Code of fair competition for the cotton textile industry

MISSING IMAGE

Material Information

Title:
Code of fair competition for the cotton textile industry as approved on July 9, 1933 by President Roosevelt
Physical Description:
23 p. : ; 23 cm.
Language:
English
Creator:
United States -- National Recovery Administration
Publisher:
Supt. of Documents
Place of Publication:
Washington, D.C
Publication Date:

Subjects

Subjects / Keywords:
Cotton textiles -- Law and legislation -- United States   ( lcsh )
Industries -- Law and legislation -- United States   ( lcsh )
Genre:
federal government publication   ( marcgt )
non-fiction   ( marcgt )

Notes

Additional Physical Form:
Also available in electronic format.
General Note:
"Registry No.299-25"

Record Information

Source Institution:
University of Florida
Rights Management:
All applicable rights reserved by the source institution and holding location.
Resource Identifier:
aleph - 004851468
oclc - 63654420
System ID:
AA00006614:00001

Full Text
UNIVERSITY OF FLORIDA al


NATIONAL RECOVERY ADMINISTRATION



CODE OF FAIR COMPETITION
FORC THE


COTTON TEXTILE INDUSTRY


I ~I
aotrl ei Lbyhe Supertntendent of Docum~ents Washington D.C. Pirce 5 rcnt


'


Registry No. 299--25


AS APPROVED ON JULY 9, 1933
BT
PRESIDENT ROOSEVELT


WI Do OUR PART


I. Executive Order Approving Code
2. Administrator's Letter of Transmittal to the'President
3. Text of Code
4. Executive Orders Applying Provisions to other Industries
5. Amendment Creating Cotton Textile National Industrial
Relations Board







ITNITED STATES
GOVERNMENT PRINTING OFFICE
WASHINGTON : 198


I1 II1111111 111 11111 lll ll1111111 l1i lllll l l l I IIll
3 1262 08482 9893














































Digitized by the Intlernel Archive
ln 20)11 wirh founding Iromn
University of Florida. George A. S~mathers Libraries Wilh sup~port from LY'RASIS anld Ihe Sloani Foulndation


http://www.archive.org/details/codeoffaircme93ui













EXECUTIllE ORDER


CODE OF FAIR ClOMPETITION FOR THE COTTON TEXTILE INDUSTRY
The Cotton Textile Code, a stenographic transcript of t~he hearing
thereof, a report and recommendations of t~he National Recovery
Adlministrationn t~he~reon (includ~ing a. special statistical analysis of the
industry by the Division of Platnning and Research) and reports
showing unanimous approval of such report and recommendations by
each t~he Labor Advisory Board, the Industrial Advisory Board, a~nd
the Consumers' Advisory Board, having bee~n submitted to the
President, the following are his orders thereon.
In accordance it~h Section 3 (a), National Industrial Recovery
Act, the Cott~on Text~ile Code submitted. by duly qualified trade
associations of the Cotton Textile Indlustry on June 16, 1933, in full
compliance writh all pertinent provisions of that Act, is hereby
approved by the Presiden t subject to the following interpretations anrd
condi tions:
(1) Limlitations on the use of productive mlachinery shall nzot apple
to production of tire yarns or fabrics for rubber tires for a period of
three weeks after this date.
(2) The Planning Commzit~tee of t~he Industry, provided for in the
Code, will take up at once the qluest~ion of employees ucaeo oe
in mill-villages, especially in t~he South, and wcall su hl~esbmit to the
Administration before January Ist, 19341, a plan looking toward
eventual employee home-ownership.
(3) Approval of t~he minimum -a~ges proposed by the Code is not
to be regarded as approval of their economic, sufficiency but is grlinted
in the belief that, in view of the large increase in wage payrment~s
provided by the Code, any higher minima at this time might react to
reduce consumption and employment, and on the understanding that
if and as conditions improve the subject mlay be reopened wit.h a view
to increasing them.
(4) That office employees be included within~ the benefits of the
Code.
(5) The existing amounts by which wages in the higher-paid
classes, up t.o workers receiving $30 per week, exceed wages in the lowl-
est. paid class, shall be maintained.
(6) Whkile the exception of repair shop crews, engineers, electricians
and watching crews from the maximum hour provisions is approved, it
is on the condition that time and one-half be paid for overtime.
(7) While the ex-ception of cleaners and outside wvokers is approved
for the present, it is on condition that the Plannmng and Supervisory
Committee provided by Section 6 prepare and submit to thet Atdminis-
tration, by January 1, 1934, a schedule of minimum wages and of
maximum hours for these classes.
(8) It is interpreted that the provisions for maximum hours
establish a maximum of hours of labor per week for every employee
covered, so that under no circumstances will such an employee be
9713*-3 I 1









employed or permlt~ted to work for one or more employers in t.he
industry in the aggregate in excess of the prescribed number of hours
in a single week.
(9) It is interpreted that t~he provisions for a minimum wage in this
code establish a guaranteed minimum rate of pay per hour of employ-
ment regardless 'f whether the employee's compensation is otherwise
based on a time rat.e or upon a piece work performance. This is to
avoid frustration of the purpose of the code by changinga from hour
to piece-work rules.
(10) Until adoption of further provisions of this Code necessary to
prevent any unproper speeding up of work to the disadvantage of
employees ~("stret.ch-outs ") and in a manner destructive of the
purposes of the National Industrial Recovery Act, it is required thbat
any and all increases in the amount of work or production required
of employees ove~r that required on July 1, 193.3, must be submitted
to anrd approved by the agency created by section six of the code and
by the administration and if not so submitted such increases will be
regarded as a prima facie violation of the provision for minimum
wages .
(11) The code will be in operation as to the whole industry but,
opportunity shall be given for administrative consideration of every
application of the code in particular instances t~o any person directly
affected who hras not in person or by a representative consented and
agreed to the terms of the code. Any such person shall be given an
opportunity for a hearing before the Administration or his represen-
tative, and for a stay of the application to him of a~ny provision of
the code, prior to incurring any liability to the enforcement of the
code against him by any of the means provided in the National
Industrial Recovery Act, pending such hearing. At such hearing
any objection to the application of the code in the specific circum-
stances may be presented and wvill be heard.
(1'?) Thus approval is limited to a four months' period with the
right to ask for a mlodification at any time and subject to a request
for renewal for another four months at any time before it-s expiration.
(13) Section 6 of the Code is approved on condition that the
Administration be permitted to name three members of the Planning
and Supervisory Committee of the industry. Such members shall
have no vote but in all other respects shall be members of such Plan-
ning and Supervisory Committee.
(Signed) FRANKLIN D. ROOSEVELT.













NATIONAL RECOVERY ADMINISTRATION


JULY 9, 1933. -
To the President:
I have the honor to submit herein my report on the Cotton Textile
Code and hearing submitted and conducted in accordance with the
provisions of the National Recovery Act. The Code may be sum-
marized as follows:
SECTION 1. Definitions.--This is the Spinning and Weaving divi-
sion of the Cotton Text~ile Industry. The only controverted matter
in this section was a definition of "productive ma~chinery" as cotton
looms and spindles. The question of the validity of excluding card"-
ing machines as auxiliary was raised by President Mlcia~hon, of the
United Textile Workers, and was justified by M~r. Robert Amory
that inasmuch as the product of the card is not sold it cannot lead
to overproduction yet the flexibility of running it is necessary to
balance the mills operation (II-Ki-8-Ml-2). M~r. Batty, Secretary,"
New Bedford and Fall River Textile Councils (Labor) concurred
that this was an unsubstantial objection.
SEC. 2. Proposes aI minimum wnage of $12 in the South and $13 in
the North---exempts learners for six weeks, also cleaners and outside
employees.
SEc. 3. Provides for a 40-hour work week and an 80-hour machine
work week and excepts repair crews, engineers, electricians, firemen,
office and supervisory staff, shipping, watching, and outside crews
and cleaners.
SEc. 4. Abolishes child labor (minors under 16).
SEc. 5. Provides for periodical statistical reports from al mem1-
bers of the Cotton Textile Institute, bearing on wrages, hours, pr~o-
duction and consumption, etc.
SEc. 6. Sets up as a continuing planning and fair practice agency
the Cotton Textile Industry Commnittee of all the affected trade asso-
ciations to supervise the execution of the code, to develop statistical
aLccounting;, credit and other controls and to carry out long-range
planning m the interest of the industry and the statbilization of em-
PLoymnent. This is the proposed self-government agency of the
mdustry, to function subject to the approval of the Admimistration.
SEc. 7. Provides that the Committee may tender its good offices to
secure, by mediation, modifications of existing contracts rendered
burdensome by costs increased by this code.
SEc. 8. Mandatory statutory recitation of the Rights of L~abor.
SEc. 9. Mandatory statutory recitation of the President's right to
cancel, modify, or amend.
SEc. 10. Provides for consideration by the President of future
amendments at the instance of the industry.
This code was formulated during the Congressional debate on the
Recovery Act by conference among representatives of the industry,









