On the west coast there is a factory ship being constructed.
Senator TUNNELL. That is what I had reference to.

Mr. STEELE. Well, on that factory ship they will catch fish, can them, freeze them, and store them, or package them right on the boat. Senator TUNNELL. They have the same thing for the whales, haven't they?

Mr. STEELE. I am not familiar with the whaling industry.

I have here in the room, I believe, some expert who could answer those questions for you. Dr. Radcliffe, director of the Oyster Institute, is here.

I believe at one time he was head of the Commercial Fisheries for the Government, here in Washington.

We also have Dr. Kahn, of the Fish and Wildlife Service of the Interior Department here.

They might be able to answer some of your questions.

Going back to the factory ship, that new method is one hope, I believe, of building up the industry on the west coast.

During the war, in 1942, this country built either 13 or 19 factory ships for the Russians on our west coast, at a time when the Navy was taking our own fishing boats from our own commercial fishermen and converting them to war use.

So during the war we built up competition to our own domestic industry.

We have an awful time at the present time getting that one factory ship built on the west coast, and here the Russians already have 13 or 19-we cannot find how many-to compete in the Bering Sea with this proposed American ship that is being built. It is a venturesome business. Just like the salmon industry is a big gamble, this new method is a big gamble, but it is one way we feel we can build up the industry.

But if we are going to get competition from Russia and other coun tries, we think that there should be no "speculative legislative action" at this time that would interfere with this new industry which we hope to build up.

Senator TUNNELL. I know that there was a factory ship for oil and fertilizer 20 years ago along our coast.

Mr. STEELE. Of course, the Japs have operated floating canneries. too.

I heard Dr. Walling, of the Wage and Hour Division, testify something about his proposal, and I think floating canneries were not to come within the exemption.

Furthermore, we feel that the salmon industry would be in jeopardy if this legislation were passed. These men are signed on the boats under contract. They are paid when they get on and until they get off. Room, board, and keep play quite a part in these contracts.

Of course, the greater number of employees in the fisheries are already members of unions and their contracts apparently have worked out all right, because those industries are operating at the present time. We have had some strikes, but we have gotten along fairly well. and have been able to contract on a basis suitable to management and employees.

Now, Dr. Walling gave testimony here that you people should consider throwing out. He gave statistics for the year 1943, showing

what was paid in the South. I have the statement right here. He

says:

The necessity for minimum wage protection for employees engaged in fish processing is indicated by a survey of selected key occupations in fish and sea food canning plants in 10 designated areas during the 1943 season by the Bureau of Labor Statistics. The average hourly earnings in these categories were in Alabama 32.4 cents an hour, 35.7 cents in New Orleans, La., and 38.2 in Norfolk, Va.

The latest figures we have been able to get from the Fish and Wildlife Service of the Department of the Interior indicate that there have been no Southern areas where the minimum for women is lower than 50 cents, and 60 cents for men. So those figures in 1943 compared with the current figures indicate what the industry has done for itself, or within the space of 2 years, in raising wages.

The law of supply and demand has pretty well taken care of the fish industry. The per capita consumption in the United States is only about 13 pounds. During the war the fish industry has been very successful, during the shortage of meat and poultry.

I think one thing that the committee should weigh very heavily in deciding exemptions for the fish industry is these high prices for fish. Within the past 2 weeks the market has broken sharply. Fish were too high in price. I have the figures here, and they will be in the record in my prepared statement, taken from the Fish and Wild Life Service, and they show what has happened in different parts of the country. The price of fish dropping so sharply is due to meat becoming more plentiful, and that also applies to poultry, and the lowering of ration points.

Senator TUNNELL. The price of poultry has dropped very suddenly too?

Mr. STEELE. It is true of poultry, but it has been sharper in fish. We maintain the prices of fish have been artificially high. If you have a 50- and 60-cent hourly labor cost in producing fish and the bottom drops out of the market with these costs when meat becomes plentiful, then we say most anything can happen, and generally will happen.

