Full text of Monthly Labor Review : March 1957, Vol. 80, No. 3
The full text on this page is automatically extracted from the file linked above and may contain errors and inconsistencies.
Monthly
Labor
m
LAMAZi
Apr
12
!i
Ü O , *u
L i ' D -1
Review
https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
MARCH
1957
VO L.
80
NO.
New England Labor
and Labor Problems . . .
A Special Section of Eight Articles
UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF LABOR
BUREAU OF LABOR STATISTICS
i¿0
c y/
*i n I
UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF LABOR
James P. M itchell, Secretary
BUREAU OF LABOR STATISTICS
E w an C laque,
H enry
J.
B.
Assistant Commissioner
B yer,
Assistant Commissioner
D ua n e E vans,
Assistant Commissioner
H erm an
W.
Commissioner
F it z g e r a l d ,
P h il ip A r n o w ,
Assistant Commissioner
Arnold E. C hase, Chief, Division of Construction Statistics
H. M. D outy, Chief, Division of Wages and Industrial Relations
J oseph P. Goldberg, Special Assistant to the Commissioner
L eon G reenberg , Chief, Division of Productivity and Technological Developments
R ichard F. J ones, Chief, Office of Management
W alter G. K eim , Chief, Division of Field Service
P attl R. K erschbattm, Chief, Office of Program Planning
L awrence R. K lein , Chief, Office of Publications
L eonard R. L insenmayer , Chief, Division of Foreign Labor Conditions
F rank S. M cE lroy, Chief, Division of Industrial Hazards
H. E. R iley , Chief, Division of Prices and Cost of Living
Oscar W eigert, Special Assistant to the Commissioner
F aith M. W illiams, Chief, Office of Labor Economics
Seymour L. W olfbein , Chief, Division of Manpower and Employment Statistics
Regional Offices and Directors
N EW ENGLAND REGION
W endell D. M acdonald
18 Oliver Street
Boston 10, Mass.
Connecticut
New Hampshire
Maine
Rhode Island
Massachusetts
Vermont
SOUTHERN REGION
B runswick A. B agdon
50 Seventh Street NE.
Atlanta 23, Ga.
Alabama
North Carolina
Arkansas
Oklahoma
Florida
South Carolina
Geòrgia
Tennessee
Louisiana
Texas
Mississippi
Virginia
M ID-ATLANTIC REGION
R obert R. B ehlow
341 Ninth Avenue
New York 1, N. Y.
Delaware
New York
Maryland
Pennsylvania
New Jersey
District of Columbia
N O RTH CEN TRA L REGION
Adolph O. B erger
105 West Adams Street
Chicago 3, 111.
Illinois
Missouri
Indiana
Nebraska
Iowa
North Dakota
Kansas
Ohio
Kentucky
South Dakota
Michigan
West Virginia
Minnesota
Wisconsin
W ESTERN REG IO N
M ay D. K ossoris
630 Sansome Street
San Francisco 11, Calif.
Arizona
New Mexico
California
Oregon
Colorado
Utah
Idaho
Washington
Montana
Wyoming
Nevada
The Monthly Labor Review is for sale by the regional offices listed above and by the Superintendent o f Documents, U. S. Government Printing Office,
Washington 25, D . C.—Subscription price per year—$6.25 domestic; $7.75 foreign. Price 55 cents a copy.
The distribution o f subscription copies is handled by the Superintendent o f Documents.
should be addressed to the editor-in-chief.
Communications on editorial matters
U se o f fu n d s fo r p r in tin g th is p u b lic a tio n a p p r o v e d b y th e D ire c to r o f th e B u reau o f th e B u d g e t ( O c to b e r 11 ,1 9 5 6 ).
https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
Monthly Labor Review
U N IT E D STATES DEPARTM ENT OF LABOR • BUREAU OF LABOR STATISTICS
L a w rence R . K l e in , Editor-in-Chief
M ary S. B e d e l l , Executive Editor
CONTENTS
A Special Section on New England
ii
271
281
288
294
301
306
310
316
New England Labor and Labor Problems . . . An Editorial Note
Profiles of Worker Family Living in Boston, 1875-1950
Historical Patterns and Recent Trends in Employment
Labor-Management Relations
Wages and Personal Income
The Problem of Depressed Areas
Labor Turnover in Textile Mills
Collective Bargaining and Competitive Cost in the Shoe Industry
The Growth of the Aircraft Industry
Special Articles
323 Effects of the $1 Minimum Wage in Seven Industries—Part I
329 Layoff, Recall, and Work-Sharing Procedures—Part IV
Summaries of Studies and Reports
336
342
347
350
353
Automobile and New Appliance Purchases in Six Cities, 1953-56
United States Participation in the International Labor Organization
Union Wage Scales of Local-Transit Operating Employees, 1956
Codes of Ethical Practices of the Labor Movement
Conferences and Institutes, April 16 to May 15, 1957
Departments
321
354
359
361
368
369
375
https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
The Labor Month in Review
Significant Decisions in Labor Cases
Chronology of Recent Labor Events
Developments in Industrial Relations
Erratum, December 1956 Issue
Book Reviews and Notes
Current Labor Statistics
March 1957 . Voi. 80 . No. 3
N ew England Labor and Labor Problems
https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
• • •
N e w E ng la n d , as the late Bernard De Vote admiringly put it, “is the
first American section to be finished, to achieve stability in the
conditions of its life. It is the first old civilization, the first perma
nent civilization in America.” Hence all Americans, as a m atter of
tradition, possess a sympathetic interest in the area that cradled our
national development. The problems which beset the area today
are thus doubly worthy of attention.
The labor, industrial relations, and general economic problems of
New England are complex, and in some ways they differ from those
prevailing in other areas of the country. No group of eight articles
can cover all significant aspects of such problems. What has been
attempted here is a selective analysis of certain tendencies deemed
to be of importance, interest, and aid in understanding what is
taking place in New England. The reader should not look for more.
The problems of New England are and have been a subject for study
by both local and national commissions, and it is to the reports of
these inquiries that the reader should turn if he desires detailed
statistical layouts and packaged recommendations.
The situations at which seven of these articles point touch on
the problem areas and industries, the broadening base of manufac
turing and the increasing influence of new industries, the real lack
of homogeneity within the region in respect to wage levels and labor
market characteristics, the mature and generally conservative prac
tice of labor relations and collective bargaining. The eighth article,
concerned principally with Boston, portrays the changing level of
living of the wage earner and his family over the course of threequarters of a century.
Generally speaking, the authors have assumed a critical but
optimistic attitude toward the particular problems they are dis
cussing, and they recognize also that the problems are plainly but
inextricably intermeshed. New England is in a state of thorough
going change in its economic base and in the relationship of one
State to another. An economy once dominated by textiles is now
experiencing the ascendance of aircraft engine and electrical equip
ment manufactures. But the latter are not pushing ahead directly
in the path of the receding textiles. The movements frequently
affect different localities. Consequently, there are the serious labor
An Editorial N ote
force dislocations and social problems privy to distressed areas.
Such a state of pressures and resistances disturbs wage relationships,
variegates wage levels, and tends to make both labor and manage
ment cautious and conservative in some of their collective bargaining
relationships.
Despite the travail which some New England industries, com
munities, and workers are experiencing, most of the authors feel
that the future holds stability and growth in store, in part because
of the character and tradition of the New England people. Perhaps
what is lacking in the series, although it is hinted at in several of the
articles, especially in the review of living and spending habits, is a
separate treatment of the special ethos of the New Englander. In
1888, the first U. S. Commissioner of Labor, in reporting on the
status of the Boston working girl, may have caught a glimpse of
what is meant by this: “Music, literature, art, lectures, are all
within reach, and the working girls of Boston avail themselves of
such privileges to a great extent. A buttonhole maker gave as
her reason for not living in the suburbs, where living was cheaper,
that she would then be debarred from lectures, concerts,
oratorios . . . Suspender makers . . . belong to Browning clubs,
and discuss the tariff and similar vital issues. Work is regarded
as honorable, and the barriers which exist between people of leisure
and wage earners may in some cases be overcome.”
It is worthwhile to note, in closing, that the first experiment by
the Monthly Labor Review in publishing a group of articles on a
given subject or locality was ventured in July 1946 on the subject
Reconversion in New England. An editorial note introducing those
five articles somewhat cautiously warned the reader that they were
“summary in scope and are not intended to give a comprehensive
survey of general labor conditions in the region.” As a m atter of
fact, now that more than a decade has passed there probably is no
risk in revealing the editorial secret that availability of the articles
for that issue was completely unplanned, even if fortuitous. Ever
since, there has been a residue of guilty feeling that something better
was due New England. It is with confidence that the following
articles are offered as a modicum of redemption.
—L. R. K.
https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
in
Contributors to the Special Section
The Bureau of Labor Statistics is profoundly grateful to the
authors of the eight articles in this issue of the Monthly Labor
Review which make up the special section entitled “New England
Labor and Labor Problems.” Each author is a specialist on
the particular subject of his article and also a working resident
of New England. The patience of all authors has been strained
during the many months this project has been under way, but their
diligence has been unflagging; it certainly has been fruitful. No
effort has been made to limit or otherwise influence the point of view
of the authors to conform with any official policy with respect to
the general subject matter.
E wan
Cla g u e , Commissioner of Labor Statistics
L eon a rd A rno ld , author of Labor Turnover in Textile Mills, is the
Director of
Research of the Northern Textile Association.
E. R. L iv e r n a s h , author of Collective Bargaining and Competitive Cost in the Shoe
Industry, is an Associate Professor of Business Administration at the Graduate
School of Business Administration, Harvard University.
W e n d e l l D. M a cd onald , author of Profiles of Worker Family Living in Boston, 1875-
1950, is the Director of the New England Regional Office, Bureau of Labor Statistics,
U. S. Department of Labor.
W illiam H. M ie r n y k , author of The Problem of Depressed Areas, is the Director of the
Bureau of Business and Economic Research, Northeastern University.
P a ul V. M u l k e r n , author of Wages and Personal Income, is the Wage Analyst of the
New England Regional Office, Bureau of Labor Statistics, U. S. Department of Labor.
A. H oward M y e r s , author of Labor-Management Relations, is the Director of the Labor
Relations Institute, Northeastern University.
E dw ard T. O’D o n n e l l , author of Historical Patterns and Recent Trends in Employment,
https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
is the Manpower and Employment Analyst of the New England Regional Office,
Bureau of Labor Statistics, U. S. Department of Labor.
D avid P in s k y , author of The Growth of the Aircraft Industry, is the Director of Research
and Information, Connecticut Labor Department.
Profiles of Worker Family Living in Boston, 1875-1950
Seventy-jive years of steadily growing income, credit, and technology
have greatly changed patterns of expenditures of worker families
in Boston.
W e n d e l l D. M a c d o n a ld
economic profile of the Boston wage
earner and his family in 1950 was vastly altered
from that of his 1875 counterpart. Seventy-five
years of sweeping transition in the manner of
day-to-day existence, guided by technological,
educational, and institutional advances, had
heightened and brightened, at least in a material
sense, the manner of living of workers in the
Nation’s oldest urban area.
Students of the mores of Boston and Bay State
worker families have access to the findings in six
comprehensive studies of worker-family income,
savings, and expenditures. Studies made by
Federal or State agencies provide data on the
ways in which Boston or Massachusetts wageearner families exchanged their funds, and in re
cent years their credit also, for goods and services
in 1875, 1888, 1901, 1918, 1934-36, and 1950.1
In addition to considering the shifts in the
manner of family living between various points of
time over the past 75 years, this article also
explores the special consumption characteristics
in 1950 of the Boston area in comparison with
those of 10 other large city areas—Baltimore,
Chicago, Cleveland, Los Angeles, New York,
Philadelphia-Camden, Pittsburgh, San FranciscoOakland, St. Louis, and the northern New Jersey
area.
T he
Summary of Findings
Boston worker families had extensively im
proved their material plane of living by 1950 as
compared with any of the earlier years studied.
The proportion of total expenditure accounted for
by food declined almost steadily from 1875, when
food amounted to 56.5 percent, to 1950, when it
https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
was only 35.4 percent. This was a positive sign
of rising living standards according to the Engelian
hypothesis.2 The percentage of expenditure al
located to “sundries,” or miscellaneous, advanced
from only 6.2 percent to 35.6 percent over the
three-quarters of a century. This kind of trend
is regarded as a sign of material improvement by
consumption analysts. The increase in number
of workers owning their own homes has been
marked. In 1875, only 1 percent of those sur
veyed were homeowners and, by 1901, the ratio
was 15 percent for Massachusetts families studied.
Among Boston families surveyed, the ratio of
homeowners to total families increased from 9
percent in 1918 to 27.4 percent in 1950.
Worker-family money income in current dollars
was 5 times as high in 1950 as in 1875, while real
income in 1950 dollars increased by only 79 per
cent over the same span of time. The 79-percent
gain in real annual earnings occurred mostly
between World War I and 1950.
1 The approach in all six studies was roughly similar in concept, method
ology, and presentation, save that in more recent surveys increased consumer
credit has injected complications and added to the need for information about
changes in family assets and liabilities. Broad comparisons relating to
differences in family income and spending between selected years from 1875
to 1950, separated by rather long intervals, are assumed to be reasonably
valid. Definitions, coverage, and concepts are not precisely alike in each
study, but there is sufficient comparability among the six surveys to warrant
meaningful, although somewhat guarded, conclusions.
Sources of the data are: 1875—Massachusetts Bureau of Statistics of Labor,
Sixth Annual Report, March 1875, Pt. IV, Condition of Workingmen’s
Families, Boston, Wright and Potter, 1875 (pp. 191-450); 1888—U. S. Com
missioner of Labor, Seventh Annual Report, 1891, Vol. II, Cost of Production:
The Textiles—Pt. I ll, Cost of Living, 1892; 1901—U. S. Commissioner of
Labor, Eighteenth Annual Report, 1903, Cost of Living and Retail Prices
of Food, 1904; 1918— Cost of Living in the United States, BLS Bull. 357,
1924; 1934-36—Money Disbursements of Wage Earners and Clerical Workers
in the North Atlantic Region, 1934-36, BLS Bull. 637, Vol. II, Eleven Cities,
1939; 1950—Family Income, Expenditures, and Savings in 1950, BLS Bull.
1097, Revised, 1953.
2 Ernst Engel (1821-96), chief statistician of the Prussian Bureau of
Statistics, held that the percentage of family expenditures used to buy food
provided “an accurate and truthful measure of the well-being of a people.”
See Die Lebenskosten in Belgien. (In Bulletin of International Statistics,
Rome, 1895 Vol.. IX, pp. 62-124.)
271
272
Child labor accounted for one-fourth of workerfamily income 75 years ago, but gradually dis
appeared, and by the mid-20th century was
virtually nonexistent. On the other hand, the
importance of the wife’s earnings to the family
budget has increased in the 20th century.
The plane-of-living advance made possible by
gains in real income since World War I has been
greatly assisted by the expansion of consumer
credit. A gradual retreat from frugality has
occurred over three-quarters of a century.
The Boston worker family in 1950 had a lower
income than worker families in 9 of 11 large
cities of the Nation studied in that year. The
MONTHLY LABOR REVIEW, MARCH 1957
mode of living of Boston families in 1950 was not
basically different in terms of consumption habits
than in other large cities, except for a few signif
icant items of spending. The Boston worker
family spent the least, the figures show, among the
11 large cities for alcohol, but expended the most
for shelter and tobacco. The Boston worker
family also had the largest outlay for reading
material, but was among the lowest for auto
transportation. For food consumption, at home
and in restaurants, these families spent close to
the median among the Nation’s large cities. In
expenditure for clothing, Boston ranked eighth
among the 11 cities.
Proportion of Expenditures for Specified Commodity Groups, by Wage-Earner Families in Boston
A rea and Massachusetts, Selected Periods, 1875-1950
https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
WORKER FAMILY LIVING IN BOSTON
There was little evidence that consumption
patterns were much affected by national origin
except with regard to a few specific items in the
case of first-generation American families or where
religious customs dictated food preferences. The
foreign-born heads of families were 69 percent of
the group surveyed in 1875, 76 percent in 1888,
and 57 percent by 1901. In the 1934-36 survey
group, the ratio was 39 percent. By 1950, it
was only 19 percent.
Rise in Levels of Living
The mode of living of worker families in Boston,
as elsewhere in the Nation, exhibited an astounding
transformation between 1875 and 1950. Material
standards improved so markedly over this sweep
of time that the shift was almost one of kind rather
than degree. Economic forces, inventive genius,
social reforms, and the aspirations of people of
varied backgrounds traced an entirely new
economic profile. Burgeoning technological in
ventiveness sparked a rise in industrial produc
tivity which made possible higher earnings, shorter
workweeks, and more leisure for workers and
minimized the need for children’s labor to augment
the family’s income. The talent of Americans for
innovation produced and marketed the new
varieties of goods and services—canned goods,
frozen foods, refrigerators, radios, automobiles,
televisions, diaper services, baby foods—which
have not only set the tone but practically dictated
the mode of modern living.
Broadened social consciousness led to pressure
for improved housing conditions and factory
regulation, through civic action and legislation. A
growing awareness of the need for improved
sanitation and preventive medical care brought
about a healthier, stronger people in the Bay
State. Traditionally a leader in programs for
social and economic progress, Massachusetts was
3 See Seventy Years of Service—The Story of BLS: A Special Section,
M onthly Labor Review, January 1955.
4 As long ago as 1853, E. Ducpétiaux, at the International Statistical Con
gress, classified family spending into groupings that even today are valid and
form the framework of most consumer expenditure studies. One of the twoway Ducpétiaux classifications has been rejected and his division of elastic
expenditure into two groups, “good” and “bad,” is no longer followed by
modern statisticians. See Edouard Ducpétiaux, Budgets économiques des
classes ouvrières en Belgique, subsistences, salaires, population. Brussels,
M . Hayez, imprimateur de la Commission centrale de statistique, 1855
(pp. 6-8).
s The U. S. Bureau of the Census, in the 1950 Census of Population, reported
that 18.1 percent of all married women in the Boston metropolitan area were
in the labor force.
https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
273
among the earliest States to legislate in regard to
education, sanitation, working conditions of women
and children, and industrial safety.
The contributions of the labor movement in
urging reforms and sponsoring legislation to
improve living conditions and education should
not be overlooked. Progressive and enlightened
employers have similarly contributed to the great
change, often as pioneers. The role of the fact
finder was equally valuable in investigating and
publicizing the true condition of the worker and
his manner of living.3
The pattern of Boston family living, if tech
niques of investigation were adequate, might be
measured not only by material consumption but
by nonmaterial criteria as well. How to measure
nonmaterial values remains, of course, an unsolved
problem. The lyceum and the local literary
society have for the most part disappeared from
community life. Although the symphony orches
tra and other concert music retain their popularity,
and museums and lectures continue to attract
Bostonians, such amusements as the horse and
dog races, the drive-in movies, and television win
large attendance totals. These latter expendi
tures would be of the luxurious and improvident
type in the Ducpétiaux classification.4
It is gratifying that the children are no longer
forced into employment at an early age to enable
the Boston family to make ends meet or to raise
family living standards. On the other hand, the
working wife or mother spends her time gainfully
employed outside the house and away from the
children for the length of the work day and week,
frequently in order that the components of the
new higher standard of living may be purchased.5
The rise in consumer credit accounted for a siz
able proportion of the greater spending of Boston
families by the year 1950. Current family income
was no longer divided in the traditional and ortho
dox fashion between current consumption and
savings. The savings considerations have been
somewhat dampened and income at the halfway
mark of the 20th century was more likely to be
earmarked for past consumption than for savings.
Whatever the reasons—the increase in social se
curity, buying in anticipation of wartime short
ages, the rise of private pension and health funds,
a stout faith in the future, the siren call of the
“commercial,” or some shift in workers’ value
scales—parsimony appeared to be in full retreat.
274
Massachusetts Wage-Earner Families, 1875
The profile of the wage-earner family 75 years
ago6 was completely different from the 1950
counterpart. A study of wage-earner families in
Massachusetts in 1875, completed by the Massa
chusetts Bureau of Statistics of Labor, recorded
that the average size was 5.1 persons, in contrast
with 3.5 for Boston in 1950. (See table 1.) The
annual income of the earlier year families
amounted to $763, or $2,180 in 1950 dollars.7 Of
this, $738 was spent for current consumption.
The consumption pattern of that era was
greatly at variance with the 1950’s. Not unex
pectedly, and in accordance with Engel’s law of
consumption, a much larger percentage of ex
penditure was made for food in 1875 by these
lower income families—-56.5 percent, compared
with 35.4 percent in 1950. Table 2 and the chart
indicate strikingly the decreasing proportion of
family expenditures allocated to food purchases
over the period of the six studies, with each survey
disclosing a smaller percentage than the previous
one, except that the 1918 survey indicated an
increase from 1901. This latter relationship,
however, may be attributed to the exceedingly
high price level for foodstuffs in the World War I
era.
Another traditional measure of material well
being is the proportion of family expenditures for
the miscellaneous or “sundries” group,8 i. e.,
everything except food, housing, fuel and light,
and clothing. There has been a steady advance
in the proportion spent for this catchall group—
from 6.2 percent in 1875 to 35.6 percent in 1950.
Not only did total volume of sundry purchases
expand, but the number and varieties of goods and
services in the mid-20th century market basket
were wholly unlike those in the first Massachusetts
sampling.
A notion of the way in which families lived in
1875 in the Bay State is indicated by the presence
or absence of expenditures for certain prestige
possessions among the families sampled. For
example, 11 percent of these families owned
pianos or organs, 34 percent were the owners of
sewing machines, and 52 percent had one or more
rooms carpeted. The carpeting was important
not only for decorative purposes but also for
insulation during cold winters. Twenty-six per
cent owned pews in churches.
https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
MONTHLY LABOR REVIEW. MARCH 1957
Another important yardstick of family well
being is the relative importance of meat versus
vegetables in their diet. Le Play, who greatly
influenced Carroll D. Wright, the director of the
first of these Massachusetts expenditure studies,
has said that “economic progress could be meas
ured by changes in the proportion of food expendi
ture, especially the relation between animal and
vegetable foods.” 9 Consequently, an attempt
was made to obtain this relationship by classifying
each family by the number of times meat was
eaten each day. The tally was as follows: Of 397
families, 83 had meat once a day, 223 twice a day,
88 three times a day, and only 3 ate no meat.10
The actual menus of families for three meals a
day were collected in this survey and described in
detail. Although meat dishes were quite com
mon, there was a monotonous similarity, not only
from day to day, but from family to family, in the
workers’ diet. The usual supper menu was
bread, butter, gingerbread, and tea. Not unex
pectedly in Boston, baked beans appeared on
most family tables each Saturday night, even as
today, and the traditional meal of baked beans
warmed over for Sunday breakfast was prevalent
even in 1875. The ethnic composition of these
families apparently had little impact on food
consumption, as families ate what was available,
not what they would choose because of tradition or
custom in the old country.
6 For 1875, the figures presented in this article are the results of personal
investigations by agents of the Massachusetts Bureau of Statistics of Labor
in the “ condition, social and pecuniary,” of 397 families of workingmen in
15 cities and 21 towns of Massachusetts, which were representative of “ places
where considerable business was carried on and wage-laborers congregated.”
The heads of families considered were“ wage-laborers, men of family, and with
comparatively few exceptions, having children dependent upon them for
support. . . . As regarded occupations, those prominent in or peculiar to
certain towns, were designated as proper for investigation” : i. e., “ . . . mill
operatives at the seats of textile manufacture; those engaged in building trades
in large or growing towns; leather-finishers and shoemakers, in those places
devoted to the manufacture or utilization of leather; metalworkers in the
foundry districts; out-door laborers where public improvements were in
progress, or the moving of merchandise carried on to a great extent; and
finally, shop trades in those towns having prominent or peculiar industries.”
7 Adjusted by means of data in index of estimated cost of living in U. S.,
1820-1913, compiled by the Federal Reserve Bank of New York and con
verted to a 1947-49 base by the Bureau of Labor Statistics, which was linked
to the BLS Consumer Price Index for years subsequent to 1913. (Mimeo
graphed table available upon request to the Bureau of Labor Statistics.)
8 These ratios emphasized by both Engel and Le Play have limited use,
according to Carle C. Zimmerman, in his Consumption and Standards of
Living (New York, D. Van Nostrand Co., 1936, p. 286). “ Those who use
advancement expenditures as an index of well-being imply that the more
complex and prosperous peoples and societies are happier and have a greater
fund of psychological well-being than the simpler peoples and societies.”
8 F. Le Play, Ferblantier, couvreur et vitrier d’Aix-les-Bains. (In Les
ouvriers des deux mondes. Paris, La Société internationale des études
pratiques d ’économie sociale, 1859, Vol. 2, pp. 9-62.)
18 In this tally, the combination of eggs at breakfast and fish at supper, or
vice versa, was counted as meat for one meal.
WORKER FAMILY LIVING IN BOSTON
T
275
1.— Average fam ily size, annual income, and current
expenditures for goods and services by worker families sur
veyed in the Boston area and Massachusetts, 1875-1950
able
Year and survey group
N um ber Averof
age
families famin
ily
sample size
Annual income after
taxes
Current expenditures
for goods and
services 1
Current
dollars
1950
dollars
Current
dollars
1950
dollars
$763 $2,180
$738
$2,109
661
731
2,059
2,150
3, 301
Massachusetts
1875: Wage-earner families..
1888: Cotton-textile worker
families____ _________
1901: Wage-earner families..
397
5.1
400
2, 577
5.6
4.6
704
818
2,193
2,406
Boston area
1918: Wage- and salariedworker families. . .
1934-36: Wage- and clericalworker families____ ____
1950: Wage- and clericalworker families_________
407
5.3
1,477
2, 363
1,438
516
4.0
1,571
2, 766
1, 570
2, 764
146
3.5
3,900
3,900
4, 301
4, 301
1 In this table, the 1875 through 1918 figures count insurance premiums, and
the 1875 through 1934-36 figures count gifts and contributions, as current
expenditures for goods and services. Conversely, the 1934-36 and 1950
figures exclude outlays for insurance premiums and the 1950 figure also ex
cludes gifts and contributions. This should be borne in mind when compar
ing the figures in this table.
Source: See text footnote 1.
Typically, the families of 75 years ago bought
2 tons of coal per year for $19 and 3 cords of wood
for $24 for heating and cooking purposes, and
purchased kerosene for lighting at an annual cost
which ranged from $3.60 to $6 per year. A few
families, however, depended upon their children
to gather firewood on the streets.
The penchant for self-improvement was exem
plified by the fact that 264 of 397 families bought
books and papers. Their traits as joiners are
shown by the 135 families who allocated funds
for membership in fraternal societies. Many of
these organizations had beneficial features often
carrying an insurance privilege. Significantly,
only one family in this survey reported a direct
outlay for life insurance premiums, whereas the
Boston worker-family averaged $169 for insurance
premiums in 1950.
The most significant findings of this 1875 study,
however, are those dealing with the sources of
11 Some understatement of income, the treating of personal insurance not
as savings but as an expenditure, and the unusual amount spent on time
payments for consumer durables during 1950, in anticipation of expected
shortages and price rises because of the Korean conflict, make it virtually
impossible to gage with preciseness the amount by which these Boston
families went into debt.
12 In 1888, data were obtained from 400 Massachusetts families in which
the head of the family was employed in the cotton-textile industry. The
figures used in this article are for all families surveyed and not for the “normal
families” (families selected according to specified criteria), for which compara
tive data are also presented in the original report.
417232— 57------ 2
https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
worker-family income. For example, about 35
percent of heads of worker families were able by
their individual earnings to supply family needs,
while 64 percent relied upon the earnings of wives
and children, particularly the latter. Commonly,
boys at 12 and girls at 15 were forced by necessity
into labor in large numbers. These young people
supplied 25 percent of family income, while the
father accounted for 75 percent, and the wife
for only 0.1 percent. (See table 3.) The children
accounted for one-fourth to one-third of total
earnings, children under 15 accounting for oneeighth to one-sixth. Without the assistance of
children, a majority of families would have been
in poverty or debt. With the aid of these younger
workers, however, one-half of the families saved
money, only one-tenth went into debt, and the
rest broke even.
In retrospect, it seems miraculous that the
average annual income of $763 (or $2,180 in 1950
dollars) reported by these Massachusetts worker
families exceeded their reported expenditures by
$25, or 3 percent of their incomes. By contrast,
in 1950, with average incomes of $3,900, the
average Boston wage-earner and clerical family
laid out more funds for current consumption of
goods and services than were taken in as income.11
Massachusetts Cotton-Textile Workers, 1888
Cotton-textile worker families, with an average
of 5.6 members, had annual incomes of $704 in
1888 ($2,193 in 1950 dollars), according to a U. S.
Bureau of Labor Statistics study of 400 cottontextile worker families in Massachusetts.12 The
difference in annual earnings between the 1875
and 1888 studies is explained partially by the fact
that in the later study the workers were entirely
from one industry and not as many higher paid
craftsmen were represented. In spite of this
limitation, certain meaningful comparisons are
possible. First, the food expenditure in 1888 was
a smaller proportion of the total outlay than in
1875, as food prices had dropped. Both the fuel
and light group and the clothing category ac
counted for about the same percent of the total in
both years. Housing expense, on the other
hand, had declined as a percentage of all expendi
tures between 1875 and 1888, but this trend was
no doubt greatly influenced by the fact that a
large number of the textile workers included in
276
MONTHLY LABOR REVIEW, MARCH 1957
the 1888 sample lived in small towns where rents
were lower and company-owned houses more
common than in the cities.
Most important, however, was the rise in the
percentage of income available for outlay on the
miscellaneous or sundry group, where the per
centage rose from 6.2 percent in 1875 to 19.5
percent in 1888, in spite of a lower annual dollar
income in the later study. Although retail prices
had declined 9 percent from 1875 to 1888, the
implication here is that a greater quantity and
variety of goods as well as subsistence items were
attainable by wage earners.
Although the variety in the family budget was
not wide by modern standards, nevertheless by
1888 there began to appear significant expendi
tures for amusements. Among the 400 families,
210 reported an average of $11.50 for this category.
Two hundred and eighty-nine families spent an
average of $9.47 for tobacco. Labor organization
dues were paid by 111 families who averaged
$6.56. Books and magazines accounted for $6.47
per family, with 327 making expenditures of this
kind. Nevertheless, there was only slender evi
dence in these first two Massachusetts expendi
ture studies of the amazing changes that were
destined to occur by 1950.13
As in 1875, it was impossible for wage earners by
1888 to make accounts balance solely through the
husbands’ efforts. On the average, these Massa
chusetts cotton-textile worker families could count
on an annual income from all sources of $704, of
which $431 was earned by the husband. In 152
of the 400 families, there was an income from
boarders and lodgers; in 105, income from wives’
earnings; and in 138, from children’s earnings.
One hundred and ninety-one families reported on
the average a surplus of $138 and 136 families
reported a deficit of $48, the others breaking even.
Wage Earners in Massachusetts, 1901
At the turn of the century, a third survey of
family living in Massachusetts was conducted by
the Bureau of Labor Statistics.14 By 1901, the
income of Massachusetts wage-earner families had
risen to $818, or $2,406 in 1950 dollars. These
Massachusetts families spent an average of $731.
The proportion of income spent on food was 56.5
percent in 1875, 46 percent in 1888, and only 41
percent in the 1901 study. The outlay for sun
dries as a percentage of total expenditures, on the
Massachusetts families spent an average of $731.
other hand, was higher by 1901—21.8 percent.
It was significant that 2,038 of the 2,577 wage
earners’ families in the 1901 survey reported
an annual surplus, while only 143 had a deficit.
The remaining 397 families’ incomes and expendi
tures were approximately in balance.
13 In 1887,1 year previous to the date of this study of cotton-textile workers,
Looking Backward, 2000-1887, by Edward Bellamy, was published in Boston
(Houghton, Mifflin and Co.), which with its sequel, Equality (New York,
D. Appleton and Co., 1897), contained an amazing forecast of the future
economic profile of Boston by the year A. D. 2000. Bellamy, in his dream
of a future society, described the “electroscope”—his word for television,
which he visualized would enter every Boston home by the year 2000. Fur
thermore, the programs would be not only for enjoyment, but also for educa
tional purposes. Bellamy also anticipated heating and cooking by electricity,
and eating from paper plates. The radio would become commonplace in the
future, according to Bellamy, but he believed that sound would come through
telephones, not aerials and individual sets. Curiously enough, he did not
anticipate the automobile and its ability to bring about a complete trans
formation in transportation and living habits.
13 The 1901 survey covered 2,577 families of wage earners and small-salaried
workers in Massachusetts during 1899-1902 (most of the data applying to the
year 1901). All investigations were limited to families headed by persons with
a salary or wage not exceeding $1,200.
T a ble 2. —Distribution of current expenditures for goods and services by worker families surveyed in the Boston area and
Massachusetts, 1875-1950
Year and survey group
Total expendi
tures for goods
and services1
Dol
lars
Per
cent
Food (includ
ing tobacco
and alcohol)
Dol
lars
Per
cent
Housing
Dol
lars
Per
cent
Fuel and light
Dol
lars
Clothing
Other goods and
services
Per
cent
Dol
lars
Per
cent
Dol
lars
Per
cent
Massachusetts
1875: Wage-earner families____ ___________ ______
1888: Cotton-textile worker families.-- _________
1901: Wage-earner families_______________ ______
$738
661
731
100.0
100.0
100.0
$417
304
300
56.5
46.0
41.0
$124
83
143
16.8
12.6
19.6
$49
44
34
6.6
6.7
4.7
$104
101
95
14.1
15.3
13.0
$46
129
159
6.2
19.5
21.8
1,438
1,570
4,301
100.0
100.0
100.0
641
561
1,524
44.6
35.7
35.4
184
319
548
12.8
20.3
12.7
80
141
229
5.6
9.0
5.3
222
154
470
15.4
9.8
10.9
309
394
1,530
21.5
25.1
35.6
Boston area
1918: Wage-and salaried-worker families___________
1934-36: Wage-and clerical-worker families.
_
1950: Wage- and clerical-worker families____________
1See footnote 1, table 1.
N ote.—Because of rounding, sums of individual items do not necessarily
equal totals.
https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
Source:
See text footnote 1.
277
WORKER FAMILY LIVING IN BOSTON
T a b l e 3.— Average annual income of worker families surveyed in the Boston area and Massachusetts, by source of funds,
1875 to 1984-361
Year and survey group
Average
income
(current
dollars)
Husband
Average
income
Percent
of total
Average
income
Other
Children
Wife
Percent
of total
Average
income
Percent
of total
Average
income
Percent
of total
Massachusetts
1888: Cotton-textile worker families.. _
1901: Wage-earner families_____________
$763
704
818
$572
431
665
75. 0
61.2
81.3
$i
48
2
0.1
6.8
.2
1,477
1,571
1,277
1,302
86.5
83.0
19
2172
1.3
210.9
$190
155
22
24.9
22.1
2.7
$70
129
9.9
15.8
8.6
54
97
3.7
6.1
Boston area
1918: Wage- and salaried-worker families—
1934-36: Wage-and clerical-worker families.
1 Data not available for 1950.
2 Earnings of wife and children were combined in the survey reports.
In regard to sources of income, a sensational
transformation had occurred since the time of the
earlier surveys. By the early 20th century, only 9
percent of the worker families had incomes from
the earnings of children, as compared with 35
percent of the families in the 1888 study. About
31 percent of the 1901 families obtained funds
from keeping boarders and lodgers and 15 percent
derived funds from miscellaneous sources.
The average family income from the earnings of
the husband amounted to $665 in current dollars,
or 81 percent of the total, whereas the wife and
children accounted for less than 1 percent and
3 percent, respectively, of the total income, while
income from other sources (mostly boarders and
lodgers) was 16 percent. Of the 2,577 families in
the 1901 Massachusetts sample, 15 percent owned
their own homes, while 85 percent rented their
dwellings. (See table 4.) In 1875, the percentage
of homeowners had been only 1 percent.
In the 1901 study, the expenditure patterns of a
subsample of 253 families 15 portray the diversity
of expenditures and the importance of spending
for goods and services which were rarely found in
the earlier system of living. For example, 21 per
cent of these families contributed to charity,
15As these families were selected solely on the basis of their ability to give the
information sought in the desired detail, the data must be interpreted with
caution.
16 For 1918, the figures pertain to 407 wage-earner and salaried-worker
families surveyed in Boston. Eligibility requirements for families to be
surveyed were: the family m ust have as a minimum a husband and wife and
at least one child who is not a boarder or lodger (thus increasing average
family size): the family must have kept house in the locality for the entire
year covered: at least 75 percent of the family income must come from the
principal breadwinner or others who contribute all earnings to the family
fund: all items of income and expenditures of members other than those living
as lodgers must be obtainable: the family may not have boarders nor over
three lodgers, either outsiders or children living as such; and the family must
have no subrental other than furnished rooms for lodgers. Slum or charity
families or non-English-speaking families who had been less than 5 years in
the United States were not taken.
https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
Source:
127
(2)
(2)
See text footnote 1.
92 percent to religious organizations, 52 percent to
labor organizations, and 73 percent contributed to
other kinds of organizations. By 1901, the neces
sity and importance of insurance had grown in the
view of the average wage earner in Massachusetts
along with the rise of life insurance firms, since
28 percent of these families made outlays for life
insurance and 18 percent for property insurance—
expenditures almost nonexistent in 1875 and 1888.
These same worker families made an outlay of
$79 per year for furniture, $11 for books and news
papers, and a similar amount for amusements and
vacations. Alcoholic beverages accounted for $18
of their spending and tobacco for $13, in 1901.
Boston Wage and Salaried Workers, 1918
The sources and amounts of Boston family in
come at the close of ¥7orld War I are recorded in
a Bureau of Labor Statistics study.16 The average
wage-earner family size was 5.3 for 407 families
for whom detailed income and expenditure in
formation is presented.
The average annual income of $1,477 in current
dollars for these families was double that of the
1888 families and nearly twice that of the 1875 and
1901 families. In 1950 dollars, the relationship
was quite different; the 1918 income of $2,363 was
less than that in the 1901 study and only about 8
percent more than in the 2 earlier studies. Of the
1918 income, about 86 percent was earned by the
husband, 1 percent by the wife, and 9 percent by
the children. Other sources accounted for 4
percent.
Light is cast upon one aspect of living conditions
of Boston worker families in 1918 by examining
housing facilities. Although these families did not
uniformly have modern conveniences, nevertheless
278
MONTHLY LABOR REVIEW, MARCH 1957
a major step forward had been made since the
earlier studies. Of 373 Boston families who re
sided in houses, flats, or apartments,17 206 had
bathrooms and practically all had inside flush
toilets. Nine percent of these Boston wageearner families owned their residence as compared
with 20 percent in 1934-36 and 27.4 percent in
1950. In the earlier Massachusetts studies, only
1 percent were homeowners in 1875, 7.5 percent in
1888, and 15 percent in 1901.
Boston Wage and Clerical Workers, 1934-36
The 1934-36 BLS study of wage earners and
clerical workers in Boston reported an average
family size of 4.0 and an annual income of $1,571
in current dollars, or, in 1950 dollars, $2,766.18
The food expenditures amounted to 35.7 percent
of the total, but had been 44.6 percent in 1918,
while sundry spending accounted for 25.1 percent
of the total compared to 21.5 percent 17 years
earlier.
The proportion of total expenditures going
into clothing in the midthirties was lower in
Boston (9.8 percent) than in the other large cities
studied. In 1934-36, the average amount spent
on automobile transportation by wage-earner or
clerical families was smaller in Boston than in any
other large city. Incidentally, expenditures for
this category were only 2 percent of total expendi
tures in 1934-36, but were 8.5 percent in 1950.
By the mid-1930’s, the proportion of income
derived from the chief wage earner of the family
was 83 percent, compared with 86 percent in 1918,
81 percent in 1901, and 75 percent in 1875. Other
earners (wife and children) accounted for 11 per
cent and other sources for 6 percent of the average
net money income of $1,571 for the 516 Boston
T a ble 4. — Extent of homeownership among worker families
surveyed in the Boston area and Massachusetts, 1875-1950
Percent
Year and survey group
Total
Owning
100.0
100.0
100.0
1.0
7.5
15.0
99.0
92.5
85.0
100.0
100.0
100.0
9.0
20.0
27.4
91.0
80.0
72.6
S o u r c e : S e e t e x t f o o t n o t e 1.
https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
Percent
Nativity
Massachusetts
1875
1888
Boston area
1901
1934-36 2
1950 3
Worker family heads..
100.0
100.0
100.0
100.0
100.0
American bom ____ _
Foreign bom _______
Canada____ _ _
Canada (French)..
England________
Germany__ ____
Ireland _____
Italy_____ ____
Russia_________
Scotland. _ _____
Sweden_____
Other_________
31.5
68.5
23.8
76.2
2.8
18.2
22.0
1. 2
26.2
43.3
56.7
14.4
60.9
39.1
2. 7
1.4
1.4
.4
13.8
8. 8
2. 7
81.0
19.0
3. 2
.4
.7
.4
3.7
3.3
2. 9
.4
3.3
.7
7.3
20.2
6. 5
33.5
3.3
1.0
2.5
5.6
2.1
26.8
1.3
2.0
2. 8
1.7
.9
7.0
1 Data not available for 1918.
2 Data applying to 1934-36 are for homemaker, not head of family. See
text footnote 19.
3 Data on nativity were not collected in the 1950 BLS study. Data in this
column are from the 1950 Census of Population and are for all families
(not just wage-earner families) and, therefore, may understate the proportion
of foreign bom among wage-earner families.
S o u r c e : See text footnote 1.
wage and clerical worker families surveyed in
1934-36. Of the Boston families, 64 percent had
a net surplus, 32 percent reported a net deficit,
and the remainder came out even.
By 1934, the profile of the Boston worker family
had undergone immense changes. Over 90 per
cent of Boston wage-earner families who owned
their houses now had central heat, gas or elec
tricity for cooking, running hot water, and inside
flush toilets, while 24 percent had electric refriger
ators, 54 percent possessed telephones, and 43 per
cent had garden space. For the 80 percent who
rented, these facilities were less prevalent.
Fourteen percent of the Boston families owned
automobiles, on which they spent an average of
$168 for operation and maintenance. For medical
care during the year, Boston wage- and clericalworker families spent an average of $49, while $41
went to community organizations, welfare, and
gifts. Clothing outlay had declined from $222 in
1918, to $154 in 1934, partly because apparel
17 E x c l u d e s t h o s e l i v i n g i n o w n e d d w e l l i n g s a n d t h o s e w h o s e r e n t i n c l u d e d
h e a t or lig h t .
Boston area
1918: Wage- and salaried-worker families___
1934-36: Wage- and clerical-worker families.
1950: Wage- and clerical-worker families____
heads in worker families surveyed in the Boston area and
Massachusetts, 1875-19501
Renting
Massachusetts
1875: Wage-earner families.___
1888: Cotton-textile worker families. . . . . ..
1901: Wage-earner families__ ___ _
T a ble 5. — Percentage distribution, by nativity, of the family
18 In 1934-36, the group of wage-earner and clerical-worker families surveyed
in Boston numbered 516 white families and was confined to those families
with 2 or more persons, with family incomes of at least $500 per year, who
had not been on relief during the survey year. A $200 per month or $2,000
per year maximum income limit was established for inclusion of clerical
workers. No income limit was set for wage earners, but at least 1 earner
in a wage-earner family must have been employed for 36 weeks and must have
earned at least $300. Families interviewed were drawn from a random
sample. Data obtained for Boston pertain to the year ending February 1935.
279
WORKER FAMILY LIVING IN BOSTON
prices had decreased by 14.4 percent in Boston.
Relatively few persons owned pews in churches,
but large numbers contributed in other forms to
religious societies in 1934.
Homemakers of 198 families, or 39 percent of
the total sample surveyed in 1934-36, were born
outside of the United States.19 (See table 5.) Of
this number, the predominating national groups
of foreign born were Irish (14 percent), and Itali
an (9 percent). In the 1875 survejL the ratios
were 69 percent of family heads foreign born, with
34 percent of these born in Ireland and 20 percent
in England. No information on nativity of either
family heads or homemakers was collected in
the 1950 survey by the Bureau of Labor Statistics,
but the Census of Population for that year indi
cated only 19 percent of all family heads in Metro
politan Boston were foreign born. This figure
may understate the proportion of foreign born
among wage earners, which is always higher than
among the heads of all families.
This transition in composition of population by
national origin of family head constituted a major
change in the profile of the wage-earner family in
Boston. However, apparently incidence of foreign
birth little affected expenditure patterns or mate
rial wants of Boston worker families. Although
there were differences in preferences for specific
commodities and services among first-generation
families, by far the overriding considerations de
termining the manner of family living were level
of income, the availability of goods and services,
and family size and composition. Examination of
the detailed family food menus in the 1875 study
and the food item purchases in the 1888 and 1901
surveys by national origin fails to reveal any im
portant nationality tendencies in food consump
tion, suggesting rapid acceptance of consumption
patterns in the country of adoption. Heritage,
of course, was important in helping to form the
social, political, and cultural patterns of the
Boston community. National origin appears to
have played a minor role except in such matters as
food recipes handed down from mother to daugh19 In the 1934-36 study, nativity data in regard to the homemaker (usually
the wife) were collected, but no information on the head of the family.
20 For 1950, the figures presented in this article were obtained from 146
Boston wage- and clerical- or sales-worker families of 2 or more persons. They
were drawn from a random sample and no lower income was set for inclusion
nor was any restriction imposed as to receipt of public assistance at any time
during the survey year. A $10,000 maximum income limit was fixed for in
clusion of wage- and clerical- or sales-workers.
https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
Table 6.— Average money receipts, average outlays, and
percentage distribution of outlays by two-or-more person
wage- and clerical-worker families surveyed in the Boston
area, 1950
Item
Boston’s
rank
among 11
large city
areas 1
Amount
Number of families covered...
Average family size (persons)
146
3.5
......... .
2
Average money receipts
Money income before personal taxes
Money income after personal taxes 2.
Other receipts__________________
Total receipts (after taxes)________
Average outlays
Current outlays for goods and services
(total)_________ ______ - ........................
Food and drink........................ ...............
Alcoholic drinks________________ ___
Clothing............................. ..................
Shelter (current expense)4___________
Fuel, light, refrigeration, and water.......
Household operation________________
Housefurnishings and equipment_____
Automobile purchase and operation___
Other transportation________________
Medical care______________________
Personal care____________ _____ ____
Recreation.................................. ............
Reading____ __________ __________
Education_________________________
Tobacco__________________________
Miscellaneous goods and services 5____
Gifts and contributions_________________
Personal insurance premiums_____ _____
$4,138
3,886
14
3,900
Amount
$4,301
1.352
66
470
548
229
165
259
367
97
203
101
203
44
15
106
76
121
169
10
9
8
10
Percent
of total 3
100.0
31.4
1.5
10.9
12.7
5.3
3.8
6.0
8.5
2.3
4.7
2.3
4.7
1.0
.3
2.5
1.8
10
5
11
8
1
1
8
9
9
6
9
3
10
1
8
1
1
5
11
Net change in assets and liabilities6______
Payments on principal of mortgages
and downpayments on owned homes..
-347
2
108
10
Balancing difference (average) 7
-344
1
1 The 10 large city areas in addition to Boston are: Baltimore, Chicago,
Cleveland, Los Angeles, New York, northern New Jersey area, PhiladelphiaCamden, Pittsburgh, San Francisco-Oakland, and St. Louis. See BLS
Bull. 1097, Revised, 1953.
2 After deduction of Federal and State income, poll, and 'personal property
taxes.
2 Because of rounding, percentages do not add to 100.
4 Rent, interest on mortgages, taxes on owned homes, and maintenance.
5 A great variety of items: funeral expenses, alimony, etc.
6 Personal insurance premiums and all outlays for durable consumer goods
except dwellings are treated as current expenses and not included in the assets
and liabilities.
7 Represents the average net difference between reported money receipts
and reported money disbursements (i. e., sum of current outlays, gifts and
contributions, and personal insurance premiums subtracted from sum of
money receipts, after taxes, plus net decrease in assets and liabilities). I t is
a measure of the net reporting error and cannot be assigned to any one seg
ment of the accounts.
Source: See text footnote 1.
ter, or skills brought by first-generation immi
grants in the fabrication of clothing or house
furnishings.
Boston Wage and Clerical Workers, 1950
The average size in 1950 of wage-earner and
clerical-worker families in Boston, 3.5 persons, was
smaller than that in any of the 5 earlier surveys
but was second largest among the 11 cities of
1,000,000 population or more surveyed in that
year.20 (See table 6.) On the other hand, total
280
money receipts after personal taxes amounted
for these families to $3,900 (compared with an
average of $4,038 for the United States21)—a
level exceeded in 9 of the other large cities, and
surpassing only the money income in Baltimore.
In this 1950 survey, the proportion of total
expenditures allocated to “miscellaneous” was
35.6 percent, surpassing even the percentage out
lay of 35.4 percent spent for food by Boston wageearner families. These same families had a hous
ing cost which was only 12.7 percent of all pur
chases. This low ratio compared to 1934-36,
when it was 20.3 percent, is attributable to two
factors: rent control and much higher real incomes.
Inspection of the differences in the average
amount of expenditure for major consumption
commodities among the 11 cities reveals that
Boston worker families were relatively low spend
ers for most major categories, but purchased
partly by necessity and partly by inclination a few
significant items of consumption at relatively high
rates compared to families in the other large cities.
The average shelter cost for the Boston wage
earner in 1950, for example, was higher than in the
other 10 large cities. Similarly, the group which
includes fuel, light, refrigeration, and water was
one for which Boston families laid out more than
in any other large city.22 Boston families ranked
first in spending both for tobacco products and for
reading materials. For food consumption, at
home and in restaurants, Boston wage-earner fam
ilies spent close to the median among the Nation’s
large cities. In contrast to the relatively high to
bacco expenditures in Boston, the annual workerfamily outlay for alcoholic beverages was less than
in the other large metropolitan areas.23 In ex
penditures for clothing, Boston ranked eighth
among the 11 cities.
The relatively low average spending for automo
bile transportation amounting to only $367 per
worker family, was explained by the much higher
rank (6th) for Boston in terms of spending for
“other transportation,” compared to a rank of 9th
among the 11 cities for auto transportation.
Perhaps even more revealing than the amounts
spent and the rank of Boston was the wide variety
of items of which worker families made purchases
in 1950 compared to the earlier years in which
family expenditures had been studied. In com
mon with worker families elsewhere in the Nation,
Boston families bought television sets and musical
https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
MONTHLY LABOR REVIEW, MARCH 1957
instruments, television combination sets, mechani
cal refrigerators, cooking stoves, and automatic
washing machines in large quantities. The im
proved plane of living in 1950 was manifest in the
purchase of such services as laundry-sent-out,
launderettes, and babysitting.
Two hundred and three dollars per wage-earner
family were spent for medical services and $46 per
family for clothing services (that is, dry cleaning,
shoe repairing, and like items). In the recrea
tion group, Boston worker families made their
largest single outlay for paid admissions to con
certs and sporting events, and the next greatest for
cameras and photographic supplies. All of these
were the components of a system of living replete
with commodities and services of the sundries
group, many of which were unknown and even un
dreamed of at the time of the previous studies.
Conclusion
The strands of advancement threaded their way
through the Boston community, spinning and
weaving a new fabric of living in a continuous proc
ess over three-quarters of a century. Advancing
technology made available new goods at reasonable
prices and, at the same time, higher wages and
shorter hours. Reform movements focused on
education, slum clearance, and working conditions.
Political action exercised by various groups, in
cluding labor unions, obtained favorable social wel
fare legislation. Trade unionism and collective
bargaining grew and won higher wages, more lei
sure, and improved conditions for workers. The
efforts and accomplishments of many enlightened
employers aided in improving working conditions
and planes of living. The role of the factfinder in
the social sciences brought to light the true condi
tions of workers’ families, providing a factual basis
from which to initiate change and bring reform.
These statistical explorations began with the Mas
sachusetts Bureau of Statistics of Labor created in
1869 and the United States Bureau of Labor Statis
tics founded in 1884.
2! For a detailed analysis in terms of the averages for the United States,
see Standards and Levels of Living of City-Worker Families, Monthly Labor
Review, September 1956 (p. 1015).
22 Boston showed a relatively high proportion of rented units; however,
the comparatively high expenditure for fuel was affected both by the climate
and the fact that the rent included heat in only about a third of such units.
23 Although family expenditures for tobacco and alcohol are known to be
underreported in surveys, it can be assumed that the survey results reflect
intercity variations in expenditures for these items.
New England’s economy has become less dependent
on shoes and textiles as employment has risen in both
nonmanufacturing and durable-goods manufacturing.
H istorical P atterns
and R ecent Trends in E m ploym ent
E dw ard
T.
O ’D o n n e l l
and exploitation of New England’s
natural resources and advantageous location for
profitable manufacture came early. For instance,
in 1637, Abraham Shaw was granted by the Great
and General Court of Massachusetts the right
to take ore and fuel from common lands for the
purpose of manufacturing “iron barrs” ; 1 and in
1644, a large iron works was begun in Lynn. A
year earlier, the town of Braintree had voted the
setting aside of 3,000 acres for encouragement of
an iron works,2 and nearly everywhere in the
little coastal settlements, establishments were
busily turning out bricks, pottery, hollowware,
bar iron, scythes, shovels, axes, hammers, and
nails, all articles essential to settlers in a new land.
Thus, New England’s interest in manufacture and
its traditional devotion to the production of light
metalwares and consumers’ goods both began
early and stemmed naturally from the nature of
the readiest market.
Near the beginning of the 19th century, the
greatest regional industry was born with the
building of a spinning frame on the English
Arkwright model by Samuel Slater in Rhode
Island. With this event, the economic history
of New England was revolutionized, for the region
possessed every gift necessary to the manufacture
of textiles: Available waterpower, the proper
degree of humidity for the best processing of
yarn, an adequate labor supply, and excellent
ports for the import of raw cotton and the export
of finished product. In addition, impending
political and historical developments were to
guarantee markets for New England industries
of a magnitude that had previously been
unimagined.
R
e c o g n it io n
https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
Determinants of Markets for Manufactures
Earliest of these great politico-economic events
was the War of 1812 which cut the flow of English
woven goods into this country and thus afforded
an opportunity for New England merchants to
seize the domestic market. Prior to 1812, New
England had only 32 spinning mills. Between
1812 and 1815, 73 were constructed.3 Even more
significant as part of the general regional pattern
of industrial development, the first power looms
in America were installed in 1813 by the Boston
Manufacturing Co. of Waltham. The weaving of
cloth and the spinning of thread under a single
roof marked perhaps the beginning of the textile
industry in America, as well as the factory system
as we know it.4 New England’s position in the
mid-20tb century in the manufacture of precision
machines and interchangeable parts owes much
to the development over the years of mechanical
skills by workers, and of technical knowledge by
management and inventors, in connection with
improving the productivity of textile machinery.5
Of course, other influences helped shape the
region’s machinery and metalworking economy
and account in part for interstate differences
which persist to the present. Although none of
the early iron or copper mines of Connecticut
appear to have developed into major operations,
1 Nathaniel Bradstreet Shurtlifi, Records of the Governor and Company
of Massachusetts, Boston, W. White, Printer to the Commonwealth, 1873,
Vol. I (p. 206), Vol. II (pp. 61, 81, 103, 125).
2 Samuel A. Bates, The Ancient Iron Works at Braintree, Massachusetts,
South Braintree, F. A. Bates, 1898 (p. 2).
3 C. J. Ware, The Early New England Cotton Textile Manufacture,
Boston, Houghton, Mifflin Co., 1931 (p. 37).
<Victor S. Clark, History of Manufactures in the United States, New
York, McGraw-Hill Book Co., Inc., 1929, Vol. I (p. 450).
«Ibid. (p. 516).
281
282
MONTHLY LABOR REVIEW, MARCH 1957
Chart 1. Industry Shifts in Manufacturing Employment,
New England, 1939 to 1956 1
Percent C hange
+ 100
settlement of the War of 1812, insured even more
than earlier developments that New England
would specialize in the mass production of com
modities for the Nation’s ever-increasing popula
tion. America needed textiles, shoes, handtools,
and weapons, and New England capitalized and
prospered upon her early mechanization.
Inevitable Decline in Relative Position
u nited STATES department o f tabor
suREAu of labor statistics
S o u rce . B ureau o f L a b o r S ta tis tic s
and C ooperating S tate A gencies
1 1956 data are preliminary.
the presence of the metals and the need of the
colonists for handtools and household wares led
to the growth of a light manufacturing industrydevoted to meeting these demands.6 Further
impetus was imparted to Connecticut metal
working by the intensive development of clock
making. In the beginning, the clock movements
were of wood, but early and continuing effort
was made to substitute metal, and in 1837, an
inexpensive brass clock was placed on the market
by Chauncey Jerome of Plymouth, Conn. Its
immediate success proved a boon to the brass
mills of the Nutmeg State.7 At about the same
time, light machines were devised which produced
pins from wire and automatically stuck them on
paper, an advance which secured to its inventors
dominance of the burgeoning American market.8
From beginnings such as these, Connecticut de
veloped its metallic industries which make it
today a center of hard goods production.
The unparalleled westward surge to settle
inland America, beginning not long after the
https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
But the westward migration which provided
the market also contained the seeds of future
competition; each newly developed section of the
country built its own manufacturing establish
ments which utilized closer sources of raw material
and sold their goods to the new centers of popula
tion. Perhaps the most obvious single factor in
speeding the loss of New England’s relative
position was the universal adoption of steam as a
prime source of industrial power and the con
sequent loss of premium upon waterpower sites—
probably New England’s greatest locational
advantage.9
As the fight to retain markets became fiercer
and the region’s competitive advantages decreased,
New England management attitudes became less
daring than those of the early innovators and were
increasingly concerned with maintenance of exist
ing positions.10 Beset by unflagging competition
from other sections of the country, New England
over the years has been sorely pressed to maintain
a share of markets sufficient to support full
employment in its factories. That it has not
been uniformly successful in all aspects of this
struggle has engendered a measure of pessimism
over the region’s future as a manufacturing
center.11 Some of this doubt may be justified,
but, in major outline, the record contains more
favorable than gloomy implications. An examina
tion of the course of New England’s economic
fortunes since 1939, as revealed by the ebb and
flow of employment, indicates much to allay the
fears that the region has become static and is
concerned principally with fighting holding actions.
8
William G. Lathrop, The Brass Industry in the United States, revised
edition, M t. Carmel, Conn., William G. Lathrop, 1926 (p. 22).
7 William G. Lathrop, op. cit. (p. 34).
8 Ibid. (p. 62).
8
Thomas Russell Smith, The Cotton Textile Industry of Fall River,
Massachusetts, New York, King’s Crown Press, 1944 (pp. 41-44).
10 The Federal Reserve Bank of Boston, Annual Report for 1955 (p. 6).
11 Seymour E. Harris, New England’s Decline in the American Economy.
{In Harvard Business Review, Cambridge, Spring 1947, pp. 348-371.)
§|
PATTERNS AND TRENDS IN EMPLOYMENT
283
Factory Employment Patterns Since 1939
Between 1939 and 1956, nonagricultural em
ployment in New England increased by more than
1 million jobs, or 40 percent, as shown in the
following tabulation:
job totals in practically all of the other New
England major manufacturing industry groups
have increased in keeping with the nationwide
pattern of advance:
Monthly average employment
Monthly average
nonagricultural
employment
(thousands)
1939_________________________ ____________________
1943_______________________ ____________________
1949_________________________ ____________________
1953_________________________ ____________________
1955_________________________ ____________________
1956 1___________________
____________________
2,
3,
3,
3,
3,
3,
582.
380.
201.
563.
513.
608.
4
7
3
8
4
3
1 Preliminary.
Source:
Bureau of Labor Statistics and cooperating State agencies.
Analysis of these employment trends reveals
elements of both strength and weakness since
certain of the region’s oldest and largest manu
facturing industries have not, over this span of
years, shared in the general employment gains.
The most dramatic and widely publicized of these
unfavorable developments is the deep decline in
employment suffered by the region’s textile
industry (chart 1). Since 1939, when it was the
major source of jobs for factory operatives,
employment in the New England textile industry
decreased by 108,900 jobs, or 39.5 percent.
Moreover, between 1939 and 1956, the number of
workers in the shoe and leather industry, second
only to the textile industry in 1939 as a source of
manufacturing employment, remained about
stable,12 as shown in the following tabulation:
Monthly average employment
Textile-mill
products
(thousands)
1939---------------------------------------1943---------------------------------------1949__________________________
1953---------------------------------------1955
---------------------------------1956 1--------------------------------------
275. 3
296. 5
252. 2
214. 7
173.0
166. 4
Leather and
leather
products
(thousands)
113. 9
101. 8
114. 4
114. 3
114.9
111. 9
1 Preliminary.
S o u r c e : B u r e a u o f L a b o r S t a t i s t i c s a n d c o o p e r a t i n g S t a t e a g e n c ie s .
On the other hand, offsetting the employment
record of textiles and shoes and leather products,
12New England’s record is better when measured by production rather
than by employment. Its relative share of national output has been well
maintained and of recent years has increased modestly. For a discussion of
this point, see p. 310 of this issue.
13 Chris A. Theodore, New England Economic Indicators, Boston Univer
sity, College of Business Administration, Bureau of Business Research, 1955
(section on Manufactures).
https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
Durable
goods
(thousands)
1939______________ ___________
1943_____________ ___________
1949_____________ ___________
1953_____________ ___________
1955______________ ___________
1956 i ____________ ----------------1
391.
967.
585.
791.
719.
757.
8
3
5
3
4
8
Nondurable goods,
exclusive of textilemill products and
leather and leather
products
(thousands)
387.
406.
423.
463.
460.
469.
2
3
8
9
5
5
Preliminary.
Source:
Bureau of Labor Statistics and cooperating State agencies.
One effect of the divergence of trends between
textiles and shoes and leather, on one hand, and
all other manufacturing, on the other, has been
a shift of the balance in factory employment
away from the historical heavy reliance upon non
durable goods toward an even division between
nondurable and durable goods in 1956. (See
chart 2.) Nondurable-goods employment ac
counted for 66.5 percent of New England man
ufacturing employment in 1939, for 57.4 in 1949,
and for only 49.7 percent in 1956.
New England’s improving balance between hard
and soft goods is not the result of merely subtract
ing textile employment from an otherwise static
manufacturing economy. Durable-goods employ
ment has had an impressive growth in absolute
terms which compares respectably with rates of
growth in other sections of the country.
Some of the oldest and most widely disseminated
production statistics which treat with New
England manufacturing industries are concerned
with textiles and shoes and leather.13 Their
widespread use in the past has tended to focus
attention upon the vicissitudes of those two
industries which have failed to keep pace with the
employment expansion of the rest of the region’s
manufacturing industries. This emphasis has
helped nurture the opinion that New England’s
productive efforts are somehow overconcentrated
in depressed nondurables. In fact, New Eng
land’s soft-goods industries, apart from textiles
and shoes and leather, have experienced a siz
able employment gain of 21.3 percent since 1939.
MONTHLY LABOR REVIEW, MARCH 1957
284
Chart 2. Durable and Nondurable Goods Employ
ment as a Percent of Manufacturing Employment
in New England, 1939 and 1956 1
Percent
100
_
ranking by the degree of concentration of manu
facturing employment in each State’s three largest
manufacturing industry groups.14 Massachusetts
and Connecticut, with concentrations of 32.1 and
45.2 percent, were below the median of 46.4
percent. In the remaining New England States,
employment in the 3 largest industry groups ranged
from 50.7 to 57.0 percent of total manufacturing
employment. Comparable figures for other repre
sentative States were: New York, 35.6 percent;
Virginia, 40.6; Ohio, 43.8; California, 45.2;
Georgia, 56.6; North Carolina, 66.7; and South
Carolina, 78.0.
Trends in Nonmanufaciuring Employment
Nondurable Durable
Goods
Goods
1939
UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF LABOR
BUREAU OF LABOR STATISTICS
Nondurable Durable
Goods
Goods
1956
Source : Bureau o f Labor S ta tis tic s
and C o o p e ra tin g S ta te A gencies
i 1956 data are preliminary.
Diversified Base of Manufactures. In comparison
with other States and regions, New England’s
manufacturing employment, whether in durables
or nondurables, is not presently unduly concen
trated in any small group of industries, but rests
upon a broad base of well-diversified manufactures
most of which are directly tied in with the national
level of industrial activity. It remains undeniable
that in the past a heavy concentration of employ
ment in the textile industry worked to New
England’s disadvantage. Because of this expe
rience, New Englanders currently display a strong
inclination to spread employment among a broader
list of industries. Not only is the regional factory
economy today less vulnerable to employment
declines stemming from the ills of a single industry,
it is far better diversified than the economies of
some competitive areas which have been the
heaviest gainers from New England’s loss of textile
preeminence. None of the New England States
was among the top 25 percent of the States in a
https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
Because major extractive industries are but
lightly represented in New England, and because
of the early and intensive development of manu
factures, the percentage of the region’s work force
in nonmanufacturing employment is lower than
in the United States as a whole. In 1939, for
example, 54.8 percent of New England’s nonagricultural workers were concerned with nonmanu
facturing activities. At the same time, the na
tional percentage was 66.8 percent. In 1956, how
ever, the national percentage remained almost un
changed at 67.2, while New England’s participa
tion in nonmanufacturing employment advanced
to 58.2 percent (chart 3). Since 1939, the ad
vances in major categories of nonmanufacturing
employment were steady and impressive (table 1).
T able 1 .— Average monthly employment in principal non
manufacturing industries, New England, 1939 and 1956 1
Employment
(in thousands)
Industry
Total
- - ____________ ___ _ -
__
Construction
Transportation and public utilities__
Wholesale and retail tr a d e ___
______
Finance insurance, and real estate
Service and miscellaneous___
_
Government (Federal, State, and local)
Percent
change
from 1939
1939
1956 i
1,414.1
2.102. 9
48.7
84.3
172.4
506. 7
100.7
255.3
294.7
177.2
220.1
704.4
169.0
410.9
421.3
110.2
27.7
39.0
67.8
60.9
43.0
1 Preliminary.
S o u r c e : Bureau of Labor Statistics and cooperating State agencies.
u Based upon employment data obtained from reports by State agencies
cooperating in the Federal-State Current Employment Statistics Program.
Excluded from this comparison were Delaware, Idaho, Kentucky, Nebraska,
Nevada, New Mexico, North Dakota, and Wyoming, since published data
for these States were not available in form to permit isolation of the 3 largest
Standard Industrial Classification 2-digit industry groups.
285
PATTERNS AND TRENDS IN EMPLOYMENT
Whether it is desirable for New England to ex
perience a decrease in the share of manufacturing
employment is a matter over which distinguished
experts disagree. Some hold that such a develop
ment, if of considerable magnitude, may be the
result of substitution of low-paid service employ
ment for well-paid factory jobs and should not be
viewed with equanimity.15 Other experts believe
that the tertiary industries assume rising impor
tance in an advancing industrial economy and
offer hope for overcoming some of the adverse
effects of New England’s dependence on manu
facturing.16 Whatever the interpretation, cer
tainly the absolute increase in nonmanufacturing
employment has provided many New England
workers with jobs; and if the second of the two
opinions holds true, the region’s great wealth of
educational, medical, financial, research, and re
creational facilities probably will provide signifi
cantly greater employment in the future. The
continued exploitation of these industries should
be a keystone of State and regional development
policy.
Intrastate Employment Trends
To a greater or lesser extent, employment trends
within the individual New England States be
tween 1939 and 1956 have reflected overall
regional changes. Each State has experienced
increases in the relative importance of nonmanu
facturing employment and in the absolute number
of jobs in both manufacturing and nonmanufac
turing. The employment record of the textile
industry has been uniformly unfavorable in the
6 States, and an almost sidewise trend of shoe and
leather employment has occurred in 2 of the 3
States where this industry is a major factor.
Only Maine had a notable increase in the number
of shoe and leather operatives, and some evidence
exists that Maine’s gains were at the expense of
her New England neighbors.
Despite the employment trends in textiles and
shoe and leather products, every State in the
region boosted its manufacturing job total be
tween 1939 and 1956. The rates of gain, as well
» Committee of New England of the National Planning Association, The
People of New England and Their Employment, Monograph No. 7, Boston,
New England Council, 1954 (p. 290). See also William H. Miernyk, Lahor
Mobility and Regional Growth. {In Economic Geography, Clark Univer
sity, Worcester, Vol. 31, October 1955, pp. 321-322.)
16 Seymour E . Harris, op. cit. (p. 352).
https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
T a ble 2. — Employment in manufacturing and nonmanu
facturing industries in New England States, 1939 and 1956
Manufacturing
employees
State
Connecticut., . . .
Maine____ _
...
Massachusetts.. ______
New Ham pshire... .
Rhode Island___
Vermont. _________ .
Number (in
thousands)
Nonmanufacturing
employees
1939
1956 i
Per
cent
change
from
1939
281.2
94.6
568.8
68.6
127.8
27.3
433.8
108.4
710.6
82.7
131.5
38.6
54.3
14.6
24.9
20.5
2.9
41.4
Number (in
thousands)
1939
1956 i
Per
cent
change
from
1939
278.0
461.2
117.0
167.6
781.6 1,133. 9
76.4
99.7
113.6
165.9
47.5
66.4
65.9
43.2
45.1
30.5
46.0
39.8
i Preliminary.
S o u r c e : Bureau of Labor Statistics and cooperating State agencies.
as the undertying reasons, differed from State to
State. In general, the States fall roughly into
three categories with respect to changes in manu
facturing employment. Thus, Rhode Island in
creased factory jobs only slightly over the period,
while moderate gains were scored by Maine, New
Hampshire, and Massachusetts. Vermont in
creased its manufacturing workers by 41.4 percent,
and Connecticut’s 54.3-percent employment rise
put the Nutmeg State far in the van in the matter
of increased factory employment, as shown in
table 2.
Most dramatic among the manufacturing em
ployment advances were those of the electricalequipment industry, particularly the light assem
bly operations comprising the communicationsequipment category, and transportation equip
ment with especial emphasis upon aircraft engines
in Connecticut. Rhode Island did not increase
employment in any single industry sufficiently to
offset the textile industry decline, although the
growth of employment in costume jewelry pro
vided a bright spot. New Hampshire and Massa
chusetts, on the other hand, by increasing employ
ment in their electrical-equipment industries, were
able to cushion somewhat the impact of textile
job declines. Vermont’s gains were for the most
part due to a sizable employment increase in the
production of metalworking machinery. No new
industry of major size developed in Maine over
this span of years, but the gain in shoes and
leather products served to compensate in some
degree for the State’s losses in textiles. Connecti
cut during this period has been New England’s
prize example of the effect upon employment of a
manufacturing boom. Of the enormous job gain
286
Chart 3. Manufacturing and Nonmanufacturing Em
ployment in New England, 1939 and 19561
MONTHLY LABOR REVIEW, MARCH 1957
ance and finance industries, long New England
strong points, have become even greater providers
of employment in several of the States, notably
Connecticut, Massachusetts, and Vermont. Dur
ing the postwar period, government employment,
particularly State and local, mounted in volume
with the increased number of schools and the
additional police and other civic services required
by the great shifts in population and growth of
suburban areas since the close of World War II.
A combination of these factors of industrial boom,
construction activity, and population shifts has
contributed to the expansion of job opportunities
in transportation and public utilities. In five
States, as well as in New England as a region, non
manufacturing industries today account for a
greater relative share of total nonfarm employment
than in 1939, as seen in the following tabulation:
Nonmanufacturing employment as a
percent of total nonagricultural
employment
1966 i
1939
Connecticut. _
— ____
____
Maine
____
Massachusetts
New Hampshire _ __ _____
____
Rhode Island
____
Vermont __ - -
49.
55.
57.
52.
47.
63.
7
3
9
7
1
5
51.
60.
61.
54.
55.
63.
5
8
5
7
8
2
1 Preliminary.
Soubce: Bureau of Labor Statistics and oooperating State agencies.
in the Nutmeg State, much was due to the extra
ordinary volume of production of aircraft engines
and parts. This has tended, of course, to stimu
late activity in allied metalworking and machinery,
the overall effect being to establish Connecticut
at this point of cyclical expansion not only as the
leader among New England States, but as one of
the most dynamic in the Nation in terms of
employment rise.
The employment situation of nonmanufacturing
industries was more uniformly favorable among the
States. The gains have been impressive both in
relative and absolute terms. Each State has par
ticipated in the residential, government, indus
trial, and highway phases of the nationwide build
ing boom, and, consequently, construction employ
ment has risen extensively everywhere. Aggres
sive promotional drives have aided each State
in developing its recreation industry, with a
resulting stimulus to employment in service activi
ties and retail trade. Buoyed by a high level of
national income and full employment, the insur
https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
Conclusions
Several broad conclusions are supported by a
review of the historical development of manu
facturing in New England and an examination of
the regional and State patterns of employment
changes since 1939.
The early development of manufacturing and
the tendency to emphasize the production of con
sumers’ goods and light, complex machine parts
were natural results of geographical and historical
forces.
The degree of regional economic homogeneity
is sometimes overstressed. Despite similarities,
there are important and age-old differences in the
economic structures of the several States.
Emphasis upon the manufacture of nondurable
goods as a principal source of employment has
lessened. The two factors which contributed most
to this changing balance are the growth in the
production of durable goods, particularly since
1939, and the long-term decline in textiles.
PATTERNS AND TRENDS IN EMPLOYMENT
Employment trends in the manufacture of non
durable goods, apart from textiles and, to a lesser
extent, shoes and leather products, have been
strong. Realistic analysis of the region’s economy
calls for consideration of the textile industry apart
from other manufacturing in order to avoid dis
tortion of nontextile trends.
The nonmanufacturing industries of New Eng
land are growing impressively in absolute numbers
of workers and are gaining in relative importance
as sources of employment.
There is little to suggest that New England could
prosper in the absence of national prosperity.
Much of the region’s manufacture is consumed or
287
incorporated into end products beyond its borders.
Similarly, a large part of New England’s non
manufacturing employment advance stems from
high levels of national income which have stimu
lated expenditures in recreation, finance, educa
tion, research, medical, and kindred services
offered to the Nation. By the same token, apart
from the textile situation, there is little to suggest
that regional industries are worse off than their
national counterparts. Since the rising tide lifts
all boats, the economic fortunes of the New
England region, and consequently the level of its
employment, will rise or fall with those of the
country as a whole.
The British commander fin the American Revolution] managed well,
but not quite well enough. It is difficult to keep military secrets in the midst
of an attentive people, and by the people themselves the discovery was made.
Paul Revere had some thirty mechanics organized to watch and report the
movements of the British, and these men now became convinced that an
expedition was on foot, and one of a serious character. The movement of
troops and boats told the story to watchers, with keen eyes and ears, who
believed that their rights were in peril. They were soon satisfied that the
expedition was intended for Lexington and Concord, to seize the leaders and
the stores; and acting promptly on this belief they gave notice to their chiefs
in Boston and determined to thwart the enemy’s plans by warning and rousing
the country.
https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
Henry Cabot Lodge, The Story of the Revolution, New York, Charles Scribner’s
Sons, 1903 (pp. 31-32).
Labor-Management Relations
Labor and management in New England are faced
with problems arising from economic pressures
and the transition to more diversified economy.
A. H o w a r d M yers
i k e i t s e c o n o m i c a c t i v i t y , New England’s in
dustrial relations cannot be easily distinguished
from the national pattern. Interregional stand
ards, centralized authority, and nationwide policy
making have influenced both labor and manage
ment organizations. Uniform Federal legislation
also has affected local labor conditions and rela
tionships, making the distinctive elements stand
out less clearly with the passing of time since its
introduction. Some distinguishable features con
tinue nonetheless.
Anything peculiar to the New England scene
will be a reflection of the people and their economic
activity. The conservatism and respect for the
past that is generally characteristic of the local
population has found expression in their social
and economic conduct, with little inclination for
innovation or rapid change and less dynamic drive
than in some other areas of the Nation.
L
Industrial Transition and Labor Relations
Manufacturing activity of the region developed
early in the Nation’s history and generally was
limited to a few industries. In recent years, how
ever, the economic pattern has been moving away
from industrial homogeneity. Unlike the prewar
dominance of textile manufacturing, no single
major industry and no predominant labor organi
zation stands out conspicuously in any of the six
States. To describe the developing trends and
characteristics of labor relations, it will be wise
to note the diverse directions in which business
and employment have been moving.
https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
The outstanding factor is negative—the lack
of any uniform trend of business or industrial
relations. There has been a transition from an
important textile industry to increasingly mixed
industrial activity. While total manufacturing
employment in this region fell 9 percent from
1947 to 1955, a decline of 129,000 jobs in postwar
textile manufacturing accounted for over 90
percent of the net decline of 141,000 manufac
turing jobs.1
Other major industries in which employment
had fallen are machinery manufacturing (except
electrical) and fabricated metal products, which
accounted, respectively, for 18 percent and 13
percent fewer jobs in 1955 than in 1947. In an
other major manufacturing activity, leather and
leather products, no significant change occurred
in total employment. The other manufacturing
industry employing over 100,000 workers, elec
trical equipment, provided 11 percent more em
ployment over the 8-year period, while appreciable
gains also occurred in transportation equipment
and in apparel manufacturing.
A substantial drop in New England’s manu
facturing employment as a proportion of total
nonagricultural employment contrasts with the
relatively stable national situation in recent years.
Also, the increasing volume of service industry
jobs, particularly in Massachusetts and Rhode
Island, and of white-collar employment in trade
and finance has not kept pace with national
trends.2 The degree of unionization of white1 William H. Miernyk, Unemployment in New England Textile Com
munities, M onthly Labor Review, June 1955 (p. 645).
2 Seymour L. Wolfbein, Changing Patterns of Industrial Employment,
1919-55, M onthly Labor Review, March 1956 (p. 250).
LABOR-MANAGEMENT RELATIONS
collar employees has not been as great as that of
workers in the manufacturing and other industries
employing manual workers.
Many of these employment changes resulted
in large part from labor relations and labor cost
difficulties, and in turn had a serious impact on
the local problems of unions and management.
Industry, labor, and public officials in many
urban communities have been faced with em
ployment shifts and changes in job skills that
were caused by the liquidation of the older plants.
With many of the displaced workers from the
nonexpanding industries in the older age groups,
serious problems of adjustment have been posed
for management and labor representatives in
many local areas. Shifts in production and em
ployment to diverse industrial activities have
occurred in or around cities such as Brockton,
Lynn, and Worcester in Massachusetts and
Nashua and Manchester in New Hampshire.
Textile centers such as Fall River, New Bedford,
Salem, Lowell, and Lawrence in Massachusetts;
Woonsocket and Providence in Rhode Island;
and Sanford and Waterville in Maine have be
come the locations for garment, electronic, ma
chinery, or plastics plants. Labor relations have
become unstable because of periods of unemploy
ment pending shifts to new employment, and
because the new plants often prefer to employ
younger people.
Extent of Unionization
The organization of New England’s shoe
workers, leather workers, and textile workers pre
dated the unionization of mass-production indus
try, and although collective bargaining has a long
history in the region, recent unemployment, job
shifts, and the developing trend from factory to
more white-collar employment seem to have
slowed down the growth of unionization. It is
difficult to give accurate estimates of trends in
recent years since no continuing figures are avail
able on labor union membership by State. The
National Planning Association estimated that in
3 Report on the Economic State of New England, National Planning
Association, published by New England Council, 1954 (p. 370).
4 In the writer’s judgment, a fair index of recent local trends, with the pos
sible exception of Connecticut, is the Commonwealth of Massachusetts,
Department of Labor and Industries estimates. Total union membership
in the state as reported in its Annual Directory of Labor Organizations, was
as follows: 1951, 598,000; 1953, 614,000; 1954, 589,000; 1955, 565,000.
https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
289
1951 union membership included 29.3 percent of
the Nation’s nonagricultural labor force, with a
New England regional membership of 29.6 per
cent. The high figure for the 6 States was 33.2
percent for Massachusetts, while the low was 22.7
percent for Connecticut.3 There is some later
evidence that unionization in New England may
be lagging, if not declining absolutely, in net
growth as a result of increasing white-collar
employment and transitional unemployment.4
Normally, union activity will be of small interest
to those out of work and usually will take some
time to develop among those employed in a new
plant.
Competing unions have been active in some of
the major New England manufacturing industries
for many years, with keen rivalry between unions
formerly affiliated with the American Federation of
Labor and with the Congress of Industrial Organi
zations, respectively, as well as between these
and independent unions. The textile, leather
tanning, shoe, and electrical equipment industries
have been subject to this competitive unionism.
Although the AFL-CIO unification may eventu
ally reduce rivalry among affiliated unions, the
region’s independent unions will probably con
tinue their dual union campaigning. The United
Mine Workers, District 50, the International
Longshoremen’s Association, and the United
Electrical, Radio and Machine Workers of America
each represents New England employees exclu
sively in some industry or shares representation
in others in conjunction with AFL-CIO unions.
It is also pertinent to note the extent of local
independent union bargaining of long standing.
In the shoe manufacturing centers in and around
Brockton and Marlborough, Mass., Nashua and
Manchester, N. H., and in Lewiston and Auburn,
Maine, multiplant unaffiliated shoe workers’
unions compete with the national organizations.
Another multicompany local organization of
primarily textile workers bargains with manage
ment in Woonsocket, R. I., plants. In addition,
some employees in the electric power industry
have independent representation, local or national.
Factors Shaping Management Policy
The major industrial relations problems of the
region have been caused by economic factors
rather than by poor personnel practices or anti-
290
labor attitudes.5 The highly competitive markets
in which New England consumers’ goods manu
facturers often sell have usually been affected by
low-cost, nonunion competition, either domestic
or foreign. In bargaining and handling of griev
ances over work assignments and piece rates,
management has frequently been under severe
economic pressure.
In a few industries, employers bargain collec
tively on a multiplant basis through employer
associations. In some localities, this t^pe of or
ganization has helped in getting union leaders to
consider management’s problems and needs at
the same time that wages, hours, and working
conditions are negotiated. Such employer labor
relations associations bargain in building construc
tion, printing and publishing, trucking operations,
shoe manufacturing, leather tanning, worsted tex
tile manufacturing, and the fishing industry. The
formation of these multiemployer groups has been
directed toward a better balance of bargaining
power, and toward joint efforts at getting the
union to consider the competitive problems of
companies with limited economic capacity.
In the cotton-textile industry of Maine and
Massachusetts, multicompany bargaining disap
peared after the liquidation of the majority of
those mills that were operating on that basis.
The remaining companies negotiate on a single
company basis, usually with one agreement for
the unionized plants of the employer both inside
and outside of the region.
Major manufacturing agreements, covering at
least 1,000 workers each, were estimated in Janu
ary 1956 to number 139 in the 6-State area, with
a total coverage of 369,000 employees.6 Those
industry groups in which larger bargaining units
occurred most frequently were textile-mill prod
ucts, 17 agreements; paper and allied products, 7;
leather and leather products, 8; primary metals, 6;
fabricated metal products, 8; machinery (except
electrical), 21; electrical machinery, 9; transpor
tation equipment, 8; and construction, 15.
A few of the larger New England plants have
their terms of employment determined largely by
centralized bargaining at locations outside of the
region. In such situations, national patterns apply
to New England operations. Industries in which
this type of bargaining occurs include food prod
ucts, automobile assembly, and rubber in eastern
Massachusetts; chemical and electrical equipment
https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
MONTHLY LABOR REVIEW, MARCH 1957
in western and eastern Massachusetts; and ship
yards and steel wire fabrication in Connecticut
and Massachusetts.
A number of smaller and some large manufactur
ing plants remain unorganized, even in urban
manufacturing centers hke Boston and Worces
ter. Moreover, many of the large employers
in the finance and distribution industries continue
to administer personnel policy and personnel rela
tions without union participation. Except for
organization of the industrial insurance agents in
some New England cities, the insurance company
employees are not generally unionized.
Bargaining and Economics
The shifts in industrial activity and employment
have been influenced primarily by cost considera
tions. In this regard, the employees have fre
quently been on the defensive, and their unions
have often offered arguments based more on mor
ality than on economics. Justice and efficiency
unfortunately do not always coincide.
Efforts to move from a plane of conflict to one
of more cooperative bargaining and better oper
ating results have been usually motivated by the
need for survival. The liquidation or the exodus
of textile mills, of shoe factories, and of leather tan
neries has often been the cumulative result of in
dustrial relations difficulties, coupled with other
economic factors.
Some of the difficulties of collective bargaining
are reflected by the record of strike activity. With
about 7 percent of the Nation’s nonagricultural
workers, New England accounted for 2.5 percent
of all workers involved and 8.5 percent of the mandays of idleness caused by work stoppages during
1955. A lengthy textile strike resulted in the
larger figure for man-days lost.
The statistics of prior years give evidence of less
time lost through stoppages here than might be
expected. New England’s percentage of total
strike idleness has exceeded its present share of the
Nation’s nonfarm employees in only 2 years
from 1935 to 1954, namely, 1942 and 1951. (See
table.) These years were more comparable to the
s Recent reports of the National Labor Relations Board show that unfair
labor practice charges against employers in New England run from 5 to 6
percent of national totals. By comparison, New England accounted for
about 7 percent of total nonagricultural employment in 1955.
6 See Characteristics of Major Union Contracts, M onthly Labor Review,
July 1956 (p. 808).
LABOR-MANAGEMENT RELATIONS
late 1920’s and early 1930’s, when organizing as
well as economic causes accounted for an excep
tionally high regional share of total time lost.
The principal cause of stoppages in the region,
wage issues in the textile and shoe industries, has
diminished in importance in recent years, not
withstanding the 1955 textile strike, through bet
ter economic understanding in those situations
where negotiations continue.
A number of situations could be cited in which
the top management of smaller companies in the
textile, metal products, and paper products in
dustries have been able to direct the plant’s labor
relations into more cooperative efforts. In these
situations, help from both the union representa
tives and the employees have lowered labor costs
and increased employee earnings. Group incentive
systems which are successfully operating in some
New England plants 7 are examples of such co
operative efforts. Flexibly higher machine assign
ments, varying according to product requirements,
have been worked out in some textile cases to the
mutual advantage of the company, the employees,
and the union. There are woolen mills operating
profitably in Vermont and in New Hampshire,
which were threatening liquidation a few years ago.
Regularly scheduled labor-management meet
ings for discussion of whatever problems may be
bothering workers or management have replaced
grievance procedures in many plants. Cooperative
attitudes have replaced aggressive conflict in local
paper, textile, and metal products mills which the
writer has had the opportunity to observe at first
hand. While these programs improve the adminis
tration of bargaining relations, of course, they do
not eliminate all disputes over wage adjustments.
Private arbitration of contract terms is not
uncommon in New England, particularly in the
needle trades and the leather and textile industries.
A no-wage-increase award in the 1949 arbitration
between the Fall River Textile Manufacturers
Association, the New Bedford Cotton Manufac
turers Association, and the Textile Workers
Union of America was followed by a number of
subsequent cotton and rayon arbitrations, some
allowing wage reductions and some denying
increases.
7 Two such cases are reported in the National Planning Association study,
Causes of Industrial Peace, New York, Harper & Brothers, 1955 (Chs. 16
and 17, entitled “ The Lapointe Machine Tool Co. and the Steelworkers
(CIO)” and “ American Velvet Co. and the Textile Workers (CIO),” respec
tively, pp. 257-295).
https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
291
Work stoppages in New England, 1927-55
Stoppages beginning Man-days idle during year
(all stoppages)
in the year
Year
Number
1927________________
1928________________
1929________________
1930________________
1931________________
1932________________
1933________________
1934________________
1935________________
1936________________
1937________________
1938________________
1939________________
1940________________
1941________________
1942________________
1943________________
1944________________
1945________________
1946________________
1947________________
1948________________
1949________________
1950________________
1951________________
1952________________
1953________________
1954________________
1955________________
126
119
120
77
106
111
308
201
196
198
497
206
193
170
340
246
244
322
391
449
312
241
213
350
302
311
339
251
292
Workers
involved
21,360
53, 350
31,810
8, 3C0
56, 320
15, 960
149,070
222,010
48,310
51,450
111,390
30, 750
57, 580
34,010
110,180
109,300
81, 980
110,840
143,020
200, 240
88, 500
59,100
47, 600
81,900
120, 900
74, 310
95, 350
55, 750
125, 640
Number
496,470
4,106,270
1,060,700
107,300
1,310, 390
223, 580
2, 272, 620
2, 488, 800
967, 900
769,410
1,409,180
403, 800
589, 880
360,040
966,300
534,100
378,430
633, 230
1, 869,100
6, 837, 900
1, 757, 600
1, 429, 300
1,000, 200
995,800
2,404,800
2,097,400
1, 383,400
943, 600
2,390, 600
Percent of
United
States total
1.9
32.6
19.8
3.2
19.0
2.1
13.4
12.7
6.2
5.5
5.0
4.4
3.3
5.4
4.2
12.8
2.8
7.3
4.9
5.9
5.1
4.2
2.0
2.6
10.5
3.5
4.9
4.2
8.5
Source: TJ. S. Department of Labor, Bureau of Labor Statistics, New
England Regional Office.
Arbitrations have also been used to adjust costs
to a more competitive basis by increasing work
standards. Higher spindle and loom assignments
frequently have been the subject matter of arbi
trations, and these awards influenced other similar
situations. Arbitration has had educational re
sults leading to more accommodating attitudes in
bargaining subsequently on similar problems.
Although, in at least 1 woolen mill arbitration in
New Hampshire and in 1 cotton-rayon mill in
Massachusetts, weavers refused to undertake big
increases in loom assignments and still refused
after the proposals by management were allowed
by arbitrators on the basis of time studies and
engineering data, in most recent arbitrations the
awards have been accepted promptly without
serious resistances. In the past 6 months, the
writer has participated in textile workload dis
putes in Maine and Massachusetts where weavers
who objected to the management proposals finally
accepted the arbitrator’s award sustaining man
agement’s position. A substantial number of dis
putes over incentive rates have also been resolved
in textile mills, shoe factories, garment, and metal
products plants by arbitration of time-study data
or production-standard proposals.
292
In many situations, the union officials are in
clined to prefer that such disputes go to arbitra
tion because of difficulty in getting the affected
members to accept management’s demands. Al
though not finding proposals inherently unreason
able, the union representatives may find it im
possible to obtain assent. In such situations, the
employer often initiates arbitration, or the union
does so after a trial period.
Public and Neutral Influences
Labor legislation and local government policies
influence management, labor, and industrial rela
tions practices. In this respect, the three southern
New England States have played an affirmative
part. Each has enacted statutes covering insur
ance, factory legislation, and minimum wages for
both men and women, all of which affect payroll
taxes and costs. Each also has anti-injunction
and fair employment practices laws.8
Massachusetts, Khode Island, and Connecticut
each has a labor relations act applicable to em
ployees not subject to the Taft-Hartley law.
No statutory restrictions on union security
agreements exist in New England.9
State mediation and arbitration boards have
been provided for by legislation in five States,
Vermont being the sole exception. Massachusetts
established the first such permanent board in the
Nation in 1886. Connecticut also has a con
tinuing tripartite organization with authority to
intervene through mediation and to arbitrate
differences when the disputing parties are willing
to accept such services.
The Massachusetts board also has the statutory
authority to investigate any important disputes
on its own initiative and to publish a report when
cooperation of the parties is not forthcoming. In
addition, the legislature in 1947 enacted a bill
authorizing the Governor to take several optional
steps to prevent stoppages in industries furnish
ing essential services.10
Management Training
Collective bargaining and personnel work have
developed to a professional level with emphasis
on the job of management to handle labor rela
tions effectively. Management training and labor
relations programs, courses, and conferences,
https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
MONTHLY LABOR REVIEW, MARCH 1957
offered in many local universities, make an im
portant contribution to labor-management rela
tions in New England and in the entire country.
The availability of New England’s outstanding
labor economists has been an important influence
on the evolution of mature attitudes within the
area as well as bejmnd its borders.
While not confined to New England, the research
and published materials in the labor relations and
personnel field by those connected with the educa
tional institutions of New England have had an
impact on local thinking by reason of more direct
contact and of the local publicity given to their
ideas.
With the constant efforts at improving manage
ment performance, particularly in the direction of
handling group relations and individuals affected
by social situations, New England employers have
been turning to the schools for trained personnel.
Many companies not located here send their execu
tives to New England universities for professional
training or recruit management talent from stu
dents in the graduate or technical programs of
New England schools.
Union Leadership
The competitive situation of New England pro
ducers presents problems for labor as well as for
management. Many marginal situations exist,
and continued employment opportunities often
depend on lower labor costs. Therefore, bargain
ing has often required union members to make
some difficult decisions. Labor representatives in
many localities have learned from many harsh
experiences their importance in influencing the
decisions of union workers as well as in influencing
management.
The impact of bargaining decisions on the in
dustrial activity of a community can be serious
8 12 States have enacted legislation on fair employment practices.
9 When the Federal act was revised in 1947, New Hampshire adopted
legislation that made necessary the approval of two-thirds of the affected
employees before a union membership agreement could be legally executed;
it was repealed 2 years later.
As of 1954, an analysis of major agreements by the Bureau of Labor Sta
tistics showed that 55 percent of the New England contracts provided for a
union shop, 22 percent for maintenance of membership, 84 percent for dues
checkoff, and 23 percent gave the union sole bargaining rights. (See Union
Security Provisions in Agreements, 1954, M onthly Labor Review, June
1955, p. 654.)
10 Specifically food, fuel, water, electricity, gas, hospital, and medical
facilities are covered; the law, generally acceptable to all groups, is popu
larly known as the Slichter act after Professor Sumner Slichter, of Harvard
University, who was chairman of the recommending committee. (See
Oh. 596 of the 1948 enactments.)
293
LABOR-MANAGEMENT RELATIONS
where competition precludes the passing on to
consumers of higher costs. Management believes
that one cause of New England’s labor relations
problems is the existence of too great a degree of
union democracy. The main management criti
cism leveled at the union leaders comes from their
failure to overcome membership resistance to
needed changes, or membership insistence on non
competitive wage levels.
Educational programs have been undertaken by
many of the New England universities in conjunc
tion with union and management advisory groups.
Most courses are directed toward the technical
training of leaders, however, with little attention
to business economics.
The Massachusetts Federation of Labor has
introduced into the secondary schools labor essay
contests for student scholarships; it also provides
scholarships for assisting outstanding labor repre
sentatives to attend the Harvard Trade Union
Fellowship Program, which is the only fullsemester residence program tailored solely for labor
leaders and conducted on the university campus.
AFL-CIO unions formerly affiliated with the Con
gress of Industrial Organizations and some of Nevv
England’s independent unions also sponsor con
ferences and support courses in conjunction with
universities in the six New England States, as well
as educational programs in their union halls with
assistance from university teachers. The writer
has participated in meetings directed to arbitra
tion, legislation, and collective bargaining on
wages, and helped plan a number of these under
takings in Massachusetts.
To draw upon the experience and competence
of labor officials, local and national, can be ex
tremely helpful to management in meeting the
economic impact of industrial relations. As union
officials can be an obstacle or an aid in the process
of negotiating and administering agreements, they
can be helpful to management in getting employee
https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
cooperation, or they can be an adverse factor. In
the judgment of the writer, management in New
England has not done well in educating the union
leaders as to management problems. Where the
product is sold in a highly competitive market,
improvement in understanding most often came
only after harsh experience from a critical situ
ation; sometimes this education has been useful
only in other situations where the crisis may not
have developed to a fatal stage.
Conclusion
New England, the oldest industrial section of
the Nation, has been experiencing a substantial
transition in labor relations and in economic ac
tivity. The capacity of management and of labor
leaders has been severely tested in seeking to work
out accommodations to the rapid economic changes.
Inflexible attitudes have in some cases aggravated
the impersonal economic forces underlying the dif
ficulties. Labor unions and labor leaders today
play significant roles along with industry’s execu
tives in determining the capacity of industry to
meet the competition, and in influencing the job
opportunities in New England communities. Situ
ations in which poor labor-management relations
have contributed to the liquidation or removal of
plants are not uncommon, but costs, productive
efficiency, and job security have been improved
by mutual efforts in many other cases.
Generally improved labor relations and employ
ment opportunities must come from more vision
with less emphasis on the past. New England
labor and management, to accomplish their com
mon objectives to their mutual advantage, are
faced with the need for working together to per
mit necessary changes. Industrial growth and bet
ter regional prospects can be enhanced by good
management-labor relations, not only at the bar
gaining table but also in community affairs.
New England’s wage levels are diversified,
but in textiles the level in recent years
has come closer to those of other regions.
Wages and Personal Income
P aul M ulkern
he
e c o n o m ic
sta tus
of any area may b e
measured by various yardsticks. Any of them,
including employment, capital investment, produc
tivity, and wages, to choose but a few, serve as
useful tools in evaluating growth in a dynamic
society. The present article is concerned primarily
with wages of New England workers and how they
compare with those elsewhere in the United States.
Wages, of course, mean many things to many
people. To the employer, they represent the cost
of hiring labor; to the market research analyst—
potential purchasing power; to the sociologist—
attainable levels in the standard of living; to the
economist engaged in fiscal planning, they repre
sent the largest single source of gross national
income. To the worker, wages represent many of
these things but principally the return for effort
expended.
It is difficult to measure wage levels accurately
for any broad geographic area. To a great extent,
wages depend on the type of industry, skill of the
worker, size of the firm, degree of unionization,
and a host of other factors. As a result, wide
differences within an area can and do exist.
T
Regional Wage and Income Levels
From the point of view of per capita personal
income, New England compares very favorably
with other areas of the United States. In 1955,
per capita personal income for the 6 States was
$2,087 or approximately 13 percent above the
national average. For the seven broad geographic
areas of the country, the New England average
was exceeded only by the States of the Far West
($2,189) and the Middle East ($2,100).1
294
https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
Within the six New England States, however,
wide differences in income are apparent. Con
necticut, the second highest State in the Nation in
terms of per capita income, easily led the other
States in the region in 1955 with $2,499; followed
by Massachusetts with $2,097; Rhode Island,
$1,957; New Hampshire, $1,732; Maine, $1,593;
and Vermont, $1,535.
The excess of New England’s per capita income
over the national average has been steadily re
duced from 25 percent in 1929 to 13 percent in
1955.2 However, this same tendency to increase
dollarwise, but at a decreasing rate, is noticeable
in other industrialized areas. By contrast, regions
with the lowest per capita income in past years,
such as the Southeast, Southwest, and North
west, have shown the greatest relative improve
ment.
Income from wages and salaries accounted for
almost 70 percent of New England’s income in
1954. The importance of manufacturing to the
region is illustrated by the fact that almost a
third of its personal income was derived from
manufacturing, as compared with a fourth for the
United States as a whole. Wholesale and retail
trade accounted for a sizable but considerably
smaller percentage, with slightly under oneeighth of the region’s personal income attributable
to this source.3
Although common historical bonds unite the six
New England States, it would be a mistake to
overemphasize the qualities which they have in
1 Charles F. Schwartz and Robert E. Graham, Jr., Personal Income by
States in 1955. (In Survey of Current Business, Washington, August 1956,
pp. 8-10.)
2 Ibid (p. 8).
3 Charles F. Schwartz and Robert E. Graham, Jr., Personal Income by
States, 1929-54. (In Survey of Current Business, Washington, September
1955, pp. 20-21.)
WAGES AND PERSONAL INCOME
common, to the exclusion of important differences
which exist. To use the obvious comparison, the
economy of New Hampshire, with its dependence
on shoes and textiles, is far different from the
economy of Connecticut and its concentration on
aircraft, brass, machinery, and other hard-goods
industries.
In September 1956, gross average hourly
earnings for production workers in manufacturing
industries reached the $2 mark for the first time
in the Nation’s history. Among the New England
States, earnings varied by more than 20 percent,
with Connecticut leading the other States with
average earnings of $2 an hour, followed by
Massachusetts ($1.83), Rhode Island ($1.67),
Vermont ($1.61), Maine ($1.59), and New Hamp
shire ($1.56)} (See chart.) State earnings varied
considerably by area and by industry. Springfield, Vt., is a case in point where, because of the
dominant machine-tool industry, gross average
hourly earnings were only 4 cents behind the
Connecticut statewide average. These statewide
averages must be used cautiously, since they
reflect, to a great extent, the industrial composi
tion of the State and also the length of the work
week, since premium pay and shift differentials are
included. During September 1956, average hours
worked ranged from 39.4 in Rhode Island to 41.9
in Vermont.
Economically, there is strong justification for
considering New England according to a northsouth division. Earnings in Massachusetts, Con
necticut, and Rhode Island are usually higher
than in Vermont, Maine, and New Hampshire.
The 1950 survey of Family Income, Expendi
tures, and Savings by the Bureau of Labor Statis
tics substantiated this general tendency. Annual
money income of wage-earner and clerical-worker
families for the eight New England cities included
in the study ranged from $4,689 in Middletown,
Conn., to $3,423 in Portland, Maine.5 Compa
rable income in the remaining cities was Hartford,
Conn., $4,246; Boston, Mass., $3,886; Barre, Vt.,
4 See table C-7, pp. 412-418 of this issue.
5 See Family Income, Expenditures, and Savings in 1950, BLS Bull. 1097
Revised, 1953 (pp. 17-41).
6 Report of the New England Textile Industry by Committee Appointed
by the Conference of New England Governors, 1952 [Seymour E. Harris,
chairman, Littauer Center], Cambridge, Mass. (p. 129).
7 Average straight-time hourly earnings exclude premium pay for overtime
and for work on weekends, holidays, and late shifts and in this respect differ
from gross average hourly earnings mentioned earlier.
8 See Earnings in Cotton Textiles, November 1954, Monthly Labor Review,
M ay 1955 (p. 533).
https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
295
Gross Average Hourly Earnings of Factory Production
Workers
$3,727; Providence, R. I., $3,515; Bangor, Maine,
$3,513; and Laconia, N. H., $3,485.
Wages in Soft-Goods Industries
Textiles. Important differentials between wage
levels of textile plants in New England and those
in the South have existed throughout the 20th
century. As a result, many generalizations have
been made leading to the erroneous conclusion
that New England is a high-wage area. In the
period 1922-26, New England mills maintained an
average wage differential of 36 percent over
southern plants.6 However, in ensuing years
industrialization in the South gradually brought
the two closer together. By 1939, the differential
in the cotton-textile industry had been reduced to
20 percent and, at the time of the Bureau of Labor
Statistics last occupational wage survey of that
industry in November 1954, average straight-time
hourly earnings7 of the industry’s production
workers in New England ($1.32) were only 13 per
cent higher than the average ($1.17) paid in the
Southeast, where over 4 out of 5 workers in the
industry were located.8
Probably a more meaningful comparison, how
ever, can be made by type of product. New
England mills have tended to concentrate on finecombed cotton fabrics since, because of their
skilled labor force and the lower proportion of
raw material costs to total cost, they can operate
more competitively with other areas. Workers in
integrated mills or those performing the complete
operation on fine-combed cottons averaged $1.31
296
an hour as compared with $1.27 for similar oper
ations in the Southeast. The differential for com
parable products is obviously much less than that
for all cotton-textile products, including carded
yarn, duck cloth, and generally coarser fabrics
which constitute the bulk of southern production.
North-South differentials also tend to vary by
occupation. In November 1954, hourly wages for
the more skilled occupations such as men loom
fixers and weavers working on combed yarn
fabrics in New England were $1.67 and $1.50,
respectively, as compared with $1.63 and $1.44 in
southeastern plants. In other occupations, how
ever, in the unskilled and semiskilled categories,
the differences were as high as 25 cents an hour.
In the manufacture of synthetic textiles, New
England mills accounted for about 14 percent of
the production workers employed in November
1954. Of the three major producing areas, high
est hourly earnings of $1.35 were reported in New
England, with workers in mills in the Middle
Atlantic States averaging $1.32 and those in the
Southeast, $1.22 an hour.9
New England leads all other regions in the man
ufacture of woolen and worsted goods. In 1952,
over 60 percent of all persons employed in the
production of these goods worked in New England.
Because of the greater skills required, their wages
are generally higher than those in the cotton- and
synthetic-textile industry. In the period AprilMay 1952, at the time of the latest occupational
wage survey of the woolen and worsted goods
industry made by the Bureau of Labor Statistics,
average straight-time earnings for the entire
industry were $1.45 an hour as compared with
$1.50 an hour in New England mills. By com
parison, average hourly earnings were slightly
lower in the Middle Atlantic States ($1.47) and
considerably lower in the Southeast ($1.19).
These three areas combined accounted for over
nine-tenths of the total employment in the
industry.10
Footwear. New England traditionally leads other
areas of the United States in the manufacture
of footwear.11 Since 1949, its share of the national
output has been increasing, and currently over 37
percent of all footwear produced in the United
States is manufactured in New England. In
1953, straight-time average hourly earnings in the
New England and Middle Atlantic regions were
https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
MONTHLY LABOR REVIEW, MARCH 1957
about 6 percent higher than in the Great Lakes
area and 10 percent higher than in the Middle
West.12 The four areas represent the main shoe
producing areas of the country.
The favorable ranking of New England was
partly explained by the fact that about half of
its shoe workers were engaged in the production
of women’s cement-process shoes, conventional
lasted—the process for which wages were highest.
Most of its remaining workers were producing
men’s Goodyear welt dress shoes, the next highest
paid group.
Wages in Metalworking
Nonelectrical Machinery. In the latter part of
1946, machinery (except electrical), the largest
major group within the metalworking industries,
employed about 12 percent of all New England
workers engaged in manufacturing. During the
succeeding 10 years, there have been only slight
variances from year to year. BLS studies illus
trate very clearly the importance of this industry
to New England. Average straight-time hourly
earnings in 1956 for about half of all occupations
studied in three major New England machinery
centers—Boston, Worcester, and Hartford—were
over $2 an hour.13 Rates in Hartford were gener
ally higher than in the other two cities and ranged
from $1.52 an hour for janitors to $2.35 for tool
and die makers. Boston rates, ranging from $1.43
to $2.24 for the same occupations, were slightly
below those in Worcester.
Compared with machinery workers’ earnings in
other areas studied, those in New England cities
lagged behind. Earnings in the industry were
typically highest in the Detroit area, with high
levels also characteristic of other cities in the
Great Lakes region, Pittsburgh, and, for highly
skilled jobs, St. Louis. A ranking of earnings for
skilled machine-tool operators 14 in 21 major ma9 See Earnings in Synthetic-Textile Manufacturing, November 1954
Monthly Labor Review, June 1955 (p. 659).
10 Woolen and Worsted Textiles Earnings in April-May 1952, Monthly
Labor Review, October 1952 (p. 403).
11 For a discussion of the region’s footwear industry, see p. 310 of this issue.
12 Earnings of Shoe Workers, March 1953, M onthly Labor Review, January
1954 (p. 40).
13 Wage Structure: Machinery Manufacturing, Winter 1955-56, BLS
Report 107, 1956 (pp. 8-9).
14 This occupational classification includes production workers of a journey
man level of skill working on such machines as drill presses, engine lathes,
milling machines, and similar types of machine tools. It represents the
broadest classification with the largest number of employees for which com
parison is possible.
WAGES AND PERSONAL INCOME
chinery areas showed a wide dispersion—from
$2.89 in Detroit to $1.89 in Dallas. Hartford
ranked in 17th position, Worcester in 19th, and
Boston in 20th place (See table 1.)
However, although New England did not rank
among the wage leaders in the machinery manu
facturing industry, it nonetheless has succeeded
in maintaining its relative position. During the
period 1945-56, wages in the 21 key machinery
areas combined increased 98.3 percent. In
this same period, the advance in Hartford (99.1
percent) was slightly above the overall average
and that in Boston (96.4 percent) slightly lower.
(The increase for Worcester, although included
in the 21-area average, was not published
separately.)
Other Metalworking Industries. The steady growth
of transportation equipment and electrical ma
chinery has also been of great importance in
New England’s progress. These industries have
brought to New England manufacturing not
only a highly desirable degree of diversification
but also higher wages. During the past 6 years,
for example, wages of Massachusetts production
workers in electrical machinery increased from
$1.43 an hour in October 1950 to $1.82 in October
1956, and in transportation equipment from
$1.66 to $2.35 an hour during the same period.15
These industries represented 27 percent and 8
percent, respectively, of production workers em
ployed in Massachusetts durable-goods manu
facturing in October 1956.
Community Wage Levels
The community wage survey has proved a
successful tool in measuring the general wage
level of labor market areas and has made it pos
sible to compare wages in various communities
both within a region and among different regions.
This type of survey covers a wide range of oc
cupations common to a variety of industries:
manufacturing; transportation and public utilities;
is See Massachusetts Nonagricultural Employment, 1939-1953, and Manu
facturing Hours and Earnings, 1950-1953, Massachusetts Department of
Labor and Industries, 1954; also Total Manufacturing Employment and
Earnings of Production Workers in Massachusetts, October 1956, Mas
sachusetts Department of Labor.
16 Wage Differences Among 40 Labor Markets, M onthly Labor Review,
December 1952 (p. 620).
17 Statistical Abstract of the United States: 1956 (77th ed.), U. S. Bureau
of the Census, 1956 (p. 113).
https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
297
1.— Employment and average straight-time hourly
earnings for machine-tool operators, production, class A,
in 21 cities, winter 1955-56
T able
City
Number of
workers
Detroit__ ________
St. Louis__ . . . .
Chicago_____ . . .
Pittsburgh. ___
Milwaukee___ _ ..
Cleveland___ . . . _
Philadelphia________
Denver .. . . .
Los Angeles-Long Beach.
San Francisco-Oakland..
New Y o rk ...
Newark-Jersey C ity ..
Portland (Oreg.)..
Minneapolis-St. Paul
Houston____ . . .
Buffalo...
Hartford. _
___
Baltimore___ ____
W o rceste r...___ . . .
Boston.. ________
Dallas__ . . . .
10, 731
959
7, 794
2,420
2,607
3,190
227
3, 769
1,375
2,539
2,528
351
2,330
1,344
922
1,348
622
1,143
2,446
429
Average
straight-time
hourly
earnings
(to fiQ
9 AQ
O 4A Z
o
Z.
9 'A1
L.
ll
2. 37
9 37
2. 32
2.31
9 3H
2. 28
2. 26
2. 24
9 9A
2. 23
9 IQ
2 18
9 11
9 . uy
OQ
l
1 oy
fiQ
i.
Sottece: Wage Structure: Machinery Manufacturing, Winter 1955-56.
BLS Report 107, 1956 (pp. 8-9).
wholesale and retail trade; finance, insurance, and
real estate; and selected service industries.
A study of 40 labor market areas in 1952 re
vealed basic and important differences among the
areas. Generally, wages were highest in cities
along the Pacific Coast and in the Great Lakes
region, with cities in the Middle Atlantic area
usually higher than in the South and in New
England.16
This study indicated wide differences in the
wage levels of office workers among New England
cities, which ranked as follows: Hartford, 16th;
Boston, 27th; Worcester, 32d; and Providence,
38th. Weekly salaries in the last-named city
were less than 75 percent of those received by
office workers in San Francisco and Detroit, the
highest ranking of the 40 cities surveyed.
Several factors appear significant in explaining
the relative position of New England office workers.
Among these are the industrial composition of the
area, wage levels in the various industries, and the
supply of office workers relative to existing
demand. Residents of the New England States
have one of the highest educational levels in
the United States; their average of 10.4 school
years completed compares with a national average
of 9.3 school years completed.17
In the 1952 study of 40 major labor market
areas, intercity wage relationships for selected
plant occupations were generally similar to those
for office workers except that pay levels in southern
MONTHLY LABOR REVIEW, MARCH 1957
298
2. — Average weekly salaries or average hourly
earnings1 for selected occupations in 3 New England
cities, by sex, selected months, 1956
T able
Lawrence
Occupation and sex
Provi- Boston
dence
Febru- March Sep1956 tember
ary
1956
1956
Average weekly salaries1
Women office workers:
Clerks, accounting, class A.
Clerks, file, class B ---------Clerks, payroll...... ........ —
Secretaries_____________
Stenographers, general.......
$59. 50
40. 50
49. 00
67.00
54.50
$58. 50
42. 50
52.50
61.50
51. 50
$65. 50
44. 50
59.00
67.50
58.50
Average hourly earnings1
Skilled men workers:
Carpenters, maintenance-------------------------Electricians, maintenance------------------------Machinists, maintenance------------ ------ ------Pipefitters, maintenance__________________
Tool and die makers-------------------------------Men custodial and material movement workers:
Janitors, porters, and cleaners-------------------Laborers, material handling---------------------Truckdrivers, medium (l}i to and including
4 tons)----- --------------------------------- —.......
$1.71
1.91
1.84
1.81
2.15
$1.98
1.95
2.00
1. 96
2.31
$2. 22
2.32
2. 30
2. 24
2. 51
1.19
1.32
1.31
1.50
1.42
1.61
1.54
1.82
1.86
l
Average weekly salaries are standard salaries paid for standard work
schedules. Average hourly earnings are straight-time hourly earnings, ex
cluding premium pay for overtime and for work on weekends, holidays, and
late shifts.
Source- Occupational Wage Surveys, Lawrence, Mass., Providence, R. I.,
and Boston, Mass., BLS Bulls. 1188-11,1188-14, and 1202-4, respectively.
areas were considerably lower than in New
England cities for custodial, warehousing, and
shipping jobs, but for the skilled maintenance
crafts they compared favorably. Within New
England, pay levels for maintenance, custodial,
warehousing, and shipping occupations were
generally highest in Boston, followed by Hartford,
Worcester, and Providence in that order.18
In the 1955-56 community wage surveys of 17
areas, pay levels in Providence (the only New
England area included) ranked 16th for women
office workers, 17th for skilled maintenance
workers, and 13th for custodial and material
movement employees.19
In recent years, largely because of the relocation
and consolidation of textile plants, several New
England labor markets have been plagued by a
substantial labor surplus. Although there are
some data on the economic and social effects of
such conditions upon the labor force, little
information has been available on their impact
upon wages. In February 1956, at the urging of
local community groups, the Bureau of Labor
Statistics conducted a full-scale community wage
survey of the Lawrence, Mass., area. Lawrence
at one time was the center of the woolen and
https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
worsted industry and, as recently as 1941, about
80 percent of its 37,000 manufacturing employees
were engaged in the production of textile goods.
By 1956, however, slightly less than 6,000 workers,
or approximately one-fourth of its factory work
force, were so employed.
Severe hardships resulted from the curtailment
of textile production and, in 1949, an estimated
21,000 persons were unemployed. Although
great improvement had taken place by the time
of the BLS survey in 1956, an estimated 6,000
were still unemployed.
Table 2 shows comparative scales in Boston,
Lawrence, and Providence, for all occupations for
which comparison is possible. Although the
Lawrence and Providence surveys were made 7
and 6 months, respectively, before the Boston
study, several general conclusions can be drawn.
Even if allowance had been made for the increases
which probably occurred in Lawrence and Provi
dence in the interim, wages would have varied
considerably among the three cities although they
are less than 70 miles apart. Rates were con
siderably higher in Boston than in the other two
cities. Differences were most clearly apparent
in the skilled maintenance trades, where Boston
hourly rates ranged from 36 to 51 cents above those
in Lawrence and from 20 to 37 cents more than
in Providence.20 In the office and custodial and
material movement occupations, differentials also
existed but not to such a marked degree.
Union Wage Scales
Rates paid in the building trades also serve as a
useful barometer of a region’s wage structure. In
January 1957, bricklayers in nine New England
cities studied quarterly by the Bureau of Labor
Statistics earned $3.25 an hour or higher. By
contrast, the union scale for building laborers was
slightly over $2 an hour, except in Portland,
Maine, where it was $1.95.
Because of local bargaining patterns, wages in
construction trades vary from city to city and
from region to region. Data from the more
comprehensive BLS annual survey of union
scales in the building trades show that on July 1,
18 See Wage Differences Among 40 Labor Markets, op. cit. (p. 622).
19 See Earnings and Wage Differentials in 17 Labor Markets, 1955-56,
M onthly Labor Review, September 1956 (p. 1045).
" Occupational Wage Surveys, Lawrence, Mass., Providence, R. I., and
Boston, Mass., BLS Bulls. 1188-11, 1188-14, and 1202-4, respectively.
WAGES AND PERSONAL INCOME
1956, for all building trades workers (journeymen,
helpers, and laborers) in New England, average
hourly wage rates were $2.85 an hour.21 By
contrast, the national average was $3.04 an hour
and the range for 9 major geographical regions
was from $3.31 in the Middle Atlantic States to
$2.56 in the Southeast (table 3).
Related Wage Practices
In recent years, considerable attention has been
given to fringe benefits. Whether considered as
a cost item to management or as a social gain to
labor, there can be little question of the need to
consider them when discussing wages.
Results of previous surveys in the cotton, syn
thetic, and woolen and worsted textile industry
reveal that New England production workers
were granted paid holidays to a greater degree
than those in other areas. Approximately 9 out
of 10 New England textile workers received 6 or
more paid holidays in all 3 segments of the indus
try. In the Middle Atlantic States, paid holiday
provisions were about the same except in synthetic
textiles where only about half the plant production
employees received 6 or more paid holidays. By
contrast, in both cotton and synthetic textiles in
the Southeast only about 1 out of 5 production
workers received paid holidays, usually 1 or 2
holidays a year. In plants manufacturing woolen
and worsted textiles in the Southeast, about 1 out
of 10 production workers received 6 paid holidays
a year, while about 8 out of 10 received no paid
holidays.
In footwear, among the major producing areas,
3 out of 5 production workers in the New England
and Middle Atlantic areas received 6 or more
paid holidays, while the percentage was slightly
higher in the Great Lakes region and considerably
higher in the Middle West where slightly over 9
out of 10 plant workers received 6 or more paid
holidays.
The 1955-56 series of machinery surveys in 21
areas of the United States reveals that in Boston
and New York a majority of plant employees
received 8 or more paid holidays and about a third
of the workers received 9 or more paid holidays.
In Worcester and Hartford, three-fourths of the
plant employees in these areas received 7 or
31 Union Wages and Hours: Building Trades, July 1, 1956, BLS Bull.
1205,1957.
4 1 7 2 3 2 — 5 7 --------- 3
https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
299
T a b l e 3. —Average union hourly wage rates in the building
trades by region, July 1, 1956
Region
All building trades....... ..........
Middle Atlantic_____
Great Lakes_______
Pacific_________
Middle West ._
New England...
Border States___
M ountain. ___
Southwest_____
Southeast________
Average
hourly rate
$3.04
3.31
3.15
3.00
2.97
2.85
2. 82
2.74
2.73
2. 56
Source: 1QK7
Union Wages and Hours: Building Trades, July 1,7 1956.7 BLS
n il
more paid holidays. By contrast, the predominant
practice in 10 of the 21 areas was to grant 6 paid
holidays during the year.
In the footwear industry, the majority of New
England shoe workers in 1953 received 1 week’s
vacation after 1 year of employment and 2 weeks
after 5 years. When the 4 principal shoe-produc
ing areas are ranked according to the percentage
of workers receiving 2 weeks after 5 years’ service,
the Middle West area leads, followed by the Great
Lakes, New England, and Middle Atlantic areas
in that order.
Paid vacation policies applying to New England
production workers in the textile industry were
generally superior to other sections of the United
States. In cotton and synthetic textiles, New
England plant employees typically received vaca
tion benefits based on a percentage of the indi
vidual’s annual earnings; namely, 2 percent after
1 year, 3 percent after 3 years, and 4 percent
after 5 years. Provisions in the Middle Atlantic
States were not as extensive as in New England
but more liberal than in the Southeast where less
than 1 in 10 plant employees received additional
vacation provisions after 3 years of service. In
woolen and worsted textile mills also, New Eng
land vacation provisions for plant employees were
usually more liberal than those in the Southeast
and slightly higher than those applying to plant
employees in woolen and worsted mills in the
Middle Atlantic States.
In the broad area of health and insurance plans,
New England textile workers also received bene
fits to a greater degree than in the Middle Atlantic
and Southeast areas. However, in both textiles
and footwear, coverage under pension plans was
extremely limited both on a national and regional
basis. About 10 percent of New England plant
MONTHLY LABOR REVIEW, MARCH 1957
300
employees were covered under pension programs;
but in footwear coverage was even more limited,
with only 2 percent of the area’s shoe workers
covered under a pension program.
However, in contrast to the relatively low pro
portion of plant workers covered by pension plans,
over three-fourths of all New England production
workers in cotton and about one-half of those in
synthetic textiles were covered by retirement
severance pay plans calling for stated amounts for
each year of service.
This emphasis on retirement severance plans as
opposed to pension programs is due to a number of
factors, but primarily to the contracting nature of
employment and relative instability of the indus
try, plus the cost of a pension program.
Comparative Living Costs
One final standard can be used in evaluating the
relative position of New England wage earners.
Wage statistics have considerably more meaning
when considered in relationship to prices. Al
though current statistics are not available on
intercity comparisons of the cost of living, the
1951 City Worker’s Family Budget can be used
to advantage.22 This budget is defined as “ the
annual cost of a modest but adequate level of
living” for a four-person urban family. The cost
of this budget, at October 1951 prices, in 34 major
cities ranged from $3,812 in New Orleans to
$4,454 in Washington, D. C. Boston ranked in
the top third, with an estimated budget of $4,217,
which was exceeded in such cities as Milwaukee,
Richmond, and Los Angeles. New York and
Philadelphia had budgets considerably below the
Boston figure—$4,083 and $4,078, respectively.
The estimated cost of this same level of living in
Manchester, N. H., was $4,090 and in Portland,
Maine, $4,021.
This budget has not been recomputed since 1951.
However, some measure of price change is avail
able in the Consumer Price Index which in
October 1956 was 117.7 (1947—
49 = 100) or 5 per
cent above October 1951 for the United States as
a whole. The index for Boston had risen to 119.3,
or 7.1 percent over its level for the earlier period.
22 City Worker’s Family Budget for October 1951, Monthly Labor Review,
M ay 1952 (p. 520).
https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
Summary
Wages and income in New England generally
advance and decline in the same manner as they
do in other sections of the United States. The
principal exception to this tendency is found in
the textile industry where wages are usually set
by bargaining taking place within the region.
Within New England, wages and income vary by
area, industry, and level of skill. Wages and
income are generally higher in the southern half
of New England and particularly in Connecticut.
Furthermore, within the States themselves im
portant wage differences exist. In Massachusetts,
for example, occupational wage differences are
clearly evident for comparable jobs in the Law
rence and Boston areas. The substantial unem
ployment problem that has existed in Lawrence
in recent years appears to be one of the important
factors contributing to this difference in wages.
In two principal soft-goods industries—shoes
and textiles—wages in New England are higher
than those in other regions, although the differ
ential has been narrowing in recent years in the
case of textiles. In relation to other areas of the
United States, wage levels in New England cities
generally rank below cities of the Pacific Coast,
Middle West, and Middle Atlantic States. On
the other hand, pay levels of office workers in
southern cities and in New England correspond
closely, while plant workers on indirect jobs (main
tenance, custodial, warehousing, and shipping) in
New England generally have higher pay levels
than their counterparts in the South.
The most noticeable trend in recent years has
been for light-weight metal fabricating and assem
bly companies to locate in New England. Exist
ing wage rates and an industrialized work force
have offered a fertile field for manufacturers of
electronic equipment. This has been especially
noticeable in Massachusetts. In a similar man
ner, the machine-tool industry in Connecticut
has added new firms because of a wage differential
favorable in relation to other areas. In many
cases, these newly arrived manufacturers of dur
ables pay higher wages than the soft-goods indus
tries which in former times set the pace for the
New England economy. At the same time, the
new industries mean increasing diversification of
the New England economic scene.
Improvement M s taken place in tMse New England areas
w h i c h h a v e been s t r i c k e n by severe u n e m p l o y
ment, but some difficult problems remain to be solved.
The Problem
of Depressed Areas
W illiam H. M iernyk
T he i m p a c t of the recession of 1947-49 was un
usually severe in New England. In addition to
the cyclical rise in unemployment, certain struc
tural changes were taking place in the regional
economy which added to total unemployment.
Industrial activity declined from 1947 through
1949. Insured unemployment in New England
passed the 350,000 mark during the second quarter
of 1949.1 Total unemployment was in excess of
this, since some workers had exhausted their un
employment compensation benefit rights, and
others were not covered by unemployment insur
ance.2 In Massachusetts and Rhode Island, the
unemployment compensation reserve funds were
threatened with depletion.3
In July 1949, the trend was reversed. Produc
tion and employment began to increase; and by
the outbreak of the Korean conflict, in June 1950,
the revival was well under way. During the hos
tilities, employment and production remained
at high levels. The recession had ended, but it
left behind a serious problem of localized unemplo3unent. While the region as a whole enjoyed
prosperity, it was dotted with a number of seriously
depressed areas.
During the recession, employment had declined
in all industries. But following a brief revival
in 1950 and 1951, employment in the New England
textile industries resumed the secular decline which
had been halted during World War II and the
immediate postwar period. At that time, the
textile industry group was still the largest em
ployer of industrial labor in the region.
https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
The consequences of the decline in textiles could
have been disastrous for the entire region. But
during the revival of late 1949, the communica
tions equipment industry began to expand rapidly
in New England, and to many observers it ap
peared that this transition in industrial structure,
while producing temporary problems, was actually
strengthening the regional economy.4 Concern
over the decline in textile employment was miti
gated by the growth of employment in electronics.
And as this growth proceeded, there was an in
creasing tendency in the region to view the transi
tion optimistically.
In terms of aggregate employment, production,
and incomes, New England’s recovery from the
recession appeared to be progressing satisfactorily.
But the rate of unemployment in New England
remained well above the national average. It
soon became evident that new industry was not
growing in the same areas in which old industry
was declining. Also, while some of the workers
who had been displaced by the closing of textile
mills were finding jobs in the communications
equipment and other growth industries, this
«The Economic State of New England, New Haven, Yale University
Press, 1954 (p. 310).
2 See Employment and Unemployment Statistics, Hearings before the Sub
committee on Economic Statistics, Joint Committee on the Economic Report
(84th Cong., 1st sess.), Nov. 7, 1955 (pp. 33-35).
3 A contributing factor in Massachusetts was the inadequate unemploy
ment compensation tax policy which failed to provide an adequate reserve
fund. See Report on Unemployment Compensation Benefit Costs in
Massachusetts, Massachusetts Department of Labor and Industries, Divi
sion of Employment Security, Boston, August 1950 (p. 6); and Benefit Fi
nancing and Solvency of the Employment Security Fund in Rhode Island,
Rhode Island Department of Employment Security, Providence, November
1950 (p. 33, if.).
4 The Economic State of New England, op. cit. (pp. 14-17).
301
302
shift in employment was not as widespread as
many believed. The level of unemployment
remained high in the textile towns, hard hit by
the liquidation or outmigration of mills. Thus,
when the minor recession of 1953-54 occurred,
there was a sharp rise in unemployment in many
of these communities. Since then, conditions
have slowly improved, but the problem of local
ized unemployment has not been solved yet in all
of the region’s depressed areas.
Failure to Adapt to Change
Some depressed areas in New England re
bounded quickly from the loss of textile jobs.
New manufacturing establishments moved into
these communities to take up the slack. To
some extent, the quick recovery of these areas
was due to effective local redevelopment
activities.
In Nashua, N. H., for example, an announce
ment in 1948 of a proposed liquidation of a large
mill formerly operated by Textron, Inc., produced
a strong public reaction. The Textile Workers
Union of America and other groups protested the
liquidation so vigorously that a congressional
investigation was held.5 The publicity, among
other things, led the company to initiate and
support an effective redevelopment program.
Portions of the mill building were occupied by
new and smaller establishments, and the economic
base of the community became somewhat more
diversified. In many ways, however, the experi
ence of Nashua is a special case. Manchester,
N. H., likewise became a surplus labor area
owing to the loss of textile jobs, and there has
been a similar growth of new and more diversified
manufacturing establishments in this community.
But recovery in Manchester proceeded far more
slowly than it had in Nashua.
Redevelopment activities in other communities
have been less successful. The communities of
Lawrence, Lowell, Fall River, and New Bedford
in Massachusetts, and Providence, R. I., were
classified as surplus labor areas for a major part
of the past 8 years.6 While the employment
situation in all of these areas has improved since
1954, Lawrence, Lowell, and Providence have not
fully recovered from the shock of the recession of
1948-49. And it was not until late in 1956 that
https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
MONTHLY LABOR REVIEW, MARCH 1957
Fall River and New Bedford were removed from
the labor surplus category.
For a number of reasons, these communities
adapted to change only slowly and with consider
able difficulty. The liquidation of textile mills
provided a vast amount of vacant factory space,
but this was often unsuitable for other types of
manufacturing operations. Until recently, these
areas were largely bypassed by the growth indus
tries, some of which expanded in smaller, less
industrialized communities, while others located
in or near the Boston Metropolitan Area, where
a large cluster of electronics establishments has
appeared.
A further explanation of the slow adaptation to
change is to be found in the characteristics of the
workers displaced by the outmigration of textile
mills. A substantial proportion of these workers
were well past middle age; and while they may
have had many years of textile employment
ahead of them, they became marginal workers
with the loss of their jobs. The more mobile,
younger displaced workers frequently migrated to
jobs in other areas. New establishments which
located in these areas usually chose the younger
members of the labor force, and some employed
a large proportion of women. Thus, the average
age of the unemployed workers remaining in the
depressed communities was raised. The older,
male workers in the community were not easily
reemployed.
Initially, redevelopment activities in these com
munities relied heavily upon advertising the
availability of labor and vacant plant space.
Only in recent years have local redevelopment
agencies taken positive steps, such as the develop
ment of industrial parks and the construction of
modern plant buildings, in an effort to attract
new types of industry.
5
Investigation of Closing of Nashua, N. H., Mills and Operations of
Textron, Inc., Hearings before a Subcommittee of the Committee on Inter
state and Foreign Commerce, U. S. Senate (80th Cong., 2d sess.), P t. 1,1948.
« The Bureau of Employment Security classifies areas, according to rela
tive adequacy of labor supply, into six major categories designated by letters
ranging from A to F. Group A reflects the relatively greatest labor scarcity;
group C denotes a rate of unemployment about in line with the national
average; and D, E, and F are designated as areas of substantial labor surplus,
with F denoting the relatively greatest surplus. A more comprehensive
definition of area classifications appears in the Bimonthly Summary of
Labor M arket Developments in Major Areas, Bureau of Employment
Security, U. S. Department of Labor.
303
THE PROBLEM OF DEPRESSED AREAS
Magnitude of the Problem
It is difficult to make an accurate estimate of
the number of chronically unemployed in a
depressed area. Theoretically, it is possible to
make adjustments for unemployment due to
seasonal and cyclical causes and to allow for
frictional unemployment. In practice, however,
it is difficult to make accurate estimates of the
number of workers unemployed owing to secular
or structural change. Moreover, there are other
problems involving the definition of an unem
ployed worker. Only those workers in a labor
market area who are without jobs and actively
seeking work are counted as unemployed. How
ever, there are persons in the depressed areas of
New England who are available and interested in
further employment, but who have given up an
active search for a job. These are often older
women, with long records of employment in
textile mills. After the loss of their textile jobs,
some continued to register at the local employment
office for 2 or 3 years. But eventually, failing to
find work, they discontinued an active search for
a job, although they continued to desire further
employment.
If the labor force of a community is defined as
estimated total employment7 plus the unem
ployed, the following tabulation, presenting un
employment as a percent of the labor force,
provides a measure of the problem in the 5 New
England labor market areas in which chronic
unemployment has been most serious during the
past 8 years.
Unemployment as a percent of the labor force1
(iannual averages2)
1955
1956
195S
1954
im
Lawrence, Mass_____
23. 1
7. 6
Lowell, Mass
_ _
11. 2
Fall River, Mass____
New Bedford, Mass__
6. 9
Providence, R. I _____
8. 4
19.
6.
5.
5.
6.
0 24. 1
5 10. 5
9. 3
4
7 11. 3
1 12. 3
16.
8.
6.
8.
8.
4
8
1
6
7
10.
6.
6.
6.
8.
2
8
3
1
0
1 Total estimated employment plus unemployed.
2 Averages based on bimonthly data (January, March, May, July, Septem
ber, and November).
Source: Unpublished data provided by Bureau of Employment Security,
U. S. Department of Labor, as reported by the Massachusetts Division of
Employment Security except for Providence.
7 Total employment includes nonagricultural wage and salaried workers,
nonagricultural domestic, self-employed, and unpaid family workers, and
agricultural workers.
9
In July 1952, for example, there was an arbitrated wage cut of 6Hi percent
in the northern cotton-rayon textile industry.
https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
The preceding tabulation illustrates the effect
upon depressed areas of a cyclical rise in unem
ployment from a high base of chronic localized
unemployment. Between 1952 and 1953, there
was a decline in unemployment in all of the selected
areas. But the recession that began in late 1953
sent unemployment figures upward again in all
the selected areas, and except for Fall River, they
were higher in 1954 than they had been in 1952.
Since 1954, the number of unemployed has de
clined in all of the areas listed in the tabulation.
By the end of 1956, Fall River and New Bedford
had been reclassified as group C, or moderate
labor surplus areas, but Fall River was again re
classified in January 1957 to the group D sub
stantial labor surplus category. Further contrac
tion of textile employment, whether cyclical or
secular, could again create some of the problems
these communities have faced in the past.
Effects upon the Community
The existence of a substantial pool of unem
ployed in a community tends to exert downward
pressure upon the general wage structure of the
community. Wages of unionized workers covered
by national or regional agreements in nondepressed
industries will not be affected. But it is difficult
for unions in depressed industries to negotiate in
creases in the general wage level. At times, in
deed, workers in these industries have been forced
to accept wage reductions in the face of a rising
general wage level.8 In addition, the availability
of a substantial number of unemployed workers
tends to attract certain types of low-wage estab
lishments such as textile jobbing shops, certain
types of garment factories, and other small estab
lishments seeking to obtain workers at the lowest
possible wages. Some of the displaced workers,
long unemployed, have balked at the low wages,
but others have been forced by necessity to accept
them.
Labor-management relations likewise may be
come strained. Establishments which continue to
operate in these communities may resist wage in
creases or even seek to impose wage cuts. These
are strenuously resisted by unions, reluctant to
give up gains achieved after a long and, at times,
costly struggle.
304
The local economy, of course, suffers. Trade
and service establishments curtail the level of their
operations. Secondary unemployment occurs, in
duced by the decline in local manufacturing em
ployment. If local business conditions are bad,
the community may not be able to properly main
tain its social capital. Streets, sewer systems,
schools, etc., will not receive proper maintenance.
If, in addition, there is substantial outmigration
of population from the community, some facilities
will not be fully used. Consequently, there is a
waste of social capital in addition to its deteriora
tion.
State and Local Community Remedial Efforts
Until quite recently, the redevelopment of de
pressed communities was considered to be essen
tially a local matter and in practice depended upon
local initiative and activity. Some local develop
ment programs have been successful in encourag
ing sound local growth, as in the case of Nashua,
N. H. But others have been able to do little to
improve local conditions. Some local develop
ment organizations, in their anxiety to provide
work for the unemployed, have encouraged the
location of manufacturing establishments in their
communities which later proved to be unstable.
Because there is a rapid turnover of such establish
ments, they do little to reduce the level of un
employment.
In New England, development activities within
communities have not been coordinated by state
wide agencies. Each community agency has
sought to solve local problems by its own means.
Some have attempted to fill vacant factory space
with new establishments. Others have developed
industrial parks and constructed modern plant
buildings, hoping thus to induce manufacturers
from outside to locate in their areas. There is no
evidence that development credit corporations, the
new type of financial institution pioneered in New
England and designed to encourage the develop
ment of indigenous businesses, have made a sig
nificant contribution to the redevelopment of de
pressed areas.9 Probably to a greater extent than
elsewhere, the problem of rehabilitating depressed
areas in New England has been narrowly conceived
and efforts to solve the problem have been largely
restricted to local activities. State agencies have,
of course, assisted local development groups. But
https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
MONTHLY LABOR REVIEW, MARCH 1957
with few exceptions, State development organiza
tions have been unable to concentrate upon the
redevelopment of specific communities.10
By way of contrast, Pennsylvania now has a
State agency to deal with this problem.11 And
in southern Illinois, localized unemployment is
viewed, to some extent at least, as an area rather
than a local problem, and is being attacked at the
area level.