with unofficial. assistance of tlhe present Administrator's aides. It
was submitted the day the President signed the Act.. After due legal
published notice the hearing opened on June 27th and concluded
Jul 1st.
Th3e hearing was presided over by the Administrat~or and conducted
by Deputy Administrator W~illiam H. Allen wit~h the a~id of members
of the staff of the Na~tional Recovery Admlinist~ration mn t~he presence
of the Industrial Advisory Board, appointed by t~he Secretary of
Commerce, the Labor Advisory Boa~rd, appointed by the Secretary
of Labor, and the Consumers' Advisory Board, appointed by the
Administrator. Representatives of the Department of Justice and
the Federal Trade Conunission were also in attendance. The hear-
ing was attended by considerable numbers (about 500) of the public
and ha full presss complement.
The odewas presented by duly qualified representatives of the
industry after due qualifications of its proponents complying with all
statutory requirements as representing 75%0 of the capacity of the
industry. In1 accordance with announced procedure, every person
who had filed an appearance, whether as a worker, employer, or con-
sum~er, wa freely heard in public, including a representative of a
Communist organization. (List of witnesses, Appendix 1.)
All statutory and regulatory requirements were complied wcith.
III. SUMMARY OF AND CONCLUSIONS ON THE EVIDENCE
1. Hours of Labor. (Proposed Reduct~ion of Weekly Hours to 40.)
President Michahon, of the United Textile WForkers of America,
affiiated with the American Federation of Labor (who had partici-
pated in the formulation of the code and had concurred in it before
submission) submitted at the hearing amendments to his original
statement and to the code and urged that the hours of wsork be limited
to 35 instead o~f the proposed 40, in order to bring about a reabsorption
of t~he unemployed of t~he industry (II-H-3 ff.; I-7-11; J-1 ff). Presi-
dent Green o~f the American Federation of Labor went further and
asked for a 30-hour week on the ground that the work available at
the M~ay level in industry generally would provide only 25.6 hours
per week for all who needed work", and that it was, therefore, best
to arrange a single standard, presumably regardless of differences
between industries as to rates of activity and employment (Sta~t~ement,
p. 6; Record III-S-9, III-S-ll). Both testified t~o the prevalence in
the past year of as high as a 53-to-54 hour week for t~he industry and
suggested as an objective the bringing up of the employment to the
level which prevailed in the period from 1923 to, 1929 when approxt-
mlat~ely 450,000 persons were engaged in t~he industry as compared
with the May 1933 rate given by Mlr. Green as around 350,000 on 48
hours a week (Record III-I-7; statement of hIr. Green, page 6; Record
III-I-5).
The isolated figures cited by Mr. M~chlhon and h~r. Green as t~o
numbers employed a~nd hours reflecting condlitions as of varying dates
in the past half year, were all based upon official government and ot her
public sources. Hence, the issue resolves itself into a statistical one
of determining the necessary and feasible hours and shifts for handling
the present level of cotton textiles production and talking care of the
seasonal fluctuations and spurts in demand for the products of the









industry. An exhaustive analysis of this sort was carried out by our
Research and Planning Division (Dr. Sachs), a~nd th results thereof,
submitted in the course of the hearing to President Green of the
America~n Federation of La.bor and to Dr. Wtolman of the Labor Ad-
visory Board, were uncontroverted by the former and concurred in
by the latter.
SBriefly. in t~he course of t.he depression employment in the Cotton
Textile Industry has declined fromn 425,000 in 1929 to a low mark in
March of this year of 314,000, or 26%. Since then, under the im-
petus of the recovery policies of the Government, this industry, like~
other consumers goods industries, has been enjoyvilg a sharp revival,
with rising employment, having reached 346,000 for the month of~
May, and around 400,000 in June.
With productive operations in June around the 1929 level, and this
month above it, it is clear that hours and shifts should be so fixed as
to allow a general average of production a~t least as h~igh as 1929. IEn
that year there were processed 3,370,000,000 pounds of cotton, or 5%0
below the peak year of 1927. This was at the rate of 65,700,000
pounds per full working week, tatking the workiing year ats 51.3 work-
ing weeks. The labor required in 1929 to process the 65,700,000
pounds of cotton was in man-hours 20,600,000 for an effective working
week of 49 hours. Under the proposed code, limiting the week: to 40
hours, the effective average working week, allowing for those manufazc-
turers who will not be able to obtain the maximum, would be 39 hours.
Hence, dividing the 20,600,000 man-hours by the 39 effective hours
ylields 598,000, as the em ployees required or producing an average 1989
weekly level of cotton production. In other words, the 460-hour lim it
would not only call back to work those wh~o became une;mployed: since 1989,
but would call for 18% more employees than the average in the peak
year of 19927 when 467,000 were employed. It is furthermore note-
worthy that this computation only provides for the 1929 average anld
does not make any allowance whatsoever for the seasonal peaks or
sudden spurts of demand which according to t~he experience of thie
past decade me~y well carry production from 10 to 20%j~ above any
apparently well established level. To provide for such a 15%0 spurt
above the normal at any given period would require the full utiliza-
tion of the 10 to 15% increase in labor efficiency that hias developed
in the depression under conditions of the very long hours which have
obtained hitherto. Accordingly, the industry unlder the 40-hour week
would presently absorb the available corps of textile wLorklers and assum-
ing a continuation of Ithe present trend would provide openings for un-
employed from related or nearby industries, wIhose: absorption would,
according to Mr. Batty of the NVew Bedford Textille Council, require a
very considerable apprenticeship. On t~he data submitted and on the
basis of the present requirements of t~he industry, the reduction in the
working week to forty hours will effect t~he re-employment of thze
hitherto unemployed and permit t~he substantial absorption from the
outside of a potential 15 to 25%0 employment over and above the
predepression level.
It must be kept in mind that there is nothing static about such con-
clusions. Should there be a marked recession in production t~he ques-
tion of hours would have to be reconsidered. For this and other rea-
sons hereinafter set forth approval should be limited to a four months
period.









