­
ing
ing
rials
drugs
ous
ucts
goods

71.5
71.2
71.5
84.4
129.0
148.0
157.6
150.7
88.4
93.8
98.6
100. 0
109.8
100.0
99.4
105.9
104.9
88.3
64.8
48.2

64.2
64.7
65.4
75.7
104.5
119. 1
129.5
137.4
90.6
87.6
92. 7
91.0
100. 2
100.0
96. 7
101.0
99.9
90.5
74.6
61.0

68.1
70.9
75.5
93.4
123.8
125.7
174.1
171.3
109. 2
104. 6
104. 2
101. 5
105.3
100.0
107.7
121.4
109. 1
100. 0
80. 1
72.9

57.3
54.6
54.1
70.4
98.7
137. 2
135.3
164.8
94. 5
100. 2
111.3
106. 7
108.3
100.0
95.6
95.5
90.4
80. 3
66.3
54.9

61.3
56.6
51.8
74.3
105.4
109.2
104.3
163. 7
96.8
107.3
97.3
92.0
96.5
100. 0
88.3
84.3
83.0
78.5
67. 5
70.3

90.8
80.2
86.3
116.5
150.6
136.5
130.9
149.4
117.5
102.9
109. 3
106. 3
103. 2
100.0
96.3
97.0
100. 5
92.1
84. 5
80.2

56.7
52.7
53.5
67.6
88. 2
98.6
115.6
150. 1
97.4
97.3
108. 7
102.3
101. 7
100.0
94.7
94. 1
95.4
89.9
79.2
71.4

80. 2
81.4
112.0
160.7
165.0
182.3
157.0
164.7
115.0
100. 3
101. 1
98.9
101.8
100.0
96.8
95.6
94.2
89.1
79.3
73.5

56.3
56.8
56.0
61.4
74.2
93.3
105.9
141.8
113.0
103.5
108.9
104. 9
103. 1
100.0
97. 5
95. 1
94.3
92.7
84.9
75.1

93.1
89.9
86.9
100. 6
122.1
134.4
139.1
167.5
109.2
92.8
99.7
93.6
109.0
100.0
91.0
85.4
82.6
77.7
69.8
64.4

69.8
68.1
69.5
85.5
117.5
131.3
138.6
154.4
97.6
96.7
100.6
98.1
103.5
100.0
95.4
96.7
95.3
86.4
73.0
64.8

52.8
50.6
50.2
49.2
46.6
45.7
47.9
49. 1
49. 1
46.9
46.7
44.1

64.7
62. 5
62.3
61.0
59.3
58.8
60.9
61.8
61.8
60.5
60.6
58.3

79.3
78.3
77.3
75.0
72. 5
70.8
68.6
69.7
72.2
72.8
71.4
69.6

59.6
59. 5
58.0
56. 1
54.3
52.7
51. 5
52.7
55.6
55.0
53.9
53.0

67.9
68.3
67.9
70.2
70.7
71.6
72.3
72. 1
70.8
71.1
71.4
69.3

81.8
80.9
80.8
80.3
80. 1
79.9
79. 2
80. 1
80.1
80.3
79.6
79.4

74.8
73.4
73.2
72.5
71.5
70.8
69.7
69.6
70.5
70.7
70.7
70.8

75.7
75.5
75.3
74.4
73.6
73. 1
73.0
73.3
72.9
72.7
72.4
72.3

77.7
77.5
77.1
76.3
74.8
74.7
74.0
73.6
73.7
73.7
73.7
73.6

65. 6
64.7
64.7
64. 7
64.4
64. 2
64. 3
64. 6
64.7
64. 1
63. 7
63.4

67.3
66. 3
66.0
65. 5
64.4
63. 9
64. 5
65. 2
65.3
64. 4
63. 9
62.6

42.6
40.9
42.8
44.5
50.2
53.2

55.8
53.7
54.6
56.1
59.4
61.2

68.9
68.0
68.1
69.4
76.9
82.4

51.9
51.2
51.3
51.8
55.9
61.5

66.0
63.6
62.9
61.5
60.4
61.5

78.2
77.4
77.2
76.9

70.1
69.8
70.3
70.2
71.4
74.7

71.6
71.3
71.2
71.4
73.2
73.7

72.9
72.3
72.2
71.5
71.7
73.4

61. 2
59.2
58.9
57.8
58.9
60.8

61. 0
59.8
60. 2
60. 4
62. 7
65.0

450


https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis

77 .7

79.3

All
com ­
modi­
ties

451

WHOLESALE PRICES
I N D E X N U M B E R S OF S P E C IF IE D G R O U PS OF C O M M O D IT IE S
[1926 = 100]

Y ear

NonSemiagrimanu- Fin­
culRaw
ished tural
faomate­ tured prod­
com­
rials
ucts m odi­
arti­
cles
ties

68.8
67. 6
67. 2
82. 6
122. 6
135. 8
1919
145. 9
1920 ________ 151.8
88.3
1921
______
96.0
1922 .
____
98. 5
1923
97. 6
1924 ________
1925_________ 106.7
1926 ________ 100.0
96.5
1927
______
99.1
1928 ______
97. 5
1929 _______
84. 3
1930
65. 6
1931
1932_________
55.1

1913________
1914
______
1915________
1916________

74.9
70.0
81.2
118.3
150. 4
153. 8
157.9
198.2
96.1
98.9
118. 6
108.7
105.3
100. 0
94.3
94.5
93.9
81.8
69. 0
59.3

69.4
67.8
68.9
82.3
109. 2
124. 7
130.6
149.8
103.3
96.5
99.2
96.3
100.6
100.0
95.0
95.9
94.5
88. 0
77.0
70.3

69.0
66.8
68.5
85.3
113.1
125.1
131.6
154.8
100.1
97.3
100.9
97.1
101. 4
100.0
94.6
94.8
93.3
85.9
74.6
68.3

All
com­
modi­
ties
other
than
farm
prod­
ucts
and
foods
70.0
66.4
68.0
88.3
114.2
124.6
128. 8
161.3
104.9
102.4
104.3
99.7
102.6
100.0
94.0
92.9
91.6
85.2
75.0
70.2

All
com­
Non- modi­
Semities
agrimanu- Fin­
other
culRaw
ished
facmate­ tured prod­ tural than
com ­ farm
rials
ucts m odi­ prod­
arti­
cles
ucts
ties
and
foods

M onth

1932:
January----February..
M arch____
April______
M a y ______
June______
July---------August —.
September.
October___
N ovem ber.
Decem ber..
1933:
January___
February. _
M a rch .. .
April______
M a y ______
June.. . .

58.3
56.9
56.1
55.5
53.9
53.2
54.7
55.7
56.2
54.6
54.2
52.1

63.1
61.9
60.8
59.6
58.1
57.6
55.5
57.9
60.7
60.7
58.9
57.7

72.1
71.4
71.5
71.1
70.3
70.0
70.6
70.7
70.4
69.6
69.3
68.4

70.3
69. 6
69.3
68.9
68.1
67.8
68.0
68. 5
68.7
68.1
67. 5
66. 5

71. 7
71. 3
70.9
70.9
70.4
70.1
69.7
70.1
70.4
70.2
69.8
69.0

50.2
48.4
49.4
50.0
53.7
56.2

56.9
56.3
56.9
57.3
61.3
65.3

66.7
65.7
65.7
65.7
67.2
69.0

64. 9
63.7
63.8
63. 7
65.4
67.4

67.3
66.0
65.8
65. 3
66.5
68.9

Weekly Index Numbers of Wholesale Prices

A s u m m a r i z a t i o n of the weekly index numbers for the 1 0 major
groups of commodities and for all commodities combined as issued
during the month of June 1933, will be found in the following state­
ment:
I N D E X N U M B E R S OF W H O L E S A L E P R IC E S F O R W E E K S OF JU NE 3, 10, 17, A N D 24, 1933
[1926=100]
Week endinguroup

A ll commodities--------------- ------- ----------- ------------- -------------

June 24

June 10

June 17

63.8

64.0

64.5

65.1

53.2
61.0
79.9
57.5
61.1
78.2
71.8
73.2
71.9
59.2

52.5
61.0
80.9
58.7
60.8
78.7
72.9
73.8
72.4
59.5

52.8
61.0
82.8
60.2
61.4
78.9
73.4
73.8
72.8
60.6

53.2
61.4
83.5
61.5
63.6
78.9
74.2
73.6
72.8
61.1

June 3

Wholesale Price Trends During June 1933
T he index number of wholesale commodity prices as computed
by the Bureau of Labor Statistics of the United States Department
of Labor shows an increase from May to June l933. _ This index
number, which includes 784 commodities or price series weighted
according to their importance and based on the average prices for

https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis

452

MONTHLY LABOR REVIEW

the year 1926 as 100, averaged 65 for June as compared with 62.7
for May, showing an increase of more than 3 K percent between the
two months, all groups participating in the advance. This is the
fourth consecutive month showing an increase, corresponding indexes
for February, March, and April 1933 were 59.8, 60.2, and 60.4,
respectively. When compared with June 1932, with an index num­
ber of 63.9 an increase of about 1% percent has been recorded in the

trend of wholesale prices.

12 months. This is the first time since early in 1929 that prices for
the current month have shown an increase over the corresponding
month of the year before.
The farm products group showed an advance of almost 6 percent
from the previous month. A sharp rise took place in the average
prices of grains, cattle, sheep, cotton, lemons, oranges, fresh milk,
peanuts, seeds, tobacco, onions, white potatoes, and wool. Decreases

https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis

WHOLESALE PRICES

453

were recorded in tlie average prices of calves, live poultry, eggs, fresh
apples, dried beans, hay, and sweet potatoes.
Among foods price advances during the month were reported for
butter, cheese, condensed, evaporated, and powdered milk, rye and
wheat flour, corn meal, rice, dried fruits, canned vegetables, cured
beef, lamb, ham, mess pork, fresh pork, cocoa beans, oleomargarine,
raw and granulated sugar, and vegetable oils. On the other hand,
fresh beef at New York, mutton, veal, and coffee averaged lower
than in the month before. The group as a whole increased 3 percent
in June when compared with May.
The hides and leather products group registered the second largest
increase, the index raising approximately 7 percent during the month.
All subgroups shared in the advance, with the subgroup of hides and
skins mounting over 20 percent. Textile products as a whole ad­
vanced 10 percent from May to June, showing the largest increase
for the individual groups, due largely to sharp increases in the sub­
groups of cotton goods, silk and rayon, and woolen and worsted goods.
Coke, gas, and most petroleum products showed advances in aver­
age prices, causing the group of fuel and lighting materials to increase
more than 1% percent from the previous month. Bituminous coal
remained at the May level, while anthracite coal and electricity de­
clined slightly.
Metals and metal products as a whole continued upward during
June due to advancing prices for iron and steel, nonferrous metals,
and plumbing and heating fixtures. Agricultural implements and
motor vehicles showed little or no change between May and June.
The index for the group was 2 percent higher than for the month
before. In the group of building materials the average prices of
brick and tile, lumber, paint and paint materials, and other building
materials moved upward during the month, while structural steel
and cement showed no change between the two months. The group
as a whole recorded an increase of more than 4% percent.
The group of chemicals and drugs increased approximately % of
1 percent during June due to advancing prices for chemicals, drugs
and pharmaceuticals, and fertilizer materials. On the other hand,
mixed fertilizers decreased slightly. As a whole the house-furnishing
goods group increased 2% percent from the previous month. Both
furniture and furnishings shared in the advance.
The group of miscellaneous commodities rose nearly 3}{ percent
between May and June due to advances in all subgroups.
The June averages for all the special groups of commodities were
above those for May, ranging from less than 2% percent in the case
of finished products to more than 6% percent in the case of semi­
finished articles.
Between May and June price increases took place in 395 instances,
decreases in 58 instances, while in 331 instances no change in price
occurred.

2 4 0 4 ° — 3 3 ------- 14


https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis

454
IN D E X

MONTHLY LABOR REVIEW
N UM BERS

OF W H O L E S A L E P R IC E S B Y
C O M M O D IT IE S

G R O U PS

AND

S U B G R O U PS

OF

[1926=100.0]

Groups and subgroups

All commodities other than farm products and fo o d s .. .
1 Data not yet available.


https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis

June 1932

M ay 1933

June 1933

Purchasing
power of
the dollar,
June 1933

63.9

62.7

65.0

$1. 538

45.7
37.7
46.7
48.2
58.8
57.4
66.8
62.4
56.0
55.4
70.8
87.5
32.5
58.7
96.4
52.7
62.2
51.0
49.6
27. 5
55.0
66.7
71.6
85.3
81.8
76.9
105. 5
106.3
48. 2
79.9
84.9
79.8
93.8
47.5
66.7
70.8
76. 1
77.1
57.6
73.3
66.7
81.7
77.6
73.1
78.6
58.3
68.0
69.0
74.7
75.4
74.0
64.2
39.6
42.1
76.2
5.8
84.6
53.2
57.6
70.0
67.8
70.1

50.2
52.8
46.8
51.8
59. 4
58.8
69.3
58.8
52.3
60.4
76.9
83.6
67.3
68.3
77.2
55.9
61.9
57.9
48.0
29.1
61. 5
70.7
60.4
78.5
78.3
75.2
94. 6
103. 3
31. 2
77.7
83.0
75.2
90.4
56.6
61.3
71.4
75.2
81.8
59.6
70.7
61.3
81.7
78.8
73. 2
80.9
55.0
66.8
63. 1
71.7
72.0
71.6
58.9
37.6
54.4
70.7
10.2
74.0
53.7
61.3
67.2
65.4
66.5

53.2
57.4
46.6
56. 2
61. 2
63.1
70.7
63.9
52.4
61.1
82.4
85.5
81.4
74.3
78.5
61.5
64.5
67.1
50.9
35.2
68.8
73.6
61.5
76.8
78.3
75.3

1.880
1.742
2.146
1.779
1.634
1.585
i.414
1.565
1.908
1.637
1.214
1. 170
1.229
1.346
1.274
1.626
1.550
1.490
1.965
2. 841
1.453
1.359
1.626
1.302
1.277
1. 328

34.4
79.3
83.0
76.2
90.4
63.2
67.4
74.7
77.0
81.8
67.4
71.9
67.4
81. 7
80.6
73.7
81.5
55.5
68.0
63.0
73.4
73.6
73.4
60.8
40.1
55.8
73.5
12.6
75.0
56. 2
65.3
69.0
67.4
68.9

2. 907
1.261
1.205
1.312
1.106
1.582
1.484
1. 339
1. 299
1.222
1. 484
1.391
1.484
1.224
1.241
1.357
1.227
1. 802
1.471
1.587
1.362
1. 359
1.362
1.645
2. 494
1.792
1. 361
7. 937
1.333
1.779
1.531
1.449
1.484
1.451

(0
0)

COST OF LIVING
Changes in Cost of Living in the United States, June 1933

HE June 1933 cost-of-living index number for the United States,
as computed by the Bureau of Labor Statistics of the United
States Department of Labor, is 128.3, based on 1913 as 100. This
means that the total cost of living is still 28.3 percent higher than in
1913. Food is the only group that was lower than in 1913. This
survey is made by the bureau in 32 cities and the figures apply to
wage earners and lower-salaried workers.
As a whole the cost of living declined 2.9 percent between December
1932 and June 1933. Food decreased 2 percent; clothing, 1.4 per­
cent; rents, 7.8 percent; fuel and light, 5.4 percent; and miscellaneous
items, 2.4 percent. House-furnishing goods increased 0.2 percent.
Comparing June 1932 and June 1933, cost of living decreased 5.5
percent; food dropped 3.4 percent; clothing, 6.3 percent; rents, 14.9
percent; fuel and light, 5.5 percent; house-furmshing goods, 3.7 per­
cent; and miscellaneous items, 3.8 percent.
As between June 1929 and June 1933, cost of living decreased 24.6
percent; food declined 37.5 percent; clothing, 25.7 percent; rents, 29.2
percent; fuel and light, 15.3 percent; house-furnishing goods, 25.6
percent; and miscellaneous items, 6.2 percent.
As compared with June 1920 the peak period, cost of living in June
1933 decreased 40.7 percent; food decreased 55.8 percent; clothing,
58.3 percent; rents, 19.3 percent; fuel and light, 13.7 percent, house­
furnishing goods, 49.5 percent; and miscellaneous items, 3.4 percent.
During the 6-month period ending June 1933, food declined in 24
cities, the decreases ranging from 0.2 percent to 7 percent. Increases
in food prices ranging from 0.1 percent to 2.8 percent were reported
in 8 cities. The cost of clothing declined in 29 cities, the decreases
ranging from 0.3 to 3.9 percent. There were increases in clotiling
in 3 cities, 0.1 percent for 2 cities and 0.5 percent for 1 city.
Rents declined in all of the 32 cities, the decreases ranging from 1.7
to 14.3 percent. Five cities reported decreases in rent of over 10
percent. Fuel and light declined in 31 cities, the decreases ranging
from 0.1 to 12.9 percent; an increase of 1.7 percent was reported in
1 city. House-furnishing goods increased in 19 cities, the increases
ranging from 0.1 to 4.1 percent. Decreases in house-furnishing goods
in 13 cities ranged from 0.2 to 3.9 percent. The miscellaneous group
showed decreases in all 32 cities, ranging from 0.4 to 5.3 percent.
The data are based on actual prices of standard articles of major
importance in the family budget, and the price of each article is
weighted according to the importance of the article in the budget.
Retail prices on 42 articles of food are obtained monthly by mail
from a representative number of grocers, meat dealers, bakers, and


https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis

455

456

MONTHLY LABOR REVIEW

dairymen in each city. The changes in the cost of food for the
United States are based on changes in retail food prices in 51 cities.
Fuel and light prices, including gas, electricity, coal and other fuel,
and light items, are obtained by mail from regular correspondents.

All other data are secured by personal visits of representatives of the
Bureau.
Prices of men’s and boys’ clothing are taken on 32 articles, the
principal articles being suits, overcoats, hats, caps, overalls or work
trousers, shoes, rubbers, repair of shoes, underwear, and furnishings.

https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis

457

COST OF LIVING

Prices of women’s and girls’ clothing are taken on 38 articles including
coats, dresses, shoes, rubbers, repair of shoes, kimonos, hosiery, and
underclothing. Prices are also taken on silk, wool, and cotton yard
goods which are used in making dresses and aprons.
The 28 furniture and house-furnishing articles on which prices are
obtained include living-room, dining-room, and bedroom furniture,
rugs, linoleum, household linens and bedding, baby carriages, sewing
machines, stoves, brooms, refrigerators, and ldtchen tables.
Real-estate agents furnish rentals on from 500 to 2,500 unfurnished
houses and apartments in each city.
The miscellaneous prices include street-car fares, motion pictures,
newspapers, physicians’ fees, medicines, hospital fees for wards,
dentists’ fees, spectacles, laundry, cleaning supplies, barber service,
toilet articles and preparations, telephone rates for residential service,
and tobacco prices. Except for certain items, such as street-car
fare, telephone rates, and newspapers, for which 4 quotations
generally are not possible, for all items of clothing, house furnishings,
and the miscellaneous group 4 quotations are collected in each
city, and 5 in New York.
Table 1 shows the index numbers which represent changes in the
six groups of items entering into living costs in the United States
from 1913 to June 1933.
T a b l e 1 .— I N D E X N U M B E R S SH O W IN G C H A N G E S IN C O ST OF G R O U PS OF IT E M S

E N T E R IN G IN T O C O ST OF L IV IN G IN T H E U N IT E D S T A T E S , 1913 T O JU N E 1933
Index numbers
Date
Food

Cloth­
ing

Rent

House­
Fuel and furnish­ Miscel­
laneous
ing
light
goods

All
item s

100.0

100.0

100.0

100.0

100.0

100.0

100.0

1914_________ . . . . . ----1915 . . . _______________ . . .
1916_____________________ .
1917___ ____________ ______
1918------------------------------------

105.0
105.0
126.0
157.0
187.0

101.0
104.7
120.0
149.1
205.3

100.0
101.5
102.3
100.1
109.2

101.0
101.0
108.4
124. 1
147.9

104.0
no. 6
127.8
150.6
213.6

103.0
107.4
113.3
140. 5
165.8

103.0
105.1
118.3
142.4
174.4

June 1919----------- --- ---------------------------December 1919_____________________
June 1920..
________________________
December 1920_______________________

184.0
197.0
219.0
178.0

214.5
268.7
287.5
258.5

114. 2
125.3
134.9
151.1

145.6
156.8
171. 9
194.9

225.1
263.5
292.7
285.4

173.2
190.2
201.4
208. 2

177.3
199.3
216.5
200.4

M a y 1921_____________________________
September 1921_________________ _____
December 1921_______________________

144.7
153.1
149.9

222.6
192.1
184.4

159.0
160.1
161.4

181.6
180.9
181.1

247.7
224.7
218.0

208.8
207.8
206. 8

180.4
177.3
174.3

March 1922...______ _________________
June 1922.. __________________ ______ _
September 1922---------------------------------December 1922______________________ _

138.7
140.7
139.7
146.6

175.5
172.3
171.3
171.5

160.9
160.9
161.1
161.9

175.8
174.2
183.6
186.4

206.2
202.9
202.9
208.2

203.3
201.5
201. 1
200.5

166.9
166.4
166.3
169.5

March 1923___________________________
June 1923----- --------------------------------------September 1923..______ ______________
December 1923_______________________

141.9
144.3
149.3
150.3

174. 4
174.9
176.5
176.3

162.4
163.4
164.4
166.5

186.2
180.6
181.3
184.0

217.6
222.2
222.4
222.4

200.3
200.3
201.1
201.7

168.8
169.7
172.1
173.2

March 1924___________________________
June 1924_______________________ ____
September 1924---------------------- ---------December 1924------- ----------------------------

143.7
142.4
146.8
151.5

175.8
174.2
172.3
171.3

167.0
168.0
168.0
168.2

182.2
177.3
179.1
180.5

221.3
216. 0
214.9
216.0

201.1
201.1
201. 1
201.7

170.4
169. 1
170.6
172.5

June 1925.. __________________________
December 1925_______________________
June 1926.. __________________________
December 1926------------------------------------

155.0
165. 5
159.7
161.8

170.6
169.4
168.2
166.7

167.4
167.1
165.4
164.2

176.5
186.9
180.7
188.3

214.3
214.3
210.4
207.7

202.7
203.5
203.3
203. 9

173.5
177.9
174.8
175.6

Average, 1913________________ December
December
December
December
December


https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis

458

MONTHLY LABOR REVIEW

a b l e 1.—I N D E X N U M B E R S S H O W IN G C H A N G E S IN C O ST OF G R O U P S OF IT E M S
E N T E R IN G IN T O C OST OF L IV IN G IN T H E U N IT E D S T A T E S , 1913 T O JU N E 1933— Con.