At the present time, conditions in New England
are reasonably good. The secular, downward drift
in textile employment has slowed down, and there
has been a rise in employment in other industries.
Moreover, there has been improvement in the
employment situation in the depressed areas. But
with a cyclical downturn in employment, the situ
ation in those depressed areas which are not yet
fully rehabilitated would again worsen. As in the
past, they would enter a recession with relatively
high levels of unemployment.
Proposed Federal Legislation
In their report of January 1956, the Council of
Economic Advisers recognized that “the fate of
distressed communities is a matter of national as
well as local concern.”12 Congressmen, as well,
have recognized that the long-run solution of this
problem would depend upon a concerted attack.
Several bills to provide assistance to depressed
areas were introduced into the 84th Congress.
One bill, bearing administration approval, was
introduced by Senator H. Alexander Smith of
New Jersey. A bill on this subject was also intro
duced by Senator Paul H. Douglas of Illinois.
Both bills would have provided loans and
technical assistance to depressed areas. In addi
tion, the Douglas bill would have provided sup
plementary compensation to workers who had
exhausted their unemployment benefit rights,
while the latter were undergoing training for new
jobs. The Smith bill did not come to the floor
of the Senate for debate. In the final days of the
84th Congress, a modified version of the Douglas
« See New England Development Credit Corporations (in M onthly Re
view, Federal Reserve Bank of Boston, July 1954 (pp. 1-8), and August 1954
(pp. 1-8); especially, Purpose of Loans).
io
Rhode Island is a notable exception. Since Providence is the only major
labor market area in this State, the State development commission has
devoted considerable attention to its redevelopment.
n in 1956, Pennsylvania enacted an Industrial Development Authority
Act which provides loan funds to depressed areas in that State.
'2 Economic Report of the President, January 1956 (p. 61).
THE PROBLEM OF DEPRESSED AREAS
bill was passed in the Senate by a vote of 60 to
30. It did not come to a vote in the House of
Representatives, however, and thus did not
become law. There is still, however, much sup
port for Federal assistance, both in Congress and
among various private organizations. In his
1957 Economic Report, President Eisenhower pro
posed the establishment of an Area Assistance Ad
ministration Program in the Department of
Commerce to revitalize areas with long-standing
unemployment.
Some private organizations, however, including
a few which are engaged in development or pro
motional activities, have opposed Federal aid
to depressed areas. At a meeting of the New
England Council devoted to the problem of de
pressed areas, held in February 1956, a resolution
was passed opposing Federal aid. And at the
1956 meeting of the Association of State Planning
and Development Agencies, representatives of
some New England States voiced strong opposition
to Federal assistance.1'0
Conclusions
Local development organizations in New Eng
land are continuing their efforts to create new
jobs for the substantial number of unemployed in
depressed areas. But because of the improvement
in most of these areas during the past 2 years,
305
interest in the problem of area redevelopment
has waned outside the affected communities.
Past experience suggests, however, that even a
relatively mild recession such as that of 1953-54
will reveal that much remains to be done before
the problem of depressed areas is solved. And
while the decline of textile employment in New
England has slowed down, it has not been halted.
Periodically, there is an upsurge in unemploy
ment in one of the depressed areas as still another
mill is closed.
There is a strong conviction in some quarters
that the problem of localized unemployment is a
matter of national rather than local concern.
And an excellent case has recently been made for
spending substantial sums to reemploy displaced
workers on the grounds that the savings in un
employment compensation would more than
offset the direct and social costs involved.14
There has been some support for such a program
in New England; but at the same time, some of
the most articulate groups in the region have
voiced strong opposition to Federal aid. A Fed
eral program of area redevelopment remains a
distinct possibility, however, and if enacted will
benefit the region in spite of this opposition.
« Proceedings, 11th Annual Convention, Association of State Planning
and Development Agencies, Boston, 1956 (pp. 30-31).
14
Arnold C. Harberger, The Economics of the President’s Economic Re
port, Journal of the American Statistical Association, September 1958 (p. 458)
Only those [workers] who managed to accumulate a little property were
allowed to vote; and everywhere the brand of inferiority was stamped upon
them. When the son of a Boston bricklayer was elected to the office of
justice of the peace in 1759, the right to the office was attacked on the ground
of his low social origins; and his defense was not the dignity of his calling but
a reply that the charges were false.
https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
■Charles A. and Mary R. Beard, The Rise of American Civilization, New York,
Macmillan Co., 1927, Voi. I (p. 131).
Labor Turnover in Textile M ills
W ith many young workers taking jobs in New England's
cotton and synthetic textile mills, management faces
the challenging task of retaining and training them.
L eo n ard A rnold
M a n y i n v e s t i g a t i o n s have been conducted and
much has been written in recent years of the plight
of New England’s textile industry, its losses, and
the impact of these losses on the New England
economy. The barrage of material calling atten
tion to the decline of the industry has emphasized
the negative aspects and has overlooked certain
positive features.
One of these positive features is the fact that
younger workers are taking jobs in New England’s
textile mills and compose a high proportion of new
hires. This fact, combined with the fact that
there are a substantial proportion of younger per
sons among job applicants tends to indicate the
erroneousness of the popular belief that people are
not attracted to work in New England textile mills.
These facts and other data available for the first
time are the results of a study by the Northern
Textile Association of labor turnover in New
England cotton and synthetic textile mills.1 The
period selected for study was the first half of 1953—
a period of stability at a relatively high level in
both the New England cotton and synthetic textile
industry and the New England economy generally.
It is, therefore, a particularly useful period for the
purpose of studying labor turnover.
In brief, the study showed that although a
majority of the work force in New England cotton
and synthetic textile mills was 40 years of age or
over, with an average age of 43, employees with
less than a year’s service had an average age of 33,
and 48 percent of them were under 30. In addi
tion, 44 percent of job applicants were also under
30 years.
306
https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
The separation rate in New England cotton and
synthetic textile mills was significantly lower than
in all-manufacturing industries in various local
labor markets and was also below the average for
the national cotton and synthetic textile industry.
While a high proportion of total separations for
the New England industry was composed of quits,
the majority of persons quitting were employees
with less than a year’s service who were apparently
shopping for what would be their permanent jobs.
The existence of this situation, however, presents
a very real challenge to textile mill managements.
Time, effort, and study should be devoted to solv
ing the problem of retaining the younger workers
who comprise such a large proportion of the new
employees.
Composition of the Work Force
The work force of the New England cotton and
synthetic textile industry was almost evenly
divided between men and women, with men com
prising 52 percent of all production and related
workers. The average age of men was 43.6 years
and of women, 42.7 years. The proportions of the
work force at various age levels were as follows:
Percentage of the
work force
Under 30 years________________________________
Under 35 years________________________________
Under 40 years________________________________
40 years and over______________________________
45 years and over______________________________
50 years and over______________________________
19
28
40
60
48
36
1
The sample consisted of 20 cotton and synthetic textile mills, employing
15,429 production and related workers, selected to be representative of the
New England industry’s locality, product, and size of mill.
307
LABOR TURNOVER IN TEXTILE MILLS
The high proportion of older workers in the work
force poses some rather specialized problems for
New England’s textile mills. What impact does
an aging work force have on productivity and the
competitive position of the New England mills?
Do the factors of experience and skill offset or even
outweigh the physical advantages of youth? Are
the advantages of stability and maturity—charac
teristics of an older work force—an offset to the
greater responsiveness to change usually consid
ered more typical of younger workers? These are
just some of the many questions which arise from
the fact that almost half of the workers in New
England cotton and synthetic textile mills are 45
years of age and over. In any event, a greater
leavening of younger workers would be desirable
if just from the point of view of replacing persons
on the verge of retirement age.
The age distribution of employees in each of
nine major departments was quite similar to the
age distribution of the employees in all the plants
combined. While the proportion of employees in
various age brackets differed from one depart
ment to another, no particular concentration of
either younger or older workers was found in any
one department. Compared with the 60 percent
of all workers who were 40 years of age and over,
the proportions in this age group in the various
departments ranged from 55.5 percent in the clothroom to 66.5 percent in the carding department.
With respect to younger workers, 9.4 percent of
all workers were under 25; departmental ratios
ranged from 8.3 percent in the clothroom and the
carding department to 12.9 percent in the yarn
preparation department. Similar situations were
found with respect to other age brackets.
A distribution of the work force in nine major
departments shows that the largest number of
workers, by far, was employed in the weaving
department, as shown in the following tabulation.
The sex composition of the employees within each
department indicates a matching of the different
work skills and experience, as well as physical
2
United States data from monthly turnover series published by the Bureau
of Labor Statistics.
2 Unpublished study conducted by the Northern Textile Association from
data which were available from the State employment security agencies.
Although the 6 areas studied had moderate or substantial labor surpluses in
the spring of 1953, they had experienced a gradual buildup in employment
during the previous year, and two of the areas had been shifted in the direc
tion of a tighter labor market situation in the first half of 1953.
4 These rates apply only to the mills included in the sample and, therefore,
do not measure any separations which may have resulted from mill closings.
4 1 7 2 3 2 — 5 7 --------- 4
https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
qualifications, with job requirements in the various
departments.
Department
Carding _ ----- ---------------—
Spinning
Yarn preparation
Filling and winding__
Twisting
_____
S lashing__ __ _ _ __
Drawing-in and tyingin
_ _
_ __
Weaving
_
----__ __
Clothroom,
Percentage
distribution
of total e mployment by
department
Percentage distribution of departmental employment by sex
Men
Women
15
22
6
4
2
2
62
42
23
30
41
95
38
58
77
70
59
5
3
37
9
58
63
30
42
37
70
Total Separations
The average monthly separation rate of the
New England cotton and synthetic textile indus
try during the first half of 1953 was 33 per 1,000
employees, or 6 percent less than the separation
rate of 35 per 1,000 employees in the national
cotton and synthetic textile industry during the
same period.2 Moreover, it was, as shown in the
following tabulation, consistently below the sepa
ration rates of all manufacturing industries in
certain local labor market areas in the first half
of 1953.3
Separation
rate per 1,000
employees for
manufacturing
Average, all areas_________________________
Fall River, Mass_________________________
Lowell, Mass_____________________________
Manchester, N. H ________________________
New Bedford, Mass_______________________
Providence, R. I __________________________
Springfield-Holyoke, Mass_________________
50
42
72
39
49
62
36
During the period when the New England cotton
and synthetic textile separation rate was 33 per
1.000 employees, the accession rate was 28 per
1.000 employees, with a consequent net loss in
the industry’s total work force.4 In the same
period, the accession rate in the national industry
was identical with the separation rate—35 per
1.000 employees—indicating stable employment.
Also, quits accounted for a smaller proportion of
total separations in the national cotton and syn
thetic textile industry, 63 percent, than in the
New England mills, 73 percent. To complete the
analysis, 12 percent of the separations in the New
England industry were discharges; 9 percent were
layoffs; 3 percent were military separations; and
3 percent were retirements.
308
MONTHLY LABOR REVIEW, MARCH 1957
Quit Rates
By Department. With a quit rate of 24 per 1,000
employees for all employees in all plants studied,
the rates in individual departments varied widely—
from 10 in the drawing-in and tying-in department
to 34 in the twisting department, as shown in the
following tabulation:
Department
Total employees, all plants
Carding _
Spinning
_
__
Yarn preparation
Filling and winding
Twisting
Slashing
Drawing-in and tying-in
Weaving.
Clothroom ..
Quit rates per Percent oj total
1,000 employees
quits
24
25
19
17
22
34
12
10
25
13
New Employees
100. 0
17.
19.
4.
3.
3.
1.
1.
44.
5.
1
6
4
5
1
3
4
0
6
By Shift. The largest concentration of quits was
from the second shift. The high proportion of
quits from that shift—42.6 percent of the total—
is accounted for principally by two factors: (1)
The second shift is generally found to be the most
undesirable from a family and social point of view;
and (2) no premium pay was provided for secondshift work, but a 7-cent hourly premium was paid
to workers on the third shift.
Since it is generally thought that first-shift
work is more desirable than employment on the
third shift, it was surprising to find that the pro
portion of total quits from the first shift was
almost as high as from the third shift, 28.3 and
29.1 percent, respectively.
By Age. The largest cluster of quits was composed
of employees in the age group under 30 (45 per
cent of total quits). As would be expected, the
percentage of total quits by age groups declined
as the age increased.
By Sex and Length of Service. As is the case in most
industries, the majority of quits were by new em
ployees: of all persons who quit their mill jobs, 72
percent had less than 1 year of service. Seventeen
percent of the quits were by employees with more
than 3 years of service, while only 11 percent were
employees with from 1 to 3 years of employment.
Although the work force was almost evenly
divided between men and women, as previously
indicated, 62 percent of total quits were made by
https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
men. Of the men who quit, 77 percent had less
than 1 year of service, while 65 percent of the
women who quit their jobs were in this category.
The proportion of employees who quit after 3 years
of work was considerably higher among women
than among men—23 percent and 13 percent,
respectively.
By far the most interesting findings with respect
to the new employees, i. e., workers in the employ
of a mill for less than a year, were that a large
number of them were young and a relatively high
proportion had no previous textile experience.
Of the 2,948 employees hired during the period
studied, 48 percent were under 30 years of age and
30 percent were under 25 years. Of new male
employees, 55 percent were below age 30 and 37
percent were under 25. In contrast, only 38 per
cent of new female employees were below 30 years
and 21 percent were below 25. The fairly even
balance between men and women in mill employ
ment was not found among new hires; men com
prised 60 percent of the hires.
As would be expected, with the high proportion
of quits from the second shift, a high proportion
(46 percent) of new employees were hired as re
placements for that shift. The proportion of
hires exceeded that of quits for both the second
and third shifts, with 31 percent of new hires going
on the third shift. However, replacements on the
first shift—24 percent of new hires—were below
the quit level for that shift.
A comparison of new hires by departments shows
that most departments had about the same propor
tion of total hires and total quits. The two major
exceptions were the spinning department, where
hires were greater (22 percent of hires and 20 per
cent of quits), and the weaving department, where
the reverse was true (44 percent of quits as against
39 percent of hires).
With respect to the work experience of new
employees, 58 percent had previous textile experi
ence, 24 percent had other manufacturing experi
ence, and 18 percent had no previous manufactur
ing experience of any kind. The proportion of
new employees with previous textile experience
was much higher among women (71 percent) than
among men (49 percent).
LABOR TURNOVER IN TEXTILE MILLS
In this connection, information concerning train
ing programs was requested. It appeared that
specific well-formulated training programs were
carried on by only a minority of the mills, and the
information received was inadequate.
Job Applicants
More than 4,000 job applicants were studied to
determine the age, sex, and previous experience
of potential cotton and synthetic textile employees.
The proportion of younger applicants was high,
with 44 percent under 30 years of age and 30 per
cent below the age of 25.
More women applied for work than men.
While 53 percent of total applicants were women,
they represented only 40 percent of the new hires.
Like the new employees, less than half (44 per
cent) of the job applicants had had no previous
textile experience.
Reasons for Quits
It was not possible to gather adequate data
permitting valid observations concerning the
reasons why employees voluntarily left the employ
of the mills covered in this study.
Although exit interviews were conducted by 5
mills employing 22 percent of the workers, actual
exit interviews were held with only 18 percent of
the total number of quits. The largest proportion
of workers interviewed (42 percent of the 448
interviewed) gave no reason for quitting.
309
Principal Conclusions
Perhaps the most significant conclusion which
can be drawn from this study of labor turnover is
that the age levels of new employees and appli
cants for work tend to disprove the popular belief
that younger workers are not attracted to the
New England textile industry.
The extremely high proportion of persons
quitting their jobs after less than 1 year of service,
however, indicates that mill management mustmeet the challenge of retaining their younger
workers. Moreover, the lack of adequate data on
reasons for quits suggests that management has
not been particularly concerned with ascertaining
why workers leave the employ of the mills. This
is an area which deserves more thought and con
sideration than it evidently has received.
Finally, the scarcity of training programs at
the time of the study can be attributed in part to
the availability of experienced workers and in some
measure to management’s lack of interest in
developing such programs. The fairly large pro
portions of new employees and of applicants for
work without either previous textile experience or
manufacturing experience of any kind apparently
focused management attention on the increasing
need for training programs in New England cotton
and synthetic textile mills. It is encouraging to
note that evidence gathered since the date of the
study shows that many additional training pro
grams have been inaugurated and mill manage
ments appear to be cognizant of this need.
[At a meeting in 1846 of the New England Workingmen’s Association in
Peterboro, N. H., a resolution was adopted condemning work before sunrise.
The resolution read] 11Resolved, That although the evening and the morning is
spoken of in the Scripture, yet in that book no mention is made of an eve
ning in the morning. We therefore conclude that the practice of lighting up
our factories in the morning, and thereby making two evenings in every
twenty-four hours, is not only oppressive but unscriptural.”
— George E. McNeill, The Labor Movement, Boston, A. M. Bridgman & Co.,
https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
1887 (p. 107).
Collective Bargaining and Competitive Cost
in the Shoe Industry
Collective bargaining in New England shoe factories has
adapted reasonably well in the postwar period to the highly
competitive and partially organized footwear industry.
E. R. Livernash
N e w E n g l a n d has been maintaining its share in
national shoe production since 1925, except during
the years 1947-49, after many years of severe
decline following the Civil War.1 And, since
1953, it has shown evidence of enlarging its share.
Within the region, production in Maine has in
creased in importance relative to Massachusetts
and New Hampshire, but this is only a minor
qualification with respect to an encouraging
competitive performance by all three States.
Looking more closely at the New England
production record,2 we find the following: In the
years 1925-29, inclusive, census data 3 showed an
average share of total national production of
33.8 percent. There was a decline in 1947, 1948,
and 1949. The years 1950-53, inclusive, again
averaged 33.8 percent. (A revision of the sample
in 1950 precludes close comparison with the years
of decline, but probably improves the comparison
with the predepression base.) In 1954, 1955, and
the first 8 months of 1956, the average share has
been 37.3 percent—higher than in any of the
years of the period since 1924.
Can this production record be related in any
significant way to the results of collective bargain
ing in the postwar years? This is not an easy
question to which dogmatic answers may be found.
This much may be said: Assisted by the Federal
minimum wage, restraint in negotiating general
wage increases, compared with most manufactur
ing industries, seems to have held the increase in
earnings in unionized plants to about the same
310
https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
amount as the average for the industry as a whole.
The presumed differential between union and non
union earnings does not appear to have increased.
Moreover, some regional earnings differentials, un
favorable to New England, appear to have nar
rowed. This may in part be the result of collective
bargaining, although data demonstrating the im
pact of bargaining are not available.
Wage and earnings changes, both general and
regional, affect the competitive union-nonunion
situation, of course, but do not go to its heart.4
Whether union plants frequently have a serious
labor-cost disadvantage remains an unanswered
question. In a piece-rate industry, high average
earnings do not necessarily indicate high labor cost.
Generally, the traditional shoe centers, including
those in New England, have relatively high earn
ings and are heavily unionized, and manufacturers
in these centers appear to feel that they have a dis
advantageous labor-cost position. Union spokes
men can reply, however, that if there were a laborcost disadvantage equal to the earnings differ
ential, these shoe centers would have long since
disappeared.
1 The New England Economy, A Report to the President Transmitting a
Study Initiated by the U. S. Council of Economic Advisers and Prepared by
its Committee on the New England Economy, July 1951, Washington, 1951
(pp. 173-183).
2 The Federal Reserve Bank of Boston, in cooperation with the New Eng
land Shoe and Leather Association, has made several studies of New Eng
land’s share. See M onthly Review, Federal Reserve Bank of Boston,
November 1948, October 1950, and November 1953.
3 Pacts for Industry: Shoes and Slippers, Series M68A (monthly reports
on output), U. S. Bureau of the Census.
1 They are also of interest with respect to New England’s production
record, though they by no means explain that performance.
THE SHOE INDUSTY— BARGAINING AND COMPETITIVE COST
The Importance of Labor Cost in Competition
Labor cost is of crucial importance in the shoe
manufacturing industry. Marketing channels,
market analysis and finesse, and product competi
tion in all its varied aspects are also of great
importance; their effects on business success divide
firms into dynamically changing groups. But these
phases of competition are bounded by and im
mersed into cost competition.
The shoe industry meets the ordinary criteria
associated with a highly competitive industry.
Without delving into statistical description, the
number of firms is large, the average firm is small
in size, the degree of concentration of production
in larger firms does not insulate them from com
petition with each other and with smaller firms,
and entry to and exit from the industry are rela
tively easy. Production is widely dispersed geo
graphically, partly in response to the search fol
low labor costs. Internal Revenue Service figures
for the industry indicate that, in 1929, 711 estab
lishments showed gains and 547 reported losses; in
1932, 298 reported gains and 829 losses; in 1946,
1,029 showed gains and 296 losses; and in 1950,
673 were profitable and 344 were not.5
Price competition in the shoe industry is keen
though difficult to measure. Substantial quanti
ties of shoes are bought on very detailed specifica
tions, with firms gaining or losing business because
of small differences in cost. While prices at retail
appear orderly, with fairly commonly accepted
price lines and reasonably parallel movement of
these lines, there is great underlying change.
Competition intensifies as marketing opportunities
appear to shift among price lines. An indication
of this change is the greater variation in average
factory price compared with a price index based
on a fixed product composition. If average fac
tory value moves sharply within a few months,
the probability is that shoes are being repriced
through upgrading or downgrading among price
lines rather than that there is a pure change in
product mix. At all times there is strong compe
tition to produce a better shoe at a given price.
8 These figures, along with others demonstrating the general description in
the paragraph, may be found in Facts and Figures on Footwear, 10th Edition,
New York, National Shoe Manufacturers Association, 1956.
8 George P. Shultz, in Pressures on Wage Decisions (New York, The Tech
nology Press of the Massachusetts Institute of Technology and John Wiley
& Sons, Inc., 1951), has ably demonstrated this basic point, particularly in
his discussion of the Brockton grade system.
https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
311
Accepting as fact a high degree of price and
product competition, there remains the question
as to why labor cost is of particular significance.
While the shoe industry’s proportion of labor cost
to manufacturing selling price (about 25 percent)
is not low, neither is it outstandingly high in com
parison with other manufacturing industries.
The answer to our query is to be found, first, in
the absence of technological competition. Tech
nology is almost identical from factory to factory
for similar constructions and types of shoes. Also,
technology is neither controlled nor developed by
shoe manufacturers. Meaningful competitive ad
vantage of even a temporary nature cannot be
obtained by superior basic methods and processes.
This is in sharp contrast to many industries where
the technology of product and process is the major
focus of competition.
In the second place, the price of the basic raw
material, leather, derives from an auction market
in hides and, subject to modest qualification for
quantity purchasing and speculative intuition,
does not provide a competitive advantage for par
ticular firms. If the qualification were of particu
lar importance, it is most doubtful that the figures
on concentration for the largest 50 firms (or for
smaller numbers) would show, as they do, that the
proportion of production of the larger firms de
clined from 1939 to 1954.
Two major areas thus remain as possible sources
of cost advantage; these are labor cost and mer
chandising and marketing. Superior performance
in the latter area, as for example anticipation of
shifts in the market or in consumer tastes, may in
directly lower overhead per pair by so broadening
the sales base as to permit better organization
and consequently increased efficiency of produc
tion.
Lower labor cost can yield a similar advantage
and is thus a strategic competitive factor. As
shoe manufacturing is a piece-rate industry, labor
cost is the sum of a list of piece prices plus the cost
of “ fringe” benefits. Competition in selling price
(and product) becomes and is competition in piece
prices. Collective bargaining in this decentralized
industry of many firms, only partially organized,
has never been able to “remove wages from com
petition.” Rather, collective bargaining has its
primary focus upon labor cost within this com
petitive struggle for favorable price position.6
312
Union-Nonunion Changes in Earnings Level
The United Shoe Workers (formerly CIO),
the Boot and Shoe Workers (formerly AFL),
and independent unions represent little more than
half of the industry’s production workers. The
1953 wage survey of the industry by the Bureau
of Labor Statistics of the U. S. Department of
Labor estimated that 50 to 60 percent of the
workers were covered by labor-management agree
ments.7 Clearly a most substantial segment of
the industry is not organized, including some
large multiplant firms that are either entirely or
partially unorganized.
Still, it is not appropriate to describe the
industry in very many regions as “ nonunion,”
although in the South, the Border States, and
Pennsylvania, it is heavily nonunion. But the
West,8 which in the period of New England’s
heavy decline (before 1925) was poorly organized,
is now probably almost as heavily organized as
New England. Unionism, while weak in terms of
potential membership, has had a more pervasive
influence upon wage movements in World War II
and the postwar period than in the prewar era.
The shoe industry is a low-wage industry and,
as compared with all-manufacturing, has lost
ground in the postwar period. In 1946, average
hourly earnings in the shoe industry were 14
percent below the average in manufacturing
($0.93 compared with $1.08), according to the
hours and earnings series of the Bureau of Labor
Statistics. By 1949, with wartime wage controls
lifted and the labor market not so tight, earnings
in the industry ($1.10) were 21 percent below
average earnings in manufacturing ($1.40), and by
1955, this percentage had grown to 29 ($1.34
compared with $1.88). The total increase in
average hourly earnings from 1946 to 1955
was substantially less in the shoe industry than
in all-manufacturing—41 cents compared with
80, or, in relative terms, 44 and 74 percent, re
spectively. Shoe manufacturing has thus been
one of the minimum-increase manufacturing
industries, lagging even in percentage terms in
a period when most relative wage differentials
were narrowing.
To estimate the typical impact upon average
earnings of general wage increases in union
plants, two wage chronologies published by the
Bureau of Labor Statistics—for Massachusetts
https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
MONTHLY LABOR REVIEW, MARCH 1957
Shoe Manufacturing and for the International
Shoe Co.9—can be compared with the average
earnings data. While the general wage changes
listed in the chronologies are not directly compa
rable to changes in gross average earnings, such
a comparison appears to be generally valid when
the two major areas of noncomparability are
considered. First, the general wage changes do
not include adjustments in individual rates such
as promotions and changes in individual job
rates that do not have an immediate or noticeable
effect on the average wage level and thus would not
necessarily coincide with the change in straighttime average hourly earnings even in the situations
covered. In the footwear industry, changes in
individual piece rates could have an appreciable
effect over a number of years. The other major
difference stems from the fact that average earn
ings include premium payments for overtime,
shift differentials, sick leave, holidays, vacations,
and production bonuses, which are, of course,
excluded from the general wage change data.
As rough guides to the effect of these inclusions
on the average earnings figures, it should be noted
that in recent years average weekly hours of
work have not exceeded 38 and late-shift work
has not been common. With respect to paid
holidays and vacations, only those occuring in
the week ending nearest the 15th of the month
would be included, since that is the date of refer
ence for the earnings data.
General wage changes under the International
Shoe Co.’s contracts with the Boot and Shoe
Workers and the United Shoe Workers resulted in
an increase of approximately 59 cents per hour
from the end of World War II through October
1955, when the most recent wage adjustment be
came effective.10 When the Massachusetts wage
chronology, based on agreements between the
United Shoe Workers and a number of shoe com
panies in the Lynn-Haverhill-Boston area, is
updated through January 1956, the date of the
last general wage adjustment, the increase comes
7 See Wage Structure: Footwear, March 1953, BLS Report 46,1953 (p. 2).
8 Loose New England shoe parlance for Missouri, Indiana, Ohio, Illinois,
and Wisconsin.
* Wage Chronology No. 20 and Supplement 1: Massachusetts Shoe M anu
facturing, Monthly Labor Review, February 1952 (p. 169) and July 1953
(p. 751): and Wage Chronology No. 25 and Supplement 1: International Shoe
Co., M onthly Labor Review, July 1952 (p. 30) and April 1953 (p. 403).
io To the general wage changes shown in the published chronology, the
author has added his estimate of the cents-per-hour equivalent of the approx
imately 5-percent increase effective October 3, 1955.
THE SHOE INDÙSTY—BARGAINING AND COMPETITIVE COST
to 58 cents per hour.11 (In Brockton, a second im
portant Massachusetts shoe center, a rough per
sonal estimate places the comparable increase at
about 55 cents per hour.)
A rough estimate of changes in earnings in the
nonunion segment of the industry can be made by
comparing general wage changes in union plants
with the 63-cent increase in the average earnings
series for the comparable period of September
1945 to March 1956. In making such a compari
son, which is of course subject to the qualifications
previously mentioned, one must also assume that
the average earnings data are based on reports
from a sample of firms that is representative of the
extent of unionization in the industry as a whole.
While no information can be offered to validate
this assumption, the fact that the sample firms
employ about half of the workers in the industry
suggests that it is reasonable. Thus, it can be
said that nonunion earnings appear to have in
creased by almost the same amount as in union
plants. But recognition must also be given to
the effects of the two changes in the Federal mini
mum wage which took place during the period
covered.
The minimum wage under the Fair Labor Stand
ards Act was increased to 75 cents in January
1950, and average hourly earnings in the shoe
industry increased between 2 and 3 cents per hour
from 4 months prior to the change to 4 months
after the change.12 General increases were not
given during this period. A comparison of earn
ings in 12 important shoe-producing States for the
same period shows an increase of about 5 cents
per hour in the lower paying States and about 2
cents in the higher paying States. Despite some
deviations, this generalization appears reasonably
sound.
In March 1956, the $1 Federal minimum became
effective. It is not desirable to use a 4-month
before-and-after comparison in this situation, as
late 1955, early 1956 was a period of general in
creases. Union firms were more willing to nego
tiate general increases in late 1955 and early 1956
because of the probability that the higher mini
mum would bring pay increases to a substantial
11
To the published chronology, the author has added the increase amount
ing to 5 percent of gross weekly earnings effective in January 1956, with a
personal estimate of its cents-per-hour equivalent.
>2 Figures for the Federal minimum-wage comparisons are the Bureau of
Labor Statistics data on gross average hourly earnings.
13 For a discussion of the effects of the $1 minimum on wages in the southern
footwear industry, see p. 323 of this issue.
https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
313
number of workers in the industry,13 and in addi
tion, some important nonunion firms announced
general wage increases in advance of negotiations
in unionized firms, partly in anticipation of the
higher minimum. Earnings in the industry were
quite stable at $1.34 to $1.35 for the period April
to October, 1955, and then increased gradually to
$1.41 in February 1956. This figure increased to
$1.45 in March and maintained this level until
August. The only 1 of the 12 States which did
not reflect this March increase had increased very
substantially from December to January. The
pattern of larger advances in low-paying States
than in the United States average was a little less
marked than in the case of the 75-cent minimum.
A fair inference seems to be that the Federal
minimum wage increased earnings about 4 cents
per hour, with the earlier advances attributable to
general increases.
These estimates indicate that the Federal mini
mum wage has been important in the shoe in
dustry. The 2 increases have contributed at
least 5 cents per hour to average earnings in the
industry and more probably 7 cents.
Now a rough appraisal of the effects of general
wage changes on average hourly earnings may be
made. Deduction of the earnings increase that
may be attributed to Federal minimum-wage
changes from the total increase of 63 cents that
occurred from September 1945 to March 1956
leaves an amount that is within the range of the
general increases in union firms of 55 to 59 cents
per hour shown by the wage chronologies. It
would appear, therefore, that nonunion general
increases were not too different in average magni
tude from the increases in union centers.
Nothing approaching industry bargaining or
precise wage patterns exists in the shoe industry,
but the International Shoe Co., the largest pro
ducer, might be regarded as something of a bench
mark. From the unions’ point of view, Interna
tional Shoe has no doubt been a hard bargainer
well aware of the partial organization of the
industry. New England firms, bargaining from
a high earnings base, have about matched Inter
national Shoe and have held a constant relative
position. The effect of these facts, plus the union
awareness of the competitive character of the
industry, has produced no general wage increase
in various years when such increases were quite
prevalent within manufacturing. The union sec-
MONTHLY LABOR REVIEW, MARCH 1957
314
tor of the shoe industry has negotiated general
increases only when there was a good chance that
nonunion firms would follow. This restraint,
coupled with the effects of changes in the Federal
minimum wage, appears to have held to a min
imum any union-nonunion earnings differential.
Regional Earnings Levels
The best data on regional wage levels in the
industry are two BLS wage structure surveys, one
in 1945 and the other in 1953.14 Comparison of
these two surveys shows the following changes in
straight-time average hourly earnings: 15
Region 1
United States__________
Middle Atlantic_______
New England__________
Great Lakes___________
Border States__________
Middle West__________
Southeast_____________
Straight-time
hourly earnings
October
March
1945
1953
$0.
.
.
.
.
.
.
83
95
93
72
69
66
65
$1.
1.
1.
1.
1.
1.
1.
31
37
37
29
08
24
19
____ Increase_____
Cents per
hour
Percent
$0. 48
. 42
. 44
. 57
. 39
. 58
. 54
58
44
47
79
57
88
83
I Data for Pacific and Southwest regions are omitted because they ac
counted for only 3.2 percent of employment in the industry at the time of the
1953 survey.
The regions for which separate data are presented include: Middle A t
lantic—New Jersey, New York, and Pennsylvania; New England— Con
necticut, Maine, Massachusetts, New Hampshire, Rhode Island, and Ver
mont; Great Lakes—Illinois, Indiana, Michigan, Minnesota, Ohio, and
Wisconsin; Border States—Delaware, District of Columbia, Kentucky,
Maryland, Virginia, and West Virginia; Middle West—Iowa, Kansas, Mis
souri, Nebraska, North Dakota, and South Dakota; and Southeast—Ala
bama, Florida, Georgia, Mississippi, North Carolina, South Carolina, and
Tennessee.
To reflect some of the differences within regions
and to give a later terminal comparison, BLS data
on gross average hourly earnings by States are
shown in the following tabulation for December
1946 and March 1956.16 Again, it should be noted
that the gross earnings figures include payments
for overtime, shift differentials, etc., which are
excluded from the regional wage data just pre
sented.
II Wage Structure: Footwear, 1945, Series 2, No. 23: and Wage Structure:
Footwear, March 1953, BLS Report No. 46.
15 Excludes premium pay for overtime and shift differentials.
le December 1946 is the earliest month for which State data are available on
a basis fairly comparable with those for March 1956, which was chosen as the
terminal month because the $1 minimum went into effect then.
https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
State
Massachusetts
--_
___
New York
New Hampshire
Wisconsin _
Illinois___
Ohio. __ _
Maine- __
Indiana
Missouri. _
MarylandPennsylvania
Virginia__
___
Average hourly
earnings
December March
1946'
1956
$1.12
1. 19
1.10
.9 2
.9 5
.9 4
.9 4
.8 7
.9 0
.79
.8 5
.7 5
$1. 56
1. 55
1. 54
1. 50
1. 45
1. 45
1. 44
1. 42
1. 39
1. 28
1. 26
1. 21
Increase
Cents per
hour
Percent
$0. 44
. 36
. 44
. 58
. 50
. 51
. 50
. 55
. 49
. 49
. 41
. 46
39
30
40
63
53
54
53
63
54
62
48
61
1 Because of some changes in sample composition in this industry, data for
December 1946 for a few States are not exactly comparable with the March
1956 averages.
These regional and State data on earnings in the
shoe industry show a reduction in differentials
that is favorable for New England. This is
particularly true in percentage terms, which seems
to be the most valid indicator of probable effect
upon labor cost. Of course, the regions have their
internal variations; for example, Pennsylvania
lowers the Middle Atlantic average, and Maine
lowers the New England average. But in the
early postwar years, New England (particularly
Massachusetts and New Hampshire) and the
Middle Atlantic States (particularly New York)
were well above the West and South. In the
more recent years, significant improvement in
New England’s relative position, as measured by
these indicators of labor cost, is indicated with
respect to the West, less with respect to major
southern competition.
Several reasons for the improvement can be
advanced. The impact of the Federal minimum
wage has had both a direct and indirect influence.
The spreading union organization is important;
particular areas in which wages are lowest are
those remaining weakly organized. Growing in
dustrialization in some areas where unionization,
though stronger, is of relatively recent origin may
also have helped to narrow certain differentials in
this low-wage industry, but this is a limited
conjecture,
THE SHOE INDUSTY—BARGAINING AND COMPETITIVE COST
Conclusions
If labor cost data were available, a more
definitive analysis might be undertaken. If em
ployment, hours worked, and average earnings
data were broken down into union and nonunion
categories by States and types of shoes, a much
more satisfying description would be possible.
But even from the data available, two tentative
conclusions may be made.
Collective bargaining has adapted reasonably
well to the highly competitive and partially or
ganized character of the industry. If, in the
period following World War II, union demands
had been more forceful and effective, New Eng
land’s production record might easily have been
less favorable. From a union point of view, this
degree of restraint has no doubt been most frus
trating. When the union has been faced with the
task of balancing a management bargaining
position that higher wages might bring reduced
employment against the desires of its members
for a wage increase, the preservation of union
jobs must have appeared to be unreal and specu
lative. From a management point of view, it
has been a thankless task to be a tough bargainer
in order to retain or regain competitive position.
In the second place, some regional earnings
differentials appear to have narrowed since the
end of World War II. Prosperity, particularly
in the immediate postwar period, the two in
creases in the Federal minimum wage, and the
spread of unionism may all have contributed to
this end. However, growth in the industry
continues to favor low-earnings States where
organization has had limited success; some signifi
cant firms in New England have ceased operations.
Competitive difficulties remain, but collective
bargaining in the postwar period does not appear
to have intensified the problems.
[The Knights of St. Crispin were founded in 1867 by Newell Daniels, a
boot-treer of Milford, Mass. Thousands of New England shoe workers in
Lynn, Weymouth, Brockton, and other New England towns flocked to this
craft organization. Protection of the craft was one of its basic elements.
The constitution included a regulation that] “no member of this Order shall
teach, or aid in teaching, any part or parts of boot or shoe-making unless
the lodge shall give permission by a three-fourths vote of those present . . .
Provided, this article shall not be so construed as to prevent a father from
teaching his own son.”
— George E. McNeill, The Labor Movement, Boston, A. M. Bridgman & Co.,
https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
1887 (p. 200).
315
New England’s skilled workforce has joined with man
agement talent and engineering ability to establish
a new high-wage in d u stry with a promising future.
The Growth of
the A ircraft Industry
D avid P insky
i r c r a f t is not the leading manufacturing em
ployer in New England. Machinery, textiles,
apparel, leather, electrical machinery, and fabri
cated metals all exceed it in employment. What
then is its peculiar importance to the area?
First is its potential. Aircraft is a new and far
from mature industry. It is basic to national de
fense, and its importance and use in this respect
are likely to grow. But in the commercial field, its
growth potential is much greater. Even today
more passengers cross the ocean by aircraft than
by surface ships. More coast-to-coast travel is
by air than by surface vehicles. For short inter
city travel, the helicopter may become as common
as buses and trains in the not too distant future;
thus, it is important that New England maintain
its basic foothold in the industry.
Second, during the past decade aircraft em
ployment has been advancing at a time when
employment in some leading New England in
dustries has been stable or declining. This
growth has enabled the area to maintain a skilled
work force, an important key to its future growth.
Third, aircraft is a relatively high-paying in
dustry. The level of wages paid to New England
aircraft workers has been a significant factor in
maintaining its economy at a high level.
A
Development of New England Aircraft Industry
In 1925, a young executive from Ohio in search
of a location and money to realize his idea for an
air-cooled airplane engine turned to New England,
316
https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
where craftsmen of all sorts had their shops.
Journeying to Hartford, he concluded an agree
ment with Pratt & Whitney, producer of precision
tools and lathes, whereby that firm furnished
him capital and working space. This young
executive was Frederick B. Rentschler. The
company he founded, first known as Pratt &
Whitney Aircraft, eventually became the nucleus
of the present United Aircraft Corp. Its engines
have been highly successful from the start. They
power about 75 percent of all the commercial
aircraft outside of Russia flying today. With its
licensees, Pratt & Whitney produced about 50
percent of all aircraft engines used by the combined
Air Corps and Navy air arm in World War II.
A large proportion of today’s modern jet aircraft
is powered by Pratt & Whitney Aircraft gas
turbines.
Through his preeminence in aircraft, Rentschler
soon attracted other leaders in the field. They
included Igor Sikorsky and Chance Vought, both
brilliant engineers and pioneer pilots, and William
Boeing, financier and executive, pioneer pilot, and
devoted aviation enthusiast. United Aircraft,
formed in 1928 under the leadership of Rentschler
and these 3 men, gave additional know-how and
financing to 3 then small aircraft firms.
United Aircraft established a plant in Bridge
port for one of these, Sikorsky Aircraft, which was
producing amphibious planes on Long Island.
Bridgeport was selected because a seaport for the
flying boats could be built there and the area could
supply skilled workers. The plant has discon
tinued production of its flying boats and is now
the world’s leading producer of helicopters.
,
THE GROWTH OF THE AIRCRAFT INDUSTRY
The Chance Vought airplane division of United
Aircraft was moved from the environs of New
York City to East Hartford and later to Stratford,
Conn., largely because United Aircraft had found
a good supply of trained workmen in both areas,
which were nearer the parent corporation. This
division was also highly successful and made a
major contribution to the World War II effort
with the production of its Corsair fighter planes.
After the war, a number of factors caused the
division to seek a new location. Principally, the
speed of their planes had become too great for
testing over the congested metropolitan area
around Bridgeport, and the Navy was concerned
over the concentration of fighter-plane production
in the area with other major producers, Republic
and Grumman, on Long Island. As a result, the
division was moved to Texas where the flat,
unpopulated areas and arid climate better suited
jet testing. In 1954, Chance Yought was sepa
rated from United A’rcraft.
The combination of engine and propeller pro
duction was a natural one, and in 1928, Hamilton
Standard Propeller, then located in Milwaukee
and Pittsburgh, became a part of United Aircraft
and moved to the site of the engine plant in East
Hartford. Hamilton propellers today are stand
ard equipment on more than 90 percent of all
commercial airliners flying in the Western World.
With the change from piston engines to jets, the
company in 1952 built a new plant to make
accessories for jet planes and engines, at the large
Bradley Field airport in Windsor Locks, 18 miles
away from the Pratt & Whitney engine plant in
East Hartford.
The other large airplane plant in Connecticut is
Avco Manufacturing Corp.’s Lycoming plant in
Stratford, which manufactures airplane and heli
copter engines. This plant was established there
because the removal of Chance Yought to Texas
had left available a good supply of skilled workers,
and the vacated plant itself was ideally suited for
airplane engine production.
General Electric Co. has a large plant producing
jet engines and accessories at Lynn, Mass. Dr.
Sanford Moss, working for General Electric in
Lynn, pioneered the development of the turbo
supercharger in the 1920’s. The plant expanded
greatly during World War II. Additional research
developed the jet engines it is now producing.
https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
317
Aircraft and Parts Employment as a Percent of Manu
facturing Employment in New England, 1942-56
Percent
10
9
8
7
6
5
4
3
2
1
0
UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF LABOR
BUREAU OE LABOR STATISTICS
Source: Compiled by 0. Pinsky from data supplied by the
Bureau of Labor Statistics and Cooperating State
Agencies.
A smaller but promising company is Kaman
Helicopter in Bloomfield, Conn., just outside of
Hartford. Charles Kaman, its founder, was an
engineer at Hamilton Standard during the war.
He conceived the idea of a helicopter having twin
rotors intermeshed like an eggbeater and spinning
in opposite directions to eliminate the torque
resulting from use of a single rotor.
But recital of the rise of these large firms tells
only a part of the New England aircraft story.
Because of the large amounts of precision parts
required, aircraft plants traditionally contract
out considerable work. The availability of many
small precision metal shops in New England
attracted the large producers in the first place.
For example, United Aircraft alone purchases
products from 2,000 suppliers in New England,
employing an estimated 10,000 workers.
The standard airframe is not made in New Eng
land. The airplane engine, propellers, and the
helicopter are the three principal products. Many
New England plants contribute other parts or
MONTHLY LABOR REVIEW, MARCH 1957
318
subcontract work to aircraft manufacturers. Prin
cipal among these are instruments and communi
cation equipment.
1.— N u m b e r a n d in d e x o f w o r k e r s e m p lo y e d in th e
a ir c r a f t a n d p a r ts i n d u s t r y i n N e w E n g la n d a n d th e
U n ite d S ta te s i n J u n e o f 1 9 4 2 - 5 6
able
Employment
Number (in thou
sands)
United
States
1942:
1943:
1944:
1945:
1946:
1947:
1948:
1949:
1950:
1951:
1952:
1953:
1954:
1955:
1956:
787.4
June________________ -1, 339. 7
Ju n e .. ____ __________
1,300. 6
June_________ . .. .. .
947.7
June___ ._ . . . -------229.7
June__________
235.7
J u n e . . . ___ __ ____ . . . .
226.1
June________ ______ ____
262.2
June_______
-------262.5
June____. . .
- - - - - __
458.8
June_____ ___________
651.7
June______ . _ ------776.0
J u n e ... . . . . _ . . . ____
762.4
June__________
____
726.0
June_______ _ . ___---790.4
June___- _____ - . . . _
New
England
51.5
84.3
80.0
63.8
28.4
25.5
25.2
28.4
27.4
41.0
58.7
68.6
66.1
65.3
73.3
Index (June 1942=
100)
United
States
100
170
165
120
29
30
29
33
33
58
83
99
97
92
100
United States_________
New E n g la n d _______
Middle Atlantic- - ___East North Central____
West North C entral--.
South A tla n tic --.___East South Central-.
West South Central__ _
M ountain______ ____
Pacific__________ -_ _
All
manufactur
Number
ing (in
thousands) (in thou Percent
sands)
Ratio of
aircraft and
parts
employment
to all
manufactur
ing
i 17,027.0
i 759. 8
100.0
4.6
1, 504. 5
4, 241. 2
4,962. 5
973.3
1,908. 5
805.2
788.8
210.6
1, 446.8
69.6
106.6
124.5
65.9
52.9
6.4
45.8
7.7
293.5
9.0
13.8
16.1
8.5
6.8
.8
5.9
1.0
38.1
4.6
2.5
2. 5
6.7
2.8
.8
5.8
3.7
20.3
1 BLS estimate for United States adjusted to 1955 benchmarks; the States(and regional) series are unadjusted.
Source: Regional estimates compiled by the author; national data by
the U. S. Department of Labor’s Bureau of Labor Statistics.
craft workers employed in New England in June
1956 represented a 42-percent increase over the
51,500 employed in June of 1942, the first year for
which reliable data are available. For the coun
try as a whole, the 790,400 aircraft and parts
employment in June 1956 was about the same as
in June 1942.
New England’s 73,300 aircraft workers in June
1956 comprised 4.9 percent of her total factory
employment. This percentage for New England
was about the same as the proportion (4.5 percent)
for the country as a whole.
Within New England, Connecticut’s 59,600
aircraft workers of December 1955 comprised 13.7
percent of its manufacturing employment; in
Massachusetts, the proportion was only 1.2 per
cent.
In numbers of aircraft workers, three regions
exceeded New England. The largest employment
appeared in the Pacific region, followed by the
East North Central and the Middle Atlantic
States. (See table 2.)
New
England
100
164
155
124
55
50
49
55
53
80
114
133
128
126
142
Source: New England data compiled by the author; national data by
the U. S. Department of Labor’s Bureau of Labor Statistics.
https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
Em ployment
Region
Employment. Aircraft employment in New Eng
land hit an all time peak of 85,000 in February
1944.1 In 1938, employment totaled approxi
mately 7,300. In June 1940, with fighting already
started in Europe, aircraft employment reached
about 14,700. By the time the bombs fell on
Pearl PIarbor in December 1941, the number of
workers approximated 37,000.
The end of World War II in 1945 resulted in a
drop of aircraft workers from the 85,000 peak of
1944 to 20,800 after V-J Day. Following this, the
number moved up slowly to 27,400 by the outbreak
of the Korean conflict in June 1950. (See accom
panying chart.) Employment again moved up
rapidly to a peak of 71,600 in December 1953, 3
months after the truce was signed.
Unlike the situation at the end of World War
II, no large cutbacks were made in aircraft produc
tion following Korea. Aircraft and parts employ
ment dropped in New England to 65,300 by June
1955, but has increased since then to 76,300, in
September 1956.
Table 1 shows aircraft employment in New
England and the United States for June of each
year from 1942 through 1956. The 73,300 air-
Date
2. — E m p l o y m e n t i n m a n u f a c tu r in g a n d i n th e
a ir c r a f t a n d p a r ts i n d u s t r y b y r e g io n , D e c e m b e r 1 9 5 5
Aircraft and parts
Employment and Earnings in Aircraft
T
T able
Worker Concentration in Connecticut. The largest
concentration of aircraft workers in New England
is in Connecticut, where 65,900 were employed in
September 1956. Massachusetts employed a mod
erate 9,000 workers in this field, and fewer than
1,000 each were employed in Maine and Vermont.
1
Data presented for New England and other States or regions were pro
vided by the author. Corresponding estimates for the country as a whole
are from the U. S. Department of Labor’s Bureau of Labor Statistics. The
most recent data in each case apply to the latest period for which the author
had comparable data available when preparing the article in the early fall
of 1956.
THE GROWTH OF THE AIRCRAFT INDUSTRY
319
There is virtually no direct aircraft employment
in New Hampshire and Rhode Island.
These figures do not, however, indicate the large
numbers of former residents of other New England
States who have moved into Connecticut to man
the expanding Connecticut aircraft industry.
The first wave hit Connecticut during World War
II, when the moves were generally considered
temporary. The northern New Englanders were
supposedly going to Connecticut to work for “the
duration” and then, after the war, presumably
would take their hard-earned money back to their
native towns. This did not transpire. They
liked and became accustomed to their relatively
high earnings and their new environment; so they
remained in Connecticut in large numbers. The
second wave hit during the expansion of the
Korean conflict. Again large numbers of workers
from the northern States came to Connecticut
and found jobs in the aircraft industry. These
workers have also generally remained.
Was this migration to Connecticut good or bad?
For Connecticut, it permitted an expansion of
high-wage aircraft employment and offset losses in
other manufacturing industries. The aircraft
wages paid within the State have enabled the econ
omy to continue at a relatively high level and have
helped make the State the most prosperous in New
England. On the other side, the large numbers of
migrants have created housing, school, and other
social problems.
For the States which the workers left, the mi
gration may have helped to relieve unemploy
ment associated with declines in the textile and
shoe industries. On the other hand, it is con
ceivable that greater industrial development
would have occurred in some of those areas, had
the labor pool remained available.
T able 3.— H o u r s a n d g r o s s e a r n in g s o f 'p ro d u c tio n w o r k e r s
i n th e N e w E n g la n d
J u n e o f 1 9 ^ 7 -5 6
a ir c r a f t
and
Date
1947: June___ ___ _____
1948: June........ _ .
1949: June____________ _
1950: June___ . . __ _
1951: June_________________ _
1952: June________________
1953: June___ *
1954 : June________________
1955: June_____ _
. . . ___
1956: June__
.... . . . . .
Source: Estimates compiled by the author.
https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
p a r ts
Average
weekly
earnings
$ 54 .
60.
22
38
61.28
64.23
85. 40
83. 57
84. 01
82.98
86.86
93.83
in d u s tr y
Average
weekly
hours
39.8
41.5
40.1
41.2
46.6
44.0
43.1
40.7
41.1
42.4
in
Average
hourly
earnings
$ 1.36
1. 44
1.53
1.56
1. 84
1.90
1.94
2.04
2.11
2.21
Labor Turnover. The New England aircraft and
parts industry has had a lower separation rate for
the past 5 years than manufacturing as a whole.
In June 1956, the aircraft total separation and
quit rates in New England were 1.7 and 1.4, re
spectively, per 100 workers employed (see tabu
lation), compared with a total separation rate of
3.9 and a quit rate of 2.0 for the same month for
all manufacturing in Connecticut, where the bulk
of aircraft workers are employed. The aircraft
and parts accession rate in June 1956 was 5.8 in
New England as compared with 4.2 for all manu
facturing in Connecticut.
Turnover rates in the New England aircraft and
parts industry (per 100 employees)
June of—
1952________________
1953_________________
1954________________
1955_________________
1956_______________
Accession
rate
3.
5.
1.
2.
5.
7
5
6
7
8
Total separa
tion rate *
1.
1.
1.
1.
1.
9
8
6
5
7
Quit rate
1.
1.
1.
1.
1.
6
0
0
1
4
1 Includes quits, discharges, layoffs, and m ilitary and miscellaneous
separations.
Source: Estimates compiled by the author.
The aircraft and parts industry has shown
lower turnover in New England than in the coun
try as a whole. For example, in June 1956, the
aircraft total separation and quit rates in New
England of 1.7 and 1.4 compared with the na
tional industry’s total separation rate of 2.4 and
quit rate of 1.7. The 5.8 accession rate in the
New England aircraft and parts industry in June
1956 compared with 4.8 for the industry as a
whole.
Earnings. Weekly wages paid in aircraft and
parts are the highest of any industry group in
New England. In June 1956, average weekly
earnings in aircraft were $93.83 as compared with
an average of $71.94 for all production workers in
New England. (See table 3.) But the New
England aircraft average earnings were below the
$94.66 for all aircraft and parts workers through
out the United States in June 1956. Neverthe
less, the regional average was substantially above
the $54.22 in 1947. The rise was marked by a
jump from $64.23 in June 1950, to $85.40 in 1951
as the Korean conflict flared, and a second jump
from $86.86 in June 1955 to the June 1956 figure.
Fringe benefits vary from plant to plant, but
aircraft workers in New England generally enjoy
7 paid holidays; 1, 2, or 3 weeks of vacation, de-
MONTHLY LABOR REVIEW, MARCH 1957
320
pending on length of service; and life insurance,
health and medical coverage, and pensions—all
financed jointly by employer and worker.
Other Employment Characteristics. Nearly all the
New England aircraft workers are represented by
labor unions. The International Association of
Machinists covers about two-thirds of Connecti
cut’s aircraft workers, and the United Auto
Workers, the remainder. In Massachusetts, the
International Union of Electrical, Radio and
Machine Workers represents nearly all of the
aircraft workers. A few very small plants in that
State have no unions.
The aircraft industry in the region has a good
labor-management record; relatively few work
stoppages resulting from labor-management dis
putes have occurred in New England. The post
war adjustment in 1946 saw several moderately
long disputes. No stoppages occurred from 1946
until October 1951, when 1 work stoppage involv
ing 2,000 aircraft workers lasted for 2 weeks.
No stoppages have occurred since then.
The Outlook
The future of aircraft development in general
is very promising and very complex. The aircraft
industry is constantly changing and the location
in New England of a substantial segment of the
industry is, in itself, no guarantee that it will
remain there in the future. However, the New
England aircraft plants are blessed with progres
sive management and skilled labor, which bodes
well. Also, they offer a considerable amount of
training, ranging from on-the-job training for
semiskilled workers to postgraduate courses for
their professional workers.
Aircraft and engine designs are not static. Any
aircraft company which did not perform constant
research and development would soon be out of
business. One promising sign is the new atomic
engine research center being built in Middletown,
Conn. The thousands of scientists and engineers
who will be employed there will play a large part
in determining which way New England’s aircraft
production will go.
[Six hundred Boston House Carpenters were involved in the first great
strike for the 10-hour day in 1825. In opposing their demands, the master
carpenters stated that they were] “fraught with numerous and pernicious
evils” . . . and would expose the journeymen themselves “to many tempta
tions and improvident practices” from which they were “happily secure”
when working from sunrise to sunset. . . . Finally, they declared that they
could not believe “this project to have originated with any of the faithful
and industrious Sons of New England, but are compelled to consider it an
evil of foreign growth, and one which we hope and trust will not take root in
the favoured soil of Massachusetts.”
https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
—John R. Commons and Associates, History of Labor in the United States, New
York, Macmillan Co., 1918, Vol. I, Pt. 1 (pp. 159-160).
► The Labor Month
in Review
A r r e s t on March 13 of James R. Hoffa, a vice
president of the Teamsters union, on charges of
bribing an employee of the Senate Select Com
mittee on Improper Activities in the Labor or
Management Field topped all other recent labor
news. Mr. Hoifa is widely regarded as the most
powerful Teamster official.
A few days earlier, Dave Beck, Teamster presi
dent, had returned from Europe to face Commit
tee questioning regarding union affairs and his
personal finances. He had been recommended by
George Meany, AFL-CIO president, as a labor
member of the United States delegation to an
International Labor Organization meeting March
11-23 in Germany, but Secretary of Labor James
P. Mitchell refused to nominate him on the grounds
that attendance at the meeting had been men
tioned by Mr. Beck as one reason why earlier ap
pearance before the Committee could not be made.
Rudy Faupl of the Machinists substituted for him.
Testimony heard by the Committee thus far
has centered on relationships between Portland,
Greg., Teamster officials and local politicians,
gamblers, and underworld characters. One line
of questioning indicated use of union funds to
finance private business ventures.
There were numerous other news stories relat
ing to the subject of the Committee hearings and
to recent AFL-CIO actions to enforce its ethical
practices code. Curtis R. Sims, secretary-treas
urer of the Bakers’ Union, accused James G. Cross,
its president, of misuse of union funds, and ap
pealed to the AFL-CIO for an inquiry. The
Ethical Practices Committee of the federation was
to hear the complaint March 15. Sam Berger,
long the manager of a Ladies’ Garment Workers’
trucking local, resigned after pleading self-in
crimination before a Federal grand jury. Anthony
Doria, secretary-treasurer of the Allied Industrial
Workers, under charges by the AFL-CIO of mal
practices, also resigned. Concurrently, the char
ters of four New York locals of the AIW were
https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
revoked. Four officers of the Teamsters were cited
for contempt by the Senate for refusing to answer
questions.
Most labor news of recent weeks dealt with less
seamy matters and was concerned with the usual
workaday institutional operations of trade unions.
The United Steelworkers in mid-February held a
referendum election of officers in which there was a
contest for the presidency for the first time. In
cumbent David J. McDonald, based on unofficial
counts, defeated Donald C. Rarick by a surpris
ingly close 9-5 margin. A recent $2-a-month dues
increase was a major issue.
When the United Automobile Workers meet in
biennial convention April 7, they too will act on a
dues increase (50 cents) recommended by their
officers. A pamphlet sent to each of the union’s
1.3 million members describing in detail the
union’s financial position was but one step in a
broad educational campaign to stimulate precon
vention understanding and discussion of the issue.
Three vexing strikes were settled between midFebruary and mid-March. On March 8, the long
est (36 days) strike of New York Harbor tugboat
crewmen ended after members of the National
Maritime Union had twice rejected offers relating
to wages, fringe benefits, and working rules. East
Coast longshoremen from Maine to Virginia ac
cepted new contracts (including a 3-year “master”
agreement providing cumulative wage increases of
at least 32 cents an hour along with other improve
ments). Supplemental contracts deal with purely
local issues. Thus ended an 11-day strike of 45,000
dockworkers who had left their jobs on February
12 upon expiration of an 80-day Taft-Hartley Act
injunction. In effect, it had been a continuation
of last November’s 9-day walkout. In the Ports
mouth, Ohio, area a 7-month-old strike of tele
phone workers, members of the Communications
Workers of America, ended with a 4%-cent-an-hour
wage increase, a maintenance of membership
clause (company insistence on abandoning the
union shop clause in a contract with former owners
had been a prime cause of the dispute), and arbi
tration of 19 cases of discharged strikers.
In an unusual action, the city administration
of Philadelphia on February 13 granted the
State, County, and Municipal Employees ex321
322
elusive bargaining rights in all city departments in
which a majority of the employees are members of
the union. The contract presently covers about
15,000 persons, with about 13,000 others, includ
ing 8,000 policemen, firemen, and park guards,
unaffected. City officials stated that the agree
ment would centralize union responsibility and
accord “blue and white collar workers what has
been the rule in private industry—exclusive
barganing rights for one majority union.”
The Machinists and the Auto Workers, continu
ing their joint efforts in the aircraft and guided
missiles industry bargaining, announced on Feb
ruary 27 their intentions to press for 1958 demands
relating to insurance and pensions, employment
security, dispersal and severance benefits, and a
wage determination procedure to replace the
present job evaluation systems. They criticized
the industry for “failures” in the field of skilled
manpower training. The UAW had earlier re
solved to organize among engineers and tech
nicians. To this end, they established an Air
craft and Avionics Engineering Council to enable
organized engineers in the aircraft industry to
retain their identity in the union. Almost con
currently, the union won a 579-116 affiliation
vote among engineers and technicians of the
Minneapolis-Honeywell Corp.
Two unions of paper workers—the former AFL
Paper Makers and the onetime CIO United
Paperworkers—merged in Chicago on March 5.
Although the Pulp and Sulphite Workers, largest
of the three paper unions, remained outside the
new United Papermakers and Paperworkers, the
merger was the first of sizable AFL-CIO unions
(combined membership is a claimed 123,000).
Four new unions, including the Paper Makers
(ex-AFL) and the Pulp and Sulphite Workers,
along with the Commercial Telegraphers and the
Bill Posters, joined the Industrial Union Depart
ment of the AFL-CIO, bringing the membership
of that subsidiary to about 7.6 million.
In February a bid by the AFL-CIO Firemen and
Enginemen to unite with the Locomotive Engi
neers was rejected by the independent union.
Meanwhile, the Glass Bottle Blowers Association
early in March expressed a desire to merge with
https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
MONTHLY LABOR REVIEW, MARCH 1957
three other unions in the glass field. Nearly
150,000 members would be affected.
George Meany, who on April 26 will receive an
honorary doctor of laws degree from the Uni
versity of Pennsylvania, in February dedicated a
$1.5 million union health center in Philadelphia.
The project, joint effort of 28 local unions, will
provide medical service to 52,000 members and
dependents. On February 28, in Washington,
Mr. Meany told an AFL-CIO conference on radi
ation hazards that Federal legislation was needed
to provide “one standard of safety . . . to
workers exposed to radiation hazards.”
In the field of wage legislation, hearings opened
in both Houses of Congress on extending coverage
of the Federal Wage-Hour Act. Secretary of
Labor James P. Mitchell, the first witness, pro
posed at a Senate Labor subcommittee hearing on
February 25 that about 2.5 million more workers
in about 3,000 additional enterprises be blanketed
under the statutory $1 an hour minimum. Most
of these would be in the retail trade field. No
recommendation was made to bring the new
workers under the overtime provisions of the law.
Rowland Jones, Jr., president of the American
Retail Federation, testified that the proposed
extension of the law would tend to “destroy job
opportunities” for part-time employment. George
Meany, on behalf of the AFL-CIO, asked that
coverage be extended by 10 million additional
workers.
Indiana on March 1 became the first major in
dustrial State and the 19th presently with a
right-to-work law. Similar legislation, pending
in the legislatures of several States, recently failed
of passage in Idaho by only two votes.
The United States Supreme Court in a 6-3 deci
sion ordered the Federal district court in Detroit
to reinstate an indictment against the United
Automobile Workers for a 1954 violation of the
Corrupt Practices and Taft-Hartley Acts. The
union was accused for spending its funds to pur
chase television time for endorsement of con
gressional candidates. The majority opinion held
that the indictment dismissal was “premature”
and that an actual trial should precede consider
ation of the constitutional issues.
Effects of the
$1 Minimum Wage
in Seven Industries
N orman Samuels*
E
N o t e .— The present article is the first of
a, series describing various studies undertaken
by the Department of Labor to analyze the
wage and related efifects of the $1 minimum
wage. The second half of this article will
appear in April; others in the series, in various
issues during the next year.
d i t o r ’s
I n A u g u s t 1955, the Fair Labor Standards Act
was amended to provide for an increase from 75
cents to SI an hour in the statutory minimum
wage that employers must pay their employees
covered by the act. The higher rate became
effective 7 months later, on March 1, 1956.1
As on similar occasions, and particularly in 1950,
widespread interest was expressed during and after
the passage of the 1955 amendments as to the
impact of the higher minimum wage upon the in
dustries and workers most directly affected. Also,
as in 1950,2 the Department of Labor planned a
series of studies to gage the wage and related
economic effects of the $1 minimum rate. The
Wage and Hour and Public Contracts Divisions
and the Bureau of Labor Statistics jointly de
veloped a program of wage surveys designed to
provide information on the nature and magnitude
of the adjustments required to comply with the
higher minimum wage. This program of studies
includes surveys in 12 traditionally low-wage in
dustries.3 Data for seven of these industries are
now available, thus permitting a summary analysis
of some of the short-run wage effects of the higher
minimum in these industries.
Scope and Method of Study
The industries to be surveyed were necessarily
selected from among those whose wage levels
https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
would be most affected by the increase in the
minimum wage. Typically, these industries, or
regional segments of them, employed substantial
proportions of workers earning less than $1 an hour
in mid-1955. In nonseasonal industries, three
payroll periods were studied: (1) August 1955, the
time of the passage of the amended act; (2)
February 1956, immediately prior to the effective
date of the higher minimum; and (3) April 1956,
shortly after the effective date. This procedure
thereby permitted an analysis of the extent to
which employers may have sought to adjust wages
gradually prior to March 1, as well as the extent to
which mandatory adjustments were made upon
the effective date of the new minimum rate. In
seasonal industries, two payroll periods were
, selected—the first representing a period prior to
the higher minimum which was generally compar
able to one after the $1 rate became effective.
The areas and payroll periods covered in the
seven industries for which surveys have been com
pleted appear in table 1. Except for two of the
"Of the Division of Wages and Industrial Relations, Bureau of Labor
Statistics.
1 The Fair Labor Standards Act of 1938 provided for a minimum wage of
25 cents an hour effective October 24, 1938, 30 cents an hour effective Octo
ber 24,1939, and a minimum of 40 cents an hour October 24, 1945. However,
the act also provided for industry committees which were to be appointed
and convened by the Administrator of the act to reach “ . . . as rapidly as
is economically feasible without substantially curtailing employment, the
object of a universal minimum wage of 40 cents an hour.” The timing of
increases in the minimum wage to 40 cents an hour, therefore, varied among
industries as the committees met and recommended higher minimums.
The effective dates of the wage orders for the 7 industries included in the
current study were as follows:
Cents
Fertilizer.
Footwear.
Processed waste
Sawmills
Seamless hosiery.
Work s h ir ts .........
Wooden containers
F e b . 7, 1944 ___________________
f A p r il 29, 1940_____ ______ _____
I N o v . 3, 1941__________________
fO e t. 24, 1939__________________
j.Tune 3 0 ,1 9 4 1 __________________
40
35
40
32Vé
37^
[April 2 0 , 1942_________________
[ N o v . 3, 1941__________________
[F e b . 7, 1944 ___________________
(S e p t. 1 8 ,1 9 3 9 _________________
I S e p t. 15, 1 9 4 1 ..
___________
40
35
40
32^
36
[July 15, 1 9 4 0 .... _____________
[ S e p t . 2 9 ,1 9 4 1 _____ ______ _____
I N o v . 3, 1941__________________
[F e b . 7 ,1 9 4 4 ____________ ______
32H
40
35
40
2 In 1950, the Bureau of Labor Statistics studied the effects of the 75-cent
minimum in 5 low-wage manufacturing industries; the Wage and Hour and
Public Contracts Divisions of the Department of Labor, utilizing the wage
survey materials as well as other economic data, made a broader analysis of
the 75-cent minimum. These findings were summarized in Results of the
Minimum-Wage Increase of 1950: Economic Effects in Selected Low-Wage
Industries and Establishments, Wage and Hour and Public Contracts Divi
sions, 1955, which was, in turn, summarized in the M onthly Labor Review,
March 1955 (p. 307).
3 In addition to the industries listed in footnote 1, the following industries
are part of the program of studies: Canning, cigars, raw sugar, men’s and boys’
shirts, and tobacco stemming.
323
324
MONTHLY LABOR REVIEW, MARCH 1957
industries, the study was limited to regions in the
South. The men’s seamless hosiery industry was
surveyed nationwide, and the footwear industry
study included particular types of shoes in specific
wage areas (Missouri and southeastern Pennsyl
vania) as well as in the South. The 7 industries
combined included approximately 5,770 establish
ments employing about 278,000 workers in the
summer of 1955.
Industry and Labor Force Characteristics
The industries or industry sectors surveyed
were similar in that relatively large numbers of
their workers earned less than SI an hour; how
ever, they were dissimilar in many other respects.
For example, marked differences existed among.,
these industries in the ratio of wages and salaries
to value added by manufacture. Payroll ex
penditures for production workers ranged from
about 30 percent of value added in the fertilizer
industry to about 64 percent in the work-shirt
industry.4 The ratios for all seven industries
(except fertilizer) were higher than for all manu
facturing industries combined, thus indicating
that wage costs are relatively more important
for these industries than for the average manu
facturing industry. Plant size—often important
in terms of flexibility to adjust the work force to
altered conditions—likewise varied sharply. The
average sawmill had about 30 workers, whereas
the average shoe manufacturing plant employed
about 300 workers. Another factor bearing upon
pay levels is the size of community in which
plants are located. Sawmills were most often
located in small rural communities, and about 60
T able
percent of the workers in 5 of the other industries
were employed in plants located in communities
with less than 25,000 population. At the other
extreme, 75 percent of the workers in the processed
waste industry were employed in plants located
in cities of 100,000 or more population where
wage levels tend to be somewhat higher.
Significant variations also exist in the charac
teristics of the labor force. Southern sawmills
and fertilizer plants employ exclusively men,
while in seamless hosiery and work shirt estab
lishments, from 75 to 90 percent of the workers
are women. The range and composition of skills
within the work force also vary among these
industries. The manufacture of mixed fertilizers
involves largely simple, repetitive unskilled tasks
that are essentially material handling operations.
Production of shoes, on the other hand, requires
a wide diversity of skills and the usual shoe fac
tory includes a full range of skill levels. The
making of a work shirt requires a third type of
labor force composition in terms of skill, with a
large majority of the workers being semiskilled
sewing-machine operators.
In addition, the method of wage payment may
be significant in assessing pay levels, especially for
individual workers. Straight-time hourly earnings
of workers paid under an incentive system are
generally more widely dispersed than those of
workers paid on a time basis. Among the seven
industries studied, a majority of the workers were
paid under an incentive system in the footwear,
processed waste, seamless hosiery, and work
shirt establishments; an hourly basis of pay
4 1954 Census of Manufactures, Advance Reports, U. S. Department of
Commerce, 1956.
1.—Establishments and workers within scope of surveys, seven industries, August 1955 and April 1956
Number of estab
lishments 2
Scope of study 4
Industry
Geographic location
Fertilizer_____________
Footwear.. _ . . . ___
Processed waste______ ____ _ .
Sawmills . ___ ______
Seamless hosiery, men’s. . . . . .
Seamless hosiery, children’s__
Wooden containers____ _________________
Work shirts... ______ _ ____ .
South
South, Missouri, southeastern Pennsylvania 5 .
South ..
South
United States
Southeast
South.. ___
Southeast
1 The South includes the three economic regions of: Border States—Delàware, Maryland, Kentucky, Virginia, and West Virginia; Southeast—Alabama, Florida, Georgia, Mississippi, North Carolina, South Carolina, and
Tennessee; Southwest—Arkansas, Louisiana, Oklahoma, and Texas.
2 Includes all establishments with total employment at or above the minimum-size lim itation at the time the establishment lists were compiled.
https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
Minimum
size of es
tablishment
8
21
8
8
21
21
8
21
April
1956
401
129
34
4,496
262
130
223
28
August
1955 4
407
130
34
4, 599
265
130
224
30
Number of em
ployees 2
April
1956
20,850
39, 270
1,770
145,050
28,800
16,170
23,190
4,490
August
1955 4
21, 580
39, 830
1,840
149,640
32,310
18,880
22,710
4,680
3 Includes not only office and production workers but also executive, technical, and professional workers.
4 Data for fertilizer relate to April 1955 and for sawmills, to October-December 1955.
»Limited to women’s cement-process shoes in Missouri and misses’ and
children’s Goodyear welt shoes in southeastern Pennsylvania.
325
THE $1 MINIMUM WAGE IN SEVEN INDUSTRIES
T
a b l e
2 .—
Percentages of workers at selected, average hourly earnings 1 levels, by payroll period, seven industries
Percentage of workers in —
Average hourly earnings 1 (in cents) and pay period
75 and under 76:
August 1955. _____ _ _
_ ______ ____
February 1956 .
75 and under 100:
August 1955____
.
___ . . .
.. .
. ..
February 1956.
April 1956 ........................
Under 100:
August 1955_______________________ __ _________
February 1956___
. . . . . . . . ...
. ....... _.
April 1956________
100 and under 101:
April 1956_____ _______________________________
100 and under 125:
August 1955 _____
.
. ......
... .
February 1956____
. .. . . . . ................. . ...
April 1956__________ _____ . . . .. ____ _____ ...
125 and over:
August 1955____ . . ...
..
... . . . ______ ___
February 1956 April 1956___________ ___ _________ _________
Seamless
hosiery,
children’s
Wooden
containers Work shirts
Sawmills2
14
10
38
37
4 35
12
8
14
10
29
27
25
17
42
30
1
82
80
0
73
49
39
2
57
48
2
82
76
0
77
72
1
42
31
1
82
80
0
4 74
50
40
2
58
48
2
82
76
0
80
74
1
30
32
63
66
27
31
60
29
33
29
36
62
11
12
90
17
28
30
67
27
33
75
9
14
87
16
21
81
29
36
39
8
8
10
22
26
31
15
19
24
9
10
13
6
18
3h
39
4
3 41
5
64
326
31
1 E x c lu d e s p r e m iu m p a y for o v e r tim e a n d for w o r k o n w e e k e n d s, h o lid a y s ,
a n d la t e s h ifts.
2 S e a s o n a l in d u s tr y in w h ic h o n ly tw o p a y p e r io d s w e r e s tu d ie d to p r o v id e
d a ta p rio r to a n d fo llo w in g th e e ffe c tiv e d a te o f th e n e w m in im u m .
prevailed in the fertilizer, southern sawmill, and
wooden container plants.
These differences in industry and labor force
characteristics help to explain the varying effects
of the $1 minimum on industry wage structures.
It must be recognized, at the same time, that
these particular industries are not representative
of all industries. Hence, definitive conclusions
as to the short-run impact of the $1 minimum
rate on industry should be drawn with caution.
For the purpose of this article, the significant
elements of the wage structure to be examined
are (1) the distribution of nonsupervisory workers
by average hourly earnings; (2) occupational,
geographic, and industry differentials; and (3)
practices with regard to supplementary benefits.
Initial Effects of the $1 Minimum
On the Earnings Distribution. All of the 7 indus
tries employed workers whose straight-time aver
age hourly earnings were at the legal minimum
rate of 75 cents an hour in the pre-March 1956
pay periods studied. The proportion of the work
force at the minimum varied from 12 percent in
men’s seamless hosiery (studied nationwide) to
38 percent in processed waste. In these first
payroll periods, the workers earning less than $1
an hour constituted a majority of the workers in 5
of the industries; in the fertilizer industry and
footwear establishments, the proportion was two
https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
Seamless
hosiery,
men’s
Processed
waste
Fertilizer 2 Footwear
3
3
85
49
12
4
3 D a t a r e la te to A p r il 1955.
4 D a t a r e la te to O c to b e r -D e c e m b e r 1955.
fifths. The increase from 75 cents to $1 in the
legal minimum thus directly affected the earnings
of most of the workers in these industries (table 2).
Several changes obviously occurred. First, vir
tually all the workers in these industries earned a
dollar or more in April 1956. Second, a markedly
larger proportion of workers earned $1 an hour in
April 1956 as compared with the proportion who
earned 75 cents—the legal minimum—-in August
1955. Third, the percentage of workers earning
$1.25 or more generally rose less than in the lower
bracket, thus indicating a compression of the
earnings distribution.
Further evidence of this compression in wage
structures is observed by comparing the per
centage of workers in the 25-cent wage intervals
beginning at the legal minimum in the two pay
periods. In August 1955, the percentage of
workers earning 75 cents but less than $1 ranged
from 39 percent in fertilizer manufacturing to 82
percent in processed waste. In April 1956, the
percentage of workers earning $1 but less than
$1.25 ranged from 64 percent to 90 percent in
these same industries. These comparisons have
been made in terms of the first pay period studied
and April 1956, but the wage movements between
August and February in the nonseasonal industries
would not alter the inferences drawn from these
data. Two major conclusions follow: The in
crease in the minimum wage from 75 cents to $1
an hour resulted in (1) a sharp compression of the
326
MONTHLY LABOR REVIEW, MARCH 1957
earnings distribution of the work force and (2)
a higher percentage of workers at the minimum.
Average straight-time hourly earnings in April
1956 for the 7 industries ranged from $1.07 in
sawmills to $1.24 in footwear (table 3). Both the
direct wage adjustments to comply with the higher
minimum and the secondary adjustments in wage
rates above the minimum are reflected in these
averages. The minimum establishes a lower limit
to wages; above the minimum, however, the dis
tribution of workers by average hourly earnings
spreads over a considerable range of earnings.5
earnings in each industry except fertilizer were
highest in the Border States. In the case of
fertilizer, a unique situation prevailed in the
Southwest where mixed fertilizers were being
produced by firms which also produced industrial
chemicals in the same area. Wage rates in the
latter industry apparently influenced wage scales
in their fertilizer operations.
The immediate effect of the $1 minimum was
to narrow the wage differences among the regions.
In the first pay period, average hourly earnings in
the Southeast were from 82 to 96 percent as high
as the earnings in the Border States for 5 of the
industries studied. In April 1956, earnings in
these same industries in the Southeast had
climbed to within 86 to 98 percent of the earnings
in the Border States. Similarly, earnings in the
Southwest increased proportionately more than
earnings in the Border States. In the first pay
period, earnings in the Southwest—except for
fertilizer manufacturing—ranged from 78 to 96
percent of earnings in the Border States, while in
April 1956, they had increased to 89 to 98 percent.
The pattern of change immediately generated by
the $1 minimum was again reflected, with few
exceptions, by the inverse relationship between
size of increase and earnings level. The indica
tions are that in most instances the $1 minimum
exerted pressure against prevailing economic and
institutional factors so that the increases granted
were, in the main, only those required by the law.
Concurrent with the narrowing of regional
differences, a corresponding shift in interindustry
differences occurred within the regions. In the
Border States, industry average hourly earnings
On Geographic Differences. The averages for April
1956 represented increases over the 1955 pay
periods of from 7 cents to 23 cents an hour in the
areas studied. Generally, the size of the increase
between the two periods was inversely related to
the level of average hourly earnings, indicating a
greater effect on the lower than on the higher pay
ing industries. However, there were exceptions
to this general pattern which had their origin in
the differences in industry characteristics and in
the proportion of the industry located (or studied)
within the various economic regions. The differ
ences in earnings among the three economic regions
of the South and the changes that have occurred
in these differences provide a significant testing
ground for measuring the effects of minimum wage
legislation on geographic differentials. Table 3
presents average earnings by economic region for
each industry. This permits comparisons of the
effects on interindustry averages within a
more limited and somewhat more homogeneous
geographic area.
Of the 3 regions, the Southeast was most
heavily represented in terms of establishments and
employees for all 7 industries. Average hourly
s I t s h o u ld b e n o te d t h a t s o m e e m p lo y e e s o f th e s e in d u str ie s a re n o t su b je c t
to th e la w b e c a u se t h e y are n o t e n g a g ed in in te r sta te co m m e r c e , a n d o th e r s
m a y b e lea rn ers p a id a r a te le ss t h a n t h e m in im u m u n d e r a s p e c ia l c e r tific a te .
T a ble 3. — Average hourly earnings 1 in seven industries in the South, by economic region, August 1955 and April 1956
April 1956
August 1955 3
Cents-per-hour increase,
August 1955-April 1956
Industry
Total
South
Fertilizer______ _____ ____
Footwear______________ __
Processed waste_________ .
Sawmills___ _ . ___
___
Seamless hosiery, men’s . __
Seamless hosiery, children's..___
Wooden containers--.
Work shirts______________
Border
States
South
east
South
west
$1.20
1.24
1.09
1.07
1.19
$1.32
1.26
1.14
1.10
1.20
$1.45
1.23
1.01
1.08
1.11
1.20
$1.14
1.23
1.07
1.06
1.19
1.15
1.09
1.12
1.05
' ^E xcludes p r e m iu m p a y for o v e r tim e a n d for w o rk o n w e e k e n d s, h o lid a y s ,
https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
Total
South
Border
States
South
east
South
west
$1.10
1.10
.90
.91
1.06
$1.25
1.14
1.00
.98
1.04
$1.31
1.06
.78
.94
.91
1.02
$1.03
1.10
.89
.88
1.06
1.00
.89
.89
.88
Total
South
Border
States
South
east
$0.10
.14
.19
.16
.13
$0.07
.12
.14
.12
.16
.20
.18
$0.11
.13
.18
.18
.13
.15
.20
.23
South
west
$0.14
.17
.23
.14
.17
3 D a t a for fer tiliz e r r e la te to A p r il 1955 a n d for s a w m ills , to O c to b e r -D e c e m -
THE $1 MINIMUM WAGE IN SEVEN INDUSTRIES
in the 1955 pay period studied ranged from 98
cents an hour to $1.25—a difference of 27 cents;
in April 1956 the industry averages ranged from
$1.10 to $1.32—a difference of 22 cents. For
the early pay period in the Southeast, industry
averages ranged from 88 cents to $1.10—a dif
ference of 22 cents; while in April they ranged
from $1.06 to $1.23—a difference of 17 cents.
Similarly in the Southwest, industry averages in
the early pay period ranged from 78 cents to
$1.31—a difference of 53 cents; in April 1956
they ranged from $1.01 to $1.45—a difference of
44 cents. Thus the difference in interindustry
averages was reduced by 5 cents in the Border
States, 5 cents in the Southeast, and 9 cents in
the Southwest. The $1 minimum appeared to
produce some tendency toward greater equaliza
tion of rates among these industries, particularly
in the most severely affected area—the South
east—where interindustry differences were re
duced by nearly 23 percent.
On Production-Office Worker Differences. These
comparisons are based on average hourly earnings
for all nonsupervisory workers—plant and office—■
since both groups are subject to the Fair Labor
Standards Act. The combination of data for the
two groups (instead of the usual separate presen
tation) appeared to have little material effect on
the earnings picture. Although office workers
had relatively high earnings compared with pro
duction workers in these industries, office workers
accounted for 5 percent or less of all nonsuper
visory workers and their influence on the overall
average was slight. The effect of the $1 minimum
on average hourly earnings differed between office
and production workers in the expected pattern,
i. e., increases were greater for production workers
who were the lower paid. Increases between the
early pay periods and April 1956 ranged from 9
percent to 26 percent for production workers but
they were from 6 percent to 15 percent for office
workers as shown in table 4. The amount of the
increases in the averages between the two pay
periods for office workers ranged from 53 to 70
percent as high as the increases in the averages for
production workers—except in the fertilizer and
footwear industries, where office-worker average
hourly earnings increased 80 and 86 percent,
respectively, as much as wages of production
workers.
https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
327
T a ble 4. — I n c r e a s e i n a v e r a g e h o u r ly e a r n in g s l f r o m A u g u s t
1955
2 to
A p r i l 1 9 5 6 , se v e n in d u s t r i e s
Industry
All non
supervisory
workers
Production
workers
Office
workers
Cents Per Cents Per Cents Per
per cent
per cent per
cent
hour
hour
hour
Fertilizer_______________
Footwear_____
Processed waste_______
Sawmills_____
Seamless hosiery, men's . . .
Seamless hosiery, children’s .
Wooden containers____
Work shirts______________
$0.10
.14
. 19
.16
.14
.15
.20
.23
9
13
21
18
13
15
22
26
$0.10
.14
.19
.17
.14
.16
.19
.23
9
13
22
19
13
16
21
26
$0. 08
. 12
. 10
. 10
. 10
.09
. 12
.15
6
12
7
8
9
8
9
15
1 E x c lu d e s p r e m iu m p a y for o v e r tim e a n d for w o r k o n w e e k e n d s, h o lid a y s ,
a n d la te sh ifts.
2 Data for fertilizer relate to April 1955 and for sawmills, to October-December 1955.
On Employment. Concern over possible unem
ployment resulting from higher minimum rates
has often been expressed when a change in the law
is under consideration. The Fair Labor Stand
ards Act recognizes this possibility in section 2
(b):
It is hereby declared to be the policy of this act, through
the exercise by Congress of its power to regulate commerce
among the several States and with foreign nations, to
correct and as rapidly as practicable to eliminate the con
ditions above referred to in such industries w ith o u t s u b
s t a n t i a l l y c u r ta ilin g e m p lo y m e n t o r e a r n in g p o w e r .
[Italics
added.]
Past experience generally indicates that substan
tial curtailment of employment or earning power
in low-wage industries has not followed upward
revisions in the legal minimum wage. Strong
counteracting economic forces which obviated the
necessity for employers to make adjustments in
terms of employment, however, have prevailed
during these periods. Thus the increase in the
legal minimum to 40 cents an hour occurred during
World War II, and the increase to 75 cents in Jan
uary 1950 was followed within 6 months by the
Korean conflict.
The wage surveys undertaken by the Bureau to
assess the changes arising out of the $1 minimum
were not designed to provide a measure of absolute
employment changes in the industries studied,
principally because the sample excluded smaller
sized establishments—under 8 employees in saw
mills, processed waste, fertilizer, and wooden con
tainers, and under 21 employees in hosiery, work
shirts, and footwear. Despite these limitations,
the Bureau’s surveys included a large majority of
the workers in each of the industries. Therefore,
MONTHLY LABOR REVIEW, MARCH 1957
328
T a ble 5.—Selected supplementary benefits,1 August 1955
and April 1956
Percent of production workers in establish
ments providing—
Industry
Paid vaca
tions
April
1956
Fertilizer..
__________
Footwear. ------- ------Processed waste--- ----------Sawmills________ ______ ..
Seamless hosiery, men’s
Seamless hosiery, children’s . .
Wooden containers_________
Work shirts ------------- ------
85
97
73
18
63
51
50
78
Au
gust
1955
83
97
71
18
61
48
48
77
Health, in
Paid holidays surance, and
pension plans
April
1956
81
87
44
11
16
6
32
10
Au
gust
1955
78
86
40
11
11
5
30
12
April
1956
74
86
44
26
83
78
46
84
Au
gust
1955
73
85
39
26
81
76
45
83
i Supplementary wage benefits were considered applicable to all workers
if formal provisions in an establishment applied to half or more of the work
ers. Because of length-of-service and other eligibility requirements, the
p ro p o rtio n of workers currently receiving the benefits may be smaller than
estimated.
the employment changes that occurred within the
sample of identical establishments surveyed from
period to period were believed to give an approxi
mation of the short-run change in the level of em
ployment. On this basis, the current surveys indi
cate that the immediate disemployment effects of
the $1 minimum wage were relatively small.
For the 7 industries combined, the total number
of establishments declined 2 percent and employ
ment 4 percent between the 1955 payroll period
and April 1956. In terms of actual establishments,
115 apparently had gone out of business and ap
proximately 11,000 fewer workers had jobs in these
industries. Not all of this decline can be attributed
to the minimum wage. For example, of the 115
establishments that disappeared between the pay
periods, 103 were southern sawmills (employing
nearly 4,600 workers), an industry that normally
has a relatively high rate of turnover. Seamless
hosiery mills accounted for virtually all of the rest
of the loss in employment, with about 6,200 fewer
workers in April 1956 than in August 1955. Em
ployers in this industry reported a decline in sales
due to a number of factors, chiefly the entry of a
number of small marginal firms into the industry
during a preceding period of large sales volume
and the concurrent growth in the popularity of
stretch hose, a new major product which permitted
wholesalers and retailers to carry less inventory.
Employment in this industry probably would have
declined more had hours of work not been cut.
In an attempt to trace more directly the effects
on employment of the $1 minimum, the Bureau’s
https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
field representatives asked employers who re
ported discharges during the first quarter of
1956 the reasons for such actions. None of the
employers in the footwear industry attributed any
of the discharges to the $1 minimum as against
two-fifths of the employers in seamless-hosiery
mills who attributed such personnel actions to
the new minimum. Between these extremes, the
percentage of employers who made discharges
and attributed some of them to the minimum
ranged from 6 to 25 percent. Although the
minimum wage appears to have contributed to
the decrease in employment that occurred between
the pay periods studied, a combination of other
factors probably played a more important part.
These observations, it must be emphasized, are
based on data limited to the period immediately
after the $1 minimum became effective. Any
later adjustments in employment level (attribut
able to the minimum wage) are not reflected.6
On Supplementary Wage Benefits. The prevalence
of supplementary wage benefits varied widely
among these industries, but paid vacations, paid
holidays, and health, insurance, and pension
plans were available to some employees in all of
the industries. The increase in the minimum wage
appeared to have had no effect on the current
practices of plants with regard to these benefits.
None of the plants studied reduced their benefits
between the 1955 and 1956 pay periods. The
changes in the percentage of production workers
in establishments providing these benefits in
dicated in table 5 resulted from changes in in
dividual plant employment levels, not in the
incidence of benefits.
Typically, these benefits are not readily cur
tailed. They are usually expressed in formal com
pany policies or labor-management agreements.
Employees usually regard them as a part of their
overall compensation as, for example, paid vaca
tions and holidays. In other instances, such as
health, insurance, and pension programs, com
pany commitments extend over a period of time
and are not, as a rule, hastily discarded. The
extent to which these supplements might be
modified—if at all—cannot be determined except
after a more prolonged period.
« The Bureau plans to resurvey these industries in the spring of 1957 to
ascertain the longer range effects of the $1 minimum upon wages and related
practices.
Layoff, Recall, and Work-Sharing Procedures
E
N o t e .— This article concludes the series begun in the December 1956
issue' of the Review on an analysis of provisions for layoff, recall, and work
sharing procedures found in major collective bargaining agreements. The
four parts will be made available in BLS Bull. 1209. Illustrative clauses
will be found in Collective Bargaining Clauses: Lay o f, Recall, and WorkSharing Procedures {BLS Bull. 1189).
d i t o r ’s
IV—Recall Procedures; Work-Sharing
R o se T h e o d o r e *
Recall Procedures
Just as a layoff procedure in a collective bar
gaining agreement assures the employed worker
that the order of layoff, should the occasion
arise, will be equitable, a recall procedure assures
the laid-off worker that the order of return to
work will be based on similar, if not identical,
principles. Although business requirements de
termine the timing and volume of layoff and recall,
relative length of employee service is an important
and objective consideration in fixing the order
in which workers are affected. The recognition of
his equity in the job is an important right retained
by the laid-off worker under the agreement,
usually for a specified period. During recent
years, this right has been supplemented by other
rights, through collective bargaining or uni
laterally by employers, which also enhance, for
a time, the status and security of the laid-off
worker. For example, he may be entitled to
supplemental unemployment benefits financed
by the company; he may be permitted to continue
his participation in the company’s health and
insurance plan; he may preserve his credited
service under the company’s pension plan, or may
even qualify under length of service or minimum
age requirements for a deferred pension (vesting)
during a layoff period which ultimately becomes
a permanent separation.
https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
The basic principle underlying most recall pro
cedures is the return to work in inverse order of
layoff, i. e., the last person laid off is the first to be
recalled. Application of this principle, however,
is complicated by plant requirements; production
may not be resumed simultaneously in all units of
a plant or in inverse order of curtailment, nor is
the return to full production necessarily at the
same rate among units. Such situations often
result in modification of the recall principle, usually
by widening or narrowing the area of job oppor
tunity (seniority unit) or by ascribing more weight
to ability and skill than these factors may have had
in determining the order of layoff. This may be
done by mutual agreement when the exigencies
arise or may be provided for in the agreement.
Some agreements provide for such contingencies
by permitting deviation from the regular recall
procedure, as in the following provision:
It is recognized that deviations from the [stipulated]
order of recall may be made necessary by the sequence in
which plant operations are resumed. For example, in the
case where plant equipment must be put back into shape
before operations can be started, the appropriate senior
mechanical department employees required to do the work
may be recalled, even though other employees with greater
plant seniority are still laid off until such time as the de
partment is operating normally. Similarly, if a particular
operating department is to be started up and operating
*Of the Division of Wages and Industrial Relations, Bureau of Labor
Statistics.
329
MONTHLY LABOR REVIEW, MARCH 1957
330
applied in recall: 58 percent of the 1,347 agree
ments in recall and 56 percent in layoff.1 Only
28 percent of the agreements specified straight
seniority (i. e., length of service is the only factor)
in recall, in contrast to 43 percent in layoff. Re
call provisions which were not explicit or which
provided only for preference over new employees
in rehire accounted for 13 percent of the agree
ments. The remaining 1 percent provided for
recall by straight seniority for some groups and
qualified seniority for others. (See table 1.)
Qualified seniority was specified more frequently
in manufacturing than in nonmanufacturing indus
tries. Such provisions were found in slightly more
employees with the necessary qualifications and experience
in that department are required, such employees may be
recalled even though employees of other departments with
greater plant seniority are still laid off.
Of the 1,743 major agreements studied, layoff
procedures were found in 1,347, covering 5.8 mil
lion workers. Most of these agreements explicitly
set forth a recall procedure; a few, however, con
tained no reference to the manner in which recall
was to proceed. Most agreements also stipulated
the length of time that laid-off workers would
retain seniority.
Seniority in Recall. As in layoff, qualified senior
ity, whereby length of service is considered with
other factors such as ability, skill, and physical
fitness, was the predominant type of seniority
T
a ble
i
For a discussion of seniority types and their prevalence in layoff pro
cedures, see Part III—Seniority and Bumping Practices, M onthly Labor
Review, February 1957 (p. 177).
1.— Recall provisions in major collective bargaining agreements, by industry, 1954.-55
Laid-off employees recalled on the basis of—
Number with
layoff provisions
Straight seniority
Industry
Qualified senior
ity
Straight seniority
for some, quali
fied seniority for
others 1
Preference over
new employees,
seniority not a
factor
Recall procedure
not explicit
Agree- Workers Agree Workers Agree- Workers Agree- Workers Agree- Workers Agree- Workers
(thou(thouments
(thouments
(thou ments
(thouments
ments
(thou ments
sands)
sands)
sands)
sands)
sands)
sands)
All industries.
1,347
5,815.1
M anufacturing.--------------- ----------------Food and kindred products________
Tobacco m anufactures.....................
Textile-mill products--------------------Apparel and other finished textile
products___________ ___________
Lumber and wood products (except
furniture)--------- --------------- ------ Furniture and fixtures - _------- --------Paper and allied products__________
Printing, publishing, and allied indus
tries___________________________
Chemicals and allied products______
Products of petroleum and coal-.........
Rubber products______ ___________
Leather and leather products_______
Stone, clay, and glass products--------Prim ary metal industries__________
Fabricated metal products-------------Machinery (except electrical)........ —
Electrical machinery........................
Transportation equipment-------------Instruments and related products----Miscellaneous manufacturing indus
tries________________ __________
1,039
96
298
30
55
4,123.1
320.3
29.5
118.5
25
17.8
65.8
3
4.1
2
3.1
N onmanufacturing „ ................................. .
Mining, crude petroleum, and natural
gas production--------------------------T ransportation2_______ _____ ____
Communications-------------------------Utilities: Electric and gas--......... .......
Wholesale trade........................... .........
Retail trade_____________________
Hotels and restaurants_______ ______
Services______________________ _—
Construction.----- ------------------------Miscellaneous nonmanufacturing-----
10
6
17
16
53
39.2
29.2
119.5
4
4
16
14
61
26
28.1
132.6
71.7
128.8
41.7
9
14
4
1, 255.0
66.8
9.0
6.8
28.6
14.8
24.0
8.8
2
27
8
10
32
40
17
9
3,136. 5
12
296.1
43
155.0
133
562.5
2,517. 2
232.9
4.7
46.1
10
27.6
1
1. 0
28
2
1
93.9
4.8
4.5
61
9
1
2
229.4
15.8
2.5
5.6
1
1.0
2
5.5
3
1
5
7.6
1.4
10.0
1
4
1
1.8
4.9
3.2
1
9.5
4
3
4
4
1
3
2
6
6
2
2
1
11.5
6.1
23.4
75.0
1.4
18.6
3.0
24.8
9.0
4.1
5.9
1.7
17.1
17.9
80.9
97.6
36.3
19.5
15.1
62.4
583.5
114.7
232.7
286.7
572.8
49.4
1
3.1
139
29
662.5
169.2
369.8
424.0
1,205.4
64.8
16
33
32
50
34.3
15.7
21.7
70.2
28.3
121.9
79.5
615.2
6
10.1
20
29
61.5
5
12.4
22
46.9
308
1, 692.0
75
410.1
144
619.2
2
268.5
15
52
295.0
336.9
538.5
173.2
18.6
139.6
102.8
74.1
9.6
3.8
3
23
10
13
4
6
5
9
2
3.1
238.0
73.6
28.3
8.5
18.1
16.8
19.8
3.9
8
11
19.4
24.4
375.3
70.5
2
268.5
21
14
32
117
63
142
102
68
64
11
48
16
26
6
2
102.6
8
6
6
22
1 7 of these agreements combined straight seniority in recall for certain occu
pational groups or departments with qualified seniority for others; 4 used
straight seniority if the employee was recalled to his regular job classification
and qualified seniority if recalled to a new job classification; the remaining
agreement used straight seniority for employees with 7 years’ service and
qualified seniority for those with less service.
https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
642
55
6
23
90
40
100
56
85
47
34
0
22
8.6
8
57.4
44.3
14.4
2
3.8
5
1
1.2
2
1
1
2
1
1
4.7
1.5
3.5
3.3
9.4
1.2
1
1.1
2
10
1
1
2.7
50.4
2.1
2.4
1
1.0
1
1.2
15
61.0
72
333.2
1
1
6
2.8
3.0
11.9
3
4
13.8
29.5
2
17
10
11
1
17
2
9
3
4.0
71.7
86.5
62.4
1.5
50.3
12.3
40.0
4.5
2 Excludes railroads and airlines.
N ote.—Because of rounding, sums of individual items do not necessarily
equal totals.
LAYOFF, RECALL, AND WORK-SHARING PROCEDURES
than 60 percent of both layoff and recall provisions
in manufacturing agreements. In nonmanufac
turing, the proportion was 47 percent in recall and
37 percent in layoff. Recall based on qualified
seniority was provided in over 70 percent of the
agreements in the stone, clay, and glass; primary
metals; and machinery (except electrical) indus
tries.
Of the 786 agreements providing for qualified
seniority in recall, length of service was the pri
mary factor in 56 percent and a secondary factor
in 30 percent of the agreements, as indicated in
the following tabulation:
Agreements
Total__ _____ ________
Seniority governs, provided senior
employee is competent to do
available work _ ____
Seniority secondary, i. e., governs
only if ability equal to com
peting employee. _ _____
Consideration given seniority not
clear
_ _ __ _ _
Consideration given seniority varies
by length of service or type
of occupation___
_____
Workers
(thousands)
786
3, 136. 5
443
1, 656. 9
237
1, 023. 3
98
425. 1
8
31. 2
Where seniority was the primary factor, experience
on similar or related work, either with the employer or with other firms, was often accepted as
demonstration of ability. In some instances, the
employee was to be given a short trial period to
prove his ability. Under clauses where seniority
was secondary, the first test was that of ability
or fitness. As between two competing employees,
if ability was equal or relatively equal, length of
service was the determining factor.
Straight seniority governed the order of recall
in 373 agreements, accounting for 28 percent of
manufacturing and 24 percent of nonmanufactur
ing agreements, in contrast to 37 percent and 62
percent, respectively, in layoff. In each industry
except lumber, the number of agreements provid
ing for straight seniority in recall was lower than
in layoff; the difference was most marked in the
communications industry, with 15 percent pro
viding for straight seniority in recall and 90 per
cent in layoff.
A combination of both straight and qualified
seniority was applied in recall under the terms of
12 agreements. The factors determining the type
s For a discussion of seniority units, see Part III of this series, op. cit.
(p. 183).
4 1 7 2 3 2 — 5 7 --------- 5
https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
331
of seniority applicable were the occupational
groups or departments in seven instances ; and the
employee’s length of service in another. In four
such agreements, including the national anthracite
and bituminous coal contracts, straight seniority
governed recall to the employee’s former job, and
qualified seniority governed recall to a new job
classification.
Relation Between Layoff and Recall Procedures.
In 964 agreements, covering 68 percent of the
workers under layoff procedures, the order of re
call was determined by the same method appli
cable to layoff, i. e., type of seniority, weight given
to ability, skill, or other factors, and composition
of the seniority unit (table 2).2 Such procedures
would normally result in recall in inverse order of
layoff, if production were resumed in the same
order as it was curtailed. In a number of these
agreements, workers were given a wider job area
for reemployment by a proviso granting preference
in rehire to laid-off employees before new workers
could be hired. Thus, employees with recall
rights in a unit where operations had not yet
resumed would have preference in employment in
other units of the company which were expanding.
In another group of 133 agreements, the recall
procedure was not explicit. However, it is
probable that the intent, in many of these agree
ments, was to follow the same principles in recall
as in layoff. This group also included 6 master
agreements which provided for negotiation of
layoff and recall provisions at the local level.
In the remaining 250 agreements, recall pro
cedure differed from that used in layoff. The
major type of difference, found in 140 agreements,
was in the use of qualified seniority for recall as
against straight seniority for layoff. In general,
such procedure modifications are designed to
facilitate recall of workers to jobs that they can
perform, without the cost of extensive retraining,
if their regular work is not available. Some of
these clauses were found in agreements which con
tained specific provision for broadening the
seniority unit or granted laid-off employees prefer
ence in reemployment over new hires in other
units. It is probable that where clauses specify
ing qualified seniority occurred in the absence of
provisions for broadening the seniority unit, they
were designed to implement informal arrange
ments to this effect. In a relatively small propor-
MONTHLY LABOR REVIEW, MARCH 1957
332
tion of the 140 agreements, the employee’s physi
cal fitness at the time of recall was the only factor
qualifying length of service. Usually such clauses
merely required that the employee be physically
fit or physically able to do the job. Less fre
quently, the agreement specified that the employee
was required to pass a physical examination before
reemployment.
Only 33 agreements which provided for qualified
seniority in layoff based recall on straight seniority.
Kecall provisions in 43 agreements, contrary to the
procedure for layoff, did not specify seniority as a
factor, but protected laid-off employees in other
ways, either by banning new hires until all laid-off
employees were recalled, or by providing for prefer
ence in reemployment over new workers.
Other areas of difference in layoff and recall
procedures, found in 34 agreements, involved (1)
the weight given length of service, which was
secondary to ability in layoff but primary in recall;
(2) the seniority unit applicable, which was wider
for recall than layoff; or (3) the use of straight
seniority for some groups and qualified for others
T a ble 2.— Relation between layoff and recall procedures
in major collective bargaining agreements, 1954—55
L a y o ff a n d reca ll p ro cedu res
A g ree
m e n ts
T o t a l w it h b o th la y o ff a n d reca ll p r o v is io n s ---------------------
1,347
T o t a l w it h s tr a ig h t s e n io r ity in la y o f f ------------------------------R e c a ll procedu re:
S a m e as in la y o ff— s tr a ig h t s e n io r ity --------------------------D iffe r s from la y o ff p r o c e d u r e ______________
______
Q u a lified s e n io r it y ------------------------------------------------S tr a ig h t s e n io r ity for s o m e g rou p s; q u a lifie d for
o th ers
______________________ - ______________
S e n io r ity n o t a fa cto r, b u t preferen ce g iv e n in
r e h ir e ___ __________________________ - _______
N o t e x p lic it ___________________________________________
579
2 ,9 7 4 .1
336
169
140
1, 587. 5
1 ,0 2 4 .1
635.6
T o ta l w it h q u a lifie d s e n io r ity in la y o f f ___________________
R e c a ll procedu re:
S a m e as in la y o ff— q u a lifie d s e n io r ity ________________
D iffe r s from la y o ff p ro c e d u r e -------------------------------------Q u a lified s e n io r ity , b u t p ro ced u re differs i ---------S tr a ig h t s e n io r ity _________________________________
S e n io r ity n o t a fa cto r, b u t preferen ce g iv e n in
r e h ir e ___ - ____________________________________
N o t e x p lic it _____________ _____________________________
T o ta l w it h s tr a ig h t s e n io r ity for so m e g ro u p s a n d q u a li
fie d s e n io r ity for oth ers in la y o f f _____________ _________
R e c a ll p rocedure:
S a m e as in la y o ff— c o m b in a tio n o f str a ig h t a n d
q u a lifie d s e n io r ity ___________________________________
D iffe r s from la y o ff p ro c e d u r e -------------------------------------S tr a ig h t s e n io r ity _________________________________
Q u a lifie d s e n io r ity ................... .............................................
N o t e x p lic it ___________________________________________
T o ta l w it h t y p e o f s e n io r ity in la y o ff a n d reca ll n o t
s p e c ifie d (m a ster a g r e e m e n ts)_____ ____ ______________
W ork ers
(th o u
sa n d s)
5 ,8 1 5 .1
5
28 0 .3
24
74
108 .2
362.5
749
2, 737. 5
621
76
24
33
2, 329 .3
278.9
160.6
71 .5
19
52
4 6 .8
129.3
13
4 3 .6
7
5
4
1
1
2 5 .4
7 .3
6 .0
1 .3
6
59 .9
10.9
i Most of these clauses differed in that (1) in layoff the weight given length
of service was secondary to ability, but in recall it was the major factor if the
employee was capable of doing the work; or (2) the seniority unit applicable
in layoff was narrower than in recall.
N ote.—Because of rounding, sums of individual items do not necessarily
equal totals.
https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
T a b l e 3.— Preference to laid-off employees in rehiring,
provided
1954-55
by
major
collective
bargaining
Types of preference given laid-off employees in rehire
agreements,
Agree Workers
(thou
ment
sands)
Total with layoff provisions___________________ - __
1,347
5, 815.1
With provisions for preference in reh ire-__
No now hires until laid-off employees recalled____
Preference in rehire over new employees _____
Some preference in rehire in other plants of com_____ _ - ___ _____ __ _ _ _
pany1
Other 2
________ ____________________ --
440
264
142
1. 782. 5
783. 4
521.1
11
23
416.4
61.6
14 agreements limited preference to employment in new plants only and in
2 instances, preference was applicable only during the first 6 months of
operation of the new plant. The remaining 7 agreements granted preference
in other plants of the company, but in 3 instances, this was limited to employ
ees laid off because of plant closing.
2 Includes agreements which banned new hires for certain departments
only, or where'employees with a specified amount of seniority were involved;
banned new hires “insofar as practical,” or waived the ban where special
skill or training was required for new work; or permitted new hires in
emergencies until laid-off employees returned to work. Also includes agree
ments which granted preference to laid-off employees if work of a different
nature developed; or granted preference to employees who had lost their
seniority combined with a ban on new hires where seniority employees were
involved.
N ote.—Because of rounding, sums of individual items do not necessarily
equal totals.
in either layoff or recall, where either straight or
qualified seniority was specified in the reverse
situation.
Preference in Reemployment. In addition to the
43 agreements which did not specify seniority as
a factor, but granted preference in reemployment,
397 agreements with provision for seniority in
recall gave further protection to laid-off workers
by requiring preference in reemployment (table 3).
As stated earlier, this procedure may provide the
laid-off employee a wider area of job opportunity
for recall than was applicable in layoff.
Three-fifths of the 440 preference clauses banned
new hires until laid-off employees were recalled.
The bulk of the remaining clauses provided for
preference over new workers in rehire. Variations
in a limited number of clauses included preference
to employees who had lost their seniority combined,
with a ban on new hires where seniority employees
were still laid off; ban on new hires for certain
departments only, or where employees with a
specified amount of seniority were involved, or
“insofar as practical” ; or preference to laid-off
employees if work of a different nature developed.
A few agreements waived the ban on new hires in
emergency situations; persons so employed would,
however, have temporary status pending the recall
of laid-off workers.
Extension of the area of reemployment prefer
ence to other plants of the same company was
LAYOFF, RECALL, AND WORK-SHARING PROCEDURES
provided for in 11 agreements. In 4, preference
was limited to new plants only; and in 2 of these,
in the automotive industry, preference was ap
plicable only during the first 6 months of opera
tion.3 In 3 agreements, preference was limited to
employees laid off because of plant closing. Prefer
ence in employment in other plants was not limited
in the remaining 4 agreements.
Retention of Seniority. The employee’s retention
of his seniority status during extended layoffs is a
generally accepted practice. Provisions covering
seniority retention were found in 975 agreements,
covering 75 percent of the workers under agree
ments with layoff clauses (table 4). Nearly all of
these agreements specified a maximum period of
retention; only 49 provided that seniority continue
indefinitely during layoffs.
Sometimes management and unions hold di
vergent views on the length of time that seniority
should be retained. Unions tend to argue that a
short retention period unjustly penalizes the laidoff worker by forfeiture of the rights he has earned
by his years of service. Since seniority is a central
factor in determining not only eligibility for recall,
but also promotions, vacation benefits, pension
eligibility, and other benefits during reemploy
ment, the period of retention is of considerable
concern to workers in a layoff situation. From a
management viewpoint, the retention of employees
on a recall list provides a pool of experienced work
ers to draw on when needed; high seniority em
ployees, even though employed elsewhere, often
prefer to return to their jobs when recalled in order
to preserve the benefits acquired through length of
service. However, some employers object to
long-term retention on the grounds that laid-off
employees working in other occupations for an
extended period may have lost their skill and speed.
Another objection is that, after lengthy layoffs,
there is a stronger possibility of the employee’s
rejection of the job offer, with consequent delay
before new employees could be hired.
3
The Executive Board of the United Automobile Workers on September
20, 1956, instructed “ all regional directors and department directors to ap
proach employers within their jurisdictions with a view to negotiating
supplemental agreements which will include:
“ (a) New provisions on the broadening and strengthening of existing
contract provisions, requiring corporations, when hiring in any plant, to
give preference in order of seniority to workers laid off from their other plants;
and
“ (b) Provisions to require employers, when hiring, to give preference to
laid-off workers in the same area and industry, taking into consideration the
seniority of such workers with their former employers.”
https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
333
A uniform period of seniority retention appli
cable to all employees regardless of differences
in length of service was provided by more than
half of the agreements with retention clauses.
Retention periods of from 1 to 2 years, inclusive,
were specified in 460 agreements, covering nearly
half of the workers under agreements with reten
tion clauses. One-year periods were most pre
dominant, but agreements providing 2-year periods
covered nearly twice as many workers. Seniority
was retained for less than 1 year in only 67 agree
ments, and for more than 2 years in 83.
The period of retention was related to the em
ployee’s length of service under 283 agreements.
In 126, the period was equal to the employee’s
length of service. However, this was limited to a
maximum number of years, varying from 1 to 7
in 72 agreements, and to 3 years in addition to
length of service in 1 agreement. Relatively
short-service employees were granted additional
protection in 20 of the 126 agreements by provid4.—Seniority retention period for laid-off employees
under major collective bargaining agreements, 1954-55
T able
P e r io d o f s e n io r ity r e te n tio n s
T o t a l w it h la y o ff p r o v is io n s ________________________
N o referen ce to r e te n tio n o f s e n io r ity a fter la y o ff.
W it h p r o v is io n s for r e te n tio n o f se n io r ity a fter la y o f f .
P e r io d o f r e te n tio n :
L e s s t h a n 1 y e a r __________ _______ _____ _ _
1 year
______
. . . ___ __ . . . ________
M o r e th a n 1, b u t le ss t h a n 2 y e a r s _________ .
2 y e a r s ________________________________________
M o r e t h a n 2 y e a r s ______ ___________ .
E q u a l to e m p lo y e e ’s le n g th o f s e r v ic e ___
E q u a l to e m p lo y e e ’s le n g th o f se r v ic e u p to a m a x i
m u m n u m b e r o f y ea r s 1_______
R e la te d in s o m e o th e r r a tio t o e m p lo y e e 's le n g th of
s e r v ic e ________
_ _
_____ ___
F o r s p e c ifie d p eriod; th e n c o n tin u e d for a d d itio n a l
p e r io d , p r o v id e d e m p lo y e e r e q u e sts e x te n s io n ____
E q u a l to le n g th o f se r v ic e or s p e c ifie d p e r io d , w h ic h
e v e r is g r e a te r 3_____________________________ _
C o n tin u e s in d e f in it e ly __________________________
C o n tin u e s in d e fin ite ly , p r o v id e d e m p lo y e e ta k e s
p rescrib ed a c tio n 3________________________ ________
O th er 4___________________________ ______
A gree
m e n ts
W o rk ers
(th o u
sa n d s)
1,347
5, 815.1
372
975
1,469. 2
4 ,3 4 5 .9
67
197
102
161
83
33
182.8
716 .8
294 .2
1 ,1 4 5 .3
261.6
36 5 .8
73
356.1
157
435.5
21
110.1
20
18
242.1
76.7
31
12
108.8
50.1
i
Maximum periods specified were: 5 years in 25 agreements, 3 years in 12,
2 years in 16,1 year in 13, and from lj-i to 7 years in 6 agreements. The re
maining agreement provided for retention equal to length of service, plus 3
additional years.
3 Seniority was retained for a minimum period of 1 year under 13 of these
agreements; for minimum periods of 1Y, 2, or 3 years in the remaining 7.
3 In practically all instances, the actions prescribed consisted of periodic
notification by the employee of his desire to remain on the recall list—most
frequently at semiannual or annual intervals.
4 Includes agreements with no limitation on duration of seniority retention
for skilled classifications, or for employees with a specified amount of service
(5 and 15 years); agreements with a longer retention period for certain skilled
classifications; or a shorter period if the employee refused work other than in
his regular occupation. Under 1 agreement, the provision was not applicable
if 20 percent of the employees were laid off for over a year; one prohibited loss
of seniority due to layoff during the 5-year term of the agreement; another
agreement limited retention of seniority beyond the termination date of the
agreement or any renewal or amendment.
N ote.—Because of rounding, sums of individual items do not necessarily
equal totals.
334
ing for retention of seniority for minimum periods
of 1 to 3 years if these were greater than the
employee’s length of service. Retention for a
period equal to the employee’s length of service
was not limited in the remaining 33 agreements
in this group.
In 157 of the 283 agreements, the period of
retention was related to length of service in some
other ratio, such as one-half the length of service;
1 month for each year of service; or periods of
2 years for less than 2 years’ service and 5 years
for 2 years or more. Some of the agreements in
this group also set an upper limit on the length of
time that seniority could be retained by a laid-off
worker.
Another group of 21 agreements specified an
initial period of retention, after which seniority
could be further retained if the employee took
prescribed action—usually notification at stated
intervals of his desire to remain on the recall list.
Other variations, found in 12 agreements, in
cluded provisions with no limitation on duration
of seniority retention for skilled classifications, or
for employees with a specified amount of service;
provisions for a longer retention period for certain
skilled classifications; or for a shorter period if
the employee refused work other than his regular
occupation.
The degree of freedom accorded workers on
layoff to accept or reject proffered work varied.
In some agreements, rejection of proffered work
did not affect the employee’s recall status; in
others, such action limited his recall rights to his
former occupation or job, limited the period dur
ing which his seniority was retained, or resulted in
loss of seniority rights. Similar penalties were
invoked under some agreements if the employee
failed to report for work or to reply to the recall
notice within a specified time. Exceptions were
sometimes permitted if the employee could not
report because of illness or for other valid reasons.
The method of recalling workers was specified
in a number of agreements. Such provisions re
quired that notice be given by mail, registered
mail, telegram, telephone, or some other specified
device. Notification to the union was sometimes
required at the time recall notices were sent out.
Other agreements left the method of recall to the
employer’s discretion. No attempt was made in
this study to determine the prevalence of these
phases of recall provisions.
https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
MONTHLY LABOR REVIEW, MARCH 1957
Work-Sharing
Layoff and recall procedures based on seniority
favor workers in proportion to their length of
service. If layoffs materialize, workers with
relatively low seniority may expect to be laid off
early and recalled late; the high seniority workers
may expect the reverse or that they might not be
affected at all. In contrast, a work-sharing
procedure implies an equal division of available
work among qualified employees, regardless of
differences in length of service. Slackening of
work would thus affect all employees in the
sharing unit in about the same way.
On the whole, the principle of work-sharing
appears to be attractive to many companies and
unions up to a certain point. For example,
management might favor a reduction of scheduled
weekly hours for all employees, prior to resorting
to layoffs, so as to keep intact the work force and
individual work groups, but would not want to
carry this procedure beyond the point where
plant efficiency is impaired. Unions, on the other
hand, might favor the principle of equal treatment
for all union members in the establishment, but
not to the point where no one earns a living wage.
The availability of unemployment compensation
and the expansion of the economy over the past
two decades have undoubtedly had a profound
influence on current attitudes toward work-shar
ing, tending to restrict its use. Supplementary
unemployment benefit plans may also, in time,
modify some procedures.
Two basic types of work-sharing appear in
agreements: (1) temporary reduction of scheduled
weekly hours for all workers in a plant or unit in
order to forestall and minimize layoffs, and (2)
equal division of work to take the place of layoffs.
Approximately 20 percent of the 1,743 major
agreements studied required the employer to
reduce hours before regular employees were laid
off.4 Only 4 percent provided for work-sharing
in lieu of layoff, either for as long as work is
available or layoff can reasonably be avoided.
The following discussion deals with this 4 percent
of the agreements which apply the principle of
equal division of work.
Seventy-four agreements, covering approxi
mately 525,000 workers, provided for work1 See Part I, tables 5 and 6, M onthly Labor Review, December 1956 (pp.
1392 and 1393).
LAYOFF, RECALL, AND WORK-SHARING PROCEDURES
sharing in lieu of layoff. Such arrangements were
scattered through 10 industries, nearly all manu
facturing.5 However, 47 of the 74 agreements
were in apparel manufacturing, accounting for
all but 5 of the major agreements in that industry
group. The food, textile, printing, and leather
industries accounted for 18 of the remaining 27
agreements.
Almost all of the work-sharing plans, covering
98 percent of the workers under such arrange
ments, were in agreements negotiated by multi
employer groups.6 Bargaining through employer
associations is the general practice in the apparel
industry, and is fairly common in most of the
other industries with work-sharing plans.
Arrangements for equal division of work involve
a determination of who will share the work and
the area within which work-sharing will take
place. The work-sharing unit may vary according
to type of establishment and the complexities
of the processes involved. Thus the unit may
include all or only portions of the labor force
covered by the agreement. If skills are not
readily interchangeable, work-sharing may be
done on an occupational or craft basis, rather
than by department or plant. Departmental
units may be specified if skills are interchangeable
within departments or the nature of the business
is such that curtailment of production does not
affect all departments in the plant.
Fifty-four of the 74 work-sharing agreements
specified the work-sharing unit. In almost half
of these, work was to be shared on the basis of
occupation, craft, or classification; in slightly
more than a fourth, by plant; and in the re
maining agreements, by department.7
https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
335
In order to increase the work opportunities for
regular employees, layoffs of temporary, probational, or short-service employees may be made
before work-sharing begins.8 However, 61 of the
74 agreements provided for equal division of work
among all employees in the plant or work-sharing
unit. It is likely that, in actual practice, work
sharing was limited to regular employees. The
remaining 13 agreements specifically provided for
sharing work among regular employees. Tem
porary, probational, “peak force,” and, in 2
instances, employees with less than 6 months’
service were to be laid off. Further consideration
was given length of service in 2 of these agree
ments : One, in the apparel industry, provided for
equal division of work as far as practical among
employees who had worked for the employer for
2 consecutive seasons; the other provided for
preference in work-sharing, if possible, to employees
with the longest service. A few agreements, also
in the apparel industry, excluded certain occupa
tions (e. g., workers on sample garments) from the
work-sharing plan. Such workers were subject
to layoff and recall by seniority.
5 See Part I, table 1, op. cit. (p. 1386).
6 See Part I, table 2, op. cit. (p. 1387).
71n the apparel industry, it should be noted, a department or plant unit
may roughly coincide with what might be called an occupational or classifica
tion unit in a more diversified industry or one comprising larger establish
ments.
8 Other devices for increasing work opportunities for regular employees
were discussed in Part I (tables 3 and 4). The small number of work-sharing
arrangements in major agreements and the concentration of such arrange
ments in apparel industries would seem to undermine any generalization,
based on agreement analysis, relating the practice of work-sharing to the
relatively high prevalence of provisions regulating subcontracting, overtime,
shift operations, and employment practices, as shown in Part I. In other
words, both aspects may be independent characteristics of labor-management
relationships in the apparel industries.
Summaries of Studies and Reports
Automobile and N ew Appliance
Purchases in Six Cities, 1953-56
u t o m o b i l e s and television sets were the most
popular of 7 “big ticket” durables purchased by
families in 6 cities in recent periods, as shown by
exploratory surveys by the Bureau of Labor Sta
tistics. New appliances were purchased most
frequently in appliance stores in practically all the
cities, with a substantial proportion of them
bought at sale or special prices. Consumers in
the four large cities made from one-third to fourfifths of their major appliance purchases in neigh
borhood or suburban stores. Residents of the two
small cities bought about a fourth of their new
major appliances in other communities. The
practice of making trade-ins varied considerably
from city to city for the appliances but was
common for automobile purchases in all six cities.
The spread of liberal discount and trade-in
practices, as well as the accelerated movement of
large-city families to the suburbs, prompted the
Bureau of Labor Statistics in 1955 to ask families
where they bought, and what they paid, for auto
mobiles and six major appliances. Their replies
disclosed the number of cars or appliances bought,
the type of store in which purchased, the propor
tion of suburban versus downtown shopping, the
type of price paid, and the number of purchases
involving trade-in allowances. The information,
particularly on the kind and location of stores in
which families purchased appliances, is being used
by the Bureau to improve the sample of stores from
which prices are collected for the Consumer Price
Index.
sewing machines—during specified purchase peri
ods in 1953-56.1
The six cities surveyed and the various periods
of purchases covered are:
A
Scope of the Survey
During the 13-month period ending March 1956,
interviewers asked 1,650 families for information
about their purchases of new and used cars and 6
new appliances—television sets, washing ma
chines, refrigerators, vacuum cleaners, stoves, and
336
https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
Small communities:
Anna, 111_________
Shenandoah, Iowa_
Large cities:
San Francisco.
Calif.
Washington, D. C_
Houston, Tex____
Baltimore, Md___
Survey month
Purchase period covered i
Mar. 1955_
Apr. 1955-
Jan. 1953-Mar. 1955
Jan. 1953-Apr 1955
June 1955-
Jan. 1953-June 1955
Nov. 1955Feb. 1956_
Mar. 1956_
Jan. 1954-Nov. 1955
Jan. 1954-Feb. 1956
Jan. 1954-Mar. 1956
i Purchases made in the survey month prior to the date of interview were
recorded.
Differences in the annual rates of purchase between
cities may have resulted to some extent from
differences in the time periods studied.
In the four large cities, interviewers visited
families living in the suburbs as well as those
residing within the city limits. In the two small
cities, only families living within the city limits
were interviewed.
The accompanying tables apply to all families
interviewed. In order to segregate purchases of
“index families” (i. e., wage earners and clerical
workers) for Bureau study, interviewers recorded
the occupation of the head of the household but
did not request family income data.2 When pur
chases of index families, as approximated by oc
cupation, appeared to have special significance,
the text indicates how they differed.
Rate of Purchase
Automobiles were purchased by more families
than any of the six appliances, in the cities sur
veyed, except Baltimore and Anna, 111. (table
1). In these two cities, television sets were the
1 For brief information regarding the sample design, see p. 340 of this issue.
The Consumer Price Index measures the retail price trend of goods and
services bought by families of wage earners and clerical workers; hence they
are known as “ index families.” The head of the family, who was usually
the chief Income earner, was classified as (a) self-employed, (b) employed by
others, or (c) unemployed, retired, or other. If employed by others, the
interviewer ascertained the kind of work performed and the nature of the
employer’s business.
2
337
AUTOMOBILE AND NEW APPLIANCE PURCHASES
most popular item. Of the appliances, television
sets were the most commonly bought in each city.
On the whole, washing machines ranked second,
and vacuum cleaners competed with refrigerators
for third place. Cooking stoves usually ranked
fifth in frequency of purchase. Sewing machines
represented the smallest percentage of the total
purchases of the six appliances, possibly because
a number of these durable machines are bought
“used.”
In terms of annual rate of purchase, Houston
families purchased far more of the 6 types of new
appliances combined than residents of the other 5
cities. Purchases were fewest among Washington
families, despite comparatively high average in
come. In this connection, it is important to
know that 71 percent of Washington’s rental units
furnished refrigerators and 92 percent included
stoves in the equipment as of 1950,3 so purchases
of these appliances by renters would be expected
to be correspondingly low in Washington. On
the other hand, less than one-third of the rental
units in Houston provided these appliances in
1950, thus Houston renters bought more cooking
stoves and refrigerators than renters in the other
five cities. (See table 2.) Families in Anna,
where less than a fifth of the rental units were
equipped with cooking stoves and refrigerators in
1950, reported the second highest rate of purchase
of these two household appliances in the 6 cities.
Families in Houston and Anna, probably stimu
lated by improvements in telecast facilities for
both cities during the periods surveyed, bought
television sets at a much higher rate than families
in the other four cities. Washington’s families
purchased fewest television sets, about two-thirds
as many as did families in Houston and Anna.
Index families in Washington reported buying
about half as many sets as index families in the
other five cities. A higher rate of television
ownership may have been reached in Washington
3 For data on housing facilities, see Housing Surveys in 75 Cities, 1950 and
1952, Monthly Labor Review, July 1954 (p. 744).
4 The Federal Reserve System’s Surveys of Consumer Finances reported
that the following percentages of spending units bought used and new cars
in 1953, 1954, and 1955:
1955
1954
1953
All spending units_______ ________
Clerical and sales workers_____
Skilled and semiskilled________
Unskilled and service________
https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
New Used New Used New Used
15
11
17
8
16
9
14
8
15
15
9
10
12
22
7
»
20
26
4
4
14
21
4
17
1.— Rate of purchase of automobiles and new appli
ances per 100 families reporting in 6 cities for specified
purchase periods, 1953-56 1
T able
Number of items purchased per year per 100
families
Items purchased
Automobiles_________
New automobiles...
Used automobiles...
Appliances:
Television sets____
Washing machines..
Refrigerators--------Vacuum cleaners__
Cooking sto v e s___
Sewing machines. . .
Number of families reporting... ------------
Shen
an
doah,
Iowa
Wash
ington,
D. C.
Balti
more,
Md.
Hous
ton,
Tex.
San
Fran
cisco,
Calif.
Anna,
111.
15.9
11.2
4.7
9.8
5.7
4.1
18.2
9.4
8.8
12.7
6.2
6.5
11.1
6.7
4.4
18.3
7.4
10.9
8.1
6.0
2.2
6.3
1.6
1.6
10.7
5.1
4.5
4.5
2.9
1.9
13.3
7.7
6.4
6.2
6.1
3.0
9.5
5.1
4.4
4.0
2.9
2.9
13.1
6.4
5. 9
3. 5
4.0
1.3
12.1
7.4
4.3
4.3
2.7
2.3
289
426
425
220
180
110
1 For purchase periods surveyed, see text on p. 336 of this issue.
than in most of the other five cities prior to the
purchase periods covered in the surveys, due to
early introduction of good network coverage and
comparatively high average income level.
Car purchases averaged 1 for every 5 or 6
families per annum in Houston, Washington, and
Shenandoah, compared with 1 for every 9 or 10
families per year in Baltimore and Anna. Used
cars accounted for a relatively high rate of car pur
chases in Shenandoah, where approximately 11
used cars were bought each year per 100 families
interviewed, as compared with about 16 used cars
purchased per 100 index families.
The ratios of new to used car purchases in the 6
cities averaged 1.2 new cars to every used car
purchased and exceeded the national ratio of new
to used car sales for recent years. For example,
70 percent of the automobiles bought by families
surveyed in Washington were new when pur
chased, well above the proportion of cars pur
chased “new” in the last 3 years nationally.4
Shenandoah was the only city surveyed in which
the ratio of new to used car purchases (0.68 to 1)
approximated the estimated national ratio of new
to used car purchases.
On the whole, index families bought more auto
mobiles than nonindex families. However, they
bought more used cars and fewer new cars than
did nonindex families. In 4 out of 6 cities, a
higher proportion of homeowners than of tenants
bought cars, with renters buying more used cars
than did homeowners in 5 of the 6 cities.
338
MONTHLY LABOR REVIEW, MARCH 1957
Place of Purchase
Consumers bought television sets most often in
general appliance stores. Department stores
ranked second in the large cities, while in the small
cities, auto accessory stores were also frequently
patronized. Washington families obtained 22 per
cent of their sets from firms which they identified
as ‘‘discount houses” (which may be an under
statement of the proportion because of the problem
of defining discount houses). In each of the large
cities except Baltimore, the largest percentage of
washing machines was sold to the interviewed
families by retail stores of mail-order firms. Balti
more families purchased 27 percent of their wash
ing machines in department stores, 27 percent in
appliance stores, and only 18 percent in mail-order
stores. Vacuum cleaners as well as sewing ma
chines were commonly bought in stores specializing
in their sale and servicing. One exception was
Washington, where door-to-door salesmen sold
46 percent of the vacuum cleaners to the families
interviewed and accounted for one-ninth of the
appliance sales. Purchases from door-to-door
salesmen did not make up a significant proportion
of the total in the other cities.
Practically all new cars were bought from
franchised dealers. About 18 percent of the new
car purchases in Houston, however, were re
ported to have been made from independent (nonfranchised) dealers, which included used car
dealers. In each of the four large cities, threefifths of the used cars were obtained from usedcar dealers, but in Shenandoah about one-fourth
and in Anna only one-ninth of the used cars were
bought from used-car dealers. New-car dealers
sold most of the used cars in both of the small
Type oj Store {or Other Distributor). Families
bought more of the new appliances in general
appliance stores than in any other type of store.
(See table 3.) When general appliance stores
are combined with the specialty appliance stores—
radio and television, automobile accessory and
appliance, vacuum cleaner and sewing ma
chine—the proportion of appliances purchased in
these types ranged from 33 percent in Houston to
82 percent in Anna. Consumers in the two small
cities bought, in general, twice as many appliances
in this combination of appliance stores as did
families in the large cities.
About 15 percent of the purchases reported for
the 6 appliances in the large cities were made in
department stores and from 7 to 22 percent were
made in retail stores of mail order houses. Neither
Anna nor Shenandoah had department stores.
Washington, where fair-trade laws are not in
effect, was the only city in which families bought a
sizable portion (14 percent) of the surveyed appli
ances in discount stores so designated by the
families. Baltimore families reported that they
purchased about 9 percent of the 6 appliances in
stores which they regarded as discount houses, but
families in the other 4 cities did not make many
purchases in stores which they classified as dis
count houses. This is a difficult distinction to
make in any city, because it is not always possible
to differentiate between appliance stores and dis
count houses. There were no outstanding differ
ences between the types of stores patronized by
index families and other families.
T a ble 2. — Rate of purchase of automobiles and new appliances per 100 families reporting in 6 cities for specified purchase
periods, by homeownership status, 1958-561
Number of items purchased per year per 100 families
Items purchased
Automobiles____
____
N ew automob iles___
Used automobiles_______
Appliances:
Television sets_____
Washing machines--------Refrigerators________
Vacuum cleaners___
Cooking stoves____
Sewing machines_______
Number of families reporting,,
Washington, D. C.
Baltimore, Md.
Owner
Tenant
Owner
Tenant
Owner
Tenant
17.1
12.5
4.6
14.4
9.6
4.8
9.9
6.7
3.2
9.7
4.6
5.1
17.6
10.6
7.0
19.3
7.3
12.0
6.2
6.6
3.3
6.2
2.6
1.3
10.4
6.0
.8
5.6
0.4
2.0
12.2
4.8
5.1
4.8
3.8
2.1
9.0
4.1
3.7
5.5
1.8
1.6
12.3
7.6
6.2
8.8
4.7
3.2
15.2
3.8
6.9
5.7
8.5
2.8
159
130
233
193
1 For purchase periods surveyed, see text on p. 336 of this issue.
https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
Houston, Tex.
273
152
San Francisco,
Calif.
Owner
Anna, 111.
Shenandoah, Iowa
Tenant
Owner
Tenant
Owner
13.2
5.9
7.3
12.3
6.5
5.8
9.6
6.6
3.0
12.6
6.8
5.8
19.4
12.1
7.3
17.3
3.0
14.3
8.8
2.2
3.3
6.2
2.2
4.8
10.1
5.8
5.4
4.0
3.6
1.1
11.6
2.5
5.6
8.1
4.0
1.5
14.5
4.3
6.3
4.8
3.9
1.4
13.7
4.0
5.7
8.1
1.6
3.2
10.5
4.5
3.0
6.8
3.8
1.5
88
92
53
57
109
111
Tenant
AUTOMOBILE AND NEW APPLIANCE PURCHASES
339
cities. In San Francisco 30 percent, and in
Houston 16 percent, of the used cars were bought
from their former owners. Few cars were ac
quired from their previous owners in the other
cities.
T able 3.— P e r c e n ta g e d is tr ib u tio n o f n e w a p p l i a n c e p u r
Location of Store. Location of residence and
availability of parking space for shoppers seemed
to determine most strongly where families bought
appliances in each city except Baltimore. (See
table 3.) In Washington, Houston, and San
Francisco, the largest number of purchases, 58
to 81 percent, were made in neighborhood and
suburban shopping areas. Respondents in Hous
ton bought over half of their appliances in neigh
borhood shops located within the city limits.
Baltimore families said they made 56 percent of
their appliance selections in stores located down
town. Families living in Washington and San
Francisco—cities with large residential suburbs
and extensive suburban shopping facilities—
purchased 23 percent and 46 percent, respectively,
of their appliances in suburban stores. In those
2 cities, the proportion of appliance purchases
made in downtown stores was correspondingly
low, 29 percent in Washington and 16 percent in
San Francisco. Baltimore families reported the
lowest volume of appliances bought in suburban
stores, only 1 percent.
Information obtained in San Francisco about
the location of automobile dealerships showed that
automobile buyers in that city tended to make
more of their purchases in the downtown area
than did appliance shoppers.5 Purchasers of
automobiles in the small cities bought about
three-tenths of their new cars and one- to twofifths of their used cars in other communities.
Total purchases______ _____
Competitive Prices
Many consumers obtained appliances at sale
prices or other special prices below the store’s
regular price.6 (See table 4.) The highest pro
portion of purchases made at less than regular
prices was reported for refrigerators and washing
5
Families in Baltimore, Houston, and Washington were not asked about
the location of the automobile dealers they patronized.
8 The Bureau defined “regular price” as the price charged by the store as its
usual policy. For example, the usual discount price regularly charged for an
item in a discount store was the regular price for that kind of store. If a
department or appliance store usually charged the nationally advertised or
the manufacturer’s suggested list price, then for those stores this price was
the regular price.
417282— 57-------6
https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
c h a se s b y t y p e a n d lo c a tio n o f sto r e , b y f a m i l i e s r e p o r tin g
i n 6 c itie s f o r s p e c ifie d p u r c h a s e p e r io d s , 1 9 5 3 - 5 6
1
Type and location of store
(or other distributor)
Wash Balti Hous San
Shenan
ington, more, ton, Fran Anna, doah,
D. C. Md. Tex. cisco,
Iowa
111.
Calif.
143
283
379
157
137
85
Percentage distribution of purchases by
type of store
All types. _______________
D ep artm en t__________
Mail-order . _________
Furniture_____________
D isco u n t_____________
Appliance_____________
Radio and TV ____
...
Auto accessory and appliance__ _ ___
Vacuum cleaner and sewing machine__________
Wholesale distributors . .
Door-to door salesmen___
Other and not reported...
100
13
15
2
14
22
3
100
18
7
10
9
33
5
100
15
16
23
1
15
3
4
1
5
8
3
11
5
4
3
3
7
10
4
1
7
100
14
22
16
3
27
4
(4)
7
2
3
2
100
100
21
9
11
6
8 58
3
843
5
18
20
3
1
4
3
4
6
2
3
Percentage distribution of purchases by
location of store
All locations______________
Downtown area________
Neighborhood area within city limits 8________
Suburban8. . . ..
...
Out-of-town _________
Not rep o rted _____ ____
100
29
100
56
100
33
100
16
100
73
41
23
1
6
36
1
1
6
52
6
3
6
35
46
3
0
4
(7)
23
0
100
72
6
(7)
22
0
1 For purchase periods, see text on p. 336 of this issue.
2 Mail purchases.
8 Includes purchases in hardware stores.
4 Combined with data on appliance stores.
5 Including purchases from door-to-door salesmen, some made by suburban
families in the 4 large cities.