2. Limit on machine hou~rs.
The provision in the code to limit the operation of productive ma-
chinery t.o two shifts a. week of forty hours each was vigorously sup-
ported by representatives of t~he industry as a~ means of preventing
overproduction and unemployment and as a means of aiding the large
number of small mills which lack the resources for more than two
forty-bour shifts and which otherwise would be at a competitive dis-
advantage in mleeting mecreases in labor costs resulting from the code.
Certain labor representatives appeared not to be concerned about a
limitation inl shifts. M~r. Grreen stated, "If necessary to work two
shifts, or three shifts, or even four, I think that should be permitted",
(~II-T-1), but. ended up (III-W-4I) by declaring that he was "not
fundamentally opposed to the regulation of the hours of machines."
A similar position was taken by M~r. Frey (III-Y-3) though the burden
of his testimony as to the widening gap even before the depression
between increasing labor productivity and inadequate mass-purchas-
ing power tended to throw into relief the importance of controlling
technological unemployment.
The predominant view of the industry was that while less than the
maximum of two shifts might easily cause shortages and lead to
unreasonably high prices to the consumer, the needs of the country
can be fully t~akern care of by two shifts, which are not likely to be
utilized by more than half of the mills, thus avoiding the overproduc-
tion involved in three shifts and the resulting migration and concen-
tration of the business in special areas (1-F-8). The proposed limi-
tation was also defended-by members of the industry---en social
grounds as eliminating the use of the so-called "'grave-yard shift.
The strongest objection t~o the limitation of machinery came from
representatives of outside but overlapping industries and companies
which carr on cotton textile production as an integrated part of
other manufactures such as the tire fabrics and surgical supply indus-
tries. Mr. Russell Watson, of Johnson and Johnson, favored three
shifts in the interests of low prices for surgical dressings, of affording
opportunity for the more efficient units of the industry (II-C, D-ff)
and on the ground that limitations applied to his company would
throw some employees out of work. On the other hand, Mr. Kendall,
wpho is engaged in the same business, declared that in an industry
like textiles, an over-supply of production mlachineryv coupled with
unrestricted machine ours would not only make it. difficult to bring
about a reasonable equilibrium between consumption and production,
but would seriously interfere with the reemploym~ent. of labor and the
geographical distribution of that reemlploymelnt, and in addition
would tend toward monopoly by the concentration of the production
in a few efficient plants (II-Gr-ll, 13).
The same issue arose in respect of t~he application made by Mr.
Stillmnan of the Goodyear C'ompany in behalf of the so-called "Big
Four" tire producers for exclusion of the tire fabric operations from
the scope of the term "cotton textile industry" and so from the
consequent limitation upon machine hours (I-Q-II, R-1-5). A con-
trary position w~as t8aken by M~r. Seiberling speaking for the non-
integrated tire companies which obtain their fabrics from outside
textile. mills instead of their own subsidiaries ais is t~he case with the
'"Big Fiour." It was estimst~ed by him that. the difference in cost of
runnng an eightyv-hour cotton-fabric miill against one running one









hundred forty-four machine hours would be 6f per pound or equiva-
lent to 254 a. tire which "is more (profit) per tire than the industry
has made within the last three years "' I-S-2-5). This situation in
his opinion, would "unquestionably tend to promote monopoly by
the Bi1g Four (I-S-7).
On these grounds, a request w~as made on, behalf of all the manu-
facturers of tires for a delay until September 1st in the application
of the machine-hour provision of the code to spindles or looms pro-i
during tires, yarns, or fabrics (memoranda of 1\fr. C. A. Stillman).
'In respect of the request for exemptions by the makers of surgically
dressing umits and similar requests involving the, upholstery, drapery
and kmutwear units, it is clear that the granting of an exemption would
place them in a privileged position and would discriminate against
other units of the cotton-texitile industry making the same or similar
products. As that would contravene the provision in1 Section 3A of'
the Act against permitting "monopolies or monopolistic practices",l
it is recommended that these requests be denied.
In respect to the production of tire yarn and fabrics, the cotton
textile industry itself recognizes that owing to the elaborate machinery
involved a violently sudden limitation might have a serious effect"
on the production and sale of automobiles and tire~s,. It is therefore
recommended that t~he interested tire companies present wcit.hin tw~o
weeks after the approval of this code statistical evidence as to t~he
need for limited exemption, and during those two weeks the pro-
visions of the Code limiting the operation of productive machinery"
should not apply to spindles, looms, or production of fire yarn or
fabrics, and that at the end of three weeks a fial decision on this
exemption be made by the Administration.
In respect of limitation of machinery hours of the industry as a
whole, the testimony of the workers particularlyy .III-R-2) and the
employers (particularly II-B-1) is eloquent of the ~da~nger and distress
from overproduction m the fact of the admitted excessive capacity
in the industry. The comparisons given in the report of the D~irec-
tor of the Division of Research and Planning between textile. and~
cotton goods industries on the one hand, rand general manufacturing
on the other hand, disclose the prolonged depression of the industry
even during the decade of the post-war prosperity for general manu"-
facturing. The industry has been consistently losing relative to
manufacturing industry as a whole in values of product and, what is
the most significant, in value added by manlufatcture, which is th~e
difference between selling value and the cost of materials out. ofE which
"mill margin must be paid. Between 1923 and 1929 this margin
or value added declined 15%'' as against a rise of 240'i' in all other
manufactures. It would appear therefore that the causes of low
wages lie largely in the general unprofi~tability of th industry and
its inability to command a stable price for its products by reason of
the overcapacity of the industry m terms of spindles (which have
declined from thirty-seven million at the beginning of 1923 to thirty--
one million and a half beginning 1933 with only 80%0 active even now
at the present high level of activityy, the overproduction in terms of
hours and shifts and the lack of internal organization and coordinat-
tion looking towards a stabilization of production and consumption
and employment.
W130-33--2








TIhese considerations, confirm the, view of the industry that an
eighty-hour limit on machine operations is necessary and should aid
in the organization of t~he industry with a view to checking the
accumulations of diseconomlic surpluses (Report, Division of Research
and-- Planing, Chapter I and Chapt~er V, Part, 2). Such a limitation
will not interfere wi~th adequate opportunity for fair competition on
the part of efficient, producers for increasing the volume of their pro-
duction, nor will it interfere with the interests of consumers and
workers. On the contrary the preservation of existing opportunities
for employment an profitable operation and the protection of the
industry against both undue market stimulation and undue market
demoralization .require control of machine hours and the working
out of additional flexi~ble controls for stabilizing the industry as a
whole in the planning provisions of Section 6 of the Code. Especially
in view of the instant tendency, whc is clearly toward a new and
dangerous overproduction, the preverntiorn of dislocations in employ-
m~ent and demoralizing market conditions warrants the machine-hour
limits proposed in the code, and the approval of this provision is
recommended.
Another problem in~vnolingr t~he working rate of machinery is the
houtendency~9 to increasing themaximruum machine load on employees,
poplalycalled the ."stretch-out system." This problem, recurrent
in the statements of labor representatives, was dealt with in an address
by Senator James F. Byrnes of South Carolina at the opening session
of the hearing (IKT12-L5). In pursuance of this, a committee was
appointed by the Administrator, consisting of M~r. Robert W. Bruere
as Chairman, and M~r. B. E. Gee~r, representing t~he industry, and
:1lajor Berry, represreenting labor, with their technical aids. In behalf
of the industry Mr. Amory for the North and M~r. T. MI. Marchant
for the Southr are conducting inquiries and securing information for
thre "(Stretch-out") Commlittee. Similarly the Department of Indus-
trial Studies of the Institute of Human Relations at Yale University,
is making available to the Committee the results of a study of the
s~ystemr in twenty representative mills. Meanwhile Miessrs. Bruere
and G~eer are making a field trip into the cotton textile centers to
conductt engineering studies and to holdc a number of open hearings
at which all parties at interest maay express their minds. As a pre-
liminary result of its work, the Committee has drawn up a proposal
designed not only to checks the possibe tendency towards a too rapid
introduction of the "stretch-out" which may be stimulated by the
forty-hour week limitation, but also to provide a simple machinery by
which the principle of consent and participattion b labor may be
effectuated. This proposal, summed up towards the end of this
report, is recommended for approval.
3. Wages.
T'he original Code submitted on June 16th, proposed a minimum
wage for a forty-hour week of $10 for the South and 811 for the North,
which scale towards the end of the hearing, and upon intimation
that such low figures could not be considered, was lifted to $12 and
$13 respect tively.
The labor representatives in their criticism of the original proposed
scale o~f minimurm wages made reference to the very low levels of
rilinimuml wages prevalent in the indus~try.~ President Mfchahon in
his statement in behalf of the United T'extile W~orkers of America,