T

Index numbers
Date
Food

Cloth­
ing

Rent

HouseFuel and furnish­ Miscel­
light
ing
laneous
goods

AH
item s

June 1927_____________________________
December 1927____________ __________
June 1928___________________________
December 1928_________ ________

152.6
155.8

164.9
162.9
162.6
161.9

162.1
160. 2
157.6
155.9

180.8
183. 2
177.2
181.3

205.2
204. 6
201. 1
199.7

204.5
205.1
205. 5
207.1

173.4
172.0
170.0
171.3

June 1929____________________
December 1929- _ __________________
. ______________ _
June 1930 ___
December 1930.........................................

154.8
158.0
147.9
137.2

161.3
160.5
158.9
153.0

153.7
151.9
149.6
146.5

175.2
178.7
172.8
175.0

198. 5
197.7
195.7
188.3

207. 3
207.9
208. 5
208.1

170. 2
171.4
166.6
160.7

June 1931________________ __________
December 1931.......................................
June 1932____________________________
December 1932____________ _________
June 1933___________________________

118.3
114.3
100. 1
98.7
96.7

146.0
135.5
127.8
121.5
119.8

142.0
136. 2
127.8
118.0
108.8

165.4
168. 0
157.1
156.9
148.4

177.0
167.1
153.4
147.4
147.7

206.6
205.4
202.1
199. 3
194.5

150.3
145.8
135.7
132.1
128.3

158.5
155.9

Table 2 shows the percent of decrease in the price of electricity
since December 1913. This utility decreased 22.2 percent since
that time. A decrease of 1.5 percent was reported for the current
6-month period ending JuDe 1933.
T able 2

—P E R C E N T OF D E C R E A S E IN T H E P R IC E OF E L E C T R I C I T Y A T S P E C IF IE D
P E R IO D S AS C O M P A R E D W IT H D E C E M B E R 1913

Date

Percent
of de­
crease
from D e­
cember
1913

December 1914___ _
December 1915_______
December 1916 -- _ _
December 1917 - _ __
December 1918_______
June 1919
____ __
December 1919_______
June 1920 ___ .............
December 1920_______
M ay 1921.. _ _____
September 1921 - .
December 1921_______
March 1922____ _____
June 1922______ ____

3.7
6.2
8.6
11.1
6.2
6.2
7.4
7.4
4.9
4.9
4.9
4.9
4.9
6.2

Date

September 1922______
December 1922_______
March 1923__________
June 1923______ ____ _
September 1923______
March 1924__________
September 1924______
June 1925_________ _
December 1925June 1926__ __ ______
December 1926______

Percent
of de­
crease
from De­
cember
1913
6. 2
7.4
7.4
7.4
8.6
8. 6
8.6
8. 6
8.6
8 6
9.9
9. 9
11.1
11.1

Date

Percent
of de­
crease
from De­
cember
1913

IQ 8
21 0
22.2

Table 3 shows the percent of decrease in the cost of living in each
of the 32 cities in the United States from June 1920, June 1929,
June 1932, and December 1932 to June 1933. In the period between
June 1920 to June 1933 the decreases in the 32 cities ranged from
35.9 to 48.7 percent and averaged 40.7 percent for the United States.
In the period from June 1929 to June 1933 the decreases ranged from
21 to 32.1 percent and averaged 24.6 percent for the United States.
For the year period from June 1932 to June 1933 the decreases
ranged from 3.9 to 7.7 percent and averaged 5.5 percent for the
United States. Comparing the recent 6-month period ending June
1933 the decreases ranged from 0.5 to 5.1 percent and averaged 2.9
percent for the United States.

https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis

459

COST OF LIVING
T able 3 — PER

C E N T OF D E C R E A S E IN COST OP L IV IN G IN S P E C IF IE D C IT IE S F R O M
JU N E 1920, JU N E 1929, JU NE 1932, A N D D E C E M B E R 1932 T O JU N E 1933

Percent of decrease from—
June
1920
to
June
1933

City

Baltim ore.Birmingham____
Buffalo -

____

Cincinnati______
Cleveland______
H o u s t o n -._____

M e m p h is.--........
M in n eap olis___

43. 6
37.5
44.6
39. 6
38.8
42. 2
37.0
39.0
40. 5
48. 7
42.3
41. 3
42. 9
42. 2
37.7
39.9
38.8

June
1929
to
June
1933
27.1
23.0
30.0
23. 0
24. 2
28. 0
23.9
23.6
22. 6
32.1
26.3
25.1
25. 9
21.4
25. 6
24. 7
23.9

June
1932
to
June
1933
6. 4
5.0
6.0
4. 0
6.4
6.8
5.1
5.9
4. 5
7. 6
5.6
5. 7
6.1
4. 6
7. 0
5.3
7.7

Percent of decrease from—

Decem­
ber 1932
to
June
1933
2.1
3.0
3.3
2. 4
3.1
3.3
2.9
1.9
2. 4
3. 7
.5
2. 7
3. 1
2.5
4. 8
1.8
5.1

C ity

N ew Orleans___
N ew Y ork--------Philadelphia____
Portland, M e ...
Portland, Oreg_.
San F rancisco.--

Average, United
States____ _

June
1920
to
June
1933

June
1929
to
June
1933

June
1932
to
June
1933

Decem­
ber 1932
to
June
1933

41.0
36.9
38.2
41.4
39.1
39. 5
37.9
42.4
38.9
39. 3
35.9
43. 3
36. 7
37.1
38.6

25. 5
23.9
22.8
24. 4
24.8
26. 8
21.7
23.4
23. 0
25. 0
21. 5
24. 5
24.1
21.0
22. 7

4. 2
4.3
6.4
6. 9
6. 1
6. 6
5.8
5.9
5.8
5. 5
3.9
5.0
5.3
4.1
4. 6

3.0
3.4
3.4
4. 6
2.8
4.2
2.5
3.9
2.8
2.4
2.5
2.7
3. 6
1.0
1.7

40.7

24.6

5.5

2.9

For 19 cities, data are available back to December 1914, and for
13 cities back to December 1917. Sufficient additional data were
collected to warrant an extension of the index for the United States
back to 1913, but not for the individual cities.
The percent of change in the cost of living and for the six groups of
items from December 1914 to June 1933 and specified intervening
dates is shown in table 4. Index numbers for the other dates specified
in table 1 are available for these cities, but are omitted as a matter
of economy in printing.


https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis

460

MONTHLY LABOR REVIEW

T a b l e 4 . —C H A N G E S

IN C OST OF L IV IN G IN 19 C IT IE S , JU NE 1920 T O JU NE 1933

Percent of increase over December 1914 in expenditure for—
C ity and date
Food

B a ltim ore, MdL:
June 1920......... .....................
December 1920_____________
June 1928- _____________ .
December 1928________________
June 1929-_______
December 1929______________
June 193 0 -_______ __
December 1930____________
June 1931- _ ____
December 1931.......................
June 1932_-_ _______
December 1932 ____
June 1933 ______ _
B o s to n , M a ss.:
June 1920-- _____ - _
December 1920
June 1928-- _______ .
December 1928 ___________
June 1929________________
December 1929_____ . . .
June 1930-.December 1930___
June 193L-- _
December 1931_________
June 1932_____ ____
December 1932___
June 1933_______
B u ffa lo , N .Y .:
June 192 0 -_____
December 1920 ______ _
June 1928__________
December 1928- _ . _
June 1929______ __
December 1929 ________
June 1930_______
December 1930 _____
June 1931 ________
December 1931 ______
June 1932_____
December 1932. .
June 1933..............
Chicago, 111.:
June 1920 _______
December 1920 _______
June 1928-. ____ _
December 1928
... June 1929____________
December 1929 .....................
June 1930 _________
December 1930....................
June 1931________
December 1931- - .
June 1932________ _____
December 1932. .
June 1933_____
Cleveland, Ohio:
June 1920________
December 1920. __________
June 1928-.- ________
December 1928________
June 1929..- ______
December 1929..____ _____
June 1930_______
December 1930 .................
June 1931___________
December 1 93 1 ___ . . .
June 1932.. ________
December 1932____________
June 1933_______________
1 Decrease.


https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis

Rent

HouseFuel and furnish­ Miscel­
light
ing
laneous
goods

Ail
items

110. 9
75 6
52. 9
51. 9
53. 8
56. 7
47. 2
36. 9
18. 7
14. 4
l 1. 0
l. 4
l 3.8

191.3
159.5
68.1
68.3
67.5
67.2
65.9
58.1
51.6
41.9
32.7
26.5
24.0

41.6
49.5
66.7
65.7
65.2
63.4
62.4
61.3
59.8
56.3
51.5
37.9
29.8

57.6
79.0
82.0
87.3
80.7
86.1
80.9.
85.6
78.7
83.9
67.9
75.1
62.8

191.8
181.9
103.2
102.0
100.4
99.4
95.6
86.0
72. 1
66.8
55.6
48.0
47.4

111.4
112.9
118.7
120.9
119.8
120. 2
127.0
126.5
125.6
124.5
119.1
117. 1
114.5

114.3
96.8
73.7
73.9
73.8
75.1
71.6
65.8
55.8
51.8
41.0
38.1
33.9

105. 0
74. 4
45. 0
50.5
47.1
53. 2
43. 7
36. 7
14. 6
12.8
i 4.8
i 2.8
i 6. 2

211.1
192.7
80. 2
80.4
79.0
79.0
78.3
72.6
66.7
58.0
49.5
40.5
39.7

16.2
25.8
52.2
51.6
50.7
49.2
47.1
44.7
41.8
38.4
35.1
28.1
21.7

83.6
106.0
90.4
96.7
87.7
94.3
88.7
95.7
85.3
86.0
70.7
73.1
64.6

233.7
226.4
123.1
118.4
118.4
118.0
113.6
107.6
97.4
89.9
72.6
59.3
62.6

91.8
96.6
90.2
94.4
92.1
92.9
92.5
92.3
92.3
91.3
87.9
85.5
84.0

110.7
97.4
64.8
68.2
65.4
68.4
63.1
59.2
47.1
44.1
32.6
30.4
27.3

115. 7
78. 5
51. 6
54.9
54. 6
57. 9
47. 2
35. 8
16. 0
6. 7
1. 3
.5
12. 9

210.6
168.7
71.7
72.4
71.2
71.0
70.0
62.0
52.3
45.4
37.0
25.6
25.7

46.6
48.5
72.7
69.4
67.0
66. 5
65.0
62. 5
56.5
50.4
39.7
29.4
19.6

69.8
74.9
126. 7
128. 5
123.2
127.0
122.9
126.7
121.3
124.8
113.8
117.4
111.7

199.7
189. 2
105.4
104.2
104.4
104. 2
105.0
96.4
84.0
72.4
56.9
51.9
52.4

101.9
107.4
117.8
117.8
118.9
119.1
120.4
118.4
116.4
114.2
110.8
106.4
100.0

121.8
101. 5
78.7
79.7
78. 6
80.0
76.0
69.4
58. 3
51.8
44.7
39.8
35.5

120. 0
70. 5
59. 4
62. 4
63. 0
67. 3
56.9
45. 6
26. 7
23.1
5.4

205.3
158.6
53.3
52.1
51.5
49.2
47.7
37.2
30.3
19.5
11.0
7.6
6.1

35.1
48.9
86.8
83.6
80.3
77.2
75.1
71. 1
64.4
56.5
38.8
24.9
8.7

62.4
83. 5
51.2
56.5
50.7
56.7
51.5
54.8
49.5
52.5
42.1
44.1
28.1

215.9
205.8
96.0
97.2
97.4
97.0
92. 1
82.7
67.7
57.8
37. 1
34.6
35.4

87.5
96.5
98.5
101.7
101.7
102.9
104.7
104.5
103.3
98.6
94.2
93.0
89.9

114.6
93.3
71.5
73.1
72.3
73.7
69.1
62. 2
51.8
46.2
33.1
28.2
24.0

185.1
156.0
65.7
63.9
63.9
63.2
61.6
52.1
41.8
36.8
30.2
25.3
24.3

47.3
80.0
61.8
60.5
59.5
58.9
56.4
55.3
48.6
41.0
29.9
18.2
6.1

90.3
94.5
161.3
163.7
160.5
163.1
160.2
162.5
158.0
159.5
156.4
155. 4
150. 3 1

186.5
176.8
90.2
89. 2
89.4
88.8
87.7
75.5
64.4
58.3
41.6
36.1
39.6

117.9
134.0
118. 1
119.0
117.9
118. 3
125. 3
124.2
118.6
119.0
121. 2
114.8
111.8

120.3
107.3
76.3
75.4
75.7
74.3
73.3
66.2
54.4
50.0
42.7
36.9
34.3

i.3

l. 2

1

N oth­
ing

118. 7
71. 7
50. 6
48. 5
50. 6
47. 0
42. 0
29. 5
9. 6
4. 1
1 6. 4
1 10. 3
i 10.1

461

COST OF LIVING

T a b l e 4 .— C H A N G E S IN COST OF L IV IN G IN 19 C IT IE S , JU NE 1920 T O JU NE 1933— Continued

Percent of increase over December 1914 in expenditure for—
C ity and date
Food

D etroit, M ic h .:
June 1920.. ______________________
December 1920. ________ _ _ . . .
June 1928_______ _ _________
___
December 1928___________________
June 1929_________ __________ . . .
December 1929 __________
.
June 1930________________ _____
December 1930. _
_ ______ .
June 1931________________________
December 1931 . _____
. . . ..
June 1932 _______________________
December 1932 _____________ . . .
June 1933___________________ _____
H o u s t o n , T ex.:
June 1920____________ _____ _ __
December 1920_____ _. ______ .
June 1928___ _______ ___________
December 1928 ________ ______
Junel929.._ __________ _ _____ .
December 1929_____
______ . . .
June 1930. . . . ______ ________
December 1930 . ___
. ___
June 1931_____________________ . . .
December 1931 ______________ . . .
June 1932_______ ________
December 1932 _______
___
June 1933..
________ ______
J ackson ville, F la .:
June 1920_____________ _______ . . .
December 1920
________
_ .
June 1928 . . . . _________________
December 1928___________________
June 1929___ ___________________ .
December 1929________________
_
June 1930______ _________________
December 1930_______ . . . . . .
June 1931_____ ________________ .
December 1931._____________ ____
June 1932_______ ____ ____________
December 1932..____ ___________
June 1933_______ _________________
L os A ngeles, C a lif.:
____
June 1920___ ______
December 1920__________________
June 1928 . . . .
______ . . .
December 1928_____ _____________
June 1929_______________ ______ _
December 1929____________ ______
June 1930____________ . . . ______
December 1930_________ ___ _ _
June 1931___ ______ _________ _ .
December 1931___________________
June 1932_________________ ____ _
December 1932________________ . . .
June 1933________________________
M o b ile, A la .:
June 1920 . . . ____________________
December 1920____________________
June 1928____ ____ _______________
December 1928____________________
June 1929_______________ _______
December 1929___________________
June 1930_________________
December 1930___________ _______
June 1931 _ _ __________ . ____
December 1931____________________
June 1932____ ____ _______________
December 1932____________________1
June 1933....................... ........ .......... .1

Cloth­
ing

Rent

HouseFuel and furnish­ Miscel­
light
ing
laneous
goods

All
item s

132.0
75.6
53.5
55. 7
59. 2
57.9
47.6
32.6
14. 7
7.7
i 7.7
' 11.3
i 8.8

208.8
176.1
64.3
62.5
62.5
61.7
59.6
50. 2
44.0
33. 1
26.8
25.9
21.0

68.8
108.1
79.1
78.2
77.3
77.8
73.2
60.0
45.4
31.0
17.8
1.1
1 11.3

74.9
104. 5
73.2
77.0
72.8
77.5
67.2
71.0
61.4
59.3
46.2
47.2
37.3

206.7
184.0
81.4
81.2
81.2
79.4
76.7
66.5
58.8
49.3
32.7
32.2
31.0

141.3
144.0
128.8
131.1
130.4
130.6
131.1
125.1
123.7
118.1
116. 1
110.7
100.8

136.0
118.6
74.6
77.4
78.1
77.8
72.3
61.6
50.4
41.9
30.9
25.7
21.0

107.5
83.2
45.6
51.4
51.1
55.8
43.0
32.8
11.2
9.5
i 7.5
1 10.5
>9.2

211.3
187.0
85.8
86.4
84.7
84.1
82.8
65.6
63.8
52.5
42.0
30.4
29.0

25.3
35.1
30.4
30.1
27.5
27.1
25.7
23.8
20.0
12. 3
i .2
i 11. 1
i 17.0

55.1
74.2
29.2
33.6
29.1
31.8
25.3
24.0
18.9
16.8
11.8
5.9
3.9

213.9
208.2
132.0
131. 1
129.0
129.5
127.2
113.8
110.0
99.1
87.0
75.0
75.2

90.4
103.9
89.7
89.3
92.1
92.5
92.5
92.3
92. 1
92.9
88. 5
83. 2
82.5

112.2
104.0
64.1
66.4
66.1
68.0
62.3
54.7
45.2
41.1
29.6
23.0
22.4

90.1
65. 6
36.4
40.0
37.4
40.8
31.9
28.4
8.4
1.4
i 10.7
i 12.5
i 15.7

234.0
209. 3
85.0
84.6
83.9
82.4
80.4
71.9
65.4
49. 7
41.3
35.2
33.6

28.9
34.1
32.3
27.4
19.8
13.2
3.2
i 1.5
i 5.9
i 9.7
i 15.8
i 20.7
i 25.9

72.6
92. 6
74.4
78.9
77.1
75.0
70.6
66.3
64.0
61.0
53.4
49.6
48.1

224.2
222.3
119.2
119. 6
117.8
113.9
110.5
103.3
89.9
81.7
62.1
55.6
52.6

102.8
105. 6
105.1
105.1
105.1
101.0
102.4
101.0
100. 2
97.6
92.9
88.1
82.3

116.5
106.2
68.3
69.1
66.9
65.8
61.0
56.9
47.4
40.5
31.6
27.6
23.6

90.8
62. 7
34.9
44.7
41.2
40.9
30.9
21.0
3.1
5.7
i 12.0
i 8. 1
i 13.9

184. 5
166.6
71.4
70.5
69.3
69.3
68.1
60.2
50.7
40.0
32.0
26.3
24. 8

42. 6
71.4
54.1
49.8
45. 2
43.7
39.8
36.9
31.3
25.7
15.8
4.8
i 5.6

53.5
53.5
56.5
51. 5
50.6
51.4
45.6
47.6
47.0
46.6
45.3
45.6
43.1

202.2
202. 2
110. 7
108.4
106.5
105. 9
103. 6
93.0
77.8
71.2
54.9
49. 5
46.7

86.6
100.6
107.2
110.9
111.1
111.7
110.2
110. 2
107.7
103. 5
102.7
96.2
87.0

101.7
96.7
67.4
71.0
68.9
68.7
63.7
58.1
48.2
45.1
35.2
32.1
25.7

110.5
73. 5
45.4
49.6
47.5
49.0
39.6
33.0
12. 1
7.4
i 10.0
i 9.0
i 12.1

137.4
122. 2
47.5
48.1
47.2
47.2
46.8
40.0
34.1
26.2
18.9
17.6
16.8

34.6
53.6
41.0
41.6
41.0
40.6
38.9
36.3
32.5
24.6
16.3
3.6
i 5.6

86.3
122.3
90.0
92.1
84.0
85.8
81.2
2 58.6
49.6
49.7
42.1
34. 7
25.8

177.9
175. 4
93.3
92.3
87.9
87.3
85.6
73. 5
57. 5
50.6
43.5
43.8
44.1

100.3
100.7
107.3
108.3
108.1
108.3
108.1
107.5
105.4
102.3
98.1
97.7
93.7

107.0
93.3
63.5
65.7
64.0
64.8
60.3
54.4
43.0
38.0
27.4
25.9
22.1

1Decrease.
2The decrease is due primarily to the change in consumption and price accompanying the change from
manufactured to natural gas.