6 The percent of city blocks surveyed which are located in the suburbs
was as follows for the 4 large cities: Washington, 41; Baltimore, 11; Houston,
12; and San Francisco, 42 percent.
7A r e a o u t s id e c it y lim it s n o t s u r v e y e d .
machines. From 30 percent of the refrigerators
in Anna to 50 percent in Washington were bought
at a special price, and as high as 53 percent of the
washing machines in Washington were obtained
below the store’s regular price. On the whole,
residents in the two small communities did not
acquire as high a proportion of their appliances
at reduced prices as families living in large cities,
probably because there was less opportunity to
make advantageous purchases in these towns.
Anna families purchased only 21 percent of their
appliances below stores’ regular prices compared
with 42 percent of the appliances bought at com
petitive prices in Washington, D. C.
In Washington, 58 percent of the appliance
purchases in department stores and 48 percent of
the appliances purchased in retail stores of mail
order companies were made at reduced prices,
predominantly conventional sales prices. (See
table 4.) Consumers in the other three large
cities also bought a large proportion of their ap-
340
MONTHLY LABOR REVIEW, MARCH 1957
pliances below regular prices in department stores
and mail-order stores. Radio and television shops
and auto-accessory stores sold the lowest propor
tion of appliances at reduced prices.
T able 5.
P e r c e n t o f a ll n e w a u to m o b ile a n d a p p l i a n c e
p u r c h a s e s m a d e w ith t r a d e - in s , b y f a m i l i e s r e p o r tin g i n 6
c itie s f o r s p e c if ie d p u r c h a s e p e r io d s , 1 9 5 3 - 5 6
1
Item purchased
Prevalence of Trade-In Deals
As might be expected, a high proportion of ap
pliance purchases in Anna (46 percent) and in
Shenandoah (36 percent) involved trade-in trans
actions. (See table 5.) These are the small cities
in which purchases at reduced prices were lowest.
In Washington, where price reductions were most
common, only 17 percent of the appliances were
purchased on a trade-in basis. A large number of
consumers, ranging from 22 percent in Shenan
doah to 54 percent in Houston, could not esti
mate the market value of the articles they gave
as trade-ins. In every city, the majority of
appliance purchasers who offered an opinion as to
the market value of the trade-in article said that
the retailer’s allowance exceeded the old appli
ance’s value.
Retailers made trade-in allowances most fre
quently on sewing machines, with the proportions
ranging from one-fifth of the purchases in San
T able 4.
P e r c e n t o f a ll n e w a p p l i a n c e p u r c h a s e s m a d e
b e lo w r e g u la r p r ic e , b y f a m i l i e s r e p o r tin g i n 6 c itie s , b y
t y p e o f a p p l i a n c e a n d sto r e , f o r s p e c ifie d p u r c h a s e p e r i o d s
1 9 5 8 -5 6
F
,
i
Type of appliance and
store
Total purchases 2_____ _
San
Shen
Wash Bal
ti Hous
an
ington, more,
ton, Fran
Anna, doah,
cisco,
D. C. Md. Tex.
111.
Calif.
Iowa
135
275
376
156
135
85
Purchases below regular price: Percent of
all new appliance purchases
All appliances _____
Television sets____
Washing machines_____
Refrigerators__ ___
Vacuum cleaners__
Cooking stoves__
Sewing machines ___ __
42
36
53
50
34
75
22
26
20
27
38
32
19
24
37
25
40
47
40
41
50
32
30
43
33
27
25
31
21
16
27
30
29
27
17
24
10
16
36
27
29
33
All stores, ___ ___
Department____
Mail order______
Furniture______ _
Discount.._
Appliance ___ ___
Radio and T V ...
Auto accessory and appliance
Vacuum cleaner and sewing machine___
Other distributors___
42
58
48
33
45
39
25
26
27
33
11
25
24
20
37
38
42
28
60
28
15
32
41
37
25
o
33
25
21
24
100
34
25
14
23
0
19
0
4
19
20
29
0
67
20
0
28
27
43
33
42
36
68
(3)
11
43
1 For purchase periods surveyed, see text on p. 336 of this issue.
Represents those purchases for which type of price was reported.
Combined with data on appliance stores.
https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
New automobiles_______
Television s e ts ________
Washing machines
Refrigerators___ _________
Vacuum cleaners__ ____
Cooking s t o v e s ...___
Sewing machines____ . . . _
Wash Balti Hous San Anna, Shenington, more, ton, Fran 111.
nanD. C. Md. Tex. cisco,
doah,
Calif.
Iowa
88
16
21
8
23
11
44
76
23
10
16
21
0
22
71
12
18
33
22
24
33
73
22
18
33
14
12
19
85
6
42
70
36
44
67
84
16
74
64
18
71
50
1 For purchase periods surveyed, see text on p. 336 of this issue.
Francisco to two-thirds in Anna. Television
trade-ins were less common than trade-ins for the
other older types of appliances. The proportion
of television trade-ins was lowest in areas where
telecast channels had been added during the
survey period. For example, trade-in allowances
for television sets were negligible in Anna where
reception improved within the period. Similarly,
only one-eighth of the television purchases in
volved trade-in concessions in Houston, another
city in which television acquisitions ranked high
in the purchase period studied.
From 71 percent to 88 percent of the new-car
purchasers traded in an old car in the 6 cities, the
highest proportion being in Washington, where
the largest percentage of automobiles was pur
chased “new.”
Sample Design
To minimize cost, all six purchase surveys were
undertaken concurrently with the Bureau’s regular
rent and housing surveys. The sample of families
for the purchase survey was drawn from approxi
mately one-half of the dwelling units surveyed in
a sample of blocks drawn for the Bureau’s housing
studies.7
When 2 or more families shared a dwelling unit,
only 1 family was asked to give purchase informa
tion—the family who owned the house or was
responsible for rent payments. Purchases made
by members who had left the family were excluded
if the car or appliance went with the departing
member. Appliances included in the purchase
price of a house were also excluded.
7
For a description of the Bureau’s housing samples, see Monthly Labor
Review, April 1951 (p. 437). These special housing surveys were conducted
in one-third of the blocks included in the Bureau’s master housing sample.
AUTOMOBILE AND NEW APPLIANCE PURCHASES
341
The proportion of families in the sample for
each city from whom interviewers succeeded in
obtaining purchase statistics ranged from 55 per
cent in Washington to 96 percent in San Francisco.
The need for an adequately large and representa
tive sample for surveys of purchases of consumer
durable goods is due primarily to the fact that the
average family makes relatively few purchases of
appliances and automobiles in the course of a
2-year period.
Various factors, of which income is but one,
influence families contemplating purchases of
automobiles and expensive household appliances.
The housing sample for large metropolitan areas
needs to represent properly the diversity and age
of residential structures, a wide range of family
incomes, the varying degrees of service offered by
public-transit facilities, and differences in the
availability of parking space. The characteristics
of the housing sample will affect the findings in the
survey of family purchases. For example, inclu
sion of a high proportion of rental units in the
housing sample will have the effect of reducing
the rate of purchase of cooking stoves and refrig
erators where they are furnished by the landlord
(as in Washington, D. C.).
The broad occupational classification and home
ownership status of families furnishing purchase
information were fairly uniform in the six cities.
The heads of about half of the sampled families
were wage earners or clerical workers, ranging
from 45 percent in Anna to 59 percent in Balti
more. More than half of all of the respondents
in 3 cities owned their homes; the range for home
ownership in all 6 cities was 48 percent in Shenan
doah to 64 percent in Houston.
— L o u i s e J. M a c k a n d R u t h I. R o s a k r a n s
Division of Prices and Cost of Living
[In 1900,] only 8 thousand automobiles were privately owned. In 1920
the figure had jumped to 8 million, in 1950 to 40 million, and in 1954 to 48
million. Meanwhile the number of families in the United States had in
creased from 16 million in 1900 to 38 million in 1950. At the present time 7
out of every 10 families have automobiles. If you limit this comparison to
city worker families, less than 15 percent had automobiles in World War I
as compared with 65 percent in 1950. Skilled and semiskilled worker families
are more likely to have a car than are office workers or unskilled workers.
—The American Workers’ Fact Book, United States Department of Labor, 1956 (pp.
132-133).
https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
342
MONTHLY LABOR REVIEW, MARCH 1957
United States Participation in the
International Labor Organization
E d it o r ’s N o t e .— The “Johnson Committee” report
is the result oj over 8 months of intensive
investigation on the part of a committee ap
pointed by the L . S. Departments of State,
Commerce, and Labor to study “the effect of
the activities and functions of the International
Labor Organization in terms of United States
national interest, including domestic and foreign
policy aspects.m Instigated as a result of
outspoken criticism of the ILO by American
employer groups, the study is one of several
made or being made on this subject. The
excerpts which follow have been restricted,
because of space considerations, to the Com
mittee'’s general conclusions and specific recom
mendations.
Suspension marks to denote
unused portions of the report have been omitted
for easy reading.
U n it e d S t a t e s po l ic y toward and participation
in the International Labor Organization must be
considered primarily in terms of the goals of
United States foreign policy. With such a
premise, our conclusions are bound to be some
what different from those of persons whose chief
concern is a narrower interest, whether it be that
of labor, of management, or of the promotion of a
particular economic or social philosophy. The
Committee’s views will likewise be different from
those of persons who do not share our conviction
that the United States is no longer isolated and
can no longer afford to be isolationist, who, in
short, do not accept the foreign policy goals of
the United States as developed over the last
decade on a bipartisan basis with broad public
support.
Another premise underlying the Committee’s
conclusions and recommendations is a practical
one: While it is difficult to amend any constitution,
it is particularly difficult to amend the constitution
of an international organization. This requires
agreement by the representatives of many nations
and may in turn call for an educational campaign
among the citizens of those nations. The difficulty
is compounded when, as is the case of the amend
ments to the ILO constitution that some American
https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
employers have proposed, the amendments would
strike at provisions that many in the United
States as well as elsewhere regard as basic.
These premises underlie the following general
conclusions.
The Purposes of the ILO
The rationale and the purposes of the Inter
national Labor Organization are set forth in the
preamble to its constitution, written in 1919:
Whereas universal and lasting peace can be established
only if it is based upon social justice;
And whereas conditions of labor exist involving such
injustice, hardship, and privation to large numbers of people
as to produce unrest so great that the peace and harmony
of the world are imperiled; and an improvement of those
conditions is urgently required: as, for example, by the
regulation of the hours of work, including the establishment
of a maximum working day and week, the regulation of the
labor supply, the prevention of unemployment, the pro
vision of an adequate living wage, the protection of the
worker against sickness, disease, and injury arising out of
his employment, the protection of children, young persons,
and women, provision for old age and injury, protection of
the interests of workers when employed in countries other
than their own, recognition of the principle of equal re
muneration for work of equal value, recognition of the
principle of freedom of association, the organization of vo
cational and technical education and other measures;
Whereas also the failure of any nation to adopt humane
conditions of labor is an obstacle in the way of other na
tions which desire to improve the conditions in their own
countries;
The high contracting parties, moved by sentiments of
justice and humanity as well as by the desire to secure the
permanent peace of the world, and with a view to attain
ing the objectives set forth in this preamble, agree to the
following constitution of the International Labor Organi
zation.
The Committee believes emphatically that the
rationale and the purposes embodied in the pre
amble are consistent with and expressive of Ameri
can philosophy and ideals, and that the promotion
of these aims is in the national interest. The
Committee also considers this preamble as valid
today as in 1919. No one who knows the history
of the last four decades will deny that in many
1
The full text of the report is available upon request to any of the three
Departments.
The committee is as follows: Chairman—Joseph Johnson, president, Car
negie Endowment for International Peace. Members— Robert Gray, Indus
trial Relations Section, California Institute of Technology: Frederick H.
Harbison, Industrial Relations Section, Princeton University: Charles
Myers, Industrial Relations Section, Massachusetts Institute of Technology:
and Howard Petersen, president, Fidelity Philadelphia Trust Co.
UNITED STATES PARTICIPATION IN THE 1LO
parts of the world, notably the United States,
the older members of the British Commonwealth,
and much of Western Europe, there has been a
great reduction of injustice, hardship, and priva
tion, and that there has been great improvement
of the conditions of labor in many countries. But
much remains to be done, especially in the under
developed areas. And certainly “the principle of
freedom of association” is far from being accepted
in the Communist world, or indeed in a number of
other countries.
Dissatisfaction With the ILO
No organization is perfect, and everyone can
find something to criticize in the International
Labor Organization. It was only among employ
ers, however, that we found fundamental objec
tions to the very existence of the International
Labor Organization and to continued United
States participation in it.
Our inquiries among employers revealed that
the dissatisfaction expressed in resolutions of the
National Association of Manufacturers and the
Chamber of Commerce of the United States is
widespread among American employers who have
had some experience with the ILO. We found,
however, that the intensity of dissatisfaction
varied considerably, and, most important, we
learned that the dissatisfaction was not universal
among employers. Employer representatives from
the shipping industry, for example, have appar
ently found the work of the Maritime Commission
generally useful, and furthermore two of the for
mer employer delegates to the general conference
are vigorous in support of the ILO and have a
sophisticated understanding of the difficulties and
frustrations of participation.
The first, and by far the most important, cause
of dissatisfaction has been the failure of the United
States Government to formulate a clear policy
with respect to the Organization. The result has
been that employers have not known surely what
this Government’s attitude toward the Organi
zation is or how it conceives the relationship of the
International Labor Organization to the advance
ment of American national objectives.
Until very recently governmental relations with
the ILO were primarily the responsibility of the
Labor Department, with the State Department
showing little interest, the Department of Com
https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
343
merce almost none, and the White House even
less. Given the relationship between the Depart
ment of Labor and organized labor, it was natural
that employers should think of the Organization
as being primarily concerned with the promotion
of the interests of labor, and that employers
should, therefore, look upon it with suspicion, a
suspicion that may have been fortified by the
name of the Organization, which does not accur
ately describe its function.
There has been a substantial change in the last
year or so. Not only have there been policy
statements at high levels, but there is now cooper
ation between the Departments of State, Labor,
and Commerce, and the Department of State has
upgraded its representation at the general con
ference.
A second, and lesser, cause of dissatisfaction has
been the operation of the ILO machinery. With
out going into this criticism in detail, it may be
stated that it covers virtually all elements of the
ILO. The annual International Labor Conference,
its duration, its organization, its voting system;
industrial committees; conventions and recom
mendations; the objectivity of the staff in the
International Labor Office; all come under attack.
The conditions that have been criticized by
American employers existed before the reentry of
the Soviet Union into the ILO. They have
merely been accentuated by it.
The Committee recognizes the validity of some
of these criticisms, and attempts in its recom
mendations to suggest remedial measures. We
believe, however, that the Organization does not
deserve the heavy charges that have been laid at
its door. Some of the criticisms stem from the
critics’ limited experience with international
organizations, and their consequent inability to
put the ILO in perspective. The grounds for
others can, we believe, be removed by effective
action along the lines of our recommendations
The third source of employer dissatisfaction can
be briefly dealt with here and adequately taken
care of by the employers themselves. It is the
quick turnover in employer delegates and advisers,
both to the general conferences and to industry
committees. Whereas the employee delegate to
the conferences and member of the Governing
Body has served for 8 years, and succeeded one
who had served for 11 years, there have been 5
employer delegates in 11 years. We believe
344
greater continuity of delegates and advisers, with
the resultant experience, would lead to greater
understanding and effectiveness, provided of
course that highly qualified men are chosen.
The Value of the ÏLO to the United States
An objective observer must in all fairness
recognize that the ILO is not of great direct im
portance to the well-being of most American
workers, or for the improvement of the conditions
of labor or for the promotion of good industrial
relations in domestic industries. By and large,
the standards that have been attained in this
country are generally higher than those proposed
by the ILO.
If the ILO has no positive value internally, is it
then harmful in its effect on the United States
economy at home? The Committee does not find
that it is in any significant sense. We are satisfied
that the ILO constitution and our own provide
adequate safeguards against invasion by the ILO
of the prerogatives of either the Federal Govern
ment or the States. The small number of ILO
conventions submitted to the Senate and the few
ratified (seven in all), none of which invades any
American interest, are proof that the safeguards
are there and are applied.
If the ILO is neither particularly beneficial nor
harmful at home, it has a positive value to the
United States in its foreign relations that, although
not accurately measurable nor as yet fully realized,
is real and recognized.
A vast differential in labor standards exists in
the world today. To the extent that ILO action
contributes to narrowing this differential, it im
proves the competitive position of American indus
try and serves also the interests of American labor.
In the present state of our knowledge we cannot
assign a rough figure to this improvement; not even
in the maritime industry, where the benefits are
clearest, is that possible. But neither do we be
lieve that the ILO’s contribution here is meaning
less.
A more subtle, still less measurable, but in the
long run more important, contribution that the
ILO can make to the advancement of American
interest, lies in the promotion of industrial
democracy and efficiency. New trends in the ILO,
notably those signified by the Cole report of 1955
https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
MONTHLY LABOR REVIEW, MARCH 1957
and the committee of experts that considered it
in 1956, can do much to reduce the pains of transi
tion to industrialism, and thereby make it more
likely that the transition will be reasonably effi
cient and foster the growth of democracy. The
Committee believes that it is in this field that the
ILO has perhaps most to contribute over the longer
term.
Then, there is the political value of the Organiza
tion to the United States. It is a window on the
United States in which we can display what we do
and how we do it, what our labor-management
relations are, what our free associations of employ
ers and employees are like. It is also, and this
cannot be repeated too often, an instrument in the
ideological contest. It is not an excessively com
plicated instrument, and the Committee is loath
to believe that the United States lacks the skill to
employ it in the interest of the freedom and dignity
of all men.
To put the matter in its most negative sense,
if we were to withdraw, or to participate half
heartedly or grudgingly, the damage to American
interests in the larger sense, particularly to Ameri
can prestige among the governments and leaders
of Asia and Africa, would be severe.
Specific Recommendations
The Committee, convinced that the Interna
tional Labor Organization can play an important
and useful part in furthering United States foreign
policy goals, and believing that United States par
ticipation in the ILO should be viewed as an inte
gral part of our membership in international organ
izations, recommends continued but more effective
and vigorous participation in the ILO, and to that
end makes the following specific recommendations:
1. The Committee recommends that the Department of
State, as the principal agency under the President respon
sible for United States foreign policy, take the leadership,
in collaboration with the Departments of Labor and Com
merce, in a clarification and elaboration of the place of
United States participation in the International Labor
Organization in furthering our broad foreign policy ob
jectives.
2. The Committee recommends that the appropriate
agencies of the Government establish formal machinery
for periodic discussion and development by Government
officers, employers, and labor, of policy objectives for
United States participation in ILO.
UNITED STATES PARTICIPATION IN THE ILO
3. The Committee recommends that the United States
Government take urgently specific measures to improve the
organization and staff responsible for United States partici
pation in the ILO. Three problems must be tackled.
a. There must be continuous high-level United
States governmental representation at Geneva.
b. Delegations to ILO general conferences, to the
Governing Body meetings, and to various committees
and other ILO' gatherings work under high pressure
over relatively short periods of time. If United States
participation in these sessions is to be effective, ac
count must be taken of four requirements—the
quality of the delegates and their advisers, continuity
in representation, adequate staffing, and thorough
preparation.
c. The third problem is that of adequate and effi
cient organization and staffing in Washington.
4. The Committee recommends (a) that the United
States continue to work for decreased emphasis on the use
of conventions and recommendations; but (b) that when,
nevertheless, conventions or recommendations are under
consideration by the general conference, it should be United
States policy to support or oppose them on their substan
tive merits, and not to oppose a proposal with which the
United States is in agreement on principle simply because
the measure is in convention form or is thought not to be
properly a subject of legislation under the American system.
The Committee recognizes the difficult problems posed
for the United States Government by the forced labor con
vention. On the one hand, the dominant belief in our
Government seems to be that this convention in its present
form, if ratified by the United States, would run counter
to the dictates of our Constitution. On the other hand,
this country stands to suffer a major setback in terms of
world public opinion if it opposes the measure on forced
labor. It seems to us that the convention on forced labor
differs from other conventions in its significance for the
United States. For one thing, it appears to us as laymen
that the 13th amendment to the United States Constitu
tion banning involuntary servitude places the forced labor
issue within the realm of Federal jurisdiction, and therefore
not subject to the Federal-State disability. Also, this
whole issue arose primarily as the result of action taken
by the United States in the United Nations. It was we
who took the lead in bringing the problem before the world,
and, even though it later took the form of an ILO draft
convention, we cannot without damage to our prestige
ignore that fact.
The Committee believes that the United States should
continue to work for redrafting of this convention so that
it will not conflict with United States law. But if we are
unsuccessful in this effort, we should nevertheless strongly
champion it, making it clear that because of our own con
stitutional processes, and for that reason alone, we will be
unable to ratify it.
345
5. The Committee recommends that the United States
direct its most careful attention to the technical assistance
programs, the field services, and the research and informa
tional operations of the ILO, and that United States dele
gations take leadership in proposing positive suggestions
for the improvement, better integration, and possible
expansion of these activities.
6. The Committee recommends that the United States
support maintenance of the tripartite structure of the
International Labor Organization and utilize this structure
to demonstrate the advantages resulting from the activities
of free employers and free workers.
The term “tripartite,” as it is used here, refers to the
unique feature of ILO whereby not only governments, but
“the employers and the workpeople of each of the mem
bers” actively participate through delegates in the Organi
zation’s meetings. The Committee has studied carefully
the operation and impact of the tripartite system of ILO
in the light of the criticisms directed against it and the
arguments advanced in its defense.
The issue was brought to its present acute stage by
American employer delegates. Some of them had already
manifested a general dislike of ILO’s tripartitism, stem
ming from experience with tripartite agencies in the
United States during World War II, from frustrations
caused by the need to act as representatives rather than
as individuals, and from a feeling that this procedure
tends to emphasize class distinctions between employers
and workers. To this was now added an intense opposition
to the very thought that men from Soviet Russia should
be classed as employers, and particularly that Com
munist employers should be admfited to the councils of
free employers.
The discussion and disputes that arose from American
employer attack led to the appointment by ILO of a
special committee of jurists, under the chairmanship of
Lord McNair, to inquire into the degrees of freedom of
the nongovernmental delegates from member nations.
We are encouraged by the fact that the Governing Body,
after considering the McNair report in November 1956,
decided to request the Director-General to submit to its
next session a report on the desirability and the prac
ticability (a) of establishing continuing machinery which
would establish the facts relating to the freedom of as
sociation in member states of the International Labor
Organization and would report to the Governing Body
and to the International Labor Conference; and (b) of
improving the practical methods of working of the con
ference, including the committees of the conference.
We hope the Governing Body will see fit to install this
machinery and will make sure that it is allowed to function
freely.
But realistically we must recognize that this alone will
not solve the problem. The preamble to the ILO con
stitution proclaims the need for “recognition of the
principle of freedom of association,” and article 3, section
5, provides that the representatives of employers and
2
Article 3, section 5, of the ILO constitution provides: “ The members workers shall be “nongovernment delegates and advisers.”
undertake to nominate nongovernment delegates and advisers chosen in
[Emphasis added.] Unfortunately, however, there is no
agreement with the industrial organizations, if such organizations exist,
specific requirement that these delegates and advisers
which are most representative of employers or workpeople, as the case may
be, in then respective countries.”
be representative of free workers or of free employers.2
https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
346
Furthermore, while article 4 guarantees that “every
delegate shall be entitled to vote individually,” there is no
guaranty that this individual vote will be independent.
The Committee shares the view of American delegates,
governmental and worker as well as employer, that the
appointment of representatives of state-controlled labor
associations and of state industries as nongovernmental
delegates and advisers violates the spirit of the ILO
constitution, but we are not convinced that the letter
of the constitution is so clearly violated that these repre
sentatives can, on constitutional grounds, be denied seats.
As a practical matter, tripartitism is established in the
ILO constitution and any change in this principle at the
present time is unlikely. Even if this change were pos
sible, we believe that ILO’s effectiveness would be
decreased by abolition of the tripartite principle.
Since ILO seems likely, in any event, to continue to use
the tripartite system, it is essential that the United States
utilize this structure to the best of its ability. This
cannot be accomplished by the withdrawal, as has been
suggested, of American employer participation. If such
a withdrawal should take place, the American worker
delegate, under the ILO constitution, would be stripped of
his right to vote, thus leaving the two American Govern
ment representatives as our only two voting delegates.
We do not favor representation in ILO solely by Govern
ments, either for this country’s delegation or as a principle
to be adopted by ILO for all countries. We have stressed
the need for participation by workers and employers in
the solution of their problems. Of even more importance,
perhaps, is our conclusion that representation only by
governments would result in a loss to the United States.
It does not seem likely that outstanding business or labor
leaders would participate in ILO activities if they were
limited to advisory roles. In addition, the United States
would lose the opportunity of demonstrating before the
world the fact that, under our economic and political
system, it is possible for either or both the employer
delegate and the worker delegate to disagree with the
Government, as they frequently have done in voting on
ILO matters.
One proposal which we have studied with great sympathy
is to give each group in the ILO more autonomy to conduct
its own affairs at the general conference. Currently, the
standing orders of the ILO provide that a delegate may
appeal to the conference if he is denied a seat on a confer
ence committee. This means that, if he wins his appeal,
he may be seated as a worker or employer delegate over
the opposition of the majority of other workers or em
ployers who consider him not truly representative. It has
been proposed that this rule be replaced by that formerly
in force, which allowed the employer and worker groups
https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
MONTHLY LABOR REVIEW, MARCH 1957
each to pass on the eligibility of its own members without
appeal, as is done in the two Houses of the American
Congress.
We believe, therefore, that it should be United States
policy to advocate such a change at the proper time. But
the timing is of vital importance and must be determined
in the light of the probable propaganda impact.
Pending such change, the United States delegations
should challenge the credentials of employer and worker
delegates from Communist nations, emphasizing repeatedly
that to seat such delegates violates the spirit of the ILO,
and utilizing every challenge to cast in a sharp light the
contrast between freedom and oppression. We believe
that, even though Communist employer delegates may,
despite American objections, continue to be seated in the
conference and given deputy membership (without voting
rights) on committees, the impact of relentless American
attacks will be felt. In any case we are convinced, for
reasons set forth above, that, unsatisfactory as it certainly
is, this is from the viewpoint of American national interests
a less deplorable state of affairs than would result from the
withdrawal of the United States or the refusal of American
employers to participate in the ILO.
Tripartitism makes possible constant and eloquent testi
mony to the fact that freedom, as it is enjoyed in most of
the Western World, is not to be found in countries con
trolled by Communists.
7. The Committee recommends that the United States
work for a shift in the emphasis of ILO industrial com
mittees away from deliberations leading to a vote on final
action, toward an approach based on discussion and ex
change of expert information; that the United States press
for a policy calling for formation of industrial committees
to meet specific problems rather than the present practice
of perpetuating committees.
8. The Committee recommends that the United States
work to improve the International Labor Office staff and
to promote the highest degree of objectivity and com
petence of staff work.
9. The Committee recommends that the United States
Government take the leadership and enlist the cooperation
of American employer and employee organizations in
undertaking expeditiously to formulate and to work for
the adoption of proposals designed to improve the work
of the general conference and its committees.
10. Finally, the Committee recommends that the United
States Government make vigorous and sustained efforts to
call the attention of the American people to the purposes,
objectives, and activities of the International Labor Organ
ization, emphasizing that it is the sole specialized agency
of the United Nations devoted to improving management
and labor standards throughout the world.
UNION WAGE SCALES IN LOCAL TRANSIT
Union Wage Scales of Local-Transit
Operating Employees, 1956
S t r a ig h t - t im e h o u rly w age scales of org an ized
lo c a l-tra n s it o p e ra tin g em ployees in cities of
100,000 o r m o re p o p u la tio n rose a n a v erag e of
7 cents, or 3.9 percent, between July 1, 1955, and
July 1, 1956, according to the 36th annual study
of union scales in the local-transit industry by
the U. S. Department of Labor’s Bureau of Labor
Statistics.1 On July 1, 1956, the average union
scale for all operators of local-transit equipment
was $1.99 an hour.2
Labor-management contract provisions which
became effective during the 12-month period ad
vanced the scales for 93 percent of the operators
included in the survey. Raises varied from 5 to
10 cents an hour for half the workers and amounted
to 10 cents or more for a fourth.
Straight-time weekly work schedules were pro
vided in labor-management contracts for all but
8 percent of the transit workers included in the
study. As of July 1, 1956, schedules varied from
40 to more than 48 hours and averaged 41.3 hours
per week. The 40-hour schedule was most prev
alent, applying to seven-tenths of the local-transit
operators; slightly more than a tenth had standard
workweeks of 48 hours or more.
Negotiated health and insurance provisions
were stipulated in contracts covering slightly
more than nine-tenths of the workers. Pension
programs were reported for a somewhat larger
proportion.
Scale Increases and Trend
Changes in wage scales of local-transit operators
result primarily from labor-management negotia
tions. Many contracts currently in effect were
negotiated for 2 years—a few were for longer
periods. Contracts of more than a year’s duration
typically provide for one or more interim increases.
However, only those scale changes that actually
became effective during the year ending July 1,
1956, were included in the current survey. Some
of these rate adjustments were provided for in con
tracts negotiated prior to July 1, 1955. Deferred
increases, scheduled to take effect after July 1,
1956, were excluded from the current survey.
https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
347
Thus, the scale changes presented in this report
do not include the total wage advances negotiated
in individual agreements during the 12 months
covered by the survey.
During the year ending July 1, 1956, union
hourly scales for all local-transit operators rose an
average of 3.9 percent. This increase exceeded the
2.9-percent gain recorded in the preceding 12
months, but was smaller than the 5-percent ad
vance registered in the year ending July 1, 1954.
The rise in scales between July 1, 1955, and July
1, 1956, advanced the Bureau’s index (1947-49=
100) to 145.9, more than twice the level of July 1,
1945 (table 1).
Advances during the year reflected gains of 3.7
percent for operators of 1-man cars and buses, 3.2
percent for motormen and conductors on 2-man
cars, and 5.9 percent for elevated and subway
operators.
On a cents-per-hour basis, union scales for all
local-transit equipment operators showed an aver
age advance of 7 cents an hour, as did the scales
for operators of 1-man cars and buses, who repre
sented 88 percent of all local-transit employees in
cluded in the study. Average hourly pay scales
rose 6 cents for motormen and conductors on 21 Union scales are defined as the minimum wage scales or maximum sched
ules of hours agreed upon through collective bargaining between unions and
employers. Rates in excess of the negotiated minimum, which may be paid
for special qualifications or other reasons, are not included.
The information presented in this report was based on union scales in effect
on July 1, 1956, and covered approximately 73,000 local-transit operating
employees in 52 cities with populations of 100,000 or more. Trackmen and
maintenance workers were excluded from the study. Operating employees
of municipally owned transit systems were included, if unions acted as the
bargaining agents. Data were obtained primarily from local union officials
by mail questionnaire; in some instances, Bureau representatives visited
local union officials to obtain the desired information.
Mimeographed listings of union scales are available for each city included
in the survey. More detailed information will be contained in BLS Bull.
1208.
The current survey was designed to reflect union wage scales of localtransit operating employees in all cities of 100,000 or more population. All
cities with 500,000 or more population were included, as were most cities in
the population group of 250,000 to 500,000. The cities in the 100,000 to 250,000
group selected for study were distributed widely throughout the United
States. The data for some of the cities included in the study were weighted
in order to compensate for cities which were not surveyed. In order to pro
vide appropriate representation in the combination of data, each geographic
region and population group was considered separately when city weights
were assigned.
2 Average hourly scales, designed to show current levels, were based on
all scales reported in effect on July 1, 1956. Individual scales were weighted
by the number of union members having each rate. These averages are not
designed for precise year-to-year comparisons because of fluctuations in
membership and in the classifications studied. Average cents-per-hour
and percent changes from July 1,1955, to July 1, 1956, were, however, based
on comparable quotations for the various classifications in both periods,
weighted by the membership reported for the current (1956) survey. The
index series, designed for trend purposes, was similarly constructed.
Data from the 1955 survey appeared in the M onthly Labor Review, April
1956 (p. 433).
MONTHLY LABOR REVIEW, MARCH 1957
348
man surface cars and 11 cents for elevated and
subway operators.
Upward adjustments were widespread between
July 1, 1955, and July 1, 1956. Increased wage
rates were reported for 92 percent of the operators
on 1-man cars and buses, and for all operators on
2-man surface cars and elevated and subway sys
tems. Among the 1-man car and bus operators
affected by upward adjustments, slightly more
than half had scale advances of 5 to 10 cents an
hour. The rise amounted to less than 5 cents for
a fifth and to 14 cents or more for a similar pro
portion. Increases of the latter magnitude were
also reported for some operators on 2-man surface
cars and on elevated and subway systems.
Percentagewise, the increases typically repre
sented gains of 2 to 5 percent for operators on 1man cars and buses, 3 to 6 percent for motormen
and conductors of 2-man cars, and 5 to 9 percent
for elevated and subway operators.
Wage Scale Variations
Negotiated pay scales for local-transit operators
are generally graduated according to length of
service. An entrance rate, one or more inter
mediate rates, and a maximum or top rate 3 are
frequently provided. Although the time intervals
between rate steps varied among the cities, en
trance rates typically applied to the first 3 or 6
months of employment. The maximum or top
rate was usually reached after a year’s service.
In some cities, length of service was not a deter
mining factor, as only a single rate was specified
in the labor-management contract.
Entrance or starting rates for 1-man car and bus
operators varied from $1.35 in Charlotte, N. C.,
T
able
1.—
I n d e x o f u n io n h o u r ly w a g e r a te s o f lo c a l- tr a n s it
o p e r a tin g e m p lo y e e s , 1 9 2 9 - 5 6
[1947-49=100]
Date
1929:
1930:
1931:
1932:
1933:
1934:
1935:
1936:
1937:
1938:
1939:
1940:
1941:
1942:
M ay 15.
M ay 15.
M ay 15.
May 15.
M ay 15.
M ay 15.
May 15.
M ay 15.
M ay 15.
June 1-.
June !..
June 1 June 1~
July 1..
i Information not available.
https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
Date
index
52.4
52.9
52.9
51.9
«
50.4
52.3
52.7
55.2
56.8
57.2
57.9
60.0
64.4
1943:
1944:
1945:
1946:
1947:
1948:
1949:
1950:
1951:
1952:
1953:
1954:
1955:
1956:
July 1_____________
July 1------------- -----July 1-------------------Ju ly l-.. ------------- Oct. 1_____________
Oct. 1_____________
Oct. 1_____________
Oct. 1_____________
Oct. 1_____________
Oct. 1_____________
J u l y l _____________
July 1-----------------July 1_____________
July 1--------------------
Index
68.6
69.1
69.9
81.9
92.4
101.7
105.9
110.9
118.2
127.0
129.9
136.4
140.4
145.9
T able 2. — A v e r a g e u n io n h o u r ly w a g e r a te s o f lo c a l- tr a n s it
o p e r a tin g e m p lo y e e s , b y r e g io n / J u l y 1, 1 9 5 6
Average rate per hour
Region 1
United States..
N e w "England
Middle Atlantic___TRo^der States
Son t.iieast
Great Lakes _______
M id rile. W e st
Smith west,
M o u n ta in
P aeifie
All work
ers
Operators
of 1-man
cars and
buses
$1.99
$1.98
1.97
2.03
1.95
1.64
2.05
1.95
1.77
1.77
2.04
1.97
2.03
1.95
1.64
2.05
1.95
1.76
1.77
2.04
Motormen Elevated
and con
ductors of and subway
2-man cars operators
$2.01
$2.03
1.91
2.05
2.05
2.01
2.02
1.92
2.03
i The regions used in this study include: New England—Connecticut,
Maine, Massachusetts, New Hampshire, Rhode Island, and Vermont; Mid
dle Atlantic—New Jersey, New York, and Pennsylvania; Border States—
Delaware, District of Columbia, Kentucky, Maryland, Virginia, and West
Virginia; Southeast—Alabama, Florida, Georgia, Mississippi, North Caro
lina, South Carolina, and Tennessee; Great Lakes—Illinois, Indiana, Michi
gan, Minnesota, Ohio, and Wisconsin; Middle West—Iowa, Kansas, Missouri,
Nebraska, North Dakota, and South Dakota; Southwest—Arkansas, Louisi
ana, Oklahoma, and Texas; Mountain—Arizona, Colorado, Idaho, Montana,
New Mexico, Utah, and Wyoming; Pacific— California, Nevada, Oregon,
and Washington.
and Little Rock, Ark., to $2.12 in Seattle, Wash.
Maximum or top rates for these operators ranged
from $1.45 in Charlotte to $2.24 for multiunit car
operators in Boston. In two-fifths of the cities
surveyed, labor-management contracts specified
a top rate of $2 or more an hour for some operators.
Such scales were reported for all but one of the
cities with a half million or more population.
Hourly rates for all local-transit, operating em
ployees in cities of 100,000 or more population
averaged $1.99 on July 1, 1956. Rates averaged
$1.98 for operators of 1-man cars and buses,
$2.01 for operators of 2-man cars, and $2.03 for
those on elevated and subway equipment.
Negotiated hourly scales of $2 to $2.15 were
stipulated in labor-management contracts covering
slightly over 60 percent of the 1-man car and bus
operators. Scales of $2.15 or more were applicable
to 4 percent; the same proportion as for those with
scales of less than $1.65 an hour. About 3 of
every 10 had scales of $1.65 to $2. For motormen
and conductors of 2-man cars, hourly rates varying
from $1.90 to $2.05 prevailed for nearly two-thirds
of the operators and $2.05 or more for one-third.
Rates of at least $2.10 were stipulated for a fourth
of the elevated and subway operators, $2 to $2.10
for a similar proportion, and $1.90 to $2 for slightly
more than a third.
3
This so-called top rate actually becomes the employee’s basic scale after
a specified period of employment with the company. It is not a maximum
rate in the sense that the company may not pay more.
UNION WAGE SCALES IN LOCAL TRANSIT
City and Regional Rate Differentials
City and regional averages, designed to show
current rate levels, are, of course, affected not only
by the wide variation of scales which exists among
the individual cities, but also by variations in the
proportions of union members at each of the
graduated scales within cities. These differences
are reflected in the weighting of individual rates by
the number of workers employed. Therefore,
even though all rates in two areas are identical,
the average for each area may differ.
Among the 52 cities, average rates varied from
SI.45 an hour in Charlotte, N. C., to $2.18 in
Seattle, Wash. In addition to Seattle, 17 other
cities had levels of $2 or more. Levels of $1.90
to $2 prevailed in 7 cities, $1.80 to $1.90 in 12
others, and $1.70 to $1.80 in 6 cities.
Scale advances provided by labor-management
contracts affected some local-transit operators in
46 of the cities covered in the survey. Negotiated
increases in individual cities ranged up to 16 cents.
However, advances of 5 to 10 cents an hour were
most frequently reported.
When the cities included in the survey were
grouped according to population size, average
scales differed for the various size population
groups. They were highest for the group of cities
with a million or more population. Scales for
these cities averaged $2.06—3 cents higher than
for the next larger size group of cities (500,000 to
1,000,000), and 30 cents higher than for the small
est size city group studied (100,000 to 250,000).
Average hourly scales varied widely among the
cities within each population size group. The
spread between the highest and the lowest city
averages was greatest (52 cents) for cities with
populations of 250,000 to 500,000, and narrowest
(10 cents) in the group of cities with a million or
more population. Some overlapping of average
scales existed among cities in the different size
population groups. For example, the average
hourly rate for Boston in the 500,000 to 1,000,000
4
The prevalence of negotiated health, insurance, and pension programs for
local-transit operating employees was first studied in July 1954. Information
for these plans was restricted to those financed entirely or in part by the
employer. Plans financed by workers through union dues or assessments
were excluded from the study. No attem pt was made to secure information
on the kind and extent of benefits provided or on the expenditures for such
benefits.
https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
349
group was higher than for each of the cities with a
million or more population.
Regionally, levels for local-transit operating em
ployees varied from $1.64 in the Southeast to
$2.05 in the Great Lakes (table 2). Two other
regions—Middle Atlantic ($2.03) and Pacific
($2.04)—also had scales averaging in excess of the
$1.99 national average.
Standard Workweek
Weekly work schedules at straight-time rates
were reported for 92 percent of all local-transit op
erators included in the survey. Standard work
weeks had been established for 45 of the surveyed
cities. In these cities, straight-time hours aver
aged 41.3 hours on July 1, 1956, as compared with
41.4 hours on July 1, 1955. Reductions in stand
ard weekly straight-time hours were noted in 6
cities.
A 40-hour workweek applied to two-thirds of the
operators on 1- and 2-man cars and to all of those
on elevated and subway equipment. Workweeks
of 48 hours were in effect for a tenth of the 1-man
car and bus operators and for a third of the motormen and conductors on 2-man cars.
Insurance and Pension Plans
Health, insurance, and pension plans incorpo
rated in labor-management contracts for localtransit operating employees have increased in
recent years.4 The development of such plans in
this industry has been widespread, and the cover
age has expanded appreciably since World War II.
During the year ending July 1, 1956, the coverage
of health and insurance plans rose 5 percent and
that of pension programs, 3% percent.
On July 1, 1956, slightly more than 90 percent
of the local-transit operating employees were
covered by labor-management contracts providing
for health and insurance plans, and 96 percent by
provisions for pension plans.
Contributory
plans—those financed jointly by workers and their
employers—prevailed for about 80 percent of the
workers covered by health and insurance provisions
and for approximately 55 percent of those covered
by pension programs.
— A n n e t t e Y. S h e r ie r
Division of Wages and Industrial Relations
350
Codes of Ethical Practices
of the Labor Movement
I n o r d e r to implement the constitutional deter
mination that the American Federation of Labor
and Congress of Industrial Organizations shall be
and remain free from all corrupt influences, the
Executive Council of the Federation, after re
ceiving recommendations from the Committee on
Ethical Practices, adopted at its meeting in
Miami, Fla., in January 1957, three codes of
ethical practices regarding: health and welfare
plan administration; racketeers, crooks, Com
munists, and Fascists; and conflicts of interest in
the investment and business interests of union
officials. The texts of these codes are reproduced
on the following pages, together with the first
of the ethical practices codes, adopted by the
Council in August 1956; the latter dealt with
the issuance of local union charters.
On January 28, the Executive Council issued a
statement calling on union members to cooperate
with legislative committees inquiring into the pos
sible existence of racketeering or other forms of
corruption within union ranks. The statement,
which also appears on the following pages, pointed
out that carefully conducted inquiries had been of
great assistance in the past in helping labor elimi
nate abuses from within its ranks and reminded
union members of their responsibility to keep the
labor movement free of corruption.
Local Union Charters
1. A local union charter, whether issued by the A FLCIO or by any national or international union affiliated
with the AFL-CIO, should be a solemn instrument estab
lishing a subordinate or affiliated body. To assure this,
the AFL-CIO and each national and international union,
by constitution or administrative regulation, should re
quire, for issuance of a local union charter, application by
a group of bona fide employees, eligible for membership
in the union, within the jurisdiction covered by the
charter.
2. The purpose of issuing such charters should be to
promote the general welfare of workers and to give recog
nition to their joining together in a subordinate or affili
ated body.
3. A charter should never be issued to any person or
persons who seek to use it as a “hunting license” for the
improper invasion of the jurisdictions of other affiliated
unions.
https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
MONTHLY LABOR REVIEW, MARCH 1957
4. A charter should never be issued or permitted to
continue in effect for a “paper local” not existing or
functioning as a genuine local union of employees.
5. A charter should never be issued to persons who are
known to traffic in local union charters for illicit or
improper purposes.
6. The provision of the AFL-CIO constitution pro
hibiting the AFL-CIO and any affiliated national or inter
national union from recognizing any subordinate organ
ization that has been suspended or expelled by the
AFL-CIO or any national or international union plainly
includes and prohibits the issuance of a local union charter
by the AFL-CIO or any affiliated national or international
union to any group of individuals or any individuals
suspended or expelled from the AFL-CIO or any affiliated
national or international union for corruption or unethical
practices.
7. The AFL-CIO and each national and international
union shall take prompt action to eliminate any loopholes
through which local union charters have been or can be
issued or permitted to continue in effect contrary to these
policies.
8. The AFL-CIO and each national and international
union shall take prompt action to insure the forthwith
withdrawal of local union charters which have been issued
and are now outstanding in violation of these policies.
Health and Welfare Funds
1. No union official who already receives full-time pay
from his union shall receive fees or salaries of any kind
from a fund established for the provision of a health, wel
fare, or retirement program. Where a salaried union
official serves as employee representative or trustee in the
administration of such programs, such service should be
regarded as one of the functions expected to be performed
by him in the normal course of his duties and not as an
extra function requiring further compensation from the
welfare fund.
2. No union official, employee, or other person acting as
agent or representative of a union, who exercises responsi
bilities or influence in the administration of welfare pro
grams or the placement of insurance contracts, should
have any compromising "personal ties, direct or indirect,
with outside agencies such as insurance carriers, brokers,
or consultants doing business with the welfare plan. Such
ties cannot be reconciled with the duty of a union official
to be guided solely by the best interests of the membership
in any transactions with such agencies. Any union official
found to have such ties to his own personal advantage or to
have accepted fees, inducements, benefits, or favors of any
kind from any such outside agency, should be removed.
This principle, of course, does not prevent the existence of
a relationship between a union officer or employee and an
outside agency where (a) no substantial personal advantage
is derived from the relationship; and (b) the outside agency
is one in the management of which the union participates,
as a union, for the benefit of its members.
3. Complete records of the financial operations of all
welfare funds and programs should be maintained in ac-
CODES OF ETHICAL PRACTICES
cordance with the best accounting practice. Each such
fund should be audited regularly by internal auditors. In
addition, each such fund should be audited at least once
each year, and preferably semiannually, by certified public
or other independent accountants of unquestioned profes
sional integrity, who should certify that the audits fully
and comprehensively show the financial condition of the
fund and the results of the operation of the fund.
4. All audit reports should be available to the member
ship of the union and the affected employees.
5. The trustees or adminstrators of welfare funds should
make a full disclosure and report to the beneficiaries at
least once each year. Such report should set forth, in
detail, the receipts and expenses of the fund; all salaries
and fees paid by the fund, with a statement of the persons
to whom paid; the amount paid and the service or purpose
for which paid; a breakdown of insurance premium paid,
if a commercial insurance carrier is involved, showing,
insofar as possible, the premiums paid, dividends, com
missions, claims paid, retentions, and service charges; a
statement of the person to whom any commissions or fees
of any kind were paid; a financial statement on the part of
the insuring or service agency, if an agency other than a
commercial insurance carrier is employed; and a detailed
account of the manner in which the reserves held by the
fund are invested.
6. Where health and welfare benefits are provided
through the use of a commercial insurance carrier, the
carrier should be selected through competitive bids solicited
from a substantial number of reliable companies, on the
basis of the lowest net cost for the given benefits submitted
by a responsible carrier, taking into consideration such
factors as comparative retention rates, financial responsi
bility, facilities for and promptness in servicing claims,
and the past record of the carrier, including its record in
dealing with trade unions representing its employees.
The trustees of the fund should be required to include in
reporting to the membership the specific reasons for the
selection of the carrier finally chosen. The carrier should
be required to warrant that no fee or other remuneration
of any kind has been paid directly or indirectly to any
representative of the parties in connection with the business
of the fund.
7. Where a union or union trustees participate in the
administration of the investment of welfare fund reserves,
the union or its trustees should make every effort to
prohibit the investment of welfare fund reserves in the
business of any contributing employer, insurance carrier,
or agency doing business with the fund, or in any enter
prise in which any trustee, officer, or employee of the fund
has a personal financial interest of such a nature as to be
affected by the fund’s investment or disinvestment.
(This is not to be construed as preventing investment in
an enterprise in which a union official is engaged by virtue
of his office, provided (i) no substantial personal advan
tage is derived from the relationship, and (ii) the concern
or enterprise is one in the management of which the union
participates for the benefit of its members.)
8. Where any trustee, agent, fiduciary, or employee of
a health or welfare program is found to have received an
https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
351
unethical payment, the union should insist upon his re
moval and should take appropriate legal steps against both
the party receiving and the party making the payment.
Where health and welfare funds are negotiated or admin
istered by local unions or by other organizations subordi
nate to or affiliated with a national or international union,
provision should be made to give the national or interna
tional union the authority to audit such funds and to apply
remedies where there is evidence of a violation of ethical
standards.
9. Every welfare program should provide redress against
the arbitrary or unjust denial of claims so as to afford the
individual member prompt and effective relief where his
claim for benefits has been improperly rejected. Every
program should provide for the keeping of complete records
of the claims experience so that a constant check can be
maintained on the relationship between claims and pre
miums and dividends, and on the utilization of the
various benefits.
10. The duty of policing and enforcing these standards
is shared by every union member, as well as by local,
national, and international officials. The best safeguard
against abuses lies in the hands of a vigilant, informed,
and active membership, jealous of their rights and interests
in the operation of health and welfare programs, as well as
any other trade union program. As a fundamental part
of any approach to the problem of policing health and
welfare funds, affiliated unions, through education, public
ity, and discussion programs, should seek to develop the
widest possible degree of active and informed interest in
all phases of these programs on the part of the membership
at large. International unions should, wherever possible,
have expert advice available for the negotiation, estab
lishment, and administration of health and welfare plans,
and should provide training for union representatives in
the techniques and standards of proper administration of
welfare plans.
11. Where constitutional amendments or changes in
internal administrative procedure are necessary to comply
with the standards herein set forth, such amendments and
changes should be undertaken at the earliest practicable
time.
Racketeers, Crooks, Communists, and Fascists
1. The AFL-CIO and each of its affiliated unions should
undertake the obligation, through appropriate constitu
tional or administrative measures and orderly procedures,
to insure that no persons who constitute corrupt influences
or practices or who represent or support Communist,
Fascist, or totalitarian agencies should hold office of any
kind in such trade unions or organizations.
2. No person should hold or retain office or appointed
position in the AFL-CIO or any of its affiliated national
or international unions or subordinate bodies thereof who
has been convicted of any crime involving moral turpitude
offensive to trade union morality.
3. No person should hold or retain office or appointed
position in the AFL-CIO or any of its affiliated national or
international unions or subordinate bodies thereof who is
352
commonly known to be a crook or racketeer preying on
the labor movement and its good name for corrupt pur
poses, whether or not previously convicted for such
nefarious activities.
4.
No person should hold or retain office or appointed
position in the AFL-CIO or any of its affiliated national
or international unions or subordinate bodies thereof who
is a member, consistent supporter or who actively partic
ipates in the activities of the Communist Party or of any
Fascist or other totalitarian organization which opposes
the democratic principles to which our country and the
American trade union movement are dedicated.
Conflicts of Interest
1. No responsible trade union official should have a
personal financial interest which conflicts with the full
performance of his fiduciary duties as a workers’ repre
sentative.
2. No responsible trade union official should own or
have a substantial business interest in any business enter
prise with which his union bargains collectively, or in any
business enterprise which is in competition with any other
business enterprise with which his union bargains collec
tively.
3. No responsible trade union official should own or
have a substantial business interest in a business enter
prise a substantial part of which consists of buying from,
selling to, or otherwise dealing with the business enterprise
with which his union bargains collectively.
4. The provisions of paragraphs 2 and 3 above do not
apply in the case of an investment in the publicly traded
securities of widely held corporations which investment
does not constitute a substantial enough holding to affect
or influence the course of corporate decision.
5. No responsible trade union official should accept
“kickbacks,” under-the-table payments, gifts of other than
nominal value, or any personal payment of any kind other
than regular pay and benefits for work performed as an
employee from an employer or business enterprise with
which his union bargains collectively.
6. The policies herein set forth apply to: (a) all officers
of the AFL-CIO and all officers of national and inter
national unions affiliated with the AFL-CIO; (b) all
elected or appointed staff representatives and business
agents of such organizations; and (c) all officers of
subordinate bodies of such organizations who have any
degree of discretion or responsibility in the negotiation of
collective bargaining agreements or their administration.
7. The principles herein set forth apply not only where
investments are made by union officials, but also where
third persons are used as blinds or covers to conceal the
financial interests of union officials.
Public Inquiries into Corruption
The American Federation of Labor and Congress of
Industrial Organizations is pledged both by its constitution
and by fundamental principles of trade union morality to
keep the labor movement free from any taint of corruption.
https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
MONTHLY LABOR REVIEW, MARCH 1957
While the AFL-CIO has its own responsibility for keep
ing its house in order and is attempting to meet this obli
gation to the best of its ability, this does not in any sense
mean that appropriate agencies of Government and the
public do not have rights, obligations, and responsibility in
eliminating racketeering and corruption from all segments
of American life, including the labor movement.
No institution or agency, whether labor or business,
public or private, enjoys special immunity from the equal
application of the laws, from appropriate investigation by
duly constituted legislative committees, and from scrutiny
of its operations by the members of the press or the general
public.
Investigations by fair and objective legislative com
mittees in the field of labor-management relations have
been of tremendous help in eliminating abuses in this area.
The investigation conducted by the La Follette Commit
tee, exposing as it did unsavory and illegal practices on the
part of important business interests, contributed greatly
to the enactment of the Wagner Act and to the elimination
of employer practices which prevented union organization
and caused strife and violence in labor-management rela
tions. The recent investigation by the Douglas Subcom
mittee of the Senate Labor Committee, exposing as it did
instances of corruption and improper conduct by labor
officials and others in the handling of health and welfare
funds, has provided for the public and the labor move
ment invaluable information 'which has laid the founda
tion for proposed disclosure legislation in this field, en
dorsed by the AFL-CIO, and which, in addition, has en
abled the AFL-CIO and its affiliates to do a better job of
keeping their own house in order. Both law enforcement
agencies, in the interest of enforcing law, and legislative
committees, in the interest of enacting corrective legisla
tion, by reason of their power and authority to subpena
witnesses and to place them under oath, as well as their
superior investigatorial facilities, have means beyond those
of the labor movement to expose and bring to light corrupt
influences.
It goes almost without saying that law enforcement
agencies, legislative committees, and the labor movement
itself share the common responsibility of conducting in
vestigations fairly and objectively, without fear or favor
and in keeping with due process concepts firmly imbedded
in the tradition and Constitution of our great country. It
is a firm policy of the AFL-CIO that the highest ethical
standards be observed and vigorously followed by all
officials of the AFL-CIO and its affiliates in the conduct
of their offices, in the handling of trade union and welfare
funds, and in the administration of trade union affairs.
Trade union and welfare funds are the common property
of the members of our unions and must, therefore, be
administered as a high and sacred trust for their benefit.
The AFL-CIO is determined that any remaining vestiges
of racketeering or corruption in unions shall be completely
eradicated. We believe that Congress, in the interest of
enacting corrective legislation, if the same be deemed and
found necessary, has the right, through proper committees,
to investigate corruption wherever it exists, whether in
labor, industry, or anywhere else.
CODES OF ETHICAL PRACTICES
353
It is the firm policy of the AFL-CIO to cooperate fully
with all proper legislative committees, law enforcement
agencies, and other public bodies seeking fairly and ob
jectively to keep the labor movement or any other seg
ment of our society free from any and all corrupt influences.
This means that all officials of the AFL-CIO and its affili
ates should freely and without reservation answer all rele
vant questions asked by proper law enforcement agencies,
legislative committees, and other public bodies seeking
fairly and objectively to keep the labor movement free
from corruption. We recognize that any person is entitled,
in the exercise of his individual conscience, to the protec
tion afforded by the fifth amendment and we reaffirm our
conviction that this historical right must not be abridged
It is the policy of the AFL-CIO, however, that if a trade
union official decides to invoke the fifth amendment for
his personal protection and to avoid scrutiny by proper
legislative committees, law enforcement agencies, or other
public bodies into alleged corruption on his part, he has
no right to continue to hold office in his union. Otherwise,
it becomes possible for a union official who may be guilty
of corruption to create the impression that the trade union
movement sanctions the use of the fifth amendment, not
as a matter of individual conscience, but as a shield against
proper scrutiny into corrupt influences in the labor move
ment.
Conferences and Institutes, April 16 to May 15, 1957
E d it o r ’s N o t e .—A s a service to its readers, the Monthly Labor Review
'publishes a list of forthcoming conferences and institutes devoted to the broad
field of industrial relations. Institutes and organizations are invited to submit
schedules of such meetings for listing. To be timely enough for publication,
announcements must be received 90 days prior to the date of a conference.
Date
Conference and sponsor
Place
Apr. 16-17-------
37th Pacific Coast Management Conference.
fornia Personnel Management Association.
Apr. 17-19-------
Orientation seminar on Pension, Profit-Sharing, and Deferred
Compensation Plans. S p o n s o r : American Management As
sociation.
New York, N. Y.
Apr. 20-26-------
Industrial Health Conference. S p o n s o r : Industrial and Railway Medical and Surgical Association.
St. Louis, Mo.
Apr. 22-24-------
National Convention.
sonnel Administration.
American Society for Per-
Richmond, Va.
Apr. 22-M ay 1__
Seminars on (1) Setting Standards of Managerial Performance;
(2) Administering a Sound Wage and Salary Program; (3)
Planning for a Sound Industrial Relations Organization; (4)
Post Appraisal Interview and Review; and (5) Management’s
Responsibility Regarding Engineers, Specialists, and Profes
sional Personnel. S p o n s o r : American Management Associa
tion.
San Francisco,
Calif.
Apr. 29-M ay 3
and May 6-10.
Institute on Human Relations for Supervisors.
Manufacturers Association.
Dallas, Tex.
May 2 -3 ----------
Orientation seminar on The Selection of Office Supervisors.
S p o n s o r : American Management Association.
New York, N. Y.
May 6—8 ----------
Workshop for Top Personnel Directors.
Center, Marquette University. :
Management
Milwaukee, Wis.
May 8-10 --------
Workshops on Supervisory Training: Planning and Administering a Sound Program; and Personnel Record Keeping. S p o n
s o r : American Management Association.
New York, N. Y.
May 13-15-------
Workshops on Work Standards and Incentives to Increase Production; and Recruitment and Selection of Office Employees.
S p o n s o r : American Management Association.
Chicago, 111.
https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
S p o n so r:
S p o n so r:
S p o n so r:
S p o n so r:
Cali-
Texas
Berkeley, Calif.
Significant Decisions
in Labor Cases
Labor Relations
Permissible Use of the Strike. The United States
Supreme Court, reversing a Federal appellate
court and supporting the National Labor Relations
Board, held 1 that, under the Labor Management
Relations Act, a right for employees to strike
exists, after a 60-day notice, even though a con
tract which authorizes a reopening of negotiations
to modify its terms is in effect.
In this case, an employer-union contract pro
vided for its continuance unless a 60-day notice of
a desire to amend the terms of the agreement was
given and, also, a 60-day notice of termination
was given in the event that amendment was not
reached. The union had given the required re
opening notice, but had not requested contract
termination. After negotiations concerning the
union proposals for modifying the contract had
proceeded for nearly 6 months, the union member
ship voted to strike. Three months later, after
several postponements, the strike commenced and
lasted until 1 day following the signing of a new
contract. Since the union never gave notice to
terminate the original agreement as required by
the contract, a collective bargaining agreement
was in effect at all times.
After hearing union complaints of employer un
fair labor practices in the course of the strike, the
NLRB found the employer guilty and rejected
his defense that the union violated section 8 (d) (4)2
of the LMRA by striking while the contract was
in effect. The Board held that the term “expira
tion date” as used in that section “connoted not
only the terminal date of the bargaining contract
but also an agreed date in the course of its exist
ence when the parties can effect changes in its
provisions.” It, therefore, held that the modifi
cation date, followed by a waiting period of more
than 60 days, satisfied both the contract and the
waiting requirements of the act. Upon appeal,
354
https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
the Federal appellate court set aside the Board
order, holding that the “expiration date” of the
contract was “the date on which all rights and
obligations under it would cease” and stated that
the failure to give a contract termination notice
resulted in strike activity violating section 8 (d) (4)
of the act.
In reaching its conclusion, the Supreme Court
relied upon its interpretation of the LMRA in the
Mastro Plastics case 3 and upon the legislative his
tory of section 8 (d) (4). In the Plastics case,
the Court stated that in expounding a statute, it
must not be guided by a single sentence or part
of a sentence, but must look to the provisions of
the whole law and to its object and policy, and
must not accept a construction that would pro
duce incongruous results. Using this guide, the
Court decided that neither of the dual purposes
of the LMRA, to substitute collective bargaining
for economic warfare and to protect the right of
employees to engage in concerted activities for
their own benefit, would be served by upholding
the restrictive construction placed upon section
8 (d) (4) by the lower Federal court. Examining
the legislative history, the Supreme Court found
that when Congress added section 8 (d) to the
act as the result of the Conference Committee
Report, it recognized a duty to bargain over modi
fications if the contract so provided. The Court
then concluded: “It would be anomalous for Con
gress to recognize such a duty and at the same
time deprive the union of the strike threat which,
together with the occasional strike itself, is the
force depended upon to facilitate arriving at
satisfactory agreements.”
‘ Prepared in the U. S. Department of Labor, Office of the Solicitor. The
cases covered in this article represent a selection of the significant decisions
believed to be of"special interest. No attem pt has been made to reflect all
recent judicial and administrative developments in the field of labor law or
to indicate the effect of particular decisions in jurisdictions in which contrary
results may be reached based upon local statutory provisions, the existence
of local precedents, or a different approach by the courts to the issue presented.
1 N L R B v. Lion. Oil Co. et al. (U. S. Sup. Ct., Jan. 22, 1957). For dis
cussion of the NLRB decision in this case, see M onthly Labor Review,
October 1954 (p. 1133).
2 The section states in part as follows:
(d) . . . Provided that where there is in effect a collective bargaining con
tract covering employees in an industry affecting commerce the duty to
bargain collectively shall also mean that no party to such contract shall
terminate or modify such contract, unless the party desiring such termina
tion or modification—
(4) continues in full force and effect, without resorting to strike or lock
out, all the terms and conditions of the existing contract for a period of 60
days after such notice is given or until the expiration date of such contract,
whichever occurs later.
3 Mastro Plastics Corp., et al. v. N L R B , 350 IT. S. 270 (Feb. 27, 1956).
DECISIONS IN LABOR CASES
Qualification on Primary Picketing. The NLRB
held 4 that union picketing of a gasoline station of
a struck employer, when the only employees
working on the premises were those of a neutral
employer, was a violation of the LMRA and was
not an activity of legal primary picketing.
In the course of a strike resulting from failure
to renew an employer-employee contract, the
employer had utilized an independent contractor
and outside union labor to rebuild one of his
stations. Although all the regular employees at
the gasoline station had left their jobs, the union
continued intermittent picketing around the
establishment, which was more than 2 miles away
from other struck stations of the employer.
The Board concluded that the secondary boycott
provision of the LMRA (section 8 (b) (4) (A)) was
violated since the facts of the case proved that an
object of the picketing activity was to compel the
neutral employer to cease doing business with the
struck employer.
In reaching its decision, the NLRB distinguished this case from a number of so-called
common situs cases where picketing was protected. Unlike the other cases, the picket line
at the gasoline station would not have an effect on
the employees of the primary employer since they
were not on the premises. In qualifying the
protection afforded primary picketing by the
Ryan case,5 the majority of the Board did not
refer specifically to that case but did emphasize
the opinion that orderly administration of the
LMRA is best effectuated by adhering to "the
past practice of deciding cases as they arise and
not by extended discussion of the construction to
be placed upon decisions previously made." The
Rya,n case and others were cited by the trial
examiner whose recommendation was overruled
by the Board's majority holding.
355
Restriction on Un,ion Rule-Making. A F ederal
appellate court held 6 that a union violated the
Labor Management Relations Act by refusing
full employment clearance to carpenters brought
from another community and by threatening to
strike if an employer should hire the transferred
carpenters ahead of the order of employment
established by union rules.
Carpenters familiar with the installation of fixtures in the store of the employer in one community
had been brought 500 miles to install similar fixtures for the same employer in a store in another
community. For the purpose of saving time and
expense, the union had agreed to the employment
of these carpenters on this job, but placed them at
the bottom of a list of local carpenters who were
awaiting work in accordance with a "first in, first
out" rule of the union. The union also had informed the employer that if the transferred carpenters attempted to work on the installation
ahead of other carpenters with higher union
"priority," the union would take all its members
off the project. The employer then refused to
hire the transferees.
In upholding the petition of the NLRB for enforcement of its order against the union, the court
pointed out that while section 8 (b) of the LMRA
preserves a union's right to prescribe reasonable
rules and policies with respect "to the acquisition
and retention of membership," it does not sanction enforcement of such rules so as to inhibit the
statutorily guaranteed employment rights of employees through threat of a strike against a recalcitrant employer. The subsequent refusal of the
employer to hire the transferred carpenters was
considered by the court to be proof that the union
did "cause or attempt to cause the employer to
discriminate" against them in violation of section
8 (b) (2) of the act. In support of its position,
the court cited the Supreme Court decision in the
Ra,dio Officers' Union case 7 which stated that
coercing an employer to accept the union's desired
hiring practices deprived an employee of a protected right.
• Local 618, Automotive, Petroleum, and Allied Industriet Emploueu Union,
AFirCIO, Affiliated with International Brotherhood of Teamstera and Imor•
porated Oil Co., 116 NLRB No. 2n (Dec. 20, 1956).
• United Electrical, Radio and Machine Workers of America and Local 813,
et al. (Ruan Comtruction Co.), 85 NLRB No. 417 (July 28, 1949). See
Monthly Labor Review, October 1949 {p. 425).
• NLRB v. Local 11,!3, United Brotherhood of Carpenters &, Joinera of
America, AFL (C. A. 5, D ec. 21, 1956).
7 NLRB v. Radio Officers' Union, 347 U. S. 17.
• Intermountain Equipment Co. v. NLRB (C. A. 9, Dec. 27, 1956).
Employer Selectivity in Granting Benefits. A Federal appellate court reversed an NLRB ruling and
held 8 that under certain circumstances an employer may withhold benefits from employees represented by a union and at the same time may
grant the same benefits to other employees outside
of the union.
https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
MONTHLY LABOR REVIEW, MARCH 1957
356
For a number of years, the employer had provided annual bonuses and sick leave to its employees. A union certified to represent one department of the employer's business negotiated a
contract which contained substantial wage, overtime, vacation, holiday, and union-security benefits. The employer opposed the inclusion of bonus
and sick-leave provisions in the contract and
assured the union representative that there would
be no future discrimination as to sick leave between
members of the bargaining unit and other employees. However, after the contract was signed,
sick leave and annual bonuses were granted to
employees outside the bargaining unit but were
denied to those in the unit.
Upon complaint filed by the union against the
employer, the NLRB ruled that this employer
action constituted an unfair labor practice in violation of section 8 (a) (3) of the LMRA, which makes
it an unfair labor practice for an employer to
encourage or discourage membership in any labor
organization by discrimination in regard to hire
or tenure of employment or any terms or conditions
of employment.
The court, in overruling the Board, distinguished
several cases 9 from the present situation in that
(1) union employees in this case received substantial benefits under the contract not available
to nonunion employees and (2) the nonunion
employees who received the later benefits denied
union members were outside the scope of the
bargaining unit. Another case 10 was distinguished by the court on the ground that the union
there announced that no unilateral changes in
working conditions would be permitted, in contrast to the present situation where the union
expressly left the benefits in question to the discretion of the employer.
To uphold its position, the court relied on the
holding in the Nash-Finch case 11 that an employer
"may not be convicted of an unfair labor practice
for doing no more and no less for its union employees than its collective bargaining agreement
with them called for" and that the Board could
not later obtain for union members what the union
had failed to obtain in bargaining.
court of appeals, 12 held 13 that an employer violated the LMRA in discharging a supervisory
employee for testimony given to an NLRB agent
concerning discharge of other employees.
During an unfair labor practice hearing regarding the dismissal of six employees, the supervisor,
after receiving a subpena, had testified concerning
the substance of his earlier statements made to a
NLRB agent prior to the hearing. A few days
after the case was settled, the supervisor was
discharged without notice stated reason.
At the supervisor's dismissal hearing, the employer claimed that the supervisor was discharged
because he was actively engaged in support of the
union's organizing efforts, to the extent of threatening employees with loss of jobs if they did not
assist or join the union. The Board dismissed the
complaint, asserting that it had no jurisdiction
over the employer, and later denied a motion for
reconsideration of its decision and order. A
Federal appellate court reversed the Board's findings and remanded the case to the Board for
determination on its merits.
The Board concluded in its final disposition of
the case that the employer's assertion was not
supported by evidence that the supervisor was
actively soliciting on behalf of the union. Of the
two employees allegedly threatened by the supervisor, the Board determined that the testimony
of one disproved the employer claim against the
supervisor and that the testimony of the other
was not credible. Since the employer had not
proved his contention, the NLRB decided at the
rehearing that the supervisor was discharged
because of his testimony and that in dismissing
the supervisor the employer committed an unfair
labor practice by interfering in the exercise of
rights guaranteed in the act.
Unemployment Compensation
Vacation Shut,down. Affirming the decision of a
State board of review, a circuit court of Illinois
• Ge1UJral Motors Corp. v. NLRB, 150 F. 2d 201; Radio 0/fictrs' Union v.
NLRB, 347 U.S. 17; and Allis-Chalmer,, Manufacturing Co. v. NLRB, 162
F. 2d 435, 440.
Armatrimu Cork Co. v . NLRB, 211 F. 2d 843.
NLRB v. Nash-Finch Co., 211 F. 2d 622.
12 Pedersen v. NLRB, 234 F. 2d 417 (C. A. 2, June 7, 1956).
u Modern Linen and Laundrv &rvice, Inc. and Eugene Pedersen, 116 NLRB
10
11
Unlawful Discharge for NLRB Testimony. The
NLRB, in a case remanded to it by a Federal
https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
No. 284 (Dec. 28, 1956).
DECISIONS IN LABOR CASES
held 14 that the weeks for which claimants received
no vacation pay were weeks of unemployment
within the meaning of the Illinois Unemployment
Compensation Act since the claimants performed
no services for wages.
Claimants’ employer closed down its plant for
a period of 2 weeks to enable its employees to
take a vacation. Under the collective bargaining
agreements, the employees were entitled to 2
weeks’ vacation either without pay or with pay for
1 or 2 weeks, depending upon length of employ
ment. The employees filed claims for unemploy
ment benefits for the period during which they
did not receive vacation pay.
The court stated: “The statutory definition of
an ‘unemployed individual’ does not require a
severance of the employer-employee relationship
or a permanent or indefinite separation of the
worker from his job.” Furthermore, the board of
review and the court rejected the employer’s
argument that claimants were voluntarily unem
ployed because each worker knew of the vacation
plan and presumably accepted employment with
the understanding that the plant would be idle
2 weeks during the summer of each year.
Recovery of Benefits. The Maryland court of
appeals held15 that an employee claimant was
absolved of liability^ for the full amount of over
paid unemployment benefits and that recovery
from the employer may be had under the principle
of unjust enrichment or restitution.
In this case, the claimant, laid off because of
lack of work, received unemployment benefits for
several weeks prior to her recall to work. Under
the terms of the collective bargaining agreement
between her employer and her union, she was
entitled to return to work prior to the date of
recall. In accordance with an arbitrator’s award,
she was paid back wages for the period in dispute
less the amount of unemployment benefits received
during the same period. The Maryland Employ
ment Security Board sued the claimant and her
emplojmr to recover the benefit payments which
were made during the period for which the claimant
received back wages. The employer contended
unsuccessfully that the Unemployment Insurance
14 General Time Corp. v. Cummins (111. Cir. Ct., Nov. 16,1956).
15 State of Maryland v. Rucker et al. (Md. C. A., Nov. 7, 1956).
i« Moore v. Board of Review (Ohio Sup. Ct., Nov. 14,1956).
https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
357
Law required repayment only of benefits obtained
by reason of nondisclosure or misrepresentation
of a material fact and that admittedly no fraudu
lent act was committed.
The court stated that an action based upon
restitution exists “ whenever the defendant has
obtained possession of money which, in equity
and good conscience, he ought not to be allowed
to retain,” and that “recovery in such an action
is not barred by the Unemployment Insurance
Law even if it is assumed that recovery against
the claimant would not lie under the statute.”
Receipt of Civil Service Annuity. The Supreme
Court of Ohio held 16 that claimant should receive
unemployment benefits even though an annuity
under the United States Civil Service Retirement
Act was also being received.
The claimant, after retiring from Federal em
ployment, worked in private employment. When
he was laid off, he filed a claim for unemployment
compensation. He was first denied benefits on
the ground that the Federal retirement annuity
was a remuneration in the form of social security
old-age benefits or “ similar payments under any
act of Congress.” (Under the Ohio Unemploy
ment Compensation Act, unemployment benefits
must be reduced by the amount of such remunera
tion.) The Ohio court of appeals reversed the
denial. In upholding the lower court, the Supreme
Court of Ohio reasoned that even though social
security old-age benefits and civil service retire
ment annuities are similar in that age and prior
earnings are factors in determining entitlement of
both types of payment, there are pronounced dis
similarities. The court said that social security
benefits are a benevolence or a gratuity, whereas
a retirement annuity is contractual. Unlike an
annuity, social security payments are reducible if
a recipient’s annual earnings exceed SI,200. Social
security protection is provided against unemploy
ment resulting from old age; civil service retire
ment payments, on the other hand, resemble an
annuity purchased by the annuitant with his
own funds. Under certain circumstances, an em
ployee’s retirement contributions may be recovered
by the employee, his heirs, or his legal representa
tive. In reaching its conclusion, the supreme
court followed decisions by the courts of Missouri
and Minnesota.
358
Veterans’ Reemployment
Court Jurisdiction and Seniority Limitations.
A Federal court of appeals 17 recently dismissed
two claims of lack of Federal jurisdiction made
by the employer in a case involving the seniority
of a veteran in railroad employment, and approved
the action of the lower court in dismissing the
veteran’s claim respecting his seniority date as
having no legal foundation.
The bargaining agreement for railroad clerks
in this case gives employees in group 2 a prefer
ence, ‘‘based upon fitness and ability,” over
nonemployees for group 1 positions. Vacancies
are posted and after applications are received
the name of the selected person is announced.
Seniority on promotion to group 1 commences
upon assignment and may thereafter be exercised
within the group by one whose job is abolished.
The agreement also provides that after a leave of
absence a worker may return to his position or
exercise seniority rights to any position “bul
letined” during his absence.
The veteran in this case left a clerical position
in group 2 for military service. While he was
absent, two group 1 positions were bulletined.
The first position posted for group 1, that of bill
clerk, was announced September 8, 1952, and
was assigned to a nonemployee on September 15,
1952. The second, posted on September 10,
1952, was that of assistant cashier and was also
assigned to a nonemployee on September 22,
1952.
Upon the veteran’s return on October 2, 1952,
the employer placed him as an assistant cashier
in group 1 and gave him seniority as of October 7,
1952, displacing the incumbent. The veteran
protested his seniority date with the claim that
his priority over former nonemployees should
give him seniority as of the date of bulletining of
either vacancy filled in his absence. On September
4, 1953, the position of assistant cashier w'as
eliminated. The veteran then tried to assert his
claim of seniority over the incumbent bill clerk
in group 1, but the employer rejected his claim.
https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
MONTHLY LABOR REVIEW, MARCH 1957
After demotion to group 2, the veteran initiated
legal action which a Federal district court dis
missed as without merit. The court of appeals
affirmed this dismissal and construed the socalled escalator principle to mean simply that
“all of [the veteran’s] rights, including seniority,
move on as though he had not left the employ
of the company. It further held, however, that
the rights are limited to “only such established
seniority rights as he had when he entered the
service.” The court then said that the veteran
had no “absolute” right to a group 1 position
because, if he had been present when the vacancies
occurred, he could not have demanded the posi
tions except upon a determination of fitness and
qualification. It further expressed doubt that
the veteran had a right to “bump” the assistant
cashier who, in the opinion of the court, was his
senior in group 1. In discussing the relationship
of the veteran’s seniority to his rights in group 1,
the court considered only the dates after his
return from military service.
The court also rejected the contention of the
railroad that the National Railroad Adjustment
Board has exclusive primary jurisdiction of
veterans’ claims dealing with railroad employment.
It ruled that, inasmuch as labor disputes con
cerning veterans’ reemployment rights are pecul
iar to veterans and are dealt with specifically in
the Universal Military Training and Service
Act,18 veterans employed by railroads do not
havef to go to the Adjustment Board before
seeking a remedy in court. The court further
considered as ill-founded another contention of the
railroad that it was powerless to act since the bill
clerk, the nonemployee hired for the first group 1
position, wTas not made a party to the proceeding.
The court pointed out that the 1951 amendments
to the veterans’ reemployment law of 1948 require
only the employer as a necessary party defendant.19
17 McKinney v. M - K - T Railroad Co., et al. (C. A. 10, Dec. 22, 1956, af
firming D. C., E. D. Okla.).
is 50 A p p . U. S. C. 459.
» Ibid., 459 (d).
*-
Chronology of
Recent Labor Events
T he Federal Wage and Hour Administrator revoked,
effective January 14, the recently announced special
overtime pay policy for holiday weeks under the Fair
Labor Standards and the Public Contracts Acts (see
Chron. item for Nov. 14, 1956, MLR, Jan. 1957). Coun
trywide experience with enforcement of the policy over
the Christmas and New Year’s holidays demanded its
withdrawal.
January 9
A n e w 2-year agreement between the Ladies’ Garment
Workers and the Chicago Association of Dress Manu
facturers, providing higher wage rates for 4,000 employees
of 41 factories and mediation of price rates on new gar
ments, went into effect.
T he Chicago & North Western Railway and 12 non
operating unions agreed on a supplemental unemploy
ment benefit plan—the first in the industry—for railmen
with 2 years or more of service, retroactive to May 8, 1956.
Maximum benefits under the plan, when combined with
Federal payments under the Railroad Unemployment
Insurance Act, would amount to 75 percent of after tax
earnings for most workers. (See also p. 364 of this issue.)
January 2
January 11
T h e Federal Wage and Hour Administrator signed 2
orders, effective January 24, raising the minimum wage
rates under the Fair Labor Standards Act for 4 Puerto
Rican industries. The industries affected and the ranges
of their new hourly rates are: Communications, utilities,
and transportation—70 cents to $1 (except for a railroad
now liquidating its assets); wholesaling, warehousing, and
other distribution—90 cents to $1; food and related
products— 43 to 55 cents; and alcoholic beverages and
industrial alcohol— $1.
L ocomotive Fireman and Enginemen and the Canadian
Pacific Railway agreed to resume operations after a 9-day
strike, pending the outcome of a Government inquiry to
determine whether firemen are essential to safety on
diesel locomotives in freight and yard service. The
strike of the 2,800 firemen idled about 65,000 of the
company’s employees.
January 1, 1957
January 5
T h e Miami Beach, Fla., hotel strike, in progress since
April 1955, ended when the Hotel and Restaurant Em
ployees Union and the Miami Beach Hotel Association
signed a no-strike, 10-year master contract providing for
recognition of the union and seniority, negotiated wages
and working conditions by May 1, annual reopenings on
wages, and arbitration on grievances and wages and work
ing conditions. The agreement is to cover only those
association member hotels which accept it individually and
authorize the association to bargain for them. (See
Chron. item for Oct. 10, 1955, MLR, Dec. 1955.)
On January 8, the U. S. District Court for the District
of Columbia ruled, in H o te l E m p lo y e e s L o c a l N o . 2 5 5 , et
a l., . . . v. . . . N L R B , that the Board has discre
tionary power to decline jurisdiction over the hotel
industry.
January 8
J ohn J. O’R o u r k e , who had bid unsuccessfully for the
presidency of the New York City Teamsters’ Joint Council
in the February 1956 election (see Chron. item for Mar. 21,
1956, MLR, May 1956), was nominated, without opposi
tion, for council president.
https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
January 14
T he Supreme Court of the United States denied review,
thus leaving in effect the lower court decisions, in the
following two companion cases:
1. I n t e r n a t i o n a l B r o th e r h o o d o f T e a m s te r s , . . . , L o c a l
N o . 8 7 8 , e t a l. v. B la s s in g a m e , e t a l.
The Arkansas
Supreme Court had ruled that a “product picketing” of
a struck dairy’s retail outlets had been properly enjoined
because it violated the State’s public policy.
2. B u r k e e t a l., o f M i l k W a g o n D r iv e r s . . . , L o c a l 6 0 3 ,
( T e a m s te r s ) A F L , e t a l. v. A d a m s D a i r y , I n c . The Mis
souri Supreme Court had ruled that a union’s attempt,
in a jurisdictional dispute with an independent union, to
establish a boycott of a dairy’s products by distributing
leaflets asking customers not to buy “unfair products”
violated the State’s antitrust law and was subject to
State court jurisdiction, as such boycott was neither
protected by the concerted activities provision of the TaftHartley Act nor forbidden by the secondary boycott of
the act.
January 18
E n d in g its annual conference in Miami, Fla., the General
Executive Board of the Ladies’ Garment Workers’ Union
voted to affiliate the union with the Industrial Union
Department of the AFL-CIO and to limit the duration of
collective agreements to 3 years. (See also p. 365 of this
issue.)
359
360
January 22
T he Supreme Court of the United States ruled, in N L R B
v. L io n O il C o. e t a l., that a strike in support of union
demands in reopening negotiations under the existing
contract, called more than 60 days after the notice of
contract modification was served on the employer but
without a formal contract termination notice, did not
violate the Taft-Hartley Act. (See also p. 354 of this
issue.)
MONTHLY LABOR REVIEW, MARCH 1957
L u n d e b e r g , 56, president of the AFL-CIO
Maritime Trades Department and the Seafarers’ Inter
national Union, died in San Francisco.
H arry
January 23
T he Supreme Court of the United States ordered a new
trial for Ben Gold, ex-president of the defunct Fur and
Leather Workers (Ind.), convicted by a Federal court of
the charge of filing a non-Communist affidavit with the
NLRB. (See Chron. item for Oct. 6, 1955, MLR, Dec.
1955.) The High Court held that, during Gold’s trial,
FBI agents unwittingly “intruded into the privacy of the
jury” by questioning several jurors concerning an un
related matter. The case was G o ld v. U n ite d S ta te s .
T he P r e sid e n t nominated James T. O’Connell of Upper
January 30
Montclair, N. J., to the post of Under Secretary of Labor,
succeeding Arthur Larson, who resigned to become Direc
tor of the United States Information Agency (see Chron.
item for April 5, 1954, MLR, June 1954).
T he P r e sid e n t of the New York Building and Construc
tion Trades Council disclosed that 4 New York City
construction unions would invest some of their pension
reserves, initially $650,000, in the construction of a
$35-million cooperative housing project in the East
Bronx. (See also p. 364 of this issue.)
January 25
T he Senate established the Select Committee on Improper
Activities in the Labor or Management Field, with a
$350,000 budget. The committee is to report to the
Senate by January 31, 1958. (See also p. 361 of this issue.)
W h il e the longshore contract negotiations in New York
City (see Chron. item for Dec. 4, 1956, MLR, Feb. 1957)
remained in a deadlock, the 10,000-member local of the
International Longshoremen’s Association (Ind.) in New
Orleans signed a 3-year agreement with the local shippers
providing for apackage increase of 31 cents.
T h e P r e sid e n t , acting under the Railway Labor Act,
created an emergency board to study a dispute over
wages and rule changes between the Railway Express
Agency and the Teamsters.
T he Federal Wage and Hour Administrator signed an
order under the Fair Labor Standards Act, raising the
minimum wage rates for the tobacco industry in Puerto
Rico, effective February 21. The new rates for the in
dustry’s 3 classifications range from 36 to 75 cents an
hour.
January 28
January 31
T he AFL-CIO Executive Council opened its midwinter
meeting in Miami, Fla. During the first 3 days of the
meeting, the council, among other actions, voted a policy
declaration that union leaders who invoke the fifth amend
ment to avoid scrutiny by properly constituted Federal
bodies inquiring into corruption on their part should be
ousted from their jobs, and adopted a code of ethical
practices in the conduct of union affairs. It also ad
mitted the Train Dispatchers Association to the Federation.
(See also pp. 350 and 361 of this issue.)
T h e California Superior Court issued a preliminary in
junction against enforcement of the Palm Springs, Calif.,
“right to work” ordinance outlawing union-shop agree
ments (see Chron. item for Nov. 14, 1956, MLR, Jan.
1957). According to the court, the city had no right to
enact such an ordinance since, under the Taft-Hartley
Act, only “State laws” can prohibit union-shop contracts,
and in California, such contracts are lawful. The case
was S te p h e n s o n , o f L o c a l U n io n 4 4 0 , I n t e r n a t i o n a l B r o th e r
h o o d o f E le c tr ic a l W o r k e r s v. C i t y o f P a l m S p r i n g s , et a l.
https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
Developments in
Industrial Relations *
L abor n e w s during January was dominated by
investigations of racketeering and misuse of union
funds and efforts on the part of the labor move
ment to correct such abuses and to resolve juris
dictional difficulties between industrial and
construction unions within the AFL-CIO.
Union Developments
Union Standards. The Permanent Investigations
Subcommittee of the Senate Committee on Gov
ernment Operations, headed by Senator John L.
McClellan of Arkansas, focused public attention
on these problems when it began hearings on
racketeering and diversion of union funds. As the
inquiry progressed, many top union officials,
gathered for the winter session of the AFL-CIO
Executive Council, voiced publicly their views that
the Federation should take forthright action to
assure cooperation with such investigations and to
clear up corrupt situations.
Consequently, standards of conduct for union
officials became the first order of business at the
AFL-CIO Executive Council session, which opened
January 28, and several significant actions were
taken on this subject. The council issued a policy
statement 1 pledging full cooperation with all
properly authorized government bodies objectively
investigating corruption “wherever it exists.”
The declaration stated that any union official who
uses the fifth amendment for his personal pro
tection and to avoid scrutiny into alleged corrup
tion on his part, has no right to continue to hold
office in his union. Federation President George
Meany later stated that the council would call
before it any union that did not observe this
policy and would take appropriate action against it.
The only dissenting vote on the resolution was
cast by Dave Beck, president of the Teamsters.
Mr. Beck expressed the view that Government in
quiries into labor abuses often turned into “in
quisitions” and that the course adopted by the
AFL-CIO “would come home to haunt the labor
https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
movement.” Concurrently, the Teamsters union
affirmed its stand that its officers would not be
disciplined for exercising their constitutional
privilege against self-incrimination and that indi
vidual unions were autonomous in governing their
own affairs without interference from the Federa
tion. Earlier in the month, some Teamster leaders
had refused to testify before the McClellan sub
committee on the ground that it had no jurisdiction
over union activities; they offered to cooperate,
however, with any congressional committee with
proper authority over union activities. Some
officers of an Allied Industrial Workers local in
New York City, appearing before the same com
mittee, had invoked the fifth amendment.
At the end of January, the Senate approved a
resolution authorizing establishment of an 8member Select Committee on Improper Activities
in the Labor or Management Field, composed of
members chosen from the Government Operations
Committee and the Labor and Public Welfare
Committee, which also will be under the chair
manship of Senator McClellan. The new com
mittee consists of Democratic Senators Sam J.
Ervin, Jr., North Carolina; John F. Kennedy,
Massachusetts; and Patrick Y. McNamara, Mich
igan, in addition to Senator McClellan; and of
Republican Senators Barry M. Goldwater, Ari
zona; Irving M. Ives, New York; Joseph R.
McCarthy, Wisconsin; and Karl E. Mundt of
South Dakota.
The AFL-CIO Executive Council action on the
fifth amendment had been preceded by adoption
by the Executive Board of the International Union
of Electrical Workers of a ruling that any officer
invoking the fifth amendment in a congressional
investigation into racketeering (or communism)
would automatically face a union trial and be
subject to expulsion. The IUE’s Executive Board
also adopted a comprehensive code of ethical
practices for its officers which would govern or
ganizing activities and administration of welfare
funds, provide for maintenance of internal de
mocracy, and prohibit racial discrimination.
Violation of the provisions, claimed to be more
stringent than any thus far approved by other
unions, would be punishable through the union’s
regular trial machinery.
‘Prepared in the Division of Wages and Industrial Relations, Bureau of
Labor Statistics, on the basis of currently available published material.
1 For the text of this statement, see p. 350 of this issue.
361
362
Also prior to the meeting of the AFL-CIO Ex
ecutive Council, the United Automobile Workers
Executive Board had adopted a resolution urging
the Federation to cooperate with any “fair” con
gressional investigation of corruption and rack
eteering on the part of labor, business, and in
dustry. The UAW resolution declared, “there
must not be tolerance within the leadership of
the united labor movement for either Communists
or crooks.” The resolution credited the AFL-CIO
Ethical Practices Committee for making a good
beginning in dealing with corruption within the
labor movement but pointed out that a congres
sional committee would have certain advantages,
including authority to subpena witnesses.
As part of its efforts to force its constituents to
do any needed house cleaning, the Executive
Council adopted three codes of ethics proposed by
the AFL-CIO Ethical Practices Committee to
guide the conduct of union officials.2 One of the
codes was aimed at eliminating conflicts of interest
by prohibiting officers from engaging in a business
with which their unions have collective bargaining
agreements. The other two codes set up stand
ards for union officials and administrators of
health and welfare funds. The codes stated that
there is “no room” in the organization for any
officer who is “a crook, a racketeer, a Communist,
or a Fascist,” whether convicted of “any crime
involving moral turpitude offensive to trade union
morality” or “commonly known to be . . . prey
ing on the labor movement” for corrupt purposes
even though without criminal record. Each union
was urged to apply the principles on the basis of
common sense with due regard for individual
rights.
In addition to the banning of kickbacks and
other abuses of welfare funds, as disclosed in 1955
during hearings of the Senate Subcommittee on
Welfare and Pension Funds,3 the code requires
maintenance of complete records, full reports to
members, and selection of insurance carriers by
competitive bidding. These codes, it was hoped,
would serve as a guide or yardstick for the Federa
tion’s international unions. Failure of the inter
nationals to adhere to the policies would make
them susceptible to suspension or ultimate expul
sion under the AFL-CIO constitution. In the
case of the Federation’s own subsidiary depart
ments, councils, and 900 directly affiliated federal
unions, the Federation has authority to act directly.
https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
MONTHLY LABOR REVIEW, MARCH 1957
Just such action was taken when Mr. Meany,
acting upon the recommendation of a hearings
officer, expelled Charles Naddeo, secretary-treas
urer of a Can Workers federal labor union in
Philadelphia, removed the local’s other officers,
and extended a temporary trusteeship until the
local demonstrates that it is in compliance with
standards set up by the Federation. The chief
officers of this local as well as those of another
federal union—the Waste Material Handlers in
Chicago—were suspended in December on charges
of maladministration of welfare funds; 4 hearings
on the latter case were expected to be completed
in February. Mr. Naddeo was also a vice president
of the Laundry Workers’ International Union,
facing action by the AFL-CIO Executive Council
on charges of welfare fund maladministration.
The Laundry Workers, as well as the Allied
Industrial Workers and the Distillery Workers,
which were accused of similar malpractices, were
directed by the council after 2 days of hearings to
remove officials who had been found guilty by the
Ethical Practices Committee.5 If they failed to
cooperate in eliminating “corrupt influences”
within 90 days, they would be automatically
suspended. The Industrial Workers and the
Distillery Workers immediately denied the exist
ence of any abuses in their organizations and criti
cized the council’s resolution as “too vague” and
unclear as to just what reform measures were
expected. President Meany later remarked that
he would not specify what should be done but that
the Federation would provide assistance if so
requested. Meanwhile, the president of the
International Chemical Workers Union suspended
all officers of a New York local because of their
reported relationships with racketeers. The inter
national also ordered a full investigation and
appointment of supervisors for all its “amalga
mated” locals in the New York area. This step
was taken, it was said, for investigative purposes
only and not because the unions were prejudged
guilty of dubious practices.
2 For the text of these Codes, see p. 350 of this issue.
3 For a summary of the Subcommittee’s report, see M onthly Labor
Review, July 1956 (p. 812).
4 See Monthly Labor Review, February 1957 (p. 209).
3
The 3 international unions, with a combined membership of 170,000, were
tried before the Ethical Practices Committee following disclosure of the
activities of their officers in a Senate committee investigation 2 years ago.
In December, the secretary-treasurer of the Laundry Workers was“ suspended
indefinitely” by his international Executive Board. See M onthly Labor
Review, February 1957 (p. 209).
DEVELOPMENTS IN INDUSTRIAL RELATIONS
A 10-point reform program proposed by the
Maritime Trades Department of the AFL-CIO
was accepted by the independent International
Longshoremen’s Association on January 23, appar
ently as part of an effort to rejoin the Federation.
The program provided for reorganization of the
union’s internal structure along democratic lines
and adherence to the principles of the Federa
tion’s constitution. The union also promised to
honor the rival International Brotherhood of
Longshoremen’s existing contracts and its status
as a union entitled to seek exclusive bargaining
rights. However, AFL-CIO President Meany
found ILA acceptance of the plan unsatisfactory
for reaffiliation unless the Federation received
actual proof of a “cleanup” of the expelled long
shoremen’s union. Meanwhile the ousted union,
operating under a no-strike injunction secured
under the national emergency provisions of the
Labor Management Relations Act, and the New
York Shipping Association appeared to make no
progress toward settling of their protracted dispute.6
Jurisdictional Problems. A sharp conflict within
the AFL-CIO was highlighted early in the
council’s meeting as the presidents of 19 building
trades unions rejected a proposal that Mr. Meany
had offered to settle their longstanding juris
dictional controversies with former CIO industrial
unions. The disputes involved jurisdiction over
installation of new equipment, moving, mainte
nance of equipment, and related inplant construc
tion. Mr. Meany had proposed that such dis
putes be settled on the basis of past practice,
with arbitration as a last resort. Under his plan,
construction work on new plants would have been
assigned to the building trades unions but most
maintenance work and installation of new equip
ment in existing plants would have been allocated
to industrial unions. The proposal would also
have barred the boycotting of union-made products
in disputes of this sort. Further efforts to solve
the problem, by a 13-man special committee, were
scheduled for February. Meantime, a special 3member subcommittee was to render final decision
in a frictional situation between the Sheet Metal
Workers and the Steel Workers. Recently the
8 Ibid.
7 See Monthly Labor Review, January 1957 (p. 83).
8 For an account of special bargaining policies adopted last month by the
UAW ’s Fifth Annual Skilled Trades Conference, see Monthly Labor Re
view, February 1957 (p. 208).
4 1 7 2 3 2 — 5 7 --------- 7
https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
363
Sheet Metal Workers had boycotted, as nonunion,
products of an Akron, Ohio, plant organized by
the Steelworkers because they refused to recognize
the Steelworkers’ right to make new equipment.
The issue between the two groups of unions was
sharpened by the building craft unions’ adoption
of a reorganization plan for the Building Trades
Department intended to “protect their rightful
chartered jurisdiction and to regain work now
being performed by other organizations.”
At its closing session, the council charged the
International Union of Electrical Workers (IUE)
with violating the no-raiding provision of the
AFL-CIO constitution by seeking to oust the
Sheet Metal Workers as bargaining agent at a
plant in New York City. The Metal Workers
threatened to sue the IUE for libel after the IUE
claimed collusion between the company and the
Metal Workers on representation rights.
An agreement entered into by the International
Brotherhood of Paper Makers and the Pulp, Sul
phite and Paper Mill Workers in 1909 to minimize
jurisdictional and other conflicts was terminated
by the Paper Makers Executive Board, effective
March 1. The Paper Makers were to merge with
the United Paperworkers in a March convention.7
The Paper Makers union explained that it had no
authority to commit the new organization—the
United Papermakers and Paperworkers Interna
tional Union—to continue the Paper Makers poli
cies of cooperation with the Pulp Workers, includ
ing joint executive board meetings and joint organ
izing and bargaining negotiations. The Paper
Makers, however, expressed the hope that the
new union and the Pulp Workers “can live to
gether in the paper industry with a minimum of
friction and disagreement” and that the previous
relationships can continue. It also pointed out
that frequent changes in industry techniques and
job content rendered the agreement obsolete and
that the jurisdiction of the new 123,000-member
union would be extended to include workers in the
pulp and related industries. The Pulp Workers
have a membership of about 150,000.
Other Union Activities. Skilled workers repre
sented by the United Automobile Workers ob
tained greater recognition of their problems as a
result of a series of intraunion meetings.8 At a
2-day conference in Detroit, delegates representing
350,000 General Motors workers approved a re-
364
organization of the National General Motors Ne
gotiating Committee along functional rather than
existing geographical lines. Union members en
gaged in similar work or in similar plants (i. e.,
Chevrolet assembly, Fisher Body assembly, Fisher
Body stamping plants, etc.), although in different
sections of the country, will be in the same sub
council. The reconstituted negotiating committee
will continue to consist of a representative from
each of 9 sub councils but in addition will include
2 new members representing the 48,000 skilled
workers—tool and die workers, pattern makers,
maintenance employees, and design and engineer
ing employees.
The AFL-CIO plans to organize white-collar
workers were implemented by the council when it
agreed to assign a total of about 120 organizers,
including 30 or 40 new organizers, to work with
any international union requesting such assistance.
The council also pledged full support to efforts to
raise the pay of Government employees and in
crease the benefits of retired Federal workers.
The United Mine Workers’ Executive Board
acted to bolster the organization’s finances by vot
ing a special assessment of $10 on each working
member. The union’s officers reported that the
international’s funds were reduced because of last
year’s “tremendous expenses” for law suits, organ
izing activities, and its quadrennial convention,
which cost nearly half a million dollars. At the
October convention,9 the delegates had approved
a resolution that all miners pay an additional 25
cents monthly in local dues.
The American Federation of Teachers became
the third union whose members had in recent
months rejected a dues increase proposed by its
leadership. The membership vote, announced
early in January, was 17,469 to 15,688. The
other two organizations were the Machinists and
the Typographical Union.10
Announcement was made by the New York
Building and Construction Trades Council that
4 New York City construction unions were plan
ning construction of a $35 million cooperative
housing development in the city. Sponsors were
the Lathers Union, the Operating Engineers, the
Plumbers, and the Steamfitters, while the Inter
national Brotherhood of Electrical Workers indi
cated it would also participate. The 2,400apartment project would be the first tangible
accomplishment of a drive begun more than a
https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
MONTHLY LABOR REVIEW, MARCH 1957
year ago by the city administration to interest
construction unions in investing part of their
reserves in cooperative housing built under Title
I of the National Housing Act.11
Plans for establishing a center for elderly union
workers were announced by the New York Joint
Board of the Amalgamated Clothing Workers for
its 7,000 retired members.12 Recreation and educa
tion facilities for pensioners are to be added to
the union’s Sidney Hillman Health Center which
services all members. Education classes, includ
ing an arts and crafts program, will be conducted
with the assistance of city and State agencies.
Wage and Supplementary Benefit Developments
Transportation. The first supplementary layoff
pay plan in the railroad industry was negotiated
early in January by the Chicago & North Western
Railway and 12 “ nonoperating” unions represent
ing 16,000 workers. The plan provided that the
railroad make payments to unemployed workers,
with at least 2 years’ service, who have been dis
placed by technical change, mechanization, or
economy measures. Benefits, which will supple
ment amounts received under the Railroad
Unemployment Insurance Act, are to be based
on the employee’s length of service and earnings.
The plan was made retroactive to May 8, 1956,
and hence benefited a substantial number of the
employees laid off last spring as an economy
measure when operations on the railroad were
reorganized following a change in management.
For laid-off workers who have 15 or more years of
service and who are otherwise qualified for maxi
mum payments of $10.20 a day ($8.50 under the
Railroad Unemployment Insurance Act and $1.70
from the railroad) for 18 to 20 months, the rail
road, during the first year, will pay the full $10.20
daily benefit after the worker exhausts the 130
days of benefits (covering about 6 calendar months)
to which he is entitled under the Railroad Unem
ployment Insurance Act. Maximum benefits
would reportedly amount to 75 percent of “ take
home” pay for most workers. The plan, nego9 See Monthly Labor Review, December 1956 (p. 1456).
10 See Monthly Labor Review, February 1957 (p. 208).
11 Under title I of the act, municipalities can condemn land as a slum clear
ance measure and then sell it to the cooperative developers for less than the
acquisition price, with one-third of the difference made up by the city and the
remaining two-thirds by the Federal Government.
12 For other programs affecting retired workers, see M onthly Labor Review,
February 1957 (p. 211).
DEVELOPMENTS IN INDUSTRIAL RELATIONS
tiated for a 3-year period, had the approval of the
Railroad Retirement Board. The agreement was
regarded by the unions as a present-day supple
ment to the Washington Job Protection Agree
ment of 1936, negotiated by most railroad unions
and carriers to provide job transfers or separation
allowances to workers laid off because of railroad
consolidations and mergers.
Textiles, Apparel, and Related Industries. Wage
and salary increases were announced for about
4,000 union employees of rayon and cellophane
plants of E. I. du Pont de Nemours Co. in Old
Hickory, Tenn. About 1,300 members of the
Textile Workers Union received advances ranging
from 7 to 10 cents an hour, as did workers repre
sented by unaffiliated local unions.
In the cotton and synthetic branch of the textile
industry, the Bates Manufacturing Co. asked the
Textile Workers Union to accept a pay cut of
about 14 cents an hour for 6,000 employees at the
company’s 5 mills in Maine. In a January letter
to the union president, the company stated that
its wage costs averaged 14 cents an hour higher
than those of southern competitors and requested
union cooperation to eliminate this differential.
The company added that it might be forced “to
curtail operations drastically” if it failed to receive
wage-cost relief since it had lowered prices and its
earnings were “off sharply.” The union con
tended that a wage increase of 10 cents an hour
received by southern textile workers in October
1956 had raised wage scales for some job classifica
tions above northern rates, and termed the propo
sal “ill conceived and a disservice to employees.”
The union was scheduled to meet February 9 to
formulate its bargaining demands under its con
tracts with New England cotton and synthetic
textile producers, which either expire or are
subject to wage reopening in April. The Bates
contract provides for binding arbitration in the
event the parties fail to agree, but TWUA em
ployees at other mills would be free to strike if
their negotiations proved unsuccessful. (In 1955,
following a strike lasting 13 weeks at some mills,
the union had signed 2- or 3-year contracts that
provided for maintenance of existing wage rates,
subject to annual reopening. In the 1956 re
opening, pay increases averaging about 8 to 8%
13 See M onthly Labor Review, June 1956 (p. 694).
https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
365
cents an hour were negotiated to restore wage
cuts made in 1952 under arbitration awards.13)
Abandonment of a policy of industrywide bar
gaining in the woolen and worsted industry was
announced at a January 5 meeting of Textile
Workers Union delegates representing 25,000
workers in 100 mills. The departure from the uni
form “pattern” approach was attributed to the
disappearance from the industry of any company
large enough to serve as a wage leader; American
Woolen Co., formerly the largest producer, had
merged into Textron, Inc., and subsequently liqui
dated a number of its mills. Another reason cited
was the increased product diversification by pro
ducers whose disparate competitive and profit
positions required individual contract negotiations.
Numerous contract cancellation notices and re
opening requests by local unions were expected to
follow this decision. The union’s Passaic, N. J.,
Joint Board notified Forstmann Woolen Co. that
it was terminating its contract, which otherwise
would have been automatically extended beyond
its March 15 expiration date.
By contrast, the Executive Board of the Inter
national Ladies’ Garment Workers voted to au
thorize a study of the feasibility of negotiating a
nationwide agreement in the women’s coat and
suit industry. It also agreed upon a 3-year limit
on the term of all future agreements; decided to
affiliate the union with the AFL-CIO Industrial
Union Department; and proposed that contracts
provide for lowering the retirement age for women
from 65 to 62. The National Coat and Suit Re
covery Board, the labor-management advisory
group of the garment industry, which is charac
terized by a large number of small competing
firms, decided to sponsor a nationwide campaign
for the creation of a new Government agency to
aid small business. David Dubinsky, president
of the ILGWU, thereupon stated he would recom
mend to his union that it underwrite 10 percent of
the expenses of the promotion drive, which is ex
pected to cost about $600,000.
Metalworking. At the American Motors Corp.’s
Kenosha, Wis., plant, an estimated 5,000 em
ployees, members of the United Auto Workers,
left their jobs on January 22 in a dispute center
ing on the seniority layoff provision in the 1955
agreement covering layoffs of 2 days or less. Early
last year the company proposed a contract modifi-
366
cation that would allow it to prohibit employees
from “ h u m p in g ” workers with lower seniority for
layoffs lasting 2 days or less. This modification
was approved by the union’s Executive Board but
was rejected by its membership in September
and again in December 1956. However, the agree
ment ending the strike, ratified by the union mem
bership on January 29, reportedly gave the com
pany the right to furlough workers for 2 days or
less without following seniority rules rigidly.
Over 10,000 salaried employees of Douglas
Aircraft Co., Inc., received wage increases ranging
from 4 to 7 percent on January 7. The raise
affected all of the company’s salaried employees
in California, Oklahoma, and North Carolina,
including 3,400 technical employees represented
by the Professional Engineering Association, an
affiliate of the independent federation of Engineers
and Scientists of America.
A 1-year contract negotiated by the Inter
national Brotherhood of Electrical Workers and
the Western Electric Co. provided wage increases
for 15,000 employees at the company’s Haw
thorne Works in Cicero, 111. The rate increases,
retroactive to December 20, ranged from 13 to
16 cents an hour for maintenance workers and 7
to 11 cents for other classifications. Hourly
earnings, including incentive pay, reportedly would
rise by an average of about 12 cents.
Construction. The same union negotiated wagerate increases of 17 cents an hour for 11,500
members in the Chicago construction industry,
and the Pipefitters Union negotiated an 18-cent
increase for 6,000 workers in the area. The
increases, effective April 1 and June 1, respectively,
were agreed to under wage reopening provisions
of contracts expiring in 1958. Wage increases of
20 cents an hour were also scheduled for 6,500
Chicago bricklayers under a new 2-year contract
effective June 1. The agreement, containing no
provision for reopening, was negotiated with 2
employer groups representing 450 contractors.
The first contract covering Kentucky highway
and heavy construction workers on a statewide
basis was negotiated by the Associated General
Contractors and 3 unions—the Teamsters, the
Carpenters, and the Laborers—representing about
15,000 workers. Wages were set by geographical
zones and deferred pay increases ranging between
https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
MONTHLY LABOR REVIEW, MARCH 1957
10 and 15 cents an hour were provided for July
1957. The agreement was to expire a year later.
Other Industries. Employee stock plans were
under consideration by the United States Steel
Corp. and were adopted by the Piasecki Aircraft
Corp. and Montgomery Ward & Co. The United
States Steel plan provided for company con
tributions of 50 cents for each dollar saved by
salaried employees having at least 1 year’s con
tinuous service, including those covered by col
lective bargaining contracts incorporating such a
plan. The employee could elect to put 5 to 8
percent of his base salary either entirely into
Government bonds or half in Government bonds
and half in U. S. Steel common stock. All com
pany contributions would be invested in the stock
and would become “vested” as a part of the
employee’s permanent account after 3 years. The
company said the savings plan, which would be
made effective in May if ratified by stockholders
at that time, was formulated to provide salaried
workers with a substitute for supplemental un
employment benefits and to help them acquire
a continuing ownership interest in the company.
Under the Piasecki program, the aircraft com
pany would also add an amount equal to 50 per
cent of the employee’s share (up to 10 percent of
his earnings) toward the purchase of the com
pany’s common stock. At Montgomery Ward,
officers and other key management personnel
became eligible for both a stock option plan and
a pension program. The company estimated that
about 18,000 employees would also be eligible to
participate in the retirement plan on February 1,
the effective date, with the employee contribu
tions to be matched by company contributions.
Hallmark Cards, Inc., announced the establish
ment of profit-sharing and optional “thrift” plans,
as well as company-financed medical and life
insurance. Under the profit-sharing plan, the
company will make annual payments to a trust
fund for each of its 4,000 employees having at
least 2 years’ service. Such amounts will vary
from 5 to 15 percent of the employee’s earnings,
depending on company profits. The worker or
his estate can receive the amounts credited to him
upon retirement, permanent and total disability,
death, or termination of employment after 12
years’ service (with reduced amounts for those
DEVELOPMENTS IN INDUSTRIAL RELATIONS
terminated sooner). Under the thrift plan, the
company will add 20 percent to employees’ volun
tary savings funds. If an employee cancels his
savings fund, he will be able to withdraw the full
amount of his own contribution (2 to 5 percent of
total earnings), plus part of the company contribu
tion. In addition, a company-financed retirement
plan was revised.
Other Developments
Wage-Price Relationships. The dangers of infla
tion were emphasized by President Eisenhower in
his State of the Union message and again in his
Economic Report to Congress. While reporting
“an unprecedented peak in our economic pros
perity,” he pointed out that Government fiscal
and monetary policies alone could not prevent
inflation and appealed to management and labor
to practice self-discipline in price and wage policies.
The President urged that the parties to wage
negotiations seek only to correct inequities and
reward higher productivity and that they recog
nize the right of the public to share the benefits of
technological advance. His Economic Report
attributed pressures on prices largely to “wage
increases that tended to outrun the year’s small
gain in productivity.”
The AFL-CIO Executive Council, at its mid
winter meeting, evidenced its own concern over
inflation. It endorsed a proposal by the Economic
Policy Committee, headed by Walter P. Reuther,
that the Federation call for a congressional in
vestigation into price-wage-profit relationships.
Union officials believed that such a study would
show that wage increases, instead of being pri
marily responsible for higher living costs, actually
widened the market for industry’s products and
thus encouraged greater production at lower unit
costs. They stated that automatic wage increases
due in 1957 represented workers’ share in improved
efficiency.
Administrative and Court Actions. The Hotel and
Restaurant Employees Union announced that
about 300,000 of its members would receive an
estimated $3 million in tax refunds for the past 3
years as a result of a Treasury Department deci
sion approved December 31, 1956. The ruling
h
For discussion, see p. 354 of this issue.
https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
367
exempted workers from payment of income taxes
on the value of meals and lodgings furnished in
kind “at the employer’s convenience.”
The Supreme Court, reversing a lower tribunal’s
decision, held that unions can legally strike before
termination of a contract provided they give a
60-day reopening notice permitted under the agree
ment. It ruled that since a collective bargaining
agreement between the Oil Workers International
Union (now merged into the Oil, Chemical and
Atomic Workers) and the Lion Oil Co. in Arkansas
provided for renegotiation, such a strike was not
an unfair labor practice.14
Labor-management agreements in the Cali
fornia women’s sportswear industry were found
not to be in restraint of trade and competition
by a Federal Trade Commission examiner, whose
ruling is subject to review by the Commission.
In 1955, the FTC had charged that price fixing
and control of output was being practiced by 2
unions—the International Ladies’ Garment Work
ers and the Teamsters—and 3 employer groups—
the California Sportswear and Dress Association,
Inc., the Associated Sportswear Manufacturers of
Los Angeles, and the California Apparel Con
tractors Association—representing 51 manufac
turers and 32 contractors. The Commission’s
complaint had stated that agreements specifying
which contractor each manufacturer could deal
with and controlling the prices paid to them
limited competition among contractors and that
other agreement provisions restricted the freedom
of movement of manufacturers and jobbers in
opening new plants and in acquiring interests in
competing concerns. The examiner concluded
that the “provisions have been historic union
goals,” which have “come to be recognized as a
normal subject for collective bargaining”—to pro
tect “the employment opportunities and labor
standards of its membership.”
The Government was asked by a committee of
labor experts, under the chairmanship of David L.
Cole, gradually to extend its general policy of
nonintervention in labor disputes to the atomic
energy industry. The committee, which was
appointed by Secretary of Labor James P . Mitchell
following a 1954 strike at the Oak Ridge installa
tion, recommended to Mr. Mitchell that atomic
labor problems be handled under regular pro
cedures, with agreements between contractors and
368
MONTHLY LABOR REVIEW, MARCH 1957
unions to contain provisions for “safeguarding
property, processes, and life in case of strike.”
The committee also urged that contractors recog
nize their special responsibility to reach agreement
expeditiously and that the AFL-CIO actively
participate in the labor-management program
under discussion. The report held that there
should be no finding that an emergency exists or is
threatened because of a labor dispute at any
Government-owned, contractor-operated atomic
energy installation except by the President acting
on the advice of the National Security Council.
It called for liquidation of the panel procedure
established in 1949 to deal with the special prob
lems in atomic labor-management relations as
soon as the President decides it is timely to do so.
For the interim, it advocated a tapering off of the
panel’s activities in favor of “more dependence on
the parties in settling their differences through
collective bargaining.” (Cyrus S. Ching, chair
man of the panel, recently gave notice that it
would enter disputes only after all other collective
bargaining procedures had been exhausted.)
The committee’s recommendations that labormanagement relations at atomic energy installa
tions be treated “in the same manner as those in
other important industries,” including defense
production, resulted from its finding that the
unusual features of the atomic energy industry
which led to the introduction and maintenance of
panel procedure no longer have “the compelling
influence they had in former years.” It pointed
out that operations at installations have become
more stable after a decade of experience during
which both labor and management have proved
their concern for the welfare of the installations
and of the atomic energy program. A growing
emphasis on industrial and peacetime uses of
atomic energy was mentioned as still another
factor. The committee found that when alterna
tives to collective bargaining are provided by the
Government for arriving at labor-management
agreements, they are increasingly relied upon at
the expense of direct negotiations. This de
velopment was viewed as contrary to national
labor policy which relies on “collective bargaining
without Government intervention other than
effective mediation, save only in rare cases of
genuine national emergency.”
Personnel. Several personnel changes occurred
in the field of labor and labor-management rela
tions during January. President Eisenhower
nominated James T. O’Connell of New Jersey as
Under Secretary of Labor, Joseph A. Jenkins of
Texas as a member of the National Labor Rela
tions Board, and Jerome Fenton of Connecticut
as the Board’s general counsel. The post of
president of the Maritime Trades Department
was vacated by the death of Harry Lundeberg,
who was also president and founder of the Sea
farers’ International Union and secretary of its
affiliated Sailors Union of the Pacific. He was
succeeded as president of the international by
Paul Hall, who was to hold the office until the
union’s biennial convention in March. Professor
John T. Dunlop of Harvard University submitted
his resignation as chairman of the National
Joint Board for the Settlement of Jurisdictional
Disputes in the building and construction in
dustry. The arbitrator agreed to stay on until
his successor had been selected.
Erratum
In the Monthly Labor Review for December 1956 (p. 1455), it was stated
that an agreement between the Metropolitan Life Insurance Co. and the
Insurance Workers of America provided for “. . . maintenance of agents’
rights to the territories assigned to them. (The company had sought the
right to reassign such areas.)” A company communication points out that
“the new agreement . . . does not include such terms and that the company
has always retained the right to determine the size, location, and composition
of debits and there has been no need or occasion for the company to seek
that right in negotiations.”
https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
Book Reviews
and Notes
E ditor’s N ote.— Listing of a 'publication in this
section is for record and reference only and does
not constitute an endorsement of point of view
or advocacy of use.
Special Reviews
Research in Industrial Hum an Relations— A Criti
cal Appraisal. Edited by Conrad M. Arens-
berg and others. New York, Harper &
Brothers, 1957. x, 213 pp. (Industrial Re
lations Research Association Publication 17.)
$3.50.
Since Elton Mayo, the interest focus of profes
sional management has shifted from ‘‘scientific
management” (fathered by Taylor and Gilbreth
and developed in numerous directions by others)
to “human relations.” Management, aware, how
ever reluctantly, that “scientific management” did
not provide satisfactory answers to evolving
problems in a dynamic industrial society of the
workplace and the work force (especially in the
light of a Government labor policy requiring
collective bargaining), looked elsewhere for tools
and techniques. As though the dragon’s teeth
had been scattered, legions of experts in human
relations began to assault the citadel of corporate
treasuries. Management officials were subjected
to an intensive bombardment of high pressure
salesmanship on communications (upward, down
ward, sideways), participation, decisionmaking,
training, development programs, group dynamics,
etc., etc. Probably the largest part of these
programs was based on the instinctive or “seat-ofthe-pants” navigation of their proponents. Some
were founded upon the “human relations” re
search and the study of social scientists. Until
recently there has been little data to indicate how
successful (or desirable) these programs have been.
The human relations researchers have been
criticized by two groups: by the trade unions as
seeking to subvert the democracy of a union
https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
management society with new techniques of
manipulation of people; and by other social
scientists as failing to take into account the
variable environmental factors (economic, social,
and political) that have more to do with the
behavior of workers and their organizations than
the “human” motivations studied by the human
relations folks.
The IRRA volume, 17th in a distinguished
series, is exceptionally timely and makes fasci
nating reading. Thirteen knowledgeable contrib
utors, with university, labor, and management
backgrounds, to the limited extent that objective
data are available, review and appraise the ex
perience of practitioners and the vast amount of
research that has been accomplished in the field in
recent years. Most of such information has
heretofore been diffused and distributed in the
journals of the learned societies.
Considerations of space prohibit a lengthy
description of the contents. Suffice it to say that
Harold L. Wilensky, in addition to providing a
valuable bibliography in the field, contributes a
noteworthy appraisal of recent research; James C.
Worthy writes of management’s approach to
human relations; Reinhard Bendix, the history of
management attitudes to workers; Conrad M.
Arensberg, of the changing American scene;
David Riesman and Warner Bloomberg, Jr. of the
relationship of work and leisure; Abraham J.
Siegel, of the crucial importance of environmental
factors; Herbert A. Simon, of the acceptance of
managerial authority; Wilbert E. Moore, of a
comparison of management and union organiza
tions; Leonard R. Sayles, of the relation of the
small group to the larger organization; Floyd C.
Mann, of change in social organization; William
Foote Whyte, of the impact of the union on
management organization and the development of
the industrial relations department; and Mason
Haire, of interpersonal relations in collective
bargaining. Solomon Bar kin concludes with an
excellent profile of the union and the union leader
from the viewpoint of human relations.
This is a rewarding book: informative, percep
tive, interesting, and even witty. It is highly
recommended to the folks sitting on both sides
of the fence and even to those who sit on the fence
with both ears to the ground.
—P eter Seitz
Arbitrator and Consultant, New York City
369
370
By Alfred
Kuhn. New York, Rinehart & Co., Inc.,
1956. xx, 616 pp. $6.50.
Occasionally a textbook appears which, because
of its widespread use in training the minds of future
leaders of opinion, has a real impact on contem
porary thought. For example, it seems reasonable
to suppose that the popularity of Samuelson’s in
troductory economic text in leading colleges shortly
after World War II not only reflected the liberal
outlook already adopted by most economists but
also gave impetus to general acceptance of their
ideas.
A text which may well have similar influence in
the field of labor economics and labor relations
has been written by Alfred Kuhn. Labor— Insti
tutions and Economics is solidly based on the recent
findings of leading scholars, and it is written with
vigor and clarity.
The specialist will find nothing essentially new
here, but he may be surprised by the author’s fresh
insights into some hitherto murky areas. For ex
ample, Dr. Kuhn resolves the running argument
between theoretical economists and institution
alists as to which forces determine wages by simply
and rationally combining the viewpoints of both
sides into a single theory. Briefly, he suggests
that the approximate wage (general level of wages)
for a particular type of labor is determined by the
forces of supply and demand, as described in mar
ginal productivity theory, and frictional forces
cause the wage in any particular firm to be as
much as 33 percent higher or lower than the aver
age wage. In dealing with collective bargaining
and the strike, the author defines a number of un
derlying concepts and thereby helps to clarify dis
cussion of these topics and to explain union and
management actions which at first glance appear
irrational. His distinction between bargaining
issues which involve advantage and those which
involve survival, his analysis of bargaining power,
and his statement that solid decisions are made
on the basis of the parties’ interests rather than
any generalized concept of inherent prerogatives,
are all cases in point.
On subjects where there is no general agreement,
but only conflicting opinions, Dr. Kuhn indicates
as much, presents the facts of the matter, and then
does not hesitate to state his own opinion, clearly
Labor— Institutions and Economics.
https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
MONTHLY LABOR REVIEW, MARCH 1957
labeled as such. For instance, he concludes that
right-to-work laws “are intended to weaken unions
rather than to protect the rights of individual
workers.” Otherwise, he asks, why should such
laws prohibit maintenance of membership as well
as the closed and union shop, since maintenance
of membership only holds the worker to a com
mitment which he voluntarily assumes and which
he can drop during an escape period?
The book is divided into two parts. The first
discusses union history, organization, and func
tions; collective bargaining processes and results;
and public policy toward unions and collective
bargaining. The second part turns from institu
tions to economics and discusses wages, hours, and
job security. Though one might wish for more
detailed treatment of some subjects, such as juris
dictional strikes, the range of the book is really
remarkable. Here is a comprehensive presenta
tion of current thought in the field of labor, which
may play an important part in forming the atti
tudes of the personnel workers and union staff
members of tomorrow.
— T h e o d o r e A l l iso n
Bureau of Labor Statistics
Labor Problems in Communist China {to February
1953) By Shao-er Ong. [San Antonio], Lackland Air Force Base, U. S. Air Force Per
sonnel and Training Research Center, Air
Research and Development Command (for
Maxwell Air Force Base, Human Resources
Research Institute), 1955. xv, 83 pp. (Re
search Memorandum, 42.)
Pre-Communist China’s sociological milieu
serves as the point of departure for this scholarly
study of labor in Communist China. The study
was prepared for the U. S. Air Force by Shao-er
Ong, a well known student of China, under the
direction of Dr. Theodore H. E. Chen, University
of Southern California. In keeping with the ob
jectives of the Air Force’s Chinese Documents
Project, it aims to depict the “structure and organ
ization” of labor in Red China and the “organs
and methods” used by the government “to control
the population.”
Each aspect of the Communist labor program is
examined carefully with a view to ascertaining the
real objectives of the Communists. The study
BOOK REVIEWS AND NOTES
*
à
covers the major Chinese Communist labor insti
tutions and indicates the function of each in the
overall control plan. Thus, the All-China Federa
tion of Labor, though theoretically an independent
organization, is shown to be a subordinate organiza
tion of the Ministry of Labor having close working
relationships with the latter with respect to person
nel, work, and finance. Members of Chinese trade
unions must support the government’s production
quotas and plans. They are responsible for spying
on the personal conduct and businesses of their
employers and fellow employees and reporting
their findings to the cadres of the Communist
Party.
The author refers to the labor insurance program
as “their outstanding achievement.” However,
these benefits are limited to factories or mines with
100 or more employees. Gang rule among trans
port workers, which had resulted in the greater
part of the earnings of these workers going to gang
chieftains, was eliminated in 1950. Welfare pro
grams were instituted which included new housing
projects, cultural centers, rest homes, nurseries,
and safety measures in mines and factories. Due
to shortage of facilities, only a small group of
privileged workers such as the “labor models”
(model workers) were able to benefit from most of
the welfare programs, but their propaganda value
was exploited fully.
The author summarizes the position of the
workers in these words, “As tools of the Com
munist Party, they must work harder and longer
than before and their real wages remain ridicu
lously low. In theory, the ‘surplus value’ belongs
to labor. In practice, it goes to the state in
the form of contributions and dues. Only a
small group of selected ‘labor models’ are the new
‘masters’ of the nation who can enjoy the limited
sanatoria facilities and the labor insurance benefits.
No opposition is allowed. The workers do not even
dare make complaints unless they are ready to
spend the rest of their lives in slave labor camps.
The Communist leaders themselves admit that
the majority of the working class is still groaning
from the pangs of hunger and poverty.”
— B o r is S. Y a n e
Bureau of Labor Statistics
4 1 7 2 3 2 — 5 7 --------- 8
https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
371
Ageing in Industry: A n Inquiry, Based on Figures
Derived from Census Reports, into the Problem
of Ageing Under the Conditions of Modern
Industry. By F. Le Gros Clark and Agnes C.
Dunne. New York, Philosophical Library,
Inc., 1956. xi, 146 pp. $7.50.
Using a rather complex system of analysis based
on data from the 1921, 1931, and 1951 decennial
censuses of Great Britain, the authors of this book
have attempted to develop estimates concerning
“survival rates” for workers in their “mid-sixties”
in 32 major occupational fields. This book pre
sents a highly technical, statistical treatment of a
complicated problem. Its primary contributions
are: (1) To suggest and test several different
statistical approaches to the analysis of census
occupational data on an age basis; (2) to point up
the limitations of such approaches; and (3) to
describe a variety of other factors which need to be
explored in much greater depth if accurate esti
mates of “survival rates” are to be developed.
The basic statistical approach used involves a
concept of “moving cohorts” of workers in an
occupational group, by age, from one decennial
census period to another, comparing such estimates
to the numbers reported as actually employed in
the next census period, subtracting the one from
the other, and then adjusting for deaths, retire
ments, and movement out of the occupational
field. Age-group ratios are also computed for each
occupation for 2 different age groups and 3 census
periods. Finally, changes in the age structure
of each occupation for the 1931 and 1951 census
periods are secured by calculating percentage in
creases for 5 age breakdowns in each occupation.
Among the wide range of occupations included in
the study are farmers; coal miners; heavy metal
workers; construction workers; precision workers
in jewelry, clocks, and watches; transportation
workers; signalmen; salespersons; and workers in
wholesale trade. The “survival rate” for each
occupation derived from the data is an estimate
of “What proportion of men who reach their mid
sixties in a given job are physically capable of
remaining on the same job into their late sixties,
or even in some cases beyond?” The rates by
occupation range from 75 to 85 percent, for pre-
MONTHLY LABOR REVIEW, MARCH 1957
372
cision watchmakers, jewelry workers, and musical
instrument makers, to 5 to 15 percent for coal
miners working “at the face” and for signalmen
on railroads.
Generally, the authors seem to assume that a
declining number or proportion of workers age
65 and over in an occupation means that those
reaching age 65 are no longer physically able to
do the work. They go on to explain that mechani
zation of certain occupations and the introduction
of “superannuation,” (the British term for pri
vate pension plans) affect “survival rates.”
All of this assumes a more orderly and reasoned
process than actually seems to exist, at least in
American experience. In other words, it would
appear that what started out to be a scientific
statistical study to probe work-life expectancy
beyond age 65 in selected occupations, based on the
abilities of workers to continue on the job, turned
out to be a rationalization for what the data seem
to indicate has happened. One must certainly
agree with the authors that much more intensive
analysis of what is actually happening in the
selected occupations, and in the industries in which
they function, is needed before meaningful con
clusions can be drawn about valid “survival
rates.”
The book presents a sound technical approach
to statistical analysis of census data by age and
occupation. However, its most important con
tribution lies in the questions raised concerning
the “survival rates” of older workers in various
occupational fields.
For rough comparisons with American experi
ence, attention is called to the study, based on
census data for 1940 and 1950, by Carl Raushenbush and Abraham J. Berman of the New York
State Department of Labor and reported in
Making the Years Count, the 1955 annual report
of the New York State Joint Legislative Com
mittee on Problems of the Aging.
•—C harles E. Odell
New Horizons in Labor Dignity— The Power of Automation.
By Adam Abruzzi. (In Automation, Cleveland,
December 1956, pp. 38-42. $1.)
Social Implications of Technological Progress. By Charles
D. Stewart. Washington, U. S. Department of
Labor, Bureau of Labor Statistics, 1956. 4 pp.
(Reprint 2213; from Monthly Labor Review, Decem
ber 1956.) Free.
Cooperative Movement
Cooperation—A Workers’ Education Manual. Geneva,
International Labor Office, 1956. 157 pp., bibliogra
phy. $1.50. Distributed in United States by
Washington Branch of ILO.
Are Cooperatives Good BusinessP By Joseph G. Knapp.
(In Harvard Business Review, Boston, JanuaryFebruary 1957, pp. 57-64. $2.)
Costs and Standards of Living
Standards and Levels of Living of City-Worker Families.
By Faith M. Williams. Washington, U. S. Depart
ment of Labor, Bureau of Labor Statistics, 1956.
9 pp. (Reprint 2204; from Monthly Labor Review,
September 1956.) Free.
New Light on the Consumer Market. By Irwin Friend and
Irving B. Kravis. (In Harvard Business Review,
Boston, January-February 1957, pp. 105-116. $2.)
Postwar Studies of Family Expenditures. (In International
Labor Review, Geneva, December 1956, pp. 576-599.
60 cents. Distributed in United States by Wash
ington Branch of ILO.)
Education and Training
Technological Advances and Skilled Manpower: Implica
tions for Trade and Industrial Education—An Anno
tated Selected Bibliography. Washington, U. S.
Department of Health, Education, and Welfare,
Office of Education, November 1956. 67 pp. (Mis
cellaneous 3509, rev.) 45 cents, Superintendent of
Documents, Washington.
Coordinator for Older Worker Programs
U. S. Department of Labor
Training Factory Workers: A Report on a Survey of the
Training of Semiskilled and Unskilled Workers in the
United Kingdom Carried Out Under Project 179 of the
European Productivity Agency. London, National
Institute of Industrial Psychology, 1956. 127 pp.
Looking Toward Automation. By Katharine A. Lembright.
(In National Safety News, Chicago, January 1957,
pp. 20-21, 102-110, bibliography. $1.)
Automation in Industry and Its Implications for Program
Development in Vocational Education for Secondary
School Students and Adult Industrial Workers. Wash
ington, U. S. Department of Health, Education, and
Welfare, Office of Education, Division of Vocational
Education, 1956. 13 pp.
Automation
https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
BOOK REVIEWS AND NOTES
“Institutos de Trabajo” en Brasil. Washington, Pan
American Union, Department of Economics and
Social Affairs, Division of Labor and Social Affairs,
1956. 40 pp., bibliography. 25 cents.
Industrial Hygiene
The Public Health Service in Occupational Health. Wash
ington, U. S. Department of Health, Education, and
Welfare, Public Health Service, 1956. 16 pp. (PHS
Publication 490.) 20 cents, Superintendent of Docu
ments, Washington.
Emerging Industrial Health Problems. By Henry N.
Doyle. (In Industrial Medicine and Surgery, Chicago,
January 1957, pp. 1-5. 75 cents.)
Industrial Health Promotes Family Health. By Harold J.
Magnuson, M. D. (In Personnel Administration,
Washington, January-February 1957, pp. 18-22,
bibliography. $1.)
Labor Legislation
How “Right-to-Work” Laws Are Passed—Florida Sets
the Pattern.
By John G. Shott. Washington,
Public Affairs Institute, 1956. 67 pp. $1.
Regulation of Union Elections in Australia. By Leroy S.
Merrifield. (In Industrial and Labor Relations
Review, Ithaca, N. Y., January 1957, pp. 252-269.
$1.50.)
The Evolution of Industrial Relations Law in France Since
the Liberation. By Paul Durand. (In International
Labor Review, Geneva, December 1956, pp. 515540. 60 cents. Distributed in United States by
Washington Branch of ILO.)
Labor-Management Relations
Collective Bargaining: The Positive Approach Pays Off.
By James Menzies Black. (In D un’s Review and
Modern Industry, New York, January 1957, pp.
36-37, et seq. 75 cents.)
Labor Status and Collective Bargaining. By H. M. Douty.
Washington, U. S. Department of Labor, Bureau of
Labor Statistics, 1956. 7 pp. (Reprint 2212; from
Monthly Labor Review, June 1956.) Free.
The Good Faith Requirement in Collective Bargaining.
(In Virginia Law Review, Charlottesville, Va.,
January 1957, pp. 77-98. $2.)
373
ment Record, National Industrial Conference Board,
Inc., New York, January 1957, pp. 2-5, 21-22.)
Unionization Among American Engineers. New York,
National Industrial Conference Board, Inc., 1956.
72 pp. (Studies in Personnel Policy, 155.) $2.50.
Manpower
Our Manpower Future, 1955-65: Population Trends—
Their Manpower Implications. Washington, U. S.
Department of Labor, 1957. 32 pp. 30 cents,
Superintendent of Documents, Washington.
Skilled Worker Shortages in Our Changing Economy.
(In Labor Market and Employment Security, U. S.
Department of Labor, Bureau of Employment
Security, Washington, November 1956, pp. 6-10.
30 cents, Superintendent of Documents, Washington.)
Personnel Shortages in the Health Field and Working Pat
terns of Women. By Walter L. Johnson. (In Public
Health Reports, U. S. Department of Health, Educa
tion, and Welfare, Public Health Service, Washington,
January 1957, pp. 61-66, bibliography. 55 cents,
Superintendent of Documents, Washington.)
Better Utilization of College Teaching Resources. New
York, Fund for the Advancement of Education,
1956. 45 pp.
The Soviet Labor Market. By Emily Clark Brown. (In
Industrial and Labor Relations Review, Ithaca,
N. Y., January 1957, pp. 179-200. $1.50.)
Occupations
Estimates of Worker Trait Requirements for If.,000 Jobs
as Defined in the Dictionary of Occupational Titles.
Washington, U. S. Department of Labor, Bureau of
Employment Security, U. S. Employment Service,
1956. ix, 158 pp. $2.25, Superintendent of Docu
ments, Washington.
Career, 1957— The Annual Guide to Business Opportunities.
Edited by William H. Ottley. New York, Careers
Inc., 1957. 256 pp. 7th ed. $1.95, Simon and
Schuster, New York.
Engineering as a Career. By Ralph J. Smith. New York,
McGraw-Hill Book Co., Inc 1956. 365 pp.
Backgrounds of Vocational Choice: An Apache Study. By
William T. Ross and Golda Van Buskirk Ross.
(In Personnel and Guidance Journal, Washington,
January 1957, pp. 270-275. 80 cents.)
Management’s Right to Discharge Employees for Conduct
Off the Job. By Walter L. Daykin. Iowa City,
State University of Iowa, College of Commerce,
Bureau of Labor and Management, 1956. 18 pp.
(Research Series, 15.) 25 cents (free to Iowa State
residents).
Manual de Análisis Ocupacional. Lima, Peru, Servicio
Cooperativo del Empleo, Departamento de Análisis
e Informes, 1956. 73 pp.
Role of Foremen in Collective Bargaining. By James J.
Bambrick, Jr., and Marie P. Dorbandt. (In Manage
Private Pension Plans. By Theodore Geiger and Rosanne
McLaughlin. Washington, National Planning As-
https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
Pension Plans
MONTHLY LABOR REVIEW, MARCH 1957
374
sociation, 1956.
cents.
29 pp.
30
pp. (Bull. 261.) 35 cents, Superintendent of Docu
ments, Washington.
( I n Harvard
January 1957,
T h e L e g a l S t a t u s o f W o m e n i n th e U n ite d S ta te s o f A m e r ic a —
(Special Report 44.)
L e g a l P r o b le m s o f P r iv a te P e n s i o n
Law Review, Cambridge,
pp. 490-509. $1.25.)
P la n s .
Mass.,
U n ite d S ta te s S u m m a r y a s o f J a n u a r y 1, 1 9 5 3 .
By
Laura H. Dale and Laura H. Harris. Washington,
U. S. Department of Labor, Women’s Bureau, 1956.
103 pp. (Bull. 157, rev.) 35 cents, Superintendent
of Documents, Washington.
P r o c e e d in g s o f a P e n s i o n P l a n C o n fe re n c e , M o n te r e y , C a lif .,
A p r il 1 5 -2 0 , 1956.
[San Francisco], California State
Federation of Labor; Berkeley and Los Angeles,
University of California, Institute of Industrial
Relations, 1956. 68 pp.
P l a n f o r I n d u s t r i a l P e n s io n s .
ists. London, Fabian
(Fabian Tract 303.) 6d.
By a group of trade union
Society, 1956. 11 pp.
Miscellaneous
In fo r m a tio n f o r A d m in is tr a to r s — A
Personnel Management
C o u n s e lin g a s a F u n c tio n
By Alva Myrdal
and Viola Klein. London, Routledge & Kegan
Paul, Ltd., 1956. 208 pp., bibliography.
W o m e n ’s T w o R o le s — H o m e a n d W o r k .
G u id e to P u b l i c a t i o n s
a n d S e r v ic e s f o r M a n a g e m e n t i n B u s i n e s s a n d G o v e r n
By Paul Wasserman. Ithaca, N. Y. Cornell
University Press, 1956. 375 pp.
m e n t.
o f th e C o u n s e lo r ’s P e r s o n a l i t y .
( I n Personnel and Guidance
By Henry Weitz.
Journal, Washington, January 1957, pp. 276-280.
80 cents.)
New York, National Asso
ciation of Manufacturers, Industrial Relations D ivi
sion, 1956. 32 pp., bibliography. 50 cents.
The
I m p r o v in g H u m a n R e la tio n s .
o f O r g a n iz a tio n .
