of the twenties has reflected itself in, very low wage levels and deflated prices to the consumer.

The competitive factor is best revealed in a study of the productive equipment of the industry made by the industrial research department of the University of Pennsylvania under the direction of George W. Taylor, retiring chairman of the National War Labor Board. In the year 1934, the industry operated at 57 percent of its potential and effective capacity. The remaining 43 percent of the unused capacity was seeking an outlet in an already glutted market.

In the relatively good year of 1943 the industry operated at 74 percent of its effective potential capacity. During 1943 serious shortages were apparent and unprecendented demands were being made upon the industry. Fuller utilization of capacity was short-circuited by raw material and labor shortages.

No industry has reflected the need for minimum wage legislation more clearly than this one, nor can any industry show the benefit of wage legislation as clearly as this one.

The average hourly earning of seamless hosiery workers in the United States in 1929 was 30.8 cents per hour. By 1933 the average hourly earning had fallen to 18.8 cents per hour. Under the NRA hosiery code minima, the average hourly earning rose to 38.3 cents per hour in 1935 and 38.8 cents per hour in 1936. These data were compiled by Dr, George W. Taylor and Lillian Goodmar in the monograph, Recent Changes in Hourly Earnings of Employees in the Hosiery Industry.

The United States Bureau of Labor Statistics in a wage study of the industry for 1938 showed that earnings had begun to slump when NRA protection was removed. In that year the national average was 35.1 cents per hour. About 20.5 percent of all workers in the industry were earning less than 25 cents per hour with a recorded low of 4% cents per hour. At least 49.8 percent of all workers were receiving less than 321⁄2 cents per hour.

This wage pattern did not follow differentials in skill or occupation but showed itself along plant and area lines, irrespective of skill, occupation, value of product, or sex distribution of the work force.

In a companion study of the seamless men's half hose industry made by the Women's Bureau of the United States Department of Labor as the factual background to establish a minimum wage for this portion of the industry under the Public Contracts Act in 1938 an average hourly earning of 36.1 cents per hour prevailed. It was found that 25 percent of all workers earned 30 cents per hour or less. Sharp variations in the pattern of wages by States was found. In Georgia, for instance, 51.2 percent of all workers earned 30 cents per hour or less.

The 25-cent-per-hour minimum wage under the Fair Labor Standards Act became effective on October 24, 1938. This minimum resulted in wage increases to 20.5 percent of all workers employed in the seamless industry. Ten percent of the plants in the industry had plant averages of 25 cents per hour or less on that date.

On September 18, 1939, the 32% cent minimum wage for the industry under the Fair Labor Standards Act became effective. At least 17,000 persons employed in the industry on that date received an automatic wage increase. The United States Bureau of Labor Statistics measured the effect of the 32-cent minimum wage on the wage structure of the industry in September 1940. The average hourly earning was 41.3 cents per hour at that time. At least 61.1 percent of the total work force was earning less than 40 cents per hour.

On July 21, 1941, another boost in the fair labor standards minimum was made, this time up to 36 cents per hour. This rise resulted in an industry average hourly earning of 46.2 cents per hour, a weekly wage of $17.48 measured in November 1941.

On February 15, 1943, the last change in the minimum was made effective, up to the limit provided by the act; namely, 40 cents per hour. This change in the minimum, which also noted the effect of the war's pressure on wages, was measured in April 1943 and showed a national average hourly earning of 52.9 cents per hour and a gross weekly wage of $20.33.

In May 1945 the average hourly earning for the industry was 61.5 cents per hour; the gross weekly wage was $22.63, according to the United States Bureau of Labor Statistics.

Northern union and nonunion seamless plants yielded an average hourly earning of 68.0 cents per hour and a gross weekly wage of $27.20. These mills produce slightly less than 25 percent of the national output. The southern average hourly earning was 59.7 cents per hour, and gross weekly wage was $21.43. This area produces slightly more than 75 percent of the national output.

The workers in the industry have not benefited from premium rates for overtime work or premium rates for Sunday work or for continuous round-the-clock operation in proportion to the results in other industries. The average weekly hours between May 1944 and May 1945, were 401⁄2 hours per week in northern mills and 36.6 hours per week in the South. The work week in May 1945 for northern mills was 40.0 hours, and 35.9 hours in the South.