https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis

462

MONTHLY LABOR REVIEW

T able 4 .— C H AN G ES

IN COST OF L IV IN G IN 19 C IT IE S , JU NE 1920 T O JU NE 1933— Continued

Percent of increase over December 1914 in expenditure for—
C ity and date
Food

New York, N .Y .:

Cloth­
ing

Portland, M e .:

Portland, Oreg.:

December 1930--------------------------

June 1933_______ _________________
1 Decrease.


https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis

HouseFuel and furnish­ Miscel­
laneous
light
ing
goods

All
items

105.3
73.5
47.5
53.0
50.6
54.9
43.7
35.9
19. 6
14. 4
4.1
1.9
1.9

241.4
201.8
90.3
88.4
87.8
85.9
85.5
82.2
67.6
56. 5
51.0
37.6
34.8

32.4
38. 1
69.3
68.6
67.6
66.1
65.1
63.1
61.5
58.4
53.0
44.1
35.2

60.1
87.5
94.4
96.3
92.0
95.1
85.7
90.9
86.3
90.4
76.5
80.4
73.0

205.1
185.9
97.8
96.4
96.2
95.4
90.5
85.5
62.5
52.3
44.7
37.9
39.4

111.9
116.3
118.6
118.8
121.4
122.9
123.3
123.7
123.5
120.6
118.6
116.0
108.7

119.2
101.4
74.4
76.3
75.5
77.1
71.7
67.5
57.1
52.0
44.8
40.2
35.5

107.6
76.3
50.2
55.0
51.9
55.8
43.3
36.7
15.0
9.8
1.3
i 4.7
i 11.4

176.5
153.6
71.6
71.8
71.3
70.4
68.7
66. 2
57.7
46.2
• 38.9
34.2
31.0

70.8
90.8
41.7
39.6
38.8
37.1
36.0
33.3
32.6
29.3
27.0
18.2
16.2

110.6
128.9
95.6
100.3
94.3
92.7
87.3
97.0
83.6
83.0
67.4
68.4
53.4

165.0
160.5
85.7
86.1
85.2
83.0
80.4
73.5
63.8
56.1
47.4
42.4
40.5

108.4
106.3
114.6
118.2
118.0
119.3
118.6
119.0
119.0
118.3
107.8
110.3
100.2

122.2
109.0
71.5
74.1
72.3
73.5
67.9
64.8
54.0
48.8
39.9
36.5
30.2

101.7
68.1
51.3
51.7
50.0
56.1
42.6
34.4
20.8
17.0
.1
i 3.8
i 5.2

219.6
183. 5
76.5
74.0
72.6
71.2
69.7
64.9
57.6
42.0
33.4
26.3
23.6

28.6
38.0
67.1
63.8
59.9
56.5
54.0
51.2
45.8
40.3
33.7
25.7
17.7

66.8
96.0
81.5
87.3
85.4
86.3
86.5
95.8
80.5
91.7
67.4
71.9
62.8

187.4
183.4
85.4
83.9
84.1
84.7
83.2
75.3
63.2
54.1
43.9
31.8
26.7

102.8
122.3
121.4
120.3
121. 2
121.2
121.4
120.7
118.5
117.6
113.2
108.7
104.5

113.5
100.7
75.3
74.5
73.1
75.0
69.0
64.5
55.3
50.5
38.6
33.9
30.1

114.5
78.7
54.2
57.0
54.3
55.7
45.9
38.5
20.5
17.2
5.2
2.1
i .4

165.9
147.8
66. 5
64. 8
65.8
65.6
65.4
60.4
55.7
47.9
38.6
24.7
23.1

14.5
20.0
21.5
20.9
19.8
19.8
19.9
19.3
17.9
17.0
15.0
11.6
6.9

83.9
113. 5
98.4
102.4
94.1
101.9
96.9
99.9
95.3
97.3
84.1
85.9
66.6

190.3
191.2
112.5
112.3
112.3
112.1
111.9
105.8
99.2
91.0
81.1
69.9
75.7

89.4
94.3
88.8
97.3
97.3
97.1
97.1
95.9
95.9
95.7
94.9
93.5
92.0

107.6
93.1
63.8
66.6
64.8
65.8
61.5
57.2
48.2
45.1
36.9
32.3
29.0

107.1
60.9
36.6
41.8
41.4
43.7
34.2
17.8
8.2
6.0
i 6.9
i 6.8
i 10.7

158.6
122.1
50.8
49.4
48.4
47.8
44.8
38.4
32.9
23.3
15.9
10.0
10.6

33.2
36.9
20.9
16.4
11.0
8.2
5.4
2.4
i 1.3
i 6.2
i 13.2
i 19.0
i 23.9

46.9
65.9
51.6
63.0
51.4
61.8
49.7
55.5
36.4
40.1
22.9
24.9
18.4

183.9
179.9
80.5
80.1
79.7
81.0
78.6
69.7
65.8
56.8
42.7
36.4
37.5

79.7
81.1
76.4
78.0
77.3
77.7
86.6
85.1
83.6
82.9
79.6
76.9
67.5

100.4
80.3
50.5
52.4
50.7
51.6
49.1
41.5
35.2
31.9
22.7
20.1
15.4

Norfolk, V a.:

Philadelphia, P a.:

Rent

463

COST OF LIVING

T a b l e 4 — C H A N G E S IN C OST OF L IV IN G IN 19 C IT IE S , JU N E 1920 T O JU NE 1933-Continued

Percent of increase over December 1914 in expenditure for—
C ity and date
Food

San Francisco, and Oakland,Calif.
June, 1920________ _________
December, 1920_____
June, 1928________
December, 1928........................
June, 1929. _________
December, 1929____
June, 1930 ______
December, 1930_____
June, 1931________
December, 1931...... ................
June, 1932___
December, 1932____
June, 1933 . . .
Savannah, G a .:
June, 1920_______
December, 1920_____
June, 1 9 2 8 .___ . . .
December, 1928 . . . . .
June, 1929. . . .
December, 1929_____
June, 1930. _
December, 1930_____ .
June, 1931______ .
December, 1931_______________
June, 1932__________
December, 1932.............
......
June, 1933. ______
Seattle, W a sh .:
June 1920...... .........
December 1920_________
June 1928____ _____
December 1928___________
June 1929____________
December 1929...........
June 1930_______ . . .
December 1930_______
June 1931_______ ______
December 1931.............
June, 1932__ ______
December 1932 ______
June 1933__________
W ashington, D .C .:
June 1920............ .
December 1920___
June 1928______ _
December 1928 _____
June 1929________
December, 1929...
June 1930__________
December 1930... .
June 1931________
December 1931_____
June 1932________
December, 1932______
June 1933...............

Cloth­
ing

Rent

HouseFuel and furnish­ Miscel­
light
ing
laneous
goods

AU
items

93.9
64.9
41.5
48.0
45.1
48.7
40.4
32.0
15.8
10.3
.5
2.7
1.9

191.0
175.9
82.9
83.4
82.8
81.5
77.9
72.0
66.3
57.5
48.7
39.6
37.4

9.4
15.0
35.7
33.5
31.9
30.4
28.1
26.1
24.2
20.2
14.8
9.3
3.9

47.2
66.3
45.9
47.5
43.7
40.3
2 28. 7
32.0
28.8
30.6
25.1
24.6
24.5

180.1
175.6
102.0
99.0
97.8
97.4
100. 6
91.6
79. 3
66.6
52.9
49.1
49. 8

79.6
84.8
79. 6
83.2
83.4
82.5
80.9
82.0
79.1
78. 7
76.2
74.8
71. 7

96.0
85. 1
58.8
61.7
60.1
60. 8
55.9
51.5
42. 8
38.1
30. 8
28.9
25 7

91.7
63.5
31. 1
35.0
33.9
35.1
25.2
17.7
1.5
14.7
i 18.1
i 16.8
i 20.8

212.1
171.5
68.8
69.0
68.2
67.7
66.0
61.4
58.0
44.6
35.2
29.0
26.9

33.5
58.6
35.9
33.9
32.7
28.3
27.0
19.6
15.8
9.5
4.0
‘ 4.3
19.7

65.3
94.4
56.9
59.6
55.8
56.1
54.2
56.2
50.7
40.9
39.6
37.6
36.6

207. 2
206.6
120.8
118.8
117.9
117.2
113. 7
110.1
98.5
89.0
79.0
67.4
67.9

83.8
91.5
81.9
87.0
83.8
84.5
84. 7
83.8
83.8
82.3
76.8
75.2
70. 8

109.4
98. 7
56.6
59.1
57.2
57. 2
53.1
48.3
40.7
33.9
25.0
22.0
18 7

102.3
54.1
36.9
40.8
43.7
45.9
38.1
22.5
12.2
8.8
i 3.1
i 5.1
13.6

173.9
160.5
68.8
68.3
66.6
66.6
64.6
59.7
55.7
45.9
35.2
28.7
28.8

74.8
76.7
55.5
54.1
52.4
52.1
50.1
47.8
44.4
37.5
25.3
15.4
8.0

65.8
78.7
57.1
62.9
62.1
65.8
65.5
64.0
54.0
61.5
56.3
48.5
45.6

221.2
216.4
133.5
132.6
131.7
132.6
132.4
128.0
114.5
103.1
83.4
77.7
82.1

90.4
95.5
97.4
97.4
98.8
98.8
98. 6
97.6
96.6
94. 6
90. 5
88.8
85 8

110. 5
94.1
65.8
67.1
67.7
68.7
65.4
58.4
52.3
48.0
38.2
33. 7
32. 5

108.4
79.0
55.5
58.2
58.4
57.4
49.1
41.3
22.8
17.8
2.4
1 1.4
1 1.0

184.0
151.1
67.0
65.2
64.4
62.3
60.5
55.4
49.7
39.7
28.0
20.7
17.1

15.6
24.7
32.7
31.0
30.5
30.0
29.7
28.7
28.2
27.9
27.1
22.5
17.2

53.7
68.0
38.8
41.0
38.0
39.7
36.2
36.6
32.5
34.9
26.7
29.2
23.5

196.4
194.0
102.2
99.4
100.0
100.2
100.4
93.0
86.6
79.9
61.2
57.3
55.4

68.2
73. 9
73. 6
73.8
74.0
74.3
73.8
76.8
75.7
75.3
74. 6
72.7
70.1

10 1.3
87.8
59. 7
60. 2
60.0
59. 2
55. 5
51.8
43. 0
39.0
29.5
25.8
23.6

1 Decrease.
2 The decrease is due primarily to the change in consumption and price accompanying the change from
manufactured to natural gas.

The changes in the cost of living from December 1917 to June 1933,
and specified intervening dates, for 13 cities, is reported in table 5.
This table is constructed in the same manner as table 4 and differs
only in the base period.


https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis

MONTHLY LABOR REVIEW

464

T a b l e 5 .—C H A N G E S IN C O ST OF L IV IN G IN 13 C IT IE S , JU N E 1920 T O JU N E 1933

Percent of increase over December 1917 in expenditure for—
C ity and date
Food

Atlanta, G a.:

Birm ingham , A la .:

Cincinnati, O hio:

Denver, Colo.:

Indianapolis, In d .:

June 1933_________________ _______

Cloth­
ing

Rent

HouseFuel and furnish­ Miscel­
light
ing
laneous
goods

All
items

34.0
12.8
1 1.0
2.9
.3
.1
i 7.9
i 13.1
i 24.2
'29.2
i 36.6
i 39. 8
1 39.4

80.5
56.5
.2
.4
.3
1.6
i 2.8
i 6.4
18.5
i 16.7
i 21.4
i 24.9
i 25.7

40.4
73.1
38.9
38.2
37.5
35.9
32.8
30.8
28.3
19.6
14.6
.2
i 5.8

61.0
66.8
31.8
36.3
28.4
31.6
2 11.6
11.6
3.6
4.8
'2 .7
.4
'6 .6

65.0
58.4
15.2
14.9
14.6
14.1
11.2
8.0
1.7
'5 .7
i 12.3
i 16.4
' 16.1

34.6
39.7
35.6
35.3
33.0
34. 2
31.8
30.5
28.2
28.7
28.2
25.4
21.8

46.7
38.5
13.9
15.6
13.6
13.5
7.9
4.5
1 1.7
' 6.2
' 11.5
' 15.4
' 17.2

36.4
11.9
1 4.7
i 2.2
i 3.9
i 2.8
i 8.9
i 14.0
i 30. 6
i 33. 2
'4 0 .8
1 39.9
'4 0 .8

66.4
45.1
14.3
14.2
14.3
i 5.0
i 5.9
19.1
i 13.1
120.1
125.5
i 28.2
i 28.6

40.3
68.5
59.4
54.8
50.8
40.8
35.9
23.5
15.1
1.5
i 7.6
i 22.7
i 28.4

55.3
74.2
37.1
43.4
35.5
38.8
33.2
38.5
25.3
24.9
9.0
9.2
2.3

55.6
48.1
13.9
12.3
10.6
10.5
9.3
2.7
i 5.4
i 11.0
' 23.4
' 24.4
i 26.4

28.7
30.4
28.2
27.2
26.1
27.2
26.4
25.1
24.2
24.1
21.6
21.0
15.6

41.9
33.3
13.7
14.2
12.3
11.8
8. 2
3. 8
' 5.6
'9 .6
1 16.4
' 18.7
' 21.4

38. 7
10.3
i .5
.4
2.5
4. 5
' 1. 2
' 8.0
i 20.4
i 24. 2
' 37.3
i 38.3
i 38.7

96.7
73.5
i 3.9
i 5.5
i 5.8
i 6.4
i 7.1
i 8.7
i 17.5
i 22.4
i 24.3
i 26.9
i 28.7

13.6
25.0
57.1
57.1
56.9
56.7
54.5
52. 8
49.3
43.9
34.1
25.2
13.8

26.9
34.1
61.1
61.6
60.8
70.9
63.6
69.7
59.2
64.6
54.7
60.0
51.2

75.5
66.7
15.4
14.7
13.6
13.1
11.6
8.7
1.4
'5 .1
i 11.3
i 15.8
i 12.3

47.6
53.4
49.7
49.6
49.7
51.2
51.5
49.4
51.5
50.3
48.6
47.6
45.1

47.1
34.7
21.0
21.2
21.8
23.1
20.1
16.6
9.1
5. 8
' 2.3
' 4. 5
' 7.3

41.5
7.9
i 8.6
i 6.3
' 7.4
1 6. 8
1 11.9
i 19.9
i 28.7
i 30. 6
>38. 6
1 37.7
i 38.8

96.8
78.3
8.4
8.2
8.0
7.9
7.0
5.5
2.3
16.5
i 15.3
i 19.7
i 19.9

51.9
69.8
55.8
54.1
52.3
51.1
49.4
47.8
43.1
37.1
28.2
20.5
11.3

22.3
47.1
26.9
39.3
2 19.0
29.2
22.6
27.4
7.9
7.1
1.2
'4 .8
i 3.2

60.2
58.9
20.5
19.8
17.4
16.0
15.3
12.4
8.1
i .2
i 9.1
' 10.7
i 10.9

35.4
38.8
33.4
33.8
38.8
38.7
38.0
37.6
36.9
36.5
35.8
34.2
31.2

50.3
38.7
14.9
16.3
15.6
16.1
13.0
9.7
3.8
.3
' 6.3
' 8.3
' 10.5

49.0
11. 0
i 1.8
1.3
1.8
2.0
i 2.7
i 14. 2
1 26.5
i 29.1
i 37.6
i 39.0
1 39.4

87.9
72.3
4.3
3.2
3.0
2.4
1.2
i 1.6
i 10.4
i 19.4
i 22.9
i 25.5
i 25.9

18.9
32.9
31.3
30.4
28.4
27.9
25.9
23.9
16.8
11.3
3.4
1 6.6
i 14.7

45.6
60.3
29.2
32.3
26.1
31.0
24.8
30.2
23.8
23.7
12.1
17.3
14.1

67.5
63.0
13.7
12.6
12.7
11.7
9.0
5.6
i 3.6
i 12.4
' 17.0
i 19.1
' 16.5

40.5
47.5
52.3
52.0
52.3
52.0
51.8
50.4
49.5
49.2
48.5
44.8
40.3

50.2
37.6
18.2
18.5
17.7
18.8
16.1
10.8
3.0
' .8
' 6.6
'9 .5
i 11.9

1 Decrease.
2 The decrease is due primarily to the change in consumption and price accompanying the change from
manufactured to natural gas.


https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis

465

COST OF LIVING
T

able

5

— C H A N G E S IN COST OF L IV IN G IN 13 C IT IE S , JU N E 1920 T O JU NE 1933— Con.

Percent of increase over December 1917 in expenditure for—
City and date
Food

Kansas City, M o :

June 1929

____________________

June 1930----- --------------------------------

M em phis, T e n n .:

Minneapolis, M in n .:

New Orleans, L a.:

Pittsburgh, P a.:

June 1933_________________________

Cloth­
ing

Rent

HouseFuel and furnish­ Miscel­
laneous
ing
light
goods

AU
items

44.9
10.2
i 5.4
i 6.0
i 5.3
i 2.2
i 8.6
i 15.8
i 24.9
i 28.9
i 38.7
i 38.4
i 38.5

104.5
76.3
2.7
2.9
2.4
1.8
1.5
1.0
1 1.7
1 9.9
1 17.1
1 21.6
1 22.8

29.4
63.9
24.8
23.8
21. 1
20.1
19.4
19.8
17.4
16.3
8.2
2.8
1 7.9

35.2
55.1
28.7
26.8
26.3
23.9
24.0
22.0
19.7
14.3
12.0
9.4
8.0

73.0
68.7
6.8
5.6
5.1
3.4
2.1
1 1 .1
1 6.2
1 11.5
1 18.0
1 21. 1
1 20.3

37.1
40.3
35.0
37.8
37.0
36.9
36.9
44.3
44.0
42.3
37.6
35.9
33.6

51.0
39.5
11.2
11.3
11.0
11.7
9.0
7.7
2.9
1 1. 1
1 8.5
1 10.5
1 12.7

38.8
7.0
i 8.1
1 4.9
i 6.0
i 5.1
i 10.6
i 19.2
i 31.3
134.2
1 42.3
143.3
144.0

77.5
59.0
1.5
.2
1.1
i .l
1.6
1 2.4
14 .8
1 10.4
1 14.5
1 19.0
1 19.6

35.9
66.2
46.3
43.7
42.6
40.6
39.6
35.8
29.8
18.4
11.3
1.7
1 7.5

49.7
105.4
60.0
68.8
2 63.6
55.3
58.9
57.9
48.3
48.3
45.9
31.7
31.6

67.1
53.9
16.0
14. 8
13.8
13.9
13.3
10.7
6.2
1.9
1 6.5
1 14.7
1 13.6

38.8
43. 2
36.9
37.7
38.5
38.6
39.6
38.8
35.5
35.2
29.0
31.3
28.9

46.4
39.3
16.4
17.5
16.8
16.5
14.7
10.4
3.4
1.5
17.1
1 10.4
1 12.0

50.0
13.0
1.6
.7
1.8
3.9
1 1.0
1 9.4
1 2 1.2
1 25.5
1 35.2
1 36.0
1 38.7

76.7
63.6
1 1 .1
1 1.5
1 1.8
1 2.8
1 3.5
1 4.4
1 8.8
i 16.2
1 23.3
1 26. 4
1 28. 2