By Robert S. Weiss. Ann
Arbor, University of Michigan, Institute for Social
Research, Survey Research Center, 1956. 117 pp.,
bibliography.
P ro cesses
Wages, Salaries, and Hours of Labor
W a g e s a n d R e la te d B e n e fits , 1 7 L a b o r M a r k e ts , 1 9 5 5 - 5 6 .
Washington, U. S. Department of Labor, Bureau
of Labor Statistics, 1956. 93 pp. (Bull. 1188.) 50
cents, Superintendent of Documents, Washington.
P a tt e r n o f M a n a g e m e n t.
By Lyndall F. Urwick.
Minneapolis, University of Minnesota, 1956. 100 pp.
$2.50, University of Minnesota Press, Minneapolis.
W o r k a n d I t s D is c o n te n ts : T h e C u lt o f E ff ic ie n c y i n A m e r ic a .
By Daniel Bell.
pp. $1.25.
Boston, Beacon Press, 1956.
56
F a rm In co m e.
By Stephen Raushenbush.
Washington, Public Affairs Institute, 1956. 34 pp.
50 cents.
W orkers an d
O c c u p a tio n a l W a g e S u r v e y , T u ls a , O k la ., A r e a , A u g u s t 1 9 5 6 .
Oklahoma City, Oklahoma Employment Security
Commission, Research and Planning Division, 1956.
63 pp.
E c o n o m ic
By H. M.
Douty. ( I n Economica, London School of Economics
and Political Science, London, November 1956, pp.
315-327. Also reprinted. 8s. 6d.)
F o r e ig n
R a tio n a le o f C o d e te r m in a tio n .
By Abraham
Shuchman. ( I n Industrial and Labor Relations
Review, Ithaca, N. Y., January 1957, pp. 270-283.
$1.50.)
P o s t w a r W a g e B a r g a in in g i n th e U n ite d S ta te s .
I n c e n tiv e
W a g e P r o b le m s i n
C o lle c tiv e B a r g a i n i n g a n d i n
By Clifford M. Baumback. Iowa City,
State University of Iowa, College of Commerce,
Bureau of Labor and Management, 1956. 46 pp.
(Research Series 14.)
A r b itr a tio n .
C a n th e G A W
Washington, U. S.
Department of Labor, Women’s Bureau, 1957. 96
1 9 5 6 H an dbook on W o m en W o rk ers.
https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
in
th e
P h ilip p in e s .
Calcutta, Government of West Bengal,
State Statistical Bureau, 1956. 205 pp. 6 rs., West
Bengal Government Press, Alipore.
The
W e e k ly S a l a r i e s f o r O ffice O c c u p a tio n s i n M a n u f a c t u r i n g i n
Women Workers
L abor
B e n g a l.
U n e m p lo y m e n t ?
C a n a d a , O c to b e r 1 , 1 9 5 5 .
Ottawa, Canadian Depart
ment of Labor, Economic and Research Branch, [1956],
29 pp. In English and French. (Supplement to
Report 38.) 25 cents.
I n f o r m a tio n :
E c o n o m ic S u r v e y o f S m a l l I n d u s tr ie s , 1 9 5 4 , S ta te o f W e s t
[G u a r a n te e d A n n u a l W a g e ] C u r e S e a s o n a l
By Edwin B. George. ( I n Dun’s
Review and Modern Industry, New York, December
1956, pp. 55-56, 125-131. 75 cents.)
Labor
By Alice W. Shurcliff. Washington, U. S. Depart
ment of Labor, Bureau of Labor Statistics, 1956.
22 pp. Free.
I n te r n a tio n a l
L abor
O r g a n iz a tio n .
New York,
Chamber of Commerce of the State of New York,
1956. 21 pp.
R o c z n ik
S ta ty s ty c z n y ,
1956
( S t a t i s t ic a l
Y ea rb o o k ,
1 9 5 6 ).
Warsaw, Central Statistical Office of the Polish
People’s Republic, 1956. 476 pp. 15 zlotys.
D as
N e u e J u g o s la w is c h e
W ir ts c h a f ts s y s te m
(T h e N e w
Y u g o s la v E c o n o m ic S y s t e m ) .
By Viktor Meier.
Zurich, Polygraphischer Verlag Ag, 1956. 216 pp.
(Handels-Hochschule St. Gallen, Reihe-A, Heft 46.)
Current Labor Statistics
A.—Employment and Payrolls
377 Table A-l
378 Table A-2
382 Table A-3
385 Table A-4
385
386
387
388
Table
Table
Table
Table
A-5
A-6
A-7
A-8
389 Table A-9:
Estimated total labor force classified by employment status, hours
worked, and sex
Employees in nonagricultural establishments, by industry 1
Production workers in mining and manufacturing industries 1
Indexes of production-worker employment and weekly payrolls in
manufacturing industries 1
Government civilian employment and Federal military personnel1
Employees in nonagricultural establishments for selected States 2
Employees in manufacturing industries, by State 2
Insured unemployment under State programs and the program of
unemployment compensation for Federal employees, by geographic
division and State
Unemployment insurance and employment service programs,
selected operations
—Labor Turnover
390 Table B -l
391 Table B-2:
Monthly labor turnover rates in manufacturing, by class of turnover
Monthly labor turnover rates in selected industries
—Earnings and Hours
393 Table C -l:
409 Table C-2:
409 Table C-3:
410 Table C-4:
410 Table C-5:
411 Table C-6:
412 Table C-7:
Hours and gross earnings of production workers or nonsupervisory
employees 1
Gross average weekly earnings of production workers in selected
industries, in current and 1947-49 dollars 1
Average weekly earnings, gross and net spendable, of production
workers in manufacturing industries, in current and 1947-49
dollars 1
Average hourly earnings, gross and excluding overtime, of production
workers in manufacturing industries 1
Indexes of aggregate weekly man-hours in industrial and construction
activity 1
Gross average weekly hours and average overtime hours of produc
tion workers in manufacturing, by major industry group
Hours and gross earnings of production workers in manufacturing
industries for selected States and areas 2
1 Beginning with the July 1956 issue, data shown in tables A -2, A-3, A-4, A-5, C -l, C-2, C-3, C-4, and C-5 have
been revised because of adjustment to more recent (First quarter 1955) benchmark levels. These data cannot be used
with those appearing in previous issues of the Monthly Labor Review. Comparable data for earlier years are available
upon request to the Bureau of Labor Statistics.
2 This table is included in the March, June, September, and December issues of the Review.
375
https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
MONTHLY LABOR REVIEW, MARCH 1957
376
D.—Consumer and Wholesale Prices
419 Table D -l:
420 Table D-2:
421 Table D-3:
422 Table D-4:
423 Table D-5:
425
426
428
428
Table
Table
Table
Table
D-6
D-7
D-8
D-9
Consumer Price Index—United States city average: All items and
major groups of items
Consumer Price Index—United States city average: Food, apparel,
housing, and their subgroups
Consumer Price Index—All items indexes for selected dates, by city
Consumer Price Index—Food and its subgroups, by city
Consumer Price Index—Average retail prices and indexes of selected
foods
Indexes of wholesale prices, by major groups
Indexes of wholesale prices, by group and subgroup of commodities
Indexes of wholesale prices, by economic sectors
Indexes of wholesale prices for special commodity groupings
E. —Work Stoppages
429 Table E -l:
Work stoppages resulting from labor-management disputes
F. —Building and Construction
Expenditures for new construction
Contract awards: Public construction, by ownership and type of
construction
F-3: Building permit activity: Valuation, by private-public ownership,
class of construction, and type of building
F-4: Building permit activity: Valuation, by class of construction and
geographic region
F-5: Building permit activity: Valuation, by metropolitan-nonmetro
politan location and State
F-6: Number of new permanent nonfarm dwelling units started, by
ownership and location, and construction cost
430 Table F -l:
431 Table F-2:
432 Table
432 Table
433 Table
434 Table
G.—Work Injuries
Table G -l:
Injury-frequency rates for selected manufacturing industries 3
3 This table is included in the January, April, July, and October issues of the Review.
https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
►
A: EMPLOYMENT AND PAYROLLS
377
A: Employment and Payrolls
T able A -l: Estimated total labor force classified by employment status, hours worked, and sex
[In th o u sa n d s]
E s t im a t e d n u m b e r o f p e r so n s 14 y e a r s o f a g e a n d o v e r •
1957
1956
L ab or-force s ta tu s
Jan.
D ec.
N o v .s
O c t.
S e p t.
A ug.
J u ly
June
M ay
A pr.
M ar.
Feb.
Jan.
T o ta l, b o th sex es
T o ta l la b o r fo r c e ...............................................................
68, 647
69,855
70,560
70,905
70, 896
71, 787
72,325
72,274
70,711
69,434
68,806
6 8 ,396
68,691
C iv ilia n la b o r force........................................................_
TJn e m p lo y m e n t ................................ - .....................
U n e m p lo y e d 4 w e e k s or le s s ....... ............
U n e m p lo y e d 6-10 w e e k s ______________
U n e m p lo y e d 11-14 w e e k s ......................
U n e m p lo y e d 16-26 w e e k s ........................ .
U n e m p lo y e d o v e r 26 w e e k s ___________
E m p lo y m e n t ______ _____ - ............ . ...............__
N o n a g r ic u ltu r a l----------------------------------W o r k e d 35 h o u r s or m o r e ..................
W o r k e d 15-34 h o u r s ______________
W o r k e d 1-14 h o u r s _______________
W it h a job b u t n o t a t w o r k *_____
A g r ic u ltu r a l.............................................. ........
W o r k e d 35 h o u r s o r m o r e .............._.
W o r k e d 15-34 h o u r s - .____ _______
W o r k e d 1-14 h o u r s _______________
W ith a jo b b u t n o t a t w o r k *_____
65, 830
2,940
1,367
787
291
308
188
62,890
57, 947
46, 638
6,612
2,6 7 2
2, 025
4,943
3,0 3 2
1,162
471
279
67,029
2,479
1, 231
580
183
238
247
64, 550
59, 440
48, 309
6, 555
2,8 0 4
1,7 7 2
5,110
3, 245
1,175
460
229
67,732
2,463
1,401
443
182
233
204
65,269
59,076
43,158
11,164
2,775
1,980
6,192
4,163
1,445
433
151
68,082
1,909
964
408
117
209
211
66,174
59,000
46,867
7,305
2,646
2,182
7,173
5,384
1,305
350
134
68,069
1,998
1,019
368
139
261
209
66,071
58,683
47,371
5,963
2,516
2,834
7,388
5, 554
1,348
329
157
68, 947
2,1 9 5
1,011
491
223
237
233
66, 752
59, 487
45, 975
5,710
2,171
5,631
7,265
5,300
1, 384
361
219
69,489
2,833
1,384
784
184
269
213
66,655
58,955
43,661
5,725
2,2 8 3
7,287
7,700
5,419
1,656
431
194
69,430
2,927
1,676
656
195
326
175
66,503
58,627
46, 524
5,973
2,473
3,657
7,876
5,647
1,623
430
177
67,846
2,608
1,181
615
210
380
222
65,238
58,092
46,587
6 ,5 5 7
2,980
1,969
7,146
5,185
1,475
360
125
66, 555
2,564
1,0 6 3
639
214
417
231
63,990
57,603
46,615
6,2 6 4
2,784
1,941
6, 387
4, 281
1,540
416
149
65,913
2,8 3 4
1,100
680
371
401
281
63,078
57,400
46,015
6,441
2,855
2,0 8 9
5,678
3,6 4 5
1,356
437
239
65,490
2,914
1,130
865
278
359
283
62,576
57,107
45,092
7,131
2,760
2,1 2 4
5,469
3, 528
1, 213
477
253
65,775
2,8 8 5
1, 405
691
238
281
270
62,891
57,256
46,576
5,794
2,7 2 7
2,159
5,635
3,5 7 9
1,269
509
278
M a le s
T o ta l la b o r force........................ . .......... ..........................
47, 501
47,927
48,303
48,340
48,490
49, 682
49,969
49,928
48, 663
48,206
47,930
47,690
47,820
C iv ilia n la b o r force.................... .....................................
U n e m p lo y m e n t ................................................. ..
E m p l o y m e n t ...________ _________ ________ _
N o n a g r ic u ltu r a l- _____________ ______ _
W o r k e d 35 h o u r s o r m o r e ..................
W o r k e d 15-34 h o u r s _____________ _
W o r k e d 1-14 h o u r s _______________
W it h a jo b b u t n o t a t w o rk 1_____
A g r ic u ltu r a l_____ _______ ______ _______
W o r k e d 35 h o u r s o r m o r e _________
W o r k e d 15-34 h o w s .............................
W o rk ed 1-14 h o u r s _______________
W it h a jo b b u t n o t a t w o r k »_____
44, 717
1,995
42, 722
38, 395
32, 619
3, 291
1,143
1,341
4, 327
2,8 5 4
825
400
247
45,135
1,665
43,470
39,112
33,620
3 ,0 8 0
1, 219
1,193
4, 358
2, 998
773
378
210
45, 508
1,466
44,042
39,020
30,422
6,232
1,126
1,240
5,022
3,741
837
307
137
45, 550
1,124
44,426
39,007
33,036
3 ,4 8 2
1,123
1,366
5,419
4,374
691
226
128
45, 697
1,152
44, 546
39,056
33, 519
2,771
1,012
1, 754
5, 490
4,484
636
226
144
46, 875
1,319
45, 556
39, 880
3 2 ,980
2, 869
863
3,168
5,676
4, 511
732
242
191
47,167
1,672
45,495
39, 569
31,439
2,8 8 8
957
4,285
5,926
4,6 4 0
864
266
156
47,118
1,767
45, 351
39,337
33,358
2,875
1,071
% 033
6,013
4,806
775
294
139
45,832
1, 599
44, 233
38, 671
3 2 ,922
3 ,2 5 7
1,253
1,239
5,5 6 2
4, 496
722
243
100
45,361
1,643
43, 718
3 8 ,370
3 2 ,782
3,191
1,226
1,172
5,348
3 ,9 5 2
942
322
131
45,071
1,887
43,183
38,316
32,236
3 ,3 2 2
1,335
1,423
4,8 6 7
3,3 4 0
936
373
218
44,818
2,049
42, 769
38,003
31, 552
3,794
1,217
1,440
4,766
3,2 5 4
868
405
239
44, 938
1,951
4 2 ,987
38,095
32, 572
2,8 9 0
1 ,2 2 2
1,411
4,8 9 2
3 ,3 1 6
893
420
264
F e m a le s
T o ta l la b o r force____ _________ _________________
21,146
21,928
22, 258
22, 565
22, 405
22,105
22,355
22, 346
22,048
21,228
20,876
20,706
20,871
C iv ilia n la b o r f o r c e ..._________________________
U n e m p lo y m e n t ________ ___________________
E m p lo y m e n t __________________ ___________
N o n a g r ic u ltu r a l---------------------- -------- W o rk ed 35 h o u r s or m o r e _________
W o r k e d 15-34 h o u r s ..................... ..
W o r k e d 1-14 h o u r s _______________
W ith a job b u t n o t a t w o r k s _____
A g r ic u ltu r a l__________________ ________
W o rk ed 35 h o u r s o r m o r e ........... ..
W o rk ed 15-34 h o u r s ______________
W o rk ed 1-14 h o u r s _______________
W ith a job b u t n o t a t w o rk *_____
21,113
945
20,168
19, 552
14, 018
3, 321
1, 529
684
616
178
337
71
31
21, 894
814
21,080
20,327
14, 689
3, 475
1, 585
579
752
248
403
82
20
22,224
997
21, 227
20,056
12,736
4,932
1,649
740
1,171
422
608
126
14
22,532
785
21, 748
19, 994
13,831
3,823
1,523
817
1,754
1,010
614
124
6
22, 372
847
21,525
19,627
13,852
3,192
1, 504
1,080
1,898
1,070
712
103
13
22, 071
876
21,196
19, 607
12, 995
2, 841
1.308
2, 463
1, 589
789
652
119
28
22,321
1,161
21,160
19,386
12,222
2,837
1,326
3,0 0 2
1, 775
779
792
165
38
22,312
1,160
21,153
19,290
13,166
3,0 9 8
1,402
1,624
1,863
841
848
136
38
22,014
1,009
21,005
19, 422
13,665
3,3 0 0
1,727
730
1,584
689
753
116
25
21,194
921
20, 272
19, 233
13,833
3 ,0 7 3
1,558
769
1,039
329
598
94
18
20,842
947
19,895
19,084
13, 779
3,119
1,520
666
811
305
420
64
21
20,672
865
19,807
19,104
13, 540
3,3 3 6
1, 544
684
703
274
345
72
13
20,837
933
19, 904
19,161
14,004
2,903
1,505
748
743
263
377
89
14
* E s tim a te s are su b je c t to s a m p lin g v a r ia tio n w h ic h m a y b e large in ca ses
w h e re th e q u a n titie s s h o w n are r e la tiv e ly sm a ll. T h ere fo re, th e sm a lle r
e s tim a te s s h o u ld be u se d w it h c a u tio n . D a t a refer t o th e w e e k in c lu d in g
th e 12th of th e m o n th . A ll d a ta e x c lu d e p erso n s in in s t it u t io n s . B e c a u se
of r o u n d in g , th e in d iv id u a l figu res d o n o t n e c e ss a r ily a d d to g ro u p to ta ls .
* C e n su s s u r v e y w e e k c o n ta in e d leg a l h o lid a y .
https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
* I n c lu d e s p erso n s w h o h a d a jo b or b u s in e ss , b u t w h o d id n o t w o rk d u r in g
th e s u r v e y w e e k b e c a u se o f illn e s s, b a d w e a th e r , v a c a tio n , la b o r d is p u te , or
b e c a u se of te m p o r a r y la y o ff w it h d e fin ite in s tr u c tio n s to r e tu r n to w o rk
w it h in 30 d a y s o f la y o ff. A lso in c lu d e s p erso n s w h o h a d n e w jo b s to w h ic h
t h e y w ere sc h e d u le d to rep o rt w it h in 30 d a y s .
Souece:
U . S . D e p a r tm e n t of C o m m e r c e , B u r e a u o f t h e C e n su s .
378
MONTHLY LABOR REVIEW, MARCH 1957
T able A-2: Employees in nonagricultural establishments, by industry 1
[In thousands]
1957
1956
A nnual
a v er a g e
Industry
Jan.
Total employees................... ........................
M ining...........................................................
M etal...........................................................
Iron...........................................................
Copper.....................................................
Lead and zino..........................................
Anthracite....... .................. - ------ ----------Bituminous coal.........................................
D ec.
23 3 .6
Crude petroleum and natural-gas pro
duction.....................................................
O c t.
S e p t.
A ug.
J u ly
June
May
Apr.
Mar.
Feb.
Jan.
1956
1955
52,484
52,455
52,261
51,881
50,896
51,709
51,197
50,848
50, 499
50,246
50,284
51,490
49,950
811
109.1
3 3 .8
35.1
1 7 .8
811
110.0
3 4 .6
3 5 .2
17 .9
812
110.9
36 .0
3 5 .0
17.5
818
112.1
3 6 .8
3 5 .1
17.5
817
108.7
3 4 .6
3 4 .8
17 .2
746
85.1
10.6
3 4 .7
17.2
812
110.5
3 6 .0
3 4 .5
17 .5
786
108.4
35 .1
3 4 .0
17.3
790
109.3
3 5 .9
3 3 .9
1 7 .3
783
107.3
34.1
3 3 .8
17 .3
780
106.9
34.0
3 3 .6
17.0
777
105.7
3 3 .7
33.4
1 6 .2
795
106.9
3 2 .9
3 4 .4
17 .3
770
101.0
3 3 .7
2 9 .2
16.6
3 4 .3
2 3 3 .4
3 3 .0
232.0
3 2 .7
232.1
3 2 .1
231 .2
3 2 .3
227.5
31 .3
182.5
3 1 .5
226.0
2 6 .5
223.6
3 1 .4
222.9
32.1
223.1
3 4 .0
224 .5
33 .3
222.9
3 1 .9
223 .5
3 3 .5
216.7
312.1
51, 297 53,134
801
109.3
N ov.
323 .5
323 .0
321.5
327.3
332 .1
33 2 .7
329.1
315 .3
31 4 .9
313.5
309.9
310.4
320 .9
Nonmetallic mining and quarrying...........
106.1
110. 7
113 .3
114.6
115.5
115.9
114.6
115.1
112.6
111.1
107.3
104.5
104.8
111.7
107.0
Contract construction......... ..........................
Nonbuilding construction..........................
Highway and street.................................
Other nonbuilding construction..... .......
2,754
2,998
489
198 .6
290 .2
3,191
551
237.6
313 .7
3,301
594
269.3
325 .0
3,340
606
280.3
325 .3
3,3 5 3
607
282 .7
3 2 4 .7
3,270
591
276 .6
31 4 .7
3,257
591
271.9
319 .2
3,040
539
242.1
296 .7
2,853
477
204.5
272.4
2,669
425
168.0
256.8
2,588
399
153.2
245 .6
2,588
4Ó3
156.5
246.3
3,037
522
227.9
294.5
2,780
5Ò1
2 2 2.9
278.2
—
Building construction................................
2,509
2,640
2,707
2,734
2,7 4 6
2,679
2,666
2,501
2 ,3 7 6
2,244
2,189
2,185
2,515
2, 279
General contractors.................................
1,024. 8 1 ,0 9 3 .3 1,137. 7 1 ,1 5 3 .9 1 ,1 6 6 .2 1 ,1 3 4 .4 1 ,1 2 6 .4 1 ,0 3 8 .4
Special-trade contractors........................
Plumbing and heating.....................
Painting and decorating...................
Electrical work................................ .
Other special-trade contractors___
1 ,4 8 4 .2 1, 546. 4 1, 568. 8 1, 579.7 1,579. 6 1,544. 9 1 ,5 3 9 .6 1 ,4 6 2 .4 1 ,3 9 4 .4 1 ,3 3 0 .1 1, 310. 7 1 ,3 0 4 .8 1, 471. 5 1,341. 6
353 .2
3 4 3 .7
354.2
34 9 .8
3 4 9 .6
327 .4
313.5
340.3
317.3
310.2
311.9
3 4 4 .6
334 .5
318.3
181 .9
198.9
216.9
208.7
220 .7
185.6
166.2
147.3
205.0
144.3
142.5
209.7
185 .6
165.6
211 .2
209.7
208.4 204 .4
199.3
187.6
179.1
170.7
170.6
172.2
173.7
194.0
190.0
169.1
805 .2
747 .4
788.0
797.5
8 1 0 .0
698.6
737 .2
685.6
806.7
770.3
678.2
796.6
761.4
688.6
M anufacturing...--------- ---------------------Durable goods1................................
Nondurable goods *.........................
Ordnance and accessories................... .......
Food and kindred products.......................
M eat products.........................................
Dairy products........................................
Canning and preserving.........................
Grain-mill products________________
Bakery products.................................... .
Sugar-----------------------------------------Confectionery and related products.......
Beverages____ ____________________
Miscellaneous food products...................
Tobacco m anufactures........................
Cigarettes............................................
Cigars............................... ..................
Tobacco and snuff..............................
Tobacco stemming and redrying___
Textile-mill products............................
Scouring and combing plants................
Yarn and thread mills.............................
Broad-woven fabric mills___________
Narrow fabrics and small wares............
Knitting mills____________________
Dyeing and finishing textiles.................
Carpets, rugs, other floor coverings___
Hats (except cloth and millinery)...........
Miscellaneous textile goods__________
Apparel and other finished textile prod
ucts.................... ..................................
Men’s and boys’ suits and coats.............
M en’s and boys’ furnishings and work
clothing................. ...... .....................
Women’s outerwear................................
Women’s, children’s undergarments__
Millinery................................................
C hildren’s outerwear....... .....................
Fur goods________________________
Miscellaneous apparel and accessories...
Other fabricated textile products...........
See footnotes at end of table.
https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
___
___
9 ,8 1 8
914 .2
878.4
880.0 1 ,0 4 3 .4
937.7
16,935 17,129 17,151 17,222 17,121 17,034 16,291 16,809 16,715 16,769 16,764 16,824 16,842 16,893 16,557
), 944
10,031 10,024 9, 958
9,788
9,7 4 3
9,2 7 7
9, 764 9,7 4 7
9,795
9, 730
9, 776
9,811
9,791
9, 536
j, 991
7,098
7,333
7,1 2 7 7,264
7,2 9 1
7,034
7,014
7,045
6,9 6 8
6,974
7,048
7,031
7,102
7,021
132.0
133 .4
131.5
131.0
131.6
129.3
130.9
130.5
129.4
129.6
129.7
130.2
131.1
130.6
139.2
, 490.8 1, 542. 2 1, 593. 9 1, 690. 6 1 ,7 8 4 .1 1,751. 7 1 ,6 3 1 .9 1 ,5 7 5 .0 1 ,5 0 9 .4 1 ,4 7 5 .0 1 ,4 6 8 .1 1 ,4 5 9 .7 1,466. 6 1, 577.8 1, 544. 7
352 .9
343.1
352 .7
348 .2
3 4 2 .0
33 2 .5
328 .7
334.6
332.2
339 .7
337 .0
336.7
340.1
327.6
110.2
108.5
116.9
122.3
112.0
124.1
116.1
108.4
121.7
112.3
105.5
104.4
11 3 .6
113.9
194.6
230 .0
323 .5
426.8
38 9 .7
223.2
192.6
179.2
172.0
272.9
171 .7
173.1
24 3 .7
231. 5
117.4
122.1
117.3
121.0
123 .0
121.9
118.4
117.2
117.9
123.6
117.7
117.9
119.7
121.7
293 .4
294 .8
293 .2
295.7
294.7
295.2
289.4
294.2
288.0
286.7
28 7 .2
286.9
291.6
285.9
42 .3
4 6 .2
4 4 .5
3 0 .4
2 7 .7
2 8 .0
2 6 .9
2 6 .6
2 6 .8
2 7 .5
2 8 .0
3 1 .3
3 2 .6
3 2 .4
8 5 .9
87 .1
7 8 .3
8 7 .6
8 4 .3
7 4 .6
70.3
71.8
7 4 .6
78 .2
8 0 .7
8 1 .5
79 .5
7 9 .8
218.4
226.4
2 2 9 .9
211.7
218.0
229.0
216.1
209 .6
205.9
234.3
200.1
200.3
216.9
211.5
—
135.5
137.6
139.7
140.9
144.1
147.2
144.8
142.8
138.8
137.6
137.1
134.5
140.1
140.4
___
9 8 .4
105.8
3 4 .3
3 5 .0
6 .8
2 9 .7
110.2
3 4 .6
3 5 .2
6 .8
3 3 .6
119.1
3 4 .2
3 4 .6
6 .8
4 3 .5
121.6
3 4 .3
3 4 .4
7 .0
4 5 .9
111.4
3 4 .5
3 4 .0
6 .9
3 6 .0
8 6 .1
3 4 .2
3 2 .8
6 .9
12.2
8 8 .5
3 4 .7
3 4 .3
7 .1
12 .4
88.1
88.2
3 4 .2
3 4 .5
7 .1
12.3
3 3 .7
3 5 .3
7 .2
12.0
90 .1
33 .7
35 .7
7 .2
13.5
9 8 .5
3 3 .8
3 7 .3
7 .2
20.2
103.6
34 .1
3 7 .0
7 .2
2 5 .3
100.9
3 4 .2
3 5 .0
7 .0
2 4 .7
103.5
3 3 .0
3 8 .3
7 .4
2 4 .8
, 02 3 .0 1 ,0 3 3 .6 1 ,0 3 9 .6 1, 041. 8 1 ,0 3 9 .3 1 ,0 4 0 .5 1 ,0 1 3 .3 1 ,0 5 0 .9 1 ,0 5 4 .6 1 ,0 6 1 .4 1 ,0 7 1 .5 1 ,0 8 1 .4 1 ,0 8 2 .7 1,050. 7 1 ,0 7 5 .4
________
6 .2
6 .2
6 .4
6 .1
6 .3
6 .2
6.2
6 .3
6 .5
6 .3
6 .5
6 .4
6 .3
6 .5
________
119.9
119 .8
119.2
119.6
119.9
123.1
118.7
125.0
126.4
121.8
128.0
128.1
122.5
129.9
________
4 4 7 .8
449.1
450 .2
4 5 3 .3
450.1
441.0
459 .7
462 .7
459 .6
465.1
467 .2
469.4
456 .2
467.4
2 8 .9
2 9 .6
2 9 .2
29.7
2 9 .5
2 9 .7
2 8 .3
2 9 .2
30 .1
3 0 .4
3 0 .7
3 0 .8
2 9 .7
3 0 .5
219.4
224.1
2 2 5 .8
226.8
224 .8
217.6
221.3
219.8
222.6
223.5
225.2
224.0
222 .8
222.4
________
8 4 .6
8 4 .9
8 4 .6
8 3 .6
8 3 .7
8 6 .4
80 .7
8 7 .9
85 .4
8 9 .5
9 0 .3
9 0 .5
86 .0
8 9 .2
5 0 .7
50 .5
5 0 .7
50 .6
4 8 .8
4 8 .0
5 2 .3
53.1
53 .7
51.3
5 4 .3
51 .4
5 3 .8
5 2 .4
________
12.1
12 .0
11.5
12 .2
11.9
12.5
1 2 .6
1 2 .3
12.7
13 .0
13 .8
13 .7
12 .5
1 3 .2
—
64.1
6 3 .3
6 1 .6
6 3 .1
6 2 .4
6 3 .3
60.3
6 4 .2
7 4 .3
6 5 .4
61 .2
6 3 .3
6 6 .0
6 3 .9
, 195.4 1, 224.0 1, 222.4 1, 224. 7 1 ,2 1 1 .0 1, 213.7 1 ,1 4 9 .2 1 ,1 8 0 .1 1,178. 5 1 ,1 9 8 .4 1 ,2 4 8 .4 1 ,2 6 2 .6 1 ,2 3 4 .8 1, 212.1 1 ,2 0 6 .6
—
122.8
122.1
122.3
123.1
116.1
123.1
122.5
119.7
122.3
122.0
122.8
122.2
121.8
119.0
300.1
376 .3
129.4
18 .2
7 0 .5
12 .8
6 0 .0
133.9
30 5 .7
36 5 .3
131.4
16.0
7 0 .0
13.3
6 2 .7
135.9
312.5
358.3
130.4
18.8
7 2 .0
13.4
6 4 .0
133.0
311.8
354 .4
128.8
18.4
70 .9
12 .5
63 .3
127.8
31 4 .6
3 6 2 .3
126.8
18.2
7 0 .3
1 2 .2
6 3 .0
1 2 3 .2
301.8
336 .2
119.7
15.8
7 0 .2
12.7
57.3
119.4
311.4
339 .8
124.6
13.5
71.9
12.8
61 .8
122.0
31 2 .8
34 2 .8
123.0
13.4
68.8
11.4
60.1
123.7
315 .5
356 .0
126.2
17.1
6 6 .2
8 .4
6 1 .0
128.3
317.3
385.3
128.1
22.7
69 .6
9 .6
62.1
131.7
319 .4
392.0
127.8
2 4 .0
7 3 .0
1 0 .2
6 1 .7
131.7
313.6
376.8
124.3
2 1 .6
72.1
10.9
5 9 .7
133.6
311.3
362.1
126.5
18 .2
70 .6
11 .7
6 1 .4
128.5
309.7
360.4
120.9
20.0
7 1 .7
1 2 .3
6 0 .9
131.7
4
>
379
A: EMPLOYMENT AND PAYROLLS
T able A-2: Employees in nonagricultural establishments, by industry 1—Continued
[In th o u sa n d s]
1957
►
I n d u s tr y
Jan.
M a n u fa c tu r in g — C o n tin u e d
L u m b e r a n d w o o d p r o d u c ts e x c e p t fu r
n it u r e ..................................................................... 642.6
L o g g in g c a m p s a n d c o n tr a c to r s ------------------------S a w m ills a n d p la n in g m il ls ..........................................
M illw o r k , p ly w o o d , a n d p refa b rica ted
s tr u c tu r a l w o o d p r o d u c ts ---------------- ----------W o o d e n c o n ta in e r s ...... ......................................................
M isc e lla n e o u s w o o d p r o d u c ts ..................................—
F u r n itu r e a n d fix tu r e s ___________________
H o u s e h o ld fu r n itu r e ____________________
O ffice, p u b lic -b u ild in g , a n d p ro fessio n a l
fu r n itu r e ............................................................
P a r titio n s , s h e lv in g , lo c k e r s, a n d
371.3
S cr e e n s, b lin d s , a n d m isc e lla n e o u s
fu r n itu r e a n d fix tu r e s ------------------------P a p e r a n d a llie d p r o d u c ts -----------------P u lp , p a p e r , a n d p ap e rb o a rd m ills .
P a p e r b o a r d c o n ta in e r s a n d b o x e s ..
O th er p a p e r a n d a llie d p r o d u c t s ..
P r in tin g , p u b lis h in g , a n d a llie d in
d u s tr ie s _______________________________
N e w s p a p e r s ............................................- ............
P e r io d ic a ls .................... - ......................................
B o o k s — -------------------------------- ----------- —
C o m m e r c ia l p r in tin g ----------------------------L ith o g r a p h in g .....................................................
G r e e tin g c a r d s.....................................................
B o o k b in d in g a n d r e la te d in d u s tr ie s ___
M is c e lla n e o u s p u b lis h in g a n d p r in tin g
s e r v ic e s _______________________________
A nnual
a v er a g e
1956
______
D ec.
N ov.
O ct.
S e p t.
A ug.
J u ly
June
M ay
A pr.
M ar.
F eb.
Jan.
1956
1955
672.7
8 1 .4
356 .5
702.3
95.1
368 .7
733.9
107.7
382.1
751.9
112.5
38 9 .8
770.7
119.8
3 9 8 .6
757.9
114.9
395 .4
765.0
117.1
398 .4
735.3
9 9 .5
38 8 .3
709.7
8 2 .4
3 7 9 .6
686.1
6 9 .6
372 .2
7 0 3 .6
8 3 .2
37 6 .3
7 0 3 .6
8 3 .0
3 7 5 .3
72 4 .0
9 6 .8
3 8 1 .8
742.8
100 .9
3 9 2 .0
123.7
54.5
56 .6
126.8
54.4
57.3
131.1
55 .6
57 .4
136 .8
55.1
5 7 .7
139 .6
5 5 .0
5 7 .7
136.4
5 5 .2
5 6 .0
135.9
56 .2
57 .4
134.1
5 6 .6
5 6 .8
133.7
56.4
5 7 .6
131.3
5 5 .9
57.1
131.4
5 5 .5
5 7 .2
133.6
5 5 .3
5 6 .4
132.8
5 5 .5
57.1
139.6
5 5 .3
55 .0
378.5
260.3
378.1
260.8
382.9
263.5
38 2 .0
26 1 .9
377 .0
2 5 7 .3
365.0
251.1
370 .6
253.9
37 0 .0
254.5
373 .9
258 .6
377 .5
262.7
380.1
26 6 .5
380 .3
2 6 6 .6
376 .0
259.6
366 .3
257 .2
48.1
48.1
48 .8
4 9 .3
4 9 .6
4 7 .7
4 8 .0
4 7 .3
4 7 .5
4 7 .5
47 .1
4 6 .8
4 8 .0
44.1
4 1 .4
4 0 .3
41 .6
4 2 .0
4 1 .7
3 8 .3
40 .3
3 9 .4
3 8 .8
3 8 .9
3 8 .6
3 9 .3
3 9 .9
3 8 .3
2 8 .8
28 .9
2 9 .0
2 8 .8
2 8 .4
27 .9
2 8 .4
2 8 .8
2 9 .0
2 8 .4
2 7 .9
2 7 .6
28 .5
2 6 .7
573.6
576.3
287.7
153.8
134.8
574.2
285.0
155.5
133.7
574.5
285.4
154.8
134.3
576.0
287.7
153.2
135.1
575 .4
289 .4
152 .0
134 .0
567.1
285.7
148.8
132.6
570.6
286.6
151.2
132.8
565.1
281 .6
150.1
133.4
563.7
280.2
149.1
134.4
55 9 .6
278 .7
148.4
132.5
556.7
277 .3
148.2
131.2
558.7
277 .9
148.8
132.0
568.4
283.8
151.2
133.4
549.6
272 .9
146.7
130 .0
872.5
878.1
324.1
69 .0
55 .7
229.2
6 4 .0
18 .6
4 7 .6
871.1
319.3
6 8 .0
55 .3
227.3
64 .5
19 .9
47.1
870.1
320.0
6 7 .3
5 4 .8
226.5
6 4 .3
2 0 .2
4 7 .6
860 .6
318.0
6 5 .8
54.3
224 .0
6 3 .6
1 9 .7
4 7 .5
853 .9
316.1
64 .5
5 4 .4
2 2 2 .7
6 2 .8
1 9 .2
4 7 .0
848.5
315.0
64.1
55 .0
220 .6
62 .0
1 8 .6
4 6 .0
850.9
3 1 5 .8
6 4 .4
5 3 .8
221.3
6 2 .5
1 9 .2
4 6 .4
846.9
314 .0
6 4 .7
53 .8
220 .0
6 2 .1
1 8 .3
4 6 .1
847.0
312 .7
6 5 .2
53 .9
219.8
6 2 .9
17.9
4 6 .3
844.1
3 1 0 .5
6 5 .8
5 3 .7
21 9 .8
63 .1
1 7 .9
4 5 .6
839 .6
309.1
6 6 .4
5 2 .9
218 .3
6 2 .5
17 .8
4 5 .2
8 3 6 .4
304 .5
6 6 .6
52.1
2 1 9 .9
6 2 .3
18 .0
44 .7
854.3
315.1
65 .9
54.1
222.5
63.1
1 8 .8
4 6 .5
8 2 3 .0
302.1
6 4 .4
5 1 .3
214.2
6 2 .0
1 8 .9
4 2 .9
6 9 .9
69 .7
6 9 .4
6 7 .7
6 7 .2
6 7 .2
6 7 .5
6 7 .9
6 8 .3
6 7 .7
6 7 .4
6 8 .3
6 8 .3
6 7 .2
839 .0
109.0
315 .6
9 3 .2
8 3 6 .0
108.8
31 5 .6
9 3 .0
827 .4
108 .3
315 .0
9 2 .7
824 .3
1 0 8 .0
3 1 4 .3
9 2 .6
834.5
109.6
317.1
9 4 .7
810 .5
105.0
308 .6
9 2 .5
C h e m ic a ls a n d a llie d p r o d u c ts ___________ 835.3
I n d u s tr ia l in o r g a n ic c h e m i c a l s . . ........................ ..
I n d u s tr ia l o rg a n ic c h e m ic a ls -----------------------------D r u g s an d m e d ic in e s ...... .................................................
S o a p , c le a n in g a n d p o lis h in g p rep a ra
t io n s .............. ..........................................................................
P a in t s , p ig m e n ts , a n d fille r s ........................................
G u m a n d w ood c h e m ic a ls ---------------------------------F e r tiliz e r s -------- -------------- ------------------------------------V e g e ta b le a n d a n im a l o ils a n d f a t s -------------------M isc e lla n e o u s c h e m ic a ls -------------------------------------
838 .8
109.9
318.7
9 6 .6
837.0
109.6
31 7 .5
9 6 .5
840.4
110.1
317 .2
9 6 .3
8 3 8 .6
111.0
318.7
9 6 .4
8 3 5 .6
110.6
3 2 0 .9
9 6 .6
828.1
110.2
315.4
9 6 .3
831 .3
110.7
317 .8
94.1
8 3 3 .2
109.5
3 1 6 .2
9 1 .8
4 9 .4
74 .9
8 .6
3 4 .4
4 2 .5
103 .8
4 9 .7
75.1
8 .6
3 3 .2
4 3 .4
103.4
50 .0
75.1
8 .5
3 4 .7
44 .0
104.5
5 0 .0
7 5 .5
8 .5
3 2 .9
42.1
103.5
5 1 .0
76.1
8 .5
3 0 .3
3 8 .1
103.5
4 9 .9
7 5 .6
8 .4
3 1 .4
3 7 .4
103.5
5 0 .0
75 .3
8 .2
3 4 .3
3 7 .9
103.0
4 9 .5
7 4 .8
8 .4
4 3 .4
3 8 .9
100.7
4 9 .7
74 .5
8 .3
4 8 .5
4 0 .3
9 9 .9
4 9 .7
7 4 .2
8 .4
4 5 .5
4 1 .2
9 9 .6
4 9 .6
7 4 .2
8 .4
3 7 .8
4 2 .5
9 8 .9
4 9 .9
7 4 .0
8 .4
3 5 .9
4 3 .6
9 7 .6
4 9 .9
7 5 .0
8 .4
3 6 .9
41.1
101.8
4 9 .8
7 3 .4
8 .0
3 6 .9
41 .5
9 4 .8
P r o d u c ts o f p etr o le u m a n d c o a l...................... 253.0
P e tr o le u m r e fin in g ......................................................... ..
C o k e , o th e r p e tr o le u m a n d coal p ro d
u c t s ----------------- ----------------------------- ----------------- -
253.4
202 .2
254.1
202 .2
255.5
202.6
257 .6
204 .4
2 5 9 .9
2 0 6 .9
252.0
204 .7
254 .7
202 .5
251 .3
199.6
250 .8
199.3
2 5 1 .5
199 .7
248.9
198.7
249.1
199 .2
253.2
201.8
252.6
20 1 .3
5 1 .2
51 .9
5 2 .9
53 .2
5 3 .0
4 7 .3
52 .2
5 1 .7
5 1 .5
5 1 .8
5 0 .2
4 9 .9
5 1 .4
5 1 .3
B u b b e r p r o d u c t s . ............ .....................................
T ir e s a n d in n er t u b e s ___________________
R u b b e r fo o tw e a r ......... .......................................
O th er ru b b e r p r o d u c t s ................. .................
279.1
277.5
118.6
2 2 .7
136.2
257.8
101.0
23.1
133.7
280.3
119.7
23.6
137.0
275.5
119.6
2 3 .8
132.1
271.7
118.5
2 3 .8
129 .4
268.5
118.3
2 3 .5
126.7
269.3
118.6
2 3 .9
126.8
27 5 .8
119.6
2 4 .4
131.8
278.7
120.0
24 .7
134.0
280.1
120.4
2 4 .9
134 .8
28 3 .3
121 .0
2 5 .0
137.3
2 8 8 .9
121.8
2 5 .0
142.1
275.9
118.4
24 .0
133.5
274 .0
117.5
2 2 .5
134 .0
L e a th e r an d le a th e r p r o d u c t s ........ .......... ..
L ea th er : ta n n e d , cu r r ie d , a n d fin is h e d .
I n d u s tr ia l le a th e r b e ltin g a n d p a c k in g .
B o o t a n d sh o e c u t s to c k a n d f in d in g s . .
F o o tw e a r (e x c e p t r u b b e r )..............................
3 6 9 .4
368 .2
4 4 .3
4 .7
17 .6
238.5
15.1
30.1
17 .9
366 .7
4 4 .2
4 .7
17.5
235.0
15.1
3 1 .6
18 .6
367 .3
4 4 .2
4 .6
17.1
233.2
15.4
33 .6
19 .2
368 .5
4 3 .6
4 .7
1 6 .8
23 5 .7
15 .5
3 2 .8
19 .4
377.1
4 4 .3
4 .6
17.4
2 4 3 .0
16.1
3 2 .5
1 9 .2
369 .2
4 3 .4
4 .5
1 7 .2
239.6
1 5 .8
3 0 .0
1 8 .7
3 7 3 .7
4 4 .2
4 .5
17 .6
243.4
16 .5
2 8 .7
18 .8
36 4 .9
4 3 .9
4 .8
1 7 .0
239.0
16.2
2 6 .0
18.0
372 .0
4 4 .6
5 .0
17.1
243.2
15.7
2 8 .6
17.8
384 .7
4 4 .9
5 .0
18 .2
251 .4
15 .7
3 2 .0
1 7 .5
39 0 .2
45 .1
5 .1
19.1
25 4 .7
1 5 .6
3 3 .5
17.1
385.8
4 5 .3
5 .2
18 .8
2 5 3 .5
15.1
3 1 .6
1 6 .3
374 .2
4 4 .4
4 .8
17 .7
242.6
15 .6
3 0 .9
18 .2
381.1
4 5 .0
4 .9
1 7 .5
247.6
16 .6
3 2 .4
17.1
566 .8
3 4 .6
98.1
572.5
3 5 .0
9 9 .4
577.3
3 4 .7
100.0
572.4
3 4 .3
94 .1
575 .6
3 4 .2
9 6 .7
566.7
3 3 .4
9 2 .4
577.2
3 3 .5
9 8 .2
572.7
3 3 .8
9 7 .9
570.6
3 4 .4
9 8 .2
563.8
3 3 .7
9 6 .9
556.2
3 4 .0
9 6 .3
556 .7
3 5 .0
9 5 .2
569.2
3 4 .3
9 7 .0
550.0
3 3 .5
94 .2
19.1
4 3 .2
8 3 .2
55 .0
1 9 .0
4 3 .4
8 4 .6
55.3
18.7
43 .6
87 .0
55 .4
18 .3
4 4 .0
8 8 .4
5 3 .9
17.6
4 4 .4
8 8 .4
5 4 .6
1 6 .8
4 3 .9
8 8 .7
5 2 .4
17 .2
4 4 .0
9 0 .0
55.1
18.0
4 3 .4
8 6 .6
5 5 .7
18 .6
4 3 .0
8 5 .6
5 6 .1
1 8 .5
4 2 .3
8 6 .0
55 .4
18.6
4 2 .2
8 4 .0
5 3 .5
18 .9
4 2 .9
83.1
54 .2
18 .2
4 3 .4
8 6 .4
5 4 .6
1 7 .5
42 .6
8 2 .2
5 3 .9
116.3
2 0 .4
119.0
2 0 .6
120.9
20.6
122.6
2 0 .7
123 .8
2 0 .4
123.2
2 0 .9
123.0
21.1
121.0
21 .0
118.0
2 0 .8
114.1
2 0 .5
111 .3
2 0 .1
110 .8
20.1
118.7
2 0 .6
112.0
2 0 .2
9 6 .9
9 6 .2
96 .4
96 .1
9 5 .5
9 5 .0
95.1
9 5 .3
9 5 .9
9 6 .4
9 6 .2
9 6 .5
9 6 .0
9 3 .9
H a n d b a g s a n d sm a ll le a th e r g o o d s ..........
G lo v e s a n d m is c e lla n e o u s le a th e r g o o d s.
S to n e , c la y , a n d g la ss p r o d u c ts ....................... 549.6
F l a t glass................................ ...............- ...............
G la ss a n d g la ssw a r e, p r e sse d or b lo w n ..
G la ss p r o d u c ts m a d e o f p u r c h a se d
g la s s ............ ...........................................................
C e m e n t, h y d r a u lic ______________________
S tru c tu r a l c la y p r o d u c ts ................................
P o t t e r y a n d r e la te d p r o d u c ts ---------------C o n c r e te , g y p s u m , a n d p la s te r p rod u c t s __________________ _____ ___________ ________
C u t-s to n e a n d s to n e p r o d u c ts .....................................
M isc e lla n e o u s n o n m e ta llic m in e r a l
p r o d u c ts ...............................................................................
S e e fo o tn o te s a t e n d o f ta b le .
https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
380
MONTHLY LABOR REVIEW, MARCH 1957
T able A-2: Employees in nonagricultural establishments, by industry 1—Continued
[In th o u sa n d s]
1957
1956
A nnual
a v er a g e
I n d u s tr y
Jan.
Manufacturing—Continued
Primary metal Industries..........................
Blast furnaces, steelworks, and rolling
mills.....................................................
Iron and steel foundries............. ...........
Primary smelting and refining of nonferrous m etals........... ..........................
Secondary smelting and refining of
nonferrous metals................... .............
Rolling, drawing, and alloying of nonferrous metals......................................
Nonferrous foundries............. ........ ........
Miscellaneous primary metal industries..
Fabricated metal products (except ord
nance, machinery, and transportation
equipm ent).........................................
Tin cans and other tinware....................
Cutlery, handtools, and hardware____
Heating apparatus (except electric) and
plumbers’ supplies..............................
Fabricated structural metal products..
Metal stamping, coating, and engrav
ing.........................................................
Lighting fixtures....................................
Fabricated wire products............ .........
Miscellaneous fabricated metal prod
ucts.......................................................
D ec.
N ov.
O c t.
S e p t.
A ug.
1 ,3 6 1 .7 1 ,3 5 5 .4 1, 350. 2 1,347. 9 1 ,3 4 2 .3 1 ,3 0 6 .7
667.6
237.2
666.4
235.5
666.9
236. 1
73.1
7 2 .5
7 2 .2
7 2 .7
13.8
13.6
13.9
1 3 .6
116.6
80. 7
166.4
116.4
8 0 .7
165.1
114.9
8 0 .3
163.6
117.0
77 .5
162.0
111.2
7 5 .2
155.5
669 .6
229.9
650.6
233.5
J u ly
June
M ay
A pr.
M ar.
F eb.
Jan.
1956
1955
960 .9 1 ,3 3 4 .1 1 ,3 3 1 .0 1,348. 6 1 ,3 4 2 .5 1 ,3 4 5 .9 1 ,3 4 5 .6 1 ,3 0 9 .6 1 ,2 8 3 .1
310.0
231.6
663.2
233.4
655 .2
236.0
665.9
241.3
661.7
242.1
661.7
245.3
659.3
245.8
67.3
7 0 .9
6 9 .0
6 7 .9
67 .8
67 .4
6 6 .4
13.4
1 3 .3
13.3
13 .6
13.8
1 3 .6
13.7
116.4
7 3 .7
145.0
119.5
74.5
161.2
121.3
75 .7
161.3
122.1
76. £
160.8
119.2
77 .5
161.0
118.5
79.1
161.2
633.1
237.8
635.3
230.0
6 6 .4
69.4
6 3 .8
13.5
13.6
12.7
119.4
80.7
160.5
117.8
77 .7
160.2
114.0
77.1
150.2
1 ,1 3 3 .7 1 ,1 4 3 .5 1,143. 5 1,140. 6 1,114. 7 1 ,0 9 5 .0 1 ,0 5 6 .0 1 ,0 9 8 .1 1 ,1 0 7 .1 1 ,1 2 0 .6 1 ,1 1 7 .0 1 ,1 2 2 .2 1,134. 5 1 ,1 1 6 .4 1 ,108.1
53.6
53.4
61 .7
61 .6
6 1 .0
58.5
5 8 .9
6 0 .6
58.5
56 .2
57.8
54 .0
55.0
58.3
151.7
143.8
153.0
140.7
137.6
148.0
154.1
143.7
148.0
149.3
155.0
156.2
158.6
154.1
113.4
321.2
116.7
320.6
120.8
319 .8
120.8
317.8
119.2
315.6
117.7
296.7
122.2
309.1
123.0
301 .4
123.8
297.5
124.0
293.5
125.2
290.1
125.2
288 .3
121.2
305.8
125.7
278.2
252.2
50.8
6 3 .4
251.2
50.2
63.1
246.6
4 9 .7
6 2 .3
229 .9
4 6 .8
60 .0
222.8
45 .7
21 7 .3
4 4 .7
55 .4
226.0
44 .3
58 .3
233.9
45 .8
5 9 .5
240.6
4 7 .7
6 0 .4
240.8
48.1
6 0 .6
244.8
4 8 .7
61 .5
252.2
5 1 .5
6 3 .2
238.4
4 7 .8
60 .5
243.8
51.0
60.6
135.9
136.6
134.9
133.9
125.6
133.9
136.6
138.0
138.8
140.7
141.5
135.6
136.4
57 .7
131.7
Machinery (except electrical)....................
Engines and turbines............... .............
Agricultural machinery and tractors...
Construction and mining m achinery...
Metalworking machinery.......................
Special-industry machinery (except
metalworking machinery)...................
General industrial machinery................
Office and store machines and devices..
Service-industry and household ma
chines---------- ---------------------------Miscellaneous machinery parts.............
1 ,7 5 8 .0 1 ,7 5 2 .4 1,736. 4 1 ,7 2 3 .9 1,722. 8 1, 717.5 1 ,7 1 1 .7 1 ,7 3 0 .7 1, 725. 9 1 ,7 3 4 .0 1 ,720.1 1,708. 4 1 ,6 8 9 .1 1, 723.6 1 ,5 9 2 .3
86 .4
86 .2
8 3 .2
77 .5
8 4 .8
82.0
77 .0
77.3
78.1
7 7 .6
80.3
76.4
7 7 .3
74.5
139.9
137.2
137.2
133.7
129.1
141.6
146. 7
148.1
152.4
154.8
144.9
159.3
156.3
153.0
157.2
156.7
158.0
157.8
155.7
158.1
153.2
154.0
157.7
152.2
150.5
147.4
155.3
133.3
296.5
291.1
290.3
286.3
293.7
288.0
289.1
289.3
290.8
287.6
281.5
289.3
284.7
264.7
Electrical m achinery.................................
Electrical generating, transmission,
distribution, and industrial ap
paratus_________________________
Electrical appliances........................... .
Insulated wire and cable........................
Electrical equipment for vehicles..........
Electric lamps.........................................
Communication equipment...................
Miscellaneous electrical products..........
1 ,2 4 2 .0 1, 258. 2 1 ,2 6 8 .7 1, 258. 8 1 ,2 3 5 .7 1, 221.9 1 ,1 9 4 .5 1 ,2 0 0 .3 1 ,1 9 6 .3 1 ,1 9 5 .6 1,162. 2 1,162. 9 1 ,1 6 2 .5 1, 211. 5 1 ,1 2 5 .2
Transportation equipment........................
Automobiles______________________
Aircraft and parts__________________
Aircraft________________ ________
Aircraft engines and parts..................
Aircraft propellers and parts_______
Other aircraft parts and equipm ent..
Ship and boat building and repairing..
Shipbuilding and repairing................
Boatbuilding and repairing................
Railroad equipment________________
Other transportation equipment_____
1 ,9 2 7 .7 1 ,9 2 9 .3 1, 881. 5 1, 795.1 1,679. 5 1, 706.8 1 ,7 2 1 .9 1, 729.8 1, 755. 2 1 ,7 8 8 .9 1 ,8 0 5 .6 1 ,8 4 1 .4 1 ,8 9 1 .3 1 ,7 9 5 .1 1 ,8 2 2 .0
853.9
757.8
657.8
695.5
716.0
825.0
775.3
732.2
817.8
840.6
875.1
933.8
791.3
896.5
867.2
856.6
829 .5
816.8
80 4 .3
840.7
790.4
775.5
771.5
766.0
771.5
764.1
804.1
738.4
550.1
544.2
529.0
514.9
535.1
523.0
491.9
489.9
504.7
485.5
489.5
493.5
512.0
471.2
179.4
176.3
169.6
165.2
172.7
163.6
160.4
162.4
160.2
159.0
154.3
156.8
165.2
147.1
17.1
16.3
18.6
18.1
17.6
16.0
15.2
14.9
15.6
14.7
14 .6
14.3
16.1
13.6
119.1
113.8
112.3
118.0
115.3
109.8
108.0
106.5
107.7
106.8
106.6
106.0
110.8
106.5
125.7
126.1
138.7
132.8
127.9
132.8
131.6
134.7
127.9
128.1
124.4
123.8
129.6
123.2
116.5
105.8
106.8
110.9
111.6
107.5
105.9
110.9
102.1
102.2
9 8 .9
98 .8
106. 5
99.9
22 .2
2 1 .2
20.4
19 .9
19.3
21 .9
2 5 .7
23 .8
2 5 .8
25 .9
2 4 .9
25 .6
23.1
23.3
5 6 .6
55.5
57.6
6 0 .8
57 .8
58 .8
62 .2
6 2 .8
6 2 .5
61 .8
6 1 .2
61.1
6 0 .2
54.9
11.0
10.8
8 .7
1 0 .5
10.9
10.0
10.0
9 .2
10.3
9 .1
9 .2
8 .5
9 .9
9 .0
194.3
275.1
133.4
193.0
273.7
131.2
193.8
272.7
126.9
193.2
272.1
127.9
194.0
269.7
126.8
194.8
266.9
127.8
192.4
263.7
126.7
192.2
262.6
124.8
191.9
258.5
122.5
190.3
255.4
120.9
188.4
251.6
118.4
192.8
266.4
126.9
180.0
238.6
110.1
187.5
280.3
184.3
278.5
185.9
277.0
187.0
273.7
187.2
272.1
190.0
270.1
198.8
271.4
200 .7
273.3
205.5
275.3
200.8
274.2
198.4
274.6
193.2
272.9
193.3
274.4
184.9
253.2
431.1
5 2 .9
2 5 .2
78 .5
3 2 .5
585.1
52.9
Instruments and related products............
Laboratory, scientific, and engineering
instrum ents..........................................
Mechanical measuring and controlling
instruments_____________________
Optical instruments and lenses_______
Surgical, medical, and dental instru
m ents__________________________
Ophthalmic g oods................ ................
Photographic apparatus____________
Watches and clocks________________
347 .0
Miscellaneous manufacturing industries..
Jewelry, silverware, and plated w are...
Musical instruments and parts_______
Toys and sporting goods____ _______
Pens, pencils, other office supplies____
Costume jewelry, buttons, notions___
Fabricated plastics products.................
Other manufacturing industries______
See footnotes at end of table.
478.5
https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
194.6
275.9
134.6
429.7
52 .9
24 .8
7 6 .9
3 2 .5
598.5
53.4
429.6
53 .3
24.8
73 .9
3 2 .5
591.4
5 3 .3
426.3
5 3 .6
24.1
70.1
32.1
575.6
53.9
422.9
5 3 .2
2 3 .6
67.4
3 1 .7
569.6
53.5
418.9
4 9 .6
2 3 .2
66 .3
3 2 .2
554.5
4 9 .8
418.6
51.8
23 .4
67 .8
32.1
555.1
51.5
417.0
51.9
2 3 .8
71.1
3 1 .8
548.9
5 1 .8
415.8
53.3
23 .5
75.4
3 1 .4
544.5
51.7
391.0
51 .3
2 3 .7
76.1
2 6 .5
542.5
5 1 .8
387.1
50 .3
23 .7
78 .0
26 .2
545.8
51 .8
381.8
49 .4
23 .7
83.4
2 5 .9
546.5
51.8
413.9
52 .0
24 .0
73 .7
3 0 .6
565.0
52.3
382.9
4 6 .2
2 2 .2
8 0 .3
2 7 .6
516.7
49.3
346.1
346.3
345.3
343 .7
341.4
336.0
336.3
334 .8
335.1
334.2
332.6
330.8
338 .5
71 .5
71 .2
70 .9
6 9 .4
68 .2
6 7 .3
66.1
6 5 .2
6 4 .3
6 3 .6
61 .8
60.1
66 .7
57.4
87 .2
14.1
87 .4
14.0
8 6 .6
13.9
8 5 .4
14.0
84 .8
13.6
8 3 .7
1 3 .7
8 3 .7
13.9
8 3 .5
13 .9
8 4 .6
14.0
84 .9
14.0
8 4 .8
14 .0
8 4 .8
14.0
85.1
13.9
82.4
13.8
44 .0
27 .9
66 .8
3 4 .6
43 .7
27 .8
67 .0
3 5 .2
43.1
28.1
6 6 .9
3 5 .8
43.1
2 8 .2
6 7 .6
3 6 .0
4 3 .2
28.4
68 .2
3 5 .0
4 2 .5
28.1
67.1
3 3 .6
42 .9
28 .5
66 .7
3 4 .5
42.7
28. 5
6 5 .6
3 5 .4
4 2 .5
2 8 .6
65 .4
3 5 .7
42.3
28 .5
65.3
3 5 .6
42 .2
2 8 .2
65.1
3 6 .5
41.8
2 8 .0
6 5 .0
37.1
42.8
28 .2
3 5 .4
40.3
25.9
6 5 .4
3 6 .6
494.3
53.1
19.9
85.7
3 2 .0
61 .2
8 9 .6
152.8
512.9
53 .4
19 .9
9 8 .0
3 2 .6
6 2 .7
9 0 .6
155.7
520.9
5 3 .9
19.7
103.9
3 2 .9
6 4 .5
8 9 .9
156.1
511.7
5 2 .9
19.3
102. 5
3 2 .6
6 4 .2
87 .3
152.9
500.8
51.3
19.0
99.3
32.3
63 .7
84.3
150.9
475.6
47 .8
1 8 .2
93.5
3 1 .2
59 .9
82.4
142.6
491.1
49.8
18.7
9 6 .4
3 1 .6
61.3
8 3 .8
149.5
489.1
50 .3
18.8
9 4 .0
3 1 .5
59.1
8 5 .0
150.4
488.0
52 .0
18.7
90. 1
31 .4
59 .9
84 .7
151.2
491.0
52.7
18.9
86.7
31.3
6 3 .3
8 5 .6
152.5
492.5
53.7
18.8
8 5 .2
3 1 .0
6 5 .8
8 5 .5
152.5
485.8
53.4
18.5
8 1 .2
3 0 .6
64 .8
85 .5
151.8
496.3
52 .0
19.1
9 3 .5
3 1 .7
6 2 .4
86 .0
151.6
484.7
52.7
17.9
86.9
3 0 .7
64.5
81.5
150.5
66.4
321.8
381
A: EMPLOYMENT AND PAYROLLS
T able A-2: Employees in nonagricultural establishments, by industry 1—Continued
[In thousands]
A nnual
a v er a g e
1956
1957
I n d u s tr y
Jan.
D ec.
N ov.
O c t.
S e p t.
A ug.
J u ly
June
M ay
A pr.
M ar.
F eb.
Jan.
1956
1955
4,106
4,145
4,056
4,181
4,138
4,121
4,083
4,083
4,178
4,170
4,179
4,148
4,169
4,177
4,124
2,737
2. 729 2, 712
2, 719 2,7 4 5
2, 717
2, 776 2,751
2,745
2,717
2,769
2,760
2, 761
2,761
T r a n s p o r ta tio n ........ ............................................. 2, 7Ï5
1,167. 3 1 ,1 7 5 .2 1,189. 0 1 ,1 8 8 .6 1,184. 6 1 ,1 7 2 .8 1,222. 5 1, 208. 4 1,195. 8 1 ,1 8 9 .1 1,188. 3 1,192. 6 1 ,1 9 0 .0 1,205. 3
I n te r s ta te r a i lr o a d s ____________________
1 ,0 1 7 .8 1 ,0 2 7 .8 1,041. 5 1 ,0 4 1 .4 1 ,0 3 6 .9 1 ,0 3 2 .9 1 ,0 7 4 .8 1 ,0 6 2 .0 1 ,0 4 8 .1 1 ,0 4 1 .2 1 ,0 4 0 .8 1 ,0 4 5 .8 1 ,0 4 2 .8 1 ,0 5 7 .2
C la ss I r ailroad s* _____________________
109.1
110.2
110.7
111.2
109.6
112.2
115.7
108.4
10S.8
109.7
108.0
106.5
106.6
107.1
L ocal r a ilw a y s an d b u s lin e s ____________
797.6
762.6
783.8
783.3
784.9
777. 1 780.2
799.7
789.2
791.1
821.1
809 .4
826.5
T r u c k in g an d w a r e h o u sin g
_________
828.1
647 .7
643.4
633.7
64 8 .5
636.9
633.7
652.2
646.2
646 .8
654.4
652.5
659.5
653.0
651.3
O th er tr a n sp o r ta tio n a n d s e r v ic e s _____
4 4 .0
44.1
43 .4
43 .2
4 2 .9
43.7
45 .2
44 .0
4 5 .2
44 .5
44.1
4 4 .6
4 3 .6
4 3 .3
R n s lin e s, e x c e p t lo c a l_ _ _ ___________ __
125.3
128 .6
127.4
123.6
120.6
119.3
113.9
132.8
131.4
129.4
134.6
132.9
135 .8
133.6
A ir tr a n sp o r ta tio n (c o m m o n carrier).
805
796
781
753
798
791
787
824
822
805
814
812
816
813
813
C o m m u n ic a t io n ....................... ............................
761 .8
709.8
755.0
752.8
743.4
737.4
780.4
761.4
748.0
778.0
768.5
772 .8
770.4
770.7
T e l e p h o n e ______________________________
4 2 .7
4 2 .6
4 2 .4
4 2 .3
4 2 .6
4 2 .6
43.1
42 .8
42 .4
42.8
42 .6
42.1
42.6
4 2 .8
T e le g r a p h
. ________________________
595
586
609
589
588
586
584
583
609
600
595
603
595
596
596
O th er p u b lic u t ili t ie s _____________________
571.9
566.6
565.0
562.9
585.2
563.2
561.3
560.5
584.8
573.4
579.7
576.8
572.8
572.8
G a s a n d e lectric u t ili t ie s ________________
252.9
250.4
250.6
250.3
249.4
249.0
248.5
259.0
258.7
255.4
252.5
256 .5
252.7
252.5
E le c tr ic lig h t a n d p o w e r u t ili t ie s ____
146.0
144.4
143.5
142.2
141.3
149.8
143.0
142.0
149.3
147.6
146.9
146.9
147. 2 148.3
G a s u t ili t ie s ___________________________
E le c tr ic lig h t a n d gas u t ilit ie s co m 173.0
171.6
171.2
170.8
170.0
171.2
170.1
176.4
176.8
173.8
173.4
173.5
174.9
173.4
b in e d _ ___________ _______________
22 .9
2 2 .5
22.4
22 .4
2 2 .8
2 2 .3
2 2 .7
23. 6
24 .0
2 3 .3
22 .4
2 2 .6
22.8
2 3 .0
L oca l u tilitie s , n o t e lse w h e r e c la s s ifie d ..
Transportation and public utilities-----------
Wholesale and retail trade............................
W h o le s a le tr a d e __________________________
W h o le sa le r s, fu ll-se r v ic e a n d lim ite d f u n c t io n _________ ___________________
A u t o m o t iv e __ __________ ____________
G roceries, food sp e c ia ltie s , b eer,
w in e s , an d liq u o r s ____ __________ .
E le c tr ic a l g o o d s, m a c h in e r y , h ard w are, a n d p lu m b in g e q u ip m e n t —
O th er fu ll-se r v ic e a n d lim ite d -fu n c tio n w h o le s a le r s ____________________
W h o le s a le d i s t r i b u t o r o th e r ___________
--------------- -------R e ta il tr a d e ------------------G e n e ral m e r c h a n d ise s t o r e s ________ . .
D e p a r t m e n t sto res a n d g en er a l m a ilorder h o u s e s
____ __ ___________
O th er gen eral m e r c h a n d ise sto res
F o o d a n d liq u o r s to r e s _________ _______
G r o cery , m e a t, a n d v e g e ta b le m ark e ts
__ ___________________________
D a ir y -p r o d u c t stores an d d e a le r s____
O th e r fond and liq u o r sto res . ______
A u t o m o t iv e a n d acc essories d e a le r s—
A p p a r e l a n d acc essories s to r e s --------------O th er re ta il tr a d e ____________ _________
F u r n itu r e a n d a p p lia n c e s to r e s ______
D r u g sto res ___________________________
Finance, insurance, and real estate_______
11,182 12,091 11,496 11,288 11,164 11,047 11,015 11,091 10,985 10,928 10,931 10,819 10,920 11,144 10,803
2,974
2, 920
2,920
2,924
2,926
2,925
2,8 5 8
3,002
2, 974
2, 955
3,034
3,070
3,047
3, 021
3 ,0 0 3
1, 798. 6 1 ,7 7 7 .4 1, 763. 2 1 ,7 5 2 .6 1 ,749.4 1 ,7 3 7 .2 1, 725.1 1,706. 8 1, 706.0 1, 710. 3 1, 711. 3 1 ,7 1 4 .8 1, 738.7 1 ,6 7 1 .1
114.9
114.2
114.1
114.1
112.4
113.8
113.7
115.3
114.8
115.9
117.1
116.7
114.2
114.1
H o te ls a n d lo d g in g p la c e s _________________
P e rso n a l services:
L a u n d r ie s
__________________________
C le a n in g an d d y e in g p l a n t s ___________
M o tio n p ic t u r e s . ________________________
311 .2
306.8
3 0 5 .8
304.4
303.8
301.8
298.0
299.4
300.8
301.9
301.2
304.1
296.7
469.1
467.8
464.8
465.1
465.7
463.6
460.6
454 .0
452.0
449.4
446 .5
444 .5
458.5
432 .2
861.2
840 .6
840. 5 846.3
848.8
855.4
829.8
853.1
847.4
862.2
884 .2
876.8
865.8
899:5
1,271. 8 1, 269.6 1, 258.1 1 ,2 5 0 .1 1, 252.4 1 ,2 3 6 .8 1 ,2 2 9 .8 1, 213.1 1,213. 7 1 ,2 1 5 .3 1,212. 6 1 ,2 0 9 .9 1 ,2 3 5 .3 1 ,1 8 7 .0
7,895
8,170
7,945
8,008
8,005
7,995
8,041
8,136 8, 065
8,161
8,045
9,021
8, 449
8,267
8,1 4 8
1,41 0 .1 1,980. 9 1, 604. 2 1,479. 0 1 ,4 2 4 .1 1,346. 5 1,340. 2 1 ,3 8 1 .6 1,395. 4 1,369. 9 1, 384.1 1 ,3 3 3 .4 1, 397.0 1,451. 8 1 ,4 3 0 .9
941.2
89 2 .5
883.9
85 8 .5
902.4
912 .7
880.4
889 .7
922.9
880.9
902.5
1, 295. 8 1,057. 5 961.7
510.6
502.9
486.0
494.4
474.9
494 .6
518.2
459.8
479.1
501.2
465.6
685.1
546. 7 517.3
1,609. 5 1,650. 5 1, 622.1 1,599. 4 1,578. 9 1, 568.9 1, 575.4 1, 578.2 1, 567.3 1, 557.1 1, 552. 6 1 ,5 5 1 .0 1,545. 8 1,578. 6 1 ,4 9 2 .0
1,173. 9 1,152. 3 1,133. 2 1 ,1 1 1 .6 1,096. 9 1 ,1 0 1 .7 1 ,1 0 3 .8 1,097. 5 1 ,0 9 3 .9 1 ,0 9 0 .0 1 ,0 8 9 .4 1,090. 5 1 ,1 1 0 .5 1,039. 8
229.4
232.0
226 .6
233.3
225.8
224.0
223.5
240.4
242.7
236.4
229.5
241.8
227. 2 228.8
236.5
236.8
237 .6
231.8
236.1
225 .6
233.8
234.0
230 .9
230.2
231.0
241. 0
236.7
249 .4
801 .2
804.1
810.9
800.3
801.0
806.2
815.5
802.3
796.4
801.3
794.6
786.8
788.8
799.1
805 .6
587.6
589.2
582.8
576.0
589.5
552.9
571.8
545.9
585.1
580.4
569.6
620.4
536.4
711.3
600.7
3, 759. 8 3,872. 2 3, 807.3 3,801. 1 3 ,7 8 8 .4 3, 796.8 3, 777.1 3, 789. 5 3, 718. 0 3, 700. 5 3, 672. 7 3, 647.1 3,664. 5 3,751. 4 3, 631. 7
383.1
385 .2
387.1
386.0
388.1
386 .8
382.3
381. 3 383.0
386. £ 384.1
382.6
403. 5 392.0
334.2
334.4
330.2
341.7
327.3
330.5
332.2
342.1
340.8
340.7
352.2
3 4 3.6
351.8
378.6
2,297
2,308
591.9
8 3 .6
833.3
799.5
2,313
590.1
8 3 .5
831.4
807.9
2,312
586. f
8 3 .2
828. 5
814. 2
2,321
584.6
83 .3
835.3
82 4 .7
2,355
593. C
84.8
838. 2
839.2
2,342
591.2
84 .5
835.2
831.3
2,320
580.0
8 3 .4
822 .7
833.8
2,289
571.2
8 2 .4
815.1
820 .2
2,278
570.8
8 1 .8
814.5
810.4
2,265
569.7
81 .0
814.9
799.1
2,250
566.2
8 0 .6
810.8
792.7
2,238
561.1
80 .1
803.9
792.7
2,3 0 0
57 9 .7
8 2 .7
823.1
814.3
2,215
549.3
7 7 .6
795 .4
792.8
5,912
5,972
462.1
6,010
471.5
6,045
477.7
6,105
512.2
6,137
582.6
6,137
580.4
6,089
520.6
6,041
491.9
5,979
486.4
5,859
467.7
5,818
466.7
5,803
457.7
6,000
498. C
5,854
498.8
330 .0
164. 6
211.5
331.7
165.1
216 .6
332. £
166. 9
225.6
333 .7
165.3
230 .8
336.6
161.5
230.7
341.9
167.4
230.4
339.3
173.4
229.1
335. C
169.1
232.4
331.1
165. 4
230.5
330.2
163.4
218.3
328.9
160.8
214.7
330. 7
161. 8
216.9
3 3 3 .6
165.4
224.1
332.1
163.4
230 .7
■Ranks an d tr u s t c o m p a n ie s ______________
S e c u r ity d ea le rs a n d e x c h a n c e s ___________
I n su r a n c e carriers a n d a g e n ts _____________
O th er fin a n c e a g en cies a n d real e s t a t e ___
Service and miscellaneous-----------------------
315 .9
7,084
7,033
7,176
7,203
7,130
7,1 2 2
6,915
6,947
7,150
6,960
7,342
7,213
7,292
7,656
7,298
2. 202 2,1 9 6 2, 208 2,208 2,193 2,176 2,168 2,162 2,160 2,156 2, 214 2,188
2,5 3 4
2, 201
F ederal
________________________________ 2,195
4,727
4,739
4,9
6
2
4,960
4,924
4.877
4,9
6
2
5,0
2
7
4,957
4,
752
5,122
5,141
5,017
5,096
5;
097
S ta te a n d lo c a l *_______ ________ _____ _____
Government____________________________
1 The Bureau of Labor Statistics series on employment in nonagricultural
establishments are based upon reports submitted by cooperating firms.
These reports cover all full- and part-time employees in private nonagricul
tural establishments who worked during, or received pay for, any part of the
pay period ending nearest the 15th of the month. Because of this, persons
who worked in more than one establishment during the reporting period will
be counted more than once. In Federal establishments the data generally
refer to persons who worked on, or received pay for, the last day of the
month. Proprietors, self-employed persons, unpaid family workers, and
domestic servants are excluded. These employment series have been ad
justed to first-quarter 1955 benchmark levels indicated by data from govern
ment social-insurance programs.
Data for the 2 most recent months are subject to revision without notation;
revised figures for earlier months will be identified by asterisks the first month
they are published.
These data differ in several respects from the nonagricultural employment
data shown In the Monthly Report on the Labor Force (table A -l, civilian
labor force), which are obtained by household interviews. It includes all
persons (14 years and over) with a Job whether at work or not, proprietors,
self-employed persons, unpaid family workers, and domestic servants.
* Durable goods include: ordnance and accessories; lumber and wood
products (except furniture); furniture and fixtures; stone, clay, and glass
https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
products; primary metal Industries; fabricated metal products (except
ordnance, machinery, and transportation equipment); machinery (except
electrical); electrical machinery; transportation equipment; instruments and
related products; and miscellaneous manufacturing industries.
s Nondurable goods include: food and kindred products; tobacco manufac
tures; textile-mill products; apparel and other finished textile products; paper
and allied products; printing, publishing, and allied industries; chemicals and
allied products; products of petroleum and coal; rubber products; and leather
and leather products.
« State and local government data exclude, as nominal employees, elected
officials of small local units and paid volunteer firemen.
•Beginning with January 1956, class I railroads include only those having
annual operating revenues of $3,000,000 or more. This class formerly included
all railroads having annual operating revenues of $1,000,000 or more.
S ee footnote 1, p. 375.
N o t e .— Information on concepts, methodology, etc., is
given in a technical note on Measurement of Industrial
Employment, which appeared in the September 1953
Monthly Labor Review.
382
MONTHLY LABOR REVIEW, MARCH 1957
Table A-3: Production workers in mining and manufacturing industries
[In thousands]
1957
1956
Annual
average
Industry
Jan.
Dec.
Nov.
Oct.
Sept.
Aug.
July
June
May
Apr.
M ar.
Feb.
Jan.
1956
1955
Mining:
M etal_________
Iron..................
Copper........... .
Lead and zinc.
93.5
29.7
29.8
15. S
94.2
30.4
29.9
15.2
94.5
31.7
29.6
14.9
95.8
32.3
29.8
14.9
92.8
30.2
29.6
14.7
68.9
6. C
29.4
14.7
94.5
31.5
29.3
14.9
92.9
30.9
28.8
14.8
93.6
31.4
28. S
14.8
91.8
29.5
28. £
14.8
91.2
29.3
28.6
14.5
90.7
29.3
28.7
13.8
91.0
28.4
29.3
14.7
86.1
29.2
24.6
14.2
Anthracite..........
Bituminous coal.
31.8
213. S
30.4
212.5
29.9
212.6
29.3
212.0
29.6
208.8
28.6
163.1
28.8
206.1
24.2
203.7
28.6
203.0
29.1
203.5
30.8
205.6
29.9
204.8
29.1
204.1
30.3
198.7
Crude petroleum and natural-gas pro
duction:
Petroleum and natural-gas production
(except contract services)....................
129.5
129.3
129.3
132.5
136.4
137.6
134.8
128.5
128.6
127.6
128.3
128.4
130.9
129.4
94.6
97.2
98.5
99.3
99.5
97.9
98.5
96.4
95.1
91.4
89.1
89.5
95.7
Nonmetallic mining and quarrying...
M anufacturing.......... ......
Durable goods ».......
Nondurable goods ».
Ordnance and accessories.
F o o d a n d k in d r e d p r o d u c ts .............................
M e a t p r o d u c ts ................................. ..................
D a ir y p r o d u c ts ...................................................
C a n n in g a n d p r e s e r v in g —............................
G r a in -m ill p r o d u c ts ____________________
B a k e r y p r o d u c ts _______________________
S u g a r ........................... ............................................
C o n fe c tio n e r y a n d r e la te d p r o d u c ts ___
B e v e r a g e s ...............................................................
M isc e lla n e o u s food p r o d u c ts .......................
T o b a c c o m a n u fa c tu r e s ___________________
C ig a r e tte s ................................... ....................... ..
C ig a r s........................................... ...........................
T o b a c c o a n d s n u f f ______________________
T o b a c c o s te m m in g a n d r e d r y in g ..............
Textile-mill products................................ .
Scouring and combing plants................
Yarn and thread mills............................
Broad-woven fabric mills.......................
Narrow fabrics and small wares............
Knitting m ills.................. .....................
Dyeing and finishing textiles.................
Carpets, rugs, other floor coverings.......
Hats (except cloth and millinery).........
Miscellaneous textile goods....................
91.7
13,316 13,353 13,439 13,335 13,245 12,514 13,078 13,036 13,114 13,125 13,212 13,260 13,174 13,053
7,709 7,798 7,802 7,751 7, 583 7,541 7,081 7.602 7,613 7,674 7,621 7,692 7,751 7,630 7, 538
5,408 5, 518 5, 551 5,688 5,752 5,704 5,433 5,476 5, 423 5,440 5,504 5,520 5, 509 5,544 5; 515
81.6
82.8
81.8
81.6
81.6
79.6
83.2
83.4
81.7
84.2
83.7
85.7
87.1
83.1
93.8
1,030.1 1,082.4 1,131.1 1,225.8 1,312.0 1, 275.7 1,158.0 1,103.6 1,050. 7 1,023.3 1,020.7 1,013.0 1,021.8 1,117.1 1,103. 3
279.1 277.5 273.8 268.9 267.6 264.9 262.1 258.2 256.0 262.4 259.4 264.4 ' 266.3 ' 257.4
70.0
71.2
76.7
72.8
80.9
77.1
82.5
81.1
73.6
70.5
68.1
67.1
74.4
75. 3
160.7 195.8 288.3 389.7 353.0 238.4 188.2 159.4 146.9 140.1 140.0 141.1 209.8 199.7
82.9
86.9
82.5
86.0
87.9
88.2
86.8
83.8
82.9
83.8
83.4
84.0
85.1
87.8
173.4 175.4 176.3 174.0 174.7 173.9 174.7 171.6 170.0 169.3 169.4 170.3 172.8 172.1
36.8
40.2
38.6
25.0
22.4
22.6
22.5
21.8
21.4
21.4
22.0
25.5
27.0
27.0
71.2
69.6
72.3
72.7
64.1
60.2
56.3
57.7
60.3
63.7
66.3
67.0
65.0
65.5
116.9 122.7 122.5 125.2 127.4 132.3 128.6 120.2 116.9 114.5 110.3 110.2 120.8 119.9
91.4
93.5
96.0
94.8
97.7
98.9 101.9
98.4
95.3
94.1
95.0
92.2
95.9
98.6
89.4
96.6 100.8 109.8 112.7 102.6
79.5
77.3
79.8
79.4
81.6
89.7
94.9
92.0
95.0
30.8
30.9
31.2
30.7
31.0
31.2
30.7
30.7
30.2
30.4
30.4
30.8
30.8
30.0
33.2
33.5
32.9
32.7
32.3
32.6
31.0
32.8
33.7
34.0
35.5
35.2
33.3
36.5
5.7
5.7
5.9
5.9
5.7
5.8
6.0
6.0
6.0
6.1
6.1
6.2
5.9
6.3
26.9
43.1
33.2
30.7
40.5
9.8
10.0
10.0
9.5
11.1
17.7
22.7
22.0
22.2
932.2 943.2 948.9 951.6 948.8 949.7 922.0 959.6 963.1 971.0 980.5 989.0 990.9 960.2 982.3
5.7
5.8
5.6
5.6
5.9
5.7
5.7
5.6
5.7
6.0
6.0
5.9
5.8
5.9
110.5 110.9 110.2 110.6 110.9 109.6 112.7 113.9 115.7 117.1 118.6 118.8 113.3 120.4
421.2 422.4 423.2 423.2 426.4 414.2 432.3 432.4 436.1 438.0 440.0 442.5 429.3 439.6
25.4
26.1
26.0
25.6
26.0
25.5
26.1
24.8
26.6
26.9
27.2
27.2
26.2
26.6
199.2 203.9 207.1 205.0 205.7 197.7 203.8 201.8 200.2 202.8 205.0 203.4 203.1 201.7
73.2
74.1
73.0
74.3
74.0
74.3
70.0
75.0
76.7
78.1
78.8
79.0
75.0
78.0
42.4
42.4
40.5
42.2
39.4
43.2
42.5
44.3
45.2
45.7
46.0
45.9
43.3
44.2
10.8
10.5
10.6
10.4
10.0
10.8
11.1
11.1
10.8
11.5
12.0
12.2
11.0
11.7
53.9
53.1
51.3
52.9
52.0
49.8
51.0
52.9
54.4
54.0
55.4
56.0
53.2
54.2
Apparel and other finished textile
products_____ _____ ____________ 1,062.1 1,089. 5 1,087.9 1,091. 4 1,079.2 1,082.3 1,020.3 1,049.2 1,048.9 1,067.8 1,116.1 1,130.9 1,104. 8 1,080.8 1,077. 3
M en’s and boys’ suits and coats_____
110.5 109.9 110.2 111.0 111.1 104.7 110.2 110.2 107.4 109.7 111.0 109.7 ' 109.7 107.1
M en’s and boys’ furnishings and work
clothing.............................. .................
273.9 280.0 287.2 286.6 289.6 277.0 286.6 288.0 291.4 292.8 295.4 289.3 286.6 285.6
Women’s outerwear__ _____ _______
334.3 323.6 316.7 313.3 321.0 296.0 299.0 303.5 315.1 343.3 350.0 336.1 321.0 319. 5
Women’s, children’s undergarments...
115.1 116.8 116.0 114.4 112.5 105.6 110.7 109.2 112.1 114.4 114.4 111.3 112.6 107.9
Millinery....... ................ ........................
16.1
16.2
16.0
14.0
16.5
13.8
11.5
11.3
14.9
20.2
21.2
19.3
16.0
17.7
Children’s outerwear........ ....................
62.8
63.6 63.0
62.3
64.5
64.4
63.0
61.3
58.7
62.4
65.5
64.6
63.1
64.8
Fur goods................................................
9.4
9.8
10.3
9.7
10.0
8.4
9.5
9.5
5.6
6.7
7.0
7.9
9 3
8.7
Miscellaneous apparel and accessories..
54.2
56.1
57.1
56.9
57.5
51.4
55.7
53.8
54.7
55.8
55.3
53.2
55.1
54. 5
Other fabricated textile products..........
112.8 115.2 112.5 107.3 102.8
99.3 101.6 103.2 107.9 110.8 111.1 113.4 108.0 110.9
Lumber and wood products (except fur
niture)................................................ . 575.4 604.0 634.2 663.6 681.4 700.0 687.9 696.1 666.7 641.7 618.5 635.3 634.7 654.9 675.2
Logging camps and contractors.............
74.6
88.3 100.0 105.0 112.5 108.0 110.0
92.8
76.8
63.4
76.0
76.1
89.9
94.3
Sawmills and planing m ills................. .
326.2 338.8 351.1 359.2 368.2 365.6 369.1 358.9 350.2 343.7 347.9 346.1 352.1 363.4
Millwork, plywood, and prefabricated
structural wood products__________
117.2
102.6 105.8 110.0 114.8
113.9 114.0 112.2 111.7 109.1 109.4 111.1 110.9 117.7
Wooden containers_________________
50.2
50.2
51.3
50.9
50.7
50.7
52.2
52.0
52.0
51.7
51.2
51.2
51.2
51.0
Miscellaneous wood products.................
51.4
50.4
51.5
51.1
51.2
49.7
51.0
50.6
51.2
50.6
50.8
50.2
50.8
48.8
Furniture and fixtures............................... 310.6 317.8 317.6 322.1 321.3 316.1 303.8 310.5 310.8 315.0 318.3 321.9 321.7 316.4 309.3
Household furniture...............................
225.3 226.0 228.6 227.2 222.6 216.6 219.3 220.4 224.6 228.2 232.6 232.3 225.2 223.7
Office, public-building, and profes
sional furniture...................................
38.9
38.9
40.0
39.4
39.8
38.4
38.2
38.7
38.6
38.5
38.2
38.0
38.9
35.6
Partitions, shelving, lockers, and fix
tures........................ ...........................
31.2
31.9
31.6
30.1
31.5
27.6
30.5
29.7
29.3
29.7
29.6
30.4
30.2
29.5
Screens, blinds, and miscellaneous
furniture and fixtures..........................
22.4
22.6
22.4
21.9
21.2
22.6
22.0
22.5
22.5
21.9
21.5
21.0
22.1
20.5
See footnotes at end of table.
https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
383
A: EMPLOYMENT AND PAYROLLS
T able A-3: Production workers in mining and manufacturing industries —Continued
[In thousands]
Annual
average
1956
1957
Industry
Jan.
Dec.
Nov.
Oct.
Sept.
Aug.
Manufacturing—Continued
465.8 468.5 467.4 467.9 469.7 468.8
Paper and allied products____________
237.6 235.4 235.7 238.0 239.1
Pulp, paper, anti paperboard mills
Paperhoarti containers anti boxes __
125.1 127.0 126.5 125.3 124.1
105.8 105.0 105.7 106.4 105.6
Other paper and allied products______
Printing, publishing, and allied Indus561.3 567.6 563.8 563.5 556.8 550.1
trips
_ ______________
162.7 160.0 160.0 158.4 156.1
Newspapers
__________________
27.7
28.9
29.0
28.5
29.1
Period inala
_ ______________
35.4
33.8
34.8
34.3
34.3
B o o k s.-._____ _________________
185.5 184.1 183.9 181.7 180.6
Commercial printing_______________
49.2
47.5
49.0
48.7
48.2
"Lithography
_ ________________
13.2
14.2
14.1
14.7
14.5
(Treating eartis
________________
37.9
38.2
38.6
38.7
38.6
■Rnnkhindlng and related Industries. ._
Miscellaneous publishing and printing
54.3
54.3
52.4
52.6
54.1
services»________________________
547.7 552.0 550.3 554.4 552.5 548.7
Chemicals and allied products.... .........
75.9
75.6
75.4
76.0
76.6
Industrial inorganic chemicals----------215.3 213.5 213.7 214.5 217.2
Industrial organic chemicals-------------56.5
56.3
56.2
56.6
56.7
F>mgs anti metiipines
Soap, cleaning and polishing prepara29.9
29.9
30.6
29.7
30.3
tions
_ ___________________
47.7
46.7
46.7
46.8
47.1
Paints, pigments, and fillers_________
7.2
7.2
7.2
7.2
7.2
Gum and wood chemicals___________
24.2
21.7
25.4
24.1
25.8
Fertilizers
____ ___ ___ _________
31.5
26.0
30.0
30.7
29.7
Vegetable anti animal oils ariti fats
67.3
65.8
66.0
66.0
66.3
Miscellaneous chemicals____________
Products of petroleum and coal...... ........ . 173.1 173.8 174.8 175.2 176.2 177.9
132.6 132.9 132.3 133.1 135.1
Petroleum refining_________________
Coke, other petroleum and coal prod41.2
42.8
41.9
42.9
43.1
nets____________________________
217.0 216.3 198.9 220.0 215.4 210.8
Rubber products____________________
89.8
89.8
91.7
91.6
74.8
Tires and inner tubes______________
19.2
18.4
18.7
19.1
19.3
P.nbber footwear
_____________
101.8
105.4
109.2
104.5
108.1
Other rubber p ro d u cts_____________
Leather and leather products__________ 329.1 328.4 326.9 328.0 328.9 337.5
39.9
39.5
39.8
39.6
39.1
Leather: tanned, curried, and finished.
3.5
3.5
3.6
3.5
3.5
Industrial leather belting and packing..
15.5
15.3
15.7
15.0
Knot: and shoe cut st.nnk and findings
15.8
214.4 211.0 209.7 211.9 218.7
Footwear (except rubber)___________
14.0
12.9
13.1
13.2
12.7
Luggage____ __- ___ ____ ___
28.9
26.4
27.8
29.8
29.1
TTandbags and small leather eoods____
17.0
16.5
17.0
17.1
15.7
Gloves and miscellaneous leather goods. ___
Stone, clay, and glass products................. 457.4 473.2 478.9 484.3 477.8 482.4
30.5
31.4
30.7
31.1
31.1
Flat glass
_ ____________________
84.6
85.0
81.7
77.7
83.1
Ola^s anti glassware, pressed or blown _
Glass products made of purchased
14.9
16.1
15.9
15.4
16.0
glass
- ____________________
37.5
36.6
36.4
36.8
37.1
Clpm put ; hydraulic
__ __________
79.1
73.6
74.9
77.5
78.9
Structural clay products.. ------- ------48.9
47.4
48.1
48.3
48.8
Pottery anti related products__ _____
Concrete, gypsum, and plaster prod96.4
98.3
99.9 101.1
94.0
ucts __ _ _ ____________________
17.8
18.0
17.8
18.0
18.1
Cut-stone and stone products________
Miscellaneous nonmetallic mineral
71.7
72.2
72.8
72.8
72.6
products
____________________
Primary metal industries_____________ 1,137.3 1,136. 5 1,132. 0 1,131.6 1,126.2 1,090.8
Blast furnaces, steelworks, and rolling
567. 4 567.1 568.9 572.4 552.3
m ills ._________________________
206.9 205.5 205.7 199.3 203.3
Iron and steel foundries___ _________
Primary smelting and refining of non58.5
58.2
53.7
59.0
58.8
ferrous metals_______ _________
Secondary smelting and refining of non10.0
10.4
10.4
10.2
10.1
ferrous metals___________________
Roiling, drawing, andjalloying of non86.2
91.4
90.5
91.9
91.7
ferrous metals___________ _______
61.5
63.9
67.0
66.6
67.1
Nonferrous foundries_______________
Miscellaneous primary metal Indus134. C 132.4 131.3 129.7 123.8
tries ___________________ —_____
Fabricated metal products (except ordnance, machinery, and transporta
tion equipment)___ ______________ 900.5 910.1 911.3 910.5 88 5 .4 864.1
54.2
5 1 .2
54.4
4 6 .3
46 .5
Tin cans and other tinware__________
112. C
122.7
119. S 115.3
123.8
Cutlery, hand tools, and hardware____
Heating apparatus (except electric) and
92 .0
9 3 .6
8 6 .2
8 9 .2
93.1
plumbers’ supplies_______________
235.8
240.6
239.2
241.1
240.4
Fabricated structural metal products. .
Metal stamping, coating, and engrav
181.3
188.5
205.2
209.7
210.1
ing . . _________________________
36. S
4 0 .2
37. E
40 .3
4 1 .0
Lighting fixtures________ _________
4 9 .4
47.1
52 .3
5 2 .7
51 .6
Fabricated wire products..................... .
Miscellaneous fabricated metal prod105.4
110.2
107.7
109.4
108.8
ucts........................................................
See footnotes at end of table.
https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
July
June
May
Apr.
Mar.
Feb.
Jan.
1956
1955
460.6
235.7
120.4
104.5
465.6
237.9
123.1
104.6
462.4
234.3
122.2
105.9
460.2
232.3
121.2
106.7
457.1
231.3
121.0
104.8
455.5
230.4
121.0
104.1
457.6
231.5
121.4
104.7
463.7
235. 2
123.2
105.3
452.2
228.9
120.2
103.1
543.6
154.7
27.8
33.5
178.3
46.5
13.5
37.1
549.1
157.2
28.0
33.5
179.7
47.1
13.9
37.5
546.6
157.0
28.2
33.5
178.6
46.5
13.1
37.3
547.4
155.7
28.9
33.8
178.3
47.2
12.7
37.5
544.8
153.7
28.8
33.4
179.5
47.5
12.7
36.8
540.3
153.0
28.3
32.6
178.3
47.1
12.6
36.3
538.2
150.7
28.3
32.2
179.7
46.4
12.9
35.6
551.3
156.6
28.5
33.8
180.8
47.6
13.5
37.5
528.6
150.4
26.9
31.1
173.8
46.9
13.9
34.3
52.2
543.5
75.5
213.3
56.7
52.2
552.4
76.5
219.1
55.5
52. 4
559.4
76.0
219.5
54. 4
53. 3
569.0
75.8
221.2
55.9
52.4
566.1
76.0
221.1
55.6
52.1
557.5
75.8
220.6
55. 6
52.4
556.2
76.0
219.7
56.0
53.0
555.2
75. y
217.6
55.9
51. ò
546.1
74.1
215.0
56.1
29.7
47.2
7.1
22.7
25.2
66.1
169.6
133.6
29.8
47.2
6.8
25.4
25.7
66.4
174.5
132.4
29.4
46.9
7.1
34.4
26.7
65.0
171.6
129.9
29.8
46.9
7.0
39.7
28.1
64.6
171.3
130.0
29.9
46.9
7.1
36.6
28.9
64.0
171.8
130.0
29.6
46.9
7.1
28.9
30.0
63.0
169.7
129.3
30.1
46.9
7.1
27.1
30.9
62.4
170.5
130.1
29.9
47.0
7.1
28.0
28.7
65.1
173.0
131.7
30.1
46.5
6.8
28.0
28.7
60.8
173.7
132.2
36.0
208.0
90.0
18.9
99.1
330.0
39.0
3.4
15.3
215.7
13.6
26.4
16.6
472.9
29.8
77.6
42.1
208.5
90.1
19.4
99.0
333.6
39.7
3.4
15.7
219.0
14.2
25.0
16.6
484.2
29.7
83.2
41.7
216.0
91.6
20.0
104.4
324.8
39.5
3.7
15.1
214.3
13.9
22.5
15.8
479.9
30.2
82.6
41.3
218.7
91.8
20.3
106.6
331.5
40.1
3.9
15.3
218.1
13.5
25.0
15.6
478.2
30.6
83.1
41.8
220.8
92.6
20.7
107.5
344.1
40.3
3.9
16.4
226.5
13.5
28.3
15.2
472.2
29.9
82.0
40.4
224.5
93.2
20.9
110.4
349.5
40.6
4.0
17.3
229.8
13.3
29 7
14.8
465.8
30.3
81.2
40.4
229.6
93.7
21.0
114.8
345.0
40.7
4.0
17.0
228.4
12.8
28.0
14.1
467.5
31.3
80.2
41.3
216.2
90. 5
19.7
106.0
334.3
39. 8
3.7
15.8
218.3
13.4
27.3
16.0
476.5
30.6
81.9
41.5
216.3
90.2
18.2
107.9
340.4
40.5
3.7
15.7
222.8
14.2
28.8
14.7
462.1
30.1
80.0
14.0
37.0
79.1
45.9
14.4
37.1
80.6
48.4
15.4
36.4
77.3
49.3
15.9
36.1
76.5
49.5
15.7
35.5
76.6
49.0
15.8
35.3
74.6
47.2
16.2
36.0
74.2
48.0
15. 4
36. 5
76.9
48.2
15.0
35.8
73.5
47.7
100.7
18.2
101.4
18.5
99.0
18.4
96.2
18.2
92.6
18.0
90.9
17.5
90. 5
17.6
96. 8
18.0
91.7
17.6
72.2
70.7
73.5
72.1
71.3
72.9
73.0
70.6
70.9
743.0 1,117.7 1,117. 4 1,136.2 1,130.3 1,138. 4 1,141.0 1,095.7 1,084.0
210.6 563.8 557.1 568.2 563.3 566.5 566.5 535. 5 544.6
200.9 202.8 205.5 211.1 211.9 215.5 216.6 207.6 201.9
56.1
51.5
54. 9 54. 8 64.6
53. 5 53.6
55.6
57.1
9.9
9.8
10.1
10.3
10.3
10.5
10.3
10.2
9.6
91.4
60.3
94.8
60.9
96.8
62.5
97.7
63.5
95.4
64.1
95.2
66.0
95.6
67.8
93.2
64.2
91.2
64.1
112.8
130.0
130.5
130.6
130.7
131.2
130.6
128.9
121.1
825.1
5 3 .9
108.8
870.4
53 .4
114.7
880 .9
5 1 .7
119. C
894.5
5 1 .3
124.8
8 9 3 .0
49 .0
126.1
89 9 .2
4 7 .8
127.4
912.5
46 .7
130.0
888 .3
50. 5
120. 5
892.9
5 1 .0
126.5
9 0 .5
215.6
9 4 .5
23 2 .8
9 5 .8
226.5
9 6 .4
224.0
9 6 .7
220.7
9 7 .6
218.0
9 7 .4
216.8
9 3 .8
229.1
9 8 .9
209.0
176.2
35. S
45.3
184.5
34 .7
4 7 .8
192.3
3 6 .4
4 9 .0
198.3
3 8 .2
50 .0
199.1
3 8 .7
5 0 .3
203.5
3 9 .5
51.1
211.3
4 1 .8
5 2 .9
196.8
3 8 .3
5 0 .0
204.5
41. 2
5 0 .5
99 .5
108.0
110.2
111. 51
112.4
114.3
115.6
109.3
111. 3
384
MONTHLY LABOR REVIEW, MARCH 1957
Table A-3: Production workers in mining and manufacturing industries
Continued
[In thousands]
1957
1956
Annual
average
Industry
Jan.
Dec.
Nov.
Oet.
Sept.
Aug.
July
June
May
Manufacturing—Continued
Machinery (except electrical).................. 1,290.3 1, 285. 5 1,272.9 1, 263.6 1,262.3 1, 257.2 1,253. 5 1,278. 2 1,280.9
Engines and turbines...........................
62.6
62.3
61.8
60.6
59.7
55.2
55.6
55.7
Agricultural machinery and tractors..
99.7
94. 5 89.0
97.0
96.3 100.6 106.3 107.7
Construction and mining m achinery..
113.0 113.7 115.0 115.0 115.0 113.2 116.1 112.6
Metalworking machinery___________
227.7 225.5 223.4 222.7 220.3 218.9 222.2 223.7
Special-industry machinery (except
metalworking machinery).................
137.3 137.3 136.7 137.5 137.0 137.5 138.3 137.4
General industrial m achinery......... .
185.0 184.4 183.0 182.3 180.9 180.3 179. 4 178. C
Office and store machines and devices
100.9 100.1
98.7
93.8
95.8
94.9
96.5
96.3
Service-industry and household ma
chines...................................................
141.1 138.3 140.2 141.0 141.5 143.7 152.9 155.4
Miscellaneous machinery parts______
218.2 216.8 215.8 212.4 210.7 209.2 210.9 214.1
Electrical machinery.................................
891.2 904.3 918.3 913.8 891.4 877.7 854.3 866.4 871.6
Electrical generating, transmission,
distribution, and industrial appara
tus........................................................ .
304.2 304.2 306.5 302.9 298.9 295.9 300.1 299.9
Electrical appliances.............................
41.4
41.5
42.2
42.1
42.6
38.8
41. C 41.5
Insulated wire and cable....... ................
19. 8
19.7
19.7
19.1
18.6
18.3
19.1
18.7
Electrical equipment for vehicles..........
63.7
62.2
59.3
55.5
53.0
51.5
52.9
57.2
Electric lamps_____________________
28.4
28.5
28.5
28.3
28.1
28.5
28.3
28.3
Communication equipment___ _____
407.8 422.8 418.4 403.1 397.1 384.9 387.2 386.9
Miscellaneous electrical products____
39.0
39.4
39.2
39.9
39.9
36.4
38.2
38.7
Transportation equipment___ _____
1,416. 8 1,449. 4 1,402.0 1,318. 9 1,205.0 1, 234.9 1, 249.9 1, 268.5 1,295.3
Automobiles___________ ________
698.9 669.1 603.8 503.6 541.3 560.6 574.2 613.2
Aircraft and parts..............................
577.9 568.6 554.3 544.9 534.9 523.1 522.5 512.9
Aircraft....... .................................... .
365.8 360.3 351.5 346.5 342.0 333.1 332.1 323.2
Aircraft engines and parts...................
114.6 111.9 109.0 105.8 102.1 101.4 102.1 101.7
Aircraft propellers and parts........... .
12.5
12.1
11.7
11.4
10.8
10.6
10.2
10.6
Other aircraft parts and equipment.
85.0
82.1
84.3
81.2
80.0
78.0
77.7
77.8
Ship and boat building and repairing.
119.4 113.6 108.6 106.6 107.0 114.3 116.0 113.0
Shipbuilding and repairing________
100.3
95.5
91.4
89.8
90.9
95.3
95.4
90.5
Boatbuilding and repairing________
19.1
18.1
17.2
16.8
16.1
19.0
22.5
20.6
Railroad equipment...........................
46.1
43.0
42.0
40.6
42.7
43.6
47.3
47.9
Other transportation equipment_____
7.1
9.2
8.7
9.3
9.0
8.3
8.3
8.5
I n s tr u m e n ts a n d r e la te d p r o d u c ts .............. .
L a b o r a to r y , s c ie n tific , a n d en g in e e r in g
in s tr u m e n ts ................................................ ..
M e c h a n ic a l m e a su r in g a n d c o n tr o llin g
in s tr u m e n ts .....................................................
235.2
Optical instruments and lenses........... .
S u r g ica l, m e d ic a l, an d d e n ta l in s t r u
m e n t s _____________ ______ _____________
O p h th a lm ic g o o d s .............................................
P h o to g r a p h ic a p p a r a tu s ...................... ..........
W a tc h e s a n d c lo c k s ____________________
Miscellaneous manufacturing Industries.^
Jewelry, silverware, and platedware__
Musical instruments and parts.............
Toys and sporting goods...___ _____
Pens, pencils, other office supplies____
Costume jewelry, buttons, notions___
Fabricated plastics products.............
Other manufacturing industries....... .
382.3
Mar.
Feb.
Jan.
1956
1955
1,291.8 1,281.0 1,274.3 1,261.3 1, 273.0 1,178.3
57.1
57.1
57.0
58.5
56.3
53.6
112.; 114.3 115.7 119.2 104.5 113.3
113.5 112.1 110.7 108.0 113.5
96.6
222.5 221.4 219.3 217.7 222.4 202.3
137.0
178.;
94.8
137.5
176.0
92.9
136.7
174.1
91.7
134.3
171.8
90.0
137.1
179.5
95.7
127.9
160.7
85.6
159.8
216.5
153.9
215.8
152.4
216.7
147.9
216.1
147.3
214.5
140.3
198.0
874.0
841.5
848.6
853.7
877.5
823.2
301.0 275.8
43. C 41.1
18. S 19.0
60.2
60.8
28.1
23.2
384.1 383.5
38.8
38.1
274.7
40.6
18.8
63.0
23.2
389.4
38.9
271.2
39.8
18.9
68.5
22.9
393.5
38.9
294.3
41.3
19.1
59.0
27.1
397.8
38.9
269.3
37.2
17.7
65.6
24.0
372.5
36.9
1,332.4 1,353.7 1,392. 4 1, 448.7 1,330.3 1,399.4
655.3 678.1 713.2 772.4 633.2 ' 740.4
512.0 511.5 519.1 517.3 532.7 504.9
324.3 323.8 332.1 331.9 338.2 322.4
100.9 100.9
99.6
98.3 104.2 95.3
10.0
9.9
9.9
9.8
10.8
9.3
76.8
76.9
77.5
77.3
79.5
77.9
110.0 109.9 106.3 105.9 110.9 105.9
87.1
87.1
83.8
84.1
90.9
85.7
22.9
22.8
22.5
21.8
20.0
20.2
47.6
46.8
46.3
46.2
45.3
40.9
7.5
7.4
7.5
6.9
8.2
7.3
230.9 231.4 230.9 230.5 230.4 232.8 224.5
236.2
237.3
237.1
235.4
233.3
228.5
41.5
41.5
41.1
40.0
39.1
38.5
38.7
38.1
37.6
37.3
36.1
35.5
38.8
33.9
60.7
10.5
61.4
10.5
61.2
10.5
59.8
10.6
59.0
10.4
57.7
10.4
58.3
10.6
58.5
10.7
59.5
10.7
59.7
10.8
59.5
10.8
59.8
10.8
59.6
10.6
58.5
10.6
30.6
22.0
42.8
28.1
30.5
21.9
42.8
28.7
30.1
22.2
42.8
29.2
30.1
22.2
43.3
29.4
30.1
22.3
43.9
28.5
29.5
22.2
43.1
27.1
29.9
22.6
43.1
27.9
29.8
22.6
42.5
28.7
29.7
22.7
42.3
28.9
29.3
22.5
42.3
29.0
29.4
22.4
42.5
29.8
29.2
22.4
42.3
30.4
29.8
22.3
42.9
28.8
27.9
20.5
43.1
30.0
397.7
42.3
16.8
71.6
23.8
49.4
71.9
121.9
415.3
42.3
16.9
82.9
24.4
50.4
72.9
125.5
423.5
43.1
16.7
88.3
24.7
52.2
72.4
126.1
414.9
42.1
16.4
87.2
24.6
51.9
69.8
122.9
404.4
40.7
16.2
84.0
24.1
51.5
67.0
120.9
380.6
38.0
15.4
78.5
23.1
48.3
64.8
112.5
395.2
39.4
15.9
81.8
23.5
49.0
66.8
118.8
395.0
39.8
16.0
79.1
23.5
48.0
68.3
120.3
394.1
41.4
15.9
75.3
23.3
48.7
68.2
121.3
397.7
42.3
16.1
72.0
23.5
51.7
69.0
123.1
399.7
43.7
16.0
70.3
23.3
54.1
69.3
123.0
392.4
42.9
15.7
66.5
22.7
53.1
69.6
121.9
1 See footnote 1, table A-2. Production and related workers include work
ing foremen and all nonsupervisory workers (including leadmen and trainees)
engaged in fabricating, processing, assembling, inspection, receiving, storage,
handling, packing, warehousing, shipping, maintenance, janitorial, watch
man services, products development, auxiliary production for plant’s own
https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
Apr.
231.1
401.1 395.5
41. 5 42.3
16.2
15.3
78.5
73.0
23.7
22.8
50.6
53.6
69.0
66.4
121.6 122.1
use (e. g., powerplant), and recordkeeping and other services closely associ
ated with the above production operations.
3 See footnote 2, table A-2.
* See footnote 3, table A-2.
See footnote 1, p. 375.
385
A: EMPLOYMENT AND PAYROLLS
T able A -4: Indexes of production-worker employment and weekly payrolls in manufacturing industries1
[1947-49=100]
Period
1939:
1940:
1941:
1942:
1943:
1944:
1945:
1946:
1947:
1948:
1949:
1950:
1951:
Average— .......................
Average............................
Average....... ....................
Average...........................
Average-....... - ................
Average............................
Average...........................
Average....... ....................
Average.—.......................
Average-------- ------ -----Average— .......................
Average..........................
Average— .......................
66.2
71.2
87.9
103.9
121.4
118.1
104.0
97.9
103.4
102.8
93.8
99.6
106.4
Average..........................
Average..........................
Average.........................
Average..........................
A v e r a g e -------------------
106.3
111.8
101.8
105.5
106.5
136.6
151.4
137.7
152.5
161.3
1956: January.........................
February___________
March______________
April...............................
M ay__________ ____ June_____ __________
J u l y .........................
August____
_____
107.2
106.8
106.1
106.0
105.4
105.7
101.2
107.1
159.1
157.7
157.9
158.2
157.3
158.2
151.0
161.4
1952:
1953:
1954:
1955:
1956:
29.9
34.0
49.3
72.2
99.0
102.8
87.8
81.2
97.7
105.1
97.2
111.7
129.8
Employ Weekly
payrolls
ment
Period
Employ Weekly
payrolls
ment
Period
Employ Weekly
payrolls
ment
1956: September__________
October_____________
November__________
December.............. ......
107.8
108.7
108.0
107.7
1957: January........................
106.0
165.8
168.7
167.7
170.9
• See footnote 1, tables A-2 and A-3.
See footnote 1, p. 375.
Table A-5: Government civilian employment and Federal military personnel
[In thousands]
1955
1956
Annual
average
Unit of Government
Total civilian' employ
ment 1..............................
Dec.
Nov.
Oct.
Sept.
Aug.
July
June
7,656
7,342
7,298
7,213
6,960
6,947
7,150
May
7,203
Apr.
7,130
Mar.
7,122
Feb.
7,084
Jan.
7,033
Dec.
7,324
1956
1955
7,176
6, 915
2,201 2,202
2,196
2,208
22.1
22.1
22.1
4.3
21.9
4.3
22.1
4.3
21.9
4.3
21.9
4.3
21.9
4.3
21.7
4.3
233.7
232.7
228.5
228.6
228.7
228.6
228.1
234.9
231.2
230.0
207.6
207.8
207.9
207.9
207.6
2,188
2,208
2,193
2,161.7
2,187.4
2,410.0
2,134.0
2,130.0
2,142.1
2,135.8
2,150.0
2,182.0
2,166.
6
Executive..................... 2, 507. 7 2,174. 7 2,175. 9 2,169.1 2,181.1
Department of De
1, 034.1 1,027.9
fense----- ----------- 1, 034.8 1, 037. 5 1,041. 0 1,038.8 1,046. 5 1,046. 2 1,040.2 1,030. 0 1,025.8 1,022.9 1,022. 9 1,022.6 1,023.8
Post Office Depart539.6
530.0
790.5
510.6
508.7
509.4
509.4
509.9
506.1
509.8
510.1
511.4
518.9
514.0
856.9
613. 7 603.8
595.7
598.6
600.5
603.6
610.0
606.8
620.3
624.8
625.6
618.9
618.3
620.9
Other agencies------- 616.1
Federal employment *......
Legislative-..................
Judicial------------------
2,534
22.0
4.4
22.0
4.5
4.4
4.4
District of Colum bia»..
239.2
231.4
231.2
230.3
233.0
Executive--------------Department of De
fense___________
Post Office Depart-
218.3
210.4
210.1
209.2
211.9
212.8
211.7
89.7
90.1
89.8
Other agencies------Legislative...................
Judicial-----------------State and local employ
m ent----------- -------
88.0
88.1
8.8
88.3
88.2
8.6
8.6
5,141
5,096
5,017
1, 320.8 1,321.0 1,317.6
Local........................... 3^ 800.9 3, 819.9 3; 778.4
2, 347.9 2, 349.7 2,316.0
O th er.......................... 2, 773.8 2 ; 791.2 2, 780.0
Total military personnel *...
2,809
2,827
A rm y.................................
Air F orce..........................
Navy_________________
Marine Corps.....................
Coast Guard......................
992.3
915.0
672.6
200.3
28.6
1, 002.4
2,829
1,278.0 1,252.1 1,252.6
3,738.8 3,500.3 3,486. 7
2,192. 2 1,878. 5 1,877.2
2,824. 6 2,873.9 2,862.1
2,824
1,004.1 1,005. 6
' 916.0 ' 911. 5
676.9
677.7
202.1 202.8 201.5
28.7
28.8
28.8
' 918.3
675.0
https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
4.1
89.3
110.1
9.3
112.4
111.0
19.8
.7
19.6
.7
20.2
19.8
.7
4,924
4,877
4,888
4,962
4,727
1,291.1 1,296.8 1,270. 9 1, 269.2 1,260.0 1,242.0 1,245.6 1,281.0
3,665.4 3, 730.1 3,690.8 3,690. 9 3, 664.1 3, 635. 2 3,642. 5 3, 681.4
2,125.3 2,245.0 2, 242.0 2,250.1 2,241.1 2, 210.4 2,200.6 2,189.2
2,831.2 2,781.9 2, 719.7 2,710.0 2,683.0 2, 666. 8 2,687. 5 2, 773.2
2,848
2,916
2,893
2,908
2,841
2,865
2,879
2,835
1,215.4
3, 511. 2
88.1
.7
.7
.7
5,027
4,962
4,960
.7
9.3
2,060.8
2, 665.8
3,025
2,839
2,827
1,013.5 1,027.3 1,025. 8 1,039.4 1, 054. 7 1,064.4 1,060.5 1,070.7 1,083.6 1,030.1 1,165.8
955. 3
916.1
936.7
934.2
938.7
911.5
908.2
911.6
910.0
909.0
909.0
672. 7 668.8
666.7
666.2 671.6 674.5 669.4 669.8
669.9
673.6
675.1
200.4
205.
9
200.0
199.5
199.7
200.5
200.8 198.6 198.5 199.4
200.9
28.8
28.6
29.3
29.2
29.3
29.1
28.9
28.7
28.4
28.7
28.7
Data refer to Continental United States only.
a Data are prepared by the Civil Service Commission.
8 Includes all Federal civilian employment in Washington Standard
1
21.6
16.1
4,957
5,122
21.9
4.3
8.5
110.7
4,739
20.4
.7
21.4
4.2
209.4
4,752
.7
4.3
21.6
88.6
20.3
.7
20.3
.7
20.4
.7
2,214
210.3
.7
20.2
114.1
2,436
2,156
88.4
20.2
113.6
2,160
214.6
20.4
.7
112.4
2,162
88.5
8.5
113.3
113.5
16. 7
113.7
2,168
88.1 88.3 88.4
8.5
8.6 8.6 8.7
111.1 111.1 111.0 110.8
20.2 20.1 20.1 20.0
.7
8.6
8.7
113.1
2,176
Metropolitan Area (District of Columbia and adjacent Maryland and
Virginia counties).
4
Data refer to Continental United States and elsewhere.
See footnote 1, p. 375.
386
MONTHLY LABOR REVIEW, MARCH 1957
T able A-6: Employees in nonagricultural establishments for selected States 1
[In th o u s a n d s ]
1956
1955
S ta te
D ec.
2
N ov.
O ct.
S e p t.
A ug.
7 3 6 .0
2 4 6 .7
3 3 4 .8
4, 4 7 5 .8
4 7 3 .2
7 2 0 .7
23 9 .1
3 2 6 .8
4 ,4 4 6 . 5
4 7 0 .2
J u ly
June
M ay
A p r.
M ar.
Feb.
7 0 5 .4
2 4 2 .0
3 2 9 .7
4, 348. 7
4 6 3 .6
7 0 6 .7
2 3 9 .7
329. (
4 ,2 8 8 . c
4 5 1 .5
7 2 0 .0
2 3 9 .6
3 2 4 .9
4, 247. 5
4 4 4 .8
7 1 7 .0
2 3 8 .3
32 4 .4
4, 212. 4
4 3 8 .2
7 1 2 .3
2 3 5 .5
3 1 7 .1
4 ,1 6 8 . 5
4 3 3 .7
7 0 9 .9
2 3 4 .6
3 1 7 .7
4 ,1 3 0 . 4
4 3 6 .3
Jan.
D ec.
A n n u al A verage
1955
1954
7 2 1 .0
2 3 6 .8
3 3 1 .1
4, 263. 4
4 4 8 .6
6 9 0 .8
2 2 1 .2
3 1 7 .5
4 ,0 8 7 .5
4 3 3 .2
6 6 5 .5
2 0 4 .5
307 8
3 ,8 5 9 .8
4 0 6 .9
A l a b a m a ___________
A r i z o n a __________
A r k a n s a s __________
C a l i f o r n i a ____________
C o l o r a d o ___________
7 4 4 .9
2 5 6 .2
3 3 3 .8
4, 554.1
4 7 0 .5
7 3 8 .5
7 3 9 .0
2 5 2 .1
2 4 8 .4
3 3 4 .1
335. (
4 ,4 6 9 . C 4 ,4 8 6 . 2
4 6 6 .5
4 7 2 .2
C o n n e c tic u t2
D i s t r i c t o f C o l u m b i a 2_______
F l o r i d a 2________________
G e o r g ia 2______
I d a h o _____. . . . .
9 3 0 .1
5 1 7 .0
1 ,1 2 8 . 6
9 9 5 .5
1 4 3 .0
9 1 4 .6
5 0 5 .7
1 ,0 7 9 . 2
9 8 5 .3
1 4 4 .4
9 1 1 .7
9 1 0 .6
5 0 3 .2
5 0 0 .9
1 ,0 3 9 . C 1 ,0 1 5 .2
982. {
9 8 0 .3
1 4 6 .6
1 4 7 .5
9 0 4 .7
9 0 9 .6
9 0 3 .8
5 0 4 .2
5 0 4 .2
502. C
1 ,0 0 6 .1 1, 003. C 1 ,0 1 5 .3
9 7 6 .7
9 6 3 .5
9 6 9 .9
1 4 4 .0
1 4 5 .9
1 4 4 .9
9 0 3 .4
4 9 8 .4
1 ,0 3 0 . 5
9 6 5 .8
1 3 9 .7
8 9 8 .7
4 9 7 .4
1 ,0 5 1 . 3
9 6 1 .6
1 3 6 .3
8 9 0 .0
4 9 4 .9
1 ,0 5 8 .0
9 5 9 .1
1 3 4 .0
8 8 4 .3
4 9 2 .9
1 ,0 5 5 . 6
9 5 7 .2
1 3 2 .3
8 8 4 .3
4 9 2 .4
1 ,0 4 5 .8
9 5 5 .0
1 3 3 .3
9 1 0 .5
5 0 9 .1
1 ,0 4 1 .3
9 7 8 .9
1 4 0 .7
8 6 8 .9
4 9 4 .6
9 5 1 .0
9 3 6 .7
1 3 7 .5
855 9
490 9
8 6 8 .9
8 9 1 .3
1 3 2 .3
I l l i n o i s __________
I n d i a n a 2_________
I o w a 2_____ _________
K a n s a s _________
L o u i s i a n a ______ _________
3, 525. 7
1 ,4 3 6 . 2
6 6 3 .9
5 5 6 .9
7 5 0 .4
3, 4 9 1 .3
1, 422. 4
6 5 7 .6
5 5 4 .3
7 4 1 .3
3 ,4 9 0 . 7 3, 477. 7
1 ,4 2 5 .5 1, 424. 2
6 6 5 .2
6 6 7 .3
554. C
5 5 4 .6
7 3 5 .9
7 3 4 .7
3, 449. 4
1 ,4 0 7 . 7
6 6 1 .2
5 4 9 .9
7 2 9 .8
3, 4 1 2 .8
1 ,3 4 4 . 3
656. 5
5 5 5 .0
7 2 5 .9
3 ,4 7 1 . 5
1 ,4 2 3 .8
6 5 9 .6
5 5 7 .6
7 2 4 .1
3 ,4 3 6 .9
1, 4 2 0 .0
6 5 2 .4
5 5 4 .0
7 1 8 .6
3, 4 2 4 .8
1 ,4 2 0 . 5
6 4 8 .2
5 4 8 .3
7 1 7 .6
3 ,4 1 8 . 4
1 ,4 1 2 .3
6 3 8 .2
5 4 5 .9
7 1 5 .9
3, 403. 7
1 ,4 0 7 .8
6 3 4 .9
5 3 6 .4
7 1 2 .8
3 ,4 1 3 . 5
1, 412. 3
6 3 7 .5
5 3 7 .7
7 1 4 .2
3, 507. 6
1, 449. 7
6 5 7 .6
5 5 0 .8
7 3 5 .3
3, 3 7 5 .0
1, 393. 2
' 6 4 1 .3
5 4 7 .5
7 0 5 .1
3, 2 9 0 .3
1 ,3 2 9 . 3
' 6 2 4 .5
542 3
6 9 4 .1
M
M
M
M
M
2 7 8 .8
8 7 8 .5
1 ,8 9 2 . 7
2 ,4 5 1 .1
9 0 0 .0
2 7 8 .0
8 6 8 .7
1 ,8 5 9 . 0
2, 423. 6
9 0 0 .5
2 8 1 .9
8 6 4 .0
1 ,8 6 0 . 6
2 ,3 8 4 .1
9 1 4 .0
2 8 4 .2
8 6 5 .6
1 ,8 5 5 .4
2, 3 0 4 .1
9 1 7 .7
2 9 0 .1
8 5 5 .4
1 ,8 6 4 .8
2, 2 9 6 .1
9 0 6 .2
2 8 6 .9
8 2 1 .6
1 ,8 4 1 .4
2, 2 8 9 .1
8 7 9 .7
2 8 5 .7
8 5 3 .1
1 ,8 6 4 .6
2, 3 4 0 .4
8 9 5 .0
2 7 0 .9
8 4 4 .2
1 ,8 4 2 .2
2 ,3 6 6 . 6
8 8 2 .6
2 6 2 .6
8 4 0 .1
1 ,8 2 8 . 2
2 ,4 0 1 .9
8 6 3 .5
2 6 3 .1
8 3 2 .3
1 ,8 1 5 . 5
2 ,4 0 1 .4
8 4 7 .4
2 6 6 .1
8 2 2 .2
1 ,8 0 7 .3
2, 411. 3
8 4 6 .2
2 6 7 .3
8 2 3 .9
1 ,8 0 2 . 7
2 ,4 5 8 . 5
8 5 3 .1
2 7 6 .2
8 4 8 .1
1 ,8 6 5 . 7
2, 543. 4
8 8 3 .9
2 7 2 .4
8 1 7 .8
1 ,8 0 0 . 3
2 ,4 3 7 .1
' 865. 2
269 5
7 9 0 .8
1, 7 7 4 .5
3 1 9 .4
' 8 5 4 .6
M i s s i s s i p p i ___
M is s o u r i2
M o n t a n a _________
N e b r a s k a 2________
N e v a d a . . _________
1 ,3 2 3 .0
1 6 3 .1
3 5 7 .1
8 5 .4
1 ,3 0 1 . 7
1 6 4 .4
3 5 8 .5
8 5 .0
1, 299. 4
1 6 9 .2
3 6 1 .0
8 6 .3
1 ,2 9 4 . 5
1 7 1 .5
3 5 9 .7
8 8 .9
1, 2 9 1 .1
1 7 2 .0
3 5 7 .2
9 1 .0
3 5 3 .0
1, 290. 5
1 7 0 .8
3 5 9 .2
9 0 .9
3 5 1 .4
1 ,3 0 0 . 2
1 6 9 .9
3 6 2 .1
8 8 .9
3 5 3 .3
1 ,2 8 9 .8
1 6 3 .3
3 5 7 .9
8 5 .3
3 5 2 .9
1, 288. 2
1 5 8 .0
3 5 5 .7
8 3 .1
3 5 1 .5
1, 2 8 7 .0
1 5 2 .7
3 5 3 .5
8 1 .2
3 4 9 .1
1, 2 7 4 .0
1 5 2 .2
3 4 9 .6
7 9 .7
3 5 0 .7
1, 278. 5
1 5 4 .7
3 5 0 .6
8 0 .4
3 6 5 .2
1, 3 2 1 .3
1 5 9 .6
3 5 8 .5
8 4 .7
3 5 2 .7
1, 277. 6
1 6 0 .1
3 5 5 .5
8 4 .0
3 3 9 .1
1, 2 5 4 .6
1 5 5 .0
3 4 8 .3
7 5 .7
N e w H a m p s h ir e
N e w J e r s e y . ________
N e w M e x ic o 2. . . .
N e w Y o r k ____
N o r t h C a r o l in a
1 8 4 .2
1, 922. 4
2 0 0 .3
6 ,1 2 4 . 5
1 ,0 6 8 . 8
1 8 2 .6
1, 909. 6
2 0 0 .5
6, 062. 9
1 ,0 6 3 . 9
1 8 4 .7
1, 9 0 7 .8
2 0 0 .4
6 ,0 5 9 .5
1 ,0 5 9 . 6
1 8 5 .7
1 ,9 1 0 .5
1 9 7 .4
6 ,0 2 6 . 3
1 ,0 5 7 . 2
1 8 8 .2
1, 9 0 8 .9
1 9 5 .4
5 ,9 9 7 . 7
1 ,0 4 6 .0
1 8 6 .1
1 ,8 9 7 . 5
1 9 5 .5
5, 907. 7
1 ,0 3 1 . 2
1 8 6 .0
1 ,9 0 4 .3
1 9 5 .0
5, 9 7 5 .3
1 ,0 3 7 .8
1 8 0 .7
1 ,8 7 4 . 0
1 9 1 .6
5, 931. 6
1 ,0 3 7 . 3
1 7 7 .7
1 ,8 6 9 . 5
1 8 9 .7
5, 9 0 0 .0
1 ,0 3 6 . 6
1 7 7 .8
1 ,8 5 2 .8
1 8 7 .6
5 ,8 9 3 . 7
1 ,0 3 9 . 4
1 7 8 .0
1 ,8 4 2 .3
1 8 3 .8
5 ,8 8 0 . 6
1 ,0 3 9 .8
1 7 7 .5
1 ,8 4 1 .5
1 8 3 .4
5 ,8 8 0 . 5
1 ,0 4 3 .6
1 8 2 .8
1 ,8 9 9 .8
1 8 8 .8
6 ,1 1 5 .5
1 ,0 6 8 .0
1 8 0 .2
1 ,8 5 3 . 0
1 8 1 .6
5, 9 0 6 .8
0 3 6 .9
1,
1 7 4 .6
1 ,8 1 9 . 5
1 7 4 .1
5 ,8 5 8 .9
1 ,0 0 1 .8
N o r th D a k o ta ..
O h io ______ . .
O k la h o m a 2 . .
O regon . . .
______
P e n n s y l v a n i a ___________
1 1 6 .7
3 ,1 9 2 . 9
5 7 7 .1
4 8 8 .1
3 ,8 1 6 .0
1 1 8 .8
3 ,1 5 4 .1
5 7 6 .3
4 9 3 .5
3, 777. 6
1 2 2 .0
3 ,1 6 2 . 4
5 7 5 .8
5 0 9 .5
3, 7 7 9 .0
1 2 2 .4
3 ,1 5 3 . 3
5 7 7 .7
5 2 4 .0
3, 7 5 4 .0
1 2 1 .4
3 ,1 1 8 . 4
5 7 3 .7
5 2 1 .0
3, 716. 9
1 2 0 .7
3, 0 1 8 .1
5 7 2 .8
5 1 1 .8
3, 5 2 9 .8
1 1 9 .5
3 ,1 2 7 . 6
5 7 6 .1
5 1 2 .9
3, 7 4 7 .1
1 1 6 .9
3 ,1 0 3 .9
5 7 4 .0
4 9 2 .4
3, 711. 5
1 1 3 .2
3 ,1 1 2 . 7
571. 7
4 8 0 .1
3, 705. 7
1 0 8 .9
3 ,0 8 4 . 3
5 6 9 .5
4 6 5 .1
3 ,6 7 1 . 5
1 0 8 .0
3 ,0 7 1 . 5
5 6 2 .3
4 5 8 .5
3, 6 5 2 .8
1 0 9 .1
3 ,0 8 6 . 6
5 6 5 .0
4 5 7 .6
3 ,6 5 3 .1
1 1 3 .7
3 ,1 8 5 . 0
' 579. 0
4 7 8 .4
3, 782. 4
1 1 3 .5
3, 064. 7
' 5 5 9 .8
4 7 2 .6
3, 6 6 3 .0
1 1 4 .5
2 ,9 8 6 . 2
5 3 7 .9
453 5
3 ,6 3 7 .1
R h o d e I s l a n d . . . _____
S o u t h C a r o l in a 2
S o u th D a k o ta
T en n essee.
T e x a s ... . .
3 0 0 .6
5 4 2 .7
1 2 5 .8
873. 7
2 ,4 5 4 .9
3 0 0 .2
5 3 5 .9
1 2 9 .9
8 6 1 .5
2 ,4 1 9 . 5
2 9 8 .2
5 3 5 .5
1 3 1 .9
8 6 4 .1
2, 410. 8
3 0 0 .0
5 3 6 .4
1 3 1 .8
8 6 2 .8
2, 402. 9
2 9 8 .6
5 3 3 .1
1 3 0 .4
8 5 7 .1
2, 387. 5
2 9 4 .6
5 2 7 .2
1 3 0 .7
8 5 3 .6
2 ,3 7 7 . 5
2 9 7 .3
5 3 4 .2
1 3 1 .5
8 5 3 .1
2 ,3 8 3 . 5
2 9 4 .8
5 3 2 .6
1 2 9 .3
8 5 4 .1
2, 3 5 4 .1
2 9 6 .6
5 3 4 .0
1 2 5 .3
8 5 3 .8
2, 344. 2
2 9 6 .0
5 3 3 .6
1 2 0 .1
8 5 1 .6
2 ,3 3 3 .0
2 9 5 .3
5 3 1 .7
119. 3
8 4 9 .2
2 ,3 1 6 .5
2 9 6 .4
5 3 1 .9
1 2 0 .2
8 5 2 .2
2, 3 1 3 .7
3 0 6 .0
5 4 6 .8
1 2 4 .3
879. 7
2 ,3 7 5 . 5
294. 7
5 2 4 .7
1 2 4 .4
8 4 6 .2
2 ,2 9 2 .4
288 5
5 0 9 .8
121. 9
8 2 1 .7
2, 2 0 6 .6
U t a h ____ . .
V e r m o n t _______________________
V i r g in ia 2 _____
W a s h in g to n 2
W e s t V i r g in ia 2
2 3 8 .1
1 0 6 .0
1 ,0 1 2 .0
7 9 4 .2
5 0 8 .4
2 3 9 .7
1 0 5 .0
9 9 9 .6
7 9 0 .4
5 0 1 .8
2 4 3 .3
1 0 6 .7
9 9 7 .0
7 9 9 .6
4 9 9 .5
2 4 5 .8
1 0 7 .5
9 8 9 .5
8 0 4 .9
4 9 6 .4
2 3 7 .5
1 0 8 .0
9 7 6 .6
7 9 2 .0
4 9 6 .2
2 3 2 .6
1 0 6 .3
9 7 2 .2
7 8 2 .6
4 7 9 .9
2 3 4 .1
1 0 6 .3
9 7 6 .6
781.1
4 9 6 .2
2 3 1 .4
1 0 4 .5
9 6 9 .4
7 6 5 .5
4 9 7 .6
2 2 8 .5
1 0 3 .0
9 5 8 .5
7 5 3 .8
4 9 0 .6
2 2 3 .2
1 0 2 .7
9 4 4 .3
7 3 9 .9
4 8 6 .0
2 1 8 .7
1 0 2 .0
9 3 8 .5
7 2 8 .0
4 8 2 .2
2 2 0 .7
1 0 1 .7
9 3 5 .0
7 3 0 .8
4 7 9 .9
2 3 0 .8
1 0 5 .1
9 5 8 .5
7 6 0 .3
4 9 8 .9
2 2 3 .3
1 0 1 .8
9 2 0 .4
7 5 6 .4
4 7 2 .7
2 1 0 .7
1 0 1 .4
882 7
728. 5
4 6 8 .2
W is c o n s in ... .
W y o m i n g _______ ______
1 ,1 5 5 .9
87. 2
1 ,1 4 6 . 2
8 8 .1
1 ,1 5 4 . 4
9 2 .0
1 ,1 7 1 .6
9 3 .0
1 ,1 5 8 .8
9 6 .4
1 ,1 4 8 .8
9 4 .2
1 ,1 3 9 .3
9 1 .4
1 ,1 2 5 . 2
8 5 .8
1 ,1 1 8 .5
8 2 .2
1 ,1 1 4 .0
8 0 .4
1 ,1 0 8 .9
7 9 .3
1 ,1 1 1 .2 1 ,1 1 4 .2
8 0 . 0|
8 5 .0
1 ,1 0 5 . 7
8 5 .8
1 ,0 6 4 .6
8 5 .6
a i n e ___________
a r y l a n d __________
a ssa ch u setts 2
i c h i g a n . , - . . . ____
i n n e s o t a ______
6 9 8 .6
2 4 1 .3
328. (
4, 354. 6
4 6 0 .1
*o r r arA!e r y c a r s a,r.e a v a i la b l e u p o n r e q u e s t t o t h e B u r e a u o f L a b o r
s t a t i s t i c s o r t o t h e c o o p e r a t in g S t a t e a g e n c y . S t a t e a g e n c ie s a ls o m a k e a v a i la b l e m o r e d e t a il e d i n d u s t r y d a t a . S e e t a b le A - 7 fo r a d d r e s s e s o f c o o p e r a t in g
S t a t e a g e n c ie s .
https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
2 R e v i s e d s e r ie s ; n o t c o m p a r a b le w i t h d a t a p r e v i o u s l y p u b li s h e d ,
2,
A: EMPLOYMENT AND PAYROLLS
T able
387
A-7 : Employees in manufacturing industries, by State 1
[In thousands]
1956
1955
A n n u al average
S ta te
D ec.
A l a b a m a 2........... ..............................
2 4 6 .3
A r i z o n a ______ ___________ _____
3 7 .7
A rk a n sa s
___________________
8 7 .0
C a l i f o r n i a ........................................... 1, 2 3 3 .8
C o l o r a d o _________ ________
7 6 .1
N ov.
O ct.
S e p t.
A ug.
J u ly
June
M ay
A p r.
M ar.
Feb.
Jan.
D ec.
1955
1954
2 4 6 .8
3 7 .4
8 9 .2
1, 2 3 9 .0
7 6 .5
2 4 8 .4
3 7 .1
9 0 .7
1, 2 6 9 .8
7 7 .3
2 4 8 .2
3 6 .5
9 1 .3
1, 2 6 7 .8
7 5 .5
2 4 1 .4
3 4 .2
8 8 .6
1, 2 7 1 .8
7 3 .7
2 2 5 .2
3 6 .4
9 1 .1
1, 2 0 3 .4
6 5 .6
2 2 9 .6
3 6 .1
9 0 .6
1 ,1 8 8 .8
7 1 .9
2 3 0 .3
3 5 .5
9 0 .1
1 ,1 7 2 .1
6 9 .7
2 4 3 .8
3 5 .1
8 9 .6
1 ,1 6 2 . 9
6 8 .3
2 4 2 .7
3 4 .9
8 9 .9
1 ,1 5 5 . 6
6 7 .4
2 4 3 .7
3 4 .0
8 8 .2
1 ,1 3 9 .0
6 6 .5
2 4 3 .3
3 3 .4
8 8 .1
1 ,1 2 6 .6
6 6 .9
2 4 2 .8
3 3 .5
8 8 .2
1 ,1 4 5 .2
6 8 .7
2 3 5 .4
3 1 .3
8 5 .7
1 ,1 2 1 .0
6 7 .1
2 2 6 .3
2 6 .5
8 0 .8
1, 0 4 8 .6
6 5 .0
4 3 8 .1
5 9 .2
1 6 .5
1 6 3 .0
3 3 7 .5
4 3 5 .1
5 9 .3
1 6 .4
1 5 7 .6
3 3 7 .7
4 3 3 .9
5 7 .6
1 6 .4
1 4 8 .2
3 3 6 .7
4 3 4 .6
6 1 .1
1 6 .2
1 4 4 .3
3 3 7 .0
4 2 8 .8
6 1 .1
1 6 .1
1 4 1 .0
3 3 6 .0
4 2 9 .3
5 7 .9
1 6 .2
1 4 0 .9
3 3 0 .1
4 3 5 .7
5 9 .9
1 6 .3
1 4 5 .7
3 3 3 .1
4 3 5 .6
5 9 .7
1 6 .2
1 4 9 .2
3 3 2 .7
4 3 7 .8
6 0 .5
1 6 .2
1 5 0 .2
3 3 3 .7
4 3 3 .6
5 9 .9
1 6 .0
1 5 1 .4
3 3 4 .4
4 3 2 .2
5 9 .8
1 6 .0
1 5 3 .6
3 3 7 .4
4 3 3 .0
6 0 .3
1 5 .8
1 5 2 .2
3 3 7 .1
4 3 4 .6
6 1 .3
1 6 .5
1 5 1 .5
3 4 0 .4
4 1 8 .8
5 8 .3
1 6 .2
1 3 8 .5
3 3 1 .7
4 2 1 .2
5 5 .9
1 6 .4
1 2 8 .1
3 0 9 .6
I d a h o _________________________
2 6 .3
I l l i n o i s _________________________ 1 ,2 8 5 .3
I n d i a n a 2 ___________________
6 1 6 .5
I o w a 2 _____________________ . .
