Full text of Monthly Labor Review : March 1967, Vol. 90, No. 3
The full text on this page is automatically extracted from the file linked above and may contain errors and inconsistencies.
Monthly
Labor
Review
MARCH
1967
VOL.
90
KAL A M ? 700
MAR 23 1357
NO.
A Review Essay
Education and the Wealth of Nations
Quality and a Pure Price Index
The 1966 FLSA Amendments
Adult Men Not in the Labor Force
UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF LABOR
BUREAU OF LABOR STATISTICS
https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF LABOR
W. Willard Wirtz, Secretary
BUREAU OF LABOR STATISTICS
A r t h u r M . R o ss,
R obert
J.
M y ers,
Commissioner of Labor Statistics
Deputy Commissioner
Regional Offices and Directors
NEW ENGLAND REGION
Wendell D. MacD onald
1603-A Federal Building
Government Center
Boston, Mass. 02203
Phone: 223-6727 (Area Code 617)
Connecticut
New Hampshire
Maine
Rhode Island
Massachusetts Vermont
MIDDLE ATLANTIC REGION
H erbert B ienstock
341 Ninth Avenue
New York, N.Y. 10001
Phone: 971-5401 (Area Code 212)
Delaware
Maryland
New Jersey
New York
Pennsylvania
District of Columbia
NORTH CENTRAL REGION
A dolph 0 . B erger
219 S. Dearborn Street
Chicago, HI. 60604
Phone: 353-7226 (Area Code 312)
Illinois
Indiana
Iowa
Kansas
Minnesota
Missouri
Nebraska
North Dakota
South Dakota
Wisconsin
EAST CENTRAL REGION
J ohn W. L ehman
1365 Ontario Street
Cleveland, Ohio 44114
Phone: 241-7166 (Area Code 216)
Kentucky
Michigan
Ohio
West Virginia
WESTERN REGION
SOUTHERN REGION
B runswick A. B agdon
1371 Peachtree Street NE.
Atlanta, Ga. 30309
Phone: 526-5416 (Area Code 404)
Alabama
Arkansas
Florida
Georgia
Louisiana
Mississippi
North Carolina
Oklahoma
South Carolina
Tennessee
Texas
Virginia
Max D . K ossoris
450 Golden Gate Avenue, Box 36017
San Francisco, Calif. 94102
Phone: 556-3178 (Area Code 415)
Alaska
Arizona
California
Colorado
Hawaii
Idaho
Montana
Nevada
New Mexico
Oregon
Utah
Washington
Wyoming
The M o n th l y Labor R eview is for sale by the regional offices listed above and by the Superintendent of Documents,
U.S. Government Printing Office, Washington, D.C. 20402. Subscription price per year— $7.50 domestic; $9.00
foreign. Price 75 cents a copy. Correspondence regarding subscriptions should be addressed to the Superintend
ent of Documents.
Communications on editorial matters should be addressed to the Editor-in-Chief, M o n th l y Labor Review, Bureau
of Labor Statistics, Washington, D.C. 20212. Phone 961-2327 (Area code 202).
https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
Use of funds for printing this publication approved by the Director of the Bureau of the Budget (October SI, 1962).
Monthly Labor Review
UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF LABOR
L aw rence R . K l e in ,
•
BUREAU OF LABOR STATISTICS
Editor-in-Chief
CONTENTS
https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
Articles
1
5
16
21
25
27
29
30
32
34
36
38
42
45
47
Basic Provisions of the 1966 FLSA Amendments
Adult Men Not in the Labor Force
Quality and a Pure Price Index
Education and the Wealth of Nations: A Review Essay
Additional Papers From the IRRA
Processing Employment Discrimination Cases
Discriminatory Promotion Systems
The Effect of Economic Change on the Michigan Labor Force
Technological Displacement as a Micro Phenomenon
Means of Adjustment to Technological Displacement
Defense Expenditures in Depressed Areas
National Wage Policies in Europe and the U.S.
Employment and Wage Trends in Bell System Companies
Wages in Fertilizer Plants, March-April 1966
Some Factors Affecting Housing Density and Auto Ownership
Beyond the Guidelines: Wage-Price Policy for 1967
Departments
hi
50
52
56
57
64
66
75
The Labor Month in Review
Foreign Labor Briefs
Significant Decisions in Labor Cases
Chronology of Recent Labor Events
Developments in Industrial Relations
Communications
Book Reviews and Notes
Current Labor Statistics
March 1967 . Vol. 91) • No. 3
HOW’S
To get the answer ...
read the monthly
SURVEY OF
CURRENT
BU SIN ESS
published by the Office of Business Econom
ics, U.S. Department of Commerce.
S U R V E Y is for businessmen, govern
ment administrators, trade association exec
utives, union officials, economists, statisti
cians, market researchers, and anyone else
who wants to know, month by month, the
state of the Nation's economy.
S U R V E Y carries articles on special sub
jects, such as state personal incomes, corpo
rate profits, business programs for new plant
and equipment, foreign trade, Federal Gov
ernment receipts and expenditures, and cur
rent price developments.
S U R V E Y issues show more than 2,500
statistical series for each month of the past
year or for each quarter over the past several
years, plus annual data for recent years.
S U R V E Y is the official source of the
Gross National Product statistics and the
statistics on the U. S. balance of payments.
12 monthly issues averaging 70 pages, including about 40 of
tabular material. And, at no extra cost, a weekly four-page sup
plement to keep the subscriber posted on current figures as they
become available to the Office of Business Economics.
$6.oo
per annual subscription
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------1
Order from:
Superintendent of Documents
Government Printing Office
Washington, D.C. 20402
OR
Any U.S. Department of
Commerce Field Office
Enclosed is $ ............... (send only check, money order, or Supt. Docs, coupons).
Or charge to Deposit Account No.................. Make check or money order payable to
the Superintendent of Docurhents.
Please enter my subscription(s) to the SURVEY OF CURRENT BUSINESS
Mail to:
https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
Name ........................................................................................................................................................
Address
....................................................................................................................................................
City, State, ZIP C o d e ..............................................................................................................................
The Labor Month
in Review
Steps Toward
Union Mergers
Two p a i r s o f u n i o n s took merger votes in Jan
uary, with differing results. The Mine, Mill and
Smelter Workers voted to join the Steelworkers,
while the Stereotypers and Electrotypers rejected
the proposed union with the Lithographers and
Photoengravers at the same time that the latter
group approved it. Other printing unions are
exploring the possibility of merger, and several
other unions are in various stages of the merger
process.
Judging by previous attempts, it is unlikely
that all of these efforts will be consummated.
Nonetheless, that they are being discussed at all
is symptomatic of a growing realization of what
lies ahead for unions based on a single craft or
industry in a time of technological change and
continuing corporate conglomeration and product,
diversification.
Mergers Since the Merger. Trade union direc
tories published biennially by the Bureau of Labor
Statistics show only 22 union mergers since the
1958 consolidation of the AFL and the CIO.
These include mergers of independent as well as
affiliated organizations. Only three mergers
joined unions of parallel jurisdiction from each
of the former federations: mergers of paperworkers, barbers and hairdressers, and insurance
workers.
Most of the mergers united small unions, usually
of workers in a declining craft or industry, into
larger, stronger organizations. Thus, the Tex
tile Workers took in the Hosiery Workers, after
the latter’s membership dropped from 50,000 be
fore World War I I to 5,000 in 1965 because of
technological change and plant relocation in the
hosiery industry. Other mergers joined the Glove
https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
Workers with the Clothing Workers, the Agricul
tural Workers with the Meat Cutters, the Air Line
Communications Employee Association with the
Communications Workers, the Wall Paper Crafts
men with the Pulp, Sulphite Union, the Wire
Weavers with the Papermakers and Paperworkers, and the Metal Engravers and Marking Device
Workers with the Machinists.
Current Attempts. Unlike most mergers of the
past decade, in which a dying union was rescued
by a healthy one, the combinations now under con
sideration are generally composed of fully opera
tive groups. In most cases, the unions already
deal with the same employer or group of em
ployers; in many cases, furthermore, the continu
ing erosion of craft lines has caused previously
separate interests to converge.
The merger between the Steelworkers and the
Mine, Mill union combined 80 percent of the
organized workers in the nonferrous metals indus
try into one union. (Mine, Mill has 28,000 mem
bers in the industry; the Steelworkers have
38,000.)
A Mine, Mill convention approved the merger
on January 17, 1967, and the union became an
affiliate of the Steelworkers on February 1. On
July 1, 1967, Mine, Mill’s U.S. locals will be
Chartered as locals of the Steelworkers. (The
Canadian Mine, Mill union will retain its auton
omy.) This last step is being delayed until July
to protect bargaining certifications while the
merger takes place, as most of the maj or contracts
in the nonferrous metals industry expire on June
30.
The Lithographers and Photoengravers Union
(L PIU ), itself a product of a 2-year-old merger,
and the Stereotypers and Electrotypers Union
(ISEU) also completed referendums on their pro
posed union in January. The Stereotypers re
jected the merger; many members feared that
their interests would be overridden by the larger
Lithographers organization.
Other opponents of the merger were reluctant to
submerge their craft identity in the proposed
Graphic Arts Union, as the new organization was
to be called, but proponents of the amalgamation—
which would have joined all platemakers—held
that it was necessary precisely because new print
ing processes may make stereotypers obsolete.
iii
IV
While the LPITT and ISEIJ were negotiating,
the LPIU continued its efforts to unite all the
printing crafts, completing a year of merger dis
cussions with the 115,000-member Printing Press
men (who later arranged a joint relationship
with the Typographical Union) and beginning ex
ploratory talks with the Bookbinders. All of
these unions are affected by the new developments
in printing technology that are replacing tradi
tional jobs with new ones, many of which involve
monitoring rather than operating equipment.
Most of the union leaders believe that a single
graphic arts union would facilitate an orderly
transition to the new job structure and protect
their members’ interests in the process.
The proposed merger of 3 of the 5 railroad oper
ating unions—the Locomotive Firemen and Enginemen, Railway Conductors, and Switchmen—
is still in an early stage. These organizations,
especially the Firemen, have lost members through
technological change and the general decline in
rail traffic. (The 1963 National Arbitration
Award has reportedly cost the Firemen about
18,000 jobs, and has eliminated several thousand
jobs held by members of the other two unions.)
The unions’ leaders expect consolidation to pro
duce the advantages of unified representation and
operating economies.
Last June, the Conductors approved the calling
of a convention this spring to draft a constitution
for the new organization, and the Firemen “en
dorsed and approved” the proposal a month later.
The Switchmen’s union must follow suit this year
before further steps can be taken, though repre
sentatives of the three unions are already working
on proposals for the new constitution.
On February 15, the two sea officer unions—the
10.000- member Masters, Mates, and Pilots, and the
12.000- member Marine Engineers—opened refer
endum votes to approve the merger in principle.
These two unions represent deck and engine offi
cers aJboard more than 95 percent of all commer
cial American flagships, as well as civilian ship
officers of Government marine units. According
to industry experts, new technology is tending to
diminish the traditional differences between the
deck and engine jobs.
Other mergers now in the talking stage include
the two shoemaking unions, whose previous mer
ger attempts failed, and the two paper industry
unions, each of which lost a substantial portion
of its membership to a breakaway union during
https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
MONTHLY LABOR REVIEW, MARCH 1967
the joint 1964 negotiations with Pacific Coast
manufacturers.
Earlier Attempts. Just after the AFL and the
CIO merged, the leaders of the new organization
hoped that member unions with parallel jurisdic
tions would soon get together. The consolidation
of the Papermakers and the Paperworkers in 1957
was hailed as the “first concrete realization” of
that goal of ending “conflicting and duplicating
organizations and jurisdictions.” Other unions
made tentative approaches to their opposite num
bers, but generally found that old animosities had
not abated enough.
Negotiations for merger of the two packing
house unions were broken off at the very last min
ute, apparently because of mistrust engendered by
years of competition. The shoe workers’ merger
failed because of the difficulty of adjusting struc
tural differences, as well as the problem of who
was to get what offices in the new organization.
Only last year, the two postal clerk unions stopped
short of merger, mainly because the Postal Clerks’
small town locals objected to dilution of their vot
ing strength under the provisions of the new consti
tution. And the Federation’s efforts to get the two
textile unions together have not yet succeeded.
Another Avenue. The reasons that cause unions
to accept or reject mergers are varied and complex.
Rarely are such actions dictated by reason, for
sentimental attachment to union traditions, a
change of leadership, or the way that merger is ex
plained to the members is often more important
than technological change or similar considera
tions.
Certainly, union mergers could ease the jurisdic
tional wrangling behind many labor disputes, es
pecially in industries where mergers are now under
consideration—railroads, maritime, and printing.
(A report recently prepared for the British Gov
ernment concluded that a single union should be
set up for the printing industry, since the craft de
marcations on which the unions are based bear no
relation to the new jobs.)
But merger is not the only way for unions to
solve common problems. Many union leaders be
lieve that they can get some of the benefits of merg
er, principally greater negotiating strength, by the
multiunion bargaining alliances that many observ
ers expect to be a major feature of collective bar
gaining in 1967.
Basic Provisions
of the 1966
FLSA Amendments
S u s a n K o c in *
E
N o t e .— The following article is the first
of three dealing w ith the Fair Labor Stand
ards Amendments of 1966. Part I of the series
summarizes the changes and discusses their
significance. Part I I deals with the coverage
aspects of the legislation and identifies various
economic characteristics of workers protected
by the Federal statute. The economic impli
cations of the amendments as fudged by past
experience are analyzed in Part III.
d i t o r ’s
,
,
most far-reaching improvements yet accom
plished in the Federal minimum wage law were ef
fected on February 1, 1967, by the 1966 amend
ments to the Fair Labor Standards Act. Since
the 1938 enactment of the law, the level of the
minimum wage lias been increased three times and
the basic coverage of the act expanded once. The
latter occurred in 1961 when a new dimension for
“work in interstate commerce”—the “enterprise”
concept of coverage—was created and became the
basis for the present adjustments in the law’s pro
tection. The 1966 amendments establish essential
minimum labor standards for 9 million nonsupervisory workers previously excluded from the bene
fits of the law, bringing to nearly 41.5 million the
total number of workers protected by the minimum
wage, overtime pay, child labor, and equal pay
provisions of the Fair Labor Standards Act.
T he
unemployed, and millions of part-time workers
were fearful of losing the little employment they
had. For decades, many organizations, groups,
and individuals had expressed the belief that by
setting “a floor under wages,” “a ceiling over
hours,” and giving “a break to children,” unfavor
able labor conditions could be curbed or elimi
nated. The Fair Labor Standards Act was passed
with the hope of improving workers’ purchasing
power, diverting school-age children from the
workplace, and spreading available employment
among millions of jobless adults.
Initially, the standards of the act applied to
employees individually “engaged” in interstate
commerce, in the “production of goods” for inter
state commerce, or in activities necessary to such
operations. Employees so engaged could be found
in many industries, particularly in manufacturing,
mining, transportation, communications, public
utilities, wholesaling, finance, insurance, and real
estate. The original act also contained many
exemptions for employees based on either the in
dustries or occupations in which they were
engaged.
The minimum wage was set at 25 cents an hour
in 1938, to be increased to 30 cents in 1940, and to
40 cents by 1945. A maximum workweek for cov
ered employees was established, with a penalty of
time and one-half the regular rate to be paid for
hours worked over 44 a week in 1938, over 42 a
week in 1939, and over 40 a week in 1940.
The first major amendments to the Fair Labor
Standards Act were enacted in 1949.1 These
amendments increased the minimum wage require
ment from 40 cents to 75 cents an hour on Janu
ary 1, 1950. At that time, Congress reviewed the
major problems of interpretation which had arisen
through experience with the law and incorporated
a number of clarifications into the language of the
act. The coverage provisions were amended to
include as “covered activities” only those “closely
related and directly essential” to the production of
goods for interstate commerce, rather than activi
ties “necessary” to such production. These
History of the Act
At the time of the law’s enactment, the econ
omy was recovering from the effects of a severe
depression. Over 10 million Americans were still
https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
♦Of the Office, of Research and Legislative Analysis, Wage and
Hour and Public Contracts D ivisions.
1 A clarifying amendment, the Portal-to-Portal Act. w as passed
by the Congress in 1947 to remedy problems resulting from court
decisions on w hat constituted “hours worked” under the Fair
Labor Standards Act.
1
MONTHLY LABOR REVIEW, MARCH 1967
2
changes narrowed, to some degree, the scope of the
act.
The 1955 amendments raised the minimum
wage to $1 an hour, but made no changes in
coverage.
In 1961, Congress substantially expanded the
coverage of the law for the first time. While
retaining the provisions for employees individu
ally engaged in interstate commerce or in the
production of goods for interstate commerce, the
amendments established a new basis for covering
all employees in any “enterprise” which had some
employees so engaged. Dollar volume tests were
established as a basis for enterprise coverage.
Under these tests, coverage was extended pri
marily to employees in retail or service enterprises
as well as to local transit, construction, and gaso
line service station employees.
The 1961 amendments raised the minimum
wage to $1.25 an hour. For those covered before
the amendments, the first step in the increase,
from $1 to $1.15, became effective on September
3, 1961, and the final step on September 3, 1963.
Employees covered for the first time by these,
amendments became subject to a minimum hourly
wage of $1 on September 3, 1961, $1.15 on Sep
tember 3, 1964, and $1.25 on September 3, 1965.
Overtime protection for these employees for hours
worked in excess of 44 in any workweek began
in 1963, and was reduced to 42 hours in 1964 and
to 40 hours in 1965.
The 1966 Amendments
Since the enactment of the 1961 amendments,
the Congress has received reports prepared by the
Wage and Hour and Public Contracts Divisions
on the need for and feasibility of extending the
Fair Labor Standards Act to employees in a num
ber of industries. Legislation introduced in 1965,
based in part on these studies, was considered,
expanded, and eventually enacted by the Congress
as the 1966 amendments.
The latest amendments almost fulfill the origi
nal act’s commitment to eliminate substandard
working conditions in interstate commerce. With
its new concept of “enterprise,” the 1961 legisla
tion increased the number of covered workers
about 15 percent. By revising the definition of
“enterprise” as well as “employer” and deleting
https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
or narrowing some exemptions, the 1966 amend
ments increase the number protected another 30
percent.
The “enterprise” concept of coverage has proven
a workable means of encompassing large groups
of employees in various industries within the
wage protection of the act. The enterprise dollar
volume test for coverage is reduced from $1 mil
lion to $500,000 in gross annual volume of busi
ness effective on February 1, 1967, and to $250,000
beginning February 1, 1969. Coverage is ex
tended without a dollar volume test to employees
of laundries and drycleaning enterprises, con
struction enterprises, and to non-Federal hospi
tals, nursing homes, private and public elemen
tary and secondary schools, and institutions of
higher education, both profit and nonprofit. Em
ployees of retail and service establishments with
annual receipts of less than $250,000 continue to
be exempt from the law’s requirements.
A major feature of the amendments is the ex
tension of minimum wage protection to workers
employed on large farms. The amendments also
narrow or repeal exemptions for employees of ho
tels, restaurants, laundries and drycleaners, hospi
tals, nursing homes, schools, auto and farm imple
ment dealers, small loggers, local transit compa
nies, taxicab companies, and agricultural process
ing and food service employees. Coverage is ex
tended to all employees of employers with Federal
service contracts and to certain Federal wTage board
employees, as well as to employees in nonappropriated fund installations of the Armed Forces, such
as post exchanges.
As in 1961, these amendments provide a time
table for reaching the new minimum wage stand
ards. Rates for employees covered prior to the
1966 amendments, for most of the newly covered
Federal employees, and for some employees of
employers with Federal service contracts escalate
in two annual steps; those for newly covered non
farm workers are spread over a 5-year period;
and the wage level for covered farm workers will
be reached in three annual steps.
Effective date
Hourly wage
for old coverage
February 1, 1967_____
February 1,1968_____
February 1, 1969-------February 1,1970-------February 1, 1971--------
$1.40
1.60
-------------------------------------------------
Hourly wage for
new nonfarm
coverage
$1.00
1.16
1-30
1-45
1-60
Hourly wage
for new farm
coverage
$1.00
1-15
1-30
---------------------------------
1966 FLSA AMENDMENTS
Overtime pay requirements remain unchanged
for most employees previously subject to these
provisions. Many of the groups subject to the
overtime provisions for the first time are required
to receive time and one-half their regular rate for
hours worked over 44 a week as of February 1,
1967 ; those over 42 a week on February 1, 1968;
and over 40 a week beginning February 1, 1969.
Hospitals and Nursing Homes. The new amend
ments delete the exemption for employees in hos
pitals and nursing homes and extend coverage to
2 million nonsupervisory employees of non-Federal hospitals, nursing homes, and related institu
tions. These employees are subject to the act
whether they work in a private or public institu
tion, whether it is a profit or nonprofit organiza
tion.
Because of scheduling problems in these institu
tions, overtime requirements vary from those pre
viously embodied in the law. Nursing home em
ployees receive overtime pay after 48 hours a week,
and, after agreement with their employees that the
work period is to be 14 consecutive days, hospitals
may pay overtime compensation for hours worked
over 8 in a day and 80 in the 14-day period. Pre
mium pay for daily overtime may be offset against
any additional overtime pay due for hours in ex
cess of 80 in the 14-day period. This marks
the first time that an 8-hour standard has been
included in the act.
Schools. Employees of elementary and second
ary schools and institutions of higher education are
covered by the act. About 1*4 million employees
in both private and public institutions, including
many who traditionally have been among the low
est paid wmrkers in our economy, now receive the
benefits of a minimum wage and premium pay for
overtime hours.
Hotels and Restaurants. About 300,000 em
ployees in lodging establishments and almost 500,000 employees of restaurants which do $250,000
or more a year in business 2 are covered by the
minimum wage provisions of the law. However,
the Congress retained the exemption from the
overtime requirements for these employees. Pro- Such establishm ents m ust be parts of enterprises having1 an
nual business of $500,000 or more effective February 1, 1967, and
$250,000 or more on February 1, 1969.
https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
3
visions in the amendments allow employees’ tips
to count toward the minimum wage. If an em
ployee regularly receives more than $20 a month
in tips, his employer may take credit for tips up to
50 percent of the applicable minimum wage. How
ever, if the employee is receiving less than the
amount credited, the employer is required to pay
the balance so that the employee receives at least
the minimum.
Laundries. Some 500,000 employees in laundries
and dry cleaning establishments are newly covered
by minimum wages and overtime provisions. The
rates for workers already subject to the act’s pro
visions—primarily in industrial laundries and
linen supply plants—are those for previously cov
ered employment.
Farm and Agricultural Processing Workers.
In extending minimum wage protection to 400,000
agricultural workers, the 1966 amendments pro
vide some measure of economic security to a group
of workers long with little protective labor legis
lation. Generally, only employees of large farms
receive the new benefit—those who work on farms
which regularly use the equivalent of seven full
time farmhands. The minimum wage is required
for employees of farm employers who have used
more than 500 man-days of agricultural labor
in any calendar quarter of the preceding year.
The work of certain farm workers—members of
the employer’s immediate family and hand-harvest
laborers paid on a piece-rate basis who are local
residents employed in agriculture for less than 13
weeks in the previous calendar year—is not in
cluded in this man-day count. These workers are
exempt from both minimum wage and overtime
requirements of the act, as are migrant workers’
children (under 17) who are employed on the same
farm as their parents and paid at the same piecerate as adult workers, as well as employees en
gaged in the range production of livestock. All
farm workers continue to be exempt from over
time.
The 1966 amendments modify the exemptions
for canning and other food-processing employees
providing minimum wage protection for some
90,000 employees. In addition, the overtime ex
emptions for these and other processing workers
are narrowed. Finder the previous provisions of
MONTHLY LABOR REVIEW, MARCH 1967
4
the act, employers were able to claim either yearround or as much as two 14-week overtime exemp
tions each year. The amendments will allow, at
most, two 10-week partial exemptions from the
overtime requirements for these employees.
Puerto Rico. In Puerto Rico, wages increased
by the same percentages as on the mainland—12
percent the first year and 16 percent a year later—
for those previously covered by the act. Pro
vision has been made for the appointment of re
view committees in those industries which seek a
smaller increase because of financial hardship.
Newly covered workers’ wage rates will be estab
lished, as in the past, by industry committees, at
levels (no higher than the statutory minimum)
which are appropriate for the employment and
competitive conditions of the economy.
Other 1966 revisions include :
1. Full-time students of any age may be em
ployed part time on farms or in retail or retailservice establishments at 85 percent of the appli
cable minimum wage, subject to restrictions pre
scribed in the law.
2. Wages of handicapped workers in sheltered
workshops are in most instances to be no less than
50 percent of the statutory minimum.
3. The overtime exemption is revoked for em
ployees of gasoline service station establishments
with $250,000 or more in annual volume of sales.
4. The overtime exemption is changed for em
ployees of independently owned bulk petroleum
distributors with less than $1 million a year in
sales, to require time and one-half the minimum
wage for hours over 40 and up to 56 a week, with
time and one-half the employee’s regular rate for
hours over 12 a day and 56 a week.
5. Taxicab drivers and operating employees of
some local transit companies continue to be ex
empt from the overtime provision.
6. A partial overtime exemption is established
for employees of bowling alleys that are not ex
empt as retail or service establishments. Time
and one-half the employee’s regular rate is re
quired for hours worked in excess of 48 in the
workweek.
7. The statute of limitations is increased from
2 to 3 years for actions arising out of willful vio
lations of the Fair Labor Standards Act.
The 1966 amendments represent a big step
toward the goal of eliminating labor conditions
detrimental to maintenance of the minimum stand
ard of living necessary for the health, efficiency,
and general well-being of our country’s workers—
the stated purpose of the Fair Labor Standards
Act. When signing these amendments, President
Johnson noted that “Today in this country, when
you are poor, you are poor alone. The new mini
mum wage—$64 a week—will not support a very
big family, but it will bring workers and tlieir
families a little bit above the poverty line . . . My
ambition is that no man should have to work for a
minimum wage, but that every man should have
skills that he can sell for more.”
As a matter of fact, we have for too long neglected the housing problem
for all our lower income groups. We have spent large sums of money on
parks, on highways, on bridges, on museums, and on other projects of civic
betterment . . . But we have not yet begun adequately to spend money in
order to help the families in the overcrowded sections of our cities to live as
American citizens have a right to live.
https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
—Franklin D. Roosevelt, in speech delivered in New
York, October 28, 1936.
Adult Men Not in the Labor Force
A Special Labor Force Report on Historical Trends
and the Characteristics of Nonparticipants, Plus New Data
on Work Histories, Incomes, and Jobseeking Intentions
Su san
S. H o lla n d *
O v e r t h e l o n g r u n , several major trends have
been operating to reduce the proportion of men
who participate in the U.S. labor force. In 1947,
the participation rate for men 18 years of age and
over was 88.1 percent; by 1966, it had receded to
82.5 percent.
In the first decade after World War II, the
decline was accounted for mainly by lower rates
for teenagers and men past 65 years of age, as full
time school attendance lengthened and the average
age of retirement moved downward. While these
trends have continued during the past 10 years, a
number of additional factors have been at work in
the more recent period. The extension of retire
ment benefits under social security and private
pension plans to men in their early sixties has con
tributed to the downtrend in participation. At
the same time, some proportion of male nonwork
ers have been squeezed out of the labor force by
economic and sociological factors beyond their
control. In addition, incomes have risen suffi
ciently to permit a growing proportion of Ameri
can men between the ages of 18 and 64 to choose
study, social service, or travel or other leisure ac
tivities rather than paid employment.
From a social and economic point of view, nonparticipation has quite a different meaning at dif
ferent ages. For younger men, the main reason
is school attendance—a desirable alternative to
labor force participation in the sense that the in
dividual’s work skills are being developed. In
the age group approaching 65, retirement and
leisure are the desires of many men and a neces
sity for others beset by ill health or disability.
https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
But for men in the central ages, work is normally
an economic necessity, and in these ages nonpar
ticipation is frequently an evidence of deprivation.
At the moment, it is not possible to determine
what proportion of the nonparticipants were
forced out of the labor force, as distinguished
from those who retired or withdrew voluntarily to
devote themselves to leisure activities. Informa
tion in this area—particularly the reasons for non
participation—is expected to expand greatly in
1967, through a special supplemental survey and
through the regular compilation of data each
month in the household survey.
The usual expectation in the United States of
the mid-1960’s is that men who are out of school
and are not old enough to retire will be working
or seeking work. Despite the trends cited above,
over 90 percent of the men between the ages of 18
and 64 were in the labor force in 1966. The link
between employment and income is still far from
broken, whatever the future may bring in the way
of sharply reduced man-hour requirements and
income maintenance programs. The focus of this
study, however, is the sizable minority of Amer
ican men of working age—iy 2 million, or 9 per
cent of the civilian noninstitutional population
18 to 64 years old—who were outside the labor
force in 1966. The nonworker group is signifi
cant because of its size, its tendency to grow, its
age-color composition, and its hitherto li ttle known
characteristics. This group presents both an ana*Of the Division of Employment and Unemployment Analysis,
Bureau of Labor Statistics.
MONTHLY LABOR REVIEW, MARCH 1967
6
lytical and a policy challenge in a period when
adult male unemployment has reached its lowest
level in 13 years and labor shortages have emerged
in several occupations and industries, and when
one of the major strategies in the war on poverty
is the fullest possible utilization of available man
power resources.
The maj or findings of the present study of nonparticipants are summarized below.
1.
Over the past decade, the proportion of non
participants among men 18 to 64 rose from 6 per
cent of the entire population group in 1956 to 8.1
percent in 1966. The sharpest and most persistent
rise in nonparticipation occurred among those age
18-24 because of longer school attendance and in
the 60-64 age group (mainly those 63 and 64 years
Chart 1.
M a le Population N ot in Labor Force, by
A g e , 1 95 6 -6 6
Percent
https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
of age, who are eligible for early retirement under
1961 amendments to the Social Security Act).
2. The nonparticipation rate for men 25 to 44
years of age remained small over the past 10 years
(2.4 percent in 1956, 2.7 percent in 1966). But
there was a moderate rise among the 45 to 54 yearolds—up from 3.4 to 4.7 percent—and the 55 to 59
year-olds—from 7.6 percent in 1956 to 10.1 percent
in 1966. Unemployment rates among men in these
same age groups have declined below 1956 levels,
coming down very sharply in the past 3 years.
3. The proportion of men outside the labor
force is higher for nonwhites than whites except
among those under 25 years of age, and the gap is
greatest in the men of prime working age. In
1966, 6y2 percent of the nonwhite men age 25-54,
but only 3 percent of the white men in this age
group were neither working nor seeking work.
The gap between the proportions of white and
nonwhite men outside the labor force developed
in the early 1950’s and increased until 1961. In
the last 5 years, however, the relative difference
has remained about constant.
4. For two-thirds of the adult men outside the
labor force, the reasons for nonparticipation are
self-evident. About 1.9 million were going to
school, and 1.1 million were unable to work because
of a long-term physical or mental disability.
Some of those currently unable to work will re
cover and return to the labor force on their own
initiative, and some in this group have physical,
mental, or psychological disabilities which could
be remedied if sufficient resources were invested.
5. The picture for the remaining 1.6 million is
much less clear. Half were in the 55-64 age
bracket, a group that includes a growing propor
tion of early retirees. In the younger age groups,
there were a sizable number whose absence from
the labor force was only a temporary situation
(waiting to return to school or enter the Armed
Forces, expecting to move to another community,
or deciding what to do after having quit a job).
The quantification of these kinds of reasons, as con
trasted to withdrawal because of discouragement
over job prospects, awaits the obtaining of addi
tional data in 1967.
6. Nearly one-third of the Ipt million men not
in the labor force had worked within the past 6
months. Almost half of the nonparticipants in
tended to look for work in the next 12 months.
ADULT MEN NOT IN THE LABOR FORCE
These facts support the hypotheses that a signifi
cant proportion of nonparticipation is the result
of temporary factors and that a substantial num
ber of the nonworkers have a strong attachment
to the work force.
7. The same pattern was reflected in a recent
survey of the work experience of the population
during t h e entire calendar year. The study
showed that of the 5.2 million men 25-64 years of
age who were not in the labor force some time dur
ing 1964, only 1.5 million were outside the work
force for the entire year.
8. Of the 41/2 million men outside the labor
force, 3 million had worked within the past 5 years.
Only 11 percent of these (325,000) had been sepa
rated involuntarily for economic reasons—slack
work, completion of seasonal or temporary jobs,
changes in company management, and so forth.
Approximately 75 percent of these men who had
lost their jobs intended to seek work again within
the next year.
9. In March 1966, 2.9 million men age 20-64
were living in families and out of the labor force.
Their family income in 1965 averaged $5,300, com
pared with $7,900 for all men in this age group.
Slightly more than half of the 2.9 million nonpar
ticipants were family heads. Median income for
this group was $4,100, indicating the increased
economic hardships which result when the male
family head is not in the labor force.
Trends
Over the last decade, there has been a gradual
but steady increase in the number of 18-64 yearold men not in the labor force.1 More important,
the nonparticipant group increased as a percent
age of the population—from 6 percent in 1956 to
8.7 percent in 1966.
As chart 1 illustrates, the sharpest and most per
sistent rise in nonparticipation occurred in young
er and older age groups. Increased school attend
ance was responsible for all of the rise in the 1824 age group. The number of young men outside
1 D ata in this section are based on 1956—66 annual averages
from the Current Population Survey. Except for the Korean
period, 1956 was the peak year for adult male labor force par
ticipation in the post-World War II period.
2 S o c ia l S e c u r ity B u lle tin , September 1966, table Q-6, p. 51.
D ata are for the period A ugust 1961 (when reduced benefits for
men became available) through August 1965.
https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
7
the labor force because of school doubled between
1956 and 1966, as the “in school” group increased
from 13 to 18 percent of the population.
Older Men
In the same 10 years, nonparticipation also rose
among men age 55-64—from 11.5 to 15.5 percent
of the population. The increase took place pri
marily among men between the ages of 60 and 64
and was attributable mainly to retirement—part
of it voluntary and part of it mandatory or forced
on the retiree. In 1956, about 12 percent of the
population age 60-64 was not in the labor force
for reasons other than inability to work ; by 1966,
the proportion had risen to 17.3 percent. Among
55-59 year-olds, the comparable proportion edged
up from 4.9 to 6.3 percent.
The increasing number and liberalization of
private pension plans, the extension of social secur
ity coverage, and the 1961 Social Security Act
amendments which permitted men to draw retire
ment benefits at age 62 have all contributed to the
decline in labor force participation among older
men. In the 1961-65 period, 1.6 million men,
about half of the group awarded social security
retirement benefits, were under the normal retire
ment age of 65.2
There is considerable additional evidence that
early retirement was the major factor in declining
participation for these older men. Of the 60-64
year-old men outside the labor force in 1966 who
had worked in the previous 5 years, and were still
able to work, about 4 out of 10 reported that they
left their last jobs because of retirement. More
over, the decline in participation among men in
this age group has accelerated in the last 5 years.
From 1956 to 1961, the proportion of 60-64 yearold men outside the labor force increased from 16
to 18 percent; it rose from 18 to 22 percent between
1961 and 1966. This drop in participation in the
last 5 years has been sharpest among 63 and 64
year-olds. Participation rates for men between
the ages of 55 and 62 remained unchanged or de
clined moderately from 1961 to 1966. In the same
5-year period, worker rates fell about 8 percentage
points for 63 and 64 year-olds.
Although for men in their early sixties retire
ment has been the major reason for labor force
MONTHLY LABOR REVIEW, MARCH 1967
8
T able
1.
E m plo ym ent S ta tu s
M e n A g e 18-64, J a n u a r y - J u n e
[Numbers in thousands]
of
tutional
population
Number
Percent of
population
Total
In school
Unable to
work
Other
reasons
__
48,996
44,391
90.6
4,599
1,914
1,060
1,581
___ -- - - - - ___
-- ______
_________ - - ____ ___ - ____
- ___ _
________ -- ____ -___ __ _______ ___ _ ____ ______
______ - ________
- -- ____ ____ _
_ _____ _ ____ ___ _______
_____
_____ ____
______ _____ __- - - - ___ ____ _
- - _________ __
_________ ______
__ _ _________
3,169
5,640
10,200
11,339
10,575
5,487
5,088
8,071
4,399
3,672
2,006
4,698
9,916
10,971
9,996
5,268
4,728
6,831
3,960
2,871
63.3
83.3
97.2
96.8
94.5
96.0
92.9
84.6
90.0
78.2
1,162
941
310
366
580
220
360
1,240
439
801
1,016
779
86
28
4
4
23
30
98
162
294
102
192
453
213
240
121
131
126
168
268
103
165
767
215
552
Total, 18-64 years
18-19 years
20-24 years
25-34 years
35-44 years
45-54 years___
45-49 years
years
55-64 years
55-59 years
fiO—
fi4 years
Not in the labor force
Civilian labor force
Civilian
Age
1966 A v e r a g e s
____
_______
--
1
1
Source : Monthly Labor Survey.
withdrawal, preliminary studies indicate that in
many cases the retirement was involuntary or
simply an alternative to unemployment or spo
radic employment at low wages.3 Similarly, a
recent Bureau of Labor Statistics study showed
that the 1962-65 decline in participation for men
age 55-64 was almost entirely among those with the
lowest educational attainment.4 The greater tend
ency of men with low educational attainment, low
earnings, and poor work histories to withdraw
from the labor force may explain why the propor
tion of nonparticipants in the 55-64 age group is
higher for non whites (19 percent) than for whites
(15 percent).
The Central Ages
The proportion of men age 25-54 not in the
labor force has traditionally been low (under 4
percent) and stable. In the past decade this held
true for 25-44 year-olds, but there was a slight
increase in nonparticipation for the 45-54 age
group—from 3.4 percent in 1956 to 4.7 percent in
1966. Most of this rise occurred between 1956
and 1960. From 1960 to 1965, the proportion out3 Lenore A. Epstein, “Early Retirement and Work Life Experi
ence,” S o c ia l S e c u r ity B u lle tin , March 1966, pp. 3-10.
4 “Educational Attainm ent of Workers in March 1965,” M o n th ly
L a b o r R e v ie w , March 1966, pp. 250-257.
5 T his section is based on January-June 1966 averages from
the Monthly Labor Survey (M LS), a program which ran experi
m entally during 1965 and 1966 to test and improve labor force
measurements. A January-June average was selected in order
to exclude the summer m onths when many young men, who are
normally students, enter the work force temporarily. The MLS
provided data previously unavailable, on when nonparticipants
last worked, the reasons they left their last job, and their in ten
tions to seek work again.
https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
side the labor force held steady at 4.4 percent ; it
then edged up to 4.7 percent in 1966.
In 1966, unemployment rates for men age 25-54
were substantially lower than in 1956 and were
about the same as the lowest rates recorded since
World War II. Furthermore, changes in adult
male unemployment rates and changes in partici
pation have not revealed any significant or persis
tent relationship. Increases in nonparticipation
among adult men apparently represent primarily
secular, rather than cyclical, developments.
In absolute numbers, the increase in nonpartici
pation has been moderate among men in the cen
tral ages. If the participation rate of adult men
had been the same in 1966 as in 1956, there would
have been 200,000 more men age 25-54 in the labor
force. Moreover, reductions in unemployment for
this age group over the 1956-66 period exactly off
set the slight increase in nonparticipation, so that
the proportion of adult men in the central ages
who were employed was the same in 1956 and 1966
(95 percent).
Characteristics of Non workers
In the first 6 months of 1966, about I 1/^ million
men between the ages of 18 and 64 were not in the
current labor force, that is, they had no employ
ment and were not looking for work.5 On the
other hand, more than 44 million men (about 91
percent of the population in this age group) were
employed or seeking work. Men outside the labor
force are concentrated at the two extremes of the
adult male age spectrum : Approximately 2 of the
4.6 million total were 18-24 years old, and l 1/^ mil-
ADULT MEN NOT IN THE LABOR FORCE
lion were age 55-64. Only 114 million nonpartici
pants were in the central age group. ( See table 1.)
Age
Of 2.1 million nonparticipants between the ages
of 18 and 24, approximately 1.8 million were at
tending school. About 250,000 were outside the
labor force for other reasons, such as waiting to
enter the Armed Forces, taking a vacation before
returning to school or starting a job, or recovering
from a short-term illness. In addition, some of
these young men have stopped looking after re
peated inability to find work.
Of the 1 million nonworkers between the ages
of 25 and 54, slightly more than 100,000 were in
school. The remainder wTere about equally divided
between the unable.-to-work group 6 and those who
reported a variety of other reasons for nonpartici
pation. Some of the latter group were probably
discouraged wmrkers, men who have given up the
search for work after repeated failures and re
buffs. On the other hand, some of the nonpartic
ipants in the 25-54 age group were outside the
labor force because of personal preference—the
dreamers and drifters who were able to adjust
both financially and psychologically to nonworker
status. Current information is not available to
quantify the number of men in each of these two
categories.
Others were only temporarily outside the labor
force. Examples wrould be the seasonal worker
for whom the survey period fell during the off
season; the person who was taking a vacation be
tween jobs; the person who planned to move to
0The definition of inability to work is very tightly drawn in
the labor force survey. The enumerators are instructed to in
clude in th is category only long-term m ental or physical disabil
ities which incapacitate persons for any kind of work. Only
specific conditions, such as blindness, loss of limbs, serious heart
trouble, tuberculosis, and so forth, meet the test. Temporary
injury and illn ess or a combination of minor d isabilities which
norm ally come w ith old age are not included. While the in ci
dence of long-term physical or mental disability increases with
age, it is not lim ited to older persons.
7 A recent study based on data from the National H ealth Inter
view Survey indicates that about one-fifth of the 2 5-64 year-old
men not ini the labor force have work lim itations because of
chronic health problems. These men are restricted in the amount
or kind of work they can perform, but they differ from those who
are not able to work at all. See “Work Lim itations and Chronic
H ealth Problems,” M o n th ly L a b o r R e v ie w , January 1967, pp.
38-41.
8 S ta tistics for all nonwhite persons are used to depict the
labor force situation of Negroes. Negroes make up about 92
percent of all nonwhites in the United States.
https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
9
another area; or the person who was recovering
from a temporary illness, accident, or operation.7
Approximately I.14 million 55-64 year-olds were
not in the labor force in 1966, with the 60-64 age
group accounting for about two-thirds of the
total. Disability becomes an increasingly impor
tant reason for nonparticipation among men over
55 years of age. In the 25-54 age category, only
iy 2 percent of the population was outside the labor
force because of inability to work; the comparable
proportion rose to 5 percent for 55-59 year-olds,
and to 6i/2 percent for men age 60-64. In addi
tion to the 450,000 who were unable to work, ap
proximately 750,000 men age 55-64 were not work
ing for a variety of other reasons. For the 60-64
year-olds in the “other reasons” category (550,000), retirement and health problems were un
doubtedly major causes of nonparticipation.
Color
Labor force participation rates for white men
are uniformly higher than those for Negro 8 men,
except in the 18-24 age group. The gap between
white and Negro rates is largest among men of
prime working age. Moreover, the weaker labor
force attachment of Negro men was evident in both
the 25-44 and 45-54 age categories. The non
participation rate for Negro men age 55-64 (19
percent) was also higher than the comparable pro
portion for white men (15 percent), but the gap
was relatively less for these men than for men in
the 25-44 and 45-54 age categories.
Out of 11/4 million men between the ages of 25
and 54 not in the labor force, one-fifth were
Negroes. Negro men, however, accounted for only
one-tenth of the population in this age group.
This means that Negroes in the central ages, as a
group, carry about double their proportionate
share of the problems which usually result from
nonparticipation in the work force.
Higher rates of disability accounted for part
of the gap between white and Negro participation
rates. Poor diet, poor general environment, lack
of medical care, and employment in low skilled and
frequently dangerous occupations all contribute
to the higher disability rate of Negro men. In
addition, Negroes are more likely to be in jobs
which require full physical capabilities.
The greater proportion of Negro men not in the
labor force for other reasons may residt in part
MONTHLY LABOR REVIEW, MARCH 1967
10
from the concentration of Negroes in seasonal and
other temporary employment. In addition, be
cause of lower educational attainment, lesser skill,
and racial discrimination, Negroes are more fre
quently denied employment or relegated to the
least desirable j obs. Repeated refusals of employ
ment or offers of only menial jobs may have caused
some of these men to give up the search for work.
Most of the gap between Negro and white non
participation developed during the 1950’s. The
color difference has held constant—at just over 3
percentage points—for the last 5 years. In 1961,
4.6 percent of the white men age 25-64, compared
with 7.8 percent of the Negroes, were not in the
labor force. By 1966, the proportion of white
Chart 2.
M a le Population N o t in Labor Force, by
A g e and Color, 1 9 5 6 -6 6
P ercent
nonparticipants had increased to 5.5 percent, while
the Negro proportion had risen to 8.8 percent.
Among men 18-24 years of age, the labor force
participation rate was higher for Negroes than for
whites, because of the higher proportion of school
attendance among young white men. Approxi
mately 21 percent of the white 18-24 year-olds,
compared with 14 percent of the Negroes, were in
school during the first half of 1966. Better jobs,
more stable employment, and greater opportuni
ties for advancement accrue to young men with
more education. Therefore, the lower rate of
school attendance for Negroes points to less satis
fying work careers, often marked by higher rates
of unemployment and early withdrawal from the
labor force.
It is also disturbing to note that the proportion
of young men not in the labor force for other rea
sons was substantially higher among Negroes (5.3
percent) than among whites (2.5 percent). The
absolute number of Negro 18-24 year-olds able to
work, but not in the labor force and not in school,
was small—50,000. Nevertheless, the proportion
was twice as high as for whites.
Previous Work Experience
10
1
1956
I
The Monthly Labor Survey provides a substan
tial amount of information on the work history
and future jobseeking intentions of persons not in
the current labor force. The following sections
summarize data on two important factors in assess
ing the labor force attachment of persons not now
in the labor force—when they last worked and
why they left their previous jobs.
I ........ M i ..!...____ I____ L
1958
https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
1960
1962
1964
1966
Date Last Worked. Nearly half of the 4 ^ mil
lion men not in the labor force in the first 6 months
of 1966 had been employed in the preceding 18
months—about 1.4 million worked during 1966,
and 750,000 were last employed in 1965. (See
table 2.) Another 900,000 held their last jobs be
tween 1961 and 1964. The remaining 1.4 million
either had not worked in the last 5 years or had
never worked. Virtually all of those who had
never worked fell into 1 of 2 groups—under age
25, or unable to work.
White male nonparticipants reported recent
work experience more frequently than Negroes.
ADULT MEN NOT IN THE LABOR FORCE
11
Fully half of the white men had worked in the
preceding 18 months, compared with 40 percent
for Negroes. There was also a striking color dif
ference in the proportion of young men who had
never worked. About 36 percent of the 18-24
year-old Negroes not in the current labor force
had never held a regular full-time or part-time
job; only 23 percent of the young whites were in
this category. In other words, young Negro men
are far less likely than young whites to obtain the
early work experience which makes them more
employable in the adult years.
The fact that almost one-third of the men not
in the labor force had worked in the previous 6
months indicates the substantial amount of short
term mobility between the employed and non
worker status for this group. Their recent work
experience suggests that these men may still have
a strong attachment to the labor force. As will
be brought out in a later section, many of them
intend to reenter the labor force within the next
year—after completing school, discharge from the
Armed Forces, recovery from temporary illness,
or completion of brief vacations between jobs.
The 4i/^ million men not in the labor force in
1966 included 1 million who were unable to work
because of a long-term physical or mental dis
ability. When the unable-to-work group is ex
cluded, the proportion with recent work experience
rises sharply. This difference was particularly
notable among men of prime working age. (See
tabulation below.) Nearly 1.2 million men age
25-54 were not in the labor force, but only 650,000
of this group were able to work. More than half
(53 percent) of those able to work had been em
ployed in the preceding 18 months, including 44
percent who had worked in the last 6 months.
M en age 25-51,. not in the labor force
Date last worked
Number (in thousands)
Percent____________
1966_________
1965_________
1964_______
1961-63_________
Before 1961 - _______
Never worked.. ___
Total
___
----------------___
___
___
1,172
100.0
30.6
6.6
7.9
15.7
27.6
11.3
Able to work Unable to work
648
100.0
43.7
8.4
8.5
11.1
21.5
6.8
524
100.0
14.5
4.4
7.3
21.4
35.3
16.8
These proportions point up the considerable
amount of short-term movement into and out of
the labor force among men in the prime age groups,
https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
T a b l e 2. M e n A g e 18-64 N o t i n t h e L a b o r F o r c e ,
b y D a t e L a s t W o r k e d , J a n u a r y - J u n e 1966 A v e r a g e s
[Numbers in thousands]
Age and percent dis
tribution
Total 1966 1965 1964 1961-63 Before Never
1961 worked
A ge
Total, 18-64 years.. 4,392 1,383
18-19 years____________ 1,085
20-24 years____________ 929
25-44 years_____ _____
604
45-54 years.. . . ______
568
55-64 years.. .. .
. . . 1,206
55-59 years.. ______ 451
60-64 years________
755
747
347
540
307
261
46
31
103
28
76
31
76
62
32
144
54
90
15
63
116
276
90
186
68
138
186
418
182
236
31.5 17.0
7.9
12.3
17.1
28.3 2.9
28.1 8.2
7.6 10.2
5.4 5.6
8.5 11.9
6.1 11.9
10.0 11.9
1. 4
384
385
193
166
256
93
162
751
6
624
34fi
137
97
35
10
5
5
P ercent D istribution
Total, 18-64 years.. 100.0
18-19 years____________
20-24 years__ _ ______
25-44 years____________
45-54 years___ ______
55-64 years____________
55-59 years___ _ . . .
60-64 years________
100.0
100.0
100.0
100.0
100.0
100.0
100.0
35.4
41.4
32.0
29.2
21.2
20. 7
21.5
6.8
11.2
20.5
22.9
20.0
24.6
.6
22.8
32.8
34.7
40.3
31.3
14.2
31 9
14.8
16.1
6.2
.8
.9
.7
Source: Monthly Labor Survey.
a finding confirmed by a recent survey of work
experience during the entire calendar year,9 in
which approximately 10 percent of the men age
25 to 64 who worked or looked for work in 1964
were in the civilian labor force for less than a full
year. Almost all of the men who were in the labor
force only part of the year cited illness or service
in the Armed Forces, vacations, or retirement as
their reason for not being in the labor force.
Long periods of unsuccessful jobseeking did not
appear to be an important factor in driving men
out of the labor force. Of the men who were in
the labor force less than 50 weeks, about 80 percent
had no unemployment; they worked all the time
they were in the labor force. The proportion with
no unemployment was only slightly higher—87
percent—among men who had been in the labor
force all year (50-52 weeks).
The survey also showed that much of the adult
male withdrawal from the labor force is short
term. Of the 3.5 million men age 25-64 who
worked in 1964 and also had periods outside the
labor force, 1.8 million—more than half—were in
the labor force for 40^9 weeks. In other words,
these 1.8 million men were outside the work force
for less than 3 months during 1964. Another
9
“Work Experience of the Population in 1964,” M o n th ly L abor
R e v ie w , February 1966, pp. 155-163.
MONTHLY LABOR REVIEW, MARCH 1967
12
T able
3.
M e n A ge
18-64 N ot
in th e
L a b o r F o r c e , b y I n t e n t io n s to L o ok
J a n u a r y - J u n e 1966 A v e r a g e s 1
fo r
W ork
and
D ate L ast W o r k e d ,
[Numbers in thousands]
Do not intend to look
Intend to look
Age and percent distribution
Last worked
Last worked
Total
Total
Total
1961 or later
Before 1961 or
never
1961 or later
Before 1961 or
never
A ge
Total, 18-64 years
3,397
1,951
1,624
326
1,446
863
577
18-19 years____ ______
20-24 years__________
25-44 years__________
45-54 years__________
55-64 years------- ---------
1,069
'890
373
275
790
817
642
197
114
181
625
585
172
90
151
191
55
26
23
28
252
248
176
161
609
103
172
103
92
394
150
74
72
68
213
100.0
57.5
47.8
9.6
42.5
25.4
17.0
100.0
100.0
100.0
100.0
100.0
76.4
72.1
52.9
41.6
22.9
58.5
65.7
46.2
32.8
19.1
17.9
6.2
6.9
8.4
3.6
23.6
27.9
47.1
58.4
77.1
9.6
19.3
27. 5
33.6
49.9
Î4.0
8.3
19.3
24.8
27.0
P ercent D istribution
Total, 18-64 years_____________
18-19 years________________________
20-24 years________________________
25-44 years________________________
45-54 years_______________________
55-64 years________________________
1Excludes those unable to work because of a long-term physical or mental
disability.
Source : Monthly Labor Survey,
as to why they left their last regular full-time or
part-time job. Included in the 3 million were
500,000 men classified as unable to work, virtually
all of whom had left their previous jobs for med
ical or health reasons. The unable-to-work group
is excluded from the following discussion, leaving
nearly 2.5 million men who had worked in the last
5 years and were still able to work.
Only 300,000, about one-eighth, of the total able
to work, had left their last jobs for economic rea
sons. “Economic reasons” were interpreted to in
clude slack work, completion of seasonal or tem
porary jobs, changes in company management, and
similar reasons. The proportions reporting eco
nomic reasons varied considerably by age, as shown
in the following tabulation.
750,000 men who worked in 1964 were out of the
labor force for 3 to 6 months.
A total of 5.2 million 25-64 year-old men were
outside the labor force sometime during 1964;
approximately 1.5 million (29 percent) were nonparticipants for the entire year. Most of the men
outside the labor force all year (1.1 of 1.5 million)
were in the 45-64 age group. Only 350,000 in
ages 25-44 (one-sixth of the number outside the
labor force sometime during 1964) were nonpar
ticipants all year.
In summary, data from both the work experi
ence survey and the Monthly Labor Survey indi
cate that there is substantial movement into and
out of the labor force by adult men. The total
number of men not in the labor force at any given
point in time does not indicate how many have
been nonworkers for long periods, nor how many
may be expected to remain outside the work force
indefinitely. In some cases, the same individuals
remain outside the labor force for several years or
permanently, but these long-term nonparticipants
are a minority among men in the central age
groups who are able to work.
Number (in thousands)----------------Percent_________________________
E conomic reasons _- --------------Noneconomic reasons--------------Personal, family, school------Medical or health--------------Retirement or old age _ - Other____________________
Reasons for Leaving Last Job. Information was
obtained from the nearly 3 million men not in
the labor force who had worked in the last 5 years
About 60 percent of the 18-64 year■-old men
had left their last jobs for personal, family, school,
or other noneconomic reasons. Not surprisingly,
these reasons were most important for the younger
https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
Percent distribution, by age
Reason for leaving last job
Total,
18-64
18-24
25-54
55-65
2,456 1,465
100.0 100.0
8.5
12.9
91.5
87.1
78.2
50.3
2.0
14.9
9.7 .
11.2
12.2
442
100.0
23.2
76.8
16.4
35.3
6.7
18.4
549
100. 0
16.6
83.4
2.2
33.2
38.1
9.9
13
ADULT MEN NOT IN THE LABOR FORGE
men ; 7 out of 8 of those age 18-24 cited these rea
sons. Personal, family, school, and miscellaneous
noneconomic reasons were also reported for about
one-third of the 25-54 year-olds, while a similar
proportion of this age group left their last jobs
for medical or health reasons. Retirement was the
leading reason for 55-64 year-olds, closely followed
by medical or health reasons.
Future Jobseeking Intentions
A majority (57 percent) of the 3.4 million men
not in the labor force who were able to work in
tended to seek employment within the next 12
months.10 Altogether, nearly 2 million men re
ported definite, probable, or possible plans to seek
work in the next year. The “maybe” group in
cluded persons whose intentions were somewhat
weak or qualified. For example, a man who said
he would look for work if his health permitted
would be classified as a possible j obseeker. On the
other hand, 1,450,000 (43 percent of the able-towork total) were reported as not intending to look
or not knowing whether they would look for work
in the next year. ( See table 3. )
Intentions to seek work were reported most fre
quently by men who had worked within the last 5
years. Two-thirds of the group with work ex
perience since 1961 intended to look for jobs within
the next year. In contrast, only one-third of those,
who had never worked or last worked before 1961
reported intentions to look in the next year.
As would be expected, young men most fre
quently reported intentions to seek work. Ap
proximately three-fourths of the 18-24 year-olds
planned to look for jobs in the next 12 months,
compared with about half of the 25-54 year-olds
and one-fourth of the 55-64 age group. Most of
the young men not intending to seek work prob
ably planned to continue school or expected to be
in the Armed F orces for the next 12 months. On
the other hand, most of the 55-64 year-olds not in
tending to look were probably retirees or men who
considered themselves too old to work ; two-thirds
of this group was 60-64 years of age.
About 350,000 men age 25-54 reported no inten
tion to seek work ; a nearly equal number did plan
to look. Two factors, age and recent work experi
ence, have considerable influence on the jobseek
245-336 0
-
67-2
https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
ing intentions of men in the central age groups.
The group which planned to seek work was signifi
cantly younger than those who did not. Also, the
great majority (85 percent) of the 25-54 year-olds
who planned to look had worked since 1961. In
contrast, only 60 percent of the group which did
not intend to look had worked within the past 5
years.
Men who left their last jobs for economic reasons
did not appear to have given up the search for em
ployment. Approximately 75 percent of those re
porting economic reasons intended to seek work
within the next year. The comparable proportion
among those who left their previous jobs for non
economic reasons was 65 percent.
Family Responsibilities
The degree of economic hardship resulting from
nonparticipation in the work force is determined
largely by the family responsibilities of the non
participant. If he is a young single person, he may
be able to live on little income of his own, es
pecially if he is living with relatives. Of the
young men not in the labor force, virtually all of
the 18-19 year-olds and nearly 85 percent of the
20-24 year-olds were relatives of the household
head. These young men—many of them attending
school—are supported by their parents. As the
following section shows, median family income
for these families with young men not in the labor
force is substantially higher than average. The
nonworker who is married with a wife and family
to support has much greater financial needs, and
lack of regular employment income causes severe
hardship.
Household Relationship. Most men between 25
and 54 are household heads living with relatives,
that is, they carry the major responsibility for
support of the family. There was a marked dif
ference in this respect, however, between men in
the labor force and those outside it. Almost 90
percent of the 25-54 year-old men in the labor
force were household heads living with relatives.
The comparable proportion for the l 1/^ million
men not in the labor force was less than 60 per10
The 1 million men unable to work are excluded from this
section because very few of them (less than 15 percent) intended
to look for work.
14
MONTHLY LABOR REVIEW, MARCH 1967
T able
in M
4.
E m ploym ent S ta tu s of M e n
1966, b y F a m il y I n c o m e i n
arch
A ge
20-64
1965
[Numbers in thousands]
Family income in 1965
Age and employment status
Total
Under $3,000- $7,000 Median
$3,000 $6,999 or over income
E mployment S tatus , by A ge
Total, 20-64 years____ _____
. . . 43, 595
4,063
14,034
25,497
$7,948
39,465
1,210
2,920
5,470
867
20,835
553
9,978
461
7,312
1,059
2,966
274
823
601
75
1,495
145
828
173
1,139
430
12,590
473
971
2,028
187
6,890
236
2,730
175
2,386
373
23,911
462
1,125
2,841
604
12,450
152
6,420
113
3,786
256
8,131
5,720
5,334
$7,258
9,693
$7,958
4,702
$8,702
4,128
$7, 244
3,877
Family heads, total
34,708
Not in the labor force_______ 1,526
Relatives of the head, total____ _ 3,416
Not in the labor force.. . . . __
528
2,968
558
425
181
11, 077
620
922
163
20,664
350
1,992
172
$8,010
4,102
8, 297
4,460
Employed............... ._ ____
Unemployed. . ____ ____
Not in Labor force____ _____
20-24 years____________ _____
Not in the labor force.. . .. .
25-44 years________ ________ .
Not in the labor force_______
45-54 years____
__ _ ______
Not in the labor force_____ .
55-64 years.. ________ _ ____
Not in the labor force__ _____
25-64 Y ears ,
by F amily
R elationship
Source : Person-family supplement to the March 1966 Current Population
Survey.
cent, as the following tabulation shows. In other
words, about 9 out of 10 men in the labor force
were prime family breadwinners, while only 6 out
of 10 men not in the labor force carried such
responsibilities.
Men age 25-5 i
In the labor force
Relationship to household
head
Total_____________
Household head... ______
Living with relatives..
Not living with rela
tives________ . . . .
Relative of head... _ . .
Nonrelative of head______
Not in the labor force
(In
(Percent
(Percent
(In
thousands) distribution) thousands) distribution)
30,856
28,595
27,258
100.0
92.7
88.3
1,257
843
727
100.0
67.1
57.8
1,336
1,869
390
4.3
6.1
1.3
116
387
27
9.2
30.8
2.1
Despite the relatively low proportion of house
hold heads among men outside the labor force,
there were 725,000 nonparticipants age 25-54 with
family responsibilities in 1966. The majority of
these 725,000 households probably suffered eco
nomic hardship because the male head lacked reg
ular income from a job, even though in some of
the families, wives, children, or other secondary
workers took jobs in order to supplement family
income.
In contrast to the group discussed above, about
one-half million 25-54 year-old men outside the
labor force were not household heads living with
https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
relatives, and thus did not bear the major responsi
bility of providing goods and services for depend
ents. These men accounted for 42 percent of all
25-54 year-olds not in the labor force. These pro
portions clearly indicate that the family responsi
bilities and, therefore, the economic needs of men
outside the labor force—as a group—were sub
stantially less than for men in the work force. On
the other hand, the nonparticipants’ lack of em
ployment undoubtedly made it difficult for them
to assume the family responsibilities normally
carried by men in these ages.
Of the 25-54 year-olds not in the labor force,
approximately 400,000 were relatives of the house
hold head—sons, fathers, or brothers. Some of
these men may have had personal financial prob
lems, but generally they were not responsible for
the support of others. Moreover, median family
income for men not in the labor force who were
relatives of the head was moderately higher than
that for family heads who were nonparticipants.
Another 150,000 men outside the labor force
were living alone or sharing quarters. Lack of
regular income from a job undoubtedly worked
serious hardships on many of them. Again, how
ever, the financial problems were usually limited to
the individuals involved. FewTof these men had
wives, children, or other persons dependent on
their income.
Family Income and Composition. Men not in
the labor force have substantially lower family in
comes than their counterparts in the work force.11
In 1965, median family income for the nearly o
million 20-64 year-olds outside the work force was
approximately $5,300, compared with $7,900 for
all men in this age group and about $8,100 for em
ployed men. (See table 4.) About 28 percent of
the nonparticipants were in families with in
comes below the $3,000 poverty line; 39 percent
had family incomes of $7,000 or more. The high
family incomes of many adult male nonpartici
pants can be attributed partially to the presence
of other earners in the family. Also, many of the
11
D ata in this section were obtained from a supplement to the
Current Population Survey conducted in March 1966. The labor
force status and fam ily relationship of the civilian noninstitutional population in March 1966 were crosstabulated with family
income for the same persons in calendar year 1965.
15
ADULT MEN NOT IN THE LABOR FORCE
nonparticipants in March 1966 had been outside
the labor force for only short periods of time, and
may have made a substantial contribution to fam
ily income during 1965.
Family income for men outside the labor force
varied markedly by age. For nonparticipants in
their early twenties, the median was $9,700.
(Most of the nonparticipants in this age group
were college students who were supported by their
parents.) On the other hand, average income was
$4,500 for men 25-54 years old and $3,900 for 5564 year-olds. Median family income for nonpar
ticipants 25-64 years of age was somewhat lower
for men who were family heads ($4,100) than for
those who Avere relatives of the head ($4,500).
Although family incomes are low when the male
head is not in the labor force, the resulting eco
nomic hardship may be reduced because the aver
age family size is smaller and there is a relatively
low proportion of young children in these families.
Erratum
The following corrections should be made in “Review of Labor Relations
in 1966” in the December 1966 issue of the Review. The wage increase for
Chicago nurses was a monthly rather than yearly increase and ranged from
$90 to $210 (p. 1360). West Coast longshoremen received a 50-cent-an-hour
increase in basic rates rather than in average Avages (p. 1358). The special
cost-of-living escalator in General Electric Co.’s 1966 contract Avith the Inter
national Union of Electrical Workers alloAvs an increase of one-half of 1 per
cent to 1% percent (depending upon future changes in the CPI) on October 2,
1967, and again on September 30, 1968 (p. 1359) ; the 5-percent valuation
placed on this contract Avas a general press estimate and not an official estimate.
https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
Quality and a Pure Price Index
A Survey of the Problems Encountered
In Accommodating Measures of Quality Change
When Computing Pure Price Indexes
T hom as
W .
Gavett*
Q u a l i t y c h a n g e is the most pervasive problem in
measuring economic phenomena. Failure to ac
count adequately for quality differences does, at
least to some extent, adversely affect our measures
of output, productivity, and prices.
The argument over the change of quality is
reducible to a few basic issues. First, what is the
nature of a price index ? A price index may pur
port to measure any of several different concepts,
and the concept used affects the definition of
quality change. Second, what concepts of quality
change are appropriate for a particular price
index ? There may be more than one for a given
index. Third, how can quality be measured ?
Empirically, what measures of quality change are
appropriate ?
A Pure Price Index
There is no one correct and indisputable defini
tion of a price index. The index could attempt to
measure the change in money expenditure a con
sumer must make to maintain a constant level of
satisfaction. Such an index, now usually called
a cost-of-living index, would take into account
changes in income of consumers and substitution
of one commodity for another in response to rela
tive price changes, as well as general price level
changes.1
The index of interest here, however, is a pure
price index. For the purpose of this article, the
pure price index is defined as a measure of change
in the prices of a fixed group of goods and serv
ices bought and sold in markets. Basically, a pure
price index does not differ in form from any fixed
weight index, such as a Laspeyre’s index. The
group of goods and services cannot, in fact, be
16
https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
kept fixed because the characteristics of the prod
ucts are changing, and the basic problem of quality
change in a pure price index is to account for these
changed characteristics.
Probably the most important distinction be
tween a pure price index and' other indexes, such
as the cost-of-living index, is that its definition
fixes the transaction unit. If automobile tires last
longer, we must, nevertheless, report the change in
the price of a tire, not a tire-mile. If new blankets
are warmer, we still report the change in the price
of a blanket, not a unit of warmth. If a doctor
is able as a consequence of developments in medi
cal technology to cure a patient more rapidly, we
report the change in the price of a physician’s
services, not a cure. While the cost of a tire-mile,
a unit of warmth, or a cure would be of interest for
certain purposes, these do not represent transaction
units actually used in the market place. A con
sumer cannot go to a store and ask the price of a
unit of warmth; there is no price quotation avail
able for such a unit.
This does not avoid the question of quality
change, because if it is true that tires last longer
or blankets are warmer, there are differences in the
characteristics of yesterday’s and today’s tires and
blankets which must be accounted for in the pure
price index. Nor does it mean that the market
*Of the Office of Prices and Living Conditions, Bureau of
Labor S tatistics.
1
The literature on the cost-of-living index is voluminous.
A good introduction is M elville J. Ulmer, T h e E con om ic T h eo ry
of C o st o f L iv in g I n d e x N u m bers (New York, Columbia Univer
sity Press, 1949). An excellent article on the relationship of
the cost-of-living index and a conventional Laspeyre price index
is Nissan Liviatan and Don Patinkin, “On the Economic Theory
of Index Numbers,” E con om ic D e v e lo p m e n t an d C u ltu ra l C hange,
April 1961, pp. 502-536.
1Y
QUALITY AND A PURE PRICE INDEX
transactions unit is uniquely appropriate for every
conceivable purpose. In a cost-of-living index,
for example, a concept of service flows—such as
transportation, entertainment, and nourishment—
might be a useful pricing unit rather than specific
products and services.2
Another characteristic of a pure price index is
that, in principle, it does not reflect changes in pat
terns of consumption in response to changes in
real income or relative prices. In practice, the
goods and services priced are not held constant for
extremely long periods of time. This is not be
cause the characteristics of the products are chang
ing (since that is the quality problem) but because
an index measuring the change in the group of
goods or services purchased in, say, 1900 would
have little practical use in measuring the perform
ance of the economy today.
Concepts of Quality Change
A pure price index attempts to measure the
change in price that would have occurred if there
had been no change in the characteristics of goods
and services. The value of the changed character
istics represents the change in quality, which must
be removed from the pure price index. Theoreti
cally that value could be judged by three stand
ards: Objective value, subjective value to the cus
tomer, and the cost of producing the changed
physical features.
Using the objective-value approach would mean
judging the change in the product by some stand
ard or set of standards, such as the degree of
warmth of the blanket. Such a standard is ap
pealing as it more clearly corresponds to what
most people probably believe is meant by quality.
But it is the standard that must be rejected here as
having no economic meaning and not consistently
. measurable.
In neither the case of consumer goods or services
nor the case of goods purchased by a producer is
2 See M. L. Burstein, “The Measurement of Quality Change in
Consumer Durables,” T h e M a n c h e ste r S ch o o l o f E co n o m ic and
S o cia l S tu d ie s , September 1961, p. 269 and Zvi Griliches, “Notes
on the Measurement of Price and Quality Change,” M odels of
In co m e D e te r m in a tio n (Princeton, Princeton U niversity Press,
1964), p. 417.
3 See Edward P. Denison, “Theoretical Aspects of Quality
Change, Capital Consumption and New Capital Form ation,”
P ro b le m s in C a p ita l F o rm a tio n (Princeton, Princeton University
Press, 1957), pp. 2 1 5 -2 6 1 ; and Milton Gilbert, “The Problem
of Quality Changes and Index Numbers,” M o n th ly L a b o r R e v ie w ,
September 1961, pp. 992-997.
https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
there any reason to suppose that objective value is
the critical determinant of prices. Certainly in
the case of consumer goods and services it would be
simple enough to think of some examples where,
according to the judgment of experts, a product
has zero or even negative objective value. Yet the
product does command a positive price. There are
also examples of where the difference between va
rieties of a product wTould hardly justify the price
difference which does exist.
Expert judgment of the value of products is
not constant over time,' new information and
further research bring new evaluations. Fur
thermore, the objective value of a product may
differ depending on the standard used. A prod
uct may objectively contribute to o-ur amusement
but be injurious to our health. It may contrib
ute to the speed of transportation but be detri
mental to our safety. There is no theoretically
correct way that conflicting objective standards
can be blended to explain price determination.
Further, even if expert judgment would sug
gest a single standard, it is not true that buyers
want an unlimited amount of that dominant
characteristic or standard. If, for example,
consumers are interested in a blanket which is
twice as warm as an existing blanket, it does
not follow that they are interested in blankets
10 or 100 times as warm. Certain objective
standards also lead to difficult, if not insol
uble, problems of measurement. Precisely how
should the degree of safety be quantified, or
what yardstick should be used to measure ob
jectively the value of alternative forms of
entertainment ?
Costs Versus Utility
The difference in quality between two varieties
of a product, or two different products, can be
judged by comparing their relative costs or rela
tive utilities (consumer satisfaction) at a given
time. While the general prescription for measur
ing quality change appears simple, there are cer
tain theoretical issues which should be raised.
First, it should be stressed that a pure price in
dex measures the change in price after adjusting
for change in relative costs or relative utility at
tributable to changed characteristics of the prod
uct. It is not measuring changes in all costs or
utility over time.3
18
Second, the difference between an evaluation of
quality change based on costs and one based on
utility may be zero.4 In a perfectly competitive
society, each consumer will, in the long run, bal
ance his purchases so that the added satisfaction of
each purchase, relative to the price of that item, is
equal to the added satisfaction of any other item
purchased relative to its price. Further, each firm
in such a society will charge a price equal to its
average cost (including normal profits).5 If the
price were above or below costs, firms would, ac
cordingly, enter or leave the industry, thus caus
ing price to equal costs in the long run. I t is true,
therefore, that at longrun competitive equilibrium
relative prices measure both relative costs and
utility.
The objection might legitimately be raised that
the economy is not perfectly competitive and an
equilibrium situation does not really exist. But if
we retain for a moment the assumption of perfect
competition, there is at least one other difficult
theoretical issue to be resolved. Suppose that an
improved product can be produced without in
creasing the cost. If the price tag on the product
remains the same, what should we conclude about
the quality-ad justed price of this product? Cost
considerations alone would suggest that the ad
justed price is the same, if costs of the improve
ment are zero.
This answer seems, at first blush, clearly wrong
from the viewpoint of utility. After all, the prod
uct is better and the price tag is the same. Is it
not clear that the consumer is getting more for his
money? Should not the quality-ad justed price be
lower rather than the same? Within the context
of a pure price index, however, we must conclude
that even utility consideration would lead to the
conclusion that the quality-adjusted price is the
same, not lower.
Let us assume that we can buy as large a quan
tity of a product as we wish at the existing price.
The supply curve would, therefore, be as indicated
in the chart. The quantity of the product de
manded at various prices is represented by line D.
When the product is improved, the demand in
creases to D'. Since the improvement involved no
additional costs, the price remains the same rela
tive to all others.
If the consumer increases his purchases of the
commodity from Qi to Q2—say, from 1 unit to 2
units of the product—the marginal utility of the
https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
MONTHLY LABOR REVIEW, MARCH 1967
last unit purchased remains the same, but his total
utility has increased. To put it somewhat dif
ferently, the consumer surplus has increased from
the triangle ABC to triangle AEF. (See chart.)
This increase in consumer surplus is not, how
ever, attributable to a change in price but to a
change in the quantity of the product purchased.
That sort of gain in satisfaction is, however, ex
cluded from a fixed weight index. Unquestion
ably, a fixed weight index is, to some degree, an in
adequate measure of the change in satisfaction.
But unless or until a true cost-of-living index is
developed, there is no perfectly adequate measure
of the change in utility or consumer surplus.6
There is a change of a different order which
should also be discussed. We can use the cele
brated case of the half birth control pill which
does the job as effectively as a whole pill.7 In this
case there is no change in demand because the
characteristics of the pill have changed, but be
cause we have learned we need less. Obviously
there are no changes in cost due to a change in the
characteristics of the pill. Assuming the price
tag on a whole pill remains the same, cost consid
erations indicate no necessity for quality adjust
ment of price. From the preceding analysis, we
cannot, in a fixed weight index, take into consid
eration the change in the quantity purchased. It
would appear, however, that we can gain the same
utility with half the expenditures.
This case must, however, be excluded from
either a pure price index or a true cost-of-living
index on the grounds that it represents a change
in tastes. The birth control example does not
differ in principle from a case where consumers
would conclude that they would be just as well
1 See George Jaszi, “An Improved Way of M easuring Quality
Change,” R e v ie w o f E con om ics an d S ta t is tic s , A ugust 1962, pp.
332-335.
5 Normal profits are defined as that amount just adequate to
keep the firm from going out of business. Obviously, this is an
ambiguous definition for empirical measurement.
6 The persistent problem seems to be the belief that changes
in total u tility should be reflected in a fixed w eight index. Only
changes in marginal u tility can be reflected and, under com peti
tive conditions, marginal u tility m ust be proportionate to mar
ginal costs. The chart may suggest an exaggerated notion of
the gain in u tility resulting from the quality change. The gain
in consumer surplus (the area bounded by BCEF) is realized
only if there is an increase in total expenditures (the same price
times a large q u an tity). Since even a cost-of-living index must
refer to a given level of real income, a doubling of money ex
penditures with constant prices is not possible. Rather, there
is likely to be a sh ift in relative quantities purchased, yielding
some increase in total utility, but less than the amount indicated
in the chart.
7 See the discussion by Griliches and Gilbert in M o n th ly L a b o r
R e v ie w , May 1962, pp. 542-545.
QUALITY AND A PURE PRICE INDEX
satisfied with half as many tranquilizers, or half
as much food, or half as much of anything.
To summarize, there is no difference between the
use of costs and utility as a measure of quality in
a pure price index as long as we assume perfect
competition. A pure price index is deficient for
deflation of value aggregate or measurement of
the true cost of living in that it does not consider
changes in relative quantities purchased, and this
is true relative to either costs or utility. The index
does not consider changes in tastes, even if these
changes are objectively desirable.
19
Illustration of Changes in Supply and Demand for
Product with Changed Q uality
Empirical Measurement
Ideally, a method of measuring quality change
should be applicable to any or all products and
services and should potentially be capable of meas
uring any kind of quality change. Ideally too,
measures should be able to distinguish between
costs and utility if the two diverge as a conse
quence of imperfect competition or disequilibrium.
One of the most frequently advocated methods
of measuring quality change is the use of regres
sion analysis.8 There is, in principle, no inconsis
tency in the use of regression analysis within the
context of a pure price index. The regression
method relates physical characteristics of varieties
of a product to price and uses the regression coef
ficients for the characteristics as a measure of the
value of the characteristics. While usually called
a hedonic index to connote the idea that the coeffi
cients are a measure of utility, the technique can
as well be considered a method of measuring costs
of the features. In its present state of develop8
See Andrew Court, “Hedonic Price Indexes with Automotive
Exam ples,” T h e D y n a m ic s o f A u to m o b ile D em a n d (New York,
General Motors Corp., 1939), pp. 99-117 ; Zvi Griliches, “Hedonic
Price Indexes for A utom obiles: An Econom etric Analysis of
Quality Changes,” P ric e S ta t is tic s o f th e F ed e ra l G o v ern m e n t
(New York, National Bureau of Economic Research, 1961), pp.
1 7 3 -1 9 6 ; Irma Adelman and Zvi Griliches, “On an Index of
Quality Change,” J o u rn a l o f th e A m e ric a n S ta tis tic a l A ss o c ia
tio n , September 1961, pp. 535—5 4 8 Richard Stone, Q u a n tity
an d P r ic e In d e x es in N a tio n a l A cc o u n ts (Paris, Organization for
European Economic Cooperation, 1956) ; Zvi Griliches, “Notes
on the Measurement of Price and Quality Change,” M o d els o f
In com e D e te r m in a tio n (Princeton, Princeton U niversity Press,
1964) ; and a forthcom ing paper by Irving Kravis and Robert
Lipsey, “The Use of Regression Methods in International Price
Comparisons,” to be included in a study on international prices
sponsored by the National Bureau of Economic Research.
0
This does not mean th at every changed feature is necessarily
of great relevance. Cost data from manufacturers are likely
to indicate that some physical changes are trivial. In regres
sion analysis, intercorrelation among independent variables can
allow one variable to serve as a proxy measure for several.
https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
ment, it is not possible to determine whether the
coefficients are measures of cost or utility or an
amalgam of the two. Kather it must be assumed
that costs and utility are one and the same, as
would be true under perfect competition.
One method of measuring quality change is to
obtain information from manufacturers on the
cost of changed characteristics of a product . This
has the apparent advantage of providing exogen
ous information on not only prices but also costs.
There are, however, difficult problems facing the
manufacturer in imputing costs of a complex
product among its various features. Either ap
proach—regression or cost data from manufactur
ers—requires in principle a complete list of
changed physical characteristics.9
Aside from measurement errors, regression anal
ysis and cost data from manufacturers should
yield identical answers under competitive
conditions.
Comparison With CPI and WPI
Neither the Consumer Price Index nor the
Wholesale Price Index is precisely compatible
with a pure price index. There are, however, a
number of similarities. All three indexes measure
the changes in price of transaction units used in
the market—a blanket, for example, rather than
a degree of warmth; all three are fixed weight in-
20
dexes.10 While in effect the CPI and the W PI
approach a pure price index in making adjust
ments for quality change, there are some dissim
ilarities.
In practice, different varieties of a product are
frequently joined in the CPI and the W PI by link
ing prices of the varieties as of a common moment
in time. This assumes that differences in prices
are a measure of relative value. This procedure
is not inconsistent with a pure price index. If per
fect competition is assumed, the relative prices are
a measure of both relative costs and relative utili
ties. Therefore, linking—where possible—prop
erly compares both costs and utilities of the two
varieties.11
Linking is not always possible, however, because
there may be no overlapping observations. In
such cases, a decision must be made as to whether
the difference in price between two time periods is
attributable, at least in part, to a change in quality
or not. If no information is available from the
manufacturer except the nature of the specification
change, the commodity specialist makes a judg
ment on the basis of information he does have as
to whether the quality difference accounts for a
major or a minor part of the reported price dif
ference. In the first case, the prices are linked
over time; in the latter case, prices are directly
compared.
If possible, an attempt is made to get the manu
facturer of a changed product to estimate the pro
portion of the total price difference between the
two varieties attributable to quality change. I t is
not always clear, however, whether the manufac
turer’s estimate is based on the added costs of
changed features or his evaluation of the added
value to the user.
In a very few cases, detailed data from the man
ufacturer of the cost (including markup) of
changes in physical characteristics are used to
adjust prices for changes in quality. At present,
formal regression methods are not used explicitly
or implicitly in either index for measurement of
quality change.
In the use of cost data for measurement of qual
ity change, there are differences in the handling
of the data between the CPI and W PI and a pure
price index. Within the W PI and the CPI,
changes in costs are used as a proxy measure of
changes in the value of new features to the user.
https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
MONTHLY LABOR REVIEW, MARCH 1967
However, costs may move in an opposite direction
from judgments of value to the user. If the char
acteristics of a product have changed and the
changed features did involve added costs, prices
are not adjusted unless there is also some increase
in the quality of the product judged by expert
opinion. Similarly, if the cost of changed fea
tures is negative but there is no decrease in quality
judged by the same standard, no adjustment is
made.
If the changed features of a product are better
but the changes were made at a reduced cost, prices
are not adjusted. In this case, if adjustments were
made, they would indicate a higher price, though
costs were lower and expert judgment of quality
higher.12 Also, if changed features involve a de
crease in quality similarly judged but at higher
costs, there is no adjustment. Since in these cases
costs appear to be an inadequate guide to the direc
tion of movement of quality change, cost data are
disregarded. If there were a better measure of
usefulness available, it would presumably be fol
lowed instead.
Aside from these cases, there is no significant
conceptual difference between the CPI and W PI
and a pure price index in the handling of cost
data.13
10 For a fuller description of the WPI, see H an d b o o k of M e th
ods fo r S u rv e y s and S tu d ie s (BLS Bulletin 1458, 1966), pp. 91—
105.
11 This ignores sam pling problems. Since neither index prices
all varieties of all products, linking can produce different results
if the link is made immediately after a new variety appears or
after it has been on the market for a long period of time. The
general rule in the CPI and W PI is to price the volume leader.
If the link is made at the time a new variety becomes the volume
leader, one cannot be sure th a t the results would be the same
as if both varieties had been continuously priced with varying
w eights reflecting changing sales volumes of the two varieties.
There is no uniquely correct tim e when a link should be made
if the two varieties are both on the market for an extended
period of time.
12 This represents to many the classic dilemma in the use of
cost data for quality adjustm ent. See, for example, Richard and
Nancy Ruggles, “Concepts of Real Capital Stocks and Services,”
O u tp u t, I n p u t, an d P r o d u c tiv ity M ea su rem en t (Princeton,
Princeton U niversity Press, 1961), pp. 392—393. Conceptually,
there is no special problem w ithin the context of a pure price
index and the principle does not differ from the zero cost case
discussed above. It may appear to lead to some peculiarities in
the interpretation or application of the price index, but the pecu
liarities are inherent properties of any sort of fixed w eight index.
13 For a fuller discussion of CPI and W PI techniques on quality
change, see Ethel D. Hoover, “The CPI and Problems of Quality
Change,” M o n th ly L a b o r R e v ie w , November 1961, pp. 1175-1185 ;
and Margaret S. Stotz, “Introductory Prices of 1966 Automo
bile Models,” M o n th ly L a b o r R e v ie w , February 1966, pp. 1 7 8 181. It should be added that the conceptual differences between
a pure price index and the official indexes may be self cancelling
or, at least, of sm all m agnitude empirically.
A Review Essay
Education and the Wealth of Nations
An Examination of the Contribution
of Effective Educational Planning
to the Economic Growth of a Nation
H ar o ld
L.
E narson*
I n Watts and Nigeria, South Chicago and Bra
zil—everywhere the cry of governments is for
more education as the cure for poverty. Not edu
cation for the salvation of man or of particular
men, but education as a contributor to stability and
to the wealth of nations. As the Decade of De
velopment falters and the Alliance for Progress
becomes an embarrassing reminder of pretentious
promises, rich nations and poor nations alike pon
der the source of their wealth. The new breed of
development economists proclaim a new faith; it
is human resource development, human capital
formation, investment in people; it is—forgive the
old-fashioned word—Education!
The Need to Know
This comes as no surprise to educators. Their
confidence in the power of their craft is almost
without limit. The Egyptian fellaheen, dim-wit
ted in the sloth of centuries of tradition, and the
American exurbanite, sharp-witted in weighing
the comparative advantage of Yale and Michigan,
believe that in education lies opportunity for their
children.
In rich and poor lands alike, education—like
sex—is deemed a good thing. But, as with sex,
the concern is more obsessive than critical. Only
the analytical few wish to think critically; even
fewer insist on thinking quantitatively; and even
fewer (happily!) hold that unless you think
quantitatively you do not think.
https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
Teachers and parents are not alone in believing
in education. Corporations, cities, states, and na
tions preach the gospel of education. Corporate
heads in Hamburg and Chicago take the lead in
establishing technical institutes and research cen
ters ; cities compete for the prizes of that greatest
of smokeless industries, the new university; cities
and states and regions compete for the plums of
great new science laboratories, and the new na
tions of Africa discover education even as the old
nations of Europe embrace education with a new
fervor.
It is not entirely fair to suggest that only in the
past several decades have the economists discov
ered education. (Adam Smith has much to say
about education.) But only recently have firstrate economists put their energy and skills to rig
orous and formal analysis of the economics of
educational investment. It was quite recently
that Theodore Schultz devoted his presidential ad
dress before the American Economic Association
to education as human capital formation. And
only in the past decade has a new literature on the
economics of education come into being.
In the world’s hunger and illiteracy belt (and
the two go hand in hand), we repeatedly find:
poorly prepared teachers; rote learning; pitiful
facilities; unyielding educational bureaucracies;
scarcity of the bare minimums (paper, pencil,
health care, food supplements) as well as of the
♦President, Cleveland State University.
21
MONTHLY LABOR REVIEW, MARCH 1967
22
laboratory equipment required for an introduction
to the age of science; curricula, books, and pro
grams badly outmoded and irrelevant to the ob
vious needs of the country ; heavy investments in
primary education alongside meager investments
in secondary education ; preoccupation with build
ings to the neglect of program; obsessive hunger
for new universities, along with neglect of techni
cal, professional, and subprofessional programs
relevant to better health, better agriculture, better
management; appalling rates of dropout at each
level of the educational pyramid, with extraordi
narily high costs per unit of production (i.e., per
person graduating) ; frightful imbalances—as
symbolized by India’s surplus of lawyers and “edu
cated” generalists in the face of great shortages of
agronomists, engineers, and technicians of all sorts ;
and perhaps most distressing of all, tendencies to
imitate Western models rather than fashion a sys
tem of education appropriate to the country.
In the early days of foreign assistance, the pre
scriptions were often marvelously simple. The
plea was for the export of American (or German
or Japanese) “know-how,” for reorganization of
the Ministry of Education, for the export of books
in quantity (including discarded U.S. texts for
Africa !), for crash programs of teacher train
ing, for the creation of land-grant type universi
ties (and M.I.T.’s in miniature), for faculty ex
change programs, and for the development of tech
nical schools that stressed “working with one’s
hands.”
Human Development
In the face of vast and overwhelming needs, any
honest effort appeared worthwhile. The poor
countries have been told repeatedly that they must
have a development plan, including a plan for
“human resource development.” And there is
hardly a country anywhere that does not have a
plan—on paper. Meanwhile, the massive prob
lems of education have mounted, and there is
today as never before a search for shortcuts and
fresh strategies. The poor insist that they cannot
await the slow evolution of modern educational
systems. They want the Instant University,
Instant Literacy, Instant Technology. And the
1
See T h e E co n o m ics o f E d u c a tio n : P ro c ee d in g s o f a C on feren ce
H e ld hy th e I n te r n a tio n a l E con om ic A sso c ia tio n (New York, St.
M artin’s Press, 1966).
https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
$16.
development economists who guide the economic
investment policies in the world’s poverty belt are
eager to embrace the new economics of planned
investment in capital formation.
So what have the economists to say to the edu
cators? The 1963 Annual Conference of the In
ternational Economics Association was devoted to
“The Economics of Education.” The Conference
papers have been assembled by E. A. G. Robinson
and J. E. Vaizey.1 The 24 papers are ambitious
and comprehensive. They deal with national ex
penditure comparisons, “education, research, and
other unidentified factors in growth,” and educa
tion and economic progress in OECD countries.
Also included are studies of Turkey and Japan
and the U S S R , measures of the contribution of
education to economic growth, demand and supply
factors, and criteria for public expenditures on
education. The balance of education—between
various levels of education as well as between gen
eral education and technical or vocational train
ing—is also discussed. Two papers on interna
tional education carry the exhausted reader to a
172-page “summary.”
It is too bad that someone did not digest the undigestible and produce a more slender volume of
essays. The distressing truth is that there is not
yet much hard new knowledge that will make the
new economics operational. The unarguable con
clusion is that high rates of investment in educa
tion and rapid economic growth are closely related.
Perhaps the most impressive “data” lie in the
achievements of two underdeveloped Nations, Rus
sia and Japan, who some years ago deliberately
made heavy investments in the education of their
people as a key element in rapid modernization.
(The reprint of S. G. Strumilin’s article, published
in Moscow in 1925, is a distinct service.) Although
the exact “chemistry” of the interaction between
investment in education and national prosperity is
not known, the evidence seems to suggest that edu
cation is a good investment.