The net annual income of these workers whether in the North or South is below $1,000 per year on a collective basis. Individuals may fare better or worse in this type of calculation. There are several hundred workers employed at the learner's minimum of 35 cents per hour at this time. There are several hundred workers earning in excess of $1 per hour on selected jobs and in selected mills.

It must be pointed out further that this is not an hourly or weekly wage industry. The almost universal method of payment in the industry, on the overwhelming majority of operations and occupations, is either on a piecework basis or some form of incentive-pay plan. Personal efficiency thus reflects itself in the entire wage pattern. These individual variations in ability can lead to from 25 to 115 percent differentials in personal productivity within a plant and on a specific task or occupation. High wages, therefore, do not reflect high labor costs, nor do low wages always reflect low labor costs.

It is quite evident from the evidence submitted on the direct effect of varying levels of minimum wages upon the industry wage structure just how deflated and depressed the entire wage framework of the industry was and still is. The entire industry has been operating generally at socially undesirable wage levels and on a substandard basis.

The long years of intense competition which reflect themselves in the continuously deflated wage pattern in this industry do in no way reflect the skills required in the manufacture of hosiery. These skills, difficult to acquire, carry with them no monetary inducement for trainees.

During the war seamless manufacturers who have been called into conference by both the War Production Board and the armed services have gone over the problem in great detail. Individual manufacturers, important in the total production they represent, have advised the various agencies that the only basic solution would come with a change in the industry's wage pattern. Several of these manufacturers, representing both union and nonunion plants, have held consistently that the industry needed at least a 35-percent increase in the minimum wage structure so as to provide a hiring rate which would attract new workers going into other industries already operating under much more favorable wage levels.

There can be no doubt that substantial relief is badly needed for the workers in this industry. The most practical method at the moment seems to be a revision in the War Labor Board yardstick on substandards of living. The relief offered in Senate Concurrent Resolution No. 48, to set the dividing line at 65 cents per hour, is badly needed. The workers in this industry suffer from an antisocial wage level and are in fact being put through the wringer as every month passes as their net take-home pay has been reduced by taxes and by the creeping rise in the cost of living. At this moment the value of their earnings are considerably lower than the real value of their earnings in 1938 and 1939.

The alleviation of this situation is certainly not inflationary since it is inconceivable to us that the correction of substandards of living can ever do more than wipe out those dangers which threaten internally our national economic and democratic security and which undermine the health and strength of our people.

Respectfully submitted.

AMERICAN FEDERATION OF HOSIERY WORKERS.
Exhibit A

Nature of industry by size of plant

There were 439 companies on which data on production was available in 1939. This data was compiled by the National Association of Hosiery Manufacturers and is quite accurate.

One hundred and forty-three companies, 32.6 percent of total, produced less than 50,000 dozen pairs per year.

Ninety-two companies, 21.0 percent of total mills, produced between 50,000 and 100,000 dozen pairs.

One hundred and fifty-seven companies or 35.8 percent produced between 100,000 and 500,000 dozens.

Forty-seven companies or 10.6 percent produced over 500,000 dozen pairs. At least 53.6 percent of the companies must be classed as small, 35.8 percent are medium sized, and only 10.6 percent are considered large.

The 143 companies with the smallest production are in many instances plants with less than 50 machines. In this group are 25 plants which produced less than 5,000 dozens, 17 companies which produced between 5,000 and 10,000 dozens, and another 23 mills which produced between 10,000 and 20,000 dozens. The annual production of this entire group of 65 plants would equal the three month output of one of the largest mills.

Total of mills in industry is 483.

Distribution of plants by population

The plants in the industry are located predominantly in small towns. At least 63 percent of all plants are in towns with less than 25,000 population, 14 percent in towns of 25,000 to 100,000, and 23 percent in towns of more than 100,000.

Small plants in small towns have paid the lowest wages over the past 15 years. Large sized plants in large cities have paid the highest wages. The character of the industry in size of plants and location of plants has impressed itself upon the wage pattern.