1 6 8 .8
______________________
K an sas
1 2 8 .5
2 8 .7
1, 2 8 7 .8
6 1 2 .9
1 6 8 .3
1 2 6 .8
2 9 .3
1, 289. 9
6 1 4 .8
1 7 0 .2
1 2 4 .0
2 9 .7
1, 290. 5
6 0 9 .8
1 7 1 .5
1 2 4 .0
2 9 .1
1, 277. 7
6 0 6 .8
1 7 1 .9
1 2 3 .9
2 8 .7
1, 2 4 2 .0
5 4 7 .0
1 6 7 .8
1 2 3 .9
2 7 .5
1, 283, 0
6 0 8 .7
1 6 8 .1
1 2 3 .6
2 5 .8
1 ,2 7 4 . 7
6 1 1 .2
1 6 6 .9
1 2 3 .6
2 4 .2
1, 2 8 0 .1
6 2 1 .6
1 6 7 .2
1 2 2 .6
2 3 .4
1 ,2 8 7 . 6
6 2 3 .1
1 6 7 .9
1 2 2 .8
2 3 .7
1, 2 8 9 .5
6 2 9 .5
1 6 9 .0
1 2 1 .9
2 4 .4
1 ,2 9 1 .8
6 3 3 .4
1 7 0 .4
1 2 1 .8
2 5 .3
1, 2 9 7 .8
6 4 0 .4
1 7 2 .5
1 2 1 .8
2 5 .2
1, 253. 7
6 2 0 .2
1 6 7 .4
1 2 6 .2
2 3 .7
1, 2 1 1 .7
5 8 2 .0
1 6 1 .3
1 3 3 .0
1 7 5 .6
1 4 8 .7
1 0 7 .5
2 7 6 .3
7 1 5 .1
1 7 0 .0
1 5 1 .8
1 0 9 .7
2 7 9 .0
7 1 2 .4
1 6 9 .5
1 4 8 .0
1 1 2 .0
2 7 9 .0
7 1 3 .5
1 6 9 .5
1 4 7 .2
1 1 2 .4
2 7 9 .2
7 0 7 .7
1 6 9 .1
1 4 7 .8
1 1 5 .9
2 8 1 .0
7 1 1 .8
1 6 3 .4
1 4 7 .5
1 1 1 .9
2 4 9 .5
6 8 7 .8
1 6 8 .7
1 4 6 .6
1 1 2 .4
2 7 2 .8
7 1 1 .6
1 7 0 .7
1 4 3 .8
1 0 3 .4
2 6 9 .2
7 0 7 .6
1 7 0 .7
1 4 3 .3
1 0 0 .2
2 6 6 .9
7 1 0 .6
1 7 0 .4
1 4 3 .2
1 0 2 .8
2 6 4 .1
7 1 7 .4
1 7 1 .7
1 4 4 .4
1 0 6 .0
2 6 3 .9
7 1 8 .2
1 7 4 .2
1 4 4 .7
1 0 6 .9
2 6 0 .9
7 1 3 .0
1 8 1 .0
1 5 1 .8
1 0 7 .5
2 6 3 .2
7 1 7 .2
1 6 5 .7
1 4 9 .0
1 0 6 .7
2 5 8 .9
6 9 1 .8
1 5 1 .3
1 5 1 .0
1 0 6 .0
2 5 2 .4
6 8 3 .7
i c h i g a n . ____________ ________ 1 ,0 9 9 .8
i n n e s o t a ____________ _______
2 2 0 .5
i s s i s s i p p i . ________________
i s s o u r i ’2______________
3 9 4 .1
o n t a n a . ____________ . . . .
2 0 .6
1, 0 8 3 .0
2 2 0 .0
1 ,0 4 4 .6
2 2 2 .3
9 7 0 .8
2 2 7 .7
9 8 4 .2
2 3 1 .6
1, 0 1 9 .9
2 1 8 .8
1 0 3 .1
3 8 9 .0
2 1 .4
1, 0 5 7 .2
2 1 5 .2
1 0 2 .6
3 8 6 .5
2 0 .0
1, 0 9 2 .9
2 1 3 .1
1 0 3 .9
3 8 9 .2
1 9 .0
1 ,1 0 2 .3
2 1 1 .6
1 0 4 .0
3 9 1 .6
1 8 .4
1 ,1 2 9 .2
2 0 9 .7
1 0 4 .6
3 9 1 .6
1 8 .6
1 ,1 7 1 .3
2 0 8 .4
1 0 3 .9
3 9 1 .1
1 9 .5
1 ,1 9 3 . 6
2 1 2 .8
1 0 3 .9
3 9 2 .3
2 0 .4
1 ,1 4 8 .9
2 0 9 .8
1 0 3 .5
3 8 3 .4
2 0 .4
1, 0 6 1 .2
2 1 0 .3
9 5 .7
3 8 2 .6
1 8 .3
C o n n e c t i c u t 2_________________
D e l a w a r e 2____________________
D i s t r i c t o f C o l u m b i a 2 ____
F l o r id a 2_______ _______________
G e o r g ia 2____________ __________
K e n t u c k y ___ _________________
L o u i s i a n a ____________ ________ _
M a i n e _____ ____________________
M a r y l a n d _____________________
M a s s a c h u s e t t s 2______________
M
M
M
M
M
3 9 1 .0
2 1 .7
3 8 8 .8
2 2 .7
3 8 6 .4
2 2 .3
3 8 8 .8
2 2 .3
9 8 7 .4
2 2 1 .7
1 0 3 .6
3 8 6 .0
2 2 .0
5 7 .3
5 .7
8 3 .1
8 1 0 .5
1 9 .9
5 7 .7
5 .7
8 3 .5
8 1 0 .8
1 9 .8
5 8 .9
5 .8
8 3 .1
8 1 0 .3
2 0 .0
5 7 .8
5 .9
8 2 .6
8 1 2 .5
1 9 .9
5 8 .1
6 .1
8 2 .6
8 1 0 .6
2 0 .1
5 8 .6
6 .0
8 1 .2
7 9 6 .7
2 0 .0
5 8 .4
5 .9
8 2 .9
8 0 4 .8
1 9 .9
5 7 .6
5 .7
8 1 .0
7 9 8 .5
1 9 .4
5 6 .3
5 .7
8 1 .3
8 0 4 .7
1 9 .1
5 8 .0
5 .7
8 2 .9
8 0 7 .3
1 8 .7
5 8 .1
5 .7
8 4 .1
8 0 8 .0
1 8 .4
5 8 .4
5 .7
8 3 .8
8 0 5 .7
1 8 .1
5 9 .7
5 .9
8 4 .3
8 1 0 .1
1 8 .3
5 8 .7
5 .7
8 2 .2
7 9 8 .2
1 8 .1
5 8 .2
4 .8
7 9 .0
7 9 1 .6
1 6 .4
N e w Y o r k _________________ ._ 1, 9 3 5 .2
N o r t h C a r o l in a .............................
4 6 5 .1
N o r t h D a k o t a _______________
6 .3
O h io ____________________________ 1, 373. 9
O k la h o m a 2. . ______ __________
9 1 .0
1, 9 5 0 .2
4 6 9 .8
6 .6
1, 3 6 1 .0
9 2 .0
1, 958. 5
4 6 8 .1
6 .6
1, 3 7 2 .1
9 1 .8
1 ,9 3 8 .0
4 6 8 .4
6 .7
1, 3 5 8 .3
9 1 .0
1, 9 1 6 .8
4 6 5 .9
6 .8
1 ,3 4 4 .3
9 0 .7
1 ,8 2 0 .9
4 5 0 .6
6 .9
1 ,2 5 0 .3
9 0 .0
1, 8 8 3 .1
4 5 3 .9
6 .8
1, 350. 9
9 0 .7
1, 8 7 1 .2
4 5 2 .1
6 .6
1, 357. 5
9 0 .5
1, 8 8 6 .8
4 5 4 .3
6 .4
1 ,3 7 0 .1
9 0 .7
1, 9 1 4 .0
4 5 7 .5
6 .3
1, 3 6 6 .4
9 0 .7
1, 9 2 5 .0
4 6 1 .5
6 .2
1 ,3 6 8 .2
9 0 .3
1, 9 1 2 .6
4 6 4 .6
6 .2
1 ,3 7 9 .0
9 0 .5
1, 949. 7
4 6 6 .7
6 .3
1 ,3 8 5 .2
9 0 .6
1, 9 0 8 .4
4 5 6 .9
6 .4
1, 343. 9
8 7 .9
1, 914. 5
4 3 6 .8
6 .4
1, 2 9 1 .3
8 3 .0
O r e g o n ________________________
1 3 3 .1
P e n n s y l v a n i a _____________ . . 1, 491. 5
R h o d e I s l a n d _________________
1 3 1 .2
S o u t h C a r o lin a 2_____________
2 2 9 .8
S o u t h D a k o t a .............. ...................
1 1 .7
1 4 1 .1
1, 4 9 2 .9
1 3 2 .4
2 3 0 .2
1 2 .0
1 5 2 .4
1, 500. 5
1 3 2 .6
2 3 1 .1
1 2 .0
1 6 2 .2
1, 495. 7
1 3 3 .2
2 3 2 .6
1 1 .7
1 6 6 .5
1 ,4 8 2 .5
1 3 1 .8
2 3 1 .8
1 2 .0
1 6 1 .6
1 ,3 2 8 .0
1 2 7 .2
2 2 6 .5
1 2 .1
1 6 2 .5
1, 4 9 3 .4
1 2 9 .1
2 3 1 .4
1 2 .0
1 4 9 .0
1, 490. 6
1 2 8 .8
2 3 0 .5
1 1 .5
1 4 2 .2
1, 4 8 9 .1
1 3 0 .3
2 3 1 .3
1 1 .4
1 3 3 .2
1, 4 7 2 .1
1 3 2 .5
2 3 3 .0
1 1 .3
1 3 1 .8
1, 4 7 3 .9
1 3 4 .5
2 3 3 .8
1 1 .2
1 3 0 .0
1, 470. 5
1 3 4 .4
2 3 4 .0
1 1 .2
1 3 7 .4
1, 4 7 9 .4
1 3 6 .0
2 3 4 .9
1 1 .5
1 4 3 .3
1, 457. 5
1 3 1 .4
2 2 9 .8
1 1 .6
1 3 5 .7
1, 4 5 4 .3
1 2 8 .7
2 1 8 .6
1 1 .6
N
N
N
N
N
e b r a s k a 2___________________
e v a d a ________ _______ _____
e w H a m p s h i r e ........ ................ ..
e w J e r s e y ___________________
e w M e x i c o 2. . . ...........................
T e n n e s s e e _________ ________
T e x a s . . . ..............................................
U t a h __________________________
V e r m o n t _______________________
V i r g in ia 2______________________
2 9 1 .1
4 7 7 .8
3 6 .1
3 8 .8
2 6 2 .2
2 9 2 .7
4 7 8 .0
3 6 .8
3 8 .4
2 6 4 .6
2 9 4 .4
4 7 6 .3
3 8 .5
3 8 .9
2 6 6 .7
2 9 5 .3
4 7 3 .5
4 0 .5
3 9 .1
2 6 4 .1
2 9 5 .4
4 7 4 .2
3 6 .4
3 9 .1
2 6 1 .0
2 9 3 .0
4 6 4 .9
3 3 .4
3 7 .6
2 5 5 .0
2 9 2 .0
4 7 3 .6
3 5 .3
3 8 .7
2 5 6 .4
2 9 2 .6
4 6 6 .6
3 3 .8
3 8 .6
2 5 5 .6
2 9 3 .2
4 6 3 .6
3 3 .2
3 8 .4
2 5 3 .9
2 9 2 .9
4 6 5 .0
3 2 .7
3 8 .7
2 5 2 .8
2 9 5 .3
4 6 2 .1
3 2 .3
3 8 .3
2 5 3 .5
2 9 5 .5
4 5 9 .9
3 2 .5
3 8 .1
2 5 3 .7
2 9 9 .1
4 5 9 .6
3 4 .6
3 8 .4
2 5 6 .1
2 9 1 .3
4 4 6 .1
3 3 .4
3 6 .5
2 5 0 .7
2 7 5 .8
4 2 8 .4
3 1 .2
3 6 .9
2 4 3 .2
W
W
W
W
2 1 1 .6
1 3 0 .6
4 6 3 .1
6 .7
2 1 3 .0
1 3 2 .4
4 6 1 .2
6 .9
2 1 8 .3
1 3 1 .3
4 6 7 .1
7 .1
2 2 2 .7
1 2 8 .7
4 8 3 .0
2 1 8 .9
1 3 0 .8
4 7 6 .9
6 .8
2 1 1 .8
1 2 1 .9
4 6 8 .5
6 .8
2 1 0 .6
1 3 1 .7
4 5 8 .3
6 .4
2 0 4 .2
1 3 2 .7
4 5 4 .8
6 .0
1 9 8 .8
1 3 2 .3
4 5 9 .0
6 .0
1 9 4 .1
1 2 9 .9
4 6 3 .9
5 .9
1 9 2 .1
1 2 9 .9
4 6 2 .4
5 .9
1 9 3 .4
1 2 9 .4
4 6 1 .3
6 .3
1 9 7 .6
1 3 2 .2
4 6 4 .7
2 0 2 .4
1 2 8 .6
4 5 0 .9
6 .5
1 8 9 .9
1 2 5 .5
434. 4
a s h i n g t o n 2_________________
e s t V i r g in ia 2_______________
_________________
isc o n s in
________________
y o m in g ...
6 .6
1 Data for earlier years are available upon request to the Bureau of Labor
Statistics or to the cooperating State agency. State agencies also make
available more detailed industry data.
6 .6
6. 6
2 Revised series; not comparable with data previously published.
Cooperating State Agencies
Alabama—Department of Industrial Relations, Montgomery 4.
Arizona—Unemployment Compensation Division, Employment Security
Commission, Phoenix.
Arkansas—Employment Security Division, Department of Labor, Little
Rock.
California—Division of Labor Statistics and Research, Department of
Industrial Relations, San Francisco 1.
Colorado—U. S. Bureau of Labor Statistics, Denver 2.
Connecticut—Employment Security Division, Department of Labor,
Hartford 15.
Delaware—Unemployment Compensation Commission, Wilmington 99.
District of Columbia—U. S. Employment Service for D. C., Washington 25.
Florida—Industrial Commission, Tallahassee.
Georgia—Employment Security Agency, Department of Labor, Atlanta 3.
Idaho—Employment Security Agency, Boise.
Illinois—Division of Unemployment Compensation and State Employment
Service, Department of Labor, Chicago 6.
Indiana—Employment Security Division, Indianapolis 25.
Iowa—Employment Security Commission, Des Moines 8.
Kansas—Employment Security Division, Department of Labor, Topeka.
Kentucky—Bureau of Employment Security, Department of Economic
Security, Frankfort.
Louisiana—Division of Employment Security, Department of Labor, Baton
Rouge 4.
Maine—Employment Security Commission, Augusta.
Maryland—Department of Employment Security, Baltimore 1.
Massachusetts—Division of Statistics, Department of Labor and Industries,
Boston 8.
Michigan—Employment Security Commission, Detroit 2.
Minnesota—Department of Employment Security, St. Paul 1.
Mississippi—Employment Security Commission, Jackson.
Missouri—Division of Employment Security, Jefferson City.
Montana—Unemployment Compensation Commission, Helena.
https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
Nebraska—Division of Employment Security, Department of Labor,
Lincoln 1.
Nevada—Employment Security Department, Carson City.
New Hampshire—Division of Employment Security, Department of Labor,
Concord.
New Jersey—Bureau of Statistics and Records, Department of Labor and
Industry, Trenton 25.
New Mexico—Employment Security Commission, Albuquerque.
New York—Bureau of Research and Statistics, Division of Employment,
State Department of Labor, 500 Eighth Avenue, New York 18.
North Carolina—Division of Statistics, Department of Labor, Raleigh.
North Dakota—Unemployment Compensation Division, Workmen’s Com
pensation Bureau, Bismark.
Ohio—Division of Research and Statistics, Bureau of Unemployment Com
pensation, Columbus 16.
Oklahoma—Employment Security Commission, Oklahoma City 2.
Oregon—Unemployment Compensation Commission, Salem.
Pennsylvania—Bureau of Employment Security, Department of Labor and
Industry, Harrisburg.
Rhode Island—Division of Statistics and Census, Department of Labor,
Providence 3.
South Carolina—Employment Security Commission, Columbia 1.
South Dakota—Employment Security Department, Aberdeen.
Tennessee—Department of Employment Security, Nashville 3.
Texas—Employment Commission, Austin 19.
Utah—Department of Employment Security, Industrial Commission, Salt
Lake City 10.
Vermont—Unemployment Compensation Commission, Montpelier.
Virginia—Division of Research and Statistics, Department of Labor and
Industry, Richmond 14.
Washington—Employment Security Department, Olympia.
West Virginia—Department of Employment Security, Charleston 5.
Wisconsin—Statistical Department, Industrial Commission, Madison 3.
Wyoming—Employment Security Commission, Casper.
MONTHLY LABOR REVIEW, MARCH 1957
388
T able A-8: Insured unemployment under State programs and the program of unemployment compen
sation for Federal employees,1 by geographic division and State
[In thousands]
1955
1956
Geographic division and State
Dec.
Nov.
Oct.
Sept.
Aug.
July
June
May
Apr.
Mar.
Feb,
Jan.
Dec.
Rhode Island_______________________
Connecticut________________________
10.0
5.9
2.2
59.4
12.8
19.0
7.3
5.3
1.6
42.9
8.9
14.7
878.4
66.0
4.8
5.1
1.3
34.0
8.2
12.7
988.3 1, 058.6 1, 209. 5 1, 177.6 1, 255. 5 1, 358. 5 1, 472.4 1, 535.0 1, 490.9 1, 143.6
89.4
99.1
69.1
103.1
98.2
64.8
83.0
73.7
105.0
79.6
5.1
5.1
6.2
10.4
13.1
10.1
5.9
10.2
10.7
9.3
6.0
5.4
5.9
8.2
9.5
7.2
6.2
6.7
5.6
5.6
1.2
1.2
1.6
1.6
2.1
2.5
2.6
2.4
1.6
1.9
30.1
40.8
46.4
46.9
47.4
51.4
31.5
37.0
34.0
39.4
9.5
8.0
12.9
10.8
13.6
15.3
15.4
14.4
14.8
9.4
13.0
17.8
15.2
17.4
20.1
14.8
16.7
17.1
18.9
14.0
Middle Atlantic________________________
New Y ork__________________________
New Jersey ________________________
Pennsylvania_______________________
377.9
176.3
68.2
133.4
292.7
125.6
57.1
110.0
259.5
102.0
50.8
106.7
284.0
114.4
53.3
116.3
308.8
117.2
55.9
135.7
376.8
161.7
65.1
150.0
369.5
176.2
63.2
130.1
395. 3
191.3
69.4
134.6
425.5
201.1
78.6
145.8
448.3
199.3
78.9
170.2
446.0
203.7
83.7
158.6
469.9
219.4
88.0
162.4
370.2
176.0
66.9
127.3
East North Central_____________________
Ohio..............................................................
Indiana____________________________
Illinois........................ ..................................
Michigan___________________________
Wisconsin__________________________
228.3
51.4
29.3
56.0
67.8
23.9
193.0
38.4
24.4
51.4
58.9
19.8
195.4
30.7
23.0
45.8
83.8
12.2
274.0
35.2
29.5
53.9
142.7
12.6
277.7
43.4
32.7
58.5
128.0
15.1
288.9
48.8
36.0
65.6
121.1
17.4
281.0
48.9
33.6
64.4
115.9
18.2
275.6
46.9
33.4
65.5
112.7
17.2
274.9
51.0
33.4
69.0
101.3
20.2
283.7
58.3
34.8
57.0
110.9
22.6
283.5
63.3
35.6
62.9
97.2
24.5
237.8
54.8
30.5
66.4
61.5
24.6
176.4
39.5
20.5
55.7
40.9
19.9
West North Central _____________________
Minnesota__________________________
Iowa_______________________________
Missouri___________________________
North Dakota_______________________
South Dakota_______________________
Nebraska _________________________
Kansas_____________________________
83.6
23.1
9.5
29.4
3.4
2.4
6.9
8.8
60.0
14.2
6.2
26.0
1.5
1.1
4.3
6.5
46.6
9.1
4.7
23.5
.4
.5
2.7
5.7
47.6
9.1
4.6
26.0
.2
.4
2.6
4.6
49.2
11.9
5.7
22.7
.3
.5
3.0
5.1
51.8
11.5
6.0
25.0
.4
.5
3.0
5.3
53.3
11.1
6.3
26.3
.4
.5
3.2
5.5
60.8
16.3
6.0
27.4
1.0
.7
3.8
5.7
82.5
28.6
7.9
28.6
3 .2
1.7
5.3
7.2
102.4
33.7
11.9
30.3
4.9
3.4
8.0
10.2
117.9
36.0
13.4
34.8
5.4
4.1
9.6
14.5
110.3
33.5
11.6
35.0
5.1
3.7
8.9
12.6
76.1
22.3
7.4
24.8
3.6
2.4
6.3
9.3
M aryland__________________________
District of Columbia_________________
V irginia......................................_............. West Virginia.............................................
North Carolina______________________
South Carolina______________________
Georgia____________________________
Florida_____________________________
116.4
2.6
12.2
4.6
9.4
10.3
30.1
12.7
21.6
13.0
100.8
1.9
8.7
4.0
7.1
8.3
25.2
12.4
19.1
14.1
96.6
2.2
8.1
3.7
6.0
7.8
20.5
12.1
18.1
18.1
109.7
1.7
9.3
3.5
7.7
9.1
23.2
13.8
19.5
21.9
120.8
1.9
11.0
3.9
10.4
11.7
24.8
12.4
21.5
23.2
143.2
1.8
13.2
3.9
14.8
13.3
34.3
14.1
26.9
21.0
130.9
1.7
12.2
3.6
16.0
10.1
35.6
13.0
24.5
14.1
132.3
1.8
13.5
3.8
13.1
9.8
38.8
14.3
24.7
12.4
130.0
2.0
14.0
4.5
10.6
10.9
40.0
13.6
22.7
11.7
128.1
2.4
11.6
5.4
13.6
12.4
36.0
12.4
21.4
12.9
134.6
2.7
15.3
6.2
14.2
13.9
34.8
12.3
21.2
14.0
136.3
2.5
17.2
5.8
13.1
14.3
33.2
13.1
21.8
15.2
103.4
1.6
12.0
4.3
9.3
10.3
25.3
10.1
17.8
12.7
East South Central__ __________________
K entucky.. ________________________
Tennessee__ ______________________ .
Alabama. ________________________
M ississippi_______________________
97.7
29.6
36.4
17.5
14.1
85.8
27.3
32.1
15.6
10.8
75.5
26.0
28.3
12.8
8.4
76.9
26.1
28.2
14.2
8.4
92.7
29.1
32.8
20.5
10.3
108.8
30.2
38.4
28.4
11.7
110.5
30.6
36.7
32.5
10.8
115.1
32.4
38.5
32.6
11.6
104.5
34.2
38.9
19.0
12.4
106.7
34.4
39.9
19.2
13.2
108.7
33.7
42.4
18.4
14.3
99.1
27.9
41.1
17.7
12.3
75.7
21.8
30.2
14.0
9.8
West South Central_____________________
Arkansas___________________________
L ouisiana__________________________
65.3
15.0
11.2
12.3
26.8
51.7
10.6
8.8
9.8
22.5
42.5
7. 6
7.5
8.1
19.4
42.9
7.1
8.6
7.8
19.4
48.1
8.8
9.9
8.4
21.0
50.5
9.3
11.5
8.7
21.0
50.5
9.0
11.9
8.5
21.2
56.4
10.1
13.3
9.6
23.4
65.1
12.7
15.4
11.1
25.9
71.1
14.5
17.0
12.8
26.7
81.2
18.4
18.4
15.4
28.9
70.8
16.1
15.1
14.1
25.5
54.1
11.3
11.3
10.8
20.7
Mountain______________________________
Montana___________________________
Idaho _____________________________
Wyoming __________________________
Colorado
- _________________ _ .
New Mexico________________________
Arizona____________________________
Utah
....................................................
33.0
5.2
6.5
1. 7
4.7
2.7
4.2
4.8
3.2
21.5
2.3
3.6
.9
3.4
2.1
3.5
3.1
2.7
13.5
.9
1.6
.4
2.2
1.5
3.1
1.8
2.1
12.5
.7
1.2
.3
2.0
1.5
3.1
1.8
1.9
14.3
.8
1.4
.4
2.6
1.8
3.4
2.3
1.6
16.3
1.0
1.6
.8
3.0
1.9
3.3
3.1
1.6
14.8
1.4
1.4
.7
2.0
2.1
3.2
2.4
1.6
19.9
2.7
2.0
1.2
2.4
2.4
4.3
2.7
2.2
31.2
5.2
4.2
1.9
3.5
3.2
6.0
4.1
3.2
45.0
8.3
6.9
3 .0
5.3
4.2
7.0
6.2
4.2
52.4
9.1
8.6
3.4
6.4
4.9
6.9
8.0
5.0
45.0
7.6
8.2
2.6
5.2
4.1
6.1
6.7
4.6
32.9
5.3
6.8
1.6
3.8
3.4
4.2
4.6
3.3
Pacific ________________________________
Washington________________________
Oregon____________________________
California__________________________
173.5
41.8
28.8
102.9
127.3
30.6
19.3
77.5
82.8
19.5
10.1
53.2
75.9
15.0
6.4
54.6
78.0
14.4
5.8
57.9
90.2
14.2
6.3
69.7
93.3
11.9
6.3
75.1
110.7
17.2
8.8
84.7
141.6
28.6
15.9
97.1
188.0
42.6
27.5
118.0
212.6
51.2
30.3
131.1
216.7
51.8
30.3
134.6
175.2
46.2
24.5
104.5
Continental United States________________ 1, 285.0 1, 013.4
80.7
109.3
New England__________________________
M a in e
New Hampshire ____________________
Vermont___________________________
M a s sa e lm setts
Sm ith A tln.n t.le
D e la w a re
O H ah n m a
T e rn s
N evada
i Average of weekly data adjusted for split weeks in the month. Figures
may not add to exact column totals because of rounding.
Source: U S. Department of Labor, Bureau of Employment Security.
https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
N o t e .— Data for months prior to April 1956 differ from
figures previously published because of the inclusion of
data for the UCFE program.
389
A: EMPLOYMENT AND PAYROLLS
T able A-9: Unemployment insurance and employment service programs, selected operations1
[All Items except average benefit amounts are In thousands]
1956
1955
1954
Dec.
Dec.
Item
Dec.
Employment service:
New applications for work_____
Non farm placements ________
612
410
Nov.
674
474
Sept.
Oct.
683
599
Aug.
660
577
608
591
July
690
519
799
558
732
567
Feb.
Mar.
Apr.
May
June
675
504
660
450
733
402
Jan.
811
432
602
431
665
393
S ta te u n em p lo y m en t insurance
programs:J
1,193
1,049
1,349
1, 450
984
936
863
993
1,119
761
837
973
834
Initial claims * _____________
1, 229
Insured unem ploym ent1 (aver1,144
1,491
1,666
1, 535
1, 472
1, 359
1,178
1,255
1,059
1,209
1,013
878
988
1,285
age weekly volume)
_____
4.1
4.0
3.1
4.6
3.9
3.6
3.3
3.1
2.7
3.1
2.6
2.6
2.3
Rate of insured unemployment *.
3.3
Weeks of unemployment com5,499
3,787
6,280
5,287
5,775
5,122
4,503
4,896
3, 556 4,286 *4,292
pensated
____ ______ ..
3, 950 3, 503 3,461
Average weekly benefit amount
for total unemployment. ___
$27.42 $27.26 $27. 57 $27. 77 *$27.05 *$26.91 $26.79 *$26.70 *$27.03 $27.13 $26.95 $26.61 $26.10 $25.22
Total benefits paid __________ $104, 245 $91, 700 $91,476 $94,919 $112,207 $111,708 $116,052 $125,786 $133, 926 $151,998 $143, 923 $135, 722 $95,153 $153, 050
Unemployment compensation for
veterans:9
Initial claims 8_______________
Insured unemployment ‘ (average weekly volume) . _ ____ .
Weeks of unemployment compensated ...
____________
Total benefits paid 7__________
23
21
18
18
27
27
29
20
21
26
30
37
32
35
28
24
33
42
41
37
35
44
57
61
58
47
42
79
145
$3,883
118
$3,168
122
$3,258
169
$4,499
211
$5,630
187
$4,970
*167
$4,452
175
$4,694
214
$5, 722
271
$7, 274
262
$7,050
252
$6, 726
197
$5, 230
350
$9,381
17
Railroad unemployment insurance:
Applications 8____
. ___
Insured unemployment (average
weekly volume)____________
Number of payments
_____
Average amount of benefit pay
ment 3 ___ _ ____________
Total benefits paid 10_____ ____
21
12
11
23
97
18
5
5
7
10
21
21
34
59
119
49
98
37
89
41
94
57
173
66
85
19
50
25
69
36
95
48
126
55
124
57
129
47
107
124
29 7
$58.08
$6, 868
$58.04
$5,637
$59.19
$5,197
$58.92 $58.23
$5,561 $10, 201
$48. 89
$4,145
$52.66
$2, 571
$53.03
$3, 604
$54.70
$5,144
$57.40
$7, 242
$57.67
$7,112
$55.33
$7,162
All programs:11
Insured unem ploym ent8______
1, 377
1,090
1,158
1,316
1,234
1,316
1,439
1, 578
1, 651
1,606
939
1,060
1 Average weekly Insured unemployment excludes territories: other Items
Include them.
3 Data include activities under the program of Unemployment Compensa
tion for Federal Employees (UOFE), which became effective on January 1,
1955.
» An Initial claim is a notice filed by a worker at the beginning of a period
of unemployment which establishes the starting date for any insured unem
ployment which may result if he is unemployed for 1 week or longer.
* Number of workers reporting the completion of at least 1 week of
unemployment.
» The rate of insured unemployment is the number of insured unemployed
expressed as a percent of the average covered employment in a 12-month
period.
• Based on claims filed under the Veterans’ Readjustment Assistance Act
of 1952. Excludes claims filed by veterans to supplement State, UCFE, or
railroad unemployment insurance benefits.
https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
$54.82 $60.11
$5, 791 $17, 921
1,238
1,869
» Federal portion only of benefits paid jointly with other programs
Weekly benefit amount for total unemployment is set by law at $26.
• An application for benefits is filed by a railroad worker at the beginning of
his first period of unemployment in a benefit year; no application is required
for subsequent periods in the same year.
« Payments are for unemployment in 14-day registration periods; the aver
age amount is an average for all compensable periods. Not adjusted for re
coveries of overpayments or settlement of underpayments.
i° Adjusted for recoveries of overpayments and settlement of underpay
ments.
11 Represents an unduplicated count of insured unemployment under the
State, U CFE, and veterans’ programs, and that covered by the Railroad
Unemployment Insurance Act.
•Revised.
390
MONTHLY LABOR REVIEW, MARCH 1957
B: Labor Turnover
Table B -l: Monthly labor turnover rates in manufacturing, by class of turnover 1
[Per 100 employees]
Year
Jan.
Feb.
Mar.
Apr.
May
June
July
Aug.
Sept.
Oet.
Nov.
Dec.
Annual
average
Total accession
1948................................................
1949...............................................
1950................................................
1951........................................... .
1952................................................
1953...............................................
1954................................................
1955................................................
1956................................................
4.6
3.2
3.6
5.2
4.4
4.4
2.8
3.3
3.3
3.9
2.9
3.2
4.5
3.9
4.2
2.5
3.2
3.1
4.0
3.0
3.6
4.6
3.9
4.4
2.8
3.6
3.1
4.0
2.9
3.5
4.5
3.7
4.3
2.4
3.5
3.3
4.1
3.5
4.4
4,5
3.9
4.1
2.7
3.8
3.4
5.7
4.4
4.8
4.9
4.9
5.1
3.5
4.3
4.2
4.7
3.5
4.7
4.2
4.4
4.1
2.9
3.4
3.3
5.0
4.4
6.6
4.5
5.9
4.3
3.3
4.5
3.8
5.1
4.1
5.7
4.3
5.6
4.0
3.4
4.4
4.1
4.5
3.7
5.2
4.4
5.2
3.3
3.6
4.1
4.2
3.9
3.3
4.0
3.9
4.0
2.7
3.3
3.3
3.0
2.7
3.2
3.0
3.0
3.3
2.1
2.5
2.5
2.2
4.4
3.5
4.4
4.4
4.4
3.9
3.0
3.7
3.4
5.1
4.0
4.2
5.3
4.6
4.8
3.5
4.0
3.9
5.4
4.2
4.9
5.1
4.9
5.2
3.9
4.4
4.4
4,5
4.1
4.3
4.7
4.2
4.5
3.3
3.5
3.5
4.1
4.0
3.8
4.3
3.5
4.2
3.0
3.1
3.3
4.3
3.2
3.6
3.5
3.4
4.0
3.0
3.0
2.8
4.6
4.3
3.5
4.4
4.1
4.3
3.5
3.3
3.5
3.4
1.8
2.9
3.1
3.0
2.9
1.4
2.2
2.2
3.9
2.1
3.4
3.1
3.5
3.1
1.8
2.8
2.6
2.8
1.5
2.7
2.5
2.8
2.1
1.2
1.8
1.7
2.2
1.2
2.1
1.9
2.1
1.5
1.0
1.4
1.3
1.7
.9
1.7
1.4
1.7
1.1
.9
1.1
1.0
2.8
1.6
1.9
2.4
2.3
2.3
1.1
1.6
1.6
0.4
.3
.4
.4
.3
.4
.2
.3
.3
0.4
.2
.4
.3
.4
.4
.2
.3
.3
0.4
.2
.4
.4
.4
.4
.2
.3
.3
0.4
.2
.3
.3
.4
.3
.2
.3
.3
0.3
.2
.3
.3
.3
.2
.2
.2
.2
0.4
.2
.3
.3
.3
.4
.2
.3
.3
1.2
1.8
.6
1.4
1.0
1.3
1.7
1.3
1.2
1.0
1.8
.7
1.3
.7
1.5
1.7
1.1
1.4
1.2
2.3
.8
1.4
.7
1.8
1.6
1.2
1.3
1.4
2.6
1.1
1.7
.7
2.3
1.6
1.2
1.5
2.2
2.0
1.3
1.5
1.3
2.4
1.1
1.2
1.1
1.3
1.9
1.2
1.5
0.1
0.1
.1
.4
.4
.3
.3
.2
.2
.2
0.1
.1
.3
.4
.3
.3
.1
.2
.2
0.1
.1
.3
.3
.3
.2
.2
.2
.2
Total separation
1948................................................
1949................................................
1950................................................
1951................................................
1952................................... ...........
1953................................................
1954_______________ ________
1955................................................
1956................................................
4.3
4.6
3.1
4.1
4.0
3.8
4.3
2.9
3.6
4.7
4,1
3.0
3.8
3.9
3.6
3.5
2.5
3.6
4.5
4.8
2.9
4.1
3.Î
4.1
3.7
3.0
3.5
4.7
4.8
2.8
4.6
4,1
4.3
3.8
3.1
3.4
4.3
5.2
3.1
4.8
3.9
4.4
3.3
3.2
3.7
4.5
4.3
3.0
4.3
3.9
4.2
3.1
3.2
3.4
1948................................................
1949................................................
1950................... ............................
1951................................................
1952................................................
1953................................................
1954................................................
1955................................................
1956................................................
2.6
1.7
1.1
2.1
1.9
2.1
1.1
1.0
1.4
2.5
1.4
1.0
2.1
1.9
2.2
1.0
1.0
1.3
2.8
1.6
1.2
2.5
2.0
2.5
1.0
1.3
1.4
3.0
1.7
1.3
2.7
2.2
2.7
1.1
1.5
1.5
2.8
1.6
1.6
2.8
2.2
2.7
1.0
1.5
1.6
2.9
1.5
1.7
2.5
2.2
2.6
1.1
1.5
1.6
4.4
3.8
2.9
4.4
5.0
4.3
3.1
3.4
3.2
Quit
2.9
1.4
1.8
2.4
2.2
2.5
1.1
1.6
1.5
Discharge
1948...............................................
1949........ ......................................
1950................................................
1951................... ...........................
1952................................................
1953................................................
1954...............................................
1955................................................
1956................................................
0.4
.3
.2
.3
.3
.3
.2
.2
.3
0.4
.3
.2
.3
.3
.4
.2
.2
.3
0.4
.3
.2
.3
.3
.4
.2
.2
.3
0.4
.2
.2
.4
.3
.4
.2
.3
.3
0.3
.2
.3
.4
.3
.4
.2
.3
.3
0.4
.2
.3
.4
.3
.4
.2
.3
.3
0.4
.2
.3
.3
.3
.4
.2
.3
.2
Layoff
1948................................................
1949....... ........................................
1950................... ......... ..................
1951................................................
1952................................................
1953................................................
1954...............................................
1955................................................
1956................................................
1.2
2.5
1.7
1.0
1.4
.9
2.8
1.5
1.7
1.7
2.3
1.7
.8
1.3
.8
2.2
1.1
1.8
1.2
2.8
1.4
.8
1.1
.8
2.3
1.3
1.6
1.2
2.8
1.2
1.0
1.3
.9
2.4
1.2
1.4
1.1
3.3
1.1
1.2
1.1
1.0
1.9
1.1
1.6
1.1
2.5
.9
1.0
1.1
.9
1.7
1.2
1.3
1.0
2.1
.6
1.3
2.2
1.1
1.6
1.3
1.2
1.0
2.5
1.7
1.4
1.4
Miscellaneous, including military
1948................................................
1949................................................
1950........................................... .
1951.............. .................................
1952.......................... .....................
1953................................................
1954................................................
1955............................................ .
1956................................................
0.1
.1
.1
.7
.4
.4
.3
.3
.2
0.1
.1
.1
.6
.4
.4
.2
.2
.2
0.1
.1
.1
.5
.3
.3
.2
.2
.2
0.1
.1
.1
.5
.3
.3
.2
.2
.2
1 Data for the current month are preliminary.
N ote.—M onth-to-month changes in total employment in manufacturing
industries as indicated by labor turnover rates are not comparable with the
changes shown by the Bureau’s employment series for the following reasons:
(1) Accessions and separations are reported for the entire calendar month;
the employment and payroll reports, for the most part, refer to a 1-week pay
period ending nearest the 15th of the month.
(2) The turnover sample is not so large as that of the employment sample
and includes proportionately fewer small plants: certain industries are not
covered. The major industries excluded are printing, publishing, and allied
industries: canning and preserving fruits, vegetables, and seafoods: women’s,
misses’, and children’s outerwear: and fertilizers.
https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
0.1
.1
.1
,4
.3
.3
.2
.2
.2
0.1
.1
.1
.4
.3
.3
.2
.2
.2
0.1
.1
.2
.4
.3
.3
.2
.2
.2
0.1
.1
.3
.4
.3
.3
.3
.2
.2
.1
.4
.4
.3
.3
.3
.2
.2
0.1
.1
.2
.5
.3
.3
.2
.2
.2
(3) Plants are not included in the turnover computations in months, when
work stoppages are in progress: the influence of such stoppages is reflected,
however, in the employment figures.
Beginning with data for October 1952, components may not add to total
separation rate because of rounding.
N o t e .— Information on concepts, methodology, etc., is
given in a technical note on Measurement of Labor
Turnover, which appeared in the May 1953 Monthly
Labor Review.
391
B : LABOR TURNOVER
T able B-2: Monthly labor turnover rates in selected industries
[Per 100 employees]
Industry
Dec.
1956
Manufacturing
All m anufacturing......................................
Durable goods...... .................. ..............
Nondurable goods................................
Ordnance and accessories............................
Food and kindred products.......................
Meat products....... .............................. .
Grain-mill products...............................
Bakery products.................................. .
Beverages:
M alt liquors....................................
Tobacco manufactures............ ................ .
Cigarettes............. ........... .................... Cigars.................. ......................... .........
Tobacco and snuff.................................
Textile-mill products...................................
Yarn and thread m ills........................
Broad-woven fabric mills___________
Cotton, silk, synthetic fiber...........
Woolen and worsted..................... .
Knitting mills................................. ......
Full-fashioned hosiery.................. .
Seamless hosiery........ ...................
K nit underwear_______________
Dyeing and finishing textiles..............
Carpets, rugs, other floor coverings__
Apparel and other finished textile products_______________________ ______
M en’s and boys’ suits and coats_____
M en’s and boys’ furnishings and work
clothing.......... ...... ..............................
Lumber and wood products (except furniture)_________________ _______ ___
Logging camps and contractors...........
Sawmills and planing mills . ______
Mill work, plywood, and prefabricated
structural wood products..................
Furniture and fixtures............... ..................
Household furniture..... .........................
Other furniture and fixtures_________
Paper and allied products...........................
Pulp, paper, and paperboard mills___
Paperboard containers and boxes____
Chemicals and allied products................. .
Industrial inorganic chemicals...........
Industrial organic chemicals________
Synthetic fibers..............................
Drugs and medicines__ __________
Paints, pigments, and fillers________
Products of petroleum and coal..................
Petroleum refining...............................
Rubber products_____________________
Tires and inner tubes____ _________
Rubber footwear__________________
Other rubber products................. ........
Leather and leather products.....................
Leather: tanned, curried, and finished.
Footwear (except rubber)...................
Stone, clay, and glass products..... ........... .
Glass and glass products.......................
Cement, hydraulic..... ...........................
Structural clay products......................
Pottery and related products...............
Primary metal industries...... ......................
Blast furnaces, steelworks, and rolling mills..............................................
Iron and steel foundries_____________
Gray-iron foundries...... ........ ...... .
Malleable-iron foundries................
Steelfoundries.............. ..................
Primary smelting and refining of nonferrous metals:
Primary smelting and refining of
copper, lead, and zinc_____ ____
Rolling, drawing, and alloying of nonferrous metals:
Rolling, drawing, and alloying of
copper...........................................
Nonferrous foundries............ ................
Other primary metal industries:
Iron and steel forgings............. ......
See footnotes at end of table;
https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
Separation rate
Total accession
rate
Nov.
1956
Total
Dec.
1956
Nov.
1956
Dec.
1956
2.8
2.8
2.7
3.3
3.3
3.1
3.3
4.2
3.8
3.4
4.1
0
4.0
4.9
2.2
2.6
4.7
2.1
1.6
2.7
1.6
3.4
2.9
3.6
3.1
7.0
3.5
2.1
2.3
3.4
2.6
3.0
«
1.3
1.3
1.4
0.2
.2
.2
1.1
1.3
.9
1.1
2.0
0
1.0
.6
.7
1.5
.5
1.4
.7
2.2
.6
1.6
1.6
1.6
1.7
1.4
1.6
1.5
1.5
1.4
1.2
1.1
(0
3.0
3.1
2.8
2.9
3.9
4.3
2.0
2.8
0
2.3
2.3
2.2
1.7
4.3
1.8
1.1
2.8
.6
2.9
3.3
3.0
2.9
4.2
2.4
2.1
2.9
1.5
2.8
1.7
0
.8
.7
.9
.5
1.8
2.7
2.0
1.9
2.6
1.2
.9
1.4
1.1
1.1
0)
1.9
2.0
3.4
4.4
2.9
1.9
3.7
4.1
1.6
1.0
0
1.9
.7
3.2
1.0
3.1
2.9
2.4
2.3
2.5
5.7
5.5
2.6
6.9
1.7
0
Dec.
1956
1.0
.9
1.0
2.2
2.3
1.9
«
Nov.
1956
.9
.5
1.4
.5
1.1
1.2
1.1
1.1
.7
1.4
1.1
1.5
1.1
.9
0
Nov.
1956
Dec.
1956
0.3
.3
.2
.2
.2
.3
.2
.2
.1
.3
.1
.2
.2
.2
.2
.2
.1
.1
.1
.1
.3
0
Mise., inch mili
tary
Layoff
Discharge
Quit
.2
.3
.3
.3
.4
0
.1
.2
.2
.2
.1
.3
.3
.3
.3
.2
.3
.2
.2
.3
.3
.4
0
2.2
1.9
.1
.1
.2
.2
Nov.
1956
Dec.
1956
1.4
1.5
1.3
1.5
1.5
1.4
1.8
2.3
2.3
1.8
1.6
0
2.7
3.9
1.0
.8
4.0
.4
.5
.3
.3
1.4
.9
1.5
1.0
5.3
1.6
.3
.6
1.7
.9
1.3
0
.7
.1
1.4
0
1.6
1.4
1.0
.9
1.6
4.1
4.3
1.0
5.6
.3
0
1.1
.5
0.2
.2
.1
0.2
.2
.2
.1
.1
.2
.1
.3
.2
.2
.1
.1
.1
.1
.1
.5
.1
.1
.1
.1
.1
.1
.1
0
Nov.
1956
.1
.2
0
.1
.1
.2
0
0
.5
.2
.1
.2
.2
.2
.1
.1
.1
.3
.2
1.3
2.0
.1
.3
.1
.1
1.7
2.5
3.0
3.7
1.8
2.1
.2
.2
1.0
1.2
.1
.1
2.2
4.3
1.7
3.2
8.0
2.1
4.9
5.8
5.7
6.1
13.5
4.9
.9
1.1
.9
2.0
5.1
1.5
.2
.3
.1
.4
.3
.4
3.6
4.3
4.5
3.5
7.8
2.8
.2
.1
.2
.2
.2
.2
2.2
1.8
1.6
2.2
1.7
1.2
1.7
1.1
1.5
1.0
1.5
1.0
.8
2.0
2.5
2.5
2.3
2.3
1.2
2. 8
1.6
1.4
1.2
1.6
1.2
1.5
5.0
4.8
5.3
3.5
2.6
1.4
3. 9
1.8
Ì.8
1.1
1.2
1.0
1.2
1.1
.6
2.6
1.4
6.4
3.0
3.8
3.1
3.9
2.7
2.9
2.1
3.8
2.9
2.0
1.0
1.0
1.1
.9
.9
.5
1. 5
.5
.7
.3
.2
.8
.6
.4
.3
.8
.4
1.2
1.1
1.6
.7
1.8
.6
.5
.4
.9
1.1
.7
1.1
1.6
1.6
1.4
1.3
.7
2.1
.7
.7
.4
.3
.2
.3
.3
.2
.2
.1
.3
.1
.2
.1
.2
.4
.4
.4
.3
.2
.4
.1
.1
.1
1.6
1.3
1.2
1.4
.7
.4
1.0
.4
.3
.2
.3
.1
3.5
2.6
3.1
1. 6
.9
.4
1. 3
.8
.8
.4
.7
.2
.2
.2
.1
.2
.2
.1
.1
.1
.1
.1
.1
.2
.2
.2
.2
.2
.1
.2
.1
.2
.2
.2
.6
1.6
1.2
1.3
2.0
3.8
2.1
4.1
1.5
1.3
.4
2.0
1.3
1.5
.5
2.1
1.5
2.4
2.4
4.3
2.6
4.6
1.9
2.0
1.2
1.5
2.5
2.0
2.9
2.7
2.8
2.7
2.0
1.2
2.9
1.2
1.3
.7
.7
1.2
1.7
1.2
.6
1.8
1.1
2.2
2.3
3.2
1.9
3.4
2.3
2.3
1.8
3.6
2.4
1.8
1.3
1.8
1.8
2.1
1.7
1.3
2.3
2.4
2.1
2.3
1.2
2.1
2.0
1.8
2.4
1.4
2.7
3.0
2.5
2.4
1.8
1.8
1.6
1.0
2.9
1.5
4.5
2.8
3.7
.7
.7
.7
.8
.3
0
.1
0
.2
0
0
.1
.1
.1
.7
.7
.2
.1
.6
.2
.2
.7
.1
.2
.3
.2
.1
.2
.2
.2
.3
.2
.4
.2
.5
.7
.8
1.0
.4
1.1
1.3
1. 4
1.0
2.3
1.0
.7
.9
.3
3.4
.9
1.6
2.0
1. 5
1.4
1.7
.7
2.2
.8
.7
.2
.3
.2
.4
.3
.1
.4
.4
.3
.4
.3
.9
.9
.5
1.0
1.2
.1
.2
.6
1.4
.4
2.1
.2
.4
.8
1.1
.4
.2
1.2
0
2.6
1.5
1.9
.8
2.1
1.0
.8
.9
1.2
1.5
.9
.1
.1
.1
.2
.2
.1
.2
.2
.1
.2
.2
.1
.2
.5
.8
.7
.8
.9
.6
1.2
1.3
1.4
1.1
1.7
1.1
2.8
3.0
1.7
4.3
3.1
2.6
.7
.2
.2
.2
.2
.1
.2
.2
.2
.1
.2
.2
.3
.3
.2
.2
.2
.2
.2
.1
.2
.3
.3
.2
.3
.1
.2
.1
.2
.2
.3
.2
.2
.2
.4
.9
1.2
.6
.6
.2
.2
.2
.1
.2
.2
.2
.1
.1
.2
.1
.1
.2
.3
.1
.7
1.6
.9
.9
1.2
.3
.3
.2
.3
.3
1.7
1.0
.2
.3
.2
392
MONTHLY LABOR REVIEW, MARCH 1957
T able B -2 : M o n th ly labor tu rn o v er rates in selected industries— C ontinued
[Per 100 employees]
Separation rate
Total accession
rate
Total
Industry
Dec.
1956
Manufacturing—C ontlnued
Fabricated metal products (except ord
nance, machinery, and transportation
equipm ent)...............................................
Cutlery, handtools, and hardware___
Cutlery and edge tools...................
Handtools____________________
Hardware___ ________________
Heating apparatus (except electric)
and plumbers’ supplies....................
Sanitary ware and plumbers’
supplies.-....................................
Oil burners, nonelectric heating
and cooking apparatus, not elsewhere classified...... ........... ..........
Fabricated structural metal products.
Metal stamping, coating, and engraving________________________
Machinery (except electrical)......................
Engines and tu rb in es..........................
Agricultural machinery and tractors..
Construction and mining m achinery..
Metalworking machinery__________
Machine tools._____ __________
Metalworking machinery (except
machine tools)............................
Machine-tool accessories...............
Special-industry machinery (except
metalworking m achinery)................
General industrial machinery_______
Office and store machines and devices.
Service-industry
and
household
machines ...........................................
Miscellaneous machinery parts. ____
Electrical machinery__________________
Electrical generating, transmission,
distribution, and industrial apparatus______________ ______ _____
Communication equipment.................
Radios, phonographs, television
sets, and equipment. ................
Telephone, telegraph, and related
equipment__________________
Electrical appliances, lamps, and miscellaneous products............................
Transportation equipment..........................
Automobiles....... .................................
Aircraft and parts_________________
Aircraft______________ _______
Aircraft engines and parts_______
Aircraft propellers and parts____
Other aircraft parts and equipm ent_______________________
Ship and boat building and repairing.
Railroad equipment...... ........................
Locomotives and parts_________
Railroad and street cars................
Other transportation equipment_____
Instruments and related products..............
Photographic apparatus___________
Watches and clocks................... ...........
Professional and scientific instruments.
Miscellaneous manufacturing industries...
Jewelry, silverware, and plated ware..
Nonmanufacturing
Metal mining............................................
Iron mining______________________
Copper m ining......................................
Lead and zinc mining...........................
Anthracite mining.............. .............. .........
Bituminous-coal mining .......................
Communication :
Telephone_______________________
Telegraph8. . ___________________
2.2
1.8
1. 1
1.9
2.0
Nov.
1956
Dec.
1956
Nov.
1956
2.9
2.9
2.0
3.6
2.9
2.9
2.5
1. 7
1.7
3.1
3.9
3.5
2.9
2.4
4.2
2.5
1.8
5.5
1.1
2.0
6.3
3.3
2.2
1.7
2.9
2.9
1.7
1.1
3.2
1. 5
1.5
1.5
Dec.
1956
Discharge
Nov.
1956
Dec.
1956
Layoff
Nov.
1956
Dec.
1956
0.9
1.1
.7
1.0
1.3
1.4
1.6
1.6
1.4
1.7
0.2
.3
.2
.3
.3
0.3
.4
.3
.3
.4
1.6
.9
.7
.2
1.3
5.5
.8
1.2
.2
.4
5.3
.7
.8
.1
5.0
2.3
5.6
2.7
.9
.8
1.4
1.1
3. 5
2.6
2.4
5.9
1.9
2.1
2.2
3.2
1.7
2.2
1.4
1.3
1.7
1.4
4.4
2.3
1.6
3.1
1.8
1.8
1.5
.9
.7
.6
.6
.7
.7
.7
1.1
1.9
1.6
2.7
1.6
2.3
1.9
2.4
1.4
1.7
1.9
1.8
2.4
2.8
1.6
1.9
1.2
1.6
1.8
2.6
3.0
2.4
3.0
1.9
2.3
3.5
(9
3.0
4.2
3.9
4 1
2.6
2.6
2.3
(9
2.6
(9
(9
(9
4.4
.8
1.7
(9
(9
1.7
1.9
1.3
1.5
.6
1.6
1.6
(9
.8
(9
(9
4.1
2.7
(9
2.9
5.1
5.9
3.3
3.4
2.7
3.2
4.2
12.6
3.5
2.0
4.2
1.9
2.0
1.0
2.2
2.3
3.1
2.1
3.1
.6
3.1
1.9
1.6
1.0
1.5
1.1
Mise., incl. mili
tary
Nov.
1956
Dec.
1956
Nov.
1956
2.0
1.3
1.0
.5
1.7
0.2
.2
.1
.2
.3
0.3
.3
.1
.2
.4
4.1
3.7
.2
.2
.4
5.3
3.9
.2
.3
.3
.2
.4
.3
3.5
1.1
3.6
1.0
.2
.1
.2
.2
1.5
1.0
.9
.9
1.0
1.1
1.0
.3
.2
.2
.2
.2
.2
.2
.3
.2
.2
.2
.3
.2
.2
1. 7
.6
1.2
.2
.2
.5
.2
2.3
.8
.3
1.6
.4
.4
.2
J2
.2
.2
.4
.2
.2
.3
.2
.2
.3
.1
.2
.2
.6
.9
.9
1.5
.2
.3
.3
.3
.6
.9
.6
.5
.2
.2
.1
.1
2.4
2.8
2.1
.8
.8
.7
1.1
1.2
1.1
.2
.2
.1
.3
.3
.2
.5
.7
.2
.8
1.1
.6
.1
.2
.1
.2
.2
.1
2.3
1.6
3.3
3.2
2.1
3.2
.6
.7
1.3
1.0
1.0
1.6
.2
.2
.3
.2
.2
.3
1.2
.4
1.6
1.7
.6
1.0
.3
.2
.2
.3
.2
.2
2.2
2.2
3.7
1.0
1.1
2.1
.2
.2
.4
.9
.7
1.1
.2
.2
.2
.1
.2
.2
.4
.6
.2
.2
.2
.3
.3
.5
.2
.2
.2
.1
.2
.1
.3
.4
1.1
.1
.1
.1
.1
.1
.1
.2
.2
(9
4.7
4.9
1.8
(9
4.6
2.9
2.7
1.7
1.7
1.5
(9
3.1
(9
(9
(9
3.5
11.3
1.9
(9
(9
1.8
7.0
1.8
2.9
3.1
1.7
1.4
(9
.6
(9
(9
1 Not available.
8 Less than 0.05.
8 Data relate to domestic employees except messengers and those compensated entirely on a commission basis.
https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
Quit
3.7
3.4
3.8
2.0
1.9
1.6
1.4
3.8
8.4
4.1
5.3
3.5
12.3
2.5
1.2
5.5
2.3
5.6
3.4
3.6
3. 1
3.8
2.1
1.1
1.4
1.6
1.9
(9
1.7
.9
1.0
.7
1.0
1.1
.9
(9
1.5
(9
(9
(9
1.0
1.0
1.0
(9
(9
1.0
1.3
1.0
.9
.3
1.1
.8
(9
.4
(9
(9
2.5
1.3
(9
(9
1.3
1.3
1.0
1.3
1.4
1.1
1.0
1.8
2.6
1. 1
1.0
1.2
2.2
1.1
.6
1.3
1.1
2.0
1.4
.5
.4
.2
(9
.3
.2
.2
.2
.2
.1
.3
.2
.2
.2
.2
.2
.2
.4
.5
.7
.2
(9
(9
(9
(9
(9
(9
.3
.3
.2
(9
.2
.3
.2
2.0
.3
2.8
1.3
.9
.3
.4
.1
.3
.1
(9
(9
(9
1.2
1.1
(9
(9
(9
(9
.3
(9
.3
.4
.2
.1
.3
.2
.3
.3
.3
.1
(9
2.5
1.7
.1
(9
3.2
1.3
1.2
.3
.3
.3
(9
(9
(9
(9
2.2
9.9
.6
(9
(9
.5
5.2
.4
1.5
2.7
.1
.4
(9
.l
.1
(9
(9
.2
(9
1. 7
1.5
2.0
.3
.2
.2
(9
1.0
(9
(9
1.3
4.8
2.4
3.1
2.0
9.5
1.0
.4
3.8
.8
3.1
1.5
1.0
2.5
.3
.5
.1
.8
.3
.6
(9
(9
(9
(9
(9
.l
.1
.1
.1
.2
.2
.2
.1
.2
.1
(9
.1
(9
(9
.3
.3
.5
.2
.1
.1
.1
.2
N ote.—See footnote 1 and N ote on table B -l, p. 390. For industries ineluded in the durable- and nondurable-goods categories, see footnotes 2 and
3, table A-2 (exceptions are contained in the note to table B -l).
393
C: EARNINGS AND HOURS
C: Earnings and Hours
T able C -l: Hours and gross earnings of production workers or nonsupervisory employees1
Mining
Metal
Year and month
Avg. Avg.
wkly. wkly.
earn hours
ings
1955: Average........... $92. 42
08. 04
December___
97. 52
1956: Average_____
January........... 98.93
96.48
February......
M arch............. 95.11
96.67
April_______
M ay................ 98. 50
97.36
J u n e _______
July_._............
96.02
August..........
92.63
September___ 100.54
October_____ 97.39
November___ 96.23
December___ 100.85
1955: Average_____
December___
1956: Average_____
January..........
February____
M arch.............
April_______
M ay......... ......
June.............. Ju ly .................
August______
September___
October_____
November___
December___
1955: Average_____
December___
1956: Average_____
January...........
February____
March______
April....... ........
M ay---- ------June _______
July----- ------August______
September___
October_____
November___
December___
Avg. Avg.
hrly. wkly. Avg.
earn earn wkly.
ings hours
ings
42.2 $2.19 $92. 46
2.28 99.36
43.0
42.4
2.30 97.44
43.2
2.29 98. 49
42.5
2.27 95.91
2.27 92.34
41.9
42.4
2. 28 96.24
43.2
2.28 100. 62
42.7
2.28 98.23
42.3
2.27 89.05
2.31 82.38
40.1
42.6
2.36 103.41
2.33 97. 71
41.8
2.33 98.21
41.-3
2.34 104. 25
43.1
M ini ng—Continued
40.2
41.4
40.1
40.7
40.3
38.8
40.1
42.1
41.1
36.2
33.9
41.2
39.4
39.6
41.7
Copper
Avg. Avg. Avg.
hrly. wkly.
earn earn wkly.
ings
ings hours
$2.30
2.40
2.43
2.42
2.38
2.38
2.40
2.39
2.39
2.46
2.43
2. 51
2.48
2.48
2.50
Petroleum and nat
ural-gas produc
Nonmetallic mining
tion (except con
and quarrying
tract services)
40.6 $2.32 $80.99
$94.19
44.5 $1.82
40.4
2.33 80.96
1.84
94.13
44.0
1.92
44.6
2.48 85.63
41.0
■101. 68
2.38 80. 41
1.87
43.0
99.96
42.0
2.43 81.35
43.5
97.93
40.3
1.87
2.46 81.27
40.4
99.38
43.0
1.89
2.50 83.92
44.4
1.89
103. 25 41.3
45.1
40.3
2.48 85.69
1.90
99.94
2.49 88. 59 45.9
1.93
99.60
40.0
41.9
2.53 88.01
45.6
106.01
1.93
1.94
40.6
2.47 87.69
45.2
100.28
42.4
2.54 89.77
45.8
1.96
107.70
2.49 89.83
45.6
1.97
40.6
101.09
1.96
44.5
40.6
2.50 87.22
101. 50
2. 52 85. 46 43.6
1.96
104.83
41.6
General contractors
36.1 $2.66
$96.03
2. 72
36.1
98.19
2. 80
101. 92 36.4
2.74
35.1
96.17
2.74
35.5
97.27
34.6
2. 75
95.15
2.75
36.0
99.00
36.5
2.76
100.74
103. 42 37 2 2.78
2.79
37.0
103.23
2.81
37.2
104.53
2.84
37.4
106.22
37.4
2.85
106.59
2. 87
102. 46 35.7
104. 26 36.2
2.88
Special-trade con
tractors—C ontinued
$90. 22
92.11
95.04
88.75
90.30
87.98
92.20
93. 96
96.42
96.52
98.05
99.06
99.80
96.21
96.39
1955: Average...........
December___
1956: Average_____
January_____
February____
M arch.........
A pril.............
M ay......... ......
June________
July................
August______
September___
October_____
November___
December.......
See footnotes at end of table
https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
44.1
43.8
43.7
45.2
44.1
43.9
43.9
44.2
44.0
42.9
43.0
44.0
43.3
41.6
43.7
$2.17 $83.82
2.26 88.62
2.31 89. 67
2.27 88.83
2. 26 86.74
2.26 88.62
2. 27 90.10
2.26 89.89
2.28 88.17
2.34 90.30
2.34 91.37
2.36 89.40
2.34 89.25
2.33 88.37
2.33 91.58
Avg. Avg. Avg.
hrly. wkly.
earn earn wkly.
ings hours
ings
33.4
41.7 $2.01 $84.50
42.4
2.09 88. 23 34.6
42.1
2.13 87.58
33.3
35.1
42.3
2.10 91.96
2.08 85. 58 33.3
41.7
2.11 71.32
28.3
42.0
42.5
2.12 80.34
30.9
42.2
29.2
2.13 70. 66
41.2
2.14 88.63
33.7
35.6
2.15 92.20
42.0
33.3
42.3
2.16 87.25
41.2
2.17 87.88
33.8
35.4
41.9
2.13 94.87
33.9
2.15 91.19
41.1
2.16 108.04
36.5
42.4
Contract construction
$95.94
97.99
101.65
95.41
96.84
94.50
98.19
100.44
103.25
103.09
104.78
106.37
106.86
102. 28
103. 49
Avg. Avg.
hrly. wkly. Avg.
earn earn wkly.
ings
ings hours
$2.53
2.55
2.63
2.62
2.57
2. 52
2.60
2.42
2.63
2.59
2.62
2.60
2.68
2.69
2. 96
$96.26
105. 73
105. 94
104.22
103.18
102.38
105. 46
106.02
107.82
102.16
102.49
106.12
110.38
106.79
115.33
37.6
39.6
37.7
38.6
38.5
38.2
37.8
38.0
38.1
36.1
37.0
37.9
37.8
36.2
38.7
Avg.
hrly
earn
ings
$2.56
2.67
2.81
2.70
2.68
2.68
2.79
2.79
2.83
2.83
2.77
2.80
2.92
2.95
2.98
Nonbuilding construction
Total: Contract con
struction
Total: Nonbuilding
construction
40.2 $2.36
36.9 $2.60 $94.87
2.41
39.4
2.67 94.95
36.7
2. 74 101. 59 40.8
2. 49
37.1
2.42
38.5
35.6
2.68 93.17
2.44
38.7
2.69 94.43
36.0
2.45
37.5
35.0
2.70 91.88
2. 42
39.2
36.5
2.69 94.86
40.7
2.44
37.2
2.70 99. 31
2. 71 104.90
2.48
42.3
38.1
42.4
37.9
2. 72 105.15
2.48
2.75 106.42
42.4
2.51
38.1
2.53
38.4
2.77 108. 28 42.8
42.4
2. 55
2. 79 108.12
38.3
2.54
2. 81 100.84
36.4
39.7
2.82 98. 67 39.0
2.53
36.7
Building construction
35.8
35.7
36.0
34.4
35.0
34.1
35.6
36.0
36.8
36.7
37.0
37.1
37.1
35.5
35.7
Total: Special-trade Plumbing and heat
ing
contractors
$2.52 $100.83
36.4 $2.77 $106. 68 38.1 $2.80
2.82 109.42
2.82
36.5
38.8
2.58 102.93
38.2
2.92 112.31
2. 94
2.64 107.16
36.7
2.84 109.16
2.85
38.3
2.58 101.10
35.6
2. 58 102.03
37.7
2.85 107.82
2.86
35.8
34.9
2.86 108. 58 37.7
2.88
2.58 99. 81
2. 59 103. 82 36.3
2.88
37.5
2.86 108.00
38.3
2.61 105.62
36.8
2.91
2.87 111.45
2. 62 108.38
2. 92
38.7
37.5
2.89 113.00
2.95
38.5
2.63 107.59
37.1
2.90 113.58
2.65 109.66
37.3
2.94 114.35
2.97
38.5
2. 96 115.03
2.98
38.6
2.67 111.30
37.6
2.99
2.69 112.05
37.6
38.6
2.98 115. 41
35.9
2. 99 112. 57 37.4
2. 71 107.34
3.01
3.03
38.9
2.70 110.17
36.6
3.01 117.87
Highway and street
$91.05
87.47
97.39
85 19
86.14
84.90
88.65
94.16
102. 49
102.70
105.16
106.12
106. 52
95.41
90.78
41.2
39.4
41.8
38.9
38.8
37.4
39.4
41.3
43.8
43.7
44.0
44.4
44.2
40.6
39.3
$2.21
2.22
2.33
2.19
2.22
2.27
2.25
2.28
2.34
2.35
2.39
2.39
2. 41
2.35
2.31
Other nonbuilding
construction
$98. 50 39.4 $2.50
39.5
101.12
2.56
2.63
104. 94
39.9
98.43
2.57
38.3
99.85
2.58
38.7
2.57
96.38
37.5
2.56
100.10
39.1
103.86
40.1
2.59
106. 75
2.61
40.9
107. 68
41.1
2.62
107.83
2.63
41.0
2.67
110.27
41.3
2.69
109. 75 40.8
105.30
2. 70
39.0
104.10
2.69
38.7
$2.71 $76. 52
2.77 79.71
2. 85 80.19
2.79 78. 55
2.80 78.17
2.81 78.78
2. 81 78.99
2.81 79.00
2.84 79.19
2.84 79.00
2.87 79. 79
2.89 81.40
2.91 82. 21
2.92 82.22
2. 95 84.05
Painting and deco
Electrical work
rating
$94.38
34.7 $2.72 $116.82
39.2 $2.98
34.5
96.26
2.79 122.00
40.0
3.05
99. 81
34.9
2.86 125. 22
39.5
3.17
94.24
33.9
2.78 120.26
39.3
3.06
94.92
39.6
33.9
2.80 122.36
3.09
95.26
33.9
2.81 120.12
39.0
3.08
2. 82 120. 74 39.2
97. 57 34.6
3.08
35.2
99.62
2.83 122. 22 39.3
3.11
101.24
35.9
2.82 124. 66
39.7
3.14
35.1
39.5
2.85 124.03
3.14
100.04
39.9
103.10
35.8
2.88 127.68
3.20
103.24
35.6
40.3
2.90 131.78
3.27
104.11
35.9
39.9
2.90 130.87
3.28
2. 91 124. 97 38.1
98.36
33.8
3. 28
34.4
2. 92 130. 22
100.45
3.28
39.7
Manufacturing
Other special-trade Total: Manufacturing
contractors
35.5
35.1
35.8
33.9
34.6
33.1
35.6
36.1
36.9
36.6
36.7
37.1
37.0
35.3
35.3
$95. 70
98.99
100.95
102.60
99.67
99. 21
99.65
99.89
100. 32
100.39
100.62
103.84
101.32
96.93
101.82
Avg. Avg Avg.
hrly. wkly.
earn earn wkly.
ings
ings hours
Bituminous
Anthracite
Lead and zinc
Special-trade contractors
Total: Building con
struction
$96.21
97.23
102.03
94.58
96.88
93.01
100.04
101. 44
104. 80
103.94
105.33
107.22
107. 67
103. 08
104.14
Coal
Iron
Total: Metal
40.7
41.3
40.5
40.7
40.5
40.4
40.3
40.1
40.2
40.1
40.3
40.7
40.7
40.5
41.0
Durable goods3
$1.88 $83.21
1.93 86.52
1.98 86.31
1.93 84.87
1.93 84.05
1.95 84.25
1.96 85.49
1.97 84.86
1.97 85.27
1.97 84. 25
1.98 85.68
2.00 88.60
2.02 89.01
2.03 88.99
2.05 91.34
41.4
42.0
41.1
41.2
41.0
40.9
41.1
40.8
40.8
40.7
40.8
41.4
41.4
41.2
41.9
Nondurable goods3
$2.01 $68.06
2.06 70.30
2.10 71.68
2.06 69.83
2.05 69.65
2.06 70.49
2.08 70.17
2.08 70.38
2. 09 70.95
2.07 71. 71
2.10 71.68
2.14 72.44
2.15 72.83
2.16 73.26
2.18 74.03
39.8
40.4
39.6
39.9
39.8
39.6
39.2
39.1
39.2
39.4
39.6
39.8
39.8
39.6
39.8
Total: Ordnance
and accessories
$1. 71 $83.44
1.74 86.73
1.81 91.54
1.75 87.56
1. 75 88.19
1.78 88.80
1.79 90.29
1.80 90. 71
1.81 91. 52
1.82 91.74
1.81 90.64
1.82 93.88
1.83 95.18
1.85 94.50
1.86 96.93
40.7
41.3
41.8
41.3
41.6
41.3
41.8
41.8
41.6
41.7
41.2
42.1
42.3
42.0
42.7
Food and kindred
products
Total: Food and
kindred products
$2.05 $72.10
41.2 $1.75
2.10 75. 66
41.8
1.81
2.19 76.04
41.1
1.85
2.12 76.36
1.84
41.5
2.12 74.48
1.83
40.7
2.15 75.11
1.85
40.6
2.16 74.37
40.2
1.85
2.17 75.11
1.85
40.6
41.2
2.20 76.22
1.85
41.2
2.20 76.22
1.85
41.4
2.20 75.35
1.82
2.23 76.80
42.2
1.82
2.25 76.41
41.3
1.85
2. 25 78.88
41.3
1.91
1.92
2.27 78. 72
41.0
MONTHLY LABOR REVIEW, MARCH 1957
394
T able C - l : H ours an d gross earnings of production w orkers or nonsupervisory em ployees *•—C ontinued
Manufacturing—Continued
Food and kindred products—Continued
Year and month
Meat products 4
Avg. Avg.
wkly. wkly.
earn hours
ings
1955: Average........... $83.16
December....... 93.01
1956: Average_____ 87.99
January........... 91.54
February........ 85.08
M arch ............ 86.11
April_______ 83.42
M ay.............— 84.46
June________ 86.94
J u ly ............... 86.32
August______ 84.46
September___ 89.45
October_____ 88.20
I\ ovember___ 95. 91
December___ 91.96
42.0
44.5
41.9
43.8
41.3
41.6
40.3
40.8
41.8
41.5
41.0
42.8
41.8
43.4
41.8
$56.65
57.83
62.33
59.36
58.75
59.63
59.68
60. 67
60.06
61.54
65. 52
67. 35
65.60
58.03
61.34
38.8
38.3
39.7
38.8
38.4
37.5
37.3
38.4
39.0
39.7
42.0
42.9
41.0
37.2
38.1
$70.35
71.40
73.49
71.10
72.09
71.33
71.73
73.26
74. 03
74.21
73. 71
74.85
74.30
74.93
74.34
40.9
40.8
40.6
40.4
40.5
40.3
40.3
40.7
40.9
41.0
40.5
40.9
40.6
40.5
40.4
$58.11
59.39
61.45
59.70
60.25
59.74
60.83
60.92
61.86
62.17
61.54
64.12
63.34
62.31
62. 56
39.8
40.4
39.9
39.8
39.9
39.3
39.5
39.3
39.4
39.6
39.7
41.1
40.6
40.2
40.1
See footnotes at end of table.
https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
Condensed and
evaporated milk
Ice cream and ices
Avg. Avg.
hrly. wkly. Avg.
earn earn wkly.
ings
ings hours
Avg. Avg. Avg.
hrly. wkly.
earn earn wkly.
ings
ings hours
Avg. Avg.
hrly. wkly. Avg.
earn earn wkly.
ings
ings hours
$1.98 $86.92
2.09 98. 52
2.10 92.00
2.09 96.98
2.06 88.40
2.07 89. 67
2.07 86.27
2.07 87.31
2.08 90.07
2. 08 89. 44
2.06 87.74
2.09 93.74
2.11 92.84
2.21 101. 85
2.20 96.64
$2.05 $80.90
2.17 85.85
2.18 85. 28
2.16 84.25
2.12 82.62
2.13 83.03
2.13 81.40
2.14 84.86
2.16 88.37
2.15 87.34
2.14 85. 07
2.17 86. 31
2.20 83.44
2.32 88. 02
2.29 87.99
$1.94 $72.65
2.02 72.42
2.05 74. 30
2.03 73.02
2.02 73.62
2.03 73. 44
2.04 73.18
2.04 73.62
2.06 75. 86
2.06 75.95
2.04 74.30
2. 06 75.93
2. 05 74.80
2.10 75. 65
2.10 75. 54
$1.67 $74.46
1.70 73. 81
1.74 75. 95
1.71 75.21
1.72 75.21
1.72 75.31
1.73 75.34
1.72 75.68
1.74 78.82
1.75 77.43
1.74 76. 56
1.77 78.59
1.76 75. 25
1.78 75.23
1.79 75.65
$1.64 $74.90
1.67 75.78
1.73 77. 46
1.69 75.00
1.69 77.53
1.70 76.26
1.72 75. 58
1.72 76.44
1.74 78.87
1.74 78.69
1.74 76. 86
1.77 79.42
1.75 78.49
1.77 78.17
1.78 78. 81
42.4
45.4
42.2
44.9
41.7
42.1
40.5
40.8
41.7
41.6
41.0
43.2
42.2
43.9
42.2
Seafood, canned and
cured
$1.46 $50.55
1.51 59.85
1.57 50.33
1.53 56.11
1.53 50.06
1.59 53.57
1.60 54.74
1.58 50.53
1.54 49.59
1.55 49. 77
1.56 49.75
1.57 48.84
1.60 50. 27
1.56 44. 76
1.61 52.56
32.2
34.2
30.5
33.2
30.9
31.7
32.2
29.9
32.2
31.3
30.9
28.9
30.1
26.8
31.1
41.1
41.1
40.7
40.5
40.7
40.4
40.4
41.0
41.1
41.0
40.6
40.8
40.7
40.9
40.6
$1.46 $55.98
1.47 57.77
1.54 59. 55
1.50 57.71
1.51 58.51
1.52 58.02
1.54 59.10
1.55 59.19
1.57 60.13
1.57 58.98
1.55 59.65
1. 56 62. 73
1.56 61.41
1.55 60. 95
1.56 61.20
39.7
40.4
39.7
39.8
39.8
39.2
39.4
39.2
39.3
38.8
39.5
41.0
40.4
40.1
40.0
39.9
38.9
41.5
40.1
39.6
38.8
38.5
39.6
39.8
41.2
43.4
44.9
43.1
39.0
39.6
39.7
39.4
40.0
40.1
39.9
39.7
39.7
39.5
39.9
40.9
40.1
41.4
40.0
39.0
39.4
$1.47 $77.18
1.51 77.40
1.59 80.29
1.54 78.74
1.56 75.90
1.62 77.35
1.64 78. 51
1.62 79. 06
1.58 79.79
1.56 80.85
1.58 80. 54
1.59 83.73
1.63 83.16
1.57 81.46
1.64 82. 51
$1.41 $82. 22
1.43 82. 59
1.50 85.41
1.45 82.18
1.47 82.78
1.48 84.59
1.50 84.40
1.51 84.82
1.53 87. 72
1.52 89.62
1.51 88.13
1.53 85. 39
1.52 84.96
1. 52 86.37
1.53 87. 64
40.5
39.9
40.1
39.7
39.8
39.9
40.0
40.2
40.8
41.3
40.8
39.9
39.7
39.8
40.2
44.1
43.0
43.4
43.5
42.4
42.5
42.9
43.2
43.6
43.7
43.3
44.3
44.0
43.1
43.2
43.6
47.4
43.5
41.7
40.5
39.9
40.3
39.4
41.4
42.3
41.0
42.0
43.0
48.9
47.5
41.9
41.4
41.2
40.9
40.7
40.9
40.8
41.5
41.6
42.0
42.3
41.1
40.6
40.4
41.8
44.7
44.7
44.0
44.3
42.4
43.4
43.2
43.1
43.6
43.0
43.9
45.9
45.4
44.6
44.6
$1.77 $84.12
1.62 84.04
1.87 87.36
1.88 85.91
1.91 83.44
1.92 82.21
1.97 84.05
1.95 81.80
1.96 87.35
2.00 93.01
1. 96 87. 76
2.00 92.22
1.83 93.95
1.76 89.66
1. 79 85.86
$1.51
1.56
1. 57
1.52
1.52
1.55
1.56
1. 55
1.59
1. 58
1.58
1.59
1.56
1.58
1.61
42.7
41.4
42.0
41.5
40.9
40.3
41.2
40.1
42.2
44.5
42.6
43.5
43.9
41.7
40.5
$1.85 $74. 25
1.90 74.12
1.93 76. 83
1.90 75.75
1.85 73.61
1.89 73.79
1.89 76.04
1.88 75. 77
1.89 77.33
1.93 78. 05
1.96 75.86
2.00 78.94
1.98 78. 32
2.00 77.94
1.98 79.35
$97.84
98.50
103.08
97.61
99.04
100.73
101.35
102.14
106. 34
110. 24
107.33
102.31
100. 49
102. 57
105. 34
40.1
39.4
39.8
39.2
39.3
39.5
39.9
39.9
40.9
41.6
40.5
39.5
38.5
39.0
39.9
$1.75
1.80
1. 84
1.79
1.82
1.82
1.83
1.82
1. 83
1.83
1.83
1.86
1.86
1.87
1.89
45.0
43.6
43.9
44.3
43.3
42.9
43.7
43.8
44.7
44.6
43.6
44.6
44.0
43.3
43.6
$1.65
1.70
1.75
1.71
1.70
1.72
1.74
1.73
1.73
1. 75
1.74
1.77
1.78
1.80
1.82
Beet sugar
$1.97 $73. 43
2.03 76.44
2.08 78.94
2.07 73.53
2.04 73.68
2.04 72.19
2.04 76.44
2.04 73.73
2.07 76.33
2.09 75.66
2.06 72.57
2.12 77.60
2.14 71.88
2.15 85.31
2.12 88.64
Malt liquors
42.8
42.1
42.1
41.9
42.6
41.9
41.3
42.0
43.1
43.0
42.0
42.7
42.2
41.8
41.7
Avg.
hrly.
earn
ings
Prepared feeds
Cane-sugar refining
Bottled soft drinks
$2.03 $63.27
2.07 64.58
2.13 64.68
2.07 62.17
2.08 61.86
2.12 63.40
2.11 63.65
2.11 64.33
2.15 66.14
2.17 66.36
2.16 66.83
2.14 65. 35
2.14 63. 34
2.17 63. 83
2.18 67. 30
45.4
44.2
43.9
44.5
44.5
44.3
43.8
44.0
45.3
44.5
44.0
44.4
43.0
42.5
42.5
Flour and other
grain-mill products
$1.75 $82.70
1.80 84.93
1.85 84. 92
1.81 84.17
1.79 78.44
1.82 82.03
1.83 81.65
1.83 81.03
1.83 82. 40
1.85 82.99
1.86 86.04
1.89 91.80
1.89 89.89
1.89 89.20
1.91 88.31
Sugar 4
$1.58 $77.17
1.62 76. 79
1.65 81.35
1.64 78.40
1.64 77.36
1.64 76. 61
1.65 79.39
1.65 76.83
1.65 81.14
1.64 84.60
1.66 80. 36
1.66 84.00
1.66 78.69
1.67 86. 06
1.70 85.03
Beverages4
43.5
42.6
42.7
42.7
42.8
42.7
42.3
42.8
43.6
43.4
42.7
42.9
42.5
42. 5
42.2
Grain-mill products 4
Biscuits, crackers,
and pretzels
$1.75 $62.73
1.78 63.83
1.84 66.00
1.79 65.76
1.81 65. 44
1.80 65.11
1.81 65. 51
1.83 65.18
1.85 65. 84
1.85 67.08
1.86 66.57
1.87 68. 72
1.87 66.40
1.89 65.13
1.87 66. 98
Confectionery
41.7
42.5
41.6
41.5
40.9
40.9
39.9
41.6
42.9
42.4
41.7
41.9
40.7
42.2
41.9
Canned fruits, vegetables, and soups
$1.57 $58.65
1.75 58.74
1.65 65. 99
1.69 61.75
1.62 61.78
1.69 62.86
1.70 63.14
1.69 64.15
1.54 62. 88
1.59 64. 27
1.61 68. 57
1.69 71.39
1.67 70. 25
1.67 61.23
1.69 64. 94
Bread and other
bakery products
$1.72 $71.93
1.75 73.16
1.81 74.89
1.76 72.50
1.78 73.67
1.77 72. 72
1.78 73.12
1.80 75.03
1.81 76.04
1.81 75.85
1.82 75. 52
1.83 76.30
1.83 76.11
1.85 77.30
1.84 75.92
Confectionery and
related products 4
1955: Average...........
December.......
1956: Average_____
January_____
February........
M arch______
April_______
M ay________
June________
J u ly ...............
August______
September___
October_____
November___
December___
Dairy products 4
Avg. Avg. Avg.
hrly. wkly.
earn earn wkly.
ings
ings hours
Bakery products 4
1955: Average_____
December___
1956: Average__ ..
January..........
February____
March______
April_______
M ay________
June_______
J u ly ................
A ugust..........
September___
October_____
November___
December___
Sausages and
casings
Avg. Avg. Avg.
hrly. wkly.
earn earn wkly.
ings
ings hours
Canning and
preserving 4
1955: Average...........
December.......
1956: Average_____
January...........
February........
March.............
April___ ____
M ay................
June................
J u ly ................
August______
September___
October_____
November___
December.. ..
Meatpacking,
wholesale
42.2
45.5
44.1
40.4
39.4
37.6
38.8
38.4
40.6
38.6
37.6
40.0
43.3
49.6
49.8
$1.74
1.68
1.79
1.82
1.87
1.92
1.97
1.92
1.88
1.96
1. 93
1.94
1.66
1.72
1.78
Distilled, rectified,and
blended liquors
$2.44 $78. 56
2. 50 75.95
2.59 82.50
2.49 80.13
2.52 81.16
2. 55 80.11
2. 54 79. 87
2.56 79. 31
2.60 79.66
2.65 81.48
2.65 79. 46
2. 59 80.05
2.61 86. 62
2.63 88.94
2.64 82.89
38.7
37.6
39.1
38.9
39.4
38.7
38.4
38.5
38.3
38.8
38.2
38.3
40.1
40.8
38.2
$2.03
2.02
2.11
2.06
2.06
2.07
2. 08
2.06
2.08
2.10
2.08
2. 09
2.16
2.18
2.17
C: EARNINGS AND HOURS
395
T able C - l : H ours an d gross earnings of production workers or nonsupervisory employees 1— C ontinued
Manufacturing—Continued
Food and kindred products—Continued
Year and month
Miscellaneous food
products *
Avg. Avg.
wkly. wkly.
earn hours
ings
1955: Average_____ $67.97
December....... 70.14
1956: Average___ - 72. 51
January_____ 70. 21
February...... . 70. 97
M arch..... ....... 71.45
April_______
70.18
M ay________ 71.10
72.21
June________
July------------- 72.22
August______ 73. 57
September___ 74. 75
74. 75
October_____
November___ 75.71
December___
75.17
Corn sirup, sugar, oil,
and starch
Avg. Avg.
hrly. wkly. Avg.
earn earn wkly.
ings
ings hours
41.7
41.5
41.2
41.3
41.5
41.3
40.8
41.1
41.5
40.8
41.1
41.3
41.3
41.6
41.3
$1.63 $83.16
1.69 84. 85
1.76 86.32
1.70 83.02
1.71 83.02
1.73 83.01
1.72 83. 22
1.73 84. 25
1.74 85. 49
1.77 80. 70
1.79 90.09
1. 81 89.62
1.81 92. 42
1.82 90. 50
1.82 89. 62
Tobacco manufactures
Manufactured ice
Avg. Avg.
hrly. wkly. Avg.
earn earn wkly.
ings
ings hours
42.0
41.8
41.3
41.1
41.1
41.3
41.2
41.5
41.7
38.8
41.9
41.3
42.2
41.9
41.3
$1.98 $66. 28
2.03 67.20
2. 09 69.39
2.02 66.30
2.02 67.35
2.01 68. 98
2.02 67. 89
2. 03 67. 55
2.05 71.84
2.08 71.71
2.15 69.64
2.17 69. 76
2.19 69.28
2.16 71.07
2.17 72. 61
45.4
45.1
44.2
45.1
45.2
44.5
43.8
43.3
44.9
45.1
43.8
43.6
43.3
43.6
45.1
Total: Tobacco
manufactures
Avg. Avg.
hrly. wkly. Avg.
earn earn wkly.
ings
ings hours
$1.46 $51.60
1.49 53.70
1.57 56. 26
1.47 52. 96
1.49 50. 87
1.55 55.57
1.55 56.47
1.56 58.20
1.60 59.19
1.59 58. 59
1.59 55.13
1.60 56.03
1.60 54. 25
1.63 55. 87
1.61 58.76
Tobacco manufactures—Continued
Tobacco and snuS
1955: Average........... $54.17
December....... 55.80
1956: A v erag e.___
57.13
January_____ 55. 65
February........ 53.87
M arch______
56.42
A pril.............. 55.96
M ay................ 57.04
June________ 56. 52
Ju ly ------------- 55.39
August............ 57. 44
September___ 58.28
October_____ 58.28
November___ 58.88
December___
60.13
37.1
37.7
37.1
37.1
36.4
36.4
36. 1
36.8
36.7
36.2
37.3
37.6
37.6
37.5
38.3
39.8
40.0
39.0
40.0
39.9
39.8
39.7
38.8
38.9
39.3
39 6
39.2
38.4
38.2
39.3
$1.30 $54.27
1.31 57.27
1.35 56.28
1.32 56.31
1.31 56.17
1.32 56.17
1.32 55.07
1.32 55.18
1.34 53. 96
1.36 53. 68
1.37 54. 23
1. 37 54. 51
1.40 58.46
1.42 59.02
1.40 59.31
Narrow fabrics and
small wares
1955: Average_____ $56.28
December....... 58.63
1956: Average_____ 58.36
January........ . 57.77
58.06
February___
M arch..........
57.89
April................ 58.29
M ay________ 57.28
June....... ........ 58.25
July................. 57. 77
August______ 58.31
September___ 59.05
October_____
58.80
November___ 58.59
December___
60.30
40.2
41.0
39.7
40.4
40.6
40.2
40.2
39.5
39.9
39.3
39.4
39.9
39.2
38.8
40.2
See footnotes at end of table.
4 1 7 2 3 2 — 5 7 --------- 9
https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
40.5
41.8
40.2
41.1
41.0
40.7
40.2
39.7
39.1
38.9
39.3
39.5
40.6
40.7
40.9
Total: Textile-mill
products
$1.06 $55.74
1.14 58.50
1.20 57. 42
1.16 57.37
1.16 57. 51
1.33 57.06
1.35 56.20
1.35 56. 02
1.36 55. 73
1.34 55.73
1.17 56.45
1.14 56. 99
1.13 59.20
1.18 60.30
1.26 60.30
Broad-woven fabric
mills <
Thread mille
1955: Average......... $51. 74
December....... 52. 40
1956: Average_____ 52.65
January_____ 52.80
February___
52. 27
March______
52. 54
April............... 52.40
M ay________ 51.22
June________ 52.13
July------------- 53. 45
August______ 54. 25
September___ 53.70
53. 76
October_____
November___ 54.24
December___
55.02
39.8
37.6
38.8
36.2
35.1
37.8
37.5
38.7
39.1
38.1
39.3
43.6
40.4
37.3
39.2
40.1
41.2
39.6
40.4
40.5
39.9
39.3
38.9
38.7
38.7
39.2
39.3
40.0
40.2
40.2
$1.33 $67.30
1.37 71.72
1.45 71.05
1.39 70.45
1.39 61.66
1.47 67.03
1.49 68. 34
1.50 72. 16
1.51 73. 81
1.51 72.34
1.41 72.34
1.37 71. 98
1.37 70. 35
1.44 72.85
1.48 76.08
40.3
41.7
40.6
41.2
36.7
39.2
39.5
41.0
41.7
41.1
41.1
40.9
40.2
40.7
41.8
Avg. Avg.
hrly. wkly. Avg.
earn earn wkly.
ings
ings hours
$1.67 $44. 27
1.72 46.08
1.75 48.13
1.71 44.65
1.68 46.00
1.71 46.61
1.73 47.10
1.76 47.24
1.77 47. 74
1.76 47. 74
1.76 47.87
1. 76 48. 77
1.75 49. 41
1.79 50. 57
1.82 50. 05
Avg.
hrly.
earn
ings
37.2
38.4
37.6
36.9
37.4
36.7
36.8
37.2
37.3
37.3
37.4
38. 1
38.3
38.6
38.5
$1.19
1.20
1.28
1.21
1.23
1.27
1.28
1.27
1.28
1.28
1.28
1.28
1.29
1.31
1.30
41.0
42.1
41.2
41.8
42.4
41.4
40.2
41.0
41.1
44.0
42.8
41. 2
40. 9
40.7
41.5
Yam and thread
mills *
$1.55 $50.04
1.57 53.19
1.60 52.39
1.57 53.06
1.57 52. 66
1.56 52.01
1.57 51.47
1.60 50. 67
1.61 50. 54
1.61 51.19
1.60 51.99
1. 61 51. 72
1.63 54.12
1.65 55.32
1.62 54.65
39.4
40.6
39.1
40.5
40.2
39.4
38.7
38.1
38.0
38.2
38.8
38.6
39.5
39.8
39.6
Yarn mills
$1.27 $50.04
1.31 53. 45
1.34 52.53
1.31 53.32
1.31 53.46
1.32 52. 67
1.33 51. 74
1.33 50.67
1.33 50. 41
1.34 51.05
1. 34 51.86
1. 34 51. 72
1.37 54. 25
1.39 56.00
1.38 55.18
39.4
40.8
39.2
40.7
40.5
39.6
38.9
38.1
37.9
38.1
38.7
38.6
39.6
40.0
39.7
$1.27
1.31
1.34
1.31
1.32
1.33
1.33
1.33
1.33
1.34
1.34
1.34
1.37
1.40
1.39
Cotton, silk, synthetic fiber
Woolen and worsted
United States
$1.34 $52. 79
1.37 56. 30
1.40 54. 80
1.37 55. 35
1.37 55.08
1.38 54. 94
1.37 53. 87
1.39 53. 06
1.38 52.11
1.38 52.11
1.38 52.65
1. 38 53. 45
1.44 57. 51
1.45 58.34
1.45 58.34
40.3
41.7
40.0
41.0
40.8
40.4
39.9
39.3
38.6
38.6
39.0
39.3
40. 5
40.8
40.8
North
$1.31 $57.63
1.35 59. 76
1.37 58.46
1.35 59.04
1.35 58. 75
1.36 57. 46
1.35 56. 74
1.35 57. 66
1.35 56. 92
1.35 58. 80
1.35 57. 37
1.36 57. 75
1.42 60.10
1.43 59. 58
1.43 61.16
40.3
41.5
39.5
41.0
40.8
39.9
39.4
38.7
38.2
39.2
38.5
38. 5
39.8
39.2
40.5
South
$1.43 $51.99
1.44 55. 46
1.48 54.00
1.44 54. 53
1.44 54. 26
1.44 54.27
1.44 53.20
1.49 52. 40
1.49 51.08
1.50 50. 82
1.49 51.61
1.50 52.40
1.51 56. 84
1.52 58.30
1.51 58.08
403
41.7
40.0
41.0
40.8
40.5
40.0
39.4
38.7
38.5
39.1
39.4
40.6
41.1
40.9
Full-fashioned hosiery
United States
38.2
38.9
37.8
37.8
38.6
37.8
36.7
37.2
37.5
37.4
38.0
37.8
38.4
38.3
37.7
38.8
39.2
38.8
38.1
36.6
37.8
37.9
38.8
39.2
38.8
39.1
40.9
39.6
38.8
39.7
Scouring and comb
ing plants
$1.39 $63. 55
1.42 66.10
1.45 65.92
1.42 65.63
1.42 66. 57
1.43 64. 58
1.43 63.11
1.44 65.60
1.44 66 17
1.44 70.84
1.44 68. 48
1. 45 66. 33
1.48 66. 67
1. 50 67.16
1.50 67.23
Knitting mills ‘
$1.40 $50. 81
1.43 52. 52
1.47 53.30
1.43 51. 79
1.43 52.88
1.44 53. 30
1.45 52.11
1.45 52.82
1.46 52.88
1.47 52.73
1.48 53.58
1. 48 53. 68
1.50 54.91
1.51 55.15
1.50 54.29
Avg. Avg.
hrly. wkly. Avg.
earn earn wkly.
ings
ings hours
Cigars
Textile-mill products
Tobacco stemming
and redrying
$1.46 $42.19
1.48 42.86
1.54 46.56
1.50 41.99
1.48 40. 72
1.55 50. 27
1.55 50. 63
1. 55 52. 25
1.54 53.18
1.53 51.05
1.54 45.98
1. 55 49.70
1.55 45. 65
1.57 44.01
1.57 49.39
Cigarettes
$1.33 $56.39
1.35 58.95
1.41 59.14
1.37 59.98
1.37 61.29
1.41 60. 76
1.42 58.13
1.42 57. 97
1.41 57.13
1.41 56. 76
1.41 57.38
1. 42 57. 83
1.43 59. 21
1.44 60.37
1.44 60.61
38.1
39.3
38.4
39.2
39.8
39.2
37.5
37.4
37.1
37.1
37.5
37.8
38.7
39.2
39.1
$1.48 $54.90
1.50 58.31
1.54 59.13
1.53 59. 89
1.54 60. 44
1.55 58.29
1.55 57. 22
1. 55 58.14
1.54 57. 91
1.53 56. 77
1.53 58.67
1.53 59. 98
1.53 59.89
1.54 61.20
1.55 60.04
North
37.6
39.4
38.9
39.4
39.5
38.6
37.4
38.0
38.1
38.1
38.6
39. 2
39.4
40.0
39.5
41.7
42.5
41.5
41.8
42.3
42.6
42.1
42.3
42.0
41.1
41.0
41.3
41.1
40.1
41.4
$1.52
1.53
1 57
1.53
1.53
1.53
1.54
1.58
1.58
1.57
1.57
1. 57
1.60
1.60
1.61
Seamless hosiery
South
$1.46 $56. 68
1.48 59.19
1. 52 59. 21
1. 52 59. 82
1.53 61.45
1.51 61.62
1.53 58.50
1.53 58.03
1.52 56.89
1.49 56. 52
1.52 57.13
1.53 56.92
1.52 58. 75
1.53 60.30
1.52 60.68
$1.29 $63. 38
1.33 65.03
1.35 65.16
1.33 63. 95
1.33 64. 72
1.34 65.18
1.33 64.83
1.33 66.83
1.32 66. 36
1.32 64. 53
1.32 64. 37
1. 33 64.84
1.40 65. 76
1.42 64.16
1.42 66. 65
38.3
39.2
38.2
39.1
39.9
39.5
37. 5
37.2
36.7
36.7
37.1
37.2
38.4
38.9
38.9
United States
$1.48 $42. 80
1.51 45.58
1. 55 46 08
1.53 43. 56
1.54 45. 38
1.56 44. 93
1.56 43. 55
1.56 44. 51
1.55 45. 57
1.54 45.31
1.54 46.96
1.53 46.70
1.53 48. 99
1.55 49.37
1.56 49.24
36.9
38.3
36.0
36.3
37.2
35.1
33.5
34.5
35.6
35.4
36.4
36. 2
37.4
37.4
37.3
$1.16
1.19
1 28
1.20
1.22
1.28
1.30
1.29
1.28
1.28
1.29
1. 29
1.31
1.32
1.32
MONTHLY LABOR REVIEW, MARCH 1957
396
T able C - l : H ours and gross earnings of production w orkers or nonsupervisory em ployees 1— C ontinued
Manufacturing—Continued
Textile-mill products—Continued
Seamless hosier y— Continued
Year and month
North
South
Avg. Avg.
wkly. wkly.
earn hours
ings
Avg. Avg. Avg.
hrly. wkly. wkly.
earn earn hours
ings
ings
1955: Average_____ $46.34
December___
49.48
1956: Average____
49. 27
January_____ 47.24
February.......
47.88
March______
47.32
April_______
48.75
M ay------------ 49.27
49.79
Ju n e...............
July................. 49. 79
49.79
August........
September___ 51.60
52.00
October_____
November___ 51. 07
December. . . . 50.12
38.3
39.9
37.9
38.1
38.0
36.4
37.5
37.9
38.3
38.6
38.6
38.8
39.1
38.4
37.4
$1.21 $42. 57
1.24 44.96
1.30 45.82
1.24 43.32
1.26 44.89
1.30 44.67
1.30 42.90
1.30 43.99
1.30 45.06
1.29 44.80
1.29 46. 57
1.33 46.18
1.33 48. 73
1.33 49.24
1.34 49. 24
Carpets, rugs, other
floor coverings 4
1955: Average......... . $73. 74
December___
76.46
1956: Average___ _ 74.34
January-------- 75. 47
February........ 74. 76
M arch.... ........ 75.00
73.98
April_______
M ay------------ 71.60
67.06
J u n e _______
Ju ly ................ 71. 56
August______ 74.64
September___ 75.89
October_____ 76.68
November___ 76.49
December....... 77.28
41.9
43.2
41.3
42.4
42.0
41.9
41.1
40.0
38.1
40.2
41.7
41.7
41.9
41.8
42.0
36.7
38.1
35.8
36.1
37.1
34.9
33.0
34.1
35.2
35.0
36.1
35.8
37.2
37.3
37.3
Knit outerwear
Avg. Avg. Avg.
hrly. wkly. wkly.
earn earn hours
ings
ings
$1.16 $53. 76
1.18 53. 77
1.28 56.30
1.20 52.20
1.21 53.91
1.28 55.42
1.30 54. 75
1.29 56.30
1.28 56. 21
1.28 57.72
1.29 58.31
1.29 56.83
1. 31 58.80
1.32 58. 05
1.32 55.58
Wool carpets, rugs,
and carpet yarn
$1.76 $71.23
1.77 75.05
1.80 73.62
1.78 73.92
1.78 73.69
1.79 73.16
1.80 71.91
1.79 71.20
1.76 67.97
1.78 71.68
1.79 73. 44
1.82 76.18
1.83 75.81
1.83 74. 85
1.84 76. 54
40.7
42.4
40.9
42.0
41.4
41.1
40.4
40.0
38.4
39.6
40.8
41.4
41.2
40.9
41.6
38.4
37.6
38.3
36.5
37.7
37.7
37.5
38.3
38.5
39.0
39.4
38.4
39.2
38.7
37.3
Avg. Avg. Avg.
hrly. wkly. wkly.
earn earn hours
ings
ings
$1.40 $48.46
1.43 50.15
1.47 49.78
1.43 49. 53
1.43 50.04
1.47 51.74
1.46 50.69
1.47 50. 57
1.46 49. 91
1.48 48.86
1.48 49.28
1. 48 50.94
1.50 49. 34
1.50 49.82
1.49 48. 74
Hats (except cloth
and millinery)
$1.75 $57.88
1.77 61.66
1.80 57.70
1.76 60.16
1.78 62.37
1.78 55.17
1.78 51.95
1.78 57. 32
1. 77 60.09
1.81 58.03
1.80 60.09
1.84 56.91
1.84 53. 79
1.83 55. 61
1.84 57. 27
37.1
38.3
35.4
37.6
38.5
34.7
33.3
35.6
36.2
35.6
36.2
34.7
32.8
33.5
34.5
Knit underwear
Avg. Avg. Avg.
hrly. wkly. wkly.
earn earn hours
ings
ings
39.4
39.8
38.0
39.0
39.4
39.2
38.4
38.6
38.1
37.3
38.2
38.3
37.1
36.9
36.1
$1.23 $65.14
1.26 68.89
1.31 65. 51
1.27 65.63
1.27 66.25
1.32 64.43
1.32 63.18
1.31 61.31
1.31 64.78
1.31 64.15
1.29 64.78
1.33 64.06
1.33 69.14
1.35 70.38
1.35 69. 55
1955: Average........... $73.27
December___
75.51
1956: Average_____ 68.17
January........... 67.37
February........ 64. 30
March.... ........ 66.36
April_______
66.63
M ay------------ 65.35
J u n e ............... 66. 53
Ju ly ................ 67.89
A ugust........... 68. 57
September___ 72.56
October_____
73.27
November___ 72.07
December___
75. 50
43.1
43.9
40.1
40.1
38.5
39.5
39.9
38.9
39.6
39.7
40.1
41.7
42.6
41.9
42.9
$1.70 $51.91
1.72 51.17
1.70 54. 37
1.68 51.75
1.67 52. 45
1.68 53. 54
1.67 53.41
1.68 53.02
1. 68 54.13
1.71 52.53
1.71 52.93
1. 74 53. 33
1.72 54. 95
1.72 56.71
1.76 59.46
M en’s and boys’
furnishings and
work clothing 4
1955: Average........... $41.92
December....... 42.86
1956: Average____
45.26
January____
42.67
February____ 43.36
M arch______
45. 76
April_______
45.38
M ay............
44.64
June................. 44. 76
J u ly ............... 45.00
August______ 45.88
September___ 46.12
October____
46.48
November___ 45.70
December___
45.95
See footnotes at end of table.
https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
37.1
37.6
36.5
37.1
37.7
36.9
36.3
36.0
30.1
36.0
36.7
36.6
36.6
35.7
35.9
Processed waste and
recovered fibers
42.2
41.6
41.5
41.4
42.3
41.5
41.4
41.1
40.7
40.1
40.1
40.4
40.7
41.7
43.4
$1.56 $67.14
1.61 69.86
1.63 67.47
1.60 67. 57
1.62 66.02
1.59 65.69
1.56 65.20
1.61 65.11
1.66 65. 51
1.63 65.18
1.66 67.37
1. 64 69.12
1.64 70.62
1.66 71.10
1.66 72.66
Shirts, collars, and
nightwear
$1.13 $42.29
1.14 43.50
1.24 45. 51
1.15 42.82
1.15 43.38
1.24 45. 51
1.25 44.64
1.24 43. 77
1.24 44.39
1.25 44.89
1.25 46.13
1.26 47.87
1.27 48.63
1.28 48.49
1.28 46.93
37.1
37.5
36.7
36.6
37.4
36.7
36.0
35.3
35.8
36.2
37.2
37.4
37.7
37.3
36.1
46.0
47.3
44.0
45.7
44.0
43.1
41.3
41.6
42.4
43.8
44.2
44.5
45.7
45.2
46.9
41.7
42.6
40.4
41.2
40.5
40.3
40.0
39.7
39.7
39.5
40.1
40.9
41.3
41.1
42.0
$1.61 $74.46
1.64 77.17
1.67 71.15
1.64 70.30
1.63 68.00
1.63 66.02
1.63 65.46
1.64 68.78
1.65 68.08
1.65 67.20
1.68 70.27
1.69 75.66
1.71 79.18
1.73 80.09
1.73 81.03
37.2
38.1
36.9
37.6
38.2
37.8
37.5
37.3
36.8
37.1
36.2
35.5
36.0
35.3
37.0
Cordage and twine
$1.93 $55. 72
2.03 59.18
2.00 56.99
2.01 57.74
1.97 57.31
1.94 57.86
1.95 58.00
1.95 57.13
1.94 56.26
l. 95 55.58
1.99 55.83
2.02 57. 82
2.07 57.09
2.06 57.87
2.10 59.60
Separate trousers
$1.14 $43.52
1.16 44.58
1.24 46.49
1.17 44.37
1.16 45.46
1.24 47.25
1.24 46.88
1.24 47.00
1.24 47.10
1.24 46. 75
1.24 46. 34
1.28 45.09
1.29 46.44
1.30 45. 54
1.30 48.10
$1.54 $64.87
1.58 69.05
1.59 65. 51
1.57 65.63
1.57 66.25
1.56 64. 27
1.56 63.02
1.56 60.76
1.58 64. 21
1.58 63.59
1.58 64.37
1. 57 63.80
1.65 69.30
1.66 70. 55
1.66 69.89
41.6
42.4
40.2
41.6
40.0
39.3
39.2
39.3
38.9
38.4
39.7
41.8
42.8
42.6
43.1
Avg.
hrly.
earn
ings
42.4
43.7
41.2
41.8
42.2
41.2
40.4
39.2
40.9
40.5
41.0
40.9
42.0
42.5
42.1
$1.53
1.58
1.59
1.57
1.57
1.56
1.56
1.55
1.57
1.57
1.57
1.56
1.65
1.66
1.66
Lace goods
$1.79 $63.69
1.82 64.02
1.77 66. 26
1.69 64.90
1.70 65.28
1.68 65.84
1.67 64. 33
1.75 65. 77
1.75 66.05
1.75 66.64
1.77 67.23
1. 81 67.86
1.85 68.11
1.88 66.02
1.88 67. 61
38.6
38.8
38.3
38.4
38.4
38.5
37.4
37.8
38.4
38.3
38.2
39.0
38.7
37.3
38.2
$1.65
1.65
1.73
1.69
1.70
1.71
1.72
1.74
1.72
1.74
1.76
1. 74
1.76
1.77
1.77
Apparel and other finished textile products
Artificial leather, oil
cloth, and other coated
fabrics
$1.23 $88.78
1.23 96.02
1.31 88.00
1.25 91.86
1.24 86.68
1.29 83.61
1.29 80.54
1.29 81.12
1. 33 82. 26
1.31 85.41
1.32 87.96
1.32 89. 89
1.35 94.60
1.36 93.11
1.37 98.49
42.3
43.6
41.2
41.8
42.2
41.3
40.5
39.3
41.0
40.6
41.0
40.8
41.9
42.4
41.9
Dyeing and finishing
textiles (except wool)
Avg. Avg. Avg.
hrly. wkly. wkly.
earn earn hours
ings
ings
Miscellaneous textile
Felt goods (except
goods 4
woven felts and hats)]
Textile-mill products—Continued
Paddings and uphol
stery filling
Dyeing and finishing
textiles4
39.8
41.1
39.3
40.1
39.8
39.9
40.0
39.4
38.8
38.6
38.5
39.6
39.1
39.1
40.0
Work shirts
$1.17 $36.29
1.17 36.96
1.26 39. 96
1.18 38.12
1.19 37.73
1.25 42.00
1.25 41.40
1.26 41.58
1.28 39.93
1.26 39.96
1.28 40.32
1. 27 40.93
1.29 40. 71
1.29 37.15
1.30 40.48
37.8
38.1
36.0
38.9
38.5
37.5
36.0
36.8
36.3
36.0
36.0
35.9
35.4
32.3
34.9
Total: Apparel and
other finished tex
tile products
$1.40 $49.41
1.44 50.83
1.45 52.27
1.44 50.37
1.44 51.61
1.45 52.48
1.45 51.77
1.45 50.69
1 45 51.12
1.44 51.91
i: 4 5 53.29
1. 46 52.92
1.46 53.87
1.48 53.07
1.49 53.72
36.6
37.1
36.3
36.5
37.4
36.7
36.2
35.7
35.5
35.8
36.5
36.0
36.4
36.1
36.3
$1.35 $59.86
1.37 62.54
1.44 63.30
1.38 61.22
1.38 62.32
1.43 62.29
1.43 61.62
1.42 61.42
1.44 63.18
1.45 62.11
1.46 65. 33
1.47 64.97
1.48 65.16
1.47 64. 25
1.48 64. 61
Women’s outerwear 4
$. 96 $52.90
.97 53.91
1.11 55.42
.98 54.62
.98 56.30
1.12 56.83
1.15 55. 65
1.13 53.63
1.10 53.04
1.11 55.65
1.12 57.64
1.14 54. 92
1.15 55.87
1.15 55.46
1.16 56. 76
35.5
35.7
35.3
35.7
36.8
36.2
35.9
34.6
34.0
35.0
35.8
33.9
34.7
35.1
35.7
M en’s and boys'
suits and coats
36.5
37.9
36.8
37.1
38.0
37.3
36.9
37.0
36.1
35.9
36.7
36.5
36.4
36.3
36.5
$1.64
1.65
1.72
1.65
1.64
1.67
1.67
1.66
1.75
1.73
1.78
1. 78
1.79
1.77
1. 77
Women's dresses
$1.49 $53. 40
1.51 53.66
1.57 55.62
1.53 53.81
1.53 55.33
1.57 57.67
1.55 59.29
1.55 55.36
1. 56 51.46
1. 59 53.48
1.61 57.16
1.62 54.76
1.61 55. 55
1.58 55. 97
1.59 57. 28
35.6
35.3
35.2
35.4
36.4
36.5
36.6
34.6
33.2
34.5
35.5
33.8
34.5
35.2
35.8
$1.50
1.52
1.58
1.52
1.52
1.58
1.62
1.60
1.55
1.55
1.61
1. 62
1.61
1.59
1.60
C: EARNINGS AND HOURS
397
T able C - l : H ours and gross earnings of production workers or nonsupervisory em ployees 1—C ontinued
Manufacturing—Continued
Apparel and other finished textile products—Continued
Year and month
Horn ehold aiyparel
Avg. Avg.
wkly. wkly.
earn hours
ings
1955: Average_____ $40. 52
December___ 41.89
1956: Average_____ 44. 76
Ja n u ary ____
41 36
February.......
42. 26
M arch______ 45.88
April.........__
46. 75
M ay________ 44.98
43 72
June...............
J u ly ,........... — 43. 88
August______ 45.11
September___ 43. 56
October____
44.58
November___ 45. 97
December___
47.87
36.5
37 4
36.1
36.6
37.4
36.7
37.1
35.7
34.7
35.1
35.8
34.3
35.1
36.2
37.4
Avg. Avg. Avg.
hrly. wkly. wkly.
earn earn hours
ings
ings
$1.11 $64. 27
1.12 67.03
1.24 67.94
1.13 70.00
1.13 70.35
1.25 65.14
1.26 59.17
1.26 60.29
1.26 66. 92
1. 25 73. 03
1.26 73.19
1. 27 68.13
1.27 69. 63
1.27 65. 27
1.28 68.20
Children’s outerwear
1955: Average____ $45.38
December___ 45. 63
1956: Average_____ 48.44
Jan u ary____
47.12
February___
47. 12
M arch______ 47. 21
April_______
46.93
M ay________ 47. 16
June —......... 48. 71
J u ly ............... 49. 18
August........ __ 49.45
September___ 48.33
October_____
49.58
November___ 48.94
December___
49.14
37.2
37.1
36.7
37.1
37.4
36.6
36.1
36.0
36.9
36.7
36.9
35.8
37.0
36.8
36.4
Women’s suits, coats, Women’s and chil Underwear and night
and skirts
dren’s undergarments4 wear, except corsets
33.3
34.2
33.8
35.0
35.0
32.9
30.5
31.4
33.8
35.8
35.7
32.6
33.8
32.8
34.1
Avg. Avg. Avg.
hrly. wkly. wkly.
earn earn hours
ings
ings
$1.93
1. 96
2. 01
2.00
2.01
1.98
1.94
1.92
1. 68
2.04
2.05
2.09
2.06
1.99
2.00
Miscellaneous apparel
and accessories
$1.22 $45.14
1.23 48. 76
1.32 49. 71
1.27 47.00
1 26 47. 75
1.29 49.37
1.30 49.04
1.31 48.64
1.32 48.68
1.34 49.08
1.34 50.86
1.35 51.24
1.34 52. 30
1.33 50.37
1.35 50. 92
37.0
38.7
37.1
37.6
37.9
37.4
36.6
36.3
36.6
36.9
37.4
37.4
37.9
36.5
36.9
$44. 77
45. 51
47.92
45.49
46.37
48.18
47.35
46.46
46. 95
47.12
48.41
49.31
50.73
50.09
49. 55
36.7
37.0
36.3
36.1
36.8
36.5
35.6
35.2
35.3
35.7
36.4
36.8
37.3
37.1
36.7
Avg. Avg. Avg.
hrly. wkly. wkly.
earn earn hours
ings
ings
$1.22 $42.32
1.23 42.80
1.32 45.38
1.26 42.12
1.26 43.41
1.32 45. 75
1.33 44.48
1.32 43. 38
1.33 43. 75
1.32 44.63
1.33 46.12
1. 34 47.62
1.36 49.14
1.35 48.00
1.35 47.10
Other fabricated
textile products 4
$1. 22 $50.94
1.28 52. 50
1.34 53.02
1.25 50.42
1.26 51.41
1.32 52. 50
1.34 51.94
1.34 51.38
1.33 52.03
1. 33 52. 68
1.36 52.78
1.37 54.10
1.38 56.12
1.38 56. 30
1.38 56.92
38.3
38.6
37.6
36.8
37.8
37.5
37.1
36.7
36.9
37.1
37.7
38.1
38.7
38.3
38.2
36.8
36.9
36.3
36.0
37.1
36.6
35.3
34.7
35.0
35.7
36.6
37.2
37.8
37.5
36.8
Avg. Avg. Avg.
hrly. wkly. wkly.
earn earn hours
ings
ings
$1.15 $48. 78
1.16 50. 09
1.25 51.77
1.17 50.68
1.17 51.04
1.25 51.55
1.26 51.62
1.25 51.34
1.25 51. 55
1. 25 50. 69
1.26 51.62
1.28 52.13
1.30 53.07
1.28 52.93
1.28 53.07
Curtains, draperies,
and other housefurnishings
$1.33 $45. 60
1.36 47. 07
1.41 47.10
1.37 43.67
1.36 46.38
1.40 47.60
1.40 45.80
1.40 44.80
1.41 45. 44
1.42 45. 67
1.40 48.38
1.42 48. 64
1.45 50.31
1.47 48. 62
1.49 48. 23
38.0
38.9
36.8
35.5
37.4
36.9
35.5
35.0
35.5
35.4
37.5
38.0
39.0
37.4
37.1
Corsets and allied
garments
Avg. Avg. Avg.
hrly. wkly. wkly.
earn earn hours
ings
ings
36.4
37.1
36.2
36.2
36.2
36.3
36.1
35.9
35.8
35.7
36.1
36.2
36.6
36.5
36.6
$1.34 $57.15
1.35 55 14
1.43 62.39
1.40 61.22
1.41 70.64
1.42 64.21
1.43 57.87
1.43 51.50
1.44 53.94
1. 42 61.75
1.43 63.13
1. 44 66.61
1.45 67.20
1.45 56.95
1.45 61.35
Textile bags
$1.20 $53.79
1.21 55.04
1.28 57.13
1.23 56.12
1.24 55.70
1.29 56.77
1.29 56.34
1.28 55.54
1.28 56. 60
1.29 57. 92
1.29 58.90
1.28 59.05
1.29 58.95
1.30 57.09
1.30 59.64
38.7
39.6
39.4
39.8
39.5
39.7
39.4
38.3
38.5
39.4
39.8
39.9
40.1
39.1
40.3
Millinery
36.4
34.9
36.7
37.1
40.6
36.9
35.5
31.4
32.3
35.9
37.8
38.5
39.3
33.9
36.3
Avg.
hrly.
earn
ings
$1.57
1.58
1.70
1. 65
1.74
1.74
1.63
1.64
1.67
1.72
1.67
1.73
1.71
1.68
1.69
Canvas products
$1.39 $53.72
1.39 55.04
1.45 55.81
1.41 54.46
1.41 53. 65
1.43 54.74
1.43 54.99
1.45 55.81
1.47 57.20
1.47 57.63
1.48 56.34
1. 48 54. 81
1.47 56.41
1.46 54.53
1.48 56.06
39.5
39.6
39.3
38.9
38.6
39.1
39.0
39.3
40.0
40.3
39.4
38.6
38.9
38.4
39.2
$1.36
1.39
1.42
1.40
1.39
1.40
1.41
1.42
1.43
1.43
1.43
1.42
1.45
1.42
1.43
Lumber and wood products (except furniture)
Total: Lumber and
wood products (ex
cept furniture)
1956: Average. ___ $69.29
December___ 68.47
1956: Average_____ 70.93
January_____ 66 73
February____ 66. 80
March............ 67. 72
April_______
70.22
M ay------------ 71.38
June............
73. 71
Ju ly ......... ...... 72.54
August______ 74. 93
September___ 74.44
October_____ 73.03
November___ 71.20
December___
69.60
41.0
41.0
40.3
40. 2
40.0
39.6
39.9
40.1
40.5
40.3
41.4
40.9
40.8
40.0
40.0
See
41.7
41.7
40.4
40.7
40.7
40.6
40.6
40.4
40.8
40.4
40.8
40.4
40.1
39.8
40.8
footnotes at end of table.
https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
Sawmills and planing
m ills4
Sawmills and planing mills, general
United States
$1.69 $75.04
1.67 70. 27
1.76 78.80
1.66 71.23
1.67 69. 56
1.71 64. 83
1.76 77.17
1.78 76.91
1.82 80. 39
1.80 79.00
1.81 87.87
1.82 86.50
1.79 84.62
1.78 79.20
1.74 74.45
Miliwork, plywood,
and prefabricated
stru c tu ra l wood
products *
1955: A verage____ $73.81
December___ 74.23
1956: Average_____ 73.93
January_____ 72 85
February------ 72.85
M a rc h .......... 74.30
April....... ........ 74.70
M ay____ ___
74.34
Ju n e..............
75.07
Ju ly ................ 74.74
August______ 75.48
September___ 74.74
October_____
73.38
November___ 73. 23
December....... 75.48
Logging camps and
contractors
37.9
36.6
39.4
37.1
37.2
34.3
37.1
36.8
38.1
39.5
43.5
42.4
42.1
39.6
39.6
Miliwork
$1.77 $72. 56
1.78 72.86
1.83 73.31
1.79 71.28
1.79 70.93
1.83 71.78
1.84 72.14
1.84 73. 44
1.84 74. 75
1. 85 73. 53
1.85 74.44
1.85 74. 70
1.83 73.35
1.84 72.98
1.85 74.30
41.7
41.4
40.5
40.5
40.3
40.1
40.3
40.8
41.3
40.4
40.9
40.6
40.3
40.1
40.6
$1.98 $69. 97
1.92 69. 89
2.00 71.91
1.92 67.80
1.87 67.37
1.89 69. 25
2.08 70.80
2.09 73.26
2.11 75. 62
2.00 73.75
2.02 75.81
2.04 74. 52
2.01 73. 71
2.00 71.82
1.88 69.70
41.4
41.6
40.4
40.6
40.1
39.8
40.0
40.7
41.1
40.3
41.2
40.5
40.5
39.9
39.6
Plywood
$1.74 $78.19
1.76 80.18
1.81 75.81
1.76 77.35
1.76 78.32
1.79 79.90
1.79 79.38
1.80 75.36
1.81 75. 52
1.82 74.52
1,82 75.99
1.84 74.85
1.82 73. 71
1.82 73.02
1.83 75.81
43.2
44.3
41.2
42.6
42.8
42.5
42.0
40.3
40.6
40.5
41.3
40.9
40.5
39.9
41. 2
$1.69 $70.38
1.68 70.30
1.78 72.32
1.67 68.04
1.68 67.60
1.74 69. 65
1.77 71.20
1.80 73.67
1.84 76.04
1.83 74.15
1.84 76.22
1.84 74.93
1.82 74.12
1.80 72.22
1.76 69.92
41.4
41.6
40.4
40.5
40.0
39.8
40.0
40.7
41.1
40.3
41.2
40.5
40.5
39.9
39.5
$1.70 $46. 76
1.69 47.74
1.79 49.09
1.68 46.43
1.69 45. 76
1.75 48.08
1.78 48.79
1.81 49.86
1.85 49.68
1.84 49.68
1.85 50.52
1.85 50.52
1.83 50.16
1.81 49.80
1.77 49.92
Wooden containers 4
$1.81 $52.48
1.81 64.31
1.84 56. 71
1.82 52.63
1.83 53.43
1.88 56. 71
1. 89 57.26
1.87 57. 67
1.86 57.53
1.84 57. 94
1.84 57.92
1.83 57. 92
1.82 58. 50
1.83 56. 54
1.84 57.12
41.0
42.1
40.8
40.8
41.1
40.8
40.9
40.9
40.8
40.8
40.5
40.5
41.2
40.1
40.8
South
43.7
43.8
41.6
42.6
41.6
40.4
41.0
41.9
41.4
41.4
42.1
42.1
41.8
41.5
41.6
West
$1.07 $88.43
1.09 88.37
1.18 90.64
1.09 86.49
1.10 87.10
1.19 87.32
1.19 90.64
1.19 92.20
1.20 95.99
1.20 92.51
1.20 95. 51
1.20 92.90
1.20 91. 73
1.20 90.64
1.20 86. 77
Wooden boxes, other
than cigar
$1.28 $53.12
1.29 54. 95
1.39 56.58
1.29 53.63
1.30 53. 66
1.39 56.44
1.40 57.13
1.41 56. 71
1.41 57.26
1. 42 57.40
1.43 57.11
1.43 57. 94
1.42 57.95
1.41 56.03
1.40 56. 30
41.5
42.6
41.0
41.9
41.6
41.2
41.4
40.8
40.9
41.0
40.5
40.8
41.1
40.6
40.5
39.3
39.1
38.9
38.1
38 2
38.3
38.9
39.4
40.5
39.2
40.3
39.2
39.2
38.9
37.4
$2.25
2.26
2.33
2.27
2.28
2.28
2.33
2.34
2.37
2.36
2.37
2.37
2.34
2.33
2.32
Miscellaneous wood
products
$1.28 $57.82
1.29 58. 52
1.38 60.01
1.28 56.99
1.29 57.82
1.37 58.49
1.38 59.04
1.39 59.45
1.40 60.30
1.40 60.53
1.41 60.27
1. 42 61. 57
1.41 61.80
1.38 61.39
1.39 61.24
41.6
41.8
41.1
41.0
41.3
40.9
41.0
41.0
41.3
40.9
41.0
41.6
41.2
41.2
41.1
$1.39
1.40
1.46
1.39
1.40
1.43
1.44
1.45
1.46
1.48
1.47
1. 48
1.50
1.49
1.49
MONTHLY LABOR REVIEW, MARCH 1957
398
T able C - l : H ours and gross earnings of production w orkers or nonsupervisory em ployees 1—C ontinued
Manufacturing—Continued
Furniture and fixtures
Wood household furTotal: Furniture and
niture (except upHousehold furniture4
fixtures
bolstered)
Year and month
Avg. Avg. Avg.
wkly. wkly. hrly.
earn- hours earnings
tags
$67. 23
69.37
68 95
67. 32
67. 82
68. 47
67.13
66. 63
67.70
67.13
69.87
70.62
71.55
69. 43
71.62
1955: Average.......
December—
1956: Average___
January----February__
M arch____
April______
M ay ______
June............
July ............
August____
September..
O cto b er__
Novem ber..
December.. .
41.5
42.3
40.8
40.8
41.1
41.0
40.2
39 9
40.3
40.2
41.1
41.3
41.6
40.6
41.4
Avg. Avg.
wkly. wkly.
earn- hours
tags
Avg.
hrly.
earntags
$65.68
74.37
71.05
73. 87
74.48
74. 59
73. 75
71.45
71.28
67. 39
70.79
71.31
69. 76
66. 83
70. 46
42.1
44.8
42.8
44.5
44.6
44.4
43.9
43.3
43.2
41.6
42.9
42.7
42.8
41.0
42.7
$1.56 $84.18
1.66 89. 59
1.66 86.74
1.66 89. 22
1.67 87. 96
1.68 86. 92
1.68 84. 86
1.65 85.90
1 65 86. 32
1.62 85.69
1.65 85.28
1. 67 80.94
1.63 89.88
1.63 88.81
1.65 92. 43
Paper
Paperboard contain
ers and boxes 4
$73.85
74.62
76.13
73. 87
72. 75
74.70
75. 35
74.03
74.98
75. 81
76.78
78.86
78.86
77.89
78.12
1955: Average__
December..
1956: Average__
January---February...
M arch____
April..........
M ay.........
June...........
Ju ly ............
August.......
September.
October . . .
November.
December-
$92.97
93.60
96. 40
93. 37
92. 50
95. 20
92. 82
94.17
96. 80
95. 60
100.77
102.41
. 102.56
96. 92
93. 53
42.2 $1.75 $73 60
1.76 74. 38
42.4
1.83 75. 71
41.6
1.78 73. 46
41.5
1.77 72. 34
41.1
1.80 74. 46
41.5
1.82 74.93
41.4
1.81 73.62
40.9
1.82 74. 75
41.2
1.84 75. 76
41.2
1.85 76. 54
41.5
42. 4 1.86 78. 63
42.4
1.86 78. 63
42.1
1.85 77. 65
42.0
1.86 77.70
39.9
40.0
40.0
39.9
39.7
40.0
39.0
39.4
40.0
40.0
41.3
40.8
40.7
39.4
39.8
See footnotes at end of table.
https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
Avg. Avg.
wkly. wkly.
earn- hours
tags
Fiber cans, tubes, and
drums
42.3 $1.74 $77. 68
1.75 78. 09
42.5
1.82 79.54
41.6
1. 77 78. 69
41.5
41. 1 1.76 78.12
1.79 78. 74
41.6
1.81 78. 72
41.4
40.9
1.80 79.37
1.81 77. 97
41.3
1.83 75. 66
41.4
1.84 77.95
41.6
42. 5 1. 85 79. 38
1.85 81.36
42.5
1.84 83. 42
42.2
82.60
1.85
42.0
Books
$2.33 $80.40
2.34 82. 21
2.41 83.84
2.34 82. 62
2.31 82.41
2. 38 82. 62
2.38 83.02
2. 39 83.6c
2. 42 84.45
2. 39 83.81
2.44 85.48
2.51 85.06
2. 52 85.69
2. 46 84. 44
2. 351 84.66
Partitions, shelving,
lockers, and fix
tures
40 0 $2.01 $90.23
40. a
2. 04 93. 3C
2. 07 93. oa
40.5
2.05 91.88
40.3
40.2
2.05 91. 2C
2.05 92.69
40. a
2.06 92. 0C
40. c
40. 4 2.07 92.17
2. 08 91. 25
40.6
2. Of 92. 7c
40.1
40. £ 2. Of 92.57
40. 7 2. 09 95. 82
41.0
2. Of 95.41
40.4
2.09 92. 9C
40.7
2.08 95. 65
Office, public-buildtag, and professional furniture 4
Avg. Avg.
wkly. wkly.
earn- hours
tags
Avg. Avg.
wkly. wkly.
earn- hours
ings
Avg.
hrly.
earntags
42.2
40.8 $1.74 $75.96
40.5
1.79 81.10
43.6
39.4
1.82 79.42
41.8
39.1
1.81 79.10
42.3
39.2
1.81 79. 85
42.7
38.9
1.80 80.09
42.6
42.1
37.0
1.78 78. 73
37.1
1.78 77.83
41.4
39.9
1.82 78. 96
42.0
40.2
1.80 78. 25
41.4
41.6
1.83 79.99
42.1
41.5
1.86 77. 30
40.9
40.6
1.87 80.83
42.1
38.4
1.87 79. 52 41.2
39.3
1.87 83.10
42.4
Paper and allied products
Total: Paper and
allied products
Avg.
hrly.
earntags
$1.80
1.86
1.90
1.87
1.87
1.88
1.87
1.88
1.88
1.89
1.90
1. 89
1.92
1.93
1.96
Pulp, paper, a id
paperboard mili
41.4 $1.59 $78. 87 43.1 $1.83 $S5. 94 44.3 $1.94
40.9
1.60 81.97
43.6
1.88 89. 75
45.1
1 99
1.64 83.03
40.3
1.94 91.05
44.2
42.8
2. 06
1.62 81.46
41.0
43.1
1.89 89.60
44.8
2.00
1.62 79. 85 42.7
41.3
1.87 87.32
44.1
1.98
1.63 81.27
41.2
43.0
1.89 88.80
44.4
2.00
1.62 81.32
40.0
42.8
1.90 88.40
44.2
2.00
1.91 88.68
40. 1 1.63 80. 98 42.4
43.9
2.02
40. 5 1.63 82. 41
42.7
1.93 90.61
44.2
2.05
1.62 84. 28 43.0
40.9
1.96 93. 21
44.6
2.09
1.63 83.92
40.6
42.6
1.97 92.19
43.9
2.10
1.66 84. 71 43.0
2.11
40.3
1. 97 93. 05
44.1
1.66 84. 94 42.9
1.98 93 28 44.0
2.12
40.0
1.66 84. 74 42.8
39.1
1.98 92.86
2.12
43.8
40.3
44.2
1.69 85. 57 43.0
2.13
1.99 94.15
Printing, publishing, and allied industries
41.3
41.8
41.2
41.1
41.3
41.7
41.2
40.7
41.0
41.5
41.1
41.3
41.0
41.2
41.5
Total: Printing, pub
lishing, and allied
industries
Newspapers
$1.69 $91.42
1.74 94. 25
1. 77 93. 90
1.74 91.72
1. 73 91.87
1.74 93.60
1.74 93. 51
1.75 93.65
1.77 93.80
1.78 93. 80
1.78 94.28
1. 79 95. 94
1.81 95. 8C
1.81 94. 57
1.82 95.80
Lithographing
40.1 $2.25 $91.66
41. 1 2 27 93. 20
2. 32 94.16
40.1
2.28 91.87
40. a
40. C 2. 28 91.41
2. 30 93. 83
40.3
2.30 92. 90
40. (
39.9
2.31 93. lc
39.5
2.31 94. 8(
2. 33 96. 56
39.8
39.9
2.32 96.56
2. 36 98. 4f
40.6
40.6
2. 35 96. 32
2. 34 92. 75
39.7
2. 35 94.41
40.7
Mattresses and bedsprings
40.8 $1.70 $70.99
42.4
1.77 72.50
1.80 71.71
39.8
38.9
1.75 70. 77
40.3
1.78 70.95
1.79 70.02
40.4
1.79 65. 86
39.3
38.1
1.78 66.04
38.4
1.79 72. 62
37.6
1.77 72. 36
1.79 76. 73
39.7
41. 1 1. 82 77.19
41.5
1.83 75.92
1.82 71.81
41.0
41.7
1.86 73. 49
Other paper and
allied products
41.1 $1.89 $69.80
41.1
1.90 72. 73
1.94 72.92
41.0
41.2
1.91 71.51
40.9
1.91 71. 45
1.93 72. 56
40.8
41.0
1.92 71.69
1.95 71.23
40.7
40. 4
1.93 72. 57
39.2
1.93 73.87
40.6
1.92 73.16
40. 5 1.96 73.93
41.3
1.97 74.21
41. 5 2.01 74. 57
41.3
2.00 75. 53
Commercial printing
Avg.
hrly.
earntags
Screens, blinds, and
miscellaneous fur
niture and fixtures
42.3 $1.99 $80. 78 40.8 $1.98 $65. 83
2.05 81 77 41.3
1.98 65. 44
43.7
2. 05 66. 09
40.9
2. 09 83.85
41.5
1.99 66. 42
40.1
43. 1 2.07 79.80
2.01 66.91
42.7
2.06 80. 40 40.0
2.00 67.16
39.6
42.4
2.05 79.20
40.5
2.02 64. 80
2.04 81.81
41.6
40.7
2.04 65.36
41.7
2. 06 83.03
2. 05 66. 02
41.6
2. 07 85. 28
41.7
2. 05 66.26
41.0
2.09 84. 05
41.0
42.2
2.10 66.18
41.0
2.08 88.62
39. 1 2. 07 87. 15 41. 5 2.10 66. 90
2.10 66.40
2.14 87. 78 41.8
42.0
2.08 64. 91
2.14 84. 45 40.6
41.5
2. 09 68.11
42.4
2.18 86. 74 41.5
and allied products--Continued
Paperboard boxet
Periodicals
1955: Average__
December..
1956: Average__
January---February...
M arch____
April...........
M ay...........
June_____
J u ly ..........
August.......
September.
October___
November.
December..
Avg.
hrly.
earntags
42.1 $1.38 $69.36
$1.62 $63. 76 41.4 $1.54 $58.10
1.40 75.05
1.57 60 34 43.1
1.64 66. 41
42.3
1.43 71.64
1.60 59. 35 41.5
40.6
1.69 64.96
1.40
68. 08
42.0
1.57 58.80
40.7
1.65 63.90
41.9
1.39 71.73
1.58 58. 24
1.65 64. 78 41.0
72. 32
41.7
1.43
1.60 59.63
1.67 65. 44 40.9
1.59 58. 63 41.0
1.43 70.35
39.9
1.67 63.44
67.82
40.8
1.43
39.5
1.59 58. 34
1.67 62. 81
1.43 68. 74
40.3
1.60 57. 63
1.68 63. 68 39.8
40.7
1.42 66. 55
1.59 57.79
1.67 63. 28 39.8
1.43 71.06
1.61 59. 06 41.3
40.8
1.70 65.69
41.8
1. 45 74.80
41. 4
1.63 60. 61
1. 71 67. 48
1.46 75.95
1.64 61.76
42.3
1.72 68. 39 41.7
74.62
41.2
1.46
60.15
1.
63
40.6
1.71 66.18
1.47 77.56
41.9
41.3
1.65 61.59
1.73 68.15
Furniture and fixtures—Continued
Wood office furniture Metal office furniture
1955: Average.......
Decern her...
1956: Average.......
January___
February__
M arch____
April...........
M ay______
June............
Ju ly -...........
August........
September..
October __
Novem ber..
December.. .