10.7
36.8
27.2
27.5
25.6
25. 2
23.6
23.5
21.4
19.8
12. 1
6.7
1 2. 7

36.9
60.3
45.2
44.6
41.9
44.3
46. 2
39.9
41.6
44.3
37. 1
39.2
22.4

65.5
65.8
12.3
10.5
10.5
10.9
10.6
7.8
3.7
1 2. 7
1 12. 4
1 14. 1
1 13.8

31.3
37.6
34.6
34.5
36.7
36.6
36.3
37.0
35.4
36. 1
35.6
30.3
27.2

43.4
35.7
15.8
15.2
15.4
16.2
14.1
10.6
5.0
2.1
1 4.9
1 7. 5
1 1 2 .2

28.6
10.7
1 6.8
1 3.2
1 4.3
1 1.8
1 9.8
1 15.0
1 30.3
130.3
1 40.5
1 38.5
1 41.6

94.9
69.4
13.1
13. 1
12.6
12. 6
12.0
.1
1 2.7
1 9.7
1 13.9
1 16. 2
1 18.5

12.9
39.7
55.9
54.8
53.6
51.3
49. 2
45.3
43.0
38. 7
35.4
26.9
21.1

36.3
41. 5
34. 5
28.4
2 14. 9
18.1
12.4
14.4
1 6.5
4. 1
1 4.4
16.4
1 10.7

75.9
63.9
17.9
17.9
15. 9
15. 7
14.8
10. 2
5.9
1.5
1 8.7
1 10.8
1 11. 2

42.8
57. 1
46.1
46.8
45.9
45.8
46.5
46. 5
43.1
45. 2
42.6
41. 6
39.2

41.9
36.7
18. 2
19.5
17.8
18.8
14.8
10. 2
1.2
.3
1 6.4
1 7. 2
110.4

36.5
14.3
1 3.8
2.1
.6
1.2
1 5.6
1 13.4
1 24.2
1 29.2
138.4
1 38.8
1 40.3

91.3
75.4
4. 2
3.5
2.9
2. 1
1.5
1 3.9
1 9.4
1 13. 3
1 17.0
1 2 1.2
1 22.7

34.9
35.0
72.8
71.6
68.3
67. 1
64.9
63.7
56.8
52.3
35.9
29.4
10.9

31.7
64.4
85.6
86.0
85.6
86.0
85. 1
84.4
83.1
83.8
81.6
77.4
76.9

77.4
78. 1
15.9
16.4
15.1
14.6
13.5
6.6
.4
1 6.4
1 14.5
1 17.0
1 18.1

41.2
46.3
46.9
46.9
48.1
47.5
47.9
47.5
46.9
45.6
42.5
40.8
38.7

49.1
39.3
22.3
24.4
23.2
23.2
19.9
15. 2
8.4
4.5
1 3.4
1 5.8
1 9.8

a The decrease is due primarily to the change in consumption and price accompanying the change from
manufactured to natural gas.


https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis

466

MONTHLY LABOR REVIEW

T able 5 .— CH AN GES

IN C O ST OF L IV IN G IN 13 C IT IE S , JU N E 1920 T O JU N E 1933-C on
Percent of increase over December 1917 in expenditure for—

C ity and date

Food

R ichm ond, V a .:

St. Louis, M o .:

HouseFuel and furnish­ Miscel­
ing
laneous
light
goods

Rent

All
items

36.1
11.9
i 3.8
i 3.1
i 5.0
i 3.4
i 8.0
i 14.9
' 27. 2
129.2
i 39.2
i 39.7
'41.7

93.6
69. 0
5.0
5.4
4. 2
4.2
3.3
2.0
i 2.4
'8 .6
i 13.9
i 18. 1
i 19.1

12.5
25.9
30. 6
28.9
28. 3
27.0
26.5
25.5
24.4
21.8
20.0
10.4
7.0

36.1
62.2
43.9
47.5
42.0
44.7
38. 5
42.0
33. 1
37.6
25.6
24. 5
17. 7

75.4
70.0
33.8
32.7
32.4
31.3
30.0
26.6
18.6
15.5
2. 8
i 1.6
'2 .1

32.4
36.0
41.0
40.9
40.2
41.0
41.3
41.0
40.6
40. 3
38.3
34.4
30.9

43.8
33.3
15.3
15.7
14.2
14.9
12. 5
9.3
2.4
.3
' 6. 7
' 9.6
' 12. 1

46.2
8.8
i 3. 5
i 2.2
'.4
1.5
i 6.7
i 14.9
i 24.9
i 29.8
i 38.3
: i 39. 4
i 38.2

89.7
70.0
3.1
2.5
1.7
.8
(3)
i 1.4
' 10.7
i 19.2
i 22.4
i 25.7
i 26.6

29.8
42. 4
76.3
74.2
71.8
69.2
66.0
59.5
53.0
44.0
34.4
22.3
11.2

19. 6
42.6
18.9
23.1
22.5
33.4
21.8
29.1
12. 4
20.7
17.4
14.1
.2

73.1
70.2
21.6
19. 5
17.8
16.2
16.9
15.4
5.9
'.6
' 8.6
' 12.7
' 11.5

37.6
43.2
37.2
38.7
38.4
44.2
44.6
42.1
41.5
39.2
39.1
38.7
36.1

48.9
35.4
19.9
20.4
20.5
21.7
18.3
13.9
6.2
1.4
' 4.3
' 7.4
'9 .6

41.4
17.8
2.4
4.3
2.9
6.5

97.7
76.5
16.2
15. 3
15.2
13. 7
13. 5
10.7
3.9
i 7.1
i 9.5
i 14.1
i 15.1

17.2
18.5
71.7
71.7
68. 1
63.9
60. 5
59.1
53.2
51.8
43.8
40.6
30.1

43.5
67.3
69.0
72. 2
65.0
67. 6
60.2

62.8
62.0
30.1
29.3
26.5
26.0
26.0
22.9
18.2
7.3
3.7

47.9
50.4
56.2
57.8
57.5
57.3
57.3
56.8
55.2
55.2
52.1
51.0
48.4

51.5
39.1
26.9
27.8
26.3
27.3
23.5
19.5

Scranton, Pa.:

i.8

i
i
i
i
i
1 Decrease.

Cloth­
ing

i 8.1
20.3
22.8
32.1
33.4
35.1

66.1

61.3
69.5
45. 3
53. 3
33.5

1 .0

' 2.5

11.8
8 .4
1.3
'. 5

' 4.1

3 N o change.

Cost of Living in the United States and in Foreign Countries

HE trend of cost of living in the United States and foreign
countries for June and December 1929, 1930, 1931, 1932, and
June 1933 is shown in the following table. In cases where data for
June 1933 are not available, the latest information is given and
noted. The number of countries included varies according to the
information available. Index numbers for the groups of items
and a general index are presented for all countries with the exception
of Australia, Bulgaria, Ireland, the Netherlands, and South Africa.
The item of rent is not shown for Bulgaria. Australia, Ireland,
the Netherlands, and South Africa publish a general index and
an index number for food only. The table shows the trend in the
cost of food, clothing, fuel and light, and rent together with the
general index for all items for the countries for which such information
is published in the original sources.
Caution should be observed in the use of these figures, since not
only are there differences in the base periods and in the number and
kind of articles included, and the number of markets represented, but
there are also radical differences in the method of construction of the
indexes.

T


https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis

467

COST OF LIVING

I N D E X N U M B E R S OF C OST OF L IV IN G F O R S P E C IF IE D P E R IO D S IN T H E U N IT E D
S T A T E S A N D IN F O R E IG N C O U N T R IE S

Country___ _

____

United
States

Australia Austria,
(30 towns) Vienna

Belgium

Bulgaria

Canada

Chile,
Santiago

China,
Shanghai

Food,
clothing,
Food,
Food,
fuel and
Food,
Food,
Food,
Food,
clothing, clothing,
light,
Food,
clothing,
groceries, clothing, clothing,
fuel
and
fuel
and
C o m m o d i t i e s in­
rent,
rent, 4 fuel and fuel and clothing, fuel and
light,
light,
cluded____________
houselight,
light,
fuel and
light,
and
5
rent,
rent,
furnish­
rent,
rent,
light
rent,
rooms
miscel­
ing goods,
sundries1 sundries
sundries miscel­
laneous
laneous
miscel­
laneous
Bureau
Ministry
National
Bureau
Federal
Federal Depart­
Tariff
Computing agen cy... of Labor, of Census Statistical of Labor Statistical ment of Office of
and
Sta­
and
In­
Statistics
Commis­
Statistics
Bureau
Bureau
Labor
tistics
dustry
sion

Base period_________ 1913=100

1923-27
= 1,000

July 1914 1921 = 100 1926=100 1913=100 March 1926=100
= 100
1928=100

General:
170. 2
171.4
166.6
160.7
150.3
145.8
135.7
132.1
128.3

2 1, 042
2 1, 046
2 996
2 912
2 860
2 814
2 810
2 776
• 757

111
113
113
108
106
108
109
107
106

212. 6
227.7
224.0
222.5
204.5
193. 1
179.7
187.9
4 180. 7

88.0
76.6
72.1
71.2
66.8
64.3
8 64. 2

156
160
157
151
138
135
126
125
3 121

110. 5
115.1
108.0
109.6
104.0
105.0
107.6
133.3
8 132.8

105.4
111.5
120.2
113.8
121.0
1 2 1.2
121.3
108.0
3 106. 8

154.8
158.0
147.9
137.2
118.3
114. 3
100.1
98.7
96.7

1,045
1,0 11
968
871
833
809
803
759
8 734

124
122
121
111
108
110
113
109
106

207.8
227.1
20 1.1
200. 1
176.5
160.7
143.8
156.9
4 147. 7

87.7
75.5
71.4
70.5
66.2
63.5
8 63. 6

149
161
151
138
111
107
93
96
3 93

122. 6
134.0
116.3
114.8
103.6
110.4
107.1
143.3
8 136. 5

93.5
104. 5
119. 2
100.8
99.6
97.0
107.3
84.5
3 86.0

161. 3
160. 5
158.9
153.0
146. 0
135.5
127.8
121. 5
119. 8

183
183
183
177
162
166
162
162
159

255.8
262. 0
262. 0
259.8
250. 8
246.4
236.1
231.9
4 227. 5

157
156
155
148
137
127
120
114
3 107

10 1. 2
99. 3
99. 3
96.9
96. 9
96.9
126. 5

97.0
98. 8
99.1
99.0
110. 2
108.8
98.3
92.0
6 91.4

175. 2
178. 7
172.8
175.0
165.4
168.0
157.1
156. 9
148.4

103
106
104
104
104
104
104
105
105

194.3
212.8
204. 6
198.3
184. 0
182.4
' 173.8
177. 0
4 170.8

157
157
156
156
153
152
148
145
3 143

96. 0
93. 3
105.1
10 1.2
94. 2
89.2
99.9

123.8
120. 2
120. 5
119.6
128.3
140.8
131. 7
128.7
8 137.3

153. 7
151. 9
149. 6
146. 5
142.0
136. 2
127.8
118.0
108. 8

15
22
22
25
25
27
28
28
28

223.7
226. 8
406.0
405.0
402. 5
401. 0
398. 5
397. 5
4 395. 6

158
158
160
160
158
158
147
141
3 133

100.0
100. 0
100. 0
100. 0
100. 0
100. 0
100.0

102.2
102.4
104.5
104. 5
105. 6
107.3
107.3
108.8
8108. 8

December—
1930—June______
December..
1931—June______
Decem ber..
1932—June______
December—
1933—June______
Food:
1929—June______
December-1930—June_____
Decem ber..
1931—J u n e . - ___
December..
1932—June______
December-1933—June______
Clothing:

December..
December—

Fuel and light:

December-.
December—

Rent:

1 Gold.
2 Quarter ending with month.
3 M ay.


https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis

4 April.
8 February.

7 95. 6
7 95.6
7 80. 9
7 80. 9

92.4
93.3
82. 7
82.9
75.9
76. 7
8 73. 5

6 March.
7 Year only.

468

MONTHLY LABOR R EV IEW

I N D E X N U M B E R S OF C OST OF L IV IN G F O R S P E C IF IE D P E R IO D S IN T H E U N IT E D
S T A T E S A N D IN F O R E IG N C O U N T R IE S — Continued

Czecho­
slovakia,
Prague

Country _ _ _ _ _

Estonia,
Tallin

Finland

France,
Paris

India,
Germany Bombay

Ireland

Italy,
Milan

Food,
Food,
Food,
Food,
Food,
Food,
Food,
Food,
clothing, clothing, clothing, clothing, clothing, clothing, clothing, clothing,
fuel and fuel and
C o m m o d i t i e s in ­ fuel and
fuel and fuel and
fuel,
fuel and fuel,rent,
light,
light,
light,
light,
light,
cluded __ -------light,
light,
light,
rent, sun­ rent, sun­
rent, sun­ rent, etc. taxes, etc. rent, sun­ rent, sun­
rent
dries
dries
dries
dries
dries
Commis­ Federal
Ministry sion for
Bureau of
Statisti­
Computing agency___ Office of Statistics of Social study of
cal
Statistics
Affairs
cost of
Bureau
living
January- JanuaryJuly 1914 1913 = 100 June 1914 June 1914
= 100
= 100
= 100

Base p e r io d -------

General:

1913-14
= 100

Labor
office

Depart­
M unici­
ment of
pal ad­
Industry
and Com ­ ministra­
tion
merce

JanuaryJuly 1914 July 1914
June 1914
= 100
= 100
= 100

1930—June _
December. _
1931—June------December,.
1932—June _ . . .
December...
1933—June........ .
Food:

1 1 1 .1
105.8
106. 8
101.6
103.6
103.8
3 101. 7

119
109
102
99
104
95
95
89
3 86

1215. 3
1207. 2
1108. 3
1083. 2
1019.9
1048. 0
1003. 4
1021. 1
3 993. 3

556
565
572
597
589
531
535
516
8 523

153.4
152.6
147.6
141.6
137.8
130.4
121.4
118.4
3 118.2

147
150
140
121
109
109
107
110
3 100

4 173
« 179
4 168
8 168
3 156
« 165
3 159
» 155
3 148

544.3
549.2
530.9
508.3
488.0
472.7
471.7
468.0
3444.7

1930—June.. . .
December.
1931—June, ___
December. _
1932—June..
December. _
1933—June______
Clothing:

118.1
109.4
109.3
99.1
101.4
102.3
3 90. 8

130
112
101
96
93
80
80
75
3 74

1103.1
1090. 1
937. 2
903. 3
842. 4
918.8
871.0
910.2
3 867. 8

590
589
593
636
642
555
567
531

154. 0
152.2
142.7
134.8
130.9
119.9
113.4
109.0
3 109. 5

144
148
137
116
101
101
99
103
3 91

4 164
8 173
4 156
8 156
3 139
» 155
3 144
» 135
3 126

541.7
548.0
522.5
499.0
456.6
437.8
438.0
433.9
3 398.9

133. 2
119.9
111 9
105.8
100. 5
96. i
3 95. 4

150
150
150
147
147
145
141
136
3 127

1055. 4
1051. 3
1045. 6
1033. 6
1004.1
975.7
979. 1
978.2
3 968.4

604
604
626
610
552
508
499
499

172.4
170. 3
166. 8
149.8
139. 9
129.1
117. 2
112.4
3 110. 5

159
151
138
125
123
117
115
116
3 112

555.2
548.8
508.8
447.7
421.2
390.3
371.8
366.1
4 366.1

97
101
96

539
602
607
633
596
619
592
617

148.9
152.9
149.4
151.1
145.4
148.8
133.8
136.6
3 133. 7

143
143
143
141
143
145
137
137
3 136

425.0
453.1
473.0
457.3
424.3
404.3
403.6
394.4
4 394. 4

300
350
350
350
350
360
360
375

126. 0
126. 7
129.8
131.3
131. 6
131.6
121. 4
121.4
3 121. 3

172
172
172
172
158
158
158
158
3 158

407.6
410.2
410.2
422.2
473.1
482.7
445.1
490.5
4 488. 9

December..
December..
December..
Fuel and light:

December. _
December.
December .

12 1. 6
121.6
119. 7
119. 7
117. 5
117.4
3 114. 7

80
76
65
64
3 57

1455. 5
1455. 4
1407.1
1290. 1
1066. 8
913. 5
865. 9
887.4
3 880. 8

49. 6
52.8
54. 4
54.4
54. 4
54.4
3 54.9

52
52
52
52
145
145
144
135
3 120

1476. 3
1476. 3
1467. 0
1467. 0
1373. 1
1373. 1
1263. 9
1252. 0
3 1252. 0

Rent:

December..
December.
December..
1933—Ju n e.. .__
3 M ay.
4 April.


https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis

94

6 March.
8 October.

®November.

469

COST OF LIVING

I N D E X N U M B E R S OF COST OF L IV IN G F O R S P E C IF IE D P E R IO D S IN T H E U N IT E D
ST A T E S A N D IN F O R E IG N C O U N T R IE S —Continued
Nether­
lands,
Amster­
dam

New
Zealand

C o m m o d i t i e s in­
cluded, ..................

Food,
all com­
modities

Food,
Food,
Food,
clothing, clothing, clothing,
fuel,
fuel,
fuel,
light,
light,
light,
rent,
rent,
rent,
sundries sundries sundries

Food,
fuel,
light,
rent,
sundries

Food,
Food,
Food,
clothing,
fuel and clothing, clothing,
fuel,
fuel,
light,
light,
light,
rent,
rent,
rent,
taxation,
sundries sundries sundries

Computing agency.._

Bureau
of Sta­
tistics

Census
and Sta­
tistics
Office

Central
Statis­
tical
Office

Office of
Census
and Sta­
tistics

Board of
Social
W elfare

1927=
100

1914 =
1,000

Norway

Central
Statis­
tical
Office

Base period_________ 1911-1913 1926-1930 July 1914
= 100
= 1,000
= 100
General:
1929—June______
Decem ber..
1930—June______
Decem ber..
1931—J u n e . ___
Decem ber..
1932—June .
December..
1933—J u n e ... .
Food:
1929—June_____
Decem ber..
1930—J u n e . . ___
Decem ber..
1931—June______
Decem ber..
1932—June, ____
Decem ber..
1933—June___ _
Clothing:
1929—Ju n e.. . . .
D ecem ber..
1930—June_____
December. _
1931—June
_ _.
December .
1932—June
Decem ber..
1933—June______
Fuel and light:
1929—June. ____
Decem ber..
1930—June.. ___
December .
1931—June.
D ecem ber..
1932—June__ . . .
Decem ber..
1933—June______
Rent:
1929—June______
D ecem ber..
1930—June_____
D ecem ber..
1931—J u n e . . ___
D ecem ber..
1932—June ____
December1933—June____ _

Sweden

Switzer­ United
land
Kingdom

Federal
Labor
Office

Ministry
of Labor

July 1914 June 1914 July 1914
= 100
=100
=10 0

9 1003
3 990
9 963
3 913
»888
3 839
9 806
‘ 797

165
161
159
151
150
149
148
3 147

100.4
94.0
93.8
88. 4
83.3
81.9
73.2
3 72.8

1294
1293
1258
1233
1206
1179
1146
4 1138

3 170
4 165
3 163
4 160
8 158
4 157
3 156
4 153

162
158
156
150
145
138
134
3 130

167
154
155
146
148
142
143
136

165. 3
161. 6
151. 6
144.8
140. 6
125. 5
119. 2
119. 2
6 115. 5

9 1017
988
922
839
835
778
713
4 714

156
157
151
149
138
136
133
132
3 130

94 7
91.7
80.9
80.2
75.9
69.1
68.1
56.7
3 58. 8

1176
1124
1120
1085
1064
1004
963
926
4 966

3 150
4 140
3 137
4 130
8 128
4 125
8 125
4 119

157
151
149
141
134
125
120
3 116

159
138
141
127
132
123
125
114

9 972
3 952
9 924
3 877
»849
3 826
9 784
5 798

159
157
153
148
143
142
144
143
6 142

106 5
108 9
105 8
99 6
81 3
76. 4
73 0
69. 0
3 63.2

8 167
4 163

3 117

185

9 990
3 990
9 994
3 990
9 975
3 978
9 954
3 959

161
160
157
150
148
146
146
142
3 139

127 6
134 6
130 5
132.1
131 7
129 2
128 1
123 8
3 104. 3

8 144
4 139

3 118

168

9 1019
3 1012
9 998
3 964
9 922
io 816
9 795
3 774

175
175
174
174
173
173
172
172
6 172

131 1
134. 3
154 8
170 1
170 1
170 1
170 1
170 1
3 170.1

3 184

156

■15


https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis

South
Africa

1G9. 0
167.4
162. 1
156.6
153.5
145. 2
140.9
140. 2
3 137. 9

3 M ay.
4 April.
3 February.

2 4 0 4 ° — 33-

Poland,
W arsaw

March.
October.

8 170

8 200
206
8 206

4

8 206
8 206
4 202
' November.
>August.

470

MONTHLY LABOR R EV IEW

Typical Family Budgets of Executive, Clerk, and Wage Earner,
in San Francisco, 1932

HREE quantity and cost budgets for San Francisco, priced for
November 193*2,1are given in a report of the Heller Committee for
Research in Social Economics, of the University of California,
Berkeley, January 1933. These budgets are not household accounts
but picture respectively what the committee considers typical spend­
ing customs of a wage earner and his family, a clerk and his family,
and an executive and his family.
The equable climate of San Francisco keeps down the fuel bill
and eliminates the need for special winter and summer clothing.
Domestic help, however, is considerably more scarce and more ex­
pensive in that city than in the East. Even the family of the execu­
tive has 'typically, according to the committee’s budget, only one
maid for cleaning and laundry, a gardener twice during the year
and occasional assistance in taking care of the children.
The clerk and the wage earner are assumed to have a 5- or 6-room
rented house or flat, ordinarily the latter, while the executive is
scheduled as buying a home on the installment plan extending over
12 years.
The committee realizes that the allowance for investment in the
following budgets is not sufficient to meet grave emergencies or pro­
vide for the retirement or death of the head of the family.

T

The allowance for medical care is undoubtedly low. The accepted consensus
of opinion today agrees that it is impossible for the average family in any class
adequately to provide against the larger emergencies of illness. In other words,
it is admitted that the allowance given here cannot be expected to cover the
occasional serious operation or the needs of the family with continuous doctor’s
bills. In case of an operation or a long illness either drastic economies in the
whole scale of living or debt are the only alternatives.