Nature of work force

This is one of the few industries in which the majority of workers are women. In 1938, at least 7 of every 10 persons employed were women.

In 1941 at least 8 of every 10 persons were women.

Under the Fair Labor Standards Act, the following occupations in the seamless hosiery industry were provided with a subminimum learning period:

Looping and transfer top knitting which are classified as the most highly skilled female jobs represent 35 percent of the total workers in the industry. The nine occupations requiring a 480-hour learning period represent semiskilled jobs, and represent another 35 percent of all persons employed. The actual training period on some of these occupations is relatively short, but speed in handling is a requisite to the job, and such productive speeds take some time to acquire after job instruction is completed.

Machine fixers, who represent the most highly skilled group in the industry, are all males and represent 5.8 percent of the work force; fixer apprentices represent another 1 percent. The normal apprenticeship period for a fixer is 4 years. Top job classifications in fixing are seldom acquired in less than 4 years after completion of apprenticeship.

Male knitters represent about 5 percent of the total work force and are semiskilled, except for a very limited group operating complex foreign types of machines.

Male boarders classed as semiskilled representing about 7 percent of the work force prior to the war, now represent about 4 percent.

EXHIBIT 49

STATEMENT BY GEORGE BALDANZI, EXECUTIVE VICE PRESIDENT, TEXTILE WORKERS UNION OF AMERICA, CIO, ON THE PROPOSED REVISION OF THE FAIR LABOR STANDARDS ACT TO ESTABLISH A 65-CENT MINIMUM, PRESENTED TO THE SENATE COMMITTEE ON EDUCATION AND LABOR

The Textile Workers Union of America, CIO, appreciates this opportunity to appear before your committee, and in behalf of 500,000 organized textile workers expresses its support of the legislation now before you, which would raise the legal minimum wage in this country to 65 cents an hour.

The question, as we see it, is not whether American workers are entitled to at least 65 cents an hour, but whether or not we are going to have the courage, intelligence, and foresight to start to lay the foundation for the kind of economy which will guarantee Americans a constant improvement in their living standards. There should be no question that an economy which can provide an annual income of more than $160,000,000,000 could also provide a living wage for every one of those who has helped produce that income. The proverbial man from Mars, I am sure, would find it difficult to understand why the productive equipment which could pile up a wartime record so great as to stagger the imagination, cannot provide sufficient food, clothing, shelter, education, medical care, and other needed services so that a large proportion of American wage earners must bring up their families in want.

And if, by some chance, the radio speeches made by our leaders during the war could be received in that far-away planet, I am sure that our Martian visitor would have expected that our first peacetime objective would be to place a floor under wages high enough to provide that Americans, at least, shall be "free from want."

But the world is what it is, and we must face the fact that a large number of American workers are today receiving far less than a sufficient income to support them and their families, and that we have come here to consider bringing their wages part way up to what they need.

That the need is for earnings greater than 65 cents an hour can be demonstrated by a simple statement of facts. Our union has priced the lowest available family budget conceived by American authorities. It was developed by the WPA for relief families financed on an emergency basis. This budget is so low that no one has risen publicly and challenged its items. It cannot be regarded as providing a decent continuing standard of living. It is a mere stopgap for hunger.

With the aid of the Bureau of Labor Statistics, our research department priced this budget in January 1944. The pricing was approved by governmental and business agencies as fair, honest, and accurate. At that time a family of four would have required an annual income of $1,563.92 to provide the commodities and service required by this minimum budget, and to meet taxes and other similar charges. On the basis of a steady income of 50 40-hour weeks, this would mean weekly earnings of $31.28 and an hourly rate of more than 78 cents. Increases in the cost of living since January 1944 have brought the figure well above 80 cents an hour, or $32 a week.

But it is not now even being suggested that we guarantee that low income level, which the WPA felt was satisfactory as an emergency minimum. We are only seeking to establish a 65-cent-an-hour minimum wage which shall be moved up to 75 cents after a 2-year period.

The Bureau of Labor Statistics estimates that almost half a million textile workers are within the group now receiving less than 65 cents an hour. These are workers who, with their fellows, have earned the gratitude of a nation during the past 4 years for their production of needed war and essential civilian materials. They made the cloth for uniforms, the duck for tents, the nylon for parachutes, and thousands of other needed textile products. Despite their low wages, despite poor working conditions, they have heeded the call of a nation and remained at textile jobs, resisting the urge to move into the shipyards, into the plane and tank arsenals where earnings were often double what was earned in the textile mills.

They pledged not to strike during wartime, and kept that pledge, often despite extreme provocation by the employers and what seemed to many workers a golden opportunity to bring into the textile industry for the first time in its more than 100 years of history a wage scale which would provide a living wage to its workers. But the need was for production, and more production, and tex tile workers stayed on the job.

I feel that I can stand before you unashamed and say that the war-production record of the textile workers has earned for them at least the kind of consideration that would be shown by the establishment of a 65-cent minimum wage today and the boosting of that minimum to 75 cents after 2 years.

This I say despite the assertion by one leader of the textile industry that tex tile workers' earnings are low because they lack the "skill, ingenuity, and efficiency" to earn more.

Nor can I agree with that same gentleman, Dr. William P. Jacobs, now presi dent of the American Cotton Manufacturers Association, when he stated, in his dissent to a panel report in the southern WLB cotton cases, that "charity rather than a high minimum wage or a high living budget" should correct the misfortune of those whose earnings are insufficient to maintain their families at a decent level.

Charity is not what workers want or need. Rather, it is the feeling that their work is considered useful to society, and by that token they are repaid for it at a decent level.

But, it may be said by some, the textile industry cannot afford to pay a 65-cent minimum wage. These people say that mills will close and workers lose their jobs if the minimum is raised. This familiar song is one that has been heard every time an effort has been made to put a floor under textile wages, no matter how low that floor might be. It is the kind of story that has for 100 years kep: textile wages at a level which the economists call substandard. It is the kind of story which has kept textile wages so low that man and wife have both had to work so as to keep body and soul together. It is the kind of story which bas driven children from school into the mill. It has been responsible for slums, for inadequate medical care, for a century of suffering in this country's oldest manufacturing industry.

Yet, when the test has come, and the Government has moved to put a floor under textile wages, we have seen here how false this cry has been. We heard it in 1933 when the NRA minima were established. In 1939, when the 32-centan-hour minimum was proposed, one Texas textile manufacturer predicted that there wouldn't be a mill in Texas operating after 5 years unless a differential in wages was permitted. No differential was allowed, and the minimum has gone far beyond the 32% cents an hour set at that time. Yet the mills headed by that manufacturer are still operating, and today are under contract with our union. For the textile industry absorbed that increase as it did the more recent moves to 371⁄2 cents in 1941, to 40 cents in 1942, to 47% cents in September 1942, to 50 cents in 1944, and to 55 cents in the early part of this year.

The supplemental brief I am submitting shows just how the establishment of a 65-cents-an-hour minimum will affect the various branches of the industry. It is important to note, however, that negotiations just concluded with the largest group of northern cotton-rayon manufacturers have established a cents-an-hour minimum in that section of the industry, and that in the South. where the minimum is 55 cents an hour, the union is now negotiating for the establishment of the higher rate. A wage movement now in evidence in the woolen and worsted industry can be expected to raise the 60-cent minimum in effect there, to 75 cents. What is true in these two large sections of the textile industry is equally true in the others.

These recent wage movements make obsolete the Bureau of Labor Statistics estimates of the distribution of textile wages, which place 5 percent of the workers in the industry earning less than 50 cents an hour, and 47 percent less than 65 cents. It is entirely possible that conclusion of present wage movements will leave no textile workers below the 65-cent level. Action by Congress would clear up the fringes of employers who have not definitely crossed the line, and would guarantee fair competition to the fair employer within the industry who is paying the going rate.

But even on the basis of the BLS figures the cost of the establishment of the 65-cent minimum wage could be easily absorbed by the industry without the need for price increases. As of June 1945, the BLS estimated that 489,000 textile workers would require an increase to be brought up to the 65-cent figure. This increase would raise the pay roll 4.7 cents per hour, or 6 percent.