Avg. Avg.
wkly. wkly.
earn- hours
tags
Wood household furniture, upholstered
38.9 $2. 35 $96.65
36.2 $2. 67
39.6
2. 38 100. 81
37.2
2. 71
2. 42 99. 64 36.1
2. 76
38.8
38.7
2.37 94. 52 35.4
2. 67
38.6
2.38 96.30
35.8
2.69
39.0
2.40 98. 74 36.3
2. 72
38.8
2.41 99.46
36.3
2. 74
2.42 100. 55 36.3
38.7
2. 77
38.6
2 43 101.00
36.2
2. 79
2. 43 98. 73 35.9
2. 75
38.6
35.9
38.8
2.43 99.08
2.76
2.46 100. 24 35.8
39.0
2.80
39.1
2.45 101.36
36.2
2.80
2. 45 102. 28 36.4
38.6
2.81
39. 1 2. 45 103. 21
2.82
36.6
Bookbinding and re
Greeting cards
lated industries
40 2 $2.28 $56.68
40.7
2.29 59. 36
39. S 2. 36 61. 6C
2 32 59. 52
39.6
39.1
2. 32 59.97
2. 34 61.37
40.1
39.7
2.34 63.24
39. S 2.34 62.15
40. C 2. 37 60. 48
40.1
2. 39 62.69
40.4
2.39 60.36
2.42 60.1C
40.7
40. a
2. 39 62.6a
2. 36 63.76
39. a
39.5
2. 39 62. 65
38.3 $1.48 $70.09
38.8
72.90
1 . 5a
38.5
1.60 72. 29
38.4
1.55 71.46
38.2
1.57 70.59
38.6
1. 59 70.98
38.8
1.6c 71.86
1.61 71.71
38.6
37. 8
1. 6( 71.16
38.7
1.62 71.71
38.2
1. 58 73. 6C
37.8
1. 5Í 72.71
1.61 73. 84
38.9
39.6
1.61 72. 54
38.2
1.64 74.24
39.6 $1.77
40.5
1.80
39.5
1.83
39.7
1.80
39. C 1.81
39. C 1.82
39.7
1.81
39.4
1.82
39.1
1.82
39.4
1.82
1.84
40.0
1.85
39. a
1.86
39.7
39. C 1.86
39.7
1.87
399
C: EARNINGS AND HOURS
T able C-l: Hours and gross earnings of production workers or nonsupervisory employees 1—Continued
M a n u fa c tu r in g — C o n tin u e d
P r in tin g , p u b lis h in g ,
an d allied in d u stries-- C o n t i n u e d
Y ea r a n d m o n th
M isc e lla n e o u s p u b
lish in g an d p r in tin g
ser v ic e s
A vg.
w k ly .
earnin gs
A vg.
w k ly .
h ours
1955: A v e r a g e _______ $168. 78
109. 53
D e c e m b e r ..,..
1956: A v e r a g e ______
109. 37
J a n u a r y ---------- 108. 19
F e b r u a r y _____ 110. 64
M a r c h ________ 111. 44
A p r il__________ 108. 74
M a y __________ 107. 59
J u n e __________ 108. 03
J u l y ....... ............. 109. 20
A u g u s t ________ 110.94
S e p t e m b e r ____ 110. 94
O c t o b e r ______ 107. 59
N o v e m b e r ____ 108. 64
D e c e m b e r ____ 108.81
39 .7
39 .4
39 .2
3 9 .2
3 9 .8
39 .8
39 .4
3 8 .7
39 .0
3 9 .0
3 9 .2
3 9 .2
38 .7
38 .8
3 9 .0
A vg.
h r ly .
earnta g s
$97. 81
100. 98
104. 50
101. 88
101. 57
102. 51
102. 75
103.00
103. 41
103. 75
108.03
104. 90
107. 52
103. 57
106.81
4 1 .8
4 1 .9
41.8
42. 1
4 1 .8
41.5
4 1 .6
4 1 .2
41 .2
4 1 .5
4 2 .2
4 1 .3
4 2 .0
41.1
4 1 .4
$84.18
85.67
86.74
84. 46
85. 69
85. 07
84. 46
85. 70
86. 53
87. 57
88. 41
87. 78
88.62
87. 77
87. 77
4 2 .3
4 2 .2
4 1 .7
41.4
41 .8
41.7
41.4
4 1 .6
41.6
41.7
41 .9
4 1 .6
41 .8
4 1 .4
4 1 .4
A vg.
w k ly .
earnta g s
A vg.
w k ly .
hours
41 .4
41 .8
4 1 .3
41.4
41.3
41 .2
41 .2
4 1 .3
41.3
41.1
40 .9
41 .4
4 1 .3
41 .4
4 1 .6
A vg.
h r ly .
earnta g s
40 .3
40. 5
40 .0
40.5
39 .9
3 9 .6
3 9 .5
3 9 .7
4 0 .4
3 9 .8
3 9 .4
40.2
3 9 .9
4 0 .3
4 0 .5
42 .2
42.1
4 1 .5
41.1
4 1 .2
41. 1
4 1 .2
4 1 .2
41.4
4 1 .4
4 1 .5
4 1 .5
4 1 .7
41.4
4 1 .4
A vg.
w k ly .
earnta g s
A vg.
w k ly .
hours
40 .9
41.4
41.1
41 .3
41. 1
41 .0
4 0 .9
4 1 .0
4 1 .0
40 .7
4 1 .0
41.3
4 1 .0
41.1
4 1 .4
A vg.
h r ly .
earnta g s
40.1
40. 3
4 0 .6
40. 6
39 .6
40 .0
40 .2
4 0 .5
41.0
3 9 .9
40.1
40 .9
41 .0
41 .5
41 .7
43.1
4 2 .5
43.1
43.4
43.2
42.9
43 .5
43 .4
43 .3
43 .9
42 .6
43.1
43.1
42 .7
42 .5
A vg.
w k ly .
earnin g s
A vg.
w k ly .
hours
40.4
41.2
40.8
40.9
4 0 .9
40.7
40.9
40 .9
40.9
40 .4
4 0 .9
41.0
4 0 .8
4 0 .5
4 1 .0
A vg.
h r ly .
earnta g s
$2. 03 $75.07
77. 42
2. 08
78.74
2.1 5
76. 92
2 .1 0
77. 90
2 .0 9
77.71
2 .1 0
77. 74
2 .1 3
77.93
2 .1 3
78. 34
2.14
78. 57
2.16
78. 20
2 .1 6
79.17
2 .1 9
79.98
2 .1 8
80.78
2.20
81.19
2.20
4 0 .8
41 4
40 .8
40.7
41.0
40.9
40.7
40 .8
40 .8
4 0 .5
40.1
4 0 .6
4 0 .6
40.8
40.8
42.5
42.6
4 2 .2
41.8
4 2 .0
42. 4
4 3 .6
43 .7
42. 5
4 2 .0
3 9 .9
41.1
41 .7
41 .7
4 2 .9
1955: A v e r a g e _______
D e c e m b e r ____
1956: A v e r a g e _______
J a n u a r y _______
F e b r u a r y _____
M a r c h ________
A p r il_____ ____
M a y __________
J u n e __________
J u ly ___________
A u g u s t _______
S e p t e m b e r ____
O c t o b e r ______
N o v e m b e r ____
D e c e m b e r ____
$81.17
83. 62
84. 79
84. 73
83.14
84. 41
84. 55
84.79
85. 27
86. 67
85.05
85.81
85.25
87.17
86.10
4 5 .6
4 6 .2
45.1
46.3
44.7
44.9
4 4 .5
45.1
45.6
46.1
45 .0
45 .4
44. 4
45.4
45 .8
See fo o tn o te s a t en d o f tab le.
https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
M isc e lla n e o u s ch em ic a ls 4
$1. 78 $75.07
1.81
77. 64
78.36
1.88
1. 83
77. 90
1.86
76. 36
1.88
77.14
77. 95
1.9 0
1 .8 8
77. 76
1.87
77. 38
1. 88
77. 99
1.89
77.57
1.8 9
79. 58
1.92
79.18
1.9 2
80. 77
1.88
81 .5 9
40.8
4 1 .3
40 .6
41.0
4 0 .4
4 0 .6
40 .6
4 0 .5
40 .3
4 0 .2
4 0 .4
40. 6
40 .4
41 .0
41 .0
$1.8 4
1.88
1.9c
1.90
1.8 9
1.9C
1 .9 2
1 .9 2
1.92
1.94
1.9 2
1.9 6
1.96
1.9 7
1.99
Essential oils, perfumes, cosmetics
$63.18
66. 00
66. 30
65.35
64.18
65. 57
65.96
66. IS
64.39
65. 11
65.86
66.15
6 7 .0£
68.97
71.10
39 .0
40 .0
39. C
38. £
3 8 .2
38. S
3 8 .8
3 8 .9
38.1
38.5
3 9 .2
3 8 .9
39.7
40.1
40 .4
A vg.
w k ly .
hours
41.0
41.4
4 1 .0
41 .2
40 .9
40.7
40.8
4 0 .9
41.3
41 .0
40 .7
41.1
41 .0
41.1
4 1 .2
A vg.
h r ly .
earnin g s
S o a p , cle a n in g a n d
p o lis h in g p rep a ra
tio n s 4
40.9
4 1 .0
4 1 .2
4 0 .6
41.2
4 1 .5
4 1 .0
4 0 .8
41 .6
41.3
41.5
4 1 .6
41.1
41.1
41. 2
4 5 .6
47 .0
45 .0
4 6 .4
45.3
4 4 .2
43.4
4 3 .8
43.8
4 4 .4
4 3 .5
46.1
4 6 .6
46.8
46 .4
$1. 50 $71.14
72. 38
1. 56
74. 70
1.61
71.92
1. 55
1. 56
71. 57
1.52
73. 37
73. 35
1 .5 6
75.34
1.61
1.65
76.65
78. 14
1. 65
1.63
75. 69
75.14
1.65
1.64
75.96
76.28
1.65
75. 63
1.66
Plastics, except synthetic rubber
A vg.
w k ly .
earnta g s
$2.13 $88. 41
2 .1 8
92.23
2. 25
93. 88
90. 09
2 .1 9
89. 24
2 .1 9
2 .2 0
90. 50
91.56
2 .2 3
2. 24 92.64
2. 26
95. 02
2. 27 93. 68
2. 27 95.60
2. 29 95. 91
95. 57
2. 28
2. 29 97.44
2.3 0
97.86
A vg.
w k ly .
h ours
42 .3
42.7
42.1
41.9
41.7
41 .9
4 2 .0
4 2 .3
42 .8
4 2 .2
42 .3
41 .7
42.1
4 2 .0
4 2 .0
A vg.
h r ly .
earnings
$ 2 .0 9
2 .1 6
2 .2 3
2.1 5
2 .1 4
2 .1 6
2 .1 8
2 .1 9
2. 22
2. 22
2. 26
2. 30
2 .2 7
2. 32
2 .3 3
Soap and glycerin
$2.08 $91. 88
94. 54
2.1 3
98.16
2 .1 8
2.1 4
93 83
2. 14 94.89
2 .1 6
97.17
2 .1 9
97. 85
97. 85
2 .1 8
2.2 0 100. 43
2. 20 100. 19
98. 88
2.18
99.12
2 .1 9
2. 20
98.33
2. 22 99. 39
2. 23 99. 63
V e g e ta b le a n d a n im a l o ils a n d fa ts 4
40 .3
40.4
4 0 .9
40. 1
4 0 .9
41.0
4 0 .6
4 0 .6
41 .5
4 1 .4
4 1 .2
41.3
4 0 .8
4 0 .9
4 1 .0
$2.2 8
2.3 4
2. 40
2. 34
2 .3 2
2.3 7
2. 41
2.4 1
2. 42
2 .4 2
2 .4 0
2 .4 0
2.41
2 .4 3
2 .4 3
Vegetable oils
$1.5 6 $65.07
1.54
65. 89
1.6 6
67.80
1. 55
64. 96
64. 75
1.58
1.66
66. 58
66. 19
1 .6 9
1.72
67. 62
1.75
69. 37
1. 76
70. 36
1.74
68.10
1.63
67. 89
1.63
70. 74
1.6 3
69. 97
1.6 3
69. 26
45. 5
47.4
44 .9
4 6 .4
45. 6
4 3 .8
4 2 .7
4 2 .8
42 .3
4 2 .9
4 2 .3
46. 5
47 .8
4 7 .6
4 6 .8
$1.4 3
1.3 9
1.51
1. 40
1.42
1.52
1.5 5
1 .5 8
1.64
1.6 4
1.61
1 .4 6
1.48
1 .4 7
1.48
P r o d u c ts of p e tr o le u m a n d coal
C h e m ie a is a n d a llie d p r o d u c ts— C o n tin u e d
Animal oils and fats
A vg.
w k ly .
earnta g s
$1.84 $85. 07
1.87
87.33
1.93
89 .8 2
86. 88
1.89
1.90
88. 17
1.90
89.6 4
1.91
89. 79
1.91
88.94
1.92
91. 52
1. 94
90. 86
1.95
90.47
1. 95
91.10
1.97
90.4 2
1.98
91.24
1.9 9
91.88
F e r tiliz e r s
$1.67 $63. 75
66. 46
1. 69
1.7 6
67. 94
1. 70 64. 79
1. 69
65. 52
64. 45
1.70
1.74
68.02
1 .7 5
70.36
1.7 9
70.13
69. 30
1. 77
1.8 0
65.04
1.79
67.82
1.7 9
68. 39
1.7 8
68.81
71. 21
1.79
In d u s tr ia l o rg a n ic
c h e m ic a ls 4
$2.17 $87. 33
2. 23 90 25
92. 25
2 .2 8
2. 24 90. 23
2. 24
89. 57
2. 23 89. 54
2 .2 4
90.98
2. 26 91.62
2 .2 7
93. 34
2. 30 93. 07
2. 33
92.39
94.12
2. 34
2 .3 3
93.48
2. 32 94.12
2. 34 94. 76
D r u g s a n d m e d ic in e s
G um and w ood
ch em ica ls
$1.95 $71. 98
1. 99
71. 83
75. 86
2 .0 3
2.0 0
73. 78
73.01
2 .0 0
72. 93
2. 00
75.69
2 .0 0
75.95
2.01
2. 01
77. 51
2. 02
77. 70
2.0 4
76.68
77.15
2. 06
2. 07
77.15
76.01
2 .0 7
2. 07
76.08
Alkalies and chlorine
$2. 20 $87. 67
2. 26 91. 88
2. 32
93. 02
2. 27 91.62
2. 28
91.62
2. 28 90. 76
2. 28 91.62
2.30
92. 43
2.31
92. 84
2. 32 92.92
2. 34 95.30
95. 94
2.3 7
95.06
2. 36
2. 36 93. 96
95 .9 4
2.36
Explosives
$1.87 $81.40
1.91
83. 82
1.95
87. 29
1.92
85. 26
82. 76
1. 93
84. 00
1. 92
85. 63
1.9 3
1.95
86. 27
1.99
87. 74
1. 99
86. 18
86.62
1.96
89. 57
1.97
89. 38
1.96
1.96
91.30
91.74
1.96
Paints, varnishes,
lacquers, and enamels
$1.99 $82. 29
2. 03
83. 78
84. 25
2.08
82.20
2. 04
82. 40
2.05
82. 20
2 .0 4
82. 40
2 .0 4
2 .0 6
82.81
2. 08
83. 21
2.1 0
83. 63
2.11
84. 66
85. 49
2.11
2 .1 2
86.3 2
2 .1 2
85. 70
2 .1 2
85. 70
In d u s tr ia l in o rg a n ic
c h e m ic a ls 4
$1.99 $89. 98
93. 56
2 .0 3
95. 35
2.1 0
2.05
93. 75
2. 05
93.71
2. 05
93. 48
2 .0 7
93.2 5
2.0 9
94.30
94. 71
2.11
94. 42
2 .1 3
95.94
2.13
97. 88
2.13
96. 76
2 .1 3
2 .1 3
97. 00
2 .1 4
97.70
Synthetic fibers
$2.34 $75. 36
2.41
77. 36
78.00
2. 50
2 .4 2
77. 76
77.01
2. 43
76. 03
2. 47
2. 47 76.24
2. 50 77.42
80.40
2.51
2. 50 79.20
77.22
2. 56
2. 54
79. 19
2. 56
78.20
2. 52
78.99
79.38
2.58
P a in t s , p ig m e n ts ,
a n d fillers 4
1955: A v e r a g e _______
D e c e m b e r ____
1956: A v e r a g e ______
J a n u a r y _______
F e b r u a r y _____
M a r c h .................
A p r il__________
M a y __________
J u n e _________
J u ly ......................
A u g u s t ______
S e p te m b e r ____
O ctober ............
N o v e m b e r ___
D e c e m b e r ____
T o ta l: C h e m ic a ls a n d
a llie d p r o d u c ts
$2.74 $82. 39
2.78
84. 85
2. 79 86.7 3
2. 76
84. 87
2. 78
84. 67
2 .8 0
84. 46
85.28
2. 76
2. 78 86. 32
2. 77 87.14
87.54
2. 86
87.12
2. 83
2 .8 3
88. 18
2. 78 87.97
2. 80 88.18
2.79
89. 02
Synthetic rubber
1955: A v e r a g e _______
D e c e m b e r ____
1956: A v e r a g e
__
J a n u a r y ______
F e b r u a r y _____
M a r c h _______
A p r il__________
M a y ....................
J u n e _____ _____
J u ly - ................
A u g u s t _______
S e p te m b e r ____
O c t o b e r ______
N o v e m b e r ____
D e c e m b e r ____
C h e m ic a ls a n d a llied p ro d u c ts
Compressed and liquifled gases
$1.62 $87.52
1.65
88.99
90. 74
1.7C
1. 68
88. 82
88.62
1.68
1. 6£
88.85
1.7 0
89.46
89. 68
1.70
1.69
90. 95
1 .7C 89. 88
89.45
1.68
92. 25
1. 71
91.51
1.6£
1.72
94. 35
93.88
1.76
42.9
43 .2
4 2 .4
42. 7
42.2
42.5
42 .2
42.5
42.5
42 .0
41.8
42.5
4 1 .8
42 .5
42.1
$2.04
2 .0 6
2.1 4
2 .0 8
2 .1 0
2 .0£
2 .1 2
2 .1 2
2.14
2. 14
2 .1 4
2.1 7
2.19
2. 22
2.23
T o ta l: P r o d u c ts of
p e tr o le u m a n d coal
$96. 76
98.40
104. 39
99. 95
99. 72
103. 82
104. 65
102 97
104. 81
107. 01
103. 89
108. 00
104. 45
105.11
105. 78
41 .0
41 .0
41.1
41.3
40 .7
41.2
41.2
4 0 .7
41.1
4 1 .8
4 0 .9
41 .7
4 0 .8
40 .9
41.0
$2. 36
2.4 0
2. 54
2.42
2.45
2. 52
2. 54
2. 53
2. 55
2 .5 6
2. 54
2. 59
2. 56
2. 57
2 .5 8
P e tr o le u m refin in g
$100.37
102.09
108.39
103.66
103. 68
107.18
110. 27
107. 73
108. 67
111. 22
107.73
111.78
108.14
109.20
110.42
40 .8 if$ 2 . 46
|2 .49
4 1 .0
2. 65
4 0 .9
41 .3
2 .5 1
2. 56
40 .5
2 .6 4
4 0 .6
41 .3
2 .6 7
4 0 .5
2 .6 5
2 .6 7
40 .7
4 1 .5
2 .6 8
4 0 .5
2.66
41 .4
2 .7 0
2. 67
40. 5
2 .6 7
40 .9
41 .2
2.6 8
400
MONTHLY LABOR REVIEW, MARCH 1957
T able C-l: Hours and gross earnings of production workers or nonsupervisory employees 1—Continued
Manufacturing—Continued
Products of petroleum and coal—
Continued
jar and month
Coke, other petroleum, and coal
products
Avg. Avg.
wkly. wkly.
earn- hours
ings
Average-------- $86.31
December....... 86. 51
Average_____ 90.91
January.......... 87. 77
February........ 87.56
March______ 92.66
April.......... .
86.90
M a y ........ ...... 88.17
June________ 92.00
Ju ly ................ 92.67
92.42
August_____
September___ 96.48
October.......... 93.83
November___ 91.98
December___
91.30
41.9
41.0
41.7
41.4
41.3
42.9
40.8
41.2
42.2
43.1
42.2
42.5
41.7
40.7
40.4
Avg.
hrly.
earnings
Average.......... $72. 40
December___
75.48
Average_____ 74.64
Ja n u a ry ___
74.19
February........ 74.19
March______
74.00
April_______
73.08
M ay________ 73. 84
June_____ .
73.87
J u ly ................ 73. 49
August______ 74.26
September___ 75.03
October_____
74.86
November___ 75. 64
December___
76. 42
43.0
40.8
39.7
40.1
40.1
40.0
39.5
39.7
39.5
39.3
39.5
39.7
39.4
39.6
39.8
Total: Rubber
products
Avg. Avg.
wkly. wkly.
earn- hours
ings
$2.06 $87. 57
2.11 89. 21
2.18 87.23
2.12 87.91
2.12 85.81
2.16 84. 93
2.13 85. 79
2.14 86.18
2.18 84.93
2.15 86.15
2.19 87. 64
2.27 89.51
2. 25 90.17
2. 26 88. 29
2.26 92. 96
Leather: tanned,
curried, and finished
41.7
41.3
40.2
40.7
40.1
39.5
39.9
39.9
39.5
39.7
40.2
40.5
40. S
40.5
41.5
41.4
40.9
39.7
41.6
40.8
39.1
38.5
39.6
39.5
40.0
39.8
40.5
40.8
42.0
40.3
Tires and inner
tubes
Avg. Avg. Avg.
hrly. wkly. wkly.
earn- earn- hours
ings
ings
$2.10 $101.09
2.16 99. 50
2.17 100.30
2.16 101. 00
2.14 97. 71
2.15 97.25
2.15 98.00
2.16 99.65
2.15 98.25
2.17 98.14
2. lg 101.20
2.21 102. 51
2.21 102.66
2.18 103. 53
2.24 109.46
Industrial leather
belting and packing
$1.81 $72.45
1.85 74. 44
1.88 72.25
1.85 76.96
1.85 74. 26
1.85 69.60
1.85 68. 53
1.86 69.30
1.87 70. 71
1.87 71. 20
1.88 71.64
1.89 73.31
1.90 75. 07
1.91 79.38
1.92 74. 56
41.6
39.8
39.8
40.4
39.4
38.9
39.2
39.7
39.3
39.1
40.0
40.2
40.1
40.6
42.1
Avg.
hrly.
earnings
$1. 75 $51. 82
1.82 54. 51
1.82 53.63
1.85 55. 58
1.82 54.74
1.78 52.40
1.78 50. 62
1.75 53. 28
1.79 54. 58
1. 78 54. 05
1.80 53. 77
1.81 53.07
1.84 53.07
1.89 53.14
1.85 55.68
38.1
39.5
37.5
39.7
39.1
36.9
35.4
37.0
37.9
37.8
37.6
36.6
36.6
36.4
38.4
Other rubber
products
Rubber footwear
Avg. Avg.
wkly. wkly.
earn- hours
ings
$2. 43 $70. 70
2.50 74. 89
2. 52 71.71
2.50 74. 37
2. 48 74. 74
2.50 71. 34
2.50 72.25
2. 51 72. 25
2. 50 70. 53
2. 51 71. 28
2. 53 70.35
2. 55 71.71
2. 56 71.71
2. 55 71.55
2.60 73.26
Boot and shoe cut
stock and findings
Leather and leather
products—Continued
Gloves and miscellaneous leather goods
Leather and leather
products
Rubber products
40.4
40.7
39.4
40.2
40.4
39.2
39.7
39.7
39.4
39.6
39.3
39.4
39.4
39.1
39.6
Avg.
hrly.
earnings
Avg. Avg.
wkly. wkly.
earn- hours
ings
$1. 75 $78.35
1.84 83.69
1.82 78.96
1.85 79. 73
1.85 77.95
1.82 76. 99
1.82 77.95
1.82 76.99
1.79 76.02
1.80 77. 78
1.79 78. 76
1.82 81.18
1.82 82.98
1.83 79.98
1.85 82. 39
Footwear (except
rubber)
$1. 36 $19.98
1.38 53.16
1.43 53. 57
1.40 54. 21
1.40 55.98
1.42 55. 39
1.43 52.20
1.44 51.91
1.44 53. 22
1. 43 54. 96
1.43 54.17
1.45 52. 56
1.45 52.41
1.46 52. 71
1.45 54.31
37.3
38.8
37.2
39.0
39.7
38.2
36.0
35.8
36 7
37.9
37.1
36.0
35.9
36.1
37.2
41.9
42.7
40.7
41.1
40.6
40.1
40.6
40.1
39.8
40.3
40.6
41.0
41.7
40.6
41.4
Avg.
hrly.
earnings
39.4
38.9
39.1
38.2
38.5
38.1
39.2
39.3
39.6
38.8
39.9
40.2
39.5
39.9
38.5
Avg. Avg.
wkly. wkly.
earn- hours
ings
$1.87 $53.44
1.96 55.91
1.94 56.40
1.94 56.55
1.92 57.67
1.92 56.92
1.92 54.90
1.92 54. 75
1.91 55. 95
1.93 57. 00
1.94 56.40
1.98 55.72
1.99 56.09
1.97 56.09
1.99 57.30
Luggage
$1. 34 $60.28
1.37 61.07
1.44 62. 56
1.39 59. 97
1.41 60.83
1.45 60. 20
1.45 61.94
1.45 62.09
1.45 62.17
1.45 61.69
1.46 62.64
1.46 64.32
1.46 63.99
1.46 67.03
1.46 64. 30
Total: Leather and
leather products
$1. 53 $48.39
1.57 49.54
1.60 51.00
1.57 49.39
1.58 50.70
1.58 50.63
1.58 49.23
1.58 48.36
1.57 50.73
1. 59 50.09
1.57 51.68
1.60 51. 61
1.62 53.76
1.68 53.30
1.67 53.02
$65.35
70.72
68. 71
68.06
68.48
67.32
66.83
66.58
67.80
67.20
68. 51
69.02
70. 58
73.10
72.92
41.1
42.6
40.9
41.5
41.5
41.3
40.5
40.6
40.6
40.0
40.3
40.6
40.8
41.3
41.2
See footnotes at end of table.
https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
$1. 59
1.66
1.68
1.64
1.65
1.63
1.65
1.64
1.67
1.68
1.70
1.70
1.73
1.77
1.771
38.1
38.4
37.5
37.7
38.7
37.5
36.2
35.3
37.3
37.1
38.0
37.4
38.4
37.8
37.6
Stone, clay, and glass products
Total: Stone, clay,
and glass products
Flat glass
Glass and glassware,
pressed or blown <
$78.85
78.69
84.04
79.07
78.69
78.69
78.34
82.20
85. 49
87.78
86.74
90.53
86.74
86.11
85.49
41.5
41.2
41.4
41.4
41.2
41.2
40.8
41.1
41.1
41.8
41.5
42.5
41.5
41.2
41.1
$1.90 $69.80
1.91 71.80
2.03 73. 21
1.91 70.99
1.91 70. 99
1.91 72. 57
1.92 73.10
2.00 74.29
2.08 73. 93
2.10 73. 57
2.09 74.16
2.13 74.62
2.09 74.21
2. 09 72.98
2.08 73. 35
41.3
41.5
40.9
40.8
40.8
41.0
41.3
41.5
41.3
41.1
41.2
41.0
41.0
40.1
40.3
$1.69 $67. 94
1.73 68.64
1.79 69. 97
1.74 66.88
1.74 66.40
1.77 68.81
1.77 71.14
1.79 71.83
1.79 71.40
1. 79 71. 99
1.80 71.40
1.82 71.40
1.81 70.98
1.82 68.78
1.82 68.88
43.0
42.9
41.9
41.8
41.5
41.7
42.6
42.5
42.6
42.6
42.5
42.0
42.0
40.7
41.0
Glass containers
$1.58 $69. 43
1.60 72.18
1.67 74.15
1.60 72.58
1.60 74.03
1. 65 73.85
1.67 74.80
1.69 73.38
1.68 72.80
1. 69 74.52
1.68 75.36
1.70 74. 74
1.69 73.60
1.69 73.66
1.68 74.80
39.9
40.1
40.3
40.1
40.9
40.8
41.1
40.1
40.0
40.5
40.3
40.4
40.0
39.6
40.0
$1.41
1.43
1.50
1.45
1.46
1.49
1.50
1.50
1.50
1. 50
1. 50
1.51
1.52
1.52
1.52
Handbags and small
leather goods
$1.27
1.29
1.36
1. 3i
1.3,
1.3 k
1.3o
1.32
1.3»
1.3®
1.35
1.36
I.4 8
1. 4 O
I .4 I
1
Pressed and blown
glass
1955: Average_____ $46.38
37.1 $1. 25 $76. 78
41.5 $1. 85 $114. 38
43.0 $2. 66 $74. 82 39.8 $1.88 $76. 00
40.0 $1.90 $73. 08
December___
48.89
38.8
1.26 79.19
41.9
1.89 118. 80
43.2
2. 75 77. 57
40.4
1.92 77. 76 40.5
1.92 77. 38
1956: Average_____ 48.34
36.9
1.31 80.15
41.1
1.95 113.03
41.1
2. 75 79.20
39.6
2.00 80.39
39.6
2.03 77.62
January.......... 46.49
36.9
1.26 78.12
40.9
1.91 120. 25
43.1
2.79 76.64
39.3
1.95 75.47
38.7
1.95 77.60
February........ 46. 75
37.1
1.26 77.90
41.0
1.90 112. 48 41.2
2. 73 76. 80
40.0
1.92 76. 61
39.9
1.92 77.20
March______
48. 47
37.0
1.31 78.31
41.0
1.91 110.02
40.3
2.73 78. 99
40.3
1.96 80.39
40.6
1.98 77. 41
April________ 47.84
36.8
41.1
1.30 79.32
1.93 109. 76 40.5
2. 71 78.80
39.6
1.99 80. 99 39.7
2.04 75.65
M a y ............. . 48.34
36.9
1.31 80. 51
41.5
41.4
2. 71 80.20
1.94 112.19
40.1
2.00 83.44
40.7
2.05 75.66
June________ 48.10
37.0
41.4
1.30 80.73
1.95 110.16
40.8
2.70 80. 40
40.0
2.01 82. 82 40.4
2. 05 76. 44
J u ly ............... 47.82
36.5
1.31 80. 36
41.0
1. 96 112. 06
41.2
2.72 80.79
39.8
2.03 83.63
40.4
2.07 75. 66
August—....... . 49.74
37.4
1.33 80. 95
41.3
1.96 110.02
40.9
2.69 78.79
39.2
2.01 80.94
39.1
2.07 76.04
September___ 49.58
37.0
1.34 80.97
41.1
1.97 111. 38
40.8
2.73 75. 72 37.3
2.03 73.34
35.6
2.06 79.00
October.......... 50.63
37.5
1.35 81.77
41.3
1.98 112. 34 41.3
2. 72 82.01
40.4
2.03 82.62
40.3
2.05 81. 20
November___ 48.37
36.1
1.34 81.79
41.1
1.99 119.23
41.4
2. 88 81.60
40.0
2.04 83. 21
40.2
2.07 79 80
December___
49. 71 37.1
1.34 82.61
41.1
2.01 119.43
40.9
2.92 82. 61
40.1
2. 06 83.01
40.1
2. 07 81.60
Glass products made Cement, hydraulic
Structural clay
Brick and hollow tile
Floor and wall tile
of purchased glass
products 4
Average...........
December.......
Average_____
January_____
February____
M arch______
April..... ..........
M ay....... ........
June________
July.................
August—.........
September___
October_____
November___ j
December___ [
37.9
39.1
37.6
39.0
39.5
38.2
36.6
36.5
37.3
38.0
37.6
36.9
36.9
36.9
37.7
Avg.
hrly.
earnings
$1.74 $70.00
1.80 70.07
1.84 73.26
1.81 68. 85
1.81 69. 25
1.81 71.69
1.82 67.69
1.83 73.85
1.82 75.48
1.84 76.59
1.87 75.30
1.85 76.41
1.84 76.22
1.86 74. 56
1.87 72.29
39.5
40.3
39.6
40.0
40.0
39.9
39.4
39.2
39.4
38.8
39. 4
39 9
40.4
39 7
4Ò.0
$1.85
1.92
1.96
1. 94
1 93
1. 94
1.92
1.93
1. 94
1.95
1 93
1 98
2 01
2 01
2.04
40.7
40. 5
40. 7
39. 8
39.8
40. 5
38.9
42.2
40.8
41.4
40.7
41.3
41. 2
40 3
39.5
$1. 72
1.73
1. 80
1. 73
1 .7 4
1 .7 7
1 .7 4
1 .7 5
1 85
1 85
1. 85
1 85
1 85
1 85
1.83
401
C: EARNINGS AND HOURS
T able C -l: Hours and gross earnings of production workers or nonsupervisory employees ^Continued
Manufacturing—Continued
Stone, clay, and glass products—Continued
Year and month
Clay refractories
Avg. Avg.
wkly. wkly.
earn- hours
ings
1955: Average......... $75.08
December___
80.39
1956: Average.........
80.16
January........... 80.99
February____ 81.00
M arch______ 80.40
April.........
81.00
80.60
M ay.........
80.19
June____
74. 77
Ju ly .........
78. 56
August__
September___ 79.31
80.73
October .
November___ 81.48
82.71
December-
38.7
39.6
39.1
39.7
39.9
39.8
39.9
39.9
39.5
37.2
38.7
38.5
39.0
38.8
39.2
Avg.
hrly.
earnings
Pottery and related
products
Avg. Avg.
wkly. wkly.
earn- hours
ings
$1.94 $66.00
2.03 71.02
2.05 70. 50
2.04 67.89
2.03 69.17
2.02 70. 49
2.03 71.62
2.02 70.50
2.03 69. 75
2.01 67.07
2.03 71.25
2.06 72.00
2.07 71.63
2.10 73.34
2.11 73.34
37.5
39.9
37.5
37.3
37.8
37.9
38.3
37.7
37.1
35.3
37.9
38.3
37.5
38.4
38.4
Avg.
hrly.
earnings
Concrete, gypsum,
and plaster products *
Avg. Avg.
wkly. wkly.
earn- hours
ings
$1.76 $78.40
1.78 78. 77
1.88 80.99
1.82 76.38
1. 83 78.40
1.86 78.84
1.87 80. 55
1.87 82.63
1.88 83.90
1.90 82.35
1.88 83.72
1.88 82.98
1.91 82.25
1.91 80.34
1.91 80.59
44.8
44.5
44.5
43.4
43.8
43.8
44.5
45.4
45.6
45.0
45.5
45.1
44.7
43.9
43.8
Avg.
hrly.
earnings
Avg. Avg.
wkly. wkly.
earn- hours
ings
$1.75 $75.15
1.77 74.15
1.82 78.58
1. 76 72.31
1.79 75.07
1.80 76.12
1.81 77.60
1.82 80.15
1.84 81.42
1.83 81.07
1.84 81.70
1.84 81.07
1.84 80.36
1.83 77. 70
1.84 78.23!
45.0
44.4
44.9
43.3
43.9
44.0
44.6
45.8
46.0
45.8
45.9
45.8
45.4
44.4
44.2
1955: Average____
December___
1956: Average-.......
January____
February.......
M arch_____
A pril.............
M ay..............
June...............
Ju ly ..............
A u g u s t _______
September__
October____
November__
December__
December___
1956: Average.........
January_____
April.
M ay..
June..
Ju ly ..
October__
November.
Asbestos products
43.2 $1.96
$2.10 $84. 67
1.97
41.2
2.16 81.16
2.03
41.7
2.20 84.65
1.97
41.0
2.14 80. 77
1. 97
41.0
2.12 80. 77
41.7
1.97
2.15 82.15
41.6
2.00
2.17 83. 20
41.5
2.00
2.16 83.00
41.4
2. 02
2.21 83. 63
2.02
40.7
2.21 82. 21
42.2
2.08
2. 21 87.78
42.5
2.08
2. 24 88.40
42.3
2.08
2. 29 87.98
2.06
87.14
42.3
2.29
42.4
2.09
2. 34 88.62
Iron and steel founElectrometallurgical
dries *
products
$87.15
90.07
88.00
86.24
85. 65
85. 79
87.02
86.40
86. 63
87. 52
85. 75
85. 57
91.83
93.89
100. 39
$87.14
87. 91
88.66
86. 88
86.88
86.88
86.65
88.73
88.91
85. 53
88.80
89.15
91.08
90.27
91. 53
41.5
41.7
40.0
40.3
40.4
39.9
40.1
40.0
39.2
39.6
38.8
38.2
40.1
41.0
42.9
$1.67 $67. 94
1.67 69.34
1.75 69.70
1.67 66.42
1. 71 67. 56
1.73 67. 54
1.74 69.46
1.75 70.55
1.77 70. 21
1.77 69.63
1.78 70.35
1.77 70.28
1.77 72. 56
1.75 70.93
1.77 70.99
41.3
40.7
40.3
40.6
40.6
40. 6
40.3
40.7
40.6
38.7
40.0
39.8
40.3
40.3
40.5
1955: Average-........ $81.61
December___
86.32
89. 44
1956: Average........
87. 99
"January____
85. 48
February.......
M arch______
86.32
87.78
April—
87.57
M a y ...
87.14
J u n e ...
. 92.42
July—
90.47
August .
93.26
September__
.
90.6Í
October........
90.01
November—
December___ . 90.8t
40.6
41.5
41.6
41.9
40.9
41.3
42.0
41.7
41.3
42.2
41. £
42.2
41. (
41.1
41. £
See footnotes at end of table.
https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
Avg. Avg.
wkly. wkly.
earn- hours
ings
$1.61 $81.12
1.62 81.97
1.70 82.82
1.64 80.99
1.66 80.38
1.68 80.59
1.69 82. 21
1.70 82. 21
1. 70 82.01
1.69 79.99
1.72 82.01
1.71 83.85
1.74 84.46
1.73 86.11
1.74 87. 57
41.6
41.4
40.8
40.7
40.8
40.7
40.9
40.9
40.6
39.6
40.4
40.9
40.8
41.2
41.7
Avg.
hrly.
earnings
$1.95
1.98
2.03
1.99
1.97
1.98
2.01
2.01
2.02
2.02
2.03
2.05
2.07
2.09
2.10
38.3
40.2
39.2
40.2
40.0
40.0
40.7
40.8
39.8
33.0
38.0
38.0
37.0
40.9
39.4
Total: Primary
metal industries
$2.15 $92. 29
2. 26 97. 21
2.28 96.76
2. 32 97.63
2.31 95. 35
2. 26 95.12
2. 26 96.00
2.26 95. 53
2. 25 95. 71
2.23 91.48
2.21 93.69
2.29 100.12
2. 29 98.74
2.36 99.06
2.31 101.19
Gray-iron foundries
41.2
41.9
41.0
41.9
41.1
41.0
41.2
41.0
40.9
40.3
39.7
41.2
40.8
40.6
41.3
$2.24
2. 32
2.36
2.33
2.32
2. 32
2.33
2. 33
2.34
2.27
2.36
2. 43
2.42
2. 44
2.45
Malleable-iron foundries
Blast furnaces, steelworks, and rolling
$95.99
101. 60
102.47
103. 25
99.38
99.14
99. 79
100. 69
100.94
96.47
97.14
107. 53
104.90
105.18
107.42
40.5
41.3
40.5
41.8
40.4
40.3
40.4
40.6
40.7
38.9
38.7
41.2
40.5
40.3
41.0
$2.37
2.46
2. 53
2. 47
2. 46
2. 46
2. 47
2.48
2. 48
2. 48
2. 51
2.61
2.59
2.61
2.62
Steel foundries
Blast furnace , steelrolling
mills, except electrometallurgical prod
ucts
40.5 $2.38
$96.39
102.01
41.3
2.47
102.47
40.5
2. 53
103. 66
41.8
2.48
40.4
99. 79
2.47
99. 54
40.3
2.47
40.4
2.48
100.19
40.6
2.49
101. 09
101.34
2. 49
40.7
97.25
38.9
2.50
2. 52
97.52
38.7
41.2
2.62
107.94
105. 30
40.5
2.60
40.3
2.62
105. 59
41.0
2.63
107.83
Prim ary s m e l t i n g
and refining of nonferrous metals *
40.6 $2.08
41.7 $2.11 $84.45
41.8 $2.01 $87. 99
42.0 $2.00 $84.02
$2.02 $84.00
2.15
2.20 88.80
41.3
43.6
42.2
2. 06 95.92
42.1
2.04 86.93
2. 08 85. 88
41.2
2.22
42.5
2.25 91.46
40.4
2. 07 95.63
2.07 83.63
40.8
2.11 84.46
41.5
2.16
43.2
2.20 89.64
2.07 95.04
2.04 86.32
41.7
40.8
2.08 83. 23
40.9
2.16
2.20 88. 34
42.8
41.1
2. 05 94.16
2.03 84. 26
41.0
2.07 83. 23
41.2
2.16
42.9
2.22 88. 99
40.9
2.05 95.24
41.0
2.04 83. 85
2.09 83. 64
41.6
2.16
2.23 89.86
42.7
40.8
2.04 95.22
41.7
2. 04 83. 23
2.09 85.07
2.17
2.24 89.62
41.3
42.9
2.03 96.10
40.7
2.03 81.00
39.9
2.08 82.62
2.19
2.24 90. 45
41.3
42.8
40.4
2.02 95.87
2.04 78.38
38.8
2.09 82.42
2.24
41.7
42.0
2.23 93.41
2.04 93.66
40.2
2.05 81.19
39.8
2.10 82.41
40.8
2.24
2.23 91.39
41.7
40. C 2. 07 92. 99
2. 06 82.80
40.7
2.11 83.84
41.6
2.28
42.1
2.28 94.85
2.12 95.99
40.8
40.7
2.07 86. 50
2.13 84.25
41.3
2.27
2.29 93.75
42.3
40.6
2.11 96.87
40.4
2.1C 85.67
2.15 84.84
41.1
2.27
2.28 93.30
41.8
2.12 95.30
39.9
2.12 85.44
40.S
2.16 84.59
41.2
2.29
42.8
2.31 94. 35
40.5
2.12 98.87
41.4
2.15 85.86
2.19 89.01
Secondary smelting R o llin g , drawing, R o l l i n g , drawing,
a n d alloying o f Rolling, drawing, and
a n d alloying o f
a n d refining o f
Primary refining of
alloying of aluminum
copper
metnonferrous
nonferrous metals
aluminum
als *
$2.11 $84. 64
2.16 88. 40
2.20 86.72
2.14 86. 32
2.14 85.70
2.14 86.53
2.15 87.36
2.18 85.70
2.19 85.27
2.21 85.26
2. 22 86.30
2.24 87. 54
2.26 87.94
2.24 87.26
2.26 91.10
Primary s m e l t i n g
and refining of copper, lead, and zinc
42.2
42.8
41.0
40.5
40.7
40.2
41.1
41.5
41.3
41.2
40.9
41.1
41.7
41.0
40.8
Avg.
hrly.
earnings
Miscellaneous n o n metallic m in e r a l
products *
Primary metal industries
Nonclay refractories
82.35
90.85
89.38
93. 26
92.40
90. 40
91.98
92. 21
89. 55
73. 59
83.98
87.02
84. 73
96. 52
91.01
Avg. Avg.
wkly. wkly.
earn- hours
ings
Avg.
hrly.
earnings
Stone, clay, and glass products—Continued
Abrasive products
Cut-stone and stone
products
Concrete products
$2.01 $88.88
2.08 92. 97
2.15 95.34
2.10 91.94
2.09 93.43
2.09 93.02
2.09 93.15
2.10 93.79
2.11 94.83
2.19 94.54
2.18 93.17
2.21 9 9 . o e
2.18 99.38
2.18 99. Of
2.19 102.46
41.9
42.5
41.1
41.5
41.4
41.4
41.8
41.2
40.8
40.6
40.9
41.1
40.9
40.4
41.6
40.4
40.6
40.4
40.5
40.8
40.8
40.5
40.6
40.7
40.4
38. £
40.
40.4
40.
4 i.;
$2.20
2. 2Í
2.36
2. 27
2.29
2.28
2.30
2.31
2.3!
2.34
2.47
2 .4‘
2 .4f
2.44
2.48
82.03
86. 2Í
86.2Í
85. 57
86.40
84.18
85.80
82.57
82. 78
83.2:
86.57
86. 786.57
84.8(
87. F
42.5
42. Í
42.;
43. (
43.2
42.!
42.6
41.7
41.6
41.'
42.1
41."
42.1
41.1
4i.;
$1.93
2.0Î
2.0'
1.96
2.0C
1.96
2. OC
1.98
1.96
2.0
2. Of
2. Of
2.0
2.0' :
2.1
$89. 89
96. 56
93.6(
97.22
96. i:
95.22
95.2C
92. K
91.2
89.9:
89.73
94. 53
93.06
92.9'
95.53
42.2 $2.13 $93. 31
2.2! 101. 93
43.Î
2.2£ 95.40
41.6
2. 2' 104.42
43.'
2.23 101. 47
43. :
42."
2. 2; 98. 73
42. £
2. 24 99. 21
2.2Í 93.9J
41. £
2.2; 91.06
40.6
2.26 90.36
40.
39.
2.2, 90. 53
41.; ; 2.2' 94.06
91. 53
40. i 2.2
2.29 91.9'
40.
2.321 95. 5Í
41.
43.4
45.1
42.4
45.8
44.
43.
43.
42.3
41.
40.
40.
41.
40."
40.
41.6
2.15 $86.09
2. 26 91.05
2.25 90.90
2.28 89.13
2. 26 89. 79
2. 2£ 90. 64
2.26 90.1"
2.26 89.23
2.26 89. 6,
2.2; 89.24
2.26 87.8(
2.2( 94.8;
93. 5t
2.2
2.2' 93.0‘
2.36 94.46
40.8 $2.11
2. 21
41. 2
40.4
2. 25
2.19
40.
41. C 2.19
41.5
2.20
2.21
40.3
2.21
40.4
40.
2.23
40.6
2.22
38.6
2.32
40."
2.30
2.31
40..
2.31
40.
40."
2.32
402
MONTHLY LABOR REVIEW, MARCH 1957
Table C -l : Hours and gross earnings of production workers or nonsupervisory employees 1—Continued
Manufacturing—Continued
Fabricated metal
products (except
ordnance, machin
ery, and transpor
tation equipment)
Primary metal industries—Continued
Year and month
1955: Average__
December..
1956: Average__
January__
February...
M arch____
April..........
M ay_____
J u n e .........
J u ly ..........
August.......
September.
October___
November.
December..
Nonferrous foundries
Miscellaneous pri
mary metal indus Iron and steel forgings
tries 4
Avg. Avg.
wkly. wkly.
earn- hours
ings
Avg. Avg.
wkly. wkly.
earn- hours
mgs
$85. 89
89. 44
89. 57
85. 84
87 10
87 10
87. 51
87. 2Ç
87.05
89. 13
89. 57
91.91
91.69
90. 76
94.24
40.9
41.6
40.9
40.3
40.7
40.7
40.7
40.6
40.3
40.7
40.9
41. 4
41.3
40.7
41.7
Avg.
hrly.
earntags
$2.10
2.15
2.19
2.13
2. 14
2.14
2.15
2.15
2.16
2.19
2.19
2.22
2. 22
2. 23
2. 26
Tin can and other
tinware
1955: Average__
December..
1956: Average__
January__
February...
March___
A pril.........
M ay_____
June_____
Ju ly ...........
August___
September.
October__
November.
December. .
$85. 69
89. 25
91. 56
86. 05
88. 38
90. 09
93.31
90.07
92. 01
93. 52
94.17
94.81
94. 73
90. 80
96. 73
41.8
41.9
42.0
40.4
41.3
41.9
43.2
41.7
42.4
42. 9
43.0
42.9
42.1
40.9
42.8
$82. 21
87.12
83.07
84. 40
84.02
83. 10
84. 32
82. 71
80.01
80. 89
82.32
84.14
84.07
81. 70
83.16
40.3
40.9
39.0
40.0
40.2
39. 2
39.4
39. 2
38.1
37.8
39.2
39.5
39.1
38.0
38. 5
1955: Average...
December.
1956: Average.-.
January__
February..
M arch___
April........
M ay_____
June_____
July_____
August___
September.
October__
November.
December..
$84. 85
89. 46
89.89
87. 99
85. 91
86. 53
88. 62
90.31
90.31
89. 46
91.15
93.29
93.30
91. 56
93. 51
41.8
42. 6
42.2
42.1
41. 5
41.6
42.2
42.8
42.6
42.0
42.2
42.6
42.8
42.0
42.7
See footnotes at end of table
https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
41.3
41.9
40.7
40.7
40. 7
40.4
40.3
40.2
40.1
40.0
40.4
41.5
41.8
41.4
42.0
42.2
42.9
42.1
43.3
42.7
42.6
41.9
41.9
41. 5
41.1
40.9
41.3
42.5
42.3
42.3
Avg.
hrly.
earntags
$2.40 $96 32
2.49 101.18
2. 51 97.06
2.50 100. 51
2. 48 97.78
2. 48 96. 25
2. 48 96. 48
2. 47 95. 57
2. 45 95. 76
2. 48 93.60
2. 47 94. 39
2. 52 96.56
2. 58 97.39
2. 57 98.28
2.58 99. 59
Cutlery and edae tools
$1. 92 $69. 87
1.97 75. 15
2.00 72. 62
1.95 73. 22
1.95 72. 69
1.95 70. 88
1.95 72.57
1.95 71.98
1.97 70. 58
1. 97 71.33
1.99 70. 80
2.05 73. 26
2. 07 74.44
2. 06 75.53
2.10 75.21
41.1
42.7
40.8
41.6
41.3
40.5
41.0
40.9
40.1
40.3
40.0
40.7
40.9
41.5
41.1
Avg. Avg.
wkly. wkly.
earn- hours
tags
43.0
43.8
42.2
43.7
42.7
42. 4
42.5
42.1
42.0
41.6
41.4
41.8
41.8
42.0
42.2
Avg.
hrly.
earnings
$2. 24
2. 31
2.30
2. 30
2. 29
2. 27
2.27
2. 27
2. 28
2. 25
2. 28
2.31
2. 33
2.34
2. 36
Handtools
$1. 70 $77. 95
1. 76 82.19
1.78 82. 62
1. 76 81.38
1. 76 81.99
1.75 81. 59
1. 77 81. 59
1. 76 80. 79
1 76 81.00
1. 77 79. 80
1.77 82.62
1.80 84. 26
1.82 85. 08
1.82 84.05
1.83 85. 90
Welded and heavyriveted pipe
Avg. Avg.
wkly. wkly.
earn hours
ings
$91. 46
98.09
94.25
93. 90
94.16
94. 43
94.85
93. 94
97.63
94.16
93. 32
95. 00
91. 10
94.64
96.08
41.2
42.1
40.8
40.3
41.3
41.6
41.6
41.2
41.9
41.3
40.4
40.6
39.1
40.1
40.2
$2.22 $82. 37
2. 33
2.31
2. 33
2.28
2. 27
2 2S
2.'28
2. 33
2.28
2. 31
2. 34
2.33
2.36
2. 39
41.6
42.0
40.7
40.2
40.2
40.0
39.8
39.8
39.9
39.8
40.3
41.9
42.4
41.6
42.6
40.3
40.3
40.0
39.7
39.6
39.6
39.4
39.6
40.0
39.5
40.2
40.8
40.9
39.7
40.3
$1.89
1. 92
1.98
1.94
1. 94
1. 96
1.96
1.95
1.96
1. 95
1.98
2.01
2.02
2.01
2.03
Metal stamping, coating, and engraving4
$2.03 $86.10
2.10 87. 99
2.13 87. 76
2. 09 82.81
2. 07 85. 07
2.08 86.10
2.10 85. 48
2.11 84. 00
2. 12 87.12
2.13 86. 71
2.16 86.28
2.19 91.98
2.18 93. 50
2.18 92.20
2.19 94. 57
42.0
42.1
41.2
40.2
40.9
41.0
40.9
40.0
40.9
40.9
40.7
42.0
42.5
42.1
42.6
$2. 05
2.09
2.13
2. 06
2.08
2.10
2. 09
2.10
2.13
2.12
2.12
2.19
2.20
2.19
2.22
$83.01
85.90
88.19
86. 32
85. 49
85. 49
86.94
87.15
87. 99
85. 90
86. 67
90.07
91.14
90. 27
92.00
41.3
41.7
41.6
41. 5
41.3
41.3
41.8
41.7
41.9
41.1
40.5
41.7
42.0
41.6
42.2
$2.01 $83. 00
2. 06 84. 25
2.12 87. 57
2.08 85. 28
2. 07 84. 87
2.07 85.70
2.08 86. 32
2.09 86.74
2.10 87. 57
2. 09 85. 49
2.14 84. 35
2.16 89.21
2.17 90. 72
2.17 90.69
2.18 92. 00
Vitreous enameled
products
$65. 27
63. 34
66. 64
61. 56
66. 02
65. 57
66.80
63. 71
65.62
67.13
66. 92
71.81
71.23
70. 24
67.83
39.8
37, 7
39.2
36.0
39.3
38.8
40.0
37.7
38.6
40.2
39.6
40.8
40.7
40.6
39.9
41.5
41.3
41. 5
41.2
41.2
41.4
41.7
41.7
41.9
41.3
39.6
41.3
42.0
41.6
42.2
$2.00 $82.82
2. 04 85. 90
2.11 85.27
2. 07 85.28
2. 06 83. 84
2.07 83. 23
2. 07 84. 46
2.08 79.78
2 09 88.20
2. 07 82.21
2.13 82.58
2.16 87. 54
2.16 87. 29
2.18 81.93
2.18 89.45
Stamped and pressed
metal products
$1.64 $89. 25
1.68 91.80
1.70 91.30
1. 71 85.24
1.68 87. 53
1. 69 89. 21
1. 67 88.37
1.69 86.83
1.70 90.86
1. 67 91.05
1.69 89. 79
1. 76 96. 25
1.75 97.81
1.73 96.25
1.70 98. 67
42.3
42.5
41. 5
40.4
40.9
41.3
41.1
40.2
41.3
41.2
41.0
42.4
42.9
42.4
42.9
41.0
41.7
40.8
41.0
40.5
40.6
41.0
39.3
41.8
40.3
39.7
41.1
40.6
39.2
41.8
1.
2.02
2. 03
2. 04
2.12
2.15
2.13
2.18
40.9
41.1
40.1
39.5
39.2
39.0
39.3
39.5
39.4
40.0
40.1
40.8
41.0
40.9
41.3
$1.98
2.03
2. 07
2.03
85.06
85.28
83. 03
83. 02
83. 23
83.84
83.23
84. 46
83. 64
84.25
87.99
89.25
88.18
90.52
$78.18
80. 60
80.19
79. 20
79.20
79 40
79. 59
79. 00
78.80
78.39
80. 60
82. 42
83. 22
80.36
82.39
2.02
2.03
2.04
2.04
2. 06
2.05
2.07
2.11
2.13
2.13
2.15
40.3
40.5
39.7
39.8
39.8
39. 5
39.4
39.5
39.4
39.0
39.9
40.4
40.4
39.2
39.8
$1.94
1.99
2.02
1. 99
1. 99
2.01
2.02
2.00
2.00
2. 01
2.02
2. 04
2. 06
2.05
2.07
Boiler-shop products
$2.02
40.7
41.5
41.5
41.6
41.6
41.3
41.8
41.7
41.4
40.5
40.9
41.7
41.9
42.0
42.1
2.06
2.09
2.08
2.07
2.05
2.00
2. 03
2.11
2. 04
2. 08
2.13
2.15
2. 09
2.14
Lighting fixtures
$2.11 $78. 53
2.16 78. 91
2.20 76.59
2.11 75.05
2.14 72.13
2.16 71. 76
2.15 73. 49
2.16 74. 26
2. 20 74.86
2. 21 75.60
2.19 75. 79
2.27 78.34
2.28 80.36
2. 27 80. 57
2.30 82.60
Avg.
hrly.
earn
ings
H eating ap p aratu s
(except electric)
and plumbers’ sup
plies 4
Hardware
40.6 $1.92 $82. 78
41 3
1.99 85. 26
40.9
2. 02 83.44
41. 1 1. 98 80.40
41.2
1.99 80. 00
41.0
1. 99 79.60
41.0
1.99 79. 20
40.6
1.99 79.20
40.5
2.00 80.60
40.1
1.99 80. 79
40.9
2. 02 82. 21
41.1
2. 05 88.83
41.1
2.07 91.16
40.8
2.06 88.61
41.3
2. 08 92.87
Total: Fabricated
metal products
Avg. Avg. Avg.
hrly. wkly. wkly.
earn earn hours
ings
ings
Oil burners, nonelectrie heating and Fabricated structural Structural steel and M etal doors, sash,
cooking apparatus,
metal products 4 ornamental metal work frames, molding,
not elsewhere classiand trim
fied
$2. 04 $76.17
2. 13 77. 38
2.13 79. 20
2.11 77. 02
2. 09 76. 82
2.12 77. 62
2.14 77. 22
2.11 77. 22
2.10 78. 40
2.14 77.03
2.10 79. 60
2.13 82.01
2.15 82. 62
2.15 79. 80
2.16 81.81
Sheet-metal work
Avg. Avg.
wkly. wkly.
earn- hours
tags
42.5 $2.29 $101.28
43.3
2. 3S 106. 82
42. C 2.38 105. 67
43.2
2. 37 108. 25
42.6
2. 36 105. 90
42.4
2. 35 105. 65
42.2
2.35 103. 91
42.0
2. 35 103.49
41.9
2.35 101.68
41.3
2. 34 101. 93
40.9
2. 35 101.02
41.3
2. 39 104. 08
41.4
2.42 109. 65
41.6
2.43 108. 71
41.9
2. 44 109.13
Cutlery, handtools,
and hardware 4
$2.05 $79. 30
2.13 82. 54
2.18 81.40
2.13 79. 37
2.14 79. 37
2.15 78. 78
2.16 78.59
2.16 78. 39
2.17 79. 00
2.18 78. 80
2.19 80. 40
2. 21 85. 08
2.25 86. 53
2. 22 85. 28
2. 26 88. 20
Sanitary ware and
plumbers' supplies
1955: Average__
December..
1956: Average__
January__
February...
M arch____
April_____
M ay_____
J u n e .........
July............
August___
September.
October___
November.
December..
$97.33
103.05
99. 96
102. 38
100. 54
99. 64
99.17
98.70
98. 47
96. 64
96.12
98. 71
100.19
101.09
102.24
Avg.
hrly.
earnmgs
Wire drawing
$ 2.00
2. 06
2.12
2. 07
2.07
2. 08
2. 08
2.09
2.11
2.10
2.14
2.16
2.18
2.17
2.18
Fabricated wire
products
$1.92 $77.87
1. 92 80. 48
1.91 80.56
1.90 80. 12
1.84 79. 32
1.84 78. 74
1. 87 79. 73
1.88
78.76
1.90 79. 93
1.89 77.16
1.89 79. 37
1. 92 82. 59
1.96 84.62
1.97 82.81
2.00 84.85
41.2
41. 7
41. 1
41.3
41.1
40.8
41.1
40.6
41.2
40.4
40.7
41.5
42.1
41.2
41.8
$1.89
1.93
1.96
1. 94
1.93
1.93
1.94
1.94
1.94
1. 91
1.95
1.99
2.01
2.01
2.03
403
C: EARNINGS AND HOURS
T able C -l: Hours and gross earnings of production workers or nonsupervisory employees ^Continued
M anufacturing—C ontinued
Machinery (except
electrical)
Fabricated metal products (except ordnance, machinery, and transportation equipment)—Continued
Year and month
Avg. Avg.
wkly wkly.
earn hours
ings
1955: Average.......... $84. 28
88.48
December___
1956: Average_____ 86. 51
January_____ 86.83
February____ 86.43
M arch............. 85.65
A p ril-............ 85. 45
M ay________ 84.64
June________ 84.45
July------------- 84. 04
August______ 84. 67
September___ 87. 36
88. 62
October. ----November___ 88.62
December----- 90.95
43.0
43.8
42.2
43.2
43.0
42.4
42.3
41.9
41.6
41.4
41.3
42.0
42.2
42.0
42.7
Avg.
hrly
earn
ings
Engines and turbines4
1955: Average_____ $91.08
95.40
December___
1956: Average_____ 95.45
January.......... 93. 86
February____ 94.50
95.60
March______
95. 57
April_______
M ay________ 93. 56
June________ 94.62
July------------- 94.16
92.29
August_____
September___ 96.00
October_____ 97.00
November___ 97.00
99.90
December___
41.4
42.4
41.5
41.9
42.0
42.3
42.1
41.4
41.5
41.3
40.3
41.2
41.1
41.1
41.8
Avg. Avg. Avg. Avg. Avg. Avg.
wkly. wkly. hrly. wkly. wkly. hrly.
earn hours earn earn hours earn
ings
ings
ings
ings
Avg. Avg. Avg.
wkly. wkly. hrly.
earn hours earn
ings
ings
$1.96
2.02
2.05
2. 01
2. 01
2. 02
2.02
2.02
2.03
2. 03
2.05
2.08
2.10
2.11
2.13
$2.20
2.25
2.30
2.24
2.25
2. 26
2.27
2.26
2.28
2.28
2.29
2.33
2.36
2.36
2.39
$90.74
91.27
97.36
90. 91
91.32
97. 44
99.90
100. 35
105.34
107.87
95. 57
94. 25
92. 40
95.30
98. 51
42 4
41.3
42.7
41.7
41.7
43.5
44.4
44.8
45.8
46.1
42.1
40.8
40.0
40.9
42.1
$92.20
97. 75
102.41
94. 47
97.64
99.96
98.83
96.64
96. 88
97.11
96. 88
101. 57
106. 26
105.50
111.46
39.4
40.9
41.8
40.2
41.2
42.0
41.7
41.3
41.4
41.5
40.2
41.8
42.0
41.7
43.2
$89. 25
94.57
90.61
88.88
88.97
87. 72
89.38
88.32
88. 73
88. 07
86. 40
88. 44
93. 71
92.11
98.94
$2.14
2. 21
2.28
2.18
2.19
2.24
2.25
2.24
2. 30
2.34
2.27
2.31
2.31
2. 33
2.34
Steam engines, tur
bines, and water
wheels
42.4
43.1
42.5
43.1
43.2
43.2
43.1
43.1
42.7
41.7
41.7
42.1
42.2
41.6
42.3
$2.05
2.13
2.17
2.13
2.14
2.15
2.16
2.16
2.17
2.14
2.16
2.20
2. 20
2.21
2. 21
Machine-tool
accessories
1955: Average.......... $102.52
December....... 110.32
1956: Average_____ 114.86
January_____ 111. 48
February___ 1 1 3 . i:
114. 7£
M arch_____
116. 4(
April........ .
115.6'
M ay_____
June_______ 115. 3'
114. 3(
July_______
August.......... 116. 9'
Septem ber... 119.0
114.8
October____
N ovem ber... 110.7
December___ 116.0
$2. 34 $90. 72
2.39 94. 79
2.45 93.98
2.35 93.68
2. 37 64.11
2. 38 94. 98
2. 37 94.95
2. 34 92.74
2.34 94. 21
2.34 93. 52
2.41 91.08
2.43 94.30
2.53 93. 84
2.53 94.07
2.58 95. 82
https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
42.3 $2. 06
2.12
43.0
2.17
42.4
2. 14
43.3
2.15
43.5
43 5 2.16
2.17
43.2
2.17
43.0
2.18
42.4
2.15
41.0
2.15
41.2
2.19
42.0
2. 20
42.0
2.20
41.4
2. 21
42.2
Special-industry ma
chinery (except metal
working machinery)4
44.0 $2.32 $83.38
2.42 88.33
45.4
45.4
2. 52 89. 24
2. 4£ 87.74
45.5
2. 4' 88.36
45.8
2.4£ 88. 58
46.
88.1'
46.
2.5
2. 5‘. 89. 21
45. £
2.52 88.8'
45.
2.5' 89.0'
45.
89. 2,
2.5
45.
90.9
2.6
45.
91.1
2.5
44.
90.7
2.5
43.
91.5 )
2.5
45.
See footnotes at end of table.
4 1 7 2 3 2 — 5 7 --------- 1 0
$87.14
91.16
92. 01
92 66
93. 53
93. 96
93. 74
93.31
92.43
88.15
88. 58
91. 98
92. 40
91.08
93.26
41.9
42.6
41.0
40.4
41.0
40.8
41.0
40.7
40.7
40.4
40.0
40.2
41.1
40.4
42.1
$2.13 $88.48
2. 22 92.77
2.21 88.41
2.20 90.67
2.17 89. 22
2.15 87.98
2.18 86.93
2.17 86.11
2.18 84.05
2.18 83. 23
2.16 85. 28
2.20 90.31
2.28 91.38
2.28 89.88
2.35 92.88
41.9 $1.99
2.01
43.3
2. Of
42.7
2 . 0;
42.8
2.0.
43.
2.06
43.
2. 06
42.8
2.08
42. £
2.0
42.'
2.1
42.
2.1
42.
2.1
42.
2.1
42.
2.1
42.
2.1 3
43.
42.0
42.7
41.4
42.2
42.2
42.4
42.2
41.4
41.5
41.2
40.3
41.0
40.8
40.9
41.3
$2.16 $83. 84
2.22 87.53
2.27 86.80
2. 22 88.13
2.23 87.29
2.24 86.67
2. 25 85.60
2.24 84.99
2. 27 85. 60
2.27 85.14
2.26 85.17
2.30 87. 47
2. 30 86. 68
2.30 87.07
2.32 89.15
Oilfield machinery
and tools
$86.90
92. 45
92.45
90.31
90.10
89.46
91.16
02. 44
92. 23
92.87
93.95
93.93
94.37
93. 46
94.57
42.6
43.2
42.8
42.6
42.5
42.4
43.0
43.4
43.3
43.6
42.9
42.5
42.7
42.1
42.6
$2.04
2.14
2.16
2.12
2.12
2.11
2.12
2.13
2.13
2.13
2.19
2.21
2. 21
2. 22
2.22
Food-products
machinery
$84.66
88.1£
89. 6’
88.61
90. 7'
90. 51
87. 7Í
89.0'
87.9
90.9
89.4
89.6
89.4
88.7
91.1
41. £
42.
41. £
42
42.8
42.
41.6
42.6
41.
42.
41.
41.
41.
40.
41.
40.5
40.9
40.0
40.8
40.6
40.5
40.0
39.9
40.0
39.6
39.8
39.4
39.4
39.4
39.8
$2.07
2.14
2.17
2.16
2.15
2.14
2.14
2.13
2.14
2.15
2.14
2.22
2.20
2. 21
2. 24
Metalworking
machinery 4
$98.10
106. 70
108.45
106.91
107. 62
108.07
108. 77
108.96
107. 76
106. 80
107.89
110. 95
109. 27
106.87
110. 50
Total: Machinery
(excep t electrical)
Avg. Avg. Avg.
wkly. wkly. hrly.
earn hours earn
ings
ings
Avg. Avg. Avg.
wkly. wkly. hrly.
earn hours earn
ings
ings
43.2
44.7
42.5
44.1
44.0
42.9
42.8
42.5
41.6
41.3
41.7
42.0
42.5
42.0
43.0
$1.91 $87.36
1.97 93.31
2.01 93.26
1.97 92. 66
1.97 92. 44
1.97 92.01
1.98 92. 65
1.98 92.00
1.98 91.98
2.00 91.74
2.00 92.16
2.03 94. 95
2.05 94.73
2.07 94.05
2.08 96.28
$87.53
91.24
90. 27
92. 93
91.58
90.35
88.84
88.44
88.62
88. 44
86.90
91.83
92.06
91.37
92.63
40.9
41.1
40.3
41.3
40.7
40.7
40.2
40.2
40.1
40.2
39.5
40.1
40.2
39.9
40.1
$2.14
2. 22
2.24
2.25
2.25
2.22
2. 21
2.20
2. 21
2.20
2.20
2.29
2.29
2.29
2. 31
Machine tools
43.7
46.6
45.8
46.2
46.4
45.9
46.2
46.0
45.4
45.1
44.7
46.0
45.9
45.3
46.0
$2.18
2.28
2.32
2.29
2.28
2. 27
2.29
2. 30
2.30
2.29
2.32
2.37
2.36
2. 38
2.40
Paper-industries
machinery
41. £ $1. 79 $89.0C
1.85 97.03
42.
41.4
1.86 96. IE
1.81 94.71
41.
1.81 92.65
41.
1.81 94. 3,
41. £
1.8' 94. 6(
41.
1.8' 95.8'
41.
98.3
41.
1.8
96.9
1.8
40.
98.1
41.
1.8
1.8 100.5
41.
96.9 2
41.
1.8
1.9 3 100.1 9
41.
41. 5 1.9 0 106.4 3
41.8
43.2
42.2
42.7
42.6
42.4
42.5
42.2
42.0
41.7
41.7
42.2
42.1
41.8
42.6
$2.09
2.16
2.21
2.17
2.17
2.17
2.18
2.18
2.19
2. 20
2. 21
2.25
2. 25
2. 25
2.26
Agricultural machin
ery (except tractors)
Tractors
43.6 $2. 25 $95.27
2.34 106. 25
45.6
2. 41 106.26
45.0
2. 36 105. 80
45.3
2. 36 105. 79
45.6
2. 37 104.19
45.6
2.38 105. 80
45.7
2.40 105.80
45.4
2. 40 104. 42
44.9
2.40 103. 28
44.5
2.43 103. 70
44.4
45. 1 2. 46 109.02
2.45 108. 32
44.6
2.44 107. 81
43.8
2.45 110. 40
45.1
Textile-machinery
$2. 04 $74.29
2.08 76.62
2.14 76. 59
2.1C 75.4?
2.1£ 75.66
2.1£ ' 75. 9£
2.11 76. 54
76. IÍ
2. 1:
75. 6S
2.1
2.16 75.6'
76.6,
2.1
78.3
2.1
78.4
2.1
78.8
2.1
2.1 8 78.8 5
Screw-machine
products
43.8 $2. 02 $82. 51
2. 08 88. 06
44.6
2.09 85.43
42.3
2.07 86.88
43.8
2. 07 86.68
43.1
2.07 84. 51
42.5
42.2
2.06 84. 74
2.07 84.15
41.6
2.05 82. 37
41 0
2.03 82.60
41.0
2.08 83.40
41.0
2.12 85.26
42.6
2.14 87.13
42.7
2.14 86.94
42.0
2.16 89.44
43.0
Diesel and other inter Agricultural machin
nal combustion engines, ery and tractors 4
not elsewhere classified
Construction and min
Construction and
ing machinery, except
mining machinery 4
for oilfields
1955: Average........... $86. 92
December___ 91.80
1956: Average........... 92.23
January_____ 91.80
February____ 92. 45
92.88
M arch.........
93.10
April_______
M ay________ 93.10
June________ 92.66
89.24
July________
August______ 90. 07
September----- 92. 62
92.84
October---- -November----- 91.94
93.48
December___
Bolts, nuts, washers,
and rivets
Steel springs
Miscellaneous fabri Metal shipping barrels,
cated metal products4 drums, kegs, and pails
$79. 80
83.64
82.58
83.42
82. 62
82. 81
81.78
80.98
82.40
81.30
83. 62
82.43
80. 47
82.04
84.71
40.1
40.6
39.7
40.3
40.5
40.2
39.7
39.5
40.0
38.9
40.2
38.7
38.5
38.7
39.4
$1.99
2.06
2.08
2.07
2.04
2.06
2.06
2.05
2.06
2. 09
2.08
2.13
2.09
2.12
2.15
Metalworking machinery (except m ichine
tools)
$92.02
99. 90
97.41
98. 34
99.90
98.56
97.67
97.88
96.32
96. 73
94. 05
96. 02
98.21
97.25
100. 22
42.6
44.6
43.1
43.9
44.4
44.0
43.8
43.5
43.0
42.8
41.8
42.3
42.7
42.1
43.2
$2.16
2.24
2. 26
2.24
2.25
2.24
2. 23
2. 25
2 24
2.26
2. 25
2.27
2. 30
2. 31
2.32
Printing-trades
machinery and
equipment
44.5 $2. 0C $92.6C
2. 0( 100.55
47.1
2.1( 102.4f
45.8
2.0. 100 7£
46.2
2. 0' 101 8'
45.4
2.0 101. 3S
45.
2.0 100.0
45."
2.0 IO2 . 9 :
46.1
2.1 ' 102.9
46.
2.0 ) 104.7
46.'
2.1 101.2
46.
2.1 4 105.1
47.
2.1 3 104.4 4
45.
46. 3 2.1 5 105.1 2
3
2.1 9i 102.8 6
48.
41. £ $2. 21
2. 29
43. £
2.35
43.6
2.31
43.6
2.31
44.
2.32
43.'
2.30
43.
43.
2.35
2.35
43.
2.37
44.
42.
2.36
2.39
44.
2.3£
43.
43. 8 2.46
43. 4 2.3'
404
MONTHLY LABOR REVIEW, MARCH 1957
T able C 1: Hours and gross earnings of production workers or nonsupervisory employees 1—Continued
M anufacturing—0 ontinued
Machinery (except electrical)—Continued
Gen eral ind ustrial
Eoachine ry 4
Year and month
Avg. Avg.
wkly. wkly.
earn hours
ings
1955: Average........
December___
1956: Average........
January.........
February.......
March_____
April..............
M ay..............
June_______
July________
August______
September___
October. ___
November___
December___
$86.7,
93.0
93. 2<
91.3i
91.8
91.5'
92. 2 ;
92.8?
92. 8'
90. 6£
92.81
95. 695.8"
95. 2C
96. 98
41. !
43.
42.
42.'
42.'
42.
42.'
42.?
42.
41. €
42.
42. £
42.?
42. £
43.
Avg. Avg. Avg.
hrly. wkly. wkly.
earn earn hours
ings
ings
$2.0 $84.4,
2.1
88.6!
2.1
90. 5!
2.1
89.24
2.1
90. 71
2.11 90.94
2. If 90.5!
2. r
89.6?
2.1? 90.31
2.1? 87.34
2.2( 88. 61
2. 2Í 91.5?
2. 2l 91. 8C
2.24 91.37
2. 2, 93.06
Mech anical s tokers,
and ndustruil furnai es and otens
1955: Average_____
December
1956: Average_____
January_____
February____
M arch______
April_______
M ay................
June_____
Ju ly ................
August______
September___
October_____
November___
December.......
1955: Average_____
December___
1956: Average.........
January_____
February____
M arch______
April_______
M ay................
June______
July________
August______
September___
October____
November___
December.......
Purr ps, air and gas
compressors
41.
42.
42.,
42.
43.
43.1
42.
42. £
42.
41.
41.
42.4
42. £
42.3
42.6
Conveyors and con
veying equipment
Avg. Avg. Avg.
hrly. wkly. wkly.
earn earn hours
ings
ings
$2 . 0 ;
2.0$
2.K
2.0!
2.11
2.11
2.11
2.11
2.11
2.16
2.13
2. If
2. If
2 . ie
2.17
$87. 5(
96. y
97.3?
' 95.91
93.9^
95.2-4
95.6'
95.44
98. 7(
95.34
97.81
102.6f
102. 26
98. 87
100.8£
41.,
43.!
42.
43.
42.'
42.!
42.
42.
43.
42.6
42. £
43. £
43.'
42.?
43.1
Avg. Avg. Avg.
hrly. wkly. wkly.
earn earn hours
ings
ings
$2.1! $80.11
2.1! 85.6'
2.2’ 86.1
2.21 84. o;
2.26 84.4,
2.2! 84.8,
2. 2? 85. 4?
2.2? ? 84.66
2.26 ' 86. 9^
2.2' 87.5'
2.2? 85.76
2.36 87. 5’
2.34 88.26
2.31 86. 5£
2.34 88.41
Office and ste>re ma- Comp uting machines
chine and de vices 4
and cash registers
$85. 70
41.6 $2.06 $82.41
40.2 $2.05
91.81
42.7
2.15 87.14
41.3
2.11
90. 27 41.6
2.17 88.78
41.1
2.16
87. 98
41.5
2.12 86.30
40.9
2.11
92.02
42.6
2.16 85. 88 40.7
2.11
89.45
41.8
2.14 85.46
40.5
2.11
90. 52 42.3
2.14 87.13
41.1
2.12
91.38
42.5
2.15 87.12
40.9
2.13
91.56
42.0
2.18 87.48
40.5
2.16
88.94
40.8
2.18 90.03
41.3
2.18
91.78
42.1
2.18 88. 78 41.1
2.16
93.26
42.2
2.21 92.16
41.7
2.21
91.52
41.6
2.20 92.82
42.0
2.21
90.23
41.2
2.19 91.27
41.3
2.21
93.68
42.2
2.22 92.99
41.7
2.23
Comm ercial la undry,
dry-c leaning and
Sew ng machines
press ing mac hiñes
Refrigerators and airconditioning units
$79.19
83.10
80.36
83.27
80.70
82.10
81.14
80.18
79.79
80.56
80.56
81.93
79. 77
80.34
83.13
$84. 46
92. 44
86.00
91. 58
87.34
84.84
88.17
82.04
84. 56
84.80
85. 54
86. 55
84. 41
85. 58
88.44
41.9
42.4
41.0
42.7
41.6
42.1
41.4
40.7
40.5
41.1
41.1
41.8
40.7
41.2
42.2
$1.89
1.96
1.96
1. 95
1.94
1.95
1.96
1.97
1.97
1.96
1.96
1.96
1. 96
1.95
1.97
$82.81
86.09
88.97
86.50
88. 81
89.02
89.62
88.78
88.13
93. 50
87.16
89.10
88.26
88.04
88.00
40.2
40.8
41.0
40.8
41.5
41.6
41.3
41.1
40.8
42.5
39.8
40.5
40.3
40.2
40.0
$2.06
2.11
2.17
2.12
2.14
2.14
2.17
2.16
2.16
2.20
2.19
2.20
2.19
2.19
2.20
$88.84
93.11
96.05
92.03
92.21
91.98
93. 52
94.81
94.42
99.22
96. 51
100.14
99. 96
96.70
99.90
40.2
41.2
41.4
40.9
40.8
40.7
41.2
41.4
40.7
42.4
41.6
41.9
42.0
40.8
41.8
40.8
42.6
40.0
42.4
41.2
40.4
41.2
38.7
39.7
40.0
39.6
39.7
38.9
38.9
40.2
$2.07
2.17
2.15
2.16
2.12
2.10
2.14
2.12
2.13
2.12
2.16
2.18
2.17
2.20
2.20
1955: Average
$85.45
December___
91.35
1956: Average_____ 90.31
January_____ 90.94
February____ 88.62
M arch_____
88.41
April............... 89. 25
M a y ............... 89. 67
June................ 89. 67
Ju ly ................. 89.25
August______ 89.88
September___ 91.57
October____
91. 36
November
91.32
December___
95.03
42.3
43.5
42.2
43.1
42.2
41.9
42.3
42.1
42.1
41.9
42.0
42.2
42.1
41.7
43.0
See footnotes at end of table.
https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
$2.02
2.10
2.14
2.11
2.10
2.11
2.11
2.13
2.13
2.13
2.14
2.17
2.17
2.19
2.21
41.
42. !
41.
41.
41.
41.?
41.!
41.,
4L?
41.'
4L!
4L
4L?
41.
4L
40.1
41.5
41.2
40.5
40.5
40.2
40.7
40.1
40.2
40.5
40.9
42.0
43.1
43.1
42.0
$1.9 $86.9!
2.0;
96.0^
2.0- 90.2'
2.0! 91.8i
2.01 90.0!
2.0£ 88.1?
2.0* 90.0!
2.04 90.7;
2.0? 87.36
2.16 83.9!
2.0? 88. 54
2.0£ 93. 24
2.11 91.7!
2.0£ 95.6C
2.11 98.06
42.1
43.4
41.6
42.5
41.9
41.5
41.8
41.2
41.2
40.7
40.7
41.6
41.7
41.5
42.6
42.
45.£
4L
42.!
42.1
41.4
4L!
42.!
41.6
39.4
40.?
42.
4L
42. 3
43.2
$1.90
1. 96
2.01
1.97
1.97
1. 97
1.96
1.96
1.97
1.99
1.99
2.05
2.04
2.08
2.06
$83.64
91.16
85.84
89.46
87. 77
85.47
87.13
83.13
84. 59
85. 65
84.74
87.05
85.75
86. 55
88. 29
40.8
42.4
40.3
42.0
41.4
40.7
41.1
39.4
39.9
40.4
39.6
40.3
39.7
39.7
40.5
$2.0, $90.3
2.1! 98.1!
2.1' 95.0!
2.14 96.14
2.14 94.61
2. IS 93.0!
2.15 93.5!
2. If 94.3?
2. IS 93.2!
2.13 91.54
2.17 95.44
2.22 96. 73
2. 21 97.84
2. 26 96.02
2.27 99.16
$2.05
2.15
2.13
2.13
2.12
2.10
2.12
2.11
2.12
2.12
2.14
2.16
2.16
2.18
2.18
Fabricated pipe, fit
tings, ana valves
$2.04 $83.03
2.12 87.99
2.15 88.78
2.12 87. 35
2.11 86.31
2.11 87.34
2.13 89.02
2.12 87.12
2.13 87. 74
2.13 85.81
2.15 87.64
2.19 91.49
2.20 91. 49
2.21 91.05
2.22 93.93
40.9
42.1
41.1
41.4
41.1
41.2
41.6
40.9
41.0
40.1
40.2
41.4
41.4
41.2
42.5
Mechanical powertransmission equip
ment
Avg. Avg. Avg.
hrly. wkly. wkly.
earn earn hours
ings
ings
Service—industry
and household ma
chines 1
Miscellaneous ma
chinery parts *
$85. 88
92. 01
89.44
90.10
88.41
87. 57
89.03
87.34
87.76
86.69
87.51
91.10
91.74
91.72
94. 57
Industrial trucks,
tractors, etc.
Avg. Avg. Avg.
hrly. wkly. wkly.
earn earn hours
ings
ings
Typewriters
$2.21 $76.19
2.26 81.34
2.32 82.81
2.25 79.79
2.26 79.79
2.26 79.19
2.27 79.77
2.29 78.60
2.32 79.19
2.34 80.60
2. 32 81.39
2.39 86.10
2.38 87.92
2.37 89. 65
2.39 86.52
Machinery (except
electrical)—Con.
Machi ne shop, (job
an d repair
Blowers, exhaust and
ventilating fans
$2.03
2.09
2.16
2.11
2.10
2.12
2.14
2.13
2.14
2.14
2.18
2. 21
2. 21
2.21
2.21
42.?
44.
42.
43.,
43. !
42.’
42. £
42. £
42.
4L?
42.3
42.8
43.1
42.3
43 3
Avg.
hrly.
earn
ings
$2.11
2.20
2.22 ?
2.21
2.19
2.18
2.18
2.20
2.19
2.19
2.23
2 26
2.27
2.27
9 9Q
Domestic laundry
equipment
$85.07
97.90
89.98
90.71
92.84
87.53
87.67
84.38
83. 67
87.02
86. 41
92.51
91.39
92.43
04 66
40.9
43.9
40.9
41.8
42.2
40.9
40.4
39.8
39.1
40.1
39.1
41.3
40.8
40.9
41 7
$2.08
2.23
2.20
2.17
2.20
2.14
2.17
2.12
2.14
2.17
2.21
2.24
2.24
2.26
Ball and roller bearinçs
$90.92
97. 65
89.23
92.66
92.02
87.15
88.82
84.85
85.44
85.01
84. 40
89. 62
92.38
92.80
94. 73
43.5
45.0
41.5
43.3
42.8
41.5
41.7
40.6
40.3
40.1
40.0
41.3
41.8
41.8
49. 1
$2.09
2.17
2.15
2.14
2.15
2.10
2.13
2.09
2.12
2.12
2.11
2.17
2. 21
2.22
9 9 fi
Electrical machinery
Electrical generating,
Total: Electrical ma transmission, distri
chinery
bution, and indus
trial apparatus«
$76.52
79.68
80.78
78.94
78.36
78. 96
80. 36
80.18
79.98
79.40
80.60
83.02
83.64
83.64
84.461
40.7
41.5
40.8
40.9
40.6
40.7
41.0
40.7
40.6
40.1
40.5
41.1
41.2
41.0
41.21
$1.88
1.92
1.98
1.93
1. 93
1.94
1.96
1.97
1.97
1.98
1.99
2.02
2.03
2.04
2.05
$80.98
84. 85
87. 57
84.86
84. 46
84.05
87.36
86.74
87.36
87.14
87.33
90. 07
89.84
89.62
90. 471
40.9
41.8
41.5
41.6
41.4
41.2
41.8
41.5
41.6
41.3
41.0
41.7
41.4
41.3
41.5
$1. 98
2.03
2.11
2.04
2.04
2.04
2.09
2.09
2.10
2.11
2.13
2.16
2.17
2 . 17
2 . 181
Wiring devices and
supplies
$71.15
74.98
76.11
74.66
75.03
74. 52
76.59
76.07
75.14
75.55
74.24
77.11
77.71
77.38
78.12
40.2
41.2
40.7
40.8
41.0
40.5
41.4
40.9
40.4
40.4
39.7
40.8
40.9
40.3
40.9
$1. 77
1. 82
1.87
1.83
1.83
1.84
1.85
1.86
1.86
1.87
1.87
1.89
1.90
1.92
1.91
Carbon and graphite
products (electrical)
Electrical indicating,
measuring, and record
ing instruments
$79.13
85.80
84.26
84.62
82.61
83.82
83.03
83.23
83. 44
84.66
83.84
85. 48
83.62
84.86
86.93
$74. 56
77.68
79. 97
77.23
77.14
76.55
80.56
79. 56
82.74
78.39
79.76
81. 58
82.01
81.00
84.04
41.0
42.9
41.1
42.1
41.1
41.7
40.9
40.8
40.9
40.7
40.5
40.9
40.2
40.8
41.2
$1.93
2.00
2.05
2.01
2.01
2.01
2.03
2.04
2.04
2.08
2.07
2.09
2.08
2.08
2.11
40.3
41.1
40.8
41.3
40.6
40.5
41.1
40.8
42.0
40.2
40.9
41.2
40.8
40.1
41.4
$1.85
1.89
1.96
1.87
1. 90
1.89
1.96
1.95
1.97
1.95
1.95
1.98
2.01
2.02
2.03
405
C: EARNINGS AND HOURS
T a b l e C -l: Hours and gross earnings of production workers or nonsupervisory employees ^ C ontinu ed
Manufacturing—Continued
Electrical machinery—Continued
Year and month
Motors, generators, and Power and distribution Switchgear, switch
board, and indus
transformers
motor-generator sets
trial controls
Avg. Avg.
wkly. wkly.
earn hours
ings
1955: Average_____ $85.90
Dpcflmbftr
90.30
91.27
1Qfifi* Average
90.29
.Tannery
89.01
F eb ru ary __
TVfA rfih
87.95
89.86
April
M ay
88. 56
.Tima
90.25
90.01
,Tnly
August,
___ 90.13
September___ 94. 39
October
92.89
November
93.11
December....... 94. 85
41.1
42.0
41.3
41.8
41.4
41.1
41.6
41.0
41.4
41.1
40.6
41.4
41.1
41.2
41.6
Avg. Avg. Avg.
hrly. wkly. wkly.
earn earn hours
ings
ings
$2.09
2.15
2.21
2.16
2.15
2.14
2.16
2.16
2.18
2.19
2.22
2.28
2. 26
2.26
2.28
Electrical equipment
for vehicles
Average. ___ $83.64
Dfipfimber.
85.90
IQfifV Average ___ 84. 21
January
83.01
F e b ru ary ___ 77.93
ATarch
83.01
\ pril
80. 58
ATay
79.58
June
80. 55
,Tnly
81.56
August _____ 83.37
September
87.94
October
89. 84
November___ 90. 47
December....... 94.78
41.2
41.3
40.1
40.1
38.2
40.1
39.5
39.2
39.1
39.4
39.7
40.9
41.4
41.5
42.5
$84.23
83.23
92.40
84.87
84.05
86.94
92.23
92.87
92 20
93.72
94.98
96.08
95.95
97.71
96. 37
41.7
40.8
42.0
41.4
41.0
41.8
42.7
42.6
42.1
42.6
42.4
42.7
41.9
42.3
41.9
Avg. Avg. Avg.
hrly. wkly. wkly.
earn earn hours
ings
ings
$2.02 $79.98
2.04 86.09
2.20 90.30
2.05 85.07
2.05 85.48
2.08 84.86
2.16 90.95
2.18 91.37
2.19 90. 73
2.20 90.29
2.24 90.07
2. 25 93.50
2.29 93.48
2.31 92.80
2.30 91.94
Electric lamps
$2.03 $69.37
2.08 74.82
2.10 75.07
2.07 75. 42
2.04 75.06
2.07 75.42
2.04 78.86
2.03 75.26
2.06 73.75
2.07 71.50
2.10 72.76
2.15 73.60
2.17 74.05
2.18 76.57
2.23 78.12
40.1
41.8
40.8
41.9
41.7
41.9
42.4
40.9
40.3
39.5
40.2
40.0
39.6
40.3
40.9
40.6
42.2
42.0
41.7
41.9
41.6
42.3
42.3
42.2
41.8
41.7
42.5
42.3
41.8
41.6
Avg. Avg. Avg.
hrly. wkly. wkly.
earn earn hours
ings
ings
$1.97
2.04
2.15
2.04
2.04
2.04
2.15
2.16
2.15
2.16
2.16
2.20
2. 21
2. 22
2.21
Communication
equipm ent4
$1.73 $72.50
1.79 75.17
1.84 76.14
1.80 74.70
1.80 74.93
1.80 74.96
1.86 75. 52
1.84 75.55
1.83 74. 5S
1.81 73.3C
1.81 75.76
1.84 77.33
1. 87 78.12
1.90 78.55
1.91 79.15
40.5
41.3
40.5
40.6
40.5
40.3
40.6
40.4
40.1
39.2
40.3
40.7
40.9
40.7
40.8
Electrical welding
apparatus
$92.42
93.53
101.91
98.33
101.02
101.24
103.05
105. 56
103. 73
102.56
99. 76
102. 08
102.75
97.78
102.10
43.8
43.5
44.5
44.9
44.7
44.6
45.0
45.5
45.1
44.4
43.0
44.0
44.1
42.7
44.2
Avg. Avg. Avg.
hrly. wkly. wkly.
earn earn hours
ings
ings
$2.11 $79.17
2.15 80.16
2.29 80.80
2.19 77.03
2.26 78.41
2.27 78.01
2.29 81.00
2.32 80.00
2.30 78.79
2.31 81.18
2.32 81.20
2.32 82.41
2.33 84.87
2.29 84.25
2. 31 82. 41
Radios, phonographs,
television sets, and
equipment
$1.79 $69.77
1.82 71.46
1.88 72.98
1.84 70.80
1.85 70.84
1.86 71.82
1.86 72.00
1.87 72.22
1.86 72.40
1.87 72.82
1.88 73. 75
1.9C 74.74
1. 91 75.7C
1. 9c 74.77
1.94 75.95
Electrical appliances
40.1 $1.74
1.76
40.6
1.82
40.1
40.0
1.77
39.8
1.78
39.9
1.80
40.0
1.80
1.81
39.9
40. C 1.81
1.83
39.8
1.83
40.3
1.85
40.4
1. 86
40.7
40.2
1.86
40.4
1.88
1955: Average....... .
December__
1956: Average....... .
January____
February___
March_____
April______
M a y ............
June.... ........
Ju ly .............
August-....... .
September. .
October........
Novem ber...
December...
$74.48
79.46
78.14
77.93
77. 55
76. 92
76. 70
76.36
76. 57
76. 38
76.95
78. 55
81.95
82.19
83. 01
40.7 $1.83 $85.07
1.91 90.50
41.6
1.92 86.69
40.7
1.91 85.28
40.8
1.91 82. 58
40.6
1.89 83.82
40.7
1.88 83. 21
40.8
40.4
1.89 82.99
1.90 83. 77
40.3
40.2
1.90 83.77
1.90 86. 71
40.5
40. 7 1.93 88. 99
1.97 93.93
41.6
1.99 94.30
41.3
41.3
2. 01 94.13
Motor vehicles. bodies.
parts, and accessories
$98.87
99.17
95.91
91.77
February____ 88.09
March........... . 90 23
91. 54
A p ril............
86 02
M ay_______
88 77
June...............
93.77
July...............
August-.......... 93.85
100.94
October........ 103 91
N ovem ber... 107 75
113.85
December__
1955: Average.
1956: Average.
42.8 $2.31
2.35
42.2
40.3
2.38
39.9
2.30
2.30
38.3
39.4
2.29
2.30
39.8
37.4
2. 30
2.33
38.1
2.35
39.9
39.6
2.37
2. 48
40.7
2.48
41.9
2.50
43.1
45.0
2. 53
See footnotes at end of table.
https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
Storage batteries
41.7
43.3
40.7
41.0
39.7
40.3
40.2
39.9
39.7
39.7
40.9
41.2
42.5
42.1
42.4
40.0
40.7
39.2
39.5
39.0
39.0
39.7
39.9
38.7
37.2
38.8
40.0
39.7
38.8
39.0
Truck and bus bodies
$81.77
76.24
81.00
79.00
80.78
80.78
80.78
81.20
82.22
80.60
83.44
81.80
81.58
81.58
84.65
39.4
39.8
39.9
39.7
40.6
40.2
40.3
40.0
40.1
40.0
39.6
39.5
40.0
39.6
39.9
X-ray and nonradio
electronic tubes
$1.55 $82.62
1.61 86.31
1.62 88.15
1.60 83.20
1.62 88.18
1.60 88.61
1.61 87.34
1.61 88.38
1.60 87. 56
1.58 86.67
1.60 88. 56
1.63 88.15
1.65 88. 78
1.66 89.60
1.66 89.10
Trailers (truck and
automobile)
41.3 $1.98 $84.44
38.9
1.96 86.74
2.02 82.80
40.1
1.97 81.39
40.1
1.98 83.03
40.8
1.98 84.25
40.8
1.98 82.00
40.8
2.03 84.65
40.0
2.03 82.19
40.5
2.02 81.39
39.9
2.04 82.62
40.9
2.04 84.00
40.1
39.6
2.06 84. S‘
2.06 80.47
39.6
2.09 82.37
40.5
42.1
44.2
42.9
43.2
42.7
42.5
43.3
42.7
42.5
41.7
42.4
43.7
43.4
42.9
43.4
Avg.
hrly.
earn
ings
$1.83
1.91
1.97
1.91
1.89
1.91
1.94
1.95
1.94
1.99
1.99
2.01
2.03
2.05
2. 04
Telephone, telegraph,
and related equipment
$1.66 $90.94
1.68 96.57
1.72 95.46
1.69 97.02
1.69 97.90
1.68 95.04
1.70 95. 26
1.70 93.94
1.69 92. 62
1.71 84.89
1.73 92.60
1.75 95.22
1.76 95.67
1.75 101. 22
1.75 100.11
43.1 $2.11
44. 5 2.17
43.0
2. 22
2. 21
43.9
44.3
2.21
43.2
2.20
43.3
2. 20
2. 20
42.7
42.1
2.20
2.16
39.3
41.9
2.21
42.7
2.23
2.23
42.9
44. 2 2.29
2.27
44.1
Transportation equipment
Primary batteries
(dry and wet)
$2.04 $61.07
2.09 64.08
2.13 64.64
2.08 63.52
2.08 65.77
2.08 64.32
2.07 64.88
2.08 64.40
2.11 64.16
2.11 63.20
2.12 63.36
2.16 64.39
2.21 66.00
2.24 65.74
2.22 66.23
$1.95 $77.04
1.96 84.42
2.02 84. 51
1.96 82. 51
1.97 80.70
1.97 81.18
2.02 84.00
2.01 83.27
2.01 82.45
2.05 82.98
2.03 84. 38
2. 05 87.84
2.07 88.10
2.07 87.95
2.05 88. 54
Radio tubes
Electrical machinery—Continued
Miscellaneous elec
trical products 4
Avg. Avg. Avg.
hrly. wkly. wkly.
earn earn hours
ings
ings
40.6
40.9
40.0
39.3
39.8
39.6
40.1
39.8
39.2
39.6
40.0
40.2
41.0
40.7
40.2
$66.40
68.38
67.42
66.76
65. 91
65.52
67. 49
67.83
65.40
63.61
67.12
70.00
69. 87
67.90
68. 25
Insulated wire and
cable
40.9
41.1
41.0
40.0
41.4
41.6
41.2
41.3
41.3
40.5
41.0
41.0
41.1
41.1
40.5
41.9
41.9
41.0
40.6
39.9
40.4
40.6
39.6
39.9
40.8
40.8
41.3
41.8
42.2
43.4
$2.02 $93.44
2.10 95.53
2.15 94. 71
2.08 91.35
2.13 89.38
2.13 90.90
2.12 91.76
2.14 89.89
2.12 91.37
2.14 93.84
2.16 94.25
2.15 97.88
2.16 99.48
2.18 100.86
2.20 105.46
Aircraft and parts 4
41.8 $2.02 $89.62
41.5
2.09 93.26
40.0
2.07 95. 57
2.05 92.82
39.7
40.5
2.05 92.82
40.7
2.07 92. 57
40. C 2.05 93.83
40.5
2.0£ 94.47
39. Ç 2.06 94. 66
2.05 95.95
39.7
2.05 97.06
40. Í
40.0
2.1( 97.71
2.K 97.71
40.4
2.09 98.37
38.5
2.081 100.15
39.6
Total: Transporta
tion equipment
Aircraft
41.3 $2.17 $89.62
2.21 91.54
42.2
2.27 94. 66
42.1
42.0
2.21 91.32
42.0
2.21 91.74
41.7
2.22 91.94
41.7
2.25 94.02
41.8
2.26 94.43
2.27 93.75
41.7
2.2£ 95.49
41.9
2.3C 96.60
42.2
2.31 96.60
42.3
42.3
2.31 96.79
2.33 97. 25
42.4
2. 3' 97.67
42.8
$2.23
2.28
2.31
2.25
2.24
2.25
2.26
2.27
2.29
2.30
2.31
2.37
2.38
2.39
2.43
Automobiles4
$97.78
98.09
95.11
90.97
87. Ö5
89.67
90.97
85.73
88.47
92.97
93.30
99.47
102.83
106.14
112.45
42.7
42.1
40.3
39.9
38.4
89. 5
39.9
37.6
38.3
39.9
39.7
40.6
41.8
42.8
44.8
$2.29
2.33
2. 36
2.28
2.28
2.27
2. 28
2.28
2.31
2.33
2.35
2. 45
2.46
2.48
2. 51
Aircraft engines and
parts
41.3 $2.17 $88.97
2.19 96.73
41.8
2.27 97.13
41.7
41.7
2.19 96.08
41.7
2.20 94. 55
2.21 92.99
41.6
2.26 92.35
41.6
2.27 93.18
41.6
2.27 94.89
41.3
2.29 96.22
41.7
2.30 97.55
42.0
42.0
2.30 99.76
2.31 99.76
41.9
42.1
2.31 99.26
2.32 105.36
42.1
41.0 $2.17
42.8
2.26
42.6
2.28
42.7
2.25
42.4
2.23
2.23
41.7
41.6
2.22
2.24
41.6
41.8
2.27
42.2
2.28
2.29
42.6
43.0
2.32
2.32
43.0
2.33
42.6
43.9
2.40
406
MONTHLY LABOR REVIEW, MARCH 1957
T able C -l: Hours and gross earnings of production workers or nonsupervisory employees ^ C ontinu ed
Manufac tur ing—Con tlnued
Transportation equipment—Continued
Aircraft propellers ana
parts
Year and month
Avg. Avg.
wkly. wkly.
earn hours
ings
1955: Average......... .
December__ _
1956: Average........
January____ .
February___
M arch_____
April..............
M a y ........ ......
June_______
July...............
August_____
September......
October_____
November___
December___
$90.2
95.4(
96.9,
92. T
92.3?
91.91
93. 495. 4i
94. 91
97. If
96. 5C
98. 27
97. 81
99.62
103. 84
Other aircraft parts
and equipment
Avg. Avg. Avg.
hrly. wkly. wkly.
earn earn hours
ings
ings
41.
42.
42.
41.
41.
41.
41.
42.
42.
42.
42.7
43.
42.9
43.5
44.0
$2. 18 $90. 4«
2.2. 96.1(
2. 2( 98. 01
2. 2f 95. li
2.21 95. 2(
2. 2‘ 94.31
2.2f 95. 8S
2.21 97. 38
2. 2f 99 36
2.2S 96.87
2. 2f 98. 21
2. 28 99. 72
2. 28 99. 76
2.29 101.32
2.36 104.08
Ship and boat build
ing and repairing 4
Avg. Avg. Avg.
hrly. wkly. wkly.
earn earn hours
ings
ings
41.
$2. r '
42.
2.24
42.8
2.26
42.
2.2,
42.,
2.24
42.
2. 21
42.4
2. 2f
42. £
2. 2'
43.2
2.3C
42.
2. 2£
42.7
2.3C
42.8
2. 33
43. C 2. 32
43.3
2. 34
44.1
2. 36
$83. 5f
86.1
88.7,
84.6f
85.28
86.681
87.1(
88.26
89 02
88. 8C
90.1"
90. 3£
90.12
89.86
93. 6C
Shipbuilding and
repairing
Avg. Arg. Avg.
hrly. wkly. wkly.
earn earn hours
ings
ings
39.
$2.12 $86.41
39.’
89. 6"
2. r
39.
2 . 2:
91.8"
39.
2. r
87. 8.
39.f
2.1' 89.31
39.4
2. 2( 90. 02
39.
2.1£ 90. 46
40. :
2. IE 92.06
2. 22 92. 46
40.1
40.
2.22 91.83
2. 26 92.34
39.
39.
2.27 93. 77
39.7
2. 27 93.06
38.9
2. 31 92.73
40. C 2. 34 97.04
39.
39.,
39.6
38.
39.6
39.6
39.,
40.6
40.6
40.1
39.
39.
39.6
38.8
40.1
Transportation equipment—Continued
Locomotives and parts
1955: Average_____
December___
1956: Average_____
January..........
February____
March______
April...............
M ay________
J u n e ..............
J u ly ...............
August______
September___
October_____
November___
December___
$94. 69
98. IS
99.64
99. 49
99 10
100. 28
99.96
100. 66
102. 82
101.01
94.89
100. 86
97. 82
97.10
102. 06
41.9
42.5
42.4
42.7
42.9
43.6
42.9
43.2
43.2
42.8
40.9
42.2
41.1
40.8
42.0
$2.26
2. 31
2. 35
2. 33
2.31
2.30
2.33
2.33
2.38
2. 36
2. 32
2.39
2.38
2. 38
2. 43
Railroad and streetcars
$87. 81
95.11
93.06
91.03
90. 48
92.28
92. 75
90.24
89.30
93.38
85.88
94. 95
97. 84
91.63
97.11
39.2
40.3
39.1
38.9
38.5
39.1
39.3
38.4
38.0
39.4
36.7
39.4
40.1
38.5
39.8
$2.24
2. 36
2. 38
2.34
2.35
2.36
2.36
2.35
2. 35
2.37
2.34
2.41
2.44
2.38
2. 44
Boatbuilding and
repairing
Avg. Avg. Avg.
hrly. wkly. wkly.
earn earn hours
ings
ings
$2 . 2
2.2'
2.31
2.2' '
2. 2'
2.31
2.26
2.36
2. 31
2.26
2.3£
2.3f
2. 35
2. 39
2. 42
$70. li
71.16
73. 7,
71.1,
71.16
73. 21
74. Of
74.76
73.31
72.5C
75. 76
73. 87
75. 6C
74.07
74. 82
40.:
40.
40.:
40.:
40.4
40.
40.
41. £
40. £
39.4
40.1
39. £
40.0
39.4
39.8
Avg. Avg. Avg. Avg.
hrly. wkly. wkly. hrly.
earn earn hours earn
ings
ings
ings
$1. 7‘ $90.6i
1. 7f 96.4
1.8:
95. 9£
1.7' 94. 7'
1. 7( 94. If
1.7E 95. 5f
1.81 95. 88
1.8C 94.54
1.81 95.2'
1.84 97.1"
1.8E 89. 71
1. 87 97. 68
1. 8E 97. 61
1.88 94. 01
1.88 99.31
1955: Average.......... $78.36
December___
81.99
1956: Average_____ 83.03
January_____ 81.81
February____ 81.20
March........... . 80.80
April............... 82.62
M ay................ 82.41
June________ 82. 00
July................. 83.02
August____ ... 84.05
Septem ber..... 84. 25
October_____ 84. 25
November___ 84.23
December___
84. 65
1955: Average_____
December___
1956: Average....... .
January_____
February........
March.............
April...............
M ay________
June________
Ju ly ................
August— .......
September.......
October_____
November___
December___ 1
40.6
41.2
40.5
40.7
40.4
40.2
40.9
40.2
40.0
40.3
40.8
40.7
40.7
40.3
40.5
$1.93
1.99
2. 05
2.01
2.01
2. 01
2.02
2. 05
2. 05
2. 06
2. 06
2.07
2. 07
2.09
2. 09
Surgical, medical,
and dental instru
ments
$69. 02
70. 69
71.33
70. 58
70.99
70.47
70.82
70. 53
70.00
70. 75
71.51
72.50
72. 04
73. 75
73.12
40.6
41.1
40.3
40.8
40.8
40.5
40.7
40.3
40.0
40.2
40.4
40.5
39.8
40.3
40.4
$1.70
1. 72
1.77
1.73
1.74
1.74
1.74
1. 75
1.75
1.76
1.77
1. 79
1.81
1.83
1.81
Other transportation
equipment
Laboratory, scien
tific, and engineer
ing instruments
Mechanical measur
ing and controlling
instruments
$77. 83
76. 92
78.17
77. 55
77.38
78. 53
78. 55
77. 59
80.20
78.00
77.60
79. 15
78. 72
76. 61
77.02
$77.93
80.73
82. 01
79. 97
80.36
80.38
81.38
81.19
80. 79
81.41
82.21
83. 64
83. 64
83.64
84. 67
$88. 99
91 10
94. 95
91.52
91.74
92. 80
93. 91
93. 91
92. 99
95. 40
96.02
98.01
97. 33
95.11
97. 94
$79.15
83. 40
83. 44
82.60
82. 60
82. 82
84. 45
83.84
82.62
81.80
82. 01
85.49
85.49
85.49
85.07
41.4
40.7
40.5
40.6
40.3
40.9
40.7
40.2
40.3
40.0
40.0
40.8
41.0
39.9
38.9
$1.88
1.89
1.93
1.91
1.92
1.92
1.93
1.93
1. 99
1.95
1.94
1. 94
1.92
1.92
1.98
40.8
41.4
40.8
40.8
41.0
40.8
41.1
40.8
40 6
40.5
40. 7
41.0
41.0
40.8
41.1
$1.91
1.95
2. 01
1.96
1.96
1.97
1.98
1.99
1.99
2.01
2. 02
2.04
2.04
2. 05
2.06
41.2
41.6
42.2
41.6
41.7
41.8
42.3
42.3
41.7
42.4
42.3
42.8
42. 5
41.9
42.4
$2.16
2.19
2.25
2.20
2.20
2. 22
2. 22
2.22
2.23
2. 25
2. 27
2.29
2. 29
2.27
2. 31
Ophthalmic goods
$62. 52
66. 52
64. 64
62.40
64.53
65. 35
65.19
64. 96
66. 26
64.80
63.28
64.40
64.00
64. 64
65.93
40.6
42.1
40.4
40.0
41.1
41.1
41.0
40.6
40 9
40.0
39.8
40.0
40.0
39.9
40.2
$1.54
1.58
1.60
1.56
1.57
1.59
1.59
1.60
1.62
1.62
1.59
1. 61
1.60
1.62
1.64
Photographic appa
ratus
Watches and clocks
$85.49
89. 44
91.46
89. 40
89. 40
88. 54
89. 82
89.60
89.84
91.62
92. 29
93. 34
93. 75
93. 30
96. 67
$69. 20
71.56
71.13
70. 17
70.13
69.03
69.60
69. 09
69. 87
70.05
72. 25
72.47
73. 75
71.21
72.34
41.1
41 6
41.2
41.2
41.2
40.8
41.2
41.1
41.4
40.9
41.2
41.3
41.3
41.1
42.4
$2.08
2.15
2. 22
2.17
2.17
2.17
2.18
2.18
2.17
2.24
2. 24
2.26
2. 27
2. 27
2.28
Silverware and plated
ware
Musical instruments
and parts
$71. 40
74.91
73.57
71.99
72.16
72.73
72.63
72.92
71.40
69.48
72.34
74.40
76.93
78.08
78.44
$67.04
71.01
69. 22
68. 10
68.10
68.88
69. 39
70.30
68. 39
65. 01
67. 32
68.39
71. 74
71.91
73.36
$79. 95
84. 20
83.78
80. 06
81.90
80.73
79. 95
78.78
77. 39
81.20
84. 02
87. 72
89.42
92.14
90. 46
$75.07
79. 19
80. 34
77. 27
77. 83
79.65
78.91
78.34
77. 76
79. 37
80.16
82.80
83. 60
84. 02
82. 81
See footnotes at end of table.
https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
41.9
43.3
41.7
42.3
42.3
42.0
41.8
41.6
41 2
39.4
40.8
41.2
42.2
42.3
42.9
$1.60
1.64
1.66
1.61
1.61
1.64
1.66
1.69
1. 66
1.65
1.65
1. 66
1.70
1.70
1. 71
42.3
43.4
42.1
41.7
42.0
41.4
41. 0
40.4
40. 1
40.6
41.8
43.0
43.2
44.3
43.7
$1.89
1.94
1.99
1. 92
1.95
1.95
1.95
1.95
1.93
2.00
2. 01
2.04
2. 07
2. 08
2.071
40.8
41.9
41.2
41. 1
41.4
41.7
41.1
40.8
40. 5
40.7
40.9
41.4
41.8
41.8
41.2
40.8
41.7
40.9
41.3
41.3
41.0
41.6
41.3
40.5
40.1
40.2
41.1
41.1
41.3
40.9
$1.94
2.00
2.04
2.00
2.00
2. 02
2.03
2. 03
2. 04
2.04
2. 04
2.08
2.08
2. 07
2.08
Miscellaneous manu
facturing industries
Jewelry and findings
$1.70
1. 73
1. 76
1.71
1.71
1.74
1. 75
1.77
1.75
1. 75
1.76
1.78
1.81
1.82
1.82
$2. 25 :
2.34
2. 37
2.34
2.33
2.33
2. 35
2.34
2.37 :
2. 37
2.33
2. 40
2.41
2. 38
2.44
Instruments and related products
Je weir y, silverware,
and Elated ware 4
42.0
43. 3
41.8
42.1
42.2
41.8
41.5
41.2
40.8
39.7
41.1
41.8
42.5
42.9
43.1
40.
41. :
40. £
40.,
40.
41.
40.8
40.4
40.
41.
38. £
40.7
40.5
39.5
40.7
Total: Instruments
and related prod
ucts
Instruments and related products—Continued
Opticsd instru ments
a nd lense s
Railroad equipm ent 4
$1.84
1.89
1.95
1.88
1.88
1.91
1.92
1.92
1.92
1.95
1.96
2.00
2. 00
2.01
2.01
40.0
40.2
39.3
39.2
39.4
39.0
39.1
38.6
38.6
38.7
39.7
39.6
40.3
38.7
39.1
$1.73 $67.40
1.78 70.04
1.81 70. 70
1.79 69. 66
1.78 69. 43
1.77 69. 89
1. 78 70.47
1.79 69.95
1.81 69. 77
1.81 68. 90
1.82 69. 95
1.83 70.53
1. 83 72.04
1.84 71.33
1.85 73.21
Toys and sporting
goods 4
$60. 52
61.15
62. 72
61.78
62. 65
62. 56
61.85
60. 99
61.78
61.69
62. 49
62.56
64. 64
63.57
65. 51
39.3
39.2
39.2
39.1
39.4
39.1
38.9
38.6
39. !
38.8
39.3
39.1
39.9
39.0
39.7
Total: Miscellaneous
manufacturing in
dustries
$1.54
1.56
1.60
1.58
1.59
1.60
1. 59
1.58
1.58
1.59
1.59
1.60
1.62
1.63
1.65
40.6
41.2
40.4
40. 5
40.6
40.4
40.5
40.2
40. 1
39.6
40.2
40.3
40.7
40.3
40.9
$1.66
1.70
1. 75
1.72
1.71
1.73
1.74
1.74
1.74
1.74
1.74
1. 75
1. 77
1. 77
1.79
Games, toys, dolls,
and children’s ve
hicles
$60. 28
59. 52
62.17
60. 67
62. 01
61.37
61. 85
61.30
61.86
61.23
61.86
61.15
64. 24
62. 76
63. 63
39.4
38.4
39.1
38.4
39.0
38.6
38.9
38.8
39.4
39.0
39.4
38.7
39.9
38.5
38.8
$1. .53
1.55
1.59
1.58
1.59
1.59
1. 59
1.58
1.57
1.57
1.57
1.58
1.61
1.63
1.64
407
O: EARNINGS AND HOURS
T able C - l : Hours and gross earnings of production workers or nonsupervisory employees ^ C o n tin u e d
Manufacturing—Continued
Transportation and
public utilities
Miscellaneous manufacturing industries—Continued
Year and month
1955: Average...........
December___
1956: Average_____
January-------February........
M arch......... .
April...........
M ay________
June_______
July------------August______
September___
October.____
November___
December___
Pens, pencils, other
office supplies
Sporting and athletic
goods
Avg. Avg.
wkly. wkly.
earn hours
ings
39.3
$60.92
40.4
63.83
39.3
63. 27
39.9
63.04
39.9
63.44
39.8
64.08
39.0
62.40
38.3
60.90
38.6
61.76
38.4
61.82
39.2
63.90
39.7
65.11
39.9
65.04
65. 27 39.8
40.8
67.73
Avg.
hrly.
earn
ings
$1.55
1.58
1.61
1.58
1.59
1.61
1.60
1.59
1.60
1.61
1.63
1.64
1.63
1.64
1.66
Avg. Avg.
wkly. wkly.
earn hours
ings
41.1
$62. 88
41.5
65.16
41.2
67.16
40.2
62.31
41.2
64.68
65. 67 41.3
40.9
65.85
41.1
66.17
41.0
67.24
65. 93 40.2
41.0
66.01
40.3
65.69
70. 98 42.0
41.8
69.39
42.4
70.81
Costume jewelry,
buttons, notions
Fabricated plastic
products
Other manufacturing
industries
Avg. Avg. Avg. Avg. Avg. Avg. Avg. Avg. Avg.
hrly. wkly. wkly. hrly. wkly. wkly. hrly. wkly. wkly.
earn earn hours earn earn hours earn earn hours
ings
ings
ings
ings
ings
ings
41.6 $1.75 $70. 30 40.4
40.1 $1.50 $72.80
$1.53 $60.15
41.1
1.77 73.98
41.7
41.2
1.55 73.81
1.57 63.86
1.83 74. ,37 40.2
41.4
1.59 75.76
39.3
1.63 62.49
40.4
1.78 73.93
40.8
40.4
1.56 72.62
1.55 63.02
40.6
1. 77 73.89
40.9
1.56 72.39
40.2
1.57 62. 71
1.78 73. 38 40.1
1.58 73. 87 41.5
39.4
1.59 62. 25
40.6
75.11
1.80
1.61
74.88
41.6
39.5
1. 61 Kl. 60
41.2
1.80 74. 56 40.3
1.62 74.16
39.3
1. 61 63. 67
40.2
74.
77
1.81
74.21
41.0
1.58
61.62
39.0
1.64
39.5
1.81 73.87
41.0
1.57 74. 21
38.3
1.64 60.13
74.
56
40.3
1.83
75.
58
41.3
1.
56
38.3
1.61 59. 75
1.87 74. 59 40.1
1.55 78. 73 42.1
39.1
1.63 60.61
74.
59
40.1
1.88
41.9
1.
61
78.
77
39.1
1. 69 62.95
39.8
1.87 73.23
1.63 77. 61
41.5
38.7
1.66 63.08
40.4
75.14
1.88
41.6
1.61
78.
21
39.8
64.
08
1.67
Transportation and public utilities—Continued
Avg.
hrly.
earn
ings
$1. 74
1.80
1.85
1.83
1.82
1.83
1. 85
1. 85
1.86
1.87
1.85
1.86
1.86
1.84
1.86
1955: Average.......... $80. 60
83.03
December___
1956: Average........... 84. 48
January_____ 81.60
February........ 82.60
M arch______ 83.23
83. 27
April.......... .
84.83
M ay_______
June...... ........ - 85.85
July------------- 85.73
August______ 85.30
September___ 85.14
October_____ 85. 54
November___ 85. 97
December....... 86.37
41.2
41.4
41.5
41.4
41.2
41.5
41.7
41.4
41.6
41.9
41.7
41.5
41.3
41.6
41.6
$2.14
2.19
2. 25
2.20
2.20
2. 21
2. 22
2. 22
2. 24
2.26
2.26
2. 27
2. 29
2.29
2. 3C
Retail trade
Electric light and gas
utilities combined
Gas utilities
$82.62
85.28
86.30
84.05
83. 03
83. 22
84.03
85.26
86.28
86.48
86.28
88.99
89.84
89. 86
89.62
40.9
41.4
40.9
41.0
40.7
40.4
40.4
40.6
40.7
40.6
40.7
41.2
41.4
41.6
41.3
2.10
2.12
2.10
2.11
2.09
2.11
2.11
2.09
2.14
2.10
2.19
Line construction,
Telegraph
Total: Gas and
installation, and
electric utilities
maintenance em
ployees 1
41.2 $2.10
42.0 $1.87 $86. 52
43.9 $2.32 $78. 54
$1.58 $101.85
2.15
41.4
1.88 89.01
2.35 78. 96 42.0
44.8
1.60 105. 28
2.22
41.3
1.97 91.69
42.3
2. 32 83.33
1.61 100. 69 43.4
2.16
41.4
1.88 89.42
41.7
2.35 78. 40
1.61 102. 93 43.8
2.15
41.1
1.88 88.37
41.6
2. 31 78.21
43.0
1.60 99. 33
2.17
41.1
1.89 89.19
41.7
2. 31 78.81
42.8
1.59 98.87
2.19
1. 89 90. 45 41.3
42.0
43.4
2.31 79.38
1.60 100. 25
2.20
41.1
1. 90 90.42
42.6
2.32 80.94
1.60 100. 22 43.2
2.22
41.3
2.03 91.69
42.3
43.3
2. 32 85.87
1.62 100. 46
2.23
2. 02 92. 32 41.4
42.2
2.33 85.24
1.61 102. 75 44.1
41.2
2.23
2. 03 91.88
42.5
43.4
2.31 86.28
1.60 100.25
2.24
2.03 92. 74 41.4
42.0
2. 32 85. 26
44.0
1.61 102.08
2. 26
41.0
2.03 92.66
2. 32 85. 26 42.0
43.5
1. 61 100.92
2. 27
2.02 94. 21 41.5
2.34 84. 03 41.6
1.62 102. 96 44.0
41.4
2.28
2.02 94.39
41.6
2.37 84.03
1.65 104. 75 44.2
Wholesale and retail trade
Other public utilities—Continued
1955: A verage------- $88.17
90.67
December___
1956: Average_____ 93.38
January.......... 91.08
February........ 90.64
91. 72
M arch______
April------------ 92.57
M ay________ 91.91
Ju n e ................ 93.18
Ju ly ------------- 94.69
94.24
August--------September___ 94. 21
O c to b e r.------ 94. 58
November___ 95.26
95.68
December___
41.3
42.4
41.8
41.0
42.3
41.6
40.6
42.5
40.7
42.6
42.1
86. 73
89.89
87.78
86.51
88.41
87.78
85.67
88. 83
87.10
89.46
92.20
Switchboard opera
ting employees 8
Telephone *
39.6 $1.82 $59. 72 37.8
43.1 $1.87 $72.07
37.3
.39.7
1.86 59.68
1.90 73.84
43.7
38.3
1.86 61.66
39.6
1.96 73.66
43.1
36.9
39.4
1.86 59. 41
1.92 73.28
42.5
37.0
1.84
59.20
39.1
1.93 71.94
42.8
37.2
1.84 59.15
39.1
1.94 71.94
42.9
37.1
59.
36
1.85
39.1
1.95 72.34
42.7
37.0
1. 85 59.20
39.0
1. 95 72.15
43.5
37.5
60.
75
39.3
1.86
1.96 73.10
43.8
38.1
1.86 61.34
39.9
1.98 74. 21
43.3
37.6
1.85 60.16
39.4
1.97 72.89
43.3
38.1
1.86 61.34
39.9
1.98 74. 21
43.0
61.66
38.3
1.86
39.8
1.98 74.03
43.2
40.5
1.88 65.61
41.0
1.99 77.08
43.2
61.55
37.3
1.91
39.7
1.99 75. 83
43.4
Transportation and public utilities—Continued
Electric light and
power utilities
Avg.
hrly.
earn
ings
$1.95
1.96
Other public utilities
Communication
Local railways and
buslines
Class I railroads •
Avg. Avg.
wkly. wkly.
earn hours
ings
41. 9
$81. 71
41.9
82.12
Wholesale trade
40.6 $1.91
41.5 $2.11 $77.55
$2. 02 $87. 57
1.95
41.4
2.17 79. 56 40.8
2.06 89.84
40.4
2.01
2.
26
81.20
41.2
2.11 93.11
1.96
40.6
2.18 79.58
41.6
2.05 90.69
40.3
1.96
78.99
41.3
2.18
2.04 90.03
40.2
1.99
2. 21 80.00
41.0
2.06 90.61
40.2
2.01
2.
24
80.80
41.5
92.96
2.08
40.3
2.01
41.1
2. 25 81.00
2.10 92. 48
2.02
2. 26 81.41
40.3
2.12 93. 56 41.4
2.03
40.5
41.4
2.26 82.22
2.13 93. 56
2. 02
40.3
2. 27 81.41
2.12 92. 62 40.8
2.04
40.6
2. 28 82.82
41.3
2.16 94.16
2.04
40.5
40.4
2.30 82. 62
2.17 92.92
2.05
41.2
2.33 82. 82 40.4
2.16 96.00
2.05
40.9
2.34 83.85
41.1
2.17 96.17
Wholesale and retail trade—Continued
Retail trade (except
eating and drink
ing places)
$58. 50 39.0 $1.50
39.4
1.49
58. 71
1.57
38.5
60.45
1.54
38.6
59.44
1.54
38.5
59.29
1.54
38.4
59.14
1. 56
38.4
59.90
1.56
59. 75 38.3
1.58
38.7
61.15
1.59
62.17
39.1
39.1
1.58
61.78
1. 59
61.22
38.5
38.2
1. 59
60.74
60.42
38.0
1.59
1.55
38.5
59.68
General merchandise
stores
$41.65
43.04
43.40
43. 05
42.58
42.11
42.90
42. 66
44.10
44.73
44.50
43.97
43.60
42.63
43. 92
35.3
37.1
35.0
35.0
34.9
34.8
34.6
34.4
35.0
35.5
35.6
34.9
34.6
34.1
36.0
$1.18
1.16
1.24
1.23
1.22
1.21
1.24
1.24
1.26
1.26
1.25
1.26
1.26
1.25
1.22
Retail trade—Continued
Department stores
and general mail
order houses
36.
1955: Average......... $ 1 7 . 52
38.5
50.44
December___
35.6
1956: Average.......... 48.77
35.4
January_____ 48.42
35.6
F ebruary...'... 4 8 . oe
35.5
M arch............. 47.5"
35.
A pril.............. 48. 36
35.2
M ay________ 48.22
35.6
49.84
June...... .........
36.
Ju ly ................ 50.04
August______ 49. 9C 35. Í
49. 7C 35.
Septem ber...
35.
49. 42
O cto b er___
34.6
November___ 47. 7c
36.
49.
6
S
December__
See fo o tn o tes a t end of table.
https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
Food and liquor
stores
$1.35 $61. 72
1.31 62.16
1.37 63.38
1.36 61.92
1.35 61.92
1.34 61.92
1.3" 62. 5C
1.3" 62. 8"
1.46 64.39
1.36 65.62
1.3Í 64. 7f
1.4C 64.3(
1. 4( 63.6
1.36 63.8
63. 2'
1 .3 c
38.1
37.9
37.5
37.3
37.3
37.3
37.2
37.2
38.1
38.6
38.
37.6
37.2
37.1
37.
Automotive and
accessories dealers
$1.62 $79. 64
1.64 79.64
1.69 81.47
1. 66 79.1C
1.66 78.92
1.66 80. If
1. 68 81. Of
1.6' 81.1C
1.69 83. Of
1. 7( 83. 41
1.6( 82.1C
81.9’
1.7
81. 0.
1.7
81.7
1.7
82.0'
1.7
44.0
44.0
43.8
43.7
4.3. 6
43.8
43.8
43.
43."
43.'
43."
43.
43.8
43."
43.
Apparel and acces
sories stores
$1.81 $46.82
1.81 48.87
1.86 47.68
1.81 47.06
1.81 46. If
1.88 45.0'
1. 8f 46.1"
1.8C 46.9'
1.9C 48.1C
1.9C 48. 3(
1.88 48. 2S
1.88 48.1
47.9
1.8
1.8' 47.4
49.6
1.8
Other retail trade
Furniture and ap Lumber and hardware
supply stores
pliance stores
43.1 $1.62
42.1 $1.5' $69.82
35.2 $1.33 $66. 94
1.65
42.7
1.66
70.
46
43.6
36.2
71.38
1.35
1.71
42.5
1.37 69. 3C 42. C 1.6f 72.68
34.8
42.
C
1 .6 6
1.61
69.
72
41.6
67.3'
34.6
1.36
1 .6 6
41. S
1.6C 69. 5
41.6
1.33 66. 56
34.7
1 .6 8
42.
1.61 70.56
42.
33.
1.33 ' 67. 65
1 .6 9
42.C
1.6
71.4£
42.1
34.2
1.3c 67. 7Í
1. 71
1.6' 72. 8c
42.6
42.;
34.
1. 3" 69. 3"
1.72
43.1
1.66 7 4 . I f
1.38 69.8C 42.1
34.
1.72
43.2
1.6' 7 4 . 36
41.'
1.3" f 69.9"
35.
1.73
43.1
1.6 ' 7 4 . 56
41.
35. c
1.3( 6 9 . 5c
1.74
42.'
7 4 . 6c
1.6
4L'
34.
1. 4( 6 9 . 9
1.76
42.;
75.3f
1.6
42.
70. 5(
1.3
34.
1.74
42.
73. 4,
1.6
41.
1.3
34.
70.8
1.74
42.
73.0
1.7
42.
1.3
73.1
36.
408
MONTHLY LABOR REVIEW, MARCH 1957
T able
C-l: Hours and gross earnings of production workers or nonsupervisory employees 1—Continued
Service and miscellaneous
Finance, insurance, and real estate8
Year and month
1955:
956:
Average........... ............
Decem ber................ .
Average----- ------------January____________
February.....................
M arch.........................
April.............................
M ay..... .........................
June---------------------July................. ............
August_____________
September__________
October.............. ..........
November.___ _____
December--------- ------
Personal services
Banks and
trust
companies
Security
dealers
and
exchanges
Insurance
carriers
Avg.
wkly.
earnings
Avg.
wkly.
earnings
Avg.
wkly.
earnings
$ 5 9 .2 8
6 0 .8 3
6 2 .0 0
6 1 .7 2
6 1 .6 1
6 1 .7 5
6 1 .8 9
6 1 .5 1
6 1 .5 3
6 2 .1 1
6 1 .7 9
6 1 .9 3
6 2 . 55
6 2 .3 5
62. 96
$ 1 0 2 .1 3
9 9 .2 4
9 7 .1 8
9 9 .0 9
9 7 .5 1
9 8 .8 3
1 0 3 .7 8
1 0 0 .5 3
9 8 .1 9
94. 75
9 6 .2 3
9 4 .0 7
9 2 .8 7
9 4 .9 8
98.86
$ 7 3 .2 9
7 4 .9 4
7 7 .5 4
7 5 .7 8
7 5 .6 2
7 6 .2 0
7 6 .5 2
7 7 .0 8
7 7 .3 9
7 8 .3 2
7 7 .7 7
7 8 .1 0
7 8 .2 1
78. 92
8 0 .2 6
Hotels, year-round 8
Cleaning and dyeing
plants
Avg.
Avg.
Avg.
Avg.
Avg.
Avg.
Avg.
Avg.
Avg.
wkly. wkly.
hrly.
wkly. wkly.
wkly. wkly. hrly.
hrly.
earnings hours earnings earnings hours earnings earnings hours earnings
$ 4 1 .0 9
4 2 .0 2
4 2 .1 3
4 1 .6 1
4 1 .4 1
4 1 .2 0
4 1 .7 1
4 2 .0 2
4 2 .4 3
4 2 .2 3
4 2 .4 3
42. 22
4 2 .7 4
4 2 .6 3
4 3 .3 5
• Data are based upon reports from cooperating establishments covering
both full- and part-time employees who worked during, or received pay for,
any part of the pay period ending nearest the 15th of the month. For mining,
manufacturing, laundries, and cleaning and dyeing plants, data refer to pro
duction and related workers only. For the remaining industries, unless
otherwise noted, data relate to nonsupervisory employees and working
supervisors.
Data for the most recent month are subject to revision without notation;
revised figures for earlier months will be identified by asterisks the first month
they are published.
8 See footnote 2, table A-2.
« See footnote 3, table A-2.
<Italicized titles which follow are components of this industry.
• Figures for class I railroads (excluding switching and terminal companies)
are based upon monthly data summarized in the M-300 report by the Inter
state Commerce Commission and relate to all employees who received pay
during the month, except executives, officials, and staff assistants (ICO
Group I). Beginning with January 1956, class I railroads include only
those having annual operating revenues of $3,000,000 or more. This class
formerly included all railroads having annual operating revenues of $1,000,000
or more.
• D ata relate to employees in such occupations in the telephone industry as
https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
Laundries
4 1 .5
4 1 .6
4 0 .9
4 1 .2
4 1 .0
4 1 .2
4 1 .3
4 0 .8
4 0 .8
4 1 .0
4 0 .8
4 0 .6
4 0 .7
4 0 .6
4 0 .9
$ 0 .9 9
1 .0 1
1 .0 3
1 .0 1
1 .0 1
1 .0 0
1 .0 1
1 .0 3
1 .0 4
1 .0 3
1 .0 4
1 .0 4
1 .0 5
1 .0 5
1 .0 6
$ 4 0 .7 0
4 1 .3 1
4 2 .3 2
4 1 . 51
4 0 .9 0
4 1 .7 0
4 2 .1 2
42. 54
4 2 .9 5
4 2 .4 2
43. 90
4 2 . 61
4 2 .6 1
4 2 .2 9
4 2 .8 0
4 0 .3
4 0 .5
4 0 .3
4 0 .3
4 0 .1
4 0 .1
4 0 .5
4 0 .9
4 0 .9
4 0 .4
3 9 .9
4 0 .2
4 0 .2
3 9 .9
4 0 .0
$ 1 .0 1
1 .0 2
1 .0 5
1 .0 3
1 .0 2
1 .0 4
1 .0 4
1 .0 4
1 .0 5
1 .0 5
1 .0 5
1 .0 6
1 .0 6
1 .0 6
1 .0 7
$ 4 7 .4 0
4 7 .9 2
4 9 .9 0
4 7 .3 4
4 7 .2 1
4 7 .9 7
4 9 .8 8
5 1 .9 1
5 1 .6 9
4 9 .9 0
4 8 .3 9
5 0 .9 4
5 0 .8 2
50. 56
4 9 .9 2
3 9 .5
3 9 .6
3 9 .6
3 8 .8
3 8 .7
3 9 .0
3 9 .9
4 1 .2
4 0 .7
3 9 .6
3 8 .1
3 9 .8
3 9 .7
39.5
3 9 .0
$ 1 .2 0
1 .2 1
1 .2 6
1 .2 2
1 .2 2
1 .2 3
1 .2 5
1 .2 6
1 .2 7
1 .2 6
1 .2 7
1 .2 8
1 .2 8
1 .2 8
1 .2 8
Motion
picture
production
and distributton8
Avg.
wkly.
earnings
$ 9 4 .8 9
9 4 . 61
9 0 .8 0
9 3 .2 1
8 6 .5 5
8 7 .4 9
9 2 .9 4
9 3 .4 6
8 9 .5 0
9 0 .2 5
9 2 .0 2
9 2 .9 6
9 0 .1 1
9 5 .7 6
9 4 .9 8
switchboard operators, service assistants, operating-room instructors, and
pay-station attendants. During 1956 such employees made up 40 percent of
the total number of nonsupervisory employees in telephone establishments
reporting hours and earnings data.
i Data relate to employees in such occupations in the telephone industry as
central office craftsmen; installation and exchange repair craftsmen; line,
cable, and conduit craftsmen; and laborers. During 1956 such employees
made up 27 percent of the total number of nonsupervisory employees in
telephone establishments reporting hours and earnings data.
• Data on average weekly hours and average hourly earnings are not lavailable.
»Money payments only; additional value of board, room, uniforms, and
tips not included.
fNew series; beginning with January 1956, data are not comparable with
those for earlier years.
See footnote 1, p. 375.
N o t e .— Information on concepts, methodology, etc., is
given in a technical note on Hours and Earnings in Nonagricultural Industries, which appeared in the April 1954
Monthly Labor Review.
409
C: EARNINGS AND HOURS
T a b l e C-2: Gross average weekly earnings of production workers in selected industries, in current and
1947-49 dollars 1
Manufacturing
Bituminouscoal mining
Manufacturing
Laundries
Year
$40.17
42.07
47.03
52.58
58.30
61.28
57. 72
52. 54
52.32
52.67
53.95
67. 71
58.30
59.89
62.67
62. 60
66.83
69.01
$23.88
24. 71
30.86
35.02
41.62
51.27
62.25
58.03
66. 59
72.12
63. 28
70.35
77.79
78.09
85.31
80.85
96.26
105.94
$40. 20
41.25
49. 06
50.24
56. 24
68.18
67.95
69.58
69. 73
70.16
62.16
68.43
70. 08
68.80
74. 57
70.43
84.07
91.17
Laun dries
Current 1947-49 Current 1947-49 Current 1947-49
Current 1947-49 Current 1947-49 Current 1947-49
1939: Average_________ $23.86
25.20
1940: Average_________
1941: Average.................. 29.58
36.65
1942: Average_________
43.14
1943: Average_________
1944: Average................... 46.08
44.39
1945: Average_________
43.82
1946: Average_________
49.97
1947: Average_________
54.14
1948: Average_________
1949: Average.......... ........ 54. 92
59.33
1950: Average_________
64. 71
1951: Average_________
67. 97
1952: Average_________
71.69
1953: Average_________
71.86
1954: Average_________
1955: Average-------------- 76. 52
1956: A verage_________ 80.19
Bitum inouscoal enining
Year and month
$17. 64
17. 93
18.69
20.34
23. 08
25.95
27. 73
30.20
32. 71
34. 23
34.98
35.47
37.81
38.63
39.69
40.10
40.70
42.32
$29.70
29. 93
29. 71
29.18
31.19
34. 61
36.06
36.21
34. 25
33.30
34.36
34.50
34.06
34.04
34.69
34. 93
35. 55
36.42
i These series indicate changes in the level of average weekly earnings prior
to and after adjustment for changes in purchasing power as measured by the
Bureau's Consumer Price Index, the years 1947-49 being the base period.
1955: December_______ $79.71
78.55
1956: January_________
78.17
February________
M arch_____ _____ 78.78
April____________ 78.99
M ay____ _____—- 79.00
79.19
June____________
July------------------- 79.00
August__________ 79. 79
September_______ 81.40
October......... ......... 82.21
November_______ 82. 22
84. 05
December 2 ______
$69.49 $105.73
68.54 104. 22
68. 21 103.18
68.68 102.38
68. 75 105. 46
68.46 106.02
68.15 107. 82
67.52 102.16
68.31 102. 49
69.51 106.12
69.85 110.38
69.80 106. 79
71.23 115.33
$92.18
90.94
90.03
89.26
91. 78
91.87
92.79
87.32
87. 75
90.62
93.78
90. 65
97. 74
$41.31
41.51
40.90
41.70
42.12
42.54
42. 95
42.42
41.90
42. 61
42.61
42. 29
42.80
$36.02
36.22
35.69
36.36
36.66
36.86
36.96
36.26
35.87
36.39
36.20
35.90
36. 27
* Preliminary,
See footnote 1, p. 375.
T able C—3: Average weekly earnings, gross and net spendable, of production workers in manufactur
ing industries, in current and 1947-49 dollars1
Net spendable average weekly
earnings
Net spendable average weekly
earnings
Gross average
weekly earnings
Year
Worker with
no dependents
Worker with 3
dependents
Gross average
weekly earnings
Year and month
Average.
AverageAverage.
Average.
Average.
Average.
Average.
Average.
Average.
Average.
Average.
Average.
Average.
Average.
Average.
Average.
Average.
Average.
$23.86
25.20
29.58
36.65
43.14
46.08
44.39
43.82
49.97
54.14
54. 92
59.33
64. 71
67.97
71.69
71.86
76. 52
80.19
45.1
47.6
55.9
69.2
81.5
87.0
83.8
82.8
94.4
102.2
103.7
112.0
122.2
128.4
135.4
135.7
144.5
151.4
$23. 58
24. 69
28.05
31.77
36. 01
38.29
36.97
37.72
42.76
47.43
48.09
51.09
54.04
55.66
58.54
59. 55
63.15
66.02
$39. 70
41.22
44. 59
45.58
48.66
50.92
48.08
45.23
44. 77
46.14
47.24
49.70
48.68
49.04
61.17
51.87
55.15
56.82
$23.62
24.95
29.28
36.28
41.39
44.06
42.74
43.20
48.24
53.17
53.83
57.21
61.28
63.62
66.58
66.78
70.45
73.38
$39. 76
41.65
46. 55
52.05
55.93
58. 59
55.58
51.80
50. 51
51.72
52.88
55.65
55. 21
56.05
58.20
58.17
61.53
63.15
l Net spendable average weekly earnings are obtained by deducting from
gross average weekly earnings, Federal social security and income taxes for
which the worker is liable. The amount of income tax liability depends,
of course, on the number of dependents supported by the worker as well as
on the level of his gross income. Net spendable earnings have, therefore,
been computed for 2 types of income-receivers: (1) A worker with no depend
ents; (2) A worker with 3 dependents. See footnote 1, table C-2.
The computations of net spendable earnings for both the worker with no
dependents and the worker with 3 dependents are based upon the gross
average weekly earnings for all production workers in manufacturing indus
tries without direct regard to marital status and family composition. The
primary value of the spendable series is that of measuring relative changes
in disposable earnings for 2 types of income-receivers.
https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
Worker with 3
dependents
Index
Amount (1947- Current 1947-49 Current 1947-49
49=100)
index
Amount (1947- Current 1947-49 Current 1947-49
49=100)
1939:
1940:
1941:
1942:
1943:
1944:
1945:
1946:
1947:
1948:
1949:
1950:
1951:
1952:
1953:
1954:
1955:
1956:
Worker with
no dependents
December_______ $79. 71
78.55
January_________
F ebruary............... 78.17
78.78
M arch__________
78.99
April_____ ______
79.00
M ay_________ June__ _____ ___ 79.19
79.00
J u l y .................. .
August__________ 79. 79
September----------- 81.40
October____ _____ 82.21
82. 22
November— . . .
84. 05
December 2___ .
150.5
148.3
147.6
148.8
149.2
149.2
149.6
149.2
150.7
153.7
155.3
155.3
158.7
$65.64
64.74
64.44
64.92
65.08
65.09
65. 24
65. 09
65. 71
66.97
67.62
67.63
69.10
$57. 23
56.49
56.23
56.60
56.64
56.40
56.14
55.63
56.26
57.19
57.45
57.41
58. 56
$73.00
72.07
71.77
72.25
72.42
72. 43
72.58
72. 43
73. 06
74.37
75.03
75. 04
76. 54
$63.64
62.89
62.63
62.99
63.03
62.76
62.46
61.91
62.55
63. 51
63. 75
63.70
64.86
» Preliminary.
See footnote 1, p. 375.
N o t e .— Information on concepts, methodology, etc., is
contained in a technical note on the Calculation and Uses
of the Net Spendable Earnings Series (Revised May 1954),
which is available upon request to the Bureau of Labor
Statistics.
410
MONTHLY LABOR REVIEW, MARCH 1957
Table C-4: Average hourly earnings, gross and excluding overtime, of production workers in manu
facturing industries 1
M a n u fa c tu r in g
D u r a b le
goods
E x c lu d in g
o v e r tim e
Y ea r
G ross
am ount
G ross
In d e x
A m o u n t (194749= 1 0 0 )
1941:
1942:
1943:
1944:
1945:
1946:
1947:
1948:
1949:
1950:
1951:
1952:
1953:
1954:
1955:
1956:
A v e r a g e ______
A v e r a g e ............
A v e r a g e _____
A v e r a g e ............
A v e r a g e ______
A v e r a g e ____
A v e r a g e ______
A v e r a g e ______
A v e r a g e _____
A v e r a g e ______
A v e r a g e _____
A v e r a g e ............
A v e r a g e ______
A v e r a g e ____
A v e r a g e ______
A v e r a g e ______
$0. 729
.8 5 3
.961
1.019
1.023
1.086
1.237
1.350
1.401
1.465
1.5 9
1.67
1.77
1.81
1.88
1.98
$0. 702
.805
.894
.9 4 7
3. 963
1.051
1.198
1.310
1.367
1.415
1.53
1.61
1.71
1.7 6
1.8 2
1.91
54 .5
6 2 .5
6 9 .4
7 3 .5
3 74 .8
8 1 .6
9 3 .0
101.7
106.1
109.9
118.8
125.0
132.8
136.6
141.3
148.3
N o n d u r a b le
goods
E x
c lu d
in g
over
tim e
E x
c lu d
in g
over
tim e
G ross
$0.808 $0. 770 $0.640
.947
.881
.7 2 3
1.059
.976
.8 0 3
1.117
1.029
.861
1. I l l 3 1.042
.904
1.156
1.122
1.015
1.292
1.250
1.171
1.410
1.366
1.278
1.469
1.434
1.325
1.537
1.480
1.378
1.67
1.60
1.48
1.77
1.70
1. 54
1.87
1.80
1.61
1 .9 2
1.86
1 .6 6
2.01
1.9 3
1.71
2 .1 0
2 .0 2
1.81
$0.625
.698
.763
.814
J. 858
.981
1.133
1.241
1. 292
1.337
1.43
1.49
1. 56
1.61
1 .6 6
1.75
1 O v e r tim e is d e fin e d as w o rk in ex c ess o f 40 h o u r s per w e e k a n d p a id for
a t tim e a n d o n e-h alf. T h e c o m p u ta tio n o f a v er a g e h o u r ly ea r n in g s e x c lu d in g
o v e r tim e m a k e s n o a llo w a n c e for s p e c ia l ra tes o f p a y for w o rk d o n e o n h o lid a y s
I b e se d a ta are b ase d o n th e a p p lic a tio n of a d ju s tm e n t factors to gross a v era g e
h o u r ly ea r n in g s, a s d e sc r ib e d in E lim in a tin g P r e m iu m O v e r tim e F r o m
M a n u fa c tu r in g
D u r a b le
goods
E x c lu d in g
o v e r tim e
Y e a r a n d m o n th
G ross
am ount
G ross
A m ount
1955: D e c e m b e r ...
1956: J a n u a r y ..........
F e b r u a r y ___
M a r c h .............
A p r i l . . . ..........
M a y . . .......... ..
J u n e ________
J u l y ................
A u g u s t ______
S e p t e m b e r ...
O c to b e r_____
N o v e m b e r ...
D ecem ber A .
$1.93
1.93
1.93
1.95
1.96
1.9 7
1. 97
1 .9 7
1.98
2 .0 0
2 .0 2
2. 03
2. 05
$1.85
1.87
1.86
1.88
1.9 0
1. 90
1. 91
1.90
1. 91
1.93
1.94
1. 96
1.97
In d e x
(194749 = 100)
143.6
145.2
144.4
146.0
147.5
147.5
148.3
147.5
148.3
149.8
150. 6
152.2
153.0
$2.06
2.0 6
2.0 5
2 .0 6
2 .0 8
2 .0 8
2. 09
2 .0 7
2 .1 0
2 .1 4
2 .1 5
2 .1 6
2.1 8
N o n d u r a b le
goods
E xclu d in g
o v er tim e
G ross
$1.97
1.98
1.98
1.99
2 .0 0
2.0 1
2. 02
2.01
2. 03
2 .0 6
2 .0 6
2 .0 8
2 .0 8
$1.74
1.75
1.75
1.78
1.7 9
1.80
1.81
1.82
1.81
1.82
1.83
1.85
1.86
E xc lu d in g
tim e
$1.68
1.70
1.70
1.73
1.74
1.75
1.76
1.77
1.75
1.76
1. 78
1. 79
1.80
H o u r ly E a r n in g s in M a n u fa c tu r in g , M o n t h ly L a b o r R e v ie w . M a v 1950r e p r in t Serial N o . R . 2020.
1
2 11 -m o n th average; A u g u s t 1945 e x c lu d e d b eca u se o f V - J h o lid a y p eriod .
* Preliminary.
See footnote 1, p. 375.
Table C-5: Indexes of aggregate weekly man-hours in industrial and construction activity 1
[1947-49 = 100]
1956
1955
Industry
Dec.3 Nov.
Oct.
Sept.
Aug.
July
June
May
Apr.
Mar.
Feb.
Jan.
Dec.
112.1
112.2
114.9
114.5
112.9
106.5
110.9
108.5
108.2
106.6
107.4
108.1
112.3
84.8
82.3
84.1
85.6
83.7
76.1
84.7
81.7
81.8
80.4
80.9
82.0
82.9
Contract construction division..................... 135.5
Manufacturing division________________ 110.6
144.4
157.3
159.8
159.9
154.4
154.4
140.0
128.1
114.0
113.0
112.0
124.3
T o ta l»__________________
Mining division
____________
Durable goods____________
Ordnance and accessories____
Lumber and wood products (except
furniture)___ _________
Furniture and fixtures............._...........
Stone, clay, and glass products____ .
Primary metal industries...... ................
Fabricated metal products (except
ordnance, machinery, and transpor
tation equipment)_______________
Machinery (except electrical)................
Electrical machinery__
Transportation equipment..
Instruments and related products....... .
Miscellaneous manufacturing indus
tries_______ _______
Nondurable goods __ ____
Food and kindred products.......
Tobacco manufactures______
Textile-mill products . .
Apparel and other finished textile
products_____________
Paper and allied products.....................
Printing, publishing, and allied in
dustries_______ . . .
Chemicals and allied products_______
Products of petroleum and co al...........
Rubber p ro d u cts......... ....................... .
Leather and leather products................
1956
1955
110.2 108.4
82.3
80.3
139.4 126.7
109.6
110.9
109.9
108.1
101.7
106.4
105.8
107.1
107.3
108.4
109.3
112.6
107.9 107.7
121.6
382.7
119.7
371.9
119.6
373.6
116.8
371.8
114.6
355.0
107.3
368.7
115.6
374.6
115.6
377.3
117.5
381.0
116.2
374.1
117.4
385.8
119.0
389.3
122.5
389.3
116.8 116.2
375.6 413.2
79.1
108.9
110.2
115.6
83.0
106.7
111.4
113.1
88.6
110.9
113.3
113.7
91.2
109.8
111.1
114.3
95.0
107.6
112.8
106.7
90.7
101.1
109.7
73.8
92.4
103.4
113.5
112.6
87.6
102.6
112.8
112.8
83.9
104.9
111.4
115.2
80.1
108.0
109.6
114.3
83.3
109.5
108.1
115.4
83.6
108.8
108.2
117.8
87.9
113.8
112.4
117.9
86.5 9 0 .5
106.9 106.2
110.9 108.6
110.5 110.0
121.7
118.1
145.4
157.2
125.0
119.9
114.7
146.8
147.9
124.4
121.3
114.9
146.6
137.6
125.2
117.3
115.0
142.8
124.4
124.4
111.9
113.1
138.7
125.7
122.3
106.9
112.8
133.4
127.3
119.2
113.6
116.0
137.1
126.5
120.8
114.1
116.5
138.5
128.1
121.5
117.0
118.6
139.8
135.1
122.6
116.3
117.3
133.4
136.6
121.2
117.4
117.2
134.5
138.7
121.6
118.8
116.3
136.3
146.9
121.2
123.7
116.4
140.6
154.0
123.1
116.3
116.0
139.7
136.0
122.4
105.4
108.6
111.7
108.5
105.3
97.7
102.7
102.9
103.4
104.2
105.3
103.0
109.0
104.9 104.1
97.4
88.9
95.3
79.8
97.6
93.4
97.1
80.2
100.4
101.4
107.8
80.2
101.7
110.7
114.6
78.5
100.3
105.7
99.7
78.4
95.0
95.5
74.5
75.2
95.4
91.0
77.7
78.3
94.1
85.4
76.6
79.0
94.7
82.3
74.6
80.3
96.7
82.9
76.5
82.5
97.6
82.6
81.6
84.3
97.6
84.9
89.9
84.3
100.8
90.3
97.8
105.2
118.3
104.5
117.4
105.8
117.9
103.3
118.6
105.2
117.4
97.2
116.4
99.2
116.8
99.5
115.1
102.9
115.6
109.1
115.5
112.4
114.1
107.4
115.8
110.6
119.0
104.3 104.9
116.5 114.4
117.3
108.7
94.4
112.9
91.2
115.1
107.9
94.6
101.1
88.9
116.3
108.5
94.7
112.9
89. 1
114.7
108.2
97.3
109.7
89.3
112.9
106.3
96.4
106.6
93.6
111.0
105.8
94.0
103.8
92.4
111.9
108.1
94.9
103. 6
91.7
111.7
109.3
92.5
108.3
87.5
112.2
111.0
93.5
109.7
89.4
112.2
110.4
93.7
109.6
97.0
110.3
109.0
91.5
113.1
101.7
109.9
109.1
93.3
117.5
99.1
114.0
110.1
93.0
119.9
99.5
113.1 108.6
108.6 107.0
94.1 94.5
109.4 113.3
92.7 95.0
i A g g reg a te m a n -h o u r s are for th e w e e k ly p a y p erio d e n d in g n e a r e st th e
15th of th e m o n th a n d d o n o t r e p r ese n t to ta ls for th e m o n th . F o r m in in g a n d
m a n u fa c tu r in g in d u str ie s , d a ta refer to p r o d u c tio n a n d r e la ted w o rk ers. F o r
c o n tr a c t c o n s tr u c tio n , th e d a ta r e la te to c o n s tr u c tio n w o rk ers.
https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
Annual
average
1Preliminary.
3 Includes only the divisions shown.
See footnote 1, p. 375.
8 6 .8
97.4
91.9
88.6
80.1
118.0
106.4
130.8
146.3
117.9
97.5
9 1 .0
91.5
83.0
C: EARNINGS AND HOURS
411
Table C -6 : Gross average weekly hours and average overtim e hours of production workers in m anu
facturing, by m ajor in d u stry group 1
Durable goods
Tot al: Manufac
turing
Total: Durable goods
Ordnance and acces
sories
Lumber and wood
products (except Furniture and fixtures
furniture)
Stone, clay, and
glass products
Overtime
Overtime
Gross
hours
Gross
hours
aver
average
age
wkly. Aver Per wkly. Aver Per
hours age cent 0 hours age cent oi
gross
gross
Overtime
Gross
hours
average
wkly. Aver Per
hours age cent oi
gross
Overtime
Overtime
Gross
hours
Gross
hours
averaverage
age
wkly. Aver Per wkly. Aver Per
hours age cent 0 hours age cent of
gross
gross
Overtime
Gross
hours
average
wkly. Aver Per
hours age cent of
gross
Year and month
1956:
Average..........
January..........
February........
M arch.............
April_______
M ay..............
Ju n e ...............
July— ...........
August______
September___
October_____
November___
December2__
4 0 .5
40.7
40.5
40.4
40.3
40.1
40.2
40.1
40.3
4 0 .7
4 0 .7
4 0 .5
4 1 .0
2 .8
3 .0
2 .8
2 .7
2 .7
2 .6
2 .7
2 .6
2 .7
3 .1
3 .1
3 .0
3 .1
6 .9
7 .4
6 .9
6. 7
6 .7
6. 5
6 .7
6 .5
6 .7
7 .6
7 .6
7 .4
7 .6
41.1
4 1 .2
4 1 .0
4 0 .9
41.1
4 0 .8
4 0 .8
4 0 .7
40 .8
41 .4
4 1 .4
4 1 .2
4 1 .9
3 .1
3.1
3 .0
2 .9
2 .9
2 .8
2 .9
2 .8
2 .9
3 .3
3 .3
3 .3
3 .4
7 .5
7 .5
7 .3
7.1
7.1
6 .9
7 .1
6 .9
7.1
8 .0
8 .0
8 .0
8 .1
4 1 .8
41.3
41 .6
41.3
41 .8
41 .8
4 1 .6
4 1 .7
41 .2
42.1
42.3
4 2 .0
4 2 .7
2 .9
2 .6
2 .5
2 .8
2 .8
2 .8
2 .7
2 .9
2 .6
3 .5
3 .4
3 .1
3 .4
6 .9
6 .3
6 .0
6 .8
6 .7
6 .7
6 .5
7 .0
6 .3
8 .3
8 .0
7 .4
8 .0
40 .3
40 .2
4 0 .0
3 9 .6
3 9 .9
40.1
40 .5
40 .3
41 .4
40 .9
4 0 .8
4 0 .0
4 0 .0
3 .3
3 .5
3 .5
3 .1
3 .1
3 .0
3 .5
3 .3
3 .6
3 .6
3 .1
2 .9
3 .0
8 .2
8 .7
8 .8
7 .8
7 .8
7 .5
8 .6
8 .2
8 .7
8 .8
7 .6
7 .3
7 .5
40 .8
4 0 .8
41.1
4 1 .0
4 0 .2
3 9 .9
4 0 .3
4 0 .2
41.1
4 1 .3
4 1 .6
4 0 .6
4 1 .4
2 .8
3 .0
3 .0
2 .9
2 .5
2 .4
2 .5
2 .4
2 .9
3 .2
3 .2
2 .7
3 .0
6 .9
7 .4
7 .3
7.1
6 .2
6 .0
6 .2
6 .0
7.1
7 .7
7 .7
6 .7
7 .2
41.1
4 0 .9
4 1 .0
4 1 .0
41.1
4 1 .5
41 .4
41 .0
41 .3
41.1
4 1 .3
41.1
41.1
3 .6
3 .5
3 .6
3 .5
3 .6
3 .7
3 .7
3. 7
3 .7
3 .6
3 .7
3 .6
3 .3
8 .8
8 .6
8 .8
8 .5
8 .8
8 .9
8 .9
9 .0
9 .0
8 .8
9 .0
8 .8
8 0
Durable goods—Continued
Primary metal
industries
1956:
Average_____
January_____
February____
M arch_____
April_______
M a y .......... .
J u n e ._______
J u ly ..............
August______
September___
October_____
November___
December 2__
41.0
41.9
41.1
4 1 .0
4 1 .2
4 1 .0
4 0 .9
40.3
3 9 .7
41.2
4 0 .8
4 0 .6
4 1 .3
2 .8
3 .5
2 .8
2 .8
2 .8
2 .8
2 .9
2 .8
2 .3
3 .1
2 .5
2 .6
2 .7
6 .8
8 .4
6 .8
6 .8
6 .8
6 .8
7 .1
6 .9
5 .8
7 .5
6 .1
6 .4
6 .5
Fabricated metal
products
4 1 .2
4 0 .9
41.1
4 1 .0
41.1
4 0 .8
41 .0
4 0 .8
4 0 .7
41 .7
4 1 .9
4 1 .4
42.1
3 .1
2 .9
2 .9
2 .9
2 .9
2 .7
2 .9
2 .7
2 .9
3 .5
3 .6
3 .3
3 .6
7 .5
7. 1
7.1
7.1
7.1
6 .6
7.1
6 .6
7.1
8 .4
8 .6
8 .0
8 .6
Machinery (except
electrical)
4 2 .2
4 2 .7
4 2 .6
42.4
42 .5
4 2 .2
42 .0
4 1 .7
4 1 .7
4 2 .2
42.1
41 .8
42 .6
3 .7
4 .0
3 .9
3 .8
3 .8
3 .6
3 .6
3 .4
3 .4
3 .8
3 .7
3 .5
3 .7
8 .8
9 .4
9 .2
9 .0
8 .9
8 .5
8 .6
8 .2
8 .2
9 .0
8 .8
8 .4
8 .7
Durable goods—Con.
Miscellaneous
manufacturing
industries
1956:
A verage____
January____
February___
M arch_____
April_______
M ay____
June................
Ju ly .................
August__ ___
September___
October_____
November___
December 2__
4 0 .4
40. 5
40.6
40.4
4 0 .5
4 0 .2
40.1
3 9 .6
4 0 .2
4 0 .3
4 0 .7
4 0 .3
4 0 .9
2 .6
2 .7
2 .7
2 .5
2 .5
2 .5
2 .3
2 .2
2 .6
2 .8
3 .1
2 .8
2 .9
6 .4
6 .7
6 .7
6 .2
6 .2
6 .2
5 .7
5 .6
6 .5
6 .9
7 .6
6 .9
7.1
Electrical machinery
40 .8
40 .9
40 .6
4 0 .7
4 1 .0
4 0 .7
40 .6
40.1
40 .5
41.1
4 1 .2
41 .0
41 .2
2 .6
2 .9
2 .5
2 .4
2 .7
2 .5
2 .4
2 .0
2 .5
2 .9
3 .1
2 .9
2 .8
6 .4
7.1
6 .2
5 .9
6 .6
6 .1
5 .9
5 .0
6 .2
7 .1
7 .5
7 .1
6 .8
Transportation
equipment
41 .0
40 .6
3 9 .9
40.4
4 0 .6
3 9 .6
39 .9
4 0 .8
40 .8
4 1 .3
4 1 .8
4 2 .2
4 3 .4
2 .9
2 .4
2 .3
2 .3
2 .4
2 .1
2 .2
2. 5
2 .7
3 .4
3 .8
4 .5
4 .6
7.1
5 .9
5 .8
5 .7
5 .9
5 .3
5 .5
6 .1
6 .6
8 .2
9 .1
10.7
10. 6
Instruments and
related products
4 0 .8
4 0 .8
4 1 .0
40 .8
41.1
4 0 .8
4 0 .6
4 0 .5
4 0 .7
41.0
4 1 .0
40 .8
41.1
2 .3
2 .3
2 .3
2 .4
2 .5
2 .4
2 .2
2 .1
2 .2
2 .5
2 .4
2 .3
2 4
5 .6
5 .6
5 .6
5 .9
6 .1
5 .9
5 .4
5 .2
5 .4
6 .1
5 .9
5 .6
F. S
Nondurable goods
Total: Nondurable
goods
Food and kindred
products
3 9 .6
3 9 .9
3 9 .8
3 9 .6
3 9 .2
39.1
39 .2
3 9 .4
39 .6
3 9 .8
3 9 .8
3 9 .6
3 9 .8
41.1
4 1 .5
4 0 .7
4 0 .6
4 0 .2
4 0 .6
4 1 .2
41 .2
4 1 .4
42.2
4 1 .3
4 1 .3
41.0
2 .5
2 .7
2 .5
2. 5
2 .4
2 .3
2 .4
2. 5
2 .5
2 .8
2 .7
2 .7
2 .6
6 .3
6 .8
6 .3
6 .3
6.1
5 .9
6 .1
6 .3
6 .3
7 .0
6 .8
6 .8
6 .5
3 .3
3 .5
3 .0
2 .9
2 .8
3 .1
3 .5
3 .4
3 .3
3 .9
3 .5
3 .7
3 .2
8 .0
8 .4
7 .4
7.1
7 .0
7 .6
8 .5
8 .3
8 .0
9 .2
8 .5
9 .0
7 .8
Tobacco manufactures Textile-mill products
3 8 .8
38.1
3 6 .6
3 7 .8
3 7 .9
3 8 .8
39 .2
3 8 .8
39.1
40 .9
3 9 .6
3 8 .8
3 9 .7
1.1
1 .2
.7
.8
.9
1.1
1 .3
1.1
1.0
1 .3
1 .0
1.1
1 .5
2 .8
3. 1
1.9
2.1
2 .4
2 .8
3 .3
2 .8
2 .6
3 .2
2 .5
2 .8
3 .8
3 9 .6
40. 4
40 .5
3 9 .9
3 9 .3
3 8 .9
3 8 .7
3 8 .7
3 9 .2
3 9 .3
4 0 .0
4 0 .2
4 0 .2
2 .6
3 .0
2 .9
2 .7
2 .4
2 .3
2.1
2 .1
2 .3
2 .4
2 .8
2 .9
2 .7
6 .6
7 .4
7 .2
6 .8
6.1
5 .9
5.4
5 .4
5 .9
6 .1
7 .0
7 .2
6 .7
Apparel and other
finished textile
products
3 6 .3
36. 5
37.4
36 .7
3 6 .2
3 5 .7
3 5 .5
3 5 .8
36 .5
3 6 .0
3 6 .4
36.1
3 6 .3
1 .2
1 .3
1 .5
1.3
1.1
1 .0
.9
1 .0
1 .2
1.1
1 .3
1 .3
1 .2
3 .3
3 .6
4 .0
3 .5
3 .0
2 .8
2 .5
2 .8
3.3
3 .1
3.6
3 .6
3.3
Nondurable goods—Continued
Paper and allied
products
1956:
Average_____
January_____
February____
M arch______
A p ril.......... .
M ay................
June_______
J u ly ............ .
August______
September___
October_____
November___
December 2
42.8
43.1
42. 7
4 3 .0
4 2 .8
4 2 .4
4 2 .7
4 3 .0
4 2 .6
43.0
4 2 .9
4 2 .8
43.0
4 .6
4 .7
4 .4
4 .8
4 .5
4 .3
4 .5
4 .8
4 .6
4 .8
4 .8
4 .7
4 .6
10.7
10 .9
10.3
11.2
10.5
10.1
10.5
11.2
1 0 .8
11.2
11 .2
1 1 .0
10.7
Printing, publishing, Chemicals and allied Products of petroleum
and allied industries
products
and coal
3 8 .8
38. 7
3 8 .6
3 9 .0
3 8 .8
3 8 .7
38 .6
3 8 .6
38 .8
39 .0
39.1
3 8 .6
39.1
3 .2
2 .8
2 .8
3 .1
3 .1
3 .0
3 .0
3 .0
3 .2
3 .7
3 .6
3 .2
3 .4
8 .2
7 .2
7 .3
7 .9
8 .0
7 .8
7 .8
7 .8
8 .2
9 .5
9 .2
8 .3
8 .7
41 .3
41 .4
41.3
41 .2
4 1 .2
41.3
4 1 .3
41.1
40 .9
41 .4
4 1 .3
41.4
41.6
1 Covers premium overtime hours of production and related workers during
the pay period ending nearest the 15th of the month. Overtime hours are
those for which premiums were paid because the hours were in excess of the
number of hours of either the straight-time workday or workweek. Weekend
https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
2 .3
2 .3
2 .2
2 .2
2 .3
2 .2
2 .3
2 .3
2 .2
2 .4
2 .2
2 .2
2 .2
5 .6
5 .6
5 .3
5 .3
5 .6
5 .3
5 .6
5 .6
5 .4
5 .8
5 .3
5 .3
5 .3
41.1
41.3
4 0 .7
4 1 .2
4 1 .2
4 0 .7
41.1
4 1 .8
4 0 .9
4 1 .7
40 .8
4 0 .9
4 1 .0
2 .0
2 .0
1 .7
2 .2
2 .0
1 .8
2 .2
2 .4
2.1
2 .3
2. Ó
1 .9
1 .7
4 .9
4 .8
4 .2
5 .3
4 .9
4 .4
5 .4
5 .7
5.1
5 .5
4 .9
4 .6
4. 1
Rubber products
4 0 .2
40. 7
40.1
39 .5
3 9 .9
3 9 .9
3 9 .5
3 9 .7
4 0 .2
4 0 .5
40 .8
4 0 .5
41 .5
2 .8
3 .5
2 .7
2 .3
2 .5
2 .4
2 .3
2 .5
2 .8
3 .0
3 .4
2 .8
3 .2
7 .0
8 .6
6. 7
5 .8
6 .3
6 .0
5 .8
6 .3
7 .0
7 .4
8 .3
6 .9
7. 7
Leather and leather
products
3 7 .6
3 9 .0
3 9 .5
3 8 .2
3 6 .6
3 6 .5
3 7 .3
3 8 .0
3 7 .6
3 6 .9
3 6 .9
3 6 .9
3 7 .7
1 .4
2 .0
2 .2
1 .8
1 .3
1.1
1.1
1 .2
1 .2
1.1
1 .2
1 .2
1 .3
3 .7
5.1
5 .6
4 .7
3 .6
3 .0
2 .9
3 .2
3 .2
3 .0
3.3
3.3
3 .4
and holiday hours are included only if premium wage rates were paid. Hours
for which only shift differential, hazard, incentive, or other similar types of
premiums were paid are excluded. These data are not available prior to
1956.
2 Preliminary.
MONTHLY LABOR REVIEW, MARCH 1957
412
T able C-7: Hours and gross earnings of production workers in manufacturing industries for selected
States and areas 1
S ta te
P h o e n ix
S ta te
M o b ile 3
B ir m in g h a m
S ta te
A r k a n sa s
A r iz o n a
A la b a m a
Y e a r a n d m o n th
A vg.
w k ly .
earn
in g s
A vg.
w k ly .
hours
A vg.
h r ly .
earn
in g s
A vg.
w k ly .
earn
in g s
A vg.
w k ly .
hours
A vg.
h r ly .
earn
in g s
A vg.
w k ly .
earn
in g s
A vg.
w k ly .
hours
A vg.
h r ly .
earn
in g s
A vg.
w k ly .
earn
in g s
A vg.
w k ly .
hours
1954: A v e r a g e _______ $55.91
1955: A v e r a g e _______ 60. 34
3 9 .1
4 0 .5
$1.4 3
1 .4 9
$71.68
78.3 4
3 9 .6
4 0 .8
$1.8 1
1.9 2
$66. 90
69. 55
4 0 .3
4 0 .2
$1.6 6
1 .7 3
$80. 93
8 3 .6 2
4 1 .5
4 1 .6
63.2 9
63. 49
6 1 .8 4
63. 99
64. 55
60. 53
61.4 6
59.9 0
62. 88
67.4 7
67.3 0
66. 92
68. 57
4 1 .1
4 0 .7
3 9 .9
3 9 .5
3 9 .6
3 8 .8
3 8 .9
3 8 .4
3 9 .3
4 0 .4
4 0 .3
3 9 .6
1. 54
1. 56
1. 55
1.6 2
1.6 3
1.56
1. 58
1. 56
1. 60
1.6 7
1 .6 7
1 .6 9
1.7 1
82. 00
85.0 8
8 2 .4 2
82.41
84. 67
74 .2 6
76. 00
74.45
75. 25
88.81
86. 90
87.4 8
86. 67
4 1 .0
4 1 .1
4 0 .6
4 0 .2
4 1 .3
3 9 .5
4 0 .0
3 9 .6
3 8 .2
4 1 .5
4 0 .8
4 0 .5
4 0 .5
2 .0 0
2. 07
2. 03
2. 05
2. 05
1.8 8
1.9 0
1.8 8
1 .9 7
2. 14
2 .1 3
2 .1 6
2 .1 4
71 .2 3
69. 72
68. 73
75.4 0
73. 75
73.78
77. 39
78. 55
78.78
8 2 .1 7
76. 03
76. 25
87. 52
4 0 .7
4 0 .3
3 9 .5
4 1 .2
4 0 .3
40 .1
4 0 .1
4 0 .7
4 0 .4
4 1 .5
3 9 .6
3 9 .1
42. 9
1. 75
1.7 3
1. 74
1.8 3
1.8 3
1.8 4
1 .9 3
1. 93
1. 95
1 .9 8
1. 92
1.9 5
2 .0 4
88.1 8
87. 99
87 .1 5
87 .1 5
89. 04
90. 31
91.3 8
89.8 9
88. 80
92. 62
93.0 6
92.86
93. 51
4 2 .6
4 2 .1
4 1 .9
4 1 .9
4 2 .0
4 2 .6
4 2 .5
4 2 .4
4 1 .3
4 2 .1
4 2 .3
4 2 .4
4 2 .7
1955: D e c e m b e r ____
1956: J a n u a r y ______
F e b r u a r y _____
M a r c h ............
A p r il__________
M a y . . . ............J u n e __________
J u ly ---------------A u g u s t _______
S e p te m b e r -----O c to b e r _______
N o v e m b e r ____
D e c e m b e r ____
40.1
L it t le R o c k - N o r t h
L it t le R o c k
4 0 .6
4 1 .1
52.48
50. 96
51.99
53. 60
54.81
55.08
55.49
54.6 7
54. 94
55.76
56.7 2
56. 43
57.11
4 1 .0
3 9 .5
4 0 .3
4 0 .0
4 0 .3
4 0 .5
4 0 .8
4 0 .2
40 .1
4 0 .7
41 .1
4 0 .6
4 0 .5
1955: D e c e m b e r ____
1956: J a n u a r y ______
F e b r u a r y _____
M a r c h ______
A p r il_________
M a y . . . --------J u n e __________
J u ly ---------------A u g u s t .......... ..
S e p te m b e r ____
O c to b e r _______
N o v e m b e r ____
D e c e m b e r .........
A vg.
h r ly .
earn
in g s
A vg.
w k ly .
earn
in g s
A vg.
w k ly .
hours
$1. 95 $79.17
2. 01
80. 60
4 0 .6
4 0 .5
$1. 95
1.9 9
$51.00
53. 41
4 0 .8
4 1 .4
$1.25
1.29
41 .1
4 1 .1
4 1 .2
4 0 .8
4 0 .5
4 1 .4
4 2 .2
4 2 .5
4 0 .8
4 2 .4
3 9 .6
4 1 .6
4 2 .0
2 .0 8
2. 09
2. 06
2 .0 5
2 .0 7
2. 07
2 .1 3
2 .1 1
2 .1 1
2 .1 7
2 .1 8
2 .1 5
2 .1 6
54.2 3
53. 97
54.0 0
56.3 0
56. 02
56.43
56.5 6
56. 54
54.9 4
57. 67
57. 53
56. 94
57 .2 0
4 1 .4
4 1 .2
4 0 .6
4 0 .5
4 0 .3
4 0 .6
4 0 .4
40 .1
4 0 .1
4 0 .9
4 0 .8
4 0 .1
4 0 .0
1.31
1. 31
1 .3 3
1.39
1.39
1.39
1 .4 0
1.41
1 .3 7
1.41
1. 41
1. 42
1. 43
2. 07
2 .0 9
2 .0 8
2 .0 8
2 .1 2
2 .1 2
2 .1 5
2 .1 2
2 .1 5
2. 20
2 .2 0
2 .1 9
2 .1 9
3 9 .9
4 0 .5
8 7 .3 2
86. 47
86. 77
86. 93
8 8 .1 6
88. 67
90.2 8
89. 80
90.96
92. 07
92 .4 2
91 .9 9
93 .1 7
4 0 .7
40 .1
4 0 .3
4 0 .1
4 0 .1
40 .1
4 0 .5
4 0 .5
4 1 .2
4 1 .2
4 1 .3
4 0 .7
4 0 .8
L o s A n g e le s -L o n g
B each
F r esn o
S ta te
$1.21 $81.05
1. 27 8 5 .2 4
1 .2 8
1 .2 9
1. 29
1 .3 4
1 .3 6
1 .3 6
1. 36
1. 36
1 .3 7
1 .3 7
1 .3 8
1.3 9
1. 41
A vg.
w k ly .
hours
8 5 .4 9
85. 90
84. 87
8 3 .6 4
8 3 .8 4
85. 70
89. 89
89.6 8
86. 09
92. 01
86. 33
8 9 .4 4
90. 72
C a lifo r n ia
A r k a n sa s— C o n .
1954: A v e r a g e ---------- $49.13
1955: A v e r a g e . . . . 52. 20
$2. 03 $70.37
73. 45
2.11
3 7 .8
38 .1
77. 63
76. 57
77.03
76. 09
73. 67
74. 98
80. 25
78.08
80. 44
77.1 7
79.26
74. 68
76.6 4
3 9 .9
3 8 .6
3 8 .9
3 9 .1
3 7 .2
3 8 .1
3 9 .3
3 9 .1
4 0 .4
3 8 .6
3 9 .9
3 7 .4
3 8 .1
2 .1 5
2 .1 6
2 .1 6
2 .1 7
2. 20
2. 21
2. 23
2 .2 2
2. 21
2 .2 3
2 .2 4
2. 26
2 .2 8
$1. 86 $81. 03
1.93
8 5 .6 0
4 0 .3
4 0 .9
87.81
8 6 .8 0
87. 05
86. 93
88. 47
88. 90
8 9 .6 4
89. 64
90. 86
91.1 8
91.9 7
92. 61
94. 01
4 1 .3
4 0 .7
4 0 .8
4 0 .5
4 0 .6
4 0 .6
4 0 .8
4 0 .8
41.1
4 1 .0
4 1 .3
4 1 .2
4 1 .5
1. 95
1.9 8
1.9 8
1.95
1.98
1.97
2.0 4
2 .0 0
1.9 9
2. 00
1.9 9
2 .0 0
2.0 1
S a n B e m a r d in o R iv e r sid e -O n ta r io
S a cra m en to
$2. 01 $77. 07
2. 09 80. 88
3 8 .5
3 9 .2
$2.0 0
2 .0 6
$78. 52
8 1 .0 9
4 0 .0
4 0 .0
$1.96
2. 03
79. 38
82. 51
8 3 .8 2
85 .5 6
82. 21
85. 63
87.4 5
93. 59
90. 09
112. 66
104.10
95.11
9 4 .3 4
3 7 .4
3 8 .3
3 8 .4
39 .1
3 8 .8
4 0 .5
3 9 .0
4 0 .2
4 1 .6
4 8 .8
4 6 .4
4 0 .6
4 0 .0
2 .1 2
2 .1 6
2 .1 8
2 .1 9
2 .1 2
2 .1 2
2 .2 4
2. 33
2 .1 7
2 .3 1
2. 24
2 35
2. 36
84 .7 6
8 4 .4 3
85. 58
84. 94
85. 45
87. 39
87. 25
87. 37
86. 62
90. 57
91.9 4
91. 03
9 1 .6 2
4 0 .4
40 .1
4 0 .5
4 0 .0
4 0 .1
4 0 .5
40 .1
4 0 .6
3 9 .9
4 0 .9
4 1 .0
4 0 .6
4 0 .6
2 .1 0
2 .1 1
2.11
2 .1 2
2 .1 3
2 .1 6
2 .1 7
2 .1 5
2 .1 7
2 .2 2
2 .2 4
2 .2 4
2 .2 6
2 .1 3
2 .1 3
2 .1 3
2 .1 5
2 .1 8
2 .1 9
2. 20
2. 20
2. 21
2 .2 2
2. 23
2. 25
2 .2 6
C o lo ra d o
C a lifo r n ia — C o n tin u e d
S a n F r a n c is c o -O a k la n d
S a n D ie g o
3 9 .8
4 0 .7
$2 .0 4
2 .1 3
$82. 90
86.9 8
3 9 .1
3 9 .6
$ 2 .1 2
2 .2 0
$76. 85
8 2 .1 9
40 .1
4 0 .7
90.2 8
86. 69
85. 51
87. 73
88. 07
91.11
95.0 8
93. 02
9 2 .8 8
94.1 8
94. 71
96.2 4
99.11
4 2 .1
4 0 .5
4 0 .2
4 0 .9
4 0 .8
4 1 .0
4 2 .4
4 1 .6
4 1 .3
4 1 .8
4 1 .7
4 2 .4
4 3 .6
2 .1 5
2 .1 4
2 .1 3
2 .1 5
2 .1 6
2. 22
2. 25
2 .2 4
2 .2 5
2 .2 5
2 .2 7
2 .2 7
2 .2 7
88. 75
88.25
87. 79
90.1 2
90. 37
9 1 .1 0
93. 03
91. 52
92.1 5
95. 32
94. 95
93.61
95. 35
3 9 .4
3 9 .2
3 9 .0
3 9 .5
3 9 .5
3 9 .5
4 0 .0
3 9 .4
4 0 .3
4 0 .7
4 0 .4
3 9 .3
3 9 .5
2. 25
2. 25
2. 25
2 .2 8
2. 29
2.3 1
2. 33
2. 32
2 .2 9
2. 34
2. 35
2 .3 8
2 .4 1
85. 68
86.5 0
8 3 .9 9
81.4 9
8 3 .0 3
86. 47
88. 52
87. 07
89.41
8 9 .7 6
88. 67
92. 41
93 .5 4
4 0 .3
3 9 .9
3 9 .4
3 8 .4
3 9 .0
40 .1
4 0 .3
4 2 .0
4 4 .3
4 3 .6
4 2 .5
4 0 .8
4 0 .5
$1. 92 $75. 48
2 .0 2
77. 75
3 9 .1
3 9 .4
79.7 6
82. 66
80. 79
82.11
81.31
76 .8 2
8 1 .3 7
8 7 .4 8
84. 65
89. 50
89. 81
79.6 6
8 3 .6 7
3 8 .9
3 9 .3
3 8 .5
3 9 .1
3 8 .9
3 7 .0
3 8 .8
4 1 .7
4 1 .9
4 3 .6
4 3 .5
3 7 .3
3 8 .8
2 .1 2
2 .1 7
2 .1 3
2 .1 2
2 .1 3
2 .1 6
2 .1 9
2 .0 7
2. 02
2 .0 6
2 .0 9
2 .2 7
2.31
D enver
S ta te
S to c k to n
S a n J o se
1954: A v e r a g e ...........- $81. 31
1955: A v e r a g e ---------- 8 6 .7 2
1955: D e c e m b e r ____
1956: J a n u a r y ---------F e b r u a r y -------M a r c h ________
A p r il.— --------M a y . . ................
J u n e .....................
J u ly ___________
A u g u s t ................
S e p te m b e r ____
O c t o b e r ............
N o v e m b e r ____
D e c e m b e r .........
A vg.
h r ly .
earn
in g s
A vg.
w k ly .
earn
in g s
A vg.
h r ly .
earn
in g s
$1.9 3 $72. 94
1. 97 76. 92
4 0 .3
4 0 .7
$1.81
1.8 9
$73.16
77.7 4
4 0 .2
4 0 .7
$ 1 .82
1.91
79. 32
79. 60
79. 60
79 .2 0
81 .4 0
82.61
8 3 .2 2
80. 77
85.4 6
82. 22
81.6 1
84.4 6
86. 32
4 1 .1
4 0 .0
4 0 .2
3 9 .8
4 0 .7
4 1 .1
4 1 .2
4 1 .0
42 .1
4 0 .5
4 0 .4
4 1 .4
4 1 .7
1 .9 3
1 .9 9
1.9 8
1.9 9
2 .0 0
2. 01
2. 02
1 .9 7
2 .0 3
2 .0 3
2. 02
2 .0 4
2 .0 7
80. 97
80. 20
78. 21
79.20
8 1 .0 0
8 3 .4 3
8 0 .6 0
84. 67
8 3 .6 4
84. 46
84.2 6
85.2 8
8 5 .4 9
41 .1
4 0 .3
3 9 .7
3 9 .8
4 0 .5
4 1 .1
3 9 .9
4 1 .3
4 1 .2
4 1 .0
41 .1
4 1 .2
4 1 .3
1. 97
1. 99
1. 97
1 .9 9
2 .0 0
2. 03
2. 02
2.05
2 .0 3
2 .0 6
2 .0 5
2 .0 7
2 .0 7
2 .0 5
2 .1 0
2 .1 0
2 .1 0
2 .0 9
2 .0 8
2 .1 0
2 .1 0
2. 02
2. 05
2. 07
2 .1 4
2 .1 6
C o n n e c tic u t
B r id g e p o r t
S ta te
1954: A v e r a g e .............. $72. 76
1955: A v e r a g e ............- 78. 21
4 0 .2
4 1 .6
1955: D e c e m b e r ____ 83. 42
1956: J a n u a r y .............. 8 2 .4 9
F e b r u a r y _____ 8 2 .2 9
M a r c h . . ............ 8 1 .3 2
A p r il__________ 81. 93
M a y __________ 81. 54
J u n e __________ 80. 56
J u ly ---------------- 81 .1 8
A u g u s t — .......... 81 .1 8
S e p te m b e r ____ 8 3 .4 0
O c to b e r _______ 84.8 4
N o v e m b e r ____ 84. 84
D e c e m b e r ____ 86. 51
4 3 .0
4 2 .3
4 2 .2
4 1 .7
4 1 .8
4 1 .6
4 1 .1
4 1 .0
4 1 .0
4 1 .7
4 2 .0
4 2 .0
4 2 .2
See footnotes at end of table.
https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
$1. 81 $75.17
81. 51
1.8 8
1.9 4
1. 95
1. 95
1. 95
1.9 6
1.9 6
1 .9 6
1 .9 8
1 .9 8
2 .0 0
2 .0 2
2 .0 2
2 .0 5
86. 43
86. 66
86. 03
8 6 .2 9
85. 48
8 5 .4 9
84.4 6
84. 46
8 5 .2 8
85.91
88.2 0
8 9 .2 5
91.1 6
S ta m fo r d
N ew H aven
N e w B r ita in
H a r tfo rd
4 0 .2
4 1 .8
$1.87
1.9 5
$77. 23
8 1 .9 0
4 1 .3
4 2 .0
$1 .8 7
1 .9 5
$70. 84
77. 56
3 9 .8
4 1 .7
$1.7 8
1.86
$69. 03
72.50
3 9 .9
4 0 .5
$1. 73
1. 79
$79. 98
81. 40
4 0 .6
40 .1
$1.97
2 .0 3
4 3 .0
4 2 .9
4 2 .8
4 2 .3
4 1 .9
4 1 .7
4 1 .4
4 1 .2
4 1 .4
4 1 .5
4 2 .0
4 2 .3
4 2 .4
2.0 1
2. 02
2. 01
2. 04
2 .0 4
2. 05
2. 04
2. 05
2. 06
2. 07
2 .1 0
2.1 1
2 .1 5
88. 31
8 7 .9 0
8 6 .6 8
85. 67
87. 72
87. 95
8 6 .2 9
87. 54
84. 46
87.9 8
90.2 9
91.1 4
94. 82
4 3 .5
4 3 .3
4 2 .7
4 2 .2
4 3 .0
4 2 .9
4 2 .3
4 2 .7
4 1 .2
4 2 .5
4 3 .2
4 3 .4
4 3 .9
2 .0 3
2 .0 3
2. 03
2 .0 3
2. 04
2. 05
2. 04
2. 05
2. 05
2. 07
2. 09
2 .1 0
2 .1 6
82.21
82. 60
82.2 9
81. 54
82.1 5
8 0 .9 5
79.1 7
78. 60
78. 59
81 .7 7
80. 79
8 2 .1 9
81. 59
4 3 .0
4 2 .8
4 2 .2
4 1 .6
4 1 .7
4 1 .3
4 0 .6
4 0 .1
4 0 .3
4 1 .3
4 0 .6
4 1 .3
4 1 .0
1.9 1
1 .9 3
1 .9 5
1 .9 6
1 .9 7
1 .9 6
1. 95
1.9 6
1.9 5
1.9 8
1 .9 9
1 .9 9
1 .9 9
77.7 0
75.2 6
75.11
76 .3 6
77. 46
78.85
78. 34
77. 74
78.9 4
79.1 3
76.2 4
80. 51
82. 35
4 2 .0
4 0 .9
4 0 .6
4 0 .4
4 1 .2
4 1 .5
4 0 .8
4 0 .7
4 0 .9
4 1 .0
3 9 .5
4 1 .5
4 1 .8
1.8 5
1 .8 4
1.8 5
1.8 9
1.8 8
1 .9 0
1 .9 2
1. 91
1 .9 3
1.9 3
1 .9 3
1 .9 4
1. 97
86. 53
85. 49
84. 87
85.2 8
85. 69
83. 79
83.1 6
8 3 .1 6
85. 41
87.31
88. 60
88.8 0
87. 91
4 1 .6
4 1 .3
4 1 .2
4 1 .0
4 1 .0
3 9 .9
3 9 .6
3 9 .6
40 .1
4 0 .8
4 1 .4
4 1 .3
4 0 .7
2 .0 8
2. 07
2 .0 6
2 .0 8
2. 09
2 .1 0
2 .1 0
2 .1 0
2 .1 3
2 .1 4
2 .1 4
2 .1 5
2 .1 6
C: EARNINGS AND HOURS
413
T a b l e C 7: H ours an d gross earnings of production w orkers in m anufacturing industries for selected
S tates and areas 1—C ontinued
C o n n e c tic u t— C o n .
Delaware
W a te r b u r y
S ta te 3
D is t r ic t o f C o lu m b ia
W ilm in g to n 2
F lo r id a
W a s h in g to n
S ta te
J a c k s o n v ille
Y e a r a n d m o n th
1954: A v e r a g e ___
1955: A v e r a g e ___
1955: D e c e m b e r ____
1956: J a n u a r y _______
F e b r u a r y _____
M a r c h ________
A p r il__________
M a y __________
J u n e . . ................
J u l y . . . ................
A u g u s t —............
S e p te m b e r ____
O c to b e r _______
N o v e m b e r ____
D e c e m b e r ____
A vg.
w k ly .
earn
in g s
A vg.
w k ly .
hours
A vg.
h r ly .
earn
in g s
A vg.
w k ly .
ea r n
in g s
A vg.
w k ly .
hours
A vg.
h r ly .
ea r n
in g s
A vg.
w k ly .
ea r n
in g s
A vg.
w k ly .
hours
A vg.
h r ly .
earn
in g s
A vg.
w k ly .
earnin g s
A vg.
w k ly .
hours
A vg.
h r ly .
earnin g s
A vg.
w k ly .
ea rnin g s
A vg.
w k ly .
hours
A vg.
h r ly .
earnin g s
$72.36
80.37
4 0 .2
4 2 .3
$1.80
1.90
568. 51
74.70
3 9 .6
4 0 .6
$1.73
1 .8 4
$81. 61
87. 97
4 0 .2
4 1 .3
$2.03
2.13
$81. 60
4 0 .2
$2.03
$56.44
58.10
41. 5
4 1 .5
$1.3 6
1.40
87. 71
85.73
84.08
82.80
8 4 .15
81.58
80.18
81.19
80.39
82.20
82.00
82.82
83. 23
4 4 .3
4 3 .3
4 2 .9
4 2 .9
4 2 .5
4 1 .2
4 0 .7
4 0 .8
4 0 .6
41.1
41 .0
4 1 .0
4 1 .0
1 .9 8
1 .9 8
1.96
1.9 3
1.9 8
1.98
1.97
1.99
1.98
2.00
2.00
2.02
2 .0 3
78. 53
75.66
77.99
78.99
79.15
78.17
79.84
75.81
76.78
78.31
79.59
85. 69
89.8 8
4 0 .9
3 9 .2
4 0 .2
40 .3
4 0 .8
4 0 .5
4 1 .8
3 9 .9
4 0 .2
4 1 .0
4 0 .4
4 1 .8
4 2 .8
1 .9 2
91.12
1.9 3
86.90
1.9 4
87.89
1.9 6
87.89
1.9 4
88.70
1.93
89.87
1.91
91.13
1 .9 0
89. 95
1.88 87.8 6
1.91
89.33
1.97
90. 57
2 .0 5
96.10
2.10 101.29
4 1 .8
3 9 .5
4 0 .5
4 0 .5
4 0 .5
4 0 .3
4 0 .5
3 9 .8
3 9 .4
3 9 .7
3 9 .9
4 1 .6
43.1
2 .1 8
2.20
2.1 7
2.1 7
2.1 9
2 .2 3
2 .2 5
2 .2 6
2 .2 3
2. 25
2. 27
2.31
2 .3 5
86.11
81.14
81. 77
82.99
83.7 9
85.0 3
84.84
81.93
81.9 0
86. 62
86.1 5
85.3 2
8 6 .8 0
4 1 .4
3 9 .2
3 9 .5
3 9 .9
3 9 .9
4 0 .3
4 0 .4
3 9 .2
3 9 .0
40 .1
3 9 .7
3 9 .5
4 0 .0
2 .0 8
2 .0 7
2 .0 7
2 .0 8
2 .1 0
2.1 1
2 .1 0
2 .0 9
2 .1 0
2 .1 6
2 .1 7
2 .1 6
2 .1 7
59.9 2
59. 92
59. 76
62.28
61. 31
62.3 2
62.88
63. 55
63. 02
63. 43
64.21
63. 70
65 .1 0
4 2 .2
4 1 .9
4 1 .5
4 1 .8
4 0 .6
4 1 .0
41 .1
4 1 .0
4 0 .4
4 0 .4
4 0 .9
41.1
4 2 .0
1 .4 2
1.43
1.44
1.4 9
1.51
1 .5 2
1. 53
1 .5 5
1 .5 6
1.5 7
1.5 7
1.55
1.5 5
F lo r id a — C o n tin u e d
Miami
_ $61.35
1956: J a n u a r y - ..
F ebruary
M a r c h ____
A p r il_____
M a y ______
J u n e ______
J u l y ______
A u g u s t ___
-—
---
N o v e m b e r ...
-
40.9
39.8
40.6
40.8
40.7
40.6
40.7
40.7
40.2
39.7
40.8
40.5
40.7
60.89
61.71
62.83
63.49
62.93
63.90
64.31
63. 52
61.93
64. 46
63.99
65.12
$1. 50
1. 53
1.52
1.54
1.56
1.55
1.57
1.58
1.58
1.56
1.58
1. 58
1.60
State
41.2
40.8
$1.36 $49.66
1.41 54.00
39.1
40.3
$1. 27 $63. 04
1.34 68.54
39.9
40.8
$1.58
1.68
£66.04
70.22
4 1 .8
4 2 .3
60. 61
60.62
59.04
61.98
60.30
59.40
61. 71
61.91
60.28
61.54
63.36
64.06
65.25
41.8
42.1
41.0
41.6
40.2
39.6
40.6
40.2
39.4
39.7
40.1
40.8
41.3
1.45 56.86
1.44 55. 61
1.44 55. 46
1.49 56.09
1.50 56.49
1.50 55.91
1.52 56.20
1.54 56.02
1.53 57.02
1.55 57. 71
1. 58 59.20
1.57 61.26
1.58 61.81
41.2
40.3
39.9
39.5
39.5
39.1
39.3
38.9
39.6
39.8
40.0
40.3
40.4
1.38
1.38
1.39
1.42
1.43
1.43
1.43
1.44
1.44
1.45
1.48
1.52
1.53
41.2
39.8
40.1
39.6
39.7
39.5
39.7
39.8
40.4
40.3
40.2
41.0
41.4
1. 73
1.71
1.73
1.71
1. 75
1.76
1.75
1. 75
1.75
1.78
1.81
1.89
1.91
73.27
70.73
70.56
72. 66
71.97
71.69
75.23
79.10
78.08
75.89
76. 68
77.28
77.93
43 .1
4 2 .1
4 2 .0
4 2 .0
4 1 .6
4 1 .2
4 2 .5
4 2 .3
4 2 .9
4 1 .7
41 .9
4 2 .0
4 1 .9
71.28
68.06
69.37
67.72
69.48
69.52
69.48
69.65
70.70
71.73
72.76
77.49
79.07
$1.96 $80.42
2.10 90.26
42.5
45.1
$1.89
2.00
8 3 .4 7
3 9 .6
4 1 .2
_ 86.10
41.9
41.2
40.9
41.1
40.8
40.8
40.8
40.4
40.6
41.3
41.1
41.2
41.4
2.05
2. 07
2.07
2.07
2.08
2.09
2.09
2. 08
2.09
2.14
2.14
2.15
2.17
42.0
41.3
41.0
41.2
40.9
40.8
40.8
40.5
40.4
41.6
41.2
41.2
41.5
2.14
2.16
2.15
2.16
2.17
2.17
2.19
2.15
2.19
2.24
2. 24
2.25
2. 26
41.3
41.3
40.5
40.4
39.7
40.8
41.4
40.9
40.1
40.7
40.5
40.6
2.15
2.17
2.15
2.14
2.14
2.15
2.17
2.15
2.16
2.23
2.22
2.25
2.25
46.1
45.8
45.4
45.3
45.3
44.8
42.9
41.9
42.7
43.2
43.8
44.1
44.2
2.09
2.07
2.09
2.09
2.10
2.09
2.06
2.05
2.05
2.09
2.10
2.12
2.15
87.89
87.39
84. 24
85 .3 7
84. 54
84. 39
85.81
82.8 3
84.9 9
88.60
89.4 6
89.8 0
91.34
4 1 .9
4 1 .5
4 0 .4
4 0 .7
4 0 .3
4 0 .2
4 0 .5
4 0 .2
4 0 .0
4 1 .4
41.1
4 0 .9
4 1 .3
Iowa—Continued
4 0 .6
1.7 3
1.73
1.74
1 .7 7
1.8 7
1.8 2
1.8 2
1 .8 3
1.84
1.86
$1.90
1.9 6
85.9 7
83 .2 0
79.80
83 .1 8
80.2 0
86.3 2
89.24
88.7 4
89.0 4
85.46
82.3 9
83. 23
81.81
4 3 .2
4 1 .6
4 0 .3
4 1 .8
3 9 .9
4 1 .7
4 2 .7
4 3 .5
4 2 .0
4 0 .5
3 9 .8
4 1 .0
4 0 .3
1 .9 9
2.00
1.98
1.99
2.01
2 .0 7
2 .0 9
2 .0 4
Iow a
39.9
41.8
96.14
94.90
94.86
94.80
95.24
93.45
88. 24
85. 84
87.61
90.36
91.99
93.48
94.99
1.7 0
1.68
1.68
4 1 .2
4 1 .6
S ta te
$1.98 $78.29
2. 08 87.69
88.89
89.58
87. 26
86. 61
85.14
87.91
89.83
88.12
86. 66
90.83
89.97
91.21
91.45
1.66
$78. 28
81.5 4
S ta te
39.8
41.2
85.42
84. 61
85.20
84.87
85.19
85.38
84.17
84. 77
88.18
87. 75
88.70
89. 66
$1.5 6
1.5 6
1.5 9
1.6 2
1.6 6
1 .6 8
1.68
1 .6 9
1. 67
1 .7 0
1.7 3
1.7 5
1. 75
S ta te
$1.58
I n d ia n a
$1.91 $78. 92
2.00 85.78
-
D e c e m b e r ...
Rockford
40.0
41.2
M a r c h .............
A p r il_________
M a y __________
J u n e __________J u l y . . . ............ ..
A u g u s t - .............
-
Peoria
$76.34
82.27
-
O c to b e r .
Chicago
89. 77
89.15
88.07
88. 95
88.78
88.69
89.21
87. 23
88. 57
93.25
92.11
92.53
93.99
3 9 .7
4 0 .2
3 9 .6
39 .1
3 9 .2
4 0 .8
4 1 .1
3 9 .9
3 9 .7
3 9 .8
4 1 .7
4 1 .5
4 2 .2
Savannah
Illinois
1954: A v e r a g e 1955: A v e r a g e .
$61. 93
62. 71
62.9 6
63.3 4
65.0 7
68.54
69.0 5
67.43
66.30
67. 66
72.14
72.6 2
73.85
A vg.
h r ly .
earnin g s
Idaho
Atlanta 2
$56.03
57.53
State
A vg.
w k ly .
hours
O eo rg ia
Tampa-St. Petersburg
1954: A v e r a g e 1955: A v e r a g e .
A vg.
w k ly .
earnin g s
2.12
2.11
2 .0 7
2 .0 3
2 .0 3
$1.93
2.03
$71.01
75.73
4 0 .4
41.1
$1.76
1.84
2.10
78.81
78. 62
77.22
77.07
76. 48
76.25
76.75
74. 95
76.38
80.7 6
80.4 3
81.7 7
82.9 3
4 1 .6
4 1 .3
4 0 .8
4 0 .7
4 0 .2
3 9 .9
40.1
3 9 .0
4 0 .2
4 0 .8
4 0 .6
4 0 .7
4 0 .9
1.89
1.9 0
1 .8 9
1 .9 0
1.91
1.91
1.91
1.9 2
1.90
1.98
1 .9 8
2.01
2 .0 3
2.11
2.09
2.10
2.10
2.10
2.12
2.06
2.12
2.14
2.18
2.20
2.21
K a n sa s
D e s M o in e s
S ta te
T opeka
W ic h ita
S ta te
L o u is v ille
1954: A v e r a g e _____
1955: A v e r a g e ______
$75. 50
80. 84
3 9 .2
3 9 .8
$1.93
2 .0 3
$78. 47
80.81
4 1 .8
4 1 .9
$1.88
1.93
$71.90
79.36
4 1 .8
4 2 .7
$1.7 2
1.8 6
$82.36
84.29
4 1 .9
4 1 .8
$1.97
2 .0 2
$66.17
71.75
3 9 .8
4 1 .0
$1.6 6
1 .7 5
$79.36
4 1 .0
$1.94
1955: D e c e m b e r ___
1956: J a n u a r y _____
F e b r u a r y ...........
M a r c h .................
A p r il__________
M a y .....................
J u n e __________
J u l y . ....................
A u g u s t ..............
S e p te m b e r ____
O c to b e r _______
N o v e m b e r ____
D e c e m b e r ____
84.46
85. 72
82.80
81.47
81.19
82.28
81.45
75. 22
84.43
87.60
85.90
83. 75
87. 44
4 0 .5
4 0 .8
4 0 .3
3 9 .6
3 9 .2
3 9 .5
39.1
3 6 .0
3 9 .9
4 0 .2
3 9 .5
3 9 .6
40.1
2 .0 8
2 .1 0
2 .0 5
2. 06
2 .0 7
2. 08
2. 08
2.0 9
2 .1 2
2 .1 8
2 .1 7
2 .1 2
2 .1 8
83.6 0
82. 62
81.41
82.1 0
83.4 0
81.7 6
82. 94
83.7 2
83 .4 7
86 .3 0
85. 51
89 .1 5
90.11
4 2 .4
4 2 .0
4 1 .4
4 1 .6
4 1 .9
4 1 .5
4 1 .9
4 1 .8
4 1 .2
4 2 .0
4 1 .5
4 2 .3
4 2 .6
1.9 7
1.9 7
1.97
1 .9 7
1.99
1.97
1.98
2.0 0
2 .0 3
2 .0 5
2 .0 6
2.1 1
2 .1 2
78.81
78.56
74. 54
78.36
80.11
80.2 8
78.86
80 .2 6
78. 07
82. 76
83.4 6
84. 41
81.73
4 1 .2
4 0 .6
3 9 .0
4 0 .6
4 1 .2
4 1 .7
4 1 .0
4 1 .6
4 0 .2
4 1 .4
4 1 .7
4 2 .0
4 0 .5
1.91
1.93
1.91
1.93
1.9 5
1.93
1.92
1.93
1 .9 4
2 .0 0
2 .0 0
2 .0 1
2 .0 2
86.3 2
87.1 6
86.1 0
85. 75
85 .5 3
85 .4 6
84 .4 0
86 .8 6
87.3 2
90.08
90.30
92.42
94.0 5
4 1 .9
4 2 .3
4 1 .6
4 1 .7
4 1 .6
4 1 .7
4 1 .4
4 1 .8
4 0 .9
4 2 .0
4 1 .8
4 2 .2
4 2 .9
2 .0 6
2 .0 6
2 .0 7
2 .0 6
2 .0 6
2 .0 5
2. 04
2 .0 8
2 .1 3
2.1 4
2 .1 6
2 .1 9
2 .1 9
74. 95
71.20
71.95
72.70
74.28
74.16
74.52
72.69
75.67
76.70
76. 25
76.23
75.6 2
4 1 .6
4 0 .2
4 0 .3
3 9 .8
40.1
4 0 .0
40.1
3 9 .7
4 0 .6
4 0 .7
4 0 .2
4 0 .0
4 0 .2
1 .8 0
1. 77
1.78
1.83
1.8 5
1 .8 5
1.8 6
1.83
1.86
1.88
1.9 0
1.9 0
1.88
83.1 9
80.7 4
80.0 6
80.7 8
82 .6 6
82 .1 2
81.79
81. 78
84.9 0
8 5 .5 0
85.0 0
86.3 6
8 5 .8 7
4 1 .5
4 1 .0
4 0 .4
4 0 .6
4 0 .7
4 0 .9
4 0 .3
4 0 .0
4 0 .8
4 1 .0
4 0 .8
4 1 .0
4 0 .7
2 .0 0
1.9 7
1.9 8
1.99
2 .0 3
2.01
2 .0 3
2 .0 4
2 .0 8
2 .0 8
2 .0 8
2.1 1
2.11
See footnotes at end of table,
https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
MONTHLY LABOR REVIEW, MARCH 1957
414
T able C—7 : Hours and gross earnings of production workers in manufacturing industries for selected
States and areas ^C ontinued
Maine
Louisiana
Portland
Lewiston
State
New Orleans
Baton Rouge
State
Year and month
Avg. Avg.
wkly. wkly.
earn hours
ings
1954:
1955:
1955:
1956:
Average-------Average-------December----January___ .
February____
M arch—
A p ril_____
M ay________
June________
July________
August--------September___
October_____
November___
December___
$65. 25
69. 55
71.38
71.97
71. 58
75.17
74. 62
74. 66
74. 89
76.86
75.11
76.63
75. 99
76. 74
76. 91
Avg. Avg. Avg.
hrly. wkly. wkly.
earn earn hours
ings
ings
Avg. Avg. Avg.
hrly. wkly. wkly.
earn earn hours
ings
ings
41.0 $2. 24
2. 34
40.8
2.37
41.5
2. 44
40.7
2. 45
40.8
40.9
2. 51
2. 50
40.9
2. 49
40.9
2. 50
41.2
2. 66
40.9
40.4
2. 57
2.70
39.8
2. 61
40.7
2. 58
40.8
2. 56
40.5
41.3 $1.58 $91.84
1. 66 95. 47
41.9
1.66 98. 36
43.0
1.73 99. 31
41.6
1.75 99.96
40.9
1.82 102. 66
41.3
1.82 102. 25
41.0
1.83 101. 84
40.8
1.84 103.00
40.7
1.87 108. 79
41.1
1.85 103.83
40.6
1.86 107. 46
41.2
1.84 106.23
41.3
1.81 105.26
42.4
1.84 103. 68
41.8
$65. 60
68. 40
69.43
69.95
68. 71
74. 21
71.60
74.15
72. 83
74. 61
74. 37
74. 52
75. 44
75.67
75.60
40.0 $1.64
1.71
40.0
40.6
1.71
1.74
40.2
38.6
1.78
1.81
41.0
1.79
40.0
1.84
40.3
1.83
39.8
1.87
39.9
1.85
40.2
1.84
40.5
1.84
41.0
1.85
40. 9
1.89
40.0
$56. 52
58. 98
63. 28
61.49
62.86
62.07
61.87
62.20
62. 25
63. 08
65.17
63. 79
65.63
64.31
66.40
39.9 $1.42
1.45 $52. 25
40.6
1.50 54.19
42.2
1.50 54. 76
41.0
1.50 56. 44
41.8
1.52 55.43
40.8
1.54 51.06
40.1
1.55 52.60
40.1
1.55 54. 29
40.1
1. 57 56.11
40.2
1.55 55. 56
42.2
1.59 55. 51
40.2
1.60 54.05
41.1
1.61 51.89
39.9
1.61 1 55.22
41.3
Average-------- $68. 58
A verage------- 74. 52
December----- 77. 88
January-------- 77. 48
February— - 77. 61
M arch______ 77. 49
April_______ 78.37
M ay________ 78. 59
June________ 79. 38
July________ 77.03
August______ 78. 00
September___ 79. 56
October_____ 80. 57
November___ 82.14
December___ 82. 54
1954:
1955:
1955:
1956:
39.8
40.9
41.2
40.7
40.7
40.4
40.7
40.7
41.0
40.7
40.7
41.0
40.9
41.0
40.8
40.1 $1.82 $65. 55
1.92 69.09
41.1
1.99 72.10
41.6
1.99 71.63
41.0
2.00 71.40
41.1
2. 00 70.98
40.8
2.01 71.56
41.0
2. 02 71.42
40.9
2.04 70.71
41.1
1.99 71.06
41.1
2. 05 72.00
40.8
2.06 73. 75
41.5
2.08 73.42
41.3
2.10 73.26
41.4
41.2
2.11 75.33
$72. 71
78. 89
82. 56
81.71
82. 06
81.54
82.43
82. 54
83.70
81.95
83. 48
85.30
85.84
87.02
86. 89
39.4 $1.67 $68. 54
40.4
1.71 71.48
1.75 74.44
41.2
1.76 74.34
40.7
1.75 73.93
40.8
1.77 72. 86
40.1
1.78 74. 59
40.2
1.79 74. 99
39.9
1.79 74.05
39.5
1.79 74.26
39.7
1.80 75. 58
40.0
1.83 77. 55
40.3
1.84 76. 81
39.9
1.85 76.63
39.6
1.86 79. 38
40.5
39.3 $1.74 $52. 06
1.79 54. 96
40.0
1.82 53. 72
40.9
1.84 54. 81
40.4
1.83 54. 57
40.4
1.84 53. 36
39.6
1.86 53. 71
40.1
1.87 51.50
40.1
1.87 49.98
39.6
1.88 53.87
39.5
1.88 53.94
40.2
1.91 55. 35
40.6
1.93 55.87
39.8
1.94 57.13
39.5
1.96 55. 88
40.5
Average-------- $71. 33
Average-------- 75.31
December----- 77. 98
Ja n u a ry ------ 78. 21
February------ 77.00
March______ 77. 08
April_____ - 77. 08
M ay___--- - 77. 71
June________ 76. 57
July________ 77. 93
78.72
A ugust...
September----- 81.93
October. --- 81.36
November___ 81.38
December___ 83.00
1954:
1955:
1955:
1956:
40.2
41.1
41.7
41.6
41.4
41.0
41.0
40.9
40.3
40.8
41.0
41.8
41.3
41.1
41.5
1954:
1955:
1955:
1956:
Average_____
Average-------December.
January-.
February----M arch.........
April_______
M ay____ -June_______
July_______
August-Septem ber...
October.
November__
December___
$92. 85
106.76
111.89
93. 47
95. 98
94. 98
92.69
85.23
91. 56
94. 92
94.92
101.06
106. 72
111.93
115. 71
41.9
45.2
45.8
40.2
41.0
41.1
40.6
37.4
39.5
40.1
40.1
40.9
41.3
44.4
45.5
See footnotes at end of table.
https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
$87. 84
94. 84
96. 05
92. 29
89. 65
92. 41
92. 59
89. 79
91.20
93.83
94.35
99.16
100.12
100. 02
106. 73
$81.15
88.11
93.23
89. 64
88.26
87. 58
88. 38
87.28
86.11
88.16
87. 26
91.17
90.11
88. 80
96. 81
38.9
41.0
42.3
40.8
40.1
40.1
40.1
39.6
39.3
39.5
39.7
40.5
39.8
39.1
42.0
40.8
42.3
42.0
40.8
39.6
40.8
40.7
39.4
39.6
40.6
40.6
41.3
41.7
41.5
43.6
$2.15
2.24
2.29
2. 26
2.26
2. 27
2.28
2. 28
2.30
2.31
2. 32
2.40
2.40
2. 41
2. 45
$91.85
97.64
98.53
96. 93
93. 53
97. 23
98.36
95. 51
96. 32
100.12
101.84
107.89
106. 51
106.13
114. 29
$2.09 $83. 23
2.15 92. 09
2.20 89.42
2. 20 86. 73
2.20 85. 79
2.18 86.40
2.20 86. 51
2.20 80.53
2.19 88.19
2.23 88. 86
2. 20 86. 41
2.25 86. 45
2. 26 91.41
2. 27 94.12
2. 31 100. 36
40.7
42.4
41.0
40.3
39.7
40.0
40.2
37.7
40.4
40.5
39.6
38.8
40.9
41.3
43.0
40.5
41.8
41.4
40.9
39.2
40.8
40.9
39.5
39.3
40.8
40.9
41.8
41.8
41.9
44.3
$2. 27
2.34
2.38
2.37
2.39
2. 38
2. 41
2. 42
2.45
2. 45
2.49
2.58
2. 55
2. 53
2. 58
37.7
38.8
38.1
38.6
38.7
36.8
37.3
34.8
34.0
36.9
37.2
37.4
37.0
39.4
37.5
$1.38 $55. 01
1.42 58. 53
1.41 58.46
1.42 56.06
1.41 58. 95
1.45 58. 05
1.44 57. 38
1.48 56. 46
1.47 55.33
1.46 56. 46
1.45 57. 61
1.48 58. 28
1.51 58. 56
1. 45 59.03
1.49 60. 37
$1.50
1.53
1.58
1. 59
1.61
1.63
1.64
1.64
1.61
1.68
1.65
1.69
1.68
1.69
1.71
38.3
39.5
39.5
38.4
39.3
38.7
38.0
36.9
36.4
36.9
37.9
37.6
37.3
37.6
38.7
$1.44
1.48
1.48
1.46
1.50
1.50
1.51
1.53
1.52
1.53
1.52
1.55
1.57
1.57
1.56
$2.05
2.17
2.18
2.15
2.16
2.16
2.15
2.14
2.18
2.19
2.18
2.23
2. 24
2.28
2. 33
$74.03
78. 30
81.91
81.73
80. 21
80. 27
80.27
80.06
79. 79
79. 48
79. 06
79. 94
83.69
83.15
84. 65
Grand Rapids
42.6 $2. 23
$94. 79
2.37
44.7
105.94
2.43
44.3
107. 74
2.30
39.9
91.93
2. 30
90. 35 39.3
2.31
40.0
92. 36
2. 30
39.8
91.38
2.28
35.5
81.01
2.36
39.1
92. 08
40.4
2. 38
96.23
2. 39
40.3
96. 28
2. 55
102. 89 40.3
2. 54
42.8
108.63
2.54
44.8
113.97
2.10
44.8
121.45
Minnesota
Duluth
State
Saginaw
Muskegon
$2.23
2. 36
2. 44
2. 33
2. 34
2.31
2. 28
2. 28
2.32
2. 37
2.37
2. 47
2. 58
2. 52
2.54
40.7
41.2
42.5
41.2
41.7
41.3
41.3
41.9
41.7
43.2
41.2
40.5
41.7
40.3
42.1
New Bedford
Flint
Detroit
State
W orcester
39.4 $1.79
$1.77 $70. 65
1.90
41.3
1.83 78. 45
1.99
42.6
1.87 84. 77
1.99
1.88 83. 58. 42.0
1.99
41.5
1.86 82.59
1.99
41.2
1.88 81.99
1.99
41.3
1.88 82.19
2.00
41.1
1.90 82.20
2. 01
41.0
1.90 82. 41
1.94
40.6
1.91 78. 76
2.01
40.4
1.92 81.20
2. 05
41.0
1.96 84. 05
2.05
40.9
1.97 83.85
2.07
39.6
1.98 81.97
2. 06
40.6
2. 00 83.64
Michigan—Continued
Lansing
$61.11
63.19
67. 20
65.67
67.15
67.50
67.83
68.75
67.01
72.48
67. 87
68. 62
69.97
68. 33
71.99
Avg.
hrly.
earn
ings
Michigan
Massachusetts—Continued
Springfield-Holyoke
$1.37
1.38
1.38
1.42
1.43
1.43
1.47
1.46
1.46
1.46
1.47
1.45
1.47
1.45
Fail River
Boston
State
Baltimore
$1. 72
1.82
1.89
1.91
1.91
1.92
1.93
1.93
1.94
1.89
1.92
1.94
1.97
2. 00
2. 02
38.0
39.4
39.7
39.7
38.8
35.8
35.9
37.2
38.5
38.1
37.7
37.3
35.3
38.0
Avg. Avg. Avg.
hrly. wkly. wkly.
earn earn hours
ings
ings
Massachusetts
Maryland
State
Avg. Avg. Avg.
hrly. wkly. wkly.
earn earn hours
ings
ings
Avg. Avg. Avg.
hrly. wkly. wkly.
earn earn hours
ings
ings
40.6 $1.82
1.90
41.3
1.95
42.0
1.97
41.6
1.96
40.9
1.97
40.7
1.98
40.6
40.5
1.98
40.5
1.97
40.4
1. 97
1.97
40.2
1.98
40.5
41.4
2. 02
2. 04
40.9
2. 05
41. 2
$74. 62
79.00
80. 77
84.14
85. 81
83. 50
84.19
82.42
83. 94
76. 46
82.18
79. 35
82.79
84.36
85. 54
39.2
39.3
39.0
39.2
39.4
39.6
39.8
39.2
39.9
38.1
38.7
37.9
39.0
39.4
39.4
$81. 37
84. 82
87.14
83.84
85.20
87. 27
85.03
82.99
84.82
85. 61
87. 34
90. 33
92.27
87.40
89.98
41.2
41.6
42.2
40.7
41.0
41.5
40.9
39.5
40.2
40.4
40.7
41.4
42.0
40.0
41.2
$1.98
2.04
2.07
2.06
2.08
2.10
2.08
2.10
2.11
2.12
2.15
2.18
2. 20
2.19
2.18
MinneapolisSt. Paul
$1.90 $76.14
2. 01 80.59
2.07 84. 24
2.15 83. 58
2.18 81.61
2.11 81.74
2.11 81.87
2.10 82.09
2.10 81.94
2.01 83. 30
2.12 83. 60
2.10 83. 73
2.12 85.69
2.14 85. 35
2.18 86.24
40.2
40.9
41. 5
41.2
40.6
40.4
40.5
40.3
40.2
40.6
40.6
40.4
41.0
40.6
40.8
$1.89
1.97
2.03
2. 03
2.01
2. 02
2. 02
2. 04
2.04
2. 05
2.06
2.07
2.09
2.10
2.11
O: EARNINGS AND HOURS
415
T able C-7: Hours and gross earnings of production workers in manufacturing industries for selected
States and areas 1—Continued
Mississippi
Missouri
State
Year and month
Avg. Avg.
wkly. wkly.
earn hours
ings
1954: Average_____ $48.14
1955: Average_____ 49. 80
40.8
41.5
1955: December___
1956: January_____
February____
M arch______
April . . . _
M a y .. . . . . _
June_____
July------------August______
September___
October......... .
November___
December___
42.0
40.7
40.2
39.8
39.7
40.1
39.5
40.0
40.4
41.0
40.5
39.6
39.0
51.24
49. 65
49. 04
52. 54
52.80
53. 33
52. 93
53. 60
54.14
55.35
54. 68
53.86
53. 04
Jackson
State
1955: December___
1956: January. _
February____
M arch___
April___ _
M ay____
June________
July------------A u g u st____
September___
October_____
November___
December___
42.8
42.5
41.0
40.8
40.1
41.2
42.4
41.8
41.9
42.8
42.2
42.5
41. 9
76.84
77.27
72. 50
72. 42
70. 92
73. 07
75. 04
73. 56
74.75
77.79
76.14
79. 55
78. 54
St. Louis
Avg. Avg. Avg.
hrly. wkly. wkly.
earn earn hours
ings
ings
Avg. Avg. Avg.
hrly. wkly. wkly.
earn earn hours
ings
ings
Avg. Avg. Avg.
hrly. wkly. wkly.
earn earn hours
ings
ings
$1.18 $50. 90
1. 20 54. 25
40.4
41.1
$1.26 $67. 63
1.32 71.24
39.0
39.9
$1.73 $75. 02
1.79 80. 71
39.8
40.9
$1.88 $73.13
1.97 78.20
39.3
40.1
$1.86 $79. 20
1.95 85. 66
39.9
41.3
$1. 99
2.08
44.3
42.3
40.6
41.4
42.9
42.7
42.2
41.5
41.0
43.0
43.1
42.3
42.2
1.33 74.22
1.35 73. 78
1. 33 72. 63
1.37 73. 69
1.38 73. 68
1.40 73. 69
1.45 74. 58
1.47 75.28
1.44 75. 05
1.44 76. 93
1.46 77. 72
1.46 79. 26
1.49 78. 80
40.5
40.0
39.9
39.8
39.4
39.2
39.5
39.8
39.4
39.8
40.0
40.0
40.0
41.8
40.5
40.7
39.8
39.8
39.7
39.9
39.4
39.6
40.3
39.9
40.9
41.2
2.00
1. 99
1.99
1.99
2. 00
2. 00
2. 01
2. 01
2. 03
2. 04
2. 05
2. 08
2.10
81.54
81.63
79. 93
80. 77
81.30
81.36
82.15
83. 49
82. 77
83. 94
85. 55
87. 29
87. 77
40.8
40.6
40.0
40.0
40.0
39.8
40.0
40.2
39.9
39.9
40.5
40.7
40.9
2.00 89. 50
2. 01 91. 79
2. 00 90. 22
2.02 89.96
2. 04 91.49
2. 05 90. 74
2. 06 92. 42
2.08 91.21
2. 07 94. 32
2.11 91. 61
2.11 93.82
2.14 89. 79
2.15 91. 23
41.9
42.0
41.0
41.2
41.3
41.0
41.8
40. 6
42.1
40.4
42.8
40.9
41.2
2.14
2.19
2. 20
2.18
2. 22
2. 21
2. 21
2.25
2.24
2. 27
2.19
2. 20
2. 22
1.22
1.22
1.22
1.32
1.33
1.33
1.34
1.34
1.34
1.35
1.35
1.36
1. 36
58. 92
57.11
54. 00
56. 72
59.20
59.78
61.19
61. 01
59.04
61. 92
62. 93
61. 76
62. 88
$1. 62 $70. 64
1.70 76. 68
1.79
1.82
1. 77
1.77
1.77
1.77
1. 77
1. 76
1.78
1. 82
1.80
1.87
1.88
1.83
1.84
1. 82
1.85
1.87
1. 88
1.89
1.89
1.90
1.93
1.94
1.98
1.97
83. 83
80.75
81.36
79. 88
80. 08
79. 97
80. 71
79. 43
80. 63
82. 06
81.57
85. 44
87.12
Nevada
Omaha
85. 29
84.64
77.50
77. 37
76. 83
77. 72
80. 08
78.24
78. 86
82. 76
80. 95
85. 87
83. 27
Newark-Jersey C ity 4
41.4
42.8
New Hampshire
State
$1. 71 $86.43
1. 79 86. 97
40.2
39.0
State
$2.15 $57.46
2. 23 60.12
39.9
40.9
2. 28
2. 29
2. 32
2. 31
2. 44
2. 42
2.43
2. 48
2. 50
2.51
2. 50
2.47
2. 52
41.9
41.6
41.8
40.5
40. 5
40.3
40.3
40.9
40.9
40.8
40.5
40.4
41.1
44.8
1.90 89. 38 39.2
43.9
1.93 86. 79 37.9
41. 5
1.87 83.98
36.2
41.4
1.87 87.78
38.0
41.4
1.86 91.26
37.4
41.6
1.87 91.72
37.9
42.5
1.89 92. 58 38.1
41.8
1.87 95. 23 38.4
41.8
1.89 95.75
38.3
42.9
1. 93 94. 72 37.5
42.2
1.92 95. 25 38.1
43.1
1.99 93.86
38.0
42.0
1.98 97.78
38.8
New Jersey—Continued
Paterson 4
Perth Amboy 4
62. 85
62. 82
63.12
61.97
62. 37
62. 47
62. 47
63. 80
63. 40
63.65
63. 59
63. 83
64.94
Manchester
$1.44 $53. 68
1.47 55. 87
1.50
1.51
1.51
1.53
1.54
1.55
1.55
1.56
1.55
1.56
1.57
1. 58
1.58
58. 55
58. 69
58. 95
57. 07
58.62
57. 00
56.25
57. 60
58. 05
57.15
57. 53
57.23
59. 43
Trenton
$1.42 $74.43
1.44 79.16
39.8
40.7
$1.87
1.94
40.1
40.2
40.1
38.3
38.0
38.0
37.5
38.4
38.7
38.1
38.1
37.9
39.1
1.46 82. 32
1.46 81.32
1.47 81.56
1.49 81.45
1.49 82. 70
1.50 82. 30
1.50 82. 46
1.50 82. 53
1. 50 82. 20
1.50 83. 59
1.51 84.53
1. 51 85. 27
1. 52 86. 42
New Mexico
41. 2
40.5
40.7
40. 5
40.8
40.5
40.4
40.2
40.0
40.5
40. 7
40. 7
40.9
2.00
2. 01
2. 00
2. 01
2.03
2. 03
2. 04
2.05
2. 06
2. 06
2. 08
2.10
2.11
State
$1. 90 $75. 05
1. 97 79. 07
40.5
41.4
$1.85 $75.44
1.91 81.22
40.0
41.0
$1.89 $72. 03
1.98 78. 32
39.6
40.9
$1.82 $78. 28
1. 91 80.78
41.2
40.8
1955: December___ 84. 45
1956: January_____ 83.44
February____ 82. 42
March_____ 82.54
April_______ 83.84
May....... ....... 83. 47
June_______ 83. 30
July________ 82. 72
August_____ 84. 36
September___ 85. 02
October_____ 84. 52
November___ 86.41
December___ 87.78
41.5
40.7
40.4
40.4
40.8
40.5
40.3
40.0
40.4
40.6
40.5
40.8
41.0
2. 03 81. 79
2. 05 80. 23
2. 04 81.53
2. 04 82. 34
2. 05 82. 69
2. 06 82. 01
2.07 82. 42
2. 07 82. 42
2.09 82.17
2. 09 83. 56
2. 09 86. 32
2.12 86. 53
2.14 86.-69
41.6
40.6
41.2
41.4
41.1
40.8
40.8
40.7
40.7
40.9
41.7
41.5
41.4
1.97 83.11
1.98 82. 53
1.98 81.80
1. 99 82. 69
2. 01 85.16
2. 01 84. 70
2. 02 83.46
2. 02 85. 91
2.02 84. 89
2. 04 86. 41
2. 07 86. 57
2. 09 86.79
2. 09 88.30
40.9
40.3
40.1
40.1
41. 1
40.9
40.3
40.6
40.1
40.8
40.7
40.5
40.9
2. 03
2. 05
2.04
2. 06
2. 07
2. 07
2. 07
2.12
2.12
2.12
2.13
2.14
2.16
New
41.4
39.9
40.7
40.3
41.1
40.5
39.5
40.2
39.6
40.8
40.3
40.3
41.1
1.98 82. 62
1.98 84. 87
1.98 86. 09
2. 00 87.15
2. 00 86. 53
2. 00 87. 56
2. 01 84. 05
1.99 86.10
1.99 81.80
2. 06 85. 07
2. 07 85. 49
2. 06 86. 30
2.10 88.60
40.7
41.0
40.8
41. 9
41.6
41.3
41.0
41.0
40.9
40.9
41.3
40.9
41.4
State
38.8
39.5
1955: December__
78. 08
40.1
1956: January_____ 77.12
39.5
February____ 77. 39 39.6
March______ 77. 30
39.4
April______ _ 77.73
39.6
M ay________ 77.41
39.3
June___ _ __ 77. 91
39.3
J u l y ------------ 78. 99 39. 5
August______ 79. 43 39.6
September___ 80. 01
39.7
October____
80. 78 39.8
November___ 81. 28 40.0
December___ 82. 19 40.0
See footnotes at end of table.
https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
Albany-Schenectady-Troy
$1.84 $76. 08
1. 90 81.66
1.95
1.95
1. 96
1.96
1.96
1.97
1.98
2. 00
2. 01
2.02
2. 03
2. 03
2.05
85. 46
83. 25
83. 26
83. 72
85. 57
85. 57
86.94
86. 22
85. 42
88. 71
90. 95
91.30
92. 46
Binghamton
39.6
40.5
$1.92 $65. 62
2. 02 70.02
37.7
39.2
41.1
40. 2
39.9
40.0
40.5
40.5
40.6
40.6
39.4
40.8
41.3
41.5
41.7
2. 08 72. 69
2. 07 71. 60
2. 09 73. 06
2. 09 72.86
2. 11 71.64
2.11 74. 00
2.14 72. 87
2.12 73. 97
2.17 75. 33
2.18 75. 63
2. 20 75. 26
2.20 76. 06
2.22 75. 43
40.0
39.8
40.1
39.8
39.0
39.6
39.3
39.4
39.9
39.8
39.7
40.0
40.2
Buffalo
$1.74 $82. 96
1. 79 89. 39
1.82
1.80
1.82
1.83
1.84
1.87
1.85
1.88
1.89
1.90
1. 90
1.90
1.88
94. 00
91.59
90.82
91.43
91.41
91.32
93.13
92. 46
94. 42
97. 06
96. 95
96. 88
98.60
State
37.8
38.8
39.7
40.0
81.89
78. 88
80. 75
80. 52
82. 24
80.84
79. 32
80.12
78.76
84. 21
83. 46
83.14
86.10
York
Avg.
hrly.
earn
ings
New Jersey
1954: Average_____ $75. 55
1955: Average_____ 80. 02
1954: Average_____ $71. 50
1955: Average_____ 75.17
State
Avg. Avg. Avg.
hrly. wkly. wkly.
earn earn hours
ings
ings
State
41.8
42.2
Kansas City
Avg. Avg. Avg.
hrly. wkly. wkly.
earn earn hours
ings
ings
Nebraska
1954: Average......... $67. 64
1955: Average_____ 71.83
Montana
Albuquerque
$1.90 $74. 39
1.98 76.36
2.03
2.07
2.11
2. 08
2.08
2.12
2. 05
2.10
2. 00
2. 08
2.07
2.11
2.14
Elmira
40.3
41.2
$2. 06 $73. 67
2.17 76.10
40.4
40.5
41.9
41.0
40.8
40.8
40.8
40.5
41.0
40.8
41.2
41.4
41.4
41.4
41.7
2.24 78.74
2. 23 76. 45
2.23 77. 56
2. 24 76.39
2. 24 77. 71
2. 25 76. 27
2. 27 76. 55
2. 27 76. 91
2.29 77. 07
2. 34 80.12
2. 34 82.07
2.34 81. 25
2. 37 82. 78
41.0
39.8
40.8
39.9
40.4
39.8
40.0
39.9
39.8
41. 1
41.7
41.5
41.9
82.82
83. 98
81.40
84. 65
84. 42
83. 64
81. 56
81. 60
83.23
84. 46
84.66
86.11
88. 20
41.1
40.4
$1. 81
1.89
41.0
42.2
40.5
41.7
42.0
41.2
41.4
40.8
40.8
41.2
40.7
41.2
42.2
2.02
1. 99
2.01
2. 03
2. 01
2. 03
1.97
2. 00
2. 04
2. 05
2.08
2. 09
2. 09
Nassau and Suffolk
Counties 4
$1. 82 $83. 21
1.88 83. 56
1.92
1.92
1. 90
1.91
1.93
1. 92
1.91
1. 93
1.94
1.95
1.97
1.96
1.98
86.60
87.18
87. 00
85. 91
89.35
89. 54
87. 09
90. 70
89. 61
90.23
91.68
95. 45
97.14
41.0
40.6
$2. 03
2. 06
41.6
41.5
41.4
40.8
42.1
42.3
40.2
41.8
41.1
41.2
41.7
42.7
43.1
2.08
2.10
2.10
2.11
2.12
2.11
2.17
2.17
2.18
2.19
2.20
2.23
2. 26
MONTHLY LABOR REVIEW, MARCH 1957
416
T able C-7: Hours and gross earnings of production workers in manufacturing industries for selected
States and areas 1—Continued
New York—Continued
Year and month
New York-Northeastern New Jersey
Avg. Avg.
wkly. wkly.
earn- hours
mgs
1954: A v erag e..---- $72.18
1955: Average_____ 75.26
38.6
39.2
1955: December___
1956: January_____
February____
March____
April_______
M ay____ - .
J u n e ..______
July________
August__ --September___
October-------November___
December___
39.7
39.0
39.2
39.1
39.5
39.1
38.9
39.2
39.2
39.1
39.3
39.6
39.7
77.81
77.22
77. 62
77.81
78.61
77.81
77.80
79.58
79. 58
79.37
80.17
81.18
82.18
Avg.
hrly.
earnings
38.3
40.2
1955: December___
1956: J a n u a ry .- ___
February...... .
M arch___
April.
May__ ____
June
July________
August-- _ . . .
September___
October..
_
November___
December.......
41.4
40.4
40.5
40.2
39.2
39.3
39.2
39.1
39.6
40.0
40.5
40.4
40.4
54.65
53.73
53. 87
55.07
53. 70
53.84
53. 70
53.18
53.86
54.00
55.89
56. 96
57.37
1.96
1.98
1.98
1.99
1.99
1.99
2.00
2.03
2.03
2.03
2.04
2.05
2.07
1956: January_____
February____
M arch_____
April_______
M ay________
June________
July________
August______
September__
October.. ___
November___
December___
91.03
90.84
88.19
90.57
89. 96
90.46
92.73
87.06
93. 56
94.12
93.76
97. 75
1.32
1.33
1.33
1.37
1.37
1.37
1.37
1.36
1.36
1.35
1.38
1.41
1.42
42.4
41.6
41.3
41.1
40.8
39.7
40.2
39.2
40.1
40.2
41.4
40.9
41.9
58. 51
57.82
57. 82
58. 77
58.34
56. 77
57.89
56.06
57.74
58.29
61.27
60.53
62.43
$1.31 $47.73
1.35 50.42
1.38
1.39
1.40
1.43
1.43
1.43
1.44
1.43
1.44
1.45
1.48
1.48
1.49
Canton
2.33 $93.36
2. 32 88.07
2.33 88.67
2.33 88. 73
2.33 88.12
2.33 91.16
2.37 86.14
2.35 90.34
2.42 93.43
2. 40 93.66
2.36 91.95
2.41 94. 07
Ohio—Continued
41.8
40.0
40.1
40.0
39.8
40.7
39.9
40.6
40.4
40.4
39.6
40.3
$2.23
2.20
2.21
2.22
2.21
2.24
2.16
2.23
2.31
2. 32
2.32
2. 33
1954* Average,
19.6.6: Average,
19.6.6: December
1956: January. __ .. $90.47
February___ 89.25
M arch______ 90.57
April______ _ 90.84
M ay________ 91.50
June________ 91.38
J u l y . . . ___ . 91.60
August______ 91.30
September___ 94.45
October_____ 94.22
November___ 91.27
December___ 96.92
40.1
39.7
40.1
40.2
40.2
40.0
40.0
39.9
40.4
40.2
39.2
40.8
See footnotes at e nd of table.
https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
$2.26
2.25
2.26
2.26
2.28
2.28
2.29
2.29
2.34
2.34
2.33
2.38
$102.76
98.14
97.28
98. 58
96. 59
101.89
94.86
95.78
107.33
105.66
103. 54
108.68
42.0
40.5
40.3
40.6
39.7
41.0
41.1
39.1
41.3
41.4
40.4
42.1
84.61
83. 28
81.25
81.79
83.00
81.19
81.83
82. 56
82. 65
85.81
86.93
86.48
86.60
53.33
52.50
53.31
52. 72
50. 87
51.99
52. 58
52.30
52.82
53.38
54.95
55.38
57.31
39.5
38.6
39.2
38.2
36.6
37.4
38.1
37.9
38.0
38.4
38.7
39.0
39.8
$2.45
2.42
2.41
2. 43
2.43
2.49
2.31
2.45
2. 60
2. 55
2. 56
2. 58
Avg. Avg. Avg.
hrly. wkly. wkly.
earn- earn- hours
ings
ings
40.3
41.3
$1.85 $69.03
1.94 73.44
39.5
40.7
$1.75 $71. 58
1.80 74.24
42.2
41.6
41.0
41.2
41.4
40.6
41.0
41.6
41.2
42.2
41.9
41.6
41.6
2.00 79.37
2.00 78.77
1.98 78.33
1.98 78.68
2.01 77. 52
2.00 77.18
2.00 77.27
1.99 78. 55
2.01 77. 51
2.03 78.11
2. 07 77.90
2.08 79.27
2.08 82. 20
North Dakota
42.1
41.6
41.4
41.6
41.0
41.0
41.0
41.1
40.9
41.0
40.9
41.3
41.9
44.3
44.4
40. 5
41.2
83 90
82.06
81.31
82. 53
83.48
83.10
84. 07
83.05
85.01
87. 07
87.65
87.21
88. 75
42. 2
41.2
41.1
41.4
41.6
41.3
41.3
40.8
41.6
42.1
42.1
41.8
42.1
1.99
1.99
1.98
1.99
2. 01
2.01
2. 04
2. 04
2.04
2. 07
2. 08
2.09
2.11
41.4
41.5
76.26
77.15
76.18
76. 07
78.09
77.90
79. 65
78. 66
78.34
80.48
80.67
79.93
81.51
41.9
41.7
41.4
40.9
41.1
41.0
41.7
41.4
40.8
41.7
41.8
41.2
41.8
$1.74 $69. 76
1.78 70.47
1.82
1.85
1.84
1.86
1.90
1.90
1.91
1.90
1.92
1.93
1.93
1.94
1.95
75. 50
75.08
72.33
73.25
72.76
73.85
74.62
75. 58
74. 58
77.33
77.58
77.22
75.54
42.8
42.2
42.9
43.4
42.3
42.1
42.3
42.2
42.4
42.7
41.9
43.2
43.1
42.9
42.2
$1.66 $78.88
1.71 86. 74
1.81
1.92
1.85
1.86
1.85
1.80
1.85
1.86
1.86
1.81
1.86
1.96
1.93
2.25
2.26 $83.63
2.25 83.08
2. 24 83.22
2. 25 83.44
2.25 83.86
2.27 85.24
2.24 84. 52
2. 28 86.39
2. 33 87.25
2.33 87.25
2.34 86. 01
2.35 87. 90
41.1
40.8
40.9
40.4
40.5
41.0
40.2
40.8
40.3
40.8
40.8
40.5
91.33
90.74
89.16
88.65
89.31
88.08
89.93
88. 73
89.47
93.30
93. 58
92.66
95. 59
40.9
41.6
84.00
84.03
84.04
81.20
83.84
83.64
83.64
84. 05
84.85
86.27
89. 24
85.81
89.40
42.0
41.6
41.4
40.4
40.7
40.6
40.6
41.0
40.6
40.5
41.7
40.1
41.2
1.76
1.73
1.71
1.74
1.72
1.75
1.76
1.77
1.78
1.79
1.80
1.80
1.79
$1.82
1. 85
40.1
38.7
40.0
39.9
40.4
40.3
40.2
39.8
40.9
40.3
40.7
41.8
41.8
Ohio
1.89
1.90
1.91
1.92
1.95
1.95
1.95
1.98
1.97
2.00
2.04
2.06
2.09
39.6
41.1
$1.99
2.11
41.9
41. 5
41.1
40.8
40.9
40.3
40.8
40.6
40.5
41.4
41.4
41.0
41.7
2.18
2.19
2.17
2.17
2.18
2.19
2. 20
2.19
2.21
2.25
2. 26
2.26
2. 29
$2.03
2.04
2.03
2.07
2.07
2.08
2.10
2.12
2.13
2.14
2.13
2.15
$94.26
42.1
$2.24
100.07
99.13
95.93
93.01
94.94
90.20
96.25
97.49
97.34
100.96
99.60
96.88
101.33
43.0
42.6
41.7
40.7
41.2
39.3
41.0
41.1
41.3
42.0
41.4
40.5
41.7
Oregon
2.33
2.33
2.30
2.29
2. 30
2.30
2.35
2.37
2.36
2.40
2.41
2.39
2.43
State
Tulsa
$1.63 $78.12
1.67 81.54
39.2
40.0
Dayton
$2.05
2.17
42. 8
96.45
95.08
42.1
94. 56 42.0
93. 50 41.7
41.6
93.42
40.9
92.02
41.1
93.16
41.2
92.36
94.73
41.6
41.8
97.37
42.0
97.94
98.37
42.0
99. 57 42.3
Oklahoma
Avg.
hrly.
earnings
State
43.1
46.1
42.3
42.3
43.3
42.6
44.4
44.6
44.3
41.1
42.9
44.2
41.6
78.21
88.60
78.33
78.84
80.13
76.65
82.20
82.87
82.22
74. 51
79.91
86. 56
80.19
Oklahoma City
State
$72.04
73.87
39.8
41.7
75.74
73.61
76.58
76.67
78.91
78.43
78.62
78.65
80.69
80.31
83.13
86.33
87.16
Columbus
Cleveland
$1.85 $81. 70
1.96 90.37
41.9
44.9
$1.52 $69. 70
1.54 77.65
1.65
43.0
1.35 70.91
1.36 576.50 «44.5 51.72
1.69
42.9
1.36 72.35
43.7
1.71
1.38 74.84
1.72
1.39 75.23
43.8
1.69
43.7
1.39 74.01
1.68
1.38 72. 02 42.9
1.70
1.38 75. 74 44.5
44.5
1.72
1.39 76.37
42.5
1.73
1.39 73.49
1.76
1.42 76.15
43.3
43.2
1.81
1.42 77.98
42.7
1.80
1.44 76.68
Ohio—Continued
$74.89
80.60
1.89
1.89
1.89
1.89
1.89
1.88
1.89
1.91
1.89
1.91
1.91
1.92
1.96
Fargo
State
$1.29 $67.55
1.32 68.45
37.0
38.2
Youngstown
Toledo
2.06
2.06
2.05
2.06
2.07
2.07
2.08
2.12
2.13
2.14
2.14
2.15
2.15
Cincinnati
$2 27
39 2
39.0
39.1
37.9
38.8
38.6
38.9
39.2
37.1
38.7
39.2
39.7
40.6
40.2
41.4
41.4
41.0
40.9
40.5
40.7
40.6
40.7
40.7
40.6
41.0
40.9
40.9
40.8
85.28
84. 30
83.90
83.62
84.11
83. 89
84. 64
86.15
86.33
87. 83
87.36
87.94
87.93
Greensboro-High
Point
Charlotte
$1.25 $52.66
1.28 55.89
$1.91 $74.43
1.99 80.08
40.0
40.6
$1.84 $76. 51
1.89 81.00
Avg. Avg. Avg.
hrly. wkly. wkly.
earn- earn- hours
ings
ings
Avg. Avg. Avg.
hrly. wkly. wkly.
earn- earn- hours
ings
ings
Avg. Avg. Avg.
hrly. wkly. wkly.
earn- earn- hours
ings
ings
1.92
38.4
73.63
37.7
1.93
72.97
1.94
74. 06 38.1
37.9
1.95
74.09
1.94
38.2
73.93
37.8
1.94
73.37
1.95
73. 53 37.7
1.99
75. 56 37.9
1.99
75. 66 38.0
37.7
1.98
74. 71
1.99
75.94
38.1
38.2
1.99
76.23
2.01
77. 07 38.3
North Carolina
Akron
$88 98
37.4
38.0
$1.87 $68.66
1.92 71.65
State
1954: Average___ - $47.88
1955: Average_____ 51.46
Avg. Avg.
wkly. wkly.
earn- hours
ings
Westchester County *
Utica-Rome
Syracuse
Rochester
New York City 4
$1.91 $83. 81
1.96 88.25
2.00
2.02
2.03
2.01
2.06
2. 06
2. 06
2.05
2.09
2.13
2.14
2.14
2.17
89.73
90.63
89.81
89.24
92.98
92.04
90. 71
89.86
92. 26
90.48
88. 55
88.40
89. 40
38.8
39.1
$2.16
2. 26
39.2
39.3
39.1
38.9
39.5
39.0
39.2
38.7
39.7
39.0
38.4
38.5
38.5
2.29
2.31
2.30
2.29
2. 35
2.36
2.31
2.32
2.32
2.32
2.31
2.32
2.32
0: EARNINGS AND HOURS
417
T able C 7: Hours and gross earnings of production workers in manufacturing industries for selected
__________________________
States and areas 1—Continued
Oregon—Continued
Pennsylvania
Portlan i
State
Allentown-Bethlehem-Easton
Year and month
Avg. Avg.
wkly. wkly.
earn hours
ings
1954:
1955:
1955:
1956:
Average____ $77.44
Average____ 82.00
December__ 83.46
January____ 83.63
February__ 84.75
March.......... 85.11
April............. 86.80
M ay............ 92.02
June....... ...... 89.02
July.............. 86.07
August____ 88.44
September... 86.70
October......... 85.19
November__ 85.49
December__ 87.95
38.3
38.9
38.8
38.7
39.0
38.9
39.4
38.7
37.8
38.7
39.5
39.3
38.9
38.3
38.9
Erie
Harrisburg
Lancaster
Avg. Avg. Avg.
hrly. wkly. wkly.
earn earn hours
ings
ings
Avg. Avg. Avg.
hrly. wkly. wkly.
earn earn hours
ings
ings
Avg. Avg. Avg.
hrly. wkly. wkly.
earn earn hours
ings
ings
Avg. Avg. Avg.
hrly. wkly. wkly.
earn earn hours
ings
ings
Avg. Avg. Avg.
hrly. wkly. wkly.
earn earn hours
ings
ings
$2.02 $69.48
2.11 75.20
2.15 78.67
2.16 79.22
2.17 78.31
2.19 78.84
2.20 79. 56
2.33 79.92
2.36 80.28
2.22 76.81
2.24 79.20
2.21 81.80
2.19 83.02
2.23 83.23
2.26 84.25
$1.80 $64.11
1.88 71.59
1.93 76.14
1.96 76.90
1.95 75.21
1.97 74.96
1.98 75.82
2.00 77.81
2.01 76.73
1.93 73. 58
2.00 78.97
2.04 83.22
2.06 80.96
2.07 83.18
2.07 84.40
$1.74 $74.49
1.85 80.62
1.91 82.05
1.94 84.25
1.90 84.44
1.92 84. 91
1.95 85.08
1.99 85.13
1.99 85.91
1.85 84.33
2.03 86. 51
2.06 87.78
2.06 90.52
2.09 89.46
2.11 90.09
$1.87 $59.45
1.94 65.93
1.98 70.75
1.99 72. 45
2.00 68.87
2.01 70.30
2.03 69.67
2.02 72.67
2.03 71.75
2.03 67.37
2.05 72.10
2.08 74. 96
2.11 74.03
2.13 75.83
2.14 75.83
$1.60 $63.07
1.68 66.91
1.75 70.47
1.79 70.21
1.76 70.72
1.80 70.23
1.81 70.11
1.84 68. 94
1.82 68.65
1.71 67.68
1.83 69.08
1.86 71.28
1.86 72.28
1.91 73.28
1.91 72.57
38.6
40.0
40.7
40.4
40.2
40.1
40.1
40.0
39.9
39.8
39.6
40.1
40.3
40.2
40.7
36.8
38.8
39.8
39.6
39.5
39.0
38.9
39.2
38.5
39.9
38.9
40.4
39.3
39.8
40.0
39.9
41.6
41.5
42.4
42.2
42.2
42.1
42.1
42.3
41.5
42.2
42.2
42.7
42.0
42.1
37.2
39.2
40.5
40.5
39.2
39.1
38.6
39.6
39.4
39.4
39.4
40.3
39.8
39.7
39.7
40.2
41.2
41.8
41.4
41.6
41.0
41.0
40.6
40.6
40.0
40.4
41.2
41.3
41.4
41.0
Avg.
hrly.
earn
ings
$1.57
1.62
1.69
1.70
1.70
1.71
1.71
1.70
1.69
1.69
1. 71
1.73
1.75
1.77
1.77
Pennsylvania—Continued
Philadelphia
1954:
1955:
1955:
1956:
Average____
Average........
December___
January........ .
February___
March_____
April...........
May...............
June....... .......
July............. .
August......... .
September__
October_____
November__
December___
$74.12
78.15
81.46
80.80
80.80
81.33
81.93
81.1'Z
82.90
82.17
83.60
84.85
85.65
84.44
86. 50
39.3
40.2
41.1
40. 4
40.4
40.4
40.5
40.1
40.4
40. 2
40.6
40. 6
40.4
40.4
40.8
$1.89 $80.37
1.94 89.99
1.98 94.88
2.00 97.00
2.00 94.34
2.01 94.38
2.02 95.86
2.04 95.67
2.05 96.45
2.04 90.74
2.06 90.09
2.09 96.88
2.12 99.06
2.09 98.33
2.12 101.93
Pittsburgh
Reading
38.6
40.5
41.2
41.4
40.7
40.7
41.0
40.9
40.8
39.8
38.5
40.2
40.6
40.3
41.1
38.0
39.7
40.5
40.3
40.3
39.9
40.0
40.1
39.9
40.2
40.0
39.8
40.7
40.5
40.5
$2.08 $63.31
2.22 68.36
2.30 71.77
2.34 72.34
2.32 71.45
2.34 71.14
2.34 71.96
2.34 71.98
2.36 72.50
2.28 73.16
2.34 73.20
2.41 72.83
2.44 74.07
2.44 74.52
2.48 74.52
Rhode Island
State
1954:
1955:
1955:
1956:
Average____
Average____
December___
January____
February___
March______
April............
May_______
June_______
July________
August_____
September__
October_____
November___
December___
$60.44
62.47
65.64
64.93
65.37
65.00
65. 79
65. 49
65.31
65.57
65.53
66.00
66. 24
66.14
68.12
39.5
40.3
41.0
40. 7
40.8
40.2
40. 4
39.8
39. 6
39.3
38.9
39.4
38. 9
38. 5
40.0
$61.10
63.33
66.40
66.01
65.85
64.49
66.02
66.00
64. 71
66.33
64.85
66. 73
67.26
67.09
68.85
$1.67
1.72
1.77
1.80
1.77
1.78
1.80
1.80
1.82
1.82
1.83
1.83
1.82
1.84
1.84
$54.13
55. 57
57.99
57.26
59.25
59.02
58.29
59.12
60.25
58.98
60.84
61.00
61.46
62.57
62.63
Wilkes-BarreHazleton
37.8
38.3
39.5
38.9
39.5
38.6
38.1
37.9
38.4
38.2
39.0
39.1
38.7
39.6
38.9
$1.43
1.45
1.47
1.47
1.50
1.53
1.53
1.56
1.57
1.54
1.56
1.56
1.58
1.58
1.61
$50.44
52.03
53. 52
54.05
54.29
55.32
54.72
54. 65
55.09
55.39
55.58
55.33
56.32
58.37
57.56
36.9
37.7
37.8
38.2
37.7
37.3
37.0
36.9
36.7
37.1
37.3
36.4
37.3
38.4
37.8
South Carolina
Providence
$1.53
1. 55
1.60
1. 59
1.60
1.62
1.63
1.65
1.65
1.67
1.68
1.67
1.70
1.72
1.70
Scranton
40.2
40.6
41.5
41.0
40.9
40.0
40.5
40.0
39.7
40.2
39.3
40.2
39.8
39.7
40.5
State
$1.52 $49.64
1.56 53.30
1.60 55. 59
1.61 55.21
1.61 54.53
1.61 55.21
1.63 55.07
1.65 54.12
1.64 53.72
1.65 54.79
1.65 54.80
1.66 55.35
1.69 57.08
1.69 58.34
1.70 58.49
39.4
41.0
41.8
41.2
41.0
40.3
40.2
39.5
39.7
39.6
40.0
40.4
40.2
40.8
40.9
$62.11
65.15
68.89
66.50
68.18
68. 64
68.67
68.55
69.46
67.39
68.21
67. 43
69.80
70.04
71.04
39.1
40.4
39.7
40.0
39.9
40.8
39.9
40.7
40.3
40.5
40.0
40.2
39.0
40.1
40.5
$1.33 $67.39
1.40 72.49
1.41 77.58
1.42 79.91
1.41 78.05
1.48 75.86
1.47 72.36
1.52 73.00
1.49 76.42
1.59 74.66
1.55 71.71
1.56 76.38
1.56 79.33
1.58 80.85
1.60 81.61
State
43.8
45.3
46.3
47.4
46.0
44.6
43.0
43.6
45.4
44.5
43.0
44.5
46.4
47.0
45.2
1954:
1955:
1955:
1956:
Average_____ $57. 71 39.8
Average_____ 60. 64 40. 7
December___ 62.78 41.3
January_____ 62.42 40. 8
February___ 62.12 40.6
March............ 62.96 40.1
April.............. 62.88 39.8
May_______ 62. 73 39.7
June_______ 63.12 39.7
July................ 63.04 39.4
August_____ 62. 57 39.6
September___ 64.55 40. 6
October_____ 64.00 40.0
November___ 64.48 39.8
December___ 65. 93 40.2
See footnotes at end of table.
https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
Chattanooga
$1.45 $57.48
1.49 62.37
1.52 65.83
1.53 65.03
1.53 64. 55
1.57 64.40
1.58 64.96
1.58 64.24
1.59 64.38
1.60 63.14
1.58 65.04
1. 59 65.76
1.60 64.48
1.62 66.63
1.64 68.51
39.1
40.5
41.4
40.9
40.6
40.0
40.1
39.9
39.5
38.5
39.9
40.1
39.8
39.9
40.3
$1.47 $66.47
1.54 69.20
1.59 71.68
1.59 71.68
1.59 72.39
1.61 73.49
1.62 72. 98
1.61 72.98
1.63 71.89
1.64 71.21
1.63 67.69
1.64 74.80
1.62 72.73
1.67 74.29
1.70 74.26
45.3
47.9
51.4
51.4
49.2
47.3
43.3
44.3
46.9
46.0
43.0
47. 6
49.6
49.9
49.8
$1.63
1.68
1. 76
1 76
1. 78
1. 76
1 78
1 77
1 78
1 77
1. 75
1 80
1 78
1 78
1.93
Texas
Knoxville
39.1
40.0
40.5
40.5
40.9
40.6
40.1
40.1
39.5
38.7
37.4
40.0
39.1
39.1
39.5
$1 55
1.59
1. fifi
l. as
1 64
1.67
1.68
1.67
1 69
1.67
1. 68
1.69
1 69
1.70
1.72
Sioux Falls
$1.54 $73.84
1.60 80.55
1.68 90. 55
1.69 90.61
1.70 87.40
1. 70 83.43
1.68 77.25
1.67 78.38
1.68 83.26
1.68 81.44
1.67 75.37
1.72 85.49
1.71 88.10
1. 72 88.73
1.81 95.92
Tennessee
State
40.1
40.9
41. 5
40.9
41. 5
41.1
40.9
41.0
41.2
40.4
40.6
39.9
41.3
41.2
41.3
South Dakota
Charleston
$1.26 $52.00
1.30 56. 56
1.33 55.98
1.34 56.80
1.33 56.26
1.37 60.38
1.37 58. 65
1.37 61.86
1.36 60.05
1.38 64.40
1.37 62.00
1.37 62. 71
1.42 60.84
1.43 63.36
1.43 64.80
$1.37
1.38
1.42
1.42
1.44
1.48
1.48
1.48
1.50
1.49
1.49
1.52
1.51
1.52
1.52
York
Memphis
$1.70
1.73
1. 77
1.77
1.77
1.81
1.82
1.82
1.82
1.84
1.81
1.87
1.86
1.90
1.88
$64.06
69.01
72.33
69.89
69.46
68. 71
68. 54
69.19
68.85
70.11
71.14
73.39
71.62
72.16
72. 57
41.6
42.6
42.8
41.6
41.1
40.9
40.8
40.7
40.5
41.0
41.6
41.7
41.4
41.0
41.0
Nashville
$1.54 $59.20
1.62 62.02
1.69 64.17
1.68 64.32
1.69 64.43
1.68 64.64
1.68 65.85
1.70 65.69
1.70 65.60
1.71 64.80
1.71 66.26
1.76 66.26
1.73 65.20
1.76 65.53
1.77 66.99
40.0
40.8
41.4
41.5
41.3
40.4
40.4
40.8
41.0
40.0
40.4
40.9
40.0
40.2
40.6
State
$1.48 $72.04
1.52 75.78
1.55 78.07
1.55 77.19
1.56 77.00
1.60 78.28
1.63 79.10
1.61 78.74
1.60 80.12
1.62 80.93
1.64 80.75
1.62 82. 57
1.63 81.76
1.63 82.19
1.65 84.20
41.4
42.1
42.2
41.5
41.4
41.2
41.2
40.8
41.3
41.5
41.2
41.7
41.5
41.3
42.1
$1.74
1.80
1.85
1.86
1.86
1.90
1.92
1. 93
1.94
1.95
1.96
1.98
1.97
1.99
2.00
MONTHLY LABOR REVIEW, MARCH 1957
418
T able
C-7: Hours and gross earnings of production workers in manufacturing industries for selected
States and areas 1—Continued
Avg. Avg.
wkly. wkly.
earn hours
ings
1954: Average_____ $73. 42
1955: Average_____ 77.60
39.9
40.0
1955: December___
1956: January..,
February........
March______
April_______
M ay________
June________
July------------August______
September___
October_____
November___
December___
40.7
40.3
39.7
40.2
40.7
40.8
40.4
39.4
37.2
41.4
39.3
41.0
40.4
81.40
83.82
80.99
83. 21
85. 47
84. 46
84.03
76. 83
75.14
83. 63
82. 53
86. 92
87. 67
Avg. Avg. Avg.
hrly. wkly.
earn earn wkly.
ings
ings hours
Avg. Avg. Avg.
hrly. wkly.
earn earn wkly.
ings hours
ings
$1.84 $74.89
1.94 77. 52
40. 7
40.8
$1.84 $59. 83
1.90 63. 57
40.7
42.1
79.90
80. 77
78.61
80. 60
83.01
82.01
83. 63
83.63
83.23
86.10
83. 84
85. 08
85. 06
41.4
41.0
39.7
40.3
41.3
40.8
41.4
41.4
41.0
42.0
41.1
41.1
40.7
1.93 66.15
1.97 65. 97
1.98 66. 42
2. 00 67.20
2. 01 67. 53
2.01 67. 67
2.02 68.10
2. 02 67.68
2. 03 66.88
2.05 67. 52
2. 04 68.21
2. 07 66. 67
2. 09 69. 21
42.7
42.4
42.6
42.4
42.3
42.2
42.4
42.3
41.9
41.9
42.0
40.9
42.1
2.00
2. 08
2.04
2. 07
2.10
2. 07
2.08
1.95
2. 02
2.02
2. 10
2.12
2.17
Avg. Avg. Avg.
hrly. wkly.
earn earn wkly.
ings hours
ings
$1.47 $59. 25
1.51 58. 95
39.5
40.1
58. 21
57.80
54. 46
56.60
56. 22
56.55
59.94
61.10
62. 67
60.87
65.18
65. 71
68. 44
40.2
40.0
39.6
39.5
39.5
39.4
40.3
41.1
41.8
40.3
42.4
41.8
43.7
1.55
1.56
1.56
1.59
1.60
1.60
1.61
1.60
1.60
1.61
1.62
1.63
1.65
1954: Average_____ $62.12
1955: Average_____ 66. 56
40.6
41.6
1955: December___
1956: January_____
February____
M arch. ____
April_______
May._ _____
June______ July------------August______
September___
October_____
November___
December___
■
41.9
39.6
39.7
40.0
39.9
40.7
39.9
39.5
39.5
41.9
40.8
41.5
41.9
68.30
64.15
64. 31
64.80
65.04
66.75
65.84
65.18
65. 57
72.07
69. 36
72. 62
73.74
39.9
41.0
$1.51 $81.31
1.59 84.68
39.0
39.1
68.62
66.74
64.48
67. 32
67.89
67. 56
68.88
68.71
67. 56
68.06
68.30
71.38
72.41
42.1
41.2
39.8
40.8
40.9
40.7
41.0
40.9
40.7
41.0
40.9
41. 5
42.1
1.63 87.09
1. 62 87.46
1.62 85.49
1.65 86.26
1.66 88.02
1.66 88.47
1.68 90.03
1.68 89.69
1.66 89.48
1.66 88.74
1.67 89. 38
1.72 89. 55
1.72 91.67
39.3
39.1
38.4
38.7
39.0
39.1
39.5
39.2
39.3
39.1
39.1
38.7
39.5
$1.83 $87. 91
1.91 93.09
39.6
40.3
1955: December___
1956: January_____
February____
March______
April_______
M a y ______
June________
July------------August______
September___
October_____
November___
December___
40.3
39.4
39.7
39.9
39.8
39.6
39.6
38.5
39.1
39.4
39.6
39.7
39.9
1.97 97.10
2. 01 96. 96
1.98 95.91
1.99 95.11
2. 00 97. 44
2.00 98. 77
2.03 98. 70
2.05 98. 74
2.02 98. 01
2.10 95. 92
2. 07 98.73
2. 07 98.82
2.08 101.11
40.8
40.4
40.3
40.3
40.6
41.5
41.3
40.8
40.5
39.8
40.3
40.5
41.1
$2.22 $74. 79
2. 31 80. 61
2.38
2. 40
2.38
2. 36
2.40
2. 38
2. 39
2. 42
2. 42
2.41
2. 45
2.44
2. 46
85.06
83. 75
84. 21
84. 82
84.12
83. 59
83.64
82.43
82.08
83.84
86.12
84. 22
88.32
$2.04 $81.28
2.13 87. 62
39.9
40.7
84. 73
84.88
83. 22
84. 98
85.12
85.74
86.24
89.05
88.41
85.83
87.19
89.09
91.36
39.1
38.9
38.3
39.0
38.8
38.8
38.9
39.2
39.3
38.3
38.4
39.0
39.8
2.17 91.56
2.18 88. 60
2.17 89.68
2.18 88.70
2.19 89.34
2. 21 89. 31
2. 22 91.97
2. 27 93. 20
2. 25 90. 76
2. 24 97. 67
2.27 92. 29
2.28 94.58
2.30 95. 30
40.8
40.1
40.1
39.9
40.1
39.3
39.9
40.2
39.5
40.9
39.6
40.8
40.0
2. 22
2. 23
2. 23
2. 23
2. 26
2.26
2.28
2.29
2.28
2. 27
2. 29
2. 31
2. 32
39.9
40.9
$1.42
1.45
61.57
60.49
60. 64
61.81
61. 51
61.91
61.91
61.75
61.35
62. 22
62. 27
63. 80
64. 46
41.6
40.6
40.7
40.4
40.2
40.2
40.2
40.1
40.1
40.4
40.7
40.9
40.8
1.48
1.49
1.49
1.53
1.53
1.54
1.54
1.54
1.53
1.54
1.53
1.56
1.58
1.90
1.89
1.88
1.90
1.95
1.94
1.94
1.93
1.92
1.96
1.97
1.97
1.99
Tacoma
$2.04 $80.08
2.16 82. 23
39.1
38.9
$2.05
2.12
82. 04
83.15
82.81
84. 69
83.58
86. 53
87.49
84.76
82.19
87.13
86. 55
83. 80
87.87
38.2
38.5
38.0
38.5
37.7
39.1
38.8
37.7
37.5
39.7
39.0
37.1
39.1
2.15
2.16
2.18
2.20
2.22
2. 22
2. 25
2. 25
2.19
2.20
2.22
2.26
2. 25
2.24
2. 21
2.24
2. 22
2. 23
2. 27
2. 31
2. 32
2.30
2.39
2. 33
2. 37
2. 40
40.0
41.2
$2. 03 $78.64
2.12 84. 55
39.9
41.2
1955: December, .
1956: January, ___
February____
March______
April__ ____
M ay____ ,_,
June____
July________
August........
September___
O cto b er.___
November___
December___
41.7
41.6
41.8
41.9
41.5
41.4
41.1
41. 6
41.2
41.3
41.3
40.5
41. 6
2.18 86. 91
2. 20 87. 94
2. 21 87. 91
2. 22 87. 23
2. 23 86. 02
2. 24 84. 42
2. 24 82.14
2. 25 82.86
2. 25 83.47
2. 28 85. 60
2.28 86. 68
2.29 86. 59
2. 32 87. 72
41.5
41.5
41.0
40.9
40.6
40.0
39.2
39.3
39.9
40.5
40.6
40.4
40.3
Madison
Kenosha
La Crosse
$1.89 $78. 61
1.97 83.66
40.1
40.3
$1.96
2.07
2.02 96.01
1.99 93.18
2. 00 89.60
1.98 88. 99
1.98 88. 67
1.97 87.68
1.99 88. 39
2. 00 86.29
1.97 88.62
2. 02 90.88
2. 04 92. 43
2. 05 102.90
2.07 102. 26
43.1
41.9
41.3
41.0
40.5
40.7
41.0
40.0
40.3
40.8
40.1
43.9
43.5
2.23
2. 22
2.17
2.17
2.19
2.16
2.16
2.16
2.20
2. 23
2. 31
2. 35
2. 35
40.8
42.0
$1.83 $77. 98
1.92 87. 90
39.1
41.2
$1.99 $75. 58
2.13 78.92
42.6
41.7
42.0
42.1
41.7
41.5
41.6
41.6
41.4
42.0
41.9
40.8
42.0
2. 00 101. 58
2.01 77. 80
2. 01 84.90
2. 02 84. 71
2.02 78. 76
2. 02 78.05
2. 01 84.40
1.98 81.95
1.98 83. 97
2. 00 90. 67
2.06 88.90
2.07 58.28
2.10 93. 94
44.6
35.7
39.4
39.5
37.1
36.6
39.3
38.0
39.1
40.6
40.0
26.9
41.4
2.28 82.95
2.18 74.82
2.16 79. 84
2.15 78.19
2.12 80. 50
2.14 79. 32
2.15 81.30
2.15 81.68
2.15 78.92
2. 23 83.54
2. 22 82. 86
2.17 83. 32
2. 27 85. 30
41.2
37.6
40.0
39.6
40.6
40. 2
40.9
40.9
40.0
41.4
40.6
40.6
41.2
Wyoming
Casper
State
Racine
1954: Average_____ $81.22
1955: Average_____ 87. 42
$1.97 $84.03
2.05 83. 23
40.4
41.0
84. 25
90. 72
87.34
89. 72
89.10
90. 94
87. 91
90.72
87. 67
90. 76
88.99
89. 42
91.74
40.7
42.0
39.7
39.7
39.6
40.6
39.6
40.5
40.4
40.7
41.2
41.4
41.7
2.10
2.12
2.14
2.13
2.12
2.11
2.10
2.11
2. 09
2.11
2.13
2.14
2.18
1 Data for earlier years are available upon request to the Bureau of Labor
Statistics or to the cooperating State agency. See table A-7 for addresses of
cooperating State agencies.
2 Revised series; not comparable with data previously published.
* In addition to Cobb, DeKalb, and Fulton Counties, Ga., the area defini-
https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
$1.76 $56. 66
1.81 59.30
Spokane
40.0
40.0
Wisconsin—Continued
90.81
91.60
92.38
93.12
92.75
92. 50
91.97
93. 51
92. 71
94.08
94. 37
92. 87
96. 67
Avg.
hrly.
earn
ings
Wisconsin
38.6
39.5
Milwaukee
Avg. Avg.
hrly. wkly. Avg.
earn earn wkly.
ings hours
ings
45.0
44. 2
44.3
43.8
44.1
43.6
43.4
44.4
43.3
42.9
42.4
41. 5
42.6
85. 62
83.73
83.16
83. 41
85.87
84. 56
84. 34
85. 65
83.29
83. 99
83. 57
81.82
84. 66
38.4
38.6
State
Charleston
1954: Average_____ $70. 64
1955: Average_____ 75. 45
79. 39
79.19
78. 61
79. 40
79.60
79.20
80.39
78. 92
78. 98
82.73
81.97
82.18
82. 99
1.45
1.45
1.43
1.43
1.42
1.44
1.49
1.49
1.50
1.51
1.54
1.57
1.57
$2.09 $78. 53
2.17 82.20
West Virginia
State
40.7
43.1
$1.50 $71. 63
1.47 78. 01
Seattle
State
Richmond
$1.53 $60. 25
1.60 65.19
1.63
1.62
1.62
1.62
1.63
1.64
1.65
1.65
1.66
1.72
1.70
1.75
1.76
Avg. Avg. Avg.
hrly. wkly.
earn earn wkly.
ings hours
ings
Washington
Virginia—Continued
N orfolk-Portsmouth
State
Springfield
Burlington
State
Salt Lake City
State
Year and month
Virginia
Vermont
Utah
$2.08 $95. 30
2. 03 99.80
38.9
40.9
$2. 45
2.44
97. 66
108. 54
106.13
105.06
106. 25
105. 59
107.06
110.09
104.15
106.92
109.18
104.00
104. 02
39.7
42.9
40.2
40.1
40.4
40.3
40.4
41.7
39.6
40.5
41.2
40.0
39.4
2. 46
2. 53
2. 64
2. 62
2. 63
2. 62
2. 65
2. 64
2. 63
2.64
2. 65
2. 60
2. 64
2. 07
2.16
2. 20
2. 26
2. 25
2.24
2.22
2.24
2.17
2.23
2.16
2.16
2.20
tion now includes Clayton County, Ga. Continuity of hours and earnings
series with previously published data not affected.
4 Subarea of New York-Northeastern New Jersey,
s Not comparable with preceding data shown.
WHOLESALE PRICES
and Wholesale Prices
sumer Price Index 1—United States city average: All items and ma
[1947-49=100]
All items
95.5
102.8
101.8
102.8
Food
Apparel
Housing
113.5
114.4
114.8
114.5
116.2
95.9
104.1
100.0
101.2
112.6
114.6
112.8
112.6
110.9
111.7
97.1
103.5
99.4
98.1
106.9
105.8
104.8
104.3
103.7
105.5
95.0
101.7
103.3
106.1
112.4
114.6
117.7
119.1
120.0
121.7
90.6
100.9
108.5
111.3
118.4
126. 2
129.7
128.0
126.4
128.7
117.2
121.3
125.2
128.0
132.6
97.6
101.3
101.1
101.1
110.5
111.8
112.8
113.4
115.3
120.0
113.9
113.4
113.6
113.7
114.0
114.5
114.7
115.0
115.2
115.4
115.0
114.9
113.1
111.5
111.7
111.5
112.1
113.7
113.8
114.1
113.8
113.6
112.0
112.3
104.6
104.6
104.7
104.6
104.7
104.6
104.4
104.3
105.3
105.5
105.5
105.3
116.4
116.6
116.8
117.0
117.1
117.4
117.8
118.0
118.4
118. 7
118.9
118.9
129.3
129.1
129. 3
129.4
129.4
129.4
129.7
130.6
130.7
130.7
130.1
128.9
119.4
119.3
119.5
120.2
120.7
121.1
121.5
121.8
122.6
122.8
123.3
123.6
112.4
112.5
112.4
112.5
112.8
112.6
112.6
112.7
112.9
113.2
113.4
113.6
115.
115.
117.
117.
118.
118.
118.
118.
118.
119.
115.2
115.0
114.8
114.6
115.0
115.1
115.2
115.0
114.7
114. 5
114.6
114.3
113.1
112.6
112.1
112.4
113.3
113.8
114.6
113.9
112.4
111.8
111. 1
110.4
104.9
104.7
104.3
104.1
104.2
104.2
104.0
103.7
104.3
104.6
104.6
104.3
118.8
118.9
119.0
118.5
118.9
118.9
119.0
119.2
119.5
119.5
119.5
119.7
130.5
129.4
129.0
129.1
129.1
128.9
126.7
126.6
126.4
125.0
127.6
127.3
123.7
124.1
124.4
124.9
125.1
125.1
125.2
125.5
125.7
125. 9
126.1
126.3
113.7
113.9
114.1
112.9
113.0
112.7
113.3
113.4
113.5
113.4
113.8
113.6
120.
114.3
114.3
114.3
114.2
114.2
114.4
114.7
114.5
114.9
114.9
115.0
114.7
110.6
110.8
110.8
111.2
111. 1
111.3
112.1
111.2
111.6
110.8
109.8
109.5
103.3
103.4
103.2
103.1
103.3
103.2
103.2
103.4
104.6
104.6
104.7
104.7
119.6
119.6
119.6
119.5
119.4
119.7
119.9
120.0
120.4
120.8
120.9
120.8
127.6
127.4
127.3
125.3
125. 5
125.8
• 125. 4
125.4
125. 3
126.6
128.5
127.3
126.5
126.8
127.0
127.3
127.5
127.6
127.9
128. 0
128.2
128.7
129.8
130.2
113.7
113.5
113.5
113.7
113.9
114. 7
115.5
115.8
116.6
117.0
117.5
117.9
119.
119.
119.
119.
119.
119.
120.
120.
120.
120.
120.
120.
114.6
114.6
114.7
114.9
115.4
116. 2
117.0
116.8
117. 1
117.7
117.8
118.0
109.2
108.8
109.0
109.6
120.6
120.7
120.7
120.8
120.9
121.4
121.8
122.2
122.5
122.8
123.0
123.5
126.8
126.9
126.7
126.4
127.1
126.8
127.7
128. 5
128.6
132.6
133. 2
133.1
130.7
130.9
131.4
131.6
131.9
132.0
132. 7
133.3
134.0
134.1
134.5
134.7
118.5
118.9
119.2
119.5
119.6
119.9
120 1
120.3
120.5
120.8
121.4
121.8
120.
120.
113.2
114.8
113.1
113.1
113.1
112.9
112.9
104.1
104.6
104.8
104.8
104.8
104. 8
105.3
105.5
106. 5
106.8
107.0
107.0
123.
123.
123.
118.2
112.8
106.4
123.8
133.6
135.3
122.1
123.
111.0
111.0
lex measures the average change in prices of goods
urban wage-earner and clerical-worker families,
¡ize, and small cities are combined for the United
https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
Transporta Medical care Personal care
tion
94.9
100.9
104.1
106.0
111.1
For a description of the index, see BLS Bull. 1
Major BLS Statistical Series, Ch. 9.
Historical tabulations of indexes for the Unit
20 individual large cities are available upon reqi
96.
100.
103.
105.
109.
115.
118.
120.
120.
122.
120.
120.
120.
120.
120.
120.
120.
120.
120.
120.
120.
120.
119.
121.
121
121.
121.
122.
122
122.
420
MONTHLY LABOR REVIEW, MARCH 1957
Table D-2: Consumer Price Index 1—United States city average: Food, apparel, housing, and their
subgroups
[1947-19=100]
Food
Housing
Apparel
Food at home
Year and month
Wom
Cereals Meats,
Fruits Other
Total
Men’s en’s Foot Other
food* Total and poul Dairy and foods
and
Total and
wear appar Total • Rent
food at bakery try, prod vege
at
ucts tables home*
boys’ girls’
el *
home prod and
fish
ucts
Gas Solid House- House
fuels
and
furhold
elec and nish- opera
tricity fuel oil ings
tion
Average.........Average..........
Average..........
Average_____
Average.........
Average..........
Average.........
Average........
Average....... —
Average_____
95.9
104.1
100.0
101.2
112.6
114.6
112.8
112.6
110.9
111.7
95.9
104.1
100.0
101.2
112.6
114.6
112.5
111.9
109.7
110.2
94.0
103.4
102.7
104.5
114.0
116.8
119.1
121.9
123.9
125.6
93.5
106.1
100.5
104.9
117.2
116.2
109.9
108.0
101.6
97.1
96.7
106.3
96.9
95.9
107.0
111. 5
109.6
106.1
105.9
108.7
97.6
100.5
101.9
97.6
106.7
117.2
113.5
111.9
113.5
119.0
100.1
102.5
97.5
101.2
114.6
109.3
112.2
114.8
111.5
112.8
97.1
103.5
99.4
98.1
106.9
105.8
104.8
104.3
103. 7
105.5
97.3
102.7
100.0
99.5
107.7
108.2
107.4
106.8
105.7
107.4
98.0
103.8
98.1
94.8
102.2
100.9
99.7
98.9
98.0
98.7
94.5
103.2
102.4
104.0
117.7
115.3
115.2
116.4
117.7
123.9
(«)
108.6
93.2
92.0
101.6
92.1
92.1
90.7
90.6
91.4
95.0
101.7
103.3
106.1
112.4
114.6
117.7
119.1
120.0
121.7
94.4
100.7
105.0
108.8
113.1
117.9
124.1
128.5
130.3
132.7
97.6
100.0
102.5
102.7
103.1
104.5
106.6
107.9
110.7
111.8
88.8
104.4
106.8
110.5
116.4
118.7
123.9
123.5
125.2
130.7
97.2
103.2
99.6
100.3
111.2
108.5
107.9
106.1
104.1
103.0
97.2
102.6
100.1
101.2
109.0
111.8
115.3
117.4
119.1
122.9
1953: January_____
February____
M arch______
April_______
M a y ........... .
Juno................
J u l y ...............