It is explained by the committee that these budgets give a gen­
eralized scheme of expenditure for a wide income class and that the
variations in emphasis in spending are very real within each class.
For example, in the executive class the college professor or the min­
ister spends in a different way from a physician or a business man.
The committee believes, however, that differences iron out to some­
thing like the type of spending herewith depicted. Special circum­
stances should be investigated and proper allowance made in each
case.
T a b l e 1 .— F A M IL Y

B U D G E T S FO R E X E C U T IV E S . C L E R K S , A N D W A G E
B A S E D ON P R IC E S AS OF N O V E M B E R 1932

Item

Annual
cost

Food:
Husband's lunches.

----- --- .

-----------

Clothing:
Wife

_______________________________

B oy of 2------------ --- ----------------------------------T otal____________ _____ ________ - -1 Furniture and furnishings priced for 1930.


https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis

Wage earners

Clerks

Executives

Percent Annual
of total
cost
cost

EARNERS

Percent Annual
of total
cost
cost

Percent
of total
cost

$607. 20
135. 00
742. 20

11.3
2.5
13.8

$499. 92
90.00
589.92

25.1
4.5
29.6

$443. 52

30.4

443. 52

30.4

168. 20
273. 36
71.24
69. 21

3.1
5.1
1.3
1.3

582.01

10.8

79.71
95. 45
45.02
38.13
33. 38
291. 69

4.0
4.8
2 .2
1.9
1.7
14.6

49.60
48. 58
34. 79
24.38
22. 38
179. 73

3.4
3.3
2.4
1.7
1.5
12.3

471

COST OF LIVING

.

T a b l e 1 —F A M I L Y

B U D G E T S F O R E X E C U T IV E S , C L E R K S , A N D W A G E E A R N E R S
B A S E D ON P R IC E S AS OF N O V E M B E R 1932—Continued

Executives
Item

Cldrks

Percent
of total
cost

Annual
cost

Annual
cost

Wage earners

Percent
of total
cost

Annual
cost

Percent
of total
cost
20.6

Shelter:
$1,066.48

19.8

$384.00

19.2

$300.00

180. 15
236. 62
171.15
200. 06
1, 854.46

3. 3
4. 4
3. 2
3.7

4.4
.3
3. 1
3.5
30. 5

78. 32

5.4

46. 00
45. 94

34.4

88. 76
6. 28
61.22
69.17
609. 43

470. 26

3.1
3.1
32.2

84. 53
478.41
419. 85
40. 00
620.00

1. 6
8. 9
7. 8
.7
11.5

47. 76
169. 94

2. 4
8. 5

39.94
119. 84

2.8
8. 2

House operation:

Miscellaneous:

Investm ent3

__________________

Church and c h a r it y ____________________ _
Total

-----

_

_

__________ .

Grand total___ ______ __ ________ ______

60. 00

3.0

45.00

3.1

130. 00
75.00

6. 5
3.8

65. 00
75.00

4. 5
-----f c l

5. 00
16.00

.3
.8

5.00
16.00

.3
1 .1

275. 00
36. 00
101. 00
100. 00
60. 00
2, 214. 79

41.0

503. 70

25.3

365. 78

25. 1

5,393. 46

100. 0

1,994. 74

100.0

1, 459. 29

100.0

5. 1
.6
1.9
1.8
1 .1

1 Prices for 1930.
2 Does not include initial cost or depreciation.
3 This sum provides a $10,000 life-insurance policy and small savings to meet emergencies, serious ill­
nesses beyond the scope of the allowance for medical care, and the purchase of a new car. The budget does
not contain adequate provision for the retirement or death of the breadwinner.
4 Routine care only. Cost of major operations and prolonged illnesses must come from savings or econo­
mies elsewhere.
T able 3 — B U D G E T

F O R D E P E N D E N T F A M IL IE S
V E M B E R 1932

Item
A. Required for all households:
Electricity, fuel, minimum cleaning
supplies, etc__________ ________
B. A dd rent for—
Family of 3 _________________
Family of 4 _
_
Family of 5 ________ __________
Family of 6 ______ _
_
_______
Larger families___ _ __ _________
C. A dd per person to cover all expenses
except rent and general household
expenses:
M an (em ployed)___ - _
___ _

B A S E D ON P R IC E S

Cost per
month

AS OF

Cost per
month

Item
C, etc.—Continued
M an (unem ployed)________________

$7.12
B oy 16 to 20 (em ployed).
20 00
20. 00
24. 00
24.00
(')

NO­

______

Girl 14 to 15
B oy 6 to 8_ . ____________ _______
Girl 6 to 8___ _ ________________ _
Child 3 to 5
- __________ - - - - _

16. 56

$12. 71
13. 20
2 24. 90
2 23. 91
17. 84
15. 51
12. 91
12. 47
10. 20
9. 73
8. 47
8.55

1 As paid.
2 Using food allowance for children 16 to 18. Children of 19 and 20 require less food, but this is probably
balanced b y the demand for additional spending money.

Tlie following example is given as to how to compute a budget for
a dependent family of 5—man (unemployed), wife, boy of 11, girl
of 6, and boy of 3.
General household expenses________________________________ $7.
Rent______________________________________________________ 24.
Man (unemployed)_______________________________________ 12.
Wife________________________________
13.
Boy of 11________________________________________________ 12.
Girl of 6 _________________________________________________
9.
Boy of 3_________________________________________________
8.

12
00
71
20
91
73
47

Total, per month__________________________________ 88. 14

https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis

DIRECTORIES
Labor Offices in the United States and in Canada1
(Bureaus of labor, employment offices, industrial commissions, State workmen’s
compensation insurance funds, workmen’s compensation commissions, mini­
mum wage boards, factory inspection bureaus, and arbitration and conciliation
boards)
U nited States

Department of Labor:
Hon. Frances Perkins, Secretary.
(Vacancy), The Assistant Secretary.
Hon. W. W. Husband, Second Assistant Secretary.
Bureau of Labor Statistics: Isador Lubin, Commissioner.
Immigration and Naturalization Service:
Daniel W. MacCormack, Commissioner.
Children’s Bureau: Miss Grace Abbott, chief. Address: Seventeenth and
F Streets, NW., Washington, D.C.
Employment Service: W. Frank Persons, director. Address: 1724 F Street,
NW., Washington, D.C.
Conciliation Service: Hugh L. Kerwin, director.
Women’s Bureau: Miss Mary Anderson, director. Address: 1723 F Street,
NW., Washington, D.C.
United States Housing Corporation: Turner W. Battle, president. Address:
1724 F Street, NW., Washington, D.C.
Address of all bureaus, except where otherwise noted, 1712 G Street, NW.,
Washington, D.C.
National Recovery Administration:
Labor Advisory Board:
Dr. Leo Wolman, chairman.
John P. Frey.
Joseph Franklin.
William Green.
Sidney Hillman.
Rev. F. J. Haas.
Rose Schneiderman.
National Labor Board:
Robert F. Wagner, chairman.
Walter C. Teagle, representing industry.
Gerard Swope, representing industry.
Louis E. Kirstein, representing industry.
William Green, representing labor.
John L. Lewis, representing labor.
Leo Wolman, representing labor.
Address of Labor Advisory Board and National Labor Board: Com­
merce Department, Washington, D.C.
United States Employees’ Compensation Commission:
Jewell W. Swofford, chairman.
Harry Bassett, commissioner.
William McCauley, Secretary.
John M. Morin, commissioner.
Address of Commission: Old Land Office Building, Washington, D.C.
Board of Mediation:
Samuel E. Winslow chairman.
Frank P. Glass.
Edwin P. Morrow.
Oscar B. Colquitt.
John Williams.
George A. Cook, secretary.
Address: Eighteenth and E Streets NW., Washington, D.C.
1 For directory of labor offices in other foreign countries, see M onthly Labor Review, August 1932 (p. 462).

472

https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis

Di r e c t o r i e s

473

Alabama
Child welfare commission: B. M. Miller, ex officio chairman, governor.
Child welfare department:
Mrs. A. M. Tunstall, director.
Miss Ella Ketchin, chief labor inspector.
Mrs. Daisy Donovan, deputy child labor inspector.
Address of commission: State Capitol, Montgomery.
Workmen’s compensation division (under bureau of insurance):
Chas. C. Greer, ex officio commissioner, superintendent of insurance.
Frank II. Spears, workmen’s compensation clerk.
Address of division: State Capitol, Montgomery.
Board of coal-mine inspectors: W. B. Hillhouse, chief inspector, Birmingham.
Arizona
Industrial commission:
J. Ney Miles, chairman.
Howard Keener, member.
L. C. Holmes, member.
Leo C. Guvnn, secretary.
Don C. Babbitt, attorney and referee.
R. F. Palmer, medical examiner.
Edward Massey, industrial agent.
Address of commission: Phoenix.
State inspector of mines: Tom C. Foster, Phoenix.
Arkansas
Bureau of labor and statistics:
E. I. McKinley, commissioner.
H. C. Malcom, deputy commissioner.
G. P. Bumpass, statistician.
J. D. Newcomb, Jr., chief boiler inspector.
Industrial welfare commission:
E. I. McKinley, ex officio member and chairman.
Mrs. Maud Walt, secretary.
Claude M. Burrow.
Mrs. C. H. Hatfield.
Elmer Grant.
Address of bureau: State Capitol, Little Rock.
Mine inspection department: Claude Speegle, State mine inspector, Fort Smith.
United States Employment Service:
E. I. McKinley, Federal director, room 326, State Capitol, Little Rock.
California
Department of industrial relations: Timothy A. Reardon, director.
Division of industrial accidents and safety:
Timothy A. Reardon, chairman of industrial accident commission.
Will J. French, member of industrial accident commission.
Meredith P. Snyder, member of industrial accident commission.
C. II. Fry, superintendent of safety.
Frank J. Burke, secretary.
John H. Graves, M .D., medical director.
A. L. Townsend, attorney.
State compensation insurance fund: W. G. Cannon, manager.
Division of immigration and housing:
Vincent S. Brown, chief.
Most Rev. E. J. Hanna, D.D., president of commission of immigration
and housing.
_
. . .
.
Charles C. Chapman, member of commission of immigration and housing.
Melville Dozier, Jr., member of commission of immigration and housing.
J. Earl Cook, member of commission of immigration and housing.
Mrs. Mattie W. Richards, member of commission of immigration and
housing.
Division of State employment agencies: W. A. Granfield, chief.

https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis

474

MONTHLY LABOR R E V IEW

Department of industrial relations— Continued.
Division of labor statistics and law enforcement: Frank C. MacDonald,
chief.
Division of industrial welfare:
Mrs. Mabel E. Kinney, chief.
B. H. Dyas, chairman of industrial welfare commission.
William R. Kilgore, member of industrial welfare commission.
Chas. O. Conrad, member of industrial welfare commission.
Mrs. Mable E. Kinney, member of industrial welfare commission.
Mrs. Elizabeth Lloyd Smith, member of industrial welfare commission.
Division of fire safety: Jay W. Stevens, chief, 433 California Street, San
Francisco.
Address of department: State building, San Francisco.
United States Employment Service:
W. A. Granfield, Federal director, State Building, San Francisco.
Colorado
Industrial commission:
Thomas Annear, chairman.
W. H. Young.
William E. Renshaw.
Feav B. Smith, secretary.
David F. How, Jr., referee.
Address of commission: Denver.
State compensation insurance fund: P. R. Keiser, manager, Denver.
Coal-mine inspection department: James Dalrymple, chief inspector, Denver
Bureau of mines (metal mines): John T. Joyce, commissioner, Denver.
Connecticut
Department of labor and factory inspection:
Joseph M. Tone, commissioner.
Walter J. Couper, deputy commissioner.
William J. Fitzgerald, deputy commissioner of factory inspection.
State employment offices: Joseph M. Tone, commissioner.
Address of department: State Office Building, Hartford.
Board of compensation commissioners:
Frederic M. Williams, chairman, county courthouse, Waterbury.
Charles Kleiner, 151 Court Street, New Haven.
E. T. Buckingham, 955 Main Street, Bridgeport.
Leo J. Noonan, 54 Church Street, Hartford.
James J. Donohue, 43 Broadway, Norwich.
State board of mediation and arbitration:
Johnstone Vance, New Britain.
Joseph H. Lawlor, Waterbury.
Walter J. Couper, New Haven.
United States Employment Service: Joseph M. Tone, Federal director, State
Office Building, Hartford.
Delaware
Labor commission:
Miss Helen S. Garrett, chairman.
John H. Hickey.
Newlin T. Booth.
Thomas C. Frame, Jr.
George A. Hill.
Miss Marguerite Postles, secretary.
Address of commission: Wilmington.
Child-labor division: Charles A. Hagner, chief, Wilmington.
Women’s labor division: Miss Marguerite Postles, assistant, Wilmington.
Industrial accident board:
Walter O. Stack, president.
Robert K. Jones.
William J. Swain.
James B. McManus, secretary.
Address of board: Delaware Trust Building, Wilmington.

https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis

DIRECTORIES

475

Florida
State labor inspector: John H. Mackey, Jacksonville.
Georgia
Department of industrial relations:
Hal M. Stanley, chairman.
(Commissioner of Commerce and Labor.)
T. E. Whitaker (representing employees).
Wm. F. Slater (representing employers).
Sharpe Jones, secretary-treasurer.
Elizabeth Ragland, assistant secretary.
C. W. Roberts, medical examiner.
H. L. Spahr, chief statistician.
Address of department: Atlanta.
United States Employment Service: Cator Woolford, Federal director, 90 Fairlie
Street, Atlanta.
Hawaii
C ity a nd c o u n ty o f H o n o lu lu

Industrial accident board:
M. Macintvre, chairman.
Robert Anderson.
A. J. Wirtz.
E. N. Clark.
K. B. Barnes.
A. F. Schmitz, secretary.
C o u n ty o f M a u i

Industrial accident board:
W. F. Crockett, chairman.
Dan T. Carey.
Ralph H. Wilson.
Mrs. W. Weddick.
Paul F. Lada.
Mrs. Frances S. Wadsworth, inspector and secretary.
Address of board: Wailuku.
C o u n ty o f H a w a ii

Industrial accident board:
Dr. Harold B. Elliot, chairman.
Thos. Forbes, Jr.
Cyril J. Hoogs.
James Webster.
Wm. C. Foster.
Mrs. L. Hazel Bayly, secretary.
Address of board: Hilo.
C o u n ty o f K a u a i

Industrial accident board:
J. M. Lydgate, chairman, Lihue.
H. H. Brodie, Hanapepe.
J. B. Fernandez, Jr., Kapaa.
J. P. Clapper, Kealia.
G. M. Coney, Lihue.
Idaho
Industrial accident board:
G. W. Suppiger, chairman.
Joel Brown.
Frank Langley.
P. H. Quirk, secretary.
Address of board: Boise.
State insurance fund: P. C. O’ Malley, manager, Boise.
Inspector of mines: W. H. Simons, Boise.

https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis

476

MONTHLY LABOR R E V IEW

Illinois
Department of labor:
Barney Cohen, director.
A. H. R. Atwood, M.D., assistant director.
Address of department: State Capitol, Springfield.
Division of factory inspection: Joseph J. Nowicki, chief inspector, 608 South
Dearborn Street, Chicago.
Division of private employment agencies inspection: Raymond Moore, chief
inspector, 608 South Dearborn Street, Chicago.
Division of free employment offices:
General advisory board of the free employment offices:
B. M. Squires, chairman.
A. H. R. Atwood, M.D., secretary (representing employers).
Oscar G. Mayer (representing employers).
John H. Walker (representing employees).
Miss Agnes Nestor (representing employees).
Address of board: 141 West Jackson Boulevard, Chicago.
Industrial commission:
Peter J. Angsten, chairman.
A. M. Thompson (representing employees).
Joseph Lisack (representing employers).
Gus. Hummert (representing employers).
Anton Johannsen (representing employees).
Address of commission: 205 West Wacker Drive, Chicago.
Division of statistics and research: Howard B. Myers, chief, 205 West Wacker
Drive, Chicago.
Department of mines and minerals:
John G. Millhouse, director, 315 East Cook Street, Springfield.
Peter Joyce, assistant director, 722 North Grand Avenue West, Springfield.
Indiana
Industrial board:
Ira M. Snouffer, chairman.
William A. Faust, member.
Edgar A. Perkins, Sr., member.
Dr. Horace M. Evans, member.
Sam P. Vogt, member.
William A. Faust, secretary.
Department of factories, buildings, and workshops: Thomas R. Hutson, chief
inspector.
Department of boilers: James Donohue, chief inspector.
Department of women and children: Mrs. Mary L. Garner, director.
Address of board: Indianapolis.
Department of mines and mining: A. G. Wilson, chief inspector, 421 Statehouse,
Indianapolis.
Iowa
Bureau of labor statistics: Frank E. Wenig, commissioner, Des Moines.
State-Federal employment service:
Francis W. Fisher, chief clerk, Des Moines.
James R. Reese, clerk, Sioux City.
Workmen’s compensation service:
A. B. Funk, industrial commissioner.
Ralph Young, deputy commissioner.
Ora Williams, secretary.
Dr. Oliver J. Fay, medical counsel.
Address of service: Des Moines.
State bureau of mines:
W. E. Holland, inspector first district, Centerville.
R. T. Rhys, inspector second district, Ottumwa.
J. E. Jeffreys, inspector third district, Des Moines.
Phil R. Clarkson, secretary, Des Moines.
United States Employment Service:
Frank E. Wenig, Federal director, Bureau of Labor Statistics, Des
.Moines.


https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis

DIRECTORIES

477

Kansas
Commission of labor and industry:
G. Clay Baker, chairman.
J. H. Jenson, commissioner.
George E. Blakeley, commissioner.
Address of commission: Statehouse, Topeka.
Department of workmen’s compensation:
G. Clay Baker, chairman.
J. H. Jenson, commissioner.
Address of department: Statehouse, Topeka.
Department of labor:
George E. Blakeley, commissioner of labor in charge of factory and mine
inspection, free employment, and women’s and children’s division.
Address of department: Statehouse, Topeka.
United States Employment Service:
George E. Blakeley, Federal director, Statehouse, Topeka.
Kentucky
Department of agriculture, labor, and statistics:
Eugene Flowers, commissioner, Frankfort.
Edward F. Seiller, chief labor inspector, Louisville.
William F. Holloran, deputy labor inspector, Louisville.
T. W. Pennington, deputy labor inspector, Stanford.
Mrs. Marie K. Clegg, deputy labor inspector, Louisville.
Mrs. Hallie B. Williams, deputy labor inspector, Louisville.
Department of mines: John F. Daniel, chief, Lexington.
Workmen’s compensation board:
Harry B. Miller, chairman, Lexington.
Davis M. Howerton, member, Ashland.
Ben B. Petrie, member, Elkton.
J. W. Craft, secretary, Frankfort.
Warren Fisher, statistician, Carlisle.
A. H. Mitchell, actuary, Frankfort.
Louisiana
Bureau of labor and industrial statistics:
E. L. Engerran, commissioner.
Mrs. M. V. Kirby, secretary.
Address of bureau: New Orleans.
Maine
Department of labor and industry: Charles O. Beals, commissioner, Augusta.
Industrial accident commission:
Donald D. Garcelon, chairman.
Earle L. Russell.
Granville C. Gray.
Charles O. Beals (ex officio), commissioner of labor.
Wilbur D. Spencer (ex officio), insurance commissioner.
Address of commission: Augusta.
State board of arbitration and conciliation:
Hon. Clarence H. Crosby, chairman, Dexter.
Edward F. Gowell, Berwick.
Charles M. Taylor, 453 Congress Street, Portland.
United States Employment Service: Charles O. Beals, Federal director, Statehouse, Augusta.


https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis

478

MONTHLY LABOR R E V IE W

Maryland
Commissioner of labor and statistics: J. Knox Insley, M.D., 16 West Saratoga
Street, Baltimore.
Bureau of mines: John J. Rutledge, chief mine engineer, 22 Light Street,
Baltimore.
Mine and examining board: John J. Rutledge, chairman, 22 Light Street,
Baltimore.
State industrial accident commission:
Robert H. Carr, chairman.
Omar D. Crothers.
Daniel R. Randall.
Albert E. Brown, secretary.
Miss R. 0. Harrison, director of claims.
Robert P. Bay, M.D., chief medical examiner.
Gladys M. Tunstall, statistician.
State accident fund:
James E. Green, Jr., superintendent.
Address of commission: 741 Equitable Building, Baltimore.
United States Employment Service: J. Knox Insley, M.D., Federal director, 16
West Saratoga Street, Baltimore.
Massachusetts
Department of labor and industries:
Edwin S. Smith, commissioner.
Miss Mary E. Meehan, assistant commissioner.
Associate commissioner (constituting the board of conciliation and
arbitration and the minimum wage commission):
Edward Fisher, chairman.
Herbert P. Wasgatt.
John L. Campos.
Veronica A. Lynch, secretary to the commissioner.
Division of industrial safety: John P. Meade, director.
Division of statistics: Roswell F. Phelps, director.
Division of public employment offices: M. Joseph McCartin, director.
Division of standards: John P. McBride, director.
Division of minimum wage: Miss Mary E. Meehan, acting director.
Division on the necessaries of life: Ralph W. Robart, director.
Address of department: Statehouse, Boston.
Department of industrial accidents:
Joseph A. Parks, chairman.
Alfred B. Cenedella.
Edward E. Clark.
Daniel J. Sullivan.
Chester E. Gleason.
James Farrell.
Mrs. Emma S. Tousant.
Edward P. Doyle, secretary.
Francis D. Donoghue, M.D., medical adviser.
Address of department: Statehouse, Boston.
United States Employment Service: Edwin S. Smith, Federal director, 473
Statehouse, Boston.
Michigan
Department of labor and industry:
Claude S. Carney, compensation commissioner, chairman.
W. A. Seegmiller, compensation commissioner.
Daniel J. O’ Connor, labor commissioner.
Leo J. Herrick, statistician.
J. Gottlieb Reutter, secretary.
Address of department: Lansing.
State accident fund (under supervision of department of insurance): John W.
Haarer, manager, Lansing.
United States Employment Service: Daniel J. O’ Connor, Federal director, State
Capitol, Lansing.