In economics, as in law, general propositions do
not decide concrete cases. Admittedly, a rigorous
concern for economy and productivity is long over
due. Studies of rates of dropout illuminate the
vast wastage: There is need for a balance among
levels and types of education and distribution of
investment among education, health, transporta
tion, and other necessary programs. However, if
the Robinson-Vaizey volume is any index, the
EDUCATION AND THE WEALTH OF NATIONS
economists are still a long way from explicit form
ulations that can serve as detailed guides to the
development planners. The state of the art does
not go very far beyond shrewd observation and
common sense judgments. The worst of the econ
omists have brought j argon and mountains of data
to the scene; the best have brought insight born
of on-site investigations in the developing coun
tries. Most of the economists appear to bring a
kind of petulance to the educational scene. They
really seem to be saying to governments: “Be ra
tional, i.e., make politically unpalatable decisions.”
And to educators: “Be innovative; redesign the en
tire system, restructure the schools and the offer
ings, shift the emphasis, embrace the new tech
nologies, etc.”
This may be good advice, but it is advice that
has been almost universally ignored. Govern
ments and school systems live untouched by the
new gospels of economy and efficiency of the high
priests of economics. Why? Dr. C. E. Beeby,
onetime Director of Education for New Zealand,
thinks that more than human stubbornness ex
plains the lethargy of governments and of school
systems, and he has written a splendid little book to
prove his point.2 Beeby is a professional edu
cator and a cracking good one. He begins with
a confession: “I lectured for years on education
but cannot recall having made, before 1945, a
single reference ,to the fact that half the world was
illiterate. I doubt if I even knew it.” (Such en
gaging candor appears nowhere in the RobinsonVaizey book.)
Unhurried Growth
Beeby’s point, of course, is that until very re
cently most educators gave very little thought to
strategies of educational investment and even less
to the massive problems of education in the Congo
or Asia or Latin America. The educators, in his
words, “were too deeply absorbed in solving prac
tical problems to have time to draw the lessons
from our own findings or to encompass the old and
the new in a fresh body of theory; we were so busy
saving souls that we neglected our theology.”
Beeby gives the economist-critic his due: “The
genius of the economist lay in seeking statistical
proof of this relation [the economic relation of the
2
See The Q u a lity o f E d u c a tio n in D e ve lo p in g C o u n tries (Cam
bridge, Mass., H arvard University Press, 1966). $3.95.
https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
23
educational system to the community]—even if
he has not found it, and in expressing the idea in
the language the man of affairs commonly uses in
thinking of other investments.”
Thus, Beeby welcomes the economist’s contribu
tion to the quantitative analysis but insists that
“the quality of education lies squarely in the do
main of the educator, and he will only have himself
to blame if he fails to balance the theories of the
economist concerning educational planning with
theories of his own which no one but he can pro
vide—this is the central theme of the book.” Ex
cept, thankfully, it really isn’t. The quality vs.
quantity dichotomy is at best deceptive, at worst,
meaningless. Beeby’s great contribution is to ex
plain in simple terms why it is pointless, and even
harmful, to expect the poor countries to telescope
a half century of development in 5 or 10 years. He
asks that we understand the conservatism of the
teacher and the school system in order that we can
get sensibly at the task of reform. Few, if any,
shortcuts are available. There are, Beeby argues,
certain stages of growth through which all school
systems must pass: “Although a system may be
helped to speed up its progress, it cannot leapfrog
a stage or major portion of a stage localise its
position on the scale of development is determined
by two factors, the level of general education of
the teachers, and the amount of training they have
received.” At each level of preparation, the
teacher (primary teacher in his analysis) can
embrace some degree of change. The teacher can
progress from near-illiteracy and disorganization
to rote learning methods. And teachers dependent
on rote learning can be helped to the first steps
toward emphasis on critical learning. But there
can be no Great Leaps Forward; the poorly pre
pared teacher in the bush cannot be expected to
embrace the new technologies. By the same token,
entire school systems are not to be quickly con
verted to conform to the model designed by the
development economist. Nor are universities,
technical institutes, and all other elements in a na
tional educational system to be redesigned in ac
cordance with an economically rational strategy of
investment. Beeby’s implicit criticisms of the
economist-expert on education cut deep. He
asserts the paramount value of a higher logic, one
that embraces the stubbornnesses of men and
policies and politics and institutions along with
the logic of economic rationality.
24
Traditions and Economics
Studies and grand strategies for poor countries
are legion. However, it is rare that a “developed”
nation takes the same medicine. The Bobbins’
study of Britain’s higher education system was a
first-rate study conducted by a first-rate economist.
Now we have a splendid body of essays by Lord
Robbins, largely in defense of the Robbins’ re
port. 3
It is a marvelous book, not only because Robbins
is master of his craft (he surmounts mere informa
tion and jargon) and master of the English lan
guage, but because the essays illustrate admirably
the frustrations that beset one when the ’attempt is
made to apply the logic of organization to the real
ity of institutional life. (Oxford, we learn, would
be “too big” if it wTere to go beyond adding 4,000
graduate students to the present undergraduate
body of 7,500.)
As for cost-benefit analysis, Lord Robbins found
it impossible to give an economic justification for
the large additional expenditures proposed. He
states, “Quite frankly, I do not see how, in the pres
ent state of knowledge, any quantitative statement
can be made about the social returns at these new
margins . . . I submit that, in general, decisions
of this sort have to be made on grounds other than
calculations of the pecuniary return to investment
in human capital . . . Even within the limits of
the so-called economic justification, I am also clear
that the questions we have to ask are very largely
of a nature which precludes quantification.”
And indeed they are! In the reform of educa
tion, whether in Britain, Nigeria, or Home State,
USA, we deal inescapably with the weight of tra
dition, the momentum and vitality of institutions,
the convictions of educators and politicians as well
as with the “economics” of education. In Rob
bins’ book, we return, as we always must, to issues
of public policy in which sentiment and belief
and prejudice mix and blur and intertwine with
the quantitative constructs and the logic of organi
zation. With him, we rediscover the glory of the
Oxbridge universities, sense the new thrust and
dynamism of the Red Brick universities and the
Technical Institutes, admit the political reality of
the public demand for more university spaces, are
reminded that the public interest in education
https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
MONTHLY LABOR REVIEW, MARCH 1967
leads everywhere and inexorably to greater control
over the direction of universities as part of sys
tems and subsystems.
Overdue Coalition
We share Robbins’ rueful admiration for the
ancient universities, where “much of the most ele
mentary statistical information . . . was wrapt in
almost impenetrable obscurity.” It will be a sad
day when the power of the state is joined with
the logic of organization to control universities,
either new or old. It is important that economists
ask hard questions about the economics of edu
cation, but it is even more important that, edu
cators continue to be charged with finding the
answers. The British, more than any other
people, sense that the university is a very special
and delicate institution, that it flourishes best in a
climate of freedom, and that even at considerable
cost it must enjoy, as Robbins puts it, “a substantial
insulation from irrelevant political intrusions.”
If universities are the least prescribed, least
regulated, the least “planned” of all our educa
tional levels, they are also the most productive, the
most creative, the most promising. In last analy
sis, it is the university community which will pro
vide the seminal ideas that enable the less
developed countries to pursue the Greater Glory
of Man and the Wealth of Nations.
But how does one deal constructively witli the
organization of the highest of high-level talent
at the very apex of the educational pyramid ? The
economists interested in education found it far
easier to travel to France for an international
conference than to climb the disciplinary boun
daries separating them from the professional edu
cators on their own campus. Plainly, economist
and educator must soon join hands; their aliena
tion from one another, distressing at home, is in
tolerable as they travel overseas to give expert
advice to the poor nations. We deal, in short,
with problems of our own making, which ought
to make us a bit more humble, whether as econo
mists or educators, when we consult in the de
veloping countries on problems of their making.
3
Lord Robbins, T h e U n iv e r s ity in th e M odern W o rld (New
York, St. Martin’s Press, 1966). $6.
Additional Papers From the IRRA
E ditor ’s N ote .— The
following articles conclude the Reviewis
excerpts from papers given at the IR R A winter meetings in
San Francisco. Other papers icere published in the Feb
ruary issue. As before titles and subtitles have been added
as well as necessary transitions. Guts have not been indicated.
,
Processing Employment
Discrimination Cases
A lfred
W .
B lu m ro sen*
i t l e v i i of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 is the
first Federal legislation designed to eliminate dis
crimination in employment. It established the
Equal Employment Opportunity Commission
(EEOC), to investigate complaints of discrim
ination based on race, religion, sex, or national
origin; determine if there is “reasonable cause”
to believe the allegations; and attempt to concili
ate the matter. If conciliation fails, the individual
employee may sue in a Federal court, and the At
torney General may institute a Federal court suit
if he believes there is a pattern or practice of dis
crimination.
As introduced in the House of Representatives,
the bill proposed giving the Commission powers to
conduct hearings and issue orders if conciliation
failed. The House removed the hearing powers
from the bill, and the Senate deprived the Com
mission of power to sue, which was vested in the
individual complaint and the Attorney General.
The Commission retained only the power to ask
the Attorney General to sue.
Supporters of civil rights legislation were dis
appointed at this course of legislative development
which, in their view, watered down the original
conception of a powerful Commission and turned
it into a toothless tiger. They have supported,
and the Commission has supported, legislation
which would give the Commission the hearing
powers that had been proposed originally. The
proposal to give hearing and order-issuing powers
T
https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
,
to the Commission carries with it implicitly the
elimination of the individual right to sue. While
this is not a necessary consequence of endowing the
Commission with cease and desist powers, it is
contemplated in present versions of proposed
legislation.
We are thus confronted with two competing
models for administrative processing of employ
ment discrimination cases: The present statutory
scheme with its emphasis on the individual right
to sue, and the proposed scheme with its emphasis
on the powers of the agency to hold hearings and
issue orders.
At present, when a complaint of employment
discrimination is submitted to the Commission, it
is investigated and, subsequently, the Commission
makes a written determination as to whether there
is reasonable cause to believe the charges to be true.
If the Commission finds cause, all relevant parties
are notified and conciliation is attempted. In the
conciliation process, the individual charging party
is constantly consulted, and the outcome of a suc
cessful conciliation is an agreement to which he is
a party.
The existence of the individual right to sue
permeates this entire process, beginning with the
reasonable cause finding itself. What are the im
plications of the individual right to sue for this
process of conciliation, and for the successful
achievement of the objective of the statute?
The classic “liberal” view is that the individual
right to sue is not meaningful in the field of social
legislation. Individual suits require initiative,
* Chief of Conciliations, Equal Employment Opportunity Com
mission ; Professor of Law, Rutgers University (on leave, 19656 7 ). The views expressed are those of the author only, and do
not necessarily reflect the views of the EEOC.
25
26
knowledge of rights, willingness to undertake
delay and expense, and possible liability for at
torney fees. Many disadvantaged persons are un
willing to complain at all about their condition,
much less engage in the serious business of litiga
tion. Thus the individual right to sue is a shadow
without substance.
Recent developments under Title V II oast some
doubt on this view. First is the extensive activity
under Title V II of Negro organizations such as
the National Association for the Advancement of
Colored People and the Legal Defense and Educa
tion Fund. These organizations have instituted
many suits—possibly as many as 50—under Title
V II, and have advised and counseled in many
others, during the first year under the statute.
The organization of minority-group persons for
the purpose of asserting legal rights in the employ
ment field is relatively new. Second, the sex pro
vision of the act has worked in such a way that
women employees have found it relatively easy to
obtain counsel. Third, several suits that have
been settled involved substantial attothey fees in
the settlement. The largest monetary settlement
today is the backpay in a sex case settled for more
than $35,000.
In these situations, the “assistance of counsel”
was provided, which is necessary if the individual
right to sue is to work. Thus, the individual
litigant under Title V II is rarely alone or unor
ganized, but rather is part of a formal or informal
organization set up to assert Title V II claims.
Pressed under the “individual rights” of Title VII,
these claims are also “group claims,” representing
the group interests of the minority discriminated
against. The individual right, then, has become a
vehicle by which these group interests are asserted.
The group interest has breathed life into what
might have been a sterile conception of individual
rights to sue.
Another reason frequently given for the admin
istrative processing of litigation under social
legislation is the unfriendly attitude of the courts.
It is too early to tell whether this will be a com
pelling reason under Title VII. Thus far, we
have had only one decision on the merits of a
case; but virtually every Federal judge who has
been confronted with a Title V II matter has
strongly urged that the parties conciliate, and
many settlements have resulted from this initial
judicial response to the case.
https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
MONTHLY LABOR REVIEW, MARCH 1967
There is one further dimension to the individ
ual right to litigate which should be explored here.
The consequence of litigation or the risk of litiga
tion has its impact on the personnel involved in
handling the discrimination problem on both
sides. Where suit has been instituted or is in the
offing, it is very likely that local officials of either
management or union will be subject to guidance,
and sometimes outright direction, from home-of
fice attorneys or other personnel, who view the
risk of litigation as a serious matter. Local per
sonnel are directly and often emotionally involved
in their existing employment relations system, and
the introduction of higher level officials and at
torneys is generally advantageous in terms of se
curing a settlement. The intervention of lawyers
has, on the whole, contributed favorably to the
settlement of cases. The lawyers have not ap
proached the cases with their eyes on the distant
portals of the Supreme Court, but with the de
sire to settle and eliminate the problems involved.
Where they have determined to litigate, I doubt
that the availability of the Commission as a hear
ing tribunal would seriously have influenced
them.
The existence of the individual right to litigate
means that the possibility of settlement, as well
as the litigation prospects, are not controlled by
the Government. Control is shared with the in
dividual. Counsel for the charging party thus
has a significant role to play in shaping the nature
of settlements under Title V II as he advises his
clients, makes recommendations to Commission
conciliators, and sometimes engages in direct ne
gotiations with the respondents. It is this re
tention of control by counsel which lies at the
heart of the Title V II procedures as presently
constituted. If they were modified, counsel for
the charging party would be less influential in
shaping the conciliation and litigation effort. If
control of the process rested in the hands of the
Government, the attorney for the respondent
could focus all of his energies on the Government,
without being as concerned for the charging party
as is now often the case. In short, a change in
the statutory system would have a subtle effect on
all of the relationships which have been described,
in a direction which would reduce the individual’s
control over his own case. This would be one cost
of the change, a cost which should be weighed
carefully.
DISCRIMINATORY PROMOTION SYSTEMS
Discriminatory
Promotion Systems
Peter
B . D o e r in g e r *
e w c o l l e c t i v e a g r e e m e n t s contain provisions
which explicitly disadvantage Negroes. Instead,
the definition of promotion units, transfer rights
between units, promotion criteria, and patterns of
hiring and assigning employees to units are used
to limit the Negro’s advancement opportunity.
The patterns of racial discrimination in promo
tion systems can, for the most part, be divided into
three broad categories. The least common type
consists of two functionally identical progression
lines within a single department, one Negro and
the other white. A more typical arrangement in
volves restricting Negroes to the lower paying job
classifications and progression lines within a de
partment. The third type of discriminatory pro
motion system restricts Negroes to separate units
such as labor pools, less desirable production de
partments, or unskilled job classifications which
are not connected to other promotion units. Here
the functional relationships between the Negro and
white promotion units are less clear or nonexistent.
Discrimination of this type may also be reinforced
by bargaining unit boundaries, as when different
promotion units are represented by different un
ions or when certain groups—laborers, janitors,
and the like—are not included within any bargain
ing unit.
Such segregated promotion units may be for
mally established or may exist informally through
tacit arrangements which permit only white em
ployees to transfer into more desirable job classi
fications or to acquire permanent employment
rights in those job classifications. The net result
of these systems has been to reduce economic op
portunities of Negroes and to limit their opportun
ities to acquire either the requisite in-plant train
ing or the seniority credits to enable them to com
pete for promotion on an equal basis with white
employees.
F
Proposed Remedies
Remedies for discriminatory promotion systems
may be divided into two types—those involving
https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
27
changes in the scope of the promotion unit or the
linkage between units, and those involving changes
in the rules governing the priorities for interunit
and intraunit promotions and transfers. Reme
dies of both types can be combined in a variety
of ways to suit the particular conditions surround
ing each discriminatory promotion system. While
they can all be implemented voluntarily through
collective bargaining procedures, distinctions may ,
be drawn among them on the basis of equity of
distribution of the costs of the remedy among the
parties, and the degree to which they are required
by Title V II of the Civil Rights Act of 1964.
Consider, for example, the type of remedy in
which white and Negro promotion units are
merged in a manner which permits Negro em
ployees to move into only those vacancies in the
previously white job classifications for which
white employees hold no prior promotion expecta
tions. Such remedies do not create any significant
additional training costs for the employer, nor do
the white employees bear any costs of reduced
promotion opportunities. By permitting the
white employees to exercise training and seniority
previously acquired under the discriminatory
system, a period of transition is established dur
ing which Negro employees are unable to compete
for promotions on an equal basis with whites.
Thus Negro employees continue to bear, for this
transition period, the implicit costs of reduced
promotion opportunities.
An alternative remedy which recognizes these
transition costs is to permit Negroes to advance
into job vacancies for which whites held priority
rights under the previous promotion system. This
would include, for example, broadening the scope
of the promotion unit in which length of service
credits can be exercised in job bidding, and re
laxing the ability criteria to be used in evaluating
an employee’s qualifications for promotion. When
ability qualifications are maintained while the
scope of the unit in which seniority rights are ex
ercised is broadened, any increase in the advance
ment rates of Negro employees will come entirely
at the expense of reduced promotion opportuni
ties for the white employees, with no costs being
incurred by the employer. If ability standards
are relaxed, however, the employer shares some
of the remedy costs by providing additional train*Professor of Economics, Harvard U niversity.
28
ing with each promotion. In the extreme case,
in which senior Negroes are allowed to displace
junior white incumbents regardless of ability, the
cost of the remedy is borne exclusively by the
employer and the white employees.
Protection of Prior Rights
Since the legislative history protects a limited
set of established rights and standards within pro
motion system, it constrains, to some degree, the
types of remedies which the courts can require.
Moreover, it is difficult to assert, within the limits
set by these constraints, that any specific remedy
is determined by the act.
Any solution which the courts can require will
have certain practical disadvantages. Remedies
which permit Negro employees to transfer into
only those vacancies in previously white job classi
fications to which white employees hold no prior
claims will prevent them from competing on equal
terms with their white peers. If the courts recog
nize this inequity and endorse some form of rem
edy which rearranges promotion rights or job
security, the following disadvantages will accrue:
The remedy will be meaningless if Negroes lack
the qualifications required for upgrading; the dis
tribution of the costs of the remedy between the
respondents will be excessively imbalanced, where
the employer will not bear any additional training
costs and the union might even encourage a
stricter interpretation of the ability clause to pro
tect white promotion opportunities; and the dis
cretionary latitude inherent in the application of
the ability clause when determining the qualifica
tion of Negroes for promotion may make the rem
edy technically difficult to enforce if the employer
and the union are not firmly committed to accept
ing it.
Alternative Solutions
These disadvantages, in my view, indicate that
the types of solutions which the courts can require
are likely to be more limited and less effective than
those which are available through voluntary nego
tiation. Therefore, in order to encourage a volun
tary development of meaningful remedies, the
courts might well adopt, where necessary, a posi
https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
MONTHLY LABOR REVIEW, MARCH 1967
tion which would impose some costs upon the re
spondents. One alternative which the courts
might accept, for example, is to expand the scope
of the promotion unit to encompass both Negro
and white job classifications, combined with a
broadening of the criteria governing promotions
to include an employee’s recent training and train
ing potential as well as his ability and seniority.
This remedy has the advantage of permitting each
promotion to be handled on an individual basis
within the plant, and permits a wider range of
relevant considerations to be applied in determin
ing eligibility for promotion.
A second, and in the long run more satisfactory,
alternative is to have the employees currently in
Negro promotion units or progression sequences
be given preferential access rights to the entry
jobs in the previously white units. However,
since it does not provide Negro employees with
any opportunities to acquire nonentry jobs in the
white unit commensurate with their seniority or
ability, this reorganization should be considered
as only a partial fulfillment of the obligation
of the union and the employer to eliminate
discrimination. The quid pro quo for this waiver
by the Negro employees should be that they
receive additional compensation, and, most im
portant, additional training, both to ensure their
qualification for promotion to the previously
white unit when job vacancies occur and to develop
more general skills.
Such a solution will provide fewer immediate
economic advantages for particularly well quali
fied Negro employees than can perhaps be required
by the act. It will, however, more effectively
serve the longrun interests of the Negro em
ployees, as a class, by ensuring that more of them
will be qualified for advancement and that such
advancement will not require the sacrifice of in
come or job security. Moreover, it provides a
mechanism through which the employer and the
union can share the costs, rather than penalizing
specific individuals who may not have been respon
sible for the discrimination. Perhaps more im
portant, this solution permits the parties to the
complaint to exercise wider discretion in fashion
ing remedies, through a collective bargaining
process which recognizes the diversity of compet
ing needs and preferences within the plant.
EFFECT OF ECONOMIC CHANGE ON MICHIGAN LABOR FORCE
The Effect of Economic Change
on the Michigan Labor Force
P eter
S.
B arth*
p a p e r attempts to summarize a larger study
designed to explore the responsiveness of the labor
force to changes in economic conditions. The main
question was, does the labor force expand, con
tract, or remain unchanged as unemployment rates
change? In an effort to answer this and other
relevant questions, the labor force of a heavily
industrialized urban center, the Detroit Standard
Metropolitan Statistical Area, was analyzed as was
that of the relatively unindustrialized Upper Pen
insula of Michigan, a chronically depressed area.1
The study revealed that the relationship between
aggregate unemployment rates in an area and par
ticipation rates for various male age groups, taking
account of the industrial composition of the area
and the median level of educational attainment,
was not significant for any of the six male age
classes studied. However, the sign of the coeffi
cient of the unemployment variable was negative
for 5 of the 6 classifications, lending a very
slight weight to the discouraged worker hypothe
sis. A very strong positive correlation was found
to exist between the median level of education in
an area and participation rates of males 65 years
and older. This apparently reflects the generally
more prolonged attachment of professional per
sons to the labor force. Labor force participation
rates of women, except those age 14 to IT and 65
and over, were significantly and inversely corre
lated to unemployment rates. This finding is in
accord with thê discouraged worker hypothesis.
A positive relationship exists between median
educational attainment levels of women over 24
years and participation rates for all age classes 25
years and over and is statistically significant in
4 of these 5 categories.
The regression analysis using time series data
for the State as a whole indicated that the flow of
workers out of the labor force during periods of
high or rising unemployment outweighed that of
the secondary workers who entered the labor force
during such times.
The pattern of migration varies with the area
under analysis. During the period from mid-1951
to mid-1956, both Detroit and the entire State of
T h is
245-336 0
-
67-3
https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
29
Michigan experienced net in-migration. This
corresponds to periods of generally low unemploy
ment rates in both areas. From mid-1956 to mid1962, a period of high unemployment rates, the
State and Detroit lost population through migra
tion. This trend was ended in 1963, a good year
economically for Michigan, when net in-migration
occurred for Detroit and the State experienced
almost no net movement of population.
Reliable estimates of unemployment in Michigan
were available only for 1956-63. A simple regres
sion was estimated so that the rate of net migration
for the State was a function of the unemployment
rate. When that regression was found to be not
significant, a new regression was estimated with
an index composed of the unemployment rate in
Michigan over that in the United States as the
explanatory variable. The findings suggest that
the decision to leave an area like Michigan or re
frain from moving into it is based on conditions
other than simply those which exist in that area.
In the Upper Peninsula, the Detroit Standard
Metropolitan Statistical Area, and in the State
of Michigan (excluding these two areas), labor
force participation rates declined from 1956 to
1962. The absolute and relative declines were
greatest in the Upper Peninsula, the area which
consistently suffered the highest unemployment
rates over the period. In Detroit the absolute and
relative declines in labor force participation rates
were greater than in the rest of the State. The
latter area suffered lower unemployment rates over
this period than did Detroit. Moreover, as De
troit and the Upper Peninsula experienced an eco
nomic upswing in 1963, the consistently downward
trend of participation rates was reversed in these
areas. Although not conclusive by themselves,
these factors along with the earlier cited findings
lend further support to the applicability of the
discouraged worker hypothesis to the State.
♦Assistant Professor of Economics, Ohio S tate U niversity.
1 In the m ultivariate analysis here, cross-sectional data from
the 1960 decennial census were used. The key hypotheses tested
were that participation rates were associated with other eco
nomic aggregates, such as unemployment, and that these variables
affected various age and sex groups differently. Labor force
participation rates for 12 age-sex classifications (covering the
entire population of 14 years and over) were taken for the 52
areas in Michigan which were defined by the Bureau of Employ
ment Security as labor market areas.
In a time series analysis, seasonally adjusted unemployment
rates in the State over time, together with a variable represent
ing the proportion to total population of persons whose unem
ployment insurance benefits had been exhausted in th a t period,
were regressed participation rates.
30
MONTHLY LABOR REVIEW, MARCH 1967
Technological Displacement
As a Micro Phenomenon
H e r b e r t E . S t r in e r *
p a p e r is concerned primarily with two fea
tures of the report completed a year ago by the
National Commission on Technology, Automa
tion, and Economic Progress.1 They are: (1) the
Commission’s assumptions which underlie the re
port, and (2) the data and methodology that were
used on the conduct of the research.
In order to meet its legislative charge, the Com
mission had to be concerned with productivity,
rates of innovation and technological change, and
the projected impacts of technology upon employ
ment up to the year 1975. Quite properly, the
Commission undertook no research in these com
plex areas but leaned on the existing fund of
knowledge.
T h is
Selected Projections
The Commission’s key assumption, based on the
Bureau of Labor Statistics projection of unem
ployment for 1975, was that the level of unemploy
ment that year would not be high. The overall
assumption of the meaningfulness of this projec
tion or of any gross measure of unemployment for
the problem of technological displacement fore
dooms dealing with this problem. For the prob
lem is not a gross one; it is one which exists in the
interstices and at the edges of our huge economy—
so huge, indeed, that even minor percentages can
involve extremely large numbers of people who
need help. Such interstitial problems call for
data, methodologies, and monitoring techniques
which the Commission could not, and did not, be
come sufficiently concerned about because of the
euphoric paralysis of its initial assumption con
cerning the low level of unemployment in 1975.
Using correlation techniques, the BLS re
searchers indicated (in the appendix to the report)
that an assumed level of 4-percent unemployment,
rather than the Commission’s assigned 3 percent,
would result in somewhat more than 1 million ad
ditional unemployed, with over half of these
located in the manufacturing sector. The re
searchers are quite explicit about the serious
caveats one would normally expect with this
https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
type of projection. All of which weakens con
siderably the Commission’s rather optimistic use
of this methodology in assessing the likely impact
of technological changes on employment in 1975.
Innovation and Productivity
The major burden of the Commission’s mes
sage on rates of change and diffusion is that al
though things happen faster nowadays, the lag
between discovery and commercial application is
still substantial so that whatever technology can
affect employment by 1975 must already be “in the
works.” This may be so, but Mansfield’s paper in
the appendix (vol. II, pp. 97-132) contains two
items which limit acceptance of his average lag
of 14 years from the process of invention to com
mercial innovation.
Mansfield warns us of his
average, indicating that the range of lag-times for
diffusion varied from 0.9 to 15 years for acceptance
by 50 percent of the logical user firms.
Although the report warns that “output for
man-hour is not, of course, a measure of technical
progress alone,” it does not shrink from an al
most immediate acceptance of this measure as an
adequate guide. But this index is one of the most
difficult and mischievous ones in the entire field
of index numbers, with regard to both construc
tion and credibility.
I contend that for any policy dealing with tech
nological change, productivity indexes must re
late to specific industries. The very crux of the
measurement of technological impact is the fact
that it is for each industry that it must be meas
ured, not in the aggregate. This is entirely missed
in the global viewpoint of the Commission. Tech
nological change and its consequent employment
and other economic impacts are highly uneven
among industries. The central problem in per
ceiving technological change is to understand that
it is a disaggregated problem.
The “Shape-Up” Hypothesis
A major contention of the report is that, given a
sufficiently high and sustained rate of overall eco*Director of Program Development, The W. E. Upjohn In sti
tute for Employment Research. Copies of the entire paper can
be obtained from the author at the In stitu te (1101 17th Street
NW„ Suite 905, Washington, D.C. 20036).
1 For a summary of the Commission’s report, see M o n th ly L ab o r
R e v ie w , March 1966, pp. 274-277.
TECHNOLOGICAL DISPLACEMENT AS A MICRO PHENOMENON
liomic growth, the general level of unemployment
can be reduced well below 4 percent. The Com
mission looked upon reduction of the unemploy
ment rate (from 5.1 percent in August 1964, when
the Commission was chartered, to 4.0 percent at
the end of 1965, when the report was completed)
as ample evidence th a t a continued high level of
economic grow th would reduce the level further.
This aura of optimism was placed within the
fram ework of what the Commission referred to as
a “shapeup.” The employed tend to be those near
the beginning, the unemployed near the end of the
shapeup line. The report stated fu rth er that,
“Only as demand rises will employers reach fu r
ther down the line in their search for employees.”
D uring the 10-month period following this con
clusion, the economy has m aintained its peak level
of activity, but the general level of unemployment
has remained so close to 4 percent as to be statisti
cally undifferentiated. W hat is truly interesting
is the shift in the unemployment rates for those at
the head of the shapeup as opposed to those toward
the end of the line.
F irst, let us define this shapeup line. The be
ginning would include the prime age group of
white persons—th a t is, the white males, age 25
years and over. The end of the line is probably
composed of Negroes and younger workers (16
and IT years old), both white and non white.
As we all know, during the period since issuance
of the report, the economy has continued to ex
pand. The job m arket had tightened to the point
where, in October 1966, over h alf of those unem
ployed had been jobless for 5 wTeeks or less. In
contrast, the number of long-term unemployed (15
weeks or longer) declined by 200,000 over the year.
Those at the head of the line showed a drop in the
unemployment level.
Did this augur well for the end of the line?
No: The level of unemployment for the non white
group was 7.0 percent in Jan u ary 1966. By Octo
ber 1966, it had risen to 7.6 percent. And, for the
16 and 17 year-old group, both white and nonwhite,
during the same period the unemployment rate re
mained at 14.7 percent.
Manpower in 1975
A vital task given by the Commission to BLS
was th at of estim ating projected requirements in
https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
31
1975 for employment by m ajor occupation groups.
These projections were made, but they were not
capable of meeting the real needs of the Commis
sion. To begin with, as Lee H ansen so well dem
onstrated in his paper a year ago at these meetings,
BLS projects “actuals” rather than “require
ments.” The projection represents an inevitable
outcome of the economic environment th a t the pro
jection is attem pting to capture. The occupa
tional requirements used by the Commission is a
distribution implied by the assumptions, and no
more. This statement is so obvious th at one m ight
question why I bother to make it. The reason
grows out of my contention th at the Commission’s
inclusion and use of BLS “requirements” data for
1975 explicitly are supposed to indicate “new job
requirements and the m ajor types of worker dis
placement . . . likely to occur during the next 10
years.” The Commission chooses to answer by ac
cepting a series of assumptions which obliterate
the very problem under investigation. Unem
ployment is assumed to be 3 percent; no m ajor
changes in technology are envisioned as being pos
sible in terms of anything less than roughly 14
years; and the categories of occupation are so
broad as to defy any m eaningful discussion re
garding skills or job descriptions.
W as this Commission, or any sim ilar Commis
sion, in a position really to deal w ith the problem
assigned to it ? I believe not.
There are many m ajor reasons why this is so.
They all grow out of the fact th a t the nature and
m agnitude of technological change has never been
such as to cause unemployment both so large and
so sudden as to be discerned in a macro situation.
All past experience tends to indicate not only
th at technology does not cause sudden, massive
unemployment, but th a t it probably occurs at
widely varying rates between firms w ithin an in
dustry. The effects of innovation and dissemina
tion of technology on employment are, I believe,
a micro phenomenon, not a macro one. To study
it and its various implications, we m ust have data
which are designed for entirely different categories
than much of our current series, and we m ust use
our methodologies in a m anner consistent with
micro phenomena. The fact is th a t minute errors
which cancel out so nicely in aggregate analysis
often represent extremely large numbers of people
in the absolute sense.
MONTHLY LABOR REVIEW, MARCH 1967
32
Means of Adjustment
to Technological Displacement
J oseph A. P ichler*
s t u d y of worker adjustm ents to unemploy
ment caused by technological and m arket changes
is not new in the field of industrial relations. A t
least 20 m ajor analyses of shutdowns had been pub
lished when the present study was undertaken.
The present research extends the displacement lit
erature by assessing the contributions of pro
visions for training, severance pay, and interplant
transfer to the adjustm ent patterns of displaced
workers.
Interview data were provided by workers from
three shuttered plants: Arm our and Co., F o rt
W orth, Tex. (closed in the summer of 1962) ;
Arm our and Co., Sioux City, Iowa (closed June
1963); and the Studebaker Co., South Bend, Ind.
(closed December 1963). Interviews were held
roughly 1 year after each shutdown. The Arm our
Autom ation F und Committee sponsored the field
work for the first two cases. The respective State
and local employment offices were most cooperative
during all phases of the research.
T he
Factors Determining Choice
Distributions of age, education, race, and pre
shutdown skill level were prepared in order to
measure their effect on the displaced workers’
choices among provisions. I t was predicted th at
acceptance of training would show a negative asso
ciation w ith age. This prediction was validated
by the one-variable tables in F o rt W orth and
South Bend; results in Sioux City were in the
same direction, but the tendency was much less
pronounced.
Educational achievement was also expected to be
negatively related to the acceptance of training.
Findings were in a direction opposite to th at pre
dicted : In all cities, the proportion of workers ac
cepting training was a positive function of edu
cational achievement.
The analysis of the influence of age upon tran s
fer yielded particularly interesting results. I t
was hypothesized th at acceptance of transfer
would be negatively related to age. The data,
however, yielded a flat distribution. Except for
https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
men who were below 30, 20 percent of each age
group transferred. A subanalysis showed that
acceptance of transfer and seniority were strongly
correlated.
The influences of race and preshutdown skill
upon the choice process were also examined. Ne
groes from the A rm our plants were significantly
less likely to accept training than whites; no racial
difference was found in South Bend. Negroes
were also twice as likely to transfer as whites with
comparable education. Given the possibility of
encountering racial barriers in the local labor
m arket, the job security afforded by transfer was
of particular importance to these men.
The relationship between skill and acceptance
of training was as expected: Unskilled men and
those with skills not transferable across industry
lines were more likely to train than men with
widely usable skills.
Employment Consequences
One measure of the effect of shutdown pro
visions upon adjustm ents is the degree to which
they improve reemployment prospects. P erform
ance in this respect was determined by computing
unemployment rates for workers who chose each
provision. Com putation of gross unemployment
rates for the trainees yielded these results: In
F o rt W orth, the trainee rate was lower than the
nontrainee (11 as against 30 percent) ; the nontrainee rate was lower in Sioux City (28 and 33
percent) ; and in South Bend, the rates were identi
cal (22 percent).
Given the influence of age, education, and skill
rate upon reemployment prospects, it was im por
tan t th at these factors be controlled in the analysis.
Findings on age were particularly interesting.
F o rt W orth trainees of all ages fared better than
nontrainees on the reemployment criterion. H ow
ever, while the unemployment rate of nontrainees
rose steadily w ith age, the rate for trainees in the
highest age group (50-59 years) was below the
younger groups. Results were parallel in Sioux
City and South Bend.
Educational analysis did not significantly quali
fy the aggregate findings in F o rt W orth and Sioux
City. F o rt W orth trainees had lower unemploy
ment rates than nontrainees at every level of edu*A ssistant Professor of Business Adm inistration, University
of Kansas.
ADJUSTMENT TO TECHNOLOGICAL DISPLACEMENT
cation. Sioux City nontrainee rates were above
those of trainees for all groups except those with
8 years of schooling or less. In South Bend, non
trainees w ith at least 1 year of high school had un
employment rates below those of trainees.
The skill rating of each respondent’s preshut
down job was classified according to the Diction
ary of Occupational Titles. A n estimate of the
transferability of skill across industry lines was
also made. T raining’s effect, independent of skill,
was then determined. Trainees in all skill classes
enjoyed a lower unemployment rate than nontrainees in F o rt W orth, but no such effect was ob
served in the other cities.
The questionnaire data yielded no clue as to why
training wTas apparently successful in reducing un
employment only in F o rt W orth, although there
are some external data which suggest an expla
nation.1
A second criterion of train in g ’s effect was the
skill mobility among workers who found reem
ployment. Changes in the preshutdown and postshutdown skill level of each worker’s occupation
were measured, and trainees in all cities were
shown to have experienced considerably greater
upw ard mobility than nontrainees. Results were
significant at less than the 10-percent level for 5
of the 6 categories which could be analyzed.
Earnings provided a th ird measure of training’s
effect. All workers were stratified by preshutdown
skill levels, and weekly wages after reemployment
were computed. Results were quite inconclusive.
Five of the seven comparisons yielded a positive
training increment ranging from $4 to $18 per
week; one indicated no difference; and the last
showed a $3 earnings difference in favor of the
nontrainees. Only the $18 difference was signifi
cant at less than 10 percent.
In summary, judgm ents of train in g ’s effect on
job m arket adjustm ents vary w ith the criterion
chosen. By the unemployment rate standard,
training was a clear success only in F o rt W orth,
1
Shultz and Weber have indicated that the Fort Worth econ
omy took an upward turn between the date of the shutdown and
the surveys, so that employment opportunities improved. When
trainees entered the labor market w ith their new skills, the
market was ready to receive them. No sim ilar economic re
surgence occurred in Sioux City or South Bend during the period
studied. It may be that some increase in aggregate demand
was needed to utilize the changes in the skill structure of supply.
(See George P. Shultz and Arnold R. Weber, “A Report to
the Armour Automation Fund Committee on the Placem ent and
Retraining Experience of Workers Displaced by the Shutdown of
the Main Armour P lant in Fort Worth, T ex.,” mimeographed,
P- 4.)
https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
33
although the older trainees in Sioux City and
South Bend fared better than their nontrained
peers. Nor did training appear to exert a consist
ent effect upon postshutdown earnings. On the
other hand, trainees in all cities enjoyed greater
upw ard skill mobility than nontrainees—a devel
opment which indicates th at their longrun wage
progression prospects may have been enhanced.
Income and Expenditures
The overall impression from the analysis of in
come and expenditure adjustments and from sec
ondary labor force data is th a t trainees made the
greatest changes in living patterns. Even with
the subsistence allowance, they apparent ly shoul
dered a sizable personal cost in order to acquire
a new skill.
On the other hand, transferees made the least
severe change in living standards. Indeed they
were the only group with earnings above the preshutdown level.
The study was rounded out by an analysis of
severance pay usage and an investigation of the
nonoccupational experience of transferees. Over
half of the workers from the A rm our plants spent
most of their severance pay for debt payment or
living expenses. Most of the others either saved
their payment or used it to finance self-employ
ment. There was some indication th at the pay
ment influenced the reemployment rate in F o rt
W orth. W hen th at sample was grouped by age
and dichotomized about the median severance pay
figure, the upper h alf of the distributions showed
either a longer lag between layoff and reemploy
ment or a higher proportion w ith no postshutdown
employment experience.
Despite the mobility problems, the transfer
option appears to have been the most effective
mechanism for adjustm ent to shutdown. This
statement holds true for virtually all of the adjust
ment criteria used: employment rates, pay scales,
and living standards. There is also some sub
jective evidence indicating th a t transferees were
the group most satisfied with the provision
chosen. All Sioux City respondents were asked,
“Do you wish th at you had chosen some other
provision after the shutdow n?” The proportions
answering in the affirmative were 2 percent for
transferees, 44 percent for nontrainees, and 47
percent for trainees.
MONTHLY LABOR REVIEW, MARCH 1967
34
Defense Expenditures
In Depressed Areas
I r w in
Gray*
T h e D e pa r tm en t of D e fe n se through its pro
curement activities creates more employment op
portunities than any other agency in or out of
Government. The effect of such spending in
stim ulating the grow th of jobs has led to proposals
to channel contracts to other areas in which un
employment is severe and new industries are
needed. W ould the unemployed worker really
benefit from the increased defense activity in his
area? To help answer the question, and to ana
lyze the conditions under which the aid m ight be
effective, let us look at the type of worker defense
industries need and the type of worker who is un
employed in the depressed areas, and examine the
extent of the mismatch (if any) between the two.
Defense Job Requirements
W ork forces of 84 defense firms in five industry
classifications 1 were grouped on a sample basis
into seven job-entrant categories according to skill
and education. A person applying for a job at a
given level would have to meet one of these re
quirements, briefly stated as follow s:
0 to 4 years of school, no vocational skills.
5 to 7 years of school, or vocational skills only.
8 years of school.
9 to 11 years of school, or 8th grade plus skills.
12 years of school, high school diploma.
18-15 years of school, junior college or equivalent, or
high school diploma plus specialized vocational skills.
16 or more years of school, college, or advance de
gree (s).
The requirements stated are those which the
firms have established; whether these are too high
or too low in relation to what they actually need
for the work performed is a m atter th at is beyond
the scope of this paper.
Study of the data revealed no significant varia
tion in education requirements associated w ith d if
ferent size classifications of the plants. I t also
showed th a t there is less variation in skill require
ments, from industry to industry, than m ight have
been expected. In four of the industries, over 95
percent of the work force must possess at least a
high school education. Over 65 percent must pos
https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
sess schooling beyond th at p o in t; a th ird or more
of the workers m ust have at least a college educa
tion.
The high skill of the defense plants’ work forces
is further emphasized by the composition of the
aggregate defense labor force. The defense in
dustries require about two-thirds of their job en
trants to meet the requirements of the two topmost
skill-education categories. By contrast, less than
one-third of the employed nonagricultural labor
force of the U nited States would fall into these
categories. Defense work requires twice the num
ber of people w ith a college education and more
than twice the number w ith 13 to 15 years of school
(or specialized skill) than does the nonagricul
tural labor force. Furtherm ore, in all the lesser
categories of skill-education (w ith the exception of
those in the 5 to 7-years or skills-only group), the
proportion of workers in the nonagricultural labor
force is higher than for a potential defense work
force. The relatively large percentage of defense
jobs in the 5 to 7-years group is due to several large
facilities which produce munitions and electronic
components—items well suited to high-volume
automated production lines and the use of lessskilled production (and m aterials handling)
workers.
New Plants in Depressed Areas
Figures illustrating the occupational distribu
tion of the unemployed labor force in 120 urban
industrial depressed areas and on a national basis
disclose th a t unemployment has affected the bluecollar worker proportionately more than the
white-collar worker. Only 15 percent of the un
employed were in the latter occupations in the
depressed areas compared with 21 percent nation
ally. (Among the employed, white-collar work
ers make up 46 percent of the U.S. labor force.)
Inform ation about the educational qualifications
of the unemployed was obtained by converting the
inform ation about the occupational distributions
into educational distributions. The distribution
for unemployed workers in the depressed area was
not substantially different from th a t of the un
employed work force all over the country. Both,
however, have a relatively small percentage of
♦A ssistant Professor of Industrial Engineering, School of E ngi
neering, P ratt Institute.
1 Aircraft-m issiles ;
communications-electronics-instruments ;
ordnance and accessories ; electrom echanical ap p aratu s; and a
miscellaneous class.
DEFENSE EXPENDITURES IN DEPRESSED AREAS
35
workers in the two topmost education levels—a
forewarning th at we will have a mismatch when
we compare the requirements of defense work with
the characteristics of the unemployed.
The central question now is, to what extent
would a new defense plant reduce unemployment
in a depressed area ?
We start with a wide discrepancy between the
qualifications of the unemployed and the require
ments of the defense industries. W hile less than
4 percent of the unemployed have a college de
gree, defense work requires th a t 30 percent of its
work force possess a degree; only about 7 percent
of the unemployed have 13-15 years of schooling,
while defense work requires th at 33 percent of the
work force fall into this category. A t lesser edu
cation levels, the depressed areas have a surfeit of
potential applicants vis-a-vis the potential open
ings, to such a degree th at few of the applicants
could get jobs. Overall, the defense skill levels
at which the largest number of employees are re
quired are just the ones at which the fewest per
sons are available from among the unemployed.
F o r a more explicit estimation of the imbalance
between supply and demand, a model was set up in
which the computer matched each firm’s job open
ings with workers in an area. The results may
be summarized as follow s:
1. In general, the larger the defense facility,
the greater its impact in reducing the unemploy
ment in an area.
2. The percentage of a facility’s job openings
filled increases as the area labor-pool size in
creases, but the change is on the order of 10 per
cent even as the labor pool doubles. In short,
companies hiring 1,000-1,500 workers cannot ex
pect to fill more than about 35 percent of their
openings (from among the unemployed), regard
less of the size of the area involved. The percent
age of positions filled drops 3 to 5 percent every
time the plant size doubles, down to about 10 per
cent for a 20,000-wmrker facility. The company
m igrating into a depressed area will have to take
many employed people away from other firms or
im port their own workers because the mismatch
here is due to lack of education on the part of the
unemployed and not to lack of certain skills.
W hile a company m ight be willing to train work
ers to im part a specific vocational skill, it is doubt-
ful th a t a company would undertake to provide
remedial training to compensate for a lack of a
basic education. Since defense requirements are
basically for highly educated persons, the com
pany’s willingness to provide vocational training
would not make up for the lack of education on the
p art of the unemployed.
3. In every plant-area match, almost 100 percent
of the unemployed white-collar workers found
jobs.2 Beyond this point, however, employment
(by occupation) fell off rapidly. Unemployed
laborers showed the least improvement in employ
ment status—less than 10 percent found jobs even
with the biggest firms.
4. The key element in determining the degree
to which a plant was beneficial in reducing unem
ployment was its need for workers a t various job
educational levels (not just the two or three top
most levels). The best “results” were obtained by
the following types of fa c ility :
(a) A facility which employed about 6,000
workers, absorbed 85 percent of the unemployed
even in the largest labor pool, was in the missile
and aircraft business, and would accept up to 40
percent of the incoming work force w ithout a high
school education. This facility, however, could
fill only 35 percent of its needs from among the
unemployed. The most typical plant in the a ir
craft and missile business, it may be noted here,
employs about 17,000 workers at one location and
accepts only about 3 percent of its work force with
less than a high school education.
(b) A facility which employed about 3,000
workers and could absorb about 46 percent of an
area’s unemployed workers, was in the instrumentcommunications-equipment business, and would
allow about 30 percent of its work force to have less
than a high school education. This p lan t would fill
about 41 percent of its needs from the unemployed
worker labor pool. The most typical installation
in the instrum ent business is rather small—about
150 workers—and has less than 5 percent of its
work force in categories below a high school
education.
The present study suggests th a t public policy in
tent on bringing new industry into depressed areas
m ight be centered on labor-intensive industries
and those which do not concentrate on products
requiring a highly educated work force.
2 The results here are preliminary.
https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
36
MONTHLY LABOR REVIEW, MARCH 1967
National Wage Policies
in Europe and the U.S.
E. M. Kassalow*
e r h a p s t h e m o s t i m p o r t a n t l e s s o n to be learned
from experience w ith wage or income policies or
controls in the post-W orld W ar I I period is th at
in terms of quantitative economic measurement,
it is difficult to prove anything definitively as to the
effectiveness of these control efforts. I f it can be
assumed that a principal objective of any wage or
income policy is to restrict upw ard price move
ments to less than they would have been in the
absence of such a policy, the available data are
not encouraging to the advocates of wage controls.
One could almost conclude from these data th at
a case could be made that the absence of formal
wage policies yields better price results.
W hile the “figures” don’t make a clear case for
or against wage or income controls, certain nonquantitative conclusions and ideas suggest them
selves from the experience of those nations which
have experimented w ith wage policy systems in
one form or another.1
P
Labor and Wage Control
In the first place, it seems th a t to gain accept
ance, a wage control system must allow for p a r
ticipation of labor and management in the decision
m aking machinery. This can take the A ustrian
form of a wage-price council w ith unions and
management form ally represented on it. In la
bor’s case, it may merely be sufficient if there is a
labor or socialist government. I f the government
is a coalition in Europe, it has generally been
deemed wise to place a labor representative or a
socialist in the crucial labor or finance m inistry,
either of which may have responsibility for wage
policy. One of the keys to the successful opera
tion of national wage policy during W orld W ar I I
in the U nited States was its trip a rtite structure.
U nder this system, unions and management had
equal representation, along with public members,
in policy form ulation and adm inistration.
Furtherm ore, controls over wages alone are not
likely to be tolerated by the unions very long.
W age controls provoke a labor oounterdemand for
price control, profits control, dividend limitations,
and the like. Unless these equity claims are met,
https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
the operation of wage controls will not foe a durable
affair. In A ustria, this possibility is lessened by
the fact th at the control council, w ith union repre
sentation on it, has jurisdiction over wages and
prices.
On the whole, European experience usually re
veals th a t unless other income streams and prices
are subject to some control, union cooperation will
not be forthcoming. The failure of the B ritish
Conservative Government to control nonwage in
comes, for example, was one of the reasons for the
almost perem ptory refusal of the Trades Union
Congress (TU C ) to cooperate in the control pro
gram proposed in the early 1960’s.
This problem of relative equity and the contain
ment of other than wage incomes lias produced
strange twists in bargaining relationships in some
countries. In 1964, the Danish Federation of
T rade Unions and the chief employers’ organiza
tion in th a t country adopted a new procedure for
negotiation, as they agreed “to aim at seeing th a t
this income policy embraces all recipients o f-in
come in 'the society.” I t was also agreed th a t this
would involve joint pressure upon the Government
whose “legislative powers are able to secure this
objective.” The union had felt th a t after the 1961
agreement, “those who draw incomes outside of the
trade union movement . . . succeeded in securing
fa r greater income advances th an did the work
ers . . . The trade union movement wishes there
to be no recurrence of this . . . ” 2
We have had a sim ilar example of labor’s de
mand for “equal sacrifice” rig h t here in the U nited
States during the past year. W hile continuing to
express hostility to the so-called guideposts, P resi
dent George Meany of the A F L -C IO has indi
cated labor’s willingness to cooperate in a national
emergency “overall stabilization” program say
ing: “I f the President concludes there is such a
national emergency as to require extraordinary
overall stabilization measures, he will have the
complete wholehearted support of the labor move
ment. This would mean every economic fac
tor—all costs, prices, profits, wages—being equally
restrained. A ll America would be sharing
♦Professor of Economics, University of Wisconsin.
1 Included here are voluntary based efforts such as the so-called
“frame” or nationwide single bargain for private manual workers
in Sweden (and to some extent Denmark and N orw ay), as w ell as
the formal system s employed in A ustria or the Netherlands, and
more recently in Great Britain.
2 E con om ic and Social B u lle tin , International Confederation of
Free Trade Unions, Brussels, November-December 1964, p. 16.
WAGE POLICIES IN EUROPE AND THE U.S.
equally the costs and the sacrifices of a national
problem.” 3
Effects on Unions
Jud g in g from the varied experience of E uro
pean nations, it would seem th a t some trade union
movements are better able to cope with and endure
incomes or wage control policies than others.
Generally speaking, where there is a deeper tra d i
tion of worker solidarity and acceptance of the
principle th a t there should be wide power in the
hands of the center of the labor movement, it is
easier to implement an incomes policy.
The rather long “tolerance” of some forms of
wage control policy in the Netherlands, A ustria,
and Sweden seems clearly due, in part, to these fac
tors. The failure of B ritain ’s efforts at voluntary
income controls, on the other hand, seems due, in
part, to the fact th a t solidarity within the TU C
is not very strong. A TU C mission to Sweden a
few years ago compared the labor movements of
the two countries by concluding th at, “The real
difference lies in the sense of collective purpose
that pervades the Swedish movement; in this sense
there is no B ritish trade union movement but only
a collection of trade unions . . . ” 4
The statement was almost prophetic. Under a
labor government in 1965 and 1966, the British
labor movement, and the whole British society,
simply proved unequal to the task of operating a
voluntary, central, uniform wage policy.
Does the extraordinary B ritish experience have
any particular lessons for the U nited States^ On
the purely trade union side, what is disturbing is
th at in terms of structure and policies, the A F L CIO probably more resembles the TU C than any
other movement in the world, right down to the
crucial characteristic that affiliated unions jeal
ously guard their bargaining power from intrusion
by any central federation. T heir members have
3
Quoted by AFL-CIO Research Director N athaniel Goldfinger,
in N e w s F r o m th e A F L - C I O , Feb. 14, 1966.
* S w e d e n , I t s Unions a n d I n d u s t r i a l R e l a tio n s (London, Trades
Union Congress, 1963), p. 23.
5 This should not be taken too literally. It is w ell to recall
that the great wage drift over the negotiated national wage
formula, which persists in Sweden and other countries, belies
any absolute solidarity. In part, the drift reflects the push of
more skilled workers to take advantage of their superior market
position. But the general point that there is less “class” soli
darity in Britain than in Sweden, Austria, Denmark, and some
other continental countries remains true.
0 T h e G u ar dia n (Manchester, d aily), May 21, 1965.
https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
37
less of th at “sense of collective purpose” character
istic of the Swedish and other movements.5 If,
then, the U nited States had to operate a serious
wage control policy in peacetime, it could depend
on voluntarism probably no more than the British.
A national wage policy entails an increase of
power at the top of the labor movement. A rgu
ments over an acceptable form ula, decisions on
exemptions, pressure on government, and counter
ing strike threats—all these functions tend to en
hance the centralizing forces in the movement.
Furtherm ore, the “political” activity of the labor
movement receives considerable thrust as incomes
policy spreads into tax policy, full employment
policy, and the like. This, too, strengthens the
central body of the movement.
The maintenance of a national wage policy is
also likely to have the effect of accelerating the rate
of unionization. The form ulation and adminis
tration of such a policy almost invariably entails
some consultation with and a role for the trade
unions. The unorganized groups of wage or sal
ary earners are likely to be voiceless in the process.
The complaint in B ritain of the independent So
ciety of Civil Servants, which has recently felt the
necessity to reconsider its independence from the
TUC, is typical, as it judged th a t the Labor Gov
ernm ent’s “declaration of intent on prices and in
comes meant th a t negotiations m ust take place
through the T U C .” 6
As the foregoing suggests, the ramifications of
national wage policies are likely to be very wide.
T heir lasting effects on unions, management, and
industrial relations systems are considerable. Yet
they show signs of spreading, even though their
economic effectiveness still remains a subject for
inquiry and debate.
One final general observation suggests itself, as
W estern European and American experience is
viewed in retrospect. The very act of coming to
grips with wage-price relationships can be an edu
cational exercise for union and management lead
ers. Reviewing the problems of productivity and
incomes on a national level is likely to be a more
objective process, for labor and management, than
wrestling with wages and prices a t their own in
dustry and firm level. The result may be to create
a national bargaining atmosphere which makes for
greater restraint and responsibility as regards the
setting of both wages and prices. This is, how
ever, only a tentative conclusion.
Employment and Wage
Trends in Bell
System Companies
L. E arl Lewis and J oseph C. B ush *
m p l o y m e n t l e v e l s , occupational requirements,
and wage rates in Bell System telephone com
panies have changed substantially during the past
20 years.1 Changes in employment were first in
fluenced by a rapid period of expansion, then by
the introduction of new types of autom atic equip
ment which resulted in a reduced work force. A l
though there has been a steady rise in wage rates,
the value of the pay adjustm ents has varied over
time and among occupations.
E
Employment
Total employment (except officials and m an
agerial assistants) in Bell System companies was
621,734 in December 1965, 67.5 percent higher than
in October 1945. (See table 1.) Year-to-year
changes in employment, however, were not uniform
during the 20-year period, which may be divided
in three parts to describe employment trends.
The first, which covers a 12-year period, is char
acterized by an almost uninterrupted increase in
employment which term inated with a peak of 659,468 in October 1957. The second p art includes 5
successive years of declining employment. The
third is the last 3 years of the series, during which
employment again increased each year.
As would be expected, the largest change in em
ployment occurred immediately after W orld W ar
I I , with an increase of 32 percent between October
1945 and October 1946. Em ploym ent continued to
increase at a considerably reduced rate, in all but
2 of the next 11 years as the telephone industry a t
tem pted to meet the ever-increasing demands of the
public. The 5-percent decline between October
1948 and October 1949 was due largely to a reduc
tion in the number of persons being trained as
switchboard operators and to a reduction of con
38
https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
struction and installation employees. Most of the
2-percent decline between October 1953 and Octo
ber 1954 can be attributed to the smaller num
ber of switchboard operator trainees. D uring each
of the next 2 years, employment increased by
slightly more than 5 percent. The increase in em
ployment between October 1956 and 1957 was re
latively slight, reflecting a cutback in the number
of telephone operators as the companies made
more use of automatic equipment.
Em ploym ent declined 8 percent between October
1957 and October 1958, as the installation of im
proved equipment perm itted a sharp reduction in
the number of telephone operators and the com
panies made some reductions in their construction
work force. D uring each of the next 4 years, total
employment declined—-almost entirely as a result
of the reduction in the number of telephone opera
tors. The December 1962 employment wTas 20,000
less than reported 10 years earlier.
Beginning in 1963, and for the next 2 years, total
employment increased in Bell System companies.
Em ploym ent increases during these 3 years were
reflected in nearly all m ajor occupational cate
gories.
D ata for telephone carriers were first tabulated
by location in 1951, when nine regions were estab
lished by B LS.2 Since th a t year, there have been
*Of tlie D ivision of Occupational Pay, Bureau of Labor
Statistics.
1 D ata on employment and pay rates in this article were ob
tained from annual reports filed w ith the Federal Communica
tions Commission by the Bell System telephone companies as
required by the amended Communication Act of 1934. These
reports have been tabulated and published by the Bureau of Labor
S tatistics since 1947 ; prior to 1947, information was published
by FCC. The payroll period to which the data refer was changed
from October to December, beginning with the 1961 reports. Bell
System telephone companies have accounted for about nine-tenths
of the employment in the telephone industry during the entire
period covered by this study.
2 Although these tabulations include inform ation for non-Bell
companies, their combined employment was less than 5 percent
of the total and their exclusion, therefore, would not effect any
significant changes in the tabulations.
The regions established for study were defined as follow s : N e w
E n g la n d — Connecticut, Maine, M assachusetts, New Hampshire,
Rhode Island, and V erm on t; M id d le A t l a n t i c — Delaware, New
Jersey, New York, and P en n sylvan ia; G r e a t L a k e s — Illinois,
Indiana, Michigan, Ohio, and W isconsin ; C hesa peake — D istrict
of Columbia, Maryland, Virginia, and W est Virginia ; S o u t h e a s t —
Alabama, Florida, Georgia, Kentucky, Louisiana, M ississippi,
North Carolina, South Carolina, and T en n essee; N o r t h C e n tra l —
Iowa, Minnesota, Nebraska, North Dakota, and South D a k o ta ;
S o u t h C e n tr a l — Arkansas, Kansas, Missouri, Oklahoma, and
Texas (except El Paso County) ; M o u n ta in — Arizona, Colorado,
Idaho (south of the Salmon R iver), Montana, Nevada, New Mex
ico, Texas (E l Paso County), Utah, and W yom ing; and P a
cific — California, Idaho (north of Salmon R iver), Oregon, and
W ashington.
39
EMPLOYMENT AND WAGE TRENDS IN BELL SYSTEM
only slight changes in the regional distribution
of employment. The proportion of employees in
the Middle Atlantic region declined from 22.4 per
cent in 1951 to 20.3 percent in 1965; similarly, the
proportion of workers in the Great Lakes region
declined from 18.6 percent to 16.9 percent. The
largest, gains were reported for the Southeast and
Pacific regions where employment increased by
about one-third between 1951 and 1965. The
Pacific region accounted for 12.8 percent of the
total work force in 1951, compared with 15.3 per
cent in 1965; in the Southeast, the increase was
from 10.2 percent to 12.2 percent.
Occupational Classifications. The preceding
paragraphs have described significant changes in
occupational staffing among Bell System com
panies during the past 20 years. To summarize,
the proportion of workers employed as telephone
operators has declined sharply, while the relative
importance of nearly all other occupational groups
has increased in varying degrees. Table 2 in
dicates that the proportion of workers employed
as telephone operators declined by nearly one-half
between 1945 and 1965.
The telephone operator category was the only
major occupational group in which the number of
employees declined during the 20-year period—
from 195,424 in 1945 to 172,696 in 1965. The
group accounted for more than one-half (52.6 perT a b l e 1. N u m b e r a nd A verage H ourly R ates o f
E m plo y ees i n B ell S ystem T e l e ph o n e C o m pa n ie s ,
O ctober 1 9 4 5 -D ec em ber 1965
Employees 1
Month and year
Total (in
thousands)
October 1945 ____
October 1946 . ___
October 1947 _____
October 1948 ____
October 1949 _____
October 1950 _____
October 1951 _ ___
October 1952 ____
October 1953 ___
October 1954 ____
October 1955 __ . . .
October 1956 ____
October 1957 ___
October 1958 ___
October 1959 ____
October 1960 _____
December 1961____
December 1962
December 1963____
December 1964____
December 1965____
371.3
491.6
520. 7
548. 4
522.2
526.8
563.7
592.6
604.0
592. 6
625.0
658 0
659.5
609.2
598. 5
596. 7
575.8
572.7
580.8
599.1
621.7
Percent,
women
73
70
68
67
66
66
67
67
66
65
63
62
61
59
58
58
57
56
56
56
56
Average
hourly
rates 2
Increase in aver
age hourly rates
during year
Cents per Percent
hour
$0.99
1.15
1.28
1.35
1.45
1.54
1.63
1.74
1.84
1 92
1.97
16
13
7
10
9
9
11
10
g
5
16.2
11.3
5. 5
7.4
6.2
5.8
6. 7
5. 7
43
2.6
2.18
2.33
2.45
2.57
2. 70
2.81
2.91
2.99
3. 07
13
15
12
12
13
11
10
8
8
6.3
6.9
5.2
4.9
5.1
4.1
3. 6
2. 7
2.7
1 All employees except officials and managerial assistants.
2 See text footnote 3 for definition of pay data used in this article.
https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
T a b l e 2.
P e r c e n t D ist r ib u t io n
by O c cu pa tio n , 1945
Occupation
All employees______________
Telephone operators (all classes)____
Experienced switchboard operators___ _ _______ _____
Operates in training__________
Construction, installation, and maintenance_______
____ _
Installation and exchange repairm en ..
. . ____ _____ ..
Central office craftsmen_______
Line, cable, and conduit craftsmen___ ______
__ _ ___
Clerical employees__________ ___
Nonsupervisory employees. ___
Supervisory__________________
Business office and sales employees...
Building, supplies, and motor vehicle
employees______ _ _________
Professional and semiprofessional employees. ______________________
of
to
A ll E m ployees 1
1965
Oct.
1945
Oct.
1950
Oct.
1955
Oct.
1960
100.0
100.0
100.0
100.0
52.6
43.4
37.5
30.8
27.8
29.0
15.0
30.9
6.5
24.9
6.8
22.2
4.2
17.8
6.1
17.2
23.6
25.0
28.1
29.1
5.9
5.1
7.9
6.4
8.5
7.2
10.0
8.5
10.7
9.6
4.0
16.5
15.3
1.2
4.7
6.3
18.2
17.0
1.3
5.4
6.1
20.8
19.2
1.6
6.3
5.8
21.7
19.8
1.9
7.4
4.9
21.8
20.2
1.6
7.7
4.5
4.2
4.1
4.2
3.4
4.4
5.0
6.2
7.7
9.9
Dec.
1965
100.0
1 Except officials and managerial assistants.
cent) of the total employment in the earlier period,
compared with only slightly more than one-fourth
(27.8 percent) in 1965. Although the proportion
of employees working as telephone operators de
clined between 1945 and 1955, their number in
creased during this period. It was not until 1957
that a significant decline in the number of tele
phone operators was reported. Between 1957 and
1964, there was a steady decline in both the num
ber and proportion of workers employed in this
classification. In 1965, the number increased ap
proximately 7,000 (4.3 percent) over 1964; the
large majority of this increase was composed of
workers classified as operators in training.
The proportion of workers engaged in construc
tion, installation, and maintenance tasks increased
from slightly more than one-sixth in 1945 to nearly
three-tenths in 1965. Although employment in
this broad classification has increased throughout
the 20-year period, the greatest increase occurred
in the years following World War II. Between
1945 and 1950, the number of such employees
nearly doubled and their proportion of total em
ployment increased to nearly one-fourth.
The proportion of employees in clerical posi
tions edged upward during the first 15 years cov
ered by the study—from one-sixth in 1945 to
slightly more than one-fifth in 1960—and has re
mained about the same during the past 5 years.
Three groups of employees (business office and
sales; building, supplies, and motor vehicle; and
professional and semiprofessional) each accounted
for between 4 and 5 percent of the total work force
MONTHLY LABOR REVIEW, MARCH 1967
40
in 1945. Although the number of workers in each
group had increased, the building, supplies, and
motor vehicle employees group was proportion
ately less important in 1965 than in 1945. The
Other two groups had increased in proportional
weight as well as in numbers.
Men and Women. Women constituted 73 percent
of the total work force in 1945, compared with
only 56 percent in. 1965. This decline was almost
entirely due to the reduction in the number of
telephone operators, nearly all of whom were
women. Although women’s share of the profes
sional and semiprofessional, business and sales
office, and clerical jobs increased during the period,
these increases were not numerically sufficient to
offset the loss from the telephone operators’ classi
fication.
Earnings
Basic wage rates3 of employees in Bell System
companies averaged $3.07 an hour in December
1965, an increase of 210 percent from the average
of 99 cents in October 1945. In percentage terms,
the increase in average hourly rates of pay was
much greater in the first 5-year period than in
any of the three others. Between 1945 and 1950,
the average increased nearly 56 percent, compared
with 28 percent between 1950 and 1955, 30 percent
during the next 5 years, and slightly less than 20
percent between October 1960 and December 1965.
For each of the last 2 years in the series, the rate
of increase has been 2.7 percent, the lowest during
T a ble 3. A verage H ourly E a r n in g s and A m ount of
I n c r ea se by O c cu pa tio n , O ctober 1945 and D ecem
b e r 1965
Occupation
Average hourlyearnings
Amount of
increase
October December Cents
1945
1965
All employees (except officials and
managerial assistants! .
._ . . .
Building service employees (except
foremen and mechanics) - -- Experienced switchboard operators__
Nonsupervisory clerical employees __
Nonsupervisory business office and
sales employees.. . . . . . . . . ___
Linemen__
. . . . ___________
PBX and station installers_____ .. .
Central office repairmen _____ _
Cable snlicers______ _ _ ________
Exchange repairmen..
. _____
Professional and semiprofessional em
ployees. ___ ____ _ _
https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
T a ble 4.
A vera g e P ay R ates
O c cupations
of
S elec ted
Expressed as a percent of the
average for nonsupervisory
clerical employees
Occupation
October
1945
Building service employees (except foremen
and mechanics). _ _ _ ______ _______
Experienced switchboard operators .
Nonsupervisory business office and sales
employees
__ __ ___
__ - Linemen
____
__
- __
piRX and station installers
_ _______
__ __________
Central office repairmen
Cable splicers
_
__
__ _
77veil ange repairmen
___ ___ _____
Professional and semiprofessional employees.
October Decem
ber 1965
1955
84
85
88
94
87
93
121
134
157
168
171
175
269
120
114
141
142
145
157
240
122
112
141
138
144
150
227
the 20-year period, with the exception of 1954—55
when the increase amounted to 2.6 percent. The
largest percentage increases were recorded im
mediately after World War I I : a 16-percent in
crease between 1945 and 1946 and an 11-percent in
crease between 1946 and 1947.
The increases in average wage rates for all em
ployees were largely due to a series of general
wage increases that were provided over the 20year period. Collective bargaining agreements
that have covered periods longer than a year (for
example, 36 or 38 months) have provided for a
reopening on wage rates after 12 months rather
than a negotiated deferred increase.4 There were,
however, other factors that affected the extent of
the changes in average rates of pay. Important
among such factors were changes in the occupa
tional composition of the work force and signifi
cant changes in hiring practices.
As indicated in the section on employment, the
occupational composition of the total work force in
Bell System companies changed considerably dur
ing the period. This had a substantial impact on
the overall earnings level. I t is estimated that of
the $2.08 increase in average hourly earnings for
all employees between October 1945 and December
Per
cent
$0.99
$3. 07
208
210
.73
.74
.87
2.06
2. 21
2. 37
133
147
150
182
199
172
1.05
1.17
1.37
1.46
1.49
1.52
2. 88
2. 65
3.35
3. 27
3. 42
3. 56
183
148
198
181
193
204
174
126
145
124
130
134
2.34
5.37
303
129
3 The pay data contained in this article were computed by
dividing scheduled weekly compensation by scheduled weekly
hours. “Scheduled weekly com pensation,” as defined by FCC,
includes the basic weekly pay rate plus any regularly scheduled
supplementary compensation, such as differential for evening and
night tours and certain perquisites. It excludes pay for overtime
work and pay in excess of weekday rates for Sunday and holiday
work.
4 The major labor organization in the industry is the Communi
cation Workers of America. Frequently, workers in different
departments (e.g., traffic, plant, accounting, commercial) of the
same company are covered under separate collective bargaining
agreements.
41
EMPLOYMENT AND WAGE TRENDS IN BELL SYSTEM
1965, 41 cents resulted from changes in the occupa
tional makeup of the industry. Weighting
occupational averages for December 1965 by occu
pational employments for October 1945 resulted in
an average of $2.66 instead of $3.07. Year-to-year
earnings comparisons are particularly subject to
this type of impact. During a period of unusual
expansion, such as occurred immediately after
World War II, the proportion of relatively highpaid construction and installation workers in
creased substantially, causing an increase in the
average wage for all workers that is unrelated to
any actual change in wage rates.
Changes in hiring practices also have an impact
on the average wage levels because of the wide
range of rates that apply to most occupations.
Differences between the starting and maximum
rates for a specific job and locality frequently
amount to 100 percent or more. Advancement
from the starting to the maximum rate often in
volves from 10 to 14 step increases, extending over
a 5- or 6-year period. During periods of an un
usual increase in hiring, the average wage rate for
all workers is affected by a proportionate increase
in the number of workers paid at the minimum
rate for the job. That is, the increase in the aver
age for all workers was not as large as it would
have been if the average length-of-service had re
mained the same.
Occupations. The increase in average wage rates
between 1945 and 1965 has been greater for some
occupational groups than for others. Cent-perhour increases tended to be greatest for the liighwage occupations, but as indicated in table 3, the
largest percentage increases were reported for the
low-wage occupations.
5
Regional information on wages, as for employment, in this
article includes non-Bell companies. As indicated previously,
however, they constitute such a sm all proportion of the total that
their exclusion would not appreciably change the computations.
T a b l e 5. A v e r a g e H o u r l y P a y R a t e s
S y st e m T e l e p h o n e C o . E m p l o y e e s b y
O c t o b e r 1951 a n d D e c e m b e r 1965
Region
Expressed as a percent
of the Middle Atlantic
average
October 1951 December 1965
United States__ . _ _.
. _.
New England__
Middle Atlantic. . . .
Great Lakes . . . ____
Chesapeake__
.. ..
Southeast-................._ .
North Central..
South Central___ . . . .
M ountain___ ___ _
Pacific... . .
. ._
96
98
100
99
96
83
86
85
85
103
93
95
100
95
91
81
87
83
88
98
Percent increase
in the average
between 1951
and 1965
89
89
94
85
83
89
96
90
101
84
Most of the narrowing of occupational wage dif
ferentials occurred in the first half of the 20-year
period. There has been very little change in the
wage relationships for most of the occupations be
tween 1955 and 1965. (See table 4.)
Regional Wage Levels. In each of the nine
regions, average hourly rates of pay of all employ
ees were more than 80 percent higher in December
1965 than in October 1951, the first time that in
formation was tabulated by region.5 Compared
with an increase of 89 percent for all regions com
bined, individual increases during the 14-year pe
riod ranged from 83 percent in the Chesapeake to
101 percent in the Mountain region. These differ
ences resulted in a change of pay rankings among
the regions. In October 1951, the Pacific region
had the highest average ($1.73), 5 cents above the
Middle Atlantic and 6 cents above the average in
the Great Lakes region. In December 1965, how
ever, pay rates averaged highest in the Middle
Atlantic region ($3.26), 7 cents more than in the
Pacific region and 15 cents more than in the Great
Lakes region. In both years, the lowest average
was reported for the Southeast region. The
changes in regional pay rankings are illustrated in
table 5.
Statisticians are members of a professional group. It is important that
they use their abilities to enhance our knowledge. . . . I t is also important
for them to remember that the sun shines on the whole world, and that there
is a place not only for statisticians but for many other groups, even for
theoreticians.
https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
B ell
R e g io n ,
of
—“The Uses and Limits of Statistics in Manpower
Research,” M o n t h l y L a b o r R e v i e w , August 1954.
42
W ages in Fertilizer Plants,
March-April 1966
S t r a i g h t - t i m e e a r n i n g s of production and re
lated workers in the fertilizer manufacturing in
dustry averaged $1.90 an hour in March-April
1966, according to a survey conducted by the Bu
rean of Labor Statistics.1 The average was 23
cents higher than in April 1962 when a similar
survey was conducted.2 Of the 25,484 workers
covered by the current study (nearly all men and
nearly all paid time rates), 12 percent earned $1.25
but less than $1.30, with earnings of the remain
ing workers distributed over a comparatively
broad range. Thirty-seven percent of the indus
try’s work force was in the Southeast, where earn
ings averaged $1.57 an hour, substantially less than
in other regions. In each region, earnings varied
by type and size of establishment, size of com
munity, type of sales market, labor-management
contract status, and occupation. Most of the
workers were in plants providing paid holidays,
vacations, and various types of health and insur
ance benefits to year-round workers.
The payroll reference dates were selected to co
incide with a near-peak annual employment pe
riod for the industry (which varies somewhat by
locality). Approximately three-eighths of the
workers covered by the survey were classified as
seasonal workers, that is, they were employed by
the plant to work less than 11 months during the
year. Plants engaged in production less than 11
months a year accounted for a fourth of all em
ployees in the industry at the time of the survey.
Earnings
Regionally, highest earnings were recorded in
the Pacific States ($2.73) where they averaged
more than $1 above those in the Southeast.3
Workers in the Southwest averaged 46 cents an
hour more than those in the Southeast; this in
terregional differential, larger than in most in
dustries, results principally from two factors.
First, the Southwest average was increased con
siderably by the inclusion of workers in the fer
tilizer operations of a major chemical company
which paid them wage rates that conformed to
those paid to workers in the company’s industrial
https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
MONTHLY LABOR REVIEW, MARCH 1967
chemicals plant—rates substantially higher than
those paid by the fertilizer industry generally.
Second, establishments limited to mixing pur
chased fertilizer ingredients (which have a gen
erally lower level of wages than the plants manu
facturing the ingredients) accounted for a much
larger proportion of the workers in the South
east than in the Southwest.
Nationwide, wages in complete (integrated) fer
tilizer plants averaged $2.19 an hour, compared
with $1.90 in superphosphate plants and $1.68 in
mixing plants.4 In the Southeast, the correspond
ing averages were $1.69, $1.75, and $1.37. In the
Great Lakes, the only other region for which data
could be shown separately for all three types of
establishments, workers in mixing plants aver
aged the same as those in superphosphate plants,
55 cents less than workers in complete plants.
Mixing plants accounted for nearly three-tenths
of the workers in the Southwest, between twofifths and one-half in five regions, and for threefifths in the Middle Atlantic region.
Establishments reported as engaged in inter
state commerce employed seven-tenths of the work
ers or more in all regions except the Pacific where
four-fifths of the workers were in plants operat
ing only in intrastate commerce. In each of the
three regions in which comparisons could be made,
wages in interstate plants averaged substantially
iT h e survey included establishm ents employing eight workers
or more and primarily engaged in m anufacturing mixed fertilizers
from one or more ingredients produced in the same plant or in
making fertilizers from purchased fertilizer m aterials as defined
by Industries 2871 and 2872 in tile 1957 edition of the S ta n d a rd
I n d u s tr ia l C la ssifica tio n M anual and the 1963 S u p p le m e n t pre
pared by the U.'S. Bureau of the Budget.
A more comprehensive account of the study w ill be presented
in a forthcom ing BLS bulletin. Individual releases providing data
on earnings and supplementary benefits are available for the
follow ing States : Alabama, California, Florida, Georgia, Illinois,
Maryland, North Carolina, Ohio, South Carolina, Tennessee, and
Virginia.
Earnings inform ation developed by this study excludes premium
pay for overtime and for work on weekends, holidays, and late
shifts, and thus, is not comparable with the gross average hourly
earnings published in the Bureau’s m onthly hours and earnings
series. The forthcom ing bulletin w ill contain an explanation of
the differences between the earnings and employment estim ates
provided by the two series.
2 For results of the earlier survey, see “Wages in Fertilizer
P lants, April 1962,” M o n th ly L a b o r R e v ie w , February 1963,
pp. 164-167.
3 For definition of regions, see footnote 2 of table.
* Each of the three types of establishm ents mixes fertilizer in
gredients to make a finished fertilizer. Complete (integrated)
plants manufacture the acids which are then used1 to treat
phosphate rock to make superphosphate. Superphosphate plants
purchase the acids used to make the superphosphate. Mixing
plants purchase all ingredients.
WAGES IN FERTILIZER PLANTS
43
higher than those in others. These differences re
flect, in large part, a heavier concentration of lowwage mixing plants among those reported as en
gaged only in intrastate commerce. Whereas in
each of these regions, mixing plants accounted
for substantially less than one-half of the employ
ment in plants engaged in interstate commerce, in
each instance, they accounted for a large majority
of the employment in intrastate plants.
Nationwide, and in nearly all regions where
comparisons could be made, average earnings were
higher in metropolitan than in nonmetropolitan
areas, higher in plants with 100 workers or more
N
than in smaller plants, and higher in union than
in nonunion plants. Because of the interrelation
ship of these and other factors ( for example, type
of plant), it is not possible to determine the exact
influence of each characteristic on pay levels. For
example, the larger plants tended to be concen
trated in the larger communities and usually had
integrated operations; labor-management agree
ments were more prevalent among the large estab
lishments than among the smaller ones.
Establishments operating under the terms of la
bor-management agreements accounted for slight
ly more than one-half of the workers covered by
A v e r a g e S t r a ig h t - T im e H o u r l y E a r n in g s 1 o f P r o d u c t io n W o r k e r s i n F e r t il iz e r M a n u f a c t u r i n g
E s t a b l is h m e n t s B y S e l e c t e d C h a r a c t e r is t ic s a n d S e l e c t e d R e g io n s ,2 M a r c h - A p r il 1966
um ber and
United
States3
Characteristic
Middle
Atlantic
Border
States
Southeast
Southwest
Great Lakes
Middle
West
Pacific
Num Earn Num Earn Num Earn Num Earn Num Earn Num Earn Num Earn Num Earn
ber
ings'
ber ings1 ber ings1 ber ings 1 ber ings1 ber ings 1 ber ings1 ber ings 1
All production workers 4_______
____
2 5 ,4 8 4
$ 1 .9 0
1 ,5 4 9
$ 2 .2 2
2 ,8 1 9
$ 1 .7 8
9 ,4 3 9
$ 1 .5 7
Complete or integrated _ . _____ .
Superphosphate________ ____________
Mixing,. ________ __________________
8 ,9 1 3
5 ,1 6 4
11, 407
2 .1 9
1 .9 0
1 .6 8
924
1 .9 7
1 ,1 9 8
1 .6 1
3 ,4 3 4
1 ,9 2 2
4; 0 8 3
1 .6 9
1 .7 5
1 .3 7
1 9 ,6 5 2
5j 832
1 96
1 .7 2
1 ,4 2 8
2 .2 6
2 ,4 9 7
1 .8 2
6 719
2 , 720
1 64
1 3 .8 6 1
1 1 ,6 2 3
2 .0 0
1. 79
953
596
2 .1 6
2 .3 1
2 ,2 1 3
606
1 .8 9
1 39
4 ,4 3 0
5 ,0 0 9
1 .6 0
1 54
1 ,2 8 4
399
8 ,0 3 7
8 ,1 7 8
9 ,2 6 9
1 .6 5
1. 79
2 .2 3
693
411
445
1 .9 6
2 32
2. 53
833
996
990
1 .4 3
1 88
1 .9 7
2 ,8 4 5
3 666
2 ,9 2 8
1 .3 1
1 50
1 .9 0
428
318
T
y pe
T
of
E
y pe
_ _
of
M
of
C
of
E
a bo r
-M
a n a g em e n t
C
elected
2 ,1 3 9
$ 1 .9 7
1 ,2 2 8
$ 2 .7 3
1 ,2 4 7
1, 564
2, 760
2. 54
1 .9 9
1 .9 9
1 ,0 3 6
1 .6 1
560
2 .3 9
1 ,4 1 7
4 844
2 16
1 630
’ 727
L 79
’ 509
2 07
1 .6 4
1 ,0 1 8
2 .7
2 .1 1
1 .7 7
3 ,1 0 7
2 ,4 6 4
2. 27
1 .9 3
483
1 ,6 5 6
1 .9 4
1 .9 7
1 ,1 0 1
2 .7 4
1 .3 9
1 81
2 .4 0
1 ,5 5 2
1 813
2 ,2 0 6
1 .9 3
2 00
772
581
786
1 .7 4
1 93
595
2 .5 6
2.34
2 .2 2
500
2 .9 4
2 .1 2
1 .3 8
937
ontracts
Establishments with—
Majority of year-round workers covered.
None or minority of year-round work____
___
ers covered___
S
$ 2 .1 2
s t a b l is h m e n t
_ _____
8 - 4 9 workers______
5 0 - 9 9 workers____
___
.
_______
1 0 0 workers or more_______
_________
L
5 ,5 7 1
o m m u n it y
Metropolitan areas 5__________________
Nonmetropolitan areas_____
_____
S iz e
$ 2 .0 3
a r k et
Interstate___________
_____________
Intrastate______________ ____________
S iz e
1 ,6 8 3
s t a b l is h m e n t
O c c u p a t io
1 3 ,6 4 4
2 .1 0
902
2 .4 2
1 ,9 3 3
1 .9 3
4 ,3 6 3
1 .6 8
871
2 .3 2
3 ,2 7 0
2 .2 8
909
2 .3 1
752
2 .7 5
1 1 ,8 4 0
1 .6 8
647
1 .9 3
886
1 .4 5
5 ,0 7 6
1 .4 7
812
1 .7 2
2 ,3 0 1
1 .8 8
1 ,2 3 0
1. 71
476
2 .7 0
1 ,3 6 2
176
896
642
123
285
320
6, 042
979
195
738
407
1 ,2 7 5
379
1 ,9 9 5
270
1 .8 2
1 .9 0
1 .7 2
1. 7 9
2 .4 3
2 .1 3
1. 7 7
1 .6 5
2 .5 9
2 .1 3
1 .8 9
2 .0 9
1 .6 9
? .. 01
1. 75
1 .5 9
63
2 .0 8
1 .5 1
1 62
1 .4 8
1 47
2 .1 4
1 66
1 48
1 .3 9
2 .3 3
1 62
1 .6 5
2 .9 1
2 63
1 .8 3
2. 45
1 .6 3
1 .8 3
1 .6 2
1 .4 3
2 .1 6
2 22
2 .1 3
2 19
2. 7 0
2 74
2 11
1 .9 6
2 .6 5
2 54
2 .1 4
2 .1 8
2 .0 8
2 .2 5
2 .1 8
1 .9 2
1 .9 9
2 27
2 .0 5
1 .9 2
295
88
13
47
19
124
24
100
7
338
31
172
149
9
36
66
1 ,1 4 6
271
43
201
115
135
101
374
44
104
20
41
39
9
1 .6 5
1 85
1 .6 3
1 71
3 . 06
3 .1 6
1 .9 9
2. 68
2 43
2 .1 8
2 .6 3
1 .9 8
2 .1 3
2 .1 5
1 .9 3
530
65
438
256
61
149
187
2 ,6 7 9
318
65
272
165
569
72
26
61
41
9
500
60
9
59
12
1 .7 6
1 90
1 .6 6
1 82
2. 43
2 32
1. 8 0
1 .6 7
2 .4 7
2 01
1 .7 9
1 .9 5
1 ,4 4
1 .7 5
1 .8 0
1 .5 6
2 .2 3
1 .8 5
2 26
2 .6 3
2 .8 3
163
30
103
96
65
24
44
13
15
ns
Baggers____________________________
B ’g printers___________ __
______
Bag sewers, machine____ _______
Batch weighers_______ ______
Carpenters, maintenance______________
Chambermen _____________ _ _
Conveyor tenders ___________________
Laborers, material handling____ ______
Me hanics, maintenance__ _ ________
Millers.. .
_ ___
_ ...
Mixers, dry m ixing__________________
Mixers, superphosphate____ _______ . .
Truckdrivers___ _______ _
_______
Truckers, power (forklift) ___________
Truckers, power (other than forklift)____
Watchmen _ ________ _____
86
19
107
16
1 Excludes premium pay for overtime and for work on weekends, holidays,
and late shifts.
2 The regions used in this study include: Middle Atlantic—N ew Jersey,
New York, and Pennsylvania; Border States—Delaware, District of Colum
bia, Kentu; ky, Maryland, Virginia, and West Virginia; Southeast—Alabama,
Florida, Georgia, Mississippi, North Carolina, South Carolina, and Ten
nessee; Southwest—Arkansas, Louisiana, Oklahoma, and Texas; Great Lakes—
Illinois, Indiana, Mi higan, Minnesota, Ohio, and Wisconsin; Middle West—
Iowa, Kansas, Missouri, Nebraska, North Dakota and South Dakota; and
Pacific—California, Nevada, Oregon, and Washington.
https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
h
35
16
732
90
27
63
36
122
86
215
31
68
990
137
1.53
1 .7 8
1 .3 9
1 .5 7
1 .4 7
1 .3 9
26
23
317
88
20
52
32
52
33
131
24
2 58
2 19
1 .7 8
2 .7 1
1 96
2 .1 3
2.22
1 .6 3
2 .3 2
1 .9 6
1 .7 8
46
2 .3 2
9
3 .4 1
9
2 94
187
36
2.33
3 .3 9
35
16
128
32
43
2 .5 0
3 .2 3
2 .7 2
2. 68
2 . 71
3 Includes data for regions in addition to those shown separately. Alaska
and Hawaii were not included in the study.
4 Virtually all production workers were men.
5 The term “metropolitan area” as used in this study refers to the Standard
Metropolitan Statistical Areas, as defined by the U.S. Bureau of the Budget
through March 1965.
N o t e : Dashes indicate no data reported or data that do not meet publica
tion criteria.
44
MONTHLY LABOR REVIEW, MARCH 1967
the survey. The proportions were between 40 and
50 percent in the Middle West and Southeast re
gions; between 50 and 60 percent in the Great
Lakes, Middle Atlantic, and Southwest regions;
and between 60 and 70 percent in the Border
States and the Pacific region. (See table.)
Earnings below $1.25 an hour were received by
1.5 percent of the workers, almost all of whom
wTere in the Southeast region and employed by
plants reported as engaged in intrastate com
merce and thus not subject to the Federal mini
mum wage at the time of the study.5 Twelve per
cent of the workers earned $1.25 but less than
$1.30 an hour. As indicated in the following tab
ulation, the proportion earning less than $1.30 an
hour varied considerably among the regions:
Percent of production workers
_____ earning under—_____
United States.
Middle Atlantic___
Border States_____
Southeast________
Southwest________
Great Lakes______
Middle West______
Pacific___________
$1.30
$140
$1.50
13.8
1.1
10.1
26.2
16.6
2.9
12.3
23.0
1.2
17.5
45.0
25.4
3.9
18.6
_2
32.3
2.8
25.2
60.6
36.0
8.1
25.2
.3
Other than the clustering at or near the Federal
minimum, the dispersion of wages in the industry
was comparatively wide, with the middle half of
the workers earning between $1.42 and $2.29 an
hour. This relatively wide earnings dispersion is
expected in an industry that extends to all sec
tions of the country and consists of several differ
ent types of operations with varying occupational
requirements.
Establishment Practices
Work schedules of 40 hours a week applied to
nearly one-half of the year-round workers and to
three-tenths of the seasonal workers. Virtually
all of the remaining workers were scheduled to
work more than 40 hours a week. Slightly more
than one-fourth of the year-round workers and
three-eighths of the seasonal workers were sched
uled to work 50 hours or more a week at the time
of the survey. Work schedules in excess of 40
hours were common in all regions except the Pa5 Fair Labor Standards Amendments of 1966 raised the Federal
minimum wage for workers in m anufacturing establishm ents
engaged in interstate commerce from $1.25 to $1.40 an hour,
effective Feb. 1, 1967. See pp. 1-4, this issue.
https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
cific. One-fifth of all workers were employed on
late shifts, which were more prevalent in inte
grated and superphosphate plants than in mixing
plants. Most late-shift workers received differen
tial pay over day rates, with such payments usu
ally ranging from 4 to 10 cents an hour for sec
ond-shift work and from 10 to 20 cents for the
third shift.
Paid holidays, most commonly 6, 7, or 8 days an
nually, were provided to nine-tenths of the yearround workers. Among seasonal workers, a
fourth received paid holidays, typically 1 or 2
days a year.
Plants accounting for slightly more than ninetenths of the regular workers provided paid va
cations to year-round workers with qualifying
periods of service. Typical vacation payments for
such workers were: 1 week’s pay after 1 year of
service, 2 weeks’ after 3 years, and 3 weeks’ after
15 years. Two-fifths of the workers were in plants
providing at least 4 weeks of vacation pay after
25 years of service. Vacation provisions for yearround workers were less prevalent in the Southeast
than in the other regions. Less than one-tenth of
the seasonal workers were covered by vacation
provisions.
Life, hospitalization, and surgical insurance
were available to approximately nine-tenths of the
year-round workers. Typically, employers paid
only a part, of the cost of these benefits; in the
Southwest and Pacific regions, however, em
ployers usually paid the entire cost. Accidental
death and dismemberment insurance, sickness and
accident insurance, and medical insurance benefits
were also provided by plants employing more than
one-half of the year-round workers. Seasonal
workers rarely received insurance benefits.
Pension plans, providing regular payments
upon retirement (in addition to Federal social se
curity benefits) applied to seven-tenths of the
year-round workers but to less than 5 percent of
the seasonal workers. These plans were usually
financed entirely by the employer.
In general, the supplementary wage practices
discussed above were not as common among mix
ing plants as they were in the other two types of
plants.
— C harles
E.
S cott, J r .
Division of Occupational Pay
45
HOUSING DENSITY AND AUTO OWNERSHIP
Some Factors Affecting
Housing Density
and Auto Ownership
E
N o t e . — The following excerpt is taken
from “Postwar Metropolitan Development’.
Rousing Preferences and Auto Ownership
a paper presented by John F. Kain of H ar
vard University , at the American Economic
Association meeting in San Francisco, Calif.,
December 26-29, 1966. For ease in reading ,
signs to denote elisions have not been used.
d i t o r ’s
e t r o p o l i t a n a r e a s in the United States have
been literally transformed in the two decades since
World War II. Extensive geographic growth of
metropolitan regions, employment and popula
tion declines in central areas, and low density de
velopment, particularly residential, are perhaps
the most notable dimensions of this transforma
tion. While metropolitan area population grew
by 26 percent between 1950 and 1960, mean cen
tral city densities declined from 7,800 to 5,800 per
sons per square mile.1 During the same period,
auto ownership increased from a level of 0.69 per
household in 1945, to 0.92 in 1950, and 1.16 in
I960.2 This coincidence of rapid increases in
automobile ownership and transformations in met
ropolitan structure have caused many observers to
conclude that the growth in automobile ownership
is the primary cause of postwar changes in metro
politan structure.
There is one striking exception to this view of
the relationship between automobile ownership
and metropolitan development. Elaborate urban
transportation studies have been carried out in
over 200 U.S. metropolitan areas since World War
II. In these studies, automobile ownership is used
to explain and predict levels of tripmaking, choice
M
1 TJ.S. C ensus o f P o p u la tio n : 1 9 6 0 , N u m b er o f I n h a b ita n ts , U.S.
S u m m a ry — F inal Report PC (1)1A (U.S. Bureau of the Census,
1961), pp. 1-40.
- A u to m o b ile F a c ts an d F ig u res (Detroit, Mich., Automobile
Manufacturers Association, Inc., 1964), p. 18; S ta tis tic a l A b
s tr a c t of th e U n ite d S ta te s , 1964 (U.S. Bureau of the Census).
3 For a survey and discussion of automobile ownership, see
John F. Kain, “Urban Travel Behavior,” in Leo F. Schnore and
Henry Fagin, eds., U rb a n R esea rch and P o lic y P la n n in g : The
F ir s t U rban A ffa irs A n n u a l R e v ie w (Beverly Hills, Calif., Sage
Publications, Inc., 1967).
245-336 0
-
67-4
https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
of travel mode, and other aspects of urban travel.
Auto ownership is always assumed to depend on
net residential density, just the opposite assump
tion of causality from that noted above. Projec
tions of net residential density in these studies in
turn are made without consideration of automobile
ownership.3
This paper addresses itself to the reconciliation
of these conflicting views about the causal rela
tionships between auto ownership and net residen
tial density. Econometric models are estimated,
based on the hypotheses that: (1) residential den
sity depends on auto ownership per household, in
come, and preferences for residential space with
unidirectional causality from auto ownership to
density; (2) auto ownership per household de
pends on residential density, income and household
transportation requirements with unidirectional
causality from residential density to auto owner
ship; and (3) automobile ownership and residen
tial density are jointly and simultaneously
determined.
Residential Density
Empirical evaluation of these alternative hy
potheses is based primarily on data for 54 cities
and towns in the Boston Metropolitan region for
1950 and 1960. Several automobile ownership
statistics are used. None are ideal. Similarly,
difficult problems are associated with the concept
of residential density. In this framework, resi
dential density is interpreted as a measure of
household or family consumption of residential
space. Dwelling unit density is probably prefer
able on a priori grounds, since postwar residential
development has been marked by both increased
occupancy of single family units and larger lot
size.
While these problems of measurement are seri
ous, variables not included in the analysis are po
tentially an even greater source of bias. Nearly
everyone agrees that the availability and quality
of public transit affects the ownership of private
automobiles and many would contend that the
density of residential development is similarly
affected by the amount and kinds of available
transit services. Yet for many reasons, not the
least being measurement problems, no transit serv
ice variable is included in the statistical analysis.
46
Additionally, changes in metropolitan employ
ment distributions have affected both the competi
tiveness of public transit and the costs of lower
density residential services. In Boston, as else
where, much of the observed increases in automo
bile ownership and declines in lower residential
densities must be due to employment dispersal.4
Public transit is obviously much more competitive
in dense central areas. Moreover, high residential
land costs in central areas or the expense of com
muting to cheaper peripheral land inhibit many
centrally employed workers from living at lower
densities. If their jobs shift to suburban loca
tions near cheap land or if they purchase a private
automobile for commuting to work, the costs of
residing at lower density will decline.
While this paper does not provide clearcut or
conclusive answers about the interrelationship be
tween residential density and automobile owner
ship, it does provide much new and consistent in
formation. Regardless of which causal hypothesis
is accepted, it appears that income has been the
most important factor underlying both higher
postwar levels of automobile ownership and de
clines in residential density. This conclusion de
rives from consideration of both the estimated re
gression coefficients and the postwar changes in
income and other explanatory variables.
Real median family income in the Boston SMSA
increased by an estimated 56 percent between 1950
and 1960. It is estimated that an increase of this
magnitude in real median family income would
increase auto ownership per household by between
28 and 34 percent. By comparison, the decade’s
39-percent increase in the proportion of Boston
households living in single family units would ac
count for only an 8- to 10-percent increase in auto
ownership per household. Moreover, residential
* Rough calculations indicate that employment w ithin 5 miles
of downtown Boston declined from 65 to 57 percent of all metro
politan area employment between 1950 and 1960. More signifi
cantly, the number employed in that area fell by 29,000 or by 6
percent.
https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
MONTHLY LABOR REVIEW, MARCH 1967
density is at least partially dependent upon in
come. Thus, part of this 8- to 10-percent increase
in auto ownership might also be attributable to the
growth in income during the decade.
Family Income
It also appears that rapid postwar increases in
family income have strongly affected residential
density, either directly as an item of consumption,
or indirectly through their effect on automobile
ownership. Using the most satisfactory- of the
four least squares residential density equations, in
come elasticity is approximately minus one, indi
cating that the 56-percent increase in real median
family income between 1950 and 1960 would cause
about a 56-percent decrease in net dwelling unit
density. In the same equation, the automobile
ownership elasticity is also approximately minus
one, indicating that the estimated 29-percent in
crease in auto ownership per household during the
decade should have caused about a 29-percent de
cline in net dwelling unit density. Auto owner
ship would appear to be strongly dependent on in
come, and thus, part of the 29-percent decline in
net dwelling unit density due to increased auto
ownership must be attributed to rising income.
Family size and labor force participation are much
less powerful as explanations of postwar changes
in residential density during this period, since
changes in them have been much smaller than in
creases in income.
While the models used in this study appear to
provide surprisingly consistent results for a fairly
wide range of samples, their partial character is
painfully obvious. The omission of transit serv
ice variables and inadequate specification of em
ployment location are only the most obvious ex
amples. Specification and measurement of these
concepts will not be easy tasks, but they would ap
pear to be essential if the processes of metropolitan
development are to be fully understood.
47
BEYOND GUIDELINES: 1907 WAGE-PRICE POLICY
Beyond the Guidelines:
Wage-Price Policy for 1967
E ditor ’s N ote .— T h e f o l l o w i n g e x c e r p t i s t a k e n f r o m c h a p
t e r 3, “M a i n t a i n i n g P r i c e S t a b i l i t y a n d R e d u c i n g U n
e m p lo y m e n t,” o f th e a n n u a l r e p o r t o f th e C ou n cil o f
E c o n o m i c A d v i s e r s .*
Two im p o r t a n t d e ve l o pm e n ts have created the major
problems for wage-price policy today. The first is that
consumer prices have risen by 3.3 percent in the past 12
months, which makes organized workers—even in unions
which were previously disposed to cooperate with the
Government’s policy—unwilling to contemplate settle
ments at or close to the guideposts. And it gives unions
which were never disposed to cooperate an additional
reason for not doing so. The second development is that
corporate profits have increased considerably more than
aggregate labor income, especially when measured from
the slack years of the late 1950’s or the recession year of
1961. This provides a second reason for labor’s resist
ance to the guidepost.
There can be no question that some part of the rise in
consumer prices is due to past failure to observe the guideposts, both by organized labor and by business. And some
part of the faster rise of corporate profits has been due to
the failure of some businesses to make their price de
cisions conform to the guidepost principles (particularly
by not reducing some prices when costs fe ll).
But it is clear that the primary source of the rise in con
sumer prices lies in areas to which the guideposts have no
applicability: in farm products, where prices have risen
considerably, despite rapid productivity gains; and in
services, where wages and professional incomes of un
organized workers have also risen rapidly.
So far as the rise in corporate profits is concerned, much
of it would have occurred had the guideposts been pre
cisely followed. . . .
Nevertheless, the rise in consumer prices and the increas
ing share of profits until the first quarter of 1966 are facts
that cannot be disputed nor explained out of existence.
And they cannot fail to influence the behavior of wages
in 1967. Through the effect of wages on costs, they will
also influence prices.
The main issues for wage-price policy in 1967 are these:
( а ) Should the guidepost for wages be adjusted to
recognize in some way the recent increase in living
costs?
(б) Should further recognition be given to special
factors—other than those previously recognized—which
appropriately justify exceptions to the general guidepost principles?
(c) To what extent should profit margins absorb cost
increases?
Higher Living Costs
The Council recognizes that the recent rise in living
costs makes it unlikely that most collective bargaining
https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
settlements in 1967 will fully conform to the trend in
crease of productivity. But it sees no useful purpose to
be served by suggesting some higher standard for wage
increases, even on a temporary basis.
The only valid and noninflationary standard for wage
advances is the productivity principle. If price stability
is eventually to be restored and maintained in a highemployment U.S. economy, wage settlements must once
again conform to that standard.
While it can be expected that many wage settlements in
1967 will exceed the trend increase of productivity, it is
obvious that if, on the average, they should exceed it by
the amount of the recent increase in living costs, price
stability could never be restored. If the average wage
increase in 1967 were to include a full allowance for pro
ductivity plus an additional margin to “compensate” for
past increases in living costs, unit labor costs would rise
at a rate which would require living costs to continue
their rapid rise.
In this connection, it must be recognized that some part
of the advance of consumer prices represents a transfer
of income to public uses. Most State and local govern
ments are compelled repeatedly to raise indirect tax rates
to finance the expansion of essential services. These in
direct taxes enter into prices, accounting for 0.2 per
centage point of rise in the consumer price index in 1966.
And in 1967, there will be no offset to the rise in these
indirect taxes (as in 1965 and 1966) from reduced Federal
excises. If every group attempted to offset the burden of
these higher indirect taxes by a compensating rise in
money incomes, no transfer of real resources to public
purposes could be achieved.
It is not expected that market forces in 1967 will again
require that average wages in the largely unorganized
sectors—agriculture, trade, and services—should rise
faster than in the organized segments—manufacturing,
mining, construction, and transportation—in order to pro
mote an efficient allocation and use of labor. But the
higher minimum wage effective in 1967 will have its prin
cipal impact on wages in the unorganized sectors, and in
the largely unorganized low-wage segments of manu
facturing. Thus there will be some continued pressure
on costs and prices originating in wage increases outside
of the organized sectors.
In 1967, the national interest continues to require re
straint in wage settlements; indeed, it is more essential
than ever that restraint be practiced in order to turn the
trend of prices back toward stability. If restraint cannot
mean an average wage advance only equal to the rise in
productivity, it surely must mean wage advances which
are substantially less than the productivity trend plus the
recent rise in consumer prices.
Although the Council recognizes that some allowance
will frequently be made for higher living costs in 1967
settlements, it continues to believe that arrangements
which automatically tie wage rates to changes in con
sumer price indexes will contribute to inflation. One
union may be able to protect its members in this way
1 E con om ic R e p o r t of th e P r e s id e n t, T r a n s m itte d to th e C on
g ress J a n u a ry 196 7, T o g e th er W ith th e A n n u a l R e p o r t o f th e
C ouncil of E co n o m ic A d v is e r s (W ashington, Government Printing
Office, 1967).
48
against any deterioration in its real wage or any real
impact from increased indirect taxes. But it does so only
by imposing more of the burden on others. And if all
unions—and other groups in society—were to succeed in
tying compensation to consumer prices, the arrangement
would become a vast engine of inflation, which, once it
began to roll, would continue to gain speed.
Guidepost Exceptions
The most frequent criticism of the present wage guidepost—after the criticism that it fails to allow for the
rise in consumer prices—is that it fails to provide suf
ficient exceptions for the many special and individual
circumstances of which account must be taken in wage
negotiations. This criticism requires consideration.
A guidepost exception has always been made for low
wages. In a year in which the minimum wage will ad
vance 11 percent, from $1.25 to $1.40 an hour, with an
inevitable impact on wages previously near the new min
imum, this exception is obviously significant. The fact,
however, that few strong unions exist among low-wage
workers gives the exception only limited relevance for
collective bargaining.
It surely does not justify large wage increases for highwage unions. Indeed, the productivity arithmetic sug
gests that, if an exception for low-wage workers is to be
meaningful in permitting low-wage workers to receive
increases in r e a l wages, high-wage workers who have
profited in the past from exceptionally strong bargaining
power must respect the counterpart exception that their
wage increases should be less than the average.
Second, the guidepost principle has always contained
a clear exception for wage changes that serve an economic
function by assisting in the reallocation of labor toward
shortage occupations and industries. Thus, for example,
no complaint has ever been made in the name of the
guideposts with respect to the large wage increases re
cently received by nurses.
Indeed, in a high-employment economy, the importance
of differential wage changes as an instrument of labor
reallocation is greatly increased, and this exception is
more important today than in earlier years. However,
the Council suggests that, as a general principle, an
exception to the guideposts for workers in a shortage
occupation should be claimed only where the union in
volved stands ready to lift every artificial barrier to entry
into the occupation, and to cooperate fully in public and
private efforts to train whatever numbers of workers may
desire to enter the occupation. Moreover, the remaining
labor shortages this year will be concentrated in unor
ganized professional and technical occupations.
Other exceptions have frequently been proposed for in
corporation in a national wage policy.
One such proposal is to allow for the narrowing of
differentials between wage rates paid in different in
dustries or by different employers for similar work—the
so-called issue of “comparable wages.” To the extent that
such differentials may interfere with a rational alloca
tion of labor, their correction is already encouraged by the
exception just discussed.
https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
MONTHLY LABOR REVIEW, MARCH 1967
The public interest obviously requires that wage settle
ments pay appropriate attention to factors of compara
bility. But it cannot accept inflationary settlements
every time this justification is alleged.
At least within a single labor market area, it is surely
desirable that workers in occupations requiring similar
training, skill, education, and responsibility should be paid
the same wage. This is less obvious as between labor
markets. Even within labor markets, some wage differ
entials may reflect the fact that one employer finds it
worthwhile to pay above-average rates in order to insure
low turnover, good morale, and greater selectivity in
hiring, while another prefers to pay lower rates and
forego these advantages.
It is probably true, on the whole, that the dispersion
of wages for similar work by similar workers is larger
than it should be from the point of view of either efficiency
or equity. But the wage comparisons made in collective
bargaining disputes often have little or no relevance
either to resource allocation or to equity. Very often the
wage comparisons in collective bargaining are only part of
a gam'e of follow-the-leader which, at best, is irrelevant
to resource allocation and, at worst, speeds up a wageprice spiral.
Many recent instances in which outsized wage agree
ments have emerged from collective bargaining—based on
claims that such increases were necessary in order to
achieve wage comparability—have created more prob
lems of inequity and inefficiency than they have resolved.
Meaningful wage comparisons should be made not only
with wages that are higher but also with those that are
lower. Otherwise, wage increases to achieve “compara
bility” may actually reduce it. Unions can always find
s o m e group of workers more highly paid than they—
whether or not all other conditions are similar. If all
corrections of such “inequities” are upward, labor cost
inflation is inevitable.
One recent important collective bargaining dispute pro
duced a highly inflationary uniform percentage increase
for the entire work force involved. The justification was
that an increase of this magnitude was necessary to cor
rect what may have been genuine disparity between the
wages of a small group of specialized workers and simi
lar workers in other employments. The mediation com
mittee which recommended the settlement recognized
that, for the great majority of the work force involved,
wage rates were already as high as, or higher than, those
for comparable workers. But they could not recommend
destroying the customary relationship between the wages
of those workers for whom the disparity was found to
exist and the wages of all other members of the work
force. This is a clear recipe for inflation.
Another exception frequently urged is that, in indus
tries with rapid productivity gains, wages should rise
faster than th’e average. If such an exception were
made, it would necessarily impart an inflationary bias to
the system—for no one argues that wages will or should
rise less rapidly or not at all in industries with little
or no productivity gain.
It is clearly in the public interest for unit labor costs
and prices to fall in industries with relatively high pro-
BEYOND GUIDELINES: 1967 WAGE-PRICE POLICY
ductivity gains. In the long run, falling unit labor costs
do result in falling prices (except where there are off
setting increases in other costs). But the long run may
be too long for labor’s and the public’s patience. And
sometimes the very factors that produce falling costs
may work against price reduction. For example, the in
dustries in which labor costs ars falling are often those in
which demand, and thus production, is expanding most
rapidly—a situation which weakens rather than strength
ens the competitive forces driving down prices.
If there is a long lag between a reduction in labor costs
and a reduction in prices, it is difficult to make a con
vincing case that high wage settlements in industries with
high productivity growth are not in the public interest. . . .
Another of the reasons given for an exception to the
wage guidepost is ability to pay. In practice, this refers
to the profits of the bargaining employers. Ability-to-pay
considerations are, of course, often related to the indus
try’s own productivity trend. Industries with rapid pro
ductivity gains, falling labor costs, and stable prices are
industries in which profits have risen.
But ability-to-pay considerations arise independently in
another context. In any period of rapid expansion to
ward full utilization, profits inevitably rise faster than
total employee income—just as profits fall more rapidly
when utilization rates decline. The past 5 years have
been such a period of rising profits. It is not surprising
that trade unions seek to share in the profits generated by
prosperity.
The record shows, however, that attempts on the part
of unions to redistribute income from profits to wages
through excessive wage increases in high-profit industries
results primarily in higher prices in those industries.
When this happens, the effect is to redistribute real in
come from the rest of the community—who are mostly
other wage earners—to the workers in question, with very
title redistribution from profits to wages.
To avoid a wage-price spiral it is therefore essential
that firms with discretion over prices—and particularly
those with unusually high profits—pursue price policies
which will not invite excessive wage demands.
Price Policy, for 1967
The foregoing discussion has indicated the essential
character of the problems which businesses with pricing
discretion will face in 1967 :
1. Wage contracts newly negotiated in 1967 will tend
to raise unit labor costs of many firms and industries.
2. Nevertheless, many important industries will con
tinue to operate in 1967 under labor contracts negotiated
in 1965 or 1966, which often will be consistent with de
clining unit labor costs.
3. Although the cost of purchased industrial products
may frequently be higher in 1967 than in 1966, the pur
chase cost of some raw materials will be lower.
4. Many firms in 1967 will be using new and modern
capital equipment installed during the past year, and will
https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
49
be under less pressure to operate marginal units. Often
this will involve substantially lower costs.
In short, the cost picture for price setters in 1967 will
continue to be a mixed one.
Although average profit margins of manufacturers de
clined in the second half of 1966, they were higher for the
entire year—at least as a percentage of equity—than in
any prior year since the highly inflationary year of 1950.
In the past, profit rates like those recorded in 1966 en
dured only for brief periods. Profits rose rapidly in
cyclical expansions. But as the economy reached and
quickly passed a cyclical peak, reductions in capacity utili
zation retarded the growth of productivity and intensified
competitive pressures, with a resulting erosion of profit
margins. If public and private policies now succeed in
maintaining a steadily expanding economy, it follows that
the profit margins which were feasible only in the boom
stage of a boom-bust economy—and therefore may have
been appropriate in that stage—are inappropriate in a
steadily prosperous economy.
Once firms can become accustomed to operating in a
more stable environment, the profit margins which they
now seek to achieve in periods of high utilization can be
reduced, as no longer necessary to make up for the low
and frequently inadequate profits of periods of slack and
recession. In fact, profit margins not only should be lower
than in the boom phase of a cyclical economy, but should
be reduced on the average because operations in such an
environment carry lesser risk.
It is true that an adjustment to lower profit margins
may be feasible and appropriate only if steady economic
advance can be maintained. But it is equally true that
such an adjustment of margins may itself be required if
a steadily high employment economy is to be maintained.
In an economy which grows steadily but does not out
run the growth of capacity, there will be vigorous com
petition, and, ultimately, profit margins in most industries
should seek an appropriate level. But competitive pres
sures work slowly. In industries where a small number
of leading firms possess strong market power, they work
very slowly indeed. Firms in those industries in which
market power, combined with strong demand has pushed
profit margins to record levels, have a special responsi
bility in price-making at this critical time.
If, in 1967, firms with discretion as to their prices
should follow pricing policies which even maintain present
margins, the opportunity for a significantly improved
price record will be compromised. It would speed up the
rise in living costs, and it would again pose inviting tar
gets for inflationary wage demands by unions.
To assume steady movement toward price stability in
1967, the public interest requires that producers absorb
cost increases to the maximum extent feasible, and take
advantage of every opportunity to lower prices.
In so doing, they will make an important contribution to
strengthening America’s international competitive position
and to a climate that will permit the economy to maintain
the forward momentum which will preserve and enlarge
the gains of the past 6 years of rewarding prosperity.
Foreign Labor Briefs*
tion which claimed the sole right to represent the
soldiers. The union failed in its efforts to obtain
a favorable ruling on the matter from the Consti
tutional Court. In August 1966, the Minister of
Defense reversed his long-standing opposition to
the OeTV’s drive and issued the enabling decree.
Federal Republic of Germany
Honduras—Collective Agreement
Unemployment. A slowdown in economic activ
ity caused the number of unemployed workers to
rise to 327,300 by mid-December 1966, and to ex
ceed the number of job vacancies for the first time
since early 1960. Though still relatively low, the
unemployment rate had risen from 1 percent at
the end of November to 1.5 percent at mid-Decem
ber. Foreign workers were apparently not being
singled out for dismissal; there were still 1.3 mil
lion of them in Germany in mid-December, and
their unemployment rate wTas still 1 percent. Some
of those who had been dismissed have, however,
obviously returned home and are not shown on the
German unemployment rolls.
The Tela Railroad Company (the operating en
terprise of the United Fruit Company in Hon
duras) and SITRATERCO (the union of its
employees) signed a new 5-year collective agree
ment which became effective December 1, 1966.
The contract meets the company’s desire for a
longer agreement; previous agreements had been
of only 2 or 3 years’ duration.
Virtually all employees covered by the agree
ment received an immediate wage increase of at
least 4 percent. A few employees already earning
monthly salaries of more than 250 lempiras
(US$125) in livestock operations or more than 500
lempiras (US$250) in other activities of agricul
ture, processing and transport were not included in
the wage increase provision. New hourly mini
mum wages were established at 0.60 lempiras
(US$0.30) for livestock work and 0.70 lempiras
(US$0.35) for all other work. The change in the
minimum increased the wages paid in the lowest
brackets by an amount ranging from 5 to 8 percent.
All workers will receive an additional 4-percent
wage increase on December 1, 1969. For the first
time in recent years, the agreement provided an
annual bonus equivalent to 2 weeks of wages for
all permanent workers, to be paid on December 15
of each year beginning in 1966.
Unionization of Soldiers. The controversial
drive by the Public Service and Transport Work
ers Union (OeTV) to recruit members among the
ranks of the Federal Republic of Germany’s
Armed Forces was discussed at a conference of
union officers, political leaders, Government offi
cials, and some 50 representatives of the soldiers
held in November 1966 at the initiative of Heinz
Kluncker, president of the union. Spokesmen for
the OeTV, whose organizing drive reportedly had
netted 3,000 members by September 1966, stressed
that the union was interested only in the social wel
fare of the professional soldiers; that it would not
interfere in purely military matters; and that it
could never call a strike of soldiers as this was ex
pressly forbidden by the union’s bylaws. Despite
these assurances, some army commanders were ap
parently apprehensive about the union’s objectives.
Some commissioned and noncommissioned officers
had been refused leave to attend the conference de
spite the decree issued by the Minister of Defense
in August 1966, which authorized members of the
Armed Forces to engage in trade union activities.
The OeTV began to reeruit members among
army personnel in early 1965. Its drive was sty
mied by opposition from the Ministry of Defense
and the Bundeswehrverband, a military associa
50
https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
Italy—Collective Bargaining Agreements
The collective bargaining impasse which was
first confronted in September 1965 ended in the
closing months of 1966, when eight collective con
tracts covering a total of 1.4 million industrial
workers and one covering 1.5 million agricultural
workers were signed. Prospects were brightened
for the renewal of 60 other expired contracts cov
ering 3.6 million workers.
A result of the firm resistance of employers and
the Government to what they termed the “exces*Prepared in the Office of Foreign Labor and Trade, Bureau of
Labor S tatistics, on the basis of m aterial available in early
January.
FOREIGN LABOR BRIEFS
sive, inflationary demands” of labor, the impasse
had had the effect of a wage and salary freeze.
The impasse also helped to limit the rise in the cost
of living to 1.6 percent during the year ending
August 1, 1966. In the years ending August 1,
1961, and 1965, living costs had risen 7.4 and 4
percent, respectively. The newly signed contracts
provide for average increases in wages and fringe
benefits of 13 to 15 percent over the next 2 to 3\'2
years.
Netherlands—Wage Policy
Directives for wage policy in 1967 were issued
by a Cabinet committee and the Board of the Labor
Foundation (the official labor-management body)
on December 9, 1966. According to these direc
tives, wage contracts for 1967 must conform to the
following terms: Wage increases may not exceed
4 percent on January 1 and iy 2 percent on July 1,
and there must be bargaining for benefits which
would increase wage costs beyond these limits; the
workweek may not be reduced; and clauses may
not provide wage increases in case of excessive rises
in the cost of living. (The Government, in turn,
promised a vigorous attempt to hold prices in line.)
The weekly minimum wage was raised from 120
guilders (US$33) to 126 guilders (US$34.80) on
January 1, 1967, to be raised to 130 guilders (US
$35.91) on July 1. Social security benefits were
increased 5 percent on January 1,1967, but not on
a retroactive basis as had been the custom.
Both management and union representatives
stated that they were “not enthusiastic” about the
directives. The president of the Netherland Fed
eration of Trade Unions (NVY) accused the Gov
ernment of siding with the employers, while the
representative of the employers stated that he
would have preferred a mutual agreement reached
within the Labor Foundation.
Soviet Union—Wage Gap
The wide gap between wages in agriculture and
industry has been reduced considerably since the
adoption in March 1965 of a comprehensive pro
gram to stimulate agricultural production. How
ever, according to figures recently published in a
magazine for Communist Party workers in the
Armed Forces, average monthly earnings of col
lective farmers in 1965 were still about half the
https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
51
average monthly earnings of industrial workers.
The average monthly earnings of collective farm
ers were 51.3 rubles (US$57) compared with the
103 rubles (US$114) of industrial workers, and
the 73.6 rubles (US$82) of State farm workers.
United Kingdom
Brain Drain. In 1964, some 400 doctors left Eng
land; in 1965, the number rose to 550; and in
1966, the exodus, accelerated in part by the wage
freeze, was expected to range from 600 to 800,
about half of the total output of Britain’s medical
schools. Government concern over the rising
emigration results from its heavy financial stake
in the education of doctors, as well as its commit
ment to the National Health Service, whose effec
tiveness would be severely impaired by the con
tinued emigration.
In a recent speech before hospital doctors, the
Minister of Health stated that it costs at least
£7,500 (about US$20,000) in public funds to train
each doctor. The Minister added that working
conditions of doctors in British hospitals would be
improved by the Government, but he warned that
the exodus of medical personnel was placing
additional burdens on the remaining staffs.
Retraining. A Government grant of £2 million
(US$5.6 million) to aid private industrial re
training was announced by the Minister of Labor
on November 30,1966. The money is to help meet
the cost of installing new machinery and auxiliary
equipment in the training shops or training cen
ters of individual employers and is to be used for
retraining adults “off the job” for semiskilled
occupations.
The Minister also announced plans to expand
the public training centers which the Government
operates to train or retrain people who either never
learned a skill or must change their skill. Ac
cording to these plans, the number of Government
centers will be increased to 38 from 32, adding
1,600 places for trainees to the existing 6,400
places during 1967. Moreover, the Government
is exploring the possibilities of making room for
more adults at the centers by providing courses
for adults in the Defense Ministry’s training estab
lishments and by using technical colleges in the
vicinity of Government training centers for firstyear apprentice classes.
Significant Decisions
in Labor Cases*
Labor Relations
Craft Severance. The National Labor Relations
Board discarded 1 the restrictive tests for craft
unit determination established in American Pot
ash? and reverted to the policy of full discretion
and broad inquiry into all the factors relevant to
a requested severance.
The International Brotherhood of Electrical
Workers (IBEW ), desiring to represent the in
strument mechanics at a plant engaged in the
production of uranium for the Atomic Energy
Commission, petitioned for a craft severance elec
tion. The Board found that the instrument me
chanics constituted an identifiable group of skilled
employees, but that the IBEW did not qualify as a
traditional representative of the class and dis
missed the petition. However, that the union’s
failure to satisfy the traditional representative test
under American Potash was not in itself a de
cisive ground for dismissal of the case. The valid
ity of this test was challenged by the employer, and
the Board decided to review its policy on craft
severance. It did so particularly in view of an ap
pellate holding3 that the Board was abrogating
its statutory duty by adopting such rigid tests in
craft severance cases, and in consideration of in
dustrial progress and the resultant changes.
Originally, under the rules laid down in Am eri
can Co.4, the Board refused to grant craft sever
ance in the face of a “bargaining history on a
broader basis.” To soften the impact of this de
cision, section 9(b) (2) was included in the TaftHartley Act, which provided that “the Board
shall not . . . decide that any craft unit is inap
propriate on the ground that a different unit has
been established by a prior Board determination,
unless a majority of the employees in the proposed
craft unit vote against separate representation.”
Subsequently, in deciding National T u b e 5, the
Board took the position that section 9(b)(2)
52
https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
merely prevented it from denying separate craft
representation solely on the basis of a previous
Board decision, but that the Board was free to
consider such factors as bargaining history, the
integration of craft functions with the overall pro
duction process, and other circumstances. How
ever, in American Potash , the Board reversed the
National Tube decision by stating that a craft
group will be granted severance where there is a
discernable craft group and the union seeking
representation traditionally represents that craft.
This position was predicated mainly on the view
that 9(b)(2) “foreclose[d] discretion and com
pel [led] the Board to grant severance” where these
tests were met.
In discarding its previous statutory interpreta
tion on which the American Potash ruling was
founded and, as well as the tests set up by it, the
Board stated that those tests “ [did] not consider
the interests of the other employees and thus [did]
not permit a weighing of the craft group against
the competing interests favoring continuance of
the established relationship.”
The Board held that henceforth it would
broaden its inquiry and evaluate all relevant con
siderations, including: (1) whether or not the
proposed unit consists of a distinct group of
skilled craftsmen; (2) whether or not craft sever
ance would disrupt the history of collective bar
gaining and thus affect the stability of labor rela
tions; (3) the extent of the unit’s separate identity
while included within the larger unit; (4) the his
tory of collective bargaining in the industry; (5)
the degree of integration of the employer’s pro
duction processes; and (6) the experience of the
union in representing similar units.
♦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 admin
istrative developments in the field of labor la.wi 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.
1H allin cJcrodt C h em ical W o rk s, U ran iu m D iv is io n and I n te r
n a tio n a l B ro th e rh o o d of E le c tr ic a l W o rk e rs, L o c a l 1, 162 NLRB
48 (Dec. 30, 1966).
3A m e ric a n P o ta s h <6 C h em ical C o rp ., 107 NLRB 1418 ; see also
M o n th ly L a b o r R e v ie w , May 1954, p. 560.
3N L R B v. P itts b u r g h P la te G lass Co., 270 F. 2d 167 (C.A. 4) ;
cert. den. 361 U.S. 943.
i A m e ric a n C an Co., 13 NLRB 1252.
5 N a tio n a l Tube Co., 76 NLRB 1199.
DECISIONS IN LABOR CASES
Indicating that this list was not exclusive, the
Board stated, “Our determination will be made
only after a weighing of all relevant factors on a
case-by-case basis, and we will apply the same
principles and standards to all industries.”
The dissenting Member Fanning agreed that a
restatement of policy was required, but held that
Congress, in passing section 9(b)(2), had in
tended to strengthen and protect the right of craft
employees to organize separately, their inclusion
in a larger unit notwithstanding. He stated that
those who would deny separate representation to
craft employees should have the burden of demon
strating that the smaller unit had been submerged
in the larger, and that this burden is not met
merely by showing a bargaining history on a
broader basis, no matter how long it has endured.
Mr. Fanning also stressed that this approach is
applicable where craft severance is involved or
where the issue of separateness arises during an
initial organizing campaign.
He would allow severance if the employee unit
consists of true craftsmen and their interests are
subordinated to those of an unskilled majority,
regardless of whether the union is a traditional
representative or whether the employees had pre
viously attempted to gain separate representation.
Duty to Bargain. The Supreme Court of the
United States recently handed down two decisions
dealing with an employer’s duty to bargain.
In the first decision,6 the Court held that the
NLRB had jurisdiction of a dispute over interpre
tation of a contract provision for a premium pay
plan, since the Board’s intervention could have no
other objective than to facilitate an agreement be
tween the parties. The Court, further, upheld
the Board’s decision that the employer had no
contractual right to institute the premium plan
unilaterally.
The collective bargaining agreement between
the employer and the union contained a provision
whereby the employer reserved the right to “pay
a premium rate over and above the contractual
classified wage rate to reward any particular em
ployee for some special fitness, skill, aptitude or
the like. . . . ” The agreement did not provide for
arbitration. Subsequently, the employer posted a
6 N L R B v. C. & C. P ly w o o d G ory. (U.S. Sup. Ct., Jan. 9, 1967).
7 N L R B v. A cm e I n d u s tr ia l Co. (U jS. Sup. Ct., Jan. 9, 1967).
https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
53
notice that employees of certain crews would be
paid $2.50 per hour if the crews met specified pro
duction standards. (The contractual wage scale
stipulated hourly wages for these crews ranging
from $2.15 to $2.29.) The union immediately met
with the employer, but during this and subsequent
conferences, the employer refused to rescind the
wage plan, although it was willing to discuss its
terms.
The NLRB had found that the provision of the
collective agreement in question did not grant the
employer power to unilaterally change the wage
system as he had because the provision allowed
merit increases for “particular employee[s],”
while under the employer’s plan merit increases
would be granted to entire crews. This, the Board
found, amounted to a unilateral change of the
wage system. The employer was charged with a
failure to bargain. A court of appeals refused to
enforce the Board’s order, saying that the Board
had no jurisdiction since the existence of the al
leged unfair labor practice did not turn on statu
tory provisions, upon a good faith dispute as to
the meaning of a contractual provision.
In reversing the court of appeals, the Supreme
Court found that the Board’s action did not
amount to regulation of contract terms, a function
the Congress clearly had refused to entrust to the
NLRB. The Board had not invaded the courts’
jurisdiction under section 301 of the Labor Man
agement Relations Act to construe labor agree
ments and resolve disputes, the Court said, but
merely interpreted the agreement only so far as
was necessary to decide this unfair labor practice
case. The Court also pointed out that if the Board
were not able to consider a collective bargaining
agreement in a case of this type, where the parties
have not provided for arbitration, the union would
have to institute a court action to have the contract
interpreted before obtaining vindication of their
statutory rights. “This would add years to the
already lengthy period required to gain relief from
the Board,” the Court added.
In the other case,7 the Supreme Court held that
the Board had power to order an employer to
furnish the union with information needed for
determining whether the collective bargaining
agreement had been violated, even though the dis
pute had not been submitted to compulsory arbi
tration as provided by the contract.
54
The collective agreement between the parties
contained a clause declaring that it was contrary
to company policy to subcontract out work where
this would result in layoffs of employees. An
other clause provided that employees subject to
layoff or downgrading owing to removal of plant
equipment to another location were entitled to a
transfer to such location. Differences of opinion
over the contract were subject to a grievance and
arbitration procedure.
A number of employees were laid off and the
union became alarmed when the employer began
to remove certain plant equipment. To the union’s
inquiry as to why and to what place the equipment
was being removed, the employer replied simply
that there had been no violation of the contract and
the company was not obliged to answer such ques
tions. Thereafter the union filed 11 grievances, as
well as a refusal to bargain charge with the NLRB.
The Board found that the information requested
was “necessary in order to enable the union to
evaluate intelligently the grievances filed,” and
that the employer had failed to bargain in good
faith. A court of appeals refused to enforce the
Board’s order, ruling that the contractual provi
sion for binding arbitration deprived the Board
of jurisdiction. The court reasoned that the
Board’s action was contrary to the national labor
policy favoring arbitration.
The Supreme Court noted that there is no ques
tion but that an employer is obligated to provide
information needed by the bargaining representa
tive for the proper performance of its duties, and
this obligation applies to labor-management rela
tions during the entire term of an agreement. Ac
cording to the Court, the Board’s action in deter
mining that the desired information was relevant
decided nothing about the merits of the union’s
contractual claims and did not amount to a con
struction of the labor agreement.
In the Court’s opinion, the “only real issue” in
the case was whether the Board; should have waited
for an arbitrator’s determination of the relevancy
of the information requested by the union. The
Court ruled that the LMRA provides the Board
with ample authority to take action in disputes re
gardless of any other means of adjustment. Far
from hindering the arbitration process, the Court
reasoned, the Board’s action would relieve the
burden on the arbitrator by enabling the parties
https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
MONTHLY LABOR REVIEW, MARCH 1967
to consider all aspects of a grievance on the merits
in the lower steps of the grievance procedure.
This, in turn, could lead to the resolution of many
grievances, thereby freeing the arbitrator to con
sider only those disputes which are impossible of
resolution by agreement of the parties.
Union Affairs
Unauthorized Practice of Law. A State court
determined 8 that a union was engaging in unau
thorized practice of law when it retained an at
torney to represent its members in personal injury
suits before the State industrial commission.
For years the union had employed a licensed
attorney on a salary basis to represent members’
personal injury claims under the Workmen’s Com
pensation Act. Members were free to seek other
counsel, the attorney’s assistance merely being a
service made available free of charge by the union.
The entire sum of any settlement or award was
retained by the claimant.
The court examined the question of whether,
under its prior decisions, the union was engaging
in unauthorized practice of law and if so, whether
this activity was protected by the 1st and 14tli
Amendments to the United States Constitution.
An argument was presented that since the union
was not a legal entity, the members were merely
pooling their resources in order to hire legal coun
sel and, therefore, there was no question of an in
termediary between the attorney and his client
In rejecting this line of reasoning the court said
it was not concerned with forms but with activities
of the association. Furthermore, it said, “the
public welfare demands that legal services should
not be commercialized, and that no corporation,
association, or partnership of laymen can contract
with its members to supply them with legal serv
ices.” Lawyer-client relationship, the court point
ed out, requires complete dedication of the attorney
to his client’s interests, and this relationship would
be jeopardized by the inclusion of another party.
The court also found support for its position
in the Illinois State Bar Association’s Canons
of Ethics which, it found, condemned such
arrangements.
8
I llin o is S ta te B a r A ss o c ia tio n v. U n ite d M in e W o rk e rs of
A m e ric a (111. Sup. Ct„ May 21, 1966) ; 219 N.E. 2d 503.
55
DECISIONS IN LABOR CASES
The union argued that the practice was proper
under the “concerted activities” provision (section
T) of LMRA. The court rejected this contention,
saying that this general statutory language cannot
restrict the States from regulating the practice of
law.
In deciding the question of whether denying the
union the right to hire an attorney to represent
its members violates the First and Fourteenth
Amendments, the court examined the U.S. Su
preme Court decisions in the Virginia Railroad
Trainmen9 and Button cases.10 Since the State
court’s objection was to the union’s practice of
keeping an attorney on its payroll to represent its
members, but not to the referral of members to
particular attorneys, the court reasoned that its
ruling here was consistent with Virginia Railroad
Trainmen. Nor did the court conclude that the
Button decision involving a civil rights group,
compelled a different result: “ [T]he litigation
therein engaged,” said the court, “was regarded as
a form of constitutionally protected political ex
pression not to be equated with the bodily injury
litigation, with which this case is concerned.”
Past judicial decisions, the court held, had recog
nized individual States’ right to regulate the prac
tice of law to the extent that the regulations do not
impinge on the First and Fourteenth Amendment
guarantees relating to freedom of speech and asso
ciation. However, even if there was an infringe
ment in this case, the court believed the State’s
interest in controlling standards of professional
conduct was sufficient to sustain the decision.
In conclusion, the court pointed out that if the
union were allowed to continue this arrangement,
it might expand the practice to domestic relations,
contracts, criminal situations, and other areas re
quiring legal service, thus impairing “the integrity
and personal nature of the attorney-client relation
ship,” with results detrimental to public interest.
9 B ro th e rh o o d of R a ilro a d T ra in m en v. V irg in ia , 84 S. Ct. 1113
(1964) ; see also M o n th ly L a b o r R e v ie w , June 1964, p. 689. The
decision upheld the right of the union to advise injured members
to obtain legal advice, and to recommend specific lawyers.
™ N A A C P v. B u tto n , 83 S. Ct. 328 (1963). The Supreme Court
held that a system devised by the NAACP to furnish and recom
mend attorneys, compensated on per diem and per case basis, to
member litigan ts in civil rights cases was in stitu tion ally pro
tected by the F irst and Fourteenth Amendments.
If . . . we may speak of intelligent foresight and rational ordering and
direction of appropriate means to be given social ends, it must be clear that
such an activity must operate with the physical resources—natural and cul
tural—with the laws and institutions, and with the capacities, the attitudes,
and interests of men. Of these only the physical resources are merely means ;
all the rest are ends as well as means. Some of the major difficulties of con
temporary industrial society seem to arise in large measure out of the fact
that our economic and technological changes have far outdistanced the rela
tively slow réadaptation of our institutions, ideas, and sentiments.
https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
—Louis Wirth,
C o m m u n ity L ife a n d S o c ia l P o licy .
Chronology of
Recent Labor Events
January 5, 1967
R e c eiv in g 3,091 of 3,517 votes, the Teamsters won an elec
tion to represent 7,000 office, clerical, and related em
ployees of Pan American World Airways, Inc., then repre
sented by the Railway Clerks. The clerks had asked
their supporters to abstain, but there were 48 more votes
than the required majority of eligible voters.
a 164-day strike, members of Plumbers Local 2
returned to work in New York City under a “memoran
dum of understanding” between national officials of the
union and New York contractors. The tentative agree
ment, which covers 4,000 plumbers, calls for wage in
creases of nearly 18 percent over 3 years.
E n d in g
January 13
F our railroad unions (Maintenance and Way Employees,
Transportation-Communication
Employees,
Railroad
Signalmen, and Hotel and Restaurant Employees) and
the Nation’s Class I Railroads agreed on 18-month con
tracts covering 135,000 workers. The contracts provide
a 5-percent wage increase retroactive to January 1, an
increase of 2.5 percent a year later, and improved vaca
tion benefits.
January 16
O i l , C h e m ic a l a n d A tom ic W orkers agreed on a 2-year
contract with Sinclair and Mobil Oil Cos. The union,
which represents about 60,000 workers at 100 refineries,
also settled with Continental, Marathon, Gulf, and Texa
co Oil Cos. this month, and a 9-day strike at Texaco’s
Port Arthur Plant ended on January 18. All contracts
call for a wage increase of 14 cents an hour retroactive
to January 1, 15 cents next January, and improved fringe
benefits. The contracts also contain a job security clause
which enables the union to strike over a layoff. (See
pp. 57-58, this issue.)
to hear the I n t e r n a t i o n a l U n i o n o f E l e c t r i c a l
v. t h e G e n e r a l E l e c t r i c C o. coalition bargaining
case, the Supreme Court remanded it for a decision as to
whether it is moot because the parties were able to reach
a contract. (See MLR, November 1966, pp. 1271-1272.)
D e c l in in g
January 8
A sso ciated P r e ss and the Wire Service Guild agreed on a
2- year contract covering 1,350 employees. The contract,
retroactive to January 1, gives wage increases of $4 to
$7 a week the first year and $3.25 to $6 the second; the
workweek is reduced from 40 hours to 37% for all em
ployees other than newsmen and photographers. (See
p. 61, this issue.)
J. I. C a s e Co., and the United Auto Workers agreed on a
3- year contract covering 7,000 members in seven plants
in Illinois, Wisconsin, Iowa, Indiana, and California. The
contract is retroactive to January 1 and provides for wage
increases from 9 to 22 cents an hour each year. It also
includes a cost-of-living escalator and increased health,
pension, and vacation benefits. (See p. 61, this issue.)
January 9
Chicago Board of Education and the American Fed
eration of Teachers agreed on a contract covering 23,000
public school teachers, and a settlement ending a strike at
eight junior colleges provided 700 teachers with wage
increases of $20 a month retroactive to January 1 and an
additional $30 on September 1. The contract also liberal
ized insurance and leave provisions and reduced class
loads for most teachers. In Woodbridge, N.J., an 11-day
strike ended on January 30 when the Woodbridge Town
ship Federation of Teachers and the Board of Education
agreed on a 1-year contract covering 900 public school
teachers. The agreement provides a salary range from
$5,850 for beginning teachers to $9,850 for teachers with
12 years’ experience and a bachelor’s degree.
T he
56
https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
W orkers
January 17
U.S. locals of the International Union of Mine, Mill and
Smelter Workers voted to merge with the United SteelWorkers. The Mine, Mill union has about 30,000 members
in the nonferrous metal mining, smelting, and refining in
dustry, while the 1.1 million member Steelworkers has
38,000. ( See pp. III-IV , this issue.)
January 30
E m pl o ye rs and the Dressmakers’ Joint Council of the
Ladies Garment Workers reached agreement on a 3-year
contract covering about 40,000 workers in New York City
and 40,000 in other New England plants. The agreement
provides a 9-percent wage increase February 20 and an
additional 6 percent in February 1968, improves vacation
benefits, and strengthens contract language regarding work
on imported garments.
and Local Lodge 75 of the Machinists
reached agreement on a 1-year contract covering 500
mechanics. The settlement, which ended a 52-day strike,
resolves a dispute over the terms of a pension plan and
provides for the elimination of about 125 jobs in the next
few weeks.
M o h a w k A ir l in e s
Developments in
Industrial Relations*
J a n u a r y is often a month of relatively little
bargaining activity, but January 1967 saw a num
ber of major settlements—an indication of the
heavy bargaining activity expected during the
year. Eighteen-month agreements for about 135,000 members of four nonoperating brotherhoods
brought to 280,000 the number in these brother
hoods covered in the late 1966-67 round of railroad
negotiations. About 144,000 Railway Clerks had
accepted a 12-month contract, in mid-December—
2 weeks before their contract was subject to revi
sion. The six unions representing 145,000 shop
craft workers were still bargaining,1 as were three
operating unions (the Switchmen, Conductors and
Brakemen, and the independent Locomotive Engi
neers), bargaining for about 62,000 workers.
Other agreements concluded during the month in
volved the Brotherhood of Railway and Steam
ship Clerks and REA Express. A settlement was
reached by the Philadelphia Transportation Co.,
and the Transport Workers after a 1-day strike.
By January 20, the Oil, Chemical and Atomic
Workers, which represents about two-thirds of the
country’s oil refinery workers, had concluded its
round of bargaining in refineries. The 2-year con
tracts were the first in the industry’s history to
provide deferred wage increases. Teachers were
in the news again as 23,000 of them in Chicago
public schools and 684 at eight Cook County junior
colleges were included in new contracts. In New
York City, 4,000 Plumbers in the construction in
dustry ended a 6-month strike on January 5. The
Plumbers returned to work under a “memorandum
of understanding” while a bargaining committee
continued attempts to resolve outstanding issues.
In 1966, all measures of strike activity reached
their highest levels since 1959, but the percentage
of total estimated worktime lost because of stop
pages only increased to 0.19 from 0.18 percent in
1965. In 1959, the Steelworkers conducted a ma
jor strike against major steel producers, and the
percentage of time lost amounted to 0.61 percent.
https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
Some 4,200 stoppages involving 1,800,000 workers
began during the year, compared with 3,963 stop
pages, idling 1,550,000 workers in 1965. In 1966,
25 million man-days were lost as a result of strikes,
compared with 23.3 million man-days the previous
year.2
In his annual economic report to the Congress,
President Lyndon B. Johnson appealed to business
and labor “in their own interest and that of the
Nation—for the utmost restraint and responsibil
ity in wage and price decisions.” He stated that
if unions attempted to recoup in wages all past
or anticipated advances in the cost of living, and
if business passed along rising costs when it would
be possible to absorb them, the result would be a
wage-price spiral “damaging to business, damag
ing to labor, and disastrous to the Nation.” The
accompanying Annual Report of the Council of
Economic Advisers recognized that recent in
creases in living costs made it unlikely that most
collective bargaining settlements in 1967 would
fully conform to long-term productivity trends.3
However, the Council saw “no useful purpose to
be served by suggesting some higher standard for
wage increases, even on a temporary basis.” The
report added that “the only valid and noninflationary standard for wage advances is the pro
ductivity principle.”
Petroleum
During the first 3 weeks of January, the Oil,
Chemical and Atomic Workers (OCAW) signed
2 -year contracts—the first in the industry’s his
tory to provide deferred increases—covering about
two-thirds of the country’s 90,000 oil refinery work
ers. First-year wage increases followed a previous
round of wage adjustments by about 15 months;
for a number of years petroleum wages had been
changed about every 18 months to 2 years. Gulf
Oil Corp., was the first to come to final agreement
with the union, when, on January 4, a contract
was reached for some 3,100 employees of its Port
*Prepared in the D ivision of Wage Economics, Bureau of Dabor
Statistics, on the basis of published m aterial available in late
January.
1On January 28, President Johnson acted under the terms of
the Railway Labor Act and named a three-man emergency panel
to study the issues and make recommendations w ithin 30 days.
The action prevents a strike for an additional 30 days.
2E stim ates are preliminary.
3See pp. 47-49 of this issue.
57
MONTHLY LABOR REVIEW, MARCH 1967
58
A rthur, Tex., refinery; this contract set a pattern
for other final settlements.
The settlements provided a 14-cent-an-hour
wage increase effective on Jan u ary 1, 1967, with
an additional 4 percent a year la te r; shift differen
tials of 10 and 20 cents an hour instead of 8 and
16 cents, respectively; and an increase in contribu
tions for hospital and medical insurance for m ar
ried employees, varying from $3 to $5 a m onth;
as well as improved job security provisions con
sisting of a guarantee of wage rates for employees
demoted through no fault of their own and ad
vance notice of layoff, with the union having the
right to strike in case of such layoffs.4
Some contracts provided additional changes.
The G ulf settlement included classification ad
justm ents to be effective on Jan u ary 1, 1968, and
an increase in pensions; pensions were also
changed in a few other contracts. A t Sinclair
Oil, where the 1964 settlement was limited to bene
fits—a year when other companies put into effect
packages stressing wage increases—an additional
2-percent wage increase was effective on January
1, 1967.
A fter the G ulf settlement, an additional 2-centan-hour wage increase was put into effect at H um
ble, and some Humble units also agreed to the 4percent deferred wage increase while others agreed
to a wage reopening as of Jan u ary 1968. Interim
increases in wages and benefits in October and
November 1966 preceded these settlements at most
units of Humble Oil. These interim adjustments
included a 12-cent-an-hour wage increase; a $5-amonth increase in the company’s contribution to
hospital and medical insurance for m arried em
ployees; and the 25-percent increase in shift d if
ferentials. Most Humble units reportedly had
job security provisions sim ilar to those negotiated
at most other companies.
Contracts due to expire on December 31 were
extended to m idnight, Jan u ary 8, when a few work
stoppages occurred, but workers at most com
panies rem ained on the job as negotiations con
tinued. Texaco, Inc., in P o rt A rthur, Tex., was
struck as some 3,200 workers walked off the job
on Jan u ary 9, and a work stoppage involving 520
workers at the Cleveland and Toledo, Ohio, re
fineries of Standard Oil Co. (O hio), occurred
when agreements could not be reached by the ex
tended deadline.
https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
M ajor companies reaching agreements w ith the
OCAW on contracts sim ilar to the G ulf settle
ment included American Oil Co., Atlantic-Richfield, Inc., Cities Service Oil Co., Mobil Oil Co.,
Shell Oil Co., Sinclair Oil Co., S tandard Oil Co.
(O hio), and Texaco, Inc.
Apparel
W age reopening provisions contingent on stipu
lated minimum rises in the Consumer Price Index
were exercised by the Ladies’ Garm ent W orkers
under two contracts in the dress and sportswear
industry. A lthough reopening clauses of this na
ture have been widespread in the apparel industry
since the mid-1950’s, they have generally provided
for a reopening if the C P I rose at least 5 percent,
and seldom resulted in interim wage increases dur
ing the years from 1962 through 1965. In 1966,
a number of settlements reduced the minimum C P I
increase required to trig g er a reopener to 2 or
21/2 percent.
About 5,000 workers in St. Louis and other
Missouri areas and in Arkansas and Illinois re
ceived an increase in wages effective November 14,
1966, under this type of provision. A 3-year con
tract negotiated in February 1966 between the
union and the Associated Garment Industries of
St. Louis provided for a reopening on wages if the
BLS C P I rose at least 2 percent above the level
for February 1966 and the Federal minimum wage
was raised. Pieceworkers received an increase of
approxim ately 2.46 percent, cutters and graders
15 cents an hour, and other timeworkers 2 14 p er
cent. A dditional increases of approxim ately 3.28
percent, 20 cents an hour, and 3 percent respec
tively were to be effective on February 1, 1968.5
The reopening agreement provided increased m ini
mum rates, effective February 1, 1967, ranging
from $1.75 an hour—instead of $1.60—for ship
ping and receiving clerks and packers with 6
4 The period of rate guarantee for demoted workers varied
among settlem ents, as did the period of advance notice. At Gulf,
workers were guaranteed their former rates for 18 weeks, plus,
for those w ith 15 years of service, 1 additional week for each
year the agreement continued the provision negotiated in 1962
requiring the company to give 00 days’ notice of layoff, and the
union 60 days’ notice of intent to term inate the contract.
5The reopening settlem ent revised the follow ing deferred wage
increases which were to become effective February 4, 1968, under
the original 3-year co n tr a c t: 3.36 percent for pieceworkers, 15
cents for cutters and graders, and 3 percent (minimum 5 cents an
hour) for other timeworkers.
DEVELOPMENTS IN INDUSTRIAL RELATIONS
months of experience, and for examiners, finishers,
and bundlers w ith 3 months of experience to
$3.50—instead of $3.40—for pattern graders. New
minimums ranging from $1.95 to $3.70 were to be
effective on February 1,1968.
In San Francisco, a cost-of-living wage re
opener in the Garment Union’s contract with dress
and sportswear firms resulted in an arbitration
award of 4 percent in wage increases, effective De
cember 1, 1966, for 2,200 workers. Negotiated in
August 1964, the 3-year agreement provided for a
wage reopening when the San Francisco C P I rose
3 percent above the index for September 1964.
The union sought an increase after the index had
risen 3.78 percent by June 30,1966.
The H . W. Gossard Co., and the Ladies’ G ar
ment W orkers reached agreement in mid-Decem
ber on a 3-year contract for 2,000 workers in the
foundation garm ent and lingerie divisions in five
M idwestern and Central States. A 6-percent
wage increase was retroactive to September 1,
1966, and an additional 4 percent was to be effec
tive February 1, 1968; minimum rates were to be
increased in three steps. As a result of wage
increases and higher craft minimums as well as
other adjustments over the 3 years, pay increases
to timeworkers will range up to 83 cents an hour.
The contract may be reopened on wages if the
C P I increases by 2 y2 percent by December 1967,
or thereafter. Vacation improvements provided
2 weeks after 3 instead of 5 years of service, a th ird
week after 20 years, and effective in 1968, the third
week a fter 15 years of service. The company’s con
tribution to the union’s national retirem ent fund
was increased to 2% from 2 percent; hospitaliza
tion, sickness, and health benefits were improved
for workers iivthe foundation division shops; and
jury duty and funeral leave provisions were lib
eralized.
Transportation and Utilities
Class I railroads and the negotiating commit
tees for some 135,000 workers in 4 of the 11 non« Brotherhood of Railroad Signalmen (B R S ), Brotherhood of
Maintenance of Way Employees (BM W E), H otel and Restaurant
Employees and Bartenders International Union (H R EU ), and
Transportation-Communication Employees Union (TCE)
7See M o n th ly L a b o r R e v ie w , February 1967, p. 67.
8See M o n th ly L a b o r R e v ie w , January 1967, p. 64.
BSee M o n th ly L a b o r R e v ie w , July 1966, p. 783.
https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
59
operating railroad brotherhoods reached agree
ment on January 14.6 The 18-month contracts
provided 5-percent wage increases effective on J a n
uary 1, and 2i/2 percent effective Jan u ary 1, 1968.
In addition, employees were to receive 3 weeks of
vacation after 10 instead of 15 years of service.
Another nonoperating brotherhood, the R ail
way Clerks (B R S C ), settled in mid-December on
a 5-percent increase in a 1-year contract with the
same vacation improvement.7 Settlements had
been reached in November w ith 2 of 5 operating
unions, the R ailroad Trainm en and the Firemen
and Enginemen.8
The Brotherhood of Railway and Steamship
Clerks (B R SC ) and R E A Express agreed in late
December to extend their current contract one
additional year, to Ju ly 1, 1968. The contract
extension agreement affected 35,000 workers and
provided a 5-percent wage increase on Ju ly 1,
1967, in addition to the 9-cent-an-hour deferred
increase effective on Jan u ary 1,1967 afforded in the
existing agreement.9 Minimum weekly wages
were to be raised to $126 from $120 as a result of
the 5-percent increase. F o r employees with 2
years or more of service, severance pay of $75 to
$90 a week was established, and those whose jobs
are moved will be reimbursed for moving expenses
and losses resulting from selling their homes.
On Jan u ary 15, the Philadelphia T ransportation
Co., and the T ransport W orkers agreed to a settle
ment covering 5,000 employees. The 2-year pact
provided wage increases of 15 cents an hour on
Jan u ary 15 of 1967 and 1968, and 12 cents an hour
on Ju ly 15, 1968. The contract also improved
supplem entary benefits.
Improvements effective on Jan u ary 15,1967, in
cluded a fifth week of paid vacation after 25 years
of service; company payment of the full cost of
Blue Cross-Blue Shield insurance along w ith any
increases in premiums occurring during the term
of the agreement (previously the company paid the
full cost but the employee had to pay for any in
creases in premiums) ; a decrease to 3 from 7 days
in the w aiting period for paid sick leave; $75 in
stead of $70 a w’eek for the first 28 days of illness,
and $65 instead of $60 a week for the next 72 d ay s;
and the establishment of 3 days funeral leave.
Effective January 15, 1968, improvements were
to include a 10-cent-an-hour inequity adjustment
to bring conductors’ pay to the motormen’s scale;
60
an eighth paid holiday, Good F rid a y ; $175 in
stead of $125 normal pension benefits; $140 rather
than $100 a month early and disability pension
benefits; $50 instead of $25 lump-sum severance
payment for each year of service; and $50 rather
than $42.50 a year tool and clothing allowance.
On Ju ly 15, 1968, group life insurance coverage
was to be increased to $2,500 from $2,000.
Announcement was made on December 21 of an
agreement between the Tennessee Valley A uthor
ity and the Tennessee Valley Trades and Labor
Council,10 representing some 10,900 employees.
The agreement provided increases in hourly rates
ranging from 12U> to 2 2 ^ cents, and annual in
creases for salaried employees ranging from $185
to $360. The raises became effective on December
25 for 4,900 operating and maintenance employees
and on December 31 for 6,000 hourly construction
employees.
A 4-year agreement was reached in midDecember between the Pacific Gas and Elec
tric Co., and the Electrical W orkers (IB E W ),
representing 13,500 operations, maintenance, and
construction employees in northern and central
California. W ages were increased 4 percent retro
active to Ju ly 1, 1966, with additional 4-percent
increases in Ju ly of both 1967 and 1968; provisions
were made for a wage reopener in the final year of
the contract and for a cost-of-living adjustment
in 1968. The company's monthly contributions to
hospital-medical premiums were increased to $6.50
for employees only (from $5.50), to $9.25 for em
ployees with one dependent (from $8), and to
$13.75 for employees with two or more dependents
(from $11.75). Employees were also to receive a
“bonus week of vacation for each 5 years of
service.
On December 12, the Communications W orkers
at Michigan Bell Telephone Co., ratified a 3-year
contract, which followed the Bell pattern. A l
though they had rejected a sim ilar agreement in
late October employees had continued on the job.
W age increases ranged from $3.50 to $8 a week,
with additional classification adjustm ents ranging
up to $5 a week to employees in some communities.
The contract covered 17,000 employees in the plant,
traffic, and accounting departments.
Southern New E ngland Telephone Co., and the
Connecticut Union of Telephone W orkers (Ind.)
agreed on December 14 to a sim ilar contract pro
https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
MONTHLY LABOR REVIEW, MARCH 1967
viding wage increases ranging from $3.50 to $9 a
week. The 3-year agreement was retroactive to
November 6, and covered 8,900 employees. Shift
differentials, holiday call-out pay, and meal allow
ances were also improved.
About 24,000 long-distance telephone operators,
communications, adm inistrative and clerical em
ployees in 47 States were covered by a 3-year agree
ment reached on January 17 between the Commu
nication W orkers and the American Telephone and
Telegraph Co.’s Long Lines Departm ent. The
agreement provided wage increases ranging from
$3.50 to $8 a week, with a wage reopener after 18
months. The Michigan, Southern New England,
and Long Lines contracts included improvements
in vacations, pensions, and health and welfare ben
efits sim ilar to those negotiated for employees of
other Bell System Companies in recent months.
Government and Services
Some 7,500 New York City welfare w orkers11
ended a 3-day strike on January 19 by voting to
accept a m ediator’s proposal for factfinding on
wages—the m ajor issue in dispute. The union had
demanded a 25-percent reduction in caseloads. A l
though the city offered the use of caseworker’s
aides to alleviate workloads, it refused to lower the
number of cases assigned. The Social Service E m
ployees also put forth “professional demands” to
improve the W elfare D epartm ent’s services, but
the city refused to bargain on these issues on the
grounds th at policy questions could be decided
only by adm inistrators of the W elfare D epart
ment.
The Chicago Teachers Union and the Chicago
Board of Education concluded an agreement on
Jan u ary 8, 1967, which provided a $500-a-year
salary increase for 23,000 public school teachers.
Medical, leave, and other benefits also were im
proved.
Representing 684 teachers in eight junior col
leges, the Cook County College Teachers Union
and the Chicago City College Board of Education
agreed on a settlement th a t gave teachers a $20-amonth increase retroactive to Jan u ary 1,1967, and
$30-a-month increase on September 1, 1967. The
10Consisting' of
11Caseworkers,
16 craft unions.
home economists, homemakers, and children’s
counselors, represented by the Social Service Employees Union.
DEVELOPMENTS IN INDUSTRIAL RELATIONS
previous average salary for the college teachers
was $9,000 a year. O ther benefits for the college
instructors included a reduction in class load to
four from five 3-hour sessions weekly for most
teachers; reduction in class size to 25 students in
some classes and 35 in others; and liberalized leave
and insurance provisions. Settlement was reached
while the union was conducting its second strike in
40 days. The first., from November 30 to Decem
ber 2, sought union recognition; the second, over
wages and benefits, disrupted classes on Jan u ary 6.
V irginia announced a 10- to 15-percent pay raise,
effective February 1, for 8,400 State employees in
clerical and related categories. The previous in
crease was in December 1965.
About 8,500 civil service employees in St. Louis
benefited from a two-step salary increase an
nounced in December by the Board of Aldermen.
The first increase ranged from 5 to 15 percent and
was effective in January. The second increase, a
flat 5 percent, was to be effective in March.
In early December, New York City officially ac
cepted a contract w ith the School Crossing G uards’
Association, which currently represents 1,450 em
ployees but expects to represent 2,328 by June 30,
as the force is expanded. H ourly rates were in
creased to $1.80 from $1.75 for new hires, to $1.95
from $1.85 for guards w ith 1 year of service, and
to $2.15 from $2 for those w ith 2 years of service.
Effective September 1967, employees in each of
the categories will receive an additional 10-cent in
crease. (The maximum workday for crossing
guards is 5 hours).
The Michigan Nurses’ Association (MNA) ne
gotiated its first contract for registered nurses in
the State of Michigan. The early December con
tract covering some 124 registered nurses at H igh
land P ark General H ospital in D etroit raised an
nual scales for staff nurse to $6,484 from $5,792,
and provided a new maximum of $9,609 for nurs
ing instructors with m aster’s degrees—an increase
of $600. The MNA represents some 8,000 of the
13The Electrical Workers walked out on October 17 and ratified
the GE offer on December 30. They did not return until January
9. having refused to cross picket lines of 1,000 teamsters, drafts
men, and plumbers, who were out over local grievances.
13The MSC program w as initiated by GE to lower labor costs
and thus enable the company to remain in Schenectady. The
1964 agreement allowed the company to transfer some 3,000 in
centive workers to straight hourly wages. For further details see
M o n th ly L a b o r R e v ie w , December 1964, p. 1436.
34Racine, Wis. ; Rock Island and Rockford, III. ; Burlington and
Bettendorf, Iowa ; Terre Haute, Ind. ; and Stockton, Calif.
245-336 0
-
67-5
https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
61
20,000 nurses in Michigan. The State’s public
employment act of 1965 which provides for collec
tive bargaining between public employees and city
and county governments had led the MNA to in iti
ate negotiations throughout the State.
The Associated Press and the W ire Service Lo
cal of the Newspaper Guild reached a 2-year agree
ment on Jan u ary 8, giving 1,380 employees general
wage increases ranging from $4 to $7 a week effec
tive Jan u ary 1, 1967, and from $3.25 to $6 the sec
ond year. The agreement also raised m ini
mum rates. The top minimum for newsmen in
class I (large) cities was increased to $200 weekly
the first year and $207 the second (instead of
$188.75). Top minimums in class II (other
cities) were set at $194 and $202, instead of $179,
thereby narrow ing the geographic differential
by $4.75. A dditional adjustm ents were provided
for employees whose form er pay was below the
new minimums.
Subject to membership ratification, the contract
included a 371^-hour workweek for all employees
except newsmen and photographers who continue
on a 40-hour workweek. Employees discharged
because of automation were given the option of in
creased dismissal pay or $1,000 for retraining for
jobs outside the news service.
Metalworking
A 3-month strike by 12,000 members of E lectri
cal W orkers (IU E ) Local 301 against the General
Electric Co., in Schenectady, N.Y., ended early in
Jan u ary .12 The settlement eliminated the last
three transition pay cuts for incentive workers
which had been agreed upon in 1964 as part, of
the “Make Schenectady Competitive” (MS'C) pro
gram .13 The new contract provided th a t lan
guage in the MSC agreement relating to incentive
work was not to apply to daywork operations.
O ther provisions included a review of hourly job
evaluations, with “red circle” rates for long-serv
ice employees, and “reasonable payments” for time
spent, by union representatives discussing the re
views with management.
On Jan u ary 3, J. I. Case Co., and the Automo
bile W orkers announced agreement on a 3-year
master contract covering 7,000 workers a t six
plants in the mid-W est and one in C alifornia.11
Previously, bargaining had been on an individual
plant basis. The contract provided wage increases
MONTHLY LABOR REVIEW, MARCH 1967
62
ranging from 9 to 22 cents an hour each year.
Q uarterly escalator reviews were established, pro
viding a 1-cent adjustm ent for each 0.4-point
change in the C P I—w ith the stipulation th at the
first 4 cents in adjustm ents due under the form ula
be applied toward the cost of supplem entary bene
fits. A company fund of $130,000 was set up to
eliminate inequities; Christm as and New Y ears
Eve were added as eight and ninth paid holidays;
and, effective the second year, 5 days of annual
paid “casual” leave was established.
An improved pension plan provided $6 a month
for each year of credited service. E arly retire
ment at full pension rates at age 62 was included,
as was a survivorship option and vesting after 10
years of service. Other terms included a reduc
tion in employee contributions to finance the cost
of group insurance; $4,500 (instead of $4,000) life
insurance; and $55 to $75 a week sickness and acci
dent benefits (depending on the wage bracket) for
52 weeks (from a flat $50 a week for 26 weeks).
Transition and bridge benefits sim ilar to those
in the 1964 automobile settlements were included.
“Transition benefits” provide $100 a month for
24 months to the widow under age 50 or other eli
gible dependents of employees dying before age
60 who were covered by life insurance. I f the
widow is age 50 or above, “bridge benefits” pro
vide $100 a month until rem arriage or age 62.
Some 3,500 production workers had approved
the company’s offer on December 24, but settlement
was delayed when some 300 skilled tradesmen re
jected it, exercising their newly won veto power
over agreements.15 The skilled group was con
cerned over several items including binding lan
guage regarding the subcontracting of work.
The company agreed to set up a subcontracting
committee and make other improvements, and
the offer was accepted.
Sunbeam Corp., (appliances) and the M achin
ists announced agreement on January 11, on a 3year contract for 3,800 workers in the Chicago
area. The settlement provided an immediate
wage increase ranging from 4 to 5 percent and
total increases of 10 or 11 percent over the con
tract term. In addition, there are provisions for
increases in the second and th ird years to offset a
rise in the consumer prices. O ther terms included
eighth and ninth paid holidays, an improved vaca
https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
tion schedule, increased pension benefits, and im
proved group insurance.
W age increases totaling 21 cents an hour were
agreed to by Sun Shipbuilding and Drydock Co.,
of Chester, Pa., and the Boilermakers in a 3-year
agreement ratified Ja n u ary 8. Previously the
rate for first-class mechanics was $3.28 an hour.
O ther provisions for the 4,000 employees included
establishment of a pension plan and improved in
surance.
Trade
F irst National Stores, Inc., and the M eat Cut
ters signed a 1-year contract covering some 7,000
employees in Maine, Massachusetts, New H am p
shire, and Connecticut. The agreement gave meat
and grocery departm ent managers and other classi
fied workers $5-a-week wage increases and other
full-tim e employees $4. Part-tim e employees
w ith less than 3 years of service received 7 y2 cents
more an hour, while those with 3 or more years of
service received 10 cents. A m ajor medical pro
vision was added to the health and welfare plan.
Negotiations by Local 328 of the Meat Cutters,
located in Providence, R.I., continued with F irst
National Stores, Inc., and Stop and Shop, Inc.
Form erly, the local had bargained together with
other New E ngland locals.
An estimated 6,000 employees of D ayton Co.,
departm ent stores located in Minneapolis, Roches
ter, St. Paul, and Southdale, Minn, received in
creased employee benefits as a result of recent
company action. A liberalized hospital-medical
plan increased the daily hospital room allowance
from $12 to $20 for employees and their depend
ents. A new sick leave plan related benefits to
length of service w ith employees receiving twothirds of th eir weekly pay up to specified
maxi mums.
Beginning in 1967, all employees with at least 6
months of service were to receive a “personal” paid
holiday in addition to the existing 6 paid holidays.
A new retirem ent plan insured employees retiring
after 30 years of service an income of at least $60
a month. The company was also to establish a
savings plan whereby an employee could deposit
from 2-5 percent of his base pay up to $1,000 a
15See
M o n th ly L a b o r R e v ie w , July 1966, pp. 733-35.
DEVELOPMENTS IN INDUSTRIAL RELATIONS
year w ith the company m atching h alf th at con
tribution.
A novel no strike, no lockout clause was included
in agreements for waitresses and kitchen employees
of two of the largest New York City area restau
rant chains.16 Both contracts were formally
signed in Jan u ary for 4,500 members represented
by Local 11 of the Hotel and R estaurant E m
ployees. They stipulated th a t the union “volun
tarily declares its opposition to the use of the
strike, under any circumstances, either as an instru
ment in the settlement of disputes arising out of
opposing interpretations of the existing contract,
or after the term ination of this agreement, as an
instrum ent to promote its program .” In return,
the companies agreed not to lock out employees
or engage in antiunion activities. Bargaining is
to begin 3 months before the contract expires, with
automatic extension and binding arbitration if
agreement is not reached by the expiration date.
Economic provisions of the 3-year Schrafft
agreement included wage increases of $2 a week for
tipped workers and $3 a week for nontipped work
ers each year. (W aitresses previously earned $36
a week plus tips while nontip employees’ salaries
ranged from $55 to $100.) O ther terms included
a $7-a-week employer contribution to the union’s
pension and welfare funds, improved vacations,
and other benefits.
Construction
In the New York City construction industry, a
164-day strike by 4,000 members of Local 2 of the
Plumbers and Pipe F itters ended on January 5
after P eter Schoemann, president of the inter
national union, intervened in the negotiations.
Under a “memorandum of understanding” with
two employer groups, the Association of C ontract
ing Plumbers and the M etropolitan M aster
Plumbers, Inc., workers went back to their jobs
10Bickford’s Restaurants, operated by Bickford, Inc., and
Schrafft’s Restaurants operated by the Frank G. Shattuck, Co.
17See pp. I l l and IV of th is issue.
https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
63
while the bargaining committee continued discus
sions on unresolved issues. The strike had re
portedly slowed or halted work by other trades
men on projects, worth about $550 million.
Dealing with 2 of the 4 main issues, the memo
randum established an office to locate jobs for outof-work plumbers and established procedures for
investigating contract violations involving stew
ards. O ther issues to be resolved by the commit
tee were union demands for both 7 hours of pay
for 6 hours of work and selection of some new
hires by means of a union hiring hall. U nder the
previous agreement, the contractors did all the
hiring. The memorandum also provided a 15cent-an-hour wage increase retroactive to June 30,
1966, and a 20-cent wage-benefit package increase
effective Jan u ary 5,1967.
Other Developments
As a result of m erger of the independent Mine,
Mill, and Smelter W orkers and the Steelworkers,17
about 50,000 mine and smelter workers in the nonferrous metal industries will be able to bargain as
a unit; contracts w ith m ajor producers covering a
m ajority of these workers expire in June 1967.
The merger was ratified by the Mine, Mill conven
tion in Jan u ary 1967. Affiliation is scheduled to
be completed by June 30, when tem porary charters
issued by the Steelworkers to 65 Mine, Mill locals
on February 1,1967, were to become final. Presi
dent A lbert C. Skinner and two other top officers
of the Mine, Mill union were slated to become
international representatives of the Steelworkers
and other staff members of the dissolved union
were to join the Steelworkers’ staff.
W est V irginia’s first minimum wage law set a
$1 an hour minimum effective Jan u ary 1. An
estimated 25,000 to 40,000 employees were affected.
The law applies to employers of six persons or
more, but excludes specific categories of workers,
and individuals subject to Federal minimum wage
legislation. In addition to its minimum wage pro
visions, the law generally calls for time and onehalf pay for work in excess of 48 hours per week.
Communications
E ditor ’s N ote .— The
Monthly Labor Review is always eager to publish com
munications from its readers. Letters should be held to 500 words. The
Revieio reserves the right to choose the comments for publication and to
make minor editorial changes to clarify meaning and to reduce length
to the prescribed limits.
The letters below are inspired by the article in the February issue, by
Professors Cain, Hansen, and Weisbrod , entitled “Occupational Classifi
cation: A n Economic Approach .”
The Heart of the System
O c c u p a t io n s have been defined and classified in one
manner or another for over 100 years, in both estab
lishment and household statistics, but there has been
considerable dissatisfaction with existing systems. The
new edition of the D i c t i o n a r y o f O c c u p a t i o n a l T i t l e s is
the major example of recent efforts. Less well known
is the work in progress in the Bureau of Labor Statistics
on the development of an industry-occupational table for
the entire economy, which brings together occupational
data from a wide variety of sources. The occupational
classification used is essentially that of the Census.
The Bureau of Labor Statistics is also studying occupa
tional employment which will utilize occupational defini
tions drawn in large part from the DOT. The data will
be obtained directly from employers by means of a mail
questionnaire and are expected to generate a flow of timely
information about occupations badly needed in connection
with national manpower problems. Until we have con
structed a common classification system for statistical
purposes, however, it will be difficult to aggregate these
figures to levels comparable to those presented in current
labor force statistics.
Placing the problems into a theoretical framework,
such as Cain, Hansen, and Weisbrod have done from the
viewpoint of the economist, and as Hodge and Siegel1 have
done from the sociological viewpoint, is necessary if the
statistical applications are to be wisely conceived and ex
ecuted. It is no doubt true that the occupation classifiers
have not only been vague about their principles of clas
sification but also have allowed them to vary as they
moved across the wide spectrum of jobs, to the consterna
tion of users of the data. It has not yet been established,
1Robert W. Hodge and Paul M. Siegel, The C la ssifica tio n of
O ccu p a tio n s: S o m e P ro b le m s o f S o c io lo g ic a l I n te r p r e ta tio n , pre
pared for delivery at the annual meeting of the American Sta
tistical Association, Los Angeles, Calif., August 1966.
64
https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
however, that a single system will suffice for all pur
poses. It may be necessary, in order to get some immedi
ate payoffs in terms of usable data, to make rather heroic
compromises.
The overall problem may be thought of as a system in
which the development of the means of production is ac
companied by the development of the manpower needed
(a) to build the necessary capacity and (b) to operate it.
Occupations are the result of the division of labor to do
this job efficiently, or—as the article puts it—“employers
choose among the alternative types of labor that are
capable of producing given goods and services.” As econ
omists, they think in terms of factor prices and factor
substitution possibilities.
The comment is made that discussions of “needs” and
“requirements” for workers of various skills are likely
to be deficient because they imply that substitutions among
types of labor and between labor and capital cannot be
made. Most serious studies do, I believe, take substitut
ability into account—not only at earlier stages in the pro
jection but especially at later stages if an initial projection
of requirements and supply shows the likelihood of a
shortage.
In using the analogy to commodities one must bear in
mind that “within-class” and “between-class” are two
quite different things. Most commodity standardization
is of the “within-class” variety.
“Work performed” or “kind of work done” would seem
to be a desirable central principle for a classification sys
tem. It may be necessary to bring related elements into
the definition of work performed, such as normal prerequi
sites for its performance. Ability to perform the work
required in the work situation in which it must be per
formed then becomes the heart of the evaluation of labor
supply.
— R o b e r t B. S t e f f e s
Division of Occupational Employment Statistics
Bureau of Labor Statistics
AN ADDITION TO THE CRITERIA
65
An Addition to the Criteria
M e s s e s . C a i n , H a n s e n , a n d W eisbrod concern themselves
with the needs of economists for a system of occupational
classification. Most of their views, however, appear to
have more general application. Needs include not only
job-skill and worker-skill categories, but also sets of data
(numbers of jobs and workers) relevant to those cate
gories. Although the D i c t i o n a r y o f O c c u p a t i o n a l T i t l e s
is the most comprehensive document to provide and de
scribe such categories, available quantitative data have
not usually been expressed in terms of these same cate
gories. On the other hand, a wealth of data is expressed
in terms of Census classifications, which lack the authors’
requirement for job-skill and worker-skill descriptions.
The first step to meet this need is the development of the
convertibility list between the DOT and Census systems
now jointly undertaken by the U.S. Employment Service
and the Bureau of the Census. The Interagency Com
mittee on Occupational Classification of the U.S. Bureau
of the Budget proposes to go even further toward meeting
this requirement of a Standard Occupational Classifica
tion System.
The authors set forth a list of attributes of an ideal
classification system. Most of these are objectives of the
planned Classification, and many are already incorporated
in the third edition of the DOT. The Occupational Group
Arrangement of the DOT provides the required homo
geneous classes of jobs, and the Worker Traits Arrange
ment provides the means of identifying homogeneous
classes of workers. The level of detail of classification
desired by the authors is not met by some parts of the
DOT system because its structure has been influenced by
numbers of workers in certain classifications. For exam
ple, S a l e s m e n , T r u c k D r i v e r s , and W e l d e r s are classified in
greater detail than F a c u l t y M e m b e r s , C o lle g e o r U n i v e r
s i t y because of the relative number of applications in
volved. However, in the development of the Standard
Occupational Classification, the Interagency Committee
plans to give minimum consideration to the numbers of
workers in occupations, so that the level of detail of the
system will best meet the variety of needs of its users.
The authors applaud the attempts at a two-way codifi
cation of occupational categories, one job-oriented and one
worker-oriented, which appear in the third edition of the
DOT. It also comes much closer to meeting the desire
for a classification system adaptable to changes that
occur over time than did the old DOT structure.
A need to measure and evaluate labor-resource flexi
bility, the essential theme of the paper, establishes a re
quirement for standardizing the classification of both
occupations and job-worker data in the same system, and
the authors have made an interesting and significant
contribution to the criteria that must be considered.
— A . B. E ckersc In
U.S. Employment Service
The meaning of work has changed in our times. Most of us are no longer
bound, as our forefathers were, to long, hard labor on the land and in the mill.
B ut we are bound to our work in other ways—what a man is has become closely
involved with what he does, both in his own mind and in the eyes of others.
And this identity through work keeps changing as men derive more status
and have a sense of achievement and satisfaction in their daily occupational
activities.
https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
—Marc A. Fried, “Is Work a Career?”
September-October 1966.
T r a n s -A c tio n ,
Book Reviews
and Notes
Cross-fire on Poverty
Growth and Welfare in the American Past. By
Douglass C. North. Englewood Cliffs, N .J.,
Prentice-H all, Inc., 1966. 192 pp., bibliog
raphy. $5.95.
Economic Progress and Social Welfare. E dited
by Leonard H. Goodman, New York, Colum
bia U niversity Press, 1966. 233 pp. $5.
Do we want economic grow th or social welfare?
Iii Mr. Goodman’s words, “The ‘well-being of the
population’ differs little from the ‘social welfare of
the population.’ ” In a directly opposed view,
North implies th at social welfare depends on
growth. There’s evidence in the Goodman volume
t hat the social welfarists have fallen into their own
statistical trap. Their official statistics exclude
all but activities concerning the economic and so
cial well-being of people. F o r them, social wel
fare increases from increases in official welfare
payments (activities). F o r N orth, welfare in
creases from adding to income faster than to popu
lation: “The consequences of a compounded real
per capita growth rate of 1.6 percent per year
dw arf all other welfare effects in our history (as
suming no change in income distribution).”
H ere’s a paradox : I f people leave welfare rolls,
ceteris paribus, to go to jobs increasing the national
income, N orth’s welfare would rise, but social wel
fare would decline. N orth has produced a highly
im portant new economic history. The reason for
its significance lies in its methodology. He boldly
appl ies modern statistical inference to test hypoth
eses against a “reasonable” alternative by looking
at the extensive record. He finds that “R edistrib
uting income or elim inating depressions would
result in less gain to the poor or the whole society
than they would derive from an even relatively
short period of economic grow th.”
W as the New Deal a social revolution? Not
from the record, answers N orth; employment was
no fuller, growth no faster, and income no less
66
https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
unequally distributed—reasonable hypotheses to
test the question.
N orth concludes: “Make mine G row th.” B ut
the second volume throughout implies: “Make
mine Social W elfare.” S tartin g strong with the
fast-moving, big-business welfare dollar, its Jo y
cean introspective monologue is, “Keep those wel
fare dollars rolling.” Indeed, Ellen W inston
boasts “social welfare is ‘big business’. The wel
fare dollar is the fastest moving dollar in the
community.”
In a way, as Goodman reports it, the 1966 N a
tional Conference on Social W elfare seems, in the
flush of victory, beset by doubts—w hat to do with
Paradise Found?
Some skepticism creeps in. Lam pman, b ril
liantly negotiating the transfer-paym ent maze,
shows th at the pretransfer poor got only $30 billion
of 1964’s estimated $97 billion. Rein and M iller
look some g ift horses in the mouth, like the
Russell Sage studies which show social casework
makes no appreciable difference in the behavior
of client families. C arter and H ansen use opera
tions research to ask social workers the embar
rassing question: W hat are you try in g to do ?
Schottland discusses the slips betw ixt the cup
of welfare legislation and the lip of budget deci
sions. H e concludes th at if political action is
good for social workers, influencing budgets is
better.
Robert N athan conducts his usual whirlwind
tour through “social planning for economic abun
dance,” at no loss for words. And P aul Jacobs
tugs at the heartstrings of welfare adm inistrators
by describing poverty in the flesh.
The star essay for scope and insight, ranking
with Lam pm an’s virtuosity, is a searching study
by Sheldon and Moore on m easuring social
change—not to be missed, but defying summary.
In any event, the whole volume gives intim ate in
sights into the social welfare odyssey, from postu
late to passion to Parkinson.
Yet the crossfire remains. There is no confron
tation between those who seek to advance social
welfare by increasing expenditures for it and those
who would rely on economic growth for the same
ends. Perhaps the boldest suggestion is ReinM iller’s—to get out from behind professionalism’s
shield and let the issue be joined.
— C arl H. M adden
Chief Economist
Chamber of Commerce of the United States
BOOK REVIEWS AND NOTES
Local Color
The Job Hunt. By H arold L. Sheppard and A.
Harvey Belitsky. Baltimore, Johns Hopkins
Press, 1966. 270 pp. $7.95.
The study involves an analysis of a local economy
after interviews with 455 blue-collar workers and
77 white-collar workers, separated from their jobs
in Erie, Pa. They had registered w ith the local
public employment office during the 15-month pe
riod ending M arch 31, 1964. The blue-collar
sample represented about 5 percent of the regis
tered total.
Perhaps the best critique of this study is that
of the authors in their In tro d u ctio n :
On the research side, we are convinced that our re
sults in the Erie study warrant an expanded and
systematic “curiosity” about the general applicability
of our research techniques and their results among
other samples of workers in other types of local econ
omies. The social-psychological side of our research
is a unique part of this study. It should be evaluated
primarily in terms of its e x p l o r a t o r y nature—as a
beginning, subject to qualifications and further re
finement, that may serve as a springboard for new re
search and demonstration on the role of socialpsychological factors in the behavior of unemployed
workers.
E rie County is a metalworking center; its m anu
facturing industries reached their employment
peak in 1953 and a decade later still accounted for
one-half the area’s nonfarm wage and salary jobs.
Findings for the county should be assessed in the
light of reported causes of its “secular stagnation”
which include—according to prom inent indus
trial, financial, and community leaders—the
follow ing:
Internal strife within old family-owned companies,
the purchase and consolidation of local companies
with companies outside Erie, which has resulted in
the closing of Erie plants, opposition by established
Erie companies to bringing in new firms which might
be competition for labor or markets ; labor-manage
ment relations which have not always been of the
best; action by State and local governments, which
have been interpreted as unfriendly to new industry:
and a lack of positive concern about making Erie a
good place in which to live and work.
If this statement accurately describes the nature
of the county’s employment problems, it should be
hoped th a t they are not representative of the N a
tion as a whole or even of the employment problems
of most declining areas. Recognizing limitations
https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
67
of their data, the authors nevertheless do generalize
and offer national program recommendations and
recommendations for fu rth er research. The latter
w arrant special attention.
— W illiam P apier
Director of Research and Statistics
Ohio Bureau of Unemployment Compensation
Flight Patterns
Airline Industrial Relations: Pilots and Flight
Engineers. By John M. Baitsell. Boston,
H arvard University, Division of Research,
Graduate School of Business A dm inistration,
1966. 398 pp. $7.50.
Any attem pt to examine an industry’s indus
trial relations system must cope with formidable
problems of coverage. Areas which need to be
discussed are the sources of work practices, the
levels and methods of wage compensation, the ex
tent, nature, and history of collective bargaining,
technological developments, accidental turns of
personal leadership, and the play of product and
m arket forces. In a regulated industry—and few
are as regulated as the airlines—government ac
tion is widely pervasive and must be credited with
im portant and sometimes independent inffuence.
Professor Baitsell has made a valiant effort to
analyze an entire industry by focusing upon a lim
ited number of issues. Most of the discussion re
fers to the A ir Line Pilots Association, with
briefer reference to the F lig h t Engineers Asso
ciation. Much space is devoted to wage compen
sation, pilot pensions, and work assignments,
with emphasis on the historical development of
each. The inform ation is, on the whole, soundly
handled and is supplemented by appropriate ref
erence to the special characteristics of the sched
uled airline industry.
To collect in one place, as is done here, so much
m aterial essential to the understanding of vexa
tious issues, is a valuable and useful contribution.
However, the merits of this work are reduced by a
naïveté in analysis which at times is self-contra
dictory.
The running thesis and m ajor organizing theme
is the excessive power of the A ir Line Pilots, and
a concern th at employers “have given away too
much” in noneconomic areas. W hile practically
no standards are set up to measure managerial
68
MONTHLY LABOR REVIEW, MARCH 1967
concessions, there is an elaborate evaluation of the
nature and basis of union power. Seven pages
are given to the influence of former pilots as mem
bers of carrier bargaining teams (which the author
regards as a boost to union power). Although
pilots would never engage in slowdowns accord
ing to Baitsell, the cost of deliberately lengthening
flights as an economic weapon “cannot be dis
missed.” But the author emphasizes that the key
to the carriers’ weakness lies in their decision to
abstain from industrywide bargaining and the con
sequent union whipsawing.
It would appear that inadequate recognition is
given to employer values which are served by in
dividual bargaining. Professor Baitsell, in his
discussion of work assignment disputes, attacks
the usefulness of a presidential commission on
the grounds that each carrier is unique and must
find its own “tailor-made” solution. However,
this view is not fully incorporated in his formal
analysis which also neglects the implications and
employer advantages which are to be found in
such events as the pilot schism on American Air
lines. While acknowledging the fact that indus
trywide negotiations would invite more govern
ment intervention and might contribute to a pos
sible breakdown of bargaining, the author stops
short of understanding that this would end tradi
tional bargaining entirely. After all, individual
bargaining has not interfered with the rapid
growth and extraordinary profits enjoyed by the
industry in recent years.
— P h il ip R oss
School of Business Administration
University of Pittsburgh
Cost of Culture
Performing A rts: The Economic Dilemma. By
W illiam J . Baumol and W illiam G. Bowen.
New York, Twentieth Century Fund, 1966.
582 pp.
$7.50.
Professors Baumol and Bowen have contributed
a major addition to the literature concerning both
the performing arts in the United States and the
economics of nonprofit institutions. Specifically,
they present a scholarly, systematic, and rigorous
exposition of the financial problems facing sym
phony orchestras, opera companies, dance groups
and the theatre.
https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
The book is organized into three parts. The
first section describes the current state of econom
ics in the perform ing a r ts ; here, the authors neatly
demolish the popularly held concept th at the
United States is undergoing a “culture boom,”
with regard to the higher perform ing arts.
Professors Baumol and Bowen also discovered
th at the perform ing arts were playing to a pre
dom inantly young, white-collar professional and
m anagerial assemblage, one th a t is “exceedingly”
well-educated and economically well-off. Bluecollar workers accounted for only 2 to 3 percent
of the audience. They estimated th a t the audience
going to one or more perform ing arts program s
consisted, in total, of no more than 5 million in
dividuals. Considering the posture of m any arts
organizations (excepting the commercial the
a tre )—th a t they are community service organiza
tions seeking to perform before the widest audi
ence—they apparently have failed to achieve a
basic goal. I t becomes almost imperative, as a
result, for arts groups to reevaluate th eir appeal
to the community. They do not necessarily have
to play before a mass audience, but 5 million in
dividuals indeed makes the perform ing arts too
much of a m inority attraction.
In examining compensation, the authors con
clude th a t “society has not been overly generous”
to the perform ing artist. But, the authors point
out, arts organizations are unable to pay better.
In their second section, they indicate why: (1)
perform ing arts technology is stable and cannot
keep pace with rising costs; and (2) the sale of
tickets does not return sufficient revenue to cover
disbursements. The gap between revenue and
costs is growing and will continue to grow. Con
sequently, most arts organizations must depend on
contributions to keep alive. Baumol and Bowen’s
third and final section, therefore, is devoted to
sources and levels of contributed income.
Again their conclusions about individual, corpo
rate, foundation, and government giving are not
optim istic: Inexorably, they lead us to the conclu
sion that the survival of perform ing arts requires
larger government expenditures than have thus far
been given.
The publication of this study in late 1966 was
timely. I t followed a series of collective bargain
ing disputes which underscored basic economic d if
ficulties. Ballet companies in national negotia-
BOOK REVIEWS AND NOTES
tions, the M etropolitan and New York City Cen
ter operas, and the Los Angeles, Philadelphia, and
Indianapolis symphony orchestras all experienced
strikes. The results of bargaining in 1966, at least
for symphony orchestras, exceeded Baumol and
Bowen’s projection of the annual rate of increase
in the compensation component of costs. Thus,
the urgency of the economic pressures which they
described has increased even further.
B ut 1966 was also a year in which the Ford
Foundation contributed $80.2 million in endow
ment and development funds to symphony or
chestras, in which the A rts and Hum anities F oun
dation exhibited vigor and originality in allocating
Federal funds, in which perform ing arts organi
zations and boards of education experimented with
joint ventures, encouraged by the Elem entary and
Secondary Education Act of 1965, and in which
State and municipal support to the arts increased.
Thus, there was also some reason for optimism.
The authors support their findings with a
wealth of inform ation, including a statistical ap
pendix of more than 100 pages. Theirs is the kind
of data from which reasonable policy decisions may
flow—especially concerning the support role of
Federal and subordinate government bodies.
One m ight expect th a t an economics text involv
ing the perform ing arts m ight be w ritten with
style; in addition, this is a readable, well-organized
exposition of significant findings.
— L eon E. L u n d e n
Division of Industrial and Labor Relations
Bureau of Labor Statistics
Summaries of Recent Books
Planning for a Nation of Cities. E dited by Sam
Bass W arner, J r. Cambridge, Mass., The
M .I.T. Press, 1966. 310 pp. $2.95 (paper
back) .
Challenge to the Cities: A n Approach to a Theory
of Urban Leadership. By H enry W. Maier.
New York, Random House, Inc., 1966. 210
pp. $2.50 (paperback).
Urbanization in Newly Developing Countries.
By Gerald Breese. Englewood Cliffs, N.J.,
Prentice-H all, Inc., 1966. 151 pp. $4.95
(cloth) ; $2.50 (paperback).
https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
69
The “gap between what a thoughtful citizen is
entitled to expect from urban planning and public
policy, and the contemporary performance of
American cities is the subject of this book,” says
Professor W arner about his compilation on city
planning. The project of the book originated with
the urban faculty of the W ashington University
in St. Louis, Mo., as the university’s contribution
to the celebration of the city’s bicentennial in 1964.
The threads of common concern th a t run
through the 16 essays originate in three funda
mental problems to which city planners should
provide optimum solutions. These a r e : The kinds
of jobs cities should be able to offer; the nature of
“physical settings” they should possess; and the
public services (prim arily as regards welfare and
education) they should be able to provide. The
question of public policy—particularly the role of
Federal Government—in urban planning is p ara
mount in these considerations, and is given prom i
nence in the book. The first p a rt is entitled “The
Federal Responsibility.”
The rem aining three parts of the book are:
“W ork and the Quality of U rban Life,” “Respon
sive Physical Planning,” and “Responsive U rban
Services.”
The volume by Mr. M aier focuses on one of the
vital urban problems—how to run a large city
efficiently. The author is the present m ayor of
Milwaukee, Wis., and his story relates how he de
veloped a form ula for successful “creative . . .
institutional leadership” and applied it to his
burdensome office.
The mayor reduced his form ula to an alpha
betical expression—D -S T E P P , each of the initials
standing for a different conceptual “ingredient”
th at is fully developed in a separate chapter, or
chapters, of the book. Thus, D stands for decision
making, S—for strategy, T —for tactics, E —for
enrollment (of people in support of a given p roj
ect), P —for power (personal and official of the
leader), and the other P —for philosophy, which
seems to be th a t a mayor does his job best if he
succeeds in enlisting active cooperation of those
he leads.
Gerald Breese’s work deals with urbanization
in certain foreign lands, which usually takes place
more randomly than not. The book is one of the
latest volumes of Princeton U niversity’s “Mod
ernization of Traditional Societies” series. In
70
this scholarly study, Dr. Breese undertakes to cope
not only with the “how” but also with the “why”
and the extent, of rapid proliferation and growth
of cities in the newly developing countries (other
than the “A nglo-European” countries). He ana
lyzes social and economic as well as cultural and
environmental inducements in this process, de
scribes the inhabitants of the cities and how they
found themselves there, and touches upon “the
shape of things to come”—the possible and fore
seeable consequences of this rapid urbanization.
The author admits th a t the subject is too vast
for adequate treatm ent in a slender volume like
his, and says his book is intended as an “intro
ductory discussion”—an invitation to further
exploration.
Management Preparation for Collective Bargain
ing. By Meyer S. Ryder, Charles M. Rehmus,
Sanford Cohen. Homewood, 111., Dow JonesIrw in, Inc., 1966. 151 pp. $9.95.
Based almost exclusively on personal interviews
with about 100 representatives of 40 companies and
employer bargaining associations, this study con
tains a methodical treatm ent of the two broad
phases of the preparation process—collection and
evaluation of the data necessary for bargaining,
and decisionmaking regarding the goals and ne
gotiation tactics. The authors describe the two
functions in terms of tim ing, the locus and degree
of responsibility, and the extent of participation
by the corporate departm ents concerned.
Perhaps the least expected finding of the study
was th a t it is “illusory” to assume th a t the usually
complex prebargaining activity produces a “con
sensus ‘management’ position.” “Management is
multifaced and multivoiced,” say the authors, “and
its position is simply the one strongly defended at
any given point of tim e.”
MONTHLY LABOR REVIEW, MARCH 1967
ect was undertaken at the Aluminum Co. of Cana
da, and was aimed at providing the handicapped
worker with a choice of jobs. The authors con
tend th a t the offering of choice in times of personal
crisis gives the worker a feeling of competence and
self-respect. F urther, they m aintain that, used
on a wider scale, the choice concept could be a
worthwhile p a rt of a social program.
Economic Progress and Problems of Labor. By
Frederick Baerwald. Scranton, Pa., In tern a
tional Textbook Company, 1967. 353 pp.
$7.75.
Balancing a description of institutional struc
tures w ith economic analysis, Professor Baerwald
has w ritten a text which emphasizes the progress
of American workers. B ut he is also aware of a
current problem—the quest for security. The au
thor m aintains th at most of our population is de
pendent upon its daily work both for current in
come and for credits toward unemployment insur
ance pensions, sick leave, and social security. In
this context, he is concerned w ith the effects on
employment levels of both the shifting age struc
ture of the population and technological change.
He advocates continued research to ascertain th at
we have adequate social insurance coverage.
One of the first text books to analyze Medicare,
it also covers other forms of social insurance, col
lective bargaining, labor force development, em
ployment theories and goals, wage determination,
and a brief history of organized labor.
Other Recent Publications
Education and Training
E d u c a tio n a l I n s titu tio n s in th e P r o c e s s o f E c o n o m ic a n d
Choice in Human Affairs: A n Application to A g
ing —Accident—Illness Problems. By Elm er
Luchterhand and Daniel Sydiaha.
New
Haven, Conn., College and University Press
Services, Inc., 1966. 176 pp., bibliography.
$5 (cloth) ; $1.95 (paperback).
The “m utual system of placement” (M SP) p ro j
ect was begun about 12 years ago by Dr. L uchter
hand. The purpose was to develop a method of
placing blue-collar workers in new jobs after hav
ing lost p art of their physical capacity. The proj -
https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
D e v e l o p m e n t . By Joseph R. Gusfield.
Champaign, 111., University of Illinois, Institute of
Labor and Industrial Relations, 1966. 18 pp. (Re
print Series, 166 ; from Journal of Asian and African
Studies, Vol. 1, No. 2.)
N a tio n a l
I n c r e a s in g t h e P r o d u c t i v i t y o f C o l l e g i a t e S c h o o ls o f B u s i
St. Louis, Mo., American Association of Col
legiate Schools of Business, 1966. I l l pp. $1.75.
n ess.
E d u c a tio n a l A tta in m e n t o f th e C a n a d ia n P o p u la tio n a n d
By Frank J. Whittingham.
Ottawa, Dominion Bureau of Statistics, 1966. 40 pp.
(Special Labor Force Studies, 1.) 75 cents.
L a b o r F o r c e : 1 9 6 0 -1 9 6 5 .
BOOK REVIEWS AND NOTES
71
to R e d u c e T r a i n i n g C o s ts . By O. 0. Lott.
Training and Development Journal, American
Society for Training and Development. Madison, Wis.,
January 1967, pp. 38-41. $1.75.)
E v a lu a tin g
a n d t h e U n io n s a t T V A . By
Arthur Thompson and Irwin Weinstock. ( I n Per
sonnel Journal, Swarthmore, Pa., January 1967, pp.
14-21. 75 cents.)
W h ite -C o lla r E m p lo y e e s
(In
A S tu d y o f S ta n d a r d s f o r A p p r e n tic e s in th e E le c tr ic a l
T h e D e v e lo p m e n t a n d E n f o r c e m e n t o f th e C o lle c tiv e A g r e e
By Cecile J. Newburg. Wash
ington, U.S. Department of Labor. Bureau of Appren
tice and Training, 1966. 22 pp.
[ i n C a n a d a ]. By C. II. Curtis. Kingston,
Ontario, Queen’s University, Industrial Relations Cen
ter, 1966. 115 pp., bibliography. $6.50.
C o n tr a c tin g I n d u s tr y .
m ent
to A d v e r t i s e .
By S. Norman
Feingold. Cambridge, Mass., Bellman Publishing Co.,
1966. 37 pp., bibliography. $2.25.
T h e D u t y o f F a i r R e p r e s e n t a t i o n —R e v i s i t e d .
[ A S y m p o s i u m ].
Employment Service Review, U.S. Department of
Labor, Bureau of Employment Security, Washington.
December 1966, pp. 1-8, 21-26, et seq. 40 cents,
Superintendent of Documents, Washington.)
T h e C a d illa c D o c tr in e .
T h e J o b F in d e r : I t P a y s
C o u n s e lin g : B r id g e to J o b O p p o r tu n ity
By Wil
liam C. Owen. ( I n Labor Law Journal, Chicago,
December 1966, pp. 749-762. $1.35.)
By James R. Cox. ( I n Labor
Law Journal, Chicago, December 1966, pp. 707-711.
$1.35.)
(In
By Edward D. Onanian. Washington, U.S. Department of Labor,
Bureau of Labor Statistics, 1966. 45 pp. (Bulletin
1525.) 35 cents, Superintendent of Documents,
Washington.
A n a ly s is o f W o r k S to p p a g e s , 1965.
By Her
New York, Mac
V o c a t i o n a l G u id a n c e a n d C a r e e r D e v e l o p m e n t .
man J. Peters and James C. Hansen.
millan Co., 1966. 466 pp.
T e c h n iq u e s o f G u i d a n c e : A n A p p r o a c h t o P u p i l A n a l y s i s .
By Bernard
L. Sanioff. ( I n Labor Law Journal. Chicago, No
vember 1966. pp. 643-663. $1.35.)
T a ft- H a r tle y J o b D is c r im in a tio n V ic to r ie s .
By Robert L. Gibson and Robert E. Higgins. Chi
cago, Science Research Associates, Inc., 1966. 264 pp.
A r b itr a tio n o f N e w
Employee Benefits
C o n tr a c t
W a g e D is p u te s : S o m e R e
By Richard Ulric Miller. ( I n Indus
trial and Labor Relations Review, Ithaca, N.Y.,
January 1967, pp. 250-264. $1.75.)
cen t T ren d s.
D ig e s t o f 100 S e le c te d H e a lth a n d I n s u r a n c e P la n s U n
d e r C o l l e c t i v e B a r g a i n i n g , E a r l y 1 9 6 6 . By Robert
C. Joiner. Washington, U.S. Department of Labor,
Bureau of Labor Statistics, 1966. 152 pp. (Bulletin
1502.) $1, Superintendent of Documents, Washing
ton.
T h e M in e W o r k e r s ' W e l f a r e a n d R e t i r e m e n t F u n d : F i f
Y e a r s ' E x p e r ie n c e .
By Robert J. Myers. ( I n
Industrial and Labor Relations Review, Ithaca, N.Y.,
January 1967, pp. 265-274. $1.75.)
te e n
P o l i c y a n d P r i v a t e P e n s io n P la n s .
By Edwin
Shields Hewitt. ( I n Personnel Administration,
Washington, November-December 1966, pp. 23-30.
$1.25.)
P u b lic
Industrial Relations
Chicago, Commerce
376 pp. $5.
Labor Force
The
E m p l o y m e n t o f R e t i r e d M i l i t a r y P e r s o n n e l . By
Laure M. Sharp and Albert D. Biderman (for Office
of Manpower Policy, Evaluation, and Research of the
U.S. Department of Labor.) Washington, Bureau of
Social Science Research, Inc., 1966. xvi, 269 pp.
Sum m er
E m p lo y m e n t
D ir e c to r y
S u m m er J o b s fo r 1967.
Directory Service, 1966.
of
th e
U n ite d
S ta te s :
Cincinnati, Ohio, National
176 pp. $4.
M a r r i e d W o m e n in t h e L a b o r F o r c e — A n E c o n o m i c A n a l
y s is.
By Glen G. Cain. Chicago, University of
Chicago, Economic Research Center, 1966. 159 pp.
(Studies in Economics.) $6.50, University of Chicago
Press, Chicago.
1 9 6 7 G u i d e b o o k to L a b o r R e l a t i o n s .
Clearing House, Inc., 1966.
Wash
ington, Machinery and Allied Products Institute (in
cooperation with Council for Technological Advance
ment), 1966. 81 pp. (MAPI Series, 5.) $2.
T h e C a t e r p i l l a r A p p r o a c h to I n d u s t r i a l R e l a t i o n s .
Princeton,
N.J., Princeton University, Industrial Relations Sec
tion, January 1967. 4 pp. (Selected References
133.) 40 cents.
P a t t e r n s i n W o m e n ’s E m p l o y m e n t .
Ottawa,
Canada Department of Labor, Women’s Bureau, 1966.
71 pp. 35 cents, Queen’s Px-inter, Ottawa.
C h a n g in g
By Sar A. Levitan
and Garth L. Mangum. ( I n The Reporter, New York,
November 17,1966, pp. 44-46. 35 cents.)
C o m in g to G r ip s W i t h U n e m p l o y m e n t .
C o l l e c t i v e B a r g a i n i n g i n t h e P u b l i c S c h o o ls .
https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
S c ie n tific a n d M a n a g e r ia l M a n p o w e r in N u c le a r I n d u s tr y .
By James W. Kuhn. New York, Columbia University
Press, 1966. xv, 209 pp. $7.50.
72
MONTHLY LABOR REVIEW, MARCH 1967
F o r e ig n A g r ic u ltu r a l W o r k e r s a n d th e P r e v e n tio n o f A d
By Howard N. Dellon. ( I n Labor Law
Chicago, December 1966, pp. 739-748.
v e r s e E ffe c t.
Journal,
$1.35.)
By Victor H. Vroom.
Business Management, Greenwich, Conn., Novem
ber 1966, pp. 81-86. $1.)
W h a t R e a lly M o tiv a te s E m p lo y e e s ?
(In
P e r s o n n e l P a n o r a m a , 1 9 6 6 : 1, C a n a d i a n F e d e r a l D e v e l o p
F o r e ig n W o r k e r s : A P r o b le m o f S o c ia l A d a p ta tio n .
(In
OECD Observer, Organization for Economic Co
operation and Development, Paris, December 1966,
pp. 11-14. 50 cents. Distributed in United States
by OECD Publications Center, Washington.)
F arm
W orkers
in
a
S p e c ia liz e d
S ea so n a l
C rop
A rea,
By William H.
Metzler. Berkeley, University of California, Divi
sion of Agricultural Sciences, 1966. 90 pp. (Giannini
Foundation Research Report 289.)
S ta n is la u s
C o u n ty ,
C a lifo r n ia .
By
Lowell E. Callaway. ( I n Social Security Bulletin,
U.S. Department of Health, Education, and Welfare,
Social Security Administration, Washington, Septem
ber 1966, pp. 10-22. 25 cents, Superintendent of
Documents, Washington.)
I n te r in d u s tr y L a b o r M o b ility A m o n g M en , 1 9 5 7 -6 0 .
P r o j e c t i o n s — S e l e c t e d R e f e r e n c e s . Washing
ton, U.S. Department of Labor, Library, November
1966. 18 pp.
M anpow er
in
E m p lo y e r -E m p lo y e e
R e l a t i o n s h i p s . By
John J. Carson. ( I n Public Personnel Review, Chi
cago, January 1967, pp. 2-6. $2.)
m e n ts
P e rs o n n e l P a n o r a m a , 1 9 6 6 : I I , P e r s o n n e l D e v e lo p m e n ts on
t h e U .S . F e d e r a l L e v e l . By John W. Macy, Jr.
(In
Public Personnel Review, Chicago, January 1967, pp.
7-11. $2.)
A t t i t u d e t o E f f ic ie n c y i n I n d u s t r y : R e p o r t o f a W o r k i n g
P a r t y o f O ffic ia ls . London, Ministry of Labor, 1966.
35 pp. 30 cents, British Information Services, Sales
Section, New York.
H um an
R eso u rces
and
W o r ld
E c o n o m ic
D e v e lo p m e n t:
By Charles A.
Myers. ( I n International Labor Review, Geneva,
November 1966, p. 435-448. 60 cents. Distributed in
United States by Washington Branch of ILO.)
F r o n tie r s f o r R e se a r c h
a n d A c ti o n .
5 a n O u t m o d e d O ffice S c h e d u l e ? By Lewis E.
Lachter.
( I n Administrative Management, New
York, December 1966, pp. 20, 24-25. 60 cents.)
I s 9 to
T h e S e le c tiv e E m p lo y m e n t T a x a n d
th e L a b o r M a r k e t.
By J. P. Hutton and K. Hartley. ( I n British Journal
of Industrial Relations, London School of Economics
and Political Science, London, November 1966, pp.
289-303. $2.80.)
Prices and Consumption Economics
C o m p a r a tiv e
Labor Organizations
R e p o r t o f t h e 9 8 t l i A n n u a l T r a d e s U n io n C o n g r e s s , B l a c k
p o o l, S e p t e m b e r 5 t h
Union Congress, 1966.
to
9 tli, 1 9 6 6 .
London, Trades
611 pp.
Ottawa, Canada,
Canada Department of Labor, Economics and Re
search Branch, 1966. 106 pp. 50 cents, Queen’s
Printer, Ottawa.
P r ic e s
of
N o n fe rro u s
M e ta ls
in
I n te r n a
By Irving B. Kravis and
Robert E. Lipsey. New York, National Bureau of
Economic Research, 1966. 56 pp. (Occasional Paper
98.) Distributed by Columbia University Press, New
York.
tio n a l
T ra d e,
1953-61,\.
L a b o r O r g a n iz a tio n s in C a n a d a , 1966.
By James Roeckel and
Raymond Schulze. San Francisco, California De
partment of Industrial Relations, Division of Labor
Statistics and Research, 1966. 33 pp.
U n io n L a b o r i n C a l i f o r n i a , 1 9 6 5 .
J o b A t t i t u d e s o f R a t i o n a l U n io n O f fic ia ls : P e r c e p t i o n s o f
th e I m p o r ta n c e o f C e r ta in P e r s o n a lity
F u n c tio n
of
Job
L evel
and
U n io n
T r a its
as a
O r g a n iz a tio n a l
S t r u c t u r e . By Edwin L. Miller. ( I n Personnel Psy
chology: A Journal of Applied Research, Durham,
N.C., Winter 1966, pp. 395-410. $2.50.)
Personnel Management
N o n - W a g e I n c o m e s a n d P r i c e s P o l i c y : T r a d e U n io n P o l i c y
a n d E x p e r ie n c e .
By Derek Robinson. Paris, Orga
nization for Economic Cooperation and Development,
Manpower and Social Affairs Directorate, 1966. 191
pp. $3.50, OECD Publications Center, Washington.
Productivity and Technological Change
S e m i n a r on M a n p o w e r P o l i c y a n d P r o g r a m : A u t o m a t i o n
in
th e
By Richard B. Miller. Swarthmore, Pa., Assignments in Management, 1966. 42 pp.,
bibliography.
https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
of
L o n g -T erm
T e c h n o lo g i c a l
By Robert L. Heilbroner. Washington, U.S.
Department of Labor, Office of Manpower Policy,
Evaluation, and Research, 1966. 38 pp.
T e c h n o lo g y
and
M a n p o w e r in
th e
T e le p h o n e
I n d u s tr y ,
By Sheldon H. Luskin. Washington, U.S.
Department of Labor, Office of Manpower Policy,
Evaluation, and Research, 1966. 53 pp., bibliography.
(Manpower Research Bulletin 13).
1 9 6 5 -7 5 .
R o w to M o t i v a t e P e o p le .
P e r s p e c tiv e
C hange.
BOOK REVIEWS AND NOTES
73
a n d th e R ig h t to A u to m a te .
By John J.
Adams and Jay E. Moyer. ( I n Automation, Cleve
land, Ohio, January 1967, pp. 62-65. $1.)
and Japan Ministry of Labor. 1966. 155 pp.
Superintendent of Documents, Washington.
A r b itr a tio n
$1,
I n d u s t r y W a g e S u r v e y — S o u t h e r n S a w m i l l s a n d P la n i n g
Social Security
M i l l s , O c t o b e r 1 9 6 5 . Washington, U.S. Department of
Labor, Bureau of Labor Statistics, 1966. 40 pp.
(Bulletin 1519.) 30 cents, Superintendent of Docu
ments, Washington.
S t a t e W o r k m e n 's C o m p e n s a tio n L a w s : A C o m p a r is o n o f
M a jo r
P r o v is io n s
W ith
R ecom m ended
S ta n d a rd s .
Washington, U.S. Department of Labor, Bureau of
Labor Standards, 1966. 37 pp. (Bulletin 212, rev.
1967.) 30 cents, Superintendent of Documents,
Washington.
By Joseph A.
Hickey. ( I n Unemployment Insurance Review, U.S.
Department of Labor, Bureau of Employment Se
curity, Unemployment Insurance Service, Washing
ton, September-October 1966, pp. 1-3. 30 cents,
Superintendent of Documents, Washington.)
H a n d y R e f e r e n c e G u id e to t h e F a i r L a b o r S t a n d a r d s A c t
a s A m e n d e d i n 1 9 6 6 . Washington, U.S. Department
of Labor, Wage and Hour and Public Contracts Divi
sions, 1966. 14 pp. (WHPC Publication 1159.)
C h a n g e s in S ta te V I L a w s D u r in g 1966.
H ir e d F a r m W o r k e r s U n d e r th e F a ir L a b o r S ta n d a r d s A c t
a s A m e n d e d i n 1 9 6 6 . Washington, U.S. Department
of Labor, Wage and Hour and Public Contracts Divi
sions, 1966. 7 pp. (WHPC Publication 1161.)
R a tio n a liz in g th e F a r m L a b o r M a r k e t: T h e C a se f o r S u p
The
Q u e s ti o n
of N ew
F e d e r a l R e q u ir e m e n ts
fo r
W a g e P a y m e n ts .
By Fred H. Schmidt.
Los Angeles, University of California, Institute of
Industrial Relations, 1966. 10 pp. (Reprint 160;
from Southwestern Social Science Quarterly, June
1966.)
p le m e n ta l
S ta te
P r o g r a m s o f U n e m p lo y m e n t C o m p e n s a tio n W ith P r o
a n d C o n D i s c u s s i o n . ( I n Congressional Digest, Wash
ington, January 1967, pp. 1-32. $1.25.)
W e lf a r e P o lic y a n d E c o n o m ic D e v e lo p m e n t: A C o m p a r a
tiv e H is to r ic a l P e r s p e c tiv e .
By Gaston V. Rimlinger. ( I n Journal of Economic History, New York
University, Graduate School of Business Administra
tion for Economic History Association, New York,
December 1966, pp. 556-571.)
By Ida C. Merriam. ( I n Social Security Bulletin, U.S. Department
of Health, Education, and Welfare, Social Security
Administration, Washington, December 1966, pp. 9-21.
25 cents, Superintendent of Documents, Washington.)
P r e m iu m
Pay
P r o v is io n s
fo r
W eekend
W ork
in
S even
By Rose T.
Selby. Washington, U.S. Department of Labor, Bu
reau of Labor Statistics, 1966. 15 pp. (Bulletin
1480.) 20 cents, Superintendent of Documents,
Washington.
C o n tin u o u s -P r o c e s s
I n d u s tr ie s ,
1966.
S o c ia l W e lf a r e E x p e n d itu r e s , 1 9 6 5 -6 6 .
B l u e p r i n t f o r P u b l i c W e l f a r e . By Helen E.
Martz. Washington, U.S. Department of Health, Ed
ucation, and Welfare, 1966. 21 pp. (Reprint from
Health, Education, and Welfare Indicators, November
1966.) 20 cents, Superintendent of Documents,
Washington.
W a g e In d e x e s: L o n g -T e rm
T re n d D a ta f o r S e le c te d O c
Wash
ington, U.S. Department of Labor, Bureau of Labor
Statistics, 1966. 27 pp. (Bulletin 1505.) 25 cents,
Superintendent of Documents, Washington.
c u p a tio n s a n d M e tr o p o lita n A r e a s , 1 9 0 7 -6 6 .
N a tio n a l
Q u a r te r ly E s tim a te s
of S ta te P e rso n a l In co m e: A
N ew
By Edith T. Burton. ( I n Survey of Current
Business, U.S. Department of Commerce, Office of
Business Economics, Washington, December 1966,
pp. 13-15. 45 cents, Superintendent of Documents,
Washington.)
S e r ie s .
Wages and Hours
W a g e : A n A lte r n a tiv e .
By J. H.
Foegen. ( I n Personnel Journal, Swarthmore, Pa.,
December 1966, pp. 677-680. 75 cents.)
R a is in g th e M in im u m
W ages
and
R e la te d
B e n e fits :
P art
I,
8Jj M e t r o p o l i t a n
A r e a s , 1 9 6 5 -6 6 — O c c u p a tio n a l E a r n in g s a n d S u p p le
m e n ta r y P r a c tic e s .
By John F. Fitsock, Kenneth J.
Hoffman, James N. Houff. Washington, U.S. Depart
ment of Labor, Bureau of Labor Statistics, 1966. 100
pp. (Bulletin 1465-86.) 55 cents, Superintendent of
Documents, Washington.
a n d th e S h o r t W o r k w e e k .
By John C.
Deiter. ( I n Southwestern Social Science Quarterly,
Austin, Tex., December 1966, pp. 308-315. $2.50.)
M o o n lig h tin g
Miscellaneous
W a g e s in J a p a n a n d th e
U n i t e d S t a t e s : R e p o r t o n th e
J o i n t U n i t e d S t a t e s - J a p a n W a g e S t u d y . Prepared
by Joint Working Group of U.S. Department of Labor
https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
BLS
H andbook
of
M e th o d s
fo r
S u rveys
and
S tu d ie s.
Washington, U.S. Department of Labor. Bureau of
m onthly
74Labor Statistics, 1966. 23S pp. (Bulletin 1458.)
$1.50, Superintendent of Documents, Washington.
The
C o m m o n M a r k e t ’s L a h o r P r o g r a m s .
By Mark J.
Fitzgerald, C.S.C. Notre Dame, Ind., University of
Notre Dame Press, 1966. 256 pp. $6.95.
P o litic a l
O p in io n
and
LABOR REVIEW, MARCH 1967
E le c to r a l
B e h a v io r — E s s a y s
and
Edited by Edward C. Dreyer and Walter A.
Rosenbaum. Belmont, Calif., Wadsworth Publish
ing Co., Inc., 1966. 495 pp. $4.95.
S tu d ie s .
“H a r d T i m e s ” : H u m a n D o c u m e n t s o f t h e I n d u s t r i a l R e v
By E. Royston Pike. New York, Frederick
A. Praeger, Publishers. 1966. 368 pp. $8.50.
o l u tio n .
By E. Malinvaud;
translated by A. Silvey. Amsterdam, North-Holland
Publishing Co., 1966. 631 pp. (Studies in Mathe
matical and Managerial Economies 6.) $15, Rand
McNally & Co., Chicago.
S ta t i s t i c a l M e th o d s o f E c o n o m e tr ic s .
C o n c e p ts a n d P r a c t i c e .
By Erich Helfert.
Belmont, Calif., Wadsworth Publishing Co., Inc.,
1966. 119 pp., bibliography. (Wadsworth Series
in Finance.) $2.35, paperback.
V a lu a tio n :
E c o n o m ic G r o w th , 1 9 6 0 -1 9 1 0 : A
M id -D e c a d e R e v ie w
of
Paris, Organization for Economic Coop
eration and Development, 1966. 113 pp. $2.50, OECD
Publications Center, Washington.
P r o s p e c ts .
t h e U .S .S .R . Washington, U.S.
Department of Labor, Bureau of Labor Statistics,
1966. 45 pp. (BLS Report 311.)
L a h o r D e v e lo p m e n ts in
o n C e n t r a l A m e r i c a [A S y m p o s i u m ] ,
( I n Cur
rent History, Philadelphia, Pa., December 1966. pp.
321-359, 364-367. 95 cents.)
E ocus
L a b o r C o s ts in C a n a d a : A n E x a m in a tio n o f W a g e s , P r ic e s ,
Ontario, Canadian Labor
Congress, 1966. 40 pp.. bibliography. $1.
P r o fits a n d P r o d u c tiv ity .
C u r r e n t P r o je c ts o n E c o n o m ic a n d S o c ia l I m p lic a tio n s o f
By Kenneth E. Boulding. { I n The
Public Interest, New York, Fall 1966, pp. 36-44.
$1.50.)
I s S c a r c ity D e a d ?
https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
Washington, National
Science Foundation, 1966. 187 pp. (NSF 66-21.) 65
cents, Superintendent of Documents, Washington.
S c i e n c e a n d T e c h n o lo g y , 1 9 6 5 .
Current Labor Statistics
TABLES
A.—Labor Force and Employment1
76
76
77
77
78
78
79
84
88
88
89
A -l.
A-2.
A-3.
A-4.
A-5.
A-6.
A-7.
A-8.
A-9.
A-10.
A - ll.
A-12.
A-13.
Summary employment and unemployment estimates, by age and sex, seasonally adjusted
Seasonally adjusted rates of unemployment
Rates of unemployment, by age and sex, seasonally adjusted
Employed persons, by age and sex, seasonally adjusted
Unemployed persons, by duration of unemployment, seasonally adjusted
Full- and part-time status of the civilian labor force, not seasonally adjusted
Employment status, by color, sex, and age, seasonally adjusted 1
Total employment and unemployment rates, by occupation, seasonally adjusted 1
Employees in nonagricultural establishments, by industry
Production or nonsupervisory workers in nonagricultural establishments, by industry
Employees in nonagricultural establishments, by industry division and selected groups, seasonally adjusted
Production workers in manufacturing industries, by major industry group, seasonally adjusted
Unemployment insurance and employment service program operations
B.—Labor Turnover
90
B -l.
Labor turnover rates, by major industry group
C. —Earnings and Hours
93
106
106
C—1.
C-2.
C-3.
107
109
109
C-4.
C-5.
C-6.
D.
110
D -l.
111
D -2.
112
D -3.
D -4.
D -5.
D -6.
113
115
116
Gross hours and earnings of production workers, by industry
Average weekly hours, seasonally adjusted, of production workers in selected industries
Average hourly earnings excluding overtime of production workers in manufacturing, by major industry
group
Average weekly overtime hours of production workers in manufacturing, by industry
Indexes of aggregate weekly man-hours and payrolls in industrial and construction activities
Gross and spendable average weekly earnings of production workers in manufacturing
—Consumer and Wholesale Prices
Consumer Price Index'—U.S. city average for urban wage earners and clerical workers, all items,
groups, subgroups, and special groups of items
Consumer Price Index—U.S. city average for urban wage earners and clerical workers, selected groups,
subgroups, and special groups of items, seasonally adjusted
Consumer Price Index— U.S. and selected areas for urban wage earners and clerical workers
Indexes of wholesale prices, by group and subgroup of commodities
Indexes of wholesale prices for special commodity groupings
Indexes of wholesale prices, by stage of processing and durability of product
E. —Work Stoppages
E - l.
Work stoppages resulting from labor-management disputes
1Tables A -l through A-6 are new monthly tables; A-7 and A-8 will appear quarterly in the February, May, August, and November issues of the Review.
Tables A-9 through A-13 were formerly numbered A-2 through A-6. Old table A -l has been discontinued.
N o t e : With the exceptions noted, the statistical series here from the Bureau of Labor Statistics are described in Techniques of Preparing Major B L S Statisti
cal Series (BLS Bulletin 1168,1964), and cover the United States without Alaska and Hawaii.
https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
75
M O N T H L Y
7 .6
L A B O R
R E V IE W ,
M A R C H
1967
4.— Labor Force and Employment
T
a b l e
A -l.
S u m m a ry
e m p lo y m e n t a n d
u n e m p lo y m e n t e s tim a te s , b y
age an d
sex, s e a s o n a lly
a d ju s te d
[In thousands]
Annual
average
1966
1967
Employment status, age, and sex
Jan.
Dec.
Nov.
Oct.
Sept.
Aug.
July
June
May
Apr.
Mar.
Feb.
Jan.
1966
1965
80, 473
77, 087
74,255
4, 015
70,240
80,154
76,764
73,893
4, 011
69,882
79,934
76,612
73,897
3,892
70, 005
79,360
76, 081
73,199
3,779
69, 420
79,268
76, 039
73,195
3,886
69,309
79,247
76, 069
73,141
3,935
69,206
78,905
75,770
72,846
3,926
68,920
78,767
75, 668
72,730
3,981
68,749
78,194
75,149
72,253
3,902
68,351
78,349
75,341
72, 542
4,199
68,343
78, 091
75,117
72,266
4,113
68,153
78, 050
75,126
72,341
4,155
68,186
78,245
75,355
72, 410
4,144
68,266
78. 893
75,770
72,895
3,979
68,915
77,17 s
74, 455
2 ,9 2 8
2 ,9 2 4
2 ,9 3 8
2 ,8 9 6
2 ,7 9 9
2 ,8 5 1
2 ,7 8 5
2 ,9 4 5
2 ,8 7 5
3 ,3 6 6
4 7 ,3 7 6
44, 759
4 3 ,6 1 5
2 ,8 5 4
40, 761
4 7 ,2 7 8
4 4 ,7 0 7
4 3 ,6 2 4
2 ,8 8 8
40, 736
4 7 ,4 0 4
4 4 ,8 1 1
4 3 ,7 3 1
3 ,0 3 5
40, 696
4 7 ,2 9 7
4 4 ,7 6 9
4 3 ,6 1 7
2 ,9 7 4
40, 643
4 7 ,3 0 1
4 4 ,7 8 3
43, 645
2 ,9 9 7
40, 648
4 7 ,2 8 6
4 4 ,7 9 7
43, 620
2 ,9 5 2
40, 668
4 7 ,4 3 7
4 4 ,7 8 7
4 3 ,6 6 7
2 ,8 9 4
40, 773
4 7 ,1 1 5
44, 857
43, 422
3, 174
4 0 ,2 4 6
1,080
1,152
1,177
1,119
1,435
25,221 25,139 25,145 24,884 24,938 24, 504 24,321 24,193 24, 081 24, 019 23,942 23,993 24,077 24, 427
24,128 24,167 24,278 23,891 23,994 23, 556 23, 422 23,271 23,142 23,139 23, 070 23,112 23,150 23, 507
744
754
675
631
712
735
684
690
652
645
663
593
702
729
23, 426 23, 438 23,615 23,298 23,349 22,904 22,738 22, 581 22, 511 22, 427 22,335 22,368 22,396 22,832
919
881
927
880
872
922
939
944
948
899
972
993
867
1,093
23, 687
22, 630
748
21,882
1, 056
T otal
Total labor force__________ ___________
Civilian labor force . _ ---- -------------- Employed . _________ _____ ...
Agriculture .. ------------------------Nonagricultural industries----------Unemployed______________________
2 ,8 3 2 .
2 ,8 7 1
2 ,7 1 5
2 ,8 8 2
2 ,8 4 4
Total labor force ------- -------- --------- . 48, 591
Civilian labor force. . ___ ... . ----------- 4 5 ,2 3 9
Employed. . ____________________ 4 4 ,2 2 7
Agriculture ______________ .. . 2 ,8 6 1
Nonagricultural industries _ _
4 1 ,3 6 6
Unemployed.-.
. .
. . . ---- ---- 1,012
4 7 ,8 4 2
4 4 ,9 8 7
4 3 ,8 9 8
2 ,8 8 4
4 1 ,0 1 4
4 7 ,6 0 4
4 4 ,7 9 7
4 3 ,7 1 1
2 ,8 0 7
40, 904
47, 493
4 4 ,7 2 3
43, 654
2 ,8 0 0
40, 854
47, 465
4 4 ,7 3 6
4 3 ,6 5 5
2 ,8 7 5
4 0 ,7 8 0
4 7 ,5 0 6
4 4 ,8 2 2
4 3 ,6 8 8
2 ,8 5 2
40, 836
4 7 ,3 7 0
4 4 ,7 2 3
43, 577
2, 846
40, 731
1,089
1,086
1,069
1,081
1,134
1,146
M
en
, 20 Y
ears and
7 1 ,0 8 8
4,361
66, 726
O v er
1,144
1, 083
1,138
Women, 20 Y ears and Over
Civilian labor force _ . ------ --------------Employed . ____________________
Agriculture __________________
Nonagricultural industries----------Unemployed______________________
B oth Sexes, 16-19 Y ears
Civilian 1abor force_____ . . .
______ . 6,627
Employed____ ___'_______ ______ 5,900
452
Agriculture..
. _____
Nonagricultural industries----------- 5, 448
727
Unemployed______________________
T
a b l e
A -2 .
6,638
5,828
398
5, 430
810
6,670
5,908
422
5,486
762
6,474
5,654
386
5,268
820
S e a s o n a lly
6,365
5, 546
366
5,180
819
6,743
5,897
431
5,466
846
a d ju s te d
6,726
5,847
396
5, 451
879
6,716
5,844
437
5, 407
872
6,361
5,487
383
5,104
874
6,511
5,672
452
5,220
839
6,406
5,579
404
5,175
827
6,350
5, 584
414
5,170
766
6, 481
5,640
438
5,202
841
6, 557
5,721
410
5,310
836
5,910
5, 036
439
4, 598
874
r a te s o f u n e m p lo y m e n t
[In thousands]
Annual
average
1966
1967
Selected unemployment rates
Jan.
1966
1965
Dec.
Nov.
Oct.
Sept.
Aug.
July
June
May
Apr.
Mar.
Feb.
3.7
2.2
4.3
11.0
3.7
2.4
3.9
12.2
3.5
2.4
3.4
11.4
3.8
2.4
4.0
12.7
3.7
2.4
3.8
12.9
3.8
2.5
3.9
12.5
3.9
2.6
3.7
13.1
3.9
2.6
3.8
13.0
3.9
2.4
3.9
13.7
3.7
2.4
3.7
12.9
3.8
2.6
3.6
12.9
3.7
2.5
3.7
12.1
3.9
2. 6
3.9
13.0
3.8
2. 5
3.8
12.7
4.5
3. 2
4. 5
14.8
_ ------- -. - _____. . .
.
3.3
6.6
3.3
7.6
3.1
6.9
3.4
7.4
3.2
7.2
3.3
8.0
3.4
7.5
3.4
7.5
3.5
7.4
3.3
7.1
3.3
7.3
3.3
6.8
3.5
6.9
3.3
7.3
4. 1
8.1
Married men
- .
Full-time workers----------- -----------------Blue-collar workers . -. ----- ------Experienced wage and salary workers------Labor force time lo st1__________
____
1.7
3.1
4.2
3.5
4.1
1.7
3.3
4.3
3.5
4.1
1.7
3.4
4.3
3.4
3.8
1.9
3.4
4.1
3.5
4.1
1.9
3.4
4.1
3.6
4.2
2.0
3.4
4.5
3.7
4.2
2.0
3.4
4.5
3.5
4.5
1.9
3.7
4.3
3.7
4.7
1.8
3.4
4.3
3.7
4.3
1.8
3.3
4.1
3.4
4.1
1.9
3.3
4.2
3.5
4.1
1.9
3.3
4.1
3.4
4.0
1.9
3.4
4.3
3. 6
4.3
1.9
3.4
4.3
3. 5
4. 2
2.4
3. 5
5.3
4.3
Jan.
Total fall civilian workers)______
___
Men, 20 years and over
Women, 20 years and o v e r ____ _
Both sexes, 16-19 years.. ____ _
White workers.
Non white workers.
1 Man-hours lost by the unemployed and persons on part time for economic reasons as a percent of potentially available labor force man-hours.
Beginning in this issue, the statistics on the labor force have been revised to take account of
the definitional change which raised the lower age limit from 14 to 16 years of age.
In addition,
the seasonally adjusted series have been slightly revised due to the application of new seasonal
adjustment factors which incorporate 1966 data.
https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
0. u
77
A.—LABOR FORCE AND EMPLOYMENT
TABLE A-3.
Rates of unemployment, by age and sex, seasonally adjusted
[In thousands]
Annual
average
1966
1967
Age and sex
Jan.
Total, 16 years and over______
-
-----
16 to 19 years___ __________________
16 and 17 years__
_____ _____
18 and 19 years___ — ..
...
20 to 24 years_______ . ____- - 25 years and over___ _
25 to 54 years______— -- ---------55 years and over------ -------- ...
Males, 16 years and over. _ _ .. _ _ 16 to 19 years------ ------- --------------16 and 17 years__ _____________
18 and 19 years.__ _____ ___—
20 to 24 years_______
25 years and over----.
----25 to 54 years__________________
55 years and over- _____ _ _ - Fp.malps, Ifi ypars and over__
__
16 to 19 years--------- -------- -----------16 and 17 years___
--.
_ -.
18 and 19 years.._ . . . . -----------20 to 24 years______________
25 years and over___ -----------25 to 54 years______ _
----55 years and over----------- -----------
T able A-4.
Dec.
Nov.
Oct.
Sept.
Aug.
June
July
May
Apr.
Mar.
Feb.
Jan.
1966
1965
3.7
3.7
3.5
3.8
3.7
3.8
3.9
3.9
3.9
3.7
3.8
3.7
3.9
3.8
4.5
11.0
13.1
9.5
5.6
2.6
2.6
2.9
2.9
11.1
13.9
8.8
4.2
2.0
1.8
2.8
5.0
10.8
11.9
10.2
7.4
3.8
4.0
3.3
12.2
13.8
10.8
5.6
2..6
2.5
2.5
3.2
12.2
13.8
10.8
5.3
2.1
2.0
2.3
4.7
12.2
13.7
10.7
6.1
3.5
3.6
3.0
11.4
12.9
10.6
5.0
2.5
2.5
2.4
3.0
10.5
11.5
9.7
4.9
2.2
2.1
2.4
4.4
12.6
14.9
11.5
5.2
3.1
3.4
2.3
12.7
14.7
11.4
5.4
2.6
2.7
2.5
3.1
11.7
14.1
9.9
4.3
2.1
2.1
2.1
5.0
13.9
15.7
13.0
6.9
3.5
3.8
3.1
12.9
14.8
11.2
5.2
2.6
2.6
2.5
3.1
12.3
14.1
10.2
4.3
2.2
2.1
2.6
4.8
13.6
15.8
12.2
6.5
3.3
3.6
2.3
12.5
14.2
11.3
5.4
2.7
2.7
2.6
3.2
10.9
12.5
9.7
4.7
2.3
2.2
2.7
5.0
14.6
16.8
13.0
6.4
3.4
3.7
2.3
13.1
14.9
11.9
4.7
2.8
2.7
2.7
3.3
11.7
13.3
10.5
3.7
2.5
2.2
3.0
4.9
14.9
17.3
13.5
6.1
3.3
3.6
2.3
13.0
15.0
11.9
5.6
2.6
2.7
2.5
3.3
11.8
13.5
10.9
4.8
2.3
2.2
2.8
5.0
14.5
17.2
13.0
6.5
3.3
3.6
2.1
13.7
16.8
11.8
5.4
2.5
2.6
3.0
3.2
12.6
15.8
10.6
4.8
2.1
1.9
3.3
5.1
15.2
18.3
13.1
6.3
3.4
3.9
2.5
12.9
15.2
11.5
5.2
2.5
2.5
2.5
3.1
11.3
13.0
10.1
4.4
2.2
2.0
2.8
4.8
14.9
18.7
13.1
6.3
3.2
3.5
2.0
12.9
15.9
10.8
5.3
2.6
2.6
2.7
3.3
12.0
14.7
9.9
5.0
2.3
2.1
2.8
4.7
14.1
17.9
11.7
5.8
3.3
3.5
2.4
12.1
14.1
10.8
5.1
2.6
2.6
2.8
3.2
11.4
12.7
9.9
4.5
2.3
2.1
3.0
4.6
13.0
16.1
12.0
5.9
3.3
3.5
2.4
13.0
15.1
11.5
5.4
2.7
2.8
2.8
3.4
12.1
15.0
10.0
4.1
2.4
2.3
2.9
4.9
14.2
15.3
13.2
7.0
3.3
3.6
2.5
12.7
14.8
11.3
5.3
2.6
2.6
2.6
3.2
11.7
13.7
10.2
4.6
2.2
2.1
2.7
4.8
14.1
16.6
12.6
6.3
3.3
3.6
2.4
14.8
16.5
13.5
6.7
3.2
3.2
3.2
4.0
14.1
16.1
12.4
6.3
2.8
2.7
3.3
5.5
15.7
17.2
14.8
7.3
4.0
4.3
2.8
Employed persons, by age and sex, seasonally adjusted
[In thousands]
A nnual
average
1966
1967
A g e a n d sex
T
June
M ay
A p r.
M ar.
F eb .
7 3 ,1 9 9
5 ,6 5 4
2 ,2 3 3
3 ,3 8 6
7 ,9 7 7
59, 593
4 6 ,1 4 6
13, 332
7 3 ,1 9 5
5 ,5 4 6
2 ,2 2 9
3, 304
7 ,9 1 6
5 9 ,7 6 1
4 6 ,1 1 9
1 3 ,4 1 7
7 3 ,1 4 1
5 ,8 9 7
2 , 311
3, 587
7 ,9 3 7
59, 294
4 5 ,8 4 5
13, 394
7 2 ,8 4 6
5 ,8 4 7
2 ,2 7 7
3, 568
7 ,9 3 7
59, 056
45, 739
1 3 ,2 4 3
72, 730
5 ,8 4 4
2 ,2 6 4
3 ,5 4 3
7 ,9 9 3
5 8 ,8 7 5
4 5 ,6 9 8
1 3 ,2 4 9
7 2 ,2 5 3
5 ,4 8 7
2 ,1 3 5
3, 31 9
7 ,9 9 4
58, 789
4 5 ,7 1 9
13, 079
72, 542
5 ,6 7 2
2 ,2 3 0
3 ,4 4 0
7 ,9 7 1
5 8 ,8 7 0
45, 713
1 3 ,1 4 4
7 2 ,2 6 6
5 ,5 7 9
2 ,2 0 4
3 ,4 0 9
7 ,9 0 7
58, 797
4 5 , 721
1 3 ,1 3 2
7 2 ,3 4 1
5 ,5 8 4
2 ,2 6 0
3 ,3 4 7
7 ,8 9 4
58, 936
4 5 ,8 1 3
1 3 ,1 4 3
7 2 ,4 1 0
5 ,6 4 0
2 ,2 5 1
3 ,3 9 4
7 ,8 6 1
5 8 ,9 1 1
4 5 ,8 2 4
1 3 ,1 4 7
7 2 ,8 9 5
5 ,7 2 1
2 ,2 6 9
3 ,4 5 2
7 ,9 6 3
5 9 ,2 1 2
45, 944
1 3 ,2 6 8
7 1 ,0 8 8
5, 036
2 ,0 7 4
2, 962
7 ,7 0 2
5 8 , 351
45, 318
13, 033
4 6 ,8 2 4
3 ,1 7 0
1 ,3 6 9
1 ,7 9 0
4, 586
4 6 ,7 6 9
3 ,1 1 4
1 ,3 4 7
1 ,7 7 8
4 ,5 7 0
47, 036
3, 34 8
1 ,4 0 5
1 ,9 3 4
4 6 ,9 1 7
3, 34 0
1 ,3 9 9
1 ,9 3 0
4 6 ,9 6 0
3 ,3 4 5
1 ,4 0 6
1 ,9 1 0
46, 736
3 ,1 1 2
1 ,2 8 8
1 ,7 8 9
4 7 ,0 1 6
3 ,2 8 5
1 ,3 8 9
1 ,8 9 1
4 6 ,8 5 9
3 ,2 4 2
1 ,3 6 7
1 ,8 8 3
4 6 ,8 4 9
3 ,2 0 4
1 ,3 9 8
1 ,8 5 2
4 6 ,8 7 6
3 ,2 5 6
1 ,3 8 6
1 ,8 7 7
4 6 ,9 1 9
3 ,2 5 2
1 ,3 9 0
1 ,8 6 2
4 6 ,3 4 0
2 ,9 1 8
1 ,2 8 4
1 ,6 3 4
4,592 4,575 4,607 4,599 4,615 4,640 4,607 4,617 4,599
39,493 39,259 39, 098 39,085 39, 090 39, 087 39, 0C2 39, 005 39, 025 39, 099 39,004 39,085 38,990 39,069
30,776 30, 519 30, 331 30, 313 30, 302 30, 311 30,264 30,313 30, 390 30,426 30,417 30,471 30,436 30,378
-------------------- 8, 758 8,767 8,805 8,741 8, 748 8,738 8, 715 8,731 8,605 8,639 8,618 8,609 8, 589 8,691
4,583
38,839
30,240
8,599
26,722 26,777 26,886 26, 375 26,426 26,105 25,929 25,770 25,517 25,526 25,407 25,492 25,534 25,976
2,594 2,610 2,608 2,484 2,432 2,549 2, 507 2,499 2, 375 2, 387 2, 337 2,380 2, 384 2,469
879
865
862
841
837
858
847
906
878
864
882
964
911
936
1,649 1,685 1,679 1,596 1,526 1,653 1,638 1,633 1,530 1,549 1,526 1,495 1,517 1,590
3, 507 3,538 3,468 3,391 3,346 3,345 3, 362 3,386 3,395 3,356 3,267 3,287 3,244 3,364
20,632 20,627 20,827 20, 508 20,671 20,207 20, 054 19,870 19,764 19,771 19,793 19,851 19, 921 20,143
__ 15,966 16,022 16, 068 15,833 15,817 15,534 15,475 15, 385 15, 329 15,287 15, 304 15,342 15, 388 15, 566
4, 710 4,638 4,739 4,591 4,669 4,656 4,528 4,518 4,474 4,505 4,514 4,534 4,558 4, 577
24, 748
2,118
790
1,328
3,119
19,512
15,078
4,434
N ov.
O c t.
7 4 ,2 5 5
5 ,9 0 0
2 ,3 8 9
3, 516
8 ,2 2 8
6 0 ,1 2 5
4 6 ,7 4 2
1 3 ,4 6 8
7 3 ,8 9 3
5 ,8 2 8
2 ,4 2 7
3 ,4 8 7
8 ,1 2 6
5 9 ,8 8 6
4 6 ,5 4 1
1 3 ,4 0 5
7 3 ,8 9 7
5 ,9 0 8
2 ,3 6 2
3, 537
8 ,0 6 2
5 9 ,9 2 5
46, 399
13, 544
4 7 ,5 3 3
3 ,3 0 6
1 ,4 5 3
1 ,8 6 7
4 ,7 2 1
4 7 ,1 1 6
3 ,2 1 8
1 ,4 6 3
1 ,8 0 2
4, 588
4 7 ,0 1 1
3, 3 0 0
1 ,4 5 1
1 ,8 5 8
4 ,5 9 4
otal
ale
25 years "and over
25 to 54 years
55 years and over
.
.
.
. .
em ale
16 years and over
"16 to 19 years
16 and 17 years. .
18 and 19 years. . .
20 to 24 years. . . .
- 25 years and over
25 to 54 years . . .
55 years and over - - - - - - - - - -
245-336 0
-
1965
J u ly
16 y ea rs a n d ov er
.
” 16 t o 19 y e a r s
16 a n d 17 y e a r s . . . 18 a n d 19 y e a r s
. . .
2 0 t o 24 y e a r s
____
F
1966
A ug.
16 yea rs a n d over
- 16 t o 19 y e a r s ,
- .
1 6 a n d 1 7 y e a r s ________ - --------------------18 a n d 19 y e a r s .- 20 t o 24 y e a r s .
25 y e a r s a n d o v e r
" 25 t o 54 y e a r s . . ----------------------------55 y e a r s a n d o v e r
M
Jan.
S e p t.
D ec.
Jan
67-6
https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
78
MONTHLY LABOR REVIEW, MARCH 1967
T able
A-5.
Unemployed persons, by duration of unemployment, seasonally adjusted
lln thousands]
1967
1966
Annual
average
Duration of unemployment
Jan.
Less than 5 weeks___ ______________ _ 1,542
5 to 14 weeks . . . . _ ___ _______ _ __
787
15 weeks and over_________ . _ _ _____
485
15 to 26 weeks_____________________
282
27 weeks and over_____ ___. . .
203
15 weeks and over as a percent of civilian
labor force_____________________ _ .
.6
T able A-6.
Dec.
Nov.
Oct.
Sept.
Aug.
July
June
May
Apr.
Mar.
Feb.
Jan.
1966
1965
1,562
760
496
269
227
1,397
789
484
287
197
1,493
900
517
293
224
1,523
831
493
291
202
1,576
891
462
254
208
1,592
882
446
228
218
1,653
816
486
263
223
1,604
854
538
262
276
1,536
667
590
333
257
1,494
796
583
316
267
1,450
738
594
327
267
1,481
764
639
340
299
1,535
804
536
245
241
1,628
'983
755
404
351
.6
.6
.7
.6
.6
.6
.6
.7
.8
.8
.8
.8
.7
1.0
Full- and part-time status of the civilian labor force, not seasonally adjusted
[In thousands]
Full- and part-time employment status
January
1967
December
1966
November
1966
October
1966
Annual average
1966
F ull T ime
Civilian labor force_____ . . ___ _. __ _____ ________ ___
Employed:
Full-time schedules 1 __ . ______. . . ________ . . . _ _____
Part time for economic reasons___ _ _________ __ _ . . . _____ . . . _
Unemployed, looking for full-time work_____ ____________________ . ..
Unemployment rate______ . . . . . . . ____ _______ _________ _ _________
P art T ime
... ...
____ . . .
Civilian labor force____ _
Employed (voluntary part time)1___ _____. . . _ ____ ____ __ _ _
Unemployed, looking for part-time work______ _________
......
Unemployment rate__ . . . . . . . . . . _ _________ _ .. _
_________
_ __
___
65,610
66,205
66, 312
66,400
66,943
66,145
60,953
2,195
2,462
3.8
62, 285
1,875
2,045
3.1
62,713
1,632
1,967
3.0
62,878
1,638
1,884
2.8
62,734
1,894
2,315
'3.5
61,144
2,209
2,792
4.2
9,710
9,013
697
7.2
10,047
9,439
608
6.1
10,261
9, 650
611
6.0
9,809
9, 228
581
5.9
8,830
8| 270
560
6.3
7, 735
1Employed persons with a job but not at work are distributed proportionately among the full- and part-time employed categories.
https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
1965
8,310
575
6.9
79
A —LABOR FORCE AND EMPLOYMENT
T able
A-9.
Employees in nonagricultural establishments, by industry 1
Revised series; see box, p. 87.
[In thousands]
1966
1967
Annual
average
Industry
Jan.2
Total employees.
M ining_____________ ______ - .............. .........
Metal mining.............................................
Iron ores.............- ......................— ........
Copper ores-------- -------------------------Coal mining................................................
Bituminous.......... .....................- .........
Crude petroleum and natural gas---------Crude petroleum and natural gas fields.
Oil and gas field services____________
Quarrying and nonmetallic mining-------Crushed and broken stone__________
Sand and gravel------ ----------- -----------
Contract construction------------------------------
General building contractors---------------Heavy construction--------------------------Highway and street construction........
Other heavy construction...------------Special trade contractors--------------------Plumbing, heating, and air condition
ing........ ..................... .........................
Painting, paperhanging, and deco
rating............................. ......... ...........
Electrical work.......................................
Masonry, plastering, stone, and tile
work___________________________
Roofing and sheet metal work.............
Manufacturing........... .............. .........................
Durable goods.......................................
Nondurable goods..................................
July
June
May
Apr.
Mar.
Feb.
Jan.
1965
1964
64,316 65,910 65,389 65,190 64, 867 64,484 64, 274 64,563 63,465 62,928 62, 243 61,622 61,439 60,770 58,332
649
631
645
630
637
627
628
645
590
617
621
620
634
632
88.6
87.3
86.1
85.7
87.7
86.5
87.8
85.3
84.4
84.0
84.2
83.7
83.6
79.5
26.4
25.8
26.4
26.0
26.0
26.0
26.4
25.7
24.6
24.0
24.3
24.3
24.6
25.7
33.2
33.0
32.2
32.7
32.6
32.8
31.9
31.9
31.5
32.8
32.0
31.8
30.1
27.1
143.3 142.9 143.7 142.7 142.5 139. 5 142.2 140.7 104.3 141.3 142.2 142.5 141.8 147.3
134.3
131.9 134.1 132.2
95.8 132.2 132.8 133.0 132.0 136.1
135.3 134.9 135. 7 134.7
279.0 276.9 277.4 281.0 289.7 289.6 288.1 281.0 281.2 281.9 281.6 283.8 288.1 291.1
148.8 149.6 150.2 153.3 156.6 156.9 155.1 151.7 151.9 152.1 151.9 152.6 156.0 160.4
130.2 127.3 127.2 127.7 133.1 132. 7 133.0 129.3 129.3 129.8 129.7 131.2 131.4 130.7
117.9 121.7 123.9 126.2 127.8 127.8 126.9 122.5 119.9 112.4 108.8 111.3 118.3 116.2
44.4
42.8
44.3
43.8
42.0
41.0
43.8
41.2
37.6
42.3
35.7
37.6
41.0
40.5
42.4
41.2
42.5
41.9
39.8
37.1
42.2
40.5
35.8
35.1
39.3
34.3
39.4
39.3
2,911 3,122 3,310 3,449 3, 525 3,641 3,623 3,521 3,277 3,156 2,981 2,818 2,940 3,181 3,050
1,036.0 1,078.0 1.107.3 1,125. 2 1,165.3 1,153.3 1,121.1 1, 037.1 1, 014. 6 967.7 915.4 961.7 997.6 949.1
571.3 673.9 740. ' 758.8 781.5 782.2 756.8 680. 1 618.0 521.1 474.8 507.6 643.2 613.9
257.4 335.5 386.9 401.1 411.9 411.7 397.8 345.3 296.4 224.3 199.8 220.0 323.6 313.7
313.9 338.4 353.7 357.7 369.6 370.5 359.0 334.8 321.6 296.8 275.0 287.6 319.6 300.3
1,514.2 1, 558.1 1.601.3 1, 641. 0 1,694.0 1, 687.8 1, 643.1 1, 559.4 1, 523. 7 1, 492. 2 1, 428. 2 1, 470.8 1,540.6 1, 487. 0
617
368.7
374.8
377.8
380. 3
125.5
247.6
134.9
249.4
147.1
249.8
153.0
255.0
206.7 215.7 228.9 238.2
112.3 116.5 117. 7 117.1
19,246 19,429 19,522 19,538 19, 533
11,367 11, 446 11, 480 11,470 11,434
7,879 7,983 8,042 8,068 8, 099
383.6
118.'
384.6
376.7
366.3
363.8
360.6
353.6
363.0
365.5
354.3
157.7
255.2
148.5
248.5
137.3
238.6
130.3
235.6
124.0
231.1
118.6
227.6
119.7
229.5
142.3
231.8
140.4
218.7
253.4 248.9 236.6 231. 0 230.6 209.2 210.0 237.6 241.1
117.8 115.1 107.6 106.8 104.4
97.2 104.9 110.0 107.5
19,123 19,258 18,906 18,774 18,651 18,518 18,333 18,032 17,274
11,213 11,319 11,130 11,039 10,921 10,822 10, 707 10,386 9,816
7,910 7,939 7, 776 7,735 7,730 7,696 7,626 7,645 7,458
Durable goods
Ordnance and accessories........ ................. 276.1 268.1 270.6 266.4 263.0 259.1 256.4 254.9 251.8 247.8 245.3 243.2 239.2 226.0 243.9
Ammunition, except for small arms___ 204.0 196.2 199.6 196.8 195.0 191
189. 5 189.2 188.3 187.3 185.6 184.5 182.2 172.7 185.0
14.8
14.7
Sighting and fire control equipment.
15.0
14.8
14.6
12.4
14.2
13.5
12.8
14.1
13.7
13.3
13.1
54.8
53.3
Other ordnance and accessories........
56.9
56.2
52.3
44.2
44.8
47.0
46.4
45.6
40.9
51.6
49.8
Lumber and wood products, except
579.0 593.5 608.9 618.5 630.6
furniture.............................................
648. 5 653.5 626.4 617.6 609.6 602.9 602.5 610.1 604.2
86.7
Logging camps and logging contractors.
93.9 100.9 102.6 103.6
106.2 106.6
86.2
84.5
94.8
88.5
87.4
89. C 87.7
Sawmills and planing mills................... 231.6 235.5 240.7 244.4 250.5
256.5 259.0 251.3 251.3 248.8 244. 6 247.1 250.8 253.1
Millwork, plywood, and related prod
149.4 152.2 155.3 159.8 164.5
ucts..................... ................................
172.5 173.1 167.6 166.5 163.7 163.0 162.8 162.7 158.2
35.0
35.7
35.1
35.3
Wooden containers_______ _______ _
36.1
35.0
34.8
34.2
34.4
34.4
34.2
36.9
36.3
35.4
76.7
76.9
75.6
77.2
76.6
77.0
Miscellaneous wood products............. .
70.3
73.9
73.2
74.9
75.9
75.3
77.9
76.4
Furniture and fixtures......... ..................... 460.6 466.0 468.3 467.0 465.6
451.9 458.4 450.5 447.2 447.6 443.7 442.3 429.1 405.9
Household furniture.............. ...............
329.9 334.2 336.7 336.0 335.2
325. £ 330. 2 326.2 326.0 325.1 323.4 320.5 309.7 292.6
34.2
Office furniture.____ _____________
35.1
34.8
28.0
29.6
33.8
33.5
31.2
31. i
32.2
31.5
32.2
29.9
47.0
Partitions; office and store fixtures___
47.3
47.3
47.3
40.3
43.2
46.5
44.5
42. £ 44.6
47.2
45. i
44.8
49.8
Other furniture and fixtures........... .
48.5
49.4
49.5
49.3
45.1
46.0
46.6
46.1
46.5
46.1
48.7
47.0
46.5
Stone, clay, and glass products................. 612.0 625.9 639.3 644.3 653.4 661.3 661.6 658.4 647.8 641.7 625.9 616.9 619.1 627.4 613.8
32.4
Flat glass.___ _______ ____________
30.8
32.3
33.2
32.3
32.8
32.8
32.9
32.2
32.9
32.9
32.4
33. 1 33.2
Glass and glassware, pressed or blown. 122.5 123.4 124.8 124.3 125.9 126.3 125.2 125.6 123.1 120.3 118.6 117.7 116.1 115.4 111.9
38.3
34.0
Cement, hydraulic....... ................... ......
38.6
39.7
38.0
36.0
36.1
35.4
37.8
35.5
37.1
39.0
39.4
39.6
37.7
67.9
Structural clay products........................
63.6
69.2
71.5
69.3
64.9
66.6
68.3
67.2
69.5
67.7
72.7
69.8
72.5
71.1
44.0
Pottery and related products............ .
43.2
43.4
43.5
42.9
43.9
42.5
44.2
44.1
42.2
43.1
43.7
43.8
43.3
Concrete, gypsum, and plaster prod
164.7 170.7 176.5 180.2 184.2 187.7 189.4 188.4 183.1 180.5 172.1 167.1 169.9 177.9 173.3
ucts.___ _______ _________ _____
128.5 130.7 132.2 132.9 134.1 136.3 136.3 132.1 132.1 132.7 130.8 129.5 129.5 129.2 126.6
Other stone and mineral products____
Primary metal industries.....................
1,330.2 1.326.1 1,328.6 1,332.2 1, 344.9 1.351.8 1, 353. 4 1, 355. 7 1,329. 6 1, 321. 7 1,303. 4 1,291. 4 1,277. 0 1, 295.6 1, 233. 2
Blast furnace and basic steel products.. 641.9 638.3 643.3 649.4 659.7 669 " 676.9 673.4 656. 4 649.1 634.9 623.6 615.6 656.8 629.2
Iron and steel foundries.___ ________ 239.5 236.7 236.7 236.4 236.6 237.8 236.7 239.1 235.8 235.9 233.6 234.2 232.7 226.2 212.3
69.7
Nonferrous smelting and refining___ _
73.8
75.5
77.9
79.9
78.6
75.9
76.2
75.7
79.6
76.8
78.5
78.8
78.6
79.2
Nonferrous rolling, drawing, and ex
186.0
194.4
truding................... ........... ...............
211.4
201.6
209.2
204.0
210.1
211.3
205.2
211.2
206.5 207.0 205.9 205.8
212.0
75.2
80.5
Nonferrous formdries................. ...........
87.4
84.0
88.0
85.6
85.6
86.3
87.8
88.9
88.0
85.7
86.3
88. 5 87.9
Miscellaneous primary metal indus
60.8
64.0
tries................................................ .
67.6
68.5
68.4
70.8
71.4
68.1
68.4
68.4
68.4
70.7
69.6
69.6
Fabricated metal products...................... 1.369.5 1.383.1 1,387.5 1,379.7 1,372. 5 1.360.9 1,339. 2 1,360.8 1,340.7 1,337. 0 1,326.8 1,319. 5 1, 310. 5 1,268. 3 1,189. 2
62.1
60.4
59.7
61.4
60.7
Metal cans................................. ...........
62.1
63.5
65.2
62.0
65.9
66.0
61
61.6
61.8
64.0
Cutlery, hand tools, and general hard
144.0
155.3
ware...................................... .............
164.8 165.6 166.5 165.7 164.4 160.3 155.3 161.2 160.7 163.4 163.3 161.5 161.0
Heating equipment and plumbing
80.2
78.7
79.0
79.9
80.1
79.6
fixtures________________________
79.4
80.2
79.9
76.8
80.1
78.1
78.6
79.9
79.3
Fabricated structural metal products.. 395.3 401.7 404.5 405.5 408.9 411.2 410.7 406.6 394.4 390.4 385.1 384.6 384.8 375.5 354.1
90.4
97.8
Screw machine products, bolts, etc___
114.7 114.2 112.7 110.8 109.3 108.1 107.2 108.0 105.9 105.6 105.0 103.5 102.5
Metal stampings__________________
249.6 251.4 252.1 249.0 241.9 231.1 221.5 234.5 235.9 236.8 237.0 235.8 234.4 221.3 198.6
71.4
76.7
79.5
81.6
82.3
Coating, engraving, and allied services.
81.9
82.2
81.6
84.0
84.9
85.0 84.8
81
83.7
83.7
57.7
62.3
64.8
65.1
65.9
67.9
66.0
66.0
68. 7 67.9
Miscellaneous fabricated wire products.
68.0
67.5
70.2
69.9
69.8
Miscellaneous fabricated metal prod
130.7
144.81
140.3
146.8
146.7
153.6
151.4
150.9
ucts......................................................
151.
i
153.0
155.2 156.4 155.8
152.5 152.2
See footnotes at end of table.
https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
80
MONTHLY LABOR REVIEW, MARCH 1967
T able
A-9.
Employees in nonagricultural establishments, by industry 1—Continued
Revised series; see box, p. 87.
[in thousands]
1967
1966
Annual
average
Industry
Jan.2 Dec.2 Nov.
Oct.
Sept.
Aug.
July
June
May
Apr.
Mar.
Feb.
Jan.
1965
1964
Manufacturing —Continued
Durable goods—Continued
Machinery_______________ . . . ............. 1,936.9 1,927.1 1,899.9 1,897.1 1,895. 3 1,891.1 1, 887. 5 1, 882. 0 1,855. 2 1, 841. 7 1,828. 8 1,813.2 1, 793. 5 1, 725. 8 1, 609. 6
98.4
94.6
88.4
Engines and turbines______________ 101.0
98.6
99.7
99.1
94.7
96. £ 95.2
94.5
93.2
93.7
90.1
87.0
150.1 145.6 143.8 143.9 143.9 145.2 148.2 147. 5 147.9 147.9 145.9 142.1 135.2 126.5
Farm machinery and equipment_____
Construction and related machinery... 278.4 278.7 277.3 277.5 279.2 279.2 281.4 279.2 274.2 270.8 268.7 265.4 261.2 255.3 236.3
Metalworking machinery and equip
ment____________■______
___ 344.9 344.0 340.0 337. 4 338.8 334.5 334.8 335.1 329.2 327.8 324.8 323.1 317.4 304.5 282.9
Special industry machinery_________
203.7 204.9 203.9 203.7 204. 0 203.3 203.0 202.9 199.5 198.1 199. 1 198.1 198.2 192. 1 181.2
General industrial machinery________ 288.1 286.8 284.5 282.3 281. C 280.8 280.5 279.6 275. C 273.1 272.7 270.8 268.8 259.0 243.4
Office, computing, and accounting
227.2 225.9 223.7 220.7 218.6 217.3 214.8 213.1 210.2 208.4 206.1 203.7 202.6 189.5 172.8
machines___ . ______________
119.0 119.3 117.0 115.8 115.6 118.7 117.0 118. C 116.4 115.0 111.9 112.3 112.3 112.7 106.4
Service industry machines__________
Miscellaneous machinery____________ 223.5 222.8 219.5 217.3 214.5 214.3 212.4 211.2 206.9 205.4 203.1 200.2 197.7 187.5 173.1
Electrical equipment and supplies_____ 1,972.4 1,980.2 1,980.9 1,981.5 1,958. 0 1,939. 6 1, 887. 8 1,898. 4 1, 858.1 1, 842.8 1,810.8 1,800.0 1, 778. 2 1, 658.1 1, 544. 3
Electric distribution equipment______ 197.0 197.9 197.2 198.9 198. C 198.2 195.0 193.4 187.1 185.6 184.1 181.9 181.1 170.5 161.8
225.6 220.9 216.9 220.6 218.7 219.8 216.6 215.8 206.9 208.8 206.6 204.0 202.1 191.9 177.8
Electrical industrial apparatus__ ..
185.2 189.9 190.1 192.9 187. 5 184.1 173.4 181.6 184.1 181.7 168.6 178.1 173. 1 166.6 160.9
Household appliances______________
Electric lighting and wiring equipment. 193.4 194.8 193.6 195.4 194.7 192.8 190.1 193.4 190.6 188.7 186.5 184.5 181.9 172.3 158.0
Radio and TV receiving sets_________ 194.5 193.6 195.4 191.5 185.1 177.1 163.4 162.9 154.6 153.2 152.5 152.1 152.3 135.1 118.8
Communication equipment_________
476.7 477.4 485.5 480.9 478.3 476.6 468.4 465.8 458.3 454. 2 449. 2 443.6 440.4 416.8 408.6
Electronic components and accessories. 388.4 391.6 388.9 389.1 384.9 384.4 376.4 379.8 371.1 366.6 360.5 354.3 345.8 304.9 264.8
Miscellaneous electrical equipment and
supplies_________________ ______ 111.6 114.1 113.3 112.2 110.8 106.6 104.5 105.7 105.4 104.0 103.0 101.5 101.5 100.1
93.6
Transportation equipment____________ 1,972.0 1,994.5 1,989.2 1,974.4 1, 953. 2 1,777.9 1, 865.3 1,921.1 1,910. 2 1,894. 7 1,886.6 1,867. 4 1, 839.1 1, 737.9 1, 604. 3
Motor vehicles and equipment_______ 870.3 891.5 898.1 891.4 881.9 712.1 807.7 881.2 884.3 877.8 881.2 877.2 868.3 843.4 752.9
Aircraft and parts__________________ 819.9 818.7 808.6 794.6 786.8 776.2 767.2 748.6 735.6 726.6 715.5 702.8 688.8 625.2 605.4
Ship and boat building and repairing.. 172.9 171.3 165.7 170.8 166.7 171.3 173.1 170.9 171.9 173.2 177.1 176.5 173.0 158.8 145.1
59. 1 60.0
Railroad equipment________________
61.6
60.8
61. 0 60.3
59.7
59.2
61.6
58.0
57.3
57.6
55. 7
50.2
58.0
58.2
Other transportation equipment_____
51.4
56.8
60.4
51.4
56.8
58.7
57.9
54.8
55.2
53.6
54. 9
50. 7
445.7
445.1
76.7
440.9
76.0
439.5
75.2
434.6
73.8
434.0
74.1
429.3
73.4
428.8
73.0
421.4
73.1
416.0
71.9
413.6
72.4
409.5
72.1
404.6
71.4
386.8
69.8
369.9
69.8
108.2
51.2
107.8
50.6
33.8
107.8
50.7
34.1
107.6
50.0
33.6
107.4
49.6
33.3
107.3
49.1
33.3
107.1
47.6
32.5
106.6
48.6
33.4
103.9
48.8
33.4
103.3
48.7
33. 5
102.1
48.2
33.1
101.3
47.9
33.0
100.4
47.1
32.2
98.4
45.4
31. 0
96.0
43.3
29. 3
67.9
68.2
101.9
39.9
67.5
101.4
37.5
66.9
100.8
39. 0
66.2
99.1
38.5
65.4
100.2
37.9
65.4
99.0
36.8
65.1
97.9
37.6
63.8
95.2
36.6
63.1
93.8
35. 2
62.4
92.6
35.9
61.5
91. 5
35. 2
60.5
90.1
35.1
57.2
84.1
31.9
54.4
76.7
29.6
Miscellaneous manufacturing industries. _ 412.8
Jewelry, silverware, and plated w are...
50.7
Toys, amusement, and sporting goods
Pens, pencils, office and art materials..
Costume jewelry, buttons, and notions.
Other manufacturing industries______ 176.5
Musical instruments and parts..............
436.8
50.7
113.2
36.3
57.7
178.9
27.9
466.3
50.7
138.0
36.4
59.6
181.6
27.8
469.8
50.1
141.4
36.4
59.7
182.2
27.8
463.2
48.9
138.6
36.4
58.7
180.6
27.4
456.6
48.7
132.2
36.5
59.6
179.6
27.2
431.9 447.2
48.6
45.3
121. 5 125.7
36 1 36. 2
58.6
54.8
174.2 178.1
26.6
26. 8
438.5
48.4
121.3
35. 5
57.5
175.8
26.6
430.9
48. 5
114.9
35.4
57.0
175.1
26. 5
422.9
47.9
109.1
35. 3
56.8
173.8
26.7
414.7
47.4
104.4
34. 6
56.1
172.2
26.3
401.3
45.8
99.2
33.1
53.4
169.8
26. 2
421.2
45.5
118.0
33. 6
56.0
168.1
24. 6
397.6
43.7
105.2
31. 9
55.5
161.4
21.9
Instruments and related products______
Engineering and scientific instruments.
Mechanical measuring and control
devices_______________________
Optical and ophthalmic goods_______
Ophthalmic goods_______________
Surgical, medical, and dental equip
ment____ _______
Photographic equipment and supplies.
Watches and clocks
Nondurable goods
Food and kindred products..
1,713.0 1,760.5 1,801.9 1,838.0 1, 881. 0 1,897.1 1, 806. 8 1, 751. 4 1,683. 5 1,676.0 1, 674. 7 1,671. 8 1, 686. 2 1,752. 0 1, 750.4
Meat products______
321.9 330.2 330.9 330. 0 327.9 329.7 326.8 319.9 311.3 307.3 307.6 309.3 310.4 317.3 316.2
Dairy products__________
270.2 271.2 272.2 275.2 279.8 289.0 291.1 288.1 279.8 278.1 275.9 275.1 275.7 286.3 289.1
Canned and preserved food, except
meats________________
254.8 285.2 323.9 380. 5 381.9 304.9 256.1 227.4 230. 4 223. 6 224. 8 226.9 260 6 253. 7
Grain mill products__________ .
121.2 122.8 121.7 124.4 125.5 127.1 128.0 127.0 122.5 120.9 122.1 122.0 121.6 125.6 127.8
Bakery products_____ _____ _______
282.1 284.0 285.2 282.3 281.9 285.3 275. 5 285.2 279.1 278.9 280.1 278.7 279.9 286.4 290.8
Sugar_________
49.2
30.4
45.1
30.0
30. 6 30. 9 32.0
52 0
33 8 30.6
33. 6 41. 5 36 3 37. 7
Confectionery and related products . . .
80.2
76.4
84.5
69.5
71.2
70.0
69.6
75.2
77.1
84.0
77.8
75.3
75.3
76.5
75.5
Beverages__________ .
230.8
241.2
220.9 226.3 228.3
234.8 225.1 221.7 218.0 212.4 213.3 220.9 216.4
233.6 238.7
Miscellaneous food and kindred prod
ucts____________
138.8 141.6 142.4 142.0 140.2 139.3 139.4 139.1 137.7 138.2 140.1 140.7 141.6 142.1 141.6
Tobacco manufactures....
Cigarettes......................
Cigars____________
Textile mill products...............
Cotton broad woven fabrics___
Silk and synthetic broad woven fabrics.
Weaving and finishing broad woolens..
Narrow fabrics and smallwares______
Knitting_______
Finishing textiles, except wool and knit.
Floor covering_____
Yarn and thread__ _
Miscellaneous textile goods_______
See footnotes at end of table.
https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
87.6
91.0
39.8
22.1
91.5
39.7
22.3
94.8
39.5
22.4
94.8
39.8
22. 2
88.2
40.0
22.0
73.8
39.7
21.0
74.8
39.4
22.7
73.8
38. 7
22. 7
75.6
38.6
22. 6
78.3
38.3
22. 5
82.1
38.1
22.8
84.6
37.7
22. 5
86.6
38.6
24. 3
90.2
37.6
25.6
937.9
239.6
94.8
42.6
32.5
219.5
75.8
948.3
240.6
95.8
42.2
32.8
226.0
76.7
43.4
115.4
75.4
955.3
240.1
95.7
42.0
32.6
233.8
76.5
43.4
115.5
75.7
958.1
238.9
95.8
42.6
32.3
237.6
75.8
43.5
116.1
75.5
959.7
238.3
96.2
43.8
32.0
238.8
75.9
43.1
116.5
75.1
965.4
238.5
96.7
45.0
31.8
241.7
76.4
42.6
117. 9
74.81
947.5
238.3
95.9
45.4
30.6
234.1
75.9
39. 8
114.4
73.11
964.9
239.3
96.2
45.5
31.8
241.8
77.0
41.3
116.7
75.3
951.8
235.8
94.9
45.2
31.4
238.1
76.2
41.4
114.6
74.2
947.6
235.0
94.8
44.8
31.3
235.8
75.9
41.4
113.8
74.81
943.4
234.7
94.8
44.9
31.0
231.8
75.5
41. 5
113.8
75.4
936.6
234.2
94.2
44.5
30.8
227.3
75.1
41.9
113.4
75.2
929.7
233.8
93.9
44.1
30.3
222.9
74.9
42.0
113.2
74.6
921.3
229.2
91.9
44.2
29.4
228.9
75.9
40.9
109.0
71.9
892.0
226.7
90. 5
45.0
27.8
214.8
76.1
38.6
104.6
67.9
115.2
75.4
A.—LABOR FORCE AND EMPLOYMENT
T able
A-9.
81
Employees in non agricultural establishments, by industry 1—Continued
[in thousands]
1967
Revised series; see box, p. 87.
1966
Annual
average
Industry
Jan.2 Dec.2 Nov.
Oct.
Sept.
Aug.
July
JuDe
May
Apr.
Mar.
Feb.
Jan.
1965 1964
Manufacturing—Continued
Nondurable goods—Continued
Apparel and related products-------------- 1, 386.31, 401.01, 418.91, 420.7 1, 414.21, 422.2 1, 353.11, 414. 41, 396. 91, 380. 41, 401. 01, 391. 31, 331.8 1, 353.61, 302. 5
Men’s and boys’ suits and coats__ _ . 120.2 122.0 120.6 120.0 120.7 120.7 115.3 123.5 122.4 120.4 121.1 120.7 119.6 118.6 114.7
Men’s and boys’ furnishings_________ 362.8 365.1 367.5 369.2 370. 4 373.1 360.5 373.2 368.4 365.4 364.4 360.9 357.0 350.7 327.4
Women’s, misses’, and juniors’ outerwear ___ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _
------- 425.6 425.3 430.2 430.6 428.9 434.6 412.9 431.0 428.3 419.8 435.7 435.8 402.9 418.8 406.3
Women’s and children’s undergarments________ ___________ ______ 125.7 129.4 132.1 131.7 130.0 128.8 120.4 126.9 124.9 124.8 124.6 123.1 118.2 121.0 120.3
28.0 27.2 28.2 28.4 29.2 27.0 27.2 24.9 26.1 30.7 30.9 27.7 29. 0 29. 7
Hats, caps, and millinery______ _____
80.4
82.3
80.3
81. 5 83.6
80.4
78.4
80.9
80.2
80.5
78.1
81.1
76.8
78.4
Girls’ and children’s outerwear______
77.6
82.4
76.8
83.7
82.0
79.0
82.6
79.8
77.9
76.8
77.9
75.0
69.8
Fur goods and miscellaneous apparel ._
76. 0
72.4
Miscellaneous fabricated textile products____________________________ 168.5 173.8 178.3 176.9 173. 5 171.1 158.7 169.2 169.6 167.9 166.8 163.8 159.8 161.2 154.1
679.1
219.2
71.8
685.0 .684.6
220.7 220.0
70.3
71.0
679.5
218.9
69.5
677.1
219.7
69.7
683.8
223.5
70.3
678.2
225.1
69. 5
679.0
223.2
69.4
661.4
216.8
68.4
659.4
215.7
68.0
655.6
214.6
68.5
653.3 651.7
213.8 213.6
68.6 ' 68.3
640.0
213.0
67.3
625.5
213.1
66.6
173.2
214.9
175.8
217.5
175. 0
216.1
173. 7
214.0
175.3
214.7
171.4
212.2
172.3
214.1
167.0
209.2
167.6
208.1
165.8
206.7
164.8
206.1
163.8
206.0
159.3
200.4
152.5
193.3
Printing, publishing and allied industries. 1, 048.0 1, 056.1 1,047.9 1,044. 0 1, 038. 2 1, 035.1 1, 030. 4 1, 026.8 1,015.3 1, 014. 6 1, 005.8 1, 004.3
Newspaper publishing and printing---- 357.4 361.7 359.5 358.4 356. 8 353. 3 354.1 353.7 350.7 352.3 346.7 350.5
73. 5 73.9 73. 3 72.6
72.2
72.0
74.6
74.2
74.0
71.9
71.9
Periodical publishing and printing___
89.1
90.8
89.9
88.8
87.4
86.5
90.1
89.8
87.1
85.1
92.9
_____________ _______ . .
Books
Commercial printing________ ______ 335.6 335.7 333.3 332.6 330.5 327.3 325.5 326.7 323.9 322.5 321.6 317.9
56. 5 55.5
56. 5 57.9
53.3
55.9
53.5
53.6
52.3
54.6
56.3
56.2
Bookbinding and related industries___
Other publishing and printing indus131.
8
131.
9
131.1
129.5
127.6
126.6
132.5
127.2
125.7
134.9
134.6
133.3
tries_____________________ ____
Chemicals and allied products.. . _____ 966.3 968.5 968.0 965.4 968.2 976.9 970.3 964.5 948.6 944.0 935.5 924.3
Industrial chemicals________________ 304.3 304.1 303.6 301.2 304. 5 307.2 305.5 302.8 296.7 296.1 294.6 293.1
207.6 209.7 209.9 209.8 212.2 215.1 214.1 210.8 205.8 205.2 204.6 202.8
Plastics materials and synthetics___..
Drugs_________ . . . ____________ 130.2 130.6 129.8 128.9 128. 5 130.8 130.1 127.5 124.6 123.8 123.7 122.9
107.3 109.9 111.0 112.2 i n . 5 111.2 109.0 109.5 107.1 102.7 101.7 103.5
Soap, cleaners, and toilet goods______
67. 2 68.9
68.2
65.7
66.6
68.6
66.7
66.0
65.1
66.2
66.0
66.5
Paints, varnishes, and allied products..
ÖU. /
50.7
52.5
50.6
55.1
60.3
64.1
60.0
54.3
54.3
52.8
52.2
Agricultural chemicals... . _________
93. 6 93.0
94.2
92.4
90.6
87.4
85.2
96.4
86.1
82.6
95.4
95.0
Other chemical products____________
997.7
348.9
71.3
83.7
316.9
51.6
981.0
345.6
70.1
81.1
310.5
51.2
951.5
335.7
68.6
77. 0
302.4
49.0
Paper and allied products_____________
Paper and pulp____________________
Paperboard_____ ___________ -- -Converted paper and paperboard
products____________________ -Paperboard containers and boxes.. . . .
176.0
218.3
125.3
122.6
118.7
918.0
291.5
201.7
122.2
104.0
64.6
52.2
81.8
906.4
289.7
194.5
118.1
105.0
66.0
53.2
80.0
878.6
288.4
181.7
112.9
101.5
64.2
51.4
78.5
Petroleum refining and related industries.
Petroleum refining_________________
Other petroleum and coal products.......
177.8
145.9
31.9
180.1
146.5
33.6
182.0
146.8
35.2
182.8
146.9
35.9
185.4
148.1
37. 3
188.2
149.8
38.4
190.1
151.6
38. 5
186.4
148.5
37.9
182.9
146.6
36.3
180.6
145.8
34.8
178.7
145.5
33.2
178.0
145.3
32.7
177.9
145.1
32.8
182.0
147.5
34. 5
183.9
149.6
34.2
Rubber and miscellaneous plastic products____________________________
Tires and inner tubes_______________
Other rubber products______________
Miscellaneous plastic products_______
531.4
109.2
187.9
234.3
536.8
110.1
188.0
238.7
534.7
110.2
185.2
239.3
529.3
109.2
183.5
236.6
523.2
108.8
182.7
231.7
520.5
109.3
180.9
230.3
509.6
109.1
177.9
222.6
514.2
107.9
180.9
225.4
505.4
106.6
179.7
219.1
502.0
105.1
177.9
219.0
497.7
104.8
178.1
214.8
493.9
104.4
177.9
211.6
493.4
105.6
178.4
209.4
471.5
101.8
172.4
197.4
436.0
99.0
164.0
172.9
Leather and leather products_________
Leather tanning and finishing________
Footwear, except rubber________ . .
Other leather products___ __________
Handbags and personal leather goods.
351.3
30.6
235.3
85.4
355.6
31.4
235.4
88.8
36.1
357.2
31.0
234.9
91.3
37.8
355.1
30.8
233.3
'91.0
37.7
356.9
31.2
235.7
90.0
36.7
364.8
31.9
242.0
90.9
37.0
350.3
31.2
234.6
84.5
33.3
362.2
31.8
240.7
89.7
36.0
356.4
31.5
237.0
87.9
34.6
354.9
31.6
235.4
87.9
35.0
358.8
31.9
238.8
88.1
36.4
360.0
32.1
240.4
87.5
35.9
354.7
32.3
237.7
84.7
34.0
350.9
31.6
233.4
85.9
35.4
347.6
31.4
230.5
85.7
37.2
Transportation and public utilities. ---------
4,155
4,199 4,208 4,198 4,218 4,154 4,171 4,180 4,115
727. 6 715.3
716 2 712 3 715 6 720 6 728 3
628 4 636 2
619. 5 620.5
635.2 623. 6
270. 5 268.0 267 5 264 8 246 3 246 8 255. 0 267. 5
81 4
81 0
79 6
79 9
80.9
80.5
79.9
80. 4
109.5 107 3 105 8 104 5 104 0 104 5 105.6 105. 4
42.6
42.5
43! 0 43.9 44.7 44.1 39.5 42.3
1,030.7 1,045.4 1,045.5 1, 045. 7 1, 030.8 1, 030. 7 1, 025. 5 989.9
88 9
82 8 81. 5
77.1
87.8
91.3
79 5 79.8
268.0 266.1 264. 5 261 6 201.7 215. 6 259.9 254.2
239.1 237.4 236. 2 233 6 174.1 187. 7 232.1 227. 0
19. 3
18. 7
18.3
18 4 18. 5
19. 4
19. 4
18 9
320.5 322.6 315. 5 326 7 325. 5 330.9 320. 4 329.9
943.0 942.8 937.3 938 8 949.0 944. 9 928.7 911.4
790.3 790.4 784.9 786 5 796.3 792. 2 777. 7 761.6
33.6
33.2
33.2
33.6
33.3
33.2
33.1
33.5
112.8 112.8 112. 9 112. 9 112.9 112.8 111. 5 110.3
631.7 632.0 633.2 641 4 652. 7 652.4 643.6 627.7
257.3 257.4 257.6 260 3 264.6 263.9 261. 0 254.8
156.0 155.9 156.1 158. 6 161.7 162. 0 159.6 154.6
176.8 176.9 177.1 179. 7 182.8 182.8 180.1 176.2
42.4
43.6
41.6
42.9
42.1
41.8
43.7
42.8
4,077
711.9
619. 6
269.3
80.8
108.8
41.7
973.8
75.8
250.8
223.8
18.6
319.3
906.6
757.7
32.7
109.9
627.1
254. 6
154.9
175.8
41.8
4,056
708.3
615.3
272.8
81. 5
110.9
41.1
969.8
78. 0
246. 6
220. 0
18. 7
315.2
899. 4
751. 4
32.6
109.1
624.7
253. 4
154.8
175. 4
41.1
4,035
708. 2
614. 6
273.3
81. 4
112. 0
41.0
960.7
77. 6
245.3
219.1
18.7
311. 5
893 7
746.3
32.4
108.7
623.2
252.7
154. 5
175.2
40.8
4,026
715.3
623. 7
274. 0
81. 5
111. 7
41.8
953.0
78. 7
241.2
214.9
18.9
309.8
889.5
743. 0
31.8
108. 4
624.7
253. 0
154.8
175.8
41.1
4,033
734 8
640 1
267. 5
82.1
100.1
42.0
963.2
80. 5
229.7
205.8
19. 5
312. 7
880. 4
735. 2
31.8
107.1
625.3
253. 4
155.0
176.5
40.5
3,951
756 1
665 0
266 9
83. 4
109 5
42.1
919.1
82. 2
212. 6
190.7
20. 0
313.6
847. 9
706.1
32.6
102.9
614.7
248.9
153.3
174.1
38.4
Railroad transportation______________
Class I railroads 3__________________
Local and interurban passenger transit__
Local and suburban transportation ..
Taxicabs_________________________
Intercity and rural bus lines_________
Motor freight transportation and storage.
Public warehousing________________
Air transportation_____________ _____
Air transportation, common carriers___
Pipeline transportation_______________
Other transportation_________________
Communi cation_____________________
Telephone communication__________
Telegraph communication__________
Radfo and television broadcasting___
Electric, gas, and sanitary services.. __
Electric companies and systems______
Gas companies and systems._________
Combined utility systems___________
Water, steam, and sanitary systems__
See footnotes at end of table.
https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
82
MONTHLY LABOR REVIEW, MARCH 1967
T able
A-9.
Employees in nonagricultural establishments, by industry1—Continued
Revised series; see box, p. 87.
[In thousands]
1967
1966
Annual
average
Industry
Jan,2
Dee.2 Nov.
Oct.
Sept.
Aug.
July
June
May
Apr.
Mar.
Feb.
Jan.
1965
1964
Wholesale and retail trade______________ 13,351 14,254 13,599 13, 285 13,253 13,224 13,225 13,239 13,061 13,015 12,826 12,738 12,835 12,683 12,160
Wholesale trade---------------- --------------- 3,510 3, 557 3, 533 3,521 3,498 3,521 3, 511 3,473 3,400 3,386 3,374 3,367 3, 371 3,317 3,189
Motor vehicles and automotive equip
ment___________________________
267. 0 266.1 263.2 263.9 277. 5 266.5 264.6 261.7 260.7 260.1 259.1 260.0 256.0 245.9
211.9 212.2 210.5 208.9 210. 6 209.0 207.8 204.2 203.2 202.8 201.9 201.6 198.2 192.0
Drugs, chemicals, and allied products—
151.5 152.7 151. 2 150. 5 150.1 148.6 148.3 146.2 145. 4 145.8 144.8 142.5 141.0 134.6
Dry goods and apparel______________
524.6 523.8 529.5 515.1 517. 4 532.1 530. 2 506.4 499.0 498.4 497.3 509.1 509.2 497.7
Groceries and related products_______
284.5 281.8 279.1 279. 0 284.0 282.4 276.0 272.0 271.0 268.7 267.0 263.8 257.1 242.7
Electrical goods___________________
Hardware, plumbing, and heating
158.7 158.9 159.4 158. 4 160.1 159.3 158. 2 155.8 155.6 155. 1 155.0 154.2 151.0 146.0
goods__________________________
639.8 636 3 633.3 632. 7 637.8 635. 5 625. 5 614.2 611.8 606.0 600.8 596.8 579.3 548.4
Machinery, equipment, and supplies..
1,205. 4 1,198.6 1,192.8 1. 187.9 1,194.5 1,188.1 1,174. 9 1,154. 2 1,152. 4 1,147. 8 1.145.0 1, 139. 9 1.124.8 1. 078.5
Miscellaneous wholesalers___________
Retail trade_______________ _____ ___ 9,841 10.697 10, UÖ6 9,864 9, 755 9,703 9, 714 9,766 9, 661 9, 629 9. 452 9, 371 9, 464 9,366 8,971
2, 555.9 2,160.8 2. 009.0 1, 938. 9 1,892.3 1,885. 5 1, 907. 2 1, 890. 9 1,888. 0 1, 846. 5 1.825. 0 1. 916.1 1,875.1 1, 763.1
General merchandise stores__________
1, 655. 7 1,373.3 1,267.8 1,215.1 1,185.6 1,185.1 1, 201. 8 1, 189. 7 1,183. 6 1,159.1 1.144. 9 1, 207.1 1,171. 3 1, 087.8
Department stores_________________
153.8 146.0 129.9 119.8 116.1 114. 5 114.0 112. 5 114. 2 115.8 118.2 129.9 119.3 108.3
Mail order houses__________________
417.4 350.9 330.4 322.1 307.6 304. 2 309.7 313.8 317.6 308.1 299.9 312.9 314.0 309.2
Limited price variety stores___ _____
1,612.6 1,585.2 1,577.0 1, 555. 5 1, 542.2 1.548.9 1, 549. 8 1, 543. 7 1, 534. 9 1, 535. 0 1, 528. 5 1,519. 5 1. 473.5 1, 419. 4
Food stores_________________________
1, 424. 4 1,404. 7 1,398.6 1,378.5 1,368.4 1.374.9 1,372. 6 1, 366. 6 1,356. 6 1, 359. 6 1,352. 1 1, 347.8 1, 299.6 1, 250.1
Grocery, meat, and vegetable stores.—
800.1 688.1 665.8 654.6 632.7 632.6 652.0 644. 9 661.7 624.9 615. 6 636.8 638.1 616.4
Apparel and accessories stores_________
143.5 114. 7 110.3 108.3 106.3 106. 7 109. 3 106. 0 106. 5 103. 9 107.0 111. 9 105.0
Men’s and boys’ apparel stores______
99.8
284.2 249. 4 244.0 236.4 234.0 230.8 238.0 238.0 237.5 230.2 225. 7 233. 3 235. 6 229.9
Women’s ready-to-wear stores_______
137.9 109. 4 103.5 102. 6 97.9 100.4 102. 2 98.3
Family clothing stores______________
98.4
96.6
96,4 100.3 102, 4 102.6
148.1 133. 7 129.8 131.3 123.3 124.1 127.8 127.9 143.6 121. 1 116. 4 120.5 123.9 117.5
Shoe stores________ __________ _____
448.3 438.0 431.6 427. 1 426.7 426.4 425.3 421.2 420.4 420.7 420.0 420.3 411.2
Furniture and appliance stores________
285.8 280. 2 275.2 273.3 272.8 274.7 274.3 270.4 269.5 268.9 268. 5 269.3 265.4 394.5
Furniture and home furnishings_____
255. 0
2.027.0 2,032.1 2,046. 7 2,055. 8 2,067. 8 2,069.5 2, 074. 4 2, 034. 9 2, 001. 6 1, 949. 4 1, 919. 4 1.904.6 1, 938. 7 1,848.1
Eating and drinking places___________
3,253. 5 3,161. 8 3,133.6 3,122. 7 3,141.0 3,151. 5 3,157. 5 3,125.1 3,122. 0 3, 075.1 3, 062.613. 066.9 3,
Other retail trade__________________ _
029.
5
2,929.
535. 2 537. 6 544. 5 549.6 563.0 568.5 568.8 553.5 550.4 538. 3 529.0 533. 9 541.8 533.04
Building materials and hardware_____
1,497.2 1, 488.1 1,477. 5 1,477.6 1, 485. 4 1,490. 6 1, 479. 6 1, 463. 0 1, 454. 3 1, 445. 0 1, 442. 4 1, 446. 6 1,425.
Auto dealers and service stations_____
753.9 /52. ö 747.3 745.3 747.5 751. 5 749.3 745.1 746.4 746.6 744.4 743.4 726.15 1,366.8
Motor vehicle dealers_____________
195.0 191.9 191.7 194.7 193.5 191. 1 187.4 183.9 178. 2 176.5 179.9 178.3 692.5
200.1
Other vehicle and accessory dealers..
167.2
543.2 540. 6 538. 3 540.6 543.2 545. 6 539.2 530.5 524.0 520. 2 521.5 523.3
Gasoline service stations__________
521. I 507.2
1,136.1
1
.
221.1
1,111.6 1,095. 5 1, 092. 8 1,092. 4 1,109.1 1, 108. 6 1.117.3 1, 091. 8 1, 091. 2 1, 086.4 1, 062. 2 1, 029.6
Miscellaneous retail stores__________
464. 4 430.4 425.6 418.4 415.1 414.3 416.5 413. 1 413.9 410. 0 409.6 411.8 401. 0 387.8
Drug stores_____ ______ _________
102.2 101. 7 102. 5 100. 5 100.7 101.1 106.5 111.3 113. 9 106.8 101. 0
Farm and garden supply stores____
97.6
97.4
94.6
116.6
109.7 104.3 102.9 102.9 104.0 105.6 109.2 114,2 118.1 119.2 108.9 108.5
Fuel and ice dealers.............................
3,094 3,104 3,098 3,099 3,109 3,146 3,148 3,112 3,070 3,056 3,013 3,024 3,018 3,019 2,957
Finance, insurance, and real estate_______
835. 4 832. 3 830.1 830.6 839.2 835.4 821.6 807.7 806.5 803.8 800.3 798.1 790.9
Banking___________________________
334.8 333.2 333. 0 333.6 337.5 337.3 334.4 332.5 332.6 333. 1 331. 7 333.0 326.8 314.8
Credit agencies other than banks______
93. 5 94.2
93.8
93. 8 95.8
Savings and loan associations________
95.8
96.0
96.9
97.2
97.2
97.3
98.2
97.1
94. 5
183.3 182.2 181. 2 181.9 182.9 181.3 180. 0 178.1 177.4 177.5 176. 0 176.5 171.8 164.3
Personal credit institutions__________
141.2 141.2 14.16 141.7 144.0 144.7 142.3 139.4 138. 1 136. 9 134.0 131.2 128.9 125.8
Security dealers and exchanges________
912.9 909.1 907. 3 908.3 915.1 911.2 899.4 891.4 890.9 890.1 889.1 888.2 890.8 889.5
Insurance carriers.—................... ........... . .
480.1 479.2 479. 6 480.8 484.0 482. 5 476.1 474.1 475.3 474.9 475. 8 476. 6 478.7 474.6
Life insurance_____________________
66.0
65. 0
67.1
63. 7 64. 0 62.7
Accident and health insurance_______
60.4
58.2
57.2
56.8
55.8
55.3
54. 5 55.2
327.6 325.8 324. 0 324. 7 327.1 325.2 322.0 318.3 317.7 317. 5 316.
Fire, marine, and casualty insurance...
4
315.7 316.2
243.6 242.2 240.7 241.4 244.2 243.7 242.2 239.2 238.6 237.6 235. 8 315.1
Insurance agents, brokers, and services..
234.2
233.1
6
554.7 558.0 565.1 571. 6 583.4 593.4 590.2 577. 9 568.2 560. 5 552.1 553.6 569. 0 225.
Real estate_________________________
556. 4
36. 7 39.1
35.6
40.1
Operative builders_________________
44.2
43.2
45.5
45.8
45.9
45.0
43.2
43.5
46.9
46.2
81. 7 81. 5
81.6
81.9
Other finance, insurance, and real estate.
82.5
82.6
81.7
81.6
81.3
81.1
80.5
80.1
79.7
78.9
9,661 9,731 9,739 9,751 9,707 9,772 9,782 9,702 9,572 9,465 9,331 9,250 9,176 9,098 8,709
Services and miscellaneous______________
610.2 620.8 645.1 687.9 789.5 789.5 702.7 661.7 640. 4 617.7 613.7 602.1 653.8 636. 2
Hotels and lodging places_____________
552.9 562. 4 583. 0 612. 2 650.9 653.1 624.4 594.9 579.4 561.5 558. 4 546.9 578.8 567.8
Hotels, tourist courts, and motels........
1,009.5 1,013.8 1,015.1 1,008.1 1, 013. 7 1,016.8 1, 014. 7 1, 001.6 995.3 988.2 982.6 983.5 982.2 953.9
Personal services___ ________________
548.2 552.2 555. 6 552. 7 561.1 565.6 565.2 553. 5 548.1 542.4 538.0 540.8 546.5 532.9
Laundries, cleaning and dyeing plants.
1, 256. 7 1,246.5 1,239.9 1, 227. 5 1, 232.0 1,225.6 1, 214. 1 1,189. 7 1,178. 3 1,169. 9 1,160. 0 1,144.1 1,102.
Miscellaneous business services________
2 1, 022.1
113.2 114.1 114.7 116.3 114.8 113.5 111.9 112.4 112.4 112.2 111.5 111.6 110.2
Advertising_______________ _______
112.6
68.9
68.9
68.6
Credit reporting and collecting agencies.
68.2
67.7
68.7
68.5
67.9
67.4
67.3
66.9
66.5
65.6
63.0
183.8 185.0 187.3 190.7 199.8 202.1 192.7 180.9 179.8 173.6 171.5 177.9 183.3 177.4
Motion pictures_______ _____________
Motion picture filming and distrib
uting___________________________
57.6
55.9
58.7
55.6
52.8
52.3
46.6
58.5
47.8
47.6
49.9
53.2
48.2
42.8
Motion picture theaters and services...
125.1 127.4 131.7 137.9 143.9 143.6 140.4 134.3 132.0 126.0 121.6 124.7 135.1 134.7
Medical and other health services.........
2,315.9 2,304.3 2,286.5 2, 268. 7 2,266.3 2,260.1 2, 232. 7 2,197. 4 2,192. 2 2,178. 0 2,164. 6 2,147. 9 2, 087.8 1,963.0
Hospitals_________________________
1,493.7 1, 488.1 1,477.3 1, 464.1 1,463.3 1,460.1 1, 440. 9 1,421. 7 1,417.4 1, 413. 1 1, 403. 9 1,393. 7 1, 364. 5 1,295.1
Legal services_______________________
200.4 199.4 198.8 198.6 201.0 202.3 196. 0 188.4 187.9 188.2 186.4 185.0 182.7 173.9
Educational services_________________
1,089.1 1,092.3 1,069. 0 973. 7 873.2 886.1 965.3 1,032. 1 1, 028. 7 1,033.7 1, 023.9 1,011.8 933.2 890.3
Elementary and secondary schools___
353.8 354.5 347.3 326.8 282.3 285.9 328.4 345.1 344.2 344.3 343.3 342.1 317.8 301.6
Higher educational institutions______
662.0 664.2 651. 4 577.9 524.1 533.4 569. 9 618.4 615. 0 620.2 611.8 603.4 551.2 526.6
Miscellaneous services________________
489.1 487.5 484.9 490.2 498.4 497.2 491. 1 479.8 480.3 482.0 477.1 471.3 452.1 422.6
Engineering and architectural services.
267.1 266.1 264.8 268.3 273.4 273.9 271.2 264.1 261.5 259.9 256.9 254.9 242.4 225.9
Nonprofit research organizations_____
68.3
68.5
68.1
68.6
69.9
69.9
68.6
67.6
67.7
67.6
67.4
67.1
63.6
66.6
See footnotes at end of table.
https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
A.—LABOR FORCE AND EMPLOYMENT
T able A-9.
83
Employees in nonagricultural establishments, by industry 1—Continued
Revised series; see box, f». 87.
[In thousands]
1967
1966
Annual
average
Industry
Jan.2
Dec.2 Nov.
Oct.
Sept.
Aug.
July
June
May
Apr.
Mar.
Feb.
Jan.
1965
1964
Government__________________________ 11,281 11,444 11,285 11,139 10,885 10,507 10,557 10,906 10,834 10,795 10,735 10,622 10,490 10,091 9,59
Federal Government4_______________
2,621 2,769 2,641 2,612 2,589 2,641 2,637 2,592 2,513 2,496 2,460 2,431 2,406 2,378 2,34
Executive____ ____________________
2,736. 4 2,608. 2 2.579.3 2, 556. 4 2, 608. 0 2, 604. 2 2, 559.8 2,481.5 2,461.5 2, 428.8 2,399. 7 2,375. 4 2.346.7 2,317.
Department of D efen se._________
1, 076.3 1,071. 7 1.057.4 1,042. 8 1, 055.4 1, 050. 7 1, 034.8 1, 001. 5 991.9 980.0 964.8 956.2 938.5 933.
Post Office Department___________
837.8 706.3 689.6 682.0 689.4 683.1 673.6 660.2 652.8 639.5 632.4 624.4 614.2 599.
Other agencies________ ______ ____
822.3 830.2 832.3 831.6 863.2 870.4 851.4 819.8 816.8 809.3 802.5 794.8 793.9 783.
Legislative____ _____ _____________
26.0
26.4
26.2
25.4
26. 5 27.1
26.6
25.4
25.4
27.0
25.2
24.9
25.4
24.
Judicial__________________________
6,1
6.1
6.2
5.9
6.9
6.1
5.9
5.9
6.0
6.0
5.9
5.9
5.9
5.
State and local governments__________
8,660 8,675 8, 644 8,527 8,296 7,866 7,920 8,314 8,321 8,302 8,275 8,191 8,084 7, 713 7,24
State government__________________
2,249.3 2, 247. 4 2.219.0 2.147. 6 2, 091.4 2,112. 4 2,156. 7 2,139.1 2,132.2 2,129.9 2.113.3 2, 084.9 1,995.9 1,856.
State education__________________
867.9 869.3 843.2 736.4 656.2 679.6 756.7 786.7 787.4 786.6 773.0 755.6 679.1 608.
Other state government......................
1, 381. 4 1.378.1 1,375.8 1,411.2 1,435.2 1, 432.8 1, 400. 0 1,352.4 1,344. 8 1,343.3 1.340.3 1,329.3 1.316.8 1,247.
Local government__________________
6,425. 5 6,396. 2 6.308.4 6.148. 7 5, 774.9 5,807. 4 6,156.8 6,182. 0 6,170. 0 6.144.7 6, 077.3 5, 999. 5 5.717.4 5,392.
Local education__________________
3, 694. 3 3, 673. 0 3,599. 4 3, 391. 2 2,926.1 2, 959. 6 3,387.2 3, 504.1 3, 507.6 3, 494.9 3.441.6 3, 379. 5 3.119.9 2,906.
Other local government_______ ____
2, 731.2 2.723.2 2.709.0 2, 757. 5 2,848.8 2, 847. 8 2, 769.6 2,677.9 2,662.4 2.649.8 2.635.7 2,620. 0 2.597.5 2,486.
1 Beginning with the October 1966 issue, figures differ from those previously
published. The industry series have been adjusted to March 1965 bench
marks (comprehensive counts of employment). For comparable back data,
see Employment and Earnings Statistics for the United States, 1909-66 (BLS
Bulletin 1312-4). Statistics from April 1965 forward are subject to further
revision when new benchmarks become available.
These series are based upon establishment reports which cover all fulland part-time employees in nonagricultural establishments who worked
during, or received pay for any part of the pay period which includes the 12th
of the month. Therefore, persons who worked in more than 1 establishment
during the reporting period are counted more than once. Proprietors, selfemployed persons, unpaid family workers, and domestic servants are
excluded.
https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
2 Preliminary.
3 Beginning January 1965, data relate to railroads with operating revenues
of $5,000.000 or more.
4 Data relate to civilian employees who worked on, or received pay for
the last day of the month.
5 State and local government data exclude, as nominal employees, elected
officials of small local units and paid volunteer firemen.
Source : U.S. Department of Labor, Bureau of Labor Statistics for all
series except those for the Federal Government, which is prepared by the
U.S. Civil Service Commission, and that for Class I railroads, which is
prepared by the U.S. Interstate Commerce Commission.
84
T able
MONTHLY LABOR REVIEW, MARCH 1967
A-10.
Production or nonsupervisory workers in nonagricultural establishments, by industry 1
Revised series; see box, p, 87.
[inthousands]
1965
1966
Annual
average
Industry
Jan.2 Dec.2 Nov.
Oct.
Sept.
Aug.
July
June
May
Apr.
Mar.
Feb.
Jan.
1965
1964
. ..
___
486
71.3
21.9
26.4
487
71. 2
21.8
26.2
490
70. £
21.8
26.5
496
72 5
22 3
26.9
506
73.5
22.2
27.3
502
72. 8
21. 7
27.0
504
73 S
22 4
27. 0
491
70 £
21. 7
26.2
452
70 1
20 6
26 3
482
69 5
20 0
26 3
480
69 8
20 3
26 2
484
69 6
20 3
26 0
494
6Q 5
21 8
24 8
497
Coal mining
__
____
_____
Bituminous__ _____ _ . .......
124.7
117.6
124.5
117. 4
124.5
117.4
124. 2
117 0
124.0
116.8
121. 0
114.3
123.8
116. 5
122.5
114 8
86 8
79 3
123 6
115 5
124 5
116 1
124 5
116 0
124 1
115 3
129 7
11Q 8
Crude petroleum and natural gas..
Crude petroleum and natural gas fields.
Oil and gas field services.
193.0
81.4
111.6
190.6
81.4
109. 2
191.3
82.0
109.3
193 9
84.4
109 5
201. 9
87.0
114.9
202.1
87.3
114.8
201.7
86.9
114 8
195 9
84.2
111. 7
195 6
84! 3
111 3
196 5
84.7
111 8
196 7
84.8
111 9
199 0
85.4
113 6
202 6
L88! 4
114 2
9l! 9
113 6
96.9
34.4
100.7
35. 5
103.0
36.7
105 2
37 5
106.4
38.0
106.5
37.9
105. 4
37. 5
101. 7
36 0
99 3
35 0
92 0
31 5
88 5
29 6
91 1
31 4
98 0
34 Q
95 8
34 3
M ining __
Metal mining.. Iron ores.
.
Copper ores.. .
------
..
----
_
.
__
- -
Quarrying and nonmetallic mining__
Crushed and broken stone______
Contract construction......... . .
.
2,422
..
General building contractors. ____ _ .
Heavy construction.. ______ ______
Highway and street construction... . .
Other heavy construction _ _ _ _ _ _
Special trade contractors__
________
Plumbing, heating, and air conditioning___ __ __ _ ____ _ _ _
Painting, paperhanging, and decorating..
Electrical work___
Masonry, plastering, stone and tile
work_________ . ____ ___ _ ..
Roofing and sheet metal work_____ ..
Manufacturing...
......
477
_ ...
Durable goods____________________
Nondurable goods__________ ___ ..
2,625 2,812 2,950 3,026 3,141 3,122 3,026 2,788 2,673 2,499 2,339 2,461 2,707 2,597
889. 0 930.7 959.3 977 3 1,017.3 1, 0Ó4. 4 975. 0 891 6 869 7 823 9 772 9 818 9 856 2
483.8 584.1 648.4 667 9 689.9 690.5 665. 7 590 7 529 7 433 1 388 3 421 3 555 8
221.0 299. 0 348.8 364 3 374.9 374.4 360 2 308 6 259 6 189 0 165 1 185 6 288 5 279 5
262. 8 285.1 299. 6 303. 6 315. 0 316.1 305. 5 282.1 270 1 244J. 223^2 235. 7 267 3
1,252.3 1,297. 3 1,342.2 1,380. 7 1,433.8 1, 427.3 1,385.5 1,305. 5 1,273.3 1,241.6 1,177.9 1,221.0 1,294.5 1,250.2
296.7
302. 2
306. 1 309. 6
312.1
312.9
306.. 0
296. 0
294. 4
291.6
284 4
294.1
297.3
286.1
110.4
196. 5
119.9
199. 8
131.9
201.2
137. 5
206. 4
145.3
211.1
141.8
206.4
133.3
200.2
122.6
191.1
116. 0
188.5
109 1
184.1
103 3
180.7
104 5
182. 5
127 6
186. 0
126. 5
174. 0
185.3
91.3
194. 4
94.9
208.2
96.1
217.4
95. 5
234.3
97.1
231.8
96.2
227.7
93.9
215.4
86.6
209 9
85 9
209.6
83.6
188 4
76.2
189 4
84.1
216. 5
89. 5
220.2
87. 0
14,265 14,440 14,548 14,581 14,582 14,417 14,159 14,351 14,074 13,969 13,878 13,775 13,617 13,413 12,781
8, 402 8,481 8,527 8, 530 8,501 8,304 8, 277 8,419 8,277 8,207 8,113 8,038 7, 942 7, 702 7,213
5,863 5,959 6,021 6,051 6,081 6,113 5,882 5,932 5,797 5,762 5,765 5,737 5,675 5,711 5, 569
Durable goods
136.8 132.2 132.6 129.3 126.6 122.8 120.2 119.1 117.0 113.4 111.9 110.0 106.8
Ordnance and accessories_______ _____
96.0 104.1
83.9
77.2
89.4
79.4
Ammunition, except for small arms___
84.9
82.6
68.1
86.0
76.7
76.1
75.2
74.2
73.0
63.6
71.1
6.3
6.2
Sighting and fire control equipment..
6.4
6. 2
6.2
6.0
5.8
5.4
5.3
5.9
6.3
5.7
5. 5
5. 0
36.8
39.1
41.1
Other ordnance and accessories_____
40.9
37.8
37.2
36.4
30.4
27.4
30.0
40.3
35.1
32.5
32.2
31.6
Lumber and wood products, except
503.6 516.8 532.1 541.0 552.6 570.0 568.5 573.9 548.1 539.1 532.2 526.3 525.4 535.4 531.6
furniture__ . . . ____________
Sawmills and planing mills__________ 210.2 214.0 219.4 222.6 228.9 235.2 234.6 237.0 229.5 229.4 227.1 222.7 225.1 229.3 230.8
Millwork, plywood, and related prod124.5 126.4 129.6 134.0 138.1 144.3 145.6 146.4 140.9 139.5 137.1 136.8 136.2 137.0 134.0
ucts__________________________
31.4
32.2
32.0
31.5
Wooden containers_____ . _ . . . ___
31.8
31.4
32.8
33.3
32.6
31.7
31.8
30.9
30.6
30.7
31.0
66.2
65.6
Miscellaneous wood products_______
64.6
65.5
66.0
66.9
63.1
60.5
66.0
66.9
65.6
65.2
64.3
62.6
64.6
374.4
Furniture and fixtures_______________
381.8 386.5 389.5 387.9 386.9 387.6
380.5 373.2 370.6 370.6 366.9 366.4 356.2 337.0
___ _ . _. 280.3 284.5 287.4 286.7 286.2 286.6 278.4 282.5 278.9 278.5 277.7 276.5 274.2 265.0 250.7
Household furniture___
26.3
26.8
Office furniture___ . . . . . . . _____
26. 5 26.2
23.1
21.9
27. 5 27.5
24.9
25.1
23. 5 24.6
24.4
24.2
34.4
35. 1 35.3
Partitions; office and store fixtures___
29.7
35.7
35.4
36.3
35.3
33.2
32.8
32.2
33.0
32.8
31.0
35.3
39.3
Other furniture and fixtures___ . . . _ 38.1
38.9
34.8
39.2
38.5
36.0
35.2
35.9
38.8
37.8
35.5
35.0
35.6
Stone, clay, and glass products___ ___
486.7 499.2 512.2 517.4 525.7 533.2 532.7 529.7 521.3 515.6 502.1 493.4 495.1 503.9 493.8
25.4
24.8
Flat glass.. _ . ______
25.3
25.2
25.9
26. 0 25.6
25.9
26. 4 26. 5 26.2
26.2
26. 5 26.1
Glass“and glassware, pressed or blown. 106.2 107.2 108.6 108.2 110.1 110.2 109.4 109.9 107.7 105.0 103.4 102.4 101.0 100.6
97.5
30.9
29.5
30.3
Cement, hydraulic______ .. ______
25.5
29.9
29.4
27.4
30.9
30.3
29.2
29.0
27.2
27.7
28.6
27.0
61.9
57.0
Structural clay products_____
.....
58.9
58.9
52.5
60.6
54.0
55.8
61.6
60.2
57.2
58.7
59.1
56.6
57.5
Pottery and related products___ .
37. 6 37. 0 35.4
36 4 37. 2 37.4
37.2
36.9
36.4
37. 0 36.5
37.3
37.9
36.9
Concrete, gypsum, and plaster products___ ______________________
125.0 130.2 135.5 139.2 142.8 146.1 146.9 145.6 141.0 138.6 131.7 127.5 129.3 137.2 134.3
94.9
Other stone and mineral products... ..
96.5
98.2
99.9 100.6 101.2 103.5 103.4
99.8
99.8 100.3
98.4
97.1
97.0
96.9
Primary metal industries_______ . . . . 1,081.8 1, 076.2 1,079.6 1, 083.4 1,095.0 1,100.2 1,102.2 1,108.3 1,085.3 1, 080. 0 1, 063.6 1, 052.7 1, 038.6 1,057.8 1, 003. 6
553.6
Blast furnace and basic steel products.. 521.9 516.3 521.7 527.6 537.2 545.8
551.8 537.1 530.9 517.8 506.9 498.5 538.0 515.6
Iron and steel fo u n d r ie s . . . _______ 204.5 202.0 201.9 201.7 202.0 202.8 201.4 204.5 201.3 202.1 199.9 200.8 199.6 193.9 181.9
61.3
Nonferrous smelting and refining___
60.1
53.7
61.8
60.3
60.2
59.4
57.3
61.6
60.8
59.1
60.7
58.9
58.7
58.7
Nonferrous rolling, drawing, and ex. _____ . . . . . .
trading______
162.3 163.5 164.0 164.1 164.4 162.0 158.7 160.4 159.5 159.6 159.1 158.3 156.1 149.4 141.6
72.0
73.7
Nonferrous foundries_______ _____
74.4
62.5
74.1
75.1
74.2
74.4
72.4
70 9 67.5
75.0
72.7
73.1
72.6
Miscellaneous primary metal indus55.2
56.2
tries........ ........ ........... . _
48.3
57.1
55.0
51.6
57.8
57.1
56.0
55.3
55.4
55.2
54.8
56.5
55.5
Fabricated metal products. . _______ . 1, 065. 5 1, 080. 0 1, 084. 0 1,077.3 1,071.1 1,057.9 1, 035.2 1, 060.9 1, 045.7 1,041.6 1, 031. 5 1, 026. 0 1, 018.9 982.4 914.0
Metal cans__ _________ . . _
52.6
52.3
54.6
56.2
52.1
52.3
56.2
55.4
54.1
50.3
50.7
52.3
51.9
51.1
52.7
Cutlery, hand tools, and general hardware._ _________
____
130.8 131.9 132.5 132.0 131.1 126.8 121.1 127.7 127.2 130.1 129.5 128.3 127.9 122.8 113.2
Heating equipment and plumbing
60.3
fixtures____. . . ______ ________
60.5
60.2
59.1
57.5
59.2
59.9
60.3
58.6
60.2
60.1
60.9
60.7
60.5
59.6
Fabricated structural metal products.. 285.5 291.5 293.7 295.2 299.0 301.1 300.5 297.7 287.7 283.6 278.6 278.5 279.4 271.3 252.2
88.2
77.4
70.8
Screw machine products, bolts, etc___
90.2
91.7
91.7
85.5
84.7
86.8
86.0
84.2
83.9
83.3
82.3
81.5
Metal stampings.._______ _ _____
204.2 206.7 207.5 204.6 197.9 186.8 176.8 190.7 192.7 193.2 193.8 192.8 191.9 180.8 161.1
72.0
60.2
64.4
Coating, engraving, and allied services.
68.4
72.1
71.0
68.5
70.5
70.8
69.4
69.4
66.5
71.9
9.1
68.6
56.0
46.3
Miscellaneous fabricated wire products.
50.4
55.3
55.1
57.6
57.0
57.0
55.3
55.0
52.8
52.7
53.6
53.6
53.5
Miscellaneous fabricated metal products_____________________ . . .
117.7 119.2 118.8 116.4 115.4 114.9 113.7 116.3 115.9 115.3 110.8 111.1 109.1 105. 5| 97.4
See footnotes a t end of table.
https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
85
A —LABOR FORCE AND EMPLOYMENT
T able
A-10.
Production or nonsupervisory workers in nonagricultural establishments, by
industry 1—Continued
Revised series; see box, p. 87.
[in thousands]
1966
1967
Annual
average
Industry
Jan.2 Dec.2 Nov.
Oct.
Sept.
Aug.
July
June
May
Apr.
Mar.
Feb.
Jan.
1965
1964
Manufacturing—Continued
Durable goods—Continued
1,364.4 1,356.9 1, 333.3 1,333. 4 1, 332.3 1, 325. 3 1,323. 7 1,325.7 1,308.9 1,298.9 1,289.3 1,279.1 1,261.7 1,208. 3 1,120.4
Machinery... . . . . ___ . . .
--------65.4
58.2
65.3
66.9
66.0
64.9
64.4
63.9
61.4
67.5
58.4
69.8
69.0
68.5
67.9
Engines and turbines... ____ _ . .
112.1 107.7 105.9 106.0 104.5 106.7 110.1 109.6 110.1 110.3 108.7 105.1
98.6
92. 1
190.2 189.5 189.3 189.7 191.4 190.7 192.9 192.5 189.2 186.9 184.4 182.6 178.9 175.1 160.5
Construction and related machinery—
Metalworking machinery and equip262.3 262.1 258.0 255.7 255.6 253.0 252.7 253.8 250.2 249.0 247.0 245.8 241. 2 229.6 212.6
m ent.. __. . ..
... . .
...
140.0 141.5 140.8 141.0 141.2 140.7 139.9 140.5 138.1 136.9 137.8 137.3 137.7 132.9 124.4
Special industry machinery.
------General industrial machinery________ 193.6 192.9 191.1 189.4 188.3 186.8 187.2 188.2 185.5 184.3 185.0 183.2 181.3 174.5 163.3
Office, computing, and accounting
machines___ . ______ . . .
.. . . . 134.6 133.7 132.3 131.0 130.2 129.1 127.1 125.6 124.6 123.0 121.8 120.8 120.3 111.7 101.9
82.4
82.1
83.2
81.9
80.6
77.2
84.4
84.7
77.7
78.1
78.5
73.2
83.7
81.1
81.2
Service industry machines__________
Miscellaneous machinery------------ . . . 176.6 176.5 173.5 171.6 169.5 168.3 167.6 166.5 162.9 162.1 159.9 157.7 155.6 146.0 134.1
Electrical equipment and supplies_____ 1,365.8 1,374.1 1,380.1 1,385. 3 1,365. 6 1,345.4 1,302.2 1,322. 4 1,291.1 1,281.0 1,256. 3 1,252. 5 1,236.6 1,139. 8 1,036. 8
Electric distribution equipment-------- 136.2 136.4 136.2 138.3 137.2 136.8 134.2 133.7 128.6 127.5 126.1 124.6 124.0 116.0 108.5
Electrical industrial apparatus_______ 161.7 158.0 154.6 157.9 156.0 157.8 155.0 154.8 147.5 149.3 147.7 145.6 143.9 134.7 122.7
Household appliances---- -- ------- -- . . . 146.3 150.9 150.0 153.5 148.6 144.4 134.1 143.0 145.6 143.9 131.1 140.8 136.8 130.6 124.6
Electric lighting and wiring equip150.4 151.8 151.2 153.5 152.6 150.7 148.3 152.1 149.7 148.1 145.9 144.2 142.0 134.0 123.2
ment_________ . ________ ____
91.8
Radio and TV receiving sets.------------ 156.1 155.9 158.1 154.2 148.8 141.2 128.6 128.8 121.6 120.5 120.8 121.4 122.4 107.1
Communication equipment.. . . . ----- 233.4 234.0 244.5 241.9 240.3 236.8 233.0 234.9 232.3 229.7 227.5 224.9 223.0 209.0 201.4
289.3
298.2
297.0
295.9
293.5
284.2
281.5
277.5
272.7
266.0
294.8
295.8
231.1
194.0
298.0
Electronic components and accessories..
Miscellaneous electrical equipment
79.7
81.6
81.6
88.9
88.5
86.3
81.8
80.5
79.7
78.3
78.5
77.3
86.9
70.7
88.0
and supplies------------ --------------. . .
Transportation equipment____________ 1,406.5 1,426.1 1,424.1 1,413. 6 1, 392.9 1,215.4 1,299. 2 1,362. 9 1,364.9 1,354.9 1,352.0 1,337.6 1,315.7 1,238.1 1,119.6
Motor vehicles and equipment___ . . . 682.4 702.3 708.1 701.5 692.0 519.1 608.9 685.6 691.5 686.5 690.4 687.6 679.2 659.5 579.2
496.4 493.0 486.4 475.9 468.0 458.2 451.7 438.1 434.7 429.8 422.2 413.3 405.0 357.0 338.6
Aircraft and parts____ ______
Ship and boat building and repairing... 141.2 140.3 135.6 141.5 137.8 142.5 144.1 141.5 142.8 143.8 148.9 147.8 144.7 133.0 121.1
48.3
47.4
47.2
44.9
45.5
44.9
43.6
38.8
48.9
48.8
46.1
47.1
46.7
48.0
Railroad equipment . . ________ ._
48.2
46.8
48.4
50.5
44.0
41.9
41.8
41.6
45.2
48.8
48.1
45.0
45.0
46.7
Other transportation equipment_____
Instruments and related products. ------Engineering and scientific instruments.
Mechanical measuring and control dev i c e s ...----- -- -----------------------Optical and ophthalmic goods-----------Ophthalmic goods
. . . . ___
Surgical, medical, and dental equipmentPhotographic equipment and supplies.
Watches and clocks __ ____________
286.4
Miscellaneous manufacturing industries..
Jewelry, silverware, and plated ware..
Toys, amusement, and sporting goods.
Pens, pencils, office and art materials
Costume jewelry, buttons, and notions.
Other manufacturing industries ____
Musical instruments and parts
322.6
38.7
71.2
36.8
47.3
137.0
286.1
283.7
282.4
279.8
279.4
274.9
277.4
38.1
38.3
271.2
37.6
267.9
37.3
267.0
37.7
264.2
37.7
260.6
37.2
247.3
35.9
234.0
36.0
70.4
35.1
25.5
46.4
57. 6
31.0
70.0
34.0
24.8
45.6
57.3
29.9
70.3
35.0
25.6
45.4
57.7
30.7
68.1
35.4
25.7
44.6
55.7
29.8
67.8
35.3
25.7
43.9
55.0
28.6
67.1
35.0
25.5
43.8
54.2
29.2
66.4
34.7
25.3
43.0
53.7
28.7
65.9
33.9
24.6
42.2
52.8
28.6
64.5
32.6
23.6
39.7
49.0
25.8
62.9
30.8
22.2
37.5
43.3
23.5
366.7
38.0
111.5
26.9
49.6
140.7
22.6
343.6
34.9
101.2
26. 7
45.4
135.4
22.2
358.3
38.1
105.3
26.8
48.5
139.6
22.0
350.6
38.1
101.5
26.1
47.7
137.2
22.1
343.6
38.0
95.3
26.2
47.2
136.9
22.0
336.4
37.6
89.7
26. 1
47.0
136.0
22.2
328.8
37.2
85.4
25.5
46.2
134.5
21.9
316.3
36.0
80.2
24.0
43.8
132.3
21.8
336.9
35.8
98.4
24.9
46.1
131.6
20.5
317.9
34.3
87.1
23.6
45.7
127.1
18.1
40.0
39.0
38.9
70.9
36.5
26.0
47.0
58.3
30.8
70.6
35.7
25.6
46.7
57.4
32.0
70.6
35.6
25.4
46.2
56.8
31.6
376.2
39.8
117.3
26.7
49.6
142.8
22.8
378.5
38.8
120.2
26.7
49.7
143. 1
22.9
372.0
37.9
117.3
26.9
48.5
141.4
22.6
40.7
40.2
70.8
36.1
25.6
47.5
58.3
32.7
346.6
39.8
92.2
26.7
47.8
140.1
23.2
Nondurable goods
Food and kindred products___ ______ 1,121.6 1,166.6 1,209.0 1, 243.9 1,283. 8 1,291.0 1,200.4 1,151.8 1,093. 2 1,086. 4 1,087.1 1,084.5 1,098. C 1,155.1 1,157. 3
Meat products_________ ____ _ . _. 256.7 265.0 265.5 265.6 262.9 263.5 261.1 254.9 246.7 243.0 243.5 245.0 246. C 251.8 252.5
Dairy products________ ________ .. 120.5 121.6 122.0 123.8 127.2 133.4 135.6 133.7 128.3 126.6 125.0 123.6 123.2 131.0 134.8
Canned and preserved food, except
212.2 242.7 280.1 335.8 336.2 260.9 213.7 186.0 189.1 181.9 183.4 185.8 220.1 214.8
meats. ___ - - - - - . . . ._
90.6
88.8
88.2
89.7
84.9
84.8
84.5
85.3
83.5
85.4
86.5
85.3
90.3
87.9
90.5
Grain mill products________________
163.2 164.2 166.1 164. C 164.6 167.3 157. 1 166.6 161.2 160.7 161.7 160.6 161. 4 165.8 167.0
Bakery products___
_____ ______
26.6
29.4
30.7
22.9
25.2
26.9
34.8
23.5
23.3
23.8
24.1
38.0
44.6
41.7
Sugar . _____________ ..
64.5
62.1
61.9
62.1
61.9
62.1
56.1
57.7
56.2
62.0
56.7
61.3
68.9
69.8
66.9
Confectionery and related products---121.7
111.8
111.4
107.3
113.3
124.2
126.0
116.2
'113.7
106.2
116.6
118.8
122.7
112.8
120.6
Beverages_____ ____ _________ . .
Miscellaneous food and kindred prod93.2
93.4
91.7
92.9
89.9
89.5
91.5
92.1
94.2
90.5
89.8
89.0
93.6
93.3
91.9
ucts____________________ ______
. Tobacco manufactures__________ _____
Cigarettes
- - - - - - __
Cigars
....
75.5
Textile mill products... . ---------------Cotton broad woven fabrics... . . ---Silk and synthetic broad woven fabrics.
Weaving and finishing broad woolens..
Narrow fabrics and small wares----- . .
Knitting__ _______________________
Finishing textiles, except wool and knit.
Floor covering.____ . . . ___ _. . .
Yarn and thread______ . . . . _____
Miscellaneous textile goods............. ..
See footnotes at end of table.
834.8
220.1
85.i
37.Í
29.0
196.0
63.7
https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
106.4
62.4
78.5
32.7
20.7
844.7
221.5
86.1
36.6
29.1
201.1
64.9
35.7
107.1
62.3
82.2
32.4
20.9
82.1
32.7
20.6
75.5
32.8
20.4
61.7
32.5
19.5
62.6
32.2
21.0
851.4 854.0
220.£ 219.6
86.4
86.5
36.4
36. £
29.C 28. Í
208.£ 212. Í
64.4
63.8
35.7
35.7
107.1 107.6
62.6
62.3
855.5
218.7
86.9
38.2
28.5
214.0
63.9
35. í
108.0
62.0
862.5
219.4
87.4
39.3
28.3
217.2
64.4
34. £
109.6
62.0
843.7
219.3
86.3
39.1
27.1
209.5
63.9
32.2
106.1
60.0
861.6
220.0
86.8
39.9
28.3
217.3
65.0
33.6
108.5
62.2
79.1
32.7
20.8
61.7
31.6
21.0
63.6
31.5
21.0
849.7 845.6
216. S 215.8
85.5
85.5
39.6
39.3
28. C 27.9
213.7 211.4
64.4
64.3
33.7
33. £
106.5 105.7
61.9
61.5
69.6
31.2
21.1
72.3
31.(1
20.8
74.6
32.1
22.6
78.4
31.4
24.0
841.7 835.8
215.7 214.9
85.6
85.1
39.4
39.1
27.4
27.6
207.3 203.4
63.9
63.7
34. C 34.5
105.7 105.4
62.3
62.5
829.9
214.8
84.9
38.6
27.0
199.2
63.7
34.7
105.1
61.9
823.1
210.5
82.9
38.8
26.2
205.8
64.5
33.7
101.0
59.7
798.2
208.8
81.7
39.5
24. 6
193.1
65.3
32. 0
96.8
56.6
66.2
31.3
20.8
86
MONTHLY LABOR REVIEW, MARCH 1967
T a ble
A-10.
Production or nonsupervisory workers in nonagricultural establishments, by
industry 1—Continued
[In thousands]
Revised series; see box, p. 87.
Annual
average
1966
1967
Industry
Jan.2 D ec.2 Nov.
Oct.
Sept.
Aug.
July
June
May
Apr.
Mar.
Feb.
Jan.
1965
1964
Manufacturing—Continued
Nondurable goods—Continued
Apparel and related products__________ 1,231.7 1,244.4 1,260.5 1,263. 4 1, 257. 3 1,264. 7 1,198. 5 1,257.9 1,241.6 1,225.6 1,246.1
Men’s and boys’ suits and coats.—....... 107.5 108.9 107.6 107.1 107.9 107.7 102.7 110.7 109. i 107.5 108.3
Men’s and boys’ furnishings____ ____ 326.9 329.5 331.7 333.4 334.9 337.3 325.0 337.7 333.4 330.4 329.5
Women’s, misses’, and juniors’ outer
wear—.............. ............. ....................... 380.6 379.6 383.8 385.2 383.3 389.0 368.6 385.3 383.1 374.2 390.0
Women’s and children’s undergar
ments—___ _______ ______ ______
110.9 114.3 116.9 116.5 115.1 114.5 106.1 112.4 110.6 110.5 110.2
Hats, caps, and millinery___________ —
25.1
24.3
25.1
25.3
26.0
24. C 24.1
21. Ç 23.0
27.5
71.9
70.1
Girls’ and children’s outerwear_______
71.7
71.6
71.5
73.5
74.9
72.7
72.2
70.0
72.7
Fur goods and miscellaneous apparel...
68.7
72.0
73.0
71. 4 71.7
66.5
69.4
67.5
67.7
66.7
Miscellaneous fabricated textile prod
143.5 148.2 152.5 151.5 147.9 145.0 132.9 143.4 143.6 142.3 141.2
ucts......................................................
Paper and allied products_____________ 526.3 532.9 533.5 528.7 526.5 533.5 527.8 529.8 515.0 514.0 509.6
Paper and pulp____________________ 171.8 173.9 173.4 172.0 173.2 176.5 178.0 177.0 171.5 170.8 169.7
55.4
54. 6
54. 9 55.2
55.5
Paperboard_______________________
55.3
54.9
54.9
53.7
53.7
53.3
Converted paper and paperboard prod
ucts____________________________ 127.0 129.0 129.5 128.8 127.3 128.8 125.7 126.5 122.8 123.5 121.9
Paperboard containers and boxes_____ 172.1 174.5 175.3 173.3 171.1 172.0 169.2 171.4 167.0 166.0 164.7
Printing, publishing, and allied indus
664.0 672.1 666.2 664.0 661.4 657.8 653.2 653.0 645.6 645.2 640.5
tries.................................... .................
179.2 183.4 181.7 181.3 181.2 177.7 178.0 178.2 177.8 178.7 175.3
Newspaper publishing and printing__
25.8
25.9
26.3
25.7
Periodical publishing and printing___
26.1
25.5
25.7
26.2
25.4
25.2
56.9
Books_______________ ______ _____
56.5
M fi
55 0 54. 7
263.6 263.7 261.7 261.4 259.6 256.5 254.8 256.2 254.1 253.0 252.8
Commercial printing____________ _
45.1
46.3
47.0
46.5
48.3
Bookbinding and related industries___
46.5
44.0
44.2
43.8
46.9
46.3
Other publishing and printing indus
94.4
93.1
92.9
93.1
95.3
tries........................... ..........................
95.2
89.6
89.2
87.9
92.4
91.6
574.0 576.9 576.4 575.2 576.6 583.5 577.8 579.8 570.4 567.7 560.6
Chemicals and allied products............ .
Industrial chemicals________________ 171.8 171.4 170.9 168.8 171. 4 172.9 171.8 171.7 168.2 168.1 167.7
Plastics materials and synthetics_____ 135.6 138.7 138.9 138.8 139.9 142.1 141.2 140.5 137.2 137.0 136.1
67.3
67.3
67.9
68.4
69.2
Drugs___ ________ ________________
67.9
65.6
65.1
65.1
68.7
68.0
64.6
68.7
69.6
68.6
66.9
Soap, cleaners, and toilet goods______
68.0
61.4
65.6
60.9
66.3
67.5
36.4
36.9
37.
4
39.0
36.5
Paints, varnishes, and allied products..
36.7
37.2
36.7
36.5
38.7
38.5
33. 6 31.8
35.4
31.6
33.8
Agricultural chemicals______________
33.1
40.7
44.5
40.2
31.5
35.7
60.2
60.1
62.3
60.1
61.2
55.9
Other chemical products____________
60.9
54.9
54.1
59.6
57.9
Petroleum refining and related indus111.0 112.7 114.2 114.7 116.2 118.2 118.2 117.0 113.7 111.9 110.3
tries......... ............ ............................
88.8
89.3
90.4
88.8
89.2
87.9
Petroleum refining_________ _______
89.2
87.6
87.4
90.3
89.6
25.9
26.9
22.2
27.8
23.5
25.8
25.0
24.3
Other petroleum and coal products.......
22.9
27.9
27.4
Rubber and miscellaneous plastic prod
ucts____________________________ 418.3 420.4 419.1 414.7 409.2 406.1 395.1 400.5 393.4 390.8 387.6
77. 2 77. 4 77.3
Tires and inner tubes______________
77.4
77.6
75.5
74.2
74.0
78.3
78.3
76.6
Other rubber products......... ................ 152.0 149.5 147.2 146.0 145.0 143.0 140.0 143.2 142.4 141.0 141.5
187.
0 185.7 177.8 180.7 175.5 175.6 172.1
Miscellaneous plastic products_______ 188.7 192.6 193.6 191.3
Leather and leather products.......... ........ 305.3 310.1 312.0 310.3 312.4 319.9 306.0 317.9 312.4 310.7 315.1
Leather tanning and finishing___ ____
27.2
26.9
26.5
27.9
27.4
27.1
27.5
27.5
27.8
27.2
27.8
Footwear, except rubber____________ 207.6 208.0 207.4 206.3 208.8 214.9 207.8 213.7 210.3 208.9 212.6
77.1
76.4
Other leather products______________
77.1
71.2
74.7
77.5
74.6
74.3
71.0
74.7
76.4
33.1
32. 2 32.5
Handbags and personal leather goods. —
31.3
33.2
29.9
30.3
31.6
29.0
31.5
Transportation and public utilities :
Local and interurban passenger transit:
76.7
76.9
Local and suburban transportation___
75.2
76.6
76.4
75.5
75.7
76.0
76.5
77.2
40. 4 41. 2 40.6
Intercity and rural bus lines..................
39.4
39.0
39.0
36.3
38.7
38.0
37.5
Motor freight transportation and Storage937.7 953.7 955.1 956. 0 942.0 942. 4 935.7 901.5 886.3 882.5
72. 8 71.6
Public warehousing________________
78. 5
77.2
80.8
69.7
69.9
67.2
66.1
68.1
15, 8
15.4
Pipeline transportation.................. ...........
16.3
15.2
15.3
16.3
16.3
15.6
15.6
15.6
Communication_____________________
745.9 745.6 741.1 742. 9 754.7 750.4 735.0 720.2 716.4 710.6
Telephone communication___ _____
629.6 629.5 624. 8 626. 9 638.2 634.0 619.9 606.7 603.0 598.4
23.1
23.0
Telegraph communication a_________
23.1
23.1
23.0
23.1
22.8
22.7
22.5
22.4
91.1
90. 9 91.3
Radio and television broadcasting____
91.0
91.0
91.2
90.2
88.7
88.8
87.7
Electric, gas, and sanitary services_____
545.3 545.9 547. 5 556. 7 567.5 567.1 559.7 545.1 544.7 542.4
Electric companies and systems______
218.9 219.0 219. 3 222.0 226.1 225.3 222.5 216.6 216.3 215.1
Gas companies and systems_________
134.1 134.1 134. 4 137.1 140.2 140 4
Combined utility systems___________
156.0 156.3 156.8 160.0 162.9 163.1 161.0 157 9 15719 157.3
37. 6 38.3
37.0
Water, steam, and sanitary systems__
36.3
36.5
38.3
37.7
36.9
36.5
36.0
Wholesale and retail trade______________ 11,870 12, 765 12,139 11,936 11,802 11,787 11,798 11,815 11,643 11,595 11,419
Wholesale trade_____________________ 2,964 3,012 2,992 2,982 2,960 2,984 2,977 2,945 2,875 2,864 2,855
Motor vehicles and automotive equip
ment-__________________________
223.6 223.5 220.3 221.1 223.7 223.0 221.8 219.7 218.6 218.0
Drugs, chemicals, and allied products..
175.8 176.1 174.4 172.6 174.1 172.7 171.5 168.3 167.8 167.8
Dry goods and apparel_____________
123.1 124.0 122.8 122.5 122.1 120.7 120.9 118.9 117.7 118.6
Groceries and related products_______
460.8 460.7 465. 2 452.4 454.6 468.6 467.1 443.8 436.8 436.5
Electrical goods____________________
233.6 231.7 228.9 227.3 233.1 232.3 226.9 223.8 224.2 222.6
Hardware, plumbing, and heating goods.
134.7 135.1 135. 6 134.7 136.4 135.6 134.7 132.2 131.9 131.3
Machinery, equipment, and supplies...
542.8 539.7 536.7 537.2 542.9 541.1 531.4 519.6 517.7 512.3
Miscellaneous wholesalers.....................
1,019.0 1,013.4 1,009.7 1,005.1 1.011.9 1,009.2 996.9 977.7 976.4 972.1
See footnotes at end of table.
https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
1,238.6 1,181.1 1,205. 1,158.3
108.1 107.0 106.4 102.6
326.4 323.0 318.2 297.1
390.6
359.2
375.1
363.3
108.8
27.8
73.1
64.8
104.1
24.7
68.8
59.5
106.8
25.9
70.2
65.9
106.5
26 4
69.4
63.0
139.0
134.8
136.7
130.0
506.8
169.1
53.3
506.9
169.3
53.6
498.5
169.1
53.4
488.8
169.9
53.0
120.3
164.1
119.7
164.3
116.6
159.3
112.4
153.5
638.1
177.3
26.2
632.9
176.6
25.7
621.8
175.6
25.4
602.1
169.7
26.1
249.2
42.8
248.5
42.0
242.8
41.8
236.3
39.5
89.2
552.9
167.1
135.3
64.7
62.6
36.2
35.1
51.9
88.1
548.1
165.8
135.1
64.1
62.6
35.9
33.3
51.3
86.3
545.3
166.4
131.3
61.7
64.4
36.9
34.6
50.0
83.2
529.4
165.5
122.2
59.8
62.4
36.3
34.0
49.3
109.8
87.4
22.4
109.5
87.1
22.4
112.4
88.3
24.1
114.2
90.4
23.8
384.2
73.8
141.1
169.3
316.5
28.1
214.1
74.3
31.2
385.0
74.9
142.2
167.9
311.1
28.3
211.2
71.6
29.4
366.6
72.7
136.4
157.5
308.3
27.5
207.8
73.0
30.7
336.3
70.9
128.6
136.8
305.5
27.5
204.8
73.3
32.3
77.1
37.2
874.1
67.7
15.7
705.6
593.8
22.3
87.4
540.8
214.2
77.2
38.1
865.5
68.9
15.8
702.5
591.2
22.1
87.1
541.9
214.3
77.8
38.7
878.2
70.7
16.3
698.1
587.2
22.2
86.8
544.0
214.8
79.3
38.7
836.7
72.4
16.9
674.5
565.9
22.9
84.0
535.1
211.7
156.9 157.1 158.1 155.5
33.4
35.3
35.6
35.9
11,339 11,433 11,326 10,869
2,850 2,856 2,818 2,719
217.4
167.3
117.6
436.0
221.4
131.4
507.5
970.3
218.3
167.0
115.0
447.0
219.2
130.9
503.6
966.3
214.9
164.2
114.2
449.0
214.0
128.5
490.6
956.2
206.8
159.0
110.4
439.9
203.5
125.1
465.4
920.0
87
A —LABOR FORCE AND EMPLOYMENT
T
able
A-10.
Production or nonsupervisory workers in nonagricultural establishments, by
industry 1—Continued
Revised series; see box below.
[In thousands]
Annual
average
1966
1967
Industry
Jan.2 Dec.2 Nov.
Wholesale and retail trade— Continued
Retail trade
__ _______
_____
General merchandise stores___
__Department stores
________ _ -IVTail order houses
_ ____ _______ _
Limited price variety stores__ ____
Food stores
___ _
_______
Grocery meat- and vegetable stores_
Apparel and accessories stores
yfpn’s and hoys’ apparel stores
Women’s ready-to-wear stores__
Family clothing stores
____
Shoe stores
___ _ _
___
Furniture, and appliance stores__
Furniture and*home furnishings_____
Rating and drinking places__
Other retail trade
_Rnilding materials and hardware___
IVTotor vehicle dealers.
Other vehicle and accessory dealers___
Drug stores
...
Fuel and ice dealers
Finance insurance, real estate t .
8,906
.
Ranking
____ _
Credit agencies other than banks---------- —
Savings and loan associations. __
Security dealers and exchanges------------- —
Insurance carriers
Life insurance
__
Accident and health insurance.
__
Fire marine and casualty insurance __
2,459
Oct.
Sept.
Aug.
July
June
May
Apr.
Mar.
Feb.
Jan.
1965
1964
9, 753 9,147 8,954 8, 842 8, 803 8,821 8,870 8,768 8,731 8,564 8, 489 8,'577 8, 508 8,151
2, 388.8 1, 998.1 1,848.8 1, 779. 6 1, 734.8 1,731.7 1, 750.1 1,732.7 1,729. 2 1, 690. 3 1, 669. 9 1, 758.1 1,721.2 1, 613. 0
1,547. 8 1,270. 3 1,165.0 1,113.2 1, 084.6 1, 087. 5 1,100.8 1, 089. 4 1,083.6 1,061.3 1,048.0 1,108. 7 1,076.0 998.0
145.8 138.0 122.2 112.2 108.7 107.0 106.6 105.1 106.7 108.5 110.7 122.5 112.1 101.3
396.3 330.3 309.9 301.3 287.1 283.7 289.3 292.9 296.8 287.2 279.0 291.1 293.4 285.4
1, 484. 7 1, 472. 3 1,466.9 1, 443. 8 1,431.4 1, 438.9 1, 440. 0 1, 433. 0 1, 425. 6 1, 425. 6 1, 419. 4 1,410.5 1,368. 7 1,320. 9
1,308.4 1, 303. 4 1,299.9 1,278.6 1, 269.1 1,276.8 1, 274. 5 1, 267. 8 1, 259. 2 1, 262.1 1, 253. 4 1, 249. 2 1, 204.8 1,160. 6
731.1 620.3 598.5 586.6 567.0 567.7 585.7 579.6 596.4) 559.1 551.1 572.2 575.0 557.0
90.2
94.6
93.7
96.8 101.3
95.5
95.7
96.7
98.9
96.2
132.6 104.3 100.1
97.7
261.4 226.6 221.4 213.6 211.7 209.2 215.9 216.0 215.3 208.1 203.8 211.2 213.7 209.1
93.3
95.4
95.6
88.8
88.9
90.6
91.1
93.2
94.8
90.6
95.9
129.7 101.6
94.6
131.0 116.7 112.8 114.1 106.1 107.0 110.4 111.9 127.5 104.7 100.4 104.4 108.1 102.7
395.0 385.6 379.6 375.5 375.3 375.1 373.6 370.3 369.4 369.8 369.0 370.3 363.6 349.8
251.8 246.8 242.1 240.3 239.5 241.5 240.5 237.4 236.1 235.9 235. 6 236.9 234.4 225.8
1,887. 5 1,893.2 1,912.2 1,918.0 1,932.4 1,934. 8 1,940.2 1, 903.9 1,869. 4 1, 819. 2 1, 789. 3 1, 771. 6 1,806. 7 1, 722. 0
2,866.1 2,777.1 2,748.1 2, 738. 8 2, 762. 0 2,772. 5 2, 780. 0 2, 748. 7 2, 741.2 2, 700. 3 2, 690. 5 2, 694. 7 2, 672.8 2, 587.8
458.0 461.4 467.7 473.0 486.7 492.3 490.9 476.6 473.7 461.6 452.8 458.1 467.1 460. 5
641.9 641.1 636.7 634.5 638.9 642.0 640.8 636.9 639.0 639.7 638.4 638.2 626.0 596.8
174.3 169.0 165.9 165.8 169.0 168.1 166.3 162.9 159. 6 154.1 152.5 155.8 154. 9 144.4
427.2 394.1 388.1 381.2 377.9 376.5 379.1 375.7 375.8 372:7 371.9 374.7 366.2 354.8
95. 6
95.9
95.2 100.0 104.3 104.0
91.6
88.8
89.7
88.9
95.0
102.4
98.9
90.1
2,475
696.3
265.8
75.1
123.8
644.2
279.2
58.5
274.9
2,472
694.1
264.5
74.8
124.1
640.5
278.3
57.4
273.3
2,473
691.6
264.4
75.5
124.8
638.7
278.1
56.4
272.0
2,485 2,522
692.8 701.9
265. 3 269.5
77.4
75.4
124. 5 126.5
641.2 647.5
279.8 282.6
55.5
55.4
273.3 275.9
2,526
698.3
269.7
78.4
127.7
645.4
282.2
54.4
274.5
2,493
685.1
266.9
77.5
125.5
635.5
277.8
52.1
271.4
2,454
671.9
265.2
77.6
123.2
628.2
276.0
49.9
268.2
2,441
671.3
265.5
78.8
121.7
628.5
277.4
49.0
268.0
2,431
669.1
266.3
78.8
120.6
629.0
277.4
48.3
269.2
2,413
666.2
265.3
78.8
117.9
626.9
277.5
47.5
267.7
2,410
ööö. 3
266.9
80,0
115.2
626.6
277.7
47.1
267.4
2,425
662. 6
263.3
79.7
113.8
632.7
281.7
46. 5
269.1
2,386
645.9
254.1
78.2
111. 6
638.9
283.7
47. 0
271.3
Services and miscellaneous:
Hotels and lodging places:
Hotels tourist, courts, and motels...
Personal services:
Laundries cleaning and dyeing plants..
Motion pictures:
Motion picture filming and distribution
- __ ______ _
516.4
526.7
545.9
573.0
610.5
612.9
585.7
556.5
541.9
524.4
522.0
510.8
541.8
532. 4
496.2
499.8
502.9
499.7
508.2
512.0
511.5
499.7
494.3
489.0
484.7
486.8
490.3
474.4
36.8
35.8
34.8
33.8
35.9
36.6
32.9
28.8
28.6
29. 5
29.7
32.1
30.3
27.2
i For comparability of data with those published in issues prior to October
1966, and coverage of these series, see footnote 1, table A-9.
For mining and manufacturing data, refer to production and related
workers; for contract construction, to construction workers; and for all other
industries, to nonsupervisory workers.
Production and related workers include working foremen and all nonsuper
visory workers (including leadmen and trainees) engaged in fabricating,
processing, assembling, inspection, receiving, storage, handling, packing,
warehousing, shipping, maintenance, repair, janitorial, and watchmen
services, product development, auxiliary production for plant’s own use
(e.g., powerplant), and recordkeeping and other services closely associated
with the above production operations.
Construction workers include working foremen, journeymen, mechanics,
apprentices, laborers, etc., engaged in new work, alterations, demolition,
repair, and maintenance, etc., at the site of construction or working in shop
or yards at jobs (such as precutting and preassembling) ordinarily performed
by members of the construction trades.
Nonsupervisory workers include employees (not above the working super
visory level) such as office and clerical workers, repairmen, salespersons,
operators, drivers, attendants, service employees, linemen, laborers, janitors,
watchmen, and similar occupational levels, and other employees whose
services are closely associated with those of the employees listed.
2 Preliminary.
3 Data relate to nonsupervisory employees except messengers.
4 Nonoffice salesmen excluded from nonsupervisory count for all series
in this division.
Caution
The revised series on employment, hours, and earnings, and labor turnover in non
agricultural establishments should not be compared with those published in issues prior
to October 1966. (See footnote 1, table A-9, and “BLS Establishment Employment
Estimates Revised to March 1965 Benchmark Levels” appearing in the September 1966
issue of E m p l o y m e n t a n d E a r n i n g s and M o n t h l y R e p o r t o n t h e L a b o r F o rc e .) More
over, when the figures are again adjusted to new benchmarks, the data presented in this
issue should not be compared with those in later issues which reflect the adjustments.
Comparable data for earlier periods are published in E m p l o y m e n t a n d E a r n i n g s
S t a t i s t i c s f o r t h e U n i t e d S t a t e s , 1909-66 (BLS Bulletin 1312-4), which is available at
depository libraries or which may be purchased from the Superintendent of Documents
for $4.50 a copy. For an individual industry, earlier data may be obtained upon request
to the Bureau.
https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
88
T able
MONTHLY LABOR REVIEW, MARCH 1967
A -ll.
Employees in nonagricultural establishments, by industry division and selected groups,
seasonally adjusted 1
[inthousands]
Revised series; see box, p. 87.
1967
1966
Industry division and group
Jan.2 Dec.2 Nov. Oct. Sept. Aug. July June May Apr. Mar. Feb.
Jan.
65, 360 65, 081 64,823 64, 466 64,168 64,199 64,072 63,983 63, 517 63,350 63, 247 62,811 62, 469
Mining_______________ __________________________
631
628
624
625
628
636
636
632
628
595
637
634
635
Contract construction______ _ _______ ____ .
3,286 3,286 3,204 3, 202 3,228 3,251 3,297 3,300 3,238 3,333 3, 419 3,323 3,318
Manufacturing_________ __ _ _____ _ ___________ . 19,480 19,445 19,415 19,312 19,204 19, 262 19,128 19,167 19, 002 18, 923 18, 840 18,722
18,566
Durable goods__________________________________ 11,464 11,439 11,424 11,387 11, 322 11, 324 11,210 11, 220 11,122 11,065 11, 007 10,911 10 805
Ordnance and accessories___ _____ _ _ ________
274
266
269
262
265
260
94£
257
257
249
253
Lumber and wood products, except furniture. .
613
606
607
609
621
607
622
628
623
633
638
633
642
Furniture and fixtures.._ . . . _____________
465
465
463
459
460
462
456
458
456
451
448
451
446
Stone, clay, and glass products____ ___ . . . . . . ...
641
636
638
633
633
637
641
643
643
646
648
647
649
Primary metal industries___ _ __ ._ ___
1,343 1,342 1,351 1,351 1,341 1,351 1,338 1,333 1,315 1,307 1,300 1 295 1 290
Fabricated metal products. ____ ______ _
1,382 1,379 1,378 1,365 1,357 1,360 1,346 1,348 b 341 1,345 1,344 1,332 l ’ 322
Machinery_____ _____________
1,941 1,933 1,917 1,912 1,903 1,901 1,888 1,865 1,846 1,827 1,818 1 810 1 797
Electrical equipment and supplies
1,966 1,960 1,959 1,962 1,941 1,948 1,903 1,904 1,877 l ’860 1,824 1,805 1’ 773
Transportation equipment.. . . . _ __
_
1,951 1,962 1,960 1,951 1,945 1,910 1,888 1,915 1,901 l ’ 887 1,881 1 853 l ’ 819
Instruments and related products.
444
447
439
432
431
439
430
428
424
’ 412
415
f 406
’418
Miscellaneous manufacturing industries_______ ___
441
444
445
440
442
443
439
443
443
441
438
434
428
Nondurable goods_______________ _
8, 016 8,006 7,991 7,925 7,882 7,938 7,918 7,947 7,880 7,858 7,833 7 811 7 761
Food and kindred products .
1,786 1,781 1,781 1,750 1,737 1,765 1,763 1,760 1,748 1, 757 1,767 1 762 l ’ 758
Tobacco manufactures . __ . . . _ .
89
85
87
79
78
80
85
86
85
86
86
85
85
Textile mill products_________
950
951
950
952
950
957
955
957
952
950
942
948
945
Apparel and related products.
1,411 1,408 1,406 1,403 1,390 1,395 1,388 1,424 1,412 1,396 1,386 1,384 1,356
Paper and allied products- .
....
684
684
682
670
676
677
674
679
665
664
662
661
657
Printing, publishing, and allied industries______
1,053 1,050 1,044 1,039 1,035 1,035 1,031 1,026 1,018 1, 017 1,009 1,007 1 003
Chemicals and allied products
974
976
976
965
969
968
963
961
945
'937
936
932
027
Petroleum refming and related industries. . ____ .
182
183
183
182
182
184
186
183
183
182
182
181
181
Rubber and miscellaneous plastic products .
532
534
529
517
523
520
515
518
508
506
5ÒÓ
496
494
Leather and leather products
354
353
355
355
355
357
350
361
364
363
358
358
357
Transportation and public utilities.
4,223 4,195 4,195 4,165 4,168 4,105 4,122 4,143 4,132 4,114 4,109 4,105 4,091
Total________________________________________ . . .
Wholesale and retail trade _____
Wholesale trade___________
Retail trade. _______
Finance, insurance, and real estate___
Service and miscellaneous.. ..
Government. _
Federal. ________
State and local____
____
13,532 13,404 13, 393 13,340 13,268 13, 264 13,256 13, 217 13,164 13,128 13,085 13, 045 13,009
3,531 3,518 3,505 3,486 3,474 3,483 3,483 3,470 3,445 3,434 3,422 3; 404 3j 391
10, 001 9,886 9,888 9, 854 9, 794 9, 781 9, 773 9, 747 9, 719 9,694 9,663 9; 641 9; 618
3,128 3,120 3,110 3,102 3,100 3,100 3,095 3,090 3, 076 3,068 3, 064 3,051 3,052
9,858 9,819 9,778 9,712 9,649 9,647 9,609 9,549 9,515 9,484 9,463 9,410 9,363
11,222 11,184 11,104 11, 008 10,923 10,934 10,929 10,885 10, 762 10, 705 10,630 10,521 10,435
2,639 2,629 2,621 2, 615 2, 594 2,610 2,601 2,571 2,523 2,501 2, 477 2,451 2,423
8,583 8,555 8,483 8,393 8,329 8,324 8,328 8,314 8, 239 8,204 8,153 8,070 8| 012
i For coverage of the series, see footnote 1, table A-9.
N o t e : The seasonal adjustment method used is described in The B L S
Seasonal Factor Method (1966) which may be obtained from the Bureau on
Preliminary.
T able
request.
A—12.
Production workers in manufacturing industries, by major industry group, seasonally
adjusted 1
Revised series; see box, p. 87.
[in thousands]
1967
1966
Major industry group
Jan.2 Dec.2 Nov.
Manufacturing_____
____
Oct.
Sept.
Aug.
July
June
May
Apr.
Mar.
Feb.
Jan.
14,487 14,445 14,436 14,350 14,268 14,330 14,201 14, 281 14,154 14,100 14,048 13, 967 13,833
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- . . .
Machinery
Electrical equipment and supplies
Transportation equipmentInstruments and related products____
Miscellaneous manufacturing industries.
8,494
136
534
386
516
1,095
1,077
1,364
1,362
1,386
287
351
8,468
130
529
385
510
1,091
1,076
1,360
1,355
1,393
285
354
8,467
131
530
385
507
1,103
1,074
1,348
1,358
1,395
281
355
8,442
128
529
381
507
1,102
1,062
1,346
1,363
1,392
280
352
8,395
126
531
380
507
1,092
1,055
1,339
1,350
1,389
277
349
8,395
124
542
382
512
1,100
1,060
1,338
1,353
1,353
278
353
8,293
122
543
378
515
1,090
1,043
1,331
1,320
1,324
277
350
8, 328
120
550
381
515
1,086
1,048
1,312
1,327
1,358
276
355
8,261
118
546
379
516
1, 070
1,046
1,299
1,308
1,351
273
355
8,226
114
554
374
521
1,066
1,049
1,284
1,297
1,344
270
353
8,190
112
563
375
525
1,058
Î, 047
1,278
1, 268
b 344
269
351
8,123
110
556
372
520
1,055
b 039
1,274
1,260
1,323
266
348
8,033
106
557
370
525
1,051
1,029
1,262
1,233
1,296
261
343
Nondurable goods_____ .
Food and kindred products .
Tobacco manufactures. . . .
Textile mill products___
Apparel and related products.
Paper and allied products..
Printing, publishing, and allied industries .
Chemicals and allied products .
Petroleum refining and related industries .
Rubber and miscellaneous plastic products . . .
Leather and leather products
5,993
1,189
77
847
1,256
531
671
581
115
419
307
5,977
1,185
73
848
1,250
531
667
583
115
417
308
5,969
1,186
74
847
1,250
531
662
581
115
413
310
5,908
1,156
66
847
1,246
525
659
576
114
409
310
5, 873
1,145
67
848
1,234
520
657
575
114
403
310
5,935
1,170
68
856
1,239
528
659
582
115
406
312
5, 908
1,165
73
850
1,232
530
656
577
115
403
307
5,953
1,166
74
854
1,268
525
654
578
115
403
316
5,893
1,154
73
850
1,257
519
648
564
113
396
319
5,874
1,163
74
847
1,239
518
647
559
113
395
319
5,858
1,174
74
846
1,230
515
642
560
112
390
315
5,844
1,169
73
843
1,231
514
641
558
113
387
315
5,800
1,163
73
842
1, 204
512
638
555
113
386
313
■For definition of production workers, see footnote 1, table A-10.
2 Preliminary.
https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
N o t e : The seasonal adjustment method used is described in The B L S
Seasonal Factor Method (1966) which may be obtained from the Bureau on
request.
A.—LABOR FORCE AND EMPLOYMENT
T able
A-13.
89
Unemployment insurance and employment service program operations 1
[All items except average benefit amounts are in thousands]
1966
Item
Nov.
Dec.
Employment service:2
New applications for work___
Nonfarm placements________
-
—
Oct.
794
513
721
420
Sept.
819
592
Aug.
801
619
July
869
619
1965
June
896
549
May
1,314
622
Mar.
Apr.
906
568
806
533
Feb.
850
547
Jan.
852
460
Dec.
905
452
707
462
State unemployment insurance programs:
709
915
626
826
1,019
1,280
690
665
Initial claims 34. ----769
693
985
1,285
1,399
Insured unemployment3 (average weekly
903
755
1,254
753
928
947
793
862
volume) 6----------- ------ -------------------1,044
1,301
1,590
1,307
1,644
1.9
1.6
1.6
2.1
2.0
2.7
1.8
Rate of insured unemployment7_______
1.9
2.3
2.9
3.6
3.0
3.7
2,960
2, 476
2,817 3,639
3,022
3, 087
Weeks of unemployment compensated. . .
3,971
3,385
5,852
4,098
5,653
4, 555
5,587
Average weekly benefit amount for total
unem ploym ent..----$41.39 $40. 57 $39.84 $39. 68 $40.65 $39. 05 $38.72 $38.86 $39.38 $39.83 $39. 66 $39.36 $38.81
Total benefits paid__________________ $157,566 $114,814 $93,697 $106, 548 $143, 058 $113,812 $114,358 $126,149 $155,494 $225,472 $217,171 $212,659 $172,110
Unemployment compensation for ex-servicem en:8 9
Initial claims3 6. . . . ------------- . .
Insured unemployment « (average weekly
volume)____ . . . . . . ---------Weeks of unemployment compensated...
Total benefits paid___________________
21
75
$2,973
Unemployment compensation for Federal
civilian employees:910
Initial claims 3_______ _ .
. . . . ..
Insured unemployment5(average weekly
volume).. . .. ----------------- ----- ..
Weeks of unemployment compensated__
Total benefits paid_______ _ ..............
10
9
9
7
8
11
9
7
7
8
11
19
12
20
75
$3, 045
17
67
$2, 752
16
60
$2,466
16
67
$2,731
18
79
$3,239
19
65
$2,645
18
79
$3,255
18
78
$3,217
21
92
$3, 718
26
118
$4,717
29
109
$4,319
29
100
$3,973
23
94
$3,740
Railroad unemployment insurance:
Applications 11___
________________
Insured unemployment (average weekly
volume)____ . _________ . . . ..
Number of payments 12______ . ----- ..
Average amount of benefit payment13..
Total benefits paid 14_____ ___ .
...
7
6
6
7
8
18
25
42
6
5
4
11
14
19
40
$76. 70
$2,858
18
38
$73.80
$2,550
16
34
$71. 99
$2,126
16
36
$72. 07
$2, 422
15
35
$74. 96
$2,499
16
31
$72.16
$2,138
15
54
$60.07
$2,913
18
77
$50.55
$3,750
23
53
$69. 79
$3, 606
26
69
$77.68
$5,154
28
54
$79.10
$4,148
30
68
$77.32
$5,092
28
66
$71.04
$4, 587
All programs: 13
Insured unemployment3_______ _____
1,313
955
799
802
980
1,001
841
916
1,112
1,381
1,679
1,739
1, 394
17
.
15
13
12
16
17
14
12
13
17
18
20
20
16
59
$2, 450
14
51
$2,117
15
63
$2, 561
19
81
$3,204
19
63
$2,443
17
72
$2,872
18
76
$2,936
22
92
$3, 558
27
121
$4,620
31
120
$4, 572
32
126
$4,816
29
111
$4, 278
1 Includes data for Puerto Rico beginning January 1961 when the Common
wealth’s program became part of the Federal-State UI system.
2 Includes Guam and the Virgin Islands.
3 Initial claims are notices filed by workers to indicate they are starting
periods of unemployment. Excludes transitions claims under State programs.
4 Includes interstate claims for the Virgin Islands.
5 Number of workers reporting the completion of at least 1 week of unem
ployment.
6 Initial claims and State insured unemployment include data under the
program for Puerto Rican sugarcane workers.
7 The rate is the number of insured unemployed expressed as a percent of
the average covered employment in a 12-month period.
3 Excludes data on claims and payments made jointly with other programs.
9 Includes the Virgin Islands.
10 Excludes data on claims and payments made jointly with State programs.
https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
11 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 re
quired for subsequent periods in the same year.
12 Payments are for unemployment in 14-day registration periods.
13 The average amount is an average for all compensable periods, not ad
justed for recovery of overpayments or settlement of underpayments.
14Adjusted for recovery of overpayments and settlement of underpayments.
15 Represents an unduplicated count of insured unemployment under the
State, Ex-servicemen and UCFE programs and the Railroad Unemployment
Insurance Act.
Source : U.S. Department of Labor, Bureau of Employment Security for
all items except railroad unemployment insurance which is prepared by the
U.S. Railroad Retirement Board.
MONTHLY LABOR REVIEW, MARCH 1967
90
B.—Labor Turnover
T
able
B -l.
Labor turnover rates, by major industry group 1
[Per
loo employees]
Revised series; see box, p. 87.
1966
1965
Annual
average
Major industry group
Dec.2 Nov.
Oct.
Sept.
Aug.
July
June 1 May
1
Apr.
Mar.
Feb.
Jan.
Dec.
1965
1964
Accessions: Total
Manufacturing:
Actual----------------- --------------- ----Seasonally a d ju ste d ___
2.9
15
5.1
5.1
5.1
16
4.6
4.8
4.9
4.6
5.3
5. 1
4.2
5.0
5.1
5.2
4.9
4.9
3.1
4.3
4. 0
Jf. 9
3.9
6.1
6.4
5.1
6.7
4.8
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_________
Machinery__ _. ____ __________
Electrical equipment and supplies____
Transportation equipment__________
Instruments and related products____
Miscellaneous manufacturing Industries_______________ _ __ ____
2.8
2.4
3.8
3.6
4.8
4. 5
5.9
4.3
6.2
4.2
4.5
3.8
6.5
4.8
4.9
3.6
4.6
3.6
4.9
3.7
4.2
3.4
4.7
3.5
3.1
2.0
4.1
2.9
3.7
2.0
3.5
3.4
2.3
2.3
3.2
2.7
2.6
2.8
2.6
4.5
5.6
3.1
2.8
4.4
3.2
3.7
3.8
3. 0
5.9
7.4
3.9
3.3
5.4
3.9
5.1
5.1
3.9
6.9
8.5
4.5
3.8
6.2
4.2
5.5
8.4
4.2
7.0
8.9
5.0
4.4
7.1
4.4
5.9
9. 0
4.3
6.4
6.8
4.6
3.0
5.2
3.8
4.3
4.5
4.1
10.2
7.8
6.7
5.6
6.9
5.7
6.2
6.2
5.9
8.6
6.8
5.3
3.8
5.5
3.9
4.6
4.8
3.9
8.8
6.3
5.5
3.4
5.0
3.6
4.3
4.2
3.4
7.3
6.5
5.7
3.9
5.2
3.8
4.7
5.4
3.8
5.9
5.6
3.8
3.5
4.6
3.5
4.2
4.3
3.5
6.1
5.6
4.0
4.0
5.0
3.9
4.7
5.2
3.6
3.7
3.8
2.4
2.7
3.2
2.7
3.4
3. 5
2.5
6.0
5.5
4.0
2.9
4.6
3.3
3.9
4.7
3.2
5.3
4.8
3.8
3.0
4.2
3.0
3.3
4.1
2.8
3.0
5.5
8.3
9.2
8.3
7.7
7.8
7.0
6.8
6.9
6.5
6.7
3.3
6.3
5.7
Nondurable goods . .
_____
Food and kindred products--. _ _ .
Tobacco manufactures____ ___ -_Textile mill products___ __________
Apparel and related products.. ____
Paper and allied products___________
Printing, publishing, and allied Indus-
3.0
3.9
6.6
3.0
3.2
2.4
4.2
5.4
5.8
4.2
4.9
3.4
5.4
7.6
6.1
5.2
5.8
4.4
6.3
9.2
7.1
5.9
6.7
4.8
6.7
10.3
15.9
6.3
7.5
4.4
6.0
9.2
9.0
5.3
7.4
3.9
7.1
10.2
4.8
6.3
7.0
6.8
5.3
6.7
3.7
5.5
6.8
4.3
4.7
5.7
3. 0
5.5
5.6
3.7
4.8
5.5
4.2
5.3
5.8
3.8
4.2
4.6
4. 5
4.4
5.8
3.2
4.4
4. 4
4.9
4.6
6.4
3.3
3.1
3.4
7.7
3.1
3.7
2.3
4.6
6.1
6. 0
4.3
5. 8
3.2
4.3
6.1
6.8
3.8
5. 5
2.8
25
1.7
33
2.2
4.1
2.7
4.9
3.0
4. 4
2.8
3.7
2.6
5.5
5.1
3.8
3.1
3.4
2.8
3.5
3.4
3.2
2.6
3.2
2.5
2. 5
1.7
3.2
2.4
3.1
2.1
1.1
1.4
1.9
2.0
2.0
2.2
4.5
2.3
2.3
1.9
1. 5
1.9
1. 3
1. 8
1. 6
3.1
3.9
4.9
5.3
6.0
6.2
6.9
6.6
7.1
7.3
5.9
7.5
7.3
7.4
5.4
6.5
4.9
5.5
5.3
6.0
4.4
6.1
4.7
7.1
3.1
4.4
4.4
5. 4
3.9
5.1
2.4
1.5
2.8
1.7
3.0
2.0
3.0
1.8
3.6
2.2
3.2
1.6
6.4
1.8
3.9
1.7
3.4
1.7
2.9
1.7
2.9
1.4
3.3
1.8
2. 5
li
3.2
1.7
3.2
1.7
Chemicals and allied products..
__
Petroleum refining and related Industries__________ -__ .. ____
Rubber and miscellaneous plastic
products__ ___ _______________
Leather and leather products________
Nonmanufacturing:
Metal mining______ _____
Coal mining____________
___
.
Accessions: New hires
Manufacturing:
Actual______ ____________________
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. ________
Machinery_______ . . _________
Electrical equipment and supplies.
Transportation equipment__________
Instruments and related products.. ..
Miscellaneous manufacturing industries____ _ ___________ _______
Nondurable goods____ ______________
Food and kindred products_______ ..
Tobacco manufactures______________
Textile mill products___ _________
Apparel and related products________
Paper and allied products___________
Printing, publishing, and allied industries________ . ________________
Chemicals and allied products_______
Petroleum refining and related industries________________ ________
Rubber and miscellaneous plastic
products____ _________ ________
Leather and leather products____ . . .
N onmanufacturing:
Metal mining.. ____________________
Coalm ining.. ____________________
See footnotes at end of table.
https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
2.1
.«? 7
3.1
.<?
4.7
3.9
5. 6
3.1
2. 6
3.6
4.8
5.7
2.2
3.9
4.0
4.0
3.9
4.S
3.9
3.8
3.8
2.1
2.1
3.1
3.0
4.1
4.0
4.5
3.7
4.5
3.4
3.5
3.1
5.5
4.1
4.0
3.0
3.7
2.8
3.8
2.9
3.2
2.7
3.3
2.7
2.3
1.3
3.0
1.8
2.4
1.1
2.7
3.0
1.6
1.5
2.5
2.2
2.0
1.8
2.3
3.8
5.1
2.5
2.1
3.7
2.7
3.1
2.8
2.7
5.3
6.7
3.3
2.6
4.6
3.3
4.3
3.9
3.5
6.1
7.6
3.8
3.2
5.4
3.7
4.7
4.1
3.8
6.3
7.9
4.1
3.1
5.4
3.5
4.6
4.0
3.8
5.8
6.0
3.7
2.3
4.0
2.9
3.4
3.1
3.3
9.2
7.1
5.7
4.7
5.9
4.9
5.3
4.7
5.4
7.4
6.2
4.3
3.1
4.6
3.3
3.9
3.4
3.4
7.0
5.6
4.1
2.7
4.1
3.1
3.6
3.0
3.1
6.0
5.9
3.8
2.7
4.2
3.2
3.9
3.3
3.3
4. 5
4.9
2.6
2.1
3.6
3.0
3.4
3. 0
3.0
4.4
4.9
2.5
2. 0
3.7
3.2
3.7
3.2
3.1
3.1
3.3
1. 5
1.3
2. 5
2.1
2.7
2.3
2.1
4. 8
4.7
2.7
2. 0
3. 5
2.6
2.9
2. 8
2.6
4.1
3.9
2.4
1.8
2. 9
2.2
2.1
2. 2
1. 9
2.4
4.1
5.6
4.1
3.6
3.7
3.1
3.2
4.9
7.5
8.2
7.2
5.4
6.3
5.4
5.2
5.0
4.3
4.0
2. 5
4. 5
3. 8
2.2
2.8
3.3
2.2
2.0
2.0
3.2
3.9
4.5
3.3
3.5
3.1
4.2
5.5
4.3
4.1
4.3
4.0
5.0
7.0
4.8
4.9
5.0
4.4
5.2
7.9
10.0
5.2
5.4
3.9
4.4
7.0
4.0
4.0
4.5
3.4
5.7
7.6
3.2
5.3
5.2
6.0
4.1
4.8
2.3
4.6
4.6
3.8
3.6
3.8
1.8
4.5
4.1
3.2
3.6
3.4
2.0
4.2
4.4
3.2
3.0
2.8
1.8
3.4
3.7
2.6
3.0
2.7
2. 0
3.4
3.9
2. 6
2.1
2.1
4. 5
2. 4
2. 2
1. 8
3.2
4.1
3.3
3.3
3. 7
2. 5
2.8
3.8
3. 7
2. 7
3.3
2. 0
2.0
1.3
2.8
1.8
3.5
2.3
4.1
2.6
3.7
2.4
3.1
2.1
4.6
4.5
3.2
2.6
2.9
2.4
2.8
2.8
2.6
2.0
2. 6
1.9
1. 9
1.2
2.6
1.9
2.4
1. 6
.8
1.2
1.7
1.8
1.7
2.0
3.8
1.9
1.7
1. 5
1.2
1. 2
.8
1.4
1.1
2.6
2.9
4.1
4.1
5.3
4.8
6.1
.3
5.7
5.6
4.4
5.3
6.4
6.4
4.6
5.1
4.1
4.3
4.3
4.7
3. 5
4.3
3. 5
5.1
2. 5
3.3
3. 4
3. 9
2. 6
3. 4
1.5
2.0
1.1
2.4
1.3
2.5
1.2
2.7
1.4
2.7
1.1
5.2
1.1
2.6
1.1
2.1
2. 0
1.1
2.0
.9
1. 9
1. 0
1.8
.7
2. 2
.9
21
.9
1.0
1.0
B.—LABOR TURNOVER
T a ble
B -l.
91
Labor turnover rates, by major industry group 1—Continued
Revised series; see box, p. 87.
[Per 1 0 0 employees]
1966
1965
Major Industry group
D ec.2 Nov.
Oct.
Sept.
Aug.
July
June
May
Apr.
Mar.
Annual
average
Feb.
Jan.
Dec.
3.6
4.1
4 1
3Q
1965
1964
Separations: Total
Manufacturing:
Actual---------------------- ------------------Seasonally adjusted _________ ______
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---------------Machinery_______________ _______
Electrical equipment and supplies-----Transportation equipment__________
Instruments and related products____
Miscellaneous manufacturing industries------------ ----------------------------Nondurable goods... -----------------------Food and kindred products_________
Tobacco manufactures___ _________
Textile mill products_______________
Apparel and related products________
Paper and allied products____ _____
Printing, publishing, and allied industries____________________________
Chemicals and allied products_______
Petroleum refining and related industries_____________________ _____
Rubber and miscellaneous plastic products__________________________
Leather and leather products...... - ........
N onmanufacturing:
Metal mining_____________________
Coal mining_______ _______________
4.1
4.3
4-9
4.6
3.8
1. 5
4.8
6.6
5.8
5.3
4.4
4.3
4.3
4.1
4.6
4.4
4.0
3.9
2.7
3.8
2.4
3.5
2.1
3.7
2.1
3.7
1. 6
3.8
2 fi
3 fi
34
7.1
6.2
4.1
2.6
4.7
3.3
3.4
3.9
2.9
7.3
6.1
3.7
2.6
4.5
3.1
3.5
3.8
2.8
5.4
5.2
3.7
2.3
4.1
2.6
3.0
4.2
2.5
6.3
5.0
4.5
2.6
4.2
3.0
3.2
3.8
2.7
6.7
4.3
4.3
2.9
3.9
2.3
2.9
3.9
2. 2
61
5 1
3.9
3.0
4.2
2«
3.1
43
27
fi
4
3
2
4
2
3
4
2
4.6
63
10.9
5.9
5.7
3.8
5.1
4,5
5,8
4.6
6.8
3.9
4.5
2.9
4.3
5.8
3.3
4.0
5.9
3.0
4.4
6.1
6.4
4.1
5.8
3.1
4.3
6.0
6.8
38
5 6
28
2.8
1.8
3.3
2.1
3.1
1.9
3 1
22
3n
20
4-6
5.1
4-3
5.0
4.9
4.0
2.1
4.5
2.8
6.1
4.0
5.5
3.1
5.4
3.0
4.2
2.5
4.1
2.7
6.4
4.7
4.7
2.9
4.0
2.5
3.1
4.0
2.6
7.5
5.7
4.5
3.1
4.7
2.6
3.4
3.6
2.5
7.5
6.8
4.7
3.6
5.3
3.2
4.0
4.3
3.6
9.4
8.3
6.8
5.6
7.0
5.1
5.8
5.3
4.9
8.6
8.4
5.9
4.3
6.3
4.5
4.5
6.4
3.7
6.6
6.4
4.5
3.6
5.4
3.8
4.0
9.8
3.3
6.7
6.0
4.2
2.8
5.0
3.3
3.8
4.8
3.0
7.0
6.1
4.2
2.9
5.1
3.2
3.6
4.1
2.8
11.3
8.6
6.8
8.6
7.2
6.6
5.4
5.7
5.4
5.0
4.5
6.8
6.5
4.4
5.6
3.0
4.7
7.2
6.3
4.8
5.4
3.5
5.4
8.4
4.9
5.3
5.8
4.1
7.3
11.0
5.6
6.7
7.2
6.6
6.1
7.9
8.3
6.5
7.2
5.1
5.3
6.2
5.5
5.5
7.9
3.5
4.6
5.6
3.4
4.7
6.0
3.6
4.5
5.5
40
5.0
5.9
3.4
4.7
5.6
fi 7
5.0
6.6
3.5
4.4
5.6
4.7
5.6
3.3
2.8
2.0
3.0
2.0
3.5
2.5
5.1
4.6
4.6
3.0
3.3
2.2
3.5
2.6
3.1
2.6
3.2
2.4
2.9
2.3
4.7
4.7
4
1
J, 2
fi
fi
7
3
1
fi
2
1
7
1.6
1.9
2.1
3.9
2.6
2.1
2.0
1.8
1.9
1.6
1.5
1.8
1. 9
19
18
4.0
6.5
4.5
5.1
5.5
5.9
7.2
8.4
6.2
7.8
5.7
8.1
4.8
5.7
4.8
5.6
4.7
6.3
4.6
6.2
4.0
5.1
4.1
6.0
3.9
5.6
4.2
5.3
3.8
5.0
3.3
1.5
3.4
1.6
4.0
1.8
6.0
1.9
3.8
1.5
3.7
2.5
2.9
1.3
3.1
1.8
3.2
2.2
3.2
1.8
2.4
1.5
2.7
1.7
3.3
1.7
3.1
1.9
3.0
1.8
Separations: Quits
Manufacturing:
Actual___________________________
Seasonally adjusted____________ _ 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___- _____
Machinery—.
Electrical equipment and supplies____
Transportation equipment______ ____
Instruments and related products____
Miscellaneous manufacturing industries__________________________-
1.6
2.1
2.8
4.5
3.6
2.5
2.5
2.5
3.6
2.7
2.6
2.6
2.5
2. 5
2.5
2.5
2. 7
2.5
2.7
2.3
2.4
2.8
2 8
1.4
1.9
1. 5
1.5
.8
2.0
1.1
2.6
1.6
4.2
2.6
3.4
1.9
2.3
1.5
2.3
1.5
2.3
1.4
2.3
1.4
2.2
1.3
1.7
1.2
1.7
1.2
1.3
.8
1.7
1.1
1.3
.9
2.4
2.6
1.4
1.1
1.7
1.3
1.6
1.1
1.5
3.4
3.7
1.9
1.3
2.4
1.5
1.9
1.5
1.5
4.7
4.8
2.6
1.8
3.0
1.9
2.5
2.0
2.4
6.9
6.5
4.4
3.8
4.8
3.5
4.2
3.1
3.7
6.1
6.2
3.6
2.7
4.0
2.7
3.1
2.5
2.6
4.6
4.2
2.5
1.5
2.6
1.9
2.0
1.8
1.8
5.0
4.0
2.5
1.5
2.7
1.9
2.3
1.8
1.9
5.3
4.4
2.4
1.5
2.7
1.9
2.1
1.8
1.7
5.2
4.4
2.4
1.5
2.8
2.0
2.1
1.7
1.9
4.3
4.3
2.0
1.4
2.5
1.8
2.1
1.7
1.8
3.2
3.3
1.6
1.1
2.0
1.4
1.7
1.4
1.5
2.8
3.1
1.6
1.1
2.0
1.5
1.8
1.4
1.5
2.5
2.4
1.2
.8
1.5
1.1
1.4
1.0
1.2
3.4
3.1
1.6
1.2
1.9
1.4
1.6
1.3
1.4
3.8
2.4
1.3
.9
1.5
1.1
1.2
1.0
1.2
2.1
3.9
4.6
6.5
4.9
3.3
3.2
3.4
3.2
3.1
2.5
2.5
2.0
2.6
2.0
1.8
2.3
1.3
2.3
2.0
1.5
2.4
2.9
1.7
2.9
2.8
2.1
3.1
3.9
2.3
3.6
3.4
2.7
5.0
6.7
3.4
5.1
4.7
5.1
4.0
4.7
2.8
4.9
4.6
3.5
2.8
3.1
1.7
3.5
3.7
2.2
2.7
3.0
1.4
3.4
3.2
2.3
2.7
2.8
1.7
3.6
3.3
2.2
2.7
2.7
1.7
3.7
3.2
2.2
2.4
2.4
1.7
3.3
2.9
2.1
2.0
2.0
1.4
2.6
2.5
1.6
2.1
2.0
1.5
2.7
2.8
1.7
1.6
1.7
1.1
2.0
2.0
1.3
2.1
2.4
1.5
2.5
2.6
1.7
1.7
2.0
1.3
2.1
2.2
1.3
1.5
.9
1.8
1.0
2.2
1.4
3.7
3.3
3.1
2.1
2.1
1.1
2.3
1.3
2.0
1.3
2.0
1.3
1.8
1.2
1.7
.9
1.8
L.O
1.3
.7
1.7
1.0
1.5
.8
1.8
1.9
Nondurable goods___________________
Food and kindred products______
Tobacco manufactures__________ . Textile mill products____ —_______
Apparel and related products._
Paper and allied products.. ______ _
Printing, publishing, and allied industries_______________ . ____ _ ...
Chemicals and allied products_______
Petroleum refining and related industries......... . . . _____ _ ______
Rubber and miscellaneous plastic
products. _________ . _ - ___ _
Leather and leather products________
.5
.6
.9
2.3
1.4
.9
1.0
.9
.9
.7
.5
.5
.7
.6
2.0
2.8
2.7
3.4
3.5
4.3
5.3
6.3
4.3
5.9
2.8
4.4
2.9
4.2
2.9
3.9
3.0
4.0
2.8
3.9
2.2
3.2
2.2
3. 3
1.7
2.7
2.1
3.0
1.5
2.4
N onmanufacturing:
Metal m in in g .____ _ _ _____ _ . . .
Coal mining________ _____ ______ 1
.8
.6
1.3
.6
1.7
.8
4.8
1.1
2.7
.9
2.0
.9
1.8
.6
2.0
.7
2.0
.8
1.6
.8
1.3
.6
1.2
.5
1.2
.4
1.7
.6
1.5
.5
See footnotes at end of table.
https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
M O N T H L Y L A B O R R E V IE W , M A R C H 1967
92
T
able
B -l.
Labor turnover rates, by major industry group ^C ontinued
Revised series; see box, p. 87.
[Per 1 0 0 employees]
1966
1965
Annual
average
Major industry group
Dec.2 Nov.
Oct.
Sept.
Aug.
July
June
May
Apr.
Mar.
Feb.
Jan.
Dec.
1965
1964
1.0
1.2
.7
.4
1.0
1.3
1.2
1.9
1.4
1.2
1.7
.7
1.9
.9
.3
1.1
1.6
.3
1.2
.8
1.5
1.3
2.6
.9
2.1
.8
1.2
3.4
1.7
1.9
1.3
1.7
Separations: Layoffs
Manufacturing:
Actual
__ _______ ______ —
1.8
1.3
1.1
1.0
1.1
1.0
1.0
0.9
1.0
2.0
1.1
1.1
l.S
1.3
1.1
Durable goods _ _ __ - -------------Ordnance and accessories __ ______
Lumber and wood products, except
furniture
_ _ ___ - -- -- ------Furniture and fixtures
_ ______ <3frme clay and glass products__ __
Primary metal industries
_ _ _____
Fabricated metal products___ ____
"Machinery
_____
- -- —
Electrical equipment and supplies—
Transportation equipment.
Instruments and related products__
Miscellaneous manufacturing indusfries
__________ ________
1.6
.2
1.1
.8
.8
1.1
2.2
.6
.9
.3
.8
3.4
3.1
1.7
.7
1.3
.5
1.4
.7
1. 0
.5
.9
1. 1
.7
.9
.6
Nondurable goods
__ _ _______
Food and kindred products____
Tobacco manufactures _ _ _ _ _ _ _
Textile mill products __ ______
Apparel and related products
___
Paper and allied products
_ __ _ __
Printing, publishing, and allied industries
_
_____ _ _ _ _ _
rihemioals and allied products
Petroleum refining and related industries
___
_ ___
Rubber and miscellaneous plastic
products._ _____ -- - -- —
Feather and leather products______
Nonmanufacturing:
Metal mining ___ ___ ___- __
Coal mining_____ ____ - _______
1.2
1.0
2.7
1.3
.5
.4
1.0
1.8
.8
1.3
.4
.5
.5
1.1
.7
1.1
.4
.4
1.3
.4
.4
1.1
.6
1.0
.6
.4
1.2
1.0
.8
.3
2.8
.3
1.1
1.1
1.7
1.0
1.0
7.1
.8
.6
2.2
1.2
8.4
3.5
.8
■ .8
1.1
2.3
2.1
1.6
1.5
3.6
1.7
1.4
3.3
1.5
1.3
2.3
4.8
1.7
2.3
3.2
.4
.5
.5
3.2
.5
.4
3.9
4.5
1.4
3.0
.7
.3
3.5
3.9
.9
1.1
1.9
.6
.6
.7
1.1
.8
1.6
.4
.6
1.6
.6
1.8
.8
.4
1.3
.4
.5
2. 0
.3
1.1
1.1
1.9
1.4
.5
.5
.6
.8
.6
.8
.3
1.0
.5
.9
.4
1.3
.4
.4
1.3
.3
.4
.4
1.3
.4
1.3
1.1
2.1
1.2
1.1
.8
.6
2.1
.3
1.3
2.8
8.1
2.3
2.8
1.1
1.7
3.0
7.1
.9
2.3
4.4
5.7
1.3
3.3
1.6
2.9
4.4
1.9
3.3
4.9
2.4
1.1
2.6
.7
.9
.7
1.0
.8
.6
1.2
1.5
.7
.9
.7
.9
1.1
.9
1.3
4.5
.4
1.3
2.5
3.8
.5
.5
2.0
.4
2.6
.6
.6
.6
2.4
3.8
.6
2.0
.5
1.3
.5
.6
.6
2.2
.8
1.0
2.4
1.3
1.5
.5
1.0
1.2
.7
.8
.3
.5
.5
.6
.6
.7
.6
.9
.4
.4
.5
.5
.6
.8
1.0
.8
.6
1.1
.9
.8
.9
.9
1.8
1.3
2.7
.7
1.4
.7
.9
.7
.7
.8
2.9
.7
.6
1.8
.3
.7
.6
.6
1.4
.5
1.5
.5
1.2
.2
.2
.2
.2
.8
1.2
.3
.4
.3
.7
1.1
.9
.4
.7
.4
1.3
.6
.5
.5
.3
.6
.7
.7
.3
1.2
.6
1.8
.5
.5
1. 5
.4
1.1
.3
.4
1.9
.3
2.2
.4
1.0
1.0
1.4
.6
.8
2.1
.6
1.4
.4
.4
.4
1. 2
.3
1.7
.4
1.9
.4
1.1
.6
.8
.4
1.0
1.4
.6
i For comparability of data with those published in issues prior to October
1966, see footnote 1, table A-9.
Month-to-month changes in total employment in manufacturing and
nonmanufacturing 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) the labor turnover series measures changes
https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
.4
1.7
.4
.6
.9
1.0
2.1
.8
1.5
.8
.8
1.5
.8
1.8
.8
1.2
2.3
.9
.9
.7
1.8
during the calendar month, while the employment series measures changes
from midmonth to midmonth and (2) the turnover series excludes personnel
changes caused by strikes, but the employment series reflects the influence
of such stoppages.
2 Preliminary.
C.—EARNINGS AND HOURS
93
C.— Earnings and Hours
T able C -l.
Gross hours and earnings of production workers,1 by industry
Revised series; see box, p. 87.
1967
1966
Annual
average
Industry
Jan.2 Dec.2 Nov.
Oct.
Sept.
Aug.
July
June
May
Apr.
Mar.
Feb.
Jan.
1965
1964
Average weekly earnings
Mining___________________________
$133.14 $132.71 $131.66 $134. 78 $133.73 $131. 58 $131. 46 $132. 80 $130. 85 $121.72 $127. 37 $126.30 $126. 48 $123. 52 $117. 74
Metal mining.................... ............ ......
134.82 136.24 135.14 136.64 134. 62 135. 79 134. 93 132. 51 133. 88 129. 79 130. 62 132. 19 127. 30
Iron ores_______________________
134.48 136.29 136.29 142.23 138.32 143. 99 142. 35 136. 27 139. 63 133. 74 133. 74 136. 36 129. 24 122. 54
Copper ores_____ ______ ________
142.79 143.11 142. 46 140. 62 140. 51 139. 64 138. 13 137. 26 138. 97 135. 99 137.49 139. 64 136. 71 125.83
Coal mining......................... .................
155.50 146.20 156.98 151.00 149.33 145. 70 153. 41 152. 31 HI. 52 143. 44 142.45 142. 04 137.45 130.42
Bituminous.............................. ..........
158.25 148.13 159.80 154.09 152.44 148. 03 156. 98 155. 12 112. 85 146. 08 144. 79 144. 73 140.23 126.88
128.91
Crude petroleum and natural gas____
123.48 124.53 123.68 123. 68 121.84 123. 70 121. 70 121. 84 122. 41 121. 69 120. 42 121. 27 116.18 112.63
Crude petroleum and natural gas fields.
129.34 129.74 129. 74 129.34 125.96 129. 68 126. 98 127. 30 129.15 126. 36 127. 39 128. 84 123.62 120.95
Oil and gas field services____ _____
119. 26 120.89 118.86 118. 86 118.46 119. 26 118. 28 117. 75 117.13 118. 09 115. 37 115. 54 110.31 106.43
Quarrying and nonmetallic mining__
120.67 124.03 129.44 129. 44 128.46 127. 64 126. 90 122. 29 120. 31 116. 48 113.70 112. 05 117.45 111.85
Crushed and broken stone________
121.64 125.76 130.95 131.49 131.14 130. 9 128. 87 121. 47 119.20 114. 29 109. 03 107. 65 116.58 110. 62
Contract construction_________________ 149.57 148.06 143.39 152.08 151.67 149.38 150. 15
General building contractors................. .
140.46 136.26 141. 70 140.56 138.00 137. 27
Heavy construction..................................
142.00 138.16 155. 55 156.09 152.34 154. 07
Highway and street construction_____
130. 07 131.58 154.86 157.04 153.47 195. 46
Other heavy construction......... ............
152.38 145.51 156.91 155.04 151.44 152. 21
Special trade contractors___ _____ ____
155.72 151.20 157.96 157.88 155. 70 156. 59
Plumbing, heating, and air condition
ing..................................... ........ .........
164.58 158.76 165. 85 166.21 163.90 163. 12
Painting, paperhanging, and decorating
141.50 142.26 144.68 145.16 143.08 145. 04
Electrical work_________ _____ _____
185.26 178.89 185.26 183.46 180.45 180. 12
Masonry, plastering, stone, and tile
work................................. ...................
140.90 135.38 144. 79 142.90 143. 72 144. 63
Roofing and sheet metal work..............
126.21 121.84 132. 46 129.17 128.16 129. 23
Average
Mining................................ ........... ........ .....
Metal mining..............................................
Iron ores____________ ____________
Copper ores............................................
Coal mining............................................. .
Bituminous.......... .................................
Crude petroleum and natural gas______
Crude petroleum and natural gas fields.
Oil and gas field services_____ _____ _
Quarrying and nonmetallic mining____
Crushed and broken stone__________
42.0
Contract construction_______ _________
General building contractors....................
Heavy construction.............................. .
Highway and street construction____
Other heavy construction.....................
Special trade contractors............... ...........
Plumbing, heating, and air condition
ing................................................. .
Painting, paperhanging and decorating.
Electrical work.................. ........... .........
Masonry, plastering, stone, and tile
work___ __________________ ____
Roofing and sheet metal work_______
37.3
Mining_______ _____ _______ ______
Metal mining______ ______________
Iron ores_______________________
Copper ores___ _________________
Coal mining_____________________
Bituminous____________________
Crude petroleum and natural gas____
Crude petroleum and natural gas fields.
Oil and gas field services_________
Quarrying and nonmetallic mining__
Crushed and broken stone________
$3.17
Contract construction_________________
General building contractors__________
Heavy construction__________________
Highway and street construction_____
Other heavy construction___________
Special trade contractors_____________
Plumbing, heating, and air conditioning— . -------------------------------------Painting, paperhanging and decorating.
Electrical work._____ _____________
Masonry, plastering, stone, and tile
work_______________________ ____
Roofing and sheet metal work...............
4.01
See footnotes at end of table.
245-336 0 - 67 - 8
https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
42.4
42.0
41.0
43.8
41.8
42.2
42.0
40.8
42.9
44.2
45.9
42.2
42.0
41.3
43.9
39.3
39.5
42.5
40.8
43.8
45.1
47.1
43.2
42.1
41.3
43.7
42.2
42.5
42.5
40.8
43.7
46.9
48.5
43.0
42.7
43.1
43.4
40.7
41.2
42.5
40.8
43.7
46.9
48.7
43.0
42.2
42.3
43.1
40.8
41.2
42.6
40.5
44.2
47.2
49.3
37.2
36.2
40.0
39.9
40.1
36.9
36.3
35.3
38.7
38.7
38.7
36.0
38.5
36.9
42.5
43.5
41.4
37.7
38.3
36.7
42.3
43.5
40.8
37.5
39.0
35.2
39.5
37.8
35.3
37.9
39.3
35.9
39.5
34.2
33.3
33.1
33.2
$3.13
3.21
3.28
3.26
3.72
3.75
2.94
3.17
2.78
2.73
2.65
146. 69
135. 05
150. 45
151. 64
148. 42
153. 38
141. 71
132. 09
137. 07
134. 06
140. 76
150. 88
140. 59
131. 74
137.94
135.05
141. 05
148.15
143. 26
134. 32
139. 47
133. 95
143. 42
150. 26
139.05
130.30
131.41
123.00
137.16
147. 38
138. 34
129. 23
133. 23
126. 64
138. 06
146. 21
138.01
128.16
137.90
136.45
139.60
144. 99
132.06
122.79
131.78
130.00
133.93
138. 35
161. 09 160. 27 156. 21 157. 12 155.54 155. 94 152.08 144.40
141. 21 140. 30 137.28 136. 26 134.64 133. 13 134. 97 128. 52
177. 45 177. 00 173. 57 174. 60 172.60 173. 94 169. 89 165.17
140. 65 139. 15 138. 98 142. 00 134. 92 125. 58 133. 56 127.31
123. 90 118. 61 117. 57 123. 20 119. 39 118. 74 117.65 112. 49
weekly hours
43.1
41.3
44.5
47.1
49.4
43.4
42.7
43.4
43.3
41.8
42.2
42.7
40.7
44.3
47.0
49.0
42.9
42.2
41.8
43.3
41. 5
41.7
42.6
40.8
44.1
45.8
46.9
41.4
42.5
42.7
43.7
32.8
32.9
42.8
41.0
44.2
45.4
46.2
42.6
41.6
40.9
42.9
41.1
41.5
43.0
40.5
44.9
44.8
45.9
42.1
41.6
40.9
43.1
40.7
40.9
42.4
40.7
43.7
43.9
44. 5
42.3
42.1
41.7
43.5
40.7
41.0
42.7
40.9
44.1
43.6
44.3
42.3
41.6
41.9
43.4
39.9
40.2
42.4
40.8
43.6
45.7
47.2
41.9
41.4
40.2
42.9
39.0
39.2
42. 5
41.0
43.8
45.1
45.9
38.4
36.8
42.2
43.6
40.6
37.7
39.0
37.1
43.4
44.8
41.7
38.1
38.3
36.6
42.5
43.7
41.0
37.5
37.0
35.7
39.5
39.9
39.1
36.8
36.9
35.8
40.1
40.8
39.4
36.4
37.7
36.8
40.9
41.6
40.4
37.1
36.4
35.6
38.2
38.2
38.1
36.3
36.5
35.6
39.3
39.7
39.0
36.1
37.4
36.1
40.8
41.6
40.0
36.8
37.2
35.8
40.8
41.4
40.1
36.6
39.2
36.2
39.2
39.4
36.5
39.4
39.4
37.0
39.5
39.1
36.3
39.0
38.9
35.7
38.9
38.1
35.2
38.4
38.7
35.3
38.8
38.5
34.7
38.7
38.6
34.4
39.0
38.6
35.8
38.7
38.1
35.7
38. 5
35.4
35.8
34.6
35.1
35.4
35.8
34.9
34.7
36.2
35.6
35.2
33.6
Average hourly earnings
34.4
33.4
35.5
35.0
33.9
32.8
32.2
32.8
34.6
34.5
34. 5
34.4
$3.12
3.22
3.30
3.26
3.72
3.75
2.93
3.18
2.76
2.75
2.67
$3.12
3.21
3.30
3.26
3.72
3.76
2.91
3.18
2.72
2.76
2.70
$3.11
3.20
3.30
3.24
3.71
3.74
2.91
3.17
2.72
2.76
2.70
$3.06
3.19
3.27
3.26
3.66
3.70
$3.00
3.14
3.27
3.19
3.50
3.54
2.84
3.13
2.64
2.59
2.45
$2.99
3.14
3.27
3. 21
3.49
3.53
2.84
3.15
2.62
2.57
2.43
$2.92
3.06
3.16
3.15
3.45
3.49
2.74
3.03
2.53
2.57
2.47
$2.81
2.96
3.13
3.04
3.26
3.30
2.65
2.95
2.43
2.48
2.41
3.98
3.88
3.55
3.26
3.80
4.22
3.95
3.86
3.57
3.40
3.76
4.20
3.95
3.84
3.66
3.56
3.79
4.19
3.96
3.83
3.69
3.61
3.80
4.21
3.89
3. 75
3.61
3.52
3.73
4.13
4.22
4.02
4.69
4.20
4.03
4.72
4.22
4.03
4.69
4.24
4. 01
4.68
4.12
3.79
4.09
3.67
4.09
3.70
4.13
3.68
43.1
42.7
43.5
43.5
$3.05
3.18
3.31
3. 21
$3. 06
3.16
3.28
3.19
3.67
3.72
2.85
3.12
2.67
2.70
2.63
$3.05
3.14
3.26
3.17
3.67
3. 72
$2.94
3.15
3.27
3.18
3.40
3.43
3.12
2.67
2.67
2.59
3.15
2. 65
2.65
2.58
$2.99
3.12
3.27
3.17
3.49
3.52
2.83
3.12
2.63
2.60
2.49
3.85
3. 70
3. 55
3. 47
3. 65
4.11
3.83
3.69
3. 54
3. 47
3. 62
4.09
3.83
3.70
3.47
3.36
3.60
4.10
3.81
3.68
3. 44
3. 31
3.58
4.07
3.80
3.65
3.41
3.22
3. 55
4.05
3.82
3. 66
3. 44
3.22
3.60
4.06
3. 79
3.63
3. 39
3.19
3.54
4.05
3. 69
3. 55
3.38
3.28
3.49
3.94
3. 55
3. 43
3.23
3.14
3.34
3.78
4.16
3.92
4.58
4.14
3.92
4. 56
4.12
3. 89
4. 55
4.12
3. 93
4. 55
4.10
3.90
4. 52
4.06
3. 86
4.50
4.04
3.88
4. 46
4.04
3.87
4.46
3.94
3. 77
4. 39
3.79
3.60
4.29
4.06
3.60
4.04
3. 57
4.03
3. 52
4.01
3. 53
4.04
3. 52
4.00
3.52
3. 98
3.64
3.90
3. 62
3. 86
3.41
3.69
3. 27
2.86 2.87
3.11
3.14
2.68 2.68
2.73
2.71
2.66 2. 65
2.86 2.86
MONTHLY LABOR REVIEW, MARCH 1967
94
T able C - l .
Gross hours and earnings of production workers,1 by industry—Continued
Revised series; see box, p. 87.
1966
1967
A nnual
average
In d u str y
J a n .2
D e c .2
N ov.
O ct.
S e p t.
A ug.
J u ly
June
M ay
A p r.
M ar.
F eb.
Jan.
1965
1964
A v e r a g e w e e k l y e a r n in g s
$ 1 1 1 .2 4 $ 1 1 0 .9 5 $ 1 1 0 .2 7 $110. 00 $107. 53 $102. 97
M a n u fa c tu r in g
_____
_______ - - $ 1 1 3 .1 5 $ 1 1 4 .4 0 $ 1 1 3 .9 9 $ 1 1 3 .8 5 $113. 71 $111. 78 $ l l i . l i $112. 74 $ 1 1 2 .0 5
1 2 2 .8 4 1 2 4 .2 0 123. 77 124. 07 1 2 3 .9 4 120. 54 1 1 9 .8 1 121. 82 1 2 1 .8 2 1 2 1 .5 4 120. 69 1 2 0 .6 9 119. 99 1 1 7 .1 8 1 1 2 .1 9
D u r a b l e g o o d s _____
__ - ______
9 5 .5 2
9
9
.1
4
9 6 .9 6
9 6 .8 8
9 6 .8 8
9 4 .6 4
9 0 .9 1
9
9
.2
3
9
8
.3
3
9
9
.5
4
9
9
.2
3
1
0
0
.1
0
1
0
0
.2
5
99.
94
99. 65
N o n d u r a b l e g o o d s . . -----------------------------O r d n a n c e a n d a c c e s s o r ie s ____
- —
A m m u n i t i o n , e x c e p t for s m a l l a r m s . . .
f l i g h t i n g a n d fir e c o n t r o l e q u i p m e n t ____
O th e r o r d n a n c e a n d a c c e s s o r ie s -------------L u m b e r a n d w o o d p r o d u c ts, e x cep t
f u r n it u r e
_
_
_
___—
S a w m i ll s a n d p l a n i n g m i l l s . . . .
M illw o r k ,
p ly w o o d ,
and
r e la t e d
p r o d u c ts
____ - _______ ______
W o o d e n c o n t a in e r s ________
. . .
M is c e ll a n e o u s w o o d p r o d u c t s - - --------------F u r n i t u r e a n d f i x t u r e s ___- - - - - - ...
H o u s e h o l d f u r n i t u r e .............................................
O ffic e f u r n i t u r e . _ _ _
_
___________
133. 46
134. 55
1 3 0 .4 2
1 3 2 .0 0
1 3 2 .8 2
134. 64
134. 51
1 2 9 .0 3
1 3 4 .0 9
136. 69
136. 20
127. 58
136. 21
1 4 0 .1 5
135. 79
126. 98
131. 57
136. 08
127. 08
1 2 1 .9 3
1 2 2 .7 2
1 2 4 .8 4
1 2 9 .3 4
1 1 6 .4 0
9 3 .9 4
86. 92
94. 66
8 6 .9 4
9 2 .4 8
8 5 .4 8
88. 91
8 2 .6 2
8 8 .8 8
8 1 .9 9
88. 75
8 2 .2 2
88. 54
8 2 .0 1
8 5 .2 4
79. 60
9 9 .6 3
7 5 .9 5
8 7 .1 2
1 0 0 .9 1
76. 91
8 7 .5 6
102. 61
77. 71
8 8 .1 9
1 0 0 .0 8
7 6 .3 1
8 7 .3 5
9 7 .8 8
7 3 .8 0
8 7 .1 4
9 7 .4 7
7 3 .6 2
85. 90
9 8 .1 8
7 2 .9 8
85. 90
9 6 .9 3
72. 75
8 4 .6 7
9 3 .1 1
6 8 .6 3
8 1 .7 9
8 9 .1 3
8 2 .6 1
110. 50
115. 93
97. 75
9 1 .9 6
85. 70
1 1 2 .4 1
119. 54
9 8 .4 1
9 0 .6 7
8 4 .8 7
111. 02
116. 60
9 7 .0 2
8 8 .7 5
8 3 .8 4
107. 78
113. 58
9 4 .5 8
9 0 .0 6
84. 87
108. 54
113. 02
9 4 .4 3
8 8 .5 8
8 4 .0 5
1 0 9 .3 7
110. 83
92. 70
8 8 .1 5
8 3 .2 3
1 0 8 .1 1
110. 43
9 1 .6 5
8 7 .9 8
8 3 .2 1
1 0 4 .0 6
1 1 2 .8 6
9 2 .1 8
8 4 .4 6
7 9 .9 3
97. 88
105. 85
8 7 .3 3
1 3 3 .8 8
134. 23
127. 62
133. 90
1 3 4 .2 0
1 3 4 .3 1
133. 65
1 3 4 .9 8
9 4 .8 3
8 7 .2 6
9 4 .0 7
87. 72
93. 66
8 6 .9 0
1 0 0 .1 2
75. 44
88. 58
100. 61
76. 78
8 8 .3 8
1 0 0 .1 2
7 6 .9 1
8 7 .7 7
9 3 .8 6
8 8 .1 9
115. 01
117. 74
100. 91
9 3 .2 1
8 7 .1 4
114. 58
118. 83
1 0 1 .4 8
9 3 .2 6
8 7 .1 5
115. 02
119. 63
9 9 .3 6
1 4 0 .3 0
1 3 7 .9 2
136. 45
1 3 3 .3 5
1 4 1 .4 8
1 3 6 .6 3
1 3 5 .5 5
121. 60
1 4 1 .4 8
136. 95
135. 88
1 2 8 .9 6
139. 02
89. 67
8 2 .8 6
9 1 .2 0
8 3 .7 4
9 2 .0 0
84. 77
9 4 .8 3
8 6 .6 7
9 9 .1 4
74. 26
8 7 .3 1
9 9 .0 6
7 5 .8 1
87. 74
9 7 .6 0
7 6 .0 4
8 8 .7 8
9 0 .0 0
83. 74
9 3 .7 9
8 7 .7 6
1 1 6 .8 5
1 1 6 .7 6
1 0 0 .4 4
9 2 .7 4
8 7 .1 3
1 1 4 .6 5
1 1 4 .8 1
9 8 .9 4
O th e r f u r n it u r e a n d f i x t u r e s ------------------
51
03
55
44
82
88
66
72
1 3 9 .1 0
1 3 7 .9 4
135. 78
1 4 2 .9 7
1 3 8 .3 2
136. 78
134.
135.
125.
133.
134.
136.
131.
132.
A verage w e e k ly h ou rs
..
. . .
------ --M a n u f a c t u r i n g ____ . .
D u r a b le g o o d s .. . .
..
.
----- N o n d u r a b l e g o o d s --------- ------ --O r d n a n c e a n d a c c e s s o r ie s ---------- --------------A m m u n i t i o n , e x c e p t for s m a l l a r m s -----S i g h t i n g a n d fir e c o n t r o l e q u i p m e n t . . _
O th e r o r d n a n c e a n d a c c e s s o r ie s ------- . .
L u m b e r a n d w o o d p r o d u c ts, ex c ep t
f u r n i t u r e . — ____
----------------S a w m i ll s a n d p l a n i n g m i l l s . -----M illw o r k ,
p ly w o o d ,
and
r e la t e d
p r o d u c t s ______ ________
____________
W o o d e n c o n t a i n e r s ______ . .
___ —
M is c e lla n e o u s w o o d p r o d u c t s - - _ . . . .
F u r n i t u r e a n d f i x t u r e s -------- ------------------H o u s e h o l d f u r n i t u r e ____
. .
O ffic e f u r n it u r e
--------P a r t i t i o n s ; o ffic e a n d s to r e f i x t u r e s ___ __
O th e r f u r n it u r e a n d f ix t u r e s ------- ----------
4 0 .7
4 1 .5
3 9 .7
4 1 .3
4 2 .1
4 0 .1
4 1 .3
4 2 .1
4 0 .2
4 1 .4
4 2 .2
4 0 .3
4 1 .5
4 2 .3
4 0 .3
4 1 .4
4 2 .0
4 0 .5
4 1 .0
4 1 .6
4 0 .3
4 1 .6
4 2 .3
4 0 .5
4 1 .5
4 2 .3
4 0 .3
4 1 .2
4 2 .2
3 9 .9
4 1 .4
4 2 .2
4 0 .2
4 1 .3
4 2 .2
4 0 .2
4 1 .2
4 2 .1
3 9 .8
4 1 .2
4 2 .0
4 0 .1
4 0 .7
4 1 .4
3 9 .7
4 2 .3
4 1 .2
4 4 .4
4 2 .8
4 1 .8
4 2 .3
4 5 .1
4 2 .7
4 1 .6
4 2 .2
4 5 .2
4 2 .3
4 1 .2
3 9 .1
4 5 .2
4 2 .4
4 1 .3
4 1 .6
4 4 .7
4 2 .0
4 1 .3
4 0 .8
4 3 .7
4 2 .1
4 1 .3
4 1 .3
4 3 .9
4 2 .2
4 1 .2
4 2 .7
4 4 .4
4 2 .3
4 1 .6
4 2 .3
4 4 .0
4 2 .1
4 1 .4
4 1 .8
4 4 .0
4 1 .9
4 1 .3
4 2 .7
4 3 .3
4 2 .3
4 1 .8
4 3 .1
4 3 .1
4 2 .7
4 2 .6
4 2 .7
4 2 .9
4 1 .9
4 2 .0
4 0 .6
4 1 .9
4 0 .5
4 0 .4
4 0 .8
4 0 .7
3 9 .5
3 8 .9
4 0 .0
3 9 .5
4 0 .0
3 9 .8
4 0 .7
4 0 .5
4 0 .7
4 0 .4
4 0 .9
4 0 .8
4 0 .9
4 0 .8
4 1 .2
4 1 .0
4 1 .7
4 1 .4
4 1 .1
4 0 .9
4 0 .6
4 0 .5
4 0 .4
3 9 .8
4 0 .9
4 0 .5
4 0 .8
4 0 .6
4 0 .4
4 0 .2
4 0 .3
4 0 .8
4 0 .8
4 0 .6
4 1 .2
4 1 .0
4 0 .0
4 1 .1
4 1 .1
4 0 .7
4 1 .0
4 1 .2
4 0 .9
4 1 .5
4 1 .3
4 1 .2
4 1 .8
4 1 .4
4 1 .0
4 1 .5
4 0 .9
4 1 .7
4 1 .8
4 1 .3
4 2 .4
4 2 .7
4 1 .6
4 1 .7
4 1 .7
4 1 .4
4 1 .3
4 1 .0
4 1 .3
4 1 .3
4 0 .9
4 1 .1
4 1 .6
4 1 .0
4 1 .1
4 1 .6
4 1 .1
4 1 .3
4 1 .2
3 9 .9
4 1 .1
4 0 .0
3 9 .5
4 1 .5
4 1 .2
4 3 .6
4 1 .7
4 2 .2
4 1 .4
4 1 .1
4 3 .1
4 1 .3
4 2 .1
4 1 .9
4 1 .6
4 3 .4
4 2 .2
4 2 .4
4 1 .8
4 1 .3
4 3 .4
4 2 .9
4 3 .0
4 2 .2
4 1 .7
4 3 .9
4 3 .5
4 3 .2
4 0 .7
4 0 .1
4 2 .5
4 1 .7
4 2 .5
4 1 .8
4 1 .4
4 3 .4
4 3 .0
4 2 .6
4 1 .4
4 1 .0
4 3 .2
4 2 .4
4 2 .0
4 0 .9
4 0 .7
4 2 .6
4 1 .3
4 1 .3
4 1 .5
4 1 .4
4 2 .9
4 1 .4
4 1 .6
4 1 .2
4 1 .0
4 3 .4
4 1 .2
4 1 .2
4 1 .0
4 0 .8
4 2 .9
4 0 .9
4 1 .1
4 1 .5
4 1 .4
4 2 .3
4 1 .8
4 1 .9
4 1 .2
4 1 .2
4 1 .3
4 0 .4
4 1 .0
A v e r a g e h o u r l y e a r n in g s
M a n u f a c t u r i n g _____________
___________
...
D u r a b l e g o o d s ___
______ -----------N o n d u r a b l e g o o d s _____
______
$ 2 .7 8
2 .9 6
2 .5 1
$ 2 .7 7
2 .9 5
2 .5 0
$ 2 .7 6
2 .9 4
2 .4 9
$ 2 .7 5
2 .9 4
2. 48
$2. 74
2. 93
2. 47
$2. 70
2 .8 7
2. 45
$ 2 .7 1
2 .8 8
2 .4 6
$2. 71
2. 88
2. 45
$2. 70
2. 88
2. 44
$ 2 .7 0
2 .8 8
2 .4 3
$ 2 .6 8
2. 86
2 .4 1
$ 2 .6 7
2 .8 6
2 .4 1
$2. 67
2. 85
2. 40
$ 2 .6 1
2 .7 9
2. 36
$ 2 .5 3
2 .7 1
2. 29
O r d n a n c e a n d a c c e s s o r ie s ____
- A m m u n i t i o n , e x c e p t for s m a l l a r m s -----S i g h t i n g a n d fir e c o n t r o l e q u i p m e n t . .
O t h e r o r d n a n c e a n d a c c e s s o r ie s _________
3 .2 7
3 .3 2
3 .1 6
3 .2 5
3 . 3C
3 .2 1
3 .1 7
3 .2 3
3 .2 8
3 .1 6
3 .1 3
3 .2 3
3 .2 9
3 .1 1
3 .1 3
3 .2 3
3. 29
3.1C
3 .1 1
3. 21
3 .2 9
3 .0 8
3. 06
3 .1 8
3. 25
3. 0E
3 .0 5
3 .1 8
3 .2 6
3 .1 3
3 .0 4
3 .1 8
3. 27
3 .1 1
3. 01
3 .1 7
3 .2 5
3 .1 2
3 .0 0
3 .1 7
3. 26
3 .1 5
2 .9 8
3 .1 7
3 .2 7
3 .1 6
2. 96
3 .1 9
3 .2 9
3. IS
2 .9 6
3 .1 4
3 .2 4
3 .1 3
2 .9 1
3 .0 3
3 .0 9
3 .1 7
2. 86
2 .2 7
2 .1 3
2 .2 5
2 .1 2
2 . 3C
2 .1 3
2. 33
2 .1 4
2 .3 3
2 .1 6
2.3C
2 .1 5
2 .2 9
2 .1 3
2 .2 8
2 .1 2
2. 27
2 .1 0
2. 25
2 .0 9
2 .1 9
2 .0 4
2. 20
2 .0 6
2 .1 7
2 .0 3
2 .1 7
2 .0 2
2 .1 1
1 .9 8
2 .4 6
1 .8 2
2 .1 4
2.4 4
1 .8 4
2 .1 4
2 .4 4
1 .8 5
2 .1 6
2. 46
1 .8 4
2 .1 5
2 .4 6
1 .8 5
2 .1 4
2. 43
1 .8 4
2 .1 2
2 .4 3
1 .8 3
2 .1 3
2 .4 2
1.81
2 .1 2
2 .4 2
1 .8 2
2 .1 2
2 .4 0
1.82
2 .1 1
2 .3 7
1 .8 0
2 .1 1
2 .3 6
1 .8 0
2 .0 9
2 .3 6
1 .7 8
2 .0 9
2 .3 3
1 .7 7
2 .0 5
2 .2 6
1 .7 2
1 .9 9
2 .2 5
2 .1 2
2 .2 6
2 .1 3
2 .6 8
2 .8 0
2 .3 8
2 .2 4
2 .1 2
2 .6 6
2. 78
2 .3 5
2 .2 4
2 .1 2
2. 65
2 .7 9
2. 38
2 .2 3
2 .1 1
2. 64
2. 77
2 .3 6
2. 21
2 .0 9
2 .6 2
2 .7 5
2. 30
2 .1 9
2. 06
2. 60
2. 78
2 .3 0
2 .2 0
2 .0 7
2 .5 9
2 .7 8
2 .3 1
2 .1 9
2 .0 7
2 .5 7
2. 75
2. 31
2 .1 7
2 .0 6
2 .5 3
2. 75
2 .2 9
2 .1 7
2 .0 5
2 .5 3
2 .7 3
2 .2 7
2 .1 5
2 .0 5
2 .5 2
2. 69
2 .2 5
2 .1 5
2 .0 4
2 .5 2
2. 70
2 .2 3
2 .1 2
2. 01
2 .4 6
2. 70
2 .2 0
2 .0 5
1. 94
2 .3 7
2 .6 2
2 .1 3
L u m b e r a n d w o o d p r o d u c ts, ex c ep t
f u r n i t u r e _______
____ __ __________ . . .
S a w m i ll s a n d p l a n i n g m i l l s ________ __
M il l w o r k ,
p ly w o o d ,
and
r e la t e d
p r o d u c t s ..
_____
- . ---------------------- .
W o o d e n c o n t a i n e r s _____ ...
M is c e lla n e o u s w o o d p r o d u c ts . . . . . .
F u r n i t u r e a n d f ix t u r e s
_____
.
.
H o u s e h o ld f u r n it u r e . . _
.............
O ffic e f u r n it u r e
P a r t i t i o n s ; o ffic e a n d s t o r e f ix t u r e s
O th e r f u r n it u r e a n d f ix t u r e s _____________
See footnotes at end of table.
https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
C — EARNINGS AND HOURS
T a b l e C - l.
95
Gross hours and earnings of production workers,1 by industry—Continued
Revised series; see box, p. 87.
1967
1966
Annual
average
Industry
Jan.2
Dec.2 Nov.
Oct.
Sept.
Aug.
July
June
May
Apr.
Mar.
Feb.
Jan.
1965
1964
Average weekly earnings
Manu facturing—Continue d
Durable goods—Continued
Stone, clay, and glass products_______ - $113.85 $115.23 $115.79 $116. 47 $116. 05 $115.75 $113. 82 $115. 60 $114. 63 $114.09 $112.83 $110. 54 $110.66 $110.04
$105. 50
Flat glass_______________________
155.79 160.60 159.87 153. 99 152. 44 141. 60 151.01 152. 34 155. 86 154. 51 152.08
30 149 fiO 144.14
Glass and glassware, pressed or blown
113.83 114.96 114.12 111.38 111.38 110.30 109. 76 111.79 111.79 109. 34 111.92 110.70 151.
106
25
111.
37
Cement, hydraulic_______________ - 128.79 131.65 138.22 132.39 133. 76 132. 61 134. 82 131.87 132.19 132. 51 130. 94 126.98 129. 79 124 42 102. 21
Structural clay products___________
95.35 96.24 97.20 98.16 97.99 98.12 97. 94 97.94 97.29 98.00 96.28 93.38 93. 66 94 02 121.30
Pottery and related products..............
101.63 102.36 100.15 100.44 98. 50 95. 94 99.00 98. 95 98.80 97. 91 97. 66 97.91 95 12 89.82
93.53
3- 112.44 114.48 116.42 121.38 121. 76 122.94 120. 87 120. 87 118.10 116.95 113.62 108.
62
113. 08 108. 32
Other stone and mineral products.
116.48 116.20 118.86 117. 32 115.79 114.68 116. 47 116. 60 115.63 114. 24 113. 55 110.33
111. 22 110. 62 107.01
Primary metal industries..___ _____
136.62 137.61
Blast furnace and basic steel products _ 141.20 141.20
Iron and steel foundries___________ - 128.59 131.33
Nonferrous smelting and refining____ - 131.86 132.80
138.69
143.37
130.42
132.91
139.02
144.84
130.90
132.91
140. 77
147.80
129. 73
132. 71
138.09
145. 85
126. 69
130.62
136. 86
147. 03
121.13
130. 09
139.50
147.68
128. 01
128.83
139. 07
146.97
127.58
128.83
138. 74
146.56
128.90
129.32
136. 83
143.56
128.60
126.96
136. 08
141. 69
128. 46
125.93
135. 34
140. 24
127.01
125. 82
133 88
140 90
125 72
124. 44
130.00
138. 43
119.84
120. 22
truding______________ ________
136.34 138.47 138.97 136. 47 138.22 135.83 133. 55 137. 20 136.14
134.20 134.81 135.86 130.07 122. 26
Nonferrous foundries______________ - 121.42 122.77 122.22 121.67 123. 26 118. 02 114. 80 119.29 118.86 134.90
118.16 117.59 117.17 118.43 113. 55 110.54
Miscellaneous primary metal indus
tries____ ___ ____ ________ ______ - 153.47 154.26 154.70 153.12 153. 91 146.89 141. 86 147. 74 149. 64 146. 03 149.80 150.82
148.14 143.09 133. 77
Average weekly hours
Stone, clay, and glass products........ ......
41.1
Flat glass________________________
Glass and glassware, pressed or blown
40.8
Cement, hydraulic_______ ________
40.;
Structural clay products___________
39. ‘
Pottery and related products________ - ....... Concrete, gypsum, and plaster prod
ucts___________________________
41.8
Other stone and mineral products____
Primary metal industries____________
Blast furnace and basic steel products.
Iron and steel foundries____________
Nonferrous smelting and refining____
Nonferrous rolling, drawing, and ex
truding____________ ____ ________
Nonferrous foundries_______________
Miscellaneous primary metal indus
tries__________ __________
41.
42.8
41.5
41.4
40.1
39.7
41.8
44.Ü
41.2
42.4
40.5
40.3
42.2
43.8
40.8
41.5
40.9
39.9
42.2
43.5
40.8
41.8
41.0
39.7
42.4
42.7
40.7
41.7
41.4
39.4
42.0
40. (
40.5
42. (
41.5
39.0
42.5
42.:
41.]
41.6
41.5
39.6
42.3
42.2
41.1
41.7
41.1
39.9
42.1
42.7
40.2
41.8
41.7
40.0
42.1
42.8
41.3
41.7
41.5
39.8
41.4
42.6
41.0
40.7
40.6
39.7
41.6
42.5
41.4
41.6
40.9
39.8
42.0
42
40. 4
41. 2
41. 6
39.8
41. 7
41 9
40 4
41 4
41^2
39.8
42.4
41.6
42.8
41.5
44.3
42.3
44.6
41.9
45.2
41.8
45.1
41.7
45.1
42.2
44.4
42.4
44.3
42.2
43.7
42.0
42.1
41.9
42.6
41.5
44.0
41.9
43. 5
41.8
41.4
40.0
42.3
42.4
41.7
40.0
43.2
42.7
41.9
40.5
42.9
42.6
42.0
40.8
43.2
42.6
42.4
41.4
43.1
42.4
42.1
41.2
42.8
42.0
41.6
41. 2
41.2
42.1
42.4
41.6
43.1
42.1
42.4
41.4
43.1
42.1
42.3
41.4
43.4
42.4
42. 1
40.9
43.3
41.9
42.0
40.6
43.4
41.7
41.9
40.3
43. 2
41.8
42.1
41. 2
43 5
41.9
41.8
41. 2
42 8
41.6
43.7
41.3
44.1
41.9
44.4
42.0
43.6
42.1
44.3
42.8
44.1
42.0
43.5
41.0
44.4
42.3
44.2
42.3
43.8
42.2
44.0
42.3
44.2
42.3
44.4
42.6
43. 5
41.9
42. 6
41.4
43.6
43.7
43.7
43.5
43.6
42.7
41.6
43.2
43.5
42.7
43.8
44.1
43.7
43.1
42.2
Average hourly earnings
Stone, clay, and glass products...............
Flat glass_____________ ___________
Glass and glassware, pressed or blown
Cement, hydraulic_________ ____ __
Structural clay products____________
Pottery and related products________
Concrete, gypsum, and plaster prod
ucts____________________________
Other stone and mineral products____
$2.77
Primary metal industries_____________
Blast furnace and basic steel products..
Iron and steel foundries_____________
Nonferrous smelting and refining____
Nonferrous rolling, drawing, and ex
truding_________________________
Nonferrous foundries_______________
Miscellaneous primary metal indus
tries_______________ ____
See footnotes at end of table.
https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
2.79
3.18
2.42
$2.77
3.64
2.77
3.18
2.40
2.56
$2.77
3.65
2.77
3.26
2.40
2.54
$2.76
3.65
2.73
3.19
2. 40
2. 51
$2.75
3. 54
2.73
3.20
2.39
2.53
$2.73
3.57
2.71
3.18
2. 37
2. 50
$2.71
3. 54
2. 71
3.21
2. 36
2. 46
$2.72
3.57
2. 72
3.17
2.36
2.50
$2.71
3.61
2.72
3.17
2.35
2.48
$2.71
3. 65
2.72
3.17
2.35
2.47
$2.68
3.61
2.71
3.14
2.32
2.46
$2.67
3.57
2.70
3.12
2.30
2.46
$2.66
3. 56
2.69
3.12
2.29
2.46
$2.62
3. 52
2.63
3.02
2.26
2.39
$2. 53
3.44
2. 53
2.93
2.18
2. 35
2.69
2.70
2.80
2.72
2.80
2.74
2.81
2.73
2.80
2.72
2.77
2.68
2. 75
2.68
2. 76
2.66
2.75
2.64
2.74
2.60
2.72
2.58
2.71
2. 59
2.68
2. 57
2.64
2.49
2.56
3.30
3.53
3.04
3.11
3.30
3.53
3.04
3.11
3.31
3.54
3.04
3.12
3.31
3. 55
3.03
3. 12
3. 32
3.57
3. 01
3.13
3.28
3. 54
2.96
3.11
3.29
3. 56
2. 94
3. 09
3.29
3. 55
2.97
3.06
3.28
3. 55
2.96
3.06
3.28
3.54
2.97
3.05
3.25
3. 51
2.97
3.03
3.24
3. 49
2.96
3.02
3.23
3.48
2.94
3.01
3.18
3.42
2.89
2.97
3.11
3.36
2.80
2.89
3.12
2.94
3.14
2.93
3.13
2.91
3.13
2.89
3.12
2. 88
3.08
2.81
3.07
2. 80
3.09
2.82
3.08
2.81
3.08
2.80
3.05
2.78
3.05
2.77
3.06
2.78
2.99
2.71
2.87
2.67
3.52
3.53
3.54
3. 52
3. 53
3. 44
3.41
3.42
3. 44
3.42
3. 42
3. 42
3.39
3. 32
3.17
MONTHLY LABOR REVIEW, MARCH 1967
96
T a b l e C -l.
Gross hours and earnings of production workers,1 by industry—Continued
Revised series; see box, p. 87.
Annual
average
1966
1967
Industry
Jan.2 Dec.2 Nov.
Oct.
Sept.
Aug.
July
June
May
Apr.
Mar.
Feb.
Jan.
1965
1964
Average weekly earnings
Manufacturing—Continued
Durable goods—Continued
$111.76
Fabricated metal products....... -........ ...... $122.77 $124.10 $123.09 $124. 26 $124. 84 $121. 26 $119. 42 $121. 70 $121.84 $119. 99 $119.85 $119. 00 $118. 02 $116.20
Metal cans......... ....................... ............... 136.69 138.55 136.92 136. 73 143. 66 148. 40 151.52 142. 68 142. 03 138.14 135. 36 135.14 133. 66 137.49 131.82
Cutlery, hand tools, and general hard
ware........-------- --------------------------- 116.18 117.03 116. 20 116. 06 116. 34 113.15 109. 76 113.15 114.81 113.85 113.98 113.57 112.88 111.22 107.64
Heating equipment and plumbing fix109.02 112.06 110.95 113. 30 114. 40 112.06 106.13 no. 70 110. 70 108.40 108. 00 108.27 105.60 105. 06 102.91
114.26 110. 27
Fabricated structural metal products.. 123.31 125.40 123.09 123. 54 123. 83 121.11 118. 56 121.13 120.27 117. 73 117.03 116. 76 116.48 120.
73 113.85
126.17
Screw machine products, bolts, etc----- 132.28 133.32 132.44 130. 79 130. 92 125. 24 121.67 128. 25 128. 25 126.66 128. 37 127.18 130.11
128.60 123.41
130.
29
132.
75
131.89
Metal stampings----------------------------- 130.52 133.22 134.78 137. 34 138.85 131.70 129. 74 131. 58 133. 36
100.43
95.58
104.92
102.18
105.84
106.
85
105.
00
107.19
105.
73
110.
59
108.
29
107.49
108.10
108.21
109.
20
Coating, engraving, and allied services.
Miscellaneous fabricated wire products. 112.29 112.98 112.98 112. 44 113.10 110. 20 110. 04 111.25 111.51 108. 58 108. 26 109.56 107. 01 104.92 99.46
Miscellaneous fabricated metal prod
108.65
ucts........................... — ..........-........... 122.54 120.38 119.42 120. 56 121.13 118. 58 117.03 120.56 120. 56 117.88 117.87 116. 34 115. 37 113.42
Machinery_______ _________ ___ _____
Engines and turbines------- --------------Farm machinery and equipment-------Construction and related machinery...
Metalworking machinery and equip
ment--------------- ------ ------------------Special industry machinery-------------General industrial machinery.........—
Office, computing and accounting ma
chines__________________________
Service industry machines------------ Miscellaneous machinery-------- ----------
137. 66 138.60
154.26
132.48
134.71 134.71
136. 78
144.33
128.30
135.45
136.34
138. 69
130. 29
135.14
136. 53
143. 81
131. 57
135. 33
131. 89
141.53
124. 85
132. 25
133. 55
143. 72
127. 31
132.99
135.83
142.76
130. 82
134.85
135.83
146. 06
131. 63
133.67
134.03
144.86
131.94
132. 50
156.03 156.37 154.90 152.97 153. 05 148.46 149. 70 155. 04 156. 37 153.45
129.80 132.90 129.65 128.92 129. 80 126.14 122. 41 127.74 126. 28 124. 55
136.90 138.92 136.66 137.46 138. 40 135. 39 131.46 135.69 134.64 132.24
133.54 133.11 131.75 132. 06 131. 02 127. 80 129. 36 131.44 130. 59 128.94
117.26 119.26 118.85 118.14 115.64 115.37 114.12 117.74 115.23 115.79
131.86 132.61 132.76 132. 02 130. 83 127.16 124. 85 128.32 128. 32 127.30
134.95
141.57
133.06
133.42
133.76
137. 99
130. 54
132.37
132.41
135. 85
129. 02
130.16
127.58
133.44
121.72
126.39
121.69
127.30
118.82
120.25
153.64 152. 52 150.75 144.37 137. 06
125. 24 124. 36 124. 24 120.22 114.86
132.54 132.41 131. 67 126. 56 120.83
132.13 133. 06 133.80 127. 20 120.60
115.92 115. 51 113.44 112.19 107.16
127.87 127.43 125.97 120.93 115.83
Average weekly hours
42.1
43.1
41.7
42.8
Fabricated metal products-----------------Metal cans...............................................
Cutlery, hand tools, and general hard
ware___________________________
Heating equipment and plumbing fix
tures___________________________
Fabricated structural metal products. .
Screw machine products, bolts, etc----Metal stampings............. ...........--- - —
Coating, engraving, and allied services.
Miscellaneous fabricated wire products.
Miscellaneous fabricated metal products.
41.9
41.8
42.5
42.5
42.3
42.0
42.7
42.2
42.9
43.8
42.4
44.7
41.9
45.5
42.7
43.9
42.6
43.7
42.1
42.9
42.2
42.3
42.2
42.1
42.0
41.9
41.2
41.5
41.5
41.6
41.7
41.6
40.5
41.6
41.9
41.4
41.6
41.6
41.5
41.5
41.4
39.5
41 8
45.3
41.7
41.3
41 9
42.4
40.6
42.8
45.5
42.7
42.0
42.0
41.8
40.2
42.3
45.2
43.2
41.5
42.0
41.9
41.2
42.6
45.1
43.6
41.9
41.8
42.3
41.3
42.7
45.3
43.8
42.7
42.2
42.5
41.2
42.2
44.1
42.9
42.3
41.9
42.2
39.9
41.6
43.3
42. 4
41.3
42.0
41.5
41.0
42.5
45.0
43. C
42.2
42.3
42.6
40.7
42.2
45.0
43.3
41.9
42.4
42.6
40.0
41.6
44.6
43.1
41.5
41.6
42.1
40.0
41.5
45.2
43.1
42.0
41.8
42.4
40.1
41.7
45.1
43.0
41.8
42.3
42.0
39.7
41.6
44.9
42.8
41.2
41.8
41.8
40.1
41.7
43.9
43.3
41.5
41.8
41.7
40.2
41.3
42.8
43. 0
41.2
41.1
41.0
Machinery_________________________
Engines and turbines______________
Farm machinery and equipment..........
Construction and related machinery—
Metalworking machinery and equip
ment-............................—------ -------Special industry machinery...................
General industrial machinery..............
Office, computing and accounting ma
chines...................................................
Service industry machines__________
Miscellaneous machinery...................... .
43.7
42.9
44.0
44.2
41.4
42.9
43.7
42.7
40.6
43.0
43.7
41.4
41.1
42.9
43.9
42.8
41.9
43.1
43.5
42.9
41.2
42.9
43.1
42.5
40.8
42.8
44.1
43.0
42.2
43.5
44.1
43.6
42.6
43.4
43.8
43.5
42.7
43.3
44.1
42.9
43.2
43.6
44.0
42.2
42.8
43.4
43.7
41.8
42.3
43.1
43.1
41.7
41.4
42.7
42.4
40.8
41.4
41.9
46.3
44.C
43.
46.4
44.9
44.1
46.1
44.1
43.8
45.8
44.0
44.2
46.1
44.3
44.5
45.4
43.8
44.1
45.5
42.8
43.
46.7
44.2
44.2
47.1
44.0
44.0
46.5
43.7
43.5
46.7
44.1
43.6
46.5
44.1
43.7
46.1
43.9
43.6
45.4
43.4
42.9
44.5
42. 7
42.1
42
41
44.1
42.8
41.7
44.5
42.5
41.7
44.7
4i. e
42.
42.4
41.3
44.5
41.9
41.5
44. C
42.0
41.2
43.5
42.4
42.2
44.4
42.4
41.6
44.4
42.0
41.8
44.2
42.9
42.0
44.4
43.2
41.7
44.4
43.3
41.4
44.2
42.4
41.4
43. 5
41.3
40.9
42.9
$2.85
3.22
$2.84
3.20
$2.82
3.21
$2.81
3.19
$2.76
3.19
$ 2.68
2.73
2.72
2.68
2.60
2.62
2.74
2.75
2.97
2.42
¿.51
2.72
2.56
2.67
44.
Average hourly earnings
Fabricated metal products____________
Metal cans........... ...................................
Cutlery, hand tools, and general hard
ware___________________________
Heating equipment and plumbing fix
tures____ ______________________
Fabricated structural metal products...
Screw machine products, bolts, etc___
Metal stampings___________________
Coating, engraving, and allied services.
Miscellaneous fabricated wire products.
Miscellaneous fabricated metal products
$2.93
3.27
Machinery______ _________ __________
Engines and turbines______________
Farm machinery and equipment....... .
Construction and related machinery...
Metalworking machinery and equipment.
Special industry machinery_________
General industrial machinery_______
Office, computing and accounting ma
chines____________ ____________
Service industry machines__________
Miscellaneous machinery............ ......... .
3.15
See footnotes at end of table.
https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
2.82
2.76
2.95
2.92
3.13
2.62
2.68
2
$2.92
3.26
2.82
$2.91
3.26
2.80
$2.91
3. 24
2.79
$2.91
3.28
2. 79
$2.86
3.32
2.72
$2.85
3.33
2.71
$2.85
3.25
2.72
$2.86
3.25
2.74
2.75
2.74
3. 08
2.76
2.93
2.93
3.12
2.60
2.69
2.88
2.76
2.91
2.93
3.12
2.59
2.69
2.85
2. 75
2.90
2.90
3.15
2. 58
2.69
2.85
2.77
2.90
2.89
3.17
2. 59
2.68
2.85
2.72
2.87
2.84
3.07
2.56
2.63
2.81
2.66
2. 85
2.81
3. 06
2. 56
2. 62
2.82
2. 70
2.85
2.85
3. 06
2. 54
2.63
2.83
2.72
2.85
2.85
3.08
2. 55
2.63
2.83
2. 71
2. 83
2.84
3.08
2. 53
2.61
2.80
2.70
2.82
2.84
3.06
2. 52
2.59
2.78
2. 70
2.80
2.82
3.03
2.51
2.59
2.77
2.66
2.80
2.81
3. 04
2.48
2.56
2.76
3.15
3.49
3.20
3.14
3.37
2.96
3.15
3.13
3.38
3.16
3.15
3.36
2.94
3.12
3.12
3.35
3.17
3.15
3. 34
2.93
3.11
3.11
3.36
3.14
3.14
3. 32
2. 93
3.11
3.07
3.35
3.09
3.10
3.27
2.88
3.07
3. 06
3. 33
3. 06
3. 09
3.29
2. 86
3. 05
3.08
3.32
3.10
3.10
3. 32
2.89
3. 07
3.08
3.35
3.09
3.08
3.32
2.87
3.06
3.06
3. 33
3.09
3.06
3.30
2.85
3.04
3.06
3.30
3.08
3.06
3.29
2.84
3.04
3.04
3.27
3.05
3.05
3.28
2.82
3.03
3. 03
3.25
3.05
3.02
3.27
2.83
3.02
2.96
3.20
2.94
2.96
3.18
2.77
2.95
2.87
3.12
2.87
2.87
3.08
2.69
2.87
3.11
2.86
2.98
3.10
2.85
2.97
3.10
2. 84
2.96
3. 09
2.80
2.94
3.05
2.78
2.89
3. 08
2. 77
2.87
3.10
2. 7t
2.89
3.08
2. 77
2.89
3. 07
2.77
2. 88
3.08
2. 76
2.88
3.08
2.77
2.87
3.09
2. 74
2.85
3.00
¿.71
2.78
2.92
2.62
2.70
2.66
2.87
2. 32
2.42
2.65
C.—EARNINGS AND HOURS
T a b l e C - l.
97
Gross hours and earnings of production workers,1 by industry—Continued
Revised series; see box, p. 87.
1965
1966
Annual
average
Industry
Jan.2
Dec.
Nov.
Oct.
Sept.
Aug.
July
June
May
Apr.
Mar.
Feb.
Jan.
1965
1964
Average weekly earnings
Manufacturing—Continued
Durable goods—Continued
Electrical equipment and supplies..........
Electric distribution equipment-------Electrical industrial apparatus - - -Household appliances_________ - --Electric lighting and wiring equipment __________ - -------- ------ -Radio and TV receiving sets------------Communication equipment--------Electronic components and accessoriesMiscellaneous electrical equipment
and supplies--. --------------------------
$108.81 $110.42 $109. 74 $109.86 $110.12 $107. 68 $106.11 $108. 62 $108. 62 $107. 68 $107. 53 $108. 05 $107. 79 $105. 78 $101. 66
118.98 123.98 120.27 117. 32 119. 99 115. 64 117. 46 117. 73 116. 05 113. 98 115. 50 113. 57 113. 98 113. 02 110. 83
117.31 118. 58 117.18 117. 60 119. 57 117. 74 118.15 117.17 118.13 117. 73 118. 28 117. 58 115.35 113. 28 109.56
116.91 116.98 121.01 119.94 122. 51 119. 42 116.28 118. 28 119. 97 118.69 114. 24 117.86 119. 00 114. 54 107. 33
103.06 104.70 103. 79 103. 73 103. 82 101. 93 99.20 101. 59 101. 84 101. 09 101. 43 100. 78 100. 69 99.14 95.04
90.64 92.97 94.30 98. 41 94. 07 93.96 91.57 91.87 89.17 91. 80 92. 50 93.43 93. 30 91.31 87.25
124.86 124.91 122.60 122.18 122. 22 118.37 117. 33 119. 81 120. 51 118. 82 120.25 121. 25 121.11 116.47 112. 07
92. 57 92.46 91.60 92.00 91.66 91.03 89. 27 93. 02 92. 21 91.35 91.80 92.25 91.39 88 . 88 86.18
120.54 126.12 127.02 124.62 122.43 115.14 114. 34 117. 79 117. 79 118. 03 117. 50 120.35 118. 66 115.36 108. 67
141.10 146.03 145. 52 146.63 144. 84
Transportation eq u ip m en t...------Motor vehicles and equipment_______ 142.45 150.38 151. 71 154. 43 151.87
Aircraft and parts— ___
- - - ___
146. 26 145.92 144. 05 143. 52
Ship and boat building and repairing.. 135.56 136. 73 131.02 134.18 129. 60
141. 23 141.80 141.04 136.15
Railroad equipment-.
- ________
Other transportation equipment - ------94.28 94.62 97.20 99.14
139. 35
142. 27
144. 09
129.34
135. 74
97. 27
137. 94
140. 42
142. 23
130.29
136. 68
93.30
140. 25
143. 40
143 22
132. 40
133 32
96. 87
139. 07
141. 54
143 44
128. 75
137 94
96.96
141.47
149. 02
139 43
128. 65
133 20
95.2G
140. 06
144. 57
141 43
130.10
132 44
9 5 .20
140. 71
146. 02
142 14
129. 58
133 32
91.42
142. 46
148.14
143 00
128. 86
130 71
sa 47
137. 71 130. 09
147. 63 138.03
131 88 125 03
12L 50 121.10
19Q 44
92. 69 93. 89
Average weekly hours
Electrical equipment and supplies_____
Electric distribution equipment ___
Electrical industrial apparatus--. ---Household appliances---------------------Electric lighting and wiring equipment — - - ---------------- --------Radio and TV receiving sets____ ____
Communication equipment__ _____
Electronic components and accessories.
Miscellaneous electrical equipment and
supplies________________
___ _
40.6
41.6
41.6
39.9
41.2
42.9
42.2
40.2
41.1
42.2
42.0
41.3
41.3
41.9
42.0
41,5
41.4
42.7
42.4
42.1
41.1
41.9
42.2
41.9
40.5
42.1
42.5
40.8
41.3
42.5
42.3
41.5
41.3
42.2
42.8
41.8
41.1
41.6
42.5
41.5
41.2
42.0
42.7
40.8
41.4
41.6
42.6
41.5
41.3
41.6
42.1
41.9
41.0
41.4
41.8
41.2
40.5
41.2
41.5
40.5
40.1
38.9
41.9
39.9
40.9
39.9
42.2
40.2
40.7
40.3
41.7
40.0
41.0
41.7
41.7
40.0
41.2
40.2
42.0
40.2
41.1
40.5
41.1
40.1
40.0
39.3
40.6
39.5
40.8
39.6
41.6
40.8
40.9
38.6
41.7
40.8
40.6
39.4
41.4
40.6
40.9
39.7
41.9
40.8
40.8
40.1
42.1
41.0
40.6
39.7
42.2
40.8
40.8
39.7
41.3
40.4
40.1
39.3
40.9
39.9
41.0
41.9
42.2
42.1
41.5
40.4
39.7
40.9
40.9
40.7
40.8
41.5
41.2
41.2
40.7
Transportation equipment____________
Motor vehicles and equipment_______
Aircraft and parts
___ .
___
Ship and boat building and repairing..
Railroad equipment____________ .
Other transportation equipment_____
41.5
40.7
42.7
42.6
43.4
42.2
40. 7
38.8
42.8
43.1
43.3
41.2
41.1
39.1
43.0
43.5
43 0
41.8
41 0
4Ò.Ò
42.6
42.9
43. 1
40.5
40 4
40.8
42.1
41.6
43 4
40.8
40 4
40.7
41.8
41.3
43 1
41.1
40 8
39.2
42.5
42.3
42.4
42.0
43.0
43.7
42.7
42.9
42.9
43.2
43.3
43.7
42.9
44.2
42.1
43.0
41.9
40 4
40.7
4l! 4
41 3
40.4
41.5
41 5
40.0
41.7
40 5
40.0
41.4
41.3
41 0
38.9
40.5
4o! 5
38.9
4o! 3
41. 0
$2.61
2. 75
2.77
2. 80
2.48
2.33
2. 87
2. 25
$2.61
2.73
2. 76
2.84
2. 47
2.33
2.88
2. 25
$2.61
2. 74
2.74
2.84
2. 48
2.35
2. 87
2.24
$2. 62
2.74
2.75
2. 86
2.48
2.35
2. 87
2.24
$2. 58
2.73
2.71
2.78
2.43
2.30
2.82
2.20
$2.51
2. 69
2.64
2.65
2.37
2.22
2.74
2.16
42.1
Average hourly earnings
Electrical equipment and supplies.......... $2.68
Electric distribution equipment______
2.86
Electrical industrial apparatus..____
2.82
Household appliances________ _____
2.93
Electric lighting and wiring equipment _ 2.57
Radio and TV receiving sets— - —
2.33
Communication equipment_________
2.98
Electronic components and accessories.
2.32
Miscellaneous electrical equipment and
supplies__________ ______ ____
2.94
Transportation equipment___ _______
Motor vehicles and equipment__
Aircraft and parts___ _____. .
Ship and boat building and repairing..
Railroad equipment_____ _ ____ Other transportation equipment .
See footnotes at end of table.
https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
3.40
3.50
3.22
$2.68
2.89
2.81
2.91
2.56
2.33
2.96
2.30
$2.67
2.85
2.79
2.93
2.55
2.34
2.94
2.29
3.01
3.01
2.96
2.95
2. 88
3.42
3.53
3.37
3.24
3 47
2.43
3.40
3.52
3.37
3.18
3 4fi
2.42
3.41
3.55
3 35
3.21
3 44
2.43
3.40
3. 54
3 33
3. 20
3 37
2.43
3.30
3. 40
3 30
3.17
3 35
2.38
$2.66
2.80
2.80
2.89
2.53
2.36
2.93
2.30
$2. 66
2. 81
2. 82
2. 91
2.52
2.34
2.91
2.28
$2.62
2. 79
2. 78
2. 85
2. 48
2.33
2.89
2. 26
$2.63
2. 75
2. 76
2.87
2.49
2.31
2.89
2.26
$2.62
2.74
2. 77
2.86
2.49
2.33
2. 87
2.25
2.88
2.88
2. 90
2. 88
2.90
2.88
2. 88
2.80
2. 67
3.30
3.39
3 30
3l 16
3. 28
3.37
3 2Q
3.29
3.41
3 25
3.30
3.43
3 24
3.08
3 30
2.38
2.35
3. 21
3.34
3 14
3 ! 00
3 22
2.30
3.09
3.21
3 02
3 .1 0
3.28
3.38
3 20
3.13
3.29
3.39
3 20
3.1 1
3. 28
3. 37
3 20
3 ! 12
$2.63
2. 77
2.77
2.85
2.49
2.32
2.88
2.28
2! 38
3 34
2.40
3 33
2.38
3 .1 2
3 31
2.30
2.3 5
2.9 9
3 13
¿29
MONTHLY LABOR REVIEW, MARCH 1967
98
T a b l e C -l.
Gross hours and earnings of production workers,1 b y industry—Continued
Revised series; see box, p, 87.
Annual
average
1966
1967
Industry
Jan.2 Dec.2 Nov.
Oct.
Sept.
Aug.
July
June
May
Apr.
Mar.
Feb.
Jan
1965
1964
Average weekly earnings
Manufacturing—Continue d
Durable goods—Continued
Instruments and related products______
Engineering and scientific instruments.
Mechanical measuring and control
devices_____ . ----------- -----------Optical and ophthalmic goods----------Ophthalmic goods
_ _ ______
Surgical, medical, and dental equipment___ . . . -------------------------Photographic equipment and supplies..
Watches and clocks ..
$113.71 $115. 50 $114. 66 $114.93 $114. 78 $112.17 $111.90 $113.94 $113. 79 $112. 71 $113.10 $112. 67 $111.72 $108.47 $103. 63
136.97 133. 49 133.18 133. 06 128. 59 131. 89 131. 82 . 131.40 130.28 133.18 131.70 132.25 125. 33 119. 66
114.96 116. 06 115.92 116. 20 115. OS 112.74 112. 19 115.60 115.75 114. 63 114.48 114.06 114.06 108. 62 103. 79
105. 66 104.83 103. 91 102. 26 103. 83 101. 26 101.92 102. 66 102.48 97.68 101. 88 101.22 99.84 98.65 94.81
93.79 94.19 92. 57 94. 07 91.58 93. 25 93.30 92.48 88. 44 92.06 91.24 90.17 89.40 86. 07
93.85 95. 91 96. 46 96.12 95.71 93. 50 91.94 95.30 94.89 93.38 93.89 92. 57 93.20 90.23 88.22
_____ 135. 65 133. 73 136. 78 136. 03 132. 25 131. 58 133. 67 133. 90 134. 29 131. 63 132.85 129.86 127. 84 120.38
91.53 91.69 91. 65 92.48 92.70 91.35 91.17 89.91 90. 50 91.62 91.02 89.35 87. 85 84.50
Miscellaneous manufacturing industries.. 93.20 91.60 90.45 90.09 89. 20 88. 22
104.81 108. 89 109.48 108. 63 105. 42 102. 51
Jewelry, silverware, and plated ware.
80.52 79.60 79. 60 78.41 79.00
Toys, amusement, and sporting goods..
90.39 90. 45 89.38 88. 07 86. 43
Pens, pencils, office and art materials
81.74 79.54 80.98 81.18 80.00
Costume jewelry, buttons, and notions.
Other manufacturing industries--------- 97. 51 97.84 97. 84 97.28 96. 40 95.04
104.08 104. 75 103. 42 99.39 99. 63
Musical instruments and parts--------
86. 24 88. 62 88.62 87. 74 89.28 88.84
95. 35 100.94 100.28 100.04 100.19 97.27
77. 60 78. 80 78.40 78.40 79. 59 78. 59
84. 02 87.48 86.05 84.42 85.44 84.80
78. 56 82.42 81. 20 79.37 81. 81 81.81
93. 62 95.04 95. 75 94. 56 95.47 95.88
97. 28 100.45 99.39 98.42 99. 53 102.18
87.52
96.63
77.20
82.29
80.17
94.24
97.20
85.39
95.53
76.44
82. 82
77.62
92.46
97.75
82.37
91.58
74.30
78. 80
73.90
89.60
94.66
Average weekly hours
Instruments and related products--------Engineering and scientific instruments.
Mechanical measuring and control
devices------ -- ------------------- -----Optical and ophthalmic goods----------Ophthalmic goods _ . __________
Surgical, medical, and dental equipment______________ ____. . .
Photographic equipment and supplies.
Watches and clocks________________
41.5
42.0
43.9
42.0
43.2
42.1
43.1
42.2
43.2
41.7
42.3
41.6
43.1
42.2
42.8
42.3
42.8
41.9
42.3
42.2
43.1
42.2
42.9
42.0
42.8
41.4
41.5
40.8
40.7
41.5
41.6
41.9
41.6
40.6
42.0
41.4
40.6
42.1
41.4
40.6
42.0
41.7
40.9
41.6
41.5
40.7
41.4
41.6
40.9
42.5
41.9
41.1
42.4
42.0
41.1
42.3
40.7
.40.2
42.4
42.1
41.1
42.4
42.0
41.1
42.4
41.6
40.8
41.3
41.8
41.2
40.7
41.4
40. 6
39.6
40.3
43.2
40.5
40.7
43.0
41.3
40.9
43.7
41.1
40.9
43.6
41.1
40.3
42.8
41.2
39.8
43.0
40.6
40.9
43.4
40.7
40.9
43.9
40.5
40.6
43.6
40.4
41.0
43.3
40.9
40.6
43.7
41.0
40.7
43.0
40.8
40.1
42.9
40.3
40.1
41.8
39.3
Miscellaneous manufacturing industries .
Jewelry, silverware, and plated ware..
Toys, amusement, and sporting goods.
Pens, pencils, office and art materials.
Costume jewelry, buttons, and notions.
Other manufacturing industries--------Musical instruments and parts........
40.0
41.1
40.0
42.7
38.9
40.9
39.3
40.1
41.8
40.2
42.6
40.0
41.3
38.8
40.1
41.9
40.4
42.6
40.0
41.0
39.5
40.2
41.7
40.0
42.0
39.4
40.4
39. 6
40.0
40.9
40.1
41.5
39.7
40.2
39.8
40.1
41.0
39.2
39.4
38.8
38.9
38.7
39.5
40.2
40.1
41.2
39.4
40.5
40.4
40.1
41.0
40.1
41.1
39.2
40.4
40.2
40.4
40.9
39.7
41.0
39.2
40.2
39.1
39.9
40.5
40.4
41.4
39.4
40.3
40.3
40.8
41.3
40.2
40.7
39.1
40.0
40.3
40.8
42.4
39.6
40. 6
38.6
39.0
39.3
40.1
40.5
39.9
41.0
39.2
40.4
39.6
40.2
40.9
39.6
40.7
38.9
39.4
39.1
40. 0
40.8
39.8
Average hourly earnings
Instruments and related products__ ..
Engineering and scientific instruments.
Mechanical measuring and control
devices........
.. -------------------Optical and ophthalmic goods_______
Ophthalmic goods_______________
Surgical, medical, and dental equipment----------------------------------------Photographic equipment and supplies.
Watches and clocks________________
$2.74
$2.75
3.12
$2.73
3.09
$2.73
3.09
$2.72
3. 08
$2.69
3.04
$2.69
3.06
$2. 70
3.08
$2.69
3.07
$2.69
3.08
$2.68
3.09
$2.67
3.07
$2.66
3.09
$2.62
3.02
$2.54
2.94
2.77
2.54
2.77
2.52
2.31
2.76
2.51
2.32
2.76
2. 47
2.28
2. 74
2.49
2.30
2.71
2.44
2.25
2.71
2. 45
2. 28
2. 72
2.45
2.27
2.73
2.44
2.25
2.71
2.40
2.20
2. 70
2.42
2.24
2.69
2.41
2. 22
2.69
2.40
2. 21
2. 63
2.36
2.17
2. 55
2.29
2.12
2.37
2.38
3.14
2.26
2.37
3.11
2.22
2. 35
3.13
2.23
2.34
3.12
2. 25
2.32
3.09
2.25
2.31
3. 06
2. 25
2.33
3.08
2.24
2.32
3.05
2. 22
2.30
3.08
2. 24
2. 29
3.04
2. 24
2.28
3.04
2.22
2.29
3.02
2.19
2. 25
2.98
2.18
2.20
2.88
2.15
Miscellaneous manufacturing industries..
Jewelry, silverware, and plated ware..
Toys, amusement, and sporting goods.
Pens, pencils, office and art materials..
Costume jewelry, buttons, and notions.
Other manufacturing industries........ .
Musical instruments and parts--------
2.33
2.55
2.29
2.55
2.07
2.21
2.08
2.44
2.49
2.25
2. 57
1.9Î
2. It
2.05
2. 44
2.50
2. 23
2. 55
1.99
2. IS
2. 05
2. 42
2.48
2.23
2. 51
1.9S
2.18
2. 05
2.41
2.43
2. 20
2.47
1.99
2.15
2. 01
2.37
2.43
2.20
2. 42
2. 0C
2.16
2. 03
2.37
2. 42
2. 21
2. 45
2. 0C
2.16
2.04
2.37
2. 45
2. 21
2.44
2.00
2.13
2.02
2.37
2.43
2. 21
2. 44
2.00
2.1C
2.03
2.37
2. 43
2. 21
2.42
2.02
2.12
2.03
2.34
2.41
2.21
2.39
2. 01
2.12
2.03
2. 35
2.41
2. 21
2.38
2. 00
2.11
2.04
2. 35
2.40
2.14
2.33
1.95
2. 05
1.96
2.30
2.39
2.08
2.25
1.91
2. 00
1.89
2. 24
2.32
See footnotes at end of table.
https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
2.45
99
0.—EARNINGS AND HOURS
T a ble C - l.
Gross hours and earnings of production workers,1 by industry—Continued
Revised series; see box, p, 87.
Industry
Annual
average
1966
1967
Jan.2 Dec.2 Nov.
Oct.
Sept. | Aug. | July | June | May I Apr. I Mar.
Feb.
Jan.
1965
1964
Average weekly earnings
lV
lclIlU
ldiLl/U
.1IlIJi,
VyUIllIllUCU
Nondurable goods
a n r ] lr in ^ r P f i p r o r h i p t s
Dairy'products......... . ......................
Canned and preserved food, except
meats
$105.41 $106.14 $104. 90 $104. 08 $104.92 $103. 34 $105. 59 $104. 24 $103. 89 $102. 21 $101.66 $101. 59 $101.34 $99. 87 $97.17
115.23 116.20 115.35 113. 28 114. 78 108. 79 109. 74 109. 86 108. 53 106. 27 105. 73 106. 00 108. 53 107. 27 105.98
111. 14 111.25 111.14 no. 30 110. 93 109.23 112. 92 110. 68 108. 20 107. 52 107. 26 106. 59 107. 01 105. 08 102.12
82.08 79.93
120. 94 123.40 122.94
101.79 104.28 104. 54
111.02 110.50
88.62 88.29 87.60
Confectionery and related products _
118.37
120. 66 121.29
Beverages.
_ .. . . .
Miscellaneous food and kindred prod103.17
105.11 104.92
ucts_____ - -- -------------------- - 84. 80 88.29 81.24
'Tnfraceo manufactories
112.47
100. 77
Cigarettes
68.58 68.24
Cigars
81.40 82.40 83.21
Teytile mill products
86.68 86.86 87.29
Cotton broad woven fabrics
83.
43 85. 46 87.11
Silk and synthetic broad woven fabrics.
Weaving and finishing broad woolens.. 86.32 87.78 85.68
81.32
81.34 81.16
Narrow fabrics and small wares ___
71.25 70.69 72.58
Knitting... . ______ . . . . .
Finishing textiles, except wool and
90. 71 93.53 92.66
knit
83.40 86. 88
Floor covering
74.15 75.67 77.42
Yam and thread
94.53
93.46
96.10
Miscellaneous textile goods___
. ...
82.39
124. 47
105.99
101.12
88.44
119.66
86. 93
124. 55
106.11
119. 23
89.06
118. 73
86.71
118. 42
106.08
121. 54
89.06
119.97
82.58
120.38
106. 71
127. 75
87.36
130.23
80. 89
118.22
106.34
121. 84
87.91
121. 67
84. 50
114. 04
104.23
120. 41
87.02
117.33
83.11
113.36
102. 66
117. 42
84. 75
117. 74
81.09
114.40
101. 75
119.39
85. 97
115. 37
82.18
115. 00
101. 85
116. 48
84. 50
114. 00
79.54
114. 66
101.35
105. 57
84.10
113. 43
104.25 104. 55 102. 41 101. 50 102. 24 101.64 99.84 99.30 101. 44 99.17
81.93 83.41 82.68 87.23 88. 55 86.94 86. 49 84. 64 87.91 82.30
105. 72 106.23 106.11 104. 72 106.92 103. 45 105. 57 102. 80 111.25 101.38
66.41 64. 61 64.25 63. 71 65.12 66.33 65.28 66.15 66.15 64. 05
83. 20 83.38 83. 36 81.76 84.35 81.45 79.90 81.22 81.22 79.84
86.46 87.06 86. 23 85. 63 89. 85 83.38 82. 64 84.15 84.97 84.39
86.70 87. 31 89. 35 89. 35 87.87 87.71 85.14 86.68 86.24 84. 83
86.53 87. 78 88.60 88. 39 90. 90 89. 76 87.03 87.23 87.44 85. 80
82.15 81.90 81.25 80.48 81.64 79. 27 78.47 79.52 79.10 77.38
73. 71 72.93 74. 24 70.27 72.31 72.31 68. 63 70.59 69.87 68.02
92.66
86. 25
78.17
96.11
91.59
86.05
79.05
95.90
90. 74
85.43
79.00
93.95
89.03
80.39
78.07
92. 65
94.17
83.18
78. 94
95. 25
91.54
80.93
76. 68
94. 61
78. 60 75.66
113.40 109. 07
101. 40 97.12
110.33 106. 57
83.53 79. 98
114. 09 109. 89
98.79
79.21
97.27
63.95
78.17
80.28
83.90
83. 69
75.99
68.29
96.25
75. 66
93.45
64. 08
73.39
74.34
79.24
76. 86
73.03
65. 45
91.54
80.15
76. 50
91.59
91.94
81.41
76.79
92.02
90. 87
82.41
76. 72
92.23
87. 96
81. 25
76. 72
90.95
85.85
81.51
73. 70
88. 20
81.90
76.26
66. 99
83.63
Average weekly hours
Food and kindred products___ ______
Meat products
Dairy products___. . -------------- - ..
Canned and preserved food, except
meats
. . . . __
44.3
Grain mill products . . . . . ___
39.0
Bakery products
. . . . ___
Sugar
40.1
Confectionery and related products___
40.4
Beverages__ . . .
-------Miscellaneous food and kindred prod41.6
ucts_________________ _____ - 38.2
Tobacco manufactures
_. . . . .
Cigarettes
Cigars________________ . . . ----------- _____
40.7
Textile mill products___ __
. . .
42.7
Cotton broad woven fabrics.. . . . ..
41.3
Silk and synthetic broad woven fabrics.
41.3
Weaving and finishing broad woolens..
41.7
Narrow fabrics and small wares
37.5
Knitting_____ . . . . ______________
41.8
Finishing textiles, except wool and knit.
Floor covering
40.3
Yam and thread. .
......
42.2
Miscellaneous textile goods___ ______
41.3
42.1
42.3
41.3
42.1
42.1
41.3
41.8
42.1
41.8
42.2
42.5
41.5
40.9
42.5
41.9
41.1
43.6
41.2
41.3
42.9
40.9
40.8
42.1
40.4
40.1
42.0
40.5
39.6
41.9
40.8
40.0
41.8
40.7
40.8
41.8
41.1
41.1
42.2
41.0
41.4
42.2
38.9
45.2
39.8
43.2
40.5
40.9
38.8
45.2
39.9
45.1
40.0
40.7
39.8
46.1
40.3
39.5
40.2
40.7
41.2
46.3
40.5
41.4
40.3
40.8
40.9
45.2
40.8
42.2
40.3
41.8
39.7
46.3
41.2
43.6
39.0
44.6
37.8
46.0
40.9
42.9
39.6
42.1
39.3
44.2
40.4
42.1
39.2
40.6
38.3
43.6
40.1
41.2
38.7
40.6
38.8
44.0
39.9
43.1
39.8
40.2
39.7
44.4
40.1
43.3
39.3
40. 0
38.8
44.1
39.9
41.4
39.3
39. 8
39.3
45. 0
40.4
42.6
39.4
40. 6
38.8
44. 7
40.3
42. 8
39.4
40. 4
42.9
40.5
41.5
38.1
41.2
43.0
42.1
42.0
41.5
37.6
43.1
41.7
40.9
42.1
43.0
38.5
37.6
37.7
41.4
43.0
42.7
40.8
41.2
38.4
42.7
42.8
41.4
42.9
42.9
39.2
39.3
37.1
41.6
42.8
42.5
41.4
41.7
39.0
42.9
42.7
41.8
43.1
42.5
40.1
39.2
36.5
41.9
43.1
42.8
42.0
42.0
39.0
42.8
42.6
42.5
43.2
41.8
38.1
39.3
36.3
42.1
42.9
43.8
42.8
42.1
39.7
42.6
42.5
42.7
42.9
41.6
37.6
38.5
36.2
41.5
42.6
43.8
42.7
41.7
38.4
41.8
40.6
42.2
42.5
41.9
38.5
39.6
37.0
42.6
44.7
43.5
43.7
42.3
39.3
43.8
41.8
42.9
43.1
42.0
38.3
38.6
37.9
42.2
43.2
44.3
44.0
41.5
39.3
43.8
41.5
42.6
43.5
41. 6
38.1
39.1
37.3
41.4
42.6
43.0
43.3
41.3
37.5
43.8
41.1
42.5
42.6
41.9
38.3
38.5
37.8
42.3
43.6
44.0
43.4
42.3
39.0
44.2
42.4
42.9
43.0
42.8
39.6
40.9
37.8
42.3
43.8
44. 0
43. 5
42.3
38.6
43.9
42.7
43.1
43.1
42. 2
38.1
38.4
36.6
41.8
43. 5
43. 5
42.9
41. 6
38.0
42.7
42.1
43.1
42.7
42. 4
37.9
37.7
37.4
41.8
42. 7
43. 7
42. 7
41,3
38. 8
42. 5
42.9
42.6
42. 2
42. 4
38.8
39.1
38. 6
41. 0
42. 0
43. 3
41.1
40. 8
38. 5
42. 0
41. 9
41.1
41. 4
$2. 59
2. 79
2.64
$2.57
2.76
2.63
$2.54
2.74
2.64
$2.52
2.71
2.62
$2.51
2.72
2.61
$2.49
2. 66
2.57
$2. 52
2. 67
2. 59
$2.53
2.66
2. 58
$2.54
2. 66
2. 57
$2.53
2.65
2.56
$2.51
2. 67
2.56
$2.49
2. 65
2. 55
$2.49
2.66
2. 56
$2.43
2.61
2.49
$2.37
2.56
2.42
2.11
2.73
2.62
2.57
2.18
2.95
2.06
2.72
2.62
2.45
2.19
2.98
2. 07
2.70
2.63
2.56
2.20
2.94
2.11
2.69
2.62
2.88
2.21
2.91
2.12
2.62
2.60
2.88
2. 21
2. 87
2.08
2.60
2. 59
2. 93
2. 24
2. 92
2.14
2. 57
2. 60
2. 84
2. 22
2.89
2.15
2.58
2.58
2. 86
2.22
2.89
2.17
2. 60
2.56
2.85
2.19
2.90
2. 09
2.60
2. 55
2. 77
2.16
2.87
2.07
2.59
2.54
2. 69
2.15
2.85
2.05
2.60
2.54
2.55
2.14
2.85
2.00
2.52
2. 51
2. 59
2.12
2. 81
1.95
2.44
2.41
2.49
2.03
2.72
2.45
2.18
2.71
1.80
2.00
2.02
2.03
2.09
1.96
1.88
2.17
2.00
1.85
2.22
2.44
2.11
2.68
1.81
2.01
2.03
2.04
2.10
1.97
1.89
2.17
2.03
1.87
2.24
2.43
2.09
2.69
1.79
2.00
2.02
2.04
2.09
1.97
1.89
2.16
2.02
1.87
2. 23
2.46
2.08
2.71
1.77
1.99
2.02
2.04
2.09
1.95
1.87
2.14
2.02
1.86
2.22
2.45
2.17
2. 70
1.77
1.98
2.01
2.04
2.07
1.93
1.87
2.13
2.01
1.85
2.19
2.44
2.32
2. 72
1.76
1.97
2. 01
2.04
2. 07
1.93
1.83
2.13
1.98
1.85
2.18
2.44
2.30
2.70
1.76
1.98
2. 01
2.02
2.08
1.93
1.84
2.15
1.99
1. 84
2.21
2.42
2.27
2. 68
1. 75
1.93
1.93
1.98
2.04
1.91
1.84
2.09
1.95
1.80
2.18
2. 40
2.27
2. 70
1.75
1.93
1.94
1.98
2. 01
1.90
1.83
2. 09
1.95
1.80
2.15
2.37
2. 21
2. 67
1.75
1.92
1.93
1. 97
2. 01
1.88
1.81
2.08
1.92
1. 79
2.14
2.37
2. 22
2. 72
1. 75
1.92
1.94
1.96
2.01
1.87
1.81
2. 07
1.93
1.78
2.14
2.35
2.16
2. 64
1.75
1.91
1. 94
1. 95
2. 00
1.86
1.79
2. 06
1.93
1.78
2.13
2.33
2.09
2. 58
1.71
1.87
1. 88
1.92
1.96
1. 84
1.76
2. 02
1.9C
1. 73
2. 09
2.27
1.95
2.39
40.7
41.3
42.1
Average hourly earnings
Food and kindred products___________
Meat products____________________
Dairy products........- ______________
Canned and preserved food, except
meats___ ______________________
Grain mill products________________
Bakery products.--»_______________
Sugar._____ ______________________
Confectionery and related products__
Beverages_______________ ________
Miscellaneous food and kindred prod
ucts................. ......................... ............
Tobacco manufactures_______________
Cigarettes.._______________________
Cigars....................... .................. ______
Textile mill products..................... ...........
Cotton broad woven fabrics_________
Silk and synthetic broad woven fabrics.
Weaving and finishing broad woolens.
Narrow fabrics and smallwares______
Knitting______ _________ _________
Finishing textiles, except wool and knit
Floor covering____________________
Yam and thread..______ __________
Miscellaneous textile goods..... .............
See footnotes at end of table.
https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
2. 73
2. 61
2.21
2.93
2.48
2.22
2.00
2.03
2.02
2.09
1.95
1.90
2.17
1.84
2.24
1.66
1.79
1.77
1.83
1. 87
1.79
1.70
1.95
1.82
1.63
2. 02
MONTHLY LABOR REVIEW, MARCH 1967
100
T a b l e C -l.
Gross hours and earnings of production w orkers,1 by industry—Continued
Revised series; see box, p. 87.
1967
Annual
average
1966
Industry
Jan.2
Dec.2
Nov.
Oct.
Sept.
Aug.
July
June
May | Apr.
Mar.
Feb.
Jan.
1965
1964
Average weekly earnings
Manufacturing—Continued
Nondurable goods—Continued
Apparel and related products.--......... .. $69.65 $69.87 $70. 25 $70.64 $67.83 $70.11 $67.88 $68. 63 $68.26 $67.51 $69. 37 $68.81 $66.05 $66. 61 $64.26
Men’s and boys’ suits and coats--------- 85. 33 87.32 86.94 87.17 84.83 87.19 85.03 85.86 85.69 83. 54 85. 25 85.69 83.76 81.86 76.23
61.59 61.50 60.64 59.84 59.36 60.10 58.56 59. 78 58. 30 57.67 59.09 59.31 58.46 57.90 56.09
Men’s and boys’ furnishings------------Women’s, misses’, and juniors’ outerwear. -------- _ - - - - _ - 71.23 71.02 71.44 72.21 68.67 73.56 71.90 71.34 71.34 71.34 73. 63 72.38 66. 73 68. 68 66. 78
Women’s and children’s undergarments____ ___ .
--_
------ 63.71 62.97 65.98 66.12 64.18 63. 92 61.99 62. 53 62. 59 61.39 63.07 62.53 59.45 60.19 58.97
72.50 70.81 72.69 67.86 75. 38 71.28 70. 30 67. 71 66.40 74. 03 74. 43 68.42 70. 08 69. 70
Girls’ and children’s outerwear. . - .. 64.62 62.84 62.48 62.48 59.86 63.86 63.86 64.01 63.15 62.47 64.01 64.75 61.22 60. 79 58. 00
74.70 76.80 77.46 72.04 74.23 73.43 74.54 74.17 71.54 71. 57 71.93 70. 40 70.81 67.51
Miscellaneous fabricated textile* prod76.13
78.36 78.95 80.96 76.58 76.23 69. 92 74.10 74.30 73. 71 74.11 73.34 72.35 73. 73 70.47
------------ -ucts_________
Paper and allied products------ _ ------Paper and pulp.__ _ - - ------- -Paperboard. . . ------------- ------- Converted paper and paperboard nroducts---------- --------------------- -Paperboard containers and boxes_____
119.28 120. 53 121.37 121.37 121.92 120. 77 120. 50 120.18 119. 03 117.50 117.34 116.37 115. 83 114. 22 109.57
135. 69 137.51 139.05 138. 43 138.29 137.39 137. 56 135.45 134.25 132.76 131. 72 131.28 130. 69 128.16 121.88
138.08 137.95 140. 43 139.05 138.91 138.12 139.38 138. 78 139.54 141. 22 136.96 133.95 136. 05 132.14 124.32
Printing, publishing and allied industries.
Newspaper publishing and printing__
Periodical publishing and printing
____ _ _ _ ______ ___
Books
Commercial printing_______________
Bookbinding and related industries. _
Other publishing and printing industries___________ _ ___________ -
123. 26 125. 51
124. 24 131.32
131. 54
114. 54
126. 55 128.40
96.33
105.66 105. 42 105.84 104. 75 105. 75 104.23 103. 91 104.66 103.57 102.34 102.41 101.50 101.26 99. 42 96.28
106.19 109.13 109.91 110.68 111. 89 109. 82 108. 54 110.08 108. 89 106. 01 107.35 105.92 104. 00 104.23 100. 56
124. 87
129.17
133. 39
115.08
127. 76
95. 94
125.51
127. 73
136.04
115.93
129.52
96.29
125.12
127.39
139.03
117.04
129.04
94.92
122. 85
125.17
132. 93
115.78
127.20
93.60
121.83
124.17
132. 76
114.11
126. 25
92.19
122.54
125. 58
129. 44
117. 43
125.37
93.65
122.22
125. 24
125. 58
116.84
125.45
95.01
120. 82
122. 40
124.74
112. 59
124. 03
94.14
121.06
119.95
126. 00
114.36
125.77
94.95
119.74
119.62
124. 90
111.22
124. 03
94.17
117.73
118.57
124.50
111.22
120.59
90.58
118.12
119. 85
125. 83
110.68
120.96
91.57
114. 35
116. 84
122. 01
106. 90
116.42
89.40
129.89 126.36 124.94 125. 71 126.81 124.16 123.00 122.43 122. 88 123.13 125. 05 124.41 123. 24 120. 90 116.10
Average weekly hours
Apparel and related products......... ..........
Men’s and boys’ suits and coats______
Men’s and boys’ furnishings____
.
Women’s, misses’, and juniors’ outerwear.. _
_ _....____
Women’s and children’s undergarments.......... .
___
Hats, caps, and millinery
Girls’ and children’s outerwear.. ._
Fur goods and miscellaneous apparel
Miscellaneous fabricated textile" products__ _____ ____
_____
35.9
37.1
37.1
36.2
38.3
37.5
33.6
33.5
36.2
36.4
36.8
35.5
36.8
37.5
38.6
Paper and allied products____ _ _____
Paper and pulp_________ _________
Paperboard_____ ________________
Converted paper and paperboard products________ _ _
. __ _ _
Paperboard containers and boxes_____
42.6
44.2
44.4
43.2
44.5
44.5
41.6
41.0
Printing, publishing and allied industries.
Newspaper publishing and printing__
Periodical publishing and printing
Books.. ___
Commercial printing_________
__ _
Bookbinding and related industries
Other publishing and printing industries________ . . . ______ _ ______
38.4
35.6
36.4
38.3
37.2
36.9
39.1
37.8
36.3
38.3
37.3
32.7
34.7
34.4
34.8
34.8
37.1
34.8
34.4
36.2
37.6
37.5
36.7
37.3
36.9
36.0
36.7
36.9
37.0
37.0
37.0
36.9
36.6
36.6
36.5
36.9
39.3
38.1
38.5
36.8
38.0
38.1
43.5
44.8
45.0
43.7
44.9
45.1
43.6
44.9
44.7
43.5
45.1
45.4
43.7
45.0
45.5
43.6
44.9
45.9
42.0
42.6
41.9
42.9
42.3
43.2
42.2
42.9
41.9
42.4
42.2
43.0
39.1
37.2
39. 5
41.2
40.0
39. C
38.9
36.8
40.3
41.1
39.8
39.0
39.1
36.6
41.1
41. 7
40.1
39.3
39.1
36.5
41. 5
41.8
40.2
38.9
39.0
36.6
40.9
42.1
40.0
39.0
38.8
36.2
40.6
41.8
39.7
38.9
38.9
36.4
40.2
42.7
39.8
38.7
39.6
39.0
38.8
38.8
38.9
38.4
38.8
38.8
38.5
Average hourly earnings
Apparel and related products.. __ ____
Men’s and boys’ suits and coats_____
Men’s and boys’ furnishings________
Women’s, misses’, and juniors’ outerwear. ____ ____
_ _____
_ _
Women’s and children’s undergarments.
Hats, caps, and millinery_____ _
Girls’ and children’s outerwear______
Fur goods and miscellaneous apparel..
Miscellaneous fabricated textile products_______________ _____ ____
$1.94
2.30
1.66
$1.93
2.28
1.64
$1.93
2. 27
1.63
$1.93
2.27
1.6C
$1.90
2.25
1.60
$1.90
2.23
1.59
$1.87
•2.22
1.57
$1.87
2.23
1.59
2.12
1.76
2.12
1.73
1.97
1.77
2.03
2.12
1.75
1.94
1.75
2.07
2.13
1.74
1.97
1. 75
2.06
2.10
1.73
1.95
1.74
1.99
2.12
1.70
2.01
1.74
1.99
2.0S
1.68
1.98
1.74
1.99
2.05
1.69
1.90
1.73
2. 02
2.03
2.03
2.04
2.06
2.01
1.98
1.90
1.95
1.95
1.95
1.93
1.93
1.95
1.92
1.84
Paper and allied products.._ _ ____ _
Paper and pulp.____ __ _________
Paperboard- _____ __ ____ ___
Converted paper and paperboard products_______ __ ________ -__ _
Paperboard containers and boxes_____
2.80
3.07
3.11
2.79
3.09
3.10
2.79
3.09
3.10
2.79
3.09
3.09
2.79
3.08
3.08
2. 77
3.06
3. 09
2. 77
3. 05
3.07
2.75
3. 01
3.05
2. 73
2.99
3.04
2.72
2.97
3.05
2. 71
2.96
3. 01
2. 70
2.95
3.01
2. 70
2.95
3.01
2.65
2.88
2.93
2.56
2.77
2. 80
2. 51
2.59
2. 51
2.58
2.52
2.58
2.50
2.58
2. 50
2.59
2.47
2. 56
2.48
2.56
2.48
2.56
2.46
2.55
2.46
2.53
2.45
2. 52
2.44
2.51
2. 44
2.50
2.39
2.47
2.32
2.40
Printing, publishing and allied industries.
Newspaper publishing and printing__
Periodical publishing and printing. . . .
Books___ ____ _ ____. . _
Commercial printing_________ ___
Bookbinding and related industries___
Other publishing and printing industries ________ _____________
See footnotes at end of table.
3. 21
3. 4£
3. 21
3. 53
3. 33
2. 78
3. 21
2. 47
3. 21
3.51
3.31
2. 80
3. 21
2. 46
3. 21
3.49
3.31
2 78
3.23
2 45
3.20
3.49
3.35
2 80
3.21
2 44
3.15
3. 42
3.25
2 75
3.18
2 40
3.14
3. 43
3.27
2. 73
3.18
2.37
3.15
3.45
3. 22
2. 75
3.15
2. 42
3.15
3.45
3. 22
2. 73
3.16
2. 43
3.13
3.40
3.15
2. 70
3.14
2. 42
3.12
3.36
3.15
2. 71
3.16
2. 41
3.11
3.36
3.17
2.68
3.14
2.39
3.09
3.34
3.16
2.68
3.10
2.39
3.06
3.32
3.13
2.68
3.07
2.36
2.97
3. 21
3.02
2.62
2.97
2.31
3. 24
3.22
3.24
3.26
3.20
3.17
3.18
3. 20
3.19
3.19
3.19
3.16
3.10
3.00
https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
36.1
39.3
1. 7i
3.22
3.28
36.6
38.4
37.4
35.7
37.7
37.1
33.7
33.9
37.7
36.5
35.7
37.1
38.0
36.9
35.7
37.6
38.7
43.5
45.0
45.3
42.0
42.3
36.7
38.5
37.6
36.9
38.4
37.4
36.6
38.6
37.3
34.8
35.4
34.8
35.9
35.7
35.9
36.5
37.1
37.2
37.0
36.7
37.0
37.4
37.0
36.7
37.8
38.4
38.0
37.1
38.4
38.3
43.2
44.7
46.3
43.3
44.5
45.5
43.1
44.5
44.5
42.9
44.3
45.2
43.1
44.5
45.1
42.8
44.0
44.4
42.1
42.7
41.6
41.9
41.8
42.6
41.6
42.2
41.5
41.6
41.6
42.2
41.5
41.9
38.8
36.3
39.0
42.8
39.7
39.1
38.6
36.0
39.6
41.7
39.5
38.9
38.8
35.7
40. 0
42.2
39.8
39.4
38.5
35.6
39.4
41.5
39.5
39.4
38.1
35.5
39.4
41.5
38.9
37.9
38.6
36.1
40.2
41.3
39.4
38.8
38.5
36.4
40.4
40.8
39.2
38.7
38.6
39.2
39.0
39.0
39.0
38.7
$1.87
2.22
1.58
$1.87
2.21
1.58
$1.88
2. 22
1.58
$1.88
2.22
1.59
$1.85
2. 21
1.58
$1.83
2.16
1.54
$1.79
2.10
1.52
2.05
1. 71
1.85
1.73
2. 01
2.05
1.71
1.86
1.74
1.96
2.08
1. 70
1.99
1.73
1.95
2.08
1.69
1.99
1.75
1.96
2. 01
1.67
1.89
1.71
1.95
2.02
1.64
1.92
1.67
1.94
1.97
1.62
1.92
1.62
1.87
36.5
38.6
36.9
36.1
37.8
36.5
36.4
37.9
37.6
35.9
36.3
36.9
33.2
34.0
33.9
35.6
36.2
35.8
36.1
36.7
36.5
36.4
36.5
36.4
36.3
35.8
36.1
35.7
37.9
37.0
101
C — EARNINGS AND HOURS
T a b l e C - l.
Gross hours and earnings of production workers,1 by industry—Continued
Revised series; see box, 87.
Annual
average
1966
1967
Industry
Jan.2 Dec.2 Nov.
Oct.
Sept.
Aug.
July
June
May
Apr.
Mar.
Feb.
Jan.
1965
1964
Average weekly earnings
Manufacturing—Continued
Nondurable goods— Continued
Chemicals and allied products------- ------ $126.77 $127.98 $128.29 $127. 56 $127.14 $125. 70 $126. 00 $125. 76 $124.49 $124.66 $122.64 $123.19 $122.18 $121. 09 $116. 48
Industrial chemicals__
.
- - 141.20 143.65 145.43 143. 99 142. 04 140. 53 141. 53 140. 77 139. 26 139. 26 137. 76 137. 34 136. 27 136. 08 131.04
Plastics materials and synthetics---- — 126. 30 126. 78 126. 05 125. 88 125.33 125. 50 126. 52 125. 97 124.98 125. 99 122.09 123.25 121.25 120. 70 116.89
Drugs
--- - - __ — 116.16 116.47 116.18 115. 77 114. 24 111.23 110. 68 111.78 111.93 111.66 111.25 111.79 111.38 106. 90 102. 77
Soap, cleaners, and toilet goods--------- 121.36 120.42 122. 06 122. 06 122. 77 122.93 121.42 121.93 118.12 117. 29 116. 62 116. 31 116. 03 113.15 108.68
Paints, varnishes, and allied products— 117.10 118. 53 117.99 117. 83 119. 83 118. 58 118. 01 119. 99 120. 70 118. 72 115. 65 114. 40 112. 75 113.15 109.03
105.40 104.23 106. 27 105.15 103. 39 104. 23 102.48 105.94 107. 88 106. 48 103.25 102. 53 100.69 97.63
Other chemical products.. . . . . ----- 120.60 124. 07 122.89 122.64 123. 97 121. 51 120.38 121.55 119.00 118. 43 115. 62 116. 72 116. 75 116.90 112.98
Petroleum refining and related industries. 150.10 145. 32 146. 70 145. 43 146. 80 142. 72 147. 06 145.95 145. 61 145.69 141. 62 140. 61 141.62 138.42 133. 76
Petroleum refining.
. ..
---- 158.47 152.46 154.34 150.12 152. 04 148. 57 153. 91 152.40 154.15 154. 21 149.58 148.10 148. 39 145. 05 139. 52
Other petroleum and coal products....... 115.37 117.04 119. 71 128. 29 130. 87 123.48 125. 27 124.37 116. 42 115.87 111.87 112. 86 114.09 115.90 112. 49
Rubber and miscellaneous plastic products__ _ - . . _____ _ -- --- - 111.22 112.17 112. 98 113. 52 114. 21 111.04 110.27 111. 30 111. 57 110. 62 110. 46 111. 14 111.41 109.62 104. 90
156.34 159.78 165.17 166. 66 165.99 163. 02 162. 94 161. 55 163. 44 162. 79 159. 56 161. 01 162. 62 158.06 142. 54
Tires and inner tubes------ . . . .
Other rubber products. . .
------------ 110.56 110.35 110.20 110.20 110. 72 106.91 104. 34 107.33 106.24 105.06 105. 57 106. 24 106. 75 103.82 99.96
Miscellaneous plastic products----------- 93.56 93.89 93.94 94.81 95. 04 93.11 92. 21 93.38 93. 56 93.11 93. 60 93. 79 92.74 92. 35 90.06
Leather and leather products-----. . . . .
77.99 77.01 76.03 74. 68 74.09 75.85 74.49 76.05 74.88 73.33 73.92 75.26
103. 57 104.19 103.83 103. 53 101.45 100.19 100.19 102.66 103.16 102.09 101. 93 100.21
Leather tanning and finishing----- . .
Footwear, except rubber---- . . . . . . 75.47 73. 73 72.39 70.88 71.25 73.32 72. 71 73.88 71.62 69.94 71.05 72.34
76.00 75.06 76.05 75. 66 72.18 73. 71 70.88 72.77 72.96 71.63 72. 77 73.33
Other leather p r o d u c ts ..---- 69.00 72.20 71.82 66.22 70.49 68.63 68.60 68.63 67.89 69.91 70.09
Handbags and personal leather goods.
74.11
99.31
71.39
71.44
65.88
71.82
97. 99
68.80
70.49
67.86
68.98
94.19
66. 55
66. 73
64.88
Average weekly hours
41.3
42.1
42.5
42.4
41.3
41.1
41.3
42.5
42.2
42.2
42.9
42.3
41.2
41.8
41.4
42.2
41.8
42.1
42.6
42.1
41.2
41.8
41.2
43.2
42.0
42.1
42.4
42.2
40.8
41.9
41.9
42.4
42.6
41.9
42.2
42.4
40.3
42.1
41.9
42.2
41.9
42.0
42.5
42.6
40.1
41.3
41.7
42.2
41.8
42.2
42.4
42.7
40.5
41.9
42.4
42.7
42.5
42.2
42.2
42.8
40.7
41.3
42.5
44.7
41.9
42.4
42.2
43.0
40.9
41.3
42.1
46.5
41.7
42.0
42.0
42.1
40.9
41.5
41.6
45.7
41.0
41.9
42.0
42.5
41.1
41.1
41.3
43.2
41.1
41.7
41.8
42.1
41.1
41.0
41.0
42.9
41.4
41.9
42.0
42.5
40.8
40.7
41.6
43.4
41.9
41.6
41.6
42.2
40.3
40.4
41.3
43.2
42.0
42.4
42.6
41.5
42.0
42.0
41.8
42.4
42.4
42.6
42.4
41.7
44.7
42.8
42.0
45.6
42.1
41.5
44.1
43.0
42.4
44.9
42.8
42.1
44.9
42.7
42.7
42.8
42.6
42.6
42.6
41.9
41.9
41.9
41.6
41.6
41.8
41.9
41.8
42.1
42.2
41.8
43.9
41.8
41.4
43.6
Rubber and miscellaneous plastic products_________ __________________
Tires and inner tubes____. . . ------ -Other rubber products____ .. . . . .
Miscellaneous plastic products-----------
41.5
42.6
42.2
40.5
41.7
43.3
41.8
41.0
42.0
44.4
41.9
41.2
42.2
44.8
41.9
41.4
42.3
44.5
42.1
41.5
41.9
44.3
41.6
41.2
41.3
43.8
40.6
40.8
42.0
43.9
41.6
41.5
42.1
44.9
41.5
41.4
41.9
44.6
41.2
41.2
42.0
44.2
41.4
41.6
42.1
44.6
41.5
41.5
42.2
44.8
41.7
41.4
42.0
44.4
41.2
41.6
41.3
41.8
40.8
41.5
Leather and leather products____ _ . . .
Leather tanning and finishing_______
Footwear, except ru b b er.__________
Other leather products.. - _ ____
Handbags and personal leather goods.
38.8
40.3
38.9
38.0
38.7
40.7
38.6
38.1
36.9
38.4
40.4
37.9
39.0
38.0
38.1
40.6
37.5
38.8
37.8
37.8
40.1
37.7
37.4
35.6
39.1
40.4
39.0
39.0
38.1
39.0
40.4
39.3
37.7
37.3
39.2
40.9
39.3
38.5
37.9
38.6
41.1
38.3
38.4
37.5
37.8
41.0
37.4
37.9
37.1
38.5
41.1
38.2
38.5
38.2
39.2
40.9
39.1
38.8
38.3
38.8
40.7
38.8
38.0
36.6
38.2
41.0
37.8
38.1
37.7
37.9
40.6
37.6
37.7
37.5
Chemicals and allied products------- —
Industrial chemicals__ _ . -------Plastics materials and synthetics-------Drugs__ _____ _____ . -----------------Soap, cleaners, and toilet goods------Paints, varnishes, and allied products..
Agricultural chemicals_____ _ . . .
Other chemical products. .. _ ---------
41.7
41.9
42.1
40.9
41.0
40.8
Petroleum refining and related industries.
Petroleum refining.. ________ ____
Other petroleum and coal products___
Average hourly earnings
Chemicals and allied products_________ $3.04
Industrial chemicals__________ ___ __ 3. 37
3.00
Plastics materials and synthetics-------Drugs_____ . . . _ ______ __ ____ _ 2.84
2.96
Soap, cleaners, and toilet goods___ .
2.87
Paints, varnishes, and allied products..
Agricultural chemicals
2.92
Other chemical products_____ ______
$3. 04
3.38
2.99
2.82
2.93
2.87
2.48
2.94
$3.04
3. 39
2. 98
2. 82
2. 92
2.85
2.47
2.94
$3. 03
3. 38
2.99
2.81
2.92
2. 86
2. 46
2.92
$3.02
3. 35
2. 97
2. 80
2. 93
2.86
2. 48
2. 91
$3.00
3. 33
2.96
2. 76
2.92
2.83
2. 45
2.90
$3.00
3.33
2.97
2. 76
2.94
2.83
2.47
2.88
$2.98
3.32
2.95
2.76
2. 91
2.83
2. 40
2.86
$2.95
3.30
2. 92
2.75
2,86
2.84
2.37
2.84
$2. 94
3. 30
2.93
2.73
2.84
2.82
2.32
2.84
$2. 92
3. 28
2.90
2. 72
2.81
2. 78
2.33
2.82
$2.94
3. 27
2. 90
2.72
2.83
2. 77
2.39
2.84
$2.93
3. 26
2.88
2.71
2.83
2.75
2.39
2.82
$2.89
3.24
2.84
2.62
2. 78
2.72
2.32
2.79
$2.80
3.15
2.77
2.55
2.69
2.64
2.26
2.69
Petroleum refining and related industries.
Petroleum refining. .
______
Other petroleum and coal products.......
3.54
3. 72
2.78
3.46
3. 63
2. 80
3.46
3.64
2. 81
3.43
3.60
2.87
3.43
3. 62
2. 87
3.39
3. 58
2.80
3.42
3. 63
2. 79
3.41
3. 62
2.77
3. 41
3.61
2.72
3.42
3. 62
2.72
3.38
3. 57
2. 67
3.38
3. 56
2. 70
3.38
3. 55
2.71
3.28
3.47
2.64
3.20
3.37
2.58
Rubber and miscellaneous plastic products____________________________
Tires and inner tubes________ _____
Other rubber products. ._ _______
Miscellaneous plastic p roducts.___
2.68
3.67
2.62
2. 31
2.69
3.69
2.64
2.29
2.69
3. 72
2. 63
2.28
2.69
3 72
2. 63
2.29
2. 70
3. 73
2. 63
2.29
2.65
3.68
2. 57
2.26
2. 67
3. 72
2. 57
2.26
2.65
3.68
2. 58
2.25
2.65
3.64
2. 56
2.26
2. 64
3. 65
2. 55
2. 26
2.63
3. 61
2. 55
2.25
2. 64
3. 61
2. 56
2.26
2. 64
3.63
2. 56
2. 24
2.61
3. 56
2.52
2. 22
2.54
3. 41
2. 45
2.17
Leather and leather products_______ ._
Leather tanning and finishing_______
Footwear, except rubber. ________
Other leather products.. . . . .
_ ..
Handbags and personal leather goods.
2. 01
2. 57
1.94
2.00
1.99
2.56
1.91
1.97
1.87
1.98
2. 57
1.91
1.95
1.90
1. 96
2. 55
1.89
1. 95
1.90
1.96
2.53
1.89
1.93
1.86
1.94
2.48
1.88
1.89
1.85
1.91
2.48
1.85
1. 88
1.84
1.94
2.51
1.88
1.89
1.81
1.94
2. 51
1.87
1.90
1.83
1.94
2. 49
1.87
1. 89
1.83
1.92
2. 48
1. 86
1.89
1.83
1.92
2.45
1.85
1.89
1.83
1.91
2.44
1.84
1.88
1.80
1.88
2. 39
1.82
1.85
1.80
1.82
2.32
1.77
1.77
1.73
See footnotes at end of table.
https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
102
MONTHLY LABOR REVIEW, MARCH 196'
T a b l e C - l.
Gross hours and earnings of production workers,1 by industry—Continued
Revised series; see box, p. 87.
1967
1966
Annual
average
Industry
Jan.2 Dec.2 Nov.
Oct.
Sept.
Aug.
July
June
May
Apr.
Mar.
Feb.
Jan.
1965
1964
Average weekly earnings
Transportation and public utilities:
Railroad transportation:
Class I railroads3. _____
__
Local and interurban passenger transit:
Local and suburban transportation___
Intercity and rural bus lines___
Motor freight transportation and storage.
Public warehousing. .
Pipeline transportation __ _ ____ __
Communication____
. . .
. .
Telephone communication.
Telegraph communication4
Radio and television broadcasting___
Electric, gas, and sanitary services
Electric companies and systems__ . ..
Gas companies and system s__
Combined utility systems_____ . .
Water, steam, and sanitary systems
113. 28
143. 66
137. 49
97.82
153. 55
121.10
116.00
128. 53
154. 40
139. 86
142. 61
128. 64
151. 79
110. 70
$137. 54 $135.83 $132. 75 $135.12 $139.91 $131.94 $130.80 $121.80
114. 75 $115.56 $112.83 $113. 63 $114.59 113.52 113.52 111.83 109.36 109.10 108. 42 108.20 104.16
143.99 141.37 149. 57 158. 84 148. 50 141.24 142.46 143.60 131.77 138.16 140.87 133.72 125.83
136. 43 138.14 138. 78 136. 63 136. 42 137. 06 133.14 131.36 131.88 132.40 128.96 130.48 124. 02
97. 76 96.64 98.16 98. 29 98.33 95.92 95. 04 92.43 92. 59 95.34 93.26 93.09 91.53
152.31 152.25 152. 77 148.37 150. 38 148.96 151.00 153.18 150. 75 151. 00 150.32 145.85 142.55
122. 54 119. 54 119. 43 117. 62 119.19 118.44 116.47 116.29 116.47 117. 74 115. 20 114.62 110.15
117.03 114. 24 114.11 112.33 114.12 113.15 111.63 111. 08 111.63 112.87 110.12 109.08 105.32
127. 62 130.16 131.94 131. 37 131. 07 131.50 127.17 124.99 124.26 123.54 123.97 122.55 116.05
158.36 154.77 152. 82 149.27 152.05 150.86 148.13 148.92 148. 45 150.42 148.45 147.63 140.66
140. 53 141. 20 137. 86 136. 54 139.35 134. 72 135.14 133.99 133.25 135.62 135.20 131.24 125.25
142.96 142.12 139.93 139.61 143.90 137.78 137. 78 136.29 136.29 136.54 137. 03 133.31 127.62
129.90 131.36 128. 03 124. 64 124.64 122.72 124.14 122. 61 121.99 124.92 124.31 120.83 116.03
152. 52 154. 40 149. 82 148.93 152. 70 147.33 147.03 146.26 144.89 149.29 148.19 143.79 135.55
112.89 111. 79 111.24 109. 74 112.17 108.39 108.53 110.00 107.83 110.51 108.58 105.41 100.77
Average weekly hours
Transportation and public utilities:
Railroad transportation:
Class I railroads3. .
__
__
Local and interurban passenger transit:
Local and suburban transportation___
Intercity and rural bus lines___ ____
Motor freight transportation and storage.
Public warehousing..
Pipeline transportation____
Communication
.
__.
. .
Telephone communication
Telegraph communication4
___
Radio and television broadcasting__
Electric, gas, and sanitary services___
Electric companies and systems..
Cas companies and sy stem s..___
Combined utility systems. .. ____
W a te r , s te a m , a n r| s a n i t a r y s y s te m s
41.8
43.8
42.7
41.1
41.5
40.1
40.0
42.7
40.0
41.5
41.7
41.1
41. 7
40.7
42.5
43.9
42.5
41.6
41.5
41.4
41.5
42.4
40.5
41.7
41.8
41.5
41.9
41.2
42.8
43.1
42.9
41.3
40.6
40.8
40.8
43.1
40.2
41.9
41.8
41.7
42.3
41.1
42.1
45.6
43.1
40.9
41.4
40.9
40.9
43. 4
39.9
41. 4
41.4
41.3
41.5
41.2
42.4
47.7
43.1
41.3
41.1
40.7
40.7
43.5
39.7
41.5
41.8
41.0
41.6
41.1
42.6
45.0
42.9
40.8
41.2
41.1
41.2
43.4
39.7
42.1
42.7
41.0
42.3
41.7
44.8
44.1
43.1
44.3
44.7
42.7
43.6
43.5
43.0
44.0
43.1
39.8
40.7
40.7
40.7
43.4
39.7
41.2
41.5
40.5
41.5
40.9
43. 0
44.8
42. 0
39.6
40.7
40.3
40.3
43.7
39.5
41.2
41.5
40.7
41.3
40.8
42.2
45.3
41.7
39. 0
41.4
40.1
40.1
43.1
39.5
41.1
41.3
40.6
41.2
41.2
41.9
42.1
42. 0
39.4
41.3
40.3
40.3
42.7
39.8
41.0
41.3
40.8
40.7
41.0
41.8
44. 0
42.3
40.4
40.7
40.6
40.6
42.6
39.9
41.6
41.5
41.5
41.7
41.7
41.7
44.3
41.6
40.2
40.3
40. 0
39.9
42.6
39.8
41.6
41.4
41.3
42.1
41.6
42.1
43.7
42.5
40.3
41.2
40.5
40.4
43. 0
39.9
41.4
41.4
41.1
41.8
41.5
42.0
42.8
41.9
40.5
41.2
40.2
40.2
42.2
39.4
41.2
41.3
41. 0
41.2
41.3
Average hourly earnings
Transportation and public utilities :
Railroad transportation:
Class I railroads3__ _ ___
__
Local and interurban passenger transit:
Local and suburban transportation___
Intercity and rural bus lines___
Motor freight transportation and StoragePublic warehousing
Pipeline transportation____. . . .
. .
. . .
Communication___ . . .
Telephone communication. . . . ___
Telegraph communication4
Radio and television broadcasting.
Electric, gas, and sanitary services_____
Electric companies and systems
Gas companies and systems . . . _
Combined utility systems______ ___
Water, steam, and sanitary systems .
See footnotes at end of table.
https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
$2. 71
3.28
3.22
2.38
3.70
3.02
2.90
3.01
3.86
3.37
3.42
3.13
3. 64
2.72
$2.70
3.28
3.21
2.35
3. 67
2.96
2.82
3.01
3.91
3.37
3.42
3.13
3.64
2. 74
$2.70
3.28
3.22
2.34
3.75
2.93
2.80
3.02
3.85
3.37
3.40
3.15
3.65
2. 72
$2.68
3.28
3.22
2. 40
3. 69
2.92
2. 79
3. 04
3.83
3. 33
3. 38
3.10
3.61
2. 70
$2. 68
3. 33
3.17
2.38
3.61
2. 89
2. 76
3.02
3. 76
3.29
3.34
3.04
3. 58
2.67
$2.69
3.30
3.18
2.41
3.65
2.90
2. 77
3.02
3.83
3.31
3.37
3.04
3. 61
2.69
$3.07
$3. 08
$3.08
$3. 05
$3.13
$3.09
$3.00
$2.80
2.64
3.21
3.18
2.41
3.66
2.91
2.78
3.03
3.80
3.27
3.32
3.03
3.55
2.65
2.64
3.18
3.17
2.40
3.71
2.89
2.77
2.91
3.75
3.28
3.32
3.05
3.56
2.65
3.17
3.15
2.37
3.70
2.90
2.77
2.90
3.77
3.26
3.30
3.02
3.55
2.67
2.61
3.13
3.14
2.35
3.65
2.89
2.77
2.91
3.73
3.25
3.30
2.99
3.56
2.63
2.61
3.14
3.13
2.36
3.71
2.90
2.78
2.90
3.77
3.26
3.29
3. 01
3.58
2.65
2.60
3.18
3.10
2.32
3.73
2.57
3.06
3.07
2.31
3.54
2.83
2.70
2.85
3.70
3.17
3.22
2.94
3.44
2.54
2.48
2.94
2.96
2.26
3.46
2.74
2.62
2.75
3.57
3.04
3.09
2.83
3.29
2.44
2.66
2.88
2.76
2.91
3.73
3.25
3.31
3. 01
3.52
2.61
C.—EARNINGS AND HOURS
T a b l e C -l.
103
Gross hours and earnings of production workers,1 by industry—Continued
Revised series; see box, p. 87.
1966
1967
Annual
average
Industry
Jan.2 Dec.2 Nov.
Oct.
Sept.
Aug.
July
June
May
Apr.
Mar.
Feb.
Jan.
1965
1964
Average weekly earnings
Wholesale and retail trade___ _ _____ _ $80.30 $80.14 $79. 79 $79.86 $79. 92 $80.73 $80.94
Wholesale trade_________
______ 114.09 114.11 112.87 112. 74 111. 93 111. 38 112.20
Motor vehicles and automotive equip
105.92 105. 41 105.41 106.26 103.42 105.58
ment . . . . . __
116.11 115.60 115.49 115. 66 113.08 114.33
Drugs, chemicals, and allied products
109.82 109.15 110.78 108. 95 109.16 107.82
Dry goods and apparel______________
103. 73 103. 79 103. 07 103. 89 103. 66 105. 75
Groceries and related products
137.39 126.65 128.87 127. 97 123.65 123. 48
Electrical goods. _________ __
Hardware, plumbing, and heating
108.81 108.00 108.95 108.12 106.90 106. 34
goods
____ _ _________
124.85 125.05 124.84 122.18 123.49 123. 37
Machinery, equipment, and supplies__
Miscellaneous wholesalers___
. . .
113.81 112. 40 111. 60 111.35 110.83 111. 10
69.34 69.29 68.64 68.87 69. 09 70.11 70.48
Retail trade . . .
______
62.24 60.26 61. 01 61.38 62.24 62.93
General merchandise stores ___ . .
Department stores . . .
____ ____
64.70 63.36 64.94 65. 54 66. 50 67.18
84.84 73.08 70. 04 71.25 71. 66 71. 55
Mail order houses. _________ _____
48.13 47.12 46. 66 46.66 48.00 47. 23
Limited price variety stores.. ____
Food stores ____________ ________
71.81 72.59 71.81 72. 76 74.84 75.05
72.81 73.48 72. 70 74. 00 75.90 76.33
Grocery, meat, and vegetable stores..
Apparel and accessories stores________
61.15 58.24 58.97 59. 01 59.84 60.52
Men’s and boys’ apparel stores . . .
74.13 72.12 71. 69 71.48 73.64 74 78
Women’s ready-to-wear stores____ _
55.28 52.95 52.97 52.98 52.63 54.26
Family clothing stores____________
58. 76 57.32 58.86 57. 32 59.99 60.12
Shoe stores ____________ . ___
59.84 56.36 58.02 60.41 60.52 59.88
$79. 45 $78. 60 $78. 23 $77. 86 $77. 70 $77. 54 $76.53 $74.28
110. 70 111. 11 110.43 109. 48 109. 08 108. 53 106. 49 102 31
104. 08
113. 36
106. 96
101. 34
125. 24
103.83
114. 29
107. 54
100. 85
127.15
103. 42
113. 88
105. 75
99. 54
126. 85
103.07
112.00
105. 08
99 23
125. 85
101.75
111. 48
105.18
99 06
126. 58
101. 50
112. 44
103. 32
98. 09
124 84
100.14 96 79
109. 08 105. 04
103.19 99 94
96. 76 94.16
122 84 111 79
106. 86 106. 34 106.49 105. 67 106. 37 105. 41 101. 91 98 01
121. 66 120. 83 120. 01 117.96 117. 55 116 88 115 23 111. 52
110.83 110. 68 110. 28 109. 07 109. 34 109. 89 107. 20 104.38
69.14 67.64 67. 47 67.12 67.30 67.49 66.61 64. 75
61. 49 59. 88 59. 73 59. 40 59.22 58. 53 58. 81 56. 77
65. 52 63. 83 63. 69 62. 98 62. 98 62 08 62. 98 61.18
71. 96 70. 64 68. 61 68. 94 67. 40 66 78 71.00 70 12
46. 03 44. 54 44. 97 44. 82 44. 53 44 53 44 10 41 53
73. 49 70. 81 70 26 70 26 70. 35 70.35 70.32 68. 51
74. 74 71. 81 71 26 71 26 71 69 71 57 71 69 69. 55
58. 92 58. 03 58.18 56.90 57. 05 58 38 57.46 55 26
73. 44 70 90 69 65 68 56 69 40 71.20 69. 84 67. 53
52. 81 52. 49 52.33 51 19 51. 04 52 49 51 46 49 73
57 67 57.38 57 55 57.23 56. 40 59. 04 56.45 54. 27
57.66 56. 36 59. 67 55. 67 56. 52 56.65 56. 64 55.21
Average weekly hours
Wholesale and retail trade_____ _________
Wholesale trade......... ................................
Motor vehicles and automotive equip
ment___________________________
Drugs, chemicals, and allied products..
Dry goods and apparel_____________
Groceries and related products............
Electrical goods.................... ..................
Hardware, plumbing, and heating
goods........................................... ........
Machinery, equipment, and supplies...
Miscellaneous wholesalers___________
Retail trade........ .................................. .
General merchandise stores_________
Department stores..._____ _______
Mail order houses________________
Limited price-variety stores_______
Food stores_______________________
Grocery, meat, and vegetable stores..
Apparel and accessories stores....... ........
Men’s and boys’ apparel stores_____
Women’s ready-to-wear stores...........
Family clothing stores.................. .
Shoe stores_____ ________________
36.5
40.6
35.2
37.1
40.9
36.6
40.6
36.8
40.7
37.0
40.7
37.9
40.8
38.0
41.1
37.3
40.7
36.9
40.7
36.9
40.6
36.9
40.7
37.0
40.7
37.1
40.8
37.7
40.8
37.9
40.6
41.7
39.9
38.4
41.0
44.9
41.5
40.0
37.9
40.7
42.5
41.5
40.1
38.2
40.9
43.1
42.0
40.3
37.7
40.9
42.8
41.7
40.1
38.3
41.3
42.2
42.4
40.4
38.1
42.3
42.0
41.8
40.2
38.2
40.7
42.6
41.7
40.1
38.0
40.5
43.1
41.7
40.1
37.5
40.3
43.0
41.9
40.0
37.8
40.5
43.1
41.7
40.1
37.7
40.6
43.2
41.6
40.3
37.3
40.7
42.9
41.9
40.4
37.8
41.0
42.8
41.9
40.4
38.0
41.3
41.1
40.6
40.8
40.5
35.9
34.2
33.7
42.0
32.3
33.4
33.4
33.6
35.3
33.5
33.2
32.0
40.6
41.0
40.0
35.2
32.4
32.0
36.0
31.0
33.3
33.4
32.0
33.7
31.9
32.2
30.3
40.5
41.2
40.0
35.5
32.8
32.8
34.5
30.7
33.4
33.5
32.4
34.3
32.1
32.6
30.7
40.8
41.0
40.2
35.8
33.0
33.1
35.1
30.7
34.0
34.1
32.6
34.7
32.5
32.2
31.3
40.8
41.3
40.3
36.9
34.2
34.1
35.3
32.0
35.3
35.3
34.0
36.1
33.1
33.7
34.0
40.9
41.4
40.4
36.9
34.2
34.1
34.9
31.7
35.4
35.5
34.0
36.3
33.7
33.4
32.9
41.1
40.9
40.8
40.6
40.7
40.6
40.5
41. 1
4 1 .1
4 1 .3
40.3
36.2
33.6
33.6
35.1
31.1
34.5
34.6
33.1
36.0
32.8
32.4
31.0
4 1 .1
40.8
41. 1
41. 1
4 1 .0
40.1
35.7
33.0
33.0
33.8
30.8
33.3
33.3
32.5
35.0
32.5
32.7
30.6
40.1
35.7
33.0
32.8
34.3
30.7
33.3
33.3
32.7
34.8
32.4
32.7
31.1
40.2
35.8
32.9
32.8
33.7
30.5
33.5
33.5
32.6
34.7
32.1
32.6
31.4
40.4
35.9
32.7
32.5
33.9
30.5
33.5
33.6
32.8
34.9
32.4
32.8
31.3
4 1 .3
40. 1
35.6
32.9
32.9
34.8
30.3
33.4
33.4
32.6
35.1
32.4
32.6
30.3
40.3
36.6
33.8
33.5
36.6
31.5
34.3
34.3
33.6
36.0
33.2
33.4
32.0
40.3
37.0
34.2
33.8
37.7
31.7
34.6
34.6
33.9
36.7
33.6
33.5
32.1
Average hourly earnings
Wholesale and retail trade............................
Wholesale trade..........................................
Motor vehicles and automotive equip
ment____ ______________________
Drugs, chemicals, and allied products..
Dry goods and apparel...........................
Groceries and related products..............
Electrical goods__________ _________
Hardware, plumbing, and heating
goods............................................ ........
Machinery, equipment, and supplies...
Miscellaneous wholesalers___________
Retail trade________________________
General merchandise stores_________
Department stores_______________
Mail order houses________________
Limited price variety stores..... .........
Food stores_______________________
Grocery, meat, and vegetable stores..
Apparel and accessories stores_______
Men’s and boys’ apparel stores_____
Women’s ready-to-wear stores______
Family clothing stores................ ........
Shoe stores...........................................
See footnotes at end of table.
https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
$2.20
2.81
1.97
$2.16
2. 79
$2.18
2.78
$2.17
2.77
$2.16
2.75
$2.13
2.73
$2.13
2.73
$2.13
2.72
$2.13
2. 73
$2.12
2. 72
$2.11
2.69
$2.10
2. 68
$2. 09
2. 66
$2.03
2. 61
$1.96
2.52
2.54
2. 91
2.86
2.53
3.06
2. 54
2.89
2.88
2. 55
2.98
2.54
2.88
2.90
2. 52
2.99
2.53
2.87
2.89
2.54
2.99
2.48
2.82
2.85
2. 51
2.93
2.49
2. 83
2.83
2.50
2.94
2. 49
2.82
2. 80
2.49
2.94
2.49
2.85
2.83
2. 49
2.95
2.48
2. 84
2. 82
2.47
2.95
2. 46
2. 80
2. 78
2. 45
2.92
2.44
2.78
2. 79
2. 44
2.93
2. 44
2. 79
2. 77
2.41
2. 91
2.39
2. 70
2. 73
2. 36
2. 87
2. 31
2. 60
2.63
2. 28
2. 72
2.68
3.06
2.81
1.93
1.82
1.92
2.02
1.49
2.15
2.18
1.82
2.10
1.65
1.77
1.87
2. 66
3.05
2.81
1.95
1.86
1.98
2.03
1.52
2.18
2.20
1.82
2.14
1.66
1.78
1.86
2.69
3.03
2.79
1.94
1.86
1.98
2.03
1. 52
2.15
2.17
1.82
2.09
1. 65
1.80
1.89
2.65
2.98
2.77
1.93
1.86
1.98
2.03
1. 52
2.14
2.17
1.81
2. 06
1. 63
1. 78
1. 93
2. 62
2.99
2.75
1.90
1.82
1.95
2.03
1.50
2.12
2.15
1.76
2.04
1.59
1.78
1.78
2.60
2.98
2.75
1.91
1.84
1.97
2.05
1.49
2.12
2.15
1.78
2.06
1.61
1.80
1.82
2.60
2. 96
2. 75
1.91
1.83
1.95
2. 05
1.48
2.13
2.16
1.78
2. 04
1.61
1.78
1.86
2.60
2. 94
2. 76
1.90
1.82
1. 94
2. 03
1.47
2.12
2.15
1.78
2. 02
1.62
1.76
1.86
2. 61
2. 92
2. 75
1.89
1.81
1.93
2. 03
1.46
2.11
2.14
1.79
1.99
1.61
1.76
1.95
2. 59
2.87
2. 72
1.88
1.80
1.92
2.01
1.46
2.11
2.14
1. 74
1.97
1.58
1.75
1.79
2. 62
2.86
2. 72
1.88
1.80
1.92
2.00
1.46
2.10
2.14
1.75
2. 00
1.59
1.73
1.80
2. 59
2.83
2. 72
1.88
1.79
1.91
1.97
1.46
2.10
2.13
1.78
2. 04
1.62
1.80
1.81
2.51
2. 79
2. 66
1.82
1.74
1.88
1.94
1.40
2.05
2.09
1.71
1.94
1.55
1.69
1.77
2.42
2. 72
2.59
1.75
1.66
1.81
1.86
1.31
1.98
2.01
1.63
1.84
1.48
1.62
1.72
MONTHLY LABOR REVIEW, MARCH 1967
104
T able
C - l. Gross hours and earnings of production workers,1 by industry—Continued
Revised series; see box, p. 87.
1967
1966
Annual
average
Industry
Jan.2
Dec.2 Nov.
Oct.
Sept.
Aug.
July
June
May
Apr.
Mar.
Feb.
Jan.
1965
1964
Average weekly earnings
Wholesale and retail trade—Continued
Retail trade—Continued
Furniture and appliance stores___
Furniture and home furnishings.
Eating and drinking places 5_______
Other retail trade________________
Building materials and hardware - Motor vehicle dealers___________
Other vehicle and accessory dealers
Drug stores........................................
Fuel and ice dealers___ _________
Finance, insurance, and real estate6-----Banking_________________________
Credit agencies other than banks........
Savings and loan associations______
Security dealers and exchanges----------
$95.12 $91.65 $91.34 $91. 64 $91.37 $91.77 $89.89 $88.59 $87.81 $88.09 $87.47 $89.21 $88.18 $85.44
93.60 90.32 90.39 90. 46 91.20 90.12 89.89 88.65 87.47 87.30 86.63 88.03 86.98 83.82
48.72 47.95 47. 91 48. 00 48.93 48.79 47.40 46.51 46.31 46.31 46.38 46.17 45.76 44.38
86.83 86.37 86.80 85. 81 86. 90 87. 53 86.46 84.99 85.01 84.00 83.81 84.03 83.44 80.75
92.99 92.32 93. 41 93. 21 93.28 93.51 92. 64 90.91 90.49 88.81 88.38 89.02 88.41 85.46
110.00 110.33 109. 91 106. 50 108.97 110. 77 110.25 108.46 108.28 107.50 104.92 104.98 105.32 100.76
89.82 90.29 90. 48 89. 20 91.54 92. 82 89.38 88. 54 87.03 86. 76 86.76 87.16 85.89 85.41
63.83 62.68 63. 39 63. 46 64.60 65.15 63.50 61.70 61.72 61.20 61.58 61.41 61.60 59.57
105.40 104.73 102. 61 99. 25 97.29 98.33 97.11 98.18 98.41 99.54 102.38 103.97 96.05 93.00
$94.23
Insurance carriers_____________________
Life insurance___________________
Accident and health insurance_____
Fire, marine, and casualty insurance.
93.00
82.43
87.00
86.95
128.43
100.81
101.29
90.13
103.09
93.00
82.73
86.02
86.85
131.73
100.81
100.56
90.27
103.19
93. 25 92. 01 92.13 92. 75 91.88 92.63 92. 50 91.76 92.13 91.76 88. 91 85.79
82.81 82. 14 82. 21 82. 43 81.18 82.21 82. 21 81.84 81.47 82.28 79.24 76. 67
86. 71 85. 27 85.96 86. 41 84. 75 86. 56 86.18 85.28 86.26 87.10 84.29 80.89
87.32 86. 25 87.05 89.07 85.38 86.81 86.54 85.56 86.16 87.70 84.67 82.72
131. 72 133. 20 132.82 135.42 139.13 149.71 148.93 145.16 144.02 139.13 127.43 120.99
100.44 99. 70 99. 32 99.80 99.06 98.69 98.85 98.85 99.22 98.21 95.86 92. 01
100. 56 99. 82 99. 82 99.65 98.92 98.64 98.19 98.92 98.82 98.26 95.63 91.73
88. 93 90. 27 89. 65 88.91 89.17 88.56 88.43 88.32 88.67 86.14 85.38 81.70
102. 71 101. 52 101.41 101. 90 101.41 100.93 100.81 100.70 101.08 100.17 97.92 94.75
Average weekly hours
Wholesale and retail trade— Continued
Retail trade— Continued
Furniture and appliance stores____
Furniture and home furnishings..
Eating and drinking places6........ .......
Other retail trade_________________
Building materials and hardware...
Motor vehicle dealers_____ ______
Other vehicle and accessory dealers.
Drug stores____________________
Fuel and ice dealers_____________
Finance, insurance, and real estate6____
Banking_________________________
Credit agencies other than banks____
Savings and loan associations______
Security dealers and exchanges............
Insurance carriers__________________
Life insurance______________ ____Accident and health insurance_____
Fire, marine, and casualty insurance.
$37.1
39.8
40.0
33.6
40.2
41.7
42.8
43.6
34.5
42.5
39.0
39.1
33.3
39.8
41.4
42.6
43.2
33.7
42.4
39.2
39.3
33.5
40.0
41.7
42.6
43.5
33.9
42.4
39.5
39.5
33.8
40.1
41.8
42.6
43.3
34.3
41.7
39.9
40.0
35.2
40.8
42.4
42.9
43.8
35.3
41.4
39.9
39.7
35.1
40.9
42.7
43.1
44.2
35.6
42.2
39.6
39.6
34.1
40.4
42.3
42.9
43.6
34.7
41.5
39.2
39.4
33.7
39.9
41.7
42.7
43.4
33.9
41.6
39.2
39.4
33.8
40.1
41.7
42.8
43.3
34.1
41.7
39.5
39.5
33.8
40.0
41.5
43.0
43.6
34.0
42.0
39.4
39.2
34.1
40.1
41.3
43.0
43.6
34.4
43.2
39.3
39.3
34.2
40.4
41.6
43.2
43.8
34.5
43.5
39.9
39.9
35.2
40.9
42.1
43.7
43.6
35.4
42.5
40.3
40.3
35.5
41.2
42.1
44.0
43.8
36.1
42.9
37.2
37.3
37.5
37.0
36.8
37.2
36.7
37.4
37.9
37.2
37.1
37.4
36.8
36.9
37.2
36.7
37.3
37.8
37.3
37.3
37.7
37.0
37.0
37.2
36.7
36.9
37.9
37.1
37.0
37.4
36.7
37.0
37.2
36.7
37.3
37.6
37.3
37.2
37.7
37.2
37.1
37.2
36.7
37.2
37.7
37.4
37.3
37.9
37.9
37.1
37.1
36.5
37.2
37.6
37.2
36.9
37.5
36.8
37.5
37.1
36.5
37.0
37.7
37.2
37.2
37.8
37.1
37.9
37.1
36.4
36.9
37.8
37.3
37.2
37.8
37.3
37.8
37.3
36.5
37.0
37.9
37.3
37.2
37.9
37.2
38.0
37.3
36.5
36.8
38.0
37.3
37.2
38.0
37.3
37.8
37.3
36.6
37.1
38.0
37.3
37.4
38.2
37.8
37.1
37.2
36.8
36.5
37.8
37.2
37.2
37.8
37.3
37.7
37.3
36.5
36.8
38.1
37.3
37.4
37.8
37.6
37.0
37.1
36.4
36.8
37.9
$2.22
2.21
$2.27
2.24
1.35
2.08
2.14
2.43
1.99
$2.21
$2.12
2.18
1.30
2.04
2.08
1.25
1.96
2.03
2.29
1.95
Average hourly earnings
Wholesale and retail trade—Continued
Retail trade—Continued
Furniture and appliance stores____
Furniture and home furnishings..
Eating and drinking places 5________
Other retail trade________________
Building materials and hardware.. .
Motor vehicle dealers____________
Other vehicle and accessory dealers.
Drug stores_____________________
Fuel and ice dealers______________
Finance, insurance, and real estate 6____
Banking__________________________
Credit agencies other than banks_____
Savings and loan associations______
Security dealers and exchanges_______
Insurance carriers_________ ______
Life insurance___________________
Accident and health insurance_____
Fire, marine, and casualty insurance.
See footnotes at end of table.
https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
$2.54
$2.39
2.34
1.45
2.16
2.23
2.57
2.06
1.85
2.48
$2.35
2.31
1.44
2.17
2.23
2.59
2.09
2.50
2.50
2.23
2.30
2.36
3.57
2.71
2.74
2.42
2.73
2.21
2.32
2.35
3.49
2.71
2.76
2.41
2.72
1.86
2.47
$2. 33
2.30
1.43
2.17
2.24
2.58
2.08
1.87
2.42
$2.32
2. 29
1.42
2.14
2.23
2. 50
2.06
1.85
2.38
$2.29
2.28
1.39
2.13
2. 50
2.48
2.47
2.22
2. 30
2. 36
3. 56
2. 70
2. 74
2. 41
2.71
2.20
2.54
2.09
1.83
2.35
2. 22
2. 21
2.68
2.28
2.34
3. 58
2.67
2.72
2. 41
2.69
2. 28
2.35
3. 60
2. 72
2. 42
2.70
$2.30
2. 27
1.39
2.14
2.19
2.57
2.10
1.83
2.33
$2.27
2.27
1.39
2.14
2.19
2.57
2.05
1.83
2.34
$2.26
2.25
1.38
2.13
2.18
2.54
2.04
1.82
2.36
$2.24
$2.23
2.22
2.21
1.37
1.37
1.81
2.36
2.37
2.12
2.17
2.53
2.01
2.10
2.14
2.50
1.99
1.80
2.47
2.49
2.48
2.46
2.21
2.20
2.21
2.21
2.20
2. 28
2. 35
3.65
2.69
2.73
2.39
2. 71
2.26
2.32
3.71
2.67
2.71
2.41
2.69
2.29
2.34
3.95
2.28
2.32
3.94
2.65
2.69
2.39
2. 48
2.66
2.71
2.40
2.67
2.66
2.25
2.30
3.82
2.65
2.71
2.40
2.65
1.36
2.09
2.14
2.44
1.99
1.79
2.37
2.47
2.19
2.27
2.31
3.81
2.66
2.70
2.39
2.66
1.78
2.10
2.41
1.97
1.74
1.65
2.39
2.26
2.17
2.46
2.39
2.13
2.23
2.27
3.38
2.57
2.62
2.32
2.57
2.30
2.05
2.14
2.20
2.28
2.32
3.75
2.64
2.67
2.36
2.65
2.20
3.27
2.48
2.52
2.22
2.50
105
C —EARNINGS AND HOURS
T able
C -l. Gross hours and earnings of production workers,1 by industry—Continued
Revised series; see box, p. 87.
1966
1967
Annual
average
Industry
Jan.2 Dec.2 Nov.
Oct.
Sept.
Aug.
July
June
May
Apr.
Mar.
Feb.
Jan.
1965
1964
Average weekly earnings
Services and miscellaneous:
Hotels and lodging places:
Personal services:
Laundries cleaning and dyeing plants __
Motion pictures:
Motion picture filming and distributing.
$55. 50 $54.83 $55. 06 $53. 73 $53. 58 $53. 72 $52. 68 $52. 97 $52.36 $52.13 $52. 59 $52.36 $51.17 $49. 54
62. 87
61.99
62. 65
61.88
60. 74
61.76
62.15
61.44
60.04
59. 82
58. 90
59. 44
58.98
55. 73
166.96 159. 42 164. 55 159.29 162. 51 165.68 160.19 148. 71 147. 66 146. 07 148. 80 153. 97 148. 08 136.17
Average weekly hours
Services and miscellaneous:
Hotels and lodging places:
Personal services:
Motion pictures:
Motion picture filming and distributing.
37.0
36.8
37.2
36.8
38.0
38.1
37.1
37.3
37.4
37.5
37.3
37.4
37.9
38.4
38.1
37.8
38.2
38.2
38.2
38.6
38.6
38.4
38.0
38.1
38.0
38.1
38.8
38.7
42.7
41.3
42.3
41.7
42.1
42.7
41.5
40.3
39.8
39.8
40.0
40.2
39.7
39.7
$1.29
Average hourly earnings
Services and miscellaneous:
Hotels and lodging places:
Personal services:
Laundries, cleaning and dyeing plants..
Motion pictures:
Motion picture filming and distributing.
$1.50
$1.49
$1.48
$1.46
$1.41
$1.41
$1.42
$1.42
$1.40
$1.39
$1.41
$1.40
$1.35
1.65
1. 64
1.64
1.62
1.59
1.60
1.61
1.60
1.58
1.57
1. 55
1. 56
1.52
1.44
3.91
3.86
3.89
3.82
3.86
3. 88
3.86
3.69
3.71
3.67
3.72
3.83
3.73
3. 43
i For comparability of data with those published in issues prior to October
1966, see footnote 1, table A-9. For employees covered, see footnote 1, table
A-10.
3 BasecTupon monthly data summarized in the M-300 report by the Inter
state Commerce Commission, which relate to all employees who received
pay during the month, except executives, officials, and staff assistants (ICC
Group I). Beginning January 1965, data relate to railroads with operating
revenues of $5,000,000 or more.
https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
4 Data relate to nonsupervisory employees except messengers.
5 Money payments only, tips not included.
6 Data for nonoffice salesmen excluded from all series in this division.
Source : U.S. Department of Labor, Bureau of Labor Statistics for all
series except that for Class I railroads. (See footnote 3.)
106
T able
MONTHLY LABOR REVIEW, MARCH 1967
C-2. Average weekly hours, seasonally adjusted, of production workers in selected industries 1
Revised series; see box, p. 87.
1967
1966
Industry division and group
Jan.2 Dec.2 Nov.
Mining___ _______
- ______ ________
_________
Oct.
Sept.
Aug.
July
June
May
Apr.
Mar.
Feb.
Jan.
42.3
42.4
42.5
42.6
42.9
42.4
43.2
42.9
42.6
41.7
43.2
42.7
42.6
Contract construction___________________ . _________
38.6
38.8
37.1
37.3
37.7
36.9
37.8
37.4
36.1
37.2
38.5
38.1
37.8
Manufacturing__
40.9
40.9
41.3
41.3
41.5
41.4
41.0
41.3
41.5
41.5
41.5
41.5
41.4
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______
. ______
____ . . _ ___
Machinery. . .
Electrical equipment and supplies__ _____ _____
Transportation equipment.
_ ________ . . . _. _
Instruments and related products____________ . . .
Miscellaneous manufacturing industries____ _____
41.8
42.0
39.9
40.7
42.0
41.4
42.4
43.8
40.8
41.6
41.7
40.4
41.7
42.2
40.3
40.5
42.4
41.6
42.2
43.6
40.6
41.7
41.7
39.7
42.1
42.7
40.4
41.1
41.7
42.5
42.2
44.0
40.9
42.0
41.7
40.0
42.2
42.2
40.4
41.2
41.8
42.7
42.4
43.9
41.1
42.4
42.0
40.0
42.3
42.5
40.3
41.2
41.9
42.5
42.7
44.3
41.3
42.9
42.2
39.9
42.1
42.1
40.3
41.6
41.8
42.4
42.2
43.8
41.2
43.2
41.7
40.0
41.8
42.7
40.6
41.0
41.5
41.6
42.1
43.3
40.9
42.1
41.7
39.7
42.0
42.1
40.5
41.8
41.9
42.0
42.3
43.8
41.2
42.3
42.0
40.1
42.2
42.4
41.4
42.0
41.8
42.2
42.4
43.8
41.3
42.2
42.4
40.3
42.3
42.2
41.3
41.6
42.1
41.8
42.4
43.7
41.4
43.4
42. 0
40.0
42.3
42.0
41.1
41.9
42.8
41.9
42.4
44.0
41.3
42.9
42.4
40.3
42.4
42.3
41.2
41.7
42.4
41.9
42.5
43.9
41.5
43.3
42.3
40.2
42.4
42.4
41. 4
41.7
42. 5
41. 9
42.5
43.8
41. 5
43. 4
42. 2
40.0
Nondurable goods_______. . . . _____
_________
Food and kindred products______________ _ __ ..
Tobacco manufactures____ ___________ .
___
Textile mill products_____________ . . ______
Apparel and related products____ .. . . . . _______
Paper and allied products _.
. _
____________
Printing, publishing, and allied industries...
___
_____________
Chemicals and allied products__
Petroleum refining and related industries____ _
Rubber and miscellaneous plastic products.. . . ___
Leather and leather products___ ___________ . . . .
40.1
41.1
39.0
41.1
36.5
43.0
38.8
42.0
42.8
41.6
38.5
39.9
41.0
39.2
40.9
36.5
42.9
38.6
42.0
42.3
41.2
37.9
40.2
41.1
38.5
41.0
36.5
43.6
39.0
42.2
42.6
42.0
38.8
40.2
41.0
37. 7
41.3
36.7
43.1
39.0
42.2
42.4
42.1
38.8
40.2
41.2
38.7
42.1
35.6
43.4
38.9
42. 0
41.8
42.0
38.3
40.2
41.1
37.8
42.0
36.3
43.3
38.9
42.0
41.9
41.8
38.6
40.1
41.3
37.9
41.7
36.2
43.4
39.0
42.0
42.4
41.5
38.3
40.3
41.0
38.0
42.2
36.5
43.4
39.0
42.0
42.5
41.7
38.7
40.3
40.9
38.5
42.2
36.5
43.7
38.7
41.9
42. 5
42.1
39.0
40.3
41.1
39.2
41.9
36. 4
43.7
38.9
42.3
42.6
42.4
39.0
40. 4
41.1
39.4
42.4
36.5
43.5
38.7
42. 0
42.6
42.2
38.5
40. 5
41. 5
41.3
42.3
36.5
43.5
38.7
42.1
42. 6
42.3
38.7
40.2
41.1
38.9
42.2
36.3
43.3
38. 5
42. 0
42.3
42.3
38.5
Wholesale and retail trade_______________ _________
Wholesale trade____ _____________________ ______
Retail trade________________ ____ _ . . . __________
36.8
40.8
35.5
36.8
40.6
35.6
36.9
40.6
35.6
36.9
40.7
35.7
37.0
40.7
35.8
37.3
40.8
36.1
37.3
40.9
36.1
37.2
40.6
36.0
37.0
40.7
35.9
37.1
40.7
35.9
37.1
40.8
36.0
37.3
37.4
40.9 - 41.0
36.1
36.2
____________ —
_ _________
1 For employees covered, see footnote 1, table A-10.
2 Preliminary.
T able
N ote : The seasonal adjustment method used is described in The B L S Seasonal Factor Method (1966) which may be obtained from the Bureau on re
quest.
C-3. Average hourly earnings excluding overtime of production workers in manufacturing, by
major industry group 1
Revised series; see box, p. 87.
1967
Annual
average
1966
Major industry group
Manufacturing_______________________
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__________
Machinery_________________ ______
Electrical equipment and supplies____
Transportation equipment__________
Instruments and related products____
Miscellaneous manufacturing indus
tries____________________________
Nondurable goods___________________
Food and kindred products_________
Tobacco manufactures______________
Textile mill products_______________
Apparel and related products________
Paper and allied products___________
Printing, publishing, and allied indus
tries____________________________
Chemicals and allied products______ I
Petroleum refining and related indus
tries____________________________
Rubber and miscellaneous plastic
products______ _________________
Leather and leather products________
Jan.2 Dec.2 Nov.
Oct.
Sept.
Aug.
July
June
May
Apr.
Mar.
Feb.
Jan.
1965
1964
$2.67
$2.65
$2.63
$2.62
$2.61
$2.57
$2. 59
$2. 58
$2. 58
$2. 58
$2.56
$2.56
$2.56
$2.50
$2.44
2.84
2.82
3.10
2.80
3.07
2. 79
3.08
2.78
3.07
2. 73
3.06
2.74
3.04
2. 74
3.04
2. 74
3.05
2.74
3. 04
2.72
3. 05
2.72
3.04
2.72
3. 05
2. 67
3. 03
2.60
2.96
2.19
2.16
2.64
3.16
2.78
2.96
2.58
3.25
2.63
2.20
2.14
2.64
3.16
2.76
2.95
2.57
3.22
2.62
2.22
2.13
2.62
3.15
2. 75
2.94
2.55
3.22
2.60
2.22
2.12
2.61
3.15
2.75
2.92
2. 54
3. 21
2.60
2.19
2.11
2.59
3.13
2. 71
2.89
2.52
3.13
2. 58
2.18
2.10
2. 57
3.15
2. 71
2. 89
2.52
3.13
2. 58
2.17
2.10
2. 57
3.14
2. 70
2.89
2.52
3.13
2.59
2.16
2.10
2. 57
3.13
2.71
2.89
2. 52
3.12
2.57
2.13
2. 09
2.57
3.13
2.71
2.88
2. 52
3.11
2. 58
2.09
2. 07
2. 55
3.11
2.70
2.87
2. 51
3.11
2. 57
2.10
2. 06
2. 55
3.09
2.69
2.86
2. 51
3.11
2.56
2.08
2.06
2.54
3. 09
2.68
2.86
2. 51
3.10
2.56
2. 08
2. 03
2. 49
3. 04
2. 63
2.81
2.49
3. 04
2.52
2.03
1.97
2.42
2.99
2. 57
2.75
2. 44
2.96
2. 47
—
—
2.21
2.16
2.14
2.14
2.12
2.14
2.14
2.13
2.14
2.13
2.13
2.13
2. 07
2.02
2.42
2.40
2.45
2.13
1.91
1.89
2.63
2.39
2.42
2.08
1.91
1.89
2.63
2.37
2.40
2.05
1.90
1.88
2.62
2.36
2.39
2.04
1.89
1.86
2.61
2.34
2.37
2.12
1.88
1.85
2.60
2.35
2.39
2.27
1.88
1.84
2.60
2.34
2. 41
2.26
1.88
1.83
2. 58
2.34
2.42
2.24
1.83
1.83
2.57
2.33
2. 43
2.24
1.83
1.83
2.57
2.32
2.41
2.18
1.82
1.84
2. 55
2.31
2.38
2.17
1.82
1.84
2. 55
2.31
2.38
2.13
1.82
1.82
2. 55
2.27
2.33
2.06
1.78
1.80
2. 50
2.21
2.27
1.91
1.71
1.76
2. 43
(s)
(*)
2.93
(s)
2.92
(3)
2.91
(3)
2.90
(3)
2.88
(3)
2.89
(3)
2.87
(3)
2.84
(3)
2.82
(3)
2.81
(3)
2.83
(3)
2.83
(3)
2.79
(3)
2.72
3.34
3.33
3.30
3.29
3.27
3.28
3.28
3.27
3. 30
3.28
3.29
3.28
3.18
3.10
2.56
1.93
2.55
1.93
2. 55
1.91
2.55
1.91
2. 52
1.88
2. 55
1.86
2.52
1.88
2. 52
1.88
2. 52
1.89
2. 51
1.87
2. 51
1.86
2. 51
1.86
2. 49
1.84
2. 44
1.78
c2mParakility of data with those published in issues prior to October
*
see/ 00tn°te 1» table A-9. For employees covered, see footnote 1, table
A-10. Average hourly earnings excluding overtime are derived by assuming
that overtime hours are paid for at the rate of time and one-half.
https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
2 Preliminary.
3 Not available because average overtime rates are significantly above
time and one-half. Inclusion of data for the group in the nondurable goods
total has little effect.
107
C — EARNINGS AND HOURS
T a b l e C -4 .
Average weekly overtime hours of production workers in manufacturing, by industry 1
Revised series; see box, p. 87.
Industry
Jan.2 Dec.2 Nov.
Manufacturing----- ----------------------------Durable goods.. . ---- -- -- -----------Nondurable goods--------------------------
3.3
3.5
2.9
Annual
average
1966
1967
Oct.
Sept.
Aug.
July
June
May
Apr.
Mar.
Feb.
Jan.
1965
1964
4.0
4.3
3.5
3.8
4.1
3.5
4.0
4.4
3.5
4.0
4.4
3.4
3.9
4.3
3.3
3.9
4.2
3.3
3.8
4.2
3.3
3.7
4.1
3.1
3.6
3.9
3.2
3.1
3.3
2.9
41
3.7
3.0
3.4
5. 4
3.9
3.1
4.1
5.6
3.7
3.1
3.6
5.0
3.6
3.0
3.5
5.2
3.4
2.9
3.4
4.5
3.5
3.2
3.7
4.4
3Q
38
3.4
4.0
3.0
3.1
1.6
2.9
1.8
1.8
1.3
2. 0
3.8
4.1
3.3
3.9
4.2
3.4
4.1
4.5
3.6
4.2
4.6
3.7
4. 2
3.5
3.0
5. 6
4.3
3.3
3.9
6.3
4.1
3.3
2.2
6.2
42
3! 5
6. 0
3 .0
5.6
3.3
3.2
3.4
3.3
3.9
3.9
4.0
3.9
4.1
4.1
4.1
4.1
4.2
4.3
4.4
4.5
4.3
4.4
4.0
4.0
3.7
3.8
3.8
3.8
3.8
3.7
3.4
3.4
3.2
3.8
3.5
3.7
3.6
5.2
3.4
4.3
3.9
4.0
4. 0
2.3
2.9
2.6
3.3
3.7
3.8
3.8
3. 7
4.9
3. 5
4.2
4. 3
5.9
4.1
3.0
3.4
3.1
3.7
3.7
4.0
4.3
4.1
5.0
4.7
4.5
4.6
4.8
4.0
2.8
3.7
2.8
3. 8
4. 0
4.2
4.3
4.0
4.9
5. 5
5.1
4. 7
3.8
4.1
3.0
3.7
3.0
3 .9
4 .6
4.1
3.9
4.5
4 .0
4.7
4.7
3.9
3.8
3.6
4.6
4.3
4.1
4.8
4.1
4.5
2.8
3.9
2.2
4.4
4.2
3.9
3.4
3.3
4.5
3.6
3.4
4.6
4.8
4.0
2.7
3.8
2.5
4.1
3.4
3.8
3.7
3.6
4.3
4.0
3.4
4.5
4.4
4.4
2.7
3.6
2.3
3.9
3.6
3.6
3.5
3.5
4.5
3.6
3.2
4. 0
4.3
4.3
2.3
3.1
2.4
39
3 fi
4.2
3 9
5.2
4.2
4.4
3.9
4.0
3.7
4.7
4.9
4.5
4.9
3.6
4.6
2.7
4.0
2.6
4.0
3.5
3.6
3.6
3.6
3.5
3. 7
3.7
4.2
4.1
4.0
2.2
3.6
2.2
3.6
2.8
3.4
3.2
3.4
2. 5
2.4
3.1
3.9
3.7
3.6
2.1
3.3
2.0
5.0
3.7
3.8
2.2
5.4
4.0
5.3
3.8
4.0
2.4
5. 4
4.2
6.6
4.3
4.2
2.8
5.4
4.4
7.0
4.2
4.5
3.3
5.3
4.3
7.1
4.4
4.2
2.9
5.4
4.0
7.0
4.3
4.0
2.8
5.1
3.8
6.8
4.3
4.1
2.8
5.6
3.9
6.3
4.0
4.0
2.4
5. 6
3.6
5.0
4.0
3.9
2.3
5. 6
3. 5
3.2
6.2
3.5
3.8
2.8
55
3.5
5.9
3.3
3.2
2.4
4.7
3.1
5.6
4.6
6.2
4.8
6.3
4.8
6.3
5.2
6. 0
4.4
3.7
6.5
4.7
6.2
4.5
5.9
4.6
5.9
4.5
5. 9
4.5
4.7
5.0
3. 9
3.9
3.2
6.0
4.4
3.0
6.5
4.6
3.7
6. 5
4.8
3.6
6.5
5.0
5.1
5.4
4 .8
4.7
5.6
4 .3
6 .9
5.7
4.6
4. 6
6.0
4.6
4.8
5.4
4.3
4.4
6.1
4.3
3.8
6.3
4.2
4.0
3.4
5. 2
4. 0
4.5
4. 0
3.4
3.8
D u r a b le g o o d s
Ammunition, except for small arms__
Sighting and Are control equipment- Other ordnanee and accessories__
Lumber and wood products, except
furniture
.
_. .
Sawmills and planing mills- -----------Millwork, plywood, and related prod__
nets
- __
Wooden containers . _ _ _
_ _ ___
Miscellaneous wood products---------------Furniture and fixtures
_
_
TTonsehold furniture
Office furniture
Partitions; office and store fixtures _ _
Other furniture and fixtures__ ___
Stone, clay, and glass products _
Flat glass
__ __ ___
__
Glass and glassware, pressed or blown..
Cement, hydraulic...
Structural clay products . .
Pottery and related products______
Concrete, gypsum, and plaster products
- __ - ___
Other stone and mineral products..
Primary metal industries ..
Blastfurnace and basic steel products..
Iron and steel foundries__
Nonferrous smelting and refining__
Nonferrous rolling, drawing, and extruding
. . . .
Nonferrous foundries.._ . .
Miscellaneous primary metal industries
.
.
Fabricated metal products____
____
Metal cans
Cutlery, handtools, and general hardware. _
_ _ _
__
____
Heating equipment and plumbing fixtures...
. _ ___ .
Fabricated structural metal products
Screw machine products, bolts, etc...
Metal stampings__ . . .
Coating, engraving, and allied services.
Miscellaneous fabricated wire products.
Miscellaneous fabricated metal products____
_ _
_____
Machinery____. . .
.
____ _
Engines’and turbines___ . . . . .
Farm machinery and equipment...
Construction arid related iriachinery...
Metalworking machinery and equipment___
_
_____ __ .
Special industry machinery _ _
General industrial machinery. ______
Office, computing, and accounting machines___
.
. .
Service industrv machines _
Miscellaneous machinery____ .
Electrical equipment and supplies_____ __
Electric distribution equipriient______
Electrical industrial apparatus.
Household appliances!. .
Electric lighting and wiring equipment.
Radio and TV receiving sets_____
Communication equipment___
Electronic components and accessories.
Miscellaneous electrical equipment
and supplies____________________
Transportation equipment.. .
_______
Motor vehicles and equipment________
Aircraft and parts...
Ship and boat building and repairing..
Railroad equipment__________ _ _______
Other transportation eq u ip m en t..___
Instruments and related products_____
Engineering and scientific instruments.
Mechanical measuring and control devices. _____________ _
Optical and ophthalmic goods__
.
Ophthalmic goods______
Surgical, medical, and dental equipment___
......
P h o to g r a p h ic e q u ip m e n t a n d s u p p lie s .
W a t c h e s a n d c l o c k s ___________ __________
S e e f o o tn o te s a t e n d o f t a b le .
https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
3.4
3 fi
5.0
3.3
2.9
4.7
4.1
4 .6
4.8
4. 0
4.1
3. 0
3. 7
2.7
4.7
4.2
4.1
3.3
3.9
2.0
7.3
4.2
7.2
4.0
4.1
3. 0
5.1
4. 2
3.9
3.1
5.4
4. 5
3.8
5. 5
3.6
3 4
33
4 n
3 fi
31
40
43
40
2* 5
33
2 .3
fi 3
34
3 fi
1.8
fi 1
fi 0
fi 1
41
3.4
3.5
3.6
3.8
3. 5
3.1
3.6
3.7
3.6
3.4
3.3
3.4
3. 4
3.1
2.5
4.5
7.4
4.5
5.1
4.4
2.6
4.4
7.2
5.4
4.7
4.5
3.3
4.5
7.2
5.8
5.0
4. 5
3.2
4.7
7.3
6.0
5.7
4.5
3 .0
4 .4
6.5
5.4
5.1
4 .4
2.3
4.1
5 .9
5.1
4.4
3.0
4.1
6. 9
5.3
2.6
36
6. 7
5.3
2.4
35
6. 8
5.3
2. 5
34
7. 0
52
1
34
fi 3
2.3
36
5.4
5.2
4. 4
3.1
4.3
7. 0
5.1
5.0
4.5
5.1
4. 6
4 .8
4.0
4 .8
4.1
4 .7
4 .4
4.3
4.0
4.3
3. 8
2.2
3.0
4.3
4. 5
3.8
3.1
3.7
5.6
6.7
3.4
4.2
4.0
5.4
4.9
3.1
4.7
4.2
5.6
4.9
3.7
4.9
4.4
5.7
5.8
4.0
4.9
4 .3
3.8
4.9
5.2
5 .8
3. 2
5.2
5 .8
5.7
3.7
5 .3
4.6
5.8
6. 0
42
5. 3
40
5. 6
5.8
4.4
5.1
4 3
5.4
6 .0
3.4
4.9
5.7
5.4
43
4 1
5 fi
44
40
37
3
39
37
34
4.6
2.9
5.1
5.0
4.5
4.2
7.8
6.2
5.6
7.6
5.8
5.4
7.5
5.7
5.8
7.6
6.1
6.0
7.1
5.4
5 .6
7.4
4.7
5.0
8.2
5.8
83
5. 5
80
53
82
80
76
fi fi
fi fi
6.7
48
5 .8
5.7
5.1
5.1
5. 2
5.1
4.4
4.0
3.5
6.4
3.3
4.4
4.1
2.6
3.0
2.8
3.6
2.7
3.8
3.5
6.5
3.3
3.9
4.0
3.3
3.1
3.0
3.3
2.7
4.1
3.5
6.6
3.5
3.8
4.2
3.7
3.4
3. 7
3.4
2.7
3.9
3.3
6.6
3.6
4.4
4.7
4.1
3.3
3.3
3.6
2.9
3.5
3 .7
6 .3
3 .2
3.4
5.9
40
37
fi 3
3 .2
3.9
4.3
3.6
2.8
2.7
2.7
2.9
3 4
3
3
6
3
3
4
3
4
3
3.2
3 .7
4.3
3.8
3.2
2 .9
2 .9
2 .7
40
33
63
34
39
4J7
38
4 fi
33
fi 2
34
34
43
3 fi
49
3 9
61
32
3* 3
41
33
34
29
fi 4
28
29
3 fi
39
3.9
4.3
4.3
4.6
4.3
3.7
1.9
3.7
4.9
4.1
4.8
5.0
5.1
4.0
3.4
2.1
3.7
4.3
3.8
5.2
5.9
4.9
4.5
3.2
2.8
4.0
4.7
3. 5
3.1
4.9
5 .2
5.1
3.7
3.0
3 .4
4 .8
5.0
5 .2
3 .9
3 .5
3.1
4.0
4 .5
4.0
3.1
2.6
4.1
3.0
2.6
4.4
3.3
2.8
2.5
4.4
2.7
4.5
2.8
2.8
2.8
5.1
2.9
4.1
45
3 fi
3.1
7
3
3
3
5
5
fi
25
32
19
34
3.1
2 .8
3.3
3 .4
3 n
3.3
2.5
28
3 0
4.5
4 .4
5.0
4.1
3.9
2.6
4 4
4 4
42
5 1
4.2
3 .1
3 2
3.5
3 .9
3 .4
4 .0
3 8
4! 5
4.4
3.5
2 .9
3 .8
3.1
2 .5
3.9
3 .0
2.8
4 1
33
2.8
2 .9
5.1
2.8
2.7
4.1
2 .6
2.6
3.9
2.3
28
4 .6
2 .4
3
3
4
2
4
3
7
4
9
2.8
2. 9
23
33
23
34
3.3
3.4
29
fi 1
? 9
4' 7
fi 2
fi' 8
4 fi
3 fi
48
fi 3
4.0
3 .6
4.2
3. 7
4 1
24
fi
2
fi
47
fi
1
4 .4
3.0
2
fi 7
fi
fi* 4
41
5.9
41
3.5
23
2. 3
4.7
2. 3
2. 6
3. 0
2.2
2 .7
2.1
1.7
2. 9
2.4
2.1
32
2. 6
2.5
3 .1
2.8
2 .8
23
36
24
27
fi n
fi fi
fi fi
32
48
fi 2
33
3.8
2.9
3.8
3 .1
3.4
2 .6
5 1
29
3 9
3!4
2. 2
3 .9
5.0
3.2
29
3 fi
3!7
28
36
32
4 1
29
2 .8
2.1
2 .9
2 .7
2.6
2' 7
2 .4
2.1
4 .8
2 .4
4.9
2.5
4 .7
2 .8
2 4
5.0
2 .6
2 5
4 .3
2 .5
2 1
4.0
2 .4
3.3
1.6
33
38
4! 5
4. 0
43
32
29
37
2.7
3.9
3.1
2.6
3.5
4 .2
29
35
3! 9
29
2 4
2 .3
2 fi
24
29
108
M O N T H L Y L A B O R R E V IE W , M A R C H 1967
T
able
C-4.
Average weekly overtime hours of production workers in manufacturing, by
industry 1—Continued
Revised series; see box, p. 87.
Annual
average
1966
1967
Industry
Jan.2 Dec.2 Nov.
Oct.
Sept.
Aug.
July
June
May
Apr.
Mar.
Feb.
Jan.
3.4
5.3
3.2
2.8
3.1
3.2
3. 7
3.3
4.9
3.3
2. 7
2.9
3. 2
3. 5
3.1
46
3.1
2. 4
2.9
29
2.9
2.3
22
2.3
2. 0
2.2
2.3
2.3
2.8
4.2
2.3
2.8
3.4
2.7
3.1
2.9
4.1
2.6
2.2
3.0
2.9
3.2
2.8
4.1
2.6
2.0
2.6
2.8
2.8
3.1
4.3
2.7
2.4
3.0
3.1
3.2
2.9
3.7
2.5
2.1
3.0
2.9
3.5
2.7
3.7
2.4
1.8
2.7
2.8
2.7
2.7
3.6
2.6
2.3
2.4
27
3. 0
2.4
3.3
2.1
1.8
2.0
2. 5
3.1
4.0
4.0
Food and kindred products...
4.2
4.4
5.1
5.1
Meat products..
. .
__
5.1
4.8
3.5
3.7
4. 0
Dairy products__ . . ..
3.6
Canned and preserved food, except
2.9
2.7
3.5
meats.
. .
__ .
___
3.2
6.6
6.7
Grain mill products ____
. . .
8. 5
77
3.1
3.3
3.8
Bakery products _____
... . . .
3.7
3.8
3.0
4.4
Sugar
...
3.8
3.1
3.2
Confectionery and related products__
3.1
3.1
3.6
3.6
4. 0
Beverages__
. . _ ..
3.8
4.9
4.9
5.0
Miscellaneous food and kindred products.
4.8
1.2
1.9
1. 5
Tobacco manufactures.
1. 4
1.2
2.2
1.8
Cigarettes
1. 7
1.2
1.0
11
.9
_____
_____
Cigars
4.2
3.8
4.4
Textile mill products
__ _ _ ______
4.2
4.9
5.3
5.2
Cotton broad woven fabrics__ _
50
4.5
4.0
4.7
Silk and synthetic broad woven fabrics.
4.3
3.9
4.0
4.3
Weaving and finishing broad woolens..
3.9
4.1
3.9
4.3
Narrow fabrics and smallwares
4 1
1.9
2.3
2.7
Knitting . .
__ ______
2.5
5.2
5.4
4.9
Finishing textiles, except wool and knit.
5.1
4.2v
5.0
5.4
____
____
Floor covering
_
53
3.4
4.0
5.0
Yarn and thread____
4.4
4.2
4.9
5.2
Miscellaneous textile goods . . . . .
52
1.5
1.4
1.5
Apparel and related products.. .
....
1. 7
1.7
1.5
1.7
Men’s and boys’ suits and coats__
2. 0
1.3
1.1
1.3
Men's and boys' furnishings. _
1. 4
1.3
1.2
1.3
Women's, misses', juniors’ outerwear
1.3
Women’s and children’s undergar1.9
1.9
1.3
ments
2.2
1.2
1.2
1.1
Hats, caps, and millinery.
1.3
1.4
1.5
1.0
1.4
Girls’ and children’s outerwear
1.5
1.8
1.5
Fur goods and miscellaneous apparel.. _____
2.1
Miscellaneous fabricated textile prod2.4
2.5
2.2
3.0
ucts
- __ _________ 5.2
5.5
5.8
Paper and allied products ..
5.7
6.5
6.3
6.3
Paper and pulp
66
7.4
7.5
6.9
Paperboard
7.2
Converted paper and paperboard
4.3
4.5
3.9
products
43
5.0
5.7
4.6
5.5
Paperboard containers and boxes
Printing, publishing, and allied indus4.0
3.6
3.7
3.9
tries
3.2
3.0
3.5
Newspaper publishing and printing. .
3.1
4.4
5.8
3.3
Periodical publishing and printing
5.6
5.2
4.1
4.4
Books ...
. . . .
. . .
4.8
4.4
3.9
4.0
4.3
Commercial printing
3.3
2.6
2.7
Bookbinding and related industries
3.2
Other publishing and printing indus3.9
3.5
3.6
3.6
tries
3.5
3.3
3.2
3.5
Chemicals and allied products
3.5
3.4
3.7
3.7
Industrial chemicals
3.2
3.0
3.0
3.2
Plastics materials and synthetics
3.1
2.8
2.7
Drugs . . . . __
. __. . .
2.9
3.9
3.6
2.8
3.9
Soap, cleaners, and toilet goods___
3.4
2.7
2.5
2.9
Paints, varnishes, and allied products
4.2
3.9
4.2
4.6
Agricultural chemicals
3.8
3.3
3.4
3.6
Other chemical products____________
Petroleum refining and related indus3.7
3.3
2.9
3.3
tries
. . ______ ____ _______
2.6
2.9
2.5
2.3
Petroleum refining
7.4
4.9
4.6
6.7
Other petroleum and coal products
4.7
4.5
4.0
4.7
Rubber, miscellaneous plastic products.
6.1
6.4
6.4
5.6
Tires and inner tubes
4.4
4.1
3.6
4.2
Other rubber products
4.5
4.0
4.4
3.7
Miscellaneous plastic products_______ ......
2.0
2.1
2.1
2.1
Leather and leather products____
3.4
3.5
3.5
3.6
Leather tanning and finishing
1.7
1.6
1.6
1.9
Footwear, except rubber ..
. . ..
2.5
2.8
2.0
2.8
Other leather products
_ . ..
2.2
2.9
1.7
2.8
Handbags arid personal leather goods.
1
For comparability of data with those published in issues prior to October
1966, see footnote 1, table A-9. For employees covered, see footnote 1, table
A-10.
These series cover premium overtime hours of production and related
workers during the pay period which includes the 12th of the month. Over
time hours are those paid for at premium rates because (1) they exceeded
4.0
4. 2
3.9
4. 7
4. 5
4.6
4.2
4.3
4.3
3.8
3.9
3.7
3.4
3.5
3.5
3.4
3.4
3.3
3.6
3.5
3.4
3.5
4.2
3.2
3.8
4.2
3.6
3.6
4.2
3.5
3.4
7.0
3.8
4.0
2.9
4.2
4.2
1.7
2.2
1.2
4.4
5.1
5.2
4.3
3.9
3.1
4.8
4.9
4.9
4.7
1.7
1.8
1.5
1.4
3.6
7.9
4.3
4. 8
2.3
6.7
4.4
1.7
2.5
.8
4.4
5.5
5.6
5.0
3.7
2.6
4.5
3.5
4.7
4.2
1.3
1.3
1.1
1.3
3.1
7.3
3.9
4.0
2.5
4.4
4.2
1.5
1.9
1.0
4.6
5.3
4.9
5.2
4.4
2.8
5.9
4.5
5.1
5.1
1.5
1.7
1.4
1.5
3.1
6.4
3.5
3.7
2.3
3.5
4.1
1.2
1.2
1.3
4.6
5.3
6.0
5.5
4.0
2.8
5.6
4.1
5.0
5.2
1.5
1.7
1.3
1.5
2.8
5.6
3.3
3.5
1.9
3.6
3.8
1.3
1.6
1.1
4.5
5.3
5.5
5.3
3.9
2.2
5.7
4.2
5.2
5. 0
1.4
1.4
1.2
1.4
2.7
5.6
3.1
4.6
2.6
3.1
3.9
1.0
.9
1.1
4.6
5.5
5.7
5.1
4.4
2.5
5.8
4.4
5.2
4.8
1.6
1.6
1.3
1.8
3.3
6.3
3.2
4.5
2.4
2.8
4.4
1.9
2.9
1.2
4.6
5.6
5.5
5.2
4.5
2.3
5.5
4.7
5.4
4.9
1.5
1.8
1.2
1.5
2.6
6. 0
3.1
3.4
2.5
2.7
4.0
.9
.6
1.2
4.3
5.4
4.8
4.7
4.1
2.1
5.1
4.0
5.2
4.8
1.3
1.5
1.1
1.2
2.9
6.6
3.3
3.9
2.4
3.3
4.3
1.1
.8
1.3
4.2
4.8
5.3
4.4
3.6
2.5
4.6
5.1
4.7
4.3
1.4
1.5
1.2
1.3
2.8
6.3
3.1
3.7
2.2
3.1
4.0
1.6
1.6
2.1
3.6
4.3
5.0
3.4
3.1
2.1
4.2
4.4
3.6
3.6
1.3
1.0
1.0
1.3
1.9
1.7
1.8
1.6
1.5
1.3
1.7
1.1
1.5
1.3
1.9
1.6
1.5
1.0
1.6
1.6
1.3
1.0
1.4
1.2
1.7
1.9
1.6
1.3
1.6
1.9
1.8
1.3
1.1
1.3
1.4
1.2
1.4
1.4
1.4
1.4
1.4
1.4
1.3
1.2
2.4
5.6
6.4
7.4
1.6
5.5
6.3
7.6
1.9
5.7
6.5
7.7
1.9
5.6
6.7
7.8
1.9
5.3
6.2
8.2
2.0
5.3
6.2
7.5
1.8
5.1
6.2
7.0
1.7
5.0
6.1
7.5
2.1
5.0
6.0
7.0
1.9
4.7
5.7
6.3
4.3
5.0
4.3
4.9
4.3
5.2
3.9
5.0
3.7
4.5
3.9
4.8
3.7
4.5
3. 5
4.2
3. ô
4.5
3.3
4.1
3.7
2.7
4.6
5.4
4.1
3.1
3.4
2.6
3.9
4.9
3.8
2.8
3.5
3.0
3.3
5.4
3.7
2.8
3.5
3.0
3.4
5.4
3.8
3.0
3.3
2.6
3.7
5.1
3.6
2.8
3.5
2.3
4.1
5.1
3.9
3.0
3.0
2.0
3.7
4.4
3.5
2.4
2.8
1.9
3.4
4.3
3.1
2.2
3.1
2.4
3.8
4.2
3.4
2.5
2.9
2.4
4.0
3.8
3.1
2.4
3.5
3.4
3.4
3.5
2.6
3.8
3.3
3.7
3.3
3.2
3.3
3.5
3.5
2.3
3.2
3. 0
3.8
3.3
3. 0
3.4
3.4
3.4
2.5
3.4
3.7
4.3
3.6
2.6
3.4
3.2
3.3
2.8
2.9
3.8
6.5
3.4
2.9
3.7
3.4
3.6
2.8
3.0
3.4
8.9
3.1
3.6
3.3
3.2
3.0
2.9
3.1
2.7
7.3
2.7
3.1
3.1
3.0
3.2
3.0
2.9
2.6
4.7
3. 0
3. 0
2.9
2.9
2.8
3.1
2.8
2.2
4.1
2.9
3.1
3.0
3.0
2.9
2.6
2.5
2.7
4.9
3.0
2. 7
2.7
2.6
2.7
2. 0
2.5
2. 5
4.6
3.0
M anufacturing—Continued
Durable goods—Continued
Miscellaneous manufacturing industries.
Jewelry, silverware, and plated ware ..
Toys, amusement and sporting goods..
Pens, pencils, office and art materials
Costume jewelry, buttons, and notions.
Other manufacturing industries . . . .
Musical instruments and parts.
2.9
5.2
2.4
3.3
2.8
2.6
3.4
3.1
4.9
2.8
3.2
2.8
2.9
3.9
1965
1964
Nondurable goods
https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
2. 5
3. 7
2.4
2.4
2.8
3.4
2.6
3.6
3.5
3.1
1.8
2.7
1.9
2.1
2.0
3.1
3.0
2.3
2.2
2.6
5. 0
6.8
4.2
5.5
3.8
4.6
3.9
6.7
5.0
5.8
3.4
4.4
4.1
3.9
4.4
4.4
4.2
4.3
4.3
4.3
4.3
5. 8
6.8
6.1
6. 5
5. 8
6. 7
5. 4
6.6
5.7
2. 7
3.3
3.7
3.3
3.6
3.6
3.8
3.7
3.5
4.0
3.7
3.5
4.0
4.0
4.2
4.1
4.2
4.0
3.9
4.0
1.7
2.2
2.4
2.1
1.8
2.1
1.9
2.1
2.3
2.2
3.4
2.9
3.3
3.3
3.5
4.0
3.5
3.5
3.8
3.3
2.1
1. 5
1.6
2.2
1.9
1.9
2.1
1.9
1.6
2.0
1. 7
2.2
2.0
1.8
2.4
2.2
2.1
2.1
2.3
2.5
2. 0
1.9
2.4
1.7
2.5
2.0
2.0
1.9
1-8
2.7
either the straight-time workday or workweek or (2) they occurred on week
ends or holidays or outside regularly scheduled hours. Hours for which
only shift differential, hazard, incentive, or other similar types of premiums
were paid are excluded.
2 Preliminary.
109
C.—EARNINGS AND HOURS
T able C-5.
Indexes of aggregate weekly man-hours and payrolls in industrial and construction
activities 1
[1957 - 5 9 = 100]
Revised series; see box, p. 87.
1967
1966
Annual
average
Activity
Jan.2 D ec.2 Nov.
Oct.
Sept.
Aug.
July
June
May
Apr.
Mar.
Feb.
Jan.
1965
1964
Man-hours
111.9
79.5
98.3
116.0
115.6
81.8
106.4
119.0
117.1
81.5
111.2
119.9
119.6
84.1
123.6
120.6
120.0
84.7
126.1
120.7
119.6
86. 5
131.4
119.1
117.2
85.9
132.4
116.0
118.8
86.9
126.1
119.1
114.6
83.7
112.4
116.5
112.2
74.3
107.4
114.9
111.5
81.5
102.5
114.6
109.2
80.2
92.5
113.7
108.6
81.3
97.8
111.9
109.1
82.9
110.2
110.2
103.2
82.7
105.2
103.9
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__________
Machinery_________ _____________
Electrical equipment and supplies____
Transportation equipment.
_ ___
Instruments and related products___
Miscellaneous manufacturing indust r i e s .______ ___________________
123.1
162.7
126.0
159.3
126.6
159.3
127.2
154.0
126.9
150.9
123.2
145.2
121.5
142.5
125.8
141.5
123.6
139.3
122.1
134.4
120.9
132.0
119.6
130.8
118.1
128.3
114.1
113.1
105.5
118.7
88.8
122.8
102.4
113.5
126.5
140.7
149.1
117.5
130.4
92.2
129.0
106.1
113.7
130.1
140.9
152.2
122.4
131.7
95.0
129.6
109.5
114.7
130.0
137.6
152.7
122.6
130.6
98.1
130.7
111.7
115.3
130.1
137.3
153.9
122.2
130.4
100.2
130.0
113.5
117.7
130.2
138.0
152.1
119.4
129.3
104.1
131.6
115.4
117.3
127.2
135.9
148.6
103.0
127.7
103.7
122.5
114.5
116.3
122.7
134.5
141.9
109.3
125.5
105.6
128.1
115.2
119.2
128.2
137.9
146.7
116.5
128.2
102.0
124.3
112.8
116.5
126.2
136.3
143.3
116.4
125.6
98.9
122.0
110.9
115.8
124.3
134.3
141.5
117.2
122.9
96.4
123.7
108.0
113.5
123.4
134.2
139.4
116.3
123.6
94.8
121.6
104.5
112.1
122.6
132.8
139.5
115.4
122.3
95.9
120.8
105.4
110.2
121.2
130.2
137.4
114.6
120.0
97.5
119.0
108.1
112.9
117.2
123.0
125.6
106.8
112.3
95.7
111.6
105.4
106.2
107.9
112.1
113.0
94.8
104.6
105.4
113.4
123.6
124.7
121.5
120.1
109.9
117.3
114.8
111.5
111.0
108.0
102.3
109.8
102.7
Nondurable goods___________________
Food and kindred products_________
Tobacco manufactures. . . ____
Textile mill products_______________
Apparel and related products________
Paper and allied products.
. ..
Printing, publishing, and allied industries. . _________ __________
Chemicals and allied products.. . __
Petroleum refining arid related industries_________ _
______
___
Rubber and miscellaneous plastic
products__________________ . .
Leather and leather products. . _____
106.9
90.4
88.0
100.4
115.8
114.3
109.9
95.5
96.8
102.7
118.2
117.4
111.2
98.9
92.8
104.2
120.2
118.5
112.0
101.7
98.3
105.0
121.3
117 3
112.6
106.3
100.4
105.8
117.7
117.5
113.7
106.1
87.7
107.2
122.5
118.4
108.9
99.5
70.8
103.4
114.2
117.2
110.4
94.0
73.4
108.4
121.1
118.2
107.3
88.6
72.1
106.0
118.8
114.7
105.6
86.9
73.9
103.4
116.2
113.4
106.5
87.1
77.2
105.2
120.6
112.7
105.9
87.6
84.0
104.5
118.9
111.4
103.8
88.4
83.9
102.6
110.5
110.9
105.2
94.0
86.2
101.5
115.0
109.8
101.7
94.0
92.9
96.8
109.1
106.8
117.3
115.4
120.8
116.9
119.1
117.1
119.2
116.6
118.7
116.9
118.0
117.9
116.4
116.8
116.7
117.9
115.1
116.0
114.3
116.1
114.2
113.4
113.0
111.5
110.9
110.1
110.2
110.1
106.5
106.0
80.2
78.7
76.3
75.5
75.7
78.3
78.9
Total________________________ ______
Mining____ __ _____________________
Contract construction__________________
Manufacturing_________ _____________
77.7
78.1
80.0
80.3
82.2
82.2
83.9
82.6
152.6
97.0
154.2
98.1
154.9
98.0
153 9
96.7
152 1
96.7
149 7
102.4
143 6
97.7
147 9
102.1
145 ft 143 ft 143 9 142 2 142 ft 13J5 4 122 1
9&6
96! 2 99! 3 101 ! 5
96! 3
94! 6
98! 7
Payrolls
Mining__________ . . . ___ .
Contract construction__________________
Manufacturing___ ____________________
101.2
139.7
152.4
102.7
149.9
155.9
102.0
155.7
156.4
105.2
173.0
156.9
105.6
173.2
156.9
105.4
177.0
156.7
105.2
180.3
148.6
106.5
171.1
152.5
102.5
152.6
149.0
87.4
145.1
146.8
97.7
137.9
145.3
96.5
125.4
143.8
97.5
131.4
141.3
97.0
144.3
136.3
93.1
132.4
124.3
1
For comparability of data with those published in issues prior to October
workers and for contract construction, to construction workers, as defined
1966, see footnote 1, table A-9.
in footnote 1, table A-10.
For mining and manufacturing, data refer to production and related
2 Preliminary
T able C-6.
Gross and spendable average weekly earnings of production workers in manufacturing 1
Revised series; see box, p. 87.
[In current and 1957-59 dollars]1
1966
1965
Item
Dec.2 Nov.
Oct.
Sept.
Aug.
July
June
May
Apr.
Mar.
Feb.
Jan.
Dec.
Annual
average
1965
1964
Manufacturing
3ross average weekly earnings:
Current dollars__________
1957-59 dollars__________ .
Spendable average weekly earnings:
Worker with no dependents:
Current dollars___
_ _ __ _
1957-59 dollars...... _ .................
Worker with 3 dependents:
Current dollars____________
1957-59 dollars__________
$114.40 $113.99 $113. 85 $113. 71 $111.78 $111.11 $112.74 $112. 05 $111.24 $110.95 $110. 27 $110. 00 $110. 92 $107. 53 $102.97
99.74 99.47 99.43 99.66 98.22 98.07 99.86 99.51 98.88 99.06 98. 81 99.10 99.93 97. 84 95. 25
93.13
81.19
92. 61
81.17
91.14
80. 09
90.63
79.99
91.87
81.37
91.35
81.13
90.73
80.65
90.51
80.81
90.00
80.65
89.79
80.89
91.80
82.70
89.08
81.06
84. 40
78.08
101.09 100.76 100.65 100. 54
88.13 87.92 87.90 88.12
99. 00
86.99
98.47
86.91
99.77
88.37
99.22
88.12
98.57
87.62
98. 34
87.80
97.80
87.63
97.58
87.91
99.62
89.75
96.78
88.06
92.18
85.27
92.82
80.99
92.72
80.98
1 For comparability of data with those published in issues prior to October
1966, see footnote 1, table A-9. For employees covered, see footnote 1, table
A-10.
Spendable average weekly earnings are based on gross average weekly
earnings as published in table C -l less the estimated amount of the workers’
Federal social security and income tax liability. Since the amount of tax
liability depends on the number of dependents supported by the worker as
well as on the level of his gross income, spendable earnings have been com
2 4 5 -3 3 6 0
-
67-9
https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
puted for 2 types of income receivers: (1) A worker with no dependents
and (2) a married worker with 3 dependents.
The earnings expressed in 1957-59 dollars have been adjusted for changes
in purchasing power as measured by the Bureau’s Consumer Price Index.
2 Preliminary.
N o t e : These series are described in “The Calculation and Uses of Spend
able Earnings Series,” Monthly Labor Review, April 1966, pp. 106-410.
MONTHLY LABOR REVIEW, MARCH 1967
110
D.—Consumer and Wholesale Prices
T able
D -l.
Consumer Price Index 1—U.S. city average for urban wage earners and clerical workers,
all items, groups, subgroups, and special groups of items
[1957-59=100 unless otherwise specified]
1967
1966
Annual
average
Group
Jan.
Dec.
Nov.
Oct.
Sept.
Aug.
July
June
May
Apr.
Mar.
Feb.
Jan.
1966
1965
All items ----- ------------ -----------All items (1947-49=100)________________
114.7
140.7
114.7
140.7
114.6
140.6
114.5
140.5
114.1
140.0
113.8
139.6
113.3
139.0
112.9
138.5
112.6
138.2
112.5
138.0
112.0
137.4
111.6
136.9
111.0
136.2
113.1
138.8
109.9
134.8
Food_______ _______________________
Food at home___ ______ _ .. ______
Cereals and bakery products______
Meats, poultry, and fish____________
Dairy products____________________
Fruits and vegetables________ _____
Other foods at home 2_______ _______
Food away from home________ ______
114.7
112.3
118.8
110.3
116.4
115.3
104.9
127.0
114.8
112.6
118.8
110.9
116.5
114.3
105.7
126.3
114.8
112.8
118.6
111.8
116.7
114.9
104.8
125.7
115.6
113.8
118.3
113.8
117.1
115.3
106.0
125.2
115.6
114.0
118.4
114.8
116.0
116.6
105.3
124.6
115.8
114.4
117.3
114.5
114.8
122.3
104.9
124.0
114.3
112.7
114.8
114.3
111.0
121.5
102.1
123.5
113.9
112.3
114.7
114.2
109.6
121.7
101.3
122.8
113.5
112.0
114.3
113.9
109.3
119.2
102.8
122.2
114.0
112.7
114.1
115.6
108.9
119.8
103.6
121.6
113.9
112.6
113.6
116.9
108.1
117.4
103.7
121.2
113.1
111.8
113.2
115. 7
107.0
116.5
103.5
120.8
111.4
109.8
113.0
112.9
106.6
111.3
102.9
120.4
114.2
112.6
115.8
114.1
111.8
117.6
103.9
123.2
108.8
107.2
111.2
105.1
105.0
115.2
101.8
117.8
Housing_____________________________
Shelter 3_____ _ _ _________
_
Rent________
-----------------------Homeownership 4___ _____________
Fuel and utilities 5.
_ __ ____ _
Fuel oil and coal6_____ ____________
Gas and electricity_______ ____ _____
Household furnishings and operation 7__
113.1
116.5
111.4
118.7
108.6
110.5
108.3
106.7
113.0
116.4
111.3
118.6
108.4
110.2
107.9
106.7
112.6
115.8
111.2
117.8
108. 3
108.9
108.1
106.5
112.2
115.5
111.0
117.4
108.1
108.3
108.0
106.1
111.8
115.0
110.7
116.8
108.0
107.4
108.1
105.7
111.5
114.6
110.6
116.4
107.9
107.0
108.1
105.2
111.3
114.4
110.3
116.2
107.9
107.0
108.1
105.1
111.1
114.1
110.2
115.8
108. 0
107.0
108.1
104.8
110.7
113.5
110.2
115.0
108.2
108.0
108.2
104.6
110.3
113.0
110.1
114.3
108.3
108.5
108.3
104.4
109.6
112.3
109.9
113.5
106.6
108.9
108.2
104.0
109.4
112.1
109.8
113.3
106. 5
109.0
108.2
103.8
109.2
112.0
109.7
113.1
106.4
108.9
107.9
103.6
111. 1
114.1
110.4
115.7
107.7
108.3
108.1
105.0
108.5
110.6
108.9
111.4
107.2
105.6
107.8
103.1
Apparel and upkeep 8___________ _____
Men’s and boys’. ________________ ..
Women’s and girls’__________________
___
Footwear___________________
111.3
111.6
106.4
122.9
112.3
112.6
108.1
122.9
112.0
112.4
107.8
122.8
111.5
111.5
107.5
122.2
110.7
111.2
106.3
121.3
109.2
109.9
103.8
120.4
109.2
109.6
104.6
119.8
109.4
110.1
104.7
119.8
109.3
109.9
105.0
119.0
108.7
109.6
104.2
118.1
108.2
109.0
103.9
116.9
107.6
108.6
103.1
116.2
107.3
108.6
102.6
115.6
109.6
110.3
105.1
119.6
106.8
107.4
103.1
112.9
Transportation_______________________ 113.4
Private..
. _____ ________ ________ 111.4
Public_____________________________ 129.8
113.8
111.7
129.8
114.5
112.6
129.6
114.3
112.3
129.6
113.3
111.3
129.5
113.5
111.6
129.2
113.5
111.5
129.1
112.2
110.7
122.8
112.0
110.5
122.1
112.0
110.5
122.1
111.4
109.9
122.1
111.1
109.6
122.0
111.2
109.6
122.0
112.7
111.0
125.8
111.1
109.7
121.4
121.4
132.9
113.8
118.5
116.2
121.0
131.9
113.7
118.4
115.9
120.8
131.3
113.4
118.3
116.0
120.4
130.4
113.3
118.0
115.9
119.9
129.4
113.0
117.5
115.7
119.5
128.4
112.7
117.4
115.5
119.1
127.7
112.5
117.2
115.3
118.7
127.0
112.2
117.0
114.9.
118.4
126.3
112.0
116.8
114.7
118.1
125.8
111.6
116.8
114.3
117.6
125.3
111.0
116.6
113.8
117.1
124.5
110.8
115.9
113.6
116.9
124.2
110.4
115.7
113.4
119.0
127.7
112.2
117.1
114.9
115.6
122.3
109.9
115.2
111.4
Special groups:
All items less shelter.. _ ________ . .. 114.2
All items less food______ ____________ 114.8
114.3
114.9
114.4
114.8
114.3
114.4
113.9
113.8
113.6
113.4
113.1
113.2
112.6
112.8
112.4
112.5
112.4
112.2
111.9
111.6
111.4
111.3
110.8
111.1
112.9
113.0
109.6
110.4
Commodities 10_______________________
Nondurables17___________________ . . .
Durables 1012_ ______________ ______
Services101314_______ . . . . . . .
. . ...
109.9
112.7
102.7
125.5
110.1
113.0
103.1
125.2
110.2
112.9
103.5
124.7
110.3
113.1
103.5
124.1
110.0
112.9
102.7
123.5
109.8
112.5
103.0
123.0
109.3
111.8
103.0
122.6
109.0
111.5
102.6
122.0
108.8
111.3
102.5
121.5
108.8
111.4
102.3
121.1
108.4
111.1
102.0
120.1
108.0
110.6
101.8
119.7
107.4
109.6
101.9
119.5
109.2
111.8
102.7
122.3
106.4
107.9
102.6
117.8
Commodities less food i° ... ____ ___
Nondurables less food... _____________
Apparel commodities_____ . . . . ___
Apparel commodities less footwear...
Nondurables less food and apparel.
New cars.. ._ _ _ . ___. . . . __ . . .
Used cars___ _
_ ___ __________
Household durables 14___ ___________
Housefurnishings________ _____ _____
107.3
111.0
110.1
107.6
111.6
97.6
113.0
97.6
99.7
107.7
111.4
111.2
108.8
111.6
98.6
114.2
97.7
100.0
107.8
111.3
110.9
108.6
111.5
99.3
119.3
97.6
99.9
107.6
110.9
110.4
108.1
111.2
98.4
120.8
97.4
99.5
107.0
110.5
109.7
107.4
111.0
94.4
120.1
97.3
99.3
106.6
109.6
107.9
105.5
110.5
95.8
122.1
97.0
98.9
106.7
109.7
108.1
105.8
110.6
96.7
120.3
96.9
98.8
106.4
109.5
108.3
106.0
110.1
96.8
118.2
96.7
98.6
106.3
109.3
108.3
106.1
110.0
97.0
117.5
96.7
98.5
106.0
109.0
107.6
105.6
109.8
97.4
117.4
96.4
98.3
105.6
108.6
107.1
105.2
109.4
97.1
115.4
96.2
98.0
105.4
108.3
106.5
104.6
109.3
97.2
114.0
96.1
97.8
105.3
108.0
106.2
104.3
109.1
97.4
114.8
96.1
97.6
106.5
109.7
108.5
106.3
110.3
97.2
117.8
96.8
98.8
105.1
107.2
105.8
104.4
108.0
99.0
120.8
96.9
97.9
Services less rent10 73________ _____ ____
Household services less rent70________
Transportation services______________
Medical care services_________________
Other services 70 76_________ . . . _ .
128.8
125.1
126.9
140.6
129.1
128.3
124.9
126.5
139.4
128.9
127.7
124.2
126.1
138.6
128.5
127.1
123.5
125.9
137.4
128.2
126.5
123.0
125.5
136.2
127.5
125.9
122.4
125.3
134.7
127.1
125.5
122.1
125.0
133.9
126.7
124.8
121.7
123.2
133.0
126.4
124.1
120.9
123.0
132.1
125.9
123.6
120.2
123.0
131.4
125.5
122.5
118.5
122.6
130.8
125.0
122.0
118.1
122.6
129.9
124.1
121.8
117.9
122.5
129.5
123.8
125.0
121.5
124.3
133.9
126.5
120.0
117.0
119.3
127.1
121.8
Health and recreation_______________ ..
Medical care. ______________________
Personal care _________________ ____
Reading and recreation__________ ____
Other goods and services 8_____ _ ____
7 The CPI measures the average change in prices of goods and services
purchased by urban wage-earner and clerical-worker families. Beginning
January 1964, the index structure has been revised to reflect buying patterns of
wage earners and clerical workers in the 1960’s. The indexes shown here are
based on expenditures of all urban wage-earner and clerical-worker consumers,
including single workers living alone, as well as families of two or more
persons.
2 Includes eggs, fats and oils, sugar and sweets, nonalcoholic beverages, and
prepared and partially prepared foods.
3 Also includes hotel and motel room rates not shown separately.
4 Includes home purchase, mortgage interest, taxes, insurance, and main
tenance and repairs.
5 Also includes telephone, water, and sewerage service not shown separately.
6 Called “Solid and petroleum fuels” prior to 1964.
7 Includes housefurnishings and housekeeping supplies and services.
8 Includes dry cleaning and laundry of apparel, infants’ wear, sewing
materials, jewelry, and miscellaneous apparel, not shown separately.
8 Includes tobacco, alcoholic beverages, and funeral, legal, and bank
service charges.
10 Recalculated group—indexes prior to January 1964 have been recomputed.
11 Includes foods, paint, furnace filters, shrubbery, fuel oil, coal, household
textiles, housekeeping supplies, apparel, gasoline and motor oil, drugs and
https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
pharmaceuticals, toilet goods, nondurable recreational goods, newspapers,
magazines, books, tobacco, and alcoholic beverages.
72 Includes home purchase, which was classified under services prior to
1964, building materials, furniture and bedding, floor coverings, household
appliances, dinnerware, tableware, cleaning equipment, power tools, lamps,
Venetian blinds, hardware, automobiles, tires, radios, television sets, tape
recorders, durable toys, and sports equipment.
13 Excludes home purchase costs which were classified under this heading
prior to 1964.
74 Includes rent, mortgage interest, taxes and insurance on real property,
home maintenance and repair services, gas, electricity, telephone, water,
sewerage service, household help, postage, laundry and dry cleaning, furni
ture and apparel repair and upkeep, moving, auto repairs, auto insurance,
registration and license fees, parking and garage rent, local transit, taxicab,
airplane, train, and bus fares, professional medical services, hospital services,
health insurance, barber and beauty shop services, movies, fees for sports,
television repairs, and funeral, bank, and legal services.
15 Called “ Durables less cars” prior to 1964. Does not include auto parts,
durable toys, and sports equipment.
'* Includes the services components of apparel, personal care, reading and
recreation, and other goods and services. Not comparable with series pub
lished prior to 1964.
D.—CONSUMER AND WHOLESALE PRICES
111
T able D-2. Consumer Price Index 1—U.S. city average for urban wage earners and clerical workers,
selected groups, subgroups, and special groups of items, seasonally adjusted 2
[1957-59 = 100 unless otherwise specified]
1966
1967
Group
Jan.
Dec.3 Nov.3 Oct.3 Sept.
Aug.
July
June
May
Apr.
Mar.
Feb.
Jan.
Food_____ _ __________ - - ____ -- - ------------- -Food at home___
__
___
___ ___
Meats, poultry, and fish... _ ____ - . . . Dairy products__ ___ - ___ ____- Fruits and vegetables_____ - . _- - - ____
Other foods at home____________________ _______
114.9
112.5
110.4
115.8
118.5
104.4
115.3
113.1
111.3
115.9
117.6
104.9
115.3
113.4
111.5
116.1
119.6
104.1
115.8
114.0
112.8
116.5
120.9
104.5
115.3
113.7
112.4
115.8
121.0
103.8
115.5
113.9
112.9
114.9
121.4
105.1
113.2
111.3
114.1
111.6
113.9
102.9
114.0
112.4
115.9
110.7
115.8
102.9
114.0
112.6
116.0
110.2
115.3
104.0
114.3
113.2
117.1
109.4
117.7
104.5
114.2
112.9
117.7
108.0
117.4
104.4
113.1
111.8
115.7
106.7
117.7
103.3
111.6
110. 0
112.9
105.9
113.9
102.1
Fuel and utilities 4__________ ______________ ____
Fuel oil and coal5______________ ______________
108.2
108.3
108.0
108.3
108.1
108.3
108.0
108.5
108.2
108.8
108.4
109.2
108.4
109.3
108.4
109.2
108.5
109.5
108.2
107.7
106.3
106.9
106.3
106.5
106.0
106.6
Apparel and upkeep A __ __ ------- ______ . . _
Men’s and boys’. ............ . ....... _ --------------------- Women’s and girls’_________________ . -------------Footwear_____ . . ________________ _____ ___ ..
111.9
111.9
107.5
123.0
111.7
111.9
107.1
122.5
111.3
111.7
107.5
122.3
110.8
111.1
106.3
122.0
110.5
111.0
105.8
121.3
109.6
110.2
104.5
120.6
109.6
109.9
105.1
120.2
109.5
110.2
105.0
119.9
109.4
109.9
105.4
119.0
108.8
109.7
104.5
118.1
108.5
109.4
104.4
117.0
108.0
109.0
103.8
116.3
107.8
109.0
103.6
115.6
Transportation_________________ - --------- ------------Private----------- ------- ----------------------------- --------
113.2
111.3
113.3
111.4
114.0
112.0
114.1
112.0
113.5
111.5
113.5
111.6
113.4
111.4
112.3
110.8
112.0
110.5
112.3
110.8
111.8
110.5
111.4
110.0
110.8
109.2
Special groups:
Commodities 7________________ __________________ - 110.1
Nondurables---_____
- --------------------- 112.9
Durables78--- _ --_ _____ _____ - - - - 102.7
110.1
113.1
102.9
110.1
112.9
103.1
110.2
113.0
103.3
109.9
112.8
102.9
109.8
112.4
103.2
109.1
111.4
103.1
108.9
111.5
102.6
109.0
111.6
102.5
109.0
111.6
102.3
108.6
111.4
102.1
108.1
110.7
101.9
107.5
109.8
101.9
Commodities less food 7_. _ - ____
-- _
Nondurables less food - _____ - - - - _______
Apparel commodities___ _________ ___
Apparel commodities less footwear.. _
New cars__________________ _______ _____
Used cars........ ...... ..............
...
. ___
Housefurnishings__
..
___ _ ..
107.4
111.1
110.5
108.0
97.5
114.0
100.0
107.4
111.0
110.0
107.6
97.4
118.0
99.8
107.3
110.6
109.5
107.2
97.9
119.6
99.5
107.0
110.3
109.5
107.1
96.2
118.7
99.3
106.9
109.8
108.4
106.0
97.1
120.8
99.2
106.8
109.9
108.3
106.1
97.9
118.6
98.9
106.5
109.6
108.4
106.2
97.4
116.8
98.4
106.4
109.4
108.4
106.3
97.4
117.6
98.4
106.0
109.1
107.8
105.9
97.4
118.2
98.0
105.7
108.8
107.4
105. 6
96.9
117.6
97.8
105.6
108.6
107.0
105.2
96.8
117.3
97.9
105.4
108.1
106.8
104.9
96.6
116.5
97.9
-- -- - ___ _
__.
______
___
107.4
111.1
110.8
108.4
96.9
115.1
100.0
1See footnote 1, table D -l.
2Beginning January 1966, seasonally adjusted national indexes were com
puted for selected groups, subgroups, and special groups where there is a
significant seasonal pattern of price change. Previously published indexes
for the year 1965 have been adjusted. No seasonally adjusted indexes will be
shown for any of the individual metropolitan areas for which separate indexes
are published. Previously, the Bureau of Labor Statistics has made
available only seasonal factors, rather than seasonally adjusted indexes (e.g.,
Department of Labor Bulletin 1366, Seasonal Factors, Consumer Price Index:
Selected Series). The factors currently used were derived by the BLS
https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
Seasonal Factor Method using data for 1956-66. These factors will be up
dated at the end of each calendar year. A detailed description of the BLS
Seasonal Factor Method is available upon request.
3Recalculated indexes, based on updated seasonal factors.
4See footnote 5, table D -l.
5See footnote 6, table D -l.
6See footnote 8, table D -l.
7See footnote 10, table D -l.
8See footnote 12, table D -l.
MONTHLY LABOR REVIEW, MARCH 1967
112
T able
D-3.
Consumer Price Index—U.S. and selected areas for urban wage earners and clerical
workers 1
[1957-59=100 unless otherwise specified]
1966
1967
Annual
average
Area2
Jan.
Dec.
Nov.
Oct.
Sept.
Aug.
July
June
May
Apr.
Mar.
Feb.
Jan.
194749=100
1965
1964
Jan.
1967
All items
U.S. city average3 ---- -------------- 114.7
114.7
114.6
114.5
114.1
113.8
113.3
112.9
112.6
112.5
112.0
111.6
111.0
109.9
108.1
140.7
Atlanta, Ga-----------------------------(4)
Baltimore, Md._ ______ 0)
Boston, Mass_____ ___ ______ 118.6
Buffalo, N.Y. (Nov. 1963 = 100)___
(4)
Chicago, 111.-Northwestern Ind___ 111.8
Cincinnati, Ohio-Kentucky_____
(4)
113.3
114.5
(4)
(4)
112.2
111.2
(4)
(4)
(4)
108.0
111.9
(4)
(4)
(4)
118.5
(4)
112.0
(4)
112.8
114.3
(4)
(4)
111.9
111.7
(4)
(4)
(4)
107.7
111.4
(4)
«
(4)
117.1
(4)
110.5
(4)
111.1
113.4
(4)
(4)
110.6
110.2
(4)
(4)
(4)
106.6
110.2
(4)
(4)
(4)
116.8
(4)
109.9
(4)
110.3
112. 5
(4)
(4)
109.9
109.1
(4)
(4)
(4)
105.8
109.3
(4)
(4)
(4)
113.9
(4)
108.6
(4)
108.1
109.6
113.2
103.5
107.6
107.2
106.7
107.9
111.1
101.1
106.1
(4)
(4)
146.9
Cleveland, Ohio_____ _____ ___
(4)
Dallas, Tex. (Nov. 1963=100) ___
(4)
Detroit, Mich___ ______ ..
. _ 113.3
Honolulu, Hawaii (Dec. 1963 = 100). (4)
113.0
- _____
Houston, Tex__
Kansas City, Mo.-Kansas... . . . .
(4)
(4)
(4)
113.3
106.6
(4)
117.3
110.9
106. 5
112.7
(4)
(4)
(4)
(4)
(4)
112.6
(4)
112.4
(4)
(4)
(4)
112.1
105.6
(4)
117.1
110.2
105.6
111.9
(4)
(4)
(4)
(4)
(4)
111.3
(4)
111.6
(4)
(4)
(4)
111. 2
104.6
(4)
116.5
109.7
104.6
110.6
(4)
(4)
(4)
(4)
(4)
109.6
104.4
(4)
115.3
108.1
103.4
108.8
(4)
(4)
(4)
(4)
(4)
108.4
(4)
110.0
(4)
106.9
101. 4
106.4
102.1
108.5
113.3
115.8
(4)
113.4
117.5
115.0
114.0
116.3
111.6
(4)
117. 7
115.0
(4)
(4)
115.9
(4)
113.4
117.8
115.0
114.1
117.1
116.3
(4)
(4)
117.6
115.3
(4)
(4)
114.6
111.5
(4)
116.7
114.5
(4)
(4)
115.0
(4)
112.0
116.3
113.7
112.8
115.5
114.5
(4)
(4)
115.3
113.4
(4)
(4)
114.2
110.1
(4)
115.2
113.1
(4)
(4)
II 4.7
113.7
(4)
(4)
114.8
112.7
(4)
(4)
113.4
109.5
(4)
114.2
112.4
(4)
(4)
112.8
(4)
110.5
113.4
111.6
111. 0
116.6
115.7
(4)
(4)'
117.3
114.7
(4)
(4)
(4)
(4)
110.2
(4)
110.9
(4)
114.3
(4)
111.8
115.2
113.2
113.0
112.9
112.5
108.2
109.5
112.2
110.6
110.2
111.8
109.0
(«)
(4)
(4)
(4)
(4)
(4)
114.9
(4)
117.2
(4)
(4)
(4)
(4)
(4)
(4)
(4)
(4)
(4)
114.7
(4)
116.4
(4)
(4)
(4)
(4)
102.0
(4)
(4)
(4)
(4)
(4)
(")
(4)
113.6
(4)
115.2
(4)
(4)
(4)
(4)
101.6
(4)
(4)
(4)
(4)
(4)
(4)
(4)
112.1
(4)
114.9
(4)
(4)
(4)
(4)
101.2
(4)
113. .9
112.6
111.9
(4)
(4)
(4)
(4)
(4)
(4)
109.9
100.1
112.7
108.1
110.6
111.0
109.6
109.7
108.1
106.4
Los Angeles-Long Beach, Calif___
Milwaukee, Wis__ . _______ _ .
Minneapolis-St. Paul, Minn_____
NewYork,N.Y.-Northeastern N.J.
Philadelphia, Pa.-N.J____ ______
Pittsburgh, Pa________ _____ ..
Portland, Oreg.-Wash.5. ______ .
St. Louis, Mo.-Ill______________
San Diego, Calif. (Feb. 1965 = 100)...
San Francisco-Oakland, Calif... .
Scranton, Pa.5_____ ____________
Seattle, Wash______ ______ . .
Washington, D.C.-Md.-Va______
(4)
103.5
(4)
116.2
115.6
114.6
115.5
114.5
114.0
II 4.I
113.7
112.8
111.0
106.3
141.0
(4)
105.2
100.1
104.0
100.3
139.7
(4)
107.2
109.8
139.2
(4)
110.2
144.4
(4)
140.3
141.6
141. 2
140.4
106.0
108.0
110.4
108.8
108.5
109.3
I45.I
(4)
(4)
(*)
(4)
(•)
(4)
Food
U.S. city average3--------------- ------
114.7
114.8
114.8
115.6
115.6
115.8
114.3
113.9
113.5
114.0
113.9
113.1
111.4
108.8
Atlanta, Ga ..
Baltimore, Md. . .
Boston, Mass
Buffalo, N.Y. (Nov. 1963 = 100) . .
Chicago, Ill.-Northwestern Ind . .
Cincinnati, Ohio-Kentucky______
114.1
115.3
119.0
109.7
114.1
111.5
113.8
116. 0
118. 8
109.3
114.7
111.7
114.0
115.9
118. 5
109. 7
114.7
112.4
114.7
116.7
119.3
109.7
115.4
113.6
114.2
117.9
119.3
109.9
116.3
113.4
114.0
117.4
118.9
110.5
116.8
113.9
112.5
116.2
117.0
108.8
114.1
112.1
112.4
115.9
115.7
108.5
114.3
111.6
112. 0
115.3
115.3
108.0
113.6
110.7
112.8
116.3
116.6
109.2
114.2
111.2
112.4
115.5
116.0
108.0
115.1
110.9
111.9
115.5
115.4
108.2
114.2
110. 9
110.5
112.7
113.6
106.0
112.0
108.9
107.4 104.8
109.3 6106. 6
112. 5 109.8
104.1 101.5
108.8 106.1
106. 2 IO4.5
Cleveland, Ohio__ . . . .
__
Dallas, Tex. (Nov. 1963=100)
Detroit, Mich___ .
Honolulu, Hawaii (Dec. 1963=100).
Houston, Tex ...
Kansas City, M o.-K ansas..__
110.9
110.5
113.0
108.1
116.6
118.0
111.5
110.9
113.1
108.0
116.9
117.8
111.8
111.0
113.1
108.7
116.6
117. 5
112.1
111. 0
113.5
108.4
117.0
118.7
112.4
111.1
113.7
107.3
117.0
119.0
113.1
111. 6
114. 4
106.6
117.0
118.1
111.1
110.1
112.8
106.5
115.8
117.1
111.1
109.4
112.0
106.6
114.4
116.9
110. 0
109.4
111.5
106.2
114.1
116.0
110.3
110.2
111.6
106.6
114.8
116.5
110.1
109. 0
111.3
106.7
114.3
116.7
109.8
108. 6
110.0
106.4
113.6
116.4
106.9
107.6
108.9
106.2
113.2
115.3
104.8
103.9
105.0
103.5
109. 2
111.3
Los Angeles-Long Beach, Calif. .
Milwaukee, Wis___
Minneapolis-St. Paul, Minn_
New York, N.Y.-Northeastern N.J.
Philadelphia, Pa.-N.J_______ . _
Pittsburgh, Pa.
Portland, Oreg.-Wash.5...... . . ..
113.7
114. 0
113.7
112.4
113.4
112.3
115.1
113.2
111.6
111.6
114.5
112.9
111.4
112.4
115.0
113.4
112.8
112.7
115.1
112.8
111.9
112.9
112.6
111.3
114.2
111.9
111.7
112.1
113.4
116.3
114.5
112.8
113. 0
113.5
111.7
114.4
112.5
111.5
113.5
114.2
116.5
114.5
112.8
113.8
116.2
113.3
116.4
114.9
112.8
112.8
112.9
115.3
114.0
111.2
113.7
114.3
112.6
115.7
113.5
111.4
114.2
113.0
115.5
113.7
111.3
110.7
107.7
107.1
109.8
107.2
107.5
119.3
119.2
118.1
117.2
116.7
114.4
113.6
113.6
117. 0
106.3
113.9
117.1
114.4
118.6
106.6
115.1
114.7
114.6
114.3
114.7
114. 7
113.5
114.1
114.3
114.3
114.1
114.4
113.6
St. Louis, Mo.-Ul . .
San Diego, Calif. (Feb. 1965=100)
San Francisco-Oakland, Calif
Scranton, Pa.5. .
Seattle, W ash..
__
Washington, D.C.-Md.-Va_____
115.7
112.6
114.0
114.7
115.6
113.1
116.0
113.2
115.6
116.1
115.6
119.7
119.4
115.0
114.7
119.8
106. 8
114.2
113. 8
115.1
115.1
113.7
115.2
115.6
US. 7
114.9
115.8
•See footnote 1, table D -l. Indexes measure time-to-time changes in
prices. They do not indicate whether it costs more to live in one area than in
another.
2 The areas listed include not only the central city but the entire urban
portion of the Standard Metropolitan Statistical Area, as defined for the 1960
Census of Population; except that the Standard Consolidated Area is used
for New York and Chicago.
https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
II 4.7
112.6
115.5
112.5
II 4.7
112.1
II 4.O
113.1
114.0
114.2
113. 4
112. 8
113.7
113.8
113.0
116.3
106. 6
113.8
112.1
112.9
113.2
110.3
112.1
109.5
109.7
111.8
114.4
109.5
112.9
111.5
102. 7
no. 2
111.5
110.6
110.3
108.4
110.8
107.7
102.1
100. 5
101.9
100.8
105.7
107.2
108.2
105.0
IO4.6
108.4
105.2
104.8
107.1
107.6
107.7
105.6
108.7
106.0
3 Average of 56 “cities” (metropolitan areas and nonmetropolitan urban
places) beginning January 1966.
4 All items indexes are computed monthly for 5 areas and once every 3
months on a rotating cycle for other areas.
5 Old series.
* 10-month average.
D.—CONSUMER AND WHOLESALE PRICES
T able
D-4.
113
Indexes of wholesale prices,1 by group and subgroup of commodities
[1957-59=100, unless otherwise specified]3
1967
Annual
average
1966
Commodity group
Jan.3
Dec.
All commodities..................... .....................
106.2
105.9
Farm products and processed foods______
107.2
106.7
Farm products_______ _____________
Fresh and dried fruits and vegetables..
Grains. . . . ____________ ________
Livestock and live poultry ________
Plant and animal fibers. ___ _____
Fluid milk_______________ ________
Eggs-------------------------------------------Hay, hayseeds, and oilseeds____ _ . .
Other farm products_______________
Processed foods_____ ______________
Cereal and bakery products . _. . . . .
Meats, poultry, and fish.. _ . . . .
Dairy products and ice cream __ __
Canned and frozen fruits and vege
tables__ ______________________
Sugar and confectionery. . _________
Packaged beverage materials... ____
Animal fats and oils. .. _______ ..
Crude vegetable oils_______________
Refined vegetable oils . .. ___ _ .
Vegetable oil end products_____ _____
Miscellaneous processed foods __ _ ...
All commodities except farm products____
All commodities except farm and foods___
Textile products and apparel__________
Cotton products_______________ ..
Wool products_______
__________
Manmade fiber textile products______
Silk products______________________
Apparel_________________________
Miscellaneous textile products_______
Hides, skins, leather, and leather prod
ucts____ ____________________ ._
Hides and skins___________________
Leather . . . ___________________ .
Footwear__________________ .
Other leather products____ _______
Fuel and related products, and power__
Coal. __ ___________ ____ ____
Coke______________________ _ _ .
Gas fuels 5
Electric power 8________ . . . ___
Petroleum products, refined.. ______
Chemicals and allied products________
Industrial chemicals___
Prepared paint______ _____ . . .
Paint materials. _ ..
... .
Drugs and pharmaceuticals_______ ..
Fats and oils inedible. . ________ .
Mixed fertilizer... . ______
Fertilizer materials_________________
Other chemicals and allied products__
Rubber and rubber products__________
Crude rubber _ .
_ ____
Tires and tubes.. ___
_ ...
Miscellaneous rubber products.............
Lumber and wood products___________
Lumber______ __ ______ . _
Millwork _ _. _____ _
Plywood_____________________
Pulp, paper, and allied products. ____
Woodpulp___________________
Wastepaper... . . . _ _____ _ _
Paper_______ ________ .
Paperboard
..
.
Converted paper and paperboard prod
ucts__________ ____
Building paper and board_________ .
102.8 101.8
101.9 101.3
100.4 101.5
95.5
100.2
70.9
71.0
123.6 <124.0
99.4 109.0
123.8 124.5
100.5 100.5
110.7 110.6
117.6 118.0
105.6 104.4
122.1 <122.3
102.5
104.2
98.0
96.9
70.9
124.4
121.8
122.9
98.7
110.7
118.7
104.2
122.6
See footnotes at end of table.
https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
Nov.
Oct.
Sept.
Aug.
July
105.9
106.2
106.8
106.8
107.1
108.8
111.5
111.3
104.4
97.9
98.9
103.8
71.4
125.8
114.7
121.5
100.8
112.4
118.7
108.1
124.5
108.7
110.4
104.6
106.7
71.7
125.4
128.0
126.3
102.3
113.8
118.9
112.2
124.2
105.7
109.9
107.7
108.1
97.7
105.6
109.4
72.3
124.1
108.6
139.2
102.5
113.8
118.9
111.1
124.0
107.8
107.0
103.1
107.1
90.5
119.3
98.5
135.2
101.3
111.7
115.5
110.0
119.8
102.3
110.9
93.5
120.9
127.5
118.4
108.7
114.1
106.6
105.2
102.4
103.3
106.6
89.6
156.7
105.2
121.2
Feb.
Jan.
1965
1964
105.6
105.5
105.4
105.4
104.6
102.5
100.5
107.9
108.7
109.4
109.8
107.7
102.1
98.0
104.2
99.7
94.9
108.5
90.3
112.6
90.9
122.6
101.1
110.6
114.0
109.9
116.5
104.5
103.3
93.6
110.4
90.3
111.0
86.9
120.2
101.4
110.5
113.0
110.9
114.9
106.4
111.0
91.2
112.4
89.9
111.9
101.8
116.9
102.5
110.6
112.6
110.9
114.8
106.8
101.7
90.8
114.2
89.7
112.7
118.5
115.6
102.1
111.5
112.2
113.3
115.0
107.4
98.0
92.9
116.7
89.5
111.5
116.3
116.6
102.3
111.8
112.1
114.9
113.0
104.5
97.5
92.4
112.6
89.6
108.4
99.8
113.5
102.5
110.3
111.8
112.7
110.9
98.4
101.8
89.6
98.9
91.1
103.5
93.5
112.9
97.6
105.1
109.0
101.0
108.5
94.3
103.2
94.1
84.7
98.3
102.0
90.8
110.1
98. 6
101.0
107.8
90.8
107.8
104.5
109.8
93.5
106.3
113.0
109.8
103.8
114.0
106.2
105.2
102.4
103.0
106.7
90.1
152.1
105.0
123.3
104.9
109.4
93.5
105.8
105.6
104.7
101.9
112.5
105.8
104.9
102.2
102.8
106.5
90.0
143.8
104.8
124.1
105.4
109.3
93.5
107.7
105.6
108.5
101.9
113.1
105.7
104.7
102.2
102.6
106.4
89.9
140.9
104.9
124.7
104.8
109.3
93.5
115.2
106.7
111.3
102.5
114.0
105.3
104.3
102.2
102.3
106.3
90.5
151.6
104.7
125.1
104.8
109.7
93.5
121.8
104.3
112.0
103.0
114.4
105.2
104.0
102.1
101.8
106.0
90.8
151.4
104.7
126.3
105.2
110.1
93.5
126.2
107.6
116.0
102.5
114.1
105.1
103.8
102.0
101.5
105.8
91.0
155.3
104.7
124.2
104.7
109.4
93.5
125.8
106.5
116.1
99.5
114.0
104.6
103.5
101.9
101.0
105.9
91.3
147.6
104.6
124.7
102.1
109.0
93.8
113.4
100.9
97.0
101.2
113.6
102.9
102.5
101.8
100.2
104.3
95.0
134.3
103.7
123.0
104.8
111.8
96.9
95.4
84.5
82.2
89.7
108.9
101.2
101.2
101.2
99.6
103.0
95.8
117.3
102.8
117.9
119.9 121.2
134.2 141.2
121.8 124.9
119.1 119.1
115.1 116.0
102.2 102.0
99.6
98.5
112.0 112.0
129.2 128.9
100.3 100.3
101.0 100.7
97.9
98.0
95.8
95.8
106.8 106.8
90.5
90.3
94.8
94.7
103.8 105.5
105.8 105.4
102.5 102.5
101. 0 100.7
95.1
94.7
88.8
87.9
93.9
93.4
99.0
99.0
105.9 106.2
109.5 110.2
110.9 110.9
90.0
89.2
103.1 103. 2
98.0
98.0
102.9 106.7
108.4 108.4
97. 2
97.2
122.7
156.4
126.0
119.0
116.6
101.4
97.6
112.0
128.3
100.3
99.9
97.9
95.9
106.8
90.4
94.5
105.3
105.5
104.2
100.3
95.1
89.0
93.9
99.0
106.6
110.5
110.7
91.5
103.2
98.0
113.2
108.2
97.2
122.9 122.8
161.0 163.0
126.6 125.1
118.9 118.9
115.7 115.4
101.5 100.4
97.2
96.9
109.4 107.3
128.5 128.3
100.2 100.2
100.2
98.4
97.6
97.7
95.8
96.0
106.8 106.2
89.9
90.2
94.1
94.3
101.6 102.5
105.5 105.5
104.8 106.6
100.0 100.0
95.4
95.4
89.5
90.0
94.4
94.4
98.9
98.7
107.7 109.6
112.0 113.2
110.6 110.4
92.2 100.3
103.0 102.7
98.0
98.0
112.7 112.0
108.0 107.1
97.2
97.2
120.6
148.8
122.4
118. 2
114.4
100.0
94.9
107.3
129.2
100.3
97.7
97.6
95.6
106.2
90.4
94.1
104.0
105.8
105.5
100.0
95.4
90.0
94.4
98.7
108.4
110.8
109.6
102.4
102.3
98.0
110.3
106.0
97.1
118.7 117.8 116.0
147.8 152.8 140.0
123.3 118.0 116.6
115.4 115.0 114.6
112.5 111.6 110.3
99.9 100.3 100.5
98.1
97.5
98.2
107.3 107.3 107.3
128.2 128.9 128.2
100.4 100.4 100.4
97.2
98.3
97.8
97.6
97.6
97.6
95.2
95.2
95.1
105.9 105.9 105.9
89.5
89.8
89.5
94.4
94.4
94.5
106.4 110.0 113.1
105.4 105.3 105.4
104.7 104. 7 103.8
100.2 100.2 100.2
94.3
94.1
93.7
91.2
90.0
91.0
91.1
91.1
91.1
98.7
97.9
98.5
105.6 103.7 102.8
107.2 105.6 104.3
109.3 108.4 107.9
97.7
94.0
93.9
101.8 101.3 101.2
98.0
98.0
98.0
108.7 105.5 105.8
105.4 105.4 105.2
96.7
97. 0 96.7
109.2
111.2
108.1
110.7
106.1
98.9
96.5
107.3
124.1
100.8
95.9
97.4
95.0
105.4
89.8
94.4
112.7
105.1
103.5
99.8
92.9
90.0
90.0
97.1
101.1
101.9
107.7
92.3
99.9
98.1
99.4
104.1
96.4
104.6
87.5
102.9
108.5
103.1
97.1
96.9
106.3
121.3
101.1
92. 7
96. 7
94.2
104.7
91.0
95.0
96.8
103.9
100.1
99.4
92.5
90.6
89.0
96.9
100.6
100.7
108.5
92.3
99.0
96.1
92.4
103.6
96. 4
103.0 103.0 102.8
93.0 1 92.7 1 92.8
102.7
92.7
102.4
92.4
99.3
92.7
98.3
94.0
105.7 103.7
111.6 111.4
90.5 90.5
108.9 115.9
100.1 112.4
97.0 107.6
108.2 110.4
115.1 114.2
106.4 106.6
105.3 105.2
102.2 102.2
103.3 103.1
105.6 106.1
88.1 <88.6
161.1 158.6
105.3 105.1
118.8 120.3
117.6
110.6
116.9
120.7
113.7
102.2
102.4
112.0
129.2
100.8
100.3
98.4
96.6
108.7
90.6
94.5
94.2
106.4
106.8
101.4
95.5
87.5
94.8
99.7
102.3
104.3
110.3
87.2
103.1
98.0
82.6
108.5
97.3
<117.3 117.5
<109.2 114.3
116.2 114.1
120.3 120.1
<114.2 115.1
*102.0 102.7
<102.4 101.9
112.0 112.0
<127.4 130. 6
<100.8 100.3
100.2 101.3
98.2
98.0
96.4
96.0
<108. 5 107.8
90.6
90.4
94.7
95.0
95.1
91.6
<105.5 105.9
105.0 105.0
101.2 101.2
95.0
95.0
87.6
87.9
93.9
93.9
99.3
99.2
102.5 103.0
104.5 105.6
<110.3 110.3
<87.4
86.9
103.0 103.0
98.0
98.0
92.7
90.5
108.5 108.5
97.2
97.2
118.7
120.8
117.5
120.1
115.6
102.6
100.6
112.0
130.7
100.2
101.3
97.9
95.9
107.3
90.2
95.0
94. 5
106.1
103.7
101.2
94.6
87.4
93.4
98.9
104.8
108.0
110.8
88.1
103.1
98. 0
98.8
108.4
97.2
103.1
93.1
106.4
Mar.
<105.8 105.9
112.6 112.1
90.4
<90.4
97.5 105.6
99.2
98.1
101.2 102.2
<106.3 106.8
113.7 114.6
106.3 106.3
105.5 105.5
<101.8 102.1
102.7 103.0
<104.8 105.1
*86.9 <87.7
163.2 161.1
<105.4 105.5
119.7 119.1
103.2
92.7
May
Apr.
106.2
113.1
90.4
95.6
94.2
92.7
106.3
112.3
106.6
105.8
102.0
102.5
104.5
87.1
166.1
105.9
121.2
103.7
92.5
June
102.2 102.2
92.4 1 92.4
101.6
92.5
100.9
92.5
100.8
92.5
114
MONTHLY LABOR REVIEW, MARCH 1967
T able
D-4.
Indexes of wholesale prices,1 by group and subgroup of commodities—Continued
[1957-59=100, unless otherwise specified]2
1967
1966
Annual
average
Commodity group
Dec.
Nov.
Oct.
Sept.
Aug.
July
June
May
Apr.
Mar.
Feb.
Jan.
1965
1964
109.4 4109. 0
103.0 4102. 9
121.8 120.5
111.8 110.2
112.0 4111. 9
110.5 110.5
93.4
92.4
104.6 104.9
109.0
102.8
121.0
110.2
111.5
110.5
93.4
104.8
108.6
102.5
120.3
110.1
110.9
110.6
93.3
104.6
108.4
102.5
119.9
110.1
110.3
110.6
92.9
104.4
108.5
102.7
120.4
110.1
110.1
110.0
92.5
104.2
108.8
102.2
122.9
110.1
109.8
110.0
92.9
104.2
108.7
102.0
123.2
110.1
109.8
108.5
92.5
104.1
108.4
101.8
122.5
110.1
109.6
107.9
92.1
103.8
108.2
102.0
122.1
110.0
108.4
107.1
92.1
103.7
108.0
102.3
120.8
109.8
108.3
105.7
91.8
103.1
107.5
102.2
119.5
109.8
107.4
104.9
91.7
102.6
107.0
102.0
118.3
109.8
107.3
104.8
91.5
102.3
105.7
101.4
115.2
107.6
106.0
103.1
91.7
101.2
102.8
100.5
105.9
105.5
104.8
100.9
92.0
99.3
113.8 113.2
108.3 4108.0
121.2 4120.8
113.1
107.7
120.4
112.7
107.1
118.5
112.4
106.3
118.2
112.3
106.2
118.3
111.2
106.0
118.5
111.2
105.9
118.4
110.9
105.8
118.2
110.9
105.2
118.1
110.9
105.0
118.0
110.5
104.7
117.8
110.0
104.4
117.3
109.4
103.7
115.1
108.5
102.9
112.9
121.1 4121.0
120.6
119.8
119.4
118.9
118.9
118.9
118.9
118.5
117.9
117.5
116.9
115.3
112.4
126.4
126.3
126.0
125.6
125.0
124.0
123.5
123.5
122.5
121.0
121.0
120.8
119.6
116.9
112.6
112.9
108.1
112.4
108.1
112.2
107.8
111.8
107.4
111.1
106.8
110.6
106.6
110.0
106.5
109.8
106.0
109.3
105.9
108.5
105.7
107.3
105.8
106.8
105.6
106.8
105.4
105.1
105.2
104.4
104.5
114.8 114.3
102.0 4101. 5
101.7 101.7
114.1
100.7
101.7
113.9
99.5
101.7
113.2
99.2
100.1
112.9
99.1
100.5
112.2
99.0
100.7
111.8
98.8
100.7
110.8
98.9
100.9
110.0
98.4
100.2
109.9
98.2
100.3
109.4
97.8
100.4
109.1
97.0
100.5
108.0
96.8
100.7
105.9
96.8
100.5
102.7
100.5
112.4
108.7
94.6
89.2
4102. 7
100.4
4111.8
4108.7
4 96.2
89.2
101.0
100.3
111.5
108.0
96.6
89.2
101.0
99.7
110.3
107.3
96.6
88.9
101.0
99.2
109.8
106.0
96.6
88.7
101.0
99.1
109.4
105.8
96.6
88.8
101.0
99.0
109.1
105.8
96.8
89.1
101.0
98.9
108.9
105.3
97.1
89.4
101.0
98.9
108.9
105.3
97.5
89.4
101.0
98.6
108.3
104.1
97.5
89.3
101.0
98.4
107.2
104.1
97.5
89.1
101.0
98.4
107.2
104.1
97.7
89.0
101.0
98.3
107.0
104.1
97.7
89.0
100.9
98.0
106.2
103.7
97.7
89.2
100.5
98.5
105.3
103.2
99.4
91.3
83.7
110.3
103.7
103.3
105.2
104.4
107.4
103.5
95.7
101.3
110.3
110.3
101.4
132.3
121.2
83.8
109.8
4103. 3
103.3
4104. 3
4103.9
4107. 0
103.5
95.7
101.3
4110. 3
110.3
4101.4
132.2
120.5
83.8
83.8
83.3
109.6 4109.5 4108. 1
103.3 103.2 103.0
103.3 102.1 100.6
104.2 104.3 103.9
103.5 103.5 103.6
107.1 106.9 106.7
103.5 102.7 102.7
97.6
97.6
97.6
101.3 102.0 101. 8
110.1 110.1 110.1
110.2 110.3 110.3
101.0 101.0 101.0
132.2 132.2 132.2
118.5 118.2 120.4
83.1
107.8
102.7
99.7
103.8
103.3
106.7
102.7
97.6
101.8
110.1
110.3
101.0
132.2
121.1
83.5
107.8
102.7
100.3
103.7
103.1
106.5
102.7
97.6
101.7
110.0
110.3
101.0
131.8
120.5
83.5
106.7
102.5
100.2
103.6
103.0
106.5
102.7
94.4
101.2
109.8
110.3
101.0
131.0
115.7
83.5
106.7
102.4
100.2
103.7
102.7
106.3
102.2
94.4
101.7
109.4
110.3
101.0
128.5
115.1
83.5
106.7
102.3
99.5
103.8
102.7
106.0
101.4
94.8
101.8
109.4
110.2
101.0
128.5
113.0
83.5
106.9
102.1
99.2
103.8
102.2
105.9
101.4
94.8
102.1
109.2
109.8
101.0
128.5
113.1
83.8
107.1
102.1
99.9
103.7
102.1
105.8
101.4
94.8
101.7
108.0
106.6
101.0
128.5
116.0
83.9
106.8
102.0
99.9
103.6
102.0
105.6
101.4
94.6
101.8
108.1
106.6
101.1
128.5
114.3
85.2
105.4
101.7
100.9
103.2
101.5
105.1
104.0
92.8
101.3
107.7
106.2
100.8
128.3
111.0
87.2
104.2
101.5
102.4
102.8
100.9
104.2
108.2
88.8
101.5
107.4
106.0
100.7
127.0
109.2
105.1
132.9
100.8
104.8
132.0
100.8
104.8
128.4
100.8
105.0
128.1
100.8
104.8
132.3
100.8
104.9
133.6
100.8
104.5
132.6
100.8
103.7
124.1
101.8
103.7
123.1
100.8
103.7
119.2
99.8
103.3
119.6
99.8
103.3
124.8
99.8
103.2
121.8
99.1
102.7
116.3
99.1
101.0
113.9
99.1
107.0 4106. 3
107.0 4106. 9
106.1
107.0
105.2
106.0
105.2
105.9
105.3
105.7
105.5
105.4
105.2
105.2
105.1
105.2
105.1
105.0
105.1
104.7
105.1
104.9
105.0
105.0
104.4
103.7
103.5
102.5
Jan.3
All commodities except farm and foods—
, Continued
Metals and metal products___________
--------- Iron and steel—
Nonferrous metals-------- - - ------Metal containers---- ------------- .
Hardware . . . - . . . -- --------Plumbing fixtures and brass fittings...
Heating equipment___ . -----------Fabricated structural metal products..
Fabricated nonstructural metal prod
ucts.— . . . . . . ---------------------Machinery and motive products.. ------Agricultural machinery and equipment.
Construction machinery and equip
ment__ . . . . . .
. . ----Metalworking machinery and equip
ment--------- ------------ General purpose machinery and equip
ment___ _____ . -------------------Miscellaneous machinery------- ---- ..
Special industry machinery and equip
ment 6_._ . . . . . . .
. . ...
Electrical machinery and equipment __
Motor vehicles... . . . . . . . .
Transportation equipment, railroad
. ..
rolling stock6. . ---- -Furniture and other household durables..
Household furniture_______ . ------Commercial furniture.............................
Floor coverings_______ _ . . --------Household appliances.. . . -----------Television, radio receivers, and phono
graphs______ . --------------- .. . . .
Other household durable goods____ ..
Nonmetallic mineral products___ _____
Flat glass. . . . __________
______
Concrete ingredients_______ .. .. . . .
Concrete products__
. . . . -------Structural clay products_____ . . . .
Gypsum products-------------------Asphalt roofing i ___________________
Other nonmetallic minerals____ _____
Tobacco products and bottled beverages..
Tobacco products... _ _____________
Alcoholic beverages---- -------------------Nonalcoholic beverages___
Miscellaneous products______________
Toys, sporting goods, small arms, am
munition __________ ___ . ...
Manufactured animal feeds..
Notions and accessories_____________
Jewelry, watches, and photographic
equipment... ..
______________
Other miscellaneous products____ _
1 As of January 1961, new weights reflecting 1958 values were introduced
into the index. See “Weight Revisions in the Wholesale Price Index 18901960,” Monthly Labor Review, February 1962, pp. 175-182.
2 As of January 1962, the indexes were converted from the former base of
1947-49=100 to the new base of 1957-59=100. Technical details and earlier
data on the 1957-59 base furnished upon request to the Bureau.
https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
3 Preliminary.
4 Revised.
5 January 1958=100.
6January 1961 = 100.
2 Formerly titled “prepared asphalt roofing.”
115
D._CONSUMER AND WHOLESALE PRICES
T able
D-5.
Indexes of wholesale prices for special commodity groupings 1
[1957-59=100, unless otherwise specified]2
1966
1967
Annual average
Commodity group
Jan.3 Dec. Nov. Oct. Sept. Aug. July June May Apr. Mar. Feb.
All foods______ - --- - --- - - --------------- ---All fish________________________ _______________
All commodities except farm products_________ - -Textile products, excluding hard and bast fiber products5Bituminous coal—domestic sizes-------------Refined petroleum products--------------------------------East Coast markets... --------------------- . . . Midcontinent markets . . . . . . - - - - - - -- -Gulf Coast markets . — ___ ______ _______
Pacific Coast markets.. ----- - ___
-- - Midwest markets «___ ____________ ___ - -Soaps.. - - - - - _______
-- - Synthetic detergents. ------- --------------Pharmaceutical preparations. --------------- ----------Ethical preparations2 . . . _ .- . . . . -------------Anti-infectives6_______ . .. -------------------Anti-arthritics6 .
- ___ ___
Sedatives and hypnotics 6__ _____- . . . ..
Ataractics«__________
.. ----------------Anti-spasmodics and anti-cholinergics 8_ ____
Cardiovasculars and anti-hypertensives «____
Diabetics 8
Hormones6. ____ ____
- ...
_____
Diuretics8__
....................... ......
Dermatologicals8- .
. Hematinics 8._. ___
. ...
..............
Analgesics 8_-------_____
Anti-obesity preparations 8___ _________ ..
Cough and cold preparations 8- . . . .
__ . .
.
___
Vitamins 8 _
.
Proprietary preparations 8 _ - - - - - - - - ___
Vitamins8 .- - - - - - - - - Cough and cold preparations 8____ . . ___
Laxatives and elimination aids 8. - ___Internal analgesics 8__ _ . ------- ------- ..
Tonics and alteratives8- - - - - - _ External analgesics 8 . - - - - - - - Antiseptics 6-_ . .
- ___
Antacids8_____
____
_ - ..
Lumber and wood products (excluding millwork). .
Softwood lumber____________ ------____
Pulp, paper, and allied products (excluding building
— ______
paper and board).-- ___ _
Special metals and metal products L
- --. - __ .
Steel mill products____
. - - - - - - - - - ______
Machinery and equipment
___
Agricultural machinery (including tractors)__ _ ..
Metalworking machinery. _
___ ______
All tractors...
___ ______
_ ___Industrial valves__
_______ - ------Industrial fittings... _ _ ___________ ______ - Anti-friction bearings and components___
Abrasive grinding wheels.
--------- -----Construction materials__
.
____
1 See footnote 1, table D-4.
2 See footnote 2, table D-4.
2 Preliminary.
4 Revised.
https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
Jan.
1965
1964
110.6
125.0
106.3
98.0
1C2. 0
101.3
98.1
99.5
105.1
94.4
92.7
113.8
101.2
97.5
94.0
76.0
103.7
118.3
101.4
105.6
94.9
103.8
104.1
100.0
108.7
110.6
105.8
102.9
104.9
89.4
107.5
100.3
104.4
109.6
108.4
106.0
106.9
116.3
103. 6
101.6
101. 4
111.3
131.3
106.4
98.4
101.2
101.3
98.1
98.6
105.1
96.4
92.0
113.8
101.2
97.3
93.8
76.0
103.7
118.3
101.4
105.6
94.9
103.8
104.1
100.0
108.7
110.6
105.8
102.9
101.5
89.4
107.5
100.3
104.4
109.6
108.4
103.9
106.9
116.3
103.6
103.7
103.2
114.0
131.4
106.6
98.6
99.4
101.0
98.1
100.2
104.9
90.4
93.3
113.8
101.2
97.2
93.8
76. C
103.7
118.3
101.4
105.6
94.9
103.8
104.1
100. 0
108.7
110.6
105.8
102.9
101.5
89.4
107. 0
100,3
102.3
108.9
108.4
101.1
107.5
116.3
103.6
105.1
104.6
112.4
129.5
106.6
99.0
97.4
100.7
96.4
100.2
104.5
90.4
93.3
113.8
101.2
97.0
93.7
76.0
103.7
118.3
101.4
102.3
94.9
103.8
104.1
100.0
108.7
110.6
105.8
102.9
104.9
88.1
106.8
100.3
102.3
108.9
107.9
101.1
107.5
116.3
103.6
105.8
105.2
110.9
129.7
106. 2
99.1
95. 6
99.9
96.4
100.2
102.4
90.4
93.3
113.7
100.5
96.8
94.0
77.2
103.7
118.3
101.4
102.3
94.9
103.8
104.1
100.0
108.7
110.6
105.8
102.9
104.9
88.1
105.3
100.3
102.3
108.0
105.4
103.2
107.9
111.0
103.0
106.4
105.8
109.0
127.2
105.8
98.8
94.5
100.2
96.3
100.2
104.1
87.8
93.3
113.7
99.3
96.6
93.8
77.2
100.6
118.3
101.4
102.3
94.9
103.8
104.1
100.0
108.7
110.6
105. 8
100.0
104.9
88.1
105.2
100.3
103.9
108.0
104.8
100.2
107.9
111.0
103.0
107.7
107.5
109.1
126.9
105.7
98.7
93.6
98.4
96.3
97.1
100.7
89.4
92.0
113.7
99.3
96.2
94.1
78.3
100.6
118.3
101.4
102.3
94.9
103.8
104.1
100.0
108.7
110.6
105.8
100.0
104.9
88.1
103.0
100.3
101.2
107.0
104.8
92.8
105.8
101.8
103.0
110.3
109.0
110.2
126.5
105.3
98.8
92.9
97.7
96.3
97.7
100.2
89.4
89.0
113.7
99.3
96.2
94.1
78.3
100.6
118.3
101.4
102.3
94.9
103.8
104.1
100.0
108.7
110.6
105.8
100.0
104.9
88.1
103.0
100.3
101.2
107.0
104.8
92.8
105.8
101.8
103.0
109.0
106.5
110.9
126.7
105.2
98.6
97.7
97.2
98.2
93.7
98.6
89.4
93.3
113.7
99.7
96.5
95.0
82.3
100.6
118.3
100.0
102.3
94.9
103.8
104.1
100.0
108.7
110.6
105.8
100.0
104.4
88.1
102.2
100.3
100.5
107.0
104.8
92.8
105.8
96.4
102.8
105.1
102.6
110.8
123.2
105.1
98.5
100.0
97.8
98.2
98.9
98.6
86.8
93.9
113.7
99.7
96.5
95.0
82.3
100.6
118.3
100.0
102.3
94.9
103.8
104.1
100.0
108.7
110.6
105.8
100.0
104.4
88.1
102.1
100.3
99.9
107.0
102.5
92.8
105.8
101.8
102.8
103.0
100.9
108.9
124.5
104.6
98.3
100.0
98.3
98.2
98.5
99.7
88.3
93.8
113.7
99.7
96.5
94.9
82.3
100.6
118.3
100.0
102.3
94.9
103.8
104.1
100.0
108.7
110.6
105.8
100.0
102.1
88.1
102.1
100.3
99.9
107.0
102.5
92.8
105.8
101.8
102.8
102.0
99.9
104.5
112.8
102.9
99.1
96.6
95.9
95.3
97.6
95.1
90.6
91.7
112.3
100.5
96.5
94.7
82.0
100.6
115.3
100.0
102.3
94.9
103.8
102.3
100.0
108.7
110.0
105.5
100.0
102.9
88.1
102.7
100.3
100.9
106.0
102.3
95.0
105.2
104.9
102.9
99.8
99.1
100.8
107.4
101.2
98.9
96.7
92.7
93.6
89.7
94.0
87.4
88.0
107.1
99.6
97.1
95.4
85.4
100.6
113.3
100.0
100.2
97.6
103.8
100.6
100.0
108.7
108.8
101.8
100.0
103.5
87.7
103.1
100.3
101.0
105.4
102.2
100.2
103.1
108.6
103.0
98.9
99.3
103. 6 103.4 103.4
107.8 107.5 107.5
105.4 105.3 105.2
111.0 4110.7 110.2
123.1 4122.7 122.4
128.2 4128. 2 127.8
122.8 4122. 7 122.3
122.4 4122.1 4121.9
101.5 99.1 99.1
83.5 83.7 83.7
94.7 94.7 94.7
104.1 4104.0 104.0
103.5
107.2
105.1
109.4
120.2
127.2
120.7
121.0
100.5
83.4
94.7
104.3
103.6
106.6
105.1
108.9
119.9
126.4
120.3
118.8
100.5
83.2
94.7
104.3
103.6
106.8
105.0
108.5
120.0
125.2
120.0
118.4
99.1
83.2
94.7
104.5
103.6
107.0
104.5
108.3
120. 2
124.4
120.0
117.4
94.8
83.1
94.1
104.6
103.4
106.9
104.5
108.1
120.1
124. 5
120.0
116.7
93.9
83.1
93.3
104.8
103.1
106.8
104.3
107.8
120.1
122.8
120.0
115.7
93.9
83.0
93.3
105.1
102.7
106.5
104.3
107.2
119.9
121.1
119.6
114.2
92.9
83.0
93.3
104.3
102.2
106.3
104.3
106.9
120.0
120.9
119.4
110.5
92.9
83.0
93.3
103.2
101.7
106.0
104. 2
106.5
119. 6
120. 7
119.1
109.4
92.9
83.0
93.3
102.4
101.5
105.7
104.1
106.0
119.1
120.0
118.8
109.3
91.9
84.0
93.3
101.9
100.2
104.7
103.3
105.0
116.6
117.4
116.8
105.7
90.8
84.1
94.2
100.8
99.3
102.6
102.8
103.8
114.3
112.6
114.4
107.2
92.7
89.0
98.1
99.6
109.6 109.8
129.1 4125.0
106.6 106.3
97.5 4 97.5
103. 2 4102.9
100.3 100.2
99.9 99.9
98.5 97.9
102.5 102.5
94.8 94.8
92.7 92.7
113.8 113.8
101.2 101.2
96.8 97.1
93.4 93.4
73.8 73.8
103.7 103.7
118.3 118.3
101.4 101.4
105.6 105.6
93.5 94.9
103.8 103.8
104.1 104.1
100.0 100.0
108.7 108.7
110.6 110.6
105.8 105.8
102.9 102.9
105.4 104.9
89.4 89.4
106.9 107. 5
100.3 100.3
103.8 104.4
108.2 109.6
108.4 108.4
97.9 106.0
104.9 106.9
116.3 116.3
103.6 103.6
100.6 4100.8
100.7 4100. 7
5 Formerly titled “textile products, excluding hard fiber products.”
8 New series. January 1961=100.
i Metals and metal products, agricultural machinery and equipment, and
motor vehicles.
MONTHLY LABOR REVIEW, MARCH 1967
116
T able
D-6.
Indexes of wholesale prices,1 by stage of processing and durability of product
[1957-59=100] 2
Commodity group
1966
1967
Jan.3 Dec.
All commodities----
Nov. Oct. Sept. Aug.
Annual average
July June May Apr. Mar.
Feb.
Jan.
---- ---------------- ----------------- 106.2 105.9 105.9 106.2 106.8 106.8 106.4 105.7 105.6 105.5 105.4 105.4 104.6
1965
1964
102.5
100.5
98.9
98.3
99.8
94.1
91.9
97.8
Stage of processing
Crude materials for further processing--------------------- 102.2 100.8
Crude foodstuffs and feedstuffs------------------------ 104.3 4102. 3
Crude nonfood materials except fuel------------------ 97.3 97.4
Crude nonfood materials, except fuel, for
96.6 96.8
Crude nonfood“ materials, except fuel, for
construction. _ ___
_- _
-------- 105.2 104.3
108.9 *108.2
Crude fuel _
_ __ _ _ _
_
__
Crude fuel for manufacturing------- ------------ 108.8 *108.2
Crude fuel for nonmanufacturing --------------- 109.0 *108.3
Intermediate materials, supplies, and components----Intermediate materials and components for manu-----------facturing__ ___
Intermediate materials for food manufacturingIntermediate materials for nondurable manufacturing,._ _ ------- —
----------Intermediate materials for durable manufacturing .
Components for manufacturing____________
Materials and components for construction------Processed fuels and lubricants------------------------Processed fuels and lubricants for manufacturing. -------------- .
Processed fuels and lubricants for nonmanu--------------facturing..
--------------Containers, nonreturnable..- . . . - ----- - Supplies.. ____
. ---------------_
Supplies for manufacturing _______________
Supplies for nonmanufacturing________ ____
Manufactured animal feeds_________ Other supplies___ ----- . --------- -Finished goods (goods to users, including raw foods
and fuels)-------------- -------------------------------------___
Consumer finished goods__
Consumer foods---- --------------------------------Consumer crude foods. . . . ---- _
Consumer processed foods- ___ ..
- Consumer other nondurable goods_____ ____
Consumer durable goods. __________ .. ..
Producer finished goods____ _ ---------------------Producer finished goods for manufacturing---Producer finished goods for non manufacturing.
101.1 103.6 106.1 107.4 107.8 105.6 105.7 106.3 106.9 107.5 105.2
102.5 106.2 109.9 111.2 109.1 106.0 106.5 107.5 108.3 109.6 106.8
97.6 98.2 98.9 100.2 105.7 105.1 104.5 104.5 104.6 103.8 102.2
97.0
97.7
104.3
108.9
108.9
109.1
104.3
108.1
108.1
108.3
98.5 100.0 106.1 105.4 104.7 104.7 104.8 104.0 102. 2
99.5
97.4
103.7
105.0
105.0
105.2
103.2
103.3
103.2
103.5
102.8
102.5
102.4
102.8
103.9
107.0
107.0
107.2
103.8
106.2
106.2
106.4
103.7
105.5
105.5
105.6
103.6
105.3
105.3
105.5
103.9
104.0
103.9
104.2
103.8
105.2
105.1
105.5
103.8
105.9
105.8
106.2
103.6
105.6
103.5
105.9
105.7 105.4 105.3 105.3 105.6 105.8 105.4 104.9 104.8 104.3 103.9 103.8 103.4
102.2
100.9
104.7 104.5 104.4 104.3 104.6 104.8 104.4 104.1 104.1 103.7 103.4 103.2 102.8
110.0 110.9 111.2 111.6 113.6 114.8 111.9 110.0 109.8 110.1 no. 8 111.1 109.7
102. 0
106.6
100.4
104.0
99.3
99.2
99.2
99.5
107.6
107.6
104.4
101.8
107.1
*107.1
*104.3
101.7
107.0
106.6
104.3
102.5
106.8
105.9
104.5
102.6
99.8 100.1 100.2 100.0
99.7
106.7
105.0
104.5
101.8
106.8
104.8
104.8
100.7
99.4
99.2
99.0
98.9
98.7
97.8
106.6 106.1 105. 8 105.5
104.1 103.3 102.9 102.5
104.3 103.4 102.7 102.3
100.3 99.8 100.2 100.7
104.6
101.3
101.4
99.5
102.5
99.7
100.6
98.1
103. 0 102.9 103.4 103.5 103.1 103.1 102.8 102.8 101.9 101.7 101.2 101.5 101.9
106.8
105.5
104.6
102.1
106.9
105.4
104.6
102.1
106.6
105.1
104.5
101.7
101.0
99.8
99.8
106.1
113.0
109.2
113.8
125.7
104.5
*99.8
105.3
112.6
*109.2
113.3
124.8
104.2
100.8
105.2
111.6
109.5
111.8
121.2
104.0
100.9
105.1
111.5
109.5
111.6
120.9
103.9
100.5
104.9
112.8
109.7
113.4
125.0
104.3
100.4
104.9
113.3
109.5
114.1
126.3
104.6
99.9
105.1
112.7
109.6
113.3
125.0
104.1
100.2
105.1
110.0
109.2
109.7
116.9
103.4
98.7
105.1
109.5
108.9
109.2
116. 0
103.0
97.9
105.1
108.3
108.3
107.6
112.4
102.8
97.4
104.8
108.0
108.0
107.4
112.7
102.3
97.9
104.3
109.3
107.7
109.3
117.7
102.1
98.7
104.2
108.2
107.3
108.0
114.8
101.9
97.1
102.1
106.0
106.1
105.4
109.7
100.9
95.2
100.2
105.0
105.5
104.2
107.4
100.4
107.7
106.7
110.5
106.1
111.2
105.8
101.4
110.3
113.9
106.7
107.6
106.6
110.5
*108.0
110.9
105.5
101.3
*110.2
*113.7
*106 6
107.8
107.0
111.3
112.7
111.0
105.7
101.2
109.8
113.4
106.1
107.8
107. 2
112. 2
108.1
112.8
105.5
100.9
109.1
112.7
105.4
108.1
107.8
114.5
116.6
114.2
105.4
100.0
108.4
112.0
104.8
107.5
107.1
112.8
105.3
114.0
105.2
100.1
108.3
111.7
104.7
107.0
106.4
111.2
106.0
112.0
105.0
100.2
108.1
111.4
104.7
106.4
105.7
109.5
99.3
111.1
104.9
100.1
107.9
111.2
104.6
106. 2
105.6
109.6
99.9
111. 1
104. 5
100. 2
107.6
110.8
104. 4
106.3
105.9
110.7
107.8
111.2
104.3
99.8
107. C
110.0
103.8
106.4
106.1
111.5
107.6
112.1
104.1
99.7
106.8
109.8
103.7
106.3
106.0
111.5
105.6
112.4
104.0
99.7
106.6
109.6
103.5
105.6
105. 2
109.5
101.0
110.8
103.9
99.7
106.2
109.1
103.3
103.6
102.8
104.5
100.2
105.2
102.8
99.6
105.4
108.0
102.9
101.8
100.9
100.6
99.8
100.7
101.6
99.9
104.1
106.2
102.0
107.4 *107.1
105.3 104. 9
106.5 106.2
107.5 *107.2
105.4 *105.2
104.8 *104.0
104.1 103.9
104.8 104.1
106.9
105.1
106.2
107.0
105.3
104.7
106.3
104.6
106.6
105.8
106.3
106.7
105.8
106.0
105.6
106.0
106.2
107.1
106.4
106.3
106.5
108.4
104.4
108.7
106.2
107.0
106.4
106.3
106.5
108.2
105.0
108.4
106.2
106.4
106.0
106.1
105.8
108.2
112.4
108.0
106.2
105.2
105.6
106.1
105.1
105.8
112.4
105.4
106.1
105.0
105.5
106.1
104.8
105.8
110.1
105.6
105.7
105.1
105.1
105.6
104.6
107.0
113.9
106.6
105.3
105.3
105. C
105.1
104.7
107.3
114.7
106.9
104.9
105.5
104.9
104.8
104.8
107.5
111.4
107.3
104.6
104.5
104.4
104.5
104.3
105.3
108.2
105.1
103.7
101.5
102.8
103.7
101.9
100.7
104.7
102.4
99.1
101.1
102.5
99.7
97.5
98.0
97.5
Durability of product
Total durable goods__________________ _________
Total nondurable goods_________________________
Total manufactures._
. ----- - _ ___
Durable manufactures____ ______________
Nondurable manufactures----------________
Total raw or slightly processed goods------------------ ..
Durable raw or slightly processed goods...
Nondurable raw or slightly processed goods.
1 See footnote 1, table D-4.
2 See footnote 2, table D-4.
3 Preliminary.
4Revised.
Note:
https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
ICO. 5
N ote : For description of the series by stage of processing, see “New BLS
Economic Sector Indexes of Wholesale Prices,” Monthly Labor Review,
December 1955, pp. 1448-1453; and by durability of product and data begin
ning with 1947, see Wholesale Prices and Price Indexes, 1957 (BLS Bulletin
1235, 1958).
Table E -l (Work Stoppages) including January 1967 figures will appear in the April issue.
U. S. GOVERNMENT PRINTING OFFICE : 1967 O - 245-336
New Publications Available
For Sale
Order sale publications from the Superintendent of Documents, Government Printing Office,
Washington, D.C. 20402. 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 Bulletin 1312-4: Employment and Earnings Statistics for the United States,
1909-66. 788 pp. $4.50.
BLS Bulletin 1458: BLS Handbook of Methods for Surveys and Studies.
$1.50.
238 pp.
BLS Bulletin 1465-86: Wages and Related Benefits, Part I: 84 Metropolitan Areas,
1965-66. 100 pp. 55 cents.
BLS Bulletin 1480: Premium Pay Provisions for Weekend Work in Seven ContinuousProcess Industries, 1966. 15 pp. 20 cents.
BLS Bulletin 1525: Analysis of Work Stoppages, 1965. 45 pp.
35 cents.
BLS Bulletin 1527: Industry Wage Survey—Textile Dyeing and Finishing, Winter
1965-66. 68 pp. 45 cents.
Area Wage Surveys:
BLS Bulletins—
1530-10: San Jose, Calif., Metropolitan Area, September 1966. 20 pp. 20 cents.
1530-11: Wichita, Kans., Metropolitan Area, October 1966. 31 pp. 25 cents.
1530-12: Sioux Falls, S. Dak., Metropolitan Area, October 1966. 15 pp. 20
cents.
1530-14: San Bernardino-Riverside-Ontario, Calif., Metropolitan Area, Septem
ber 1966. 24 pp. 25 cents.
1530-15: Washington, D.C.-Md.-Va., Metropolitan Area, October 1966. 35 pp.
30 cents.
1530-16: Boston, Mass., Metropolitan Area, October 1966. 26 pp. 25 cents.
1530-17: Portland, Maine, Metropolitan Area, November 1966. 19 pp. 20 cents.
1530-18: Omaha, Nebr.-Iowa, Metropolitan Area, October 1966. 22 pp. 25
cents.
1530-19: Davenport-Rock Island-Moline, Iowa-Ill., Metropolitan Area, October
1966. 34 pp. 30 cents.
1530-20: Columbus, Ohio, Metropolitan Area, October 1966. 34 pp. 30 cents.
BLS Report 304: Labor Law and Practice in Lebanon.
https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
98 pp.
50 cents.
KALAMAZOO
o |^
PUBLIC
ROSE
KALAMAZOO
MICH
U n it e d S tj
G o v e r n m e n t P rint
DIVISION OF PUBLIC DOCUMENTS
W
a s h in g t o n
,
D.C. 20402
O F FIC IA L B U S IN E S S
https://fraser.stlouisfed.org
Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis
LIBRARY
S
___
^9006
POSTAGE AND FEES PAID
U.S. GOVERNMENT PRINTING OFFICE
@FedFRASER