August______
September___
October_____
November___
December___
113.1
111.5
111.7
111.5
112.1
113.7
113.8
114.1
113.8
113.6
112.0
112.3
112.9
111.1
111.3
111.1
111.7
113.7
113.8
114.1
113.5
113.3
111.4
111.7
117.7
117.6
117.7
118.0
118.4
118.9
119.1
119.5
120.3
120.4
120.6
120.9
110.9
107.7
107.4
106.8
109.2
111.3
112.0
114.1
113.5
111.1
107.0
107.8
111.6
110.7
110.3
109.0
107.8
107.5
108.3
109.1
109.6
110.1
110.5
110.3
116.7
115.9
115.5
115.0
115.2
121.7
118.2
112.7
106.6
107.7
107.4
109.2
109.7
107.3
109.1
110.4
110.3
110.9
112.3
114.4
116.7
117.4
114.8
113.5
104.6
104.6
104.7
104. 6
104.7
104.6
104.4
104.3
105.3
105.5
105. 5
105.3
107.1
107.3
107.3
107.3
107.4
107.2
107.4
107.3
107.5
107.6
107.8
107.6
99.7
99.3
99.6
99.4
99.4
99.2
98.9
98.7
100.5
100.8
100.7
100.5
114.3
114.6
114.5
114.8
115.1
115.3
115.0
115.0
115.3
115.8
116.2
116.1
92.0
92.3
92.4
92.1
92.5
92.3
92.2
92.0
92.5
92.3
91.3
90.9
116.4
116.6
116.8
117.0
117.1
117.4
117.8
118.0
118.4
118.7
118.9
118.9
121.1
121.5
121.7
122.1
123.0
123.3
123.8
125.1
126.0
126.8
127.3
127.6
105.9
106.1
106.5
106.5
106.6
106.4
106.4
106.9
106.9
107.0
107.3
107.2
123.3
123.3
124.4
123.6
121.8
121.8
123.7
123.9
124.6
125.7
125.9
125.3
107.7
108.0
108.0
107.8
107.6
108.0
108.1
107.4
108.1
108.1
108.3
108.1
113.4
113.5
114.0
114.3
114.7
115.4
115.7
115.8
116.0
116.6
116.9
117.0
1954: January_____
February____
March......... .
April...............
M ay................
June________
July________
August______
September___
October_____
November___
December.......
113.1
112.6
112.1
112.4
113.3
113.8
114.6
113.9
112.4
111.8
112.6
112.0
111.4
111.8
112.8
113.3
114.2
113.3
111.6
110.9
110.1
109.2
121.2
121. 3
121.2
121.1
121.3
121.3
121.6
122.3
122.6
122.7
123.1
123.3
110.2
109.7
109.5
110.5
109.7
107.6
106.7
103.9
103.5
102.2
109.7
109.0
108.0
104.6
103. 5
102. 9
104.3
105.1
105.8
106. 7
106.6
106.8
110.8
108.0
107.8
110.0
114.6
117.1
120.1
114. 7
110. 5
111.1
109.6
108.4
113.5
114.0
112.3
113.6
114.5
115.2
117.3
119.6
116.0
115.7
113.7
112.0
104.9
104.7
104.3
104.1
104.2
104.2
104.0
103.7
104.3
104.6
104.6
104.3
107.4
107.4
107.2
107.1
107.3
107.0
106.6
106.4
106.4
106.4
106.5
106.5
99.8
99.5
99.0
98.4
98.5
98.5
98.2
97.7
99.0
99.6
99.5
99.0
116.2
116.1
116.1
116.1
115.9
116.3
116.5
116.9
116.5
116.7
117.0
116.9
90.4
90.4
90.0
90.4
90.9
91.0
90.8
90.7
90.9
91.1
91.2
91.1
118.8
118.9
119.0
118.5
118.9
118.9
119.0
119.2
119.5
119.5
119.5
119.7
127.8
127.9
128.0
128.2
128.3
128.3
128.5
128.6
128.8
129.0
129.2
129.4
107.1
107.5
107.6
107.6
107.7
107.6
107.8
107.8
107.9
108.5
108.7
109.1
125.7
126.2
125.8
123.9
120.9
120.9
121.1
121.9
122.4
123.8
124.2
125.5
107.2
107.2
107.2
106.1
105.9
105.8
105.7
105.4
106.0
105.6
105.4
105.4
117.2
117.3
117. 5
116.9
117.2
117.2
117.2
117.3
117.4
117.6
117.8
117.7
1955: January_____
February____
March______
April_______
M a y ............ .
June________
Ju ly-----------August______
September___
October_____
November___
December___
110.6
110.8
110.8
111.2
109.4
109.6
109.7
110.1
110.0
110.3
110.0
110.4
109.4
108.2
107.9
123.4
123.8
123.9
123.9
123.8
124.0
124.2
124.1
124.0
123.9
123.9
123.9
102.4
102.5
102.3
103.0
102.1
103.8
103.7
102.9
103.5
100.9
97.1
94.6
106.4
106.1
105.4
104.6
104.0
104.1
104.7
105.7
106.5
107.5
107.8
107.7
110.6
110.7
112.0
117.5
120.2
119.5
121.9
111.3
110.2
108.5
109.0
110.7
111.3
112.1
111.9
109.4
108.4
107.7
109.2
112.6
114.1
113.9
113.1
113.7
103.3
103.4
103.2
103.1
103.3
103.2
103.2
103.4
104.6
104.6
104.7
104.7
105.5
105.6
105.6
105.5
105.7
105.6
105.7
105.5
105.8
106.0
106.0
106.1
97.6
97.7
97.4
97.1
97.3
97.2
96.9
97.4
99.5
99.5
99.3
99.1
116.7
116.6
116.7
116.9
117.4
117.4
117.5
117.6
118.1
118.4
119.2
119.8
90.5
90.6
90.4
90.2
90.3
90.1
90.5
90.5
91.0
91.0
91.0
91.1
119.6
119.6
119.6
119.5
119.4
119.7
119.9
120.0
120.4
120.8
120.9
120.8
129. 5
129.7
130.0
129.9
130.3
130.4
130.4
130.5
130.5
130.8
130.9
131.1
109.4
109.9
110.3
110.3
110.9
110.7
110.8
110.8
111.2
111.2
111.5
111.5
126.1
126.2
126.2
125.7
122.5
122.7
123.2
123.8
125.2
126.3
126.7
128.0
104.6
104.8
104.6
104.5
103.7
103.8
103.6
103.2
103.6
104.4
104.5
103.4
117.7
117.7
117.9
118.1
119.0
119.2
119.4
119.5
119.8
120.1
120.5
120.7
1956: Januarv_____
February____
March______
April_______
M ay________
J u n e ...............
July------------August______
September___
October...........
November___
December___
109.2
108.8
109.0
109.6
113.2
114.8
113.1
113.1
113.1
112.9
112.9
107.5
107.1
107.3
107.9
109.5
112.1
113.8
111.8
111.7
111.7
111.3
111.2
123.9
124.3
124.4
124.5
124.7
125.2
125.8
126.3
126.6
126.8
127.0
127.4
93.3
93.6
92.8
94.0
95.5
98.0
99.3
99.9
101.3
100.8
98.8
98.0
107.3
107.3
106.9
106.4
107.5
107.7
108.7
109.2
109.8
110.7
111. 1
111.3
112.6
113.3
114.8
116.7
121.5
131.4
135.2
120.7
114.8
113.9
115.8
117.4
112.8
109.6
110.7
110.8
110.9
112.8
113.9
115.4
115.8
115.2
114.2
104.1
104.6
104.8
104.8
104.8
104.8
105.3
105.5
106.5
106.8
107.0
107.0
106.0
106.5
106.6
106.5
107.0
107.5
107.7
107.7
108.3
108.2
108.4
108.6
97.9
98.3
98.3
98.1
97.9
97.5
98.0
98.1
99.6
100.1
100.4
100.3
120.4
121.3
121.9
123.0
122.8
123.1
124.2
124.8
126.0
126.2
126.2
126.4
90.7
91.0
91.1
91.1
91.1
91.1
91.4
91.5
92.0
92.1
92.1
92.2
120.6
120.7
120.7
120.8
120.9
121.4
121.8
122.2
122.5
122.8
123.0
123.5
131.4
131.5
131.6
131.7
132.2
132.5
133.2
133.2
133.4
133.4
133.8
134.2
111.7
111.7
111.7
111.8
111.8
111.7
111.7
112.1
112.2
112.0
111.8
112.0
129.5
130.0
130.6
129.7
127.9
128.4
128.7
129.5
130.5
132.9
134.3
136.1
102.0
102.5
103.1
102.7
102.6
102.8
102.8
102.6
103.3
103.6
103.8
104.1
121.2
121.4
121.6
122.1
122.4
122.6
123.0
123.4
123.7
124.2
124. 5
124.8
1957: January........... 112.8
111.1
128.0
99.0
111.2
116.9
112.7
106.4
108.4
98.9
126.7
91.9
123.8
134.2
112.3
138.9
104.0
125.4
1947:
1948:
1949:
1950:
1951:
1952:
1953:
1954:
1955:
1956:
111.1
110.4
111.1
111.3
112.1
111.2
111.6
110.8
109.8
109.5
111.0
111.1
111.0
111.1
111.1
1 See footnote 1 to table D -l.
1 In addition to subgroups shown here, total food includes restaurant meals
and other food bought and eaten away from home. Before 1953, food away
from home was represented in the index by food bought to be consumed
at home
https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
s Includes eggs, fats and oils, sugar and sweets, beverages (nonalcoholic),
and other miscellaneous foods.
4 Includes yard goods, diapers, and miscellaneous items.
8 In addition to subgroups shown here, total housing includes the purchase
price of homes and other homeowner costs.
• Not available.
421
D : CONSUMER AND WHOLESALE PRICES
T able D -3 : Consum er Price Index
All item s indexes for selected dates, b y city
[1947-49=100]
City
Jan.
1957
Dec.
1956
Nov.
1956
Oct.
1956
Sept.
1956
Aug.
1956
July
1956
June
1956
May
1956
Apr.
1956
Mar.
1956
Feb.
1956
1956
Jan.
June
1950
United States city average ..............
118.2
118.0
117.8
117.7
117.1
116.8
117.0
116.2
115.4
114.9
114.7
114.6
114.6
101.8
Atlanta, Ga_____________________
Baltimore, M d ............................ ........
Boston, Mass— ......... ........................
Chicago, 111-..____ ______________
Cincinnati, Ohio ________________
00
00
119.0
121.0
(3)
119. 5
119.5
<*)
121.0
117.5
(3)
(3)
(3)
119.3
121.1
(3)
118.9
117.5
(3)
120.3
117.1
(3)
00
(0
117.8
120.5
(0
118.0
116.6
00
119.5
116.3
(0
(0
(0
118.6
(0
(0
(0
115.2
118.1
(0
116.8
115.2
(0
117.7
114.3
(0
(0
(0
118.3
(0
(0
(0
114.6
118.1
(0
(0
101.6
102.8
102.8
101.2
Cleveland, Ohio_________
____
Detroit, M ich.............. ......................
Houston, Tex.................. ...................
Kansas City, Mo_____ ____ ______Los Angeles, Calif____ ___________
(3)
120.5
00
120.2
(0
00
119.4
120.0
120.6
119.7
(3)
(0
120.2
00
117.6
118.1
(0
118.7
(0
(0
117.4
117.3
118.0
116.8
(0
116.9
(0
117.4
(0
116.4
116.3
(0
116.9
(0
(0
116.1
115.7
116.4
116.6
(0
115.8
(0
119.1
00
120.0
00
118.9
118.5
116.3
(0
115. 5
116.0
(0
102.8
103,8
(0
101.3
Minneapolis, M inn______________
New York, N. Y . _______ ________
Philadelphia, P a ................................
Pittsburgh, P a __________________
Portland, Oreg....................................
119.4
115.6
118.8
118.8
120.1
00
115.5
118.6
00
00
115.6
118.2
(3)
(3)
117.4
115.7
118.6
118.2
119.5
115.1
118.4
(3)
(3)
114,4
117.9
00
(3)
(3)
117.7
114.6
117.9
117.3
118.6
(0
113.8
116.8
(0
(0
(0
113.0
116.2
00
(0
115.6
112.3
116.0
115.2
116.4
(0
112.2
115.8
(0
(0
(0
112.1
114.7
(0
(0
116.1
112.1
114.6
113.6
116.3
102.1
100.9
101.6
101.1
00
St. Louis, M o......... ............................
San Francisco, Calif............................
Scranton, P a ____________ _______
Seattle, Wash _________ _______
Washington, D. C _______________
(3)
(3)
(3)
(3)
(3)
119.1
121.6
00
(3)
00
114.9
120.2
115.9
(3)
00
(3)
(3)
118.1
119.0
00
00
(3)
(3)
(3)
113.5
118.8
115.7
(0
00
(0
(0
(0
117.0
117.9
(0
(0
(0
(0
(0
112.1
117.1
114.4
(0
(0
(0
(0
(0
115.7
116.8
(0
(0
(0
(*)
(0
111.1
116.2
113.4
(0
(0
(0
(0
(0
101.1
100.9
(0
00
(0
(3)
119.8
119.6
(3)
(3)
(«)
00
00
121.0
(3)
(3)
(3)
119.7
(3)
(3)
117.8
(3)
1 See footnote 1 to table D -l. Indexes measure time-to-time changes in
prices of goods and services purchased by urban wage-earner and clericalworker families. They do not indicate whether it costs more to live in one
city than in another.
https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
(3)
00
120.0
(3)
119.1
119.6
118.2
(3)
117.4
a Average of 46 cities.
* Indexes are computed monthly for 5 cities and once every 3 months on a
rotating cycle for the 15 remaining cities.
422
MONTHLY LABOR REVIEW, MARCH 1957
T able D -4 : C onsum er Price Index 1—Food an d its subgroups, b y city
[1947-49=100]
Food at home
Total food 2
Total food at home
City
Jan.
1957
Dec.
1956
Jan.
1956
Jan.
1957
Dec.
1956
Cereals and bakery products
Jan.
1956
Jan.
1957
M eats, poultry, and fish
Jan.
1956
Dec.
1956
Jan.
1957
Dec.
1956
Jan.
1956
United States city average3__
112.8
112.9
109.2
111. 1
111.2
107.5
128.0
127.4
123.9
99.0
98.0
93.3
Atlanta, Ga________________
Baltimore, M d___ _____ ____
Boston, M ass..............................
Chicago, 111........ ................ .........
Cincinnati, Ohio........................
111. 2
114.9
112. 1
109.5
113.8
111.1
114.8
111.9
109.8
113.9
108.2
110. 5
108.4
106.5
110.3
109.9
111. 1
109.6
107.5
112.0
109.8
111.0
109.3
107.6
112.1
106.2
107.9
105. 8
104.4
108.6
119.0
126.9
126.8
120.4
124.5
119.2
126.6
126.3
121.3
124.8
117.8
121.2
122.1
118.9
123.8
101.9
100.8
98.2
92.2
100.9
99.7
99.3
97.0
90.8
99.8
95.2
94.8
93.8
87.0
93.1
Cleveland, Ohio....................... .
Detroit, M ich______________
Houston, Tex-_........................ .
Kansas City, M o___________
Los Angeles, Calif______ ____
111.0
114.7
111.9
109.0
116.4
110.8
114.7
111.4
109.2
116.0
107.1
110.6
107.0
104.9
111.5
109.1
112.8
110.1
106.7
113.1
108.7
112.7
109.6
107.1
112.6
105.3
108.8
105. 5
102.9
108.3
122.1
122.6
120.9
124.0
132.9
121.7
120.2
119.8
123.8
131.4
118.9
119.1
117.6
120.3
128.0
95.8
96.1
95.6
95.3
101.5
95.7
95.1
93.3
93.8
100.5
90.9
91.5
88.9
86.9
94.6
Minneapolis, M inn...................
New York, N . Y ____________
Philadelphia, Pa........................
Pittsburgh, Pa________ ____ _
Portland, Oreg............................
112.6
112.3
115. 5
114.9
115.5
112.3
112.6
115.2
114.6
115.4
111.2
109.1
110. 5
109.4
110.2
111.3
110. 4
113.7
113.0
113.4
111. 1
111.0
113.4
112.9
113.5
110.4
107. 3
109.0
108.3
108.9
129.0
131.4
130.8
127.5
130.0
129.2
131.1
130.6
125.0
130.1
125.4
128.7
123.1
124.9
124.6
94.6
100. 5
101.8
98.4
100.4
93.2
100.6
100.6
97.4
98.3
91.1
96.6
95.0
90.6
93.4
St. Louis, M o______ ____ ___
San Francisco, Calif_________
Scranton, Pa_______________
Seattle, Wash________ ______
Washington, D . C ____ ______
115.0
116.3
109.8
115. 4
113.7
114.5
116.3
110.0
115.5
113.1
110.2
112.3
106.2
110.7
110.4
111.0
114.9
109.0
114.1
111.8
110.4
114.9
109.2
114.3
111.1
107.8
111.0
105. 3
109. 5
108.5
123.6
138.9
125.5
137.1
128.9
122.7
138. 2
124.9
136. 7
127.7
118.8
130.7
119.3
127. 6
121.6
97.1
104.3
99.0
99.1
98.8
94.6
103. 5
97. 7
97.7
96.5
90.6
100.1
90.8
93.9
91.6
Food at home—Continued
Dairy products
City
Jan.
1957
Dec.
1956
Fruits and vegetables
Jan.
1956
Jan.
1957
Dec.
1956
Other foods at home 4
Jan.
1956
Jan.
1957
Dec.
1956
Jan.
1956
U n it e d S ta te s c i t y a v e r a g e 3.
111.2
111.3
107.3
116.9
117.4
112.6
112.7
114.2
112.8
A tla n ta , O a _________________
B a ltim o r e , M d .............................
B o s to n , M a s s _______________
C h ic a g o , 111_________________
C in c in n a t i, O h io ____________
112.8
112.5
115.2
110.7
114.2
112. 5
112. 5
116. 5
111.2
114.2
108.8
108.8
108.9
107.6
110.3
116.9
111.3
112.9
113.7
112.8
119.8
112.1
111.8
114.1
114.3
113.6
112.5
106.6
108.6
112.8
106.7
113.0
105. 3
117.4
118.6
107.4
114. 2
105.8
119. 2
119.6
105.5
111.9
106.8
118.4
118.0
C le v e la n d , O h io ____________
D e t r o it , M ic h _______________
H o u s t o n , T e x ______________ _
K a n s a s C it y , M o ___________
L o s A n g e le s , C a lif......................
108.4
112.5
112.7
108.0
105.3
108.3
112.8
112.4
108.2
105.4
105.0
105.1
109.9
107.5
102.7
113.1
127.0
120.1
110.6
123.7
110.0
128.1
120.9
114. 5
122.1
107.0
123.6
113.0
108.3
114.3
116.6
115.0
112.6
106.4
112.7
118.2
116. 4
113. 7
107.0
114.0
111.0
105.3
112.7
M in n e a p o lis , M i n n _________
N e w Y o r k , N . Y ........................
P h ila d e lp h ia , P a ____________
P itts b u r g h , P a ....... .....................
P o r tla n d , O reg.............................
107.8
109.6
116.0
113. 6
113.9
108.5
109.7
116.1
113.8
114.1
110.7
104.6
110.1
109.5
108.6
123.0
112.3
118.8
116.6
118.0
120.9
113.7
118.2
118.6
118.8
120.9
107.4
115.0
109.9
115.4
119.6
112.2
112.0
122.2
115.8
121. 5
113.6
112.8
123.0
117.3
121.8
113.5
112.4
121.9
113.4
S t. L o u is , M o ..............................
S an F r a n c is c o , C a lif________
S c r a n to n , P a .................................
S e a ttle , W a s h ...............................
W a s h in g to n , D . C __________
102.8
113.3
108.6
116.6
115. 9
102.4
113. 2
108.8
116.4
116.0
100.9
105.4
107.7
110.8
113.1
122.8
120.5
110.2
123.0
113.0
122.8
121.4
112.3
123.5
111.9
121.5
119.1
108.1
119.3
114.6
121.1
112.0
109.8
112.0
113.3
122.9
112.7
111. 1
114. 5
114.3
121.2
111.5
110.6
110.7
112.9
1 See footnote 1 to table D -l.
3 See footnote 2 to table D-2.
https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
3Average of 46 cities.
*See footnote 3 to table D-2.
115.8
113.9
428
D : CONSUMER AND WHOLESALE PRICES
T able D -5 : C onsum er Price In d ex —Average retail prices and indexes of selected foods
Commodity
Average
price,
Jan.
1957
Unit Cents
Cereals and bakery products:
Flour, wheat___________ __ 6 pounds.. 53.8
Biscuit mix 1...................... ...2 0 ounces.. 26.8
12. 6
Corn meal___ _________ ........ pound..
Rice-................................. ..............do----- 17. 2
Rolled oats......................... ...2 0 ounces. . 20. 9
Corn flakes......................... ...1 2 ounces.. 22. 7
18. 4
Bread....... ......................... ........ pound..
Soda crackers 1_________ .............d o ___ 27.6
Vanilla cookies....... .......... ___ 7 ounces.. 24.3
Meats, poultry, and fish:
Meats.................................
Beef and veal..................
88.7
Round steak................ ........ pound..
Chuck roast................. ..............do___ 49.0
Rib roast..................... ..............do___ 72.3
Hamburger-................ ..............do___ 39.0
Veal cutlets.......... ...... ..............do___ 114.7
Pork..............................
79.7
Pork chops, center cut.......... pound..
Bacon, sliced_______ _______do___ 64. 4
Ham, whole________ _______do___ 62. 0
Lamb, leg....................... ..............do----- 67. 7
Other meats:
Frankfurters 1______ ............. do___ 52.5
Luncheon m eat 1......... 12-ounce can.. 42. 5
Poultry, frying chickens...
pound. - 45.4
Ready-to-cook................
F ish.............................- .....................................
Fish, fresh or frozen........... — ................ .
Ocean perch, fillet, frozen___ pound..
Haddock, fillet, frozen-------------- do----Salmon, pink...................16-ounce can..
Tuna fish, chunk *..6-614-ounce c a n ...
Dairy products:
M ilk, fresh, grocery . ....................................
Homogenized, with vitam in D added
quart. .
42 2
62. 2
31.9
https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
Jan.
1957
Dec.
1955
N ov.
1956
Oct.
1956
Sept.
1956
Aug.
1956
July
1956
June
1956
M ay
1956
Apr.
1956
Mar.
1956
Feb.
1956
Jan.
1956
111.9
95.7
111.2
92.2
128.5
133. 4
138.2
107.3
125. 4
111.2
95.6
111.4
92 2
120 2
132 6
137.5
108.7
125.3
110.7
95.6
111.0
92.1
119.5
130.2
137.2
108.6
125.1
110.5
95.5
111. 1
92.2
119.2
129.2
137.1
107.8
125.0
110.5
95.3
111.4
92.9
119.2
128.5
136.6
107.7
124.8
110.9
95.2
111.8
93.1
119.3
128.5
136.0
107.8
124.6
111.1
95.2
111.9
93.0
119.0
128,4
134.9
107.7
124.1
111.5
95.2
111.3
92.9
119.0
128.2
133.7
107.5
123.8
111.0
95.1
110.3
92.7
119.0
128.2
133.0
106.8
123.7
110.5
95.4
110.6
92.9
118.9
128. 1
132.9
105.5
123.6
110.4
95.6
110.5
93.2
118.7
128.1
132.6
107.3
123.0
110.2
95.8
110.6
93.3
118.7
128.1
132.5
107.0
122.9
110.2
95.8
110.3
93.3
118.7
128.2
132.3
104.6
122.1
101.7
101.2
97.1
107.7
88.8
108.5
80. 4
124.5
98. 5
109.7
88.6
95.4
98 2
100.3 101.3 103.5 103.8
98.6 101.2 103.5 102 7
109.0 113.3 117.2 117.5
98.1
96.1
93.0
96.2
110.2 113.3 115.1 113.8
82.3
81.1
80.6
81.4
122. 0 122.0 122.6 122.6
99.8
98.5
95.6
95.2
106.9 109.1 116.9 120.9
83.3
84.4
84.9
83.5
95.1
94 3
92.6
91.8
t98. 9 f 102.3 flOl.4 1103.0
101.3
98.0
111.8
89.0
106.4
79.9
120.7
98.6
117.3
81.9
96.7
102.2
99.8
94.4
106. 7
83.6
102.8
79.0
120.0
98.2
118. 1
80.6
96. 5
103.5
99.1
93.1
104.2
83.1
100.9
78.1
120.2
97.4
118.7
78.0
96.6
108. 5
95.5
91.8
102.1
82.1
98.9
77.7
119.9
90.9
106 3
74.6
92.4
103.5
93.6
90.5
100.2
80.1
97.7
77.5
118.9
88.5
100.4
74.2
91.4
94.9
91.6
89.9
98.8
79.8
97.3
77.2
119.4
84.7
92.6
72.8
88.9
92.6
92.7
91.5
100.9
81.3
99.3
77.8
122.0
85.7
95.2
74.4
87.0
93.5
92.5
93.1
103.0
83.7
101.1
79.2
119.8
83.5
89.2
75.0
85.5
93.1
107.6
113.0
116.0
109.7
112.1
111.5
116.0
97.3
107.6
83.7
95.7
111.6
June
1950
( 2)
93.1
84.3
100.2
106.6
103.8
(2)
103.3
86.6
87.9
75 9
86.0
86.8
74.7
86.2
85.9
75.1
86.1
84.9
76.7
85.9
83.6
78.7
85.2
83.6
81.4
85.4
83. 5
84.7
85.2
83.6
80.7
84.9
83.6
82.1
84.7
83.8
81.6
84.7
84.2
83.3
84.6
84.3
83.7
85.5
85.1
81.9
109. 5
107.3
108.9
106.7
108.3
105.8
108.3
105.7
108.1
105.6
108.0
105.3
107.6
104.7
108.0
105.1
1Ö8.4
105.5
108.5
104.9
109.2
105.3
108.8
105.4
109.6
106.0
98.8
104.6
129.5
92.7
129 0
92 4
128.6
92.2
128.0
92.6
126.9
92.7
126.5
92.9
125.9
93.1
125.2
93.9
124.3
94.9
123.6
96.5
122.8
98.4
122.6
97.1
122.6
98.4
(2)
117.2
117.2
117.0
116.5
115.3
114.2
113.6
112.0
111.8
110.2
111.3
111.9
112.1
92.7
121. 4
121.5
121.4
120.9
119.8
119.0
118.6
ÏÏ6.9
116.9
115.3
116.2
116.8
116.9
94.1
96.5
94.0
108.8
105.3
96 3
94.6
108.8
105.2
96.2
94.3
108.5
105.1
95.9
92.9
108.5
105.1
96.0
91.5
108.7
105.0
95 7
9i. 1
108.9
104.5
95.5
90.9
108.5
103.9
95.2
90.9
108.4
103.4
94.9
90.7
108.5
101.8
95.1
89.4
108.2
101.8
95.0
89.5
108.1
101.7
95.2
89.6
108.1
101.6
94.8
89.6
108.0
101.4
(2)
100.3
88. 4
104.4
103 0
94.8
120.0
126. 3
106. 8
118. 1
113. 4
113.4
100.4
88.2
104.8
103.3
94.3
120.4
123 5
107. 5
122.6
110 3
114 6
101.1
88.0
106.3
103.8
94.2
117.4
113.9
107.8
130.1
109.8
121.6
102.5
88.8
108.0
104.5
96.5
114.1
111. 5
106.1
151.0
108.3
104. 1
89.5
109.8
108.2
95.0
115.5
128.0
104.8
148.1
106.6
104.5
90.4
109.7
109.2
95.2
124.9
136.9
103.2
139. 5
100.4
104.7
92.3
109.0
110.0
95. 5
148.4
157.0
101. 2
142.7
102.3
104.1
93.3
107.0
109.5
96.3
142.5
155.0
106. 5
130.8
94.1
102.9
92.6
105.7
107.4
96.7
114.1
116.9
107.0
109.5
99.1
95.0
102.3
93.2
102.9
108.6
97.3
113.3
113.5
104.4
108.9
104.9
97.0
(*)
(*)
(*)
(*)
(*)
(*)
(2)
(*)
(*)
(*)
103.9
92.3
107.6
108. 1
96 9
116.3
119.0
102.8
108.7
95.9
93.9
91.2
(*)
103.6
92.6
106.4
108.6
96.6
119.3
129.2
96.1
109.4
96.0
96.6
(2)
(2)
(2)
(2)
(*)
(*)
n
103.5
92.6
106. 4
109.0
95.8
126.8
141.9
105.1
118.9
94.8
109.0
(*)
(*)
74.5
(*)
(*)
(*)
(*)
(’)
(*)
(*)
(*)
(*)
(*)
(*)
(*)
23.3
M ilk , fresh , d e liv e r e d - .................
H o m o g e n iz e d , w ith v it a m in D a d d e d
24 R
q u a r t ..
Ice cream i -------- -------------------p in29.1
t.
74.3
B u t t e r ......................................................... p o u n d ..
57.3
C h e e se , A m eric a n p r o c e ss................. . d o -----14.3
M ilk , e v a p o r a te d ________1414-ounce ca n
A ll fru its an d v e g e ta b le s:
F r o z e n fr u its an d v e g e ta b le s 1...............—
28 6
S tra w b e rrie s 1_______________ 10 o u n c e s ..
19.2
O range ju ice c o n c e n tr a te * . . . 6 o u n c e s ..
20.1
P e a s , green 1_________________10 o u n c e s ..
d o22.
. 8
B e a n s , green 1------------------F r esh fru its a n d v e g e ta b le s ........................
14.7
A p p le s ------ ---------------------------------p o u n d ..
17. 2
B a n a n a s ......... ........................................... d o —
54. 2
O r a n g e s_________________________ d o z e n ..
21.
L e m o n s 8--------------------p o u n d0 ..
11. 4
G r ap e fru it* *— --------e a c h ..
(*)
P e a c h e s* 8............................................. p o u n d ..
S traw b e rrie s* 8------------------------------p i n t . .
(*)
(*)
G r ap e s, seed le ss* 8---------------------p o u n d
(*)
W a te r m e lo n s* 7..........
d o ..
56. 4
P o t a t o e s ......................................... 10 p o u n d s ..
13. 2
S w e e t p o ta to e s _________________ p o u n d ..
7. 7
O n i o n s . . . --------- ----------------------------d o . . .
14.0
C a r r o ts___________________________ d o . . .
L e t t u c e ....................................
. . h e a18.
d . .5
17.0
C e le r y 8........................- ........................p o u n d
8. 3
C a b b a g e ................- ......................
do—
31. 9
T o m a to e s 1__________________
d o -----------27. 4
B e a n s , g r e e n — ......................................do .
C a n n e d fr u its an d v e g e ta b le s ..........................
38. 4
O range ju ic e 1........................ 4 6-ounce c a n .
34. 4
P e a c h e s ...........................................#214 c a n .
34.0
P in e a p p le ------#2 c a n .
25. 9
F r u it co c k ta il 1......................
#303 c a n .
17. 2
C orn , cream s t y l e _____________
d o -P e a s , g re en ------------------------do.21. 4
T o m a t o e s ...............................
-d o 14.
. 9
10. 0
B a b y f o o d s 1_____________ 414-5 o u n c e s ..
D r ie d fru its a n d v e g e ta b le s ..........................
P r u n e s ----------------------------p o u n34.
d 6
1 6 .1
D r ie d b e a n s . . .......................- ...............d o . .
See footnotes at end of table.
Indexes (1947-49=100) (unless otherwise specified)
(*)
(*)
(*)
(*)
106 3
118.2
91.5
110. 5
129. 1
117. 2
120. 4
113.7
129. 4
107. 7
122 6
109. 7
101.2
113.4
89.9
109.4
145. 4
101 3
107 1
122.8
130.3
108.3
124.9
109.7
109. 7
100.0
102. 6
101. 7
102. 9
102. 7
112.2
143. 1
109.8
100 2
103.6
101.8
103.3
102.2
112.7
143.6
8 4 .5
8 5 .1
99.4
105.5
84.6
108.3
167.8
92.0
97.1
94.5
110.9
108.8
126.4
109.9
109.3
100.7
105.3
101.5
103.9
102.3
113.6
145.0
85 6 1
(*)
(*)
(*)
89.6
(*)
111.4
(*)
91.7
85.2
(*)
(*)
(*)
108.9
117.6
106.0
110.9
111 0
86.0
104.1
59.2
86.3
108.7
124.2
110.5
75.6
62.4
146.4
136.1
159.6
108.8
102.8
92.8
107.4
77.2
81.4
108.8
123.4
111. 1
104 9
77. 1
218.6
138.4
186.4
108.5
96.9
99.6
116.3
106.9
101.5
108.6
121.4
112. 1
109.1
101.0
106.9
101.5
103.5
102.2
114.6
109.0 108.9
101.1 100.9
108.4 108.4
101.4 101.8
103.6 104.2
102. 1 101.9
115.3 115.4
109.1
100.8
108.1
102.5
104.0
101.8
115.4
99.0
174.4
121 8
148.2
107.9
112.0
99.6
125.6
118.8
134. 0
108. 0
118 6
111.8
14 7 . 5
85 7
1 4 9 .9
8 5 .3
1 4 9 .7
8 5 .5
1 4 9 .5
8 5 .5
1 4 8 .6
8 5 .3
(*)
97.6
106.9
89.2
106.2
125.4
84.7
100.3
74.8
102.1
108.9
126.4
110.1
68.4
(*)
109.1
100.5
107.8
102.3
104.5
101.4
114 9
122.2
(*)
(*)
(J)
(2)
96.1
87.9
89.0
95.6
91.1
( 2)
106. 4
126 6
103. 4
104. S
(2)
(2)
(2)
(2)
(2)
(2)
150.6
112.5
107.8
101.8
111.1
90.6
115. 9
101.7
132.3
107 6
117.5
111.6
126.3
106.9
94.2
97.8
106.4
96.7
124.3
121.1
121.4
107.3
116.6
111.3
108.2
107.2
92.0
102.4
103.2
90.1
115.6
151.1
126.4
106. 9
114.9
110.9
103.7
105.7
93.5
110.8
96.2
89.8
119.9
116.9
157.3
106.5
113.5
111.2
98.3
106.3
97.4
124.0
95.1
89.7
140.4
120.0
149.9
106.1
111.7
111.2
107.8
101.5
106.0
102.5
103.6
98.7
114.7
102 4
(2)
89.9
98.0
85.6
(2)
90.6
1 4 8 .1
1 4 7 .6
8 5 .3
1 4 6 .7
8 5 .9
1 4 6 .0
8 6 .6
1 4 4 .5
8 7 .6
1 0 4 .8
7 4 .9
108.7
100.6
107.3
102.5
104.3
100.5
114.6
85.2
108.7
100.7
106.7
102.5
105.2
99.2
114.5
108.3
100.7
106.8
102.6
104.7
99.1
114.5
107.9
101.0
106.4
102.6
104.5
99.0
114.7
98 1
98.6
91.6
87.7
95.1
(2)
97.1
112.8
76.9
89.7
(2)
85.7
MONTHLY LABOR REVIEW, MARCH 1957
424
T able D -5 : C onsum er Price In d ex —A verage retail prices an d indexes of selected foods—C ontinued
C o m m o d ity
O th er food s a t h om e:
P a r tia lly p rep ared foods:
Unit
S o u p , to m a to
......... . .1 1 -o u n c e c a n ..
B e a n s w it h p ork 1______ .1 6 -o u n c e c a n . .
C o n d im e n ts a n d sauces:
P ic k le s , s w e e t 1................... . . -7J4 o u n c e s ..
C a tsu p , to m a to 1............... ___ 14 o u n c e s .
B e v e r a g e s .................................
C o ffe e ...................... ............... .1 -p o u n d c a n ..
T e a b ags 1..................... ........ p a ck a g e of 1 6 ..
C o la d r in k i ________ ca r to n , 36 o u n c e s . _
F a t s a n d o ils _____ _____ ___________________
S horten in g, h ydro g en a ted -3 -p o u n d c a n ..
M a r g a r in e , co lo r e d .......... _______p o u n d ..
L a r d _______ ______ ______ ................ . d o ____
S a la d d r e s s in g ..................... ................ . p i n t . .
P e a n u t b u tte r 1.................. _______p o u n d ..
S u gar a n d s w e e t s _________
S u g a r ___________________ ___ 5 p o u n d s ..
C orn s y r u p 1 .................. ___ 24 o u n c e s ..
G r ap e "jelly > . . . .............. ___ 12 o u n c e s ..
Chocolate bar »_______ ______1 o u n c e ..
E g g s , grad e A, lar ge_____ _______d o z e n ..
M is c e lla n e o u s foods:
G e la tin , fla v o r ed 1______ . . . 3 - 4 o u n c e s ..
A ver
age
p ric e,
Jan.
1957
I n d e x e s (1947 -4 9 = 1 0 0 ) (u n le s s o th e r w is e s p e c ifie d )
Jan.
1957
D ec.
1956
N ov.
1956
O c t.
1956
S e p t.
1956
A ug.
1956
J u ly
1956
June
1956
M ay
1956
A pr.
1956
M ar.
1956
Feb.
1956
Jan.
1956
June
1950
12 .3
14.7
9 8 .2
104.0
97 .8
103 .2
9 7 .6
102.4
9 7 .3
102.8
97 .7
103.2
9 9 .0
103.2
9 8 .7
103.4
9 8 .6
103.3
9 8 .5
102.5
9 8 .6
102.2
9 8 .6
103.1
9 8 .6
103 .0
9 8 .7
103.2
(*)
27.1
2 3 .2
54 .3
2 4 .5
2 6 .9
4 .5
5 3 .6
9 9 .3
102.4
201 .3
201.0
122.2
115.0
8 6 .6
94.1
79 .0
8 1 .9
9 7 .0
109.7
111.5
112.8
104.5
113.2
100.0
7 7 .0
9 9 .0
102.4
201.6
201.8
121.9
114.3
8 5 .3
9 2 .6
7 7 .3
7 9 .2
9 6 .4
109.9
110.9
111.5
103.7
113.4
100.0
8 3 .8
9 8 .5
102.3
202 .8
2 0 3 .7
121.1
114.2
8 4 .6
9 2 .2
76 .6
76 .9
9 5 .6
109.9
110.6
110 .7
103.4
113.8
100.0
8 7 .7
9 8 .6
102.1
2 0 2 .8
20 3 .7
120.9
114.2
8 4 .2
9 2 .2
7 6 .2
7 5 .9
9 4 .6
110.0
110.3
110.2
103.1
113.4
100.1
9 0 .7
99 .4
102.4
201.5
202.1
121.0
113.9
8 4 .2
9 2 .4
76.4
74.4
9 4 .8
109.9
109.9
110.0
102.5
112.2
9 8 .5
102.0
196.9
195.8
120.8
113.6
84 .4
9 3 .6
7 6 .2
72 .9
9 5 .5
110.1
109.6
110.0
100.9
111.6
100.0
8 3 .4
98 .4
101.9
191.7
189.1
120. 7
112.7
8 4 .6
9 4 .2
7 6 .2
73.5
94 .9
109.8
109.3
109.8
100.6
110.7
100.0
8 0 .8
9 8 .7
101.5
189.3
185.9
120.8
112.4
8 3 .9
92.4
7 6 .5
7 3 .2
94.1
109.7
109. 0
109 .3
100 .5
110.8
9 9 .8
8 2 .2
9 8 .8
101.4
188.9
185.4
121.1
112.3
8 2 .2
8 9 .5
7 5 .6
6 9 .8
93.1
109.7
109 .0
109 .3
100.5
110.5
9 8 .6
10 1 .0
188.0
184.6
120.7
111.6
80 .4
8 6 .0
7 3 .7
69.1
9 2 .5
110.1
108.9
109 .0
100. 5
110.0
9 8 .7
100 .3
183.3
178.1
120.6
111. 4
7 9 .6
84.1
73.1
6 9 .2
9 2 .2
110.0
108.8
109.0
100 .5
109 .5
99.9
100.0
100.1
8 3 .5
85.1
8 4 .9
99.1
100 .0
182.9
176.9
123.4
111. 4
7 9 .6
8 4 .0
72.8
6 9 .8
92 .2
110.6
108.8
108.8
100.7
109.2
100. 4
9 6 .8
(»)
(*)
145.2
144.6
(2)
(8)
7 7 .6
7 8 .5
7 7 .9
6 4 .8
91.1
(8)
98. Ö
9 8 .6
(J)
8 9 .9
9 9 .0
102.2
197.8
196.9
121.0
113.8
8 4 .4
9 3 .3
7 6 .4
7 3 .6
9 5 .4
109.9
109.7
110.0
101.5
111.6
100.0
86 .5
8 .7
102.4
101.3
100.6
9 9 .0
9 8 .8
9 9 .4
9 9 .3
99.2
99.0
98.1
9 8 .9
9 9 .0
99.1
Cents
108.2
2 3 .5
3 3 .3
99 .1
3 0 .2
22.1
3 6 .3
53.6
•Priced only in season,
i December 1952=100.
8 N ot available.
8 M ay 1953=100.
<January 1953=100.
N o t e .—The United States average retail food prices and
indexes appearing in table D -5 are based on prices col
lected monthly in 46 cities for use in the calculation of the
food component of the Consumer Price Index. Average
retail food prices for each of 20 large cities are published
https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
99.9
(?)
(? )
(2)
7 2 .9
(*)
* July 1953=100.
« April 1953=100.
' June 1953=100.
8 Vegetable soup priced from December 1952 through July 1956; tomato
soup substituted August 1956.
t Revised.
monthly and are available upon request. Prices for the
26 medium-size and small cities are not published on an
individual city basis. Item indexes for the period Decem
ber 1952 through April 1955, which were not published in
the Monthly Labor Review, are available upon request.
D : CONSUMER AND WHOLESALE PRICES
425
T able D -6 : Indexes of wholesale prices,1 b y m ajor groups
F a r m p r o d u c ts
P r o c e s se d food s
A ll c o m m o d itie s
oth er th a n farm
a n d food s
T e x tile p r o d u c ts
an d a p p a r el
H id e s, s k in s ,
le a t h e r , a n d
le a th e r p r o d u c ts
F u e l, p o w e r , a n d
lig h tin g m a t e
ria ls
C h e m ic a ls
and
a llie d p r o d u c ts
R u b b er an d ru b
b er p r o d u c ts
L um ber
an d
w o o d p r o d u c ts
P u lp , p a p e r, an d
a llie d p r o d u c ts
M e ta ls a n d m e ta l
p r o d u c ts
M a c h in e r y a n d
m o t iv e p r o d u c ts
F u r n itu r e
and
o th e r
h ou se
h o ld d u r a b les
1947_________
1948_________
1949_________
1950_________
1951_________
1 9 5 2 -.................
1953...................
1954........ ...........
1955...................
96.4
104.4
9 9 .2
103.1
114.8
111.6
110.1
110.3
110.7
100.0
107.3
92. 8
97.5
113. 4
107.0
97.0
9 5 .6
8 9 .6
9 8 .2
106.1
9 5 .7
9 9 .8
111.4
108.8
104. 6
105.3
101.7
9 5 .3
103.4
101.3
105.0
115.9
113.2
114.0
114.5
117.0
100.1
104.4
9 5 .5
9 9 .2
110.6
9 9 .8
97 .3
9 5 .2
95.3
101.0
102.1
9 6 .9
104. 6
120.3
9 7 .2
9 8 .5
9 4 .2
9 3 .8
9 0 .9
107.1
101.9
m o
106.7
106.6
109. 5
108.1
107.9
101.4
103. 8
9 4 .8
96 .3
110.0
104.5
105.7
107.0
106.6
9 9 .0
102.1
9 8 .9
120. 5
148.0
134.0
125.0
126.9
143.8
9 3 .7
107. 2
9 9 .2
113.9
123. 9
120.3
120.2
118.0
123.6
9 8 .6
102.9
98 .5
100.9
119.6
116.5
116.1
116.3
119.3
9 1 .3
103.9
104.8
110.3
122.8
123.0
126. 9
128.0
136.6
92 .5
100.9
106.6
108.6
119.0
121.5
123.0
124.6
128.4
9 5 .6
101.4
103.1
105.3
114.1
112.0
114.2
115.4
115.9
9 3 .9
101.7
104.4
106.9
113.6
113.6
118.2
120.9
124.2
9 7 .2
100.5
102.3
103.5
109.4
111.8
115.7
120.6
121.6
100.8
103.1
96.1
96 6
104.9
108.3
9 7 .8
102. 5
9 2 .0
1953:
J a n u a r y ___
F e b r u a r y ..
M a r c h ____
A p r il______
M a y _____
J u n e .............
J u ly _______
A u g u s t ___
S e p te m b e r .
O c t o b e r .. .
N ovem b er.
D ecem ber.
109. 9
109. 6
110.0
109.4
109.8
109.5
110.9
110.6
111.0
110.2
109.8
110.1
9 9 .6
9 7 .9
9 9 .8
97.3
9 7 .8
95. 4
9 7 .9
96.4
98. 1
95.3
93.7
94.4
105.5
105. 2
104.1
103.2
104.3
103.3
105. 5
104.8
106 .6
104.7
103.8
104.3
113.1
113.1
113.4
113.2
113.6
113.9
114.8
114.9
114.7
114.6
114.5
114.6
9 8 .8
9 8 .5
97 .5
97 .4
9 7 .6
9 7 .4
9 7 .5
97.5
9 6 .9
9 6 .5
9 6 .2
9 5 .8
9 7 .3
9 8 .0
98.1
9 7 .9
100.4
101.0
100.0
9 9 .9
9 9 .7
97.1
97.1
9 5 .6
107. 8
108.1
108.4
107.4
107.1
108.3
111. 1
111.0
110.9
111.2
111.2
111.1
103.6
103.6
104.2
105.5
105.5
105.6
106.2
106.3
106. 7
106.7
107.2
107.1
127.3
126.2
125.7
124.8
125.4
125.0
124. 6
123.5
124.0
124.2
124.3
124.8
120.5
121.1
121.7
122.2
121.8
121.5
121.1
120.4
119.2
118.1
117.3
117.4
115. 8
115.3
115.1
115.3
115.4
115.8
115.8
116.2
116. 9
117.5
117.3
117.1
124.0
124.6
125. 5
125. 0
125. 7
126.9
129.3
129.4
128.5
127.9
127.9
127.5
121.5
121.6
121.8
122.0
122.4
122.9
123.4
123.7
124.0
124.1
124.2
124.3
112.7
112.9
113.1
113.9
114.1
114.3
114.7
114.8
114.9
114.8
114.9
115.0
114.6
114.6
115.1
116.9
117.2
118.1
119.4
119.6
120.7
120. 7
120.8
120.8
111.9
111.9
114.8
114.8
114.8
114.9
115. 6
115.6
116.2
118.1
118.1
118.1
103.0
101.2
101.7
9 8 .5
9 9 .7
9 5 .8
9 5 .3
9 6 .4
9 4 .7
94.4
9 3 .2
100.1
1954:
J a n u a r y ...
F e b r u a r y ..
M a r c h .........
A p r il______
M a y .............
J u n e ______
J u ly ..............
A u g u s t____
S e p te m b e r .
O c to b e r ___
N ovem ber.
D ecem b er.
110.9
110.5
110.5
111.0
110.9
110.0
110.4
110.5
110.0
109.7
110.0
109.5
9 7 .8
9 7 .7
98.4
9 9 .4
97.9
9 4 .8
9 6 .2
9 5 .8
9 3 .6
93.1
9 3 .2
8 9 .9
106.2
104.8
105.3
105. 9
106.8
105.0
106.5
106.4
105. 5
103.7
103.8
103.5
114.6
114.4
114.2
114.5
114.5
114.2
114.3
114.4
114.4
114.5
114.8
114.9
96. 1
95 .3
9 5 .0
9 4 .7
9 4 .8
9 4 .9
95.1
9 5 .3
95.3
9 5 .4
9 5 .2
9 5 .2
9 5 .3
9 4 .9
9 4 .7
9 4 .6
9 6 .0
9 5 .6
9 4 .9
9 4 .0
9 3 .0
9 2 .4
9 2 .8
9 1 .8
110.8
110.5
109.2
108.6
108.2
107.8
106.2
106.9
106.9
106.9
107.4
107.5
107.2
107.5
107.4
107.2
107.1
106.8
106.7
106.8
106.8
106.9
107.0
107.0
124.8
124.6
124.9
125.0
125.1
126.1
126.8
126.4
126.9
128.5
131.4
132.0
117. 0
116. 8
116.7
116. 2
116.1
116. 3
119.1
119.1
119.3
119.8
119. 9
120.0
117.0
117.1
116.0
116.3
115.8
115.8
116.2
116.3
116.3
116.3
116.0
115. 9
127. 2
126.2
126.3
126.8
127.1
127.1
128.0
128.6
129.1
129.7
129.9
129.8
124.4
124. 5
124.5
124.4
124.4
124.3
124.3
124.3
124.4
124.3
125.3
125.7
115.2
115.1
115.0
115.6
115.5
115.4
115.3
115.3
115.3
115. 6
115 .6
115.7
120.9
121.0
121.0
120.8
119.3
119.1
120.4
120.5
121.7
121.9
121.8
121.8
118.2
118.0
117.9
121.5
121.4
121.4
121.4
121.5
121.5
121.5
121.4
121.4
101. 1
102.8
104.9
110.3
109.2
105.1
103.9
102.3
99.1
96.7
9 7 .0
9 8 .0
1955:
J a n u a r y ...
F e b r u a r y ..
M a r c h ____
A p r il______
M a y .............
J u n e ______
J u ly _______
A u g u s t ___
S e p te m b e r .
O c to b e r ___
N ovem b er.
D ecem b er.
110.1
110.4
110.0
110.5
109.9
110.3
110.5
110.9
111.7
111.6
111.2
111.3
92.5
93.1
92.1
9 4 .2
9 1 .2
9 1 .8
89.5
88.1
8 9 .3
86.8
84.1
8 2 .9
103.8
103.2
101.6
102.5
102.1
103.9
103.1
101.9
101.5
100.2
9 8 .8
9 8 .2
115.2
115.7
115. 6
115.7
115.5
115.6
116.5
117.5
118.5
119.0
119.4
119.8
9 5 .2
9 5 .2
95 .3
9 5 .0
9 5 .0
9 5 .2
95 .3
95 .3
9 5 .4
9 5 .4
9 5 .6
9 5 .6
9 1 .9
92 .3
9 2 .2
9 3 .2
9 2 .9
9 2 .9
9 3 .7
9 3 .8
9 4 .0
9 5 .3
96. 4
9 6 .7
108.5
108.7
108. 5
107.4
107.0
106.8
106. 4
107.2
108.0
108.0
108.6
109.3
107.1
107.1
106.8
107.1
106.8
106.8
106.0
105.9
106.0
106.5
106.6
106 .6
136.8
140.6
138.0
138.3
138.0
140.3
143.4
148.7
151.7
147.8
150.6
151.0
120.3
121. 2
121.4
122,4
123.5
123.7
124.1
125.1
125.7
125.4
125.0
125.1
116.3
116. 6
116.8
117.4
117.7
118.3
119.0
119.7
120.5
122.8
123.2
123 .6
130.1
131. 5
131.9
132.9
132.5
132.6
136.7
139.5
141.9
142.4
142.9
143.9
125.8
126.1
126.1
126.3
126.7
127.1
127.5
128.5
130.0
131.4
132.5
133.0
115.5
115.4
115.1
115.1
115.1
115.2
115.5
116.0
116.4
116.9
117.2
117.3
122.0
121.8
121.9
122.3
123.2
123.7
125.3
126.1
126.4
126.8
125.2
125.4
121.4
121.6
121.6
121.6
121.6
121.6
121.6
121.7
121.7
121.7
121.7
121.7
9 7 .0
97.1
9 5 .6
9 4 .0
91 .3
89. 1
9 0 .8
8 9 .8
9 0 .3
9 1 .5
8 8 .0
8 8 .8
1956:
J a n u a r y ...
F e b r u a r y ..
M a r c h .........
A p r il______
M a y .............
J u n e .............
J u ly ---------A u g u s t ____
S e p te m b e r
O c to b e r ___
N ovem b er.
D ecem b er.
111.9
112.4
112.8
113.6
114.4
114.2
114.0
114.7
115.5
115.6
115.9
*116.3
84.1
86.0
8 6 .6
88.0
9 0 .9
91.2
9 0 .0
89.1
90.1
88. 4
8 7 .9
*88.9
9 8 .3
9 9 .0
99. 2
100.4
102.4
102.3
102.2
102.6
104.0
103. 6
103.6
103.1
120.4
120.6
121.0
121.6
121.7
121.5
121.4
122.5
123.1
123. 6
124.2
*124. 7
9 5 .7
9 6 .0
9 5 .9
95.1
9 4 .9
9 4 .9
9 4 .9
9 4 .8
9 4 .8
9 5 .3
9 5 .4
9 5 .6
96 .7
97.1
97.7
100.6
100.0
100.2
100.1
100.0
100.2
9 9 .7
9 9 .8
*99.2
111.0
111.2
110.9
110.6
110.8
110.5
110.7
110.9
111.1
111.7
111.2
*114.0
106.3
106. 4
106.5
106.9
106.9
107.1
107.3
107.3
107.1
107. 7
108.2
108.3
148.4
147.1
146.2
145.0
143.5
142.8
143.3
146.9
145. 7
145. 8
146.9
147.9
126.3
126.7
128.0
128. 5
128.0
127.3
126.6
125.2
123.6
122.0
121.5
*121.0
124.8
125.4
126.8
127.4
127.3
127.4
127.7
127.9
127.9
128.1
127.8
*128. 0
145.1
145.1
146.5
147.7
146.8
145.8
144.9
150.2
151.9
152.2
152.1
*152.3
133.3
133.9
134,7
135.7
136.5
136.8
136.9
137.7
139.7
141.1
143.4
*143.6
118.0
118.2
118.1
118.0
118.0
118.1
118.3
119.1
119.7
121.0
121.1
*121.2
127.0
127.1
127.9
128.6
128.6
128.9
130.6
130.8
131.1
131.5
131.2
131.3
121.7
121.7
121.7
121.7
121.6
121.6
121.7
122.5
122.8
123.1
123.5
123.6
89.6
88.7
88 .2
92.1
96. 1
92 9
91 .3
91.1
89. 9
89 2
9 1 .2
*91.7
1957:
J a n u a r y 2__
116.9
8 9 .3
104.3
125.2
9 5 .8
9 8 .4
115.9
108.7
144.6
121.4
128.6
152 .4
143.9
121.8
131.9
124.0
9 3 .2
1 F o r a d e s c r ip tio n o f th e W h o le s a le P r ic e I n d e x , see B L S B u ll. 1168,
T e c h n iq u e s o f P r ep a rin g M a jo r B L S S ta tis tic a l S eries, C h . 10. H isto r ic a l
ta b u la tio n s o f in d e x e s o f w h o le s a le p rices are a v a ila b le u p o n r e q u e st.
https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
1 P r e lim in a r y .
* R e v is e d .
M isc e lla n e o u s
p r o d u c ts
Y ea r an d
m o n th
A ll c o m m o d itie s
N o n m e ta llic
m in er als—struc
tu ra l
T ob acco m an u
fa c tu r e s
and
b o ttle d b e v e r
ages
[1947-49 = 100]
MONTHLY LABOR REVIEW, MARCH 1957
426
T able D -7 : Indexes of wholesale prices, by group and subgroup of com m odities 1
[1947-49=100]
C o m m o d ity grou p
Jan.
1957 2
D ec.
1956
N ov.
1956
O ct.
1956
S e p t.
1956
A ug.
1956
J u ly
1956
June
1956
M ay
1956
A pr.
1956
M ar.
1956
Feb.
1956
Jan.
1956
A ll c o m m o d itie s _____________________________________
116 .9
*116. 3
115.9
115.6
115.5
114.7
114.0
114.2
114.4
113.6
112.8
112.4
111.9
100.2
F a r m p r o d u c ts ...............................................................................
F r e sh a n d d rie d fr u its a n d v e g e ta b le s _________
G r a in s ............... ....................................... ......................... ..
L iv e sto c k a n d liv e p o u lt r y _____________________
P la n t an d a n im a l fib e r s_________________________
F lu id m il k ...... ...................................................................
E g g s ____________________ _________________ - .......... H a y , h a y se e d s, a n d o ils e e d s ............ ............................
O th e r farm p r o d u c t s ........................................................
8 9 .3
100.7
89. 5
73. 9
102 .9
9 8 .3
6 5 .7
8 6 .6
148 .8
*88.9
102.6
8 8 .8
7 1 .7
101.3
*99.0
7 4 .3
*85. 4
*147. 9
8 7 .9
104.3
87 .9
6 8 .6
100.8
9 8 .8
79.3
8 4 .0
147.4
8 8 .4
9 7 .6
84 .0
73 .0
100.0
97 .2
87 .4
7 8 .6
149.9
9 0 .1
9 5 .3
9 0 .7
75 .7
9 8 .4
96. 1
9 1 .2
7 6 .5
152.9
89.1
9 4 .8
88 .8
7 6 .0
9 8 .2
95.1
77 .7
80.1
151.1
9 0 .0
111.8
88.4
72.9
104.3
94.4
82.1
8 0 .6
149.2
91 .2
120.2
86 .9
74.8
106.1
92 .7
78.7
87. 5
147.1
90 .9
111.8
90.5
74.4
105.9
92.7
8 0 .2
90.1
144.4
8 8 .0
101.8
8 9 .5
70.8
105.8
8 9 .9
7 9 .9
8 6 .7
143.4
8 6 .6
106.5
84. 5
6 7 .5
105. 5
9 0 .5
8 5 .0
8 2 .5
143.7
86 .0
9 8 .2
82 .9
67 .7
105.7
9 4 .0
8 1 .3
8 0 .4
145.8
84.1
105.0
8 1 .5
6 3 .0
101.9
93 .9
85 .9
78.9
139.7
9 4 .5
89.8
8 9 .6
99.8
107.3
81.6
70.6
8 7 .6
122.4
P r o c e sse d fo o d s ._____________________________________
C ereal an d b a k e r y p r o d u c ts .........................................
M e a ts , p o u ltr y , an d fis h ________________________
D a ir y p r o d u c ts a n d ic e c r e a m _____ _____________
C a n n e d an d frozen fru its a n d v e g e ta b le s _______
S ugar an d c o n fe c tio n e r y ....................... ..........................
P a c k a g e d b ev er a g e m a te r ia ls ------------------ -------A n im a l fa ts an d o il s _______________ _________ _
C r u d e v e g e ta b le o ils ____________________________
R e fin e d v e g e ta b le o ils __________________ _______
V e g e ta b le oil e n d p r o d u c ts --------------------------------O th er p ro ce ssed fo o d s ....................................... ...............
104.3
103.1
115. 4
115.8
*81.5
84 8
112. 5 *112.6
105.6 *105. 6
112.3
113. 1
196.3
196.3
8 4 .3
*84. 5
*72.0
7 3 .8
7 3 .9
7 8 .5
*89. 4
8 9 .6
9 5 .7
9 5 .0
103.6
115.8
82.7
113.6
106.4
111.8
201.6
74 .4
70 .4
74.4
8 6 .2
9 5 .7
103.6
115.3
8 5 .7
110.9
106.4
110.8
201.6
75 .5
65 .9
7 0 .2
8 3 .7
9 5 .3
104.0
114.6
8 9 .3
109.7
106.8
110.0
201.5
7 2 .7
59 .4
6 6 .0
8 3 .3
9 5 .9
102.6
114.5
85.1
108.9
107.3
109 8
196.1
72. 2
6 0 .3
6 7 .5
8 5 .4
96.1
102.2
114.8
83.7
107.9
109.3
110.0
196.1
65.5
65. 1
6 7 .5
8 5 .7
97. 1
102.3
115.3
83. 1
108.0
109.7
109.5
191.0
6 6 .2
70.8
75. 5
8 8 .4
9 7 .4
102.4
115.5
82.1
107.9
109.3
109.6
187.4
71.9
7 8 .6
81.9
92 .3
9 7 .5
100.4
115.6
79.3
105.9
109 0
105.3
187.4
67 .9
77 .2
80. 6
85 .7
9 7 .8
9 9 .2
115.4
7 4 .6
106.1
108.6
109.6
192.8
63.1
74.1
80.4
84 8
97.4
9 9 .0
115. 4
76.1
106.1
108.9
109.3
183.8
6 4 .2
6 7 .0
7 3 .9
80.4
9 7 .7
9 8 .3
115.1
75.7
106.1
108.1
109.4
176.6
59.1
61 .3
69.4
78.7
98.1
9 6 .8
9 6 .5
102.4
9 0 .0
98.0
94.7
136.9
63.9
67.9
67.4
79.2
106.6
A ll c o m m o d itie s o th e r th a n farm a n d f o o d s ................
125 .2
*124. 7
124.2
123.6
123.1
122.5
121.4
121 5
121.7
121.6
121.0
120.6
120.4
102.2
T e x tile p r o d u c ts a n d a p p a r e l_______________________
C o tto n p r o d u c ts ________________________________
W o o l p r o d u c ts __________________________________
M a n m a d e fib er te x tile p r o d u c t s ........................ ..
S ilk p r o d u c ts____________________________________
A p p a r e l__________ _______________________________
O th er te x tile p r o d u c ts ___________ ___________ _
9 5 .8
92 3
109. 2
82. 0
122. 8
9 9 .7
7 6 .8
9 5 .6
9 2 .7
107.7
8 0 .5
122.8
9 9 .7
7 8 .7
9 5 .4
9 2 .8
106.1
80 .3
122.7
9 9 .7
76 .2
9 5 .3
9 2 .7
104.8
8 0 .9
123.6
99 .7
75.3
9 4 .8
91. 5
103.9
80 .4
120.1
9 9 .7
74 .7
9 4 .8
9 1 .9
103.4
8 0 .3
121.0
9 9 .7
7 2 .2
9 4 .9
9 2 .3
103.1
80.4
122.0
9 9 .8
7 0 .5
9 4 .9
92 7
102.9
8 0 .2
124. 7
9 9 .7
70.0
9 4 .9
93.1
102.9
8 0 .3
125. 0
9 9 .4
70.3
95.1
93 .7
102.5
8 0 .6
121.0
9 9 .5
71.1
9 5 .9
94.1
102. 1
8 4 .5
119.5
99.7
7 2 .0
9 6 .0
9 4 .3
102 7
8 4 .8
119. 5
9 9 .5
71 .6
9 5 .7
9 3 .8
102.6
8 4 .2
120.5
9 9 .5
71.4
9 3 .3
9 0 .0
105.3
9 1 .3
8 8 .8
9 2 .7
9 6 .3
H id e s , s k in s, le a th e r , a n d le a th e r p r o d u c ts_________
H id e s a n d s k in s __________ ______________________
L e a t h e r ._________ __________________ _________ _
F o o t w e a r .___________________________ _______ ____
O th er le a th e r p r o d u c ts .....................................................
98
52.
88
120
97.
*99 2
5 3 .8
9 0 .9
120.8
*98.3
9 9 .8
59.0
9 0 .6
120.8
9 8 .6
9 9 .7
5 7 .8
9 0 .8
120.7
9 8 .6
100.2
6 3 .3
9 0 .8
120.5
9 8 .5
100.0
60.4
9 0 .9
120.5
9 8 .9
100.1
60.4
9 1 .6
120. 5
98 .8
100.2
61. 2
91 .7
120.5
99. 1
100.0
59.0
92 .9
120.0
9 9 .2
100.6
6 1 .9
9 4 .6
119.9
9 8 .9
97 .7
58.3
90 .9
116.5
9 8 .3
97.1
58.2
89 .9
115.8
98.1
9 6 .7
5 6 .6
8 9 .5
115.7
9 7 .7
99.1
94.3
98.2
102.7
95.2
F u e l, p o w e r, a n d lig h tin g m a te r ia ls ________________
C o a l............................... ..........................................................
C o k e ................................................. .......... ............... ...............
G a s ___ _______________________ ________ _________
E le c t r ic it y .._________________ _______ _____ _____ _
P e tr o le u m a n d p r o d u c ts_______________ ________
11 5 .9 *114. 0
123.6
123. 5
159. 1
156.3
11 9 .9 *119.9
9 4 .3
9 4 .3
124. 4
120 .9
111.2
122.0
156.3
111. 1
94 .3
117.5
111.7
121.0
156.3
111.1
9 4 .9
118.3
111. 1
114.4
156.3
110.3
9 4 .9
118.4
110.9
113.8
152. 9
109.4
9 4 .9
118.3
110.7
112.9
145.4
109.7
93 .8
118.8
110.5
112.3
145. 4
111 3
9 3 .8
118.3
110 8
111.9
145 4
115.4
93. 2
118.3
110.6
111.7
145. 4
117. 5
9 3 .2
117.5
110.9
110.1
145.4
122. 7
9 4 .3
116.8
111.2
109.9
145. 4
122.0
94 .3
117.5
111.0
109.9
145.4
121.1
9 4 .3
117.2
102.4
104.8
115.6
94.8
101.3
103.1
C h e m ic a ls a n d a llie d p r o d u c ts ............................. ...............
I n d u s tr ia l c h e m i c a l s . . . ____________ _____ _______
P r ep a red p a in t ________ ______ _____ ______________
P a in t m a te r ia ls _______________________________ .
D r u g s an d p h a r m a c e u tic a ls ____________________
F a t s an d o ils, in e d ib le __________________________
M ix e d f e r t i liz e r ...________ ______________________
F e r tiliz e r m a te r ia ls ______________________________
O th er c h e m ic a ls a n d a llie d p r o d u c ts ___________
108.7
123. 5
124.1
9 9 .0
92. 6
58. 7
110. 2
105. 9
104 .5
108.3
*122. 5
124. 1
*99. 5
92. 5
59. 4
*109.3
105.7
10 4 .4
108.2
122.5
123.6
9 9 .4
9 2 .3
57 .8
109.6
105.7
104.2
107.7
122.6
122.4
98 .8
9 1 .9
55 .8
109.5
104.1
103.6
107. 1
121.9
119. 1
9 7 .9
9 1 .9
55.4
109.6
104.5
103.4
107.3
122.1
119.1
9 8 .3
9 2 .2
53 .8
109.7
106.0
103.8
107.3
122.1
119.1
9 8 .6
9 2 .2
5 3 .7
108.5
105.7
103.8
107.1
121. 1
119. 1
99 4
92. 1
55. 1
107.9
108. 7
103.8
106 9
120.8
119.1
101.2
92.1
60 .3
107.9
109.1
102.4
106 9
120.9
119. 1
101.6
91 .9
58.1
108. 1
112.4
102.4
106. 5
120.0
119. 1
101.4
9 1 .9
55.0
107.9
112.8
102.3
106.4
119.9
119.1
100.4
9 2 .0
54.4
108.2
113.0
102.3
106.3
120.0
117.0
98 .6
92 .6
55.6
108.2
113.1
102.3
92.1
96.3
9 8 .0
86.8
9 1 .3
48.8
101.2
9 8 .5
91.1
R u b b e r an d r u b b e r p r o d u c ts _____________ ________ _
C n id e r u b b e r -----------------------------------------------------T ir e s an d t u b e s _________________________________
O th er r u b b e r p r o d u c ts __________________________
144 .6
145.1
148.2
139 .9
147.9
151. 1
153. 4
139.7
146.9
147.0
153.4
139.5
145.8
141.9
153.4
139.5
145. 7
142.2
153. 4
139.1
146.9
149.9
153.4
138.0
143.3
143.9
149.3
136.0
142.8
137.5
151. 8
136.0
143.5
139. 5
151.8
136.7
145.0
144.2
151.8
137.9
146.2
149.4
151.8
137.9
147. 1
153.5
151.8
137.9
148.4
160.0
151.8
137.8
109.5
129.0
106. 1
103. 6
L u m b e r an d w o o d p r o d u c ts ..................................................
L u m b e r ._____________ _________ ________ _______ _
M i llw o r k ____________________ ___________________
P ly w o o d ______ __________________ ________ _______
121 .4
122.6
128. 8
97.1
*121.0
*122. 5
128. 5
9 4 .6
121.5
123.1
128. 5
9 4 .8
122.0
123.6
128.6
96.1
123.6
125. 2
129.2
9 9 .2
125.2
127. 1
129.5
99. 2
126.6
128.5
129. 7
103.3
127.3
129.6
129. 5
101. 0
128.0
130. 4
129.2
102.7
128.5
130. 6
128.9
106.9
128.0
129.9
128.9
107.5
126. 7
128.2
129. 1
107.5
126.3
127.6
129.2
107.5
112.4
113.5
110.9
101.7
P u lp , p a p e r, a n d a llie d p r o d u c ts ___________________
W o o d p u lp ..............................................................................
W a s te p a p e r ____________________ _____ ___________
P a p e r ____________________ _______ _________ ______
P a p e r b o a r d _______________________________ _____
C o n v e r te d p ap e r an d p a p e rb o a rd p r o d u c ts ___
B u ild in g p ap e r a n d b o a r d ..............................................
128 .6 *128.0
118.0
118.0
7 7 .3
7 8 .3
139.3
139.2
136.2
136.2
124. 5
125. 6
138.1
141.1
127.8
118.0
77 .3
139.2
136.2
124.3
138.1
128.1
118.0
9 2 .5
139.1
136.3
124.3
138.1
127.9
118.0
9 7 .5
138.9
136.3
123.8
138.1
127.9
118.0
112.1
138.2
136 4
123.7
138.1
127. 7
118.0
112. 4
138.2
136.5
123.2
138.1
127.4
118.0
114 3
137 0
136.5
123 2
138. 1
127.3
118.0
116.4
136.2
136.4
123. 2
138. 1
127.4
118.0
127.4
136.2
134. 5
123.3
138.1
126.8
116. 8
142.6
136 2
130. 6
122.7
133 3
125.4
116.8
142.6
135.0
130.7
120.6
133.3
124.8
116.8
133. 9
134.6
130.7
119.9
133.3
9 5 .9
90.6
79.0
103.3
97.2
93.2
106.3
M e ta ls a n d m e ta l p r o d u c ts ....................................................
Iron an d s t e e l___________________________________
N o n fe r r o u s m e ta ls ________________ _______ ______
M e ta l c o n ta in e r s ______ __________ _________ _____
H a r d w a r e ______________________________________ _
P lu m b in g e q u ip m e n t ................................... ...................
H e a tin g e q u ip m e n t _____________________________
F a b r ic a te d s tr u c tu r a l m e ta l p r o d u c ts _________
F a b r ic a te d n o n s tr u c tu r a l m e ta l p r o d u c ts _____
152. 4 *152.3
163.3
164.3
148. 6 *149. 6
147 5
147. 5
160. 1 *160.2
133. 4
133.9
122. 1
122.3
137. 5
135 .8
141.2
141 .6
152.1
162. 5
149.7
147.5
160.1
133.9
122.0
137. 5
141.2
152.2
161.1
154.1
143.4
159.8
133.9
121.9
137.1
141.2
151.9
161.5
154. 8
143.4
158.8
133.9
121.0
137. 1
136.9
150.2
159.4
155.4
141.9
358.2
134.1
119.1
134.2
133.5
144.9
149.9
152.5
141.2
155.2
134. 1
117.9
129.7
132.5
145.8
149. 5
158.0
141.2
154. 7
134. 1
117. 4
129.4
132.5
146.8
150.8
160.0
141. 2
154.0
135.0
117.3
129.4
132.6
147.7
151.0
163.2
137.9
153.9
133.9
117.3
131.6
132.6
146. 5
149.4
162.0
137.9
152.8
133.1
117. 1
129.8
132.7
145.1
149.1
157.1
137.9
151. 6
133.1
117.1
128.8
132.5
145.1
149.4
156.6
137.9
151.5
133.1
117.3
128.7
132.2
108.8
113.1
101.8
109.0
111.1
103.2
102.0
100.1
113.2
See footnotes at end of table.
https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
4
1
2
8
9
June
1950
D : CONSUMER AND WHOLESALE PRICES
427
T able D -7: Indexes of wholesale prices, by group and subgroup of commodities1—Continued
[1947-49=100]
C om m odity group
Jan.
Dec.
1957 2 1956
Nov,
1956
Oct.
1956
Sept.
1956
Aug.
1956
Ju ly
1956
June
1956
M ay
1956
Apr.
1956
M ar.
1956
Feb.
1956
Jan.
1956
June
1950
M achinery and m otive products.................................
A gricultural m achinery and equipm ent______
Construction m achinery and equipm ent............
M etalw orking m achinery a n d equ ip m en t____
General purpose m achinery and equipm ent__
M iscellaneous m achinery_______ ___________
Electrical m achinery a n d e q u ip m e n t...............
M otor vehicles_____________________________
143.9
131. 9
156.2
163.3
155.1
142 3
146.0
134.3
*143. 6
*131.2
*155. 9
*163. 3
*154. 6
142.2
*145. 4
134.3
143.4
130.8
155.5
163.0
154.0
142.0
145.2
134.2
141.1
129.5
154.7
161.4
153.0
140.4
143.2
130.8
139.7
127.4
151. 5
159.6
151.6
138.9
142.0
129.4
137.7
126.9
149.4
157.1
149.1
137.2
138.0
129.1
136.9
126.8
147.8
155.2
146.4
136.6
137.4
129.1
136.8
126.6
146.8
155.2
145.6
135. 5
137.6
129.1
136.5
126.5
146.6
154.5
146.0
135.2
137.0
129.1
135.7
126.1
144.8
153.8
144.0
134.3
135.6
129.1
134.7
126.1
143.5
151.9
142.6
134.0
133.6
129.0
133.9
126.8
143.5
151. 2
141.7
133.7
133.2
127.5
133.3
126.8
143.2
150.7
141.4
133.6
132.4
126.7
106.3
108.3
108.1
108.8
107.0
105.0
102.1
106.7
F urniture and other household d u ra b le s..................
H ousehold fu rn itu re ...................................... .........
Commercial fu rn itu re_______________________
Floor covering________________ ____ ________
Household appliances..... ........................................
Television, radio receivers, and p h o n o g ra p h s..
Other household durable goods.............................
121.8 121.2
121.8 121.2
146.9 146. 9
134.9 131.9
106.5 *105. 9
93.5 *93.3
146.8 146.7
121.1
121.2
146.9
131.9
106. 5
93. 5
145.0
121.0
120.8
146.8
131.8
106. 5
93.5
145.0
119.7
120.4
146.8
131.9
105.5
93.7
140.2
119.1
119.5
145.9
131.6
105.0
93.2
139.7
118.3
119.2
138.8
131.4
104.4
92.9
139.3
118.1
118.1
138. 5
130.5
105.1
92.4
139.3
118.0
118.0
138.5
130.5
105.0
92.6
139.2
118.0
117.8
138.5
130. 5
105.2
92.8
139.1
118.1
117.5
138.3
130.5
105.3
93.3
139.2
118.2
117.3
138.3
130.5
105.7
93.3
139.2
118.0
117.4
137.3
130.5
105.6
93.1
138.6
103.1
101.8
106.2
109.1
100.1
(3)
106.8
Nonm etallic minerals—stru ctu ral___
F lat glass....................................................................
Concrete ingredients________________________
Concrete products__________________________
Structural clay products....................................... .
G ypsum products_____________ ____________
Prepared asphalt roofing_________
O ther nonm etallic m inerals________ _________
131.9 131.3
135.7 135.7
134.5 131.7
125.6 125.3
150.5 *150.5
127.1 127.1
111.2 114.4
124.3 124.3
131.2
135.7
131.6
125.3
150.3
127.1
114.4
124.3
131.5
135.7
131.6
125.0
150.1
127.1
117. 5
124.3
131.1
135.7
130.7
124.8
150.1
127.1
117.5
123.6
130.8
135.7
130.7
123.4
150.1
127.1
117.5
123.8
130.6
135.0
130. 6
123.0
149.3
127.1
117.9
123.8
128.9
131.8
130.4
121.9
146.5
127.1
111.9
123.1
128.6
131.1
130.1
121.7
146.1
127.1
111.9
122.8
128.6
131.1
130.0
121.7
146.0
127.1
111.9
123.4
127.9
131.1
130.0
121.1
145.9
127.1
106.5
122.3
127.1
131.1
129.9
121.1
145. 6
127.1
99.6
123.0
127.0
131.1
129.7
121.1
145.3
127.1
99.6
122.1
105.4
105.6
105. 7
104.5
110.5
102.3
98.9
105.7
Tobacco m anufactures and bottled beverages__
Cigarettes....................................................................
Cigars...........................................................................
O ther tobacco m anufactures___________
Alcoholic beverages..................................................
Nonalcoholic beverages...........................................
124.0
124.0
104.2
126.0
119.0
148.7
123.6
124 0
104.2
126.0
118.1
148.7
123.5
124. 0
104.2
122. 5
118.1
148.7
123.1
124.0
104.2
122.5
117.2
148.7
122.8
124.0
104.2
122.5
116.9
148.4
122.5
124.0
104.2
122.5
116. 2
148.4
121.7
124.0
104.2
122.5
114. 6
148.4
121.6
124.0
104.2
122. 5
114.6
148.1
121.6
124.0
104. 2
122.5
114.6
148.1
121.7
124.0
104. 2
122.5
114.7
148.1
121.7
124.0
104.2
122.5
114.7
148.1
121.7
124.0
104.2
122.5
114.7
148.1
121.7
124.0
104.2
122.5
114.7
148.1
101.4
102.8
100.6
103.3
100.9
100.8
Miscellaneous pro d u cts..................................................
Toys, sporting goods, small arms, and ammunition.
M anufactured anim al feeds..................................
Notions and accessories_____________________
Jewelry, watches, and photographic equipm ent.
O ther miscellaneous p roducts...............................
93.2 *91.7
117.5 *116. 9
74.4
72.6
96.7
96.6
107.6 105.4
126.1 *125. 4
91.2
116.8
71.9
96.5
105.2
125.1
89.2
116.7
68.2
96.5
105.2
124.7
89.9
116.6
69.6
96.5
104.8
124.8
91.1
116.3
72.1
95.8
104.8
124.7
91.3
115.7
72.8
95.7
104.8
124.4
92.9
115.8
75.9
95.7
104.8
123.2
96.1
115.8
81.8
95.7
105.0
123.1
92.1
115.8
74.4
95.4
105.0
123.1
88.2
115.7
67.2
93.9
104.8
123.1
88.7
115.8
68.2
92.5
104.8
123.3
89.6
115.8
69.9
92.5
104.4
123.9
96.9
104.8
93.7
88.7
96.6
105.4
1See footnote 1 to table D-6.
* Preliminary.
4 1 7 2 3 2 —
5 7 --------------1 1
https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
3Not available.
•Revised.
428
MONTHLY LABOR REVIEW, MARCH 1957
T able
D-8: Indexes of wholesale prices, by economic sectors1
[1947-49=100]
Commodity group
1956
1957
Jan.2
1950
Dec.
Nov.
Oct.
Sept.
Aug.
July
June
May
Apr.
Mar.
Feb.
Jan.
June
All commodities..........................................................
116.9 *116. 3
115.9
115.6
115.5
114.7
114.0
114.2
114.4
113.6
112.8
112.4
111.9
100.2
Crude materials for further processing---------------Crude foodstuffs and feedstuffs-------- ------- -----Crude nonfood materials except fuel---------------Crude nonfood materials, except fuel, for manufacturing-........................................... - ...........
Crude nonfood materials, except fuel, for construction..................—......................................
Crude fu e l---------- ------------------------------------Crude fuel for manufacturing---------------------Crude fuel for nonmanufacturing industry-----
97.2 *96.6
86.4 *85.0
115.2 *115. 9
94.9
83.4
114.3
95.0
84.4
96.4
113.1
95.0
85.4
111.5
95.7
112.6
96.7
87.2
113.1
86.2
96.6
86.4
114.3
95.4
83.4
116.6
93.4
80.8
115.5
93.3
80.7
115.2
91.5
77.8
115.8
99.5
95.8
106.2
114.5 *115. 5
113.7
111.9
112.5
112.5
110.8 111.2
113.8
116.3
115.2
114.8
115.5
106.3
134.5 *131.7
120.5 *120. 4
120.1 *120. 0
121.1 *121.0
131.6
116.5
116.3
116.8
131.6
116.0
115.8
116.2
130.7
111.5
111.3
130.7
110.9
110.7
130.6
110.4
110.6
130.0
112.6
130.0
113.1
129.9
112.7
110.7
113.9
113.5
129.7
112.4
111.9
113.2
102.8
102.8
Intermediate materials, supplies, and components
Intermediate materials and components for
manufacturing-------------------------------------Intermediate materials for food manufacturing
Intermediate materials for nondurable manufactoring------ ------ ---------------- ---------- -----Intermediate materials for durable manufaetaring------- ------- --------------------------------- Components for manufacturing------------------Materials and components for construction____
Processed fuels and lubricants------- ---------------Processed fuels and lubricants for manufaeta rin g .-........ ...... ............................ ................
Processed fuels and lubricants for nonmanufactoring industry---........................................
Containers, nonreturnable-------- ----------- -------Supplies________________________ ________ Supplies for manufacturing------------------------Supplies for nonmanufacturing industry_____
Manufactured animal feeds_________ _____
Other supplies...................................................
124.9
124.2
123.8
123.6
111.8 111.1
123.0 122.6
110.5
110.9
130.1
111. 9
111.7
112.3
121.3
121.7
122.2
121.7
120.3
120.0 101.1
126. 4
101.1 100.1
125.9
125.7
99.8
125.6
98.3
124.8
97.0
124.2
96.7
122.6
97.3
123.1
98.7
123. 4
100.5
123.1
98.1
121.0
122.6
98.1
121.9
96.7
121.3
95.3
105.4
Finished goods (goods to users, including raw
foods and fuels)__________________________
Consumer finished goods____________________
Consumer foods_______ __________________
Consumer crude foods _________ _______
Consumer processed foods.... ...........................
Consumer other nondurable............... ...... ........
Consumer durable goods.------ -------------------Producer finished goods
--------------------------Producer goods for manufacturing industries-.
Producer goods for nonmanufacturing Industries_______________________ _____ _____
110.2
111.9
130.4
112.3
112.9
112.6 112.2
105.7
102.9
100.3
90.4
105.0
104.8
104.7
104.0
104.0
104.1
104.0
104.2
104.3
104.3
104.3
104.1
94.2
152.1 151.1
147.5 147.9
133.1 133.0
111.9 *109. 9
151.1
147.9
133.1
106.4
151.9
146.7
133.4
107.1
151.7
145.2
133. 2
107.3
150.6
143.3
132.8
107.1
146.1
142.0
131.4
106.5
147.1
142.3
131.5
106.2
147.3
142.3
131.8
106.1
147.4
141.1
132.3
105.8
146.8
139.3
131.3
106.0
145.7
138.4
130.3
106.2
145.0
137.9
129.9
105.8
110.2
110.2
104.0
106.7
99,5
105.4
105.9
106.0
105.7
104.9
104.6
104.5
104.4
104.8
104.9
104.5
98.4
115.0 *112.3
133.0 132.6
113.7 113.0
135.3 *135. 3
104.0 102.9
73.6
75.7
120.4 120.0
108.3
132.3
112.7
135.3
102.5
72.6
119.9
109.2
131.1
111.3
135.1
100.5
68.3
119.3
109.5
129.3
109.5
128. 5
111.3
132.7
101.7
72.4
118.7
109.4
127.9
111. 1
132.2
101. 6
73.3
117.9
108.9
127.9
108.8
127.9
113.6
132.0
105.5
83.3
118.1
108.3
127.1
132.4
102.5
75.7
118.0
108.1
126.8
109.4
132.1
99. 2
117.3
108.5
125.5
109.1
131.3
99.1
69.3
116.4
108.2
125.1
109.3
131.1
99.5
71.2
115.9
101. 5
99.6
99.1
105.4
96.4
93.4
98.0
116. 7 *116.2
109.9 *109. 3
115.6
109.1
103.0
96.5
104.3
110.3
120.7
141.9
146.2
115.3
109.1
103.7
96.7
105.2
114.0
108.2
09.7
119.2
137.2
141.6
109.7
119.1
137.1
141.2
113.6
108.0
101.5
97.6
102.4
109.6
119.1
136.6
140.5
112.7
107.0
99.1
92.1
100.5
109.6
119.1
135.8
139.6
112.3
106.8
98.4
96.8
98.9
109.6
119.0
134.7
138.1
112.0 111. 8
119.8
140.6
145. 2
114.1
108.1
101.4
91.5
103.4
109.8
119.5
138.4
143.3
114.0
108.3
94.6
103.3
*111.0
*122. 4
144.3 *144.0
148.7 *148.5
116.2
109.4
102.7
97.2
103.9
110.3
122.3
143.8
148.2
106. 5
98.0
93.6
99.0
109.7
118.5
134.1
137.2
106.4
98.0
98.6
98.1
109. 5
118.3
133.3
136.3
99.7
98.0
95.7
81.9
98.3
98.0
103.5
106.2
106.3
140.5 *140. 2
140.0
138.3
136.7
134.9
133.5
133.7
133.3
132.6
132.0
131.6
130.8
106.1
*108.5
102.2 101.8
91.0
104.4
111.8
122.8
i For a description of these indexes, see New BLS Economic Sector Indexes
of Wholesale Prices, Monthly Labor Review, December 1955 (p. 1448).
T able
86.8
111.0
133.6
100.7
69.5
118.9
110.0
112.0
132.1
103.0
77.0
118.0
102.1 102.2
199.3 100.3
102.8 102. 7
111.8
68.2
2 Preliminary,
‘Revised.
D-9: Indexes of wholesale prices 1 for special commodity groupings
[1947-49=100]
1957
1956
1950
C o m m o d ity gro u p
A ll foods___________________ _________ ________
All fish ___________________________________________
S pecial m e ta ls a n d m e ta l p ro d u c ts ________________
M eta lw o rk in g m a c h in e ry _________________________
M a c h in e ry a n d e q u ip m e n t_______________________
A g ric u ltu ral m a c h in ery (in c lu d in g tra c to rs )----------T o ta l tra c to rs -------------------------------------------------------Steel m ill p ro d u c ts ------------------------------------------------B u ild in g m a te ria ls ________________________________
S oaps__________ - -----------------------------------------------S y n th e tic d e te rg e n ts --------- ------- ---------------------------R efin ed p e tro le u m p ro d u c ts ______________________
E a s t C oast p e tro le u m . -------- ------------------------M id -c o n tin e n t p e tro le u m ____________________
G u lf C oast p e tro le u m _________________________
P acific C oast p e tro le u m ____
__________ ____
P u lp , p a p e r a n d p ro d u c ts, excl. bld g , p a p e r________
B itu m in o u s coal, d om estic sizes______ - ---------------L u m b e r a n d w ood p ro d u c ts, excl. m illw o rk ________
All com m odities except farm p ro d u c ts ..........................
« See footnote 1, table D-6.
https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
J a n .2
D ec.
N ov.
O ct.
Sept.
A ug.
J u ly
June
M ay
A pr.
M a r.
F eb .
Ja n .
102.1
121.6
147.4
172.7
149.1
131.9
138.2
172. 1
130.7
100.9
97.9
124.6
120.6
121. 9
130.1
127.0
128.3
123.9
120.3
121.5
101.6
116.1
147.3
*172. 4
*148. 6
*131.1
137.2
169.9
130. 5
*100.4
97.9
120.6
117.5
119. 7
121.2
127.0
127.7
*123.9
*120. 0
*120. 9
102.4
118.4
147.1
172.2
148.3
130.7
137.2
169.9
130.8
100.2
97.9
116.8
114.3
118.3
117.2
116.2
127.6
123.7
120.5
120.6
102.3
112. 5
146.3
172.0
146.7
129.2
136.5
169.8
131.0
100.2
97.9
117.6
116.8
118.3
119.1
114.6
127.8
122.9
121.1
120.1
102.8
114.3
145. 7
171.0
145.2
127.1
134.3
169.8
131.0
100.2
97.9
117.7
116.0
119.9
118.0
114.6
127.6
116.4
122.9
119.7
100.7
114.6
144.4
167.1
142.3
126.6
133.2
169.8
131.5
100.2
97.9
117.7
116.0
119.9
117.5
115.7
127.7
114.4
124.6
119.0
101.8
114.6
140.5
163.9
141.1
126.7
132.2
159.6
130.6
100.6
97.9
118.3
115.2
119.9
118.6
118.9
127.4
111.4
126.2
118.0
102.3
109.7
141.2
163.7
140.9
126.4
131.1
159.2
130.6
100.6
97.9
117.7
113.9
119.9
118.6
116.2
127.2
109.8
127.0
118.1
101.9
111.7
141.9
162.6
140.6
126.3
131.0
159.1
130.8
98.9
91.1
117.7
113.0
120.2
118.6
116.8
127.0
107.9
127.9
118.3
99.4
108.6
142.5
161.1
139.3
125.8
130.0
158.2
131.3
98.7
91.1
116.9
112.9
117.0
118.6
119.5
127.1
107.1
128.6
117.9
99.0
113.1
141.6
158.8
137.8
125.8
129.2
158.2
130.5
98.7
91.1
115.9
112.2
116.2
119.4
114.0
126.6
114.0
128.0
117.2
98.0
113.7
140.3
158.0
137.4
126.7
129.2
158.2
129.6
99.0
91.1
116.6
114.1
116.0
119.4
117.1
125.2
116.6
126.4
116.8
98.0
122.3
140.1
157.3
136.8
126.7
129.2
157.0
129.4
99.0
91.1
116.2
113.8
114.8
119.3
117.8
124.6
116.7
126.0
116.5
! Preliminary.
‘Revised.
June
95.0
92.4
108.3
109.8
106.1
108.4
107.5
114.9
107.5
80.9
82.9
102.1
98.1
101.8
109.7
94.1
95.6
106.8
112.6
101.2
429
E: WORK STOPPAGES
E: Work Stoppages
T able
E -l: Work stoppages resulting from labor-management disputes 1
Number of stoppages
Month and year
Beginning in
month or year
Workers Involved in stoppages
In effect dur
ing month
Beginning in
month or year
1935-39 (average)__________________________________
1947-49 (average)___ _______________________________
1945 . . . I ....... A -___________________________________
1946_____________________________________________
1947. _______________ _________________ _________
1948______________________________________________
1949 ____ ________________________________________
1950_____________________________________________
1951___________________________________ _________
1952______________________________________________
1953...................... ...........................................—-.................. .
1954______________________________ ______ ________
1955........................................... ..............................................
1956 2___________________________________ _________
2, 862
3j 573
4, 750
4, 985
3, 693
3, 419
3, 606
4, 843
4, 737
5,117
5, 091
3', 468
4, 320
3,800
1956: January 2____________________________ . .
. ..
February 2__________________________ . _____
M arch 2___ ______
..
..
_ . . _______
A pril2_______ __________________ _________
M ay 2_______________________________________
June 2-_- . . . . . . . . . . . _________________
July 2_______________________________________
A ugust2 ________ ____ __________________
September 2__________________________________
October2 __________________________ _____
November 2..._ _____ _________________ _____
December2___ ______________________________
250
250
250
350
450
350
400
350
325
325
200
150
350
350
350
450
550
500
550
550
550
525
375
300
85,000
70,000
50,000
140,000
190,000
115,000
620, 000
125,000
150,000
130,000
150,000
40,000
1957: January 2__________________________
225
325
60, 000
. --------
i All work stoppages known to the Bureau of Labor Statistics and its
various cooperating agencies, involving six or more workers and lasting a
full day or shift or longer, are included in this report. Figures on “workers
involved” and “man-days idle” cover all workers made idle for as long as one
https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
In effect dur
ing month
1,130,000
2, 380, 000
3, 470, 000
4, 600, 000
2,170, 000
1, 960,000
3' 030j 000
2, 410, 000
2, 220,000
3, 540,000
2, 400, 000
1, 530, 000
2, 650, 000
1,900,000
Man-days idle during month
or year
Number
Percent of esti
mated work
ing time
16, 900, 000
39, 700, 000
38,000 000
116, 000,000
34, 600 000
34,100,000
50, 500,000
38, 800,000
22, 900, 000
59,100,000
28 300,000
22, 600,000
28, 200, 000
33,000, 000
0.27
.46
.47
1.43
.41
.37
.59
.44
.23
. 57
. 26
.21
. 26
.30
190,000
190, 000
175, 000
210,000
280, 000
235, 000
710, 000
725,000
215,000
190, 000
210, 000
100,000
2,000,000
2, 200,000
2,000,000
1, 500, 000
2,800, 000
2,100,000
13, 600,000
3, 200,000
1, 500,000
1,000, 000
1, 500,000
800, 000
.22
.25
.21
.17
.29
.23
1.47
.31
.18
.10
.16
.09
80,000
550,000
.06
shift in establishments directly involved in a stoppage. They do not measure
the indirect or secondary effects on other establishments or industries whose
employees are made idle as a result of material or service shortages.
2Preliminary.
I
430
MONTHLY LABOR REVIEW, MARCH 1957
F: Building and Construction
F -l: Expenditures for new construction 1
T able
[Value of work put in place]
Expenditures (in millions of dollars)
Type of construction
1957
1956
Feb.2 Jan.2
Dec.
Nov.
Oct.
Sept.
Aug.
1956
July
June
May
Apr.
Mar.
Feb.
1955
Total Total
2,883
3.051
4,133
4,264
4, 304
4, 242
4,105
3,780
3, 421
3, 071
2, 821 44. 258 42, 991
Private construction___________________ 2,083
Residential building (nonfarm).............
934
New dwelling units.............. . . ......
820
Additions and alterations________
77
Nonhousekeeping ®_____________
37
Nonresidential building (nonfarm)«—
696
Industrial_____________________
264
Commercial.- .......................... ......
234
Office buildings and warehouses___________________
116
Stores, restaurants, and garages.
118
Other nonresidential building------198
Religious. ______________ .
65
Educational________________
41
Hospital and institutional i___
34
Social and recreational_______
23
Miscellaneous______________
35
Farm construction____________ _____
96
Public utilities............................ ...........
346
Railroad_______ _______ _______
31
Telephone and telegraph.......... ......
75
Other public u tilities............... ......
240
All other private 8__ _______________
11
Public construction.......................................
800
Residential building 9______________
29
Nonresidential building (other than
military facilities)________________
304
Industrial..........................................
35
Educational_______ ___________
194
Hospital and institutional.............
22
Other nonresidential.............. .........
53
Military facilities 10________________
86
Highways________________________
205
Sewer and w ater..___ _____________
93
Miscellaneous public service enterprises11________________ ________
26
Conservation and developm ent..........
44
All other public 12_.................... .............
13
2,188
1,017
900
79
38
719
268
244
2, 472
1, 202
1, 060
102
40
768
270
272
2,666
1,313
1,145
126
42
794
271
288
2, 766
1, 365
1,195
129
41
793
274
287
2,843
1, 415
1, 240
135
40
788
276
288
2,882
1, 440
1, 260
139
41
788
276
293
2, 862
1, 442
1,260
139
43
787
270
300
2,786
1,417
1, 235
142
40
760
263
290
2, 600
1, 319
1,150
132
37
705
252
266
2,424
1,232
1,090
109
33
665
239
252
2,260
1,116
1,000
86
30
655
226
257
2,088 30, 825 30, 572
998 15, 339 16, 595
895 13, 510 14,990
73 1, 382 1,266
339
30
447
648 8,801 7, 612
225 3, 065 2,399
252 3,296 3,043
121
123
207
68
43
33
24
39
91
350
32
75
243
11
863
28
128
144
226
73
46
32
25
50
90
402
34
75
293
10
898
27
131
157
235
75
48
31
27
54
103
445
36
80
329
11
1,134
30
130
157
232
76
49
31
27
49
122
474
41
85
348
12
1,367
30
127
161
224
74
49
30
27
44
148
480
40
85
355
12
1,421
25
123
170
219
71
49
28
27
44
161
481
39
90
352
12
1, 422
24
114
186
217
67
48
26
25
51
159
462
39
85
338
12
1, 380
24
106
184
207
62
48
25
23
51
150
448
38
85
325
11
1,319
26
102
164
187
56
42
24
21
44
139
427
36
80
311
10
1,180
23
98
154
174
53
40
24
19
38
121
398
35
80
283
8
997
23
97
160
172
53
39
25
18
37
109
373
33
75
265
7
811
19
101 1, 362 1,136
151 1, 934 1,907
171 2,440 2,170
55
773
734
40
537
492
351
25
327
17
274
239
34
354
529
101 1,500 1,600
334 5,065 4, 604
29
430
374
70
960
805
235 3, 675 3, 425
7
120
161
733 13, 433 12, 419
21
292
263
331
40
211
23
57
93
220
100
311
33
200
23
55
108
250
100
338
36
210
28
64
118
420
110
373
42
226
32
73
140
575
120
382
40
231
32
79
144
615
121
392
43
236
31
82
142
605
125
379
38
231
27
83
135
590
122
359
38
221
26
74
134
565
115
335
32
216
25
62
115
485
109
314
29
205
23
57
104
355
102
301
31
195
23
52
89
225
92
284
33
187
19
45
82
200
77
4,061
431
2, 548
309
773
1,398
5,100
1, 275
4,227
721
2, 442
331
733
1,297
4, 520
1,085
29
48
14
32
56
14
36
66
16
42
69
18
47
68
19
49
67
18
48
65
17
42
62
16
39
58
16
38
47
14
31
42
12
23
36
10
452
675
180
279
593
155
Total new construction *_______________
3,370 3,800
1 Joint estimates of the Bureau of Labor Statistics, U. S. Department of
Labor, and the Business and Defense Services Administration, U. S. Depart
ment of Commerce. Estimated construction expenditures represent the
monetary value of the volume of work accomplished during the given period
of time. These figures should be differentiated from permit valuation data
reported in the tabulations for building permit activity (tables F-3, F-4,
and F-5) and the data on value of contract awards reported in table F-2.
2 Preliminary.
2 Revised.
< Includes major additions and alterations.
s Includes hotels, dormitories, and tourist courts and cabins.
6 Expenditures by privately owned public utilities for nonresidential
building are included under “Public utilities.”
https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
1 Includes Federal contributions toward construction of private nonprofit
hospital facilities under the National Hospital Program.
2 Covers privately owned sewer and water facilities, roads and bridges, and
miscellaneous nonbuilding items such as parks and playgrounds.
9 Includes nonhousekeeping public residential construction as well as
housekeeping units.
10 Covers all construction, building as well as nonbuilding (except for
production facilities, which are included in public industrial building).
11 Covers primarily publicly owned airports, electric light and power
systems, and local transit facilities.
12 Covers public construction not elsewhere classified, such as parks, play
grounds, and memorials.
F : BUILDING AND CONSTRUCTION
T able F - 2 :
431
Contract awards: Public construction, by ownership and type of construction 1
Value (In millions of dollars)
Ownership and type of construction 8
1956
Dec.
All public construction.—....................... 807.7
Federally owned....... ..............................
Residential building........................
Nonresider.tial building............ .
Educational________________
Hospital and institu tional___
Administrative and general___
Other nonresident.ial building..
Airfield building............... .
Industrial__ ___________
Troop housing............... .
W arehouses_____________
All other. ......... ..................
Airfields______________________
Conservation and development___
Highway. ____________________
Electric power____ ____________
All other federally owned________
State and locally owned____________
Residential building____________
Nonresidential building..................
Educational ________ ______
Hospital and institutional____
Administrative and general___
Other nonresidential building..
Highway. .......................................
Sewerage systems______________
Water supply facilities....................
Utilities.......... .............. .................
Electric power______________
Other u tilitie s__ ___________
All other State and locally owned..
Nov.8 Oct.8
1956
1955
Total
Total
Sept.8 Aug.8 July 8 June
May
Apr.
Mar.
Feb.
Jan.
Dec.
836.4 L093.8 1,099.2
859.4
932.1
878.4
648.1
807.8
936.7 10,314.5
169.7
9.3
84.0
.5
10.9
17.5
55.1
6.6
26.8
1.2
4.9
15.6
7.7
28.7
6.6
28.2
5.2
689.7
21.1
295.1
205.9
34.3
21.8
33.1
249.1
45.0
33.3
31.6
7.9
23.7
14.5
220.2
9.9
119.7
2.9
3.5
6.5
106.8
4.4
45.2
8.1
32.6
16.5
17.2
53.3
4.8
5.0
10.3
711.9
18.3
296.8
204.1
25.0
30.6
37.1
265.3
51.3
38.3
23.1
12.4
10.7
18.8
178.8
7.6
88.3
3.0
4.5
8.4
72.4
8.4
41.9
1.6
2.5
18.0
7.5
66.9
2.9
2.1
3.5
699.6
38.8
279.4
215.4
12.4
32.6
19.0
279.0
42.9
30.6
11.2
2.6
8.6
17.7
119.6
12.7
39.8
«
.3
4.2
35.3
7.2
7.0
9.0
1.3
10.8
17.1
29.2
8.4
5.5
6.9
528.5
22.0
186.0
145.1
9.4
17.4
14.1
234.3
30.5
26.7
20.0
5.7
14.3
9.0
114.6 185.2
3.0
33.5
81.9
48.3
.2
10.9
5.5
.7
6.2
2.8
64.1
39.8
11.9
4.9
9.9
32.8
10.9
6.3
1.2
4.7
5.9
15.4
15.4
24.6
41.1
23.8
2.2
3.8
2.0
8.9
2.6
S. 7
693.2 751.5
10.5
11.7
254.9 286.7
192.8 236.1
35.5
13.4
10.3
23.2
16.3
14.0
246.3 320.7
114.6
53.2
29.1
35.2
29.1
32.4
15.4
11.9
20.5
13.7
8.7
11.6
769.6
830.1
751.9
160.1 119.0
3.6
1.2
50.8
57.3
1.4
.9
1.1
.5
3.8
3.0
44.5
52.9
6.4
3.0
22.6
16.3
11.7
4.7
3.6
1.2
9.9
18.0
28.0
21.6
62.6
26.5
7.1
8.8
2.1
3.9
4.1
1.5
647.6 650.6
13.8
17.6
272.3 253. 7
211. 5 189.3
15.5
14.0
22.9
21.0
27.9
23.9
240.5 278.1
36.2
49.1
31.7
29.0
33.6
28.6
11.2
17.9
22.4
10.7
7.4
6.6
143.5
.5
97.6
6.7
6.8
5.1
79.0
1.8
46.6
20.3
2.0
8.3
4.7
27.9
9.3
1.6
1.9
686.6
23.0
253. 4
175.0
28.8
27.7
21.9
269.1
50.3
43.4
28.4
17.8
10.6
19.0
116.3 111.6
1.8
1.0
37.4
63.9
.3
.7
.5
1.7
4.1
3.5
32.5
58.0
5.6
3.9
10.5
43.1
7.2
1.8
3.8
1.6
5.4
7.6
5.2
7.5
22.6
55.7
10.0
5.8
1.6
2.9
4.6
7.9
635.6 724.8
31.7
12.3
260.0 286.7
173.7 192.9
43.6
15.6
16.1
54.2
26.6
24.0
223.6 271.9
74.9
54.7
29.9
28.9
20 9 30.2
15.1
9.0
15.1
11.9
14.8
19.9
1 Prepared jointly by the Bureau of Labor Statistics, U. S. Department
of Labor, and the Business and Defense Services Administration, U. S.
Department of Commerce. Includes major force account projects started,
principally by TVA and State highway departments.
https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
1955
178.5 340.4
.4
12.0
46.3 176.0
2.3
4.8
5.2
3.4
6.3
22.1
34.3 143.9
4.1
8.8
14.1
54.4
6.1
40.1
4.5
4.0
5. 5 36.6
6.1
17.7
54.8
41.7
17.4
8.6
58.3
64.3
11.3
4.0
915.3 758.8
21.4
22.7
284.4 287.5
199.2 184.1
24.2
28.0
26.1
40.1
34.9
35.3
349.3 305.1
49.3
60.1
76.2
44.0
118.2
27.7
103.6
8.6
14.6
19.1
16.5
11.7
9, 009.9
1,972.3 1, 556.0
61.4
63.0
909.4
885.5
23.7
21.6
77.5
43.9
87.3
66.7
754.5
719.7
72.1
103.8
338.4
333.9
122.7
54.1
63. 2
84.0
158.1
143.9
155.7
157.4
271.9
511.0
91.9
58.5
177.5
43.5
63.8
77.8
8,342. 2 7, 453. 9
253.2
210.1
3, 210. 2 2,851. 4
2, 289.0 2,107. 2
286.3
195.3
320.8
263.0
314.1
285.9
3,211.6 2,933. 5
658. 9
501.9
441.1
393.6
402. 6
433.8
227. 2
247.4
175.4
186.4
164.6
129.6
8 Types not shown separately are included in the appropriate “ other”
category.
8 Includes revisions in federally owned components.
4 Less than $50,000.
432
MONTHLY LABOR REVIEW, MARCH 1957
Table F-3: Building permit activity: Valuation, by private-public ownership, class of construction,
and type of building 1
Valuation (in millions of dollars)
C lass of c o n stru ctio n , o w n ersh ip , a n d
ty p e of b u ild in g
1956
D ec.
A ll b u ild in g c o n s tr u c tio n ............. ................................... .
P r iv a te ___________________________ ______ ____
P u b lic .......................................................... .....................
1,048. 4
924.2
124.2
1955
1956
1955 2
D ec.
T o ta l
Total
N ov.
O ct.2
S ep t.
1,337.2
1,191.1
146.1
1,652. 8
1,483. 0
169.8
1,440. 6
1,308.9
131.7
1, 732.7
1, 591. 3
141.4
1,716.7
1, 559.3
157.5
1,841.9
1, 594. 8
247.1
1,093. 0
956.1
136.9
18, 740. 2
16,872. 6
1,867. 6
18, 939. 0
17,264. 3
1,674. 7
772.7
761.4
746.9
688.4
16.4
7.6
34.4
14.6
11.3
525.3
163.4
10.2
3.6
15.4
57.5
76.7
180.9
106.6
32.2
42.1
22.4
97.7
21.4
23.2
16.3
142.5
969.8
946.9
942.4
869.6
18.6
896.6
887.1
881.0
824.3
18.4
6.9
31.4
6.1
9.5
636.7
192.8
12.7
7.0
13.6
78.4
81.1
208.9
110.7
52.6
45.6
21.8
125.2
30.6
37.1
20.3
183.4
973.9
964.4
938.3
879.3
18.7
6.5
33.7
26.1
9.5
694.8
214. 9
10.7
6.8
15.2
97.1
85.1
215.8
149.6
26.8
39.3
20.6
120.6
67.2
34.2
21.4
173.1
605.4
595.9
584.1
544.5
11.6
4.3
23.8
11.8
9.5
389.9
118.6
4.7
4.1
9.6
33.4
66.9
133.7
96.2
13.2
24.3
6.2
59.6
26.2
31.5
14.1
97.6
10,272. 8
10,130. 8
9, 955. 9
9.211.3
214.5
87.9
442.1
174.9
142.1
6, 634. 9
2,076. 3
113.4
60.0
165.4
733. 7
1,003. 7
2,222. 0
1,406. 5
364.6
450.8
201.9
1.254.3
323.9
326. 7
229.9
1, 832. 5
11,696.1
11, 535.1
11,386.4
10, 643.1
208.4
84.0
451.0
148.7
161.1
5,593. 7
1, 858. 7
99.4
66.7
140.0
553.4
999.1
1,946. 2
1,242.3
307.7
396.2
187.6
830.4
306.6
273.1
191.0
1,649.1
N e w re s id e n tia l b u ild in g .....................................................
527.5
677.9
878.5
N e w d w elling u n its (housekeeping o n ly )...............
518.6
670.0
863.5
P riv a te ly o w n e d .....................................................
663.9
512.7
836.6
fa m ily ....................................... .
453.9
609.1
774.9
2f a m i l y ... ................................. .
15.6
11.8
17.8
3a n d 4-fam ily...............................................................................................
5.4
7.2
9.8
5-or-more fa m ily ..............................................
31.9
34.1
41.5
P u b lic ly o w n e d ____ ______________________
5.9
6.1
26.9
N o n h o u se k e e p in g b u ild in g s ___________________
7.9
8.9
14.9
N ew n o n re s id e n tia l b u ild in g s ______________________
411.2
525.5
607.6
C om m ercial b u ild in g s..................................................
135.8
153.1
177.1
A m u se m e n t b u ild in g s..........................................
10.6
5.3
8.9
C o m m ercial garages..............................................
4.0
4.7
5.8
G asoline a n d service s ta tio n s ..............................
13.9
17.2
10.7
Office b u ild in g s ___________________ _______
56.1
57.3
44.0
S tores a n d o th e r m erc a n tile b u ild in g s ______
58.5
67.8
101.2
C o m m u n ity b u ild in g s.......... .......................................
145.2
175.5
208.5
E d u c a tio n a l b u ild in g s_____________________
99.6
120.6
125.0
In s titu tio n a l b u ild in g s .........................................
16.3
24.3
41.5
R eligious b u ild in g s .............................................
29.2
30.6
42.0
G arages, p riv a te re s id e n tia l...................................... .
6.4
23.4
13.8
I n d u s tria l b u ild in g s ___________________________
59.7
105. 5
122.9
P u b lic b u ild in g s ................. ............. ........... .................
19.9
28.3
26.7
P u b lic u tilitie s b u ild in g s.............................................
28.4
27.4
29.9
A ll o th e r n o n re s id e n tia l b u ild in g s ........................ .
15.9
19.1
21.8
A d d itio n s, a lte ra tio n s, a n d re p a ir s ..................................
109.8
133.8
166.7
1
1 These statistics on building construction authorized by local building
permits measure building activity in all localities having building-permit
systems—rural nonfarm as well as urban. Such localities (over 7,000) in
clude about 80 percent of the nonfarm population of the country, according
to the 1950 Census. The data cover both federally and nonfederally owned
projects. Figures on the amount of construction contracts awarded for
Federal projects and for public housing (Federal, State, and local) in permit
issuing places are added to the valuation data (estimated cost entered by
builders on building-permit applications) for privately owned projects;
A ug.
7.7
46.4
4.5
22.9
581.0
187.6
7.5
5.1
15.5
67.1
92.4
190.5
102.6
47.5
40.4
23.9
105.2
24.4
32.4
16.9
181.9
J u ly
June
construction undertaken by State and local governments is reported by
local officials. No adjustment has been made in the building-permit data
to reflect the fact that permit valuations generally understate the actual
cost of construction, nor for lapsed permits or the lag between permit issuance
or contract-awarded dates and start of construction. Therefore, they should
not be considered as representing the volume of building construction started.
Components may not always equal totals because of rounding.
2 Revised.
T able F-4: Building permit activity: Valuation, by class of construction and geographic region 1
V a lu atio n (in m illio n s of dollars)
C lass of c o n stru c tio n a n d geographic region
A ll b u ild in g c o n stru ctio n A .____ _______
N o rth e a s t.......................................................
N o rth C e n tra l__________________
S o u th ___________________________
W e s t................................................
N e w d w ellin g u n its (housekeeping only)
N o rth e a s t............................................ ..
N o rth C e n tra l.................... .................
S o u th ......................................................
W e st.......................... ...............................
N e w n o n re s id e n tia l b u ild in g s ___________
N o rth e a s t_______________________
N o rth C e n tra l......................................
S o u th __________________ _____
W e s t_____________ __________
A d d itio n s, alte ra tio n s, a n d re p a irs .............
N o rth e a s t____________________
N o rth C e n tra l..........................................
S o u th ____________________
W e s t..................................................
1 See footnote 1, table F-3.
https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
Revised.
1956
D ec.
Nov.
1,048.4
242.6
258.0
272.0
275.9
518.6
116.8
127.1
132.6
142.1
411.2
99.2
99.0
108.3
104.7
109.8
24.1
30.1
29.4
26.1
1955
1956
1955 2
D ec.
Total
Total
O ct.2
S ept.
1,337. 2
287. 3
386.2
319.1
344.5
1, 652. 8
346.8
537.3
386.3
382.4
1,440.6
337.6
446.6
335.0
321.4
1,732. 7
363.5
548.2
398.2
422.8
1, 716. 7
341.5
555.7
394.1
425.4
1,841. 9
437.1
566.8
401.9
436.0
1,093.0
237.8
287.9
293.7
273.6
18,740. 2
4,041.3
5,669. 4
4,451.1
4, 578. 5
18,939. 0
4,129. 6
5, 715.4
4,667. 7
4,426.2
670.0
147.6
193.1
149.7
179.7
525.5
111.3
157. 5
130.0
126.7
133.8
27.3
34.0
37.3
35.2
863.5
192.6
267.2
202.5
761.4
168.5
255.5
171.5
166.0
525.3
133.8
146.8
125.1
119.6
142.5
946.9
194.5
306.4
214.8
231.2
581.0
124.1
186.9
128.1
141.8
181.9
42.7
52.3
45.8
41.1
887.1
187.3
291.3
200.1
208.3
636.7
113.9
209.6
140.0
173.2
183.4
39.2
52.0
50.2
42.0
964.4
224.6
319.6
198.6
221.6
694.8
172.4
197.2
156.0
169.2
173.1
38.2
47.5
44.5
42.9
595.9
132.5
145.7
160.2
157.4
389.9
81.3
114.7
103.8
90.1
97.6
21.8
25.9
26.1
23.9
10,130. 8
2,191. 6
3,135. 8
2,345. 6
2,457. 7
6,634. 9
1, 430. 5
1,991.3
1, 578.9
1,634.2
1,832. 5
393.7
510.2
484.4
11, 535.1
2, 500.1
3,488. 5
2, 700. 9
2,845. 7
5, 593. 7
1,233.8
1, 748. 7
1,455.4
1,155. 9
1, 649.1
364.9
449.2
451.1
383.9
201.2
607.6
115.9
213.2
138.6
140.0
166.7
34.1
53.2
41.6
37.8
33.3
40.6
36.0
32.5
A ug.
J u ly
June
2 Includes new nonhousekeeping residential building, not shown separately.
444.4
433
F: BUILDING AND CONSTRUCTION
Table F-5: Building permit activity: Valuation, by metropolitan-nonmetropolitan location and State 1
V a lu a tio n (In m illio n s of d ollars)
1955
1955 2
1954
Mar.
Nov.
Total
Total
1956
State and location
Nov.
Oct.2
Sept«
Aug.
July
June
May
Apr.
All States_________________
Metropolitan areas 8____
Nonmetropolitan areas__
1,337.2
1,029.4
307.8
1, 652. 8
1,294.1
358.7
1, 440.6
1,101. 4
339.2
1, 732. 7
1,350. 2
382.5
1,716. 7
1,330. 7
386.0
1, 841. 9
1,453. 6
388.3
1, 902.1
1, 504.3
397.8
1,863. 0
1, 441. 7
421.3
1, 677.1
1,302. 8
374.3
1,323.4
1,028.1
295.3
18,939.0
15,108. 9
3,830.1
16,485.8
13,180. 7
3,305.1
Alabama....................... ...........
Arizona-------- ------ -------------Arkansas. _______________
California_________________
Colorado_______________ --
14.7
16.3
3.7
242.0
22.3
14.3
19.7
4.5
255.6
41.2
14.1
12.4
5.3
205.7
16.8
14.2
18.0
5.3
291.6
23.7
15.6
16.7
4.3
314.1
17.9
14.5
18.4
5.0
281.9
28.8
17.0
19.3
5.7
286.7
20.7
13.9
12.2
5.7
269.8
25.5
15.1
15.7
6.0
314.9
22.8
12.1
12.8
4.1
217.9
20.7
166.5
165.8
54.3
3,065.1
2S0.6
135.8
145 1
77.4
2, 569 5
245. 3
Connecticut_______________
D elaw are____».......................
District of Columbia_______
Florida....................................
Georgia--------- ------- -----------
37.1
9.0
4.4
65.7
17.2
33.0
7.8
17.9
77.5
19.2
29.8
3.2
8.9
61.7
20.2
34.6
6.2
3.6
79.3
23.7
30.9
3.8
6.1
72.9
24.2
41.1
6.3
4.5
75.0
23.2
37.9
5.0
5.5
73.8
26.7
37.6
5.2
3.1
69.1
20.0
22.0
3.7
5.4
70.1
24.6
29.0
3.5
1.6
57.0
30.3
359.1
62.0
87.7
746.9
276.7
320.4
49.5
76.8
650.9
267.8
Idaho____________________
Illinois___________________
Indiana---------------------------Io w a ._____ _____ ________
Kansas__________ _____ —_
3.3
92.6
30.7
13.0
14.2
3.3
118.8
40.1
21.6
13.3
4.3
106.9
34.1
16.7
11.4
3.7
117. 3
51.2
15.6
10.3
3.1
119.5
38.4
14.9
13.0
3.6
125.0
41.0
18.9
10.9
6.3
138.6
45. 2
21.4
13. 2
4.4
138.5
39.9
21.1
14.6
3.9
137.4
30.8
16.2
20.4
3.1
81.2
32.8
12.2
10.9
36.5
1, 261. 6
381.0
180.1
195.4
30.5
986.7
340.6
141.4
108.8
Kentucky________ ________
Louisiana_________________
M aine___________________
M aryland_________________
Massachusetts_____________
10.6
14.9
2.7
28.0
39.5
11.2
21.7
2.7
36.4
42.5
13.9
19.7
3.9
26.5
47.2
15.6
24.2
2.8
49. 1
40.0
22.3
21.5
3.9
33.7
46.4
14.1
20.5
4.5
40.1
39.2
20.0
30.5
4.6
46.1
45.1
19.4
27.6
2.8
39.5
50.2
13.0
27.8
1.4
41, 6
36.9
10.8
19.4
3.1
30.6
29.1
189.3
292.6
29.8
494.4
445.1
170.8
21S. 6
30.2
400 4
393. 0
Michigan_____________ ___
Minnesota---------------------Mississippi. --------------------Missouri..------------ -----------M ontana. . . ............ . ........ .
72.8
21.7
3.5
19.4
2.3
114.2
30.8
4.1
29.9
3.2
81.4
40.2
5.2
22.4
5.9
112.6
38.1
4. 1
30.3
3.2
113.9
36.2
5.1
27.7
4.2
98.2
41.0
3.8
28.4
5.5
124.5
51.9
5.0
26.6
5.0
119.4
46.0
6.2
37.4
3.4
89.3
26.2
4.9
31.5
5.6
71.8
25.9
3.1
22.6
2.1
1,130.4
403.3
50.3
336.4
41.7
1,010.2
358.1
624
304 6
39 7
N eb rask a...--------------------N evada.......—------- -----------New Hampshire___________
New Jersey....... ..................... .
New Mexico______ _____ _
5.6
3.7
3.1
54.1
7.2
8.7
3.0
4.4
73.6
6.5
6.2
5.7
2.9
62.8
7.0
8.3
3.0
3.8
68.8
7.1
10.2
2.6
3.6
64.0
6.6
8.0
3.1
3.8
72.4
5.9
7.2
3.9
6.2
83.8
6.8
8.9
5.1
4.2
90.9
6.1
7.8
6.1
2.0
70.1
5.7
5.2
6.3
2.6
63.7
4.7
100.0
75.3
41. 2
&32 3
85.7
78.0
82.0
27.6
687. 7
72.3
New York________________
North Carolina____________
North Dakota.............. ...........
Ohio_____________________
Oklahoma..................... ...........
96.9
14.9
1.8
78.8
15.9
120.8
16.7
3.5
111.1
9.4
129.6
14.4
4.0
83.5
13.0
140.9
20.4
6.0
116. 1
13.4
116.4
20.4
3.9
136.0
12.0
166.6
17.5
6.6
139.8
13.5
133.8
29.5
5.0
132.0
13.9
167.3
19.1
7.1
119.8
11.4
111.5
21.3
.9
101.1
11.6
113.3
13.0
2.2
87.9
7.9
1,489.9
216.4
35.6
1, 216. 0
149.2
1,410.2
182.2
29.8
985.8
137.4
Oregon..._________________
Pennsylvania--------- ----------Rhode Islan d ..-----------------South Carolina.......................
South Dakota_____ ________
11.9
48.7
4.6
4.7
1.6
13.4
65.5
3.6
6.8
4,5
16.3
55.1
3.5
5.1
3.2
17.5
67.2
4.9
5.4
2.6
16.9
67.8
8.1
6.5
3.3
21.1
93.9
14.1
6.0
5.3
23.9
84.1
4.4
7.7
4.5
16.9
94.9
4.7
6.5
4.7
14.5
68.3
2.9
6.6
3.4
8.1
70.2
4.5
6.5
1.9
157.2
871.9
49.0
94.6
36.9
150.9
734.8
44 7
67.3
32.7
Tennessee________ _____ _
T exas...-------- ------------------Utah_____________________
Vermont—.............................. .
Virginia.......... ..........................
17.0
64.9
9.0
.6
24.8
15.7
76.1
8.1
.6
40.7
15.5
71.9
12.6
2.8
31.2
16.5
75.2
14.8
.6
36.1
24.4
78.1
8.7
.5
37.3
19.1
75.1
13.1
1.5
55.5
20.3
84.3
12.0
1.9
58.0
21.4
77.1
11.3
.7
45.0
10 9
88.4
12.0
.3
46.1
14.6
65.9
9.2
.7
29.3
219.6
1,024. 6
118.7
11.3
475.2
209.9
946.4
105 1
9.3
420.9
Washington ______________
West Virginia_____________
25.7
5.2
34.0
24.8
6.2
40.9
3.4
32.7
5.1
36.6
2.0
37.4
5.8
39.7
2.7
32.8
5.9
38.9
51.7
7.9
43.6
3.1
35.9
6.2
52.6
2.1
39.2
6.0
59.6
46.3
4.7
35.6
3.0
21.8
4.0
31.3
381.0
67.4
438.8
18.6
375.5
65.1
401.5
23.2
W T sc o n sin ...........................................
Wyoming— .................... ........
• S ee fo o tn o te 1, ta b le F -3 .
https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
.8
2 R e v is e d .
1.8
2.2
s C o m p r ise d of 168 S ta n d a r d M e tr o p o lita n A rea s u se d in 1950 C e n su s.
.9
434
T able
MONTHLY LABOR REVIEW, MARCH 1957
F-6: Number of new permanent nonfarm dwelling units started, by ownership and location,
and construction co st1
Number of new dwelling units started
Location2
Period
Total
1950 4____ ________ _____ ____ 1, 396,000
1951______________ ________ 1, 091,300
1952________________________ 1,127,000
1953-......................................... . 1,103,800
1954_______________________ 1,220,400
1955_______________________ 1,328. 900
1956 5__ ______ ___________
1,120,800
1953: First quarter. ________ __ 257,100
Second quarter__________
324,300
Third quarter,.................
285,000
Fourth quarter___ ______
237, 400
1954: First quarter___ ________ 236,800
January __
________
66, 400
February_________ ____
75, 200
March_______________
95, 200
Second quarter__________ 332, 700
April____________ ____ 107, 700
M ay_________________ 108, 500
Ju n e _ _ -_____ ________
116, 500
Third quarter___________ 346, 000
July_________________
116, 000
August_______________
114, 300
September____________
115, 700
Fourth quarter__________ 304, 900
October______________
110, 700
November _ . _______ 103, 600
December ___________
90, 600
1955: First quarter.-. _________ 291,300
January______________
87,600
February------- --------89, 900
March..- ________
113,800
Second quarter__________
404, 400
April_________________ 132, 000
M ay______ __________
137, 600
June_________________
134, 800
Third quarter. _________
362, 200
July--------------------------- 122, 600
August_______ _______
124, 700
September____________
114, 900
Fourth quarter. . _ ______ 271, 200
October______________
105,800
November ___________
89, 200
December_____________
76, 200
1956: First quarter___ _______ _ 251,900
January______________
75,000
February_____ ________
78, 300
M arch, _____________
98, 600
Second q u arter__________ 332,400
April_________________ 111, 3Q0
May_____________ ____ 113, 700
Ju n e ___________ ____
107,400
Third quarter__________
298, 900
July------------------ 101,100
August_______________ 103, 900
September_ _________
93, 900
Fourth quarter 4___ _____
237, 600
October 2_______ _____
93, 600
Novem ber{__________
80,000
December 5_____ _
64, 000
1957: First quarter_______
January 4_______ - . . .
65,000
Privately Publicly
owned
owned
1,352, 200
1,020,100
1,068, 500
1,068, 300
1, 201, 700
1, 309, .500
1, 097, 200
238,100
315,000
280, 700
234, 500
232, 200
65,100
73, 900
93, 200
326, 500
106, 500
107, 400
112, 600
339, 300
112, 900
113, 000
113, 400
303, 700
110, 500
103, 300
89. 900
288, 000
87, 300
87, 900
112, 800
397, 000
130,500
135,100
131,400
357, 800
121,900
122,300
113, 600
266, 700
104, 800
88, 400
73, 500
244,600
73, 700
77,000
93, 900
325,300
109, 900
110,800
104,600
292, 900
99.000
103, 200
90, 700
234,400
91, 200
79,600
63, 600
62,200
Metro Nonmetro North North
politan
politan
east Central South
places
places
43, 800 1, 021, 600
71, 200
776. 800
794, 900
58, 500
35, 500 803. 500
18, 700
896,900
19, 400 975,800
779, 500
23,600
184, 400
19,000
9, 300
238,100
207. 800
4,300
173, 200
2,900
174,300
4,600
1,300
49, 700
1,300
63, 500
2,000
71,100
6,200
244, 000
1,200
79, 400
1,100
77,100
3, 900
87, 500
252, 800
6, 700
3,100
87, 500
1,300
82.600
82, 700
2,300
1,200
225,800
200
80, 400
300
75, 700
700
69, 700
3,300
221,800
300
68,100
2,000
66, 900
1,000
86, 800
295, 400
7,400
1,500
96, 800
99, 700
2,500
3, 400
98, 900
4,400
263, 300
700
88. 300
91, 500
2,400
1,300
83, 500
4,500
195,800
1,000
76, 500
800
64,600
2, 700
54, 700
7, 300
183,800
1,300
54,300
1,300
57,600
4,700
71, 900
7,100
228,200
1, 400
76,100
2, 900
77, 600
2,800
74, 500
6,000
202, 900
2,100
69, 700
700
70,900
3.200
62, 300
3.200
164, 600
2, 400
64,900
400
54, 500
400
45,200
2,800
45,8ÒÒ
1 T h e d a ta sh o w n h ere d o n o t in c lu d e te m p o r a r y u n its , co n v e r sio n s, d o r
m ito r y a c c o m m o d a tio n s , tra ilers, or m ilita r y b a rra cks. T h e y d o in c lu d e
p refab ricated h o u sin g , if p e r m a n e n t.
T h e s e e s tim a te s are b a se d on (1) m o n t h ly b u ild in g -p e r m it re p o r ts (a d ju ste d
for la p se d p e r m its a n d for la g b e tw e e n p e r m it is s u a n c e a n d th e sta r t o f c o n
s tr u c tio n ), (2) c o n tin u o u s fie ld s u r v e y s in n o n p e r m it-is s u in g p la ce s, a n d
(3) re p o r ts o f p u b lic c o n s tr u c tio n c o n tr a c t aw a rd s.
B e g in n in g w it h J a n u a r y 1954 d a ta , th e e s tim a tin g te c h n iq u e s for th e
p r iv a te ly o w n e d s e g m e n t o f th e h o u s in g sta r ts series w e r e re v ised to c o m b in e
(1) a m o n t h ly re p o r tin g s y s te m e x p a n d e d t o in c lu d e a lm o s t a ll b u ild in g p e r m it-is su in g lo c a litie s (a c c o u n tin g for n e a r ly 80 p e r c e n t o f to ta l n o nfa rm
p o p u la tio n ), w it h (2) a n e w ly d e sig n e d s a m p le o f c o u n tie s t h a t p e r m its m o re
e ffic ie n t o p e r a tio n s a n d a g reater d egree o f a c c u r a c y th a n p r e v io u s ly . T h e
n e w series is c o n tin u o u s w it h s ta tis tic s for earlier d a te s e x c e p t t h a t th e u rb a n
an d ru ral-non farm d is tr ib u tio n s h o w n p r e v io u s ly is re p la ced b y m e tr o
p o lita n -n o n m e tr o p o lita n a n d r e g io n a l e s tim a te s . D a ta o n t y p e o f s tr u c tu r e
(1 -fa m ily v er su s r e n ta l-ty p e s tr u c tu r e s) are c o n tin u e d from th e o ld to th e
n e w series, an d are a v a ila b le o n r e q u e s t.
https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
1
(in thousands)
374, 400
314, 500
332,100
300,300
323, 500
353,100
341,300
72, 700
86, 200
77, 200
64, 200
62, 500
16, 700
21, 700
24,100
88, 700
28, 300
31, 400
29,000
93, 200
28, 500
31, 700
33, 000
79,100
30,300
27, 900
20, 900
69, 500
19, 500
23,000
27,000
109,000
•35, 200
37, 900
35,900
98,900
34, 300
33, 200
31,400
75, 400
29, 300
24, 600
21, 500
68,100
20, 700
20, 700
26,700
104,200
35, 200
36,100
32,900
96, 000
31,400
33,000
31. 600
73,000
28,700
25, 500
18, 800
m
(j)
(a)
(2)
243,100
273,100
(6)
(s)
(2)
(2)
(2)
47, 400
13,000
13, 300
21,100
67, 300
21, 700
21,600
24, 000
72, 500
25, 300
24,800
22, 400
55,900
21, 600
19,000
15. 300
53,100
16, 000
13, 500
23, 600
89, 700
28, 600
30, 300
30, 800
75, 300
27,000
24, 900
23, 400
55, 500
23, 500
17, 700
14, 300
45, 700
12, 400
14, 400
18, 900
72,300
23, 400
24, 700
24, 200
61, 800
21, 800
20,800
19, 200
(s)
(2)
(2)
(2)
325, 800
356,000
(6)
(2)
(2)
Í2)
(2)
52, 700
13, 300
16, 200
23,200
98, 400
31,100
32, 900
34, 400
97, 800
33, 300
32,600
31, 900
76, 900
30,100
26, 800
20,000
63, 400
15, 600
19, 700
28,100
116,600
37, 300
40,000
39,300
108,000
35. 600
38,000
34, 400
68,000
29, 400
23,000
15, 600
58,200
15, 700
16, 400
26,100
98,100
33, 600
33, 300
31, 200
86, 700
29, 900
29, 200
27, 600
20,100
(6)
m
26,200
(6)
m
19,200
(6)
(6)
West
Total
Privately
owned
Publicly
owned
$11, 788, 595 $11, 418, 371
(2)
9, 800, 892
9,186,123
(2)
10, 208,983
9, 706, 276
(2)
10, 488,003 10,181,185
(2)
291, 800 12, 478, 237 12, 309, 200
310, 800 14, 544,647 14, 345, 829
13,116,907 12,853,287
(6)
2, 346, 213
2,183, 710
(2)
3,083, 256 3, 000,120
(2)
2, 777, 607 2, 739, 268
(2)
2, 280, 927 2, 258,087
(2)
59,100
2, 240, 448
2,199, 446
17, 600
618, 313
605, 951
19, 600
701, 934
690, 760
21, 900
920, 201
902, 735
76,100
3, 454, 571
3, 398, 898
25, 600
1,106,809
1, 095, 557
24,000
1,137,562
1,128, 751
26, 500
1, 210, 200
1,174, 590
75, 800
3, 690, 366 3, 528, 471
25, 200
1,213, 311
1,182, 830
25, 200
1,186,019
1,175, 766
25, 400
1,191,036
1,169,875
80, 800
3,192, 852
3,182,385
27, 200
1,160, 300
1,158, 338
26, 300
1,083, 449
1,080. 578
949,103
27,300
943, 469
78, 900 3, 076,198
3,043, 959
25, 400
892, 794
890,092
24, 300
954, 570
934, 585
29, 200 1, 228,834
1, 219, 282
88, 500 4, 416, 285 4,349,159
30, 400
1, 434, 395
1, 421, 309
29, 900
1, 502, 901
1, 479, 773
28, 200
1, 478, 989
1, 448,077
79, 500
4, 025, 441
3, 981,182
27, 300
1, 372,150
1, 363,092
27,000
1, 369, 948
1,346, 848
25, 200 1, 283, 343
1, 271, 242
63, 700 3,026, 723 2, 971, 529
24, 400
1,178, 809
1,168, 229
20, 700
993, 986
985,891
18, 600
853, 928
817,409
64, 700 2,847,118
2,761,446
812,162
19,600
800', 665
20, 700
885,855
871, 700
24, 400 1,149,101
1,089,081
68,900 3,923,942
3,844; 192
23, 300
1, 308, 933
1,293,488
22, 900
1,346, 513
1, 312, 890
22, 700
1,268,496
1, 237,814
63, 400 3, 534, 804 3, 471, 787
21, 700
1, 201,352
1,179, 266
23, 200
1, 227,269
1, 222, 281
18, 500
1,106,183
1, 070, 240
2,811,043
2,775,862
27, 500 19,800
1,104, 981
1,078,142
951, 652
' 947, 240
(6)
(6)
754,410
750, 480
(6)
(6)
(2)
(2)
(2)
(’)
359, 700
389,000
(6)
(2)
(2)
(2)
(2)
77, 600
22, 500
26,100
29,000
90, 900
29, 300
30, 000
31, 600
99, 900
32. 200
31, 700
36,000
91, 300
31,800
31, 500
28, 000
95,900
30,600
32,400
32, 900
109,600
35, 700
37, 400
36, 500
99, 400
32, 700
34,800
31, 900
84,000
28, 500
27, 800
27, 700
83, 300
27, 300
26, 800
29,200
93,100
31, 000
32, 800
29,300
87, 000
27, 700
30, 700
28, 600
(6)
(«)
761, 635
727, 740
$370, 224
614, 769
502', 707
306, 881
169,037
198, 818
263,620
162', 503
83,136
38, 339
22, 840
41, 002
12,362
11,174
17, 466
55, 673
11, 252
8, 811
35, 610
61, 895
30, 481
10, 253
21,161
10, 467
1, 962
2, 871
5, 634
32, 239
2, 702
19. 985
9, 552
67,126
13,086
23,128
30, 912
44, 259
9,058
23,100
12,101
55,194
10, 580
8,095
36', 519
85, 672
11, 497
14,155
60,020
79, 750
15, 445
33, 623
30,682
63,017
22,086
4,988
35; 943
35,181
26,839
i 412
3, 930
33,895
T h e error in th e to ta l p r iv a te n o n fa r m e s tim a te d u e to sa m p lin g in th e
n o n p e r m it s e g m e n t is s u c h t h a t for a n e s tim a te o f 100,000 sta r ts th e ch an ces
a re 19 o u t o f 20 t h a t a c o m p le te en u m e r a tio n o f a ll n o n p e r m it areas w ou ld
r e su lt in a to ta l p r iv a te n o n fa r m figure b e tw e e n 98,000 an d 102,000. F or
m e tr o p o lita n -n o n m e tr o p o lita n or reg io n a l c o m p o n e n ts, th e r e la tiv e error is
s o m e w h a t larger.
2 D a ta b y u rb a n a n d ru ra l-n o n fa rm c la ssific a tio n for p erio d s before J a n u a r y
1954 are a v a ila b le u p o n r e q u e s t. A n n u a l m e tr o p o lita n -n o n m e tr o p o lita n
lo c a tio n d a ta n o t a v a ila b le before 1950; m o n t h ly figures n o t a v a ila b le before
1953; re g io n a l d a ta n o t a v a ila b le b efore J a n u a r y 1954.
s P r iv a t e c o n str u c tio n c o sts are b a se d on p e r m it v a lu a tio n , a d ju ste d for
u n d e r s ta te m e n t o f co sts s h o w n o n p e r m it a p p lic a tio n s . P u b lic c o n str u c tio n
co sts are b a se d o n c o n tr a c t v a lu e s or e s tim a te d c o n str u c tio n co sts for in
d iv id u a l p ro jects.
4 H o u s in g p ea k y ea r .
* P r e lim in a r y .
6 N o t y e t a v a ila b le .
2 R e v is e d .
U. S . GOVERNM ENT P R IN T IN G O F F IC E : 1957
-*
New Publications Available
For Sale
Order sale publications from the Superintendent of Documents, Government Printing
Office, Washington 25, D. C. Send check or money order, payable to the Superintendent
of Documents. Currency sent at sender’s risk. Copies may also be purchased from any
of the Bureau’s regional offices. (See inside front cover for the addresses of these offices.)
BLS Bull. 1188: Wages and Related Benefits, 17 Labor Markets, 1955-56.
93 pp. 50 cents.
For Lim ited Free Distribution
Single copies are furnished without cost as long as supplies permit. Write to Bureau
of Labor Statistics, U. S. Department of Labor, Washington 25, D. C., or to any of the
Bureau’s regional offices. (See inside front cover for the addresses of these offices.)
Foreign Labor Information: Labor in the Philippines, December 1956. 23 pp.
https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
United S tates
Government printing O ffice
DIVISION OF PUBLIC DOCUMENTS
W
a s h in g t o n
25, D. C.
O F F IC IA L B U S IN E S S
https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
P E N A L T Y F O R P R IV A T E U S E T O A V O ID
PAYM ENT O F PO ST A G E . » 3 0 0
IG P O )
@FedFRASER