https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis

DIRECTORIES

479

Minnesota
Department of labor and industry:
Industrial commission:
Niels H. Debel, chairman.
J. D. Williams.
C. R. Carlgren.
J. F. Emme, secretary.
Emily L. Olson, assistant secretary.
Division of workmen’s compensation: H. O. Halverson.
Division of accident prevention: A. E. Smith.
Division of boiler inspection: George Wilcox, chief.
Division of women and children: Florence A. Burton.
Division of statistics: Carl E. Dahlquist, chief.
Division of employment: J. D. Williams, supervisor.
Division for the deaf: Mrs. Petra F. Howard, chief.
Address of department: State Office Building, St. Paul.
Mississippi
Bureau of industrial hygiene and factory inspection:
J. W. Dugger, M.D., director.
Mrs. Myrtis Clements, secretary.
Address of bureau: P. 0. Box 784, Jackson.
Missouri
Department of labor and industrial inspection:
Mrs. Mary Edna Cruzen, commissioner.
Ethel M. Kuever, chief clerk.
Winifred Sexton, statistician.
Address of department: Jefferson City.
Workmen’s compensation commission:
Edgar C. Nelson, chairman.
Orin H. Shaw.
Jay J. James.
Earl E. James, secretary.
Address of commission: Jefferson City.
State bureau of mines:
.
.
Arnold Griffith, chief inspector, Excelsior Springs.
Alice Moss Ferris, secretary, Jefferson City, % Bureau of Mines.
Evan Jones, deputy inspector, Higbee.
George E. Callahan, deputy inspector, Flat River.
United States Employment Service: Mrs. Mary Edna Cruzen, Federal director,
Capitol Building, Jefferson City.
Montana
Industrial accident board:
J. Burke Clements, chairman.
J. J. Holmes, State auditor, member.
A. H. Stafford, State commissioner of agriculture, member.
G. G. Watt, secretary.
Nell O’ Connell, assistant secretary.
Harold O. Mead, chief accountant.
Bureau of safety inspection: Nona McRae, chief clerk.
Address of board: Helena,
Nebraska
Department of labor: Cecil E. Matthews, commissioner of labor and compensation.
Bureau of compensation: Cecil E. Matthews, commissioner.
Address of department: State Capitol, Lincoln.


https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis

480

MONTHLY LABOR R E V IEW

Nevada
Office of labor commissioner:
William Royle, commissioner.
Leonard T. Blood, deputy commissioner.
Address of office: Carson City.
Industrial commission:
Dan J. Sullivan, chairman.
William Royle.
Alex L. Tannahill.
Vinton A. Muller, M.D., chief medical adviser, Reno.
Address of commission: Carson City.
Inspector of mines:
A. J. Stinson, Carson City.
Charles Huber, Tonopah.
United States Employment Service: William Royle, Federal director, room 34,
Capitol Building, Carson City.
New Hampshire
Bureau of labor:
John S. B. Davie, commissioner, Concord.
Bion L. Nutting, factory inspector, Concord.
Harold I. Towle, factory inspector, Laconia.
Mary R. Chagnon, factory inspector, Manchester.
State board of conciliation and arbitration:
J. R. McLane (representing public), Manchester.
Walter F. Duffy (representing manufacturers), Franklin.
K. E. Merrill (representing labor), Hudson.
United States Employment Service: John S. B. Davie, Federal director, State
Capitol, Concord.
New Jersey
Department of labor: Charles R. Blunt, commissioner.
Bureau of general and structural inspection and explosives: Charles II.
Weeks, deputy commissioner of labor.
Bureau of hygiene, sanitation, and mine inspection: John Roach, deputy
commissioner of labor.
Bureau of electrical and mechanical equipment: acting chiefs, Charles H.
Weeks and John Roach.
Bureau of statistics and records: James A. T. Gribbin, chief.
Bureau of women and children: Mrs. Isabelle M. Summers, director.
Bureau of engineers’ license, steam boiler, and refrigerating-plant inspection:
Joseph F. Scott, chief examiner.
Bureau of workmen’s compensation:
Charles R. Blunt, commissioner.
William E. Stubbs, deputy commissioner and secretary.
Charles E. Corbin, deputy commissioner.
John J. Stahl, deputy commissioner.
Daniel A. Spair, deputy commissioner.
John W. Kent, supervisor of informal hearings.
John C. Wegner, referee.
Harry F. Monroe, special investigator.
Frank C. Mobius, special investigator.
Hugh J. Arthur, special investigator.
William J. Wilkie, special investigator.
Harry H. Umberger, special investigator.
Maurice S. Avidan, M.D., medical adviser.
William C. Stuart, M.D., medical adviser.
James C. Keeney, M.D., medical adviser.
Bureau of employment: Russell J. Eldridge, director.
Address of department: Trenton.
United States Employment Service:
Charles R. Blunt, Federal director, Statehouse, Trenton.
Russell J. Eldridge, assistant Federal director, room 757, 1060 Broad
Street, Newark.


https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis

DIRECTORIES

481

New Mexico
Labor and industrial commission:
Bonifacio Montoya, chairman, Santa Fe.
Edward Sackett, member, Albuquerque.
Waite J. Keeney, member, Belen.
Labor commissioner: Ralph E. Davy, Santa Fe.
_
United States Employment Service: Ralph E. Davy, Federal director, Santa he.
New York
Department of labor:
Elmer F. Andrews, industrial commissioner.
William J. Picard, deputy industrial commissioner.
Maud Swartz, secretary.
Industrial board:
Richard J. Cullen, chairman.
Edward W. Edwards.
Leonard W. Hatch.
Nelle Swartz.
John J. Carroll.
Division of inspection: James L. Gernon, director.
Division of workmen’s compensation:
Verne A. Zimmer, director.
Raphael Lewy, M.D., chief medical examiner.
Address of division: 150 Leonard Street, New York.
Division of industrial relations: James Brady, director.
Bureau of mediation and arbitration: A. J. Portenar, chief mediator.
Bureau of labor welfare: Lillian R. Sire, director.
Division of employment: Fritz Kaufmann, chief.
Bureau of junior placement: Clare L. Lewis, director.
Address of division: 124 East 28th Street, New York.
Division of industrial codes:
Edward J. Pierce, referee.
George P. Keogh, referee.
Division of engineering: D. E. Bellows, active director.
Division of industrial hygiene: James D. Hackett, director.
Division of statistics and information:
Eugene B. Patton, director.
S. W. Wilcox, chief statistician, Albany.
Division of women in industry and minimum wage: Frieda S. Miller, director.
Division of bedding: (vacancy.)
_
.
,T
State insurance fund: C. G. Smith, manager, 625 Madison Avenue, New
Y Qrk.

General address of department, except where otherwise noted: 80 Centre
Street, New York.
United States Employment Service:
Elmer F. Andrews, Federal director, 80 Centre Street, New York.
Fritz Kaufmann, assistant Federal director, 124 East 28th Street, New
York.
North Carolina
Department of labor:
A. L. Fletcher, commissioner.
_
. . .
Division of statistics: Liston L. Mallard, chief statistician. _
Division of standards and inspection: F. H. Shuford, chief inspector.
Division of service to World War veterans:
, T
Col. John H. Manning, commissioner, North Carolina Veterans Loan
Fund.
F. A. Hutchison, service officer.
J. P. Lang, assistant service officer.
Address of department: Raleigh.
Industrial commission:
Matt H. Allen, chairman.
J. Dewey Dorsett, representing employers.
T. A. Wilson, representing employees.
E. W. Price, secretary.
Address of commission: Raleigh.
. .
,
United States Employment Service: A. L. Fletcher, Federal director, Agricultura
Building, Raleigh.

https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis

482

MONTHLY LABOR R E V IE W

North Dakota
Department of agriculture and labor:
John Husby, commissioner.
Roy G. Arntson, deputy commissioner and labor commissioner.
Address of department: Bismarck.
Workmen’s compensation bureau:
R. E. Wenzel, chairman (representing employers).
R. H. Walker, commissioner (representing public).
W. C. Preckel, commissioner (representing labor).
Carl E. Knudtson, secretary.
Minimum wage department: John Garberick, secretary.
Address of bureau: Bismarck.
Coal-mine inspection department: Ole Olson, inspector, Bismarck.
Ohio
Department of industrial relations: T. A. Edmondson, director.
Industrial commission:
Thomas M. Gregory, chairman.
L. E. Nysewander.
J. W. Beall.
T. A. Edmondson, secretary.
Division of workmen’s compensation:
Lloyd D. Teeters, chief and assistant director, department of industrial
relations.
William H. Mahoney, supervisor of claims.
W. K. Merriman, assistant supervisor of claims.
Evan I. Evans, supervisor of actuarial division.
G. L. Coffinberry, auditor and statistician.
H. H. Dorr, M.D., chief medical examiner.
Division of labor statistics and employment offices: John B. Gilbert, chief.
Division of safety and hygiene:
Thomas P. Kearns, superintendent.
Carl C. Beasor, chief statistician.
Division of factory inspection: Edgar W. Brill, chief.
Division of boiler inspection: Carl O. Myers, chief.
Division of examiners of steam engineers: Carl R. Daubenmire, chief.
Division of mines: James Berry, chief.
Address of department: Columbus.
United States Employment Service: John B. Gilbert, Federal director, new
State Office Building, Columbus.
Oklahoma
Department of labor:
W. A. Pat Murphy, commissioner.
James Hughes, assistant commissioner.
Bureau of factory inspection: Fred Kemp, chief inspector.
Bureau of boiler inspection: W. L. Newton, State boiler inspector.
Division of women and children in industry: Zelda Harrel, inspector.
Bureau of labor statistics: Adah E. Mauldin, statistician.
Bureau of free employment:
Oklahoma City office (men’s division), J. R. McCarty, superintendent.
Oklahoma City office (women’s division), Mrs. L. C. Pierce, superin­
tendent.
Tulsa office, E. N. Ellis, superintendent.
Muskogee office, S. A. Reed, superintendent.
Enid office, J. O. Roach, superintendent.
State board of arbitration and conciliation:
W. A. Pat Murphy, chairman.
James Hughes, secretary.
Address of department, except where otherwise noted: Oklahoma
City.


https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis

DIRECTORIES

483

Industrial commission:
Thomas H. Doyle, chairman.
Matt McElroy, commissioner.
Fred H. Fannin, commissioner.
Chester Napps, secretary.
Nacy Hood, statistician.
State compensation insurance office: Chester Napps, manager.
Address of commission: Oklahoma City.
United States Employment Service: W. A. Pat Murphy, Federal director, State
Capitol, Oklahoma City.
Oregon
Bureau of labor:
C. H. Gram, commissioner, Statehouse, Salem.
Charles H. Elrey, deputy commissioner and attorney, 101 Courthouse,
Portland.
State welfare commission:
Dorr E. Keasey, chairman, 616 S.W. Stark Street, Portland.
Mrs. W. C. Hay hurst, 625 Madison Street, Portland.
Harry M. Kenin, Public Service Building, Portland.
C. H. Gram, executive secretary, Room 101 Courthouse, Portland.
Mary K. Brown, investigator.
State industrial accident commission:
Albert R. Hunter, chairman.
O. R. Hartwig, commissioner.
T. Morris Dunne, commissioner.
E. W. Rockey, M .D., chief medical examiner, Portland.
Address of commission: State Office Building, Salem.
State board of conciliation:
.
O. M. Plummer, chairman, 210-211 American Bank Building, Portland.
Charles N. Ryan, 704 Couch Building, Portland.
William E. Kimsey, 286 Main Street, Portland.
United States Employment Service: C. H. Gram, Federal director, Room 101,
Courthouse, Portland.
Pennsylvania
Department of labor and industry:
Charlotte E. Carr, secretary.
Industrial board:
Charlotte E. Carr, chairman.
Morris Harrison.
John A. Phillips.
George W. Fisher.
Mrs. George B. Wood.
J. S. Arnold, secretary.
State workmen’s insurance board:
Charlotte E. Carr, chairman.
Charles F. Armstrong, insurance commissioner.
Charles A. Water, State treasurer.
State workmen’s insurance fund: J. Howard Devlin, manager.
Workmen’s compensation board:
Arthur C. Dale, chairman.
William J. Burchinal.
Edward J. Hunter.
Charlotte E. Carr, ex officio.
Bond C. White, secretary.
Bureau of inspection: John Campbell, acting director.
Bureau of workmen’s compensation: Dr. Stephen B. Sweeney, director.
Bureau of employment: A. W. Motley, director.
Bureau of industrial standards: John Campbell, director.
Bureau of women and children: Beatrice McConnell, director.
Bureau of rehabilitation: Mark M. Walter, director.
Bureau of accounts and statistics: William J. Maguire, director.
Address of department: Harrisburg.


https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis

484

MONTHLY LABOR R EV IEW

Department of mines:
Walter H. Glasgow, secretary.
Joseph J. Walsh, deputy secretary, anthracite division.
Richard Maize, acting deputy secretary, bituminous division
Address of department: Capitol Building, Harrisburg
Ul^ti d ^ at.es Employment Service: A. W. Motley, Federal director, 410 South
Office Building, Capitol Building, Harrisburg.
Philippine Islands
Department of the interior and labor:
Hon. Teofilo Sison, secretary.
Hon. Leon G. Guinto, under secretary.
Hon. Faustino Aguilar, commissioner of labor.
Bureau of labor:
Hermenegildo Cruz, director.
Modesto Joaquin, assistant director.
Inspector general of labor (vacant).
Administrative division: Rosendo Regalado, acting chief clerk.
Office of the attorney of labor: Bernabe Butalid, attorney.
Workmen’s compensation division: Mrs. Nieves Baens del Rosario, chief.
Glaims and conciliation division: Roberto Ancog, chief.
Division of inspection and statistics: Simon Estavilla, acting chief.
Interisland migration division: Gabriel Alba, commissioner
Marine and employment division: Albino C. Dimayuga chief
Accounting division: Domingo F. Cadaing, acting chief accountant.
Puerto Rico
Department of labor:
Prudencio Rivera Martinez, commissioner.
William D. Lopez, assistant commissioner.
Mediation and conciliation commission: Luis Villaronga, chairman,
industrial commission: Juan M. Herrero, chairman.
Division of economic social research and investigations: Vicente Geieel
Polanco, director.
&
Wage protection and claim bureau: Pedro Santana, Jr., chief.
Bureau of women and children in industry: (vacancy).
Homestead division, in charge of the labor boroughs: Eduardo Larroca
secretary.
’
Homestead division, in charge of the farms: Harry B. Llenza law clerk
Division of inspection, investigation, and diffusion of labor laws: Sandalio
E. Alonso, chief.
Division of accounts, property and statistics: Artemio Pilar Rodriguez chief
Employment service: J. M. Vivaldi, chief.
Address of department: San Juan.
Industrial commission:
Juan M. Herrero, chairman.
M. Leon Parra, commissioner.
F. Paz Granela, commissioner.
Joaquin A. Becerril, secretary.
Address of commission: San Juan.
Rhode Island
Department of labor: Daniel F. McLaughlin, commissioner, Providence.
Board of labor (for the adjustment of labor disputes):
Daniel F. McLaughlin, commissioner of labor, chairman.
Edwin O. Chase (representing employers).
William C. Fisher (representing employers).
Albert E. Hohler (representing employees).
Roderick A. McGarry (representing employees).
Chnstopher M. Dunn, deputy commissioner of labor, secretarv.
Address of board: Providence.
Office of factory inspectors: J. Ellery Hudson, chief inspector, Providence
U R ^ i , Q f i e « +Ef I^ °yT V t T,Servii!e: Daniel
McLaughlin, Federal director,
Room 0 I 8 , fetate Capitol, Providence.

https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis

DIRECTORIES

485

South Carolina
Department of agriculture, commerce, and industries: J. Roy Jones, commissioner.
Labor division: J. Roy Jones, commissioner.
Address of department: 118 State Office Building, Columbia.
Board of conciliation and arbitration:
James C. Self, chairman, Greenwood.
H. E. Thompson, secretary, Batesburg.
W. H. McNairy, Dillon.
South Dakota
Office of industrial commissioner: F. L. Perry, industrial commissioner, Pierre.
Tennessee
Department of Labor:
William E. Jacobs, commissioner and State fire marshal.
Frances Aaron, secretary and chief clerk.
Division of factory inspection: Lester E. Wallace, chief inspector.
Division of mines: A. W. Evans, chief inspector.
Division of hotel inspection: William W. Faw, inspector.
Division of workmen’s compensation: Dave Hanly, superintendent.
Address of department: Nashville.
Texas
Bureau of labor statistics:
Jack Flynn, commissioner.
C. E. Mick, secretary.
J. Catherine Long, assistant secretary.
Chas. H. Poe, chief deputy commissioner.
Address of bureau: Austin.
Industrial accident board:
Earle P. Adams, chairman.
Mrs. Espa Stanford, member.
H. T. Kimbro, member.
Address of board: Austin.
Utah
Industrial commission:
William M. Knerr, chairman.
O. F. McShane.
B. D. Nebeker.
Carolyn I. Smith, secretary.
State insurance fund: Charles A. Caine, manager.
Coal-mine inspector: John Taylor.
Address of commission: Salt Lake City.
Vermont
Office of commissioner of industries:
Clarence R. White, commissioner, Montpelier.
Charles A. Root, factory inspector, Burlington.
United States Employment Service: Clarence R. White, Federal director, State
Capitol, Montpelier.
Virginia
Department of labor and industry:
John Hopkins Hall, Jr., commissioner.
H. W. Furlow, assistant commissioner.
Virginia J. Reynolds, secretary.
Division of mines: A. G. Lucas, chief.
Division of factory inspection: S. A. Minter, chief.
Division of women and children: Carrie B. Farmer, director.
Division of research and statistics: R. H. Barker, director.
Address of department: Richmond.
2 4 0 4 ° — 3 3 ------- 16


https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis

486

MONTHLY LABOR REVIEW

Department of workmen’s compensation, industrial commission:
W. H. Nickels, Jr., chairman.
Parke P. Deans.
C. G. Kizer.
W. F. Bursey, secretary.
Wade M. Miles, deputy commissioner, Bristol.
F. P. Evans, statistician.
W. L. Robinson, examiner.
Address of commission, except where otherwise noted: State Office
Building, Richmond.
United States Employment Service: John Hopkins Hall, Jr., Federal director.
318 State Office Building, Richmond.
Washington
Department of labor and industries:
E. Pat Kelly, director.
Dexter A. Armstrong, secretary.
Division of industrial insurance:
John Shaughnessy, supervisor of industrial insurance and medical aid.
H. Eugene Allen, M.D., chief medical adviser.
J. E. Sullivan, claim agent.
Division of safety:
L. M. Rickerd, supervisor of safety.
W. W. Wilson, mine inspector.
George T. Wake, deputy mine inspector
Division of industrial relations:
L. M. Rickerd, supervisor of industrial relations.
William J. Coates, assistant supervisor of industrial relations.
Earl Millikin, industrial statistician.
Dexter A. Armstrong, secretary of labor and industries.
Industrial welfare committee:
E. Pat Kelly, director of labor and industries, chairman.
John Shaughnessy, supervisor of industrial insurance.
L. M. Rickerd, supervisor of industrial relations.
Earl Millikin, industrial statistician.
Address of department: Olympia.
United States Employment Service: E. Pat Kelly, Federal director, Olympia.
West Virginia
Department of labor: Clarence L. Jarrett, commissioner, Charleston.
Workmen’s compensation department:
George T. Watson, commissioner.
B. C. Downing, assistant to commissioner.
P. R. Harrison, Jr., secretary.
Ralph M. Hartman, assistant secretary.
R. H. Giles, actuary.
J. Bankhead Banks, M.D., chief medical examiner.
Address of department: Charleston.
Department of mines: Ernest L. Bailey, chief, Charleston.
United States Employment Service: Howard S. Jarrett, Federal director, Public
Library Building, Charleston.
Wisconsin
Industrial commission:
Voyta Wrabetz, chairman.
R. G. Knutson, commissioner.
Peter A. Napiecinki, commissioner.
A. J. Altmeyer, secretary.
Safety and sanitation department: R. McA. Keown, engineer.
Workmen’s compensation department: H. A. Nelson, director.
Apprenticeship department: Walter F. Simon, supervisor.
Woman and child labor department:
Taylor Frye, director.
Miss Maud Swett, field director, Milwaukee.