submitted early in June, stated: "Today in several sections of our
country, including the North, we have had personal contact w-it~h
Textile Workers who after a full working week were compelled to
appeal to public charities to supplement their earnings. Wages of
$5 and SI a wleekl are common throughout the inldustry."" In his testi-
mony at the hearing he protested against accepting $10 as an econom-
ically sound w~age for any worker regardless of degree of skill (Record
II. 1.3); and proposed a minimum for the Nort~h of $14 in place of
the old one that he had submitted of $12 (Record II. J-1). President
Green, of the American Federation of Labor, set t~he average w\eek~ly
wage in t~he Cot~ton Goods Industry, a~s of t~he month of Miay 1933,
as $10.40 (III T-. 7~-8) and as of the recent. past, in 1932, he said,
" If% of all mnenl employed in the cotton mills sctudied e~r~e receicinI
wages which averaged below $10 and ini some cases belowl 88 for a 58-5~4
hour w~eekl.(IIT-)
Speaking for the consuming public, Mliss Lucy Miason, Secret~aryr,
National Consumers' League, joined with labor in urging a higher
minimum but dismissed the fear expressed by certain labor repre-
sentatives that t~he minimum wage might tend to become maximum:
"The Consumers League w~as the first, proponent of minimum wage
laws in this country~, and it has been their experience that in America
minimum wage rates do not tend to become the maximum, but
establish bargaining power for t~he more skilled worker, and that the
wages rise rapidly above t~he minimum (IV'. H 1-7).
Figures such as those st~at~ed by M~r. Green and others reflect very
inadequately the extent of the declines that have taken place in the
wages of the unskilled and the skilled, as well, by reason of the pro-
gressive narrowing during the depression of the wage differential for
the skilled, and besides, the record for unskilled rates applies largely to
certain of the more important mills whose w~age level, particularly in
the latter part of the depression, has been higher than. thatf of the
country as a whole. To meet the shor comings of t~he wage rate data for
this, as well as for other industries, as a basis for determlining mi~nimumn
wages, the Research Division secured from representatives mills in the
industry sample or illustrative pay rolls for North zad South. These
pay-roll records showed that minimumz walges as of the low in 11&zrch-
April this yIear, applicable to between 10% fo 20% of the pay rolls, wcere
in the neighborhood of $8 to $S.S: ~for the S'outh for aiffly-hour week and
$9 to $9.50 for the N~orth for a forty-eightl-hour workX week.
In attempting to aid in working out a proper minimum, wage, this
Administration sought to do something more than st~rive~ for a com-
promise between opposing claims. The guiding thought was to effec-
tuate the policy laid down in t.he President's statement, upon sigrningr
the National Recovery Act, to wit: "LThe idea is simlply for employers
to hire more men to do the existing work and at the same time paying
a living wage for the shorter week." This policy sets as an objective
and as a norm for the emergency at any rate the restoration of the
purchasing power which the worker in the industry had prior to the
depression. Now, in 1929, the average unskilled weekly wage in t~he
North was $17.60 (819.47 for male workers and $15.75 for female
workers). This average unskilled wlage for the forty-eight-houlr w~eek has
in the course of depression declined to a recent low point of $11.76 in
April and $11.62 in January this year (for male workers, $13.27-$13.15
for the respective months, and for female, $9.96 and $10.37). During









the same period the decline in the cost of living as computed by our
Division of Research has amounted to about 30%. Applying the
progressive decline irl living costs to the original $17i.60 of 1929 weekly
earnings, we obtain as a reala" weekly earnings for Mlay this year
$12.16; that is, t~he present t required dollars to give the 19'29 purchasing
power. We have to carry this idea of purchasing power wages one
step furt.her. For in a period of price imereases living costs tend at
first to lag behind the advance in the price level, which has followed
in the wake of the end of the liquidity complex and deflation and the
synthetic business and price recovery brought about since M~arch of
this year.
To 1(~fi up and provide adequate purchasing power, w~e should adjust
"real"! wzLages to the moving trend of prices and icing costs, else wce shall
be no more ecffecti~e than tr~ylngl to catch a trai;n moving out of the station
by aim ring for w~here the backi platform was wlhen the train. was sta~nding
still. There has already occurred an advance of between 16% and
20%1' in certain comprehensive yet not too insensitive indices of whole-
sale prices. In general t.he cost of living changes about 6%/ for each
10%7 change in wholesale prices due to the inclusion of certain rela-
tively stable and slowly varying elements. It appears necessary then
to anticipate and adjulstfor a rise of 10%o in the cost of living, which as of
2May 1983 was 69%o of 1969 tak~en as 100. This gives the Jigulre o
$138.1 as thea requisite average weekly wages for unskilled male and female
workers in N~orther.n mills to produce nowu on a forty-hou~r w~eek: the pur-
ch~aPsig power which they had on a foty-eight-hour w~eek in 1929.
In applying this figure of $13 as the prospective purchasing power
parity of the 1929 wage income of the unskilled, consideration should
bje given to certain geographical differentials in accordance wfith the
last sentence of Section 7 (c) of the Act. The differential between
North and South has developed in part from the practice of furnishing
housing at much less than cost, far more common in the South than
in the North. Evidence under this head was submitted by Colonel
G. Anderson of Marcon, Georgia, whose figures indicate t.he saving
per w-eek per employee in a Southern mill village to be in the neighbor-
hood of $2 (T.H-MI).
While there was some opposition to the differentiall as expressed
particularly by AIr. F. C. Dumaine of Amoskeag (IIB), Alr. Robert
Am~ory, representing the Northern part of the industry stated that
the differential wans conceded by the Nort~h as wairranted, not on the
basis of living costs, but on the basis of saving in rents, and that the
proposed exemuption of cleaners and outside help would further operate
m favor of the South to meeting the difference where it is in excess
of $1, inasmuch as such belp is now paid in the North considerably
higher than the proposed miinimum (IIIH1-2).
Notwrithstanding the probable original justification for the erection
by employers of mill villages there is something feudal and repugnant
to American principle in the practice of emnployer-ownership of em-
ployvee homes. WTe must recognize existing realities, however, and it
Is therefore recommended that the existence of the regional differential
of $1 per week in the minimum wage between the North and South
should be for the present accepted, but it is hoped that, writh the
creation of real industr~ial self government and improvement in the
mnimii-umn wage, an impetus will be given by employers to independent
home ownership eventually looking toward home ownership by em-









ployees and the conversion of the differential into a wage equivalent.
Applying the porposed minimum of $13 for the North and $12 for
the South, to the wage distribution payrolls of typical mills, it has
been calculated by the Division of Research that the average mnill wages
throughout the country could be increased about 30%, and hours
reduced over 25%. This proposed minimum wage was in turn tested
from the point of view of management by relating it to the "mill-
margin," that is to say, t~o t~he difference between the pries of finished
cotton goods per pound and the cost of raw! materials inclusive of,
power. Being partially subject to adjustment by management (as
opposed to raw material costs which are det~ermlined by outside forces),
the "mlill-margin" (under giv en conditions of material costs) is some
measure of the extent to which a wage increase is supportable.
While the proposed increased minimum wage and lower working
hours wrill raise labor costs somewhat above the 50% ratio of wag~es to
"mill-margin that existed between 1923-1929, there has recently
occurred a marked improvement in mill-margin back~ to conditions of
profitable operations. Therefore the increased wages could now be
absorbed with only a small increase in price to the consumer.
Our studies show, however, that any larger wage increase would
require such a mark-up as might impair consumption and so react
unfavorably on the President's whole re-employment policy. There
is such a thing as taking too big a bite. This was an industry of low'
wages. WFe are increasing for certain mills unskilled rates enoir-
mously and total wage payments by about 20% and lowering hours
over 25%/. It is about the limit of present practicabilityS.Whl
it is not enough to produce the general effect at which we are aiming,
as a practical matter, it should be accepted for the present. A
general purchasing power increases and as the industry gets the bene-
fits which it should resp from the wrise self-government authorized
under the code, further adjustments can be made.
Far from criticizing management for not profferring more at this
time, the courage and cooperative spirit of this industry in comin
forward ahead of all others is to be commended and, as will later be
shown, these conclusions have the unanimous support and comm-
mendationn of the whole Labor, Consumers' and Industrial Advisory
groups of this Administration.
4. ExLceptions of certain classes.
The exception of low paid cleaners and outside employees from hour
and wage provisions of the code were subjected to some criticism which
seems legitimate (I-HI-1; IV-E-1, ff.; compare III-O-5; IV-I-2 and 3;
VI-C-7, fr.; II-G-1). The exception of learners for a six wneekts period
from the wage scale is open to possible abuse and must be watched in
administration (IV-1-12; III-O-5; III-2-8, ff.; III[-Q-1; IV-K-6).
The exception of office and supervisory staff from the hour pro-~
visions is inconsistent with the principle of the President's statement
of June 16, 1933, which requires inclusion of the white collar class
within all benefits of the Act, and an agreement (see p. -, infra) to
remedy this defect was reached.
This code applies minimum wage provisions only to the: lowest.-paid
classes of employees. The general theory is that the normal differen-
tials in the higher grades of skilled labor will automatically be propor-
tionately increased by economic pressure. M~r. William G. Batty,
iSecretary of the M~assachusetts Textile Council, however, argued very









