Reports of committees and resolutions adopted by third National conference on labor legislation, November 9, 19, and 11, 1936


Material Information

Reports of committees and resolutions adopted by third National conference on labor legislation, November 9, 19, and 11, 1936
Physical Description:
iii, 39 p. : ; 23 cm.
United States -- Bureau of Labor Standards
National Conference on Labor Legislation, 1936
U.S. Govt. Print. Off.
Place of Publication:
Publication Date:


Subjects / Keywords:
Labor laws and legislation -- Congresses   ( lcsh )
Labor laws and legislation -- United States   ( lcsh )
federal government publication   ( marcgt )
non-fiction   ( marcgt )


General Note:
At head of title: United States Department of labor. Frances Perkins, secretary. Division of labor standards. Verne A. Zimmer, director.

Record Information

Source Institution:
University of Florida
Rights Management:
All applicable rights reserved by the source institution and holding location.
Resource Identifier:
aleph - 004980593
oclc - 05369879
lccn - l 36000142
lcc - HD8057 .N2 1936
System ID:

This item is only available as the following downloads:

Full Text


. Frances Perkins, Secretary
Verne A. Zimmer, Director

Reports of Committees and Resolutions

Adopted by

Third National Conference on Labor Legislation

November 9, 10, and 11, 1936


IF 1s

1 ir


Committee on Industrial Health and Safety------ 1
Committee on Workmen's Compensnation i--_-_ 3
Commit tec on Hours of Labor_------------- 5
Committee on Minimum Wage___-------------------- 7
Committee on Child LaborStandards------------------ 9
Committee on Apprentice Training -------------------- 11
Committee on Unemployment Compensation and Em-
ployment Service--------------------------------- 12
Committee on Regulation of Pri v toe Employment Agencieso_ 16
Committee on Housing ----------------------------- 19
Committee on Vacations with Pay --------------------- 23
Committee on Cooperation between State and Federal
Departments of Labor----------------------------- 24
Committee on Resolutions --------------------------- 25

The Secretary's Advisory Committee on National and
State Labor Department Problems_ ----------------- 30
Committee on Powers and Duties of State Labor Depart-
ments ---------------------------.--------------- 32
Committee on Wage Payment and Wage Collection ----- 33
Committee on Industrial Home work ----------------. 36


Digitized by the Internet Archive
in 2012 with funding from
University of Florida, George A. Smathers Libraries with support from LYRASIS and the Sloan Foundation

Digiize by he nteret rchie .


SAFETY-as adopted
The committee endorses the reconmelndations on industrial safety
and health n(dopted at the Second National Conference held at A.-Ie-
ville in October 1935, and in addition or amplifi:ation of those
standards makes further reconmnendiations as follows:
Industrial codes or rules, having the force and effect of law, have
proven more effective and are deemed more practicable than statute
enactmenlts, and we recommend that the State departments adlmiln-
istering the labor laws be authorized to adopt suich rules or regu-
lations, in conformance with generally accepted standards, and with
the advice of technicians and of employer and employee representa-
tives. We recommend that special studies of health hazards be made.
under the auspices of the labor departments and assisted in every
possible way by the United States Department of Labor.
This committee is impressed with the important work already
accomplished by many State labor departments throu lgh the develop-
ment and promulgation of safety and other codes for the protec-
tion of the wav-e earners. The committee recommends that the ap-
propriate officials in every State reexamine the possibilities of
strengtleningj their laws and procedure for the sound development
of this vitally essential administrative practice.
In order to further the cause of health and safety in inlldustry
nationally, and to promote a better knowledge of practical methods
for eliminating industrial hazards to life, we reco0nmmend and urge
that the Federal Governlment, through the United States Depart-
menlt of Labor, establish a safety laboratory in Washington, and
that so far as practicable the benefits of such a laboratory be maIl
available to the several States through traveling exhibits.
Recognizing that a reduction of industrial health and accident
disabilities requires a constant program of education under comp le-
tent direction, we recommend that the labor department- of the
several States, or those State agencies having the responsibility for
the enforcement of labor laws and regulations, develop adequate
safety educational programs in cooperation) and collabioration with
employers and employees.
As a major and basic factor in reduction of industrial accidents
and health casualties, the committee recomunnds the obligatory

reporting of inldu-trial injuries and diseases to the State agency
cli;irg.d with the enforcement of labor laws. The committee recom-
] inl.-nl that all States that have not yet adopted the standard sched-
ules for industrial accident reports be urged to do so at an early
The conii:,l ittee further recommends that this conference urge the
early complete ion of the undertaking to standardize the method of
classifying c;111-ta of accidents, in order that experience may be
comparable in the several jurisdictions.
Believing that the State departments enforcing safety and health
laws and regulations, and having the duty to promote safety in every
proper way, should have the fullest possible information and data,
the committee re'r iiiiiends State laws requiring casualty companies
to file with the labor departments copies of all reports of inspections
as to health and safety hazards, including elevators, boilers, and
factory e(lqipment and conditions.
The c',lliii:ittee rpco minen.ds that the Third National Conference
commend the Secretary of Labor for her constructive move in calling
a National Silicosis Conference and urges that the results be given to
State commissions and labor groups at the earliest possible moment.
Gent-rally throughout the country legislation for protection against
occupational disease has lagged behind accident prevention, both in
respect to workmen's compensation and health regulations. Recent
1,ti'ognition of industrial health hazards, and their constant develop-
ment in new 1)prcesses, make it essential that special facilities for
their detection and control be given to the labor law or other enforce-
ment agencies in the States. The committee recommends that Fed-
eral grants uintier the Social Security Act be utilized to the fullest
extent in setting up industrial hygiene services in the States, and that
such units should be directly in the departments charged with en-
foiretment of laws for the protection of industrial workers, or in any
event, shall be available in all instances to the administrator of such
laws and for workIen's compensation adjudication.
The committee, recognizing that the health and safety of millions
of industrial workers depend in great measure not only upon the
laws and regulations in the several States, but more part i.uila ly upon
the competency of the factory inspectors who enforce them, this com-
mittee recommends that States not having civil-service laws enact
theiii as soon as possible, and that meanwhile the personnel for fac-
tory iiilpection be selected by some practicable merit test. The com-
mittee commends the United States Department of Labor for its
development of factory inspection manuals and for sponsoring a
course of instruction for inspectors in collaboration with the States.
The c (liiinittee further recommends the extension and co'ntin lan ce of
the plan, and if possible its utilization in furthering the selection,


training, and retention of competent inspectors in the State. not
having adequate civil-service merit sy.-tiiins. in operation.
Due to the constant development of nei proil, h'is in the A(con1 rl of
industrial health hazards, as well as in adniiii.,trative problelis, a
standing committee should consider subjects during the interim
and report to the next. conferncI(e, and we reconminend tie appoint-
ment of such conumittee by the Secretary.
Chairman: Voyta Wrabetz, Clirmalnli,n Industrial C,,mmiis.:in. Wi-'-iin.mir.
A. L. Flotclher, C,,Ilnissinl'r, Department of Labor, N',rth Car1olina.
Frank Wad,. Commissioner of Labor, Mi.'liian.
E. I. Lh Kinley, Commissioner, Bureau of Labor and St;iti.1 i.r, Arkansas.
John B. Aw row\., Secretary, American Association for Labor;ilation,
New York.
David Fowler, Pref-ident, District 21, Uiitildl Mine Workers of America,
L. H. Jones, Presidlent, State Federati'n of Labor, Missi.sipili.
Ray Ediliiioniu. Presildenit, District 12, UIiitcd Mine Workers of America,
John J. Esan, Secretary, State Fedlerati,,n of Labor, Connecticut.
James Wilson, International Labor Office, Geneva, Switzerland.
J. A. Henry, Secret ary-Treasurer, State Conference of Stonecutters, Ohio.
John F. Woi.-os, Jr., Artiingi Chief Factory Inspebtir, Department of Labor,
West Virguinia.
Ethel M. Johlnsun. International Labor Office, Washington, D. C.
Dr. M. G. Lloyd. National Bureau of Standards, Washington, D. C.
Verne A. Zimmer, Director, Division of Labor Standards, United States
Department of Labor.

as adopted

The committee made the following recommendations:
1. Compi,.nsatfimon.-Compulsory, with elective coverage for agri-
cultural workers and domestic servants.
2. Adminhistration.-Commi ssion, not court.
The cost of administration should be defrayed out of premium
3. Insurance.-Exclusive State insurance fund.
Severe penalties on employers not complying with insurance re-
quirements desirable.
4. Coverage.-All industries and all employees, including State and
municipal. No exemptions of small employers or nonhazardous
industries. The right of the employee to waive compensation pro-
hibited. Extraterritorial workers to be included. In this connec-
tion, reciprocity and cooperation between States is very desirable.
All employees excluded from State jurisdictions by reason of being


subject to Federal jurisdiction to be covered by a Federal workmen's
compensation law.
5. Injuries.-Define injuries to include occupational diseases.
"Blanket" coverage on occupational diseases rather than "schedule"
6. Wa;fing period.-Not more than 7 days, nor less than 3. Retro-
active after 14 days to date of injury.
7. Medical service.-Unlimited medical and hospital service with-
out cost to injured employees. Choice of physician by employee.
8. Percentage.-For nonfatal cases, not less than 662/3 percent of
the injured employee's wage. In case of death, 35 percent for widow
without children, plus 15 percent for each child, the total not to
exceed the percentage for permanent total disability.
9. Weekly maximum and, coi nptn. atlon.-Maxi mu
should recognize the rights of the higher-paid workers to a standard
of living above the subsistence level, and minimum should be not less
than the subsistence level, maintenance of standards of benefits in
case of permanent disability or death to be unaffected by abnormally
depressed employment or wage conditions. The wage basis should be
a normal full-time week.
10. Compensation period.-
Fatal cases: Benefits until death of widow or remarriage, in which
case not less than 2 years' compensation at time of remarriage; chil-
dren, to 18 years or thereafter, if physically incapacitated or mentally
Permanent total disability: During life.
Temporary total disability: During disability.
Permanent partial disability: Compensation shall be calculated on
the basis of a percentage of permanent total disability and shall be
payable in addition to compensation for healing period (i. e., tempo-
rary disability). For administrative simplicity, there should be a
schedule of permanent partial disability benefits based upon the fore-
going principle.
11. Second injuries (e. g., loss of serovlo, eye).-Employer to be
charged as though for first injury, and balance to be paid out of
special-injury fund, both amounts not to exceed permanent total dis-
12. Second-injury fund and rehabilitation fund.-To be secured
from death benefit where there are no dependents, and from pay-
ments in first major injury cases.
13. Minors.-At least double compensation for minors illegally em-
Expected future increase of earnings of minors to be taken into
consideration in fixing the compensation rates for permanent injuries
or death. The employer to be charged with primary liability for

TllllI) NATIONAL CON I'EIlI:.NCE ON L..\1(>1 .1.I.-.I ;1..I'1ION

additional compllllrill -'ioi,. AIpproval,,\ by a 'o4iipetent St.ial ailllrity
of the expenditures of (oinai'lls:c;fi,,i grI;1nt' to mIinors to ;a-iiIr the
most dc-iraibloe rlllablilit;tliinl and c(llii.:liull of the injiir'i1d minllor.
14. Commu/utation.-Workiil(en's c(mipen station being in lieu of 1'ls
of earning '.Iapliiity, pa);yviii(ts hall be ,;ial in in -alliin.l,-. Com-
mutation of iln kiei 's coIpenh la ion shall be approved only for good
c('ause llhown with properr -alfeguanrl as to the use of the funds so
coImJI1(ted1, with ithe l -4I interests of the workman or his dlepi-iidelitl
in case of deatIi being the primary coiiideration.
15. Ini...rance cov,'era'/e /ai'wt/y.-That the problem, ari ing frIm
insol \ve ly of ii-~lllfani' carriers and self-insurers be .,d olved y re-
quiriiig positive and adequate afeguarls for the guar: ii a iing of the
paymvient of erimpenv, nation to all injured employees.
16. Accident pr'.,''. tn,; adli'q/ fi' in, r,'.,,in.-Reporting of all
disabling injuries, as well as occupational disc;.-ea shi:ll be 'coImpul-

17. Proc"dur,.-Informal, "administrative", with adeq uat. pro-
vision in law for the commission to have the power to clhe'k "ambu-
lance chasing", regulate attorney's and doctor's fees, etc. Appeals
from decrees should not be allowed except on questions of law and
should be carried direct to the highestt court.
c'liiniirian: Franlk T. Sfiark,.y, Industrial Commission, Minnesota.
HI\\inlril E. Armistronii, Commissioner of Industrie~. Vermont.
RThillih G. Sims. Director, Department Induiistrial Relations, G''orgia.
Daniel D. Carmell, Assistant Atto'irncey General, Illinois.
W. C. Burrows, Commissioner, Industrial Relations, Kentucky.
John Dnuk,,, Chairinmin, Industrial Commission, South Carolina.
J. N.,y Mileh. Chairman, Indlustrial Commission, Arizona.
B. D. NchIwkpr, Indu trial Cniniiissioin, Utah.
John J. Tinlhy, Jr., Commissioner, Diepartment of Labor, New Jer'ey.
Stephen J. Lorenz. DeIluty Commissioner of Conmpensatiin. Dpartiment of
Labor, New Jersey.
Ch(i:rles F. Sharkey, Bureau of Labor Statistics, United States Department
of Labor.
Marshall D;iwson, Bureau of Labor Stattistics, United States Di'',rtnipnt
of Labor.
R. E. Wenzel, Division of Labor Standards, United States D'ii:artmnent of

With increased industrial activity, tlhe value of manufactured
products, the volume of retail sales, and the income from the service
branches of industry have all increased in greater proportion than
have employment and pay rolls. Therefore, we believe even more
strongly than we did a year ago that the adoption of a schedule of
not more than 40 hours a week by State law in all States will promote
the welfare of the Nation.


The increase in man-hour production in recent decades has released
vast numllbers of employees who are not being absorbed in normal
indllusrial and economic processes. Shortened hours have in the past
been regarded In rgely as welfare legislation, but there is a rapidly
growing consciousellss, not only in this country but all over the
world, as indicated by recent action of the International Labor Con-
ference, that a close relatiil:-hilp exit, between efficiency and the
hours and earnings of the working population. This principle has
been demonstrated by the practices of progressive employers in va-
rious branches of industry over a period of years. Industry on the
whole was able to adjust itself to a 40-hour schedule under N. R. A.
cotdeq, and there are still today large and important branches of
industry operating on this standard or on an even shorter work week.
In the light of these broad considerations, your comnlittee recom-
mends the following more specific standards for State labor leg-
With the possible exception of agricultural employment and
domestic service, no employer shall employ any person for more
than 5 days in any 1 week or for more than 8 hours in any 1 day.
Since experience has proved that exceptions to an hours law tend
to make adequate enforcement impossible, exceptions should be
granted only by industry and only after public hearings held by the
State labor department. In no case should exceptions be granted
to individual employers nor to an industry for longer than a
48-hour week.
We urge the Senate to ratify all 40-hour conventions submitted
to this country by the International Labor Conference.
We recommend that the Secretary of Labor appoint a committee
to consider the provisions of the present standard hours bill to deter-
mine whether in the light of further experience revision is advisable.
Chairman: Elmer F. Andrews, Industrial Commissioner, Department of
Labor, New York.
Roscoe Cranor, State Senator, Louisiana.
Petricha E. Manchester, Executive Secretary, Consumers' League, Dela-
Herbert Woods, International Union of Operating Engineers, Washing-
ton, D. C.
James F. MI;r.fh, Deputy Minister of Labour, Ontario.
Lucy R. Mason, General Secretary, National Consumers' League, New
John W. Nates, Commissioner, Department of Labor, South Carolina.
Ralph M. Bashore, Secretary, Department of Labor and Industry, Penn-
Mary Anderson, Director, Women's Bureau, United States Department of
A. Louise Murphy, Division of Labor Standards, United States Depart-
ment of Labor.



In light of reve.,it studies of wa.ig- paid in various parts of the
UTiedi S tate your committee concluIdes that the ineel ( floor Itmma-
tiv liilliIum-w:Ig,. h1,i1:ition to prIevent t(le pHllymeint of sweat-
sil )l wa_,,L 1 is as IIIlL', it as ever. Indil edt sto urI ,iil is t lii> 11eel t lat
the iirniiiittee roPCOIIIIlId tlit ai .'\v'r effOrtO be .lx.i i(i b the S"taties
and the Federal (,Governiment to draft miniiium-wn:,L1' I,.i-!:ltioi
which will conform to the pr.'-'nit limitations imTpoled 1by the ('o0n-
stitution. Inasimuch l ;i such l.-gislation in the past has been declaredl
luncIlii:-iutili ,11;1 the committee Irgt that the conference al,) endo r ec
the priopq,-l that the Fedr;l C ,on-titution be amended so :i- to pir-
mit minimumin-\\;ig and other -,'i:Il In thie Ih,)ce thit
there may be min"1ifit;i-tion of the Constitution in tie futIure to permit
withoiil question gmoi\i ii~inel :l regulation of w\;i'es. thought sh1u,111d
be given to the principles which should be incorporated in a model
minimum-waLe, law within the terms of this coln-tiilional aimend-
It is recom(illended therefore that the Secretary's co( lluittee, alp-
pointed la:t Auin,-t to coordinate the States' efforts to revise their
minimum-wage laws, and to explore the possibilities of drafting new
legi-,ation in light of the expected decisions of the Supreme Court
in ipenlding minimum-waun came, continue its activitie-. and in cop-
eration with other interested group-, undertake a -t uly of the ideal
principles which should form the basis of a model law under a p,.s-
sible c' lln tutituonal amendment, and report its findings a- early as
cilrcIrni mt a-i,'e permit.
In the mniantimnle, while solutions of these probhli'II are being
sought, \e reo'",uiiiinnd that Stalt.- now operating ii..der minim iun-
wa ge laws administer thie, laws as thi y have in the p.1-t. and that
States without such laws inl titute wage inve-,tigations to show tlhe
urgency of the situation.
Some Statee. which have not en 1:ted minilnum-wage laws are
without the right of entry and without power to inspect and tran-
scribe pay rolls-powers nece--sar; if wage inve-tig ions and str-
veys are to be made. It is therefore reconimendn'1- that bills em-
powering the officials of State labor delpartmintl s to enter plai.-, of
employment and make such tran-c:riptions be introdiice'ld into the
next sessions of the legislatures of such States.
When constitutional means have been devised for setting mini-
mum-wage standards, the committee rec'inmiend.- that States p;1-s
as rapidly as possible minimum-wage laws for women and minors,
and, where the time seems ripe, for men as well.
The mininnum-wage committee of the present ciinferec,'e endor-,.s
the recommendations of previous conferences pertaining to effective

aidlii liitration of minimum-wage laws. These recoinendiations are
briefly as follows:
1. The adlininstration of the minimum-wage law should be placed
under a respoiiible executive with an adequate trained staff.
2. The application of civil-service principles, which give proper
weight to practical experience. are essential to efficient administra-
3. Conferences of those persons administering minimum-wage laws
should be continued.
4. Recommendation for basic standards made by previous confer-
e.ncet for adminii.strative regulations, including the requirement that
wage payments be made in cash with no deductions, except for State
insurance, are reiterated.
5. State minimum-wage departments should carry on current
analyses of wage and employment trends in the industries covered by
ware orders in order to reveal the effects of minimum-wage laws.
6. Especial :si.-tance in the interpretation of statistical and other
technical material presented to wage boards should be given by the
divisions of minimum wage to the labor members of such boards.
7. The Department of Labor is again requested to make a study
of the ways in which the divisions of minimum wage may secure the
most effective cooperation in matters of legal procedure and prose-
8. Minimum-walge orders should be applied as promptly as possible
to I holJle-work industries.
The present comm-ittee makes the following recommendations per-
taining to the matter of administration:
It is recommended that administration of minimum-wage and
workmen's-compensation and unemployment-insurance laws cooperate
to such an extent that their interpretation of what constitutes a wage
m;liy result in the greatest benefit to the workers under each law.
In order that the collection of wages due employees covered by
minimum-wage orders be as effective as possible the closest coopera-
tion between the minimum-wage and wage-claims divisions of State
labor department is recommended.
The proper enforcelimenit, of minimum-wage laws requires minute
inspection of the hours worked by employees as well as wages re-
ceived. Both require careful investigation of pay rolls, time cards,
and po ,tt. hour schedules. Hour and minimum-wage laws apply
to minors as well as womlien. In the interest of efficient administra-
tion and enforcement, it is re:counlended, therefore, that wherever
feasible the administration of hour, iiininiurm-wage, and child-labor


laws be p1lacd u1ndr (lonet director in a divi-iinn otf the department
of labor.
Chairman: 0. B. Clapni:ma. Director Inlustrial R1latim i,-. (Ohio.
N;Ial S. et\\ t, f, 'ild Director, Industrial (',,nni-iaitln,, W isconsin.
Kate (O'C riiii'r, ('liij Supervisor, Division Milliiinl ll W:il,', Departmenti of
Labor, 1Illiimi.
Mabel E. Kin e\, I'hif. Division of Industrial Welfare, Departmnit of
I inlultrial TRol:itii-n,. California.
Friedal S. Miller, Director, Division of Women in Industry and Mliiiin1111
Wao-e. Department of Labor, N .w York.
Anne S. Davis, Assistant ('liiif, Minimumn Wage Division, Department of
LA.l r. Illillois.
Lucy R. M.';isin, General Secretary, National Consumers' T.I.;l -',., New York.
P'tr richla E. M Ian -lc .strir, Executive Secretary, Consumers' L.c;i-ain, Delaware,
Louise Stitt, Women's Burm-nu. United States Department of Labor.
Marian MIel, Division of Labor SianIda lrd1, V' litl States Department of

as adopted

The following recommendations were adopted unaniimouily by the
coluniit tee:
Celiild Lablor A ,iwndeWJ'nl.-We are fa ced with evidence of increased
employment of children under 16 years of age since the invalidation
of the N. R. A. codes. Reports show that two and one-half times a,
many 14- and 15-year-old children went to work in the first 5 montlih
of 1936 as did in the first 5 months of 1935, while the codes were still
in effect. This return of child labor shows that, in spite of the great
gains that have been made and in spite of the very sincere desire on
the part of many employers to maintain the standards of employment
which were established under the N. R. A., the lack of a national
uniform minimum age subjects them to the unfair competition of the
marginal group of employers who are willing to exploit the young
and inexperienced worker. Such exploitation of children for profit
is clearly contrary to the spirit of the American people today, and
we believe that it must be eliminated completely and permanently
from our national life.
In order to make possible the establishment of a national minimum
standard so obviously needed, the committee strongly urges that every
possible effort be put forth to secure the speedy ratification of the
child labor amendment by the 12 additional States to make
it a part of the Consuttution.
Government contract work.-We commend the initiation of a Fed-
eral program, begun by the enactment of the Walsh-Healey Act in
1936, to guarantee minimum labor standards including prohibition of
child labor for employment on Government contract work. In order


to further secure the protection of young workers, we recommend that
the Walsh-Healey Act be extended in its coverage to include employ-
jilent. on contracts of less than $10,000 and to include safeguards for
the employment of minors between 16 and 18 years of age by requir-
ing age certificates and by prohibiting employment in hazardous
State Iegi.l7ation.-We heartily commend all efforts by States to im-
prove the standards of their child-labor laws and urge that every
effort be made to incorporate in all State child-labor laws the follow-
ing standards:
1. A minimum age of 16 years for employment in all gainful
occupations, including industrialized agriculture away from the
home farm.
2. The regulation of employment of young persons 16 to 18 years
of age, as follows:
(a) Hours of work not to exceed 8 hours per day and 40 hours
per week; or not to exceed those of adults in the industry in which
employed, whichever is the lesser. Night work to be prohibited
between 6 p. m. and 7 a. m.
(b) Prohibition of employment of persons under 18 in hazardous
occI:pations, the State department of labor or industrial board to
have authority to classify occupations as hazardous for this age
(c) Employment certificates to be required for the legal employ-
ment of minors under 18 years of age.
Wolrknetn's compensation.-We recommend provision for at least
double compensation .or injured minors illegally employed, the
employer to be charged with primary liability for the payment of
such compensation; and the basing of compensation for permanent
disability, whether the employment was legal or illegal, upon the
probable adult earning capacity of such minor. Compensation laws
should provide for approval by a competent State authority of the
expenditure of the compensation granted to assure the most desirable
rehabilitation and education of the injured minor.
School (at ,inda o!ce.-We urge that every effort be made to revise
upward State school attendance laws to conform with the higher
minimum age and employment certificate requirements recommended
for State child-labor laws and to emphasize also the need for the)
provision by the schools of an enriched and varied school program
to meet the needs of all young people.
Industrial home work.-We wish to emphasize our conviction that
industrial home work, that is, the sending of factory work to be
done in the home, serves not only to exploit the child worker but
also to break down labor standards in general through the reintro-


duction of the sweatshop, and urge thelrelfire the speedy enactmentle
of legi.-la ion, looking to its ablit ion.
T'lcre are certain probl,'in., rhlating to child labor for which no
remedies have been suirgge.l d.u,1ch as the inlert;lat e shilpmllnt of
goods for work in hIonws. Thei c Lmmitiee recomii(' I ds that tii-re
be stu dy of further methods of national control for the solution of
this and simil;ir piroblemils.
Chairman.-JTisrl11 I so~niii, St'le Fedleration of Labor, Virgilii:i.
W. E. Jacilbs. Commissioner of Labor, Tennessee.
James T. Miiri;rity, Commissioner, Department of Labor and Industries,

Dr. Worth Tippy, IF',-lrial Council of ClIl.Iiris. New York.
W. C. lhiihiuin'. American F'l,,ir:tli i of Labor, W;,1hiiitnii. D. C.
Henry Lay Duer, Commissioner of Labor andI Statistics, aMaryland.
Cirtnfiy Din iiidlie, National Labor Committee, New York.
Thomas Crmi.-hiaw, State Fl''hi-r;alin1ii of Labor, South Carolina.
Beatrice MI.C uiiiill, C'lllrien's Bureau, United States Department of Labor.


The comlllittee s\ i-les to bring before the Conference in the strong-
est ternis the need of I.'tabl i- ing a t abilized progr:i-i of aplprj tit ,e-
ship throughout the country. It recognizes the value to youth, to
employers and emiploye'-, and to the public, of a pro(Igr-; to stimu-
late and encourage the training of young people to be(o'im, thor-
oughly trained and responsible workers in the skilled tra'le.. A con-
structive and sound plan of apprenticeship must be developed for all
branches of the skilled crafts instead of the loose system of helpers
and learners now prevailing in numerous indli.trie,. A training
structure to correct the evils of this haphazard system should be built
up, which will provide, on an intelligently planned and carefully pro-
tected basis, a program developed unde-r necepted labor standards.
The committee's (concern is with the setting up of these labor stand-
ards-standards to protect the apprentice, the entire labor group, the
employer, and the public. The coilniittee believe; that this end can
best. be attained through the enactment of sound legislation on
apprenticeship in the various States.
The committee, therefore, re'(cm 11 enIds that the S cretary of Labor
appoint a representative committee to draft suigested standards for
incorporation in State apprenticeship legIi-lation. Thel-, t;ndards
should include provision for placing the administration of the law
and the control of the labor standards a--pct:-t of apprenticeship in
the State department of labor. The problems of apprenticeship are
.o closely con(nectedl with the labor .ituntion that it is a w;-t( of re-
sourcts not to have the closest possible connection with tlw-e deplart-


ments of labor since they have the information in regard to such
matters as employment opportunities, the types of work for which it
might be worth while to train apprentices, the increase or decrease in
employment, openings, and the general industrial conditions in differ-
ent industries.
It is important that State labor departments understand and act
upon the pressing need to cooperate with all the agencies interested in
this field. Particularly will it be necessary to insure cooperation
with State departments of vocational education, with all State and
national organizations interested in the educational aspects of ap-
prenticeship programs and with State employee nt services.
The committee reconinend-'l that the Federal Committee on
Apprentice Training be requested to furnish advice and help to the
States in their effort to secure adequate standards for apprentice
training and that the campaign of education for the development of
adequate programs which has been carried on by that committee and
the State committees on apprentice training be continued with in-
creasing vigor. It recominenlds that funds for the continuance of the
work of the Federal committee be provided through the Federal
Department of Labor.
Chairman: W. A. Pat Murphy, State Labor Commissioner, Oklahoma.
John S. B. Davie, Commissioner of Labor, New Hampshire.
Mary Edna Cruzen, Commissioner of Labor, Missouri.
Elmer Spahr, President, Pennsylvania Conference of Bricklayers, Masons,
and Plasterers.
John Lloyd, 7th Vice President, Journeymen Barbers' International Union
of America, Indiana.
Ella Merritt, Children's Bureau, United States Department of Labor.
Wm. F. Patterson, Executive Secretary, Federal Committee on Apprentice
Michael O'Connor, Division of Labor Standards, United States Department
of Labor.



The committee made the following recommendations:
That the members of the conference present from the five States
whose legislatures have not accepted the provisions of the Wagner-
Peyser Act-Kansas, Maine, Maryland, Michigan, Montana-pro-
mote the introduction and enactment of legislation in their respective
States accepting the provisions of the act at the next. meeting of their
That the Wagner-Peyser Act be amended to include Puerto Rico.


That in the operatlion of the State emtployniiiion .:-.Vic- :iflili:illci1
with the Unlitedl States Employ nt Si.l ice special emphli'-i- be
given to their long-tiiii, programs.
That the ,ieitil,.ers of the con fr.eiir. promote the introduction and
the enactiiiment of legislat ion for the St ai ii.dl nation of prii,:\ em-
ploy3lent. a"eenciel, and Fiderdl; legi'slatiion for regulation of ilo-il
interstate act iil ies.
That the St1:te employi)C-il services 1. cb,1op plil-.. including ade-
quane lflldgets and training programs for a prvlrii,;,int State-wide
employment service that will adleqCately erv\ the unemployment -
insuranlce program of lteir respective States.
That this co(ll f(.re('e rec,'liiendi(.11(i to such governors who conte ill-
pl:te appoint lug (coIniHis-ions in coiii ct iont with ithe develop)entit of
plans for uIemployment comlnl'pell; ionl, the inclusion of a repiv''-int-;-
five of the i ldere -ts of publlic employment serviices in the menmber-
ship of suchi commissions.
That Congress be urged to appropriate funds adequate to .'iaiIil
regional~ organization of the United States, Employment Service in
order to make available to the State employment services Federal
assistance for thl development. along the lines neces-;irvy to handle the
work under the unemployment-compensation laws.
That. the (coil frence promote in every way possible the securing of
adequate appropriate ioiin for the State employment services.


The ]egi.-lauli'es of the following 15 States and the Congress of
the Unit,(le States have tena'ted unemploymtent-co()len-;ftio(ii laws
that comply with the Federal Social Security Act:
Alalbama. New Hampshire.
California. New York.
District of Columbina. Oregon.
Idaho Rhode Island.
Indiana. South Carolina.
Louisi:na. Texas.
Ma.ssachutsetts. Utah.
Miiss isippi. Wisconsin.
Your committee reconiivi(eIds that this conference place itself on
record ;I., co'nll111eningi this prompt action.
In order that the workers in the riiiiliIliiig States and Territories
may be afforded protection ag-aiint unemployment. we rei'o.llll!ild
and uirge that such States and Territ(orie, should at the earliest
oppo(rt uity, through special sessions or otherwise, enact unemploy-
iment-conipeI-ation law.. which will qualify such States and Terri-


stories to receive Federal aid and tax credits under the Social Secur-
ity Act.
We urge that the proper authorities undertake to secure an
;amendment of the Social Security Act by the Congress to provide
the benefits of the Social Security Act to the workers of Puerto Rico
and all other territory comprising the United States of America.
State laws, while they should be designed to permit the proper co-
ordination of their provisions with the Social Security Act, should
be so drafted as to remain operative independently of the Federal
act. The laws of those States whose operation has in any way been
nladle contingent upon the conltinued operation of the Federal act
should be so al menlded as to stand on their own feet.
The various States welcome the advice of the Social Security Board
in drafting unemployment-coinlpe,1 nationn laws or in amending exist-
ing ones so that they will meet the requirements of the Social Security
Act and will assure efficient and economical State administration.
The success of unemployment compensationn will depend in major
part on the efficiency of its administration and the cooperation of the
several States, and this in turn will depend upon the competence and
integrity of the State administrative personnel. We, thereffore,
strongly urge that the State authorities ve.ted with the administra-
tion of unemployment comipeni.iatinii classify the personnel and for-
mulate persioniel and salary standards with the assistance of the
Social Security Board. We urge that the Social Security Board rec-
(omulend to the several States adequate minimum standleds for the
waiting period, rate of benefits, and duration of benefits.
In the field of workmen's compensation, many abuses have devel-
oped out of the superfluous representation of claimants by expensive
counsel. To avoid this same development in unemployment compen-
sation we recfinmend that the Social Security Board advise the sev-
eral States to include in their laws specific provisions to minimize
this danger. While \\e are not prepared at this time to recommend
the content of such provisions we neverthele-.s suggest that the claims
procedures be made as simple as possible and that consideration be
given to restricting the right of attorneys to practice before unem-
ployment-compensation commissions and to the rigid control of attor-
ney's fees by the commissions.
It is recoiiiinlelndld that the workers covered by the unemiployment-
compensation acts of the various States and Territories should not be
required to contribute to the unemployment-compensation funds of
their respective jurisdictions.
The Board should recoimmnend and the States should adopt in thei r
laws a uniform and broader bani- of coverage to avoid siuch conflicts
in State jurisdiction as have occurred in the field of accident cohipen-
sation. Your, committee believes that the State in which the major-


ity of the w\\rk is (done should be the only owiI to cover the worker
and pay Iiimi linefit.. Wlerei an employi. works in a numllb'r of
States but does not spend thle majority of his working time in any
one,. he should come under the law of the St:ie in which the contract
of eniploymii et is made. This will prevent imuiltiple taxation oI the
empl)y','; i. e., "iily one State should receive contrilbuitios from an
employer, for a particular emlployevI. Worker- should in n1o case
be l):b11,r' from benefits by) any residence requirement' t. \fe flrtIher
Iref(milllllInId that the Fed(eral act be amendledl to provided a broader
Iasi, of einplhc.e covenragi, and that the individual States enact laws
or ivllin'l their existilig laws to sc'r,, the gre:ite-t pl,--ibll ,ipl,,y.v,
The varilius States should in their own laws authorize reciprocal
agreIemlli.-it on such features of unemployml n t compn,-al ion a-, that
of ,prov,\iiing for the ri'gi.t ration of and paLymeniits of biilrfits to
workers becomliiii unemployed in States distant from the ,on from
which their lbe lnefits are due and front pr evni in ug workers from lo in g
their benifils 1be .aeie of their transfer from a job in one State to a
job in another. Interstate comity should prevail in this field.
Your (com(iittee wishes to emphll-iz/ that IIiu IIiplvIoyib et-cilipen-
sa.tion legislation is primarily ciin'lernled with and directly affects
conditions of labor in industry. We. therefore, stroInily urge uplon
the States tile de-irability of placing the administration of State
uieneiployment conil'pensation in the State a jeiy generally respon-
sible for the admliiiiisration of labor leid-lat ion.
We e'cogniiize and 'oiiiiinml nd the admirable work that liha been
,lone 1) b the Social Security Board and its filne spirit of cooperation.
but in view of the necessity of ci -e coordination 1b.tweeil the ac-
tivities- of the United States Empiloyment Service and the adminis-
tration of the ymet-cotion titles of thee Sotiial
Security Act we recommend and urge that the administration of the
uneimploient-minpiin-iation titles of that act be made an inte~rial
part of the United States Department of Lalbor.
We recomm)llllen a contiinuing committee to study the subject of how
unemnployinent-conilpe.i;itiiln benefits can be iiial mIore ahlqiuate.
''lJiiirin:'i. Alex E. ,; r1iu1u. Secretary. Fedel-rated Labor I Pilli-lhini Assoina-
tionl, Indiana.
W Y-n. ('li. i iiniia., Inldust'rial ('onu iiission. C'olora(o.
L. L. tWh'elss, (Chair ian. i:(nemploy1vnleit I',inil,, I-.irioil ( 'lIiiii--iii,
M. l L. Lyd 'ii. i'l-iili. State Felderll tioii of Labor. Ohio.
Grace Abbott, School of S.-hi;l Service. University nf Clhii';i'. Illinois.
Prudeneio Martinez. Comninissioner 'if Labor, Puerto Rico.
John I, 1'ini-l ITiall. ('oniiinissioner. Depalrtmnulnt of Labor and Industry,
V irl illi;i
Friaink E. Wviii,'. Commissioner of T.i,,i-r. Iowa.
Paul I'. KI.ll,,'..-. Sunvy A-.on.iat'-,. N \\ York.


Gordon R. Wagenet, Director, Bureau of Unemployment Compensation,
Social Security Board.
R. G. Soderstrom, President, State Federation of Labor, Illinois.
Alice Nnr\\woid Spearman, Works Progress Administration, South Carolina.
Peter Camni'lltl, Secretary, State Federation of Labor, Kentucky.
W. Frank Persons, Director, United States Employment Service, United
States Department of Labor.
Isador Lubin, Commissioner of Labor Statistics, United States Department
of Labor.
Charles L. Hodge, Division of Labor Sta nudard.- United States Department
of Labor.


The evils present in the operation of private employment ag-eiicies
have been the subject of study and investigation over a period of
years, and are well known to persons associated with the administra-
tion of labor laws. Among the most common practices which make
the regulation of fee-charging agencies desirable are misrepresenta-
tion of jobs, collections of fees when no employment is furnished,
charging of exorbitant fees, fee splitting, and the sending of workers
across State lines, only to be left stranded, penniless, and jobless.
That the licensing and regulation of private employment agencies is
a matter within the proper concern of the State is settled. The com-
mittee has endeavored to evolve a number of standards which it feels
are desirable in a law to license and control private employment
agencies. These standards are not recommended with the thought
that they include all desirable features of a definitive or model bill.
Rather the committee has endeavored to ascertain those provisions
which may be applicable generally without regard to any peculiar
local conditions which may require specific treatment.
A bill to regulate private employment offices should apply to all
fee-charging agencies, and should be State-wide in its application.
The law should be administered by the State department of labor.
The commissioner of labor should be given well-defined but broad
rule-making power to insure the effective administration of the law.
Both the employment agencies and their individual employees
should be licensed. Licensing of the agencies should be on an annual
basis with a fee sufficiently large to keep out financially irresponsible
persons, and also to provide adequate amounts sufficient for the ad-
ministration of the law. The committee feels that in no case should
such fee be less than $25 and that it is highly desirable that it be
fixed at a much higher rate. Licenses of placement clerks should be
granted for an indefinite period, to terminate only upon revocation
or upon the placement clerk leaving the employ of the agency. The
fee should be a nominal amount.


The cominiit l(e feels that it is ilc-.-, : ry thatl the bill provide, for
the bondiing of employment ;IiL'l(ll' in suci a, way as to i-ii-re tile full
protection of the w\i'ker-. The department of labor should b,
auiihorize(l to apliprir, the form of the bond, and should be i':riiimed
the right to ii~tl on the bond and collect for workers. Inl order to
speed the payment of claiiis :,in-1 t1he bond, the time for filing
cl:ills should be shorted to 9 da fro t 9 d fo the (date of tlie receipt for
the fee. Under present State laws, a bonding company may refuse
to pay any claims against. a bond until the statute of limitations hiis
run which Iu.-nlly requires at least 5 .:;i r.-.. Tle bolnd should be
colnditionied for the return of fees and for the pa)ymenL t by the 'iii-
ployliielit. agent of ldaiiiges to ally pei' son having a jii-t cl;ailii ;ail;inst
him. The iamounit of the bond should he ri:idil;fe1i with a mininiun
of $1.000 and a maximum to be set at least a-. high as $:,.)OO, the scale
being based upon the geographic lalt ion and the Inumberii of a:Iecy
employees or some other ieasilre of the volume of bIsiili-:.
Before any license is iiue,1 to an :geriir a careful inv\,-fi action
of both the isuitability of the premises and the character and repu-
tationi of the employment agent should be required. A similar inves-
tigation should be required of the character of p;il'larii t cI.rk. be-
fore the issuance of a license. The 'n, iiii--ioinr should be given
the p,\\or to -i.-pe ndl and revoke licenses for cause.
Both by the proviiion.s of the bill and under the irulb--iiikiiig power
granted to the clliiii--iIl er, there should be prohibited the various
acts which have been found by expl'riii'.e to constitute evil pri'-.ti.ces.
The bill should set forth the most common of these pi;i tices with
authority in the commissioner to enlarge the field of the prohibitiol-.
The following should be prohibited: Fee lpli tinl. false advertising
and false represent at tion,. ph:laceirnt of wo, iiien and minors in spei field
prohibited kinds of work, operalf i lng of employment ai en-ies in rot ,11s
used for living purpoi-"'l.' operation by licensees of lodginiL liilisi's or
labor camp-, se.ndillng of workers to plants on strike without notifi-
cation thereof, and the maki ili! of plainiments in violation of other
State labor laws.
The bill should also regulate -.ert:iin pra'tic'; in connection with
the chariring of fees. Registration fees .-hoiiiil be prioibited except
that some State-; may desire to allow agencies pilaili ta;ihler- and
professional worker- to charge regis-tration fees upon the I-ezcIrirn
of a permit to do so from the department of labor. Fees -hinold
be charged only on the basi- of ca-h received from'en-ts
directly re-iilting from the employment agencie-' activities. The
assignment of wages. the execution of notes authorizing, the i:-nfei-
sion of judgment. and the giving of powers of attorney to the airei'y
should be 1prohibited. Also, the agent, should be required to file with
the commissioner and to post the schedule of fee- to be lchair ed. and


should be prohibited from charging or receiving any fees not speci-
fied therein or in excess of such schedule.
The employment agency should be required to file with the com-
missioner, for his approval, copies of all forms, blanks, and contracts
to be u.ed by such agency.
A receipt in a form to be prescribed by the commissioner of labor
should be required to be given in every case where a fee is paid.
The receipt should include a statement of the office at which a worker
may register any complaint, the time for filing such claims against
the bond, and any other information which the commissioner may
deem desirable.
The committee has not attempted to make recommendations as
to the administrative features and enforcement powers of such a bill.
However, it is pointed out that in adopting any such bill for use in
a particular State care should be taken to see that the commissioner
has the necessary investigational and inquisitorial powers, and that
there are provisions requiring the keeping of records, etc.
The committee also desires to raise for discussion the question as
to whether or not this conference feels that. such a bill should at-
tempt to regulate and control schools which advertise a placement
service as an inducement to enrollment therein.
The committee recommends that the continuing committee on the
regulation of private employment agencies, heretofore appointed by
the Secretary, shall in cooperation with the United States Depart-
ment of Labor, draft a bill containing suggested language covering
the points above mentioned, and that a study be made of existing
State laws to determine those provisions which have been found most
desirable in practice. It is felt that such a bill should be drafted
so as to be generally applicable to any State, with the understanding
that changes may be made and additional provisions may be in-
serted as found necessary to meet the needs of the local situation.
It is also recommended that the committee, after drafting the bill
for State use, should turn its attention to the problem of drafting
a Federal bill for the control of agencies making interstate place-
('hli, irmin: Martin Cannon, Deputy Inspector, Division of Private Employ-
ment Agencies, Department of Labor, Illinois.
Harry R. McL,,gan, Commissioner, Industrial Commission, Wisconsin.
Morgan R. Mooney, Deputy Commissioner of Labor, Department of Labor
and Factory Inspection, Connecticut.
James Fitzgerald, Commissioner of Labor, Nevada.
Henry D. Sayer, Industrial and Workmen's Compensation Service, New
David Y. Campbell, Division of Labor Standards, United States Department
of Labor.



The formlllatioll of an ade~uIjlll1 and col)mprehenisive hlioii-illn pro-
graii is an iriillediate ipubllic responsibility. The acute hol(iiing
shiortige now rapidly developing thrii-.gliolit the colintry is subll-
jecting low-income families to especial hardship,. antd makes tihe
provision of new dwellings for themii an iir-L.ntl ilneess-it y.
The hoiiuinig pr,)olemi is cil,.riwilril with tihe provision of an ade-
quate ,-iIpply of dI'elit mliodern -lelter, well located in relation to
e(1ployiiment and icomlllnunity facilities, protected from blight, prop-
erly de.igiied for the families which are to use it, and available at
prices within the iealn of these families. Thle housing problem
also includes the rec'lla (iiniilo of slums and blightted areas. iboili1
urban and rural, and the safegla:i ingll of iilundeveloped a i;i- in the
suburbs of our cities froii spoilation by luconitrolled and unipi;innl
The increase and proper distriblition of the national inrl.iir.c woult
solve a major portion of the hou-inrg problem. However, a sound
housing program will itself gri'-atly aid in inirealsing the niitional
income through the provisions of eniploynient in the const ructi ,1.
building imiterial, and allied industries, and through the elimina-
tion of the great wa:ist-e now incurred in -lpiulative subdivi-iol
and lbuiiliiig.
The solution of the housing problems demii iinds bold and coura-
geous policies on the part of go \ve'Irnents, both local, State and
Federal. The programs adopted must be 1broialy colnrei\'veil aiind
have permanent andi continuing foundations. It is impossible to
cope with the long-term problems of lohii-ilng on a temporary. and
emergency basis.
Phlnningf and control of lalul ru.,l ad plalining
of city growth and the control and stabilization of neidi.tborlhtood-
are essential both for ecnomniical hoil-ing and livable cities. The
responsibility for plahnning- future developmenlits and the reVlalia-
tion of slums and blighted areas mu-t rest primarily with municipal
and county authorities. In every 'ity a planning conmlmiio,!: o uli'uld
be established which will boldly envision the best possible ise. of
all the land areas both in the city and in its adjoiining .subrbs.
Such planning must go far beyond the -afeguarding of existing
realty values and the mere provision of street.- utilitie-. and parks
for the amelioration of preseLnt bad land uses. Zoning must be
made an effective weapon to guide growth and protect neighborhoods
rather than to legitimatize present speculative values.
It is possible that the increasing public owinerslhip of land. either
by municipalities or housing authorities, will be found to be the
most realistic solution of the problem of planning and control.
Such tracts of publicly owned land could either be develled with


public housing for low-income group or rented on long-term lease
for building under proper control by private enterprise or coopera-
tive groups. Public acquisition, making use of.the powers of emi-
nent domain, seems the most promising solution for the relain;ition
of blighted areas and slums.
State legislation will be necessary to strengthen the planning and
zoning powers of municipalities, and to extend these powers beyond
the city limits so na to cover entire met ropolitan areas. State legisla-
tion will also be nece-;ary to enable municipalities and counties to
acquire and develop land either directly or through honing authori-
ties. The power of condemnation for housing as a public purpose
(which has recently been upheld in the highe-t court, of the State of
New York) must be delegated to municipalities and local housing
The Federal Govern-iment must actively and courageoni ly promote
research and thought on the problems of planning and control. It
must be prepared to give advice and counsel and lend experts to
local authorities requesting such aid. Above all it must in-ist when
it extends financial aid through the insurance or guarantee of mort-
gages, or through loans or grants, that proper planning and control
be a condition precel:dnt, to such aid.
Fianww-!an aid and public housing.-The residential building indus-
try as pre-ently organized is a speculative lisinec looking to quick
turn-over and inieiiiilliate profits rather than long-term investment.
We cannot get good housing for workers by continuing this indi Itry's
practice of building most of our new hiies, for the wealthy and
well-to-do, while handing down obsolete and dilapidated houses to
lower-income groups. Our greatest need is for new houses built
directly for workers, in neighborhoods convenient to employment and
protected from blight, and designed especially for low-income
Through better building practices and with lower interest rates
based on long-term investment in stabilized neighborhoods, private
enterprise could extend its field of operations to lower-income groups
than those which it now serves. If the Federal insurance of private
mortgages through the F. H. A. is to be continued increased emphasis
should be placed on reducing financing charges and interest rates, and
on avoiding any underwriting of speculative values.
A still further extension of housing construction for lower-income
groups can be obtained by placing public credit or governmental
loans at low-interest rates at the disposal of limited dividend com-
panies or cooperative groups.
It must, however, be frankly realized that families in the lowest
third of the income range cannot afford to pay the full economic cost
of lIdeent and adequate shelter. For the housing of these groups we
must look to public housing aided by governmental subsidy. In the

TIill>[ NATIONAL CON I- .ll-.NCE ON I.\lnIR 1 .I .--I..\iTION of such 1hiii-ilng it is '--, tllli;il to r.alize aIll possible e( ilo,-
11i,.V thr,,olgl .Atable iJ 'igliborlio d-, .-m, ind cI)IItruction :and simple
plllling. Public hoiiii .- so planned, :andl in'lt rited to families
which need such aid, will in nomwi cn.-itute a threat to private
ciliprl ise -er\ inlg 1igi,'r-iui,,uill groups.
The initiate iloi. pl:111llaill_, ,Il,( iructioll, an( ir;ill; llllin of o pullli
h ,l,,ilg is p 'imllarily a function of ], ;Il ,,ci ,lliil, l, a'-iill either
directly or t hrgiiii local hoii-in authoril ii-, and in clI', cooperation
\\ill the State and Federal Governments. Tjl organization of local
ilistriiitit :Ilifie-, ad-.e;quat.ely financed, properly staffed with techni-
cal experts, and with the power to n~iquire land through coiirli-innation
and to incur financial obligations, is urgently necessary.
Further State inlation is needed to authorize public hoii-inig by
local governments, and to regulate and supervise their :i'-livities in
this field. In States with -,ftlicient financial resounIr.- based on in-
'1come taxation, .ll) ilies should be rj!iilt ed to local authorities. In all
States. there should be provision for the guaranteeing of loans made
by local authorities in order to sec~ r11 the lowest p,--ible interest r. ui-.
Under our preLent system of taxation we nnu-t loik to the Federal
Government for the major part of the ,ii -idies ncce-:Iiry for public
hou-ig~. In addition to such grants, wi\lilhcr in l1ump sums or on an
annual basis, the Federal Governimient -lh ild also be in the position
to make lhan n at low interest rates to local authorities or -rniaranitee
their mortgage obligations. The Federal Governiiiient should also
provide expert advice and counsel in connection with the initiation,
planning, construction, and nin riLage iiiit, of houWinLr. In all cases
where aid is .granted by the Federal Government there must be ef-
fective control of the planning of nieighborhoods in connection with
the city and re'giniial plan, and the future use of public hon-ingr for
the income grolslls for which it is de.-i!ined must also be safeti-nuark.l1d.
The Wagner bill, which was 1pa--'d by the Senate at the last ses-
si(o of the Coigres-, lbut which for lack of time failed of )pa-'age in
the HIIo use, provide a sound scheme of Federal aid for public hous-
ing on a lo1ng-tern, permanent Ca.-ii-. The provi si(in- for financing
and for Federal demn1o.t ration projects should be more liberal than
those contained in Senator Wagner's bill as originally introduced
in the Senate la t year. Provi-inn shl iuld also be made for Federal
aid in the acquiisitioi of land for housing in advance, of immediate
need.-. It is strongly recollItM nedi that legislation of this character
be adopted by the next Congres.
Labor's int, I,('et in inu.inh.-Labor has a vital interest in the liou.-
ing problem. As producers, labor is concern'edl with the construction
of homes and the manufacture of building materials. As consumers,
labor is deeply interested in raising the standards of housing for all
families to adequate levels. As citizens, labor has the right to plan
beautiful, livable, and healthful communities.


The workers of the Nation, as they become fully aware of the in-
adequacy of our housing and its serious effects on their lives, will
increasingly demand decent homes with modern conveniences at prices
within their means. Many low-income families are forced to pay
upward of 30 percent of their incomes for their present inadequate
housing, forcing drastic curtailment of other necessary family ex-
penditures and in particular reducing food conlsulnption to starva-
tion levels. Labor insists that adequate housing must be available
to all families at not more than 20 percent of their incomes.
Labor should be accorded prevailing rates of wages on all housing
construction. It is a fallacy to assume that the ultimate cost of hous-
ing can be reduced by attacks on wage levels. Sound construction
with good materials and skilled labor is far cheaper than jerry-
building with labor at depres-ed wages. Intelligent contractors have
long since found that it pays better to employ skilled labor at pre-
vailing rates rather than less experienced imehaniis at lower wages.
The principle of prevailing wages embodied in the Davis-Bacon Act
for Federal conl-truction, and in the Walsh-Healey Act for Federal
purchases should be insisted on in connection with all construction
financed through Federal guaranty ie-, loans, or grants, and on all new
construction aided through F. H. A. mortgage insurance.
Because of the interest. of labor in the housing problem it is rec-
ommended that the United States Department of Labor be ready to
give aid and counsel to labor in the formulation of housing policies
and local, State, and Federal legislation.
Progress in the solution of the housing problem will be made only
in response to the demand of informed public opinion. The Federal
Government through its research and studies and through demonstra-
tion projects is advancing housing education throughout the country.
Labor as a whole must take the leadership in arousing local interest
and civic responsibility for a comprehensive and permanent housing
Chairman: R. S. McCann, President, State Federation of Labor, Tennessee.
Claude R. Boland, President, Building Tr;ails Council, South Carolina.
Helen Hall, Henry Street Settlement, New York.
Elsie D. Harper, National Board, Y. W. C. A., New York.
T. Arnold Hill, Nationial Urban League, New York.
Spencer Miller, Director, Workers' Education Bureau of America, New York.
Oliver Peternii. Workers' Eduiietin Division, Works Prozrct-. Administra-
tion, Washington, D. C.
John A. Philliis. President, State Federation of Labor, Peiiinsvlainia.
Boris Shishkin, Labor HTouiing Conference, Washiinton, D. C.
Warren Jay Vinton, Suburban Resettlement Division, Resettlement Admin-
istration, Washington, D. C.
Bruce Greene, Division of Labor Standards, United State. Department of



The question of vacations with pay lias not been consid.r-.el here-
tlfore in the United States in any ,conll'erted, public fa-hlion. Al-
thougll there has been a limited reI, ignition of the need for' such
provisionl in private industries and )y certain t rade ulni'in-. no
State has legislati n covering this ib)ject. This is not the case else-
where in the world.
Some, 30 count ri.e have laws under which some groups of % workers
enjoy the Iblnefit, of annual \;iatalions with pay. In many of these
coMiitr'ies indlvu.try has not developed to .-iim an extent as to bril g
about the repetitioni, -IeeIl, and Illmonotony which are founil in in-
dustries in the United States. ESpecially because of our atdlvanced
techlnological developmenllt, it is imperative that we provide for
American workers the protection to health and efficiency now guar-
anteed by law to many worker, throughout the worll.
Your cnimlittee on Vacationl with Pay, having considered the
draft convent ion on this .uiibject adopted by the Intelrnt ional Labor
Co)lnference mee ting in Geneva in 1936 with an affirmative vote by
all delegates from, the United State-, rec~Inmmends that the Third
National Conferevce on Labor Le.gislation in the United States go
on Record a, endor-ing the principles -et forth in this dIraft coinven-
tion and the 'rect llvllildatios ; r m acillying it. Thet', principles
provide, in brief:
1. That after 1 full year of -en ice every employee shall have a
va'.ation with pay of at leat; 1 full and continuous working week,
with appropriate inera. ,es; for length of .-erv ice;
2. That this provision shall apply to as many forms of employ-
mlent as po.--ible;
3. That the vacation time here -pecified 1;hall con-titute a mini-
mun and shall not interfere with any collective agreement now in
force or hereafter entered into, or with any private employment.
policies insofar as these provide for higher : standards on this -iiHject.
Your committee further rtecmm lr ids that the Secret. ay of Labor
be asked by this confr'ien le' to continue the coming ittee and in i-ruct
it to explore further the possibilities of promoting legislation in
this field in the United States and to draft a bill on vacations with
pay for the use of States in furthering, such legislat in.
('liirlll;lll Joseph M1. Tone, Si;iI, Labor ( 'iiiii' i--iiiinr. Connecticut.
W. D. Johnson, National L.'-i-]:ll i\ Representative, Onrd.e of Railway Con-
ductors, Watisii.itiin D. C.
J. A. Fa ;'iiirm1i Irn. National LTAi-l:itivr Representative. Brotherhood of
R:ilirul Tr;iinmii~i WaiT-Hi Lta... D. C.
.Mar PiiL.Iiii,. Women's Bureau, I 'itiel, States Department of Labor.
Ruth Scandrett, Division of Labor Standards. United States Department of



Your Committee on Cooperation between State and Federal De-
partments of Labor believes that national and regional conferences
of representatives of State departments of labor, organized labor,
State federations of labor, and organizations interested in the im-
provement of labor standards are an effective stimulant to the im-
lprovement of labor legislation. It is urged that the United States
Department of Labor continue to hold such conferences and make
suitable arrangeiments with the Governors of the several States so
that all States may be represented.
Your committee has reviewed the activities of the Division of
Labor Standards which was established in the United States Depart-
ment of Labor in accordance with the recommendations of the First
National Con fere(nce on Labor Legislation. The committee appreci-
ates and approves the work done by this Division in holding con-
ferences on various phii~i-. of labor legislation and administration,
in promoting -aifety and health standards, in helping to train factory
inspectors, in cn.iillt ig and advising State labor departments con-
cerning the best methods of administering labor laws, and in pro-
viding a bill-drafting service available to the State federations of
labor and other ilnteciested groups which has greatly assisted labor
in its efforts to improve working conditions.
In order to assure the continuance of these activities, the com-
mittee recommends that this conference record itself in favor of the
establlishliiielt of the Division of Labor Stanllards as a permanent
bureau in the United States Departmiient of Labor with an appropri-
ation that will enable it to carry on these and other activities for
the pIurp','e of raising labor staindards and bringing about a greater
degree of uniformity as to basic minimum standards.
Your -oinlnittee recommends that studies be made by the United
States Department of Labor of the following problems of particular
interest to the States:
The problem of discrimination against older workers in industry.
The problem of the extent to which gainfully employed workers
are not cove red by workmen's compensation laws and the consequent
competitive advantage, real or alleged, enjoyed by employers.
The problem of enforcement of prison-labor legislation.
Your committee recommends that the State departments of labor
cooperate with the Federal Department of Labor in the enforcement
of the Walsh-Healey Act.


Your conlulittee recommends that the Dveprtment of Labor be
recquitedl to develop standards for accident reporting, record keep-
ing, and gcriieal ilnic.,tion procedure and that the Statces. be iurgel
to adopt these standards.
We further rcou'm11111ned that State departmln'lts furnish promptly
statistics and otler information whnll ri'rque.ited by the United States
Department of Labor, with particular reference to the man-hours of
exposure in each employment cla:s to the end that the Biur.aii of
Labor Statistics may have accurate data as to the frequency and
severity of indu.-trial accidents.
Finally we reconi end that a copy of the proceedings of this con-
ference be ctnlt, to the Governors of the various States, their official
reprVseiitatives, secretaries of all national labor organizations, secre-
taries of State federations of labor, and secretaries of the transporta-
tion brotherhoods.
Chairman: Robert J. Watt, Secretary-Treasurer, State Federation of Labor,
(-'lharl s H. Gr:im. Commissioner of Labor, Oregon.
Clarence L. Jarrett, Commissioner of Labor, West Virginia.
Carl Mullen, President, State Fedlr;tiion of Labor, Indiana.
A. Steve Na;.e, President, State Fo'leratiini of Labor, Georgia.
L. Metcalfe Walling, Director of Labor, Rhode Island.
T. E. Cunninrlianiam. President, State Federation of Labor, Minnesota.
Martin P. Durkin, Director of Labor, Illinois.
I. H. Helander, Vice President, State Federation of Labor, South Dakota.
O. E. Petry, Secretary, State Federation of Labor, Georgia.
Bertha M. Nienburg, Women's Bureau, United States Department of Labor.
Sidney W. Wilcox, Bureau of Labor Statistics, United States Department
of Labor.
Clara M. Beyer, Division of Labor Standards, United States Department
of Labor.



Resolved, That this conference extend its thanks to the President of
the United States for his message of greeting, and for the charge
which he has placed upon the delegates to proceed along the lines
established by the sessions of the National Conference on Labor Leg-
islation in 1934 and 1935, for assuring working people throughout the
Nation and in every State adequate labor standards. Specifically,
the President sets before us the goal of assuring decent working con-
ditions, including safe and healthful places of work; adequate care
and support of workers when incapacitated by reason of accident,
industrial disease, unemployment, or old age; reasonably short work-


ing hours; adequate, annual incomes; proper housing; and elimina-
tion of child labor. In undertaking responsibility for State action,
we are encouraged by the assurance contained in the President's letter
that the Federal Government is willing to do its part in making these
standards effective and in supplementing the efforts of the States
when problems assume an interstate or a national character.
Encouraged by the progress that has been made since the First
Conference on Labor Legislation was called in 1934, and impressed
with the need for vigorous action to place necessary legislation on the
statute books at the coming sessions of Congress and the State legis-
latures, the conference pledges itself specifically to the following
major objectives, which have been more fully set forth in reports of
committees adopted by the conference:
1. State depiti,-nfu,,, of labor.-The conference urges the develop-
ment of an adequate foundation for State labor law administration
through State labor departments with broad powers and adequate
appropriations to perform both fact-finding and administrative func-
tions, and to suIgg'est. programs of labor legislation. Provision
should be made in the budgets of State labor departments for co-
operation with the United States Department of Labor in the pro-
motion of labor stlndlards through part iipation in national and
regional conferences and in other ways.
2. United States D p,,IrilmnIct of Labor.-The conference recom-
mends adequate appropriations for the United States Department
of Labor, and consolidation in this Department of Federal admin-
istrative functions involving leadership and cooperation with the
States in matters affecting labor.
3. International Labor Office.-The conference urges continuing
full participation of the United States, in the work of the Interna-
tional Labor Conference and the Internationnll Labor Office as essen-
tial agencies for raising standards of labor legislation throughout
the World, and appropriations by Congress of the full amount re-
quired for such participation.
4. Child labor.-The conference urges Federal cooperation with
the States in the enforcement and maintenance of a 16-year minimum
for entrance into industry, with special protection against employ-
ment in hazardous occupations up to the age of 18 years; completion
of ratification of the child labor amendment, as an essential .tep in
this direction, by the 12 States whose action is still required.

5. Minimum wtage.-The cii ferenice iurIes that every effort be
ln;mde by the States and the Federal Governllment to develop adequate
mandatory minimum-wwzge la\vs and endor-e- the proposal of an


amendment to the Con.ititition to permiit, without question effective
State and Federal minimum-wage legislation.
6. Hours.-The coniferellce eiidor-ses the 8-hour day and 40-hour
week as a maximum standard for all workers.
7. Health aiid safety.-The conference urges that State ldpart-
ments responsible for the administration of labor laws be clothed
with adequate powers and facilities for the promotion of inldut rial
health and safety, and that the Ujnited, States Department of Labor
establish a safety yv labor tory.
8. Workl ,m, 's colmp', jii,,,i;n.-The conference re'tlcoiii nelllls compul-
sory coverage of all gainfully employed workers under compensation
laws, with exclusive State funds, co(,plete blanket coverage of occu-
pational diseases, and the commission (not court) form of adminis-
9. Uiml Ioyment com,n -i,a!ti;,n an, employlimnt .r, ';r'*.'-.-The
conference urges States and Territories to enact unemployment com-
pensation laws which will qualify such States and Territories for
Federal aid and tax credits under the Social Security Act, will more
broadly and more uniformly cover gainfully employed workers, will
stand independently of the Federal act, will not require the worker
to cent ribute, and will be administered by the State agency generally
responsible for administering State labor laws. The conference rec-
omlmtenlds that the administration of the unemployment-compensation
provisions of the Social Security Act be made an integral part of
the United States Department of Labor. It urges amendment of
the Federal act to provide social-security benefits for the workers of
Puerto Rico and all other territory comprising the United States of
The conference recommends completion of the program for a
Nation-wide system of Federal-State employment service by means
of acceptance of the Wagner-Peyser Act by the five remaining States.
It believes that this program should be closely integrated with the
State program for unemployment compensation.
The conference believes there should be State-wide effective regu-
lation of private employment offices under the jurisdiction of the
State departments of labor, with Federal legislation for the regula-
tion of interstate activities.
10. Idlwb rial home work.-The conference records itself as urging
the elimination of indur-triial home work through the pa-sage of State
and F(ederal legislation with adequate provision for en fo:rcr~iit-ent.
11. Wage /l,, .i{mnt and w'age collh ct;on.-The coferenice urgei leg-
islation conferring upon State labor commissioners the power to take
assignment of wage claims and to collect and, furthermore, urges the
adoption of laws providing for weekly or seumimiontlhly payment of
wages by all employers in States that do not yet have them.



The following resolutions were submitted and adopted:
Pn e4i' ;;g ~wjr:s.-(This re.-olutionl was recommunended by the com-
mittee as a substitute for a resolution submitted by Edward L. Nolan,
Labor Commissioner of California.)
Whereas the legislatures of iilllny States have enacted into law
sta tites to provide for the payment of the prevailing rate of wages on
public works; and
Whereas the Federal Congress has likewise established a policy of
maintaining the prevailing rate of wages and in pursuance of that
policy enacted into law the Davis-Bacon Act applying to public
works and public buildings and included the prevailing rate of wage
principle in other public-works statutes; and
Whereas cooperation between these various agencies, both in the
determination of the wage rates and in general enforcement, is neces-
sary in order to accomplish the purpose of these laws: Therefore be it
Resolved, That the Department of Labor make a study as to the
methods of administration of these laws and the relationship bet ween
Federal and State agencies charged with their administration.
State-use system for pi';,~'n-nde goods.-
Whereas some States have not yet adopted the principle of restric-
tion of production by prison labor to the State-use system; and
Whereas this system has been widely advocated in order to keep
convict-made goods from undercutting free labor on the open market:
Therefore be it
Resolved, That this conference urge the States to adopt legislation
providing for the State-use system, and that the United States De-
partment of Labor compile and distribute information as a basis for
such legislation.
Poll-tax voting requirement.-
Whereas the payment of a poll tax as a prerequisite to voting exists
in many States;
Whereas this conference is considering and endorsing a broad and
progressive program of labor legislation; and
Whereas this requirement has the undoubted effect of restricting
the labor electorate, thus reducing the popular support upon which
progress in labor legislation depends: Be it
Resolved, That the conference favors the elimination of such lim-
itations as the poll tax upon the right to vote, and, furthermore, that
it request the United States Department of Labor to inquire into the
extent of such restrictions and ask it to cooperate with the State
federations of labor and other groups interested in their elimination.


1 lit-u/rial r Be it *r .,o,'vJ,, that in the interest of industrial peace and the pro-
motion of better employer and employee relations, this confrmi'ii'e
respectfully requests. the Secretary of Labor to appoint a committee
to investigate ways and :means of accomplishing these purp,-'.-. It
is su2gr-stcl1 that the following subj.rls would be appropriate for this
committee to ilnvs\tigate: Collective largaining; the use of injunc-
tions in labor disptes; "yellow dog" contracts; use of strikebreak-
.ers and labor spies; conciliation and arbitration functions; and re-
lated subjects.
Chairman: E'l\\;ird F. Nolan, Labor Commissioner, California.
Elizabeth E;iast imi. Na;tinal;l Board, Young Women's Christian Association,
WF.sliin-tn,. D. C.
E. I. M.Kiiil.y, Commissioner, Bureau of Labor and St;ati-li-, Arkansas.
Eliz:iAiethl Christman, National Women's Tri;i1e Union L,.:miu, Wa;iliiniigtn,
D. C.
Fred E. Gastrow, Executive Board MeTliler, State Federation of Labor,
Kathl:rine Lenroot, Chief, Children's Bureau, United Statem Department of
Jean A. Flexner, Division of Labor Standards, United States Department
of Labor.
The following resolution was introduced from the floor, adopted,
and signed by the delegates to the Third National Conf'rence on
Labor Leislation:
We, the dtle.;itet., to the Third Annual National Conference on Labor Legis-
lation, held at Wa.ilinigtn. D. C., November 9, 10, and 11, 1936, wish to express
our appirei'ition of the inspiring and far-visioned leadership of Secretary of
Labor FainnceOi PTrkins in initiating the policy of holding these national and
regional meetings from time to time. Such gatherings have been responsible
for direct and substantial gains to millions of wage earners through the enact-
ment of a broad program of legislation in the States which has brought about
needed and dc.irable improvement in the working conditions of so many


as adopted

As a result of a resolution adopted by the Second National Labor
Conference, held last year at Asheville, N. C., an advisory commit-
tee on National and State Labor Department problems was appointed
by the Secretary of Labor. It was suggested at the last conference
that such a committee might be of aid to the Secretary in developing
close cooperation between the Federal and State labor departments.
The committee met in Washington on May 5, 1936, at which time
a wide range of subjects were considered and various recommenda-
tions made. Among the more important were the suggestions, based
upon experience with two earlier national conferences on labor legis-
lation, that this year's conference should be held in Washington and
should be scheduled for 3 days, instead of 2, in order to allow more
time for the formulation and discussion of committee reports. These
suggestions have been carried out in the planning of the program
for this conference.
It was agreed that regional conferences were of real value in stimu-
lating interest in improving labor legislation and that further con-
ferences of this sort should be called whenever the work of the
Department permits it. It was thought advisable to hold the next
such conference in Texas to cover the States in the southwestern
area. This conference was planned for late September, but the com-
mitments of the Secretary made it impossible for her to attend, so
it has been postponed until January 1937.
The committee received reports of the activities of the special com-
mittees engaged in drafting industrial homework legislation and
legislation on the subject of wage payment and wage collection in
accordance with the instructions of the Asheville Conference, and
suggested the appointment of a committee to consider the regulation
of private employment agencies, a committee to draw up suggested
language for the powers and duties of State labor departments, and
a committee to develop a manual for factory inspection that would
combine the best procedures of a number of State labor departments.
These various committees were appointed and are now functioning.
We shall have reports on progress during this conference.


Consideration wasN given to the results obtafinvcd at the factory
inspectors' training school, held in Baltimore for 10 days during Feb-
ruary, 1900, in which the fictc,,ry inspe'-t,,r, from four States par-
ticipated. All of the labor comniiii-ioners pri-i'rit expr'--cd interest
in having such an experience made available to their own inspection
staffs. It was hoped that the United States Department of Labor
might find ways and me:iIas to continue the program for the Iii--fit
of any States wishing to participate.
The need for better clearance of inforniilt ion concerning intir.-ni ing,
new developments in State labor departments w;-: dis.1i-c~d, and it
was strongly urged that State labor commissioners send in news items
and pre-s releases, or any sort of informal account, of their activities
to the Division of Labor Standards for possible incorporation in the
Survey of Labor Law Admlinisriiration.
The i ied for additional funds for promoting the Federal appren-
tice-training program and the di.-irability of putting it on a prT111-
nent :basis were di.scus-ed.
Consideration was given to the place of the State labor depart-
ments in the development of the Social Security prgrlam. It was
generally agreed that the place for unemployment compensation and
employment service administration is together, and both belong in
the State departments of labor.
In addition to the u eL-toions miadi at this paLrtio-ilar mrceting, the
various members of the committee have advised with the Division of
Labor Standards from time to time as to ways and means of improv-
ing service to the States. The :'oiinittee feels that real progre-s has
been made in bringing about a b1t-ter undicl.r-tndinf between the
State labor departments and the Federal Depart mient, of Labor during
this past year and sincerely hopes that this underi-tnitdinri and coop-
erative relationship can be developed still further.
Chairmniu: Wendell C. Heaton, Chairman, Industrial Commission, Florida.
Elmer Andrews, Industrial Commissioner, Department of Labor, New York.
G. Clay Baker, Chairman, Department of Labor and Industry, Kansas.
Martin P. Durkin, Director, Department of Labor, Illinois.
George Googe, Southern Representative, American Fedei riinii of Labor,
Carl Mullen, President, State Federation of Labor, Indiana.
Rose Schneiderman, President, National Women's Tril'l Union League,
New York.
Joseph M. Tone, Commissioner of Labor, Connecticut.
L. Metcalfe Walling, Director of Labor, Rhode Island.


DEPARTMENTS-as adopted
The committee has drafted suggested language for the creation of a
State labor department. Inasmuch as the bill in its final form was
approved at a meeting held just prior to the opening of this con-
ference, there has not been an opportunity to obtain mimeographed
copies for distribution to the conference.
In drafting this bill, the committee contemplated that it should
be drawn to meet the needs of States having no labor departments
functioning at present, and those States desiring to reorganize and
strengthen existing departments.
While the bill creates a State department of labor under the
supervision of a single commissioner, the committee recognizes in its
accompanying memorandum that a multiple-headed commission may
be found to be more satisfactory under certain conditions.
All labor functions in the State, insofar as practicable, are com-
bined and placed under the jurisdiction of the labor department.
The commissioner is granted the necessary powers of enforcement:
To make inspections, to examine records and premises, to require
information and subpoena testimony, to administer oaths, and to
prosecute violations.
In addition the commissioner is given the power to make general
orders for the safety and health of employees and the public, and
to issue variations in cases of undue hardship. In preparing safety
and health requirements, the commissioner has the power to utilize
the voluntary services of technical advisers. A procedure for the
adoption of such orders is created, providing for notice and public
hearing, approval by the industrial council, and publication. The
industrial council, just mentioned, is also created by the bill. It is
composed of three persons representing employers, employees, and
the public, with the commissioner as an ex-officio member without
vote. Its functions consist of advising the commissioner generally
on the administration of the Department and passing on general
orders and variations relating to safety and health.
There is imposed on employers and owners of places of employ-
ment, public buildings, and places of public assembly the duty to
provide adequate protection for the safety and health of employees
and the public. It is this duty which serves as the basis for the
power of the commissioner to issue general orders, above mentioned.
Violations of the bill or of any order of the commissioner, or
obstructing the commissioner in the performance of his duties, is
made a misdemeanor, punishable by fine and imprisonment. In lieu


of such criminal actions, the fines may be recovered in a civil action
in the name of the State, in the nature of an action for debt.
Chairman: Martin P. Durkin, Director, Dcpairtmiit of Labor, Illinois.
Elmer F. Andrews, Industrial Commissioner, Department of Labor, New
A. L. Fletclher, Ciouiiiissioner, Dlepa:rtment of Labor, North Carolina.
C. L. Jarrett, Commissioner of Labor, West Vilrginia.
James T. Moriarty, Coiniui-iouinr. Departmnitit of Labor and Industries,
MassN'iuse t.
F. E. Nichols, Commissioner of Labor, Texas.
Edwin E. Witte, Professor of Ecn"iioinii-, University of Wisconsin.
David Y. Camilibll. Division of Labor Stanldards, United States DIepartment
of Labor.
Clara M. Beyer, Division of Labor Standards, United States Department of

COLLECTION--as adopted

At the Second National Conference on Labor Legislation at Ashe-
ville, N. C., last year, the problem of unpaid wages was called to the
attention of the conference. The failure of many employers to pay
wages earned, the inability of the individual wage earner to settle
disputes on wages due or to collect the sums owing to him through
existing legal machinery resulted, in many States, in wage earners
bringing their complaints to the labor commissioners. Wherever the
labor commisioner had some legal authority to proceed, they were
able to collect very large sums; but even in States where the laws
were weak or not explicit, persuasion was often used and many cases
settled in favor of the employee. After' this problem and the exist-
ing legal remedies had been discussed by a conference committee, a
report brought in by that committee was adopted, requesting the
Secretary of Labor to form a committee of inquiry to develop proper
types of legislative remedy and, in cooperation with other interested
groups, to prepare an act to serve as a model for State laws. The
Secretary's committee was subsequently combined with a committee
appointed by the president of the International Association of Gov-
ernmental Labor Officials, and the joint committee then consisted of
Morgan Mooney (Deputy Labor Coliiinisioner, Connecticut); W. A.
Pat Murphy (Labor Commissioner, Oklahoma); Harry R. McLogan
(Member, Industrial Commission, Wisconsin); O. B. Chapman
(Director, Department of Industrial Relations, Ohio); and E. I.
McKinley (Commissioner, Bureau of Labor and Statistics, Arkansas)
as chairman.
The committee met for 4 days at the United States Department
of Labor the end of January of this year, and again at the Topeka


meeting of the International Association of Governmental Labor
Officials in September. It has prepared and is presenting to you
now for your approval suggested language for a State wage pay-
ment and wage collection law. This language has received the en-
dorsement of the International As,.-ri;it ion of Governnmental Labor
Officials; and probably most of those present from State labor
departments and State federations of labor have already received
copies of this bill, since it has been sent out with a covering letter by
the pre-idellt, of the Intern ltional Association of Governmental
Labor Officials. However, for the benefit of those who are not
familiar with the draft, I shall briefly ,ullmlnrize its main provisions:


The bill provides that every employer doing business in the
State-whether an individual employer or a corporation-must pay
his employees wages earned semimonthly, on days to be designated
in advance by the employer as the regular pay days; it provides that
such wages shall be paid in full, in lawful money, or bank checks
convertible into cash at full face value. Employees who are dis-
charged shall be paid within 24 hours; employees who quit volun-
tarily shall be paid within 72 hours of quitting, or of giving notice;
in the event of a suspension of work due to an industrial dispute,
wages shall be paid at next regular pay day. The bill provides for
enforcement by the labor commissioner, who is also empowered to
hold hearings which would create an opportunity for the settlement
of disputes without court action, and to compel the attendance of
witnesses as well as the production of books, accounts, pay rolls, and
similar material. The commissioner is authorized and instructed to
cooperate with any employee in. the enforcement of any just and
valid claim against an employer or contractor, and to that end he may
take assignments of wage claims, mechanics' and other workers' liens,
not exceeding $200 per claim. In addition, he may prosecute all
necessary actions to collect, without having to advance court costs
or to give bond or security.
There are also sections in the bill providing for notifying the
employees of time and place of payment, of their rate of wages, and
of the terms of the law; providing that an employer may become
civilly liable to the employees of his sulbcontraetors. The penalty
sections provide for penalties of varying degrees of severity, in
order to allow the enforcing official some discretion, depending on
the character and standing of the employer who violates the act.
The standards embodied in this draft are minimum standards.
Some States have more rigorous requirements than those which are
here recoin ended. But in most jurisdictions all these minimum
requirements do not exist. For those States which have attained or


surpa.-ed these standards they are a basis from which to work in a
continued effort to remiiedy any defects which may arise. For other
juri.-dictioii.- these standards are a gnal toward which to work in
order to protect the wage earner and eiablle him to obtain w-iges
due him.
While every effort has been iinade to kiop the language of this bill
brief, simple, and nniitechlical, it lhas also been carefully worded
in order to make -iIir of ar''c iiplishing the ends in view, and that
is not always easy to For instanie, the section on payment
of wages as it now stands would prevent the lundrlir;ible practice of
withholding wage- for a considerable period of time, although
withholding wages is not .pec ifeally mentioned.
The committee feels that the bill miay still require changes or
amendii,,nts from time to time, but that these can best be made after
there ihas acc um ulated some further administ4 rative experience under
a law of this type.

The co unmittee reconlmnendst that this colinittee be continued for
another year in order to keep in touch with the situation and con-
sider any amendments that may prove desirable. For this purpose,
if the committee is continued, I would urge that some arrangement
be made whereby the committee can learn about the problems that
arise in getting this bill adopted, as well as the administrative
experience after it is adopted.
It is asked that the Division of Labor Standards, which has been
assisting the committee in its work, be made the clearing house for
this information.
The committee presents this bill to you for your endorsement, and
urges that the conference record itself as recomlnendling to the
States enactment of this bill.
Chairman, E. I. McKinley, commissioner, Bureau of Labor :and Statistics,
MIorain lM oonuy, Depluty Commissioner of Labor, Connecticut;
W. A. Pat Murphy, Commissioner of Labor, Oklahoma;
Harry R. McLogan. Member of Industrial Commission, Wisconsin;
0. B. Chapman, Director, Department of Industrial Relations, Ohio;
Jean A. Flexner, United States Department of Labor;
Henry Lehmann, United States Department of Labor.

as adopted

The Industrial Home Work Committee which was appointed after
the Asheville conference has been working along two rather distinct
but complementary lines. It has been working on a draft of a stand-


ard State bill and it has been attempting to work out some machin-
ery to control the growing, difficult situation arising from interstate
traffic in home work. I am glad to report that so far as a standard
bill for the control of industrial home work in the States is con-
cerned, the committee has something drafted which is here, ready
for distribution among you. This bill, we believe, does point toward
the elimination of home work within the States, which is the com-
mittee's definite objective.
The more you know about industrial home work the more certain
you are that complete elimination is what you ought to go after. You
are certain of that, both because of the very bad conditions which
you find as you attempt to control it, and because of the difficulties
that are inherent in the administration of a .tatiite for the control
of home work. The committee's bill, a copy of which you can get
here, was drafted by Mr. Gellhorn, of the Columbia University Law
School, who acts as legal adviser to the committee, and was endorsed
in Topeka by the recent session of the International Association of
Governmental Labor Officials. It does prohibit home work out and
out in a nllumler of types of industry, where there is a special hazard
to health or to safety: Any home work on food or drink; home work
on articles used in connection with serving of food or drink; home
work on wearing apparel for infants and for children 10 years of
age or under; toys, dolls; tobacco; drugs and poisons; bandages and
sanitary goods; explosives and fireworks and articles of like charac-
ter. Obviously, we don't want explosives and fireworks manufac-
tured where people live, where their families and children are con-
gregated. You don't want shelled nuts or sippers for drinks, or
things of that sort, that were made under tenement-house conditions,
coming into your home for use, and so prohibition is the obviously
reasonable thing to provide.
Then the bill goes on to provide that the labor commissioner shall
have the power to prohibit where the continuance of industrial home
work either causes injury to the health or ~welfa re of the home worker,
or where it miakeis especially difficult the maintenance of existing labor
standards or the obsVrvaince and enforcement of labor law protection
for factory workers. Those of us who have been studying homiiework
conditions, those States which have had a lot of it close at home for
some time, like New York, New Jersey, and Penn-ylvania, know that
it is a Illn;ace to factory conditions; that the woman-and it usually
is a vwomlan who works at home-is least able to bargain for the main-
tenance of her labor standards; that she doesn't know what other
people are paid; that she can't get together with her fellow workers
and say, "We will none of us do this sort of w ork unless we get decent
returns for the work we do."


We know, when we issue a certificate to a home worker to do a cer-
tain piece of work herself that when she is told to get it Lauk the
next morning she lets her children help, or she call; in the neiwh-
bors, regardless of the conditions on her certificate, which make such
assistance illegal; and we know that it wvoulld take a staff of in-
spectors laIrger than any of the States or, I take it. the Federal Gov-
ernment could llpport, to see that during the busy tasens tlie-e things
don't happen.
Therefore, your committee is definitely in favor of prohibiting in-
duistrial home work. It recognizes that prohibition iimeaii;l continued
checking up on the sources of home work which are with us ciiltaiitly
because home work does mean that the manufacturer shifts a good
deal of his cost and can take advantage of the worker's inability to
maint ain her equality with factory standards.
The committee's bill provides that the employer nmust have a per-
mit if he is to give out home work and that he must pay for that per-
mit annually according to the number of home workers he has. Since
the Internation0al Association of Governmental Labor Officials meet-
ing in Topeka there has been added to the bill a section which pro-
vides for a home worker's certificate, because we find that that does
help to educate the home worker as to her rights and responsibilities
and that it helps the department of labor to check up.
The bill also provides that the manufacturer who gives out home
work shall pay quarterly a tax on every home worker he employs.
Where there is a good deal of home work such a provision means
revenue for the maintenance of the inspection service, but it is a
provision which perhaps would mean too costly a set-up where home
work is not a general problem. The tax provision, however, is a
separable part of the bill.
Your committee feels very strongly that where home work is al-
lowed to continue, and there is a minimum-wage law, the provisions
of the minimum-wage law should be applied as promptly and as
broadly as possible to home work industries. We would like to point
out also that even where you have no minimum-wage law the standard
bill makes possible the prohibition of industrial home work when
it is found that the pay of home workers is less than the factory
workers, and that an aim of the draft is to help bring up the earn-
ings, the income of the home worker.
Three States have recently enacted home-work legislation that has
the same general objective as this new standard bill-Connecticut,
Rhode Island, and New York. Some of us have felt that just as
we profited greatly in our minimum-wage legislation by having con-
ferences on methods of administration so, as the roster of States
having similar home-work legislation grows, we might well confer


on adimiiiiiItrative practices in this field also. They are difficult and
complex and leave us with many questions unsolved.
Now, on an interesting aspect, an earlier conference recommended
that the Federal Department of Labor begin to study the transit of
industrial home work in interstate commerce and so those States
which require licensing have been reporting to each other where
they thought that manufacturers were sending work across State
lines. Copies of the reports have cleared through the United States
Department of Labor, and we have for the first time a partial picture
of what is happening. I don't think I can emphasize sufficiently
how partial that picture is, because most of us in the States feel that
we cannot push to hard on getting the information and seeking to
control wages outside of the State borders. For instance, we in New
York may report that a manufacturer has several hundred or a
thousand home workers of whom 50 are outside of New York State,
but we don't know from his register whether those are individual
home workers or whether they are contractors who in turn may be
distributors, perhaps in an interstate area.
Mrs. Beyer and I have been having a lively correspondence about
somebody down in Baltimore who was reported on one of our regis-
ters. We found to my astonishment that that man wasn't doing
home work at all but that he was sending materials into Pennsylvania.
Our records had not given us the whole picture.
Actually six States have been clearing through the United States
Department of Labor and several additional States have reported
that so far as they know, no industrial home work has crossed their
borders, either coming in or going out. The six States that have
reported actual passage of home work are Delawa re, Maine, Massachu-
setts, New Jersey, New York, and Pennsylvania. And New York, I
know, and the records say, is the source of most of that home work.
One hundred and seventy-one manufacturers in New York State
have been sending out home work into 16 States and Puerto Rico;
160 of them sent work into one State only; 153 of those cases were
home work going into New Jersey. Seven of the States-Delaware,
Kentucky, Maine, New Hampshire, Vermont, Virginia, and West
Virginia-into which New York materials were going, have no laws
regulating industrial home work. Much of the outgoing New York
home work consisted of infants' sacks and bootees, and so forth, and in
these seven States it is a matter of nobody's concern whether there is
disease in the homes where the women work at the rate of 3 cents an
hour, or whether children are working on the materials, or whether
the work is being performed under any of the other characteristic
conditions of home work.
A subl:stantia proportion of the materials which pass in interstate
commerce were found to be distributed through the contr et system.


At least 56 of the 171 New York firms sent materials to conltractors
or distributors operating in otler States and the reports listed 92
New Jersey contractors and 3 count actors living in Pennsylvania
who were acting as local distributors for New York manufacturers.
From these 171 New York manufacturers we have specific reports of
1,451 home workers in other States and the exact nuimlber of home
workers to whom 50 of the local distributors give out work is as yet
This also is significant: Thirty-six percent of the li ,u. e workers who
were receiving work from New York lived in States where there are
no industrial home work laws and I want to emphasize again that
the bulk of the work was intended for the use of infants and children.
Our committee is working on the problem of what to do about
this passage of industrial home work across State lines. Mr. Gell-
horn feels that it is important to recou-immilen not only that the Fed-
eral Government have some authority in the control of interstate
passage of home work, but that the States shall be able to stop home
work from coming in if it is going to have an adverse effect on
State standards. We are waiting for a decision of the Supreme
Court in connection with existing legislation which prohibits the
shipment of prison-made goods into States where its sale is forbid-
den. If that statute is upheld, Mr. Gellhorn feels that he can then
reco' mmend much more intelligently to the committee the direction
which we should take with regard to interstate passage of home-
work goods. This, therefore, is one of the important lines of
activity to be continued. We further recommend that all of you
consider what is coming into your States from these chief distribu-
tion centers of home work and the possibility that we get together so
that we may have the benefit of all experience in the administration
of the new home-work laws.
Chairman, Frieda S. Miller, Director, Division of Women in Industry and
Minimum Wage, Department of Labor, New York.
Anne S. Davis, Assistant Chief, Minimum Wage Division, Department of
Labor, Illinois.
W. E. Jacobs, Commissioner of Labor, Tennessee.
W. A. Pat Murpliy, Commissioner of Labor, Oklahoma.
John J. Toohey, Jr., Commissioner of Labor, New Jersey.
Beatrice Mconncell, Children's Bureau, United States Department of Labor.
Mary Elizabeth Pidgeon, Women's Bureau, United States Department of
A. Louise Murphy, Division of Labor Standards, United States Department
of Labor.


II 1 W1 1 81 1 011 03I I liI D
3 1262 08860 0308

Full Text
xml version 1.0 encoding UTF-8
REPORT xmlns http:www.fcla.edudlsmddaitss xmlns:xsi http:www.w3.org2001XMLSchema-instance xsi:schemaLocation http:www.fcla.edudlsmddaitssdaitssReport.xsd
INGEST IEID EWANEP6D1_726JZX INGEST_TIME 2012-10-23T16:36:46Z PACKAGE AA00012236_00001