https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis

DIRECTORIES

487

Industrial commission— Continued.
•
Statistical department: Orrin A. Fried, statistician.
Unemployment relief: Florence Peterson, director.
Address of commission: Madison.
Board of conciliation:
Chris Hochgreve, Green Bay.
Jacob P. Beuscher, Milwaukee.
Homer Witzig, Superior.
.
United States Employment Service: R. G. Knutson, Federal director, State
Capitol, Madison.
Wyoming
Department of labor and statistics:
W. E. Jones, commissioner.
L. T. Cox, deputy commissioner.
Address of department: Cheyenne.
Child labor board:
W. E. Jones, secretary.
B. H. McIntosh.
W. H. Hassed, M.D.
Address of board: Cheyenne.
Coal-mine inspection department:
Lyman Fearn, chief, Rock Springs.
David K. Wilson, deputy, Rock Springs.
R. E. Gildroy, deputy, Sheridan.
Workmen’s compensation department (under State treasurer s office):
H. R. Weston, State treasurer.
C. B. Morgan, deputy treasurer.
Arthur Calverley, assistant deputy and department manager.
Address of department: Capitol Building, Cheyenne.
Canada

Department of Labor:
Hon. W. A. Gordon, minister.
H. H. Ward, deputy minister.
Gerald H. Brown, assistant deputy minister.
M. S. Campbell, chief conciliation officer.
R. A. Rigg, director of employment service.
E. G. Blackadar, superintendent of Dominion Government annuities.
F. A. McGregor, registrar of combines investigation act.
C. W. Bolton, chief of statistical branch.
H. Hereford, Dominion director of unemployment relief.
Address of department: Ottawa, Ontario.
Alberta
Bureau of labor:
W. Smitten, commissioner of labor.
F. W. Hobson, chief boiler inspector.
H. M. Bishop, chief factory inspector.
G. P. Barber, chief theater inspector.
A. A. Millar, chief mine inspector.
Employment service: William Carnill, director.
Minimum wage board:
A. A. Carpenter, chairman.
W. Smitten, commissioner of labor, secretary.
Address of bureau: Administration Building, Edmonton.
Government employment bureau:
William Carnill, director, Edmonton.
L. J. Ricks, superintendent, Calgary.
W. G. Paterson, superintendent, Edmonton.
A. R. Redshaw, superintendent, Lethbridge.
J. W. Wright, superintendent, Medicine Hat.
A. A. Colquohoun, superintendent, Drumheller.


https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis

488

MONTHLY LABOR R E V IE W

Workmen’s compensation board:
Alex Ross, chairman.
Walter F. McNeill, commissioner.
James A. Kinney, commissioner.
Frederick D. Noble, secretary.
Address of board: Administration Building, Edmonton.
British Columbia
Department of labor:
Hon. W. Middleton Dennies, minister.
Adam Bell, deputy minister.
H. Douglas, chief factories inspector, Vancouver.
Employment service: J. H. McVety, general superintendent, Vancouver.
Minimum wage (for females) board:
Adam Bell, deputy minister of labor, chairman.
Mrs. Helen G. MacGill.
Herbert Geddes.
Miss Mabel Agnes Cameron, secretary.
Hours of work and minimum wage (for males) board: Adam Bell, deputy
minister of labor, chairman.
Address of department, except where otherwise noted: Parliament
Building, Victoria.
Workmen’s compensation board:
E. S. H. Winn, K. C., chairman.
Parker Williams, commissioner.
Hugh B. Gilmour, commissioner.
F. P. Archibald, secretary.
R. B. Fulton, assistant secretary.
Old-age pensions department: H. L. Greenwood, secretary.
Boiler and machinery inspection department: L. Duckitt, chief inspector.
Electrical energy inspection department: H. L. Taylor, chief inspector.
Address of board: 411 Dunsmuir Street, Vancouver.
Manitoba
Bureau of labor:
W. R. Clubb, minister of public works.
Edward McGrath, secretary.
Arthur MacNamara, assistant deputy minister of public works.
Fair wage board:
Arthur MacNamara.
J. W. Morley.
E. Claydon.
Thomas J. Williams.
C. J. Harding.
Minimum wage board:
George N. Jackson, chairman.
Mrs. Edna M. Nash.
James Winning.
E. R. Kennedy.
Address of bureau: Winnipeg.
Workmen’s compensation board:
C. K. Newcombe, commissioner.
George E. Carpenter, director.
J. L. McBride, director.
A. J. Fraser, M.D., chief medical officer.
Nicholas Fletcher, secretary.
P. V. E. Jones, assistant secretary.
Address of board: Winnipeg.
New Brunswick
Department of health: H. T. Taylor, minister of health and labor, St. George.
Workmen’s compensation board:
John A. Sinclair, chairman.
Eugene R. Steeves, vice chairman.
Alexandre J. Doucet, commissioner.
Department of factory inspection: William Golding, inspector.
Address of board: Provincial Building, St. Johns.

https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis

DIRECTORIES

489

Nova Scotia
Department of public works and mines:
Colonel, the Hon. Gordon S. Harrington, premier and minister.
Norman McKenzie, deputy minister.
Address of department: Halifax.
Department of labor:
Colonel, the Hon. Gordon S. Harrington, premier and minister.
C. J. McDonald, secretary.
Address of department: Halifax.
Workmen’s compensation board:
F. L. Milner, K. C., chairman.
Fred W. Armstrong, vice chairman.
John T. Joy, commissioner.
Dr. M. D. Morrison, medical officer.
John McKeagan, assessment officer.
N. M. Morison, claims officer.
Miss M. M. Skerry, secretary.
Address of board: Halifax.
Employment service:
C. J. Cotter, superintendent men’s division, Halifax.
Miss Elda E. Caldwell, superintendent women’s division, Halifax.
Ontario
Department of labor:
Hon. J. D. Monteith, minister.
A. W. Crawford, deputy minister.
D. M. Medcalf, chief inspector of steam boilers.
J. M. Burke, chief inspector of factories.
J. M. Brown, chairman, board of examiners of operating engineers.
H. C. Hudson, general superintendent, Ontario Government Employ­
ment Offices.
J. B. Carswell, chairman, apprenticeship board.
A. W. Crawford, chief inspector of apprenticeship.
F. A. Swarbrick, inspector of caisson work.
Address of department: East block, Parliament Buildings, Toronto.
Minimum-wage board:
R. A. Stapells, chairman.
H. G. Fester.
Miss Margaret Stephen.
Address of board: East block, Parliament Buildings, Toronto.
Workmen’s compensation board:
Victor A. Sinclair, K.C., chairman.
Henry J. Halford, vice chairman.
George A. Kingston, commissioner.
N. B. Wormith, secretary.
T. Norman Dean, statistician.
F. W. Graham, claims officer.
D. E. Bell, chief medical officer.
J. M. Bremner, medical officer.
J. F. Hazelwood, medical officer.
Address of board: Metropolitan Building, Toronto.
Quebec
Department of labor:
Hon. C. J. Arcand, minister, Montreal.
Gerard Tremblay, deputy minister, Parliament Buildings, Quebec.
Alfred Robert, chief inspector of industrial establishments and pubiic
buildings, 97 Notre-Dame Street east, Montreal.
Clovis Bernier, deputy chief inspector, 97 Notre-Dame Street east,
Montreal.
J. N. Mochon, chief examiner of the board of electrical examiners, 88 St.
James Street east, Montreal.
N. S. Walsh, chief examiner of the board of stationary engineers, Parliarment Buildings, Quebec.


https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis

490

MONTHLY LABOR R EV IEW

Department of labor— Continued.
Maxime Morin, K.C., registrar of the board of conciliation and arbitra­
tion, Parliament Buildings, Quebec.
Joseph Ainey, general superintendent of provincial employment bureau,
97 Notre-Dame Street east, Montreal.
Achille Latreille, fair wages officer, 97 Notre-Dame Street east, Montreal.
Pierre A. Gosselin, fair wages officer, 231 St. Paul Street, Quebec.
Women’s minimum-wage commission:
Gustave Francq, chairman, 89 Notre-Dame Street east, Montreal.
Alfred Crowe, secretary, 229 St. Paul Street, Quebec.
Quebec workmen’s compensation commission:
Robert Taschereau, K.C., chairman.
Simon Lapointe, ICC.
O. E. Sharpe.
O. G. Molleur, secretary.
Address of commission: 73 Grande Allee, Quebec.
Saskatchewan
Department of railways, labor, and industries:
Hon. J. A. Merkley, minister.
Thomas M. Molloy, deputy minister.
D. McDonald, chief boiler inspector.
W. H. Hastings, mines inspector.
Gerald E. Tomsett, general superintendent of employment service.
J. A. Anderson, chief inspector, theaters and cinematographs.
Address of department: Farmers Building, Regina.
Minimum wage board:
A. J. Wickens, K.C., chairman, Moose Jaw.
Mrs. Ethel Henderson, Moose Jaw.
Miss Bertha Walker, Regina.
Ralph Heseltine, Regina.
Stanley Edwards, Saskatoon.
Thomas M. Molloy, secretary, Regina.
Workmen’s compensation board:
N. R. Craig, K.C., chairman.
Robert S. Banbury, commissioner.
Alfred Higgin, commissioner.
Address of board: 7 Farmers Building, Regina.


https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis

PUBLICATIONS RELATING TO LABOR
Official— United States
I d a h o .— Inspector
B o ise , 1 9 3 3 .

of Mines. T h i r t y -f o u r t h
3 0 3 p p . , m a p , illu s .

annual

r e p o r t, f o r

th e

yea r

1932.

Wage data from this report are given in this issue.
I l l i n o i s .— Department
1932.

of Mines and Minerals.

S p rin g field , 1 9 3 3 .

F ifty -fir s t coal rep o rt o f I llin o is ,

270 pp.

Includes data on mechanical loading and on accidents.
— Board of Health. K a n s a s
( M i m e o g r a p h e d .)
Reviewed in this issue.

K

a n s a s .-

a c c id en ta l

d e a th s ,

1932.

Topeka,

1933.

3 3 p p . , ch a rts .

M

aryland

1932.

N

ew

H

.-— Commissioner

of Labor and Statistics.

B a l t im o r e , 1 9 3 3 .

F o r ty -fir s t

annual

r e p o r t,

56 pp.

— Bureau of Labor.

a m p s h ir e .

p e r i o d e n d in g J u n e 3 0 , 1 9 3 2 .

N i n e t e e n t h b i e n n ia l r e p o r t, f o r
C on cord , 1 9 3 2 .
1 0 4 P P-

th e f is c a l

Contains information on industrial accidents and factory inspection and
directories of manufacturers and labor organizations.
O k l a h o m a .— Industrial Commission.
R e p o r t c o v e r in g th e p e r i o d f r o m J a n u a r y 1 ,
1 9 3 1 , to J a n u a r y 1 , 1 9 3 3 .

P

e n n s y l v a n ia .

[O k la h o m a C i t y ] , 1 9 3 3 .

G o v e r n o r G if f o r d P i n c h o t M a y 1 9 3 3 .
6 8 p p . , c h a rts.

U

51 pp.

— Committee on Unemployment Reserves.

Reviewed in this issue.
S t a t e s .— Congress.

n it e d

R e p o r t s u b m i t t e d to
P h i l a d e l p h ia , 2 3 6 C h e s t n u t S tr e e t, 1 9 3 3 .

House of Representatives.

Committee on Labor

N a tio n a l e m p lo y m e n t s y s te m .
H e a r i n g s ( 7 3 d C o n g ., 1 s t s e s s .) o n H . R . 4 5 5 9 , a
bill to p r o v id e f o r th e e s ta b lis h m e n t o f a n a t io n a l e m p l o y m e n t s y s t e m , e t c .;
H . R . 5 6 , a bill to cr ea te a b u r e a u o f w e lfa r e o f th e b lin d i n th e D e p a r t m e n t o f
L a b o r , e t c .; a n d H . C o n . R e s . 1 7 , g i v in g p r e f e r e n c e to v e te r a n s w h o a re d is a b le d
a n d u n e m p lo y e d , M a y 1 7 a n d 1 8 , 1 9 3 3 .
W a sh in g to n , 1 9 3 3 .
45 pp.

------------------------------- T h i r t y -h o u r

w e e k bill.
H e a r i n g s ( 7 3 d C o n g ., 1 s t s e s s .) o n
S . 1 5 8 a n d H . R . 4 5 5 7 , a n d p r o p o s a l s o ffe r e d b y th e S e c r e t a r y o f L a b o r A p r i l a n d
M a y, 1933.
W a sh in g to n , 1 9 3 3 .
991 pp.

—---- -—— ------ Committee on Ways and Means. N a t i o n a l
H e a r i n g s ( 7 3 d C o n g ., 1 s t s e s s . ) , M a y 1 8 - 2 0 , 1 9 3 3 .

in d u str ia l re co v ery .
W a sh in g to n , 1 9 3 3 .

306 pp.

---------------------- R e p o r t

N o . 1 5 9 ( 7 3 d C o n g ., 1 s t s e s s . ) : N a t i o n a l i n d u s t r i a l r e c o v e r y
b ill.
R e p o r t [to a c c o m p a n y H . R . 5 7 5 5 ] o f M r . D o u g h t o n , C o m m i t t e e o n W a y s
and M ea n s.
W a sh in g to n , 1 9 3 3 .
3 4 pp-

--------------Senate. Committee on Finance.
i n g s ( 7 3 d C o n g ., 1 s t s e s s .) o n S . 1 7 1 2 a n d

N a tio n a l in d u str ia l re co v ery .
H ea r­
H . R . 5 7 5 5 , b ills to e n c o u r a g e n a t i o n a l
i n d u s t r i a l r e c o v e r y , to f o s t e r f a i r c o m p e t i t i o n , a n d to p r o v id e f o r th e c o n s t r u c t i o n
o f c e r ta in u s e f u l p u b l i c w o r k s , a n d f o r o th er p u r p o s e s .
M a y 2 2 , 2 6 , 2 9 , 3 1 , and,
June 1, 1933.
W a sh in g to n , 1 9 3 3 .
439 pp.

---------------------- Committee on Interstate Commerce.

P e n s i o n s a n d r e tir e m e n t f o r
e m p l o y e e s o f in te r s ta te r a i l w a y s .
H e a r i n g s ( 7 2 d C o n g ., 2 d s e s s .) o n S . 3 8 9 2
and S . 4 6 4 6 , J a n u a ry 1 1 -1 9 , 1 9 3 3 .
W a sh in g to n , 1 9 3 3 .
4 5 9 p p . , ch a rts.


https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis

491

492
U

MONTHLY LABOR R E V IEW
S t a t e s — Department of Commerce.
Bureau of Mines. C o a l i n 1 9 3 1 :
P a r t 1 , B i t u m i n o u s c o a l ; P a r t 2 , P e n n s y l v a n i a a n th r a c ite.
W a sh in g to n .
1933.
( M i n e r a l R e s o u r c e s o f th e U n i t e d S ta te s , 1 9 3 1 , P a r t I I , p p . 4 1 5 - 5 1 0
ch a rts .)

n it e d

The labor statistics given in the report cover number of men employed, days
worked by the mines, length of the working day, output per man, and industrial
disputes.
----------;----------- I n f o r m a t i o n

C ir c u la r 6 7 1 0 :
E x p lo s io n s
in
m in es, 1 8 7 0 -1 9 3 2 , b y J . J . F orbes an d H . B . H u m p h r e y .
2 8 pp.

P e n n s y l v a n i a coal
W a sh in g to n , 1 9 3 3 .

Reviews explosions to show the hazards of gas and dust, the influence of
certain factors, and methods of explosion prevention.
■——' I n f o r m a t i o n C ircx d a r 6 7 1 3 : A c c i d e n t e x p e r ie n c e a n d c o s ts i n C o lo ­
r a d o m e ta l m i n e s , b y E . H . D e n n y a n d E . A . A n u n d s e n .
W a sh in g to n , 1 9 3 3 .
23 pp.
Discusses causes and costs of Colorado metal-mine accidents, 192&-30.
I n f o r m a t i o n C i r c u la r 6 7 2 1 : A c c i d e n t e x p e r ie n c e o f f o u r L o u i s i a n a
p e t r o l e u m r e fin e r ie s , b y F . E . C a s h .
W a sh in g to n , 1 9 3 3 .
7 pp.

Gives frequency and severity rates, causes, and location of injuries, 1929-31.
-----------—. —— R e p o r t s o f I n v e s t i g a t i o n s 3 2 0 7 : A s t u d y o f f a l l s o f r o o f a n d coa l,
R o c k S p r i n g s co a l d is tr ic t, S w e e t w a te r
W a sh in g to n , 1 9 3 3 .
2 3 p p . , d ia g r a m s .

C o u n ty ,

W y o m in g ,

by

H.

T o m lin s o n .

Results of examinations of the mines, with suggestions for additional safeguards
to prevent accidents.
-------------- — —•R e p o r t s

o f I n v e s t i g a t i o n s 3 2 0 8 : R e v ie w o f f a t a l i t i e s i n th e C a l if o r n ia
p e t r o l e u m i n d u s t r y d u r i n g th e ca le n d a r y e a r 1 9 3 2 , b y R . L . M a r e k .
W a sh in g ­
to n , 1 9 3 3 .
2 1 p p . , ch a rt.

------ Department of Labor.

Women’s Bureau. B u l l e t i n N o . 1 0 3 : W o m e n
w o r k e r s i n th e th ird y e a r o f th e d e p r e s s i o n : S t u d y b y s tu d e n ts i n B r y n M a w r
S u m m e r S c h o o l u n d e r d ir e c t io n o f A m y H e w e s .
W a sh in g to n , 1 9 3 3 .
13 pp.

Reviewed in this issue.

Official— Foreign Countries
A

— Bundesamt für Statistik.

u s t r ia .

Ö s te r r e ic h .

V ien n a , 1 9 3 2 .

S t a t is t is c h e s
231 pp.

H andbuch fü r

d ie

R e p u b lik

Includes data on prices, wages, cost of living, trade agreements, employment
service, unemployment, social insurance, industrial disputes, etc., in Austria.
The volume contains some data for 1932, but most of the information is for 1931
and earlier years.
B u l g a r i a .—

Direction Générale de la Statistique.

R oyanm e
F r e n c h .)

de

B u lg a r ie ,

1932.

S o fia ,

1932.

598

A n n u a i r e s t a tis t iq u e d u
pp.
(I n
B u lg a r ia n a n d

The data given in this statistical annual are for 1931 and earlier years and
include information on wages, employment, industrial disputes, industrial acci­
dents, prices, production, cooperative societies, social insurance, and compulsory
labor service. The section of the volume containing comparative statistics for
various countries includes index numbers of wholesale prices and cost of living.
C

— Department of Labor.

anada.

1933.

D

enm ark

L a b o r l e g is la t io n i n

Canada,

1932.

O tta w a ,

121 p p .

.— Statistiske

m ark 1 9 2 6 -1 9 3 1 .

Departement. A r b e j d s l /n n e n
C op en h a gen , 1 9 3 3 .
175 pp.

i in d u strien

m .v . i

Dan­

Contains statistics in regard to wages of workers in Danish industries during
the period 1926-31, including both time and piece rates and hours of labor.


https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis

493

PU B LIC A T IO N S R E L A T IN G TO L A B O R
F r a n c e .— Sous-Secrétariat

d’Êtat de l’Economie Nationale.

d es o u v r i e r s m i n e u r s , 1 9 2 3 - 1 9 2 8 .

P a ris, 1 9 3 3 .

T a b le d e m o r ta lité

39 pp.

The report deals with mortality among miners during the years 1923 to 1928,
the rates being compared with mortality figures for the general population.
G r e a t B r i t a i n .— Department of Overseas Trade.
R e p o r t N o . 51+5: R e p o r t o n
e c o n o m i c c o n d it i o n s i n A l g e r i a , T u n i s i a , a n d T r i p o l i t a n i a i n 1 9 3 2 .
1933.

London,

127 pp.

Includes a short section on labor conditions for each country.
-------------- R e p o r t

N o . 51+6: E c o n o m i c c o n d it i o n s i n B e l g i u m i n 1 9 3 2 , b y N . S .
R e y n t i e n s , to g eth er w ith a n a n n e x o n th e G r a n d D u c h y o f L u x e m b u r g .
London,
1933.

11+0 p p .

The chapter on social questions contains brief statements on unemployment,
family allowances, housing, wages, cost of living, strikes, trade unions, and
cooperative societies.
------ Industrial Health Research Board.
p r o n e n e s s , b y E . F a r m e r a n d o th e r s.

R e p o r t N o . 6 8 : T ests f o r
a c c id e n t
London, 1933.
3 7 p p . , c h a rts.