persuasively that definite specifications for each pay grade are
necessary to protect the higher classification of workers receiving
more than the minimum code scales (III-A-5, ff.), but the atdminis-.
t~rative difficulty of promptly developing such scales is sufficient
reason for not including them at this time. It is believed, however, '
that the President's approval should be conditioned on the under-
standing that existing differentials in the higher-paid grades shall be
maintained (III-Q-7I). i
The exception of repair shop crews, engineers, electricians, fiemen,
shipping and watching crews from the hour scale is subject to criticism
which would be removed if such workers are guaranteed time and a
half for overtime (III-S-1) (memorandum of Joseph S. MlcDonald),
and it is recommended that approval be so conditioned.
It is recommended that the President direct the planning agency of
thze industry provided for in the code, to consider and submiit a scale
of hours and wages for cleaners and outside help and to devise means
for so administering the provisions exrcepting learners as to avoid
abuses.
It is further recommended that the President's approval include a
condition that the resolution, passed at a meeting of the Cotton Tex-
tile Indust~ry Committ~ee, held on June 30, 1933, to include office
employees within the hour provisions of the code shall be carried into
effec t.
5. Conlcession~s in original proposals obtained during the hear~ing.--
(Child Labor-Increased M~in imum---Stretch-ou t).
Increases in the $10 and $11 wage scales originally proposed to $12
and $13, and the elimination of child labor, were provided for in amlend-
ments adopted during the hearing.
Of course, the most dramatic and significant development was the
voluntary proposals by the industry to abolish child labor. This
resullted less from, the h2ea~rings than from the intendments of the Act
itself. This resulted from the President's own~ concept that a mini-
mum wPa~ge applied without distinction as to age would automatically
eliminate child labor and' it did. The reason why this ancient
atrocity~i could be so easily killed, notwithstanding its tenacity of life
against 25 years of attack, was also intrinsic in t.he President's idea
that emlployer~s would be glad to do mluch by general agreement that
no single employer would dare to do separately.
6. Planning and Superviory Agency.--A planning and fair practice
agency was provided for in an amendment which is now section 6 of
the Code, adopted and submitted by the industry towards the end of
the hearing along with other amendments, chief of which were the
child labor provisions and the increases in the proposed mlinimumn
wage. Whie these proposals were advanced too late for complete
public discussion, no objections to their inclusion have come in from
any of the interested parties. There has been some newspaper
crticism on permitting new matter so late in the hearing. This
springs from a miisconception of the nature of this procedure. It is
an administrative process to arrive at a just result. It is not an
adversary judicial trial. The am~endmnicts w5ere all in the public
interests. This method wrill be continued.
Section 6 was included at the instance of the Administration and
wiTth the active collaboration of our Div-ision of Research a~nd Planning
(VI-D). It is a series of permissive powers and directions for indus-
trial administration. It sets up a committee for industrial self 1









government. The creation of such a planning agency for the con-
tinuous collaboration of the industry w~ith the Administration is an
application to an individual industry of the industrial planning and
research agency provided under Section 2 (b) of the Act for effectuat-
ing the policies of the Act and is an intrinsic and necessary part of
these policies.
Recurring reference in the course of this report has been made to
the plight of the industry even in the prosperity years prior to the
depression. Comparisons between that industry and general manu-
facturing and business contained in the accompanying economic
report bear ample testimony to the need of rational control of pro-
duction and balancing with consumption, the more pressing because
of overcapacity of this staple industry as a byproduct of war expan-
sion, of cut-throa~t competition from within, and the competition of
substitute products from without.
Broadly, the industry proposes an economic clearing house for the
development of statistical accounting and economic controls which
will aid its members in the conduct of their individual business pro-
duction and distribution, and throughh a service bureau for engineer-
ing, accounting, and credit) aid more especially the smaller mills in
meeting the emergency and the requirements of the Code. As
a supplement to this, it projects the development of an open
trading association through which, as in t~he case of commodity
exchanges, prices and terms of trading would be reported by all
companies with a view to avoid and elimuinatte unfair and destructive
competitive prices and practices. It further proposes to fashion
instruments of self-governmlent for dealing with the problems of over-
capacity and overproduction by subjecting the installation of addi-
tional productive machinery to its scrutiny and the approval or
disapproval of the Admlinistration, at the same time allowing for
flexibility of control over machinery through recommendations to
the Admlinistration for changes in or exemptions from limlitation
upon machinery hours when the interest of the industry atnd the
public render it necessary. Finally, mindful of the importance of
credit in furthering economic stability, it proposes a cooperation
with the banking and credit systems to advise them of the actual
functioning of the Code and the operations of its members, to the end
that available credit be adapted to the needs of the industry con-
sidered as a whole and the needs of the small as w~ell as the large units.
The foregoing and other listed functions of the Planning and Fair
Practice Agency are thus placed within framework in which the
common interests in stabilization of profitable activity and employ-
ment at adequate wages can be brought into focus in practice. It
remains to provide the framework for cooperation on the part of this
agency with the Administration to which it is to make recommenda-
tions which, when approved by the Administration, have the same
force and effect as provisions of the Code.
For the purpose of permitting the development of cooperative
planning and rational self-government in this industry, as in other
industries, and for the purpose of protecting the public interest, it is
recommended that Section VI of the Code be approved with the con-
dition that the Administrator shall appoint a committee of three, one
representing labor in t~he cotton textile industry, one representing the
owners and managers of the industry, and one representing the Ad-









ministreation of the Recovery Act, to act with such agency in super-
vising the execution of the Code and in promoting the purposes
defined by Section 6 for the effectuation of the policy of the Recovery
Act.
Other provisions of the code were not subjected to controversy;
were found advisable in the Administration's own analysis, and their
approval is recommended.
7. SuLggested Conditlions on Approval.
For obvious reasons, it is recommended that the following conditions
be imposed on approval of the cotton textile code:
(a) Maxczimum hours to apply to particular person~s.--It is inter-
preted that t~he provisions for maximum ours established a maximum
of hours of labor per week for every employee coererd, so that under no
circumstances will such an employee be employed or permitted to
wKork for one or more employers in the industry in the aggregate in
excess of the preselribed number of hours in a single week.
(b) Piece! work not to frustrate the code.-It is interpreted that the'
provisions for a minimum wage in this code establish a guaranteed
minimum rate of pay per hour of employment regardless of whether
thet employee's compensation is otherwise based on a time rate or upon
a piece work performance. This is to avoid frustration of the purpose
of the code by changing from hour to piece-work rules.
(c) '"Stretch-outs to be h~eld in abeyance.--Until adoption of further
provisions of this Code necessary to prevent any improper speeding
up of wcork to the disadvantage of employees ("stretch-outs") and in'
a manner destructive of the purposes of the Nat~ional Industrial Re-
covery Act., it is required that any and all increases in the amount of
work or production required of employees over that required on July
1, 1933, must be submitted to and approved by the agencyq created
by section VI of the code and by the Administration and if not so
submitted such increases will be regarded as a prima facie violation
of the provision for minimum wages.
(d) 19ons~ignatories to be given a hearing .--Opportunity shall be
given for adnuinistrative consideration of every apphecation of the
Code in particular instances to any person directly affected who has
not in person or by a representative consented and agreed to the terms
of the, code. Any such person shall be given an opportunity for a
.bea~ring before the Administrator or his representative, and for a stay
of thet application to him of any provision of the code, prior to in-
curring any liability to the enforcement of the Code against him by
any of the means provided in the National Industrial Recovery Act.
At such hearing any objection to the application of the Code in the
specific circumstances may epeetdadwl ehad
(e)Temoray aproal-The existing condition in the Cotton
Textile industry; is not static. It may change very quickly. This
is the first Code and is frankly experimental. Its approval should be
limited to a four months' period with the right to ask for a modificfL-
tion at any time and subject to a request for renewal for another four
months at any time before its expiration.
The attention of the President is called to the provision of Section I
of the code, by virtue of which approval of the Code on or before Sun-
day, July 9, will make it effective on M~onday, July 17.
JRespectfully submitted,
HUGH S. JOHFNSON,
Admi nisTrator.














LIST OF WITNESSES


M~r. George A. SiloaLn, President, Cotton Textile Institute, Inc.
M/r. Robert Amory, President, Nashua M~anufacturing Company.
Mr. WCilliam D. Anderson, President, Bibb Mianufacturing Com)r
pany.
Mlr. F. C. Dumaine, Almoskeaga, M~anufacturing Co.
Senator James F. Byrnes, South Carolina.
Mr. Harry P. K~endall, The K'endall Company.
Mr. B. D. Gordon, representing four hosiery knitting mills.
M~r. F. A4. Seiberling, representing 20 independent tire manufac-
turers.
Mlr. E. J. Mlchillan, President, American K~nitwear M~anufacturers
Association.
Mr. Thomas M~chIhon, President, United Textile Workers of
America.
M/r. W. E. G. Batty, Secretary, New Bedford Textile Council.
Mr. C. A. Stillman, Vice President, Goodyear Tire and Rubber
Company, speakiinga for Goodyear Tire and Rubber Co., Goodrich
Rubber Co., Firestone T~ire and Rubber Co.; and U.S. Rubber
Company.
Mr. S. Gottschall, National Upholstery and Drapery Textile A4sso-
0186108.
M1r. Russell E. Watson, representing Johnson & Johnson.
Senator Hugo L. Black, of Alabama.
Mr. John Frey, Mletal Trades Department, American Federation of
Labor.
Mr. Sidney Hillman, President, Amalgamated Clothing Workers.
Miss Lucy R. Mason, General Secretary, Nat~ional Consumers
Leasr~ue.
1 ~t~ss M~argaret WViseman, Executive Secretary, Consumers League
of Massachusetts.
Miss June Croll, National Textile Workers UTnion.
Mr. William Green, President, American Federation of Labor.
Mr. John P. Davis, Executive Secretary, Negro Indust~rial Leagoue.
Mr. John L. Barry, New Hampshire Federat~ion of Labor.
Miss Maiud Y'ounger, Chairman, National Women's Party.
M~r. Flint Garrison, Director, Wholesale Dryv Goods Instit~ute.
Mr. T. M. M'archant, President, American Association of Cotton
Manufacturers.
Mr. H. J. Carr, General Vice President, Internat~ional Association
of Machinists.
Mfr. Joseph S. McDonagh, International Brotherhood of Electrical
Workers.
Mr. Robert R. West, President, Riverside and Dan River Cotton
M~ills.
Mr. Stuart W. Cramer, President, Cramierton Miills, Inc.
M~r. Courtenay Dinwciddie.


97130--33--3


(15)













CODE OF FAIR COMPETITION FOR THE COTTON TEXTILE
INDUSTRY
.To effectuate the policy of Title I of the National Industrial Recov-
ery Act; during the period of the emergency, by reducing and relieving
unlemployment, improving t~he standards of labor, eliminatmgp com-
petitive practices destructive of the interests of the public, employees,
and employers, relieving the disastrous effects of overcapacity, and
otherwise rehabilit.ating the cotton textile industry and by increasing
the consumption of industrial and agricultural products by increasing
purchasing power, and in other respects, the following provisions are
established as a code of fair competition for the cotton textile
industry:
I. Definitions.-The term "cotton textile industry" as used herein
is defined to nican the manufacture of cotton yarn and/or cotton
woven fabrics, whether as a final process or as a part of a larger or
further process. The term employeese" as used herein shall include
all persons employed in the conduct of such operations. The term
"'productive machinery as used herein is defined to mean spinning
spindles and/or looms. The term "effective date" as used herein is
defined to be July 17, 1933, or if this code shall not have been approved
by the President two weeks prior thereto, then the second M~onday
after such approval. The term "persons" shall include natural per-
sons, partnerships, associations, and corporations.
II. On and after the effective date, the minimum wage that shall
be paid by employers in the cotton textile idndstry to any of their
employees--except learners during a six-wreek~s' apprenticeship,
cleaners, and outside employees--shall be at the rate of $12 per week
when employed in the Southern section of the industry and at the
rate of $13 per week when employed in the Northern section for 40
hours of labor.
III. On and after the effective dat.e, employers in the cotton textile
industry shall not operate on a schedule of ours of labor for their
employees--except repair shop crews, engineers, electricians, firemen,
office and supervisors staff, shipping, watching and outside crews,
and cleaners--inz excess of 40 hours per week and they shall not operate
productive machinery in the cotton textile industry for more than
2 shifts of 40 hours each per week.
IV. Onz and after the effective date, employers in the cotton textile
industry shall not employ any mlinor under the age of 16 years.
V. Wiith a view to keeping the President informed as to the obsery-
ance or nonobserv;ance of this Code of Fair Competition, and as to
whether the cotton textile industry is taking appropriate steps to
effectusae the declared policy of the National Industrial Reover
Act, each person engaged in the cotton textile industry will furnish
duly certified reports in substance as follows and in such form as may
hereafter be provided:
(18)








(a) Wages and hours of labor.-R~eturns every four weeks showing
actual hours worked by the various occupational groups of employees
and mmunmum weekly rates of wage.
(b) M\achin~ery data.--In the case of mills having no looms, returns
should be made every four weeks showing the number of spinning
spindles in place, the number of spinning spindles actually operating
each week, the number of shifts, and the total number of spindle
hours each week. In the case of mills having no spinning spindles,
returns every four weeks showing t.he number of looms in place, the
number of looms actually operated each weekr, the number of shifts
and the total number of loom hours each week. In the case of mills
that have spinning spindles and looms, returns every four weeks
showing the number of spinning spindles and looms in place; the
number of spinning spindles and looms actually operated each week,
the number of shifts, and the total number of spindle hours and loom
hours each week.
(c) Reports of production, stocks, and orders.-W~eekly returns show-
ing Production in terms of the commonly used unit, i.e. linear yards,
or pounds or pieces; stocks on hand both sold and unsold stated in
the same terms and Unfiled Orders stated also in the same terms.
These returns are to be confined to staple constructions and broad
divisions of cotton textiles. The Cotton-Textile Institute, Inc., 320
Bjroadway, New Y'ork City, is constituted the agency to collect and
receive such reports.
VI. To further effectuate the policies of the Act, the Cotton Tex-
tile Industry Committee, the applicants herein, or such successor
committee or committees as may hereafter be constituted by the
action of the Cotton Textile Institute, the American Cot~ton 1\lanufac-
turers Association, and the National Association of Cotton Manu-
facturers, is set up t~o cooperate with t~he Administrator as a planning
and fair-practice agency for the cotton textile industry. Such agency
may from time to time: present to t~he Admzinistrator recommenda-
tions based on conditions in the industry as they may develop from
time to time which will tend to effectuate the operation of the pro-
visions of this Code and the policy of the National Industrial Recovery
Act, and in particular along the following lines:
1. Recommendations as to the requirements by the Administrator
of such further reports fromt persons engaged in the cotton textile
industry of statistical information and keeping of uniform accounts
as may be required to secure the proper observance of the code and
promote the proper balancing of production and consumption and
the stabilization of the industry and employment.
2. Recommendations for the setting up of a service bureau for
engineering, accounting, credit, and other purposes to aid the smaller
mills in meeting the conditions of the emergency and the requirements
of this code.
.: 3, Recommendations (1) for the requirement by the Administrator
of registration by persons engaged in the cotton textile industry of
their productive machinery, (2) for the requirement by the Adminis-
trator that prior to the installation of additional productive machinery
by persons engaged or engaging in the cotton textile industry, except
for the! replacement of a similar number of existing~looms or spindles
or to bring the operation of existing productive machinery into balance,
such persons shall secure certificates that such installation will be








consistent with effectuating the policy of the National. Industrial
Recovery Act during the period of the emergency, and (3) for the
granting or wFithholding by the Administrator of such certificates if
so required by him.
4. Recommendations for changes in, or exemptions from the
provisions of this code as to the working hours of machinery which will
tend to preserve a. balance of productive activity with consumption
requirements, so that the interests of the industry and the public
m~ayr be properly served.
5. Recommendations for the making of requirements by the Ad-
ministrat~or as to practices by persons engaged in the cotton textile
industry as to methods and conditions of trading, the naming and
reporting of prices which may be appropriate to avoid discrimination,
to promote the stabilization of the industry, to prevent and eliminate
unfair and destructive competitive prices and practices.
6. Reco~mmendat~ion s for regullat~ing the disposal of distress mer-
chanzdise in a way to secure the protection of the owners and to,
promote sound and stable conditions in the industry.
7. Recommendations as to the making available to the suppliers of
credit t~o those engaged in the industry of information regarding terms
of, an~d actual functioning of a~ny or all of the provisions of the code,
the conditions of the industry and regarding the operations of any
and all of the members of the industry covered by such code to the
end that during the period of emergency available credit may be
adapted to the needs of such industry considered as a whole and to
the needs of the small as well as to the large units.
8. Recommendations for dealing with any inequalities that may
otherwise arise to endanger the: stability of the industry and of pro-
ductionl and employment.
Such recommendations, when approved by the Administrator,
shall have the same force and effect as any other provisions of this
code.
Such agency is also set up to cooperate with the Administrator in
making investigations as to the functioning and observance of any
of thet pro-visions of this Code, at its own instance or on complaint by
any person affected, and to report the same to the Administrator.
Suchi agency is also set up for the purpose of investigating and
informing the Administrator on behalf of the Cotton Textile Industry
as to thie impportat~ion of competitive articles into the United States
in substantial quantities or increasing ratio to domestic production
on such terms or under such conditions as to render ineffective or
seriously to endanger the maintenance of this Code and as an agency
for making complaint to the President on behalf of the Cotton
Textile Industry, under the provisions of the National I~ndustrial
Recovery Act, with respect thereto.
VII. Where the costs of executing contracts entered into in the
Cotton T~ext~ile Industry prior to the presentation to Congress of~the
National Indust~rial Recovery Act are increased by the application
of the provisions of that Act to the industry, it is equitable and
promotive of the purposes of the Act that appropriate adjustments
of such contracts to reflect such increased costs be arrived at by arbi-
t~ral proceedings or otherwise, and the Cotton Textile Industry Com-
mittee, the applicant for this Code, is constituted an agency to assist
in effectin such adjustments.









:VITT. Employers in the Cotton Textile Industry shall comply wFith
the requirements of the National Industrial Recovery Act as follows:
" (1) That employees shall have the right to organize and bargain
collectively through representatives of their ow-n choosing, and shall
be free from the interference, restraint, or coercion of employers of
labor, or their agents, in the designation of such representatives or in
self-organization or in other concerted activities for the purpose of
collective bargaining or other mutual aid or protection; (2) that no
employee and no one seeking employment shall be required. as a, con-
d~ition of employment to join any company umion or to refrain from
J oiing, organizinga, or assisting a labor organization of his own choos-
mng; and (3) that employers shall comply wpith the ma ximulm hours of
labor, miniimum rates of pay, and other conditions of employment,
approved or prescribed by the President."'
IX. This code and all the provisions thereof are expressly made
subject to the right of the President, in accordance wit~h the provision
of Clause 10 (b) of the National Industrial Recovery Act, from time
to time to cancel or modify any order, approval, license, rule, or regu-
lation, issued under Title I of said Act, and specifically to the right
of the President to cancel or modify his approvc~al of ths Code or any;
conditions imposed by him upon his approval thereof.
X. Such of the provisions of this Code as are noti required to be
included therein by the National Industrial Recovery Act may, w5it.h
the approval of the President, be modified or eliminated as changes
mn circumstances or experience may indicate. It is contemplated
that from time to time supplementary provisions to this Code or
additional codes will be submitted for the approval of the President
to prevent unfair competition in price and other unfair and destructive
competitive practices and to effectuate the other purposes and policies
of Title I of the National Industrial Recovery Act consistent with the
provisions hereof.













EXECUTIVE ORDERS APPLYING PROVISIONS OF` THE
COTTON TEXTILE CODE TO OTHER INDUSTRIES

EXECUTIVE ORDEa, JULY 15, 1933
In supplement to an application filed for approval of a code of fair
compet.it.ion for t~he rayon weaving i-ndustry, t~he applicants have re-
quested imlmediatee approval of certain provisions, and after due con-
sideration, acting under the Provisions of the National Industrial
Recovery Act., I agree with the applicants who have fied said code for
the rayon weaving industry, that the provisions of section. V, para-
graphs A-, B, D a~nd E, which are identical with corresponding pro-
visions in the Cotton Textile Code, approved by me July 9, 1933,
should be made effective on July 17, 1933, which is t.he effective date
of t~he Cotton Textile Code, and I hereby approve of said provisions
of said code for the rayon weaving industry subject to the interpreta-
tion and conditions imposed by me on my approval of the correspond-
ing provisions of said Cotton Textile Code, and subject further to
such revision or modification as I may find proper after a hearing has
been held on said code of fair competition for the rayon weaving
industry, now set for July 25, 1933.

EXECUTIVE ORDER, JULY 15, 1933
In supplement to an application filed for approval of a Code of Fair
Competition for the Throwing Industry, the applicants have requested
immedilt~e approval of certain provisions of said Code, with amend-
ment~s thereto, and after due consideration, acting under the Provi-
sions of the N~ational Industrial Recovery Act, I agree wi~th the appli-
cants who hav-e filed said Code for the Throwing Industry that the
provisions of Sections III, IV', V', IX which, as amended, are identical
with corresponding provisions in the Cotton Textile Code, approved
by me July 9, 1933, should be made effective as amended on July 17,
1933, which is the effective date of the Cotton Textile Code, and I
therefore hereby approve of said provisions of said Code for the
Throwing Industry, as amended, subject to the interpretations and
conditions imposed by me on my approval of the corresponding
provisions of said Cottoni Textile Code and subject further to such
revisions or modifications as I may find proper after a bearing has been
held on such Code of Fair Competition for the Throwing Industry,
now set for July 25, 1933.

EXECUTIVE ORDER, JULY 15, 1933
In supplement to an application filed for approval of a Code of
Fair Competition for the Cotton Thread Industry, the applicants
have requested immediate approval of certain provisions, and after
due consideration, acting under the provisions of the National
Industrial Recovery Act, I agree with the applicants who have filed
(20)









said Code for the Cotton Thread Indust~ry that the provisions of
Title 2, Paragraphs 5 and 6 and the provisions of Title 3, paragraphs
4 and 5, which are identical with corresponding provisions in the
Cotton Textile Code, approved by me July 9, 1933, should be made
effective on July 17i, 1933, which is the effective date of t~he Cotton
Textile Code, and I therefore hereby approve of said provisions of
said Code for the Cott~on Thread Industry subject t~o the interpre-
tations and conditions imposed by me on my approval of the corre-
sponding provisions of said Cot~ton Textile Code and subject further
to such revisions or modifications as I may find proper after a hearing
has been held on said Code of Fair Competition for the Cotton
Thread Industry.

EXECUTIVE ORDER, JULY 15, 1933
Pursuant to the authority vested in me by Title I of the National
Industrial Recovery Act, approved June 16, 1933, and pending action
upon a Code of Fair Competition to be presented by the Silk
Association of America,
I agree with the Committee representing the Broad Silk and
Rayon Weavers Division, t~he Converters Division, the Special
Fabrics Division, t.he Ribbon Division, and the Woven Label Division,
of the Silk Association of America, that they shall be bound beginning
July 17 by the provisions of the Cotton Textile Industry Code as set
forth in the telegram, dated July 14, offering this agreement to the
President of the Unit~ed States, pursuant to Section 4 of t~he National
Recovery Act, which telegramu is signed by Henry E. Stehli, James
C. Black, Paul C. Debry, Sol C. M~oss, Ramsay Pieugnet, G~eorge G.
Sommaripa, and addressed to h~r. Nelson Slater, Deputy Ad~mini-
thator, Department of Comumerce, Wlashington, D.C., it~h the express
understanding that this agreement is subject to cancellation at any
time without notice.