If you put an artificial floor into the cost, then you drive the fish commodity too high in price so that you cannot sell it in competition with meat. As a result you have ruined that industry.

The recent break in the market proves our point. I am not talking about something that happened in 1943, I am talking about something that happened in the last 2 weeks.

If we could get Congress to make people eat more fish, then we would be all right, but it just does not happen that Congress proposes this. As I say, the per capita consumption of fish is very low. We will have to admit that the industry has been very backward.

You are talking about a lot of small people when you talk about people in the fish industry, compared to what you gentlemen have been listening to, such as the people in the textile industry.

It will be our job, of course, to try and build up that per capita consumption, but for an industry that has been pretty backward, we think Congress ought to tread rather easily and give it a chance.

We will have to admit, furthermore, right now, we have the biggest black-market operators in the Ash industry of any industry we know

of.

Senator TUNNELL. Why should there be a black market when there is an oversupply?

Mr. STEELE. We have some few commodities that are still scarce and in demand.

However, I think that there is a tapering off of the black market. In the shrimp and scallops business we have a tremendous black market.

We furthermore think in dealing with a group of small businessmen that if the Congress makes the same mistake on wage and hour legislation, that it did on price legislation, you would not have enough investigators or snoopers to enforce the law.

Just like I heard a man who was supposed to be an expert say the other day if you have someone paying an income tax on the basis of $10 a year, it may cost more to collect the $10 than it would cost not to tax the person at all.

By the same token, we think the benefit you would get by splitting the exemption in two for the fisheries would be negligible and out of line with the cost of enforcement.

First of all, you are dealing with a commodity that is unseen until you catch it. It is perishable until it is entirely processed or finds its way into the retail market.

It is not a question of the industry trying to chisel, or not being able to pay wages. That is demonstrated in the figures that you had in 1943, that went up in 1945 15 or 20 cents higher than Mr. Walling's figures showed.

I believe that the man here with me who will speak next will be able to substantiate the figures that I gave for the South, showing a minimum hourly rate of 50 cents for women and 60 cents for men. It all demonstrates where you are dealing with an unknown quantity you better tread carefully. As Congressman Bland, of Virginia, said, you can legislate all you please but the fish will not pay any attention to you in regard to wages and hours.

I introduce here Mr. Triggs, who represents the largest distributing wholesale organization in the country. He is from New York and Chicago. He can tell you very well how the exemption should follow through the wholesale channels as well as at the shore where the fish are caught and handled.

To break this exemption in two right where you have it under this proposal puts me in mind of a story when I was practicing law. A fellow wanted a code of ethics established, but when it came right down to it he did not want it to apply to him.

We feel this way-that the fisherman should be granted his exemption. We are in his corner, because we have to have production before it can be handled on the shore. But we want the thing to be handled in a straightforward manner, so we can bargain with one another as we are doing now. It is only fair that the exemption apply equally to the off-shore and on-shore worker.

We think that exemption as is should remain.

We have already learned to live under the present law. And, Senator, it is not an outright exemption like you would suspect. We have employees already in plants who are not exempt.

Mr. Walling's department has already given us several interpretive bulletins, telling us what you gentlemen meant when you passed the wage-and-hour law in 1938. The industry is learning to live under that exemption, and we would like to maintain it.

I am sure there would be so many court actions if this present amendment were put through, that it would take a long time for the industry to level off, to be able to tell where-it stands.

Senator TUNNELL. I would like to ask you a question.

You are talking about the situation for the last 2 weeks with reference to fish. Now you know up until a very short time we could get no meat but fish to speak of. Then the Government stopped buying poultry. In the section of the country where I am from, they took all of the poultry until a short time ago, and then they took 70 percent of the poultry, so that a civilian could not get poultry to eat. Now, the Government suddenly stopped buying the poultry when the war ended. Do you think that this is a typical situation, just at a time when poultry has been thrown on the market?

