Page images


know how we are going to prevent child labor occasionally, and the neighbors from coming in and helping.

We thought that the 54-hour law was as firmly impressed on Rhode Island as the Rock of Gibraltar. It seemed absolutely impossible to change it. A 48-hour law has been introduced every vear since 1914. It was reported out of committee only once in 1922. The Democrats then carried on a filibuster to wear down Republican opposition. They had a gas bomb exploded in the senate and went away and stayed away several weeks. This year it was passed, but not without a struggle. It was finally passed at 6 o'clock in the morning at the end of their last long legislative day. Party lines on both sides were broken and it passed with a majority of just one vote. We think it is quite an achievement. It has somewhat unique features such as including business establishments with mercantile establishments. The law has an unusually large coverage. We interpret as a business establishment any concern that is run primarily for profit. Boys of 16 and 17 years are included in the hours regulation in our 48-hour law, and as Miss Anderson pointed out, it allows for a longer working day if the establishment is on a 5-day week. We thought that the prominent achievement was a little clause that required employers to post their minimum-wage rates --both hourly and/or piece rates. We hoped that it would have the effect of encouraging employers to post at least a substantial wage and then live up to it. I think in some cases it has had a desirable effect. The employers did not understand it at first. It has been quite interesting to see what wages were posted and to compare them with the actual pay rolls. One manufacturer was quite satisfied to post a minimum of 10 cents an hour and another said: "Well, the minimum wage in this establishment is 25 cents but I don't like to post 25 cents an hour, because so many of them get less."

Our problems of administration are many. A great many fears are coming up all the time and we are uncertain about a great many things, but instead of telling you about them, I will, in closing, say that we are very glad that in the next set of maps the Women's Bureau gets out Rhode Island will probably be a white State instead of a black or yellow State.

Mr. MAGNUSSON (Washington, D. C.). You gave your figures by States, Viss Anderson. Is it possible to say to what extent the textile industry is on the 40-hour week?

Miss ANDERSOx. The textile industries work all kinds of hours. Some of them are on the 40-hour week, but you may have a textile mill in the same State that is working longer hours than that. There has been ro uniformity since the N. R. A. was declared unconstitutional, and there had never been any uniformity until the N. R. A. came into existence.

Mr. Wilcox (Washington, D. C.). In your excellent report, Miss Anderson, you say: "Inequalities lead to serious consequences, such as the tendency for employers to migrate from States with better laws to those with lower legal standards, and, as a result of such moves, for workers to be left stranded without possibility of finding jobs in their own industrial fields and too often without opportunity for any employment.” When I was in New York I made a study of that, trying to get real instances, studying anything that could be offered by the chamber of commerce and several other organizations, and the more we tried to run down particular instances the more we found that some other reason than difference in labor standards was the basic reason for migration. Mr. Swanish prepared an article recently showing to what extent towns have offered exemption from taxes, etc. I wonder if we should include this statement about the migration. If the facts are so it should be said, of course, but I wonder if it is so essentially in the picture that we should set it forth as one of the results of social legislation.

Miss ANDERSON. I was talking about labor standards. I was not going into the whole situation. It is true that in the last few years we also made a study of that question and did not find that labor laws entered much into migration. In the past few years, however, various studies have shown that a great many industries go into the smaller States, where the standards for labor are lower and where they can get people for less money, to get away from unions and from labor standards that may have been set by the States where they were doing business. There are, of course, a lot of other things that enter into the situation. In talking to one textile manufacturer who has five big mills in South Carolina I tried to induce him, before the N. R. A., to introduce some labor standards, because he was a pretty decent employer. He said that he could not do it because of his credit; that he was not sufficiently established in his own right. I then asked him why he had moved to South Carolina from Massachusetts. He said, “You know, we have the 48-hour week in Massachusetts." I said, "But what else did you move to South Carolina for?” “Well,” he said, “ I moved here because we pay no tax for 5 years and after that we are established pretty well. We build our mill village, and we control our tax. We do not come within the city limit; we are in the country, and we pay very little tax. We are close to the raw material; we have very cheap labor; and we can ship just as easily from Atlanta to New York as we can from Boston to New York.” You are right that there are all kinds of things that enter into the situation but labor standards is one of them.

Mr. PATTON (New York). We have just completed a detailed study in New York State of every manufacturing industry listed by the Census Bureau from 1919 through 1933, the latest year for which

[ocr errors]

census figures are available. The only industry of significance in New York State which has suffered a relative disadvantage is the textile-industry group. We have taken every State in the Union in which textiles are an important part, and discovered that the textile industry has not moved from New York to.New Jersey, Pennsylvania, etc., but it has fanned out into a large number of States. In Tennessee from 1918 to 1933 the textile industry increased 20 percent.

Mr. NATES (South Carolina). I think I ought to say something about the 40-hour bill that was passed in South Carolina. It is true that the majority of the textile manufacturers in South Carolina have come from the New England States, as Miss Anderson said, because they can get cheap labor, and also very low taxes. Of course the 5year limit has run out now. We had a very hard time getting this 40-hour bill passed. Many of the members of the house and senate felt that if we passed such a law it would run the manufacturers out of the State of South Carolina into other territory. The result was that an amendment to the bill was introduced in the house providing that when all other States in the Union passed a 40-hour bill our bill would go into effect. Later another amendment was introduced providing that our bill would go into effect when six other States passed similar laws–Virginia, North Carolina, Alabama, Tennessee, Mississippi, and Georgia. We killed that amendment, but when the two-State amendment came along it passed by a majority of about six votes. Then in the senate we lacked only three votes of killing that amendment. The big argument was that this 40-hour week is only a gentleman's agreement, and if South Carolina had a 40-hour law for the textile industry, with, you might say, no law at all in Georgia, and with North Carolina on about a 60-hour week, it would work a hardship on our manufacturers and possibly bankrupt some of them. That is the reason the 40-hour bill passed was not to go isto effect immediately, but we are hoping that our sister State will take action with regard to shortening the hours there.

It is our intention to introduce a general 48-hour bill for the textile and all other industries in South Carolina. The law in regard to the textile industry is for 55 hours per week. Approximately 93 percent of the textile mills in South Carolina are still paying the minimum wage and working only 40 hours a week, most of them in two shifts and some in three shifts, but we cannot get rid of that 7 percent of chiselers unless we do have regulation through laws. South Carolina, I briere, passed as many labor laws as any other State in the Union in the past session. Since we now have a department of labor we are kopeful of get:ing in the session which convenes in January more *s to help labor as a whole. I am hoping to get some very useful bootnation here to carry back. Our general assembly is considerably


changed this year, but it set up a department of labor, which is to make a survey and report back to the general assembly at the next session as to the labor legislation that is needed in South Carolina. Of course, I know that since the regional labor conference was held in Columbia last June, the manufacturers are beginning to look at human needs more than ever before. That conference has done a great deal of good, and the N. R. A. has done a great deal of good. Many other things have helped the manufacturers to realize that they must put human rights above profit rights, but if it had not been for the labor representatives staying with the members of the house and senate the 6 months they were in session we would not have gotten these bills passed.

[ocr errors][ocr errors][merged small][merged small]

Report of Committee on Child Labor, by L. METCALFE WALLING, Chairman

The past year has been a significant one in the history of child-labor legislation. It is the year following the invalidation of the N. R. A. codes and the consequent removal of their effect in bringing about higher standards for employment of children throughout the country than had ever existed under State legislation alone. It seems significant, therefore, to review briefly the standards advocated by the International Association of Governmental Labor Officials during the period when the N. R. A. was in effect and their advance as shown by enactment into State law.

Briefly, these standards as recommended in 1935 for adoption by State legislatures are:

1. A 16-year minimum age for employment in all occupations during school bours and in factories at any time, and a 14-year minimum for nonfactory work outside school hours. 2. An 8-hour day and a 40-hour week for minors under 18.

3. Prohibition of night work for at least a 13-hour period for minors under 16 and at least an 8-hour period for minors between 16 and 18. 4. Requirement of employment certificates for minors under 18.

5. Adequate protection of minors under 18 from dangerous work or work involving health hazards.

Standards recommended by the association at previous periods have covered employment of children in street trades, provision for additional compensation under workmen's compensation laws in case of minors Tegally employed, and regulation of industrial home work.

The appointment of the committee on child labor in 1932 was concrete evidence of the association's deep interest in the problems of Working children an interest which has been continuous since its organization. The committee began work immediately, and drafted and approved a preliminary set of standards for a general child-labor law for the use of the conference of national organizations interested in child welfare held in Washington in December of that year, to consider the acute child-labor problems that had developed with increasng unemployment. These standards were substantially the same as those which were approved in 1935, special emphasis being placed on the 16-year minimum age. At that time only two States had this

« PreviousContinue »