EXECUTIVE ORDER, JULY 15, 1933
A Code of Fair C~ompetition for the Cotton Textile Industry has
been heretofore approved by Order of the President dated July 9,
1933, on certain conditions set forth in such order. The applicantS
for said Code have now requested the withdrawal of condition 12 of
said order providing for the termination of approval at the end of
four months unless expressly renewed, have accepted certain other
conditions, have proposed amendments to t~he Code to effectuate the
intent of the remaining conditions, and have requested that final
approval be given to the Code as so amended and on such conditions.
Pursuant to the authority vested in me by Title I of the National
Industrial Recovery Act, a.pproved June 16, 1933, on the report and
recommenRration of the Administrator and on consideration.
It is ordered that t~he condition heretofore imposed as to the ter-
minattion of approval of the Code is now w~ithdralwn and that the
Code of Fair Competition for the Cot~ton Textile Industry is finally
approved with t~he conditions so accepted and with the amendments
so proposed, as set forth in Schedule A attached hereto.















SCHEDULE A


APPLICATION TO THE PRESIDENT BY THE COTTON TEXTILE INDUSTRY COMMITTEE
FRo FINAL APPROVAL OF CODE OF FAIR COMPETITION FOR THE COTTON
TEXTILE INDUSTRY

The Cotton Textile Industry Committee, the applicant for the approval of the
Code of Fair Competition for the Cotton Textile Industry, submitted for the
approval of the: President June 16, 1933, and as revised June 30, 1933, accepts the
interpretations and conditions to the approval thereof set forth in paragraphs 1,3,
7, 8, 9, and 13 of the order of the President dated July 9, 1933, and asks the ap-
proval of the President to the following amendments to such code as properly
complying wvith and effectuating the conditions provided for in paragraphs 2, 4, 5,
6, 10,~ and 11 of said order of approval, and asks for the final approval by the
President of thae Code of Fair Competition for the Cotton Textile Industry as so
amended, andc on the conditions so accepted and with the omission of the condi-
tion in paragraph 12 of such order as to the termination of the approval at the end
of four months.
1. It shall be one of the functions of the Planning and Fair Pr actice Agency pro-
vide~d for in Section 6 of the Code to consider the question of plans for eventual
employee ownership of homes in mill villages and submit to the Recovery Admin-
istration prior to January 1, 1934, its report in the matter.
2. On and after July 31, 1933, the maximum hours of labor for office employees
in the Cotton Textile Industry shall be an average of forty hours a week over
each period of sixr months.
3. Thie amoount of differences existing prior to July 17, 1933, between the
wage rates paid various classes of employees (receiving more than the established
minimum wage) shall not be decreased-in no event, however, shall any employer
pay anly employee a w-age rate which will yield a less wage for a work week of 40
hours than such, employee was receiving for the same class of work for the longer
week, of 48 hours or more prevailing prior to July 17, 1933. It shaUl be a function
of the Planning and Fair Practice Agency provided for in Paragraph 6 of the
Code to observe the operation of these provisions and recommend such further
provisions as experience may indicate to be appropriate to effectuate their pur-
poses.
4. On and after the effective date the maximum hours of labor of repair shop
crews, engineers, electricians and watching crews in the Cotton Textile Industry
shall, except in case of emergency work, be forty hours a week with a tolerance of
10 percent. Any emergency time in any mill shall be reported monthly to the
Planning and Fair Pract~ice Agency provided for in Paragraph 6 of the Code,
though the Cotton-Textile Institute.
5. Until adoption of further provisions of this Code that may prove necessary
to prevent any improper speeding up of work (stretch-outs), no employee of any
Inill in the Cotton Textile Industry shall be required to do any work in excess
of the: practices as to the class of work of such employee prevailing on July 1,
1933, or prior to the Share-the-Work Mlovement, unless such increase is submitted
to and approved by the Agency created by Section 6 of the Code and by the
National Recovrery Administration.
6. This Code shall be in operation on and after the effective date as to the
whole cotton textile industry except as an exemption from or a stay of the appli-
cation of its provisions may be granted by the Administrator to a person applying
for the same or except as provided in an executive order. No distinction shall
be made in such exemptions between persons who have and have not joined in
applying for the approval of this Code.
Respectfully submitted.
THE COTT~ON TEXTIL INDJUSTRY COMMITTEE,
GEPORGEF A. SLoAx, Chairman.
D rATEDr JULY 15, 1983.
(22)










AMENDMlENT TO CODE OF FAIR COMPETITION FOR THE COTTON TEXTILE INDUSTRY
XVII. To make proper provision wlith regard to t~he stretch-out (or speciall-
sation) system or any other problem of w~orkring conditions in the Cotton Textile
Industry, it is provided:
1. There shall be cons!.ituted by appointment of the Administrator a Cotton
Textile National Industrial Relat~ions Board, to be composed of three members,
one to be nominated by the Cotton Textile Industry Committee to represent
the employers, one to be nominated by t~he Labor Advisoryl Board of the National
Recovery Administration to represent t~he employees, and a, third to be selected
by the Administrator. This National Board shall be provided by the National
Recovery Administration with a per die~m for actual days engaged in its work
and w~ith such secretarial and expert technical assistance as it may require in the
performance of its duties.
2. The Administrator, upon the nomination of the Cotton Textile National
Industrial Relations Board shall appoint in each state in which the cotton textile
industry operates a State Cotton Testile Industrial Relations Board composed
of three members, one of whom shall be selected from the employers of the cotton
textile industry, one from the employees of the cotton, textile industry, anid a
third to represent the public.
S3. Whenever, in any cotton textile mill, a controversy shall arise between
r employer and employees as to the stretch-out (or specialization) sys~temn or any
i other problem of w~ork~ing conditions, the employer and the employees may
establish in such mill an Industrial Relations Committee chosen from the man-
agement and the employees of the mill and on which the employer and thet em-
plo~yees shall have equal representation of not more! than three representatives
each. If such a committee is not otherwise established, the employer or the
employee, or both, may apply to the State Industrial Relationls Board for
assistance and cooperation in the establishment in such mill of such industrial
I rehstions committee. The term of service of each such mill committee shall, be
limited to the adjustment of such controversy or problem of working conditions
for the adjustment of which the committee was created.
If the representatives of the employers and of the employees in such industrial
relations committee are unable to arrive at an agreement and united action
with respect to such differences of opinion, the representatives of the employers
or of the employees, or both, may appeal to the State Industrial Relations
Board for cooperation and assistance in arriving at an agreement and united
action.
It shall be the duty of such Industrial Relations Committee to endeavor
to adjust such controversy. In cases where such committee reaches agreement
with respect to any such controversy, such agreement shall be final except
that it shall be submitted to the Cotton Textile National Industrial Relations
Board for review and approval under such regulations as such National Board
may establish.
This provlision for such industrial relations committee within the particular
mills shall be without prejudice to the freedom of association of employees and
the.other provisions of Section 7, of the Industrial Recovery Act.
4. Ithllr beII the dulty ~S of lthe SJ~tate Ind~ustrlial Relations Board, where their as-
sistance is requested, as provided in subsection 3, to cooperate with employers
and employees i n organizing i nd ustrial-relations committees in individual cotton
textile mills and to cooperate w~ith such committees in the development of con-
ference procedures and in the adjustment of differences of opinion w~ith respect to
the operation or introduction of the stretch-out system and other problems of
w-orking conditions.
In the event that the State Industrial Relations Board is unable to bring about
agreement and united action of labor and management in a controversy so ap-
pealed to it, such St.ate Industrial Relations Board shall present the controversy
to the National Industrial Relations Board for hearing anid final adjustment.
5. The National Industrial Relations Board shall hear anid ~finally determne
all such questions brought before it on appeal by the State Industrial Rtelations
Boards and certify its decisions to the Administrator and shallpave authority to
codify the experience of the industrial-relations committees of the various mills
and state boards w~ith a view\ to establishing standards of general practice with
respect to t~he stretch-out (or specialization) sysbt~em or other problems of worrinlg
conditions.















:ii