I would like to have your idea on it. I am interested. Mr. STEELE. If you think your industry is in bad shape you ought to look at the fish industry. This is an item that has never been in great demand in normal times. I cannot tell you offhand what the per capita consumption of poultry is, but it is at least five or six times as high as the per capita consumption of fish.

Certain food items are in demand. In your case, in the poultry industry, I know that a glut has occurred in different parts of the country.

The same thing happened to the fish industry. It came overnight. There were no set-aside orders on fresh and frozen fish, but the Government was able to get its supplies and they had certain channels to go through to get the fresh and frozen fish without set-aside orders. The Government did have set-aside orders for canned fish, like they did on poultry, but not on frozen commodities. Overnight the armed forces discontinued the purchases of fish, except for current uses, and that helped crack the market.

Senator TUNNELL. I just call your attention to this difference: You do not have to feed the fish while you are waiting. Mr. STEELE. No.

Senator TUNNELL. You do the poultry.

Mr. STEELE. That raises a question, though, Senator. Once we get them out of the water, we have to take care of them, and we have to maintain enough help to take care of them at once. They have an overtime provision here in this amendment. Our industry has to maintain personnel to take care of something they do not see until it is right in their laps.

I am sure the employer groups would not want to pay overtime after the employees sat around all day waiting for something to do. That is one of the objectionable features to the amendment.

I will not take any more of your time.

I would like to know if you would like to hear from Mr. Triggs, of Chicago.

Senator TUNNELL. What part of the country are you from?

Mr. STEELE. I am an Ohioan originally, from Steubenville.
Senator TUNNELL. Thank you, Mr. Steele.

(Mr. Steele submitted statements which appear in the appendix.) TESTIMONY OF CHARLES W. TRIGGS, EXECUTIVE SECRETARY, FISH DISTRIBUTORS COOPERATIVE ASSOCIATION, INC.

Mr. TRIGGS. Mr. Chairman: My name is Charles W. Triggs. I am executive secretary of the Fish Distributors Cooperative Association. It is an organization composed of distributors reaching from Philadelphia across the country to Dallas, Tex.

I am talking for a continuance of the exemption that we have in the present law.

Senator TUNNELL. Exemption of what, now?

Mr. TRIGGS. Exemption of the fish industry.

If you wish, I will give you my background.

I have been in the fish business all my life, 20 years of which I was associated with one of the largest fish companies in the industry, with branches from Boston to Seattle, during which time I had a good opportunity to acquire knowledge of the fish industry in a large part of the United States and Canada.

I was secretary of the Fish Advisory Committee of the Department of the Interior for 2 years and head of the Fish Section of the Office. of Price Administration for 2 years.

Fish are extremely perishable and, unlike other perishable food stuffs, it is necessary to keep them properly iced and kept in favorable temperatures to guard against spoilage."

Furthermore, the production of fish is erratic and influenced to a marked extent by weather conditions and the run of fish. Production may be extremely heavy when weather is warm and the need for proper icing is very important. The same conditions as to quantity of catch apply to the handling of fish ashore, transportation, and handling at destination.

Throughout a large part of the country a very great percentage of fish is handled 1 or 2 days a week, which necessarily means that more work is required on those days than other days of the week. As a matter of fact, during the early part of the week and on Saturday work is exceedingly light which compensates for the extra labor required on the busy days. This situation maintains more away the producing points.

from

Careful consideration was given to the wage and hour exemption in the present law before Maior General Fleming, Administrator of Wages and Hours, and testimony given at that time should be considered.

Due consideration should be given to the extremely perishable nature of fish and seafood and the effect upon quality if not properly handled. Even under normal conditions, the uncertainty as to supply and demand is very great and, without a doubt, fish and sea foods are in a class by themselves and should be treated as such.

Senator TUNNELL. Your idea is that the exemption of those who catch the fish is not sufficient?