Third report on an investigation of individual susceptibility to accidents.
I n t e r n a t io n a l L a b o r O f f ic e .— R e p o r t o f th e d ir e c to r [to th e I n t e r n a t i o n a l L a b o r
C o n f e r e n c e , s e v e n te e n th s e s s i o n , G e n e v a , 1 9 3 3 ] : A p p e n d i x — T a b le s s h o w in g the
s it u a ti o n o f th e S t a t e s m e m b e r s i n r e s p e c t o f th e c o n v e n t io n s a n d r e c o m m e n d a t i o n s
a d o p te d b y th e I n t e r n a t i o n a l L a b o r C o n f e r e n c e .
G eneva, 1 9 3 3 .
1+2 p p .

------ S t u d i e s

a n d R e p o r t s , S e r i e s A , N o . 31+: C o n c il i a t io n
in d u s t r i a l d i s p u t e s .
G en eva , 1 9 3 3 .
696 pp.

and

a r b itr a tio n

in

------ S u m m a r y

o f a n n u a l r e p o r t s , u n d e r a rticle 1+08, [ m a d e to th e I n t e r n a t i o n a l
L a b o r O ffice b y m e m b e r s o f th e L e a g u e o f N a t i o n s o n m e a s u r e s ta k e n b y th e m to
g iv e effect to th e p r o v i s i o n s o f c o n v e n t io n s to w h ic h t h e y a r e p a r t i e s , d u r in g the
p e r i o d O c to b e r 1 , 1 9 3 1 , to S e p t e m b e r 1 9 3 2 ] .
G en eva, 1 9 3 3 .
50 5 pp.

The reports cover hours of work in industry, unemployment, maternity care,
night work of women and young persons, workmen’s compensation, weekly rest,
social insurance, etc.
N e w S o u t h W a l e s .— Bureau of Statistics.
N e w S o u t h W a l e s s ta tis tic a l reg ister
fo r 1 9 3 0 -3 1 .

S yd n ey, 1932.

661+ p p .

The section on social conditions contains statistics on placement work of the
State labor exchanges, housing and rents, wholesale and retail prices, and mini­
mum wages in various industries, while the section on factories and mines gives
data on number of employees, wages, accidents in mines and quarries, etc.
N e w Z e a l a n d .— [Unemployment

Board.]

pared b y S . G . S m ith and A . E . A n s e ll.

J u v e n ile u n e m p lo y m e n t.
R ep ort p r e ­
W e llin g to n , 1 9 3 3 .
2 0 p p .,

The report of an investigation into the problem of unemployment among boys,
undertaken at the request of the Government at the end of June 1932. The
authors found that large numbers of boys were unable to find employment o f any
kind, and that the usual results of compulsory idleness were appearing. The
remedies suggested are the retention of youth in school to a higher age, the pro­
vision of vocational training and supervision, an improvement in the apprentice
system adapting it to the changed conditions of the depression, and, above all, a
definite and carefully planned effort to interest boys in farming and to place them
in such work. The authors feel that the importance of agriculture to New Zea­
land cannot be over-estimated, and that the industrial situation presents an oppor­
tunity to build it up. A large-scale scheme is suggested, under which the Govern­
ment should undertake to develop for settlement areas now undeveloped and un­
productive, using for the purpose young boys who have completed technical
training in agricultural colleges or on instruction farms, or who have shown a
liking and aptitude for farming either in practical experience or in training courses.
As the land is opened up, these boys could be settled upon it under favorable
conditions.


https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis

494

M O N T H L Y L A B O R R E V IE W

N o r w a y .— Rikstrygdeverket.

A r sb e r e tn in g N r . 3 6 ( 1 9 3 2 ) .

O s lo , 1 9 3 3 .

30 pp.

Annual report on public insurance against industrial accidents and sickness in
Norway in 1932.
Department of Labor and Industry. S e c o n d a n n u a l r e p o r t u p o n
th e o p e r a t i o n s a n d p r o c e e d i n g s u n d e r “ th e i n c o m e ( u n e m p l o y m e n t r e li e f ) ta x
a cts o f 1 9 3 0 - 3 1 , ” to g eth er w ith f in a n c i a l s ta te m e n ts f o r th e y e a r e n d e d J u n e SO,
1932.
B r isb a n e , 1 9 3 2 .
J)8 p p .

Q u e e n s l a n d .—

S w e d e n .— Kommerskollegium.
1933.

In d u str i:

B e r a t te ls e

fo r

dr

1931.

S to c k h o lm ,

112 pp.

This report on Swedish industries in 1931 shows number of establishments and
workers, motive power used, and quantity and value of products. Printed in
Swedish with a French table of contents, resume, and list of industry classifications;

Unofficial
Educational Office. S ta n d a r d ­
i z a t i o n o f a r tic le s f o r h o m e u s e : A s t u d y o u t l in e c o v e r in g s o m e r e c e n t d e v e lo p ­
m e n ts i n p r o d u c t io n a n d d i s t r ib u t io n w h ic h a ffe ct th e c o n s u m e r , b y th e c o m ­
m itte e o n s t a n d a r d i z a t i o n o f c o n s u m e r s ’ g o o d s , A m e r i c a n H o m e E c o n o m i c s
A s so c ia tio n .
W a sh in g to n , 1 9 3 2 .
51 p p .

A m e r ic a n A s s o c ia t io n o f U n iv e r s it y W o m e n .

Among the subjects discussed in this publication are advertising, the salesman,
and testing laboratories as sources of consumer information; brands, trademarks,
grades, and specifications as aids in buying; and consumer purchasing and planned
production.
A m e r ic a n

E c o n o m ic A s s o c ia t io n . P a p e r s a n d p r o c e e d i n g s o f th e f o r t y - f i f t h
a n n u a l m e e t in g , C i n c i n n a t i , O h i o , D e c e m b e r 1 9 3 2 .
196 pp.
(S u p p l e m e n t to
A m e r i c a n E c o n o m i c R e v i e w , C a m b r i d g e , M a s s . , M a r c h 1 9 3 3 .)

The subjects considered at the conference included unemployment insurance
and stabilization of industries.
B r o o k e , E sth e r E b e r st a d t .
C o ., 1 9 3 3 .

T h e g ir l a n d h er j o b .

N ew

Y o rk , D . A p p leto n

&

ljO pp.

Heller Committee for Research in Social Eco­

C a l if o r n ia , U n iv e r s it y o f .

nomics.

Q u a n t i t y a n d cost b u d g ets f o r ( 1 ) f a m i l y o f a n e x e c u t i v e ; (2 ) f a m i l y o f
a c l e r k ; (3 ) f a m i l y o f a w a g e e a r n e r ; (4 ) d e p e n d e n t f a m i l i e s o r c h ild r e n .
(P ric e s
f o r S a n F r a n c i s c o , N o v e m b e r 1 9 3 2 .)
B e r k e le y , 1 9 3 3 .
58 pp.
( M i m e o g r a p h e d .)

Data from this publication are given in this issue.
C a n a d ia n C o u n c il o n C h il d a n d F a m il y

W e l f a r e . P r o b l e m s i n th e s o c ia l
a d m i n i s t r a t io n o f g e n e r a l a n d u n e m p l o y m e n t r e li e f , C a n a d a , 1 9 3 3 .
O tta w a ,
1933.
53 pp.
(S u p p l e m e n t to “ C h ild a n d F a m i l y W e l f a r e ,” M a y 1 9 3 3 .)

The discussions and findings of a conference held at Ottawa under the auspices
of the Canadian Council on Child and Family Welfare.
C a s u a l t y A c t u a r ia l S o c ie t y .
9 0 J o h n S tr e e t, [ 1 9 3 3 1 ] ,

P ro c eed in g s,
2 1 4 P P-

N ovem ber

18,

1932.

N ew

York,

Contains papers read or presented at the nineteenth annual meeting, held at
New York, November 18, 1932, and discussions of papers read at the previous
meeting. The new papers include one on the Wisconsin unemployment act,
and one reviewing the actuarial, statistical, and related organizations in the
United States and abroad.
C o n s u m e r s’ L e a g u e of N e w Y o r k .
w om en em p lo yed
[1 9 3 2 1 ].
14 pp.

in

N ew

York

W h a t th e n e w c a n n e r y c o d e h a s
ca n n eries.
N ew
Y o r k , 1 5 0 F ifth

done fo r
A ven u e,

Reviewed in this issue.
D a y , C l iv e .
C o ., 1 9 3 3 .

E c o n o m i c d e v e lo p m e n t i n
447 pp.

D ir e c t o r , A a r o n .
P ress, 1 9 3 3 .

m od ern

E u rope.

N ew

York,

M a c m illa n

T h e ec o n o m ic s o f tec h n o cr a cy.
C h ic a g o , U n i v e r s i t y o f C h ic a g o
27 pp.
( P u b l i c P o l i c y P a m p h l e t s N o . 2 .)


https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis

495

P U B LIC A T IO N S R E L A T IN G TO L A B O R
D onham ,

S. A g n e s .

S p e n d i n g th e f a m i l y i n c o m e .
B o s to n , L ittle, B r o w n &
2 2 2 p p . , ch a rts.
N e w e d i t i o n , c o m p l e t e ly r e v is e d .

1933.

C o .,

E. F. M. P u r c h a s i n g p o w e r a n d tra d e d e p r e s s i o n s : A c r itiq u e o f u n d e r ­
c o n s u m p t i o n t h e o r ie s .
L o n d o n a n d T o ro n to , J o n a th a n C a p e , 1 9 3 3 .
198 pp.

D u r b in ,

J o h n s e n , J u l ia
N ew

E., Compiler.

York, H .

W .

S e le c te d a rticles o n c a p i t a l is m a n d its a ltern a tiv es .
C o ., 1 9 3 3 .
497 pp.
( T h e H a n d b o o k S e r ie s , I V ,

W ilso n

V o l . 4 -)

The articles contained in the volume are classified under the following heads:
Capitalism, socialism, communism, fascism, Hitlerism, and technocracy.
L a n d is , B e n s o n

Y., and W il l a r d , J o h n D .

M a c m i l l a n C o ., 1 9 3 3 .

R u r a l a d u lt e d u c a t io n .

N ew York,

229 pp.

The findings of a national survey showing the nature and scope of what is
being done along the lines of adult education for the rural people of the United
States.

Landsorganisationen i

S v e r g e . S i f f e r u p p g i f t e r o ch g r a fis k a f r a m s t d l l n i n g a r
o v e r L a n d s o r g a n i s a t i o n e n s o ch f o r b u n d e n s v e r k s a m h e t a r e n 1 9 1 3 - 1 9 3 0 .
S to ck ­
h o lm , 1 9 3 2 .

6 7 p p . , c h a rts.

Statistical and graphic presentation of the growth and activities of the Swedish
Federation of Labor from 1913 to 1930, including a list of 53 national labor unions
with data on their membership, financial transactions, and activities for the
betterment of labor conditions in Sweden during that period.
L o r w i n , L e w i s L ., and F l e x n e r , J e a n A t h e r t o n .

T h e A m e r ic a n F e d era tio n
o f L a b o r , h is to r y , p o lic ie s , a n d p ro sp e cts.
W a sh in g to n , 1 9 3 3 .
573 pp.
( P u b l i c a t i o n N o . 5 0 , I n s t i t u t e o f E c o n o m i c s , B r o o k i n g s I n s t i t u t i o n .)

M o n t r e a l C o u n c il o f S o c ia l A g e n c ie s .

R e p o r t o n u n e m p lo y m e n t in su r a n c e .
O tta w a , C a n a d i a n C o u n c i l o n C h ild a n d F a m i l y W e l f a r e ( s u p p l e m e n t to “ C h ild
a n d F a m i l y W e l f a r e ,” M a r c h 1 9 3 3 ) .
43 pp.

The committee recommended that a scheme of compulsory unemployment
insurance, planned to meet the particular conditions of Canada, should be
initiated at as early a date as possible. The report reviews employment condi­
tions and discusses alternatives to unemployment insurance, such as employ­
ment stabilization. The general arguments both for and against unemployment
insurance are also given. A bibliography is appended.
N a t io n a l I n d u s t r ia l C o n f e r e n c e B o a r d , I n c .
co u n tries, 1 9 3 2 - 1 9 3 3 .

N a t io n a l L e a g u e

of

N ew

E c o n o m i c c o n d it i o n s i n f o r e i g n
York, 2 4 7 P ark A ven u e, 1 9 3 3 .
62 pp.

W o m en V o ters.

Department of Living Costs.

p la n a t io n o f th e p r o g r a m o f th e d e p a r t m e n t o f liv i n g c o s ts , 1 9 3 2 —1 9 3 4 .
i n g t o n , D . C . , 5 3 2 S e v e n te e n th S tr e e t, N W . , 1 9 3 2 .
13 pp.

E x­
W a sh ­

------ Department of Women in Industry.

E x p l a n a t i o n o f th e p r o g r a m o f th e
d e p a r t m e n t o f w o m e n i n i n d u s t r y , 1 9 3 2 —1 9 3 4 ■
W a sh in g to n , D .C ., 5 3 2 S even ­

teen th S tr e e t, N W . , 1 9 3 3 .

23 pp.

N a t io n a l S a f e t y C o u n c il , I n c .
1 9 3 3 e d itio n .

P u b lic S a fe ty S e r ie s N o . 2 7 : A c c id e n t fa c t s ,
C h ic a g o , 2 0 N o r t h W a c k e r D r i v e , 1 9 3 3 .
6 3 p p . , c h a rts.

Reviewed in this issue.
N a t io n a l U r b a n L e a g u e .

------

C o lo r L i n e S e r i e s , N o . 1 : T h e f o r g o t t e n ten th — A n
a n a l y s i s o f u n e m p l o y m e n t a m o n g N e g r o e s i n th e U n i t e d S t a t e s a n d i t s s o c ia l
c o s ts , 1 9 3 2 - 1 9 3 3 .
N ew York, 1 1 3 3 B roadw ay, 19 3 3 .
6 3 p p . , i ll u s .
C o l o r L i n e S e r i e s , N o . 2 : 5 , 0 0 0 , 0 0 0 j o b s — T h e N e g r o at w o r k i n th e U n i t e d
S ta tes.
N ew York, 1 1 3 3 B roadw ay, 1933.
31 p p .

N e w Y o r k S ch o o l o f S o c ia l W o r k .
P h ilip K l e i n a n d R u th V o r is .

N ew

S o m e b a s ic s ta tis tic s i n s o c ia l w o r k ,
York, 1933.
2 1 8 p p . , m a p s , ch a rts.

by

An attempt to formulate, for family social work agencies, accurate and uniform
statistics that are appropriate for expressing the task of such agencies and are
capable of being related to community life.


https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis

496

M O N T H L Y L A B O R R E V IE W

College of Commerce and Administration.

O h io S t a t e U n i v e r s i t y .

Bureau

of Business Research.
a n d v a c a tio n s i n
C o lu m b u s, 1 9 3 2 .

D e p a r t m e n t S t o r e S t u d i e s X - 8 5 : E m p l o y e e d is c o u n t s
O h i o d e p a r t m e n t a n d d r y g o o d s s to r e s , b y A . H . C h u te .
6 5 p p ., m a p .

The data in this report, which relate to 1931, cover 172 stores of various sizes.
It was found that as a result of the depression 29 stores had changed their vaca­
tion policies so that the vacation pay was either reduced or discontinued
altogether.
------ ------ ------

M iscella n eo u s
S t u d y X - 4 2 : T h e o p e r a t i o n o f th e O h io
g a r n i s h m e n t l a w , b y L . H . G r in s t e a d .
C o lu m b u s, 1 9 3 3 .
105 pp.

P e ir c e , A d a h .
829

V o ca tio n s f o r

w om en .

N ew

York,

M a c m illa n

C o .,

1933.

w age

x v i,

pp.

When, several years ago, the author was put in charge of the vocational
guidance course established by Stephens College, and began to assemble data
that would be serviceable in counseling women, she found that little had been
collected in serviceable form. While material for aiding men in the choice of a
vocation was abundant, information for women was scanty and scattered. For
several years she collected and organized material on this subject, constantly
revising it in the course of her own work, and this volume is one result of her
researches. Modern vocations have been grouped in five great classifications—
health, scientific, business, art, and social vocations— each group including a
number of different professions and pursuits. For each group the author sup­
plies information on such points as its contribution to society, the opportunities
for advancement within the field, relation to other vocations, the preparation
needed in order to follow the vocation successfully, the qualifications which
should be possessed by those desiring to enter it, and the remuneration and
personal satisfactions which might be expected from it.
Wharton School of Finance and Commerce.
Industrial Research Department. R e s e a r c h S t u d i e s X X I I : T e n t h o u s a n d

P e n n s y l v a n i a , U n i v e r s it y o f .
out o f w ork, b y
1 8 8 p p . , c h a rts.

Ewan

C la g u e

and

W e b ste r

P o w e ll.

P h i l a d e l p h ia ,

1933.

Reviewed in this issue.
Bureau of Business Research. M o n o g r a p h N o . 1 :
H o u s i n g s ta tu s o f s a la r ie d w o r k e r s e m p l o y e d i n P i t ts b u r g h , b y T h e o d o r e A .
V ee n str a .
P itts b u r g h , 1 9 3 2 .
9 9 p p . , m a p s , c h a rts.

P it t s b u r g h , U n iv e r s it y o f .

A study based on an investigation made in the spring of 1931, covering 1,415
families of the salaried class. Of those reporting, 58 percent were renters and
42 percent home owners. Rents were proportionately a heavier burden to
those having low incomes. “ The percentage of family income spent for rent
(adjusted) declines from 28.1 percent, for those with incomes of $1,000— $1,499,
to 20 percent, for those with incomes of $3,500— $3,799, and to 15.7 percent for
those with incomes of $6,000— $6,999.” Home costs show a somewhat similar
variation, ranging from 3.4 times the annual incomes of those earning between
$1,500 and $1,999 to 2.3 times the incomes of those earning between $3,500 and
$3,799, and to 1.9 times the incomes of those earning between $6,000 and $6,999.
Details concerning character and cost of housing obtained, size of family and
of income, age of head, and so on, are also given.
P r in c e t o n U n i v e r s i t y .

Industrial Relations Section.

s h i p a n d th e d e p r e s s i o n ,
( M i m e o g r a p h e d .)

by

E lea n o r

D a v is .

E m p l o y e e s to c k o w n e r ­
P r in c e to n ,
1933.
fl
pp.

Reviewed in this issue.
R ayn aud , B arthélem y.
1938.

D r o i t i n t e r n a ti o n a l o u v r i e r .

P a r i s , F . L o v i t o n et C i e ,

236 pp.

A study of international labor laws, that is, laws which affect the juridical
situation of foreign workers as regards questions of labor.

https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis

497

PUBLICATIONS RELATING TO LABOR
Save

the
C h il d r e n ' I n t e r n a t io n a l U n i o n . C h ild r e n , y o u n g p e o p le , a n d
u n e m p lo y m e n t: A
s e r i e s o f i n q u i r i e s i n t o th e e ffe c ts o f u n e m p l o y m e n t o n
c h ild r e n a n d y o u n g p e o p le .
P a r t I — G e r m a n y , U n ited S ta tes, B e lg iu m , a n d
S w i t z e r la n d .
G e n e v a , S w i t z e r la n d , 1 5 R u e L é v r i e r , 1 9 3 3 .
112 pp.

T o d d , A r t h u r Ja m e s .
in d u s tr ia lis m .

N ew

T u g w ell, R exford
N ew

I n d u s t r y a n d s o c i e t y : A s o c io lo g ic a l a p p r a i s a l o f m o d e r n
Y o r k , H e n r y H o l t & C o ., 1 9 3 3 .
626 pp.

G.

Y o r k , C o lu m b ia

T h e i n d u s t r i a l d i s c i p l i n e a n d th e
U n iv e r sity P r e s s , 1 9 3 3 .
241 pp-

g o v e r n m e n ta l

a rts .

U n io n

S u is s e d e s P a y s a n s . R e c h e r c h e s d u S e c r é ta r ia t d e s P a y s a n s s m s s e s
re la tiv es à la r e n ta b ilité d e V a g r ic u ltu r e .
B ern e, 1 9 3 2 .
(A p p e n d i c e à la I I e
p a r t ie d u r a p p o r t s u r V e x e r c ic e 1 9 3 0 - 3 1 ; tir a g e à p a r t d e V A n n u a i r e a g r ic o le
d e la S u i s s e , 1 9 3 2 , p p . 4 & I - 4 I 3 ; ch a rts .)

Another of the annual studies of the Swiss Farmers’ Union relating to the
cost of production of the various crops in Switzerland. Includes data on cost
of labor and proportion thereof chargeable to labor by members of the farm
family and to hired help.
W h it e , R . C l y d e .

S o c ia l s ta tis tic s .

N e w Y o r k , H a r p e r & B r o s ., 1 9 3 3 .

4H

P P -,

c h a rts.

W is c o n s in ,
B u lle tin
m ap.

U n i v e r s it y
114'

of.

F a rm fa m ily

Agricultural
l iv in g i n

Experiment

W isc o n sin .

Includes information on cost of living and income.


https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis

o

Station.

M a d iso n ,

1933.

R esea rch
4 $ PP->


https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis